59:7 - Explain.
-
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?
-
Salaam OPF,
"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.Peace Hussein,
Thats where the big discord is I think between Quran alone and Hadith Followers. I find it difficult to follow men whom are not Prophets or Messengers, and were not alive during the time of Revelation. Those who collected the Hadith are no way different from you and me other than they lived a bit closer to the time of revelation. Who asked them to compile the Hadith? It was not God? Why did they feel the need to do it? Wasn't their religion complete?peace
Al -
Peace to all,
Excellant post OPF, that pretty much summed up what I believe but couldnt quite put into words. It was the best and most logical explanation ive seen yet to put the hadeeth in their proper place.
Good Job and keep up the good and very important work your doing brother.
Kurt
-
Salaam OPF, aalmakto,
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?
And those were all responded to in the relevant thread. In brief, the word Kitab= book does not mean only the Qur'an. It means the Qur'an and other things that fit within that definition and that does not exclude the authentic hadeeths.
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.
1- There is no "clearly" to mean obeying the Qur'an alone.
2- Forcing obey the messenger to mean "only Qur'an" makes the qur'an poor in it's literal style and therefore you undermine it's uniqueness and miracle. It forces redundancy on fourty or more statements of the qur'an. Why would God repeat it so many times, when He really meant "only obey the Qur'an"?
3- It is not either hadeeth or Qur'an. It is Qur'an and then hadeeth. So a proper use of hadeeth does and should not move any person away from the Qur'an.
4- If there is only one hadeeth that is authentic and God ordered you to obey the messenger, then the effort to find that one authentic hadeeth is worth it. Why? because you are doing what God ordered you, seek knowledge.
5- Just repeating that you have demonstrated what you have never demonstrated does not make it so. A glance at that thread will show your weakness.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.
1- actually, the people who reject the Qur'an will use your same argument (Quran has to prove itself) to reject Islam in general. So, you have no point because those same people will have to answer to their lord.
2- Islam is not about spoon feeding. It is about search and learning with humility. So, the burden does not fall off of you by claiming "burden of proof".
3- When a person limits the meaning of a term in the Qur'an to make it deliberately narrower than it's import, then that person is lying about God. This is what happens to a person that claims that obey the messenger means "only obey the Qur'an". If a person is insisting upon ignorance then that is a sin, especially if he knew that his or her knowledge of the Arabic is lacking, something that characterizes the majority here.
4- You seem to have forgotten that part of the message of the Qur'an is "Do not reject what should not be rejected, even if you do not like it". " Do not reject what you may not completely understand". Let us face it, this is why many of you guys reject hadeeth.
5- Hadeeth that is authentic can prove itself.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.
A system that insist on consensus on everything is a false system. A system that has consensus on nothing is a false system. That is your system. Islam has consensus in those core issues and allows diversity in other areas. You guys fail at that. When you fail at such a basic level, then one has to conclude that your system is more of bias (disguised as "common sense", "logic" and all your nice empty slogans) and then Qur'an, rather than Qur'an alone as you like to claim.
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?
And you read the Qur'an in your own images. Archeaology can be attractive to some of you because you can fill in the many blanks the way you like it. Stupidity is a matter of judgement. The Qur'an is full of statements about people who were labeled stupid when they were not. I would be careful when I use this word. It can come back and haunt me.
Thats where the big discord is I think between Quran alone and Hadith Followers. I find it difficult to follow men whom are not Prophets or Messengers, and were not alive during the time of Revelation. Those who collected the Hadith are no way different from you and me other than they lived a bit closer to the time of revelation. Who asked them to compile the Hadith? It was not God? Why did they feel the need to do it? Wasn't their religion complete?
1- We all learn from each other. Refusing to learn from someone who lived long ago, just because you do not believe that he knew better than you is not defensible. You can learn from someone that does not know as much as you do. On principle, you are wrong.
2- How can you arrive at such a conclusion that you know better, before you read what they have written and study it deeply.
3- People did not read the Qur'an and say this and that. People were taught the Qur'an from others who were taught the Qur'an from others. Those writings are the reflection of that learning process. You guys want to learn the Qur'an without help in learning it and as if it came from nothing. if you guys do not speak Arabic, then you are being told what it says and you have no way whether someone is lying to you. May be people like to be lied to and then they are responsible for their wrong decisions to follow a false teacher.
Take care all and have a great day.
Hussein
-
Salaam OPF, aalmakto,
And those were all responded to in the relevant thread. In brief, the word Kitab= book does not mean only the Qur'an. It means the Qur'an and other things that fit within that definition and that does not exclude the authentic hadeeths.
1- There is no "clearly" to mean obeying the Qur'an alone.
2- Forcing obey the messenger to mean "only Qur'an" makes the qur'an poor in it's literal style and therefore you undermine it's uniqueness and miracle. It forces redundancy on fourty or more statements of the qur'an. Why would God repeat it so many times, when He really meant "only obey the Qur'an"?
3- It is not either hadeeth or Qur'an. It is Qur'an and then hadeeth. So a proper use of hadeeth does and should not move any person away from the Qur'an.
4- If there is only one hadeeth that is authentic and God ordered you to obey the messenger, then the effort to find that one authentic hadeeth is worth it. Why? because you are doing what God ordered you, seek knowledge.
5- Just repeating that you have demonstrated what you have never demonstrated does not make it so. A glance at that thread will show your weakness.
1- actually, the people who reject the Qur'an will use your same argument (Quran has to prove itself) to reject Islam in general. So, you have no point because those same people will have to answer to their lord.
2- Islam is not about spoon feeding. It is about search and learning with humility. So, the burden does not fall off of you by claiming "burden of proof".
3- When a person limits the meaning of a term in the Qur'an to make it deliberately narrower than it's import, then that person is lying about God. This is what happens to a person that claims that obey the messenger means "only obey the Qur'an". If a person is insisting upon ignorance then that is a sin, especially if he knew that his or her knowledge of the Arabic is lacking, something that characterizes the majority here.
4- You seem to have forgotten that part of the message of the Qur'an is "Do not reject what should not be rejected, even if you do not like it". " Do not reject what you may not completely understand". Let us face it, this is why many of you guys reject hadeeth.
5- Hadeeth that is authentic can prove itself.
A system that insist on consensus on everything is a false system. A system that has consensus on nothing is a false system. That is your system. Islam has consensus in those core issues and allows diversity in other areas. You guys fail at that. When you fail at such a basic level, then one has to conclude that your system is more of bias (disguised as "common sense", "logic" and all your nice empty slogans) and then Qur'an, rather than Qur'an alone as you like to claim.
And you read the Qur'an in your own images. Archeaology can be attractive to some of you because you can fill in the many blanks the way you like it. Stupidity is a matter of judgement. The Qur'an is full of statements about people who were labeled stupid when they were not. I would be careful when I use this word. It can come back and haunt me.
1- We all learn from each other. Refusing to learn from someone who lived long ago, just because you do not believe that he knew better than you is not defensible. You can learn from someone that does not know as much as you do. On principle, you are wrong.2- How can you arrive at such a conclusion that you know better, before you read what they have written and study it deeply.
3- People did not read the Qur'an and say this and that. People were taught the Qur'an from others who were taught the Qur'an from others. Those writings are the reflection of that learning process. You guys want to learn the Qur'an without help in learning it and as if it came from nothing. if you guys do not speak Arabic, then you are being told what it says and you have no way whether someone is lying to you. May be people like to be lied to and then they are responsible for their wrong decisions to follow a false teacher.
Take care all and have a great day.
Hussein
1.) I already addressed the usage of kitab on Page 5
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?
2.) I originally wrote "Obeying the messenger is not restricted purely to the Quran" but I edited it out for various reasons. There is redundancy on many Quranic statements. Ar-Rahman has a single verse repeating throughout the surah.
Obeying the messenger can only mean obeying the Quran/verified truth from God as seen here
066.001
YUSUFALI O Prophet! Why holdest thou to be forbidden that which Allah has made lawful to thee? Thou seekest to please thy consorts. But Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
PICKTHAL O Prophet! Why bannest thou that which Allah hath made lawful for thee, seeking to please thy wives? And Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
SHAKIR O Prophet! why do you forbid (yourself) that which Allah has made lawful for you; you seek to please your wives; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.The messenger attempted to do something out of Allah's guidelines and he was rebuked.
3.) Good. I hope you will take this in mind on subjects such as stoning, apostacy, theft, adultery, fear of nushooz and many more subjects which have been distorted by ahadeeth.
4.) Yes, we already have this one hadeeth, it's called Quran.
5.) Please respond to the post on page 5. Then we shall know who is telling the truth. Simply responding that someone's post is indefensible does not make it so either.
1/6.) Definitely. And I will lead them straight to the inherent signs of Allah presented in the Quran. Those who are guided will follow, those who are misguided will toss it aside.
2/7.) As for burden of proof, now you are really mocking the deen. Please read 1736, and 4906, the burden of proof is on whoever seeks the positive, not the negative. One cannot prove a negative. Do you like to revel in such stupidity? The onus is on Bukhari to show his hadeeth are true. By critical analysis, this is flat out not so.
3/8.) It is a vast shame you did not read my post on page 5. The Sunnis fetter the Quran far more than this understanding in any case.
4/9.)
Volume 4, Book 52, Number 110Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar
I heard the Prophet saying. "Evil omen is in three things The horse, the woman and the house."
Volume 4, Book 52, Number 111
Narrated Sahl bin Sad Saidi
Allah's Apostle said "If there is any evil omen in anything, then it is in the woman, the horse and the house."
Volume 8, Book 76, Number 479
Narrated Ibn Abbas
Allah's Apostle said, "Seventy thousand people of my followers will enter Paradise without accounts, and they are those who do not practice Ar-Ruqya and do not see an evil omen in things, and put their trust in their Lord.
Volume 8, Book 76, Number 549
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas
The Prophet said, "The people were displayed in front of me and I saw one prophet passing by with a large group of his followers, and another prophet passing by with only a small group of people, and another prophet passing by with only ten (persons), and another prophet passing by with only five (persons), and another prophet passed by alone. And then I looked and saw a large multitude of people, so I asked Gabriel, "Are these people my followers?' He said, 'No, but look towards the horizon.' I looked and saw a very large multitude of people. Gabriel said. 'Those are your followers, and those are seventy thousand (persons) in front of them who will neither have any reckoning of their accounts nor will receive any punishment.' I asked, 'Why?' He said, 'For they used not to treat themselves with branding (cauterization) nor with Ruqya (get oneself treated by the recitation of some Verses of the Qur'an) and not to see evil omen in things, and they used to put their trust (only) in their Lord." On hearing that, 'Ukasha bin Mihsan got up and said (to the Prophet), "Invoke Allah to make me one of them." The Prophet said, "O Allah, make him one of them." Then another man got up and said (to the Prophet), "Invoke Allah to make me one of them." The Prophet said, 'Ukasha has preceded you."
One needs only common sense...
5/10.) Yes, the Quran can prove itself.
A system that insist on consensus on everything is a false system. A system that has consensus on nothing is a false system. That is your system. Islam has consensus in those core issues and allows diversity in other areas. You guys fail at that. When you fail at such a basic level, then one has to conclude that your system is more of bias (disguised as "common sense", "logic" and all your nice empty slogans) and then Qur'an, rather than Qur'an alone as you like to claim.
A system that has consensus on everything is God's system. As for empty slogans, I sincerely dare you to refute any of the logic presented pertaining to the Quran. By doing so, you will simply demonstrate yourself as one who rejects the Quranic message.
And you read the Qur'an in your own images. Archeaology can be attractive to some of you because you can fill in the many blanks the way you like it. Stupidity is a matter of judgement. The Qur'an is full of statements about people who were labeled stupid when they were not. I would be careful when I use this word. It can come back and haunt me.
Conversely, we can say archaeology is not attractive to you because it exposes the Sunni cube circumambulation as a pagan practice. Concrete evidence is better than hearsay and conjecture. The people I labelled as stupid are the people described exactly as such in the hadeeth. Those that believe the Earth rests on the back of a giant bull, and when this bull shakes its head, an earthquake occurs, are stupid.
-
OPF,
I am up against time constraints, the last couple of days have been full for me, as I am attempting to acquire some property. But I just wanted to say a couple of things about your latest post. First, THE ONUS OF PROOF IS UPON THE ONE WHO MAKES THE CLAIM!!! We are not making any claims against someone or something you all are. So you have to prove your claim!!! And proof is not conjecture, for ALLAH says that conjecture avails naught against the truth (1036) Nor is proof something that doesn't make sense to you. For there are many verses in the Qur'an that someone without faith or sound grounded knowledge could say the same thing to you, and Hlatif made this point to you. A shame you keep making the same mistake. So because a Hdith don't make sense to you, does not at all dispel it as being untrue. It is like the american story of the fox (I think it was a fox) where he wanted some grapes, but could not reach them from the vine, so after trying and being unable, he just wrote it off and claimed, the grapes were sour (anyway). And this is your approach to this Deen, how sad, or maybe how scary, the equivalent of a fox.
And what was this report you cited about the earth on the back of a bull and etc. Where is this at? I have not ever read that, and I am not saying that I read everything, but that I know I have not. Please provide you source for this.
Finally, and the saddest part of your post it such ignorance as the following quote from you. It just goes to show how someone who really thinks they know, but are really seen to be ignorant when the light of truth is shed.
OPF, YOU STATED Conversely, we can say archaeology is not attractive to you because it exposes the Sunni cube circumambulation as a pagan practice. Concrete evidence is better than hearsay and conjecture
..AND ALLAH STATED THEN LET THEM END THEIR UNTIDINESS AND FULFILL THEIR VOWS AND PERFORM TAWAF (CIRCUMAMBULATION) AROUND THE ANCIENT HOUSE. (2229)
AND THIS ANCIENT HOUSE IS THAT CUBE THAT OPF, QUOTED TO BE FROM AMONGST THE PAGAN PRACTICES. SO, OPF, NOW YOU ARE INSINUATING THAT ALLAH, THE GOD THAT REVEALED THE QUR'AN IS CALLING THE BELIEVERS TO FOLLOW THE PAGAN PRACTICES? IS THIS WHAT YOU BELIEVE OPF? LETS TAKE A VOTE, SHOULD WE BELIEVE THE QUR'AN OR OPF? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE QUR'AN, SAY BYE TO OPF, YOU HAVE LOST YOUR STATUS AS THE LEAD SINGER OF THE CHORUS. -
Salaam OPF,
You want me to address your post on page 5. I will do that.
The Quran states that law itself is restricted to judgement through the Quran alone
Quote
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.1- God is the best of judges and He judged that we obey the messenger.
2- Obeying the messenger is not obeying the majority.
3- The words of God are not limited to the Qur'an. In fact the sea can run dry without the words of God running out.
4- The book is not limited to the Qur'an. In addition it says that the book was sent to the messenger. You can contemplate "the book" in the Qur'an and you will find that it extends beyond the Qur'an. There is nothing to stop the orders of the prophet from being included in "the book" as mentioned in the above Ayat. This is the same as the word of God not being limited to the Qur'an. In fact the Qur'an says that "the book" entered the heart of the messenger and that is why He acted by the book and he spoke the book, even when it was not Qur'an.
5- As for the last Aya, it works against you. God does not ask us to follow the messenger if He knew that following the messenger meant that we follow false premises. Did God not know that people will make up hadeeth and then make others follow them? Why would he then ask us to follow the messenger when it can cause such confusion? Did God misplan for 1400 year till you guys came for the rescue?
6- Alternatively, God asked us to follow the messenger because He wanted us to follow him and not in the limited fashion that you claim.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.
This the clause that you guys use to manipulate the Qur'an. It is clear in the posts of those who think that Jesus was a clone and that God did not part the sea. They are clearly present in the posts where you guys manipulate the language right and left to make the Qur'an in your image.
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?
God's hadeeth is the best hadeeth. It does not prevent people from following what his prophet said. God's hadeeth tells us to obey the messenger. So, I apply it. I do not give it lip service to read what I want. Obey the messenger does not mean obey a wrong scholar.
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.
If the early Muslims needed to resort to conjecture, then you will need it more. If you cannot see that they followed the Qur'an then that is in your eyes only. Your eyes are not really good judge, with all due respect. I do not follow them blindly, nor do I reject them blindly. I can see that following them is much better than following the great Imams of this site.
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.
The ones who follow Hadeeth believe that the Qur'an is wide enough to encompass all hadeeth within it and more. You guys however narrow it to make it incapable to encompass hadeeth. This narrowness makes you face an inadequate Qur'an that cannot answer much. Then you will switch to "detailed only in what we need", but that does not cut it either, becaue even what you need, you are incapable of finding as Salat and Sawm and Zakat.
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 have to happen if person A asked person B to repeat first what he heard and to put it in writing. Your example has many weaknesses.
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.
Then you are right. The error is not in the Qur'an, but you guys then are a confused bunch, by your own judgement.
The differences between Sunnis and Shias are negligible in those areas. The differences between you guys are not. Is masjid Al haram in your brain or a building or an institute of higher learning? Is it in Mecca or Jerusalem or some kind of ruin somewhere between Jordan and Saudi Arabia? That is your example.
2/7.) As for burden of proof, now you are really mocking the deen. Please read 1736, and 4906, the burden of proof is on whoever seeks the positive, not the negative. One cannot prove a negative. Do you like to revel in such stupidity? The onus is on Bukhari to show his hadeeth are true. By critical analysis, this is flat out not so.
You shot yourself in the mouth here. Aya 1736 says
Itha Jaakum fasiqun binabain fatabayyanoo= If someone comes with news then clarify it. The job of clarifying is on us according to the Aya and not on the one who brought the news.The burden of proof is also dependant on the assertion of the person. If a person insists that something never happened, then he has to prove it. If a person insists that something happened then he has to prove it. The one who insists on something has to prove it. The best that a person that can say about the negative is "I am not aware of it happening" but that does not negate that it may have happened. The person that keeps the possibilities open does not have to bring proofs. If you cannot prove a negative, then you cannot negate the positive.
2.) I originally wrote "Obeying the messenger is not restricted purely to the Quran" but I edited it out for various reasons. There is redundancy on many Quranic statements. Ar-Rahman has a single verse repeating throughout the surah.
The Qur'an does repeat the statement for emphasis. The Qur'an though never uses two words with the exact meaning in the same sentence. That is not it's style and it makes poor literary style that is against the opinion that every word has it's place. Two words overlapping, sure. Two words identical is not true. However, you guys make it do that a lot to manipulate it's meanings.
066.001
YUSUFALI O Prophet! Why holdest thou to be forbidden that which Allah has made lawful to thee? Thou seekest to please thy consorts. But Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
PICKTHAL O Prophet! Why bannest thou that which Allah hath made lawful for thee, seeking to please thy wives? And Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
SHAKIR O Prophet! why do you forbid (yourself) that which Allah has made lawful for you; you seek to please your wives; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.Ok, so God rebuked him here, but did not take the message from him, nor retract the order to obey him, nor retracted the order to have safety in him. The way you put them together is that this is an isolated incident and that the order still stands for us. Notice that God did not ask us not to obey the messenger despite this. Why? because it was isolated or because it is not enough to change the rule of God to obey the messenger.
A system that has consensus on everything is God's system. As for empty slogans, I sincerely dare you to refute any of the logic presented pertaining to the Quran. By doing so, you will simply demonstrate yourself as one who rejects the Quranic message
What I wrote about you guys is that you have consensus on nothing. The Sunnis and the Shias have consensus on somethings. I do not fight God's words. I do fight your false system that uses a word of truth "God alone" to introduce falsehood "bias and then God alone". The degree of divergence of views depends on the degree of bias. It is then rampant here. What examples to bring Are the Jinn humans, bad spirits, egos, savage people, leaders and followers? or any of that nonsense. This is in the system that is presented in this forum under the banner "Qur'an alone".
Conversely, we can say archaeology is not attractive to you because it exposes the Sunni cube circumambulation as a pagan practice. Concrete evidence is better than hearsay and conjecture. The people I labelled as stupid are the people described exactly as such in the hadeeth. Those that believe the Earth rests on the back of a giant bull, and when this bull shakes its head, an earthquake occurs, are stupid.
I will ignore this nonsense. However define worship when it comes to this cube thing.
Take care and have a great day.
Hussein
-
Peace hlatif,
God's hadeeth is the best hadeeth. It does not prevent people from following what his prophet said. God's hadeeth tells us to obey the messenger. So, I apply it. I do not give it lip service to read what I want. Obey the messenger does not mean obey a wrong scholar.
OK is there a minimum number of hadith that one needs to apply it...
Volume 7, Book 69, Number 504
Narrated 'Aisha
The Prophet used to like sweet edible things and honey.Will Qur?an and eating honey suffice?