Need help!

[mezeren]

ditta;585102]As-salaamu'alaykum,

Allah sent Muhammad with the Truth and revealed the Book (the Qur’aan) to him, and among what Allah revealed, was the verse of the Rajm (the stoning to death) of married person (male and female) who commits illegal sexual intercourse, and we did recite this verse and understood and memorised it. Allah’s Messenger did carry out the punishment of stoning and so did we after him. I am afraid that after a long time has passed, somebody will say,

Do you reject what Umar ibn al-Khattab said wherein he shows that the prescribed punishment for zina was carried out upon the married person after the Prophet passed away?

Brother,

You either reject this claim or reject whole Quran all together. Does Allah protected Quran or not? That is the danger of believing in narrations as we believe in Quran. i do not believe that Omar(r.a.) would have said such a thing while he was the one who warned those narrating from Rasulallah , who forbade Abu Hurairah from narrating. What did he said when Rasulallah was ill and asked for a piece of paper? Fıqh of Omar was similar to the fiqh of Aisha. İ love Omar(r.a.) and i reject the narration not him.

 

[ditta]

ditta;585102]As-salaamu'alaykum,


Brother,

You either reject this claim or reject whole Quran all together. Does Allah protected Quran or not? That is the danger of believing in narrations as we believe in Quran. i do not believe that Omar(r.a.) would have said such a thing while he was the one who warned those narrating from Rasulallah , who forbade Abu Hurairah from narrating. What did he said when Rasulallah was ill and asked for a piece of paper? Fıqh of Omar was similar to the fiqh of Aisha. İ love Omar(r.a.) and i reject the narration not him.

So you reject Abu Hurayrah as a narrator of hadith? The fact is, you are saying a narration is false yet you have little knowledge of hadith criticism to grade it your self, just as I do, rather simply on the basis that it appears to contradict the Qur'aan. You are picking and choosing what to follow according to your desires (how is that you can accept one narration of Umar ibn al-Khattab but reject the others, despite the reasoning you gave, when we know that the Sahaba were the closest in following the Qur'aan and the Sunnah, so is your understanding better than theirs, I don't think so:

If anyone contends with the Messenger even after guidance has been plainly conveyed to him and follows a path other than that of the Believers (i.e., the Companions). We shall leave him in the path he has chosen and land him in Hell. What an evil refuge.

(Qur'aan, 4: 115)

). In the pdf linked in the previous post it highlights:

“Stoning to death in case of adultery is clearly stated in the Qur’an (through the aforementioned verse that was abrogated in wording but not in ruling), the recurrent Sunnah, and the consensus of Muslim scholars. However, the Kharijites as well as some similar modern writers have dared to deny it, following their own desires and disregarding the prescribed legal rulings and the consensus of Muslim scholars.”

The main point is though the fact that you reject the authentic narrations as a legislative authority, and as the thread I linked in my previous post, nobody appears to have believed this apart from those that were extreme. I don’t believe there is anything left to discuss. This is clear, and I doubt you will find anyone else here saying that the authentic narrations are not a legislative authority, as a clarification of the Qur’aan, and as something independent that is not mentioned in the Qur’aan. By the way I did not say, that Qur'aan was as the same rank as the authentic narrations, rather the authentic narrations are second although they do rule independently when an issue is not mentioned in the Qur'aan. Additionally, the Prophet was infallible with regards to the Message although did make mistakes with regard to matters not related to the Message, as explained in the link below.

http://islamqa.com/en/ref/42216/

His opponent:

“You accept that which narrators inform you of, yet you even acknowledge possible faults in them; what is your proof, then, against those who reject such narrations? Because of the possibility of error, I accept nothing from them. I only accept... Allah’s book, which no can have doubts about, not even about a single letter. Can something have the same weight as sure knowledge, though that something does not reach its level?”

Imam Ash-Shafi’ee:

When one has knowledge of Arabic and of the Qur’an which was revealed in that tongue, that knowledge will make it binding upon him to accept the narrations of truthful people regarding the Messenger of Allah. (Next Imam Ash-Shafi’ee began mentioning proofs to back up his statement).

Allah says:
He it is Who sent among the unlettered ones a Messenger (Muhammad

from among themselves, reciting to them His Verses, purifying them (from the filth of disbelief and polytheism), and teaching them the Book (this Quran, Islamic laws and Islamic jurisprudence) and Al-Hikmah (wisdom).

(Qur’an, 62: 2)

Edit: Umar did not forbid any one from narrating hadith, this is a fabrication. I am unable to post the full excerpt but this is discussed fully in the book where the quote above is located. I think this shows the validity of your claims to have made such an accusation against Umar (that he would do such a thing) and Abu Hurayrah's truthfulness. When you reject Umar's narration do you affirm that the narrators of that narration lied/attributed something false to him? How are you able to accept their other narrations if this is the case? When you reject an authentic narration, and Allah knows best, does it not automatically imply that you are doubting the truthfulness of those narrators?

From IslamQA:

When any Sunnah is proven to be saheeh, the Muslims are agreed that it is obligatory to follow it. There may be something in the Sunnah which a person thinks appears to go against the apparent meaning of the Qur’aan and add to it, such as the Sunnah which explains the threshold of stealing at which the hadd punishment becomes due, and the Sunnah which stipulates that the married adulterer is to be stoned. This Sunnah must also be followed, according to the view of the Sahaabah and those who followed them in truth, and all the groups of Muslims.
Adapted from Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 19/84-86

http://islamqa.info/en/ref/9067

 

[mezeren]

ditta;585106]So you reject Abu Hurayrah as a narrator of hadith? The fact is, you are saying a narration is false yet you have little knowledge of hadith criticism to grade it your self, just as I do, rather simply on the basis that it appears to contradict the Qur'aan. You are picking and choosing what to follow according to your desires (how is that you can accept one narration of Umar ibn al-Khattab but reject the others, despite the reasoning you gave, when we know that the Sahaba were the closest in following the Qur'aan and the Sunnah, so is your understanding better than theirs, I don't think so:

Assalamun Alaykum,

Brother, does it mean we reject Musa(a.s.) or isa(a.s.) when we reject the falsehood of Torah or Bible of today? i hope you understand what i am saying. You should know imam Abu Haneefah's stance regarding ahad narrations. He did not accept them coming from Rasulallah(a.s.) when they contradict Quran. And it does not imply that we should throw away all the hadith collection. i believe that Omar(r.a.) would not have said anything against Quran, so, i accept the ones that complies with Quran and reject the ones that contradics. Why would you not say that Aisah(r.a.) was in extreme or rejected Abu Hurayrah as a narrator of hadith or accepted one narration of Umar ibn al-Khattab but rejected the others? Why do you not make such claims about the Mother of Believers but me or anybody who has opposite opinion of yours?

Surely, i am neither a scholar nor an authority on the matter. But i am open to different ideas and ready to accept them when i feel they are right and complies with Quran. Do not forget that there are muslims all over the world who thinks they are in the right and the opposition is extreme. And that labelling does no good to find the truth.

When you reject Umar's narration do you affirm that the narrators of that narration lied/attributed something false to him? How are you able to accept their other narrations if this is the case? When you reject an authentic narration, and Allah knows best, does it not automatically imply that you are doubting the truthfulness of those narrators?

Do you think that every narrator were correct 100 % all the time? Do you not realise that one can make mistakes sometimes? Do you not know that the ranking of a narrator differed from one muhadith to the other? Do you not know that imam Muslim did not include some of the hadith of imam Bukhari in his book because they had differed regarding the truthfulness of a narrator?

“Stoning to death in case of adultery is clearly stated in the Qur’an (through the aforementioned verse that was abrogated in wording but not in ruling), the recurrent Sunnah, and the consensus of Muslim scholars. However, the Kharijites as well as some similar modern writers have dared to deny it, following their own desires and disregarding the prescribed legal rulings and the consensus of Muslim scholars.”

And, that is a bold claim against Quran, astagfeerullah. Do we not believe as a muslim that Quran is preserved till today in its original form. Do Allah Teala not promised to preserve the Quran? What do you think prevented Allah from taking the so called verse about adultery off Quran? Do you think He feared the orientalist's critics, astagfeerullah?

Do we have to believe everything without questioning whatever so and so scholar said? That idea, i believe, leads us astray.

 

[um muhammad al-mahdi]

Do we have to believe everything without questioning whatever so and so scholar said? That idea, i believe, leads us astray.

Assalamu alaykum

Sorry, but where do you take your deen/knowledge from?

Jazakhum Allahu khayran

 

[mezeren]

Assalamu alaykum

Sorry, but where do you take your deen/knowledge from?

Jazakhum Allahu khayran

Wa Alaykum Salam Sister,

From scholars, off course. But, i do not believe that any scholar has the correct answer all the time. Acctually, i believe that every single scholar has opinions that are wrong even though he is right most of the time. That is nature of human. They are not immune from making mistakes. Let's say, on a particular topic there are 3 different opinion from 6 different scholar. i try to read them with their proofs and reasonings, and i choose the one i feel is the right regardless of the names of the scholar.

 

[Harris Hammam]

Sister, i would like you to think about the hadith and verses that i will write below. Then tell me if you think something is wrong.

Sahih Bukhari,Volume 2, Book 23, Number 452 :

Narrated by Ibn 'Umar

"The Prophet looked at the people of the well (the well in which the bodies of the pagans killed in the Battle of badr were thrown) and said, "Have you found true what your Lord promised you?" Somebody said to him, "You are addressing dead people." He replied, "You do not hear better than they but they cannot reply."


QURAN(27-NAML/80):

"Indeed, you will not make the dead hear, nor will you make the deaf hear the call when they have turned their backs retreating."

QURAN(30-RUM/52):

"So indeed, you will not make the dead hear, nor will you make the deaf hear the call when they turn their backs, retreating."

QURAN(6-EN'AM/36):

"Only those who hear will respond. But the dead - Allah will resurrect them; then to Him they will be returned."

QURAN(35-FATIR/22):

"And not equal are the living and the dead. Indeed, Allah causes to hear whom He wills, but you cannot make hear those in the graves."


As you can see here, the narration contradics The Quranic verses. Which one is correct? Do the dead ones can here us or not? Please, let me know.

Do you believe that Muhammed(a.s.) would say such a thing that contradics Quran? Well, sister, i do not believe so and i think that something is wrong here.

Wassalam

Four simple questions:

1. Have you read the books of Tafsir to see how they reconcile between what you claim is a contradiction between the verse and the Hadith?

2. Are you aware that the issue of the dead hearing is a matter of difference within the Ahl 'l-Sunnah? Do you even believe that a matter can be a point of contention without problem (i.e. not everything is black and white)?

3. What makes you so confident, given that you are doubting the authenticity of Hadith, that the Quran is authentic as well? If your arguments are applied to the Quran, one can unearth multiple apparent contradictions between verses. Without a proper study of those verses, one can easily claim that the verses lack authority, والعياذ بالله. Also, what about the multiple Qira'at and Riwayat in the Quran (Hafs, Wash, Qalun) - are they all authentic according to you? On top of that, yes the Quran has been preserved no doubt, but through the hearts of men (بل هو آيت بينت في صدور الذين أوتوا العلم), just like the Hadith was preserved through the hearts of men. So why are you dismissing the Hadith yet upholding the Quran when the means of transmission is the same?

4. Name a scholar from each of the 14 centuries of Islam that espouses the beliefs you are pushing forth here, i.e. the undermining of the authority of Hadith.

 

[mezeren]

Harris Hammam;585126]Wassalam

WA alaykum Salam,

Brother, first of all,i want to make clear that i don't come here to argue. May be i am wrong but i feel that you have such an impresion.
i visit TTI to gain knowledge and mostly read the post instead of participating. TTI helped me a lot since joining here. But, since i have other sources to study islam i came to conclusions that some of the beliefs which this site promotes are not quite right. And, i do not post to argue but to give a different perspective.

Four simple questions:

1. Have you read the books of Tafsir to see how they reconcile between what you claim is a contradiction between the verse and the Hadith?

2. Are you aware that the issue of the dead hearing is a matter of difference within the Ahl 'l-Sunnah? Do you even believe that a matter can be a point of contention without problem (i.e. not everything is black and white)?

it is a fact, as you stated, that some scholars say the dead can hear, some say they can not. What do you believe? it is a stiation of black and white obviously. You either take one of the sides or try to find reasons(excuses) to save both sides just because they are scholars of past, the salaf ulama. i think i have a right to choose between two opinions according to my understanding, as well as anybody.

3. What makes you so confident, given that you are doubting the authenticity of Hadith, that the Quran is authentic as well? If your arguments are applied to the Quran, one can unearth multiple apparent contradictions between verses. Without a proper study of those verses, one can easily claim that the verses lack authority, والعياذ بالله.

No, brother. To reach a verdict about a text you take all the data into consideration. if you pick one verse to have verdict than you get it wrong. it is the same with narrations as well. if you take all the narrations into consideration about the dead hearing, actually, you will see two conflicting ideas that are impossible to combine. That is why, as you stated, the dead hearing is a matter of dispute. But, if you show me one example in Quran which shows contradiction, i would searc for an answer.

Also, what about the multiple Qira'at and Riwayat in the Quran (Hafs, Wash, Qalun) - are they all authentic according to you?

That is another topic which are disputed, isn't it? Meaning, there are different opinions on the matter.

On top of that, yes the Quran has been preserved no doubt, but through the hearts of men (بل هو آيت بينت في صدور الذين أوتوا العلم)

You are half right here. Quran has been preserved through the hearts of men as well as written down on paper, leather, stone etc as soon as they were revealed. Do you deny those narrations or not? Did the Prophet not appointed some of his companions to write down the Quran? Do you deny such narrations? Did the Prophet (a.s.) not prevented his companions to write down from him except Quran? Do you deny those narrations?

So why are you dismissing the Hadith yet upholding the Quran when the means of transmission is the same?

if you genuinly believe that the Hadith and the Quran were transmitted in the same way, then i have nothing to say but to remind you to examine the very hadith collections you are referring to, again.

You either did not read my previous post or did not understand me correctly. i will state again that i do not dissmiss hadith. But, because they were not preserved as Quran, they have mistakes in them. There are narrations that contradics Quran and they can not be from Rasulallah(a.s.) is my main point.

espouses the beliefs you are pushing forth here

The above statement is not a polite one. if you think i have an agenda to be here, then all i can say you are wrong.

 

[um muhammad al-mahdi]

Wa Alaykum Salam Sister,

From scholars, off course. But, i do not believe that any scholar has the correct answer all the time. Acctually, i believe that every single scholar has opinions that are wrong even though he is right most of the time. That is nature of human. They are not immune from making mistakes. Let's say, on a particular topic there are 3 different opinion from 6 different scholar. i try to read them with their proofs and reasonings, and i choose the one i feel is the right regardless of the names of the scholar.

assalamu alaykum

Who are these Scholars, if you don't mind me asking?

jazakallahu khayran

 

[Harris Hammam]

mezeren, I want for brief answers, not a lecture. Try again - I'll simplify things even further:


1. Have you read the books of Tafsir to see how they reconcile between what you claim is a contradiction between the verse and the Hadith?
Yes or no. If yes, which ones?

2. Is everything in the religion a matter of black and white for you?
Yes or no. If yes, then please explain how the Sahabah differed over multiple issues.

3. What about the multiple Qira'at and Riwayat in the Quran (Hafs, Wash, Qalun) - are they all authentic according to you?
Yes or no. If yes, on what basis, and can one read all and any of them? If no, list for us which ones are not authentic, and on what basis you claim they are unauthentic.

4. Can you name a scholar from each of the 14 centuries of Islam that espouses the beliefs you are pushing forth here, i.e. the undermining of the authority of Hadith.
Yes or no. If yes, list them.

Very simple yes-no questions, requiring a yes or no answer, and a very brief clarification thereafter. Not a lecture please.

 

[mezeren]

assalamu alaykum

Who are these Scholars, if you don't mind me asking?

jazakallahu khayran

Wa alaykum salam sister,

By no means i am saying that i have great library or i have enough knowledge in islam. To start with, i have all volumes of Sahih Bukhari, a couple of books of Abu Haneefah, ibn-i Taymiyah, Gazzali, ibn-i Arabi(just to see his deviant belief in his own books) and some late Turkish academics such as Prof. Bunyamin Erul(has a great book about the sahabah's understanding of sunnah ), Prof ibrahim Sarmis(recently i am reading a book of him,"is hadith equal to Quran", he has graet book about tasawwuf as well, "Tasawwuf and islam, in Theory and in Practise), Prof. Abdulaziz Bayindir, Mustafa islamoglu etc.

i would read any book from anybody. And i do not take everything they say as the ultimate truth. i just try to reach the correct understanding of islam.

 

[mezeren]

mezeren, I want for brief answers, not a lecture. Try again - I'll simplify things even further:


1. Have you read the books of Tafsir to see how they reconcile between what you claim is a contradiction between the verse and the Hadith?
Yes or no. If yes, which ones?

2. Is everything in the religion a matter of black and white for you?
Yes or no. If yes, then please explain how the Sahabah differed over multiple issues.

3. What about the multiple Qira'at and Riwayat in the Quran (Hafs, Wash, Qalun) - are they all authentic according to you?
Yes or no. If yes, on what basis, and can one read all and any of them? If no, list for us which ones are not authentic, and on what basis you claim they are unauthentic.

4. Can you name a scholar from each of the 14 centuries of Islam that espouses the beliefs you are pushing forth here, i.e. the undermining of the authority of Hadith.
Yes or no. If yes, list them.

Very simple yes-no questions, requiring a yes or no answer, and a very brief clarification thereafter. Not a lecture please.

Haris Hammam,

i don't know why but i didn't like your attitude. i think you are the one who is trying to give lecture.
You ask like " Is everything in the religion a matter of black and white for you?", then you say "Very simple yes-no questions, requiring a yes or no answer".

if you want to know my stance on the matter you can see it in my previous posts.

No need to answer them again. You can start with the answers where i replied to you after your first post.

Again i am not here to argue, so do not try to start one. Convey your massage and i'll read them.

 

[Harris Hammam]

Look if you can't answer, then that would simply be indicative of your lack of knowledge, lack of transparency, and lack of willing to engage in an open discussion (not an argument).

I'll repeat the questions for you, which I'm sure everyone here would like to know your answers to.

1. Have you read the books of Tafsir to see how they reconcile between what you claim is a contradiction between the verse and the Hadith?
Yes or no. If yes, which ones?

2. Is everything in the religion a matter of black and white for you?
Yes or no. If yes, then please explain how the Sahabah differed over multiple issues.

3. What about the multiple Qira'at and Riwayat in the Quran (Asim, Nafi, al-Kisa'i, Abu Ja`far, Ya`qub, Hasan al-Basri, al-A`mash) - are they all readable according to you?
Yes or no. If yes, on what basis, and can one read all and any of them? If no, list for us which ones are not readable, and on what basis you claim they are unreadable.

4. Can you name a scholar from each of the 14 centuries of Islam that espouses the beliefs you are pushing forth here, i.e. the undermining of the authority of Hadith.
Yes or no. If yes, list them.

 

[muslimg]

salam alaykum
Harris Hamam and mezeren brothers !
try to convince each other peacfully
maybe it is but i feel a little weird
i really like the way you two discuss
it makes me a little jealous you are so much full of knowledge about
Islam mashaallah may allah reward you inshallah :tti_sister:

 

[mezeren]

Harris Hammam;585144]Look if you can't answer, then that would simply be indicative of your lack of knowledge, lack of transparency, and lack of willing to engage in an open discussion (not an argument).

Look i can answer your questions but as i said i did not like your attidute. And i never claimed to be a authority in islam. But i might say i know a little bit.

1. Have you read the books of Tafsir to see how they reconcile between what you claim is a contradiction between the verse and the Hadith?
Yes or no. If yes, which ones?

Do i need to read all the books you refer to? is it not enough to read them from the posts and links that were provided by brother Ditta? Plus, when you read any book on the topic, you will find different views there.

2. Is everything in the religion a matter of black and white for you?
Yes or no. If yes, then please explain how the Sahabah differed over multiple issues.

There are matters which must be as distinct as black or white and the matter of akeedah is the first of them. And off course there are areas which are open for different views. i will repeat again the core beleif system of islam is a matter of black or white. Either you believe in oneness of Allah or not. Either you believe that Quran is the unaltered words of the Creator or not etc.

3. What about the multiple Qira'at and Riwayat in the Quran (Asim, Nafi, al-Kisa'i, Abu Ja`far, Ya`qub, Hasan al-Basri, al-A`mash) - are they all readable according to you?
Yes or no. If yes, on what basis, and can one read all and any of them? If no, list for us which ones are not readable, and on what basis you claim they are unreadable.

No, Quran of today was the one that was revealed to the Prophet of Allah word by word. They are not readable to me. Otherwise, that would be the end of islam.

QURAN(10:15) : And when Our verses are recited to them as clear evidences, those who do not expect the meeting with Us say, "Bring us a Qur'an other than this or change it." Say, [O Muhammad], "It is not for me to change it on my own accord. I only follow what is revealed to me. Indeed I fear, if I should disobey my Lord, the punishment of a tremendous Day."

QURAN(44,45,46) : And if Muhammad had made up about Us some [false] sayings,
We would have seized him by the right hand;
Then We would have cut from him the aorta.

4. Can you name a scholar from each of the 14 centuries of Islam that espouses the beliefs you are pushing forth here, i.e. the undermining of the authority of Hadith.
Yes or no. If yes, list them.

Either i lack the ability to make myself understood in English or you are deliberetely insisting on not understanding me.
i do not deny whole collections of hadiths. Firstly, the authority belongs to the one who created you and also created Muhammed(a.s.).
if you belive that Quran is the unaltered words of Allah and it will remain that way, one has to accept that no narration can overrule it.


Now, it is your turn to unswer the questions i asked before;

1 . it is a fact, as you stated, that some scholars say the dead can hear, some say they can not. What do you believe? it is a situation of black and white obviously. You either take one of the sides or try to find reasons(excuses) to save both sides just because they are scholars of past, the salaf ulama.

You said;

So why are you dismissing the Hadith yet upholding the Quran when the means of transmission is the same?

i asked;

2 . You are half right here(actually you are totally wrong). Quran has been preserved through the hearts of men as well as written down on paper, leather, stone etc as soon as they were revealed unlike the narrations from the Prophet. Do you deny those narrations or not? Did the Prophet not appointed some of his companions to write down the Quran? Do you deny such narrations? Did the Prophet (a.s.) not prevented his companions to write down from him except Quran? Do you deny those narrations?

 

[Harris Hammam]

I'm sorry but you've virtually failed on all accounts regarding answering the questions I posed to you. Instead, you resorted to giving a long lecture - again. Your multiple spelling mistakes makes me think you are not even worthy of being taken seriously.

You are unable to give simple, clearly-defined answers to perfectly simple questions. Here they are again:

1. Have you read the books of Tafsir to see how they reconcile between what you claim is a contradiction between the verse and the Hadith?
Yes or no. If yes, which ones?

You said:

Do i need to read all the books you refer to? is it not enough to read them from the posts and links that were provided by brother Ditta? Plus, when you read any book on the topic, you will find different views there.

You call that an answer? I don't know who Ditta is. I am talking to you. Which book of Tafsir has said that those Riwayat that affirm the hearing of the dead are outright wrong?


2. Is everything in the religion a matter of black and white for you?
Yes or no. If yes, then please explain how the Sahabah differed over multiple issues.

You said:

There are matters which must be as distinct as black or white and the matter of akeedah is the first of them. And off course there are areas which are open for different views. i will repeat again the core beleif system of islam is a matter of black or white. Either you believe in oneness of Allah or not. Either you believe that Quran is the unaltered words of the Creator or not etc.

So basically, there are grey areas in the religion. Here is a link for you stating the massive difference of opinion and evidences in the issue of the dead hearing:
http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vb/showthread.php?t=19104
Now tell me why this matter is black-white issue and not a a grey area. Tell us why you are so sure that the "Mawtaa" (dead) referred to in the verses means dead people and nothing else. There are multiple Tafsirs on what Mawtaa means. Why should we blindly follow your interpretation?

You should get off your high horse and respect the difference of opinion in this issue, instead of ramming down one Tafisr down the throats of readers here.


3. What about the multiple Qira'at and Riwayat in the Quran (Asim, Nafi, al-Kisa'i, Abu Ja`far, Ya`qub, Hasan al-Basri, al-A`mash) - are they all readable according to you?
Yes or no. If yes, on what basis, and can one read all and any of them? If no, list for us which ones are not readable, and on what basis you claim they are unreadable.

You said:

No, Quran of today was the one that was revealed to the Prophet of Allah word by word. They are not readable to me. Otherwise, that would be the end of islam.

Is this what you call an answer? I asked you to give a list of readable Qira'at and Riwayat of the Quran. Since you believe that not all Riawayat of the Quran are readable, give us a list of Riwayat that are. A simple, straightforward question.


4. Can you name a scholar from each of the 14 centuries of Islam that espouses the beliefs you are pushing forth here, i.e. the undermining of the authority of Hadith.
Yes or no. If yes, list them.

You said:

Either i lack the ability to make myself understood in English or you are deliberetely insisting on not understanding me.
i do not deny whole collections of hadiths. Firstly, the authority belongs to the one who created you and also created Muhammed(a.s.).
if you belive that Quran is the unaltered words of Allah and it will remain that way, one has to accept that no narration can overrule it.

Fact is you think there is a contradiction between the Hadith and (your interpretation of) the Quran. Instead of reconciling, you immediately discarded the Hadith. Is this what you call knowledge? Be humble and notice that you haven't covered all of knowledge. There are many possible ways in which the Hadith and Quran can be reconciled.


You also said:

Look i can answer your questions but as i said i did not like your attidute. And i never claimed to be a authority in islam. But i might say i know a little bit.

This is the era where any layman can claim knowledge and think he is entitled to have an opinion. This attitude of yours is an insult to scholarship. Your performance here is proof that you lack the skills, the training and the insight to be able to hold a discussion on these delicate matters. You have uttered catastrophic deviances against the Hadith of the Prophet (peace be upon him), and you are thus in no position to be taken seriously any more.

When you give a proper answer to the questions above, we can further the discussion. Until then, we'll remain stuck with you and your exhibitions of incompetence.

 

[mezeren]

Harris Hammam;585172]I'm sorry but you've virtually failed on all accounts regarding answering the questions I posed to you. Instead, you resorted to giving a long lecture - again. Your multiple spelling mistakes makes me think you are not even worthy of being taken seriously.

Don't take me seriously, then!

You are unable to give simple, clearly-defined answers to perfectly simple questions. Here they are again:

i do not need to play your mind games. i said repeatedly before that i am not an expert, but i can read and understand the works of the knowledged one's.

So basically, there are grey areas in the religion. Here is a link for you stating the massive difference of opinion and evidences in the issue of the dead hearing:
http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vb/showthread.php?t=19104

Woow! That was helpfull and indicative of your arrogance.

Now tell me why this matter is black-white issue and not a a grey area. Tell us why you are so sure that the "Mawtaa" (dead) referred to in the verses means dead people and nothing else. There are multiple Tafsirs on what Mawtaa means. Why should we blindly follow your interpretation?

You tell me why it was a matter of black and white for the Mother of Believers?

Narrated by Ibn Umar

"The Prophet stood at the well of badr (which contained the corpses of the pagans) and said, "Have you found true what your lord promised you?" Then he further said, "They now hear what I say." This was mentioned before 'Aisha and she said, "But the Prophet said, 'Now they know very well that what I used to tell them was the truth.' Then she recited (the Holy Verse):-- "You cannot make the dead hear... till the end of Verse)." (30.52)"

And if the reconciliation you are talking about like the one below, then, thanks, i won't have it.

A'ishah interpreted this event to mean that the Prophet was making the point that now they would know that what he had been telling them was true. Qatadah said: "Allah brought them back to life for him so that they could hear what he said by way of rebuke and vengeance.''

i do not worship the scholars and will not accept anything without questioning with the intellect Allah gives me and every human.

You should get off your high horse and respect the difference of opinion in this issue, instead of ramming down one Tafisr down the throats of readers here.

i am not "ramming down one Tafisr down the throats of readers here". it is another perspective which shared by other scholars. You can not force people to accept something. Eithger they take it or leave it.

Is this what you call an answer? I asked you to give a list of readable Qira'at and Riwayat of the Quran. Since you believe that not all Riawayat of the Quran are readable, give us a list of Riwayat that are. A simple, straightforward question.

i believe that there was/has been and is just one version of Quran which is what we have today.

instead of asking those Questions, you should enlighten people about your statement below;

On top of that, yes the Quran has been preserved no doubt, but through the hearts of men (بل هو آيت بينت في صدور الذين أوتوا العلم), just like the Hadith was preserved through the hearts of men. So why are you dismissing the Hadith yet upholding the Quran when the means of transmission is the same?

And you do not listen when you said;

Fact is you think there is a contradiction between the Hadith and (your interpretation of) the Quran. Instead of reconciling, you immediately discarded the Hadith. Is this what you call knowledge? Be humble and notice that you haven't covered all of knowledge. There are many possible ways in which the Hadith and Quran can be reconciled.

if you want to see how the reconciliation should be made, read the link below;

http://www.islamandquran.org/research/abrogation-and-punishment-of-stoning.html

See, it does not deny the narrations that mentions stoning the adulterer, it simply says the Prophet applied the punishment before the verses which defined the punishment for adultery had been revealed. if Allah orderen something in His book , every muslim including the Prophet must obey it. if you say a goat ate the verses of Quran, that is not a reconciliation. That is worshipping the narrations.

This is the era where any layman can claim knowledge and think he is entitled to have an opinion. This attitude of yours is an insult to scholarship. Your performance here is proof that you lack the skills, the training and the insight to be able to hold a discussion on these delicate matters. You have uttered catastrophic deviances against the Hadith of the Prophet (peace be upon him), and you are thus in no position to be taken seriously any more.

Yes, i am a layman and entiteled to have my opinion, because Allah will hold me responsible for them. But i am saying again, those views have been taken from scholars.

And, please do not take me serious.

 

[mezeren]

Actually, we need to emphasize your statement and demand an answer so that we could be illuminated by you.

On top of that, yes the Quran has been preserved no doubt, but through the hearts of men (بل هو آيت بينت في صدور الذين أوتوا العلم), just like the Hadith was preserved through the hearts of men. So why are you dismissing the Hadith yet upholding the Quran when the means of transmission is the same?

 

[Harris Hammam]

Since you have failed to answer the four simple questions, let's try this route:

Don't take me seriously, then!

ok

i said repeatedly before that i am not an expert

ok

Yes, i am a layman and entiteled to have my opinion

Really? ok

And, please do not take me serious.

ok

Can you even read and understand Arabic?

 

[tic_tac_toe]

Yes, i am a layman and entiteled to have my opinion, because Allah will hold me responsible for them. But i am saying again, those views have been taken from scholars.

:salam2:

I am Sorry but this doesn't make any sense. If you are a laymen then you are just that and not entitled to have an opinion because it will be an uneducated, rudimentary guess at best.

If your child is having a lifesaving cardiac surgery do you go up to the Surgeon and say:

Yes, i am a layman and entiteled to have my opinion

OR do you defer to the opinion of the Surgeon???

 

[mezeren]

:salam2:

I am Sorry but this doesn't make any sense. If you are a laymen then you are just that and not entitled to have an opinion because it will be an uneducated, rudimentary guess at best.

If your child is having a lifesaving cardiac surgery do you go up to the Surgeon and say:



OR do you defer to the opinion of the Surgeon???

When you or someone you love have serious health problem, you do not content with just one doctor. You try to see as many doctor as possible and sometimes they would difffer in their findings and solutions. You listen all of them and make a decision. And you do not do it blindly. You listen to their reasoning and whether you accept them or not. The one you accept would be the opinion of you as well as the doctor.