To Obey the Prophet(PBUH) is obligatory to every Muslim
-
Peace Rajah,
Ahl-Hadith are one extreme and you are the other, both are extremists and experience tells us extermists are not good for the society.
It is good that you acknowledge that Ahl-Alhadith are exterme. They are extreme followers of falsehood. You are one of them because you follow much of the same falsehood. The difference is that you are in denial while they are proud of it. If you think that "Ahl Al-Hadith" is such a dirty word that you are ashamed of then why do you defend Hadiths on this forum? As I said, you are in denial.
We have listened to these fancy talking a lot, question is How do you pray to the GOD?
This question that you put in your defense of Hadiths merely demonstrates your ignorance of Hadiths. It is a fact that you cannot perform the false ritual that you call "Salat" according to Hadiths. You cannot even get the most basic info about your false Salat such as the 2,4,4,3,4 formula from Hadiths. This is such an indisputable fact that even the most ardent Hadith defenders acknowledge it. It is only ignorant blind Hadith followers who don't know this. When are you going to grow up (intellectually), face reality and stop being one of them?
Peace,
Ayman
-
Why do you follow the 6 books of Sunni Hadith and not the 4 Shia Hadith books?
Can you explain? They (Shia) call your books lies and you call their's lies.
This is what makes one Sunni and what makes one Shia, primarily today their Hadith books, additional scriptures written by their own hands over 600 years.
-
Why do you follow the 6 books of Sunni Hadith and not the 4 Shia Hadith books?
Can you explain? They (Shia) call your books lies and you call their's lies.
This is what makes one Sunni and what makes one Shia, primarily today their Hadith books, additional scriptures written by their own hands over 600 years.
Exactly. How do you prove which ones are right/wrong? These verses are particularly interesting in regards to this issue
Ironically, they broke up into sects only after the knowledge had come to them, due to jealousy and resentment among themselves. If it were not for a predetermined decision from your Lord to respite them for a definite interim, they would have been judged immediately. Indeed, the later generations who inherited the scripture are full of doubts.
Those who divide themselves into sects do not belong with you. Their judgment rests with GOD, then He will inform them of everything they had done.
You shall submit to Him, reverence Him, observe the Contact Prayers (Salat), and - whatever you do - do not ever fall into idol worship.
(Do not fall in idol worship,) like those who divide their religion into sects; each party REJOICING with what they have.
3032 mixes well with the following verse
When GOD ALONE is mentioned, the hearts of those who do not believe in the Hereafter shrink with aversion. But when others are mentioned beside Him, THEY BECOME SATISFIED/REJOICED.
Peace
-
The shia hadeeths came a hundred or more years after the Sunni ones. There are books on the men of hadeeeth and those books gave proofs of why one cannot believe a person's narration. Some narrations in Shia books are correct and some are not and they have to abide by the science of men of hadeeth as in the books of men.
The Shia do not refuse all the hadeeths of Sunnis. They refuse hadeeths that came from some Sahaba that they deemed Hypocrites and so forth. Despite all that, there is a lot of common ground. Something that is clearly lacking here.
Hussein
-
Peace Hussein,
The shia hadeeths came a hundred or more years after the Sunni ones. There are books on the men of hadeeeth and those books gave proofs of why one cannot believe a person's narration. Some narrations in Shia books are correct and some are not and they have to abide by the science of men of hadeeth as in the books of men.
The Shia do not refuse all the hadeeths of Sunnis. They refuse hadeeths that came from some Sahaba that they deemed Hypocrites and so forth. Despite all that, there is a lot of common ground. Something that is clearly lacking here.
The Shia sect came a hundred or more years before the Sunni sect. It is a fact that Sunnism is a later day innovation that only became official dogma at the time of the Abbassid Caliph El-Mutawakil. This naturally heralded anti-rationalism and the long decline of the Abbassid empire.
It is interesting that Shia Hadiths came later than those of Sunnis despite the fact that Shiism predates Sunnism. The only possible explanation is that there was no such thing as Hadiths at the time the Shia sect was established. It only became necessary to have Hadiths after the Sunni sect invented them.
Peace,
Ayman
-
You obviously lack history knowledge as well as logic. The group that left the default is the later group. Sunnism is the default because it does not ask additional requirements to a person's Islam. Shiism adds more requirements and that is why it came later, very much like yours which requires rejection of hadeeth and other stuff. So, while you and your group will not call me Muslim, I will not do the same to you. You are muslims but not Sunnis= not the default.
Hussein
-
very much like yours which requires rejection of hadeeth and other stuff.
Please provide reference. Thanks. More to follow.
I was under the impression this included baseless hadeeth and idle talk only (316 and others) and that which is verifiable by the eyes, ears, and heart (1736).
-
Peace Hussein,
You obviously lack history knowledge as well as logic. The group that left the default is the later group. Sunnism is the default because it does not ask additional requirements to a person's Islam.
The very names Sunnah or Sunnism that you use and call yourself are later day innovations and this is a historical and logical fact. The Arabic common noun "sunnah" literally means "a way or a manner of acting". Linguistically, it is not a religious word.
Although the term "sunnah" occurs a number of times in the great reading, it never refers to the example of the prophet but it mostly refers to the manner in which the god chose to deal with the previous people who rejected the message of prophets sent to them (1777, 3362, 4085, 4823, 33137, etc.).
Until the late 8th century CE, sunnah was an abstraction which encompasses the practice of anyone (typically of the past). Despised practices were also referred to with this term. Thus, in quranic commentaries such as those of Ibn Kathir, there are no attempts to equate certain terms from scripture with Sunna. It was Al-Shafii (d. 820) who was the first to try and link up a quranic term with Sunnah, in an attempt to provide scriptural evidence for his insistence that Sunnah should be equated automatically with Sunnat al- nabi (manner of acting of the prophet). The word chosen by him was "7ikma" (wisdom), but even after his lifetime this identification does not seem to have caught on with other jurists. And, finally, the passage that comes to mind most readily as offering a good opportunity for tracing the concept of Sunnah of the prophet in the great reading, namely 3321, ?You had in the messenger of the god a perfect example...?, was not even hinted at by Al-Shafii. It is Ahmad bin Hanbal (d. 855) who mentions 3321 in connection with his arguments for Sunnah.
Finally, the invention of authority for Sunnah was completed in the first chapter of the Sunan of al- Darimi (d. 869) where a number of traditions and opinions on Sunnah vis-?-vis the great reading are listed. In there, the statement "Al-sunnah qadiyat 3aly al-quran wa laysa al-quran bi-qadi 3aly al-sunnah" (i.e. The Sunnah abrogates/eliminates/judges the great reading but not vice-versa) is ascribed to an early authority but is probably Al-Darimi's own handiwork.
Sunnis or Ahl-Al-Sunna were in the minority until the Abbasid Caliph Al-Mutawakil adopted the Ahl Al-Sunna dogma as the official creed of the Abbasid Empire. Before that time, there were disputes between, for example, theologians of the Qadariyya, Murji3a, Rafi3a and Mu3tazila. On the other hand, the Ahl al-sunna, busily searching for Sunnahs, were out of their depth and constituted no match for them. Among these theologians Ahl al-sunna even acquired the derogatory nickname "7ashawiya" (those that stuff), predominantly because of their credulity with respect to collecting/stuffing large quantity of traditions. Ahl Al-Sunna were regarded as Ahl Al-Bid3a (the people of innovation of dogma). Thus, the ranks of Ahl al-sunna were rapidly swollen by anyone who wanted to promote a dogmatic idea and could produce a tradition to support it. Large numbers of traditionalists harboring one or more dogmatic ideas ("bid3a" joined their ranks. Various contemporary sources convey the impression that Ahl al-sunnah began to constitute the majority in the Abbasid Empire after the theological squabbles had been decided in their favor by Al-Mutawakil.
Shiism adds more requirements and that is why it came later, very much like yours which requires rejection of hadeeth and other stuff. So, while you and your group will not call me Muslim, I will not do the same to you. You are muslims but not Sunnis= not the default.
Sunnism adds far more requirements (and as you say "other stuff" than Shiism. Shia generally don't consider Hadiths as "wa7y" (divine inspiration) so they are not required to have faith in Hadiths. Indeed unlike Sunnis many Shia clergy do not put a high weight on Hadiths. On the other hand, Sunnis make having faith in Bukhari, Muslim, Nisaaii, etc. an absolute requirment. This is why religious decress have been issued by pretty much all Sunni authorities against those who reject Hadiths. On the other hand, you seldom hear such religous decrees against Hadith rejecters from Shia authorities.
As for calling me Muslim, unlike what you think this is not a label that you can name someone with or put it on their ID card. The true concept of a "muslim" (peacemaker) is something that one has to actually become in truth. It is not a label. Now you can happily call yourself Sunni but you will never become Sunni in truth since it is just a meaningless label and as I showed you above as a true concept "sunnah" means something totally different than what you take it to be.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Dion
No I really give up
Fine!
If "your God" is so picky that he is goona count the times you rolled your head to the sides, or the times and hight of buts going up when your head is hiting the ground than go ahead and take those kung fu lessons couse than there is no place for complaint with your extensive and attractive moves during prayer.
My God is Allah same as your's.
Again fancy stories, assumptions, assertions, blames etc.
It was a simple question How do you pray to the God?As I said, I am an individual and I wont give that up. The way I pray is my way and mine only
See I said it is funny, have you read the sentence you just posted before posting it?
You are a "Quran Only" then how do you pray to God according to Quran? it is a simple question but you are telling us that THE WAY YOU PRAY IS YOUR WAY AND YOUR ONLY this means there is no way of Praying to GOD mentioned in Quran, because if there was then it would not been for you only and it would be for all Muslims alike, this is what I can understand from your paragraph.It is not like this dear friend, I will try it to explain it in later posts, you have fell prey to west propoganda that religon is a PERSONAL kind of thing but ISLAM is a DEEN it is a system uniting all Muslims under one Umbrella.
-
Dion
Fine!My God is Allah same as your's.
Again fancy stories, assumptions, assertions, blames etc.
It was a simple question How do you pray to the God?As I said, I am an individual and I wont give that up. The way I pray is my way and mine only
See I said it is funny, have you read the sentence you just posted before posting it?
You are a "Quran Only" then how do you pray to God according to Quran? it is a simple question but you are telling us that THE WAY YOU PRAY IS YOUR WAY AND YOUR ONLY this means there is no way of Praying to GOD mentioned in Quran, because if there was then it would not been for you only and it would be for all Muslims alike, this is what I can understand from your paragraph.It is not like this dear friend, I will try it to explain it in later posts, you have fell prey to west propoganda that religon is a PERSONAL kind of thing but ISLAM is a DEEN it is a system uniting all Muslims under one Umbrella.
I hope it is not beach umbrella &
-
Twilight
Salaam.
This isn't an attempt to argue (with you), but a genuine question that makes me wonder. In the Quran Allah gives us the method of ''wusu'/washing before prayer and also gives us the times for prayer. Do you really feel that to suddenly miss out the method of prayer (if it's so important) makes much sense? I'm just confused that for the prayer preparations (wusu) the details are given, but then for the details of the prayer we're suppossed to look to the hadith? Why didn't Allah give the prayer instructions in the Quran (this way shias, sunni's and everyone else would have one single uniform method) but expect humans to collect details on such a crucial activity, by people who saw the prophet do it in a specific way (that Allah inspired to him)?As I said, I'm genuinely curious. I'd appreciate some insight, thanks
Well dear, As we know from the Quran that teachings in Quran are continuation of taechings taught to ABRAHAM and his son's, and we also know from Quran that Salat was obligatory even before Muhammad.
In surah Anbiya, Allah tells us
We made them imams who guided in accordance with our commandments, and we taught them how to work righteousness, and how to observe the Contact Prayers (Salat) and the obligatory charity (Zakat). To us, they were devoted worshipers.The following Ayat tells us that Salat was before Muhammad
Their Contact Prayers (Salat) at the shrine (Ka`bah) were no more than a mockery and a means of repelling the people. Therefore, suffer the retribution for your disbelief.The angels called him when he was praying in the sanctuary "GOD gives you good news of John; a believer in the word of GOD, honorable, moral, and a righteous prophet."
In Quran we have found out that Pray is something that existed before Muhammad now let us see how the pray was offered, we also came to know that it should be in sanctuary.
"O Mary, you shall submit to your Lord, and prostrate and bow down with those who bow down."
This Ayat asks MArry for "Rakooh" and "SAjood"
They are the repenters, the worshipers, the praisers, the meditators, the bowing and prostrating, the advocators of righteousness and forbidders of evil, and the keepers of GOD's laws. Give good news to such believers
So we know from Quran that
- Prayers are prior to Muhammad
- During Praying to God one must try to create Contact with Allah.
- During Pray one should bow and prostrate.
- During pray there should be a focal point and we should face towrads a specific direction.
Now how to bow? how to prostrate and how to stand? are minor details which have been not discussed in Quran and thus people refer to the way of Prophet because he was Chosen by Allah as the carrier of his Final word, and was exalted over others.
But offcourse if Quran does not mention those minor details then we should not be so critical of them, as to where should be our hands, how high should be the Butt, or how low should be the Shalwar during the prayers as they are not ordered by Allah.This is very detailed topic and My english is the obstacle in explaining it in good way, however if you understand Urdu, we can discuss it further deeply.
But still if you disgaree I am open to discussion, but remember just don't provide links of this site. -
afridi
I hope it is not beach umbrella
No doubt Pathans are so behind in education? How come all Muslims come under a beach umbrella?, we need a very Bigggggg Umbrella for that, may be we have to order for it to USA, because only they have the resources and technology to build such a big Umbrella. peace
Salaaam to afridi hail hail
-
Salaam Ayman,
Sunnah, the word, is used in the Qur'an and by Sunnis to mean
Repeated and consistent implementation of rules.
So, there has always been a Sunna in one way or another and it was used before Shafii. Malik used it and so forth. The Shia agree on the same issue, but they believe that you cannot arrive at the Sunna except by following an Imam. Sunnis believe that you arrive at it by study.
Sunnis do not require that you follow hadeeth to arrive at Sunna. They believe that hadeeth helps you arrive at Sunna. So, Sunna and hadeeth are not synonyms and Sunnis were Sunnis before the six books were canonized. Proof all schools of thought are pre Bukhari. Sunnis do not declare takfir on a person who does not accept hadeeth but they declare takfir on a person who abolishes the rule "obey the messenger".
Al Mutwakkil did not create Sunnism. He stopped the persecution that happened to the followers of Ibn Hanbal on the hands of not Shia, but Mutazila. The Mutazila added another condition to the islam of the person. They said a person has to believe that the Qur'an is created to be a Muslim. Sunnis were still the default before them
The Shia added another rule. It is that you cannot be muslim except when you follow an Imam. That is why they left Sunnism but not Islam.
Proof that you guys are people of innovation. There is no where in the Qur'an that prohibits a person from trying to understand the Qur'an in any way possible, including the reading of hadeeth. To many of you guys, that is close to Kufr if not Kufr. Then you add the idol worship label here and there.
another proof is that you know that when the messenger came, then he was followed and he must have ordered his followers to do things not in the Qur'an. They followed and the ones that came after them followed them and so forth. To you all that is irrelevant and should be thrown away. That is a new innovation. Even if many of the hadeeths are innovated, they still shed an important light of the understanding and practices of the early muslim community in it's first 200 years. You throw that out. That is an innovation.
Take care all and have a great day.
Hussein
-
afridi
No doubt Pathans are so behind in education? How come all Muslims come under a beach umbrella?, we need a very Bigggggg Umbrella for that, may be we have to order for it to USA, because only they have the resources and technology to build such a big Umbrella. peaceSalaaam to afridi hail hail
Salaam raja jii
beach umbrella is used by naked peoples.
By the way can you tell us how prophet use pray.
yes peace peace
-
Peace Hussein,
Sunnah, the word, is used in the Qur'an and by Sunnis to mean
Repeated and consistent implementation of rules.Hussein, which planet do you live on? No Sunni I know thinks of the word "sunnah" as meaning "repeated and consistent implementation of rules". They all think that it means "the manner of acting of the prophet" or if you want to use your made up definition then you need to reword it to say "repeated and consistent implementation of the rules of the prophet".
The word "sunnah" in Arabic is a neutral word that talks about the manner of acting, which can be good or bad. This is a fact. There is no connotation of "sunnah of the prophet" in the Arabic word "sunnah" or in any of its uses in the great reading. This meaning that Sunnis (and you) use is a later day innovation that is completely made up.
So, there has always been a Sunna in one way or another and it was used before Shafii. Malik used it and so forth.
Of course there has always been a "manner of acting" (sunna) in one way or another but there was never anything that equates the term "sunna" with the manner of acting of the prophet. This is a completely baseless later-day innovation. Thus, Malik and Ibn Kathir never try to link up anything in the great reading with what they knew was the later invented term "Sunna".
The Shia agree on the same issue, but they believe that you cannot arrive at the Sunna except by following an Imam. Sunnis believe that you arrive at it by study.
This is false. No average Sunni I know has studied Hadiths or the opinions of scholars. The fact is that the vast majorty also rely on following Imams. In fact, Sunnis are so ignorant that they don't know what the term "sunna" means and they falsely equate it with "the manner of acting of the prophet" despite it carrying no such connotation. Everything about your sect, including its very name is a false later day innovation.
Sunnis do not require that you follow hadeeth to arrive at Sunna. They believe that hadeeth helps you arrive at Sunna. So, Sunna and hadeeth are not synonyms and Sunnis were Sunnis before the six books were canonized. Proof all schools of thought are pre Bukhari.
Hadith and Sunnah are intertwined. They parallel the Mishna and the Gemara in Talmudic Judaism. The Mishna is essentially collected traditions traced back to early Judaism (i.e., Jewish Hadith) and the Gemara is the rabbinic view on the manner of acting (Sunnah) based on Mishna. Together, the Mishna and Gemara form the Talmud. So essentially, the Hadith and Sunnah are the sectarian equivalent of the Talmud. You also implicitly admit that Bukhari and the so-called schools of thought are later day innivations that certainly didn't exist at the time of the prophet.
Sunnis do not declare takfir on a person who does not accept hadeeth but they declare takfir on a person who abolishes the rule "obey the messenger".
Sunnis personify the messenger in the book of Bukhari so for them not accepting the book of Bukhari means "not accepting the messenger" and for them "obey Bukhari" subconsciously means "obey the messenger". Thus, no Hadith rejecter I know says that he is rejecting Hadiths because he doesn't want to "obey the messenger". All Hadith rejecters simply reject Bukhari but still have so-called Takfir Fatwas issued against them. This is reality so stop your apologetic defense of Sunnis.
Also, equating "obeying the messenger" with Sunna is a false later day innovation and there was never any link between anything in the great reading and Sunna prior to Shafii.
Al Mutwakkil did not create Sunnism. He stopped the persecution that happened to the followers of Ibn Hanbal on the hands of not Shia, but Mutazila. The Mutazila added another condition to the islam of the person. They said a person has to believe that the Qur'an is created to be a Muslim. Sunnis were still the default before them
It was Sunnis who added the condition of the belief that the so-called Quran is uncreated and eternal. We even have irrational folks still arguing for this nonsense to this day. The idea of the uncreated Quran and the very terms "sunna" and "sunnis" are false later day innovations so they cannot be the default.
The Shia added another rule. It is that you cannot be muslim except when you follow an Imam. That is why they left Sunnism but not Islam.
The Sunnis have the same false later-day rules. They say you cannot be a "muslim" if you don't follow the so-called Sunna. While as you acknowledged above, the Hadith (Mishna) and Sunna (Gemara) are later day innovations.
Proof that you guys are people of innovation. There is no where in the Qur'an that prohibits a person from trying to understand the Qur'an in any way possible, including the reading of hadeeth. To many of you guys, that is close to Kufr if not Kufr. Then you add the idol worship label here and there.
There is no one that prohibts anyone from reading Hadiths. In fact, I read and studed many more Hadiths than the majority of Sunnis that I know. However, if you come here and claim that messenger said a Hadith because Bukhari said so then this is a lie. At best you can say that Hadiths are unverifiable hearsay. But don't put words in the mouth of the messenger. Also, taking any decrees in our obligation/"deen" from Hadiths would indeed fall under the ruling in 4221. So since the god did not authorize Bukhari and the like then unless you want to contest 4221, taking anything relating to your obligation to the god from Bukhari is indeed idolatry.
another proof is that you know that when the messenger came, then he was followed and he must have ordered his followers to do things not in the Qur'an. They followed and the ones that came after them followed them and so forth. To you all that is irrelevant and should be thrown away. That is a new innovation.
Do you even know "when" the messenger came and lived? You really don't. Much like Paul in Christianity, most of those who you say were his followers likely never met or saw him. So of course all this is irrelevant. Your proof is nothing more than the appeal to authority of people (who you don't even know if they existed or not) based on the circular argument of the appeal to the authority of other people who judged the character of the first people. Sunnism is one big logical fallacy.
Even if many of the hadeeths are innovated, they still shed an important light of the understanding and practices of the early muslim community in it's first 200 years. You throw that out. That is an innovation.
So according to you even following "innovated" Hadiths is not a dogmatic "innovation" while throwing them out is a dogmatic "innovation". As I said, Sunnism is just one big logical fallacy so it is no wonder that only Sunnis could come up with such ridiculous arguments.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Salaam Ayman,
The problem with your understanding is that you consider what every person on the street does and believes is Sunnism even the uneducated. However, what matters is what a person with education does with what he learned.
So, yes all Sunni scholars agree with my definition and so does the Qur'an.
As for the created and uncreated Qur'an. The Mutazila decided to purge anyone who does not say that the Qur'an is created. Imam Ahmad said "I cannot say what is not in the Qur'an". Basically, he kept to the Qur'an. If you disagree with Imam Ahmad, then bring the Aya of the Qur'an that says that the Qur'an is created.
As for the innovated hadeeths and Sunna, I did not say that. You claim it. Just because something was recorded and written later, does not mean that it was not said earlier. actually this is an argument against you. If one refuses to follow something written 200 years later, then how come you expect them to follow you 1400 years later and especially when you deem the linguistic tools unacceptable as long as they disagree with your biased point of view. You did not deconstruct Hadeeth, you actually deconstructed the whole of Islam.
Yes also, you are supposed to do things the way the prophet did it, especially Salat, Zakat, Sawm and so forth. Not invent your own Sunna as a replacement, very much as waiting for the full moon of the middle of the summer.
Last but not least. A person who refuses a whole body of knowledge without proving every singles piece of it as being inauthentic is an act of Innovation. God never asked us in the Qur'an to throw whole bodies of knowledge.
Take care and have a great evening.
Hussein
-
Peace Hussein,
The problem with your understanding is that you consider what every person on the street does and believes is Sunnism even the uneducated. However, what matters is what a person with education does with what he learned.
So, yes all Sunni scholars agree with my definition and so does the Qur'an.You are just saying that but you know that it is not true. Even you don't agree with your own definition. According to you "sunna" means "repeated and consistent implementation of rules". Of course, there can be bad rules and good rules. So when you say "Sunni scholars" do you mean "scholars that repeatedly and consistently implement rules". So according to you Christian scholars who repeatedly and consistently implement wrong rules are included!!!
Of course, what you are saying is not reality and in your mind and the minds of all Sunnis, the word "sunna" doesn't mean that. It means "the manner of acting of the prophet". So when you say "Sunni scholars", you mean those scholars who supposedly follow the manner of acting of the prophet. You know very well that this is a false later-day invented meaning so you won't admit to the reality. However, your own words betray you and expose that reality.
As for the created and uncreated Qur'an. The Mutazila decided to purge anyone who does not say that the Qur'an is created. Imam Ahmad said "I cannot say what is not in the Qur'an". Basically, he kept to the Qur'an. If you disagree with Imam Ahmad, then bring the Aya of the Qur'an that says that the Qur'an is created.
What are you talking about? How can you doubt that the god created EVERYTHING?!! Is the great reading not part of EVERYTHING??!!!! Do you think that the god in passages such as 6102 neglected to say that he created everything except this book that you call Quran??!!! How much clearer should the god make it to you!!!
You are not only defying the clear signs of the god but you are also defying your god-given common sense. Since the great reading is uncreated it also follows that every word in the great reading is uncreated. So the words of Moses and all the other people who speak and even Iblis's words (he speaks there too) are all uncreated. Since the great reading is in Arabic and it is uncreated and eternal then Arabic must be uncreated and eternal too!!! Of course anyone with a grain of common sense can see the huge logical absurdities that Sunnis have created for themselves with their anti-rationalism.
As for the innovated hadeeths and Sunna, I did not say that. You claim it. Just because something was recorded and written later, does not mean that it was not said earlier.
This is the same exact thing that Talmudic Jews, Christians and all dogmatic people say. This is why Jews believe that by following the Talmud they are following Moses and Christians think that Jesus told them that he is the son of the god (he be most exalted above what they describe). Your logic is exactly the same. As I said earlier, Hadiths are at best unverifiable hearsay and most are proven as outright lies.
actually this is an argument against you. If one refuses to follow something written 200 years later, then how come you expect them to follow you 1400 years later and especially when you deem the linguistic tools unacceptable as long as they disagree with your biased point of view. You did not deconstruct Hadeeth, you actually deconstructed the whole of Islam.
Again, your own words betray your dogmatic innovation. You claim that "Sunnism adds no requirements" and yet you say that by deconstructing the book of Bukhari and the like I have deconstructed so-called "Islam" (you don't even seem to know the meaning of the word).
Yes also, you are supposed to do things the way the prophet did it, especially Salat, Zakat, Sawm and so forth.
Everything you need to know about those concepts is in the great reading. It is not my problem that you are too blind to see it.
Not invent your own Sunna as a replacement, very much as waiting for the full moon of the middle of the summer.
Ironically, even die hard Sunnis admit to the fact that the prophet never abstained according to the Umar calendar. You seem to ignore this.
Last but not least. A person who refuses a whole body of knowledge without proving every singles piece of it as being inauthentic is an act of Innovation. God never asked us in the Qur'an to throw whole bodies of knowledge.
This is the classic logical fallacy of negative proof.
It is the same fallacy used by Bush "prove that there are no WMDs". It shifts the burden of proof because you know that you can't prove that it is authentic. You can add this to all the fallacies of Sunnism. Again, everytime you defend Sunnism, you are inadvertently further confirming the fact that it is entirely based on logical fallacies.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Since you guys are "Qur'an aloners" then bring an Aya that says that the Qur'an is created. The Qur'an and all the books of God are words of God. Words are not entities that stand alone. Entities are two kinds
1- stand alone and those are then divided into created and uncreated. The only stand alone uncreated entity is God.
2- Entities that do not stand alone. Those are then called attributes of stand alone entities. If it is an attribute of a created entity then it is created and if it is an attribute of an uncreated entity, then they are uncreated.
3- Jesus is called word of God and created by the Quran. However the Qur'an was mentioned as the word of God but no mention of creation. The reason is that Jesus is stand alone and therefore the designation of word for him means that he was created by the word of God "Kun" and not being the actual word of God.
Words or statements are never stand alone. They are always in the speaker, and then they are attribute, in the listener or carried on created means of communication.
not believing some hadeeths is logical and every Sunni does it. Rejecting all hadeeths and then rejecting all language tools except what Ayman approves is illogical. Also bring the evidence from hadeeth sources that the prophet never did Sawm according to this calendar.
However, yes Ayman I believe in what I write. Please do not project what you do on others.
Take care all
Hussein