What do you think of the prophet Mohamed

I don't have the ability to tell you much but I can tel you that
Muhammad,sallallahu alaihi wa salam, was the best men that ever lived.
He went through so much. He faught and he dind't complain. He never complained to Allah.Just look at his teachings you'll experience his manners.
He didn't use miracles much instead he used his body and brain.
May peace and blessings be upon him,his family, ashaba and everyone else who loves him more than themselves. Ameen

Like all prophets of islam he was a great man, pious

I do not know anything about him. I have read much but I remember that all of these things were written by his friends and followers and are therefore suspect. After all who would say "I think he was a bit of a rotter" and expect to find that preserved for all posterity. No writings or sayings of his enemies were preserved and thus there is no balance. Now if an enemy had written something like "I might hace fought him all my life but he was a ****ed decent chap...." Then that would be grade one evidence for him being a ****ed decent chap.

format_quote Originally Posted by Santoku

I do not know anything about him. I have read much but I remember that all of these things were written by his friends and followers and are therefore suspect. After all who would say "I think he was a bit of a rotter" and expect to find that preserved for all posterity. No writings or sayings of his enemies were preserved and thus there is no balance. Now if an enemy had written something like "I might hace fought him all my life but he was a ****ed decent chap...." Then that would be grade one evidence for him being a ****ed decent chap.

The way you put it is as if his frends made things up.

format_quote Originally Posted by Rasema

The way you put it is as if his frends made things up.

Or perhaps forgot the bad bits in order to boost their leader. Perhap they did, perhaps they did not. Bt we have only the words of his friends filtered through his followers who wrote down the hadiths some years after his death.

format_quote Originally Posted by Santoku

Or perhaps forgot the bad bits in order to boost their leader. Perhap they did, perhaps they did not. Bt we have only the words of his friends filtered through his followers who wrote down the hadiths some years after his death.

"The bad bits"
What about the criticisms by Non-Muslims of of the hadeeths?
Have you studied the science of the hadeeths?
If not, than I say that you don't judge what you don't have knowledge about. I don't have time to sit by the computer and argue with you but I'll come back with feed back.

^^

am sure not all ?

Assalamu Alikum wa rahmatu Allahi wa barakatuh

This iperson who was intevieved by Hercules was an enemy of Muhammad,sallallahu alaihi wa salam.

Salam to all Mu'mineen

Sahih Bukhari
Volume 1, Book 1, Number 6:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas:

Abu Sufyan bin Harb informed me that Heraclius had sent a messenger to him while he had been accompanying a caravan from Quraish. They were merchants doing business in Sham (Syria, Palestine, Lebanon and Jordan), at the time when Allah's Apostle had truce with Abu Sufyan and Quraish infidels. So Abu Sufyan and his companions went to Heraclius at Ilya (Jerusalem). Heraclius called them in the court and he had all the senior Roman dignitaries around him. He called for his translator who, translating Heraclius's question said to them, "Who amongst you is closely related to that man who claims to be a Prophet?" Abu Sufyan replied, "I am the nearest relative to him (amongst the group)."

Heraclius said, "Bring him (Abu Sufyan) close to me and make his companions stand behind him." Abu Sufyan added, Heraclius told his translator to tell my companions that he wanted to put some questions to me regarding that man (The Prophet) and that if I told a lie they (my companions) should contradict me." Abu Sufyan added, "By Allah! Had I not been afraid of my companions labeling me a liar, I would not have spoken the truth about the Prophet. The first question he asked me about him was:

'What is his family status amongst you?'

I replied, 'He belongs to a good (noble) family amongst us.'

Heraclius further asked, 'Has anybody amongst you ever claimed the same (i.e. to be a Prophet) before him?'

I replied, 'No.'

He said, 'Was anybody amongst his ancestors a king?'

I replied, 'No.'

Heraclius asked, 'Do the nobles or the poor follow him?'

I replied, 'It is the poor who follow him.'

He said, 'Are his followers increasing decreasing (day by day)?'

I replied, 'They are increasing.'

He then asked, 'Does anybody amongst those who embrace his religion become displeased and renounce the religion afterwards?'

I replied, 'No.'

Heraclius said, 'Have you ever accused him of telling lies before his claim (to be a Prophet)?'

I replied, 'No. '

Heraclius said, 'Does he break his promises?'

I replied, 'No. We are at truce with him but we do not know what he will do in it.' I could not find opportunity to say anything against him except that.

Heraclius asked, 'Have you ever had a war with him?'

I replied, 'Yes.'

Then he said, 'What was the outcome of the battles?'

I replied, 'Sometimes he was victorious and sometimes we.'

Heraclius said, 'What does he order you to do?'

I said, 'He tells us to worship Allah and Allah alone and not to worship anything along with Him, and to renounce all that our ancestors had said. He orders us to pray, to speak the truth, to be chaste and to keep good relations with our Kith and kin.'

Heraclius asked the translator to convey to me the following, I asked you about his family and your reply was that he belonged to a very noble family. In fact all the Apostles come from noble families amongst their respective peoples. I questioned you whether anybody else amongst you claimed such a thing, your reply was in the negative. If the answer had been in the affirmative, I would have thought that this man was following the previous man's statement. Then I asked you whether anyone of his ancestors was a king. Your reply was in the negative, and if it had been in the affirmative, I would have thought that this man wanted to take back his ancestral kingdom.

I further asked whether he was ever accused of telling lies before he said what he said, and your reply was in the negative. So I wondered how a person who does not tell a lie about others could ever tell a lie about Allah. I, then asked you whether the rich people followed him or the poor. You replied that it was the poor who followed him. And in fact all the Apostle have been followed by this very class of people. Then I asked you whether his followers were increasing or decreasing. You replied that they were increasing, and in fact this is the way of true faith, till it is complete in all respects. I further asked you whether there was anybody, who, after embracing his religion, became displeased and discarded his religion. Your reply was in the negative, and in fact this is (the sign of) true faith, when its delight enters the hearts and mixes with them completely. I asked you whether he had ever betrayed. You replied in the negative and likewise the Apostles never betray. Then I asked you what he ordered you to do. You replied that he ordered you to worship Allah and Allah alone and not to worship any thing along with Him and forbade you to worship idols and ordered you to pray, to speak the truth and to be chaste. If what you have said is true, he will very soon occupy this place underneath my feet and I knew it (from the scriptures) that he was going to appear but I did not know that he would be from you, and if I could reach him definitely, I would go immediately to meet him and if I were with him, I would certainly wash his feet.' Heraclius then asked for the letter addressed by Allah's Apostle

which was delivered by Dihya to the Governor of Busra, who forwarded it to Heraclius to read. The contents of the letter were as follows: "In the name of Allah the Beneficent, the Merciful (This letter is) from Muhammad the slave of Allah and His Apostle to Heraclius the ruler of Byzantine. Peace be upon him, who follows the right path. Furthermore I invite you to Islam, and if you become a Muslim you will be safe, and Allah will double your reward, and if you reject this invitation of Islam you will be committing a sin by misguiding your Arisiyin (peasants). (And I recite to you Allah's Statement

'O people of the scripture! Come to a word common to you and us that we worship none but Allah and that we associate nothing in worship with Him, and that none of us shall take others as Lords beside Allah. Then, if they turn away, say: Bear witness that we are Muslims (those who have surrendered to Allah).' (3:64).

Abu Sufyan then added, "When Heraclius had finished his speech and had read the letter, there was a great hue and cry in the Royal Court. So we were turned out of the court. I told my companions that the question of Ibn-Abi-Kabsha) (the Prophet Muhammad) has become so prominent that even the King of Bani Al-Asfar (Byzantine) is afraid of him. Then I started to become sure that he (the Prophet) would be the conqueror in the near future till I embraced Islam (i.e. Allah guided me to it)."

The sub narrator adds, "Ibn An-Natur was the Governor of llya' (Jerusalem) and Heraclius was the head of the Christians of Sham. Ibn An-Natur narrates that once while Heraclius was visiting ilya' (Jerusalem), he got up in the morning with a sad mood. Some of his priests asked him why he was in that mood? Heraclius was a foreteller and an astrologer. He replied, 'At night when I looked at the stars, I saw that the leader of those who practice circumcision had appeared (become the conqueror). Who are they who practice circumcision?' The people replied, 'Except the Jews nobody practices circumcision, so you should not be afraid of them (Jews).

'Just Issue orders to kill every Jew present in the country.'

While they were discussing it, a messenger sent by the king of Ghassan to convey the news of Allah's Apostle to Heraclius was brought in. Having heard the news, he (Heraclius) ordered the people to go and see whether the messenger of Ghassan was circumcised. The people, after seeing him, told Heraclius that he was circumcised. Heraclius then asked him about the Arabs. The messenger replied, 'Arabs also practice circumcision.'

(After hearing that) Heraclius remarked that sovereignty of the 'Arabs had appeared. Heraclius then wrote a letter to his friend in Rome who was as good as Heraclius in knowledge. Heraclius then left for Homs. (a town in Syrian and stayed there till he received the reply of his letter from his friend who agreed with him in his opinion about the emergence of the Prophet and the fact that he was a Prophet. On that Heraclius invited all the heads of the Byzantines to assemble in his palace at Homs. When they assembled, he ordered that all the doors of his palace be closed. Then he came out and said, 'O Byzantines! If success is your desire and if you seek right guidance and want your empire to remain then give a pledge of allegiance to this Prophet (i.e. embrace Islam).'

(On hearing the views of Heraclius) the people ran towards the gates of the palace like onagers but found the doors closed. Heraclius realized their hatred towards Islam and when he lost the hope of their embracing Islam, he ordered that they should be brought back in audience.

(When they returned) he said, 'What already said was just to test the strength of your conviction and I have seen it.' The people prostrated before him and became pleased with him, and this was the end of Heraclius's story (in connection with his faith).

Assalamu Alikum wa rahmatu Allahi wa barakatuh

double post,............

assalaamu 'alaikum wa rahmatullah,

The beloved Muhammad (sallaalllaahu alayhi wasallam) as was previously mentioned was the greatest person in the whole of humanity.

format_quote Originally Posted by Rasema

"The bad bits"
What about the criticisms by Non-Muslims of of the hadeeths?
Have you studied the science of the hadeeths?
If not, than I say that you don't judge what you don't have knowledge about. I don't have time to sit by the computer and argue with you but I'll come back with feed back.

No, I haven't, what I have got is a fair idea of human nature and when a man has devoted followers they tend to ascribe all manner of virtues to him that may or may not be accurate. Indeed they may go in for competitive hagiography after he dies where, in order to gain the approval of the great mans followers they invent marvellous stories and titles for him.

format_quote Originally Posted by Rasema

Assalamu Alikum wa rahmatu Allahi wa barakatuh

This iperson who was intevieved by Hercules was an enemy of Muhammad,sallallahu alaihi wa salam.

Salam to all Mu'mineen

Sahih Bukhari
Volume 1, Book 1, Number 6:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas:

Abu Sufyan bin Harb *
*
*
*
*
*seen it.' The people prostrated before him and became pleased with him, and this was the end of Heraclius's story (in connection with his faith).

Sorry but this testimony has a visible falsehood in it. We have been told by others on this board that the reason for the sentence of death for Apostates was to prevent those who wanted out from disturbing the faith of the other members whether they were false converts or not is testified to by one side only.
Second very shortly after this incident he was one of Mohameds lieutenants, so his testimony is suspect, and finally the source of this story is a transmitted hadith which is recorded by muslims.... who will not hear a bad word said about Mohammed. Thus this is not the testimony of a neutral or a hostile witness.

Conditions of a saheeh (sound) hadeeth
What are the conditions of a saheeh hadeeth?.


Praise be to Allaah.

The phrase “saheeh hadeeth” may refer to one of two things:

In general terms it includes those which are mutawaatir (narrated from so many by so many in each stage of transmission that it is inconceivable that they could all have agreed upon a lie), saheeh li dhaatihi (sound in and of itself), saheeh li ghayrihi (sound because of corroborating evidence) and hasan (good).

Al-Haafiz ibn Hajar said:

Most of the scholars of hadeeth do not differentiate between hasan and saheeh. End quote from al-Nukat (1/480),

In specific terms it includes saheeh li dhaatihi (sound in and of itself) and saheeh li ghayrihi (sound because of corroborating evidence) only.

Based on this definition, a saheeh hadeeth is one which is narrated by men of good character, who are known for their good memories and precision, with a continuous isnaad, and is not odd or faulty.

If the precision is lacking and is not complete, then it is hasan li dhaatihi (hasan in and of itself). If it has a number of isnaads, then it is saheeh li ghayrihi (saheeh because of corroborating evidence).

See Nakhbat al-Fikr by al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allaah have mercy on him).

From this definition we may sum up the conditions of a saheeh hadeeth as follows:

1 – Good character of all its narrators

2 – Good memory and precision on the part of narrators with regard to what they are narrating.

3 – Continuous isnaad from beginning to end, meaning that each narrator heard the hadeeth from the one before him.

4 – The hadeeth is free from any oddness in its isnaad or text. What is meant by “odd” is anything in which the narrator narrates something that contradicts the narration of a sounder narrator.

5 – The hadeeth is free from faults in its isnaad and text. A “fault” is a subtle problem that undermines the soundness of the hadeeth, which can be detected only by the well versed scholars of hadeeth.

The definition of these conditions came about as the result of the later imams studying the words of the scholars of hadeeth and their applications. Hence you may find things in the words of the earlier scholars which point to these conditions.

For example: Imam al-Shaafa’i (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in al-Risaalah (370-371):

Evidence cannot be established on the basis of a report narrated by a few unless several factors are present, such as:

The one who narrated it is trustworthy in his religious commitment, known to be truthful in his speech, understanding what he narrates, and knowledgeable about the wording and possible interpretation of the hadeeth; and he should be one of those who can narrate the hadeeth exactly as he heard it, not based on the meaning but with the exact wording, because if he if narrated on the basis of meaning and not with the exact wording, and he does not have knowledge of possible interpretations, he may inadvertently change what is halaal into haraam. But if he narrates it exactly, there is no fear that it may be changed.

And he should know the hadeeth very well, if he is narrating from memory or he should take get care of his book if he is narrating from his book. If he checks what he knows with the scholars of hadeeth, he should be in agreement with them, and he should not be mudallis, i.e., one who narrates from one who met (a narrator) but did not hear it from him, or who narrates from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) something that contradicts the narration of authentic scholars from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). The same must be true for the narrators who came before him (in the isnaad), who narrated it to him, until the hadeeth ends with an uninterrupted chain all the way back to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or to the one who narrated it from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). End quote.

If all these conditions are met then a hadeeth is saheeh according to scholarly consensus, as was narrated by Ibn al-Salaah (may Allaah have mercy on him).

See: al-Muqaddimah fi ‘Uloom il-Hadeeth (8) and al-Dhahabi in al-Mooqidah, (24).

Some of the scholars did not list all these conditions:

Imam Maalik and Abu Haneefah accepted mursal hadeeth, which is compromising the condition of having a continuous isnaad all the way to the source of the hadeeth.

Some scholars accepted mudallas hadeeth even if the narrators did not state that they heard it.

Al-Dhahabi said in al-Mooqidah (24): The scholars of hadeeth added a condition that the hadeeth should be free from any oddness or fault. This is subject to further discussion according to the principles of the fuqaha’, because many of what may be considered as faults are not accepted as such by them.

See: Tadreeb al-Raawi (1/68-75, 155).

What is meant is that the scholars’ differences with regard to classing ahaadeeth as saheeh are due to two reasons:

1 – Their differences regarding some of the conditions of soundness. That is because those who compromised on some of these conditions were bound to class as saheeh reports that others did not class as saheeh.

2 – Their differences in applying these conditions to a specific hadeeth. They may differ as to the good character of some narrators or whether the isnaad is uninterrupted and so on.

It should be noted that these conditions are based on evidence from sharee’ah and evidence based on reason. These conditions are not just a ritualistic procedure, rather they are rational and serve a clear purpose. They are no less than the result of the efforts of thousands of scholars and the result of the tremendous efforts of the earlier scholars of hadeeth during the long years when the books of hadeeth were being compiled in the first three centuries and those who came after them.

Anyone who wishes to know more may read the book by al-Khateeb al-Baghdaadi entitled al-Kifaayah fi ‘Ilm al-Riwaayah

And Allaah knows best.


Islam Q&A

Also, waht you're asking me for is illogical. It's my word against yours. Do you really think that enemies would presearve something positive of Muhammad,saws.

format_quote Originally Posted by Santoku

Or perhaps forgot the bad bits in order to boost their leader. Perhap they did, perhaps they did not. Bt we have only the words of his friends filtered through his followers who wrote down the hadiths some years after his death.

In the Name of Allah .

Assalam alaykoum .

It is not only good things that have been reported but also "bad bits" , as you said .

In first , the Coran doesn't spare the Prophet and Allah reproached to him to neglect a blind poor man while he was preaching the notables of Mecca . (Sourate 80 , Habassa )

Also , after the battle of Badr , the Prophet discussed about the lot of the captives with Omar and Abu Bakr . The Prophet and Abu Bakr agreed with an option but Allah did'nt agreed .
They are a lot of ahadeeth saying about the mistake of the Prophet and his correction . Perhaps you don't see them ?

Assalam alaykoum .