The question on what defines a sunni muslim often arises, and the answer according to the Ulamaa of Islam is that a Sunni Muslim is one who adheres to one of the two schools of Aqida (doctrine), which is the Ash’ariyya and the Maturidiyya, and one of the four schools of fiqh (jurisprudence), who is Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i and Hanbali.
Refer to Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, in his brilliant work Fatawa al-Hadithiyya.
Abu Skander's blog 
February 22, 2008 at 6:28 am |
So which school of Aqida amd school of Fiqh did the Prophet follow to make him a good sunni muslim?
February 22, 2008 at 11:46 am |
Perhaps you want to ask which manhaj he followed in 3ilm al-jar7 wal ta3dil too?
February 22, 2008 at 1:50 pm |
my point is the Prophet did not follow any of the schools you mentioned, yet funnily enough he still could be considered a good muslim. By fossilizing our faith in schools of juriprudence that existed thousands of years ago, we do our faith great harm. If we remain in the same place, we infact fall behind in relation to everything else that is moving forwards.
February 22, 2008 at 4:23 pm |
That argument is invalid because the schools is not one particular opinion but a scientific method to derive this opinion.
And about your anology to the Prophet (saw), you should not compare. What the prophet did was nothing but revelation (Surat al-Najm) and naturally he did not need a method for understanding his own words. The same is true for the Sahaba (ra) – they did not need a method for understanding their own master.
However, the same was not always true for the Tabi’een and the Taba’ al-Tabi’een, thats why the mazhabs came around in this period.
Likewise, you can say that the Hadith science is an innovation because the Prophet (saw) did not do this, but what do you expect? That the Prophet (saw) had a science on how to understand what he himself were saying?
February 22, 2008 at 8:49 pm |
Although I agree that the Prophet did not need an explanation as explanation would have been intuitive by a divine act, I disagree with you that the Sahaba did not need an explanation: that is most ridiculous. They were but normal men and women in dire need of guidance and the Prophet would have had some explaining to do!
As for the Hadith books, I do not need a holy book other than the Qoran. If you need another book that is up to you.
I remind you that the Prophet himself forbade them from writing any of his sayings while he was alive, other than the Qoran, and every Hadith was written after his death, most of the references were in fact written down two centuries or more later. I can’t tell you what somebody said last week in this day and age of computers and video, can you really tell me that they wrote it down so correctly two hundred years later in THAT day and age? Have you considered how influenced the people writing the “Hadiths” may have been by politics and personal gains of those around them and those in power at that time? Come on, you can’t be so naive to think that a book written by Humans can be anything but corrupt and full of mistakes. That is why we have the Qoran, so that we don’t follow any book written by Humans.
These men who’s schools you follow were living in circumstances that do not apply to the modern age whatsoever. What they wrote applied to what they knew then and may have worked for their ancient times. We live in the modern times, our religion was designed to grow with the times, we cannot allow it to be stunted by being held back in History.
February 23, 2008 at 5:49 pm |
“As for the Hadith books, I do not need a holy book other than the Qoran. If you need another book that is up to you. ”
– If this is what one believe, i do not know if such one are considered muslim by the traditional ulama. Whatever the Prophet (saw) said, is revelation, revealed by Allah. No one rejects them except a disbelieve, because Allah (swt) orders us to obey Allah (swt) and his messenger – not only Allah (swt).
Like the Prophet (saw) said;
I leave behind me the Quran and the Sunnah, whoever adheres to these shall never go astray.
“I remind you that the Prophet himself forbade them from writing any of his sayings while he was alive”
– This happended in the time of the Sahaba (ra) and none of them forbade doing so – Abu Hurayrah (ra) had a pupil who used to write down what his teacher would relate from the Prophet (saw). Would Abu Hurayrah (ra) allow this if it was forbidden?
“I can’t tell you what somebody said last week in this day and age of computers and video, can you really tell me that they wrote it down so correctly two hundred years later in THAT day and age? Have you considered how influenced the people writing the “Hadiths” may have been by politics and personal gains of those around them and those in power at that time? Come on, you can’t be so naive to think that a book written by Humans can be anything but corrupt and full of mistakes”
– Mistakes and corruption occur. Thats why the scholars of Islam through the time (and i mean SCHOLARS, not Rashad Khalifa) have developed a science to find out if they are true.
Things as a mutawatir hadith exist. That is something that is mass-transmitted, for example one of Ali’s (ra) sermon in Kufa was witnessed by more than 30 different people and collected through more than 80 different chains with a similar wording – would all these people, of different faiths among many who did not see each other, gather on the same lie? Highly unlikely.
February 23, 2008 at 7:11 pm |
As for the Hadiths, you know most of them weren’t MASS TRANSMITTED EH? Just a few words from abu-hurairah (who was forbidden to ever write a hadith by the Khalifa Omar because he stole the Zakat money of Bahrain) and then we have to follow them for all eternity. God Almighty help us from his words. One of the main transmitters was 9 yrs old when the Prophet died, yeh lets follow his words for all eternity too.
As for the scholars did not develop a “science” they are not scientists, pls stop with this delusion. They are religious men with their own ideas and biases, and we don’t have to follow them to be muslim. Their words are not munazzal and I choose to follow the Qoran instead. If I was living 1400+ ago, the Prophet’s own words would guide me comming straight from him. But 1400+ yrs later his words have been filtered through time and space and the hands and thoughts and wills and wants of many men. God Almighty sent as the Qoran that is unchangeable, if it is not enough of a book for you, then I think that is your choice.
you said “if this is what one believe, i do not know if such one are considered muslim by the traditional ulama”
Luckily for us then that it is God Almighty who decides who is a muslim not the ulamas eh?
February 23, 2008 at 7:26 pm |
Well if you want God to protect you from the words of the sahaba then that is a deviancy from islam.
Yes i know a lot about the hadith science also that only few are mutawatir, a hadith can be sahih if it is ahad too. It is about the men narrating them and its matn. Of course, the Quran in the main source.
And well yes, Ibn Abbas (ra) was very young when the prophet died, but many of things he narrated was things he head from older sahaba (ra) as Imam Dhahabi states in his Mizan al-I’tidal. According to this, it was common for the sahaba (ra) to due this, and there is no 3eib in it, as they are all upright (3udul).
Did you ever care to read about Imam Bukhari (ra) and his methods?
“As for the scholars did not develop a “science” they are not scientists, pls stop with this delusion. They are religious men with their own ideas and biases, and we don’t have to follow them to be muslim”
– Well yes they were scientists. Being a religious man do not make you less scientist. Ibn Hajar, Suyuti and Al-Dhahabi were in fact among the most brilliant of these scientists.
“But 1400+ yrs later his words have been filtered through time and space and the hands and thoughts and wills and wants of many men. God Almighty sent as the Qoran that is unchangeable, if it is not enough of a book for you, then I think that is your choice.”
– Well according to the Quran itself, we should obey the Prophet (saw) and his messenger – his messengers words are not something that eventually will disappear, else there will be no meaning for revealing this. Keep in mind that Islam is universally true for all people and for all time – Muhammad (saw) was a warner and guide for every people.
And he told us to adhere to the Quran and the sunnah – these two must not be seperated as done by Rashad Khalifa and his pupils.
February 23, 2008 at 10:46 pm |
please continue….. this is very interesting.
Do I insult anyone if I say that the time and place when the Prophet lived, is gone ? The world he lived in is no more. And yet some try to fit “our” world into “his” world…. not an easy mental exercise.
February 24, 2008 at 6:45 am |
God Almighty told us to Obey the Prophet and head his message.
The Prophet’s message was the Qoran. If the Prophet were alive now I would obey every word he said to the last letter, but he is not alive now so how can we know what he would have said to us? To say that the Sahaba are relating what “he would have said” is rather strange, because had he lived in this time he would have probably had different issues to deal with yes? I repeat that to me his Sunnah was his Good charachter , his kindess , his devoutness to God Almighty and his pure heart, if I follow these I think I’m doing well, don’t you?
God Almighty promised us that the Qoran is unchanging and we must follow it and learn from it, not the stories told by the Sahaba are unchanging. Are the Sahaba not but human with human falacies or were they perfect? This “holification” of the Sahaba from humans who were lucky to have known the Prophet to “super-holy” humans is one of the main differences between us: what I think about Islam as a pure religion from God almighty unadulturated by human hands. The Sahaba are human, and a product of their own times.The only part that is unadulturated is the Qoran, and hence it is a book for all times.
As for the transmission of the Hadiths, have you ever played Chinese Whispers? It is a Children’s Birthday Party Game: you sit in a circle and whisper a word into the ear of the person sitting next to you. By the time the word comes back to the beginning of the cirlce it is always changed into something else. This is the way of man.
you said:”Well if you want God to protect you from the words of the sahaba then that is a deviancy from islam”
My friend, the words of the Qoran are Islam not the words of the Sahaba.
February 24, 2008 at 1:25 pm |
Halalhippie:
While the time is changing, the benefit of the sunnah does not. There might be certain matters where the Sunnah is impossible today, and in these cases it is a matter of ijtihad on how to do react then. Thats what we have our scholars for.
Muslima:
“The Prophet’s message was the Qoran. If the Prophet were alive now I would obey every word he said to the last letter, but he is not alive now so how can we know what he would have said to us? To say that the Sahaba are relating what “he would have said” is rather strange, because had he lived in this time he would have probably had different issues to deal with yes?”
– Probably some issues would not have to be dealt with today YES, and some issues would have to be dealt with today but not back then YES! But that does not invalidates the Sunnah, the essence of his acts. We still only know the details of prayer through the hadith, its mustahabat and so forth, we only know the sunnah of the Adhan from the hadith, not the Quran, and so forth.
“I repeat that to me his Sunnah was his Good charachter , his kindess , his devoutness to God Almighty and his pure heart, if I follow these I think I’m doing well, don’t you?”
– How do you even know about his character in details? Do you know how he used to greet christians or jews, what the sunnah is for dealing with christians or jews etc? You have to follow that sunnah too, but yet you reject it.
In fact most of the life of the Prophet (saw) is unknown to us if you follow your logic, that is ridicolous.
“God Almighty promised us that the Qoran is unchanging and we must follow it and learn from it, not the stories told by the Sahaba are unchanging.”
– And he also told us to obey his Prophet (saw), and there will be no meaning for the Prophet (saw) to leave behind his sunnah along with the Quran if it would’nt have been preserved. I can provide you with various chains for the Quran and Sunnah thing.
“Are the Sahaba not but human with human falacies or were they perfect? This “holification” of the Sahaba from humans who were lucky to have known the Prophet to “super-holy” humans is one of the main differences between us: what I think about Islam as a pure religion from God almighty unadulturated by human hands. The Sahaba are human, and a product of their own times.The only part that is unadulturated is the Qoran, and hence it is a book for all times. ”
– So the sunnah is not for all times even though it was the legacy of our Prophet (saw) along with the Quran!?
As for the Sahaba, they were not ma3someen (infallible), but they were all 3udul (just and upright). Remember that among them were the first of the Muhajirin and the Ansar, and Allah (jj) says about them:
And the first to lead the way, of the Muhajirin and the Ansar, and those who followed them in goodness – _Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him_, and He hath made ready for them Gardens underneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide for ever. That is the supreme triumph. (9:100)
So Allah (swt) is pleased with those who follow the Sahaba! In fact this, and one other aya, is what we build our belief about the sahaba upon. This is the other aya:
Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves. Thou (O Muhammad) seest them bowing and falling prostrate (in worship), seeking bounty from Allah and (His) acceptance. The mark of them is on their foreheads from the traces of prostration. Such is their likeness in the Torah and their likeness in the Gospel – like as sown corn that sendeth forth its shoot and strengtheneth it and riseth firm upon its stalk, delighting the sowers – that He may enrage the disbelievers with (the sight of) them. Allah hath promised, unto such of them as believe and do good works, forgiveness and immense reward. (48:29)
Look how Allah (swt) praises the Sahaba, which you accuse of corruption.
In fact the Sahaba (ra) are all the believers who saw the Prophet (saw) and on some level i believe their knowledge is higher than ours, considering that none of us ever saw the Prophet (saw), and that Allah (swt) is pleased with those who follow the sahaba (ra).
“As for the transmission of the Hadiths, have you ever played Chinese Whispers? It is a Children’s Birthday Party Game: you sit in a circle and whisper a word into the ear of the person sitting next to you. By the time the word comes back to the beginning of the cirlce it is always changed into something else. This is the way of man.”
– Then my question arrives:
Is it absolutely impossible that you tell it to such a righteous man who will never corrupt anything and that you might get your words back the way they were? Is this impossible, or is there a possibility? If there is a possibility, then our hadith science suffices, because it actually tells about people who had a weak mamory, people who made mistakes but who were goods, people who were thiqah thabit (one which reliability is rock-steady), and people who were liars. Also the hadith science do not accept anything who goes against the Quran in its Matn. A golden shield who will always protect the believers.
And let me get one thing straight: Do you accuse the Sahaba of corruption?
February 24, 2008 at 3:34 pm |
“In fact the Sahaba (ra) are all the believers who saw the Prophet (saw) and on some level i believe their knowledge is higher than ours, considering that none of us ever saw the Prophet (saw), and that Allah (swt) is pleased with those who follow the sahaba (ra).”
Are you trying to tell me that every person who ever saw the prophet is a better muslim than you? that makes Abu-Sufian Sahaba too by your defenition does it not? Shall we follow what Abu-Sufian says?
By expanding “sahaba” label to everyone who ever said Hi to the Prophet while walking down the street, you are being very very naive if you don’t think ANY of them had a few ulterior motives that could be pushed through with a nice “Hadith”. As for your “scientific” method, the “scientists” decided on the rules and picked their Hadiths, we should be free to disagree with their method of choice, especially who they think is reliable and how easily a “chain” can be broken.
Obviously amongst those who knew the prophet were a select few who are better than all of us put together e.g. the Khalifas al Rashidin, his wives, and those who were the closest of the close. Not a nine year old boy and not someone who knew the prophet for a mere couple of years.
But also and again, whatever they said, the fact that it was narrated from person to person across hundreds of years means that applying simple logic,it must have changed.
Hence we cannot base our religion upon it and mearly look at in a historical context not as laws to base our lives on.
I said:“I repeat that to me his Sunnah was his Good charachter , his kindess , his devoutness to God Almighty and his pure heart, if I follow these I think I’m doing well, don’t you?”
You said:How do you even know about his charachter in details? Are you kidding me? You need some hadith proof that he was of good charachter and kind of heart?
You said:Do you know how he used to greet christians or jews, what the sunnah is for dealing with christians or jews etc? You have to follow that sunnah too, but yet you reject it- ?? when did I mention christians and jews in my posts??? And are you telling me that if you had no Hadith instructing you how he treated them then you would be at a loss on how to behave? Can’t you intuitivly be good towards all, you have to be told to do this?
You said:Also the hadith science do not accept anything who goes against the Quran in its Matn. A golden shield who will always protect the believers.
At this point I too will quote you something: In Sourat al Jathyia (45.6)
Tilka ayatu Allahi natlooha AAalayka bialhaqqi fabiayyi hadeethin baAAda Allahi waayatihi yuminoona
Can you see from that senctence that anything outside of the actual AYAT that were RECITED(natlooha) to the Prophet ie the HOLY QORAN, we need no furthur HADITH. It is funny how the exact word HADITH is used yes?
And as for Bukhari, I quote my favorite “Hadith”:
Volume 1, Book 8, Number 406:
Narrated Abu Said:
The Prophet saw sputum on (the wall of) the mosque in the direction of the Qibla and scraped it off with gravel. Then he forbade Spitting in front or on the right, but allowed it on one’s left or under one’s left foot.
So are you going to go ahead and spit in the mosque on Firday?
February 24, 2008 at 5:20 pm |
Sahaba is everyone who SAW the Prophet (saw), KNEW the Prophet (saw) and BELIEVED until his death.
Abu Sufyan (ra) falls under this category yes, he converted to Islam before his death and he lost his eyes in battle for the sake of Allah (swt).
“By expanding “sahaba” label to everyone who ever said Hi to the Prophet while walking down the street, you are being very very naive if you don’t think ANY of them had a few ulterior motives that could be pushed through with a nice “Hadith”. ”
– This were not the case of any Sahaba (ra). Just like the Prophets (as) are infallible because we need an infallible to guide us, the sahaba (ra) were 3udul because we need their example for following the Prophet (saw). This is the aqida of the muslims.
“But also and again, whatever they said, the fact that it was narrated from person to person across hundreds of years means that applying simple logic,it must have changed.
Hence we cannot base our religion upon it and mearly look at in a historical context not as laws to base our lives on.”
– Why did you not answer my question instead?
“Are you kidding me? You need some hadith proof that he was of good charachter and kind of heart? ”
– No but i need actual proof for how he acted. It is not what i think is good that is good, it is what the Prophet (saw) did that is good. It is that way around, not the other.
“when did I mention christians and jews in my posts??? And are you telling me that if you had no Hadith instructing you how he treated them then you would be at a loss on how to behave? Can’t you intuitivly be good towards all, you have to be told to do this?”
– If i had no nass (text) aviable, no ijtihad and no sahaba and no ijma3, i would have to act upon what i believe is good. But then again – what WE believe is good is not necessarily good. The mind of man is limited – we cannot imagine everything by ourselves. This is where Allah tt’s comes in – he sends us a divinely appointed Prophet that we can take for a guide, so that we have an example upon the Perfect Adab & Akhlaq.
About the Quranic aya you used, the translation is as follows:
045.006
YUSUFALI: Such are the Signs of Allah, which We rehearse to thee in Truth; then in what exposition will they believe after (rejecting) Allah and His Signs?
PICKTHAL: These are the portents of Allah which We recite unto thee (Muhammad) with truth. Then in what fact, after Allah and His portents, will they believe?
SHAKIR: These are the communications of Allah which We recite to you with truth; then in what announcement would they believe after Allah and His communications?
As every arab know, the word “haddath” has multiple meanings. Here is the explanation of the Ulamaa:
يقول تعالى ذكره: هذه الآيات والحجج يامحمد من ربك على خلقه نتلوها عليك بالحقّ: يقول: نخبرك عنها بالحقّ لا بالباطل، كما يخبر مشركو قومك عن آلهتهم بالباطل، أنها تقرّبهم إلى الله زُلْفَى، فبأيّ حديث بعد الله وآياته تؤمنون: يقول تعالى ذكره للمشركين به: فبأيّ حديث أيها القوم بعد حديث الله هذا الذي يتلوه عليكم، وبعد حججه عليكم وأدلته التي دلكم بها على وحدانيته من أنه لا ربّ لكم سواه، تصدّقون، إن أنتم كذّبتم لحديثه وآياته. وهذا التأويل على مذهب قراءة من قرأ «تُؤْمِنُونَ» على وجه الخطاب من الله بهذا الكلام للمشركين، وذلك قراءة عامة قرّاء الكوفيين. وأما على قراءة من قرأه { يُؤْمِنون } بالياء، فإن معناه: فبأيّ حديث يا محمد بعد حديث الله الذي يتلوه عليك وآياته هذه التي نبه هؤلاء المشركين عليها، وذكَّرهم بها، يؤمن هؤلاء المشركون، وهي قراءة عامة قرّاء أهل المدينة والبصرة، ولكلتا القراءتين وجه صحيح، وتأويل مفهوم، فبأية القراءتين قرأ ذلك القارىء فمصيب عندنا، وإن كنت أميل إلى قراءته بالياء إذ كانت في سياق آيات قد مضين قبلها على وجه الخبر، وذلك قوله: { لِقَوْمٍ يُوقِنُونَ } و
This is of Galal al-Din al-Suyuti.
يقول تعالى: { تِلْكَ آيَـٰتُ ٱللَّهِ } يعني: القرآن بما فيه من الحجج والبينات { نَتْلُوهَا عَلَيْكَ بِٱلْحَقِّ } أي: متضمنة الحق من الحق، فإذا كانوا لا يؤمنون بها، ولا ينقادون لها { تَلْكَ آيَاتُ ٱللَّهِ نَتْلُوهَا عَلَيْكَ بِٱلْحَقِّ فَبِأَيِّ حَدِيثٍ بَعْدَ ٱللَّهِ وَآيَاتِهِ يُؤْمِنُونَ }؟ ثم قال تعالى: { وَيْلٌ لِّكُلِّ أَفَّاكٍ أَثِيمٍ } أي: أفاك في قوله، كذاب حلاف مهين، أثيم في فعله وقلبه، كافر بآيات الله، ولهذا قال: { يَسْمَعُ ءَايَـٰتِ ٱللَّهِ تُتْلَىٰ عَلَيْهِ } أي: تقرأ عليه { ثُمَّ يُصِرُّ } أي: على كفره وجحوده؛ استكباراً وعناداً { كَأَن لَّمْ يَسْمَعْهَا } أي: كأنه ما سمعها، { فَبَشِّرْهُ بِعَذَابٍ أَلِيمٍ } أي: فأخبره أن له عند الله تعالى يوم القيامة عذاباً أليماً موجعاً، { وَإِذَا عَلِمَ مِنْ ءَايَـٰتِنَا شَيْئاً ٱتَّخَذَهَا هُزُواً } أي: إذا حفظ شيئاً من القرآن، كفر به، واتخذه سخرياً وهزواً { أُوْلَـٰئِكَ لَهُمْ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ } أي: في مقابلة ما استهان بالقرآن واستهزأ به، ولهذا روى مسلم في صحيحه عن ابن عمر رضي الله عنهما قال: نهى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أن يسافر بالقرآن إلى أرض العدو؛ مخافة أن يناله العدو. ثم فسر العذاب الحاصل له يوم معاده فقال: { مِّن وَرَآئِهِمْ جَهَنَّمُ } أي: كل من اتصف بذلك سيصيرون إلى جهنم يوم القيامة { وَلاَ يُغْنِى عَنْهُم مَّا كَسَبُواْ شَيْئاً } أي: لا تنفعهم أموالهم ولا أولادهم { وَلاَ مَا ٱتَّخَذُواْ مِن دُونِ ٱللَّهِ أَوْلِيَآءَ } أي: ولا تغني عنهم الآلهة التي عبدوها من دون الله شيئاً { وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عظِيمٌ } ثم قال تبارك وتعالى: { هَـٰذَا هُدًى } يعني: القرآن { وَٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ بِـآيَـٰتِ رَبِّهِمْ لَهُمْ عَذَابٌ مِّن رِّجْزٍ أَلِيمٌ } وهو المؤلم الموجع. والله سبحانه وتعالى أعلم.
And this is the one of Ibn Kathir, in his Tafsir al-Quran al-Adhim.
“And as for Bukhari, I quote my favorite “Hadith”:
Volume 1, Book 8, Number 406:
Narrated Abu Said:
The Prophet saw sputum on (the wall of) the mosque in the direction of the Qibla and scraped it off with gravel. Then he forbade Spitting in front or on the right, but allowed it on one’s left or under one’s left foot.
So are you going to go ahead and spit in the mosque on Firday?”
– This is a matter of shar7. If you want this shar7 in particular, then wait for a few days and let me find it for you.
February 25, 2008 at 6:46 am |
“Abu Sufyan (ra) falls under this category yes, he converted to Islam before his death and he lost his eyes in battle for the sake of Allah (swt).”
If you think Abu Sufian is Sahaba there is something truely strange in your logic. Abu Sufian converted at the last minute when there was no hope for the Kafiroon to win against Islam any more. I seriously doubt he is a good reference about Islam.
“This were not the case of any Sahaba (ra). Just like the Prophets (as) are infallible because we need an infallible to guide us.”
The prophet was infalliable because he was a Prophet. The Sahaba are men and women who are falliable. I remind you about how much arguing and fighting they had in between themselves. I remind you of what Saidna Ali insinuated about Sittna Aisha as an example. Obviously he was wrong because God Almighty would never allow the Prophet to marry someone who would hurt him. This is what I mean about the over-holification of everything and everyone. I repeat the closest of the close were obviously the best kind of people or the Prophet would not have “hung around” with them. However the best of people are still people and despite all good intentions they make mistakes and may get emotional and have errors in judgement.
Despite all this and again I repeat, whatever happend there, we only now have glimpses across time, we cannot base our religion upon glimpses only upon what is whole: the Qoran. I find myself in the strange position of trying to convince you that the Qoran is enough of a book to guide us.
About the Quranic aya you used, the translation is as follows:
I think you mean: About the Quranic aya you used, the translation COULD BE as follows. At least say Allahu Aalam.
For they are but men who are trying to explain the words of God Almighty, and they will always fall short however good their intentions. At least add and Allahu-Aalam, giving us the latitude to work to look for furthur explanations and understandings of the words of God Almighty, instead of fossilizing our understanding and limiting us to what was decided centruies ago.
And by the way I know that Hadath has multiple meanings, I just found it very interesting that God Almighty chose that word in that Aya in that position, so that it just “may be” understood like I explained it to you. Allahu Aalam.
“So are you going to go ahead and spit in the mosque on Firday?”
– This is a matter of shar7. If you want this shar7 in particular, then wait for a few days and let me find it for you.”
If you actually need to ask someone wether you are going to SPIT in the mosque then all hope is lost.
Allow me to decide for myself NOT TO SPIT IN A MOSQUE, without referring to anybody.
February 25, 2008 at 8:17 pm |
What you are saying about Ali (ra) and Aisha (ra) is nothing but great lies not shared by other than the shia, how can you held such beliefs as a muslim?
“If you think Abu Sufian is Sahaba there is something truely strange in your logic. Abu Sufian converted at the last minute when there was no hope for the Kafiroon to win against Islam any more. I seriously doubt he is a good reference about Islam.”
– And yet he lost his eyes for the sake of Allah!!!
Are you arab and do you even know what a Shar7 is? Shar7 is interpretating of ahadith. The reason that i will bring you Sharh is to prove to how how we muslims understand this hadith, and what its rulings are.
Regarding the Ayah, i’ve just gave to the commentary of the greatest muslim scholars, you should ahdere to them instead of the “united Submitters” or whatever they call themselves.
“I find myself in the strange position of trying to convince you that the Qoran is enough of a book to guide us.”
– Do you find yourself in a strange position trying to convince a muslim to leave what the majority of all muslims believe and has always believed?
February 26, 2008 at 5:49 am |
“I find myself in the strange position of trying to convince you that the Qoran is enough of a book to guide us.”
– Do you find yourself in a strange position trying to convince a muslim to leave what the majority of all muslims believe and has always believed?”
Are you trying to tell me that the majority of muslims believe that the Qoran is NOT enough of a book to guide us? How can you even write or think such a thing?
“Are you arab and do you even know what a Shar7 is? Shar7 is interpretating of ahadith”
Are you indicating that being an ARAB gives you a superior position with regards to islam? Is this what your sheikhs tell you to make you feel superior to everyobody else?
I know what Shariaa is, it is the attempts of man. However since it is the attempts of man to do this it means that yes there are mistakes some big some small however good their intentions were. Thus it is up to us to continuosly try to re-evaluate the Shariaa and not fossilize it in the words of some scholars who died a thousand years ago.
As for disagreement between the sahaba, could you please enlighten us on the Battel of the Camel?
By the way, I notice you ignored any mention of the spitting issue.
February 26, 2008 at 1:07 pm |
“Are you trying to tell me that the majority of muslims believe that the Qoran is NOT enough of a book to guide us? How can you even write or think such a thing?”
– We believe the Quran suffices along with the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw) – in fact a great deal of our understanding of the Quran is from narration of the Asbab al-Nuzul. And yes, this have always been the belief of all Muslims except the innovation movement of Rashad Khalifa and his Manaker al-Hadith people. The matter is the same – we need the asbab al-nuzul and the rulings of the Prophet (saw) in order to get the correct understanding of the Quran. This is believed upon by Mainstream Sunni’s and Salafists, Akhbari & Usuli Twelver Shias and the Ibadiyyah, who together contain more than 98% of all muslims in the world.
“Are you indicating that being an ARAB gives you a superior position with regards to islam? Is this what your sheikhs tell you to make you feel superior to everyobody else?”
– No but understanding arabic would help you not to understand “sharh” as “shari3a”. Sharia is the laws of Islam, while Sharh is the understanding on how to understand the ahadith. Like Tafsir, only on hadith. I have not located the Sharh yet (but i am working on it), and thats why i have not commended on it yet. And i’ve already told you this once before. Next time if you do not understand something then there is no shame in asking.
“As for disagreement between the sahaba, could you please enlighten us on the Battel of the Camel? ”
In fact i did this yesterday, look under the Haaretz thing.
February 26, 2008 at 3:45 pm |
I find it very strange that a muslim says he finds the Qoran “not enough”. The Qoran is perfection in writing and therefore is more than enough. Again I find myself defending the Qoran to you.
As for a whole nation believing one thing, well my friend, we have seen across the ages whole nations being wrong about many things.
As for Sharh, hadith, ahadith, shariaam, tafsir etc etc etc, those who cannot see what is pure confuse themselves in knots of words trying to see what is simple infornt of their eyes.
I do not disagree with you that what has been written is interesting and worth a read, as all ancient and historical writings are. What we disagree on is the fundemental nature of what is unchangeable, the words of God Almighty (the Qoran), or the words of man (the transmission and writing of the Hadiths). The words of man are interesting but full of mistakes and as such we cannot but revise and disagree and study and correct.
I have explained this before so if you don’t understand what I am saying then there is no shame in asking me to explain it to you again.
By the way you did not ask earlier wether I understood arabic, you asked wether I was an Arab which is a whole different thing: “Are you arab and do you even know what a Shar7 is?”.
So just to put your mind at ease, you can assume from now on that I understand arabic perfectly well.
I read your comment about the battle , you said “The battle of the Camel (Harb al-Jamal). A complex matter, but to summarize our answer, the war was a mistake provoked by hypocrites which we free Ali, Aisha, Talha and al-Zubair (May Allah be pleased with themall) for responsibility of”
A complex matter or not, and whoever instigated it, it was a HUGE mistake from people YOU claim are infalliable in the name of religion. Whatever excuses you make these people, however much we love them, must always be seen as human, good humans yes, but still human. by the way, I find it hilarious that “we” free them of all responsibility, who are “we” who now have the authority to absolve and free the Sahaba?
As for the spitting issue, don’t worry about it, I decided not to spit in the mosque already, as I told you before, whatever the shariaa says. My question was not what the shariaa says. My question was what will you do? Spit in the mosque (as accroding to your argument the Prophet allowed it and you are 100% sure he said this hadith) or not?
February 26, 2008 at 3:57 pm |
please note as regarding the above comment what I mean as the “words of man” should have also included the following:
the transmission of the hadiths and also the studies, explanations and decisions regarding islam and its meaning by the various scholars and schools .
February 27, 2008 at 5:04 pm |
“Muslima”, please read what i am saying.
“I find it very strange that a muslim says he finds the Qoran “not enough”. The Qoran is perfection in writing and therefore is more than enough. Again I find myself defending the Qoran to you.
As for a whole nation believing one thing, well my friend, we have seen across the ages whole nations being wrong about many things. ”
– What you find strange is that i do not reject the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw), and how can that be strange if the majority of the muslims is upon this, which you denied not long ago!?
“I read your comment about the battle , you said “The battle of the Camel (Harb al-Jamal). A complex matter, but to summarize our answer, the war was a mistake provoked by hypocrites which we free Ali, Aisha, Talha and al-Zubair (May Allah be pleased with themall) for responsibility of”
A complex matter or not, and whoever instigated it, it was a HUGE mistake from people YOU claim are infalliable in the name of religion. Whatever excuses you make these people, however much we love them, must always be seen as human, good humans yes, but still human. by the way, I find it hilarious that “we” free them of all responsibility, who are “we” who now have the authority to absolve and free the Sahaba?”
– First, they are not infallible and i’ve never said that.
Second, you did not read my comment. Read futher down and everything should be clear inshallah
February 27, 2008 at 7:18 pm |
“What you find strange is that i do not reject the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw)”
Abu Skander, please do not twist my words. I do not reject the Sunnah of the Prophet. What I reject is the fact that you are sure this Sunnah has reached us in its original form with what must have been specific nuances to every situation. Hence what I believe you have between your hands is not the Sunnah of the Prophet, and hence the reason why I don’t agree with you.
As for the battle of the camel, I had not read your furthur comments, only the first one, but have done so now. It was a sad situation but shows the humanity and the falliability of even those closest to the Holy Prophet. They were but humans, attempting to do their best. But in the end, they were both Sahaba and they did disagree leading to a war between muslims.
They were blessed but not perfect, hence my orignial comment about being careful about over-holification of people however good they were or however good their intentions were.
The last Holy one to be sent to us was our Prophet, all others were mere men and women, lucky to be living at the time he existed.
February 28, 2008 at 1:29 pm |
“I do not reject the Sunnah of the Prophet. What I reject is the fact that you are sure this Sunnah has reached us in its original form with what must have been specific nuances to every situation. Hence what I believe you have between your hands is not the Sunnah of the Prophet, and hence the reason why I don’t agree with you.”
– You also twist my words in saying that the Quran is not enough. It IS enough – but we need the Sunnah to follow this Quran good. It is not the Quran who does not suffice, it is US who do not suffice without have the divinely guided example to follow, and this is the best of all creations Muhammad (saw).
How do we do that? By following the Sahaba, as they were the only one that saw him! Allah ta3ala says that we is pleased with who follows the sahaba.
You have still not responded me: Is it absolutely impossible that i tell a righteous person a story (a righteous one who have never lied about anything), who narrated the samme incident to another righteous man, who writes it down as he have heard it, and that the essence of my story is still preserved? Is this IMPOSSIBLE or is there a possibility that this would happen?
Also do you follow a hadith if it is Mass-transmitted? or do you reject them all alike?
And yes, they were both Sahaba and thus UPRIGHT (not INFALLIBLE which i have said from the very beginning), and all they did was due to UPRIGHT intentions, and i hope that you can see how it is wrong to say that they are responsible for all these deaths.
February 28, 2008 at 5:35 pm |
Dear Abu-Sakndar,
It seems we go back and forth repeating the same words in different ways and not convincing each other of anything.
For me our religion was made to grow with the times and I fear your way is limiting its growth to a certain time, and hence preventing the growth and progress of a whole muslim nation.
I don’t think we will agree on any issue and so I will now bid you farewell.
Goodbye and Good luck to you.
Muslima
February 29, 2008 at 5:32 pm |
Okay thank you for the conversation i hope you will keep commenting on my blog
July 23, 2008 at 2:41 pm |
I don’t subscribe to any of the 4 madhaib nor the two schools of Aqeedah, does that make me a non-sunni Muslim? I think not.
August 13, 2008 at 1:45 pm |
Following the two schools of Aqida means having beliefs in accordance with them. But yes, it does take you out of sunni-islam according to this fatwa.