[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Insaniyat: *
.....
Why dont any one answer my question... I have asked Several times and have been answering about my question...; Now for a minute
Mr. BIHARI BABU AND SMOOTH GUY can anyone tell me about what does the hadith i posted apply
Is taraweeh a bidat of 20 rakats follows by sunni pals... and if it is DOES UMAR HAS THE RIGHT TO INTRODUCE BIDAT........
[/QUOTE]
Insaniyat, in Sunnis, the definition of "Bidaa" goes like
"If something is NOT done by Prophet PBUH, and his companions, tabiyeen and taba-tabiyeen, then it is a bidaa".
I know it is "debatable" or "questionable". Anyone can comeup with their own definition to justify their "additions". But this is what I believe to be true in Sunnis, thats why "20 rakats" which sounds to be a huge problem for many is followed because initiated by Prophet PBUH's companion.
The hadith you are about to post is NOT from Sahih al-Bukhari. Have you ever read al-Bukhari? Obviously not.
Al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, as per your reference, does NOT mention a chain of transmission for this report. So how can it stand as evidence?
It has already been shown in another thread through a hadith which you yourself posted that in fact people were already in the habit of praying tarawih even AFTER the Prophet’s (s) death and BEFORE 'Umar (r) united them behind a single reciter (a practice which in itself was known and sanctioned during the Prophet’s (s) lifetime).
Answer to your Question asked in the Header of the post.
They can call themselves Muslim just the same way every other Muslim can call himself/herself a Muslim. By giving a self thought justification for what ever they are doing is right same as WE all do.
Same as the web-site you quoted and many other Sunni websites which are there with only one hidden punch line "WE ARE THE DADDY OF ISLAMIC UMMAH, LISTEN TO US" but then again thats the only purpose of every secteraian web-site.
If we despite doing every possible ****ed up thing still Muslims then my dear Insaniyat they are aswell. (Ahhhh acidity kills!!! never visit these sites while having food .... or is it other way around??)
And Now** Bihari Babu ** the only thing which makes more sense in your posts is your signature ( But I didn't even get that); I know you are thinking that I'm dumb ( Dont worry I'm thinking same), I just wanna know in accordance with your signautre "Are all Biharis THAT FAT or is it ONLY YOU?"
And as we all know Iran is doing 'talking talking and talking' only. Haven't done anything good for Ummah. It is very easy to issue a fatwa and its other thing to do something practical.
What "ummah" smooth guy? Please tell me, I'd like to know. Don't tell me its the same one in which self-appointed guardians of faith decide who is muslim and who isn't or those that legitimise the killings of other muslims? Or maybe you just want to let me know what saudia arabia has done for the great ummah?!
Insaniyat, in Sunnis, the definition of "Bidaa" goes like
"If something is NOT done by Prophet PBUH, and his companions, tabiyeen and taba-tabiyeen, then it is a bidaa".
I know it is "debatable" or "questionable". Anyone can comeup with their own definition to justify their "additions". But this is what I believe to be true in Sunnis, thats why "20 rakats" which sounds to be a huge problem for many is followed because initiated by Prophet PBUH's companion.
[/QUOTE]
Changez bahi...... following things followed by companions is sure debate able.... i mean they don't get wahi's, Islam says religoin is perfect ... so anything introduced by them after the death of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. is sure a bidat... i mean is it implying that nauzubillah they are same as Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H.
Iqbal sahab… I am not talking here about who introduced Taraweeh… I am asking about the hadeeth.. that was in the book… and it caught my eye from a website which was using such hadith’s to prove that taraweeh should be prayed 20 rakat because that how UMAR not PROPHET MOHAMMAD P.B.U.H. introduced it… No one here was talking about who introduced it… i was asking lets say if Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. introduced it and mentioned the number of rakats to be prayed. Does Umar has any right to change the number of rakat in so called the sunnah of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H and make it his own Sunnah…
I mean in other words is it implying nazubillah according to sunnis he is more superficial then Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H to change around his teaching???
Bihari Babu you seemed to be have sole faith in your books may be you can help us enlighten better… Or may be i am sure you can cook up some lie excuses again as usual ???
I am not talking here about who introduced Taraweeh... I am asking about the hadeeth.. that was in the book...
[/quote]
To be honest, it's blatantly obvious that you don't really know what you are asking for. You began, in another thread, by pointing the finger at 'Umar (r) for re-introducing tarawih after the Prophet (s), in your view, had stopped it. Then when it was shown from a hadith that you yourself posted that people were in fact continuing to pray tarawih even after the Prophet's (s) death - in other words the Prophet (s) had never stopped it - and before 'Umar (r) united them behind a single reciter you now, in this thread, want to blame him not for re-introducing tarawih per se but for re-introducing it with 20 rakats. Do you actually have a consistent trail of thought on this issue or are you just making it up as you go along?
If you recall, i did ask you (twice) in our previous discussion just what your objection regarding tarawih was. As usual, you just skated around the question.
And by the way, the hadith you previously posted is still NOT in al-Bukhari and al-Muttaqi al-Hindi's citation, as per your reference, still does NOT have a chain of transmission for the report. But i guess you probably couldn't care less about these FACTS as they might divert you from your "get 'Umar (r) at all costs" agenda.
[quote] I mean in other words is it implying nazubillah according to sunnis he is more superficial then Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H to change around his teaching?????
[/quote]
It isn't implying anything of the sort. You assume that the number of rakats ordered by 'Umar (r) differs from the number performed by the Prophet (s) - an assumption for which you've presented NO evidence so far other than a chainless report from a book that you've probably never seen let alone read. And please don't go putting your own baseless conclusions into the mouths of Sunnis, it'll just make you look even more foolish!
Like i said I am not the scholar to have all the books in my hand... and even though if it is in the book... Its not hard to tell its a very weak thing... But in one of my earlier posts i asked you who are they referring it tooo... who is the one who claimed that... I am sure its not one of the teachings of Imams or Prophet and also Quran contradicts it.. so it can be ignored
Now how about answering my quesitons bihari babu... I did my part. Why are you sunnis so reluctant to answers questions raised to you... How about telling me now... about the hadith for Taraweeh... Why are you ignoring it...
Why dont any one answer my question... I have asked Several times and have been answering about my question...; Now for a minute
Mr. BIHARI BABU AND SMOOTH GUY can anyone tell me about what does the hadith i posted apply
Is taraweeh a bidat of 20 rakats follows by sunni pals... and if it is DOES UMAR HAS THE RIGHT TO INTRODUCE BIDAT...
ANY ANSWERS.....
[/QUOTE]
salam
TARAWEEH
i have posted it several times that we sunnis believe that if a sahabi did something and all the other sahabah accepted it then it is considrd as authentic as sahabah will not agree on any thing that is unislamic.......sahbah were the best judge of islam they were the companions of rasul allah s.a.w .............
as far as shias r concerned u believe that all apart from 4 sahbah all other sahbah (nauzobillah)became murtid.....{rauza kafi-pg254 vol.8-"after hazoor s.a.w all sahbah became murtid apart from MAQDAD,ABUZAR GHAFARI,SALMAN FARSI,and ahlebait ......}(rawah baqir)
if sunnis say that hadrat ali and all other shia imams followed sunni believe all their life u say that they were doing taqiyyah ....thats why its hard to prove something to u people........
QURAN
bhai u know what does this means ........thareef topics included in ur books ......what will u say about the surahs that were inclded in ur books saying they were in quran we sunii removed it (wlayat..naurain)what r their justification....
whole book written onthe assumption that quran is not complete in its present form and u say that it can be ignored...........
i think u know this basic assumption of islamic fiqah that one who cosiders a kaffir as a muslim ,he is also a kaffir......?
these people r the best known scholrs of shia faith .....khomeni gave thier refrence in his books many times....
wamaallina illal balagh
TARAWEEH
i have posted it several times that we sunnis believe that if a sahabi did something and all the other sahabah accepted it then it is considrd as authentic as sahabah will not agree on any thing that is unislamic.......sahbah were the best judge of islam they were the companions of rasul allah s.a.w .............
[/QUOTE]
Ok.... Based on this assumption Read what does sahaba Abu Bakr has to say about himself when he became a caliph
Ibn Sa`d in his al-Tabaqat (Leiden, 1322), iii, part 1, p.129 reports that in a sermon that Abu Bakr delivered after taking charge of the caliphate, he declared, "I am only a man, and I am not better than any of you. So obey me when I go straight and correct me when you see me deviate. You should know that (at times) I am overwhelmed by a devil, so when you see me in a state of rage keep away from me." Similar statements by him have been reported by:
al-Tabari in his Ta'rikh (Cairo, 1357), ii, 440;
Ibn Qutaybah in al-'Imamah wa al-siyasah (Matbaat al-Futuh al-'Adabiyyah, 1331), 6;
al-Haythami in Majma al-zawa'id (1352), v, 183;
al_Muttaqi in Kanz al-`ummal (Hyderabad, 1312), ii, 136;
and others.
So you would advice you to follows Bidat's introduced by the sahabas... when some sahabas themselves, who claim they are overwhelmed by devil.... How can one be best judge who says that.... you want to follow people who can't even trust themselves..............? Did Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. asked us to follow his companions after him????
on what bases do you follow them??????
To be honest, it's blatantly obvious that you don't really know what you are asking for. You began, in another thread, by pointing the finger at 'Umar (r) for re-introducing tarawih after the Prophet (s), in your view, had stopped it. Then when it was shown from a hadith that you yourself posted that people were in fact continuing to pray tarawih even after the Prophet's (s) death - in other words the Prophet (s) had never stopped it - and before 'Umar (r) united them behind a single reciter you now, in this thread, want to blame him not for re-introducing tarawih per se but for re-introducing it with 20 rakats. Do you actually have a consistent trail of thought on this issue or are you just making it up as you go along?
If you recall, i did ask you (twice) in our previous discussion just what your objection regarding tarawih was. As usual, you just skated around the question.
And by the way, the hadith you previously posted is still NOT in al-Bukhari and al-Muttaqi al-Hindi's citation, as per your reference, still does NOT have a chain of transmission for the report. But i guess you probably couldn't care less about these FACTS as they might divert you from your "get 'Umar (r) at all costs" agenda.
It isn't implying anything of the sort. You assume that the number of rakats ordered by 'Umar (r) differs from the number performed by the Prophet (s) - an assumption for which you've presented NO evidence so far other than a chainless report from a book that you've probably never seen let alone read. And please don't go putting your own baseless conclusions into the mouths of Sunnis, it'll just make you look even more foolish!
Iqbal
[/QUOTE]
Iqbal the view i pointed finger at was based on the info on the site replies by sunni alim i am sure you must have read that site yourself....
read this post i am not saying who introduced taraweeh... I was just asking about the hadith i posted... but i guess if to you sunnis if a hadith is not in Al-Bukhari.. other books are irrelevant is that right???
Can you please tell me how many rakats do you actually pray in taraweeh just for my info?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Insaniyat: *
Changez bahi...... following things followed by companions is sure debate able.... i mean they don't get wahi's, Islam says religoin is perfect ... so anything introduced by them after the death of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. is sure a bidat... i mean is it implying that nauzubillah they are same as Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H.
[/QUOTE]
Insaniyat, you agree that taraweeh was introduced by Prophet Mohammed PBUH, but you don't agree with 20? or you don't agree with "taraweeh in congregation (jamaat)"?
Insaniyat, you agree that taraweeh was introduced by Prophet Mohammed PBUH, but you don't agree with 20? or you don't agree with "taraweeh in congregation (jamaat)"?
[/QUOTE]
To tell you the truth man... right now i don't know anything... there are so many things i've been reading in your books....
One says Prophet stopped the congregation prayer gettin scared it will be obligatory then Umar introduced it back claiming what a bidat he introduced
One says Umar introduced 20 rakats of taraweeh, which was never prayed before...???
too many things here... thats why i am asking you all how many rakats are there in the taraweeh???? when Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H Introduced it?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Insaniyat: *
....
too many things here... thats why i am asking you all how many rakats are there in the taraweeh???? when Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H Introduced it?
[/QUOTE]
To my knowledge, Prophet Mohammed PBUH held taraweeh randomnly (not all nights) and there was no number fixed, so some scholars said that 8 was "more" some said "20". I am not very sure if Hazrat Umar RA really decided a number "8" or "20", but he did decide to make it a "regular" and "organised" thing. And BTW, I don't think it is "mandatory" at all. So arguing/discussing over a "non-mandatory" thing really makes no use of your or mine time and energy.
I am curious, why every discussion here is directed ultimately towards taraweeh. Is this merely used to side-track from the main discussion at hand?
As far as I know, "taraweeh" is a gift of Ramadan. You don't have to pray it. You do it because you want to and because it gives you added sawaab, which multiplies in the month of Ramadan. So exactly why are we making such a fuss over it here?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *
I am curious, why every discussion here is directed ultimately towards taraweeh.
As far as I know, "taraweeh" is a gift of Ramadan. You don't have to pray it. You do it because you want to. So whats the big deal here?
[/QUOTE]
And May be you should ask yourself... when a thread was open secretarian killing.... Why was it diverted to if Quran is complete on or not based on some source ... which is so weak because it contradicts Quran....
May be you should see who brought the things from the questions raised from a closed thread of mutah up....
All these new things were introduced in the thread before taraweeh even came up..... and all you got curious was why did taraweeh came up????????????
Thats whats making me curious, of all the new things introduced in the forumm.... why did your eye catch taraweeh only when so many of the topic things were introduced before even taraweeh came up??????? Sounds very biased to me....
As far as taraweeh is a gift or as Changez mentioned it is just a sunnah which should be either followed or not... the big deal that concerns me is if its a bidat... or as to say if taraweeh introduced by Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. is not 20 rakats then its not a sunnah of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. and a bidat or in other words sunnah of Umar to be followed... and i guess we shouldnt do bidat now should we faisal bahi.....
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Insaniyat: *
Thats whats making me curious, of all the new things introduced in the forumm.... why did your eye catch taraweeh only when so many of the topic things were introduced before even taraweeh came up??????? Sounds very biased to me....
[/QUOTE]
Insaniyat,
I am actually quite tired of your senseless posts, where anytime, I make a general question or a general request, you take it as if someone has attacked you personally. And then you complain about "bias". Where the heck is "bias"? Bias will be if your posts get deleted. If your threads get locked. If you are restricted from posting. Thats bias. Get it? Abhi tau you have not seen an inch of bias. Cz there is none.
Get it out of your system that just because someone asked a simple question, they are biased against you.
If you want to discuss taraweeh... go ahead. Discuss all you want. Discuss it for a day, for a week, for a lifetime. If you have time to hash the same arguments day in and day out, be it. No one is stopping you.
I am actually quite tired of your senseless posts, where anytime, I make a general question or a general request, you take it as if someone has attacked you personally. And then you complain about "bias". Where the heck is "bias"? Bias will be if your posts get deleted. If your threads get locked. If you are restricted from posting. Thats bias. Get it? Abhi tau you have not seen an inch of bias. Cz there is none.
Get it out of your system that just because someone asked a simple question, they are biased against you.
If you want to discuss taraweeh... go ahead. Discuss all you want. Discuss it for a day, for a week, for a lifetime. If you have time to hash the same arguments day in and day out, be it. No one is stopping you.
[/QUOTE]
senseless post.... I didnt say someone attacked me... All i showed was an irony... and it wasnt the first time...Before in one the forums earlier someone posted a question off the topic and when i answered it ... you asked me to stick to the topic eventhough i just answered the question.... thats what i call you being biased ..... And now this time people raised so many issues that were off the topic and of them the most of senseless one was the one where bihari babu want to prove Quran is incomplete based on some book... and not to mention all the senseless lies he have been saying....thats what my definition of sensless post....
I dont know what do you call the irony of you ignoring all the other off the topic questions raised before taraweeh... and all your eye caught was the taraweeh discussion??????????? and not some senseless discussions?
How come asking questions regarding taraweeh is a sensless post to you... Are you trying to say taraweeh is something senseless to start with? or can you please tell me what part of my post was senseless to you?