592 Mohammad's Journey to Syria, [No. 7. 



Musalmans who had no protection, this reason therefore falls to the 

 ground. 



It has already heen stated that the tradition of Tirmidzy is the 

 most authentic. It was in the third century of the Hijrah traced 

 through different authorities to 'alyy (see Taysyr) and to Abu Miisa 

 Ash'ary, and we have evidence that it had been taken to paper at the 

 very latest, about the middle of the second century. The first tradi- 

 tion of Waqidy p. 585 and that taken from the Mawahib do not essen- 

 tially differ from it, and may be considered condensed fragments of the 

 same tradition. 



The second tradition of Waqidy bears equally the stamp of high 

 antiquity, and admitting as it does that MoAammad was in his youth 

 an idolator that of truth. Moreover it had been handed down by the 

 most respectable authorities. Waqidy who was born in A. H. 130 

 had it from two men, who cannot be supposed to have conspired to 

 deceive him, this version of the story must therefore have existed in 

 the first century of the Hijrah. 



It appears then that in the first century, two versions were extant, 

 represented by Tirmidzy and Waqidy, and on examining the account 

 of Ibn Is^aq, we find that it is composed of these two. The first part 

 contains an embellished version of Tirmidzy's tradition, and the con- 

 clusion agrees literally with Waqidy's. But there are some additions. 

 No authority is stated in support of them, but they are cautiously 

 introduced by "it is supposed." The Musalmans are scandalized at 

 the idea that MoAammad should ever have worshipped idols, and 

 therefore not only is the passage of Waqidy omitted in which it is 

 allowed that he had done so, but it is said that MoAammad reproved 

 the Monk (or Hermit) for swearing by al-Lat and al'ozza. (Later 

 authors have improved on Ibn IsAaq, and assert that Mohammad 

 refused to swear by these two idols, when required to do so by a 

 merchant). It is no doubt the same spirit of dishonesty which 

 manifests itself in this addition, which induced Ibn IsAaq to state that 

 Abu Talib returned fast with him to Makkah instead of the words " he 

 sent him back, &c." as he found in the two traditions which he fol- 

 lowed. By these means and by omitting in another part of his work 

 the very mention of the deputation of Abrahah of which Ba^yra was a 

 member, he got over the charges of the Christians against the prophet. 



