By M. Asadi
The Koran and the History of Religion
Humankind were one community, then God sent prophets as bearers of good news and as warners and revealed with them the Book with the truth that it [the Book] might judge between humankind concerning that in which they differed. And only those to whom the book was given differed concerning it, after clear proofs had been given them, through mutual hatred and rivalry&127;(Koran 2:213)
According to the Koran, as has been the case in the history of all the prophets (Koran 25:30-33), Muslims have fallen victim to inventions against, the word of God, the Koran. These inventions have distorted the way that God sent down via all the prophets. The message that God has been sending down has been the same all throughout history, same in every way (Koran42:13). Even though the Koran says in well over 15 places, that it is explained in detail, Tafseel (Koran 6:114 etc.), and contains a full explanation of whatever is needed by a believer (Koran 16:89), and should be enough, Kaafi, for them (Koran 29:51), and contains the complete law (Shariah) of God (Koran 45:18 and 42:13), as against man-made law or Shariah (Koran 42:21), "Muslims" insist that the Koran needs supplements to be understood, and lacks details. This amounts to disbelieving what God himself says in unequivocal terms in the Koran.
The Koran and Hadith:
The Koran states explicitly that the messenger's duty was only to convey (Balagh) the message (Koran 29:18) contained in the Koran (Koran 69:44) and that the Koran was the only Wahi (revelation) given to the prophet to be conveyed to people (Koran 6:19), by testimony of God Himself. Therefore to follow the words of God in the Koran would be to follow the messenger. Thus following God is the same as following the messenger, who only conveyed the Koran (see Koran 4:80)
The inventions against the true words of God, revealed to the messengers, which is called their true speech (Qawl- Koran 69:40) are the so called "Hadith" (stories about the sayings and doings of the prophets) as narrated by the writers of the Old Testament, the Gospels of Jesus (i.e. the "Hadith" about Jesus), and the various Hadith about the prophet Muhammed contained in the many "extra-Koranic" books believed in by the Sunni and Shia schools of thought. People have attributed these things throughout history to the messengers, whereas the messengers could never have said them given the history of the documents and the Criterion (Furqaan) of the Koran (Koran 2:185)
The Koran states:
"Do they not consider the Koran with care, If it had been from anyone other than Allah, it would contain many discrepancies (Koran 4:82)."
Any document that claims to be from God, but in actuality is not would contain some form of error according to the Koran. What we see on analysis is that the Hadith attributed to Muhammed and the Gospels attributed to Jesus fail this test of authenticity. What we also see is the subjectivity of the various Muslims groups. They reject the Gospels of Jesus based on the same test as being corrupt whereas similar defects found in the books of Hadith are overlooked by them and they accept them as being authentic sayings of Muhammed. Let us have a look at the books of Hadith:
Hadith are the various traditions contained in specific books, believed in by the majority of Muslims to be the sayings of the prophet Muhammed. These in the major part are extra-Koranic, i.e. from outside the Koran. They either contradict or add to the Koran. Muslims sometimes present them as an explanation of the Koran or as an integral part of Islamic law, even though the Koran does not confirm them.
A minority among the Muslims does not accept the various books of Hadith as being an accurate representation of what the prophet Muhammed said. They take the Koran as Criterion (Furqaan in Arabic), according to the Koran's own claim (2:185), accepting only those Hadith [tradition or narration attributed to the prophet] which the Koran confirms and attests in totality. I represent that view in this paper. Opposition to the Hadith, and the whole body of extra-Koranic literature on Islam as doctrine, has existed from the earliest days of Islam. This is well documented by Shafi (died 204AH/ 819AD).
The Koran, historically predates any written Hadith and there is no mention of Hadith or the Sunna of the Prophet in what we possess as writings before the third century after the prophet. Koran and rationality based on its principles formed the basis of religion for first century Muslims (Rahman 1979). Thus contrary to being an innovation, following the Koran alone is historically the original Islam and hadith and other extra-Koranic literature is an innovation, introduced in its written form in the 3rd century after the prophet.
And they scattered not, those who were given the Book, except AFTER the clear sign came unto them. They were commanded only to serve God, making the way PURE for Him alone(Koran 98:1-)
Hadith and the Gospels:
The various books of Hadith that we see in Muslim society today are the same in relation to Muhammed, as the gospels are to Jesus. They are both similar in that both were complied [in what we possess today] centuries after Muhammed and Jesus respectively [unlike the Koran which was memorized and written down at the time of its revelation] and they both present no proof of authenticity [unlike the Koran in which numerous verses say: In this is a sign [or proof]&127;", and then asks you to refute it]. Therefore, objectively speaking both the Hadith and the gospels do not present any evidence as to be considered a 100% reliable representation of the words of the prophets, Muhammad and Jesus. Modern scholarship of both the gospels [the Jesus Seminar] and the Hadith finds them an unreliable representation of the words of the prophets or even their close companions.
Fazlur Rahman, who was the Harold H. Swift Distinguished Service Professor of Islamic Thought at the University of Chicago wrote in his book Islam (1966) on the historic study of the Hadith. Summarising I. Goldziher's scientific study of the Hadith, he writes:
But his argument runs, since the corpus of the Hadith continued to swell in each succeeding generation, and since in each generation the material runs parallel to and reflects various and often contradictory doctrines of Muslim theological and legal schools, the final recorded product of the Hadith, which date from the 3rd/ 9th century [over 250 years after the death of the prophet], must be regarded as being on the whole unreliable as a source for the prophets own teaching and conduct (1979:44)
Professor Schacht, who according to Fazlur Rahman is the first scholar to have undertaken a, "extensive and systematic comparison of legal traditions in their historical sequence, is unassailably scientific and sound in method&127;(1979:47-48), did not believe that the Hadith or the concept of "Sunna of the Prophet" were part of first century Islam. Shafi [150-204/767-819] introduced them, at the earliest, nearly two hundred years after the death of the prophet. The Koran states exactly the same. The Koran was the only "Hadith" that was conveyed by the prophet and formed the guidance for the early Muslim community.
Most Muslims who have taken on themselves the responsibility of teaching Islam to others have themselves abandoned the Koran by upholding Hadith. They say without hesitation: "The majority of Shariah (Law) in Islam is contained outside the Koran in books of Hadith and fiqh." Such a saying is a direct attack on the validity of the Koran, which claims to contain the complete Islamic law from God. We need to ask ourselves, what kind of submission (Islam) is this when you are rejecting God's words to follow your traditions.
"...If any do fail to judge by what Allah(God) has sent down (i.e the Koran), they are unbelievers (Kaafiroon)." (Koran 5:45).
"...If any do fail to judge by that which Allah has sent down, they are tyrants (dhilamoon)." (Koran 5:45)
"...If any do fail to judge by that which Allah has sent down, such are evil-livers (fasikoon)." (Koran 5:47)
The Koran reports that the messenger himself will complain to God about his so called followers abandoning the Koran: "And the messenger says,"O my Lord, my OWN people have forsaken the Koran." (Koran 25:30)
Muslims, those, who claim also to believe in the Hadith as being totally true, need to be objective and not subjective. They should, as concern for truth demands not change standards while evaluating phenomena. If they reject the Gospels as being true based on reasons that are valid, i.e. contradictions, history etc (and they almost all do), then they should also reject the Hadith on the same criteria. Hadith have the same problems of authenticity as the gospels do. Hadith do not represent the words of Muhammed just like the gospels don't represent the words of Jesus in total.
One would be mistaken in thinking that once the Gospels were written they constituted the basic Scriptures of the newly born Christianity and that people referred to them the same way they referred to the Old Testament. At that time, the foremost authority was the oral tradition as a vehicle for Jesus' words and the teachings of the apostles. The first writings to circulate were Paul's letters and they occupied a prevalent position long before the Gospels. They were, after all, written several decades earlier. It has already been shown that contrary to what certain commentators are still writing today, before 140 AD there was no witness to the knowledge that a collection of Gospel writings existed. It was not until circa 170 AD that the four Gospels acquired the status of canonic literature (Bucaille 1987).
Both the Hadith and the Gospels are based on oral traditions that were written down, in the written form that we have today, centuries after the prophets, Muhammed and Jesus. In recalling events, a gap of even a year can be distorted by memory beyond recognition. However, when the gap is of more than a hundred years, and you're narrating something to support a point of view [the Ahl-al Kalam and Mutizila, against the Ahl al Hadith in early Islam or the Judeo Christians against the Pauline Christians in early Christianity], your own as against conflicting points of view, the distortions are immense. Since history shows that eventually the followers of the Hadith and the followers of Pauline Christianity, politically dominated the scene both the teachings of Muhammed and Jesus got distorted. Modern scholarship recognizes this. Except for the Koran, we have no reliable historical record of the message that Muhammed conveyed.
John Dominic Crossan, in his book, The Birth of Christianity (1998), cites a study done after the Challenger explosion:
The morning after the Challenger explosion, the 106 students in Psychology 101 [Personality Development] at Emory University filled out questionnaires on how they had first heard of the disaster. That established a baseline for their memories within twenty four hours of the even itself in January of 1986. Then in October of 1988, the forty-four of 106 students still at Emory were requestioned (only 25% remembered the original questionnaire) and their two answers compared. Finally in March of 1989, follow up interviews were given to the forty students willing to participate in the final phase of the experiment&127;When those second versions were compared with the first ones for accuracy and graded on a 0-7 scale for major and minor attributes of the event, the mean was a 2.95 out of a possible 7. Eleven subjects were wrong about everything and scored 0 (25% of the sample). Twenty two of them [50% of the sample] scored 2 or less, this means that if they were right on one major attribute, they were wrong on both of the others&127; what makes these low scores interesting is the high degree of confidence that accompanied many of them (Crossan 1998: 62-63)
The Koran captures the similarity of what has happened in the case of both Jesus and Muhammed in this statement:
Has not the time arrived for the believers that their hearts should engage in the admonishment from God and the truth that has been revealed to them and that they should not become like those to whom was given the Book before, but long ages passed over them and their hearts grew hard..(Koran 57:16)
Hadith believing Muslims make big claims on the so-called scientific compilation of Hadith. Let it be clear however, that no matter how scientific you are in your compilation of what is "false" to start with, the compilation cannot make it true. Even the criteria that is presented are un-objective, i.e. the truthfulness of a particular narrator with a story of how truthful he was. To repeat, falsehood is not converted to truth by its scientific compilation.
The scientific method demands that "subjective" proof i.e. how truthful a person was be ignored and the item tested on objective criteria. What does the content say? THE DILEMMA:
Hadith doctors have traditionally evaluated Hadith on its chain of narrators and its body text, according to their own criteria of what should be correct. However even according to their own standards, they fell into a dilemma. Some Hadith exist which have according to them a "sound" chain of narrators i.e. it was truthfully narrated but they dispute the text of the Hadith. One example of this and their whole system collapses. The Koran gives us the standard for judging anything that is presented. If the Koran confirms it in total its true. If the material adds to or contradicts the Koran, its source is not God or his messenger.
History of compilation of Hadith:
Out of the books that the majority of Muslims believe in as being authentic, Sahih Bukhari is presented as being the MOST authentic. However a analysis of the history of the books shows that it is anything but authentic. Imam Bokhari the collector of the narration lived in a period over 230 years after the death of the prophet. Out of the 600,000 Hadith (narrations) that he collected, which were initially attributed to the prophet, he threw out as fabrication 592,700 of them and kept only 7300 as being genuine. They further reduce to 2762 Hadith after repetition. The margin of error in these numbers is so great, that any rational inquirer can see that accepting the book of Bukhari as containing all authentic Hadith or even a majority of authentic Hadith is stupidity. Yet the majority of Muslims unquestionable accept it as "gospel" truth!
There are many scientific and logical errors and contradictions in the Book of Bukhari, as well as the other books. Some examples:
1.The prophet according to Bukhari in one of the narration tells his companion Abu- Dharr Ghafari that the sun goes around the earth, in the apparent description that he gives (Hadith 421, pg. 283, vol. 4 of M.Muhsin Khan's translation of Sahih Bukhari).
This erroneous view was very popular at the time Bukhari compiled his collection. However this is absurd, we know today that the earth rotates around the sun, proven by scientific evidence. The Koran not only corrected this erroneous notion but also gave an accurate description of a round earth centuries before scientists discovered it.
2.According to Hadith no disease is contagious [Adwa]. This as we all know is inaccurate. What about the common cold and viruses like Ebola etc. [Hadith 649, page 435, volume7]
3.Books of Hadith contain many home-remedies, according to ideas prevalent at that time, which are scientifically absurd. The Hadith mentions there being a cure for every ailment in black cumin seed [Hadith 591, pg.400, vol 7]. This is evidently not true. Can it cure cancer or AIDS, not to mention even the common cold? Hadith suggests that we drink "camel-urine" to recuperate after an illness [Hadith 590, pg.399, vol.7]. This is disgusting, naturally speaking. Urine is toxic stuff. The Koran places extreme importance on cleanliness and clean eating (tayyab). The Hadith mentions that "fever" is from the "heat of hell" [Hadith 621,622, page 417, vol 7]. Atrocious!
4.The Hadith books insult the prophet by giving him a contradictory personality. In one instance it mentions that the prophet ate with a leper and in another it mentions that he refused to meet with a leper who had come to take allegiance at his hand and accept Islam. He told the man to leave and accepted his allegiance in absentia.
5.The famous Hadith about the fly: "If a fly falls into the vessel of any of you, let him dip all of it (in the vessel) and then throw it away [and use the material in the vessel], for in one of its wings there is a disease and in the other there is a healing [Bukhari, Hadith 673, pg. 452, vol 7] Beware world, there is going to be an outbreak of typhoid and cholera if people take the above as "Hadith-truth", just like "gospel truth" made some people get castrated just because it reports Jesus saying, "....and there are some who make themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom of God." Beware these myths can harm you!
6.According to Hanbel 6/136, 192,213, the prophet "Never urinated in a standing position." However Bukhari in his "authentic" book of Hadith says that the prophet indeed urinated in a standing position. (Bukhari 4/60-64)
7.According to Bukhari 56/152 and Hanbel 3/107, 163; the prophet recommended that people drink camel urine to recuperate after an illness Later on when the same people killed the prophet's shepherd, he commanded that they be seized, their eyes taken out and their hands and feet cut and left them thirsty in the desert. This does not fit in with the personality of the prophet presented in the Koran. The Koran says that the prophet was compassionate. How could the prophet recommend the drinking of camel's urine, considering the importance that the Koran gives to hygiene?
8.The Koran commands believers not to make any distinction between any of God's messengers (Koran 2:285 and many other places), yet according to Bukhari's books of Hadith (Bukhari 97/36), the prophet contradicted the Koran saying that he was the "most honorable" among all the messengers. Not only this, the books of Bukhari make the prophet even contradict himself by saying in a different Hadith (Bukhari 65/4,6 and Hanbel 1/205,242,440) that we should not make any distinction between the messengers and that he was not better than even Yunus. Could the prophet have contradicted the Koran? Could the prophet of Allah have contradicted himself? The books of Hadith in fact insult the prophet by attributing to him things he never said or did.
9.According to the books of Hadith, a woman is compared to a black dog or a monkey (this Hadith pre-dates Darwin but it refers to women only) Bukhari 8/102 and Hanbel 4/86. The Koran on the other hand honors women and lifts up their status contrary to what is contained in the Hadith. A woman is called bad luck in the haidth (Bukhari 76/53). Also, according to the collection of Muslim (Sahih Muslim), most of the people in hell were of the feminine gender! According to Bukhari, "Women are naturally, morally and religiously defective." Therefore, according to the standard of the Koran, no Muslim should accept such prejudiced Hadith as issuing from the lips of the prophet of God.
10.According to Bukhari (Book of Jihad, 146) and Abu Dawd 113, the prophet gave permission to warriors to kill women and children in war. Indeed these people are attributing tyranny to a prophet held in honor by Allah, and described as having mercy for the people. The Koran says, even about the people that attack us first, that we should quit fighting if they offer peace, leave alone killing women and children. According to the standard of the Koran, the prophet could NEVER have asked his warriors to kill women and children.
11.The Koran describes accurately, the shape of the earth as being rounded (Koran 39:5), and the cause of night and day as being the rotation of the earth. The Hadith and similar writings however contain mythological concepts, which are then by hook or by crook attributed to the prophet. The most famous commentary of the Koran, that by Ibn Kathir (2/29 and 50/1) makes extensive use of the Hadith as explaining the Koran. In that spirit, Ibn Kathir suggests that the earth is "carried on a giant bull." When the bull shakes its head, an earthquake results. As stated earlier, Bukhari's book of Hadith states that the sun revolves around the earth.
12.According to Hanbel 4/85, 5/54, the prophet ordered that all black dogs be killed because they were devils. Inspired by that Hadith so called "Muslims" kill hundreds of dogs all over the world and consider them unclean.
The Koran, on the other hand talks about the sleepers in the cave (sura 18) as having a dog, inside their dwelling place and allows meat killed by hunting dogs. There is nothing in the Koran, which even remotely suggests that dogs are unclean as pets. Indeed the Koran states that God has subjected animals to be of use to humankind.
13.The Koran states that," Vision cannot comprehend God, who comprehends all vision," yet the Hadith of Bukhari 97/24 and 10/129 says that to prove his identity to Muhammed, God showed the prophet his thigh.
14.The Koran mentions with absolutely no ambiguity that the punishment of adultery or fornication is 100 lashes (Koran 24:1-3); which is half in the case of slave girls (50 lashes) and double in the case of the wives of the prophet (200 lashes) if they were to become guilty. The Hadith, contrary to this mention "stoning to death," as being the punishment of adultery in the case of married couples. This is completely against the commandment of Allah in the Koran, which makes no distinction between married or unmarried in the case of adultery.
The Hadith is definitely borrowed from a similar ruling in the Old Testament. It contradicts the Koran. Could the prophet have issued a ruling contrary to the ruling of Allah in the Koran? There is no verse on stoning adulterers in the Koran. Hadith forgers knew about this so they inserted another Hadith which claims that a verse on stoning existed in the Koran but it was eaten by a goat and so vanished from the earth (Ibn Maja 36/144; Ibn Hanbal 3/61;5/131, 132, 183;6/269). The Hadith also tells of a "planet of the apes" type story in which the prophet helped stone a monkey guilty of adultery whom the other monkeys had caught in order to bring it to justice. Why do they attribute such fairy tales to the prophet? Could not God protect his book from the goat? The Koran suggests halving or doubling the punishment for adultery, how can you kill someone (stone to death) half or double?
15.The Koran states that God is the protector of true believers, yet the Hadith states that the prophet was bewitched by a Jew and for many days, he didn't know what he was doing (Bukhari 59/11, 76/47; Hanbel 6/57 and 4/367). This Hadith goes completely against the Koran, which counters in many places the claim of the unbelievers that the prophet was bewitched.
16.The Koran talks of itself as being the only message that God intended the prophet to convey (Koran 42:52, 14:52;69:44;6:19 etc.). The Hadith of Muslim quotes the prophet as saying (Muslim, Zuhd 72, Hanbel 3/12,21,39) that no one should write anything from him other than the Koran. This particular Hadith is in harmony with the Koran, but then another Hadith contradicts not only the Koran but this Hadith. The prophet is quoted as asking, in Hanbel 2/162, Amr bin As, his companion to write everything he spoke.
17.The Koran states that those who forbid things even though God has allowed them, are committing a great sin. Yet the followers of Hadith have forbidden (haraam) the use of silk and gold by men, even though Allah never forbade these in the Koran. Contrary to that Allah specifically allows them (Koran 7:30-32, 42:21;22:23; 35:33). The Hadith in keeping with its reputation of contradictions, even contradicts this forbidding law by stating that the prophet allowed a "gold ring" to be worn by one of his companions and forbade the others! Could the prophet have invented laws not in the Koran? Could he then have been partial in implementing those laws?
18.The Koran only prohibits the meat of one animal, the pig. Certain sects in Islam however, based on the authority of the Hadith forbid clams, shrimp, crab etc. Why are they attributing against God a lie if they are submitters?
19.According to the Koran, division into sects is the work of evil, and is the result of following man made ideas like the Hadith (Koran 23:52-56 and 6:159) Division into sects can never be a mercy as claimed by some schools of thought.
The Koran claims to be the best Hadith (Ahsan ul hadeeth 39:23), and states that after Allah and his ayat (verses) no other Hadith is to be followed (Koran 45:6). The Koran also states that people have fabricated Hadith to mislead from the way of Allah (Koran 31:6 Lahwal Hadith). The Koran challenges people to produce a "Hadith" like the Koran (Koran 52:34) if they are truthful. The difference in language, style and content between the Koran and the other "Hadith" has been evident and is not denied even by those who believe in the Hadith as being genuine. "These are the verses of Allah (God) which we rehearse to you with truth. Then in what Hadith will they believe after Allah and His verses? (Koran 45:6)."
The Koran's Verdict:
" And the messenger says of Judgment Day, "O my Lord! My own people took this Koran as a thing to be shunned (KORAN 25:30)."
The Koran says in well over 15 places that it is "explained in detail (6:114 etc)." One word used is Tafseel which means a detailed explanation. It further says that it contains a Biyan or clear exposition of everything (16:89). God says in the Koran that He neglected nothing in the Book (6:38). The Koran talks about Moses' Book being Tamam (which means complete), and that the Koran is in no way less than that. The Koran also suggests that it should be Kaafi meaning "enough" for guidance by itself (29:51).
The Koran states explicitly that the messenger's duty was only "to convey the message (29:18)," and he said nothing on his own as his own sayings (69:44). It states that the message that the messenger conveyed was the Koran only (42:52 & 14:52 & 69:44). Therefore, to follow God's words in the Koran would be to follow the messenger, (4:80), as the words of the Koran is the messenger's speech (69:40). It also claims to be the Qawl or the speech of the messenger (69:40). The Koran claims that it contains answers to ALL relevant questions (25:33) and contains the best explanation (Tafseer) of itself (25:33 & 2:159). The Koran claims to be the Hukm or commandments of God, according to which humankind is to be judged (5:48). It also states that it is the Shariah or law/way with which God sent the messenger (45:18 & 42:13). Who would know best on how to talk to humankind but their creator? Therefore, it makes no sense to say that outside sources better explain God's word.
The Koran claims that it is explained fully in detail and lacks nothing. Therefore it must, according to its claim, contain a full explanation of everything in Islam, including Salaah (prayer). It surely does, we just need to study it. A careful reading of the Koran reveals that we are to get our Salaah from the Masjid-el Haraam [the continuous practice at Mecca since the time of Abraham], specifically the "place of Abraham (moqaam e Ibraheem)." The Koran tells us that the purpose of Hajj is to educate Muslims in Islam (Koran 22:27-28) and that the Masjid-el-Haraam is "guidance for all the worlds (3:96)."
By indexing the verses of the Koran, we can check all relevant details on the Salaah [the daily prayer]. The Koran confirms and covers every aspect of Islam, more comprehensively and with no discrepancy compared to the books of Hadith. The Koran states explicitly that it guides to that "which is the MOST STRAIGHT PATH (17:9)."
In Koran 2:185 it is stated explicitly that the Koran is the Criterion (Furqaan). It is the distinguisher between what is correct and what is wrong. If the Koran is missing details, as Muslim sects purport, how can it be a criterion or a distinguisher over those details?
The Koran is in detail [6:114; 2:159-160; 10:37; 11:11; 41:1-3; 22:16; 6:38; 12:111; 14:52; 17:89; 75:16-19; 18:54; 20:113; 39:27-28; 54:17; 25:33; 16:89 etc.]
The messenger's duty is only to convey the Book [5:102; 16:35; 16:82; 24:54; 36:16-17; 14:52 etc.]
The way sent down by God has been uniform in history in every way [41:43; 42:13; 46:9; 30:30; 6:20; 23:68; 21:24; 4:26; 1:7 read together with 19:58; 6:83-88]
Extra-Koranic Hadith an innovation [6:112; 22:52; 17:73-77; 10:15; 16:116; 42:21; 10:69-70; 5:47-49; 7:28; 33:64-68; 6:123; 6:144; 49:16; 39:23; 45:6; 31:6; 52:33-34; 31:20; 6:116; 2:170; 69:38-49;81:15-19; 51:7-11]
Koran. Translated from the Arabic The Bible. Revised Standard Version (1971) Fazlur Rahman. Islam (1979). University of Chicago Press. Chicago. Illinois. Sahih Al Bokhari. English Translation by M. Muhsin Khan. Bucaille, Maurice. The Bible, The Qur'an & Science. 1987. Seghers. Paris
References to the Koran in this paper e.g. 39:23 refer to Koran chapter or sura 39, aya or verse 23. References to the various books of Hadith e.g. Bukhari 56/152 refer to the Book of Bukhari, book (chapter) 56, Hadith number 152. Copyright © 1997 Muhammed Asadi
The article is interesting but it ignores or misleads in many ways.
The Gospels are based on Jesus and they are also based on humanity, love, God, and the weakness of humanity - and from a Christian point of view we have a personal relationship with God.
Also, the ancient languages had already been formed but Arabic was still evolving many centuries after Mohammed and clearly the Koran had to be changed in order to meet this reality - and the same applies to the Hadiths.
More important, the Hadiths and the Koran focus on war, a codified system, science (many comments are false), the need to subdue "infidels" and so forth - the Gospels are based on the love of God and the scope is much more limited because the Gospels are not concerned about power politics, military issues, science, and so forth.
Also, you have many contradictions in the Koran and yes you will have many contradictions in all holy books (including Christianity) - but the manner of Mohammed when he was weak and when he had power is too different even within the Koran.
No compulsion to kill the apostate is not just a contradiction; it raises serious issues and the same applies to praying towards Jerusalem and then Mecca and the Satanic Verses - how can such major changes be made or stated?
Does anyone believe that the world was created in 6 days or 7 days?
Also, debates about the Gospels are about theology - debates about the Hadiths apply to harsh punishments, child marriage, amputation of criminals, and so forth..............therefore the issue of the Hadiths are very important .
M. Asadi in his writing ''Hadith conspiracy and the distortion of Islam, is trying to make a point that Hadith has nothing to do with Islam. He further says in Quran details of everything can be found even the details of salah but he could not show where. He is either in ''Fitna'' or he is himself conspiring a fitna in Islam. Well let's see what M. Asadi has got to say about the following Ayah. Then it is for Us (Allah) to make it clear to you,-(surah-Qayamah-19) The Arabic word is "BAYANAH". What does Allah mean by BAYANAH? Why is Allah talking about making Quran clear to Mohammed (PBUH)? This clarification in Islamic term called WAHI-E-KHAFI or HADITH. TAFSEER also raises a question here (because he also talks about TAFSEER in his writing in a positive manner). But how TAFSEER is written? Without the help of Hadith?
OBEY: ALLAH & HIS MESSENGER
2:151 - A similar (favor have ye already received) in that We have sent among you an Apostle of your own rehearsing to you Our signs and sanctifying you and instructing you in Scripture and wisdom and in new Knowledge
Order to obey and follow the Prophet:
3:31- Say: "If ye do love Allah follow me: Allah will love you and forgive you your sins for Allah is Oft-Forgiving Most Merciful.
4:59 - O ye who believe! obey Allah and obey the Apostle and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves refer it to Allah and His Apostle if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: that is best and most suitable for final determination.
4:80 - Obedience of the Rasool is in fact the
obedience of Allah
4:80- He who obeys the Apostle obeys Allah: but if any turn away We have not sent thee to watch over their (evil deeds). 599
4:170 - O mankind! the Apostle hath come to you in truth from Allah: believe in him: it is best for you. But if ye reject faith to Allah belong all things in the heavens and on earth: and Allah is All-Knowing All-Wise.
7:157 - "Those who follow the apostle the unlettered prophet whom they find mentioned in their own (Scriptures); in the law and the Gospel; for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil: he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); He releases themThe Life of Rasool Allah (Muhammad) is the best Model for you from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them.
The Life of Rasool Allah (Muhammad) is the best Model for you:
33:21- Ye have indeed in the Apostle of Allah a beautiful pattern of (conduct) for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day and who engages much in the praise of Allah.
34:28 - We have not sent thee but as a universal (Messenger) to men giving them glad tidings and warning them (against sin) but most men understand not.
64:12- So obey Allah and obey His Apostle; but if ye turn back the duty of Our Apostle is but to proclaim (the Message) clearly and openly. 5493
Allaah warns against rejecting the word of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) (interpretation of the meaning): “… And let those who oppose the Messenger’s commandment (i.e., his Sunnah) (among the sects) beware, lest some fitnah (disbelief, trials, afflictions, etc.) befall them or a painful torment be inflicted on them.” [al-Noor 24:63]
"Indeed the people of Truth and the Sunnah do not follow anyone [unconditionally] except the messenger of Allaah SAW, the one who does not speak from his desires - it is only revelation revealed to him."
Sahih Al-Bukhari HadithHadith 4.803 Narrated byHudhaifa bin Al Yaman
"There will be some people who will lead (people) according to principles other than my tradition. You will see their actions and disapprove of them." I said, "Will there be any evil after that good?" He said, "Yes, there will be some people who will invite others to the doors of Hell, and whoever accepts their invitation to it will be thrown in it (by them)." I said, "O Allah's Apostle! Describe those people to us." He said, "They will belong to us and speak our language." I asked, "What do you order me to do if such a thing should take place in my life?" He said, "Adhere to the group of Muslims and their Chief." I asked, "If there is neither a group (of Muslims) nor a chief (what shall I do)?" He said, "Keep away from all those different sects, even if you had to bite (i.e. eat) the root of a tree, till you meet Allah while you are still in that state."
Please see below Lecture by Muhammad Nasir-ud-deen Al-Albaani.
The Status of 'Sunnah' in Islam
by Muhammad Nasir-ud-deen Al-Albaani.
praise be to Allah, Benediction and Peace be on the Messenger of Allah, his family, his companions, and his adherents.
This is a lecture which the late Sheik Al-Albaani, Allah's Mercy be with him, delivered in the city of Doha, the capital of Qatar, in the blessed month of Ramadhan 1392 A.H. At the suggestion of some of his friends who asked him to publish his lecture due to the need of the Muslims for a work of this type. In reply to their request he printed it for general propagation because of advantage, having regard for the reminiscences and history. He did add some separate titles to enable the reader to collect the main ideas. Pray for our beloved sheik and scholar of Islam, that Allah will accept from him and open wide his grave with the smell and light of Paradise.
The Status of Sunnah in Islam
A Declaration that it cannot dispense with The Qur'an
All Praise be to Allah, we praise Him, seek His help and His forgiveness. We seek refuge in Allah from the evils of our souls and evils of our deeds. One whom Allah guides, none can lead him astray, and one whom He misguides, none can guide him. I bear witness that there is no deity to worship(1) other than Allah, and I bear witness that Muhammad (peace be upon him) is His servant and His messenger.
"O you who believe. Fear Allah truly, and don't die except in a state of Islam" (3:102).
"O Men fear your Lord who created you from one soul, and created its partner, and from them spread men and women in numbers. Take care, Allah will question you about it and the kinship. Surely, Allah is ever watchful of your deeds." (4:1).
"O those who believe. Fear Allah and say what is correct so that it fits you. He will forgive your sins. Whoever obeys Allah and His messenger that is a great achievement." (33:70-71).
The best of speech is the speech of Allah. That is The Book of Allah. The best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad. Of all matters, the worst are innovations; and everything new is an innovation, and every innovation is a deviation, and every deviation leads to Hell-fire.
I do not think that I will be able to offer this high ranking assembly - especially when there are distinguished ulema (scholars) and professors present - some knowledge which has not been dealt with before. If what I think is true, I will rest contented that my address will be a reminder, as Allah says in the Qur'an:
"Remind, for the reminder would benefit the believers." (51:55).
I do not think that my talk in this blessed month of Ramadhan, the month of importance, is an exposition of something of its merits, rules and their practice, and the like, which generally the preachers and instructors touch on, on account of the benefit they give to the listeners, and procure for them good and blessing; but I have chosen my talk to be a study of a general nature, surely it is one of the roots of the Shari'ah (Islamic law). It is a declaration of the importance attached to the Sunnah in the Islamic law.
The Role of Sunnah Towards The Qur'an
You all know that Allah, The Blessed and Mighty, chose Muhammad (peace be upon him) as His Prophet and picked him to deliver the final message. The Qur'an was revealed to him and commanded him to obey all what He had ordered him to do, that is, to expound His message to the people. Allah says, We have revealed to you the Reminder (The Qur'an) to expound to people what was revealed to them (16:44).
I think that the declaration mentioned in the verse contains two orders:
Declaration of the word and its arrangement. It is the communication of the Qur'an and its non-concealment, and its pursuit to Mankind just as Allah, The Blessed Almighty, has revealed to the heart of the Prophet (peace be upon him) which is the intent of His saying O Messenger proclaim what is revealed to you from your Lord (5:67). Sayyida Ayesha (may Allah be pleased with her) is reported to have said "Whosoever says that Muhammad (peace be upon him) concealed something which he was commanded to communicate, is a great calumny against Allah." Then she read the abovementioned verse. (Bukhari and Muslim have stated it.)
And according to the narration of Muslim: "If the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) had concealed something which he was commanded to communicate, he would have concealed the saying of The Almighty Behold thou didst say to one who had received the grace of Allah and thy favor: Keep your wife to yourself and fear Allah. But thou didst hide in thy heart that which Allah was about to make manifest; you did fear the people, whereas Allah had a better right that you should fear Him (33:37).
The explanation of the meaning of the word or sentence or verse for which man needs an explanation, most of which bear reference to 'Mujmal' (comprehensive) verses or 'Amah' (general) verses or 'Mutlaq' (unbounded) verses.
Then comes the Sunnah and clarifies the sentences and specifies the verses called 'Amah' and defines what is 'mutlaq' that is, in reference to the saying (Qaul) of The Prophet (peace be upon him), his deed (Fi'l) and the act he confirmed (Iqrar).
The Necessity of Sunnah to Understand The Qur'an and Parables
Allah says The male thief and female thief cut off their hands (5:38) is a fitting example of that. The thief in it is general like the hand.
The oral tradition explains the first of them and restricts it by 'as-sareq' (the thief) who steals something worth a fourth of a Dinar(2) according to the saying of the Prophet (SAW) There is no cutting - of the hand - unless the thing stolen is worth a fourth of a Dinar or more (Bukhari & Muslim) the two sheikhs have recorded this Hadeeth.
Again, the other is explained by the action of the Prophet (SAW) or the action of his companions and his confirmation. They used to cut the hand of the thief from the wrist as is known in the work of Hadeeth. The oral tradition explains the hand mentioned in the verse on Tayammum (dust ablution) And rub therewith your faces and hands (5:6) is also the palm of the hand as is stated in a Hadeeth Tayammum is the wiping of the face and the hands recorded by the two sheikhs and Ahmad and others from a tradition reported by Ammar bin Yaasir (may Allah be pleased with them).
There are other verses that cannot be completely understood except through Sunnah. They are:
It is whose who believe and confuse not their beliefs with wrong, 'dhulm' that are (truly) in security for they are on (right) guidance (6:82).
The companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) understood the word 'dhulm' in its general sense to mean every wrong doing, even if it be little. On this account the verse is regarded as dubious and they said, "O Messenger of Allah, which of us did not involve his faith with obscurity?" He (peace be upon him) said; It is not that. It is only the 'shirk'(3). Have you not heard what Luqman said: Verily, 'shirk' is a very great sin (dhulm) (31:13). The two sheikhs have recorded it with others.
Allah says: When you travel on earth, there is no blame on you to shorten your prayer, for fear the unbelievers will persecute you (4:101). It is obvious from this verse that fear is a pre-requisite for the shortening of prayers. Some of the Prophet's companions asked him: "Why do we shorten our prayers while we feel safe?" He said: It is a charity from Allah, so accept it (Muslim).
Allah says: The carcass and it's blood are forbidden to you (5:3). In explanation of this verse, the corpse of locusts, fish, the livers, spleen of blood are lawful. So the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: He has made two dead things and blood lawful: the locusts and the fish, the liver and the spleen.
Baihaqi and others have recorded it as 'marfu' type of hadeeth as also 'mauquf' type. The 'isnad' or 'mauquf' is authentic and it is as good as 'marfu' tradition, since it is not stated in the form of a 'ra'y' (decision based on one individual's judgment not on Qur'an and Sunnah).
Allah says: I find not in the message received by me by inspiration any (food) forbidden to be taken by one who wishes to, unless it is dead meat or blood poured forth or the flesh of swine, for it is an abomination, or what is impious (meat) on which a name has been invoked other than Allah's (6:145).
The Sunnah has forbidden many things not mentioned in the verse mentioned above, as for example in the saying of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him): All predatory animals with tusk and every bird with claw are forbidden for consumption. There are other traditions which have forbidden the consumption of such animals as the Prophet (SAW) is reported to have said on the Day of Khaibar: Allah and His Messenger have prohibited the consumption of domesticated asses, for they are filth. The two sheikhs have reported it.
Allah says: Who has forbidden the adornment of Allah which He has produced for His servants, and the things clean and pure (which he has provided for sustenance) (7:32).
The Sunnah, too, has forbidden some adornments, and this is evident from the Prophet (SAW) who is reported to have met some of his companions, and had a silk garment in one hand, and gold in the other, and said: These are prohibited to Muslim males, lawful to females. The hadeeths in their interpretation are many and well known in both the authentic collections of hadeeths, and others and the like of many examples well known to scholars familiar with hadeeth and Islamic Jurisprudence.
From what has been stated above, O Muslim Brethren, you can see the importance attached to Sunnah in Islamic Law. When we divert our intention again to the examples mentioned beside others not mentioned, we are certain that there is no way to understand the Qur'an correctly except in association with the interpretation of the Sunnah.
In the first example, the understanding of the 'sahabah' of 'dhulm' mentioned in the verse is on its general sense, despite the fact that the (Allah be pleased with them) were, as stated by Ibn Mas'ud: "The best of this community, most pious, profound in learning, least of dissimulation." Yet with all that they erred in their understanding of that.
Were it not for the Prophet (peace be upon him), who held them back from their mistaken notion, and made them take the step in the right direction in that the correct meaning of 'dhulm' in the context is shirk (association of partnership with Allah), we too would have followed in their wrong thinking. Allah, The Blessed and The Most High saved us from that wrong notion by the grace of the right direction of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his Sunnah.
In the second example - with Allah's guidance - if not for the hadeeth mentioned above, we would have been in doubt at least with regard to the shortening of prayer (qasr-as-salat) during a journey while secure - if we did stipulate the condition of fear as obvious in the verse - till the companions saw the Prophet (peace be upon him) shorten the prayers when it was safe and secure.
In the third example, if not for the hadeeth, we would have forbidden ourselves the consumption of good things made lawful to us: locusts, fish, liver, and the spleen.
In the fourth example, if not for the hadeeths, some of which we have mentioned, we would have considered lawful what Allah has made unlawful through the dictum of the holy Prophet (peace be upon him) like predatory animals, and the birds which have claws.
And so in the fifth example, if not for the hadeeths in regard to this question, we would have considered lawful what Allah prohibited through the words of His Prophet (peace be upon him) like gold and silk.
It is for this, some forbearers (as-Salaf) say that 'Sunnah' pronounces judgment of The Book (al-Qur'an).
The Deviation of those who are satisfied with The Qur'an to the exclusion of Hadeeth
It is a matter of regret that according to the interpretation found in the works of some commentators and modernist authors, that it is permissible to do what is stated in the last two examples: Consumption of the predatory animals and the wearing of gold and silk by referring their interpretation only to the Qur'an.
Today, a sect exists called "Quranites" who comment according to their whims and fancies; without seeking the explanation of the authentic Sunnah. They only accept and follow the Sunnah which suit their desires, the rest they throw behind. The Prophet (SAW) is reported to have said that:
None of you reclines on his bed, the order comes to him on an affair which I am commanded to do or not to do. He says: "I don't know, what is found in The Book of Allah we follow" (Tirmidhi).
According to another report: What is found in The Book of Allah as 'Haram,' we pronounce it 'haram' (forbidden). Surely, I am given The Qur'an and its example with it. Yet, according to another report: What the Messenger of Allah has forbidden, Allah has prohibited it.
It is a matter of regret that one renowned scholar has written a book on Islamic law and its dogma, and in its preface, he says that he has written it and that he has made reference only to The Qur'an.
This true hadeeth gives positive evidence that the divine law of Islam - As-Shari'ah - is not merely Qur'an, but Qur'an and Sunnah. Therefore, whoever holds fast to one source for reference to the exclusion of the other, he held fast to neither of them, since both complement each other. The Qur'an says Whoever obeys the Messenger, obeys Allah. Allah says:
"No, by your Lord they do not believe until they submit to your adjudication in all disputes between them, then they do not find themselves oppressed with your decisions and they completely submit." (4:65)
Again, Allah says:
"When a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger, it does not behoove a believer, man or woman, to have choice in their matter. One who disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path." (33:36)
Furthermore, Allah says:
"What the Messenger teaches you, take it, and what he forbids you, avoid doing it." (59:7)
In connection with this verse, I am marveled by what is corroborated by Ibn Mas'ud (Allah be pleased with him) that is:
A woman came to Ibn Mas'ud, may Allah be pleased with him, and asked him:
"Are you the one who says: 'May Allah's curse be on 'Al-Namisat' and 'Al-Motanamisat'(4) and those who tattoo?"
He said "Yes."
She said, "I read the Book of Allah (Al-Qur'an) from beginning to its end. I did not find what you have said."
He told her: "If you have read it, you would have found it. As for your reading what the Messenger teaches you, take it, and what he forbids you, avoid doing it."
She said, "Certainly."
He said: "I have heard the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) say:
"May Allah's Curse be on the Al-Namisat."
(Bukhari and Muslim)
Inadequacy of Philology to understand The Qur'an
From what has been stated above, it is clear that there is no scope for anyone with all his Arabic Scholarship to understand the glorious Qur'an, without the help of the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him), his sayings and actions.
The companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) were the most knowledgeable in the language, which The Qur'an was revealed in, when it was not blemished by the incorrectness of the common folks knowledge or their grammatical mistakes. Yet, they erred in understanding the verses quoted above when they relied on language alone.
It is self-evident that a man well-informed of the Sunnah is more appropriate to understand The Qur'an and deduce the rules from it than one who is ignorant of it. How can it be a source to one who does not reckon it and does not make reference to it?
For this reason, it is part of the rules agreed upon that Qur'an should be interpreted by the Qur'an itself as well as the Sunnah, then by the sayings of the Sahabah... etc. (5)
It is here that the cause of deviation of scholastic theologians (Ahlu-el-Kalam) become clear, both ancient and modern, and their opposition to the forbears 'As-Salaf' (May Allah be pleased with them) in their doctrines not to speak of their laws. They are far from Sunnah, and knowledge of it, and rely on their intelligence and desires to decide on the verses of attributes and others.
What is best is what was written down in the exposition of Tahawi's doctrine (page 212 Fourth Edition):
When one is not well-informed of The Book and Sunnah, what would he say about the Fundamentals of Religion (Usulu-d-din)? He only receives the assertion of someone. If he says that he takes it from The Book of Allah, he does not study the commentary of The Qur'an on the basis of prophetic traditions, and reflects over it, nor what the companions (Sahabah), and the following generations narrated, which is transmitted to us from the authorities whom the critics chose. They have not transmitted the system and arrangement of The Qur'an, but its poetic expression and meaning. They did not learn the Qur'an like children, but studied it with meaning. One who does not follow in their footsteps, speaks on his own accord. One who does that thinks it be the religion of Allah, and does not study The Book of Allah, he sins, even if he is right.
One who studies The Qur'an and The Sunnah, he is rewarded, even if he goes wrong, but if he is right in his opinion, his reward is doubled. Then he says:
What is obligatory, is submission to the Messenger (SAW) carrying out his saying and accepting his saying with satisfaction and belief without contradicting it with false ideas called 'apprehensive faculty' (Ma'qul) bearing doubt or complaint, or offering the opinions of men and the garbage of their intellect. We unite with The Prophet (SAW) in judgment, submission, obedience and compliance, just as we have unison with Allah, glory be to Him, by worshipping Him by humility, submissiveness, repentance and reliance.
In short, what is obligatory on all Muslims is that they do not separate between Qur'an and Sunnah; whereas, it is obligatory to take both of them and to formulate the law on both of them.
This is a safeguard for them, so that they won't fall right or left; and that they won't fall back in error as explained by The Prophet (SAW): I leave behind me two things. You will never go astray if you hold fast to them: The Qur'an and my Sunnah.
It is self-evident after this that I say:
The Sunnah which has an important bearing on Islamic Law is only the Sunnah confirmed by scientific channels, and authentic chains of narrations known to the learned in regard to hadeeths and the background of the narrators.
It is not the one which is found in different works of Tafseers (commentaries of The Qur'an) and Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), and in different writings of longing, intimidation, advices, and admonitions, etc...
They contain weak, spurious, and fabricated hadeeths, of which Islam absolves, like the story of 'Harut and Marut,' and the story of 'Gharanik.' I have a special letter which makes it void and it is printed(6). A major part of it is recorded in two huge books namely "A chain of weak and fabricated hadeeths and their evil impact on the community." Their number up to date have reached approximately four thousand hadeeths(7).
It is obligatory on the learned, especially those who spread the knowledge of fiqh and legal opinions among the public, that they shouldn't dare to argue with hadeeth unless it is well-attested. Books of jurisprudence, which they refer to, are normally filled with traditions which are not well-attested, nor have any bases, as is well-known to the learned.
I have begun an important project, and I think it will be of use to those occupied with jurisprudence, and I will name it: "Weak and Fabricated Hadeeths in the Major Jurisprudence 'fiqh' Books," by which I mean:
Al-Hidayah, by Al-Marghinani, in Hanafi fiqh,
Al-Modawwanah, by Ibnil-Qasim, in Maliki fiqh,
Sharhul-wajeez, by Al-rafiee, in Shafiee fiqh,
Al-Mughni, by Ibn Quddamah, in Hanbali fiqh, and
Bidayatul Mujtahid, by Ibn Rushd-al-Andalusi, in comparative fiqh.
I regret that I did not get the opportunity to finish it, because the journal "Al-Wa'e-al-Islami" of Kuwait which promised to publish it, when perused it, didn't print it.
Although I missed this opportunity, perhaps I will succeed on another occasion, Allah willing, to offer to my brethren occupied with jurisprudence a precise learned course to help them to facilitate their knowledge of the different categories of hadeeth with reference to various sources from books on hadeeth, with an explanation of its special nature and character and reliance on them. Allah is the source of success.
Weakness of Hadeeth of Mu`adh in the opinion And its disapproval
Before I conclude my talk, I think I must direct the attention of brethren present to a well known hadeeth. It is devoid of one of the books of jurisprudence on account of its weakness in respect of its chain of narration (isnad) and its contradiction with what we have concluded in this talk, regarding the illegitimacy of discrimination in law between The Qur'an and Sunnah; and the necessity of taking both.
It is a hadeeth of Mu`adh bin Jabal (May Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (SAW) said to him when he sent him to Yemen: By what source will you decide? He said, "By the book of Allah." He then asked, If you don't find any guideline? He said, "I will make an effort to form my own opinion." He said, Praise be to Allah who makes success the effort of the envoy of the Messenger of Allah, to what The Prophet likes.
As for the weakness of its 'isnad,' there is no scope for its explanation now. But I have explained it clearly in the above mentioned chain(8).
It would suffice now to mention that the Commander of the Believers in the hadeeth 'Imam Al-Bukhari' (may Allah have mercy on him) says that the hadeeth is not recognized (Munkar). After this I am permitted to begin to explain the conflict which I pointed.
The tradition of Mu`adh gives the ruler a method of three stages which does not permit to search for any rule with regard to 'Ra'e' (personal opinion) except that he does not find it in the Sunnah, nor in the Sunnah, except that after he does not find it in The Qur'an. It is in relation to 'Ra'e' a genuine method with all the learned (ulema), so that they say, "Where there is a tradition relating the deeds and utterances of The Prophet (SAW), personal opinion is void." But in relation to Sunnah, it is not true, because Sunnah dictates The Qur'an and clarifies its doctrines. It is then essential to search for a ruling in Sunnah, even if he thinks it is found in The Qur'an as we have mentioned it.
Sunnah is not with The Qur'an in the same manner as 'Ar-Ra'e' with the Sunnah. No, definitely not. It is rather necessary to regard the Qur'an and Sunnah as being one source with no discrimination between the two whatsoever. This is indicated in a saying of the Prophet (SAW): Certainly I have come with The Qur'an and its like (meaning the Sunnah). He said They are never separated until they come to the Basin(9). The compilation mentioned between them is not correct because the separation between them is void as we have explained.
This is what I wish to draw attention to. If I am right, it is from Allah; if wrong, it is from me. I ask Allah Almighty to protect us and you from errors and from all that displeases him. I conclude my praising by "Al-Hamdu-Lillaahi Rabbil Alameen" - Praise be to Allah, The Lord of the Worlds.
Related Pages: HADEETH
i.e.: There is no true god - but Allah - who really deserves to be worshipped by Mankind
Dinar: A form of currency
Shirk is to disbelieve in the oneness of Allah, or to offer any form of worship to other than Allah.
Namisah: a woman who plucks hers or others eyebrows - to be a thin line - to seek beauty. Such an act is forbidden. It is a means to change the form of Allah's creation.
Motanamisah: a woman who asks others to do it for her.
This states other than what is known by many of the learned: to comment on The Qur'an itself if there is not any Sunnah, then by the Sunnah. This will be explained in at then end of this treatise on the hadeeth of Mu`adh bin Jabal - may Allah be pleased with him.
Its title is "Pitch of majaniq to demolish the story of gharaniq" printed by Al-Maktabul-e-Islami
Story of gharaniq: is a fabricated story found in some commentaries, claiming that a verse in The Qur'an acknowledged the polytheists in their beliefs.
The number at present [1394 A.H.] has exceeded five thousand and may Allah make easy its publication in the near future. So far only five hundred have broken into print.
No. 885 of the chain mentioned, and we hope that the volume which includes it will be published shortly, 'Insha Allah.'
i.e. until the Day of Judgment.
I do not think that writer has said that there are no authentic Hadith at all. His plea is that in the course of time many traditions have been portrayed in such way that it are considered as true hadith.
on 5/2 2010 Mr Jameel stated:
Where in the Quran does Allah mention the way as to HOW Salah (namaaz) should be performed? Also the same for Hajj.
If it is not mentioned in the Quran, where did that information come from.
And that's what would I like to know.
Article of Mr. Asadi is interesting, similar to the finding and approach of Dr Shabbir Ahmed but what looks funny to me that, basic line is you guys are still debating the validity or authenticity of Hadith or Quran. Debating these things since 1400 years and may continue to do so for another few hundred years still you won’t be able to find an unanimity. You have killed hundreds of thousands to submit to a particular sect or school of thought and will continue to do it for another hundred years. How long this mindless business will continue? I am not surprised to read the mentioned Hadith, you go to any anti-Muslim website, you can read all these Hadiths being targeted to paint Islam or Prophet in a particular way. I read a book, written by Ramswaroop, “Understanding Quran thru Hadith” about 20 years ago and it has all these Hadith and the writer easily could paint Islam a demonic religion as he wanted to do.
Vested interest has distorted the real character of Islam and they have done so much damage that it is hard to bring it in its originality. When they are still debating what is fake and what is considered to be original, who will believe that the agreed verses or Hadith is original? The problem is, more to try to make it rational, more you face resistance from those who don’t want any interference of reason in Islam, unfortunately, they rules the roots. Earlier, the kingship was not receptive now their Wahabi clan do not like it. They want their own currency to be accepted by hook or crook. Use of force has been an integral part of any religion including Islam. I feel pity for those who try to claim it to be scientific and they will tell after the outbreak of any discovery that its already in Quran (Other fellow religions also does this exercise), I have a humble request to these elements or so-called scholar, pls do something great for entire humanity and try to find our cure of incurable disease like cancer, virus, diabetic, AIDS so on so forth. They won’t do it however; it will solve their problem of identity crisis. No one could find the nuclear technology from any religious book and we know how all scientific development took place in the different part of the world.
It is not about only Islam, its same for other religions as they are feeling under constant threat of extinction as more and more the whole world is coming under universal influence of western powers, thru media i.e. Television, Internet other form of media. All eastern religions are trying hard to revive and reinforcing themselves rigorously. Islam since it has got himself in contradiction with west, has to take the maximum beatings from its enemy. It’s on fore front so all sects and school of thoughts within Islam are busy in fresh interpretation.
Sooner or later, we will have some scientific tools to assess the validity and authenticity of any verses or act of a person and these tools would not be coming from any Madarsa or any Islamic University either. Soon, we would be able to scan the earth and see what has happened in the past and who did it? Only these scientific tools will provide salvage to truth seekers, until then dialogue, debate, discussion will be as weaker as they have been in the past before people of FORCE. What if we believe TRUE all Hadith which Asadi want us to reject? Actually we have been doing so in the past. So, the picture is not perfect which we have believed in the past for 1400 years, did we question it? Now people started using reason and find uncomfortable with such stuff..process is on..it’s a welcome sign. We should explore other avenues as well.
Regards to everyone.
The mission statement of the International Quranic Center is lucid:
"The International Quranic Center aims to unite all the "Quranic people” and provide them a forum to interact with others in Islam and with followers of the other religions of the world. The term “Quranic People” provides a conceptual umbrella for Muslims who subscribe to the following beliefs: 1. The Quran is the sole source of Islam and its’ laws. 2. The Quran is comprehensive, completely sufficient in itself.3. The Quran was revealed to Mohamed to clarify all controversial and mysterious religious issues.4. The Quran -not the Hadith- was the prophet Mohamed’s only tradition and he was ordered to abide by it alone.5. Islam is the religion of peace, mercy, justice, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion.
These fundamental principles distinguish the Quranic People from those Muslims who follow the principles of the Wahabists and other Islamists who consider the central tenet of Islam to require violent Jihad."
The link was provided by Mr. Mubaschir Inayet in another discussion:
Actually there is no ‘trouble’ really, except that it is looking compounded. I wouldn’t like to pass on the blame to my educational institutions also, because none of them was a madarsa (and I was certainly exposed to every possible ideology, even as a young child). Yes Mr. Asif Merchant, it was a sarcasm and sarcasm can afford to be hyperbolic else, it would not be what it is, and as we all know sarcasm is a permitted way of literary expression, which is done by magnifying the contradictions.But dear friend, why do you blame Muslims and Islam more than their fair share? Please think of it. Muslims do with their children in terms of passing on their community sanskar, just as any other religionists do, or rather Muslims do less, otherwise there would not be so many deviant Muslims. If you are talking of bettering the quality of sanskar to be given to Muslim children where they learn to respect all other faiths and shun hatred etc, I am all with you. But isn’t that a different thing from what you are saying.By singling out Muslims, where they do not deserve to be singled out, you are showing signs of bias against Muslims. And you know we consider bias as a human weakness and do not encourage it even if it is against one’s own self or one’s family or one’s community. But your penchant for fairness is visible. It seems to me that you are more committed in your belief than at least I am about the superiority of our religion of birth – Islam (the solution lies in being less committed). If you have read my writings you will see – what do I do? I simply defend Islam after realizing at this age, that this ideology is worth defending against unreasonable onslaughts (I don’t defend it against reasonable criticisms).
It is possible that if I were born a Hindu or a Christian I may not have converted to Islam but I may not have defended those ideologies because of their socially non-utilitarian aspect (just a presumption, if the findings in my mind were such).
If you look at this model, this thing is already happening. Extremely intelligent men are born amongst Hindus and Christians but they may perhaps be finding it sufficiently not attractive or viable enough to defend their ideologies (In any case because they are dominant powers, their ideologies are hardly put to question by at least Muslims, except by some odd mavericks like Dr. Naik) . If you are worried about good men of other religions going to hell, you need not, in the light of following verse (You will see how the vice of accidental birth is taken care of):VERILY, those who have attained to faith [in this divine writ], as well as those who follow the Jewish faith, and the Christians, and the Sabians - all who believe in God and the Last Day and do righteous deeds - shall have their reward with their Sustainer; and no fear need they have, and neither shall they grieve. (Quran at 2.62 in the Muhammad Asad translation)Best wishes
Salaam alaikum Mr. Asadi,
Please answer my following questions:
If it is not mentioned in the quran, where did that information come from.
The trouble with most of your commentators is that they cannot see beyond a totalitarian type education. So, Mr. Haque in his sarcasm asks if Muslim children are to be kept away from religious education till the age of 21, etc. Actually, it is best if our children are exposed to all viewpoints, including agnosticism and athiesm. If after all they remain Muslims, then, and only then can they truly say that they are Muslims because of their Imaan.
Most of us are Muslims only because we are born in Muslim families.Imaan coimes afterwards, but the same person, even perhaps Mr. Haque would have used the same intlligence to proclaim the glories of Christianity or Hinduism if he had been born in one of those families.
Even the particular sect whose superiority is announced with so much authority is usually dependant on the accident of birth. Where is the truth in our beliefs if we allow this to be so?
The subject-matter is being discussed under two sub-heads under the head Islamic Ideology: one, ‘The Hadith Conspiracy and the Distortion of Islam’ and two, ‘Wrongs From the “Right” Bukhari’. I would like to continue the discussion under the thread ‘Wrongs From the “Right” Bukhari’ because of the consistency of comments there.
Mr.Haque, I am not averse to having learned clerics that people can turn to for guidance, provided such clerics have had broad liberal education, are not literalists or obscurantists, and are tolerant and humble and not dogmatic. We do not need blasphemy laws, apostasy laws or heresy laws. If people err, it is a matter between them and God. The validity of Hadiths is doubtful and many of them contradict each other. If the Quran is read with intelligence and common sense, and filtered through the wisdom of the ages, either by oneself or with the help of an aalim, that should be enough for our needs.
Mr.Rizvi, when I said, "We should have more faith in our Faith", I meant that we should not be afraid of freedom of speech and freedom of dissent,, and that we do not need blasphemy laws, apostasy laws or heresy laws.
Brother Asadi has made some valid points in his article. The supremacy of the Quran has never been in doubt, but does the author recommend scrapping the entire hadith collection, if not why?
Dr khalid Ahmad
Mr. Syed Rizvi, I think this is the second time you have brought out this issue of upbringing. I do hope you were brought up as a Muslim, then how come you became so critical. And would you not like to give credit to anybody else too with the ability to become equally critical? But ‘having the ability to be critical’ and ‘being critical’ are two things. It is perfectly possible to critically choose not to be critical as well.
Second point. Can you cite one community (there could be one stray family here and there) that does not pass on its values to its next generation? To my knowledge there is none (values can vary in design and depth), which I have gathered from books of sociology.
So the model according to Mr. Rizvi should be – let the Muslim girls and boys grow (Of course non-Muslims are exempted because it is Islam alone that has to be tested through the hellfire), till the age of 21 and let us hide from them any smell of any religion. Then on the 21st (Is the age okay?) birthday, we should present them with five or six packets of different religious ideologies (like Islam, Christianity, Brahminism, Budhimsm, Judaism, Sikhism –but why six only), and ask them to choose the one to their liking.
And of course to prove themselves rational and decent and civilized, the Muslims must bloody-well agree to the above model.
And if Muslims do not agree to this silly archaic model, then they are bloody fundamentalists!
Now, Mr. Asif Merchant suggests that Government and by implication Judiciary and legislature should have no say in the matter of interpretation. In fact there is no role of religious scholars (Pope) too. So it is left to - each man unto himself. Now let’s assume that all the five or six of us commenting here, come to a common conclusion, in our most enlightened ways, on how it can be done, then it will go against our thesis because we would have formed a school of thought, and that is prohibited by this theory. It is another point that even the five or six us cannot agree on the modality and so all this would remain an empty talk, but presuming that we five or six did present the formula to the rest of Muslims, what chance do we have of being heard? These are practical problems.
I think we have stuck ourselves in a bind, since we cannot find a practical solution to this complex problem and so the job of managing the interpretation remains unsettled.
I could not get the ‘social laws’ point. Are there such laws? If he is referring to social norms, then religion will be controlled by model ramps or devdasis with their mass appeal. It might still be a religion, but it will create a veritable hell on this earth as it has done in the past. It will certainly be better to have no religion at all, with no religious sanctity, so that there will be no religious worship, no religious place of worship and no mention of a religious idea. People will still be enamoured of their chosen dancers, singers, sex-performers, but at least those will be devoid of religious sanctity to be taken care by the magistrate and the police, when they overdo it. In fact an indulgent society may lay down the threshold of a law allowing them so much of leeway to romp, that they may never overdo it also.
An apt Agenda charted for the Twenty First Century!!