Hadith: Discussion

[MK11]

So, humblemuslim, do you know how to determine whether or not a chain of narration is valid?

every narrator in the chain is examined to see whether he was righteous man or not, and if he was following the right belief or a heretic, if he was discovered to lie even once, the hadith won't be accepted, if he was known to memorize well or that he forgets, did every narrator really hear from his predecessor or that there was a long time between them that it was impossible for both of them to have met,...etc.
It's actually a huge science and many books are written about it. These are just very basic outlines.

 

[Glorthac]

every narrator in the chain is examined to see whether he was righteous man or not, and if he was following the right belief or a heretic, if he was discovered to lie even once, the hadith won't be accepted, if he was known to memorize well or that he forgets, did every narrator really hear from his predecessor or that there was a long time between them that it was impossible for both of them to have met,...etc.
It's actually a huge science and many books are written about it. These are just very basic outlines.

That answer is closer to what I'm looking for. But do you know how to determine who fits those shoes? Cause I know books are written about it, but I don't know Muslims who know it.

 

[humblemuslim]

Why do you not pick and choose the Quran?

This is a rather pointless question since we both agree the Qur'an is the Word of GOD, not the Word of men.

The Hadith are the words of men.

 

[humblemuslim]

I have two questions for the original poster, humblemuslim. Your list of criteria is as follows:
1. Must never contradict the Qur'an.
2. Must come from a creditable source(s).
a) Who is the narrator of the Hadith?
b) How many people reported the same Hadith independently
3. Must make sense.
4. Can not contradict other accepted Hadith.

To me, it seems as if #1, #3, and #4 are all presuppositional. For example, #1, why can't a hadith contradict the Qur'an? You might say: "Because the Qur'an is the word of Allah". But if it isn't? Then a hadith can contradict the Qur'an. So #1 is presupposing that the Qur'an is true.

#3, if a non-sensical hadith is valid according to #2, can't it be conclusive that a valid hadith can be non-sensical? It seems #3 is presupposing that the ancient speakers in the hadiths couldn't make mistakes, and have their mistakes accurately passed down into writings.

#4, again, it seems as if you are presupposing that two hadiths each proven valid by #2 cannot be possible. What if two hadiths are proven valid by #2, and they contradict each other?

My second question is, it seems from the posts on this thread that nobody here knows how to determine the validity of a hadith. You know that a valid chain of narration is necessary, and independant sourcing is necessary, but it seems as if you don't know how to determine if a chain of narration is valid or not.

So, humblemuslim, do you know how to determine whether or not a chain of narration is valid? If you don't, how do you know the proper interpretation of the Qur'an? And without that, how do you know anything about what the Qur'an says?

My point is, it seems you don't know how to determine which hadith is true, so I must conclude that you are relying on your imam to tell you what the Qur'an is saying. But how do you know your imam isn't lying to you? You don't.

So where's your foundation?

Clarification: This is my proposed list of criteria. So far no one has bothered to comment on adding or taking away from the list. I am not dictating anything. This is a discussion, not preaching.

You realize you are talking to a muslim? Of course they are presumptive. "presuppositional" is not a proper word, though you will find it on Wikipedia .

This question is akin to asking "Why can the Bible not contradict the Qur'an? Maybe the Bible is right!" If I held such a view that the Qur'an is not the authority text then I would not be a muslim, making this point moot.

These items must be collectively true. Not independently. I thought that would be obvious... I'm not really sure where you are gathering that my list requires that "the ancient speakers in the hadiths couldn't make mistakes", but that is simply not true.

Then one is false and one is true. Pretty simple logic applied here. You can not take any one item in the list and depend solely on it. You must consider the collective appeal.

You appear to be missing the entire point of this thread. This is an open discussion regarding how to determine which Hadith should be regarded as truthful. Not a thread preaching the already agreed upon standards used by others, though anyone is welcome to state them.

You presume understanding the Qur'an requires the Hadith. Do you have support for this idea?

I do not rely on an Imam. I rely on the intellect GOD gave me and GOD's mercy. If the intellect GOD gave me is insufficient to figure out the core important message of the Qur'an then I would not be a muslim.

The Qur'an...

The Qur'an, and common sense, supports the viewpoint that our intellect should be enough:

Qur'an Translation 17:36
Literal:
And do not follow the tracks/accuse of evil deeds what knowledge is not for you with it (you have no knowledge of), that the hearing/listening, and the eye sight/knowledge, and the heart , all (of) those are/were about it questioned.

Free_Minds:
And do not uphold what you have no knowledge of. For the hearing, eyesight, and mind, all these you are responsible for.

Khalifa:
You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them.

Yusuf_Ali:
And pursue not that of which thou hast no knowledge; for every act of hearing, or of seeing or of (feeling in) the heart will be enquired into (on the Day of Reckoning).

Shakir:
And follow not that of which you have not the knowledge; surely the hearing and the sight and the heart, all of these, shall be questioned about that.

Pickthal:
(O man), follow not that whereof thou hast no knowledge. Lo! the hearing and the sight and the heart - of each of these it will be asked.

Arberry:
And pursue not that thou hast no knowledge of; the hearing, the sight, the heart -- all of those shall be questioned of.

George_Sale:
And follow not that whereof thou hast no knowledge; for the hearing, and the sight, and the heart, every of these shall be examined at the last day.

Hilali_Khan:
And follow not (O man i.e., say not, or do not or witness not, etc.) that of which you have no knowledge (e.g. ones saying: "I have seen," while in fact he has not seen, or "I have heard," while he has not heard). Verily! The hearing, and the sight, and the heart, of each of those you will be questioned (by Allah).

 

[AskTheFamily]

Here is a question. Why did trustworthy people narrate from untrustworthy people and why were weak hadiths recorded in the first place?

This specially by the fact there was tons more narrations we didn't record, so why bother recording fabricators instead of all authentic narrations?

Let's start going down the Rabbit hole.

 

[humblemuslim]

Here is a question. Why did trustworthy people narrate from untrustworthy people and why were weak hadiths recorded in the first place?

This specially by the fact there was tons more narrations we didn't record, so why bother recording fabricators instead of all authentic narrations?

Let's start going down the Rabbit hole.

This is a great question. Why leave any room for doubt?

Honestly I do not know. I could venture to guess that it might have something to do with fearing that some truth might be filtered if the requirements were too strict for recording them. Not to mention the gatherers of Hadith were not perfect men. Good men, but not perfect.

 

[AskTheFamily]

This is a great question. Why leave any room for doubt?

Honestly I do not know. I could venture to guess that it might have something to do with fearing that some truth might be filtered if the requirements were too strict for recording them. Not to mention the gatherers of Hadith were not perfect men. Good men, but not perfect.

This answer would make some sense for the recording IF they were aiming at collecting most of the narrations. None of the collections were aimed at that, they were rather selecting very few narrations out of a very huge amount of narrations. So why include Weak ones in this selection?

Also each trustworthy narrator would have tons of narrations. For example, a trustworthy Sahabi would have tons of Sayings to inherit from, a trustworthy person whom took from him would have tons, and the next trustworthy person would have tons. And so why would people not simply take from trustworthy people? Why narrated both from liars and truthful people?

I feel there is something not making sense here. What was done by scattering sayings and mixing it with trustworthy and untrustworthy and narrating from all sorts of people, opens up to picking and choosing.

Also if you meet a trustworthy person, would you ask him to narrate all the trustworthy narrations, and pass them all, instead of picking random ones here and there, and then later people picking narrations here and there, and collecting some, while with a great amount being weak.

Doesn't it feel something is wrong with this. And then some few people basing their opinion on some people are going to tell us what is authentic and not... Feels like it takes away Sunnah being passed on by people to people, and putting it in the hands of a few whom for some reason we should trust on their view of whom is trustworthy or not.

 

[humblemuslim]

This answer would make some sense for the recording IF they were aiming at collecting most of the narrations. None of the collections were aimed at that, they were rather selecting very few narrations out of a very huge amount of narrations. So why include Weak ones in this selection?

Also each trustworthy narrator would have tons of narrations. For example, a trustworthy Sahabi would have tons of Sayings to inherit from, a trustworthy person whom took from him would have tons, and the next trustworthy person would have tons. And so why would people not simply take from trustworthy people? Why narrated both from liars and truthful people?

I feel there is something not making sense here. What was done by scattering sayings and mixing it with trustworthy and untrustworthy and narrating from all sorts of people, opens up to picking and choosing.

Also if you meet a trustworthy person, would you not ask him to narrate all the trustworthy narrations, and pass them all, instead of picking random ones here and there, and then later people picking narrations here and there, and collecting some, while with a great amount being weak.

Doesn't it feel something is wrong with this. And then some few people basing their opinion on some people are going to tell us what is authentic and not... Feels like it takes away Sunnah being passed on by people to people, and putting it in the hands of a few whom for some reason we should trust on their view of whom is trustworthy or not.

All good points. I can't find any reasoning online for why weak Hadith were recorded in the first place.

Take these Hadith for example:

Bukhari (8.816 and 3.885)

Narrated Ibn `Abbas:
`Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." `Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him."‏

Narrated Abu Huraira and Zaid bin Khalid Al-Juhani:
A Bedouin came to Allah's Apostle and said, "O Allah's apostle! I ask you by Allah to judge My case according to Allah's Laws." His opponent, who was more learned than he, said, "Yes, judge between us according to Allah's Laws, and allow me to speak." Allah's Apostle said, "Speak." He (i.e. the Bedouin or the other man) said, "My son was working as a laborer for this (man) and he committed illegal sexual intercourse with his wife. The people told me that it was obligatory that my son should be stoned to death, so in lieu of that I ransomed my son by paying one hundred sheep and a slave girl. Then I asked the religious scholars about it, and they informed me that my son must be lashed one hundred lashes, and be exiled for one year, and the wife of this (man) must be stoned to death." Allah's Apostle said, "By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, I will judge between you according to Allah's Laws. The slave-girl and the sheep are to be returned to you, your son is to receive a hundred lashes and be exiled for one year. You, Unais, go to the wife of this (man) and if she confesses her guilt, stone her to death." Unais went to that woman next morning and she confessed. Allah's Apostle ordered that she be stoned to death.‏



And then take the Qur'an:

[24:2] The adulteress and the adulterer you shall whip each of them a hundred lashes. Do not be swayed by pity from carrying out GOD's law, if you truly believe in GOD and the Last Day. And let a group of believers witness their penalty.

[24:5] If they repent afterwards and reform, then GOD is Forgiver, Merciful.
[24:6] As for those who accuse their own spouses, without any other witnesses, then the testimony may be accepted if he swears by GOD four times that he is telling the truth.
[24:7] The fifth oath shall be to incur GOD's condemnation upon him, if he was lying.
[24:8] She shall be considered innocent if she swears by GOD four times that he is a liar.
[24:9] The fifth oath shall incur GOD's wrath upon her if he was telling the truth.


Seven Questions Seeking Answers… | free-minds.org

Something smells fishy here.

 

[AskTheFamily]

This is one example of which both Sunni and Shia are not willing to accept what the Quran says. They both have authentic narrations that the punishment for married Zanis is stoning and this what both scholars say today.

Despite the Quran being clear on the punishment of the Zani and then verses right after talking about accusation of wives, and the Surah being brought down about a wife of Rasool (pbuh) being accused of it, they say this is about only non-married.

I use to for a while pretend this was about non-married Zanis as well as pretend other verses didn't say what they said, but one day, I had enough of it.

Other examples are about many narrations obligating people to commitment to a Ruler no matter how unjust he is. This despite so much of Quran being about rejecting Unjust Authority (The Taghut) and commands not to obey sinners and not to obey the mischief makers. These narrations that go against a great deal of Quran imposes disgrace on the nation and forbids the repelling of some men to some men which is necessary to stop huge corruption in the earth and will keep in power the unjust authorities from generation to generation.

These narrations are not a few but many.

Both Sunni and Shi have narrations that are deemed authentic yet contradict Quran.

One example of major going against Quran is what Shias have done with Khums and Zakat. They have twisted both from it's obvious meaning in the Quran (and contradicts many hadiths including ones they deem authentic as well).

The Shia Scholars will not be honest about it when their whole foundation is on their twisting of it, otherwise, their income and basis will disappear.

 

[AskTheFamily]

To make it clear, I believe in the SUNNA. I'm not Quran only, hadith rejector.

I just can't blindly follow the system of Rijaal of either Sunni or Shias specially when it fails when tested with Quran.

However some hadiths are Mutuwatir (they have so many chains with many deemed authentic and unbroken). Some Sunna has also been passed on by Muslims in Mutuwatir Fashion that hadiths cannot go against it.

Also other thoughts I have is that fabricators for example fabricating against Imam Jaffar (as), they can't really change on how to do Salah because they will be recognized as liars attributing lies to him when people all know how he prays and how other shias pray, and this well established in the community of his followers.

They are limited in what they can change and says lies upon him without giving away themselves.

However, the real way to approach Sunnah is not to reject weak hadiths neither blindly follow authentic hadiths, rather to search insight from them in Quran and try to see through them wisdom. I feel again the Quran and Sunnah go hand to hand, so that you can see one in light of each other, and they compliment one another.

As for the Shariah, a great deal of it is preserved in Quran and great deal has been passed in a Mutuwatir fashion.

So I'm not saying abandon the traditions, rather on how to approach them. (not to rely on a man made system that fails when tested on Quran).

 

[Montalban]

What's that group of Moslems that only use the Koran, and not the Hadith?

 

[Supreme]

I think they're called Quranists . Although, I think they represent something like 1% of all Muslims.

 

[humblemuslim]

To make it clear, I believe in the SUNNA. I'm not Quran only, hadith rejector.

I just can't blindly follow the system of Rijaal of either Sunni or Shias specially when it fails when tested with Quran.

However some hadiths are Mutuwatir (they have so many chains with many deemed authentic and unbroken). Some Sunna has also been passed on by Muslims in Mutuwatir Fashion that hadiths cannot go against it.

Also other thoughts I have is that fabricators for example fabricating against Imam Jaffar (as), they can't really change on how to do Salah because they will be recognized as liars attributing lies to him when people all know how he prays and how other shias pray, and this well established in the community of his followers.

They are limited in what they can change and says lies upon him without giving away themselves.

However, the real way to approach Sunnah is not to reject weak hadiths neither blindly follow authentic hadiths, rather to search insight from them in Quran and try to see through them wisdom. I feel again the Quran and Sunnah go hand to hand, so that you can see one in light of each other, and they compliment one another.

As for the Shariah, a great deal of it is preserved in Quran and great deal has been passed in a Mutuwatir fashion.

So I'm not saying abandon the traditions, rather on how to approach them. (not to rely on a man made system that fails when tested on Quran).

All great points brother.

Although people who read my posts, both past and present, are quick to label me as "Qur'an Only" muslim, I continue to repeat that I do not ascribe to any man-made group but only view myself simply as a submitter(muslim).

If someone is critical of the Hadith they immediately become 'Qur'an Only'.

Yet the Qur'an says:

[2:89] When this scripture came to them from GOD, and even though it agrees with, and confirms what they have, and even though they used to prophesy its advent when they talked with the disbelievers, when their own prophecy came to pass, they disbelieved therein. GOD's condemnation thus afflicts the disbelievers.
[2:90] Miserable indeed is what they sold their souls for - rejecting these revelations of GOD out of sheer resentment that GOD should bestow His grace upon whomever He chooses from among His servants. Consequently, they incurred wrath upon wrath. The disbelievers have incurred a humiliating retribution.
[2:91] When they are told, "You shall believe in these revelations of GOD," they say, "We believe only in what was sent down to us." Thus, they disbelieve in subsequent revelations, even if it is the truth from their Lord, and even though it confirms what they have! Say, "Why then did you kill GOD's prophets, if you were believers?"



[2:213] The people used to be one community when GOD sent the prophets as bearers of good news, as well as warners. He sent down with them the scripture, bearing the truth, to judge among the people in their disputes. Ironically, those who received the scripture were the ones who rejected any new scripture, despite clear proofs given to them. This is due to jealousy on their part. GOD guides those who believe to the truth that is disputed by all others, in accordance with His will. GOD guides whoever wills in a straight path.



All over the Qur'an we see that GOD's Books were sent to humanity to make clear what is right/wrong and true/false. As a muslim I can examine any religious text to see the merit it holds by using the Qur'an as my guide. Now of course disbelievers are going to dislike this methodology, since they have not verified and accepted the Qur'an for themselves. Let the the disbelievers sort things out for themselves. GOD has given us our eyes, hearing, and intellect and we will all be held accountable for their use.


I see no problem in judging the individual merit of Hadith, just as I see no problem in doing so with the Bible, the Torah, The Bhagavigita, or anything else. Technically I could grab a cooking book and try to do likewise, but alas a cooking book would not contain any relevant material. Thus the only reason I confine my examination to religious texts.

 

[Islam_mulia]

All good points. I can't find any reasoning online for why weak Hadith were recorded in the first place.

Take these Hadith for example:

Bukhari (8.816 and 3.885)

Narrated Ibn `Abbas:
`Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." `Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him."‏

Narrated Abu Huraira and Zaid bin Khalid Al-Juhani:
A Bedouin came to Allah's Apostle and said, "O Allah's apostle! I ask you by Allah to judge My case according to Allah's Laws." His opponent, who was more learned than he, said, "Yes, judge between us according to Allah's Laws, and allow me to speak." Allah's Apostle said, "Speak." He (i.e. the Bedouin or the other man) said, "My son was working as a laborer for this (man) and he committed illegal sexual intercourse with his wife. The people told me that it was obligatory that my son should be stoned to death, so in lieu of that I ransomed my son by paying one hundred sheep and a slave girl. Then I asked the religious scholars about it, and they informed me that my son must be lashed one hundred lashes, and be exiled for one year, and the wife of this (man) must be stoned to death." Allah's Apostle said, "By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, I will judge between you according to Allah's Laws. The slave-girl and the sheep are to be returned to you, your son is to receive a hundred lashes and be exiled for one year. You, Unais, go to the wife of this (man) and if she confesses her guilt, stone her to death." Unais went to that woman next morning and she confessed. Allah's Apostle ordered that she be stoned to death.‏



And then take the Qur'an:

[24:2] The adulteress and the adulterer you shall whip each of them a hundred lashes. Do not be swayed by pity from carrying out GOD's law, if you truly believe in GOD and the Last Day. And let a group of believers witness their penalty.

[24:5] If they repent afterwards and reform, then GOD is Forgiver, Merciful.
[24:6] As for those who accuse their own spouses, without any other witnesses, then the testimony may be accepted if he swears by GOD four times that he is telling the truth.
[24:7] The fifth oath shall be to incur GOD's condemnation upon him, if he was lying.
[24:8] She shall be considered innocent if she swears by GOD four times that he is a liar.
[24:9] The fifth oath shall incur GOD's wrath upon her if he was telling the truth.


Seven Questions Seeking Answers… | free-minds.org

Something smells fishy here.

I think you just came from the wet market. Probably that is where the smell came.

Please read Al-Suyuti in the chapter entitled "The Abrogating and the Abrogated," section entitled "Verses Whose Recitation Was Abrogated But Not Their Legal Ruling."

I think, without a strong foundation in Islam (no offence, my knowledge is just as bad) it is dangerous to make interpretations on both the Quran and hadith. We do require Ulamas who had sacrificed much time and efforts to study the Quran and hadith and give guidance to the ummah.

Muslims, in the past and the future, do not follow or make silly remarks and interpretations on the Book of God and the sayings of the Prophets and his Companions based on their shallow understanding of fiqh and tauhid.

 

[Islam_mulia]

This is a great question. Why leave any room for doubt?

Honestly I do not know. I could venture to guess that it might have something to do with fearing that some truth might be filtered if the requirements were too strict for recording them. Not to mention the gatherers of Hadith were not perfect men. Good men, but not perfect.

But the Quran, the original mashaf, written on wood and skins of goats, were collected by MEN, "Good men, but not perfect men". Of course there were memorisers of the Quran, who were also "Good men" to confirm the Quran and the Companions of the Prophet, who were also "Good Men".

My point is: If you allow your shallow mind to believe that hadith should be removed because the gatherers of hadith were not perfect men, why not follow the same rule for the Quran?

 

[AskTheFamily]

Islam Mullia, I don't think you should call him shallow minded just because he doesn`t trust the house you trust in and because he accepts verses on face value (what we all read the first time reading the Quran before we tangled ourselves in weak spider houses).

 

[Islam_mulia]

Islam Mullia, I don't think you should call him shallow minded just because he doesn`t trust the house you trust in and because he accepts verses on face value (what we all read the first time reading the Quran before we tangled ourselves in weak spider houses).

What should you call him then?

 

[AskTheFamily]

What should you call him then?

You should call him with respectful manner, either don't say anything if you don't want to praise him or say "respected brother" "honorable brother".

He follows hadiths, he simply isn't blind following a system which obviously contradicts Quran.

With this system, the very Taghut we been ordered to reject and overthrow, the masses were convinced to accept it and ignore the struggle most of the Quran was about.

Bro, I understand, you don't want people following their desires and throwing away hadiths with their whims, but has it occurred to you, that perhaps the system is flawed and is not based on sure evidence?

Has it occurred to you there is hadiths that go against Quran but are deemed authentic?

Also have you not noticed so many authentic hadiths of the same report differ.

For example, the prediction of Twelve from Quraysh, there is many "authentic" hadiths, but the narrations differ in what they say... it's not exact same words...

So you can see that words are lost in the way or changed and this might not be by purpose.

I remember in high school, we did something with this whisper thing, everyone whispers something in the persons ears, and the next person whispers what he heard to the next. The phrase was totally changed at the end of the whole class. It changed through out.

Now with whispering yes you can hear it wrong, but the truth, is even when people say things, sometimes people hear something, and remember it differently. Happens in real life all the time and it's normal, people sort of remember the words, not exact.

The fact of people's memorizations are exageratted.

This is why we see hadiths narrated on the same event and speech, for the same Sahabi, differ from one another.

So even when they are all trustworthy and just and connected, we cannot be sure of the exact words stated.

Now this a huge difference. Quran doesn't differ in any of the Huruf we been passed on. Sure there is differences in Qariat, but the huruf is the same.

 

[humblemuslim]

I think you just came from the wet market. Probably that is where the smell came.

Please read Al-Suyuti in the chapter entitled "The Abrogating and the Abrogated," section entitled "Verses Whose Recitation Was Abrogated But Not Their Legal Ruling."

I think, without a strong foundation in Islam (no offence, my knowledge is just as bad) it is dangerous to make interpretations on both the Quran and hadith. We do require Ulamas who had sacrificed much time and efforts to study the Quran and hadith and give guidance to the ummah.

Muslims, in the past and the future, do not follow or make silly remarks and interpretations on the Book of God and the sayings of the Prophets and his Companions based on their shallow understanding of fiqh and tauhid.

I do not believe in abrogation brother.

[15:90] We will deal with the dividers.
[15:91] They accept the Quran only partially.

[3:105] Do not be like those who became divided and disputed, despite the clear proofs that were given to them. For these have incurred a terrible retribution.

No offense brother, but if these men who have sacrificed so much time have been unable to weed out these obvious problems, then trust in them is not well placed.

GOD will hold us all accountable for our own abilities. GOD made the Qur'an for everyone, not just a few men who spend their entire life studying the Qu'ran and Hadith.

[17:36] You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them.

[75:13] The human being will be informed, on that day, of everything he did to advance himself, and everything he did to regress himself.
[75:14] The human being will be his own judge.
[75:15] No excuses will be accepted.
[75:16] Do not move your tongue to hasten it.
[75:17] It is we who will collect it into Quran.
[75:18] Once we recite it, you shall follow such a Quran.
[75:19] Then it is we who will explain it.

Brother, where does GOD tell us that the Hadith explains the Qur'an? GOD tells us HE will explain it to us. Thus, if you read the Qur'an you find explanation.

[59:21] If we revealed this Quran to a mountain, you would see it trembling, crumbling, out of reverence for GOD. We cite these examples for the people, that they may reflect.

Muslims should listen to the plain warning/message in the Qur'an and not idolize the views of men above their due level. For it is said...

[5:92] You shall obey GOD, and you shall obey the messenger, and beware. If you turn away, then know that the sole duty of our messenger is to deliver the message efficiently.

[3:7] He sent down to you this scripture, containing straightforward verses - which constitute the essence of the scripture - as well as multiple-meaning or allegorical verses. Those who harbor doubts in their hearts will pursue the multiple-meaning verses to create confusion, and to extricate a certain meaning. None knows the true meaning thereof except GOD and those well founded in knowledge. They say, "We believe in this - all of it comes from our Lord." Only those who possess intelligence will take heed.

The verse does not say 'Those who study the Hadith' or anything remotely the likes thereof. The people well founded in knowledge say 'We believe in this - all of it comes from our LORD (GOD)'. Those who believe they are well founded in knowledge today say it comes from the Hadith in direct contradiction with GOD's statement here.

[55:1] The Most Gracious.
[55:2] Teacher of the Quran.

Brother GOD plainly tells us the GOD is the teacher of the Qur'an...Not the Hadith. Why then should I turn away when I know? If I turn away, then GOD will surely hold me accountable for my understanding which he has given me. Can I say "They told me so!" This is not an acceptable answer.

[41:26] Those who disbelieved said, "Do not listen to this Quran and distort it, that you may win."
[41:27] We will certainly afflict these disbelievers with a severe retribution. We will certainly requite them for their evil works.

And it does not take a such dedicated study to get the core message of the Qur'an for GOD says:

[54:40] We made the Quran easy to learn. Does any of you wish to learn?

And we find that GOD tells us much more:

[41:3] A scripture whose verses provide the complete details, in an Arabic Quran, for people who know.

Why would a book completely detailed need an additional guide with more details? The plain response is, it doesn't.

And we are both no stranger to interpretations in English translations. Brace yourself for this one:

[39:28] An Arabic Quran, without any ambiguity, that they may be righteous.
[39:29] GOD cites the example of a man who deals with disputing partners (Hadith), compared to a man who deals with only one consistent source (Quran). Are they the same? Praise be to GOD; most of them do not know.

ONE source. The Hadith would make two sources. GOD has spoken, will the people take heed?

But Brother I can most certainly continue. The Qur'an also says:

[36:2] And the Quran that is full of wisdom.

[18:54] We have cited in this Quran every kind of example, but the human being is the most argumentative creature.

Why is the Hadith not mentioned for the wisdom muslims are so eager to attribute to it? The Qur'an endorses itself, not the Hadith.


Brother I am simply following the command in the Qur'an as follows:

[27:92] And to recite the Quran. Whoever is guided is guided for his own good, and if they go astray, then say, "I am simply a warner."

I am simply a warner...These are the words in the Qur'an.

Brother I pray you do not become what this verse warns of...

[17:45] When you read the Quran, we place between you and those who do not believe in the Hereafter an invisible barrier.
[17:46] We place shields around their minds, to prevent them from understanding it, and deafness in their ears. And when you preach your Lord, using the Quran alone, they run away in aversion.

[7:204] When the Quran is recited, you shall listen to it and take heed, that you may attain mercy.

Shall I continue Brother?

 

[humblemuslim]

But the Quran, the original mashaf, written on wood and skins of goats, were collected by MEN, "Good men, but not perfect men". Of course there were memorisers of the Quran, who were also "Good men" to confirm the Quran and the Companions of the Prophet, who were also "Good Men".

My point is: If you allow your shallow mind to believe that hadith should be removed because the gatherers of hadith were not perfect men, why not follow the same rule for the Quran?

Because brother, I have tested the Qur'an and it passed with flying colors. The Hadith unfortunately did not pass the same test...At least not entirely. Parts of it are acceptable, other parts condemnable.

[85:21] Indeed, it is a glorious Quran.

[85:22] In a preserved master tablet.

--------------

[56:77] This is an honorable Quran.

[56:78] In a protected book.

--------------

[10:37] This Quran could not possibly be authored by other than GOD. It confirms all previous messages, and provides a fully detailed scripture. It is infallible, for it comes from the Lord of the universe.

--------------

[4:82] Why do they not study the Quran carefully? If it were from other than GOD, they would have found in it numerous contradictions.