Could it really be true that the vast majority of Muslims strayed from Islam?
-
Ask those Sunni scholars about all those Christian scholars who promote Trinity and many other false teachings in the name of Jesus, and then replace the word Christian scholars with Sunni or Shiite scholars, and replace the name of St. Paul or Tertullian with Abu Hurayra or Bukhari, there you get the best answer to your question.
Peace,
EdipYes, I thought someone would use this as an example and it stands up in theory however, the Quran is protected from within therefore withdrawing these dogmatic Hadithist principles from Quran is virtually impossible when you don't twist the verses beyond belief. The Judeo-Christian scriptures are however written by man and aren't intact. Now, upon studying the Quran which all scholars have to do, shouldn't they be coming to the same conclusion that we have?
Although... You never know? Their Quran might have the Hadith literature inside the actual kitab. The first Quran I was ever gifted was 1/4 English translation, 1/4 Arabic script and 1/2 HADITH. I don't know if I have the urge to laugh or cry about that fact? Truth is, I understand that during their scholarly study, they are under the impression that Quran and Hadith go hand in hand and thus any study of Quran must be verified with Hadith or Tafsir and this, their conclusions are completely shaped by the Ahadith.
Thanks for the response.
Peace
-
Peace
Not to mention the incessant desire to 'save' each other (as if a -political- difference of opinion has anything to do with heaven or hell).
I think that?s to do with power hunger but yeh they have an obsession of saving people /guiding to right path. That?s kinda normal though. well I think it is, groups want to prosper.
Although... You never know? Their Quran might have the Hadith literature inside the actual kitab. The first Quran I was ever gifted was 1/4 English translation, 1/4 Arabic script and 1/2 HADITH. I don't know if I have the urge to laugh or cry about that fact?
The Quran is a form of hadith (3923), the term hadith has been misused to only represent Bukhari and co?s work. The Quran you got is just the way the organisation printed it, it should have a stamp or some intro about who authorised it, or why it's like that. Odd though.
Anyway the content of the Quran verifies itself if you have doubts of the origins or soundness of Quran that's something else.
-
The Quran is a form of hadith (3923), the term hadith has been misused to only represent Bukhari and co?s work. The Quran you got is just the way the organisation printed it, it should have a stamp or some intro about who authorised it, or why it's like that. Odd though.
Anyway the content of the Quran verifies itself if you have doubts of the origins or soundness of Quran that's something else.
No, when I said 1/2 Hadith I literally meant, Hadith from the Sunni books of Hadith ie Ahadith from Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Nasa'i and so on and so forth , not in terms of Quranic Hadith. It was given with the text (Arabic/English) in two seperate columns and the Ahadith at the bottom of the page in the footnotes corresponding to numerous reference points placed throughout the text. Not really odd, it was a translation that was distributed by some Saudi prince. They've (the translations) been called into question a few times for the numerous parenthesis placed throughout which attempt to skew meanings of verses . For the Converts though, they really should explain the format, the excessive use of parenthesis and use of Sunnah/Ahadith literature. If I didn't know any better I'd have thought it part of the actual book.
-
I'm not sure if I agree with Ms. Mogahead, that independent study leads to terrorists. So does that mean many of us on this forum are like that? I highly doubt it...
While I am not going to go around spouting off fatwas, if I say something I will say 'This is what I think'.
I think that 4 madhabs is not really a lot, and there are only slight differences ... I also think that independent thinking is suppressed, as our choices are to be within the box of the 4 madhabs, not outside of them. For example, if I want to get wudu according to what the Qur'an says - that's not enough for any of the 4 madhabs... it would be close to how the Shia get wudu, but not quite either.Those so called 4 madhabs are also divided in 40 maghabs now look arround you if you dont believe me, tempt
-
Those so called 4 madhabs are also divided in 40 maghabs now look arround you if you dont believe me, tempt
Maghabs??? lol rotfl rotfl rotfl
-
Ask those Sunni scholars about all those Christian scholars who promote Trinity and many other false teachings in the name of Jesus, and then replace the word Christian scholars with Sunni or Shiite scholars, and replace the name of St. Paul or Tertullian with Abu Hurayra or Bukhari, there you get the best answer to your question.
Peace,
EdipYeah but Paul has nothing to do with the Trinity and Christians do not quote Paul to justiy the trinity. Paul simply supported making Christianity universal. Paul was a Pharisee and so he is hated by Jews because he gave up the Talmud for the Old Testament and followed Jesus's ways. Pual today will be considered a Unitarian and not a Trinitarian. Paul also emphasized Jesus's resurrection, but that has nothing to do with the Trinity or Jesus's divinity.
-
At an early period, the ancient Arab idea of sunna, precedent or normative custom, reasserted itself in Islam. Whatever was customary was right and proper, whatever their forefathers had done deserved to be imitated, and in the idea of precedent or sunna the whole conservatism ofArabs found expression. This idea presented a formidable obstacle to every innovation, including Islam itself. But once Islam had prevailed, the old conservatism reasserted itself within the new community, and the idea of sunna became one of the central concepts of Islamic law.
Sunna in its Islamic context originally had a political rather than a legal connotation. The question whether the administrative acts of the First two caliphs, Abu Bakr and 'Umar, should be regarded as binding precedents, arose probably when a successor to 'Umar had to beappointed in 23/644, and the discontent with the policy of the third caliph, 'Uthman, which led to his assassination in 35/655, took the form of a charge that he, in his turn, had diverged from the policy of his predecessors and, implicitly, from the Qur'an. In this connexion, there arose the concept of the 'sunna of the Prophet', not yet identified with any set of positive rules, but providing a doctrinal link between the sunna of Abu Bakr and 'Umar' and the Qur'an. The earliest evidence for this use of the term 'sunna of the Prophet' dates from about 76/695, and we shall see later how it was introduced into the theory of Islamic law.
Also
During the greater part of the first/seventh century, Islamic law, in the technical meaning of the term, did not as yet exist. As had been the case in the time of Muhammad, law as such fell outside the sphere of religion; if no religious or moral objections were involved, the technical aspects of law were a matter of indifference to the Muslims. This accounts for the widespread adoption, or rather survival, of certain legal and administrative institutions and practices of the conquered territories, such as the treatment of the tolerated religions which was closely modelled on the treatment of the Jews in the Byzantine empire, methods of taxation, the institution ofemphyteusis, and so forth. The principle of the retention of pre-Islamic legal practices under Islam was sometimes openly acknowledged, e.g. by the historian al-Baladhuri (d. 279/892), but generally speaking fictitious Islamic precedents were later invented as a justification.
http//www.fordham.edu/halsall/med/schacht.html
Schacht ones again.