Need help!
- Thread starter muslimg
- Start date
tic_tac_toe
Junior Member
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.
:salam2:
Being able to judge between expert opinions presupposes some knowledge and background but you are admitting that you are a laymen and also not able to provide the background research which you have performed. So I am Sorry to say that in your case your will be distinguishing between opinions of two Doctors based on the color of their ties!
So it is right for you to be asked to explain yourself and provide Academic justification for your position and if you want to cop out by claiming to be laymen then you can't claim to have a certain position.
: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.
i do not understand this. Are we all an expert on every matter in life? Are we not able to read different opinions of different scholars and form an opinion? if you follow a particular scholar, how you come to follow him? is it not your opinion and decision to follow him? Did someone force you to do so?
tic_tac_toe
Junior Member
:salam2:
I am absolutely not an expert on everything in life but in areas where I believe myself to be able to distinguish between opinions I do quote what the background research which I have done and this is what you are being asked in simple words.
I don't claim to be a laymen and then also take an Academic position without having any background in being able to research by simply being able to use a search engine.
What you are being asked is this:
In short I don't claim to be a laymen and then also waffle pretending to have an Academic position!
tic_tac_toe;585205]:salam2:
i am not pretending to be expert and have been very clear about it. As i said earlier i am saying that there are different opinions of different scholars on the matter. Am i allowed to do that?
irrelevent question and serves no purpose on the topic.
Again, this is a wrong accusation. By the way, while saying i am a layman, i do not mean that i have zero knowledge in islam.
Every muslim is responsible for finding, believing and living the correct way of islam. When one says;
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?
you simply expect them to prove their point. You don't follow blindly just because so and so say it.
i am not pretending to be expert and have been very clear about it. As i said earlier i am saying that there are different opinions of different scholars on the matter. Am i allowed to do that?
irrelevent question and serves no purpose on the topic.
Again, this is a wrong accusation. By the way, while saying i am a layman, i do not mean that i have zero knowledge in islam.
Every muslim is responsible for finding, believing and living the correct way of islam. When one says;
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?
you simply expect them to prove their point. You don't follow blindly just because so and so say it.
tic_tac_toe
Junior Member
i think you should demand an explanation for this ;
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?
This is not a platform to test someone. You'd better mind your own bussiness. i would advise you to examine the above statement which is a great mistake.
tic_tac_toe
Junior Member
Since I have nothing but your esteemed word which frankly is nothing but hot air I will ignore until you specify your research and expertise otherwise your claim is not worthy of being paid attention to. As far as your opinion is concerned then Opinions are like Noses and everybody has got one
What has been proven so far is that when your sophistry is stripped bare there is nothing but ignorant empty claims left!
As far as i can see you choose to play the insulting game like your friend. i don't care.
i assume that you don't have any opinion about islam and you never ever posted here on TTI to express your view. Or? is that the case?
Anyway, for the truth seekers here (not talking about you), i hope, the explanation of the statement below is needed.
Harris Hammam wrote;
"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 now, muslims have at least three holly books, the holly Quran, the Holly Sahih Bukhari and the Holly Sahih Muslim. What an insult to Quran!
uniqueskates
Rabbe Zidni Illma
AssalaamuAlaikum.
[6776] 2 - (2666) Abü 'Imrân Al-Jawni said: 'Abdullâh bin Rabâh A1-Ansâri wrote to me (saying) that 'Abdullâh bin 'Amr said: "I went to the Messenger of Allah one day, and he heard the voices of two men arguing about a Verse (of the Qur'ân). The Messenger of Allah came out to them, and signs of anger could be seen on his face. He said: Those who came before you were only doomed because they argued about the Book." [Muslim - Book Of Knowledge]
[6777] 3 - (2667) It was narrated that Jundab bin 'Abdullâh A1-Bajali said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Read Qur'ân (together) so long as your hearts are united, then when you begin to argue (about the meaning), then stop and disperse."[Muslim - Book Of Knowledge]
[6780] 5 - (2668) It was narrated that 'Aishah said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'The most hated of men to Allah is the one who is argumentative and is harsh in arguing."[Muslim - Book Of Knowledge]
Allah SWT knows the best.
Peace
[6776] 2 - (2666) Abü 'Imrân Al-Jawni said: 'Abdullâh bin Rabâh A1-Ansâri wrote to me (saying) that 'Abdullâh bin 'Amr said: "I went to the Messenger of Allah one day, and he heard the voices of two men arguing about a Verse (of the Qur'ân). The Messenger of Allah came out to them, and signs of anger could be seen on his face. He said: Those who came before you were only doomed because they argued about the Book." [Muslim - Book Of Knowledge]
[6777] 3 - (2667) It was narrated that Jundab bin 'Abdullâh A1-Bajali said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Read Qur'ân (together) so long as your hearts are united, then when you begin to argue (about the meaning), then stop and disperse."[Muslim - Book Of Knowledge]
[6780] 5 - (2668) It was narrated that 'Aishah said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'The most hated of men to Allah is the one who is argumentative and is harsh in arguing."[Muslim - Book Of Knowledge]
Allah SWT knows the best.
Peace
Harris Hammam
Junior Member
What's your point pal? I saw see you mentioning:
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?
And Hadith? Do you deny Hadith was written in the era of the Prophet?
Where did you get your education, at a pub? i am sure you could be more polite when adressing people.
First of all, you did not mention Quran's being preserved by not only memorising but also writing in your original statement. Did you deny that Quran was written down word by word just after being revealed?
Do you claim that hadiths were written down just like Quran, word by word? Do you claim that hadiths are as authentic as Quran?
Harris Hammam
Junior Member
Nobody is denying that the Quran wasn't written. But that wasn't and has never been considered the primary form of preservation of the Quran. The Quran is preserved orally, from heart to heart, as Allah says بل هو آيت بينت في صدور الذين أوتوا العلم, especially given the fact that our Ummah is fundamentally an unlettered Ummah (Ummah Ummiyyah) by origin.
Let's put this into a bit more context. It was an era where virtually everything was narrated orally, where being a writer was like being a scribe as a profession. Oral transmission is the virtue of this Ummah that no other Ummah has the benefit of. We have hundreds of books in Rijal and Jarh and Ta`dil that talk about men as oral narrators. The Quran is recognised as an orally transmitted text, with Isnads in all the readable Qira'at, which is why the Qira'at and the Riwayat of the Quran are known by the cities and the names of Qaris, not the Mushaf that was present in the city.
Now let's look at Hadith - it was exactly the same. Prime method of preservation and narration was oral, mouth to mouth. Writing was secondary. Yes it was prohibited in the beginning, but that was never considered a rule forever. Abdullah bin `Amr used to write Hadith. The Sahifah of Hammam bin Munabbih, the oldest surviving document of Hadith, was from Hammam's teacher, Abu Hurayrah. The Prophet himself ordered for his own words to be written when he wrote letters to the rulers in and around Arabia. But still, oral transmission was the main.
In this regard i.e. transmission, the Quran and Hadith are no different. What is your claim?
Are you telling me every narration of the Quran is readable? There are narrations of the Quran which are by consensus unreadable, like the narrations of Hasan al-BAsri and al-A`mash, which by the way are preserved word for word. Authenticity is a separate question altogether. Some Hadith are more authentic than others yes, but how on earth that translates into what you are claiming - that the Hadith must be discarded when it conflicts with Quran (your claim) - I have no idea.
Fact is you haven't studied anything. You are unable to satisfy us with reasonable answers. You just want to insult if you have no answer, like:
Said by layman who thinks who is entitled to an opinion, yet cannot even answer the four most basic 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?
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.
Assalamu alaikum Brother Mezeren,
I have just seen this thread and read almost all the posts today. Jazakallah Khayr for the effort you have done to educate us. Your patience with the ill-mannered brothers here is commendable.
It is our duty to speak the truth, even if our own shadow leaves us alone.
I support your understanding on this issue and want to add, that Quran declares itself to be Mizaan and Furqaan. So we should go to Quran, if we are in need of differenciating from the truth and the falsehood. Just the way, the Mother of the Believers Ayesha did. Unfortunately, the trend was set in the early times by people like Tabari and Ibn Kathir to mould the meaning of the verses according to the narrations. When the illness is old, it is more difficult to heal.
The arrogance, which you had to deal with comes from the mentality, which is the direct result of the scholar-worship. The results of that mentality are clearer today than ever before. We have organizations like ISIS, Boko-Haraam etc. which are growing like mashrooms all over the islamic world and they have their interpretations on the same understanding, which you were trying to deal with. You can see, some of my threads to see a few examples of the same phenonomenon.
Wassalamu alaikum.
I have just seen this thread and read almost all the posts today. Jazakallah Khayr for the effort you have done to educate us. Your patience with the ill-mannered brothers here is commendable.
It is our duty to speak the truth, even if our own shadow leaves us alone.
I support your understanding on this issue and want to add, that Quran declares itself to be Mizaan and Furqaan. So we should go to Quran, if we are in need of differenciating from the truth and the falsehood. Just the way, the Mother of the Believers Ayesha did. Unfortunately, the trend was set in the early times by people like Tabari and Ibn Kathir to mould the meaning of the verses according to the narrations. When the illness is old, it is more difficult to heal.
The arrogance, which you had to deal with comes from the mentality, which is the direct result of the scholar-worship. The results of that mentality are clearer today than ever before. We have organizations like ISIS, Boko-Haraam etc. which are growing like mashrooms all over the islamic world and they have their interpretations on the same understanding, which you were trying to deal with. You can see, some of my threads to see a few examples of the same phenonomenon.
Wassalamu alaikum.
a_stranger
Junior Member
Assallamu alaikim brother
I am not a scholar , just simple Muslim who read Quran and tafseer, I believe that battle of badr was a very special and critical occasion in human history , the seal of the prophets salla Allah alaihi wa sallam was the leader , those who fought him was the most arrogant , tyrant people on earth , Allah subhanahu wa taaala supported his prophet and Sahaba by angels on that day.....I believe on those moments Allah made those who spend their life fighting the truth and torturing the believers hear as the prophet said salla Allah alaihi wa sallam . The verses is talking about dead hearts not people . It was not the responsibility of the prophet to talk to the dead or guid them , he talked to those who are still alive but to respond one need a living sound heart. And Allahu aallam .
Assalamu alaikum sister,
I think you are missing the point the brother Mezeren is trying to make. The conclusion, whether on that day, the deads were hearing or not, is not important. The methodology of the Mother Ayesha is important. A "Hadith" is being presented to her. She analyses that in the light of Quran and suggests an alternative understanding of the same incident. Thus she sets an example for us to follow.
Wassalamu alaikum
WA Alaykum Salam,
Wow brother, what a reminder. Thanks for your kind words. But, i am in no position to educate. if i could give a different (and usefull, off course) perpective to my brothers and sisters, i would be glad.
You are so right that we must form our belief according to Qur'an. We should not forget that, Qur'an is also hadeeth of Rasullullah(a.s.) and %100 sound.
a_stranger
Junior Member
Asslamu alaikim wa rahmatu Allah wa barakatu
I like to add that without hadith of our prophet salla Allah alaihi wa sallam we would never know how our prophet salla Allah alaihi wa sallam prayed to Allah subhanahu wa taaala , or fasted , talked, treated others ..........many many important issues to be a Muslim ( the main lines in Quran ) the details in Sunna. We need all that badly . Those scholars who collected hadiths were of great deal of truth and sincerity . ............Not all of us scholars or very brilliant . Please such discussions should be among qualified scholars who studied a large amount of hadiths , very good in tafseer .in Arabic, Serra of our prophet salla Allah alaihi wa sallam , very sincere and sensitive not to do mistakes............many people with little knowledge ( like myself) , but AlhamduliAllah good Eman May be confused. Differences among people are natural , but not always good to be discussed in public.
I like to add that without hadith of our prophet salla Allah alaihi wa sallam we would never know how our prophet salla Allah alaihi wa sallam prayed to Allah subhanahu wa taaala , or fasted , talked, treated others ..........many many important issues to be a Muslim ( the main lines in Quran ) the details in Sunna. We need all that badly . Those scholars who collected hadiths were of great deal of truth and sincerity . ............Not all of us scholars or very brilliant . Please such discussions should be among qualified scholars who studied a large amount of hadiths , very good in tafseer .in Arabic, Serra of our prophet salla Allah alaihi wa sallam , very sincere and sensitive not to do mistakes............many people with little knowledge ( like myself) , but AlhamduliAllah good Eman May be confused. Differences among people are natural , but not always good to be discussed in public.
Assalamu alaikum sister,
I agree absolutely. Who is denying that?
Again I agree. Laymen shouldn't give verdicts. We should choose the best verdict from the scholars, which seems best representing the basic sources of Islam: Quran and Sunnah, using our rational thinking. By breaking our direct relation with the basic sources or by turning off our rational thinking, we may indulge in the scholar-worship.
If the differences were not costing the lives of the innocent, the honour of the women and the properties of the people of other faiths, I wouldn't bother writing a word, since I have other important things to do than compelling others to do rafa' yadein.
Wassalamu alaikum
I agree absolutely. Who is denying that?
Again I agree. Laymen shouldn't give verdicts. We should choose the best verdict from the scholars, which seems best representing the basic sources of Islam: Quran and Sunnah, using our rational thinking. By breaking our direct relation with the basic sources or by turning off our rational thinking, we may indulge in the scholar-worship.
If the differences were not costing the lives of the innocent, the honour of the women and the properties of the people of other faiths, I wouldn't bother writing a word, since I have other important things to do than compelling others to do rafa' yadein.
Wassalamu alaikum
a_stranger
Junior Member
Nowadays people are taught and trained by many other sources including Muslims , it is not Islam that teaches masses , it is Media. Please see:
http://www.megaessays.com/viewpaper/91461.html
If we want to search of roots of crimes and violence let us see how Media is affecting minds of people since childhood and making crimes something very common. It is the immoral attitude that controls Media and entertainment which generate such values in humans. Otherwise if we start with basics of Islam in building personality , I believe this criminal attitude will vanish and replaced by a very beautiful human loving calm nature.
http://www.megaessays.com/viewpaper/91461.html
If we want to search of roots of crimes and violence let us see how Media is affecting minds of people since childhood and making crimes something very common. It is the immoral attitude that controls Media and entertainment which generate such values in humans. Otherwise if we start with basics of Islam in building personality , I believe this criminal attitude will vanish and replaced by a very beautiful human loving calm nature.