Is Prophet Muhammad?s duty to deliver Quran only?: No

Ayisha

I am aware of your silly unrighteous tactic and tricks. That will not work with me. In fact any righteous person will detect your phoniness right way.

A righteous person would have said this is how I do it and that it consistent with Prophet Muhammad?s way for such and such reason. Allah has already exposed you for what you are.

Learn from leaders and righteous person as you are unable to comprehend the Quran correctly.

I have just gone through these 16 pages and I have noticed that you and raj have not answered any questions asked of you but both wayfinder and I have answered all yours. You have picked out of our replies and totally ignored the questions asked and have used that we have said to ask more, in the hope that the ones you are ignoring will be forgotten. you have now resorted to nastiness because i pulled you up on one, which you still have not answered. that is your tactics and tricks which are glaringly obvious for anyone reading through this thread which you started in an attempt to claim the hadith are the wisdom outside Quran but you dont have the guts or committment to say it. A righteous person will stand by thier belief and defend it, you have not showed that and have resorted to nasties. If this is what you have learned from your supposed righteous leaders then they are not righteous and you have not grasped any of it or what righteousness even is.

peace

Raaajah

can you ever back anything you claim up raj?

Rajah
Ayisha poses worth less questions.

back up

guest

There are worthless questions and good questions. And your questions are not good. It takes an intelligent person to pose a good question.

I still have more back-ups.

Ayisha

I have just gone through these 16 pages and I have noticed that you and raj have not answered any questions asked of you but both wayfinder and I have answered all yours

Hey WAY FINDER you are lucky one, got an "strong" ally.

Ayisha

I take that as a NO then

Mushu

Dear Mushu,

Thanks.

No problem.

Mushu

yes I agree the prophet understood and implemented Quran the way a prophet should and if I had been blessed to have been alive in his day I would have followed him round like I was glued to his shib shibs to soak up as much knowledge as I could from him. yes Quran does need humans to use their natural and acquired and combined, I will add, knowledge and thats why I have always read everything I could on Islam, good bad and indifferent, to make an informed choice in what i personally see as how I should follow it. There is, as with anything in following forefathers, an element of 'was that really there' though, if you understand what I mean. We are warned about following what our forefathers followed and not looking ourselves, and this is what I am getting at. What Muhammed did and said that WE need are in Quran. Whether he wiped his socks or took them off is not here or there if you understand me and is just a part of what the MAN did. What I think I mean is that there would have been things he did AS Muhammed the MAN that have nothing to do with the revelation but have found their way into Islam BECAUSE he did them, does that make sense?

The separation between the man and the Prophet would not necessarily have been clear to all the sahaba. The Quran says he was an excellent example and so I don't see the harm in blurring the lines a little i.e. between the man and the Prophet. The problem is when we claim that every minute detail of his life was revelatory and incumbent for us to follow. That's what we're fighting today but that wasn't the attitude of the earlier Muslims. They were far more flexible. As for following their forefathers, in this instance I think they were completely justified. They were following the previous generation not because of misplaced veneration, but because their fathers actually lived with the Prophet or were at least his contemporaries. It would have been arrogant and unwise for the tabi'een to dismiss the hereditary knowledge at their disposal.

yes but the biggest problem is that there are so many who have been brainwashed into recitation only, dont think, dont ask questions. i have been told that asking questions will bring me out of the 'fold of Islam' and reduce my faith! the Book is no longer looked at by so many unless they 'read' it or recite it, they dont STUDY what it means because the 'scholars' did that for them, they don't question and if they do they accept whatever answer they get even if it makes no sense because they are scared that if 'the answer' makes no sense they have lost their deen and Allah has drawn a veil on their hearts. It is from reading hadith that I have come to the conclusion to reject and find my answers from Quran but by the same token I still think there are many WISE hadith, whether they really were from Muhammed or not, but I cannot take them as the huge part of islam that they are taken by the majority because too many are not in any way the same 'religion' as the Quran is.

Which is why I'm not arguing for hadith, per se. Hadith leads to the types of problems you've just mentioned. The claim of Fazlur Rahman is you can know what the sunnah of the Prophet is without hadith, but through observing common, established practises of the Muslims. It's an interesting theory that I'm going to try and look into.

Yes I agree with you but Quran also says the sunnah of Allah and not the sunnah of Muhammed. There were other prophets and messengers including Jesus whose sunnah seems to be one of total peace, nothing wrong in following that one too but the sunnah of the absolute correct way is sunnah of Allah that all those will have followed correctly and never is subject to change. Science is wonderful as it shows us more of the wonders of the signs of Allah that we wouldnt have understood before as deeply as we do now. I have a 60 minute Hubble video which is so amazing you just sit like Subhanallah!

The sunnah of Allah isn't the only sunnah. Muslims today follow the sunnah of the scientific method whenever embarking on new technological feats. Nothing wrong with that. Modern day Muslim economists may follow the sunnah of Keynesian economics or the sunnah of the Austrians. Nothing wrong with that either. Muslims who follow the Quran are following the sunnah of Allah but how they interpret the Quran will depend, amongst other things, on whether they try to use the living sunnah of the Prophet.

Just to re-iterate my point about the impossibility of understanding the Quran in a vacuum ? are you aware of Muslims who try to prove the evolution theory through Quran? I'm sure you are. So here we have Muslims who are using a scientific theory (which by the the admission of its own proponents can never be fully proved because of the huge time needed for significant macro changes to happen) to try and shed light on Quran. Isn't this similar to those Muslims who use the sunnah to understand Quran? In both cases, there are doubts to the truth of their position, yet they both interpret the Quran using their supplementary knowledge/world view. I think this is something to be celebrated and encouraged i.e. pluralism of thoughts and ideas giving Quran maximum potency.

I agree but same again its easier for most to watch a schollar on TV or listen to the imam than it is to reference sunnah with Quran. Most people I know use Quran for recital or 'reading' with eyes alone, mouths alone, no thought, no mind, no heart, no 'what does that really mean' at all, which is sad.

Yes, it's sad. It can only be challenged through education and making the masses aware of the reality.

I see no problem in looking at hadith literature and using some and rejecting those that contradict Quran and the spirit of islam, and using others BUT not as a solid 'this IS Islam' as IMHO nothing else is SOLID as Quran is. I have said there are some lovely hadith and very wise ones too which are totally in the spirit of Islam, but those tend to be the rejected ones if you put them forward to a hadith follower

That's my position also. In the same way, it would be wrong for us to tell Muslims that the sunnah of the Prophet has no place in Islam and has no use. If we can pry the sunnah away from the grips of hadith you would have a far more dynamic sunnah which would be a benefit to many Muslims who wish to have a connection with tradition.

I am just trying to expell the myth that people cannot understand Quran without hadith and that people cannot be muslim without following these, of which the vast majority have never even LOOKED at but follow anyway coz the guy on the tv says this is Islam. Its scary just how this opens doors wide to changing this religion and people stop LOOKING at the book without a veil over the eyes that only allows them to see the words and not THINK about them, not FEEL them.

What's even more scary is that the above used to be me a few months ago. I look back at that time now and cringe at what a bigot I was at times. But alhamdulillah that's all in the past and I think I'm stronger for it. I'm determined to not become a bigot in the other direction either i.e. become a Qur'an only Muslim and deny traditionalist Muslims the opportunity to use the sunnah of the Prophet to elucidate Quran. I just want Muslims to realize as I did that debasing the Quran by making it subservient to the hadith scholars is bad news.

Leyna

Truth vs. falsehood is independent of time.

Allah?s system does not change. Therefore, according to your logic it is an old system. Are you implying that we should lose it because it is old?

It's not about truth vs. falsehood, it's about practical implementations. Those have to change over time, otherwise faith becomes absurd and not applicable.

For example You don't use camels for transportation although the Qur'an tells us to and although we can safely assume the prophet did. So are you changing God's system or saying that it is outdated? Of course not, you are adapting it to your time and circumstances, which makes perfect sense.

WayFinder

Peace Rajaah

Whether you are happy or sad with my answer does not count at all... because if that would have been the standard, then let me tell you that you have not answered 99% of what I had asked you since the beginning of this discussion...

I do not know what seems so obvious to you... But I really know what is NOT obvious in your sight... It is the clear style linguistic style of the quran and the detailed presentation of all those who played some role or that other during the revelation of the Quran...

What you have FAILED to notice is that...

ALL the claims made in the Quran by UNBELIEVERS are FALSE.. None of their CLAIMS are TRUE... They are depicted as cheats and liars.. They lied constantly in each and every of their statement... Each and every of their quote is filled with one or all of these sickness which is arrogance, lies, doubts,fabrications, pretention, insincerity, dishonesty and the list goes on... NONE of their claims is true and NONE of them has been taken as serious... They have been constantly labelled as liars... They claimed that Muhammad was a sorceror, a madman, a fool, a fabricator, a magician... and ALL of these were lies... Because they said it, that does not mean Muhammad was truly what they claimed him to be... Although they themselves knew it very well.. But they rejected him mainly due to their arrogance as they did not want to lose the reigns of authority... Bear in mind that most of these arguments between Muhammad (pbuh) and the disbelievers are with those who were currently the leaders... The discussion always went on with the leaders and those who always opposed the messengers are the leaders...

Back to their claims on Ar-Rahmaan... They knew him very well... But they had ZERO intention to accept anything from Muhammad(pbuh)... or do you suggests Muhammad explained them and they accepted Islam?? Do you? Do you think God would have quoted their blatant denial of the messenger in this case? I leave this on you to decide...

Way Finder

I am extremely disappointed by your answer.

You think that the Book of Allah that does not need any explanation is more concerned with effect or style rather than content or meaning.
From your post it is evident that you are not sure.

Why to Al-Rehman? and What is Al-Rehman? there is hell lot of difference for any one to see.
Regarding inscription I have posted before, which you seem not bothered to read about, an inscription of 1000 Km away does not make it necessary to be recognized by people in Makkah and Quran is pointing towards that fact.

It must be stated at the outset that the list of polytheistic divinities mentioned in the inscriptions do not constitute a south Arabian pantheon per se. An appraisal of the archaeological sites where divinities are praised or invoked leads one to the conclusion that the majority of divinities had a special relationship with a particular family, tribe or Kingdom.
?Athtar was the only divinity common to the entire population of South Arabia, whereas other divinities were only worshiped in one kingdom only, or individualized with a specific title or qualifying name.
pp. 85-87; J. Ryckmans, "The Old South Arabian Religion", in W. Daum (Ed.), Yemen 3000 Years Of Art And Civilization In Arabia Felix, 1987?, Pinguin-Verlag (Innsbruck) and Umschau-Verlag (Frankfurt/Main), p. 107.

What ever claim you make it is quite obvious that Al-Rehman was something most of the audience of Muhammad Peace is upon him had never heard off, and the Messenger of Allah explained to them.
For example for a while let us say that they Knew who Al-Rehman was, but to them it was one of deity as you mentioned, still Messenger of Allah needed to explain to them about Al-Rehman.

Allah Ho Akbar

Praise be to Allah the lord of Abraham, Ram, Buddha, Musa, Essa, Muhammad , Mine and yours.

Raaajah

Mushu

What's even more scary is that the above used to be me a few months ago. I look back at that time now and cringe at what a bigot I was at times. But alhamdulillah that's all in the past and I think I'm stronger for it. I'm determined to not become a bigot in the other direction either i.e. become a Qur'an only Muslim and deny traditionalist Muslims the opportunity to use the sunnah of the Prophet to elucidate Quran. I just want Muslims to realize as I did that debasing the Quran by making it subservient to the hadith scholars is bad news.

excellent yet again.

You are an example of following

2143
Thus, have We made of you an Ummat justly balanced, that ye might be witnesses over the nations, and the Messenger a witness over yourselves;......

I remember my initial posts at this forum, when I used this Ayat, to show Quran alone extremists that the best way is Middle way.

Ayisha

The separation between the man and the Prophet would not necessarily have been clear to all the sahaba. The Quran says he was an excellent example and so I don't see the harm in blurring the lines a little i.e. between the man and the Prophet.
Absolutely, he was a fine character and a trustworthy man even before his prophethood.

The problem is when we claim that every minute detail of his life was revelatory and incumbent for us to follow. That's what we're fighting today but that wasn't the attitude of the earlier Muslims. They were far more flexible. As for following their forefathers, in this instance I think they were completely justified. They were following the previous generation not because of misplaced veneration, but because their fathers actually lived with the Prophet or were at least his contemporaries. It would have been arrogant and unwise for the tabi'een to dismiss the hereditary knowledge at their disposal.
Totally agree with your first statement here! and THAT is what my 'problem' is with the majority of Muslims today. Agree with the rest also.

Which is why I'm not arguing for hadith, per se. Hadith leads to the types of problems you've just mentioned. The claim of Fazlur Rahman is you can know what the sunnah of the Prophet is without hadith, but through observing common, established practises of the Muslims. It's an interesting theory that I'm going to try and look into.
i would be interested in what you find.

The sunnah of Allah isn't the only sunnah. Muslims today follow the sunnah of the scientific method whenever embarking on new technological feats. Nothing wrong with that. Modern day Muslim economists may follow the sunnah of Keynesian economics or the sunnah of the Austrians. Nothing wrong with that either. Muslims who follow the Quran are following the sunnah of Allah but how they interpret the Quran will depend, amongst other things, on whether they try to use the living sunnah of the Prophet.
yes I agree with that too, now I see that you are saying the IS a separation that can be made between hadith and sunnah and that sunnah is NOT necessarily derived from hadith, not many look at that way though, or look at it that way. 'the prophet did/said this' is generally FROM hadith but to me more of the real sunnah of the prophet can actually be found in Quran.

Just to re-iterate my point about the impossibility of understanding the Quran in a vacuum ? are you aware of Muslims who try to prove the evolution theory through Quran? I'm sure you are. So here we have Muslims who are using a scientific theory (which by the the admission of its own proponents can never be fully proved because of the huge time needed for significant macro changes to happen) to try and shed light on Quran. Isn't this similar to those Muslims who use the sunnah to understand Quran? In both cases, there are doubts to the truth of their position, yet they both interpret the Quran using their supplementary knowledge/world view. I think this is something to be celebrated and encouraged i.e. pluralism of thoughts and ideas giving Quran maximum potency.
Personally i dont do evolution and rather go with the big bang, which I can personally see in Quran, but yes you are right in that we have to use what knowledge we have now to shed light on Quran as I would liken it to the Temples of Ancient Egypt in that barely 5% of what's there has been found ;D The more we find out scientifically the more things will come to light. A friend of my husbands recently was here all excited as he had been shown a verse that had been 'proven' about not seeing your hand when so far underwater which Muhammed wouldnt have known then as there was no deep sea diving as we know of ;D

Problem is using sunnah to understand Quran up to now has come from hadith, of which many are just too rediculous for words IMO and make a great prophet into an idiot and a liar, and that is why I do not believe the majority are even from him at all, its not that I dont want to beleive he said these things, its that I cannot believe knowing what Quran SAYS and then hearing silly hadith that anyone who knew Quran would not possibly believe Muhammed said them..

Yes, it's sad. It can only be challenged through education and making the masses aware of the reality.
but to educate on this you have to get past the barrier that is pulled up of 'you are not a muslim unless you follow hadith and sunnah it is Islam' and as you see from here that turns people nasty.

That's my position also. In the same way, it would be wrong for us to tell Muslims that the sunnah of the Prophet has no place in Islam and has no use. If we can pry the sunnah away from the grips of hadith you would have a far more dynamic sunnah which would be a benefit to many Muslims who wish to have a connection with tradition.
yes, but doing that is almost impossible and HAS to come from those with an open mind as the closed ones just close tighter and do WANT to know.

What's even more scary is that the above used to be me a few months ago. I look back at that time now and cringe at what a bigot I was at times. But alhamdulillah that's all in the past and I think I'm stronger for it. I'm determined to not become a bigot in the other direction either i.e. become a Qur'an only Muslim and deny traditionalist Muslims the opportunity to use the sunnah of the Prophet to elucidate Quran. I just want Muslims to realize as I did that debasing the Quran by making it subservient to the hadith scholars is bad news.

Alhamdulillah you changed your opinions for the better and inshaAllah we all can do that. peace

Ayisha

Mushu
excellent yet again.

You are an example of following

2143
Thus, have We made of you an Ummat justly balanced, that ye might be witnesses over the nations, and the Messenger a witness over yourselves;......

I remember my initial posts at this forum, when I used this Ayat, to show Quran alone extremists that the best way is Middle way.

and have continued to show your justly balanced behaviour and middle way since then peace

Raaajah

WAY FINDER

Bear in mind that most of these arguments between Muhammad (pbuh) and the disbelievers are with those who were currently the leaders... The discussion always went on with the leaders and those who always opposed the messengers are the leaders...

I would like to see your source for that? Interesting.

Way Finder

Back to their claims on Ar-Rahmaan... They knew him very well... But they had ZERO intention to accept anything from Muhammad(pbuh)... or do you suggests Muhammad explained them and they accepted Islam??

Again I will ask your source for that? because Quran tells another story.
Even if they knew him still they wanted to Know why "Ar-Rehman" it is a name of deity? Why Muhammad peace is upon him is using it for Allah (which was not the question, it was "What is Al-Rehman"?).
Off course all the early Muslims accepted Islam due to Muhammad peace is upon him.

Raaajah

Way Finder

because if that would have been the standard, then let me tell you that you have not answered 99% of what I had asked you since the beginning of this discussion...

I think you have been influenced by one of our sweet and sour member Ayisha.
Can you re-post them or even direct me to those questions you are talking about.

Ayisha

Way Finder
I think you have been influenced by one of our sweet and sour member Ayisha.
Can you re-post them or even direct me to those questions you are talking about.

hiya sweetie, sour one here. Please answer my questions too, I wont even have to direct you to them, I have them here

What do you think Hikmah is raj?

Where are the explanations of the verses Muhammed explained, you said extracted, to where?

Thank you sweetie mwauh mwuah peace

Raaajah

Ayisha
Khalid Zaheer a student of Javed Ghamidi sahib has also tried to distinguish Sunnah from Hadith, but not quite as good as Fazalur Rehman, but following is good quote

We know that the prophet, alaihissalaam, travelled on the backs of camels, horses, and donkeys; he advised people to resort to the medicines that were available during his times; he had his own taste for dishes which were different from the tastes of others; and he fought battles with swords and other forms of equipment of warfare that were available during his times. Muslim scholars have never considered any of these acts of him as sunnah, because they have nothing to do with religion.

Raaajah

Ayisha

Thank you sweetie mwauh mwuah

sure you should thank me, but there are still few questions left to be answered by you.

Ayisha

hiya sweetie, sour one here. Please answer my questions too, I wont even have to direct you to them, I have them here
What do you think Hikmah is raj?

Have you not read posts of Mushu? He has explained it in much better English then mine.
To me Hikmah is the Wisdom provided to Messenger of Allah to understand the Book of Allah, and any one he chooses.

by Burhan
Al-Hikmah or wisdom means a total insight and having sound judgment concerning a matter or situation through understanding cause and effect phenomena.

Al-Hikmah constitutes one of the three major teachings of Prophet Muhammad (p). Verse 2129 of the Qur'an, below, expresses Prophet Muhammad's mission with the three major categories Al-Kitab (The knowledge of the Holy Qur'an), al-Hikmah (the wisdom) and al-Tazkiyah (the inner-self purification). Each category is dependent upon the other. These three fundamental teachings combined are the foundations required to make the character of a true Muslim.

al-Quran
"Our Lord! send among them an Apostle of their own, who shall rehearse Your signs to them and instruct them in the Holy Qur'an (al-Kitab) and wisdom (Hikmah), and sanctify them (yuzakeehim), for You are the Exalted in Might, the Wise."

Teaching wisdom is an integral part of the mission of the earlier Prophets. The Qur?an speaks of Prophets Abraham, Moses and Jesus (p) how they were sent to teach wisdom along with their respective scriptures.

Scientific DefinitionIbn al-Qay'im al-Jawziyah in his book, Madarij al-Salikeen
"Knowing and understanding the genuine nature of matters; the knowledge of relating results (effects) to causes as relevant to the physical composition and function of the matter, and with respect to Allah's natural law (qadarun) and revealed law (shar'an) regarding the matter."

WayFinder

WAY FINDER
I would like to see your source for that? Interesting.

And similarly, We did not send before you any warner into a city except that its affluent said, "Indeed, we found our fathers upon a religion, and we are, in their footsteps, following.

Way Finder
Again I will ask your source for that? because Quran tells another story.
Even if they knew him still they wanted to Know why "Ar-Rehman" it is a name of deity? Why Muhammad peace is upon him is using it for Allah (which was not the question, it was "What is Al-Rehman"?).
Off course all the early Muslims accepted Islam due to Muhammad peace is upon him.

The problem is not about knowing or not knowing... as I see.. U did not understand anything from what I said and you pretend to be smart again... If their problem was about knowledge.. they would have said...' Should we worship something we don't know' .... but again... knowledge is not their problem... and knowledge was never their problem... Their objection was regarding their submission to the Amr(order) of the messenger and lower themselves... and instead of being followed... they would themselves become a follower... Read the post above again... Or you may bypass it and take the UNBELIEVERS as truthful/trustworthy/sincere people... this is your take... Leaders/affluent people always opposed the messengers and always objected to become followers.

26111 They said "Shall we believe in thee when it is the meanest that follow thee?"

As I told you, each and every of their focus has to be shifted from polytheism to monotheism and this was done through revelations..

Ayisha

oh you got me there raj, you're quick laugh

WayFinder

Way Finder
I think you have been influenced by one of our sweet and sour member Ayisha.
Can you re-post them or even direct me to those questions you are talking about.

Browse through the 17 pages and you can pick them by yourself...there are plenty...

Let me just give you the most recent example of your response to me.... Upon which you PICKED only 1 part and trying to discuss it because you THINKS you have something concrete to crack on... But as always, you are wrong once again.

You left so many before this one... So, don't play it like a fool.. Everything is black on white here... unless you are sure of what you are saying, you better remain silent..

Peace,

First note... You conveniently manage to disregard the false accusation you made against me (cheating) due to you misunderstanding... So, more pic and choose... Not strange when it comes from you.

Yes.. I agree and never opposed this idea.
Agreed.. I never said it was true for all the verses but most of them was as such.

This is what I said and understand it as such

Where do you get that? When questions were brought to the Messenger, it was God who provide the explanations... Hence we see many verses ending with ...

Other verses starting with

This is how the explanation was brought to the audience... Again, you are totally disregarding my post on perception in which I have explained this. And you dare cry for circular argument! It is just you who is pushing the circular argument all the time. Otherwise, why would I need to repeat myself on and on

Did you just invented this? Why do you make such baseless claims... Ar-Rahmaan as a name existed from pre-islamic times... it is even ENGRAVED in stone in an inscription known as the inscription of Abraha... Do your research before making claims. I will see whether you would be

Peace,

First note... You conveniently manage to disregard the false accusation you made against me (cheating) due to you misunderstanding... So, more pic and choose... Not strange when it comes from you.

Yes.. I agree and never opposed this idea.
Agreed.. I never said it was true for all the verses but most of them was as such.

This is what I said and understand it as such

Where do you get that? When questions were brought to the Messenger, it was God who provide the explanations... Hence we see many verses ending with ...

Other verses starting with

This is how the explanation was brought to the audience... Again, you are totally disregarding my post on perception in which I have explained this. And you dare cry for circular argument! It is just you who is pushing the circular argument all the time. Otherwise, why would I need to repeat myself on and on

Did you just invented this? Why do you make such baseless claims... Ar-Rahmaan as a name existed from pre-islamic times... it is even ENGRAVED in stone in an inscription known as the inscription of Abraha... Do your research before making claims. I will see whether you would be blind on this one in your next reply to me.

How do you know it was 'half the way'? Believe me, either you are not understanding anything from what I told you or you are pretending not to understand... I told you several times, I have no idea when the verse was revealed and no one does either.

No.. I already gave you the proper verses regarding the mechanism.. The same mechanism which those who did not believe fail to comprehend/understand. You are talking about explanation again.. so please refer back to my post on perception.. it will solve your riddle.

I convenient gave you clear examples of these verses regarding wives of prophet etc...which you of course... DID NOT SEE.

Well, let me just use same methodology as you did.. Let us look at Surah 10(Yunus)... If you are so CONFIDENT that we NEED what GOD did not record in his Book... then please give me the reason of revelation for the first 20 verses of Surah 10.. Would like to get that from you... Again, I picked this surah at random. Let's see how honest you are in your claims.

I do not have to do that because I DO NOT DEPEND/NEED the context of revelation as YOU.. Since it is you who need this... You should be able to explain the above.

Ok.. then tell me how the verse of not marrying the wives of the prophet applies today... unless you do this.. we cannot talk any further.

I would hope this was true... but we all know why you pick and choose.. so you do not have to explain yourself... Infact it is this pick and choose itself which is the reason behind the circular arguments. Had you taken time to consider what has been presented to you.. You would not be be constantly pushing the very same thing on and on.

And there is no hadiths/sunnah either... Moreover, that does not mean each believer will get his own sunnah to be followed for the later generation...

Praise be to God.

Peace

on this one in your next reply to me.