Can Iblis Overpower Us?

[Scimitar]

Anwar al Awlaki...

I was wondering what happened to him, not seen any new video lectures of his recently... I've got a lot of "what if" questions regarding his disappearance... Maybe he's not even dead? What if he's in some torture chamber getting questioned and stuff?

I mean, how the heck can BBC claim he was responsible for inciting the 911 attacks. The news LIE to us. This age is fitna and fasaad... I'm miffed.

Also:

Blueshell, it seems you agree with me that the Prophet(sawaws) didnt' attempt to commit suicide and that Bukhari's hadith is fabricated.

So you agree with a Shi'a that Bukhari contains fabrications, and yet Bukhari himself claims his collection of Hadith to be "Sahih".

Where do you guys get your haddeeth from? The net? or do you own the books? Coz I don't trust the hadeeth ont he net at all... Just a heads up. There are 5 separate sites i've come accross which claim to have authentic hadeeth, but in actual fact they are not authentic and some of the more questionable ones aren't even da'eef - they don't even exist in any text, forget sahih, not even in da'eef... You gotta be careful with your references, get them checked out. Hardly no one exercises this point of protocol though...

Quoting hadeeth is not a thing to be taken lightly...

...I'm sure you'll all agree.

 

[جوري]

Where do you guys get your haddeeth from?

The good old fashioned way 'books' lol

 

[Al Qabayli]

All power is from Allah SWT.

The moment we think the other creature has the power over us (such as can bring death to us as they will), is the moment we venture into shirk.

as-salâmu `alaykum,

As Allâh said : Inna kayda sh-shaytâni kâna da`îfâ
And also in Hell, Iblîs will say : illâ an da`awtukum fastajabtum lî. falâ talûmûnî wa lûmû anfusakum.

 

[alluminati]

interesting, thank you for clarifying the mason history, although I am sure at their earliest age they were more Christian, and slowly over time it changed. But if nebuchadnezzar destroyed the temple and then rebuilt it, it is highly possible he may have rebuilt it with this so called "sacred symbolism". It is pure idolatry. Allah (praise be to Him!) will tell us the history of man on the final day, so until then, it is always wise to maintain the open mind.

 

[YaAqsa]

Anwar al Awlaki...

I was wondering what happened to him, not seen any new video lectures of his recently... I've got a lot of "what if" questions regarding his disappearance... Maybe he's not even dead? What if he's in some torture chamber getting questioned and stuff?

I mean, how the heck can BBC claim he was responsible for inciting the 911 attacks. The news LIE to us. This age is fitna and fasaad... I'm miffed.

Also:

Where do you guys get your haddeeth from? The net? or do you own the books? Coz I don't trust the hadeeth ont he net at all... Just a heads up. There are 5 separate sites i've come accross which claim to have authentic hadeeth, but in actual fact they are not authentic and some of the more questionable ones aren't even da'eef - they don't even exist in any text, forget sahih, not even in da'eef... You gotta be careful with your references, get them checked out. Hardly no one exercises this point of protocol though...

Quoting hadeeth is not a thing to be taken lightly...

...I'm sure you'll all agree.[/COLOR]

Jazakallah dear brother for the humble reminder.

The hadith are from Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, you can go look them up for yourself.

The Qur'an and Hadith I quoted are just examples of why the Prophet(sawaws) was never bewitched and of why we cannot trust that a hadith is authentic even if a scholar thinks it is authentic, especially when it goes against the qur'an by saying something such as Prophet(sawawS) was bewitched or suicidal.

If I'm a deviant for loving Muhammad(sawaws) and refusing to believe he was bewitched and suicidal, then I'd rather be a deviant and face Allah SWT with good thoughts than be a deviant and face Allah SWT with negative thoughts about Rasoolallah(sawaws). Sharpen your knives because I'd rather be beheaded like Imam Husayn (AS) for what I believe in even if everyone else disagrees, just as was the case with him and his small group of companions by whose sacrifice Allah SWT chose to save Islam.

Jazakallah

 

[جوري]

The Qur'an and Hadith I quoted are just examples of why the Prophet(sawaws) was never bewitched and of why we cannot trust that a hadith is authentic even if a scholar thinks it is authentic, especially when it goes against the qur'an by saying something such as Prophet(sawawS) was bewitched or suicidal.

you seem to be under some faulty impression that Bukhari stated the Hadith is authentic? Bukhari & Muslim and others are but a compilation. You should do minimum research at least before speaking against someone who was blind, left his life behind to go in pursuit of COLLECTING as many information and ahadith about the prophet's life as possible from as many different sources as possible!

secondly there are two types of ahadiths again basic minimal third grade knowledge of the matter would enable you to understand the science of Isnad, uhad and twatur. Scholars have already rendered the hadith weak, especially with different narrations around the same character existing so why do you persist in this folly? Why do you persist that 'Bukhari' rendered it true or false, do you read at all? Do you understand the difference between compiling a work and scholastic validation of work?

sob7an Allah.. with so many ignorant people out there it is a wonder we're in the state we're in!

 

[Skillganon]

this all came from me watchin a film and the devil in the film basically which ever women he met...he'd fornicate with her, whatever guy he didnt like he'd get them instantly killed....what does islam say about, can he really do that?

or is the best thing iblis can do is whispering bad stuff to us?

Devil and fornication?

At this moment it is more worrying to me that you are watching these kind of film than the question itself.

 

[YaAqsa]

you seem to be under some faulty impression that Bukhari stated the Hadith is authentic? Bukhari & Muslim and others are but a compilation. You should do minimum research at least before speaking against someone who was blind, left his life behind to go in pursuit of COLLECTING as many information and ahadith about the prophet's life as possible from as many different sources as possible!

secondly there are two types of ahadiths again basic minimal third grade knowledge of the matter would enable you to understand the science of Isnad, uhad and twatur. Scholars have already rendered the hadith weak, especially with different narrations around the same character existing so why do you persist in this folly? Why do you persist that 'Bukhari' rendered it true or false, do you read at all? Do you understand the difference between compiling a work and scholastic validation of work?

sob7an Allah.. with so many ignorant people out there it is a wonder we're in the state we're in!

Sorry, I had assumed you had knowledge of Hadith by the way you spoke to me.

Bukhari's collection is called "Sahih al-Bukhari"

The reason it is called "Sahih al-Bukhari" is because every hadith in his collection was graded Sahih by himself.

Muhammad ibn Ismaa’eel al-Bukhari said, “We were with Ishaq ibn Rahoyah who said, ‘If only you would compile a book of only authentic narrations of the Prophet.’ This suggestion remained in my heart so I began compiling the Sahih.”

You can read more at Islamic-Awareness.org

"Imam al-Bukhari's collection of ahadith was maintained to be authentic on account of his authority, and it has been maintained as authentic ever since. The missionaries' assertion, that Imam al-Bukhari regarded almost 99% of his own collection as spurious, is among the most rash and foolhardy statements ever dared by Christian missionaries. On the contrary, the 7,397 refers to the number of hadiths that Imam al-Bukhari chose to include in his Al-Jami` and left out many authentic narrations from his vast collection for the fear of excessive length."

Ibn al-Salah said: "The first to author a Sahih was Bukhari, Abu ‘Abdillah Muhammad ibn Ismaa’eel al-Ju’fee, followed by Aboo al-Husain Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj al-Naisaabooree al-Qushairee, who was his student, sharing many of the same teachers. These two books are the most authentic books after the Quran. As for the statement of al-Shafi’i, who said “I do not know of a book containing knowledge more correct than Malik’s book,” – others mentioned it with a different wording – he said this before the books of Bukhari and Muslim. The book of Bukhari is the more authentic of the two and more useful." - Umdah al Qari fi Sharh Sahih al Bukhari' written by Badr al-Din al-Ayni and published in Beirut by Dar Ihya’ al-turath al-`Arabi

Ibn Khuzaymah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: I have never seen anyone beneath the canopy of heaven who has more knowledge of the hadeeth of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and who has memorized more (hadeeth) than al-Bukhaari.

Al-Tirmidhi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: I have never seen in Iraq or in Khorasan anyone with more knowledge of hadeeth criticism, history and isnaads than al-Bukhaari.

Imam al-Nawawi, Hafz ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani Hafiz Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti, Imam ibn al-Salah in his muqaddima, Imam Imam al-Sakhawi, and all these great `giants` of the field of Hadith have stated that after the Book of Allah, the most authentic book is the Sahih of Imam al-Bukhari.

Insha'Allah you understand now that the source of misunderstanding/disagreement between us has been your lack of knowing that Sahih al-Bukhari is in fact known to be Sahih not only by himself but by a great many Sunni scholars. Sahih is Arabic for "sound/authentic/accurate".

 

[جوري]

"Imam al-Bukhari's collection

Bukhari & Muslim and others are but a compilation

Sorry, I had assumed you had knowledge of Hadith by the way you spoke to me.

Not just of ahadiths but of synonyms, antonyms, homonyms generally of the English language!

the adage of arguing with a fool rings ever more true..

best,

 

[YaAqsa]

No need for you to be so hostile towards me, I've only quoted hadith from Bukhari and explained they're either fabricated or something else is very wrong.

In any case, the Prophet(sawaws) was never bewitched. Bukhari says he was suicidal, we agreed that this hadith was weak/fabricated, similarly Bukhari says that 'Aisha said the Prophet(sawaws) was once bewitched, we know that this contradicts Qur'an so the hadith is either fabricated or Aisha was wrong.

No need to take an intellectual discourse so personally insha'Allah.

 

[جوري]

No need for you to be so hostile towards me, I've only quoted hadith from Bukhari and explained they're either fabricated or something else is very wrong.

In any case, the Prophet(sawaws) was never bewitched. Bukhari says he was suicidal, we agreed that this hadith was weak/fabricated, similarly Bukhari says that 'Aisha said the Prophet(sawaws) was once bewitched, we know that this contradicts Qur'an so the hadith is either fabricated or Aisha was wrong.

No need to take an intellectual discourse so personally insha'Allah.

It is a weak narration(see previous detailed replies)-- I dislike repeating myself! and don't care enough for you to be hostile or expend any other sort of emotion.

best,

 

[YaAqsa]

You seem to be missing the point, we have already clearly established that we agree Bukhari has weak narrations. My contention is that there are many Sunni scholars who graded the entire works of Bukhari as Sahih, including Bukhari himself, which is why the collection is called "Sahih al-Bukhari". Once again, "Sahih" is Arabic for "authentic/sound/accurate", it represents hadith which are reported to be true without question.

Now, given that notion, when one finds contradicting hadith, or hadith which contradict the Qur'an, in a book claiming to be Sahih, then one must scrutinize sincerely every other hadith inside the book claiming to be sahih. Logical deduction: if I give you a basket full of eggs and I say "I'm 100% certain every egg is not rotten" and the first egg you crack open is rotten then you must criticize my comment and would be worried about all of the other eggs in the basket also being rotten. The same logic applies to the collection formally known as "Sahih al-Bukhari" (The Authentic of Bukhari).

Thus, when one reads anything in Bukhari, even if one claims scholarship and authenticity based on opinion of chain, the possibility for someone with a black heart to have narrated something unjustly is strong indeed. Seeing as a lot of the Sunni beliefs are circled around Bukhari, it is integral to be critical in order not to attribute falsely to Allah(SWT), Muhammad(sawaws), wa Ahlul-Bayti-Muhammad (as).

I hope inshallah that you can re-read everything I've written in this thread so far, you'll see that I'm not the ignorant fool on the topic I've been speaking of as you've asserted.

 

[Abz2000]

i am not an expert on hadith so somebody please do correct me if i am wrong as i am human,
but from my own reading of sahih muslim and sahih bukhari (i have summarized english and arabic side by side)
i noticed that they went with the sources and chains of narrations and recorded them even if they differed from each other, thereby not ommiting one in favour of another as only Allah knows best and they may omit the right one.
as long as the chains were strong - they recorded them for posterity,
i read more on the prophecies of the last days, and i do sometimes find that some ahadith are narrated through different chains and can be slightly different from each other due to the narrator.
but would i prefer that they left out genuine ahadith just because they needed to cross one out?
no,
i would rather they went by strong chains and recorded both and left it to the people of the time to understand and make sense of both.
there are many ahadith which are not in the sahih of Bukhari or Muslim- but seem to make sense in this day and age.

• Umm Salama said:

1. His [the Mahdi's] aim is to establish a moral system from which all superstitious faiths have been eliminated. In the same way that students enter Islam, so unbelievers will come to believe.
   (Vizier Mustafa, Emergence of Islam, p. 171)

When the Mahdi appears, God will cause such power of vision and hearing to be manifested in believers
that the Mahdi will call to the whole world from where he is,
with no postman involved,
and they will hear and even see him.

Muntakab al Adhhar, p. 483

(this is john connor and if you are listening to this broadcast - you are the resistance :statisfie)


this doesn't necessarily make them liars - but i believe we should be grateful that they recorded what they found to be from strong chains.
and i am grateful that others also recorded what they sincerely believed to be true.

but ask yourself - being someone who has been taught to reject them off hand - do you not find hadith in bukhari and Muslim which you know to be true?

i don't think Imam bukhari or Imam Muslim would ever have said that every single one of their narrations were guaranteed to be true.
rather - they went with the best they could find.

and further - i would like to apologize to Allah and to others for any mistake i may have made by quoting a weak hadith which i sincerely believed to be true due to the number of renowned scholars who have mentioned it.
they are human - and history texts can never be guaranteed to be completely accurate.
the Quran is however different - as we know it to be memorized by numerous companions who were brought together to authenticate.



11. By no means (should it be so)! For it is indeed a Message of instruction:
12. Therefore let whoso will, keep it in remembrance.
13. (It is) in Books held (greatly) in honour,
14. Exalted (in dignity), kept pure and holy,
15. (Written) by the hands of scribes- 16. Honourable and Pious and Just.
Quran 80

so please don't allow them to decieve you regarding it.
we are in this together - and should strive to find what is right without taking sides based on sectarian lines.
then we will prosper.

peace


​

 

[جوري]

You seem to be missing the point, we have already clearly established that we agree Bukhari has weak narrations. My contention is that there are many Sunni scholars who graded the entire works of Bukhari as Sahih, including Bukhari himself, which is why the collection is called "Sahih al-Bukhari". Once again, "Sahih" is Arabic for "authentic/sound/accurate", it represents hadith which are reported to be true without question.

I am not missing the point, in fact you are!
per your own last statement (and I say last as you seem to spin a tale as you go along, first Bukhari wrote it then Bukhari collected it) Bukhari is a compilation! an 'authentic' compilation in that he didn't invent per your previous or write out of whim rather gathered as many different narrations from different sources surrounding the same events as possible. That is what makes it authentic! now whether the narrations themselves are weak 'uhad', strong 'twatur' is a different issue, where the science of hadith falls in and where the scholars do their research.

So it does in fact make you an ignorant fool who is so hung up on saving face and lost in semantics!

If you have no desire to subscribe to hadiths or desire your own rendition you're free to do so, no one is holding a gun to your head. But your assertions are meaningless to us otherwise, as we've amply made plain & comprehensible the difference between an authentic compendium and scholarly critique of what lies therein!

best,

 

[Kitsune92]

this all came from me watchin a film and the devil in the film basically which ever women he met...he'd fornicate with her, whatever guy he didnt like he'd get them instantly killed....what does islam say about, can he really do that?

or is the best thing iblis can do is whispering bad stuff to us?

This is why I try not to watch scary movies too much... They always get you thinking about really disturbing things... :hmm:

 

[alluminati]

So back with some new opinions: basically freemasonry = satanic (of course), and had its origins with the mystery religions (satanic). New world order will bring about the destruction of the church, of Christianity, Islam and Judiasm and replace it with the mystery one world religion (its happening now, the the mystery religion is freemasonry, the new "church" is the lodge). The masons were pretty much since their roots corrupt, of course over time evil grows and is nurtured by the hate and deception and misdeeds of man and shaitan. Clearly what is said in bible in terms of the revelations is being met, and wickedness is essentially everywhere and shall end in hellfire.

 

[YaAqsa]

I am not missing the point, in fact you are!
per your own last statement (and I say last as you seem to spin a tale as you go along, first Bukhari wrote it then Bukhari collected it) Bukhari is a compilation! an 'authentic' compilation in that he didn't invent per your previous or write out of whim rather gathered as many different narrations from different sources surrounding the same events as possible. That is what makes it authentic! now whether the narrations themselves are weak 'uhad', strong 'twatur' is a different issue, where the science of hadith falls in and where the scholars do their research.

So it does in fact make you an ignorant fool who is so hung up on saving face and lost in semantics!

If you have no desire to subscribe to hadiths or desire your own rendition you're free to do so, no one is holding a gun to your head. But your assertions are meaningless to us otherwise, as we've amply made plain & comprehensible the difference between an authentic compendium and scholarly critique of what lies therein!

best,

Well it seems you're the only scholar who holds this opinion of the definition of Sahih and the science of hadith you profess, which is not shared by Muhaddith (a scholar of hadith).

And it is increasingly ironic that you sign your posts with ",best" but the content is always the worse, in terms of akhlaq. Please why must you be hostile towards me?

Jazakallah brother abz for your kind response, I agree with some of what you said and inshallah will reflect on it more.

 

[جوري]

Well it seems you're the only scholar who holds this opinion of the definition of Sahih and the science of hadith you profess, which is not shared by Muhaddith (a scholar of hadith).

And it is increasingly ironic that you sign your posts with ",best" but the content is always the worse, in terms of akhlaq. Please why must you be hostile towards me?

Jazakallah brother abz for your kind response, I agree with some of what you said and inshallah will reflect on it more.

well then by all means pose your query to a Muslim scholar along with said Hadith & bring us the reply back, I'll be very open to that. I think it would take care of your problem & spare me the utter waste of your linear logic..
I have said before several things & continue to repeat them & will repeat them for the last time, you're no more than an SN to me with deviant intent. I am no more emotionally invested in you than I am in sweet apple pie.

best,