Which Islam is introduced to New Muslim?

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

norul

Guest
There is no greater feeling for a Muslim than knowing a new Muslim has entered into Deen of Islam and became a part of brotherhood and sisterhood with a mission to serve our creator. I often hear new converts to Islam saying as how Islam has changed their lives and how they see the purpose of their lives much clearer as Muslim than before. And how their main purpose of life was changed into serve Allah only.

I am wondering what they meant by serving Allah and at the same time makes me a little worried for them that they are not trapped in a ritual Islam which is generally practiced in the Muslim world and here as well. For some Muslims praying five times, fasting dawn to dusk, sporting a beard and follow the rituals of Muslims around the world, means serving Allah. Infact, that is not the sole purpose. Prayers, fasting and Sunnah is there to keep Muslims in touch and in remembrance to Allah, and also a part of training and motivation as a process to develop a person of highly disciplined who serves Allah, our creator for His mission. By serving Allah means to be a believer in Allah and trust His words of wisdom Which were delivered to mankind from time to time and finally by Prophet Muhammad SW and before by other prophets. To serve Allah means to obey His divine laws. To serve Allah means to follow a straight path which our ancestors followed and were blessed. What was the path they followed is how they lived their lives, according the message that was delivered to them, and how they established a community of peace and justice. How they stood by oppressed and how they stand against oppressor. How they lived a simple moderate life. How they sought knowledge and served the mankind and took care of each other, of natural resource to preserve it for future generations, and prohibited waste, obscenity and evil desires so that we live in harmony and respect to each other. The same message from our creator was completed at Prophet Muhammad SW. The Muslims as promised by our creator in Quran will prevail if we live our lives according His final message Al_Quran without any addition and corruption.

I hope there is some foundation with a true Islamic perspective with less ritual dogmas that follows up to these new brothers and sister who enter into Islam and give them a better understanding of Islam from the main source of Islam Which is Al-Quran and ignore those Ahadeeth and Sunnah which is contradictory to the teachings of Quran, so that they are not confused and as they go deeper in the community which is divided by self created controversies and man made rituals rather by the fundamental tenets of Islam.

Waslam

Nourl Qureshi
 

Mabsoot

Amir
Staff member
Assalamu Alaykum,

I believe i understand the gyst of what you are trying to say. Islam is one, when someone implements the teachings in their life it is not simply a "Ritual". All our actions have a meaning and they are all benefiting us in many ways.

But, to make things clear:

Allah the most high, says in the Quran:

" And I created not the jinns and humans except they should worship Me
" Chapter 51, Verses 56

Allah created us to worship him alone. The Prayer, fasting and all the other obligatory actions make us better Muslims and human beings.

When a person follows Both the Quran and the Sunnah properly, then they will also have a sense of spiritual fulfilment, happiness and understanding of their life. When they encorporate the Quran and the Sunnah into their lives, they will know how to deal justly and kindly with their spouse, neighbours, family, their friends and with strangers. etc. Kindness, patience, understanding, respect, honour, care for the poor, charity, humility are many of the things that a True Muslim will embrace into their life.

The Sunnah is based on the authentic, reliable hadith of the Prophet :saw:. There is no doubt or conflict in it.

There are Absolutely NO part of the Sunnah which contradicts the Quran. Those who say such things are simply ignorant of Islam and its teachings and have no clue about the science of Hadith.


Allaah, subhana watala, says in the Quran (Surah An-Nûr 24:54):

Say: "Obey Allah and obey the Messenger, but if you turn away, he (Messenger Muhammad :saw:) is only responsible for the duty placed on him (i.e. to convey Allah's Message) and you for that placed on you. If you obey him, you shall be on the right guidance. The Messenger's duty is only to convey (the message) in a clear way (i.e. to preach in a plain way)."


Rather, it is incumbant on every single Muslim, to follow both the Quran and the Sunnah of the blessed messenger :saw:.
 
N

norul

Guest
Which Islam is introduced to new Muslims

Asslamu Alaikum WRWB,

I am not in anyway trying to deny the Sunnah. Quran and Sunnah both has a guidance for Muslims. What I meant Quran is the main source and divine book thus has 0 chances of misleading a thought to someone who is new to Islam and has not yet built a strong foundation of faith. Where as Sunnah is deeds of the prophet SW and Hadees is sayings of the prophet SW . Now we all know Prophet SW would never do any thing or say anything that would go against Quran. That should be a belief of every Muslim. But we all know this was more applicable during the life time of the prophet. We all know the existing Ahadess was written 250 years after the death of Prophet and it is not humanly possible that whatever was written, preserved and researched will be a 100% accurate as said or done by prophet SW , no matter how scientific approach was taken while collecting Ahadess. So, the human error and human creation is what has made some Ahadess and Sunnah contradictory to the message of Allah which is Quran and the Character of prophet who was chosen by Allah as perfect role model to mankind.

I don’t like to argue but since you have confirmed the authenticity of Sunnah and Ahadees. I am giving you some samples from authentic books of Ahadess and would like you and others to judge yourself. And would like to ask you, is it still right to follow those books and seeks guidance from them or follow AlQuran the book of Allah and only Sunnah which does not go against the fundamentals of Quran. Please read the following carefully without any prejudice and pre-assumption.
____________________________________________________________________________________

.
1. Sayings of the exalted prophet (Hadith)
2. Deeds of the exalted prophet (Sunnah)
But, both of these often merge together. See for yourself a very few of the "most authentic" deeds (SUNNAH) of the prophet (S). Do they contradict the Qur'an or not? Furthermore, do they insult RAHMALLIL'AALAMEEN or not? How about WA INNAKA LA'ALAA KHULUQIN 'AZEEM (And, verily you - O Prophet - are statinoned at the highest order of human conduct. - Al-Qur'an)
This presentation leaves no room for argument, therefore, I will not enter into one.
Wrongs from the “Right” Bukhari
Most of the references given here belong to Bukhari published by Madina Publishing Company, Karachi, 1982, Printer Hamid & Co. The translator is “Maulana” Abdul Hakim Khan Shahjahan Puri.
At the outset, please know that a great scholar of Islam, Ubaidullah Sindhi concedes, "I cannot teach Bukhari hadith to any youngster, or to a non-Muslim because of shame" (Preface to Ilham-ur-Rahman). Let’s explore why he said this…

( Deleted)
 

Karima

Junior Member
Asalamualikum,

Thank you for helping 'clear' the air for me. Once one accepts Islam, muslims 'bombard' with other things to read...other than just the Qur'an.....'wait!...is...there's a catch somewhere with all the demands of reading other books...which needs to be in the full picture, when one has said the Shehaddah....with the simple truth that there is one God and Muhammad is his messenger...

I am not in anyway trying to deny the Sunnah. Quran and Sunnah both has a guidance for Muslims. What I meant Quran is the main source and divine book thus has 0 chances of misleading a thought to someone who is new to Islam and has not yet built a strong foundation of faith. Where as Sunnah is deeds of the prophet SW and Hadees is sayings of the prophet SW . Now we all know Prophet SW would never do any thing or say anything that would go against Quran. That should be a belief of every Muslim. But we all know this was more applicable during the life time of the prophet. We all know the existing Ahadess was written 250 years after the death of Prophet and it is not humanly possible that whatever was written, preserved and researched will be a 100% accurate as said or done by prophet SW , no matter how scientific approach was taken while collecting Ahadess. So, the human error and human creation is what has made some Ahadess and Sunnah contradictory to the message of Allah which is Quran and the Character of prophet who was chosen by Allah as perfect role model to mankind.

Sallam
 

samiha

---------
Staff member
:salam2:
I know it's not the same thing... but read this.

Summary of Hadith Rejecters' Claims

1. A) We, Quranists, do not make a distinction between obeying Allah and obeying His Messenger, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam. Anyone who obeys the Qur'an has no other option but to obey the Messenger, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, too. Had we been living with him, we would have no hesitation in blindly following his orders. We do make a distinction but that is between Allah and Hadith collectors like Bukhari, Muslim, Nassai, Ibn Majah, Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud. We accept Allah's Word that He has protected the Quran from corruption, but why should we accept the words of these hadith collectors? Are they as infallible as Allah?

1. B) Qur'an is sufficient and does not need any further explanation.

2. Hadith is the same as the gospels of Christianity. Indeed the time span between death of Messenger Muhammad, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, and the compilation of Sahihs was almost the same as that between the departure of Jesus, Alayhis salam, and compilation of the Bible. How can Muslims reject one but accept the other?

3. Dr. Maurice Bucaille finds that Saheeh is as unscientific as the Bible.

4. The Messenger, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, may have elaborated on items like mode of salah. Such hadith is probably from the Messenger, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, and should be obeyed. But what about the hadith that contradict the Qur'an.

5. The root cause of Muslim decay is their reverence for the hadith.

6. Allah has protected only the Qur'an -- not Islam -- from corruption.

7. Allah expects from His slaves exclusive servitude. When Sunnis talk of Quran and Sunnah, the Qur'an is undermined for its exclusivity is lost.


---------------------------------------------------------------------

"If anyone disobeys Allah and His Messenger he is indeed on a clearly wrong path." [Al-Ahzab, 33:36]
"He that obeys Allah and His Messenger has already attained the great victory." [Al-Ahzab, 33:71].


For the past fourteen centuries Qur'an and Sunnah have been the twin undisputed sources of Guidance for Muslims. In every generation, the Muslims devoted the best of their minds and talents to their study. They learned both the words and meanings of the Qur'an through the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, and made an unprecedented effort in preserving them for the next generation. The result: The development of the marvelous -- and unparalleled -- science of hadith, one of the brightest aspects of Muslim history.

What does it mean to believe in a Prophet except to pledge to follow him? And so the teachings of the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, have always guided this Ummah. No body, in his right mind, could or did question this practice. Then something happened. During the colonial period, when most of the Muslim world came under the subjugation of the West, some "scholars" arose in places like Egypt (Taha Hussein), India (Abdullah Chakralawi and Ghulam Ahmed Pervaiz), and Turkey (Zia Gogelup), who began questioning the authenticity and relevance of hadith. It was not that some genius had found flaws in the hadith study that had eluded the entire ummah for thirteen centuries. It was simply that the pressures from the dominant Western civilization to conform were too strong for them to withstand. They buckled. Prophetic teachings and life example -- Hadith -- was the obstacle in this process and so it became the target.

Another factor helped them. Today most Muslims, including the vast majority of the western-educated Muslims, have meager knowledge of hadith, having spent no time in studying even the fundamentals of this vast subject. How many know the difference between Sahih and Hasan, or between Maudau and Dhaif? The certification process used in hadith transmission? Names of any hadith book produced in the first century of Hijrah, or the number of such books? A majority probably would not be able to name even the six principal hadith books (Sihah Sitta) or know anything about the history of their compilation. Obviously such atmosphere provides a fertile ground for sowing suspicions and doubts.

They call themselves as ahle-Qur'an or Quranists. This is misleading. For their distinction is not in affirming the Qur'an, but in rejecting the Hadith. The ideas of munkareen-e-hadith evolve into three mutually contradictory strains. The first holds that the job of the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, was only to deliver the Qur'an. We are to follow only the Qur'an and nothing else, as were the Companions. Further, hadith is not needed to understand the Qur'an, which is sufficient for providing guidance. The second group holds that the Companions were required to follow the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, but we are not. The third holds that, in theory, we also have to follow the hadith but we did not receive ahadith through authentic sources and therefore we have to reject all ahadith collections!

Internal contradictions are a hallmark of false ideologies. How can anyone hold the first position yet profess belief in Qur'an while it says: "And We have sent down unto You the Message so that you may explain clearly to men what is sent for them." [An-Nahal, 16:44]. And this: "Allah did confer a great favor on the Believers when He sent among them a Messenger from among themselves, rehearsing unto them the Signs (Verses) of Allah, purifying them, instructing them in Scripture, and teaching them Wisdom. While before that they were in manifest error." [A'ale Imran 3:164].

How can anyone hold the second position (limiting the Prophethood to 23 years) yet profess belief in Qur'an, while it says: "We did not send you except as Mercy for all creatures." [Al-Anbia, 21:107] And, "We have not sent you except as a Messenger to all mankind, giving them glad tidings and warning them against sin." [Saba, 34:28]

The third position seems to have avoided these obvious pitfalls, yet in reality it is no different. Consider statements 1, 4, and 7 in the summary of hadith rejecters' claims. So hadith undermines Qur'an's exclusivity, yet would have been followed blindly at the time of the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam. Ahadith cannot be followed because they are not reliable, yet can be followed for ritual prayers.


Salah And Hadith Rejecters

But we don't need a favor for hadith about salah (coming from the same books and the same narrators who are declared as unreliable). We need an answer to this question: If the Qur'an is the only authentic source of Guidance, why did it never explain how to offer salah, although it repeatedly talks about its importance, associating it with eternal success and failure? What would we think of a communication that repeatedly emphasizes a certain act but never explains how to perform it? There are only two possibilities. Either it is a terrible omission (and in that case it cannot be from God) or another source for the how-to information is provided and it is a terrible mistake for any recipient to ignore that.

(Recently some hadith rejecters have realized the difficulty of their position on salah. But they have made a claim that is even more ludicrous, namely that the Qur'an gives details on how to offer salah. "A careful reading of the Koran reveals that we are to get our Salaah from the Masjid-el Haraam [the continuous practice at Mecca since the time of Abraham]," says one proponent, "specifically the 'place of Abraham (moqaam e Ibraheem).'" Let us leave aside all the practical questions about such a fluid answer. Whose Salah? When? Are we to follow anyone and everyone we find praying at Muqame Ibrahim? How are those offering salah there are to determine proper way of offering Salah? How do you resolve their differences? In his enthusiasm in proposing this innovative solution, this proponent even forgot that the Qur'an says the following about the salah of mushrikeen at the Masjid-el Haraam: "Their prayer at the House of Allah is nothing but whistling and clapping of hands. (Its only answer can be), 'Taste the chastisement because you blasphemed.'" [Al-Anfal 8:35] )


The Reliability of Resources

To accept one and reject the other source on the basis of reliability (statement #2) also defies reason, unless we received the Qur'an directly from Allah. But we have received both Qur'an and Hadith through the same channels. Same people transmitted this as the Word of Allah, that as the word of the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi was sallam. Even the verse claiming that Qur'an will be protected came to us through the same people. Through what logic can anyone declare that the channels are reliable for Qur'an and unreliable for Hadith? On the contrary the Quranic promise of protection must apply to Hadith as well for there is no point in protecting the words but not the meanings of the Qur'an.


Protection of Qur'an

To say that Allah promised to protect only Qur'an but not Islam (#6) is being as ridiculous as one can get. Let's ignore the obvious question regarding the point of this Heavenly act. The question is if Islam has been corrupted and its true teachings have been lost, how can anyone claim to be its follower? Moreover, Qur'an says "If anyone desires a religion other than Islam, never will it be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be in the ranks of those who have lost" [A'al-e-Imran, 3:85]. How are we to follow the religion acceptable to Allah if it was not to be protected?



Were Ahadith Written Down for the First Time in the Third Century of Hijra?

The above proves that ahadith must have been protected. Were they? The very existence of a huge library of hadith -- the only one of its kind among the religions of the world -- answers the question in the affirmative. To dismiss all that as later day fabrication (#1A, #2) requires lots of guts -- and equal parts ignorance. Were ahadith written down for the first time in the third century of Hijra? Not at all. Actually hadith recording and collection started at the time of the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam. Abd-Allah ibn Amr ibn al-'As, Radi-Allahu unhu, sought and was given the permission to write everything he heard from the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa Sallam, who said: "By the One in Whose Hands is my life! Whatever proceeds from here [pointing to his mouth] is the truth." He produced Sahifa Sadiqa, which contained more than six thousand ahadith. Anas ibn Malik, Radi-Allahu unhu, who spent ten years in Prophet's household, not only recorded the ahadith but also presented them to the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, and got corrections. Abu Hurairah, Radi-Allahu unhu, had many volumes of his collections and even produced smaller compilations for his students. Prominent Hadith scholar Dr. Mustafa Azami has shown in his doctoral thesis that in the first century of Hijra many hundred booklets of hadith were in circulation. By the end of the second century, "by the most conservative estimate there were many thousands."

Of course most of these books do not exist today. They were simply absorbed into the encyclopedic collections that emerged in the third century. One manuscript from the first century was discovered in this century and published by Dr. Hamidullah. It is Sahifa Hammam ibn Munabbah, who was a disciple of Abu Hurairah, Radi-Allahu unhu. It contains 138 ahadith. Muhaddithin knew that the ahadith of this Sahifa had been absorbed into Musnad Ahmed and Muslim collections, which have been published continuously since their third century debut. After the discovery of the original manuscript it was naturally compared with the ahadith in Muslim and Musnad Ahmed that were thought to have come from that Sahifa. And what did they find? There was not an iota of difference between the two. Similarly Mussanaf of Abd al-Razzaq is extant and has been published. As has been Mu'ammar ibn Rashid's al-Jami. These recently discovered original manuscripts bear out the Sihah Sitta. The recent appearance of these original manuscripts should bring the most skeptical into the fold of believers.

Back to Top

Saheeh and the Gospels

Regarding comparison of Saheeh with Gospels (#2), let's listen to Dr. Hamidullah. "The compilation of the Gospels, their preservation and transmission from one generation to the other, has not taken place in the way which governed the books of Hadith... We do not know who wrote them, who translated them, and who transmitted them. How were they transferred from the original Aramaic to Greek? Did the scribes make arrangements for a faithful reproduction of the original? The four Gospels are mentioned, for the first time, three hundred years after Christ. Should we rely on such an unauthentic book in preference to that of Bukhari who prefaces every statement of two lines with three to nine references?"

Back to Top

The Comments of Dr. Maurice Bucaille

Dr. Maurice Bucaille earned the admiration of many Muslims because of his study of some scientific phenomena mentioned in the Qur'an and his testimony based on that study that Qur'an must be the Book of Allah. However he is not a hadith scholar and it is unfair to drag him into this discussion. His account of history of hadith compilation contains many errors, for example the claim that the first gathering of hadith was performed roughly forty years after Hijra or that no instructions were given regarding hadith collection. He questions about a dozen or so entries in Bukhari that he thinks deal with scientific matters. Even if all that criticism were valid, would it be sufficient ground to throw away the 9082 total entries (2602 unique ahadith) in Bukhari? He himself does not think so, for he writes: "The truth of hadith, from a religious point of view, is beyond question."

Back to Top

The Hadith Regarding the Sun

But even his criticism is of questionable value. Consider the hadith about the sun: "At sunset the sun prostrates itself underneath the Throne and takes permission to rise again, and it is permitted and then a time will come when it will be about to prostrate itself... it will seek permission to go on its course... it will be ordered to return whence it has come and so it will rise in the West." His criticism: "This implies the notion of a course the sun runs in relation to the Earth." Bucaille fails to understand the real message of this hadith. It was not meant to teach astronomy. Its clear message is that sun is a slave of Allah, moving always through His Will. The hadith brings out that message very powerfully so that even the most illiterate bedouin would understand it fully. Moreover Bucaille should know better than to criticize the implied notion of sun's rotation around earth. Even today the astronomers, when calculating the time of sunrise and sunset, use a mathematical model in which the sun revolves around the earth. If that is acceptable for scientific work as it makes calculations easier, why is it questionable, when it makes communication easier?

Also there are other ahadith which clearly demonstrate a scientific fact beyond the knowledge of the times but Bucaille has failed to take notice. For example the hadith about solar eclipse: "The sun and moon are two signs of Allah. They are not eclipsed on account of anyone's death or on account of anyone's birth." (Muslim, hadith #1966]. The eclipse had coincided with the death of Prophet's son. A false prophet would have tried to exploit the occasion. A fabricated hadith would require scientific knowledge that did not exist then.

The munkareen-e-hadith think that their beliefs are built on solid rock. Well, it is as solid as wax: The religion based on this idea can be fitted into any mold. For some hadith rejecters that was the motivation. For everyone, that is the inevitable result. But the good news is that their arguments are the same way. On the surface they appear to be solid. But faced with the light of truth, they melt away like wax.

Back to Top
 

Solemn_G

Junior Member
AS-salaamu alaikum

The Qur'an is of course more important than Hadeeths. Muslim Scholars even stress this to people that the Hadeeth are not to be placed on the level of the Holy Qur'an, but Muslim must also know that these Hadeeths will aid you in bettering themselves in the name of Allah(swt). The Hadeeth are a way of following the example of Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) and this is a requirment of all Muslims

You are indeed correct that reverts should look at the Qur'an before anything else because it is the undeniable word of God, but once they have established faith they must look at the Hadeeth in order to strengthen it and follow the path of the righteous.

As for Prayer, fasting, and all those "rituals", they are a MUST and that is clearly stated in the Qur'an by Allah(swt). It's true that they are in a way a form of discipline to show God our obedience, but we cannot shrug them off because that would be disobediance to Allah(swt). This is how we are meant to worship Allah(swt), among other things. Doing good works and striving in Allah(swt)'s Way are all forms of worship, but prayer, fasting, etc are Fard and are what unify the Ummah and mankind in general. No matter who you are, whether your rich, your poor, your black, your white, your whatever, we are all united with the pray in worship of Allah. Salah is extermely important, as is fasting , we must never forget that.

As-salaamu alaikum, PEACE BE UPON YOU ALL
 

Abul Harith

Active Member
Staff member
AS-salaamu alaikum

The Qur'an is of course more important than Hadeeths. Muslim Scholars even stress this to people that the Hadeeth are not to be placed on the level of the Holy Qur'an, but Muslim must also know that these Hadeeths will aid you in bettering themselves in the name of Allah(swt). The Hadeeth are a way of following the example of Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) and this is a requirment of all Muslims

You are indeed correct that reverts should look at the Qur'an before anything else because it is the undeniable word of God, but once they have established faith they must look at the Hadeeth in order to strengthen it and follow the path of the righteous.

As for Prayer, fasting, and all those "rituals", they are a MUST and that is clearly stated in the Qur'an by Allah(swt). It's true that they are in a way a form of discipline to show God our obedience, but we cannot shrug them off because that would be disobediance to Allah(swt). This is how we are meant to worship Allah(swt), among other things. Doing good works and striving in Allah(swt)'s Way are all forms of worship, but prayer, fasting, etc are Fard and are what unify the Ummah and mankind in general. No matter who you are, whether your rich, your poor, your black, your white, your whatever, we are all united with the pray in worship of Allah. Salah is extermely important, as is fasting , we must never forget that.

As-salaamu alaikum, PEACE BE UPON YOU ALL

Asalam alaikom,

The Hadeeth of the Prophet Muhammad :saw: is equal to the Quran in it's application in the Sciences of Usool (Jurisprudence) in Islam,

The Status of Sunnah in Islam
by Shaikh Muhammad Nasir-ud-deen Al-Albaani​

Introduction

Praise be to Allah, Benediction and Peace be on the Messenger of Allah, his family, his companions, and his adherents.

This is a lecture which I delivered in the city of Doha, the capital of Qatar, in the blessed month of Ramadhan 1392 A.H. Some of my friends have suggested to me to publish my lecture on account of need of the Muslims to a work of its kind. In response to their request, I am printing it for general propagation on account of its advantage, having regard for the reminiscences and history. I have added some separate titles to assist the reader to collect the main ideas. I pray to Allah, the Mighty, the Glorious, to write me among those who defend the religion and those who help enact the law; and to reward me for it. Surely he is the most generous in responding to my prayer.

Damascus 22 Muharram-al-Haram 1394 A.H.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The Status of Sunnah in Islam

A Declaration that it cannot dispense with The Qur'an.

All Praise be to Allah, we praise Him, seek His help and His forgiveness. We seek refuge in Allah from the evils of our souls and evils of our deeds. One whom Allah guides, none can lead him astray, and one whom He misguides, none can guide him. I bear witness that there is nothing worthy of worship(1) except Allah, and I bear witness that Muhammad (SAW) is His servant and His messenger.

Oh you who believe, Fear Allah Truly, and do not die except as Muslims. (S.3 A.102).

O Men fear your Lord who created you from one soul, and created its partner, and from them spread men and women in numbers. Take care, Allah will question you about it and the kinship. Surely, Allah is ever watchful of your deeds (S.4 A.1).

O those who believe. Fear Allah and say what is correct so that it fits you. He will forgive your sins. Whoever obeys Allah and His messenger that is a great achievement (S.33 A.70-71).

The best of speech is the speech of Allah. That is The Book of Allah. The best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad. Of all matters, the worst are innovations; and everything new is an innovation, and every innovation is a deviation, and every deviation leads to Hell-fire.

I do not think that I will be able to offer this high ranking assembly - especially when there are distinguished ulama (scholars) and professors present - some knowledge which has not been dealt with before. If what I think is true, I will rest contented that my address will be a reminder, as it says in the Qur'an: Remind, for the reminder would benefit the believers (51:55).

I do not think that my talk in this blessed month of Ramadhan, the month of importance, is an exposition of something of its merits, rules and their practice, and the like, which generally the preachers and instructors touch on, on account of the benefit they give to the listeners, and procure for them good and blessing; but I have chosen my talk to be a study of a general nature, surely it is one of the roots of the Shari'ah (Islamic law). It is a declaration of the importance attached to the Sunnah in the Islamic law.


The Role of Sunnah Towards The Qur'an

You all know that Allah, The Blessed and Mighty, chose Muhammad (SAW) as His Prophet and picked him to deliver the final message. The Qur'an was revealed to him and commanded him to obey all what He had ordered him to do, that is, to expound His message to the people. Allah says, We have revealed to you the Reminder (The Qur'an) to expound to people what was revealed to them (16:44).

I think that the declaration mentioned in the verse contains two orders:

Declaration of the word and its arrangement. It is the communication of the Qur'an and its non-concealment, and its pursuit to Mankind just as Allah, The Blessed Almighty, has revealed to the heart of the Prophet (SAW) which is the intent of His saying O Messenger proclaim what is revealed to you from your Lord (5:67). Sayyida Ayesha (may Allah be pleased with her) is reported to have said "Whosoever says that Muhammad (SAW) concealed something which he was commanded to communicate, is is a great calumny against Allah." Then she read the abovementioned verse. (Bukhari and Muslim have stated it.)

And according to the narration of Muslim: "If the Messenger of Allah (SAW) had concealed something which he was commanded to communicate, he would have concealed the saying of The Almighty Behold thou didst say to one who had received the grace of Allah and thy favour: Keep your wife to yourself and fear Allah. But thou didst hide in thy heart that which Allah was about to make manifest; you did fear the people, whereas Allah had a better right that you should fear Him (33:37).


The explanation of the meaning of the word or sentence or verse for which man needs an explanation, most of which bear reference to 'Mujmal' (comprehensive) verses or 'Amah' (general) verses or 'Mutlaq' (unbounded) verses.

Then comes the Sunnah and clarifies the sentences and specifies the verses called 'Amah' and defines what is 'mutlaq' that is, in reference to the saying (Qaul) of The Prophet (SAW), his deed (Fi'l) and the act he confirmed (Iqrar).

The Necessity of Sunnah to Understand

The Qur'an and Parables on that...

Allah says:The male thief and female theif cut of their hands (5:38) is a fitting example of that. The thief in it is general like the hand.
The oral tradition explains the first of them and restricts it by 'as-sareq' (the thief) who steals something worth a fourth of a Dinar(2) according to the saying of the Prophet (SAW) There is no cutting - of the hand - unless the thing stolen is worth a fourth of a Dinar or more (Buhkari & Muslim) the two shaikhs have recorded this Hadeeth.

Again, the other is explained by the action of the Prophet (SAW) or the action of his companions and his confirmation. They used to cut the hand of the thief from the wrist as is known in the work of Hadeeth. The oral tradition explains the hand mentioned in the verse on Tayammum (dust ablution) And rub therewith your faces and hands (5:6) is also the palm of the hand as is stated in a Hadeeth Tayammum is the wiping of the face and the hands recorded by the two shaikhs and Ahmad and others from a tradition reported by Ammar bin Yasir (may Allah be pleased with them).
There are other verses that cannot be completely understood except through Sunnah. They are:

It is whose who believe and confuse not their beliefs with wrong,'dhulm'that are(truly) in security for they are on(right) guidance (6:82).

The companions of the Prophet (SAW) understood the word 'dhulm' in its general sense to mean every wrong doing, even if it be little. On this account the verse is regarded as dubious and they said, "O Messenger of Allah, which of us did not involve his faith with obscurity?" He (SAW) said; It is not that. It is only the 'shirk'(3). Have you not heard what Luqman said: Verily Shirk is a very great sin (dhulm) (31:13). The two shaikhs have recorded it with others. [Bukhari and Muslim]


Allah says: When you travel on earth, there is no blame on you to shorten your prayer, for fear the unbelievers will persecute you (4:101). It is obvious from this verse that fear is a pre-requisite for the shortening of prayers. Some of the Prophet's companions asked him: "Why do we shorten our prayers while we feel safe?" He said: It is a charity from Allah, so accept it (Muslim).


Allah says: The carcass and it's blood are forbidden to you (5:3). In explanation of this verse, the corpse of locusts, fish, the livers, spleen of blood are lawful. So the Prophet (SAW) said: He has made two dead things and blood lawful: the locusts and the fish, the liver and the spleen.
Baihaqi and others have recorded it as 'marfu' type of hadeeth as also 'mauquf' type. The 'isnad' of 'mauquf' is authentic and it is as good as 'marfu' tradition, since it is not stated in the form of a 'ra'y' (decision based on one individual's judgement not on Qur'an and Sunnah).


Allah says: I find not in the message received by me by inspiration any (food) forbidden to be taken by one who wishes to, unless it is dead meat or blood poured forth or the flesh of swine, for it is an abomination, or what is impious (meat) on which a name has been invoked other than Allah's (6:145).

The Sunnah has forbidden many things not mentioned in the verse mentioned above, as for example in the saying of the Holy Prophet (SAW): All predatory animals with tusk and every bird with claw are forbidden for consumption. There are other traditions which have forbidden the consumption of such animals as the Prophet (SAW) is reported to have said on the Day of Khayber: Allah and His Messenger have prohibited the consumption of domesticated asses, for they are filth. The two shaikhs have reported it.


Allah says: Who has forbidden the adornment of Allah which He has produced for His servants, and the things clean and pure (which he has provided for sustenance) (7:32).

The Sunnah, too, has forbidden some adornments, and this is evident from the Prophet (SAW) who is reported to have met some of his companions, and had a silk garment in one hand, and gold in the other, and said: These are prohibited to Muslim males, lawful to females. The hadeeths in their interpretation are many and well known in both the authentic collections of hadeeths, and others and the like of many examples well known to scholars familiar with hadeeth and Islamic Jurispudence.


From what has been stated above, O Muslim Brethren, you can see the importance attached to Sunnah in Islamic Law. When we divert our intention again to the exaples mentioned beside others not mentioned, we are certain that there is no way to understand the Qur'an correctly except in association with the interpretation of the Sunnah.

In the first example, the understanding of the 'sahabah' of 'dhulm' mentioned in the verse is on its general sense, despite the fact that the (Allah be pleased with them) were, as stated by Ibn Mas'ud: "The best of this community, most pious, profound in learning, least of dissimulation." Yet with all that they erred in their understanding of that.

Were it not for the Prophet (SAW), who held them back from their mistaken notion, and made them take the step in the right direction in that the correct meaning of 'dhulm' in the context is shirk (association of partnership with Allah), we too would have followed in their wrong thinking. Allah, The Blessed and The Most High saved us from that wrong notion by the grace of the right direction of the Prophet (SAW) and his Sunnah.

In the second example - with Allah's guidance - if not for the hadeeth mentioned above, we would have been in doubt at least with regard to the shortening of prayer (qasr-as-salat) during a journey while secure - if we did stipulate the condition of fear as obvious in the verse - till the companions saw the Prophet (SAW) shorten the prayers when it was safe and secure.

In the third example, if not for the hadeeth, we would have forbidden ourselves the consumption of good things made lawful to us: locusts, fish, liver, and the spleen.

In the fourth example, if not for the hadeeths, some of which we have mentioned, we would have considered lawful what Allah has made unlawful through the dictum of the holy Prophet (SAW) like predatory animals, and the birds which have claws.

And so in the fifth example, if not for the hadeeths in regard to this question, we would have considered lawful what Allah prohibited through the words of His Prophet (SAW) like gold and silk.

It is for this, some forbearers (as-salaf) say that 'Sunnah' pronounces judgement of The Book (al-Qur'an).


The Deviation of Those Who are Satisfied with The Qur'an to the Exclusion of Hadeeth

It is a matter of regret that according to the interpretation found in the works of some commentators and moders authors, that it is permissible to do what is stated in the last two examples: Consumption of the predatory animals and the waearing of gold and silk by referring their interpretation only to the Qur'an.

Today, a sect exists called "Quranites" who comment according to their whims and fancies; without seeking the explanation of the authentic Sunnah. They only accept and follow the Sunnah which suit their desires, the rest they throw behind. The Prophet (SAW) is reported to have said that: None of you reclines on his bed, the order comes to him on an affair which I am commanded to do or not to do. He says: "I don't know, what is found in The Book of Allah we follow" (Tirmidhi). According to another report: What is found in The Book of Allah as 'Haram,' we pronounce it 'haram' (forbidden). Surely, I am given The Qur'an and its example with it. Yet, according to another report: What the Messenger of Allah has forbidden, Allah has prohibited it.

It is a matter of regret that one renowned scholar has written a book on Islamic law and its dogma, and in its preface, he says that he has written it and that he has made reference only to The Qur'an.

This true hadeeth gives positive evidence that the divine law of Islam - As-Shari'ah - is not merely Qur'an, but Qur'an and Sunnah. Therefore, whoever holds fast to one source for reference to the exclusion of the other, he held fast to neither of them, since both complement each other. The Qur'an says Whoever obeys the Messenger, obeys Allah. Allah says, No, by your Lord they do not believe until they submit to your adjucation in all disputes between them, then they do not find themselves oppressed with your decisions and they completely submit (4:65). Again, Allah says When a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger, it does not behove a believer, man or woman, to have choice in their matter. One who disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path (33:36).
Furthermore, Allah says What the Messenger teaches you, take it, and what he forbids you, avoid doing it (59:7).

In connection with this verse, I am marvelled by what is corroborated by Ibn Mas'ud (Allah be pleased with him) that is, a woman came to him and told him, "You who says: May Allah's curse be on 'Al-Namisat' and 'Al-Motanamisat'(4) and those who tattoo." He said "Yes." She said, "I read the Book of Allah (Al-Qur'an) from beginning to its end. I did not find what you have said. He told her, "If you have read it, you would have found it. As for your reading what the Messenger teaches you, take it, and what he forbids you, avoid doing it." She said, "Certainly." He said, "I have heard the Messenger of Allah (SAW) say May Allah's Curse be on the Al-Namisat." (Bukhari and Muslim)


Inadequacy of Philology to understand The Qur'an

From what has been stated above, it is clear that there is no scope for anyone with all his Arabic Scholarship to understand the glorious Qur'an, without the help of the Sunnah of the Prophet (SAW), his sayings and actions.

The companions of the Prophet (SAW) were the most knowledgeable in the language, which The Qur'an was revealed in, when it was not blemished by the incorrectness of the common folks knowledge or their grammatical mistakes. Yet, they erred in understanding the verses quoted above when they relied on language alone.

It is self-evident that a man well-informed of the Sunnah is more appropriate to understand The Qur'an and deduce the rules from it than one who is ignorant of it. How can it be a source to one who does not reckon it and does not make reference to it?

For this reason, it is part of the rules agreed upon that Qur'an should be interpreted by the Qur'an itself as welll as the Sunnah, then by the sayings of the Sahabah... etc. (5)

It is here that the cause of deviation of scholastic theologians (Ahlul-Kalam) become clear, both ancient and modern, and their opposition to the forbears 'As-salaf' (May Allah be pleased with them) in their doctrines not to speak of their laws. They are far from Sunnah, and knowledge of it, and rely on their intelligence and desires to decide on the verses of attributes and others.

What is best is what was written down in the exposition of Tahawi's doctrine (page 212 Fourth Edition):


When one is not well-informed of The Book and Sunnah, what would he say about the Fundamentals of Religion (usoolud-deen)? He only receives the assertion of someone. If he says that he takes it from The Book of Allah, he does not study the commentary of The Qur'an on the basis of prophetic traditions, and reflects over it, nor what the companions (Sahabah), and the following generations narrated, which is transmitted to us from the authorities whom the critics chose. They have not transmitted the system and arrangement of The Qur'an, but its poetic expression and meaning. They did not learn the Qur'an like children, but studied it with meaning. One who does not follow in their footsteps, speaks on his own accord. One who does that thinks it be the religion of Allah, and does not study The Book of Allah, he sins, even if he is right.
One who studies The Qur'an and The Sunnah, he is rewarded, even if he goes wrong, but if he is right in his opinion, his reward is doubled. Then he says:


What is obligatory, is submission to the Messenger (SAW) carrying out his saying and accepting his saying with satisfaction and belief without contradicting it with false ideas called 'opprehensive faculty' (Ma'qul) bearing doubt or complaint, or offering the opinions of men and the garbage of their intellect. We unite with The Prophet (SAW) in judgement, submission, obedience and compliance, just as we have unison with Allah, glory be to Him, by worshipping Him by humility, submissiveness, repentance and reliance.
In short, what is obligatory on all MUslims is that they do not separate between Qur'an and Sunnah; whereas, it is obligatory to take both of them and to formulate the law on both of them.

This is a safeguard for them, so that they won't fall right or left; and that they won't fall back in error as explained by The Prophet (SAW): I leave behind me two things. You will never go astray if you hold fast to them: The Qur'an and my Sunnah.


CAUTION

It is self-evident after this that I say:

The Sunnah which has an important bearing on Islamic Law is only the Sunnah confirmed by scientific channels, and authentic chains of narrations known to the learned in regard to hadeeths and the background of the narrators.

It is not the one which is found in different works of Tafseers (commentaries of The Qur'an) and Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), and in different writings of longing, intimidation, advices, and admonitions, etc...

They contain weak, spurious, and fabricated hadeeths, of which Islam absolves, like the story of 'Harut and Marut,' and the sotry of 'gharanik.' I have a special letter which makes it void and it is printed(6). A major part of it is recorded in two huge books namely "A chain of weak and fabricated hadeeths and their evil impact on the community." Their number upto date have reached approximately four thousand hadeeths(7).

It is obligatory on the learned, especially those who spread the knowledge of fiqh and legal opinions among the public, that they shouldn't dare to argue with hadeeth unless it is well-attested. Books of jurisprudence, which they refer to, are normally filled with traditions which are not well-attested, nor have any bases, as is well-known to the learned.

I have begun an important project, and I think it will be of use to those occupied with jurisprudence, and I will name it: "Weak and Fabricated Hadeeths in the Major Jurisprudence 'fiqh' Books," by which I mean:

  • Al-Hidayah, by Al-Marghinani, in Hanafi fiqh,
  • Al-Modawwanah, by Ibnil-Qasim, in Maliki fiqh,
  • Sharhul-wajeez, by Al-rafiee, in Shafiee fiqh,
  • Al-Mughni, by Ibn Quddamah, in Hanbali fiqh, and
  • Bidayatul Mujtahid, by Ibn Rushd-al-Andalusi, in comparative fiqh.
I regret that I did not get the opportunity to finish it, because the journal "Al-Wa'e-al-Islami" of Kuwait which promised to publish it, when perused it, didn't print it.

Although I missed this opportunity, perhaps I will succeed on another occasion, Allah willing, to offer to my bretheren occupied with jurisprudence a precise learned course to help them to facilitate their knowledge of the different categories of hadeeth with reference to various sources from books on hadeeth, with an explanation of its special nature and character and reliance on them. Allah is the source of success.


Weakness of Hadeeth of Muadh in the opinion And its disapproval

Before I conclude my talk, I think I must direct the attention of brethren present to a well known hadeeth. It is devoid of one of the books of jurisprudence on account of its weakness in respect of its chain of narration (isnad) and its contrdiction with what we have concluded in this talk, regarding the illegitimacy of discrimination in law between The Qur'an and Sunnah; and the necessity of taking both.

It is a hadeeth of Muadh bin Jabal (May Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (SAW) said to him when he sent hin to Yaman: By what source will you decide? He said, "By the book of Allah." He then asked, If you don't find any guidline? He said, "I will make an effort to form my own opinion." He said, Praise be to Allah who makes success the effort of the envoy of the Messenger of Allah, to what The Prophet likes.

As for the weakness of its 'isnad,' there is no scope for its explanation now. But I have explained it clearly in the above mentioned chain(8).

It would suffice now to mention that the Commander of the Believers in the hadeeth 'Imam Al-Bukhari' (may Allah have mercy on him) says that the hadeeth is not recognized (munkar). After this I am permitted to begin to explain the conflict which I pointed.

The tradition of Muadh gives the ruler a method of three stages which does not permit to search for any rule with regard to 'Ra'e' (personal opinion) except that he does not find it in the Sunnah, nor in the Sunnah, except that after he does not find it in The Qur'an. It is in relation to 'Ra'e' a genuine method with all the learned (ulama), so that they say, "Where there is a tradition relating the deeds and utterances of The Prophet (SAW), personal opinion is void." But in relation to Sunnah, it is not true, because Sunnah dictates The Qur'an and and clarifies its doctrines. It is then essential to search for a ruling in Sunnah, even if he thinks it is found in The Qur'an as we have mentioned it.

Sunnah is not with The Qur'an in the same manner as 'Ar-Ra'e' with the Sunnah. No, definitely not. It is rather necessary to regard the Qur'an and Sunnah as being one source with no discrimination between the two whatsoever. This is indicatied in a saying of the Prophet (SAW): Certainly I have come with The Qur'an and its like (meaning the Sunnah). He said They are never separated until they come to the Basin(9). The compilation mentioned between them is not correct because the separation between them is void as we have explained.

This is what I wish to draw attention to. If I am right, it is from Allah; if wrong, it is from me. I ask Allah Almighty to protect us and you from errors and from all that displeases him. I conclude my praising by "Al-Hamdu-lillahi rabbil-alameen" - Praise be to Allah, The Lord of the Worlds.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Footnotes

  1. i.e.: There is nothing worthy of worship except Allah - who really deserves to be worshipped by Mankind

  2. Dinar: A form of currency

  3. Shirk is to disbelieve in the oneness of Allah, or to offer any form of worship to other than Allah.

  4. Namisah: a woman who plucks hers or others eyebrows - to be a thin line - to seek beauty. Such an act is forbidden. It is a means to change the form of Allah's creation.
  5. Motanamisah: a woman who asks others to do it for her.

  6. This states other than what is known by many of the learned: to comment on The Qur'an itself if there is not any Sunnah, then by the Sunnah. This will be explained in at then end of this treatise on the hadeeth of Muadh bin Jabal - may Allah be pleased with him.

  7. Its title is "Pitch of majaniq to demolish the story of gharaniq" printed by Al-Maktabul-e-Islami
  8. Story of gharaniq: is a fabricated story found in some commentaries, claiming that a verse in The Qur'an acknowledged the polytheists in their beliefs.

  9. The number at present [1394 A.H.] has exceeded five thousand and may Allah make easy its publication in the near future. So far only five hundred have broken into print.

  10. No. 885 of the chain mentioned, and we hope that the volume which includes it will be published shortly, 'insha Allah.'

  11. i.e. until the Day of Judgement
 

Mabsoot

Amir
Staff member
Asslamu Alaikum WRWB,

I am not in anyway trying to deny the Sunnah. Quran and Sunnah both has a guidance for Muslims. What I meant Quran is the main source and divine book thus has 0 chances of misleading a thought to someone who is new to Islam and has not yet built a strong foundation of faith. Where as Sunnah is deeds of the prophet SW and Hadees is sayings of the prophet SW . Now we all know Prophet SW would never do any thing or say anything that would go against Quran. That should be a belief of every Muslim. But we all know this was more applicable during the life time of the prophet. We all know the existing Ahadess was written 250 years after the death of Prophet and it is not humanly possible that whatever was written, preserved and researched will be a 100% accurate as said or done by prophet SW , no matter how scientific approach was taken while collecting Ahadess. So, the human error and human creation is what has made some Ahadess and Sunnah contradictory to the message of Allah which is Quran and the Character of prophet who was chosen by Allah as perfect role model to mankind.

I don’t like to argue but since you have confirmed the authenticity of Sunnah and Ahadees. I am giving you some samples from authentic books of Ahadess and would like you and others to judge yourself. And would like to ask you, is it still right to follow those books and seeks guidance from them or follow AlQuran the book of Allah and only Sunnah which does not go against the fundamentals of Quran. Please read the following carefully without any prejudice and pre-assumption.
____________________________________________________________________________________

.
1. Sayings of the exalted prophet (Hadith)
2. Deeds of the exalted prophet (Sunnah)
But, both of these often merge together. See for yourself a very few of the "most authentic" deeds (SUNNAH) of the prophet (S). Do they contradict the Qur'an or not? Furthermore, do they insult RAHMALLIL'AALAMEEN or not? How about WA INNAKA LA'ALAA KHULUQIN 'AZEEM (And, verily you - O Prophet - are statinoned at the highest order of human conduct. - Al-Qur'an)
This presentation leaves no room for argument, therefore, I will not enter into one.
Wrongs from the “Right” Bukhari
Most of the references given here belong to Bukhari published by Madina Publishing Company, Karachi, 1982, Printer Hamid & Co. The translator is “Maulana” Abdul Hakim Khan Shahjahan Puri.
At the outset, please know that a great scholar of Islam, Ubaidullah Sindhi concedes, "I cannot teach Bukhari hadith to any youngster, or to a non-Muslim because of shame" (Preface to Ilham-ur-Rahman). Let’s explore why he said this…

( Deleted)

Assalamu Alaykum,

What you say is very wrong and I hope that you are guided and that Allah gives your mind some expansion to see the Truth in this issue. Hadith were not Written 250 years after the Prophet :saw:, as we know they were written and memorised at the time of the Prophet :saw: by his Sahaba..... They were put into hadith collections later. There is no problem in this.

I am not in anyway trying to deny the Sunnah.

That is exactly what you did, furthermore you ridiculed the Hadith.

Your ideas are both misleading and evil.

The truth with regards to hadith is in the post above, in Mu2mins post. This is the way that the Sahaba, the pious predecessors and Ulema of the past thought. Please, after all the advice given above, if you are still sticking to your deviant ideas do not come back to reply with them or to make others confused with your UnIslamic nonsense.

May Allah help us all to the Sirat al mustaqeem, the Straight Path.

wasalam.
 
N

norul

Guest
Assalamu Alaykum,

What you say is very wrong and I hope that you are guided and that Allah gives your mind some expansion to see the Truth in this issue. Hadith were not Written 250 years after the Prophet :saw:, as we know they were written and memorised at the time of the Prophet :saw: by his Sahaba..... They were put into hadith collections later. There is no problem in this.



That is exactly what you did, furthermore you ridiculed the Hadith.

Your ideas are both misleading and evil.

The truth with regards to hadith is in the post above, in Mu2mins post. This is the way that the Sahaba, the pious predecessors and Ulema of the past thought. Please, after all the advice given above, if you are still sticking to your deviant ideas do not come back to reply with them or to make others confused with your UnIslamic nonsense.

May Allah help us all to the Sirat al mustaqeem, the Straight Path.

wasalam.

Asslamu Alaikum WRWB,

You have totally misunderstood me and the issue. So, as usual you have displayed an attitude one can expect from those who are afraid of truth. Speaking of truth, I never said in my post that I don't believe in Sunah or Ahadees. If you simplify my statement, What I said was, anything that goes against the principles of Quran can not be an act or a saying of prophet SW or His family or his companions, but corruption and fabrication on the part of those who wrote and approve such Ahadeeth. A sample of that fabricated Ahadees from Sahi Bukhari,is nothing but an insult to our prophet. Have you shown the best form of intelligent debate by deleting the part of my post which included a sample of insult in the form Ahaadees from Sahi Bukhari. Instead of debating the validity and authenticity of these ahadeeth with rationale and proved me wrong , cleared my doubts and help me as a misguided brother, you rather have chosen to deleted that part of my post to avoid the debate, so that other members don't get to know the Bukhari Sharief, so well. By deleting you have made my doubts stronger on the authencity of Such ahadees and Sunnah and my belief even firm for those who have challenged the traditional clergy on the authencity of Ahadees to be put at the level of Quran.

You have not given truth a chance to come out. But then how you expect me and those who think like me to have a blind faith on our scholars and Imams and take their word just like a word of Allah. How is that possible? Allah tells us in the Quran to use our commonsense and rationale to make a distinction while making a decision between right and wrong using the Quran and Sunnah, as a guide line and never follow any thing blindly.

Quran has not divided the Islam and this Umah but the controversies and contradiction within Ahadees and Sunnah . Putting Ahaadees at the level of Quran inspite that it is not the word of Allah, inspite that it stands on no divine rationale but a humanly advice, no wonder we Muslims are failing miserably everywhere, from east to west and north to south.
Whenever, someone challenges godliness in the practice of Some Muslims or in the works of some Ulma-e- Islam, he gets labeled as a colonial agent or an evil. As if all our Imams and scholars were also chosen prophets who couldn't be wrong.

If your condition to be a participant of this forum is not to question the common belief but follow it blindly then I would rather close my eyes and follow nothing.
 

samiha

---------
Staff member
Certain people are so wrapped in their own opinion that they don't read what has been written in responce to their question.

If you deny the narrators of Hadith of which Bukhari is MOST strict MOST sound then you deny Qur'aan!!! Since essentially they are the same people.
Astaghfirullah!!!!!


Very dangerous very hypocritical!!

May Allah help you.
 
N

norul

Guest
:salam2:
I know it's not the same thing... but read this.

Summary of Hadith Rejecters' Claims

1. A) We, Quranists, do not make a distinction between obeying Allah and obeying His Messenger, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam. Anyone who obeys the Qur'an has no other option but to obey the Messenger, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, too. Had we been living with him, we would have no hesitation in blindly following his orders. We do make a distinction but that is between Allah and Hadith collectors like Bukhari, Muslim, Nassai, Ibn Majah, Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud. We accept Allah's Word that He has protected the Quran from corruption, but why should we accept the words of these hadith collectors? Are they as infallible as Allah?

1. B) Qur'an is sufficient and does not need any further explanation.

2. Hadith is the same as the gospels of Christianity. Indeed the time span between death of Messenger Muhammad, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, and the compilation of Sahihs was almost the same as that between the departure of Jesus, Alayhis salam, and compilation of the Bible. How can Muslims reject one but accept the other?

3. Dr. Maurice Bucaille finds that Saheeh is as unscientific as the Bible.

4. The Messenger, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, may have elaborated on items like mode of salah. Such hadith is probably from the Messenger, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, and should be obeyed. But what about the hadith that contradict the Qur'an.

5. The root cause of Muslim decay is their reverence for the hadith.

6. Allah has protected only the Qur'an -- not Islam -- from corruption.

7. Allah expects from His slaves exclusive servitude. When Sunnis talk of Quran and Sunnah, the Qur'an is undermined for its exclusivity is lost.


---------------------------------------------------------------------

"If anyone disobeys Allah and His Messenger he is indeed on a clearly wrong path." [Al-Ahzab, 33:36]
"He that obeys Allah and His Messenger has already attained the great victory." [Al-Ahzab, 33:71].


For the past fourteen centuries Qur'an and Sunnah have been the twin undisputed sources of Guidance for Muslims. In every generation, the Muslims devoted the best of their minds and talents to their study. They learned both the words and meanings of the Qur'an through the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, and made an unprecedented effort in preserving them for the next generation. The result: The development of the marvelous -- and unparalleled -- science of hadith, one of the brightest aspects of Muslim history.

What does it mean to believe in a Prophet except to pledge to follow him? And so the teachings of the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, have always guided this Ummah. No body, in his right mind, could or did question this practice. Then something happened. During the colonial period, when most of the Muslim world came under the subjugation of the West, some "scholars" arose in places like Egypt (Taha Hussein), India (Abdullah Chakralawi and Ghulam Ahmed Pervaiz), and Turkey (Zia Gogelup), who began questioning the authenticity and relevance of hadith. It was not that some genius had found flaws in the hadith study that had eluded the entire ummah for thirteen centuries. It was simply that the pressures from the dominant Western civilization to conform were too strong for them to withstand. They buckled. Prophetic teachings and life example -- Hadith -- was the obstacle in this process and so it became the target.

Another factor helped them. Today most Muslims, including the vast majority of the western-educated Muslims, have meager knowledge of hadith, having spent no time in studying even the fundamentals of this vast subject. How many know the difference between Sahih and Hasan, or between Maudau and Dhaif? The certification process used in hadith transmission? Names of any hadith book produced in the first century of Hijrah, or the number of such books? A majority probably would not be able to name even the six principal hadith books (Sihah Sitta) or know anything about the history of their compilation. Obviously such atmosphere provides a fertile ground for sowing suspicions and doubts.

They call themselves as ahle-Qur'an or Quranists. This is misleading. For their distinction is not in affirming the Qur'an, but in rejecting the Hadith. The ideas of munkareen-e-hadith evolve into three mutually contradictory strains. The first holds that the job of the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, was only to deliver the Qur'an. We are to follow only the Qur'an and nothing else, as were the Companions. Further, hadith is not needed to understand the Qur'an, which is sufficient for providing guidance. The second group holds that the Companions were required to follow the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, but we are not. The third holds that, in theory, we also have to follow the hadith but we did not receive ahadith through authentic sources and therefore we have to reject all ahadith collections!

Internal contradictions are a hallmark of false ideologies. How can anyone hold the first position yet profess belief in Qur'an while it says: "And We have sent down unto You the Message so that you may explain clearly to men what is sent for them." [An-Nahal, 16:44]. And this: "Allah did confer a great favor on the Believers when He sent among them a Messenger from among themselves, rehearsing unto them the Signs (Verses) of Allah, purifying them, instructing them in Scripture, and teaching them Wisdom. While before that they were in manifest error." [A'ale Imran 3:164].

How can anyone hold the second position (limiting the Prophethood to 23 years) yet profess belief in Qur'an, while it says: "We did not send you except as Mercy for all creatures." [Al-Anbia, 21:107] And, "We have not sent you except as a Messenger to all mankind, giving them glad tidings and warning them against sin." [Saba, 34:28]

The third position seems to have avoided these obvious pitfalls, yet in reality it is no different. Consider statements 1, 4, and 7 in the summary of hadith rejecters' claims. So hadith undermines Qur'an's exclusivity, yet would have been followed blindly at the time of the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam. Ahadith cannot be followed because they are not reliable, yet can be followed for ritual prayers.


Salah And Hadith Rejecters

But we don't need a favor for hadith about salah (coming from the same books and the same narrators who are declared as unreliable). We need an answer to this question: If the Qur'an is the only authentic source of Guidance, why did it never explain how to offer salah, although it repeatedly talks about its importance, associating it with eternal success and failure? What would we think of a communication that repeatedly emphasizes a certain act but never explains how to perform it? There are only two possibilities. Either it is a terrible omission (and in that case it cannot be from God) or another source for the how-to information is provided and it is a terrible mistake for any recipient to ignore that.

(Recently some hadith rejecters have realized the difficulty of their position on salah. But they have made a claim that is even more ludicrous, namely that the Qur'an gives details on how to offer salah. "A careful reading of the Koran reveals that we are to get our Salaah from the Masjid-el Haraam [the continuous practice at Mecca since the time of Abraham]," says one proponent, "specifically the 'place of Abraham (moqaam e Ibraheem).'" Let us leave aside all the practical questions about such a fluid answer. Whose Salah? When? Are we to follow anyone and everyone we find praying at Muqame Ibrahim? How are those offering salah there are to determine proper way of offering Salah? How do you resolve their differences? In his enthusiasm in proposing this innovative solution, this proponent even forgot that the Qur'an says the following about the salah of mushrikeen at the Masjid-el Haraam: "Their prayer at the House of Allah is nothing but whistling and clapping of hands. (Its only answer can be), 'Taste the chastisement because you blasphemed.'" [Al-Anfal 8:35] )


The Reliability of Resources

To accept one and reject the other source on the basis of reliability (statement #2) also defies reason, unless we received the Qur'an directly from Allah. But we have received both Qur'an and Hadith through the same channels. Same people transmitted this as the Word of Allah, that as the word of the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi was sallam. Even the verse claiming that Qur'an will be protected came to us through the same people. Through what logic can anyone declare that the channels are reliable for Qur'an and unreliable for Hadith? On the contrary the Quranic promise of protection must apply to Hadith as well for there is no point in protecting the words but not the meanings of the Qur'an.


Protection of Qur'an

To say that Allah promised to protect only Qur'an but not Islam (#6) is being as ridiculous as one can get. Let's ignore the obvious question regarding the point of this Heavenly act. The question is if Islam has been corrupted and its true teachings have been lost, how can anyone claim to be its follower? Moreover, Qur'an says "If anyone desires a religion other than Islam, never will it be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be in the ranks of those who have lost" [A'al-e-Imran, 3:85]. How are we to follow the religion acceptable to Allah if it was not to be protected?



Were Ahadith Written Down for the First Time in the Third Century of Hijra?

The above proves that ahadith must have been protected. Were they? The very existence of a huge library of hadith -- the only one of its kind among the religions of the world -- answers the question in the affirmative. To dismiss all that as later day fabrication (#1A, #2) requires lots of guts -- and equal parts ignorance. Were ahadith written down for the first time in the third century of Hijra? Not at all. Actually hadith recording and collection started at the time of the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam. Abd-Allah ibn Amr ibn al-'As, Radi-Allahu unhu, sought and was given the permission to write everything he heard from the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa Sallam, who said: "By the One in Whose Hands is my life! Whatever proceeds from here [pointing to his mouth] is the truth." He produced Sahifa Sadiqa, which contained more than six thousand ahadith. Anas ibn Malik, Radi-Allahu unhu, who spent ten years in Prophet's household, not only recorded the ahadith but also presented them to the Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, and got corrections. Abu Hurairah, Radi-Allahu unhu, had many volumes of his collections and even produced smaller compilations for his students. Prominent Hadith scholar Dr. Mustafa Azami has shown in his doctoral thesis that in the first century of Hijra many hundred booklets of hadith were in circulation. By the end of the second century, "by the most conservative estimate there were many thousands."

Of course most of these books do not exist today. They were simply absorbed into the encyclopedic collections that emerged in the third century. One manuscript from the first century was discovered in this century and published by Dr. Hamidullah. It is Sahifa Hammam ibn Munabbah, who was a disciple of Abu Hurairah, Radi-Allahu unhu. It contains 138 ahadith. Muhaddithin knew that the ahadith of this Sahifa had been absorbed into Musnad Ahmed and Muslim collections, which have been published continuously since their third century debut. After the discovery of the original manuscript it was naturally compared with the ahadith in Muslim and Musnad Ahmed that were thought to have come from that Sahifa. And what did they find? There was not an iota of difference between the two. Similarly Mussanaf of Abd al-Razzaq is extant and has been published. As has been Mu'ammar ibn Rashid's al-Jami. These recently discovered original manuscripts bear out the Sihah Sitta. The recent appearance of these original manuscripts should bring the most skeptical into the fold of believers.

Back to Top

Saheeh and the Gospels

Regarding comparison of Saheeh with Gospels (#2), let's listen to Dr. Hamidullah. "The compilation of the Gospels, their preservation and transmission from one generation to the other, has not taken place in the way which governed the books of Hadith... We do not know who wrote them, who translated them, and who transmitted them. How were they transferred from the original Aramaic to Greek? Did the scribes make arrangements for a faithful reproduction of the original? The four Gospels are mentioned, for the first time, three hundred years after Christ. Should we rely on such an unauthentic book in preference to that of Bukhari who prefaces every statement of two lines with three to nine references?"

Back to Top

The Comments of Dr. Maurice Bucaille

Dr. Maurice Bucaille earned the admiration of many Muslims because of his study of some scientific phenomena mentioned in the Qur'an and his testimony based on that study that Qur'an must be the Book of Allah. However he is not a hadith scholar and it is unfair to drag him into this discussion. His account of history of hadith compilation contains many errors, for example the claim that the first gathering of hadith was performed roughly forty years after Hijra or that no instructions were given regarding hadith collection. He questions about a dozen or so entries in Bukhari that he thinks deal with scientific matters. Even if all that criticism were valid, would it be sufficient ground to throw away the 9082 total entries (2602 unique ahadith) in Bukhari? He himself does not think so, for he writes: "The truth of hadith, from a religious point of view, is beyond question."

Back to Top

The Hadith Regarding the Sun

But even his criticism is of questionable value. Consider the hadith about the sun: "At sunset the sun prostrates itself underneath the Throne and takes permission to rise again, and it is permitted and then a time will come when it will be about to prostrate itself... it will seek permission to go on its course... it will be ordered to return whence it has come and so it will rise in the West." His criticism: "This implies the notion of a course the sun runs in relation to the Earth." Bucaille fails to understand the real message of this hadith. It was not meant to teach astronomy. Its clear message is that sun is a slave of Allah, moving always through His Will. The hadith brings out that message very powerfully so that even the most illiterate bedouin would understand it fully. Moreover Bucaille should know better than to criticize the implied notion of sun's rotation around earth. Even today the astronomers, when calculating the time of sunrise and sunset, use a mathematical model in which the sun revolves around the earth. If that is acceptable for scientific work as it makes calculations easier, why is it questionable, when it makes communication easier?

Also there are other ahadith which clearly demonstrate a scientific fact beyond the knowledge of the times but Bucaille has failed to take notice. For example the hadith about solar eclipse: "The sun and moon are two signs of Allah. They are not eclipsed on account of anyone's death or on account of anyone's birth." (Muslim, hadith #1966]. The eclipse had coincided with the death of Prophet's son. A false prophet would have tried to exploit the occasion. A fabricated hadith would require scientific knowledge that did not exist then.

The munkareen-e-hadith think that their beliefs are built on solid rock. Well, it is as solid as wax: The religion based on this idea can be fitted into any mold. For some hadith rejecters that was the motivation. For everyone, that is the inevitable result. But the good news is that their arguments are the same way. On the surface they appear to be solid. But faced with the light of truth, they melt away like wax.

Back to Top

Asslamu Alaikum WRWB,

I respect your commentary, but In brief I may say, you have not proved that sample from Bhukhari( which was deleted by the administrator) is my work. If you agree it is from Bhukhari then you have to clear my doubts that it does not contradict the character of the prophet SW and the principles of Quran. If you prove me that, I will follow every Ahadess written on earth. Otherwise repeating the same Mantra without giving any intelligent clarification will not going to solve this issue once for all. and let us not suspect the intention of the questioner but rather try to be honest in our answers.

Waslam
 

Abul Harith

Active Member
Staff member
1. The Article you posted was written by Quranites. They are not even Muslim.

2. Anyone who rejects Sound hadith is a Non Muslim.

Sahih al Bukhari has been around for over 1000 years. Imam Bukhari was imam al muslimeen in hadeeth. This took years of painstaking effort and work. The Imam followed a strict and scientific method in choosing the hadeeth with the best isnad. Go and read the biographies of the great scholars like Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Daud, Imam Ahmad, Imam Malik...to mention a few and educate yourself. Some deluded people and enemies of Islam have made futile attempts to discredit the hadeeth. But each time the ulama have defended the hadeeth in a scientific way.

You have just copied and pasted someone's speech and claim that it is throwing doubt upon the texts. This shows that you have no grounding in knowledge let alone any understanding of the science of hadeeth.

I advise you to read this simple introduction to the science of hadeeth:

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/scienceofhadith/atit.html

This is not the site to come and debate in a completely ignorant and unscholarly way. Please go and present your arguments to a scholar.

What you have brought is completely ridiculous, but this is not the site to discuss such issues. Turn to Islam is about explaining Islam to new Muslims.

This thread is closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top