posted
Hi, I am a recent convert to Islam and have looked EVERYWHERE in the holy book to find a requirement to follow hadith. There are clear warnings about committing shirk by equating other texts with the Quran, about straying by listening to 'learned' people. In the records the Prophet (god protect him)refused to let his words be written to avoid shirk. If god wanted us to follow hadith where is the clear command? Would it not have been stated extremely clearly as in the commandments about marriage, inheritance, prayer ect? I am genuinely concerned because of the consequences if I follow the wrong path.
Posts: 195 | From: Nottingham, England | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
He who obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah ; but those who turn away - We have not sent you over them as a guardian
(2:151) just as (you have found from this: that) We sent the Messenger to you from among you, who recites to you Our Revelations; who purifies your lives; who instructs you in the Book and in Wisdom and teaches you those things that you did not know.
4:64 And We did not send any messenger except to be obeyed by permission of Allah . And if, when they wronged themselves, they had come to you, [O Muhammad], and asked forgiveness of Allah and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah Accepting of repentance and Merciful.
4:65 But no, by your Lord, they will not [truly] believe until they make you, [O Muhammad], judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in [full, willing] submission.
33:36 It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have any option about their decision: if any one disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path.
59:7 What Allah has bestowed on His Messenger (and taken away) from the people of the townships,- belongs to Allah,- to His Messenger and to kindred and orphans, the needy and the wayfarer; In order that it may not (merely) make a circuit between the wealthy among you. So take what the Messenger assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you. And fear Allah. for Allah is strict in Punishment.
24:51 The answer of the Believers, when summoned to Allah and His Messenger, in order that He may judge between them, is no other than this: they say, "We hear and we obey": it is such as these that will attain felicity.
Posts: 1044 | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
4:87 Allah! There is no god but He: of a surety He will gather you together against the Day of Judgment, about which there is no doubt. And whose word can be truer than Allah's?
7:185 Do they see nothing in the government of the heavens and the earth and all that Allah hath created? (Do they not see) that it may well be that their terms is nigh drawing to an end? In what message after this will they then believe?
31:6 But there are, among men, those who purchase idle tales, without knowledge (or meaning), to mislead (men) from the Path of Allah and throw ridicule (on the Path): for such there will be a Humiliating Penalty
39:23 Allah has revealed (from time to time) the most beautiful Message in the form of a Book, consistent with itself, (yet) repeating (its teaching in various aspects): the skins of those who fear their Lord tremble thereat; then their skins and their hearts do soften to the celebration of Allah's praises. Such is the guidance of Allah: He guides therewith whom He pleases, but such as Allah leaves to stray, can have none to guide.
45:6 Such are the Signs of Allah, which We rehearse to thee in Truth; then in what exposition will they believe after (rejecting) Allah and His Signs?
52:34Let them then produce a recital like unto it,- If (it be) they speak the truth!
68:44 Then leave Me alone with such as reject this Message: by degrees shall We punish them from directions they perceive not
These are a few verses, I have made bold the words where it says hadith in Arabic in the original text. As you see the best hadith is Allahs, that you need no hadith of anyone else and in fact are very much warned against them
-------------------- If you don't learn from your mistakes, there's no sense making them. Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ayisha: 4:87 Allah! There is no god but He: of a surety He will gather you together against the Day of Judgment, about which there is no doubt. And whose word can be truer than Allah's?
No one's word is truer than Allah's and he said:
(2:151) just as (you have found from this: that) We sent the Messenger to you from among you, who recites to you Our Revelations; who purifies your lives; who instructs you in the Book and in Wisdom and teaches you those things that you did not know.
4:64 And We did not send any messenger except to be obeyed by permission of Allah . And if, when they wronged themselves, they had come to you, [O Muhammad], and asked forgiveness of Allah and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah Accepting of repentance and Merciful.
4:65 But no, by your Lord, they will not [truly] believe until they make you, [O Muhammad], judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in [full, willing] submission.
quote:Originally posted by Ayisha: 7:185 Do they see nothing in the government of the heavens and the earth and all that Allah hath created? (Do they not see) that it may well be that their terms is nigh drawing to an end? In what message after this will they then believe?
None. We believe this message only and it includes:
He who obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah ; but those who turn away - We have not sent you over them as a guardian
(2:151) just as (you have found from this: that) We sent the Messenger to you from among you, who recites to you Our Revelations; who purifies your lives; who instructs you in the Book and in Wisdom and teaches you those things that you did not know.
4:64 And We did not send any messenger except to be obeyed by permission of Allah . And if, when they wronged themselves, they had come to you, [O Muhammad], and asked forgiveness of Allah and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah Accepting of repentance and Merciful.
4:65 But no, by your Lord, they will not [truly] believe until they make you, [O Muhammad], judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in [full, willing] submission.
33:36 It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have any option about their decision: if any one disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path.
59:7 What Allah has bestowed on His Messenger (and taken away) from the people of the townships,- belongs to Allah,- to His Messenger and to kindred and orphans, the needy and the wayfarer; In order that it may not (merely) make a circuit between the wealthy among you. So take what the Messenger assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you. And fear Allah. for Allah is strict in Punishment.
24:51 The answer of the Believers, when summoned to Allah and His Messenger, in order that He may judge between them, is no other than this: they say, "We hear and we obey": it is such as these that will attain felicity.
quote:Originally posted by Ayisha: 31:6 But there are, among men, those who purchase idle tales, without knowledge (or meaning), to mislead (men) from the Path of Allah and throw ridicule (on the Path): for such there will be a Humiliating Penalty
We do no such thing. We obey the God and he commanded us to obey hi messenger.
quote:Originally posted by Ayisha: 39:23 Allah has revealed (from time to time) the most beautiful Message in the form of a Book, consistent with itself, (yet) repeating (its teaching in various aspects): the skins of those who fear their Lord tremble thereat; then their skins and their hearts do soften to the celebration of Allah's praises. Such is the guidance of Allah: He guides therewith whom He pleases, but such as Allah leaves to stray, can have none to guide.
And in that most beautiful message we are commanded to obey : 4:64 And We did not send any messenger except to be obeyed by permission of Allah . And if, when they wronged themselves, they had come to you, [O Muhammad], and asked forgiveness of Allah and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah Accepting of repentance and Merciful.
quote:Originally posted by Ayisha: 45:6 Such are the Signs of Allah, which We rehearse to thee in Truth; then in what exposition will they believe after (rejecting) Allah and His Signs?
We believe in Allah, his signs and his message which contain several command to obey his messenger.
quote:Originally posted by Ayisha: 52:34Let them then produce a recital like unto it,- If (it be) they speak the truth!
No one can produce anything truer than the Quran which commands us to obey the messenger.
quote:Originally posted by Ayisha: 68:44 Then leave Me alone with such as reject this Message: by degrees shall We punish them from directions they perceive not
Be forewarned Aysiha. Posts: 1044 | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ayisha: 4:87 Allah! There is no god but He: of a surety He will gather you together against the Day of Judgment, about which there is no doubt. And whose word can be truer than Allah's?
No one's word is truer than Allah's and he said:
(2:151) just as (you have found from this: that) We sent the Messenger to you from among you, who recites to you Our Revelations; who purifies your lives; who instructs you in the Book and in Wisdom and teaches you those things that you did not know.
the purification comes from Quran, the book is Quran and the wisdon is IN Quran. What he teaches that they did not know IS Quran, nothing else
003.020 YUSUFALI: So if they dispute with thee, say: "I have submitted My whole self to Allah and so have those who follow me." And say to the People of the Book and to those who are unlearned: "Do ye (also) submit yourselves?" If they do, they are in right guidance, but if they turn back, Thy duty is to convey the Message; and in Allah's sight are (all) His servants.
Muhammed submitted to Allah, so should we, not to some guys made up hadith of which 1% is 'sahih' which contradict each other AND Quran and most are narrated by a JEW who cannot even decide how many women Soloman slept with in one night and makes things up as he goes along. he was a known story teller!
005.092 YUSUFALI: 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.
005.099 YUSUFALI: The Messenger's duty is but to proclaim (the message). But Allah knoweth all that ye reveal and ye conceal.
013.040 YUSUFALI: Whether We shall show thee (within thy life-time) part of what we promised them or take to ourselves thy soul (before it is all accomplished),- thy duty is to make (the Message) reach them: it is our part to call them to account.
016.082 YUSUFALI: But if they turn away, thy duty is only to preach the clear Message.
024.054 YUSUFALI: 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. The Messenger's duty is only to preach the clear (Message).
029.018 YUSUFALI: "And if ye reject (the Message), so did generations before you: and the duty of the messenger is only to preach publicly (and clearly)."
036.017 YUSUFALI: "And our duty is only to proclaim the clear Message."
042.048 YUSUFALI: If then they run away, We have not sent thee as a guard over them. Thy duty is but to convey (the Message). And truly, when We give man a taste of a Mercy from Ourselves, he doth exult thereat, but when some ill happens to him, on account of the deeds which his hands have sent forth, truly then is man ungrateful!
064.012 YUSUFALI: So obey Allah, and obey His Messenger: but if ye turn back, the duty of Our Messenger is but to proclaim (the Message) clearly and openly.
quote:4:64 And We did not send any messenger except to be obeyed by permission of Allah . And if, when they wronged themselves, they had come to you, [O Muhammad], and asked forgiveness of Allah and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah Accepting of repentance and Merciful.
the messenger is dead now so we cant go to him. his duty was to preach the message which is Quran, that we still have unchanged. The messenger gave nothing but Quran. Obeying the messenger is in what he gives you from Quran, nothing else, no secret revelation, Allah missed nothing out, it is complete.
quote:4:65 But no, by your Lord, they will not [truly] believe until they make you, [O Muhammad], judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in [full, willing] submission.
see above. The messenger is no longer with us and the hadith attributed to him are false, he would have added nothing to the words of God and some made up fables cannot no way be used to judge anyone when we have the Book and Allah to judge.
no time or inclination at the moment to reply to the rest.
Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
There was a time when I almost became a Muslim..if not for the following 2 issues...
1. the marriage of Ayesha and the prophet 2. the issue of authentic hadiths
It was hard, but I was practically willing to ignore the first and hoped that the child didn't suffer too much, and everything was done with honour and righteousness. I was also willing to accept the fact that the same Muslim men and boys I saw everyday in my neighborhood who committed all sorts of misdemeanours(and still do so) such as...
- gambling - drinking - sex outside of holy matrimonies - illegal drug issues - theft(eg. theft of books even from the mosque itself) - unneccessary assault/physical violence - the most important....a lot of these creatures could not be bothered with actually reading their own holy book
...and many others..would be the same men and boys I would have been sharing the same prayer floor with at the local mosque. By the end of the day, I thought it was really none of my business how and when the sinners start heading off for the doorway to hell itself
But...the hadiths..I just could not get past. The way I saw it, I probably would have been shouted down and verbally abused/insulted in all sorts of manner should anybody found out that I could not accept anything outside of the actual holy book, which is the Qur'an
Truth be told, there is a big stretch of time between now and the actual times of the prophet. How does anyone in this day and age really know what the prophet Muhammad said, did, or recommended when he was alive? Also, my understanding for the moment is that a lot of reliance is made on the interpretations, guidance, and teachings of supposedly great Islamic figures from the past...figures who have lived long after the death of the prophet. People then read their Qur'an translations today according to the rules of these men whose supposed greatness we'll never really know about. It was too long ago to find out about such people now
The way I see it for the moment is like this: perhaps God had the holy book brought down from above as it was(and still is), to be read in a straightforward manner. Most Muslims I know would then argue that the hadiths come into use to help interpret the words of the holy book, because the book as such may be a little hard to understand on certain instructions. So the big question...did God intend for the holy book to be the way it is up until today so the believers can interpret and learn for themselves to the best of their abilities? If the Qur'an is vague on certain rulings, perhaps God had intended for it to be so. After all, human beings in all this time were endowed with brains and common sense
Posts: 62 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MrMoussaka: But...the hadiths..I just could not get past. The way I saw it, I probably would have been shouted down and verbally abused/insulted in all sorts of manner should anybody found out that I could not accept anything outside of the actual holy book, which is the Qur'an
I know of "Qur'an-only Muslims" in Germany who formed a very active group at one of the universities. They do receive a lot of hostility and the occasional threat.
Posts: 2803 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
MrM, that is the problem I have, there are SO many contradictions in hadith and many were written by the generation after the Prophets death so how accurate can they be, and don't give me any of that 'they were checked' if anyone has seen a group of eye witnesses after an incident, one person can convince a whole group that they saw something that never happened. I think that I will follow the holy book and ignore hadith, though I like praying with my friends their way so I will keep doing that Posts: 195 | From: Nottingham, England | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
MrM, that is the problem I have, there are SO many contradictions in hadith and many were written by the generation after the Prophets death
Not many, all of them actually. Bukhari started collecting ahadeeth about two centuries after the death of the prophet.
quote:Originally posted by Stephie_ELH:
so how accurate can they be, and don't give me any of that 'they were checked' if anyone has seen a group of eye witnesses after an incident, one person can convince a whole group that they saw something that never happened.
My thoughts exactly. I've read countless texts about the science of classifying hadith, the "authority of sunnah" and so on. None of it convinced me, quite the opposite.
Posts: 2803 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not a worry, Stephie. I have a special respect for Muslims who would do their utmost to keep the peace and not rock the boat in anyway whatsoever up to a point
When I was going through the Qur'an, I came across the same message all the time which practically said something like...'Allah will judge in the end who were right, and who were misguided'...or something like that. Sorry, I can't remember the passages or their locations
I'm going to be diverting a little here and I promise to keep on topic afterwards. I am really curious about Muslim thoughts here on the marriage of Ayesha and the prophet, and the hijab. Now, I'll admit that I haven't delved into these too much and I'm only going by what other people have learnt themselves, and so I don't mean any disrespect by my enquiries here. As a Muslim...
- What do you think of this marital union between man and child? - Does this issue bother you as you observe your faith? - Should Muslims(especially women and young girls) even consider this an issue, and just move on by continuing the faith? - Would the average Muslim woman who decided to marry a nonMuslim fellow(especially a Westerner) be possibly inclined to comply with her future husband's wishes if he's not comfortable with her wearing the hijab, let alone the nikab or the burqah(spelling?)?
The last question above was something I've been wanting to enquire about as well, as I've been very curious about the matter...and this thing again, probably goes back to the question of hadith I guess. Perhaps there's also something in hadith about the taboo of discussing all these questions/issues above, no?
Posts: 62 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MrMoussaka: When I was going through the Qur'an, I came across the same message all the time which practically said something like...'Allah will judge in the end who were right, and who were misguided'...or something like that. Sorry, I can't remember the passages or their locations
Surely those who believe; and those who are Jewish, and the Nazarenes, and the Sabians, whoever of them believes in God and the Last Day and does good works; they will have their recompense with their Lord, and there is no fear upon them, nor will they grieve. (2:62)
There is no compulsion in the system; the proper way has been clarified from the wrong way. Whoever rejects evil, and believes in God, indeed he has taken grasp of the strongest hold that will never break. God is Hearer, Knower. (2:256)
And the Jews say, 'the Christians do not stand on anything;' and the Christians say, 'the Jews do not stand on anything;' and they recite the Book (of God). Even so, like their saying, say those who have no knowledge. Now God shall decide between them on the Day of Resurrection in what they differed. (2:113)
Posts: 2803 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Christians don't say that "the Jews do not stand on anything".
The Jews are God's chosen people. They have the law and the prophets. The difference is that they are still waiting for their Messiah. Where the Christians believe (along with Muslims) that their Messiah has already come. The Jews are still looking for a rich king to come in glory and rule them. Jesus said that his kingdom is not of this world and he came riding on an ass.
...and as for "good works"
Good works are the keeping of the law. No One can keep the law. We all sin. The punishment for breaking the law is death. The Jews made atonement for their sins by shedding the blood of animals throughout the year. Then once a year they would sacrifice an unblemished lamb to revisit their sins and once again make an atonement for them. Because the blood of animals can never take away sin. Yet without the shedding of blood there is no remission for sin.
Christians believe that Jesus is the perfect lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.
Christians believe (as do Muslims) That Jesus is the Messiah and that he was born of a virgin, was without sin, and is the living word of God.
But, (as I see it) Muslims have taken all power away from Jesus and instead of treating him as the word of God (even though the Quran states this) they treat him as an impotent prophet and revert back to the law.
This difference (as I see it) between the beliefs of Muslims and Christians is that Muslims believe that "good works" get you to heaven. On the contrary Christians believe that our works are as filthy rags to God and that you can never get to heaven by your works alone.
Posts: 3891 | From: No good deed goes unpunished. | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hi Dalia, What is your definition of "good deeds" and the law?
-------------------- "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts." (Sign hanging in Einstein's office at Princeton) Leap and the Net will Appear. Posts: 3891 | From: No good deed goes unpunished. | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I do not understand anyone who says that you should blindly follow anything, from what I understand from the Quran (not hadith which, as I have said, I do not trust) Questioning and seeking knowledge is required of all Muslims. Any god who put us on this planet with our miracle of brains, would not want us to use the same mental effort as a land snail...
Posts: 195 | From: Nottingham, England | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ourluxor: "We hear and we obey": it is such as these that will attain felicity.
Therefore the answer to:-
"Perhaps there's also something in hadith about the taboo of discussing all these questions/issues above, no?"
must surely be "Yes, there is no room for discussion."
This is what I meant when I said we are expected to blindly follow cultural tradition and customs....I have been shunned my muslims in my community for ASKING why we follow hadith and told 'that is just how it is'. Everything else that we are expected to do in the Quran is explicitly indicated but the only proof of hadith is 'obey the messenger' which can be done by following the Quran as he did without having to take the uncertain words of dead zealots!
Posts: 195 | From: Nottingham, England | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stephie_ELH: Everything else that we are expected to do in the Quran is explicitly indicated
That's not true. But in any case as Ayisha ineloquently or vaguely implied, though obeying the Prophet is stated in Quran, the authenticity of his "hadith" and deeds can be put into question. As someone mentioned, sections of the Quran tended to be "vague" or metaphoric and that that could actually be the "genius" in Quran. That it could be reinterpreted to suit the times and increase in knoweldge. Of course it could be argued that that would be a disastrous because of human nature and our tendency to twist things to suit our desires regardless of harm or benefit.
Posts: 1044 | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I meant that everything that is vital to following gods path is stated clearly with room to live between , but a lot of people I have spoken to want every corner of their lives so bound up with ritual and rules that they cant think for themselves and they think others should do the same. I was just looking for proof that adherence to hadith is a requirement for faith....
Posts: 195 | From: Nottingham, England | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Two: That's not true. But in any case as Ayisha ineloquently or vaguely implied, though obeying the Prophet is stated in Quran, the authenticity of his "hadith" and deeds can be put into question. As someone mentioned, sections of the Quran tended to be "vague" or metaphoric and that that could actually be the "genius" in Quran. That it could be reinterpreted to suit the times and increase in knoweldge. Of course it could be argued that that would be a disastrous because of human nature and our tendency to twist things to suit our desires regardless of harm or benefit.
I think you put that quite well actually. IMHO, as the Quran is for all times and all mankind which says its verses should be read and reflected upon, it is down to the readers 'interpretation' in how they use that information. There are those who will interpret it, with a warped view because they are warped people, to how they see it. Like for want of a better example - the taliban.
There are many 'sects' of 'Islam' now, there should be none according to Quran. Some shout for sharia law, which contradicts there is no compulsion in religion. Some want a woman to be covered from head to toe claiming its 'protection' from men who 'are just being men' who turn into animals at the sight of a womans hair, when Quran says to both men and women to lower their gaze and guard their modesty and women are to cover their bosoms, not hair.
The biggest problem, as I see it, is that most dont seem to actually do the 'read, think, reflect' part as much as the 'recite' and find 'obey the messenger' to mean something other than what he tells you from Quran and then go off in another direction to look for answers. The answers are in the Book. The other problem is that the prophet is not HERE now and we have Quran. By taking 'obey the messenger' as obey his every word and deed NOW should only be found in Quran, his words and deeds are in Quran, how many times do verses start with "say"? The sunnah the prophet followed was the sunnah of Allah which is in Quran. The 'sunnah' that is contained in 'hadith' (bukhari etc) are a collection of writings that are 'claimed' to be from Muhammed, many of which contradict Quran and contradict the man he was that we see from Quran. Many were narrated by a known story teller who changed the story as often as he told it and we find many differing hadith from the same man about the same thing.
The only thing that is real is Quran.
Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
When you read Quran, you will see that the message that the Book gives is 'The submission is to Allah and devotion is to Muhammed and His path'
Al Araf 158. Say: "O men! I am sent unto you all, as the Messenger of Allah, to Whom belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth: there is no god but He: it is He that giveth both life and death. So believe in Allah and His Messenger, the Unlettered Prophet, who believeth in Allah and His Words: follow him that (so) ye may be guided."
I really can't get people who reject the Sunnah (the system and the order)of Muhammed (saw) while they ONLY believe in The Book that sent to people VIA him. Yes there may be contradictions, but questioning all of them is leaving all those ulemas, scholars under BIG suspicion that can be called as 'slandering'. It is the most dangerous arrogancy to tell 'The path you follow is wrong!!' to billions of Muslims on earth.
How can those Quranists proove that they are right?
Did Allah send them a Messenger to whisper that following all those hadiths are wrong?
I think this is one of the most dangerous thing as they reject being Ummah, they damage the religion like Vahabbis in SA, they are not better than them.
I was also questioning that matter before Stephie. But I stopped doing it as I may find myself in a big trouble in front of Allah by questioning it that much. Religion is submission.
There are many beautiful hadiths that may help you to learn your new religion better Stephie. Instead of obsessing the ones like 'in which order you should cut your nails' hadiths, better to focus on the ones that will make you to learn Islam better.
Posts: 2591 | From: **Ex Oriente Lux** | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 'Shahrazat: I was also questioning that matter before Stephie. But I stopped doing it as I may find myself in a big trouble in front of Allah by questioning it that much. Religion is submission.
But submission does not mean not questioning.
Posts: 2803 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 'Shahrazat: I was also questioning that matter before Stephie. But I stopped doing it as I may find myself in a big trouble in front of Allah by questioning it that much. Religion is submission.
But submission does not mean not questioning.
Dalia, I would never understand why those 'too questioning' people believe in God or Quran... This is redicilous.
Mind is the most dangerous enemy of the belief..
Posts: 2591 | From: **Ex Oriente Lux** | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
"Hadith as Scripture is the only book that covers both the earliest and most recent discussions on the authority of the Hadith. The authority of Hadith is a concern to Muslims in their daily lives, as well as a question of academic interest. Hadith as Scripture contains the first-ever Western language translation of the earliest extant text on the subject. This work explores the earliest extant discussions on the authority of the Hadith in Islam and compares them with contemporary debates."
In modern Islamic movements, a new trend has emerged, created because of the need to reform the Muslim society to make it progressive and 'to keep up with the times'. Famous reformers, Muhammad Abduh and Sayyid Qutb for example, were more focussed on the Qur'an and its message, than the Hadith and other historical materials deemed important as a basis for Islam. Their reason was that only the Qur'an could be seen as timeless and flexible in its usage and meaning so as to be applicable for modern society and knowledge. This trend was taken further, and eventually many reformers and groups became to renounce all historical material next to the Qur'an as unusable or even as false teachings, and have come to accept only the Qur'an as the major or only source for their ideas of what Islam is about.
These reform ideas have been seen as heretical by the majority of traditional schools in Islam and attacked and labelled as dangerous and blasphemous. As the majority of Muslims are still being deeply controlled by the traditional schools, these reform movements have always stayed a minority among the majority, and have been successful only in certain countries and social classes. But these 'Qur'an alone' reformers and followers kept popping up over the decades in all Muslim countries, and now in the age of the Internet have grown into a large community and are thus being taken more seriously, and are gaining attention and interest among the general Muslim public.
The 'Qur'an alone' or 'mostly focused on the Qur'an' movements are mostly labelled by the traditional Islamic schools as results of Western Orientalist research, who from the beginning of the 19th century have written many books critical of the reliability of the Hadith and other historical materials. Thus the 'Qur'an alone' movements are labelled as apologetic or caused by Western attacks on Islam, and thus are not based on Qur'anic teachings itself, but simply on Western beliefs and methods of viewing Islam. It is labelled as a 'Western caused' movement.
This tactic is similar to the treatment of the Medieval schools of Kalam and Mu'tazilah, who used Reason (aql) to interpret the Qur'an and its doctrines (tafsir bi'l-Ra'y). Most of these schools only accepted Mutawwir Hadith, historical reports that had multiple chain-sources. These were themselves miniscule in number compared to the accepted majority of Hadith based on simpler and more easily falsified transmission chains. And even the Mutawwir Hadith were approached with caution by these schools of Kalam. Many of the rational methods of the Kalam were taken to a certain degree into the later formed traditional schools, but their major beliefs on the Qur'anic message and their approach to the Hadith were rejected and deemed false, and thus non-Islamic (Western) teachings, created through the influence of the Greek philosophy.
When Muhammad Abduh, Sayyid Ahmad Khan, GA Parwez, Muhammad Iqbal and other reformers in the 19th and 20th century came to use the same arguments and conclusions as the Mu'tazilah, while most of the time not ever referring to them, they were labelled as neo-Mu'tazilah, conforming to the Western (and colonial ruler) judgment on Islam and its history.
They were accused of blindly believing Orientalists such as Goldziher, Schacht, Muir and others who attacked Islamic history as unreliable and many Qur'an interpretations as illogical and superstitious. Scholar Daniel Brown in his book "Rethinking Tradition in Modern Islamic Thought" began to research these reformers and their methods and came to very different conclusions. According to him, many of these reformers based their ideas on the Qur'an itself and their personal research into the historical reliability of Islamic records, and believed to have found contradictions and falsified records. Thus these reformers came to the same conclusions as several Orientalists, but were not influenced by them. The traditional schools still outlawed their works or ordered rulings their work must not be read, and so many of the reformist ideas never gained firm ground in the Muslim mind.
In the late 20th and beginning 21st century, new 'Qur'an alone' reformers and groups have emerged and now have the power of the internet to spread their ideas. Although these were also branded as heretic by the traditional schools, the Internet has created a platform which could be reached easily by the Muslim majority, and thus has more impact. Also the works of Parwez for example, who belonged to the pre-Internet reform movement, have been rediscovered by many Muslims, as they are freely available on the web and translated into English and other languages, which was not possible before. And so the 'Qur'an alone' movement is gaining ground by the anarchistic and almost unbannable word-wide web.
But the same arguments are still used against them; they are Western creations or apologetic movements. Just as Brown, Professor Aisha Musa asked herself: Is this true, is it a Western creation, or is there some truth in their arguments? Having been herself part of the reform movements for a long time, she had seen the many accusations laid against the movement. As a professor having a degree in Islam, and thus having the education and knowledge to perform a professional inquiry, she focused on two areas which were not discussed by Brown in his book. One is a research into the question: If the idea of the Qur'an alone is based on arguments found within the Qur'an itself, shouldn't the idea of the Qur'an alone be the orthodox movement, instead of the traditional pro-Hadith schools? The second question concerned researching the movement of the late 20th and present 21st century movements- the modern day Internet-based groups, which were not covered by Brown. Are they a product of Western society?
The difference from Brown's book is that Musa searched for traces of evidence of similar discussions between the 'Qur'an alone' and 'Hadith accepting' schools and groups in the first centuries of Islam. If the 'Qur'an alone' arguments are sound, these must have been part of almost every age in Islam from day one, and indeed they were she shows.
Caliph Umar, the second ruler of Islam, was known for his rejection of the recording of Hadith. The reformers use this as a proof for their rejection of Hadith, while the Hadith-accepting groups that now form the traditional schools say he only did this because Umar didn't want the Qur'an to be recorded wrongfully, so he only allowed oral transmittal of Hadith. This prohibition of recording Hadith came from the Prophet itself it was said, and was upheld till as late as 70 years after the Prophet. The then ruling Caliph ordered scholars to write Hadith down, but they did this reluctantly. And as much time had passed and much strife had occurred among the Muslim societies, false Hadith were abundant in such a degree that most Hadith scholars in the second Islamic century rejected at least 90% of the Hadith they collected. But these were the historical question-of-reliability arguments which were already discussed by Brown. And so Musa goes on and searches for Qur'an-based arguments against Hadith or outside sources.
She found none, no documents written by a person that could be labeled as 'Qur'an alone' in the first centuries could be found. But the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence; and so Musa used a different tactic by reviewing the earliest pro-Hadith documents, as then we could deduce what arguments the Qur'an-aloners used. This tactic had also been used to deduce the doctrines of early Christian sects, and also for the Mu'tazilah by early 19-20th century scholars as almost no Mu'tazilah documents survived in common main Muslim libraries, and so by reviewing the opponents of the Mu'tazilah it could be understood what the Mu'tazilah believed by seeing what their opponents accused them of or argued against. In the middle of the 20th century, old copies of Mu'tazilah books were found in some libraries in Yemen, and so finally the works themselves could be read. Many of the deduced conclusions of what Mu'tazilah believed turned out to be correct.
Musa uses two main pro-Hadith texts written by two famous scholars of orthodox Islam. Shafi, founder of the Shafi school and labelled as the first scholar who made both Hadith and Sunnah as divine sources in Islam. And the later follower Ibn Qutayba. Both scholars have written books against the Qur'an alone ideology and thus showed that the Qur'an alone movements were present in their lifetimes and even important and known enough to write books for to attack them. She has found the proof she was looking for. Musa breaks their texts down and discusses how the pro-Hadith groups won their arguments over the majority and also which Qur'an verses were used by both sides. Her analysis is thorough and well explained. Shafi's text is not considered as simple, but Musa shows step by step Shafi's method in a very clear way. Next to reviewing their work and arguments, she also delivers the immense work of translating Shafi's Kitab Jima'al-Ilm, the Book of Amalgamation of Knowledge, for the first time into English, which must have been an extremely difficult task since the text's style and Classic Arabic form is not easy to read and understand.
Then she goes on discussing the modern Qur'an-alone movements, their founders and their arguments. She has found that these founders - Rashad Khalifa, Subhy Mansour, Edip Yuksel, Kassim Ahmad and several groups, are not persons coming from the West, but from traditional Muslim backgrounds, and were all brought up in Islam. All of them were highly knowledgeable in the Qur'an and Hadith, as for example, Mansour was a professor in history at the famous Al-Azhar University of Cairo. Also these reformers did not use Orientalist conclusions as proof for their beliefs, but came to their 'Qur'an alone' ideas based on Qur'anic verses. Only after reviewing these verses did they research the history of Hadith to further strengthen their belief that only the Qur'an can be used to understand what Islam is.
So her book is unique in its approach and its conclusions. Not only is the Qur'an-alone a historical and orthodox movement, Musa showed that throughout the centuries, the same Qur'an verses were used as arguments for only accepting the Qur'an as divine and only source for Islam. It is not a Western movement, nor even an Western Orientalist caused movement, but an authentic Islamic movement based on its core text, the Qur'an. Just as the Mu'tazilah writings have been systematically wiped out from the general Muslim libraries when they fell out of favor, the same has occurred with the Qur'an-alone writings over the centuries. Which in my eyes not only shows political influence in the debate (the rulers clearly wanted no traces remained, so the pro-Hadith gave them more wealth and power it seemed), but also that the arguments supporting Hadith were not as strong as the majority believes. Why eliminate a weak threat? The following of Hadith became dominant as there was no literature remaining that attacked this view. Maybe the future will produce some hidden treasures somewhere. But the modern Qur'an-alone writings can not be lost to history because of the Internet and modern printing, and so more and more Muslims will and are reading them and are being influenced by them. The movement is growing, not only because the Qur'an-alone movement has sound arguments from the Qur'an itself and historical proof of false Hadith, but also because the Qur'an is accepted by all sects and movements in Islam, while there are many disputes on what and which Hadith and tradition is accepted. And as mentioned above , the Qur'an is the only timeless, flexible and very open-source text that can withstand the criteria of modern human knowledge and thought.
It is viewed as more gender-neutral, more universal, very humanistic and scientific than the Hadith which reflects mostly 7-9th century mythology and cultural beliefs. Thus the Qur'an alone can not only be the vehicle to modernize and reform the Muslim world, but even start a new revolution of a socio-humanistic scientific faith which is demanded by modern-day scepticism and rationalism. The Medieval scientists of Islam who were the founders of the Renaissance and modern science, were scientific because of the Qur'an. Muslim society was so tolerant and progressive mostly because of the universality of the Qur'an, while the rest of the world was oppressive and backward, stooped in the dark ages. The increasing acceptance of the Hadith as divine source in Islam from the 9th century on, has slowly demolished the revolutionary system of the Qur'an and caused the majority Muslim world to fall into its deplorable state it is in now. The Qur'an alone is not a heresy, it is a revival.
Professor Musa's book is a groundbreaking study into a very important and growing, or as her study shows, a re-vitalized movement within Islam that can positively change the world. This book is superbly written and a must read.
"The role they (the Hadith) have played has been so influential for so long that both Muslims and non-Muslims alike generally assume they have always uncontested authority. However, a survey of Islamic history shows that the Hadith did not always enjoy such widespread acceptance and authority.[...] Ignorance of these early disputes has contributed to the common misconception that opposition to the Hadith as an authoritative scriptural source of law and guidance is a modern-day, Western, Orientalist-influenced heresy," [Introduction to the book]
posted
Dalia, no need for copy&pastes I found dozens of them for supproting my thoughts but all those c/ps make the disscussion more complicated and unreadable.
Edit ; And I have no sympathy for the ones who call themselves as 'Islamic reformist'...
Posts: 2591 | From: **Ex Oriente Lux** | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I find this article very interesting because it clears up the often heard suggestion that "Qur'anists" are mainly orientalists or Western converts who are lacking knowledge of traditional Islamic sources.
What's wrong with reform? Posts: 2803 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by *Dalia*: I find this article very interesting because it clears up the often heard suggestion that "Qur'anists" are mainly orientalists or Western converts.
The thing is people believe what they would like to believe. I respect everybody. But my concern is all those new ideas like Vahabbism, Salaphisim, Quranism damage Islam.
Posts: 2591 | From: **Ex Oriente Lux** | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 'Shahrazat: Dalia, I would never understand why those 'too questioning' people believe in God or Quran... This is redicilous.
Well, I believe in God and the Qur'an and still consider myself a very questioning person. You don't need to agree with that, but calling it ridiciculous is a bit insulting.
quote:Originally posted by 'Shahrazat: Mind is the most dangerous enemy of the belief..
I disagree. Our mind and heart are essential for our belief, and we should make use of both.
And if the mind is so dangerous, why are there countless verses in the Qur'an urging us to use it?
quote:Originally posted by 'Shahrazat:
But my concern is all those new ideas like Vahabbism, Salaphisim, Quranism damage Islam.
"Qur'anism" is not a new idea at all.
Posts: 2803 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know Quranism's not new, it has a 1300 years old history and since then, most of the Islamic scholars are disagree with them.
Mind is only a tool. It didn't invent the religion. It is not the pruduct of the mind and logic. It is the law of Allah who is the owner of the mind. Mind and logic can't judge the religious matter after a certain point. Everybody's mind level and way of mind working is different than the other and by questioning, people can create millions of thoughts. And we change our mind sometimes and our thoughts are affected by many things. So the basics of religion are put by ALLAH, they are fixed and he chose prophets for making people to know Him and His rules. And he wanted us to follow His prophets.
Posts: 2591 | From: **Ex Oriente Lux** | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 'Shahrazat: When you read Quran, you will see that the message that the Book gives is 'The submission is to Allah and devotion is to Muhammed and His path'
Al Araf 158. Say: "O men! I am sent unto you all, as the Messenger of Allah, to Whom belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth: there is no god but He: it is He that giveth both life and death. So believe in Allah and His Messenger, the Unlettered Prophet, who believeth in Allah and His Words: follow him that (so) ye may be guided."
Muhammed followed His Words, His path, ALLAHS Words and Allahs path.
quote:I really can't get people who reject the Sunnah (the system and the order)of Muhammed (saw) while they ONLY believe in The Book that sent to people VIA him.
The sunnah is in Quran that Muhammed followed
quote:Yes there may be contradictions, but questioning all of them is leaving all those ulemas, scholars under BIG suspicion that can be called as 'slandering'.
slander is saying something untrue. You said yourself 'there may be contradictions', well YES there are MANY contradictions and there are NO contradictions in Quran, so what is best to follow?
quote:It is the most dangerous arrogancy to tell 'The path you follow is wrong!!' to billions of Muslims on earth.
Yes its most dangerous arrogancy for the billions of Muslims to also say that to those who follow God's Book. You will find that people who follow God Alone and Quran Alone and not the ones saying that to the billions of muslims though, its the billions of sect following muslims who are the ones saying this to God Alone followers, as you are now. Most God Alone followers are just getting on with following what they believe.
quote:How can those Quranists proove that they are right?
Quran. How can hadithists prove they are right?
quote:Did Allah send them a Messenger to whisper that following all those hadiths are wrong?
yes
31:6 But there are, among men, those who purchase HADITH, without knowledge (or meaning), to mislead (men) from the Path of Allah and throw ridicule (on the Path): for such there will be a Humiliating Penalty. 31:7 When Our Signs are rehearsed to such a one, he turns away in arrogance, as if he heard them not, as if there were deafness in both his ears: announce to him a grievous Penalty
68:44 Then leave Me alone with such as reject this HADITH: by degrees shall We punish them from directions they perceive not.
45:6 Such are the Signs of Allah, which We rehearse to thee in Truth; then in what HADITH will they believe after (rejecting) Allah and His Signs?
7:185 Do they see nothing in the government of the heavens and the earth and all that Allah hath created? (Do they not see) that it may well be that their terms is nigh drawing to an end? In what HADITH after this will they then believe?
52:34 Let them then produce a HADITH like unto it,- If (it be) they speak the truth!
4:87 Allah! There is no god but He: of a surety He will gather you together against the Day of Judgment, about which there is no doubt. And whose HADITH can be truer than Allah's?
I am sure you will agree that in all the above verses the word HADITH is there in the original Arabic where I have put it.
quote:I think this is one of the most dangerous thing as they reject being Ummah, they damage the religion like Vahabbis in SA, they are not better than them.
damage the religion by following Quran alone and God Alone? Damage the religion by doing exactly as GOD ordered? Wahabi follow more hadith than you do! If you mean damage the false religion that has become to be 'islam' as is practiced today by 'billions of muslims' then Alhamdulillah, its time they woke up and got back on track. Personally I dont care if they worship Muhammeds camel but dont interfer in MY faith and MY belief and tell me what I SHOULD be following as Islam when it is clear it is IN the BOOK.
quote:I was also questioning that matter before Stephie. But I stopped doing it as I may find myself in a big trouble in front of Allah by questioning it that much. Religion is submission.
Well its sad you stopped questioning and using your God given brain, most probably because you were threatened and scared into going back in the herd. I hope for your sake that God will re-open your eyes and give you strength to follow what He was obviously trying to show you was right back then.
68:36 What is the matter with you? How judge ye? 68:37 Or have ye a book through which ye learn-
25:30 Then the Messenger will say: "O my Lord! Truly my people took this Qur'an for just foolish nonsense."
quote:There are many beautiful hadiths that may help you to learn your new religion better Stephie. Instead of obsessing the ones like 'in which order you should cut your nails' hadiths, better to focus on the ones that will make you to learn Islam better.
Why direct her to another book other than the Book of God to learn His Words? It is ALLAh we should worship Shah, Not Muhammed.
She can learn from hadith to do wudo as the prophet did right?
Volume 1, Book 4, Number 159: Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: The Prophet performed ablution by washing the body parts only once.
Volume 1, Book 4, Number 160: Narrated 'Abdullah bin Zaid: The Prophet performed ablution by washing the body parts twice.
Volume 1, Book 4, Number 161: Narrated Humran: (the slave of 'Uthman) I saw 'Uthman bin 'Affan asking for a tumbler of water (and when it was brought) he poured water over his hands and washed them thrice and then put his right hand in the water container and rinsed his mouth, washed his nose by putting water in it and then blowing it out. then he washed his face and forearrlns up to the elbows thrice, passed his wet hands over his head and washed his feet up to the ankles thrice.
Which is it? 1, 2 or 3?
Bukhari Vol.4, Book 055, Hadith # 635.
Narated By Abu Huraira : The Prophet said, "Solomon (the son of) David said, 'Tonight I will sleep with SEVENTY ladies each of whom will conceive a child who will be a knight fighting for "Allah's Cause.' His companion said, 'If Allah will.' But Solomon did not say so; therefore none of those women got pregnant except one who gave birth to a half child." The Prophet further said, "If the Prophet Solomon had said it (i.e. 'If Allah will') he would have begotten children who would have fought in Allah's Cause." Shuaib and Ibn Abi Az-Zinad said, "Ninety (women) is more correct (than seventy)."
so his story then changes
Bukhari Vol. 8, Book 78, Hadith # 634.
Narated By Abu Huraira : Allah's Apostle said, "(The Prophet) Solomon once said, 'Tonight I will sleep with NINETY women, each of whom will bring forth a (would-be) cavalier who will fight in Allah's Cause." On this, his companion said to him, "Say: Allah willing!" But he did not say Allah willing. Solomon then slept with all the women, but none of them became pregnant but one woman who later delivered a half-man. By Him in Whose Hand Muhammad's soul is, if he (Solomon) had said, 'Allah willing' (all his wives would have brought forth boys) and they would have fought in Allah's Cause as cavaliers."
Then, bless his little story book:
Volume 4, Book 52, Number 74i: Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle said, "Once Solomon, son of David said, '(By Allah) Tonight I will have sexual intercourse with one hundred (or ninety-nine) women each of whom will give birth to a knight who will fight in Allah's Cause.' On that a (i.e. if Allah wills) but he did not say, 'Allah willing.' Therefore only one of those women conceived and gave birth to a half-man. By Him in Whose Hands Muhammad's life is, if he had said, "Allah willing', (he would have begotten sons) all of whom would have been knights striving in Allah's Cause."
Volume 9, Book 93, Number 561: Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Prophet Solomon who had sixty wives, once said, "Tonight I will have sexual relation (sleep) with all my wives so that each of them will become pregnant and bring forth (a boy who will grow into) a cavalier and will fight in Allah's Cause." So he slept with his wives and none of them (conceived and) delivered (a child) except one who brought a half (body) boy (deformed). Allah's Prophet said, "If Solomon had said; 'If Allah Will,' then each of those women would have delivered a (would-be) cavalier to fight in Allah's Cause." (See Hadith No. 74 A, Vol. 4).
quote:Originally posted by 'Shahrazat: I know Quranism's not new, it has a 1300 years old history and since then, most of the Islamic scholars are disagree with them.
Mind is only a tool. It didn't invent the religion. It is not the pruduct of the mind and logic. It is the law of Allah who is the owner of the mind. Mind and logic can't judge the religious matter after a certain point. Everybody's mind level and way of mind working is different than the other and by questioning, people can create millions of thoughts. And we change our mind sometimes and our thoughts are affected by many things. So the basics of religion are put by ALLAH, they are fixed and he chose prophets for making people to know Him and His rules. And he wanted us to follow His prophets.
Yes following Quran is not a new concept, Muhammed did it first so i follow him in this
Allahs prophets followed Allah. There are many verses in Quran which tell you what followers did in following something else after the Words were given and how it led to their own destruction and brought forth new 'religions' based on following and worshipping a man.
You do not seem to accept that Muhammed followed to the letter the words in Quran. he wasnt given another 'secret revelation' after, before or during Quran, so what exactly do YOU follow?
Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ayisha: Yes following Quran is not a new concept, Muhammed did it first so i follow him in this
Ayisha, you understand what I mean. My opinion is if we call ourselves as Muslim, that includes the Quran and Sunnah both. In many verses, Allah orders us follow him.
[QUOTE] Allahs prophets followed Allah. There are many verses in Quran which tell you what followers did in following something else after the Words were given and how it led to their own destruction and brought forth new 'religions' based on following and worshipping a man.
This is a very brave comment Ayisha. You mean that people worshipping Muhammed (puh) by following and respecting Sunnah? No way There are also many verses that orders us to follow and take the Prophets as an example.
quote: You do not seem to accept that Muhammed followed to the letter the words in Quran.
Sheesh ya3ni I may be missing my points while translating my thoughts into English but this is definitely the last thing to say about my thoughts. I m trying to say 1) Allah is one, Quran is His Book, Muhammed (saw) his Nabii 2) Taking Quran as an only guide and rejecting Muhammed's sunnah (saw) is a wrong thing for a person who calls him/herself as a Muslim 3) Just because of some contradictions, calling all hadiths wrong is not a right thing. This damages religion. It is another try to give a new dimension to Islam like Vahabbis do. And both of them are wrong.
Posts: 2591 | From: **Ex Oriente Lux** | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 'Shahrazat: 3) Just because of some contradictions, calling all hadiths wrong is not a right thing. This damages religion.
No. It damages what many perceive as "religion". And that's a good thing imho.
There is so much crap in mainstream interpretations of Islam that comes from hadith -- and sometimes from hadith that contradict the Qur'an! That is damaging the religion.
People get stoned in this day and age in the name of Islam -- based on hadith, since there is no mentioning of stoning in the Qur'an. According to mainstream interpretation (and according to the jurisdiction in some countries), women are not allowed to become presidents, or occupy positions of authority. This argument is based on a weak(!) hadith which clearly contradicts the Qur'an.
Those are just two examples out of many, and they are serious, not small, matters. Questioning those interpretations and the traditions that support them is necessary and healthy; the only thing it is damaging is the power of those people who claim to have sole authority about God's words.
Posts: 2803 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
When someone says not to question I am reminded of being told that I should not study other religions then being asked why I do it. My response was "If what I believe is the truth it will stand against any religion, if not, I will find the truth".
You have to question. If not you could be following traditions rather than the truth.
With all due respect Shah. I think that your terminology may be different because I see you as strong with your own mind. If you are not questioning then how do you choose one which you agree with over another which you don't? If there are contradictions, then that means at some point you have to question which is correct. Maybe you don't say I reject all of them but don't you choose between them?
Here is an example. Ayisha's age. If you do not question if the correct reporting of her age was eight at the time of marriage then you would have to believe that this is an appropriate age for a girl to marry. no?
...and your English is very good.
-------------------- "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts." (Sign hanging in Einstein's office at Princeton) Leap and the Net will Appear. Posts: 3891 | From: No good deed goes unpunished. | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dalia, There is mention of stoning in the Bible.
The story is that the woman was convicted of adultery. The people went to stone her and Jesus was there. He said to the people, ok, stone her, but let him who is without sin cast the first stone. Then he bent down to write in the dirt. One by one the people threw down their stones and walked away. When Jesus stood up he asked the woman "where are those that condemn you?" She said that they left and he told her "neither do I condemn you, go away and sin no more". This is the love of God. This is grace.
Posts: 3891 | From: No good deed goes unpunished. | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: Dalia, There is mention of stoning in the Bible.
Yes, but that is not the point. It is not in the Qur'an, yet some Muslims claim it has been commanded by God. And in order to justify this barbaric practice as "Islamic", they resort to hadith that speak about monkeys stoning other monkeys for adultery. Or, even worse, hadith in which it is being claimed the verse about stoning was in the Qur'an, but has been eaten by a goat!
Posts: 2803 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 'Shahrazat: 3) Just because of some contradictions, calling all hadiths wrong is not a right thing. This damages religion.
No. It damages what many perceive as "religion". And that's a good thing imho.
There is so much crap in mainstream interpretations of Islam that comes from hadith -- and sometimes from hadith that contradict the Qur'an! That is damaging the religion.
People get stoned in this day and age in the name of Islam -- based on hadith, since there is no mentioning of stoning in the Qur'an. According to mainstream interpretation (and according to the jurisdiction in some countries), women are not allowed to become presidents, or occupy positions of authority. This argument is based on a weak(!) hadith which clearly contradicts the Qur'an.
Those are just two examples out of many, and they are serious, not small, matters. Questioning those interpretations and the traditions that support them is necessary and healthy; the only thing it is damaging is the power of those people who claim to have sole authority about God's words.
Dalia, I have no energy and time for standing in the middle of Dalia/Ayisha crossfire, I m not Ahmed
I claim that Quranists are in a wrong path. This is my opinion and my opinion based on the most trustable scholars like Bukhari (not to a wacko called Edip Yüksel)
Who taught us the numbers of rak'ats of 5 times prayer? Did we learn it from Quran? No
Who taught the amount of zakat? Quran? No
Who taught the number of tawaf during Umrah and Pilgrimage? Quran? No
Who taught what ruins fasting? Quran? No
In many ayats, Allah orders Prophet 'teach' Allah gave the authorization to explain the ayats.
Why didn't Allah choose to leave his words in the middle of a street suddenly? Or why He didn't make a cow to tell his verses? Why did he prefer to do it slowly and wanted the Prophets explain them to their followers? Because he wanted the prophets to be an example for his creatures. Why did he send thousands of Nabis? It should have a reason.
Can you rule a country just by depending on a constitution? No. You also need rules, internal regulations, legislations etc.. Everything cannot be dependent to constitution. Constitution transmtis to internal regulations.
So you can't say Quran is the only source, this is wrong.
I really wonder how Quranists perform their 5 times pray? Can you tell me??
Posts: 2591 | From: **Ex Oriente Lux** | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ayisha: Yes following Quran is not a new concept, Muhammed did it first so i follow him in this
Ayisha, you understand what I mean. My opinion is if we call ourselves as Muslim, that includes the Quran and Sunnah both. In many verses, Allah orders us follow him.
He doesnt say follow what Bukhari claims was him, He also says Muhammed followed the other prophets like Abraham, He also says make no distcinction among any of the prophets as they all follow 'Islam' as given by Allah not 'sunnah' as given by bukhari et al. The sunnah in Quran is sunnatullah, im sure you are aware of that. Allahs description of Islam is in Quran and it doesnt include 'follow Quran and sunnah of Muhammed' It is very detailed on this and I have posted verses regarding which Hadith is the best Hadith and it is IN Quran from ALLAH.
quote:
quote: Allahs prophets followed Allah. There are many verses in Quran which tell you what followers did in following something else after the Words were given and how it led to their own destruction and brought forth new 'religions' based on following and worshipping a man.
This is a very brave comment Ayisha. You mean that people worshipping Muhammed (puh) by following and respecting Sunnah? No way
Yes way shah. Why are you not following the claimed 'sunnah' of Ambraham, Moses, Jesus then and are distinguishing between prophets as you were told not to? You are doing exactly as the Jews and Christians did and there are also verses warning you that.
quote:There are also many verses that orders us to follow and take the Prophets as an example.
yes and his example was Quran. he followed Quran. His example about how to use the toilet and hadith about not washing with dung (****) are not part of the message, anyone with a grain of common sense can see that. The hadith attributed to the prophet even include oppression of women, is that what God said? NO.
quote:
quote: You do not seem to accept that Muhammed followed to the letter the words in Quran.
Sheesh ya3ni I may be missing my points while translating my thoughts into English but this is definitely the last thing to say about my thoughts. I m trying to say 1) Allah is one, Quran is His Book, Muhammed (saw) his Nabii
Allah had many prophets, not just one.
quote:2) Taking Quran as an only guide and rejecting Muhammed's sunnah (saw) is a wrong thing for a person who calls him/herself as a Muslim
No, this is wrong for one who calls him/herself a 'sunni' Muslim.
Quran says Allah is the guide, Quran is the guide, the fully detailed complete easy to understand guide to mankind, does it not? You seem to think I reject the sunnah that Muhammed followed, I dont, the sunnah that Muhammed followed is the sunnah of Allah. I reject the claimed hadith that are attributed to a prophet of God which contradict themselves AND Quran AND the prophet, because what Muhammed did and said are IN Quran, not some made up rubbish by enemies of Islam claiming to be what he said and did.
quote:3) Just because of some contradictions, calling all hadiths wrong is not a right thing.
because of 'some contradictions' they cannot be trusted and are certainly NOT part of Islam.
quote:This damages religion. It is another try to give a new dimension to Islam like Vahabbis do. And both of them are wrong.
I am not damaging religion, I am rejecting the man made claims that this (hadith and sunnah) is religion from Allah when it is clearly not. Nor am I giving another dimension to religion as the sects have already done by breaking away from Gods Book and following something else. I am sticking to the one dimension that Allah gave in Quran.
Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: When someone says not to question I am reminded of being told that I should not study other religions then being asked why I do it. My response was "If what I believe is the truth it will stand against any religion, if not, I will find the truth".
You have to question. If not you could be following traditions rather than the truth.
With all due respect Shah. I think that your terminology may be different because I see you as strong with your own mind. If you are not questioning then how do you choose one which you agree with over another which you don't? If there are contradictions, then that means at some point you have to question which is correct. Maybe you don't say I reject all of them but don't you choose between them?
Here is an example. Ayisha's age. If you do not question if the correct reporting of her age was eight at the time of marriage then you would have to believe that this is an appropriate age for a girl to marry. no?
...and your English is very good.
Let me ask you a question D.
How come a virgin becomes pregnant?? What do your mind and logic tell about this?
Regarding Ayisha subject, I already believe that she was between 13-16 when she got married to the Prophet (saw). There are many people who claim that but still the Islam enemies (I dont mean you ) prefer covering that fact in order to give Islam a bad reputation. http://www.fountainmagazine.com/article.php?ARTICLEID=1026Posts: 2591 | From: **Ex Oriente Lux** | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 'Shahrazat: Regarding Ayisha subject, I already believe that she was between 13-16 when she got married to the Prophet (saw). There are many people who claim that but still the Islam enemies (I dont mean you ) prefer covering that fact in order to give Islam a bad reputation. http://www.fountainmagazine.com/article.php?ARTICLEID=1026
These enemies of Islam have hadith in sahih bukhari shah. the age of aesha being 6 and 9 is in sahih bukhari. Your AUTHENTIC HADITH Posts: 15090 | From: http://www.egyptalk.com/forum/ | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 'Shahrazat: Dalia, I have no energy and time for standing in the middle of Dalia/Ayisha crossfire, I m not Ahmed
I commented on this thread and stated my opinion, just like you did. I don't see how that means starting a crossfire on anyone. As for the standard questions that are being brought up in just about every discussion about the issue, such as how do you pray, fast etc. ... they have been answered literally dozens of times on this board, and I don't have the energy to write yet another post about this. I know, for example, that Ayisha has been explaining the "how do you pray" issue over and over again for several years.
You don't have to agree with the answers and opinions regarding those issues, but please respect that people are not stupid and simply ignoring them, but they have come to their own conclusions based on study and using their brains.
quote:Originally posted by 'Shahrazat: So you can't say Quran is the only source, this is wrong.
I am sorry you feel that way, but I will keep saying it, no matter if people tell me I'm wrong, misguided or whatever. My beliefs are a personal thing and don't depend on what the majority / the mainstream / the scholars say.
Posts: 2803 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 'Shahrazat: Regarding Ayisha subject, I already believe that she was between 13-16 when she got married to the Prophet (saw). There are many people who claim that but still the Islam enemies (I dont mean you ) prefer covering that fact in order to give Islam a bad reputation. http://www.fountainmagazine.com/article.php?ARTICLEID=1026
These enemies of Islam have hadith in sahih bukhari shah. the age of aesha being 6 and 9 is in sahih bukhari. Your AUTHENTIC HADITH
If so, I mean if he married to her at 9, there should be something missing there, read the article please..
Ayisha matter is not the only issue Ayisha. I really wonder how Quranists apply while performing their Muslm duties.
Posts: 2591 | From: **Ex Oriente Lux** | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: When someone says not to question I am reminded of being told that I should not study other religions then being asked why I do it. My response was "If what I believe is the truth it will stand against any religion, if not, I will find the truth".
You have to question. If not you could be following traditions rather than the truth.
With all due respect Shah. I think that your terminology may be different because I see you as strong with your own mind. If you are not questioning then how do you choose one which you agree with over another which you don't? If there are contradictions, then that means at some point you have to question which is correct. Maybe you don't say I reject all of them but don't you choose between them?
Here is an example. Ayisha's age. If you do not question if the correct reporting of her age was eight at the time of marriage then you would have to believe that this is an appropriate age for a girl to marry. no?
...and your English is very good.
Let me ask you a question D.
How come a virgin becomes pregnant?? What do your mind and logic tell about this?
Regarding Ayisha subject, I already believe that she was between 13-16 when she got married to the Prophet (saw). There are many people who claim that but still the Islam enemies (I dont mean you ) prefer covering that fact in order to give Islam a bad reputation. http://www.fountainmagazine.com/article.php?ARTICLEID=1026
LOL Touché
Well it is not logical, but to me, questioning and logic are different things. I was speaking of questioning.
Like you claim that Ayisha was 13-16. Why don't you believe 8? I think because you questioned this. I don't promote one way or the other but it is Muslims who also say she was eight. I don't think that they say this because they are enemy's of Islam but because they have been taught this and they do not question it.
The only reason that I care about her age is because I care about how the girls are treated today. Not to degrade Muslims.
Actually I don't care if someone is for Sunnah, or against, or Catholic or Protestant, or Jew, or Buddhist, or Bahia, or Atheist. I care about the individual and their heart. I believe the truth transcends religion. IMHO, Some have a good heart in spite of their religion, some have a bad heart within their religion, but no one has a good heart because of their religion.
I am just trying to point out that questioning is a good thing, no matter what conclusion that you come to. We all should question and take and leave what works and does not work for us.
Posts: 3891 | From: No good deed goes unpunished. | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by *Dalia*: [QUOTE] I commented on this thread and stated my opinion, just like you did. I don't see how that means starting a crossfire on anyone.
It was just a joke Dalia
quote: As for the standard questions that are being brought up in just about every discussion about the issue, such as how do you pray, fast etc. ... they have been answered literally dozens of times on this board, and I don't have the energy to write yet another post about this. I know, for example, that Ayisha has been explaining the "how do you pray" issue over and over again for several years.
So give me the link please, unfortunately I don't read everything here or tell me in a few words
quote:You don't have to agree with the answers and opinions regarding those issues, but please respect that people are not stupid and simply ignoring them, but they have come to their own conclusions based on study and using their brains.
That is also my point. Also all those narraters, the Sunnah followers were/are not stupid either. many scholars agree that most of the hadiths are collected with a great afford.
quote:]I am sorry you feel that way, but I will keep saying it, no matter if people tell me I'm wrong, misguided or whatever. My beliefs are a personal thing and don't depend on what the majority / the mainstream / the scholars say.
Same for me Dalia. I have a deep respect for the Sunnah of the Prophet. That is mainly taught by my father who read thousands of Islamic, anti-Islamic books both in English and Turkish.
Posts: 2591 | From: **Ex Oriente Lux** | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
But it's a very important tool.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic