Quran & Hadith
Sep 8th, 2006, in News, by PatungThe validity or otherwise of the hadith tradition and its relationship to the Quran and how Muslims understand their faith.
This post has been created due to the female circumcision thread having gone substantially off-topic. Hopefully, within the spirit of the site, commenters can make some reference to the situation in Indonesia and within Indonesian Muslim organisations such as NU, etc, vis-a-vis their understanding of the hadith tradition.
212 Comments on “Quran & Hadith”
-
Muhammad Elijah says:
Assalamu ‘Alaikum moderator
Please kindly replace,if possible and delete this message
Yes,educated Muslims and Muslimahs have a choice between the pristine Islam which truly integrates into the whole of civilization
with
Yes,educated Muslims and Muslimahs have a choice between the pristine Islam which truly integrates Kitaab and Sunnah into the whole of civilization
-
Assalamu ‘Alaikum Brother Dray Musa
Why should the word “Hadith” in that ayah not be understood to include any and all Hadith?
This is simple linguistics. If an Arab Muslim or Muslimah happens to read this, she would never corroborate such a mistranslation.
It is like if you don’t know English. And in your country you refer to your national armed forces as Army. And you don’t know what does army actually mean?
If you come across two English speaking people who are discussing about for example an army(metaphorically) of writers, and you don’t know the context of discussion, you can easily be misled to conclude that they are talking about Army: which in your mind is your national armed forces when this is not the case.
-
draymusa says:
This is simple linguistics.
Please elaborate on the Arabic linguistics.
If an Arab Muslim or Muslimah happens to read this, she would never corroborate such a mistranslation.
First, what Mrl Khafi suggests is not translating the word “hadith,” but keeping it in the Arabic, and the first translator to do so was a native speaker of Arabic.
-
Mohammed Khafi says:
Assalamu Alaikum Brother Muhammad Elijah,
You said:
Please kindly replace,if possible and delete this message
Yes,educated Muslims and Muslimahs have a choice between the pristine Islam which truly integrates into the whole of civilization
with
Yes,educated Muslims and Muslimahs have a choice between the pristine Islam which truly integrates Kitaab and Sunnah into the whole of civilization
Brother Muhammad Elijah, there is no need to replace the first version, for indeed it is the correct one!
We could take it further and say: “Yes,educated Muslims and Muslimahs have a choice of the pristine Islam which truly integrates into the whole of civilization and is pure from corrupt post-demise of The Prophet innovations of Hadith and Sunnah.
You keep repeating the same verses about The Prophet being the judge between men, and if The Prophet were alive today I would love him to be the judge between us, but, and I have to keep repeating this fact, the Prophet is not with us today. The only guaranteed example we have of him is that portrayed in Al Quran, guaranteed by Allah Himself. There simply is no guarantee of any other information and one only needs to look through Sunnah and Hadith to find many corrupt examples of portrayals of The Prophet.
Al Quran emphasises Eternal Divine Law, and not the law of mortal men, our loyalty and devotions are to be to Allah, and not to His Prophets:
?????? ???? ???????? ????? ???????? ??????? ??????????? ???? ????????????
…If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers.[5:44]
?????? ???? ???????? ????? ???????? ??????? ??????????? ???? ?????????????
… And if any fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (No better than) wrong-doers.[5:45]?????? ???? ???????? ????? ???????? ??????? ??????????? ???? ????????????
…If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel. [5:47]
Peace
-
My apologies, but it suddenly struck me that I had fallen prey to the corruptors of Islam by including additions to the verses quoted above. Lets try again!
If any do fail to judge by what Allah hath revealed, they are Unbelievers.[5:44]
… And if any fail to judge by what Allah hath revealed, they are wrong-doers.[5:45]
…If any do fail to judge by what Allah hath revealed, they are those who rebel. [5:47]
The meaning has changed hasn’t it! Instead of being “no better” than unbelievers, wrong doers and rebels, suddenly those who do not judge by what Allah has revealed actually become unbelievers, wrong doers, and rebels!
Peace
-
asif raza says:
Assalamoalaikum.
I totally agree with MK that Quraan is the only divine book protected by God Himself,and we have to follow only the Quraan.
What I would like to ask and inquire from MK the following.
There is no mention of how do we have to offer our 5 times daily prayers.how do we stand,how to bow and how to prostrate and what we have to recite during our Salat?
likewise there is no mention as how we should burry our dead.what we have to pray in Salat Jinaza?
There is no mention of call for prayers AZZAN.so whom do we have to follow?Quraan does not say anything about Azzan.
Now as brother Mk points out that we have to take guidance only from quraan and discard the hadith totally.wouldn’t that mean to stop praying and calling for prayers because it is not mentioned in quraan.
likewise there are so many other instances which have no mention in quraan but muslims all over the world practice.
I shall be highly thankful to Mr.MK to kindly let me know as to how i have to perform my daily prayers? -
Wa’alaikum Salam Asif Raza,
Don’t simply follow my idea’s and opinions, I may be wrong! What you should do is study for yourself, use your God given gifts of intelligence and reason and find your own answers, if you read Al Quran with an open heart and mind, Allah will fill your heart with the truth. There are many sources in print and via the internet to assist you, sources which illustrate many different opinions and viewpoints. My posts here are simply my opinions, I am a simple engineer, not a theologian. They are simply my truths and may not be yours.
I don’t think Islam can be so easily defined as one set of rituals or beliefs. True Islam encompasses believers of All religions, what is important is that we believe in God, in the Day of Judgement and that we do good deeds. These directives would appear to override anything else. If there is something in Al Quran which doesn’t appear to be a good deed, then we either don’t know the context of the verse or the meaning of the original Arabic text has become corrupted by the changes in linguistic usage.
Peace
-
Assalamu ‘Alaikum Brother Khafi
You said:
Brother Muhammad Elijah, there is no need to replace the first version, for indeed it is the correct one!
We could take it further and say: “Yes,educated Muslims and Muslimahs have a choice of the pristine Islam which truly integrates into the whole of civilization and is pure from corrupt post-demise of The Prophet innovations of Hadith and Sunnah.
Brother, I made a typograhical error, and the way you capitalised on it is sad. You appear less interested in a subtle argument based on the Aayaat of Allah than in easy rhetorical tricks. When I focus on Aayaat of Allah you switch over to Buhtaan over Muhadditheen (rahimahumullaah)mode, and when I defend the impeccable characters of the Muhadditheen (rahimahumullaah) you switch to Ilhaad mode, evade answering the questions I raise.
You keep repeating the same verses about The Prophet being the judge between men, and if The Prophet were alive today I would love him to be the judge between us, but, and I have to keep repeating this fact, the Prophet is not with us today.
‘keep repeating’: Aren’t you insinuating that I should stop quoting the Aayaat of Allah?
‘if The Prophet were alive today’ :
1.Aren’t you stating your own opinion rather than the Aayaat of Allah ?
2.Where did Allah say that Muhammad (s.a.a.w.s) is the Rasool only for the people of His (s.a.a.w.s) age?
3.Where did Allah say that Muhammad (s.a.a.w.s) is not the Rasool for the people after His (s.a.a.w.s) death?
4.Where did Allah say that Rasool (s.a.a.w.s) is the Uswah only for the people of His (s.a.a.w.s) age?
5.Where did Allah say that Rasool (s.a.a.w.s) is not the Uswah for the people after His (s.a.a.w.s) death?Soorah Al A’raaf
Aayah 158
Allah says:
Say [O Muhammad]: “O mankind! Verily, I am an apostle of God to all of you, [sent by Him] unto whom the dominion over the heavens and the earth belongs! There is no deity save Him; He [alone] grants life and deals death!” Believe, then, in God and His Apostle-the unlettered Prophet who believes in God and His words-and follow him, so that you might find guidance!This clearly shows:
1.Muhammad (s.a.a.w.s) is the Rasool of Allah to entire humanity for all ages till Qiyaamah
2. Qur’aan exhorts emphatically to the entire humanity for all ages till Qiyaamah to believe in His Rasool (s.a.a.w.s) along with Eemaan in Allah.Soorah Al Ahzaab
Aayah 21
Allah says:
VERILY, in the Rasool of Allah you have Uswatun Hasanah for everyone who has Eemaan in Allah and Yaumul Aakhir, and remembers Allah much.This clearly shows:
1. Uswatun Hasanah is not confined to only the contemporaries of Rasool (s.a.a.w.s).
2. Uswatun Hasanah is meant for all those who have Eemaan in Allah and Yaumul Aakhir and engage very much in the Dhikr of Allah
3.A corollary is that only those who truly have Eemaan in Allah and Yaumul Aakhir and engage very much in the Dhikr of Allah would heed to the call of Uswatun HasanahAs far as the Aayah 44 of Soorah Al Maaidah is concerned are you stating that I am a Kaafir?
In Saudi Arabia and Iran the law of Miata Jaldah for fornication mentioned in Qur’aan is functional as well as law of Rajm for adultery commanded by Rasool (s.a.a.w.s).Hence all Sunnis and Shias follow Qur’aan completely while pseudo-Qur’aanists of today flagrantly disobey Qur’aan’s injunctions of utterly surrendering to Rasool’s (s.a.a.w.s) decisions otherwise they could never become Mu’mins ( Falaawa Rabbika Laa Yuminoona )by following the Ahwaa of Kuffaar who dislike it perhaps beacause most of them deserve Rajm.
BTW, Nicholas Sarkozy, the President of France,(IMAGINE) scolded a Muslim for believing in Rajm.Pseudo-Qur’aanists really care much about the disbelievers of Qur’aan, but are extra-ordinarily harsh dealing with Sunnis and Shias as if they are some worse kind of Kufaar.
I would never state the same about you as long as I am not a Mufassir nor a Muhaddith.
Allah’s Rasool (s.a.a.w.s) said: “If a man says to his brother: ‘O kafir! Indeed it returns to one of them.”
I hope no Sahaabee(r.a.a.) or Raawee could ever have obtained a material benefit from this saying of Allah’s Rasool (s.a.a.w.s). -
Assalamu ‘Alaikum Brother Khafi
There are many sources in print and via the internet to assist you, sources which illustrate many different opinions and viewpoints.
This illustrates the essence of pseudo-Qur’aanism.
1.Perhaps the authors of those viewpoints are better interpreters of Qur’aan than Allah’s Rasool (s.a.a.w.s) and His As-haab (r.a.a.).
2.Perhaps the authors of those viewpoints can speak,read and comprehend better Arabic than Allah’s Rasool (s.a.a.w.s) and His As-haab (r.a.a.)They are simply my truths and may not be yours.
Sorah Taubah
Aayah 33
Allah says:
He it is who has sent forth His Rasool with Hudaa and the Deenul Haqq, to the end that He may cause it to prevail over all religion -however hateful this may be to those who ascribe divinity to aught beside Allah.The Deenul Haqq of Allah’s Rasool (s.a.a.w.s) and His As-haab (r.a.a.) has continued to remain unchanged in the last fourteen centuries.
-
Wa’alaikum Salaam Brother Muhammad Elijah,
Brother, you said:
As far as the Aayah 44 of Soorah Al Maaidah is concerned are you stating that I am a Kaafir?
First, please do not ever think that I would use the “K” word in reference to you, Allah is our only Judge in these matters. I may think that you are misguided by mainstream dogma, or possibly blinded to Allah’s simple system by your extraordinary love of The Prophet, but I would never judge you in that repect to call you an unbeliever.
What concerns me more is that you should think such a thing, do you have a guilty conscience perchance? Did those particular verses strike a chord in your heart?
I would ask you this question that The Prophet was commanded to ask:
Is there any of your associates who guides to the truth? Say: Allah guides to the truth. Is He then Who guides to the truth more worthy to be followed, or he who himself does not go aright unless he is guided? What then is the matter with you; how do you judge? 10:35
What is this verse saying Brother?
Allah guides to the Truth. All men including The Prophet were guided by Allah.
Is He then Who guides to the truth more worthy to be followed, or he who himself does not go aright unless he is guided?
I would say that He who guides to the truth should be followed wouldn’t you?
The simple fact of the matter is this, Al Quran is Allah’s complete, perfect and fully detailed book, protected by him!
Hadith and Sunnah are not!
As The Prophet was commanded to say:
O people! if you are in doubt as to my religion, then (know that) I do not serve those whom you serve besides Allah but I do serve Allah, Who will cause you to die, and I am commanded that I should be of the believers. 10:104
Peace Brother
-
Brother Muhammad Elijah, please don’t forget we are all waiting on an answer to this:
You said:
This is simple linguistics.draymusa requested:
Please elaborate on the Arabic linguistics.You said:
If an Arab Muslim or Muslimah happens to read this, she would never corroborate such a mistranslation.draymusa said:
First, what Mrl Khafi suggests is not translating the word “hadith,” but keeping it in the Arabic, and the first translator to do so was a native speaker of Arabic.Peace
-
Assalamu Alaikum Brother Muhammad Elijah,
I am not the most eloquent of men using this language. Perhaps Brother Naveed’s writing is clearer than mine.
Obey God and The Messenger:
Many people site the Quraanic Verses that command us to Obey Allah and Obey the Messenger, and say that Obeying Allah and obeying the Messenger are two different things – Obeying Allah is to obey the Quraan and obeying the Messenger is to obey the books of Hadith. They point that if obeying the Messenger was the same thing as obeying Allah’s Quraan, then Allah would have only said Obey Allah. These people say that Allahs inclusion of obey the Messenger implies that the Messenger is saying EXTRA things outside of the Quraan that we must obey.
The thing that many proponents of Hadith forget is that Allah does not leave it to speculation as to what the people are to obey. The Ayaat do not end at Obey Allah and obey the Messenger, but they continue to include what the duty of the Messenger is:
And obey Allah and obey the messenger and be cautious; but if you turn back, then know that only a clear deliverance of the message is (incumbent) on Our messenger <wa ma_ alar rasu_li il lal balaghul mubin (5:92)
And Allah has made for you of what He has created shelters, and He has given you in the mountains places of retreat, and He has given you garments to preserve you from the heat and coats of mail to preserve you in your fighting; even thus does He complete His favor upon you, that haply you may submit. But if they turn back, then on you devolves only the clear deliverance (of the message) <wa ma_ alar rasu_li il lal balaghul mubin. (16:81-82)
And if you (o people) reject (the truth), nations before you did indeed reject (the truth); and nothing is incumbent on the messenger but a plain delivering (of the message) <wa ma_ alar rasu_li il lal balaghul mubin.(29:18)
And obey Allah and obey the messenger, but if you turn back, then upon Our messenger devolves only the clear delivery (of the message) <wa ma_ alar rasu_li il lal balaghul mubin.(64:12)
Say: Obey Allah and obey the messenger; but if you turn back, then on him rests that which is imposed on him and on you rests that which is imposed on you; and if you obey him, you are on the right way; and nothing rests on the messenger but clear delivering (of the message) <wa ma_ alar rasu_li il lal bala_ghul mubin. (24:54)
These verse clearly illustrate that The Prophets main mission was delivery of His Lords Message, Al Quran.
Peace
-
Assalamu ‘Alaikum Brother Dray Musa
When I had said
If an Arab Muslim or Muslimah happens to read this, she would never corroborate such a mistranslation.
I totally forgot Rashad Khalifah.
I would rephrase it as
If an honest Arab Muslim or Muslimah happens honestly reads the full Aayah,he or she would never corroborate such a mistranslation.
Assalamu ‘Alaikum Brother Khafi
Brother Naveed said
Many people site the Quraanic Verses that command us to Obey Allah and Obey the Messenger, and say that Obeying Allah and obeying the Messenger are two different things – Obeying Allah is to obey the Quraan and obeying the Messenger is to obey the books of Hadith. They point that if obeying the Messenger was the same thing as obeying Allah’s Quraan, then Allah would have only said Obey Allah. These people say that Allahs inclusion of obey the Messenger implies that the Messenger is saying EXTRA things outside of the Quraan that we must obey.
A gross misrepresentation of the Deen ofSahaabah(r.a.a.)
who did Tilaawah of Qur’aan-who studied Qur’aan, as it deserved to be studied like Allah says in Soorah Al Baqarah, Aayah 121 in the words
Yatloonahoo Haqqa Tilaawatihee
Those to whom We have sent the Book study it as it should be studied.
who did Itaa’ah of Allah and Rasool as Qur’aan required them to the extent that God gave them the certificate of the true followers of Qur’aan by making their mention in Qur’aan with the words
Walladheena Ma’ahu
Those who are with Muhammad Rasool-u-(A)llaahwhom Allaah promised Maghfirah-The Forgiveness and Ajrun ‘Azeem(un)-The Great Reward
Qur’aan testfies to this in Soorah At-Taubah, Aayah 100 and Soorah Al Bayyinah, Aayah 8
Allaah is well-pleased with them, and well-pleased are they with Him. And for them has He readied gardens through which running waters flow, therein to abide beyond the count of time: this is the triumph supreme!Their reward is with Allaah: gardens of perpetual bliss, through which running waters flow, therein to abide beyond the count of time; well-pleased is Allaah with them, and well-pleased are they with Him: all this awaits him who of his Sustainer stands in awe!
Sahaabah(r.a.a.) passed their lives in Jihaad and Qitaal so they neither needed nor managed to codify the Ahkaam of Sharee’ah.
Azaan continues to this day in the same way as Rasool-u-(A)llaah (s.a.a.w.s) taught it to Bilaal (r.a.a.) and will continue till Qiyaamah
Salaatul Janaazah continues to this day in the same way as Rasool-u-(A)llaah (s.a.a.w.s) taught it by doing to Sahaabah(r.a.a.) by offering Salaatul Janaazah of the Shuhadaa of Badr and Uhud and will continue till Qiyaamah.While the Qur’aan was being revealed in the battlefields and otherwise the Uswah, Awaamir and Nawaahee of Rasool-u-(A)llaah (s.a.a.w.s) were continually being suffused irreversibly into the lives of Sahaabah(r.a.a.) and they never failed to teach the Qur’aan and Deen to humanity till Qiyaamah.
-
Salaam,
If an honest Arab Muslim or Muslimah happens honestly reads the full Aayah,he or she would never corroborate such a mistranslation.
Again, it is not aa translation we are discussing. It is keeping the Arabic word “hadith” in the verse and whether the word “hadith” as used in the verse includes the “hadith” attributed to the Prophet. You claim it cannot be understood to include those hadith. When I asked why, you said it is a matter of simple linguists. So, please explain the Arabic linguistics that support of your claim.
Jazaka Allah Khayr
-
Wa ‘Alaikum Salaam Brother Dray Musa
I requote my whole comment-the one with your initial question
Why should the word “Hadith” in that ayah not be understood to include any and all Hadith?
This is simple linguistics. If an Arab Muslim or Muslimah happens to read this, she would never corroborate such a mistranslation.
It is like if(I mean that you assume for a few momets) you don’t know English. And in your country you refer to your national armed forces as Army. And you don’t know what does army actually mean?
If you come across two English speaking people who are discussing about for example an army(metaphorically) of writers, and you don’t know the context of discussion, you can easily be misled to conclude that they are talking about Army: which in your mind is your national armed forces when this is not the case.
What I explained in the last two paragraphs is what I termed as ‘linguistics’ initially.
Again, it is not a translation we are discussing. It is keeping the Arabic word “hadith” in the verse
Keeping the Arabic word “hadith” in the Aayah is the red herring either dishonest or ignorant either deliberately or unwittingly use to divert attention from the actual purpose of discussion. They select one of the dictionary uses of the word ‘hadeeth’ , the use of their choice as in Hadeeth-ur-Rasool(s.a.a.w.s) to give the a fabricated meaning to that Aayah suggests their crime of Ilhaad.
Ghulam Ahmadis commit the crime Ilhaad in Soorah Al Ahzaab, Aayah 40 by selecting the use of Khaatamor Seal of their own choice and replacing it in the original Aayah because they are convinced of the intellectual laxity of blind followers who are Sunnees mostly ,BTW, because they would never bother to verify, sometimes for their entire lives.
It is like a third person in the above example who either knows English or not (like Rashad Khalifah or anyone else) who quotes one of the statements of the two English speaking people to you (whom, we have assumed,don’t know English but know that Army means your national armed forces) by replacing the word ‘army’ they are using with the Army you undesrtand, you would be misled easily like many thousands of educated Muslims and Muslimahs today.
So, the answer of your question
whether the word “hadith” as used in the verse includes the “hadith” attributed to the Prophet.
is honestly No. All Muslims believe that Quraan is from Allaah and it is the Kafiroon ,to use the proper word Allaah uses in Quraan for the Unbelievers ,who do not believe in Quraan.
Brother, I am 21 year old enginering student in Pakistan in the Project year and am doing a radar project for Pakistan military, but despite all this, I tried my best to show the Ilhaad being perpetuated on the internet as much as I could. I would like to remain in contact with anyone interested, if possible, through email.
I would suggest all my educated brothers and sisters that pristine Islam is still intact in our regional languages like Urdu, Afghani,Faarsi, I guess you people speak Malay and is the same from Mashriq to Maghrib but in English the Islamic literature is predominantly by Yahood ,Nasaaraa or Bahaaees, Ghulam Ahmadees or those obsessed with Faasiq Jahiliyyah of modern West whose essential components are the real brothels-institutionalised centres of Zinaa.Those who use today these words used by Allaah or Rasool-u-(A)llaah (s.a.a.w.s) or As-haab(r.a.a.) are termed by the Kaafiroon (the title of a Soorah in Al Qur’aan) as ‘extremists’.
Try to translate as much Islamic literature in the regional languages before we leave this world beacuse our languages are facing an existential threat from this Jaahiliyyah
Assalaamu ‘Alaikum All
-
What I explained in the last two paragraphs is what I termed as ‘linguistics’ initially.
But what you said was not linguistic evidence. It was simply a false analogy. The reason your analogy is false is that the example you give bears no resemblence to the verse in question. Here is what you said:
If you come across two English speaking people who are discussing about for example an army(metaphorically) of writers, and you don’t know the context of discussion, you can easily be misled to conclude that they are talking about Army: which in your mind is your national armed forces when this is not the case.
In your example, the word “army” is clearly modified by the term “of writers,” so that anyone who hears the conversation knows that “army” in this instance is being used in its sense of “a large organized group,” and to referring to the armed forces of a country.
This is quite different than the usage we find in the verses under discussion.Keeping the Arabic word “hadith” in the Aayah is the red herring either dishonest or ignorant either deliberately or unwittingly use to divert attention from the actual purpose of discussion.
You need to support your claim with evidence. A false analogy is not convincing evidence. Can you show us how the Arabic of the verse supports your claim?
-
Assalamu ‘Alaikum Brother Dray Musa
You said:
In your example, the word “army” is clearly modified by the term “of writers”
To remove the modification, we can rephrase the example:
If you come across two English speaking people who are discussing about for example an army(metaphorically) of writers
as
If you come across two English speaking people who are discussing about any army
so that anyone who hears the conversation knows that “army” in this instance is being used in its sense of “a large organized group,” and to referring to the armed forces of a country.
We have assumed that a listener who is English illiterate, and he doesn’t know the sense
of any “large organized group” and its reference to the armed forces of any country, so he applies everytime he encounters the word “army” he misapplies it to the Army, he understands.Can you show us how the Arabic of the verse supports your claim?
Unfortunately, the “Arabic of the verse” for most non-Arab Muslims applies just to the set of dictionary meanings of the individual words.
For example, Baina individually means Between, Aideehim means Their Hands, but collectively both Baina Aideehim means “In Front of Them”. -
We have assumed that a listener who is English illiterate, and he doesn’t know the sense of any “large organized group” and its reference to the armed forces of any country, so he applies everytime he encounters the word “army” he misapplies it to the Army, he understands.
If the speakers are discussing “any army,” then the Army understood by the listener would be included because it is “an Army.” So, if the speakers said “Are you a supporter of any army?”, the listerner would not be mistaken in understanding the reference to include the Army of his country.
Unfortunately, the “Arabic of the verse” for most non-Arab Muslims applies just to the set of dictionary meanings of the individual words.
I am not asking most non-Arab Muslims. I am asking you. I thought from your strong statements that you understand Arabic. Do you? If you do, please discuss the Arabic of the verse. If you do not, please say so.
For example, Baina individually means Between, Aideehim means Their Hands, but collectively both Baina Aideehim means “In Front of Them”.
This is a very common metaphor that is both listed in dictionaries and makes perfect sense considering the meaning of the words and how the function in the phrase. You are willing to discuss a phrase such as “baina aideehm,” so I do not understand why your are so reluctant to disccuss the phrase, “fa bi ayy hadith ba’d” and why “ayy hadith” does not include “hadith min al-bukhari” or “hadith sahih,” etc.
-
Assalamu ‘Alaikum Brother Dray Musa
If the speakers are discussing “any army,” then the Army understood by the listener would be included because it is “an Army.” So, if the speakers said “Are you a supporter of any army?”, the listerner would not be mistaken in understanding the reference to include the Army of his country.
By stating so you assume that everytime and eveywhere when a word is used in its general sense it always apply to every possible meaning the dictionary confers on it.Hence, by stating the example of the question “Are you a supporter of any army?”, you assume that your example is similar to the Aayah in question.The phrase in question is a rhetorical statement to exhort Unbelievers to believe in Qur’aan not an exhortation to Believers in Qur’aan to disregard the Ta’leem of Hikmah.This is tantamount to equating Believers with Unbelievers, that is , equating Mu’mineen with Kuffaar, to use the proper term used in Qur’aan.
The preciser saying of the speaker is:
If you don’t support the army we are discussing, which other army in the world you could possibly support?
-doesn’t even remotely suggest that do not support any other army in the world(which is not another army in our case rather actually supporting the army)
-doesn’t even remotely suggest that disregard the descisions of the commander-in-chief of the army for which the statement is vociferously demanding to support.
Such a statement would never include the Army of his country because it is rhetorical questioning, not a statement announcing an unequivocal prohibition of support to all armies including his Army.You are willing to discuss a phrase such as “baina aideehm,” so I do not understand why your are so reluctant to disccuss the phrase, “fa bi ayy hadith ba’d” and why “ayy hadith” does not include “hadith min al-bukhari” or “hadith sahih,” etc.
You are using the straw man fallacy.How does the mention “baina aideehim” to prove the point that collective meaning is not always equal to the sum of individual meanings, as is the case in “fa bi ayyi hadeethim ba’dahoo” , demonstrate the unwilingness or reluctance to discuss the phrase “fa bi ayyi hadeethim ba’dahoo” ?
Unfortunately, the “Arabic of the verse” for most non-Arab Muslims applies just to the set of dictionary meanings of the individual words.
I am not asking most non-Arab Muslims. I am asking you. I thought from your strong statements that you understand Arabic. Do you? If you do, please discuss the Arabic of the verse. If you do not, please say so.
The Arabic of the verse is quite clear to me:
If they don’t believe in Qur’aan, in which other Revelation in the world, in which other Message in the world they could possibly believe?Like Allah says in Sooratul Kahf, Aayah 6,
But wouldst thou, perhaps, torment thyself to death with grief over them if they are not willing to believe in this hadith(in this Message,in this Revelation-the Qur’aan)As regards your mention of “hadith min al-bukhari” or “hadith sahih,” etc., I would say that Sahaabah(r.a.a.) were the living Books in the battlefields during the Revelation of Qur’aan. These living Books preserved for eternity the Kitaab and Hikmah the Ta’leem of which Rasool(s.a.a.w.s) gave not only to them but the entire human race till Qiyaamah, in fulfilment of the Divine injunction Qul Yaa-ayyuhan Naas.
Allaah says in Sooratul Baqarah, Aayah 231 and Sooratul A’raaf, Aayah 158
waothkuroo niAAmata Allahi AAalaykum wama anzala AAalaykum mina alkitabi waalhikmati yaAAithukum bihi
Remember Allah’s favours on you, and the fact that He Anzala on you the Kitaab and Hikmah, for your instructionQul ya ayyuha alnnasu innee rasoolu Allahi ilaykum jameeAAan
Say (O Muhammad): O mankind! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah to you all -
You are using the straw man fallacy.How does the mention “baina aideehim” to prove the point that collective meaning is not always equal to the sum of individual meanings, as is the case in “fa bi ayyi hadeethim ba’dahoo” , demonstrate the unwilingness or reluctance to discuss the phrase “fa bi ayyi hadeethim ba’dahoo” ?
It is not a strawman, because I have not attributed an argument to you. Discussing “baina aideehim” indicates you, unlike most Muslims, know Arabic. Your reluctance to discuss “fa bi ayy hadith ba’d” is demonstrated by the fact that you consistently refused to do so until this message.
The Arabic of the verse is quite clear to me:
If they don’t believe in Qur’aan, in which other Revelation in the world, in which other Message in the world they could possibly believe?The question remains: Why does this not include the messages recorded by al-Bukhari and Muslim, etc.; especially since Imam Shafi’i argued successfully that hadith should be seen as revelation, which is other than the Qur’an?
waothkuroo niAAmata Allahi AAalaykum wama anzala AAalaykum mina alkitabi waalhikmati yaAAithukum bihi
Remember Allah’s favours on you, and the fact that He Anzala on you the Kitaab and Hikmah, for your instructionThis is a non-sequitur because it has nothing to do with the phrase “fa bi ayy hadith…”. It begs the question (another logical fallacy) of what constitutes hikma. The idea that hadith constitute the hikma is also an idea from Imam al-Shafi’i, which was hotly contested by other Muslims of his time, as we see in Kitab Jima’ al-‘Ilm.
Qul ya ayyuha alnnasu innee rasoolu Allahi ilaykum jameeAAan
Say (O Muhammad): O mankind! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah to you allAnother non-sequitur. The fact that Muhammad delivered the Qur’an for all humanity is unrelated to the question at hand.
So, let us get back to the phrase in question. You say it is a matter of simple linguistics, so please, using the Arabic linguistics of the phrase itself, please explain why “fa bi ayy hadith ba’d” does not include “hadith min al-Bukhari” or “hadith sahih,” etc.
Jazakum Allah khayr.
-
Assalamu ‘Alaikum Brother Dray Musa
RabbiShrahLee Sadree wa Yassirlee Amree waHlul ‘Uqdatam Mi(n) Lisaanee Yafqahoo Qaulee.
I invoke Allaah to help me present in a way easy to understand for all the readers.So, let us get back to the phrase in question. You say it is a matter of simple linguistics, so please, using the Arabic linguistics of the phrase itself, please explain why “fa bi ayy hadith ba’d” does not include “hadith min al-Bukhari” or “hadith sahih,” etc.
Fa bi Ayy=In which(Depending on the Tarkeeb (Phrase as you said or combination of words) in which the Mufrad (individual word) ‘Ayy’ can both be
1.’indicative which?’ which demands a concrete answer from the reader or listener by indicating a specific object to what follows ‘Ayy’ which in this case is hadeeth and one can give an answer, for example ,as you said “hadith min al-Bukhari” or “hadith sahih,” etc.
For example, if I ask you fa bi ayyi hadeethin tu’minu?
You can give a concrete answer like Qur’aan or “hadith min al-Bukhari” or “hadith sahih,” etc.as well as
2. ‘rhetorical which’ which demands or exhorts the reader an action corresponding to whatever object corresponding to which the required action is being referred to which in this case is ‘hoo’. To whatever ‘hoo’ refers to, the reader or listener is demanded an action.Allaah is not demanding us to believe in “hadith min al-Bukhari” or “hadith sahih,” etc.,either .
The Mufrad Ba’d which means ‘other’ in this case is what transforms ‘Ayy’ from indicative which? to ‘rhetorical which’.
Hence, if I ask you fa bi ayyi hadeethim ba’dahu tu’minu?
I am not demanding an answer nor I am forbidding you from an action rather exhorting you to perform the specified action corresponding to whatever follows Ba’d. Whether it is Qur’aan as implicitly in Ba’d followed by ‘Hu’ and as explicitly in the Aayah in which Ba’d is followed by Allaahi wa Aayaatihee , or for example, if you are a judge and I am giving you an evidence of my innocence, and you disbelieve me, and while or after showing you the best possible evidence I could present, I say fa bi ayyi hadeethim ba’dahu tu’minu? So, I am neither demanding an answer from the judge nor forbidding him from an action, but making an emotional appeal by using a rhetorical statement like this. -
Assalamo Alikum wr wb
Brother Dray Musa!
Your question needs not to be answered.
You say it is a matter of simple linguistics, so please, using the Arabic linguistics of the phrase itself, please explain why “fa bi ayy hadith ba’d” does not include “hadith min al-Bukhari” or “hadith sahih,” etc.
Your contention is rather flawed as the verse only dwells upon the importance of Quran as a Message from Allah and it no way excludes anything. The verse simply means that if you deny Quran what else would you believe?, not that you need not to believe in anything other then Quran.
The wording of Jathiya 45:6 also questions your novel interpretation.
?????? ?????? ??????? ?????????? ???????? ?????????? ? ????????? ??????? ?????? ??????? ?????????? ???????????
Such are the Signs of Allah, which We rehearse to thee in Truth; then in what exposition [Hadith] will they believe after (rejecting) Allah and His Signs? -
First, thank you for the answer.
The Mufrad Ba’d which means ‘other’ in this case is what transforms ‘Ayy’ from indicative which? to ‘rhetorical which’.
Can you explain why ba’d transforms it to a rhetorical question?
for example, if you are a judge and I am giving you an evidence of my innocence, and you disbelieve me, and while or after showing you the best possible evidence I could present, I say fa bi ayyi hadeethim ba’dahu tu’minu? So, I am neither demanding an answer from the judge nor forbidding him from an action, but making an emotional appeal by using a rhetorical statement like this.
This still does not explain why the phrase “ayy hadith” cannot include the hadith attributed to the prophet.
-
The verse simply means that if you deny Quran what else would you believe?,
Can you explain why you added the word “rejecting” in parentheses? It is not part of the Arabic of the verse.
-
Can you explain why you added the word “rejecting” in parentheses? It is not part of the Arabic of the verse.
Such are the Signs of Allah, which We rehearse to thee in Truth; then in what exposition [Hadith] will they believe after (rejecting) Allah and His Signs? (Jathiya 45:6)
Yes, the word ‘rejecting’ is the implied meaning. The context of the verse also testifies to it. The verse is addressed to disbelievers so how it be that Allah asks the people not to believe in anything after it when they do not believe in Quran itself?
Can you explain why ba’d transforms it to a rhetorical question?
This is not merely the word ba’d, infact the whole consruction of the sentence implies the rhetroic.
-
Assalamu ‘Alaikum Brother Dray Musa
First, thank you for the answer.
The Mufrad Ba’d which means ‘other’ in this case is what transforms ‘Ayy’ from indicative which? to ‘rhetorical which’.
Can you explain why ba’d transforms it to a rhetorical question?
To understand this, consider the following two questions.
Who is a policeman?
Who is a policeman to stop people from entering the Masjid.While the initial phrases are the same in both of the statements, it is the ‘to’ which transforms ‘who’ from a concrete question or an indicative question to a rhetorical question or rhetorical statement shifting the emphasis from whatever follows ‘who’ which emphasizes the policeman amd demands a concrete answer in terms of a definition, to the new emphasis on whatever follows ‘to’ which emphasizes a criticism of the specified object and the whole construction becomes not a demand for a concrete answer but a rhetorical statement to convey an implicit but obvious message of criticizing the policeman.
for example, if you are a judge and I am giving you an evidence of my innocence, and you disbelieve me, and while or after showing you the best possible evidence I could present, I say fa bi ayyi hadeethim ba’dahu tu’minu? So, I am neither demanding an answer from the judge nor forbidding him from an action, but making an emotional appeal by using a rhetorical statement like this.
This still does not explain why the phrase “ayy hadith” cannot include the hadith attributed to the prophet.
The first question above would include every real or imaginary or metaphorical policeman in the universe, because there is no rhetorical transform followed by the policeman which intends to convey an implicit but obvious message regarding the specified policeman. But the second question in which policeman is followed by a rhetorical transform which would shift the emphasis of the previous question to a new and completely different emphasis on the criticism of policeman introduced by the phrase followed by ‘to’. Now, in contrast with the previous scenario, in the drastically changed scenario in which there is a known object of criticism(the policeman) and a known subject of criticism(his action of stopping) wouldn’t entail the criticism of either all the possible objects of criticism(all the policemen in the world who didn’t stop anyone from entering the Masjid) nor all possible subjects of criticism(no one should interpret the above-mentioned statement as a criticism of all the actions of the said policeman. He can and should stop a robber from entering a bank inspite of the fact that the word ‘stop’ can include every action of stopping but the rhetoric integrated ‘stop’ in the implict but obvious message it originally intended to convey.).
-
Brother Muhammad Elijah or is it muhammadelijah?
Are you even the same people?
Are you forgetting the following verse:
“And We have indeed made the Qur’an easy to understand and remember, then is there any that will take admonition?” (Qur’an 54:17)
How can you possibly use Arabic Grammar to explain a book which was first committed to text before the existence of Arabic Grammar, and which itself was used as a basis for formulating the rules of Arabic Grammar?
Just look at the verses and let Allah place the meaning in your heart, don’t try and twist their meaning with gramattical rules which didn’t exist when they were revealed.
-
Zainab says:
Many aspects of Dr. Aisha Musa are right. However when she says that even if a hadith was heard from the lips of the Prophet (SAAW) and we had proof that it was from the Prophet, still it cannot be taken as a source of law, sounds an incorrect opinion of Dr. Musa.
The reason I say this is because while expressing such an opinion, she takes it for granted that the Prophet’s words are not compatible with the laws of the Quran. That’s a wrong and harsh judgment. What’s not in conformity with the Noble Quran is the present-day Hadith institution as we see it. But if the Prophet (SAAW) said something on the Quran, and if we had that in record (which unfortunately we don’t), then surely those words of the Prophet with be totally in conformity with the Quran because we know for certain that the prophet meticulously followed the Quran, much more than us. In that case, rejecting the Prophet’s words would amount to rejecting the Quran.
The fact that we don’t have any quotes directly from the Prophet (SAAW) with clear evidence that they are from him (SAAW), is a different issue.
-
Jamal says:
I am surprised at people who claim to follow Quran with heart and soul yet chose to believe parts of it and chose to completely ignore parts of it which is not inline with their newly emerging thoughts.
Did Allah need the messenger ONLY to reveal Quran? There is NO OTHER purpose of the messenger? OR Did Allah revealed Quran to messenger and told him to recite to people and teach them (ref. below)? And after that does Quran not tell us to follow Quran AS WELL AS messenger? So why do people chose to completely ignore this part of Quran?
The fact is yes, I believe in Quran which is the most detailed and primary source of islam and which also VERY CLEARLY says to follow messenger so i cannot completely ignore it. So I follow the ahadith which are completely INLINE WITH QURAN and have various sources, and dont follow blindly the ahadith which can be contradictory to quran because ofcourse after all ahadith books are not perfect since they have been collected by human beings.
The thing is dear brothers, we are not trying to win from oneanother here. The purpose of this discussion should not be to fight, argue baselessly or to protect out egos, but the purpose should be to find success in life hereafter for ourselves and for all muslim brothers.
SO i dont feel ashamed to follow a hadith which is inline with quran because Quran tells me to follow messenger, BUT i cant risk NOT following ANY hadith and NOT finding any justification when Allah asks me did u not read Quran which says at various places to follow the messenger???
if we can understand this simple thing, then the basis of our arguements will change. instead of arguing on the very basic beliefs, why shouldnt we do research and discuss which hadith is not inline with Quran, which hadith is contained in how many books, what is the sours=ce of which hadith etc etc?
Common brothers lets be constructive rather than fighting with each other.
Or… has “Shaitan” been successful to find a way to make muslims fight with each other?References:
3:164 – Allah verily hath shown grace to the believers by sending unto them a messenger of their own who reciteth unto them His revelations, and causeth them to grow, and teacheth them the Scripture and wisdom;(how did he teacheth the wisdom? was mentioning only “reciteth unto them His revelations” not enough? is Quran just trying to add some “literature” or does every word has its function and meaning? if yes, what does teacheth refer to after reciting the relevation?)
4:59 – O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the messenger and those of you who are in authority; and if ye have a dispute concerning any matter, refer it to Allah and the messenger if ye are (in truth) believers in Allah and the Last Day. (why doesnt it say only obey Allah and Quran? why does it say obey messenger? if we say the hadiths are corrupt now we should only follow quran, then was this verse only for a specific period of time and not for the current period? does this mean there are verses in quran which are not relevent today? if the answer is no, then how do we obey messenger now? if by following quran, then why doesnt the verse say just follow Allah and quran in the first place? Also note the condition of being believers in Allah… are we unknowingly drifting away from being one by not doing wat this verse is telling us to do??? something to think about.)
7:158 – So believe in Allah and His Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, who believed in Allah and His words: follow him that (so) ye may be guided.
14:4 – We sent not a messenger except (to teach) in the language of his (own) people, in order to make (things) clear to them. (how does messenger make things clear? by just reciting the relevation (ref again to 3:164), or do you really believe thats all messenger did, just reciting the relevations? if not, how do we know now how and what things did he (SAW) make clear? (ref again to 4:59))
16:44 – (We sent them) with Clear Signs and scriptures 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. (same as above)
24:56 – So establish regular Prayer and give regular Charity: and obey the Messenger; that ye may receive mercy. (why not just obey Quran, why messenger? if we want to obey messnger how do we do that? plz dont say by following quran, because quran specifically mentions obey messenger, we cant just assume that it means quran, as like you said quran gives “clear” instructions so we cant start assuming things while interpreting quran.)
and finally 33:21 – Verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example for him who looketh unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembereth Allah much. (what does “uswa e hasna” mean exactly? how do we follow uswa e hasna? if by only looking at quran then was this uswa e hasna or example only for people who were there at that time?)
33:36 – And it becometh not a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His messenger have decided an affair (for them), that they should (after that) claim any say in their affair; and whoso is rebellious to Allah and His messenger, he verily goeth astray in error manifest. (why is messenger mentioned separately?)
Fee aman Allah
Comment on “Quran & Hadith”.
Copyright Indonesia Matters 2006-2025
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact
Assalamu ‘Alaikum Brother Khafi
Don’t you contradict yourself?
(Personally, I bear you no grudge.Even if sometimes I find you a bit harsh, I consider it a part of constructive discussion. So, forgive me if you find me a bit harsh as well. Don’t you care for my Qabr and Aakhirah, after all?)
Didn’t the perfect Deen which the perfect Qur’aan refers in Soorah Al Maaidah, Aayah 3 complete within his lifetime as well?
Al Yauma Akmaltu Lakum Deenakum
Today I have perfected your system for you
http://www.progressivemuslims.org/quran.pdf
Today have I perfected your religious law for you
Muhammad Asad
‘rulers’:Did you refer to Abubakr (r.a.a.) , ‘Umar (r.a.a.), Uthmaan (r.a.a.), Ali (r.a.a.)?
‘scholars’:Did you refer to Aboo Haneefah (rahimahullaah) who was publicly,and corporally whipped by the ruler of his time for defying his pressure to become an offical Chief Justice?
Did you refer to Ahmad bin Hanbal (rahimahullaah) who met the same fate for refusing to accept the official creed of the ruler of his time?
‘clergy’:the word clergy is a word with Christian connotations of their own corrupt clergy, many of them Sodomites, may well be chosen to refer to the pious Muhadditheen, who may have erred many times owing to their human nature yet their sincerity is unquestionable for Muslims and non-Muslims alike, by some Muslims today, yet I consider it a grave injustice to refer to them as such owing to the negative coonnotation associated with the word ‘clergy’ in the contemporary world.
‘High Esteem’:I hope you would never be able to prove from Qur’aan that any Muslim or Muslimah commits Shirk
Kitaab and Sunnah throughout the history never produced Sodomites, but great philosophers and scientists. Averroes, or Ibn Rushd ,for example, was a Maaliki Faqeeh, whereas Maaliki Fiqh was based on Kitaab and Sunnah.
However, modern pseudo-Qur’aanism has only recieved applause from enemies of Islam like Daniel Pipes.
Yes,educated Muslims and Muslimahs have a choice between the pristine Islam which truly integrates into the whole of civilization and is pure from corrupt post-colonial pseudo-interpretations of Qur’aan like Ghulam Ahmadism, Bahaaullahism, and pseudo-Qur’aanism which share the acceptance of Western hegemony via their political structures and the antagonism of Madaaris-the last bastions of Islam which only need educated Muslims and Muslimahs to devote themselves to an extensive study of Arabic linguistics, just like they devote themselves to medicine, engineering or science.
I prefer the impeccable characters of ‘men’ who exhausted their youth, their entire lives in spreading Qur’aan and Sunnah and conveying the words of Allah’s Rasool (s.a.a.w.s) far more than the words of Westophile ‘men’ who distort the meanings of Qur’aan unwittingly or deliberately.
Soorah An Nisaa, Aayah 65
Allah says:
But nay, by thy Sustainer! They do not [really] believe unless they make thee [O Prophet] a judge of all on which they disagree among themselves, and then find in their hearts no bar to an acceptance of thy decision and give themselves up [to it] in utter self-surrender.
http://honorablequran.com/4.htm
My brother, I hope we would both follow His words, may be imperfectly,and try our best to live by the standard He Himself gave us.
Soorah An Nisaa, Aayah 65
Allah says:
But nay, by thy Sustainer! They do not [really] believe unless they make thee [O Prophet] a judge of all on which they disagree among themselves, and then find in their hearts no bar to an acceptance of thy decision and give themselves up [to it] in utter self-surrender.
Sahaabah(r.a.a.) and Muhadditheen (rahimahumullaah) may not have been as perfect as Allah’s Rasool (s.a.a.w.s) but they tried their best to follow His words.
Yes, my brother.I would testify not to the infallibility of Muhadditheen (rahimahumullaah) but I would testify to their piety and impeccability of character of both Sahaabah(r.a.a.) and Muhadditheen (rahimahumullaah) which not even a non-Muslimwould ever be able to question till Qiyaamah .And the Gauranteed words of Allah point to more fallacies in the pseudo- interpretations of today’s anti-Sahaabahists than the alleged contradictions in Ahaadeeth literature which owing to the humility of their compilers never claim of their Divine origin despite thorough compilation of the entire chain of narrators tracing back to Allah’s Rasool (s.a.a.w.s) for every individual Hadeeth out of hundreds of thousands, like the Christian Evangelists who boast of the Divine origin of the Bible based on four narrators.
This simplistic Whether Qur’aan Or Sunnah? question is like someone asking Whether Constitution or Chief Justice’s decision?
Also, the ‘somebody’ may be true for Christians who don’t know the narrators between ‘Eesaa (a.s.) and many of the New Testament writers. But ‘somebody’ in our case is a recorded fact of history, rather a landmark in the spiritual history of mankind, which can satisfy any objective standard which judges the credibility of a orally transmitted historical tradition.After all, Sahaabah(r.a.a.) who lived and died in the battlefields tried their best to orally transmit the perfect Deen in its pristine form while the Muhadditheen (rahimahumullaah) lived and died in the towns where Sahaabah(r.a.a.) lived and died, compiling the legacy of the pristine Islam based on Kitaab and Sunnah.