I would call that hypocricy Diference of opnion is one thing I all for it You may not agree with you father or your brother Its kind of clear The Ahadith are not only an interesting aspect of Islam, but also an integral part of Islam. To begin, one must first understand what the Ahadith are. They are the only means we have of how Muhammad saws performed Islam. To read the Ahadith is very much like having Muhammad saws personally giving you his views of what we are to do as Muslims.
The Qur'an in all it's glory and beauty, is the reason we should be Muslims, the Ahadith tell us how. The Ahadith are not for a novice, aperson should first study the very basics of "The Science of Hadith" before reading a single Hadith. One needs to have a minimum of a basic knowledge of Isnad, The determination of Authenticity and Reliability.
Only then can one feel comfortable with reading the Ahadith. The Christians have a saying "What would Jesus a. We know exactly what Muhammad saws did in every trial he faced because of the Ahadith. While the Ahadith are similar to the Gospels of Jesus a.
We do not have just the accounts of 4 writers, we have the actual eye witness reports of hundreds if not thousands of eye witnesses in the Ahadith. First get a basic education in the "Science of Hadith" and then learn the wisdom of Ahadith. Greetings, You keep comparing the Hadeeth with traditions of Catholics and Jews. For anyone who does some basic research, it is very clear that such a comparison is absurd.
The Talmud of which there are two is a combination of Jewish Rabbis' teachings and discussions spanning hundreds of years. It didn't begin being written down until many hundreds of years after the original Torah is said to have been revealed. More than being a mere explanation of the Torah or tradition in practical Jewish life, the Talmud is more important to Jews in dictating day-to-day activities than the Torah. If the Talmud forbids something the Torah permits, it is considered forbidden; if it permits something the Torah forbids, it is permitted.
In the words of a Jewish revert, it is common to meet Jews who have studied Talmud for years and can explain complex Talmudic debates, but have never read the entire Tanakh. It is also common to find households that have expended large amounts of money to buy entire sets of Talmud and Mishna but do not have a single Tanakh.
Moving on to Christianity, you seem to be referring to 'apostolic succession' claimed by Catholics for preservation of their teachings. What this really is is blind submission to an institution the church which is unaccountable to either scripture or history.
It is a belief in councils that have the ability to infallibly define doctrines which are not in the Bible. The claim of an 'unbroken chain' is also dubious when scrutinised, considering years without popes, simultaneous popes, antipopes, popes being deposed and restored and others being outrageously sinful.
Now, how does this compare to Hadeeth? The Hadeeth are revelation from Allaah to the Prophet Muhammad. They are not the sayings of scholars and leaders living centuries later. There is no contradiction between the Qur'an and Hadeeth, rather the two are complementary. All of the teachings of Islam were revealed and the religion completed during the lifetime of the Prophet. It is not possible for people to invent 'traditions' later and create their own doctrine in the way Jews and Christians have.
When did Hadeeth begin being written down? Hadeeth were compiled and written down from the time of Prophet Muhammad.
There is evidence of existence of hadith collections from as early as the first century of Hijra. Moreover, Hadeeth have been preserved in memory and a huge science in Islam is dedicated to the study of narrators. Again, this is a major contrast with Islam and other religions. Please refrain from making ignorant remarks about Islam. I would have thought you have enough to account for regarding your own religion before trying to find fault with ours.
Salaam again, You have said that Muslims do the same thing you mentioned above with the Qur'an as well - in your words, similar to the Christians and Jews. This goes against your entire premise in this thread as quoted above.
The following is your response to a member's post: Your comparisons are conflicted. Thus, this understanding is not coherent. It is recommended that you take the time to appreciate the valuable posts that have been posted by members in this thread in relation to this. A further recommendation would be for you to register for the following online course. Financial aid is available if requested.
Uloom Al-Hadith with Shaykh Dr. Mateen Khan. Hadiths dont kill people - people kill people. As a Christian you should know that the bible didn't kill and create divisions between the Catholics, the protestants,, eastern orthodox church etc. They were remembered by close followers of the Prophet and were later written down. They teach Muslims how to live their lives, and to understand and follow the teachings of the Qur'an. When a Muslim follows the example of the Prophet Muhammad as laid out in the Hadith, they are following the Sunnah , or customary practices of the Prophet.
They are not intended to be read, analyzed, and interpreted without the necessary tools for proper understanding. In his excellent book, The Death of Expertise, Tom Nichols highlights how the internet challenges actual learning.
Although people may think they are learning when they search the internet, they are more likely to be immersed in yet more data they do not understand. What often happens online is an avoidance of reading in the traditional sense.
Instead of reading with the aim of learning, it often involves reading to win an argument or to confirm a pre-existing belief. These explanations had the force of law and Muslims understood them to be another form of revelation, which they called the Sunnah.
Hadith rejecters have arrived at many different conclusions concerning Islamic law and rituals. How often does one perform it, what does one say in it, and how many units does it contain? Muslims also differ over the details of prayer, but the fundamentals of prayer such as the number of prayers per day, the physical format, and certain core elements are agreed upon. Texts do not speak for themselves; readers always provide context and bring their assumptions to their understanding of texts.
This could have only been distinguished by the Prophet's indication that a particular verse was the speech of God and not his own. For example, the verses that address intoxication give contradictory advice:. Were intoxicants prohibited at first and then gradually allowed except when one was praying or were they allowed at first and then gradually prohibited?
The Sunnah provides the necessary context to these verses and others like them. The Sunnah as revelation. Because the vast majority of these Prophets did not have books, there must have been a non-scriptural form of revelation. Despite these Prophets not having scriptures, people were still required to obey them.
Moses was given scripture after Pharaoh was destroyed. This means that even when Moses did not have scripture his people were still required to follow him. These verses established that revelation is not limited to a book but can take different forms. Azami goes on to state:. Upon closer examination, we notice that the verse mentions the revelation of two distinct things. Second is that which was already been revealed to the people; i.
The Arabs of the seventh century excelled in all aspects of the Arabic language. They competed in poetry and delivered eloquent speeches, all of which are the main sources of Arabic literature today.
Muhammad Mustafa Al-Azami d. If you differ in anything, then refer it to Allah and His Messenger if you believe in Allah and the last day; that is better and the best interpretation. Ibn al-Qayyim d. It then goes on to say that if a dispute arises, it should be referred to God and His Messenger. How does one refer to God and His Messenger?
There is nothing in this verse that indicates the necessity of meeting the Messenger. What is meant by referring to him is to return to the words of God and His Messenger, not their beings. What does it mean to separate between God and His Messengers? Therefore, separation does not mean split up in their beings, because it is obvious that the two are completely different and separate.
Rather it refers to separating between them with regards to obedience or stating that one will obey God but not the Messengers.
0コメント