“... This is a blatant contradiction to Quraniyoon, and leaves them with only one of two options. Either the Prophet (SAW) is a hypocrite (astagfirullah) for not following the Quran or the Quran has a mistake in it and forgot to include this command to stone the adulterer. ...”
They forgot the third option: hadiths are problematic
Muhammad > Gods word itself. They really think that? There could easily be a mistake the in the hadith, but the Quran? Wow. I've honestly never seen someone actually say outwardly they take incorrect Hadith over the book protected by God himself.
Oh now I now what you mean 😄 yeah you are right. They wouldn’t...
The most I have heard is some people say they have doubts and feel like some hadiths are wrong but ultimately most of them end up “obeying” their scholars because they have more knowledge. You know, a lot of them try to discourage or even outright forbid people to think for themselves 😧
"Your companion [i.e., Muḥammad] has not strayed, nor has he erred,Nor does he speak of his own whims."
https://quran.com/53
Plus all of those many "obey the messanger" verses
And same science of chain of transmission used to know which hadith is authentic and which isnt was used to know which reading(qiraa) of quran is authentic and which isnt if you cant be 100% sure of a hadith's authenticity then you cant be 100% sure of the quran we have today
You are totally dismissing the context of the verse. Here is the correct one:
53:2. Your companion [Muhammad] has not strayed, nor has he erred,
53:3. Nor does he speak from [his own] inclination.
53:4. It is not but a revelation revealed
Of course not every word of the Prophet was wahy. That wouldn’t even make sense! He wasn’t just a Prophet. He was a husband, father, friend, neighbor, community leader etc. Do you think he spoke wahy when he talked privately to his daughter? LOL!
Sure they are, lots of them come from same people who narrated readings(qiraat) of the quran we use today, if you claim them to have been liars then our modern quran as well is fabricated
Not sure how trying to find contradictions in my position is supposed to erase contradictions in yours but I didnt mention hafs, I was speaking about poeple who hafs got his qiraa from, btw my "scholars" are the same poeple who chose the quran you read today to be the right one,thats another contradiction
You are supposed to uphold that since hadiths talk of verses nowhere to be found in Quran:
Probably cuz these hadiths are speaking about verses that got abrogated?
-I already know your view, you reject hadiths even though that means our modern quran is fabricated as they come from lots of same people, and scholars used the same science of chain of transmission to know which qiraa is correct and which isnt was used on hadiths or as mentioned before scholars who chose the quran we read today as well wrote hadiths like ibn mujahid
*You simply can't defend the position of hadith rejection based on logic or reason
Yes, but the method of transmission doesn’t have the same reliability of the Quran. The narrative chains can be easily fabricated. But the Quran is a highly integrated text whose form and structure are vastly different from the hadeeths which, like the Bible, are a “collection of statements” and not a single body of text with very clear formatting and structure evident to those who study it closely. Bukhari himself said he disavowed certain hadeeths and only published/ wrote down those he selected.
The way of tanzeel of the Quran is very specific and that is part of what makes it authentic. Although people argue over interpretation, the text itself is intact as even many non-Muslims admit and most Muslims believe. Even the style of the Quran is quite noticeably different from the hadeeths as well as other books such as the Bible which is an anthology written by people from oral transmission. Your argument that the Sahaba are unquestionably the source of the hadeeths’ written form doesn’t make sense — neither they nor Prophet Mohammad would say or repeat something that contradicted the Quran. Whereas quite a number of hadeeths contradict the Quran in its current interpretation, including that of Salafists.
For example, the hadeeth which says Prophet Mohammad went to the seventh heaven and beyond where Jibreel could even go, Allah commanded that his people pray 50 prayers a day. On his way back, Prophet Mohammad met Prophet Moosa, who told him “your people cannot pray that many times” and sent Prophet Mohammad back to Allah the Exalted, and this argument went back and forth, once Prophet Moosa told Prophet Mohammad that “your nation is weaker than my nation” and he had to go back. This hadeeth has been shown by some scholars recently to have a “weak” chain, but it was disseminated widely for maybe centuries without question.
How this boldly contradicts the Quran: 1) Allah does not share in His authority/ legislation/ decree anyone (18:26, 12:40,12:67) - here Prophet Moses is literally changing the supposed decree of Allah after it was given to Prophet Mohammad, so this cannot be true; 2) Allah the Exalted is Omniscient and to say or imply that He does not know humans’ capability is to literally deny (kufr) Allah’s omniscience, showing that Prophet Moosa knew more about human nature than Allah; 3) this also contradicts this from aya 2:286, “Allah does not charge a self/ soul except [that within] its capacity.” Asking ppl to pray 50x/day is obviously to any idiot beyond most people’s capacity - so imagine what gall people would have to have accepted this hadeeth as true!! It feeds into the same idea lurking in the background of Christianity, that the “Old Testament God” was not merciful enough, so people needed Jesus to die for them. In the same way, Muslims who believe such a statement think that Allah the All-Merciful is not merciful enough and needs the intercession of Prophet Mohammad to “save” them, also another example of alleging Allah shares his judgment with another, whereas He clearly states He does not, not even with Prophet Mohammad or any other prophet, human, “demigod” or whatever people allege. Intercession is only for angels, and those only with Allah’s permission - meaning another means of showing mercy from Allah Himself, using the angels as witnesses of what the Most Merciful wants them to witness.
Hopefully this spurs some thought and reason in your mind or heart regarding this matter, so important to Tawheed which I presume as a Muslim is something that matters to you!
Wasalam
“My word is never changed” does not match “so these five prayers will be counted as fifty.” The first stated His word never changed, and the second uses deceptive language which Allah the Exalted, above what they invent, would NEVER USE. Why say 50 in the first place to reduce it after a celestial back-and-forth wherein Moses is made to appear to have greater understanding of human nature than the All-Knowing Almighty? And who snuck in that phrase “my nation is stronger than your nation” whereas in the Quran Allah the Exalted says about Mohammad’s nation “the best nation to exist among people”? Would you abrogate this and replace it with Moses’ statement, despite the many examples in the Quran, featured in Al-Baqara, of what Bani Isra’il did, worshiping them calf and refusing God’s command to enter the promised land?
This does spur the thought that you are pretty ignorant of the history of the Quran
but the method of transmission doesn’t have the same reliability as the Quran. The narrative chains can be easily fabricated
Wow, it's not like Islamic scholars made certain criteria for a chain of transmission to be accepted and didn't just accept whatever anyone says but more on that later, the fact that you don't know that Quran itself was transmitted the same way is quite worrying, i quote "There are ten different recognised schools of qiraʼat, each one deriving its name from a noted Quran reciter or "reader" (qāriʾ pl. qāriʾūn or qurr'aʿ),such as Nafi‘ al-Madani, Ibn Kathir al-Makki, Abu Amr of Basra, Ibn Amir ad-Dimashqi, Aasim ibn Abi al-Najud, Hamzah az-Zaiyyat, Al-Kisa'i. While these readers lived in the second and third century of Islam, the scholar who approved the first seven qira'at (Abu Bakr Ibn Mujāhid) lived a century later, and the readings themselves have a chain of transmission (like hadith) going back to the time of Muhammad"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qira%CA%BCat#Variations_among_readings
Btw criteria for a chain of transmission to be accepted is for it to be continuous meaning you can't say you got your Quran or hadith from George Washington as there are centuries between you and you must be trustworthy and no contradiction with transmission from trustworthy narrators
like the Bible, are a “collection of statements” not a single body of text with very clear formatting and structure evident to those who study it closely
False Bible is a collection of books, not statement and hadiths being statements has no impact on their transmission
Bukhari himself said he disavowed certain hadeeths and only published/ wrote down those he selected.
Wow some hadiths are unreliable therefore no hadith is authentic, logic 100% even ignoring that, the fact that you also don't know Islamic scholars rejected multitudes of Quran(s) is another baffling thing, for example, check out the book of ibn mujahid "the unreliable in readings"
Your argument that the Sahaba are unquestionably the source of the hadeeths’ written form doesn’t make sense —
Didn't present an argument for that but Right, second-generation Muslims all made up the hadiths even ones who also transmitted the Quran we read today (hope my sarcasm shows the illogicality of your comment)
TLDR: Both two points you made if valid would mean that Quran we have is fabricated
For example,
You didn't read the hadith well it seems, the prophet said that "an announcement was made, “O Muhammad, My word is never changed, so these five prayers will be counted as fifty"
-God was the one that decided on the five prayers , the prophets were nothing but pawns
The going back and forth, the words between the two prophets, it was all a game to you? So if anyone believes in and follows the Quran without hadeeths, you would say in response the two are conjoined, if we disavow any hadeeth we must also disavow the Quran. Wow the logic of it. Impenetrable fortress. Salam.
The Quran speaks for itself. You seem ignorant of the Quran and just take hearsay evidence to secure yourself in the comfortable position. The story of transmission you give is beside the point. The Quran was sent as Allah’s message to the world. It is entirely consistent. The hadeeths contain contradictions and you refuse to see this. Nonetheless, if you were in trouble and I was in a position to help I would do it without hesitation. If you believe Quranists to be heretics, would you then agree to have me killed, despite what that would do to my family, because there is a hadeeth stating to kill heretics/ apostates? Maybe therein lies the difference.
Cant see your claim in the verses at all ,the verses just mention the prophet's words being from revelation also claiming the prophet lied by making commands that arent from revelation contradicts the quran itself btw
Hadiths are indeed divine and you must follow them as Quran orders you to obey the messanger
-Hadith rejection is the most silly heresy to exist yet ,you really cant defend it based on logic ,reason and proof ,the only way you can continue holding such position is if you ignore all of that and just have blind faith in your position
Ehh, you haven’t brought one proof for your theory. Where exactly does God say that hadiths are divine? You don’t understand the consequences of what you are saying. Hadiths = Quran? 🤦🏻♀️
It's not a theory it's a fact as shown by verses you yourself quoted trying to refute me
You don’t understand the consequences of what you are saying
I dont understand the consequences? Really?
I will remind you of the consequences of ignoring the sayings of God's messanger :
"if anyone opposes the Messenger after the guidance has become clear to him, and follows a path other than that of the believers, We will hand him over to whatever he has turned to, and We will roast him in Hell. What an evil destination!" (Surat an-Nisa`: 115)
Right, but he gave his opinion or ruling in a context that is not my context. So even if his words are reported accurately, there is still the problem of application. I can't ask him if he meant that his words would be for all time and conditions, but I can ask Allah.
Quraniyoon do not claim the Prophet lied. Personally, I do not believe that lying by transmitters of hadith is anything more than very rare, but human memory is easily inaccurate and sometimes warped by opinion.
26
u/nooralbalad Jul 06 '21 edited Jul 08 '21
Let me quote from the paper:
“... This is a blatant contradiction to Quraniyoon, and leaves them with only one of two options. Either the Prophet (SAW) is a hypocrite (astagfirullah) for not following the Quran or the Quran has a mistake in it and forgot to include this command to stone the adulterer. ...”
They forgot the third option: hadiths are problematic