Proof Qur'an-alone is Error
-
He might not even have existed, given that he does not even appear in the muwatta of Malik. Funny how he's the most prolific narrator in the later hadith collections.
Says Mush from free-minds.org
-
Says Mush from free-minds.org
Mushu, actually. And am I wrong? Is Abu Huraira present in the most important hadith collection in Sunni Islam? How come he's the most prolific narrator of authentic ahadith in the later collections but doesn't even make an appearance in the earliest? Do you smell something funny there?
Is it coincidental that some of the most outrageous hadith come from Abu Huraira, like the dipping of the fly, vomit out any water that you drink whilst standing, wipe your ass with odd number pebbles, satan farting during azaan, hell taking two breaths in the high summer and winter, women being cursed by angels, a fat man will be given no weight on the day of judgement as per the meaning of verse 18105, meat only decays because of Jews and women are unfaithful because of Eve, one should run away from a leper as one runs away from a lion, rats do not drink the milk of she camels but do drink milk of sheep because rats are are Jews changed by Allah, women are like a rib so don't try and straighten her, wash your hands when you wake up because you never know what your hands were up to when you sleep, Moses chasing his clothes like a buffoon and beating up a stone, yawning is from satan, satan stays in your nose during the night, cocks crow because they've seen an angel and donkeys bray when they see a satan, new-born babies cry because satan pricks them, Allah created clay on Saturday, mountains on Sunday etc., wash a utensil touched by a dog seven times, and so on?
The biggest insult is that you uphold such lies. You don't have the balls nor the honour to stand up for the Prophet and free him from such slander. You have been so severely conditioned to believe in these things that you would prefer to defend the ulema and their work than the character of the Prophet.
-
Peace "Badr",
Mmmmmh hmm NO !
Both arguments are too much forced.
JK- You can say that and think so if you like but many people here find this much more reasonable and acceptable. There maybe better arguments in the future I'm not denying that much but in order to show that hadith are trustworthy and contain divine inspiration applicable to us, way much more is necessary. In our current understanding, rather impossible. GOD Bless!
-
The biggest insult is that you uphold such lies. You don't have the balls nor the honour to stand up for the Prophet and free him from such slander. You have been so severely conditioned to believe in these things that you would prefer to defend the ulema and their work than the character of the Prophet.
I think this is the problematic part with hadithists, they think rejecting hadith means rejecting the prophet and it does not, it means accepting the prophet for the man he was shown to be in Quran and not what is shown in the ridiculous hadith. The man Allah gave the message of Quran to is not the same as the man portrayed in the hadith and anyone with half an open mind can see the difference, problem is they are told these are the sayings and deeds of the prophet of Allah and can only be found in the hadith, ignoring all the sayings and deed in Quran. The hadith are an insult to this man and his impecable character but what better way to lead Muslims astray than tell them these are things he said and did outside Quran.
-
Are you ignorant, or a liar?
A post that start with this choice make me want to answer so badly that I skipped it ;D
Badr, I sincerely hope you are genuine in your quest for the truth.
No great companion in their right mind burns their own and others hadith without good reason.
Tell us Badr, what is that reason?
It is there in your sources for all to see
Volume 7, Book 70, Number 573
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas
When Allah's Apostle was on his death-bed and in the house there were some people among whom was 'Umar bin Al-Khattab, the Prophet said, "Come, let me write for you a statement after which you will not go astray." 'Umar said, "The Prophet is seriously ill and you have the Qur'an; so the Book of Allah is enough for us." The people present in the house differed and quarrelled. Some said "Go near so that the Prophet may write for you a statement after which you will not go astray," while the others said as Umar said. When they caused a hue and cry before the Prophet, Allah's Apostle said, "Go away!" Narrated 'Ubaidullah Ibn 'Abbas used to say, "It was very unfortunate that Allah's Apostle was prevented from writing that statement for them because of their disagreement and noise."
As everyone can see, right from the start, The Quran was enough, not only for Umar but most in the room with them.
in fact I've already answered your question, I said in this period they were afraid to mix Quran and hadeeth as Quran has been only written down in the time of Khalifat Othman.
the book of Allah is enough for them who see the revelation day by day and knew the prophet and lived with him, can we say the same for us ? can you hold as much wisdom and knowledge as a Umar Ibn Khattab ? if you say "yes" you are fooling yourself.
On the other hand, other statements from the prophet commanded them to write and i've already posted them somewhere, you can use the search feature.
-
Mushu, actually. And am I wrong? Is Abu Huraira present in the most important hadith collection in Sunni Islam? How come he's the most prolific narrator of authentic ahadith in the later collections but doesn't even make an appearance in the earliest? Do you smell something funny there?
Is it coincidental that some of the most outrageous hadith come from Abu Huraira, like the dipping of the fly, vomit out any water that you drink whilst standing, wipe your ass with odd number pebbles, satan farting during azaan, hell taking two breaths in the high summer and winter, women being cursed by angels, a fat man will be given no weight on the day of judgement as per the meaning of verse 18105, meat only decays because of Jews and women are unfaithful because of Eve, one should run away from a leper as one runs away from a lion, rats do not drink the milk of she camels but do drink milk of sheep because rats are are Jews changed by Allah, women are like a rib so don't try and straighten her, wash your hands when you wake up because you never know what your hands were up to when you sleep, Moses chasing his clothes like a buffoon and beating up a stone, yawning is from satan, satan stays in your nose during the night, cocks crow because they've seen an angel and donkeys bray when they see a satan, new-born babies cry because satan pricks them, Allah created clay on Saturday, mountains on Sunday etc., wash a utensil touched by a dog seven times, and so on?
I already stated that theres a classification for the hadeeths, and that some errors can be found (it doesnt mean that all what you wrote are false hadeeth, some are beyond your understanding Mush) but it is not a reason to reject all hadeeths.
The biggest insult is that you uphold such lies. You don't have the balls nor the honour to stand up for the Prophet and free him from such slander. You have been so severely conditioned to believe in these things that you would prefer to defend the ulema and their work than the character of the Prophet.
Well Mush, as you don't know me you can't advance such insinuations.
-
I think this is the problematic part with hadithists, they think rejecting hadith means rejecting the prophet and it does not, it means accepting the prophet for the man he was shown to be in Quran and not what is shown in the ridiculous hadith. The man Allah gave the message of Quran to is not the same as the man portrayed in the hadith and anyone with half an open mind can see the difference, problem is they are told these are the sayings and deeds of the prophet of Allah and can only be found in the hadith, ignoring all the sayings and deed in Quran. The hadith are an insult to this man and his impecable character but what better way to lead Muslims astray than tell them these are things he said and did outside Quran.
I remember being a happy sunni, completely comfortable with hadith... until I saw the outright stupid and insulting ones. That's the difference between someone with half an open mind and someone like Badr. Badr comes across as someone who has seen these lies before but chooses to accept them despite knowing in his heart they are absolute baatil. The majority of sunnis have never come across such stupid narrations and thus defend and follow hadith based on ignorance. But the ulema and "interested" sunnis do know of these hadith and have made a clear choice. They have chosen to follow their heritage and uphold the honour of the ulema as opposed to reject their flawed scholarship and defend the character of the Prophet.
It's the level of conditioning that is really disturbing. As you say, it's the belief that rejecting such ridiculous hadith is tantamount to rejecting the Prophet.
I already stated that theres a classification for the hadeeths, and that some errors can be found (it doesnt mean that all what you wrote are false hadeeth, some are beyond your understanding Mush) but it is not a reason to reject all hadeeths.
I take it you couldn't find Abu Huraira in Malik's muwatta? Why is that then? How is the most prolific narrator of sahih narrations missing from your earliest collection?
All of the ones I referenced were classified as sahih. None of them are beyond my understanding because I understand falsehood perfectly well. However you, Bad, cannot seem to differentiate between truth and falsehood. Are you prepared to show some courage and reject the ones I've referenced? Come now, let's see you reject the classification of Bukhari and denounce the following hadith as false
Bukhari Book 55 Number 547
Narrated Abu Huraira The Prophet said, ?But for the Israelis, meat would not decay and but for Eve, wives would never betray their husbands.?Do you uphold that the Prophet said the above? You either insult the Prophet and say yes. Or you reject the classification of Bukhari and say no. Or you take the route of the most insincere of sunni Muslims and say "Well I don't understand the possible meanings of the hadith so I can't comment. I leave it to the ulema who are specialists and I follow them"
Well Mush, as you don't know me you can't advance such insinuations.
Well Bad, as you have shown your inability to defend the Prophet against such ridiculous traditions you have proven these insinuations without my need to express them.
-
Badr,
Please dont be disingenuous.
You replied saying they only burned the hadith collections of those who were not companions of the prophet. I then stated you must be either ignorant or a liar, because the evidence refutes your claim 100%, to which you did not respond.
Now you imply, the companions were incapable of differentiating the two sources, and no-one thought "hey why dont we collect Quran into one book, that way any other material will be easy to identify". It's funny how Abu Bakr, Umar, and everyone he gave the command to, to collect and burn hadith were able to differentiate the two sources! Or did they burn some Quran and some Hadith according to you? Whoops. ;D
Further, this implies they made a huge error by not planning for the preservation of the genuine prophet's sunna by way of authentic hadith for future generations, if it was so critical. I guess you feel they weren't that great after all, and helped cause all the confusion of later generations.
My view is they were great, and that's why they collected and burned all the hadith they could get their hands on.
And then you attempt to defend your position by saying the prophet said in some hadith to write them down, but compared to collecting and burning all the hadith they could get their hands on, this pales into comparison! Again, showing, according to your view, Abu Bakr, Umar etc disregarded the prophet's so-called command. But I guess that's not a big deal, considering in your hadith they did not allow the prophet to write something down that he wanted to write down on his deathbed!
Your view is riddled with contradictions and flaws.
As I said, please dont be disingenuous.
Background
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/Quran_True_Sunnah_of_Messenger_Naveed.htm -
Peace "abdullah_m",
salam 3alaykum brothers and sisters.
There is no god, except Allah. I am a slave of God-Alone, but I can't say that I follow Qur'an alone now as I had before when I first joined this forum.
It was a very slow process for me to integrate sunnah into my deen, basically because it just turned me off. You know... being told you have to wash your ears three times and nostrils three times, wipe with this hand, eat with that hand, etc. etc. Stuff that has nothing to do with righteousness as defined by the Book of Allah.JK- You were a Quran Alone Muslim when you joined the forum? From this early post(only a few weeks after u joined) of your's it doesn't seem like it
I quote from http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=16663.msg166459#msg166459Everybody should see "The Power of Nightmares" for their own health!
Osama Bin Laden is nothing like the evil mastermind the media has made him seem to be. They have even made fake videos of him using an actor dupe. In the early footage they show of him, he has the blessed looks of noble serenity, not of a madman. In fact, I would be honored to pray with him four rakat. I do not believe he caused the controlled demolition of the twin towers and building seven - or even could have.
JK- NOW while agree that the notorious baker elite who's controlling the US via offshore banks is most likely behind setting up the whole of al-Qaeda as their lackeys, it by no means makes Osama bin Ladin a good and pious man. On the contrary 1) if he knows that he's working for the elite, which I've heard that he(Osama) IS INFACT a CIA agent, then ofcourse he's in it with them and as evil as can get or if 2) he doesn't know and is being used then he's a little less evil but evil nontheless sicne if he could have attacked the US or any western country for that matter, he would have. His ideology is an ideology of terror no matter whether he actively carried out 911 or not, which I btw don't believe he could(I believe 911 was an inside job) but would've done if he had the power. AND YOU SAY that you were Quran Alone but nontheless pray with such a man who is a strict wahabi following hadith and strictly practcing shariah derived mostly from it. Makes no sense. GOD Bless!
-
All of the ones I referenced were classified as sahih. None of them are beyond my understanding because I understand falsehood perfectly well. However you, Bad, cannot seem to differentiate between truth and falsehood. Are you prepared to show some courage and reject the ones I've referenced? Come now, let's see you reject the classification of Bukhari and denounce the following hadith as false
Bukhari Book 55 Number 547
Narrated Abu Huraira The Prophet said, ?But for the Israelis, meat would not decay and but for Eve, wives would never betray their husbands.?Do you uphold that the Prophet said the above? You either insult the Prophet and say yes. Or you reject the classification of Bukhari and say no. Or you take the route of the most insincere of sunni Muslims and say "Well I don't understand the possible meanings of the hadith so I can't comment. I leave it to the ulema who are specialists and I follow them"
The hadeeth is clear and sahih
The israelites have received the Mann and the Salwa to eat and drink and have been forbidded from keep them but they did. The punishment of god were that meat rot since then, and to prove the opposite you have to go back to the time before the israelites to see if the meat were to rot or no. And yes this is beyond your understanding.
As for Eve, this is even more simpler, as all women come from Eve, there wouldnt be betrayal if there wouldnt be women so there wouldnt be betrayal if there wouldnt be Eve.
-
Badr,
Please dont be disingenuous.
You replied saying they only burned the hadith collections of those who were not companions of the prophet. I then stated you must be either ignorant or a liar, because the evidence refutes your claim 100%, to which you did not respond.
Now you imply, the companions were incapable of differentiating the two sources, and no-one thought "hey why dont we collect Quran into one book, that way any other material will be easy to identify". It's funny how Abu Bakr, Umar, and everyone he gave the command to, to collect and burn hadith were able to differentiate the two sources! Or did they burn some Quran and some Hadith according to you? Whoops. ;D
Further, this implies they made a huge error by not planning for the preservation of the genuine prophet's sunna by way of authentic hadith for future generations, if it was so critical. I guess you feel they weren't that great after all, and helped cause all the confusion of later generations.
My view is they were great, and that's why they collected and burned all the hadith they could get their hands on.
And then you attempt to defend your position by saying the prophet said in some hadith to write them down, but compared to collecting and burning all the hadith they could get their hands on, this pales into comparison! Again, showing, according to your view, Abu Bakr, Umar etc disregarded the prophet's so-called command. But I guess that's not a big deal, considering in your hadith they did not allow the prophet to write something down that he wanted to write down on his deathbed!
Your view is riddled with contradictions and flaws.
As I said, please dont be disingenuous.
Background
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/Quran_True_Sunnah_of_Messenger_Naveed.htmYou have to know that they also burn alot of fake Quran too before to have the final version we have now so yes they burnt Quran and hadith and yes they first thought they wouldnt need to write it down but later they wrote it and yes they are only human beigns and not infaillibles like the prophet so they do their best.
-
Peace "Badr",
The hadeeth is clear and sahih
The israelites have received the Mann and the Salwa to eat and drink and have been forbidded from keep them but they did. The punishment of god were that meat rot since then, and to prove the opposite you have to go back to the time before the israelites to see if the meat were to rot or no. And yes this is beyond your understanding.
JK- You are denying science now. We know that meat has been rotting even before there were humans on this planet. If you deny this how can you accept the big bang in cosmology at the same time which hadith muslims so easily do and use it as evidence for the Quran being true? You can't have it both ways.
As for Eve, this is even more simpler, as all women come from Eve, there wouldnt be betrayal if there wouldnt be women so there wouldnt be betrayal if there wouldnt be Eve.
JK- BUT Eve need NOT be THE CAUSE of some women today or in any time betraying their husbands. THAT is the point. This hadith makes it look as Eve was the cause of this behaviour in all contemporary women otherwise why make such a statement in the first place? Then the hadith shouldve also said "If it wasnt for Adam, men wouldn't cheat on their wives". Moreso all women come from both men and women. LISTEN "badr" i really wish you good luck if you want to convince anyone, whos not already a dogmatic hadith follower, through these arguments. GOD Bless!
-
The hadeeth is clear and sahih
The israelites have received the Mann and the Salwa to eat and drink and have been forbidded from keep them but they did. The punishment of god were that meat rot since then, and to prove the opposite you have to go back to the time before the israelites to see if the meat were to rot or no.
But meat did rot before the time of the Israelis. And if rotting meat is a punishment, why has the whole of mankind been afflicted with such punishment because of the transgressions of the Israelis?
And yes this is beyond your understanding.
Enlighten me. Explain to me how meat did not rot before the time of the Israelis.
As for Eve, this is even more simpler, as all women come from Eve, there wouldnt be betrayal if there wouldnt be women so there wouldnt be betrayal if there wouldnt be Eve.
All women come from Adam as well. If it wasn't for Adam, there wouldn't be betrayal either, yet the Prophet seems to have forgotten that bit. Of course, the problem here is that you don't understand the hadith. It's alluding to the Christian concept that Eve tempted Adam and thus caused him to "fall". And thus attributing a share of the blame to Eve for every woman who betrays her man.
Going back to the options I presented you before, being,
You either insult the Prophet and say yes. Or you reject the classification of Bukhari and say no.
, you've clearly made your choice.Your explanation of the hadith is utter nonsense, just like the hadith itself. The point has been proven that you would prefer to insult the Prophet than disregard the works of Bukhari and the scholars who followed him. The conditioning is so severe that you are adverse to rejecting such falsehood under the guise of "following the ulema".
-
But meat did rot before the time of the Israelis. And if rotting meat is a punishment, why has the whole of mankind been afflicted with such punishment because of the transgressions of the Israelis?
Enlighten me. Explain to me how meat did not rot before the time of the Israelis.
Your thirst of scientific proofs will cause your loss (in the general sense), anyway you can't scientifically proove that meat were rotting before this event with the israelites.
All women come from Adam as well. If it wasn't for Adam, there wouldn't be betrayal either, yet the Prophet seems to have forgotten that bit. Of course, the problem here is that you don't understand the hadith. It's alluding to the Christian concept that Eve tempted Adam and thus caused him to "fall". And thus attributing a share of the blame to Eve for every woman who betrays her man.
Yes, but in this hadeeth in particular Eve has been stated, where's the contradiction ? we can also say, if it wasnt for Adam men wouldnt betray their wives.
PS Quran didnt mentionned that Eve was the cause of eating from the tree.
Going back to the options I presented you before, being, , you've clearly made your choice.
Your explanation of the hadith is utter nonsense, just like the hadith itself. The point has been proven that you would prefer to insult the Prophet than disregard the works of Bukhari and the scholars who followed him. The conditioning is so severe that you are adverse to rejecting such falsehood under the guise of "following the ulema".
I give them the benefice of the doubt, not like you, and if the prophet have said it it MUST be true. Then after all this have no direct effect on my every day life and worship so I can care less if it's sahih or not.
-
And where is Abu Huraira in Malik's muwatta?
http//www.al-eman.com/hadeeth/viewchp.asp?BID=5&CID=2&SW=%E5%D1%ED%D1%C9#SR1
http//www.al-eman.com/hadeeth/viewchp.asp?BID=5&CID=4&SW=%E5%D1%ED%D1%C9#SR1
http//www.al-eman.com/hadeeth/viewchp.asp?BID=5&CID=14&SW=%E5%D1%ED%D1%C9#SR1
http//www.al-eman.com/hadeeth/viewchp.asp?BID=5&CID=21&SW=%E5%D1%ED%D1%C9#SR1
etc etc...
-
You have to know that they also burn alot of fake Quran too before to have the final version we have now so yes they burnt Quran and hadith and yes they first thought they wouldnt need to write it down but later they wrote it and yes they are only human beigns and not infaillibles like the prophet so they do their best.
Whoops, I'm sorry, I thought I was discussing with someone who had read The Quran. Nowhere does it state the prophet was infallible, and in fact, The Quran points out his errors, albeit minor, see 18110, 3337, 801, 867, 943, 661. Interestingly, if you had studied your own traditional history that you claim to uphold, you would know the following to be true
The concept of the infallibility of the Prophet found its way into mainstream Sunni doctrine by the 9th century CE (over 160 years after Prophet Muhammad's death). Almost all theologians agreed that Muhammad was free from error when it came to matters of revelation, but there were disagreements to the nature and extent of isma (infallibility) in matters outside the sphere of revelation. Only a minority held to a doctrine of complete immunity from error. The majority limited isma to the period after a prophet received his call and considered matters only directly related to the prophetic mission to be completely guaranteed. In matters that would not affect the prophetic mission, prophets could conceivelably commit errors or even minor sins, although they would remain protected against major sins. Thus the Prophet's persona was divided into human and prophetic spheres. In his everyday life, personal affairs, and private judgements he was potentially fallible, hence his words and actions are not legally binding. In his capacity as Prophet however, his words and actions were divinely guided and represent God's Will.
A little challenge I like to set people is for them to bring forth their 5 strongest objections or evidence against Quran based islam, and post them in a thread. Take your time, weeks, even months, read, speak to people, gather all the information you can, then post them. I'm sure they will be discussed, and we can see if they hold much weight.
That is of course, if you genuinely seek the truth, and not disingenuous.
-
Whoops, I'm sorry, I thought I was discussing with someone who had read The Quran. Nowhere does it state the prophet was infallible, and in fact, The Quran points out his errors, albeit minor, see 18110, 3337, 801, 867, 943, 661. Interestingly, if you had studied your own traditional history that you claim to uphold, you would know the following to be true
A little challenge I like to set people is for them to bring forth their 5 strongest objections or evidence against Quran based islam, and post them in a thread. Take your time, weeks, even months, read, speak to people, gather all the information you can, then post them. I'm sure they will be discussed, and we can see if they hold much weight.
That is of course, if you genuinely seek the truth, and not disingenuous.
You are so entitled to your opinions that it becomes ridiculous.
I'm not seeking anything, I've already found the truth.
Your little group of Quran-aloners don't make the weight, you'll turn in circle then the most wise of yall will come back to the truth.
