Traditional Sunni Challenge to Quranities

Mutazilaah

Now, think otherwise, starting from the Quran. You believe/I believe, Quran is unaltered. So, the transmission source was definitely reliable. So, description about Muhammad (sm)'s practice related to Quran's command transmitted by them must have been reliable.

First of all you make many good points, there is no doubt that the rationale behind your arguments makes sense - especially to one who is have literal interpretations and pursue dogma (not meant to offend one who takes this approach but rather to define what type of approach we are dealing with); but as a follower of Ilm-al-Kalam and the Qur'an (only), there are philosophical responses to the ordeal.

I think we need to consider first and foremost that the 'sanad' that the compilers of Sunni Ahadith considered were trusted according to the theology as it was understood and believed in according to the theology of the four Sunni Fuqaha. Prior to the compilation of Ahadith, the Sunnis had already formed their four schools and condemned all other existing denominations such as the Jahmiyya, Mu'tazilah, Khawarij, Shi'a, and had also shunned Ilm al-Kalam by then. This means narrations from any people from these schools was regarded as 'fabricated' ... the Muhaditheen even identified that there were many fabricated Ahadith and fabricators and untrustworthy narrators etc. etc. This means that the Sunni Ahadith have a biased isnad; the entire science of Ahadith is based on accepted 'isnad' - there is nothing more to the 'science' other than who are the narrators in the chain of narrations; although, except for one other aspect called 'matn' - or the implications of the Ahadith; in other words any Ahadith that disagrees with their theology due to the 'matn' or implications of the Hadith, it is usually dismissed.

In any event, one would have to evaluate whether those individuals found in each isnad at some point are 'Sunni-biased' or not.

Now comes the dilemma of the Qur'an. Is it true that there were Hufaz among the Khawariji, Shi'i, Mu'tazili, and Jahmi Muslims? Well, we do know that its verses are authenticated by Shi'i and Sunni sources, making the preservation of the Qur'an more likely, given that denominations agreed on the ayats of the Qur'an, whereas they did not agree on the Ahadith. There is no way to possibly say that the early denominations of the Muslims during the first three generations of Muslims ever agreed on the Sunni-biased science of Ahadith or with the compilation of Ahadith by its Sunni compilers. Is this true?

Wakas

peace,

Now, think otherwise, starting from the Quran. You believe/I believe, Quran is unaltered. So, the transmission source was definitely reliable. So, description about Muhammad (sm)'s practice related to Quran's command transmitted by them must have been reliable.

You are simply perpetuating a myth

A commonly stated argument by those who wish to raise traditional hearsay/ahadith to divine-status level is that its compilation was the same as The Quran.

Is that really true? Lets look at the simple and obvious facts...

The Quran = God's Word
Ahadith = man's word

The Quran = 100% fact/truth/perfect
Ahadith = mix of truth and falsehood (hence weak and strong hadith)

The Quran = recorded under the DIRECT supervision of prophet Muhammad
Ahadith = not recorded under the DIRECT supervision of prophet Muhammad

The Quran = written AND memorised word for word as soon as it was transmitted
Ahadith = no-one ever claimed to record and memorise ahadith word for word as soon as it was transmitted

The Quran = protected explicitly by God Himself as stated in The Quran
Ahadith = no such explicit protection stated

The Quran = no Muslim doubts its credibility
Ahadith = each sect has its own versions, weak & strong ones etc

The Quran = in-built verification mechanism, e.g. challenges others to find inconsistancy, bring a chapter like it etc.
Ahadith = no such in-built mechanism, full of inconsistancies etc.

unknownuser

This thread is a striking example of what the quran terms "vain discourse". You will get nowhere arguing for or against ahadith, both sides are perfectly blind to the truths & falsehoods in each other.

antibhondo

Brother Mutazilaah
Assalamu Alaikum.

First of all you make many good points, there is no doubt that the rationale behind your arguments makes sense - especially to one who is have literal interpretations and pursue dogma (not meant to offend one who takes this approach but rather to define what type of approach we are dealing with); but as a follower of Ilm-al-Kalam and the Qur'an (only), there are philosophical responses to the ordeal.

Thank you very much for your appreciation and criticism. Please never ever hesitate to criticize me. I always appreciate that.

However in this part of your comment, I really did not understand your last line

but as a follower of Ilm-al-Kalam and the Qur'an (only), there are philosophical responses to the ordeal.

Can you try to make it clear?

In any event, one would have to evaluate whether those individuals found in each isnad at some point are 'Sunni-biased' or not.

Now comes the dilemma of the Qur'an. Is it true that there were Hufaz among the Khawariji, Shi'i, Mu'tazili, and Jahmi Muslims? Well, we do know that its verses are authenticated by Shi'i and Sunni sources, making the preservation of the Qur'an more likely, given that denominations agreed on the ayats of the Qur'an, whereas they did not agree on the Ahadith. There is no way to possibly say that the early denominations of the Muslims during the first three generations of Muslims ever agreed on the Sunni-biased science of Ahadith or with the compilation of Ahadith by its Sunni compilers. Is this true?

Nice logic. Thank you. Now, would you tell me what you think about the basic method of Salat (which got a similar treatment)? Let alone Ahadith for the time being.

Layth

Salam,

Quran was written and compiled during the lifetime of the prophet, therefore, the argument that those who transmitted the Quran are the same people who transmitted the hadith holds no water and is a falasy.

Quran is from God and His messenger.

Hadith is from Satan and his followers.

Chose what you follow carefully.

antibhondo

Peace,

This is where knowing how the Quran was trasmitted and how Hadeeth were transmitted becomes of the utmost importance. 10 readings of the Quran (beside 4 of them) are mutawaatir. All sahih hadeeeth are ahadi hadeeth. Mutawaatir hadeeth are in accordance with authentication of accounts found in 2411-13. So the Quran's transmission is historical and acceptable because it is mutwaatir (10 levels). No Ahadi hadeeth can be accepted as even historical, unless it falls under mutawaatir al-ma'any. Which means that atleast four separate and completely independent chains quote the same event or have something in common. Mutawaatir al-ma'aany is weaker than mutawaatir but it is still acceptable as historical. However no hadeeth has religious authoriy. And there is no way to connect many Muslim rituals including traditional salat to the prophet Muhammad (God bless him). Partly because the definitions of terms we use cannot be used in a pre-islamic sense, making them post-quranic islamic theological jargon. And partly because none of these rituals can be traced to hadeeth that are mutawaatir or even mutawaatir al-ma'any. Lastly and most importantly the Quran says that it is the only religous authority and that it is fully detailed.

Godbless,
Anwar

Brother Anwar

I was waiting for your reply.

Your assumption that {{Mutawaatir hadeeth are in accordance with authentication of accounts found in 2411-13.}} has been found to be a wrong assumption.

Here are the ayats 2411-13 (Translated by Edip-Layth)

2411 Those who have brought forth the false accusation were a group from within you. Do not think it is bad for you, for it is good for you. Every person amongst them will have what he deserves of the sin. As for he who had the greatest portion of it, he will have a great retribution.

2412 If only when you heard it the acknowledging men and women should have thought good of themselves and said "This is an obvious lie!"

2413 If only they had brought four witnesses to it. If they did not have the witnesses, then these with God are the liars.

My explanation
These ayats clearly express that if someone brings up any allegation/accusation against someone, only then does he/she have to produce four witnesses. How do you relate these with any rumor or any news? Why would he/she produce four witness if the news is a normal news?

The quran does not require this. Please brother, do not make quran say something that it did not say at all.

Rather look at the following ayat
496 O you who acknowledge, if a wicked person comes to you with any news, then you shall investigate it. Lest you harm a people out of ignorance, then you will become regretful over what you have done.

This ayat indicates that if a wicked person comes with any news, then we should investigate. What if the news comes with someone who we know is definitely not wicked? This ayat requires no investigation against it, and there is no formal quranic constraint to accept the news!

However, here is a brief account of Mutawatir Hadith copied from this link http//www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&pagename=Zone-English-Living_Shariah/LSELayout&cid=1158658487972

Please read this and let me know whether you have any disagreement

Depending on the number of the reporters of the hadith in each stage of the isnad, that is, in each generation of reporters, the hadith can be classified into the general categories of mutawatir or ahad (single) hadith. A mutawatir hadith is one that is reported by such a large number of people that they cannot be expected to agree upon a lie, all of them together (Al-Jaza?iri 33).

Al-Ghazali (d. AH 505) stipulates that a mutawatir narration be known by the sizeable number of its reporters equally in the beginning, in the middle, and at the end (Al-Jaza?iri 33). He is correct in this stipulation because some narrations or ideas, although known as mutawatir among some people, whether Muslims or non-Muslims, are not originally mutawatir. There is no precise definition for a ?large number of reporters?; although the numbers 4, 5, 7, 10, 12, 40, and 70? among others?have all been variously suggested as a minimum, the exact number is irrelevant. (Some reporters, for example, imams of Hadith, carry more weight, anyway, than others who are their contemporaries.) The important condition is that the possibility of coincidence or ?organized falsehood? be obviously negligible (Al-`Asqalani 8?9).

Examples of mutawatir practices are
the five daily prayers, fasting, zakah, the Hajj and recitation of the Qur?an. Among the verbal mutawatir hadiths, the following has been reported by at least 62 Companions from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and has been widely-known among the Muslims throughout the ages ?Whoever invents a lie and attributes it to me intentionally, let him prepare his seat in the Fire.?

Mutazilaah

wa'alaykumus salaam,

Now, would you tell me what you think about the basic method of Salat (which got a similar treatment)? Let alone Ahadith for the time being. [Of course I will talk to you about this later, if you allow.

I think it becomes very difficult to argue that the Salat as it is practiced by the Sunni Muslims is not from the Prophet (sa) given that both Sunni and Shi'i Muslims with different sources perform the Salat similarly and as you said there are 'mutawattir' chains that back the Salat method as it is described in Ahadith. However, we should first define the word and concept of Salat according to the Qur'an before we allow any other source to define it. We should also distinguish Salat from dua, as dua is a supplication, invocation, or prayer in the literal sense; whereas the word Salat/Salah can have different meanings. For example

Allh sends His Salt (Graces, Honours, Blessings, Mercy, etc.) on the Prophet (Muhammad SAW) and also His angels too (ask Allh to bless and forgive him). O you who believe! Send your Salt on (ask Allh to bless) him (Muhammad SAW), and (you should) greet (salute) him with the Islmic way of greeting (salutation i.e. As?Salmu 'Alaikum). (Al-Ahzab 3356)

Many Christians have tried to make an objection that Allah (swt) and his angels prayed to Muhammad (sa) according to this verse, when in actuality this is not the case. I have also heard Salat being defined as 'connection' or to make a connection with God. But clearly, this ayah is not talking about prayer nor is it talking about the five daily Sunni/Shi'a Salat.

The Qur'an also talks about Prophets such as Abraham and Isaac and Jacob performing the Salat, but it is unlikely that they repeatedly went up and down and up and down saying words in Arabic. Example

And We made them (Isaac and Jacob) leaders, guiding others by Our Command, and We inspired in them the doing of good deeds, performing Salt, and the giving of Zakt and of Us (Alone) they were worshippers. (Al-Anbiya 2173)

Now the Qur'an by itself never gives us any details about what Salat is or how to perform it. As a rationalist, whenever a Sunni Muslim asks - well how do you know how to pray if you use only the Qur'an? The very question itself surprises me as if there is a 'how' to pray. There shouldn't be a 'how' to pray, prayer to God is something the individual can do without being taught. I can communicate to God, praise Him, worship Him, without any formal ritual.

It is interesting for example, that the Qur'an gives full details about wudhu/ablution (56) but does not describe any method on 'how' to pray. This is because I don't think there is a necessary HOW to pray. But if there is no necessary 'how' to pray then why do we have Muhammad (sa) praying the way he (sa) did? And if he prayed the way he did, how can you say that we should pray other than the way that he prayed and makeup our own Salat?

This has been the battle between rationalism and traditionalism. My belief is that Muhammad ibn Abdullah (sa) completely made up his Salat according to his own seventh century Arab rationale. This was not something that was mandated by God himself, that you have to go up and down and up and down repeatedly saying words in Arabic. Hence it is my belief that the Salat is not limited to the way Muhammad (sa) did it, nor is ritualistic 'Salat' of Muhammad (sa) from Allah, but it is from the Prophet. When Allah judges whether a believer performed Salat, He will not judge it according to the performance of repetitious raka'ats with ritualistic Arabic words; rather Salat is a personal, subjective meditative state of mind where one can pray however and in whatever position he or she likes given that the Qur'an itself does not dictate what Salat is. Had the Qur'an dictated a specific way to pray, fine, but since it did not, we cannot limit the understanding and definition of Salat according to how Muhammad (sa) chose to perform it.

Also, the Qur'an simply gives three times for the Salat - Fajr, Asr, Isha ... the Hadith where Moses and Muhammad went back and forth between 5,000 prayers a day and finally ended up with five is just ... well ... nonsensical, with all due respect.

Likewise is the issue of Hajj. The Qur'an does not mention any Kabaa or any devil statue that you have to throw rocks at, or any black stone you have to kiss, nor that you have to run between the mountains to relive Hagar finding water for Ishmael, nor is there anything about walking about the Kabaa chanting I am here .... these are pagan rituals that are not from the Qur'an, nor does Allah (swt) require them. The Hajj is simply a pilgrimage to a city called Mecca, where one should go to learn from scholarly individuals, experience unity and brotherhood, and for other spiritual witnessing. Not rituals.

Your thoughts?

Farhan

antibhondo

Salam,

Quran was written and compiled during the lifetime of the prophet, therefore, the argument that those who transmitted the Quran are the same people who transmitted the hadith holds no water and is a falasy.

Quran is from God and His messenger.

Hadith is from Satan and his followers.

Chose what you follow carefully.

Brother Layth
Assalamu Alaikum.

I don't understand your point; even the people who acknowledge hadith also acknowledge that Quran was written during the lifetime of the prophet. There are some Bukhari-hadiths regarding this.

So, how does Quran's being written in the lifetime of the Prophet prove that
those who transmitted the Quran are not the same people who transmitted the hadith???

Please carefully read the following point and let me know, whether we have any disagreement about this issue

In the period of Sahaba, the system of Salat (I take Salat for example, whereas I could take example for Zakat, too) must have been established in the society, whatever the meaning of Salat is. So, everywhere there were the daily practice of the System of Salat (and other system commanded by Islam, and duly practiced by Muhammad (sm)). I assumed this based upon only the importance given by the concerned quranic ayats.You don't need to believe in the history or HADITH! You can simply read quranic ayats, and these can be easily calculated.

One last question how do you know that Quran was also "COMPILED" during the lifetime of the Prophet?

Mutazilaah

Asalaamu alaykum again, brother antibhondo, did you have a chance to review my last post?

progod

Antibhondo,

I sent you a reply already. Feel free to respond to it in this discussion.

Mutaazilah,

The ritual prayer is not mutawaatir as there is no isnaad that can trace this back to the last prophet. Even when considering the term raka'ah, this word means to bow once. The meaning most Muslims understand today is a purely invented theological meaning, just as 'rapture' has a theological meaning connected to the return of Christ (God bless him), but does not possess this meaning at all in a purely linguitistic sense. It is the linguistic meanings that hold water when we read old literature, not the invented theological meanings imposed on the text later on. So in essence these traditional Islamic prayers aren't even saheeh in nature, let alone mutawaatir.
The Quran does mention the Ka'bah, clear as day. Please revisit the Quran again. It says that God has made the Ka'bah God's house.
I'm assuming you understand as-salaatul-wustaa as 'asr. Am I correct? If so I won't get into the discussion now. We will get seriously derailed from the main crux of this interaction.
Have you read Zamakhshari's tafsir or any of Al-Jahiz's work. I have yet to get my hands on Zamakhshari's work. I am dying to get a hold of it. i have read bits and pieces of al-jahiz's work. There is one online that i have favorited. The Arabic is tough, but I plan on tackling it one of these days.

Godbless,
Anwar

antibhondo

Brother Farhan
Assalamu Alaikum.

Of course, I will. Give me some time for my Office. This is morning here. I just rose from bed. Before going office I have read it two times already. The total body of your comment did not make sense to me, but I know that could be the result of my existing beliefs. Let me read it for some more times during the leisure hours, think freely with cool head and then review.

Some points have already gathered in my head; let me share it

It is not necessary for all words of the same roots to be of exactly similar meaning. Is it?
Whatever be the meaning, I can understand that Salat was/is one of most basic points of Islam. But you also said that {{the Qur'an by itself never gives us any details about what Salat is or how to perform it.}}. It just did not make sense to me.

Rather I have read 2456
Translated by Edip-Layth
Hold the contact prayer and contribute towards betterment, and obey the messenger, that you may attain mercy.

However I will rethink about this.

The Hukum for Wudu indicates that the hukum for Salat is ritual in nature.
The hukum for assembly Salat indicates that you cannot have a different meaning of your own for "Salat".
In my sense, whoever thinks of Quran important for him must feel "Salat" important, of couse. Every muslim society must have thought of the word similarly.
If I start thinking from the period of Sahaba, the system of Salat (I take Salat for example, whereas I could take example for Zakat, too) must have been established in the society, whatever the meaning of Salat is. So, everywhere there were the daily practice of the System of Salat (and other system commanded by Islam, and duly practiced by Muhammad (sm)). I assumed this based upon only the importance given by the concerned quranic ayats.You don't need to believe in the history or HADITH! You can simply read quranic ayats, and these can be easily calculated.
The Quran is Clear, and detailed. So, how come that people rejecting Hadiths completely have been coming out with different conclusions on many basic points of Islam by deriving the meanings only from Quran?

Please forgive me. I am to go now. I will reply later Inshaallah.

Layth

Salam,

I don't understand your point; even the people who acknowledge hadith also acknowledge that Quran was written during the lifetime of the prophet. There are some Bukhari-hadiths regarding this.

The Hadith followers attribute the writing of the Quran to "noble scribes" who jotted it all down (forgetting to jot down the verses on stoning which only Aysha had and which a goat later ate). The Quran tells us that Mohammed wrote the Quran down with his own hand (see 255 which acknowldges such).

So, how does Quran's being written in the lifetime of the Prophet prove that
those who transmitted the Quran are not the same people who transmitted the hadith

The mastercopy was written by the prophet and any copies would have been under his supervision - this giving zero weight to any scribes who may have
made copies as being in anyway a "source" of transmission.

Please carefully read the following point and let me know, whether we have any disagreement about this issue

Quote
In the period of Sahaba, the system of Salat (I take Salat for example, whereas I could take example for Zakat, too) must have been established in the society, whatever the meaning of Salat is. So, everywhere there were the daily practice of the System of Salat (and other system commanded by Islam, and duly practiced by Muhammad (sm)). I assumed this based upon only the importance given by the concerned quranic ayats.You don't need to believe in the history or HADITH! You can simply read quranic ayats, and these can be easily calculated.

Yes, I disagree. In the absence of you or I living in such society where the prophet is present (unless you have a time machine) the only relaible source for information becomes the Quran upon which the Salat was first re-established. Therefore, rather than play a game of guesswork looking at people 1,400 years from the time-line in question and assesing subjectively if they are right or wrong, I go back to the source mannual that the Salat was taken from and simply follow that.

One last question how do you know that Quran was also "COMPILED" during the lifetime of the Prophet?

Because it says it was arranged with instructions from the Holy Spirit and that this was a problamatic issue at the time with people accusing the prophet that we was making it up.

16101 And if We exchange a revelation in place of another revelation; and God is more aware of what He is revealing; they say ?You are making this up!? Alas, most of them do not know.

16102 Say ?The Holy Spirit has brought it down from your Lord with the truth, so that those who believe will be strengthened, and as a guidance and good news for those who have submitted.?

Mutazilaah

The ritual prayer is not mutawaatir as there is no isnaad that can trace this back to the last prophet. Even when considering the term raka'ah, this word means to bow once. The meaning most Muslims understand today is a purely invented theological meaning, just as 'rapture' has a theological meaning connected to the return of Christ (God bless him), but does not possess this meaning at all in a purely linguitistic sense. It is the linguistic meanings that hold water when we read old literature, not the invented theological meanings imposed on the text later on. So in essence these traditional Islamic prayers aren't even saheeh in nature, let alone mutawaatir.

So the Ahadith that describe the Salat are not mutawattir? Question then, why is it that the Shi'a who do not accept the Sunni canon of Ahadith happen to pray their Salat in the same ritual fashion?

The Quran does mention the Ka'bah, clear as day. Please revisit the Quran again. It says that God has made the Ka'bah God's house.

I know the Qur'an mentions Masjid al Haram and 2127 says that Abraham built al bayti - the house ... but nothing about the Ka'bah. Please show me where the Qur'an mentions the Ka'bah? Black Stone? Random Tawaf or circling of the temple chanting here I am? I think all of this is from Ahadith.

as-salaatul-wustaa as 'asr.

The middle prayer? What about it?

Have you read Zamakhshari's tafsir or any of Al-Jahiz's work. I have yet to get my hands on Zamakhshari's work. I am dying to get a hold of it. i have read bits and pieces of al-jahiz's work. There is one online that i have favorited. The Arabic is tough, but I plan on tackling it one of these days.

I am familiar with some of Jahiz's literature, but I am not able to understand the tafsir by Zamakhshari because its all in Arabi and my Arabi is limited.

Question, since you are familiar with the Mu'tazilah ... is there any record of Mutazilites or Jahmites or even the Khawarijites praying the ritual Salat as the Sunnis/Shi'a pray theirs?

...

Antibhondi

The Hukum for Wudu indicates that the hukum for Salat is ritual in nature.

How so?

The hukum for assembly Salat indicates that you cannot have a different meaning of your own for "Salat".

How so?

If I start thinking from the period of Sahaba, the system of Salat (I take Salat for example, whereas I could take example for Zakat, too) must have been established in the society, whatever the meaning of Salat is. So, everywhere there were the daily practice of the System of Salat (and other system commanded by Islam, and duly practiced by Muhammad (sm)). I assumed this based upon only the importance given by the concerned quranic ayats.You don't need to believe in the history or HADITH! You can simply read quranic ayats, and these can be easily calculated.

Even if the Salat was practiced by Muhammad (sa) that way, does it mean that when the Qur'an instructs people for Salat that it is instructing them and limiting them to only do how Muhammad (sa) performed his Salah? Isn't true that Muhammad (sa) according to your Ahadith used to make different hand and arm gestures at different times, thus changing the way he did his Salah? Isn't there a 'sahih' Hadith that says someone from the jama'ah or congregation during the Salah once said something random in Arabic, yaani, hamdan katheeran thoiyaban mubarakan feeh, and after the Salah, Rasul Allah (sa) said that thousands of angels descended on that person? So who is to say the Salah is limited to what Muhammad (sa) did?

MesMorial

Salaam Antibhondo;

A traditional Qur'an-alone challenge for you

Please re-read the first six Sura of the Qur'an from the perspecitive of the Qur'an alone (i.e. from the perspective of the Qur'an). It is no good to look at ayat in isolation because that will take them out of context.

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9602031.0

You will find that all the "obey Allah and His messenger" arguments (and others) are addressed, though it is still unfinished.

The clear, complete and fully-detailed Qur'an tells us how to pray

http//allpoetry.com/column/2364536

(also it was passed down from Ibrahim (SAW) through people's parents. The current form is contradictory to Qur'an in some parts but we can see how it has been ritualised. Please read the entire article in-depth to see my personal viewpoint, although other Qur'an-aloners may disagree)

Khuda Hafiz

P.S. You asked for a verse which says that the Qur'an is fully-detailed by itself

?Again, We gave the Book to Musa to complete on him who would do good , and making plain all things and a guidance and a mercy, so that they should believe in the meeting of their Lord. And this is a Book We have revealed, blessed; therefore follow it and guard that mercy may be shown to you.?

6154-155

So do we need Musa's (SAW) ahadith?

progod

Mutaazilah,

Yeah, the salat is considered practical sunnah or sunnah 'amaliyyah, and not sunnah qawliyyah. The second is everything that came down in a hadeeth. The first however is general practice that has been preserved from generation to generation. Well, there is a story out there that I heard (i'll try to source it for you, but you can google it) about Harun Ar-rashid's persian mother threatening all of the religious authorities with death if they did not institute the Zoroastrian prayer as part of Islam. Very traditional, usually sephardic jews also pray in a very similar way. There is a guy on youtube named Omed Yashar I believe who demonstrates this jewish prayer. My hunch is that this was a foreign influence from Jews or Zoroastrians or both, that was canonized at some point because some leader and his puppet religious authorities thought it better that way. But I know I need some more evidence to really present this as my own solid opinion. You can go to my website www.quranists.com and go to the Quranic research link, and the Quran in Arabic link and then search Ka'abah or Ka'bah or Kabah. It will give you the Arabic and you will see it there plain as day. Tawaaf is in the Quran as well (but I remember right I've seen it connected to safa and marwah) and aside from that it is a part of the definition of al-'umrah. But there is no specific amount of times mentioned in the Quran nor have I ever seen the black stone mentioned in the Quran. And I cannot tell you or speculate on its origins or connection to the Ka'bah. If I discover something credible I will let you know.

As for the middle prayer as 'asr. I disagree with that, but I really don't want to discuss that here. I would have to read through some of Al-Jahiz's work and Zamakhashri's work to see if there are any hints at them praying the traditional prayer. Both of them were very prominent, intelligent and prolific Mu'tazilites. Have you seen Zamakhshari's work? Could you point me to where I could purchase it? He has a very lengthly linguistic tafsir of the Qurn which I am DYIING to read. Thanks.

Godbless,
Anwar

Mutazilaah

http//www.fadakbooks.com/taala.html is a link to Tafsir al-Kashshaf by Zamakhshari ... four volumes only 64 dollars ... but its in Arabic -(

mmkhan

Salaam Mutazilaah,

Please allow to say something.

So the Ahadith that describe the Salat are not mutawattir? Question then, why is it that the Shi'a who do not accept the Sunni canon of Ahadith happen to pray their Salat in the same ritual fashion?

Yes! Ahadith of Salaat are not mutawatir. Answer to your question above is, all the hadeeth that sunnis follow are written down by shias so the made sunnis follow their way of Salaat, handshake hence, same ritual fashion of Salaat.

I know the Qur'an mentions Masjid al Haram and 2127 says that Abraham built al bayti - the house ... but nothing about the Ka'bah. Please show me where the Qur'an mentions the Ka'bah? Black Stone? Random Tawaf or circling of the temple chanting here I am? I think all of this is from Ahadith.

597

597 Allah has made the Kaaba to be the Restricted Sanctuary; to enforce for the people, and for the restricted month, and for the donations, and for regulation; that is so you may know that Allah knows what is in the heavens and what is in earth, and that Allah is aware of all things.

The middle prayer? What about it?

Allah said

4103

4103 So, when you have completed the contact prayer, then remember Allah while standing, or sitting, or on your sides. So, when you are relieved, then hold the contact prayer. Indeed, the contact prayer for the believers is a timed schedule.

Where are these TIMES not names?

2458

2458 O you who believe, let those who are maintained by your oaths, and those who have not yet attained puberty, request your permission regarding three times before the dawn contact prayer, and when you put off your attire from the noon time, and after the evening contact prayer. These are three private times for you. Other than these times, it is not wrong for you or them to intermingle with one another. Allah thus clarifies the revelations for you. And Allah is Knowledgeable, Wise.

You can see that "Before the dawn " is a time + Salaat and "After the evening " is also a time + Salaat. Then how about the middle one/AlSalaat AlWusta? Let see

2238

2238 Maintain the contact prayers; and the middle contact prayer; and stand for Allah dutifully.

"The middle" is NOT the time.

Point to be noted

Salaat + Al + Fajr
Salaat + Al + Eishaan

Al + Salaat + Al + Wusta

Can you see the difference brother? For further details please follow http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9601300.msg261111#msg261111

Even if the Salat was practiced by Muhammad (sa) that way, does it mean that when the Qur'an instructs people for Salat that it is instructing them and limiting them to only do how Muhammad (sa) performed his Salah? Isn't true that Muhammad (sa) according to your Ahadith used to make different hand and arm gestures at different times, thus changing the way he did his Salah? Isn't there a 'sahih' Hadith that says someone from the jama'ah or congregation during the Salah once said something random in Arabic, yaani, hamdan katheeran thoiyaban mubarakan feeh, and after the Salah, Rasul Allah (sa) said that thousands of angels descended on that person? So who is to say the Salah is limited to what Muhammad (sa) did?

Good point bro, MashaAllah.

May Allah guide us all towards the Truth pr
Mohammed M. Khan

antibhondo

Antibhondo,

I sent you a reply already. Feel free to respond to it in this discussion.

Brother Farhan
Assalamu Alaikum.

For the readers' sake, I represent my previous comment (which I sent to you as a message too) and your reply here
My comment

Your assumption that {{Mutawaatir hadeeth are in accordance with authentication of accounts found in 2411-13.}} has been found to be a wrong assumption.

Here are the ayats 2411-13 (Translated by Edip-Layth)
2411 Those who have brought forth the false accusation were a group from within you. Do not think it is bad for you, for it is good for you. Every person amongst them will have what he deserves of the sin. As for he who had the greatest portion of it, he will have a great retribution.

2412 If only when you heard it the acknowledging men and women should have thought good of themselves and said "This is an obvious lie!"

2413 If only they had brought four witnesses to it. If they did not have the witnesses, then these with God are the liars.

My explanation
These ayats clearly express that if someone brings up any allegation/accusation against someone, only then does he/she have to produce four witnesses. How do you relate these with any rumor or any news? Why would he/she produce four witness if the news is a normal news?

The quran does not require this. Please brother, do not make quran say something that it did not say at all.

Rather look at the following ayat
496 O you who acknowledge, if a wicked person comes to you with any news, then you shall investigate it. Lest you harm a people out of ignorance, then you will become regretful over what you have done.

This ayat indicates that if a wicked person comes with any news, then we should investigate. What if the news comes with someone who we know is definitely not wicked? This ayat requires no investigation against it, and there is no formal quranic constraint to accept the news!

However, here is a brief account of Mutawatir Hadith copied from this link http//www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&pagename=Zone-English-Living_Shariah/LSELayout&cid=1158658487972

Your reply
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Reply-1

The ayat is specifically about women being accused of lewd behavior yes. However, it provides a template for verifying all sorts of accusations that cannot be taken lightly. Not only can an accusation against a woman's chastity not be taken lightly, but neither should an accusation that God's last prophet (God bless him) said or did something. So in order to verify such serious accusations we need to follow this template given to us for a similar serious situation. Either 4 witnesses or an account by the spouse will suffice. I understand the specific context of the ayat in question. What you do not understand is the reasoning behind this standard of four witnesses. It makes the accusation/rumor strong and reduces the ability that it was fabricated. The idea of mutawaatir, although not originally born from these Quranic verses proves this point. 4 or more independent witnesses provides the strongest standard for accepting an accusation and what essentially is a rumor. This is how we authenticate the rumourous accusation, and this is why the Quran stands up to this test, in that it is mutawaatir. And any hadeeth can be accepted as historical if it is also mutawaatir and does not contradict the strongest mutawaatir account, which is the Quran.
This is the reasoning and the truth of the matter, and there may be more truths behind this yet to be discovered. God knows best.

Reply-2

I also want to add that the parameters of the news found in the verses in surah 24 have specifically to do with history as well, i.e. something that has already happened, not something that is happening. In the end you can come up with alot of reason for why certain ayats are not applicable with our thinking or a certain issue. You may say dogs are haram, but yet they were halaal for the believers who aged in the cave. and there are many other things that many believe or disbelieve in now where the Quran shows that those very things were okay for previous people and does not forbid us these things. We can find out best guidance by examining the Quran and reality will show us that this is the best guidance. When it comes to serious accusations which could amount to slander concerning a personage's past events, specifically accusing a woman of adultery or fornication the Quran gives us the template to follow. The undeniable historical accuracy of mutwaatir hadeeth has proven that this is a truth that yields results.

As for traditional rituals being considered mutawaatir, mutawaatir up to who? There is not chain mutawaatir or ahadi that distinctly links many of these rituals, including the traditional form of salat back to the prophet Muhammad (God bless him). No one can give even 1 ahadi or sahih isnaad for this. Even the terms as Muslims use them do not have the same meaning in Classical Arabic. Making two rak'ah in Classical Arabic means to bow twice. No specifics. The specifics are given by theologians, not the Arabic language itself. A lot of people will call something mutawaatir when it is not, twisting the definition for mutawaatir, to include only the companions for instance or trying to say that because many people have been doing it for centuries they could not have made it up on their own. But this doesn't discount the fact that someone other than the prophet gave them this practice. They can't trace the practice through everyone that taught them back to the prophet, so there is not point in calling it saheeh, let alone mutawaatir.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

At first I thank you that you acknowledged that the ayats (2411-13) are specifically about women being accused of lewd behavior .

Let me tell you one thing
The ayat 496 was specifically about investigation of any news/information coming through a fasikun. The ayat says that if a wicked person (fasikun) comes to you with any news, then you shall investigate it.

So the simple indication is that whenever a fasik brings a news/information, investigation is a Quranic requirement. If he is not a fasik, investigation is not a Quranic requirement.

This a very simple logical deduction .

If you want to apply 2411-13 ayats in this case, you have to first change the Ayat's base (the specificity to another which did not seem to me 1) simple and 2) logical. I am also not sure whether even all the Quranist people will support this).

May I ask you, brother, when you have got a simple Ayat, should you try to apply another Ayat by dislocating it?

A purity-test of your argument
Brother Farhan, if the accuser does not produce four witness, he/she becomes a LIAR, according to Quran; See
2413
If only they had brought four witnesses to it. If they did not have the witnesses, then these with God are the liars.

Now, if you apply this ayat to "any news", then the person who is not a fasiq, but cannot bring 4 witnesses becomes a liar.

But, the Ayat 496 does not even require any investigation at all, let alone four witnesses.

You think, brother Farhan, when quran is not requiring any investigation at all (i.e., not requiring any witness at all), your explanation of an Ayat, in that same situation requires not only investigation, but also four witnesses. And moreover, your explanation accuses the man (who is not fasiq) of lying with Allah!

To me, this is a simple refutation of your explanation!

I request the readers to read the portion article about Mutawatir Hadith. I re-mention the same here
Link http//www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&pagename=Zone-English-Living_Shariah/LSELayout&cid=1158658487972

Depending on the number of the reporters of the hadith in each stage of the isnad, that is, in each generation of reporters, the hadith can be classified into the general categories of mutawatir or ahad (single) hadith. A mutawatir hadith is one that is reported by such a large number of people that they cannot be expected to agree upon a lie, all of them together (Al-Jaza?iri 33).

Al-Ghazali (d. AH 505) stipulates that a mutawatir narration be known by the sizeable number of its reporters equally in the beginning, in the middle, and at the end (Al-Jaza?iri 33). He is correct in this stipulation because some narrations or ideas, although known as mutawatir among some people, whether Muslims or non-Muslims, are not originally mutawatir. There is no precise definition for a ?large number of reporters?; although the numbers 4, 5, 7, 10, 12, 40, and 70? among others?have all been variously suggested as a minimum, the exact number is irrelevant. (Some reporters, for example, imams of Hadith, carry more weight, anyway, than others who are their contemporaries.) The important condition is that the possibility of coincidence or ?organized falsehood? be obviously negligible (Al-`Asqalani 8?9).

Examples of mutawatir practices are
the five daily prayers, fasting, zakah, the Hajj and recitation of the Qur?an. Among the verbal mutawatir hadiths, the following has been reported by at least 62 Companions from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and has been widely-known among the Muslims throughout the ages ?Whoever invents a lie and attributes it to me intentionally, let him prepare his seat in the Fire.?

Another very useful article to understand Mutawatir Hadith.
Link http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith_terminology
or
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutawatir#Mutawatir

Thank you.

progod

Peace,

Mutaazilah, thanks for that website I will be ordering it soon. Also a book I recommend which I saw on the website is 'A literary history of the Arabs.' It is an exellent book which I read from a University library. I have to check out Lisanul-Arab on there. I didn't see it. I paid about 400 dollars for it some 6 years ago. So to see those books so dirt cheap is AMAZING!!! I swear, reading through the dictionary has been the best thing for me. Yeah many times I have to cross reference or read it with a good Arabic/English dictionary but so many things have been clarified for me. Especially just in the past few months using al-baheth.com (all Arabic dictionaries, it will be a pain drudging through it for certain defintions but it is WELL worth it! Considering the edification you recieve in return.).

Antibhondo,

I just have a few quick points

So how is calling the righteous man who maybe DID see that woman fornicating or commiting an adultery a liar with God any different? You are proposing that this person being considered a liar is more just than the person who brought news which had to to with an accusation and/or a past event but was the only witness. Both of them can be telling the truth and NOT be liars, but their information is so unconfirmable that God says that their information is not to be taken as truth. I'll have to look up that word in that verse and see if it means 'liar' (I'm doing multiple things at this moment), but the result is still the same. Even if they are telling the truth and are of impeccable character if their information is not to be taken as true. Investigating is a process of gathering witnesses. I need to check that word 'wicked' too. However, no story should be left to run wild with only ONE source. All stories must be investigated. And the best way to do that is to gather or create multiple witnesses. It seems you have a very narrow way of looking at things. You arbitrarily separate investigating/seeking out the truth of a matter from gathering witnesses, in this case 4. In many, many cases investigating involves just that; gathering multiple witnesses.

Godbless,
Anwar

ramzi

As-salamu 'alaykum,

This is an enquiry from a truth seeking student of knowledge. I am traditional Shafi'i Sunni, in the sense that I have studied formally with traditional scholars. This site and forum is very interesting and informative. I have found some useful resources here. However I have some questions that I would like to be addressed

Salaam Isa,

Most of the questions you ask are addressed in the video below

http//search.4shared.com/q/1/%D8%B3%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%84%D8%A9%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B9%D8%AC%D8%B2%D8%A9%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%A8%D8%B1%D9%89

If the link does not work then type into the search bar at www.4shared.com

Regards
Ramzi