ISIL, Taliban = True Islam??

[SA Huguenot]

You need to know, that even the most dogmatic, hardcore, extremely and fanatically hadith believing, maula type muslim will never in their life believe all the ahadith. So you are more extreme, more hardcore, and more fanatical than any muslim in the whole world to believe any hadith you pick up as "Historically valid" enough to quote one, and stand on in as absolutely historic. You are much much more fanatical than any muslim I have ever heard of in my whole life.

This is not the Islamic method. You have built your own Islamic sect.

1. No muslim in the world believes in all the hadith.
2. Most of the hadith you find in the whole are fake "according to Muslims".
3. Its recorded for "Study if Ilmal ahadith", a science of hadith.
4. The Qur'an is considered Muhaimunun wa Furqaan in ahadith. The Supervisor and Criterion.
5. They use the primary manner of Qur'an bi Qur'an to study the Qur'an. Everyone does.

Your so called "True Islam" methodology is as ignorant as a child who cannot count but says "I watched the stars last night, so I am now an astro physicist".

I thought the Quran is easy to understand, and has no errors or needs no interperetation?

Now you tell me the Quran is the supervisor of the Hadith?
Why not just dump all of the Hadith pal?

Oh, I forgot, you need the Hadith to interperate the Quran!
Funny that Allah had to reveal a book that needs Muhammads explanations from people who by hearsay told their offspring what Muhammad said.
Then Muslim scholars has to sift through all these traditions, to get the ones who they say are the best, and then scrap the rest.

Is the Quran realy that flimsy?
From my point of view, YES.
It is a mumbo Jumbo of storytelling with no beginning, and no ending in its naratives plagerised from the Bible and other pagan myths.
To read it is painfull to intellect, and numbing to the brain. It is repitition after repitition, with absolute zero literacy value at all.

If it was not for Muslims who started to chime on every word, to make the quran sound interesting, Arabs would have discarded it a long time ago.

Now, studying the quran is perhaps the most horrendous thing I did.
I found Allah assisting Muhammad in everything he wanted out of greed, and Allah supporting Muhammad in killing off any critisizer about his so called prophethood.

But, this is not only me thinking this way, millions of ex Muslims say the same.
One Ex Muslim said he wasted his life in memorising the Quran. But he was forced due to peer pressure.
This is the true Islam.
Everyone watches everyone, and if you find anyone not conforming, they must be punnished by the laws of Allah.
Anyone saying anything bad about Muhammad, must die!

And you know the above it the truth, and you defend these autrocities.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Well, then you have to pick and choose between the already colelcted "Correct" traditions collected by Muslim scholars.
I love the way Muslims dont like some traditions, and loves the next.

This is the reason why Muslims have to jiggle and wiggle.
The Quran can not be understood without the hadith, but the Quran is a very bad book with the interperetation of the Hadith.
Thats why Muslims needs to create some "science" in interperating the Hadith and the Quran.
You need a whole bunch of previous islamic scholars to tell you the best of explanations, to get out of the bad reality of what the Quran and Hadith tells us.
Hundreds of years of excuse after excust, then we call it the science of interperating the Hadith, because we now can show what a peacefull book the Quran is.

In the meantime, the Islamic scholars sits in the Mosques and teaches "Real" Muslims to fight and to wage war against the West, untill only Islam is left.
In your madrassas you sprout Jihadi's and suicide bombers, with the nicely formulated "Science" from your Hadith.
My friend,
You dont need to try to teach me about the true Islam you want to sell, no, go to the islamic terrorists that kills, rapes, and decapitated people for 1450 years.
Even now in Africa, in Mocambique, and Somalia, and Nigeria Muslims are practicing the Quran and Hadith.
Go there and tell them they are wrong.
Or go to Iraque, and Iran, and tell them the Hadith is wrong.

lets see what they do to you?

I am a culture Christian and atheist. And I will fight them if I have to or even fight you. So sorry. I have a different faith than you and no, it is not Islam.

 

[firedragon]

Carry on to lie about Islam, Taquiah, taquiah!

Thats cute.

But do give me your so called bookworm study on this "Taqeeyah". Because you dont have any, you are trolling.

 

[firedragon]

Now you tell me the Quran is the supervisor of the Hadith?
Why not just dump all of the Hadith pal?

Oh, I forgot, you need the Hadith to interperate the Quran!
Funny that Allah had to reveal a book that needs Muhammads explanations from people who by hearsay told their offspring what Muhammad said.
Then Muslim scholars has to sift through all these traditions, to get the ones who they say are the best, and then scrap the rest.

Is the Quran realy that flimsy?
From my point of view, YES.
It is a mumbo Jumbo of storytelling with no beginning, and no ending in its naratives plagerised from the Bible and other pagan myths.
To read it is painfull to intellect, and numbing to the brain. It is repitition after repitition, with absolute zero literacy value at all.

If it was not for Muslims who started to chime on every word, to make the quran sound interesting, Arabs would have discarded it a long time ago.

Now, studying the quran is perhaps the most horrendous thing I did.
I found Allah assisting Muhammad in everything he wanted out of greed, and Allah supporting Muhammad in killing off any critisizer about his so called prophethood.

But, this is not only me thinking this way, millions of ex Muslims say the same.
One Ex Muslim said he wasted his life in memorising the Quran. But he was forced due to peer pressure.
This is the true Islam.
Everyone watches everyone, and if you find anyone not conforming, they must be punnished by the laws of Allah.
Anyone saying anything bad about Muhammad, must die!

And you know the above it the truth, and you defend these autrocities.

Absolutely cute.

The question was why you believe a few hadith that you like are absolutely historically accurate. So your generalisation, and your shifting of the burden, and your strawman proves that you are simply ignorant. And you just want to gun down people.

Nothing more, nothing less. Either answer a question, or ask.

Try to be genuine.

 

[Link]

Oh, I forgot, you need the Hadith to interperate the Quran!

You bring a good point. I've made threads about this subject though, are you aware of my stance?

I use hadiths for insights. Ahlulbayt (a) calculate their words to compliment Quran.

The Quran to me can't be interpreted without help of hadiths which differs from @firedragon stance who believes we mainly should rely on Quran by Quran. To me Quran by Quran is part of it but through help of Ahlulbayt (a) hadiths and their Welayat spiritually as well.

I believe there are many levels and types of sorcery upon Quran, and Ahlulbayt (a) know what to say, to unlock the locks and break the knots if we humble our hearts to them and don't go to their hadiths to impose our view on them but to gain insights and learn.

Also, you need their company in the journey and sometimes they need to spiritually break locks and make you see truth in Quran and make you understand through telepathy power they have.

 

[firedragon]

The Quran to me can't be interpreted without help of hadiths which differs from @firedragon stance.

Mate. Dont make strawman arguments just because you have some other viewpoint. If you wish to argue about viewpoints, do that. But dont make up bogus arguments. Concisely, do not create aunt sally's to shoot at for your pleasure.

**Mod edit**

 

[Link]

Mate. Dont make strawman arguments just because you have some other viewpoint. If you wish to argue about viewpoints, do that. But dont make up bogus arguments. Concisely, do not create aunt sally's to shoot at for your pleasure.

Salam

Sorry brother if I misunderstood your stance. What is your stance on hadiths?

 

[firedragon]

Salam

Sorry brother if I misunderstood your stance. What is your stance on hadiths?

Link. With all due respect, please do not ask me my stance on ahadith or something else as a whole because my discussion is with a guy who uploaded a visual gif of a man with beard having perverted sex with a little baby in this very forum and attributed it to the prophet Muhammed. So my personal stance on ahadith and Quran as a general theory is absolutely not relevant. Please understand that.

Peace.

 

[Link]

Link. With all due respect, please do not ask me my stance on ahadith or something else as a whole because my discussion is with a guy who uploaded a visual gif of a man with beard having perverted sex with a little baby in this very forum and attributed it to the prophet Muhammed. So my personal stance on ahadith and Quran as a general theory is absolutely not relevant. Please understand that.

Peace.

Salam

Okay brother, I understand. My view is Ilmel Rijaal is mostly unreliable (some of it is useful though) but hadiths are insights when they are truth and I believe Message and Nubuwa two different things but overlap, Nubuwa = Quran but also it's knowledge at various levels of journey and knowledge of how it appears at various levels to humanity but it's Quranic scripture, that type of revelation.

Message is found a lot in Quran, but Sunnah contains more, and clarification often is needed in the Sunnah to see the truth in Quran about it.

I also believe Ahlulbayt (a) words often can be seen to be higher then normal humans, just like Quran is higher then all speech, their speech is lower then Quran, but higher then other humans.

Messengers and Nabis are not the same although almost every Nabi was a Messenger and ever a Messenger a Nabi. They are not the same roles.

Musa (a) and Haroun (A) for example were Messengers delivering God's message to Pharaoh before they received their scriptures from God.

A non-Nabi Rasool is when a person has to deliver the clear message and revive the truth of God's religion without scripture from God.

A non-Rasool Nabi is when a person receives scripture from God but the people already accept the message and it's not about reviving the truth and religion, an example of that I believe is Dul-Kifl (a) who revealed Gog and Magog and how they lead bani-Israel astray and lead to their fall, to a people who already accept God, his Oneness, and message.

Because people would almost always break away from God's covenant and not understand the message and differ with respect to it. The case of a non-Rasool Nabi is very rare.

Anyways, I didn't want to strawman you, but just emphasize I strongly believe on relying on hadiths, but not in the way most Muslims do and not by Ilmel Rijaal.

 

[firedragon]

Okay brother, I understand. My view is Ilmel Rijaal is mostly unreliable (some of it is useful though)

Please open a new thread to discuss the science of hadith rather than aiding a guy who uploads profane pictures of your precious Navi.

Try.

 

[Link]

Please open a new thread to discuss the science of hadith rather than aiding a guy who uploads profane pictures of your precious Navi.

Try.

I'd rather discuss with you then ignorant people like him though. Anyways, I've opened threads about my approach to Quran and Sunnah, you didn't come.

 

[Link]

than aiding a guy

Try.

How did I help him?

 

[firedragon]

I'd rather discuss with you then ignorant people like him though. Anyways, I've opened threads about my approach to Quran and Sunnah, you didn't come.

Maybe it is irrelevant to me brother. So I won't come.

Anyway, what do you want to discuss. I will honour you.

 

[Link]

I was trying to say hadiths should be used for insights and sought for that. Not relied on outside of perception meaning not blindly followed.

Of course there is some hadiths we can't but blindly follow till we gain insights later from Quran or Wisdom ,to see if true or false.

But what I mean is we shouldn't say a hadith is true just based on ilmel rijaal.

 

[Link]

Salam

I noticed you did come in this thread but didn't comment on the hadiths I shared about my method: The four things that turned Islam into a religion mixed with so much lies and falsehood by believers | Religious Forums

 

[firedragon]

I was trying to say hadiths should be used for insights and sought for that. Not relied on outside of perception meaning not blindly followed.

Of course there is some hadiths we can't but blindly follow till we gain insights later from Quran or Wisdom ,to see if true or false.

But what I mean is we shouldn't say a hadith is true just based on ilmel rijaal.

Okay.

there is a hadith, proposed by this so called student of Islam or Islamic pseudo scholar who has read all the books, that Imam Ali rejected two verses of the Surah atthauba.

So what do you say about this from a Shii point of view?

 

[Link]

Amir al-mu’minin said in disparagement of the differences of view among the theologians



When1 a problem is put before anyone of them he passes judgement on it from his imagination. When exactly the same problem is placed before another of them he passes an opposite verdict. Then these judges go to the chief who had appointed them and he confirms all the verdicts, although their Allah is One (and the same), their Prophet is one (and the same), their Book (the Qur’an) is one (and the same)!

Is it that Allah ordered them to differ and they obeyed Him? Or He prohibited them from it but they disobeyed Him? Or (is it that) Allah sent an incomplete Faith and sought their help to complete it? Or they are His partners in the affairs, so that it is their share of duty to pronounce and He has to agree? Or is it that Allah the Glorified sent a perfect faith but the Prophet fell short of conveying it and handing it over (to the people)? The fact is that Allah the Glorified says:

We have not neglected anything in the Book (Qur’an) . . . (6:38),

and in it is a ‘clarification of everything’2 And He says that one part of the Qur’an verifies another part and that there is no divergence in it as He says:

.And if it had been from any other than Allah, they would surely have found in it much discrepancy. (4:82)

Certainly the outside of the Qur’an is wonderful and its inside is deep (in meaning). Its wonders will never disappear, its amazements will never pass away and its intricacies cannot be cleared except through itself.



My Comment: In this regard Imam Ali makes it clear that the Quran has not left an issue of guidance out. Everything pertaining to guidance can be found therein. He further emphasizes, that, it’s intricacies cannot be cleared except through itself. There is points we don’t see in Quran, and things that are unclear, but all that will be clarified through Quran.

One may ask, if Quran is sufficient, why do we need Ahlulbayt? And this is a secret only believers witness, the complimentary nature of the traditions of the family of Mohammad with Quran.

The traditions of Ahlulbayt (as) are supposed to be guiding ways to perceive and compliment the Quran. They are suppose to gain insights and the whole Shariah and the words of Ahlulbayt (as) always keep in mind Quran.

Hadiths are also necessary "as did the Prophet fell short of conveying it and handing it over". This means nothing is left but found in the Sunnah as well.

 

[Link]

Okay.

there is a hadith, proposed by this so called student of Islam or Islamic pseudo scholar who has read all the books, that Imam Ali rejected two verses of the Surah atthauba.

So what do you say about this from a Shii point of view?

Salam

I don't accept it. This is because Mohammad (s) can't be end of Nubuwa without Nubuwa safeguarded.

While in the past, it was okay to see divine books as possibly corrupted, because we believe Mohammad (s) is last Nabi, the belief that Quran is protected has become a necessary logical stance to take.

Or otherwise, we are denying wisdom of Nubuwa. Allah (swt) would not end Nubuwa without safeguarding the last form of it.

 

[firedragon]

But what I mean is we shouldn't say a hadith is true just based on ilmel rijaal.

Bro. Who said ahadith are true just because of Rijaal? Do you really think I am that stupid. Honestly bro, please be kind enough to make a little more effort. I am telling you because you are a Muslim and I truly believe you are an honest person. Just because I disagree with you does not mean I think you are dishonest.

try to ask people on their views prior to making judgments. Its alright. Ask me your question. Forget the relationship of this thread.

 

[Link]

Bro. Who said ahadith are true just because of Rijaal? Do you really think I am that stupid. Honestly bro, please be kind enough to make a little more effort. I am telling you because you are a Muslim and I truly believe you are an honest person. Just because I disagree with you does not mean I think you are dishonest.

try to ask people on their views prior to making judgments. Its alright. Ask me your question. Forget the relationship of this thread.

I was saying this to the non-Muslim brother where I mentioned you but was quoting him. I was trying to clarify I was trying to say hadiths are for insights not to be blindly followed (clarifying to you what I was saying to him in the first place). Actually most Muslims Shiites and Sunnis rely on Ilmel Rijaal.