IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum: Muhammad as a partner with Allah

Originally posted by Ron Webb

I know nothing of angels, but I know plenty about humans. To insult a man is not ordinarily blasphemous; and man by his very nature is imperfect and capable of mistakes.

This is the islamic view about humans as well, that they are not immune from errors / mistakes, but we have exception to that, which is Prophets

Also insulting even though is a wrong thing, is not blasphemous, with the exception of Prophets as well

Your idea is actually challenging the concept of Prophet-hood, if that is the case, then please start a new topic discussing it since this will be off this topic

A simple answer for now would be

To commit a blasphemous act, it implies you're already a believer, you believe in God, you believe in a messenger sent from God
you decide to insult the messenger whom you believe is from God, this implies insulting God
Insulting the God you believe in is unarguably a blasphemous act

if this answers your question, then good, otherwise please start a new topic specifically discussing this

Originally posted by Ron Webb

It is reasonable to suppose that a man could recite the "message" (the Quran) without errors, and if he did make an error Allah could correct him.

Yes, God could, but since we're talking logical without relying on a script then let's use pure logic
First we're not talking about any man reciting, it's the person who's assigned the task of delivering the message

what you're suggesting that he's not infallible this opens a window of probabilities

Think of this scenario :
The messenger is prone to make an error , which God corrects

A: Either it is corrected while he's about to make the error, so the message he's delivering stays correct to an outsider who wouldn't know that this happened

B: Either it's corrected immediately after he makes the error, so the message stays correct to the outsider while knowing an error happened and was corrected

C: Either it is corrected after sometime of the error happening, thus for an outsider he received a message that was incorrect, which was corrected afterward, with a probability of him/her not receiving the correction

If it is A: then this implies infallibility.
We know B didn't happen since it wasn't reported to us ( or at least we don't have any proof it did happen )
C: would imply God allowing people receiving an incorrect message from a person who's assigned to deliver a message , which is not logical

As I said, this is a simple answer for now, if this doesn't answers your question, then please start a new topic specifically discussing this

Originally posted by Ron Webb

What I said was that there is no logical reason to suppose that Muhammad was correct in everything he said or did;

The same logic used above can be used for actions thats related to Islam

I think ( have to double check ) Actions related to everyday life is a negotiable topic between scholars, whether infallibility applies to just the teachings of the religion or everyday actions as well

Nevertheless, it's unarguable that Prophet Muhammad is the role model in all aspects of life

Originally posted by Ron Webb

and your quotes from the Quran do not support such a claim.

I might have said this in a different reply to you, so merging both here so we have only one thread going

The several verses posted, such as

قُلْ أَطِيعُواْ اللّهَ وَالرَّسُولَ فإِن تَوَلَّوْاْ فَإِنَّ اللّهَ لاَ يُحِبُّ الْكَافِرِينَ {32}
[3:32 Say: Obey God and the Messenger; but if they turn back, then surely God does not love the unbelievers.

Implies obeying the messenger, as a general rule
it doesn't state to obey him only in Qur'an

if you want to put exception to a rule, you have to bring a proof for the exception

Well, we need to know what you consider to be most of the attributes of a partner to start with, then we can see if we're attributing it to Prophet Muhhammad ( PBUH ) ?

Originally posted by Ron Webb

I've already mentioned the degree of reverence, the protection from insult, infallibility, the function of defining doctrine,

As mentioned before, this is not unique to Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) only
So it's not an attribute that's for a partner with God
Unless you're implying that we have hundreds and thousands of partners of God ( there's about 120 thousand prophet and messenger ) which as you're probably aware of, not true

Originally posted by Ron Webb

and authority that transcends time and space.

Every messenger had such authority until the time of the messenger that comes after him
Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) was the last of the Prophets, so his message remains authoritative

Originally posted by Ron Webb

However, I think it's more important to know what Muslims would consider to be the attributes of a partner to Allah. Aside from the error of addressing prayers directly to Allah, what else would constitute the sin of shirk?

As mentioned, some of the attributes that we never attribute to a human or another creature

Self existence
Creation by self power ( not by another's power )
All knowing
All Sustaining
Self subsisting

I have to say that I find the concept of God in western civilization to be quite weak
I recall watching a movie where someone thinks he gained immortality, and he calls on someone and say something like "look as I now have equation with God"

For muslims, even if God gave immortal life has nothing to do with being partner with God, of it is 'given' , not self stated attribute
Same as the power to create, God gave Jesus ( PBUH ), the power to create out of mud shapes that would come to life, believing in this, doesn't mean we believe Jesus ( PBUH ) is partner with God

Originally posted by Ron Webb

The passages you quoted state that the purpose of the Quran (a.k.a. the "Reminder", "the Book") is for Muhammad to make clear what is revealed. In other words, Muhammad recites the Quran, and thus makes it clear what has been revealed.
It is not an invitation for Muhammad to add his own commentary,

First : If you know arabic , you would know the arabic word in the verse 'letubayen' implies making clear in a form of explaning, some translators simply use the word explain instead of making clear

Second : What in reciting would cause something that's unclear to become clear ? or something that's not understood to become understood
If I don't understand a verse and it's recited to me 10 times, I still won't understand it

Third : that's not how the Prophet ( PBUH ) understood the Qur'an, nor the companions did, and surely the one who received the message is the best one to understand it , correct ?

Originally posted by Ron Webb

which would have made it unclear what had been revealed by Allah and what had not;

First : God revealed many things to Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) not only the Qur'an, an example is the Qudsi Hadith, which are words from God, but not Qur'an
Second : it's not true that commenting on the verses would result on the companions not knowing what is Qur'an and what is not for several reasons :
A: Qur'an is recited, not just spoken,
if you heard Qur'an being recited before, you would know how it differs from saying human words
( if you haven't heard Qur'an you can visit http://mp3quran.net/ where you can hear it from several reciters )
B: It is a muslim tradition to make meetings specifically for reciting Qur'an, if anything would have got mixed it would show
C: In the five daily prayers, Muslims read Qur'an out loud in group prayers, any mix of human words would show up immediately

Originally posted by Ron Webb

and indeed Muhammad forbade the scribes to record his own words

This statement as it is, is not correct

recording comes in different ways, it could be by writing or by memorizing and delivering

As for memorizing, Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) encouraged us to hear his words, understand it and transfer it to another as we heard it, the hadiths in this topic are famous, I can post some if you want
Also note memorizing was the main method of transmitting data for Arabs, who were used to memorize thousands of lines of poetry like you would memorize your home address
If this sound bizarre to you, try to visit some Qur'an schools, where you might find a 7 years old child who memorizes all of the Qur'an by heart, every single word and letter

As for writing
It is true that Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) forbade some companions in the early days of Islam to write his own words, but he later allowed some companions to do so such as Abdulllah ibn Amr in Al'As
Many companions had documents, written in it the hadiths of the Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH )

Some of them are :

Sa'ad Ibn Ubada Al Ansari
Abdullah ibn Abi Awfa
Samra bin jundub
Aby Rafe'
Abu Harira
Abu Mussa Al Ash'ari ( Kept in Saheed Aly basha library in Istanbul )
Gabir ib Abdullah ( Kept in Saheed Aly basha library in Istanbul )

Originally posted by Ron Webb

for exactly that reason.

I think you mentioned before that you can not know why Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) did something, are you saying now that we can know why he did somethings ?

Originally posted by Ron Webb

Exactly, because those details are unimportant

unimportant to who ?
it was important to the Prophet ( PBUH ), and the companions and to all muslims that came afterward

God orders us to perform prayers, to fast, to perform hajj, to pay zakah

Without these details, either we have an order that we have no exact clue how to obey, or we have individual ideas about how to obey it
either are against the cores of Islam

Originally posted by Ron Webb

and may vary with different times and circumstances.

What's in prayers, fasting, zakah, hajj varies from different times and circumstances ?

In prayers ( salat ) we read Qur'an then bow down, what might happen that cause this to be the other way around ?

True as well, because they come from the Prophet ( PBUH ) whose sayings are guided from God whom instructed us to follow the Prophet ( PBUH )

Originally posted by Ron Webb

There is no evidence in the Quran that his sayings, aside from the Quran itself, were guided by God. The instruction to "follow the Messenger" (not the Prophet) means to follow him in his capacity as a messenger, in other words to abide by his message.

As mentioned before, the rule to follow the messenger is a general rule
If you want to apply exceptions, you need proof for that exception

Originally posted by Ron Webb

At best it could be interpreted as instructions to his contemporaries to follow Muhammad as a leader among men, i.e. as a political or social leader; but it makes no sense to follow a leader who is long dead, unless we are to follow him into death.

We think of Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) as the best leader to follow
Do you know of a better leader to follow ?

Will you please read about His legacy ( PBUH ) , as a husband, leader, in aspects such as generosity, dealing with followers, dealing with enemies, dealing with those who hard him, dealing with those who reject him, communicating ....etc. and find if someone else would be a better leader in such aspects

Originally posted by Ron Webb

For example, in sura 4:65 how are we in 2009 supposed to make Muhammad "judge in all disputes"? How can a dead man judge anything?

By following His teachings and applying it to matters of dispute in our times, this is how muslims understood this verse since the early days, for surely Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) wasn't present every place there was muslims

Originally posted by Ron Webb

Islam "unites" believers!?

This might sound a laughable idea to you, but yes it does
Even with all the differences, the common between muslims is far more than the difference

We pray to the same God
We believe in the same Prophet ( PBUH )
We read the same book
We pray in the same times, to the same direction
We fast the same month
We pilgrimage to the same place, in the same time

Ask anyone who's been to Hajj, how it feels to be in this mix of so many nationalities, races and they will tell you it DOES unite people all together

Yes, the differences might seem to be more, but then again, if you and me sit in one place, and we have 95% topics we agree upon, we won't be discussing it, we would discuss the 5 % only

It's unfortunate that we're now in a time where many muslims lost the feeling of unity or nation, but most of the islamic countries have only recently been freed from so many years of occupation, and manipulation by other powers
It takes a long time to get out of this mix of poverty, sickness and ignorance, especially that in several muslim countries the ruling parties do notseem to be acting for the good of the people,
but it will come back again, we're hopefull of that

Originally posted by Ron Webb

Sunnis and Shias have been slaughtering each other for centuries over silly unimportant differences in dogma that have no basis in the Quran!

As far as I know, differences in thoughts never resulted in such killings / fighting on a large scale, maybe some individual incidents

It's only when politics / power / wealth was involved that fighting came to such sad scale

Originally posted by Ron Webb

And that, by the way, is my point. I am not a Muslim myself, so I have no personal stake in its dogma.

Your knowledge of Islam doesn't sound like a mere stranger to it, were you used to be muslim, or had close muslim friends ?

Originally posted by Ron Webb

However, for the sake of the world as a whole I would very much like Islam to be a "religion of peace", as it claims; and IMHO that cannot happen as long as it is tied to the corrupt and anachronistic hadith.

Well, it seems you based an opinion on hadith, which is broad general
Muslims don't think of hadith in this broad general way, it's categorized in so many categories, ranging from authoritative to some that are not authoritive at all
If you want to discuss hadith, and why you say it's corrupt, please open a new topic

That said, as demonstrated clearly ( I hope ) muslims consider words of the Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) to be part of the core of Islam

Also, the idea of linking Islam to not be the religion of peace to one thing or another in it results in an endless road
First we'll be asked to reject hadith
Second we'll be asked to reject verses in the Qur'an that doesn't 'suit' the agenda for modern world peace
Third we'll be asked to reject group practices ( what remained from it after rejecting hadiths )
and the list goes on
We know this is what some want muslims to do, and thank God this didn't happen, and we pray it doesn't

I hope you found your answers, feel free to ask more if you wish

Also, I would like to note that with all due respect to all members here, I think the majority didn't not study islamic sciences
if you don't find answers you're looking for here, I suggest going to a forum where more specialized people visit, like
http://forum.aslein.net/index.php
the arabic forum is quite active, I'm not sure how active the english one

May God guide us all to the righteous path

Best Regards

Author	Message
Sign*Reader Senior Member Joined: 02 November 2005 Online Status: Offline Posts: 3352	Posted: 08 October 2009 at 10:01pm
	*Originally posted by Ron Webb* The Quran tells us how to perform wudu ... when to pray ... and how to pray Exactly. (And thanks for those quotes.) It seems pretty clear to me, and where it is unclear that can only be intentionally so, because the details are unimportant -- not because Allah failed to explain it adequately. What is clear to you? Which is not even factual...capice, the main reason the Prophet(s) was sent to establish ...worship of one true God (Allah)...Prophet(s) showed it by his personal sunnah and hadith as per Gabrial's instructions which were not part of the Quran... It is hilarious we have reincarnation of Rashad Khalifa in you here preaching Quran only stuff...It did not work for the Black Muslim reverts though they tried for quite some time under Elijah M... Ron, you are barking up the wrong tree...preaching us go the same way as the Christians, where they had a questionable collection of stories and that church took all the liberties in creating the dogma, make it fit any or all circumstances! And ended up with What you are saying if the Muslim prayers methods are not found in Quran then they are not important and don't need to be practiced even if they been continually handed down from the Prophet(s) time unbroken... What a proposal you have here asking Muslims to commit a creedal suicide WOW, you have lot of nerve amigo...What the colonist couldn't achieve in a century of control you want to get done with this... BTW Have you tried this hand on Orthodox Jews asking them to stick to Torah and forget about Midrash and Mishnah and see how far you get! Tell you what you want to learn or just waste our time in talking nonsense... Finally the Quran is an executive summary of Allah's plans with references of past and future... the study of sunnah and hadith gives you how were plans executed and the guidelines on how to handle entirely new situations and stay within the legal parameters and not be like the non believers of the hereafter! Edited by Sign*Reader - 09 October 2009 at 4:22pm
	Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction.
	IP Logged

Hayfa Female Islam Senior Member Joined: 07 June 2005 Location: United States Online Status: Offline Posts: 2370	Posted: 09 October 2009 at 9:10am
	My eyes glaze over some more...
	When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy. Rumi
	IP Logged

Akhe Abdullah Male Islam Senior Member Joined: 19 November 2008 Location: United States Online Status: Offline Posts: 1252	Posted: 09 October 2009 at 10:35am
	If Im not mistaken and im sorry if this was mentioned but Prophet Muhammad had a right to establish rules, the Prophets were leaders of man.And be it that He is the last Rasool his law is last.what happen Ron you went and found Jesus did you?or are you still Humanist Prophet Muhammad was the best of Humans. [IMG]smileys/smiley2.gif" align="middle" /> Edited by Akhe Abdullah - 10 October 2009 at 11:55am
	IP Logged

Meditations Senior Member Joined: 16 November 2002 Online Status: Offline Posts: 239	Posted: 09 October 2009 at 5:13pm
	*Originally posted by Ron Webb* I know nothing of angels, but I know plenty about humans. To insult a man is not ordinarily blasphemous; and man by his very nature is imperfect and capable of mistakes. This is the islamic view about humans as well, that they are not immune from errors / mistakes, but we have exception to that, which is Prophets Also insulting even though is a wrong thing, is not blasphemous, with the exception of Prophets as well Your idea is actually challenging the concept of Prophet-hood, if that is the case, then please start a new topic discussing it since this will be off this topic A simple answer for now would be To commit a blasphemous act, it implies you're already a believer, you believe in God, you believe in a messenger sent from God you decide to insult the messenger whom you believe is from God, this implies insulting God Insulting the God you believe in is unarguably a blasphemous act if this answers your question, then good, otherwise please start a new topic specifically discussing this *Originally posted by Ron Webb* It is reasonable to suppose that a man could recite the "message" (the Quran) without errors, and if he did make an error Allah could correct him. Yes, God could, but since we're talking logical without relying on a script then let's use pure logic First we're not talking about any man reciting, it's the person who's assigned the task of delivering the message what you're suggesting that he's not infallible this opens a window of probabilities Think of this scenario : The messenger is prone to make an error , which God corrects A: Either it is corrected while he's about to make the error, so the message he's delivering stays correct to an outsider who wouldn't know that this happened B: Either it's corrected immediately after he makes the error, so the message stays correct to the outsider while knowing an error happened and was corrected C: Either it is corrected after sometime of the error happening, thus for an outsider he received a message that was incorrect, which was corrected afterward, with a probability of him/her not receiving the correction If it is A: then this implies infallibility. We know B didn't happen since it wasn't reported to us ( or at least we don't have any proof it did happen ) C: would imply God allowing people receiving an incorrect message from a person who's assigned to deliver a message , which is not logical As I said, this is a simple answer for now, if this doesn't answers your question, then please start a new topic specifically discussing this *Originally posted by Ron Webb* What I said was that there is no logical reason to suppose that Muhammad was correct in everything he said or did; The same logic used above can be used for actions thats related to Islam I think ( have to double check ) Actions related to everyday life is a negotiable topic between scholars, whether infallibility applies to just the teachings of the religion or everyday actions as well Nevertheless, it's unarguable that Prophet Muhammad is the role model in all aspects of life *Originally posted by Ron Webb* and your quotes from the Quran do not support such a claim. I might have said this in a different reply to you, so merging both here so we have only one thread going The several verses posted, such as قُلْ أَطِيعُواْ اللّهَ وَالرَّسُولَ فإِن تَوَلَّوْاْ فَإِنَّ اللّهَ لاَ يُحِبُّ الْكَافِرِينَ {32} [3:32 Say: Obey God and the Messenger; but if they turn back, then surely God does not love the unbelievers. Implies obeying the messenger, as a general rule it doesn't state to obey him only in Qur'an if you want to put exception to a rule, you have to bring a proof for the exception Well, we need to know what you consider to be most of the attributes of a partner to start with, then we can see if we're attributing it to Prophet Muhhammad ( PBUH ) ? *Originally posted by Ron Webb* I've already mentioned the degree of reverence, the protection from insult, infallibility, the function of defining doctrine, As mentioned before, this is not unique to Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) only So it's not an attribute that's for a partner with God Unless you're implying that we have hundreds and thousands of partners of God ( there's about 120 thousand prophet and messenger ) which as you're probably aware of, not true *Originally posted by Ron Webb* and authority that transcends time and space. Every messenger had such authority until the time of the messenger that comes after him Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) was the last of the Prophets, so his message remains authoritative *Originally posted by Ron Webb* However, I think it's more important to know what Muslims would consider to be the attributes of a partner to Allah. Aside from the error of addressing prayers directly to Allah, what else would constitute the sin of shirk? As mentioned, some of the attributes that we never attribute to a human or another creature Self existence Creation by self power ( not by another's power ) All knowing All Sustaining Self subsisting I have to say that I find the concept of God in western civilization to be quite weak I recall watching a movie where someone thinks he gained immortality, and he calls on someone and say something like "look as I now have equation with God" For muslims, even if God gave immortal life has nothing to do with being partner with God, of it is 'given' , not self stated attribute Same as the power to create, God gave Jesus ( PBUH ), the power to create out of mud shapes that would come to life, believing in this, doesn't mean we believe Jesus ( PBUH ) is partner with God *Originally posted by Ron Webb* The passages you quoted state that the purpose of the Quran (a.k.a. the "Reminder", "the Book") is for Muhammad to make clear what is revealed. In other words, Muhammad recites the Quran, and thus makes it clear what has been revealed. It is not an invitation for Muhammad to add his own commentary, First : If you know arabic , you would know the arabic word in the verse 'letubayen' implies making clear in a form of explaning, some translators simply use the word explain instead of making clear Second : What in reciting would cause something that's unclear to become clear ? or something that's not understood to become understood If I don't understand a verse and it's recited to me 10 times, I still won't understand it Third : that's not how the Prophet ( PBUH ) understood the Qur'an, nor the companions did, and surely the one who received the message is the best one to understand it , correct ? *Originally posted by Ron Webb* which would have made it unclear what had been revealed by Allah and what had not; First : God revealed many things to Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) not only the Qur'an, an example is the Qudsi Hadith, which are words from God, but not Qur'an Second : it's not true that commenting on the verses would result on the companions not knowing what is Qur'an and what is not for several reasons : A: Qur'an is recited, not just spoken, if you heard Qur'an being recited before, you would know how it differs from saying human words ( if you haven't heard Qur'an you can visit http://mp3quran.net/ where you can hear it from several reciters ) B: It is a muslim tradition to make meetings specifically for reciting Qur'an, if anything would have got mixed it would show C: In the five daily prayers, Muslims read Qur'an out loud in group prayers, any mix of human words would show up immediately *Originally posted by Ron Webb* and indeed Muhammad forbade the scribes to record his own words This statement as it is, is not correct recording comes in different ways, it could be by writing or by memorizing and delivering As for memorizing, Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) encouraged us to hear his words, understand it and transfer it to another as we heard it, the hadiths in this topic are famous, I can post some if you want Also note memorizing was the main method of transmitting data for Arabs, who were used to memorize thousands of lines of poetry like you would memorize your home address If this sound bizarre to you, try to visit some Qur'an schools, where you might find a 7 years old child who memorizes all of the Qur'an by heart, every single word and letter As for writing It is true that Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) forbade some companions in the early days of Islam to write his own words, but he later allowed some companions to do so such as Abdulllah ibn Amr in Al'As Many companions had documents, written in it the hadiths of the Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) Some of them are : Sa'ad Ibn Ubada Al Ansari Abdullah ibn Abi Awfa Samra bin jundub Aby Rafe' Abu Harira Abu Mussa Al Ash'ari ( Kept in Saheed Aly basha library in Istanbul ) Gabir ib Abdullah ( Kept in Saheed Aly basha library in Istanbul ) *Originally posted by Ron Webb* for exactly that reason. I think you mentioned before that you can not know why Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) did something, are you saying now that we can know why he did somethings ? *Originally posted by Ron Webb* Exactly, because those details are unimportant unimportant to who ? it was important to the Prophet ( PBUH ), and the companions and to all muslims that came afterward God orders us to perform prayers, to fast, to perform hajj, to pay zakah Without these details, either we have an order that we have no exact clue how to obey, or we have individual ideas about how to obey it either are against the cores of Islam *Originally posted by Ron Webb* and may vary with different times and circumstances. What's in prayers, fasting, zakah, hajj varies from different times and circumstances ? In prayers ( salat ) we read Qur'an then bow down, what might happen that cause this to be the other way around ? True as well, because they come from the Prophet ( PBUH ) whose sayings are guided from God whom instructed us to follow the Prophet ( PBUH ) *Originally posted by Ron Webb* There is no evidence in the Quran that his sayings, aside from the Quran itself, were guided by God. The instruction to "follow the Messenger" (not the Prophet) means to follow him in his capacity as a messenger, in other words to abide by his message. As mentioned before, the rule to follow the messenger is a general rule If you want to apply exceptions, you need proof for that exception *Originally posted by Ron Webb* At best it could be interpreted as instructions to his contemporaries to follow Muhammad as a leader among men, i.e. as a political or social leader; but it makes no sense to follow a leader who is long dead, unless we are to follow him into death. We think of Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) as the best leader to follow Do you know of a better leader to follow ? Will you please read about His legacy ( PBUH ) , as a husband, leader, in aspects such as generosity, dealing with followers, dealing with enemies, dealing with those who hard him, dealing with those who reject him, communicating ....etc. and find if someone else would be a better leader in such aspects *Originally posted by Ron Webb* For example, in sura 4:65 how are we in 2009 supposed to make Muhammad "judge in all disputes"? How can a dead man judge anything? By following His teachings and applying it to matters of dispute in our times, this is how muslims understood this verse since the early days, for surely Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) wasn't present every place there was muslims *Originally posted by Ron Webb* Islam "unites" believers!? This might sound a laughable idea to you, but yes it does Even with all the differences, the common between muslims is far more than the difference We pray to the same God We believe in the same Prophet ( PBUH ) We read the same book We pray in the same times, to the same direction We fast the same month We pilgrimage to the same place, in the same time Ask anyone who's been to Hajj, how it feels to be in this mix of so many nationalities, races and they will tell you it DOES unite people all together Yes, the differences might seem to be more, but then again, if you and me sit in one place, and we have 95% topics we agree upon, we won't be discussing it, we would discuss the 5 % only It's unfortunate that we're now in a time where many muslims lost the feeling of unity or nation, but most of the islamic countries have only recently been freed from so many years of occupation, and manipulation by other powers It takes a long time to get out of this mix of poverty, sickness and ignorance, especially that in several muslim countries the ruling parties do notseem to be acting for the good of the people, but it will come back again, we're hopefull of that *Originally posted by Ron Webb* Sunnis and Shias have been slaughtering each other for centuries over silly unimportant differences in dogma that have no basis in the Quran! As far as I know, differences in thoughts never resulted in such killings / fighting on a large scale, maybe some individual incidents It's only when politics / power / wealth was involved that fighting came to such sad scale *Originally posted by Ron Webb* And that, by the way, is my point. I am not a Muslim myself, so I have no personal stake in its dogma. Your knowledge of Islam doesn't sound like a mere stranger to it, were you used to be muslim, or had close muslim friends ? *Originally posted by Ron Webb* However, for the sake of the world as a whole I would very much like Islam to be a "religion of peace", as it claims; and IMHO that cannot happen as long as it is tied to the corrupt and anachronistic hadith. Well, it seems you based an opinion on hadith, which is broad general Muslims don't think of hadith in this broad general way, it's categorized in so many categories, ranging from authoritative to some that are not authoritive at all If you want to discuss hadith, and why you say it's corrupt, please open a new topic That said, as demonstrated clearly ( I hope ) muslims consider words of the Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) to be part of the core of Islam Also, the idea of linking Islam to not be the religion of peace to one thing or another in it results in an endless road First we'll be asked to reject hadith Second we'll be asked to reject verses in the Qur'an that doesn't 'suit' the agenda for modern world peace Third we'll be asked to reject group practices ( what remained from it after rejecting hadiths ) and the list goes on We know this is what some want muslims to do, and thank God this didn't happen, and we pray it doesn't I hope you found your answers, feel free to ask more if you wish Also, I would like to note that with all due respect to all members here, I think the majority didn't not study islamic sciences if you don't find answers you're looking for here, I suggest going to a forum where more specialized people visit, like http://forum.aslein.net/index.php the arabic forum is quite active, I'm not sure how active the english one May God guide us all to the righteous path Best Regards
	IP Logged

Meditations Senior Member Joined: 16 November 2002 Online Status: Offline Posts: 239	Posted: 09 October 2009 at 5:23pm
	**Originally posted by SignReader* According to the Prophet the Hadith were not to be recorded while Quran was being revealed to keep Quranic authority perspective clearly supreme...That should tell you something ...** AsSalam Alaykoum SignReader ( interesting name, I have to say ) I'm sorry but your statement lacks some information, which I find many muslims who didn't study history of hadith don't know about Recording comes in different ways, it could be by writing or by memorizing and informing others As for memorizing, Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) encouraged us to hear his words, understand it and transfer it to another as we heard it, the hadiths in this topic are famous, I can post some if you want Also note memorizing was the main method of transmitting data for Arabs, who were used to memorize thousands of lines of poetry like you would memorize your home address This shouldn't be of any surprise to you, when you can find children who memorize all of the Qur'an by heart, every single word and letter As for writing* It is true that Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) forbade companions in the early days of Islam to write his own words, but he later on allowed some companions to do so such as Abdulllah ibn Amr in Al'As Many companions had documents, written in it the hadiths of the Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) Some of them are : Sa'ad Ibn Ubada Al Ansari Abdullah ibn Abi Awfa Samra bin jundub Aby Rafe' Abu Harira Abu Mussa Al Ash'ari ( Kept in Saheed Aly basha library in Istanbul ) Gabir ib Abdullah ( Kept in Saheed Aly basha library in Istanbul ) and God knows best AsSalam Alaykoum
	IP Logged

Akhe Abdullah Male Islam Senior Member Joined: 19 November 2008 Location: United States Online Status: Offline Posts: 1252	Posted: 09 October 2009 at 5:55pm
	SubhanAllah! Salams Mediations.Nice, for me that right there makes alot of sense as do everything I have learned for the last fifteen years.This takes me back to a reply from one of the Christian members that said the Bible(Engil)was like the Hadith first I thought no,but know I think that it is similar since those closes to Prophet Muhammad(SAW) wrote the Ahadith just like they say the ones closes to Jesus(As)wrote the Engil.And niethier of them Prophet(SAW)or(Jessus)(As) wrote anything.SubhanAllah!Hafiz(memorizing)AlHamduillah!
	IP Logged

Sign*Reader Senior Member Joined: 02 November 2005 Online Status: Offline Posts: 3352	Posted: 09 October 2009 at 7:48pm
	*Originally posted by Meditations* **Originally posted by SignReader* According to the Prophet the Hadith were not to be recorded while Quran was being revealed to keep Quranic authority perspective clearly supreme...That should tell you something ...** AsSalam Alaykoum SignReader ( interesting name, I have to say ) I'm sorry but your statement lacks some information, which I find many muslims who didn't study history of hadith don't know about Recording comes in different ways, it could be by writing or by memorizing and informing others As for memorizing, Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) encouraged us to hear his words, understand it and transfer it to another as we heard it, the hadiths in this topic are famous, I can post some if you want Also note memorizing was the main method of transmitting data for Arabs, who were used to memorize thousands of lines of poetry like you would memorize your home address This shouldn't be of any surprise to you, when you can find children who memorize all of the Qur'an by heart, every single word and letter As for writing* It is true that Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) forbade companions in the early days of Islam to write his own words, but he later on allowed some companions to do so such as Abdulllah ibn Amr in Al'As Many companions had documents, written in it the hadiths of the Prophet Muhammad ( PBUH ) Some of them are : Sa'ad Ibn Ubada Al Ansari Abdullah ibn Abi Awfa Samra bin jundub Aby Rafe' Abu Harira Abu Mussa Al Ash'ari ( Kept in Saheed Aly basha library in Istanbul ) Gabir ib Abdullah ( Kept in Saheed Aly basha library in Istanbul ) and God knows best AsSalam Alaykoum Waalykumussalaam, signs...there are signs to readYou know what I mean? Thanks for the info if you say these Sahabis recorded hadith were on substantial practices and became part of the Sharia, well and good, so no issue there and they do not impact the argument against Ron's suggestion for Muslims -who are up against a great liberalism's wave- of Hadith abandonment altogether... all data of Hadith are based on the chain of transmitters and narrators...I know then the whole science of Hadith takes over for their soundness, that is a long subject to make Mohuddis ) which is kinda late for me ... Edited by Sign*Reader - 09 October 2009 at 8:03pm
	Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction.
	IP Logged

Mansoor_ali Male Islam Senior Member Joined: 25 September 2008 Location: Pakistan Online Status: Offline Posts: 582	Posted: 10 October 2009 at 11:26am
	Subject:Hadith important part of Islam No doubt Hadith is very important part of Islam.We have to follow Hadith when we read Quran.Even we cannot understand Quran when we ignore Hadith.
	IP Logged

	Active Topics Memberlist Calendar Search Help
	Register Login Old Forum

Interfaith Dialogue
IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Religion - Islam : Interfaith Dialogue

Topic: Muhammad as a partner with Allah
	<< Prev Page of 28 Next >>