Hadith vs Quran Only

[Zeenix]

1) That the Ahadith in itself (as in isolation) IS A SOURCE OF LAW.
Not in isolation. By law I assume you mean shariah, this is a long and complicated topic but in summary. A lot of the shariah can be changed according to the times and the environment. So whether ahadith is a source of shariah is irrelevant.

But yes it is a source of law but not in isolation.

2) That the Ahadith or Sunnah can abrogate Quran.
No but there are instances where an ahadith is from a time before the completion of the quran hence the quran has abrogated the mat'n of the hadith.

3) The Ahadith or Sunnah is immutable.
No Ahadith is the name given to the tradition of collecting the saying and actions of the prophet(pbuh). Sunnah are the sayings and actions of the Prophet(pbuh).

4) The Quran can Only be understood CORRECTLY under the light of Ahadith.
The quran can only be completely understood by the explanations and teachings of the Prophet(pbuh). He was sent down for this purpose only. A lot of the ayats are straightforward and simple to understand but there are some which we can't just understand by reading alone. This is why the Prophet(pbuh) was sent to us. His explanations are recorded for us in what is know as the tradition of ahadith.

I presented earlier an ayat which you can't understand without the historical context contained only in the ahadith I presented with it.

5) Do you believe the Quran is complete?
Yes but I differ with your (i am assuming) understanding of the word. I don't agree with the belief that this means absolute completeness because if that was the case then we would have a book with infinite pages.

Could I please have your definition of completeness

I believe like I have stated already, Quran has given guidance on every subject we needed spiritual guidance on. The prophet(pbuh) was here to explain this guidance.

6) Do you believe Allah completed His final message with Prophet Mohammad (PBUH)?
Ofcourse I do, and the prophet(pbuh) then explained this message to his people.

Waz Paaji.. Read this importantly. So can i Take you as a FIQAH REJECTOR. ?????

 

[Wazeeri]

elaborate

 

[Zeenix]

elaborate

Are you are a Fiqah Rejector OR NOT.

 

[Joseph K.]

Who is talking about other books up here? We are talking about the Prophet(pbuh)'s teachings reaching us as the method of prayer, hajj...etc reached us.

Your tone seems very frustrated why can't you just discuss sensibly?
Notice how you didn't answer the question directly, you have just pointed me in the pursuit of some conensus which was reached when I wasn't paying attention.

Tell me what you take complete to mean. Simple request.
Don't point me in the direction where I can get the answer, give me the answer.

Tariq Ramadan quotes Imam Jaffar (RA) in one of his books to this effect (not exact words, I am quoting from my memory here), "Qur'an changes, like day and night", which means Qur'an is a dynamic text, it changes with time while staying the same. It is complete in this sense. Yes it has an infinite number of pages. This is Allah's greatest creation. One 'authorised' interpretation and an official interpreter would condemn this dynamic text to the shackles of time and space. This is what has come to pass. Too much emphasis on Hadith has pushed Qur'an in the backgtound, put it on a padestal where everybody worships it but nobody understands it as somebody else has done the task of understanding it for us hundreds of years ago and this understanding was recorded over a hundred years of that official interpreter's death! Not actively understanding the Word of God is THE main cause of the present state of affairs in Islamic world which has not only pushed us in the mire of corruption and exploitation but has brought infamy to our religion itself. The over-emphasis on hadith and sunnah has literally killed any chances of an authentic history of early Islam. What we have in our hands is nothing but a bunch of Cinese whispers and hagiography. Qur'an has lost its context, still it is very much possible to read Qur'an in the light of our present circumstances as Allah's book is for all times and all people, not just for the uncivilised beduin of a millinium and a half ago. Unfortunately, this anachronistic and static interpretation of our Text has made us stupid and a laughing stock in the eyes of the rest of the world.

 

[Wazeeri]

Are you are a Fiqah Rejector OR NOT.

Like i said earlier elaborate on your question. What aspect or part of the fiqah are you speaking off? What fiqh are you speaking off?

 

[Wazeeri]

Unfortunately, this anachronistic and static interpretation of our Text has made us stupid and a laughing stock in the eyes of the rest of the world.

JK
This is a rhetorical argument, please provide an ayat of the quran for which you feel the meaning has changed over time so we can understand exactly what you mean.

I am not against this concept but I just feel you have presented an argument which doesn't really provide any conclusive points against the ahadith. You have set out what you feel is the ideal way to approach the quran (at the moment this concept itself is an idea and not supported by any absolute basis in the quran) and you have argued how hadith go against your ideal approach.

A dynamic interpretation of the quran also comes with it's own problems and that is another topic all together.

 

[Zeenix]

Like i said earlier elaborate on your question. What aspect or part of the fiqah are you speaking off? What fiqh are you speaking off?

The response of yours to my questions, suggest one of the two things..

Either you are totally unaware of the Fundamentals of Fiqah OR you are a Fiqah Rejector.
See when i asked those questions, i wanted to ascertain where you stand. And when i asked you that, all you could was to ask which Fiqh i am talking about. Mere Bhai, Usool e Fiqah were setup by Al-Shafi in his Al-Risla. Kabhi time milay tu parhna zaroor. Its a fascinating read.

Some points that i remember, are

1) Both Quran and Sunnah are from Allah.
2) The Quran can abrogate Sunnah whether mutawatir or Ahad. And a Sunna (mutawatir or Ahad) can abrogate the Quran.
3) Any traditions that has been transmitted through reliable sources MUST BE Believed.
4) The Hadith are the source of Sunnah.

These arguments are backed by sound reasoning, and references.

So now i leave it to you, to evaluate your position vis a vis Fiqah.

Between can we have a SAW emoticon please. There are readily available images, so shouldn't be a problem.

 

[Wazeeri]

Zeenix

That is a bit of a convoluted argument. What if I am a fiqah rejector?
I don't understand what that has to do with this discussion.

PS: I left some questions which you haven't answered.

 

[fawad_wellwisher]

Fawad
I hope we can have a decent debate and in order to do so I hope you avoid loaded statements like the above. Contradiction with the quran is a criteria which all famous muhadith and nearly all muhadith set when assessing Hadith. This is not something new which people who reject ahadith as a whole have developed.

Here is what you said in your earlier post

But what about lies
This question is not only a problem for me to answer, it is a problem for you as well. The concept of ahadith is logical and necessary as shown above. We have lies in the collection of ahadith and it is our duty to work out a way of removing these lies.

To me this leaves me with no doubt that your have finally seen the truth in that Hadith contain lies. Now what you want to do is to somehow sweep those uncomfortable lies under the rug so that you can continue to follow a religious framework that is clearly not working. The proof of this is that the muslim countries have clearly lost their way in seeking intellectual pursuits and use the God given ability to reason and inquire.

From this quote I understand that you don't have a problem with the concept of ahadith but particular collections.

I am not willing to defend any collection because they are all works of humans and thus they are likely to contain problems. I generally use all books of ahadith as a source of knowledge, Out of all the famous collection of ahadith I feel sahih Bukhari and Muslim have been collected the most methodically.

No this is not what I meant. You need to define the scope of your argument. As the title suggests, the debate is between Hadith vs Quran Only. But you refuse to tell me which Hadith books to consider in this debate. Are you saying we should consider the top 2. Please confirm so that we can finalize the scope.

As I said I only believe in the Quran to follow my Deen. What do you? Quran + Sahih Bukhari and Muslim? Please confirm.

That is not an argument against the concept of ahadith. Please elaborate on what exactly you are arguing.
Hadith means speech/saying, the word hadith has been adopted as the title given to the tradition of collecting the sayings of the prophet(pbuh). Is your objection against the name given to this tradition?

I asked you to tell me how you translate the word Hadith that I left untranslated. You unfortunately did not answer my question.

The fact that you accused me of playing with semantics eventhough I had left the word untranslated suggests you somehow implicitly felt that the verses didn't gel with your belief system.

I don't understand what argument you are trying to present.

I think your last two arguments have now been confused with each other.

Is that not what is being argued? that hadith are historical accounts?
I asked you a simple question, explain the ayat without the aid of the hadith.
You replied suggesting that the hadith gives a historical context to the ayat which I would argue proves the importance of ahadith.

To explain this a little better, there are those who use Hadith purely as a historical source and not use to follow their deen because of the myriad of issues surrounding it. Then there are those like who use Hadith heavily to form their belief system. The challenge you gave refers to the former situation. If the Hadith did not exist, trust me no one would miss it. Besides you should only give such challenges when you are sure the Hadith contains the complete 'Tafsir' of the Quran. That unfortunately it does not so your challenge is a bit silly to be honest.

To reiterate, If the Prophet cut down the tree, it really doesn't have any affect on how I follow my Deen. So a Quran Only person can believe in it if he or she wishes to.

This suggestion that if I independently read the quran I will agree with you is not an argument but a belief which helps in avoiding the opposing points.

No. You can independently study the Quran and still disagree with me. I will just respect you more for doing so.

 

[Joseph K.]

JK
This is a rhetorical argument, please provide an ayat of the quran for which you feel the meaning has changed over time so we can understand exactly what you mean.

I am not against this concept but I just feel you have presented an argument which doesn't really provide any conclusive points against the ahadith. You have set out what you feel is the ideal way to approach the quran (at the moment this concept itself is an idea and not supported by any absolute basis in the quran) and you have argued how hadith go against your ideal approach.

A dynamic interpretation of the quran also comes with it's own problems and that is another topic all together.

Sorry, I really have to drag myself to this thread and find absolutely no inclination to take part in this debate. Still you posed a question and it would be rude of me to just ignore it.

We come accross countless occasions where Qur'an is shown as competent with the current scientific truth and people talk about 'the miracle of Qur'an' or 'Qur'an and science' etc. This is only one example where Qur'an sheds light on present-day truth in spite of its medieval origins. We are scared of using Qur'anic verses in social sciences. You will never find me taking part in debates about Qur'an and science as to me it is self-evident and natural of Qur'an to prove present-day realities. Scientific truths are transient, Qur'an goes beyond that. It proves what is said now and will prove what will be said tomorrow. Qur'an is more concerned with how we live or should live. We are scared of finding or even following the injunctions there and use the crutches of hadith to walk away from Qur'an. Hadith is the tool used to keep the status quo. Qur'an was sent to revolutionise human thinking. It is loaded with meanings, there are layers and layers of meanings. In this sense Qur'an changes like day and night. It is universal. Qur'an is simple yet complete. There are no complications in it yet it is complex enough to be universal and fit all time and ages. It is full of answers. We are scared to look for the answers to our modern-day problems in Qur'an. Hadith, on the other hand, is utilised as the means to keep people in the line. From "ghazwa i hind" to the division of world into "dar ul Islam" and "dar ul harb", it divides. It focuses on ritual with undue emphasis on 'salat' at the cost of action and duties. If 'salat' was so important, Allah would have taught it in Qur'an like he did the laws concerning inheritence and agreement (Kaffāra, fidya etc). All important things are explained in Qur'an. Hadith has different emphasis from Quran. Hadith is a means by which clergy has aquired and wielded power over centuries. Clergy has only one product: ritual. Hadith is the means to promote this product at the expense of Quranic imperative of action and interaction (mu'amlatt, worldly affairs). There may not be any contradiction between Qur'an and the so-called 'sahih' ahadith but the emphasis and nature of the two is totally different. Qur'an is dynamic and organic (grows, changes with time and space), hadit is static and mechanical (is bound in time and space), hence following former leads mankind to the future, latter, to the past.

 

[rhussain33]

I dont get you people why you disucssing this !?!

belieiving in and following the Messenger Muhammed (saw) is a fundamental part of our aqeedah... any one who rejects this is not from this Muslim Aqeedah,

we have to follow his sayings and actions, this is the command of allah... it just so happens that his sayings and actions are recorded in what is called a hadith in the hadith books, which have chains of narrations going back to the messenger (saw) some have many many chains for one hadith, all these chains are scrutinised for their authenticity, any fradulent narrators or people who are not trustworthy are clearly mentioned and highlighted and those hadiths are disregarded. The Quran was compiled in the same way !?! by the same Sahabah who brought you the hadith

I cannot for the life of me imagine why some people are debating whether the actions and sayings of the Messenger (saw) are not suppose to be followed along with the Quran.

please do read the fatwa from Islamqa again which i posted earlier.

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/showpost.php?p=2202423&postcount=61

 

[Wazeeri]

To me this leaves me with no doubt that your have finally seen the truth in that Hadith contain lies.

Finally seen the truth??
Please read your own post again, you are quoting my first post on the topic. I have never claimed that the hadith are divine.

As I said I only believe in the Quran to follow my Deen. What do you? Quran + Sahih Bukhari and Muslim? Please confirm.

I think that is the problem we are having up here fawad. You are not disntingusing between the concept of hadith and the books which are compilation of hadiths.

I don't accept any hadith book as complete and free from contradiction. I believe in all ahadith in Bukhari and Muslim unless there is a clear reason not to which the two scholars missed out.

I asked you to tell me how you translate the word Hadith that I left untranslated. You unfortunately did not answer my question.
The fact that you accused me of playing with semantics eventhough I had left the word untranslated suggests you somehow implicitly felt that the verses didn't gel with your belief system.

Fawad sorry to be direct but I am sure you have understood my point.
You left some ayats with one word untranslated, you made no point and no arguments.

The implied argument you presented has been tackled and you are not willing to explain your point. I don't know what you are trying to argue so I don't know whether I have answered you or not.

Please explain yourself, what were you implying by leaving that one word untranslated. in clear and precise words.

To explain this a little better, there are those who use Hadith purely as a historical source and not use to follow their deen because of the myriad of issues surrounding it. Then there are those like who use Hadith heavily to form their belief system.

I slightly agree with this point of yours, there are many self proclaimed mullahs who can not see beyond the written word. There is no concept of changing times, different cultures, different needs...etc. People see a hadith and observe it as a commandment for all times.

But I would like to argue that the fact that this historical account is off the very man responsible for giving us allah's message (peace be upon him) would give it religious significance. Not all ahadith are specific to a time period or exclsusive to the arabs.

The challenge you gave refers to the former situation. If the Hadith did not exist, trust me no one would miss it. Besides you should only give such challenges when you are sure the Hadith contains the complete 'Tafsir' of the Quran. That unfortunately it does not so your challenge is a bit silly to be honest.

Fawad I would argue that this suggesion is silly. As we have discussed earlier, not all ayats of the quran need explaining hence what you call the ahadith (the collection of ahadith books) do not contain a tafsir.

However the many tafsirs which are availabe are themselves derived from a concept similat to ahadith (in many aspects identical).

 

[Wazeeri]

JK

I don't have much to add to my last post other then to say I agree with a lot of what you have said but once again you have presented a subjective argument against ahadith. There is no forensic or absolute value to these arguments.

I do agree that ahadith need to be looked upon in the light of changing times and I also propose that the topic of hadith which has been pretty static since the 12th century needs to be revisted using new techniques in the field of literature developed since then and the use of computer technology.

But these are arguments against the use the ahadith are put to by different people not against the need or concept of ahadith themselves.

 

[Zeenix]

Zeenix

That is a bit of a convoluted argument. What if I am a fiqah rejector?
I don't understand what that has to do with this discussion.

PS: I left some questions which you haven't answered.

This debate is not on the personal likes and dislikes of Messrs Zeenix and Messrs Wazeeri. If that is the reason behind the debate then i don't want to be involved further in this debate at all.

The importance of Sunnah/Hadith in jurisprudence is in question, and not our personal likes and dislikes. This is why i put forward a questionaire, and your answers are somewhat "convoluted".

 

[Wazeeri]

This debate is not on the personal likes and dislikes of Messrs Zeenix and Messrs Wazeeri.

Exactly!
So why then was the issue of Wazeeri being a fiqah rejector brought up?

 

[Zeenix]

Exactly!
So why then was the issue of Wazeeri being a fiqah rejector brought up?

i explained it in the previous post. Why do you need Sunnah between. Not because Messrs Wazeeri feel that he somehow likes Sunnah. Whats the raison de'etre. What are we trying to establish here. The importance of Sunnah isn't just for the personal likes and dislikes but

If you are a Fiqah rejector then what are you trying to establish.
If you are not a Fiqah rejector then why (as suggested by the answers you gave) you don't believe in the Fundamentals of Fiqah.

So until you yourself are clear about this subject, there is no point debating this point with you any further. Comprendre.

 

[Wazeeri]

sorry you have not explained your argument at all. So no comprende.

The fiqah argument is a red herring and has nothing to do with this discussion.

Your questions have been answered. Mine haven't,

We have already established the need for ahadith (see challenge above).

I don't understand the question re: why we need sunnah.

 

[Apnacricket]

Brothers this thread should be deleted. You shouldnt be having competition between Holy quran and hadith.

 

[Wazeeri]

brother no one is having a competition between hadith and quran. The competition is between hadith and no hadith.

 

[Apnacricket]

OK. So why does the thread say hadith vs quran...

 

[Wazeeri]

the thread says hadith vs quran only

 

[Apnacricket]

Ok .

 

[Zeenix]

sorry you have not explained your argument at all. So no comprende.

The fiqah argument is a red herring and has nothing to do with this discussion.

Your questions have been answered. Mine haven't,

We have already established the need for ahadith (see challenge above).

I don't understand the question re: why we need sunnah.

I believe i explained my argument very well. You yourself are not clear as to what role do you want the hadith to play.

This is what i asked in my question. What Role are you arguing for Hadiths. As i said, its not the personal likes or dislikes of someone. Which school of thought do you follow.

Judging by your answers it is clear that you don't agree with the classical fundamentals of Fiqah. So what role do you want for the ahadith. There is no problem with hadith being a source of historical information, as an aid in understanding the culture, environment in place, as with those ahadith which conform to the quran. However if you give legal authority to the ahadith as in isolation with absolutely no ground in Quran, as in introducing a new concept, or as contradictory to Quran, then you run into problems.

Nobody in their right minds would challenge the authority of the Prophet (SAW) in Islam worldly or non-wordly affairs (Though a hadith does say that the prophet Might not be followed in the worldly affairs). The problem is with the attributed sayings of the prophet, not in conformity in Quran.

The second coming of Jesus, the Azaab e Qabar, the coming of Mehdi etc are some of the concepts which have no reference in the Quran, yet through narrations they became a part of the religion, so much so that a person difference between being a Kafir and Muslim is being decided on the basis of hadith.

One needs to read a bit of history about the hadith (which fortunately i have) to keep things in perspective.

 

[Wazeeri]

Zeenix

No you haven't explained yourself well because you hadn't until your last post stated your position in this debate. I think we are on the same chapter, this thread is not relevant to you as it is hadith vs quran ONLY. I think you have chosen to bat for the wrong side on this thread out of confusion.

I am against the concept of rejection of anything in ahadith just because it is not the quran. I find this position to be illogical and resultant of a head in the sand syndrome. Hadith as a historical source cannot be denied.

What religious importance you place on the ahadith is a personal choice at an individual level but I believe the more rational people will have to take the ahadith into account when deciding on the interpretation of religious commands. Hadith as a historical source by default has importance for someone trying to understand their religion.

The second coming of Jesus, the Azaab e Qabar, the coming of Mehdi etc are some of the concepts which have no reference in the Quran, yet through narrations they became a part of the religion,

We have already established that not every piece of data has been included in the quran. Your objection is based on the belief that everything which was taught to the Prophet(pbuh) ended up in the quran. We can discuss this further to prove that this is not the case but just to prevent that side of the debate I would like to mention the following "details of how to perform salat", "details of how to perform hajj", "Details of what the Prophet was told about his wives", "details of miraaj"

All of the above have been mentioned in the quran but the details were only with the Prophet(pbuh). Similarly the concept of the signs of the hour has been mentioned in the quran but the details were only with the Prophet(pbuh).

 

[Zeenix]

I am against the concept of rejection of anything in ahadith just because it is not the quran . I find this position to be illogical and resultant of a head in the sand syndrome. Hadith as a historical source cannot be denied.
What religious importance you place on the ahadith is a personal choice at an individual level but I believe the more rational people will have to take the ahadith into account when deciding on the interpretation of religious commands. Hadith as a historical source by default has importance for someone trying to understand their religion.

So you refute the status of the Quran as the Furqan or the Criterian. The scope of Hadith as a SOURCE of jurisprudence is under discussion. If a hadith complies with the Quran, there should be no problem in accepting it. Like, those passages of the Bible or any Holy book that are in accordance with the Quran. i can point out hundreds of ahadith that contradict the Quran, contradict with other ahadith, And i challenge you to point out to a single contradiction in Quran.

We have already established that not every piece of data has been included in the quran. Your objection is based on the belief that everything which was taught to the Prophet(pbuh) ended up in the quran.

Wow. This is one huge claim. One thing people don't understand is that the Quran establishes guidelines. If one remains within the guidelines s(h)e is Good. The Quran doesn't try to strangle you with dictating each step of your life. I can point out to millions of things that the Hadith doesn't even touch upon. People take the wrong notion from Islam is a complete code of life. Islam through Quran establishes the "Hudood". Within that Hudood you are free to use your intellect to act.

We can discuss this further to prove that this is not the case but just to prevent that side of the debate I would like to mention the following "details of how to perform salat", "details of how to perform hajj", "Details of what the Prophet was told about his wives", "details of miraaj"

All of the above have been mentioned in the quran but the details were only with the Prophet(pbuh). Similarly the concept of the signs of the hour has been mentioned in the quran but the details were only with the Prophet(pbuh).

I believe this has been covered in many other discussions. The rituals regarding establishing Salat etc were practiced since the Prophet (SAW) Time and even before it. Even the pagans used to perform Hajj. Perform Tawaf etc. Those practices were brought inline with the Quranic teachings and were practiced from the word Go. Those who say we need Hadith to establish prayers don't know what they are talking about. Its the Sunna. Sunna was well established by practice and IT WAS NOT WORD OF MOUTH. It was an established practice, practiced by generations.

I believe you are confused. You bring up Ahadith and then escape to Sunnah to resurrect your argument. During this course you have been putting forward lots of idiotic claims, which i don't need to go into. JFR

1) Nobody is questioning the role of the Prophet (SAW) authority. Who does that is completely off base.
2) The prophet (SAW) himself forbade the collection of ahadith, and erase those ahadith which people had written down.
Still if people want to collect ahadith then.

1) The preservation of Ahadith as a historical document, which can and should be revisted anytime i.e not considered as an eternal immutable finished document.
2) Such Ahadith which introduces new tenet of faith which has no evidence in Quran, should be completedly removed.
3) Ahadith not in comformity with Quran should be removed.
4) The law making source should be the Quran and only the Quran itself.

A Question.
Why did the Prophet not take any interest in preserving the ahadith, the way he preserved the Quran. Were they short of paper or was it not considered important enough.

 

[6xafridi]

Say: Obey Allah and obey the Messenger, but if you turn away, he (the Prophet) is only responsible for the duty placed on him (i.e. to convey Allah's Message) and you for that placed on you. If you obey him, you shall be on the right guidance. The Messenger's duty is only to convey (the message) in a clear way. (An-Nur 24:54)

This Ayah tells us the importance of Hadith

But no, by the Lord, they can have no (real) Faith, until they make you (the Prophet] judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against your decisions, but accept them with the fullest conviction." (An-Nisaa' 4: 65)

And we find such decisions from the Hadith

source (website): http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/...agename=Zone-English-Living_Shariah/LSELayout

 

[Wazeeri]

i can point out hundreds of ahadith that contradict the Quran, contradict with other ahadith, And i challenge you to point out to a single contradiction in Quran.

I am sure there are many contadictions between different ahadith. However the general perception of contradiction with the quran lies in the fact that people don't appreciate temporal logic. People don't appreciate that when the Prophet(pbuh) gave a certain command, it may have been long before or long after a certain ayat.

Wow. This is one huge claim. One thing people don't understand is that the Quran establishes guidelines. If one remains within the guidelines s(h)e is Good. The Quran doesn't try to strangle you with dictating each step of your life.

Hence for context of some ayat, religious rituals, history...etc we turn to ahadith which is the logical thing to do.

I can point out to millions of things that the Hadith doesn't even touch upon.

Which is why ahadith are not complete and not considered the word of god (other then qudsi).

Those who say we need Hadith to establish prayers don't know what they are talking about. Its the Sunna. Sunna was well established by practice and IT WAS NOT WORD OF MOUTH. It was an established practice, practiced by generations.

I think you have missed the point or you are arguing something which is very concerning.I would suggest that it is the people who consider the salaat and hajj to be a pagan ritual who don't know what they are talking about. It seems like an easy exit for when there is no answer.

The argument was just to show you that there is religious information outside of the quran. Which you have already accepted in your post but just to drive home the following point re: salat and hajj being pagan rituals.

Did the pagans read quranic ayats in their salat? Is your salat complete without quranic ayat? Did the pagans confirm the prophethood of Muhammad (pbuh) in their salat?

The answer is NO.
So who brought these changes into the "pagan" salat?

Allah(swt)?
Did the Prophet(pbuh) invent them?
Your argument that we were just doing something that has been done for centuries before the prophet(pbuh) are very weak and therefore they cannot be used to answer why this was not mentioned in the Quran.

The salat was passed down through word of mouth because everyone who learns salat is taught it by a teacher. This person goes ahead and teaches that to someone else. The concept is exactly the same as the ahadith, the only objection you have is that the Ahadith were at one point written down.

2) The prophet (SAW) himself forbade the collection of ahadith, and erase those ahadith which people had written down.
Still if people want to collect ahadith then.

1) You are relying on ahadith themselves for your argument.
2)At the starts of Islam the Prophet(pbuh) forbade the scribes from writing his words with those of the Quran so the words of allah are not confused with the words of The prophet(pbuh). The Prophet(pbuh) later allowed his words to be written down.

1) The preservation of Ahadith as a historical document, which can and should be revisted anytime i.e not considered as an eternal immutable finished document.
2) Such Ahadith which introduces new tenet of faith which has no evidence in Quran, should be completedly removed.
3) Ahadith not in comformity with Quran should be removed.
4) The law making source should be the Quran and only the Quran itself.

1) Agreed
2) Agreed
3) Agreed
4) Illogical, ahadith as historical documents are obviously going to have to be considered to understand verses in the quran regarding punishment.

During this course you have been putting forward lots of idiotic claims,

Zeeshan Bhai, if you don't have the capacity to discuss then just leave and play with computers or whatever you do.

Personal abuse just shows that your arguments have now been frustrated and you have no other resort.

It's a pity that arguments are dragged down to this level.

 

[Wiji]

Wazeeri,

On a daily basis, how do you perform wudu (ablution)? Kindly tell me which part of the body you wash.

 

[1137moiz]

Quran/Ahadith debate (plz keep civil)

I believe that the Quran is the unchangeable word of Allah, an the most emphatic, important source of information for a Muslim. However the Sunnah and Ahadith are the actions and words of the best servant of Allah.

There is a school of thought that presumes that the two are mutually exclusive which I find ridiculous, because the bulk of the Ahadith and Sunnah appear to align with the commands of Allah. Yes there are a few dodgy-looking Ahadith (I actually contacted a compiler of Ahadith wrt to one of them a few months ago, it completely contradicted Islam and he agreed that it was a very unreliable if not patently untrue source). But by and large the so-called "contradictions" between the Quran and Sunnah have, imho, been either taken out of context or misinterpreted.

There is a risk in that the Ahadith were compiled a good two centuries after occurrence but it should be remembered that the most reliable compilers (Bukhari and Muslim, for instance) went to stiff lengths to ensure the reliability of the collections. Bukhari if I am not mistaken omitted even slightly unreliable Ahadith and only put about a fifth of the total Ahadith he came across in his book, for fear of including unreliable accounts.

Now people will always twist things the way they like. There is no justification in Islam, for intance, for forbidding girls' education, but some readers of the Quran and Ahadith have been guilty of atrocious crimes in tryin to block girls' education. Others will bang on about the progressiveness of Islam but hoard up on interest. Does that invalidate the actual sources that they claim to be following? I believe not.

At the end of the day the Quran is the outstanding source of guidance, but this does not, in my opinion, invalidate the bulk of the Ahadith which nearly always align with the commands of the Quran.

 

[Tapori]

How did Namak_Halal and Wazeeri not intellectually square off on this one?

C'mon, it's like Mayweather V Pacquiao - Give the people what they want!

 

[shaheen1shaheen2]

@Tapori

Wow I need to have a proper read of this thread, as discussed in the other thread here are my demands I mean questions?

The Quran says that men can beat their wives. But we know according to the hadith that this is meant to be a light beating that inflicts a spiritual punishment and not a harmful physical punishment. What is to stop a man from misinterpreting the Quran and beating his wife severely?

It says in the Quran to shorten the prayer when you travel. How long do you have to travel in order to be eligible to have this privilege? How short do you have to cut the prayer?

How do you know how much Zakah to pay using the Quran alone?

 

[Tapori]

Cool, bro seriously, just understand that people will differ. Even if you believe you're 100 percent right, the same way you're never going to get people to agree on what day to do Eid and Ramadan, you're never going to get everyone to believe your position.

Read everything that contradicts what you think, You'll be better for it even if you don't change your mind.

Live, Learn and just relax.

- There's another thread too, but I ain't bumping it yet in case this gets deleted. So please people, if you can, keep to the rules, Read the Religious Sticky in the forums again if you must...

 

[shaheen1shaheen2]

Cool, bro seriously, just understand that people will differ. Even if you believe you're 100 percent right, the same way you're never going to get people to agree on what day to do Eid and Ramadan, you're never going to get everyone to believe your position.

Read everything that contradicts what you think, You'll be better for it even if you don't change your mind.

Live, Learn and just relax.

- There's another thread too, but I ain't bumping it yet in case this gets deleted. So please people, if you can, keep to the rules, Read the Religious Sticky in the forums again if you must...

I understand that brother and I'm normally a calm guy its just all of a sudden everyone started insulting me and I'm not wearing bangles on my wrists (it sounds better in urdu)

 

[Jadz]

@Tapori

Wow I need to have a proper read of this thread, as discussed in the other thread here are my demands I mean questions?

The Quran says that men can beat their wives. But we know according to the hadith that this is meant to be a light beating that inflicts a spiritual punishment and not a harmful physical punishment. What is to stop a man from misinterpreting the Quran and beating his wife severely?

It says in the Quran to shorten the prayer when you travel. How long do you have to travel in order to be eligible to have this privilege? How short do you have to cut the prayer?

How do you know how much Zakah to pay using the Quran alone?

Brother, you have provided us with the conventional interpretation of the Verse in question - Q4;34.

There is, however, an alternate interpretation which refutes the conventional one. That is to say, the word translated as "beat them" has been re-interpreted to mean "leave them" or "turn away (from) them"

This is in keeping with the general theme and tone of the Qur'an: which calls for peace, mediation and reconciliation as opposed to aggression and violence.

Please see Laleh Bakhtiar's The Sublime Qur'an.

 

[shaheen1shaheen2]

Brother, you have provided us with the conventional interpretation of the Verse in question - Q4;34.

There is, however, an alternate interpretation which refutes the conventional one. That is to say, the word translated as "beat them" has been re-interpreted to mean "leave them" or "turn away (from) them"

This is in keeping with the general theme and tone of the Qur'an: which calls for peace, mediation and reconciliation as opposed to aggression and violence.

Please see Laleh Bakhtiar's The Sublime Qur'an.

Sahih International
Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand.

Shakir
Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.

Tafsir Ibn Kathir
http://abdurrahman.org/qurantafseer/ibnkathir/ibnkathir_web/4.11037.html



Do I believe you or Ibn Kathir?

 

[zimmz]

Do I believe you or Ibn Kathir?

Both are human. Both are not perfect. You don't have to believe in any of them. You ought to believe in message (what you read of them) using your logic and wisdom. Read the arguments from both side and decide for yourself.

 

[azhar329]

According to some on this forum, yes

 

[Tapori]

I understand that brother and I'm normally a calm guy its just all of a sudden everyone started insulting me and I'm not wearing bangles on my wrists (it sounds better in urdu)

I know aapne chooriaan nahi pehn ke rakhiwee hain - but that too is a little insulting to any ladies wearing bangles, who join in the discussion; Are they meant to take the insults?

I'm just kidding , I know what you mean, fair enough.
Hope this thread doesn't get deleted thats all.

 

[afridianakhtar1]

Kudos to Wazeeri..... I salute you for debating thus far with ppl who are like jews in my sight. seriously next thing they'd be saying did you see prophet SAW from your own eyes doing such things or where in the quran Allah commended muslims to read hadith?? for them Allah has said they will never believe even you give them ample evidence. Also there is a veil in front of there eye which can only be removed if Allah wills.

with all the debate going around regarding Hadith vs Quran Only, I'm glad to see people are about to grasp what Wazeeri has in OP.Inshallah May Allah show each and every one to the right path.

Note: whoever say's where in the quran does it say to read hadith in order to understand quran in detail? think about it dont you wana educate yourselve with the truth which is the Quran the best thing on the eartthhhh. Sorry to say but those of you are not far away from jews as they reject all the books other then their torah.

 

[Tapori]

^ Do the Jews believe in the Quran?

So if someone chooses to believe in the Quran, surely that is a sound position in of itself?

 

[Tapori]

Can I also add, I hope this thread isn't restricted to just Quran only Vs Hadith, but encourages a broader debate about the Hadith and the Quran and the roles they play as witnessed in other threads going off a bit. Try and make this the go to Hadith debate thread

Might I add too If I may, to refrain from huge copy and paste jobs and arduously long links unless requested and of course don't just read that which you agree with!

 

[Liberty]

This thread is going down the gutter very soon.

 

[Jadz]

Sahih International
Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand.

Shakir
Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.

Tafsir Ibn Kathir
http://abdurrahman.org/qurantafseer/ibnkathir/ibnkathir_web/4.11037.html



Do I believe you or Ibn Kathir?

Brother, you are not required to believe either Ibn Kathir or me or any other human being. You are only supposed to read the Qur'an and understand its Verses for yourself - independant of all extraneous material as well as pre-concieved notions.

If you believe that Allah SWT really and truly gave Permission for men to beat their wives - based upon no more no less than scholarly interpretations and translations - then good for you. I, however, as a thinking individual, prefer to do my own study of the Text and its language.

 

[Opener]

Jadz I have a simple question. If the Quran alone is enough what is the role of Prophet-hood in Islam for today's Muslims? Why was the Quran not revealed in a book form rather than being revealed through a Prophet.

Also if we are not supposed to believe in any human being and Prophet (SAW) was a human how can we believe that Quran was actually revealed as we are told. If you say that it is in the Quran, then we know its in the Quran because the Prophet said it is in the Quran.

 

[AbdulrazzaqFan]

Brother, you are not required to believe either Ibn Kathir or me or any other human being. You are only supposed to read the Qur'an and understand its Verses for yourself - independant of all extraneous material as well as pre-concieved notions.

If you believe that Allah SWT really and truly gave Permission for men to beat their wives - based upon no more no less than scholarly interpretations and translations - then good for you. I, however, as a thinking individual, prefer to do my own study of the Text and its language.

Sister why do you take Laleh Bakhtiar's translation over let's say Picthal's?

 

[shaheen1shaheen2]

Brother, you are not required to believe either Ibn Kathir or me or any other human being. You are only supposed to read the Qur'an and understand its Verses for yourself - independant of all extraneous material as well as pre-concieved notions.

If you believe that Allah SWT really and truly gave Permission for men to beat their wives - based upon no more no less than scholarly interpretations and translations - then good for you. I, however, as a thinking individual, prefer to do my own study of the Text and its language.

My Sister the operative word used in this verse is "daraba" while it may have many meanings none of them seem to be leave them or turn away from them,you're saying not to believe any human being but you're referring me to a translation by a half American half Iranian woman, that doesnt make sense.You know before I can even attempt to comment on a verse I need to read a few tafseers to understand it properly which is the same for everyone else as well including knowledgeable scholars, what makes you think you're such an expert on the quran that you can just do your own study of the text and its language and make judgement on it?

 

[Jadz]

Jadz I have a simple question. If the Quran alone is enough what is the role of Prophet-hood in Islam for today's Muslims? Why was the Quran not revealed in a book form rather than being revealed through a Prophet.

Also if we are not supposed to believe in any human being and Prophet (SAW) was a human how can we believe that Quran was actually revealed as we are told. If you say that it is in the Quran, then we know its in the Quran because the Prophet said it is in the Quran.

Salaam Brother - hope you are well, In Sha Allah Ta'ala.

Appreciate your questions, thankyou.

Allah SWT has always revealed HIS Word through HIS Messengers. Allah SWT communicates to human beings through the medium of language - which is why HE invariably revealed each successive Scripture in the language of its recipients.

The Prophets are also role models, so the Message from Allah SWT is multi-faceted and multi-layered - it is not simply an abstract detailing of dos and don'ts.

I hope you will re-read my earlier post, because I fear you may have misunderstood its meaning. Or perhaps I expressed myself badly, in which case I apologize.

Believers are required to study the Text of the Scriptures for themselves in order that they may understand them. They are not supposed to blindly - and without question - follow and/or accept the translations, interpretations or explanations by scholars. That is what I was striving to convey.

 

[Jadz]

Sister why do you take Laleh Bakhtiar's translation over let's say Picthal's?

Brother, it is not a question of accepting one scholarly interpretation over another. It is much more important than that. It is about striving to comprehend the Intent of Allah SWT when considering Q4;34.

To that end, it is incumbent upon believers to attempt to understand the words employed. Which is why I accept Laleh Bakhtiar's re-interpretation of the Verse - I also agree with her reasoning in respect of this subject.

I hope you will take time to read her work - at the very least, it deserves careful consideration.

 

[Jadz]

My Sister the operative word used in this verse is "daraba" while it may have many meanings none of them seem to be leave them or turn away from them,you're saying not to believe any human being but you're referring me to a translation by a half American half Iranian woman, that doesnt make sense.You know before I can even attempt to comment on a verse I need to read a few tafseers to understand it properly which is the same for everyone else as well including knowledgeable scholars, what makes you think you're such an expert on the quran that you can just do your own study of the text and its language and make judgement on it?

Brother, I know that the verb Daraba has many meanings - they all depend upon context.

Why characterize Laleh Bakhtiar in the way that you have? What does her nationality have to do with anything? Please refrain from seeking to demean fellow believers. Laleh is a Muslimah and a scholar. If you read many tafseers then why not hers?

Incidentally, I am not referring you to her work in order to persuade or convince you. I am merely pointing out to you that there exist alternate translations to Q4;34.

Ultimately, you must weigh all the evidence for yourself and then arrive at your own understanding. It is intellectually naive to accept interpretations simply because they represent majority or conventional view.

 

[shaheen1shaheen2]

@Tapori

Wow I need to have a proper read of this thread, as discussed in the other thread here are my demands I mean questions?

The Quran says that men can beat their wives. But we know according to the hadith that this is meant to be a light beating that inflicts a spiritual punishment and not a harmful physical punishment. What is to stop a man from misinterpreting the Quran and beating his wife severely?

It says in the Quran to shorten the prayer when you travel. How long do you have to travel in order to be eligible to have this privilege? How short do you have to cut the prayer?

How do you know how much Zakah to pay using the Quran alone?

@Tapori

My friend when you get a chance if you could be so kind as to answer these questions please, thank you.

 

[Tapori]

Will do, thanks.

In any capacity, Jadz has answered the first, Namak_Halal the third and that leaves the second.

The counter-question would be: Are you 100 percent (or close to) certain the Hadith related to such questions are 100 percent, truthfully the words and actions of the Prophet? (PBUH)

 

[Tapori]

shaheen1shaheen2

If we had criticised the politics, sectarian leanings or agendas of your favoured Scholars, you'd go absolutely Rambo on us.

Focus on Laleh Bakhtiar's points and debate them. You can later say comment on her "Agenda" but deal with her points that address your question using the Quran.

Jadz is right. Logically, that verse makes no sense if you imply it means to hit.

If we take the "Light beating interpretation" that too is hilarious, as what would be the purpose and would that solve anything?

You really think most ladies are going to go: Well he's lightly beat me so you know what, I think I'll stay...


That;s before we get to the Scholars that say "Use a special stick to beat lightly"

What is a "Spiritual beating" and does it demonstrably work?

 

[Tapori]

shaheen1shaheen2

What are your thoughts on the concept of Rape within marriage, as discussed amongst many esteemed "Scholars..."

 

[Tapori]

shaheen1shaheen2

Again, the key point is this:

If I choose to just follow the Quran for religious jurisprudence, what's the worst unIslamic thing I could do?

If I followed the Hadith, I could be, doing something that wasn't said or done by the Prophet.

Who's more conservative in that sense?

 

[shaheen1shaheen2]

shaheen1shaheen2

What are your thoughts on the concept of Rape within marriage, as discussed amongst many esteemed "Scholars..."

what you mean like if one wants to make love with ones wife it is haram for her to refuse?

 

[Tapori]

You'll also note that the key Religious divide between Shia's and the other sects were in large part due to the interpretation of the Quran.

The Hadith were compiled during the most tension filled and Civil unrest Islam had seen.

 

[Tapori]

what you mean like if one wants to make love with ones wife it is haram for her to refuse?

Yes, but I'll have to be much raw than that; If you want to have sexual intercourse or sexual realtions and your wife refuses.

Many Scholars/Imams believe Rape within an Islamic Marriage is impossible.

 

[shaheen1shaheen2]

Yes, but I'll have to be much raw than that; If you want to have sexual intercourse or sexual realtions and your wife refuses.

Many Scholars/Imams believe Rape within an Islamic Marriage is impossible.

I have no knowledge on this subject I'd have to do some research before I can even attempt to comment on it.

 

[shaheen1shaheen2]

@tapori
I take it you read verses and interpret them how you understand them without reading any tafseer's or anything?
If so then how do you know you're interpretation is right?

 

[AbdulrazzaqFan]

Why did Allah revealed the Quran in 23+ years?

 

[Tapori]

I take it you read verses and interpret them how you understand them without reading any tafseer's or anything?
If so then how do you know you're interpretation is right?

No. I of course read tafseers. But i do not have a pre-ordained affiliation to a particular sect, other than the broad Sunni umbrella I was brought up in.

That's exactly the point! I might not be right. But Allah knows my hearts intention and knows I have used the most reliable source and demonstrably most consistent literary text claiming to be the word of Allah, in the world along with his gift of the Human brain.

When scholars regularly say "the Hadith says" as a means to win a debate about a Quranic principle or vers.
That is my only bone of contention where a Hadith can be proven to be illogical when compared to the Quranic verse it is attempting to clarify, or when a "Scholar" doesn't show any reasoning as to why this Hadith should be deemed correct. Regularly, it's:
"I don't know; Got to believe the Prophet did/said it though! Don't question it too much...
We also hear little of the context and political, religious leanings of a particular author of a particular Hadith, nor the climate it was revealed in.

If I am biased, it is that I would rather someone brings Quranic principles of evidence and logic and reason to explain things rather than "This Scholar said this so it has to be true" or "This Imam says this, i won't try to offer any alternative explanation, even though this explanation doesn't make logical sense regarding the Quran"

Just look at the Isa (PBUH) will return thread...

If somebody discovers a new way of interpreting a Quranic verse, or a new concept that adheres to it using evidence and logic (Say Evolution) then that further emboldens the majesty of the Quran in my eyes and I'll change my mind.

Of course I could be wrong; it's the Arrogance that many Scholars and Imams believe that their way is 100 percent right without question and seek to justify it, rather than looking at the evidence and arriving at a conclusion as objectively as possible. Many do it the other way to justify a sects position!

Why did Allah revealed the Quran in 23+ years?

You mean over time? Well i would have to look more carefully at the subject. For now, As the Prophet was in contact with Allah throughout this period and he was human, it makes sense that an entire regions belief system is challenged over a period of time, rather than:

Illiterate Pious Man has complete divine revelation last night... all of it.

Also, the Prophet himself would have to come to terms with his own status of the chosen one, the doubts he might have had after the initial revelation and of course the dynamic nature of him accepting the challenges he faced throughout trying to establish Islam. not to mention people would logically ask him:

"Well if Allah spoke to you, bring us another revelation" etc.

It would be a pretty illogical Allah who would say:

You're the last messenger, here is the last revelation all at once. Now go establish it... I won't talk to you ever again

I have plenty of unanswered questions irrespective of whether I believe in the bulk of Hadiths or not... Some people are just more curious

 

[Tapori]

Science has revolutionized our lives throughout history.

When Islam was synonymous with this approach to life, we had much progress.

Conversely, when the Europeans were in the Dark Ages, they relied on very similar things Muslims today rely on: A blind belief in Imams and Scholars being more learned therefore automatically being 100 percent right in everything or being 100 percent immune to question by anyone not a scholar/Imam.

Sounds eerily similiar to the approach many Catholics have to the Catholic Church.

And we all know what the Catholic Church as an unanswerable, all-knowing, beyond question by any layman, actually did to mankind. Not least Galileo...

He tried telling them logically and based on Aql that the world was not flat... they not only didn't listen but accused him of Blasphemy and going against the Bible...

it is for this reason Islam and The Quran is for all mankind. It's translations are not hidden and there have been no restrictions on it's translation. Anyone can join in the discussion and add their input.

So count yourself lucky you can read your own Quran; It is a right Martin Luther and many Christians had to fight centuries for their own scripture.

 

[AbdulrazzaqFan]

No. I of course read tafseers. But i do not have a pre-ordained affiliation to a particular sect, other than the broad Sunni umbrella I was brought up in.

That's exactly the point! I might not be right. But Allah knows my hearts intention and knows I have used the most reliable source and demonstrably most consistent literary text claiming to be the word of Allah, in the world along with his gift of the Human brain.

When scholars regularly say "the Hadith says" as a means to win a debate about a Quranic principle or vers.
That is my only bone of contention where a Hadith can be proven to be illogical when compared to the Quranic verse it is attempting to clarify, or when a "Scholar" doesn't show any reasoning as to why this Hadith should be deemed correct. Regularly, it's:
"I don't know; Got to believe the Prophet did/said it though! Don't question it too much...
We also hear little of the context and political, religious leanings of a particular author of a particular Hadith, nor the climate it was revealed in.

If I am biased, it is that I would rather someone brings Quranic principles of evidence and logic and reason to explain things rather than "This Scholar said this so it has to be true" or "This Imam says this, i won't try to offer any alternative explanation, even though this explanation doesn't make logical sense regarding the Quran"

Just look at the Isa (PBUH) will return thread...

If somebody discovers a new way of interpreting a Quranic verse, or a new concept that adheres to it using evidence and logic (Say Evolution) then that further emboldens the majesty of the Quran in my eyes and I'll change my mind.

Of course I could be wrong; it's the Arrogance that many Scholars and Imams believe that their way is 100 percent right without question and seek to justify it, rather than looking at the evidence and arriving at a conclusion as objectively as possible. Many do it the other way to justify a sects position!



You mean over time? Well i would have to look more carefully at the subject. For now, As the Prophet was in contact with Allah throughout this period and he was human, it makes sense that an entire regions belief system is challenged over a period of time, rather than:

Illiterate Pious Man has complete divine revelation last night... all of it.

Also, the Prophet himself would have to come to terms with his own status of the chosen one, the doubts he might have had after the initial revelation and of course the dynamic nature of him accepting the challenges he faced throughout trying to establish Islam. not to mention people would logically ask him:

"Well if Allah spoke to you, bring us another revelation" etc.

It would be a pretty illogical Allah who would say:

You're the last messenger, here is the last revelation all at once. Now go establish it... I won't talk to you ever again

I have plenty of unanswered questions irrespective of whether I believe in the bulk of Hadiths or not... Some people are just more curious

You're correct and I'm glad you're open minded enough to accept that you could be wrong and from your post above it appears to me that you do not necessarily reject all ahadith? Am I correct in assuming that?

So which ahadith do you find problematic and why?

 

[Saqs]

Can someone point me to a list of all the Mutawattir Hadith?

 

[shaheen1shaheen2]

Science has revolutionized our lives throughout history.

When Islam was synonymous with this approach to life, we had much progress.

Conversely, when the Europeans were in the Dark Ages, they relied on very similar things Muslims today rely on: A blind belief in Imams and Scholars being more learned therefore automatically being 100 percent right in everything or being 100 percent immune to question by anyone not a scholar/Imam.

Sounds eerily similiar to the approach many Catholics have to the Catholic Church.

And we all know what the Catholic Church as an unanswerable, all-knowing, beyond question by any layman, actually did to mankind. Not least Galileo...

He tried telling them logically and based on Aql that the world was not flat... they not only didn't listen but accused him of Blasphemy and going against the Bible...

it is for this reason Islam and The Quran is for all mankind. It's translations are not hidden and there have been no restrictions on it's translation. Anyone can join in the discussion and add their input.

So count yourself lucky you can read your own Quran; It is a right Martin Luther and many Christians had to fight centuries for their own scripture.

I'm in agreement with you on this, the reason the muslims are in decline is because they follow the scholars blindly, what the scholars say is halal they take as halal, what the scholars say is haram they take as haram without asking for evidence from quran and sunnah. Allah said that the Jews and Christians who do this are committing shirk so is it any different if a Muslim does this?

 

[khan-92]

Can someone point me to a list of all the Mutawattir Hadith?

Two of the more famous ones are those of al-Suyuti and al-Kattani, who use different criteria for assessment they are in arabic. Here are links for both:

http://ia700305.us.archive.org/16/items/waq3759/3759.pdf

http://ia700406.us.archive.org/28/items/waq17623/17623.pdf

 

[Tapori]

^ Thanks khan-92 -

He tried telling them logically and based on Aql that the world was not flat... they not only didn't listen but accused him of Blasphemy and going against the Bible...

Correction: Galileo told the Church, that the Earth revolved around the Sun. They thought the Sun revolved around the earth.

 

[Namak_Halaal]

Why did Allah revealed the Quran in 23+ years?

You might as well ask why God did not reveal the Qur’an with Adam (PBUH).

You might as well ask why we are born as babies and not adults.

You might as well ask why a seed does not grow into a fruit bearing tree over-night.

The reason, this is my opinion by the way, why the Qur’an was revealed in 23 years was to provide context to revelation so that man could understand. Moreover, had god revealed the Quran in a day, it would be difficult for man to digest, difficult for man to memorize, and so forth. Also, it exemplifies the point of patience, which is a virtue.

 

[AbdulrazzaqFan]

You might as well ask why God did not reveal the Qur’an with Adam (PBUH).

You might as well ask why we are born as babies and not adults.

You might as well ask why a seed does not grow into a fruit bearing tree over-night.

I hope you're not mocking me for asking a question? And I asked this question precisely for the reason you listed below and which I'm about to comment on. Unfortunately, Tapori didn't fell for it. Smaat guy Tapori but you did.

The reason, this is my opinion by the way, why the Qur’an was revealed in 23 years was to provide context to revelation so that man could understand. Moreover, had god revealed the Quran in a day, it would be difficult for man to digest, difficult for man to memorize, and so forth. Also, it exemplifies the point of patience, which is a virtue.

You say that Quran was revealed in 23 years to provide context but you don't beleive in the context since you don't believe in ahadith that often expound or give details on a particular ayah or what it means, how then can you justify your position?

 

[Namak_Halaal]

I hope you're not mocking me for asking a question? And I asked this question precisely for the reason you listed below and which I'm about to comment on. Unfortunately, Tapori didn't fell for it. Smaat guy Tapori but you did.

No, I was not mocking you. Why would I mock you? For what reason? For what purpose?

You say that Quran was revealed in 23 years to provide context but you don't beleive in the context since you don't believe in ahadith that often expound or give details on a particular ayah or what it means, how then can you justify your position?

This is where you and I digress. You say the Hadith provides context to the Qur’an, but the reality is Hadith subscribers sponsor the Hadith to be a ‘manual’ on how to comprehend the Qu’ran. For example, on how to read Salaat. Where’s the context in this? There is none.

 

[AbdulrazzaqFan]

This is where you and I digress. You say the Hadith provides context to the Qur’an, but the reality is Hadith subscribers sponsor the Hadith to be a ‘manual’ on how to comprehend the Qu’ran. For example, on how to read Salaat. Where’s the context in this? There is none.

Prophet saw says "Pray as you've seen me pray", why does it not make sense to you?

As for the context, there are certain ayaat that are self-explanatory but then there are others that are not, how then one learns the context?

Let's try an example if you're willing: Please read Surah 'Abasa: 1-10, it's a very small surah, shouldn't take you more than 10 seconds to read the first 10 verses. Now please explain the context, not the ayah but the context.

Who's the ayah talking about?

 

[shaykh1985]

NH...yes or no please...do you only pray 3 times a day?...

From the Quran can you please answer the following questions...

How do you perform Salat?
Can a common person find out how many Rakat's there are?
Can we perform Salat when we are naked?
Is it ok to perform Salat right behind a Woman, behind her behind?
How do you determine the amount to give for Zakat?
How much is the Jizya tax?
Can men look at naked men?
Is Cross Dressing Permissible?
Is Alcohol permissible, how do we know which verse came first?
Is Vinegar Haram since it comes from Wine?
How do we get Married?
Can we eat Monkeys or Tigers or Bears?
Can we sodomize our Wives?
Can we read the Bible for Guidance?
If a male has Madhy does he require Ghusl?
If in travel, how do we shorten the prayer?
If in travel, could travel mean across the street, what is the length?

On the topic of Sunnah I accept the Sunnah to be the sayings, actions and confirmations of the Prophet...

Now for starters remember that Sunnah is revelation in itself...

Quran is revelation in word and meaning whilst Sunnah is revelation in meaning...

And whoever obeys the Messenger, thereby obeys Allâh. (4:80)

And there are plenty of Ayat of Quran which speak of obeying the Prophet...

Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and beware (of evil): if ye do turn back, know ye that it is Our Messenger's duty to proclaim (the Message) in the clearest manner. (5: 92)

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. (4: 59).

Say: "Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger: but if ye turn away, he is only responsible for the duty placed on him and ye for that placed on you. If ye obey him, ye shall be on right guidance.(24: 54).

And whoever obeys Allâh and His Messenger, Allâh shall admit him in the Gardens underneath which rivers flow. (4:13)

And whoever obeys Allâh and His Messenger, he has won a great success. (33:71)

And we sent no messenger, but that he should be obeyed by the leave of Allâh. (44)

DIY Muslims is another topic...I will discuss the need to follow scholars at a later time...

Its interesting that you talk about divisions when essentially you follow YOUR OWN version of Islam as it based solely on your own interpretation of what the faith is...could there be any bigger a division than that?...your from the Namak Halaal school of though...

Your not a scholar on this subject...just as I wouldn't go to a shoe shine boy for an operation I am not going to go to a layman like yourself for Islamic knowledge...I would love for you to tell me about the process of ijtihad btw...considering the Quran doesn't provide direct answers to modern questions such as cloning for instance I would love for you to provide me hukm shari answers for such questions...

 

[shaykh1985]

This is something I wrote on this forum a while back about why I am not a DIY Muslim and follow scholastic opinions...

Ask yourself this...are you qualified to make these decisions by yourself...do you have the ability?...to give a simple parallel...I am not a scholar by an stretch...I am unable to read Arabic...I havent analysed the Quran and its sources in depth either...

Its not just knowledge of Arabic I lack, I lack knowledge of Arabic grammar...how for instance am I a layman able to infer whether the text indicates a recommendation or a command?...

What for instance is the legal reason behind a text, how do I analyse the strength of an evidence alone...how am I supposed to reconcile evidences that appear contradictory?...how can I distinguish between words that are aam (general) and khass (specific)...and this isnt even discussing ijtihad which is deducing new rulings based on the text...essentially many of us are reliant on knowledgeable people who have analysed the Quran and Sunnah in depth...if I want to know the law of something I would rely on a lawyer because he is qualified...I wouldnt represent myself...in the same vein I would rely on those qualified in analysing Islamic texts and producing rulings...

Am I more knowledgeable than these scholars who have dedicated their lives to Islam?...no of course not...now if you have the ability to be scholar...ie learn Arabic, Quran and Hadith sciences, Ijma and Qiyas then by all means do it an then rely on your own opinions but when does not have knowledge they should seek knowledge from those that do...the Quran does not directly answer many things and to get full answers you need other sources such as hadith...if I only read one book on something then I will only have one source...Islam has provided us the Quran and the Sunnah and full analysis of those things is required to formulate a hukm...

Now ask yourself can you do that?...then ask yourself if there are those that can?...I would not perform surgery if I do not know how...I would hire a surgeon...why would I do a DIY job with my faith when there are qualified people in jurisprudence who can assist me...

We all seek advice from people that are knowledgeable on a subject so why is it that some of us decided these scholars are not worthy of our attention...

Further additions...

Essentially as a layman you are allowed to choose an opinion from a scholar as you are unable to determine its strength yourself...

For Sunnis there are 4 main schools of thought so Hanafis, Shafis, Hanbalis and Malikis...it isnt required to be part of a school of thought but it is required to follow a scholastic opinion and the classical scholars are considered the strongest generally...obviously with new realities these scholars wont cover everything so therefore it is upon scholars to do ijtihad which is deducing a hukm from the texts to deal with a new reality...so there are scholars who have done things on cloning for instance...read the evidences provided and your free to follow which one you want...just make sure its not to do with your own desires and rather you choose it because you believe it to be correct and the strongest sounding argument you have been provided...

There are a lot of views flying around and there are many issues where there is consensus opinion where things are not up for debate...then there are issues of difference of opinion (ikhtilaaf) of which you are able to choose a scholastic opinion...

Unless you are qualified in what is a serious list of areas then you cant deduce hukms of your own...it isnt neccesary that you belong to a school of thought for all of your opinions but it is neccesary that Muslims who are taqleed take opinions from qualified scholars and not do DIY hukms...

I hope this is of help to you NM and those who aren't clear on this subject...below is a good article on laymans and Madhab...

I hope you don't think I have been rude to you...essentially it is ludicrous for me to suggest someone should follow my understanding of Quran and Sunnah considering my lack of scholarship...therefore I find it ludicrous that you present yourself as an Islamic authority on issues when all you are is a layman...

The Opinion of the Majority: The Layman Has No Madhab:
This is the opinion of the majority of the Malikis, Shafi’is and Hanbalis, according to Ibn Taymiyah.

It is also widely reported in Shafi’i sources, that Abu al-Fath al-Harawi - from the students of al-Shafi’i - said: “The Madhab of the generality of the followers (of al-Shafi’i), is that the layman has no Madhab. Hence, if he finds a Mujtahid, he makes Taqleed of him; and if he is unable to find one, but finds instead one who is well-acquainted with a Madhab, he makes Taqleed of him”

Al-Imam al-Nawawi says: “What is dictated by the evidence is that a person is not obliged to adhere to a Madhab; rather he should ask whoever he wishes.”

Ibn Qawan al-Shafi’i says in his al-Tahqiqat, “The truth is that it is not incumbent to adhere to a Madhab; Rather, a person should ask whoever he likes, but without seeking allowances (tatabbu’ al-rukhas).”

Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari al-Hanafi says (as reported by al-Ma’sumi): “It is not obligatory upon anyone from the Ummah to be a Hanafi, or a Maliki, or a Shafi’i, or a Hanbali; rather, it is obligatory upon everyone, if he is not a scholar, to ask someone from Ahl al-Dhikr (people of knowledge), and the four Imams are from amongst the Ahl al-Dhikr.”

Ibn al-Humam al-Hanafi says in his Tahrir (as quoted by al-Ma’sumi): “Adhering to a particular Madhab is not obligatory, according to the correct opinion, since nothing becomes obligatory, except that which Allah and His Messenger  has commanded; and Allah and His Messenger  did not oblige anyone to adhere to the Madhab of any particular individual from the Ummah, to make Taqleed of all that he says and to leave the sayings of everyone else. Surely, the blessed generations passed without obliging anyone to adhere to a particular Madhab.”

This is also the opinion of some of the leading Hanafi jurists of modern times, such as ‘Abdul-Fattah Abu Ghuddah - may Allah have mercy on him, (see his comments on al-Ihkam by al-Qarafi p. 231) in addition to Al-Zuhaili who says in his Usul al-Fiqh al-Islami 2/1166 that this is the correct opinion. He further adds, in the footnote of the same page, about the layman, that: “It is not correct for him to have a Madhab, even if he adheres to it.”

Ibn Muflih al-Hanbali, in al-Furu’, mentions the difference of opinion amongst the Malikis and Shafi’is, saying: “It not being obligatory is the most famous opinion”. Al-Mardawi comments: “And this is the correct opinion”.

Ibn al-Najjar al-Hanbali says: “A layman is not obliged to adhere to a Madhab…”

Ibn al-Qayyim says: “This is definitely the correct opinion, since there is nothing obligatory, except that which Allah and His Messenger  made obligatory. And never did Allah or His Messenger  oblige anyone to adhere to the Madhab of one of the Imams, to make Taqleed of one and leave the others.”

Ibn Taymiyah says: “If a Muslim faces an event without precedence, then he should ask the one he believes issues verdicts in accordance with Allah’s and His Messenger’s  Shari’ah, irrespective of which Madhab he is from. It is not incumbent upon any Muslim to make Taqleed of a particular person amongst the scholars in everything he says” - to his words - “For one to follow someone’s Madhab due to his incapacity to find out the Shar’i ruling from other than him, then that is only permissible, and not something obligatory upon everyone if it becomes possible for one to obtain the knowledge of Shar’ through different means. In fact, everyone is obliged to fear Allah to his utmost, and seek the knowledge of what Allah and His Messenger  have ordained, so that he may perform the ordered and abstain from the prohibited.”

He also says: “There are two opinions [with regards to this issue] amongst the followers of Ahmad, as well as amongst the followers of al-Shafi’i, and the majority from both groups do not oblige [adherence to one of the Madhabs]. And those who oblige it say: If one adheres to a Madhab, it is not possible for him to oppose it, so long as he is an adherent, or as long as it does not become clear to him that another Madhab is more worthy of being followed.”

He then discusses the issue of changing Madhabs and saying that if one changes his Madhab for worldly reasons, or merely seeking allowances, then that is, without doubt, condemned; it is like the companion who was known as ‘the migrant for Umm Qais’, who migrated from Makkah to Madinah to marry a woman, about which the Prophet  said: “Indeed actions are based on intentions…”. As for the one who changes his Madhab due to religious reasons, or leaves an opinion in his Madhab when opinion of another Madhab appears stronger to him, then that is not only praiseworthy, but also obligatory, as no one has the right to oppose the verdict of Allah and His Messenger .

Hence, our conclusion is that, it is not obligatory on a layman to follow a Madhab, but it is still allowed for the one who finds no way but this, to obtain Allah’s ruling on an issue.

Prohibition of Devising Opinions and Following Allowances:
By ‘devising opinions’ (Talfiq), we mean the practice of selecting various opinions in a particular issue from the different Madhabs and combining them, such that the end result is considered invalid in the sight of all the Madhabs. An example of this would be for a person to wipe only a part of his head in Wudu, in accordance with the Shafi’i opinion, and then to touch a woman, while believing that does not break Wudu, following the Maliki opinion. Such Wudu, however, is invalid according to both Malikis and Shafi’is, because the Malikis believe in wiping the head in its entireity, whilst the Shafi’is believe that to touch a woman, even without desire, breaks one Wudu.

Although the majority of the latter scholars from the Malikis, Shafi’is and Hanbalis prohibit Talfiq absolutely, most of the Hanafis allow it. They argue that the phenomenon of Talfiq did not exist at the time of the Companions, as there were many occasions where a Companion would be asked about an issue yet he would not forbid the Mustafti from seeking Fatwa from other than him. Albani al-Husaini mentions many examples from the four Imams and their followers of practicing Talfiq, not to mention praying behind each other, in spite holding different opinions concerning the conditions of Wudu. In addition, many times a layman would ask numerous Muftis, without knowing the Madhabs they adhered to, about different aspect of prayer, which may often result in Talfiq, yet none considered their acts of worship to be invalid.

However, those who permit Talfiq, do not allow all of its types, and moreover, they stipulate further conditions. Therefore, the type of Talfiq they deem to be prohibited is when the end result in and of itself is Haram, such as the consumption of alcohol or fornication. An example of this is for a person to marry without a guardian, following the Hanafi opinion, and without any witnesses, following the Maliki opinion; The end result of such Talfiq is marrying a woman without guardian nor witnesses, which is essentially fornication, an act clearly forbidden by all scholars. Another type of prohibited Tafliq is that which is prohibited due to additional factors; for example to deliberately hunt out the most lenient opinions from the Madhabs, without any need or excuse. This is very brief discussion of the issue of Talfiq, and if the reader desires to know more of the issue, then the best resource would be Albani al-Husaini’s book “’Umdat al-Tahqiq Fi al-Taqlid wa al-Talfiq”.

Following allowances (Tatabbu’ al-Rukhas) is for a person to “pick and choose from every Madhab the most lenient opinion for himself”, as stated Ibn Qawan al-Shafi’i. That is, as Imam Ahmad said: “If a person were to act on the opinion of people of Kufa in [permissibility] of Wine (Nabidh), and the opinion of people of Madinah in [permissibility] of music, and the opinion of the people of Makkah in [permissibility] of temporary marriage (mut’ah), he would be considered a Fasiq”. Sulayman al-Taimi said: “If you were to take allowances of every scholar, all the evil will be gathered in you”.

The one who seeks and follows allowances is considered a Fasiq, according to the correct opinion, which has been expressed explicitly byAhmad (nass), as well as an opinion amongst Shafi’is. Ibn Taymiyah says that if it is allowed for the layman to make Taqleed of whomever he wishes, then what the statements of our [Hanbali] scholars indicate is that it is not permissible for him to seek and follow allowances in any circumstance. Al-Mardawi says that: “Ibn ‘Abdil-Bar mentioned consensus (Ijma’) on this issue, and such a person is regarded to be a Fasiq in the opinion of Ahmad - may Allah have mercy upon him - as well as others”. Although the consensus mentioned by ibn ‘Abdil-Barr is not definitely established, the prohibition of following allowances remains to be the opinion of the vast majority of the scholars. Even the minority who permit it - that is, the majority of the Hanafis - only do so in certain situations, such as a person facing extreme hardship, or a person affected with constant whispering from the devil (wiswas). This is understood from the statement of al-Zuhaili in the section on the occasions when Talfiq is prohibited: “Tatabbu’ al-Rukhas (following allowances) intentionally, that is, for one to deliberately select the most lenient opinion from every Madhab without any necessity or excuse, is forbidden, in order to prevent the means (Sadd al-Dhara’i) which would absolve one of their Shar’i responsibility.”

However, the correct opinion - and Allah knows best - is that which has been favoured by the majority of the scholars, namely, that Tatabbu’ al-Rukhas is forbidden under all circumstances; since a Muslim is obliged to follow the orders of Allah, and not merely the most lenient opinion, for that entails following desires, and not revelation.

Point of Benefit:
Those who oblige every layman to make Ijtihad and abandon Taqleed usually use statements of the four Imams that indicate absolute prohibition of Taqleed in support of their position, such as the statement of Abu Hanifah: “It is not allowed for anyone to follow our opinion if he does not know from where we obtained it”; or that of Malik: “I am only a human being, who is correct and errs. Hence, look into my opinions, and all that which corresponds to the Book and the Sunnah, follow it. And all that conflicts with the Book and the Sunnah, leave it”; or that of al-Shafi’i: “If you find in my book that which opposes the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah  then follow the Sunnah Messenger of Allah  and leave what I said”; or that of Ahmad: “Do not make Taqleed of me, nor Malik, nor al-Shafi’i, nor al-Awza’i, nor al-Thawri. Rather take from where they took”.

All these statements are correct, but they were not intended for every layman, rather they were addressed to the students of these Imams, while barely any of them was a Mujtahid Mutlaq. They were, however, able to derive rulings from the sources of Islam and assess and evaluate evidences. In this regard, Sheikh Taqi al-Din Ibn Taymiyah says: “[Imam Ahmad] would order the layman to ask (yustafti) Ishaq, Abu ‘Ubaid, Abu Thawr, Abu Mus’ab, whilst he would forbid the scholars from his followers, such as Abu Dawud (the compiler of Sunan), ‘Uthman ibn Sa’id, Ibrahim al-Harbi, Abu Bakr al-Athram, Abu Zur’ah, Abu Hatim al-Sajistani, Muslim (the compiler of Sahih) and others, from making Taqleed of anyone from the scholars. He would say to them: You must refer to the sources, to the Book and the Sunnah.”

(See al-Manhaj 373-376, al-Tahqiqat 643-645, Majmu’ah 20/116, 124-126, al-Mustadrak 2/241, 258, al-Furu’ 6/492, al-Insaf 11/147, I’lam 6/203-205, Mukhtasar al-Tahrir 103, Hal al-Muslim Mulzam… 14, Rawdhat al-Talibin 11/117, Usul al-Fiqh al-Islami 2/1166) http://forums.islamicawakening.com/f...-262/#post1331

 

[DeadlyVenom]

This movement seems to have died a death since the thread was created but I am noticing a massive uptick in recent times, mainly from apologists.

Any PPers swayed by it?

 

[sweep_shot]

Hadith vs Quran? Wow! Surprised at the thread title.

Quran is obviously the most supreme book. After that, authentic hadiths are important. Both Quran and Sunnah (authentic hadiths) are important.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Hadith vs Quran? Wow! Surprised at the thread title.

Quran is obviously the most supreme book. After that, authentic hadiths are important. Both Quran and Sunnah (authentic hadiths) are important.

Yeah it was a major thing online over the past couple of years, generally from insecure Muslims. However, I've seen a bit of resurgence so thought I'd see if there were still any PPers who subscribe to the ideology.

Looks like there isn't!

 

[cric_man]

Hadith vs Quran? Wow! Surprised at the thread title.

Quran is obviously the most supreme book. After that, authentic hadiths are important. Both Quran and Sunnah (authentic hadiths) are important.

I don't think the OP meant Hadith or the Quran . More like do you believe in Quran only or Quran + Hadith (as complementary to Quran).

 

[cric_man]

Yeah it was a major thing online over the past couple of years, generally from insecure Muslims. However, I've seen a bit of resurgence so thought I'd see if there were still any PPers who subscribe to the ideology.

Looks like there isn't!

Subscribe to which ideology?

 

[Justcrazy]

To be honest, on the day of judgement people will be judged according to Quran.

It may seem weird but many people do not follow the Quran itself properly , for example

إِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ وَإِيَّاكَ نَسْتَعِينُ

It is You we worship and You we ask for help.

Does it not clearly say that we need to ask for help from Allah swt only ? But there are so many Muslims who call out for help from others besides Allah swt and try to justify that.

 

[Robert]

This movement seems to have died a death since the thread was created but I am noticing a massive uptick in recent times, mainly from apologists.

Any PPers swayed by it?

This is an interesting thread [MENTION=51465]DeadlyVenom[/MENTION].