Who Can Prove, Hadith is Prophet�s?

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.

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

UmmTaaha wrote:   Does the name AbuHurayrah sound familiar?  Do you know anything about this sahabi? When he saw people were dedicated to collect and preserve the Quran, he dedicated himself to collect the sayings of the prophet (saw), which were other than the Quran. Yes, and he was a sahabi - he did not come into picture some 100s of years after the death of the prophet (saw). So whosoever says that hadith was never payed attention to for 100s of years, has not done his research well. Another thing, try to learn something about the human brain and its abilty to collect and recall. There have been people who can memorise entire Quran cover to cover - till today. And there are people who have memorised entire Bukhari and/or entire Muslim cover to cover - with their chain of transmission - meaning that they not only memorise the hadith they also memorise from who it came to be documented in the book of Hadith Muslim or Hadith Bukhari, going back to the Prophet (saw) himself.  Calling it chinese whisper is an insult to human intellect. When people of today can memorise hadith with its chain of transmission, can the former generations not memorise them as they heard from the prophet(saw) ? Perhaps it does not cross the minds of some that people have been avid to maintain the authenticity of religion in all times. There have been a band of people and shall remain till the end of times who will adhere to the traditional form of Islam. They have been transmitting it from generation to generation - there have not been any "dark ages" in history where mankind might have seen total wipe out of Islamic documentations as in other religions. This is a big difference between Islam and other monothestic religions. Even when the great conquests against Islam witnessed the books of knowledge being thrown in Tigris so much so that its water became black with ink, Islam did not die. - That was just an event in history which came to pass and we still have knowledge - abundant knowledge - and all of this comes from Quran AND hadith - plus their careful analysis.

Sister

I have Quoted Quran which does not permit any Hadith; I have Quoted Hadith Also if you like which says that it was forbidden to writedown anything else of prophet other than Quran, If you see the collection process of Quran during the time of Omar; it clearly says that eveything else other than quran was burnt and destroyed. Now if you tell me some sahaba has disobeyed it, I don't agree with you and undermine that sahaba.

I hope that's enough and I don't want to respond to your sarcasms.

All Allah's revelations before Quran have been distorted by people, most recently the christianity. Which was meant to be preserved and was written with a much less time gap than Hadith and got distorted. Hadith; which was not preserved at all you want to say is intact. Even Bukhari does not agree with you. Your human brain theory does not suit. If some one memorises wrong thing, how can it become true? Did the human not have brains before Islam?

Some muslims tend to believe that those christians were bad people so changed it and our muslims are good people and they can't make mistake. Come on, Read history. who killed Usman? Who fought with Ali? Who betrayed whom? Why muslims are divided? Were they not two of the 4 closest companions? Even good people will change words while passing verbally, that's natural and human.

You are bringing out another Sahaba whose collection came out 100 years later. Another dead man exploited by the Hadith preachers only to make blind people believe. Hard to believe that a Sahaba violated prophet's instruction and Osman's instruction.

I have put many other questions and refferences in my posts from the begining; please answer some of those hard questions or prove my refferences are wrong with the ref from Quran, if you can. I will be happy to listen to it.

"Always in search of truth and more truth and more .... untill death"

Allah SWT says repeatedly in the Quran to obey both Him and the Messenger. One example is Surah an-Nisa ayah 59.

Ya ayyuha alladhina amanu ati Allaha wa ati ar-Rasul wa ulu'l-amr min kum. Fa in tanaza'tun fi shay'in fa rudduhu ilaAllahi wa ar-Rasul in kuntum tu'minuna bIllahi wa'l-Yawmi al-Akhir. Dhalika khayrun wa ahsanu ta'wil.

O you, those who have faith, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you dispute over a thing, then return it to Allah and the Messenger, if you have faith in Allah and the Last Day. That is better and more beautiful of interpretation.

He says that the Prophet (sAas) has been sent to explain the Quran, not just to deliver it (Surah an-Nahl ayah 44).

Bi al-bayyinat wa az-Zubur wa anzalna ilayka adh-Dhikra li-tubayyina li an-nas maa nuzzila ilayhim wa la'allahum yatafakkarun.

By clear proofs and scriptures, and We have sent down on you (O Prophet) the Reminder, that you can explain to humankind what is sent down for them and in order that they may reflect.

He says that people do not have faith if they do not take the Prophet (sAas) as the judge of their disputes (Surah an-Nisa ayah 65).

Fa laa wa Rabbika laa yu'minuna hatta yuhakkimuka fi maa shajara baynahum thumma laa yajidu fi anfusihim haraj min maa qadayta wa yusallimu taslima.

No, by your Lord and Sustainer, they do not have faith until they have you (O Prophet) judge what is disputed among them, then they do not find in their souls any distress at what you have decided, and they accept it wholly and completely.

He says that when He and the Prophet (sAas) have decided a matter, it is not for any believing man or woman to do anything but obey (Surah al-Ahzab ayah 36).

Wa maa kana li mu'min wa laa mu'minah idha qadaAllahu wa Rasuluhu amran an yakuna lahum al-khiyarat min amrihim wa man ya'siAllaha wa Rasulaha faqad dalla dalala mubin.

And it is not ever for a faithful man or a faithful woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided an affair that there is any choice for them in their affair, and who disobeys Allah and His Messenger, so he is indeed wandering far astray.

He says that what the Messenger gives, people should take, and what he prohibits, they should abstain from (Surah al-Hashr ayah 7).

...Wa maa atakum ar-Rasul fa khudhuhu wa maa nahakhum anhu fa intahu. Wa ittaquAllah innAllaha Shadid al-Iqab.

...And what the Messenger gives you, so take it, and what he prohibits you, so refrain from it. And be in awe of Allah. Surely Allah is Stern of Punishment.

How do we determine what the Prophet (sAas) has ordered, in order to obey it?

How do we find out what he judged in disputes so that we can abide by it?

How do we know what he has decided on matters, so that we can submit to it?

How do we discover what he has given, so that we can take it, or what he has prohibited, so we can abstain from it?

The answer to all these questions is very simple: we look to the SUNNA. If you deny the validity of the Sunna then you may end up disobeying what the Prophet (sAas) has commanded, turning away from what he has judged, rejecting what he has decided, ignoring what he has given, and doing what he has prohibited.

And if you do these acts of disobedience, turning-away, rejecting, ignoring, and doing-the-prohibited then YOU HAVE DISOBEYED ALLAH. It's that simple. It is incumbent upon every Muslim to obey both the Quran and the Sunna. Read the verses I have cited for yourself. What do you think they mean?

The Mistake of Those Who Confuse the Sunna and the Hadiths

Very often, those who proclaim that they follow the Quran only, ignore the Sunna and concentrate on the hadiths. They assume that if they can refute or disprove the hadiths, they have proved their own position.

Their mistake is to assume that the Sunna and the hadiths are the same thing. This is incorrect. No scholar of Islam has ever claimed that the sources of Shari'a are "the Quran and the hadiths". Rather, the correct statement is that the sources of Shari'a are the Quran and the SUNNA.

The hadiths are a textual source for determining what the Sunna is. But they are not by themselves the Sunna.

The scholars of Islam have developed a sophisticated methodology for collecting the hadiths and for determining from them what the Sunna is.

Collecting the hadiths: Briefly, the great collectors of hadiths such as Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim followed a methodology that they collected everything that there was on a subject, and they marked down how authentic it was. Rather than discarding the material they felt was not wholly authentic, so that it became lost to history, they included it. This means that other scholars can examine the evidence for themselves, and make their own determination of what is authentic.

The above description of the methodology of the hadith collectors should make it abundantly clear why there are hadiths that appear to be contradictory, hadiths with variant wordings, and all the other problems with hadiths that the rejectors point to. Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim, and the other great hadith collectors, were not incompetent. Rather, they saw their job to be preserving the evidence so that each later scholar could make his own determination.

Simply put, the rejectors are attempting to take the honesty of Imam Bukhari, Imam Muslim, and the others and to twist it to prove their own point.

There is no reason for any Muslim to be confused or feel doubt because of variant hadiths in the collections. It is simply a matter of learning about the methodologies and procedures of the scholars.

Here are some links that provide information about the methodology of the hadith scholars:

Modern Historical Methodology Versus Hadith Methodology - This essay discusses the methodology of the hadith collectors in quite a bit of detail and compares it to modern historiographical methods

An Introduction to the Science of Hadith - This essay discusses in detail the methodology for classifying and rejecting hadiths, and the terminology used

Issues Concerning Hadith - This page contains several essays discussing specific concerns that have been raised about the hadiths

Determining the Sunna: The science of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) is the science of deriving rulings from the sources of Shari'a. Part of fiqh is determining from the hadiths what the Sunna is. This too is a sophisticated science.

First, all the hadiths on a given subject should be gathered. Next, the scholar studies their authenticity to determine which give a correct report of what the Prophet (sAas) said, did, or allowed. He may consider such factors as what the practice of the Muslims in the matter has been, if the absence of reports to the contrary actually indicates a consensus of the Sahaba (rAa) behind the existing reports, even if only a few people have transmitted them, and other issues.

It is only after this analysis that the scholar has made his determination of what the Sunna is. He does not simply pick and choose hadiths at random, or take their text out of context. The reason he may only quote one or two is that he has determined that it or they express most clearly what the Sunna is.

Here are some links that provide information about the science of fiqh:

Sources of Islamic Law - This essay discusses the many sources of Shari'a beyond just the literal text of a hadith, and also how different schools of fiqh developed with slightly different methodologies

Usul al-Fiqh: Source Methodology In Islamic Law - This essay also discusses the history of fiqh, and different methodologies that are used

Inshallah, the information provided at the above links should be more than enough to reassure any Muslim that the collection of hadiths and the derivation of rulings from them is anything but haphazard. The claims made by the hadith rejectors are based on ignorance. If they had studied Islamic science, they would see how ridiculous what they say is.

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

PERF No. 731: The Earliest Manuscript Of Malik's Muwatta' Dated To His Own Time

PERF No. 665: The Earliest Extant Manuscript Of The Sirah Of Prophet Muhammad By Ibn Hisham