Interesting exchange. I will comment on some parts.
Becky , don't forget that one of the criteria we have in the science of the hadeeth is the existence of many different chains of narrators
which means that different people narrated the same hadeeth from the prophet directly
when the hadeeth have just one chain of narrator which means that only one who heared the hadeeth directly from the prophet , so it will not be sahih even if the narrator was trustworthy
afterall , we have hadeeth from the prophet where he said to his people that after his death many lies will attributed to him , then he command them to compare whatever the hear with words of God , so if they found contradictions they should to refuse it and if they find no contradictions , they can accept it
My readings cause me to think that things are not so simple. Hadiths that don't agree with the established idealistic model that you have presented Mohammad to be are rejected, even if they can be historically validated. Those that support the ideal model and have passed the isnad test, are accepted, even if they may be historically inaccurate. What I am saying in the last two statements is that the acceptance or rejection of hadiths favors a heavy bias to fit the model of Mohammad that is most suitable to current Muslims. They assume positive things must be true and negative things must be false, thus creating a self fulfilling prophecy of Mohammad being the best example of mankind. This is a flawed system to use and claim that somehow the hadiths that you consider authentic are truly authentic or without problems in their credibility. If you were to apply this logic to other religious writings, you would have to admit that they were equally true and trustworthy. But, what I see is a one sided hypocritical attempt to keep Islamic material from being legitimately scrutinized and for errors to be found in your prophet's character. This is all predicated in that everything that Mohamad did can be justified as being approved by Allah, there being righteous.
Hmm... so you believe a person who does memorize something (in this case the Qur'an and Sunnah) is excluded from forgetting something from the memorized things?
The simple fact of memorizing something is IMO not a guarantee of transmitting this information to another person without errors.
That is more true as more time passes between the events. Also one must consider how good are the memories of these people over 100 years afterwards when the collection started. Note that none of these people claimed to be inspired by Allah, but some Muslims are quick to assert this.
I do understand the procedure of testing the authenticity of ahadeeth. I do also understand that there are scholars whos job is to verify these things. And I do not doubt that nowadays this information is passed on accurately, as we have computers for that. My doubt is that the ones who first wrote the ahadeeth down started making mistakes. I don't say they made them intentionally, maybe it was really just erroneously, but the possibility is there that they made mistakes. And no one can verify that. That is why I am also saying that to some degree you simply have to believe that what they wrote down was also the truth.
We would also have to assume that these people had a consciousness to understand the significance to preserve these sayings and to be alert to memorize them for that purpose so that future generations could compile such a collection; otherwise, they would be expected to behave as normal people that processed information, some of which they may remember and other things that they may never give thought to again. What I find funny is that Muslims won't allow for Jesus' Apostles and close acquaintances to have this ability to remember exact sayings and write them down in a closer vicinity to the historical time of those sayings--perhaps 20-50 years, contrasted to 100-150 years (hadiths).
No I never said or meant that....if you read my words carefully
So if I memorise something and pass that on to someone else word for word, you are assuming it will have errors because I am human and make mistakes?
That doesn't guarantee errors, but it also doesn't exclude them from surfacing. The only thing that I would say is that if this could work for Mohammad's companions, then it should work equally for Jesus' followers who listened to His teachings and repeated them and wrote them down. There should be no distinction in God's followers ability to comprehend and perpetuate God's teachings to their posterity.
I think this may happen, it does not have to, but it is possible.
I would not say that error is a necessity, but I do not think that Mohammad's companions were no more gifted than Christian contemporaries that testified to Jesus and His teachings. I think that Muslims like SlaveOfGod would have us believe that only Muslims could accomplish this feat. I will say that if we take into consideration the thousands of hadiths that had to be filtered through, it is no doubt in my mind that there are errors that left out some authentic while keeping some unauthentic ones.
Know Becky the Companions did not make any mistakes in transmitting as they are all deemed trustworthy by consensus by the Muslim community. That is because Allaah has praised them in His Book and they were also praised by the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) as is narrated in the books of Sunnah. I remember sending you an internet link which detailed this to you before, maybe if you can remember?
Allah says (interpretation)
Allaah knows best with whom to place His Message
[al-Anaam 6:124]
Ibn al-Qayyim who is a very big scholar of the Ahlus Sunnah and contemporary of
Ibn Kathir said:
Allaah knows best where to place His Message, both with regard to the original recipient and those who inherit it from him. He knows best who is fit to receive His Message and convey it to His slaves in a trustworthy and sincere manner, respecting the Sender and fulfilling his duties towards Him, patiently following His commands and showing gratitude for His blessings and drawing close to Him, and He knows who is not fit for that. Similarly, He knows best who among the nations is fit to be the heirs of His Messengers and to succeed them and convey the Message that they received from their Lord.
Read more further explanation here:
Islam Question and Answer - The virtue of the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them)
This will clear up the argument that there could have been any mistakes in the transmission from the Companions (may Allah the Mighty and Majestic be Please with them all). However if you need any further explanation please let me know
Regards
I don't buy that unless you say that Mohammad's companions were infallible from misunderstanding and propagating misinformation, whether it be embellishments or diminishing accounts, or even totally mythomaniacal ones. Being trustworthy is not a guarantee of not making erros. That is a separate issue. My theme is that if you want to say these things, then you must accept that this is not unique to Allah and Muslims. If Allah failed to do this in previous revelations, that is an indictment upon Allah fickleness. All I ever see from Muslims is two different standards, and the one used to debate non Christians is always lacking in the same principles that Muslims get. One good example is what is being discussed. How do you justify that other prophets, apostles, followers of God's apostles did not have the same protection or abilities and protection of Allah? I will never be convinced that God works that way for only one group of people that He supposededly sent revelation to. That is why the theory of corruption will never be accepted as a plausable defense of Islam and the Qu'ran.
While this is not a Christian thread, my goal is not to change the subject, but bring up these questions and give some thoughts since this is a good opportunity to challenge you to think about what you are saying and understand the ramifications of your Islamic POV.
