hadith thread

sam1528

kid posted on 22-11-2014 03:01 PM
Brother sam. In the past people also collect compilations and make them as law.

Jews compilations called Misnad, using the same method Sanad and Mathan, this is now what followed by Jews aside Tawrat.

Christian compilations also known as Matthews, Lucas, John etc, also compiled by story using Sanad and Mathan method.

How we ended up believing the same method brother?

While Quran is clear and direct from God from word to word without Sanad and Mathan method. Quran completed by collecting the Writing! Not mouth to mouth story.

Yet we muslim fell into the same trap of so called compilation. Please think about it brother.

Making laws is ok as long as it doesn't contradict scripture.

The Mishnah utilize the system of Isnad / Mantn? I have never come across this claim. As far as I know , it is a preserved oral tradition up to the time of Ezra (~ 450BC). It does not go all the way to Prophet Moosa(as). It is not even close to being the same as the Hadiths.

The books of the Gospel in the NT were written by unknowns , cannot even apply the methodology of Isnad

Nobody is denying the Quran. The part usage of Hadith is context to the Quran but the more importantly , usage is for Shariah. 2 simple questions
(1) How do you pray. By this I mean the sequence in the prayer ritual. This is from the Hadith where Prophet Muhammad(saw) taught his companions and they later taught others
(2) The Quran state of paying Zakat. It does not state the amount. However we fix it at 2.5%

You need to show me where in the Quran that state of such which I am sure you would be stuck.

Therefore Hadith is the practical aspect of the Quran or the Quran made practical.

Quran9:100 (sahih international)

And the first forerunners [in the faith] among the Muhajireen and the Ansar and those who followed them with good conduct - Allah is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him, and He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide forever. That is the great attainment.

Allah has promised paradise for these people. However these were the people who also transmitted the Hadith.

It is impossible to fabricate or change a mutawatir Hadith. You have rejected such. What is your objective reason in doing so?

Put it this way bro , I have yet to witness an objective reason for rejecting the Hadith.

kid

Making laws is ok as long as it doesn't contradict scripture

Bro... Qur'an clearly said do NOT make any other laws.  So even if it doesn't contradict, new laws is forbidden.

Nobody is denying the Quran. The part usage of Hadith is context to the Quran but the more importantly , usage is for Shariah. 2 simple questions
(1) How do you pray. By this I mean the sequence in the prayer ritual. This is from the Hadith where Prophet Muhammad(saw) taught his companions and they later taught others
(2) The Quran state of paying Zakat. It does not state the amount. However we fix it at 2.5%

What shariah bro, or better, which Shariah? Shariah is human interpretation, in this world the shariah from place to place is much different! You go to Afghanistan, go to Africa, go to Arab and go to Malaysia, people apply Shariah differently! WHY? Because there are many version of Shariah! They just follow whatever Shariah told by their local ulama.

1. How do you pray? Do not mistaken, Qur'an taught about how to pray. Go read Qur'an. And whatever God taught in Qur'an is sufficient. God do not care where you put your hand, how you put your forehead to the ground, how you stand, you spell Qunut or not. This all human wishful thinking who taught Qur'an not complete so there must be Hadith to show how to do this and that. While praying (salat) in Qur'an have so much different meaning than what Hadith means.

2. Regarding Zakat, of course God told how much we should spent for Zakat. Do not mistaken by that people who said God not mentioning how much to spent Zakat. Bro... please read Qur'an first.

Put it this way bro , I have yet to witness an objective reason for rejecting the Hadith.

Ok bro Sam, probably if I bring forward few hadith, it might be more fair and objective rather than I bring Qur'an to you.

Let examine this hadith:

- "The prophet said:'Do not write anything from me EXCEPT QURAN. Whoever wrote, must destroy it" (Muslim, Zuhd 72; Hanbal/12,21,39)
So you said Muhajireen and Anshar transmit the hadith, while prophet said do not write anything except Qur'an.
Bro, lets be clear on this... Would they transmit hadith while prophet ban it?

sam1528

kid posted on 22-11-2014 07:02 PM
Bro... Qur'an clearly said do NOT make any other laws.  So even if it doesn't contradict, new laws is forbidden.

Ok then , can you show me where in the Quran that states do not make other laws? We can have laws of going thru the red light. Quran states anything about such?

Like I stated , it is ok to make laws as long as it doesn't go against the Quran. It sould not be a problem.

What shariah bro, or better, which Shariah? Shariah is human interpretation, in this world the shariah from place to place is much different! You go to Afghanistan, go to Africa, go to Arab and go to Malaysia, people apply Shariah differently! WHY? Because there are many version of Shariah! They just follow whatever Shariah told by their local ulama.

1. How do you pray? Do not mistaken, Qur'an taught about how to pray. Go read Qur'an. And whatever God taught in Qur'an is sufficient. God do not care where you put your hand, how you put your forehead to the ground, how you stand, you spell Qunut or not. This all human wishful thinking who taught Qur'an not complete so there must be Hadith to show how to do this and that. While praying (salat) in Qur'an have so much different meaning than what Hadith means.

2. Regarding Zakat, of course God told how much we should spent for Zakat. Do not mistaken by that people who said God not mentioning how much to spent Zakat. Bro... please read Qur'an first.

Shariah means 'a path well trodden'. I stated that majority of the shariah Law is from Hadith. This doesn't mean there is none from the Quran. If you say its human interpretation then you are also admitting to the fact that of human interpretation to the Quran. You really need to be careful bro.

(1) Can you provide me the Quranic verse that teach us how to pray? This I mean the verses like when we should bow and prostrate and what is to be said at those positions. I really cannot find any. In addition , how many raka'at should we pray for each prayer. Perhaps you can be of help.

(2) I am not asking how we should spend for zakat. Every muslim since the time of Prophet Muhammad(saw) agree that zakat is 2.5% of our income. Where in the Quran that state of such?

I am not trying to corner you but I am trying to point out the inconsistency of Quranists. You cannot say you just follow the Quran because it is not objective.

Ok bro Sam, probably if I bring forward few hadith, it might be more fair and objective rather than I bring Qur'an to you.

Let examine this hadith:

- "The prophet said:'Do not write anything from me EXCEPT QURAN. Whoever wrote, must destroy it" (Muslim, Zuhd 72; Hanbal/12,21,39)
So you said Muhajireen and Anshar transmit the hadith, while prophet said do not write anything except Qur'an.
Bro, lets be clear on this... Would they transmit hadith while prophet ban it?

There is a valid explanation to this by Imam Nawawi

Al-Nawawi said in his commentary on Saheeh Muslim:

"Al-Qaadi said: there were many disputes among the Sahaabah and Taabi'een concerning the writing down of knowledge. Many of them regarded this as being makrooh, but most of them regarded it as permissible. This dispute is no longer an issue.

They differed as to the meaning of this hadeeth which says that it is forbidden. It was said that this pertained to one who was sure of his memory, and there was the fear that he may rely upon what he had written if he wrote it down; the ahaadeeth which say that it is permissible to write things down is to be interpreted as referring to the one whose memory is not reliable, such as the hadeeth, "Write it down for Abu Shaah";

In fact I can go one better from Kitab Al Ilm (Sunan Abu Dawud)
Book 25 , Number 3640

Narrated Zayd ibn Thabit:

    Al-Muttalib ibn Abdullah ibn Hantab said: Zayd ibn Thabit entered upon Mu'awiyah and asked him about a tradition. He ordered a man to write it. Zayd said: The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) ordered us not to write any of his traditions. So he erased it.

However in Book 25 Number 3639

Narrated Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As:

    I used to write everything which I heard from the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him). I intended (by it) to memorise it. The Quraysh prohibited me saying: Do you write everything that you hear from him while the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) is a human being: he speaks in anger and pleasure? So I stopped writing, and mentioned it to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him). He signalled with his finger to him mouth and said: Write, by Him in Whose hand my soul lies, only right comes out from it.

One says don't write but the words of Zayd. However the other says write , the very words of Prophet Muhammad(saw). The context is what I have provided from Imam Nawawi.

Take this being a honest discussion. I really would like to know what is the reason for you to embrace a Quranist standpoint. To be honest , I cannot see any objectivity in your position.

kid

Ok then , can you show me where in the Quran that states do not make other laws? We can have laws of going thru the red light. Quran states anything about such?

Of course what God prohibit is adding a new law in religion's term.
Going thru the red light is not religion's law, it is road traffic law bro.

Sure we can make new laws as many as we want in our life, government law, banking law, whatever law except new law in aqidah/religion. Many people claim Qur'an is not sufficient because it is not containing anythoing that their heart desire! They wish Qur'an follow their imagination instead.

- 6:114 "Shall I seek other than God as a source of law, when He has revealed to you this book fully detailed?"

It is clearly stated that Qur'an is fully detailed, means in terms of aqidah's law it is sufficient and detailed ENOUGH. Qur'an contains ALL the guidance for our salvation! Nothing missed from it.
And from this verse we learnt that it is prohibited to seek OTHER source as law. Isn't that verse very clear indeed bro?

I would like to present a simple case again, for example God said wudhu is only 4 steps in Qur'an, it is ENOUGH. Do not seek other source which said it is 10 steps or more! Thats what the verse means.

Then why wudhu becomes 10 steps or more? Because some claims that Qur'an not really detailed on the correct wudhu, which only 4 steps. So they thought the correct one must be 10 steps or more so it is more clean!
So does wudhu about cleaning? Then why not taking a bath alltogether?

Have you ever read the verse about wudhu? It is not about cleaning, but about OBEYING God, please read verse about wudhu yourself bro and tell me what you find?

Wudhu verse is about OBEYING God's command, not about cleaning. God command us to do it in 4 steps, so we MUST obey that.

Then if you think Wudhu is really 10 steps, do you think God forgot to put 6 more? b]God said HE doesn't FORGET!

So does Muhammad added 6 more steps on his own initiatives?

God said clearly in Qur'an that Muhammad will be killed if he utter/add other things than Qur'an:

69:43-47 "It (the Quran) is a revelation from the Lord of the universe. Had he (Muhammad) uttered any other teachings, We would have grabbed him by the right, and We would cut off his artery (of the heart)...."

The verse above strongly emphasize NO NEW LAWS to be added aside Qur'an!

Those who insist that the prophet left us a second source of religious law (hadith) are either accusing the prophet of disobeying God's commands in 69:43-47, or do not really understand the Quran.

So after you study above verse, do you really think prophet Muhammad dare to add new 6 steps in wudhu? Really bro?

Let we stop for a moment here.
I think I dont want to discuss too many subjects at once, let we clear one by one bro, it is much better for those who really sincere finsing the truth. We are here to FIND the truth, not to argue or to WIN a debate. . So bro, really try to do research on the above, what you find? Let me know.

If you want to win, let me say You won already, I admit losing.
I don't care about debating, thats the first thing you must know about me.

I'm here to talk about the truth and nothing but the truth, and hopefully you too.

FYI, I was the student of hadith for many years, I knew exactly hadith in and out, no need to talk about sanad, mathan etc to me bro, I got it. I was the big supporter of hadith in this forum 10 years back.

Please give me your opinion on the above verses, then when we reached some conclusion, we can move on to the next.
May Allah guides us to the straight path.

sam1528

kid posted on 23-11-2014 01:04 AM
Of course what God prohibit is adding a new law in religion's term.
Going thru the red light is not religion's law, it is road traffic law bro.

Sure we can make new laws as many as we want in our life, government law, banking law, whatever law except new law in aqidah/religion. Many people claim Qur'an is not sufficient because it is not containing anythoing that their heart desire! They wish Qur'an follow their imagination instead.

- 6:114 "Shall I seek other than God as a source of law, when He has revealed to you this book fully detailed?"

It is clearly stated that Qur'an is fully detailed, means in terms of aqidah's law it is sufficient and detailed ENOUGH. Qur'an contains ALL the guidance for our salvation! Nothing missed from it.
And from this verse we learnt that it is prohibited to seek OTHER source as law. Isn't that verse very clear indeed bro?

I would like to present a simple case again, for example God said wudhu is only 4 steps in Qur'an, it is ENOUGH. Do not seek other source which said it is 10 steps or more! Thats what the verse means.

Then why wudhu becomes 10 steps or more? Because some claims that Qur'an not really detailed on the correct wudhu, which only 4 steps. So they thought the correct one must be 10 steps or more so it is more clean!
So does wudhu about cleaning? Then why not taking a bath alltogether?

Have you ever read the verse about wudhu? It is not about cleaning, but about OBEYING God, please read verse about wudhu yourself bro and tell me what you find?

Wudhu verse is about OBEYING God's command, not about cleaning. God command us to do it in 4 steps, so we MUST obey that.

Then if you think Wudhu is really 10 steps, do you think God forgot to put 6 more? b]God said HE doesn't FORGET!

So does Muhammad added 6 more steps on his own initiatives?

God said clearly in Qur'an that Muhammad will be killed if he utter/add other things than Qur'an:

69:43-47 "It (the Quran) is a revelation from the Lord of the universe. Had he (Muhammad) uttered any other teachings, We would have grabbed him by the right, and We would cut off his artery (of the heart)...."

The verse above strongly emphasize NO NEW LAWS to be added aside Qur'an!

Those who insist that the prophet left us a second source of religious law (hadith) are either accusing the prophet of disobeying God's commands in 69:43-47, or do not really understand the Quran.

So after you study above verse, do you really think prophet Muhammad dare to add new 6 steps in wudhu? Really bro?

Let we stop for a moment here.
I think I dont want to discuss too many subjects at once, let we clear one by one bro, it is much better for those who really sincere finsing the truth. We are here to FIND the truth, not to argue or to WIN a debate. . So bro, really try to do research on the above, what you find? Let me know.

If you want to win, let me say You won already, I admit losing.
I don't care about debating, thats the first thing you must know about me.

I'm here to talk about the truth and nothing but the truth, and hopefully you too.

FYI, I was the student of hadith for many years, I knew exactly hadith in and out, no need to talk about sanad, mathan etc to me bro, I got it. I was the big supporter of hadith in this forum 10 years back.

Please give me your opinion on the above verses, then when we reached some conclusion, we can move on to the next.
May Allah guides us to the straight path.

Then you agree that the Quran does not prohibit in making laws that is just and in protection of the community.

If you are talking about Hadd punishment or Quranic Law , I have not seen any of this being contradicted by any Hadith. Can you provide an example.

In you arguing about wudhu in the Quran , the 4 steps against 10 steps or more , this is really a case of seeing problems where there aren't any. Quran5:7 (sahih international)

O you who have believed, when you rise to [perform] prayer, wash your faces and your forearms to the elbows and wipe over your heads and wash your feet to the ankles. And if you are in a state of janabah, then purify yourselves. But if you are ill or on a journey or one of you comes from the place of relieving himself or you have contacted women and do not find water, then seek clean earth and wipe over your faces and hands with it. Allah does not intend to make difficulty for you, but He intends to purify you and complete His favor upon you that you may be grateful.

The only difference of the so called steps are
(1) to be done 3 times , once also can
(2) washing of hands , nose and ears

Where does it state haram if a person does a bit more that what is stated in the Quran? The more important point here is that washing must be
(1) from the hands to the elbow
(2) from feet to ankle
It cannot be like what we observe that some just place their elbow and / or ankle under the tap and let the water run down the arm / foot. The wudhu is not satisfactory with such action.

Quran69:43-47 , is addressing the question of faith / monotheism / Allah. It is not addressing the rituals of Wudhu.

Back to my question : How do you perform solat / zakat of 2.5% from a Quranist standpoint.

Until now I cannot see what is in the Hadith that contradict the Quran. You need to provide the evidence. I am not talking about Isnad / Mantn.

I really cannot see any objectivity in the position of the Quranist and I hope you can provide it.

kid

Bro,

As I already stated, making any laws is not prohibited except new laws in religions. You can make undang-undang negara, but do not make new laws in religion. The verse is very clear on that. I'll reply about your inquiry for hadith sample, and I'll reply about wudhu later in next post.

You asked about hadith sample that contradict quran, ok then lets talk about punishment of adultery for a married Muslim.

Quran: 100 lashes
Hadith: Stoning to death

Guess what, right now in many Islamic countries that apply shariah law, they follow hadith instead of Quran in this adultery case. Also ask any Muslim in the street they will say stoning for punishment, not 100 lashes, this is how hadith has took over laws of God without they even realized!

Do you think God forget to put stoning in Quran? Or He had run out of words? Or He was shameful to put stoning commandment?

If the punishment is indeed stoning, God surely told us in Quran! But He said 100 lashes, and now you tell me this is not what God really mean?

Come on bro... Tell me please. No need to tell me that God actually mean stoning, He didnt mean 100 lashes, so He asked ulama to explain to us what God really means in common layman terms?

Does ulama is more cleverer in expalining laws to us than God?

Please dear brother, how come you still not see this?

sam1528

kid posted on 23-11-2014 01:28 PM
Bro,

As I already stated, making any laws is not prohibited except new laws in religions. You can make undang-undang negara, but do not make new laws in religion. The verse is very clear on that. I'll reply about your inquiry for hadith sample, and I'll reply about wudhu later in next post.

You asked about hadith sample that contradict quran, ok then lets talk about punishment of adultery for a married Muslim.

Quran: 100 lashes
Hadith: Stoning to death

Guess what, right now in many Islamic countries that apply shariah law, they follow hadith instead of Quran in this adultery case. Also ask any Muslim in the street they will say stoning for punishment, not 100 lashes, this is how hadith has took over laws of God without they even realized!

Do you think God forget to put stoning in Quran? Or He had run out of words? Or He was shameful to put stoning commandment?

If the punishment is indeed stoning, God surely told us in Quran! But He said 100 lashes, and now you tell me this is not what God really mean?

Come on bro... Tell me please. No need to tell me that God actually mean stoning, He didnt mean 100 lashes, so He asked ulama to explain to us what God really means in common layman terms?

Does ulama is more cleverer in expalining laws to us than God?

Please dear brother, how come you still not see this?

Well , we can look at the said law in a different perspective. Law against going thru the red light is for the preserverance of life as the quran state of not taking another person's life. In a way , isn't it touching on religion?

Stoning to death of the adulterer? This fall under abrogation of the Quranic verse but the law remains. However if you look into Sahih Bukhari , there is nothing in it about stoning the adulterer. Stoning comes under Punishment of Disbelivers at war with Allah and his Apostle. If you read carefully , the penalty of stoning to death is only after the confession of the adulterer. Even that , Prophet Muhammad(saw) asked a couple of times. Lets be logical now. Where in the world would anybody confessed to have committed adultery and wait to be stoned? A lot of the narratives are about stoning of the adulterous Jews but this is in accordance to the Torah.

You mention the penalty of lashing. Can you elaborate how is the lashing being done? Do you take a stick and start beating. In that case after 5 beatings , bones might be broken .... not to mention 40 or 100 lashes. How do you go about it? Do you have any idea from the Quran alone?

In the Hadith , how to lash has been mentioned. They were beaten with shoes or palm leaf stalk. The current way is that the person who does the lashing has to put a book the size of the Quran in his armpit and swing the cane and the book cannot fall off.

Can you now see the hadith explaining the practical side of the Quran.

The questions that you have not answered are getting more and more.

Like I stated , I like this discussion. Again I state , there is no objectivity in the stance of a Quranist. You cannot just leave things hanging without explanation.

What do you think bro?

kid

Bro, sorry I dont have the chance to fully reply yet because the time is a bit late. So I'll make it short for now.

I just put my attention to your reply about abrogation of Quranic verses.

If you read Quran carefully, this is a big No No.
Allah said in Quran none of His laws shall be abbrogated!

Then I know the excuse given by Bukhary hadith follower about the absence of rajam/stoning in Quran because a hadith said a goat ate the rajam verse so it is missing from the Quran, then those 100 lashes verse is abbrogated by a goat!

Really? Were they out of their mind? GOD VERSUS GOAT?

How blasphemous that hadith toward ALLAH the Most High.

Bro please do some homework on:

- Does God allow Quran to be abbrogated?
- Hadith about goat that ate stoning verse.

Find that two things and hpefully you will see what I mean. Pray to God so you can see clearly.

Thats all for now bro, will continue tomorrow.

Sephiroth

69:43-47 "It (the Quran) is a revelation from the Lord of the universe. Had he (Muhammad) uttered any other teachings, We would have grabbed him by the right, and We would cut off his artery (of the heart)...."  

Again? Did Muslims said somewhere that at young age, Muhammad claimed to be received by two angels who opened his chest and cleaned his "heart"?

Sounds like that Muhammad's alter ego have a control over him. Or perhaps Muhammad was just another puppet, being played around by something calling itself God and was using him (Muhammad) to create a belief system in par with Moses and Christ which could later bring chaos and destruction to Mankind.

sam1528

kid posted on 23-11-2014 11:43 PM
Bro, sorry I dont have the chance to fully reply yet because the time is a bit late. So I'll make it short for now.

I just put my attention to your reply about abrogation of Quranic verses.

If you read Quran carefully, this is a big No No.
Allah said in Quran none of His laws shall be abbrogated!

Then I know the excuse given by Bukhary hadith follower about the absence of rajam/stoning in Quran because a hadith said a goat ate the rajam verse so it is missing from the Quran, then those 100 lashes verse is abbrogated by a goat!

Really? Were they out of their mind? GOD VERSUS GOAT?

How blasphemous that hadith toward ALLAH the Most High.

Bro please do some homework on:

- Does God allow Quran to be abbrogated?
- Hadith about goat that ate stoning verse.

Find that two things and hpefully you will see what I mean. Pray to God so you can see clearly.

Thats all for now bro, will continue tomorrow.

Ok Bro ,

Can you show me where in the Quran that states of no abrogation? The concept of abrogation is in the Quran. Let us look at the prohibition of alcohol which was done in a gradual manner
(1) Quran2:219 (sahih international)

They ask you about wine and gambling. Say, "In them is great sin and [yet, some] benefit for people. But their sin is greater than their benefit." And they ask you what they should spend. Say, "The excess [beyond needs]." Thus Allah makes clear to you the verses [of revelation] that you might give thought.

(2) Quran4:43 (sahih international)

O you who have believed, do not approach prayer while you are intoxicated until you know what you are saying or in a state of janabah, except those passing through [a place of prayer], until you have washed [your whole body]. And if you are ill or on a journey or one of you comes from the place of relieving himself or you have contacted women and find no water, then seek clean earth and wipe over your faces and your hands [with it]. Indeed, Allah is ever Pardoning and Forgiving.

(3) Quran5:90 (sahih international)

O you who have believed, indeed, intoxicants, gambling, [sacrificing on] stone alters [to other than Allah ], and divining arrows are but defilement from the work of Satan, so avoid it that you may be successful.

Can you see the gradual prohibition until made haram altogether? The law from the later verses abrogated the preceding one. Isn't such abrogation?

I think you are mistaken using the argument of the so called excuse of a 'Bukhari Hadith Follower' of a goat that ate the parchment. Try to be logical Bro :
(i) We know that in the early days , Quran transmission was done orally (a tradition alive till today). Did the said goat also ate the memory , of Aishah(ra) in this case?
(ii) Quran was a mutawatir transmission , more than 1 person would have said verse either in documented form or in memory

This is again seeing problems where there aren't any.

Still awaiting the answers to my questions

Anytime you ready Bro ....

kid

sam1528 posted on 24-11-2014 06:04 PM
Ok Bro ,

Can you show me where in the Quran that states of no abrogation? The concept of abrog ...

The concept of abbrogation is actually due to the lost of translation from the Quran translator, and also due to the influence of hadiths which indeed saying Quran can be abbrogated.

The question is, Quran abbrogated to what? As the Quran is the final scripture and there is no more scripture, so to abbrogate Quran means there should be a next scripture! It is impossible that God meant a non-divine (man-made) books can replace the posisition of Quran or to abbrogate Quran. I think you are agree with me? That is one thing.

The sample of alcohol you said gradually changed to haram, you also based on the interpretation of the translator which also based their view on hadith, so that verses judged by hadith instead, and some more lost in translation too. It is too much to discuss now so probably in the future when dust settled we can look into this later. I wont discuss about abbrogation except just short paragraphs.

About abbrogation, I'll make it short, so not to deviate from the main subject we discussed here.

6:115 And the word of your Lord has been completed with truth and justice; there is no changing His words. He is the Hearer, the Knower.

Allah is not the same like human who can decide one thing today and change it tomorrow, depend on mood or situation. No... Allah knows exactly everything and every matter from pas to future so that He doesn't need to keep changing His mind! This you must agree with me.

But Allah said in Quran He will produce something better, but what He meant this only for the scriptures, like Quran is superseding Injil, and Injil superseding Torah.

"Then we revealed to you this scripture, truthfully, confirming previous scriptures, and superseding them." 5:48

Here, the words "superseding them" confirm that the previous scripture were substituted with the Quran.

But it doesn't mean another man-made books can supersed Quran? Quran is no longer changeable because it is PERFECT!

So it is a big lie to say that rajam from hadith abbrogate 100 lashes law in Quran. Otherwise God wont say: Today I have perfected your Faith - religion - for you!
To say hadith which come much later can abbrogate Quran is a blasphemy to God who claimed He perfected the Quran already.

Furthermore, it is a big lie and actually HILARIOUS to say that a goat ate Quran verse so it is MISSING from Quran:

1. Sunan Ibn Majah , Hadith 1944: Reported ‘Aisha (RA): ‘<b>the verse of stoning</b> and of suckling an adult ten times was revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) expired and we were occupied by his death, <b>a goat entered and ate away the paper.’ </b>

Copy the Code

- So a goat able to make the Quran missing someverse, so in conclusion today's Quran is IMPERFECT. You bet!
- 100 lashes law in Quran actually was not valid, but stoning is the REAL one (sadly goat ate that verse)

Does God that weak so that He couldn't prevent a goat from abbrogated His words?

Yes that what Ibn Majah hadith did to Quran!

sam1528

kid posted on 24-11-2014 08:04 PM
The concept of abbrogation is actually due to the lost of translation from the Quran translator, a ...

Bro , you are confused. This is not the issue of the Quran being abrogated. It is the issue of a law in the Quran being abrogated and replaced by another law. An example being the prohibition of alcohol. Do you agree that prohibition of alcohol was made in stages and the next law superseeded the previous? If you don't agree , that means the stand of the Quranist is that they can go on consuming alcohol.

Nobody claim that stoning abrogate the 100 lashes. If you had read carefully the Hadith I linked to , there are conditions for the penalty of stoning and it is impossible to invoke such penalty nowadays. What makes you have the idea that stoning has abrogated lashing? Please be objective in your argument.

The bigger question here , how do you conduct the lashing according to Quran alone? You have not answered yet.

A goat ate the verse so that its missing from the Quran? Lets look at the said Hadith :

Sunan Ibn Majah , Hadith 1944: Reported ‘Aisha (RA): ‘the verse of stoning and of suckling an adult ten times was revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) expired and we were occupied by his death, a goat entered and ate away the paper.

Where does it state that these verses were to be in the Quran? You need to bear in mind that it is your claim (and its true) that the Quran was already documented in the time of Prophet Muhammad(saw). Like I stated
(1) Did the goat also ate Aishah(ra) memory because she was a memorizer of the Quran
(2) Since the Quran is a mutawatir transmission , there would be others having the verse on hand

You are again not objective but just projecting your unfounded bias into the argument.

This again confirm my point. The position of the Quranist is far from being objective

kid

Nobody claim that stoning abrogate the 100 lashes. If you had read carefully the Hadith I linked to , there are conditions for the penalty of stoning and it is impossible to invoke such penalty nowadays. What makes you have the idea that stoning has abrogated lashing? Please be objective in your argument.

Stoning is Hudud punishment bro.
Of course any country or region which apply hudud will use stoning instead of lashes, what you call that if not abrogated?
If you are not agree with stoning then it is fine by me, but don't tell me I'm not being objective, I just point out what your ulama says on hudud.
Blame them not me please.

Let see "what happened" during prophet time:

Hadith Abu Dawud:

"Narrated Al-Lajlaj al-Amiri: I was working in the market. A woman passed carrying a child. The people rushed towards her, and I also rushed along with them.
I then went to the Prophet (peace be upon him) while he was asking: Who is the father of this (child) who is with you? She remained silent.
A young man by her side said: I am his father, Apostle of Allah!
He then turned towards her and asked: Who is the father of this child with you?
The young man said: I am his father, Apostle of Allah! The Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) then looked at some of those who were around him and asked them about him. They said: We only know good (about him).
The Prophet (peace be upon him) said to him: Are you married? He said: Yes. So he gave orders regarding him and he was stoned to death.
He (the narrator) said: We took him out, dug a pit for him and put him in it. We then threw stones at him until he died. A man then came asking about the man who was stoned...."

From the above hadith CLEARLY, there is no whatsoever condition for the consideration of stoning, not even considered he is a good guy. Prophet ordered him to be soned to death just like that (konon).

Please tell me again what you said: there are conditions for the penalty of stoning and it is impossible to invoke such penalty nowadays..
How do you stand up to your claim after you read the hadith above? I'm waiting your honest answer please



So you see, no matter how you try to uphold hadith, you always end-up dissaponted.

The hadith above is a lie against our prophet, it is impossible for the prophet to ordered someone to stone to detah just like that. And it is hadith sahih.

The bigger question here , how do you conduct the lashing according to Quran alone? You have not answered yet.

You will always come up in how to do that, how to do this, what, how and etc.
Just exactly the same when Bani Israil asked by God to sacrifice a cow (period!), they asked how to do that? what the color? what is the age? what is the characteristic etc.

If Allah told you to lash, then do it. Dont ask how to do lash, or where to lash. Use your own judgement. Dont be like bani Israil.

Where does it state that these verses were to be in the Quran?

Ask the ulama, it wasn't me saying that goat ate Quran's verse, but hadith scholar said that hadith talking about the verse of Quran!

IF I may present what Ibnu Kathir says on adultery:

(And the two persons among you who commit illegal sexual intercourse, punish them both.) Ibn `Abbas and Sa`id bin Jubayr said that this punishment includes cursing, shaming them and beating them with sandals. This was the ruling until Allah abrogated it with flogging or stoning, as we stated.)

Ibnu Kathir do not even talk about lashing, but beating with sandals

So this is perhaps the answer to your question above on how to do lashes. It uses sandals!

sam1528

kid posted on 24-11-2014 09:46 PM
Stoning is Hudud punishment bro.
Of course any country or region which apply hudud will use stoni ...

You have already answered the question yourself with regards to Sunan Abu Dawud 38:4421.

I will copy paste bit part of your post to point it out :

I then went to the Prophet (peace be upon him) while he was asking: Who is the father of this (child) who is with you? She remained silent.
A young man by her side said: I am his father, Apostle of Allah!
He then turned towards her and asked: Who is the father of this child with you?
The young man said: I am his father, Apostle of Allah! The Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) then looked at some of those who were around him and asked them about him. They said: We only know good (about him).
The Prophet (peace be upon him) said to him: Are you married? He said: Yes. So he gave orders regarding him and he was stoned to death.

If you read carefully Prophet Muhammad(saw) asked 2x about the father of the child and once about being married. When answered the affirmative , the penalty of stoning was pronounced. Be logical and tell me , nowadays anybody wants to admit that they are the father? No DNA test here , it needs to be the admission of the parties concern that carries the penalty of stoning. It is impossible unless the person has a death wish.

You claim no condition. Did you read much less understand the said hadith? I am not disappointed with the hadith but with you as you did not even take the trouble to read and much less understand the said hadith.

You will always come up in how to do that, how to do this, what, how and etc.
Just exactly the same when Bani Israil asked by God to sacrifice a cow (period!), they asked how to do that? what the color? what is the age? what is the characteristic etc.

If Allah told you to lash, then do it. Dont ask how to do lash, or where to lash. Use your own judgement. Dont be like bani Israil.

In other words , you don't have the answer ..... am I right. You in lashing someone means you are hurting them and can kill them. A person can judge that he can kill with the lashing. What is the limit? This is a big difference to what the Israelites asked about the attributes of the cow because they did not want to do it thus dragging their feet.

If you now claim to use judgement , then indirectly you are admitting that the Quran is incomplete because you have been saying that the Quran is complete. What is it now?

Ask the ulama, it wasn't me saying that goat ate Quran's verse, but hadith scholar said that hadith talking about the verse of Quran!

IF I may present what Ibnu Kathir says on adultery:

(And the two persons among you who commit illegal sexual intercourse, punish them both.) Ibn `Abbas and Sa`id bin Jubayr said that this punishment includes cursing, shaming them and beating them with sandals. This was the ruling until Allah abrogated it with flogging or stoning, as we stated.)

Ibnu Kathir do not even talk about lashing, but beating with sandals

So this is perhaps the answer to your question above on how to do lashes. It uses sandals!

I am asking you because you appealed to it and claim it is the reason that the verses were missing from the Quran. It is not an accurate argument. No ulema ever state of such.

If you agree of flogging using sandals , you are agreeing with hadith.

You are going round and round in circles. My point of Quranist not being objective.

kid

sam1528 posted on 25-11-2014 12:59 AM
You have already answered the question yourself with regards to Sunan Abu Dawud 38:4421.

I will ...

If you read carefully Prophet Muhammad(saw) asked 2x about the father of the child and once about being married. When answered the affirmative , the penalty of stoning was pronounced. Be logical and tell me , nowadays anybody wants to admit that they are the father? No DNA test here , it needs to be the admission of the parties concern that carries the penalty of stoning. It is impossible unless the person has a death wish.

You claim no condition. Did you read much less understand the said hadith? I am not disappointed with the hadith but with you as you did not even take the trouble to read and much less understand the said hadith.

I put that hadith BECAUSE you claimed there are many conditions to be considered before putting stoning sentence, thus making it nearly impossible.

Then in THAT hadith, I didn't see much conditions there except the confession of the adulterer. I'm reading the hadith allright.

So I wonder now, where your statement: "conditions (with 's') for the penalty of stoning and it is impossible to invoke such penalty nowadays.." you mentioned.

So what are the conditions apart from confession you meant?

Obviously in that hadith a single confession is enought to put stoning sentence. And funny thing you are agree with that while it againts your own word!

As a proof from another hadith:
Sahih Bukhari 8:82:805
Narrated Jabir bin Abdullah Al-Ansari: A man from the tribe of Bani Aslam came to Allah's Apostle and Informed him that he had committed illegal sexual intercourse and bore witness four times against himself. Allah's Apostle ordered him to be stoned to death as he was a married Person.

What are the conditions you meant exactly? Please state them.

sam1528

kid posted on 25-11-2014 10:17 AM
I put that hadith BECAUSE you claimed there are many conditions to be considered before putting stoning sentence, thus making it nearly impossible.

Then in THAT hadith, I didn't see much conditions there except the confession of the adulterer. I'm reading the hadith allright.

So I wonder now, where your statement: "conditions (with 's') for the penalty of stoning and it is impossible to invoke such penalty nowadays.." you mentioned.

So what are the conditions apart from confession you meant?

Obviously in that hadith a single confession is enought to put stoning sentence. And funny thing you are agree with that while it againts your own word!

As a proof from another hadith:
Sahih Bukhari 8:82:805
Narrated Jabir bin Abdullah Al-Ansari: A man from the tribe of Bani Aslam came to Allah's Apostle and Informed him that he had committed illegal sexual intercourse and bore witness four times against himself. Allah's Apostle ordered him to be stoned to death as he was a married Person.

What are the conditions you meant exactly? Please state them

You provided the hadith and if you had read carefully Prophet Muhammad(saw) asked 2x (the man and woman) and then whether each were married to another person. Then we have their confession of the adultery and admission whether they were married. In other hadiths , our Prophet(saw) asked 4 times. The conditions are
(1) asking to confirm the adultery (x4 per consensus of scholars)
(2) asking whether each part of the couple are married (to others)
(3) getting a confession (x4 per consensus of scholars)

That accumulates to many conditions. If the conditions are met , the penalty is stoning.

Lets be logical here , these conditions are impossible to be met. First , there is no way you can catch a couple committing adultery meaning the 'the act when the sword is in the scabbard'. Secondly , nowadays no one would admit to have committed adultery unless such person has a death wish.

Now you are arguing of only 1 witness. This is what we call verse isolating. There are lots of hadiths on this issue and some narrations differ from others in the number of times of asking or confessions or witness. That is why scholars have come to the consensus of 4 witnesses. The confession of the adulterer is of extreme importance , Sunan Abu Dawud 38:4423

Narrated Sahl ibn Sa'd:

A man came to the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and confessed before him that he had committed fornication with a woman whom he named. The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) sent for the woman and asked her about it. But she denied that she had committed fornication. So he inflicted the prescribed punishment of flogging on him, and let her go

The said lady denied it and she was freed.

We are in agreement that you being a Quranist cannot provide answer of what is the standard for the lashing. How can you say the hadith following muslims are wrong?

Another issue , the lashing verse : Quran24:2 (sahih international)

The [unmarried] woman or [unmarried] man found guilty of sexual intercourse - lash each one of them with a hundred lashes, and do not be taken by pity for them in the religion of Allah , if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a group of the believers witness their punishment.

The verse states that you must lash the person and not take pity. What if the person who committed the adultery is suffering from illness and the lashing might kill him? What is your solution? Still whack the person?

However Prophet Muhammad(saw) exercised judgement and we have the hadith for judgement to be exercised , Sunan Abu Dawud 38:4457

.... He said: Ask the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) about the legal verdict for me, for I have had unlawful intercourse with a slave-girl who visited me.

So they mentioned it to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) saying: We have never seen anyone (so weak) from illness as he is. If we bring him to you, his bones will disintegrate. He is only skin and bone. So the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) commanded them to take one hundred twigs and strike him once.

A Quranist like you would never be able to provide any solution from the Quran alone.

Isn't it obvious Bro? There is no objectivity in the standpoint of Quranist.

kid

sam1528 posted on 25-11-2014 01:47 PM
You provided the hadith and if you had read carefully Prophet Muhammad(saw) asked 2x (the man and  ...

You provided the hadith and if you had read carefully Prophet Muhammad(saw) asked 2x (the man and woman) and then whether each were married to another person. Then we have their confession of the adultery and admission whether they were married. In other hadiths , our Prophet(saw) asked 4 times. The conditions are
(1) asking to confirm the adultery (x4 per consensus of scholars)
(2) asking whether each part of the couple are married (to others)
(3) getting a confession (x4 per consensus of scholars)

Lets examine your conditions:
1. Asking to confirm (4x per concensus of scholars)
Umar is not agree with you:
Al-Muwatta 28 28.1126
Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu'z-Zubayr al-Makki that a case was brought to Umar about a marriage which had only been witnessed by one man and one woman . He said, "This is a secret marriage and I do not permit it. Had I been the first to come upon it, I would have ordered them to be stoned."

I'm in hurry so I only reply point no 1 for now.

Please reply if you have time. Thanks

sam1528

kid posted on 25-11-2014 02:54 PM
Lets examine your conditions:
1. Asking to confirm (4x per concensus of scholars)
Umar is not agree with you:
Al-Muwatta 28 28.1126
Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu'z-Zubayr al-Makki that a case was brought to Umar about a marriage which had only been witnessed by one man and one woman . He said, "This is a secret marriage and I do not permit it. Had I been the first to come upon it, I would have ordered them to be stoned."

I'm in hurry so I only reply point no 1 for now.

Please reply if you have time. Thanks

Not talking about the same thing Bro.

Witness(es) to adultery and marriage are two different things.

We are discussing about another condition or the third condition of which people who voluntarily confess to have committed adultery. To get such confession is pretty impossible.

kid

sam1528 posted on 25-11-2014 05:22 PM
Not talking about the same thing Bro.

Witness(es) to adultery and marriage are two different t ...

Yes I actually still talking about stoning, but in that case it is not about adultery. Sorry for the wrong topic.

But Umar said that stoning can be done on secret marriage (only one witness a male and female).
If thats really the case than what is teh reason for that? A marriage is still a marriage, despite the number of witness.
Even if that is wrong, it shouldn't be stoned. How do you explain that?

Back to stoning for adulterer. I remember a hadith said the prophet stoned a couple of monkeys because they did adultery? This is very silly, how come the prophet stoning monkeys? Monkeys are not human, they made sex like their wishes, they are animals? How do you explain that?
I believe that hadith was just another corrupted hadith from the enemy of the prophet to disregard him.

So we have come to conclusion that:
Quran said: 100 lashes
Hadith said: Stoning/rajm (based on certain condition)

I dont accept hadith, but okay we have to conclude what it is. You insist of supporting stoning.

Lets get to the next topic.

kid

Bro Sam,

You were asking about how zakat (obligatory charity) is commanded in Quran.
Though it is a bit strange that you asked as if Quran didn't explain zakat.

Quran says: Give of the excess, immediately when you harvest (or receive salary, business profit etc)
Hadith said: 2.5% (based on certain conditions, only when the term is reached)

If we see the different, how do you explain 2.5% equal the excess?
Let see what Quran says about zakat:

Background story:
According to the Quran, the Zakat was decreed from as far back as the time of Abraham:
"We made them leaders who guide by Our command and We inspired them to work good deeds, to observe the Salat and to give the Zakat, they were worshippers of Us." 21:73

What to spend:
"They ask you what to spend, say: ("al-affwoo") The excess [beyond needs]. God thus clarifies the revelations for you that you may reflect." 2:219
We can see that God is telling us that we should pay Zakat (charity) from that part of our income which we can afford to give away without the need to ask for it back, or in other words what we can afford to overlook without incurring any hardship.

When we should spend:
"Eat from their fruits when it blossoms, and give its decreed obligation on the day of its harvest." 6:141
According to 6:141, Zakat must be given away "on the day of harvest" or when receiving salary, bonus, profit, etc.

Who should pay the zakat:
Quran gives us the clear answer. Zakat is payable only by those who have excess after fulfilling their basic needs (food, clothes, housing, medicine, etc). Therefore if paying a zakat would cause genuine hardship to a person or his family, then they are not obliged to pay it:
"They ask you what to spend, say: "al-affwoo". God thus clarifies the revelations for you that you may reflect." 2:219

This means that for those who receive an income that is only enough to feed and clothe their families, but with nothing to spare, are not required to pay zakat. This is also confirmed in 22:78 where God tells us that He does not want us to experience hardship in practicing the religion:
“You shall strive for the cause of God in the sincerity the cause deserves. He has chosen you and has placed no hardship on you within the religion.” 22:78

Who should zakat paid to:
And give the relative his due ("haqahu"), and [also] the poor and the traveler, and do not spend wastefully. 17:26
The use of the word ‘haqahu’ indicates that God is speaking of the obligatory Zakat and not about voluntary charities.
Vesre 2:215 outline more details of what it means of relatives and the poor.

Does Quran authorize fixed zakat?:
The 2.5% which is followed by most Muslims is not found in the Quran. The source of this ritual, as many other non Quranic rituals, can only be found in the 'hadith' collections.

"Do not keep your hand tied to your neck, nor shall you fully extend it, lest you end up blaming yourself and regretful." 17:26-29
We must examine on these words for a while and ask the following question: If God had actually set a fixed percentage (as the 2.5%) for the payment of the Zakat (due alms), would God command us "Do not keep your hand tied to your neck" nor "fully extend it"? These words can only mean that the percentage is NOT fixed, but is flexible and that it has been left to each individual's means.

To conclude zakat based on Qur'an, the payment of the Zakat is a “fard” (obligation) on all believers who receive an income. It must be distributed according to 17:26 and must be paid as soon as the income is received.