How do we understand how to interpret the quran

[randome3889]

For instance ... who decided that the hadith was a good way to interpret the quran?
In my philosophy if the Quran is meant to be a timeless, universal book ... it should be self containing -- i.e it should be the only necessary component to read and fully understand islam.

I the individual should be able to pick it up read it and know what I need to do.
It seems pretty dumb to me that you would need 100s of scholars analyzing hadith for "clues" when it is all written right there ... WHO said that we need to analyze what the prophet did to understand the Quran? The prophet was great 1500 years later and copy it. It says in the Quran that this is the only book necessary ... so lets just read it and interpret it! Maybe it was MEANT to be reinterpreted in many different ways .. maybe there IS NO UNIVERSAL definition of Islam but rather it is a religion meant to be interpreted differently by people from different backgrounds and cultures.
Why does this never come up? Why does everyone assume there is exactly one "fiqh" one jurisprudence, one correct way of living an islamic life????? Why is everyone so conformist stating that "this is wrong ... that is wrong" then their only evidence is some hadith.

[chacha_jalebi]

you sound like a hadiths rejector, if you are good luck in the future :D

if not....

nothin stops us from pickin up the Quraan, and ponderin over the meanin, infact we are told to do that ponder over the meanins, and its pretty easy peezy what is written. for the more difficult stuff, that may need interpretin it has been done in the hadiths or you leave it to the scholars, for example, surah takwir, idaas shamsu kuwwiraat, one sahabi said kuwwirat means wrappin up, and others said foldin, so they both same, but its a explanation of what stuff means, so we need the hadiths to understand certain ayahs. like events for what ayah was revealed, what happen get me :D for the more harder surahs which are not so evident, you need explanations!! like the Quraan is complete, but in the Quraan we are told to follow what the messenger gives and follow the messenger, and in the messenger we have a perfect example so how do we find out bout the messenger, from HADITHS!

so if you do look at it proply, the hadiths go hand in hand with the Quraan,

[aamirsaab]

:sl:
I just use my common sense. It works pretty well. If that fails, then atleast I've scholars notes to look into. Since I don't know arabic well (I can read it, but canne understand it!) I tend to read the english translations. Fortunately I have two at home and they are quite useful. I used one in a refutation today actually.

[Brother_Mujahid]

Following the Messenger of Allah is a Must

here hope that link helps

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[chacha_jalebi]

also check this thread

http://www.islamicboard.com/miscella...ow-sunnah.html

[aamirsaab]

:sl:
Oh and btw, there's an ayat in the Qur'an actually telling you to follow the teachings and ways of the Prophet [pbuh] - so that's the evidence of following one fiqh. I'll post it here:

''Those who follow the apostle, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures),- in the law and the Gospel;- for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); He releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honour him, help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him,- it is they who will prosper."

[Qur'ân 7:157]

[Abdul Fattah]

Selam aleykum
As I am writing this post, it has become very lengthy, so I'll suggest a way for you to "short circuit" the debate so you won't have to reply to ever single line. It's very simple. Here is tafsir ibn kathir. Now what I suggest is, pick a verse from the Quran, any verse, whichever you'd like. And look up the explanation of Ibn Kathir. Then tell me, whether your had an alternative interpretation. If you can convince me that your interpretation is better, you'll have me proven wrong. If you cannot, then perhaps you should consider whether or not you're biting off more then you can chew, and whether you are really that capable of understanding the Qur'an without following the proper rules of tafsir.

Let me start by giving a copy pastes from The introduction of Tefsir ibn kathir. I will address your arguments after that.

All praise is due to Allah, Who started His Book by saying,

‘All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of all that exists. The Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. The Owner of the Day of Recompense’ (AI-Fatihah 1:2-4)

and Who began His creation with the Hamd (His praise and appreciation), by saying,

‘All praise and thanks be to Allah, Who created the heavens and the earth, and originated the darkness and the light; yet those who disbelieve hold others equal to their Lords’ (Al An`am 6:1),

and ended it with the Hamd, by saying, after mentioning the destination of the people of Paradise and the people of the Fire,

‘(and you will see the angels surrounding the Throne (of Allah), glorifying their Lord with praise. And judgement will be made between them (creatures) with the truth. And it will be said “All Praise and thanks be to Allah, the Lord of all that exists.’ (Az Zumar 39:75)

Similarly,

‘He is Allah, there is no illah except for Him, His is the praise in the beginning and in the end, His is the judgment and to Him you (all) return.’ (Al Qasas 28:70),

All thanks are due to Allah in the beginning and in the end the end, for what He has created and what He shall create. Allah is the One praised for all things, just as the praying person says, "O Allah, Yours is the praise, praise that fills the heavens, the earth and whatever You will after that." [1]

All the thanks are due to Allah Who sent His Messengers, whom He described as,

'Say, "What thing is greatest in testimony?" Say, "Allāh is witness between me and you. And this Qur’ān was revealed to me that I may warn you thereby and whomever it reaches. Do you [truly] testify that with Allāh there are other deities?" Say, "I will not testify [with you]." Say, "Indeed, He is but one God, and indeed, I am free of what you associate [with Him].' (An-Nisa 4:165)

And ended them with the unlettered, Arabian, Makkan Prophet who guides to the clear straight path. Allah sent the Prophet Muhammad Peace be upon him to all of His creation - the Jinns and mankind - from the time that his prophet hood began until the commencement of the Last Hour. Allah said,

‘Say (O Muhammad ) :"O mankind! Verily, I am the Messenger sent to you all by Allah, the One to Whom the dominion of the heavens and the earth belongs. There is no god (worthy of worship) but He. It is He Who gives life and causes death. So believe in Allah and His Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, who believes in Allah and His Words, and follow him so that you may be guided.’ (Al-A`raf 7:158) and,

‘That by it, I may warn you and whoever it reaches}’ (Al *An`am 6:19).

Therefore, whether one is an Arab or non-Arab, black or red, human or Jinn's, whoever this Quran is conveyed to, it is a warning for them all. This is why Allah said,

'So is one who [stands] upon a clear evidence from his Lord [like the aforementioned]? And a witness from Him follows it, and before it was the Scripture of Moses to lead and as mercy. Those [believers in the former revelations] believe in the Qur’an. But whoever disbelieves in it from the [various] factions – the Fire is his promised destination. So be not in doubt about it. Indeed, it is the truth from your Lord, but most of the people do not believe.’ (Hud 11: 17)

Therefore, whoever disbelieves in the Qur'an among those whom we mentioned, then, according to Allah, the Fire will be then their destination. Allah said,

Then leave Me alone with those who deny this narration (the Ow-'an).

‘We shall gradually punish them from where they perceive not’. (Nun 68:44).

The Messenger of Allah Peace be upon him said, I was sent not to the white and red. Mujahid commented, "Meaning, mankind and the Jinns." [1]

Hence, Muhammad Peace be upon him is the Messenger to all creation, mankind and Jinn, conveying what Allah revealed to him in the Glorious Book that,

‘Falsehood cannot come to it from before it or behind it, (it is) sent down by the Wise, Worthy of all praise.’ (Fussilat 41:42)

Therefore, the scholars are required to elaborate upon the meanings of Allah's Speech and to convey these meanings, providing they seek them from their proper resources. The scholars are required to learn and convey these meanings, just as Allah said,

'And [mention, O Muhammad], when Allah took a covenant from those who were given the Scripture, [saying], "You must make it clear to the people and not conceal it." But they threw it away behind their backs and exchanged it for a small price. And wretched is that which they purchased.’ (Al Imran 3:187) and, Ahmad 5:145.

‘Verily, those who purchase a small gain at the cost of Allah's covenant and their oaths, they shall have no portion in the Hereafter (Paradise). Neither will Allah speak to them nor look at them on the Day of Resurrection, nor will He purify them, and they shall have a painful torment}’ (Al Imran 3:77).

Allah criticized the People of the Scriptures - Jews and Christians - who came before us, for ignoring Allah's Book that was revealed to them, and for acquiring and indulging in the affairs of this life, all the while being distracted from what they were commanded, that is, adhering to Allah's Book.

We Muslims are thus required to refrain from doing what Allah criticized the People of the Scriptures for, and to heed what He commanded us; learning and comprehending the Book of Allah, revealed to us, and to convey all that is in it. Allah said,

‘Has not the time come for the hearts of those who believe (in the Oneness of Allah - Islamic Monotheism) to be affected by Allah's Reminder (this Qur'an), and that which has been revealed of the truth, lest they become as those who received the Scripture before, and the term was prolonged for them and so their hearts were hardened? And many of them were Fasiqun (the rebellious, the disobedient to Allah) Know that Allah gives life to the earth after its death! Indeed We have made clear the Ayat to you, if you but understand}’ (Al Hadid 57:16-17).

Hence, Allah's mentioning this Ayah (57:17) after the Ayah that preceded it, alerts us to the fact that just as He brings life to the earth after it has died, He also softens the hearts with faith and guidance after they become hard because of committing sins and errors. We ask Allah to grant us this good end, He is Most Kind, Most Generous.

[1] Al-Bukhari, Muslim and others have recorded Hadiths mentioning this supplication.

After this introduction he continues to adress some of the issues that you brought up:

The source of Tafsir

If someone asks about the best methods of Tafsir, we reply that the best method is to explain the Qur'an with the Qur'an itself. What is mentioned in general terms in one place in the Qur'an, is usually explained in another place. When one does not find this easily, he should look to the Sunnah because its purpose is to explain the Qur'an and elaborate upon its meanings. Allah said,

‘Surely, We have sent down to you (O Muhammad SAW) [1] the Book (this Quran) in truth that you might judge between men by that which Allah has shown you, so be not a pleader for the treacherous.’ (An Nisa 4:105)

‘And We have also sent down unto you (O Muhammad SAW) the reminder and the advice (the Quran), that you may explain clearly to men what is sent down to them, and that they may give thought.’ (An Nahl 16:44) and,

‘This is why the Messenger of Allah said,
‘The Sunnah was a revelation from Allah just as the Qur'an, although it is not recited as the Qur'an is recited.’

So one seeks the Tafsir of the Qur'an with the Qur'an itself and with the Sunnah. If one cannot find the Tafsir in the Qur'an or Sunnah, he should refer to the statements of the Companions, who were the most knowledgeable of Tafsir, for they witnessed the situations and incidents that we did not witness. They also had the deepest comprehension, the most correct knowledge, and the most righteous works. Especially the scholars and leaders among them, such as the Four Rightly Guided Khalifahs and righteous Imams, and `Abdullah bin Mas`ud, may Allah be pleased with them all. Imam Abu Ja'far bin Jarir At-Tabari narrated that 'Abdullah bin Mas`ud said,

"By He other than Whom there is no God, no Ayah in the Book of Allah was revealed but I have knowledge about whom and where it was revealed. Verily, if I know of a person who has more knowledge than me in the Book of Allah that the animals can reach (by travelling on them), I will travel to meet him."

Also, among the scholars of the Companions is the great scholar, the sea of knowledge, 'Abdullah bin `Abbas, the cousin of the Messenger of Allah, and the explainer of the Qur'an, as a result of the blessing of the supplication of the Messenger of Allah peace be upon him. The Prophet invoked Allah for the benefit of Ibn `Abbas,

(O Allah! Teach him Fiqh in the religion and interpretation.) [3]

Further, Ibn Jarir At-Tabari reported that `Abdullah bin Mas`ud said, "Yes, Ibn 'Abbas is the interpreter of the Qur'an." This Hadith has an authentic chain of narrators. [4] Ibn Mas`ud died in the thirty-second years of Hijrah and 'Abdullah bin `Abbas lived for thirty-six years after that. Hence, what do you think about the knowledge that Ibn 'Abbas collected after Ibn Mas`ud? Al-A'mash said that Abu Wa'il said, "Ali once appointed 'Abdullah bin `Abbas to lead the Haj season. Ibn 'Abbas gave a speech to the people in which he read and explained Surat Al* Baqarah (according to another narration, Surat An-Nur) in such a way, that if the Romans, Turks and the Daylam heard him, they would have embraced Islam." [5]

This is why the majority of the knowledge Ismail bin `Abdur* Rahman As-Suddi Al-Kabir collected in his Tafsir is from these two men, Ibn Mas`ud and Ibn `Abbas. Yet, he sometimes mentions what they narrated of the Israelite accounts that the Messenger of Allah has allowed when he said,

‘Convey on my behalf, even if it is one Ayah (sentence), and narrate from the Children of Israel, as there is no sin in this. And whoever intentionally lies on me, let him assume his assured seat in the Fire.’

This Hadith from 'Abdullah bin Amr was collected by Al-*Bukhari (Fath Al-Bari 6:572). This is why when `Abdullah bin 'Amr had possession of two books from the People of the Scripture on the Day (battle) of the Yarmuk, he used to narrate what was in- them, because of what he understood of the Hadith that allowed this practice.

Israelite Accounts and Tales

Yet, the Israelite accounts and stories should only be used Not supporting evidence, not as evidence themselves. There are three types of these accounts and tales; a kind that we are `tire is authentic because we have in our religion something that testifies to its truth. The second type is what we know to be false based on what we have. The third is of neither type. Hence, we neither affirm nor deny this type, and we are allowed to narrate it, because of the Hadith that we mentioned. The majority of these are of no religious benefit. 'In instance, an Israelite tale mentions the names and number of the people of the Cave (Al-Kahj) and the color of their dog. They also include the type of tree Moses' staff was made of, the kind of the birds Ibrahim brought back to life by Allah's leave, the part of the cow the dead Israelite was struck with to resurrect him, and the kind of tree that Allah spoke to Moses through. Such examples of things that Allah kept unexplained in the Qur'an do not carry any daily or religious significance for responsible adults.

Tafsir of the Tabi`in

When unable to find the Tafsir in the Qur'an, the Sunnah or with the Companions, the scholars then look to the Tafsir of the Tabi`in, (second generation of Islam) such as Mujahid bin Jabr, who was a wonder himself in Tafsir. Muhammad bin Ishaq narrated that Abban bin Salih said that Mujahid said, "I reviewed the Mushaf with Ibn `Abbas thrice from beginning to end asking him about each and every Ayah in it." Also, Ibn Jarir narrated that Ibn Abi Mulaykah said, "I saw Mujahid asking Ibn `Abbas about the Tafsir of the Quran while he was holding his tablets (papers). Ibn 'Abbas would say to him, Write,' until Mujahid asked him about the entire Tafstr." This is why Sufyan Ath-Thawri said, "If the Tafsir reaches you from Mujahid, then it is sufficient for you." [5]

The scholars of Tafsir also include Sa`id bin Jubayr, 'Ikrimah-the freed servant of Ibn 'Abbas, 'Ata' bin Abi Rabah, Al-Hasan Al-Basri, Masruq bin Al-Ajda`, Sa'Id bin Al*Musayyib, Abu Al-`Aliyah, Ar-Rabi` bin Anas, Qatadah, Ad *Dahhak bin Muzahim and other scholars among the Tabi`in and the following generations.

The statements of these Imams should be mentioned and referred to for Tafsir. We should mention here that these scholars use a variety of meanings for some words, leading those who do not have enough knowledge to think that they conflict, and thus, they consider them opposing statements. This is not correct, for some of these scholars would use variations of the same expressions and some of them would use the precise terms.

These meanings are all the same in the majority of instances, and those who have sound comprehension see this, and Allah is the One Who guides and directs to success.

Tafsir by mere Opinion

It is prohibited to indulge in Tafsir by mere opinion. Muhammad bin Jarir reported that Ibn 'Abbas said that the Prophet Peace be upon him said,

(For this, and the previous quotes, see At-Tabari 1:90-91)

[Whoever explains the Qur'an with his opinion or with what he has no knowledge of, then let him assume his seat in the Fire.]

At-Tirmidhi, An-Nasa'i and Abu Dawud also recorded this Hadith. At-Tirmidhi said, "Hasan".

Explaining what One has Knowledge of, Silence otherwise

The Salaf used to refrain from explaining what they had no knowledge of. For instance, Ibn Jarir (At-Tabari) reported that Abu Ma'mar said that Abu Bakr As-Siddiq said, " Which land will carry me and which heaven will shade me if I said about Allah's Book that which I have no knowledge of? " [6]

Ibn Jarir also reported that Anas narrated that 'Umar bin Al-Khattab read the Ayah,~{And fruits and Abba (herbage, etc.)

while standing on the Minbar. He then said, " We know the fruit, so what is the Abba?" He then said, "O 'Umar! This is exaggeration." [7]

This statement means that 'Umar briefly wanted to know the exact nature of the Abba, for it was evident - to him - that it is a plant that grows on earth, just as Allah said,

‘And We cause therein the grain to grow. And grapes and clover plants’ (i.e. green fodder for the cattle) (80:27-28).

Ibn Jarir also recorded that Ibn Abi Mulaykah said that Ibn 'Abbas was asked about an Ayah, "That if any of you is asked about, he will indulge in its Tafsir." without hesitation Ibn 'Abbas refused to say anything about it (meaning with his opinion). This narration has an authentic chain of narrators. He also narrated that Ibn Abi Mulaykah said, "A man asked Ibn 'Abbas about, One Day, the space whereof is a thousand years.

Ibn 'Abbas asked him, What is, Day the measure whereof is fifty thousand years~?'

The man said, `I only asked you to tell me.' Ibn 'Abbas said, They are two Days that Allah has mentioned in His Book and He has better knowledge of them.' He disliked commenting on the Book of Allah when he had no knowledge about it."

Al-Layth narrated that Yahya bin Sa`id said that Said bin Al-Musayyib used to talk about what he knows of the Qur'an (At-Tabari 1:86). Also, Ayyub, Ibn 'Awn and Hisham Ad*Dastuwa i narrated that Muhammad bin Sirin said, "I asked 'Ubaydah (meaning, As-Salmani ) about an Ayah of the Qur'an and he said,

"Those who had knowledge about the circumstances surrounding revelation of the Qur'an have perished. So fear Allah and seek the right way."

Ash-Sha`bi narrated that Masruq said, "Avoid Tafszr, because it is narration related to Allah." [8]

These authentic narrations from the Companions and the Imams of the Salaf (righteous ancestors) testify to their hesitation to indulge in the Tafsir of what they have no knowledge of. As for those who speak about what they have linguistic and religious knowledge of, then there is no sin in this case. Hence, the scholars and the Imams, including the ones we mentioned, issued statements of Tafsir and spoke about what they had knowledge of, but avoided what they had no knowledge of.

Refraining from indulging in what one has no knowledge of is required of everyone, just as everyone is required to convey the knowledge that they have when they are asked. Allah said,

‘To make it known and clear to mankind, and not to hide it’ (3:187);

Also, a Hadith narrated through several chains of narrators says, [9]
(Whoever is asked about knowledge that he knows but hid it, will be tied with a muzzle made of fire on the Day of Resurrection.)

References:
[1] was given the Qur'an and its equal with it)), in reference to the Sunnah.
[2] Ahmad 4:131
[3] Fath Al-Bari 1:205.
[4] At-Tabari 1:90.
[5] At-Tabari 1:81.
[6] At-Tabari 1:78.
[7] At-Tabari 24:229.
[8] At Tabari 1:86, for these quotes.
[9] Ahmad, At-Tirmidhi, and others.

I hope this somewhat answers your questions already. But allow me to reply somewhat more directly to your arguments. First of all, as already suggested by Ibn Kathir, tafsir is a very serious work, not to be taken lightly. Allah subhana wa ta'ala warns us with the following verse:

YUSUFALI: He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book: In it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book: others are allegorical. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord:" and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.
PICKTHAL: He it is Who hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture wherein are clear revelations - they are the substance of the Book - and others (which are) allegorical. But those in whose hearts is doubt pursue, forsooth, that which is allegorical seeking (to cause) dissension by seeking to explain it. None knoweth its explanation save Allah. And those who are of sound instruction say: We believe therein; the whole is from our Lord; but only men of understanding really heed.
SHAKIR: He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding. (3:7)
A warning not to take lightly.

For instance ... who decided that the hadith was a good way to interpret the quran?

As illustrated in the copy paste from Ibn kathir, it's the Qur'an itself that advices us to do such.

In my philosophy if the Quran is meant to be a timeless, universal book ... it should be self containing -- i.e it should be the only necessary component to read and fully understand islam.

You're jumping to conclusions. Just because it's timeless doesn't mean that it's clear enough for everyone to understand at face value. those are two separate things that don't necessarily go along. Take for example the verse telling us:
And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith. (2:191)
It's not knowing the context of such verses that brought such a negative light over Islam in the first place! It's not unimaginable that many people would commit acts of terrorism when they don't properly understand such verses, so the context in which they were revealed is very much crucial! And Everyone having his own interpretation is definitely not an option we should encourage.

I the individual should be able to pick it up read it and know what I need to do.

Well I don't know whether you are smart. I cannot and may not judge you. And in a way, that's not really relevant to your argument. However the truth is, a lot of people in this world are not smart. And even smart people, often make mistakes. So again I repeat the importance of scholars pointing the general population in the right direction. Afterall, you wouldn't get medical advice from your plumber, or ask your butcher to draw blueprints for building a house. Scholars are scholars because they have dedicated much time of their lives to better understanding this. Of course everyone can make mistakes. But what vanity makes you assume that your amateuristic (no offense intended) interpretation would be so much better then theirs, who follows strict guidelines and logic?

It seems pretty dumb to me that you would need 100s of scholars analyzing hadith for "clues" when it is all written right there ... WHO said that we need to analyze what the prophet did to understand the Quran?

Let me give you a concrete example, how would you interpret:
O Prophet! Why holdest thou to be forbidden that which Allah has made lawful to thee? Thou seekest to please thy consorts. But Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. (66:1)
(In case you are curious, find ibn kathir's tafsir here.)
I think this illustrates quite nicely how hadeeth can give more insight to verses that nobody would ever understand at face value.

The prophet was great 1500 years later and copy it. It says in the Quran that this is the only book necessary ... so lets just read it and interpret it!

The Qur'an tells un everything indeed, but only in the sense that it lines out the major issues, and gives a general idea. The Qur'an however, does not always give us details. For example, the Qur'an dictates us to pray 5 times a day, but it doesn't tell us exactly how to pray. To find out which is the best way, we are forced to rely on hadeeth. Even if there's a chance that eventually we'll mistakingly accept a false hadeeth. Remember that there's are strict rules when dealing with hadeeth. So is there a guarantee that we'll do everything right? No, but at least we'll get as close as possible. As for your suggestion, if we leave people to interpret it as they want, it would lead to a lot of corruption and people following their preference rather then their moral.

Maybe it was MEANT to be reinterpreted in many different ways .. maybe there IS NO UNIVERSAL definition of Islam but rather it is a religion meant to be interpreted differently by people from different backgrounds and cultures.

Maybe, maybe not. Again, I refer to the verse:
He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding. (3:7)
Also the underlying suggestion, that there are several forms of Islam acceptable is even more dangerous. Allah subhana wa ta'ala has spread Islam as a mercy for mankind. His rules are not only a covenant, but they are also a breath of fresh air trying to make our lives easier! Islam is perfection in the sense that it is the most optimal way of life. To suggest that there is more then one optimal form is of course odd. Optimal by definition is the best you can get. If you alter that, you'll always end up worse. Your suggestion opens the door to even more fractions and divisions. And if history has thought us anything it's that dividing up the ummah is a bad idea.

Why does this never come up? Why does everyone assume there is exactly one "fiqh" one jurisprudence, one correct way of living an islamic life????? Why is everyone so conformist stating that "this is wrong ... that is wrong" then their only evidence is some hadith.

Well you do understand that the science of tafsir are different from the science of fiqh? They are two completely different fields of knowledge that follow different rules and guidelines. Of course part of them overlaps, but that doesn't mean you should reach conclusions about one, based on your feelings of the other.

Selam aleykum

[alcurad]

firs of all , dubbing someone as hadith rejector is not the best way to answer a genuine question sis jilbay, it's usually used by people who are afraid of confronting beliefs they held since childhood.


the hadith is simply an application of the qur'an at the prophet's time, also the people who transmitted the ahadith tend to interpret the qur'an & hadith in literary terms which isnt th best way of tafsir.
Islam doesn't have men of religion like other religions rather we have scholars who's opinions on many issues is as good as anyone's. he only reason the scholars are given a voice louder than anyone's is because they have more knowledge in some areas,still that's no reason to view their words as the qur'an itself.
Ali bin Abi Talib once said: aluqr'an hammalu aojuh, which means that the qur'an carries many faces or in other words supportmany interprettions.



the prophet tried by all means , heavenly(qur'an, hadeeth) or earthly(war, emissaries,etc) to unite the arabic tribes, but the unity was fragile since it was the first time they were united politically,also as evidenced the the so caled ridda wars right after the prophets death ,which involved large tribes that were resentful for having lost power and far enough from central authority (Medina) to rebel. thus at that time, ie. the prophet's and the people who gained authority after him preserving that unity by almost all means was a given. thus distinction betwen citizens according to belief and other such ractices werent meant to be sacred law (shari'ah) but rather as means of preserving the newborn unity in the arabian peninsula.



the problem with the so called Islamic world is largely due to the corrupt religion it has, not Islam but what beliefs and practices that are considered part of slam. thus the questions at the beginning of this thread are crucial to for reform if there is any to be done. the tragedy began right after the prophet's death, the revered 'sahaba' fought several battles and spilled each others' blood a mere three decades after the prophet's passing away. the result of that fighting is important but the reasons for it are always forgotten.



and therein lies the problem, thus we need to ask and not be afraid, the qur'an is the sacred words of Allah, the creator but the ahadeeth are the words and actions of a human being who no matter how highly regarded was liable to make mistakes. in Islam the prophet doesn't make mistakes in revealing and transmitting the words of Allah , but in actions and decisions that normal humans make.



in his time the prophet was statesman, judge, military leader and every other high position of authority there was. this was natural since along with his religious authority he was also the political leader, which was normal at the times. but that authority was only for him and him alone, after him no one was to hold all high positions at once.



unfortunately, the so called scholars of Islam assume or try to assume the authority the prophet had by marking themselves as the only ones allowed to interpret the ahadeeth.

[Brother_Mujahid]

the qur'an is the sacred words of Allah, the creator but the ahadeeth are the words and actions of a human being who no matter how highly regarded was liable to make mistakes.

So what you trying to say theres something deficient in the sunnah and hence the religion.

you seem confused.

“This day those who disbelieve despair about your religion: so dread them not but rather dread Me. This day I have perfected your religion for you, completed My favor towards you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.”(Al-Ma’idah 5:3)

he tragedy began right after the prophet's death, the revered 'sahaba' fought several battles and spilled each others' blood a mere three decades after the prophet's passing away.

.... the prophet saw said:

"Do not revile my companions. By (Allah) in Whose Hand my soul is!, if any one of you spends gold (piled up) like (mount) 'Uhud it will not equal a pint of any one of them, nor its half." (al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu-Dawud, at-Tirmidhi Ibn Majah, Ibn Hanbal)

unfortunately, the so called scholars of Islam assume or try to assume the authority the prophet had by marking themselves as the only ones allowed to interpret the ahadeeth.

the scholars are the inheritors of prophethood. they don't just speak on a matter without knowledge.

[Abdul Fattah]

Selam aleykum

So what you trying to say theres something deficient in the sunnah and hence the religion.
you seem confused.
“This day those who disbelieve despair about your religion: so dread them not but rather dread Me. This day I have perfected your religion for you, completed My favor towards you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.”(Al-Ma’idah 5:3)

Well, Islam itself is perfect, but the interpretations people give is not. Who is to say that this or that scholar hasn't made a single mistake and all his writings and fatawaa are pure Islamic.
BTW brother Alcurad,
Do you know about the edit button? ^_^

[Brother_Mujahid]

Selam aleykum

Well, Islam itself is perfect, but the interpretations people give is not. Who is to say that this or that scholar hasn't made a single mistake and all his writings and fatawaa are pure Islamic.

does that give the right to people without knowledge to

1) talk ill and disrespect scholars
2) form your own interpretation without knowledge

[Abdul Fattah]

does that give the right to people without knowledge to

1) talk ill and disrespect scholars
2) form your own interpretation without knowledge

No of course it doesn't. And I've said so in my first post. I'm just saying your counterargument against Alcurad was flawed. Doesn't mean I share his opinion ^_^

[randome3889]

You stated that there is only one "optimal" path ... clearly this is not true from an economic or mathematical perspective ... There are often many optimal paths in reality... i.e equally valid paths.
Furthermore you must understand that optimal is based on different situations... what may be optimal for one culture may be impossible to conform to in another culture ... I haven't read the whole post yet but I will as soon as get back

[alcurad]

sorry Abdul fattah, actually I didn't know.
to continue, the prophet's application of the qur'an is not to be taken as absolute law, but rather as a guide light. so for example the political system at his time would certainly not be applicable at our times in most countries. the stake people make when they equate he hadeeth with the qur'an is that they confuse what is to be held unchangeable like the principle of tawheed or unity of Allah or the way the prayers are to be established, with what is changeable like the political and economic methods.

[Woodrow]

Although the Qur'an is the direct word of Allaah(swt) and as such is complete and perfect, we humans are not. This is where the need and wisdom of the Ahadith comes into focus, to help us understand the Qur'an as we change as people.


The Qur'an is unchangable and to keep it unchangable, not only in words but also in conantations we have the Ahadith. The Ahadith gives us examples of what was done and how people acted towards specific surah's and ayyats. This is a visible means of being able to see how the Prophet(PBUH) understood the Qur'an. We can not expect ourselves to understand the Qur'an better than the Prophet(PBUH), however the Ahadith give us a means to approach that level.

For true continuity of the essense and understanding of Islam, we need the Ahadith.

[Keltoi]

So Muslims find the hadith helpful in applicating Qu'ranic lessons into modern situations?

[Woodrow]

So Muslims find the hadith helpful in applicating Qu'ranic lessons into modern situations?

In my opinion and experience I believe so. An analogy, that you might understand as a Christian.

THIS IS AN ANALOGY, NOT A FACT NOR PRESENTED AS FACTUAL

Think in terms of the OT as being the Qur'an and the 4 Gospels as being the Ahadith.

[Abdul Fattah]

You stated that there is only one "optimal" path ... clearly this is not true from an economic or mathematical perspective ... There are often many optimal paths in reality... i.e equally valid paths.

There is always only one optimal path. Their might be several paths, but only one of them can be optimal. Of course I grant that people might disagree on which of them actually is optimal, depending on which criteria they use to measure whether or not it is optimal. Nevertheless that doesn't change the fact that only one is the most optimal (whatever the criteria be). And yes, this is even true for economy or math. There also we always find there is only one optimal.

Furthermore you must understand that optimal is based on different situations... what may be optimal for one culture may be impossible to conform to in another culture ... I haven't read the whole post yet but I will as soon as get back

No this isn't true here, because Islam is beyond culture. For example let's take a simple rule. Let's say a religion has a rule saying: "It's forbidden to eat pork". Now lets say there are two situations, situation (A) where there is plenty of food, and situation (B) where there's only pork available to survive. You could say that in situation (A) the rule is the most optimal approach for your health, but in situation (B) it is not the most optimal rule. However, as I said, Islam is beyond this and has a build-in dynamic, so that rules are the most optimal in every situation. The rule in Islam about pork is: "It's forbidden to eat pork unless when there is a shortage of food." this means that one and the same rule with its intrinsic dynamics is applicable and most optimal both in situation (A) and (B). In other words what I'm illustrating with this example, is that Islam is the most optimal set of rules regardless of what situation and culture background you are in! This means that the very nature of the rules make it universal and we have no reason to alter the rules to fit other situations or circumstances. Let alone that we don't even have the authority to do so; which is a whole different discussion altogether!

But rather then just these abstract arguments, how about you give me some more detail. Which Islamic rule is not the most optimal way due to your cultural background? Can you bring me concrete example of where you would have an alternative rule to Islamic rules? And can you defend why your alternative would be more optimal? Or can you just give an example of a hypotetical situation/environment where Islamic rules are not optimal?

[alcurad]

the issue isn't about the hadeeth being important or accepted I believe, rather its about what was the prophet simply following cultual norms of his time and place, as opposed to the divine commands in the qur'an that must be held unchngeable. for example the narrations of the prophet using or prescribing medicine, are they to be considered sacred and priscribed to everyone around us or were they the prophet telling people what was generlly known about medicine back then? and so on.
no one considers every single act the prophet did as sacred, but the attitude prevalent among traditional muslims seems to miss this point. we don't need to reinvent the religion, rather to rediscover it. In the end we are all humans, and who knows how much of our judgment is based on primal instinct rather than so called logic and rational thought. thus anyone making assumptions as to what the prophet meant by this or that shouldn't be accepted right away. the past generations did that, and look where it got them and us.

[Woodrow]

the issue isn't about the hadeeth being important or accepted I believe, rather its about what was the prophet simply following cultual norms of his time and place, as opposed to the divine commands in the qur'an that must be held unchngeable. for example the narrations of the prophet using or prescribing medicine, are they to be considered sacred and priscribed to everyone around us or were they the prophet telling people what was generlly known about medicine back then? and so on.
no one considers every single act the prophet did as sacred, but the attitude prevalent among traditional muslims seems to miss this point. we don't need to reinvent the religion, rather to rediscover it. In the end we are all humans, and who knows how much of our judgment is based on primal instinct rather than so called logic and rational thought. thus anyone making assumptions as to what the prophet meant by this or that shouldn't be accepted right away. the past generations did that, and look where it got them and us.

I think I am begining to understand where you are coming from. But, it does not mean we need to discard the Ahadith. Although there is a possibility some of the things mentioned in the Ahdith may have long been a cultural practice and not revealed in the Qur'an, the Ahadith demonstrates that they were not forbidden by anything in the Qur'an and did not need to be revealed again as they were already acceptable pactices.

[Abdul Fattah]

Selam aleykum

the issue isn't about the hadeeth being important or accepted I believe, rather its about what was the prophet simply following cultual norms of his time and place, as opposed to the divine commands in the qur'an that must be held unchngeable.

Welll that's not really an issue because:
1. There are different kind of hadeeth, the ones saying what the prophet (peace be upon him) said, the ones saying what the prophet (peace be upon him) did, and what the prophet (peace be upon him) allowed. Rules derived from these different types have different strengths going from advisory to obligatory for that very reason you pointed out.
2. The Prophet (peace be upon him) is reported to have done many things merely for the sake of hadeeth! Like an example would be that he ate something he didn't like at least once, just so people wouldn't think its forbidden.

for example the narrations of the prophet using or prescribing medicine, are they to be considered sacred and priscribed to everyone around us or were they the prophet telling people what was generlly known about medicine back then? and so on.

That depends on the strength of the hadeeth. Also remember that if the Prophet (peace be upon him) would have said something because of cultural backgrounds that wasn't optimal that Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) could have corrected him, similar to how he corrected him with the surah Abasa (surah 80).

no one considers every single act the prophet did as sacred, but the attitude prevalent among traditional muslims seems to miss this point.

I never said his very acts were sacred. I don't think his acts were sacred, but I do think he lead by example and we should attempt to follow his deeds as much as possible. Whether or not they qualify as sacred actually has little to do with the whole discussion. In fact as has been pointed out a few times here already, the Qur'an itself tells us to follow his actions!

we don't need to reinvent the religion, rather to rediscover it.

Yes, of course, but how better to do that then to go back to the source of it all! If you want to know what true Islam is like, who better to look to then the prophet peace be upon him his sunnah?

In the end we are all humans, and who knows how much of our judgment is based on primal instinct rather than so called logic and rational thought.

Yes of course that is what I told you in the previous message, and this is exactly why we shouldn't just follow our own opinion but stick to the logical "proofs" based on hadeeth and ayath.

thus anyone making assumptions as to what the prophet meant by this or that shouldn't be accepted right away. the past generations did that, and look where it got them and us.

I never said we have to "assume" that is a strawmen-argument. Most hadeeth are actually crystal clear and leave no room for interpretation or assumptions. It seems to me you have a wrong idea of what information can be actually found in the hadeeth.

BTW, have you read my first post already?

[chacha_jalebi]

the issue isn't about the hadeeth being important or accepted I believe, rather its about what was the prophet simply following cultual norms of his time and place, as opposed to the divine commands in the qur'an that must be held unchngeable. for example the narrations of the prophet using or prescribing medicine, are they to be considered sacred and priscribed to everyone around us or were they the prophet telling people what was generlly known about medicine back then? and so on.
no one considers every single act the prophet did as sacred, but the attitude prevalent among traditional muslims seems to miss this point. we don't need to reinvent the religion, rather to rediscover it. In the end we are all humans, and who knows how much of our judgment is based on primal instinct rather than so called logic and rational thought. thus anyone making assumptions as to what the prophet meant by this or that shouldn't be accepted right away. the past generations did that, and look where it got them and us.

the sunnah is the way RasoolAllah (saw) performed deeds, because he performed them perfectly

but im sure no one says, RasoolAllah (saw) liked a certain fruit, so it becomes obligatory for us to like that fruit, i understand your point but if its not clear what the Prophet (Saw) meant then we can leave that thin, i.e their is a hadiths tellin us to leave what we doubt, so we should act upon that, one thing we need to remember RasoolAllah (saw) was human, he did humanistic stuff aswell, so every deed of his wasnt sunnah, he had to do human stuff like eat, sleep, drink. but muslims copy even minor details of his life, out of love and respect for the Prophet (saw), no one will say, the Prophet (saw) slept at these times, so you have to, like durin asr and maghrib, or dhuhr to asr, the sun was hot so they would sleep, so no one is gona say, sleep at these times because the Prophet (Saw) did it. its jus out of love and respect deeds are copied

[alcurad]

sister jalebi; what do you think about the political system of his time, would that work nowadays,and would the majority happily accept it for that matter? isn't it part of the sunnah as well on the other hand. aren't the orders of :" hear and obey" the amir no matter if he "beats your back and takes your money" part of the sunnah as well. we could say that, and blindly follow, just like most people in Muslim countries, who by the way get told that hadeeth above by some of our esteemed scholars and whatnot as a justification for their rulers actions.

Abdul Fattah; actually I just skimmed through your first post, was there something in particular you wanted read?
you make a good point, but who gets to say what was obligatory etc from the three categories you mentioned, if-and I note you haven't- you say the scholars, but which scholars are those. see the reason so many different schools of thought and sects emerged right after the prophet's death in my opinion is that we don't have a set of methods or techniques to ascertain what the prophet meant all the time. you yourself said to stick to the logical proofs, but in the end isn't that you following your opinion? and being 'open to all sides' doesn't cut the butter, since still you would be following your own opinion within your own thought frame or paradigm if you like.
you say the hadeeth is crystal clear, but is all of it like that, and if not then are we to simply ignore the ahadeeth we don't get? or perhaps listen to the scholars. but again, which scholar/s? I do believe that there is an 'optimal' to everything, but then relativity exists as well...

[Abdul Fattah]

Selam aleykum
It's brother Jalebi ^_^ I guess that was an honest mistake.

Abdul Fattah; actually I just skimmed through your first post, was there something in particular you wanted read?

Well actually the whole lot. I know it's long, but some things can't be explained in 5 sentences.

you make a good point, but who gets to say what was obligatory etc from the three categories you mentioned, you would say the scholars but which scholars are those.

Well it's not like the scholars get to decide that based on their personal preference. They have to asses that based on logical guidelines. Like how direct/clear was the hadeeth. Or how strong/weak is it.

see the reason so many different schools of thought and sects emerged right after the prophet's death in my opinion is that we don't have a set of methods ortechniques to ascertain what the prophet meant all the time.

Well most sects and devisions come from long after the death of the prophet (peace be upon him). Other then that your argument makes little sense (no offense). Your assumption goes, if there were guidelines, there wouldn't have been divisions. That completely ignores the alternative that their could be divisions despite the guidelines, due to groups of people or "scholars" simply not following the guidelines. Having guidelines is no guarantee that people follow them.

you say the hadeeth is crystal clear, but is all of it like that, and if not then are we to simply ignore the ahadeeth we don't get? or perhaps listen to the scholars. but again, which scholar/s? I do believe that there is an 'optimal' to everything, but then relativity exists as well...

Well actually I said "most" are crystal clear. I do acknowledge some leave room for doubt. However even then there are solid guidelines: in case of doubt take the safest route. As for which scholar to follow; remember that scholars are not allowed to have personal opinions. Well at least not in their work. Obviously every human being has personal opinions. But what I meant was that they are not allowed to make rulings based on those. They require some base of evidence for that. Even in the case of Ijtihad (ruling by opinion) there are rules and guidelines that need to be met for the ruling to be valid. Of course humans are fallible, so disagreement and wrong rulings are to be expected. When scholars agree on a rule though, there is no reason to doubt it. When scholars disagree, they should discuss with one another and consider one another's arguments until they reach an agreement. If they cannot reach an agreement (or fail to try); follow the one who you think has the strongest, most logical case in the matter.

[alcurad]

oh and Woodrow, don't you think that if those practices were accepted, or in other words allowed to remain, this means it's a matter of choice to follow them?
I don't think we should reject hadeeth, rather some of the ways of interpreting it.

[alcurad]

ohhh, extremely sorry, brother chacha but I thought you werea sister
I mean what with the name and all, really sorry...

[alcurad]

Abdul Fattah, how many scholars of which schools of thought have ever agreed on something except it be that Allah is all seeing or that the five daily obligatory prayers are five, bearing in mind that some have actually said the daily five prayers aren't obligatory?
also, who set the guidelines? in reality the guidelines spread along along because the people who created/invented them had backing from some ruler or other.I do agree with the need for guidelines, but we need to be more critical of the people who claim to stand in the prophet's shadow and speak form his authority, again Islam should never have priests-or worse, shamans as many a 'scholar' really is, ever heard of exorcism and all that-oh, and no offense taken...

[Abdul Fattah]

Selam aleykum

Abdul Fattah, how many scholars of which schools of thought have ever agreed on something except it be that Allah is all seeing or that the five daily obligatory prayers are five, bearing in mind that some have actually said the daily five prayers aren't obligatory?

Yeah I understand what you mean, but you have to be reasonable. any self proclaimed scholar could break consensus. But does he have reasonable arguments. For example, I've seen Sufi scholars base themself on hadeeth that are most likely fabricated since they don't even have a chain of narration. When confronted with this they simply go to another subject or start bringing false metaphors and moot issues to their defense. Like I said, you shouldn't see things in terms of: "Scholar1 says this and Scholar2 says that. I wonder which one is right?"
Instead think of it in terms of: "Scholar1 bases his ruling on this evidence and Scholar2 bases himself on that. I wonder which base is most certain?"

also, who set the guidelines? in reality the guidelines spread along along because the people who created/invented them had backing from some ruler or other.

There's three sources.
1. Guidelines from the Qur'an. I.e. the verse telling us to follow the prophet peace be upon him his example.
2. Guidelines dictated by the Prophet peace be upon him. Although I grant that if you question those hadeeth to begin with, that the validity of these guidelines themselves are in question, and insisting on them would be circular.
3. Guidelines by logic. These are guidelines suggested by scholars, but they are self-evident and obvious. An example of these would be the study of validity of hadeeth. If you look at the criteria that hadeeth collectors had for accepting/rejecting hadeeth; you'll see that they did not use their personal opinion or preference at all. Instead they relied on simple logical deductions and criteria to asses different grades of probability of falseness or validity.

I do agree with the need for guidelines, but we need to be more critical of the people who claim to stand in the prophet's shadow and speak form his authority,

Why? Could you give a concrete example of where we currently lack criticalness? If you ask me the science of hadeeth is very critical already. Of course I have to admit I'm not an expert in the field. But either way, can you provide a concrete example to back this statement up, or are you just saying this without actually knowing what level of criticalness that scholars apply to science of hadeeth?

again Islam should never have priests-or worse, shamans as many a 'scholar' really is, ever heard of exorcism and all that-oh, and no offense taken...

Well I think I stressed numerous times that we should never accept a scholar's opinion, but instead only rely on him to point us to the right proofs. One of the major causes of different divisions are:
1. Scholars providing rulings without saying proofs.
2. People accepting rulings without asking proofs.
As for exorcisms and the like, many of it might be fake indeed, but others might be genuine. But I suggest you leave that for a separate topic if you wish to discus that further, because if we'll head into that here also it'll just add to the confusion. ^_^

[alcurad]

saying the scholars didn't use their own preferences and personal opinions is not exactly a counter argument.
just look at how many ahadeeth that circulate in the Muslim community like 'the passing of a black dog,donkey and a woman invalidates the prayer' and so on that would defy any reasonable guidelines any scholar sets and are generally accepted. and by the way, the a fore mentioned 'hadeeth' has a strong chain of narration and people do take it seriously. there are many like it, simply open one of the 'saheeh's' and look around and you'll find something of that caliber. another example would be the splitting of the moon, why wasn't it ever recorded by other nations, in all recorded history the hadeeth that speaks of it is as far as I know the only one that speaks of the event.
just how critical is it to accept such things as part of the religion?

another point I'd like to discuss is the validity of the chains of narration themselves. I'm not denying the need for the hadeeth in understanding Islam, but just how logical is it to accept even a strong chain of narration if the only thing making it strong is that everyone in it is saying that the ones he heard it from are truthful! just how much could be changed or projected to mean something else bearing in mind that it is allowed to narrate a hadeeth by it's meaning. as far as I know all the different sects have 'strong' ahadeeth to back their positions.

I take it you think exorcism could be genuine, but where in the ahadeeth-weak or strong- is there mention of it and it's methods?

[chacha_jalebi]

lol talkin bout sounds your name sounds like a wild mexican animal sooo :D and chacha thats masculiner then masculine psssh

anywhoo

your confusin hadiths and sunnah, sunnah is stuff like prayer, fastin, and things done by the Prophet (Saw) hadiths are narrations, some of which tell us about the sunnah of the Prophet (saw)

also talking about your narrations process, the scholars have done large large amounts of work on verifyin hadiths, like we have sahih hadiths, mutawatir hadiths, and loads of other levels, also scholars reached this level of classin hadiths, by lookin at different sources which all were the same,lik you see in bukhari, muslim they will often have the same narrations with different wordin and many other hadiths books have similiar hadiths

also one thing you need to understand the hadiths were also a command of Allah (swt) like it says in surah najm v 4

Nor does he speak of (his own) desire. It is only a Revelation that is revealed.''

there is loads loads of ayahs that explicity confirm the hadiths

for example ... surah nisa v 59

"(And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger (PBUH)".

refer back to Allah (Swt) via the Quraan, and to the messenger (saw) through his hadiths

and one of my favouritesss, surah nur v63

"And let those who oppose the Messenger's (Muhammad (PBUH)) commandment (i.e., his Sunnah -- legal ways, orders, acts of worship, statements) (among the sects), beware, lest some Fitnah (disbelief, trials, afflictions, earthquakes, killing, overpowered by a tyrant) should befall them or a painful torment be inflicted on them.''

take out the brackets and it reads the same thin!

also surah al hashr v 7

"And whatsoever the Messenger (Muhammad (PBUH)) gives you, take it; and whatsoever he forbids you, abstain (from it)".

and what has the messenger given us, the hadiths, and as he said follow the Quraan and my way,

so if you still want to doubt the hadiths thats your personal choice :D

[YusufNoor]

For instance ... who decided that the hadith was a good way to interpret the quran?

we don't necessarily use the Hadeeth to "interpret" the Qur'an, we simply seek further clarification or try to understand how the Prophet[pbuh] and the Companions[ra] explained or understood certain passages. because we believe in La Illahah Ilah Allah Muhammadur Rasululah we must seek wherever possible the Prophet's guidance on issues of faith; if we DON'T then we are rejecting the 2nd part of our Shahadah!


In my philosophy if the Quran is meant to be a timeless, universal book ... it should be self containing -- i.e it should be the only necessary component to read and fully understand islam.

I the individual should be able to pick it up read it and know what I need to do.

unless you know Quraish Arabic and are intimately rehearsed in the Seerah, you have no way to understand the Qur'an. Quraish Arabic is THE language of the Qur'an and the Seerah is important in order to know what order the Surahs and Ayahs were revealed. if you are using a "translation" of the Qur'an, then indeed it is not the Qur'an AT ALL, but merely a form of explanation or Tafseer. if the translator is NOT versed in Qur'an, Sunnah, Tafseer and Seerah then all you have is a rather "poor" translation" of the Qur'an!


It seems pretty dumb to me that you would need 100s of scholars analyzing hadith for "clues" when it is all written right there ... WHO said that we need to analyze what the prophet did to understand the Quran?

in short, the Prophet was the "Living Qur'an" and as the Messenger of Allah,it was indeed his task to explain revelation to us!


The prophet was great 1500 years later and copy it. It says in the Quran that this is the only book necessary ... so lets just read it and interpret it! Maybe it was MEANT to be reinterpreted in many different ways .. maybe there IS NO UNIVERSAL definition of Islam but rather it is a religion meant to be interpreted differently by people from different backgrounds and cultures.

we have Hadeeth to confrim that this would be misguidance! :D

Why does this never come up?

it does, by those who are NOT on the straight path!

Why does everyone assume there is exactly one "fiqh" one jurisprudence, one correct way of living an islamic life?????

in Fiqh, there CAN be differences of opinions to some degree AND those opinions CAN change!

Why is everyone so conformist stating that "this is wrong ... that is wrong" then their only evidence is some hadith.

:sl:

a nice starting place to increase your understanding would be watch the Foundations of Islam by Bilal Philips:

http://www.bilalphilips.com/bilal_pa...sk=view&id=288

it's the 21 part lecture series located at the bottom of the page. it's about 18 hours long by VERY INTERESTING and it should, In Sha'a Allah, answer most of your questions.

May Allah [swt] make it easy on you and may He guide you and give Hidayah and Taqwa! Ameen!

:w:

[Abdul Fattah]

saying the scholars didn't use their own preferences and personal opinions is not exactly a counter argument.
just look at how many ahadeeth that circulate in the Muslim community like 'the passing of a black dog,donkey and a woman invalidates the prayer' and so on that would defy any reasonable guidelines any scholar sets and are generally accepted.

I'm not sure I understand your point here. Could you explain in depth what exactly your issue is here?

and by the way, the a fore mentioned 'hadeeth' has a strong chain of narration and people do take it seriously. there are many like it, simply open one of the 'saheeh's' and look around and you'll find something of that caliber.

Well I can't say I've read every single sahih hadeeth, but on the other hand I haven't read anything that makes me seriously question the science of hadeeth either.

another example would be the splitting of the moon, why wasn't it ever recorded by other nations, in all recorded history the hadeeth that speaks of it is as far as I know the only one that speaks of the event.
just how critical is it to accept such things as part of the religion?

I don't see any conflict with it. See, the splitting of the moon is considered a miracle. As a miracle its philosophically speaking completely possible. However, we don't know how exactly Allah subhana wa ta'ala performed this miracle. Perhaps he really split the moon in two, or maybe he made it appear as if the moon is split, by deflecting some of the light which is reflected of teh moon's surface. We simply don't know and Allah subhana wa ta'ala knows best. However if it's the latter, that would explain why nobody else except the people present at that location witnessed it. Then again, perhaps a number of people did see it. If it's the former, and the moon did actually physically split for a segment of time, that still doesn't mean anything. Perhaps Allah subhaan wa ta'ala made it so that nobody else could see it (like making all other areas clouded). If you can believe Allah subhana wa ta'ala is omnipotent, and so he can physically split the moon, he obviously must be able to form some clouds to. Or maybe there actually are a number of people who witnessed this event. But then consider, how many would witness this, if the moon only remained split for several seconds? And how many would be simply ignored as being mad? If someone told you they witnessed the moon splitting yesterday, you'd probably wouldn't put it in the newspapers either would you? Or even better, how many people would have remained silent simply in fear of being viewed as a mad if they would talk about what they witnessed? Or how many people would start to question them selves: "maybe I was just imagining it, or drank to much".

another point I'd like to discuss is the validity of the chains of narration themselves. I'm not denying the need for the hadeeth in understanding Islam, but just how logical is it to accept even a strong chain of narration if the only thing making it strong is that everyone in it is saying that the ones he heard it from are truthful! just how much could be changed or projected to mean something else bearing in mind that it is allowed to narrate a hadeeth by it's meaning. as far as I know all the different sects have 'strong' ahadeeth to back their positions.

There's actually more to it then just this. The collectors of hadeeth took more then just that as criteria for their sahih.

I take it you think exorcism could be genuine, but where in the ahadeeth-weak or strong- is there mention of it and it's methods?

Yes I do think it's possible. Yes, most illnesses from djinns can be cured simply by reciting certain verses of the Qur'an. Well actually that's not correct. It's not the recitation that cures, but it is Allah subhana wa ta'ala that cures when you recite those verses.

[Grace Seeker]

‘This is why the Messenger of Allah said,
‘The Sunnah was a revelation from Allah just as the Qur'an, although it is not recited as the Qur'an is recited.’

So then Muslims have two pieces of sacred revelation -- the Quran, plus the Sunnah -- not one. There is the message and then there is more besides.

When unable to find the Tafsir in the Qur'an, the Sunnah or with the Companions, the scholars then look to the Tafsir of the Tabi`in, (second generation of Islam) such as Mujahid bin Jabr, who was a wonder himself in Tafsir.

But these writings are interpretations, they are not revelation. That is they come from men and express their understanding, they do not come from God. So, why do they seem to carry the same weight in the practice of Islam as the revelation Allah gave to Muhammad does? Or do you suggest that their interpretations are also inspired interpretations?

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

:sl:

also, who set the guidelines?

The guidelines are derived from the Qur'aan and the Sunnah themselves and have been codified and can be learned in a science known as Usool al-Fiqh. If you wish, I can direct you to a series of lectures that teach this science.

why wasn't it ever recorded by other nations, in all recorded history the hadeeth that speaks of it is as far as I know the only one that speaks of the event.

{The Hour has come near, and the moon has split.}[al-Qamar; 1]

[Grace Seeker]

In my opinion and experience I believe so. An analogy, that you might understand as a Christian.

THIS IS AN ANALOGY, NOT A FACT NOR PRESENTED AS FACTUAL

Think in terms of the OT as being the Qur'an and the 4 Gospels as being the Ahadith.

I might go so far as to say (again I to am using analogy, not saying this is the actual case) that what Muslims call the Injil of Jesus, his message regarding the Kingdom of God, is the Qur'an and what Christians call the Gospel of Jesus, the record of the things Jesus not only said but did and the interpretation of their meaning, is the Hadith.

[coddles76]

So then Muslims have two pieces of sacred revelation -- the Quran, plus the Sunnah -- not one. There is the message and then there is more besides.



But these writings are interpretations, they are not revelation. That is they come from men and express their understanding, they do not come from God. So, why do they seem to carry the same weight in the practice of Islam as the revelation Allah gave to Muhammad does? Or do you suggest that their interpretations are also inspired interpretations?

Salam to All,

With the Help of ALLAH SWT I am hoping that I can Clear your misunderstanding.....

Sunnah in the Arabic language (without any religious context) means a way or method. It is derived from the word: "Sanan," which is Arabic for: a road or a path.
In a religious context the best possible path or road and Muslim can take is the path of Our Prophet Muhammed (PBUH). The Quran and the sunnah are both seperate entities though the Sunnah holds a great deal of value to the Muslim due to the words of ALLAH SWT :-

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “He who obeys the Messenger has indeed obeyed Allaah . . .” [al-Nisaa’ 4:80] Allaah described obedience to the Prophet (peace be upon him) as being a part of obedience to Him. Then He made a connection between obedience to Him and obedience to the Prophet (peace be upon him): “O you who believe! Obey Allaah and obey the Messenger . . .” [al-Nisaa’ 4:59]

The Quran and the Sunnah perfects a Muslims character and works hand in hand with perfecting one's faith. The Sunnah is not revelation but a standard or practice coming from the best man who ever walked the face of the earth and that is our beloved prophet Muhammed (May the peace and blessing of the Almighty Allah be upon him)

This was also comfirmed by written work of Michael H. Hart, "The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History." He states that the most influential person in all history was Muhammad, peace be upon him, with Jesus second. Examine his actual words:

"My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world's most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular level."

[Grace Seeker]

The Sunnah is not revelation but a standard or practice coming from the best man who ever walked the face of the earth and that is our beloved prophet Muhammed

With respect, I would still like to hear from Abdul Fattah, for in very clear terms he specifically said, "the Sunnah was a revelation from Allah." And it wasn't just any old piece of revelation, he claimed it was "a revalation from Allah just as the Qur'an."

[coddles76]

With respect, I would still like to hear from Abdul Fattah, for in very clear terms he specifically said, "the Sunnah was a revelation from Allah." And it wasn't just any old piece of revelation, he claimed it was "a revalation from Allah just as the Qur'an."

With Respect, My intention was to clear your misunderstanding and my reply was also for the benefit of the other individuals who visit this forum.

[Grace Seeker]

Granted. But I would still like to know what Abdul meant by that phrase?

[coddles76]

He claimed it was "a revalation from Allah just as the Qur'an."

This is my take on it and maybe Abdul can correct me if I'm wrong.
Muhammed (PBUH) was inspired by ALLAH SWT so in essence you can say that everything that our Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) acquired plus his noble character was inspired by ALLAH SWT and taught by the one and only ALLAH SWT. He is a walking example of the Quran and this was confirmed by his wife wife, Aisha (May Allah (SWT) be pleased with her) to be like "a walking Qur`an", embodying the Laws of Almighty Allah (SWT).

[Grace Seeker]

Or maybe Abdul simply mis-spoke. We all do that from time to time.

[Uthman]

Our maybe Abdul simply mis-spoke. We all do that from time to time.

Mis-spoke? Isn't that a word invented by Hilary Clinton? :D