What is Islam?

David_Saidi

For Javalatte

I think without influence of manmade hadiths, the Qur'an becomes more easier to learn, a very excellent book it is.

Yes, because it hath already been translated and formatted by ahlul hadith.
You simply play mockery against them, but used their work to support your faith

and I suggest to consider brother mmkhan's advice below.

Perhaps you will change your mind after reading this one

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604387.0

muslims

Ignoring the issues , blank denials, blank accusations , and ad hominem etc . . . again ?

I think you are not fit for discussion . . . perhaps, not in this forum . rotfl

Avoding asbabun ul nuzul = NONSENSE!!
Perhaps this is the argument I left, since you intepred the Quran blatantly

and of course, another blank accusations and unable to prioritize the issue relating to Islamic Jurisprudence, ignoring questions and real issues. . .

and the context of historical purpose . . .

They will say there were three, the fourth of them being their dog <- rules relating to history
and they will say there were five, the sixth of them being their dog
guessing at the unseen
and they will say there were seven, and the eighth of them was their dog.

Say, "My Lord is most knowing of their number. None knows them except a few.

So do not argue about them except with an obvious argument <- the prohibitions, disobey ?
and do not inquire about them among from anyone."
1822

Inconsistent and contradicting hadith = NONSENSE!!

David_Saidi

and of course, unable to prioritize the issue relating to Islamic Jurisprudence, and ignoring questions and real issues. . .

Ok, we discuss this issue first and please don't divert to anywhere

Ok I want your evidences first, it can be scholar works or something (but not ur personal opinion or intepretations)

muslims

Ok, we discuss this issue first and please don't divert to anywhere

Ok I want your evidences first, it can be scholar works or something (but not ur personal opinion or intepretations)

Yes, the same old strategy . . . rotfl

Therefore, give the authority from the Quran first, and then we go to hadith, ijma and qiyas etc. . .
You keep ignoring the issue, please refer to the usul al fiqh

Priority of the Quran over the Sunnah
A Sunnah is the second source of the Shari'ah next to the Qur'an,
the mujtahid is bound to observe an order of priority between the Qur'an and Sunnah.
Hence in his search for a solution to a particular problem,
the jurist must resort to the Sunnah ONLY WHEN he fails to find any guidance in the Qur'an.
Should there be a clear text in the Qur'an, it must be followed and be given priority over any ruling of the Sunnah
which may happen to be in conflict with the Qur'an
Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence; p.58 Second Revised Edition; Mohammad Hashim Kamali

Wishful thinking. . . prove from the Quran, then the hadith. . . then Ijma, Bible, Torah, Qiyas etc.
Again, and according to priority. . .

Quran
http//api.ning.com/files/uGCxg7sZSOsBbNwvSUN0m6uFBP5OUvR7e-3lYPcnfzzdki1NKdfBKi*MBEzKhhqFLbCaNgzbOCTwHTwBFp0cz3nyqUP-l7F1/arrowDownSmall.png
Hadith
http//api.ning.com/files/uGCxg7sZSOsBbNwvSUN0m6uFBP5OUvR7e-3lYPcnfzzdki1NKdfBKi*MBEzKhhqFLbCaNgzbOCTwHTwBFp0cz3nyqUP-l7F1/arrowDownSmall.png
Ijma (consensus of opinion relating to similarities with specific verses from the Bible, Torah (incl. hadith) etc)
http//api.ning.com/files/uGCxg7sZSOsBbNwvSUN0m6uFBP5OUvR7e-3lYPcnfzzdki1NKdfBKi*MBEzKhhqFLbCaNgzbOCTwHTwBFp0cz3nyqUP-l7F1/arrowDownSmall.png
Qiyas (analogical reasoning relating to similarities with
non specific verses from the Bible, Torah, Traditions, Man-made law (incl. hadith) etc)
http//api.ning.com/files/uGCxg7sZSOsBbNwvSUN0m6uFBP5OUvR7e-3lYPcnfzzdki1NKdfBKi*MBEzKhhqFLbCaNgzbOCTwHTwBFp0cz3nyqUP-l7F1/arrowDownSmall.png
Istihsan (equity), Maslahah Mursalah (considerations of public interest),
Istishab (presumption of continuity), Ijtihad (logic, critical thinking) etc . . . .
http//api.ning.com/files/uGCxg7sZSOsBbNwvSUN0m6uFBP5OUvR7e-3lYPcnfzzdki1NKdfBKi*MBEzKhhqFLbCaNgzbOCTwHTwBFp0cz3nyqUP-l7F1/arrowDownSmall.png
Lastly. . . your opinion.

Therefore . . .

I have give you an ayat from the Quran . . .and Allah said "There is no argument between us and you", see also 5.48
This is the rule relating to hablum minallah . . . there is no argument!

Therefore where is the ayat to prove your statement that the Ahmadiya deserved to be killed like that ?

http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=es-p5OHTSxk

How many times do I have to repeat asking you not to merely stating your opinions ?

and

How come they destroyed the following church ?

http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHPvxCKofs4

Question Does the following ayat say Allah protected monasteries, churches, and synagogues ? Does it also means Allah protects other religions ?

and

There shall be no compulsion in the religion. 2.256

. . .

Therefore, which ayat from the Quran ?

This is the first stage. . . before you are qualified to discuss the rules from the hadith, ijma, qiyas, ijtihad and fatwa etc.

Verse and Chapter that allowed such killings and oppressions ?

Don't fail at the first stage . . . laugh

David_Saidi

Again, and according to priority. . .

Quran
http//api.ning.com/files/uGCxg7sZSOsBbNwvSUN0m6uFBP5OUvR7e-3lYPcnfzzdki1NKdfBKi*MBEzKhhqFLbCaNgzbOCTwHTwBFp0cz3nyqUP-l7F1/arrowDownSmall.png
Hadith
http//api.ning.com/files/uGCxg7sZSOsBbNwvSUN0m6uFBP5OUvR7e-3lYPcnfzzdki1NKdfBKi*MBEzKhhqFLbCaNgzbOCTwHTwBFp0cz3nyqUP-l7F1/arrowDownSmall.png
Ijma (consensus of opinion relating to similarities with specific verses from the Bible, Torah etc)
http//api.ning.com/files/uGCxg7sZSOsBbNwvSUN0m6uFBP5OUvR7e-3lYPcnfzzdki1NKdfBKi*MBEzKhhqFLbCaNgzbOCTwHTwBFp0cz3nyqUP-l7F1/arrowDownSmall.png
Qiyas (analogical reasoning relating to similarities with
non specific verses from the Bible, Torah, Traditions, Man-made law etc)
http//api.ning.com/files/uGCxg7sZSOsBbNwvSUN0m6uFBP5OUvR7e-3lYPcnfzzdki1NKdfBKi*MBEzKhhqFLbCaNgzbOCTwHTwBFp0cz3nyqUP-l7F1/arrowDownSmall.png
Istihsan (equity), Maslahah Mursalah (considerations of public interest),
Istishab (presumption of continuity), Ijtihad (logic, critical thinking) etc . . . .
http//api.ning.com/files/uGCxg7sZSOsBbNwvSUN0m6uFBP5OUvR7e-3lYPcnfzzdki1NKdfBKi*MBEzKhhqFLbCaNgzbOCTwHTwBFp0cz3nyqUP-l7F1/arrowDownSmall.png
Lastly. . . your opinion.

Yes, Quran is the main priority, since it's Scripture
But to undestand it we need the hadith

Man_of_Faith

For Man of Faith

Why you labeled hadith as hearsay while it's already been well precribed and transmitted since the sahabah (companion) era.

What are you talking about? I do not know anything about that and I honestly do not care either. I would rather use the hadith of the Bible than using hadith of Muhammad at least they are less bad in severity on the blasphemy.

Bukhari is not the first person who collecting hadith but just re-collecting, some people who ever met the Phrophet also collecting the hadith like Abd Allah ibn 'Amr ibn al-'As who wrote Al-Sahifah al-Sadiqah (The Truthful Scripts).

Could be, but I still find that the message of the recitation is enough for me that I do not need any external information to know God's mission.

Before Bukhari & co started collecting hadith, the Islamic schools like Maliki, Hanbali already existed for along time during the Phrophet eras.

Bukhari & co graduated from the schools and started the journey to re-collecting hadith from many Islamic schools, because in the past the writting medias is not as right now.

I find most of what you read in Bukhari as either garbage or things that would be common sense anyway without reading it in hearsay books. It does not teach anything that brings me closer to God honestly.

Then you will only play speculations until the last day.

I have nothing I find myself speculating about. The message is quite clear actually.

muslims

Yes, Quran is the main priority, since it's Scripture
But to undestand it we need the hadith

Still no answer and again, you divert with your personal opinion and circular reasoning . . .
from the start of this discussion. . . and continuing.

The Quran is analogous to the "Constitution", and the hadith is analogous to the "Statutory Law"
Before any Statutory Law is valid, there must be the main principle in the Constitution . .
This is equally true in the Principle of Islamic Jurisprudence and Usul Al Fiqh
Before any hadith etc is valid, there must be the main principle in the Quran . .

Therefore, where is the Ayat ?

This is the first stage to determine the legality of any action or rule of laws. . .

Where are the Verse and Chapter that allow such killings, oppressions and barbarianism ?

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605723.msg349449#msg349449

Man_of_Faith

Yes, Quran is the main priority, since it's Scripture
But to undestand it we need the hadith

Peace,

What exactly is it that you do not understand of the recitation? I have found it very clear actually without involving hadith. In fact hadith used to make me confused, and I did never believe that any of it was inspired by God.

God bless you

David_Saidi

Therefore, where is the Ayat ?

As I said I don't want intepret the Quran too hastily.

Because we need understand this first http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asbab_al-nuzul
And the tafseer....

Oh I want to ask How many times you salat per day? ;D

What exactly is it that you do not understand of the recitation? I have found it very clear actually without involving hadith. In fact hadith used to make me confused, and I did never believe that any of it was inspired by God.

The translation and the Quranic text you used right now is the work of Ahle Ahadith )

muslims

As I said I don't want intepret the Quran too hastily.

Because we need understand this first http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asbab_al-nuzul
And the tafseer....

Oh I want to ask How many times you salat in one day? ;D

The translation and the Quranic text you used right now is the work of Ahle Ahadith

You ask me for the scholar works and I gave it to you. .

Therefore, why are you diverting the issue ?
How many pages you want to divert the issue?

You used to be the Quran Alone follower, therefore which ayat from the Quran ?

Are you happy doing what you are doing now ?
Ignoring facts, issues, and concealing the truth . . .

David_Saidi

You used to be the Quran Alone follower,

I'm not Quran Alone follower anymore

In the past, I was a Sunni and ever join it's organization and study together.
Now I'm just feel sorry for why I leave hadith at that time.

therefore which ayat from the Quran ?

No ayats asked to kill the disbeliever except if they do something bad in Islam
Such like Baqarah 190-191.

muslims

I'm not Quran Alone follower anymore

No problem, we are discussing the Principle of Islamic Jurisprudence and the authority I gave is used in the Islamic Universities. . .

No ayats asked to kill the disbeliever except if they do something bad in Islam
Such like Baqarah 190-191.

You said no ayat to support the killing of the disbeliever. . .

Therefore, why did you support such action ? Do you believe the Quran ?

Ahmadiya deserved it, because their mockery toward God's teaching.
The purpose of punishment is to prevent Ahmadiya, before they go further for corrupting GOD's teaching.
This is the hadith said.

Murtad and raddad according to hadith, the punishment is death sentence.

What they did ?
Christian and all religions are also mocking God's teaching . .
Therefore, did they killed people ?

David_Saidi

No problem, we are discussing the Principle of Islamic Jurisprudence and the authority I gave is used in the Islamic Universities. . .

Can you provide the article/book about this

You said no ayat to support the killing of the disbeliever. . .

Therefore, why did you support such action ?

The ayats was used for Mohammed, then as ordinary people we need his example to understand the ayats.
Muhammad is moobalegh, the living example for implementation of Quranic verses

Do you believe the Quran ?

Do you believe Allah ?

Yes

muslims

Can you provide the article/book about this

Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence by M. H. Kamali (page 58-59)
http//www.tayseerulquran.com/userfiles/147file14569.pdf

The ayats was used for Mohammed, then as ordinary people we need his example to understand the ayats.
Muhammad is moobalegh, the living example for implementation of Quranic verses

You are repeating again, I said "FIRST STAGE" is the Quran . . .

Just a simple word from the Quran, "kill alll disbelievers". . can you refer that kind of ayat ?

Yes

Do you believe in this ayat ?

There shall be no compulsion in the religion. 2.256

And had your Lord willed, those on earth would have believed - all of them entirely.
Then, , would you compel the people in order that they become believers?
And it is not for a soul to believe except by permission of Allah
and He will place defilement upon those who will not use reason
1099-100

So remind, ; you are only a reminder.
You are not over them a controller.
However, he who turns away and disbelieves -
Then Allah will punish him with the greatest punishment.
Indeed, to Us is their return.
Then indeed, upon Us is their account.
8821-26

David_Saidi

Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence by M. H. Kamali (page 58-59)
http//www.tayseerulquran.com/userfiles/147file14569.pdf

Thanks, now I will log out first and examine this book

Good night

muslims

Thanks, now I will log out first and examine this book

Good night

Okay, please read and we discuss it later.

Man_of_Faith

For Javalatte

Yes, because it hath already been translated and formatted by ahlul hadith.

I suppose that is why it is also mistranslated and/or misinterpreted all too often (refer to wife beating or things I have printed out in my thread 'Nearness and Guidance' such as the analysis of the word 'ketab&#039. People calling themselves Arabic scholars know less than me; an ultimate amateur but applying reason and logic while treating the discourse more of a "code" and without any external bias, and hence by comparing the occurrences of words in all contexts of the narration (where I have discovered that most words so far have nearly exactly the same meaning in all occurrences, particularly words with two or more syllables). Arabic is very different from English, but when you study it from literary point of view then the principle is still the same. I only see danger in interpreting the recitation by Muhammad by using other hearsay as you include the bias of a lot of people and it might involve delusive ones and it is the same problem that the Jews had after Moses when they wrote a lot of hearsay and upheld that conjecture. By the risk of being bold to say so, but "hadith" adds a lot of conjecture to the system of God and follows the same story of the past. They author the decree (ketab) by their own and associate it with God and only conjecture.

Do you still wish to uphold such a system then go ahead and do so, but I fear for you a difficult day in the future. You will carry the lies as a burden and see the Truth in your face and feel humiliated. And this I wrote only as a warning from the almighty that I feel sorry for you.

See that God's decree is very easy to learn and uphold, would you not see the Truth? It is interesting that humans always want to complicate the system while God is making it (relatively) easy to follow.

A tip from me; read all the narrations with previous messengers (before the one who received inspiration for the recitation) and see what mission they came with. See that they preached "Believe in God alone, associate nothing with Him and do good deeds". Why in the world would you think that the decree was any different at the advent of the recitation by Muhammad? Would God be a pain in the behind just as the recitation was revealed to the Arabic tribes while the message was ultimately simple before that?

Most of the time there are unrighteous teachings seemingly there to mislead by people who authored the decree with their own hands. The history repeated itself as the same thing happened with the teachings of Moses (Jewish hearsay, Tanakh), and is happening after Muhammad (Bukhari & co) and it happened after Jesus (ex. Paul's nonsense). The funny thing is that no one realizes this and it just happens over and over again and yet God narrates that this is a recurring scenario. All that is nonsense, and extra-religious teachings; the Jews have like 603 different religious laws which are attacked in the narration of God which was inspired to the fallible man Muhammad. Prior to all the hearsay by the Jews they had like one or two A4 papers of rules (estimation) but they caused it to become a whole book with nonsensical rules. Most of the original rules were covered by the famous 'ten commandments' which are actually quite obvious for a reverent believer and people like Abraham before that time already attended to this kind of system (deen). The recitation even mentions the "deen of Abraham". And what is the deen of Abraham? Belief in God alone and being a good person, being a strict monotheist and not associating anyone with God, not even the missionaries of God that every now and then come around on Earth. Even then people make sons of God or patrons to God even if God said not to associate anyone with Him. It was taught already in the "Mosaic Law" not to do this, but people seem intentionally ignorant to this rule.

God's decree is easy to grasp, do you not agree?

Examples

• Believe in God alone

• No idols of any kind

• Do not steal

• Be good to your neighbors, your parents, relatives, brothers, sisters, wives, husbands and the list goes on

• Do not murder

• Do not be jealous

• Keep the remembrance of God on a special day

• Do not commit adultery

• No false witness, (i.e. do not lie)

• And never forget about God, your Lord

I brought up seven of the above straight from memory without peeking. The rest are easily found in the revelation of Moses and in the revelation to the alleged Muhammad.

Apart from that you are told not to eat pork or that there is equivalence in punishment among other things. Did I need any hadith books by Muhammad to grasp this? No, I needed only the small portion of the Bible (the revelation to Moses is contained within all the nonsensical hearsay) that is not corrupted and the recitation to Muhammad.

Like was inspired to Muhammad let me tell you was God has really decreed for you 'Read the above'. Cast away all the conjecture and scatter out the Truth from the falsehood.

It could be a matter of time until "hadith" books are bundled together with what you call Qur'an as the hearsay in the past was bundled with the teachings (torah of Moses). In ways they already are with sectarian Qur'an translations that are filled with conjecture based on their own wishful thinking. They have cast the decree behind their backs and pretending it is not there.

The decree of the recitation to Muhammad is the true hadith just as the criteria was revealed to Moses in the past. You have to see the Truth through all the falsehood and it takes being true to your heart. See that the history repeats itself and people fall into the same trap as those before them without perceiving. They despise the Jews or Christians as polytheists while committing exactly the same mistake, and they only conjecture and come up with book after book of nonsensical writings that cause much animosity and hatred because the curse of God is upon the disbelievers. They will not have peace (Islam). As happened to those before them has happened to them and that without them knowing and they are unaware of the fate that is coming and the "reward" that God will have in stock for them.

God is with those that do good and follow what God has decreed for them, and they know that from Him they have come, to Him they will return.

Do you not see that the recitation to Muhammad (Qu'ran) says the exact same things while I write in English without copying the text? God's "pen" does never run out of ink.

Open your eyes and turn back to the path after you had learned the Truth. I am not rambling or I am not following my own opinion because what I said is in the decree.

May God bless you

JavaLatte

I suppose that is why it is also mistranslated and/or misinterpreted all too often

Indeed.

Open your eyes and turn back to the path after you had learned the Truth.

Good advice, brother.

Peace.

JavaLatte

For Javalatte

Yes, because it hath already been translated and formatted by ahlul hadith.

Not all of the Qur'an interpretations were made by the people of hadith.

And beside, the interpretation from ahlul hadith may contain quite many erroneous translation that can mislead people.

Namun juga, saya rasa tidak masalah jika kita menggunakan berbagai macam jenis terjemahan/tafsir untuk dibandingkan satu sama lain dengan tujuan untuk dipelajari.

Saya sendiri saat ini lebih suka menggunakan Quranix dan corpus.quran.com, word by word

You simply play mockery against them, but used their work to support your faith

I want to support my faith by learning the translation made in righteous way, and not by using the distorted translation.

I also tend to believe that we should try to make our own rendition of Qur'an, actually.

I hope someday I can have enough time and capability to finish my own rendition/interpretation of the Qur'an.

Perhaps you will change your mind after reading this one

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604387.0

Nope. I already know that brother mmkhan made it.

My position for the case/topic Was Muhammed name of a Prophet? is still NEUTRAL.

I still need to learn more deeply before decide to accept or reject it.

Moreover, I see that thread as something valuable to learn.

Apart of whether Muhammed is name of a Prophet or not, I do found some good lessons on the thread.

Such as, I agree with brother mmkhan about this,

If anyone says that diacritics are added later, I have some questions

Why Allah did not sent down His message with diacritics, any possible reason?
If diacritics are added later by humans, then why should I not doubt the Book of Allah?
How can call it the Book of Allah when human interference is involved in it?
As brother Noon has given examples , how do people understand what exactly Allah wanted to say? Hence, it could not be called the Book of guidance which confuses more.

and this.

Yes I do believe that the original alQuraan/alKitaab was in written form. yes

Ok. I guess I know who you really are Mr. David Saidi. >(

Come on, take off your mask, bro. police

Peace.

muslims

Mankind was one single nation 2.213

Definition of Ijma (Consensus Of Opinion)

?Consensus (Ijma?) is an expression of the agreement of the generality of those qualified to loosen and bind from the community of Muhammad all mankind in a particular age upon the ruling of a particular occurrence.?; Sayf al-Din al-Amidi (1233/631)

*strike and red is mine

The Quranic Ijma

Invite to the way of your Lord
with wisdom
and good instruction
and argue with them in a way that is best
Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way
and He is most knowing of who is guided
16.125

So to that invite (them to human unity)
and remain on a right course as you are commanded
and do not follow their inclinations (for sectarianism, bigotism, religionism)
but say,
"I have believed in what Allah has revealed of the Qur'an <- Ijma - Consensus of opinions
and I have been commanded to do justice among you
Allah is our Lord and your Lord
For us are our deeds, and for you your deeds
There is no argument between us and you <- Ijma - Consensus of opinions
Allah will bring us together
and to Him is the destination."
42.15

Therefore . . . the system for human unity

Quran ( earth)
Hadith (ie. scholars research and development) ( fire)
Ijma (Consensus Of Opinion, for human unity) ( water)

Consensus of opinion between the Quran and . . .

Madhab & hadithers
Religion & sacred texts/books (rules which are similar with the Quran)
Qiyas, analogical reasoning for consensus of opinion, for human unity. ( air)

Analogical reasoning between the Quran and . . .

Religion & sacred texts/books (rules which are not similar with the Quran)
Rule of law - ie. below are those that are not based on sacred texts.
Tradition
etc. . .
Ijtihad (critical thinking) and others. . .etc, for consensus of opinions, for human unity.

The Sectarian Ijma

Ijma (Consensus Of Opinion) . . .

Consensus of opinion between the Quran and . . .

Madhab & hadithers <- I'm right, I'm special, I'm unique, I, I, I . . they are all wrong!!
Religion & sacred texts/books <- I'm right, I'm special, I'm unique, I, I, I . . they are all wrong!!
Rule of law <- I'm right, I'm special, I'm unique, I, I, I . . they are all wrong!!
Tradition <- I'm right, I'm special, I'm unique, I, I, I . . they are all wrong!!
etc. . . <- I'm right, I'm special, I'm unique, I, I, I . . they are all wrong!!

ie. shirk and god inside ourselves

no consensus ! You have your way. I have my way . . .
Bigot, ByGod . .by what God/god ? Allah only ! Sunni (god) only ! Shia (god) only ! Jesus (god) only ! etc. .
becoming a weak nation . . getting smaller and smaller . .

Ignominy shall be their portion
wheresoever they are found
save (where they grasp)

(1) a rope from Allah
and
(2) a rope from men
(3112]

Issue and example. . .

Scholarly Consensus Ijm - Between Use & Misuse

This study aims to examine unanimous consensus (ijma?) from the Sunni paradigm while searching for a truly objective criterion for discerning authentic and original teachings of faith in the Islamic tradition.

The unfortunate reality is that while unanimous consensus can serve as a unifying factor, it can and has been used constantly as a tool to suppress dissenting opinion even when that dissenting view has been, at times, legitimate. The suggestion, here, is not that every lay Muslim should feel free to follow any aberrant or minority opinion he/she discovers exists. Rather, it is merely that some minority views are valid, and critical scholars of our time have been given the capacity to determine how and when it is appropriate to adopt those opinions.

Laypeople, however, should allow conscience and humility to direct their decisions to adopt or avoid minority views so as to safeguard one?s faith from being steered by personal fancy. One should also be sure to suspend definitive judgement on any point of dispute even if it is something that one inclines toward, particularly to avoid violent dispute with others whose convictions may be just as strong.

Despite that, it is important to understand that if claims of unanimous consensus are suspect, it is quite possible for a Muslim to invent in his/her mind an understanding of Islam located in a realm of imagination and fantasy. On the other hand, if claims of unanimous consensus are valid and authoritative, the one who casts aspersion on such claims may be in danger of violating universal teachings of the religion of Islam.

So, how should one deal with claims of unanimous consensus?
What authority do such claims have?
If unanimous consensus is a fictitious principle,
what means do Muslims have at their disposal to identify the unshakable bedrocks of Islam?

It must be understood concretely before proceeding that the aim of this study is not to de-emphasize or devalue the importance and place of the doctrine of unanimous consensus (ijma?). The aim is, rather, to address its meaning and role, and to assess our understanding of it for the sake of greater unity. Too often in recent times, those advocating the doctrine of consensus attempt to browbeat some of the learned and unlearned into conformance with tendentious interpretations of ?genuine? Islamic ?tradition.?

This study commences upon the thesis that most historical claims of unanimous consensus are subjective and circumscribed by the parameters within which claimants define this concept.

It further proceeds upon the belief that the only decisively confirmable precepts of the Islamic tradition are found in its self-evident teachings known as ?al-ma?ruf min al-din bi al-darura? (i.e. matters known by immediate necessity). To be clear, this means that what is often ascribed to ?Islam? is nothing more than ?dominant? interpretation, while Islam and the Shariah are what the Prophet Muhammad delivered to us prior to the appearance and development of the various schools of law and theology. Those schools, while basing their doctrines on references from the Qur?an and prophetic tradition, represent nevertheless interpretations of the revelation; not the revelation itself.

What we are not claiming is that unanimous consensus is a ?theoretical? impossibility nor that it is impermissible for one to claim unanimous consensus on a particular issue.It is merely that most claims of unanimous consensus lack the authority to make them religiously binding upon Muslims to accept; whereas the soundness of one?s faith is not mortally threatened by the contravention of those claims.