59:7 - Explain.
-
To Abu Zahara
I don't think anyone can convince me that Hadith's go Hand in Hand with the Quran (edit God Willing). Simply Because it contradicts what the Quran says in many areas and simply because it contains alot of Nonsense. Plain enough for anyone to see.If you want to trust Bukhari when he says he has authenticated the Hadith's then go ahead. But that doesn't explain the gap between what the Quran says (clearly) and what the Hadiths say. And I'm sure many people on this forum can tell you exactly where they differ.
No more questions directed at me please because I don't see where you are going with this.
Peace
Al -
By the way, this is not a circular argument, the inclusion of God makes it not so.
-
Salaam all, Nun,
Most OBEY THE MESSENGER verses pertain to a particular context; i.e. how to divide spoils of war, etc.
459 O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and OBEY THE MESSENGER, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day That is best, and most suitable for final determination.
- Impossible to follow and obey the deceased
- Nor wise to obey those charged with authority today
All we have is the Message; the rest is suspicious contradicting hearsay.
You are wrong on many angles
1- The order to obey the messenger was mentioned more than 40 times. It cannot be only specific.
2- The above Aya has no indication of any war, nor the one before it or after it. It actually does not talk about anything specific. If you are depending on reason for revelation, then you are depending on hadeeth that you refute.
3- As if you are saying that this Aya does not apply for now, except in a much narrower version. This goes against the Qur'an being for all time.
4- God tells you to obey the people of authority, and you say that is unwise. Who is wiser? You or God?
5- The order to obey the people of authority still stands. Why? because God already put criteria for arbitration in difference of opinion. Who are those criteria?, Allah and His messenger.
6- If you obey God by reading His book, then what would stop you from obeying the messenger by reading the material attributed to him?
7- Who are the people of authority? Two kinds, the rulers and the people of knowledge. We obey both as long as they are consistent with the message. So, you cannot easily discard an educated opinion and accept the superficial uneducated opinion as presented on this forum.
8- Why is it still wise to obey those in authority today? because they prevent chaos, anarchy and vastly ignorant decisions.As for the issue of the delivery of the message. It is delivery and making it understandable. That is how a messenger delivers and not like a parrot, delivery without making it understandable.
As for idle speech, then it is true that someone can bring hadeeth and make idle speech with it. However, any person can do that with or without hadeeth, just as the person who claims that God's order to obey the people of authority is unwise, or that since the messenger is dead you cannot obey him, while his material is still existant. Astaghfirullah.
Take care and have a great day
Hussein
-
Salaam all, Nun,
You are wrong on many angles
1- The order to obey the messenger was mentioned more than 40 times. It cannot be only specific.
2- The above Aya has no indication of any war, nor the one before it or after it. It actually does not talk about anything specific. If you are depending on reason for revelation, then you are depending on hadeeth that you refute.
3- As if you are saying that this Aya does not apply for now, except in a much narrower version. This goes against the Qur'an being for all time.
4- God tells you to obey the people of authority, and you say that is unwise. Who is wiser? You or God?
5- The order to obey the people of authority still stands. Why? because God already put criteria for arbitration in difference of opinion. Who are those criteria?, Allah and His messenger.
6- If you obey God by reading His book, then what would stop you from obeying the messenger by reading the material attributed to him?
7- Who are the people of authority? Two kinds, the rulers and the people of knowledge. We obey both as long as they are consistent with the message. So, you cannot easily discard an educated opinion and accept the superficial uneducated opinion as presented on this forum.
8- Why is it still wise to obey those in authority today? because they prevent chaos, anarchy and vastly ignorant decisions.As for the issue of the delivery of the message. It is delivery and making it understandable. That is how a messenger delivers and not like a parrot, delivery without making it understandable.
As for idle speech, then it is true that someone can bring hadeeth and make idle speech with it. However, any person can do that with or without hadeeth, just as the person who claims that God's order to obey the people of authority is unwise, or that since the messenger is dead you cannot obey him, while his material is still existant. Astaghfirullah.
Take care and have a great day
Hussein
1 - N/A
2 - N/A
3 - N/A
4 - Who do we believe/follow/obey of those charged with authority? There are many who are charged with authority on Earth. Some are the spawn of satan. Clearly this must reference those charged with authority who judge by the Quran & truth (6114 amongst others). Sunni scholars do not demonstrate this key principle.
5 - See 4.
6 - The material attributed to him may or may not be about him, and such material is inconsistent with the character of the messenger as in the Quran and with real life science, and also with common sense.
7 - Rulers are not seperate from knowledge. It is noteworthy that every ruler in the Quran was blessed with wisdom & intelligence. I understand you make the distinction between men of law and men of science.
8 - They do not. They spread FUD, and also what can only be described as horses*** (the eyptian scholar advocating breastfeeding for mahrams, for instance). Most vocal scholars are also heavily opinionated and not in good ways. They do not prevent vastly ignorant decisions, they CAUSE vastly ignorant decisions, ignorant of the Quran (apostacy, theft, stoning). Because of their malice, other countries with a semblance of civilisation rip them to shreds, sometimes literally.I believe Nun's entire point is that we obey the messenger by following the message brought forth. No idle talk there.
Peace.
-
Peace all,
Sunni You can obey the messenger by reading the material attributed to him. The messenger is dead but his material is still existent.
(Note that Sunni goes from "material attributed to him" to "his material".
Mr. Sane How do you know that the material attributed to him is really his material, i.e. he really said or did those things ?
Sunni Because Bokhari and company said so.
Mr. Sane Huh ?
Sunni You see, Bokhari and company went door to door collecting sayings from Z who claimed they were attributed to the messenger.
Mr. Sane But Z was born 150 years after the messenger. How can Z be sure that the messenger really said or did those things ?
Sunni Because Z heard them from Y, who heard them from X, who heard them from W, who heard them from V, who heard them from U, who heard them from T, who heard them from S, who heard them from the messenger, so the messenger must have said that.
(Note that every court in the world will throw out such unverifiable testimony based on hearsay).
Mr. Sane Huh ? How did Bokhari and company verify whether S, T, U, V, W, X, Y really said those things, or whether Z, Y, X, W, V, U, T, S really hear those things and did not fabricate them ?
Sunni Because Z said so to Bokhari and company.
Mr. Sane That is not verification. The only way Bokhari and company could have verified was if they had visited S, T, U, V, W, X, Y also and verified it from them personally, and also verified the contents if they contained any contradictions.
Firstly, Bokhari and company did not have time to do all that for each of the 600,000 attributed sayings.
Secondly, how do we know if any one of them was really truthful and did not fabricate it ?
Thirdly, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y were already dead by then so it was impossible to verify from them personally.
Fourthly, lot of things Z attributes to the messenger contradict God's message and each other.Sunni
- Bokhari and company trusted Z
- They were all truthful because Z said so
- It does not matter, see 1 and 2.
- If it contradicts, I don't accept it.
Mr. Sane But if Z falsely attributed some things to the messenger because they clearly contradict God's message and even each other, then how can Z be trusted ?
Sunni That's ok, Z was a human after all.
Mr. Sane But doesn't God ask us to trust ONLY His hadeeth ?
456 These are God's revelations that We recite to you with truth. So, in which HADEETH after God and His revelations do they trust/believe ?
The above question is clearly directed to the mumineen according to the context.
Sunni Yes, I trust God's words more, but I also trust Bokhari and company.
Mr. Sane I think you did not hear God's question properly. I did not see the word "MORE" in the question.
He does not say "in which HADEETH after God and His revelations do they trust/believe MORE ?"
The question is "in which HADEETH after God and His revelations do they trust/believe ?"
It is a rhetorical question for the mumineen, and if the mumineen trust God, their only possible answer can be "none other than God and His revelations".
And does God also not tell us that His message is fully detailed, details ALL things, is complete, and contains EVERY example relevant to our guidance, and that it is enough for our guidance, and that God Himself explains His message, and that the messenger followed His message only, and was strongly advised not to add to God's message ?
Sunni Well, I don't care what God says. I trust Bokhari and company, and hence the messenger really said what they say Z attributed to him. Is it my fault that God gave me a defective intellect and faulty logic and reasoning ability ?
Mr. Sane brickwall
(Note that Sunni's dialogue drove Mr. Sane to insanity reflected by banging his head on the wall !! P)
-
It is obvious that none of you are willing to deal with reality!!! You all sound like fanatical emotional Christians. And what I mean by that is that, you are all arguing from emotion, NOT FACTS, or even attempts at the facts. And you never deal with the real issues when they are presented. And when you attempt to do so, you leave the whole context of the discussion, create your own context, and then refute what you superimposed. And I missed a class in logic. You guys couldn't even get in the door. The Brother Hlatif, posted a well structured rebuttal to Nun, and to all by default, since all of you are in the same chorus. And when the infamous OPF attempted to respond, just look at how far he is from the intent of the Ayat that Hlatif employedand argues with nonsense point of views. My friends, you cannot let your hatred of people cause you to avoid and reject the truth. Now, I have listed several Ayat that clearly shows that we are to obey and follow the Messenger (S). And you guys know these Ayat, but your arrogance makes you blind and causes you to say the most absurd stuff, like "impossible to obey and follow the deceased". This is one of thee most ridiculous statements I have heard in this site thus far. There exist in this country (USA) a "Constitution". It was written several hundred years ago. In it is laws of the land, which are to be obeyed and followed. Any violation of these laws will result in problem for those who make such infractions. My friends, if you are here in the USA, you do obey them and follow them. Yet, all of those who was responsible for putting these laws together, are well dead. What in the world does living and being dead have anything to do with obeying and following the injunctions and example of someone?
I also asked a question to the forum participants; I asked, does anyone know what Asbab un nuzool is? I have not heard a peep about that question! I wonder why? I posed several questions, and almost hands down, no one has yet to deal with them. And again, if you attempted to deal with it, it was so evading. Since you guys have all the answers, where are they when serious core questions are asked of you? So I will give YOU ALL, another chance to prove to me, that you at least have a ground to stand on to even enter into a serious discussion on this subject, because I am just testing the waters, my next step is to blow all of you pretenders out of the water!
Below are some questions and maybe statements that I would really like you guys to consider. If you (at least one of you) can answer them, then we can move to another aspect of this issue. Note, these questions may sound like they don't make sense or are absurd, but if you really think over them, you will see how absurd you are, especially if you can't bring forth any answer to them!!!
Ques #1 What is the name of the Messenger that ALLAH revealed the Qur'an to?
And if you say it was Prophet Muhammad (S), please provide me with any ayah in the Qur'an where ALLAH says that HE revealed "The Qur'an" (by name) to "Prophet Muhammad" (S) (by name). Meaning like And it is ALLAH who revealed "The Qur'an or even Kitab to Muhammad". Please provide just ONE Ayah!!! And I will help you all out, the Prophet Muhammad's 'Name' is ONLY mentioned four times in the entire Qur'an. And if you cannot provide an Ayah like such, and you will never be able to do so, THEN HISTORICALLY, HOW DO YOU KNOW, AND HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD (S) WAS THE ONE WHO RECEIVED THE REVELATION OF THE QUR'AN? REMEBER "ONLY QUR'AN PEOPLE" WE ARE TALKING ABOUT FACTS AND PROVING THEM BY THE CLEAR STATEMENTS OF THE QUR'AN!!!
Due to my time constraints, I have to excuse myself, but I want to post this now, I will finish this later, Insha-ALLAH. But in meantime, if any think they are wise enough to answer the question, then be my guest. But remember "ONLY QUR'AN PEOPLE" it has to state it in no uncertain terms!!!
-
Peace Abu Zahrah
You ask for the reason of revelation as if you are unsure of the admonition and the good news, al/dhikr for the healing of which many are in dire need.
What is the name of the Messenger that ALLAH revealed the Qur'an to?
Should I know this that his name be an assurance of my salvation? How important is the name of this messenger, or any other messenger, or even the messengers whose names God does not intend to speak of? Why should someone know the name of the messenger? You ask a question that you probably think will be asked of me in the judgement. "Joe, what was the messenger's name?" asks the Disciminator. Joe speaks "I know not", and then his scales sink lower toward the side of sin. This is a complete dramatization of course, but I would think you do not believe such a thing is significant. Neither is his wife's pet name for him, his nickname, or any such sort.
Joe
-
Peace all,
Sunni You can obey the messenger by reading the material attributed to him. The messenger is dead but his material is still existent.
(Note that Sunni goes from "material attributed to him" to "his material".
Mr. Sane How do you know that the material attributed to him is really his material, i.e. he really said or did those things ?
Sunni Because Bokhari and company said so.
Mr. Sane Huh ?
Sunni You see, Bokhari and company went door to door collecting sayings from Z who claimed they were attributed to the messenger.
Mr. Sane But Z was born 150 years after the messenger. How can Z be sure that the messenger really said or did those things ?
Sunni Because Z heard them from Y, who heard them from X, who heard them from W, who heard them from V, who heard them from U, who heard them from T, who heard them from S, who heard them from the messenger, so the messenger must have said that.
(Note that every court in the world will throw out such unverifiable testimony based on hearsay).
Mr. Sane Huh ? How did Bokhari and company verify whether S, T, U, V, W, X, Y really said those things, or whether Z, Y, X, W, V, U, T, S really hear those things and did not fabricate them ?
Sunni Because Z said so to Bokhari and company.
Mr. Sane That is not verification. The only way Bokhari and company could have verified was if they had visited S, T, U, V, W, X, Y also and verified it from them personally, and also verified the contents if they contained any contradictions.
Firstly, Bokhari and company did not have time to do all that for each of the 600,000 attributed sayings.
Secondly, how do we know if any one of them was really truthful and did not fabricate it ?
Thirdly, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y were already dead by then so it was impossible to verify from them personally.
Fourthly, lot of things Z attributes to the messenger contradict God's message and each other.Sunni
- Bokhari and company trusted Z
- They were all truthful because Z said so
- It does not matter, see 1 and 2.
- If it contradicts, I don't accept it.
Mr. Sane But if Z falsely attributed some things to the messenger because they clearly contradict God's message and even each other, then how can Z be trusted ?
Sunni That's ok, Z was a human after all.
Mr. Sane But doesn't God ask us to trust ONLY His hadeeth ?
456 These are God's revelations that We recite to you with truth. So, in which HADEETH after God and His revelations do they trust/believe ?
The above question is clearly directed to the mumineen according to the context.
Sunni Yes, I trust God's words more, but I also trust Bokhari and company.
Mr. Sane I think you did not hear God's question properly. I did not see the word "MORE" in the question.
He does not say "in which HADEETH after God and His revelations do they trust/believe MORE ?"
The question is "in which HADEETH after God and His revelations do they trust/believe ?"
It is a rhetorical question for the mumineen, and if the mumineen trust God, their only possible answer can be "none other than God and His revelations".
And does God also not tell us that His message is fully detailed, details ALL things, is complete, and contains EVERY example relevant to our guidance, and that it is enough for our guidance, and that God Himself explains His message, and that the messenger followed His message only, and was strongly advised not to add to God's message ?
Sunni Well, I don't care what God says. I trust Bokhari and company, and hence the messenger really said what they say Z attributed to him. Is it my fault that God gave me a defective intellect and faulty logic and reasoning ability ?
Mr. Sane brickwall
(Note that Sunni's dialogue drove Mr. Sane to insanity reflected by banging his head on the wall !! P)
Keep it up brother. bravo
One good , comprehensive peice , should not mind improving further upon it to make it even more interesting, i am gonna print it and keep it handy to shoot at Hadithians close to me.
Tanveer ! This kinda effort is better than lenghty articles.
Once again, Very good and logical effort .
siki
-
Peace FJ, thanks for the response, I benefited from it and thank you for it. However, I think there is a fundamental point that you all are misunderstanding. I am not questioning the validity of the Qur'an being from ALLAH, (ALLAH forbid) what I am asking you all, is; HOW DO YOU KNOW AND HOW CAN YOU PROVE THAT THE QUR'AN HAS NEVER BEEN TAMPERED WITH OR ALTERED OR ADDED TO OR TAKEN AWAY? HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT AND HOW CAN YOU PROVE THAT? HISTORICALLY?! NOT THEORHETICALLY OR BY BELIEF?! THIS IS WHAT I AM ASKING AND HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR OVER 10 POST NOW, AND NOT ONE PERSON HAS PROVIDE ME WITH ANYTHING CLOSE. BUT I KNOW WHY! BECAUSE IF YOU ATTEMPT TO PROVE IT HISTORICALLY, YOU WILL NEED TO EMPLOY THE HISTORICAL RECORDS FOR SUCH. WHAT RECORDS? THE SAME RECORDS THAT THEY USE TO PROVE THE AUTHENTIC HADITH!
Your next point about looking to the 7th century for everything. I don't know who told you that but I sure didn't. We look to the Companions to find out what the Messenger of ALLAH said and did, as it relates to various acts of worship or social transactions. Why because ALLAH in the Qur'an has commanded us to do so. Obey and follow the Prophet (S), and this is why we look to the Hadith, because contained in them is the guidance of the Messenger of ALLAH (S) as He (S) was guided by ALLAH. What a beautiful Deen.
Ma Salaam
Peace to you Abu Zahrar, I, too, am benefiting from this debate and I thank you for that. I see you keep asking right questions, which have not been answered so far. As far as Quran is concerned most, if not all, people blindly believe on it without doing any verification and without any historical or archaeological proof. If you ask a muslim today why do you believe in Quran he would answer, 'bcoz it's from God', and why do you believe it's from God he would say, 'because they say so and that is why I also believe'. This is blind belief. But Quran passes the test of blind belief because it does not contradict itself. To be honest I don't really believe that the Quran that we have today is the exact intact copy of the Quran of the 7 century. I think there have been added minor things to it such as the numberings for easy of reference but it is the message (the core) that has been preserved... and once again I repeat the question that God Himself asked "if you find a contradiction on it simply do not believe it is from God". Simply, right? Most of the time it is us that make these contradiction without them being so because of the lack of knowledge that we have but they have been always explained away by those who have the knowledge and have reached a better understanding of the Quran. Honestly there it is almost nothing that can be verified 100% to be as the history tell us and we are witness that History has always lied or always told the story of the stronger ones and almost never the story of the week ones. Even the week ones told the story to fit their own political agendas... that is why history is never 100% correct. Hence, nothing is 100% correct in this world.
We all know that not everything has been included in the Quran but the 'path' on how to handle the life on all angles is given there in details and that is what we all need... based on the 'path' we handle the life as it should be rightly handled. We should not expect a guide on how to go out and cut the grass or collect mushrooms the right way or where to find them because that is not what we need. What we need as a guidance is already in Quran, and we all agree on that, don't we?I hope it helped,
Peace,
FJ -
Peace all, have an early flight to catch so need to make this quick.
I believe Nun's entire point is that we obey the messenger by following the message brought forth. No idle talk there.
Thank you!
Ques #1 What is the name of the Messenger that ALLAH revealed the Qur'an to?
Al-Imran (The Family of Imran)>
Al-Ahzab (The Confederates)>
Muhammad >
Al-Fath (The Victory) >Again, question you keep avoiding; name ONE hadith 100% accurate that belongs next to Qur?an.
-
Greetings Abu Zahrah,
Why are you challenging us to verify and substantiate your understanding of these issues? If I don't see/understand things as you do, what's the point of your attempts to make me not only conform to your 'view', but refute any issues from it that you bring up?
This is odd.
-
Salaam all,
OPF, the people of authority are the people who have the authority of giving us orders and the people who have more knowledge than we do. It starts from our parents on.
The message is not limited to the Qur'an. In fact, the Qur'an never limited the message to only the Qur'an. You can search and you will not have proofs of limitation.
Tanveer, The material of hadeeth is finite. You can start by studying what is attributed to the prophet and then decide on what is and what is not.
A person can make a consistent method of authentification in any way he or she wants. Refusal outright is both ignorant and arrogant. It is the same error as accepting all hadeeth without questioninig.
Muslims in the early generations learnt Islam not by reading the Qur'an alone, but by mentorship and discipleship. This is what happened in the first 150 years. When the divergence of opinion became greater, there was a need for a stronger criterion of following and that was hadeeth.
The material of hadeeth contains the thought process of the early Muslims who knew Arabic better than you or I can dream. So, even if the hadeeth is false, it can still carry an opinion that is worth of study and cannot be dismissed outright.
This does not mean that one has to live in the 7th century as many of you may respond. It means that one needs to learn how to think and look at the material, the way they did in order to arrive at solutions for our modern day.
Authentic or not, hadeeth contain linguistic resources of the thoughts of the people who received the Qur'an. Something that your roots and dictionaries cannot give you.
Authentication of hadeeth does not depend on Isnad alone, it also depends on material in it. The problem with you guys is that you understand the Qur'an in such a narrow way and the hadeeth in another narrow way, that you cannot see that the Qur'an can encompass the authentic hadeeth within it easily and without pressure.
There is more to Isnad than what you guys see. It tells us about the schools of the different cities of early Islam, the thought processes. It is not limited to this is good or bad person. Also, one can link the quality of hadeeths and their believeability to the name of the person who narrated it. If a person narrated weird hadeeths then he takes that label.
The worst thing that can happen to a person is when he or she manifests ignorance with arrogance and refuses to learn from a readily avaible resource. It defeats the most basic message of the Qur'an and unfortunately, is manifest often in this forum.
Take care all.
-
Peace all,
The worst thing that can happen to a person is when he or she manifests ignorance with arrogance and refuses to learn from a readily avaible resource. It defeats the most basic message of the Qur'an and unfortunately, is manifest often in this forum.
How true !!!!!!!!!!!! bravo
I only wish the author learns from his own words.
Readily available AUTHENTIC resource = The Qur'aan
Ignorance = ignorance of The God's message
Arrogance = arrogance by thinking one knows better than The God. When The God directly and clearly tells us not to trust ANY hadeeth other than His words, then saying "no, I will trust hadeeth other than God's revelations too" = ARROGANCE
Refusal to learn = refusal to learn from The God's CLEAR message
I agree, all this defeats the MOST BASIC message of al-qur'aan, and is the WORST thing that can happen to a person.
-
Salaam brother Sikandar,
Keep it up brother. bravo
One good , comprehensive peice , should not mind improving further upon it to make it even more interesting, i am gonna print it and keep it handy to shoot at Hadithians close to me.
Tanveer ! This kinda effort is better than lenghty articles.
Once again, Very good and logical effort .
siki
Thanks for the kind words brother handshake
Ya, I agree that it can be refined further and any improvement/suggestion is welcome.
Some of the above posts are examples that one can make the best efforts to educate, inform, and convey the message, but unless The God guides, there are some who will never listen to and follow His words. It is proof that The God has placed shields on their hearts, and ears (1746).
I pray that The God guide all of us to the truth so we can submit to Him and serve Him according to His will.
Once again, thanks for the kind support.
-
I also asked a question to the forum participants; I asked, does anyone know what Asbab un nuzool is? I have not heard a peep about that question! I wonder why? I posed several questions, and almost hands down, no one has yet to deal with them.
Ah, yes of course!! The infamous "Asbab al-Nuzul" excuse. According to the sectarians' "All High and Knowledgeable Scholars" , every single verse of the Quran has "sabab nuzul" ( occasion of revelation). If you don't know the "sabab nuzul" , you can't understand the verse.
If you open Saheeh BUkhary and flip through the section of "asbab nuzul" , you will find ridiculous stories along the lines of
- Mr. A had an argument with Mr. B about subject X, so God sent down verse Y.
- Mr. A came to the Prophet complaining about his wife having done X , so God revealed verse Z,
and so on and so forth. (I am preparing a nice list of such stories, and will post them is a new thread by the week-end, hopefully).
Again I remind Mr. AbuZahra that the Quran is not only for the people of the seventh century. I remind him that the "sahaba" are not smarter than us , nor are they more qualified to understand the Quran than we are.
By upholding this ridiculous theory of "asbab nuzul", you are making the Quran as nothing but a reaction from God to petty things that happened in the 7th Century. As if God is short-sighted, and cannot reveal anything unless "Abu Whatever" argues with "Ibn Whomever" about a certain matter.
This ridiculous theory defeats the entire purpose of the Quran as a guidance for MANKIND , and is nothing but a product of your "scholars" enslaving your brain and prohibitting you from using reason or logic. (Only through them can you interpret God's words).
When God tells me, through the mouth of His messenger
{And give the orphans their money, and do not replace the good with the bad, and do not consume their money with your money; for truly this is a great sin!}
Do I need "sabab nuzul" to understand it???
When God tells me
{Say "Come let me recite for you what your Lord has forbidden for you that you should not set up anything with Him; and be kind to your parents; and do not kill your children for fear of poverty, We provide for you and for them; and do not come near lewdness, what is plain of it or subtle; and do not kill the soul which God has forbidden, except in justice. That is what He enjoined you that you may comprehend."}
Do I need "Sabab nuzul" to understand it??
Must I run straight to the nearest Islamic library and flip through the yellowed and deseased volumes of "Abu Whatever" or the "Tafseer of Ibn Whomever", to understand when this verse was revealed??
Why must you always read the Quran through 7th Century lenses??
Ques #1 What is the name of the Messenger that ALLAH revealed the Qur'an to?
I believe brother TheNAbi answered this question very nicely.
Is the word "muhammad" a proper noun, or is it an adjective describing the man who carried God's words to the people? Either way it is of ZERO importance to my salvation. The importance is to apply the message in my daily life. Not to make an idol of the one who bore it and worship him.
Read verse 472
What other questions do you have to "blow us all out of the water?"
-
Peace all,
How true !!!!!!!!!!!! bravo
I only wish the author learns from his own words.
Readily available AUTHENTIC resource = The Qur'aan
Ignorance = ignorance of The God's message
Arrogance = arrogance by thinking one knows better than The God. When The God directly and clearly tells us not to trust ANY hadeeth other than His words, then saying "no, I will trust hadeeth other than God's revelations too" = ARROGANCE
Refusal to learn = refusal to learn from The God's CLEAR message
I agree, all this defeats the MOST BASIC message of al-qur'aan, and is the WORST thing that can happen to a person.
Beautiful post )
Salaam all,
OPF, the people of authority are the people who have the authority of giving us orders and the people who have more knowledge than we do. It starts from our parents on.
The message is not limited to the Qur'an. In fact, the Qur'an never limited the message to only the Qur'an. You can search and you will not have proofs of limitation.
Tanveer, The material of hadeeth is finite. You can start by studying what is attributed to the prophet and then decide on what is and what is not.
A person can make a consistent method of authentification in any way he or she wants. Refusal outright is both ignorant and arrogant. It is the same error as accepting all hadeeth without questioninig.
Muslims in the early generations learnt Islam not by reading the Qur'an alone, but by mentorship and discipleship. This is what happened in the first 150 years. When the divergence of opinion became greater, there was a need for a stronger criterion of following and that was hadeeth.
The material of hadeeth contains the thought process of the early Muslims who knew Arabic better than you or I can dream. So, even if the hadeeth is false, it can still carry an opinion that is worth of study and cannot be dismissed outright.
This does not mean that one has to live in the 7th century as many of you may respond. It means that one needs to learn how to think and look at the material, the way they did in order to arrive at solutions for our modern day.
Authentic or not, hadeeth contain linguistic resources of the thoughts of the people who received the Qur'an. Something that your roots and dictionaries cannot give you.
Authentication of hadeeth does not depend on Isnad alone, it also depends on material in it. The problem with you guys is that you understand the Qur'an in such a narrow way and the hadeeth in another narrow way, that you cannot see that the Qur'an can encompass the authentic hadeeth within it easily and without pressure.
There is more to Isnad than what you guys see. It tells us about the schools of the different cities of early Islam, the thought processes. It is not limited to this is good or bad person. Also, one can link the quality of hadeeths and their believeability to the name of the person who narrated it. If a person narrated weird hadeeths then he takes that label.
The worst thing that can happen to a person is when he or she manifests ignorance with arrogance and refuses to learn from a readily avaible resource. It defeats the most basic message of the Qur'an and unfortunately, is manifest often in this forum.
Take care all.
Peace,
I understand that we are to obey all who are charged with authority based on knowledge, and not conjecture & hearsay (270-82, verse 80 is notable). Of course, obeying parents is key, but that is also in the Quran (298 amongst others). Obeying the scholars without justification is NOT (544, 563, 931-34, emphasis on verse 31). When they are going against Quranic teaching, we are ordered to disobey. Now cross-reference 931 with 298 and 459 and we get a general idea. This idea is reasonably simple to understand and consists of a few laws.
The first is that we should obey those charged with authority - 459. If we have doubts about their message, we refer to Allah and his messenger (through the Quran, at the lowest level). Now, we are also told to obey parents in 298. Specifically, however, we are to disobey them if they lead us away from Allah by taking others in worship besides him. 931 demonstrates very clearly that the act of shirk (which has the same meaning in English, interestingly) includes taking a human's word over the word of Allah's. Hence, we obey those with authority, and disobey the mushriks, and the criterion for this is Al-Quran. Is this bad reasoning?
The message is not limited to the Qur'an. In fact, the Qur'an never limited the message to only the Qur'an. You can search and you will not have proofs of limitation.
The Quran states that law itself is restricted to judgement through the Quran alone
006.114
YUSUFALI Say "Shall I seek for judge other than Allah? - when He it is Who hath sent unto you the Book, explained in detail." They know full well, to whom We have given the Book, that it hath been sent down from thy Lord in truth. Never be then of those who doubt.
PICKTHAL Shall I seek other than Allah for judge, when He it is Who hath revealed unto you (this) Scripture, fully explained? Those unto whom We gave the Scripture (aforetime) know that it is revealed from thy Lord in truth. So be not thou (O Muhammad) of the waverers.
SHAKIR Shall I then seek a judge other than Allah? And He it is Who has revealed to you the Book (which is) made plain; and those whom We have given the Book know that it is revealed by your Lord with truth, therefore you should not be of the disputers.006.115
YUSUFALI The word of thy Lord doth find its fulfilment in truth and in justice None can change His words for He is the one who heareth and knoweth all.
PICKTHAL Perfected is the Word of thy Lord in truth and justice. There is naught that can change His words. He is the Hearer, the Knower.
SHAKIR And the word of your Lord has been accomplished truly and justly; there is none who can change His words, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing.006.116
YUSUFALI Wert thou to follow the common run of those on earth, they will lead thee away from the way of Allah. They follow nothing but conjecture they do nothing but lie.
PICKTHAL If thou obeyedst most of those on earth they would mislead thee far from Allah's way. They follow naught but an opinion, and they do but guess.
SHAKIR And if you obey most of those in the earth, they will lead you astray from Allah's way; they follow but conjecture and they only lie.006.117
YUSUFALI Thy Lord knoweth best who strayeth from His way He knoweth best who they are that receive His guidance.
PICKTHAL Lo! thy Lord, He knoweth best who erreth from His way; and He knoweth best (who are) the rightly guided.
SHAKIR Surely your Lord-- He best knows who goes astray from His way, and He best knows those who follow the right course.There is, of course, an exit clause somewhere that shows that law itself can be used according to the truth. Aside from the Quran, our next best method is not hearsay and conjecture, it is observation of the world around us. These things always lead back to the Quranic law. We find pornography is bad, hypocrisy is bad, there is harm in intoxicants, there is benefit in intoxicants, adultery is bad for society, religion should be free, so on, and so on. These can all be deduced WITHOUT the Quran. Slowly, the world catches on.
Our argument here is NOT that we should disobey the truth. Our argument is that these scholars do not speak truth, they speak horses*** (Egypt, Al-Azhar, breast feeding!?!). We are NOT to obey conjecture and hearsay, this is clearly outlined. We are to follow the best of the message (391. Allah's hadeeth is THE BEST of the hadeeth (3923). Why is this word not untranslated in the majority whereas when this noun is attributed to Bukhari it is left as such? Is this not a concealment of the truth?
A person can make a consistent method of authentification in any way he or she wants. Refusal outright is both ignorant and arrogant. It is the same error as accepting all hadeeth without questioninig.
The Quran has the BEST method of authentication. I will not post the verses because they take up a few pages.
Muslims in the early generations learnt Islam not by reading the Qur'an alone, but by mentorship and discipleship. This is what happened in the first 150 years. When the divergence of opinion became greater, there was a need for a stronger criterion of following and that was hadeeth.
In other words they also followed conjecture and hearsay? The criterion is very simple, it is also called "the reading". Why did they choose to obey a different criterion when they had the BEST 114 chapter criterion sitting in front of them? Does error multiplying cause good? If these people are in error and you appeal to them to justify error, does that make it any better even taking into account the 1 1/2 millenia past? Not at all. The hadeeth history itself shows much judgement from other than the Quran, this is most evident in the Sunni/Shia rift. They are both Shia as far as I'm concerned.
The material of hadeeth contains the thought process of the early Muslims who knew Arabic better than you or I can dream. So, even if the hadeeth is false, it can still carry an opinion that is worth of study and cannot be dismissed outright.
Correct. It would probably make a good linguistic reference if anything else. Unfortunately the message presented is mostly useless and contradictory to Quranic guidelines.
Authentication of hadeeth does not depend on Isnad alone, it also depends on material in it. The problem with you guys is that you understand the Qur'an in such a narrow way and the hadeeth in another narrow way, that you cannot see that the Qur'an can encompass the authentic hadeeth within it easily and without pressure.
I just don't know where to start with this quote. The material is worthless. Just worthless. As for understanding the Quran in a narrow way, who is narrower, those who accept the Quran's application to everything or those who fetter the Quran through supposed events (i.e. conjecture and hearsay) that occured in the context of the revelation of a verse? It appears you do not understand the very meaning of conjecture or hearsay. Let's give you a clue - Person A told me Person B said that Person C said that Person D was dining with his mother, Person E who told him that Person F saw the Prophet talking to Person G who was told "..." - THAT is hearsay, that is conjecture. There is a game played in nursery, it's called "Chinese Whispers". The isnad of a hadeeth in this game is relatively just as long in this pre-school game. The isnad is fully authentic and 100% verified to be so.
This does not mean that one has to live in the 7th century as many of you may respond. It means that one needs to learn how to think and look at the material, the way they did in order to arrive at solutions for our modern day.
We are told to trade in camels and dirhams. We can look towards the Quran for actual guidance, thank you very much.
There is more to Isnad than what you guys see. It tells us about the schools of the different cities of early Islam, the thought processes. It is not limited to this is good or bad person. Also, one can link the quality of hadeeths and their believeability to the name of the person who narrated it. If a person narrated weird hadeeths then he takes that label.
Goodbye Abu Hurairah and also Imam Bukhari (. DO let the door hit you on the way out, Mr Father of Cats and his friend the 10 year old superhuman.
The worst thing that can happen to a person is when he or she manifests ignorance with arrogance and refuses to learn from a readily avaible resource. It defeats the most basic message of the Qur'an and unfortunately, is manifest often in this forum.
I am glad we can come to a common understanding )
See Tanveer's post.
Peace.
It is obvious that none of you are willing to deal with reality!!! You all sound like fanatical emotional Christians. And what I mean by that is that, you are all arguing from emotion, NOT FACTS, or even attempts at the facts. And you never deal with the real issues when they are presented. And when you attempt to do so, you leave the whole context of the discussion, create your own context, and then refute what you superimposed. And I missed a class in logic. You guys couldn't even get in the door. The Brother Hlatif, posted a well structured rebuttal to Nun, and to all by default, since all of you are in the same chorus. And when the infamous OPF attempted to respond, just look at how far he is from the intent of the Ayat that Hlatif employedand argues with nonsense point of views. My friends, you cannot let your hatred of people cause you to avoid and reject the truth. Now, I have listed several Ayat that clearly shows that we are to obey and follow the Messenger (S). And you guys know these Ayat, but your arrogance makes you blind and causes you to say the most absurd stuff, like "impossible to obey and follow the deceased". This is one of thee most ridiculous statements I have heard in this site thus far. There exist in this country (USA) a "Constitution". It was written several hundred years ago. In it is laws of the land, which are to be obeyed and followed. Any violation of these laws will result in problem for those who make such infractions. My friends, if you are here in the USA, you do obey them and follow them. Yet, all of those who was responsible for putting these laws together, are well dead. What in the world does living and being dead have anything to do with obeying and following the injunctions and example of someone?
I also asked a question to the forum participants; I asked, does anyone know what Asbab un nuzool is? I have not heard a peep about that question! I wonder why? I posed several questions, and almost hands down, no one has yet to deal with them. And again, if you attempted to deal with it, it was so evading. Since you guys have all the answers, where are they when serious core questions are asked of you? So I will give YOU ALL, another chance to prove to me, that you at least have a ground to stand on to even enter into a serious discussion on this subject, because I am just testing the waters, my next step is to blow all of you pretenders out of the water!
Below are some questions and maybe statements that I would really like you guys to consider. If you (at least one of you) can answer them, then we can move to another aspect of this issue. Note, these questions may sound like they don't make sense or are absurd, but if you really think over them, you will see how absurd you are, especially if you can't bring forth any answer to them!!!
Ques #1 What is the name of the Messenger that ALLAH revealed the Qur'an to?
And if you say it was Prophet Muhammad (S), please provide me with any ayah in the Qur'an where ALLAH says that HE revealed "The Qur'an" (by name) to "Prophet Muhammad" (S) (by name). Meaning like And it is ALLAH who revealed "The Qur'an or even Kitab to Muhammad". Please provide just ONE Ayah!!! And I will help you all out, the Prophet Muhammad's 'Name' is ONLY mentioned four times in the entire Qur'an. And if you cannot provide an Ayah like such, and you will never be able to do so, THEN HISTORICALLY, HOW DO YOU KNOW, AND HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD (S) WAS THE ONE WHO RECEIVED THE REVELATION OF THE QUR'AN? REMEBER "ONLY QUR'AN PEOPLE" WE ARE TALKING ABOUT FACTS AND PROVING THEM BY THE CLEAR STATEMENTS OF THE QUR'AN!!!
Due to my time constraints, I have to excuse myself, but I want to post this now, I will finish this later, Insha-ALLAH. But in meantime, if any think they are wise enough to answer the question, then be my guest. But remember "ONLY QUR'AN PEOPLE" it has to state it in no uncertain terms!!!
Salam,
If you wish to argue logic, we can. Let's look at your post.
First sentence It is obvious that none of you are willing to deal with reality!!! You all sound like fanatical emotional Christians. And what I mean by that is that, you are all arguing from emotion, NOT FACTS, or even attempts at the facts.
Irony or hypocrisy, you choose. "You sound like fanatical emotional Christiians" is equally an emotional statement. There is no way to verify that we "sound like fanatical emotional Christians". This falls under the "No true X" fallacy also. You have also shown a remarkable dedication to ignoring fact that opposed your views.
Second sentence And you never deal with the real issues when they are presented. And when you attempt to do so, you leave the whole context of the discussion, create your own context, and then refute what you superimposed.
Again, selective perception. Selective perception is wrong in every way. There is no strawman in much of these arguments presented. The "whole context of the discussion" is presumably Asbab al-Nuzul. Which is, ironically, the very subject of discussion. The fallacy here is attempting to use the item in dispute as a proved point.
Third sentence And I missed a class in logic. You guys couldn't even get in the door.
Let's cease hostilities here.
Fourth And when the infamous OPF attempted to respond, just look at how far he is from the intent of the Ayat that Hlatif employedand argues with nonsense point of views. My friends, you cannot let your hatred of people cause you to avoid and reject the truth.
Another ridiculous fallacy. I already stated I accept the Quran, the whole Quran and nothing but the Quran. Is that not truth? As for the intent, I believe you will find it now cross-referenced with a few other verses from the Quran. There are many, many more to substantiate the point, those are verses I noted off the top of my head. In fact, the Quran is littered with such verses depicting malevolant authority being used to spread falsehood and misconceptions.
Fifth Now, I have listed several Ayat that clearly shows that we are to obey and follow the Messenger (S). And you guys know these Ayat, but your arrogance makes you blind and causes you to say the most absurd stuff, like "impossible to obey and follow the deceased".
More selective perception. Please see my argument for Nun De Plume. I personally recommend Vision Express for all your reading glasses, though in an authentic hadeeth, I heard Specsavers had 10% off.
Sixth onwards his is one of thee most ridiculous statements I have heard in this site thus far. There exist in this country (USA) a "Constitution". It was written several hundred years ago. In it is laws of the land, which are to be obeyed and followed. Any violation of these laws will result in problem for those who make such infractions. My friends, if you are here in the USA, you do obey them and follow them. Yet, all of those who was responsible for putting these laws together, are well dead. What in the world does living and being dead have anything to do with obeying and following the injunctions and example of someone?
The irony is exceedingly succulent in this paragraph. The similitudes presented are also notable, and sourly funny. Let me understand your point of view. This country, America has a constitution, written down in the 1700s, by very wise men who were muhajiroun, correct? The fallacy here is on two accounts. This analogy does not take into account the creation of ahadeeth/extra law, it leaves the constitution, the whole constitution and nothing but the constitution. Let's suppose Abraham Lincoln came along and said "Alright, this Constitution is not clear enough for us, we need unverified conjecture and hearsay to help". This creates Sahih Al-Abraham Ibn Lincoln. In the modern day, Mr George W. decides to throw the constitution away. Not so much throw it away, but revise it to suit Sahih Al-Ibrahim Bin Lincoln. The argument that he should follow the constitution, first, is thrown out of court by executive powers - "obey those charged with authority". Yet, "if you differ in a matter amongst yourselves, refer to the Founding Fathers & their associates" takes precedence. When we look at this in court, they are clearly in error according to the constitution itself. However, the latter day law of Sahih Ibn Al-Ibrahim Ibn Lincoln, of course permits it (though beloved Georgey boy picks and chooses which of those to follow also). Clearly there is manifest error in two ways here. Firstly, George is wrong according to the constitution - period. Sahih Ibn Al-Ibrahim Ibn Lincoln is ALSO wrong - because it allows that which is forbidden constitutionally. Nobody has a problem with following our constitution, the Quran. We disobey those charged with authority because THEY do not adhere to the constitution/Quran. The examples and injuctions of someone are clearly laid out in the message they brought forward (Muhammad was not acting purely as an envoy but also as a delegate, on behalf), not the indirect biographies of them creating by others using unverified hearsay and conjecture.
I also asked a question to the forum participants; I asked, does anyone know what Asbab un nuzool is? I have not heard a peep about that question! I wonder why? I posed several questions, and almost hands down, no one has yet to deal with them. And again, if you attempted to deal with it, it was so evading. Since you guys have all the answers, where are they when serious core questions are asked of you? So I will give YOU ALL, another chance to prove to me, that you at least have a ground to stand on to even enter into a serious discussion on this subject, because I am just testing the waters, my next step is to blow all of you pretenders out of the water!
You evaded a legitimate point, which was to state clearly that asbab un nuzool is IRRELEVANT because of the nature of the Quran itself. The entire reason I asked whether you believe the Quran can be verified here and now based on the science verses is based on this. You chose to ignore it; it exposes your clear deceit. So far you have presented ZERO logical argument. I advise you just step aside and let people such as Hussein Latif make the point for Sunnism, because he gets straight to the point instead of dwelling on concealing truth using Arabic terminology in Sunni contexts in a forum where nobody generally cares for the latter.
Ques #1 What is the name of the Messenger that ALLAH revealed the Qur'an to?
See Nun De Plume. I can add to that post. The name of this messenger is "IRRELEVANT". Let that sink into your brain. We do not significantly need to know anything about the messenger other than that which is outlined in a fully detailed Quran. Anything we have of those 1400 millenia preceding events are nought but hearsay and conjecture save the Quran, which can be verified today. Some can be substantiated with archaeological evidence, hence we have evidence for Christianity & Judaism. Due to the hearsay/gossip nature of ahadith, there is very little we can even look for in archaeology to find anything - the overwhelming majority refers to speech. Do we look for Aisha & Muhammad's bath water and check for menstrual blood?
And if you say it was Prophet Muhammad (S), please provide me with any ayah in the Qur'an where ALLAH says that HE revealed "The Qur'an" (by name) to "Prophet Muhammad" (S) (by name). Meaning like And it is ALLAH who revealed "The Qur'an or even Kitab to Muhammad". Please provide just ONE Ayah!!! And I will help you all out, the Prophet Muhammad's 'Name' is ONLY mentioned four times in the entire Qur'an. And if you cannot provide an Ayah like such, and you will never be able to do so, THEN HISTORICALLY, HOW DO YOU KNOW, AND HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD (S) WAS THE ONE WHO RECEIVED THE REVELATION OF THE QUR'AN? REMEBER "ONLY QUR'AN PEOPLE" WE ARE TALKING ABOUT FACTS AND PROVING THEM BY THE CLEAR STATEMENTS OF THE QUR'AN!!!
I can say that the Quran was revealed to Muhammad by referring the person enquiring to Sunnis. I can also say that that Muhammad stoned black dogs, also by referring the person to Sunnis. Irrelevant. Nothing more. The name of the messenger, is "irrelevant". His/her character is embodied in the Quran, fully detailed and emphasised for all to see.
Have a good day indeed. I know I am. )
-
Ah, yes of course!! The infamous "Asbab al-Nuzul" excuse. According to the sectarians' "All High and Knowledgeable Scholars" , every single verse of the Quran has "sabab nuzul" ( occasion of revelation). If you don't know the "sabab nuzul" , you can't understand the verse.
If you open Saheeh BUkhary and flip through the section of "asbab nuzul" , you will find ridiculous stories along the lines of
- Mr. A had an argument with Mr. B about subject X, so God sent down verse Y.
- Mr. A came to the Prophet complaining about his wife having done X , so God revealed verse Z,
and so on and so forth. (I am preparing a nice list of such stories, and will post them is a new thread by the week-end, hopefully).
Again I remind Mr. AbuZahra that the Quran is not only for the people of the seventh century. I remind him that the "sahaba" are not smarter than us , nor are they more qualified to understand the Quran than we are.
By upholding this ridiculous theory of "asbab nuzul", you are making the Quran as nothing but a reaction from God to petty things that happened in the 7th Century. As if God is short-sighted, and cannot reveal anything unless "Abu Whatever" argues with "Ibn Whomever" about a certain matter.
This ridiculous theory defeats the entire purpose of the Quran as a guidance for MANKIND , and is nothing but a product of your "scholars" enslaving your brain and prohibitting you from using reason or logic. (Only through them can you interpret God's words).
When God tells me, through the mouth of His messenger
{And give the orphans their money, and do not replace the good with the bad, and do not consume their money with your money; for truly this is a great sin!}
Do I need "sabab nuzul" to understand it???
When God tells me
{Say "Come let me recite for you what your Lord has forbidden for you that you should not set up anything with Him; and be kind to your parents; and do not kill your children for fear of poverty, We provide for you and for them; and do not come near lewdness, what is plain of it or subtle; and do not kill the soul which God has forbidden, except in justice. That is what He enjoined you that you may comprehend."}
Do I need "Sabab nuzul" to understand it??
Must I run straight to the nearest Islamic library and flip through the yellowed and deseased volumes of "Abu Whatever" or the "Tafseer of Ibn Whomever", to understand when this verse was revealed??
Why must you always read the Quran through 7th Century lenses??
I believe brother TheNAbi answered this question very nicely.
Is the word "muhammad" a proper noun, or is it an adjective describing the man who carried God's words to the people? Either way it is of ZERO importance to my salvation. The importance is to apply the message in my daily life. Not to make an idol of the one who bore it and worship him.
Read verse 472
What other questions do you have to "blow us all out of the water?"
Bang on,
Time well spent and a very good effort.
siki
-
Salaam all,
The Qur'an is the readily available and most authentic resource for us. There is no argument about that. The Qur'an is also clear, but clarity is not something that is equal to all, nor quantifiable. So, when you guys cannot agree on what Salat, Sawm and Zakat and Hajj mean, nor how to perform them, when they are all over the Qur'an, then you have a big problem. You will have to face that sad reality and then ask yourselves an honest question
1- Is it not clear to us enough? If so then who will clarify it to us?
2- Are we fooling ourselves and lying to ourselves?
3- Where can we find the more fool proof answers?It is ignorance mixed with arrogance when you face such a problem and refuse to be honest with yourselves about it. It is insistance on this sad state of affairs when you have a ready source of knowledge that can help you, but then you insist to live in your own darkness. Why? because of your myth that you cannot authenticate the hadeeth? Even before you try?
Siki, the Aya is clear that you obey but not when the order is against God's order. If someone more knowledgeable than you is not convincing, then ask him or her. Dismissing them means that you are not interested in what they have to say. It means that you made up your mind already that you know better, and that is questionable. Secondly, you guys misuse God and his order a lot. You accuse others of going against the Qur'an when it is mainly, "in your own eyes". My fear is that your eyes do not see beyond your biases. Sure some scholars have said such strange things. They are not error free. However, have you read some of the posts on here? I would rather be guided by a mistaken scholar than be a fool and follow some arrogant poster on this site who likes to sound intelligent.
Pazuzu, if the Qur'an is not only for the 7th century, then the Aya that said obey the messenger and the people of authority in the 7th century, is still saying it today. Or is the Qur'an for today, only when it agrees with your made up theology?
Take care all and have a great day.
Hussein
-
As Salaamu Alaikum,
Hlatif, May ALLAH continue to bless you and make you a proof of this Deen. Your approach is very good and full of thought and facts. I pray that some of the others can learn from you, FJ, very good post, no I don't agree with everything in it, but I enjoyed it. I think our dialogue has proven to be very mature and beneficial. My friend Nun, I am sorry to say, but AI think you case is lost. I really believe you post just to have your name on the post. You are terrible in following directions, or listening. I didn't ask you to tell me the only four place where Prophet Muhammad's name is mentioned, I asked you to tell me or provide me with an Ayah where ALLAH clearly states that HE revealed the Qur'an (by name) to Muhammad (S) (by name). So, your post is a clear indication of where you are in this. And about this one Hadith that stands next to the Qur'an. What is the use of responding to such an absurd request. Honestly I don't even understand what you are talking about. I would ask; "have you not read any of the many post that i left explaining the significance and role of the Hadith as it relates to the Qur'an? Have you read what the Brother Hlatif have written? In all seriousness, do you read at all? (Of course besides your own post on this site). Pazuzu, your statement that the sahaba are not smarter than us, is clear disbelief in the Qur'an and historically stupid, to say the least. You think that yourself or anyone else 14 centuries after the Message, with just reading some of the Message can possibly be more qualified to understand this Deen, this Messsage, this Qur'an than Men who witnessed the revelation upon the Messenger (S). How foolish a notion, and everyone on this site, whether you agree with my views or not should blame him for such, to say the least. As for you OPF, you are herectically funny. Just a quick point, as I have to go. For those of you who say that the name of the Messenger is irrelevant, than, in reality this is your state. You are a people who believe in a book, you don't know who is responsible for introducing us the book, ( since the name of the Messenger is irrelevant, basically who cares who the book was revealed to, right?) you don't know the historical preservation of the book, you don't know the historical reasons for much of what is contained in the book. You have absolutely no connection with those who were first responsible for receiving the book, and thereafter passing it on, and you have no scholastic tradition connected to the book to help you understand it. rather as our esteemed..... Pazuzu, would have one to believe, we are smarter than the sahaba and are more qualified. Please, just step outside of self for a minute and tell me how this sounds. I have to go, but I hope this provoked enough thought to help you see how ridiculous your foundation is in this affair. You people have nothing! Not even the Qur'an, since you have absolutely no knowledge about it, other than I have an English translation in front of me. And just for the record, the English is not the Qur'an, It was revealed in Arabic. And if you are not understanding there, then you are really behind the affair.As for Hlatif and FJ, I do look forward to hearing from you. And the rest of you, well, I'll just keep looking forward.
-
My friend Nun, I am sorry to say, but AI think you case is lost. I really believe you post just to have your name on the post. You are terrible in following directions, or listening. I didn't ask you to tell me the only four place where Prophet Muhammad's name is mentioned, I asked you to tell me or provide me with an Ayah where ALLAH clearly states that HE revealed the Qur'an (by name) to Muhammad (S) (by name).
3340 MUHAMMAD is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets and Allah has full knowledge of all things.
472 But those who believe and work deeds of righteousness, and believe in the (Revelation) sent down to MUHAMMAD - for it is the Truth from their Lord,- ?.
Who exactly was ?the Seal of the Prophets? and was not Qur?an the last revelation?
Simple logic.
There may be hope for you yet; if you bother to read and open your eyes.
Peace