Stylometric analysis is the quantitative study of linguistic patterns in texts to identify unique characteristics of an author’s style. It leverages statistical and computational methods to analyze features such as word frequency, sentence structure, punctuation, and even rhythm or syntax. Stylometry assumes that each writer develops an unconscious and consistent way of expressing themselves, which can serve as a “fingerprint” for their authorship.
Stylometric Analysis of Quran & Hadith
Sunni apologists often refer to stylometric analysis research as evidence to substantiate the authenticity of Hadith, arguing that the distinct linguistic patterns observed in the Quran and Hadith confirm their separate origins and therefore reinforce the reliability and authenticity of the sayings attributed to the prophet found in Hadith. At first glance, this might seem like a compelling argument. However, upon closer examination, it becomes evident that the research does not support these claims and is fraught with methodological flaws and interpretive gaps.
Articles
Stylometric analysis has been employed, most notably by the researcher Halim Sayoud. These studies analyze linguistic features to demonstrate that the Quran and the Hadith were authored by different entities. This is known as “authorship discrimination” in the field of stylometric analysis and consists in checking if two different texts are written by the same author or not. Below are links and a brief summary of four of his key articles on this topic.
“Stylometric Comparison between the Quran and Hadith based on Successive Function Words: Could the Quran be written by the Prophet?” by Halim Sayoud (2022).
This study examines the use of successive function words in both texts, finding significant stylistic differences that suggest distinct authorship.
Significance
“Visual Analytics Based Authorship Discrimination Using Interrogative Particles: Application to the Quran and Hadith” by Halim Sayoud (2018).
This paper utilizes visual analytics and interrogative particles to differentiate between the texts, further indicating separate authorship.
Springer Link
“Segmental Analysis-Based Authorship Discrimination between the Holy Quran and Prophet’s Statements” by Halim Sayoud (2015).
This research conducts a segmental analysis of the two texts, revealing clear distinctions in writing styles, supporting the conclusion of different authors.
Digital Studies
“ Author discrimination between the Holy Quran and Prophet’s statements” by Halim Sayoud (2012)
This study uses stylometric analysis and machine learning to compare the Quran with Hadith texts from Sahih Bukhari in order to determine whether they share the same author.
Oxford Academic
Sunni vs. Research Claims
Sunni apologists often misrepresent the claims and findings of these studies. As noted earlier, the primary goal of these papers was to identify distinct linguistic patterns between the Quran and Hadith and to explore authorship discrimination—essentially, determining whether the two texts were written by the same author. As stated in the author’s 2022 paper:
“ That is, the main purpose of this investigation is to conduct a fair text-mining based investigation (i.e. authorship discrimination) in order to see if the two concerned books have the same or different authors (Mills 2003; Tambouratzis 2000, 2003) with a maximum of objectivity. “
The research does not confirm the authenticity of the Hadith or establish that it originates from even a single source. It simply concludes that the Quran and Hadith have different sources. This distinction does not require complex stylometric analysis to be recognized. Any reasonable person who reads both texts can immediately discern that one reflects a divine origin, while the other does not.
Problems with Hadith Dataset
These papers also have a significant issue: the assumption that the dataset of statements attributed to the Prophet is valid. If the dataset is flawed or unreliable, the analysis will also be flawed and unreliable. This is a clear example of the principle “junk in, junk out,” where poor-quality input leads to meaningless results. In his 2022 article, Sayoud claims,
“Fortunately, we also possess a copy of the Hadith, which represents the original statements and speech of the Prophet.”
The author uses the term “copy of the Hadith” as if a single book of Hadith was compiled and preserved along the Quran. The fact is there is no single “copy” of Hadith as there are hundreds of volumes of Hadith in the Hadith corpus, all with various narrations attributed to the prophet with differing gradings. Despite not mentioning in his 2022 paper which “copy of Hadith” he is referring to, in his 2015 article, the author indicates that he extracted statements from Bukhari (d. 870CE). This automatically makes the dataset biased, as all the narrations are from a single author, Bukhari.
Additionally, there are issues with the text of Bukhari as a whole. The oldest Arabic manuscript of Bukhari is dated 1017 CE and only contains books 65 through 69, with book 65 being incomplete. This manuscript is kept at the National Library of Bulgaria, and can be viewed online at World Digital Library ‘s official website.
The oldest full manuscript is a version narrated by Abu Dharr al-Heravi (d. 1043CE), kept at the Süleymaniye Library in Istanbul, and dated 1155 CE / 550 AH. Another complete manuscript is kept at Chester Beatty Library in Dublin, Ireland (no. 4176). It was copied by Ahmad bin Ali bin Abdul Wahhab and was dated 28 November 1294 CE / 8 Muharram 694 AH.
So, even if we discount the ~250-year gap between the death of the prophet and Bukhari’s compilation of his Sahih, there is an additional gap of hundreds of years and numerous narrators between Bukhari to the first complete manuscript we have. Additionally, there are different versions of Bukhari’s Sahih. Today, the most famous version is the version transmitted by Muhammad ibn Yusuf al-Firabri (d. 932 CE), and all modern printed versions are derived from this version. While the differences in the versions are said to be minor, this is critical for stylometric analysis as the text’s subtle differences will impact the results. All this compounds the fact that puts in question the text that is even used that are being attribute to the prophet.
Moreover, as we will see, none of these statements found in any Hadith book can even be attributed to the prophet as actual statements he made.
Hadith are not verbatim statements from the prophet
The fundamental problem in this kind of analysis is that even among Sunni authorities, the Hadith are not considered verbatim statements by the prophet. For example, we see the following quotes made by companions and the most prominent Tabi’i, Hasan al-Basri, regarding this matter.
“ The Companion Wathila b. Asqa‘ had admitted that sometimes the early Muslims even confused the exact wording of the Quran, which was universally well-known and well-preserved. So how, he asked, could one expect any less in the case of a report that the Prophet had said just once? Al-Hasan al-Basri is reported to have said, If we only narrated to you what we could repeat word for word, we would only narrate two hadiths.”
– Hadith Muhammad’s Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World p. 24
100+ Year Gap Between Prophet (d. 632 CE) and Written Hadith
The second issue is that there are no manuscripts of written Hadith for the first hundred years, as those who even looked to Hadith viewed the idea of writing Hadith as not permissible. It wasn’t until the 8th century hadith scholar Az-Zuhri (d. 742 CE) was compelled by the Umayyad ruler Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan to begin the practice, which he previously opposed. He is attributed with stating,
“The rulers made me write [the tradition down] (istaktabani). Then I made them (i.e. the rulers’ princes) copy it (fa-aktabu-hum). Now that the rulers have written it (i.e. the tradition), I am ashamed I do not write it for anyone else but them.”
– Motzki 2004, p. 86, citing a narration found in Ibn Abd al-Barr’s Jami
No Hadith is Genuinely Mutawatir
Thirdly, virtually no Hadith is mass-transmitted (mutawatir). The simplest reason for this is that something that is genuinely mass-transmitted does not require a chain of transmitters (isnad). A chain of transmitters is only required if the information is dubious.
For example, no one bothered applying an isnad to the Quran for the first ~400 years after its revelation. It wasn’t until the 4th Hijri (10th CE) that an isnad for the Quran was even concocted. This is because the earliest believers all understood that the Quran is the most widely circulated masterfully preserved text in history, and just like any other fact that is genuinely mutawatir, it did not require an isnad to prove its authenticity. Additionally, the work of Shady Nasser shows that the isnads applied to the various reciters are dubious at best.
In the book “Hadith, Muhammad’s Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World,” by Jonathan A.C. Brown, on page 109, it states:
The categories of mutawatir and had were similarly unsuitable for the hadith tradition, for essentially all hadiths were ahad. As Ibn al-Salah (d. 643/1245), the most famous scholar of hadith criticism in the later period, explained, at most one hadith (‘Whoever lies about me, let him prepare for himself a seat in Hellfire.’) would meet the requirements for mutawatir. [1] No hadiths could actually be described as being narrated by a large number of narrators at every stage of their transmission. In fact, when Mu’tazilites had insisted that hadiths be transmitted by a mere two people at every stage, the Sunni Ibn Hibban had accused them of trying to destroy the Sunna of the prophet in its entirety. [2]
[1] Ibn al-Salah, Muqaddima p. 454
[2] Ibn Hibban, Sahih Ibn Hibban, vol. 1, p. 145
Ironically, even this supposed mutawatir Hadith has variations, so it cannot be considered the absolute verbatim statement from the prophet.
Therefore, attempting to do any kind of stylometric analysis on Hadith fails out of the gate because aside from the Quran, we do not have any actual word-for-word statements from the Hadith corpus.
Speech vs. Text
One last critical issue must be addressed when evaluating the use of stylometric analysis for authorship discrimination, particularly in comparisons between the Quran and the Hadith. For such analysis to be valid, it must compare composed text to composed text. This fundamental criterion is not met in the case of the Quran and Hadith. The Quran is a fully composed text, while the Hadith comprises reported sayings of Muhammad, transmitted orally before being compiled into written collections.
Even if one sets aside the debate over whether the Hadith accurately represents the Prophet’s words, stylometric analysis requires both works to be treated as authored texts to yield reliable results. The Quran’s carefully constructed structure stands in stark contrast to the conversational and varied nature of the Hadith. This difference undermines any argument that stylometric analysis can effectively compare the two for authorship discrimination. Spoken language differs significantly from written language, as they serve distinct purposes and adhere to different stylistic conventions.
To illustrate this point, consider William Shakespeare. If one were to compare his meticulously crafted literary works to his casual spoken language, the differences would be so pronounced that they might suggest two separate individuals. It would be absurd to think Shakespeare spoke in his daily life in the same style he wrote in his plays and sonnets. Similarly, comparing the Quran’s written poetic form to the Hadith’s conversational oral traditions does not provide a meaningful basis for determining authorship. And this is coming from someone who believes the Quran was the speech of God, while the Hadith was the concoction of men.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the validity of the Hadith dataset used in these studies is fundamentally compromised by several issues, including the lack of verbatim statements from the Prophet, significant time gaps between his life and the compilation of Hadith, and the inherent lack of reliability in sources. This is a classic example of the principle “junk in, junk out,” where flawed or biased input data inevitably produce unreliable results. These foundational problems undermine the credibility of any conclusions drawn from such analyses.
Furthermore, while stylometric analysis offers an intriguing method for examining linguistic patterns and exploring questions of authorship, its application, as utilized in the respective papers of the Quran and Hadith, is deeply flawed. The Quran, as a composed and meticulously preserved written text, contrasts sharply with the Hadith, which comprises of questionable orally transmitted sayings subjected to centuries of compilation and interpretation. These fundamental differences render any direct comparison unreliable, and the conclusions derived from such analysis as highly untrustworthy.
Finally, the misrepresentation of these studies by apologists further highlights the disconnect between the actual findings and the claims made to support the authenticity of Hadith. The research does not validate the Hadith corpus or confirm its attribution to the prophet; it merely attempts to establish linguistic differences between the Quran and Hadith—something readily apparent to any discerning reader without the need for complex analysis. Ultimately, the Quran stands as a unique and unparalleled text, while the Hadith remains a human construct plagued by historical, textual, and methodological challenges.