My views about Islam and why it is so difficult to attain constructive dialogue about them

[Deidre]

I'm betting that hardly any do. Ahadith, I have read, are a major source of discord among Muslims. There may be a very few that are considered binding, but I don't think that is even a matter raised at all often.

yes, I've read that the Qur'an is considered the infallible word of God, but not Hadith, but then the other day...I read it too is considered part and parcel with the Qur'an...so...hmmm. lol

Ok, thank u Luis.

 

[Zulk-Dharma]

Thanks for the above. I'm a she, btw. ^_^

I couldn't tell if you were speaking on my behalf or to me...but, I was wondering...I've read different things about Hadith, is it considered by most Muslims or many, as the infallible word of God, also?

You're welcome!

I was speaking on your behalf. Hadith are not considered infallible nor the word of God, but similar to Christan Gospels, they are documents of the lives of Prophet Muhammad and his Companions related by a chain of narrators through generations of oral transmission, written down by Bukhari and Muslim, the most popular authors of the Hadith. As these have been transmitted and related through a generations of people with flawed memories and mentalities, it's easy to believe they are fallible and not every of these Hadith should be relied on.

 

[LuisDantas]

As these have been transmitted and related through a generations of people with flawed memories and mentalities, it's easy to believe they are fallible and not every of these Hadith should be relied on.

It is a shame that Muslims have so little faith on their own religious discernment. That usually becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

[Zulk-Dharma]

It is a shame that Muslims have so little faith on their own religious discernment. That usually becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I don't understand what you are trying to mean. Care to rephrase your post?

 

[DawudTalut]

Though it is addressed to someone else:

... I was wondering...I've read different things about Hadith, is it considered by most Muslims or many, as the infallible word of God, also?

Allah the Exalted exclusively tells about Holy Quran:
[15:10] Verily, We Ourself have sent down this Exhortation, and most surely We will be its Guardian.

In Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), there is best model:
[33:22] Verily you have in the Prophet of Allah an excellent model, for him who fears Allah and the Last Day and who remembers Allah much.

This model comes from Quran, Practice (sunnah) and Hadith (collected) latter.

Sunnah and hadith should be checked though perfectly saved Quran.

=========================================

=If a hadith is not against Holy Quran and Holy Prophet pbuh's Practice, it should be followed.

=Help from books of Ahadith [hadith-s] Bukhari andMuslim (provided their hadiths do not go against Quran) and then come other books of ahadith (provided their ahadith do not contradict Quran and Bukhari's and Muslim's ahadith-in-accordance-to-Quran.

=If despite our best effort, we do not find a hadith in accordance with Quran, we leave it.

=Ahadith are of two types.
One which fully found the cover of Holy Prophet pbuh's repeated Practice. These are surely true.

Others are those which are based on narrators' memory and righteousness etc. There status is less than surety.

=To fully reject Ahadith is not correct too. Islam was not dependent of Ahadith, It was Practice of Holy Prophet pbuh (Sunnah) which spread in millions of people generation after generation. Islam was being practiced, Salaat (five daily prayers and Tahajjud salaat and othe types of salaat) were being practiced before Ahadith were collected. Initial scholars did not mention much such Ahadith which were not already in practice.

Above points are based on Ahmadiyya Promised Messiah (a.s.)'s writings.

# 10 @ Weren't Charlie Hebdo's attackers following the Hadith? | ReligiousForums.com

 

[icehorse]

Hi Luis,

Fantastic discussion, thanks!

The main point I'd like to bring up is the political aspect of Islam. It strikes me that Islam declares itself to be a total solution, including a political solution. I was told in the last day or two, by a Muslim on this forum, that all Muslims hope to live under Sharia.

To me this is a huge point that we should attempt to clarify.

 

[LuisDantas]

I wasn't clear enough with you, man?

 

[LuisDantas]

In any case, there is something worth replying to there, so let's see.

If all Muslims wanted to live under Islamic law, they wouldn't be any Muslim immigration to Western countries, would there???

If that were always the decisive factor, I suppose not.

Considering how little of such immigration there actually is, you may be arguing that it usually is a decisive factor.

Its mostly the extreme fundamentalists that want Sharia law,

I would ask how sure you are of that. But at this point, I don't bother wanting to know. I actually wrote why, but then I thought we both would be better off attempting to forget my reasons, so I deleted that.

In any case, that is the crux of the matter. How extreme is extreme, and how representative of the average Muslim (or of the average militant Muslim) are those "extreme fundamentalists"? And for that matter, what is understood exactly by Sharia Law?

There is considerable (if inconclusive) evidence pointing towards a fair degree of confusion and premature assumptions for both concepts. Both matters (the actual reach and meaning of Sharia Law and the degree to which Muslims want to live under it) are very much worth of clarification.

But I will not be caught trusting your claims on those matters, until and unless you learn to present some convincing support for them. I'm not holding my breath.

most Muslims in most Muslim countries do not live under Sharia law and would probably prefer to keep it that way. I learned this attending a local mosque for several months 20 years ago, it was the right wing Jamat Ismaiyala group, a very vocal minority, and recognized today as a terrorist group, that was calling for Sharia law, not the everyday Muslims.

That is an interesting testimonial, in that it illustrates how difficult it is to trust the vocal groups, or even their representativeness.

Also, assuming that you are speaking about this group, it should be noted that they actually hold seats in the Egyptian Parlament even today. What that says about your certainty that they are not representative of the willingness to adopt Sharia among Muslims, I don't know and will rather not guess. I suspect you don't know either.

A majority of Muslims might like to see elements of Sharia law in Government, but not the whole package as practised 1400 years ago.

Now, that is a nice way of not saying anything of use.

Please don't come back to this thread. I have asked you at least once before in no uncertain terms.

 

[LuisDantas]

You can ask me to stay out of your own journal, certainly. It is not necessary, but you can.

 

[godnotgod]

I recently discovered Reza Aslan:

 

[paarsurrey]

and the acceptance of a line of prophets that includes Abraham

One is welcome to differ with me, yet I will express my belief that I find truthful no compulsion whatsoever for others to accept it or to get convinced with it. One has to find one's own way for one's life. It is just a gesture for peaceful dialogue.

Abrahamic line has been given only because Muhammad happened to be from that line, but that does not exclude others. It is Quran's style to start with the immediate people that makes it pragmatic , then to make it generic and to generalize for the whole world. There is nothing hypothetical, all from real life.

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

one can't accept the Quran without believing it to be immutable and eternal

One could accept it like that as a plausible notion , as one gets it confirmed with one's own experiences, then one may become firm on this.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Mohammad to be the final prophet of God

Quran is the final and formal Word of G-d, in that sense yes. In status Muhammad is the last prophet/messenger of G-d. After him there could come caliph/prophets who would follow Quran, that does not change the status of Muhammad as a master prophet/messenger.

Regards

 

[YmirGF]

Quran is the final and formal Word of G-d, in that sense yes. In status Muhammad is the last prophet/messenger of G-d. After him there could come caliph/prophets who would follow Quran, that does not change the status of Muhammad as a master prophet/messenger.

Regards

Sounds like an apt description of a supremacist replacement theology.

 

[paarsurrey]

Islam somewhat assumes that all people are ultimately Muslims, or at least would be Muslims if correctly informed and oriented

Muslim is a generic name it does not relate to a person (like Zoroastrian relate to Zoroaster or Christians to Christ or Buddhist to Buddha etc), anybody who submits to truth and is perfectly peaceful with truth qualifies to be called a muslim which in fact the word means. If one with one's own free-will wants to become a formal Muslim then one has to openly declare and become one as such.
I think it helps.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

A related matter is the end of the Caliphate.

The caliphate of Islam stands restored with Caliph/Prophet Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908. The present day is his fifth caliph Mirza Masroor Ahmad.
Regards

 

[YmirGF]

The caliphate of Islam stands restored with Caliph/Prophet Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908. The present day is his fifth caliph Mirza Masroor Ahmad.
Regards

the Caliph of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, and certainly not for the vast majority of the Muslim world.

regards.......

 

[JFish123]

I recently discovered Reza Aslan:

Reza Aslan knows nothing about Jesus as he claims and he's very bent when it comes to islam

 

[paarsurrey]

Islam is a message of hope as I see it

I agree with you.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

If you want specifics, just tell me, I will check them up and return to you.

I have checked all such places in Quran, all such places are clear in the context verses.
Muhammad was indeed opposed to violence and war.
Regards