Salaam Everyone
-
Salaam truestar
I?m from Australia too.
As muslims we should follow the Quran, correct.
when did hadith start? I?m not sure exactly. Apparently ?suhuf? used to exist and basically they were just peoples personal accounts of knowledge, sayings and interpretations. Imagine it like your own personal journal with notes and opinions on a about a particular subject. Unfortunately none of these suhuf exist today they?re just talked about. Though these are different from hadiths as we know now.
During the civil war many people allegedly claimed hadiths i.e. ?the prophet said so and so? lot?s of ?oral? forgery took place and then people started a system which asked them to prove on who?s authority i.e. the chain (this method is reliant on a trust that could easily be faked)
It was later, about 300 years (some say 200, some say 150years) after the death of the prophet, after the existence of the companions did people start actually documenting hadiths. Scholars travelled to hear a hadith be narrated (orally) then they?d record it or memorise it. Later the classification of hadiths came into play.
So it seems like a rough system to start off with, God wouldn?t entrust us to follow something with ambiguity do you think? As muslims we?re supposed to follow what God ordained, laws are in the Quran. 3923 mentions the Quran is the best hadiths, that?s the benchmark anything contradicting should be evaded and repelled. You might like a saying that?s not contradictory and that?s fine but it?s not obligated. Muslims are supposed to follow truth )
hope that helps
peace
-
Salam Truestar
welcome to the forum
I recommend an article. The article is about the "history of hadiths"
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=16838.msg169055#msg169055
Also check out these webpages below. I recommend them too
www.quranic.org
www.rationalreality.com
www.aididsafar.com ( Especially check out the book "Mental bondage" on this webpage. It can be download there, for free)
www.ourbeacon.com -
I recommend an article. The article is about the "history of hadiths"
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=16838.msg169055#msg169055
Just to show your lie . The Article about Hadith is full of lies
Imam Bukhari
He was born year 256 in Hijra, and some people say he was born year 260 (Hijra is the islamic calender as mentioned earlier). We know that Bukhari died in Khartank. It was said that after wandering through different towns and villages, he collected as much as 600 000. and after having grading them, he found 7300 ahadiths that he assumed was authentic. These are repeated in various chapters. If we don't take the repetions, the total number is 2630 or 2762.He is mostly known as Bukhari, Al-Bukhari or Imam bukhari, and he is know to be a Sunni Islamic scholar of persian roots. With other words, bukhari was originally Iranian/Persian.
Imam Muslim
Muslim bin Hajaj came from a city in iran, called Nishapoor. He was born in year 204 in hijra and died 261.The red sentences are what came in the article .
First of all Bukhari is born year 194 Hijreya and he died in 256 hijreya .
Second of all >>> if Muslim born before Bukhari, why Bukhari was his sheikh ? and why the book of Bukhari was before the book of Muslim ? let me remind you that Muslim was a student learning from Bukhari .
Muslim born in Nissabour but his father is not from nissabour neither his mom was, his father was from Yamen the first country that Aslamat and Bayaatte Arassoul Salla laho alayhe wa Salam .so you're lied about his roots .
is that giving birth in a place, will not allowed you to learn and teach what you learned ?
Bukhari was not from persian and his origin is from Bukhara which is in Ozbakistan but he went to Quffa to learn and to take science of Quran and hadith . and he went to Qabba when he was 18 and he took the science of Quran and Hadith from the best shouyoukh and scholars at that time do you know where Qabba is ?
-
Just to show your lie . The Article about Hadith is full of lies
Imam Bukhari
He was born year 256 in Hijra, and some people say he was born year 260 (Hijra is the islamic calender as mentioned earlier). We know that Bukhari died in Khartank. It was said that after wandering through different towns and villages, he collected as much as 600 000. and after having grading them, he found 7300 ahadiths that he assumed was authentic. These are repeated in various chapters. If we don't take the repetions, the total number is 2630 or 2762.He is mostly known as Bukhari, Al-Bukhari or Imam bukhari, and he is know to be a Sunni Islamic scholar of persian roots. With other words, bukhari was originally Iranian/Persian.
Imam Muslim
Muslim bin Hajaj came from a city in iran, called Nishapoor. He was born in year 204 in hijra and died 261.The red sentences are what came in the article .
First of all Bukhari is born year 194 Hijreya and he died in 256 hijreya .
Second of all >>> if Muslim born before Bukhari, why Bukhari was his sheikh ? and why the book of Bukhari was before the book of Muslim ? let me remind you that Muslim was a student learning from Bukhari .
Muslim born in Nissabour but his father is not from nissabour neither his mom was, his father was from Yamen the first country that Aslamat and Bayaatte Arassoul Salla laho alayhe wa Salam .so you're lied about his roots .
is that giving birth in a place, will not allowed you to learn and teach what you learned ?
Bukhari was not from persian and his origin is from Bukhara which is in Ozbakistan but he went to Quffa to learn and to take science of Quran and hadith . and he went to Qabba when he was 18 and he took the science of Quran and Hadith from the best shouyoukh and scholars at that time do you know where Qabba is ?
so the only point you could refute was bukhari's date of birth? lol that was not even the point of the article. the point was that he collected an insane amount of lies adn then selected the best of the them. he had no knowledge of the quran and his books dont even cover the entire of the quran itself. go figure.
-
so the only point you could refute was bukhari's date of birth? lol that was not even the point of the article. the point was that he collected an insane amount of lies adn then selected the best of the them. he had no knowledge of the quran and his books dont even cover the entire of the quran itself. go figure.
Lying about his date of birth and lying about his roots and lying about his life, is basically the article all full of lies .
About Quran, you just missed the traget , he was the best . He is the one who people said " a student beat his teachers" .
Ignorance lead to darkness, and blind leads a blind , both shall fall in a ditch . Peace.
-
Lying about his date of birth and lying about his roots and lying about his life, is basically the article all full of lies .
About Quran, you just missed the traget , he was the best . He is the one who people said " a student beat his teachers" .
Ignorance lead to darkness, and blind leads a blind , both shall fall in a ditch . Peace.
wow i agree yes
-
He was born in Bukhara which at that time belonged to Persia. But he was not Persian? ???
No, wrong , the Arab used to call everyone near to persia by persian . His origin is from Bukhara and it is a twon in Ozbakistane(it is a country) and it is not in persia . Yes Bukhari never was a persian .
-
wow i agree yes
Yes, you must agree because it is about you and your kind of people.
-
No, wrong , the Arab used to call everyone near to persia by persian . His origin is from Bukhara and it is a twon in Ozbakistane(it is a country) and it is not in persia . Yes Bukhari never was a persian .
"Historically, some of the greatest Sunni Muslim scholars were Persian speakers or had Persian descent, including Abu Dawood, Hakim al-Nishaburi, Al-Tabarani, Ghazali, Imam Bukhari, Tirmidhi, Al-Nasa'i and Abu Hanifa, amongst many others."
"Imam Bukhari (194/810?256/870), was a famous Sunni Islamic scholar of Persian ancestry"
"Muhammad ibn Ismail al-Bukhari. Popularly known as Al-Bukhari (Arabic ي or Imam Bukhari (810-870), he was a famous Sunni Islamic scholar of Persian ancestry"
"On the other hand, most of the leading Sunni Imams were Persian, such as
Abu Hanifa, al-Nisa'i, al-Tirmithi, al-Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn Majah, al-
Ghazzali, Ibn Sina, al-Farabi, and many others." -
His origin is from Bukhara and it is a twon in Ozbakistane(it is a country) and it is not in persia . Yes Bukhari never was a persian .
So what do you suggest was his nationality?
I know Bukhara is in Uzbekistan. But at Bukhari's time, it belonged to Persia.
For a century after the Battle of Talas, Islam slowly took root in Bukhara. In 850 AD Bukhara became the capital of the Samanid Empire, which brought about a revival of Iranian language and culture after the period of Arab domination. While under Samanid control, Bukhara was a rival to Baghdad in its glory. Scholars note that the Samanids revived Persian more than the Buyids and the Saffarids, while continuing to patronize Arabic to a significant degree. Nevertheless, in a famous edict, Samanid authorities declared that "here, in this region, the language is Persian, and the kings of this realm are Persian kings."
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Bukhara
The Samani dynasty (Persian ن, also known as the Samanid Empire, or simply Samanids (819?999) (Persian Smniyn) was an important Persian state and empire in Central Asia and Greater Khorasan, named after its founder Saman Khuda who converted to Sunni Islam despite being from Zoroastrian theocratic nobility. It was the first native Persian dynasty in Greater Iran and Central Asia after the Arab conquest and the collapse of the Sassanid Persian empire. During Samanid period the Tajik nation was formed in Central Asia. Samanid Empire is considered as the first Tajik state.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samanids
-
Just to show your lie . The Article about Hadith is full of lies
Imam Bukhari
He was born year 256 in Hijra, and some people say he was born year 260 (Hijra is the islamic calender as mentioned earlier). We know that Bukhari died in Khartank. It was said that after wandering through different towns and villages, he collected as much as 600 000. and after having grading them, he found 7300 ahadiths that he assumed was authentic. These are repeated in various chapters. If we don't take the repetions, the total number is 2630 or 2762.He is mostly known as Bukhari, Al-Bukhari or Imam bukhari, and he is know to be a Sunni Islamic scholar of persian roots. With other words, bukhari was originally Iranian/Persian.
Imam Muslim
Muslim bin Hajaj came from a city in iran, called Nishapoor. He was born in year 204 in hijra and died 261.The red sentences are what came in the article .
First of all Bukhari is born year 194 Hijreya and he died in 256 hijreya .
Second of all >>> if Muslim born before Bukhari, why Bukhari was his sheikh ? and why the book of Bukhari was before the book of Muslim ? let me remind you that Muslim was a student learning from Bukhari .
Muslim born in Nissabour but his father is not from nissabour neither his mom was, his father was from Yamen the first country that Aslamat and Bayaatte Arassoul Salla laho alayhe wa Salam .so you're lied about his roots .
is that giving birth in a place, will not allowed you to learn and teach what you learned ?
Bukhari was not from persian and his origin is from Bukhara which is in Ozbakistan but he went to Quffa to learn and to take science of Quran and hadith . and he went to Qabba when he was 18 and he took the science of Quran and Hadith from the best shouyoukh and scholars at that time do you know where Qabba is ?
Salam thereformer
You are right there are some small errors in the article. Thank you for pointing them out. The article is not mine, and i have not wrote it originally. And i don't think the guy that wrote it intentionally wrote the small errors. I just made some small changes on the article and then posted the article on the forum. I don't think the little errors in the article will change the facts, reality and message of the article. Let me give you an example. If somebody gives you a brand new mercedez, will you throw away that car just because it is a 2 centimeter scratch on the left door on the front of the car. Will this insignificant and almost unnoticeable scratch on the door make the car less good? will the car be of lower caliber just because there is a small scratch on it? Will it be impossible to drive this car just because there is a tiny scratch on the door? will the engine be harmed just because there is a scratch on the door? Think about these things my friend.
Or let me ask you another question. If somebody shows you a great sea, will you look at a tiny boat on the see and judge the sea from the boat you see? If this boat is ugly and rotten, will you conclude that since this boat is ugly and rotten, then that means that the great sea right in front of you is ugly and rotten too?
If you are interested in learning more about hadiths i recommend this article
http//www.masjidtucson.org/publications/books/SP/1996/nov/page1.html
Also check out this article below. It shows us 20 hadiths that violates Quranic verses
http//www.submission.org/corruption.html
Peace and Respect
David -
"Historically, some of the greatest Sunni Muslim scholars were Persian speakers or had Persian descent, including Abu Dawood, Hakim al-Nishaburi, Al-Tabarani, Ghazali, Imam Bukhari, Tirmidhi, Al-Nasa'i and Abu Hanifa, amongst many others."
"Imam Bukhari (194/810?256/870), was a famous Sunni Islamic scholar of Persian ancestry"
"Muhammad ibn Ismail al-Bukhari. Popularly known as Al-Bukhari (Arabic ي or Imam Bukhari (810-870), he was a famous Sunni Islamic scholar of Persian ancestry"
"On the other hand, most of the leading Sunni Imams were Persian, such as
Abu Hanifa, al-Nisa'i, al-Tirmithi, al-Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn Majah, al-
Ghazzali, Ibn Sina, al-Farabi, and many others."Imam Bukhari never never was a persian , he is from Bukhara and it is not even was in the empire of persia. look one advice internet will not give you the right information especially in english.
-
-
Imam Bukhari never never was a persian , he is from Bukhara and it is not even was in the empire of persia. look one advice internet will not give you the right information especially in english.
How would you know if the information is correct in 'English' or not, you dont even understand what 'FULL' and 'WISDOM' mean!  
Are you saying all the information about Islam that is on the net, including your favourite Khan translations are all wrong ' according to you' whose knowledge of English is limited to that of a 4 year old martian?
I dont care if he was persian, venusian, mongolian or londonian but your information conflicts with EVERY other piece of information about him thats out in the big wide world, Oh great shake hail
-
So what do you suggest was his nationality?
His nationality was Bukhara , and that's why he takes his name from it.
I know Bukhara is in Uzbekistan. But at Bukhari's time, it belonged to Persia.
No, wrong, Uzbakistane never has been under the empire of persia . Even they don't speak persia . Their language called Uzbak and it is different from the language of persia .
For a century after the Battle of Talas, Islam slowly took root in Bukhara. In 850 AD Bukhara became the capital of the Samanid Empire, which brought about a revival of Iranian language and culture after the period of Arab domination. While under Samanid control, Bukhara was a rival to Baghdad in its glory. Scholars note that the Samanids revived Persian more than the Buyids and the Saffarids, while continuing to patronize Arabic to a significant degree. Nevertheless, in a famous edict, Samanid authorities declared that "here, in this region, the language is Persian, and the kings of this realm are Persian kings."
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_BukharaWhat ? , do you have any library near to you , where you can find history of Asia ? It was before under the Akmaneyia Al-Iraneya, and the city has had their own habitants and they were not persian . So by your logic Britain setlled India, so indian are british .
The Samani dynasty (Persian ن, also known as the Samanid Empire, or simply Samanids (819?999) (Persian Smniyn) was an important Persian state and empire in Central Asia and Greater Khorasan, named after its founder Saman Khuda who converted to Sunni Islam despite being from Zoroastrian theocratic nobility. It was the first native Persian dynasty in Greater Iran and Central Asia after the Arab conquest and the collapse of the Sassanid Persian empire. During Samanid period the Tajik nation was formed in Central Asia. Samanid Empire is considered as the first Tajik state.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SamanidsThis empire arose after the spreading of Islam in it, and the poor empire has been vanquished at the age of Al-Hajaj . And they were a strain from a strain of persian, and they weren't from Bukhara, they settled it. Bukhara has its own people and Bukhari was one of them, he wasn't persian .
-
Yes, Bukhara did belong to the Persian empire at one time.
No, is that belong to an empire will vanish your origins ? and your nationality ? and Bukhara wasn't under the real persian, it was under Al-kan'anyine and they are a strain of persian .
Could you please answer my question? What do you suggest was Bukhari's nationality? ???
I've answered , Bukhari his nationality is Bukhara from Uzbakistane . So he is Uzbakitani