1
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1]
2
Cults & Deviant Beliefs / Re: rebuttal on Ahlul Quran's Claim?
« on: May 21, 2016, 01:48:17 PM »
I recognize the efforts that many of these scholars put forth to try to discern the truth from the many sayings and practices that developed after the prophet Muhammad passed (saas). However, the problem is that they made obligatory what should not have been made obligatory. As I said, mash-hoor is not mutawaatir. And sound Ahaad are not either. Practices and sayings that are not demonstrably mutawaatir and Quranic simultaneously cannot be made obligatory upon any Muslim. And I cannot just trust the scholars blindly. It's funny that it's hard to determine if the work of Imam Abu Haneefah and Imam Malik were given correctly recorded from them, as they did not actually author their own works. So it is difficult to tell if what we have inherited from them is mutawaatir and true or fabricated by their self-proclaimed students.
3
Cults & Deviant Beliefs / Re: rebuttal on Ahlul Quran's Claim?
« on: May 21, 2016, 01:39:16 PM »
Peace,
I have yet to see tawaatur being proven in these methods. Imam Malik saw that the people of Medina did certain things in their majority, but it seems that he did not get further than mash-hoor in what he put forward. If you read about him you will learn about MANY scholars in Medina during his time who held many different opinions.
I have also seen a lot of inconsistency in what is considered tawaatur. Sometimes Ahaad hadeeth that can be attributed to a number of sahaabah is considered mutawaatir, even if there are common narrators in the chains that coincide or could have colluded. These hadeeth are often not really mutawaatir. The concept of mutawaatir is flawless and the hadeeth that all scholars agree upon as being mutawaatir are only a handful. Much of what is mash-hoor or seemingly widespread is wrongly called mutawaatir. Some may assume that because all Muslims or schools of thought agree upon something that that thing is mutawaatir. That is mistaken. The thing is mash-hoor but not mutawaatir. Mutawaatir has to be clearly demonstrated and that is where the scholars lack. I have not seen them clearly demonstrated tawaatur, but rather settling for mash-hoor or other "acceptable" aahaad hadeeth that conform what seem to be preconceptions or alread established practices or beliefs.
In a way you have highlighted the problem...too many methodologies, and too may concepts of what is obligatory and what is not based on hadeeth. Much is said about these scholars but none of their methodologies are made fully clear. Ijmaa' is not mutawaatir, and neither is mash-hoor. When that is taken into consideration it seems that much of the consistency of the methodologies fade away.
I have yet to see tawaatur being proven in these methods. Imam Malik saw that the people of Medina did certain things in their majority, but it seems that he did not get further than mash-hoor in what he put forward. If you read about him you will learn about MANY scholars in Medina during his time who held many different opinions.
I have also seen a lot of inconsistency in what is considered tawaatur. Sometimes Ahaad hadeeth that can be attributed to a number of sahaabah is considered mutawaatir, even if there are common narrators in the chains that coincide or could have colluded. These hadeeth are often not really mutawaatir. The concept of mutawaatir is flawless and the hadeeth that all scholars agree upon as being mutawaatir are only a handful. Much of what is mash-hoor or seemingly widespread is wrongly called mutawaatir. Some may assume that because all Muslims or schools of thought agree upon something that that thing is mutawaatir. That is mistaken. The thing is mash-hoor but not mutawaatir. Mutawaatir has to be clearly demonstrated and that is where the scholars lack. I have not seen them clearly demonstrated tawaatur, but rather settling for mash-hoor or other "acceptable" aahaad hadeeth that conform what seem to be preconceptions or alread established practices or beliefs.
In a way you have highlighted the problem...too many methodologies, and too may concepts of what is obligatory and what is not based on hadeeth. Much is said about these scholars but none of their methodologies are made fully clear. Ijmaa' is not mutawaatir, and neither is mash-hoor. When that is taken into consideration it seems that much of the consistency of the methodologies fade away.
4
Cults & Deviant Beliefs / Re: rebuttal on Ahlul Quran's Claim?
« on: May 21, 2016, 11:01:39 AM »
Wa Alaykumu-salaam,
Thank you for responding to me with courtesy and intelligence. I would go a bit further and question the tawaatur of even the number of prayers (5 being based on hadeeth Aahaad associated with the mi'raaj). It is very true that the skeleton of the salaat could be tawaatur, however as far as I have seen it has only been shown to be mash-hoor. Lisanul-Arab has a portion that defines a rak'ah, in its meaning of unit of post-Quranic Salaat it states that the bowing of rukoo' does not have to be made, although most consider it makrooh. I am looking for further evidence/proof of the tawaatur of the formula of the rak'ah for Salaah as we know it. The 5 prayers seem to be mash-hoor (as with most practices assumed to be sunnah 3amaliyyah) but both the Quran and Ibn Katheer conform more with 2 prayers a day before the Ahaad hadeeth associated with Salaat after the Mi'raaj. I also watched a Hanafi scholar on youtube talk about how some commands attributed to the last prophet in hadeeth are interpreted as recommendations (like where he is recorded to have said in a saheeh narration 'Wear white clothes') and others are taken as commands that must be followed. This approach seems highly hypocritical and disingenuous where scholars arbitrarily determine what is a command and what is a recommendation using very flimsy logic. Not to mention that each scholars or group of scholars studies of jarh wa ta'deel can change the status of a hadeeth in any given book of "saheeh" traditions. For instance I have heard that Bukhari did not leave a jarh and ta'deel study or methodology for the hadeeth he declared a saheeh. Other scholars did this for him later.
What is the name of the Pakistani scholar? I have no problem with scrapping "beloved traditions" as long as we do not make obligations where Allah has not made them, and the true religion of the Qur'an is not distorted. At this point is seems TOO many distortions have been made in the name of acquiring and adhering to our last prophet's sunnah using hadeeth which are generally agreed upon as possibly being false, and assuming that such hadeeth are so representative of the last prophet that they are equal to or superior to what the Quran seems to be saying to us through its words and wordings.
Salaam,
Din Yaqin
Thank you for responding to me with courtesy and intelligence. I would go a bit further and question the tawaatur of even the number of prayers (5 being based on hadeeth Aahaad associated with the mi'raaj). It is very true that the skeleton of the salaat could be tawaatur, however as far as I have seen it has only been shown to be mash-hoor. Lisanul-Arab has a portion that defines a rak'ah, in its meaning of unit of post-Quranic Salaat it states that the bowing of rukoo' does not have to be made, although most consider it makrooh. I am looking for further evidence/proof of the tawaatur of the formula of the rak'ah for Salaah as we know it. The 5 prayers seem to be mash-hoor (as with most practices assumed to be sunnah 3amaliyyah) but both the Quran and Ibn Katheer conform more with 2 prayers a day before the Ahaad hadeeth associated with Salaat after the Mi'raaj. I also watched a Hanafi scholar on youtube talk about how some commands attributed to the last prophet in hadeeth are interpreted as recommendations (like where he is recorded to have said in a saheeh narration 'Wear white clothes') and others are taken as commands that must be followed. This approach seems highly hypocritical and disingenuous where scholars arbitrarily determine what is a command and what is a recommendation using very flimsy logic. Not to mention that each scholars or group of scholars studies of jarh wa ta'deel can change the status of a hadeeth in any given book of "saheeh" traditions. For instance I have heard that Bukhari did not leave a jarh and ta'deel study or methodology for the hadeeth he declared a saheeh. Other scholars did this for him later.
What is the name of the Pakistani scholar? I have no problem with scrapping "beloved traditions" as long as we do not make obligations where Allah has not made them, and the true religion of the Qur'an is not distorted. At this point is seems TOO many distortions have been made in the name of acquiring and adhering to our last prophet's sunnah using hadeeth which are generally agreed upon as possibly being false, and assuming that such hadeeth are so representative of the last prophet that they are equal to or superior to what the Quran seems to be saying to us through its words and wordings.
Salaam,
Din Yaqin
5
Cults & Deviant Beliefs / Re: rebuttal on Ahlul Quran's Claim?
« on: May 20, 2016, 07:10:35 PM »
To clarify I agree with the majority orthodox, shia and ibadhi opinon that Ahaad hadeeth can be true. Howevever, I disagree that they are obligatory upon the Muslim IN ANY FASHION, because it is almost unanimously recognized that these hadeeth can be false and that they are conjectural and only convey doubt.
Pages: [1]
What's new | A-Z | Discuss & Blog | Youtube
