What is the value of the Hadith in Islam?

[JPR]

I understand that they are to be studied with the Qu'ran, but are they as reliable to muslims as the Qu'ran is?

I'm trying to understand the real value of a second book in Islam apart from learning the story of Muhammad. I also understand that Sha'ria (sorry if my spelling is wrong) takes some, or most, of its power in the Hadith but again, how valuable is it?

Thanks for your answers!

[Beardo]

The Relationship between the Sunnah and Revelation

The Sunnah is revelation from Allah to His Prophet (peace be upon him). Allah says in the Qur’ân:

We have sent down to him the Book and the Wisdom.

The Wisdom refers to the Sunnah. The great jurist al-Shâfi`î said: “Allah mentions the Book, which is the Qur’ân. I have heard from people who I consider authorities on the Qur’ân that the Wisdom is the Sunnah of Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him).” Allah says:

Indeed, Allah conferred a great favor on the believers when He sent among them a Messenger from among themselves, reciting to them His signs and purifying them and instructing them in the Book and the Wisdom.

It is clear from the preceding verses that Allah revealed to His Prophet (peace be upon him) both the Qur’ân and the Sunnah, and that He commanded him to convey both to the people. The Prophetic hadîth also attest to the fact that the Sunnah is revelation. It is related from Makhûl that Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: “Allah gave me the Qur’ân and what is like it from the Wisdom.”

Al-Miqdâm b. Ma`dî Karab relates that Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: “I have been given the Book and with it something like it.”

Hisân b. `Atiyyah relates that Jibrîl (Gabriel) used to come the Prophet (peace be upon him) with the Sunnah just like he would come to him with the Qur’ân.

An opinion from the Prophet (peace be upon him) was not merely his own thoughts or deliberations on a matter; it was what Allah revealed to him. In this way, the Prophet was different from other people. He was supported by revelation. When he exercised his own reasoning and was correct, Allah would confirm it, and if he ever made a mistake in his thinking, Allah would correct it and guide him to the truth.

For this reason, it is related that the Caliph `Umar said from the pulpit: “O people! The opinions of Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) were correct only because Allah would reveal them to him. As for our opinions, they are nothing but thoughts and conjecture.”

I would STRONGLY suggest you read the rest at the source:
http://load-islam.com/artical_det.ph...ection=Hadeeth

[Woodrow]

Let us imagine you have a wonderful cook book that gives you the recipes for the greatest dishes on this earth. the book tells you how to make everything and gives very precise instructions that are easy to follow. to follow that cook book exactly gives you the knowledge to become the world's greatest chef.

Now how can you follow that book if you do not have the proper utensils, stoves and source of ingredients? Is following the instruction manual for your stove a violation of your cookbook as the cookbook does not tell you how to use your stove?


So it is with the Qur'an. The Qur'an is precise and easy to follow, it tells us what Islam is and fully explains why we should follow Islam.

The ahadith in turn tell us how to be Muslims by giving us examples of what our Beloved Prophet(PBUH) did.

The Qur'an is the what and why, the ahadith are the how.

[Ali Mujahidin]

The Qur'an is the what and why, the ahadith are the how.

Allahu Akbar! JazakuLLah brother Woodrow for presenting the purpose of the Quran and the Ahadith in such an easy-to-understand way. This is the first time I have seen it put this way. I am going to use this analogy the next time I am asked about Quran vs Ahadith. May Allah keep you always strong and safe in Islam. Insha Allah.

[JPR]

So it is with the Qur'an. The Qur'an is precise and easy to follow, it tells us what Islam is and fully explains why we should follow Islam. The ahadith in turn tell us how to be Muslims by giving us examples of what our Beloved Prophet(PBUH) did. The Qur'an is the what and why, the ahadith are the how.

Very useful, thank you!

My next question might be daunting for some but to what extent has the ahadith been appropriated by humans to justify laws considered "archaic" by western standards? And I'm not talking about terrorists claiming to be muslims and using the Qu'ran and ahadith to justify their acts. I'm more interested in how the majority of muslims view things such as the sha'ria in Iran and other religious countries.

A good analogy for the Christian side would be the Catholic church claiming authority on faith and the Bible and imposing all sorts of different doctrines.

Thanks for any help on that matter

[Woodrow]

Very useful, thank you!

My next question might be daunting for some but to what extent has the ahadith been appropriated by humans to justify laws considered "archaic" by western standards? And I'm not talking about terrorists claiming to be muslims and using the Qu'ran and ahadith to justify their acts. I'm more interested in how the majority of muslims view things such as the sha'ria in Iran and other religious countries.

A good analogy for the Christian side would be the Catholic church claiming authority on faith and the Bible and imposing all sorts of different doctrines.

Thanks for any help on that matter

A good analogy for the Christian side would be the Catholic church claiming authority on faith and the Bible and imposing all sorts of different doctrines.

Actually that is a very poor analogy as there is no central authority for Islam. We have no living human leaders nor any ordained clergy. Each of us is held accountable for verifying all we learn. we do not have the option of saying "I was following the teachings of the Church"

Our Islamic education begins at home or in the case of us reverts from the moment of saying the shahadah. Emphasis is placed on us as individuals to seek out reliable teachers and to constantly search for more. Being Muslim is a life time process of learning what Islam is. Our main sources grow as we learn. For most of us our initial learning is from the Qur'an and later from the 4 authenticated books of Ahadith. Later we may wander into the realms of Qur'anic studies, Hafiz memorization, language studies, Islamic Jurisprudence, Fiqh ul-sunnah the list is endless. But we never follow the teachings of any one person without verifying from all sources we can find.

I'm more interested in how the majority of muslims view things such as the sha'ria in Iran and other religious countries

There are no true Shariah nations. Iran is a Shi'i nation and do follow some books of Ahadith the rest of us do not consider to be authenticate. Their concept of shariah is not always in agreement with the rest of the Islamic world. Those of us who are not Shi'i do not follow the Ayatollah.

[JPR]

There are no true Shariah nations. Iran is a Shi'i nation and do follow some books of Ahadith the rest of us do not consider to be authenticate. Their concept of shariah is not always in agreement with the rest of the Islamic world. Those of us who are not Shi'i do not follow the Ayatollah.

On what basis are books of Ahadith chosen or deemed "authentical"? It is my understanding that the first ahadith (spelled Hadith in other places?) was written by Ibn Shihab al'Zuhri around 750 so I would assume this one would be the most accurate. But what about the rest? I know Shias and Sunnis don't accept the same standard in choosing what text is good and what is wrong.

So if to properly understand and learn how to practice Islam according to the Qu'ran you need the guidance of ahadith, then my guess is that you would need the best one. The question behind this is: "Would you still be able to practice Islam like Allah intended you to do without the ahadith?" or, put in other words: "if you want to be the most pleasing to Allah and do everything right to insure your place in Heaven, would you need the ahadith?"

I understand from the quote below that yes, I would need the ahadith. Would that be a correct assessment?

Now how can you follow that book if you do not have the proper utensils, stoves and source of ingredients? Is following the instruction manual for your stove a violation of your cookbook as the cookbook does not tell you how to use your stove?

Thanks again for the useful help!

[Woodrow]

I should have mentioned AHadith is the plural of Hadith. That is the reason for the difference spellings.

Actually the first Ahadith were written while Muhammad was still alive. Nearly 30% of the Ahadith were from Aisha. All told over 1/2 Million Ahadith have been collected. The science of checking for reliability and authenticity is quite long and so far only the books of the First 4 Imams are accepted. Authenticity means the Hadith can be unquestionable be traced to an actual witness. Reliability means the exact same words or events are witnessed by multiple verified witnesses. The more witnesses each reporting the very same thing and the same words indicates a higher level of reliability.

The Ahadith collection by Bukhari dates back to about 240 years after the Death of the Prophet(PBUH) Bukhari collected over 300,000 Ahadith but only verified 2,602 as truly dating back to the Prophet(PBUH)

[Zuzubu]

Not as holy as Al-Qur'an but still very high.

[abjad]

I understand that they are to be studied with the Qu'ran, but are they as reliable to muslims as the Qu'ran is?

I'm trying to understand the real value of a second book in Islam apart from learning the story of Muhammad. I also understand that Sha'ria (sorry if my spelling is wrong) takes some, or most, of its power in the Hadith but again, how valuable is it?

Thanks for your answers!

but are they as reliable to muslims as the Qu'ran is?

Not all.


I'm trying to understand the real value of a second book in Islam

><>< the real value is when you will come across a certain verse in Kuran for example:-

(18:7) The fact is that whatsoever is on the earth, We have made it as its adornment so that we may test the people as to which of them does best deeds.

There is a saying of Nabiina Muhammad (s.a.w) saying that al Dunia Mazraat Akheira


I also understand that Sha'ria (sorry if my spelling is wrong) takes some, or most, of its power in the Hadith but again, how valuable is it?

my dear let me put it this way; every Prophet has come with his sharia....and Muhammad (s.a.w) we call it shariat Muhammad BUT
and they are according to Kuran Kareem as tought.


how valuable is it?

they are very very valuable, if you follow Islam and its sharia, but dont be surprised to see even at this moment how Muslim leaders are;
whether valuable or ...for your eyes and heart, wa LLAH Hakeem wa ala Kulusheiyn Shahiid.

[abjad]

Very useful, thank you!

My next question might be daunting for some but to what extent has the ahadith been appropriated by humans to justify laws considered "archaic" by western standards? And I'm not talking about terrorists claiming to be muslims and using the Qu'ran and ahadith to justify their acts. I'm more interested in how the majority of muslims view things such as the sha'ria in Iran and other religious countries.

A good analogy for the Christian side would be the Catholic church claiming authority on faith and the Bible and imposing all sorts of different doctrines.

Thanks for any help on that matter

the majority of muslims view things such as the sha'ria in Iran and other religious countries.

I cant speak for others though they are majority, but for myself.....

None of the countries you have mentioned do abide-BUT I and you too have eyes...whats going on at the very second;
tell me WHERE ARE THE ISLAM SHARIAH
WHERE IS

S
U
L
H
..............WHAT DO WE DESERVE NOE MUSLIMS?



Muslim are the only fortunate people in the world today who have with them the Word of God completely preserved, free from interpolation and precisely in the same wording in which it was revealed to the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him). And these very Muslims are those unfortunate people in the world who have the Word of God with them and are yet deprived of its blessings and its countless boons. The Qur'an was sent to them that they would read it, understand it and act upon it, and, with its help, would establish on God's earth a state which will function according to the law of God. The Qur'an came to grant them dignity and power. It came to make them real vicegerents of God on the earth. And History testifies that when they acted according to its directions, it demonstrated its power making them Imam and leader of the world. But now for them its utility is confined to keeping it in the house in order to drive away demons and ghosts, to inscribe its verses on paper and hang it round the neck or wash it in water and drink it, and read the contents unintelligibly to get some blessing. Now they do not seek guidance from it in the affairs of their life. They do not consult it to know what should be our beliefs, what should be our deeds, how should we conduct transactions, what law should we follow in contracting friendship and making enmity, what are the rights on us of our fellow-beings and of our own selves, what is truth for us and what is falsehood, whom should we obey and whom to disobey, with whom should we maintain relation and with whom not, who is our friend and who is our enemy, wherein are honour, well-being and benefit for us and wherein lies disgrace, failure and loss? Muslims have given up ascertaining all these verities from the Qur'an. Now they ask these things from unbelievers, polytheists, misguided and selfish people and from the evil force in their own souls, and follow what these elements advise. Therefore what invariably happens on ignoring God and following the precepts of others, happened to them too, and they are reaping it today in Hindustan, China, Java, Palestine, Syria, Algeria, Morocco and every where. As for the Qur'an, it is the fountainhead of supreme good. It will impart whatever and as much beneficence you seek from it. If you seek from it such, trivial, frivolous and spurious things as scaring away demons and ghosts, cure for cough and fever, success in litigation and securing of job, then you will get only these things. If you seek leadership of the world and rulership of the universe you will get that also. And if you wish to reach the pinnacle of spiritual glory, the Qur'an will take you there also. This is just a question of your own capability that you ask for two drops from the ocean, otherwise the ocean is ready to give you a gift as big as the ocean.

Gentlemen! The cruel jokes which our brother-Muslims play with the Holy Book of Allah are so ridiculous that if they themselves see anyone else doing such frolics in any other matter, they will laugh at him and even brand him as a lunatic. Tell me if somebody got a prescription written by a doctor and hung it by the neck after wrapping it in a piece of cloth or washed it in water and drank it, then what would you say about it? Will you not laugh at it, and will you not call him a fool? But this very treatment is being meted out before your eyes to the matchless prescription written by the greatest of all doctors for the merciful cure of all your ailments, and nobody laughs at it! No one tries to understand that a prescription is not an article to be hung round the neck or soaked in water and drunk, but that its purpose is to use the medicine as directed by it.


It is imperative to understand and follow Qur'an

Tell me if anyone being ill takes up the study of a book on Medicine thinking that by reading it he will get rid of his disease, what will you say about such a man? Will you not say that he is off his head and so should be sent to a lunatic asylum? But you mete out a similar treatment to the book which the Supreme Healer has sent for the cure of your diseases? You read it and think that just by scanning it all the diseases will disappear, and that it is not necessary to follow the directions given in it, nor is it essential to abstain from things which it pronounces as injurious. Then why do you not pass the same judgment about yourself which you pronounce about that man who considers mere reading of a book on Medicine as an enough cure for a disease?

If you receive a letter in a language you do not know, you run to a man who knows that language to learn its contents. You do not feel at ease until you come to know the contents. This is how you deal with letters of business which may bring you some paltry profit. But the letter sent to you by the Lord of the World describing all the benefits for you in this life and the life Hereafter is carelessly set aside without comprehending it. You do not show any keenness to understand its purport. Is this not a matter of astonishment and surprise?


Result of injustice to Allah's Book

I am not telling these things for amusement. If you ponder over these facts, your heart will testify that the greatest possible injustice in this world is being done to this book of Allah and the oppressors are the very people who assert that they have faith in it and are ready to sacrifice their life for it. No doubt they have faith in it and regard it dearer than life, but the pity is that it is they who do the greatest injustice to it. And the result of perpetrating injustice on Allah's Book is obvious! Please understand the fact thoroughly that Allah's Word is not sent to man to embroil him into ill fortune, misery and suffering.

"We have not revealed this Qur'an that you should fall into distress."

(Al-Qur'an 20:1-2)

The Qur'an is a fountainhead of auspiciousness and good fortune, not a source of viciousness and wretchedness. It is absolutely impossible that a nation be possessor of God's Word and yet wallow in misery in this world, suffer under the yoke of others, be trampled and kicked, have its neck caught in the knot of slavery of others who lead it by the nose like animals in whichever direction they like. A nation meets this doom only when it commits injustice to the Word of God. The doom of Beni Israel is before you. Taurat and Injeel were sent to them and it was said:

" If they had observed the Torah and the Gospel and that which was revealed unto them from their Lord, they would surely have been nourished from beneath their feet."

(Al-Qur'an 5:66)

But they did injustice to thee Book of Allah and aw it consequence:-

[Ramadhan]

On what basis are books of Ahadith chosen or deemed "authentical"?

The good comparison between ahadeeth is with the gospels (since you are familiar with the gospels and since this is the comparative religion section)
Ahadeeth contained the sayings and actions of the prophet Muhammad SAW, while the gospels contained the sayings and actions of prophet Jesus (pbuh). But their simiarity ends there.

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

About DR. Hamidullah:
One of his great contributions to the hadith literature was the discovery of Sahifa Hammam bin Munabbah, the earliest hadith (from the first century Hijriah) manuscript still extant today. Two copies of it were discovered; one in a Damascus library and the other in a library in Berlin. Dr. Hamidullah published it after carefully comparing the two manuscripts. This was an important discovery for the hadith scholars. It also proved, as has always been held, that the earliest manuscripts had been absorbed in the much bigger later compilations. Hammam bin Munabbah was a disciple of Syedna Abu Huraira, Radi-Allahu unhu. It was generally known that Sahifah Hammam bin Munabah had been completely included in the Musnad Ahmed. After the publication of the Sahifah by Dr. Hamidullah, hadith scholars searched Musnad Ahmed for the presence of the ahadith from the Sahifah. They found all 138 ahadith of the Sahifah in the Musnad. There was not the slightest discrepancy in any of them!

[Ali Mujahidin]

The Ahadith aka Traditions of the Holy Prophet (saw) is invaluable to the practice of Islam. No one can know the Quran better than the Holy Prophet. The Holy Prophet lived the Quran so that we would not be deceived by shaitan into making our own misguided interpretations of how we should live.

Whenever I feel tempted, which is very often, to believe that my particular personal practice of Islam is superior, I remind myself that on Judgment Day, there are 73 groups of Muslims and only one group will enter jana. I do not know which group that will be but I am sure of one thing. Anyone who believes that his personal practice of Islam is superior is definitely not going to enter jana.

Hope this is useful. Insha Allah.

[Ramadhan]

It is my understanding that the first ahadith (spelled Hadith in other places?) was written by Ibn Shihab al'Zuhri around 750 so I would assume this one would be the most accurate.

Your understanding about the first hadith is most certainly incorrect.

Let's have a look at what wikipedia (generally known to have bias against Islam) says about ahadeeth:
According to Muslims, the collection of hadith or sayings by or about the prophet Muhammad was a meticulous and thorough process that began right at the time of Muhammad. Needless to say hadith collection (even in the written form) began very early on – from the time of Muhammad and continued through the centuries that followed.[1] Thus, Muslims reject any collections that are not robust in withstanding the tests of authenticity per the standards of hadith studies. This article goes through the historical evolution of the hadith literature from its beginning in the 7th century to present day.
there are a number of hadith that indicate the permissibility if not encouragement to write down hadith. From them:

• The hadith of Abd Allah ibn ‘Amr who said, “I used write everything I heard from the Prophet wanting to preserve it. The Quraysh then prohibited me from doing so, saying, ‘Do you write down everything? And the Prophet is human who speaks while angry and pleased?’ So I refrained from writing and then mentioned this to the Prophet. He gestured to his mouth and said, ‘Write, by the one in whose hand is my soul! Nothing emanates from this except the truth.’”[9]

• Among the prisoners of war taken at the Battle of Badr those who were literate were released after each taught ten Muslims how to read and write.[4][10] Sahih Bukhari states that Abd-Allah ibn Amr wrote down his hadith.[11]

• A man came to Muhammad and complained about his memory, saying: ‘O Messenger of Allah: We hear many things from you. But most of them slip our minds because we cannot memorize them’. Muhammad replied: Ask your right hand for help.[12] Muhammad meant that he should write down what he heard.

• When Rafi‘ ibn Khadij asked Muhammad whether they could write what they heard from him, the answer came: Write, no harm!.[13] Another sources quotes Muhammad advising: "Record knowledge by writing."[14]

• During the conquest of Mecca, Muhammad gave a sermon. A man from the Yemen, named Abu Shah, stood up and said: "O Allah’s Messenger! Please write down these [words] for me!" Muhammad ordered: "Write for Abu Shah!"[15]

• Muhammad sent a letter which contained commandments about the blood money for murders and injuries and the law of retaliation to Amr ibn Hizam.[16] This letter was handed down to his great grandson, Abu Bakr ibn Muhammad.[4] Among other things, like some of his letters other head of states[citation needed], some scroll transferred to Abu Rafi was handed down to Abu Bakr ibn ‘Abd Al-Rahman ibn Harith, belonging to the first generation after the Companions.[4]

Ibn Hajar summarized the different ways in which scholars have sought to reconcile those hadith prohibiting the writing of hadith and those permitting it, in the first of which he said, “The reconciliation between the two is that the prohibition was particular to the time in which the Quran was being sent down so that it would not become mixed up with other than it and the permission was during other than that time."[17]


Of the many companions, Abu Hurairah taught hadith to students, one of whom was Hammam ibn Munabbih. Ibn Munabbih wrote down these hadith, the original manuscripts of which are present even to this day in the libraries of Berlin, Beirut and Damascus.[22]

[JPR]

Of the many companions, Abu Hurairah taught hadith to students, one of whom was Hammam ibn Munabbih. Ibn Munabbih wrote down these hadith, the original manuscripts of which are present even to this day in the libraries of Berlin, Beirut and Damascus.[22]

Then this should be correct, as taken from Wiki:

Sahifah Hammam ibn Munabbih was one of the 9 students of Abu Hurairah. Abu Hurairah used to narrate the hadith he heard from the Prophet to his 9 students. Out of all 9 students, only Sahifah Hammam ibn Munabbih's book has survived in manuscript form. It was later edited and published by Dr. Muhammad Hamidullah in 1961 in Hyderabad, India. Sahifah Hammam ibn Munabbih is perhaps one of the earliest known hadith collection.


So, this is correct to say that the most influencial and used Hadith in Islam is on the authority of Abu Hurairah, kept in records by Sahifah Hammam ibn Munabbih. The earliest record is thus one link removed from Muhammad.

Although I tried to get confirmation on the presence of the original manuscripts but it was impossible to get anything anywhere other than on one page on Wikipedia, which I won't take for granted. It seems a certain Dr. Muhammad Hamidullah "found" some parts of the manuscripts in two different libraries and proceeded to translate them and to publish and edit them. I'm not disputing the facts that Hammam ibn Munabbih wrote some ahadith, but the fact that we might not have the original manuscript written by his hand.

I anyone could post a link to confirm the location and existence of the original manuscript, I think it would benefit everyone. It seems to me that not everyone agrees about the oldest available documents, but I found this from the Leipzig university library:

The project will set up a database-supported index and provide digital access to a group of about 55 Arabic, Persian and Turkish manuscripts. The Leipzig University Library purchased these manuscripts in 1995 and 1996. In this pioneer project, for the first time Arabic script will be integrated into a database that will also feature German and American transliteration systems. This will provide scholars of Oriental Studies worldwide with access to a hitherto unknown pool of Islamic manuscripts.


The variety of disciplines covered in the manuscript collection, the origins of some works from early periods of Islamic scholarship, the age of the copies and their historical proximity to the respective author, as well as the elaborate decoration, deserve special attention. A key place in the collection will be taken by one of the oldest known Ismaili manuscripts in the world, the Kitāb al-Zīna by the Ismaili author Abū Hātim al-Rāzī (d. 322 H. / 934 AD).

The manuscripts contain texts in Arabic, Persian and Ottoman-Turkish and show an amazingly broad spectrum as far as the content is concerned, which comprises almost all traditional Islamic fields of knowledge. With a few exceptions, the manuscripts are mostly complete and well preserved. That many of these manuscripts came from the libraries of private scholars or families is suggested in several manuscripts by the many comments, some of which span over several generations, from the previous owners. The place of origin seems to be the gulf region, Yemen and Iran.


Duration of the project: 1.5 years. Start: August 2006.


From Islamic Manuscripts website:

Jan Just Witkam, The oldest known dated Arabic manuscript on paper (dated Dhu al-Qa`da 252 (866 AD).


This is MS Leiden Or. 298. Arabic, paper, 241 ff., upright script (with application of ihmal), dated Dhu al-Qa`da 252 (f.241b; 866 AD), and thereby probably the oldest dated Arabic manuscript on paper, bound in a full-leather standard Library binding.
The volume contains an incomplete copy of Gharib al-Hadith, by Abu `Ubayd al-Qasim b. Sallam al-Baghdadi (d. 223/837), GAL G I, 107. See Voorhoeve, Handlist, p. 95. The present MS has been used as MS No. 3 by Muhammad `Azim al-Din in his edition of the text: Gharib al-Hadith li-Abi `Ubayd al-Qasim b. Sallam al-Harawi. Hydarabad 1384-1387/1964-1967 (4 vols.). On p. xvi of vol. I, he gives a short note about the importance of the MS.

It seems there are no original manuscripts of Hammam ibn Munabbih

[- Qatada -]

It seems there are no original manuscripts of Hammam ibn Munabbih

In many cases, there doesn't need to be manuscripts by a compiler, so long as there is work proven to be from him through his students, with their chains of narrations recorded in later books.

[Ramadhan]

So, this is correct to say that the most influencial and used Hadith in Islam is on the authority of Abu Hurairah

Abu Hurairah (ra) was the most prolific narrator of ahadeeth because he was one of the earliest reverts to Islam, he was following the prophet SAW everywhere except when the prophet (SAW) was inside one of his wives' homes (which is where the ahadeeth by Aisha (ra) came in handy as the second most prolific narrator of hadith), he had unfailing memory, and he lived a long time (78 years).
And there were almost as many narrators of ahadeeth as the number of shahaba/shahabiyat.
While the most trusted compilation of the books of ahadeeth were by Bukhari and Muslim.
The methods employed by Bukhari and Muslims to collect, dissect, examine, evidence by evidence, proof by proof, along with examinations of the characters of every single transmitter of the chain were so rigorous and meticulous that would make the current modern scientific peer review look very lax. Out of hundreds of thousands of ahadeeth, they only classified around 2,000 as shahih (authentic), even though there were still many of the rest that may have been authentic but thrown out (classified as either dhaif or mawdoo) because for one transmitter in the chain who were found lying just once, no matter how insignificant the lie was.
To give you an illustration: Had the gospels been reviewed by Bukhari, all the gospel books would have been rejected as not being authentic for failing to meet the most stringent standards of transmission, transmitter (isnad, sanad) and content (mat'an), let alone other books such as those wrote by saul/paul who didn't even meet Jesus (pbuh) but only claimed to have done so in a dream/stupor and then not even a witness was there and on top of that he was found as a liar.

The earliest record is thus one link removed from Muhammad.

not the earliest record, but the earliest surviving record.
How many links and how many generations were missing from Jesus (pbuh) until the earliest surviving record of the gospels that you believe with life and death?
Shall we go by your own standard, or mine? I am fine either way.
So it is up to you, but we must stick to it, and you cannot shift your ground everytime.
And then we can compare the authenticity of gospels vs. ahadeeth

[JPR]

not the earliest record, but the earliest surviving record.

I just proved using muslim scholarly sources that this is not true:

Jan Just Witkam, The oldest known dated Arabic manuscript on paper (dated Dhu al-Qa`da 252 (866 AD). (See above post for the full quotation)

Here's what are believed to be the oldest Qu'ran fragments in existence:

Some of the parchment pages in the Yemeni hoard seemed to date back to the seventh and eighth centuries A.D., or Islam's first two centuries -- they were fragments, in other words, of perhaps the oldest Korans in existence.

not the earliest record, but the earliest surviving record.

False information, sorry.

How many links and how many generations were missing from Jesus (pbuh) until the earliest surviving record of the gospels that you believe with life and death?

Perhaps the earliest piece of Scripture surviving is a fragment of a papyrus codex containing John 18:31-33 and 37. It is called the Rylands Papyrus (P52) and dates from 130 A.D., having been found in Egypt. The Rylands Papyrus has forced the critics to place the fourth gospel back into the first century, abandoning their earlier assertion that it could not have been written then by the Apostle John.

Shall we go by your own standard, or mine? I am fine either way.

Mine please, the information you provide is not researched at all and taken mostly from un-reliable and highly biased sources. I take many hours to search for muslim sources to find the appropriate answers instead of going to islam-bashing christian websites and take false or manipulated information.

If anyone wants to read the article about the oldest Qu'ran fragments and see what kind of interest it has sparked around the world, for both muslim scholars and atheists scholars, you can find it on the website of The Atlantic magazine, January 1999 issue:
-I can't post links so just add the www in front:
theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/99jan/koran.htm

I still think the best answer to my post was given by Woodrow and any further discussion is bound to go beyond and outside the topic of the value of hadith.

Can you close/lock this thread?

Thank you all

[- Qatada -]

If anyone is debating the San'a Manuscripts, they can refer to this;


The History of Quranic Text from Revelation to Compilation - by Mustafa al A'zami:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/36006748/T...to-Compilation

Go on p315 of the Original Book, or p334 on the book linked to above.


The pages before and after this discuss the issue in depth, with a step by step refutation to any criticism. I might print it out and do some reading on it insha' Allah.


The book is really good for laymen and experts alike (i got it from the library once!)

[JPR]

Sorry Qatada, the link you provided doesn't work

It seemed like something I would be interested though