Re: What about Pigs
Seminole, again. We do rely on hadiths as well. :)
So God may have told Muhammad about the evil attributes of pigs, but it didn't make it to the Quran? Did those notes get lost? I thought the Quran contained all the revelations from God through Gabriel? Or did he also impart divine knowledge unto him?
Re: What about Pigs
So God may have told Muhammad about the evil attributes of pigs, but it didn't make it to the Quran? Did those notes get lost? I thought the Quran contained all the revelations from God through Gabriel? Or did he also impart divine knowledge unto him?
Have you ever read hadiths? So before you make such ****** comments again I would advice you to read some of em.
I have never mentioned I had believed that guy.
Re: What about Pigs
Sure I have. But that doesn't answer the question. How would Muhammad have related to somebody who related to somebody who wrote it done for someone else to consider "official sayings of the prophet" that pigs were posessed with evil jinnat unless God told him (through Gabriel)? How would he have known? If God told him (through Gabriel), why isn't it in the Quran?
Re: What about Pigs
Sure I have. But that doesn't answer the question. How would Muhammad have related to somebody who related to somebody who wrote it done for someone else to consider "official sayings of the prophet" that pigs were posessed with evil jinnat unless God told him (through Gabriel)? How would he have known? If God told him (through Gabriel), why isn't it in the Quran?
It is mentioned in the Quran and It is forbidden. But Quran doesnt not describe everything into deep, otherwise we Muslims would have had so much to discuss on. The problem is we cannot extend Quran like extending the Old Testament and form It to the new Testament and then declare It as Bible.
This is not going to happen.
Therefore we do rely on the words of our Prophet (s.a.w) narrated by his followers companians. The hadith contains the details on the why and why nots in Quran.
Re: What about Pigs
So, assuming there is a hadith out that that says pigs' souls are evil and evil jinnat are captured in them, how would Muhammad have known if God didn't tell him? And if God told him, why isn't it in the Quran? Or did he have the ability to look into the eyes of pigs to see their evil souls?
BTW, taking the Quran, adding hadith and declaring it as scripture is no different than taking the OT and NT and declaring it the Bible.
Re: What about Pigs
So, assuming there is a hadith out that that says pigs' souls are evil and evil jinnat are captured in them, how would Muhammad have known if God didn't tell him? And if God told him, why isn't it in the Quran? Or did he have the ability to look into the eyes of pigs to see their evil souls?
BTW, taking the Quran, adding hadith and declaring it as scripture is no different than taking the OT and NT and declaring it the Bible.
Its quite fascinating how you twist words out of my post (mouth is not existing here.).
What are you trying to prove? That I believe in pigs being evil and have some jinaat in them captured? No, dude! Sorry to bust your bubble. But Im not believing anything at all.
Quran is authentic so are some known Hadiths who have been declared authetnic. So therefore there is no reason to come back to the topic we already had discussed in another thread.
Re: What about Pigs
Its quite fascinating how you twist words out of my post (mouth is not existing here.).
What are you trying to prove? That I believe in pigs being evil and have some jinaat in them captured? No, dude! Sorry to bust your bubble. But Im not believing anything at all.
Quran is authentic so are some known Hadiths who have been declared authetnic. So therefore there is no reason to come back to the topic we already had discussed in another thread.
Declared authentic by whom? The only thing Allah declared authentic was the Quran. It was so important to Allah that scripture did not become courrupted again that he promised the Quran to be complete, perfect and protected. Now Muslims are putting things that man has "declaread authentic" as part of scripture.
You didn't answer my question though. I'm not saying you believe that pigs are evil. I realize you are just asking others. But please answer:
IF there is a hadith that says pigs' souls are evil and evil jinnat are captured in them, how would Muhammad have known if God didn't tell him? Did he have the ability to look into the eyes of pigs and see their evil souls?
Re: What about Pigs
Declared authentic by whom? The only thing Allah declared authentic was the Quran. It was so important to Allah that scripture did not become courrupted again that he promised the Quran to be complete, perfect and protected. Now Muslims are putting things that man has "declaread authentic" as part of scripture.
OK Seminole, lets ask this way round. Who has declared Jesus to be son of god? Who has said Jesus ressurrection to be ever happened? Who said Jesus had wine on the Last Supper? God? If God then who made It possible to be published 300-400 years later on stone tables, papyrus, hands etc.
[quote]
IF there is a hadith that says pigs' souls are evil and evil jinnat are captured in them, how would Muhammad have known if God didn't tell him? Did he have the ability to look into the eyes of pigs and see their evil souls?
[/quote]
There is no prove of a hadith containing the words. Therefore this question is
invalid and ignored.
Re: What about Pigs
OK Seminole, lets ask this way round. Who has declared Jesus to be son of god? Who has said Jesus ressurrection to be ever happened? Who said Jesus had wine on the Last Supper? God? If God then who made It possible to be published 300-400 years later on stone tables, papyrus, hands etc.
Are you comparing the human influenced scripture of Christianity with that of Islam? One of Islam's great bragging points is the perfect, complete and protected word of God. Now you are saying Islam follows the same flawed practice of following scripture that has been written and "declaread authentic" by man.
[quote]
There is no prove of a hadith containing the words. Therefore this question is invalid and ignored.
[/quote]
It's called a hypothetical. I'll put it another way, here's hadith that you claim is declared authentic regarding dogs:
Sahih Al-Bukhari 3:515. Narrated Abu Huraira:* I heard Allah's Apostle (saw) saying; "Angels (of Mercy) do not enter a house wherein there is a dog or a picture of a living creature (a human being or an animal)."***
How did Muhammad gain this knowledge if Allah did not tell him through Gabriel?
Re: What about Pigs
Sahih Al-Bukhari 3:515. Narrated Abu Huraira:* I heard Allah's Apostle (saw) saying; "Angels (of Mercy) do not enter a house wherein there is a dog or a picture of a living creature (a human being or an animal)."***
How did Muhammad gain this knowledge if Allah did not tell him through Gabriel?
other options
c. Abu Huraira misheard
d. He is lying
Re: What about Pigs
or he didn't remember correctly.
or it wasn't recorded properly.
or it was taken out of context.
or it wasn't meant to be recorded for all history and to be part of scripture.
But assuming all those things weren't true, the question remains, how would Muhammad have that knowledge?
Re: What about Pigs
how would Muhammad have that knowledge?
I don't have that knowledge :)
Re: What about Pigs
The truth is that no religion is perfect, there is no proof of God saying things to Mohammed / Jesus / Gabriel/ Moses or any other saints/ angels / prophets.
All these men were very wise & learned and used the ruse of "divine sayings" to enforce their beliefs on others. This is the case with all religions.
In other words - all religions are man made.
Re: What about Pigs
Are you comparing the human influenced scripture of Christianity with that of Islam? One of Islam's great bragging points is the perfect, complete and protected word of God. Now you are saying Islam follows the same flawed practice of following scripture that has been written and "declaread authentic" by man.
No Im comparing narrations with narrations. Whereas people can make proper research on the authenticy of both narrations and you will find more evidence for the Bhukari Hadiths to be valid. Whereas still there are huge contradictions If these words regarding Jesus to be true, when proper evidence was found some 60 years ago in Egypt on papyrus.
Therefore you do agree that "modern" Christianity (Church influenced) is also based on forged and modified scriptures by humans. I appreciate these words from you.
Nevertheless Quran is too authentic and is the basis for all our do and do nots. So we first rely on Quran, rather than anything else.
[quote]
It's called a hypothetical. I'll put it another way, here's hadith that you claim is declared authentic regarding dogs:
Sahih Al-Bukhari 3:515. Narrated Abu Huraira:* I heard Allah's Apostle (saw) saying; "Angels (of Mercy) do not enter a house wherein there is a dog or a picture of a living creature (a human being or an animal)."***
How did Muhammad gain this knowledge if Allah did not tell him through Gabriel?
[/quote]
Ok and what is un-authentic with this hadith? Im not getting your point?
Dogs are considered as impure, keeping them INSIDE the house is a sin. It doesnt not exclude the option keeping the dog outside the house though.
Re: What about Pigs
The truth is that no religion is perfect, there is no proof of God saying things to Mohammed / Jesus / Gabriel/ Moses or any other saints/ angels / prophets.
All these men were very wise & learned and used the ruse of "divine sayings" to enforce their beliefs on others. This is the case with all religions.
In other words - all religions are man made.
Just coz Hinduism is based on man made fiction It doesnt mean every other religion has to have evolved from Hinduisms roots of creation.
Re: What about Pigs
^ The "authenticity" of the Quran is based soley on faith, but at least it's not the categories of contradiction that hadith are. Muslims believe the Quran to be the protected words of God, whereas hadith are a hodgepodge of things the prophet may or may not have said. And even if he did say them, it doesn't make the words divine or words of God. So it is no different than the practice of Christianity, which Muslims accuse of it practicing a religion that was not delivered by God.
But you still haven't answered the question I have posed repeatedly. "How did Muhammad gain this knowledge if Allah did not tell him through Gabriel?"
Assuming there was unrivaled, unquestionable evidence (which there isn't) of Muhammad saying "Angels do not enter a house wherein there is a dog", how did he know? Even though there is nothing in the Quran about the impurity of dogs, let's assume he learned of that by applying Quranic principles. But to go further and say that angles don't come into a house with dogs is still knowledge that he could not have learned without Allah telling him.
Re: What about Pigs
It is something like, for example, I made/created something and I am utterly pisssed off at what I myself created. And I am neither able to destroy what I created and nor able to prevent others from coming near to it.
This God hates pigs has no basis.
Re: What about Pigs
^ The "authenticity" of the Quran is based soley on faith, but at least it's not the categories of contradiction that hadith are. Muslims believe the Quran to be the protected words of God, whereas hadith are a hodgepodge of things the prophet may or may not have said. And even if he did say them, it doesn't make the words divine or words of God. So it is no different than the practice of Christianity, which Muslims accuse of it practicing a religion that was not delivered by God.
But you still haven't answered the question I have posed repeatedly. "How did Muhammad gain this knowledge if Allah did not tell him through Gabriel?"
Assuming there was unrivaled, unquestionable evidence (which there isn't) of Muhammad saying "Angels do not enter a house wherein there is a dog", how did he know? Even though there is nothing in the Quran about the impurity of dogs, let's assume he learned of that by applying Quranic principles. But to go further and say that angles don't come into a house with dogs is still knowledge that he could not have learned without Allah telling him.
Prophet pbuh learned through Jibrael. And Jibrael did not bring only Quran.
Re: What about Pigs
^ The "authenticity" of the Quran is based soley on faith, but at least it's not the categories of contradiction that hadith are. Muslims believe the Quran to be the protected words of God, whereas hadith are a hodgepodge of things the prophet may or may not have said. And even if he did say them, it doesn't make the words divine or words of God. So it is no different than the practice of Christianity, which Muslims accuse of it practicing a religion that was not delivered by God.
Well you see, Seminole. There are even people who claim the Quran being some invented stories by Prophet (s.a.w) himself. Therefore you cannot (If you dont want to believe In It) confirm them to be Gods word either. Even If YOU do believe in Quran being words of God. Narrated by Angels or not is not even the question then.
Isliye, we can keep up the discussion for another 10 days and I can only remind you of the things I have stated above:
1. Quran is our main source
2. We also consider "SOME" Hadiths to be authentic (we dont even question Its authenticy anymore, although there are enough "fake" hadiths circuling and being spread around the Inet. But once you have the authentic version you rely on them. Hence you take It as a comparision for Identifying Its originality.
And as Iconoclast has stated rightly Angel Gabriel was not only busy with Prophet Mohammad (s.a.w) delivering him words of God.
Re: What about Pigs
Ali_R:I had given my views on what I think - if you have an logical reply, lets hear it, otherwise I'll accept that you are like A parrot who can repeat things, but cannot 'think'.
Show me the proof that God spoke to Mohammed, and that the quran is Gods written words. Proof, not 'totagiri"