I agree with this. Infact generalizing the rules or principles derived from specific situations often leads to misinterpretation. An example would be the verses from Surah Taubah that many Islamists use to conduct offensive operations against non-muslims under the context of Jihad. One thing though, when you mention relaxing, it means that rules or agendas are followed that appease the current situation without violating basic tenets of Islam.
This I do not agree with. The context of your reasoning was that the situation does not exist or hold true, which means there is nothing to abrogate because you are not in a position to even apply the ruling. In this case, there would be no question of overturning the ruling through an abrogation. The context of a situation must first lend itself to a certain ruling before it can be subjected to an abrogation.
If you meant to say that it has universal principles then I think I will agree with you. I cannot grasp the notion of timeless conditions. Conditions are time relevant. Principles are not though.
Agree that the Sunnah does contextualise a lot of verses from the Quran and sets and describes the parameters. Examples are prayers and charity. We do not need to go far in this case.
Absolutely right.
I agree with this however the line of discussion is about Mutawatir ahadith superceding the Quran. The context of this discussion is a Maskh which can over turn the ruling of the Quran in a specific situation. I do not believe we are pondering upon the general concept of Naskh but a very specific masala here. As you said if a Sunnah contextualizes the Quran then there should be a relevant verse that adheres itself to the basic premise in a Sunnah or it should be completely absent meaning there is no Quranic ruling on a specific matter and it is only to be found in the Sunnah.
Some people might have been stuck on terminology however I am not. I do agree that a Sunnah can define a set of parameters for a general Quranic command or verse. An example is that of music, which I was discussing a while ago in another thread. People often make music outright haram without realizing the parameters set in the ahadith or its context. One can only realize this when ahadith with opposite rulings are studied as well. There can’t be two rulings on a specific subject given the context is the same.
I am also refering to the argument that the Quran is complete from the perspective of being a mushaf and what was supposed to be propagated to the future generations however it is not complete from the perspective of all revelation that was part of Quran and we only learn such a thing through the ahadith. An example is the hadith of Umar which discusses the verses of Rajm. The ruling is in effect however the verse has been completely textually abrogated. Does that make sense? I know I discussed this with you Br. before in which your reason was that it is defining the parameters of the verse of flogging in the Quran but based on the hadith that would not be true because the hadith states that the Sunnah was following an abrogated verse of the Quran. So now the absense of that verse makes this hadith for stoning conflict with the flogging ayat in Quran unless we admit that some revealed verses of the Quran were not meant to be in there.
Brother USR completely agree with the concept of hadith superceding raises a millions questions about Quran’s infallibility. Your post is summarized really well.
Hanafis, Shaafis and Malikis, allowed the abrogation of the Sunnah by the Qur'an and vice verse...but they could not be abrogated by khabr al-wahid.
Great khanbabax! At least you accepted the khabr e wahid issue. you used to refute that khabre wahid or not, any thing in hadith is to be treated as law making statement.
so now you are accepting Ghamidee's version to prove your point.
Actually i suppose what khanbabax is trying to say is that we have to understand Quran how the jurists used to understand it. we do not have a right to use our minds.
Are we kind of some cult? i am a sunni but i have found the sunnies to be the most unreasonable lot of all muslims. Shias at least allow Ijtehad, sunnies stopped it. Sunnies have virtually turned Islam into a drill without any soul.
any way sahabas were much more flexible in understanding of Quran and implementing Quranic laws on verbatim. Hazrat Umar made jails and stopped cutting hands etc on the basis Islamic society needs to be established in other domains first to justify punishing on Quranic verdicts. He understood in totality and context. we take out of quote and verbatim. We are fond of implementing punishments first and think that Islamic society will be created.
Great khanbabax! At least you accepted the khabr e wahid issue. you used to refute that khabre wahid or not, any thing in hadith is to be treated as law making statement.
so now you are accepting Ghamidee's version to prove your point.
I dont get what you are trying to say, but read again, it says khabar-e-wahid cannot abrogate an ayat of the Quran, not that khabar-e-wahid cant be used.
Ghamdi is a zindeeq and his opinions hold any water.
Actually i suppose what khanbabax is trying to say is that we have to understand Quran how the jurists used to understand it. we do not have a right to use our minds.
.
How Sahabas understood it, their students, great mufassirs and experts of this field and not internet Mullahs. :D
Seriosly, to me the view of the experts is enough, and not what anyone says on Gupshup forums.
The experts of those era's were not privy to the huge amount of literature that we are now. And certainly you can't claim that their brains were bigger than ours. I would agree that they were closer in cultural affinity of those times though.
[quote]
The experts of those era's were not privy to the huge amount of literature that we are now.
[/quote]
B.S and propaganda, infact they had all the literature they needed, ie. Quran and Sunnah.
[quote]
And certainly you can't claim that their brains were bigger than ours. I would agree that they were closer in cultural affinity of those times though.
[/quote]
They were better than us in every field.
Memory
Understanding
Taqwa
Closeness to the time of Prophet s.a.w and Sahabas.
First three eras are the best as mentioned by the Prophet s.a.w.
etc etc.
Any view contradictory to theirs is not acceptable.
Also you are saying people who spent their whole lifes studying religion are same as people who have a online translation of the Quran and few hadees. :D
SubhanAllah!!
Signs of Qiyamat.
I pitty those ameteaur who sit on internet, flip through clicks and end up making judgements on the Ulama. *Shame has nowhere else to turn!
*
The students of real live teachers have indeed shown in this post and the others like this, how hollow the claim of self study research is. May Allah increase the status of Ulama whom Allah blessed with such insight that even before we came into existence, they penned down such thougts and masail and established Usools.. Surely without those Usools and Furoo's we would not have a way to turn to except follow our Hawaa..
I dont get what you are trying to say, but read again, it says khabar-e-wahid cannot abrogate an ayat of the Quran, not that khabar-e-wahid cant be used.
Ghamdi is a zindeeq and his opinions hold any water.
Bhai sahab, if i am not wrong you or some of your sunni fella made the statement that khabr e wahid or not, hadith is a hadith and sharia laws can be framed on it. Is it so?
Where has Allah or Rasool e Pak told that a mutawatir hadith is a superior hadith than khabr e wahid. Mutawatir only means reported by many people and Khabre wahid is reported by one. There is no difference from prophet's emphasis. If both are sahih (i.e. fulfilling your criterias for genuiness of hadith) than both should carry the equal weight as both are sayings of Hazrat Muhammad. How can one supersede and one not?
You can either declare Hazrat Muhammad had the authority to abrogate the Quran or not. But this Khabr e wahid and mutawatir is scholar's made distinction. If Hazrat Muhammad had the authority to abrogate Quran than if you believe Khabr e wahid is from Prophet, you should ammend.
Gentlemen of this forum, this exposed the problem of Hadith collection. Sunni ulemas use khabr e wahid to make things lawful and unlawful stating that it is order of Prophet. No matter how much you argue that one reporting may have problems they do not budge from their stance. Now how come they start deciding that Mutawatir can abrogate Quran or not.
The bigger question should be, can the prophet abrogate Quran? I think why should he as he mostly waited for divine instructions in all regards, from Jehad to change of Qiblah. once he can get his request delivered from Allah, why should he be in a need to abrogate Quran. Any way may be some sahabas better understood than us, but we need quotes of sahabas not these jurists and scholars.
This praying to Allah does not mean anyone can be right Khanbabax. even Abu Jehal prayed to Allah once he was coming out of Makkah for Jang e Badar that Allah please who so ever is wrong between us and Muhammad, kill him in the battle.
Seriosly, to me the view of the experts is enough, and not what anyone says on Gupshup forums.
No one is trying to win your heart, brother khanbabax. It is for the reader to decide what is right or wrong. The debate or dialogue is only to highlight the arguments of the opposing sides.
After a lot of time on debating forum, you have not yet understood the raison d etre of it.
This praying to Allah does not mean anyone can be right Khanbabax. even Abu Jehal prayed to Allah once he was coming out of Makkah for Jang e Badar that Allah please who so ever is wrong between us and Muhammad, kill him in the battle.
No one is trying to win your heart, brother khanbabax. It is for the reader to decide what is right or wrong. The debate or dialogue is only to highlight the arguments of the opposing sides.
After a lot of time on debating forum, you have not yet understood the raison d etre of it.
Let see a debate/dialogue between a DOCTOR and IRON SMITH, and IRON SMITHS are telling the DOCTOR what medicine he sould prescribe and what not. :D Very good. First spend atleast 10 years under the experts (not online), and then I MIGHT consider your opinion, get to the level of jurists and mufassirs.
Br. Psyah