Why Muslims Must Follow the Sunna As Well As the Quran

[Abdullah]

Assalamualaikum

Many people enquire about why we have to follow the Sunnah when the Quran is supposed to consist of the complete guidance for mankind.

In this thread, inshAllah I will try and give a comprehensive answer to why a Muslim has to follow the Sunnah, in addition to the Quran.

Is it contradictory to follow the Sunnah, when we are supposed to follow the Quran? It is not, for the following reasons:

In the Quran, Allah orders us to obey and follow the prophet Muhammad [saw], therefore, obeying the sayings of the Prophet [saw] is obeying the Quran; there is no contradiction in the two.

Allah says in the Quran:

Say: Obey Allah and the Messenger, but if they turn their backs, Allah loves not the disbelievers. (3:32)

The above verse [and many others similar to it] establishes that we have to obey the Messenger saw [Sunnah] as well as obeying Allah [The Quran].

And whoever obeys the Messenger, thereby obeys Allah (4:80)

Above verse shows that obeying the Messenger [saw], is obeying Allah, as Allah has ordered in the Quran to obey the Messenger [saw].

And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has gone astray into manifest error. (33:36)

The above verse shows that to not obey the Messenger [saw] [and Allah ofcourse] is to go astray...

Obeying the Messenger [saw] is so important in Islam, that there isn't a single verse where Allah has said in the Quran to obey Him [swt] and not said in the same verse to obey His Messenger [saw].

On the contrary, there are some verses where only the obedience of the Messenger has been mentioned, and there is no reference to the obedience of Allah

And establish salaah and pay zakaah and obey the Prophet so that you may be blessed. (24:56)

And if you obey him (the Prophet), you shall find the right path. (24:54)

This goes to show how absolutely imperative it is to obey the Messenger [saw]

And whatever the Messenger gives you, take it, and whatever he forbids you, leave it. And fear Allah: truly Allah is severe in punishment. [Qur'an 59:7]

The above verse is general in it's meaning, thus it does not only refer to the Quranic verses recited by the Prophet [saw], but also to whatever he says regarding the Deen of Islam, thus every such sayings of the prophet [saw] is indirectly connected to that Quranic verse, so when we follow/obey the Sunnah, we follow/obey that Quranic verse [amongst others]

here is a hadith that clarifies this point further:

Ibn Masud (Allah be pleased with him) narrated that a woman came to him and told him: "You who says: May Allah's curse be on Al-Namisat [a woman who plucks hers or others eye-brows - completely or to be a thin line] and Al-Motanamisat [a woman who asks others to do it for her] and those who tattoo." He said: "Yes." She said, "I read the Book of Allah (Al-Qur'an) from its beginning to its end, I did not find what you have said." He told her: "If you have read it, you would have found it. As for your reading what the Messanger teaches you, take it, and what he forbids you, avoid doing it." She said: "Certainly". He said: "I have heard the Messenger of Allah (salaallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) says: "May Allah's curse be on Al-Namisat." (Bukhari & Muslim)

But how can we know which hadiths are authentic and which are the fabrications of man?

This is where we have to follow and accept the classifications of the hadiths, of the experts of hadiths, that are the hadith Scholars, for us laymen cannot know for sure which hadiths are authentic and whcih are not, from our own personal reasoning, for we are not qualified in the Quranic and hadith sciences, so even if a hadith seems to be contradictory, yet we should rely on the authenticity classification given to it by the experts, for we do not have all the pre-requsite and contextual knowledge to judge the hadith ourselves.

But how can we be sure that the authenticity classifications given to the hadiths by the traditional Scholars are correct, for is it not only the Quran that is protected by Allah and not the hadiths?

This is a common misconception amongst some unorthodox Muslims. The mainstream/traditional view on wether the Sunnah [which has been preserved by the means of preserving it's written and memorised documentation; hadiths] is included in Gods promise of protection or not, is as follows:

We have undoubtedly sent down the Reminder, and We will truly preserve it. (Al-Qur'an, Surah al-Hijr, 15:9)

The above promise made by Allah is obviously fulfilled in the undisputed purity of the Qur'anic text throughout the fourteen centuries since its revelation. However, what is often forgotten by many Muslims is that the above divine promise also includes, by necessity, the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), for it is the practical example of the implementation of the Qur'anic guidance, the Wisdom taught to the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) along with the Scripture, and neither the Qur'an nor the Sunnah can be understood correctly without recourse to the other.

Hence, Allah preserved the Qur'an from being initially lost by the martyrdom of its memorisers ...

Similarly, Allah preserved the Sunnah by enabling the Companions and those after them (may Allah be pleased with them) to memorise, write down and pass on the statements of the Messenger (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) and the descriptions of his Way, as well as to continue the blessings of practising the Sunnah. Later, as the purity of the knowledge of the Sunnah became threatened, Allah caused the Muslim nation to produce outstanding individuals of incredible memory-skills and analytical expertise, who journeyed tirelessly to collect hundreds of thousands of narrations and distinguish the true words of precious wisdom of their Messenger (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) from those corrupted by weak memories, from forgeries by unscrupulous liars, and from the statements of the enormous number of 'ulama', the Companions and those who followed their way, who had taught in various centres of learning and helped to transmit the legacy of Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) - all of this achieved through precise attention to the words narrated and detailed familiarity with the biographies of the thousands of reporters of Hadith. Action being the best way to preserve teachings, the renewers of Islam also revived the practice of the blessed authentic Sunnah.

An Introduction To The Science Of Hadith: Foreword


... This argument accepts that the Holy Prophet () has a prophetic authority for all times to come, and that his obedience is mandatory for all Muslims of whatever age, but in the same breath it claims that the reports of the sunnah being unreliable, we cannot carry out this obedience. Does it not logically conclude that Allah has enjoined upon us to obey the Messenger, but did not make this obedience practicable. The question is whether Allah Allmighty may give us a positive command to do something which is beyond our ability and means. The answer is certainly no. The Holy Quran tself says,

Allah does not task anybody except to his ability.

It cannot be envisaged that Allah will bind all the people with something which does not exist or cannot be ascertained. Accepting that Allah has enjoined upon us to follow the sunnah of the Holy Prophet (), it certainly implies that the sunnah is not undiscoverable. If Allah has made it obligatory to follow the sunnah, He has certainly preserved it for us, in a reliable form.

The following aspect also merits consideration. Allah Almighty has given us a promise in the Holy Quran

Indeed We have revealed the Zikr (ie. the Quran) and surely We will preserve it. (15:9)

In this verse, Allah Almighty has assured the preservation of the Holy Quran. This implies that the Quran will remain uninterpolated and that it shall always be transferred from one generation to the other in its real and original form, undistorted by any foreign element. The question now is whether this divine protection is restricted only to the words of the Holy Quran or does it extend to its real meanings as well. If the prophetic explanation is necessary to understand the Holy Quran correctly, as proved in the first chapter, then the preservation of the Quranic words alone cannot serve the purpose unless the prophetic explanations are also preserved. As quoted earlier, the Holy Book says,

We have revealed to you the Zikr (Quran) so that you may explain to the people what has been sent down for them.

The word ?Zikr? has been used here for the Holy Quran as has been used in the verse 15:9 and it has been made clear that the people can only benefit from its guidance when they are led by the explanations of the Holy Prophet ().

Again, the words ?for the people? indicate (especially in the original Arabic context), that the Holy Prophet?s () explanation is always needed by ?everyone.?

Now, if everyone, in every age is in need of the prophetic explanation, without which they cannot fully benefit from the Holy Book, how would it be useful for them to preserve the Quranic text and leave its prophetic explanation at the mercy of distorters, extending to it no type of protection whatsoever.

Therefore, once the necessity of the prophetic explanations of the Holy Quran is accepted, it will be self-contradictory to claim that these explanations are unavailable today. It will amount to negating the divine wisdom, because it is in no way a wise policy to establish the necessity of the sunnah on the one hand and to make its discovery impossible on the other. Such a policy cannot be attributed to Allah the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.

The Authority of Sunnah - Chapter 3


But how comes the hadiths endorse opression, by saying that women should cover more than just the bosoms and not mix freely with men?,

The notion that such rulings are 'oppression' are a common misunderstanding amongst some unorthodox Muslims as well, and regarding these issues, or any issues which we find hard to understand of how they are just, or how they are in harmony with the Quran, we should seek a clearly explained and comprehensive answer from the Scholars, who would then share their deep insight into the religion regarding these matters with us, and we shouldn't just reject them as it apperantly seems to be unjust to our unqualifed minds.

But I dont like all the 'fetters' which the hadith puts on us and I prefer to just stick to the idea that I am following the Quran and not the hadith that has been corrupted by man, so I can live according to the man-made doctrines of the west, whcih suits my desires, surely I can't go wrong if I consider myself to be following the QURAN?, so couldn't I just ignore all of the above and remain iether the rejector of hadiths or a huge critic of it?

Allthough such a notion helps some unorthodox Muslims to keep to their western or desired way of life, but it is frought with dangers, and some of them are mentioned below:

Hadiths are basically of four types:

1] Mutawatir [mass transmitted]

2] Sahih Ahad [rigorously authenticated, but not narrated by enough people to fall under the 'mass transmitted' label]

3] Hasan [well authenticated; whcih falls under the catogory of the lowest degree of Sahih]

4] weak

There is no sin? on anyone that rejects a hadith that has been classified 'weak'?...but weak hadiths are not neccassarily untrue, therefore, we should resepct them.

And regarding the rejection of the Sahih hadiths [Mutawatir, sahih ahad, and possibly 'hasan' hadiths are included amongst this catogary], I'd like to now bring to all your attention, the following statements by great Scholars...:

Ahl al-Sunna concur, unlike the Mu'tazila, that authentic lone-narrator [ahad] reports are obligatory to believe and put into practice. Al-Qari relates, on this point, the consensus of the Companions and the Successors. Where scholars differ is whether the same hadiths convey certainty of knowledge (al-'ilm al-yaq) or only the compelling assumption of truth (al-zann al-gh⬩b). These two categories differ insofar as obligatory practice and belief based on certainty of knowledge cannot be denied except on pains of apostasy, while the denial of obligatory practice and belief based on reports compellingly assumed to be true do not constitute apostasy but constitute sin. The scholars do concur that if one disbelieves in a sound lone-narrator report one commits a grave transgression (fisq) and is even considered misguided (d⬬), but does not leave the fold of Islam. Al-Shafi'i, al-Risala (p. 460-461): "If one disbelieves in them [lone-narrated reports], we do not say to him: 'Repent!'" This is clearly unlike disbelief in a mass-transmitted report or in a verse of the Qur'an. [note that mutawatir hadiths are regarded to "convey certainty of knowledge".

http://www.sunnah.org/msaec/articles/blackdog.htm

"...The proofs for this are mutawatir - mass-transmitted - and to reject them is the mark of misguidance and worse". [Shaykh Jibril]

http://www.livingislam.org/fiqhi/sp2-gfh_e.html#11

Shaykh Hamza Yusuf:

"...One is the neccessity of belief in multipy-transmitted hadith, which have the status of the Quran in their legal and creedal consideration...To reject a multiply [mass] transmitted hadith is akin to rejecting a verse in the Quran and hence is a type of disbelief threatening one's faith. Abu Hasan al-Kharkhi al-Hanafi said "I fear a state of disbelief for one who rejects wiping over the foot coverings"" [because this ruling is based on mutawatir hadith] [taken from book: The Creed of Imam Al-Tahawi, translated, introduced and annotated by Hamza Yusuf; it's a great book!]
​

 

[Abdullah]

Now here is an explanation of why mutawatir hadiths are as authentic as the Quranic verses itself:

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

(b) Mutawatir in meaning: It is a mutawatir hadith 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 mutawatir concept.

For example, there is a saying of the Holy Prophet (),

Whoever intentionally attributes a lie against me, should prepare his seat in the Fire.

This is a mutawatir hadith of the first kind, because it has a minimum of seventy-four narrators. In other words, seventy-four companions of the Holy Prophet () have reported this hadith at different occasions, all with the same words.

The number of those who received this hadith from these companions is many times greater, because each of the seventy-four companions has conveyed it to a number of his pupils. Thus, the total number of the narrators of this hadith has been increasing in each successive generation, and has never been less than seventy-four. All these narrators, who are now hundreds in number, report it in the same words without even a minor change. This hadith is, therefore, mutaw⴩r by words, because it cannot be imagined reasonably that such a large number of people have colluded to coin a fallacious sentence in order to attribute it to the Holy Prophet ().

On the other hand, it is also reported by such a large number of narrators that the Holy Prophet () has enjoined us to perform two rakat in Fajr, four rakat in Zuhr, Asr and Isha, and three rakat in the Maghrib prayer, yet the narrations of all the reporters who reported the number of rakat are not in the same words. Their words are different. Even the events reported by them are different. But the common feature of all the reports is the same. This common feature, namely, the exact number of rakat is said to be mutawatir in meaning.

As for the mutawatir, nobody can question its authenticity. The fact narrated by a mutawatir chain is always accepted as an absolute truth even if pertaining to our daily life. Any statement based on a mutawatir 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 mutawatir, fact which cannot be denied or questioned.

I have not seen the events of the First and the Second World War. But the fact that these two wars occurred stands proved without a shadow of doubt on the basis of the mutawatir reports about them. Nobody with a sound sense can claim that all those who reported the occurrence of these two wars have colluded to coin a fallacious report and that no war took place at all. This strong belief in the factum of war is based on the mutawatir reports of the event.

In the same way the mutawatir 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 Quran being the same Book as that revealed to the Holy Prophet () is of the same nature. Thus, the mutawatir ahadith, whether they be mutawatir in words or in meaning, are as authentic as the Holy Quran and there is no difference between the two in as far as the reliability of their source of narration is concerned.

Although the ahadith falling under the first category of the mutawatir, ie. the mutawatir in words, are very few in number, yet the ahadith relating to the second kind, namely the mutawatir in meaning, are available in large numbers. Thus, a very sizeable portion of the sunnah of the Holy Prophet () falls in this kind of mutawatir, the authenticity of which cannot be doubted in any manner.

The Authority of Sunnah - Chapter 3


And for any further queries, refer to the following link, which answers the usual arguments put up by Sunnah rejectors and critics:

The Authority of Sunnah - Chapter 1

I have mentioned some of the great dangers of being a ahadith critic, and accepting and rejecting hadith according to one's personal opinion.

Now I'd like to bring to all your attention the statement of Shaykh Gibril Haddad of Sunnipath.com, regarding those who reject the Sunnah/Ahadith in it's totality [i.e, the 'Quran only' individuals/groups]:

And if someone were to say: "We do not take except what we find in the Qur'an", that person would be an apostate by consensus of the Community, and would not thereby be obligated to pray more than one rak`a between the going down of the sun and the dark of night, and another one at dawn [cf. 17:78]. For this is the least that has been called salat, and there is no limit (hadd) set for the most in that chapter. One who follows such a position is an idolatrous disbeliever (kafir mushrik)... The only ones to go that path are some of the extremist Rafidis upon whose apostasy consensus has formed in the Community. And success is from Allah Almighty and Exalted. Now, should someone follow only what the entire Community has agreed upon and nothing else, leaving all that they differed about with regard to what the texts mention: such a person is a transgressor (fasiq) by consensus of the Community. These two preliminaries make it obligatory to accept what is transmitted.

The Probativeness of the Sunna

 

[Muslimwoman]

Salam Aleikum Abdullah, long time no speak and I hope you and your family are well.

I have a question for you .. which book(s) list all of the hadith and which group each hadith is in?

I ask because of this:

ãæÞÚ ÝÖíáÉ ÇáÔíÎ ÃÈí ÅÓÍÇÞ ÇáÍæíäí Alheweny tube || Be Careful !!! It is aweak Ahadith & fake stories

This is a Salafi sheikh from Egypt teaching born Muslims, able to read Arabic and easily able to look such things up, to beware of weak and fabricated hadith which are commonly held as true.

A couple of examples from the video:

1. Paradise lies under the feet of mothers .. this has no root.
2. The most hated halal thing to Allah is divorce .. this is weak.

Now if my Arab speaking brothers and sisters cannot easily find this information then how am I supposed to find it? If my Arab speaking brothers and sisters all grow up believing these hadith and pass this on to me, where I have no reference material to check each one, am I not likely to simply accept what I am told?

And here lies my problem. I am not a "Quran only" kinda gal but I do know if I read the Quran there can be no possibility of my believing something which is untrue or weak but if I pick up books of hadith I would have to go to University to study hadith science in order to know which to accept.

So I will be a very happy woman when someone writes a book listing every hadith and clearly states its group.

 

[Nick the Pilot]

MW! You're back!

 

[Muslimwoman]

Did ya miss me? lol

Hi Nick how are you?

 

[NiceCupOfTea]

the Sunnah tends to lead to a lot of control and manipulation by varios scholars.

Best to stick with the Quran as the main thing IMO.

 

[bananabrain]

hiya sally and welcome back and, of course, we'd all VERY much like to hear what you think about the egyptian elections and current situation. my friend abu faris (who you would like very much) is blogging about it here: by the river - including all the latest on people like mona el-tahawy (terrible what has happened to her) and the extraordinarily brave (and not unattractive, it was hard to avoid noticing) Naked Egyptian Blogger.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[Saltmeister]

Did ya miss me? lol

Hi Nick how are you?

Um ..... who's the one that was doing the "missing" (verb)? Wasn't it you that was missing?

 

[Saltmeister]

the Sunnah tends to lead to a lot of control and manipulation by varios scholars.

Best to stick with the Quran as the main thing IMO.

Ah ...... so it's about choosing the lesser of two evils is it?

For example, if you don't like the legal system and the legal system has failed you, you throw the legal system in the bin. Otherwise, if it's the Constitution you don't like and the Constitution has failed you, then it's the Constitution that goes in the bin.

It could pretty much lead to civil war and revolution.

To arms brothers!!!!!

 

[NiceCupOfTea]

Ah ...... so it's about choosing the lesser of two evils is it?

yeah thats one way of looking at it.

For example, if you don't like the legal system and the legal system has failed you, you throw the legal system in the bin. Otherwise, if it's the Constitution you don't like and the Constitution has failed you, then it's the Constitution that goes in the bin.

well i'm all in favour of that in principle.

but seriously the hadiths are vast and in some cases really nasty

It could pretty much lead to civil war and revolution.

To arms brothers!!!!!

revolution we could do with one of the those

 

[True Gabriel]

No doubt there exist conflicts of verses and according to some Muslim scholars, abrogation is apply. Verses that came later will be given more weight in many cases it over ride the first or earlier verses. Many of the early verses consist of tolerant and peaceful verses while the later verses especially the Sura which at times is also consider the last will and testament of Mohammed consist of many violent verse. The most prominent one is Sura 9:5 And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.

The problem with the abrogation rule is that most of the peaceful verses were 1st and the violent ones came later thus the violent verses abrogates or take precedent over the peaceful verses. Early and today's radical Muslims base their actions on the Sura, while the moderate Muslims concentrate on the earlier verses the problem is that it would seem the moderates are either not familiar of the Sura violent verses as they kept on denying the violence of it and insist that Islam is of peace. At the same time the radicals too insist Islam is of peace and that their violent actions are justify because they look at it as a form of self defence, self defence in an eccentric and reverse definition.

So now, how do they resolve this issue? So far it would seem they don't know and kept on blaming us for their problems.

 

[Abdullah]

No doubt there exist conflicts of verses and according to some Muslim scholars, abrogation is apply. Verses that came later will be given more weight in many cases it over ride the first or earlier verses. Many of the early verses consist of tolerant and peaceful verses while the later verses especially the Sura which at times is also consider the last will and testament of Mohammed consist of many violent verse. The most prominent one is Sura 9:5 And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.

The problem with the abrogation rule is that most of the peaceful verses were 1st and the violent ones came later thus the violent verses abrogates or take precedent over the peaceful verses. Early and today's radical Muslims base their actions on the Sura, while the moderate Muslims concentrate on the earlier verses the problem is that it would seem the moderates are either not familiar of the Sura violent verses as they kept on denying the violence of it and insist that Islam is of peace. At the same time the radicals too insist Islam is of peace and that their violent actions are justify because they look at it as a form of self defence, self defence in an eccentric and reverse definition.

So now, how do they resolve this issue? So far it would seem they don't know and kept on blaming us for their problems.

abrogation is easy to understand when one considers the mercy behind it; Islam got revealed gradually over 23 years, and ALlah let the people gradually get used to divine rules; thus some were abrogated for others; also it is a sign of Allah's mercy where Allah abrogates one rule for a better rule, and there are only a few abrogated verses, and most of the verses in the Quran are merely put into context; this is the case with peace and war verses

 

[Abdullah]

Salam Aleikum Abdullah, long time no speak and I hope you and your family are well.

I have a question for you .. which book(s) list all of the hadith and which group each hadith is in?

I ask because of this:

ãæÞÚ ÝÖíáÉ ÇáÔíÎ ÃÈí ÅÓÍÇÞ ÇáÍæíäí Alheweny tube || Be Careful !!! It is aweak Ahadith & fake stories

This is a Salafi sheikh from Egypt teaching born Muslims, able to read Arabic and easily able to look such things up, to beware of weak and fabricated hadith which are commonly held as true.

A couple of examples from the video:

1. Paradise lies under the feet of mothers .. this has no root.
2. The most hated halal thing to Allah is divorce .. this is weak.

Now if my Arab speaking brothers and sisters cannot easily find this information then how am I supposed to find it? If my Arab speaking brothers and sisters all grow up believing these hadith and pass this on to me, where I have no reference material to check each one, am I not likely to simply accept what I am told?

And here lies my problem. I am not a "Quran only" kinda gal but I do know if I read the Quran there can be no possibility of my believing something which is untrue or weak but if I pick up books of hadith I would have to go to University to study hadith science in order to know which to accept.

So I will be a very happy woman when someone writes a book listing every hadith and clearly states its group.

My apologies Sister for ignoring you so long; i was a bit paranoid you see; thought it would just be mockery!

well Sister, first of all there are the two Sahihs; Sahih muslim and Sahih Bukhari, you can trust every hadith in them books to be sahih:

To reject a hadith that is in al-Bukhari and Muslim and claim that it is inauthentic is the mark of deviancy and innovation because it also contradicts the consensus of Ahl al-Sunna that everything attributed to the Prophet, upon him peace, in the Sahihayn is unquestionably authentic; and this is in fact tantamount to tawatur or mass transmission. [statement of Shaykh Hajj Jibril, ref: Various Questions (2) Answered by Shaykh Gibril Haddad ]


Secondly, us laymen cannot interpret hadiths by ourselves too; ofcourse we can understand their basic concept/prinicple they portray, but only the Scholars can know how they fit it into the rulings and interpretation of Islam as a whole:

Would you advise people to study hadiths on their own?

thus as long as we learn from the mainstream Scholars, we can trust what they teach to be correct; sahih hadiths are used for rulings etc, but weak one's can be used to to give our imaan a boost and increase us in good deeds, and this is what the Scholars have used the relevent hadiths for

I personally wouldn't trust a 'Salafi' Scholar Sister, for they have gone somewhat astray; i'm sure you've heard of 'Wahhabism', well that is just another name for the 'Salafi's

there are overwhelming evidences in the Quran and Sunnah that the mainstream, and they are the Creed of Ashari and Maturidi and the four traditional madhabs in fiqh, are the rightly guided; see link:

Who are the Ahl al-Sunnah?

Peace!

 

[Abdullah]

My apologies Sister for ignoring you so long; i was a bit paranoid you see; thought it would just be mockery!

well Sister, first of all there are the two Sahihs; Sahih muslim and Sahih Bukhari, you can trust every hadith in them books to be sahih:

To reject a hadith that is in al-Bukhari and Muslim and claim that it is inauthentic is the mark of deviancy and innovation because it also contradicts the consensus of Ahl al-Sunna that everything attributed to the Prophet, upon him peace, in the Sahihayn is unquestionably authentic; and this is in fact tantamount to tawatur or mass transmission. [statement of Shaykh Hajj Jibril, ref: Various Questions (2) Answered by Shaykh Gibril Haddad ]


Secondly, us laymen cannot interpret hadiths by ourselves too; ofcourse we can understand their basic concept/prinicple they portray, but only the Scholars can know how they fit it into the rulings and interpretation of Islam as a whole:

Would you advise people to study hadiths on their own?

thus as long as we learn from the mainstream Scholars, we can trust what they teach to be correct; sahih hadiths are used for rulings etc, but weak one's can be used to to give our imaan a boost and increase us in good deeds, and this is what the Scholars have used the relevent hadiths for

I personally wouldn't trust a 'Salafi' Scholar Sister, for they have gone somewhat astray; i'm sure you've heard of 'Wahhabism', well that is just another name for the 'Salafi's

there are overwhelming evidences in the Quran and Sunnah that the mainstream, and they are the Creed of Ashari and Maturidi and the four traditional madhabs in fiqh, are the rightly guided; see link:

Who are the Ahl al-Sunnah?

Peace!

So to summarise, in order to learn Islam and it's rulings, it is not the hadith and the Quran we should look to [for they need expert interpretation]; yes from those sources we can benifit in that we can get a lesson of basic realities, but we cannot derive rulings that will pertain to our every day life; for that we have to learn from the Scholars, for the comprehensive teachings and rulings for Islam has allready been established and codified, hence the correct way to go about adhering to Islam is to pick one of the four madhabs [which ever is more suitable and convenient for us to follow] and learn and practice it rulings from the Scholars of that madhab

so there you go Sis, problem solved!

now you dont have to headache over which hadiths are sahih and which are not!

 

[Muslimwoman]

No doubt there exist conflicts of verses and according to some Muslim scholars, abrogation is apply. Verses that came later will be given more weight in many cases it over ride the first or earlier verses. Many of the early verses consist of tolerant and peaceful verses while the later verses especially the Sura which at times is also consider the last will and testament of Mohammed consist of many violent verse. The most prominent one is Sura 9:5 And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.

The problem with the abrogation rule is that most of the peaceful verses were 1st and the violent ones came later thus the violent verses abrogates or take precedent over the peaceful verses. Early and today's radical Muslims base their actions on the Sura, while the moderate Muslims concentrate on the earlier verses the problem is that it would seem the moderates are either not familiar of the Sura violent verses as they kept on denying the violence of it and insist that Islam is of peace. At the same time the radicals too insist Islam is of peace and that their violent actions are justify because they look at it as a form of self defence, self defence in an eccentric and reverse definition.

So now, how do they resolve this issue? So far it would seem they don't know and kept on blaming us for their problems.

Salam alaikum true gabriel

If in doubt pull out the so called "sword verse" ho hum. Anyone worth their salt would simply read the verses above and below this, where it clearly points out that it refers to a peace treaty broken by a particular pagan tribe who were given 4 months to return to the treaty and if they did not then they would suffer the consequences.

Indeed radicals have selective reading and do as you have just done to justify their actions .. shame on them.

 

[Muslimwoman]

My apologies Sister for ignoring you so long; i was a bit paranoid you see; thought it would just be mockery!

Apologies Abdullah I have been in Egypt for a couple of months so wasn't able to respond.

Indeed my views of hadith have changed somewhat but I still find it a very difficult subject as there are many hadith which make me feel uncomfortable and I am unable to establish their authenticity.

I wish I lived near to a mosque to learn from them but sadly not. Insha-Allah I will keep learning step by step.

 

[radarmark]

MW--

I have so enjoyed your posts and am happy to sit at your and Abdullah's feet watching you talk.

 

[koranist]

The prophetic authority in the Quran versus the prophetic authority in the Sunnah

The irony here is that the verses the author of this thread used to open up his arguments actually weakens his case. Muslim authorities abrogated many of the verses he quotes precisely because it brings down the whole concept of Sunni Islam .
16:82 But if they turn away from you, your only duty is a clear delivery of the Message

4:79-80 Say: ‘Whatever good betides you is from God and whatever evil betides you is from your own self and that We have sent you to mankind only as a messenger and all sufficing is God as witness. Whoso obeys the Messenger, he indeed obeys God. And for those who turn away, We have not sent you as a keeper."

17:53-54 And tell my servants that they should speak in a most kindly manner. Verily, Satan is always ready to stir up discord between men; for verily; Satan is mans foe.... Hence, we have not sent you with power to determine their Faith

24.54. Say: "Obey God, and obey the Messenger, but if ye turn away, he is only responsible for the duty placed on him and ye for that placed on you. If ye obey him, ye shall be on right guidance. The Messenger's duty is only to preach the clear (Message).

88:21 22; And so, exhort them your task is only to exhort; you cannot compel them to believe.

42:6 48 And whoso takes for patrons others besides God, over them does God keep a watch. Mark, you are not a keeper over them. But if they turn aside from you (do not get disheartened), for We have not sent you to be a keeper over them; your task is but to preach

64:12 Obey God then and obey the Messenger, but if you turn away (no blame shall attach to our Messenger), for the duty of Our Messenger is just to deliver the message.

28.55-56 And when they hear vain talk, they turn away there from and say: "To us our deeds, and to you yours; peace be to you: we seek not the ignorant," It is true thou wilt not be able to guide whom thou lovest; but God guides those whom He will and He knows best those who receive guidance

39:41 Assuredly, We have sent down the Book to you in right form for the good of man. Whoso guided himself by it does so to his own advantage, and whoso turns away from it does so at his own loss. You certainly are not their keeper.
67:25 26 And they ask, "When shall the promise be fulfilled if you speak the Truth?" Say, "The knowledge of it is verily with God alone, and verily I am but a plain warner


As we can clearly see, many of the verses that talks about obeying the prophet also emphasizes the prophet's limited authority, something that the Islamic sects do not recognize. The ruler to them has the authority to punish people for what they consider sins like drinking alcohol, eating pork, not fasting Ramadan, watching pornos etc.

The Koran meanwhile focuses on crimes against another like stealing, killing, slandering of women falsely and oppression. It gave the believers the right to fight against those who fight them but not to transgress. It also gave people the right to defend themselves against evictions from their lands. There is no talk about punishing people for something that does not concern somebody else's right.

Adultery is the only place where the Koran diverted from this due to the fact that a adultery affects another party. Here the Koran sees adultery as affecting the other partner in a marriage. It’s a betrayal and a breaking of oath. But even then it placed strict standards on that but was lenient when it came to punishing slanders of women. Adultery needs four witnesses but the slander can get punished by flogging just from opening his mouth without four witnesses. It’s clear that the verse made it very difficult to implement on adultery but very easy to implement on the slanderer. Further reading of the verse about the Zani and Zania shows us that the issue came up concerning slandering of one of the prophet’s wife presumably. But adultery still affects another party as its a breaking of an oath between a man and a woman and is an act of betrayal.

The Koran cannot order the prophet to punish people for sins, that God's job. The Koran gave people the right and freedom to disbelieve let alone sin. Plus how the Koran understands sins is very different than how the sects understand sins.

In the end the sects had no choice but to abrogate many of these verses, usually invoking the "sword verse". They claim that many of these verses that gave the prophet limited authority(over those who chose to disobey him) has been abrogated by verse 9-5 or verse 9-29.

However these verses were about the wars with the pagans, and verse 9-13 and many other verses makes it clear who instigated these battles and why. The Jizya verse (9-29) also was claimed by the sects to be a tax to be paid by non Muslims in an Islamic state for protection. However Jizya never came concerning the Medina community where the prophet and his followers had a community. And only came upon the believers entering of Mecca. Jizya could have easily been compensation for the loss of property and homes that the believers suffered after being forced into exile. The Koran forbade prophets from seeking any form of reward. They can however accept charity on behalf of the believers.

But the Sunnah claimed otherwise. In it the prophet was ordered to fight the people till they acknowledge monotheism and also in it the prophet ordered the execution of those who apostate. That’s why they abrogated many of the verses that limited his authority. Then they simply transferred that authority to the Muslim ruler by default. The Ridda war story about Abu Bakr is a case study of this. In that story Abu Bakr apparently fought people for not paying Zakat. Now the authority was transferred from God to the prophet to one of his companions. This made it very easy to then transfer that authority to the ruler. This is why you see places where Shariah law is implemented filled with such concepts like searching cars for alcohol or flogging people for watching pornos or not wearing proper attire. None of this should concern anyone but it has become a punishable sin. God only punishes those who did not get caught and punished in this world. The sects claimed that once punished the sin falls away and disappears. You will not find such a concept in the Koran. There God punishes in a million ways and does not need humans to punish for him. I think the sects introduced this conc3ept to make people more accepting of this by making them think its better for them since God's punishment is more severe. They also introduced stoning the adulterer by claiming the Zina verse in the Koran is concerning fornification and not adultery. They claimed that the verse about stoning was lost and is not included in the Koran but the ruling remains.

This of course violated not only the freedom aspect of the Koran but also an eye for an eye and a life for a life. In the Koran, any punishment must be reciprocal and proportionate to the crime and it also must be targeted towards the actual perpetrators of the crime and not someone else associated to the criminal as the case with tribal laws that simply targets anyone from that tribe. They broke this by lower the bar for executions. Some Sunni scholars also gave the authority to execute homosexuals and enslave female prisoners and execute male prisoners. Something the Koran forbade. The Koran gave two options for prisoners, either freedom or ransom of some sort. They gave this authority to the ruler. This is all very sad as the taking of someone’s life is no easy matter in the Koran. God should take life and not humans, but if a person takes a life then he lost his right to live, but even then the Koran gave exile from the community as another option for murder especially if the person shows repentance. So an eye for an eye and a tooth for tooth somehow ended up being an eye for an eye lash and a tooth for a jaw.

To be fair the Sunni orthodoxy rarely practiced some of these laws. We know of no time in history where adulterers were stoned to death. Apostasy was rarely practiced, unlike the Christians in Europe that practiced these laws left and right. So the Sunni jurist knew that some of these laws could be controversial. There is a rumour about Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab the founder or rather the revivalist of Salafism (some call it wahhabism) stoned a women to death. This was the only time in Islamic history that we heard such a thing.

Its very unfortunate the current Islamist in Iran and Sudan and the Salafis in generally never understood why these laws were controversial. But in doing so they exposed much aspect of the sects that people were not aware of. The Sufis provided a convenient cover as they shunned legalism. But even the clerics understood that these laws were controversial. Its not easy in Islam to execute outside of murder. But this wise tradition was broken. That’s very unfortunant as now we see the culture of death has spread among Muslims till Islam became synonymous with violence and killing. Once you lower the bar it spirals out of control.

One thing is crystal clear from all this. The Koran's take on human authority and freedom is RADICALLY different than how the sects understand it. Therefore the biggest difference between a Koranic state and a Sunni or Shia state will come in the form of the state's authority over the masses. It is this, more than anything else, that separates the Koran from the Sunnah. That’s why the Abbasids championed the Sunnah over the Mutazilites. The Mutaziltes couldn't find the ink inthe Koran to give them such draconian authority. The sects did that by first bringing the divine authority from God to prophet, then propet to Caliph (companions) and now that authority is in Omar Al Bashir, Khamenei, Mullah Omar and Al Saud. And that’s very sad.

 

[Amica]

Koranist salaam,

I think it is useless to point out any truth from the Qur'an to the ones who would follow human laws as religious ones over the Divine Word. Abdullah would rather believe hadiths that say "stone adulterers" over the Divine Order of lashes. What is the point of even discussing anything with him?

 

[Amica]

Muslims, as per Holy Qur'an, are to seek knowledge. I am posting to all of you links to take a look at and read to. It is in reference to the critical look hadiths. The first link is the website, the second is free book you can open and read.

http://www.mostmerciful.com/hadithbook-sectionone.htm

http://www.mostmerciful.com/hadith-book1.pdf


I will quote the author of the website with these:

Here is what the Revealed Words of Allah tell us about the character of the Prophet:
And thou [Muhammad] (standest) on an exalted standard of character. Qur'an. 68:4
Ye have indeed in the Apostle of Allah a beautiful pattern of (conduct) for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day and who engages much in the praise of Allah. Q. 33:21
We sent thee not but as a mercy for all creatures. Q.21:107
It is part of the Mercy of Allah that thou dost deal gently with them. Wert thou severe or harsh-hearted they would have broken away from about thee; so pass over (their faults) and ask for (Allah's) forgiveness for them; and consult them in affairs (of moment). Then when thou hast taken a decision put thy trust in Allah. For Allah loves those who put their trust (in Him). Q 3:159

And we know how certain hadiths portray our Prophet pbuh. Now, which shalll we believe more? Noble Qur'an or the hadiths? Which should be our priority guidance?

We can get some good teachings for hadiths, and I am not against it. I just am against fabrications and lies.