This topic was raised in another thread, so I thought to open a thread on it to discuss it a bit furhter. I don’t know much about the history regarding this topic, so maybe I’ll learn a little.
Sahabis fought amongst eachother after the death of Prophet Muhammad (sws) over what Hadith were valid. This leads some to be uncertain of the authenticity of many Hadith. (Please correct me if I’m wrong).
The reason the Sahabis fought was because there was a conflict in what they believed to be accurate Hadith. In essence, they were fighting for the sake of the message of Islam to be conveyed properly. Their sole mission was to get accross a completely unadulterated message (narrations of the life of the Prophet). Why would the Sahabis, being devout Muslims, try to corrupt the messege of Islam by adding in invalid Hadith? They were God-fearing, yea?
They were not fighting over hadith. The hadith were recorded well after the 4rth caliph's time if I'm not mistaken. I don't think they were recorded in even Ali's (R)'s time, because the time period I have understood is that they were recorded in WRITING 200-300 years after the Prophet's death.
The Sahabah had conflicts and wars over political issues. The empire expanded pretty fast, so there was a massive change in the muslim community in how to organize themselves and manage the empire. I think the biggest one was over the whole Uthman (R) assasination. What makes it hard is that there is not a lot of hard core evidence on the issues since there are only some documents from the time period. So an expansive and exhuastive history can't really be drawn for the time period after the Prophet's death. When they were burying the Prophet, there were immediately conflicts over who would follow in power.
That's my analysis at least. There is one book on it - Succession to Muhammed or something like that.
hadith is declared unauthentic for many reasons....
some of them r: the chain of narrators is not complete till the Prophet (saw), the chain has a certain narrator who cannot be trusted, the wording of hadith is not in line with the language/teaching of the Prophet (saw), etc etc etc....
no one says that the sahabi who is mentioned in hadith lies....
just that one of the narrator in the chain of narrators through who it was passed, is not of trustworthy character....
also, hadith recording was started officially by government orders during the reign of Umar bin Abdul Aziz (ra)....
other individuals recorded it as early as during the lifetime of the Prophet (saw)....
Allah chose himself as the protector of the Quran. The Quran will always be authentic. Allah hasn't taken the responsility of protecting the Ahadith so it is in human's hands and so it becomes nothing but a part of history part of which is biased and the rest is prejudice. (When talking as a muslim)
Many mod-Muslims like to throw this Hadith in everyone's face when presenting their argument against Jihad...
"According to the Prophet Mohammad, there are two types of Jihad the small (war) and the big (against oneself). Upon his return to Mecca, the Prophet declared that the small Jihad has ended and the big Jihad started, that is, the Jihad against oneself."
Scholars pointed out, it is not even a Hadith and if memory serves me right is not even in any book of Hadith...
the holy prophet(sm) was affected by magic.tafseer tells us that it served 2 purposes
1=to ensure that the prophet (sm) was not worshipped ie he was a human being.Perfection sirf Allah ki zaat main hay.
2=to emphasize the existence of magic n its prevention by means of ALLAH and his word.
the companions were also human,but they bathed in the light of the prophet,observed him,listened to him,so respect is a must which shud b observed even while discussing them.these topics attract people like pcg who refer to the companions as 'x' , 'y' , 'z' .and exhibit balatant disregard for what they believe to be mindless,puposeless traditions/practices.
comming back to the original topic,the companions were human beings after all n therefore not perfect.God has created each one of us in a unique way. No two human beings can think or act in exactly the same way.the existence of individuality is a fact.there r a 100 other ahadith on whom all ullema agree to be authentic,why dont u just follow those?
my observation may be wrong but i dunno why people like to talk about ahadith and its authenticity wen they havent even held sahih bukhari in their hands let alone reading it or following even one hadith to perfection.it takes a whole life just to perfect a few virtues,for example gheebat,chughli na karna,praying on time everyday 5 times a day but still people have this thirst to 'know' more n more but practice nothing,zilch,nada.this wasnt directed at u phatima but ur post did initiate this trian of thought.
Many mod-Muslims like to throw this Hadith in everyone's face when presenting their argument against Jihad...
"According to the Prophet Mohammad, there are two types of Jihad the small (war) and the big (against oneself). Upon his return to Mecca, the Prophet declared that the small Jihad has ended and the big Jihad started, that is, the Jihad against oneself."
Scholars pointed out, it is not even a Hadith and if memory serves me right is not even in any book of Hadith...
Hmm.. I wasn't aware of this.
Can you give some references?
Thanks