/islam/ - 8ch Masjid

>>22948

Through the hundreds of scholars that have studied and verified the hadith. If something in the hadith cannot be verified, then it is assumed false and tossed out. There are confirmed hadith and weak hadith and all manner in between.

The nice thing about hadith is that it can be questioned and debated. Fortunately, much smarter men than I have had those debates and I can read what they've written.

>But no, by your Lord, they can have no Faith, until they make you [Muhammad] judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept (them) with full submission.” [al-Nisaa’ 4:65]

>And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allaah and His Messenger . . .” [al-Nisaa’ 4:59]

>>22949

the thing that shocked me the most is hadiths such as

"The evidence that the apostate is to be executed is the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “Whoever changes his religion, execute him.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 2794). "

>https://islamqa.info/en/20327

dont deem me as troll or whatever but im very skeptical about these hadiths in particular

>>22949

My problem is when a hadith essentially creates its own doctrine/practice that becomes a dogma in the religion, yet it has no mention or foundation in the Quran.

>>22951

apostasy isn't my dispute, I'm more interested in circumcision. If it's obligatory then Allah should've told us clearly in the Quran, while further clarification/explanation could have been provided in hadith as a supplement. But I see no mention of it in the Revelation. There were many opportunities, such as the verses about Ibrahim and his faith and practices…

>>22951

>>22953

>My problem is when a hadith essentially creates its own doctrine/practice that becomes a dogma in the religion, yet it has no mention or foundation in the Quran.

Uh-oh.

> If it's obligatory then Allah should've told us clearly in the Quran, while further clarification/explanation could have been provided in hadith as a supplement. But I see no mention of it in the Revelation. There were many opportunities, such as the verses about Ibrahim and his faith and practices…

Oh no. This is what can happen when people try to drink from the firehose. Mastering hadith is a life's work. You're doing the equivalent of trying to perform open heart surgery without going to medical school. We have scholars, like Jonathan Brown, please listen to what he has to say about how to even begin approaching ahadith.

>>22953

>If it's obligatory

There's a difference of opinion on that.

>Allah should've…

We don't talk like that, ever.

>>22955

Brown's case is not compelling, it doesn't offer a way to bridge the gap in this case.

Obligatory dogma/beliefs/practices needs to be founded in divine Revelation first of all, while secondary sources/hadiths are there to illuminate the dogma, clarify, elaborate on the history and context, etc.

>>22957

What is the case you refer to? Circumcision?

>>22954

"The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim who bears witness that there is no god except Allaah and that I am His Messenger, except in one of three cases: a soul for a soul (i.e., in the case of murder); a married man who commits adultery; and one who leaves his religion and splits form the jamaa’ah (main group of Muslims).” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 6878; Muslim, 1676) "

this is not talking about the islamic caliphate times or the separation of christendom and the caliphates in medieval contexts which the video you linked says.

example of this is the "man who commits adultery" and "a soul for a soul". which is ofc made for all time and not only in the medieval period.

>>22957

>Obligatory dogma/beliefs/practices needs to be founded in divine Revelation first of all, while secondary sources/hadiths are there to illuminate the dogma, clarify, elaborate on the history and context, etc.

We're told to obey what the Prophet says here: (5: 92), (4: 59), (24: 54), (4:13), (33:71), (4:64). That is the foundation in the divine revelation for following the words of the Prophet saws. A practice, invention, or belief taken from the Prophet is by definition part of the religion, not an innovation so long as it can be authentically ascribed to the Prophet.

>>22959

Refer to the term jamaa'ah which is lazily translated, this historically refered to the local organized polity of muslims. If a muslim in a country ruled by sharia leaves Islam then yes, he is to be killed. But first he is given ample time and counsel to be brought back to his senses. Brown is talking about the secular world and secular Islamic states like Egypt. The basic principle of maslaha allows for these kind of practical distinctions regarding applying islamic law.

>example of this is the "man who commits adultery" and "a soul for a soul". which is ofc made for all time and not only in the medieval period.

Yes for all time within an Islamic polity.

>>22960

>We're told to obey what the Prophet says here

As long as it can be tested against the Quran. That's the point of the Quran it is the barometer.

If a practice or belief is important enough to be obligatory or dogmatic then it would be revealed in the Quran.

>>22958

yea

We need creedal flags of some kind here, this is getting ridiculous.

>>22961

>As long as it can be tested against the Quran. That's the point of the Quran it is the barometer.

The point is that no sound hadith can contradict the Quran. Not each and every hadith has to have a direct corollary in the Quran.

>>22962

The hanafi madhab says circumcision is a sunnah, not obligatory. Different groups of scholars interpret the Quran and Sunnah differently and arrive at different conclusions. We have different schools of thought in legal issues like this in Sunni Islam.

>>22964

so does that mean circumcision is optional in the hanafi school? And what is their reasoning for not viewing it as obligatory? Is it similar to my argument that it doesn't appear in the Quran?

Is hanafi the best school/interpretative system in sunni islam? thnx

>>22953

>yet it has no mention or foundation in the Quran

Maybe you should read Quran.

Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and beware (of evil): if ye do turn back, know ye that it is Our Messenger’s duty to proclaim (the Message) in the clearest manner. (5: 92)

O ye who believe! obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: that is best, and most suitable for final determination. (4: 59)

>>22963

>We need creedal flags

That just leads to false flagging. Judge a post on its merits, not on some abstract. Attack the argument, not the poster.

>>22966

I know those verses and they don't clarify the topic at hand.

>>22973

I didn't read them until after I made the post. Those last two hanafi opinions are duplicates.

>>22968

How much more clear does "obey the Messenger" need to be? If you want to be Quranist, then so be it. There's a board for that >>>/modernislam/ but obeying the Messenger means acceptance of the Sunnah.

>>22976

He definitely has ghulu in his approach to hadith. But I don't think he's a full-on Hadith Rejector.

>>22977

No, I imagine not; just hoping to help steer him on the right path.

>>22976

And I think he just really doesn't want to be circumcised more than anything. Hopefully he can just follow the hanafi opinion on this matter and then not be so extreme in his approach to hadith in the future.

>>22980

Getting circumcised isn't an "extreme approach" to hadith. It is the literal command by God to Abraham for all of his descendants, of which we are numerated among. If he doesn't want to be circumcised, so be it; but he shouldn't be looking for an "easy out".

>>22986

Oh oh oh … sorry, brother, I misread.

I'm not sure which practices made obligatory by hadiths you mean since you did not specify. But what we practice in terms of zakat, salat etc were transmitted through actions primarily and not through hadiths. Same with circumcision, this is something that affects everyone in the society and not something that has to be learned through memorizing a hadith.

If we talk about aqidah matters specifically then Asharis and Maturidis don't establish matters of creed based on ahad reports.

>>23802

Can the ahad hadith rejectors point to an ayat or mutawattir hadith that justifies rejecting ahad hadith?

Do ahad hadith rejectors think Adam pbuh was a prophet? And if they do, must they rely quranic exegesis (Oh, Allah talked to him, so he's prophet) because they reject the hadith?

Do they believe in the angels of the grave?

Do they share many other beliefs that were held by sahaba ra, historic muslims, and current muslims that are based on ahad hadith?

>>23810

Yes. For example in the Quran we are told to produce two witnesses for a legal matter. So it stands to reason that something that is to be a basis in aqidah can't have even lower threshold.

As for hadiths then you also have examples here. Eg the one about Aisha(ra) rejecting the hadith about women breaking salat like donkeys and dogs.

>>23811

And it's not that people are rejecting ahad hadiths per se, but rather saying it can not become a principle in aqidah by which a person commits kufr should they reject it.

>>23811

>Yes. For example in the Quran we are told to produce two witnesses for a legal matter. So it stands to reason that something that is to be a basis in aqidah can't have even lower threshold.

Extreme qiyas.

>As for hadiths then you also have examples here. Eg the one about Aisha(ra) rejecting the hadith about women breaking salat like donkeys and dogs.

Literally using a hadith ahad to justify doubting hadith ahad.

>>23813

How about you show me the hadith telling us to accept ahad hadiths then?

>Extreme qiyas.

uh ok.

>Literally using a hadith ahad to justify doubting hadith ahad.

They use Quran firstly as I just showed. But you accept ahad hadiths as certain knowledge on the same level as the Quran, so as per your own standard, you have proof of Sahaba and salaf rejecting ahad hadiths.

>>23817

>But you accept ahad hadiths as certain knowledge on the same level as the Quran

All ahadith are subordinate to Quran.

I accept all sunni aqidahs as valid, I don't pretend to be qualified to represent any aqidah, let alone to condemn others - I was just giving you a hard time.