One minor but significant theme in the Khalidi text is Jesus’s confrontations with and condemnations of scholars. The first such saying, 17, condemns as “seditious” the errant scholar, because his errors cause many others to fall as well. Frequently, scholars are condemned for having knowledge but lacking good works (e.g., 43, 46). Saying 67 and 68 continue this critique, observing the ease with which the scholar inclines toward pride or toward love of the world. Saying 93 in particular echoes Jesus’s words to the Pharisees in linking the concerns with conceit and worldliness: those who prefer the esteem accorded to scholars precisely are the worldly ones, who receive their only reward in this world. In opposition to this paradigm, the sayings enjoin the possession of some wisdom and a far greater measure of deeds: in this fashion, one both describes the road and proceeds upon it (92).
In a number of places, this portrait of Jesus’s hostility to scholars seems to accord with the Gospels; in this connection, I think particularly of saying 93, with its echoes of Jesus’s critique of the Pharisees, or saying 94, which condemns the hypocrisy of those scholars who enjoin one practice but fail to abide by it. On the other hand, however, the attitude toward scholars presented in this text often appears harsher (or at least lacks some of the qualifications) which we might recognize in the Gospels or elsewhere in the New Testament. Thus, to cite one example, Jesus’s rebuke of hypocritical scholars, with its strong resonances of Matthew 23, lacks Matthew’s emphasis that obedience be accorded to the pharisees on account of their office (the seat of Moses).
In many places, this hostility seems to reflect a greater continuity with the Christian ascetic tradition (E.g., the saying of the desert fathers, referenced as a possible source these texts) than with the complete witness of the Gospels. Assuming that the author or compiler of the Islamic Jesus saying was familiar with both sources, as Khalidi seems to indicate, what might be the rationale for such an emphasis? Is it to be located strictly in the available source material? Contemporary political concerns, to which Khalidi occasionally alludes? Or is their something of a theological agenda on display as well?
Christian-Muslim relations blog 
Claude, interesting question, and I have no idea what the rationale for such decisions is. Just to speculate, might it be bound up with the attempt to render Jesus as a human prophet with no divine authority and who rejects this world? Or perhaps the attempt to scrub the sayings of their context in the Gospels? I’m not sure, but these are some of the other choices made to adjust the sayings from the Gospel, so perhaps they are related to an overall rationale. Or maybe not!
LikeLike
Thanks Claude (and for your reply too Stephanie). The Muslim Jesus (meaning the Jesus of the sayings we read) in a number of ways shows traits which are not obvious in the Qur’an – one of these is indeed the critique of religious scholars. I think this *may* have some basis in the Gospel critique of the scribes and Pharisees, but it is more likely to me that this emerges from the Sufi circles from which most of these sayings emerge. I think Jesus becomes their mouthpiece and therefore critiques religious scholars who are more focused on debates and authority than on the spiritual path.
LikeLike