Why Muslims Must Follow the Sunna As Well As the Quran

[Amica]

Please follow the link below. Posted is the book called "100 Fabricated Hadiths," written by a graduate from the Imam Muhammad ibn Saud University in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Read the texts and refutations of ’100 Fabricated Hadeeths’ Author is a graduate from the Imam Muhammad ibn Saud University in Riyadh | Most Merciful

 

[Abdullah]

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.

Sis, you've got the greatest source of knowledge at your finger tips; the internet, so why do you need a mosque to get hadiths verified?

 

[Abdullah]

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 ...

... 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.

koranist, or rather should that be westernist?

you never looked properly enough to see what the Quran says about the Prophet [saw's] role; you missed the following:

Allâh has surely blessed the believers with His favor when He raised in their midst a Messenger from among themselves, who recites to them His verses and makes them pure and teaches them the Book and the Wisdom, while they were, earlier in open error. (3:164)

He (Allâh) is the One who raised up, among the unlettered, a Messenger from among themselves who recites the verses of Allâh, and makes them pure, and teaches them the Book and the Wisdom. (62:2)
The same functions were attributed to the Holy Prophet (

) in the prayer of Sayyidna Ibrahim (

) when, according to the Holy Qur’ân, he prayed:

Our Lord, raise in their midst a messenger from among themselves who recites to them Your verses and teaches them the Book and the Wisdom and purifies them… (2:129)

These are the terms of reference given to the Holy Prophet (

) which include four distinct functions and the Holy Prophet (

) has been entrusted with all of them:

(1) Recitation of the Verses of Allâh.
(2) Teaching the Book of Allâh.
(3) Teaching the Wisdom.
(4) Making the people pure.

Thus, the Holy Qur’ân leaves no ambiguities in the fact that the Holy Prophet (

) is not supposed to merely recite the verses and then leave it to the people to interpret and apply them in whatever manner they like. Instead, he is sent to “teach” the Book. Then, since teaching the Book is not enough, he is also required to teach “Wisdom” which is something additional to the “Book.” Still, this is not enough, therefore the Holy Prophet (

) has also to “make the people pure,” meaning thereby that the theoretical teaching of the Book and the “Wisdom” must be followed by a practical training to enable the people to apply the Book and the Wisdom in the way Allâh requires them to apply.

These verses of the Holy Qur’ân describe the following functions of the Holy Prophet (

):

(a) He is the authority in the way the Holy Book [the Qur’ân] has to be recited.
(b) He has the final word in the interpretation of the Book.
(c) He is the only source at which the wisdom based on divine guidance can be learned.
(d) He is entrusted with the practical training of the people to bring his teachings into practice.

These functions of the Holy Prophet (

) can never be carried out unless his teachings, both oral and practical, are held to be authoritative for his followers, and the Muslims who are given under his training are made bound to obey and follow him. The functions (b) and (c), namely, the teaching of the Book and Wisdom require that his sayings should be binding on the followers, while the function (d), the practical training, requires that his acts should be an example for the Ummah, and the Ummah should be bound to follow it.

It is not merely a logical inference from the verses of the Holy Qur’ân quoted above, but it is also mentioned in express terms by the Holy Qur’ân in a large number of verses which give the Muslims a mandatory command to obey and follow him. While doing so, the Holy Qur’ân has used two different terms, namely the “itaa’ah” (to obey) and “ittibaa’” (to follow). The first term refers to the orders and sayings of the Holy Prophet (

) while the second relates to his acts and practice. By ordering the Muslims both to “obey” and to “follow” the Holy Prophet (

), the Holy Qur’ân has given an authority to both his sayings and acts.



see!


and how about this:

In the early days of his Prophethood, when the Holy Prophet (

) received the verses of the Holy Qur’ân revealed to him, he used to recite the same simultaneously, lest he should forget them. It was a strenuous exercise for him, because he felt it was much too difficult to listen to the revelation, to understand it correctly, and to learn it by heart, all at the same time. Allâh Almighty relieved him from this burden when He revealed the following verses of the Holy Qur’ân:

Move not your tongue with it in order to hasten it. It is on Us to gather it (in your heart) and to recite it. So, when We read it, follow its reading. Then it is on Us to explain it. (75:16-19)

In the last sentence, Allâh Almighty has promised the Holy Prophet (

) to explain the verses of the Holy Qur’ân to him. It is evident that this explanation is something separate from the Holy Qur’ân itself. It is not the Holy Qur’ân. It is its explanation or its exegesis. Therefore, it should necessarily be in some other form, distinct from the words of the Holy Book. And this is exactly what is meant by the “unrecited revelation [hadiths].” But the two kinds of revelation, though different in their form, are both revealed to the Holy Prophet (

); both are from Allâh; and both are to be believed and obeyed by the Muslims.

 

[Abdullah]

and i'll throw in another for good luck! :



the hadiths can infact render something haraam or halaal, just like the Quran can, for in the Quran it says that the prophet [saw] has the power to legislate laws, and it also says that whatever the Prophet [saw] says [in regards to the deen] is an inspiration from Allah [swt], thus the the source of hadiths is Allah [swt] too, allthough the hadiths are put into the Prophet's [saw] own words thus are not regarded as the speech of Allah as the Quran is


here is an explanation from Mufti Taqi Usmani;


The Prophet’s (

) Authority to Make Laws

A number of verses in the Holy Qur’ân establish the authority of the Holy Prophet (

) as a legislator or a law-maker. Some of those are reproduced below:

And My mercy embraces all things. So I shall prescribe it for those who fear Allâh and pay zakâh (obligatory alms) and those who have faith in Our signs; those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet whom they find written down in the Torah and the Injîl, and who bids them to the Fair and forbids them the Unfair, and makes lawful for them the good things, and makes unlawful for them the impure things, and relieves them of their burdens and of the shackles that were upon them. So, those who believe in him, and honour him, and help him, and follow the light that has been sent down with him- they are the ones who acquire success. (7:156-157)​

The emphasized words in this verse signify that one of the functions of the Holy Prophet (

) is “to make lawful the good things and make unlawful the impure things.” This function has been separated from “bidding the Fair and forbidding the Unfair,” because the latter relates to the preaching of what has already been established as Fair, and warning against what is established as Unfair, while the former embodies the making of lawful and unlawful, that is, the enforcing of new laws regarding the permissibility or prohibition of things. This function of prescribing new religious laws and rules is attributed here not to the Holy Qur’ân, but to the Holy Prophet (

). It, therefore, cannot be argued that the “making lawful or unlawful” means the declaration of what is laid down in the Holy Qur’ân only, because the declaration of a law is totally different from making it.

Besides, the declaration of the established rules has been referred to in the earlier sentence separately, that is, “bids them to the Fair and forbids for them the Unfair.” The reference in the next sentence, therefore, is only to “making” new laws.

The verse also emphasizes “to believe” in the Holy Prophet (

). In the present context, it clearly means to believe in all his functions mentioned in the verse including to make something “lawful” or “unlawful.”
The verse, moreover, directs to follow the light that has been sent down with him. Here again, instead of “following the Holy Qur’ân,” “following the light” has been ordered, so as to include all the imperatives sent down to the Holy Prophet (

), either through the Holy Book or through the unrecited revelation, reflecting in his own orders and acts.

Looked at from whatever angle, this verse is a clear proof of the fact that the Holy Prophet (

) had an authority based, of course, on the unrecited revelation, to make new laws in addition to those mentioned in the Holy Qur’ân.

The Holy Qur’ân says:

Fight those who do not believe in Allâh and the Hereafter and do not hold unlawful what Allâh and His Messenger have made unlawful. (9:29)​

The underlined words signify that it is necessary to “hold unlawful what Allâh and His Messenger made unlawful,” and that the authority making something unlawful is not restricted to Allâh Almighty. The Holy Prophet (

) can also, by the will of Allâh, exercise this authority. The difference between the authority of Allâh and that of the Messenger is, no doubt, significant. The former is wholly independent, intrinsic and self-existent, while the authority of the latter is derived from and dependent on the revelation from Allâh. Yet, the fact remains that the Holy Prophet (

) has this authority and it is necessary for believers to submit to it alongwith their submission to the authority of Allâh.

The Holy Qur’ân says:

No believer, neither man nor woman, has a right, when Allâh and His Messenger decide a matter, to have a choice in their matter in issue. And whoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger has gone astray into manifest error. (33:36)

Here, the decisions of Allâh and the Messenger (

) both have been declared binding on the believers.

It is worth mentioning that the word “and” occuring between “Allâh” and “His Messenger” carries both conjunctive and disjunctive meanings. It cannot be held to give conjunctive sense only, because in that case it will exclude the decision of Allâh unless it is combined with the decision of the messenger- a construction too fallacious to be imagined in the divine expression.

The only reasonable construction, therefore, is to take the word “and” in both conjunctive and disjunctive meanings. The sense is that whenever Allâh or His Messenger (

), any one or both of them, decide a matter, the believers have no choice except to submit to their decisions.
It is thus clear that the Holy Prophet (

) has the legal authority to deliver decisions in the collective and individual affairs of the believers who are bound to surrender to those decisions.

The Holy Qur’ân says:

Whatever the Messenger gives you, take it; and whatever he forbids you, refrain from it. (59:7)

Although the context of this verse relates to the distribution of the spoils of war, yet it is the well-known principle of the interpretation of the Holy Qur’ân that, notwithstanding the particular event in which a verse is revealed, if the words used are general, they are to be construed in their general sense; they cannot be restricted to that particular event.

Keeping in view this principle, which is never disputed, the verse gives a general rule about the Holy Prophet (

) that whatever order he gives is binding on the believers and whatever thing he forbids stands prohibited for them. The Holy Qur’ân thus has conferred a legal authority to the Holy Prophet (

) to give orders, to make laws and to enforce prohibitions.
It will be interesting here to cite a wise answer of ‘Abdullâh ibn Mas’ûd (

), the blessed companion of the Holy Prophet (

), which he gave to a woman.

A woman from the tribe of Asad came to ‘Abdullah ibn Mas’ûd (

) and said, “I have come to know that you hold such and such things as prohibited. I have gone through the whole Book of Allâh, but never found any such prohibition in it.”

‘Abdullah ibn Mas’ûd (

) replied, “Had you read the Book you would have found it. Allâh Almighty says: “Whatever the Messenger gives you, take it; and whatever he forbids you, refrain from it.” (59:7). (Ibn Mâjah)
By this answer ‘Abdullah ibn Mas’ûd pointed out that this verse is so comprehensive that it embodies all the orders and prohibitions of the Holy Prophet (

) and since the questioned prohibitions are enforced by the Holy Prophet (

) they form part of this verse, though indirectly.

The Holy Qur’ân says:

But no, by your Lord, they shall not be (deemed to be) believers unless they accept you as judge in their disputes, then find in their hearts no adverse feeling against what you decided, but surrender to it in complete submission. (4:65)​

The authority of the Holy Prophet (

) established in this verse seems apparently to be an authority to adjudicate in the disputes brought before him. But after due consideration in the construction used here, this authority appears to be more than that of a judge. A judge, no doubt, has an authority to deliver his judgments, but the submission to his judgments is not a condition for being a Muslim. If somebody does not accept the judgment of a duly authorized judge, it can be a gross misconduct on his part, and a great sin, for which he may be punished, but he cannot be excluded from the pale of Islâm on this score alone. He cannot be held as disbeliever.

On the contrary, the verse vehemently insists that the person who does not accept the verdicts of the Holy Prophet (

) cannot be held to be a believer. This forceful assertion indicates that the authority of the Holy Prophet (

) is not merely that of a customary judge. The denial of his judgments amounts to disbelief. It implies that the verdicts of the Holy Prophet (

) referred to here are not the normal verdicts given in the process of a trial. They are the laws laid down by him on the basis of the revelation, recited or unrecited, that he receives from Allâh. So, the denial of these laws is, in fact, the denial of the divine orders which excludes the denier from the pale of Islâm.

Looked at from this point of view, this verse gives the Holy Prophet (

) not only the authority of a judge, but also confers upon him the authority to make laws, as binding on the Muslims as the divine laws.

The Holy Qur’ân says:

They say, “we believe in Allâh and the Messenger, and we obey.” Then, after that, a group of them turn away. And they are not believers. And when they are called to Allâh and His Messenger that he may judge between them, suddenly a group of them turn back. But if they had a right, they come to him submissively! Is it that there is sickness in their hearts? Or are they in doubt? Or do they fear that Allâh may be unjust towards them, and His Messenger? Nay, but they are the unjust. All that the believers say when they are called to Allâh and His Messenger that he (the Messenger) may judge between them, is that they say, “We hear and we obey.” And they are those who acquire success. And whoever obeys Allâh and His Messenger and fears Allâh and observes His Awe, such are those who are the winners. (24:47-52)​

These verses, too, hold that, in order to be a Muslim, the condition is to surrender to the verdicts of the Holy Prophet (

). Those who do not turn towards him in their disputes inspite of being called to him cannot, according to the Holy Qur’ân, be treated as believers. It carries the same principle as mentioned in the preceding verse: It is the basic ingredient of the belief in Allâh and His Messenger that the authority of the Messenger should be accepted whole-heartedly. He must be consulted in disputes and obeyed. His verdicts must be followed in total submission, and the laws enunciated by him must be held as binding.

The Authority of Sunnah - Chapter 1

 

[koranist]

Ok so you brought some material about the place of the Sunnah in Islam. What about the place of the Koran in Islam? Do you have any Sunni Islam's information regarding that?

 

[Ahmed Farhan]

Allah has commanded us in Quran to obey the Messenger, so obeying him would be obeying Allah’s command.

 

[wil]

Allah has commanded us in Quran to obey the Messenger, so obeying him would be obeying Allah’s command.

Seems circular...

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

Seems circular...

Not if obeying Allah comes out of faith, much like what you profess comes out of faith.

 

[wil]

Not if obeying Allah comes out of faith, much like what you profess comes out of faith.

hmmm... I find in don't have much faith in the unseen... I have faith that my past experiences can be repeated.

I was speaking of the quote.

Allah has commanded us in Quran to obey the Messenger, so obeying him would be obeying Allah’s command.

The messenger said that Allah said what his scribes wrote which states that Allah said to obey the messenger...

And yes, quite similar to those who use the Bible as evidence to prove what is said in the bible is true...

 

[Saheim]

Allah has commanded us in Quran to obey the Messenger, so obeying him would be obeying Allah’s command.

Yes and, if the prophet Muhammad (saw) was HERE, I would obey him. He is not, he has been dead for a very long time. I govern my life as closely as I can to the words of Allah (swt). However, I will not make decisions based on - he said, he said, he said, the Prophet said. My father was a very ethical and intelligent man. Had he told me how to handle a situation, I would have listened to him even if I did not understand his logic. My father has been dead, for quite a while. My uncle knew him (he was his brother) and my cousin knew my uncle (it was his dad) BUT if my cousin said his dad said that my dad said, I would be very skeptical.

There are other reasons I am very leery of accepting hadith as binding, but it would be A LOT to type out. I tend to follow what I call the "Core Sunnah" - Muhammad (saw) took the message and applied it to his life the best he could with his understanding of the world around him. I'm gonna follow his example and do the same

 

[BigJoeNobody]

Yes and, if the prophet Muhammad (saw) was HERE, I would obey him. He is not, he has been dead for a very long time. I govern my life as closely as I can to the words of Allah (swt). However, I will not make decisions based on - he said, he said, he said, the Prophet said. My father was a very ethical and intelligent man. Had he told me how to handle a situation, I would have listened to him even if I did not understand his logic. My father has been dead, for quite a while. My uncle knew him (he was his brother) and my cousin knew my uncle (it was his dad) BUT if my cousin said his dad said that my dad said, I would be very skeptical.

There are other reasons I am very leery of accepting hadith as binding, but it would be A LOT to type out. I tend to follow what I call the "Core Sunnah" - Muhammad (saw) took the message and applied it to his life the best he could with his understanding of the world around him. I'm gonna follow his example and do the same

Just so I understand you correctly brother, you are claiming you only follow the strongest of Hadith? So how much of a chain would you trust? Even very basic principles displayed in Hadith are sometimes layered in several generations of recording. Muhammed (PBUH) like the other prophets (PBUTA) had 2 functions, to convey the message (The Quran) and to live as an example of such teachings as a separate form of explanation. Allah (SWT) has conveyed a core Belief and Law we are bound to (much being conveyed in human decency) as explained in the Quran. But there are far more topics that would need to be explained. While the Quran gives us a law, it also commands us to obey the commands of the Prophet Muhammed (PBUH). Now most actual scholars do not trivialize any Hadith, unless it can be found to contradict a stronger chain Hadith or the Quran. But we must realize that although Muhammed (PBUH) was a living example and teacher, not all of his commands were meant for all mankind.

Take this example I know of 2 Hadiths where men came and asked the Prophet (PBUH) if they could hug their wife during Ramadan. One man he told "No, it is Haram for you" and the other "Yes, It is Halal". There are people who would see the First Hadith and stick to it, and while nothing bad may come of it, it isn't meant to be applied to all, same as the second. Imagine for a second the first man is a pervert/uncontroled, if given permission to "hug" a woman (assuming wife) there is a good possibility that he may try to do something more.

On top of that, there are thousands, or millions of false/weak Hadiths floating around. So much so that there are 4 major schools of thought in Sunni disciplines alone. There are differences in each, but the core stays the same. It is my belief, and that of many of my neighbors/Friends that Allah wanted this to be the way it is so that we maintain discussion. While one way may be better than other, neither one is wrong, which helps defer the issues of what would be wrong into discussions where common ideas seem normal, but outside of those the ideas seem to be strange and far out there.

All in all, I just want to remind you that while you may be skeptical of what your cousin said that your uncle said that your dad said, it doesn't mean your dad didn't say it, nor does it take anything away from what may be good advice (as long as it doesn't contradict the stronger teachings.

I remember a Hadith used in Jummah a few weeks ago expressing just this... (translation/summary) "Even a fool can have advice that can improve your deen" - Muhammed (PBUH)

For example, I didn't need to check authenticity of the Hadith here, as it was a clearly good advice.

 

[Saheim]

Just so I understand you correctly brother, you are claiming you only follow the strongest of Hadith? So how much of a chain would you trust? Even very basic principles displayed in Hadith are sometimes layered in several generations of recording. Muhammed (PBUH) like the other prophets (PBUTA) had 2 functions, to convey the message (The Quran) and to live as an example of such teachings as a separate form of explanation. Allah (SWT) has conveyed a core Belief and Law we are bound to (much being conveyed in human decency) as explained in the Quran. But there are far more topics that would need to be explained. While the Quran gives us a law, it also commands us to obey the commands of the Prophet Muhammed (PBUH). Now most actual scholars do not trivialize any Hadith, unless it can be found to contradict a stronger chain Hadith or the Quran. But we must realize that although Muhammed (PBUH) was a living example and teacher, not all of his commands were meant for all mankind.

Take this example I know of 2 Hadiths where men came and asked the Prophet (PBUH) if they could hug their wife during Ramadan. One man he told "No, it is Haram for you" and the other "Yes, It is Halal". There are people who would see the First Hadith and stick to it, and while nothing bad may come of it, it isn't meant to be applied to all, same as the second. Imagine for a second the first man is a pervert/uncontroled, if given permission to "hug" a woman (assuming wife) there is a good possibility that he may try to do something more.

On top of that, there are thousands, or millions of false/weak Hadiths floating around. So much so that there are 4 major schools of thought in Sunni disciplines alone. There are differences in each, but the core stays the same. It is my belief, and that of many of my neighbors/Friends that Allah wanted this to be the way it is so that we maintain discussion. While one way may be better than other, neither one is wrong, which helps defer the issues of what would be wrong into discussions where common ideas seem normal, but outside of those the ideas seem to be strange and far out there.

All in all, I just want to remind you that while you may be skeptical of what your cousin said that your uncle said that your dad said, it doesn't mean your dad didn't say it, nor does it take anything away from what may be good advice (as long as it doesn't contradict the stronger teachings.

I remember a Hadith used in Jummah a few weeks ago expressing just this... (translation/summary) "Even a fool can have advice that can improve your deen" - Muhammed (PBUH)

For example, I didn't need to check authenticity of the Hadith here, as it was a clearly good advice.

Thank You for taking the time to type out such a great response. I appreciate it! I'll start by saying I agree with a lot of what you are saying. I am going to address a couple things, though, I've bolded sections of your post and will respond to them, in order.

(1) No, I'm stating that I give consideration to ALL hadith but considered myself BOUND by the Q'uran only

(2)Allah (swt) tells us, in the Q'uran, that the Q'uran is clear and complete. I believe Him. There are hardly (if) any other topics that I feel need more explaining.

(3) The fact that ANY hadith contradicts another or, even worse, the Q'uran, makes me skeptical of ALL hadith

(4) Muhammad (saw) never met me, is not all knowing, and could never have imagined what the circumstances of my life in the year 2016 would be. Therefore, we will never know if he would have ordered me to do something the same or different than another.

(5) This brings us back to number 3

(6) I do not subscribe to sects. I do not even consider myself a Sunni, I am simply a Muslim. I submit to my Creator and He left me pretty clear instructions for which I am grateful.

(7) I do not share this belief. I believe we are doing all sorts of things that Allah (swt) never "wanted". I believe that as humans, even though we are Muslims, we tend to get off track chasing the things that WE want.

(8) I completely agree, here. In fact, I've told friends of a hadith and said, "I'm not sure if it is authentic, but I like to think it is something Muhammad (saw) would have said". It is actually my favorite hadith and I have no clue whether or not it is genuine.

Ok, here is another issue I have with hadith in general - The Q'uran gave us instructions in all aspects of the human experience. Unfortunately war and politics are parts of the human experience. Let's look at politics/politicians, for a second. Suppose a man (from the early years) is in power (in an Islamic gvt) and there are different ways for a hadith to be verified or interpreted. Am I supposed to believe that this HUMAN did not nudge things in a direction that maintained his power? I don't. I wholeheartedly believe that early leaders would have been inclined to "tweak" things in a manner that agreed with their agenda.

I believe that Ibn Abd al-Wahab had a good idea - Apparently, he not only wanted to see a solid "chain" for a hadith but made sure the hadith itself seemed consistent with the ideals of the Q'uran. A good example of using this logic would be circumcision. When I read the Q'uran, it seems pretty clear to me that the practice is haram.

I have a brother who actually said "you need the hadith to understand the Q'uran". I was taken back and had to ask, "Is that because I am stupid or because Allah (swt) isn't good at explaining things?"

 

[BigJoeNobody]

Thank You for taking the time to type out such a great response. I appreciate it! I'll start by saying I agree with a lot of what you are saying. I am going to address a couple things, though, I've bolded sections of your post and will respond to them, in order.

(1) No, I'm stating that I give consideration to ALL hadith but considered myself BOUND by the Q'uran only

(2)Allah (swt) tells us, in the Q'uran, that the Q'uran is clear and complete. I believe Him. There are hardly (if) any other topics that I feel need more explaining.

(3) The fact that ANY hadith contradicts another or, even worse, the Q'uran, makes me skeptical of ALL hadith

(4) Muhammad (saw) never met me, is not all knowing, and could never have imagined what the circumstances of my life in the year 2016 would be. Therefore, we will never know if he would have ordered me to do something the same or different than another.

(5) This brings us back to number 3

(6) I do not subscribe to sects. I do not even consider myself a Sunni, I am simply a Muslim. I submit to my Creator and He left me pretty clear instructions for which I am grateful.

(7) I do not share this belief. I believe we are doing all sorts of things that Allah (swt) never "wanted". I believe that as humans, even though we are Muslims, we tend to get off track chasing the things that WE want.

(8) I completely agree, here. In fact, I've told friends of a hadith and said, "I'm not sure if it is authentic, but I like to think it is something Muhammad (saw) would have said". It is actually my favorite hadith and I have no clue whether or not it is genuine.

Ok, here is another issue I have with hadith in general - The Q'uran gave us instructions in all aspects of the human experience. Unfortunately war and politics are parts of the human experience. Let's look at politics/politicians, for a second. Suppose a man (from the early years) is in power (in an Islamic gvt) and there are different ways for a hadith to be verified or interpreted. Am I supposed to believe that this HUMAN did not nudge things in a direction that maintained his power? I don't. I wholeheartedly believe that early leaders would have been inclined to "tweak" things in a manner that agreed with their agenda.

I believe that Ibn Abd al-Wahab had a good idea - Apparently, he not only wanted to see a solid "chain" for a hadith but made sure the hadith itself seemed consistent with the ideals of the Q'uran. A good example of using this logic would be circumcision. When I read the Q'uran, it seems pretty clear to me that the practice is haram.

I have a brother who actually said "you need the hadith to understand the Q'uran". I was taken back and had to ask, "Is that because I am stupid or because Allah (swt) isn't good at explaining things?"

مَّن يُطِعِ الرَّسُولَ فَقَدْ أَطَاعَ اللَّهَ ۖ وَمَن تَوَلَّىٰ فَمَا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ عَلَيْهِمْ حَفِيظًا


He who obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah ; but those who turn away - We have not sent you over them as a guardian.

just wondering how you apply this Aya. It is generally accepted amongst Muslims that at least some Hadith are both completely reliable and authoritative. I understand your argument, and for a while, I thought the same way. The Quran is THE DOCUMENT. But in Ayat such as the one above it seems that the Prophets (PBUTA) are examples because we need them. It seems our capacity for understanding doesn't quite live up to the meticulous examination one would need to get everything out of the Quran. Things such as how to pray, and how often are absent from explanation and (of course this is my opinion as well as the majority of scholars) require instructions only given by the Prophet Mouhammed (PBUH).

I can only add to what you say here, not all Hadith are all inclusive. Some Hadith express things about a single person, while another may contradict that one. This doesn't mean that neither is correct, but rather that those particular examples were for specific audiences.

I'm going to have to disagree on the lines of Circumcision as well. whereas I gather what you are saying about the Ayat describing Allah's "perfect"creation, I disagree that that negates the possibility of medical or ritual acts being performed on a child. Both the strongest collections of Hadith, Jewish Tradition say that Ibrahim (PBUH) as well as all of the following prophets (PBUTA) and their followers were circumcised. Would you say cleaning a child of blood or ambiotic fluid residue is Haram? How about cutting of the cord? what about surgery to fix childhood issues like a cleft lip or conjoinment? by your definition, all these would be Haram. I must warn you brother, Telling others what is Haram without absolute knowledge is in and of itself wrong.

and finally, as crude as it may sound the answer for all of us to your last question is the same. We are all too stupid.

 

[Amica2]

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, assalamu alaikum! Thank you for such a detailed post and making an effort to explain why Muslims should follow Sunnah. You make some valid points/reminders. However, for a lot of Muslims the questions is not whether to follow Sunnah, but what is really Sunnah? How do we distinguish which is true Sunnah from all of the hundreds, thousands of hadiths? The Muslim scholarship and religious leadership has already admitted that NOT all hadiths are 100%, and they claim that in order for ordinary Muslim to decide authenticity of a hadith, he/she needs to extensively study it or ask an imam/leader. Many Muslims, however, argue that with careful observance of the Qur'an and the faculty of reason, one is able to make conclusions on their own a lot of times. With all this in mind, I would like to respond to some of your points:

1. Qur'an verses 3:32, 4:80 and 33:36 do state that Muslims must obey Allah SWT and the Messenger Muhammad pbuh. With this verse, it is our duty then to decide what it is that Allah SWT and Messenger pbuh want us to do. Allah's SWT Command is clear: it is all in the Noble Qur'an. However, all Messenger's directives are in the hadiths and not all of them are reliable. This is a HUGE issue. Therefore, we are forced to look back at the Qur'an, compare and decide whether something makes sense or not.
2. After quoting Qur'an verse 59:7, you conclude that obeying Messenger Muhammad pbuh means that we must obey him in all matters of the faith/imaan too. Ok. No issue there, but what happens when hadith contradicts the Qur'an? And there are many instances of that. For example, in Saudi Arabia the judicial system is open to the punishment of stoning to death for adultery whereas the Noble Qur'an specifies that the religious punishment for such are public lashing, marrying other adulterer and house imprisonment. Those are clear statements in the Qur'an, which then beg the question whether the hadiths that command stoning are correct? Would the Messenger pbuh contradict the Qur'an so blatantly? Also, if it is the issue of abrogation, why Allah SWT DOES NOT MAKE one single reference to the change at all in the Qur'an? After all, Allah SWT appears to be very engaged with the people of the 7th century Arabia where in the Qur'an He answers some of their questions, questions them on issues, and even refers to people's thoughts in some instances. So, why the silence on such an important issue? Allah's SWT silence in the Qur'an about stoning (and similar other issues we see in the Arab world, North Africa) is deafening! And it should mean a lot to us.
3. The Ibn Masud hadith: "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) This hadith, in my personal opinion, is a clear statement of how women are mistreated by some Muslim men. Here is why: the woman states that she read the Noble Qur'an from the start to end and did not find any women being cursed for plucking their eyebrows or for tattoing. Ibn Masud then basically told her to ignore her own intelligence, and worse yet--Allah's SWT Word!, and listen to what men tell her to do simply because they do not like women beautifying themselves. There were NO hadiths written at the time of Messenger Muhammad pbuh, only the Qur'an. The hadiths collections started decades after Prophet Muhammad's pbuh death. So, the only reading that this woman could have done at the time, if this was during Prophet Muhammad's lifetime, was reading the Qur'an. And Qur'an did not forbid her from plucking her eyebrows. Regarding tattooing, Ibn Masud may have heard about it, but may have not known that tattooing was forbidden in the Old Testament. Had he said to her: "Yes, tattoing is forbidden by the Bible, and Bible is the Word of God, hence we must abide by it," it would have been a different story. Instead, he just told her off.

4. I disagree with the fact that common person cannot use their own reason to interpret Qur'anic verse and hadith on their own, compare and then make their own decision. Qur'an is 100% clear about certain matters that there should not be any discussion about it. For example, when Allah SWT orders people to use their reason, then we must. He did not say run to your imams for interpretation, but constantly demands from Muslims to use the faculty of reason, to think and distinguish right from wrong. I may go to a scholar or imam for something like the verse in the Qur'an that compares death to sleep. Although on the surface I can understand the comparison, but at the same time I do not. What does it mean that our souls are taken each night, returned and for some not returned (meaning the person dies in their sleep). Does this mean that one is soulless when he/she sleeps? Those are the more philosophical questions that I would like experts to explain to me since they supposedly went years to school to study Qur'an more closely. And of course the religious laws: inheritance, divorce, marriages, etc., as these sometimes may get complicated. But when Allah SWT tells me not to eat pork, worship idols, behave modestly--then hey, how more clear can all such instruction be? Clear as day the way it is.

I think that orthodox Muslims spend too much time worrying what hadiths say vs what common sense from the Qur'an is. Bottom line for any person using the faculty of reason is this: compare the hadith with the Qur'an, if it contradicts the Qur'an do not follow it.
Now, some may say: Ok, but what about prayer for example? We would not know how to pray if it were not from hadiths? My answer: maybe. Allah SWT instructs regular prayers at specified times (5 times a day in the Qur'an). The sajdah (face down) is the most praised form of praying position mentioned both in the Qur'an and the Bible. However, Allah SWT did not go into any other details of the prayer format because the prayer time is NOT so much about movements as much as about our minds and heart being present and sincere in the prayer.
Same thing with clothing of women. Women are told to cover up, dress modestly, but no specified details. Why? Because ALLAH SWT knows that different times and different cultures may define modesty differently. However, the basic conditions for modesty are defined, must not be crossed and those are: do not commit adultery, do not have sex out of marriage, do not draw attention in a sexual manner, lower your gaze, marry people of good character and believers.
Segregation of women is not going to forbid people from committing crimes or engaging in religiously inappropriate behaviors. Just because a woman might socialize only with family members, does not mean that she is not susceptible to rape or sexual abuse. It is not unheard of women being sexually abused by a parent or sibling, or even spouse.
And clothes do not guarantee one's good character, nor do they indicate how religion abiding one is.
To understand hadiths, and the orthodox Muslim beliefs and high esteem for hadiths, one must first study the Bible (especially the Old Testament). ALL of the issues that Muslims run into are stemming from the Bible, such as: treatment of women, apostates, non-Muslims, etc. Literally, all of hadiths that speak against these groups of people are in the Bible. I mean not to offend Jews and Christians, but unfortunately, this is the truth--one only needs to take hadith collections and compare to the Bible, and then you will see what the problems are.

While the Noble Qur'an confirms the Revelation of the Bible, at the same time Qur'an provides new orders such as the dietary laws, divorce/marriage laws, treatment of apostates, rules of war, etc., which in 99% of the cases contradict the Old Testament Mosaic Law. However, hadith supporters are ignoring this and would rather refer back to the Mosaic Law and claim it is from Muhammad pbuh, when in fact the hadiths are biblical!

 

[Amica2]

Just a quick note: here is the list of where I found some of the sources for the draconian "Sharia" law that many Muslims in the Arab world promote from the hadiths, claiming they are from Muhammad pbuh but are actually from the Bible:

Stoning in the Bible for:
murder (Leviticus 24:17), idolatry (Deuteronomy 17:2–5), approaching near to Mount Sinai while the presence of God was there (Exodus 19:12–13), practicing necromancy or the occult (Leviticus 20:27), and blaspheming the name of the Lord (Leviticus 24:16), various types of sexual sin (Deuteronomy 22:24).

Capital punishment in the Bible for:
Murder (Exodus 21:12), kidnapping (Exodus 21:16), bestiality (Exodus 22:19), adultery (Leviticus 20:10), homosexuality (Leviticus 20:13), being a false prophet (Deuteronomy 13:5), prostitution and rape (Deuteronomy 22:24).

Bible Dress Code that rings a bell when many orthodox Muslims frown upon women wearing jeans or similar clothes:

Deuteronomy 22:5: “A woman shall not wear a man's garment, nor shall a man put on a woman's cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God.”

Bible against tattooing:
Leviticus 19:28 says, “You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor tattoo any marks on you.”

Bible against plucking of the eyebrows:

"Ye are the children of the LORD your God:
ye shall not cut yourselves,
nor make any baldness between your eyes for the dead."
Deuteronomy 14:1

And those are just a few specifics. Now, the questions for orthodox Muslims: you cannot claim the Bible is corrupted when you follow the Bible by implementing those harsh Mosaic laws, ascribing it to Muhammad pbuh and ignoring the fact that the Noble Qur'an either clearly contradicts many of the Mosaic laws or completely ignores them. So, which is it? Are we to follow the Sunnah of the Old Testament that you eagerly claim is corrupted, or are we to rely on the Qur'an that we, as Muslims, all agree is 100% the Word of God for us? Cannot have it both ways.

Either stop accusing Jews of corrupting their Bible, admit that the Sharia should include the Mosaic Law and that the Mosaic Law in some instances supersedes the actual Sharia as given in the Qur'an, and we will all be set to go. At least, we will understand where you are coming from.

 

[Abdullah]

...

thanks Amica for all of that!; wow who would have thought someone would adress my post several years later eh?

there is a verse in the Quran where Allah SWT says that Quran will be protected right sis?

and other verses basically point out that a seperate interpretation of the Quran will be revealed to Prophet Muhammad [saw], therefore the Quranic guidance will be useless without that interpretation right sis? [lets use a bit of logic and brain here since you said Quran tells us to! ], so therefore the promise of ALlah protecting the Quran extends to it's meaning too right? [i.e, enough sunnah thats needed to interpret entire Quran], so basically we have the promise of ALlah that sunnah will be protected!

ref: http://ccm-inc.org/oldsite/iqra/articles/authsun/index.html

yes there are 'weak' hadiths but weak hadiths are not used in rulings; only the sahih hadiths are used for rulings

about stoning, Quran says lock them up [adulterers] in a room for life, unless Allah alters that punishment, so ALlah altered it in the sunnah; since ALlah says in Quran obey the sunnah, we have to obey and regard the guidance being from ALlah wether it's in Quran or sunnah; the hadiths about stoning are numerous and some are mutawatir [the strongest form of sahih] so there is no doubt about their authenticity], hence the lashings punishment in the Quran refers to only fornication; see it all makes sense!

 

[Abdullah]

"Yes, tattoing is forbidden by the Bible, and Bible is the Word of God, hence we must abide by it," it would have been a different story.

the old and new testament are no longer valid sis; as well as their severe distortions, Quran clarifies their abrogation too!, so we have to only take our guidance from Quran and sunnah now

you have read the magnificent Quran right??; can such a book be from man?; open your eyes sis it is from ALlah!; save yourself; do not let pride, hate whatever get in the way, save yourself:

007:157:
Those who follow the Messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write (i.e.Muhammad SAW) whom they find written with them in the Taurat (Torah) (Deut, xviii, 15) and the Injeel (Gospel) (John xiv, 16), - he commands them for Al-Ma'ruf (i.e. Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam has ordained); and forbids them from Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief, polytheism of all kinds, and all that Islam has forbidden); he allows them as lawful At-Taiyibat [(i.e. all good and lawful) as regards things, deeds, beliefs, persons, foods, etc.], and prohibits them as unlawful Al- Khaba'ith (i.e. all evil and unlawful as regards things, deeds, beliefs, persons, foods, etc.), he releases them from their heavy burdens (of Allah's Covenant), and from the fetters (bindings) that were upon them. So those who believe in him (Muhammad SAW), honour him, help him, and follow the light (the Qur'an) which has been sent down with him, it is they who will be successful.

"By Him in whose hand is the soul of Muhammad, any person of this Community, any Jew, or any Christian who hears of me and dies without believing in what I have been sent with will be an inhabitant of hell" (al-Baghawi: Sharh al-sunna 1.104). This hadith was also reported by Muslim in his Sahih by `Abd al-Razzaq in his Musannaf, and others. It is a rigorously authenticated (sahih) evidence that clarifies the word of Allah in surat Al 'Imran"Whoever seeks a religion other than Islam will never have it accepted from him, and shall be of those who have truly failed in the next life" (Qur'an 3:85)

 

[wil]

the old and new testament are no longer valid sis

open your eyes sis it

the old and new testament are no longer valid sis

Can I get some clarification?

Is Amiga your sister?

Is sis term of endearment or respect in Islam?

Cause here stateside it would be a misogynistic slur, a word indicating someone is beneath you and her responses hardly deserve your attention...

Wouldn't want you to be misinterpreted.

 

[Ahmad232]

hi wil; i know your a brainy guy but best keep your 'ead down to earth; thinking too much on a boffin level will do your brain in mate

try to think of the word 'sis' as a run of the mill person uses it, or a street gangsta uses it! [im a former member of the bricklane bad boy posse you see! ]

 

[Ahmad232]

hi wil; i know your a brainy guy but best keep your 'ead down to earth; thinking too much on a boffin level will do your brain in mate

Can I get some clarification?

Is Amiga your sister?

Is sis term of endearment or respect in Islam?

it is both of them

basically there are two types of sisters in Islam, or rather 4, 1 your siblings, 2, cousin sisters, 3, sisters in faith, 4. sisters in humanity; Amiga is of the latter