Stuff and nonesense, they disagree on a majority of issues.
"These four schools share most of their rulings, but differ on the particular
hadiths they accept as authentic and the weight they give to analogy or reason (
qiyas) in deciding difficulties".
Fiqh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
All four agree on the basic belief system of Islam, and on the majority of their rulings, and they do not constitute separate sects, denominations or groups within Islam. They also agree on the basic begginnings of their methodology: That the primary sources of Islamic rulings are the Quran and Sunnah... There differences come over minute and difficult issues, many of which are not possible to resolve. For example: how to reconcile apperant contradictions between two texts, which there is more than one acceptable interpretation of an Arabic word, or when there is an issue [esspecially contemporary issues] which not text in the Quran and Sunnah explicitly adresses....
Understanding Madhabs: A Beginner's Guide & FAQ
Are you mad? Allah did not tell us to first follow the Messenger, then look to Allah for answers. We are clearly instructed to look FIRST to the Quran, if we find no clear indication there we then look to the Prophet. Let us take adultery, the hadiths about the Prophet stoning people actually ask the narrators whether this was before or after the revelation of the verse giving the punishment for adultery and the narrators admit they do not know. Allah has clearly given the punishment so who the hell do people think they are to ignore that and look elsewhere for answers?
The mujtahidouns of jursiprudence do take the Quran first as their primary source from where rulings are derived, and they take the Sunnah as their second source. So what they do first is see if other Quranic verses interpret the Quranic verses in question, and then they turn to the Sunnah
A more honest answer would have been "there isn't one". No I would not accept your interpretation of the verse pertaining to dress because it does not state that I must cover my entire body in ugly clothes and only have one eye showing.
And tell the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts, etc.) and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent (like palms of hands or one eye or both eyes for necessity to see the way, or outer dress like veil, gloves, head-cover, apron, etc.), and to draw their veils all over Juyubihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms, etc.) and not to reveal their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands fathers, their sons, their husbands sons, their brothers or their brothers sons, or their sisters sons, or their (Muslim) women (i.e. their sisters in Islam), or the (female) slaves whom their right hands possess, or old male servants who lack vigour, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And all of you beg Allah to forgive you all, O believers, that you may be successful. (Chapter #24, Verse #31)
...not to mention the endless Hadeeths involving this matter
![Smile :) :)]()
.
It takes a Mujtahid/Muffasir to understand the Quranic words correctly, for they have a deep insight into the Arabic language, so they not only see the 'apperant translated meaning when it's translated into english', but it's true core meaning as well, and the words in the brackets which interprets the word 'Juyubihinna', are from this deep understanding of root and indepth meaning of the Arabic words of the Quran.
So do you want to argue against the experts of the Arabic language by saying, "well according to the apperant meaning of the word as it has been translated into english, you cannot be conclusively sure that, that it means to cover the whole body with only one or two eyes showing, so I'm going to go by the apperant Abdullah Yusf Ali's translated meaning, and not going to accept your indepth understanding of the meaning of the word in it's orignal Arabic". Hmm thats a verry intelligent argument isn't it
Oh get a life Abdullah. If you are going to refer every comment I make back to LM's then I will simply not bother discussing with you, it is a waste of my time.
The cutting of the hands of the thief is verry clearly mentioned in the Holy Quran sister...The LM's cannot concede on this one, because to get rid of what they consider to be 'barbaric' is a one of their major aims, thus they will lie to you and confuse you with a manipulated and disotrted 'interpretation' of theirs in telling you that the traditionalists have got it wrong.
Allah Most High says:
“As to the thief, male of female, cut off his or her hands. A punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime” (Surah al-Ma’idah, 38).
It couldn't be more clearer sister.
Hey that is a great attitude to have toward our Supreme Lord "we will make people pray to you in gobbledygook rather than in sincere submission". If Allah had wanted the whole world to speak Arabic, guess which language we would all speak?
Only a few surahs need to be learnt for salaat and the rest of the recitations in it are not much iether, and it is easy to learn it and learn their meanings as well. The overwhelimng vast majority of muslims in the world are non-Arabic speakers and they all learn how to read Salaat in Arabic, and they are easily learning the meanings of what they read as well, so if the rest of the non-Arabic speaking Muslims dont have a problem with learning and offering salaat in Arabic, why should a few western converts have a probelm with it?
Allah does not make fardh what is too difficult for mankind to abide by, and the fact that learning to say Salaat in Arabic [or to understand the meaning of what one is saying in the Arabic recitations of Salaat] is not hard at all, goes to show that there is no injustice at all in Allah making Arabic recitations in salaat a fardh [obligation] for all mankind
Allah wants us to recite the QURAN in Salaat and only the Arabic recitation of the Quran is the Quran and a translation of the recitation is just that, a translation of it, and not the actual Quran itself.
The arabic language cannot be translated word for word, exact concept for concept, in any other language, thus if we pray salaat in any other language then in arabic, we will not be saying and meaning exactly the same words which the Prophet [saw] said in Salaat, thus we will not be saying or meaning exactly waht is meant to be said and meant in Salaat, that is one reason why even the non-Quranic recitations in the Salaat has to be said in Arabic.
Another wisdom behind why Salaat has to be said in Arabic, is that when a people leaves the orignal language of a religion/imperative religious practices, and adopts translations in it's place, then this is how gradually a religion and it's practices gets gradually corrupted and distorted, as 'translations' can easily faciliate the orignal teachings/meanings to shift from it's orignal teachings/meanings, wether it is done by 'flexibilty' that translation allows, or wether it is done with the deliberate intention to distort. Thus sticking to the orignal language of a religion blocks the paths to the religion getting gradually distorted.
So state that and stop trying to twist things. All things come from Allah, even the words and deeds of our Beloved Prophet, who never claimed to be anything other than a human male bringing a message from Allah Himself. It is high time the traditionalists stopped worshipping a Prophet and got back to worshipping and respecting Allah.
That is correct, so the Sunnah is from Allah Himself, so why shouldn't we follow the Sunnah AS THE SECOND SOURCE OF SHARIAH [in importance to the Quran] as Allah directs us in the Quran to do so?
And obeying/following the Sunnah is not worshipping the Prophet [saw]. Heres the evidence:
And whoever obeys the Messenger, thereby obeys Allâh. (4:80)
See
Because Allah has ordered me to follow Him first,
Fine, Allah wants the Quran to be taken as the first source of Shariah, but He wants us to take the Sunnah as the second source. take a look:
Say: Obey Allâh and the Messenger, but if they turn their backs, Allâh loves not the disbelievers. (3:32)
And obey Allâh and the Messenger so that you may be blessed. (3:132)
Say, if you love Allâh, follow me and Allâh will love you and forgive you your sins. (3:31)
Believe, then, in Allâh and His Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, who believes in Allâh and His words, and follow him so that you may be on the right path. (7:158)
Same right back at you. I see you heading down a dangerous path, away from Allah and toward man made and corrupt idol worship of our Beloved Prophet. May Allah guide you to the straight path and save you from hell fire brother.
Obeying and following the Sunnah is ordered by Allah in the Quran, and Allah makes it clear that the obeidence of the messenger [saw] is the obedience of Allah, so therefore, it is not idol worship but it is the worship of Allah.
Right without any of your sarcastic "no because you will not accept it" quote me one verse of the Quran that says we should follow the Sunnah before the Quran. If you can do that and it says so clearly then I promise to change my views, my beliefs and follow your path.
The Quran says to obey Allah [i.e, the Quran...] and to follow/obey the Messenger [saw] [i.e. the Sunnah].
Salaam