Islamism ???

[M. Sarmad]

The Quran is the message and the Hadith is the verbal explanation and the practical demonstration of the message. Denying the Hadith is denying the Quran because form the Hadith we come to know the precepts reveled in the Quran. From the Hadith you and I come to know how perform Prayer or pay Zakat. It is impossible to understand the Quran without Hadith and it is not possible to understand the Hadith without relating it to the Quran. Hadith is the explanation of the message by the messenger and we are told in the Quran to obey Allah and his messenger, meaning the examples set by the prophet, his saying and actions. So again the Hadith is part of the revelation since you mentioned that we should not take any book beside the Quran which is wrong understanding because the Hadith is not a book but as I mentioned earlier is the translation of the Quran as prophet Mohammed said ''I was given the Quran and something similar to it along with it.'' So from the Hadith we take the interpretation of the Quran. Also I said that same companions who passed down the Quran to us are the same who passed down the sunnah to us from the prophet by successive chain of narrations which is what we call today the authentic Hadith. Also the Hadith was not written but also studied and verified and that's why there is something called the science of Hadith and Reporters.

It is impossible to understand the Quran without Hadith

“Whatever argument they come up with, we provide you with the truth, and a better understanding. (25:33).”

The best understanding of the Qur’an is in the Qur’an.
Even Ibn Kathir admits at the beginning of his loquacious exegesis that the best understanding is to understand the Qur’an with the Qur’an.


We have made the Quran easy to understand, but is there anyone who would pay attention? (54:17,22,32 & 40)


Our problem, as Muslims, is that we believe the scholars of hadith who assure [us] that the great majority of hadith attributed to the prophet (peace upon him!) are dependent by virtue of their being handed down from generation to generation with accuracy. However, they admit that [these ahadith] can contain conjecture, and not complete certainty. In spite of this, some of [those scholars] instruct us to follow conjecture even though it is no substitute for truth.
May God guide us to the straight path!

“Do you have any proven knowledge that you can show us? You follow nothing but conjecture; you only guess. (6:148)”

1)The Qur’an is the only book for the Muslim.
“You shall recite what is revealed to you of your Lord’s scripture. Nothing shall abrogate His words, and you shall not find any other source beside it. (18:27).”

“Which Hadith, other than this,(Quran) do they uphold? (77:50).

Which Hadith, beside this(Quran), do they believe in? (7:185).

“Among the people, there are those who uphold baseless Hadith, and thus divert others from the path of God without knowledge, and take it in vain. These have incurred a shameful retribution. (31:6)

2)The Quran hasn’t left anything out.

All that is required of us is to read the Qur’an, and if we read it, then its verses will speak for themselves for they don’t need anything from us except to read them and not to ignore them and be silent
“…We did not leave anything out of this book… (6:38),”

“…We have revealed to you this book to provide explanations for everything… (16:89),”

“We have given them a scripture that is fully detailed, with knowledge, guidance, and mercy for the people who believe. (7:52)”.

“A scripture whose verses provide the complete details, in an Arabic Qur’an, for people who know. (41:3)”.

“God is the One who sent down the scripture, to deliver the truth and the law… (42:17).”




The historical basis of the Hadith is at best tenuous. Some of the historical points such as

(1) the prohibition of the Prophet himself on hadith writing, and honoring of the same position by his immediate followers,

(2) the long time gap between the Quran and the Hadith, and the accompanying lack of proper records of the deeds and sayings of the Prophet, and

(3) flawed oral transmission due to weakness of the human sources, including their imperfect memories add well to effectively dismiss the Hadith altogether. To this list one may add

(4) the influence of the ruling regimes, of people with wealth and power of the time, and of the disputing theologians on hadith collection, recording, selection and compilation, and finally

(5) the weakness of the criteria used to judge authenticity of individual hadith texts.

What denial? Didn't I make myself clear when I said Ibn AbdulWahab speaks about monotheism and monotheism only. Do you understand what monotheism means? The term Wahhabism was invented by the west in order to bush the clash of civilization and divide us into them and us, later picked by anti-islam people for political or ideological reasons. Sheikh Mohammed Ibn AbdulWahhab didn't speak about Hadith or Islamic law and jurisprudence nor was politically motivated. He basically was telling the people don't worship graves. It is that hard to grasp

Ibne Abdul Wahab is criticised for his disregard of Islamic history, monuments, traditions and the sanctity of Muslim life. His own brother, Sulayman, was particularly critical, claiming he was ill-educated and intolerant, classing Ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhab's views as fringe and fanatical .

The British supported Wahabism , it was nothing but a tool in the hands of British which they used against Ottomans .When the British army invaded Mecca and Medina with the help of Saud family and M.Ibn Abdul Wahab Najdi, they decided that Mr. Najdi should look after the religious affairs, while the Saud family will cater to state/political affairs. The huge and living example is that the name of Saud family has also been included in the name of Saudi Arabia. As soon as Mr.Najdi took over religious affairs, he passed the ruling that, whoever says Ya Muhammad and believes in Haazir/omnipresent, will be charged as Mushrik and liable to death. Taking advantage of this ruling Abdul Wahab Najdi in that era massacred lakhs of Muslims who were believers of Ya Muhammad and Haazir, captured and enslaved their women and children. This was an immoral act and opposed to all Islamic principles.

 

[Arabian Legend]

“Whatever argument they come up with, we provide you with the truth, and a better understanding. (25:33).”

The best understanding of the Qur’an is in the Qur’an.
Even Ibn Kathir admits at the beginning of his loquacious exegesis that the best understanding is to understand the Qur’an with the Qur’an.


We have made the Quran easy to understand, but is there anyone who would pay attention? (54:17,22,32 & 40)


Our problem, as Muslims, is that we believe the scholars of hadith who assure [us] that the great majority of hadith attributed to the prophet (peace upon him!) are dependent by virtue of their being handed down from generation to generation with accuracy. However, they admit that [these ahadith] can contain conjecture, and not complete certainty. In spite of this, some of [those scholars] instruct us to follow conjecture even though it is no substitute for truth.
May God guide us to the straight path!

“Do you have any proven knowledge that you can show us? You follow nothing but conjecture; you only guess. (6:148)”

1)The Qur’an is the only book for the Muslim.
“You shall recite what is revealed to you of your Lord’s scripture. Nothing shall abrogate His words, and you shall not find any other source beside it. (18:27).”

“Which Hadith, other than this,(Quran) do they uphold? (77:50).

Which Hadith, beside this(Quran), do they believe in? (7:185).

“Among the people, there are those who uphold baseless Hadith, and thus divert others from the path of God without knowledge, and take it in vain. These have incurred a shameful retribution. (31:6)

2)The Quran hasn’t left anything out.

All that is required of us is to read the Qur’an, and if we read it, then its verses will speak for themselves for they don’t need anything from us except to read them and not to ignore them and be silent
“…We did not leave anything out of this book… (6:38),”

“…We have revealed to you this book to provide explanations for everything… (16:89),”

“We have given them a scripture that is fully detailed, with knowledge, guidance, and mercy for the people who believe. (7:52)”.

“A scripture whose verses provide the complete details, in an Arabic Qur’an, for people who know. (41:3)”.

“God is the One who sent down the scripture, to deliver the truth and the law… (42:17).”

Allow me to say that you are trying to impose your point of view rather than challenging the argument. Why do I need to repeat what I just said earlier? Cherry picked verses you posted without knowledge. I don't think I ever said that the Quran is not clear or un detailed. What I was saying is that you need the Authentic Hadith to explain it otherwise we would have not known how to pray am I right? Can you point out any verse in the Quran which explains the method of praying? You will not find it because we have come to know how to pray through the illustration given in Hadith. Without the Hadith anyone can come up with his/her own interpretation.

The historical basis of the Hadith is at best tenuous. Some of the historical points such as

(1) the prohibition of the Prophet himself on hadith writing, and honoring of the same position by his immediate followers,


(2) the long time gap between the Quran and the Hadith, and the accompanying lack of proper records of the deeds and sayings of the Prophet, and

There is no gap when the entire society was adherence to the teaching of the Prophet.

(3) flawed oral transmission due to weakness of the human sources, including their imperfect memories add well to effectively dismiss the Hadith altogether. To this list one may add


(4) the influence of the ruling regimes, of people with wealth and power of the time, and of the disputing theologians on hadith collection, recording, selection and compilation, and finally



(5) the weakness of the criteria used to judge authenticity of individual hadith texts.

Put your own words and not Abdu Rub? His claims are not supported but shouting in the air. The prophet said don't write my saying at his time only for a purpose that not to be mixed with the Quran in one manuscript. That happened when the Quran has not been written down but memorized. What is funny is that you don't believe in Hadith yet you use Hadith to prove your pointThe Quran also was transmitted orally and was first collected after the death of the prophet.The Authentic Hadith criteria is unchallengeable. You yourself don't know what the criteria and methods were used, have you read the science of Hadith and reporters or just posting every crap that you find in the internet? Hadith are categorized into Authentic, Weak, false. Here we are talking about the Authentic Hadith.

Ibne Abdul Wahab is criticised for his disregard of Islamic history, monuments, traditions and the sanctity of Muslim life. His own brother, Sulayman, was particularly critical, claiming he was ill-educated and intolerant, classing Ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhab's views as fringe and fanatical .

Copy-Paste crap, untrue and false claims were attributed to his brother. Challenge the book will ya? He published a book called the book of Tawheed. If you can disagree with what he wrote please go ahead.

The British supported Wahabism , it was nothing but a tool in the hands of British which they used against Ottomans .When the British army invaded Mecca and Medina with the help of Saud family and M.Ibn Abdul Wahab Najdi, they decided that Mr. Najdi should look after the religious affairs, while the Saud family will cater to state/political affairs. The huge and living example is that the name of Saud family has also been included in the name of Saudi Arabia. As soon as Mr.Najdi took over religious affairs, he passed the ruling that, whoever says Ya Muhammad and believes in Haazir/omnipresent, will be charged as Mushrik and liable to death. Taking advantage of this ruling Abdul Wahab Najdi in that era massacred lakhs of Muslims who were believers of Ya Muhammad and Haazir, captured and enslaved their women and children. This was an immoral act and opposed to all Islamic principles.

You are hitting right and left. I bit you don't know what you have just spelled up there. Mohammed ibn AbduWahhab started his dawa without any involvement in politics. This word Wahhabi was first started by Ibrahim Basha and the Ottomans. The Ottomans didn't rule Naijd nor Makkah and Madina were under their rule but in alliance with the Hashemite. Mixture of history fabrication, false allegations and astonishing claims, not sure if it was deliberate or lack of knowledge? Lies upon lies.

@al-Hasani come join us

 

[FaujHistorian]

.......Fauji and Azlan argued about Saudi Arabia without knowing that the state jurisprudence are based on these four sources of Fiqh ....

Oh my dear Sir I DO know a lot about Saudi Arabia

It has many strengths but many weaknesses as well,.

Before I get into the technical discussion about jurisprudence in KSA. Let me (for the benefit of many who have not studied Saudi ARabia).

1. Saudi ARabian population will fit into just 2 Pakistani cities. That is just TWO large cities of Pakistan. That's all.

2. Most of the Pakistanis commenting on KSA may have lived there for 20 years, but in this time they had ZERO contact with local Saudi families in social settings. That means visiting each others' homes on regular basis, letting each others' kids play with each other, go to the same school, attending each other's weddings and birthdays.


Thus Pakistanis comment on KSA based on very limited set of observations that deal primarily with prayer, mosque, shop, and street.


Are you all with me so far?


Thank you


For details see another thread!

Do Pakistanis have romantic (unreal) view of Saudi Arabia?

 

[FaujHistorian]

Both these basic contentions are not correct. Islam is the best personal code of conduct and the State must not have anything to do with implementing it as national policy.

Well said.

Just a minor correction.

Islam could be the best personal code of conduct and the State must not have anything to do with implementing it as national policy

 

[RAMPAGE]

@Arabian Legend

Azlan and i have already discussed this topic ( writing of Hadith). with @Azlan Haider 's permission i would like to post the conversation so it can be discussed further.

@WebMaster @Aeronaut

Why is my inbox is empty ????

 

[Audio]

• How is being an Islamist different from being a Muslim? - No answer.
• How is Islamism different from following Islam? - No answer

Muslim = a person who believes in allah and respects other's wishes to pray to whatever deities they believe in.
Islamist = a person who believes in allah but denounces all other religions as paganism/inferior/blasphemy. Foot soldier for Islamofascists. Dumb, uneducated, gullible, easily worked like a tool.
Islamofascist = an evolved Islamist with more reach/influence to create conditions under which the propagation of Islam and Islamist ideology is further made possible. Educated or at least not dumb, with firm grasp of working systems and how to squeeze money/benefits/hate speech masked as free speech from said systems.

This is my view on your point 1. There's an answer for point 2 in it as well.

The problem with Islam is that you guys think it's the best thing that happened since the big bang and everyone should follow it. And you are being conditioned constantly so that the brainwashing doesn't fade away.

 

[FaujHistorian]

@Arabian Legend

Azlan and i have already discussed this topic ( writing of Hadith). with @Azlan Haider 's permission i would like to post the conversation so it can be discussed further.

Will be useless. Dare I say.

Saudi Islamism and Fiqh is moribund philosophy that is totally NOT applicable to a multi-ethnic multi-religious society.

Sorry to say.

I have seen with my own eyes, Shia mosques forcibly shuttered during Friday prayers (in Sunni majority areas).

They have zero citizens (for all practical purposes) who follow religion other than majority Wahahbi and minority Shia. No Chrisitan citizens to speak of, no Hindu citizens, no Jewish citizens of any number large enough to be counted in Saudi Islamism.

So there is no point in making this thread another religious mumbo jumbo talk,


Thank you

 

[RAMPAGE]

Will be useless. Dare I say.

Saudi Islamism and Fiqh is moribund philosophy that is totally NOT applicable to a multi-ethnic multi-religious society.

Sorry to say.

I have seen with my own eyes, Shia mosques forcibly shuttered during Friday prayers (in Sunni majority areas).

They have zero citizens (for all practical purposes) who follow religion other than majority Wahahbi and minority Shia. No Chrisitan citizens to speak of, no Hindu citizens, no Jewish citizens of any number large enough to be counted in Saudi Islamism.

So there is no point in making this thread another religious mumbo jumbo talk,


Thank you

Sir if you have a problem with religious mumbo jumbo talk, take it up with the mods.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Sir if you have a problem with religious mumbo jumbo talk, take it up with the mods.

Wow. Aren't we antsy pantsy today


I hope you have figured out Islamism definition by now. Correct?

For Saudi type discussion, please use the following thread
Do Pakistanis have romantic (unreal) view of Saudi Arabia?

For discussion on Hadees

point us to the thread that triggered what you want to say. We'll discuss it there


Thank you

 

[Contrarian]

• Don't we risk social cohesion being fractured, should we become a secular state? (Guessing thats what you implied)
  Our state was built on it, our population extracts unity from it. I believe that until we have developed a strong sense of 'Pakistaniat', we cannot take the leap....it will lead us into further mess.

1. So you think that once enough Pakistaniyat is achieved, ie Nationalism, Pakistan should make the jump to Secularism?
2. That having Secularism is a worthy goal in which all kinds of people prosper? There are no second class citizens?

 

[VCheng]

Wow. Aren't we antsy pantsy today


I hope you have figured out Islamism definition by now. Correct?

For Saudi type discussion, please use the following thread
Do Pakistanis have romantic (unreal) view of Saudi Arabia?

For discussion on Hadees

point us to the thread that triggered what you want to say. We'll discuss it there


Thank you

Please make sure to get Moderator approval, explicit or implicit, first.

 

[FaujHistorian]

1. So you think that once enough Pakistaniyat is achieved, ie Nationalism, Pakistan should make the jump to Secularism?
2. That having Secularism is a worthy goal in which all kinds of people prosper? There are no second class citizens?

Thank you.

Secularism is a loaded word.

And Pakistani Islamists and Mullahs have thrown enough $hit on this term to make it impractical for any useful discussion.

So let's talk about liberty, justice, and EQUALITY as top priority in the eyes of state institutions.

Thank you

Sir if you have a problem with religious mumbo jumbo talk, take it up with the mods.

Well so far no response for post #123

 

[VCheng]

1. So you think that once enough Pakistaniyat is achieved, ie Nationalism, Pakistan should make the jump to Secularism?
2. That having Secularism is a worthy goal in which all kinds of people prosper? There are no second class citizens?

How does one ever achieve something that is so tortuously contrived and endlessly manipulated in the first place?

 

[FaujHistorian]

How does one ever achieve something that is so tortuously contrived and endlessly manipulated in the first place?

good point.

Pakistaniyat gets contrived and manipulated in the name of Saudi/Irani Islamism by religious groups, and Pakistaniyat is destroyed in the name of marxism by the leftist educated class.

Thank you

 

[RAMPAGE]

Islamist = a person who believes in allah but denounces all other religions as inferior.

You wouldn't find a single Muslim who doesn't agree with that because Quran itself say's that.