Debate: Why do some people completely reject hadith?

[x Maz x]

Lol, chacha man i know yo eager n tin' buh ease it, all in good tym...patience my ol' codger ..Takes a lil wile thinkin of cumbks against the Quran lol...Peace x

 

[Mawaddah]

Sister BoiStop, in other forums I have already exhausted myself trying to clarify this matter to other Qur'aanis (people who reject Hadeeth) so here I am not going to do that again since Bro Ansar Al Adl has given an excellent explanation as to why Hadeeth is part of Islam.
As far as I can see, and as far as any true Muslim who understands the Qur'an can see.......You're just going around in circles, You keep asking Why? and when we give you the answer you just do a double turn and ask ' Why' again.
Wont you take time to read properly and understand what was given to you? But I would like to ask you a question which I have often asked other Qur'aanis but have never received a proper answer for : How do you make salaat? . All of the other whom I have asked always say "It's mentioned in the Qur'aan " Please, show me where?
Do you read the Faatihah? do you do rukoo' sujood ? I know these movements are mentioned in the Qur'aan......but do you know how many to do? what to say?.....Please I would like to know Insha'allah.
May Allah Guide me and You to the straight path and May He open the hearts of those whom are Blind to the Truth Amin.

 

[BoiStop]

Salaam Ansar Al-‘Adl,

Excuse me brother but you only “refuted” my position with hadiths. That’s it. Nothing you said was based on Quran. None of your evidence was based on Quran. Also which hadiths says that there was a time a limit on the rule of not writing down what the Messenger supposedly said? Which hadith? Or is that only an explanation of trying to correct an obvious contradiction in people’s actions and what they believe?

6:114
Say: “Shall I seek for judge other than Allah?- When he it is who hath sent unto you the book, explained in detail”……..

10:15
But when our clear signs are rehearsed unto them, those who rest not their hope on their meeting with Us. Say: “Bring us a Quran other than this, or change this” Say: “It is not for me of my own accord to change it: I follow naught but what is revealed unto me: if I were to disobey my Lord I should myself fear the Chastisement of a Great Day”.


6:19
Say: “What thing is most weighty in evidence?”
Say: “Allah is witness between me and you; This Quran hath been revealed to me by inspiration. That I may warn you and all whom it reaches. Can ye possibly bear witness that besides Allah there are other gods?
Say: “Nay! I cannot bear witness!”
Say: “But in truth he is the One God. And I truly am innocent of joining other with him.

No mention of hadiths. Rather the Messenger himself is commanded to say that the Quran is what has been sent to him… no mention of hadiths anywhere.

You all keep bringing up verses that talk about how the Messenger does not speak out of his own desire, that he his a good example, etc, etc… yes true, but none of that still supports your position to follow these hadiths that you practice. There are examples of the Messenger in the Quran, and even in the Quran the Messenger is commanded by God to command things of us. So your argument that following his example and obeying him can only be done through hadiths is false… Who was to tell women to cover themselves? Who was to tell people to stay away from intoxicants and gambling?

I’ll post later…
salaam

 

[BoiStop]

Salaam,

First let's establish that the Quran is detailed. You all argue that the Quran is not detailed enough, does not explain, etc, etc. Allow me to refute that lie against the Quran.

Surah 6:114
Say: “Shall I seek for judge other than Allah?- When He it is who hath sent unto you the book, explained in detail.” They know full well, to whom We have given the book, that it hath been sent down from they Lord in truth. Never be then of those who doubt.

Surah 7:52
For We had certainly sent unto them a Book, based on knowledge, which We explained in detail,-- a guide and a mercy to all who believe.


Surah 16:89
…And We have sent down to thee the Book explaining all things, a Guide, a Mercy, and Glad Tidings to Muslims.

Surah 18:54
We have explained in detail in this Quran, for the benefit of mankind, every kind of similitude: but man is, in most things, contentious.

Surah 39:23
Allah has revealed the most beautiful hadiths in the form of a book, consistent with itself, repeating:…..

Surah 44:2
By the Book that makes things clear.

Surah 45:6
Such are the signs of Allah, which we rehearse to thee in truth: then in what hadith will they believe after Allah and his signs?


Do You Have Another Book?
Surah 68: 37-38
Or have ye a book through which ye learn that ye shall have through it whatever ye choose?

 

[S_87]

ok ^^^^^^ how do we


Say (O Muhammad SAW to mankind): "if you (really) love Allah then follow me (i.e. accept Islamic Monotheism, follow the Quran and the Sunnah), Allah will love you and forgive you of your sins. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful
3:31

 

[BoiStop]

Salaam,

What is the Messenger’s duty?

Surah 42:48
If then they turn away, we have not sent thee as a guard over them. Thy duty is but to convey (the Message). And truly when we give man a taste of mercy from Us, he doth exult thereat, but when some ill happens to him, on account of the deeds which his hands have sent forth, truly then is a man ungrateful!

*Surah 5:99
The Messenger’s duty is but to proclaim (the message). But Allah knoweth all that ye
reveal and ye conceal.

Surah 35:30
Then the Messenger will say: “Oh my Lord, truly my people treated this Quran with neglect”

Surah 42:7
Thus have We sent by inspiration to thee an Arabic Quran: that thou mayest warn the Mother of Cities and all around her,-- and warn (them) of the Day of Assembly, of which there is no doubt: (When) some will be in the Garden, and some in the Blazing fire.

Surah 46:9
Say: “I am not an innovation among the messengers, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I follow but that which is revealed to me by inspiration; I am but a Warner open and clear.”


There is no mention of any other hadith besides the Quran, that has been inspired to the Messenger. It is always Quran. Are any of you willing to say that the hadiths compiled are also the Quran? I doubt.

salaam

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Re: Rejection of Ahadith

Could you please prove the authentication of hadiths through the Quran? Could you please give me the verses in the Quran that talk about these hadiths?

You are asking the same question I already responded to. Yes or no - do you agree that if a statement has been proven to be from the Prophet Muhammad pbuh then we must follow it because of the Qur'anic verses which say so?

It is quote clear that the Qur'an negates the faith of anyone who does not accept the judgements of the Prophet (verse 4:65) and it explicitly indicates that the explanations and teahcings of the Prophet pbuh have been divinely ordained (verse 16:44). So the question is not whether the Qur'an endorses hadith because it clearly mandates the acceptance of all the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh that are conveyed to us. The question is rather, are the narrations conveyed to us and labeled by the scholars as sahih reliable?. And the answer to that, as anyone who has studied the hadith sciences knows, is a resounding YES.

45:6
Such are the signs of Allah, which we rehearse in truth: then in what hadith will they believe after Allah and his signs?

So was the Messenger rehearsing other hadiths?

Another common tactic used by hadith rejectors is to exploit ignorance of arabic terms. Hadith simply means a saying/narration. So the Qur'an is asking in this verse, what will people believe in if they reject the words of their Creator. As for your question if the Prophet pbuh conveyed more than the Qur'an, the answer again is YES:

Qur'an 16:44 And We have also sent down unto you the reminder, that you may tubayyina (EXPLAIN CLEARLY) to men what is sent down to them, and that they may give thought.

This verse clearly establishes that there is not only a revelation sent down (the Qur'an) but there are also the explanations of the Prophet that accompany it. These explanations have been preserved as our ahadith. This is the divine wisdom behind sending a Prophet so that human beings will see someone like them implementing and explaining the revelation from God. Any hadith rejector who tries to say that the Qur'an needs no additional source is refuted by this explicit passage which unequivocally states that the Prophet is to not only convey the Qur'an, but explain it as well.

And again, your faith lies in the hands of men.

A red-herring. God has given human beings the ability to write and record to preserve knowledge. The Qur'an was recorded in exactly the same way - by men. It was human beings who memorized and recorded the Qur'an just as it was human beings who memorized and recorded the Ahadith. It is through human beings that God's message is conveyed from one to another. But it is due to the divine help of God that human beings accomplished either. Why do you accept the Qur'an and not the Ahadith when they have both been preserved by the same people? It is God who enabled us to do both tasks.

Do you believe that every so called "authentic" hadith, is honestly authentic? Do you believe that every so called "fabricated" haidth is truly fabricated?

Absolutely. Because unlike hadith-rejectors I educate myself about the procedure behind their authentication. You can too; he's a very basic intro:
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/Ulum/

And again, you believe that Allah has left it up to men to authenticate divine messages?

God has protected and preserved the divine message through men, just as He allows it to be conveyed to different nations through men.

So these poeple have not made one error?

One person on their own can make an error. But when someone claims that the same error has been missed by over a millenium of hadith scholars who re-examined the work, a visit to the shrink is in order. For each hadith you can find the research of hadith scholars on it, the verdicts they gave on it and their conclusions about the people in the chains of narration.

Yea, and the Prophet was also reported to have said do not write anything that he says but the Quran.

You're telling me right now that you didn't read the article I linked:
http://www.islamicboard.com/212874-post5.html
That comment was answered IN THE ARTICLE ITSELF. Dozens of ahadith are listed there which show the Prophet pbuh told the companions to record his hadith. And look at what the companions did:

Sa’eed ibn Hilal, one of the students of Anas ibn Maalik, says:
When we insisted upon Anas (may Allaah be pleased with him) he would bring to us some notebooks and say, These are what I have heard and written from the Prophet, after which I have presented them to the Prophet for confirmation. (Mustadrik Haakim)​

He didn't leave it up to you - you don't understand the rigorous process behind the authentication of hadith because you have never studied that science. Yet for some reason you have the audacity to pass judgement on a subject you are ignorant of!

Us- in general. And yes, I have the audacity to pass judgment.

So you admit that you have the audacity to pass judgement on a science you are ignorant of - I think that says a lot about your sincerity to God.

Hadith-rejectors thrive on self-imposed ignorance.

They don't have knowledge, they know they don't have knowledge, and they refuse to educate themselves to gain that knowledge. God commands Muslims to learn and ask those with knowledge, but hadith-rejectors do the opposite. I think you need to re-check your intentions: if you are sincere in your commitment to God then you will try to learn and educate yourself about hadith sciences so you can make a more informed judgement.

Obviously that is not the case becuase in the Quran it does not say to stone hte adulterer, rathar it says flog those who commit illegal sexual intercourse and then it goes even further to say that an adulterer should only be with an adulterer. YET hadiths clearly say to stone the adulterer.

Did you read the commentaries of the hadith scholars on why this hadith doesn't contradict the Qur'anic statement? I suspect not. The hadith and the Qur'an are prescribing punishments for different offences, see this thread for a detailed discussion of this issue:
http://www.islamicboard.com/depth-islam/5966-stoning-death.html
Now if you were sincere in learning you would ask, "Doesn't the hadith about stoning contradict the Qur'an? How did the scholars of hadith reconcile this with the verse from Surat An-Nur?" but instead you make the claim that they haven't reconcied the two when you have not read or studied any of their works. Like I said before - you need to check your intentions. If you are sincere in learning about your religion, then you need to do just that - adopt the attitude of a student. Instead, one will find hadith-rejectors adopting the most arrogant attitude despite their acknowledged ignorance of hadith sciences.

You're asking the wrong question. If we agree that God mandated for us to follow the Prophet pbuh, then the question should be whether these hadith are authentic in what they ascribe to the Prophet. By mandating obedience to the Prophet, God has mandated for us to follow all of the sayings and teachings of the Prophet which have been authentically transmitted to us.

Please read the verses that talk about staying away from alcohol and gambling, and women covering themselves.

You conveniently ignored my statement. Why?

Again, I don't deny the MEssenger. I know his mission, and that was all established through the Quran.

THis is the verse again:
Qur'an 16:44 And We have also sent down unto you the reminder, that you may tubayyina (EXPLAIN CLEARLY) to men what is sent down to them, and that they may give thought
The verse is refuting the claim that the Qur'an is all we need. The verse explicitly mentions that the Prophet's explanations have been divinely ordained as well.

First let's establish that the Quran is detailed. You all argue that the Quran is not detailed enough, does not explain, etc, etc.

If the Qur'an explaiend itself, then why does the above verse comannd the Prophet to explain it? Sounds a little redundant, doesn't it?

Surah 42:48
If then they turn away, we have not sent thee as a guard over them. Thy duty is but to convey (the Message). And truly when we give man a taste of mercy from Us, he doth exult thereat, but when some ill happens to him, on account of the deeds which his hands have sent forth, truly then is a man ungrateful!

The verse is only saying that the duty it to convey the message and not guard over whether they accept it or not. As I pointed out the Qur'an explicitly mentions that the Prophet's function was more than just to convey the Qur'an; he also had to explain and implement it:
Qur'an 16:44 And We have also sent down unto you the reminder, that you may tubayyina (EXPLAIN CLEARLY) to men what is sent down to them, and that they may give thought

 

[x Maz x]

First let's establish that the Quran is detailed. You all argue that the Quran is not detailed enough, does not explain, etc, etc. Allow me to refute that lie against the Quran.

Under no circumstances am I saying that the Quran is not detailed enough...
I am saying that the Quran is the divine message and the recipient of the message >> the Prophet [Pbuh] (Seal of Prophethood] showed us how to implement all that the message required of us hence his actions were recorded so that mankind can learn and follow the blessed being

I said...

The message is the Quran, which shows us the basic requirements and laws by thy Lord and the Messenger being the person showing us how to implement/enact these requirements.

The Quran sends the basic outlines of how to become a good Muslim and the hadeeth and Sunnah shows how to put it into practice

Surah 6:114
Say: “Shall I seek for judge other than Allah?- When He it is who hath sent unto you the book, explained in detail.” They know full well, to whom We have given the book, that it hath been sent down from they Lord in truth. Never be then of those who doubt.

Yes the Quran was the final revelation and the true revelation sent as guidence to mankind FROM ALLAH!..Yes it is all haaq...

Surah 7:52
For We had certainly sent unto them a Book, based on knowledge, which We explained in detail,-- a guide and a mercy to all who believe.

Yes it is as guidence showing the rules from Allah without doubt...Next...

Surah 16:89
…And We have sent down to thee the Book explaining all things, a Guide, a Mercy, and Glad Tidings to Muslims.

I am sorry I dont understand your point, well obviously it is referring to the Quran as it is the final book >> not altered [Injeel, Zabur and Tawrah have been all changed] that is all based on the truth and is the words of Allah

Surah 18:54
We have explained in detail in this Quran, for the benefit of mankind, every kind of similitude: but man is, in most things, contentious.

Yes again my argument still stands...

Surah 44:2
By the Book that makes things clear.

Yes it does ...The Quran is obviously the best of all books...First comes Quran then Sunnah and hadeeth

Surah 45:6
Such are the signs of Allah, which we rehearse to thee in truth: then in what hadith will they believe after Allah and his signs?


Do You Have Another Book?
Surah 68: 37-38
Or have ye a book through which ye learn that ye shall have through it whatever ye choose?

This is saying that there is NO more revelation directly from Allah.. The Quran is the only book but other recordings of the blessed man to showing us how to enact the message of Allah that have been recorded are vaild...

Please also respond to my questions, i would greatly appreciate it Thanks Peace x

 

[CavemanDoctor]

Peace all.

Since so many here seem to not accept anything unless backed by ulama, I'll post a book that discusses the lack of a need for hadith as per Qur'anic instructions.

You can find it at the following link: 24. No un-Islamic, anti-Islamic or inauthenthic URLS in posts, profiles, PMs or signatures

It is written by the renown scholar Kashif Ahmed Shehzada. I point this out, not cause I think it matters, but because it is obvious it matters to most of you here. Unlike the claims of some in here, there are those who have devoted just as much time to the study of the hadith sciences and who still have determined them to be unnecessary as per the Qur'an.

The book addresses most, if not all, of the claims made on this very thread. am not posting it to anger anyone. I would like us to have a discussion on its merits. After all, we are all here to submit to God alone and to find out the Truth.

I just want to say that I'm new here and I'm glad I have found this forum. Even though I disagree with many of you, I have found this forum to be open-minded and for its posters to be, for the most part, polite and respectful. I thank you guys for that.

Peace all.

 

[CavemanDoctor]

Another thing. I see 16:44 posted in this thread a lot. I'll copy-paste the argument relating to 16:44 from the Shehzada book here. It follows:

You are free to articulate arguments yourself, but simply cutting and pasting from sectarian sites is not acceptable.

 

[BoiStop]

Salaam,

Yes or no - do you agree that if a statement has been proven to be from the Prophet Muhammad pbuh then we must follow it because of the Qur'anic verses which say so?

If there was a command given by the Messenger to me then yes I would follow it.

So the question is not whether the Qur'an endorses hadith because it clearly mandates the acceptance of all the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh that are conveyed to us. The question is rather, are the narrations conveyed to us and labeled by the scholars as sahih reliable?. And the answer to that, as anyone who has studied the hadith sciences knows, is a resounding YES.

I disagree. I don’t believe that they are reliable. The reason is because these hadiths come from other people’s observations and what they think that may have seen the Messenger do or what they may have thought they have heard. What if the Messenger said something totally different? What if he was doing something just to do it, and it meant nothing? What if he was talking to ONE person and his command was only for that one person? These are OTHER people’s observations of what they saw and heard. Thus these observations can’t be divine themselves. Who are these people to say that what he was saying was divine when it may had not been at all? These are not DIRECT messages and commands from the Messenger himself… rather hadiths stem from what people may have heard or seen the Prophet due, i.e. their own view of what had happened.

And again, why would Allah have us have to “confirm” the validity? If these hadiths were given the promise of protection, then how can there ever be such a thing as a “weak” hadiths? Why are we even questioning the authentication? Do we go about and question the authentication of Quran verses? No. So why hadiths? By questioning the authentication of these hadiths, and then admitting that there are WEAK hadiths, that in itself proves that this system is faulty… and really it is up to MAN to accept or reject based on his own feeling. And just because they may be scholars does not mean that they have divine knowledge and are able to get every thing right. I believe in nothing that has error, and your system of hadiths—which you say has been protected by Allah, but yet there are “fabricated” hadiths— has error.

This verse clearly establishes that there is not only a revelation sent down (the Qur'an) but there are also the explanations of the Prophet that accompany it. These explanations have been preserved as our ahadith.

Years after the Messenger’s death.

This is the divine wisdom behind sending a Prophet so that human beings will see someone like them implementing and explaining the revelation from God. Any hadith rejector who tries to say that the Qur'an needs no additional source is refuted by this explicit passage which unequivocally states that the Prophet is to not only convey the Qur'an, but explain it as well

I don’t have a problem with the Messenger doing his job, this we can read in the Quran.
But again, hadiths are other people’s observations of what they believe they saw and heard—their view of what happened and what was going on. These aren’t direct.

And again, I believe that the only thing that he had explained was the Quran that’s it. It’s obvious that there are numerous hadiths that do not explain the Quran at all, but rather create their own separate rules, often contradicting the Quran itself. But yet Muslims accept this, just like they accept stoning the adulterer and try to make some explaination on how Allah didn’t really mean zina- illegal sexual intercourse, when he said “zina”. Yea, ok, sure. You are so in love with the hadiths and what was confirmed by man, that you are willing to reject the rules of the Quran—something whose authenticity has never been questioned by Muslims.

Why do you accept the Qur'an and not the Ahadith when they have both been preserved by the same people? It is God who enabled us to do both tasks.

Because I believe that the Quran has been promised protection. Not hadiths. I don’t believe that these hadiths that you all practice are in the Quran. It’s always been Messenger must convey the Quran, I don’t believe that you can get from Quran to narrations by people and calling them divine narrations.

I find it disturbing how you see nothing wrong or questionable about accepting something which has gone under an authentication process. It makes no since. And I don’t believe that Allah would have us go through such a struggle

If you believe that the Quran has been recorded by the same people and preserved by the same people, then why didn’t the Quran go through the same process?? You mean to tell me that people chose to neglect that hadiths—something they believe is so crucial in order to practice Islam in order to preserve the Quran? It makes no since. Quran didn’t go through an authentication process, yet hadiths have…. And you still remain steadfast in the belief that hadiths have always been recorded and preserved by the same noble people.

One person on their own can make an error. But when someone claims that the same error has been missed by over a millenium of hadith scholars who re-examined the work, a visit to the shrink is in order.

Millions of people do not believe in God…. How could they possibly make such an error? Millions of people have mistaken their Lord as Jesus, how can they possibly make such an error? What you are doing is making a grave error, by putting Muslim scholars on some level of being incapable of making an error.

I mean for goodness sakes, do you see how illogical your argument is? Thousands of black Muslims are being killed by Arab Muslims because to the Arabs the blacks aren’t really Muslim! Don’t you dare think that it’s not possible for thousands of people, for years, to act deaf, dumb, and blind.

For each hadith you can find the research of hadith scholars on it, the verdicts they gave on it and their conclusions about the people in the chains of narration.

And if hadiths were really preserved and recorded like the Quran, which you seem to be claiming, then they would have never had to gone through such a process, because we know the Quran’s authenticity is only questioned by the non-Muslim, while the authentication has even been questioned by Muslims for hundreds of years.

What you are saying is that you believe that these scholars have made no error what so ever. That basically the whole system of authenticating a hadith—which was created by man (the sytem)--- is incapable of error. You are saying this? Who told you that this system has no error and that every hadiths ever labeled “authentic” is authentic and every haith labeled “weak” is actually “weak”? Are you willing to die for this system, which was created by man, because you believe that it is so true?

I don’t believe in hadiths because 1.) I believe that it is too far off from the Quran, 2.) it is word of mouth and it comes from other people’s observations, the sayings and actions are not direct, and 3.) The simple fact that there are “weak” hadiths and “strong” hadiths proves that there has been corruption in the so called sayings of the Messenger, and there is no proof that this system of “authenticating” a hadiths is incapable of error, rather it is just traditional thought and not DIVINE knowledge that says that it is.

Sa’eed ibn Hilal, one of the students of Anas ibn Maalik, says:
When we insisted upon Anas (may Allaah be pleased with him) he would bring to us some notebooks and say, These are what I have heard and written from the Prophet, after which I have presented them to the Prophet for confirmation. (Mustadrik Haakim)

See look at what you believe in. Is that the Prophet talking? No. That is another man’s observation and experience… and yet you take it is a truth.

Now if you were sincere in learning you would ask, "Doesn't the hadith about stoning contradict the Qur'an? How did the scholars of hadith reconcile this with the verse from Surat An-Nur?" but instead you make the claim that they haven't reconcied the two when you have not read or studied any of their works.

I already know how they reconciled it--- basically they have come to the conclusion that when Allah said “Zina” he didn’t really mean zina bur rather fornication. And there are some who of course just abrogate the whole verse.

Like I said before - you need to check your intentions.

My intentions? Excuse me but I was not the one who started this thread and asked Why you all believed in hadiths. Someone else asked WHY there are those who don’t. I stated my reasons and it was you all who wished to debate over the matter.

If you are sincere in learning about your religion, then you need to do just that - adopt the attitude of a student. Instead, one will find hadith-rejectors adopting the most arrogant attitude despite their acknowledged ignorance of hadith science

Adpt the attitude of a student? You say that I don’t have the attitude of one because I don’t believe what you believe and I am not willing to accept what you are “teaching” me. Teachers are not always correct. I didn’t come up with my belief 2 days ago.

You conveniently ignored my statement. Why?

I’ll agree with you that this is a question of authentication (to a certain degree because I believe that everything goes back to the Quran). My point about alcohol, gambling, and covering of women is to show how the Quran has told the Messenger what to command, and he’s been commanded to command people of things throughout the Quran. It’s just enough for people.

If the Qur'an explaiend itself, then why does the above verse comannd the Prophet to explain it? Sounds a little redundant, doesn't it?

Honestly brother that is something that you have to answer and search for yourself, because when I say that the Quran is detailed I’m not making up a lie… the Quran says it, itself. Are you going to deny that the Quran is detailed when it calls itself detailed??

As I pointed out the Qur'an explicitly mentions that the Prophet's function was more than just to convey the Qur'an; he also had to explain and implement it:

And I don’t disagree with the Messenger’s function. It all goes back to the Quran. But I don’t believe that all of these so called sayings of the Messengers are stemmed from the Quran, etc.

salaam

 

[BoiStop]

Salaam x Maz x,

My post about the Quran being detailed wasn't meant as a specific reply to you.

 

[BoiStop]

salaam x Maz x,

Oh wait, it actually was meant to reply to something you were saying (but it wasn't so specific to you).

You keep saying:

The message is the Quran, which shows us the basic requirements and laws by thy Lord and the Messenger being the person showing us how to implement/enact these requirements.

There is nothing "basic" about being detailed.

 

[x Maz x]

Ok maybe it may seem tad contradicting but it sets basic guidelines to mankind...without no guidence we have nothing to follow...I am not saying the hadith is more explanitory than the Quran but it sets the foundation for what we have followed..its like a sandwich...the bread bit...cause without it their aint much of a sandwich simirarly their aint much point to life...its like the centrepiece but not the centre *eyes rolly**..get what me sayin? Hmm shall i just edit it? and say it explains all the guidelines?...Dya get what me tryna say? Peace x

 

[Skillganon]

I find it strange, so how do you follow the sunnah?

Boistop.

And thank's MOD for my new avatar, ;D

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

If there was a command given by the Messenger to me then yes I would follow it.

Good. So you agree that if a command or statement of the PRophet pbuh has been authentically transmitted to you, you must likewise accept it? The question should now be whether the hadith are authentic or not.

I disagree.

You're free to do so, but if you haven't studied the field you are commenting on, an ill-informed judgement carries little weight.

I don’t believe that they are reliable. The reason is because these hadiths come from other people’s observations and what they think that may have seen the Messenger do or what they may have thought they have heard. What if the Messenger said something totally different?

If they couldn't hear the Prophet pbuh clearly, they would mention such or they wouldn't transmit the statement. Remember these are the companions of the Prophet pbuh we are talking about; they were more careful than anyone to narrate the correct statement. Also consider when a statement is confirmed by multiple sources. I quoted for you a statement which says that Anas ibn Maalik used to write the Prophet's saws statements and get him to verify it. In light of all this, for someone to say for no good reason that the companions couldn't hear the Prophet pbuh properly is a very poor excuse.

What if he was doing something just to do it, and it meant nothing? What if he was talking to ONE person and his command was only for that one person? These are OTHER people’s observations of what they saw and heard.

This is an issue of Usûl Al-Fiqh, not Ulûm Al-Hadîth. How we interpret the Prophet's statements and commands found in the hadith is a different issue from the authenticity of the hadith themselves.

And again, why would Allah have us have to “confirm” the validity? If these hadiths were given the promise of protection, then how can there ever be such a thing as a “weak” hadiths? Why are we even questioning the authentication? Do we go about and question the authentication of Quran verses? No. So why hadiths?

Do educated Muslims question the authenticity of Sahih Hadith? No. The protection of the Prophet's message (pbuh) means that we are able to record and preserve the statements that have been authentically transmitted from him and seperate them from the statements that have been falsely attributed to him. The fact that we have been able to do that and reached a consensus amongst the scholars on that, is proof of their protection. If they hadn't been protected we would never have come to a conclusion about what the Prophet saws did and said.

By questioning the authentication of these hadiths, and then admitting that there are WEAK hadiths, that in itself proves that this system is faulty…

No, it doesn't. There are some people who will claim that some forgeries are from the Qur'an - does their claim contradict the Islamic belief in the Qur'an's divine protection? Of course not. Anyone can make up a verse and claim its from the Qur'an or make up a hadith and clima its from the Prophet pbuh - but in both cases the Muslim Ummah will unanimously reject such lies because our sources have been preserved. We can seperate the fabricated from the authentic, and that shows that the system works, not that it is faulty.

Years after the Messenger’s death.

No, they were recorded and transmitted by the companions themselves. I've already answered this myth, and I gave you this link:
http://www.islamicboard.com/212874-post5.html

And again, I believe that the only thing that he had explained was the Quran that’s it. It’s obvious that there are numerous hadiths that do not explain the Quran at all, but rather create their own separate rules, often contradicting the Quran itself.

No, I've already pointed out that a requirement for a hadith to be authentic is that it must be in conformity with the Qur'an. And the Qur'an contains the message of Islam. The Prophet's sunnah shows us how to implement that message and clarifies some of the general principles given in the Qur'an.

Because I believe that the Quran has been promised protection. Not hadiths.

But they have both been preserved by human beings. Answer that. Why do you reject hadith and make statements like, "Your faith lies in the hands of men" when the Qur'an was preserved in the same way! What you have acknowledged above is that God can protect the scriptures through human beings. Just because the sunnah has been preserved by human beings in the form of ahadith does not mean that God has not protected it.

I find it disturbing how you see nothing wrong or questionable about accepting something which has gone under an authentication process. It makes no since.

Why not?

If you believe that the Quran has been recorded by the same people and preserved by the same people, then why didn’t the Quran go through the same process??

Because it is completely mutawâtir. The Qur'an has been transmitted to us through an innumerable of chains of narration. There are many ahadith which are mutawâtir as well.

Millions of people do not believe in God…. How could they possibly make such an error? Millions of people have mistaken their Lord as Jesus, how can they possibly make such an error? What you are doing is making a grave error, by putting Muslim scholars on some level of being incapable of making an error.

Your analogy is flawed for so many reasons. You have mistaken my argument for the fallacy of appeal to authority or majority. This is only considered a fallacy when the person cited is not an authority in that field. So a human being is not an authority on whether God exists or not, but a medical physican is an authority in medicine, a physicist is an authority on physics, a chemist on chemistry, and a scholar of Hadith (Muhaddith) is an authority on the sciences of Ahadith. And I am not quoting just one scholar of hadith, I am quoting the unanimous consensus of all scholars of Hadith for over a millenium. The scholars of hadith are an authority on hadith sciences. Secondly, You are comparing academic enquiry to faith. Researching the reliability of a group of narrators in a chain is incomparable to the rejection of faith by some people.

And if hadiths were really preserved and recorded like the Quran, which you seem to be claiming, then they would have never had to gone through such a process, because we know the Quran’s authenticity is only questioned by the non-Muslim, while the authentication has even been questioned by Muslims for hundreds of years.

Wrong. The authentication of the hadith has NEVER been questioned by anyone with even a minimal education on hadith sciences. If you want to include ignorant people then you could find ignorant people believing anything.

You are saying this? Who told you that this system has no error and that every hadiths ever labeled “authentic” is authentic and every haith labeled “weak” is actually “weak”?

Every hadith which has been unanimously accepted by the scholars of hadith as authentic, is authentic, especially if the only ones who reject it are those who have no education in the sciences of hadith.

Are you willing to die for this system, which was created by man, because you believe that it is so true?

If you live in a house then you have already trusted your life to those who constructed and designed it so that it wouldn't collapse. The same is true for every technology, mechanism, medicine, etc. that you rely on daily.

See look at what you believe in. Is that the Prophet talking? No. That is another man’s observation and experience… and yet you take it is a truth.

Not 'another man' - it is Anas ibn Maalik, the companion of the Prophet explicitly saying that he recorded the sayings of the Prophet pbuh and verified them with him. Interesting how you have nothing to say in response to this, except to reject it since it doesn't suit your desires. I accept it as the truth because the narration has been scrutinised by scholars of hadith and they have found it to be authentic - just as you would accept the diagnosis of a medical doctor on a patient if it was confirmed by virtually every medical doctor.

I already know how they reconciled it--- basically they have come to the conclusion that when Allah said “Zina” he didn’t really mean zina bur rather fornication.

What is the arabic word the Qur'an uses for fornication. Please tell me.

My intentions? Excuse me but I was not the one who started this thread and asked Why you all believed in hadiths. Someone else asked WHY there are those who don’t. I stated my reasons and it was you all who wished to debate over the matter.

You proceeded to pass judgement on a subject that you acknowledged you were ignorant of - definitely not the attitude of a sincere Muslim. It is not too late to change your attitude: you can start learning about the hadith sciences and find out why the Muslim scholars unanimously accept them.

Adpt the attitude of a student? You say that I don’t have the attitude of one because I don’t believe what you believe

No, I say that because you cannot deny the fact that you are commeting on a subject that you have no knowledge about. You should first gain the knowledge and then comment on this subject.

I’ll agree with you that this is a question of authentication

Good. Then your focus should simply be to learn the basics of the hadith sciences. Asking where the Qur'an endorses hadith recorded in Bukhari and Muslim is a red-herring since you agree that the question is solely one of whether that hadith has been authentically ascribed to the Prophet or not.

My point about alcohol, gambling, and covering of women is to show how the Quran has told the Messenger what to command, and he’s been commanded to command people of things throughout the Quran. It’s just enough for people.

Is it? Using the Qur'an tell me how mank rak'ah in each salat, what must be recited in salah, how do we shorten our salat when travelling?

Honestly brother that is something that you have to answer and search for yourself, because when I say that the Quran is detailed I’m not making up a lie… the Quran says it, itself. Are you going to deny that the Quran is detailed when it calls itself detailed??

No, but I'm going to deny your understanding of the passage and I see now that you cannot respond to the verse I cited. Maybe now you need to admit that the Qur'an has been explained by the Prophet Muhammad pbuh who was divinely inspired by Allah to do this.

And I don’t disagree with the Messenger’s function. It all goes back to the Quran. But I don’t believe that all of these so called sayings of the Messengers are stemmed from the Quran, etc.

Like I said before, the question now becomes whether the ahadith are authentic or not, and for you to be able to answer that you need to study the hadith sciences. What you are finding now is that you have no reason to reject hadith except due to ignorance, which it is your duty as a Muslim to eliminate,

 

[al-fateh]

great info so far, i have learned a lot ehre

 

[BoiStop]

Salaam Ansar,

No, but I'm going to deny your understanding of the passage and I see now that you cannot respond to the verse I cited. Maybe now you need to admit that the Qur'an has been explained by the Prophet Muhammad pbuh who was divinely inspired by Allah to do this.

I don't deny that. What you fail to realize is that we have different views on the issue. I don't deny that he may ahve explained the Quran... if it's in the Quran, why would I deny it????? LIke I said, I believe everything goes back to the Quran. To me, hadiths defintily do not.
salaam

 

[chacha_jalebi]

boi stop elo lol do u beleive in the dajjal yesh or no?

 

[al-fateh]

people who reject the hadith will more likely reject the authenticity of the dajjal and consider it fabricated as well