59:7 - Explain.
-
Peace all,
How true !!!!!!!!!!!! bravo
I only wish the author learns from his own words.
Readily available AUTHENTIC resource = The Qur'aan
Ignorance = ignorance of The God's message
Arrogance = arrogance by thinking one knows better than The God. When The God directly and clearly tells us not to trust ANY hadeeth other than His words, then saying "no, I will trust hadeeth other than God's revelations too" = ARROGANCE
Refusal to learn = refusal to learn from The God's CLEAR message
I agree, all this defeats the MOST BASIC message of al-qur'aan, and is the WORST thing that can happen to a person.
Beautiful post )
Salaam all,
OPF, the people of authority are the people who have the authority of giving us orders and the people who have more knowledge than we do. It starts from our parents on.
The message is not limited to the Qur'an. In fact, the Qur'an never limited the message to only the Qur'an. You can search and you will not have proofs of limitation.
Tanveer, The material of hadeeth is finite. You can start by studying what is attributed to the prophet and then decide on what is and what is not.
A person can make a consistent method of authentification in any way he or she wants. Refusal outright is both ignorant and arrogant. It is the same error as accepting all hadeeth without questioninig.
Muslims in the early generations learnt Islam not by reading the Qur'an alone, but by mentorship and discipleship. This is what happened in the first 150 years. When the divergence of opinion became greater, there was a need for a stronger criterion of following and that was hadeeth.
The material of hadeeth contains the thought process of the early Muslims who knew Arabic better than you or I can dream. So, even if the hadeeth is false, it can still carry an opinion that is worth of study and cannot be dismissed outright.
This does not mean that one has to live in the 7th century as many of you may respond. It means that one needs to learn how to think and look at the material, the way they did in order to arrive at solutions for our modern day.
Authentic or not, hadeeth contain linguistic resources of the thoughts of the people who received the Qur'an. Something that your roots and dictionaries cannot give you.
Authentication of hadeeth does not depend on Isnad alone, it also depends on material in it. The problem with you guys is that you understand the Qur'an in such a narrow way and the hadeeth in another narrow way, that you cannot see that the Qur'an can encompass the authentic hadeeth within it easily and without pressure.
There is more to Isnad than what you guys see. It tells us about the schools of the different cities of early Islam, the thought processes. It is not limited to this is good or bad person. Also, one can link the quality of hadeeths and their believeability to the name of the person who narrated it. If a person narrated weird hadeeths then he takes that label.
The worst thing that can happen to a person is when he or she manifests ignorance with arrogance and refuses to learn from a readily avaible resource. It defeats the most basic message of the Qur'an and unfortunately, is manifest often in this forum.
Take care all.
Peace,
I understand that we are to obey all who are charged with authority based on knowledge, and not conjecture & hearsay (270-82, verse 80 is notable). Of course, obeying parents is key, but that is also in the Quran (298 amongst others). Obeying the scholars without justification is NOT (544, 563, 931-34, emphasis on verse 31). When they are going against Quranic teaching, we are ordered to disobey. Now cross-reference 931 with 298 and 459 and we get a general idea. This idea is reasonably simple to understand and consists of a few laws.
The first is that we should obey those charged with authority - 459. If we have doubts about their message, we refer to Allah and his messenger (through the Quran, at the lowest level). Now, we are also told to obey parents in 298. Specifically, however, we are to disobey them if they lead us away from Allah by taking others in worship besides him. 931 demonstrates very clearly that the act of shirk (which has the same meaning in English, interestingly) includes taking a human's word over the word of Allah's. Hence, we obey those with authority, and disobey the mushriks, and the criterion for this is Al-Quran. Is this bad reasoning?
The message is not limited to the Qur'an. In fact, the Qur'an never limited the message to only the Qur'an. You can search and you will not have proofs of limitation.
The Quran states that law itself is restricted to judgement through the Quran alone
006.114
YUSUFALI Say "Shall I seek for judge other than Allah? - when He it is Who hath sent unto you the Book, explained in detail." They know full well, to whom We have given the Book, that it hath been sent down from thy Lord in truth. Never be then of those who doubt.
PICKTHAL Shall I seek other than Allah for judge, when He it is Who hath revealed unto you (this) Scripture, fully explained? Those unto whom We gave the Scripture (aforetime) know that it is revealed from thy Lord in truth. So be not thou (O Muhammad) of the waverers.
SHAKIR Shall I then seek a judge other than Allah? And He it is Who has revealed to you the Book (which is) made plain; and those whom We have given the Book know that it is revealed by your Lord with truth, therefore you should not be of the disputers.006.115
YUSUFALI The word of thy Lord doth find its fulfilment in truth and in justice None can change His words for He is the one who heareth and knoweth all.
PICKTHAL Perfected is the Word of thy Lord in truth and justice. There is naught that can change His words. He is the Hearer, the Knower.
SHAKIR And the word of your Lord has been accomplished truly and justly; there is none who can change His words, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing.006.116
YUSUFALI Wert thou to follow the common run of those on earth, they will lead thee away from the way of Allah. They follow nothing but conjecture they do nothing but lie.
PICKTHAL If thou obeyedst most of those on earth they would mislead thee far from Allah's way. They follow naught but an opinion, and they do but guess.
SHAKIR And if you obey most of those in the earth, they will lead you astray from Allah's way; they follow but conjecture and they only lie.006.117
YUSUFALI Thy Lord knoweth best who strayeth from His way He knoweth best who they are that receive His guidance.
PICKTHAL Lo! thy Lord, He knoweth best who erreth from His way; and He knoweth best (who are) the rightly guided.
SHAKIR Surely your Lord-- He best knows who goes astray from His way, and He best knows those who follow the right course.There is, of course, an exit clause somewhere that shows that law itself can be used according to the truth. Aside from the Quran, our next best method is not hearsay and conjecture, it is observation of the world around us. These things always lead back to the Quranic law. We find pornography is bad, hypocrisy is bad, there is harm in intoxicants, there is benefit in intoxicants, adultery is bad for society, religion should be free, so on, and so on. These can all be deduced WITHOUT the Quran. Slowly, the world catches on.
Our argument here is NOT that we should disobey the truth. Our argument is that these scholars do not speak truth, they speak horses*** (Egypt, Al-Azhar, breast feeding!?!). We are NOT to obey conjecture and hearsay, this is clearly outlined. We are to follow the best of the message (391. Allah's hadeeth is THE BEST of the hadeeth (3923). Why is this word not untranslated in the majority whereas when this noun is attributed to Bukhari it is left as such? Is this not a concealment of the truth?
A person can make a consistent method of authentification in any way he or she wants. Refusal outright is both ignorant and arrogant. It is the same error as accepting all hadeeth without questioninig.
The Quran has the BEST method of authentication. I will not post the verses because they take up a few pages.
Muslims in the early generations learnt Islam not by reading the Qur'an alone, but by mentorship and discipleship. This is what happened in the first 150 years. When the divergence of opinion became greater, there was a need for a stronger criterion of following and that was hadeeth.
In other words they also followed conjecture and hearsay? The criterion is very simple, it is also called "the reading". Why did they choose to obey a different criterion when they had the BEST 114 chapter criterion sitting in front of them? Does error multiplying cause good? If these people are in error and you appeal to them to justify error, does that make it any better even taking into account the 1 1/2 millenia past? Not at all. The hadeeth history itself shows much judgement from other than the Quran, this is most evident in the Sunni/Shia rift. They are both Shia as far as I'm concerned.
The material of hadeeth contains the thought process of the early Muslims who knew Arabic better than you or I can dream. So, even if the hadeeth is false, it can still carry an opinion that is worth of study and cannot be dismissed outright.
Correct. It would probably make a good linguistic reference if anything else. Unfortunately the message presented is mostly useless and contradictory to Quranic guidelines.
Authentication of hadeeth does not depend on Isnad alone, it also depends on material in it. The problem with you guys is that you understand the Qur'an in such a narrow way and the hadeeth in another narrow way, that you cannot see that the Qur'an can encompass the authentic hadeeth within it easily and without pressure.
I just don't know where to start with this quote. The material is worthless. Just worthless. As for understanding the Quran in a narrow way, who is narrower, those who accept the Quran's application to everything or those who fetter the Quran through supposed events (i.e. conjecture and hearsay) that occured in the context of the revelation of a verse? It appears you do not understand the very meaning of conjecture or hearsay. Let's give you a clue - Person A told me Person B said that Person C said that Person D was dining with his mother, Person E who told him that Person F saw the Prophet talking to Person G who was told "..." - THAT is hearsay, that is conjecture. There is a game played in nursery, it's called "Chinese Whispers". The isnad of a hadeeth in this game is relatively just as long in this pre-school game. The isnad is fully authentic and 100% verified to be so.
This does not mean that one has to live in the 7th century as many of you may respond. It means that one needs to learn how to think and look at the material, the way they did in order to arrive at solutions for our modern day.
We are told to trade in camels and dirhams. We can look towards the Quran for actual guidance, thank you very much.
There is more to Isnad than what you guys see. It tells us about the schools of the different cities of early Islam, the thought processes. It is not limited to this is good or bad person. Also, one can link the quality of hadeeths and their believeability to the name of the person who narrated it. If a person narrated weird hadeeths then he takes that label.
Goodbye Abu Hurairah and also Imam Bukhari (. DO let the door hit you on the way out, Mr Father of Cats and his friend the 10 year old superhuman.
The worst thing that can happen to a person is when he or she manifests ignorance with arrogance and refuses to learn from a readily avaible resource. It defeats the most basic message of the Qur'an and unfortunately, is manifest often in this forum.
I am glad we can come to a common understanding )
See Tanveer's post.
Peace.
It is obvious that none of you are willing to deal with reality!!! You all sound like fanatical emotional Christians. And what I mean by that is that, you are all arguing from emotion, NOT FACTS, or even attempts at the facts. And you never deal with the real issues when they are presented. And when you attempt to do so, you leave the whole context of the discussion, create your own context, and then refute what you superimposed. And I missed a class in logic. You guys couldn't even get in the door. The Brother Hlatif, posted a well structured rebuttal to Nun, and to all by default, since all of you are in the same chorus. And when the infamous OPF attempted to respond, just look at how far he is from the intent of the Ayat that Hlatif employedand argues with nonsense point of views. My friends, you cannot let your hatred of people cause you to avoid and reject the truth. Now, I have listed several Ayat that clearly shows that we are to obey and follow the Messenger (S). And you guys know these Ayat, but your arrogance makes you blind and causes you to say the most absurd stuff, like "impossible to obey and follow the deceased". This is one of thee most ridiculous statements I have heard in this site thus far. There exist in this country (USA) a "Constitution". It was written several hundred years ago. In it is laws of the land, which are to be obeyed and followed. Any violation of these laws will result in problem for those who make such infractions. My friends, if you are here in the USA, you do obey them and follow them. Yet, all of those who was responsible for putting these laws together, are well dead. What in the world does living and being dead have anything to do with obeying and following the injunctions and example of someone?
I also asked a question to the forum participants; I asked, does anyone know what Asbab un nuzool is? I have not heard a peep about that question! I wonder why? I posed several questions, and almost hands down, no one has yet to deal with them. And again, if you attempted to deal with it, it was so evading. Since you guys have all the answers, where are they when serious core questions are asked of you? So I will give YOU ALL, another chance to prove to me, that you at least have a ground to stand on to even enter into a serious discussion on this subject, because I am just testing the waters, my next step is to blow all of you pretenders out of the water!
Below are some questions and maybe statements that I would really like you guys to consider. If you (at least one of you) can answer them, then we can move to another aspect of this issue. Note, these questions may sound like they don't make sense or are absurd, but if you really think over them, you will see how absurd you are, especially if you can't bring forth any answer to them!!!
Ques #1 What is the name of the Messenger that ALLAH revealed the Qur'an to?
And if you say it was Prophet Muhammad (S), please provide me with any ayah in the Qur'an where ALLAH says that HE revealed "The Qur'an" (by name) to "Prophet Muhammad" (S) (by name). Meaning like And it is ALLAH who revealed "The Qur'an or even Kitab to Muhammad". Please provide just ONE Ayah!!! And I will help you all out, the Prophet Muhammad's 'Name' is ONLY mentioned four times in the entire Qur'an. And if you cannot provide an Ayah like such, and you will never be able to do so, THEN HISTORICALLY, HOW DO YOU KNOW, AND HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD (S) WAS THE ONE WHO RECEIVED THE REVELATION OF THE QUR'AN? REMEBER "ONLY QUR'AN PEOPLE" WE ARE TALKING ABOUT FACTS AND PROVING THEM BY THE CLEAR STATEMENTS OF THE QUR'AN!!!
Due to my time constraints, I have to excuse myself, but I want to post this now, I will finish this later, Insha-ALLAH. But in meantime, if any think they are wise enough to answer the question, then be my guest. But remember "ONLY QUR'AN PEOPLE" it has to state it in no uncertain terms!!!
Salam,
If you wish to argue logic, we can. Let's look at your post.
First sentence It is obvious that none of you are willing to deal with reality!!! You all sound like fanatical emotional Christians. And what I mean by that is that, you are all arguing from emotion, NOT FACTS, or even attempts at the facts.
Irony or hypocrisy, you choose. "You sound like fanatical emotional Christiians" is equally an emotional statement. There is no way to verify that we "sound like fanatical emotional Christians". This falls under the "No true X" fallacy also. You have also shown a remarkable dedication to ignoring fact that opposed your views.
Second sentence And you never deal with the real issues when they are presented. And when you attempt to do so, you leave the whole context of the discussion, create your own context, and then refute what you superimposed.
Again, selective perception. Selective perception is wrong in every way. There is no strawman in much of these arguments presented. The "whole context of the discussion" is presumably Asbab al-Nuzul. Which is, ironically, the very subject of discussion. The fallacy here is attempting to use the item in dispute as a proved point.
Third sentence And I missed a class in logic. You guys couldn't even get in the door.
Let's cease hostilities here.
Fourth And when the infamous OPF attempted to respond, just look at how far he is from the intent of the Ayat that Hlatif employedand argues with nonsense point of views. My friends, you cannot let your hatred of people cause you to avoid and reject the truth.
Another ridiculous fallacy. I already stated I accept the Quran, the whole Quran and nothing but the Quran. Is that not truth? As for the intent, I believe you will find it now cross-referenced with a few other verses from the Quran. There are many, many more to substantiate the point, those are verses I noted off the top of my head. In fact, the Quran is littered with such verses depicting malevolant authority being used to spread falsehood and misconceptions.
Fifth Now, I have listed several Ayat that clearly shows that we are to obey and follow the Messenger (S). And you guys know these Ayat, but your arrogance makes you blind and causes you to say the most absurd stuff, like "impossible to obey and follow the deceased".
More selective perception. Please see my argument for Nun De Plume. I personally recommend Vision Express for all your reading glasses, though in an authentic hadeeth, I heard Specsavers had 10% off.
Sixth onwards his is one of thee most ridiculous statements I have heard in this site thus far. There exist in this country (USA) a "Constitution". It was written several hundred years ago. In it is laws of the land, which are to be obeyed and followed. Any violation of these laws will result in problem for those who make such infractions. My friends, if you are here in the USA, you do obey them and follow them. Yet, all of those who was responsible for putting these laws together, are well dead. What in the world does living and being dead have anything to do with obeying and following the injunctions and example of someone?
The irony is exceedingly succulent in this paragraph. The similitudes presented are also notable, and sourly funny. Let me understand your point of view. This country, America has a constitution, written down in the 1700s, by very wise men who were muhajiroun, correct? The fallacy here is on two accounts. This analogy does not take into account the creation of ahadeeth/extra law, it leaves the constitution, the whole constitution and nothing but the constitution. Let's suppose Abraham Lincoln came along and said "Alright, this Constitution is not clear enough for us, we need unverified conjecture and hearsay to help". This creates Sahih Al-Abraham Ibn Lincoln. In the modern day, Mr George W. decides to throw the constitution away. Not so much throw it away, but revise it to suit Sahih Al-Ibrahim Bin Lincoln. The argument that he should follow the constitution, first, is thrown out of court by executive powers - "obey those charged with authority". Yet, "if you differ in a matter amongst yourselves, refer to the Founding Fathers & their associates" takes precedence. When we look at this in court, they are clearly in error according to the constitution itself. However, the latter day law of Sahih Ibn Al-Ibrahim Ibn Lincoln, of course permits it (though beloved Georgey boy picks and chooses which of those to follow also). Clearly there is manifest error in two ways here. Firstly, George is wrong according to the constitution - period. Sahih Ibn Al-Ibrahim Ibn Lincoln is ALSO wrong - because it allows that which is forbidden constitutionally. Nobody has a problem with following our constitution, the Quran. We disobey those charged with authority because THEY do not adhere to the constitution/Quran. The examples and injuctions of someone are clearly laid out in the message they brought forward (Muhammad was not acting purely as an envoy but also as a delegate, on behalf), not the indirect biographies of them creating by others using unverified hearsay and conjecture.
I also asked a question to the forum participants; I asked, does anyone know what Asbab un nuzool is? I have not heard a peep about that question! I wonder why? I posed several questions, and almost hands down, no one has yet to deal with them. And again, if you attempted to deal with it, it was so evading. Since you guys have all the answers, where are they when serious core questions are asked of you? So I will give YOU ALL, another chance to prove to me, that you at least have a ground to stand on to even enter into a serious discussion on this subject, because I am just testing the waters, my next step is to blow all of you pretenders out of the water!
You evaded a legitimate point, which was to state clearly that asbab un nuzool is IRRELEVANT because of the nature of the Quran itself. The entire reason I asked whether you believe the Quran can be verified here and now based on the science verses is based on this. You chose to ignore it; it exposes your clear deceit. So far you have presented ZERO logical argument. I advise you just step aside and let people such as Hussein Latif make the point for Sunnism, because he gets straight to the point instead of dwelling on concealing truth using Arabic terminology in Sunni contexts in a forum where nobody generally cares for the latter.
Ques #1 What is the name of the Messenger that ALLAH revealed the Qur'an to?
See Nun De Plume. I can add to that post. The name of this messenger is "IRRELEVANT". Let that sink into your brain. We do not significantly need to know anything about the messenger other than that which is outlined in a fully detailed Quran. Anything we have of those 1400 millenia preceding events are nought but hearsay and conjecture save the Quran, which can be verified today. Some can be substantiated with archaeological evidence, hence we have evidence for Christianity & Judaism. Due to the hearsay/gossip nature of ahadith, there is very little we can even look for in archaeology to find anything - the overwhelming majority refers to speech. Do we look for Aisha & Muhammad's bath water and check for menstrual blood?
And if you say it was Prophet Muhammad (S), please provide me with any ayah in the Qur'an where ALLAH says that HE revealed "The Qur'an" (by name) to "Prophet Muhammad" (S) (by name). Meaning like And it is ALLAH who revealed "The Qur'an or even Kitab to Muhammad". Please provide just ONE Ayah!!! And I will help you all out, the Prophet Muhammad's 'Name' is ONLY mentioned four times in the entire Qur'an. And if you cannot provide an Ayah like such, and you will never be able to do so, THEN HISTORICALLY, HOW DO YOU KNOW, AND HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD (S) WAS THE ONE WHO RECEIVED THE REVELATION OF THE QUR'AN? REMEBER "ONLY QUR'AN PEOPLE" WE ARE TALKING ABOUT FACTS AND PROVING THEM BY THE CLEAR STATEMENTS OF THE QUR'AN!!!
I can say that the Quran was revealed to Muhammad by referring the person enquiring to Sunnis. I can also say that that Muhammad stoned black dogs, also by referring the person to Sunnis. Irrelevant. Nothing more. The name of the messenger, is "irrelevant". His/her character is embodied in the Quran, fully detailed and emphasised for all to see.
Have a good day indeed. I know I am. )
-
Ah, yes of course!! The infamous "Asbab al-Nuzul" excuse. According to the sectarians' "All High and Knowledgeable Scholars" , every single verse of the Quran has "sabab nuzul" ( occasion of revelation). If you don't know the "sabab nuzul" , you can't understand the verse.
If you open Saheeh BUkhary and flip through the section of "asbab nuzul" , you will find ridiculous stories along the lines of
- Mr. A had an argument with Mr. B about subject X, so God sent down verse Y.
- Mr. A came to the Prophet complaining about his wife having done X , so God revealed verse Z,
and so on and so forth. (I am preparing a nice list of such stories, and will post them is a new thread by the week-end, hopefully).
Again I remind Mr. AbuZahra that the Quran is not only for the people of the seventh century. I remind him that the "sahaba" are not smarter than us , nor are they more qualified to understand the Quran than we are.
By upholding this ridiculous theory of "asbab nuzul", you are making the Quran as nothing but a reaction from God to petty things that happened in the 7th Century. As if God is short-sighted, and cannot reveal anything unless "Abu Whatever" argues with "Ibn Whomever" about a certain matter.
This ridiculous theory defeats the entire purpose of the Quran as a guidance for MANKIND , and is nothing but a product of your "scholars" enslaving your brain and prohibitting you from using reason or logic. (Only through them can you interpret God's words).
When God tells me, through the mouth of His messenger
{And give the orphans their money, and do not replace the good with the bad, and do not consume their money with your money; for truly this is a great sin!}
Do I need "sabab nuzul" to understand it???
When God tells me
{Say "Come let me recite for you what your Lord has forbidden for you that you should not set up anything with Him; and be kind to your parents; and do not kill your children for fear of poverty, We provide for you and for them; and do not come near lewdness, what is plain of it or subtle; and do not kill the soul which God has forbidden, except in justice. That is what He enjoined you that you may comprehend."}
Do I need "Sabab nuzul" to understand it??
Must I run straight to the nearest Islamic library and flip through the yellowed and deseased volumes of "Abu Whatever" or the "Tafseer of Ibn Whomever", to understand when this verse was revealed??
Why must you always read the Quran through 7th Century lenses??
I believe brother TheNAbi answered this question very nicely.
Is the word "muhammad" a proper noun, or is it an adjective describing the man who carried God's words to the people? Either way it is of ZERO importance to my salvation. The importance is to apply the message in my daily life. Not to make an idol of the one who bore it and worship him.
Read verse 472
What other questions do you have to "blow us all out of the water?"
Bang on,
Time well spent and a very good effort.
siki
-
Salaam all,
The Qur'an is the readily available and most authentic resource for us. There is no argument about that. The Qur'an is also clear, but clarity is not something that is equal to all, nor quantifiable. So, when you guys cannot agree on what Salat, Sawm and Zakat and Hajj mean, nor how to perform them, when they are all over the Qur'an, then you have a big problem. You will have to face that sad reality and then ask yourselves an honest question
1- Is it not clear to us enough? If so then who will clarify it to us?
2- Are we fooling ourselves and lying to ourselves?
3- Where can we find the more fool proof answers?It is ignorance mixed with arrogance when you face such a problem and refuse to be honest with yourselves about it. It is insistance on this sad state of affairs when you have a ready source of knowledge that can help you, but then you insist to live in your own darkness. Why? because of your myth that you cannot authenticate the hadeeth? Even before you try?
Siki, the Aya is clear that you obey but not when the order is against God's order. If someone more knowledgeable than you is not convincing, then ask him or her. Dismissing them means that you are not interested in what they have to say. It means that you made up your mind already that you know better, and that is questionable. Secondly, you guys misuse God and his order a lot. You accuse others of going against the Qur'an when it is mainly, "in your own eyes". My fear is that your eyes do not see beyond your biases. Sure some scholars have said such strange things. They are not error free. However, have you read some of the posts on here? I would rather be guided by a mistaken scholar than be a fool and follow some arrogant poster on this site who likes to sound intelligent.
Pazuzu, if the Qur'an is not only for the 7th century, then the Aya that said obey the messenger and the people of authority in the 7th century, is still saying it today. Or is the Qur'an for today, only when it agrees with your made up theology?
Take care all and have a great day.
Hussein
-
As Salaamu Alaikum,
Hlatif, May ALLAH continue to bless you and make you a proof of this Deen. Your approach is very good and full of thought and facts. I pray that some of the others can learn from you, FJ, very good post, no I don't agree with everything in it, but I enjoyed it. I think our dialogue has proven to be very mature and beneficial. My friend Nun, I am sorry to say, but AI think you case is lost. I really believe you post just to have your name on the post. You are terrible in following directions, or listening. I didn't ask you to tell me the only four place where Prophet Muhammad's name is mentioned, I asked you to tell me or provide me with an Ayah where ALLAH clearly states that HE revealed the Qur'an (by name) to Muhammad (S) (by name). So, your post is a clear indication of where you are in this. And about this one Hadith that stands next to the Qur'an. What is the use of responding to such an absurd request. Honestly I don't even understand what you are talking about. I would ask; "have you not read any of the many post that i left explaining the significance and role of the Hadith as it relates to the Qur'an? Have you read what the Brother Hlatif have written? In all seriousness, do you read at all? (Of course besides your own post on this site). Pazuzu, your statement that the sahaba are not smarter than us, is clear disbelief in the Qur'an and historically stupid, to say the least. You think that yourself or anyone else 14 centuries after the Message, with just reading some of the Message can possibly be more qualified to understand this Deen, this Messsage, this Qur'an than Men who witnessed the revelation upon the Messenger (S). How foolish a notion, and everyone on this site, whether you agree with my views or not should blame him for such, to say the least. As for you OPF, you are herectically funny. Just a quick point, as I have to go. For those of you who say that the name of the Messenger is irrelevant, than, in reality this is your state. You are a people who believe in a book, you don't know who is responsible for introducing us the book, ( since the name of the Messenger is irrelevant, basically who cares who the book was revealed to, right?) you don't know the historical preservation of the book, you don't know the historical reasons for much of what is contained in the book. You have absolutely no connection with those who were first responsible for receiving the book, and thereafter passing it on, and you have no scholastic tradition connected to the book to help you understand it. rather as our esteemed..... Pazuzu, would have one to believe, we are smarter than the sahaba and are more qualified. Please, just step outside of self for a minute and tell me how this sounds. I have to go, but I hope this provoked enough thought to help you see how ridiculous your foundation is in this affair. You people have nothing! Not even the Qur'an, since you have absolutely no knowledge about it, other than I have an English translation in front of me. And just for the record, the English is not the Qur'an, It was revealed in Arabic. And if you are not understanding there, then you are really behind the affair.As for Hlatif and FJ, I do look forward to hearing from you. And the rest of you, well, I'll just keep looking forward.
-
My friend Nun, I am sorry to say, but AI think you case is lost. I really believe you post just to have your name on the post. You are terrible in following directions, or listening. I didn't ask you to tell me the only four place where Prophet Muhammad's name is mentioned, I asked you to tell me or provide me with an Ayah where ALLAH clearly states that HE revealed the Qur'an (by name) to Muhammad (S) (by name).
3340 MUHAMMAD is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets and Allah has full knowledge of all things.
472 But those who believe and work deeds of righteousness, and believe in the (Revelation) sent down to MUHAMMAD - for it is the Truth from their Lord,- ?.
Who exactly was ?the Seal of the Prophets? and was not Qur?an the last revelation?
Simple logic.
There may be hope for you yet; if you bother to read and open your eyes.
Peace
-
My friend Nun, had you bother to read my post, actually both of them, I quite clearly and distinctively put the emphasis on it mentioned by name. The Qur'an mention by name in the same Ayah as the name Muhammad, and I even gave a little ex. I said like It is ALLAH who revealed the Qur'an to Muhammad. The Ayat that you gave me does not state that!!! Sorry, Nun, wrong again. This is becoming a habit for you. And for the record there were people who claim prophethood and messengership after the Prophet Muhammad (S). One of those sinful people is on your site. You have post and articles about him and his mystic number 19. Foolishness!!! And I am pretty sure he has read the Qur'an, but obviously the verse was not CLEAR enough for him. I will be waiting for your next mistake my friend Nun. In the meantime do you think you could actually read some of my former post and actually answer one of my questions, like the one about Asbaab un nuzool, or those five or six questions I asked about what do you believe about them or the many other questions I posted that you all just don't want to answer. Do your best, I understand.
-
As Salaamu Alaikum
Hlatif, you have done it again, Barak ALLAHu fik. Aside from the normal dissenters, I know that there are people out there who are what you and I post and are gaining some benefit from it. Because I am reading what you post and gaining benefit. Please keep up the struggle to service this Deen and the the people by helping us to understand.
Ma Salaam
-
I would just like to pose another question. Please, feel free to attack as you will, but I hope people really think about this. Because as I sit here and really think about the logic of this whole idea of "Qur'an Alone" or "Only Qur'an" or whatever along these lines, this coupled with the post response that have been posted, it actually makes me a bit sad, because the state is so entrenched in darkness. So, if you all will, listen to this with an objective ear and tell me how this sounds to you all. Again, please, as many responses you want to this.
What would you say if someone, (anyone) brought you a book, and offering you the book. But, he had absolutely nothing to offer about the book, except that he has a book. When you ask where he got it from, he respond, I found it, but it doesn't really matter anyway. When you ask who printed or copied the book, he tells you he don't know, but it really doesn't matter anyway. When you ask, when was the book written, he again answers, he don't know, but again it doesn't matter. When you ask, who is the author of the book, he boldly proclaims, GOD, and HE says it in here. And then when you ask, well, who did god reveal it to, he tells you, almost upset that you are concerned, what difference does it make. Just read it, it will guide you.
Even if you received guidance from it, you are not at all concerned about the history of this book. And all those questions that was posed relating to the book. Could you truly feel peace of mind following and believing a book that you know absolutely nothing about, while at the same time, the history and narrations about the one whom the book was revealed to has been complete rejected and defamed by the very one giving you the book. Does that sound right to you??? You all know it doesn't, but people will hold on to their ways, despite the truth. And myself, as being one who completely believes in the book, all of it from the first letter to the last, and don't deny anything in it, still don't see it as right to be in darkness about what you believe in. People, ope you eyes. Ask about these things, and see what kind of answers you get. Some of them have been posted;
who cares or what relevance is the name of the one whom the Qur'an was revealed.
what does it matter knowing why a certain verse was revealed
the companions around the Messenger are not smarter than
the companions are not more qualified to understand the Qur'an than we areand the sad list goes on, eventually i will get around to addressing more specific points, but it time for Salatul Maghrib, and I have to pray (Alhamdulillah), as this is a command from ALLAH in the Qur'an.
-
Salaam all,
The Qur'an is the readily available and most authentic resource for us. There is no argument about that. The Qur'an is also clear, but clarity is not something that is equal to all, nor quantifiable. So, when you guys cannot agree on what Salat, Sawm and Zakat and Hajj mean, nor how to perform them, when they are all over the Qur'an, then you have a big problem. You will have to face that sad reality and then ask yourselves an honest question
1- Is it not clear to us enough? If so then who will clarify it to us?
2- Are we fooling ourselves and lying to ourselves?
3- Where can we find the more fool proof answers?It is ignorance mixed with arrogance when you face such a problem and refuse to be honest with yourselves about it. It is insistance on this sad state of affairs when you have a ready source of knowledge that can help you, but then you insist to live in your own darkness. Why? because of your myth that you cannot authenticate the hadeeth? Even before you try?
Siki, the Aya is clear that you obey but not when the order is against God's order. If someone more knowledgeable than you is not convincing, then ask him or her. Dismissing them means that you are not interested in what they have to say. It means that you made up your mind already that you know better, and that is questionable. Secondly, you guys misuse God and his order a lot. You accuse others of going against the Qur'an when it is mainly, "in your own eyes". My fear is that your eyes do not see beyond your biases. Sure some scholars have said such strange things. They are not error free. However, have you read some of the posts on here? I would rather be guided by a mistaken scholar than be a fool and follow some arrogant poster on this site who likes to sound intelligent.
Pazuzu, if the Qur'an is not only for the 7th century, then the Aya that said obey the messenger and the people of authority in the 7th century, is still saying it today. Or is the Qur'an for today, only when it agrees with your made up theology?
Take care all and have a great day.
Hussein
Peace,
Clarity is reasonably quantifiable/equal to all. By this, I mean that we can call something clear if a possible interpretation of it needs no additional information beyond common sense. Sectarians cannot agree what salat, sawm, zakat, hajj consist of either. A shia will say one thing and that same shia will be kafir in the eyes of a Sunni.
1 - It is clear. I have full confidence, faith that the Quran itself is clear and that confused people are making it unclear.
2 - This question should always be asked regardless of current state of knowledge.
3 - Quran.It is insistance on this sad state of affairs when you have a ready source of knowledge that can help you,
Correct. I hope Sunnis should certainly proceed to follow the Quran, such a readily authentic source of knowledge that gets placed aside for Sahih Al-Bukhari and only picked up for ritualistic chanting after prayers.
because of your myth that you cannot authenticate the hadeeth? Even before you try?
We already have an authentic ahadeeth book known as "Al-Quran".
Siki, the Aya is clear that you obey but not when the order is against God's order. If someone more knowledgeable than you is not convincing, then ask him or her. Dismissing them means that you are not interested in what they have to say. It means that you made up your mind already that you know better, and that is questionable. Secondly, you guys misuse God and his order a lot. You accuse others of going against the Qur'an when it is mainly, "in your own eyes". My fear is that your eyes do not see beyond your biases. Sure some scholars have said such strange things. They are not error free. However, have you read some of the posts on here? I would rather be guided by a mistaken scholar than be a fool and follow some arrogant poster on this site who likes to sound intelligent.
Good luck. To me, they are one and the same. Arrogance from perception is subjective. We can objectively guage arrogance against the Quran, and how willing one is to follow it. My fear is that Sunnis may destroy half the world, directly or indirectly. Too late
Pazuzu, if the Qur'an is not only for the 7th century, then the Aya that said obey the messenger and the people of authority in the 7th century, is still saying it today. Or is the Qur'an for today, only when it agrees with your made up theology?
Has it not already been made clear that "to follow the messenger" has been deduced as "follow the message"? Is this not your selective perception and concealment of what you have seen? Are we going to get anywhere when you and Abu Zahrah continue to ignore our posts and repeatedly disseminate your strawman arguments?
My friend Nun, had you bother to read my post, actually both of them, I quite clearly and distinctively put the emphasis on it mentioned by name. The Qur'an mention by name in the same Ayah as the name Muhammad, and I even gave a little ex. I said like It is ALLAH who revealed the Qur'an to Muhammad. The Ayat that you gave me does not state that!!! Sorry, Nun, wrong again. This is becoming a habit for you. And for the record there were people who claim prophethood and messengership after the Prophet Muhammad (S). One of those sinful people is on your site. You have post and articles about him and his mystic number 19. Foolishness!!! And I am pretty sure he has read the Qur'an, but obviously the verse was not CLEAR enough for him. I will be waiting for your next mistake my friend Nun. In the meantime do you think you could actually read some of my former post and actually answer one of my questions, like the one about Asbaab un nuzool, or those five or six questions I asked about what do you believe about them or the many other questions I posted that you all just don't want to answer. Do your best, I understand.
Salam
I understand that you have problems with logical thinking when it takes the form of connecting seemingly unrelated event A to seemingly unrelated event B. For instance, is the Quran from God? Does God say God will preserve the Quran? Likewise, is the Quran the last revelation? Is Muhammad the seal of prohets, and did he recieve a revelation?
What would you say if someone, (anyone) brought you a book, and offering you the book. But, he had absolutely nothing to offer about the book, except that he has a book. When you ask where he got it from, he respond, I found it, but it doesn't really matter anyway. When you ask who printed or copied the book, he tells you he don't know, but it really doesn't matter anyway. When you ask, when was the book written, he again answers, he don't know, but again it doesn't matter. When you ask, who is the author of the book, he boldly proclaims, GOD, and HE says it in here. And then when you ask, well, who did god reveal it to, he tells you, almost upset that you are concerned, what difference does it make. Just read it, it will guide you.
Yes, how dare they withold information about a figure the person seeks to idolise. Why is the information regarding that necessary? If the person READ THE QURAN they should be satisfied to their heart's content. Why is someone telling someone else to read the Quran and draw guidance a bad thing? There is no logical problem here, because the RELEVANT information they seek is all in the Quran. Allah has more wisdom than us, if something is left out of the Quran, it is left out for a good reason. We are told that should Allah have wished to write more, the Quran would take more ink than the oceans could provide. Yet we have a 6136 versed Quran.
who cares or what relevance is the name of the one whom the Qur'an was revealed.
what does it matter knowing why a certain verse was revealed
the companions around the Messenger are not smarter than
the companions are not more qualified to understand the Qur'an than we areYes, when we have A BOOK FROM THE GOD, who but an idolater cares? If the God in his infinite wisdom leaves out these details, then claims his book is fully detailed, who are we to judge?
Abu Zahrah, you have just degenerated to the point of trolling. You have yet to answer the questions presented a page ago. Namely, do you accept that we can prove the Quran as the word of God as we have it today?
-
Mr. Pazuzu, I have a question or two for you.
How do you know that the Qur'an or the Messenger (S) if from the 7th century? You keep ranting and raving about the 7th century. The Qur'an never ever mentioned any dates and times, and I never mentioned that, so where did you get that from? And you got it from history books, then on what premise do you believe them? Qur'an Only, right? You see how pathetic this idea becomes, you people have to get real!
Just a question though, I really would like a serious answer though, if you have one. Maybe you can borrow a line or two from OPF or Tanveer. But I will deal with them soon enough.As for your Asbaab un nuzool theatrical, it is really hard for me to believe that you all believe what you are saying. You don't think that a Man who actually watched revelation come to the Messenger (S), present when a particular Ayah was revealed is more qualified to understand and explain the the interpretation of that Ayah. You honestly think that you know more or is smarter then Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman Ali, and the likes? And how absurd is it to mock the Qur'an? That is disbelief. You don't even believe the book you are constantly arguing about. You said
If you open Saheeh BUkhary and flip through the section of "asbab nuzul" , you will find ridiculous stories along the lines of
- Mr. A had an argument with Mr. B about subject X, so God sent down verse Y.
- Mr. A came to the Prophet complaining about his wife having done X , so God revealed verse Z,
and so on and so forth. (I am preparing a nice list of such stories, and will post them is a new thread by the week-end, hopefully).... And went on;
By upholding this ridiculous theory of "asbab nuzul", you are making the Quran as nothing but a reaction from God to petty things that happened in the 7th Century. As if God is short-sighted, and cannot reveal anything unless "Abu Whatever" argues with "Ibn Whomever" about a certain matter.
This ridiculous theory defeats the entire purpose of the Quran as a guidance for MANKIND , and is nothing but a product of your "scholars" enslaving your brain and prohibitting you from using reason or logic. (Only through them can you interpret God's words).
Well, the list below is over ten places in the Qur'an where ALLAH begins the Ayah by saying; "Yas aluuna ka" which means 'they ask you". Meaninf the people were asking the Prophet (S) about this or that and the rest of the Ayah addressed what they were asking about. I am going to list several of them, and I am asking you people to really read over these Ayah and tell me if this is what our esteemed friend here Pazuzu was referring to when he said
"If you open Saheeh BUkhary and flip through the section of "asbab nuzul" , you will find ridiculous stories along the lines of
- Mr. A had an argument with Mr. B about subject X, so God sent down verse Y.
- Mr. A came to the Prophet complaining about his wife having done X , so God revealed verse Z,"
and so on and so forth, and when he said;
"By upholding this ridiculous theory of "asbab nuzul", you are making the Quran as nothing but a reaction from God to petty things that happened in the 7th Century. As if God is short-sighted, and cannot reveal anything unless "Abu Whatever" argues with "Ibn Whomever" about a certain matter."
Surah 2 Ayah 189
Surah 2 Ayah 215
Surah 2 Ayah 217
Surah 2 Ayah 219
Surah 2 Ayah 220
Surah 2 Ayah 222-223
Surah 5 Ayah 4
Surah 7 Ayah 187
Surah 8 Ayah 1
Surah 17 Ayah 85
Surah 18 Ayah 83
Surah 20 Ayah 105
Surah 79 Ayah 42In all the Ayat above, they began where ALLAH is responding to a question that the Companions asked the Messenger (S). Sounds like the revelation for these Ayat were caused by the questions of the Sahaba, right? But that can't be according to Pazuzu, that too ridiculous. And there are more, these just began with the question; "they ask you" I mentioned these because they are CLEAR. But there are numerous more Ayat where ALLAH addresses particular events that occurred amongst the Sahaba and in the life of the Messenger Himself (S). So please completely disregard what Pazuzu is talking about, because he don't know what he is talking about! This has nothing to do with scholars trying to lock peoples minds. Rather our great scholars are trying to open our minds by informing us of the surrounding factors of certain Ayat, which will in turn allow us to appreciate them more. And no, every single Ayah didn't come through ALLAH responding to some affair amongst the people, but many of them did, and this is very important to know when attempting to interpret the Qur'an. But we can see, that Pazuzu and whoever blindly followed him, (like by quoting his post) has disqualified theirselves from be able to interpret the Qur'an because he don't even believe that this is such a "RIDICULOUS" thing as 'Asbaab un nuzool" even though ALLAH is responding to such in the Qur'an.
And I think that just blew you out the water Pazuzu, and I took it easy.
-
I believe that if we look at the verses therein, the context is already there. 2189 - They ask you concerning the new moons. Simple. We deduce the context from the information given. This is where ahadeeth may be useful. That does not expiate for the messages presented in ahadeeth. It does not explain why Allah supposedly reveals hijab verses on Umar's whim.
-
My old friend OPF, its been awhile huh? And I see you are really at me. Let me say this, if you stop reading "INTO" my post and just start reading them, maybe you will come away with more. For the most part, all I have been doing is bombarding you all with your own line of reasoning. And the funny thing about it, is it is really weighing heavy on you guys. I will tell you why I asked all those questions about the Qur'am and the name of Muhammad (S) and etc. Because, when it comes to Hadith, this is all you people do, is scrutinize the compliers thereof. And this is irrespective of whether the Hadith appeals to your liking or not. You all refuse to get passed the historical aspect of the Hadith. But when I ask you all to look at and verify the historical aspect of the Qur'an, you all dismiss it as being absurd and irrelevant. Well, why is it relevent to the Hadith, but not to the Qur'an. Because there are scientific proofs in the Qur'an? Well there are many scientific proofs in the Hadith also. Why, because there is clear guidance in the Qur'an, there is clear guidance in the Hadith also. None of these are the reasons though. The true reasons are that you people have fixated your minds on rejecting Hadith, and even when the truth comes, or just some objective alternatives to your prejudice views about the Hadith you want nothing to do with it. And one can say about all the things in the Hadith that sounds strange and whatever. This is no reason to automatically reject something. Because there are Ayat in the Qur'an that if you read them to people who were not Muslim, would say the same thing you say about the hadith.
Next, OPF you are trying too hard to impress yourself. It is not working in your favor. And no-one here want to idolize or worship the Prophet (S). But we are going to respect Him (S) and give Him (S) his rightful due, although he is not present amongst us. Please read Surah 7 Ayat 157-158. Post it and tell us a bit about it. That should be quite interesting, Read Surah 94, post it and tell us a bit about it. Read what Your Lord said in The Qur'an about this great Man. And when you understand that, you will be concerned about Him and His relationship to the Message (S) and that He is not just a oral vehicle that ALLAH used to convey the Qur'an. Following is in the nature of humans, it is who you follow that either raises you or shames you. I follow the Messenger of Muhammad (S) and am proud of it. No I don't worship Him, ALLAH is my Lord and His Lord, but I will always support and honor Him as I was command by ALLAH in the Qur'an.
As for some points you are talking about that I evaded, if I did it was not intentional to respond, because I am trying to catch everything you guys are throwing, so if you would not mind re posting it, like I had to do with so many of the questions and points that you and the chorus missed. But hey, read my few post I put up today, something is in it for you. And just be true with yourself. And stop trying to separate This Man from This Message. They go together. THE QUR'AN & SUNNAH!!! They were going together during the time of the Messenger (S), during the time right after him and all the way through the centuries until today. Read Surah 4 Ayah 115, post it, explain it, but be careful, because since I told you why I was taking the approach I was before with the questioning, I am going to take a new approach, so whatever you do, you better come right, because Pazuzu is done. (even though he might not think so) You can be next. The Qur'an is a proof against you OPF, I am just waiting for you to fully open yourself up and I am going to show you.
-
OPF, we are not discussing context here, the point of this post was to refute the false idea that ALLAH didn't send down revelation based on the happening of the Sahaba. That somehow the Qur'an was above that.
And how do you know better than Umar. How arrogant you people are to oppose the very one that were there when the Qur'an was being revealed? Your arrogance is sickening! And what message in the Hadith are you talking about? And what again, be careful what you say about the Sahaba. You can never be like them. They have their promise of paradise from ALLAH, what do you have? Read Surah 9 Ayah 100, and I challenge you to post it. ALLAH has mentioned them in HIS Book, where are mentioned? On freeminds, wow? Humble your OPF, and respect the history!
-
Peace Abu Zahara,
If only it were as simple as assuming Authentic Hadiths were really Authentic.If I were living at the time of Bukhari, and I wanted to make up my own "Hadith". And I tried my best to camouflage it so it sounded Authentic. I spent days thinking of the best chain of narration to make sure Bukhari would accept it. I had a look at what was already accepted by Bukhari. I studied the commonalities between the "authentic" narrations. I sat and devised my own collection and subtly tried to place my agenda into it.
Would it be accepted? Why Not? Even your average person with low IQ could have implanted so much lies. What about the clever ones? who really wanted to cause mischeif.
Looking at history, the way the hunters went about gathering the Hadiths I am sure it was not very difficult to get one of your own fabrications attributed to the Prophet. Because sadly the Prophet had already been dead for over 100 years, there was no authority who could stop this.
Tell me how they filtered out lies from people who were clever, who had an agenda, who wanted to cause mischief, who did not care about authenticity? How did they stop them from making up Hadith? What criteria did this "authentic" Hadith meet?
A criteria that could not be foiled by a very clever human.
Hypothetical question but very important. Do we trust the Book brought down by the Messenger, or the Book compiled by Hadith Hunters. Do we trust that all the Sahabas' grandchildren were perfect and did not wish to mislead?
For your information, we Quran only people do have a religion to follow. Some of our Rites include doing good deeds, giving charity, prayer, pilgrimage, being patient and steadfast, honoring our contracts, avoiding evil, studying the scripture and forgiving the ignorant. There is an entire religion in the Quran, we just need to learn it.
Sincerely,
Al
-
I said like It is ALLAH who revealed the Qur'an to Muhammad. The Ayat that you gave me does not state that!!! Sorry, Nun, wrong again. This is becoming a habit for you.
My friend Abu, clearly as OPF stated...
I understand that you have problems with logical thinking when it takes the form of connecting seemingly unrelated event A to seemingly unrelated event B. For instance, is the Quran from God? Does God say God will preserve the Quran? Likewise, is the Quran the last revelation? Is Muhammad the seal of prohets, and did he recieve a revelation?
Perhaps if we simplify to 1st grade logic you may SEE?
Transitive Property of Equality if a = b and b = c, then a = c
You have post and articles about him and his mystic number 19. Foolishness!!!
Did I really? Hearsay! nope
Leaving out verses 9128-129 contradicts 159 and your hadith is not very different.
I will be waiting for your next mistake my friend Nun.
It is better to focus on acknowledging/correcting your own mistakes.
It is cordial to stop/read/contemplate and answer questions posted to you.
Peace
-
Salaam OPF,
It seems that you guys conveniently forgot this thread where your points of views did not stand up. Non of you proved that obey the messenger means obey the Qur'an only. That is only in your dreams.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=14594.0
Hussein
-
You think that yourself or anyone else 14 centuries after the Message, with just reading some of the Message can possibly be more qualified to understand this Deen, this Messsage, this Qur'an than Men who witnessed the revelation upon the Messenger (S).
Greetings Abu Zahrah,
As for myself, I do not consider myself more qualified, but rather, just as qualified as any other average human being in that we all have direct access to the source of living knowledge -- Allah --- He can speak to any one of our hearts at any time He so chooses thereby giving us insight and understanding into things we could never see into or understand on our own by using our own human intellectuality. Please refer to Re a challenge to quran aloners!!! for more specific information that I posted to you a few days back.
For those of you who say that the name of the Messenger is irrelevant, than, in reality this is your state. You are a people who believe in a book, you don't know who is responsible for introducing us the book, ( since the name of the Messenger is irrelevant, basically who cares who the book was revealed to, right?) you don't know the historical preservation of the book, you don't know the historical reasons for much of what is contained in the book. You have absolutely no connection with those who were first responsible for receiving the book, and thereafter passing it on, and you have no scholastic tradition connected to the book to help you understand it.
The historical context is irrelevant, as we have the living context of all of creation by which to gauge the veracity of any text. There is only one Truth. Everywhere you look, if you look with your heart, you can see it. Allah's system is complete and there for all to see. The Truth stands clear from error. It's as easy as that.
-
Salaam OPF,
It seems that you guys conveniently forgot this thread where your points of views did not stand up. Non of you proved that obey the messenger means obey the Qur'an only. That is only in your dreams.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=14594.0
Hussein
I will quote Tanveer's post on this.
Peace all,
The messenger is the one who told his people that the Qur'aan is from The God, so to obey The God by following the Qur'aan, one has to obey the messenger when the Qur'aan came to us through him. The messenger himself has been ordered to follow only the Qur'aan and to judge only according to the Qur'aan.
The Qur'aan is fully detailed and complete (6114-115, 12111, 1712), contains every example (1789, 3927) and clear explanation of everything (1689) relevant to our guidance to the straight path and is enough for our guidance (2951) and the Prophet followed only the Qur'aan (1015, 4105).
All the relevant examples and hadeeth necessary for our guidance can be found in the Qur'aan. Many times in the Qur'aan, the messenger is asked to say something to others, and then he said that to others, and thus it becomes his hadeeth. When we follow such ayaat, we are actually obeying the messenger also.
The Qur'aan is the best "hadeeth"
3923 God has sent down the best HADEETH (ahsana alhadeethi), a Scripture that is similar with two paths. The skins of those who reverence their Lord shiver from it, then their skins and their hearts soften up to the remembrance of God. Such is God's guidance; He guides with it whoever He wills. And for whomever God misguides, then none can guide him.
What will be your answer to the question asked by The God in the following signs
487 God, there is no god but He. He will gather you for the Day of Resurrection in which there is no doubt. Who is more truthful in HADEETH than God?
7185 Did they not look at the dominion of heavens and Earth, and all that God has created? Perhaps their time is drawing near; so in which HADEETH after this one will they believe?
456 These are God's revelations that We recite to you with truth. So, in which HADEETH after God and His revelations do they believe?
6836 What is wrong with you, how do you judge?
6837 Or do you have another book which you study?
6838 In it, you can find what you wish?7750 So in what HADEETH after it will they believe?
The people who accept baseless "hadeeth" to mislead from the path of The God will have a humiliating retribution
316 And from the people, there are those who accept baseless HADEETH (lahwa alhadeethi) to mislead from the path of God without knowledge, and they take it as entertainment. These will have a humiliating retribution.
We should disregard the fabrications and fancy words "inspired" in each other by the enemies of the Prophet and falsely attributed to him
6112 And as such, We have permitted the enemies of every prophet, human and jinn devils, to inspire in each other with fancy words in order to deceive. Had your Lord willed, they would not have done it. You shall disregard them and their fabrications.
The above sign also implies that The God deliberately allowed the existence of the fabricated "hadeeth" to test the people whether they follow The God's words or the words of human and jinn devils and their desires !
Adding something to the message is similar to changing it. THE PROPHET NEVER CONTRADICTED OR ADDED TO THE QUR'AANIC DETAILS. He followed only the Qur'aan and was ordered by The God to judge only according to the Qur'aan.
1015 And when Our clear revelations are recited to them, those who do not wish to meet Us said "Bring a Qur'an other than this, or change it!" Say "It is not for me to change it of my own accord, I merely follow what is inspired to me. I fear, if I disobey my Lord, the retribution of a great day!"
650 Say "I do not say to you that I possess God's treasures, nor do I know the future, nor do I say to you that I am an angel. I merely follow what is inspired to me." Say "Are the blind and the seer the same? Do you not think?"
7203 And because you do not bring them a sign, they say "If only you had brought one." Say "I only follow what is inspired to me from my Lord. This is an evidence from your Lord, and a guide and mercy to a people who believe."
469 Say "I am no different from the other messengers, nor do I know what will happen to me or to you. I only follow what is inspired to me. I am no more than a clear warner"
According to 469 above, Prophet Muhammad said that he was no different from the other messengers; what did the other messenger say ?
4623 He said "The knowledge of it is with God; and I only convey to you what I was sent with. However, I see that you are a people who are ignorant."
Adding something to the Qur'aanic message is attributing something falsely to The God.
6944 And had he attributed anything falsely to Us.
6945 We would have seized him by the right.
6946 Then, We would have severed his life-line.
6947 None of you would be able to prevent it.The prophet was ordered to judge only according to the Qur'aan
4105 We have revealed to you the Scripture with truth that you may judge between the people by that which God has shown you, and do not be an advocate for the treacherous.
548 And We have sent down to you the Scripture with truth, authenticating what is present of the Scripture and superseding it. So judge between them by what God has sent down, and do not follow their desires from what has come to you of the truth. For each of you We have made laws, and a structure; and had God willed, He would have made you all one nation, but He tests you with what He has given you; so strive to do good. To God you will return all of you, and He will inform you regarding that in which you dispute.
549 And judge between them by what God has sent down, and do not follow their wishes, and beware lest they divert you away from some of what God has sent down to you. If they turn away, then know that God wants to inflict them with some of their sins; and most of the people are corrupt.
6114 "Shall I seek other than God as a judge when He has sent down to you this Scripture fully detailed?" Those to whom We have given the Scripture know it is sent down from your Lord with truth; so do not be of those who have doubt.
Just because the majority is doing something or following something does not necessarily mean it is the truth
6116 And if you obey the majority of those on Earth they will lead you away from God's path; that is because they follow conjecture, and that is because they only guess.
They continue to follow their fathers, instead of following The God's words
2170 And if they are told "Follow what God has sent down," they say "No, we will follow what we found our fathers doing!" What if their fathers did not understand anything and were not guided?
Following is a reminder to those who do not consider The God enough for their guidance
3936 Is God not enough for His servant? And they frighten you with others beside Him. And whomever God sends astray, then for him there will be no guide.
WE ARE CLEARLY TOLD TO BELIEVE ONLY THOSE HADEETH THAT ARE FOUND IN THE QUR'AAN !!
All other so called "hadeeth" and "sunnah" are UNVERIFIABLE HEARSAY and UNVERIFIABLE ACTIONS and many CONTRADICT each other. Just look at the various sects ....... each of them claims that the "hadeeth" accepted by them are the right ones, even when those so called "hadeeth" contradict each other between the various sects and even within their own sect !! How are you going to obey the messenger through those UNVERIFIABLE HEARSAY AND ACTIONS when you cannot be sure that the messenger actually said or did those things ?
The MOST FAMOUS so called "hadeeth" was supposedly narrated in front of 10,000 people and STILL HAS 3 CONTRADICTORY VERSIONS in the "sahih" books. The messenger is reported to have said
- Follow the Qur'aan only
- Follow the Qur'aan and my sunnah
- Follow the Qur'aan and my family
WHICH ONE WILL YOU FOLLOW ?
Those who believe in the fabricated hadeeth as revelation from The God are inventing lies about The God and also denying His revelations and they will have a terrible retribution
621 And who is more wicked than one who invents lies about God, or denies His revelations! The wicked will never succeed.
6157 Or you say "If the Scripture was sent to us we would have been more guided than they!" Clarity has come to you from your Lord, and a guidance and a mercy. Who is more wicked than one who denies God's revelations and turns away from them? We will punish those who turn away from Our revelations with the pain of retribution for what they turned away.
737 Who is more wicked than one who invents lies about God, or denies His revelations? These will receive their recompense from the record; so that when Our messengers come to terminate their lives, they will say "Where are those whom you used to call on besides God?" they said "They have abandoned us!" and they bore witness upon themselves that they were rejecters.
1017 Who is more wicked than one who invents lies about God or denies His revelations? The criminals will never succeed.
Again, that accursed spawn of satan known as "logic" comes into the mix.
3936 combined with 1015, 650, 7203, 469, 4623, 6116, 2170 (remember the sunnah/traditions?) make it very very clear that the messenger could not have judged out of the Quran. To obey the messenger would mean obeying the message. The messenger is the personification of the message according to the Quran and nothing more. Everything he did was from the Quran. Many hadeeth are NOT from the Quran - stoning, apostacy, amputation, amongst other things. Also, this does not specifically refer to a single messenger, it refers to all (we are instructed NOT to make distinctions between messengers, as you know). 548 makes it clear we are to judge by the last message, the Quran which supersedes all.
Regardless, for those with faith in Allah, we have no need for isnad, no need for the names of any messengers beyond that provided in the Quran itself, and no need for idols to worship and conform to. The context of revelation is always given in the book when necessary.
Also, I will add to say that "obey the messenger" does not mean "obey Sahih Al-Bukhari". None of you have proved from the Quran that "obey the messenger" refers specifically to Muhammad, and specifically to such hadeeth.
Peace.
-
Salaam OPF,
And tanveer's post was responded to in the same thread. I will not pull it and post it because it is better for those who search to read the whole thread and see how indefensible your stances are.
As for this statement.
3936 combined with 1015, 650, 7203, 469, 4623, 6116, 2170 (remember the sunnah/traditions?) make it very very clear that the messenger could not have judged out of the Quran. To obey the messenger would mean obeying the message. The messenger is the personification of the message according to the Quran and nothing more. Everything he did was from the Quran. Many hadeeth are NOT from the Quran - stoning, apostacy, amputation, amongst other things. Also, this does not specifically refer to a single messenger, it refers to all (we are instructed NOT to make distinctions between messengers, as you know). 548 makes it clear we are to judge by the last message, the Quran which supersedes all.
If one truly believes that those hadeeths are false, then one can refuse them. I have no problem with that. In fact people have done that in the past. The khawarej refused stoning. Imam Abu Hanifa refused the killing of the apostate and so on. Imam Ibn Taimiyyah allowed not stoning the ones who repent. I do have a problem when one uses this clause to refuse all hadeeths as a result. None of the above groups of people refused all hadeeth. Refusing all hadeeths is reactionary and extreme.
Also, I will add to say that "obey the messenger" does not mean "obey Sahih Al-Bukhari". None of you have proved from the Quran that "obey the messenger" refers specifically to Muhammad, and specifically to such hadeeth.
"Obey the messenger" does not mean "obey Bukhari". It means that when a certain piece of material comes to your way and is attributed to the messenger, but you cannot prove it false or inauthentic, then you are bound to follow it. It also means that when something is attributed to the messenger, then it at least deserves study and a decision is made after the study but not rejected outright and before studying it.
As for the clarity issue and responding to your point that when people disagree then it is a problem with them rather than the Qur'an. I agree partially. However, that point proves that the people who are attracted to the Qur'an alone system have something wrong with their way of thinking that they cannot agree on anything.
However, you cannot be totally correct. A non Arab cannot have the same clarity as the Arab and the Arab of today does not have the same clarity as Arab of the time of the prophet, and the Arab of the prophet's tribe does not have the same clarity as the Arab from outside of that tribe. That is all another reason why one reads hadeeth. It reflects the knowledge of the language of that early group of Muslims. The difference in clarity between people cannot be denied or ignored except through stubborness.
Take care and have a great day.
Hussein
-
Salaam OPF,
And tanveer's post was responded to in the same thread. I will not pull it and post it because it is better for those who search to read the whole thread and see how indefensible your stances are.
As for this statement.If one truly believes that those hadeeths are false, then one can refuse them. I have no problem with that. In fact people have done that in the past. The khawarej refused stoning. Imam Abu Hanifa refused the killing of the apostate and so on. Imam Ibn Taimiyyah allowed not stoning the ones who repent. I do have a problem when one uses this clause to refuse all hadeeths as a result. None of the above groups of people refused all hadeeth. Refusing all hadeeths is reactionary and extreme.
"Obey the messenger" does not mean "obey Bukhari". It means that when a certain piece of material comes to your way and is attributed to the messenger, but you cannot prove it false or inauthentic, then you are bound to follow it. It also means that when something is attributed to the messenger, then it at least deserves study and a decision is made after the study but not rejected outright and before studying it.As for the clarity issue and responding to your point that when people disagree then it is a problem with them rather than the Qur'an. I agree partially. However, that point proves that the people who are attracted to the Qur'an alone system have something wrong with their way of thinking that they cannot agree on anything.
However, you cannot be totally correct. A non Arab cannot have the same clarity as the Arab and the Arab of today does not have the same clarity as Arab of the time of the prophet, and the Arab of the prophet's tribe does not have the same clarity as the Arab from outside of that tribe. That is all another reason why one reads hadeeth. It reflects the knowledge of the language of that early group of Muslims. The difference in clarity between people cannot be denied or ignored except through stubborness.
Take care and have a great day.
Hussein
A) I quoted Tanveer's post for the Quranic references, not for the arguments. As for the stances being indefensible, you can state that all you please, but I have already shown this logically. If I remember correctly, you did not even respond to it and changed the subject. This I believe is on page 5. Abu Zahrah also ignored it wholesale. This is clear concealment of truth. Are we to obey your message when you barely believe in countering our arguments?
B) If one truly believes hadeeths are false, one refuses them. This is what we are doing. It just so happens that the level of false ahadeeth is so high it is wiser to stop taking guidance from them all. Rejecting the hadeeth is one thing, but we are told that the Quran is the ONLY source of law, and the only source of truly authentic guidance. The hadeeth have uses such as history, to draw guidance from them leads people astray from the Quran. And those verses clearly show that obeying the messenger is = obeying the Quran. Your position on this is indefensible. Refusing baseless hadeeth when we have ahsan ul-hadeeth with us is not reactionary or extreme but beneficient.
C) I have already demonstrated what "obey the messenger" means. This takes roughly 3 steps of logic to deduce. It does not need inference, unlike obeying of Bukhari. When a certain piece of material comes to your way, THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE MESSENGER TO PROVE THE MESSAGE PRESENTED IS AUTHENTIC. If obeying the messenger is obeying Allah, then lying against the messenger is lying against Allah. Who is more wicked than he who lies against Allah? Again, we have a fundamental point of logic being subverted by hadeethists. The burden of proof is on the compiler of ahadeeth to prove his hadeeth are true. If we take the reverse, we must conclude that there is a teapot orbiting the moon somewhere and an invisible pink unicorn ruling over Earth. The Quranic guideline, no less is in 1736 which affirms that we must prove the positive. A negative cannot be proven. Also, 49006 reinforces this point. To this I ask, who is more wicked than he who invents a lie against Allah? The hadeeth of stoning is such an example. There is no reason to propagate such falsehood.
D) You are again using fallacious logic to justify your POV. You associated "lack of consensus" with "Quran Alone". This is a human trait, not a "Quran alone" trait. As you say, some scholars decline the stoning, another accepts stoning, rejecting apostacy, Hanifah accepts alcohol, Malik says the alcoholic is a kafir who should be beaten with shoes, so on, and so on. The hadeeth can be taken in shreds. One can accept one hadith and reject another. The difference is, with the Quran alone, we accept the WHOLE Quran and everything in it, and we ascertain that our inherent weaknesses and biases prevent us from coming to the true meaning. In ahadeeth, this is the opposite, the meaning fits around the conclusion. What is the "asbab al-nuzool" for the hadeeth that states "Three things have evil omen, the black dog, the woman, and x" (I cannot remember what x is, most probably the serpent)? If we judge by other hadeeth presenting Quranic contexts, it seems the narrator was not... getting any.
E) There are verses that state the system/deen of Islam is built into everything, the human included. I'll see what I can do to find them. For instance, does any thinking human need 1736 to tell him that we have to prove information, not disprove it? Most certainly not. As I stated, clarity is equal to common sense. Where does Arabic enter the fray? When a meaning sounds preposterous, a simple study of the terminology used in the verses, combined with clarity/common sense and following the best meaning (391 will show the clearest meaning.
F) The hadeeth may reflect the knowledge of the language of the early group of Muslims - ASSUMING THEY ARE TRUE. We would also have to contend that they were immensely stupid and superstitious people, ASSUMING THEY ARE TRUE. Archaeology reveals sophistication, not stupidity. The hadeeth teach blood, violence and gore in places. Death for the thief. Why should we listen to such a stupid group of people (ASSUMING THEY aRE TRUE) when we have THE BEST hadeeth lying in front of us, waiting to be read?