Now an "Islamic Renaissance" is to erupt out of France

[Sohail Shuja]

What happened? all the logic annihilated to naught here?

You are only confronted with your own logics about Sunnah and Ahadith, w.r.t Quran itself and this is your answer? ?

Come on mate, you can do better than that....

Is Quran not a book, which in its current form has been transmitted to us by the virtue of some editing and consolidation by the people who were not Prophets?

 

[Sohail Shuja]

Either God is wrong or the mullah, you decide.

Look buddies, first of all, clear your misconception that anyone is taking Sunnah or Ahadith over Quran --- 1.

Secondly, let me try to elaborate something in the light of my own experience and opinion. It may link to you as well.

In my school days, I used to hate mathematics, just because I could not see the relevance of (A+B) whole squared in my practical observable life. But when I got into my professional life, I started to see its relevance in my work. Since then, I have acknowledged its relevance and now my skills have also improved a lot.

Likewise, I also used to have more or less the same opinion about Ahadith and Fiqah, as you guys currently pose. But when in my life, I was confronted with many legal matters, I found out the relevance of Ahadith and Sunnah in the light of legislation.

Although, let me reiterate that it does not mean taking Ahadith and Sunnah + Fiqah over Quran.

Quran gives you a guiding principles and it is complete in its form. However, further operational and implementing elaborations are available in Ahadith and Sunnah and then Fiqah. But there is a methodology of cascading it:

1- First and foremost is Quran. If it is not in Quran or goes against the Quranic teaching, the Sunnah or the Ahadith is to be rejected.

2- If something is even not found in Ahadith and Sunnah, the matter can be referred to Fiqah, but again, the Fiqah shall not stand contradictory to the tenets of Quran and Sunnah.

In a traffic rule book, you will only find that if you need to turn right, then you have to turn on your signal and then turn right.

In the manual of driving, you will find further details that if you need to turn right, you first need to look back if there is no other vehicle there, then you need to turn your signal on before hand so that there is enough time for you to move to the right corner without obstructing the flow of the traffic and then you should stop at the turning point and see if there is no one coming from the other side who might hit you if you take the right turn, if there is one, then let him pass first and then take a turn, while keeping the signal on and being stationery at the right turn.

Now look at the first condition of the rule book. It states the principle. This is what is in Quran.

Look at the second elaboration of the driving manual. It is more detailed and elaborative of the main text of the rule book. This is Sunnah. Now Sunnah cannot go against Quran as the manual cannot go against the rules book.

It is also a famous hadith of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) that "Compare my hadith with Quran, if it is not in the Quran, it is not my Hadith". Many people take this hadith as a notion that only Quran has to be followed and that all the Hadith are liable to be rejected in this accord. However, the implication is rather retrospective, the hadith never says to reject a hadith which is in consonance with the principles laid down in Quran. It propounds to accept that hadith.

 

[Citizen X]

What happened? all the logic annihilated to naught here?

No, with all due respect the question was so moronic that there could be no reasonable reply. It's like comparing apples to purple. Not even in the same league.

 

[Citizen X]

Look buddies, first of all, clear your misconception that anyone is taking Sunnah or Ahadith over Quran --- 1.

Secondly, let me try to elaborate something in the light of my own experience and opinion. It may link to you as well.

In my school days, I used to hate mathematics, just because I could not see the relevance of (A+B) whole squared in my practical observable life. But when I got into my professional life, I started to see its relevance in my work. Since then, I have acknowledged its relevance and now my skills have also improved a lot.

Likewise, I also used to have more or less the same opinion about Ahadith and Fiqah, as you guys currently pose. But when in my life, I was confronted with many legal matters, I found out the relevance of Ahadith and Sunnah in the light of legislation.

Although, let me reiterate that it does not mean taking Ahadith and Sunnah + Fiqah over Quran.

Quran gives you a guiding principles and it is complete in its form. However, further operational and implementing elaborations are available in Ahadith and Sunnah and then Fiqah. But there is a methodology of cascading it:

1- First and foremost is Quran. If it is not in Quran or goes against the Quranic teaching, the Sunnah or the Ahadith is to be rejected.

2- If something is even not found in Ahadith and Sunnah, the matter can be referred to Fiqah, but again, the Fiqah shall not stand contradictory to the tenets of Quran and Sunnah.

In a traffic rule book, you will only find that if you need to turn right, then you have to turn on your signal and then turn right.

In the manual of driving, you will find further details that if you need to turn right, you first need to look back if there is no other vehicle there, then you need to turn your signal on before hand so that there is enough time for you to move to the right corner without obstructing the flow of the traffic and then you should stop at the turning point and see if there is no one coming from the other side who might hit you if you take the right turn, if there is one, then let him pass first and then take a turn, while keeping the signal on and being stationery at the right turn.

Now look at the first condition of the rule book. It states the principle. This is what is in Quran.

Look at the second elaboration of the driving manual. It is more detailed and elaborative of the main text of the rule book. This is Sunnah. Now Sunnah cannot go against Quran as the manual cannot go against the rules book.

It is also a famous hadith of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) that "Compare my hadith with Quran, if it is not in the Quran, it is not my Hadith". Many people take this hadith as a notion that only Quran has to be followed and that all the Hadith are liable to be rejected in this accord. However, the implication is rather retrospective, the hadith never says to reject a hadith which is in consonance with the principles laid down in Quran. It propounds to accept that hadith.

Well as I stated my own experiences were the totally opposite. I was a hard core hadithist, you don't go on to read a nine volume collection cover to cover as well as a lot of other collections, just like that. Only later on in life I discovered. Hadith is totally unreliable and uncredible and adds a lot of extra fluff and unnecessary baggage to a beautiful and simple deen.

Making it unduly stressful and complicated. Just watch any moulvi Q&A show and the type of ridiculous questions coming in makes you wonder how do people even think of such non-sense. And then the even more flabbergasting answers.

I admire to attempt like many in the past at great verbal gymnastics and far fetched analogies trying to justify hadith as a source of secondary deen and an explanation of the Quran. But alas a wasted attempt, because the Quran itself says it does not need another source to explain it. It is easy, clear and detailed and actually warns about using anything outside the Quran.

With an open mind and without and preconceived notions look into the history of hadith, how and when it was collected, how reliable is the hadith we have today and most importantly read the hadith. And you will realize there is no way you can base your religion on something that is so ridiculous and outrageous nor can they be authentic, that talks about Prophet's testicles, monkeys doing zina, nauzubillah the Prophet lusting after his own companions wives, the Prophet wanting to commit suicide so on and so forth.

If the Quran was to contain even one ayah that was suspected to be fabricated we would dismiss the entire Quran as how can something that is suppose to be from the creator have man made fabrications in it. Then the entire book loses credibility.

But the hadith has 1000s of fabricated lies in it and these are classed as fabrications by the great muhaditeen themselves. Then how can we take anything from it.

And as I mentioned earlier, the Quran itself says its a complete book, in a clear and easy to understand language and you do not need any law outside it and not to follow any other hadith and sayings other than that of Allah in the Quran. Even the hadith says the Prophet forbade hadith, the khulafa rasidun and the sahaba did not compile or allow any books of hadith.

By forcefully injected hadith which is unreliable and downright fabricated you are Going against Allah, his message and his messenger.

Hadith is great, I encourage everyone to read it, a great resource but only if you treat it for what it is, hadith is nothing but early pre and post Islamic history and a biographical account of the Prophet's life and seen and witnessed by 1000s of people in small anecdotes. If you treat and read the hadith as such, you will have no problems and issues. But if you use hadith as a source of deen and jurisprudence then you will be in great confusion and great problems and issues will arise.

Also ask you self a simple hypothetical question. God forbid if tomorrow the Quran didn't exist and only the hadith did. How much difference would it way make to the way Islam is practiced and followed today. Almost no change at all.

But vice versa if the hadith disappeared tomorrow and huge chunk of how Islam is practiced and followed will change.

So ask yourself are we following the deen of the Quran or rather the deen of hadith. If you are a thinking man, not blindly following what you've been told to follow, all of this should have set off some alarm bells in your head by now.

I know to even think that Islam can exist without hadith sounds blasphemous and just even thinking about it is making me a sinner. I went through the same when I first started to realize that what I had been told, taught, learned and read on my own for all my life could be wrong. I was a bad gut wrenching feeling to have. How could so many people could be wrong for such a long time.

So I started to do more research on hadith, hoping to discover that all of this was wrong and hadith was right but I just didn't have the knowledge to satisfy myself. But the more I looked into the more I realized that hadith was standing on very wobbly foundations, in fact it was like a house of cards that is being forcefully being kept standing by hiding and obscuring some truths about it.

Still I did not want to believe it, although I no longer had any proof to keep believing in them. But then I remember the verse from the Quran.

And when it is said to them, "Follow what Allah has revealed," they say, "Rather, we will follow that which we found our fathers doing." Even though their fathers understood nothing, nor were they guided? Surah Baqarah Verse 170

But how can so many people be wrong about this?

If you follow the majority of people on the earth, they will lead you astray from the path of God, for they follow only conjecture and surmise. Surah Anam Verse 116


And if you have made it till here, thank you for reading it all.

 

[Wake up Pak]

Ok then, tell me according to Quran that how should I say my prayers? what to recite and how many Rakaat etc. ?

Since the Quran does not mention the so-called ritual "Namaz" therefore, Allah did not give us details. Remember, Allah is not short of words.
To date, no one ever has proven the exact method of the ritual namaz through ahadith either.
So you tell me how should one pray, what to recite and how many rakaat etc. from your ahadithe books and while you at it tell me should one pray according to Shai or Sunni? Obviously one of them is wrong.
At one hand, you believe that the Quran is complete but, now you are contradicting your own statemnet by asking how to pray according to the Quran?

A- Dfferent Nimaz or prayers for Shiah and Sunni.
b- Different Azan [call for pray] for Sunni and Shiah. Etc.

No, you were giving me the meaning of the word "Ransom" as used in that translation. Visit your post again and read it in context with your other posts preceding or succeeding it.

I know what i wrote, let me reiterate that the word ransom is used to relaease the captive, since, the verse is talking about the divorce, obviously you won't be divorcing a captive would you? So do not twist my words.

 

[Sohail Shuja]

No, with all due respect the question was so moronic that there could be no reasonable reply. It's like comparing apples to purple. Not even in the same league.

In fact, those were the same questions raised against the copy of Quran we have, which you raised against the books of Ahadith e.g. man made and changed etc etc. I wonder how they became impertinent?

 

[Sohail Shuja]

Hadith is great, I encourage everyone to read it, a great resource but only if you treat it for what it is, hadith is nothing but early pre and post Islamic history and a biographical account of the Prophet's life and seen and witnessed by 1000s of people in small anecdotes. If you treat and read the hadith as such, you will have no problems and issues.

Well, as I said, no one is taking hadith over Quran. Quran remains superior as the constitution remains superior to any derived subsequent laws.

But if you use hadith as a source of deen and jurisprudence then you will be in great confusion and great problems and issues will arise.

Not a source of deen. Source remains the Quran. But only the ahadith which can be verified in the light of Quran are taken as a reference, which is over and above anyone else's elaboration of the text of Quran.

There is a certain hierarchy through which legislation and/or legal matters are formulated or sieved through.

1- Prime are the laws which are clearly elaborated in Quran e.g. the inheritance laws, divorce/khula laws, agreement/contract laws, witness (law of evidence). There, we do not have to look at hadith at all. They are clear and defined and are hence enforceable on general public in true letter and spirit.

2- When there are permutations in the situation and/or eventualities, which are not clearly mentioned in Quran, then only, the Ahadith which are in line with the Quranic text are taken for consideration (emphasis on the word "consideration") and then laws are derived with the maximum consensus among the scholars, e.g. the law of preemption of property is totally derived from the Hadith of Prophet (SAW) and is known as the "Haq e Shuffa". Any Hadith, which transpires a controversy with respect to its relevance to the Quran is outrightly rejected. Hence, these laws are applicable, but not enforceable.

3- Then there are instances where even Ahadith do not provide you enough elaboration of the modality at hand. e.g. there is no time period defined for a woman before she seeks divorce on the grounds of his husband missing. At such junctures, the law looks at the elaboration provided by and agreed upon in the Fiqah. But, these laws are loosely binding on anyone and hence are called "Personal Laws", i.e. they are only applicable if the person(s) is/are ready to accept them, but they cannot be forced on anyone against their will. So, in the problem of the missing husband, the court of law decides upon the elaborations given by different scholars of Fiqah, provided that the wife accepts that she subdues and have faith in the text of her Fiqah and wants it to be decided upon that. So, I have seen many women who previously were from Hanfi or Jafri Fiqah, turning into a Maliki for this problem. But still, the point to note that Fiqah is not a general law and is not enforceable unless the person gives his/her consent.

4- Then there are legislative and legal problems which even lie outside Fiqah, as the life and its problems are ever evolving, therefore many aspects are not even there is Fiqah. Certainly, no Faqeeh has written about the problems we may face with our lives on the internet because it was not present at their time. So, then, a Mufti is referred to in this regard. But his level of authenticity lies even below the Faqeeh and is totally unbinding on the court of law to accept it as it is. It is only taken as an opinion and can also be disregarded as such if it is found not consonance with the basic tenets i.e Quran and then Sunnah.

This is the hierarchy followed in the legal discourse and legislative framework. The laws are not based on "just any Hadith", but only the ones that are classed as authentic due to their relevance to the Quran and then the legal framework cascades downward, as described above.

So ask yourself are we following the deen of the Quran or rather the deen of hadith. If you are a thinking man, not blindly following what you've been told to follow, all of this should have set off some alarm bells in your head by now.

Don't want to reiterate that Quran cannot be superseded by the authority of any hadith. Just try to understand this that no one is advocating for taking Hadith over Quran.

So I started to do more research on hadith, hoping to discover that all of this was wrong and hadith was right but I just didn't have the knowledge to satisfy myself. But the more I looked into the more I realized that hadith was standing on very wobbly foundations, in fact it was like a house of cards that is being forcefully being kept standing by hiding and obscuring some truths about it.

Still I did not want to believe it, although I no longer had any proof to keep believing in them. But then I remember the verse from the Quran.

And when it is said to them, "Follow what Allah has revealed," they say, "Rather, we will follow that which we found our fathers doing." Even though their fathers understood nothing, nor were they guided? Surah Baqarah Verse 170

But how can so many people be wrong about this?

If you follow the majority of people on the earth, they will lead you astray from the path of God, for they follow only conjecture and surmise. Surah Anam Verse 116

No, the fact is not contested by anyone, anywhere that each and every hadith is authentic. There are certain conditions put forth for consideration:

1- It should comply with the tenets of Quran
2- It is verifiable with its sources

Even if the above criterion is met, it does not precipitate into a law, but only crystallizes into a condition to formulate a law or deal with a legal matter.

Are you getting my point here?

No one is taking Ahadith over Quran. No one has to follow Ahadith blindly, but as you said, they are taken as references and for their own accord they are a great source of knowledge and understanding. However, as the concerns raised by you, I also am of the opinion that one should study Ahadith, after studying Quran first.

And if you have made it till here, thank you for reading it all.

Come on, if this is the condition, then I will have to thank you a hundred times for the instances when you had gone through my lengthy posts on this forum. So, just forget it...

 

[Sohail Shuja]

Since the Quran does not mention the so-called ritual "Namaz" therefore, Allah did not give us details. Remember, Allah is not short of words.

Meaning of the word : الصّلوٰۃ ؟
Please, define on the basis of Quran.

I know what i wrote, let me reiterate that the word ransom is used to relaease the captive, since, the verse is talking about the divorce, obviously you won't be divorcing a captive would you? So do not twist my words.

Many words in Quran have implied rather than direct meanings. Like the word "Light" as we were discussing. Kindly do not get that "Dogmatic" here.

Secondly, what you mean remains in your head and is only depicted to others as you spell them out in your words. Try to have a clear articulation to avoid any misconception/misunderstanding.

 

[Citizen X]

Well, as I said, no one is taking hadith over Quran. Quran remains superior as the constitution remains superior to any derived subsequent laws.


Not a source of deen. Source remains the Quran. But only the ahadith which can be verified in the light of Quran are taken as a reference, which is over and above anyone else's elaboration of the text of Quran.

There is a certain hierarchy through which legislation and/or legal matters are formulated or sieved through.

1- Prime are the laws which are clearly elaborated in Quran e.g. the inheritance laws, divorce/khula laws, agreement/contract laws, witness (law of evidence). There, we do not have to look at hadith at all. They are clear and defined and are hence enforceable on general public in true letter and spirit.

2- When there are permutations in the situation and/or eventualities, which are not clearly mentioned in Quran, then only, the Ahadith which are in line with the Quranic text are taken for consideration (emphasis on the word "consideration") and then laws are derived with the maximum consensus among the scholars, e.g. the law of preemption of property is totally derived from the Hadith of Prophet (SAW) and is known as the "Haq e Shuffa". Any Hadith, which transpires a controversy with respect to its relevance to the Quran is outrightly rejected. Hence, these laws are applicable, but not enforceable.

3- Then there are instances where even Ahadith do not provide you enough elaboration of the modality at hand. e.g. there is no time period defined for a woman before she seeks divorce on the grounds of his husband missing. At such junctures, the law looks at the elaboration provided by and agreed upon in the Fiqah. But, these laws are loosely binding on anyone and hence are called "Personal Laws", i.e. they are only applicable if the person(s) is/are ready to accept them, but they cannot be forced on anyone against their will. So, in the problem of the missing husband, the court of law decides upon the elaborations given by different scholars of Fiqah, provided that the wife accepts that she subdues and have faith in the text of her Fiqah and wants it to be decided upon that. So, I have seen many women who previously were from Hanfi or Jafri Fiqah, turning into a Maliki for this problem. But still, the point to note that Fiqah is not a general law and is not enforceable unless the person gives his/her consent.

4- Then there are legislative and legal problems which even lie outside Fiqah, as the life and its problems are ever evolving, therefore many aspects are not even there is Fiqah. Certainly, no Faqeeh has written about the problems we may face with our lives on the internet because it was not present at their time. So, then, a Mufti is referred to in this regard. But his level of authenticity lies even below the Faqeeh and is totally unbinding on the court of law to accept it as it is. It is only taken as an opinion and can also be disregarded as such if it is found not consonance with the basic tenets i.e Quran and then Sunnah.

This is the hierarchy followed in the legal discourse and legislative framework. The laws are not based on "just any Hadith", but only the ones that are classed as authentic due to their relevance to the Quran and then the legal framework cascades downward, as described above.



Don't want to reiterate that Quran cannot be superseded by the authority of any hadith. Just try to understand this that no one is advocating for taking Hadith over Quran.


No, the fact is not contested by anyone, anywhere that each and every hadith is authentic. There are certain conditions put forth for consideration:

1- It should comply with the tenets of Quran
2- It is verifiable with its sources

Even if the above criterion is met, it does not precipitate into a law, but only crystallizes into a condition to formulate a law or deal with a legal matter.

Are you getting my point here?

No one is taking Ahadith over Quran. No one has to follow Ahadith blindly, but as you said, they are taken as references and for their own accord they are a great source of knowledge and understanding. However, as the concerns raised by you, I also am of the opinion that one should study Ahadith, after studying Quran first.


Come on, if this is the condition, then I will have to thank you a hundred times for the instances when you had gone through my lengthy posts on this forum. So, just forget it...

Your whole post about how no one is taking hadith over the Quran. Which unfortunate to say is not the case, even going back to Imam Shafi who emphasized the final authority of a hadith of Muhammad, so that even the Quran was "to be interpreted in the light of traditions (i.e. hadith), and not vice versa."

Even today this is happening all over. Even going so far as to insult the Prophets and making Prophet Muhammad ( nauzubillah, astaghfirullah ) as some war mongering sexual deviant child molester. And the worst part is Muslims have no issue not only believing all of this but defending it tooth and nail, just because "hadith says so" These silly fabricated hadiths are exactly what give Islamophobes cannon fodder to ridicule the Prophet.

Hadith centric traditional Muslims will happily throw the Quran and the Prophets under the bus to protect their beloved hadith.

AND biggest of all you totally dodged the point that all of these major collections of hadith are questionable, unreliable and uncredible, according to the standard set by the great muhadithseen themselves so how can we take anything from them.

Stop giving hadith holy and divine status and treat it as the times and life of the Prophet s.a.w written by man which will always have error in it and you would be fine. Do not draw aqeedah or hukum from it, even if it goes against the Quran

 

[Sohail Shuja]

Your whole post about how no one is taking hadith over the Quran. Which unfortunate to say is not the case, even going back to Imam Shafi who emphasized the final authority of a hadith of Muhammad, so that even the Quran was "to be interpreted in the light of traditions (i.e. hadith), and not vice versa."

Well, to be honest, I have not studied Imam Shafii in that much detail, but prima facie, I can establish that in the context where he said this that Quran has to be interpreted in the light of Hadith must be a notion to thwart any misconceptions that people may start abridging Quran on their own, when there are explanations existing in authentic Ahadith. Otherwise, he was a Faqeeh himself.

This raises two points:

1- If Quran is interpreted in the light of Hadith, then only the hadith which are in consonance with the Quranic text are to be considered. Not leaving any room for the Ahadith which are not in line with the message and ideology of the Quran. So, this, in one or the other way works as a filter for non relevant/authentic ahadith.

Like there is a hadith I came across which promotes drinking the urine of a camel to cure a certain disease, and it has been termed as rubbish by every Faqeeh and even does not resonates with the message of Quran i.e. the differentiation between Halal, Haraam and Tayyab is already present in the Quran. So, on the authority of Quran, this one is outrightly rejected.

Then, conversely, there is a Hadith which encourages the use of a dish known as "Talbeena" to treat signs and symptoms of post stress depression in a person. This Hadith is somewhat believable because it tells you to use the ingredients which are also described in Quran like honey, dates and milk (with the exception of barley only).
Now it is only recently has been discovered that the ingredients do actually are helpful in eliminating post stress depression due to the reasons that dates are high in Magnesium, which is helpful in eradicating symptoms depression in neurological disorders. Then Barley is a suplement for selenium, which is also neurotonic supplement fighting depression.

Magnesium and major depression - Magnesium in the Central Nervous System - NCBI Bookshelf

The impact of selenium supplementation on mood - PubMed

The possibility that a subclinical deficiency of the trace element selenium might exist in a sample of the British population was examined by giving a selenium supplement for 5 weeks. Using a double-blind cross-over design, 50 subjects received either a placebo or 100 mcg selenium on a daily...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Zinc, Magnesium, Selenium and Depression: A Review of the Evidence, Potential Mechanisms and Implications - PMC

Micronutrient deficiency and depression are major global health problems. Here, we first review recent empirical evidence of the association between several micronutrients—zinc, magnesium, selenium—and depression. We then present potential ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

So, for a person like me, there are reasons to accept the hadith under discussion and cannot help but to cherish its relevance and pertinence to the subject and its veracity of effects, given the fact that it existed in the times when there was no scientific backing to it.

2- The second point out the statement of Imam Shafii explains that there cannot be any provision in Fiqah which may go against the principles set forth in Ahadith that are in line with the teachings of Quran. Logically, I do not find it abstract as it emboldens the superiority of Hadith over Fiqah and that is followed all over the Muslim world's jurisprudence.

Even today this is happening all over. Even going so far as to insult the Prophets and making Prophet Muhammad ( nauzubillah, astaghfirullah ) as some war mongering sexual deviant child molester. And the worst part is Muslims have no issue not only believing all of this but defending it tooth and nail, just because "hadith says so" These silly fabricated hadiths are exactly what give Islamophobes cannon fodder to ridicule the Prophet.

Hadith centric traditional Muslims will happily throw the Quran and the Prophets under the bus to protect their beloved hadith.

OK, now I understand that what is bothering you the most. Look, in the books of Hadith, there are many "Riwayaat" as well, which are only the accounts and interpretations by people other than the Prophet (SAW) and are not to be followed. Like the age of Hazrat Ayesh (RA) at the time of consummation of her marriage. Nowhere you will find the words of the Prophet (SAW) towards marrying an underage child. The accounts given about the age of Hazrat Ayesha (R.A) are from people, who did it based on speculation and no one emphasized their word as totally true and/or authentic. In some riwayaats, the age is given as 9 years, in some, it is 11, 13 or even 15 years.

Therefore, the Islamic law, everywhere has not allowed marriage of a girl who has not attained the age of puberty. There can be serious repercussions if anyone does so (both for the parents and the so called husband). This is done on the authority of the injunction clearly passed in Quran for the parents who marry their daughters that "do not marry them against their will". This clearly proscribes that the girl has to be old enough to make her decision in this respect.

AND biggest of all you totally dodged the point that all of these major collections of hadith are questionable, unreliable and uncredible, according to the standard set by the great muhadithseen themselves so how can we take anything from them.

Stop giving hadith holy and divine status and treat it as the times and life of the Prophet s.a.w written by man which will always have error in it and you would be fine. Do not draw aqeedah or hukum from it, even if it goes against the Quran

No I have not dodged the question at all, but rather you are trying to escape explanation I gave by putting Quran under the same questions.

1- Hadith is questionable: there is no disregard to the question, yes it is questionable on the authority of a hadith which tells to compare every hadith from Quran. No one is asking you to take anything coming in Hadith something as divine.

2- Hadith is not to be relied because it is man made: Well, brother, if this is the criteria, then kindly also look upon the copy of the Quran we have. It has also been compiled by the people after Prophet (SAW). Even in the process of compiling, many edits were also made. So, this leaves Quran also as much questionable and reliable. So, if, by the virtue of this logic you ask me to reject Hadith altogether, then, I guess that by applying the same logic, I can also question the authenticity of the copy of Quran we have been reading.

3- Hadith was not compiled in the times of Muhammad (SAW): Well, even the Quran was not compiled in the life of Muhammad (SAW) and there could be reasons for this. First and the foremost, which I envisage is the fact that in the 24 years of Prophethood, Muhammad (SAW) was very much busy in preaching, making errands for Islam, besieged by the Kuffar, abandoned and boycotted, immigrated and building up his own state at Medinah and then in many wars that he fought.

So, if we accept the delay in the first and the foremost thing i.e. Quran, then why we cannot give some more relaxation to Ahadith?

Provided that the era after Muhammad (SAW) was also very chaotic. All the Caliphs except the first were martyred, there was mutiny, disaccord of views and the work of expansion of Islamic caliphate, the the power struggles among the second generation and the third, succeeding the Caliphs/Sahaba.

 

[Sohail Shuja]

Citizen X I am sorry for the grammatical errors I made in the post above. Reason being that I could not write all of it in one go and whacked the "Post" button in a hurry. But I hope you will make sense out of it. But if anything remains ambiguous, kindly refer back to me because now you cannot edit a post after 8 minutes of posting.

 

[Wake up Pak]

Meaning of the word : الصّلوٰۃ ؟
Please, define on the basis of Quran.

Even if given the meaning of the word Salat, you still won't believe it because of the preconceived idea/mindset and dogmatic belief of praying/namaz as it was taught by our elders/mullahs.
Just for you to investigate the meaning of the word Salat.

1- To follow closely
2- To adhere to something
3- To Turns towards

So you tell me now the exact method of Namaz, how should one pray, what to recite, and how many Rakaat, etc. from the Quran or the ahadith.

Secondly, what you mean remains in your head and is only depicted to others as you spell them out in your words. Try to have a clear articulation to avoid any misconception/misunderstanding.

It was as clear as it could get but, some people either do not want to understand or just want to manipulate the words.

 

[Citizen X]

I can establish that in the context where he said this that Quran has to be interpreted in the light of Hadith

Nope, Shafi was very much a hadith over the Quran person, even if the hadith went against the Quran then the hadith must be followed.

If Quran is interpreted in the light of Hadith then only the hadith which are in consonance with the Quranic text are to be considered.

Nope this doesn't happen in the hadithist traditional Muslim world. The Quran is twisted and contorted to conform to hadith.

The second point out the statement of Imam Shafii explains that there cannot be any provision in Fiqah which may go against the principles set forth in Ahadith

Nope this is just your own conjecture. I've already mentioned what kind of person he was.

Hadith is questionable: there is no disregard to the question, yes it is questionable on the authority of a hadith which tells to compare every hadith from Quran.

Nope, hadith is questionable because of the many many many reasons I've mentioned many times in this thread, so I will save my self the effort of writing them again. You can go back and read my previous posts in this thread as a refresher if needed.

OK, now I understand that what is bothering you the most. Look, in the books of Hadith, there are many "Riwayaat" as well, which are only the accounts and interpretations by people other than the Prophet (SAW) and are not to be followed. Like the age of Hazrat Ayesh (RA) at the time of consummation of her marriage. Nowhere you will find the words of the Prophet (SAW) towards marrying an underage child. The accounts given about the age of Hazrat Ayesha (R.A) are from people, who did it based on speculation and no one emphasized their word as totally true and/or authentic. In some riwayaats, the age is given as 9 years, in some, it is 11, 13 or even 15 years.

This was just one example off the top of my head, hadith is filled with such crap. Once again traditional Islam "ulema" and "fuqaha" have been bending over backwards to justify this hadith. None of them have said this goes against the Quran so it is a fabricated hadith. But rather twisted and contorted the Quran to fit this hadith.

Hadith is not to be relied because it is man made: Well, brother, if this is the criteria, then kindly also look upon the copy of the Quran we have.

Like I said this is a ridiculous question from the get go. The Quran does not reach us from one dubious source centuries after the Prophet passed. Quran was memorized and written by 100s if not 1000s of people and checked by the Prophet himself if it was done correctly in his lifetime i,e signed off on the Quran personal. Allah guarantees to protect it. Compiling it into a singular mushaf does not invalidate it or make it work of man.

People 5 generations later did not say I heard from Abu Fulan who heard from Abu Dhimkan, who heard from Abu This who heard from Abu That, that I heard this surah revealed to the Prophet like this this this and this. And then another person 6 generations later tells he heard from fulana x,y,z,1,2,3 the same surah was revealed like that that that which is totally different and contradictory from what the previous person said he heard from his fulanas and dhimkanas. So now we follow such a Quran narrated to us by fulanas and dhimkanas which is all over the place with no real confirmed or reliable source more often then not contradicting itself over and over again.

I can go on and on and on and on and on and on and on, on how even trying to compare that the Quran was also complied by men so it falls in the same category of hadith, or since the Quran was also compiled by men and so was hadith, so hadith is reliable and credible and why even making such a comparison is, hate to be blunt here, but moronic at best.

 

[Citizen X]

Some points I missed

I came across which promotes drinking the urine of a camel to cure a certain disease, and it has been termed as rubbish by every Faqeeh

No really, it's actually the opposite. Majority of mainstream traditional "fuqaha" endorse this, then twist and contort the Quran jump trough huge mental and verbal hoops trying to justify their beloved hadith.

A tiny sample size of well know "fuqaha"

So, for a person like me, there are reasons to accept the hadith under discussion

You believe because you want to believe and you have been told since birth this is what you are supposed to believe in. When you fire 100s of 1000s of arrows into the dark, just by law of probability a few are bound to hit something or the other. And you just also did the typical verbal hoop jumping to "prove" your hadith. the porridge in itself is hardly beneficial, Quran clearly mentions things like honey, dates and milk. Mentioning a porridge and then adding these "Quranic foods" to it somehow proves the hadith? You can have them without the addition of porridge and have similar benefits. Like I said some will find a target. Does not give ahadith any real credence.

I can establish that in the context where he said this that Quran has to be interpreted in the light of Hadith must be a notion to thwart any misconceptions that people may start abridging Quran on their own, when there are explanations existing in authentic Ahadith.

3- Hadith was not compiled in the times of Muhammad (SAW): Well, even the Quran was not compiled in the life of Muhammad (SAW) and there could be reasons for this. First and the foremost, which I envisage is the fact that in the 24 years of Prophethood, Muhammad (SAW) was very much busy in preaching, making errands for Islam, besieged by the Kuffar, abandoned and boycotted, immigrated and building up his own state at Medinah and then in many wars that he fought.

I really adore and find it cute how you just imagine up scenarios out of thin air trying to prove your point. If I didn't know better I would have assumed you are grasping at straws here.

 

[Sohail Shuja]

Some points I missed



No really, it's actually the opposite. Majority of mainstream traditional "fuqaha" endorse this, then twist and contort the Quran jump trough huge mental and verbal hoops trying to justify their beloved hadith.

A tiny sample size of well know "fuqaha"

First of all, the hadith under discussion is endorsed for its second part, which is in consonance with the Quran, about the chastisement imposed on those people who later killed the shepherd of the herd of camels, stole them and then ran away. The first part of this hadith appears with another version in Sahih Bukhari, mentioning only milk of the camels.

It took me a little time to respond to the scientific assertions made by Dr. Zakir Nayak regarding the medical benefits of camel's urine. Lest I may err in ignorance of the matter, I basically searched for all those articles and did a meta-analysis.

It has been found that the researcher claiming the effectiveness of camels urine in the reduction of cancerous tumors is nothing but only a preliminary premise around the main and conclusive study. In the eight research articles published in this discourse, four of them only establish the safety of consuming camel's urine by human subjects. The next 4 are only observations, which could never be replicated. Moreover, the research had been abandoned by the authorities in Saudi Arabia. So much for that.

By the way, Dr. Zakir Nayak is not a faqeeh. He is just known as a scholar, like many others.

You believe because you want to believe and you have been told since birth this is what you are supposed to believe in. When you fire 100s of 1000s of arrows into the dark, just by law of probability a few are bound to hit something or the other. And you just also did the typical verbal hoop jumping to "prove" your hadith. the porridge in itself is hardly beneficial, Quran clearly mentions things like honey, dates and milk. Mentioning a porridge and then adding these "Quranic foods" to it somehow proves the hadith? You can have them without the addition of porridge and have similar benefits. Like I said some will find a target. Does not give ahadith any real credence.

In fact, no. Barley provides the most potent vehicle (tryptophan), which stimulates the production of serotonin and the same results could not be obtained without it.

Amount of Tryptophan (Trp) standard amino acid in Barley, hulled

How much of Tryptophan (Trp) standard amino acid is present in Barley, hulled in details, quantity how high or low Tryptophan (Trp) standard amino acid nutrient content it has.

www.traditionaloven.com

Talbinah (Barley Porridge): neurotransmitters modulatory effect and antidepressant-like action in experimentally depressed rats - PubMed

These results provide important pharmacological insights into the therapeutic and protective effects of Talbinah against depression. Studies in the future should be directed towards investigating the mechanism underlying the antidepressant activity of these food products.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Effect of Talbinah food consumption on depressive symptoms among elderly individuals in long term care facilities, randomized clinical trial - PMC

Talbinah is a barley syrup cooked with milk and sweetened by honey. In his famous Hadith on Talbinah, the Prophet Mohammad (SAW) recommended it when sad events happen for its effect on soothing hearts and relieving sadness. This 3-week crossover ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I basically do not believe in blind firing. I try to remain as close to my target as possible.

Having said that, now let's relate it to the main theme of discussion i.e. the relevance of Hadith and Sunnah. Now, why the Hadiths are classed as Sahih, Hassan and Zaeef? just because there is a consensus among the scholars and fuqaha that not every Hadith has been transmitted without fallacy. Therefore, every hadith is first compared with the Quran for its adequacy to the criterion of acceptance.

I really adore and find it cute how you just imagine up scenarios out of thin air trying to prove your point. If I didn't know better I would have assumed you are grasping at straws here.

At least we are conducting a discussion without subvertent slurs and disdainful ruffling.

However, I don't imagine without a logical back up. I would've been surprised to know that you didn't know about the copy of Quran which was written by Hafsa (RA) and Aisha (RA) and the manuscript preserved at Birmingham and the other one recovered from San'a in Yemen. It is also a well protected & documented fact that no complete compilation of Quran ever existed in the times of the Prophet (SAW) and many of the manuscripts + recollections were discarded in the process of compiling the copy of Quran which exists today. Do you wanna surprise me by saying that you did not know it already?

The copy of Quran we have with us today has also been sieved through a rigorous exercise of editing by the people who were not prophets.

 

[Citizen X]

First of all, the hadith under discussion is endorsed for its second part, which is in consonance with the Quran, about the chastisement imposed on those people who later killed the shepherd of the herd of camels, stole them and then ran away. The first part of this hadith appears with another version in Sahih Bukhari, mentioning only milk of the camels.

It took me a little time to respond to the scientific assertions made by Dr. Zakir Nayak regarding the medical benefits of camel's urine. Lest I may err in ignorance of the matter, I basically searched for all those articles and did a meta-analysis.

It has been found that the researcher claiming the effectiveness of camels urine in the reduction of cancerous tumors is nothing but only a preliminary premise around the main and conclusive study. In the eight research articles published in this discourse, four of them only establish the safety of consuming camel's urine by human subjects. The next 4 are only observations, which could never be replicated. Moreover, the research had been abandoned by the authorities in Saudi Arabia. So much for that.

By the way, Dr. Zakir Nayak is not a faqeeh. He is just known as a scholar, like many others.


In fact, no. Barley provides the most potent vehicle (tryptophan), which stimulates the production of serotonin and the same results could not be obtained without it.

Amount of Tryptophan (Trp) standard amino acid in Barley, hulled

How much of Tryptophan (Trp) standard amino acid is present in Barley, hulled in details, quantity how high or low Tryptophan (Trp) standard amino acid nutrient content it has.

www.traditionaloven.com

Talbinah (Barley Porridge): neurotransmitters modulatory effect and antidepressant-like action in experimentally depressed rats - PubMed

These results provide important pharmacological insights into the therapeutic and protective effects of Talbinah against depression. Studies in the future should be directed towards investigating the mechanism underlying the antidepressant activity of these food products.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Effect of Talbinah food consumption on depressive symptoms among elderly individuals in long term care facilities, randomized clinical trial - PMC

Talbinah is a barley syrup cooked with milk and sweetened by honey. In his famous Hadith on Talbinah, the Prophet Mohammad (SAW) recommended it when sad events happen for its effect on soothing hearts and relieving sadness. This 3-week crossover ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I basically do not believe in blind firing. I try to remain as close to my target as possible.

Having said that, now let's relate it to the main theme of discussion i.e. the relevance of Hadith and Sunnah. Now, why the Hadiths are classed as Sahih, Hassan and Zaeef? just because there is a consensus among the scholars and fuqaha that not every Hadith has been transmitted without fallacy. Therefore, every hadith is first compared with the Quran for its adequacy to the criterion of acceptance.


At least we are conducting a discussion without subvertent slurs and disdainful ruffling.

However, I don't imagine without a logical back up. I would've been surprised to know that you didn't know about the copy of Quran which was written by Hafsa (RA) and Aisha (RA) and the manuscript preserved at Birmingham and the other one recovered from San'a in Yemen. It is also a well protected & documented fact that no complete compilation of Quran ever existed in the times of the Prophet (SAW) and many of the manuscripts + recollections were discarded in the process of compiling the copy of Quran which exists today. Do you wanna surprise me by saying that you did not know it already?

The copy of Quran we have with us today has also been sieved through a rigorous exercise of editing by the people who were not prophets.

First of all as the desi saying goes, jo mukka lardai ke baad yaad aye woh apnay mou per mar lena chaiye.

I'm in no mood to go back and revisit this entire thread to get back to speed and continue the discussion from where we left off.

All I will say is. The Quran says its from Allah, it is complete, detailed, clear and easy to understand and remember. Now if you believe this then there is no need to believe in anything else or need another body of text trying to "explain" what Allah has said is detailed and clear.

AND

If you don't believe the Quran is from Allah, it is complete, detailed, clear and easy to understand and remember, then there really is no need to believe in the Quran anyways.

or continue the discussion on my other thread

https://www.siasat.pk/forums/threads/saudi-scholar-exposes-the-false-hadith-culture-that-is-corrupting-islam.815599/