Naswaristan

[ZYXW]

@ZYXW oay larkay dusri side par hain

Busy busy ....well am back for today and tomorrow then back to busy busy

larkay dusri side par hain toh aap yehan kya keriho ??? jk jk

Oh damn, goodluck with work. but do try n come on when u can,aapki yaad mein hum day n nite yeh kertay rehtay hain LOLOLOL

Yeah I am watching bates motel, the show is sick.

 

[ZYXW]

@KingMamba93...kk can u delete ur last post though

 

[Armstrong]

@ZYXW @KingMamba93 - Get a room you're gonna make me puke !

 

[ZYXW]

@Armstrong.....shut up uncle

 

[KingMamba]

@KingMamba93...kk can u delete ur last post though

ok I did.

@ZYXW @KingMamba93 - Get a room you're gonna make me puke !

Sharif hai hum.

 

[Armstrong]

@Armstrong.....shut up uncle

Sharif hai hum.

So when you two think of taking the plunge can I walk the bride aka @KingMamba93 down the aisle ?

 

[Zarvan]

The Sahih Bukhari, which as far as I can tell are the earliest of the Sahih Al Sitah, is from nearly 200 years after Hijri !




I never said that Omar (RA) rejected the Hadith or anything like it, he after he became the 2nd Caliph of Islam deferred on undertaking the compilation of the Hadith out of fear that Muslims would concentrate on them alone instead of the Koran & even forbade, at that time, others from quoting too many Ahadith for the same reason.

Furthermore unlike the Koran the Ahadith have no congruence to them & there weren't scribes sitting with the Prophet (PBUH) writing down his sayings in accordance with his will as it was with the Koran there were some who were doing it as per their own initiative; unfortunately their accounts don't survive to this date & we only have the Sahih Al Sitta for the Sunnis which were compiled nearly 200 years after hijri unlike the Koran.

And no the personal computer analogy doesn't hold for I wasn't referring to those things ! I was referring to laws & commandments - God doesn't tell me to use or not to use a PC but if a Hadith tells me that stoning is the penalty for adultery for a married man & a married woman than that is something that could be potentially problematic in that questions must be raised whether such & such a thing should be included in the law of the land or not ?

So I agree with the reasoning that the Ahadith should be taken as historical occurrences, sayings & doings that may or may not be true which means that whereas they shouldn't be ignored completely for we don't ignore history but nor should they be legally binding on us !

No Sir Sahih Bukhari is not the earliest earliest in Mutta Imam Malik and Masnad Ahmed Bin Hanbal Sir which are not hundred years later and those compilation by Sahabs were collected in these books they were written on many different things so they were compiled here and Masnad Ahmed Bin Hanbal has 40000 Hadees Sir and Hazrat UMAR RA didn't destroyed any hadees who told you that its a complete lie Mr and Many hadees were written down by Sahabas and many orally learnt them Sir Ahadith are not historical occurrences and sayings they are the orders of HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW which Muslims have to follow sir those who deny Hadees or take it as historical occurrence are doing kufr and denying Islam Sir and without Hadees you can't follow orders of Quran Sir you will not 90 % things about those things which ALLAH ordered to do Hadees after Quran is the source of law and orders for Muslims to follow

 

[KingMamba]

So when you two think of taking the plunge can I walk the bride aka @KingMamba93 down the aisle ?

Stop being jealous I like both of you equally.

 

[Armstrong]

No Sir Sahih Bukhari is not the earliest earliest in Mutta Imam Malik and Masnad Ahmed Bin Hanbal Sir which are not hundred years later and those compilation by Sahabs were collected in these books they were written on many different things so they were compiled here and Masnad Ahmed Bin Hanbal has 40000 Hadees Sir and Hazrat UMAR RA didn't destroyed any hadees who told you that its a complete lie Mr and Many hadees were written down by Sahabas and many orally learnt them Sir Ahadith are not historical occurrences and sayings they are the orders of HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW which Muslims have to follow sir those who deny Hadees or take it as historical occurrence are doing kufr and denying Islam Sir and without Hadees you can't follow orders of Quran Sir you will not 90 % things about those things which ALLAH ordered to do Hadees after Quran is the source of law and orders for Muslims to follow

Sir mein baaat kuch aur kar raha hunn aur aap kuch aur samajhe raheii hain !

Stop being jealous I like both of you equally.

Only like - I feel so left out !

 

[Zarvan]

Sir mein baaat kuch aur kar raha hunn aur aap kuch aur samajhe raheii hain !



Only like - I feel so left out !

Sir you said Hadees should be taken as historical account Sir no sir Hadees is not that Hadees are orders of HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW which Muslims of all times have to follow Sir and first collection of Hadees were done by Sahabas as they were written on many things they got compiled in first two books of Hadees which are Mutta Imam Malik and Masnad e Ahmad Bin Hanbal and by the way HAZRAT ABU HURRAIRA RA told his student to wrote down all hadees which he told to people and he wrote it down and also some others Sahabas also did that

 

[KingMamba]

@Armstrong I just realized you called me the bride.

 

[Armstrong]

Sir you said Hadees should be taken as historical account Sir no sir Hadees is not that Hadees are orders of HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW which Muslims of all times have to follow Sir and first collection of Hadees were done by Sahabas as they were written on many things they got compiled in first two books of Hadees which are Mutta Imam Malik and Masnad e Ahmad Bin Hanbal and by the way HAZRAT ABU HURRAIRA RA told his student to wrote down all hadees which he told to people and he wrote it down and also some others Sahabas also did that

Huzoor the Ahadith are compiled well after the death of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) & unlike the Koran they were never compiled in One Book form which everyone knew; everyone came up with their own 'I heard so & so say that the Prophet (PBUH) said thus or did thus'. Even the Sahih ahadith themselves have many ahadith which are the same as each other but they are reported in very different ways i.e two people are relating the same thing but with slightly different words, context & sometimes even an entire line or two is different between the two of them.

What I'm saying is that unlike the Koran they were never universally accepted in their shape & form & that there is little historical congruence between them.

Furthermore the Prophet (PBUH) brought one Divine Revelation - the Koran, not two - the Koran & the Hadith !

I never said that Omar (RA) rejected them or anything of the sort - I said that he didn't approve of them being compiled & collected because it wasn't needed & in his opinion people would start loosing their focus from the Koran & start concentrating on the Hadith as another Divine source.

Therefore I think that Hadith should be treated like 'History' ! Just as we say that we've got historical evidence to suggest that Napoleon or Gandhi said such & such a thing or they did such & such a thing or that there were 'this' many people at the Battle of Waterloo or the Battle of Plassey - We should treat the Hadith in such a manner - As History that may or may not be correct which means that they should guide us but they shouldn't be legally binding on us in such a manner otherwise what was the point of revealing the Koran if it is incomplete ?

 

[Zarvan]

Huzoor the Ahadith are compiled well after the death of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) & unlike the Koran they were never compiled in One Book form which everyone knew; everyone came up with their own 'I heard so & so say that the Prophet (PBUH) said thus or did thus'. Even the Sahih ahadith themselves have many ahadith which are the same as each other but they are reported in very different ways i.e two people are relating the same thing but with slightly different words, context & sometimes even an entire line or two is different between the two of them.

What I'm saying is that unlike the Koran they were never universally accepted in their shape & form & that there is little historical congruence between them.

Furthermore the Prophet (PBUH) brought one Divine Revelation - the Koran, not two - the Koran & the Hadith !

I never said that Omar (RA) rejected them or anything of the sort - I said that he didn't approve of them being compiled & collected because it wasn't needed & in his opinion people would start loosing their focus from the Koran & start concentrating on the Hadith as another Divine source.

Therefore I think that Hadith should be treated like 'History' ! Just as we say that we've got historical evidence to suggest that Napoleon or Gandhi said such & such a thing or they did such & such a thing or that there were 'this' many people at the Battle of Waterloo or the Battle of Plassey - We should treat the Hadith in such a manner - As History that may or may not be correct which means that they should guide us but they shouldn't be legally binding on us in such a manner otherwise what was the point of revealing the Koran if it is incomplete ?

Quran was also not compiled in book it was in different pieces Sir it was compiled in book form after death of HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW and Hadees are also from ALLAH Sir because Quran clearly says what ever HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW says he doesn't speak from himself he says what ALLAH tells him to say and several time ALLAH says in Quran follow ALLAH and his RASOOL SAW ALLAH never came down so following him means following Quran Mr and to follow RASOOL SAW means following his sayings and actions Sir and they were universally accepted Mr 1.3 billion Muslims who are sunnis accept them as for shias their collection of hadees is much longer than ours because they also consider their Imam Sayings as hadees and they were accepted by all Muslims except group known as Kharjis who came into existence in time of HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW and HAZRAT OMAR RA always told people to follow Quran and Sunnah and he never burnt any hadees which was in written form
yes because HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW used to repeat and give orders of same thing to many people on different occasions Sir Hadees can't be treated like history if you will do you will have to also treat Quran as history and reject majority of the Quran because Quran only gives orders not details of most of the orders it gives Sir Hadees are orders and law of Islam which Muslims have to follow where ever he is Hadees is not historical accounts your views are close to Kharjis

and HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW clearly said that Kharjis will go to hell Sir

 

[KingMamba]

I agree with Zarvan. Idk why Quranists don't take into consideration that Qur'an was spoken by Muhammad PBUH through Allah swt permission and guidance and Hadith are also his spoken words along with how he lived his life. If you reject Hadith because the transmission might be corrupt then one day kaffirs will say well maybe Qurans transmission was corrupted over 1400 years. Then what? Then some Quranists pick and choose some Hadiths which they deem "acceptable". We have had countless scholars go through the Hadith for a millennium yet people are still sceptical.

 

[Zarvan]

I agree with Zarvan. Idk why Quranists don't take into consideration that Qur'an was spoken by Muhammad PBUH through Allah swt permission and guidance and Hadith are also his spoken words along with how he lived his life. If you reject Hadith because the transmission might be corrupt then one day kaffirs will say well maybe Qurans transmission was corrupted over 1400 years. Then what? Then some Quranists pick and choose some Hadiths which they deem "acceptable". We have had countless scholars go through the Hadith for a millennium yet people are still sceptical.

Sir I didn't knew you were a Muslim