Who Can Prove, Hadith is Prophet�s?

fatima wrote: Bismillah irrahman irrahim Assalamu alaykum I am sorry brother but i dont think i have capacity to debate some1.

Thanks, I would requet you to Read the quran alone and try to understand yourself. Without any tafsir/hadith and ask for the truth from Allah. Please start making your opinions after you read it 1/2 times. See what happens. Allah wil show you truth if He wants. There is nothing to loose if you read quran, isn't it?

fatima wrote:  For me every thing is 1 + 1 = 2 and i can never thank Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala enough to make things clear in my mind.

All people think the same; with or without truth. Don't you think that even the people who worship Idols, they also have the same feelings that the god has shown & made everything clear to him. I am not meaning you; i would request, even you are right still there is no harm trying to understand quran alone (Only guidance from Allah through our beloved prophet). May Allah bless you with truth & more iman

fatima wrote:  For me Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala never makes anything without a purpose. Then how can he send 240,000 Prophets alyhimusalaam just like that, He only revealed four major books and hundred and some booklets (sahifa, sorry dont know the real translation of it). So were those Prophets not sent to clarify matters and tell people about the Laws of Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala.

You are absolutely right, He has sent so many prophets and either they were given books, sahifas or told to follow some previous books. They came as an example to people so they can follow the book. They have never told or have written anything themselves. You can see, even a single book is not intact, how can you believe that the prophets sayings are intact? Once you read. Allah promised to keep Quran intact and it is proven to be intact.

fatima wrote: I am sure you must have seen me mentioning this so many times, but i can not seem to find anywhere in Holy Quran how to pray. The prayer times are not very clear themselves and many other things. I will mention one thing, if you read Surah Muzammil, it looks like tahajjud is fard on us, Do you think it is? and if not where does it say in Holy Quran it is not. Wassalam

Quran is clear on salat positions, times and sura Muzzammil does not give me a sense of conpulsory prayer. If you read the verses where timings are clearly given and check this verse where it says salat in different parts of night is optional: 17:79

Finally, it is Allah who decides whom he will bless with the right path, so look for it in the Allahs words, you may not understand in a day, but we have to persevere on that, some day Allah will (Insha Allah).

I am only inviting towards the truth of Allah; accepting or associating is every individuals right & Allahs wish.

Salam

Have A Glimpse from the History - After 24 years of Prophets Death:

This is only a glimpse, no muslim scholar ever concluded on something as serious as you have from mere glimpses.

After Uthman (Usman) was assassinated (656 AD) Ali was elected as Caliph. This period only lasted for five years. I call this period the period of frustration. Hadrat Ali found the caliphate to be a bed of thorns. During those five years, he fought three battles: (i) the Battle of the Camel, (ii) the Battle of Siffin, and (iii) the Battle of Nahrawan. All three battles were fought against the Muslims and led to considerable bloodshed. It was a matter of the great shock for him, that instead of fighting against non-Muslims, he had to fight against Muslims.

Are you now validating Al Qaeda's interpretation of the Quran, becouse certainly you are using the same methodology as them to interprate it. Should we "kill the Kufar where ever we may find them" because that verse without looking at asbab an nuzul [reason for revelation] clearly states we should do so. YOU are not educated enough to interprate historical events, it espetialy can not be done from English sources. 

Did Imam Ali's great shock lead him to forget any of the Quran or any ahadith for that matter.

At the outset of his caliphate, he was betrayed by Banu Umayya when Muawiyah defied him and accused him of involvement in the murder of Hadrat Othman. He was betrayed by the people of Medina who did not respond to his call to undertake ' <>jihad' against Muawiyah. He was betrayed by Talha and Zubair, who took the oath of allegiance from him and later defected. He was betrayed by Hadrat A'isha his mother-in-law, who took top arms against him. He was betrayed by the people of Basra who had taken the oath of allegiance fro] him but later defected. At Siffin he was betrayed by his own army who would not fight when the victory was in sight. In the matter of arbitration, he was betrayed by his umpire Abu Musa Ashari, who instead of defending his cause, deposed him. He had to face the succession of the Kharijites who had originally fought on his side at the battle of Siffin. He was betrayed by Khurrity b. Raashid who had been his ally, but later revolted against him, and created trouble in Basra. He was betrayed by his own brother Aquil who was not satisfied with the allowance that Hadrat Ali gave him, and joined Muawiyah who rewarded him handsomely. He was betrayed by his cousin Abdullah b. Abbas when he had appointed as the Governor of Basra, and who left his post after misappropriated heavy fines from the Bait-ul-Mal. The final active betrayal came when Hadrat Ali was married, by a fanatic Kharijite.

The manner in which you have quoted the above seems to indicate that it all occurred at the same time and you are using it to state that the muslim ummah was in practical anarchy while this is far from reality.

I strongly advise you to read the following article as it it mostly a historical summation written by a scholar more capable than any source you have Quoted thus far in english.

UNDERSTANDING THE FOUR MADHHABS

By Shaykh Abdal-Hakim Murad

Abdal Hakim Murad graduated from Cambridge University with a double-first in Arabic in 1983. He then lived in Cairo for three years, studying Islam under traditional teachers at Al-Azhar, one of the oldest universities in the world. He went on to reside for three years in Jeddah, where he administered a commercial translation office and maintained close contact with Habib Ahmad Mashhur al-Haddad and other ulama from Hadramaut, Yemen.

In 1989, Shaikh Abdal Hakim returned to England and spent two years at the University of London learning Turkish and Farsi. Since 1992 he has been a doctoral student at Oxford University, specializing in the religious life of the early Ottoman Empire. He is currently Secretary of the Muslim Academic Trust (London) and Director of the Sunna Project at the Centre of Middle Eastern Studies at Cambridge University, which issues the first-ever scholarly Arabic editions of the major Hadith collections. [what does that indicate to you about other modern published editions in arabic let alone english]

Shaikh Abdal Hakim is the translator of a number of works, including two volumes from Imam al-Ghazali's Ihya Ulum al-Din. He gives durus and halaqas from time to time and taught the works of Imam al-Ghazali at the Winter 1995 Deen Intensive Program in New Haven, CT. He appears frequently on BBC Radio and writes occasionally for a number of publications, including The Independent; Q-News International, Britain's premier Muslim Magazine; and Seasons, the semiacademic journal of Zaytuna Institute.

Comments:     Just have a look at the history at the last legs of the Caliphate. You can well imagine what was going on there after. If you are interested you can go through all of it. The anarchy, fighting and betrayals all around are notable. Don't you think/see clearly that all these were because of money/power/benefits etc?? Surely; not for the benefit of Islam. <>

Have you gone through all of it!!??

Clearly you have not separated political rivalries from Scholarly achievements and simply assumed the same people struggling for power are the same people writing the rules. Imam Abu Hanifah was killed by the khalifah of his time for not bowing to his pressure and making halal what allah clearly stated to be haram and Imam Malik was whipped and paraded on a donkey with his head shaved while wearing humiliating dress for not bowing to political pressure, these are just two of the countless numbers of scholars who have gone through similar things.

There are many other examples of scholars who when ever where called by the khalifah of there time to act as supreme judge would make any excuse to get out of such appointments, our scholars shunned political life and courts and considered it to be a source of moral corruption.

"Abu Hanifa was scrupulously pious and refused Ibn Hubayra�s offer of a judgeship even when the latter had him whipped."

Ibn H.abīb narrates in his �Uqalā� al-Majānīn that Sufyān al-Thawrī, Mis�ar [ibn Kidām al-Hilālī al-Kūfī (d. 153)], Abū H. anīfa, and Sharīk ibn �Abd Allāh al-Nakha�ī (d. 177) were arrested and taken to al-Mans.ūr [who wanted to force one of them to be chief judge]. Abū H. anīfa said: �I will use ruse to save myself, Sufyān will escape on the way, Mis�ar will act the madman, and Sharīk will fall.� On the way, Sufyān said to his guard: �I need the privy.� The guard waited behind a certain wall but Sufyān hailed a passing barge, telling them: �The man behind the wall wants to kill me!� They hid him and took him. The guard came back without him and his chief beat him up. The remaining three entered to see al-Mans.ūr. Mis�ar walked up to him, shook his hand, and said: �How are you, Commander of the Believers after me? How are your female slaves? How are your beasts of burden? You will make me chief judge, yes??� A man standing next to the Caliph said: �This is a madman!� Al-Mans.ūr replied: �You are right. Take him out!� They let him go. Abū H. anīfa was summoned next. He came forward and said: Commander of the Believers, I am al-Nu�mān ibn Thābit the son of the slave silkmaker in al-Kūfa. The people of al-Kūfa will never accept that the son of a slave silkmaker be judge over them!� He said: �You spoke truly.� Sharīk began to speak but the Caliph said: �Shut up! No-one but you remains, so give your pledge!� Sharīk said: �Commander of the Believers, I have memory lapses.� He said: �Chew resin gum!� Sharīk said: �I joke too much.� The Caliph said: �We will make honey pastries for you to eat before you sit in your chair to judge!� Sharīk said: �I will judge whoever comes and goes!� The Caliph said: �Judge, be it myself and my own son!� Sharīk said: �Then I will.�

Islams jurisprudence developed separately from the ruling muslims. You want to claim otherwise prove this with clear evidence not blind assumptions and conclusions based on wishfully thinking.

Introduction of the Book 'Sahih Bukhari':

"The explosion of Islam in the 7th and 8th centuries confronted Islamic scholars with a daunting task: to preserve the knowledge of the Sunnah of the Prophet (saas). Hence the science of hadith evaluation was born.

The science of ahadith began with the four imams of fiqh and in particular imam Malik, Imam Bukhari and the other scholars simply developed it more.

Science of Hadith

<>"The more important reason was the deliberate fabrication of hadith by various sects which appeared amongst the Muslims, in order to support their views (see later, under discussion of maudu' ahadith). Ibn Sirin (d. 110), a Successor, said, "They would not ask about the isnad. But when the fitnah (trouble, turmoil, esp. civil war) happened, they said: Name to us your men. So the narrations of the Ahl al-Sunnah (Adherents to the Sunnah) would be accepted, while those of the Ahl al-Bid'ah (Adherents to Innovation) would not be accepted."

Prove any hadith was fabricated what you have said is a conclusion not evidence, there is a clear distinction, you have no case just simple assumptions. Moral uprightnesses is the primary factor in identifying whether or not a hadith narrated by a particular person can be trusted. read Rijal al-Hadith (The Study Of The Reporters Of Hadith).

YOU have to prove that the individuals in each chain of narration was a liar to prove a hadith is fabricated not make a blanket statement.

Just because it makes sense does not make it sense.

What is written above is simply a summation not a real in depth account of what occurred and certainly nothing to rely on in the manner you have. You have also simply assumed the Islamic world was at a loss, the simple fact is the four schools of thought where well developed long before there was a requirement for the science of ahadith and after the sciencse was developed it was found for example that Imam Abu hanifah did not have access to a mere 100 ahadith to use in his rulings, when they compared his ijtihad to these ahadith later scholars found his rulings conformed to what was stated in the ahadith.

I will give you sincere advice, do not rely on any translated Islamic work what we have now is nothing but works done by people who where only translators and not scholars ie they knew nothing of the technical nature of the works they were translating. You can not translate arabic literally to English you can only translate the meaning, so if these people where not scholars but simple translators how can they convey the meaning of a technical work.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/scienc eofhadith/asai.html

Comments:     This is from the justification given in the book of Sahih bukhari. Which he (Bukhari) collected between 826 AD-841 AD and was first compiled as a book in 842 AD.

I suggest you go sit down with a real scholar so he can clarify your  mistakes and mamoth asumptions, what you have quoted above is from the English translation of imam Bukhari complete with the English translators introduction. No scholar on earth would even dare make a legal ruling based on an English work, and Islamic texts translated into English are among the worst in the world.

I did not find any 'science' in it; though they deliberately used the word and notably another word was 'hard work'. I also didn't understand what type of hard work could verify what prophet said? Believing their own people and using their judgment? That was after around 150 years from the death of Ali. You can imagine the deterioration of the situation at that time from Bukhari's explanation of 'fabrication for sectarian benefits'; by different sects and the reasons were still about power, money, gains etc.

Why should you find any science in it, what made you assume there would be?

why didn't you ask rather than just assume and misguide yourself?

Why did you assume Islamic scholars did things the same as western scholars?

Are you a scientist to recognize science?

<>This is simply his collection of ahadith, ie the fruits of his labor in summation not his science, methodology or reasoning you will find that only in Arabic works not English.

by different sects and the reasons were still about power, money, gains etc.

Utter garbage, are the ahadith about womens menstruation about power, money and gains. 

You can imagine the deterioration of the situation at that time from Bukhari's explanation of 'fabrication for sectarian benefits'; <>

No scholar ever formulated a conclusion based on imagination, which is not something I can say for you. The situation was far from anarchy in respect to religious instruction, those who where pious remained pious despite the political landscape or are you now asserting that no pious people existed after the time of the prophet.

Which sects did the four Imams Belong to or the scholars of ahadith or any person they narrated from, this is the crux of matter.

Keep your christian/western preconceptions in the west they do not apply to Islam our scholars did not alter the quran for gain nor the ahadith.

I also didn't understand what type of hard work could verify what prophet said? Believing their own people and using their judgment?

That is because you have blindly made judgment purely based on what is written in English, Islam is a religion based on the Arabic language all the sources are in Arabic. Hardly anything has been translated into English and nothing of the science of ahadith. What they have written is a summation, I find it amazing you have become frustrated solely based on your simple conclusion that "this is all there is to know".

by different sects and the reasons were still about power, money, gains etc.

Bismillah irrahman irrahim

Assalamu alaykum

I am sorry brother but i dont think i have capacity to debate some1. For me every thing is 1 + 1 = 2 and i can never thank Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala enough to make things clear in my mind. For me Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala never makes anything without a purpose. Then how can he send 240,000 Prophets alyhimusalaam just like that, He only revealed four major books and hundred and some booklets (sahifa, sorry dont know the real translation of it). So were those Prophets not sent to clarify matters and tell people about the Laws of Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala.

I am sure you must have seen me mentioning this so many times, but i can not seem to find anywhere in Holy Quran how to pray. The prayer times are not very clear themselves and many other things. I will mention one thing, if you read Surah Muzammil, it looks like tahajjud is fard on us, Do you think it is? and if not where does it say in Holy Quran it is not.

Wassalam

Text under the comments heading are only my words. Please read it and may go though the entire history of the time and hadith, and make your conscious decision for it. If you are confused, please turn to Quran. Allah has given us a straight path and His prophet Muhammad did not do or preach anything other than Quran. That's why when Allah says follow muhammad; Now it means follow the Quran which came through him.

Have A Glimpse from the History - After 24 years of Prophets Death:

After Uthman (Usman) was assassinated (656 AD) Ali was elected as Caliph. This period only lasted for five years. I call this period the period of frustration. Hadrat Ali found the caliphate to be a bed of thorns. During those five years, he fought three battles: (i) the Battle of the Camel, (ii) the Battle of Siffin, and (iii) the Battle of Nahrawan. All three battles were fought against the Muslims and led to considerable bloodshed. It was a matter of the great shock for him, that instead of fighting against non-Muslims, he had to fight against Muslims.

At the outset of his caliphate, he was betrayed by Banu Umayya when Muawiyah defied him and accused him of involvement in the murder of Hadrat Othman. He was betrayed by the people of Medina who did not respond to his call to undertake 'jihad' against Muawiyah. He was betrayed by Talha and Zubair, who took the oath of allegiance from him and later defected. He was betrayed by Hadrat A'isha his mother-in-law, who took top arms against him. He was betrayed by the people of Basra who had taken the oath of allegiance fro] him but later defected. At Siffin he was betrayed by his own army who would not fight when the victory was in sight. In the matter of arbitration, he was betrayed by his umpire Abu Musa Ashari, who instead of defending his cause, deposed him. He had to face the succession of the Kharijites who had originally fought on his side at the battle of Siffin. He was betrayed by Khurrity b. Raashid who had been his ally, but later revolted against him, and created trouble in Basra. He was betrayed by his own brother Aquil who was not satisfied with the allowance that Hadrat Ali gave him, and joined Muawiyah who rewarded him handsomely. He was betrayed by his cousin Abdullah b. Abbas when he had appointed as the Governor of Basra, and who left his post after misappropriated heavy fines from the Bait-ul-Mal. The final active betrayal came when Hadrat Ali was married, by a fanatic Kharijite.

Comments:     Just have a look at the history at the last legs of the Caliphate. You can well imagine what was going on there after. If you are interested you can go through all of it. The anarchy, fighting and betrayals all around are notable. Don�t you think/see clearly that all these were because of money/power/benefits etc?? Surely; not for the benefit of Islam.