/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Stoning to death & Preservation of Hadeeth



Chuck
04-28-2005, 09:20 PM
Somebody brought up a question about stoning to death. When was the last time a muslim country stoned someone to death?
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Sahabiyaat
04-29-2005, 02:04 PM
i dnt think the punishments shud be substituted to plz the west
they shud do exactly what is ordained
that way there only helping the person to avoid much worser punishment in the hereafter
Reply

Z
04-29-2005, 02:06 PM
Asalamu Alaikum

I have a question, when and if you're being stoned to death, who has the right to throw the stones? Everyone? The family only? The law?

And how is this stoning done? In a public place where crowds gather or in a back alley somewhere?
Reply

Lateralus63
04-29-2005, 02:07 PM
:sl:

just thought you lot might want to know an interesting fact

stoning to death is mentioned NOWHERE, in the Quran, do your research if you dont believe me.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
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
Z
04-29-2005, 02:09 PM
Asalamu Alaikum

But surely it's not an innovation? There must be some backing to it. Hard evidence too I'm sure.
Reply

Sahabiyaat
04-29-2005, 02:12 PM
not everything is in the Quran
that is y we have the hadith also
and its not an innovation.
Reply

Far7an
04-29-2005, 02:20 PM
Please read the following article :)
Reply

Sahabiyaat
04-29-2005, 02:21 PM
:omg: i'm sorry...i didnt mean to say it in a direspectful manner
ofcourse the quran is perfect
but that is what i meant for matters of implementation the hadith is present.
Reply

Lateralus63
04-29-2005, 02:21 PM
:sl:

yes i understand capital punishment but the particular punishment of stoning to death is not mentioned in the Quran, just a point i wanted to raise but im aware of the ethics of capital punishment.
Reply

S_87
04-29-2005, 04:34 PM
:sl: :)

Al-Bukhaari and Muslim narrated in their Saheehs from Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) that ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “Allaah sent Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) with the truth and revealed to him the Book, and one of the things that Allaah revealed was the verse of stoning. We have read it and understood it. The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) stoned (adulterers) and we stoned (them) after him, but I fear that there may come a time when some people say: ‘By Allaah, we do not find the verse of stoning in the Book of Allaah.

The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) stoned Maa’iz, the Juhani woman, the Ghaamidi woman, and the two Jews. All of that is proven in saheeh ahaadeeth narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). The scholars among the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them), the Taabi’een and those who came after them are also unanimously agreed on that.
Reply

S_87
04-29-2005, 04:35 PM
the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Receive (teaching) from me. Allah has ordained a way for those (women). When an unmarried male commits adultery with an unmarried female (they should receive) one hundred lashes and banishment for one year. And in the case of a married male committing adultery with a married female, they shall receive one hundred lashes and be stoned to death.”

(Narrated by Muslim, 1690).
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
04-29-2005, 05:11 PM
:sl:
I believe Br Chuck is asking if anyone ahs heard or a recent occurance in stoning.


On the subject of stoning, etc. please read this:
Fornication and Adultery

This is defined as any case where a man has coitus with a woman who is unlawful to him. Any relationship between a man and a woman that does not contain coitus does not fall under this category and does not mandate the prescribed, fixed punishment.

The prescribed punishment is different depending on the marital status of the perpetrator. A single person who has never been previously married receives one hundred lashes as stated by Allah:
The fornicatress and the fornicator, give each of them one hundred lashes.
If the person is married or has previously been married, then the punishment is stoning until death. This punishment has been established by a number of had?th of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

The following conditions must be met before either of these two punishments can be carried out:

1. Four trustworthy witnesses must give testimony that they have witnessed the act take place with absolute certainty. They must be in complete agreement about all the details of the act, and about its place, time, and circumstances. If their stories do not coincide, their testimony will be considered false. In this case, instead of the punishment for fornication being carried out on the accused, the prescribed punishment for bearing false witness will be carried out against the witnesses. Allah says:
- Why did they not produce four witnesses? Since they did not produce witnesses, then with Allah they are the liars.

- Those who accuse chaste women then do not come with four witnesses, flog them eighty lashes and never accept their testimony. They are the sinful ones.
It is obvious that the one who commits fornication in the plain sight of four witnesses whereby they can see every detail of his crime is a person who is flagrant in his behavior, who has little regard for religion or for social values, and if he is married, has little regard for his relationship with his wife.

This person fully deserves a severe punishment. At the same time, it must be known that there is no documented case in Muslim history ? to the extent of our knowledge ? where the prescribed punishment for fornication was carried out on the testimony of witnesses. In most cases, this punishment was carried out at the wish of the perpetrator in order that he may purify himself of the sin and as a means of repentance.

2. There must be no cause for doubt that can make the punishment fall away. If any doubt is present, or any way out is found for the accused, the punishment is not to be carried out, because Allah?s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: ?Do not carry out the prescribed punishments when there is doubt.?

Some things should be made clear at this point. The first is that if a person becomes weak and falls into this sin, it is preferable for him to conceal it from others and not speak about it or admit to it. Instead, he should repent, seek Allah?s forgiveness, and try to make up for it by doing righteous deeds. He should not despair of Allah?s mercy.

This is because Allah?s Messenger has said: ?Whoever comes with one of these filthy acts should conceal it as Allah has concealed it.?

Allah says:
- Those who, if they commit an indecency or wrong themselves, remember Allah and seek His forgiveness ? and whoever forgives save Allah? ? and do not persist in committing it, their reward is forgiveness from their Lord and gardens beneath which rivers flow.

- O my servants who have transgressed against themselves, do not despair of Allah?s mercy. Verily, Allah forgives all sins.
It should also be observed that, likewise, if someone is to see another Muslim commit this act, then he should conceal it from the public. Allah?s Messenger has said: ?Whoever conceals the fault of a Muslim, Allah will conceal his fault.?

It must also be noted that Islam has made the home completely inviolable. It is not permissible to enter someone else?s home except with the permission of its occupants. Spying is likewise prohibited. Allah says:
O you who believe, do not enter homes other than your own until you have asked permission and greeted their inhabitants. This is better for you, in order that you may remember.
Also, if a person confesses to this sin of his own accord, it is necessary to determine if he is of sound mind and in possession of all of his faculties. It must also be certain that he is under no compulsion or coercion.

Beyond that, he is afforded the opportunity to retract his confession and he is encouraged to do so. If he retracts his statement, the prescribed punishment will not be carried out. This is what Allah?s Messenger (peace be upon him) did with M?`iz when he confessed to committing adultery. Allah?s Messenger (peace be upon him) turned away from him many times while he repeatedly said: ?I have committed adultery, so purify me.? Allah?s Messenger (peace be upon him) only turned his face away.

Then he said: ?Maybe you only kissed? and: ?Maybe you were drinking.? In spite of this the man was insistent. Then, when the people were going to administer the punishment, he denied everything and fled. They informed Allah?s Messenger (peace be upon him) of this and he said: ?Why not leave him to repent so Allah can forgive him.?

The wisdom behind the prescribed punishment for fornication and adultery

If we look at all the punishments prescribed by Islamic Law, we see that they all have two inseparable qualities:

A. Excessive recourse to caution for the benefit of the accused and the large number of provisions that must be met before a punishment can be carried out.

B. The harshness and severity of the punishments.

This guarantees two things. First of all, it preserves the general security of society and reduces crime, due to the harshness of the punishments. The potential murderer who knows he will be killed, the potential thief who knows he will have his hand cut off, and the potential sexual offender who knows that he will be stoned or given a hundred lashes will think twice before going out and committing the crime. If, on the other hand, he knows that he will only be imprisoned for a few months or a few years, then he might not pay heed to the punishment and might not be discouraged from committing the crime.

Secondly, it safeguards the life of the accused and guarantees him that no punishment will be carried out until every excuse is exhausted and every reason for discarding the punishment is looked into.

If we look at fornication and adultery, we see that it is dealt with in this manner. The condition for establishing it ? four reliable witnesses ? is a very strict one, and the punishment is decisive.

If we look at the application of this punishment, we find many aspects of the wisdom behind it:

1. It preserves general peace and security, because one of the most important motives for murder is the violation of someone?s honor. Applying the punishment against fornication causes a decrease in one of the major causes of violating people?s honor, which in turn, reduces the frequency of murder. This has a direct, positive effect on public safety.

2. It protects the family. The family enjoys a special esteem in Islam. The widespread practice of extramarital sex is destructive to the family, undermines its integrity, and destabilizes the relationships between its members. The severe punishment for fornication and adultery has the effect of reducing its occurrence, which has a direct, positive effect on the family in two ways. Firstly, the family of the one who commits adultery share in the experience of his punishment, so they are discouraged from committing the act themselves, which brings stability to the family. Likewise, the family who had been harmed by the act of adultery benefits by the reduced opportunity for this crime afforded by this punishment, so its stability is increased.
Reply

Z
04-29-2005, 10:09 PM
Asalamu Alaikum

No one's answered my questions yet! :'( I'm tellin' mummy...
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
04-29-2005, 11:10 PM
:sl: The evidence for it is hadith, and it has been mentioned in one of the articles above.

It is to be carried out by the state.
Reply

Bittersteel
06-26-2005, 01:26 PM
off-Topic:

Why wasn't the verse saying stoning for adultery put in the Quran?
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
06-26-2005, 08:00 PM
:sl:
Thread split.
Threads merged.
Thread moved.

Next time you have an off-topic question, Br. Abdul Aziz, its better if you make a seperate thread.

Insha'Allah, we can discuss stoning in this thread.

:w:
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
07-02-2005, 03:23 PM
:sl: Staffy,
Please read this article:
http://islamicboard.com/showthread.php?t=1397
format_quote Originally Posted by Staffy
If it ad's to the the Al-Quran it is Haram...........For the religeon of Islam was perfected on what day??
No one invented any ahadith. They are sayings of the Prophet Muhammad saws. So when it is said, "On this day I have perfected your religion" it is meant that it has been perfected with both the Qur'an and Sunnah.

On the issue of Salah, the details are all found in ahadith. The Qur'an only tells us to pray, it doesn't say how. So are you going to stop praying salah the way you do, since this is added to the Qur'an?

Obviously the problem is not if the ahadith add to the Qur'an, but if they contradict it.

On the subject of stoning, Umar ibn Al-Khattab said
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:

'Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed...Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him. (Volume 8, Book 82, Number 816)

Please read this as well:
http://islamtoday.com/show_detail_se...&main_cat_id=6
:w:
Reply

Bittersteel
07-02-2005, 03:27 PM
the adultery punishment of stoning was practised by Prophet Mohammad(PBUH).So yeah I guess its okay.

Is there a story behind it why the verse was never put down?
Reply

Staffy
07-03-2005, 01:22 AM
""How do we know how to pray? the ansser is in two of the five pillars""
I anssered your question already Brother........

And yes some Hadith have been fabricated for as far as i know Allah in his infinate mercy and wisdom did not say they would be unchanged........Setting laws bassed on Ahadith especially seting laws about capital punishment, Why you might as well set those laws bassed on the Bible............Staffy
(P.S. Please read 17:30 and do not speak of what you know not......
I Did not state all Ahadith are false in fact i feel alot have much truth in them....But their truth is debatable brother so we must learn our ABC before learning arithmatic)
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
07-03-2005, 02:53 AM
:sl:
format_quote Originally Posted by Staffy
""How do we know how to pray? the ansser is in two of the five pillars""
I anssered your question already Brother........
What do you mean "two of the five pillars"? The five pillars are an abstract number of practices in Islam, its not a book from which you can read how to pray!

How do you pray? Either its in the Qur'an or Ahadith. How did you learn how to pray? How do you know that you're praying in the right way? If you want to check how many rakah Fajr is supposed to be, where do you look? Can you prove to me that Fajr is two rakah?

And yes some Hadith have been fabricated for as far as i know Allah in his infinate mercy and wisdom did not say they would be unchanged
Just because Allah SWT didn't promise to preserve something does not mean that all of it will be lost. Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim contain authentic ahadith that have been thoroghly examined by scholars.

Setting laws bassed on Ahadith especially seting laws about capital punishment, Why you might as well set those laws bassed on the Bible
If the Prophet Muhammad pbuh told you to do something would you disobey by saying its not in the Qur'an?
(P.S. Please read 17:30 and do not speak of what you know not......
This is good advice. Have you studied Uloom Al-Hadith in depth? What is your background research in Mustalah Al-Hadith or Rijal Al-Hadith?

If you have not studied this is detail, then what right do you have to discard the centuries of research done by scholars who have established for us which hadith are authentic and which aren't?

I Did not state all Ahadith are false in fact i feel alot have much truth in them....But their truth is debatable brother so we must learn our ABC before learning arithmatic)
I agree, so do your ABC's and read the following links:
http://www.islamonline.net/English/H...gy/index.shtml
http://www.islamonline.net/English/H...es/index.shtml
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/Ulum/

The hadith about stoning is an authentic hadith. No one with any knowledge of hadith would reject it as unauthentic.

:w:
Reply

Staffy
07-03-2005, 03:25 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
What do you mean "two of the five pillars"? The five pillars are an abstract number of practices in Islam, its not a book from which you can read how to pray!
Two of the five pillars are Prayer and Pilgramige......You would know the right way to pray when you arive in madina or mecca.....you would not think their to be more than two fard rakkahs in fajr for you father and your fathers father and the mosque would have all done so since muhammad (pboh) i did not learn how to pray from Ahadith i learnt the right way to pray from an Arab........
format_quote Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
Just because Allah SWT didn't promise to preserve something does not mean that all of it will be lost. Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim contain authentic ahadith that have been thoroghly examined by scholars.
Again refer to Surah 17:30.........Have you examined their authentisity your self??
format_quote Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
If the Prophet Muhammad pbuh told you to do something would you disobey by saying its not in the Qur'an?
If Muhammad (Pbuh and may Allah award his the highest place in jannah) told me to do somthing then i would do it imediantly for Muhammad (pbuh) is indeed the messanger of Allah but his disiples (pbut) are not and the hadith collectors are not
format_quote Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
This is good advice. Have you studied Uloom Al-Hadith in depth? What is your background research in Mustalah Al-Hadith or Rijal Al-Hadith?

If you have not studied this is detail, then what right do you have to discard the centuries of research done by scholars who have established for us which hadith are authentic and which aren't?
I did not say i wanted to discard the Hadith in fact i said from my personal belief the hadith have much truth in them and i personally follow many Hadiths for i see much good in them..
format_quote Originally Posted by Staffy
I Did not state all Ahadith are false in fact i feel alot have much truth in them....But their truth is debatable brother so we must learn our ABC before learning arithmatic)
By ABC's i ment the Holy Al-Quran the religeon of Islam in its purest form........
(may i also mention their are biblical scholars and toranic scholars and i reject much of what they say also......)
May peace be upon you and your loved one's.............Staffy
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
07-03-2005, 05:08 AM
:sl: Staffy,
format_quote Originally Posted by Staffy
Two of the five pillars are Prayer and Pilgramige......You would know the right way to pray when you arive in madina or mecca.....you would not think their to be more than two fard rakkahs in fajr for you father and your fathers father and the mosque would have all done so since muhammad (pboh) i did not learn how to pray from Ahadith i learnt the right way to pray from an Arab........
So what you actually mean is that we learn Islamic practices from other people.

The question of course is how do you verify which practices are authentic teachings of the Prophet Muhammad saws and which are not? Which source do you turn to?

For example, if you ask many jurists in Middle Eastern countries where they learned the law of stoning, they may reply exactly as you did by saying, "I learned the right law is stoning, from an arab".

How do we determine if this is truly the right law or not, especially in an age where there are so many differing opinions amongst Muslims?

Another example - your answer:
i learnt the right way to pray from an Arab
Are you aware of the different ways people pray? A Shia who prays in a very different manner might also say, "I learnt the right way to pray from an Arab." How can you tell who is praying in the right way - you or the shia?

Is the criteria the ethnicity of your teacher?
I think not.

If Muhammad (Pbuh and may Allah award his the highest place in jannah) told me to do somthing then i would do it imediantly for Muhammad (pbuh) is indeed the messanger of Allah but his disiples (pbut) are not and the hadith collectors are not
The ahadith are the words of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh not the words of the collectors. When a narration is authentic, it is confirmed to be from the Prophet Muhammad pbuh.

I hope this helps.
:w:
Reply

Staffy
07-03-2005, 07:12 AM
:w:
In Allahs infinate mercy and wisdom he set down the exact punishment to be aflicted on both those who commit Adultary and Fornification in Surah 24 verse 2..
So therfore the Hadith subsribing stoning when the punishment has already been ordained by god is a contradiction of the Al-Quran and therfore in my strong veiw should be dissmised......Any Objections?
:sl:
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
07-03-2005, 06:25 PM
:sl:
You're confusing cases. The punishment depends on the marital status of the offender. As Shaykh Salman Al-Awdah writes:
The prescribed punishment is different depending on the marital status of the perpetrator. A single person who has never been previously married receives one hundred lashes as stated by Allah:
The fornicatress and the fornicator, give each of them one hundred lashes.
If the person is married or has previously been married, then the punishment is stoning until death. This punishment has been established by a number of hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).
http://islamicboard.com/showpost.php...7&postcount=17

:w:
Reply

kadafi
07-03-2005, 09:57 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Staffy
:w:
In Allahs infinate mercy and wisdom he set down the exact punishment to be aflicted on both those who commit Adultary and Fornification in Surah 24 verse 2..
So therfore the Hadith subsribing stoning when the punishment has already been ordained by god is a contradiction of the Al-Quran and therfore in my strong veiw should be dissmised......Any Objections?
:sl:
:sl: brother Staffy,

Jazaka'Allahu Khairun bro Ansar for the explanation,

The ayat in Surah An-Noor refers to both fornicators and adulterers but the punishment for the adulterers extends to stoning to death. So in other words, the punishment the fornicators is only limited to 100 lashes whilst the adulterers is 100 lases + stoning to death.

This is because, the stoning verse was first recited durin' the days of the Prophet (Peace and blessings of ALlah be upon him) but abrogated verbally but its injuction is still applicable. This type of abrogation is known as Naskh at-Tilaawah doona al-Hukm

You see akhee, the sunnah elaborates the verse in Surah An-Noor just like how it elaborates the meaning of salaat in the Glorious Qu'ran.

:w:
Reply

Staffy
07-04-2005, 04:53 AM
The surah refers to those who commit adultery and fornification these verse were given as complete entideys i will repeat myself when i say you cant just ad somthing to the Al-Quran like that espesialy when the punishment is already set in place When God says "be" it will be God is infinate in knowlage and is not bound by time matter or space........You underestimate Him by saying "oh yes god forgot this verse and now it is in sunnah" God forgot NOTHING in the Al-Quran for God forgets NOTHING He een explained to us in the Al-Quran that drinking milk is good for us...Why would he not put in the details of capital punishment when he had already subcribed the verdict???? I need more explanation Brothers.......Im a devout muslim and i'm willing to learn but i am not blind and i will adher to 17:30 for the Al-Quran is the word of God and god is the best of teachers Allhamduilah irabil alamien.................Wasalam Brothers and Sisters..................Staffy
Reply

kadafi
07-04-2005, 02:17 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Staffy
The surah refers to those who commit adultery and fornification these verse were given as complete entideys i will repeat myself when i say you cant just ad somthing to the Al-Quran like that espesialy when the punishment is already set in place When God says "be" it will be God is infinate in knowlage and is not bound by time matter or space........You underestimate Him by saying "oh yes god forgot this verse and now it is in sunnah" God forgot NOTHING in the Al-Quran for God forgets NOTHING He een explained to us in the Al-Quran that drinking milk is good for us...Why would he not put in the details of capital punishment when he had already subcribed the verdict???? I need more explanation Brothers.......Im a devout muslim and i'm willing to learn but i am not blind and i will adher to 17:30 for the Al-Quran is the word of God and god is the best of teachers Allhamduilah irabil alamien.................Wasalam Brothers and Sisters..................Staffy
:sl: brother,

No one is here adding anything akhee but you fail to grasp the position of the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and the rulings of abrogation in Islam.

Firstly, the Prophet (Peace and blessings of ALlah be upon him) was endowed with the authority to make laws or as a legislator. These are not rulings based on his opinions but rather is based on inspiration(wahy).

"By the star when it goes down, your companion (i.e., Muhammad) has neither gone astray nor has erred. Nor does he speak of (his own) desire. It is only an Inspiration [wahy] that is inspired." [53:1-4]

Allah (Exalted is He says in the Qur'an:
And My mercy embraces all things. So I shall prescribe it for those who fear Allâh and pay zakâh (obligatory alms) and those who have faith in Our signs; those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet whom they find written down in the Torah and the Injîl, and who bids them to the Fair and forbids them the Unfair, and makes lawful for them the good things, and makes unlawful for them the impure things, and relieves them of their burdens and of the shackles that were upon them. So, those who believe in him, and honour him, and help him, and follow the light that has been sent down with him- they are the ones who acquire success. (7:156-157)

Fight those who do not believe in Allâh and the Hereafter and do not hold unlawful what Allâh and His Messenger have made unlawful. (9:29)

No believer, neither man nor woman, has a right, when Allâh and His Messenger decide a matter, to have a choice in their matter in issue. And whoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger has gone astray into manifest error. (33:36)

Whatever the Messenger gives you, take it; and whatever he forbids you, refrain from it. (59:7)

But no, by your Lord, they shall not be (deemed to be) believers unless they accept you as judge in their disputes, then find in their hearts no adverse feeling against what you decided, but surrender to it in complete submission. (4:65)

So now that I have clarified the position of the Prophet (Peace and blessings of ALlah be upon him), let's move to the authority where he can interpret the Glorious Qur'an.

And We sent down towards you the Advice (i.e. the Qur’ân) so that you may explain to the people what has been sent down to them, and so that they may ponder. (16:44)

That ayah is sufficient enough and I will not cite the rest of the other ayats that explain his position.

The Qur'an is complete but it requires explanation and thus Allah (Exalted is He) endowed his Messenger with Hikhmah (Sunnah) to explain what was revealed.

One example would be the prohibition of combinin' two sisters:

Allah (Exalted is He) said:
And (it is also prohibited) to combine two sisters together.

The Prophet (Peace and blessings of ALlah be upon him) clarified that this prohibition is not only restricted to two sisters only but also the prohibition of combining an aunt and her niece, paternal or maternal, as well.

You wrote that I stated that Allaah (Exalted is He) has forgotten the verse (May Allah forgive me). I never wrote that, my dear brother and please forgive me if my statement implied that way.

I wrote and I quote:
This is because, the stoning verse was first recited durin' the days of the Prophet (Peace and blessings of ALlah be upon him) but abrogated verbally but its injuction is still applicable. This type of abrogation is known as Naskh at-Tilaawah doona al-Hukm

In other words, Allah (Exalted is He) in his infinite Wisdom caused to abrogate the verse verbally.

This is in accordance with the verse:
"Whatever of a message We abrogate, or We cause it to be forgotten, We bring one better than that or the like of it. Do you not know that Allah indeed is the Possessor of power over all things?" (2:106)

Another example would be this ayah:
"If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, take the evidence of four (reliable) witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them, or Allah ordain for them some (other) way."
[4:15]

Ibn Khatir (May Allah have Mercy on him) said regarding this verse:

"At the beginning of Islam, the ruling concerning a woman who was proven guilty of adultery was that she was to be detained in a house and not allowed to come out until she died.

So the phrase ‘If any of your women are guilty of lewdness’ refers to adultery. ‘Take the evidence of four (reliable) witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them, or Allah ordain for them some (other) way’ - the ‘other way’ that Allah made for them was the abrogation of this.

Ibn ‘Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, said: ‘This was the ruling until Allah revealed Surat al-Nur, then this punishment was abrogated and replaced with whipping or stoning.’

Something similar was reported from ‘Ikrimah, Sa‘id ibn Jubayr, al-Hasan, ‘Ataa’ al-Khurasani, Abu Saalih, Qutaadah, Zayd ibn Aslam and al-Dahhak, stating that this is abrogated, and this is agreed upon. Imam Ahmad said: ‘Muhammad ibn Ja‘far told us that Sa‘id told us from Qutaadah from al-Hasan from Hattaan ibn ‘Abdullah al-Raqaashi from ‘Ubaadah ibn al-Saamit who said: Whenever the wahy (revelation) descended upon the Messenger of Allah (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him), it affected him, the stress showed on him and his face would change.

Allah sent a revelation to him one day, and when it was over, he said: " Listen to me, Allah has made another way for them. (When) a married man (commits adultery) with a married woman, and an unmarried man with an unmarried woman, then in the case of married (persons) there is (a punishment) of one hundred lashes and then stoning (to death), and in the case of unmarried persons, (the punishment) is one hundred lashes and exile for one year."

It was reported by Muslim and other narrators of Sunan via Qutaadah from al-Hasan from al-Hattan from ‘Ubaadah ibn al-Saamit from the Prophet (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) with the wording:
‘Receive (teaching) from me, receive (teaching) from me. Allah has made another way for those (women). When an unmarried man commits adultery with an unmarried woman, (they should receive) one hundred lashes, and banishment for one year. In the case of a married male committing adultery with a married female, they should receive one hundred lashes and be stoned to death.’ Al-Tirmidhi said: This is a saheeh hasan hadeeth."

:w: bro
Reply

Staffy
07-05-2005, 06:01 AM
:w:
I have found a very informative thread on hadith Disini>(forums.understanding-islam.org)
So i will quote it now:
format_quote Originally Posted by khalid zaheer(from UI forum)
assalaam o alaikum friends

Hadith is an unreal or conjectural knowledge so could not be accepted without strong evidences. So there are some principles made by the knowledge full persons (Muhaddaseen) through we analyze and know the accuracy of the most of the Ahadith. Following are some very famous and usual rules adopt by knowledge full persons to examine the Ahadith.

1_Hadith is saying something against Quran, in any way, would be wrong. For example “Mairaaj” from the house of Ummay Haani, or every one would be called by one’s mother name on judgment day.

2_Hadith is saying something against outright Sunnah could not be right.

3_Hadith is saying something against evident intellect considered wrong. For example Muhammad (saw) was suffered by black magic.

4_Hadith consist of the things that are beyond the personality of Muhammad (saw) as “there would be given 70000 “Horain” to Muhammad (saw)” is nothing.

5_Hadith consist of the things that do not match with daily experience as “brinjul or potato is cure of every disease.”

6_Hadith is indicating an impossible thing like “if rice becomes man would be too tolerant” have not any importance.

7_Hadith is indicating heavy return on a little good or bad practice is nothing, for example 30 year’s sins would be removed if you once say Subhaan Allah.

8_Declaration of the grace or a special place of any kind of oil or flower or stone or mountain is not able to accept, for example Rose is created with Muhammad’s (saw) perspiration.

9_Declaration of the grace or a special place of Jujube or Henna is not able to accept.

10_Every hadith using the name “Humaira” for Ayesha (rt) is nothing.

11_Every hadith calling Ali (rt) by vocative word “Ya” (Ya Ali) is not able to trust.

12_Hadith consist of such kind of saying that do not match with the personality of Messengers (as) is nothing. For example the stories relate to Muhammad’s (saw) marriage with Zainab (rt).

13_An event that should be narrated by hundreds but only one or two is narrating could not be accurate, for example re-rising of sun for Ali (rt).

14_A thing is indicating too important (means it is necessary to know for every muslim) but only one person is narrating it. For example Muhammad (saw) said Ali (rt) is my Legatee and better than any other person after me.

15_If a specific time is given for a forthcoming event. For example Muhammad (saw) said caliph ness will be existing 30 years after me. Such kinds of ahadith are not able to accept.

16_If the hadith is showing the grace of any city except Makkah and Madina, or showing the grace of any mosque except Masjid Haraam, Masjid Nabvi and Masjid Aqsa. If the hadith is stating the privilege of seeing any kind of pilgrimage tomb or grave even Muhammad’s (saw) grave. For example Muhammad (saw) said who will visit to my grave his intercession is my responsibility.

17_If the hadith states some principles relate to medical could not be considered.

18_Hadith is indicating the importance of misc. kind of prayers and fast of month Rajab, so and so. Such kinds of ahadith have nay any importance.

19_Hadith is showing aliveness of Khizer and Ilyaas in any way is nothing.

20_If the words are indecent, or the language is not right (not according to typical Arabic) then hadith will not be acceptable.

21_Statement that that day is ominous, for example Tuesday is menacing could not be a hadith.

22_If some other ways are proving the hadith wrong. For example the usually stated events at the time of migration (Hij’rat) of Muhammad (saw) from Makkah to Madina, there are some other Ahadith prove them wrong with strong references.

23_Declaring fight against “Jinnaat”, for example Ali’s (rt) fight in Badder’s well.

24_Any story relate to Muhammad’s (saw) birth is certainly wrong.

25_Censuring any one of the Suhaba Ikram (rt) in any way, or praising or censuring of any one of the founders of four sects could not be considered a hadith.

26_Declaring the virginity is a good thing. (means marriage is not good thing)

27_If the hadith is criticizing the persons, in any way, born due to illegal relationship would not be acceptable.

28_If the hadith is saying some thing about divine knowledge of Ali (rt). (It’s the agreed decision that 99.99% ahadith relate to Ali (rt) are wrong)

29_If the hadith is the cause of some kind of addition in Islam (Biddat) would not be acceptable. For example patriotism is a part of Aaimaan (faith)

30_If the “Ravi” (narrator) of a hadith is criticized in any way then the hadith is acceptable. For example most of the narrators of the ahadith relate to Imam Mahdi or Dijaal criticized by knowledge full persons.

31_The meeting of two “Ravies” of a hadith is not proved the hadith has not any place. For example Tabri did claim Sari bin Ismail told me some events through letter, but how it is possible when Sari had died in 207 Hijri and Tabri was born in 224 Hijri.

32_Hadith is indicating the pre-forgiveness of any caste or family not acceptable. For example Muhammad (saw) said Ali (rt) you and your “Shi’ias” will certainly be entered in paradise.

33_All the ahadith relate to Bannu Abbas and Bannu Umai’ya are nothing.

34_If a hadith is indicating unnatural things (like extra ordinary power or height) for past nations would be considered nothing.

34_If the hadith is claiming, in any way, that the parents of Muhammad (saw) are muslim.

35_If the hadith is claiming in any way that Abu Taalib is muslim. Such kinds of ahadith are surly wrong.

(Mao’zoaat by Mulla Ali Qaari + Ejaala-a-Na’afa by Shah Abdul Aziz Dehlvi with the reference of Imam Joozi, Ibn-a-Qai’yam, Hafiz Sukhaavi, Juzzri, Hafiz Zahbi, Ibn-a-Hajar, so and so)

There are some more rules other than mentioned above are indicated at misc. place by misc. knowledge full persons (Muhaddaseen) like ibn-a-hajar, ibn-a-joozi, hafiz zahbi etc.

1_All the ahadith relate to Abdaal, Qutab and Walli type persons are nothing.

2_If a hadith is indicating that one could pray from Allah by the reference of some one, even by the reference of Muhammad (saw), is nothing.

3_Hadith, in any way, relate to Khilafat or Imamat or Wilaayat (spiritual and physical kingship) of Ali (rt) is nothing.

4_Hadith is indicating the Shahaadat (martyrdom) of Husain (ru) in any way not able to accept. For example Ummay Salma (rt) said Jibra’eel told Muhammad (saw) Hussain (ru) will be killed.

5_Every hadith relate to “Punj’tan” (Muhammad (saw), Ali, Fatima, Hassan, Hussain these persons are innocent in every way and have the higher place than others) is wrong.

6_Every hadith indicating, in any way, that the Soul of Muhammad (saw) is created or bring into existence at very first step is wrong.

7_All the ahadith claiming the creation of any thing with Noor-a-Ellahi are wrong like Muhammad (saw) is created by Noor.

8_Every hadith relate to any Shia Imam is wrong.

9_Every hadith relate to “Tassawuff”, “Kaali kamli”, “Paradise of Shaddad” and Ism-a-Aazam is wrong.

there are many other principles said by Muhaddaseen but that are less imprtant and use casually.

Allah hafiz
I hope it sheds light Unto the topic dicused (hopefully not tooo long for yas:P) maybe if sombody has time they could post it into a main thread on this forum? Wasalam to all my brothers and sisters in Islam :brother: :sister: May we all learn from life.............Staffy
:sl:
Reply

kadafi
07-05-2005, 07:11 PM
:sl:

I cannot see the gist of how it sheds light to the topic being discussed.

:w:
Reply

Staffy
07-06-2005, 05:19 AM
The stoning rule was put in place due to aHadith so therfore to analyse the sinceraty of the rule we must first analyse the aHadith........ :sl:
Reply

kadafi
07-06-2005, 10:53 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Staffy
The stoning rule was put in place due to aHadith so therfore to analyse the sinceraty of the rule we must first analyse the aHadith........ :sl:
:sl: bro,

These [hadiths] on stoning are included in the six princinple works and to be more specificailly, in the two sahih collections (i.e. Bukharee and Muslim) so thus, they are not [fabricated] or [weak] but are classified as sahih [authenthic] which every Muslim must accept.

In addition, there is the Consensus of the Ummah from the time of the Sahabas 'till the present age. Plus it is also described in the Qur'an as the 'way out' verse.

Moreover, the 'analysis' that you have posted is fishy to say the least, especially if there are no references provided.

Remember akhee, if you still reject the hudd punishment for stoning whilst clear evidence has been presented to you, then that is an act of kufr (disbelief).

:w:
Reply

Staffy
07-06-2005, 11:30 AM
:w:
It states in the al-quran if i am not mistaken that a unclean man is for a unclean woman and a aulteror is for a adulterous and vice versa........if they were dead how could they be for eachother? corrects me if i remember the verse horibly wrong i dont have enough time to look it up......Staffy
:sl:
Reply

kadafi
07-06-2005, 09:55 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Staffy
:w:
It states in the al-quran if i am not mistaken that a unclean man is for a unclean woman and a aulteror is for a adulterous and vice versa........if they were dead how could they be for eachother? corrects me if i remember the verse horibly wrong i dont have enough time to look it up......Staffy
:sl:
:sl:

It is in Surah An-Nur, verse 3:
The Zani marries not but a Zaniyah or a Mushrikah; and the Zaniyah, none marries her except a Zani or a Mushrik. Such a thing is forbidden to the believers
You have to understand akhee, that the meaning of Zina means illegal sex intercourse. Thus, it embraces both fornication and adultery.

Since the punishment of fornication is not the hudd punishment (capital punishment), this verse applies to them. A Muslim man/woman cannot marry a fornicator except under the condition that they have sincerely repented.

:w:
Reply

Staffy
07-07-2005, 05:47 AM
:w:
In my earleir posts i have provided quranic evedence on the right punishment ordained........
:sl:
(I love Hadith Alhamduilah that we have such wonderfull reminates of hadith of the prophet to give us such great ideas for rightious conduct)
(but i love the al-quran and it's sunnah more for that is the direct words of Allah the almighty one and none can be compared with it) :brother:
Reply

Bittersteel
07-07-2005, 07:14 AM
I don't think Islam allows one man to take the life of another.
except in the course of justice.
Reply

Khaldun
07-07-2005, 08:59 AM
:sl:

Yes how many times does it say in the Quran it is Haram for one man to kill another (ie take a life) but if you pay attention it is almost always added with a "Ila bil haqq" except in a just case. And as for the sunnah, if we didnt need hadith which is the example and the way shown to us by the prophet salahu alyhi wassalam why did Allah send a Messenger amongst us? Whe have to ask ourselfs what is the Hikmah (wisedom) with sending a Human Being as a messenger? If Allah had willed He could have surely made Angels walk the earth as Messengers, but by making it a "bashar" human Allah is Merciful towards us but only the people with knowledge understand this fact. The people who say this is not in the Quran but in the sunnah and therefore disregard it even though it is a saheeh hadith have obviously not read the ayah which says

And whatever the Apostle gives you, accept it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep back, and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; surely Allah is severe in retributing (evil):

And as brother Kadafi has clearified Allahs Messenger did not speak from his own desire everything he said (in terms of Hukm) was only from revelation and nothing more or less.
Reply

khalid zaheer
07-09-2005, 09:21 AM
Assalaam o alaikum

Firstly, the Prophet (Peace and blessings of ALlah be upon him) was endowed with the authority to make laws or as a legislator. These are not rulings based on his opinions but rather is based on inspiration (wahy).
"By the star when it goes down, your companion (i.e., Muhammad) has neither gone astray nor has erred. Nor does he speak of (his own) desire. It is only an Inspiration [wahy] that is inspired." [53:1-4]
what do mean by Nor does He (saw) speaks of (his own) desire? Means “every thing” He spoke in his life was Wahy. For example

And when you were saying to him whom God had blessed and you had favored, “keep your wife to yourself and fear God, and you are concealing in your heart what God would reveal, and you are fearing people, though God had a better right that should fear Him”. Then, when Zaid had accomplished formalities concerning her (divorced her), We gave her in marriage to you, so that there should be no blame on the Believers concerning the wives of their adopted sons, when they accomplish formalities concerning them; and Allah's command is ever done. (37/33)

What you say about above verse? If the words Muhammad (saw) said to Zaid (rt) was the result of wahy then why Zahid (rt) did not act upon?

No brother this saying (53:1-4) is only for Quran that the every word of Quran is the word of Allah. Further how you become sure that you are debating over the words really the words of Muhammad (saw)?

It is your assumption my brother that Muhammad (saw) have the authority to make laws. It is impossible for any messenger that has the authority as a legislator. Legislator is only and only One and that is Almighty Allah. And the Messengers are the first and perfect actor upon order of Allah. Could you present even a single verse from Quran that indicate Muhammad (saw) have the authority as a legislator?

So now that I have clarified the position of the Prophet (Peace and blessings of ALlah be upon him), let's move to the authority where he can interpret the Glorious Qur'an.

And We sent down towards you the Advice (i.e. the Qur’ân) so that you may explain to the people what has been sent down to them, and so that they may ponder. (16:44)

That ayah is sufficient enough and I will not cite the rest of the other ayats that explain his position.
The Qur'an is complete but it requires explanation and thus Allah (Exalted is He) endowed his Messenger with Hikhmah (Sunnah) to explain what was revealed.
I think you did not read the word “Taba’yan” means “explain some thing in every way” in Quran for Quran. This word is used in Quran many times for Quran that this Quran is sent to you with complete explanation in it. There is nothing beyond it. And the perception you tried to explain through some Aayaat is only assumption nothing more. Muhammad (saw) have not any right to add or remove even a tiny thing and if He did then Quran said,

And surely they had purposed to turn you away from that which We have revealed to you, that you should forge against Us other than this Quran, and then they would certainly have taken you for a friend. And had it not been that We had already established you, you would certainly have been near to incline to them a little; In that case we would certainly have made you to taste a double (punishment) in this life and a double punishment) after death, then you would not have found any helper against Us. (17/73,74,75)

O people, the advice and cure of your souls has revealed in the shape of Quran, it is the grace, blessing and correct guidance for the persons having full faith. O Prophet Say them it is by the blessings and grace of Almighty Allah so rejoice for it and believe, it is better than that of any thing they are collecting himself.
(Younas, 57)
Imam Zahbi said for above verse when this ayat revealed Muhammad (saw) said to His companions “Don’t write any thing from me but only Quran and if you have some thing in written besides Quran destroy it” So all the written material (relate with deen) besides Quran destroyed and said by Abu Bakar (rt) and Umar_a _farooq (rt) to other people “hasbona kitaab Allah” means the book of Allah is enough.”
“Taz’kira tul Haffaaz – book one” by the reference of Sahee Muslim”

What you indicate through some Ayaat only a way of saying that there is no difference between both Allah and Muhammad’s (saw) saying, because Muhammad did or said as it as revealed in Quran. So it is impossible for Muhammad (saw) add or remove something in the order of Allah in the name explanation.

Allah (Exalted is He) said:
And (it is also prohibited) to combine two sisters together.

The Prophet (Peace and blessings of ALlah be upon him) clarified that this prohibition is not only restricted to two sisters only but also the prohibition of combining an aunt and her niece, paternal or maternal, as well.
Don’t try to load a burden over Muhammad (saw) because you would have to put it on your neck. If Muhammad (saw) did as you stated then He had not any right to say himself a Messenger. Quran has said at many places that Muhammad (saw) is nothing but a Messenger and the perfect actor of what reveals to Him. So how is it possible that He (saw) add this thing in the order of Allah? Brother you says others that they don’t know the place of Muhammad (saw) but I think you don’t know the exact place of Muhammad (saw)

I wrote and I quote:
This is because, the stoning verse was first recited durin' the days of the Prophet (Peace and blessings of ALlah be upon him) but abrogated verbally but its injuction is still applicable. This type of abrogation is known as Naskh at-Tilaawah doona al-Hukm.
Abrogated verbally but order is still applicable? Is it the thing some one have some intellect could agree with? If I ask here could you plz put even a single example other than this? There was a verse revealed by Allah but stop to enter in Quran, what a thing (wah je wah), a verse one of two lives depends upon stop to enter in Quran, but the order is still applicable, good very good. Then what is the place of Quran? There could be some other Ayaat that were stopped to enter in quran, what you say about? I think you want to spread the “Aqeedah” of Shia Sect that there were some verses did not enter in Quran and this Quran is incomplete. And what about the saying of Allah that “I am the protector of this Quran”

Stoning is the matter of life and death. Don’t you know even in the matter of murder there is first rule is “Qassaass” but in this matter death is necessary, there is no other way. This is your Deen? Don’t the orders of Allah enough for you that you want to add some thing and add in this way? Surprising

Allah sent a revelation to him one day, and when it was over, he said: " Listen to me, Allah has made another way for them. (When) a married man (commits adultery) with a married woman, and an unmarried man with an unmarried woman, then in the case of married (persons) there is (a punishment) of one hundred lashes and then stoning (to death), and in the case of unmarried persons, (the punishment) is one hundred lashes and exile for one year."
Is this the base of your DEEN? That you will kill one or two persons because some persons a saying this is the order of Allah.

Allah says in quran

Men have authority over women, for that God has exalted one over the other, and for that they expend of their wealth; so the righteous women are obedient and guard the unseen as God has guarded. And those whose rebellion you fear, admonish them and leave them alone in the beds, and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; God is surely High, Great.(34/4)

The fornicator does not marry but a fornicatress or an idolatress; and the fornicatress __ none marries her but a fornicator or an idolater; and that is forbidden to the Believers. And those who accuse chaste women, then do not bring four witnesses, flog them with eighty stripes, and do not accept their testimony ever, for they are the transgressors; but those who, thereafter, repent and make amends, then God is Forgiving, Merciful. (3 to 5/24)

And those who accuse their wives but have no witnesses except themselves, then the testimony of one of them shall be to testify by God four times that he is surely of the truthful; and the fifth time, that the curse of God be upon him, if he should be of the liars. But it shall avert the punishment from her, if she testifies by God four times that he is of the liars. and the fifth time, that the wrath of God be upon her, if he should be of the truthful. And were it not for God's bounty and His mercy on you, and that God is All-turning, Wise. (6 to10/24)

And such of your women who commit indecency, call four of you to witness against them; then if they bear witness, detain them in the houses until death ends them, or God opens a way for them. (15/4)

And the two of you who commit it, give them hurt; then if they repent and make amends, turn aside from them; God is All-returning, Merciful. (16/4)

The fornicatress and the fornicator, flog each one of them with a hundred stripes, and let no pity for them hold you in the matter of God's Religion, if you believe in God and the Last Day; and let a group of the Believers witness their punishment. (2/24)

Now what you say about these verses? What is the place of them in quran? I think all these verses are useless after the order of stoning so there is no need of these verses in Quran. Is this the Quran the base of Islamic rules and regulations?


Allah hafiz
Reply

Staffy
07-09-2005, 03:37 PM
:sl: Alhamduilah my great points my brother:) lets not forget that the quran is above all else and Allah gave the challege did he not to just try make even one chapter as good as one in the Al-Quran.....For that is inpossible Alhamduilah Irabil Alamien to Allah alone do i pledge alegance...........Wasalam.......Staffy :w:
Reply

kadafi
07-09-2005, 06:58 PM
what do mean by Nor does He (saw) speaks of (his own) desire? Means “every thing” He spoke in his life was Wahy. For example

And when you were saying to him whom God had blessed and you had favored, “keep your wife to yourself and fear God, and you are concealing in your heart what God would reveal, and you are fearing people, though God had a better right that should fear Him”. Then, when Zaid had accomplished formalities concerning her (divorced her), We gave her in marriage to you, so that there should be no blame on the Believers concerning the wives of their adopted sons, when they accomplish formalities concerning them; and Allah's command is ever done. (37/33)

What you say about above verse? If the words Muhammad (saw) said to Zaid (rt) was the result of wahy then why Zahid (rt) did not act upon?

No brother this saying (53:1-4) is only for Quran that the every word of Quran is the word of Allah. Further how you become sure that you are debating over the words really the words of Muhammad (saw)?

It is your assumption my brother that Muhammad (saw) have the authority to make laws. It is impossible for any messenger that has the authority as a legislator. Legislator is only and only One and that is Almighty Allah. And the Messengers are the first and perfect actor upon order of Allah.
:w:

You want to know the clarification for the term wahy but in the next sentence, you assume you already figured it out and attack based on your erroneous explanation of the verse. Let me re-iterate the verse:
"By the star when it goes down, your companion (i.e., Muhammad) has neither gone astray nor has erred. Nor does he speak of (his own) desire. It is only an Inspiration [wahy] that is inspired." [53:1-4]
What is this Inspiration that is inspired? Is it the wahy that is revealed to him pertaining to the religion or is it every word that he utters? Unrecited wahy is obviously relating to the Al-Islaam. EVERYTHING that is related to the religion, the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is immune from making a mistake. And that means his Sunnah is immune from mistakes. And that is exactly what the verse is refering. If the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allaah) wasn't immune of mistakes pertainin' to the religion, then Islaam would be corrupted and there was the posibility that the Prophet could have a mistake in revealing the Message. And thus, the Message would not be protected.

Allaah rebuked the Prophet in the verse you cited because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah) is not immune from minor sins. These are minor sins that have nothing to do with conveying the Message and the revelation. And when the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah) commited this minor sin, he was hastenly rebuked by Allaah. The previous Prophets were also rebuked when they commited a minor sin that had nothing do to with conveyin' the Message.

For instances:
"Thus did Adam disobey his Lord, so he went astray.
Then his Lord chose him, and turned to him with forgiveness, and gave him guidance"
[20:121-122]
Here, our father Adaam (peace be upon him) commited a sin but was swiftly rebuked by his Lord.

Or what about Moses (Peace be upon him).
"He said: `This is of Shaytaan's (Satan's) doing, verily, he is a plain misleading enemy.'

He said: `My Lord! Verily, I have wronged myself, so forgive me.' Then He forgave him. Verily, He is the OftForgiving, the Most Merciful"

[28:15-16]
Here, Moses (peace be upon him) confessed his sin and sought forgiveness from Allaah after he killed the Egyptian and Allaah forgave his sin.

These are some of the examples that support my point.

It is also funny that you cited the verse regardin' Zaid, 'cause in that verse, Allaah made us clear that he disclosed to the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) that he would marry Zainab (May Allaah be pleased with her).

Let me re-iterate the verse again(emphasis added):
When you were saying to the one whom Allah had blessed and whom you had blessed, (i.e. Zaid, before he divorced Zainab), “Keep to you your wife and fear Allah,” and you were hiding in your heart what Allah was to disclose and you were fearing people, and Allâh has more right to be feared by you. So, when Zaid finished with her, We made you marry her, so that there may remain no restriction on the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons when they have finished with them. And the order of Allah had to be done. (33:37)
See the emphasised words. Can you point out the information that Allaah (Exalted is He) disclosed to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Where did Allaah (Exalted is He) tell His messenger that he was going to marry Zainab (May Allaah be pleased with her). You cannot, because this is again unrecited revelation. But let's look at an another evidence in the same verse. Allaah (Exalted is He) also said: "We made you marry her". Where can I find this order in the Glorious Qur'an?

Could you present even a single verse from Quran that indicate Muhammad (saw) have the authority as a legislator?
A single verse? I could provide you with atleast 5 verses.
And My mercy embraces all things. So I shall prescribe it for those who fear Allâh and pay zakâh (obligatory alms) and those who have faith in Our signs; those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet whom they find written down in the Torah and the Injîl, and who bids them to the Fair and forbids them the Unfair, and makes lawful for them the good things, and makes unlawful for them the impure things, and relieves them of their burdens and of the shackles that were upon them. So, those who believe in him, and honour him, and help him, and follow the light that has been sent down with him- they are the ones who acquire success. (7:156-157)
Fight those who do not believe in Allâh and the Hereafter and do not hold unlawful what Allâh and His Messenger have made unlawful. (9:29)

No believer, neither man nor woman, has a right, when Allâh and His Messenger decide a matter, to have a choice in their matter in issue. And whoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger has gone astray into manifest error. (33:36)

Whatever the Messenger gives you, take it; and whatever he forbids you, refrain from it. (59:7)
But no, by your Lord, they shall not be (deemed to be) believers unless they accept you as judge in their disputes, then find in their hearts no adverse feeling against what you decided, but surrender to it in complete submission. (4:65)
I think you did not read the word “Taba’yan” means “explain some thing in every way” in Quran for Quran. This word is used in Quran many times for Quran that this Quran is sent to you with complete explanation in it. There is nothing beyond it. And the perception you tried to explain through some Aayaat is only assumption nothing more.
I read it correctly, your argument is flawed. Here, you're arguing the Qur'an is sent with complete explanation but yet Allaah (Exalted is He) has said in many verses that he sent His messenger to EXPLAIN and Instruct them. If we use your logic that the Qur'an was sent with the complete explanation, then clearly, the Prophet was nothing more than an postman who should only deliver the Qur'an. And you also accused Allaah for making mistake in the verse that he send his Messenger to purify and instruct the people. You cannot claim that the Qur'an has been setd down with complete explanation in one part and in the other part claim that the Messenger should explain the Message in a different way. Contradictatory parts, wouldn't you agree?


Another proof that support that the Prophet was sent down as a teacher.

Allaah (Exalted is He) said:
Move not your tongue with it in order to hasten it. It is on Us to gather it (in your heart) and to recite it. So, when We read it, follow its reading. Then it is on Us to explain it. (75:16-19)
In the last sentence, Allaah (Exalted is He) reassured His messenger that he would explain the verses of the Glorious Qur'an to him. Where is the explanation? Is that explanation the unrecited wahy? What happend to the "complete explanation Qur'an".

Muhammad (saw) have not any right to add or remove even a tiny thing and if He did then Quran said,

And surely they had purposed to turn you away from that which We have revealed to you, that you should forge against Us other than this Quran, and then they would certainly have taken you for a friend. And had it not been that We had already established you, you would certainly have been near to incline to them a little; In that case we would certainly have made you to taste a double (punishment) in this life and a double punishment) after death, then you would not have found any helper against Us. (17/73,74,75)
The Prophet Muhammad (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had the right to add the explanation to what was revealed to him. That was the decree of Allaah and supported in the Glorious Qur'an. As for the verse you cited, do you even know the history behind it? That verse was revealed after the so-called interpolation allegation. It was the (false) story that the Prophet was deceived by Sheeytan and added something in to the recited revelation.

O people, the advice and cure of your souls has revealed in the shape of Quran, it is the grace, blessing and correct guidance for the persons having full faith. O Prophet Say them it is by the blessings and grace of Almighty Allah so rejoice for it and believe, it is better than that of any thing they are collecting himself.
(Younas, 57)
Imam Zahbi said for above verse when this ayat revealed Muhammad (saw) said to His companions “Don’t write any thing from me but only Quran and if you have some thing in written besides Quran destroy it” So all the written material (relate with deen) besides Quran destroyed and said by Abu Bakar (rt) and Umar_a _farooq (rt) to other people “hasbona kitaab Allah” means the book of Allah is enough.”
“Taz’kira tul Haffaaz – book one” by the reference of Sahee Muslim”
You're not giving the complete story and nor are did you state the complete hadeeth.

The full text of the hadeeth is:
Do not write (what you hear) from me, and whoever has written something (he heard) from me, he should erase it. Narrate to others (what you hear) from me; and whoever deliberately attributes a lie to me, he should prepare his seat in the Fire.” [Sahih Muslim]
Remember that you ommited the part where it states: "Narrate to others what you hear from me".

What is the story behind this hadeeth? It is explained coherently in the following treatise titled 'The Authority of Sunnah'

The underlined phrase of the hadîth clarifies that prohibition for writing hadîth was not on account of negating its authority. The actual reason was that in the beginning of the revelation of the Qur’ân, the companions of the Prophet were not fully familiar with the Qur’ânic style, nor was the Qur’ân compiled in a separate book form. In those days some companions began to write the ahâdîth along with the Qur’ânic text. Some explanations of the Qur’ân given by the Prophet were written by some of them mixed with the Qur’ânic verses without any distinction between the two. It was therefore feared that it would lead to confuse the Qur’ânic text with the ahâdîth.

It was in this background that the Prophet stopped this practice and ordered that anything written other than the Qur’ân should be rubbed or omitted. It should be kept in mind that in those days there was a great shortage of writing paper. Even the verses of the Qur’ân used to be written on pieces of leather, on planks of wood, on animal bones and sometimes on stones. It was much difficult to compile all those things in a book form, and if the ahâdîth were also written in the like manner it would be more difficult to distinguish between the writings of the Qur’ân and those of the ahâdîth. The lack of familiarity with the Qur’ânic style would also help creating confusion.

For these reasons the Prophet directed his companions to abstain from writing the ahâdîth and to confine their preservation to the first three ways which were equally reliable as discussed earlier.

But all this was in the earlier period of his prophethood. When the companions became fully conversant of the style of the Qur’ân and writing paper became available, this transitory measure of precaution was taken back, because the danger of confusion between the Qur’ân and the hadîth no longer existed.
Did the Prophet instruct them after the style of the Glorious Qur'an was made clear to them? Yes.
“Seek help from your right hand,” and pointed out to a writing. [Jâmi’ Tirmidhi]
Râfi’ ibn Khadij , the famous companion of the Prophet says, “I said to the Prophet [that] we hear from you many things, should we write them down?” He replied:
You may write. There is no harm. [Tadrîb-ur-Râwi]

Sayyiduna Anas reports that the Prophet () has said:

Preserve knowledge by writing. [Jâmi’-ul-Bayân]

Sayyiduna Abu Râfi’ sought permission from the Prophet to write ahâdîth. The Prophet permitted him to do so. [Jâmi’ Tirmidhi]

It is reported that the ahâdîth written by Abu Râfi’ were copied by other companions too. Salma, a pupil of Ibn ‘Abbâs says:

I saw some small wooden boards with ‘Abdullâh Ibn ‘Abbâs. He was writing on them some reports of the acts of the Prophetwhich he acquired from Abu Râfi’. [Tabaqât Ibn Sa’d]
‘Abdullâh ibn ‘Amr ibn al-‘Âs reports that the Prophet said to him:
Preserve knowledge.
He asked, “and how should it be preserved?” The Prophet replied, “by writing it.” [Mustadrik Hâkim; Jâmi’-ul-Bayân]
What you indicate through some Ayaat only a way of saying that there is no difference between both Allah and Muhammad’s (saw) saying, because Muhammad did or said as it as revealed in Quran. So it is impossible for Muhammad (saw) add or remove something in the order of Allah in the name explanation.
That is because the sayings of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) IS A REVELATION. They are revealed by Allaah. And nor did I speak about adding something in the Glorious Qur'an, rather, I said that the Prophet was sent to explain the Qur'an in detail since the Glorious Qur'an lays the brief injunctions and the Prophet elaborates it.

Don’t try to load a burden over Muhammad (saw) because you would have to put it on your neck. If Muhammad (saw) did as you stated then He had not any right to say himself a Messenger. Quran has said at many places that Muhammad (saw) is nothing but a Messenger and the perfect actor of what reveals to Him. So how is it possible that He (saw) add this thing in the order of Allah? Brother you says others that they don’t know the place of Muhammad (saw) but I think you don’t know the exact place of Muhammad (saw)
I am not "trying" anything, rather you akhee are trying to attribute a new interpretation of the position of the Prophet. I am only repeating what has been revealed in the Qur'an and has been accepted by the Sahabas untill the present day Ummah. And you are right, the Prophet was nothing more than a Messenger meaning that he was just like the other messengers and that he was an human being.

Abrogated verbally but order is still applicable? Is it the thing some one have some intellect could agree with? If I ask here could you plz put even a single example other than this? There was a verse revealed by Allah but stop to enter in Quran, what a thing (wah je wah), a verse one of two lives depends upon stop to enter in Quran, but the order is still applicable, good very good. Then what is the place of Quran? There could be some other Ayaat that were stopped to enter in quran, what you say about? I think you want to spread the “Aqeedah” of Shia Sect that there were some verses did not enter in Quran and this Quran is incomplete. And what about the saying of Allah that “I am the protector of this Quran”
I am the spreader of the Shia 'aqeedah? The three types of abrogation is not in accordance with your intellect? Rather, an intellect who had specialized in the Sciences of the Glorious Qu'ran would agree with my claim. The claim of Ahlu Sunnah Wal Jamaah. The view of all the majority of scholars, the view of the scholars of tasfirs and hadeeth. These types of abrogation are stated in the Sunnah. Only the types with lack of understanding the Quranic sciences would make such claim.

Stoning is the matter of life and death. Don’t you know even in the matter of murder there is first rule is “Qassaass” but in this matter death is necessary, there is no other way. This is your Deen? Don’t the orders of Allah enough for you that you want to add some thing and add in this way? Surprising
I cannot grasp why you introduced Qasaas (retribution) in to the topic. I will make it clear, rejecting the hudd punishment for stoning is an act of kufr 'cause it is rejecting one of the fundamental laws of Islam. I have made the proof clear to you that the stoning is an applicable law of Islam.


Now what you say about these verses? What is the place of them in quran? I think all these verses are useless after the order of stoning so there is no need of these verses in Quran. Is this the Quran the base of Islamic rules and regulations?
You then cited a few verses regarding zina which I already have addressed. Perhaps if you had read my previous reply, you wouldn't had raise such question. Lack of reading on your part akhee.

:w:
Reply

Staffy
07-09-2005, 07:25 PM
rejecting the hudd punishment for stoning is an act of kufr
:sl:
So your saying i'm commiting a act of kufr? my works will amount to nothing now as i am not repenting? Please brother have some modesty in your posts on what athourity do you make such a rash statment? It hurts when a brother is so rash because most likely you only mean good! But Muhamad (pbuh) was a messanger of Allah and he delivered Allahs message....If Allah in his infinate mercy and wisdom gave permision for the punishment of stoning would it not be in the Quran? as Allahs infalible word? I go by the qurans rulings before i go by any hadith and the Al-Quran as i've stated tells me what to do in the issue of Adultery and Fornification I need no extra clarification..........Alhamduilah Irabil Alamien Ash hadu ala ilaha ila ala wa ash hadu anna muhamadan ra rasululah......That is my faith.....I am Muslim........Allah alone i worship sincre to him in my religeon......and may peace be upon you and your loved ones.........Staffy
:w: :brother:
Reply

kadafi
07-09-2005, 07:37 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Staffy
:sl:
So your saying i'm commiting a act of kufr? my works will amount to nothing now as i am not repenting? Please brother have some modesty in your posts on what athourity do you make such a rash statment? It hurts when a brother is so rash because most likely you only mean good! But Muhamad (pbuh) was a messanger of Allah and he delivered Allahs message....If Allah in his infinate mercy and wisdom gave permision for the punishment of stoning would it not be in the Quran? as Allahs infalible word? I go by the qurans rulings before i go by any hadith and the Al-Quran as i've stated tells me what to do in the issue of Adultery and Fornification I need no extra clarification..........Alhamduilah Irabil Alamien Ash hadu ala ilaha ila ala wa ash hadu anna muhamadan ra rasululah......That is my faith.....I am Muslim........Allah alone i worship sincre to him in my religeon......and may peace be upon you and your loved ones.........Staffy
:w: :brother:
:w: brother,

Please forgive me if I might sounded harsh but I have explained you in many posts the importance of the Sunnah. This is the one of the many primary beliefs in the Qur'an. Rejecting the Sunnah is disobeying Allaah and His Messenger and Disobeying them is Hellfire.

And whoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger and transgresses His limits, He shall admit him to Fire where he shall remain forever. (4:14)

And whoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger has gone astray into manifest error. (33:36)

And whoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger, for him there is the fire of Jahannam. There they shall remain forever. (72:23)

And whoever makes a breach with Allâh and His Messenger, then Allâh is severe in punishment. (8:13)

Did they not come to know that whoever opposes Allâh and His Messenger, for him there is the fire of Jahannam? (9:63)
You will find many websites belong to pseudo Islaamic-cults arguing that the Sunnah is fallible and not required but these people will only lead you astry.

I expounded the position of Sunnah and I have elucidated that the stoning punishment is one of the fundamental laws in Islaam. If you reject one of the laws, then how can one argue that he accepts the Message and believes in it. And like I also previously mentioned, the verse of abrogation was recited during the time of the Prophet but abrogated verbally whilst its injuction was applicable.

Whilst your intention may be pure akhee, I strongly urge you to seek knowledge because clearly you are new to Islam. And those who entered the Faith recently will easily get confused when confronted with advanced islamic rulings such as the abrogation.

:w:
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
07-09-2005, 07:46 PM
:sl: br Staffy,
When presented with information about Islam, you should try to increase your understanding of Islam, rather than becoming defensive. Br. Kadafi has clearly shown that we have to follow Islam as revealed by Allah SWT in the Qur'an and explained by Prophet Muhammad saws in his Sunnah (way). If you follow this you will never be lost.

If you always act defensive, you will never be able to gain a good understanding of Islam. You have to be open-minded in disucssions and see which position stands up to criticism. Br. Kadafi has refuted all of Khalid Zaheer's points.

I hope you will not be offended as you are our dear brother in Islam.
May Allah SWT guide all of us.

:w:
Reply

Staffy
07-09-2005, 08:02 PM
:sl:
I came to Islam because i read a translation of the Al-Quran Alhamduilah...
I did not have contact with muslims in Australia (or who i knew was a muslim) until i had already decided to revert......Now i have alot of contact with repitable Muslims Alhamuilah....
You did not explain to me why i should belive these aHadith's as the unchanged word of my Prophet(pbuh)? Allah reapeativly tells us that through repention lie's forgivness in fact at one stage i remember hearing of Isa (pbuh) asking Allah wether if Satan repented would Allah forgive him? and Allah was said to of said "of course i would forgive him but i already know he wont repent" so you see even shaytan would have forgivness Inshalla if he sincerley repented........So doe's this rulling not give room for forgivness? repentance? strong values which all Muslims have been taught? Allahs word in the Al-Quran is protected by Allah in his infinate mercy and wisdom! but we know not wether the Ahadith are protected.....
You have just asked me to belive and trust when the proof is not in front of me.........We are asked to seek truth from those who have knowlage but we are also asked to clarify everything ourselves otherwise to speak not of what we don't know(do not pass on info unless sure it's the truth and if doing so we must quote)........that is why i came to Islam.....Because it provideds all the evidence i need that this is the way of the rightous the truthfull way.....which hides nothing......and leaves nothing beyond the reach of anybody.......for Allah is indeed most mercifull and all knowing...... :w: :brother:
Reply

Staffy
07-09-2005, 08:08 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
May Allah SWT guide all of us
:sl:
Ameein brother..
:w:
Reply

Bittersteel
07-09-2005, 08:23 PM
ameen...

what's going on here?I lost track of your argument.

When you were saying to the one whom Allah had blessed and whom you had blessed, (i.e. Zaid, before he divorced Zainab), “Keep to you your wife and fear Allah,” and you were hiding in your heart what Allah was to disclose and you were fearing people, and Allâh has more right to be feared by you. So, when Zaid finished with her, We made you marry her, so that there may remain no restriction on the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons when they have finished with them. And the order of Allah had to be done. (33:37)
What does this verse explain?
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
07-09-2005, 09:11 PM
:sl: Staffy,
Yes, Allah SWT can forgive any sin if we sincerely repent.

The Ahadith have been authenticated, and scrutinised in detail by Islamic scholars for centures. No one claimed that Prophet Muhammad's (saws) sayings were perfectly preserved, but we have preserved much in the authentic ahadith.

I gave you this link before, but it seems you didn't study it:
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/

Please read it so that you can learn more about the sciences of ahadith and why we have authentic narrations which cannot be denied.

:w:
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
07-10-2005, 12:11 AM
:sl:
A useful article on the ahadith:
Proofs of its Preservation

Proofs that Allah preserved the sunnah are both textual and logical. The textual argument is based on the following verse “Of a surety, We certainly reveal the reminder, and We certainly are its definite guardians” (15:9). It can’t be stated that the word “reminder” in this verse is only referring to the Quran. It is either referring to the Quran and hadith or only the hadith. It is not possible that it is referring to only the Quran. This is true because it is inconceivable that only the wording of the Quran would be preserved. Preserving the Quran must imply both preserving both its wording and meaning. The meaning of the Quran is captured in the hadith of the Prophet peace be upon him, that is, its meaning cannot be had without the hadith of the Prophet peace be upon him.

The logical argument runs as follows: According to Islamic belief, the Quran is Allah’s final revelation and the Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him is Allah’s final messenger. Allah orders Muslims to follow the sunnah of the Prophet peace be upon him. If Allah did not preserve the sunnah, the true sunnah would have been lost and Allah would be ordering Muslims to follow something that they could not possibly follow. This would not be consistent with what is known of the mercy, wisdom, and justice of Allah. Therefore, logically speaking, Allah must have preserved the hadith. These arguments do not mean that Allah did not use some earthly means to preserve the Quran and the hadith. Allah, through humans, used many means by which He preserved the sunnah. Some of these aspects are unique to the Muslim nation. This is a great blessing and bounty from Allah for which every Muslim should be sincerely grateful to Allah and to those individuals who sacrificed their time and wealth in order to preserve the teachings of the Prophet peace be upon him.

Many people have a false conception of how the hadith were preserved. I will be discussing in some detail some of the means of preservation of hadith. There are yet other aspects in the preservation of hadith that “do not appear in the statistics,” as they say in the world of sports. For example, one cannot look at the chains of hadith and see the great desire that the early Muslims had in learning, memorizing, and gathering the hadith of the Prophet peace be upon him. This great desire to learn the hadith has been demonstrated in many different ways, one of them being the journeying and sacrificing of time and wealth to learn and record the hadith of the Prophet peace be upon him. The manner in which Allah preserved the Quran is well known and clear. However, the ways and means by which the hadith were preserved are not that well known. Hence some of the means by which the hadith were preserved will be discussed here.

The Prophet peace be upon him and His Position According to the Quran

a) Expounder of the Quran: The Prophet peace be upon him is the expounder of the Quran appointed by Allah. Allah mentions this in the Quran “We have revealed unto you the Remembrance that you may explain to mankind that which has been revealed for them” (16: 44). For example the Quran tells us to pray, but the details for the method of praying are not prescribed in the Quran. It was the Prophet’s task to demonstrate the forms of prayer.
b) Legislator: Allah says about the Prophet peace be upon him in Chapter 7 verse 157 “He will make lawful for them all good things and prohibit for them only the foul…”
c) Model behavior for the Muslim Society: Allah says in chapter 33 verse 21 “Indeed a noble model you have in Allah’s Messenger...” If we consider the Prophet peace be upon him as the model for the community, then Muslims have to follow his example in every way. Allah did not leave this open to debate and ordered complete obedience to the Prophet peace be upon him. For this reason the Muslim community accepted the authority of the Prophet peace be upon him from the very day his mission began.

Teaching of Ahadith by the Prophet peace be upon him

The methods used by the prophet peace be upon him to teach his sunnah or ahadith can be put in three categories:
1) Teaching of the sunnah in verbal form: the Prophet peace be upon him was the teacher of his sunnah, he would often times repeat important statements three times to make it easier for his companions to understand and memorize. New comers were often times to be accommodated by Medinites (people of Medina), not only for accommodations, but also for education in the Quran and Hadith.
2) Teaching the sunnah in writing; All letters sent by the Prophet peace be upon him to kings, chieftains, and Muslim governors can be included in his sunnah. Some of those letters were very lengthy and contained legal matters concerning zakah, taxation, forms of worship etc. The Prophet peace be upon him had at least 45 scribes who wrote for him at one time or another.
3) Teaching of the sunnah by practical demonstration: The Prophet peace be upon him taught the method of ablution, prayer, hajj etc all by practical demonstration. He gave practical lessons in excellence with clear instructions to follow his practice. He further said “Learn from the rituals of hajj” Many times he would tell questioners to stay with him and learn by observing his practice.

Measures taken by the Prophet peace be upon him for the Diffusion of Sunnah

1) Establishment of schools: The Prophet peace be upon him established a school in Mecca soon after he became a Prophet. Schools were also established by the Prophet peace be upon him in Medina soon after his arrival. His general policy was to send teachers to areas outside of Medina.
2) His Directions about Diffusion of Knowledge: The Prophet peace be upon him said “Pass on knowledge from me even if it is only one verse” He also said something similar during his farewell pilgrimage “Those who are present should convey the message to those who are absent” It was a common practice of the companions to tell absentees about the Prophets deeds and sayings.
3) Creation of incentive for teachers and students: The Prophet peace be upon him mentioned great rewards for teachers and students.
a) Reward for students: The Prophet peace be upon him said: “If anyone pursues a path in search of knowledge Allah will thereby make easy for him a path to paradise, and the angels spread their wings from good pleasure with one who seeks knowledge, and all the inhabitants of the heavens and the earth, even the fish in the depths of the water ask forgiveness for him”
b) Rewards for teachers: In this regard the Prophet peace be upon him mentioned that after death all deeds come to and end except three, one of them being knowledge that people still reap benefit from.


How the Sunnah was Received by the Companions

People always try to watch and remember the sayings and deeds of their loved ones. In regards to Mohammad peace be upon him, we can say for sure that he was the most beloved person on earth in his community. Some companions like Zayd said they would rather die, than have the Prophet peace be upon him even pricked with a thorn. Abu Sufyan a one time enemy of Islam said “I have never seen a man who was so loved by his companions as Mohammad was”. Thus the Prophet peace be upon him was the most beloved in his community. The community’s involvement in worldly pursuits was minimal and this made the opportunity for learning greater. The Arabs were known to have had excellent memories and used remember many verses of their tribal poets by heart.


Companions Learning of Ahadith

The Companions used three methods of learning

a) Learning by memorizing: They used to listen to every word of the prophet peace be upon him with utmost care. If he went away for any reason they would recollect what they had learned. Anas ibn Malik, the servant of the Prophet peace be upon him said “We sat with the Prophet peace be upon him, maybe sixty persons in number and the Prophet peace be upon him taught them ahadith. Later on when he went out for any necessity, we used to memorize it among us, when we departed it was as if cultivated in our hearts” Those who were absent also used learn from those who were present. Some of them even came to agreement among themselves to attend the gatherings of the Prophet peace be upon him in shifts, as we find in the case of Umar.
b) Learning ahadith through writing: The companions learned the ahadith by recording it in writing as well. There were a good number of companions who recorded the ahadith of the Prophet peace be upon him.
c) Learning ahadith by practice: The companions put into practice everything they learned by writing or memory. Knowledge in Islam is for practice and not just for the sake of knowledge. This is why it took Umar eight years to memorize the second chapter of the Quran
This is a sketch of how the ahadith of the Prophet peace be upon him was learned by the companions. After his death the method was almost the same except that he was no longer among them.

Recollection of ahadith in the Period of the Companions

Recollection of ahadith was carried in the time of the companions as it was during the life of the Prophet peace be upon him. Abu Huraira used to divide his night into three portions; one third for sleep, one third for prayer, and one third for the recollection of ahadith. Umar and Abu Musa al Ashari used to memorize ahadith through the night until the morning. They companions used to memorize in groups and individually.


Recording of Hadith in the life of the Prophet peace be upon him and the Companions

Certain companions wrote down ahadith in the life of the Prophet peace be upon him and in some cases he dictated it to them. There numbers are smaller than that of the later scholars. Not all companions narrated the same number of ahadith. Some had transmitted more than a thousand while others transmitted only one or two. Abu Hurairah transmitted the most ahadith and it was reported that he had books in his possession and at least nine of his students wrote ahadith from him. Others who transmitted large number of ahadith and had others collect them in written form are: Anas ibn Mailk, Aisha bint Abu Bakr, Ibn Abbas, Abdullah ibn Amr, Umar ibn al Khattab, Ali ibn Abi Talib, Abu Musa al Ashari and others.

Some Misunderstanding about Recording of Ahadith

The Hadith Against Writing Down the Ahadith: There is only one authentic hadith about this matter which says “Do not write down from me anything except the Quran and whoever has written anything from me other than the Quran should erase it.” According to Bukhari and others it is the statement of the narrator Abu Said himself and it is erroneously attributed to the Prophet peace be upon him. Others say it means that nothing should be written on the same sheet as the Quran so the two don’t get mixed up. It should be remembered that this command was given in the early days of Islam and the Prophet peace be upon him wanted all attention to be paid to the Quran and its preservation, and later on there was no danger of neglecting the Quran, thus the previous order was abrogated and writing ahadith was permitted. The Prophet peace be upon him himself sent hundreds of letters containing formulae for forms and rituals of worship.

Chain System

Every Hadith consists of two parts; the first portion is the chain of narrators while the second protion is the actual statement of the Prophet peace be upon him. The chain system was used to some extent in transmitting pre-Islamic poetry, but it was in the hadith literature that its importance culminated. It was also in hadith literature when the system was used to its full and in some cases to extravagant limits. Since hadith was the store where we get the sunnah it was natural to deal with the isnad with utmost care. Thus with the introduction of the chains, a unique science came into existence for the evaluation of chain and text of ahadith. At the end of the first century the science of the chain system was fully developed.

The Proliferation of Chains

It is a common phenomenon of the chain system that as we go further in time the number of transmitters increases. Sometimes a hadith transmitted by one companion acquires ten students in the next generation, in the class of successors, and these ten students have in some cases twenty or thirty students from different countries. For example Abu Huraira reported that the Prophet peace be upon him said when anyone amongst you wakes up from sleep, he must not put his hand in a utensil until he washed it three times, for he doesn’t know where his hand was during sleep. At least thirteen students of Abu Huraira transmitted this hadith from him. 8 out of 13 were from Medina, 1 from Kufah, 2 from Basrah, 1 from Yemen, 1 from Syria. There are sixteen scholars who transmitted this hadith from the students of Abu Huraira. 6 out of the 16 were from Medina, 4 from Basrah, 2 from Kufah, 1 from Makkah, 1 from Yemen, 1 from Khurasan, 1 from Syria.
Further down the chain the number of narrators increase and localities spread even further into different provinces. The flourishing of chains and diffusion of ahadith in this way made it easy to check the faults of scholars or any forgery that was committed. This proves the early existence of the chain system and shows how impossible it would have been to fabricate chains of transmission on this large a scale. The scholars used rigorous methods to examine chains of transmission, eliminating all ahadith passed by unreliable sources. Given centuries of this kind of activity we are logically justified in accepting the whole chain system and methodology of hadith scholars as accurate and valid.

Forgery and Errors in Transmitting Ahadith

The Prophet peace be upon him said “If anyone tells a lie about me intentionally, let him be sure of his place in hell fire.” This hadith and others had a tremendous effect on the companions and most of them refrained from imparting hadith in case of doubtful memory. Early scholars played their roles with due caution in transmitting or copying ahadith. As is known to all scholars, even the most sincere person may commit a mistake. Since the sunnah is an everlasting example for the Muslim community, the community couldn’t afford to let ahadith be polluted or diluted in any way. Therefore it was necessary to use criticism with full force.
Yahya ibn Sa’id al-Qatan, one of the greatest scholars of the second century was known for his strong criticism and he said “In the hereafter I would prefer to be opposed by anyone rather than have the Prophet peace be upon him saying ‘you heard a hadith attributed to me and it came to your mind that it was not true but you did not criticize it.’” With this intention criticism of hadith was carried out, without fear or favor for anyone. We find that a father graded down his own son, a son criticized his father, a brother criticized his own kin without any fear or favor except the fear of Allah.

Beginning of Criticism

Criticism of hadith began during the life of the Prophet peace be upon him. At that time it meant nothing more than going to the prophet peace be upon him and verifying something he was reported to have said. With the death of the Prophet peace be upon him it was the duty of the Muslim individuals, community, and state to be very careful in ascribing statements to the Prophet peace be upon him, and they had to scrutinize them carefully. The first Caliph Abu Bakr was a pioneer in the field, next came Umar and Ali. To err is human and with the spread of hadith in different regions of the Islamic world, the possibility of mistakes arose. Consequently the necessity for criticism became apparent.
During the time of trials of the assassination of Uthman the first fabrication of hadith began. During this stage the general trend of learning ahadith became stricter and schools of criticism began to appear. There were two prominent schools of that time, the school of Medina and the school of Iraq. The scholars of both schools belonged to the first century of Hijra and after this period of criticism of hadith entered a new phase. From the second century to a few centuries later it was a general requirement for the student of hadith to make extensive journeys in search of knowledge of hadith. Since the early scholars mostly learned from scholars in their area their criticism was confined to the same locality. When people began learning ahadith from hundreds of scholars their criticisms were not confined to one locality.

Methodology of Criticism

As far as it concerns the criticism of the text there were several methods that can all be brought under the broad heading of comparison. This method was by gathering all the related material and comparing them carefully with each other. Ayyub al Sakhtiyani said “If you wish to know the mistakes of your teacher, then you ought to sit down with others as well.” This method was practiced in many ways; the following are some of them:

1) Comparison between the hadith of different students of one scholar: By this method one discovered the mistakes of almost every student and was able to differentiate between the mistakes made by the teacher and the mistakes made by the students. This also gave one the ability to grade the different students and determine their accuracy.
2) Comparison between the statements of a single scholar at different times: Once Aisha told her nephew Urwah to go to Abdullah ibn Amr and ask him about the hadith of the Prophet peace be upon him. Abdullah mentioned a hadith that states that knowledge will be taken away from the earth. Aisha was discontented and sent Urwah a year later and when he returned to Aisha he told her Abdullah narrated the same hadith and didn’t add or subtract anything to it upon which she said he must be correct.
3) Comparison between oral recitation and written documents: In case two scholars have a difference about a hadith the one written in the texts will be accepted because books are more accurate in the eyes of scholars.
4) Comparison between hadith with related verses of the Quran: we find this method was used by Umar in rejecting the hadith of Fatima bint Qais concerning maintenance money for divorced women. This method was also applied by Aisha in several cases.
:w:
Reply

Staffy
07-10-2005, 04:47 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by xp2 (from UI forum)
That is not necessarily true. The Quran is a divine revelation, directly from God, sanctified by God, and even protected by God.

On the other hand, the ahadith literature is not a revelation like Quran... although it has some divine merits, it does not enjoy the same authenticity or protection as the Quran... since it is an account of history, witnessed, understood and then compiled.. by fallible men. Any particular hadith, is not a direct saying of the Prophet, rather it is a saying "attributed" to the Prophet. Therefore, we have to use sound judgement and wisdom to determine what is acceptable. It may be easier to understand.. if we look at the Bible as an example, to find the sayings/hadith of Jesus. We don't know for 100% certainty that what Jesus said is actually in the Bible, in it's original form. Some of them sayings are acceptable.. if there is no conflict with the Quran/Islam.. whereas others are put aside if there is [conflict].
format_quote Originally Posted by noori (from UI forum)
1) interesting point to note is " those companions who have spent their life with mohammed(pbuh) like abu bakar , umar -ibn-al khatab, and uthman , Ali ,aiysha , and many others few hadiths were transmited by them (b/c the reason is they were extremely careful in passing the hadith (actual words of prophet)
:sl:
Amein for the first quote and the secound quote is a very good point is it true?... :brother:
:w:
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
07-10-2005, 01:51 PM
:sl:
In the same thread you quoted from, Br. Kadafi (as servant) refuted all xp2's points in detail. You're looking at the first posts that were written, without looking at Br. Kadafi's response.

format_quote Originally Posted by Servant
As'salam Alaikum bro,

Unfortunaley, what you've stated is far from the Truth.

The [sahih] Ahadeeth are also a revelation[wahy] revealed from Allah (Exalted is He). This is manifested in al-Najm, verse(s) 1-4:

æóÇáäøóÌúãö ÅöÐóÇ åóæóì ãóÇ Öóáøó ÕóÇÍöÈõßõãú æóãóÇ Ûóæóì æóãóÇ íóäØöÞõ Úóäö Çáúåóæóì Åöäú åõæó ÅöáÇ æóÍúíñ íõæÍóì
(I swear) by the star when it sets, your companion is neither astray nor is deceived; Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed (to him).

You also question the authencity and the intricacy of compilin' the Ahadeeth by claimin' that they cannot be a direct saying of the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). That is a unfounded speculation. We have received the Glorious Qur'an and the Sahih Ahadeeth from the exact sources, how can one claim to believe in one whilst simultanously doubtin' the other.

In addition, Allah (Exalted is He) has promised that He would guard the Glorious Qur'an from corruption. Since the Glorious Qur'an and the Sunnah are indispensable with each other, then one cannot claim that the Sunnah was not protected. And furthermore, the Glorious Qur'an denotes exclusively the Book, its meanings and words which were explained by the Prophet (Ahadeeth).

Allah (Exalted is He) said in Surah Al-i-'Imran, verse 164 :

óÞóÏú ãóäøó Çááøóåõ Úóáóì ÇáúãõÄúãöäöíäó ÅöÐú ÈóÚóËó Ýöíåöãú ÑóÓõæáðÇ
ãöäú ÃóäúÝõÓöåöãú íóÊúáõæ Úóáóíúåöãú ÂíóÇÊöåö æóíõÒóßøöíåöãú æóíõÚóáøöãõåõãõ ÇáúßöÊóÇÈó æóÇáúÍößúãóÉó æóÅöäú ßóÇäõæÇ ãöäú ÞóÈúáõ áóÝöí ÖóáóÇáò ãõÈöíäò
Indeed Allâh conferred a great favour on the believers when He sent among them a Messenger (Muhammad -- Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) from among themselves, reciting unto them His Verses (the Qur’ân), and purifying them (from sins by their following him), and instructing them (in) the Book (the Qur’ân) and Al-Hikmah (the wisdom and the Sunnah of the Prophet (i.e. his legal ways, statements, acts of worship)), while before that they had been in manifest error.

And in An-Nahl, verse 44:

öÇáúÈóíøöäóÇÊö æóÇáÒøõÈõÑö æóÃóäúÒóáúäóÇ Åöáóíúßó ÇáÐøößúÑó áöÊõÈóíøöäó áöáäøóÇÓö ãóÇ äõÒøöáó Åöáóíúåöãú æóáóÚóáøóåõãú íóÊóÝóßøóÑõæäó
With clear proofs and writings; and We have revealed unto thee the Remembrance that thou (Muhammad -- Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) mayst explain to mankind that which hath been revealed for them, and that haply they may reflect.


ÅöäøóÇ äóÍúäõ äóÒøóáúäóÇ ÇáÐøößúÑó æóÅöäøóÇ áóåõ áóÍóÇÝöÙõæäó
Verily We: It is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. the Qur'ân) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption).

Let's put in a logical perspective, how can one claim that the words of the Glorious remained intact and the meanings/and or explanations (i.e. Ahadeeth) were lost or corrupted?

Wa'salaam
As far as the second quote is concerned, Aisha (rd) is one of the companions that narrated the most ahadith! I'm not sure what the actual number is, maybe Br. Kadafi knows.

:w:
Reply

Staffy
07-10-2005, 04:05 PM
:sl:
In that post he said that Hadith and The Al-Quran came from the same sorce that is not so is it? the al-quran was compiled by conpanions of the Prophet(pbuh) and the Ahadith was not right?
:w:
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
07-10-2005, 04:29 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Staffy
:sl:
In that post he said that Hadith and The Al-Quran came from the same sorce that is not so is it?
The Qur'an was revealed by Allah SWT in both wording and meaning. The sayings of the Prophet saws were inspired by Allah in meaning, but the wording was that of the Prophet saws.

the al-quran was compiled by conpanions of the Prophet(pbuh) and the Ahadith was not right?
The ahadith were recorded and compiled to some extent by the companions as well.

:w:
Reply

Staffy
07-10-2005, 04:35 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
:sl: Staffy,
Yes, Allah SWT can forgive any sin if we sincerely repent.
:w:
:sl:
Brother the point derived from that is that is that these adulturuse people couldent repent if they are dead......
:w:
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
07-10-2005, 04:40 PM
:sl:
If they have been punished for it, the punishment in the next life is negated anyway.

:w:
Reply

Staffy
07-10-2005, 04:53 PM
:sl:
But over a long debate with myself i have decided that stoning may well be a aceptable punishment for they may well be better of to be stoned than to suffer a far worse punishment in the hereafter......But i will not let go of the opinion that i will question everything that comes my way five fold before i ever think about changing my doubts for Allah created my heart also and i can alone Inshalla judge right from wrong with proper evidences........Alhamduilah Irabil Alamien
:w:
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
07-10-2005, 10:30 PM
:sl: Staffy,
format_quote Originally Posted by Staffy
But over a long debate with myself i have decided that stoning may well be a aceptable punishment for they may well be better of to be stoned than to suffer a far worse punishment in the hereafter......
May Allah SWT bless you and further you in your Islamic knowledge! :)
But i will not let go of the opinion that i will question everything that comes my way five fold before i ever think about changing my doubts for Allah created my heart also and i can alone Inshalla judge right from wrong with proper evidences....
You will always have the right to question, and we are supposed to ask questions so that we understand our religion better. :brother:

:sl: Preacher,
I ask you once again to please be polite and kind on the forum. Keep in mind the following verse when doing Dawah to both Muslims and Non-Muslims:
3:159 And by the Mercy of Allâh, you dealt with them gently. And had you been severe and harsh hearted, they would have broken away from about you

Gentleness is fundamental to Dawah. Remember, no matter how good your message is, you will never succeed until you use gentleness in your Dawah. As the Prophet Muhammad SAWS said:
Whoever is deprived of gentleness is deprived of all good. (Sahih Muslim)

Statements like the following will not be tolerated on this forum:
No you are not a Muslim, you just stepped outside the fold of Islam.
To be honest with you, I was shocked at the way you spoke to Staffy. We would love to have you stay as a member, but you certainly must change the way you speak to other members.

Staffy,
I admire your sincerity and your desire to learn the truth. This is not a simple issue, and I went through the same process as you to learn about it. I also used to have the incorrect notion that stoning was wrong before, but now I have learned the truth and I understand that there is no injustice in it.

I would love to explain it to you in detail.

Keep asking questions, and keep learning.

:w:
Reply

Staffy
07-11-2005, 06:30 AM
:sl:
Thank you to all the brothers that helped me on this subject :brother:
:w:
Reply

kadafi
07-27-2005, 03:37 PM
:sl:

Even though the ignoramuses might not fully grasp the wisdom of stoning, see here an articulate article written by brother Abdullah Mohammed

http://www.jannah.org/morearticles/4.html

:w:
Reply

Zuko
08-16-2005, 02:31 PM
Salaam,

Just wanted to ask, is it true that stoning is allowed only if there is a caliph? And assuming its true then any stoning that occurs nowadays is haraam? I heard it somewhere a while ago and I just wanted to know if it was true....

Salaam
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
08-16-2005, 10:02 PM
:sl:
It can only be conducted by the legal authorities of an Islamic state.
:w:
Reply

kadafi
08-22-2005, 08:32 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Abdul Aziz
some say its violent,outdated,uncivilised,etc.They called Muslims cavemen.They think denying pre marital sex is not right.and more stuff like that.
:sl:

I have already gave you the link that directs you to the article produced by Abdullah Mohammed

http://www.jannah.org/morearticles/4.html
Reply

khalid zaheer
10-05-2005, 12:20 PM
Assalaam o aliakum friends

Brother Kadafi recently I read your post you submitted in reply of my post. But sorry to say this is surprising for me when persons like You or Ansar present such kinds of statements. I thought you both are knowledge full persons but now I am thinking you have imagine that knowledge is the name of read some books (forgive me for my word). These forums are created to learn and I think every one here has a limited knowledge so when a thing come in front of us we should think over deeply, then examine it in every way we could, come out with results and present our views. But never sure my view is 100% secure. There could be many things out of our sight. But, forgive me, I felt many time you and brother Ansar or persons like you insist over what you have said.

10 or 12 years ago I was also think like you that what I have read in misc. books and presenting it in front of others is 100% right, but certainly I was wrong. Now I say knowledge is the name of plus and minus, what is come in front of you examine it in every way, check it in different views, calculate and come out with your personal views, this will called knowledge. Any way I had a little complaint with you so I present it and hopeful you will think over.

There was some Ahadith presented here in this thread, let see some other “Rivayaat” to examine this matter. First the very famous Rivaayat commonly presented in favour of this matter. You could find it in misc. books and I am taking it from “Kifa’yaa”.

Hassan bin abi baker, abu suhail ahmed bin Abdullah bin ziyaad al-qata’aan, ismail bin ishaq qaazi, Abdullah bin Muhammad bin asma’aa, maalik bin ans, ibn-a-shahaab zuhri, abaidullah bin Abdullah bin utba bin masood, Abdullah bin abbas (rt)

Umer (rt) said Muhammad (saw) sent by Allah as messenger and a book is revealed upon Him. And what ever revealed the verse about “Rajam” (stoning) was include. We read, understand and memorized it. Muhammad (saw) do Rajam, we do also. Now I am afraid of after a long time may some one claim that this verse is not in Quran and due to stopped the “Ferz” revealed by Almighty. So, indeed, stoning is from Kitaab Allah (Quran) so the application is essential whenever you found, with evidences, some one (male or female) committed Zina in-spite-of he or she is married. (Kifa’yaa by Abu Baker Khateeb)

There is another “Rivaayat” in Ibn-a-Maaja that makes clear the story behind above Rivaayat
– Ibn-a-Maaja said when (in abu baker’s (rt) era) Quran is gathered in the shape of book by Zaid (rt) this verse is presented only by Umer (rt), because of there was not even a single witness other than Umer (rt) of this verse it could not be entered in Quran. Zaid (rt) made the principle that only those verses could be entered in Quran which have at least two witness. And there was only Umer (rt) who knew this verse. (Ibn-a-Maaja)

Let see another “Rivaayat” from Ibn-a-Maaja – Ayesha (rt) said the verses relate to “Rajam” (stoning) and “Riza’at-a-Kabeer” (if you drink 10 gulps of milk of a woman she would be called your mother her children will be your brothers and sisters) was revealed. These verses were stayed at my home, one day door was open a goat come in and eat that papers so we lost that verses.
(Ibn-a-Maaja, chapter Rizaa’atul Kabeer)

format_quote Originally Posted by kadafi
Unrecited wahy is obviously relating to the Al-Islaam.
Now what you say brother kadafi, this is an un-recited wahee or recited wahee which could not be entered in Quran due to misshape (there was not even a single witness other than Umer -rt) or negligence (could not be paid attention over safety)? Let examine these Rivayaat – in first Rivaayat Umer (rt) saying it was a very famous matter, was in practice for many years, but next Rivaayat is saying there was not even a single person other than Umer (rt) who familiar with this verse or act. And in third Rivaayat what a classical reason is presented. I am surprised why Ayesha (rt) not made witness of this verse when she knew about very well, at least this verse is entered in Quran. When this act was in practice for a long then why other were not recognized. And in last Rivaayat Ayesha (rt) is saying this verse is lost due to eaten by a goat, means this verse was written only on a single paper and when this paper destroyed there was no other prove of this verse. Now I asked my friends this is the Quran, the unique book? If these verses could not be entered in Quran (no matter what is the reason) then there could be many more. If some verses did not enter in Quran then it is possible too many self made verses entered in Quran, how you could claim the Quran is as exact as it was revealed when you have made the principle of “Un-recited wahee”?

Certainly the philosophy of un-recited inspiration (wahee) is created to prove such kinds of Rivayaat only, other wise there is no concept of un-recited wahee in Islam. What is the reason to create such Rivayaat? There are two reasons in my opinion one is to prove the Quran is not a safest book and second is to secure the books of Rivayaat or Ahadith that if some one said there is some thing wrong in these books then could presented the evidence there is the same condition with Quran too.

Let see another Rivaayat – Many books of Ahadith have the following “Rivaayat” (very famous) and I am picking it from “Al Maozo’aat”. This is a long story so I am presenting it in brief.

One day a woman, with a little child, came to Umer (rt) and blamed His (Umer-rt) son “Abu Shum’ha” that Abu Shum’ha raped her some time ago and this child is the result of that event. Umer (rt) went home and come back with His (rt) son (Abu Shum’ha) and asked about blame put over him, Abu Shum’ha admit that He has committed this crime. He (Umer–rt) called people to come gathered and announced the punishment – 100 lashes. Punishment applied and Abu Shum’ha died. (Al Maozo’aat by Ibn-a-Joozi)

Most of the “Rivayaat” relate to stoning are narrated by Umer (rt) but here His personal behavior going opposite, why? “Abu Shum’ha” means His (rt) son was a married man, why He (rt) did not announce the punishment of stoning for him? And it is the basic part of “Rijaal” that if the practice of Suhaaba Ikraam opposite of what Hadith or Rivaayat is mentioning then certainly that Rivaayat or Hadith is wrong.

Certainly this is a forge Rivaayat (like all other Rivayaat relate with the matter of stoning) and created to blackish the bright name of Umer (rt), but give a new point of ponder. This Rivaayat is saying in clear words that even when this Rivaayat was created the final punishment of Zina (even rape) was 100 lashes as mentioned in Quran.

Let see this matter in another point of view – when you see the punishments for other wrong deeds described in Quran you would easily examine that for all the crimes, other than murder, there is no other way but the punishment described by Almighty. For example
And the thief, man and woman, cut off their hands as recompense exemplary from God for what they earned; and God is Mighty, Wise. (38/5)
And those who accuse chaste women, then do not bring four witnesses, flog them with eighty stripes, and do not accept their testimony ever, for they are the transgressors; but those who, thereafter, repent and make amends, then God is Forgiving, Merciful.(5/24)
Same as the punishment for Zina
The fornicatress and the fornicator, flog each one of them with a hundred stripes, and let no pity for them hold you in the matter of God's Religion, if you believe in God and the Last Day; and let a group of the Believers witness their punishment.(2/24)
But when you see the crimes have the punishment of death you will examine there are certainly some other ways to satisfaction because life is too important in the eye of Almighty. For example
The recompense of those who wage-war against God and His Messenger, and run about in the land causing disorder, is only this __ that they should be slaughtered or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on opposite sides, or they should be banished from the land. That is a disgrace for them in this world; and they shall receive a big punishment in the Hereafter, except those who repent before you overpower them; and know that God is Forgiving, Merciful. (34, 35/5)
These verses are for those that are the cause of spreading disorder in land. (Allah has said in Quran “spreading disorder is more than kill some one”) It’s a big offense deserves death punishment but you can easily check there is many other ways provided other than death. Even if they come back before you overpower them there is no punishment.

Let see another one – in the case of murder there is a way provided other than death. If some one kills another one unwillingly or by mistake then indeed there is many ways to satisfaction other than death, for example
It belongs not to a Believer to kill a Believer except by mistake; and if any kills a Believer by mistake, then a Believing slave will be freed and blood-money paid to his family unless they forgo it as alms. And if he is from a people that is your enemy, while he is a Believer, then a Believing slave will be freed. And if he is from a people between whom and you is a covenant, then blood- money will be paid to his family and a Believing slave freed. And whoso does not find the means, let him fast for two successive months for a repentance from God; and God is Knowing, Wise.(92/4)
But if some one kills another one willingly or by complete consent even then there is a way to satisfaction other then death.

O Believers, prescribed for you is retaliation concerning the slain; freeman for freeman, slave for slave, and female for female. Then if any is pardoned something by his brother, let it be pursued desirably, and payment made to him with gratitude. That is a lightening and a mercy granted by your Lord; and if any exceeds limits thereafter, for him shall be a painful punishment. -- And (remember), in retaliation there is life for you, O men of understanding, that you may become godfearing.(178, 179/2)

Now the matter is clear, it’s the basic principle that the crimes deserves punishment of death have, certainly, the ways to satisfaction other than death, and the crimes have simple or little punishment there no way but the punishment described by Almighty. According to the Rivayaat relate to “Rajam” (stoning) the punishment of Zina is certain death and there is no other way, and it is against the basic principle given by Almighty. Zina is not bigger than murder or disorder that its punishment should be certain death.

Allah has clear this matter in another way
And do not kill the soul God has forbidden except by right; with that He has charged you that you may understand. (152/6)
And there are only three issues, according to Quran, that give you the right to kill someone. (see the verses mentioned above)
1_If someone killed another one
2_If someone spreading disorder in land
3_In the case of war or fight
Other than there is no way to kill any one, it is against the basic rules and regulation of Islam.
In my first post I explained there is only Almighty Allah that has the authority to make laws; He is the only legislator. But brother kadafi said No, Muhammad (saw) has also the legislator and has the authority to make laws. In reply of my post he present some verses and try to prove his opinions. These were the usual verses repeated many time in Quran that (in short) “Obey Allah and His Messenger” (I think such verses are much known so no need to present here) In reply I said it does not mean that Muhammad (saw) has the right to make laws or perform as a legislator, these are the common verses describing Muhammad (saw) is the prefect actor of Quran and passing His life according to the rules and regulations given by Almighty in Quran so follow him. Muhammad (saw) could be a legislator or not I present the opinion of Mao’doodi sahib instead of me. Quran said
And do not utter the falsehood as to what your tongues describe, `this is lawful and this is forbidden', so that you forge falsehood against God. Surely those who forge falsehood against God shall not prosper.(116/16)
O mankind, there has come to you from your Lord an admonition and a healing for what is in the breasts, and a guidance and a mercy for the Believers.(57) Say, `it is by the bounty of God and His mercy; so let them rejoice in that; it is better than what they gather themselves'.(58) Say, `have you considered the provision that God has sent down for you, some of which you have made unlawful and some lawful?' Say, `has God permitted you so, or do you forge against God?'(59/10)
They have taken their priests and their monks and the Messiah, son of Mary, as lords, apart from God, while they were commanded to serve only One God; there is no god but He; He is Holy, above that they associate.(31/9)

Mao’doodi sahib said in his Tafseer for above verses “these verses are clearly saying there is only and only Allah that have the authority to make laws. He is the only legislator, other than He there is no one that has the right to make laws.
Taf’heem ul Quran by Mao’doodi sahib

you're arguing the Qur'an is sent with complete explanation but yet Allaah (Exalted is He) has said in many verses that he sent His messenger to EXPLAIN and Instruct them.
(for Quran) Move not your tongue with it in order to hasten it. It is on Us to gather it (in your heart) and to recite it. So, when We read it, follow its reading. Then it is on Us to explain it. (16 to19/75)

Let see Quran is explained by Allah or not. Not only Quran but every book was revealed by Allah with complete details. And it should be, because Allah has repeated this thing many times in every book that He is the guide of mankind to straight path, and guidance deserves complete clearance, otherwise it could not be said “guidance”.

I request my friends Pay Attention over the word “the book” which is repeated many times in verses given below, it is announcing in clear words the base of every law is the Holy Book. If I count the verses have the word “the book” these would be in hundreds numbers at least.[/RED]

We sent down the Torah wherein is guidance and light, by which the Prophets, who had submitted themselves judged for the Jews, and so did the rabbis and the priests, for they were required to guard the Book of God, And whoso does not judge according to what God has sent down, those are the unbelievers.
And We therein prescribed for them __ life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and for injuries retaliation; and if any forgoes it, it shall be an expiation for him. And whoso does not judge according to what God has sent down, those are the wrong-doers. (44, 45/5)

And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus, son of Mary, confirming what was before him of the Torah; and We gave him the Gospel, wherein was guidance and light, ………And let the People of the Gospel judge according to what God sent down therein. And whoso does not judge according to what God has sent down, those are the transgressors. (46, 47/5)
And We wrote for him on the Tablets an admonition everything and an explanation of everything: `take it firmly and bid thy people to take the fairest of it; I shall soon show you the house of the transgressors. (145/7)
And We have sent down to you the Book with the truth, confirming what is before it of the Book, and a guardian over it; so judge between them according to what God has sent down, ……..For everyone of you We have made a law and an open road;…………..And that You (saw) judgest between them according to what God has sent down, but follow not their caprices and beware of them, lest they tempt You (saw) away from some of what God has sent down to you. (48, 49/5)

Above verses are as clear as day light. Allah saying in clear words there is only book revealed upon you as law or legislation so make decisions according to it, and if you don’t do as advised you are stand against Almighty. And I think these are enough for those who are looking for the right path. But there are many for these verses would not be enough, so here could be many more verses provided from Quran have the same pattern, for example

Moreover, We gave Moses the Book, complete for him who does good, explanation of everything, and a guidance and a mercy, that they might believe in the meeting with their Lord. As this is a blessed Book, that We have sent down, so follow it and be godfearing, that you may receive mercy; lest you should say, the Book was sent down only on two groups before us, and we were indeed unaware of what they studied; or you say, `if the Book had been sent down on us, we would have been more guided than they'. Now there has come to you from your Lord a clear proof, and the guidance and a mercy; who then is more unjust than he who gives lies to God's signs and turns away from them? We will recompense those who turn away from Our signs with evil punishment for their turning away. (155, 158/6)
And We have brought them a Book, which We have explained on the basis of knowledge, for guidance and a mercy to a people who believe. (52/7)
And this is the straight path of the Lord; We have explained in detail the verses for people who pay heed. (127/6)
And there is no creature on the earth, nor a bird flying with its two wings, but they are communities like you; We have not neglected anything in the Book; then to their Lord they shall be mustered. (38/6)
The example is given by Almighty in above verse need deep thinking. Allah is saying as I did not leave even a life not included in a community same as there is nothing leave out of the book.
What! shall I seek after a judge other than God, when it is He who has sent down to you the Book, with complete explanation, and those whom We have given the Book know that it is sent down from thy Lord with the truth, so be thou not among the doubters. And the Word of the Lord is perfect in truth and justice; none can change His Words; and He is the Hearing, the Knowing. (115, 116/7)
I think above verses are enough to explain the matter. What is the role of a Messenger? They are the messengers appointed by Almighty, liable to deliver the message of Almighty. They are the perfect actor of the orders revealed in the book. As the matter of EXPLANATION, the explanation is to convert the verbal orders in practical. It is the duty of a messenger that He made his life as exact as ordered by Almighty in Divine Book, this is the exact way to Explanation. It does not mean a Messenger has the authority to add or remove something in the order of Almighty in the name Explanation.
And when you dose not bring them a sign, they say,`why has not you chosen it?' Say,`I follow only what is revealed to me from my Lord; here are evidences from your Lord and a guidance and a mercy for a people who believe'. (203/7)
And what is revealed to Muhammad (saw)
Say, `What thing is greatest in testimony?' Say, God is a witness between me and you; this Quran is revealed to me, so that I may thereby warn you and whomsoever it reaches. Do you testify that there are other gods with God?'[Color] Say, `I do not testify.' Say, `He is only One God, and I am quit of that you associate with Him.' (19/6)
Pay attention on the words in red color, what is the need of these words in this verse? Almighty is saying to Muhammad (saw) do you testify there are some other gods who revealed something upon you other than Quran, because only Quran is revealed upon you by Almighty, and the reply of Muhammad (saw) is “I don’t testify, He is only one God and only Quran is revealed to me”
Those who conceal the clear signs, and the guidance that [B/We have sent down,[/B] after We have made it clear in the Book for men, those __ God curses them and the cursers curse them, (159/2)
It belongs not to a mortal that God should give him the Book, the Judgment and the Prophet hood, and he should say to men, be you my servants, apart from God'; but (he will say) be you men of the Lord, because you teach the Book and because you study it. (3/79)
And surely they had purposed toturn you away from that which We have revealed to you, that you should forge against Us other than this Quran, and then they would certainly have taken you for a friend. And had it not been that We had already established you, you would certainly have been near to incline to them a little; In that case we would certainly have made you to taste a double (punishment) in this life and a double punishment) after death, then you would not have found any helper against Us. (73 to 75/17)
Now, I think, the matter is clear for every one, Quran is the base of every thing, it’s a book revealed with complete details about religion, there is nothing beyond it, no one has the right to add or remove some thing in the orders given by Allah (Rab ul Izzat), and if some one goes against it certainly going on the wrong way. The clear punishment of Zina (may it is committed by married or unmarried) has describe in Quran and there is nothing beyond it. So obey the orders revealed by Almighty and be certain about, otherwise may you stand with those that are rejected by Allah (Rab ul Izzat).
The punishment for “Zina” has announced by Almighty.
And such of your women who commit indecency, call four of you to witness against them; then if they bear witness, detain them in the houses until death ends them, or God opens a way for them………….And the two of you who commit it, give them hurt; then if they repent and make amends, turn aside from them; God is All-returning, Merciful. (16,17/4)

The fornicatress and the fornicator, flog each one of them with a hundred stripes, and let no pity for them hold you in the matter of God's Religion, if you believe in God and the Last Day; and let a group of the Believers witness their punishment. (24/2)
The following verses are able to think, in deep, over them. These lead to the right way if some one has the “Muslim” heart and mind.
And among them is a party that twists their tongues with the Book, that you may think it to be from the Book, yet it is not from the Book; and they say, `it is from God', yet it is not from God; and they speak a lie against God, knowingly.(78/3)
That is because God has sent down the Book with the truth; and those who differ regarding the Book are in far opposition. (176/2)

O people, the advice and cure of your souls has revealed in the shape of Quran, it is the grace, blessing and correct guidance for the persons having full faith. O Prophet Say them it is by the blessings and grace of Almighty Allah so rejoice for it and believe, it is better than that of any thing they are collecting himself.
(Younas, 57)




Allah Hafiz
Reply

Mu'maneen
10-05-2005, 05:16 PM
:sl:

Jazak Allah Kher Fe Dunya Wal Akhira Dear Brother of Islam.

The punishments of Shari'a are vital part of the Islamic State, such as stoning, cutting the hand of the thief etc.

Not accepting the laws of Allah is one of the ten nullifiers of Islam.


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

Visit my new Islamic Site:
http://hstrial-besmail.homestead.com/islam.html
Reply

kadafi
10-07-2005, 08:53 AM
Brother Kadafi recently I read your post you submitted in reply of my post. But sorry to say this is surprising for me when persons like You or Ansar present such kinds of statements. I thought you both are knowledge full persons but now I am thinking you have imagine that knowledge is the name of read some books (forgive me for my word). These forums are created to learn and I think every one here has a limited knowledge so when a thing come in front of us we should think over deeply, then examine it in every way we could, come out with results and present our views. But never sure my view is 100% secure. There could be many things out of our sight. But, forgive me, I felt many time you and brother Ansar or persons like you insist over what you have said.
:w:

Jazaka'Allaahu khairun for your post, even though you did not address most of my points (see #54) and thus missing the gist of what I discussed; I still feel obliged to offer you a reply based on what you stated.

What is knowledge according to the Glorious Qur'aan and the Sunnah and is it feasible for a layman to "examine" evidence and present his opinions/views?

Accordin' to Shaykh Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him), knowledge is:
knowledge of the Sharee'ah; knowledge of what Allaah revealed to His Messenger, from the clear explanations and guidance. So the type of knowledge which contains praise, is knowledge of the Revealation; knowledge of what Allaah revealed only. The Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:
"Whoever Allaah intends to show goodness to, He grants him the understanding of the Religion."
And the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:
"The Prophets do not leave behind them the deenaar nor the dirham as inheritance, they leave only knowledge behind as inheritance. So whosoever aquires it, aquires a huge fortune."
And it is known that the Prophets only beqeathed knowledge of Allaah's Prescribed Laws, nothing else. The Prophets (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), did not beqeathe to mankind knowledge of the arts and crafts."
Similiary, Imaam ash-Shaafi'ee (May Allaah have mercy on him) said:
"It is not permissible for anyone to ever say about anything that it is lawful or prohibited, except upon knowledge. This knowledge is what is related in the Book, or the Sunnah, or a consensus (ijmaa'), or an analogy (qiyaas)."
This leaves us with the second question, whether a layman can interpret and deduce rulings accordin' to his understanding? The answer is simply no since he has not grasped the objectives and goals of the Shariah, which is only attainable by thoroughly studying the text and the detailed workings of the Shariah. This is because Allaah (Exalted is He) said:
"Whoever Allaah intends to show goodness to, He grants him the Fiqh of the Religion"
Thus, your definition of 'knowledge' leaves the door open to every layman who wishes to interpret the Qur'aan and the Sunnah by merely using his deficient understanding.

Umer (rt) said Muhammad (saw) sent by Allah as messenger and a book is revealed upon Him. And what ever revealed the verse about “Rajam” (stoning) was include. We read, understand and memorized it. Muhammad (saw) do Rajam, we do also. Now I am afraid of after a long time may some one claim that this verse is not in Quran and due to stopped the “Ferz” revealed by Almighty. So, indeed, stoning is from Kitaab Allah (Quran) so the application is essential whenever you found, with evidences, some one (male or female) committed Zina in-spite-of he or she is married. (Kifa’yaa by Abu Baker Khateeb)
It is not correctly translated akhee. The hadeeth is found in the two saheeh volumes, reported by Ibn 'Abbaas (May Allaah be pleased with him) that 'Umar (May Allaah be pleased with him) said:
“Allaah sent Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) with the truth and revealed to him the Book, and one of the things that Allaah revealed was the verse of stoning. We have read it and understood it. The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) stoned (adulterers) and we stoned (them) after him, but I fear that there may come a time when some people say: ‘By Allaah, we do not find the verse of stoning in the Book of Allaah.’ So they will go astray by forsaking an obligation that Allaah has revealed. According to the Book of Allaah, stoning is deserved by the one who commits zina, if he is married, men and women alike, if proof is established or the woman becomes pregnant or they confess…” [Bukharee - Muslim]
There is another “Rivaayat” in Ibn-a-Maaja that makes clear the story behind above Rivaayat
– Ibn-a-Maaja said when (in abu baker’s (rt) era) Quran is gathered in the shape of book by Zaid (rt) this verse is presented only by Umer (rt), because of there was not even a single witness other than Umer (rt) of this verse it could not be entered in Quran. Zaid (rt) made the principle that only those verses could be entered in Quran which have at least two witness. And there was only Umer (rt) who knew this verse. (Ibn-a-Maaja)
This is a complete fabrication and is not found in the Sunaan Ibn Majaah. The reason being is that it has no isnad, meaning that this hadeeth is mu'addal and furthermore, there is no authority who narrated this report (meaning either Abu Bakr, Zayd or anyone else present). I urge you to cite the reference.

Also, to expose the ridiculousness of the statement, 'Umar (May Allaah be pleased with him) explicitly stated that they (meaning the Sahabas) understood it (meaning they applied the punishment as it was the practise of the Prophet). In addition, the ayaah was abrogated verbally but its injuction is still applicable (Naskh at-Tilaawah doona al-Hukm).

Ibn Hajaar (May Allaah have mercy on him) stated a reason why the ayaah was never written down, however, it's only opinion, only Allaah (Exalted is He) knows the wisdom behind the abrogating. Ibn Hajar stated a report from Zaid Ibn Thabit who recited the ayah while compiling the Mushaaf, Ibn Hajaar commenting on this and stated the ayah was not written down is that the practice was not on the appararent meaning.

Ibn Hajaar also stated another narration reported by Ibn Durais that Umar addressed the people saying: "Dont doubt stoning because it is true and I had the desire to write it in the Mushaaf so I asked Ubaay Ibn Ka'b, and he replied: "Do you remember that I wanted to ask the Prophet to recite it for me, then you struck me on my chest and you said: Do you want to ask him to recite the ayah of stoning for you whilst they are mounting, like how they mount donkeys"

Ibn hajaar said that the narrators in the chain are trusthworthy and reliable and this hadeeth is an indictation to why the recitation was abrogated and that is because of differences.

Also, 'Umar said in one narration reported in Muwatta that if there was no risk involved that people would accuse him of making addition in the Book of Allaah, he would have written this ayah on a corner of the Glorious Qur'aan, bear in mind that he did not say that he would have included this ayaah in the Qur'aan.

Ibn Qudamah wrote in Al-Mughni:
First, stoning a married adulterer and adulteress is obligatory as agreed by all religious scholars everywhere and from the days of the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), his companions, down to their followers and those who followed them. The only group that disagreed (to this fact) are the Khawarij (a deviated Muslim group) who said: Both the virgin and the widow are to be whipped.
He further said that
There is evidence that the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) confirmed the stoning in both words and acts, and all his companions agreed upon it (after him). Allaah has revealed (this punishment) in the Book (Qur’an) in an abrogated verse whose judgment still stands
In addition, the law of stoning has been narrated by 'Umar, 'Uthmaan, 'Ali, 'Aisha, 'Abdullah ibn Mas'ood, Abu Umama Ibn Sahl, Anas Ibn Malik, Jabir Ibn 'Abdullah, 'Abdullah ibn Abi Aufaa, Abu Hurairah, 'Abdullah Ibn 'Abbas, 'ubaadah Ibn Samit, Jabir Ibn Samurah, Abu 'Sa'eed Khudri, 'Imraan Ibn Hussain, Buraida Ibn Husaib, Nu'aim Ibn hazal, Hazal Al-Aslami, Nasr Ibn Dahr, Abu Barzah, Ah-Lahlaj, Zaid Ibn Thabit, Ubaiyy Ibn Ka'b, 'Ajma. These are all the sahabas who reported the stoning from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), this does not include the stoning carried out by Khulafa-i-Rashideen.

Most of these reports are muttawatir in verbatim and in meaning.

In addition to this, is the ijmaa' of the Sahabas who put in practice after the death of the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). This is stated by 'Umar (see above). There is ijmaa' of the four main maddhabs:

Maaliki Maddhab: “Stoning will be executed against the adult Muslim….”

Hanafi Maddhab : “When the ihsaan of the adulterer has been substantiated by means of evidence or confession, Stoning will be inflicted on him on the basis of Nass (categoric Hadeeth Proof), and on the basis of rational proof. The Nass is the Mash - hoor Hadith of the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): ‘ The blood of a Musli m is not lawful except with one of three factors — Kufr after Emaan; Zina after Ihsaan; Killing a person without valid cause . ”

Shaafi Maddhab:“When the adulterer is a muhsin , his (or her) hadd (prescribed punishment) is Stoning.”

Hambaali Maddhab: “The Imaams are unanimous that the Hadd of he adulterer and adulteress is Stoning…. ”

and consesus of the Muhadditeen.

If these verses could not be entered in Quran (no matter what is the reason) then there could be many more. If some verses did not enter in Quran then it is possible too many self made verses entered in Quran, how you could claim the Quran is as exact as it was revealed when you have made the principle of “Un-recited wahee”?
This is lack of knowledge on your part akhee. It seems that you haven't comprehended the rules of abrogation [naskh]. Allaah (Exalted is He) said:
Whatever We (Allaah) abrogate of any aayat or cause it to be forgotten,..)
Note that it cleary says: "cause to be forgotten" which is in the case of the ayah of stoning.

The fact that you refered the abrogated recitation of the stoning verse as 'unrecited wahy' also demonstrates that you haven't really understood what I stated in my previous post.In addition, you're referrin' the Glorious Qur'aan as the only source leaving out the Sunnah which composes of the Shariah as (Exalted is He) said:
Then, We established you on a Shariah. Therefore, follow it, and do not follow the vain desires of those who do not know. meaning the revealed laws (Qur'aan and the SUnnah)
This is confirmed in Sooraat al-Jaathiyah when Allaah (Exalted is He) says:
Then We put you on a straight path (Shariah) in your affairs, so follow it and do not follow the desires of those who have no knowledge
Islaam (Shariah) has attained completion and perfection during the time of the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). This is evidently in the ayaah:
This day have I perfected for you your Deen, and I have completed for you My Favour, and I have chosen for you Islaam as your Deen.
If the Sahabas acknowledged that the Prophet confirmed the stoning in both words and acts, how can one doubt that it's not wahy.


What puzzles me is that you claim that I have forged the principle of 'unrecited wahy'.

Unrecited wahy [Ghayr-Matluww] means revelation that is not recited but formulated in the words of the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and the meanings of which is from Allaah.

The revelation that is recited and which are the exact words of Allaah (Exalted is He) is called Wahy Matluww meaning [revelation that is recited].

Evidence for the revelation that is not recited is in the Glorious Qur'aan. Allaah (Exalted is He) says:
He does not speak from his desires. Verily it is inspiration (unrecited revelation) which has been revealed
He was also given the responsibility of clarifying for mankind Allaah's intent in the Message:
We have revealed the Reminder (Qur'aan) to you, in order that you explain to mankind what was revealed to them, that perhaps they may reflect
The explaining here is all found in his Sunnah. The Prophet would explain the intent of the Qur'anic texts by making a statement, at other times he would do so by an act, and yet other times he would do so by both.

So thus, the sunnah is an exposition of the Glorious Qur'aan by which its generalities were clarified and its intended meanings specificied.

Everything in the Sunnah can be found in the Glorious Qur'aan, either by inference or by direct reference. The address may be so general as to include the whole Sunnah as in the case of the verse:
Whatever the messenger gives you, take it; and whatever he forbids you, leave it
Or the address may indicate generaly defined laws, the details of which are left to the Sunnah. Hence the Sunnah may explain the methodology, reasons, requirements and location, or it may explain the inclusions which could not be logically deduced. An example of such inclusions may be found in the case of forbidden foods beyond those method in the Glorious Qur'aan. Allaah does state in reference the messenger:
He made lawful for them the good (and pure) things and forbade them the bad (and impure)
Anas ibn Maalik said: "On the day of the Battle of Khaybar, a visitor came and said, "Oh messenger of Allaah, the donkeys have been eaten.' Then another came and said, 'Oh messenger of Allaah, the donkeys are being destroyed.' Allah's messenger (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) then sent Abu Talhah to make an announcement; Allaah and His Messenger have prohibited you from eating the flesh of domesticated donkeys, for it is bad (and impure) (Collected by Muslim)
I am not going cite all the ayaats that refer to his Sunnah. Some of the ayaats have been quoted in post #54 which you failed to reply.

Most of the “Rivayaat” relate to stoning are narrated by Umer (rt) but here His personal behavior going opposite, why? “Abu Shum’ha” means His (rt) son was a married man, why He (rt) did not announce the punishment of stoning for him? And it is the basic part of “Rijaal” that if the practice of Suhaaba Ikraam opposite of what Hadith or Rivaayat is mentioning then certainly that Rivaayat or Hadith is wrong.
Akhee since when was Abi Shamhah married?

The story is an extract from the book Shariah the Islaamic Law by Professor 'Abdur-Rahman I Doi
One day Abi Shamhah walked past a persons house, drank wine and became intoxicated. He saw a sleeping woman and committed zina (fornication) with her. She became pregnant. When she gave birth to her son, she took him to the Prophets mosque, placed the baby on the lap of Caliph Umar saying, 'O Commander of the faithful, take this child as you have a greater right over him than myself'. Then she explained that it was the child of his son, Abi Shamhah. Caliph Umar asked if he was legitimate. She replied, 'From my side it is legitimate, from his side it is illigitimate'. And she told him what happened.

The Caliph went home and confirmed with his son that he had committed the crime even though he was very ashamed of having done so. The Caliph caught himby his collar and took him to the prophets mosque. Abi Shamhah asked him weher he was being taken, and Caliph Umar replied, 'to the companions in the Prophets mosque so I may take from you the right of Allah in this world before it is taken from you in the next world'.

Abi Shamhah asked Caliph Umar to take God's right then and there so that he would not have to face the companions in embarassment. Umar replied, 'O son, you have already disgraced yourself and your father. We must go in their presence'.

Umar ordered Maflah to give him stripes. When he was given 70 stripes, Abi Shamhah appealed to the companions of the Prophet to intervene. The companions asked Umar to stop. But Umar replied, 'O Companions of the Prophet, have you not read in the Quran "Do not show mercy over them"' He was then given the full 100 stripes as a result of which Abi Shamhah died. Then Caliph Umar took him to his house, gave him a bath, and buried him.
Here, the story fully illustrates that 'Umar would administer the punishment regardless of the status and prominence of the offender. The Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:
"What destroyed the nations preceding you, was that if a noble amongst them stole, they would forgive him, and if a poor person amongst them stole, they would enforce the legal punishment (Hadd) on him. By Allaah, if Fatima, the daughter of Muhammed stole, I would cut off her hand."
Let see this matter in another point of view – when you see the punishments for other wrong deeds described in Quran you would easily examine that for all the crimes, other than murder, there is no other way but the punishment described by Almighty. For example
And the thief, man and woman, cut off their hands as recompense exemplary from God for what they earned; and God is Mighty, Wise. (38/5)
And those who accuse chaste women, then do not bring four witnesses, flog them with eighty stripes, and do not accept their testimony ever, for they are the transgressors; but those who, thereafter, repent and make amends, then God is Forgiving, Merciful.(5/24)
This is very interesting. Because the ayaah that you cited places no restriction which simply states that anyone found quilty of stealing should have his hand cut. This would mean that if a person is found stealing a needle, his hand would be cut off.

The Sunnah places restriction on the application of this punishment. The stolen property must equal a nisab (one quarter of a Dinar in gold). Furthermore, the wealth/property must be stolen from a place where such wealth/property is ussualy kept. In addition, the robber and opportunist thief are not classified as thiefs.

Ibn al-Qayyim said:
The fact that the hand of the thief (saariq) may be cut off for three dirhams, and not in the case of the opportunist thief (mukhtalis, one who steals when a person is not looking), robber or extortioner (ghaasib, one who seizes something by force) is indicative of the perfect wisdom of sharee’ah. For one cannot take precautions against the thief who breaks into houses and breaches one’s hiding-places and breaks locks; the owner of the goods cannot do any more than that (i.e., hiding them in appropriate places). If it were not prescribed for the hand of the thief to be cut off, then people would steal from one another in this manner and a great deal of harm would be done, and the problem of theft would be grievous indeed. This is unlike the case of the robber and opportunist thief, for the robber is the one who takes things openly in the sight of people, so they may stop him and restore the rights of the one who has been wronged, or they may testify before the judge. And the opportunist thief is the one who takes things when the owner is not paying attention, etc., so there has to be some form of negligence which enables the opportunist to steal, otherwise when one is careful and alert, he cannot take anything. So he is not like a thief (saariq), rather he is more like a betrayer.

Moreover, the opportunist theif (mukhtalis) does not take things from a place where things of that nature are usually hidden, rather he waits until you are not paying attention, then he takes your things when you put something down for a moment and are not paying attention. This is something against which precautions may be taken in most cases, and he (the opportunist) is like the robber who steals openly. With regard to the one who seizes things by force, the case is more obvious: it is even more apt that his hand should not be cut off, but it is permissible to put a stop to the actions of these people by beating them, making an example out of them as a warning to others, imprisoning them for lengthy periods and punishing them by seizing their property. Alaam al-Muwaqqieen,
I do not want to elongate the post, so I will stop here since the rest of your "replies" are ayaats which you seem to interpret according to your own whims. You have not used any authoritive references but rather relied on how you perceive the ayaats. Surely, that's a grave sin.

Abu Bakr (May Allaah be pleased with him) said:
"What earth could carry me, what heaven could shade me if I spoke about a single verse of Allah's Book according to my mere opinion or to say something of which I have no knowledge?"
`Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) warned us about those who mis-interpretate the Glorious Qur'aan:

"I only fear for you two matters: A man that interprets the Qur'an in a way other than the interpretation in which it is meant, and a man who vies with his brother in acquiring property."
He also said:
"Beware of those who put forward opinions (ashab al-ra'i ) for they are the enemies of the Sunnah. They have despaired of memorizing the Prophet's(Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) narrations and have resorted to forwarding opinions. As a result they went astray and misguided others."
I might address them after you have reflected on what I stated and not simply start a new topic 3 months later akhee. Insha'Allaah, I want this discussion to be a constructive discussion where we demolish your misconceptions one by one.

:w:
Reply

khalid zaheer
11-01-2005, 04:31 AM
Assalaam o alaikum brother Kadafi

Brother first of all I want to clear you that I don’t like such debates, because I am not a dictator that I compel you to accept what I have presented here. Same as Allah (Rab ul Izzat) said to his Messenger (saw), “your work is to convey the message; you are not liable to compel them to accept it”. You & I have presented our views, you should think over what I presented here and I will examine your views, others themselves can decide what the best is. May Allah (Rub ul Izzat) bless all of us and make us able to spend our lives according to what He decided for us. Now come to your post. I hope this discussion will close now, because I don’t think there is a benefit of repeating the things again and again.

format_quote Originally Posted by kadafi
What is knowledge according to the Glorious Qur'aan and the Sunnah and is it feasible for a layman to "examine" evidence and present his opinions/views?
Quran is an absolute knowledge, so there is no need to examine it. Even then Quran said (for “Ahl-a-Aimaan”)

And those who, when they are reminded by the “Aayaat” of their Lord, do not fall down at them deaf and blind.(73/25)

And it’s my “Aaimaan” that Sunnah is, certainly, to convert the verbal orders in practical. So I can easily get the knowledge about Sunnah through Quran, and it would be authentic. So I did not mean to examine Quranic verses, because these verses are standard to examine every matter, but the other sources through misc. ways as well as through Quran.

And what do you mean by layman? I think every person is layman until he become able to call a knowledge full person. Bhukhari or Muslim was not layman? They did efforts and got up from the list of laymen, then called knowledge full person. Or you think now here is no one able to get up from the list of laymen? They were laymen too; there were not any inspiration for them. They got knowledge same as we get, they examined it and presented what they could understand. It does not mean whatever they presented is 100% perfect and we should go on the way with blind eyes.

"Whoever Allaah intend to show goodness to, He grants him the understanding of the Religion."
"Whoever Allaah intends to show goodness to, He grants him the Fiqh of the Religion"
The game of words, where this game has brought us every one easily examine by glimpses. And what blame upon whom “whoever Allah doesn’t intend to show goodness to”, what they should do when the “Fiqh” of religion is not given to them by Almighty? This is the justice of Allah that He does not show them the right path but ready to punish for what they do? What your “salaafs” interpretation says about?

When you bring such kinds of statements in front of me it make my thinking firm about you that you are not a scholar but a typical “Moolvi”. But brother its not the good way to see your Deen.

This leaves us with the second question, whether a layman can interpret and deduce rulings accordin' to his understanding? The answer is simply no since he has not grasped the objectives and goals of the Shariah,
How you imagine everyone except you and your “Salaafs” is layman, and not able to understand the book? How you know there is no one except you and your Salaafs that grasped the objectives and goals of Shariah? I think you don’t know how many time the verse “this Quran is so easy for those that want to understand it” is repeated in Quran. There is only one condition, presented by Quran, to understand it

“this book (Quran) is beyond any doubt, but it is guidance for those only that close their eyes from everywhere except what is revealed by Almighty in the book”. (2/2)

It is not correctly translated akhee.
Thanks for your correctness but I could not understand where I was wrong in translation.

This is a complete fabrication and is not found in the Sunaan Ibn Majaah.
Here you may right but a little because it’s not fabricated but I have forgot the link.It was in my mind, my memory strike that I have read it in Ibn-a-maaja so I present the name. If it is not in Ibn-a-maaja then I think it is in abu dawood. Ok, I have to search it again where I got it.

(Naskh at-Tilaawah doona al-Hukm).
I think the concept of “Naskh” has much importance in your life, because at many places I have read these words from you but I did not touch it because it’s a very useless matter that was created by “Khitaabi” and his co-religionist to change the orders of Quranic verses. But I think you could enlighten the matter, I am putting some question plz reply for me

1_According to you and your co-religionist how many verses are agreed “Naskh”?
2_Please present at least five verses that are agreed cancelled?
3_We need to act upon the verses that have been cancelled or not?
4_How many verses are in Quran we need not to act upon?

Ibn Hajaar (May Allaah have mercy on him) stated a reason why the ayaah was never written down, however, it's only opinion,
Why had these verses cancelled no one sure about but it is certainty that these are cancelled, gooood.

The only group that disagreed (to this fact) are the Khawarij (a deviated Muslim group) who said: Both the virgin and the widow are to be whipped.
If “khawarji” said the same what the Quran is saying then they are “deviate”, we need not to pay attention because they are Khawarji? You mean whatever the Khawarji said is wrong may that is according to Quran, but if someone is insisting over the things that are against Quran even then one is like a Messenger because he is not khawarji but one of your salaafs, bohat khooob. They themselves announced that we are khawarij or you make them Khawarji? They were khawarij because they said “we don’t accept the things out of Quran”, and we are “Moomin” because we are ready to accept every thing out of Quran might it be against the book. They present a thing that is according to Quran how you decline it? You reject it because a label (khawarij) has been pasted upon by some persons, then this label has been pasted upon Muhammad (saw) too. He (saw) was not khawarji for whole Arab when He (saw) presented a new Deen? Think if you able to think.

There is ijmaa' of the four main maddhabs:
I don’t need to know what your “Mazzhabs” say about; I need to know what my DEEN has said. May the Imams of these Mazzhabs have the place like Allah’s Messengers in front of you and you see their books like divine books but in my opinion if they are presenting something which is against Quran then, according to Quran, they are certainly “Zaalim”. Who permit them to make Ijma over a thing one or two "lives" depend upon, furthermore against the divine book? They are not agreeing upon most of the matters but over the thing that is against Quran they are agreed, surprising.

Whatever We (Allaah) abrogate of any aayat or cause it to be forgotten,..)
Note that it cleary says: "cause to be forgotten" which is in the case of the ayah of stoning.
I have put the questions above but here asking again “if this verse is forgotten by Almighty then why are you insisting to remember it? You should also forget it”. You did not put the next words of this Aayat; the verse is

Whatever verse We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it, or the like of it; dost thou not know that God is powerful over everything? (106/2)

If the verse of stoning is “caused to be forgotten” then which one is replaced? And if verse of stoning is replacement then which one is forgotten? Could you please explain for me?

If you want to apply this principle upon the stoning verse then you should know the order of stoning was in “Torah” as mentioned in a Rivaayat that Mohammad (saw) announced the punishment of stoning for a Yahoodi according to their book Torah. According to your “forgotten” principle certainly that verse is replaced by the verses mentioned in Quran.

What is “Aayat”? Are the verses of Quran Called Aayaat only? No if you read the Quran carefully it is easy to know most of the things are called by name of Aayaat of Almighty. The land, universe, solar systems, previous books so and so every thing is the Aayat of Allah (Rab ul Izzat). The place where from you pick the part of the verse, you mentioned above, is very clear if you read that chapter in full, the topic is “previous books (Aayaat) are to be forgotten” and the replacement, in shape of Quran, is in front of you, simple. But I think you don’t like the simple things.

Then, We established you on a Shariah. Therefore, follow it, and do not follow the vain desires of those who do not know. meaning the revealed laws (Qur'aan and the SUnnah)
The word “interpretation” is your favorite word so using for you “is this your interpretation that the revealed laws means Quran and Sunnah”, and both are a different things.

What puzzles me is that you claim that I have forged the principle of 'unrecited wahy'.
I did not claim you forged this principle but I said this principle is forged.

[Quote]He does not speak from his desires. Verily it is inspiration (unrecited revelation) which has been revealed[Quote]

How you know brother the word inspiration means “un-recited revelation”? It means you have the authority to interpretation of Quran as you like but other could not be. Every person that has a little touch with Quran knows this verse is the reply of what the “Kuffar” said “why you yourself not announce the orders in the matter of Deen” and “these are the stories Muhammad (saw) has listened from someone and repeating in front of us day and night”. But you changed its meanings to un-recited revelation.

Whatever the messenger gives you, take it; and whatever he forbids you, leave it
Or the address may indicate generaly defined laws, the details of which are left to the Sunnah.
He made lawful for them the good (and pure) things and forbade them the bad (and impure)
Your words “may” and “left to the Sunnah” are interesting. If Sunnah was able to define laws and Muhammad (saw) had the authority to announce the things lawful or unlawful then what is the need of Quran? The above two verses were enough. Allah reveals these verses and Muhammad (saw) announced these things are good and lawful and those are not.

[Quote]Akhee since when was Abi Shamhah married?[Quote]

If a man could be called “abu” or “abi” before marriage then may he was unmarried. As I know Abu or Abi is not the part of a name but “Kuni’yat”. Let see who’s “Kuni’yat was Abu Shumha, Umer (rt) made many marriages and there is a numbers of children He (rt) had

1_Zainab binnat-a-Maa’zoon ________ Hafsa, Abdullah, Abdul Rehman (al akbar)
2_Aatika binnat-a-Zaid bin Umro bin Nafeel ______ Ai’yaaz
3_Jameela binnat-a-Saabit bin Aflah ______ Aasim
4_Umay Hakeem binnat-a-Haaris bin Hashaam ______ Fatima
5_Umay Kalsoom binnat-a-Jarool bin Malik _______ Abaidullah, Zaid (al akbar)
6_Umay Kalsoom binnat-a-Ali bin Abi Talib _____ Zaid (al asghar), Ruqai’ya

Other than this Umer (rt) have three more child from two female servants
1_Fakee’ya _______ Zainab
2_Lahee’ya _______ Abdul Rehman (al wast), Abdul Rehman (al asghar)
(Hayaat-a-Farooq ul Aazam by Ibn-a-Joozi)

Some historians claim Abaidullah’s Kuni’yat was Abu Shumha, but it is wrong because it’s the agreed matter that He was alive at the time of “Jang-a-Suffain”
(Tahzeeb ul Tahzeeb by Ibn-a-hajar)

Ibn-a-Joozi said, Abu Shumha was the Kuni’yat of Abdul Rehman (al wast). He participated in “Jahaad-a-Missar” (Egypt). Where He made a mistake; drink “Nabeez”, unfortunately it was a little old so He drunk. Next day He came to Umro bin Aass (rt) and insist for “Hadd”, Umro (rt) gave him stripe but in a “Tent”. When this event came into the knowledge of Umer (rt) He annoyed that why it was not done in front of all persons. Then Umer (rt) gave some stripe to Abdul Rehman in Madeena as a trial. After few days Abdul Rehman captured by a disease, unfortunately could not survive and died. This is the real story that changed to blackish the name of Umer (rt) (Al Maozo’aat by Ibn-a-joozi)

Sayuti has the same thinking too.

Brother Kadafi I hope now you have understood that Abu Shumha was a married person. I can criticize the most of the points of this Rivaayat in many ways but it’s a waste of time only. The above description is enough to prove my point; I declared in my last post, that even then this Rivaayat was created the final punishment for Zina was 100 lashes. Otherwise, certainly, the creator of this Rivaayat suggested stoning for Abu shumha (being a married person).

This would mean that if a person is found stealing a needle, his hand would be cut off.
The Sunnah places restriction on the application of this punishment. The stolen property must equal a nisab (one quarter of a Dinar in gold). Furthermore, the wealth/property must be stolen from a place where such wealth/property is ussualy kept. In addition, the robber and opportunist thief are not classified as thiefs.
Nice shot, but I am surprised you did not put any Hadith in favour of such “unique” statements, or sayings of Ibn-a-Qayyam are also “Sunnah”? You did not prescribe if someone stole a little less than “Nisab” then what is one’s punishment. Could you please tell me when this Nisab was stated? And how many times someone could steal less than Nisab?

If I goes to somewhere in my car and park it in the parkingl, where from car is stolen by someone, you mean it is not the stealing, because it’s my negligence, I should put the car in my pocket, am I right? And the person who stole my car could not be called thief because he is opportunist and he pick this car from parking. So we could not cut his hand. But if he steals my car from my house then he is thief. Now we could cut his hand. Excellent laws

I know only one thing brother if an Islamic govt. (Khilaafat ullah) is established in full form then may someone steal a needle or a ship one would be called thief and have the same punishment describe in Quran. And if the Khilafa is not established then there is no concept of punishments described by Quran. Thief is thief, may he opportunist or according to your definition. And as the matter of robbers it is more than theft; it is “Fasaad” (anarchy) and Quran has describe the punishment for it.

You have not used any authoritive references but rather relied on how you perceive the ayaats. Surely, that's a grave sin.
You are right brother but sorry I could not provide the references stronger than that of Quran. May the sayings of your Salaafs are most authentic for you but have nothing place in front of me in compare with the sayings of Almighty.


Allah Hafiz
Reply

kadafi
11-03-2005, 03:56 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by khalid zaheer
Brother first of all I want to clear you that I don’t like such debates, because I am not a dictator that I compel you to accept what I have presented here. Same as Allah (Rab ul Izzat) said to his Messenger (saw), “your work is to convey the message; you are not liable to compel them to accept it”. You & I have presented our views, you should think over what I presented here and I will examine your views, others themselves can decide what the best is. May Allah (Rub ul Izzat) bless all of us and make us able to spend our lives according to what He decided for us. Now come to your post. I hope this discussion will close now, because I don’t think there is a benefit of repeating the things again and again.
:sl:

I cannot find any trace of ‘elitist attacks’ displayed in this discussion. To say that one is forcing his view would imply that he is receiving no opposition which is incorrect. Furthermore, people who force their views on others disregard the views of others and repeat the same predicable posts in spite of the fact that it has nothing to do with the replies of the opponent. I have not observed such behaviour in this topic or else I would have closed the thread.

As for you repeating your points, then address the replies adequately. Remember that failing to respond to my points results into you re-iterating your primary points.

Quran is an absolute knowledge, so there is no need to examine it. Even then Quran said (for “Ahl-a-Aimaan”)

And those who, when they are reminded by the “Aayaat” of their Lord, do not fall down at them deaf and blind.(73/25)

And it’s my “Aaimaan” that Sunnah is, certainly, to convert the verbal orders in practical. So I can easily get the knowledge about Sunnah through Quran, and it would be authentic. So I did not mean to examine Quranic verses, because these verses are standard to examine every matter, but the other sources through misc. ways as well as through Quran.
This is interesting, since you have introduced a whole new definition of the Sunnah. According to your statement, the sunnah is simply the commandments of the Glorious Qur’aan with any elucidation.

Allaah (Exalted is He) said in the Glorious Qur’aan, perform As-Salaat without explaining how to perform or observe. How would you convert from that single ayah into practise?

Even though your definition of sunnah concides with the quran-alone sect, let me state what Sunnah is according the various branches.

According to the ulema of ahadeeth, sunnah means all that is narrated from the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), his sayings, his acts, whatever he has tacitly approved, and all the narrations which describe his physical attributes and character.

According to the ulema of Jurisprudence( Fiqh), the sunnah refers to the category of mandub or nafilah. It is used synonymously with mandub (recommended acts)

According to the ulema of usool al-fiqh, it refers to another source of the Shariah in addition with the Glortious Qur’aan.

And what do you mean by layman? I think every person is layman until he become able to call a knowledge full person. Bhukhari or Muslim was not layman? They did efforts and got up from the list of laymen, then called knowledge full person. Or you think now here is no one able to get up from the list of laymen? They were laymen too; there were not any inspiration for them. They got knowledge same as we get, they examined it and presented what they could understand. It does not mean whatever they presented is 100% perfect and we should go on the way with blind eyes.
I did not grasp what you just stated. What do you mean with ‘until he became able to call a knowledge full person’?

If you mean that every individual is a layman unless he acquires knowledge and expertise in his chosen field. That is exactly the whole concept of being a layperson.

It seems that argument is solely based on the claim that one has to start somewhere in order to gain knowledge. This is extraneous to what I have stated and that is whether one could interpret and deduce rulings from the Glorious Qur’aan without knowledge (i.e. a layperson).

As for blind-following the Imaams of Hadeeth, how can one blind-follow them if they have left the isnad, the criteria of how they evaluated the narrations for the benefit of later generations so that they can verify it.

Let’s see what the scholars have said regarding Imaam Bukharee (May Allaah have mercy on him)

Nu’aym ibn Hammaad said,
“Muhammad ibn Ismaa’eel is the Faqeeh of the Ummah.”
Ishaaq ibn Raahawaih said,
“Write narrations from this young man (meaning al-Bukhaaree), because if he had lived in the time of al-Hasan the people would have had need of him due to his knowledge of hadeeth and its understanding.”
Aboo Bakr ibn Abee Shaybah and Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullaah ibn
Numayr both said,
“We have not seen anyone like Muhammad ibn Ismaa’eel.”
Ahmad ibn Hanbal said,
“Khuraasaan has not brought out the like of Muhammad ibn Ismaa’eel.”
Aboo ‘Ammaar al-Husayn ibn Huraith praised al-Bukhaaree and
said,
“I am not aware that I have seen anyone the like of him, it is as if he had been created solely for the hadeeth.”
Muhammad ibn Bashshaar said,
“The great memorizers of the world are four: Aboo Zur’ahi in Rayy, ad-Daarirnee in Samarqand, Muhammad ibn Ismaa’eel in Bukhaaraa and Muslim in Neesaaboor.”
Ibn Khuzaymah said,
“I have not seen under the sky anyone having more knowledge of and better memorization of the hadeeth of Allaah’s Messenger (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) than Muhammad ibn Isrnaa’eel.”
The game of words, where this game has brought us every one easily examine by glimpses. And what blame upon whom “whoever Allah doesn’t intend to show goodness to”, what they should do when the “Fiqh” of religion is not given to them by Almighty? This is the justice of Allah that He does not show them the right path but ready to punish for what they do? What your “salaafs” interpretation says about?
Akhee, I am having trouble understanding your post. What are you trying to say? Should I take a stab in the dark and guess what you’re trying to say?

Let me first explain what the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) meant with that statement. Understanding the religion is the sign of the believer and having eemaan. It’s also one of the causes for the increase of eemaan. Having knowledge of the faith and knowing what increases and decreases eemaan is obligatory upon every Muslim. The saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is also confirmed in the Glorious Qur’aan:

Allaah (Exalted is He) said in Sooraat Al-Baqarah:
He grants wisdom to whom He pleases; and he to whom wisdom is granted indeed receives a benefit overflowing. But none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.
The Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) also said:
To seek knowledge is obligatory upon every Muslim
Those who are lacking common knowledge of the Deen are hypocrites and this is because Allaah (Exalted is He) said:
"But the hypocrites do not understand."
When you bring such kinds of statements in front of me it make my thinking firm about you that you are not a scholar but a typical “Moolvi”. But brother its not the good way to see your Deen.
Haha, akhee, no one is here claiming to be a scholar. I always assumed that a Maulvi is an urdu word for scholar. Leave the petty words akhee and concentrate on the argument.

How you imagine everyone except you and your “Salaafs” is layman, and not able to understand the book? How you know there is no one except you and your Salaafs that grasped the objectives and goals of Shariah? I think you don’t know how many time the verse “this Quran is so easy for those that want to understand it” is repeated in Quran. There is only one condition, presented by Quran, to understand it

“this book (Quran) is beyond any doubt, but it is guidance for those only that close their eyes from everywhere except what is revealed by Almighty in the book”. (2/2)
Firstly, if what you have stated implies and attributes ignorance to the Salaf, then I urge you to edit it out.

We know that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was the best interpreter of the Glorious Qur’aan. Similiary the Sahabas were the best mufassireen after the Prophet since they inherited his knowledge and conveyed it to the Ummah. This is why the Prophet praised his generation (sahabas), those who followed the sahabas (tabi'ien) and those who followed the students of the sahabas (tab tabi'een). Since Islaam was completed in the time of the Prophet, the correct understanding remained untill the end of the third generation. Hence why the scholars, past and present, had no disagreement that the first generations should be followed and stop where they stopped.

Imaam Al-Awzaee (may Allaah have mercy on him) said,
Hold yourself with patience upon Sunnah, stop where they stopped(Salaf), say what they said, and take the way of your pious salaf. Verily, it is sufficient for you what was sufficient for them.
It we understood this ayah in the same way that you understood, there would be no sects and hizbs and Allaah (Exalted is He) would be pleased with us.

The only ayah where Allaah (Exalted is He) said that the Qur’aan is easy is in the ayah where Allaah (Exalted is He) said:
And surely We have made the Qur’aan easy for Dhikr (getting a lesson) so is there anyone to get a lesson?
Obviosuly this ayah refers getting lesson from the Glorious Qur’aan and its being easy for this purpose only. There is no extension of this ayah to to indicate that everybody irrespective of the volume of their learning can derive rules and interpretation of the legal laws. Then Allaah (exalted is He) wouldn’t have sent the prophet as a teacher and explainer of the Glorious Qur’aan.

Allaah (Exalted is He) said:
And these similitudes We mention before the people. And nobody understands them except the learned
Ibn Katheer comments in his tafseer regarding the ayah:
(And these are the examples We give for mankind; but none will understand them except those who have knowledge.) meaning, no one understands them or ponders them except those who are possessed of deep knowledge. Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that `Amr bin Murrah said, "I never came across an Ayah of the Book of Allah that I did not know, but it grieved me, because I heard that Allaah says:
(And these are the examples We give for mankind; but none will understand them except those who have knowledge. )''
I think the concept of “Naskh” has much importance in your life, because at many places I have read these words from you but I did not touch it because it’s a very useless matter that was created by “Khitaabi” and his co-religionist to change the orders of Quranic verses. But I think you could enlighten the matter, I am putting some question plz reply for me
The concept of Naskh is confirmed in the Glorious Qur’aan and to simply brush it as an illegal concept forged by a Muslim reveals that you do not much of the subject.

Nevertheless, I will answer your queries.
how many verses are agreed “Naskh”?
Al-Suyuti in his book al-Itqaan said that:
'twenty-one verses in the Qur'an were abrogated; some were agreed upon, while others are not. These abrogated verses are in the following Surahs: Al-Baqarah, Al-'Imran, An-Nisa', Al-Ma'idah, Al-Anfal, At-Taubah, An-Nur, Al-Ahzab, Al-Mujadilah, Al-Mumtahinah and Al-Muzzammil.
2_Please present at least five verses that are agreed cancelled?
Naskh may be either sarih (explit) or dimni (implicit). I will list some explicit and implicit ones:

First cancelled ayah is the change of Qiblah:
“Verily, We have seen the turning of your (Muhammad’s) face towards the heaven. Surely, We shall turn you to a Qiblah (prayer direction) that shall please you, so turn your face in the direction of Al-Masjid Al-Haraam (at Makkah)”[al-Baqarah 2:144]
Second cancelled ayah is the ayah in Sooraat al-Anfal:
'If there be of you twenty steadfast persons, they shall overcome two hundred, and if there be one hundred of you, they shall overcome one thousand
Allaah subsequently revealed:
Now Allah has lightened your burden [...] if there be of you one hundred steadfast persons, they shall overcome two hundred, and if there be of you one thousand, they shall overcome two thousand.'
Third cancelled ayah which is an implicit abrogation is the waiting period of widows:
Those of you who are about to die and leave widows should bequeath for their widows a year's maintenance and residence; but if they leave the residence, you are not responsible for what they do of themselves (al-Baqarah, 2:240).
To
Those of you who die and leave widows, the latter must observe a waiting period of four months and ten days; when they have fulfilled their term, you are not responsible for what they do of themselves (al-Baqarah, 2:234)
These should serve as an example since I do not have the time to list all the abrogated ayaat.


3_We need to act upon the verses that have been cancelled or not?
Ayaat that are in the Qur’aan and have been cancelled should not be acted upon but should be recited in salaat. That is naskh al-hukm such as the abrogated ayaat that I have cited above.

If “khawarji” said the same what the Quran is saying then they are “deviate”, we need not to pay attention because they are Khawarji? You mean whatever the Khawarji said is wrong may that is according to Quran, but if someone is insisting over the things that are against Quran even then one is like a Messenger because he is not khawarji but one of your salaafs, bohat khooob. They themselves announced that we are khawarij or you make them Khawarji? They were khawarij because they said “we don’t accept the things out of Quran”, and we are “Moomin” because we are ready to accept every thing out of Quran might it be against the book. They present a thing that is according to Quran how you decline it? You reject it because a label (khawarij) has been pasted upon by some persons, then this label has been pasted upon Muhammad (saw) too. He (saw) was not khawarji for whole Arab when He (saw) presented a new Deen? Think if you able to think
Not only are you not making sense but you applied the label khawarij to connote to presenting a new Deen.

Khawaraaji were the first sect who abandoned the Sunnah and rejected most of the ahadeeth and declared those who commit major sins as kaafirs. Seriously, I do not understand you reasoning to apply such label to the Prophet whilst not knowing who they were.

I don’t need to know what your “Mazzhabs” say about; I need to know what my DEEN has said. May the Imams of these Mazzhabs have the place like Allah’s Messengers in front of you and you see their books like divine books but in my opinion if they are presenting something which is against Quran then, according to Quran, they are certainly “Zaalim”. Who permit them to make Ijma over a thing one or two "lives" depend upon, furthermore against the divine book? They are not agreeing upon most of the matters but over the thing that is against Quran they are agreed, surprising.
Surprisingly, I was right. I really held the assumption that you at least knew the foundations of the Shariah sciences. Apparantly, I was mistaken and this dialogue proved to be unfruitful if the opposite hasn’t got the slightest clue of the Islaamic foundations and ridicules the Imaams.

The only source that you seem to be accepting is the Qur’aan only and thus neglecting the Sunnah. This places you in the same category as the Quran-alone sect.
I have put the questions above but here asking again “if this verse is forgotten by Almighty then why are you insisting to remember it? You should also forget it”. You did not put the next words of this Aayat; the verse is

Whatever verse We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it, or the like of it; dost thou not know that God is powerful over everything? (106/2)
If the ayah of stoning has been abrogated verbally, then how can one remember it. I never cited the exact of stoning, rather I cited the injunction. It seems that you’re confused on this issue.

If the verse of stoning is “caused to be forgotten” then which one is replaced? And if verse of stoning is replacement then which one is forgotten? Could you please explain for me?
Since naskh has various principles, the form of abrogation regarding stoning is refered to as naskh al-tilawah. There are naskh without any replacement and the basis for them is in the ahadeeth. But this will prove to be troublesome for you since you do not recognize the sunnah and thus only rely on the Glorious Qur’aan. Since all these reports were narrated from the Sahabas, do you accept or reject the ijma of the Sahabas?

The word “interpretation” is your favorite word so using for you “is this your interpretation that the revealed laws means Quran and Sunnah”, and both are a different things.
The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:
“I have been given the Qur’an and something similar to it besides it. Yet a time will come when a man leaning on his couch will say ‘follow the Qur’an only; what you find in it permissible, take as permissible, and what you find as forbidden, take as forbidden’. But verily what the Messenger of Allaah has forbidden is like what Allaah has forbidden”
This is reported by Ahmad and Abu Dawood and classified as saheeh.

It seems that you have not replied on the ayat which speak of the Sunnah. The al-dhikr that includes both the Glorious Qur’aan.

How you know brother the word inspiration means “un-recited revelation”? It means you have the authority to interpretation of Quran as you like but other could not be. Every person that has a little touch with Quran knows this verse is the reply of what the “Kuffar” said “why you yourself not announce the orders in the matter of Deen” and “these are the stories Muhammad (saw) has listened from someone and repeating in front of us day and night”. But you changed its meanings to un-recited revelation.
Why do you insist on claiming that I interpret this ayaat based on my thinking. I am simply relaying the understanding of the sahabas in regard to that ayah.

Ibn katheer (may Allaah have mercy on him) said regarding:
(It is only a revelation revealed.), means, he only conveys to the people what he was commanded to convey, in its entirety without additions or deletions. Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Umamah said that he heard the Messenger of Allaah say,
(Verily, numbers similar to the two tribes, or one of them, Rabi`ah and Mudar, will enter Paradise on account of the intercession of one man, who is not a Prophet.)
A man asked, "O Allaah's Messenger! Is not Rabi`ah a subtribe of Mudar.'' The Prophet said,

(I said what I said.)

Imam Ahmad recorded that `Abdullah bin `Amr said,

"I used to record everything I heard from the Messenger of Allaah so it would be preserved. The Quraysh discouraged me from this, saying, `You record everything you hear from the Messenger of Allaah , even though he is human and sometimes speaks when he is angry' I stopped recording the Hadiths for a while, but later mentioned what they said to the Messenger of Allaah , who said,

(Write! By He in Whose Hand is my soul, every word that comes out of me is the Truth.)''
Abu Dawud also collected this Hadith.
Does your opinion on the ayah overrule the understanding of the Sahabas?

Your words “may” and “left to the Sunnah” are interesting. If Sunnah was able to define laws and Muhammad (saw) had the authority to announce the things lawful or unlawful then what is the need of Quran? The above two verses were enough. Allah reveals these verses and Muhammad (saw) announced these things are good and lawful and those are not.
The question should be, why did Allaah (Exalted is He) repeatedly say in the Glorious Qur’aan that He sent the Prophet as legislator.

Allaah (Exalted is He) said:
Fight those who do not believe in Allaah and the Hereafter and do not hold unlawful what Allaah and His Messenger have made unlawful
Here, the Prophet, by the will of Allaah, exercises the authority to make something unlawful.

Allaah (Exalted is He) also says
No believer, neither man nor woman, has a right, when Allaah and His Messenger decide a matter, to have a choice in their matter in issue. And whoever disobeys Allaah and His Messenger has gone astray into manifest error.
He also says:
Whatever the Messenger gives you, take it; and whatever he forbids you, refrain from it.
Or what about:
But no, by your Lord, they shall not be (deemed to be) believers unless they accept you as judge in their disputes, then find in their hearts no adverse feeling against what you decided, but surrender to it in complete submission.
Brother Kadafi I hope now you have understood that Abu Shumha was a married person. I can criticize the most of the points of this Rivaayat in many ways but it’s a waste of time only. The above description is enough to prove my point; I declared in my last post, that even then this Rivaayat was created the final punishment for Zina was 100 lashes. Otherwise, certainly, the creator of this Rivaayat suggested stoning for Abu shumha (being a married person).
There are two conflicting points regarding Abu Shahma. The first statement you cited stated that he impregnated a female by force whilst in the state of being drunk. The second reported stated by Ibn hajar is that one day he, he drank wine and became unconscious. He confessed his guilt and wanted to be punished. Amr bin Al Aas said that they were feeling repentant and that was enough, and no further punishment was called for. However, Abu Shahma insisted that he should be punished according to Law. So he was punished (80 lashes). Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) found out that Amr bin Al Aas flogged Abu Shahma in his house instead of public so he ordered that Abu Shahma should be send to Madinah and be flogged in public. Compare that to your statement that he Umar showed undue favour to his son by awarding only lashes.

The penalty for drinking whine is 80 lashes. This is reported in the Muwatta of Malik:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Thawr ibn Zayd ad-Dili that Umar ibn al-Khattab asked advice about a man drinking wine. Ali ibn Abi Talib said to him, "We think that you flog him for it with eighty lashes. Because when he drinks, he becomes intoxicated, and when he becomes intoxicated, he talks confusedly, and when he talks confusedly, he lies." (80 lashes is the same amount as for slandering) Umar gave eighty lashes for drinking wine.
Despite the fact that these are conflicting reports, the first report (the one you cited) does not contradict the ruling on stoning. Umar flogged him first but he died in the processes of being flogged, since the punishment is lashing for unmarried Muslims and lashing AND stoning for married Muslims.

Nice shot, but I am surprised you did not put any Hadith in favour of such “unique” statements, or sayings of Ibn-a-Qayyam are also “Sunnah”?
At one moment, you do not accept the hadeeth but the other moment you demand the hadeeth for a ruling.

The reason why they are not classified as thieves is ‘cause they do not fit the category. Sariqa (theft) accordin’ to the Shariah Law means taking away the property of another in a secret manner, at time when such property is in custody. Compare that to a robber takes properties by force or the opportunist who takes away the property when the owner is being neglectful. It is fully explained in the statement by Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him).

You did not prescribe if someone stole a little less than “Nisab” then what is one’s punishment. Could you please tell me when this Nisab was stated? And how many times someone could steal less than Nisab?
If one still less than a Nisab, then his action would be deemed as haraam but the hadd would not be applied. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said and is reported by Ahmad.
“There is no cutting (of hands) for stealing that is less than ten Dirhams.” (Musnad Ahmad)
A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) narrates that: “The hand of a thief was not cut off during the lifetime of the Messenger of Allaah (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) except for stealing something equal to a shield in value.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, 6792, & Sahih Muslim, 1685)
If I goes to somewhere in my car and park it in the parkingl, where from car is stolen by someone, you mean it is not the stealing, because it’s my negligence, I should put the car in my pocket, am I right? And the person who stole my car could not be called thief because he is opportunist and he pick this car from parking. So we could not cut his hand. But if he steals my car from my house then he is thief. Now we could cut his hand. Excellent laws
You did not grasp the concept and hastily resorted in unnecessary analogies. If you have secured your car with utmost protection, and the thief manages to steal it, then he will be classified as a thief.

The elements that constitute sariqa are:

1. The thief must be an adult of sound understanding
2. The property must be in careful protection on the man.
3 The property must be taken out of the custody of another person (owner) in a secret manner.
4. The thief must have obtained full possession of the stolen property.
5. The property must be movable.
6. The property must be of some value, which must not be less than the prescribed “Nisaab/Nisab” (limit).
7. Dishonest intention to take property.

I know only one thing brother if an Islamic govt. (Khilaafat ullah) is established in full form then may someone steal a needle or a ship one would be called thief and have the same punishment describe in Quran
So according to you, one who steals a needle must still be punished. What about children, or the insane?

It is apparent that you cannot answer such questions since your only source is restricted to the Glorious Qur’aan despite the fact that Allaah (Exalted is He) repeatedly mentioned to obey Him and His Messenger.

It is odd that one can profess such view to be correct and that the Ummah of the last 1400 years including the Sahabas and the Prophet erred in applying the Law of stoning.

La hawla wa la quwwata illa billaah

:w:
Reply

MetSudaisTwice
12-06-2005, 11:43 AM
salam
jazakallah bro ansar, your post is very interesting and beneficial
wasalam
Reply

sapphire
12-06-2005, 02:09 PM
hmmm...interesting...jazakalah bro kadafi.....

(metsudaistwice have you got bro kadafi and bro ansar mixed up??)
Reply

khalid zaheer
12-17-2005, 10:11 AM
:sl: brother Kadafi

Sorry brother I could not reply in time because of my sickness + some personal activities, sorry again. Now I am here again, discuss will be started in a day or two inshallah.

:w:
Reply

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

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-28-2010, 09:02 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-14-2008, 04:48 AM
  3. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-01-2007, 04:37 AM
  4. Replies: 67
    Last Post: 06-11-2007, 11:18 AM
HeartHijab.com | Hijab Sale | Pound Shop | UK Wholesale Certified Face Masks, Hand Sanitiser & PPE | British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!