Much has been said, on various websites, about Muslims desire for a world wide caliphate under which all would necessarily convert to Islam or be dhimmis and live as 2nd class citizens under protective treaties that may or may not be honored. (Or at the worst, convert or die) There is known persecution of Christians in Muslim countries. Articles are available that tell of torture, imprisonment and death for Christians who refuse to convert or for those who convert to Christianity from Islam. How is it said then that Islam is a peaceful religion which honors human life? (Someone said that on another thread)
That has no relevance to the premise. I reject christian theology based on the basic tenet the 'man god dying for our sins' all other little details are irrelevant therefrom!
You're supposedly Muslim, discussing basic tenets of Islam, not a Muslim discussing Judaism. Try to stick to a concept and see it through, the above isn't a reply, if you're going to make a statement see it through don't bring some other subject into the matter and in the form of a question!
best,
my sister in law caught my youngest daughter saying jesus..
she shouted at her and i heard through an open door.
she said we dont say that in this house.
i wandered over and said..
your right.. we say alayhis salam.
i know you have your own way. but i think your missing the point.
Again, you lost me, won't you please take the plane in for a landing?
also as a side note, we don't call upon Jesus (PBUH) anymore than we call on Mohammed if you were trying to make a side point with that one, all of them are lost on me and have no relevance to the topic!
Also I don't care if you desire to apostate or not!
best,
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
That has no relevance to the premise. I reject christian theology based on the basic tenet the 'man god dying for our sins' all other little details are irrelevant therefrom!
You're supposedly Muslim, discussing basic tenets of Islam, not a Muslim discussing Judaism. Try to stick to a concept and see it through, the above isn't a reply, if you're going to make a statement see it through don't bring some other subject into the matter and in the form of a question!
best,
Well, you were playing the old "Go get an academic degree in Islam, then you are qualified to disagree with me" card, a talking point most frequently used to silence dissent. If we're supposed to deal with our absence of scholarly degree by shutting up and accepting whatever those who have the degree say, well, we better convert to Christianity in no time. Certainly there are scholars of Christian theology who are better qualified than we to judge whether Jesus is God, so let's follow them, hey
Then this is where the problem is. We have to first agree on the sources we use for Islam, before differing on the understanding of an issue. Incidentally, this hadeeth is from the collection of Imam An-Nawawi's forty, which is a very famous collection of hadeeth that has been the focus of a large number of commentaries, and considered to consist of some of the most important and comprehensive hadeeth for the individual Muslim.
Only accepting Bukhari (and possibly Muslim) hadiths as being self-sufficient is hardly a far-off heresy.
format_quote Originally Posted by Muhammad
Even if, for the sake of argument, that is true, what about the beginning of the hadeeth, does it not make clear reference to leadership? There are yet many other hadeeth (some of them in Bukhari), as well as verses in the Qur'an, all pointing to the concept of leadership - either its obligation or advice regarding it. There is also the practice of the Companions, mentioned above, which reflects their understanding of this issue. If the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) never intended there to be leadership of the Ummah, why are there so many teachings regarding it?
There's quite a large logic gap between "these are the characteristics of a good leader" and "this is the one, true political system sanctioned by Allah".
Well, you were playing the old "Go get an academic degree in Islam, then you are qualified to disagree with me" card, a talking point most frequently used to silence dissent. If we're supposed to deal with our absence of scholarly degree by shutting up and accepting whatever those who have the degree say, well, we better convert to Christianity in no time. Certainly there are scholars of Christian theology who are better qualified than we to judge whether Jesus is God, so let's follow them, hey
Your statement is still nonsensical!
This isn't a question of logic (the one that usually leads folks to be atheists or theists or choose a particular brand of religion), it is a question of knowledge, and you've already acted like an authority giving a final verdict in the matter, so the request stays. If you're going to tell us which ahadiths to take and which to forgo. That Khilafah Rashida means one thing and not the other. I expect some scholarship on the matter!
Muhammad is better qualified than you and this is what he had to say:
format_quote Originally Posted by Muhammad
I don't know the answers to your questions.
format_quote Originally Posted by Muhammad
a deep study and understanding of Islamic history is of paramount importance.
Don't write statements of assertion without the desire to be
1- challenged
2- prove what you say factual.
I think that's fair!
best,
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
well your in a thread discussing worldwide caliphate..
and your at the throats of other muslims.
the irony does not escape me.
like i always say.. when the people are ready, it will happen.
otherwise its like water over stones.
And when will we "be ready"?
When some person with a narrow, specific, exclusive idea of what Islamic unity should be like manages to convince the entire Ummah that he is right and that everyone should follow him?
I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen. Indeed, I have noticed that those who complain the hardest about the disunity of the Ummah are often among the worst causes of that disunity.
When some person with a narrow, specific, exclusive idea of what Islamic unity should be like manages to convince the entire Ummah that he is right and that everyone should follow him?
I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen. Indeed, I have noticed that those who complain the hardest about the disunity of the Ummah are often among the worst causes of that disunity.
...i dont know?
its gonna take something special thats for sure.
i mean countless countries of muslim population have undergone war and genocides and the rest of us have looked on.
persecution is rife and yet muslims all over the world cannot do anything about it.
muslim nations and there governments are just as corrupt as those that oppose them.
..i guess only allah swt can change the people.
for those that complain about disunity, live your lives according to your own laws..
and that is the point of it.
even if you were all strangers your actions are still part of a bigger picture.
be part of a caliphate that does not exist? i mean you already have the rule book, what you make of it and what is made of you is a reflection of the muslim ummah.
First of all, I don't put much stock in individual hadiths unless they are of Bukhari.
format_quote Originally Posted by Futuwwa
Only accepting Bukhari (and possibly Muslim) hadiths as being self-sufficient is hardly a far-off heresy.
It is actually a very serious matter.
Believing the Prophet in some matters and belying him in other matters, while one knows those statements came from him, strikes at the foundations of one's entire Islam and imaan, and can take one onto disbelief.
If one does not deny the hadeeth knowing they are authentic, but doubts the authenticity of a hadeeth, then they should know that judging the authenticity of a hadeeth is the job of hadeeth experts. A non-scholar or non-specialist is not free to make his own judgement about hadeeth. There are many many ahaadeeth outside of Bukhari and Muslim, which are unanimously accepted as authentic and saheeh. To deny those, when one knows that there is unanimous agreement from hadeeth experts and scholars that they are authentic, is to deny something that came from the Prophet , to deny that he said it, and is to deny part of your deen. Which is very serious indeed.
A new revert may be excused if he/she has only ever been exposed to those that deny the sunnah or hadeeth, but once they have been shown the proofs and evidences and it has been explained to them why we must follow the hadeeth and how they are an integral part of our deen, then they are no longer excused.
Allah alone knows the many reasons why someone may be pulled into denying the sunnah or specific hadeeth of the Prophet - especially in this day and age wherein the sunnah has been under attack by both non-Muslims, and sadly, Muslims themselves. It could have been the case that a Muslim never had the fortune of reading in detail about the place of the sunnah and the preservation/methodology of the hadeeth. It could also have been the case that a Muslim was surrounded by those who refused to follow the sunnah or submit to its authority in Islam. Whatever the case may be, repenting to Allah and having a strong will and intention to adhere to the sunnah may wipe away what one did in the past, and lead to the path of Allahs pleasure.
Abridged and adapted from The Authority and Importance of the Sunnah, by Jamaal al-Din M. Zarabozo.
There are some very good links on the subject of hadeeth here:
Stunningly beautiful adhaan from the Dome of the Rock in Masjid ul Aqsa Download (right click and choose "save target/link as").
This is a clear message for mankind in order that they may be warned thereby, and that they may know that He is only One God, and that those of understanding may take heed (14:52)
Indeed Allah knows, and you know not (16: 74, part)
A new revert may be excused if he/she has only ever been exposed to those that deny the sunnah or hadeeth, but once they have been shown the proofs and evidences and it has been explained to them why we must follow the hadeeth and how they are an integral part of our deen, then they are no longer excused.
So we're allowed to ask for proof, but we are obliged to accept any "proof" offered as valid and final, and fall in line?
Nope. Not going to do it
Also, I have learned to be wary of people who claim that their opinion is a matter of scholarly consensus.
I haven't asserted anything. I said that I am not convinced about the authenticity of that hadith. That is not an assertion of anything.
You made a very big assertion when you said, 'The Prophet Muhammed never told us to establish a caliphate. He gave absolutely no instructions for succession... The whole caliphate thing was made up when the early Muslim community was left wondering who should lead them'.
format_quote Originally Posted by Futuwwa
There's quite a large logic gap between "these are the characteristics of a good leader" and "this is the one, true political system sanctioned by Allah".
What I find to be lacking in logic and coherence is making the above claims when you have not even decided which sayings of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) are acceptable in your view. We cannot really have a discussion without first clarifying what is and isn't acceptable evidence. Is it the case that any hadith not matching your views will automatically be doubted in its authenticity, even if numerous hadeeth scholars graded it authentic? Or will you search for an interpretation of those texts that best suits you?
May I also remind us that when a Muslim gives the greeting of salaam, it is his right to be responded to. This is something clear from the Qur'an as well as hadeeth:
Al-Bukhaari (1240) and Muslim (2162) narrated that Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) say: “The rights of one Muslim over another are five: returning the greeting of salaam, visiting the sick, attending funerals, accepting invitations, and saying yarhamuk Allah (may Allah have mercy on you) to one who sneezes.”
You made a very big assertion when you said, 'The Prophet Muhammed never told us to establish a caliphate. He gave absolutely no instructions for succession... The whole caliphate thing was made up when the early Muslim community was left wondering who should lead them'.
And that's an assertion I have backed up. It should be obvious from the context that I was talking about hadithology.
format_quote Originally Posted by Muhammad
What I find to be lacking in logic and coherence is making the above claims when you have not even decided which sayings of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) are acceptable in your view. We cannot really have a discussion without first clarifying what is and isn't acceptable evidence. Is it the case that any hadith not matching your views will automatically be doubted in its authenticity, even if numerous hadeeth scholars graded it authentic? Or will you search for an interpretation of those texts that best suits you?
A rhetorical question like that is an accusation of insincerity. The next thing that will happen is that you will acknowledge, without reservations, that I am completely sincere. That disagreement with you, or even disaggreement with scholarly orthodoxy for that matter, is not an implication of being insincere and picking and choosing according to one's nafs.
format_quote Originally Posted by Muhammad
May I also remind us that when a Muslim gives the greeting of salaam, it is his right to be responded to. This is something clear from the Qur'an as well as hadeeth:
Al-Bukhaari (1240) and Muslim (2162) narrated that Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) say: “The rights of one Muslim over another are five: returning the greeting of salaam, visiting the sick, attending funerals, accepting invitations, and saying yarhamuk Allah (may Allah have mercy on you) to one who sneezes.”
And the thing that will happen after the first thing, is that you will stop trying to pass off insults and denigration as righteous admonition. Doing so is the worst form of hypocrisy.
If there is a hadeeth in a recognised hadeeth collection outside of Bukhari and Muslim, that has a sound and strong chain of narration, that all the hadeeth scholars of earlier generations and later generations have unanimously accepted as being authentic and saheeh, will you accept it?
If not, why not? Which criteria are you using to accept a hadeeth as being true, and from which sources and scholars do you derive your criteria from?
Last edited by Insaanah; 11-30-2012 at 08:26 PM.
Stunningly beautiful adhaan from the Dome of the Rock in Masjid ul Aqsa Download (right click and choose "save target/link as").
This is a clear message for mankind in order that they may be warned thereby, and that they may know that He is only One God, and that those of understanding may take heed (14:52)
Indeed Allah knows, and you know not (16: 74, part)
And that's an assertion I have backed up. It should be obvious from the context that I was talking about hadithology.
I find it strange for someone to say, 'if the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) intended x, he would have said so', yet disregard the hadeeth. If a person rejects most of the hadeeth, then on what basis does he know what the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) did or did not say? Moreover, I am not sure how you would back up a negative assertion such as 'the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) never told us to do x' or 'gave no instructions for y', as it implies having checked the vast amount of verses of Qur'an and authentic narrations to definitively arrive at such a conclusion. So I cannot see where you have backed up your assertion. When I provided reasons to support a different view, such as the action of the Companions in choosing a leader, you've totally disregarded this.
A rhetorical question like that is an accusation of insincerity. The next thing that will happen is that you will acknowledge, without reservations, that I am completely sincere. That disagreement with you, or even disaggreement with scholarly orthodoxy for that matter, is not an implication of being insincere and picking and choosing according to one's nafs.
I agree that disagreement on its own is not an implication of being insincere. But on what basis do you disagree - on what grounds do you doubt the authenticity of the hadeeth when it is in one of the most popular collections of hadeeth and graded authentic by many scholars, and on what basis do you determine its correct meaning?
And the thing that will happen after the first thing, is that you will stop trying to pass off insults and denigration as righteous admonition. Doing so is the worst form of hypocrisy.
My dear brother, how does reminding one of a hadeeth and a basic teaching in Islam equate to insults and denigration? If you'd prefer I said it in private, then I'm sorry. But to liken it to hypocrisy is unfair, especially when a moment ago you complained I accused you of insincerity.
May Allaah (swt) forgive us for our faults, Aameen.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Quote
in some matters and belying him in other matters, while one knows those statements came from him, strikes at the foundations of one's entire Islam and imaan, and can take one onto disbelief. 
Futuwwa,
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks