Hadiths... What Does the Quran Say About THem?

[JustBelieve]

As Salaam Alaikum,

I would like to know where is the authorization of hadith in the Quran? The reason is because I am constantly hearing and reading people telling me that I should follow them, but so far they haven't as of yet answered any of my questions with proof from the Quran. Just other sources, and ideas of what they feel is not enough for the Quran to answer.... basically it's been an avoidance of answering questions, and instead asking questions.

Really, I don't believe that the authorization of hadiths (at least the ones that people claim are those of the Messenger) is ever mandated by the Quran. I haven't come across the verse, and no one can present it to me.

People talk about obeying the Messenger and stuff, but there are many examples in the Quran in where it is clear that the Messenger is to command something from us... so really I feel that argument still does not support the belief that the hadith of the Messenger is something commanded by teh Quran... becuase even in the Quran, the Messenger is commanded to command people things.

I find that hte tone of hadith is totally different from the Quran. Just the idea that people have to research it's "validity" is ridiculous to me... I don't believe that God would put us into a position like that--- make us follow something that was only carried through word of mouth for years.

So I'd like to know where do people believe that the Quran says to follow these hadiths????

as salaam alaikum

[Kareem]

:salam: whithout the ahadith you ould not even know how to perform salah

btw, the Qur'an is transmitted in the same way the ahadith are.

[Travelleress]

Asalaamu 'alaykum,

SubhanAllah.

I was just listening to Shaykh Riyadh ul-Haq about an hour ago. He happened to mention that a group of Brothers came to him and said they had changed their beliefs etc. after finding some 'new knowledge.'

They asked him exactly the same question you just posed. His answer was to ask them 'Why do you believe in the Qur'an? How do you know thats true? What makes you believe in the Qur'an but not Ahadith?'

His answer was similar to Brother Kareems: the Qur'an and Ahadith have been transmitted to us via the same method and the same people.

Listen to the talk: http://downloads1.nadeemdownloads.com/ISLAMIC%20SERVER%2005/Riyadhul%20Haq-Juristic%

Wasalam

[AbuZaid]

As Salaam Alaikum

In the Quran there are clear verses explaining that Hadeeth is something which is necessary.

1) Allah Said in Surah Al Hashr verse 7
So take what the Messenger assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you. And fear Allah; for Allah is strict in Punishment.

This is a clear order of accepting what he teaches us which is only known through Hadeeth.

2) Allah Says in Surah Al Baqara verse 129
Our Lord! And raise up in them a Messenger from among them who shall recite to them Thy communications and teach them the Book and the wisdom, and purify them; surely Thou art the Mighty, the Wise.

What other book is the prophet SAW going to teach besides the Quran and what other teaching can it mean besides the explaining of what is inside it.

3) In Surah Baqarah verse 151 Allah Says
Even as We have sent among you a Messenger from among you who recites to you Our communications and purifies you and teaches you the Book and the wisdom and teaches you that which you did not know.

How can we know what he taught us without looking at Hadeeth.

4) In Surah An Nahl verse 44 Allah Says
(We sent them) with Clear Signs and Books of dark prophecies; and We have sent down unto thee (also) the Message; that thou mayest explain clearly to men what is sent for them, and that they may give thought.

Allah ordered the Prophet SAW to explain to us what was sent down to mankind which is the Quran and this is possible only through his own words; or else why would there be the mention " that thou mayest explain clearly to men what is sent for them".

Wallahu Alam
Abu Zaid Uthman Bin Mahmood

[JustBelieve]

As Salaam Alaikum Kareem,


:salam: whithout the ahadith you ould not even know how to perform salah



Please provide your evidence of the authoirty of these form of hadiths in the Quran. Comments like the above do not establish them or give them authority from divine authority.



btw, the Qur'an is transmitted in the same way the ahadith are.


What do you mean? Hadiths were "narrated" and "narrated"... not written down until years after the Messenger's death. Quran was not.

salaam

[salman]

As Salaam Alaikum Kareem,



Please provide your evidence of the authoirty of these form of hadiths in the Quran. Comments like the above do not establish them or give them authority from divine authority.





What do you mean? Hadiths were "narrated" and "narrated"... not written down until years after the Messenger's death. Quran was not.

salaam

Salamu 'Alaykum

Nope -

Both Qur'an and Hadith were written down during the Prophets time.

Both Qur'an and Hadith were compiled into book format the way we see today *after* the Prophets time.

The Qur'an was compiled by the same people who spread hadith - through similar methods. Another important aspect to note is that the Sunnah was transmitted as the Qur’an was transmitted. So if we accept the Qur’an as authentic due to its mode of transmission we are forced to accept that the Sunnah as authentic also. The only distinction being that the entire Qur’an has been mass transmitted and thus establishes certainty, but the Sunnah has been transmitted in the same manner of transmission, except that some of it has not been mass transmitted so it established reasonable surety.

Wasalam

[JustBelieve]

As Salaam Alaikum AbuZaid,


As Salaam Alaikum

1) Allah Said in Surah Al Hashr verse 7
So take what the Messenger assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you. And fear Allah; for Allah is strict in Punishment.

The above still does not establish the hadiths that we have today. The hadiths which had been "narrarated" for years and not written down until many years after it began it's narration.


This is a clear order of accepting what he teaches us which is only known through Hadeeth.

I disagree. The thing that the Messenger was suppose to teach was the Message and the Wisdom, which is the Quran.




2) Allah Says in Surah Al Baqara verse 129
Our Lord! And raise up in them a Messenger from among them who shall recite to them Thy communications and teach them the Book and the wisdom, and purify them; surely Thou art the Mighty, the Wise.


The Book is obviously the Quran of course.

What is the Wisdom? It's the Quran.



What other book is the prophet SAW going to teach besides the Quran and what other teaching can it mean besides the explaining of what is inside it.

3) In Surah Baqarah verse 151 Allah Says
Even as We have sent among you a Messenger from among you who recites to you Our communications and purifies you and teaches you the Book and the wisdom and teaches you that which you did not know.

How can we know what he taught us without looking at Hadeeth.


Well look at the Quran. Do you not believe that the Messenger taught the Quran??




Allah ordered the Prophet SAW to explain to us what was sent down to mankind which is the Quran and this is possible only through his own words; or else why would there be the mention " that thou mayest explain clearly to men what is sent for them".


The question though is how authentic are these so called hadiths? Thye are not authentic at all and can't be gauranteed because they do not have divine protection like the Quran. You have no idea what so ever if these hadiths were really the Messenger's saying. Nothing in the Quran points to the fact that it is his sayings, NOTHING. You only believe it becuase people, for generations, have been saying this.

But again, nothing in the Quran ever suggest that hte Messenger will command of us to follow soemthing other than teh Quran. Along with that, the Messenger did not leave us a book of hadiths, he left us the Quran only. That's it.

His purpose was to preach the Message, and that is clearly the Quran. Laws such as a don't arch your eyebrows, don't wear your pants pass your ankles, aren't mentioned anywhere in the Quran. No proof what-so-ever that these are really the sayings of the Messenger. NONE.


salaam

[JustBelieve]

As SAlaam Alaikum,


Salamu 'Alaykum
Both Qur'an and Hadith were written down during the Prophets time.

Both Qur'an and Hadith were compiled into book format the way we see today *after* the Prophets time.


If that was the case then why are hadiths often said to be "narrated by", who was "narrating"....??? Obvioulsy for a while they were just word-of-mouth.



The Qur'an was compiled by the same people who spread hadith - through similar methods.


1 name-Abu Buhkari.



Another important aspect to note is that the Sunnah was transmitted as the Qur’an was transmitted. So if we accept the Qur’an as authentic due to its mode of transmission we are forced to accept that the Sunnah as authentic also. The only distinction being that the entire Qur’an has been mass transmitted and thus establishes certainty, but the Sunnah has been transmitted in the same manner of transmission, except that some of it has not been mass transmitted so it established reasonable surety.



So basically you believe that Allah would command you to follow something in whcih there are "weak" haidths and "strong" hadiths, and which it was regular men who had to sort out the "weak" ones and "strong" ones?

Was the Quran looked at by Muslim scholars and they declared "weak" verse and "strong" verses? You believe that the Quran was narrated. And that it wasn't the MEssenger who told hte massses, but it was other poeple who said, "The Messenger recited this verse...."??? Along with that, do you belive in the Quran because of the sayings of what is claimed to be what the companions of the Messenger said?


salaam

[salman]

Salamu 'Alaykum Wa Rahmatullah


If that was the case then why are hadiths often said to be "narrated by", who was "narrating"....??? Obvioulsy for a while they were just word-of-mouth.

The above wording only came into effect when Fitna spread - after the killing of Sayyidina 'Uthman - after which it was said, "name your men!". This was in order to differentiate between the innovators and those on truth.

Yes - what is true is that the hadith were *narrated* and then written down - but this was the same way the Qur'an was written down as well. The Qur'an did not descend in book form, but was placed into writing by the Prophets *oral* transmission of it.

One of the existant manuscripts of hadith are from Hammam, the student of Abu Hurayra - who was a companion of the Prophet known for his exceptional memory - who narrated directly from him. This is sufficient proof that hadith were written down early on.


1 name-Abu Buhkari.

And who might this be?


So basically you believe that Allah would command you to follow something in whcih there are "weak" haidths and "strong" hadiths, and which it was regular men who had to sort out the "weak" ones and "strong" ones?

And do you believe Allah will make me follow a book which was sorted out, compiled and placed in order by fallible men?

If you answer: Yes, then you have my answer to your question as well.


Was the Quran looked at by Muslim scholars and they declared "weak" verse and "strong" verses? You believe that the Quran was narrated. And that it wasn't the MEssenger who told hte massses, but it was other poeple who said, "The Messenger recited this verse...."??? Along with that, do you belive in the Quran because of the sayings of what is claimed to be what the companions of the Messenger said?

The Qur'an in its present form comes to us from the compilations of the Companions of the Prophet. This compilation was completed during the time of 'Uthman and started during the time of Sayyidina Abu Bakr.

There is no such thing as "strong verse" or "weak verse". It is either a "verse" or it is not - simple. However, other issues do arise such as aborgated verses, orders of verses, qiraat of verses and so forth.

The reason being that the Qur'an was mass-transmitted - all of it - by the agreement of the Companions. Something mass-tranmitted is decisively established. Hadith - though quite a few being mass transmitted - are not *all* mass transmitted. Some may be weak and others may not be. However, the *method* of compilation was the same. Denying the system through which hadith came would be denying the way the Qur'an came as well to us in its present form.

Also, in relation to your question: Was it not the Prophet who would say to the masses "actions are judged by intentions" or "do not get angry" and other messages? When we have the book of Hammam - and between him and the Prophet there is only ONE person who is a Companion, and it was the companions who palced the Qur'an in the order we see today, why then do you have any doubt in these hadith as authorotative?

Or were these Companions just mistaken regarding the probativeness of the Sunna?

Wasalam

[JustBelieve]

As Salaam Alaikum,



The above wording only came into effect when Fitna spread - after the killing of Sayyidina 'Uthman - after which it was said, "name your men!". This was in order to differentiate between the innovators and those on truth.


So you believe that every man told the truth when they were naming their men?



Yes - what is true is that the hadith were *narrated* and then written down - but this was the same way the Qur'an was written down as well. The Qur'an did not descend in book form, but was placed into writing by the Prophets *oral* transmission of it.


Often there are hadiths where the ruling was directed to just one person... but yet Muslims take it as a ruling on all of them. What's up with that?




One of the existant manuscripts of hadith are from Hammam, the student of Abu Hurayra - who was a companion of the Prophet known for his exceptional memory - who narrated directly from him. This is sufficient proof that hadith were written down early on.

See this is what I will never understand. Allah never talks about this in the Quran. NEVER.

Even more, who gave all of these people authority to write down what the Messenger was saying??? How do you know that they were suppose to? Does the Quran say this, or is this too just a hadith?


And who might this be?

A man born hundred++++ years after the Prophet's death. Who went about and wrote down and compiled hadiths that he believed were "weak" or "strong".




And do you believe Allah will make me follow a book which was sorted out, compiled and placed in order by fallible men?


Throughout the Quran Allah refers to it as a BOOK... with chapters. Question your history adn what logically makes since.... were they really compiled so long after?

Again, Allah refers to teh Quran as a BOOK, that you READ, with CHAPTERS.

You believe that the average person didn't have access to the Quran for that many years?? That they only had "pieces" of it? Just chapters of it in their household??




Also, in relation to your question: Was it not the Prophet who would say to the masses "actions are judged by intentions" or "do not get angry" and other messages?

Don't know. Haven't read it in the Qran.



When we have the book of Hammam - and between him and the Prophet there is only ONE person who is a Companion, and it was the companions who palced the Qur'an in the order we see today, why then do
you have any doubt in these hadith as authorotative?


So your belief is that for years, people only had chapters of the Quran in their homes? And never had a BOOK (al-Kitab) which Allah constatnly refers to the Quran as?




Or were these Companions just mistaken regarding the probativeness of the Sunna?

Wasalam

I don't believe that hte Companions ever did such.

salaam

[Omar HH]

If you have the sincere intention and ask Allah for the truth you will reach the truth wherever it will be.

That is my only comment,

Ask Allah "O Allah guide me to the truth"

And with Allah is Tawfiq,

Omar.

[salman]

Salamu 'Alaykum


So you believe that every man told the truth when they were naming their men?

If the man was truthful - and it was established from those who knew him and lived with him that he had indeed met and heard the man then why should i not believe.

Imam Ibn Hajar in his Nukhbat Al Fikr - one of the great texts on Hadith methodology - stated:

- It is also important to know:

[a]affiliations to tribes, homelands, countries, localities, roads and alleys, proximities, occupation and professions.

[.....]

(end quote)

This was a brief mention of what he said. There is alot more which allows the Scholars of hadith to know...

The Science of Hadith really is a very advanced topic. It isnt simply about "chain" but alot more. If you ever happen to study the whole science you will be surpirsed - yet confident - how much has been done to secure the words of the Prophet from every type of corruption.


Often there are hadiths where the ruling was directed to just one person... but yet Muslims take it as a ruling on all of them. What's up with that?

The 'Ulema are well aware of these hadith. They do not apply it to "all" Muslims unless proof points to the fact that it was implemented in this way to begin with or that the Companions generally acted upon it. This would make the command general (aam). Examples of Prophetic stipulations which were specific (khaas) are:

[1] Umm Waraqa leading her family in prayer,
[2] Talha being allowed to wear silk
[3] The Companion being permitted to pray during the khutba.

and many more...


See this is what I will never understand. Allah never talks about this in the Quran. NEVER.

Even more, who gave all of these people authority to write down what the Messenger was saying??? How do you know that they were suppose to? Does the Quran say this, or is this too just a hadith?

The Qur'an itself shows us this:

[1] The verse on "Qur'an and Wisdom" (16:64, 2:151, 3:164, 62:2, 2:231, 4:113 e.t.c.) wherein "wisdom" is interpreted as the Prophetis Sunna mainly due to the fact that if it werent, then this would be a case of "reptition" and would thus mean "The Qur'an and the Qur'an" which is entirely impossible due to the magnificence of the Qur'an.

This is a case of differentiation (mughayara) for If the Qur'an states "A and B" then A is necessarily different from B for the reason i mentioned above.

[2] The Qur'an making mention of events which the Prophet decided - whose decision is *not* in the Qur'an such as the verse:

- But Nay, by your Lord, they shall not believe until they make you judge of what is in dispute between them and find within themselves no dislike of that which you decide, and submit with full submission (4:165)

The historical context of the verse relates to Zubayr ibn Awaams land dispute with another man whose decision was laid out by the Sunna - and not mentioned in the Qur'an.

[3] The verses of the Qur'an which are ambigous from a view point of language.

e.t.c.


Throughout the Quran Allah refers to it as a BOOK... with chapters. Question your history adn what logically makes since.... were they really compiled so long after?

Again, Allah refers to teh Quran as a BOOK, that you READ, with CHAPTERS.

You believe that the average person didn't have access to the Quran for that many years?? That they only had "pieces" of it? Just chapters of it in their household??

You assume so only because you do not know Arabic. Allah does not refer to the Qur'an as a "Book" but as a "Kitab". It is from the root word كتب which means to "write, compile, pen, compose e.t.c.". The word "Kitab" is implicitly translated as "book" because that is what the Qur'an is now - a book. Otherwise the word كتاب means "Collecting" or "Compiling". It also means, "A written or SPOKEN form of information."

I had mentioned previously that the Qur'an was revealed, orally transmitted and written. There was no denial on my part that the Qur'an was not written - it just wasnt in a "book" form as we see today.


Don't know. Haven't read it in the Qran.

So do you mean to say the Prophet did not propogate anything except the verbatim texts of the Qur'an?


So your belief is that for years, people only had chapters of the Quran in their homes? And never had a BOOK (al-Kitab) which Allah constatnly refers to the Quran as?

Yes, that is correct. Most of them did not need a mushaf for they had it memorized. Some of the Companions were known to have written it down - in book form (though not all were complete), but their arrangements differed. This was not placed into an agreed upon version until the time of 'Uthman.


I don't believe that hte Companions ever did such.

There are various narrations from the Companions that they did.

Wasalam

[salman]

If you have the sincere intention and ask Allah for the truth you will reach the truth wherever it will be.

That is my only comment,

Ask Allah "O Allah guide me to the truth"

And with Allah is Tawfiq,

Omar.

Ya Sidi!

Subhanallah!

[JustBelieve]

As Salaam Alaikum Salman,


Salamu 'Alaykum


If the man was truthful - and it was established from those who knew him and lived with him that he had indeed met and heard the man then why should i not believe...........


So basically your belief in Islam is confirmed by men and what good repuations they may have?



The Qur'an itself shows us this:

[1] The verse on "Qur'an and Wisdom" (16:64, 2:151, 3:164, 62:2, 2:231, 4:113 e.t.c.) wherein "wisdom" is interpreted as the Prophetis Sunna mainly due to the fact that if it werent, then this would be a case of "reptition" and would thus mean "The Qur'an and the Qur'an" which is entirely impossible due to the magnificence of the Qur'an.




None of the verses you mention state "Quran". So your analogy of "Quran and _" is incorrect. Also you go on about repitition, and how it is entirly impossible... actually it's not becuase the Quran is very clear on repeating itself. Along with that wisdom and it being a scriipture are attributes of hte Quran.


The Quran goes on calling itself the "The Book" and "The Book of Wisdom". In those verses they are just put together "The Book and Wisdom". ALong with that the Quran goes on and on talking about it is is a book full of wisdom.




You assume so only because you do not know Arabic. Allah does not refer to the Qur'an as a "Book" but as a "Kitab". It is from the root word كتب which means to "write, compile, pen, compose e.t.c.". The word "Kitab" is implicitly translated as "book" because that is what the Qur'an is now - a book. Otherwise the word كتاب means "Collecting" or "Compiling". It also means, "A written or SPOKEN form of information."

I had mentioned previously that the Qur'an was revealed, orally transmitted and written. There was no denial on my part that the Qur'an was not written - it just wasnt in a "book" form as we see today.


Sorry but I just don't buy that the Messenger would not have the Quran organized by his death. That makes no since and is utterly appauling. Not only is it appauling but it's like having loose sheets of paper hanging around, ready to be stepped on!

You believe that the Surahs were revealed, but yet kept seperatly? May I ask why according to your belief?




So do you mean to say the Prophet did not propogate anything except the verbatim texts of the Qur'an?


No. I just said that I wasn't sure that he said what you asked.




Yes, that is correct. Most of them did not need a mushaf for they had it memorized. Some of the Companions were known to have written it down - in book form (though not all were complete), but their arrangements differed. This was not placed into an agreed upon version until the time of 'Uthman.



So I am guessing that the word for Surah has also been translated wrong, and mean of no significant order when it comes to arabic? Seriously.



Along with that, you basically believe that hte Quran is the Book of Wisdom, and is full of wisdom, but yet when Allah talks about teachiing the wisdom, that is not refeerring the Quran, but rathar these hadiths?

Do you believe that hadiths have diviine protection? If no, why do you follow them when they aren't gaurantteed any protection?

Also what is your opinion of hte Messenger being the only addressed in parts of the Quran? Not only being only addresed, but being commanded to do things? What is your opinion on why God would allow us to read those parts??

salaam

[salman]

Salamu 'alaykum


So basically your belief in Islam is confirmed by men and what good repuations they may have?

Is it not the same for your belief regarding the Qur'an which was compiled by fallible men i.e. the Companions?


None of the verses you mention state "Quran". So your analogy of "Quran and _" is incorrect. Also you go on about repitition, and how it is entirly impossible... actually it's not becuase the Quran is very clear on repeating itself. Along with that wisdom and it being a scriipture are attributes of hte Quran.

You are right, it doesnt say Qur'an but "Al Kitab" and "al Kitab" with the definitive is used for the Qur'an. You may even check a modern dictionary, Lexicon e.t.c for this.

If it is established unanimously that Al Kitab refers to Qur'an (which it is) then it proves that "wisdom" refers to something else. It is perfectly plausible that wisdom is an "attribute" of the Qur'an in specific verses (such as Kitab Al Hikma), but it cannot be so when coupled with "wa" (e.g. kitab wal hikma) which signifies differentiation. This is clear in the Usul of the Qur'an.

Further, by repetition what is meant is "useless repetition" for saying "Al Kitab wal Hikma"" means "Al Qur'an wal Qur'an" is erroneous and lacks the eloquence the Qur'an possess' both in terms of its grammatical structure as well as it meaning! This does not refer to repetitions such as "And Allah is Most Forgiving" that occur numerous times at the end of different aya's for it is significantly different then what we are discussing.

Open any linguistic analysis of the Qur'an and you will see this.


Sorry but I just don't buy that the Messenger would not have the Quran organized by his death. That makes no since and is utterly appauling. Not only is it appauling but it's like having loose sheets of paper hanging around, ready to be stepped on!

You believe that the Surahs were revealed, but yet kept seperatly? May I ask why according to your belief?

Since you reject hadith and Isnad you really have no way of knowing "how" the Qur'an was compiled, since its compilation is not mentioned therein.

For us, however, we have numerous and widely accepted narrations regarding the compilation of the Qur'an and it shistory. There is a consensus that the final draft of the Qur'an was completed and sent to the four corners of the world during the time of Sayyidina 'Uthman - a consensus to which no one, not even the Shi'a disagree!


No. I just said that I wasn't sure that he said what you asked.

So if he did not speak verbatim - did he explain the Qur'an? If he did, how did he do so?


So I am guessing that the word for Surah has also been translated wrong, and mean of no significant order when it comes to arabic? Seriously.

The word "surah" has a wide range of meanings which I will not get into - because the detail is overwhelming.

These things are not something that average people like me or you can comprehend. There are scholars who have spent their lives understanding and researching the Qur'an. Scholars whom some people degrade merely to "men and what good reputations they may have". Subhanallah - sister believe me, if you think you will be gaining everything from the Qur'an then you are wrong, for the Qur'an is a difficult book to read. An english translation does not suffice at all.

Anyhow - even if the Qur'an was compiled as we see today then still the oldest manuscript remaing the Uthmani one.


Do you believe that hadiths have diviine protection? If no, why do you follow them when they aren't gaurantteed any protection?

Yes, I do


Also what is your opinion of hte Messenger being the only addressed in parts of the Quran? Not only being only addresed, but being commanded to do things? What is your opinion on why God would allow us to read those parts??

I dont understand the relevance of this - can you rephrase your question Insha'Allah?

May Allah grant you all good in this world and the Akhira.

Wasalam

[AbuZaid]

As Salaam Alaikum AbuZaid,



The above still does not establish the hadiths that we have today. The hadiths which had been "narrarated" for years and not written down until many years after it began it's narration.



I disagree. The thing that the Messenger was suppose to teach was the Message and the Wisdom, which is the Quran.





The Book is obviously the Quran of course.

What is the Wisdom? It's the Quran.




Well look at the Quran. Do you not believe that the Messenger taught the Quran??




The question though is how authentic are these so called hadiths? Thye are not authentic at all and can't be gauranteed because they do not have divine protection like the Quran. You have no idea what so ever if these hadiths were really the Messenger's saying. Nothing in the Quran points to the fact that it is his sayings, NOTHING. You only believe it becuase people, for generations, have been saying this.

But again, nothing in the Quran ever suggest that hte Messenger will command of us to follow soemthing other than teh Quran. Along with that, the Messenger did not leave us a book of hadiths, he left us the Quran only. That's it.

His purpose was to preach the Message, and that is clearly the Quran. Laws such as a don't arch your eyebrows, don't wear your pants pass your ankles, aren't mentioned anywhere in the Quran. No proof what-so-ever that these are really the sayings of the Messenger. NONE.


salaam


As Salaam Alaikum

I believe that your definition of Hadeeth is merely those with rulings within them such as the example you gave about arching the eyebrows and wearing pants pass your ankles.
My definition of Hadeeth and I believe it is the definition of all of the scholars of Hadeeth is a lot more general than just Fiqh rulings placed within them, therefore it seems as though you do not want to follow thnigs that you dont want to follow from within and do things that you want to do. In the Quran there is no mention of reciting Fatiha in Salaah or even the how to do Ruku. How do you do it...there is a mention of doing it but not mentioning how to do it.

What about the Hadeeth mentioning incidents that took place at the time of the Prophet SAW. you dont believe in them. And also the Hadeeth mentioning things besides Fiqh issues like The Hadeeth of Adhaan. do You believe in it.


You said that the Prophet taught the Quran. the words he used to teach Hadeeth were called what? What about the Hadeeth explaining Tafseer of verses? Is that not classified as Hadeeth.

Allah SWT Says in Sarah An Najm
Your Companion is neither astray nor being misled. Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) Desire. It is no less than inspiration sent down to him:

This doesnt mean that he only spoke exact words of the Quran. How would he explain it then? he ould probably have to use other words which werent exact words of the Quran.

[salman]

Salamu 'Alaykum

Alhamdulilah - Maulana Abu Zaid is right on target.

The reason I asked you sister whether you believed the Prophet *only* read the text of the Qur'an verbatim was precisely due to this reason. Now we have two choices:

[1] The Prophet only read the verbatim text of the Qur'an as it was revealed without explaining it,

[2] The Prophet read the verbatim text of the Qur'an and also explained it.


As for [1] it is incorrect for not only is it illogical to assume so, but it contradicts the Qur'an itself such as the verse:

- And We have revealed unto you the Remembrance that you may explain to mankind that which has been revealed for them, and that haply they may reflect. (16:44)

(end quote)

The word "explain" here is "aam" (general) and relates to legal judgements as well as things beyond it.

There are other verses of similar nature such as 16:44, 2:151 and many more.

If we accept that the Prophet explained the verses of the Qur'an then we must accept that the words of the Prophet were:

[1] Divinely inspired as the Qur'an itself states in Surah Najm,

[2] Authoratative, for such divinely inspired wording cannot be any less then authoratative as we have been commanded to follow them. This is evidently clear in the numerous verses that state "Obey Allah and His messenger..."

Lastly, another proof in the Qur'an that the Prophet is an independent source of authority and guidance is the verse:

- Oh you who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the messenger and those of you who are in authority... (4:59)

(end quote)

There is a very important yet subtle point alluded to here which only one of keen insight and 'ilm would be able to ponder and understand.

If we see the structure of the verse we notice that obedience has been obligatory in two cases. Firstly, for Allah. Secondly, for the Messenger. The repetition of the verb "obey" for the Prophet yet not for "those of you who arein authority" shows the legal sources through which our religion is derived namel the Qur'an and the Sunnah.

There is another verse I would like to discuss but Insha'Allah alittle later.

Wasalam

[JustBelieve]

As Salaam Alaikum Salman,

But this is what I don't understand, how can hadiths be divinly protected if it is admited that there are "weak" hadiths and "strong" hadiths... Hadiths being labeled as "weak" only prove the corruption that so called sayings of hte Messenger has gone under. How can God expect for anyone to believe in that? The Quran has never gone through such a scrutiny, but hadiths have by scholars for centuries.-- This proves the whole discredit of "word of mouth" news. I don't understand the lack of protection hadiths have gone under, compared to the Quran, since both are supposidly divine by SUnni thought. Can you at least tell me why according to what you believe in history?

About Al-Kitab adn Al-Hikma, again I look at them as the same. The reason is because I believe that Al-Kitab is also an attribute of hte Quran. NOt only that but there are several ways to look at as well. If you say that the Al-Kitab is the Quran, just another name, ok.... but we all agree that there is wisdom in the Quran. The Book is full of wisdom. So you can teach the "Al-Kitab" (such as teaching them hjow to recite the Surah) but teaching them the Wisdom (of it) is different.


But even besides all points, I very much agree in obeying the Messenger and following him.

BUT the question of these so called sayings is what I have a hard time with (and this is how i should of formed by originaly post, my fault, I messed up). There is so much that contradicts the Quran, and ADDS MORE on to what the Quran says. There are even hadiths that people take as aborgating the Quran! The Quran is complete, so I don't understand how this can possibly be from the Messenger. I mean who are all of these poeple, Buhkari, etc??? Did Allah give them this authority to write this stuff down??? No.--- but yet poeple belvie so because someone had a dream about Buhkari being given permission from the Messenger. Seriously, this sounds silly to me. I can't overcome this. I am unsure on if this is really what hte Messenger said! and the "weak" hadiths add more confusion, to how these are supposidly "divine".

Do you know of a good book that addresses my issues?

salaam

[Kareem]

read the authority of sunna hhttp://ccminc.faithweb.com/iqra/articles/authsun/index.html

[salman]

Salamu 'Alaykum Wa Rahmatullah


But this is what I don't understand, how can hadiths be divinly protected if it is admited that there are "weak" hadiths and "strong" hadiths... Hadiths being labeled as "weak" only prove the corruption that so called sayings of hte Messenger has gone under. How can God expect for anyone to believe in that? The Quran has never gone through such a scrutiny, but hadiths have by scholars for centuries.-- This proves the whole discredit of "word of mouth" news. I don't understand the lack of protection hadiths have gone under, compared to the Quran, since both are supposidly divine by SUnni thought. Can you at least tell me why according to what you believe in history?

The thing is this sister: Both the Qur'an and Hadith went through rigorous authentication processes. There is absolutely know denying this. The only one who denies this is one who denies history, and one who denies history - well, lets say it is not much use speaking or trying to convince that person.

As for hadith being divine - then what do we mean by Sunna? In hadith terminology what it denotes any saying (qawl), action (fi'l), approval (taqreer), or attribute (sifa), whether physical (khilqiyya) or moral (khuluqiyya) ascribed to (udeefa ila) the Prophet whether before or after the beginning of his prophethood.

Now - firstly, do you agree that the sayings, actions, approvals and attributes of the Prophet are divinely inspired, in accordance with what Surah Najm says? If you do then do you agree that the Sunna "itself" is authoratative, although specific wording of the Sunna may not be?

Secondly, do you agree to the fact that the Prophet of Allah was sent to explain the Qur'an, and explanation requires clarification through action, sayings and the like. If you do then why do you deny the Sunna as authoratative?

If you deny it because of the method of its compilation and the outcome of the method, then this is unacceptable for Allah has:

[1] Clearly told us to obey the Prophet
[2] Clearly told the Prophet to explain His commands and therefore:

[3] We *must* follow and obey these explanations.

This is all goes to show that the "method" is not false, rather it revolves around the divine wisdom of Allah to place such a method with his righteous scholars to safeguard the Prophetic message.

Thirdly, how do you assume that there is a "lack of protection"? I told you previously that if you read the Science of Hadith and the science of authentication and discrediting you will be more then confident that the hadith system is very rigorous...

But, do you understand the hadith system well enough to critique it, and if you do not then how do you criticise something which you have no knolwedge of? Rather, how do you even consider speaking of the Qur'an and what it means without knowledge if all its related sciences?


About Al-Kitab adn Al-Hikma, again I look at them as the same. The reason is because I believe that Al-Kitab is also an attribute of hte Quran. NOt only that but there are several ways to look at as well. If you say that the Al-Kitab is the Quran, just another name, ok.... but we all agree that there is wisdom in the Quran. The Book is full of wisdom. So you can teach the "Al-Kitab" (such as teaching them hjow to recite the Surah) but teaching them the Wisdom (of it) is different.

If you agree that "teaching" is something other then the "text" of the Qur'an - and this teaching constitutes the words and actions of the Prophet then you have accepted as authoratative and divine the Prophetic Sunnah.

Why?

Simply because the Prophets words and action are not necessarily the Qur'an - and rejecting what the Prophet said outside of the Qur'an is rejecting the Qur'an itself.


BUT the question of these so called sayings is what I have a hard time with (and this is how i should of formed by originaly post, my fault, I messed up). There is so much that contradicts the Quran, and ADDS MORE on to what the Quran says. There are even hadiths that people take as aborgating the Quran! The Quran is complete, so I don't understand how this can possibly be from the Messenger..

No. The Sunnah does not contradict the Qur'an. Whoever beleives so is someone who is not aware of the sciences of religion.

It is not upto the likes of me and you to decide what is contradictory and what is not. For people who cannot even understand the Qur'an in its native language properly, we should stick to our level of following the Ulema.

But what if I was to show you a verse from the Qur'an - wherein two equally acceptable meanings can be used but both refer to something different? Would you categorise this as a contradiction within the Qur'an itself?

And as for additions to the meaning fo the Qur'an then the qur'an describes Prayer as bowing and prostrating and standing and sitting - but not as reciting the Fatiha the Surahs, the Dhikr, the blessings on the Prophet. would such an addition be rejected merely because the Qur'an does nto mention it?


I mean who are all of these poeple, Buhkari, etc??? Did Allah give them this authority to write this stuff down??? No.--- but yet poeple belvie so because someone had a dream about Buhkari being given permission from the Messenger. Seriously, this sounds silly to me. I can't overcome this. I am unsure on if this is really what hte Messenger said! and the "weak" hadiths add more confusion, to how these are supposidly "divine"

Did Allah give anyone the authority to do anything except the Prophet? Based on your point a person does not even have the right to try and understand the Qur'an at all.

Did Allah not repeatedly say "Ask those who know" and "Are those who have knowledge and those who dont equal" and so forth? This is authority.

Can you tell me how the "explanation" and "teaching" of the Qur'an was kept intact if not by these people?


Do you know of a good book that addresses my issues?

A few, I'll look around.

Wasalam

[AbuZaid]

As Salaam Alaikum Salman,

But this is what I don't understand, how can hadiths be divinly protected if it is admited that there are "weak" hadiths and "strong" hadiths... Hadiths being labeled as "weak" only prove the corruption that so called sayings of hte Messenger has gone under. How can God expect for anyone to believe in that? The Quran has never gone through such a scrutiny, but hadiths have by scholars for centuries.-- This proves the whole discredit of "word of mouth" news. I don't understand the lack of protection hadiths have gone under, compared to the Quran, since both are supposidly divine by SUnni thought. Can you at least tell me why according to what you believe in history?

About Al-Kitab adn Al-Hikma, again I look at them as the same. The reason is because I believe that Al-Kitab is also an attribute of hte Quran. NOt only that but there are several ways to look at as well. If you say that the Al-Kitab is the Quran, just another name, ok.... but we all agree that there is wisdom in the Quran. The Book is full of wisdom. So you can teach the "Al-Kitab" (such as teaching them hjow to recite the Surah) but teaching them the Wisdom (of it) is different.


But even besides all points, I very much agree in obeying the Messenger and following him.

BUT the question of these so called sayings is what I have a hard time with (and this is how i should of formed by originaly post, my fault, I messed up). There is so much that contradicts the Quran, and ADDS MORE on to what the Quran says. There are even hadiths that people take as aborgating the Quran! The Quran is complete, so I don't understand how this can possibly be from the Messenger. I mean who are all of these poeple, Buhkari, etc??? Did Allah give them this authority to write this stuff down??? No.--- but yet poeple belvie so because someone had a dream about Buhkari being given permission from the Messenger. Seriously, this sounds silly to me. I can't overcome this. I am unsure on if this is really what hte Messenger said! and the "weak" hadiths add more confusion, to how these are supposidly "divine".

Do you know of a good book that addresses my issues?

salaam

As Salaam Alaikum

Firstly
Hadeeth being classified as strong or weak has never been the approach of the Scholars of Hadeeth. The term weak is wrong and the term strong is wrong. The terms used are Saheeh, Hasan, and Daeef. These three names are terms in Hadeeth which cannot be translated as weak, sound or strong because they are terms in a specific field of knowledge and a dictionary translation will not serve the purpose of its correct translation.
In Hadeeth terminology, Saheeh has 2 types and Hassan has two types.
1) Saheeh lizaatihee
2) Saheeh Lighairihee
3) Hassan lizaatihee
4) Hassan Lighairihee

Saheeh Lizaatihee: That Hadeeth in which all of the narrators Aadil and have capability to capture the words relayed to them in full. This is known as Taam Adh Dhabt. There are three more qualities which will make a Hadeeth Saheeh. The Hadeeth is not Shaaz, or Muallal, and the chain is complete

Aadil means to be fair or just. The word Aadil is the active participle of the word Adl. The meaning of Aadil in the context of Hadeeth is that narrator keeps away from bad deeds, useless talk, tries to build his fear in Allah, and keeps a good sense of humor for example he is bashfull, doesn’t eat standing, doesn’t urinate standing, etc.

Regarding Taam Adh Dhabt, The Scholars of Usool Hadeeth say that Dhabt has 2 types.
1) Dhadt us Sadr: This means that when this person hears something he remembers it word for word such that whenever he wants he can repeat it without any trouble.
2) Dhabt Ul Kitaabah: this has 2 meanings.
a) When this person hears something, he writes it down without any mistakes and constantly check if there is any mistakes in it or not.
b) When this person gets a letter from someone, he keepts it well without misplacing it (which is the case with many Hadeeth that they were sent as letter.)

Shaaz means that Hadeeth which is narrated by one reliable narrator, but his Hadeth contradicts a Hadeeth narrated by more than one narrator who are also reliable.

Muallal is that Hadeeth in which one of the narrators who is carefull in quoting Hadeeth made an error in either the chain or the words of the Hadeeth.

Saheeh Lighirihee: That Hadeeth in which all the qualities of Saheeh lizaatihee are there but the quality of dhabt in the narrator(s) is/are weak. One conditions is that such a Hadeeth has a lot of chains of narration.

Hassan lizaatihee: That Hadeeth in which all the qualities of Saheeh lizaatihee are there but the quality of dhabt in the narrator(s) is/are weak. One condition is that this Hadeeth only has that very chain.

Hassan Lighairihee: That Daeef Hadeeth which has many chains of Narration.

Daeef: That Hadeeth in which besides the quality of Dhabt any other quality of Saheeh lizaatihee are missing.

secondly
You said there are many Hadeeth which contradict the Quran. I will challenge you to tell me the Hadeeth which contradict the Quran and I believe that they all have been false or misunderstood by the individual who found the contradiction.

thirdly
You said People said some Hadeeth abrogate the Quran. This is a known mistake of the people and it is well known that if a Hadeeth is contradicting a clear ruling of the Quran then that Hadeeth will not be taken. This again is a principle of Hadeeth, but the reality is that it did not take place by any of the Ulemaa of the truth.

Fourthly
You said “ you can teach them the Kitaab such as teaching them how to recite the Surah”. If the quran were revealed in english then you believe those verses explaining that the prophet SAW job was to teach the Kitaab would mean that it means teaching you how to pronounce the letters in english or recite the surahs in english? Majority of the Sahabah were Arabs who knew the language of the quran and because of that they obviously knew how to pronounce it.

Fifthly the preservation of the Hadeeth was firstly done by word of mouth also then by means of writing it. This writing was also done at the time of the Prophet SAW
Abu Hurayrah RA Says:When Allah gave victory to His Apostle over the people of Mecca, Allah's Apostle stood up among the people and after glorifying Allah, said, "Allah has prohibited fighting in Mecca and has given authority to His Apostle and the believers over it, so fighting was illegal for anyone before me, and was made legal for me for a part of a day, and it will not be legal for anyone after me. Its game should not be chased, its thorny bushes should not be uprooted, and picking up its fallen things is not allowed except for one who makes public announcement for it, and he whose relative is murdered has the option either to accept a compensation for it or to retaliate." Al-'Abbas said, "Except Al-ldhkhir, for we use it in our graves and houses." Allah's Apostle said, "Except Al-ldhkhir." Abu Shah, a Yemenite, stood up and said, "O Allah's Apostle! Get it written for me." Allah's Apostle said, "Write it for Abu Shah." (The sub-narrator asked Al-Auza'i): What did he mean by saying, "Get it written, O Allah's Apostle?" He replied, "The speech which he had heard from Allah's Apostle." Sahih Bukhari Volume 3, Book 42, Number 613)
.


Lastly you are talking so much about Hadeeth and Bukhari etc without any proofs or evidences. Many of your claims have not been supported by any evidence.
Please provide evidence of what you are claiming.

Jazaak Allah Br Salman for your previous answer.
Jazaak Allahu Khair
Abu Zaid Uthman Bin Mahmood

[ankaboot]

Assalamu alaikum, It is easy for us to sit and criticize the work of our pious elders and scholars, who devoted their lives so that the correct Deen would reache us. May Allah accept their efforts and give them highest place in Paradise, ameen.

I just wanted to add this little fact here, to show how careful they were in their collection of Ahadeeth:

Did you know that Imam Bokhari Rahmatullah Alaih compiled his collection of 7,275 Ahaadith by selection from 600,000. Before writing each Hadith he would make 2 Rakaat nafl Salaat.

Wassalamu Alaikum, ummahmad.

[Companion]

I agree with sister JustBelieve,

Had the words of the prophet been so important, as important as the Quran, the prophet would have written manuals himself to go along the Quran.

The fact remains he did not write any manuals himself for mankind. The prophet obviously strived to establish the Quran only.

Today, Muslims are at a confusion. Muslims are even not sure when exactly how the Quran was written down.

If one reads the Quran, it is obvious streight away that the Quran was revealed to be a book. A book with front and back cover and pages in between, lets not forget that.

The Quran may have come down in stages but all of it was coordinated strictly by Allah, at the end of it all, it is a complete book and preserved. The importance Allah draws in on the Quran as an absolute guide is amazing. We can believe with assurance that all the arrangement of chapters etc. is the divine will of Allah. With that, the intricacies of exactly how it was written down becomes insignificant.
This only the person who has read the complete Quran translation will appreciate.

I can reasonably assume that almost no body here have read the Quran translation as a book right from the beginning to the end. Tho I have a good feeling sister JustBelieve has.

I just cannot stress enough the importance of reading the whole Quran translation as a book. Too many of us here have read entire large books by people (scholars) with ease, but will struggle to testify that that we've read the Quran completely the same way. Is it because the Quran is too complicated? In that case get a modern translation.

Too often the response to reading the Quran as a book is that the Quran should be left to scholars only because it is too high up, that it should not be attempted to be read by 'normal' people. This is the wrong notion. Quran is a guide and book to guide everybody. Those whom Allah wills to guide on His way. It is a book for every individual. Again, to appreciate what Im saying, you really need to pick up a good modern translation and read the whole Quran, like you would read a novel. You will just not appreciate what the Quran is if you dont read it full translation.

If any one here do decide to read the entire Quran, then like myself, you are bound to find many contradictions with what you know about Islam. What the scholars have told you in books and what Allah is telling you in His Quran. Just to give some examples from the top of my head, scholars say man are allowed to marry 4 woman unconditionally provided they are from the people of the book. Upon reading the Quran you will find that Marrying up to four wives is only permitted in order to help raise orphans. Another example is that stoning to death is no where to be found in the Quran (rather in the Bible). Woman made from mans rib is no where in the Quran (it is in the Bible). For example when you read Surah Mariam, you see the Mariam is instructed to prostrate and bow down with those who bow down (ie. in congregation or jamah), yet scholars have been telling the womans prayer is best in the deepest corner of the house. Many more...

Reading the entire Quran makes it obvious that trivial things have no basis in Islam.

The Quran is indeed a miraculous book. You will appreciate it if you just read all of it with an easy to understand translation (not Pikthall or Yusuf Ali). The whole objective of the Quran is to make the reader mindful of Allah, and it achieves this beautifully. Many Muslims dismiss the credibility of the Quran by saying it is mostly stories of the past. But to dismiss the Quran with these allegation without reading it completely is a very uwise thing to do and is another excuse to keep away from the Quran.

If you read the entire Quran, you will come to see that, every single chapter works together to make a perfect system by which it moulds the readers mind to the total submission to Allah, by the will of Allah.

Other things one will notice is that all the righteous people mentioned in the Quran. The Quran draws example totally in their devotion and submission to their Creator, Allah only. No reference is ever made to their dress code, or to beards. These people mentioned of the past are given as examples of the level of devotion Allah deserves and that is the example for mankind.

One more thing to notice is, contrary to popular belief, you will see that Quran is self explanatory. For example, one derives the full benefit of the verse without knowing the circumstances behind how it was revealed, it explains itself. For example, Quran does not give the answer to any of the disbilievers allegations without first stating clearly what the question of the disbeliever is. Reading a hadith on the 'background' of the revelation of can even make things confusing.

Tafsir is not an alternative to reading the entire Quran as a book. A tafsir is a persons (creation) own commentary on the Creators book - Quran. It cannot compare and the Quran is not dependant any human authers book as most will claim (because they have not read the Quran).

My bottom line to everyone is, read the Quran, and see what I have said is true or not.

Peace.

[Companion]

Sister Ummahmad,

That only reveals further the nature of hadiths. Imam Bukhari discarded hundreds of thousands and recorded only about 1% of hadith he knew as having some reliability, rest being totally unreliable, weak, fabricated etc.

Peace.

[AbuZaid]

I can reasonably assume that almost no body here have read the Quran translation as a book right from the beginning to the end. Tho I have a good feeling sister JustBelieve has.

That is a very wrong and general statement.


Today, Muslims are at a confusion. Muslims are even not sure when exactly how the Quran was written down. Another wrong statement. i myself hold many workshops on this topic.


Too often the response to reading the Quran as a book is that the Quran should be left to scholars only because it is too high up, that it should not be attempted to be read by 'normal' people

This is probably the situation where you live

I would also like to say that before placing such critical remarks, please read the previous posts properly and study a little bit on the topic of Uloom ul Quran and the topic of the preservation of Hadeeth. All of your questions are all answered there.

Jazaak Allahu Khair
Abu Zaid Uthman Bin Mahmood

[Tehnan]

Don't take this in a negative way,but->Abu Bukhari...LOL!!