Iqbal, excuse me, but that sounds really flimsy. Whenever anything contradicts the qur'an, why do the compilers find excuses and concoct absurd explanations rather than reject the hadith.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
Iqbal, excuse me, but that sounds really flimsy. Whenever anything contradicts the qur'an, why do the compilers find excuses and concoct absurd explanations rather than reject the hadith.
[/QUOTE]
Perhaps because those scholars and compilers had a little more respect for Islamic texts to simply throw them out of the window. One has to gather all the narrations related to a specific incident or ruling to get a better understanding of what's going on rather than assume there's a contradiction just because "we think" there is. There are even verses in the Qur'an that outwardly appear contradictory, based on your logic (or common sense?) we'd have to reject one verse whenever this occurs. Or are we going to be a little smarter than that and seek to reconcile them? There's no contradiction between authentic hadith and the Qur'an because it was the Prophet's (s) role to explain the Qur'an:
"We have sent down unto thee the Message; that thou mayest explain clearly to men what is sent for them, and that they may give thought." (16:44)
Iqbal
once again I have no intentions of going into that debate.. suffice to say in one sweep you equated the veracity of Qur'anic text with that of hadith literature.. to answer yes i'd study the qur'an again to better understand and remove any contradictions and alhamdolillah to my understanding there are no contradictions or supposed theories of abrogations in the qur'an..
As for hadiht, I was only referring to the widely accepted or let's say publicized point of view that if it contradicts the qur'an it never makes it to be 'authentic'.. sadly it isn't the case and people find ways and flimsy explanations to include everything and anything that has "the prophet said" at the beginning.
[14:4] And We did not send any messenger but with the language of his people, so that he might explain to them clearly; then Allah makes whom He pleases err and He guides whom He pleases and He is the Mighty, the Wise
[5:19] O followers of the Book! indeed Our Messenger has come to you explaining to you after a cessation of the (mission of the) messengers, lest you say: There came not to us a giver of good news or a warner, so indeed there has come to you a giver of good news and a warner; and Allah has power over all things
[75:19] Again on Us (devolves) the explaining of it.
[34:28] And We have not sent you but to all the men as a bearer of good news and as a warner, but most men do not know.
[38:65] Say: I am only a warner, and there is no god but Allah, the One, the Subduer (of all):
[16:89] And on the day when We will raise up in every people a witness against them from among themselves, and bring you as a witness against these-- and We have revealed **the Book to you explaining clearly everything, and a guidance and mercy and good news for those who submit.**
[17:105] And with truth have We revealed it, and with truth did it come; and We have not sent you but as the giver of good news and as a warner.
[17:106] And it is a Quran which We have revealed in portions so that you may read it to the people by slow degrees, and We have revealed it, revealing in portions
[17:107] Say: Believe in it or believe not; surely those who are given the knowledge before it fall down on their faces, making obeisance when it is recited to them.
2:213 people are a single nation; so Allah raised prophets as bearers of good news and as warners, and He revealed with them the Book with truth, that it might judge between people in that in which they differed...........
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
once again I have no intentions of going into that debate.. suffice to say in one sweep you equated the veracity of Qur'anic text with that of hadith literature.. to answer yes i'd study the qur'an again to better understand and remove any contradictions and alhamdolillah to my understanding there are no contradictions or supposed theories of abrogations in the qur'an.
[/quote]
In the same way, others study "apparent" contradictions between Qur'an and hadith to see if there's a possible reconciliation. I for one would be willing to analyse both texts. It would probably be true to say that you'd dismiss all such hadith without even checking them. Which seems to be the more reasonable approach?
**
[quote]
As for hadiht, I was only referring to the widely accepted or let's say publicized point of view that if it contradicts the qur'an it never makes it to be 'authentic'.. sadly it isn't the case and people find ways and flimsy explanations to include everything and anything that has "the prophet said" at the beginning.**
[/quote]
You've already accepted the principle that two apparently contradictory texts can be reconciled through study. Only those unfamiliar with hadith science would accept everything and anything that has "the Prophet (s) said" at the beginning. There are numerous spurious hadith, just as there are fabricated verses of the Qur'an. Just because someone concocted a Qur'anic verse doesn't mean we dismiss all other verses on that basis.
Iqbal
obviously we've once again been dragged into the same debate.. but just to note that the methods of removing disperancies are different.. people didn't look at a narrator's life history (as popularly known not documented) to determine what came out their mouth was a qura'nic verse or not.. Qur'an was available in the written form complete and verified.. at least around the times of the third Caliph if not earlier...
there has NEVER been ONE guaranteed source for the other historic stories.. narrators one compiler accepts are rejected by the other.. I wouldn't call that science... i'd call that selective compiling.. you are not following authentic narrations.. u're just agreeing with the compiler who chose to declare the particular narration authentic.. which is why Sheraz has a different account of history as you might have... the truth being lost somewhere in the midst of it all.
There was no onus on you to reply to my post concerning the dead hearing the Prophet (s) from the well at Badr. Wherever you might be now, you’ve dragged yourself there.
**
The Qur’an was not preserved by Angels roaming the earth with golden tablets and fine tipped pens. The same individuals who transmitted the Qur’an are the very people who transmitted and compiled hadith - both of which was largely done orally to begin with. A written document is not a proof of preservation, and in this sense the written Qur’an was subservient to the recital since the written document initially had no vowels or diacritical marks. The correct pronunciation could only be ascertained from a Qur’an memoriser. The written document therefore needed the memoriser more than the memoriser needed the document. Such fantastic memories were also employed in the preservation and transmission of hadith.
John Burton: “The method of transmitting the Qur’an from one generation to the next by having the young memorise the oral recitation of their elders had mitigated somewhat from the beginning the worst perils of relying solely on written records…” (John Burton, An Introduction to the Hadith, Edinburgh University Press: 1994, p.27)
**
You don’t seem so sure. In any case, how do you know who first compiled the Qur’an and verified it? And how are you going to prove how many copies of the Qur’an existed across the entire Muslim world at that time?
**
You are the son of our modern day book culture. We assume that if something isn’t written down, it can’t possibly be retained with any degree of accuracy.
**
Montgomery Watt: “The chains of transmitters were therefore carefully scrutinised to make sure that the persons named could in fact have met one another, that they could be trusted to repeat the story accurately, and that they did not hold any heretical views. This implied extensive biographical studies; and many biographical dictionaries have been preserved giving the basic information about a man’s teachers and pupils, the views of later scholars (on his reliability as a transmitter) and the date of his death. This biography-based critique of Traditions helped considerably to form a more or less common mind among many men throughout the caliphate about what was to be accepted and what rejected.” (Watt, What is Islam? Longman Group Ltd: 1979, pp. 124-125)
Variant readings of the Qur’an, which is what spurred Caliph 'Uthman (r) to issue his codex, are also preserved through similar chains of transmission.
**
Rather we still have the same tools at our disposal that earlier compilers employed.
**
Which is why Sheraz should take 'Ali ibn Abi Talib’s, may Allah be pleased with him, advice (as previously quoted from a Shia source) to follow the majority of the Muslims.
Iqbal
p.s. Any answers to the questions posed in this thread?
ok Iqbal, since I expressed displeasure at opening the pandora's box. i'm going to let u have the last word, with the note that whoever thinks that oral or written documents alone guarantee accuracy needs to get his head examined by a doctor who studied through lectures alone.
We need both. Where one is missing there is a gap in communication. We are all human, we were designed to have a memory that errs. I've also provided my response to the thread u referenced.. didn't think though if one was necessary..
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
whoever thinks that oral or written documents alone guarantee accuracy needs to get his head examined by a doctor who studied through lectures alone.
[/quote]
Why would i need to go see a doctor? According to your rules i should be able study on my own and diagnose myself, perhaps even prescribe myself a few medicines. Or should i be a little more humbler than that and accept that a doctor is a specialist in his or her field and is likely to know a lot more about medicine than me? Similarly, Islam has its specialists as well.
Iqbal
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Axiom: *
I asked you in "Offensive Jihad"
Any way when you say you follow the good qualities in every religion then what do you do about God. I mean, take Islam, Hinduism and Christianity. Each of them have different concepts of God. Which one do you follow.
[/QUOTE]
Basically the concept is same. it does not matter which religion you follow. If four different people are asked to daw the picture of Sun, they will draw different pictures after looking at the Real Sun. It is just a matter of perception how you look at it. If you would like to discuss it further I or you can open up a different thread. Let me know.
[QUOTE]
Basically the concept is same. it does not matter which religion you follow. If four different people are asked to daw the picture of Sun, they will draw different pictures after looking at the Real Sun. It is just a matter of perception how you look at it. If you would like to discuss it further I or you can open up a different thread. Let me know.
[/QUOTE]
But if one person says that the sun is a square and another says it is a triangle, while a third draws more than 1 picture and claims that there are more than 1 Sun, then it is not a matter of perception. Ok, open a new thread.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Iqbal1089: *
Why would i need to go see a doctor? According to your rules i should be able study on my own and diagnose myself, perhaps even prescribe myself a few medicines. Or should i be a little more humbler than that and accept that a doctor is a specialist in his or her field and is likely to know a lot more about medicine than me? Similarly, Islam has its specialists as well.
Iqbal
[/QUOTE]
quite unlike medicine which is a specialty occupation, Islam is a religion, a way of life prescribed by Allah for all and not just a group of 'specialist' scholars aiming to become sole distributors. He made his message simple for all of us to understand and follow.. if only we paid heed.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
quite unlike medicine which is a specialty occupation, Islam is a religion, a way of life prescribed by Allah for all and not just a group of 'specialist' scholars aiming to become sole distributors. He made his message simple for all of us to understand and follow.. if only we paid heed.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, it's a little bit of both. The fundamental truths of Islam can be ascertained by just about anyone who reads the Qur'an - for example, that there's only One Creator, that He's sent Messengers to mankind, that we are to be held accountable for our actions etc. etc. These can be accessed by anyone reading the Qur'an in any language. However, in addition to that there are certain finer details that not everyone may be capable of appreciating or grasping. That's where you might need a specialist. Especially for those who don't know sufficient Arabic. Many of the subtle nuances of the Qur'an and even the correct application of certain religious rulings might be lost to them.
PA, supposing someone's just converted to Islam. They're handed a copy of the Qur'an, don't know Arabic except perhaps a few words, and they want to know how to pray the obligatory prayers. They know they have to perform them because Muslims are always going on about them and the Qur'an is repeatedly saying "establish the prayer". What do they do?
Iqbal
Somehow this discussion tends to come back to 'how to pray'. I think it's quite easy to find out how to pray from the Qur'an. It's only difficult to reconcile it with many stories we have been led to believe on how to pray.
Any new Muslim can start studying the Qur'an to find out about salat and form their opinion and increase their understanding about the method of 'linking' with Allah. Alternately they can read already available material which makes it an easier reference and cross check for authenticity and then follow.
At no time would I advise anyone to follow blindly what is given to them. The Qur'an came to us so that we start to use our reasoning and understanding and knowledge.
[3:78] Most surely there is a party amongst those who distort the Book with their tongue that you may consider it to be (a part) of the Book, and they say, It is from Allah, while it is not from Allah, and they tell a lie against Allah whilst they know.
[3:79] It is not meet for a mortal that Allah should give him the Book and the wisdom and prophethood, then he should say to men: Be my servants rather than Allah's; but rather (he would say): Be worshippers of the Lord because of your teaching the Book and your reading (it yourselves).
JazaakumAllaahu khair brother Iqbal.
There is no one here who could have addressed the issue and the queries any more beautifuly and more clearly than you did, masha'Allaah.
Iqbal, you will notice that there are a people who reject ahadeeth, yet if you were to ask them about their salaah you will find that they pray according to the method found in the narrations.
However, if you were to ask them to explain their way of performing salaah, they would not describe it to you. This shows that when Allaah - subhaana wa ta'aala - commands "Establish the prayer ...", they are not interested in teaching anyone how to perform it, because if they did so they would only be contradicting themselves.
This is a people for whom it is permissible to seek medical advice from a 'doctor', but if anyone else wishes to do so they declare it haraam!
Unfamiliar with Arabic, what makes their interpretation of a Religion (where the message is in that language) better than the next persons?
A people, who interpret a Miracle (Qur'aan) by their moods and emotions built on what fuels them of their desires, thus failing to understand in thier haughtiness that their words are merely whispers under the sound of thunder.
WasSalaam
Hasnain, thank you for the kind words.
Wassalam
Iqbal
I chose prayer because it is performed at set times - even those who for reasons best known to them don’t accede to five prayers daily, they still generally accept that at least some prayers must be done during some part of the day (morning & evening, for example). Consequently, a new Muslim unfamiliar with the Qur’an has a time limit within which to familiarise him or herself with the prayer. According to you, they are on their own and can just browse through the Qur’an and instruct themselves. I disagree, as i’m sure most others would too.
In fact, your own former post Salat as found in the Qur’an exemplifies perfectly what i’m trying to say. Are you seriously suggesting that a new Muslim could open up the Qur’an and gather all the myriad of verses that you had to piece together to show us how you think prayer should be performed (incidentally, a method of prayer that i’ve yet to see anyone else perform or advocate)? Anyone who thinks that someone new to the faith could or even should do that before the first prayer time arrives is deluding not only himself but others as well.
**
Your previously referred to post clearly shows that it is not as easy as you make it out be. How much more difficult then for a new Muslim? Can you, for example, point to a single verse in the Qur’an that gives all the various details of prayer - i.e. purpose, timing, prerequisites, postures - from which someone could at a glance ascertain everything that is needed? Allah, out of His infinite Wisdom, sent a physical demonstrator of the Qur’an along with the revelation and urged us in the very same revelation to take that demonstrator, Prophet Muhammad (s), as an example to be followed.
In fact, you’ve answered my above question in your Salat in the Qur’an thread where you wrote:
“Just like all the other instructions are scattered throughout Qur’an and not in just one single chapter or a sequence of verses, one must study the whole Qur’an and ponder over it to find out where Allah mentions Salat and how.”
Now do you seriously expect this of every new Muslim, that they are obliged to “study the whole Qur’an” before they can start to pray?
**
Yes, perhaps they could. But what do they do in the meantime whilst their understanding has not yet increased? Your methodology seems to suggest that it is better to just have a go even if that amounts to an unqualified understanding of the Qur’an rather than actually finding out what the correct interpretation might be (which might actually entail having to eat humble pie occasionally before asking someone else to help us better appreciate Allah’s revelation). I know, it’s a bold statement to make - to actually suggest that we might need to ask others about the Qur’an!! - and i apologise in advance if you find that concept unpalatable.
**
Why on earth would someone have to refer to other material when they have the Qur’an? Surely you aren’t shifting the goal posts already? Your words also suggest that “already available material” can be an “easier reference” on prayer than the Qur’an itself. Please tell me, how is that possible? And this other material, who must it be written by?
**
And as i’ve already pointed out, the Qur’an - even on matters of belief - establishes the principle of questioning those who know when we ourselves don’t know.
Finally: The reason for using new Muslims as part of my questioning is because their situation is comparable to that of many Muslims who, for one reason or another, remain unfamiliar with the finer details of Qur’anic texts. Either they do not have the language tools or feel that they should not be unilaterally legislating for themselves based on their own inadequate studies. Do they just do nothing or can they in the mean time refer to someone who knows better? Or should they give up Islam and choose something else?
Allah knows best.
Iqbal