The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 3 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 58 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Ibn Ḥanbal’s Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History
Open accessAbstract
This article documents the main developments in the textual history of a short polemical treatise ascribed to Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal (d. 241/855), al-Radd 'alā al-zanādiqa wa-l-jahmiyya. In particular, I show that three different, if related, recensions of the text exist in manuscript. Then, drawing on evidence from the text and biobibliographical sources, I show that al-Radd only emerged over several centuries. The idea for the text finds its roots in the earlist elaborations of Hanbali theology, perhaps even in the notebooks of Ibn Ḥanbal himself. The first recension of the text, however, only emerged after the mid-fourth/tenth century in Baghdad. Another recension appears at the beginning of the sixth/twelfth century, perhaps also in Baghdad. These recensions were combined to form a third recension no later than the eighth/fourteenth century, and it is the third recension that became the basis for most print editions of the work.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
64 Own interpretation · 50 Sources not found · 33 Own result · 30 No basis given · 16 Not checked yet · 6 Own method
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“three years later Muḥammad Shaqfa produced an edition of the text based on a single manuscript in the Ẓāhiriyya library in Damascus that also excluded the RefZan.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it is cited in Ibn al-Qayyim's Ḥādī al-arwāḥ ilā bilād al-afrāḥ, an autograph manuscript in Mosul written in 745/1344f .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 2. terminuS ante quem: ibn al-qayyim citeS recenSion 3
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In this passage he quotes the entire introduction of al-Radd followed immediately by the first part of the RefZan, which discusses Quran 4:56.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 2. terminuS ante quem: ibn al-qayyim citeS recenSion 3
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In all of the manuscripts of Recension 1, the title pages (where they exist) include something quite close to the title of the work as we know it in print editions: al-Radd ʿalā al-zanādiqa wa-l-jahmiyya.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Ibn Taymiyya's younger contemporary and student Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (d .751/1350) also cites al-Radd in more than one of his works .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 2. terminuS ante quem: ibn al-qayyim citeS recenSion 3
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Some editions are lacking one of these elements .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This section title, moreover, is the same as the first sentence of Recension 2”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All manuscripts of Recension 1 include Riwāya X.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it is the third recension that became the basis for most print editions of the work .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Recension 3, finally, joins all three elements together.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 71
- Probably not a substantial claim. 40
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Recension 3 manuscripts are mixed: Leiden MS Or. 6275 has Riwāya X; the two late Kuwaiti manuscripts of Recension 3 include Riwāya Y; and the rest have no riwāya .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Abū Bakr al-Khallāl's (d.311/923) creedal collection al-Sunna includes one report in which an authority judges the Jahmiyya to be Zanādiqa; in another report, Ibn Ḥanbal declares that Jahmī thought is zandaqa .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Recension 1 appears in the earliest surviving manuscripts and is the same version published by Seale and Shaqfa-as said, it includes only the introduction and the RefJahm.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“He cites the RefZan in just one place, however, quoting an oft-cited passage in which Ibn Ḥanbal seems to allude to figurative speech in the Quran”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 2. terminuS ante quem: ibn al-qayyim citeS recenSion 3
hedgedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These titles stem from the incipits of the text .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The phrase that Ibn Taymiyya quotes (hādhā min majāz al-qurʾān) is not what is found in the text, however-al-Radd itself has,”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 2. terminuS ante quem: ibn al-qayyim citeS recenSion 3
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most print editions of Ibn Ḥanbal's al-Radd contain three parts”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In Recension 3, however, the logic of the passage is broken: the introduction transitions rather abruptly to the RefZan, marked only by a section title”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In each case they begin with ʿAbd Allāh b.Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal narrating,”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“al-Radd remained a source of some significance for centuries after Ibn Ḥanbal's lifetime, and there is already an accessible (and abundant) archive of quotations from it found in later works of Hanbali theology .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 2. terminuS ante quem: ibn al-qayyim citeS recenSion 3
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Recension 2, of which there are two witnesses, omits the introduction, including only the RefZan and the RefJahm .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The four earliest links in each transmission agree, but they then split off after the mid-fourth/tenth century.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the earliest three manuscripts are all of Recension 1, and a fourth witness to Recension 1 is roughly contemporary to the earliest securely dated copy of Recension 2, which is dated 906/1500f .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The second version is that by al-Khallāl, who seems to have compiled it from two slightly earlier versions: one he transmits from Abū Bakr al-Marrūdhī (d.275/888), 90 one of Ibn Ḥanbal's companions, and the other stems ultimately from ʿAbd Allāh, transmitted to al-Khallāl by a little known early Hanbali named al-Khaḍir b.Aḥmad b. al-Muthannā.91”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.2. The Lists of ʿAbd Allāh b. Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal and Abū Bakr al-Khallāl
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [90]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [91]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Al-Radd, however, includes relatively few of the verses from the lists, 108 and a large majority cited does not appear in either of the earlier lists .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 99. Li-anna hādhihi al-āyāt al-ukhrā wa-hādhihi al-asmāʾ tubayyin annahu lā yakūnu min al-qurʾān shayʾ makhlūq .
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Enlightening in this regard is Ibn ʿAsākir's comment that al-Salmāsī followed al-Shāfiʿī in particular positions (furūʿ) but Ibn Ḥanbal in theological principles (uṣūl) .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“ʿAbd Allāh's list (197 verses + 18 repetitions 104 ) is relatively close to al-Khallāl's lists (283 verses + twelve repetitions) overall”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 99. Li-anna hādhihi al-āyāt al-ukhrā wa-hādhihi al-asmāʾ tubayyin annahu lā yakūnu min al-qurʾān shayʾ makhlūq .
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [104]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Al-Salmāsī was far from being a Baghdadi Hanbali, and he is imbricated in multiple networks of tranmission .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The same reference was made by Abū al-Khaṭṭāb al-Kalwadhānī (d.510/1116) in his work on uṣūl al-fiqh, although he quotes only the opinion and not the text itself .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Al-Samʿānī (d.562/1166) notes that Ibn al-Shahrazūrī's father, al-Qāsim, studied with one of the figures in Riwāya Y, ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz b. ʿAlī al-Azajī (d .444/1052) .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In the cousin's account, the same scene is given, but Ibn Ḥanbal makes no such argument then; Ibn Ḥanbal does adduce an argument about the semantics of the verb jaʿala later, but in a different debate with a different caliphal representative .79”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.1. Quranic Arguments in the "Family" Biographies
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [79]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Discussing the possiblity that there might be”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is particularly true given that, like Ibn Taymiyya, their quotation of Aḥmad differs from the text of al-Radd itself: Ibn ʿAqīl says,”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One common theme in these passages is the issue of social interaction with holders of problematic views: is it permissible to greet them in the street or to pray alongside them?”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.2. The Lists of ʿAbd Allāh b. Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal and Abū Bakr al-Khallāl
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Ibn Ḥanbal and likeminded contemporaries tended to recommend avoiding such people altogether .87”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.2. The Lists of ʿAbd Allāh b. Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal and Abū Bakr al-Khallāl
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [87]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The first version is that given directly by ʿAbd Allāh.He says little, however, about how these verses were used in argumentation.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.2. The Lists of ʿAbd Allāh b. Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal and Abū Bakr al-Khallāl
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Ibn ʿAsākir, who apparently met al-Salmāsī, reports that al-Salmāsī's father took him to hear teachers (shuyūkh) in Baghdad as a boy; Riwāya Y indicates that he heard the text from Ibn Abī Yaʿlā in the Bāb al-Marātib neighborhood of east Baghdad during Rabīʿ II 504 (October-November 1110), i.e., when al-Salmāsī was some thirty years old .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“There he mentions that Ibn Ḥanbal wrote both Kitāb al-Radd ʿalā al-jahmiyya and al-Radd ʿalā al-zanādiqa fī daʿwāhum al-tanāquḍ ʿalā al-qurʾān .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In general, both al-Sunna works consist of reports about the opinions of Ibn Ḥanbal and his peers on what they consider to be the various problematic lines of thinking in early Islamic theology (the Muʿtazila, the Murjiʾa, the Khawārij, and so on).86”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.2. The Lists of ʿAbd Allāh b. Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal and Abū Bakr al-Khallāl
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [86]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The lists are embedded in this otherwise broad section on dealing with the Jahmiyya .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.2. The Lists of ʿAbd Allāh b. Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal and Abū Bakr al-Khallāl
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the titles of Recension 1, the term was used as another name for the Jahmiyya.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“both Ibn Ḥanbal's son ʿAbd Allāh (d.290/903) and Abū Bakr al-Khallāl quote lists of quranic verses that Ibn Ḥanbal”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4. recenSion 1 and the originS of the refjahm
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The claim of contradiction is made specifically in thirteen instances .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As the editor notes, however, both passages are ascribed to al-Radd ʿalā al-jahmiyya of ʿAbd Allāh b.Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal, and both passages are actually found in his Sunna .Neither appears in al-Radd .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Such is al-Radd's textual history .
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“and Ibn Baṭṭa often cites from reports of Ibn Ḥanbal's opinion, 127 occasionally credits the formulation of ideas of refuting the Jahmiyya directly to Ibn Ḥanbal, 128 and even provides a list of Quran verses that can be used to argue against the Jahmiyya, 129 but he does not reference Ibn Ḥanbal as the author of al-Radd.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [127]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [128]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [129]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Ibn Abī Yaʿlā provides a terminus ante quem for its completion by reporting that in the year 432/1040f .,”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [123]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Al-Radd, however, refutes Jahmī positions on a number of issues, of which the Quran's (un)createdness is one .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 99. Li-anna hādhihi al-āyāt al-ukhrā wa-hādhihi al-asmāʾ tubayyin annahu lā yakūnu min al-qurʾān shayʾ makhlūq .
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The first is referenced by ʿUmayra in his edition .In the introduction he notes that it was kept at the old library at Maydān Dikhna in Riyadh, but this library has been closed for some time .141”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [141]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As noted at the beginning of the article, al-Dhahabī doubted the work's authenticity, but few others seem to have commented directly on it .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Such is al-Radd's textual history .
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“And not everyone who transmitted the text was a Hanbali-al-Salmāsī was a liminal figure between the Shafiʿi and Hanbali schools.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Such is al-Radd's textual history .
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Ibn Abī Yaʿlā's father, the qadi Abū Yaʿlā Ibn al-Farrāʾ, quotes passages from al-Radd in his Ibṭāl al-taʾwīlāt li-akhbār al-ṣifāt, a creedal work written in response to a work correcting anthropomorphist hadith by the Shafiʿi-Ashʿari Abū Bakr Ibn Fūrak al-Iṣfahānī (d .406/1015f .), and in his al-ʿUdda fī uṣūl al-fiqh .120”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [120]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Additionally, the lists offer nothing in the way of evidence for the RefZan's existence at this point: they mention neither the Zanādiqa nor the”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 99. Li-anna hādhihi al-āyāt al-ukhrā wa-hādhihi al-asmāʾ tubayyin annahu lā yakūnu min al-qurʾān shayʾ makhlūq .
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“His method in al-Ibāna is close to that of al-Radd-refutations of problematic Jahmī ideas are offered alongside quranic proof texts, and the work is dialectical in its approach 126”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [126]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The second is mentioned by Sezgin, but he gives no specific catalogue source; checking his other sources for Bengali collections did not turn up a manuscript of al-Radd .142”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [142]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By contrast, al-Radd is a dialectical text, giving both an opponent's claim and a refutation of that claim; its refutations are clinched (rhetorically, anyway) by producing a more”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 99. Li-anna hādhihi al-āyāt al-ukhrā wa-hādhihi al-asmāʾ tubayyin annahu lā yakūnu min al-qurʾān shayʾ makhlūq .
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, with reference to manuscript witnesses, I showed that the version of al-Radd that has most often been printed represented a recension (Recension 3) that is not attested until the eighth/fourteenth century in Damascus and exists only in thirteenth/nineteenth-century manuscripts .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Ibn Abī Yaʿlā reports that Ibn Baṭṭa himself said he was born in early Shawwāl 304 (April 917); it is generally agreed that he died in Muḥarram 387 (January 997).131”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [131]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Part of the problem is the already identified ambiguity-the lists give nothing more than fragments 111 of quranic verses, organized by sura, and neither ʿAbd Allāh nor al-Khallāl gives us any concrete examples of how Ibn Ḥanbal (or anyone else) argued with these verses .112”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 99. Li-anna hādhihi al-āyāt al-ukhrā wa-hādhihi al-asmāʾ tubayyin annahu lā yakūnu min al-qurʾān shayʾ makhlūq .
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [111]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [112]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The later manuscripts are missing from Sezgin's tally; al-ʿAjmī overlooked both the oldest manuscript (Zaytūna 10192) and a witness to the second recension (Ṭalʿat Tafsīr 326).”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is unclear to me at this point what became of this manuscript .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Additional information
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Most of the quotations are verbatim or very nearly so, but they only come from the RefJahm .122”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [122]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, I have encountered three manuscripts of uncertain or mistaken identification.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“It is also reported that Ibn Baṭṭa traveled widely in search of knowledge before retiring to a life of pious seclusion for forty years, presumably in his native village of ʿUkbarā (where most students were said to have studied with him, though he also taught some in Baghdad) .133”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [133]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“as Melhem Chokr has pointed out, zandaqa in many cases referred to a”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Melhem Chokr
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fact that the manuscripts of Recension 3 usually include the same incipit as Recension 1, in light of the above, can then be interpreted as indicating their ultimate dependence on Recension 1 .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If, however, the manuscripts are sufficient to establish the likely sequence of the recensions' emergence, it still does not tell us when any of this happened”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In other words, it seems that Ibn Taymiyya knew only the RefJahm and the introduction directly, suggesting he had access to Recension 1 of al-Radd .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 2. terminuS ante quem: ibn al-qayyim citeS recenSion 3
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: An author's extant citations are a reliable guide to which recensions or parts of al-Radd that author knew.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, it seems likely that the Recension 1 title simply contains a parellelism: the Jahmiy ya are described as Zanādiqa; the Jahmiyya's conception of God and his nature is zandaqa .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, because manuscripts may be lost, it is possible that the pattern suggested by the known manuscripts does not represent fully the history of the text .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Although the term”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites EI2, s.v."Zindīḳ" (F.C. de Blois)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites M. Chokr, Zandaqa et zindīqs en Islam au second siècle de l'hégire
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites S. Jackson, ...
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Whatever the case, if”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I was able to identify thirteen extant manuscript witnesses in total and consulted eight of the nine earliest witnesses .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 1. manuScriPtS and recenSionS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The idea for the text finds its roots in the earlist elaborations of Hanbali theology, perhaps even in the notebooks of Ibn Ḥanbal himself.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Abstract
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Recension 3 emerges in the Hanbali oeuvre in the eighth/fourteenth century in Damascus, but its origins remain obscure .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Another recension appears at the beginning of the sixth/twelfth century, perhaps also in Baghdad .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Abstract
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, although it seems clear that al-Salmāsī was describing the RefZan, the other evidence only connects him to the transmission of the RefJahm .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It also seems likely that it was in Baghdad that this happened, given the biographies of the two scholars cited .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Along with many others, Ibn Ḥanbal was famously interrogated in the miḥna over his theological positions (and, implicitly, his loyalty to temporal rule) .74”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.1. Quranic Arguments in the "Family" Biographies
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [74]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Al-Radd presents the opponents of the ulema as a group of generic”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is possible that he received it in Baghdad, which would tally well with Ibn ʿAqīl and al-Kalwadhānī's citing the text in the late fifth/eleventh century.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This leaves the possibility that either the RefZan or Recension 2 emerged sometime between the mid-fifth and early sixth/mid-eleventh and early twelfth centuries .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In short, the specific issue raised in al-Salmāsī's title clearly describes the contents of the RefZan, which discusses only that issue .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although there is some evidence to suggest he may have capitulated, many Hanbalis and others commemorate his forbearance; he is said to have resisted all manner of attacks, both theological and physical .75”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.1. Quranic Arguments in the "Family" Biographies
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [75]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“That is, al-Salmāsī rejected the Shafiʿiyya in their acceptance of Ashʿari creedal principles (uṣūl al-dīn) and hewed to the credo of the Hanbalis instead .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In other words, he was invested in what George Makdisi called”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
hedgedconditionalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Particularly important in the growth of this literature are what Michael Cooperson has called the”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.1. Quranic Arguments in the "Family" Biographies
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cooperson
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There is not much in Ibn Baṭṭa's biography to suggest an answer to his omitting any mention.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The way al-Radd is described by its two transmissions (i .e., as arguments refuting the Jahmiyya transmitted from ʿAbd Allāh to al-Khaḍir to al-Khallāl) does seem to reference or be modeled on at least one of al-Khallāl's versions of the list, yet al-Radd's author apparently felt a great deal of freedom: he used a largely different archive of quranic proof texts .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 99. Li-anna hādhihi al-āyāt al-ukhrā wa-hādhihi al-asmāʾ tubayyin annahu lā yakūnu min al-qurʾān shayʾ makhlūq .
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is most likely that Ibn al-Busrī was taken to”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This seems like a dead end, but it is worth pausing over Ibn Baṭṭa's biography because he was a contemporary of Ibn al-Nadīm, the earliest writer known to ascribe a text called al-Radd to Ibn Ḥanbal, and the one knew of the text but the other did not.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Recall that ʿAbd Allāh, al-Marrūdhī, and al-Khaḍir (the latter two apud al-Khallāl) all said that the lists were found in notebooks written in Aḥmad's own hand, and later scholars such as Ibn al-Qayyim adduced this claim as one piece of evidence for the text's authenticity .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Such is al-Radd's textual history .
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Several notes in the earliest manuscript of the text indicate that Ibn al-Nadīm was producing what he called a “fair copy” of his Fihrist in 377/987, but other evidence suggests he worked on it for decades, perhaps even right up to his death in 380/990 .135”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [135]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After all, al-Khallāl noted that Abū Bakr al-Marrūdhī freely amended the list he copied from Ibn Ḥanbal.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Such is al-Radd's textual history .
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The term “Jahmiyya” was clearly used in a broader sense.In a polemical letter directed at Ibn al-Qayyim, his contemporary, the Shafiʿi jurist Taqī al-Dīn al-Subkī, accuses Ibn al-Qayyim of using the word to refer to all the Ashʿariyya, a rival school of theology .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Such is al-Radd's textual history .
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites C. Bori and L. Holtzman
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Even if Ibn Ḥanbal did famously declare that he did not wish his writings to be reproduced lest they lead others into error or his motives be mistaken, “God decreed that his works should be copied, organized, and spread .”139”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Such is al-Radd's textual history .
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [139]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Both Riwāya X and Riwāya Y appear to be later fictions, however, given that neither al-Khallāl nor ʿAbd Allāh seems to have known al-Radd, despite being given credit for its transmission .114”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 99. Li-anna hādhihi al-āyāt al-ukhrā wa-hādhihi al-asmāʾ tubayyin annahu lā yakūnu min al-qurʾān shayʾ makhlūq .
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [114]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: If either ʿAbd Allāh or al-Khallāl had known al-Radd, they would have mentioned it, especially if Ibn Ḥanbal had actually written it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Devin Stewart has argued that Ibn al-Nadīm seems to have lived and worked in Mosul until ca.346-348/957-959, when he relocated to Baghdad (likely to al-Karkh, a Shiʿi enclave) .134”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [134]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“On the other hand, it seems unlikely that anyone would have bothered to return to the text had it only been meaningful in the context of Islamic theology's earlier history or the particular context of postmiḥna Baghdad, yet Hanbalis from a variety of intellectual contexts cite the text .137”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Such is al-Radd's textual history .
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [137]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ultimately, then, al-Radd differs in both form and content from the lists .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 99. Li-anna hādhihi al-āyāt al-ukhrā wa-hādhihi al-asmāʾ tubayyin annahu lā yakūnu min al-qurʾān shayʾ makhlūq .
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I suggested that Recension 2 (which contains the refutation of the Zanādiqa, RefZan, and that of the Jahmiyya, RefJahm) could not have emerged long before the first half of the sixth/twelfth century-nobody seems to know anything about it until then .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“There are also some suggestions that the text was unfinished at Ibn al-Nadīm's death, e.g., blank spaces left in the text to be filled in and passages out of order due (it seems) to space constraints.”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [135]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Given the high level of agreement between ʿAbd Allāh and al-Khallāl's lists and al-Khallāl's explanation that al-Marrūdhī added verses not appearing in al-Khaḍir's list, the lists may well stem from a common source, which, in light of the temporal proximity of both ʿAbd Allāh and al-Khallāl to Ibn Ḥanbal, would either have been Ibn Ḥanbal's own list or one created by his close companions (and”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 99. Li-anna hādhihi al-āyāt al-ukhrā wa-hādhihi al-asmāʾ tubayyin annahu lā yakūnu min al-qurʾān shayʾ makhlūq .
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [113]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I suspect that this manuscript may not actually be al-Radd; according to Sezgin, Bengal 866 runs over fifty folios, much longer than the other manuscripts (which tend to cover only ten to twenty folios).”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Additional information
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Stewart cites Ibn al-Nadīm's asking a jurist in 340/951 about things the jurist wrote as evidence that Ibn al-Nadīm was already gathering materials for al-Fihrist then .”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [135]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper relies on this without support.
The surviving manuscript witnesses and their relative copy dates are representative enough to infer the probable order in which the recensions emerged.
“Because the manuscripts all postdate the life of the purported author, the general pattern suggested by the manuscripts' relative dating is far from secure .”
The paper relies on this without support.
An author's extant citations are a reliable guide to which recensions or parts of al-Radd that author knew.
“In other words, it seems that Ibn Taymiyya knew only the RefJahm and the introduction directly”
The authors state this as an assumption.
If either ʿAbd Allāh or al-Khallāl had known al-Radd, they would have mentioned it, especially if Ibn Ḥanbal had actually written it.
“One imagines that if either of those scholars knew about al-Radd, they would have mentioned it, especially if it had been actually written by Ibn Ḥanbal.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
If the text emerged after ʿAbd Allāh's death, al-Khallāl might have known it.
“One assumes that if the text emerged after ʿAbd Allāh's death, al-Khallāl might have known it.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Ibn Baṭṭa may have written al-Ibāna before the RefJahm or Recension 1, around 340–350.
“it is entirely conceivable that Ibn Baṭṭa might have written al-Ibāna before the writing of the RefJahm or Recension 1 (say, ca .340-350)”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Ibn al-Nadīm heard about the RefJahm or Recension 1 within the next few decades.
“and that Ibn al-Nadīm heard about the RefJahm or Recension 1 in the next few decades.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Ibn Baṭṭa lived in ʿUkbarā for the last forty years of his life and may have ceased learning new texts.
“if Ibn Baṭṭa lived in ʿUkbarā the last forty years of his life, when he might have ceased learning (of) new texts”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Ibn Baṭṭa retired to ʿUkbarā around the time Ibn al-Nadīm arrived in Baghdad.
“he must have retired there just about the time Ibn al-Nadīm is thought to have arrived in Baghdad .136”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
“For instance, Ibn Baṭṭa (d.387/977), a student of Ghulām al-Khallāl”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 4.3. Al-Radd Appears: Ibn al-Farrāʾ
“it is generally agreed that he died in Muḥarram 387 (January 997).”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > References
“Yaḥyā al-Salmāsī (474-550/1100f.-1156)”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > 3. recenSion 2 and the originS of the refzan
“Riwāya Y indicates that he heard the text from Ibn Abī Yaʿlā in the Bāb al-Marātib neighborhood of east Baghdad during Rabīʿ II 504 (October-November 1110), i.e., when al-Salmāsī was some thirty years old .”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Such is al-Radd's textual history .
“WAK 171/3, 345/11 (Riwāya”
§ Ibn Ḥanbal's Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History > Such is al-Radd's textual history .
“MS 345/10* Jumādā I 1295 (May 1878, a Friday)”
Citations
Cites
Muslim theology : a study of origins with reference to the Church Fathers
Seale, M. S. (1964) · Luzac eBooks · Cited by 42
THE CATALOGUE OF ARABIC MANUSCRIPTS (YAHUDA SECTION) OF THE GARRETT COLLECTION
ORMSBY (1978) · The Princeton University Library Chronicle · doi:10.2307/26402224 · Cited by 24
Gotz, M., & Voorhoeve, P. (1963) · Oriens · doi:10.2307/1580292 · Cited by 16
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- George Makdisi suggests, in the now somewhat outdated "Ashʿarī and the Ashʿarites in Islamic Religious History" (Studia Islamica 17 [1962]: 37-80; 18 [1963]: 19-39), that the Shafiʿiyya were split: some regarded the Ashʿari dialectical method as a sound basis for uṣūl al-dīn, but others regarded it as an innovation on their "tradition- alist" theology, which held that scriptural accounts should be accepted without investigation . Thus, the traditionalist Shafiʿiyya was more closely aligned with the traditionalist Hanbalis than with the Ashʿari Shafiʿiyya (Makdisi 1962: 79; 1963: 38) .
- J . J . Witkam, Inventory of the Oriental Manuscripts in Leiden University Library, vol . 7 (Leiden: Ter Lugt Press, 2007), 101; online at http://www . islamicmanuscripts .info/inventories/leiden/index .html . 153. Ibn Ḥanbal, Radd, 140-41, 165-66 (plates) . Al-ʿAjmī does not give a number for this manuscript, and I was unable to locate it in Fihrist al-makhṭūṭāt fī markaz al-malik Fayṣal li-l-buḥūth wa-l-dirāsāt al-islāmiyya, ed .
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Konstruksi Pemikiran Hukum Islam Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal: Pendekatan Sejarah Sosial Hukum Islam
Zainuddin, M. (2023) · Legitimasi Jurnal Hukum Pidana dan Politik Hukum · doi:10.22373/legitimasi.v12i2.19858 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- McLaren, A. G.
- Corresponding author
- McLaren, Andrew G.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Oriental Society
- Publisher
- American Oriental Society
- Published
- 2021-09-19
- Volume
- 140
- Issue
- 4
- ISSN
- 0003-0279 (ISSN-L)
- 2169-2289
- OpenAlex
- W3112688891
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1
- FWCI
- 1.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of the American Oriental Society (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Islamic Thought and Society Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Historical and Linguistic Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Qur’anic Interpretation Studies
- Keywords
- Ibn Hanbal, textual history, manuscript recensions, Islamic polemics, early Islamic theology, Baghdad
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-04, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-04 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ibn Ḥanbal’s Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7817/jameroriesoci.140.4.0901
- The paper
- McLaren, A. G. (2021). Ibn Ḥanbal’s Refutation of the Jahmiyya: A Textual History. Journal of the American Oriental Society. https://doi.org/10.7817/jameroriesoci.140.4.0901
