You have asked many questions on this forum, now may I ask something Leoxyz?
-
Leoxyz
Not only don't you understand English, but you neither have logic nor do you know much about who follows Khalifa on this forum.
The thread of Ijaz you quoted is blaming Wakas for recruiting Ayman who believes that Khalifa is a fraudulent-
If you know the meaning of "fraudulent" and "recruited" you will understand that Wakas is blamed for asking the help of someone who believes Khalifa is a liar.
-
If you know who follows Khalifa on this forum, you would know that Ijaz is one. This is also clear from the thread itself (why are you recruiting someone who believes Khalifa is fraudulent).
-
If you know logic, you will simply deduce that since Ijaz is blaming Wakas for recruiting Ayman, and Ayman says that Khalifa is a liar, therefore Ijaz considers that Wakas also believes, or agrees to that Khalifa is a liar
-
And if you could not understand the quote you brought, as always the case with you, you will not understand wht I am saying here (or anywhere), as always.
And you have a bizarre way of "interrogation" "You are so and so; if not, confess you are not and I will apologize"!! Who are you (to borrow your own words addressed to me) to interrogate anyone here? You should provide the proof that someone is so and so and if you fail to bring evidence you get PUNISHED. This is the qur'aanic way.
Agreed I lack deduction of logic.You being intelligent ,can you tell me how did you deduce that "Haaroot and Maaroot" may be women?
Just waiting for logical aspect of this deduction . -
-
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Stop destroying this thread! Go and argue somewhere else, there are many other threads where that's happening!!!
Leoxyz, you refused to take part in this thread so please be consistent, let's go away from discussing Rashad Khalifa and now back to hadith, and my conversation with Yusha, thank you Yusha.
At first the sayings were obviously memorized by his companions, word for word. Than a few generations later it became in impending necessity to record these sayings on paper. So a group of highly righteous and pious people began the task of compiling the most authentic ahadeeth possible. They were the likes of Imam Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, Tirmizi, Nasai, and Ibn Maja to name a few. They interviewed people who had learned the hadith, and questioned about where they got their source, so they made a chain and ensured that the chain of narrators go back to the Holy Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa salaam) and his illustrious companions. So in a nutshell this is how they were recorded in text/book form.
How accurate are these narrations?
Please let Yusha reply and go argue somewhere else people.
-
You are at liberty to send me as many warnings as possible.After all what you can do other than this.
It is not about what I can do. It is about what you do.
The problem is with you and the solution is with you. Whether YOU decide to change or not will dictate what happens, not me or the moderators.
-
It is not about what I can do. It is about what you do.
The problem is with you and the solution is with you. Whether YOU decide to change or not will dictate what happens, not me or the moderators.
I know you are facing tough time when I pick up PEARLS.That is the problem.
Instead of stopping PEARLS you have started threatening as my bread /butter is attached to this website.
Probably no one else before gave such tough time to "Quranist Progeny". -
Peace Edip,
Your claim about Rashad with a highlighted SOLELY is not true. But, from my past debate experience with you I doubt that you will ever acknowledge one of the greatest miracles (7430-37).
It is true. Without the false Hadiths that cast doubts over 9128-129 then Rashad would have never selected 9128-129. The Hadiths are the ONLY basis because they formed the starting point of his preconception. If you look at all Code-19 so-called "miracles", they all must start with a preconception and then people simply work backwards to justify them. This is what Ijaz did with his nonsensical numerology to prove that Abu Lahab is the uncle of the prophet. He started with the Hadiths and then worked backwards to justify his preconception. Without those false Hadiths Dr. Khalifa and Ijaz have NOTHING. Ijaz said one thing which is indeed very true. He said that he is following the example of Dr. Khalifa. I completely agree with him on that.
For instance, you insisted to reject the well-known historical and archaeological facts about the usage of ABJAD numeric system during the revelation of the Quran.
Edip, isn't it a fact that the script that Arabic has been written with for the last 1400 years and continues to be written with today is the Nabataean script? Did you see the Nabataean numerals? Please educate yourself on the real facts first and then we can start a thread where I would be honored to debate you.
I will not indulge in debating Rashad with you, since I find it unnecessary. However, while you are on your high horse, I will challenge you with a question
Can you please tell us why do you believe that 9128-129 are God's word?Why do you believe that 9127 are the god's words? Why do you believe that 3356 are the god's words?
Edip, there are many important falsehoods for sectrians that would have been worth them including in the great reading. For example, they would have loved to include somewhere in 2142-150 that "al-masjid al-haram" is in a town called Mecca. They would have loved to include the stoning of the three obelisks, the spinning seven times around the cube, the kissing of the Black Stone and the drinking of the "holy" water of Zamzam. They would have loved to add somewhere the story of Miraj. They would have loved to add the stoning for adulterers. They would have loved to add that the prophet will intercede on the day of the account. They would have loved to include the 2,4,4,3,4 formula of the false ritual that they named Salat. They would have loved to change 17107 to say "prostrate to the forehead" instead of "to the chin". Some would have even loved to change 7431 to say that the counting of 19 is a "miracle" and not a "trial/affliction", etc., etc... BUT THEY COULDN'T. So why do you think that they could in the case of 9128-129, which has nothing to do with any of their falsehood? The ONLY ultimate reason is your preconception from the false Hadiths casting doubt over this passage.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Ayman has a very good point.
Anyways, Yusha just in case you find my reply hard to find (understandably ) here's what I said one more time
At first the sayings were obviously memorized by his companions, word for word. Than a few generations later it became in impending necessity to record these sayings on paper. So a group of highly righteous and pious people began the task of compiling the most authentic ahadeeth possible. They were the likes of Imam Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, Tirmizi, Nasai, and Ibn Maja to name a few. They interviewed people who had learned the hadith, and questioned about where they got their source, so they made a chain and ensured that the chain of narrators go back to the Holy Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa salaam) and his illustrious companions. So in a nutshell this is how they were recorded in text/book form.
How accurate are these narrations?
-
Salam
I totally agree with you ayman.
I have not verified code 19 in the quran. It may be a fact that it exist, but if it does not exist in the original arabic language(nabatean), then in my opininions we can't accept it as a miracle of the Quran. There are a lot of numerical miracles in the quran, but the whole code 19 thing seems to be exaggareted and even idolized.
Your friend David
-
Peace Yusha and Al-Quraishi,
Back to the subject of this thread.
Hadith means discourse. In Islamic terminology basically it means the recorded sayings of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa salaam). The Hadith are not his own opinion or interpretation, rather I believe that whatever he said while teaching Islam and the Holy Quran is divinely inspired and not from his own desire
If you met the prophet and asked him what the word "hadith" means, he would have said that the Arabic word "hadith" simply means saying or as you said "discourse". On the other hand, it is an indisputable fact that the so-called Islamic terminology that you base your faith on is a later-day completely made-up meaning. Therefore it is nothing more than a later-day invented dogmatic idea (Bid3a).
Your Companion is neither astray nor being misled. Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) Desire. (An-Najm 532-3)
These verses confirm that the ahadith, the saying of our Holy Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa salaam) are divine revelation (WAHI), and as Muslims it is incumbant upon us to follow his ahadith.Since Ahadith are a later day dogmatic innovation. This passage doesn't confirm anything in them. Ironically, this is one of the few allusions to the "sahaba" in the great reading. As you can see, it indicates that the "sahaba" thought that the prophet was astray and misled.
At first the sayings were obviously memorized by his companions, word for word.
Are those the same companions that think that the prophet is astray and misled (532-3) and that he is crazy (7184, 3446)?
Than a few generations later it became in impending necessity to record these sayings on paper.
So a few generations later it became necessary to record what is indisputably a later-day dogmatic innovation. Why is this not suprising?
So a group of highly righteous and pious people began the task of compiling the most authentic ahadeeth possible. They were the likes of Imam Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, Tirmizi, Nasai, and Ibn Maja to name a few.
How do you know that they are righteous and pious? Based on reports of other people who are also "righteous and pious". This is the combination of two logical fallacies, circular argumentation and appeal to authority.
In fact, Bukhari is a proven liar. He has lied when he claimed that he studied 600,000 and memorized 200,000. This is a physical impossibility.
They interviewed people who had learned the hadith, and questioned about where they got their source, so they made a chain and ensured that the chain of narrators go back to the Holy Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa salaam) and his illustrious companions. So in a nutshell this is how they were recorded in text/book form.
No they didn't. It is physically impossible to interview people and question them for 600,000 Hadiths. This is impossible even today in the information age let alone at a time when a trip from Bukhara in Iran where Bukhari lived to Arabia would have taken months on camel back.
Also, unless Bukhari spoke to the dead or invented a time machine, it is impossible to make sure that the chain of narrators goes back to the prophet since by definition, all the narrators, except the last one, are dead.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Peace David,
I have not verified code 19 in the quran. It may be a fact that it exist, but if it does not exist in the original arabic language(nabatean), then in my opininions we can't accept it as a miracle of the Quran. There are a lot of numerical miracles in the quran, but the whole code 19 thing seems to be exaggareted and even idolized.
I can tell you to study the fraudulent "mathematics" called numerology. This is the same type of false mathematics that the Greeks used to make up hidden codes for their idols names and dimensions (hence the word "Gematria" that Edip appeals to, which like geometry originally refers to dimensions, in this case sacred dimensions of stone idols). The Jews later used numerology to invent hidden codes in their religious books. Even today Christians used the same nonsense to invent the Bible Code. As I said, I can tell you to study all this but if you want to get straight to the truth and have faith in the great reading then the only and most important thing you need to study is 7430-31.
In there, you will hear that "the counting of 19 is ONLY a "fitna"/trial/affliction". This is empirically verifiable truth. Who is counting 19 everywhere?
Peace,
Ayman
-
Thank you Ayman, however if I may ask people, I could have responded to Yusha's comments in kind, but I want to avoid the kind of arguments that have spiralled in the past - although people may not see this right now, my simple question and simple answer session will have a point.
I just want Yusha to answer just one or two more questions uninterrupted without having to answer further refutations to some of the claims he's made from others. This does have a point, so please Yusha as much as it may be hard for you not to respond to what Ayman said, could you simply respond to my next couple of questions and you can refute as much as whatever anyone else says here promise! (My response is a few posts up)
Salam all
-
Sure al Quraishi what is your next question?
-
Anyways, Yusha just in case you find my reply hard to find (understandably ) here's what I said one more time
At first the sayings were obviously memorized by his companions, word for word. Than a few generations later it became in impending necessity to record these sayings on paper. So a group of highly righteous and pious people began the task of compiling the most authentic ahadeeth possible. They were the likes of Imam Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, Tirmizi, Nasai, and Ibn Maja to name a few. They interviewed people who had learned the hadith, and questioned about where they got their source, so they made a chain and ensured that the chain of narrators go back to the Holy Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa salaam) and his illustrious companions. So in a nutshell this is how they were recorded in text/book form.
How accurate are these narrations?
-
How accurate are these narrations?
Well based on the vigorous research over centuries by first rate scholars who memorized these sayings and even the chain of their narrators and studying the meticulous details of those narrators' character, they set the standards to determine which sayings are strong and which are weak, not on the basis of its text or substance, but on the basis of the chain of narrators. Bukhari and Muslim were the foremost compilors of authentic sayings, their compilations are 100% authentic. The other ones are mostly authentic, but they contain a few weak and fabricated reports which have been identified. This is a science which I am not very familiar with because I am not a fluent Arabic speaker of Islamic historian, but this is what little I know on the subject.
-
Right, this is the first step I want us to all logically agree on, that Hadith, is not 100% authentic and it can be proven not to be
Sahih Al-Bukhari, Number 1623
...I leave behind me two things, the Qur'an and my example, the Sunnah and if you follow these you will never go astray.Sahih Al-Bukhari, At-Ta'rikh Al-Kabir, iii, 96
...Verily, I have left two precious things (thaqalayn) among you, one of which is greater than the other the Book of God and my `Itrah, my Ahl al?Bayt.These are two hadith, 'Sahih' (Authentic) of a saying of the prophet which were supposedly uttered at the same place at the same time, as you can see, they are different, which shows undoubtedly that even the 'most authentic' hadith is certainly not authentic.
Can we first agree on this same thing?
-
which were supposedly uttered at the same place at the same time
What makes you think this is the case?
Sahih Al-Bukhari, At-Ta'rikh Al-Kabir, iii, 96
...Verily, I have left two precious things (thaqalayn) among you, one of which is greater than the other the Book of God and my `Itrah, my Ahl al?Bayt.Tarikh al Kabir is not part of the Sahih al Bukhari, it is basically an appendix of various sayings with a rating on them by Imam Bukhari.
-
Peace "ayman",
You said amongst other stuff...Some would have even loved to change 7431 to say that the counting of 19 is a "miracle" and not a "trial/affliction", etc., etc... BUT THEY COULDN'T...
JK- Where does the Quran talk about the COUNT of 19 being a fitnah. Yes the number 19 is a trial/affliction/test for the disbeleivers AMONGST four other purposes one of which is to stregthen the faith of the believers which it did in my case, bro Edip's, Bahman's and many others. Moreover it is a trial/test for the likes of yourself and apparently your still failing. Looks like the prophecy was indeed fulfilled wasnt it? GOD Bless!
-
Tarikh al Kabir is not part of the Sahih al Bukhari, it is basically an appendix of various sayings with a rating on them by Imam Bukhari.
Sorry, Al-Dhahabi wrong reference, however it is in Al-Bukhari - I'll get the other one, they ain't hard to find, I've read more of the 'ahlul Bayt' variety than the 'sunnah' variety.
What makes you think this is the case?
The numerous hadith (that differ) on this issue refer to the same event at the same time and place.
Please bear with me.
