A simple argument regarding the Quran's being clear

antibhondo

(This piece of article is presented as a gift to Brother Layth)

Allah said The Quran is clear. OK.

The Quranists want to say that whenever Quran commands us to follow the messenger, it actually indicates about the Quran. They say that the message is important. The messenger is not.

So, the clearer ayat should have been "Follow the Quran" or "follow the message", or "follow what the messanger follows".

This was important because

WHEN quran says that "Follow the messenger", the very common sense meaning of the command is "follow the man who bears a message".

If the actual point is that the messenger is not of any importance, and the only important thing is the message, then "follow messenger" must make a unclear meaning.

So, if the messenger is not important, and the only important thing is the message, then the Quran has many times commanded a very unclear message. It could have said that "Follow what the messenger bears", or "follow the message" only. That could have made clearer meaning.

The point is that if "the messenger" has nothing to do with people's guidance, then commanding people with the words "follow the messenger" is simply meaningless. It means that the Quran bears meaningless words and orders!

It also suggests that in these days there are SMART people who can suggest Allah about his "WORD SELECTION"!

So, the Quran is not actually clear. and Allah has lied!!!

Wakas

Your reasoning and Quranic understanding is so poor it is laughable.

Yes Quran states it is clear but also see 37, 226 and many other examples. It is only clear for those who are pure of heart, sincere, just, etc.

WHEN quran says that "Follow the messenger", the very common sense meaning of the command is "follow the man who bears a message".

See http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9598901.0

Say "Indeed, I do not possess for you harm nor right-guidance."

Mushu

Allah said The Quran is clear. OK.

You are a unique sunni.

Every sunni I have spoken to, when asked if al quran is clear, responds with a resounding 'yes!'. The discussion then proceeds in trying to fit hadith and countless fatawa in with a Book that they claim is clear. You, however, do not allow yourself to fall into this trap.

Instead, you openly admit that the quran is not actually clear at all! This sets you apart from almost all sunnis. Your method is to create a contradiction, and then solve it with another contradiction.

Step 1 Create the contradiction

638 There is not a creature in the earth, or a bird that flies with its wings, but are nations like you. We did not leave anything out of the book; then to their Lord they will be summoned

To get around the above verse, and the others like it, you attempt to create a contradiction by suggesting that there are indeed things left out of the book. You use verses such as

2456 Hold the contact prayer and contribute towards betterment, and obey the messenger, that you may attain mercy.

To show that details of salat and zakat are not given. You have therefore created a contradiction in the quran. This was, and is, your intention, your desire, your objective.

This is what sets you apart from other sunnis. Other sunnis will not concede that the quran contains contradictions, and will perform all forms of conceptual gymnastics to maintain this position whilst still insisting hadith are needed.

Step 2 Solve it

The next step in your method is to now resolve this 'contradiction' by using hadith. You claim that hadith is 'wahi' which fills the gaps of the so-called 'missing details' of the quran. Although you've seemingly solved a self-manufactured problem, you've created another contradiction in the process

7185 Do they not look at the dominion of heavens and earth, and all that God has created, and perhaps their time is drawing near? In which hadith after this one will they acknowledge?

The difference between you and almost everyone on this forum is that we cannot accept any contradiction in the quran. Any apparent contradiction must be resolved from within the quran. Because Allah has said

482 Do they not reflect on the Quran? If it were from any other than God they would have found many contradictions in it.

You pay lipservice to the above. This is why you will never attempt to reconcile verses like 638 with verses like 2456 from within the quran, you are quite content to leave it unresolved in your own mind so that hadith can play a role in your religion.

Prince

^^^ Well said Mushu!

PEACE

antibhondo

Your reasoning and Quranic understanding is so poor it is laughable.

Yes Quran states it is clear but also see 37, 226 and many other examples. It is only clear for those who are pure of heart, sincere, just, etc.
See http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9598901.0

Say "Indeed, I do not possess for you harm nor right-guidance."

Brother Wakas
Assalamu Alaikum.

It was a very unwanted start for an administrator.

The Ayats you mentioned

1-a) 37
Translated by Edip-Layth

He is the One who sent down to you the book, from which there are definite signs; they are the essence of the book; and others, which are multiple-meaning. As for those who have disease in their hearts, eager to cause confusion and eager to derive their interpretation, they will follow what is multiple-meaning from it. But none knows their meaning except God and those who are well founded in knowledge; they say, "We acknowledge it, all is from our Lord." None will remember except the people of intellect.

1-b) 226
Translated by Edip-Layth

God does not shy away from citing the example of a mosquito, or anything above it. As for those who acknowledge, they know that it is the truth from their Lord. As for the unappreciative, they say, "What does God want with this example?" He lets many stray by it, and He guides many, but He only lets stray the evildoers.

Here, 37 speaks about ayats with multiple-meaning. The ayats we are talking about are not ayats with multiple-meaning. The ayats we are talking about are very simple ayats. And 226 speaks about some examples by which Allah strays the evildoers.

And, 7221 simply negates any possibility that Muhammad (sm) possesses any harm or right-guidance for people. Did anyone say that?

I failed to understand how these ayats fit in our discussion.

Please be concentrated.

a. Muhammad (sm) was not allowed to follow anything other than WAHY.
b. So, whoever follows Muhammad (sm) follows nothing other than Wahy.
c. When Allah says you have to follow Muhammad (sm) if you want to be guided, HE indicates the total package of WAHY. And it means that by obeying this total package of WAHY (embedded in a man's life) one simply obeys Allah.
d. This is clearly expressed in
480
Translated by Edip-Layth
Whoever obeys the messenger has obeyed God; and whoever turns away, We have not sent you as a guardian over them.

An interesting Example provided by you

At a swimming pool or beach, if there is a sign that says "Please obey the lifeguard at all times." then it is directly referring to the person's role as a lifeguard and nothing else. Let's say the lifeguard's name happened to be Fred, imagine the difference in meaning if the sign said "Obey Fred at all times". We can all see that this is a totally different message! It is no coincidence that every swimming pool or beach in the entire world* does not use a sign that refers to the person's name rather than their role, as they know it would be nonsense.

none that I have seen or heard of at least.

This is definitely a very interesting example. But what do you mean by that? Whoever be the lifeguard, we have to follow him (as long as she/he works as a lifeguard) to save us from any accident? Is it the meaning?

Another meaning could be obtained if you mentioned whether all of the swimmers have a manual, and whether even after that they were required to follow the lifeguard?

Another dimension of the example is that The swimmers of one pool are required to follow only the lifeguard employed to that pool. I mean, swimmers of one pool need not bother about following the lifeguards of other pools. But if a global authority of the swimmers (suppose) recruit ONE lifeguard for all pools, then...okay...you know the rest.

And now,
please read the following portion of the verse 7158
Say "O mankind, I am God's messenger to you all.

This lifeguard is for all pools.

SarahY

These arguments have been in and out all the time.

it's very foolish for a muslim to believe Quran is not clear. why submit to it's guide?

Let me ask you, if following the messenger means following prophet, how do you do that? by hadith?

what proof do you have that the ahadith are actually the sunnah of the rasool? it's one thing to say hadith is the guide of the prophets way and it's another proving it. oh wait... that's the work of the scholar isnt it? so we'll live and we'll die and we'll never know. such a shame. regardless you should read scholars work and realise their disputes and methodology only then you will realise even sahih hadith need to be reconstructed to remove falsehood. Even sheikh Qaradawi famous sunni egyptian scholar believes this! OH MY GOD! scholars are doubting authenticity of other scholars work! how could that be!!

Following the messenger is important, the messenger bears the message nowhere did the messenger authorise ahadith. let me explain before you throw some hadith of abdullah ibn amr being allowed to record what the prophet does or any other hadith, i'm not in the mood for a circular argument. to my knowledge unless you can prove me wrong, the prophet never checked any ahadith/suhuf/recordings of himself that people recorded in their own personally diaries or if you like suhuf. if the prophet authorised writing it doesnt mean he authorised the content! there is a difference, think about it.

if you can show me somewhere where the prophet did authorise the content, i'd be glad to read up about it.

and just one last question; before islam, before mohammed what did the people follow? when islam was bestowed on people what then did they follow?

salam.

Wakas

peace antibhondo,

Thanks for demonstrating the weight of your argument. You list (a), (b), (c) but insert "Muhammad" as the reference point when this is not even the situation. You simply cannot comprehend something very simple, "messenger" is a different word and meaning than "Muhammad", likewise "prophet" etc. Hence your erroneous extrapolations onto my analogy. Go ask anyone that you know about my lifeguard analogy and give away $100 each time someone says "obey the lifeguard at all times" is the same as "obey Bob at all times". Once your broke, at least you might learn a lesson.

Duke

Salaam all,

It is obvious that all of you are more educated than me in Quranic knowledge. I just have a simple statement to make. I have been reading and weighing the arguments on both sides. It seems to me that is impossible to follow someone who is no longer with you. I am under the belief that the Quran is guaranteed untampered with by Allah himself and it is the only book that is. I am also under the belief that it was sent through his messenger Mohamed. I don't see a better method of following the messenger than through his message that was given by Allah. It is difficult for me to accept hadith because I feel they are prone to mistakes just like a history text book. There has been many years of study and research that goes into creating a text book, however when you're taught something in primary school you find out in a university that it wasn't quite right and "it was really like this." Furthermore how can Hadith contradict the Quran and still be accepted? I am only a student in the beginning of his journey. May Allah guide me if I am wrong.

antibhondo

You are a unique sunni.

Every sunni I have spoken to, when asked if al quran is clear, responds with a resounding 'yes!'. The discussion then proceeds in trying to fit hadith and countless fatawa in with a Book that they claim is clear. You, however, do not allow yourself to fall into this trap.

Instead, you openly admit that the quran is not actually clear at all! This sets you apart from almost all sunnis. Your method is to create a contradiction, and then solve it with another contradiction.

Step 1 Create the contradiction

638 There is not a creature in the earth, or a bird that flies with its wings, but are nations like you. We did not leave anything out of the book; then to their Lord they will be summoned

To get around the above verse, and the others like it, you attempt to create a contradiction by suggesting that there are indeed things left out of the book. You use verses such as

2456 Hold the contact prayer and contribute towards betterment, and obey the messenger, that you may attain mercy.

To show that details of salat and zakat are not given. You have therefore created a contradiction in the quran. This was, and is, your intention, your desire, your objective.

This is what sets you apart from other sunnis. Other sunnis will not concede that the quran contains contradictions, and will perform all forms of conceptual gymnastics to maintain this position whilst still insisting hadith are needed.

Step 2 Solve it

The next step in your method is to now resolve this 'contradiction' by using hadith. You claim that hadith is 'wahi' which fills the gaps of the so-called 'missing details' of the quran. Although you've seemingly solved a self-manufactured problem, you've created another contradiction in the process

7185 Do they not look at the dominion of heavens and earth, and all that God has created, and perhaps their time is drawing near? In which hadith after this one will they acknowledge?

The difference between you and almost everyone on this forum is that we cannot accept any contradiction in the quran. Any apparent contradiction must be resolved from within the quran. Because Allah has said

482 Do they not reflect on the Quran? If it were from any other than God they would have found many contradictions in it.

You pay lipservice to the above. This is why you will never attempt to reconcile verses like 638 with verses like 2456 from within the quran, you are quite content to leave it unresolved in your own mind so that hadith can play a role in your religion.

Brother Mushu

Assalamu Alaikum.

It was a very good try.

Quran does not have any contradiction. The pseudo-contradictions are resolved by Quran itself.

Look at the example of Salat. The pseudo-contradiction that you presentedin your comment is very clearly resolved by the ayats---follow the messenger.

If you avoid that ayat, then you have the contradiction unresolved.

By the way, Quran has been detailed, really. It is some people's conjecture that Quran is detailed in itself. Nowhere in the Quran is written that Quran has been detailed in itself. The command that to have guidance we have to follow the messenger means that the Quran has been detailed in that messenger's life.

The more important point is that if the Sahaba needed to follow messenger to have guidance, we need it more than them. Because, there is no doubt that it was the Sahaba who were there in the period of revelation. So, they could understand the Quran the best of all time. Still they were commanded to follow the messenger.

I request you to tell something about the post.

If messenger is not necessary now, it was not necessary in the time of Sahabas too. So, if we are required to follow ONLY Quran, then the Sahabas were also required to follow ONLY quran.

So, "follow the messenger" is an unnecessary command.

Moreover this command makes thing unclear. "Follow the message", or "follow Quran" is the clearest expression for expressing the meaning that no man is necessary to follow; only Quran is necessary to follow.

How do you feel about this argument?

huruf

We are back to square one.

The messenger is dead. We cannot follow him, he is not acting, speaking or doing anything today. Wht we know of the messeger with all certainty is what the Qur'an say, that is, if we believe in the Qur'an. The rest that may be said of the messenger we do not have any divine guaranty of its truthness or fidelity.

Whatever we may think themessenger did or why or in what case, or for what purpose he did it is a matter at least of doubt, speculation or conjecture. It is not guranteed by any far tretch that it is a command of God, because even whatever trth may be in them may be restricted to that occasion it is said to have happened. Again we are not told in the Qur'an to follow conjecture rather the opposite.

Summing up, we are not ordered to follow hadith, that is preposterous. We may certainly learn and use whichever hadith or exemplary teachings come to us from prophets, holy men or women which have an exemplary and teaching content, we do it all the tima, but based on our personal understanding of the goodness of its contents. No label "hadith" can be pushed down ou throats to extort following of something we don't have knowledge nor proof of as if it was commanded by God.

Under no circumstance can hadith be considered something commandd by God.

There are very good hadiths, sublime, that had I found them in the Qur'an I wouldn't have been surprised, but they are not commands, they are for our spiritual nourishment and improvement and its value is dependent wholy on their contents, exactly as they Qur'an is dependent wholy on its contents. Of it contained nonsense, nobody would believe it is from God, therefore would not pay attention.

Salaam

mmkhan

Salaam,

By the way, Quran has been detailed, really. It is some people's conjecture that Quran is detailed in itself. Nowhere in the Quran is written that Quran has been detailed in itself. The command that to have guidance we have to follow the messenger means that the Quran has been detailed in that messenger's life.

I did not understand what you mean by "Quraan has been detailed in itself" when Allah said

1689

1689 And the Day We send to every nation a witness against them from themselves, and We have brought you as a witness against these. And We have sent down to you the Book as a clarification for all things, and a guidance and a mercy and good tidings to those who have submitted.

Is this not enough? If not, then why not you add more questions to your question below

1- The Book has clarification of all things BUT not in itself

2- The Book is a guidance BUT not in itself

3- The Book is a mercy BUT not in itself

4- The Book is good tidings for Muslimeen BUT not in itself

Why are you taking only a part form the above aayat? Why not raise all this questions from the same aayat?

Anyway, what do you want to say about this?

638

638 And there is not a creature on the earth, nor a bird that flies with its wings, except they belong to nations like you belong. We did not leave anything out of the Book; then to their Lord they will be gathered.

Will you question again here that Allah did not left any thing our of the Book BUT not in itself? Huh?

The more important point is that if the Sahaba needed to follow messenger to have guidance, we need it more than them. Because, there is no doubt that it was the Sahaba who were there in the period of revelation. So, they could understand the Quran the best of all time. Still they were commanded to follow the messenger.

As you said that Sahaba were there in the period of revelation, why do they believe AlQuraan? They have to believe in the messenger then only they can believe in AlQuraan. Isn't it?

So, obviously they must have to follow and believe the messenger because the source of AlQuraan for them is the messenger.

So, "follow the messenger" is an unnecessary command.

Moreover this command makes thing unclear. "Follow the message", or "follow Quran" is the clearest expression for expressing the meaning that no man is necessary to follow; only Quran is necessary to follow.

Good! Same logic can be used in your case, "follow the messenger" is unclear. "follow Mohammed" or "follow hadith" is the clearest expression for expressing the meaning and to follow AlQuraan and hadith.

How do you feel about this argument?

hmm

This expression of yours gave me wrong impression. I feel that you wanna win instead of searching for the true guidance. If that is the case, then I am not interested to join in your arguments and I think most of us in here do the same.

And in such case you can consider yourself as a winner and I admit to be a loser. Be happy.

May Allah guide us all to His path pr
Mohammed M. Khan

antibhondo

These arguments have been in and out all the time.

it's very foolish for a muslim to believe Quran is not clear. why submit to it's guide?

Let me ask you, if following the messenger means following prophet, how do you do that? by hadith?

what proof do you have that the ahadith are actually the sunnah of the rasool? it's one thing to say hadith is the guide of the prophets way and it's another proving it. oh wait... that's the work of the scholar isnt it? so we'll live and we'll die and we'll never know. such a shame. regardless you should read scholars work and realise their disputes and methodology only then you will realise even sahih hadith need to be reconstructed to remove falsehood. Even sheikh Qaradawi famous sunni egyptian scholar believes this! OH MY GOD! scholars are doubting authenticity of other scholars work! how could that be!!

Following the messenger is important, the messenger bears the message nowhere did the messenger authorise ahadith. let me explain before you throw some hadith of abdullah ibn amr being allowed to record what the prophet does or any other hadith, i'm not in the mood for a circular argument. to my knowledge unless you can prove me wrong, the prophet never checked any ahadith/suhuf/recordings of himself that people recorded in their own personally diaries or if you like suhuf. if the prophet authorised writing it doesnt mean he authorised the content! there is a difference, think about it.

if you can show me somewhere where the prophet did authorise the content, i'd be glad to read up about it.

and just one last question; before islam, before mohammed what did the people follow? when islam was bestowed on people what then did they follow?

salam.

SarahY

Assalamu Alaikum.

Before going to the discussion on the debate of the scholars, you have to first admit the necessity of the debate. otherwise leave them alone!

My discussion is on whether there is the necessity of the debate at all. Do we at all need to follow how Muhammad (sm) obeyed the commands of Allah? If we do not, then why this debate?

If we need to follow how he obeyed, then we have to debate and be careful not follow something else in the name of Muhammad (sm).

So, let us first decide on whether, at all, we need to follow how Muhammad (sm) obeyed Allah.

About Quran's being Clear
Please read this comment
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9601994.msg271641#msg271641

Please try to understand that Quran is not clear by itself.
Allah has made it clear; that's why it has been clear.
Allah has detailed the Quran; that's why it is detailed.

Again,
(Translated by Edip-Layth)
1682 So if they turn away, then you are only required to deliver clearly.
592 Obey God and obey the messenger, and beware. If you turn away then know that the duty of the messenger is clear deliverance.
2454 Say The messenger is only required to deliver clearly.

I only tried to resolve the pseudo-contradiction among the ayats. If the ayats are clear then why Muhammad (sm) is required to clear them?

Please notice carefully that I have never used any hadith to resolve the contradiction.

I resolve it only from Quran by the following way
--Muhammad (sm) was not allowed to follow anything other than WAHY.
--It means that he was always guided by WAHY.
--He was required to be followed by the muslims to be guided.

--It gives me clear indication that the Quran is actually detailed in the life of Muhammad (sm). That's why he was commanded to be followed.
And, in this way Allah has cleared Quran.

--And, according to the command that Muhammad (sm) was not allowed to follow anything other than WAHY, Muhammad (sm) complied with the WAHY. In this way He delivered the Quran Clearly.

So, see? Quran has no contradiction. Quran itself has resolved the pseudo-contradiction.

So, I do not say that Quran is not clear. I say Quran is clear because Allah has made it clear through implementing the Quran into a man's life. This man has delivered the Quran CLEARLY by complying with the WAHY.

If you minus the man's life from your study of Quran, the clarity is minussed from the Quran.

The Sahaba were asked to follow Muhammad (sm)

The Sahaba were present in the period of revelation. They themselves were Arab. Still they were commanded to follow the messenger, and they were warned that otherwise they will not be guided. It simply means that other than following Muhammad (sm), the Quran cannot be a source of guidance.

If the Sahaba were warned that they will not be guided if they did not follow Muhammad (sm), then it means that ONLY QURAN is not a sufficient source for guidance.

Summary

First you have decide whether you need to follow how Muhammad (sm) Obeyed God's command.
If you need, then you have the necessity to pay heed to the debate whether a hadith is really from Muhammad (sm) or not.

If you do not need to follow Muhammad (sm) way of obeying God's command, then you need not pay heed to the speeches regarding Hadiths. Leave them alone!

Muhammad (sm)'s only duty was to deliver the message CLEARLY. Allah made it clear by detailing it into Muhammad (sm)'s life through continuous WAHY, and Muhammad (sm) delivered to the people by obeying the Quran under continuous guidance from Alah.

The command {{if one follows Muhammad (sm), she/he will be guided}} even to the Sahaba who were well aware of the arabic language, and Quran, indicates that the Quran (independent of how Muhammad (sm) obeyed it) is not sufficient as a source of guidance.

If the Quran were clear independent of how Muhammad (sm) obeyed it, then nowhere in the Quran would Allah command people to follow the messenger.

BECAUSE, THEN THIS COMMAND WOULD BE UNNECESSARY, MEANINGLESS, AND MAKING THE QURAN UNCLEAR.

So, from point 2, are we convinced that "How Muhammad (sm) followed the Quran" is necessary for us to receive guidance?

If necessary, then you are on the right track. You will then focus on the debate of the scholars.

antibhondo

peace antibhondo,

Thanks for demonstrating the weight of your argument. You list (a), (b), (c) but insert "Muhammad" as the reference point when this is not even the situation. You simply cannot comprehend something very simple, "messenger" is a different word and meaning than "Muhammad", likewise "prophet" etc. Hence your erroneous extrapolations onto my analogy. Go ask anyone that you know about my lifeguard analogy and give away $100 each time someone says "obey the lifeguard at all times" is the same as "obey Bob at all times". Once your broke, at least you might learn a lesson.

Say "O mankind, I am God's messenger to you all.

Hey Brother, who is commanded here to say that? It is Muhammad (sm) to whom the WAHY revealed.

san

It has been asked--and it will be asked again and repeatedly, antibhondo--how do you follow the messenger?

Rest assured, your assumption that "the messenger is not considered important" here is simply wrong.

WHEN quran says that "Follow the messenger", the very common sense meaning of the command is "follow the man who bears a message".

That is the only sentence out of your original post which actually makes sense. So let's start from there.

How do you follow the messenger? Please explain in an exact and thorough way. Step-by-step. We'd love to know about your "follow the messenger" method here.

(Anytime you digress from this question, it will surely be asked again)

antibhondo

We are back to square one.

The messenger is dead. We cannot follow him, he is not acting, speaking or doing anything today. Wht we know of the messeger with all certainty is what the Qur'an say, that is, if we believe in the Qur'an. The rest that may be said of the messenger we do not have any divine guaranty of its truthness or fidelity.

Whatever we may think themessenger did or why or in what case, or for what purpose he did it is a matter at least of doubt, speculation or conjecture. It is not guranteed by any far tretch that it is a command of God, because even whatever trth may be in them may be restricted to that occasion it is said to have happened. Again we are not told in the Qur'an to follow conjecture rather the opposite.

Summing up, we are not ordered to follow hadith, that is preposterous. We may certainly learn and use whichever hadith or exemplary teachings come to us from prophets, holy men or women which have an exemplary and teaching content, we do it all the tima, but based on our personal understanding of the goodness of its contents. No label "hadith" can be pushed down ou throats to extort following of something we don't have knowledge nor proof of as if it was commanded by God.

Under no circumstance can hadith be considered something commandd by God.

There are very good hadiths, sublime, that had I found them in the Qur'an I wouldn't have been surprised, but they are not commands, they are for our spiritual nourishment and improvement and its value is dependent wholy on their contents, exactly as they Qur'an is dependent wholy on its contents. Of it contained nonsense, nobody would believe it is from God, therefore would not pay attention.

Salaam

huruf

Assalamu Alaikum

{{The messenger is dead. We cannot follow him}}
You mean, when he was alive, people could follow him?

My question is, do you agree that when Muhamad (sm) was alive, he was allowed to be followed?

And was it necessary for the people {who were alive when Muhammad (sm) was alive} to follow Muhammad (sm) at all???

After you answer my question I would like to proceed. Please...

antibhondo

It has been asked--and it will be asked again and repeatedly, antibhondo--how do you follow the messenger?

Rest assured, your assumption that "the messenger is not considered important" here is simply wrong.

That is the only sentence out of your original post which actually makes sense. So let's start from there.

How do you follow the messenger? Please explain in an exact and thorough way. Step-by-step. We'd love to know about your "follow the messenger" method here.

(Anytime you digress from this question, it will surely be asked again)

Brother San
Assalamu Alaikum.

Thank you for being direct.

But are you really convinced that following the messenger is important?
Tell me, if the Quran is clear, and detailed by itself, then why following a man is at all important?

For your understanding of how I follow messenger, please go the link
http//www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/

Wakas

Hey Brother, who is commanded here to say that? It is Muhammad (sm) to whom the WAHY revealed.

Let us know when you have asked the $100 question, as I suggested.

antibhondo

Salaam,

I did not understand what you mean by "Quraan has been detailed in itself" when Allah said

1689

1689 And the Day We send to every nation a witness against them from themselves, and We have brought you as a witness against these. And We have sent down to you the Book as a clarification for all things, and a guidance and a mercy and good tidings to those who have submitted.

Is this not enough? If not, then why not you add more questions to your question below

1- The Book has clarification of all things BUT not in itself

2- The Book is a guidance BUT not in itself

3- The Book is a mercy BUT not in itself

4- The Book is good tidings for Muslimeen BUT not in itself

Why are you taking only a part form the above aayat? Why not raise all this questions from the same aayat?

Anyway, what do you want to say about this?

638

638 And there is not a creature on the earth, nor a bird that flies with its wings, except they belong to nations like you belong. We did not leave anything out of the Book; then to their Lord they will be gathered.

Will you question again here that Allah did not left any thing our of the Book BUT not in itself? Huh?

As you said that Sahaba were there in the period of revelation, why do they believe AlQuraan? They have to believe in the messenger then only they can believe in AlQuraan. Isn't it?

So, obviously they must have to follow and believe the messenger because the source of AlQuraan for them is the messenger.

Good! Same logic can be used in your case, "follow the messenger" is unclear. "follow Mohammed" or "follow hadith" is the clearest expression for expressing the meaning and to follow AlQuraan and hadith.

hmm

This expression of yours gave me wrong impression. I feel that you wanna win instead of searching for the true guidance. If that is the case, then I am not interested to join in your arguments and I think most of us in here do the same.

And in such case you can consider yourself as a winner and I admit to be a loser. Be happy.

May Allah guide us all to His path pr
Mohammed M. Khan

Yes brother,
1.
1689 And We have sent down to you the Book as a clarification for all things, and a guidance and a mercy and good tidings to those who have submitted.

But you are not paying heed to one of most important clarifying ayat follow messenger. The book is of course a clarification for all the things. One of them is Salat. And the method of Salat is clarified when following the messenger.

638 And there is not a creature on the earth, nor a bird that flies with its wings, except they belong to nations like you belong. We did not leave anything out of the Book; then to their Lord they will be gathered.

Yes, Allah did not leave anything out of the book. For example, Salat. Allah did not leave the method of Salat out of the book, but HE has embedded the command for Salat (along with many others) into the command of following the messenger.

If you follow the messenger you will know the method of Salat. this is the indication.

READ
2456 Hold the contact prayer (Salat) and contribute towards betterment (Zakat), and obey/follow the messenger, that you may attain mercy.

SarahY

Did you need to paste me a whole essay? Thanks for being evasive quite clever.

Walaikum salaam.

I don?t need to first admit to any necessity. Speak up for truth and against falsehood. Nahi 3an elmunkar ok bro.

What?s sm stand for?

You know what is a necessity so why the mockery?

Sorry you?ve giving me plenty to read so i?ll skip your link comment just as you decide to skip my questions.

Allah made the Quran clear your point? Do you notice your statements ?Quran is not clear by itself? then your later statement?!. Peculiar because they are contradicting?

Just because something is clear it does not mean it is easily understood. Laws of physics are clear yet many people find them difficult to understand yet it is clear!

If the Quran is self consistent and you don?t understand it that?s not my problem or anyone?s but your own. Your own shortcoming are for you to deal with.

Who knows the message? who was the first being to know it? Mohammed or his companions or his wife or who? Tell me who? Wait stupid question!! Mohammed knew the message! If he didn?t convey it clearly who would?

I have a message that needs to be passed on make sure it?s passed on precisely as I say it. Make sure it?s clear so everyone knows.

What?s the contradiction? You?re making up thing in your mind..

If Mohammad was only to follow wahy explain 943 where was the wahy there?

Let me tell you the messenger has the message, the message is the Quran if you don?t follow the message off the messenger you have not followed the messenger you have not obeyed God.

Do you think sahaba are ma3sumeen? you don't need to quote hadith to use it.

First off you need to stop preaching and recognise your fault. You agree you need to follow Mohammed but you can?t prove hadith is authentic nor do you want to go into that debate

And no the command is not meaningless please read above where it is bold for a CLEAR example thanks

when you're ready to answer question and not just preach and make up statement

let me know, thanks.

Mushu

It was a very good try.

Quran does not have any contradiction. The pseudo-contradictions are resolved by Quran itself.

Look at the example of Salat. The pseudo-contradiction that you presentedin your comment is very clearly resolved by the ayats---follow the messenger.

If you avoid that ayat, then you have the contradiction unresolved.

You've just proven my point. Now, it is only 'pseudo-contradictions' (?) that are resolved within quran, but real contradictions are not resolved at all. You need hadith to resolve those ones.

That is exactly what I said was your method. You pay lipservice to 482. You are quite content in leaving 'real' contradictions unresolved in your own mind to allow hadith a role in your religion. You know perfectly well that if you believe the quran is clear and nothing has been left out of it then hadith has absolutely no role to play.

By the way, Quran has been detailed, really. It is some people's conjecture that Quran is detailed in itself. Nowhere in the Quran is written that Quran has been detailed in itself.

638 and 1689 tell us that the quran is detailed on its own.

The command that to have guidance we have to follow the messenger means that the Quran has been detailed in that messenger's life.

Which contradicts 638 and 1689! But I've already exposed your agenda as needing to create this contradiction. You have no intention of trying to reconcile 1689 with with 2456. You don't want to. That's the difference between you and the people here.

How do you feel about this argument?

Do you understand that your argument will never be accepted? Your agenda is to manufacture contradictions within the quran to allow room for hadith. Truth seekers can never accept any contradiction in the quran so your argument will always fall at the first hurdle.