My problems with Free-Minds (very long post, please read)
-
Putting each topic on its own thread is better still.
I agree. Will do better next time.
That's not what i asked regarding this matter (and by this i meant your point #2, where you said "fact check" which you have not included on your first post.
Do you feel attacked by my comment? I'm not blind and i did not miss the text you unnecessarily repeat. And I originally intend to discuss things with you. Thank you for your attitude.
Agreed. That needs clarifying.
What exactly do you need me to clarify? I'm confused, honestly. Not trying to be rude. What did I not explain?
Mate, you've registered on Free-Minds and you posted all these. I'm not going to even ask you the hard-fact (i.e., statistical evidence), but please consider this the views of Free Minds are plural. Majority does not equal all. Your thread here is one example. If you just said "some views of Free Minds" that would have clarified the matter, don't you understand my point--a literal point?
And i'm still doing physical Salaat myself btw and i have my own reason to do it, just as you have your own reason. You'll see that everyone else here would be fine with us doing physical Salaat. It's best to take the best of words.
Good luck with your call.
Peace.
Thanks!
-
In over 32265 narrations, not ONE SINGLE HADITH shows Salaat as being something else than worship/ritual prayer. Not a single one. This means nothing to you? In over 32265 narrations, every hadith that brings up Salaat as a ritual prayer is false, corrupt, and an innovation which has nothing to do with the real Salaat?? Huh?
But you cannot. You can't produce even one narration. Yet you're telling me that in over 32265 narrations, every single Hadith which describes that Salaat as a worship/ritual prayer is false and can't be trusted.
I myself still pray ritually as a form of salaat, 3 times a day, but I want to comment on the above remark. Don't forget that Bukhari chucked 99% of other Hadiths and only included the ones that he deemed authentic. You know... in 99% hadiths that he discarded, some might actually suggest that salaat is not a ritual worship .
-
- Where did I say that I don't want to "worship Him ritually"?
- How come you switched from the "salat = ritual prayer" interpretation to "salat = bond/conncetion to God" interpretation?
- What is the following supposed to mean? "but you show no reason how the Qur'an shows the prescribed Salaat as being anything other than a ritual." Did you read the links referenced by me? Did you read the verses quoted by Ayman and myself?
- Salat/salawat/etc. ARE general terms, as seen by 9103 and 2157, among others.
So what if they are general terms? There are tons of words that can be used in many different ways depending on the context. You are missing the point, obviously. I simply pointed out that a ritual prayer is, in fact, a bond/connection to God. You keep repeating the fact that Salaat is a general term for "bond" but that doesn't change anything at all. Your logic goes something along these lines
If Salaat equals Bond, then Salaat cannot equal Ritual Prayer.
That is faulty reasoning. It's the way the Qur'an talks about this special "bond" that people should pay attention to, and not simply stop thinking when they translate Salaat into "bond."
http//www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-popularity.html
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authorityAbsolute nonsense. You need to take a critical thinking class because I never made this fallacy. If I had said Salaat must be a ritual prayer because it is written so in Bukhari or any other hadith collection, then yes I would have made this fallacy. I simply said that we have many many narrations, at least (but much more) than 30000 narrations from various different sources, and not even one narration from any one of those sources, not even one half of a narration, not even 0.01%, shows, describes, or even remotely implies, that Salaat is anything other than worship/ritual prayer.
I did that in order to show that your belief (that salaat is something else) has very little logic behind it, and has a very high probability of being erroneous, unless of course you can provide a reasonable explanation or ANY explanation for that matter, as to why absolutely no historical source and no narration describes the "real salaat." So why haven't you answered the question I asked you? Here it goes again
How did these corrupters (whoever they are) manage to remove the real Salaat from every single narration related to it, and for what purpose did they change it to be a worship/ritual prayer instead of whatever it may be?
6112 We have permitted the enemies of every prophet, human and invisible devils, to inspire in each other fancy words in order to deceive. Had your Lord willed, they would not have done it. You shall disregard them and their fabrications.
Yes I absolutely agree. Stoning to death, killing apostates, oppressing women, etc. are all excellent examples of fabrications which have nothing to do with the Qur'an, yet they are practiced (sadly).
6113 That is so the minds of those who do not acknowledge the Hereafter will listen to it, and they will accept it, and they will take of it what they will.
You are a perfect example you take of the Hadith what you will - you reject some and accept some. You do not acknowledge that the reading/quran is fully detailed.
6114 "Shall I seek other than God as a judge when He has sent down to you this book 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.
First, how am I a perfect example when I am not one of those who do not acknowledge the Hereafter?
Second, yes the Qur'an is fully detailed, but it was not revealed in a vacume. It also didn't just pop out of the sky with every Surah in it. Now... you do realise that by not knowing arabic you in fact ARE going to sources beside the Qur'an to understand it. You do know that, right? I hope you do, because every translation you read is from a FALLIBLE HUMAN BEING who TRANSLATED the Qur'an. That fallible human being = outside source.
So every "Quran alone" Muslim, "Quranist," or "Submitter" who doesn't know Arabic is actually using outside sources to understand the Qur'an. Those outside sources = different translations made by men.
I don't care what your idol "implies" about salat.
Why dodge and insult? I have no idols. None whatsoever. I'm not a Sunni, nor Shia, nor Sufi, nor Ahmadiyah, nor Wahhabi, nor a Rashad Khalifa follower. I don't belong in ANY group except "Muslim." That's what I call myself. Your reaction shows you cannot give any reasonable explanation about what I asked you. Once more
At least (but much more) than 30000 narrations from various different sources, and not even one narration from any one of those sources, not even one half of a narration, not even 0.01%, shows, describes, or even remotely implies, that Salaat is anything other than worship/ritual prayer. So...
Can you give me any explanation or theory as to why that is? Give me your theory, your reasoning behind it. I would really love to hear it. How did these fabricators (whoever they are) hide the real salaat, since it can't be found in any single narration out of over 30000 narrations. And for what purpose did they change the real salaat to be a worship/ritual prayer instead of whatever it "really" is?
I'm waiting.
6116 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.
Again, I agree. You do ignore the fact that my views are in the minority just like yours are.
What do you mean with "the Sunnis"? Aren't you one of them?
No, I am not. I reject Shariah Law as being God's Divine Law or Islamic Law. You obviously haven't read my post completely. You read a few paragraphs and then already formed your opinion about it. I suggest you read everything I said and what I responded to other posters before continuing this discussion. That's just so I don't have to repeat myself 100 times.
2530 The messenger said, "My Lord, my people have deserted and forsaken this reading (quran)."
Any complaint by the messenger about people deserting and forsaking his so-called "Hadith"?
234 Let them produce a hadith like this, if they are truthful.
456 These are God's signs that We recite to you with truth. So, in which hadith, after God and His signs, do they believe?
Yes, many people have deserted the Qur'an indeed. But don't be fooled into thinking that if one rejects Sunnism or Shiaism that this person can't also desert the Qur'an, in many different ways. Don't be fooled into thinking that rejectors of Sunni or Shia teachings are immune to Satan's deceptions.
Peace
-
I myself still pray ritually as a form of salaat, 3 times a day, but I want to comment on the above remark. Don't forget that Bukhari chucked 99% of other Hadiths and only included the ones that he deemed authentic. You know... in 99% hadiths that he discarded, some might actually suggest that salaat is not a ritual worship .
But we're not only talking about Bukhari. We're talking about many different sources, and even those sources whose authenticity is questioned by "scholars" do not show the Salaat as something else. There is not even one "weak" (daif) or "fabricated" (mawdu) Hadith that implies Salaat is something other than worship/ritual prayer. Please read my response to "progressive1993" which I posted a few moments ago.
Salam
-
Peace Amid,
But we're not only talking about Bukhari. We're talking about many different sources, and even those sources whose authenticity is questioned by "scholars" do not show the Salaat as something else. There is not even one "weak" (daif) or "fabricated" (mawdu) Hadith that implies Salaat is something other than worship/ritual prayer. Please read my response to "progressive1993" which I posted a few moments ago.
Your logic is based on the fallacy of Appeal to Popularity. The same exact thing can be said about the Christians' belief that Jesus is the son of the god (the god be most exalted above what they describe). All the Christian sources, including those questioned by "scholars", agree that Jesus is the son of the god. The same thing can also be said a few hundred years ago about the earth being flat and a bunch of other things that everyone agrees on or agreed on at one point and we know are false. It is therefore not surprising that you are unable to answer the following
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599473.msg231810#msg231810
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599473.msg231813#msg231813
Peace,
Ayman
-
"Undoubtedly Allah and His Angels send blessings on the Prophet. O' you who believe! Send upon Him Blessings and salute Him with all respect." (The Qur'an 3356)
Yusuf Ali
God and His angels send blessings on the Prophet O ye that believe! Send ye blessings on him, and salute him with all respect.Pickthall
Lo! Allah and His angels shower blessings on the Prophet. O ye who believe! Ask blessings on him and salute him with a worthy salutation.Khalifa
GOD and His angels help and support the prophet. O you who believe, you shall help and support him, and regard him as he should be regarded.
Yusif Ali
He it is Who sends blessings on you, as do His angels, that He may bring you out from the depths of Darkness into Light and He is Full of Mercy to the Believers.Pickthall
He it is Who blesseth you, and His angels (bless you), that He may bring you forth from darkness unto light; and He is ever Merciful to the believers.Khalifa
He is the One who helps you, together with His angels, to lead you out of darkness into the light. He is Most Merciful towards the believers.
In 3356 God and the angels are blessing the prophet. In 3343 God and the angels are blessing the believers.
As far as "saluting the prophet with all respect" or "worthy salutation"... Well, salute can mean to greet honorably or to show respect. It's not possible to greet the prophet since his death. That was only possible for the people who lived when he was alive in this world.
It is possible, however, to show respect in today's world. Does it mean we have to say things a certain way? If respect is deep in one's heart, but doesn't show up in the thread with a capital letter, etc.... then who's to say the person typing is disrespectful? We can have respect, the deepest respect, without trying to convince anyone.
And what about asking/sending blessing upon him as stated in 3356? Here again, this only seems possible when the prophet was alive in this world. Does it make sense that he needs God's blessing when he is already in the heaven's?
Maybe I'm wrong... this is just what makes sense to me.
Peace
-
another important thing to note is that all shia/sunni ahadith agree on 5 times prayer!
Actually, this is not true. Many Shia and Sufi groups observe THREE daily salaat observances. Many of the members of the Hanafiyya group believe that THREE salaat observances are mandated in the Qur'aan (obligatory), and the other two are voluntary. The Ismailis observe THREE salaats per day, saying that this is directly ordained in the Qur'aan. There are other groups that advocate TWO and THREE, and the Sunnis are the only ones who collectively believe in FIVE, basing it on a hadiyth concerning the prophet flying off into the heavens and arguing with Allah to take the number down from 50 to 5...
-
At least (but much more) than 30000 narrations from various different sources, and not even one narration from any one of those sources,not even one half of a narration, not even 0.01%, shows, describes, or even remotely implies, that Salaat is anything other than worship/ritual prayer.
As i said you?re logic is if hadiths verify each other they must be right? Yet you said
?Yes I absolutely agree. Stoning to death, killing apostates, oppressing women, etc. are all excellent examples of fabrications which have nothing to do with the Qur'an, yet they are practiced (sadly)?
Hadiths of different sorts (other than bukhari) verify these. Yet you agree these are fabrications. Inconsistencies of thought..
Anyway I haven?t concluded on my understanding of salat. It?s just interesting to see how people think/perceive things.
Salam.
BTW for others Shia's pray 5 times, most combine prayers to 3, however it's mustahab (liked/preferred) to pray separately as sunnis do.
-
I don't think there is such a thing as a "basic" teaching. You could say the basic teaching of the Qur'an is simply obeying God and worshipping him, but that is too broad a statement. You could say that the Old Testament and the Qur'an have the same "basic teaching" which is worshipping God and abstaining from sin, but in fact those two books are very much different. Religious books has several "basic teachings" which can be expanded further. The Qur'an has several teachings; Worshipping God and not associating partners, Performing Salaat, fasting Ramadhan, accepting Muhammad (saw) as a Messenger of God, doing many good deeds, abstaining from evil/sinning, etc.
I think you nailed the 'basic teaching' pretty well (for a guy who didn't think there was one, heh). Worshipping God indeed, I very much agree. Even the opening chapter attests to this by reminding us that we worship only God (iyyaka na'budu). But bro, what does it mean to worship God? This is what the Quran inexhaustibly explains to us because it is a central concept. Why am I focussing on this when you talked about salat? Because I believe the 'salat' question is easily resolved when you understand the ibadah/worship question.
Have a look at 1/5, right after 'iyyaka na'budu - you alone we worship' of 1/4. It says 'guide us of the sirat al-mustaqeem'. 1/6 continues to explain what siratal mustaqeem. I would ask the question, why is it, in the very first time the reader is introduced to the concept of 3ibadah, he is immediately introduced to the siratal mutaqeem? Have a look at 6/151-153. This is siratal mustaqeem. As you can see its not ritualistic but rather ethical.
This is but one example of the numerous explanations of the concept of ibadah or worship. I'm going on about this because I feel that once you see what ibadah is, you will understand the ritual 'salat' just simply doesn't fit because Quran does not teach us a religion in the conventional sense (rites and rituals). Rather it is about how man is in the world and how he can connect with God and THAT connection is salaat. There are a number of ways to connect to God.
In my view, thinking holistically solves this issue very decisively.
-
Actually, this is not true. Many Shia and Sufi groups observe THREE daily salaat observances. Many of the members of the Hanafiyya group believe that THREE salaat observances are mandated in the Qur'aan (obligatory), and the other two are voluntary. The Ismailis observe THREE salaats per day, saying that this is directly ordained in the Qur'aan. There are other groups that advocate TWO and THREE, and the Sunnis are the only ones who collectively believe in FIVE, basing it on a hadiyth concerning the prophet flying off into the heavens and arguing with Allah to take the number down from 50 to 5...
guy, I wasn't talking about any false messenger RK's hadith or beliefs of any cult. I was talking about ahadith shia or sunni. bring on any hadith that says there are 2/3/4 and not 5.
peace
-
The same exact thing can be said about the Christians' belief that Jesus is the son of the god (the god be most exalted above what they describe). All the Christian sources, including those questioned by "scholars", agree that Jesus is the son of the god...
Absolutely not. When you start off with a false premise, nothing right will follow. You completely skipped over what I said regarding the Bible, and also my response to "progressive1993." There are numerous Bible verses where Jesus (pbuh) says he is the son of man. Verses where he says he is a prophet. Verses where he says the Father is greater than him. Verses where he says he can do nothing of himself. Verses where he says "our God" is one. Verses where he stresses good deeds and love for God as the way to salvation, etc. etc. This all shows that there is some truth to be found in the Bible, things which are completely compatible with Islam.
Yet there is no Hadith that describes Salaat as something else than a ritual prayer.
You see, I already mentioned that in order to avoid replies like yours, but you completely ignored what I said.
Now keep in mind that this is the Bible we're talking about. The Bible is something which is called accurate and authentic by christians, and yet still you will find inconsistencies regarding Jesus. Not to mention how many inconsistencies we find when we read the "non-authentic" gospels, the gnostic texts and the apocrypha. So the reason why your example is bad is because I specifically stated that there is not even one "weak" (daif) or "fabricated" (mawdu) Hadith that implies Salaat is something other than worship/ritual prayer.
If you had read my post, you would have seen that I already said everything that I'm saying to you now.
-
Absolutely not. When you start off with a false premise, nothing right will follow. You completely skipped over what I said regarding the Bible, and also my response to "progressive1993." There are numerous Bible verses where Jesus (pbuh) says he is the son of man. Verses where he says he is a prophet. Verses where he says the Father is greater than him. Verses where he says he can do nothing of himself. Verses where he says "our God" is one. Verses where he stresses good deeds and love for God as the way to salvation, etc. etc. This all shows that there is some truth to be found in the Bible, things which are completely compatible with Islam.
Yet there is no Hadith that describes Salaat as something else than a ritual prayer.
You see, I already mentioned that in order to avoid replies like yours, but you completely ignored what I said.
Now keep in mind that this is the Bible we're talking about. The Bible is something which is called accurate and authentic by christians, and yet still you will find inconsistencies regarding Jesus. Not to mention how many inconsistencies we find when we read the "non-authentic" gospels, the gnostic texts and the apocrypha. So the reason why your example is bad is because I specifically stated that there is not even one "weak" (daif) or "fabricated" (mawdu) Hadith that implies Salaat is something other than worship/ritual prayer.
If you had read my post, you would have seen that I already said everything that I'm saying to you now.
Peace,
would you like to answer my question?
Salam, Peace,
So for you Allah swt has forgoten to tell us how to do the ritual salat in The Reading and "historians" (hadhitist) filled the gap to help upcoming generation?
By the way please answer this easy question what is the date of the oldest hadith book?
best regards
-
guy, I wasn't talking about any false messenger RK's hadith or beliefs of any cult. I was talking about ahadith shia or sunni. bring on any hadith that says there are 2/3/4 and not 5.
Okay... First of all, your attack on Rashad Khalifa and his followers is complete foolishness, especially since Rashad Khalifa adamantly believed in 5 daily salaat observances, even to the point of creating a mathematical formula to support all 5 of them and their contents... But, as I said, Ismailis (just to name one group) claim that the Qur'aan, Sunna, and Hadiyths support the idea of THREE salaat observances, not five. Shias say the same thing, as do many Hanafis, who are considered a branch of the Sunni sect...
-
Amid,
So what if they are general terms? There are tons of words that can be used in many different ways depending on the context. You are missing the point, obviously. I simply pointed out that a ritual prayer is, in fact, a bond/connection to God. You keep repeating the fact that Salaat is a general term for "bond" but that doesn't change anything at all. Your logic goes something along these lines
If Salaat equals Bond, then Salaat cannot equal Ritual Prayer.
Actually I never said "if... then...", nor does my logic go like this. Please reproduce a quote of mine where I said this. It is you who is missing the point. If you would have actually read the links which I have referenced, you would have maybe understood. The basic meaning of slw is "go/turn towards" (in a close/positive manner). Obviously it means different things in different contexts (although, I have found, mostly it means "bond/connection". For example, look at 911 which tells "kafireen/mushrikeen" (concealers of the truth/those who set up partners) to uphold the salat. Are they told to uphold some sort of "ritual prayer"? See this.
Just becuase ritual prayer is a bond/connection with God, and "salat" means (in most contexts) "bond", it doesnt mean that salat is a ritual prayer.
Absolute nonsense. You need to take a critical thinking class because I never made this fallacy. If I had said Salaat must be a ritual prayer because it is written so in Bukhari or any other hadith collection, then yes I would have made this fallacy. I simply said that we have many many narrations, at least (but much more) than 30000 narrations from various different sources, and not even one narration from any one of those sources, not even one half of a narration, not even 0.01%, shows, describes, or even remotely implies, that Salaat is anything other than worship/ritual prayer.
Please read
Your logic is based on the fallacy of Appeal to Popularity. The same exact thing can be said about the Christians' belief that Jesus is the son of the god (the god be most exalted above what they describe). All the Christian sources, including those questioned by "scholars", agree that Jesus is the son of the god. The same thing can also be said a few hundred years ago about the earth being flat and a bunch of other things that everyone agrees on or agreed on at one point and we know are false. It is therefore not surprising that you are unable to answer the following
I did that in order to show that your belief (that salaat is something else) has very little logic behind it, and has a very high probability of being erroneous, unless of course you can provide a reasonable explanation or ANY explanation for that matter, as to why absolutely no historical source and no narration describes the "real salaat." So why haven't you answered the question I asked you? Here it goes again
That is your problem. You base your position on history/hadith (primarily), rather than going from the quran/reading without any preconceptions. You think that just because all/many Hadiths say that salat is this and this, that is what it actually is, or that it cant be something else/severely different. That's why I referenced the fallacy links.
Yes I absolutely agree. Stoning to death, killing apostates, oppressing women, etc. are all excellent examples of fabrications which have nothing to do with the Qur'an, yet they are practiced (sadly).
First, how am I a perfect example when I am not one of those who do not acknowledge the Hereafter?
I was referring to people picking what they want from Hadith, which is described by the Reading, which is exactly what you are doing. When something "doesnt contradict" the Reading from the Hadith, you adopt that teaching/practice; when something "contradicts" the Reading (Quran), you discard it.
Second, yes the Qur'an is fully detailed, but it was not revealed in a vacume. It also didn't just pop out of the sky with every Surah in it. Now... you do realise that by not knowing arabic you in fact ARE going to sources beside the Qur'an to understand it. You do know that, right? I hope you do, because every translation you read is from a FALLIBLE HUMAN BEING who TRANSLATED the Qur'an. That fallible human being = outside source.
4144 Had We made it a non-Arabic reading, they would have said, "If only its signs were made clear!" Non-Arabic and Arabic, say, "For those who acknowledge, it is a guide and healing. As for those who conceal the truth, there is deafness in their ears, and they are blind to it. These will be called from a place far away."
A question for you when was the first Hadith/Hadith collection compiled/recorded?
Or, in other wordsBy the way please answer this easy question what is the date of the oldest hadith book?
What about your response to my other points (e.g. "al masjid al haram"?
Peace
-
Actually I never said "if... then...", nor does my logic go like this. Please reproduce a quote of mine where I said this. It is you who is missing the point. If you would have actually read the links which I have referenced, you would have maybe understood. The basic meaning of slw is "go/turn towards" (in a close/positive manner). Obviously it means different things in different contexts (although, I have found, mostly it means "bond/connection". For example, look at 911 which tells "kafireen/mushrikeen" (concealers of the truth/those who set up partners) to uphold the salat. Are they told to uphold some sort of "ritual prayer"? See this.
Just becuase ritual prayer is a bond/connection with God, and "salat" means (in most contexts) "bond", it doesnt mean that salat is a ritual prayer.
And in response to that I clearly said just because Salaat means "bond" it doesn't mean that Salaat CANNOT be a ritual prayer.
That is your problem. You base your position on history/hadith (primarily), rather than going from the quran/reading without any preconceptions. You think that just because all/many Hadiths say that salat is this and this, that is what it actually is, or that it cant be something else/severely different. That's why I referenced the fallacy links.
But the links were not appropriate since I did not make that fallacy.
I was referring to people picking what they want from Hadith, which is described by the Reading, which is exactly what you are doing. When something "doesnt contradict" the Reading from the Hadith, you adopt that teaching/practice; when something "contradicts" the Reading (Quran), you discard it.
4144 Had We made it a non-Arabic reading, they would have said, "If only its signs were made clear!" Non-Arabic and Arabic, say, "For those who acknowledge, it is a guide and healing. As for those who conceal the truth, there is deafness in their ears, and they are blind to it. These will be called from a place far away."
How does that apply to me? Please explain. It is not true that I take from hadeeth whatever doesn't contradict the Qur'an. Salaat is something that is mentioned in the Qur'an and is even implied to be some sort of ritual in the Qur'an itself. Before you do Salaat, wash your faces, arms, etc. Don't do Salaat if you are in a state of junub, etc. Do Salaat in the morning, do it at night, etc.
I am not adding any new laws to the deen through the hadeeth, nor am I following instructions on how to do salaat from the hadeeth. I am simply saying to those who say it is not a worship/ritual prayer to give me a reasonable explanation as to why they think that in over 30000 narrations and even all those that are deemed fabricated by scholars you will not find one hadith that shows it to be something else. Not a single one. You still haven't given me your views on that.
A question for you when was the first Hadith/Hadith collection compiled/recorded?
Complete sidestep. I couldn't care less about it. The fact is that not even the "newest" hadith or the "oldest" hadith, or the most "authentic" hadith or "fabricated" hadith, shows Salaat as anything other than a ritual prayer. It is irrelevant whether the hadeeth contradict each other as to how salaat should be performed. I don't do it the way as described in hadeeth anyway.
What about your response to my other points (e.g. "al masjid al haram"?
You gave your own interpretation, and that's fine. I have no problems with it. So what are the prohibited months based solely on the Qur'an?
-
Salam, Peace,
So for you Allah swt has forgoten to tell us how to do the ritual salat in The Reading and "historians" (hadhitist) filled the gap to help upcoming generation?
By the way please answer this easy question what is the date of the oldest hadith book?
best regards
1.) No he did not forget. If the details of Salaat were important he would have given it to us (movements to be performed, length of the ritual, things to recite, etc). He gave us enough. He also gave us a brain to read the Qur'an carefully and find out what it is. I myself can conclude using the Qur'an alone that it is indeed a ritual of worship/prayer. I am only mentioning the hadeeth because of those who reject the ritual prayer, simply to ask themselves why no narration from any source whether authentic or inauthentic in history describes or even remotely implies the salaat as being "something else."
2.) Irrelevant sidestep. The fact is that not even the "newest" hadith or the "oldest" hadith, or the most "authentic" hadith or "fabricated" hadith, shows Salaat as anything other than a ritual prayer.
-
Amid,
And in response to that I clearly said just because Salaat means "bond" it doesn't mean that Salaat CANNOT be a ritual prayer.
So what does it mean in 911 then?
Also, please show us how to do salat based on the Hadiths.How does that apply to me? Please explain.
- Do you accept the practice/teaching of stoning married adulterers/adultresses?
- Do you accept the prohibition of eating dog meat?
- Do you accept that salat is a ritual prayer with the 2-4-4-3-4 format (rakahs)?
Answering these questions will clarify.
Complete sidestep. I couldn't care less about it. The fact is that not even the "newest" hadith or the "oldest" hadith, or the most "authentic" hadith or "fabricated" hadith, shows Salaat as anything other than a ritual prayer. It is irrelevant whether the hadeeth contradict each other as to how salaat should be performed. I don't do it the way as described in hadeeth anyway.
I didnt refer to salat. What I was getting at was that the Hadiths were compiled about 200 years after the death of Prophet Muhammad. Did the people 100 years after the death of Muhammad follow the Hadiths? Of course the logical answer would be "no".
How do you do the salat, then, if not as described by the Hadiths?
-
Peace Amid,
Absolutely not. When you start off with a false premise, nothing right will follow. You completely skipped over what I said regarding the Bible, and also my response to "progressive1993." There are numerous Bible verses where Jesus (pbuh) says he is the son of man. Verses where he says he is a prophet. Verses where he says the Father is greater than him. Verses where he says he can do nothing of himself. Verses where he says "our God" is one. Verses where he stresses good deeds and love for God as the way to salvation, etc. etc. This all shows that there is some truth to be found in the Bible, things which are completely compatible with Islam.
Can you please quote where you talk about Jesus or him being the son of god in any of your posts before my post? You are missing the point. Christians interpret the "son of man" as references to the human aspect of Jesus. They all agree that Jesus had a human aspect. Trinitarians interpret this to mean that he is equally human and equally divine as part of the trinity. Monophysites believe that his divine-aspect is so powerful that it overcame his human-aspect and thus he is 100% divine. Unlike Trinitarians and Monophysites who make Jesus divine to various degrees, Nestorians believe that he is the son of man son of god, in other words they believe he is the human son of god and is 100% human and is not divine. Similarly, people can interpret "salat" to mean "ritual prayer" despite the clear evidence against it in the great reading. This is why you can't address anything in my previous posts, plus it looks like my posts went over your head.
Yet there is no Hadith that describes Salaat as something else than a ritual prayer.
You see, I already mentioned that in order to avoid replies like yours, but you completely ignored what I said.
Now keep in mind that this is the Bible we're talking about. The Bible is something which is called accurate and authentic by christians, and yet still you will find inconsistencies regarding Jesus. Not to mention how many inconsistencies we find when we read the "non-authentic" gospels, the gnostic texts and the apocrypha. So the reason why your example is bad is because I specifically stated that there is not even one "weak" (daif) or "fabricated" (mawdu) Hadith that implies Salaat is something other than worship/ritual prayer.
If you had read my post, you would have seen that I already said everything that I'm saying to you now.How about the Hadiths that tell us that the god "yusalli 3la alnabi"? Do you think that those Hadiths describe the god performing "ritual prayer" on the prophet?! Do you think that the god performs a 5 times a day 2,4,4,3,4 ritual prayer formula on the prophet? Or do you think that like you the god mindlessly repeats "salla allah 3alayh wa salam" everytime the name of the prophet is mentioned! Surely, from the strongest of Hadiths to the weakest of Hadiths, the "salat" of the god on the prophet cannot be interpreted as "ritual prayer" by anyone with a sober mind and this creates major inconsistencies just like the inconsistencies in the Bible regarding Jesus.
Peace,
Ayman