what the quran teaches and what the Muslims do, can sometimes be two completely different things, unfortunately.If the Quran is indeed the final message of God to humans how come it has divided Islamic followers over it's message?
Nice answer but remember, ita's the FINAL communication from the CREATOR, so it has been made EASY TO UNDERSTAND.what the quran teaches and what the Muslims do, can sometimes be two completely different things, unfortunately.
just because the Muslims have strayed, deviated, etc, this does not mean that the credibility of the quran is affected...
hence, it hasn't divided its followers, its followers have deviated from it...
Islam was meant to replace the old teachings of "the book" with a final easier to understand formulae, and as soon as the founder died the first schism occurred.some division is good, the qur'an supports many interpretations, all of them are essentially equally correct, unless in contradiction to other major aspects of Islamic belief, ie. the qur'an is to be taken as a whole.
otherwise, not everyone follows all the time, as is human nature.
I originally opened it in the Quran section, a mod moved it here.P.S it is better to open such threads in the comparative religion section rather than advice & support, where such question are usually asked, advice & support is mostly for personal problems.
you could ask a mod to put it there for you.![]()
Ansar Al-'Adl said:Since it is the inherent nature of language that allows for the possibility of misinterpretations in practically any set of instructions, God sent a messenger with the scripture to explain it and demonstrate how to implement it's teachings. The teachings of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh are referred to as the Sunnah, and the Qur'an and the Sunnah form the sources of legislation and guidance in Islam. Thus, for one to determine the ruling on any particular issue it entails sound knowledge of both these sources. So anyone can understand the Qur'an so long as they invest the time to acquire knowledge of these two sources. You can't just go from a superficial reading of a medical textbook to acting as a doctor and treating patients in the hospital, you need to study in medical school first. Likewise one needs to be qualified in terms of their Islamic knowledge in order to give rulings in Islamic jurisprudence. Knowledge is a prerequisite in any field. The fact that you need knowledge in no way negates the clarity of the texts you are acquiring knowledge from. They are two seperate issues.Why must you have scholars tell you what it means?
http://www.islamicboard.com/785983-post22.htmlLack of knowledge. In this case, the problem is easily resolved by acceptance and knowledge of the teachings of the quran and sunnah. This question was also raised and discussed in the thread 'prove the quran...' and I explained there that all legitimate differences of opinion extend only to subsidiary issues of Islamic law and the main cause of any doctrinal differences amongst heretical groups or individuals would be lack of knowledge or refusal to accept those sources of knowledge as valid, for example the rejection of the teachings of the Prophet.Why do so many disagree with it?
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/13998-prove-quran-word-god-3.htmlThe clarity of the Qur'an is not negated by the fact that Muslims have differences of opinion. It should be noted that the legitimate differences only extend to lesser fiqhi rulings, as opposed to doctrinal differences or differences over laws. Differences in opinion in the latter are the result of not reading parts in context, because the Qur'an clarifies itself.
Peases explain "something akin to a church has been established,"which is not completely incorrect at that, rather this problem is not stemming from the messenger or the message, it is their personal decision not to follow & abuse the teachings.
although I do agree, something akin to a church has been established, many did not-and continue to not- understand Islam truly, and so seek to replicate earlier traditions. in no way is this representative of the qur'an's teachings though.
I disagree with your statement - the most prolific ages of Islam were when the Muslim nation adhered to the teachings of Islam. Once the people preferred worldly luxuries and deviated away from the truth, this led to their demise.Islam was meant to replace the old teachings of "the book" with a final easier to understand formulae, and as soon as the founder died the first schism occurred.
The most prolific ages of Islam were during Sufi leaders. Meanwhile modern Sunni sects are leading the "Ummah" towards a hurdle over which Christianity also fell, i.e. that a prophet's closest followers are the best examples to humanity.
alcurad said:one scholars idea's are held constant, one group of people's opinions are held constant, then the later generations do nothing but regurgitate what those before had said.
they have taken the right to interpret the qur'an and sunna to themselves, anyone else is wrong and incorrect even if the differing view is more correct.
there was no such thing as Sunni until Mu'tazili thought was suppressed.
You might be confusing the followers with the Maddhab here. See this link I provided above.the Hanafi mathhab for example is closer to Mu'tazili and at times Shiite thought than the Hanbali and Shafi'i.
Yes, and in my post, I said there were two different types of disagreements - one is valid and the other is not. Let's not go off-topic by talking about the valid differences of opinion. Let's also try to keep this thread focused on the Qur'an as a source of Islam.I was answering mithras's question, and the issue of mathahib is quite relevant, notice the first post was asking why the disagreements.
If the Quran is indeed the final message of God to humans how come it has divided Islamic followers over it's message?
I wanted you to read this link:but there are major differences between the four/five mathahib to simply call them Sunni.
I don't fully understand your question. What I was trying to say is that on the one hand we have differences in Fiqh, while on the other there is innovation and misguidance. The first type of differing isn't seen as a division in the Ummah, whereas the second one is. So as this thread is asking about the division in the Ummah, I thought the issue about Fiqhi differences was irrelevant here because that type of differing is not a problem. I am by no means an expert on this though. Allaah (swt) knows best.anyhow, to state that there are two types of disagreement then to term one not valid is suspect at best, what is the basis for forbidding this other than making certain topics off limits?
but since this thread is not specifically about such matters, I will not discuss it further unless asked to.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.