To Obey the Prophet(PBUH) is obligatory to every Muslim
-
I want to know whether God has a left foot, but this is also left out in the fully detailed Quran. Hmph. Perhaps it was left out because it is a ridiculous argument, one that distracts people from the right path, a baseless argument.
Well, neither you nor me have received direct communication from God.
God has multiple methods of communication. The word you meant presumeably was inspiration, not communication. What language did God tell things to "come together", in 4111? In what language does God say "Be" and there it is? Is God restricted to Arabic when the previous scripture was revealed in Hewbrew and possibly Aramaic? Languages are manmade and evolve over time and eventually become completely unintelligible to two people who originated from the first - exactly the case with Semitic languages, is it not?
God can act in time and out of time, since He is not limited by time.
Now we are getting to the unseen. Please explain why an omnipotent being would wish to act within time. Being within time is very illogical. A very common fallacy of logic used by people to "disprove" God is to ascribe human limitation.
-
The collection. When God says that He will collect it then it carries more than one possibility
1- God himself will collect it. We have no evidence of the Qur'an being collected out of thin air.
2- God collects it through means and those means will include people. If that is the case, then you will need hadeeth that will explain to you how it was collected. Why? because hadeeth is the only history of the time.
Why do you need explanation as to how it was collected? Even if this was necessary, this is nowhere near justification of following laws outside of the quran.
The explanation
When God says that He will explain it, then it will be one of two again
1- God will explain it Himself directly to us. Well, neither you nor me have received direct communication from God. The messenger has.
2- God explains it through means of explanation. One of those means of explanation is the messenger himself as mentioned on numerous occasions in the Qur'an.Or, the most obvious way is through Himself. How? Through the quran. Simple as that.
I don't "hate all hadith." If you want historical info, then sure, some hadith will have that. But it ends there. There is no need for religious laws to come from outside of the quran. You're accepting things as part of the deen that has not come from God.
Peace
-
Why do you need explanation as to how it was collected? Even if this was necessary, this is nowhere near justification of following laws outside of the quran.
I agree hlatif should not ask such questions from those who cannot answer .After all these questions to answer need '
-knowledge &
-brainHe should be careful not to put people in trouble.
voodoo voodoo -
I agree hlatif should not ask such questions from those who cannot answer .After all these questions to answer need '
-knowledge &
-brainHe should be careful not to put people in trouble.
voodoo voodooYou are right, we should turn to hearsay and conjecture so we can feel safe knowing that part of the Quran was lost inside the underbelly of a mountain goat (PBUH).
-
I agree hlatif should not ask such questions from those who cannot answer .After all these questions to answer need '
-knowledge &
-brainHe should be careful not to put people in trouble.
voodoo voodooDo you mock because you cannot answer?
Please tell me the relation between knowing how the quran was collected and avidly following senseless hearsay as if it was the word of God? The hadith, at best, is a bad history book. Everything we need for our deen is in the quran, the same message Jesus, Moses, etc. received. To think otherwise is ridiculous. Were other prophets required to follow the hearsay of long chains of narration regarding Muhammad?
-
Salaam all,
Navid, the only way for you to say that the Qur'an is authentic, complete with no addition nor subtraction is through knowing how it was collected. All your other methods will not work. So, if you use hadeeth to authenticate the Qur'an, then you cannot pick and chose without clear methodology to throw all the hadeeth except for the one that supports your theory.
Why is it important for you to authenticate the Qur'an? because you attack the hadeeth because it cannot be authenticated. So, for consistency sake, you have to authenticate the Qur'an.
Also, God said in the Qur'an that one of the messenger's jobs is explaining the Qur'an.
OPF, an example of how God acts within time is when He created you. Or do you think that you are timeless?
Also, God does not communicate with you to explain the Qur'an. If He did, then how come He told you something totaly different from your friends on this site. God does not play games.
Take care all.
Hussein
-
Do you mock because you cannot answer?
Please tell me the relation between knowing how the quran was collected and avidly following senseless hearsay as if it was the word of God? The hadith, at best, is a bad history book. Everything we need for our deen is in the quran, the same message Jesus, Moses, etc. received. To think otherwise is ridiculous. Were other prophets required to follow the hearsay of long chains of narration regarding Muhammad?
If history is not important why Allah reminded the "Ahl-e-kitab" about their history in the Holy Quran ?? and that with a lot of detail.
-
Salaam all,
Navid, the only way for you to say that the Qur'an is authentic, complete with no addition nor subtraction is through knowing how it was collected. All your other methods will not work. So, if you use hadeeth to authenticate the Qur'an, then you cannot pick and chose without clear methodology to throw all the hadeeth except for the one that supports your theory.
No, I use the signs in the quran to authenticate the quran. The way you authenticate the quran is with the hadith?
But let me assume you're right for a second. I'll use the hadith to authenticate the quran by knowing how it was collected. WHY does that mean we have to follow EVERYTHING else in the hadith? Why must we follow laws outside of the quran that are from long chains of narration?
Why is it important for you to authenticate the Qur'an? because you attack the hadeeth because it cannot be authenticated. So, for consistency sake, you have to authenticate the Qur'an.
What a sad excuse for an argument. I attack the hadith because the ONLY source for guidance for me is from the quran. The same message the other prophets received. How can you take as part of the deen from other than the quran?
I will ask again Were other prophets required to follow the hearsay of long chains of narration regarding Muhammad?
-
Salaam Navid,
No, I use the signs in the quran to authenticate the quran. The way you authenticate the quran is with the hadith?
But let me assume you're right for a second. I'll use the hadith to authenticate the quran by knowing how it was collected. WHY does that mean we have to follow EVERYTHING else in the hadith? Why must we follow laws outside of the quran that are from long chains of narration?
1- incorrect. You cannot prove that nothing was added or subtracted by the signs alone, especially since you do not speak Arabic. Probably, no one can but God. Show me how the signs prove no additions and no subtractions.
2- I nor any Sunni scholar ever said that you have to accept all hadeeths. However, we do not reject them like you do because of bias=Hawa.
What a sad excuse for an argument. I attack the hadith because the ONLY source for guidance for me is from the quran. The same message the other prophets received. How can you take as part of the deen from other than the quran?
I will ask again Were other prophets required to follow the hearsay of long chains of narration regarding Muhammad?
I hate to burst your bubble. You are not a prophet. They received messages from God that you will never receive. You have to deal with what was left for you of means of knowledge, including, but not limited to those chains of narration.
Hussein
-
I will ask again Were other prophets required to follow the hearsay of long chains of narration regarding Muhammad?
All other prophets were before Muhammad PBUH ,so did not need to follow any narration regarding Muhammad PBUH wether authentic or hearsay.
If you have some prophet coming 'after" Holy Prophet (PBUH) ,that is not ours .Sorry to say.
-
Peace Hussein
Salaam Navid,
1- incorrect. You cannot prove that nothing was added or subtracted by the signs alone, especially since you do not speak Arabic. Probably, no one can but God. Show me how the signs prove no additions and no subtractions.Right, so to know the quran is God's message, we must rely on things outside of the quran. Got it.
2- I nor any Sunni scholar ever said that you have to accept all hadeeths. However, we do not reject them like you do because of bias=Hawa.
I hate to burst your bubble. You are not a prophet. They received messages from God that you will never receive. You have to deal with what was left for you of means of knowledge, including, but not limited to those chains of narration.Hussein
Stop making generalizations. I am sure some are accurate. I am not, at all, saying ALL hadith are corrupt/not true. They are fine for history. But I and a lot of us here believe we do not need anything other than the quran for our deen. The only one that seems to have bias is you brother.
So do you agree or disagree that muslims before the time of the prophet Muhammad followed every single thing (down to which side to sleep on) the prophet Muhammad did?
Simple, really.
Peace
-
Salaam Navid,
I asked about completeness without addition nor subtraction. You did not answer the Question.
I am glad that you do not reject all hadeeth. Can I ask how you fast and when?
As for the way of sleeping, you are then making generalizations because most Sunnis do not care how the prophet slept, unless he indicated a religious reason for it and the hadeeth was deemed authentic by the reader.
Take care
Hussein
-
I have a question.
Can the mountain goat (PBUH) that swallowed the verses of stoning be a messenger? What can we call him/her? Does it count if it is a negative message?
-
I have a question.
Can the mountain goat (PBUH) that swallowed the verses of stoning be a messenger? What can we call him/her? Does it count if it is a negative message?
Why are using PBUH for a goat??
Is she your prophet?
Why to show such brailessness.
If possible give the difference between
-To teach a book
-To give a book
If you do not know ask a 6th grade student.So simple. -
Why are using PBUH for a goat??
Because the Holy Goat (PBUH) destroyed some verses from the holy quran, and saved us all. Peace be upon her.
-To teach a book
The Holy Goat (PBUH) taught us the book in its authenticated form by removing the stoning verses.
-To give a book
Ask a 6th grader
-
Salaam all,
Warner, thanks for you kind words and polite demeanor. Here is an Aya that talks about God's words
Wain ahadun mina almushrikeena istajaraka faajirhu hatta yasmaAAa kalama Allahi thumma ablighhu mamanahu thalika biannahum qawmun la yaAAlamoona96 If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah. and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge.
Salaam Hussein
As I said I am trying to understand your line of thinking but is 96 the only reason that we should accept that Quran as uncreated or do you have more evidence to add to that?
If the Mushrikeena listen to a verse from the Quran such as 7924 in which Pharaoh proclaims "I am your Lord Most High." or a sentence from Satan or disbelievers rejecting God will it be still applicable that the Mushrikeen have listened to the words of Allah. Can the objective in 96 be fulfilled if the Mushrikken listened to these verses ?
-
Salaam Navid,
1- incorrect. You cannot prove that nothing was added or subtracted by the signs alone, especially since you do not speak Arabic. Probably, no one can but God. Show me how the signs prove no additions and no subtractions.Even assuming the chains of narration of the ahadith dealing with the methods of collection are 100% verified (wild speculation, to say the least), this does not change the fact that those ahadith are not necessarily accurate. I know about the science of the isnad, etc. but the reality is, at some point you have to simply have faith that the quran was not added to or subtracted from. Even if you know, through ahadith, how the quran was collected, this does not change the fact that you are putting faith in those ahadith (as opposed to faith in the verses of the quran which state it is complete). Whether you believe in the quran alone, or follow ahadith, then, you still have to rely on faith on some primal level. At some point in the analysis, uncertainty abounds and faith takes over. In other words, your asking this question is completely irrelevant. Your point, at best, pushes the analysis back one step. It is not a conclusive analysis in and of itself. Those who are objective will see this. It is not open to dispute.
2- I nor any Sunni scholar ever said that you have to accept all hadeeths. However, we do not reject them like you do because of bias=Hawa.
I hate to burst your bubble. You are not a prophet. They received messages from God that you will never receive. You have to deal with what was left for you of means of knowledge, including, but not limited to those chains of narration.Your statement that brother Navid rejects them "because of bias" is pure speculation, of course. By all accounts, he does not follow ahadith as extra divine guidance simply because the quran does not tell him to do so; nay, the quran goes further and affirmatively asserts that the muslimeen must not take other sources as guidance.
The reality is the burden of proof is upon those who support the use of ahadith as extra sources of divine guidance. The quran's prohibitions are clear in this regard. No other source is to be used. Now if you want to dispute that straightforward muhkamat ayat, you must bring other straightforward verses to prove your case.
Posing non-sequiturs or asking circular questions like "how do you pray?" or "how do you fast?" does not change the fact that the quran is explicitly clear on this issue. In order to dispute this, the burden is on you to bring similarly clear verses that stand in contravention to the default interpretation of not following any other source but the quran.
There's really no way around that. I am sorry.
Of course I am assuming you are intellectually honest, and are affirmatively seeking truth, as opposed to merely defending any dogma your worldview is currently attached to.
Peace.
-
Peace Leo
What do you think about the following verse in the debate
on the created and the uncreated Quran.8119 In nahu_ laqaulu rasu_lin karim
The Quran came to us and to the rest of mankind from the Prophet as his speech from his mouth. Since it is human speech is this not created?
8119 In nahu laqulu rasulin kareem...8120 thi quuwatin 3inda thil 3arshi makeen
(a most honorable messenger..Owner of power and well established with the Lord of the Throne)This is about Gabriel, not the prophet