Can anybody answer these simple questions ??
-
The logic is perfectly valid unless you try and make a strawman argument out of it as seen here
If you are trying to make all hadeeth is insignificant details, then you are stretching your analogy beyond it's capacity.
God told him in the Qur'an to perform Salat. How did he do it?, same for Zakat and Hajj and Sawm and many other obligations and orders. The way the prophet performed them is very important, especially if the Qur'an did not give you details on those. Your poor performance in those areas reveals that your refusal to pay attention to those details has detrimental consequences. If you want to push that those issues are not important, then you are digging yourselves deeper in a hole where you bury some very important Qur'anic orders and concepts into insignificance.
Typical tactic. Those are, as you know, significant/time-consuming/distinct arguments/debates in themselves. The thing is, all of those have had several solutions from the Quran, but all that remains is to seperate the wheat from the chaff. By reversal of your logic, you are effectively accusing them (as in those who have put forward Quranic descriptions of those acts) of spreading falsehood, quite a significant accusation. Also, by ignoring those solutions, and claiming "there is no solution from the Quran", you are undermining their efforts, and also, spreading your own falsehood (if you claim as such).
Now, can I ask you
Did the companions of the prophet break out into war after his death, with Ali VS Abu Bakr fighting?
Shall I seek as a source of law other than God's revelations which are made clear, distinct?
Where in the Quran does God approve Bukhari as a source? 348 shows Allah approving Kitab, Hikma, Injeel and Taurat, 544 directly commands/commanded Jews to follow their own taurat. I can't find any reference to Bukhari anywhere. If it is found in Quran, please tell me. One condition - to find it must not require a calculator. -
If it is found in Quran, please tell me. One condition - to find it must not require a calculator.
7430 Over it are NINETEEN.
Yeah them tables go into googlian 10^100 size numbers.
Like Ibn Hambal ? I want to know how to eat watermelon. lol
http//www.answering-islam.de/Main/Books/Wollaston/Accounts/chapt6.htm
So scrupulous was this theologian in his veneration for the Prophet of Arabia, that he would not eat watermelons because, although aware that the Master whom he adored, indulged in them, it was uncertain whether the founder of Islam peeled off the rind, or whether he broke, bit, or cut them!
-
SIMPLE LOGIC
Listen to what you are saying
Hadith gives detail x and y.
The quran doesn't
The hadith is necessaryYou're using the hadith to prove that the hadith is necessary. If you don't see what's wrong with this, please go here http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_logic
Please do not say "Ok so you don't have an answer." This is simple logic. If you're going to try to prove hadith, there are much better arguments - ones that actual have a logical standing.
Peace
-
I would like to add the following questions to the list
What colour of clothing was Muhammad wearing when he received first revelation?
What did he have for breakfast that day?
What kind of house did his father live in?
Did the battle of Badr take place on a sunny day?
What kind of sandals did Muhammad wear during the timed/regular "salat"?Please answer these questions ,rest will come forward.
With reference please.Dear Brother
I would simply say
What a helpness of an ideology !!rotfl Same goes to your questions... whatever that means.
-
Now, can I ask you
Did the companions of the prophet break out into war after his death, with Ali VS Abu Bakr fighting?
YES! Do you want details? It was Ali and huzoor's most beloved and only virgin wife Aisha who had dispute. Both used to dislike each other for some reason even when huzoor was alive.
Shall I seek as a source of law other than God's revelations which are made clear, distinct?
Yes! nope
Where in the Quran does God approve Bukhari as a source? 348 shows Allah approving Kitab, Hikma, Injeel and Taurat, 544 directly commands/commanded Jews to follow their own taurat. I can't find any reference to Bukhari anywhere. If it is found in Quran, please tell me. One condition - to find it must not require a calculator.
Like you have never read in quran that obey Allah and obey huzoor?
May God give some wisdom to you.
-
Salaam OPF,
Typical tactic. Those are, as you know, significant/time-consuming/distinct arguments/debates in themselves. The thing is, all of those have had several solutions from the Quran, but all that remains is to seperate the wheat from the chaff.
It has been 1400 years and nothing comes from your camp. How much more time to wait? As for the different explanations from the Qur'an, then I do have a question How many different versions do you expect the prophet to have prayed? Will you take his example or prefer to get lost in search of the Ayat of the Qur'an.
By reversal of your logic, you are effectively accusing them (as in those who have put forward Quranic descriptions of those acts) of spreading falsehood, quite a significant accusation. Also, by ignoring those solutions, and claiming "there is no solution from the Quran", you are undermining their efforts, and also, spreading your own falsehood (if you claim as such).
I will not accuse a sincere person of spreading falsehood. As for those who reveal dishonesty as in playing linguistic manipulations of the Qur'an, then yes. However, their business is with God not with me. Also, I do not claim that there is no solution from the Qur'an. If the authentic hadeeth explains the Qur'an then the solution is in the Qur'an, explained through authentic hadeeths. Is there evidence that depending on linguistics alone will not lead to the best understanding? Yes, when people do not know how to pray or perform hajj or Zakat. You may say, but we have several options that we are contemplating. The answer is still no. Why? because if the Qur'an is clear to you guys, then one would expect a consensus on those essential simple matters, but there is no consensus in sight, why?
1- Either that the Qur'an needs other tools to clarify it.
2- The Qur'an not as detailed as you think.
3- Your whole movement is based on manipulations and bias, and when the people's bias is at work without restraint, then there is no hope of consensus.
4- None of you has the minimum needed to understand the Qur'an?Now, can I ask you
Did the companions of the prophet break out into war after his death, with Ali VS Abu Bakr fighting?
Ali and Abu Bakr did not fight. However, no one is perfect and if they erred after the messenger, then that does not make you or anyone here a better person. A little self introspection is needed. Many messengers made mistakes, so why would one expect more from their followers.
Shall I seek as a source of law other than God's revelations which are made clear, distinct?
Where in the Quran does God approve Bukhari as a source?God did not mention Bukhari, but he said in 44 places to obey the messenger. This means that wherever you arrive at a conclusion that the messenger ordered something, whether in the Qur'an or not, Bukhari or not, then you obey it.
348 shows Allah approving Kitab, Hikma, Injeel and Taurat, 544 directly commands/commanded Jews to follow their own taurat.
God sent the Taurah and sent messengers one after another to rule the Israelites by the rules of the Taurat and to explain it to the people over hundreds of years. The writings of those other messengers and orders were not Taurah, but they ruled by the taurat, and they explained it to the people. Those writings are part of the old testament itself.
So, the people of the Taurah obeyed the messengers in their lives and they still do after their death through readings the different writings and rulings of all the hebrew messengers up to Jesus.
Take care and have a great day.
Hussein
-
It has been 1400 years and nothing comes from your camp. How much more time to wait? As for the different explanations from the Qur'an, then I do have a question How many different versions do you expect the prophet to have prayed? Will you take his example or prefer to get lost in search of the Ayat of the Qur'an.
what's the obsession with muhammad, now I wanna know how moses prayed, how abraham prayed. I think I would be more interested in someone who spoke to God, and someone who is God's beloved friend. If his example was so bloody important, maybe just maybe it would be in the Quran, oh right, God is ever forgetful isn't he? Bukhari keeps him in line!
1- Either that the Qur'an needs other tools to clarify it.
2- The Qur'an not as detailed as you think.
3- Your whole movement is based on manipulations and bias, and when the people's bias is at work without restraint, then there is no hope of consensus.
4- None of you has the minimum needed to understand the Qur'an?-
Or the quran lies about itself being complete, fully-detailed, perfect. Therefore shouldn't be part of YOUR deen either, since it lies right? if it says its fully-detailed either it must be fully-detailed or its a bloody lie
-
Or as you think; The quran is a guide. A guide pushes you into the right direction and doesn't hold your hand for you.
-
you mean yours aren't?! Look in the mirror sometime
God did not mention Bukhari, but he said in 44 places to obey the messenger. This means that wherever you arrive at a conclusion that the messenger ordered something, whether in the Qur'an or not, Bukhari or not, then you obey it.
so obey moses, abraham, and jesus be fair now. OF course, muhammad is the only messenger that EVER existed.
-
-
The logic is perfectly valid unless you try and make a strawman argument out of it as seen here
Now, can I ask you
Did the companions of the prophet break out into war after his death, with Ali VS Abu Bakr fighting?
.Dear Brother
Reference please .
Why do Quranists always talk without Reference -
Salaam OPF,
It has been 1400 years and nothing comes from your camp. How much more time to wait? As for the different explanations from the Qur'an, then I do have a question How many different versions do you expect the prophet to have prayed? Will you take his example or prefer to get lost in search of the Ayat of the Qur'an.
I will not accuse a sincere person of spreading falsehood. As for those who reveal dishonesty as in playing linguistic manipulations of the Qur'an, then yes. However, their business is with God not with me. Also, I do not claim that there is no solution from the Qur'an. If the authentic hadeeth explains the Qur'an then the solution is in the Qur'an, explained through authentic hadeeths. Is there evidence that depending on linguistics alone will not lead to the best understanding? Yes, when people do not know how to pray or perform hajj or Zakat. You may say, but we have several options that we are contemplating. The answer is still no. Why? because if the Qur'an is clear to you guys, then one would expect a consensus on those essential simple matters, but there is no consensus in sight, why?
1- Either that the Qur'an needs other tools to clarify it.
2- The Qur'an not as detailed as you think.
3- Your whole movement is based on manipulations and bias, and when the people's bias is at work without restraint, then there is no hope of consensus.
4- None of you has the minimum needed to understand the Qur'an?Ali and Abu Bakr did not fight. However, no one is perfect and if they erred after the messenger, then that does not make you or anyone here a better person. A little self introspection is needed. Many messengers made mistakes, so why would one expect more from their followers.
God did not mention Bukhari, but he said in 44 places to obey the messenger. This means that wherever you arrive at a conclusion that the messenger ordered something, whether in the Qur'an or not, Bukhari or not, then you obey it.
God sent the Taurah and sent messengers one after another to rule the Israelites by the rules of the Taurat and to explain it to the people over hundreds of years. The writings of those other messengers and orders were not Taurah, but they ruled by the taurat, and they explained it to the people. Those writings are part of the old testament itself.
So, the people of the Taurah obeyed the messengers in their lives and they still do after their death through readings the different writings and rulings of all the hebrew messengers up to Jesus.
Take care and have a great day.
Hussein
Salam,
I do not know 1400 years of history so I cannot comment. Secondly, presumably the correct method -. I think one important aya on this matter, in any case, is 1959, applicable to all. Yes, I'll take his example, so long as his example does not ridicule him and Islam.
I will not accuse a sincere person of spreading falsehood. As for those who reveal dishonesty as in playing linguistic manipulations of the Qur'an, then yes. However, their business is with God not with me. Also, I do not claim that there is no solution from the Qur'an. If the authentic hadeeth explains the Qur'an then the solution is in the Qur'an, explained through authentic hadeeths.
Please do not dodge the argument, you are not Agent Smith. This is on a tangent from the original topic - who is "sincere"? As for hadeeth, you know very well that I specifically meant the Quran by itself.
Is there evidence that depending on linguistics alone will not lead to the best understanding? Yes, when people do not know how to pray or perform hajj or Zakat. You may say, but we have several options that we are contemplating. The answer is still no. Why? because if the Qur'an is clear to you guys, then one would expect a consensus on those essential simple matters, but there is no consensus in sight, why?
You are correct, which is why we throw logic, and cross-referencing into the mix, and all the other tools of study, physical or conceptual. Why is there no consensus? Clearly because some people simply cannot and will not let go of the traditional ritual. As far as I see, there is person/school of thought X saying it is spiritual and person/school of thought Y saying it is ritual.
1- Either that the Qur'an needs other tools to clarify it.
2- The Qur'an not as detailed as you think.
3- Your whole movement is based on manipulations and bias, and when the people's bias is at work without restraint, then there is no hope of consensus.
4- None of you has the minimum needed to understand the Qur'an?1 - Of course it does. As long as it isn't stamped into the brains of every single person in the world, and as long as it is written in Arabic, or any language, or even written or transmitted linguistically, it will always need other tools. The item of dispute, of course, is whether the ahadeeth are a valid tool.
2 - No. Unless you have become kaffir, rejecting that the Quran is detailed? The Quran is clearly detailed in its message, all else is left for people to decide for themselves and extrapolate from the book - the exact same technique used in the Sunni world sans hadeeth, if you remember.
3 - I will argue that every movement is based on manipulations and bias. If it isn't stretching Quran, it is stretching a hadeeth round to the point it becomes a wormhole. Seen any flying horses, by the way?
4 - Lack of manpower, the main issue. I will say you are correct. However, clearly everyone here has the tools to see a disproportionate number of hadeeth simply cannot be in line with the Quran, and hence that drags down the entire body.
Ali and Abu Bakr did not fight. However, no one is perfect and if they erred after the messenger, then that does not make you or anyone here a better person. A little self introspection is needed. Many messengers made mistakes, so why would one expect more from their followers.
Why the Sunni/Shia rift then? Can you explain? The battles of Jamal and Siffin? If these companions themselves had weaknesses and a lack of consensus, how does that preserve the stability of the Quranic message (including the "sunnah" which you previously said was transmitted through these people? Do you believe Aisha and Ali (strangely enough, less talkative than the ever prolific Abu Hurairah) would be unbiased in their transmissions? Especially regarding such events? One would be inclined to believe that the people the Almighty depended on for transmission of Islam had love and mercy between themselves regardless of the messenger - 863-64.
God did not mention Bukhari, but he said in 44 places to obey the messenger. This means that wherever you arrive at a conclusion that the messenger ordered something, whether in the Qur'an or not, Bukhari or not, then you obey it.
So why should I follow Bukhari, in fact, why should I follow any idle talk, vain discourse, baseless hearsay, you know, " ", texts which do indeed mislead from the correct path (stoning, death for apostasy, amputation, paganism), when I have " " sitting here in front of me, which also shows everything (significant) the messenger did?
Also, a saying of the messenger
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. -- Deuteronomy 2118-21
Again, I ask Allah mentions books other than the Quran as evidenced/referenced previously, why is Bukhari not mentioned as guidance when these are? If you do not know the answer, do not beat around the bush and use inconsistent logic to push out an answer like an overweight baby, simply say the words "I do not know". We are all human.
God sent the Taurah and sent messengers one after another to rule the Israelites by the rules of the Taurat and to explain it to the people over hundreds of years. The writings of those other messengers and orders were not Taurah, but they ruled by the taurat, and they explained it to the people. Those writings are part of the old testament itself.
I see. So Rashad Khalifa et al could never explain the Quran after the final Holy Prophet? but Moses had successors. Not that Rashad Khalifa is relevant as a messenger, this is simply an example. Now, can you explain why Allah decides to leave out details for the Taurat and left the job to messengers to explain, whereas Allah claims "this book is explained in detail" (6114, amongst others) and the messenger is said "I do not say aught of my own will" (650 - also many hadeeth contradict this) and that if the messenger were to invent any baseless hadith in Allah's name, he would be killed/silenced (6944)?
So, the people of the Taurah obeyed the messengers in their lives and they still do after their death through readings the different writings and rulings of all the hebrew messengers up to Jesus.
Which, of course, explains the need for two more authentic revelations. Of course, Jews already have their own ahadeeth, called the Talmud. Christians have Sahih-Matthew, Mark, Luke and John to follow on top. Can it be taken that Allah never orders us to follow the texts inside Bukhari and Muslim, BUT orders us to follow the text inside the Quran, which is detailed/distinct?
-
Dear Brother
Reference please .
Why do Quranists always talk without ReferenceSorry, I retract that, I could not find a source which in modern days, the author and his idealogy could not be considered schizophrenic or had delusions/hallucinations or otherwise on crack, LSD, or in any state of mind incompatible with salat.
If you really wish...
http//www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter4/5.html
"O' daughter of the Prophet! I didn't love anyone as much as I
loved your father, nor anyone after him is more loving to me as
you are. But I swear by Allah that if these people assemble
here with you, then this love of mine would not prevent me from
setting your house on fire."Oh, how kind! Free central heating for Fatima! She will be warm for the rest of her life!
-
It seems you are online, our beloved brother D )
http//quemaster.com/matrix/images/photos/matrix07.JPG
If you remember, I asked your opinion of 316. Specifically, why is "" in this verse not untranslated, in the same way it is not untranslated throughout the Quran, yet out of the Quran it is? Also, what does this verse entail?
Now, being a learner of Arabic, I also wish to ask what "" in 413 and another form in 6114 means. According to these bumbling fools here, it means "fully detailed", but how can it be when I need to know how Huzoor trimmed his beard, a detail not found in the Quran?
Finally, the most important one. Did the prophets(P.B.U.T.) say "amen" in their prayers/salat? For instance, after reciting Al-Fateha? What did Abraham say, " "? What did he do after prostration in the second, and fourth rakats of 4-rakat prayers, and in the 2nd and 3rd rakats of 3-rakat prayers?
WITH REFERENCE, PLEASE.
Note Transmitter of source should not be schizophrenic or delusional, or on crack, or other drugs/syndromes which cloud the mind. Examples of this entail the idea of walking several thousand miles through the desert to put up a cube when there were many similar artefacts already built. -
(emphasis mine)
Dear Brother
Reference please .
Why does Leoxyz talk GeneralisationsDear
all those I have encountered uptill now ,no one gives any reference.One guy gave Lisan ul Arab reference and unfortunately that was wrong reference.
Then generalization is justified. -
Peace Leoxyz,
What has been said that you need us to reference. In Sha Allah if it makes you understand our position better I am sure there are a number of people who would help you hunt down some reference etc. But if you do not wish to learn and merely want to mock us then no-one would wish to find references for you and waste their time. So what do you need explained? ???
Salaam
Al -
Peace Leoxyz,
What has been said that you need us to reference. In Sha Allah if it makes you understand our position better I am sure there are a number of people who would help you hunt down some reference etc. But if you do not wish to learn and merely want to mock us then no-one would wish to find references for you and waste their time. So what do you need explained? ???
Salaam
AlDear Brother
If someone comes up authentically ,I will become pretty serious because I am also a learner.But when I see wrong things are being posted without being backed up by proper reference ,I get upset.
See how many post actual arabic text of the Quran ?? -
But if you do not wish to learn and merely want to mock us then no-one would wish to find references for you and waste their time.
not many are going to waste their time repsonding to somebody who doesn't answer any of our questions and continues asking questions like a parrot. It's frustrating and a waste of time, I've personally stopped taking this guy seriously.
-
No reply?
Could I expect anything less?
