Unreliable Ahadith Regarding The Return of Jesus PBUH

[c0de]

are you suggesting ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL the knowledge that has evolvd on this earth over the millenium is going in the trash?

as well PLEASE do not say quran is the last word otherwise you then make Hadith into a talmut

seems perhaps another read to see that much of the quran is about the future, the coming, the second creation....... the Days of Judgment.

your afterlife is already in motion....

what you do 'here' on this earth IS your afterlife.

for example; each night you go to sleep; your mind is not making choices as a self (aware)..... there is no difference of death!

When you awaken you have another chance to build, to create, to support life to continue (Good defined) by choice. (we in heaven NOW)

When your body is tired and returns to the earth, just like Muhammed, Jesus, Darwin or Abe Lincoln; that 'singular' person no longer exists, except in what choices were made while alive. Them folk are spoken about because of what they left; they still live in what they gave us by choice.

No one is going anywhere!

That is truth............ either grow up and know it, or maintain beliefs and lies (jinn) as your guide. They do nothing for you, God, the future or your ever lasting life.

God doesn't want people kissing the dirt for his honor, that is a man created ritual (pay homage)............ Best to honor God by giving of yourself 'for life to continue'............ support life! That is how to live forever.

You want to live longer; spend 5 times a day planting trees, teaching truth, giving of yourself for 'others'............ be a do'er (with your life)

That was... amusing... thanks.





Now....


Back on Topic PLEASE

Seems you guys have talked about pretty much
everything except addressing the issue.

 

[bananabrain]

oy! what have you got against the talmud? as if the way hadith and sunnah are treated are anything different? not one iota.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[Abdullah]

The root cause of the belief in the return of Jesus PBUH by most of the Muslim ummah is based in the hadith. This thread deals specifically and directly with those ahadith which talk about the return of Jesus PBUH. In doing so, I have found a valuable resource in Dr. Ahmed Shafaat and his very valuable research into this matter. He is a highly respected scholar who is actually one of two leading Muslim scholars on Judiasm and Christianity in North America. In matters of credibility, this places him well above most "scholars" like Harun Yahya, whose website is the source of much misinformation on this issue. (Dr. Shafaat has also done a lot of great work on correcting the views of mainstream Islamic scholarship on matters of shariah. But let us stick to the matter at hand.) It will come as a big surprise to many, especially the ones who give credibility to web authors like Harun Yahya etc. that the ahadith which talk about the return of Jesus PBUH are not reliable and their authenticity is highly suspect. There are two reasons why:

1: The earliest and most authentic compilation of hadith (Al Muwatta) by Imam Maliki does not contain these ahadith at all.

2: The second is that these ahadith in Bukhari and Muslim are related by Ibn Shihab Al Zuhri, who gave no reliable sources for his tranmission. But more importantly, Al Zhuri is himself shown to be an unreliable source for hadith transimission.

Instead of wasting time giving my own opinions on the issue, I will state Dr. Ahmed Shafaat's research. First regarding point one, and then regarding point 2:



Regarding Point #1:

Why Imam Maliki did not include those hadiths as part of Muwatta




Regarding Point #2


This deals with Ibn Shihab directly: Bukhari himself criticizes the source

Islamic View of the Coming/Return of Jesus





For the most part Muslims try to defend the idea that Jesus PBUH
is going to return because of what the mainstream scholars of Islam
have to say. But the mainstream scholarship is itself guilty of not looking
into this matter in enough detail. The reasons for this are highly suspicious,
and it is possible that because this belief in the return of Jesus PBUH is used
as ammunition for so many political and militant movements, that this issue
is consciously suppressed by the institutionalized sects of Islam for material
and political objectives.

Salaam br,

There are a few issues here why Mr Shafaats view is severely flawed.

First and foremost br, as I pointed out, with some of the heterodox views of Dr Shafaat, regarding many major Islamic principles, his whole line of assesing the Islamic sources has to be brought into question; obviously he is using the same process of thought to judge this issue too

I have come across such views before br from liberal Muslims and in general cases it has been seen that their argument is based on taking quotes out of context, and in some cases mis-translating too and this must have what happened in this case too, for common sense tells us br, that if there is a consensus on this issue, then the verry Scholars Dr Shafaat 'quotes', they too accept this view

Another issue is that Dr Shafaat is rejecting basic logic, intuition and overwhelming evidence, regarding wether the meaning of the Quran is divinely protected too along with the Quran [see link http://www.interfaith.org/forum/173013-post8.html ], for you dont get more authentic a Sunnah, as this one

The other is that, he is basically saying the entire Ummah [including all those great Scholars, the likes of Imaam Abu Hanifa, Ash-shafi'i, Maalik, Ibn Hanbal, etc] have got it all wrong and they've been on the path of error since the early days of Islam, and he has managed to get it right in this day and age ;

There is ample proof br from the Quran and Sunnah that the entire ummah can never be misguided; minorites can, but never the entire ummah; Allah's promise in the Quran that the Quran will be protected itself implies that there will allways be a group of people who will protect the Quran [along with it's true meaning] untill the last day, hence them being rightly guided too...


Another is br, he is assuming that he has developed a better science of hadith then the great hadith Scholars of the early days of Islam; people who were outstanding individuals of incredible memory-skills and analytical expertise and had detailed familiarity with the biographies of the thousands of reporters of Hadith, not to mention that they were extremely pious too and were intimately aquainted with the culture of the time of revelation [due to basically living during the period of the same culture ] which are... important factors for acurate exegesis ...; a claim when put into contrast, makes it fallacy plain to see

And the sheer vollume of what he is claiming to be 'error ' makes his argument all the more incredulous :

http://www.interfaith.org/forum/173035-post10.html

Jesus Will Return - by Harun Yahya

Various Questions (2) Answered by Shaykh Gibril Haddad


Salaam

 

[c0de]

Salaam Brother Abdallah



This entire post of yours is totally ineffective because:


#1
You are still quoting Harun Yahya... a convicted criminal.
Someone who has no training in the sciences and somehow
claims to be an expert on evolution. Someone who is not even a scholar,
technically. When you link to his articles, you are just continuing to
weaken your entire argument.

#2
Your claim that the majority of Muslims can never be misguided
is disproved even by the ahadith. The Prophet PBUH (allegedly) said
only the first 3 generations of Muslims would be following his path.
He even said in the same hadith that the ones who come after will
"not be of me, and I am not of them"... this is a very strong condemnation.
And I know of many other hadiths which state that the majority of Muslims
near the end times would be as "the foam on top of the sea" i.e. useless.
Another reason which contradicts the entire aqeedah of your sunni sect.
Your own ahadith (which you consider infallible) are condemning your sect.

#3
You have still failed to deal with Dr. Shafaat's actual argument. You have
failed to provide a single source which proves that Imam Maliki actually supported
the idea that Jesus PBUH will return.

#4
Your direct attacks on Dr. Shafaat, aside from being irrelevant are
ineffective because they are based in a simple misunderstanding.
Your claims that he is some "liberal Muslim" who does not believe in the
supremacy of the Quran is not true. Even in the link I gave you clearly
states that he holds the Quran as the most authentic and primary source
for knowledge for Muslims. Also, because he has publicly criticized the
secular establishment of Turkey, he can not be labeled a "liberal Muslim".



Now brother, you are not making any progress by continuing on the
course on which you are continuing. You attack my source, while holding
up a convicted criminal as your own source? You do not deal with the
actual arguments but sidestep the entire issue? You fail to provide proper
referrences for your own claims?? This is no way to have a discussion
brother Abdallah.

 

[Abdullah]

Quote:
"Muwatta also does not mention the return of Jesus. In my article I showed that if Imam Malik knew of the traditions of Jesus’ return and he believed in them, he would have no reason to omit them. Hence there are only two possibilities: either the Imam did not know about these traditions or he did not believe in them. In both cases the authenticity of the traditions is cast into doubt. Malik wrote his Muwatta after the middle of the second century, about 150 years after the Prophet. During this time the belief in the return of Jesus -- an interesting, fascinating and important belief -- would have spread far enough for a man of Malik’s knowledge to come to know about it. And if Malik knew about it but did not believe in it, then his judgment in the matter carries some weight since he lived a considerable time before Bukhari and Muslim.

Salaam brother Code

Br, this is a severely flawed argument for the reason that, before Dr Shafaat embarked on 'deconstructing hadiths' and view of the consensus, he didn't even bother to check if Imaam Maalik is of the view too of the return of jesus [pbuh];

it can even occur to the common sense of a laymen br that maybe [probably] Imaam Maaliks muwatta was not meant to contain every single sahih hadith there is; Dr Shafaat mentions that maybe Imaam Maalik never included it, as his book mainly deals with 'legal' issues, but yet goes on to suspect sahih [and mutawatir] hadiths based solely on those hadiths not being included in muwatta;

one can see that here, he dont give his 'other reasons' for suspecting those hadiths, but only presumes what he does based on the above; this attitude is reckless to say the least br when it is dealing with sahih and mutawatir hadiths and the view of consensus and Aqeedah, and with one's salvation... I have shown evidence of how the Maaliki school adhere to the view of the consensus too, and inshAllah I will find you quotes of Imaam Maalik too, to this extent.

In Bukhari all the ahadith about the return of Jesus have chains that pass through Ibn Shihab and then after one more link through Abu Hurayrah. If the isnad method was very dependable this would have been acceptable but given the fact that the isnad method has not produced too dependable results we cannot put too much confidence in the reliability of these ahadith. There is a distinct possibility that (Ib Shihab) al-Zuhri heard these “ahadith” from not-too-reliable sources and then transmitted them without mentioning the source, as he was at times wont to do. This will explain why these “ahadith” are not found in Muwatta: Imam Malik might have heard these traditions from al-Zuhri, but he did not put much trust in them since no reliable source was given by (Ibn Shibab) al-Zuhri. Later, by the time of Bukhari and Muslim these traditions had been attributed to the Prophet through Abu Hurayrah and then they became acceptable."

His above assumption are all based on guesses br, and this can be seen by his useage of the words of 'possibly' and 'might have' etc, so the above tells us nothing other than unfounded, baseless suspicions; i.e, total guesswork

InshAllah I'll answer the rest later br

Salam

 

[c0de]

Salaam brother

it can even occur to the common sense of a laymen br that maybe [probably] Imaam Maaliks muwatta was not meant to contain every single sahih hadith there is; Dr Shafaat mentions that maybe Imaam Maalik never included it, as his book mainly deals with 'legal' issues, but yet goes on to suspect sahih [and mutawatir] hadiths based solely on those hadiths not being included in muwatta;

Read the first post again brother. He doesnt just base his entire argument
on Imaam Maliki.

Br, this is a severely flawed argument for the reason that, before Dr Shafaat embarked on 'deconstructing hadiths' and view of the consensus, he didn't even bother to check if Imaam Maalik is of the view too of the return of jesus [pbuh];

He did check. He didn't find anything related to the return of Jesus PBUH in the Muawatta.
If you can prove otherwise, please provide your referrences.

 

[Abdullah]

Quote:
...Yet the following evidence suggests that al-Zuhri did not always conform to acceptable standards of accuracy and objectivity:

Rabi‘ah would say to Ibn Shihab: My situation is totally different from you. Whatever I say, I say it from my own self and you say it on the authority of the Prophet and so you must be careful, and it is not befitting for a person to waste himself [like this]. (Bukhari, Tarikh al-Kabir, vol. 3, Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah, pp. 286-7)

Rabi‘ah would say to Ibn Shihab: When you narrate something according to your own opinion, always inform the people that this is your own view. And when you narrate something from the Prophet, always inform them that it is from the Prophet so that they do not consider it to be your opinion. (Khatib Baghdadi, Al-Faqih wa Al-Mutafaqqih, vol. 1, Lahore: Dar al-Ahya al-Sunnah, p. 148).

Imam Bukhari had the following opinion:

Zuhri would narrate ahadith and on most occasions would insert sentences from his own self. Some of these would be mursal and some of them would be his own. (Ibn Rajab, Fath al-Bari, 1st ed., vol. 5, Jaddah: Dar Ibn al-Jawzi, 1996, p. 286)

In a letter to Imam Malik, Imam Layth Ibn Sa‘ad writes:

When we would meet Ibn Shihab, there would arise a difference of opinion in many issues. When any one of us would ask him in writing about some issue, he, in spite of being so learned, would give three very different answers, and he would not even be aware of what he had already said. It is because of this that I have left him – something that you did not like (Ibn Qayyim, I’lam al- Muwaqqi‘in, vol. 3, Beirut: Dar al-Jayl, p. 85).


Imam Shaf‘i, Darqutni and many others have attributed Tadlis to Zuhri. (Ibn Hajar, Tabaqat al-Mudallisin, Cairo: Maktabah Kulliyyat al-Azhar, p. 32-3)

Salaam broth,

All I could say about the above is, Dr Shafaat does have a verry peculiar and abnormally suspecting approach to judging the authenticity of hadiths, as we've seen, thus allthuogh the above does SEEM like evidence of possible unreliability of one of the claimed hadith narrators of a few bukhari hadiths concerning the second coming of jesus [pbuh], yet br, this is just one side of the story looked through the prism of a not so reliable man himself in such matters [i.e, there could be a different context to such statements [subject to verification of course] and it could have no bearing whatsoever to reliability on the relevent isnads, thus it is imperative that we here the 'other side of the story too' broth to get a more objective and contextual [and verified] explanation, and for that we need to contact an ahlus Sunnah Scholar that can shed more light on this issue;

for now, given the extremely cautious and meticulous and rigourous approach to isnad verifications in the traditional science of hadiths, and given that the consesus? regard the general hadiths in Sahih Bukhari as sahih, I am more inclined to believe the consensus on this issue rather than Dr Shafaat; infact, I believe the consensus wholeheartedly...

Aquaint yourself with the generally impeccable science of hadith br in sister Friends thread: The Science of Hadith

Here are the Sahih hadiths:

By Him Whose Hand is my life, the son of Mary (Jesus) will certainly invoke the name of God for Hajj or for Umrah, or for both, in the valley of Rawha. (Sahih Muslim)

"It [the Day of Judgment] will not come until you see ten signs," and [in this connection] he mentioned the smoke, the Dajjal, the Beast, the rising of the Sun from the west, the descent of Jesus son of Mary… (Sahih Muslim)

By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, son of Mary [Jesus] will shortly descend amongst you people as a just ruler. (Sahih al-Bukhari)
Jesus son of Mary would then descend and their [Muslims'] commander will invite him to come and lead them in prayer, but he would say: No, some amongst you are commanders over some [amongst you]. This is the honor from God for this Ummah [nation]. (Sahih Muslim)

How will you be when the some of Mary (i.e. Jesus) descends amongst you and he will judge people by the Law of the Qur'an? (Sahih al-Bukhari)

And Dr Shafaat has left out a verry important bit of evidence which the certainty of this view is based on br, and this is another reckless approach of Dr Shafaat to the issue [sorry br, I dont mean to attack or denigrate Dr Shafaat for being your source, but these major flaws do bear on wether the whole approach and line of thought of Dr Shafaat to this issue is sound, thus it is important that they are pointed out] if i may say br, for there is no doubt that if he had asked the mainstream Scholars, or even done a simple search on the net, that he'd probably get to know about this ..., but yet he totally leaves out this inextricable bit of evidence, and rejects sahih hadiths, consensus and an Aqeedah point, and advocates doing the same while not even adressing or considering [or finding out?] the crucial evidence which this view is based on, which are the mutawatir chains.

He treats a few sahih chains to his personal opinions [which are rather eccentric ], but yet fails to consider the huge number of other hadiths and narrators of them hadiths which gives this view the same level of authenticity of the Quran; here is a basic run down of the impeccable proof:


(1) Mutawâtir: It is a hadîth narrated in each era, from the days of the Holy Prophet (

) up to this day by such a large number of narrators that it is impossible to reasonably accept that all of them have colluded to tell a lie.

This kind is further classified into two sub-divisions:

(a) Mutawâtir in words: It is a hadîth whose words are narrated by such a large number as is required for a mutawâtir, in a manner that all the narrators are unanimous in reporting it with the same words without any substantial discrepancy.

(b) Mutawâtir in meaning: It is a mutawâtir hadîth which is not reported by the narrators in the same words. The words of the narrators are different. Sometimes even the reported events are not the same. But all the narrators are unanimous in reporting a basic concept which is common in all the reports. This common concept is also ranked as a mutawâtir concept.

As for the mutawâtir, nobody can question its authenticity. The fact narrated by a mutawâtir chain is always accepted as an absolute truth even if pertaining to our daily life. Any statement based on a mutawâtir narration must be accepted by everyone without any hesitation. I have never seen the city of Moscow, but the fact that Moscow is a large city and is the capital of U.S.S.R. is an absolute truth which cannot be denied. This fact is proved, to me, by a large number of narrators who have seen the city. This is a continuously narrated, or a mutawâtir, fact which cannot be denied or questioned.

In the same way the mutawâtir reports about the sunnah of the Holy Prophet (

) are to be held as absolutely true without any iota of doubt in their authenticity. The authenticity of the Holy Qur’ân being the same Book as that revealed to the Holy Prophet (

) is of the same nature. Thus, the mutawâtir ahâdîth, whether they be mutawâtir in words or in meaning, are as authentic as the Holy Qur’ân, and there is no difference between the two in as far as the reliability of their source of narration is concerned.

The Authority of Sunnah - Chapter 3


The hadiths relating Jesus' second coming are reliable [tawatur]. Research shows that scholars share this view. Tawatur is defined as "a tradition which has been handed down by a number of different channels of transmitters or authorities, hence supposedly ruling out the possibility of its having been forged."1

Sayyid Sharif al-Jurjani, an Islamic scholar, explains the concept of tawatur hadith as follows:

News of mutawatir, are the news upon which so many transmitters agree; to such an extent that, according to the tradition, it is unlikely for so many transmitters to reach to a consensus on a lie. This being the situation, if statements and meanings agree with one another, then this is called mutawatir lafzi [verbal mutawatir]. If there is common meaning yet contradiction between statements [words], then it is called mutewatir-i manawi [mutawatir by meaning].2

In his Al-Tasrih fi ma Tawatara fi Nuzul al-Masih, the great hadith scholar Muhammad Anwar Shah Kashmiri writes that the hadiths about Jesus' second coming are all reliable, and quotes 75 hadiths and 25 works by companions of the Prophet and their disciples (tabi'un).

The tawatur in the hadiths regarding Prophet Jesus' (pbuh) second coming is mutawatir-i manawi. Aside from the fact that each one of the sahih and hasan hadiths may indicate different meanings, they all agree upon Prophet Jesus' (pbuh) second coming. This is actually a fact which is impossible to deny for a person who is well acquainted with the knowledge of hadith...

Muhammad al-Shawkani said that he had collected 29 hadiths and, when he had recorded them all, he said: "Our hadiths have reached the level of tawatur (reliable), as you can see. With this, we reach the conclusion that the hadiths on the anticipated Mahdi, the Dajjal, and Jesus' second coming are mutawatir (genuine)."8

At-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, al-Bazzaz, Ibn Majah, al-Hakim, al-Tabarani, and al-Musuli recorded many hadiths narrated by the Companions, such as `Ali, Ibn `Abbas, Ibn `Umar, Talha, Abu Hurayra, Anas, Abu Sa`id al-Khudri, Umm Habiba, Umm Salama, `Ali al-Hilali, and `Abd Allah ibn al-Harith ibn Jaz, upon whose narrations they based their collection on.9

...Such books show the great number of hadiths that exist on this subject.

Jesus Will Return - by Harun Yahya

Salaam

 

[Abdullah]

Salaam Brother Abdallah



This entire post of yours is totally ineffective because:


#1
You are still quoting Harun Yahya... a convicted criminal.
Someone who has no training in the sciences and somehow
claims to be an expert on evolution. Someone who is not even a scholar,
technically. When you link to his articles, you are just continuing to
weaken your entire argument.

#2
Your claim that the majority of Muslims can never be misguided
is disproved even by the ahadith. The Prophet PBUH (allegedly) said
only the first 3 generations of Muslims would be following his path.

What that meant br, is that the first three generations will be rightly guided, thus the latter generations should learn and follow from them...; we know that even in the first three generations some Muslims went astray didnt they?, like the shia's and the khawarij?, thus this does not mean that every single non kuffar Muslim will be rightly guided, but that the main and original body of the muslims will be impeccably rightly guided...

Here is an explanation from the experts; the above meaning can be gleaned from them inshAllah:

“Surely the following of our [rightly guided] Imams is not abandoning the Qur’anic verses or the sound hadiths; it is the very essence of adhering to them and taking our judgements from them. This is because the Qur’an has not come down to us except by means of these very Imams [who are more worthy of following] by virtue of being more knowledgeable than us in [the sciences of] the abrogating and abrogated, the absolute and the conditional, the equivocal and the clarifying, the probabilistic and the plain, the circumstances surrounding revelation and their various meanings, as well as their possible interpretations and various linguistic and philological considerations, [not to mention] the various other ancillary sciences [involved in understanding the Qur’an] needed.

“Also, they took all of that from the students of the companions (tabi’in) who received their instruction from the companions themselves, who received their instructions from the Lawgiver himself, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, divinely protected from every mistake, who bore witness that the first three generations of Muslims would be ones of virtue and righteousness.

Fatwa of Shaykh Murabtal Haaj on the issue of taqlid of the four Imams

Abu Amir al-Hawdhani said, "Mu'awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan (may Allah be pleased with him) stood among us and said, 'Beware! The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) stood among us and said': 'Beware! The People of the Book before (you) were split up into 72 sects, and this community will be split up into 73, seventy-two of them will go to Hell and one of them will go to Paradise, and it is the majority group (Jama'ah).' [Abu Dawood, Sunan 3/4580, English edn]

"Abdal Rahman ibn Shamasa al-Mahri said: 'I was in the company of Maslama bin Mukhallad and Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-Aas (may Allah be pleased with them).' Abdullah said, 'The Hour shall come only when the worst type of people are left on the earth. They will be worse than the people of pre-Islamic days. They will get what ever they ask of Allah.' While we were sitting Uqba ibn Amir came, and Maslama said to him, 'Uqba, listen to what Abdullah says.' Uqba said, 'He knows, so far as I am concerned, I heard the Prophet (Peace be upon him) say: A group of people from my Ummah will continue to fight in obedience to the Command of Allah, remaining dominant over their enemies. Those who will opose them shall not do them any harm. They will remain in this condition until the Hour over takes them.' (At this) Abdullah said, 'Yes. Then Allah will raise a wind which will be fragrant like musk and whose touch will be like the touch of silk; (but) it will cause the death of all (faithful) persons, not leaving behind a single person with an iota of faith in his heart. Then only the worst of men will remain to be overwhelmed by the Hour.'" (Sahih Muslim, 3/4721, English ed'n, see also Sahih al-Bukhari, 9/414, English ed'n)

Imam Nawawi said in his Sharh Muslim (vol. 2, pg. 143):

"The group of people (mentioned in the above Hadith) consists of scholars, jurisprudents, authorities on Hadith, those who enjoin Good (Maroof) and forbid Evil (Munkar) and all such persons who do good deeds. Such righteous persons may be found spread all over the world."

Imam al-Tirmidhi (Rahimahullah) said:

"The explanation of al-Jama'ah according to the people of knowledge: They are the people of fiqh, knowledge and Hadith." (Sunan al-Tirmidhi, 4/2167; Ahmad Shakir ed'n)

Imam Bukhari (Rahimahullah) stated in his Sahih (vol. 9, chapter. 10, English ed'n),

"The statement of the Prophet (Peace be upon him): 'A group of my followers will remain victorious in their struggle in the cause of the Truth.' Those are the religious(ly) learned men (Ahl ul-Ilm)."

Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (Rahimahullah) said about this group:

"If it is not the people of Hadith, then I do not know who they may be." (Sahih Muslim Sharif-Mukhtasar Sharh Nawawi, vol. 5, pg. 183, W. Zaman)

Imam Muslim (Rahimahullah) has related in his Sahih (3/4553) under the chapter heading 'Instruction to stick to the main body of the Muslims in the time of the trials and warning against those inviting people to disbelief', a Hadith on the authority of Hudhaifa ibn al-Yaman (Allah be pleased with him), who said:

"People used to ask the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) about the good times, but I used to ask him about (the) bad times fearing lest they overtake me. I said, 'Messenger of Allah, we were in the midst of ignorance and evil, and then God brought us this good (time through Islam). Is there any bad time after this good one?' He said, 'Yes'. I asked, 'Will there be a good time again after that bad time?' He said, 'Yes, but therein will be a hidden evil.' I asked, 'What will be the evil hidden therein?' He said, '(That time will witness the rise of) the people who will adopt ways other than mine and seek guidance other than mine. You will know good points as well as bad points.' I asked, 'Will there be a bad time after this good one?' He said, 'Yes. (A time will come) when there will be people standing and inviting at the gates of Hell. Whoso responds to their call, they will throw them into the fire.' I said, 'Messenger of Allah (Peace be upon him), describe them for us.' He said, 'All right. They will be a people having the same complexion as ours and speaking our language.' I said, `Messenger of Allah (Peace be upon him), what do you suggest if I happen to live in their time?' He said, 'You should stick to the main body of the Muslims and their leader' I said, 'If they have no (such thing as the) main body of the Muslims and have no leader?' He said, 'Separate yourself from all these factions, though you may have to eat the roots of trees until death comes to you and you are in this state.'"

(NB-It is not likely that there will be an absence of a Jama'ah, since I have already quoted the Prophet, peace be upon him, as saying: 'A group of people from my Ummah will continue to fight in obedience to the command of Allah, remaining dominant over their enemies. Those who will oppose them shall not do them any harm. They will remain in this condition until the Hour overtakes them.')

Who are the Ahl al-Sunnah?

He even said in the same hadith that the ones who come after will
"not be of me, and I am not of them"... this is a very strong condemnation.

this is a reference to those who go astray br, not the people who remain on Sunnah

And I know of many other hadiths which state that the majority of Muslims near the end times would be as "the foam on top of the sea" i.e. useless.

What is meant by the majority of muslims will be rightly guided, is the majority of Scholars br, for one shouldn't follow the awaam [masses of ignoramouses] but the learned, this is explained in that Shaykh Hamza video I posted earlier; here it is again:

YouTube - Sheikh Hamza Yusuf: Creed Of Imam Al Tahawi p6

The majority of Muslims are indeed owfa [froth of the sea; in other words. scum ] br, and I am one of them , but AlHamdulillah the majority do adhere to the four Schools of thought in matters of their Deen, thus in such matters [when they obey Allah that is] they are rightly guided in that sense...

Another reason which contradicts the entire aqeedah of your sunni sect. Your own ahadith (which you consider infallible) are condemning your sect.

Just the mutawatir one's are infallibe br, not the rest; however the sahih one's that dont reach the mutawatir level are considered to be acurate sayings of the Prophet [saw] and allow only an unlikely possibility of error due to human fallibility and small number of narrators in the chain of transmission

Salam

 

[c0de]

Salaam Brother Abdallah

He treats a few sahih chains to his personal opinions [which are rather eccentric , but yet fails to consider the huge number of other hadiths and narrators of them hadiths which gives this view the same level of authenticity of the Quran; here is a basic run down of the impeccable proof:

Again, you have failed to understand Dr. Shafaat's point.
It is not just a "few" hadiths, it is ALL the hadiths in Bukhari
about the return of Christ. All of them (every single one)
passes through an unreliable narrator (Ibn Shihab Al Zuhri).
Someone who Bukhari himself has criticized.

Aquaint yourself with the generallyimpeccable science of hadith br in sister Friends thread: The Science of Hadith

This point has been refuted by the fact that the weak narrator has
been uncovered, therefore the idea that the "science" of hadith is "impeccable",
can no longer stand.

What is meant by the majority of muslims will be rightly guided,

It actually means the exact opposite. Allah has clearly said in the
Quran that He does not change the state of a people, until they
change what is in their hearts. The humiliated state that the Muslims
find themselves in, is the conclusive proof that the majority is not
rightly guided.

regard the general hadiths in Sahih Bukhari as sahih, I am more inclined to believe the consensus on this issue rather than Dr Shafaat; infact, I believe the consensus wholeheartedly...

In a debate, it does not matter what you believe brother.
The only thing that matters is what you can prove.

As it stands now, you have not been able to provide any references
for your previous points about the Muawatta and Imaam Maliki.

I also ask that you analyze Dr. Shafaat's points again before responding
to them, or rejecting them simply because they do not conform to the
beliefs of your aqeedah.

 

[Abdullah]

Salaam brother

Broth, there is something of the 'mind-set' of Dr Shafaat I'd like to bring to your attention, which is obviously linked to his 'unreasonable' suspicions and rather accentric reasoning which is his basis for opposing this issue and many other important Islamic doctrines:

He says in his article:

In Bukhari (kitab al-istidhan, bab ayah al-hijab, kitab at-tafsir, bab la tadkhulu ...) and Muslim (kitab as-salam, bab ibahat al-khuruj li an-nisa ...) we read the following explanation of the circumstances of the revelation of the verse of hijab:

Ishaq related to me: Yaqub bin Ibrahim inofrmed us: my father related to us from Saleh from Ibn Shihab (al-Zuhri) who said: ‘Urwah ibn al-Zubayr informed me that ‘A’ishah said: ‘Umar bin al-Khattab used to say that the Messenger of God, “Let your wives be in hijab”. But he did not do so. And the wives of the Prophet used to go at night to al‑Manasi (a vast open place near Baqia at Medina to answer the call of nature). Once Sawdah bint Zam‘ah (the wife of the Prophet) went out and she was a tall lady. ‘Umar bin al-Khattab saw her while he was in a gathering and said, “I have recognized you, O Sawdah!” (He said so, as he desired eagerly that the verse of al‑hijab may be revealed.) So God revealed the verse of al‑hijab.

But in another version of the same story in Bukhari ‘Umar sees Sawdah not before but after the verse of hijab had been revealed:

Zakariya bin Yahya related to me: Abu Usamah related to us from Hisham from his father (’Urwah) from ‘A’ishah who said: Sawdah (the wife of the Prophet) went out for her need after hijab had been ordained. She was a fat huge lady, and everybody who knew her before could recognize her. So ‘Umar bin al‑Khattab saw her and said, “O Sawdah! By God, you cannot hide yourself from us, so think of a way by which you should not be recognized on going out. Sawdah returned while the Messenger of God was in my house taking his supper and a bone covered with meat was in his hand. She entered and said, “O Messenger of God! I went out for a need and ‘Umar said to me so‑and‑so.” Then God inspired him (the Prophet) and when the state of inspiration was over and the bone was still in his hand as he had not put it down, he said (to Sawdah), “You (women) have been allowed to go out for your needs.” (Bukhari, kitab at-tafsir, bab la tadkhulu buyut an-nabi ... )

Some harmonisers may argue that ‘Umar twice saw Sawdah go out, once before the revelation of the verse of hijab and once after. But such an explanation is most unlikely and extremely artificial. It is much more natural to conclude that we are dealing here with two versions of a single story.

Islamic View of the Coming/Return of Jesus

Now from the context of the story br it can be easily noted that these two hadiths possibly/probably relate to two different events, one before the verse of Hijab was revealed and the other, after; this is even more so possible due to the different types of revelation revealed at the end...; one of hijab and the other regarding wether women can go out to answer the call of nature [allthough they may be recognised, even while wearing hijab? due to some of the bodies having distinct shape such as Sawadah's [ra]; tall and fat...]

But in such an important matter of judging hadiths, esspecially when they're classified as Sahih, and when they're also a prelude to making a judgement on a consensus and Aqeedah issue, Dr Shafaat comes to the opposite conclusion , defying what strikes as more likely or even obvious from even the glance of a laymen like me

Salaam

 

[c0de]

Salam Brother Abdallah



I would like to remind you that all the points you keep avoiding,
are starting to pile up against you. And the new points you are raising
now are not only irrelevant, they are also based in misunderstanding.

Now from the context of the story br it can be easily noted that these two hadiths possibly/probably relate to two different events, one before the verse of Hijab was revealed and the other, after; this is even more so possible due to the different types of revelation revealed at the end...; one of hijab and the other regarding wether women can go out to answer the call of nature [allthough they may be recognised, even while wearing hijab? due to some of the bodies having distinct shape such as Sawadah's [ra]; tall and fat...]

But in such an important matter of judging hadiths, esspecially when they're classified as Sahih, and when they're also a prelude to making a judgement on a consensus and Aqeedah issue, Dr Shafaat comes to the opposite conclusion , defying what strikes as more likely or even obvious from even the glance of a laymen like me

The quote you used ignores the actual argument of Dr. Shafaat.
You make it seem as if he is basing his entire thesis on these 2 hadiths,
when he has already developed his argument beforehand:

Chastity and Hijab

• The discrepancy in the dates of the ifk incident
• The discrepance between the version of Ibn Ishaq and Bukhari/Muslim
• The command in the Quran relating only to the wives of the Prophet
• Al-Zuhri again being the narrator
• Bukhari himself having doubts about the issue

etc.


If you want to argue the point of hijab, you are free to start a thread about it.
But this thread deals with: the unreliability of the hadiths relation to the return of Jesus PBUH.
You raised a lot of objections, which were all countered. If you can not provide arguments
against the counter-points, you will have to concede them.

 

[Abdullah]

... here is a basic run down of the impeccable proof:


(1) Mutawâtir: It is a hadîth narrated in each era, from the days of the Holy Prophet (

) up to this day by such a large number of narrators that it is impossible to reasonably accept that all of them have colluded to tell a lie.

This kind is further classified into two sub-divisions:

(a) Mutawâtir in words: It is a hadîth whose words are narrated by such a large number as is required for a mutawâtir, in a manner that all the narrators are unanimous in reporting it with the same words without any substantial discrepancy.

(b) Mutawâtir in meaning: It is a mutawâtir hadîth which is not reported by the narrators in the same words. The words of the narrators are different. Sometimes even the reported events are not the same. But all the narrators are unanimous in reporting a basic concept which is common in all the reports. This common concept is also ranked as a mutawâtir concept.

As for the mutawâtir, nobody can question its authenticity. The fact narrated by a mutawâtir chain is always accepted as an absolute truth even if pertaining to our daily life. Any statement based on a mutawâtir narration must be accepted by everyone without any hesitation. I have never seen the city of Moscow, but the fact that Moscow is a large city and is the capital of U.S.S.R. is an absolute truth which cannot be denied. This fact is proved, to me, by a large number of narrators who have seen the city. This is a continuously narrated, or a mutawâtir, fact which cannot be denied or questioned.

In the same way the mutawâtir reports about the sunnah of the Holy Prophet (

) are to be held as absolutely true without any iota of doubt in their authenticity. The authenticity of the Holy Qur’ân being the same Book as that revealed to the Holy Prophet (

) is of the same nature. Thus, the mutawâtir ahâdîth, whether they be mutawâtir in words or in meaning, are as authentic as the Holy Qur’ân, and there is no difference between the two in as far as the reliability of their source of narration is concerned.

The Authority of Sunnah - Chapter 3


The hadiths relating Jesus' second coming are reliable [tawatur]. Research shows that scholars share this view. Tawatur is defined as "a tradition which has been handed down by a number of different channels of transmitters or authorities, hence supposedly ruling out the possibility of its having been forged."1

Sayyid Sharif al-Jurjani, an Islamic scholar, explains the concept of tawatur hadith as follows:

News of mutawatir, are the news upon which so many transmitters agree; to such an extent that, according to the tradition, it is unlikely for so many transmitters to reach to a consensus on a lie. This being the situation, if statements and meanings agree with one another, then this is called mutawatir lafzi [verbal mutawatir]. If there is common meaning yet contradiction between statements [words], then it is called mutewatir-i manawi [mutawatir by meaning].2

In his Al-Tasrih fi ma Tawatara fi Nuzul al-Masih, the great hadith scholar Muhammad Anwar Shah Kashmiri writes that the hadiths about Jesus' second coming are all reliable, and quotes 75 hadiths and 25 works by companions of the Prophet and their disciples (tabi'un).

The tawatur in the hadiths regarding Prophet Jesus' (pbuh) second coming is mutawatir-i manawi. Aside from the fact that each one of the sahih and hasan hadiths may indicate different meanings, they all agree upon Prophet Jesus' (pbuh) second coming. This is actually a fact which is impossible to deny for a person who is well acquainted with the knowledge of hadith...

Muhammad al-Shawkani said that he had collected 29 hadiths and, when he had recorded them all, he said: "Our hadiths have reached the level of tawatur (reliable), as you can see. With this, we reach the conclusion that the hadiths on the anticipated Mahdi, the Dajjal, and Jesus' second coming are mutawatir (genuine)."8

At-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, al-Bazzaz, Ibn Majah, al-Hakim, al-Tabarani, and al-Musuli recorded many hadiths narrated by the Companions, such as `Ali, Ibn `Abbas, Ibn `Umar, Talha, Abu Hurayra, Anas, Abu Sa`id al-Khudri, Umm Habiba, Umm Salama, `Ali al-Hilali, and `Abd Allah ibn al-Harith ibn Jaz, upon whose narrations they based their collection on.9

...Such books show the great number of hadiths that exist on this subject.

Jesus Will Return - by Harun Yahya

Salaam

I forgot to add a few more comments to this br, so here goes :

Nor did Dr Shafaat take the evidence of consensus into consideration; all these hadiths and a Quranic Ayah clarifying that consensus couldn't ever be wrong as Allah will divinely protect consensus' from error; see the above shaykh Hamza video and following post for proof:

http://www.interfaith.org/forum/178966-post66.html

heres a bit more:

there is much evidence that the orthodox majority of the Umma is divinely protected from error, such as the sahih hadith related by al-Hakim that "Allah's hand is over the group, and whoever diverges from them diverges to hell" (al-Mustadrak, 1.116). [comment by Shaykh nuh Ha Mim keller]

Studying Hadith Texts on Our Own


And regarding the Sahih Bukhari hadiths which the Dr tries to cast doubt on, there only a few br..., compared to the huge numbers of hadiths there are on this in other hadith compilations...[see above], and from which the mutawatir manawi [in meaning] has been established from...; mutawatir is basically, a hadith coming from so many different chains [not only the few in Bukhari...] that it is not practically possible for all those people to have colluded to tell a lie

Here is a basic explanation of the sheer cautiousness, meticulous and precision science and rigour that went into verifying the hadiths:

Before declaring a hadîth as sahîh or hasan [rigourously authenticated and well authenticated, respectively; these two catogories of hadith are reliable for legal and doctrinal matters], the following tests are applied:

(a) Scrutiny of its narrators.
(b) Scrutiny of the constancy of the chain of narrators.
(c) Comparison of its chain and text with other available paths of narration in the same manner.
(d) Examination of the chain and the text of the hadîth in the light of other material available on the subject, and to ensure that there is no defect in the chain or in the text.
We will try to give a brief explanation of these four tests as they are applied by the scholars of hadîth to scrutinize the veracity of a tradition.

1. Scrutiny of the narrators
The first and foremost test of the correctness of a hadîth relates to the credibility of its narrators. This scrutiny is carried out on two scores: firstly, examination of the integrity and honesty of a narrator, and secondly, examination of his memory power.

To carry out this scrutiny, a separate complete Science has been introduced which is called ‘Ilm-ur-Rijâl (the knowledge of men). The scholars of this science devoted their lives for the thorough enquiry about each person who has reported a hadîth. For this, they used to go to his place and enquire about him from his neighbors, pupils, and friends so that no scholar would be impressed by his personal relations with a narrator. ‘Ali ibn al-Madini, the famous scholar of Rijâl, when asked about his father, first tried to avoid the question and replied, “Ask some other scholar about him.” But when the question was repeated with a request for his own opinion, he said:

It is the matter of Faith, (I, therefore, reply) he is a weak narrator.​

Waki’ ibn Jarrâh, the well-known Imâm of hadîth, held his father as “weak” in hadîth, and did not rely on his reports unless they are confirmed by some reliable narrator.

Imâm Abu Dâwûd, the author of one of the Six Books, has opined about his son ‘Abdullâh (this is the same ‘Abdullâh whose work, Kitâb-ul-Masalif, has been published by some orientalists), that he was “a great liar.”
Zaid ibn Abi Unaisah has said about his brother Yahya, “Do not accept the traditions of my brother Yahya, because he is reputed in lying.”

Similar opinions are recorded in the books of the ‘Ilm-ur-Rijâl. Hundreds of books have been written on this subject. Here are only a few examples:

the shaykh here gives the examples, and then mentions that there are several other books that are meant exclusively for the narators of the six, and that "after consulting them one can easily reach a definite conclusion about the veracity of a narrator".

Then the shaykh goes on to list several other books which has a study of a large number of narrators in them, and mentions other simmilar books and says that there are books also that deal with the reliable narrator only, mentioning 11 vollumes.

then the shaykh says:

It is well-known that no report, in the science of hadîth, is accepted unless it gives the full chain of narrators upto the Holy Prophet (

). Each narrator from this chain is first scrutinized on the touch-stone of his credibility as discussed above. But even if all the narrators of a chain are found to be reliable, it is not enough to hold the tradition as authentic. It must be proved that the chain is constant and no narrator has been missed in between. If it is found that some narrator has been missed at any stage, the tradition is held to be unreliable. To ensure the constancy of the chain, it is necessary to know about each narrator whether it is possible for him historically to meet the person from whom he claims to hear the tradition. ...

And there is a lot more in there about the above aspect and 'Comparison with other narrations' and 'General analysis of the tradition'.

The Authority of Sunnah - Chapter 3

And regarding the Sahih Bukhari, Shaykh Jibril Haddad says:

The questions are sometimes asked (1) whether all the Ulema of Hadïth agree that all the hadïths in al-Bukhàrï and Muslim are sahïh or (2) if there are any scholars who con­sider them to contain some weak narrations, and (3) whether one who believes that “the Sahïhayn are not 100%sahïh” is an innovator.

As was just shown, some of the greatest hadïth au­thorities such as Ibn al-Salàh, Ibn Kathïr, and al-Suyþtï answered yes to the first ques­tion.

Imàm al-Haramayn (Ibn al-Juwaynï) said that if a man swore on pains of divorce that all that is in al-Bukhàrï and Muslim is sahïh his marriage would be safe. [12] But Imàm al-Dàraqutnï said a small number may not reach that level so the answer to the sec­ond question has to be yes. Yet the objections were refuted one by one by Ibn Hajar at the be­ginning of Fath al-Bàrï and Imàm al-Nawawï at the beginning of Sharh Sahïh Muslim. [13] The short formula “whether theSahïhayn are or not 100% sahïh” remain strenuous and misleading, for the Umma far and wide–meaning the Consensus of the Fuqahà’ generation after generation–have been satisfied that they are.

This conclusion excludes the chainless, broken-chained reports, or unattributed reports sometimes adduced by al-Bukhàrï in his chapter-titles or appended to certain narra­tions. An example of the latter is the so-called “suicide hadïth” – one of al-Zuhrï’s unattributive narrations (balàghàt) which is actually broken-chained and therefore weak. It does not meet the criteria of hadïth authenticity used by the lesser and greater hadïth Masters, much less that of al-Bukhàrï who mentioned it only to show its discrepancy with two other chains whose ver­sions omit the attempted suicide story, and Allàh knows best. [14]

Weak Hadiths in Bukhari?

So there you are broth, there is a consensus on the two Sahihayns being Sahih, thus Dr Shafaat goes against this consensus too; as for Ad-Daraqtuni [ra] disputing a small number of them, and which were refuted by Ibn Hajar and Imaam An-Nawawi, they are verry few indeed:

In his Kitàb al-Tatabbu‘, al-Dàraqutnï argues for the weakness of 78 hadiths in al-Bukhàrï, 100 in Muslim, and 32 in both based on isnàd and matn criticism.

Salaam

ps one other thing br, if Bukhari himself critisized Az-Zuhri, then that goes to show that the context of this critism in it's relations to the relevent isnads have no bearing on their authenticity whatsoever, or else would Imam Bukhari had included Az-Zuhri in them isnads and then declared them sahih?; we can see also from the above comments in that sunnipath article that there is mention of some Az-zuhri hadiths to be found in bukhari too, which were put in there by Bukhari [ra] to show the discrepency with two other chains; thus Bukhari was verry aware of what hadiths with az-Zuhri in it's chain was 'disconnected' [mursal?; i.e had a missing link to it...] and what one's were reliable...

this shows that az-Zuhri may have had a hadith [or more than one?] which had a missing lnik in it..., but az-Zuhri was certainly not the unreliable type which renders all his narrations 'weak' [if he is indeed included in Sahih chains that is in iether of the two sahihs]; an excerpt of a quote by Dr Shafaat himself, where it says that Maalik disliked a certain 'student' leaving Az-Zuhri's teaching?, shows that the likes of Imaam Maalik held az-Zuhri in high honour and considerd him trustworthy and reliable enuogh to learn from?

Salamualikum wr wb

 

[c0de]

Salam Brother Abdallah

I would like to remind you that you are now repeating points that
have already been nullified. Also, you have not answered the
counter-objections, to the new objections you raised. You are also
missing the key references to back up your original argument.

And regarding the Sahih Bukhari hadiths which the Dr tries to cast doubt on, there only a few br...,

No brother, EVERY SINGLE hadith about the return of Jesus PBUH in
Bukhari and Muslim is unreliable as it passes through Ibn Shihab Al Zuhri.
And in that generation, he is the only one to narrate the words, so in
effect, he is the only narrator of these hadiths, and this man has been
proven to be unreliable.

there is much evidence that the orthodox majority of the Umma is divinely protected from error, such as the sahih hadith related by al-Hakim that "Allah's hand is over the group, and whoever diverges from them diverges to hell" (al-Mustadrak, 1.116). [comment by Shaykh nuh Ha Mim keller]

So when evil people talk in groups, they are automatically right?
This statement makes absolutely no sense, because according to this,
being right is only dependent on being in groups.

I gave you a verse from the Quran, and even hadiths which prove that
the majority of Muslims today are misguided. You can try the argue the
point all you want, but the fact that the Muslims today are in this
humiliated state is proof that we are misguided because Allah has stated
that He does not change the state of a people until they first change
what is in their hearts. This is the ultimate proof against the majority of
Muslims. Additions to the aqeedah like this return of Christ are prime
examples of their misguidance.

 

[Abdullah]

Salam Brother Abdallah

I would like to remind you that you are now repeating points that
have already been nullified. Also, you have not answered the
counter-objections, to the new objections you raised. You are also
missing the key references to back up your original argument.

Alikum salam wr wb br

No brother, EVERY SINGLE hadith about the return of Jesus PBUH in
Bukhari and Muslim is unreliable as it passes through Ibn Shihab Al Zuhri.

Well wev'e seen that Dr Shafaat mentions the one's in Bukhari, but where does he mention the one's in Muslim?; if your reffering to same one's narrated by the same people? in Muslim, then they're basically the same one's aint they br? and if there are any different one's in Muslim with Zuhri in the chain, then by what we've seen so far [from the narrations of Dr Shafaat and Harun Yahya], there are alltogether verry few in Bukhari and Muslim [bukhari may have about 4,5 or upto 6, and Muslim may have a simmilar number or even less...; some of Muslims one's may be the same as Bukhari's with the same chain];

I think your misunderstanding me here a bit br; I am not saying that only the one's by Zuhri are few, but that all the narrations regarding the second coming in Bukhari [and muslim] are few, thus if they all have Zuhri in the chain, then so be it but they are a few compared to all the other narrations in the various hadith compilations; see previous article; it mentions 70 such hadiths...

And how many of them have been related [directly?] from the Prophet [saw] to make these hadiths mutawatir [in meaning or some in words too...]?: two to three dozens:

http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=135&CATE=24

in that generation, he is the only one to narrate the words, so in
effect, he is the only narrator of these hadiths, and this man has been
proven to be unreliable..

mutawatir is a continuous mass narration br...thus there's plenty of examples of it being mass narrated from earlier periods... and Az-Zuhri was not the only one br; he was a link in the chain according to Dr Shafaat [which still needs verification], but read the last bit of my previous post br, and you'll see inshAllah that if Zuhri has indeed been included in sahih designated chains, then he was a reliable person enough for that and that brings us to the point br of;

if a person has been proven to be unreliable, untrustworthy and with a rather abnormal and illogical suspicious attitude towards hadiths [regarding verry important matters too] and is known to have reached many hetorodox conclusions regarding important matters of Islam via the same process of thought and disposition, and on the other hand you have trustworthy and great Scholars verified by consensus, and who have extraordinary anylitical, memmory and precision skills and have all the pre-requisite sciences and quality to be a hadith Scholar too..., then who's view is more rational and safe to believe br? , not to mention that the latters view is backed up with overwhelming evidence too.

And regarding the reliability of the narrators of these hadiths, ...spanning many hadiith books...:

4. The abundance of narrators who reported the hadiths related to Prophet Jesus' (pbuh) coming and their trustworthiness is another issue to which Islamic scholars draw attention. Some of the narrators who reported these hadiths are: Abu'l Asas as-Sanani, Abu Rafi, Abul Aliyya, Abu Umama al-Bahili, Abu'd Darda', Abu Hurayra, Abu Malik al-Hudri, Jabir Ibn Abdullah, Hudhayfa Ibn Adis, Safina, Abu Qatada, Uthman Ibnul 'Aas, Nafi' Ibn Kaysani, Al Walid Ibn Muslim, Ammar Ibn Yathir, Abdullah Ibni Abbas...

http://www.jesuswillreturn.com/s1_5b.html

So when evil people talk in groups, they are automatically right?
This statement makes absolutely no sense, because according to this,
being right is only dependent on being in groups..

'group' here means the majority group br and not just any group , for otherwise every group will be rightly guided

And this makes sense too br as we'll see inshAllah:

Allah by His Mercy, has made the majority of muslims stay on the right path, for I think you may have heard of teachings that onc'e a believer/person tastes the sweetness of imaan, or has the truth manifested in his heart, he never wants to revert to kufr/misguidance, and AlHamdulillah this has worked for the majority of muslims, and since there is a satan, and with mankind having free-will, then a minority is 'bound' to go astray, thus when minorities broke away from the original body of Muslims, and formed their own devient sects, the majority remained on the right path, and this has been the case for all times and this was indeed affirmed and confirmed too by the Prophet [saw], as we've seen, that the description of the rightly guided group at times of many sects will be, those who follow the Prophet [saw's] Sunnah and they will be the largest group of muslims

And how do the majority group represent consensus too?; well br, the orignal body of Muslims that didn't go astray allways hold the consensus, for the minorities that break away or Muslims who form their own sects or who ally themselves with the minority devient sects, dont effect this consensus for their views that go against it are erroneous and thus are not valid; the original body of muslims themselves adhere to the original consensus of the Sahabah and the first 3 generations of Muslims, and whoever goes against that can never effect the original consensus':

(1) Surah al-Imran (3:103):

"And hold fast, all of you together, to the rope of Allah and be not divided."
​

Imam Sayf ad-Din al-Amidi (d. 631/1233; Rahimahullah) said in his al-Ihkam fi usul al-ahkam (The proficiency: on the fundamentals of legal rulings, pg. 295) with regard to the above Qur'anic verse:

"Allah has forbidden separation, and disagreement with consensus (ijma) is separation."
​

Hence, if Allah has forbidden separation then surely we must all unite on the unanimously accepted aqid'ah of our pious predecessors.

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/ahlsunna.htm

And once again I'll remind you of how the name ahlus Sunnah wal Jammah ['sunni' for short] came about br; when many devient sects appear, it is neccassary to designate the rightly guided group, for just calling ourselves 'Muslims' is not enough for every sect will call themselves that, so the rightly guided group needs to be given a distinct name; a description by which people will recognise them -

I think I heard that one of the four Imaams [who were from the first 3 generations of Muslims mind you; remember you acknowledging? that they will be rightly guided as said in a hadith?], Imaam Hanbali [I think it was] used this name too

- and this description was used by the Prophet [saw] himself for when he described that the rightly guided group will be 'the people who adhere to the Sunnah, and they will be the largest group of muslims'; this is exactly what ahlus Sunnah wal Jammah means; people of Sunnah and the majority

I gave you a verse from the Quran, and even hadiths which prove that
the majority of Muslims today are misguided. You can try the argue the
point all you want, but the fact that the Muslims today are in this
humiliated state is proof that we are misguided because Allah has stated
that He does not change the state of a people until they first change
what is in their hearts. This is the ultimate proof against the majority of
Muslims. Additions to the aqeedah like this return of Christ are prime
examples of their misguidance.

There are hadiths and Quranic ayah saying to the effect to follow and stick to the majority group, now common sense tells us br, that we shouldn't be following the ignoramouses [like me and the vast majority of Muslims], but only the enlightened and learned one's, i.e the qualified Scholars, thus from this simple deduction, we can see that what is probably meant by the 'majority of muslims' is the majority of Scholars, and this is what the Scholars have affirmed and confirmed too:

Imam Nawawi said in his Sharh Muslim (vol. 2, pg. 143):

"The group of people (mentioned in the above Hadith) consists of scholars, jurisprudents, authorities on Hadith, those who enjoin Good (Maroof) and forbid Evil (Munkar) and all such persons who do good deeds. Such righteous persons may be found spread all over the world."

Imam al-Tirmidhi (Rahimahullah) said:

"The explanation of al-Jama'ah according to the people of knowledge: They are the people of fiqh, knowledge and Hadith." (Sunan al-Tirmidhi, 4/2167; Ahmad Shakir ed'n)

Imam Bukhari (Rahimahullah) stated in his Sahih (vol. 9, chapter. 10, English ed'n),

"The statement of the Prophet (Peace be upon him): 'A group of my followers will remain victorious in their struggle in the cause of the Truth.' Those are the religious(ly) learned men (Ahl ul-Ilm)."

Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (Rahimahullah) said about this group:

"If it is not the people of Hadith, then I do not know who they may be." (Sahih Muslim Sharif-Mukhtasar Sharh Nawawi, vol. 5, pg. 183, W. Zaman)

And more comprehensively explained by Shaykh Hamza Yusuf on the following video:

YouTube - Sheikh Hamza Yusuf: Creed Of Imam Al Tahawi p6

The majority of commn Muslims are indeed astray br, for they are not obeying their Allah [swt] and have become too secularised, and indeed Allah will not change their conditions unless they change what is in their hearts [i.e, untill they follow Allah and His Messenger as they should and get rid of excessive love for dhunyah and develop taqwa and a love for the hereafter] this is what that hadith means br and this meaning can be deduced from common sense too for the Scholars are indeed not in the catogory of people who the hadith talks about, for the hadith specifically mentions love for the world and fear of death, i.e, they dont look forward to the hereafter or they dont think about death... or they dont defend themselves against kuffar when they should for fear of dying:

Thauban reported that the messenger of Allah said: "It is near that the nations will call one another against you just as the eaters call one another to their dishes." Somebody asked: "Is this because we will be few in numbers that day?" He said: "Nay, but that day you shall be numerous, but you will be like the foam of the sea, and Allah will take the fear of you away from your enemies and will place weakness into your hearts." Somebody asked: "What is this weakness?" He said: "The love of the world and the dislike of death." (Abu Daud)

cont...

 

[Abdullah]

And regarding Maaliks view, well Maaliks school is one of the mainstream Schools br, thus without his School, the consensus will not be complete, and Shaykh hamza Yusuf is a Maaliki, if that speaks anything of Maaliks view , and I think Shaykh Abdullah bin Bayyah may be a Maaliki too, for he is one of Shaykh Hamza's teachers.

And Muwatta is not a book that gives all of Imaam Maaliks legal or creedal views br, just like the other hadith compilations dont iether for their respective authors; muwatta is a compilations of hadiths br, not primarily a legal or creedal book...

inshAllah I'll still find you some direct quotes of Maalik too, but the evidence provided so far should be enough ... [and you can put the question to any Ahlus Sunnah Scholar too] ...

Salam

 

[c0de]

Salaam Brother Abdallah

I think your misunderstanding me here a bit br; I am not saying that only the one's by Zuhri are few, but that all the narrations regarding the second coming in Bukhari [and muslim] are few, thus if they all have Zuhri in the chain, then so be it but they are a few compared to all the other narrations in the various hadith compilations; see previous article; it mentions 70 such hadiths...

I understand your point brother, but this does not answer the argument.
Bukhari and Muslim are considered by mainstream Muslims to be the most
authentic compilations correct? (Even though Muwatta is much more so).
So if the hadith in these compilations have been proven to be
unreliable, what does that say about the other compilations???

Thats the point. There are >no< reliable hadiths to support this aqeedah.
So in the end, this belief not only lack a foundation in the Quran, it also
lacks a solid foundation in the hadith.

And regarding Maaliks view, well Maaliks school is one of the mainstream Schools br, thus without his School, the consensus will not be complete, and Shaykh hamza Yusuf is a Maaliki, if that speaks anything of Maaliks view , and I think Shaykh Abdullah bin Bayyah may be a Maaliki too, for he is one of Shaykh Hamza's teachers.

And Muwatta is not a book that gives all of Imaam Maaliks legal or creedal views br, just like the other hadith compilations dont iether for their respective authors; muwatta is a compilations of hadiths br, not primarily a legal or creedal book...

inshAllah I'll still find you some direct quotes of Maalik too, but the evidence provided so far should be enough ... [and you can put the question to any Ahlus Sunnah Scholar too] ...

The question is not what the Maliki followers today believe. The question is
what did Imaam Maliki himself believe. His own writings say nothing about
this return of Jesus PBUH belief. If you can prove otherwise, please
provide your referrences.

not to mention that the latters view is backed up with overwhelming evidence too.

Bro you have not presented any evidence...
You have only given opinions of "scholars."

Dr. Shafaat is also a scholar, but he provided
evidence for his thesis. Your scholars have not
even provided a single referrence to Muwatta
which they falsely claimed had listed the hadiths
about the return of Jesus PBUH.

now common sense tells us br, that we shouldn't be following the ignoramouses [like me and the vast majority of Muslims], but only the enlightened and learned one's,

Brother we can NOT judge a person as "enlightened". We do not know who
Allah has guided, and who He has not. This is why all we can do is to
examine the evidence that each person presents, and judge the evidence.

For all you know, the majority of scholars are just as misguided as the
majority of Muslims. After all, they are the ones who are guiding the
Muslims. They are the ones who have introduced these faulty beliefs into
the aqeedah.

Allah by His Mercy, has made the majority of muslims stay on the right path,

Wrong. And this verse is clear proof of this:

For each (such person) there are (angels) in succession, before and behind him: They guard him by command of Allah. Allah does not change a people's lot unless they change what is in their hearts. But when (once) Allah willeth a people's punishment, there can be no turning it back, nor will they find, besides Him, any to protect.
013.011

The downfall of the Muslims came after they changed what was in their
hearts. And their scholars today have furthered their misguidance by
introducing extra quranic beliefs into the aqeedah.






​

 

[Abdullah]

Salaam Brother Abdallah


I understand your point brother, but this does not answer the argument.
Bukhari and Muslim are considered by mainstream Muslims to be the most
authentic compilations correct? (Even though Muwatta is much more so).
So if the hadith in these compilations have been proven to be
unreliable, what does that say about the other compilations???

Alikum salaam wr wb brother; I thought that there's nothing left here other than to go round in circles now br, but since your waiting, I dont like to keep a person waiting, so here goes :

How have they been proven to be unreliable br?; I have shown the Dr's arguments to be baseless [once put into the correct context, and the evidence for them being reliable is taken into consideration; see post #32]; with the Dr's evident irrational and overly suspicioius approach to such issues [not to mention a tendency to reach serial heretical conclusions], thus rendering him a thoroughly unreliable person himself, and with the basic logical perspective which shows that Imaam Bukhari would not have classified hadiths Sahih with Zuhri in the chain [if he indeed did] if Zuhri was not reliable [explained in more detail in post 32], and with the evidence that there is a consensus on all the hadiths in the two Sahihs being Sahih..., and with not even a genuine Scholars [Ad Daraqtuni] critisism regarding a few of them standing ground [for they were refuted by Ibn Hajar and Imàm al-Nawawï], that is more than enough br to know that every single Sahih hadiths in the two Sahih's are indeed Sahih

Salam

 

[c0de]

Salam Brother Abdallah

Alikum salaam wr wb brother; I thought that there's nothing left here other than to go round in circles now br, but since your waiting, I dont like to keep a person waiting, so here goes

lol "We" are not going in circles bro, you are.

I asked you to provide references for your claims.
You have not provided them. You said that you
will be back with them, but you are not.

How have they been proven to be unreliable br?;

Very simply: All the narrations pass through Al Zuhri, and
this person has been criticized by Bukhari himself. And when
they pass through him, in that generation, he is the only one
to relate them, so in effect, he is the only narrator of those
ahadith.

Your only argument (that you are repeating) is that just because
they are found in Bukhari, they are automatically sahih. That is
no argument at all. We are not talking about the Quran here brother.

 

[Abdullah]

Salam Brother Abdallah

I asked you to provide references for your claims.
You have not provided them. You said that you
will be back with them, but you are not.

Alikum salam wr wb br

About Imam Maaliks view?; but isn't that obvious yet br?

I done some searches on the internet but couldn't find any, inshAllah will still keep an open eye...; but having a hang up on that isn't verry wise br, esspecially when Maaliks view should become obvious by now, and if you still regard the Dr's assumption [conviction?] to be reasonable, then in such an important matter as this br, where every other bit of evidence overwhelmingly backs the traditional view, then surely if this is the only hang up for you then the onus should be on you to find it no?;

there are online Imams/Scholars you can ask brother like ask-imam.com and Islamonline.net ...


Salaam

 

[Abdullah]

Salaam br

I have found a relevent bit of evidence for you, which allthough does not adress the second coming hadiths particularly, but yet adresses a simmilar issue by which the same conclusions can be drawn for this issue:

On the Mahdi & Imam Malik

Salam