The Sciences of Hadīth are a Joke

Citizen X · Apr 5, 2025

sitq90 said:
However, if you believe there is some truth to it then it is a different matter.

Have you actually read hadith? At least one of the collections of the Sahih Sitta? Hadith at it best, in an absolute best case scenario on its best day is a vague account of early Islamic history as told by 1000s of different men over a period of time which should be taken with a massive grain of salt. And at worse is absolute blasphemous and insulting garbage filled with wild fairytales. But regardless of everything. There is no deen or fiqh to be had in there.

Wake up Pak · Apr 5, 2025

sitq90 said:
Salam. The tall building Hadith which refers to Bedouins, and this one-
When you see Mecca, its mountain with holes (pierced through them), and its buildings reach its mountain tops, then as-Sa’ah (the Hour) has already cast its shadow- are so evidently prophetic that denial isn’t wise, and would require unrealistic mental gymnastics to justify the opinion that hadith are completely wrong. However, if you believe there is some truth to it then it is a different matter. May Allah forgive us, and guide us all. Jazak Allah Khair

Now tell me that the Messanger was sent with a message or to foretell the future.

[Quran 7:188 ] Say (O Muhammed), "I have no power to benefit myself, or harm myself. Only what God wills happen to me. If I KNEW THE FUTURE, I would have increased my wealth, and no harm would have afflicted me. I am no more than a warner, and a bearer of good news for those who believe."

[Quran 6:50] Say (O Muhammed), "I do not say to you that I possess the treasures of God. Nor do I know the future. Nor do I say to you

[Quran 46:9] Say (O Muhammed), "I am not different from other messengers. I have no idea what will happen to me or to you. I only follow what is revealed to me. I am no more than a profound warner."

observer-x Citizen X

Mughal1 · Apr 5, 2025

Whatever source of information contradicts indisputable self evident facts about real word realities cannot be true no matter what, be it alleged revelation of God or word of any human being.

This is why even the quran has to be interpreted in light of indisputable self evident facts and in light of the quran should be interpreted information which is found in historical records provided by human beings otherwise nothing can make any sense no matter how hard we human being try to make sense of things.

It is our need for organising and regulating ourselves into a purpose based proper human community in this world which requires that we use all sources of information available to us sensibly and purposefully properly. This is why the quran, the hadis, the ijma and the qayaas are authentic.

If the quran tells us in light of indisputable self evident facts that salaah cannot be panj waqta daily namaaz then it is not. Full stop. Koi aik sensible person bhi aisi namaaz ko kabhi bhi saabit hi nahin ker sakta na quraan se, na hadith se, na ijma se aur hi qayaas se. is liye keh her woh baat jo indisputable real world realities ke khilaaf ho woh kisi bhi soorat drust ho hi nahin sakti.

agar kisi ko is main shak hai to baat ker ke dekh le. ghoda bhi haazir hai aur maidaan bhi.

phir jin logoon ne ham ko islam ke paanchh sutoonu ke baare main ghalat baaten batayeen ham ye kaise maan len woh baaqi sab baaten islam ke baare main ham ko drust bataate hen?

sitq90 · Apr 9, 2025

Citizen X said:
On the contrary, it requires great leaps of blind faith, tons of verbal gymnastics and huge amount of jumping through mental hoops to even consider the hadith are right. I am very well aware of the hadith you mentioned but haven't quoted or referenced most probably and as usual because you actually haven't read it yourself and just heard it from here and there. And can easily be disputed and cast aside, like if you read the actual hadith it says naked, barefooted, poor Bedouins shepherds will compete in making tall buildings. These "Bedouins" are neither naked, barefooted, shepherds and anything but poor. Anyways these are just semantics and Nostradamus made many more such prophecies, so maybe we should follow his hadith aswell? Not to mentioned the 1000s of other hadith which make no sense and totally contradict each other.

The major point is Allah in the Quran has commanded us over and over not to follow any hadith or anything other than the Quran. That no laws other than Allah's law from the Quran are to be followed. You are only to judge from the Quran itself, your only source of guidance is from the Quran. So where do these hadith come in from? The early Muslims followed no hadith, in fact there were no hadith books back then, which are a later invention by the Irani imams centuries later.

Second of all, they have no credibility or anyway of authenticating them as demonstrated in detail in the OP video.

So as I said to actually believe in the hadith you have to leave your mental faculties and reasoning at the door.

Salam. Nostradmus was not a prophet of Allah. His knowledge is practically nonexistent compared to Rasool Allah SAW’s intellect and information. The hadith is about the future of Bedouins because it was referring to events in the future. Furthermore, the mountains have been evidently pierced.

Also, Sahifah Hammam ibn Munabbih’s early manuscript, a collection of 138 ahadiths,student of the sahabah, discovered in Berlin predates Bukhari and Muslim. According to historical evidence about the author’s life, this was probably around 40 years after the prophet PBUH’s passing. As you said it is true that Bukhari and Muslim were compiled by Central Asian Imams. However, is also true that the Sahifah was also compiled much earlier than that.
Coming back to the original point, it is true that the Ahadith have not been preserved as well as the Quran, and there is fabrication in them. However, to deny them completely, based solely on the fact that they sound like prophecies from Nostradamus, is unwise considering that there is a possibility that they could ACTUALLY be the Prophet PBUH’s sayings. If a particular Hadith is not a fabrication then the two, Quran and Ahadith, ARE NOT IN CONTRADICTION AND, NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE: “O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result.” 4:59
Obviously it is your prerogative to accept it or reject it. May Allah forgive us all, and guide us.

sitq90 · Apr 9, 2025

Wake up Pak said:
Now tell me that the Messanger was sent with a message or to foretell the future.

[Quran 7:188 ] Say (O Muhammed), "I have no power to benefit myself, or harm myself. Only what God wills happen to me. If I KNEW THE FUTURE, I would have increased my wealth, and no harm would have afflicted me. I am no more than a warner, and a bearer of good news for those who believe."

[Quran 6:50] Say (O Muhammed), "I do not say to you that I possess the treasures of God. Nor do I know the future. Nor do I say to you

[Quran 46:9] Say (O Muhammed), "I am not different from other messengers. I have no idea what will happen to me or to you. I only follow what is revealed to me. I am no more than a profound warner."

observer-x Citizen X

Read all of them including the ones you mentioned in conjunction
“Had it not been for Allah’s grace and mercy, a group of them would have sought to deceive you ˹O Prophet˺. Yet they would deceive none but themselves, nor can they harm you in the least. Allah has revealed to you the Book and wisdom and taught you what you never knew. Great ˹indeed˺ is Allah’s favour upon you!” Quran 4:113
“Nor will He disclose to you the secrets of the Unseen. But He chooses of His Apostles” 3:44
“The Knower of Unseen reveals not His secret to anyone except to His chosen Messengers” 72:26

Citizen X · Apr 9, 2025

sitq90 said:
Salam. Nostradmus was not a prophet of Allah. His knowledge is practically nonexistent compared to Rasool Allah SAW’s intellect and information. The hadith is about the future of Bedouins because it was referring to events in the future. Furthermore, the mountains have been evidently pierced.

Also, Sahifah Hammam ibn Munabbih’s early manuscript, a collection of 138 ahadiths,student of the sahabah, discovered in Berlin predates Bukhari and Muslim. According to historical evidence about the author’s life, this was probably around 40 years after the prophet PBUH’s passing. As you said it is true that Bukhari and Muslim were compiled by Central Asian Imams. However, is also true that the Sahifah was also compiled much earlier than that.
Coming back to the original point, it is true that the Ahadith have not been preserved as well as the Quran, and there is fabrication in them. However, to deny them completely, based solely on the fact that they sound like prophecies from Nostradamus, is unwise considering that there is a possibility that they could ACTUALLY be the Prophet PBUH’s sayings. If a particular Hadith is not a fabrication then the two, Quran and Ahadith, ARE NOT IN CONTRADICTION AND, NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE: “O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result.” 4:59
Obviously it is your prerogative to accept it or reject it. May Allah forgive us all, and guide us.

So you are going to follow all that garbage and do all sorts of things and implement all sorts of unfair and weird laws on the off chance that MAYBE just maybe the prophet MIGHT have said it. Even though we have 0 way of verifying it.

And once again when Allah is crystal clear NOT to follow any hadith or any outside sources, then even if we had a signed copy of the hadith by the Prophet himself we are not to follow it.

As for 4:59. How is one to refer anything to the messenger? He is long gone, he is no longer with us. And the only thing he left us was NOT the hadith but the Quran.

And as for Sahifah Hammam ibn Munabbih, oh please Ibn Munabbih was a so called student of the super dubious and shady Mr Cat i.e Abu Hurairah. Use your common sense bro, Mr Cat someone whose real name also you don't actually know and just make guesses about narrated the most amount of hadith even though he spent the least amount of time with the Prophet all the while the people who spent the most time with the prophet narrated the least amount of hadith.

So how did this direct student of Mr Cat collect only 138 hadith from the 1000s and 1000s he narrated AND even then there is no actual copy of Sahifah Hammam ibn Munabbih, you just have secondary copies. Just like the entire Sahih Sitta so actually according to your own hadith sciences cannot be labeled as "Sahih"

So like I said in my original post it requires great leaps of blind faith, tons of verbal gymnastics and huge amount of jumping through mental hoops to even consider the hadith are right.

But you want to include so much garbage and junk into the deen of Allah just of the off chance that MAYBE there is a 0.01% chance that the prophet MIGHT have said some of this. And you chose to deny and negate the actual word of Allah for this.

Think bro THINK!

Wake up Pak · Apr 9, 2025

sitq90 said:
Read all of them including the ones you mentioned in conjunction
“Had it not been for Allah’s grace and mercy, a group of them would have sought to deceive you ˹O Prophet˺. Yet they would deceive none but themselves, nor can they harm you in the least. Allah has revealed to you the Book and wisdom and taught you what you never knew. Great ˹indeed˺ is Allah’s favour upon you!” Quran 4:113
“Nor will He disclose to you the secrets of the Unseen. But He chooses of His Apostles” 3:44
“The Knower of Unseen reveals not His secret to anyone except to His chosen Messengers” 72:26

When considered in context, the verse you referenced discusses the Message, which refers to the Quran.

Citizen X · Apr 9, 2025

sitq90 said:
Read all of them including the ones you mentioned in conjunction
“Had it not been for Allah’s grace and mercy, a group of them would have sought to deceive you ˹O Prophet˺. Yet they would deceive none but themselves, nor can they harm you in the least. Allah has revealed to you the Book and wisdom and taught you what you never knew. Great ˹indeed˺ is Allah’s favour upon you!” Quran 4:113
“Nor will He disclose to you the secrets of the Unseen. But He chooses of His Apostles” 3:44
“The Knower of Unseen reveals not His secret to anyone except to His chosen Messengers” 72:26

Oh yeah typical stuff that has been dealt with many times before. Typical sunnis trying to say that in 4.113 that the "hikma" referes to the hadith! Like I said, need to so some serious mental gymnastics to make that leap.

You've made a mess of 3.44 and instead qouted two different translations of 72.26 and then added parts of 27 since you think that fits your agenda.

Yes Allah revealed things to his prophets, we all know this. How does this justify your garbage books?

sitq90 · Wednesday at 11:38 AM

Wake up Pak said:
When considered in context, the verse you referenced discusses the Message, which refers to the Quran.

Citizen X said:
Oh yeah typical stuff that has been dealt with many times before. Typical sunnis trying to say that in 4.113 that the "hikma" referes to the hadith! Like I said, need to so some serious mental gymnastics to make that leap.

You've made a mess of 3.44 and instead qouted two different translations of 72.26 and then added parts of 27 since you think that fits your agenda.

Yes Allah revealed things to his prophets, we all know this. How does this justify your garbage books?

Thank you for correcting me. It was not intentional, and I admit it was my mistake. Here is the original one “This is an account of the unseen that We reveal to you: you were not present among them when they cast lots to see which of them should take charge of Mary, and you were not present with them when they argued. (Chapter 3: Verse 44)”
Coming back to the main point, By extension of your own reasoning , I can say that your argumentation is not part of the Quran, and is strictly an interpretation. Therefore, whatever you say, other than the complete words of the Quran, it is complete and utter rubbish. Now you can argue that your mission is to remind people of the sole importance of the Quran. And, you are right about the Quran being supremely important, but you also used interpretation of the verses relating to ilm ul ghaib which means it is inevitable that the reader will do that. That’s how reading works. Therefore , it’ll be a contradictory statement to day that your and everyone else’s interpretations is completely rubbish. Allah SWT encourages us to understand the Quran.
“ Do they not contemplate the Quran? Or do hearts have their locks upon them? (Muhammad 47:24)”. Nonetheless, After Allah SWT, Rasool Allah SAW’s understanding remains supreme as not only did he receive the Quran, the criterion, but the criterion judgement from Allah calls him“And you are truly ˹a man˺ of outstanding character.”
Also, you call the books garbage. Do you think that the prophet Muhammad SAW really didn’t say anything in his life except the Quran? And, nothing like that was ever recorded.

Furthermore, the Quran also commands us to listen to Allah, the prophet SAW and even those in authority “O believers! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. Should you disagree on anything, then refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if you ˹truly˺ believe in Allah and the Last Day. This is the best and fairest resolution.” If you agree that he did say something other than the Quran, but was guided by the Quran, would it not come under the ambit of the above mentioned verse as it is not referring solely to prophets, but to those in authority. If he did say something and it is contained within those books, you could be insistently and unconsciously making a grave mistake by calling the whole book garbage as you think that your understanding could be POTENTIALLY greater. I do not think that every single hadith is from Rasool Allah, but I would be very careful about calling the whole book garbage.
“O believers! Do not raise your voices above the voice of the Prophet, nor speak loudly to him as you do to one another,1 or your deeds will become void while you are unaware.”
Now if you are genuinely interested in understanding and not labelling books as a garbage, we can have a civil conversation. if I have misunderstood your argumentation, and accordingly mischaracterised it, I apologise and would appreciate clarification from you.

sitq90 · Wednesday at 12:01 PM

Citizen X said:
So you are going to follow all that garbage and do all sorts of things and implement all sorts of unfair and weird laws on the off chance that MAYBE just maybe the prophet MIGHT have said it. Even though we have 0 way of verifying it.

And once again when Allah is crystal clear NOT to follow any hadith or any outside sources, then even if we had a signed copy of the hadith by the Prophet himself we are not to follow it.

As for 4:59. How is one to refer anything to the messenger? He is long gone, he is no longer with us. And the only thing he left us was NOT the hadith but the Quran.

And as for Sahifah Hammam ibn Munabbih, oh please Ibn Munabbih was a so called student of the super dubious and shady Mr Cat i.e Abu Hurairah. Use your common sense bro, Mr Cat someone whose real name also you don't actually know and just make guesses about narrated the most amount of hadith even though he spent the least amount of time with the Prophet all the while the people who spent the most time with the prophet narrated the least amount of hadith.

So how did this direct student of Mr Cat collect only 138 hadith from the 1000s and 1000s he narrated AND even then there is no actual copy of Sahifah Hammam ibn Munabbih, you just have secondary copies. Just like the entire Sahih Sitta so actually according to your own hadith sciences cannot be labeled as "Sahih"

So like I said in my original post it requires great leaps of blind faith, tons of verbal gymnastics and huge amount of jumping through mental hoops to even consider the hadith are right.

But you want to include so much garbage and junk into the deen of Allah just of the off chance that MAYBE there is a 0.01% chance that the prophet MIGHT have said some of this. And you chose to deny and negate the actual word of Allah for this.

Think bro THINK!

I am not negating the word of Allah SWT. Allah SWT obviously knew that the people will read the Quran, and ponder over the verse. That’s exactly why he put it in the Quran, and remains valid in the form of hadith- even after the prophet SAW’s passing. Once again, not every hadith is from the prophet. However, according to your understanding, what is unresolvably doubtful and clashes with the Quran, I do not think that you are obliged to follow it as the Quran emphasises clarity in terms of following the teachings. Also, you say that there is a zero chance of verifying it. If they were fabricated, how are they so precise about the future events? Do you have proof to the contrary that all of them were fabricated? As for the time spent, the years in number could be less than some other Ashab RA. However, he RA is known to have spent most of his time, four years, with the prophet Muhammad SAW. Also, it is a fact that there are people who have extraordinary memories. Therefore, I would not completely discard it based on the sole fact that there were more than 5000 hadiths from a person whose real name isn’t known but had a historical existence at the time

Citizen X · Wednesday at 8:37 PM

FIRST OFF : Please refrain from answering if you cannot reply back within a couple of days. Because it becomes a huge task to go revisit 10 day old thread again to refresh on what has been going on and the start from where it was left off.

sitq90 said:
If he did say something and it is contained within those books

We'll with reasonable and many years worth of study and research I can say with absolute certaintity that there is no way you can verify what is those books was ever said by the Prophet. Even the so called Hadith scienes rely on the flimsiest of premises to "authenticate" hadith. Basically just 6th 7th hand hearsay ( some chains have way more narrators ) And even then every now and then once of your great scholars comes along and says so and so hadith are not sahih and so and so that were fabricated or weak are now Sahih. Like your Al Bani. And different scholars of different sects or school of thoughts all have their own set of sahih hadith with the other sect or school of thought don't follow and vice versa. I,e this whole hadith business is nothing but a HUGE MESS! Many of your own scholars like shaikh ibn uthaymeen have pleaded for someone to come along and to clean up this mess for us all.

However, according to your understanding, what is unresolvably doubtful and clashes with the Quran, I do not think that you are obliged to follow it

Nope. Whatever is NOT in the Quran I am not required to follow it. Be it doubtful, clashes etc etc. If its not in the Quran, its not part of Islam. I think the Quran makes that pretty clear.

If they were fabricated, how are they so precise about the future events?

You gave an example of the naked beduious and I tore it to shreds. I know you will google and look up some more but on close inspection they will also all fail or see they speak in generalities like more horoscopes and fortune tellers and then when a person's mind is biased its easy to put 1+1 to mean three.

ALSO you forget to mention that have you actually read any of the hadith books yourself? Or you like the 99.9% defenders of hadith who come here defending something blindly when they even havent read any.

The Sciences of Hadīth are a Joke

(50k+ posts) بابائے فورم

(50k+ posts) بابائے فورم

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)

Voter (50+ posts)

Voter (50+ posts)

(50k+ posts) بابائے فورم

(50k+ posts) بابائے فورم

(50k+ posts) بابائے فورم

Voter (50+ posts)

Voter (50+ posts)

(50k+ posts) بابائے فورم