Muslim scholar argues that 653 hadiths in Sahih Bukhari and Sahih are false
-
Hadith ( anti quran )
Muhammad has how many wives we do not know; some say 9, 11, 13 and so on. When the choices were so many, he always preferred those wives in their periods - whereas Allah says stay away from women until they are pure from their periods. The Muhammad of Quran would not have dared to go against the ayat 2 222. What Bukhari narrated was not the quran alone muhammad.
-
Muslim brotherhood saying that the hadiths are false? That makes things interesting.
His brother Hassan formed the Muslim brotherhood. Jamal was always different since the 40s. He always called for the Islamic reformation and had views that were very liberal. The sad thing is he says in the 40s and 50s his views were accepted by a lot more people than now. He emerged after 9-11. This book will be very important
-
Peace,
I didn't even notice this thread before... This is a good sign. Many of Bukhari's writings are not only against the teachings of the Reading, but many of them are actually completely illogical and unreasonable. It's about time somebody decided to stand up and question them... What I'm wondering about now is this
But Mr Jamal al-Banna (86 years old now) is used to being attacked by al-Azhar, and he says he does not care. He excludes six kinds of hadiths
- Those that explain the Qur?an the Qur?an can?t by explained by hadiths.
- Those that talk bad about women - like the one?s that call them equal to dogs and cows and to beat them up and so on.
- Those that forbid the freedom of religion and that threaten those who leave Islam.
- Those with extreme ideas for encouraging people into Islam and the ones threatening people wit physical violence.
- Those that talk about Muhammad?s miracles.
- Some others of which he thinks that the story is not true at all.
If they're disregarding all of these, what's the point of keeping any of them?! With a basis like this, especially in considering hadith and sunna writings alongside the Reading, if they're going to reject these components of the books, they may as well just throw the books away altogether, since they'll have absolutely no value in relation to Islamic doctrine and practice...
Peace,
Ahmad
-
If they're disregarding all of these, what's the point of keeping any of them?! With a basis like this, especially in considering hadith and sunna writings alongside the Reading, if they're going to reject these components of the books, they may as well just throw the books away altogether, since they'll have absolutely no value in relation to Islamic doctrine and practice...
Peace
There is no THEY here, the post is talking about one person Gamal El bana, who is not a scholar, but rather an indpendent researcher in islamic issues, and he is very much rejecting and disregarding the Hadiths, and has been harshely attacked by religious men of the so called islamic institutes like the Azher, who are a faithfull guardians to Bukhari and his mates.
-
Peace
There is no THEY here, the post is talking about one person Gamal El bana, who is not a scholar, but rather an indpendent researcher in islamic issues, and he is very much rejecting and disregarding the Hadiths, and has been harshely attacked by religious men of the so called islamic institutes like the Azher, who are a faithfull guardians to Bukhari and his mates.
In a country like Egypt to have just one post 80 year old man taking on the entire Sunni etsblishment is a shame. But actually Ahl Al-Quran group led by Ahmad Subhi Mansour are also making an impact. They have quite an active forum and have also caught the attention of the religous authorities. Egypt is showing signs of religious dissent but the governemnt of Egypt is siding with the Sunni establishment. Gamal should be supported because he has a reputable name in religious circles being the younger brother of the founder of the Muslim brotherhood.
-
Only 653?!
I really do not care even if he says 3000 hadiths are false, as long as he does not attack those hadiths at the basis of shari3a law, such as inheritence law, divorce, right of children custody.... where verses are mis-interpreted and bias is evident.
-
Only 653?!
I really do not care even if he says 3000 hadiths are false, as long as he does not attack those hadiths at the basis of shari3a law, such as inheritence law, divorce, right of children custody.... where verses are mis-interpreted and bias is evident.
Peace
He does attack those hadiths at the basis of the Quran, in fact most if not all who attack hadiths use the quran as reference, but unfortuntely they are usually attacked as being ignornat elektro
-
Peace
He does attack those hadiths at the basis of the Quran, in fact most if not all who attack hadiths use the quran as reference, but unfortuntely they are usually attacked as being ignornat elektro
So what's the the ultimate aim to attack hadiths, or to put the message back into prespective? Many, very false hadiths, have the qur'an as reference and that's by misinterpreting verses or givnig words different meanings such as laws regarding inheritance, child custody, divorce or as far as rituals are concerned such as hajj; salaat, zakaat..etc.
I did not accuse anybody of ignorance. -
So what's the the ultimate aim to attack hadiths, or to put the message back into prespective? Many, very false hadiths, have the qur'an as reference and that's by misinterpreting verses or givnig words different meanings such as laws regarding inheritance, child custody, divorce or as far as rituals are concerned such as hajj; salaat, zakaat..etc.
I did not accuse anybody of ignorance.I don't understand the term "law" of inheritance or "law" of whatever. What does it mean to say law? Is everthing the Koran tells the prophet and the people of medina to do divine law? If you Samia believe that the Koran did not give us a specific sets of religious rituals we are to follow what makes you believe that the Koran then gives us a specific "law" to govern a community of believers? I have come up with a thread about Hukm in the Koran where I showed how the Koran uses the term hukm very differently from the way we do. Anyways its not the job of the prophecy to create a legal framework for societies to follow and it is impossible for anyone to do so anyways. The Koran doesn't tell us how to secure our borders and run our economies or how to establish ministries etc.
-
So what's the the ultimate aim to attack hadiths, or to put the message back into prespective?
They aim at put the message back to presepective.
I did not accuse anybody of ignorance.
I didn't mention you at all, i meant they are always attacked and accused by the religious men in power as being ignornat.
-
Only 653?!
I really do not care even if he says 3000 hadiths are false, as long as he does not attack those hadiths at the basis of shari3a law, such as inheritence law, divorce, right of children custody.... where verses are mis-interpreted and bias is evident.
Are those Sharia Laws based on Quran? If not, do they contradict the Quran? In my opinion, Any Law that contradicts Quran, whether hadith,sunnah or other, need to be thrown out.
-
Dear jibbo
Bukhari is a jew sent traitor of Islam. Circumcision is a jewish tradition, not followed by christians, the next generation to Musa and the immediate generation to Muhammad. The jew Bukhari brought this custom to muslims through his hadith. Next in his hadith, Bukhari the jew, writes in his hadith that muhammad was manhandled by a jew in the centre of the road by a jew loan giver when muhammad failed to pay back the money as promised. This hadith is to degrade the prophet muhammad. And further tells that muhammad thought it is better to believe and get a loan from a jew rather than believing the muslim sahaabas infested around him. Then the next hadith is when a jew dead body is taken to the burial, muhammad had to stand to honor the dead jew.
Bukhari is none but a jew send traitor to denigrate islam and prophet muhammad. His story always links muhammad with the jews and not with the christians casts doubts that hadith is the plot against islam by jews.
.
I have noticed that alot of people in this forum still use hadith. They act like they don't when they are in here, but I have had contact with them outside and they argue that there still are legit ones. FACT - God told use to use nothing BUT the Qu'ran.
-
I have noticed that alot of people in this forum still use hadith. They act like they don't when they are in here, but I have had contact with them outside and they argue that there still are legit ones. FACT - God told use to use nothing BUT the Qu'ran.
We can use any source we want. Depends entirely if what your speaking of is when they take non-Quranic information as compulsory.
The term "Quran alone" is a simplified misnomer, unless it is understood properly. It has never meant "only Quran and no other source". If "Quran alone" is understood correctly, then it is obvious Quran itself does not limit knowledge or methodology to itself.
-
We can use any source we want. Depends entirely if what your speaking of is when they take non-Quranic information as compulsory.
Whats the point of being on this site/forum then, if you use the hadith for religious practice and worship? After all, thats what this place is for!!
The hadith were notated via chinese whispers 300 - 800 years after the death of Muhammed (pbuh) which would make it highly inaccurate.
Say, "I am not different from other messengers. I have no idea what will happen to me or to you. I only follow what is revealed to me. (The Qu'ran) I am no more than a profound warner. (ie - the message in the Qu'ran)" 469
So why would Muhammed (pbuh) deliver something so different and contradicting to what God issued him with. One big example is Ablution. It's SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO CLEAR and simple to understand, yet people differ.
-
Whats the point of being on this site/forum then, if you use the hadith for religious practice and worship? After all, thats what this place is for!!
The hadith were notated via chinese whispers 300 - 800 years after the death of Muhammed (pbuh) which would make it highly inaccurate.
Say, "I am not different from other messengers. I have no idea what will happen to me or to you. I only follow what is revealed to me. (The Qu'ran) I am no more than a profound warner. (ie - the message in the Qu'ran)" 469
So why would Muhammed (pbuh) deliver something so different and contradicting to what God issued him with. One big example is Ablution. It's SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO CLEAR and simple to understand, yet people differ.
It seems you did not understand what I said, despite my underlining and making bold the word "compulsory".
For example, in the example you gave, it is only a problem if the person said you MUST do the ablution in other than what The Quran says.
Please note the underlined and bold word.
As I said, we can consult any source we want, but when non-Quranic information is taken as compulsory or to over-rule The Quran, then that's a problem.
