Rome wrote:You admit that the hadiths contradict each other, and that some contradict the Quran. So basically hadiths are not reliable. I know you are going to say they are only reliable once compared to the teachings of the Quran, but what if the Quran is absent on something the hadith speaks about?
Yes hadeeths are reliable if they pass the
litmus test including those that are Sahih as they were never tested in such a manner by the Quraan or supportive witness reports or to be sought conflicts with each other, rather they were selected based on
Isnad only.
If a hadeeth mentions something that is not indictated on the subject manner of the Quran, the weight of evidence from multiple witness ie reports on the subject matter holds weight to be reliable since the insad has already been verified. If it is a report only by one person which is not supported by others to back it up then it is not reliable.
Rome wrote:For example, what about Dogs in the home and pictures etc... the Quran to my knowledge doesnt specify anything about this, but the hadiths do.
Will you then automatically accept the hadith?
According to the Quran we are allowed to have dogs for economical reasons for hunting, guarding etc and not just for a pet. Numerous ahadeeth coincide with this.
Not have a dog in your house nor pictures has much merit.
1) Your house is your Mosque, Church, Temple etc where one prays, that should be kept clean, and free from any type of animated or life like images.
2) Dogs can disturb us when praying, as they can see thing we cannot see, such as Angels and Jinns.
We can only speak on this based on experience rather than trying to explain such a hadeeth which does not explain the reason why Angels dont come into houses where there is a dog or pictures ie animated life like pictures.
At my former office we had a guard dog. When ever I went into a room to go pray the dog would break his neck trying to get into the same room I was in and barking up a storm at the door. After I was finished the Dog would stop and go away minding his own business. The dog would be sleeping and would be awaken everytime when I go to make salah in an isolated room when making salah silently.
I have a Christian friend who has a dog in his house with pictures in the living room and kitchen. When I go to the guest room that has no images to make salah the dog does not bother me. Then one time his wife decorate the guest room with Christmas images in which I went out side to make salah. All of a sudden the dog, which could not see me, was ranting around in the house wanting get out side and was barking towards my direction. After making salah the dog stopped.
These are my personal experiences. Dogs can see things we cannot. Ever seen a dog barking into mid air or at a wall or chasing somthing you couldnt even see and thought the dog was going crazy ? These are Jinns playing with your pet and having a field day with him.
The hadeeth is backed by Quran on the issue of the dog only as a helper etc but not to have just for a pet. As to the Angels not coming into a house with animated life like Images can only be understood by a muslims whom has experienced the phenomina as your place of worship should be pure and clean of imagery as the Angels come down, as we believe, to join the worhsiper in Salah.
Rome wrote:And why is it Bukhari is considered the second holiest book in Sunni Islam if it contains hadiths that contradict each other?
The mistake that
some muslims make is they dont read what Bukhari said himself about his collection. There are many muslims and scholars who are cautious of ahadeeth and know there is a possiblity of a Sahih being bad.
http://www.mostmerciful.com/bukhari--mu ... adeeth.htm
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/bukhari.html
Rome wrote:I personally am not impressed with your defence regarding the Qurans integrity.
Well thats why you are a Christian and I am muslim. The statement can be said in reverse "
I personally am not impressed with Christian defence regarding the Bible's integrity." Which is why I am not a Christian, Jew etc .
Rome wrote:I didnt pick them from a website, I got those hadiths from a MUSLIM book. And there are many, many more.
There are many books written by muslims that doesnt mean some of them are right or wrong. Its take diligent study and labored tasks to root out what is reality. I doubt a Christian will have such ability in doing this with another religion without being influenced by prejudice of his/her own beliefs. Such a task are for those who are seeking to understand and looking for truth, not someone bound to their faith.
Rome wrote:I have located a hadith that says a goat ate part of a surah that was lost (wasted), do you reject this hadith? and if you do, on what grounds?
Which is reported by one person. Also we do not believe such a thing was lost as the only copy makes it silly to believe being the Quran was in such demand and stringent effort to be learnt and memorized.
Questions start flying on that hadeeths credability. How did they get such material ? Those are not the scribes who reported that. The scribes were the one that wrote down the Quran and distrubuted copies to the community for people to learn, teach, and memorized. The Quran was the main literal source for the Ummiyyin people to learn how to read and write in the time of muhammad.
So being such a narrator of hadeeth was not a scribe of the prophet how did they end up with the only copy as alleged to was supposed to be eaten by a goat ?
Criticism on that hadeeth can come at many angles to discredit it with numerous hadeeths in support to give it the LITMUS TEST which it cannot pass.
Liberate wrote:Let us refresh what this discussion is about:
I showed you a Bukhari hadith that states Zaid collected the koran from leaves barks, animal skin and the memory of men who knew it (qira/quraa).
Sure lets refresh, lets see how well you can refresh your delima memory.
Liberate wrote:I ask you again H2O if the qiraa were so numerous why did Zaid need to collect leaves and barks and animal skin on which the parts of the koran was written on to collate it, why didn't he just go to a few qiraa to have them recite what they knew,
Sounds like you cant make up your mind. He did collect it from memorizers. How much he collected is unknown, he himself knew a great portion of the Quran, but yet still gathered written materials. From this it sounds like he was confirming the written and oral sources with each other.
Liberate wrote:Ibn Kathir states that 450 of these memorisers died at the battle of Yamama a significant number
You have done such a great job before posting references up. Why cant you do it with Ibn Katheer on this issue and how Ibn Katheer came up with 450 when the hadeeths are saying 70. But before we ellaborate on this you said something else that we would like to hit with one stone.
Liberate wrote:You go into an irrelevant argument showing me a website url that says 70 of the ansar died at the battle of yamama it doesn't occur to you that the ansar and the memorisers at yamama were completely different people,
Absolutely not. The Qurraa who were killed in the battle of Yamama were the Ansar. There is NO hadeeth that reported 450, and we would like to see where Ibn Katheers source for 450 when the hadeeths narrate contrary.
Sahih Al-Bukhari
Volumn 005, Book 059, Hadith Number 405.
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Qatada : We do not know of any tribe amongst the 'Arab tribes who lost more martyrs than Al-Ansar, and they will have superiority on the Day of Resurrection. Anas bin Malik told us that seventy from the Ansar were martyred on the day of Uhud, and seventy on the day (of the battle of) Bir Ma'una, and seventy on the day of Al-Yamama. Anas added, "The battle of Bir Ma'una took place during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle and the battle of Al-Yamama, during the caliphate of Abu Bakr, and it was the day when Musailamah Al-Kadhdhab was killed."
Volumn 004, Book 052, Hadith Number 299.
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Anas : The people of the tribes of Ril, Dhakwan, 'Usiya and Bani Lihyan came to the Prophet and claimed that they had embraced Islam, and they requested him to support them with some men to fight their own people. The Prophet supported them with seventy men from the Ansar whom we used to call Al-Qurra' who (out of piety) used to cut wood during the day and pray all the night. So, those people took the (seventy) men till they reached a place called Bi'r-Ma'ana where they betrayed and martyred them. So, the Prophet invoked evil on the tribe of Ril, Dhakwan and Bani Lihyan for one month in the prayer.
Liberate wrote:not all ansar were qira, you even proved this with your definition of who the ansar were I was trying to show you that the companions of 70 ansar does not contradict the number of 450 MEMORISERS (not all were ansar some of those ansar accoridng to some sources were jews) according to Ibn Kathir.
And again,post for us Ibn Katheer and his reference of 450 Died. The Qurra that died were but Ansar.
Liberate" wrote:the logical answer according to the sources H2O is parts were lost, parts were missing the majority of memorisers were dead it was a salvage job, you are being spoon fed lies about this superior mental ability of the arabs who transmitted perfect copies en mass from an illiterate people.
A logical answer according to your bias and prejudice wantoness. There are plenty of people today that know entire Quran by heart. My Shiekh is a Hafeezh,and I have heard him recite Quran from a to z. So expressing that such a thing is impossible to be done is just one of your disbeliefs.
You showed hadeeth that have no support from another much less contradicted by others that have support.
Liberate wrote:You H2O state that you do not believe there is a koran in heaven
No wrong. This is what I said :
The Quran mentions more than on particular material it was recorded on which does not conform to the idea of a heavenly book (Singular) as mentioned called Ummul-Kitaab which in indeed the heavenly
The Quran, The Torah, Zuboor, and Injeel etc all came from Ummul-Kitaab in islamic beliefs. The material the Quran mentions were the actual materials the Quran was written on in the time of our Prophet(s.a.w.) which has nothing to do with a heavenly book which is not physical.
Liberate wrote:You H2O state that the verse Nay! This is a Glorious Qurโan, (Inscribed) in the Al-Luah Al-Mahfuz (The Preserved Tablet)! (Qurโan 85:21-22) does not refer to a heavenly book but to pages the koran was written on
Wrong I made no mention of such a thing: Lets recap your memory:
H2O wrote:..This we disagree with being that the verse as it is in connection with the various materials the Quran was recorded on such as Tablets and Pages (Parchments etc) as mentioned in the Quran are two different materials mentioned in plurality that cannot be allocated to Ummul-Kitab which is one heavenly book.
Where did you get out of our statement that Tablet is refering to pages ?
Liberate wrote:Which brings us straight back to our dilemma where are these pages?
"
Pages" can be refering to parchments the Quran was written on or any soft material for writting that was used.
"
Tablet" In Arabic is "
Lauh" can be either, board, plate, sheet, slab, or slate of hard materials used for writting to record ie "
Mahfoozh"
Liberate wrote:Why didn't Zaid use them during his collation of the koran
Lets see what the hadeeth says again.
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit al-Ansari, one of the scribes of the Revelation: Abu Bakr sent for me after the casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Qurra (memorizers of the Quran, were killed). Umar was present with Abu Bakr who said: "Umar has come to me and said, the people have suffered heavy casualties on the day of (the battle) of Yamama, and I am afraid that there will be some casualties among the Qurra at other places, whereby a large part of the Quran may be lost, unless you collect it (in one manuscript, or book)โฆso Abu Bakr said to me (Zaid bin Thabit): You are a wise young man and we do not suspect you (of telling lies or of forgetfulness) and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. Therefore, look for the Qur'an and collect it (in one manuscript)'โฆSo I started locating the Quranic material and collecting it from parchments, scapula, leafstalks of date palms and from the memories of men (who know it by heart)โฆ"
What were writting pages made of back then ?
Liberate wrote:Do you see the fallacy of having said koranic ayat when the koran hasn't been compiled yet? or do you accept that when it mentions the koran it is only talking of a partial koran?
The Quran was written within 23 years. As each revelation was revealed it was order by the prophet to his scribes to write it down. Selective material were being used such as tablets and pages ie boards, stones, parchments and palmleaves in which copies were distributed out into the muslim community to be learnt, taught, and memorized before the other revelation was revealed.
What are pages ? a Page or pages do not give the notion of a book. I think you need to refresh on your English.
PRONUNCIATION: AUDIO: pj KEY
NOUN: 1. a. A leaf or one side of a leaf, as of a book, letter, newspaper, or manuscript: tore a page from the book. b. The writing or printing on one side of a leaf. c. The type set for printing one side of a leaf.
2. A noteworthy or memorable event: a new page in history.
3. Computer Science A quantity of memory storage equal to between 512 and 4,096 bytes.
4. Computer Science A webpage.
5. pages A source or record of knowledge: in the pages of science.
VERB: Inflected forms: paged, pagยทing, pagยทes
Did you get it yet ?
Liberate wrote:Some parts H2O?
Which parts did you agree with?
Those which we addressed on this forum.
Liberate wrote:Fundamental parts like Jesus coming back you reject and reinterpret claiming Jesus suddenly died and was taken to some heavenly realm already dead (with no reason other than your own personal conjecture that no one can find the grave of Mary so Jesus must be buried somewhere near Mary) H2O your views on mainstream islam is alien to 95% of islam, and yet you act like are without error, even when your fellow muslims have confronted you over your very strange views.
Your percentage is a grave exageration. And the return of Jesus is NOT a fundamental belief in islam. Do you mind showing us where in the Quran it clearly states Jesus will return ? And do you mind posting up teh people that you claim confronted me whom from what I remember agree that the return of Jesus is symbolical not literal. Go ahead make you move and post the muslims you claim said such a thing. Again you exagerating.
Liberate wrote:Which you retranslate, reinterpret and claim you are correct regardless of what the 95% of islam says.
Do you have any idea what a retranslation is ? How could we do a restranslation if out dependant source is not a translation ? In that case all translation are restanslated.
Liberate wrote:Wait a minute what exactly can you convey in arabic that you are unable to convey in english? Does allah only tolerate arabic?
You cannot translate from one language into another word for word. You loose meaning as each language has its own unique character in expressive meaning.
Liberate wrote:I asked you to show me where you obtained the tafsir of samiy al mujalid? to this day you never showed anyone of us where you got that tafsir from, is this the attitude of someone who believes he has the onus on truth?
And it is obviously from those long over exausted threads you did get it.
Liberate wrote:How do you define if it has no support?
You are the critic not me. So tell us how you difine something that has not support and is contradicted by other hadeeth ?
Liberate wrote:if the koran doesn't mention it it is rejected just as you reject that Mohammed had sexual intercourse with an 8 yr old girl because the koran said marry al-nissa which you automatically take to mean young women therefore Mohammed couldn't have done it with an 8 yr old girl!! (disregarding the law of abrogation which somehow doesn't apply to you because??
It was rejected because the majority of sources contradict such a hadeeth of her being that age.
Liberate wrote:your madhzab says so?
No, mathamtics says so In which on the other thread we had this debate on we posted the links for you but it seems that wasnt enough.
Liberate wrote:which you have been unwilling to show us it's beliefs and which no one knows what it will cough up when faced with yet another immoral issue) with an attitude like that how can you possibly find fault with any immoral law or action of alledge prophet with a fill in the gaps the way you want it mentality.
It was something practice by people in general even in the USA. You are simply being cultural biased. Even if it was true I still would have no probelm with it cause it was something practice among all nations of people and religions.
Liberate wrote:This is not what you are doing you are contradicting esteemed scholars and imams, and re translating the koran according to what you want it to say contrary to what those who were closer to Mohammed believed
You make it sound like you read ALL scholars work. Most of Scholar work is in Arabic in which the minority are in englsih. So how could you make a statement when you your self are not a scholars to have read the scholars works ? We have more access to what scholars say adn you do not. You sources are limited to waht is available online ours are not.
Liberate wrote:Not supported how?
Did you search for it?
Did your pre conceived notion already disregard it before comparison?
We have Sahih
Al-Bukhari 9 volume set and
Sahih Muslim ,
MishkatulMasabih, and
RiyadhusSalaheen in their Arabic that make no mention of cuh a thing by another reporter.
Imam Nawawi does not include hadeeth that have no collaborative support by other hadeeth which was disregarded by him.
Liberate wrote:If you cannot follow the edicts of a religion other than reinterpret it to your own liking, maybe the religion is not for you.
The Edicts of our religion does not teach us to follow things blindly by accepting them without question if it is not understood. The religion is all for me, do you have another considered religion ? Please dont make me laugh, I would rather be shot than to believe in what you believe in.
Liberate wrote: would really like to know who is allowing your free lance translation and which sect they represent
Do you know what a
free lance translation is ? I dont think you do. Your just using words that have no relevance to the alleged. Sound to me your copying what I said about
Apple Pie whom has no comparison to us in his attempted translations.
Liberate wrote:Wow is all I have to say you mean you subjected yourself to authority???anyone reading your posts would get the feeling you regard yourself as the greatest koranic translator, reinterpreter and hadith rejecter this side of the atlantic even if Mohammed himself was to come to you and say this is what said verse means you are more likely to tell him to shut up that he doesn't understand arabic.
WE have done that which other translators have not done. Put their works up for criticism and test by other scholars and to work with others rather than independantly to get back a contructive imput on the project.
And I am only a hadeeth rejecter when a hadeeth does not pass the Litmus Test ir confirmation from Quran and other isnad ahadeeth.
A hadeeth Rejecter such as the Rahsad Khalifah possie do not believe in Hadeeth period and all together. How does this apply to us ?
Liberate wrote:Since you wrote it from the top of your head (could it be possible that you made an error H2O? are you this conceited?). The neutral translator saw al qAhwatu in what you typed if you think you are not the one who might have made a mistake against a bot when you are the one who said you wrote it off the top of your head, then someone needs a lesson in humility, I find it hard to believe you will subject your koranic translations to any scholar with an attitude like this.
No we did not make a mistake. Your bot transltor must be really stupid and must be seeing things.
โููุงูู ููุงูู ุฑูุณูููู ุงูููููู โ โุตููููู ุงูููููู ุนููููููู ููุณููููู
ู โ โุจููููู ุงููุฅูุณูููุงู
ู ุนูููู ุฎูู
ูุณู ุดูููุงุฏูุฉู ุฃููู ููุง ุฅููููู ุฅููููุง ุงูููููู ููุฃูููู โ โู
ูุญูู
ููุฏูุง โ โุฑูุณูููู ุงูููููู ููุฅูููุงู
ู ุงูุตููููุงุฉู ููุฅููุชูุงุกู ุงูุฒููููุงุฉู ููุงููุญูุฌูู ููุตูููู
ู ุฑูู
ูุถูุงูู โ
Do you mind telling us where you see
al qAhwatu, to be mentioned. Get some help you going to need it. We did not mention
al qahwat = coffee in our statement.
Liberate wrote:In other words you have no proof and are unwilling to provide any proof that Mushin Khan's translation of Bukhari vol 9 book 89 number 309 included parentheses.
Already provided the proof from teh Arabic which was confirmed by a Arabic speaking Christian and confirmed by other translators.
H2O wrote:te]Without the clarification in bold above H2O you are trying to pass off both threads as relating to the same discussion when you told us in July you became a haneef because of the prophecy of Saudi oil in the koran, and over two months later you then decide to find circular reasons as to why Mohammed is a prophet...in other words Mohammed is a prophet because the koran which he did not write didn't see a word of and is recorded in several muslim traditions as having undergone several amendments from what Mohammed alledgedly said says he is a prophet without a prophecy of alledge prophet...
Again I said :
H2O wrote:Omega I havent forgot about this verse. As a matter of fact this was the verse I used to test the Quran with as final confirmation before becoming a Haneef. Now lets put it to the test.
H2O later wrote:So in my case, not speaking for no other muslim but my self and those whom may agree with me, how does Muhammad qualify as a Prophet of ุงูููููู G-D that satisfies me ?
1) The logical consistancy of the Quran.
2) The rational and challenge it gives
3) The wisdom and reasoning it applies
4) Its natural aspects it delivers that conforms with nature it self
5) The obedience it asks toward ุงูููููู with reverence and love.
6) How to live in submission to ุงูููููู with balance in life
7) How to treat others as you would want to be treated by another
Its message is direct, blunt, and to the point
9) The belief in ุงูููููู oneness and the uniqueness of his divinity and the exalted manner of His sublime majesty
10) The belief in the prophets adn that ุงูููููู sent prophets to all nations of people
11) The belief in angels, scriptures, the life after death, hell, paradise, judgement day, and the resurrection.
This is how I came to believe the Quran was from Allah qualifying Muhammad as Prophet. Needless to say my belief in him as a Prophet was not sparked by the prophecies or Scientific indications of unseen realities through out the Quran. These things merely increased my belief but was not the cause or the root of it.
H2O addressing OMEGA wrote:Allah said to the muslim Arabs in the time of Muhammad that HE will soon enrich them. And it doesnt take a 12th grader to know the arabs were a poor nation at that time in which the Biazantine and Persian empires didnt dominate them. When did the Arab muslim of that region become RICH ? Who supplies the 1/3 of the world's oil and has the LARGEST oil reserves in the world. Is not Saudi Arabia one of the richest countries in the world that is now a GOLD MIND ?
H2O wrote:Your right( Liberate) 9:28 doesnt mention any about oil. It mention a prophecy of the Arabs of the Region becoming rich, in which after the establishment of, they became rich, without it they would probably be just like afghanistan.
And again and again. You just dont have enough confidence in your self to have to keep on repeating youself, or is it you just like being a revolving door ?
Liberate wrote:Have a look at this thread have a look at the number of times I have asked you who gave Uthman the authority to burn the 7 readings and how many times you have side stepped the issue (even in this response)
What will answering this question solve ? Who said uthman burnt the seven reading ?
Volumn 006, Book 061, Hadith Number 515. (Bukhari and same reported Muslim)
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Yusuf bin Mahk : While I was with 'Aisha, the mother of the Believers, a person from Iraq came and asked, "What type of shroud is the best?" 'Aisha said, "May Allah be merciful to you! What does it matter?" He said, "O mother of the Believers! Show me (the copy of) your Qur'an," She said, "Why?" He said, "In order to compile and arrange the Qur'an according to it, for people recite it with its Suras not in proper order." 'Aisha said, "What does it matter which part of it you read first? (Be informed) that the first thing that was revealed thereof was a Sura from Al-Mufassal, and in it was mentioned Paradise and the Fire. When the people embraced Islam, the Verses regarding legal and illegal things were revealed. If the first thing to be revealed was: 'Do not drink alcoholic drinks.' people would have said, 'We will never leave alcoholic drinks,' and if there had been revealed, 'Do not commit illegal sexual intercourse, 'they would have said, 'We will never give up illegal sexual intercourse.' While I was a young girl of playing age, the following Verse was revealed in Mecca to Muhammad: 'Nay! But the Hour is their appointed time (for their full recompense), and the Hour will be more grievous and more bitter.' (54.46) Sura Al-Baqara (The Cow) and Surat An-Nisa (The Women) were revealed while I was with him." Then 'Aisha took out the copy of the Qur'an for the man and dictated to him the Verses of the Suras (in their proper order).
What was burnt were the copies of the Quran that were not in their proper order. As khaleefah he had the authority to establish a copy in its correct order according to what they learnt from the Prophet.
Liberate wrote:All I want you to do is apply rationality to your scriptures it does not stand up to the cold light of reason given the evidence in the koran and the context of those ayats in the ahadith.
Already done. G-D is one G-D not three that are one or one that is three. Nor did he get beat up by his creatures, died, neither tempted by the Devil and had him take him fro a joy ride or went to the bathroom, ate food.
If you call that worshipong such a man to be G-D to be rational then thats why your a Christian and I am a muslim
Liberate wrote:if you want to defend your faith and at the same time criticize us for not seeing the koran through your very tinted glasses you are not doing yourself any favors but making yourself look very dishonest indeed.
And I will die defending what we believe in. The only reason they left cause its not worth it, and they do have lives to attend to. Why dont you try going to an Islamic forum and see how long you last there ?
I think I have went over board in waisting our my time with you. You want me to apply rational to my beliefs? Already done that to know Islam teaches Jesus is not G-D, and that G-D is not a man or anthing that is created and their will be no return of a Messiah. But yet you say to apply rational but then try to critcize us for applying the same rational against the foke lore of a man that is suppose to return that is not supported by Quran muchless the ambiguous and inconsistancies of Hadeeths ? How silly. It shows that much rational was being used to weed out what was influenced into muslims tradition after our Prophet(s.a.w.) was taken. Enough rational to know that G-D is not a Triune god, that he doesnt regret or becomes Jealous.