Abstract
The aim of this article is to focus on the views of modern Western scholars regarding the authenticity of the Document of Medina and its unity in relation to its date and preservation, rather than on the debates over its content. The focus is on their rationale for defending its authenticity despite the limited number of aḥadīth they date back to the first Islamic century. Additionally, considering the fact that many other reports with the characteristics of the document are not considered authentic, the question is raised whether it is the “sunna” of their predecessors that is actually decisive, since the testimony has been considered authentic since Julies Wellhausen on the same grounds.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
