The Qur’an, the Hadith and the Scholars

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thinker
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 45
  • Views Views 9K
Thinker

Thinker

Account Disabled
Messages
928
Reaction score
107
Please correct my understanding of the below aspects of Islam:

From what I have learned, Muslims lead their lives based upon what is said in the Qur’an, the Hadith and the teachings of scholars (if there are any other source tell me).

The Qur’an
The Qur’an is as it is and is translated and interpreted by those who have been accepted as qualified to translate and interpret it.

The Hadith
The Hadith or is it Hadiths was/were written by the companions after Mohammed’s death and they are their memories of:

1. what he said and what he did in relation to explaining and acting out verses from the Qur’an written down by them for others to better understand the meaning of that verse.

OR

2. what he said and what he did in any aspect of any part of his life for others to copy by example.

Scholars
The teachings of scholars are restricted to, through critical and objective examinations of the evidence interpret verses from the Qur’an and Hadith
 
wow - 15 hours and a zero response - I didn't realise this was such a difficult question?

What I was hoping to develop in this thread was an understanding of the weighting applied to the different layers e.g. is the opinion of a scholar as sacrosanct as the words of the Qur'an
 
Last edited:
Thinker said:
....
The Qur’an
The Qur’an is as it is and is translated and interpreted by those who have been accepted as qualified to translate and interpret it.
Click to expand...
Bingo.

The Hadith
The Hadith or is it Hadiths was/were written by the companions after Mohammed’s death and they are their memories of:

1. what he said and what he did in relation to explaining and acting out verses from the Qur’an written down by them for others to better understand the meaning of that verse.

OR

2. what he said and what he did in any aspect of any part of his life for others to copy by example.
Click to expand...
It's sort of a mixture of both really.

Scholars
The teachings of scholars are restricted to, through critical and objective examinations of the evidence interpret verses from the Qur’an and Hadith
Click to expand...
Sort of. Scholars are those who have studied the holy text. Usually, this requires them to have studied and understood arabic.

In terms of weight of importance (this is a rough guide btw):
1) Qur'aan (since this is the main holy text)
2) Ahadith (since these are the actions and sayings of the Prophet, often relate to the Quranic teachings, too)
3) Scholars/sheiks (since these are the guys/gals who interpretate the Quran and offer explanation. I bunched the two together for simplicity)
4) Imaams (These are the guys that lead the prayers. You could argue that they are joint number 3 also but this is simply a guide to get your head around it all)
 
Last edited:
sorry for the late reply, its Ramadan you see so i'll most likely only even see your posts during working hours :p

again apologies :)



Thinker said:
Please correct my understanding of the below aspects of Islam:

From what I have learned, Muslims lead their lives based upon what is said in the Qur’an, the Hadith and the teachings of scholars (if there are any other source tell me).
Click to expand...

thats correct sir :) !

The Qur’an
The Qur’an is as it is and is translated and interpreted by those who have been accepted as qualified to translate and interpret it.
Click to expand...
the Quran as it is, the original arabic, from the understanding of the sahabi's (the best tafseer - tafseer meaning interpretation - is of the sahabi's, they understood it as it was meant to be understood, as our prophet sallallahi alaihi wasallaam taught)
so yeah we take the Quran NOT AS INTERPRETER BY ANY OLD SCHOLAR (allow me to make that clear) but as interpreted and intended by the Prophet sallallahi alaihi wasallaam

The Hadith
The Hadith or is it Hadiths was/were written by the companions after Mohammed’s death and they are their memories of:

2. what he said and what he did in any aspect of any part of his life for others to copy by example.
Click to expand...
the hadiths are sayings/teachings of the prophets and his actions, we can derive rulings from them.

Scholars
The teachings of scholars are restricted to, through critical and objective examinations of the evidence interpret verses from the Qur’an and Hadith
Click to expand...

Also through their closeness to the ways of the earlier generation, if they examine the Quran n hadith CLOSELY yet stray from the understanding of the earlier generations then they cant be trusted :)
 
Thak you for your helpful replies to my questions.

One of the reasons I posed these questions is because, for me looking in from the outside, there seems to be little difference given, in weight and value, from one text to another.

For example ‘scholars’ are men and as such are fallible. And, for the many scholars that say “that means x” there are many others that say “that means y.” Yet when someone asks a question people answer it with a quote from a scholar and it appears to have the same weight as if it were a clear verse from the Qur’an.

The other misgiving I have with an edict issued by a scholar is that after 1700 years of scholars giving their scholarly advice on this or that, every question must have been asked and answered. If that is the case present day scholars must be giving different answers than previous day scholars and if that’s the case, scholars in the future may give different answers.

The other issue I have with scholars is (again a human frailty) if someone asks a scholar “Is it OK for me to do this?” the scholar is under greater pressure to say NO because he’s less likely to be criticised for being pious than he is for being too lenient or soft.

I wonder whether the general drift towards a more radical interpretation of Islamic text is because it’s easier (brings less criticism) for scholars to err on the side of a more radical interpretation.
 
scholars are not infallible. and new issues do rise as times/science/technology change therefore there is always a need for scholars.

if a scholar is apologetic or pleasing other then Allaah then he'll respond to Allah when he meets him, we should just concentrate on sticking to the ones who stick most strictly to classical islaam (ie the way the early generations knew it)
 
Thinker said:
Thak you for your helpful replies to my questions.

One of the reasons I posed these questions is because, for me looking in from the outside, there seems to be little difference given, in weight and value, from one text to another.

For example ‘scholars’ are men and as such are fallible. And, for the many scholars that say “that means x” there are many others that say “that means y.” Yet when someone asks a question people answer it with a quote from a scholar and it appears to have the same weight as if it were a clear verse from the Qur’an.

The other misgiving I have with an edict issued by a scholar is that after 1700 years of scholars giving their scholarly advice on this or that, every question must have been asked and answered. If that is the case present day scholars must be giving different answers than previous day scholars and if that’s the case, scholars in the future may give different answers.

this is addressed in the video below

The other issue I have with scholars is (again a human frailty) if someone asks a scholar “Is it OK for me to do this?” the scholar is under greater pressure to say NO because he’s less likely to be criticised for being pious than he is for being too lenient or soft.

actually the scholar is "under pressure" to give the correct answer and fear Allah[swt] and NOT his colleagues!

I wonder whether the general drift towards a more radical interpretation of Islamic text is because it’s easier (brings less criticism) for scholars to err on the side of a more radical interpretation.

this is addressed in the video series below
Click to expand...

Peace,

it's Ramadhan, and during Ramadhan we should be concentrating on the Qur'an and taking advantage of the higher Spiritual elevation of the month to improve our understanding of it [and not just having cool iftar parties]; thus you will not get much response to somewhat controversial issues. that's why certain sections are closed.

i offer you this as i would anyone else interested in Islam:

http://www.bilalphilips.com/bilal_pages.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=288

go to the bottom and watch the Foundations of Islamic Studies series. it's 21 parts and takes around 18 hours, BUT it's a VERY DETAILED description of Tawheed [Oneness of Allah(swt)] and all of it's aspects, how to approach Tafsir of the Qur'an, how to utilize Ahadeeth and other VERY BASIC pillars of Islam.

i think you get the "best bang for your buck" by watching this and that you will have a MUCH GREATER understanding of Islam, In Sha'a Allah.

:w:
 
I asked in this thread how Muslims attached to a particular edicts. I described (rightly or wrongly) Islamic teachings as layers starting with the Qur’an, followed by the Hadith and then the opinions of scholars. I asked about how Muslims weighted the value of one over the other and didn’t get a clear answer.

The question occurred to me after reading a question asked about plucking facial hair and reading the answers given. In fact Muslim readers of that question asked was it a big sin or a little sin implying that transgressions are weighted. In answer to that question great detail was given over what could be plucked, cut, trimmed and what couldn’t and what must be plucked, cut or trimmed. The evidence behind these various edicts was the below two hadith:

The hadeeth of ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood (may Allaah be pleased with him) who said: I heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “Allaah has cursed the woman who does tattoos and the one who has them done, the woman who plucks eyebrows (al-naamisah) and the one who has it done (al-mutanammisah), and the one who files her teeth for the purpose of beauty, altering the creation of Allaah.”

And it was narrated that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Umar said: I heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “Be different from the mushrikeen: let your beards grow and trim your moustaches

Based upon the above two people saying “I heard the messenger say. . . . “ it appears that scholars have come up with a ruling for what can or cannot and what must or must not be done for any hair on any part of the body.

Now I’m not sure how I can pose the questions that follow without being accused of beaching forum rules but here goes . . . . .

Maybe Mohammed did say what he is reported as saying above but did he really expect that it was going to be written down and become a sin in every age that follwed (it appears that scholars believe it so).

Maybe those people reporting what he said (being human) didn’t quite get it exactly word for word perfect, yet it appears that scholars are presuming they did.

Is God really going to deny someone paradise for plucking a hair?

Also in the first Hadith it talks about Allaah cursing eyebrow pluckers . . . .altering the creation of Allaah but the second Hadith commands that the moustache be trimmed. Would God be so prescriptive to say that it is a sin to trim your beard and a sin not to trim your moustache?

Finally how come I see lots of Muslims with moustaches or without beards; will they go to hell?


. . . . apologies in advance if I’ve broken the rules again!
 
I’d like to follow up the questions I raised in my last post by offering a suggestion that scholars, being human are subject to the same failings as all of us and in particular I’d like to suggest that within current Islamic climate (and perhaps previously) scholars are particularly inclined towards what I will call a version of Pascal’s Wager.

Pascal’s Wager . . . . Blaise Pascal (17C Mathematician) argued as follows:
If you believe in God and there is no God, you lose nothing,
If you believe in God and there is a God you gain everything (eternal paradise);
If you disbelieve in God and there is no God, you gain nothing (death ends all),
If you disbelieve in God and there is a God, you lose everything (eternal ****ation).
Pascal argued that failure to accept God's existence risks losing everything with no payoff on any count. The best bet, then, is to accept the existence of God.

How do I apply this analogy to the rulings and edicts of Islamic scholars; let us take for example to question of the veil. If a scholar rules that the evidence suggests that a woman does not need to cover her ***** and he is wrong God will punish him; if he rules that woman must cover her ***** God will not punish him, it consequently follows that the scholar has everything to gain and nothing to lose by interpreting the evidence as strictly as possible.

Again I submit the argument for academic discussion, not to offend anybody and in the earnest hope I haven’t broken the rules.
 
Hi,

Just seen on TV the swearing in of the new President of Pakistan. None of those gathered had a beard, all were either clean shaven or had a moustache. There are hadith that say that men must have beards. This is one of the things I'm having difficulty in understanding - are there some hadiths that Muslims need not adhere to, in which case who decides which ones and on what basis?
 
^ nope , the people in power these days just dont want to implement islam or shariah...
 
Hi,

How do we define hadith / what qualifies to be defined as an hadith?

I know there are the ‘companions’ whom I presume are the people who were in direct day to day contact with Mohammed and I have read text of them saying “Mohammed told me that it should be done this way” or “I heard Mohammed say this” or “I saw Mohammed do that” and that those things constitute an hadith. My question is – is that where the line is drawn or do they go further to, for example include hearsay - “a companion told me that Mohammed had told him this or that” OR when scholars extrapolate something from two hadith does that become an hadith e.g. if we agree that hadith ‘a’ and hadth ‘b’ are correct it logically follows that we should do *******?

Thanks
 
I posed a question in a thread where a female member had expressed her shame at having shook a mans hand (handshake).

I asked the question, “where is it written that women are not allowed to shake a mans hand?”

The answer I was given is below:

The Prophet used to take the Pledge of allegiance from the women by words only after reciting this Holy Verse: (60.12) "..that they will not associate anything in worship with Allah." (60.12) And the hand of Allah's Apostle did not touch any woman's hand except the hand of that woman his right hand possessed. (i.e. his captives or his lady slaves).

Rasulullah S.A.W. said, "It is better for a man that a steel nail be driven through the centre of his head rather than if he touches the palm of a strange women."

Prophet S.A.W. said, "The one who touches the hand of a woman without having a lawful relationship with her, will have an ember placed on his palm on the Day of Judgment." (Takmalah, Fath alQadir)

I posed a further question “is every hadith to be read literally; could it not be that when someone says 'touch the hand' they might be using a euphemism for hand meaning something more than hand e.g. ***. As it is the case that some people believe that when God told Adam not to eat the apple he actually didn’t prohibit the eating of apples, he used apple as a euphemism for *** with Eve. . . . . . . I got no answer.

Thinking it through I wonder whether the answer I seek is in the text? Clearly the term “his right hand possess” does mean literally his right arm possess or owns something, it means he possess them and it means more in the context in which that phrase is used, I would suggest that it means that he is entitled to have *** with them. Would it consequently not follow that the hand is used euphemistically to mean having *** with a woman i.e. Allah's Apostle did not touch any woman's hand except the hand of that woman his right hand possessed would mean he didn’t have *** with anyone who wasn’t his wife or his slave?
 
Thinker.. you ask Questions that require some thought.. and personally, I am under the weather with the flu to offer a deep theological response..
so i'll recommend you get this book by Dr. M. M Azmi studies in hadith methodology and literature..
Also Br. Ansar Al 'Adl has written extensively on such topics.. I recommend you use the search engine to browse some of his old threads..

When you don't get the direct response, it is because many of us aren't scholars and don't want to go outside our sphere of expertise transmitting you, wrong info..

Imagine you go to someone asking what to do with the fever your child and you ask a friend who has an experience with children because he has three of them, instructs you to give him an orange flavored baby aspirin .. your friend doesn't know for instance that Aspirin causes Reye's syndrome in young children and could potentially give you fatal advise... or as it turns out your kid has Kawasaki disease, in fact the only disease in children treated amongst other modalities by use of Aspirin..

You don't ask your neighbor, or your mother no matter how wise for what to do with a sick child if you wanted to genuinely help your kid.. you'd take your him/her to a pediatrician and put your trust in his/her best judgment and expertise.. and yes even with the highest level of education there is always that chance for poor judgment even when following established and tried protocol.

Do you catch my drift?
Anyone can offer you an answer, but everyone will also bear the burden if they transmitted you wrong info.. in which case it is best to seek scholarly help,,
Yes scholars err.. but in Islam each individual is responsible for his/her own deeds.. you won't present on the day of judgment stating Sheikh so and so, made this into a prohibition or an allowance.. you have to use your best judgment!

will people be punished for plucking their hair? I really don't know.. I know God forgives all sins except for two.. but that certainly not a carte blanche to go committing all kinds of sins... There is a difference for instance in plucking because you have polycystic ovary disease and are a prisoner to male hormones, and there is plucking by altering the way God made you, so that you end up looking like a drag queen..

Again.. it is a question of best judgment. And whether or not you have a valid excuse for doing what you are doing or not doing in some matters..

In the beginning and in the end, all affairs are relegated to God.
books and thorough research, help one reach an intelligent answer..

all the best

peace
 
Skye Ephémérine said:
Thinker.. you ask Questions that require some thought.. and personally, I am under the weather with the flu to offer a deep theological response..
Click to expand...

Thank you Skye for your helpful response :thumbs_up - sorry to hear your'e unwell - hope you get well soon
 
Hi Thinker,

Thinker said:
For example ‘scholars’ are men and as such are fallible. And, for the many scholars that say “that means x” there are many others that say “that means y.” Yet when someone asks a question people answer it with a quote from a scholar and it appears to have the same weight as if it were a clear verse from the Qur’an.
Click to expand...

If I may clarify, within the realms of scholarship you have different strands of thinking. There may be the ultra-fundamentalist, the middle line scholarship and the ultra-skeptical. I'll give this example in the realms of Biblical and Jesus scholarship as that is what I am familiar with. Some ultra-fundamentalist may claim that the Bible has not changed at all and that we know the authors of the entire Biblical Library. A middle line scholar may weigh the evidence with more credibility and provide you with a mix match of ideas.

So one should first analyse the type of scholarship one is approaching, you may have, within the realms of Islam people who think they are scholars but do not have a grasp of the basics. And thus you end up with different scholars saying different things. Another thing is that sometimes scholars do not have all the evidence and thus give a ruling based on the limited sources they have present at the time.

But when one realises that the scholarship of a scholar, and that this individual is trustworthy and reliable, then since we are not scholars ourselvs we can in some cases rely on his words, just like I rely on a Medical Doctor's words due to my lack of sufficient knowledge to apply medicine.

Thinker said:
The other misgiving I have with an edict issued by a scholar is that after 1700 years of scholars giving their scholarly advice on this or that, every question must have been asked and answered. If that is the case present day scholars must be giving different answers than previous day scholars and if that’s the case, scholars in the future may give different answers.
Click to expand...

Well I do not think so, we have to look at the possibilities. For example, you asked if people have beemn asking questions for 1400 years then surely every question has been previously answered, there are two observations;

1. The answers of the scholars from the previous years are not always easily accessible. The layman may not have the scholarly opinions on a matter of the Companions etc. So the scholars are used as vessels to that knowledge, just like illnesses are classified and symptoms clear, I still in our time go to a Doctor than try read a book on flu and cure myself.

2. We live in a changing world, new inventions in this world mean that new cases arise which need to be dealt with, thus the scholars using the principles of the sharia, provide rulings.

(I have personally noticed that when scholars I have read of give rulings on matters which have previously existed they do reffer to the older scholars, and when it is a new matter they apply the principles.)

Thinker said:
The other issue I have with scholars is (again a human frailty) if someone asks a scholar “Is it OK for me to do this?” the scholar is under greater pressure to say NO because he’s less likely to be criticised for being pious than he is for being too lenient or soft.

I wonder whether the general drift towards a more radical interpretation of Islamic text is because it’s easier (brings less criticism) for scholars to err on the side of a more radical interpretation.
Click to expand...

Scholars have been in the past, and contine in some places to be locked up, the truth they hold, and they believe they are holding the inheritance of their Prophet, is more important than being locked up or losing friends.

I may reply later on a different day to the rest,

And Allah knows best.

Eesa
 
The Sunnah is defined as: the manner or deeds of Muhammad and validated by the consensus of companions of Muhammad (Sahaba) in Sunni Islam, and the way or deeds of Muhammad and the twelve Imams in Shi'a Islam, while Hadith is a collection of the narrations and approvals. The two words are sometimes taken to be interchangeable.

From what I have learned here and elsewhere I have formed the view that many of the Muslims contributing here believe that they should strive to closely follow the Sunnah (as described above) in some instances searching for the smallest detail of what Muhammad did and said on diverse issues. They do that and copy those examples but ignore other examples of what Muhammed did which today would be socially unaccaptbale or even illegal – how do you reconcile that?
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top