^^

You have pretty much summed up indirectly that the dude himself deserved what he got. I have given you example of emotional outbursts in nigeria. Same applies here. I am sure Charlie is not finding it funny in his grave now. And i dont doubt that there is corruption in some of our text. It doesnt bother me a bit.

You are the one who seem to worry too much.

Response to some damage control for Hadith #6

We've received another bucket full of damage control. Let's see what the writer got.

In American democracy, despite promoting "freedom of speech", you dare not speak trash about US president without facing extra-judicial penalties. The only time you face justice system is if you make direct threat to the president. But if you say something stupid about president or the US constitution that is considered "free speech" in the eyes of the law, but it doesn't go well with secret service, i can guarantee you that CIA and FBI will take you to secret location and teach the fvck up of you in their extra-judicial treatment bcus they can not legally persecute you in court.

The writer continue to draw faulty parallels to reach half-ass conclusion.
The US is a far better country than anything the sharia activists promise, but it is still evidently flawed. And there are NGOs exposing and condemning what they see as breach of human freedom by FBI and CIA. The American public will never support the execution of anyone for speaking trash about Trump. This is one thing.
Another thing, in the US or Nigeria, you can write a newspaper column or article and publications criticizing Presidents. Sometimes these writers accuse the presidents of trashy things, but they get away with it.

In traditional Islamic law, even polite criticism of Muhammad is not allowed, not even on the internet forums like this. This is far worse than what happens in US or Nigeria.

And the reason law enforcement do this kind of illegal treatment is bcus, it is somewhere in the constitution how to deal with people who run their mouth against the country or govt officials like the president. Yet they tell you they have freedom of speech.

It'll be great if the writer reference the passage in the constitution legalizing execution and perhaps torture of people who insult the president.

Now take a look at Nigeria where citizens kill fellow citizens just for stealing without trial. They set them on fire. Why would citizens do that?. It is called emotion outburst. The same way you will see some muslim rage when Islam, Allah, Quran or the prophet is abused

.

Nigeria does not officially condone vigilante justice against criminals. Traditional Islam condones it. If a man is lynched in public for stealing a bag of rice in Nigeria, the lynch mob is condemned by the law and will probably be arrested. If a man is lynched to death for criticizing or insulting Muhammad, the lynch mob are justified under traditional Islam.

The persistence on damage control by the writer proves the problem with traditional Muslim society. His arguments are the same ones you'll hear from the likes of Zakir Naik, Yasir Qadhir, Bilal Philips, Khalid Yasin, Yusuf Qaradawi, Nouman Ali Khan, Jonathan Brown and almost every local Muslim imam, many of whom get paid to "guide" people in Islam.

There is a difference between a flawed government system like the US that doesn't attribute it laws to God and a flawed government system like Saudi Arabia and Iran that attribute their laws to God. The former is better in that there is room for change and improvement, while the latter is worse as it is unchangeable. Those who attribute man-made laws to God commit an enormous sin.

Maybe you should ask yourself what they have turned Jesus to in the name of freedom of speech. Jesus is nothing but a p*rnstar to them. So, no there is no room for trash talk against prophet of Islam. He's not for sale.

Besides, the govt I cited has separation of church and state. Therefore, it is easy for the NGO or activists to challenge authority. That's the different.

Again, due to nonsense allowed in their Christianity and separation of church and state, it gave green light to undermine their prophet Jesus. So no, our prophet is not an object of jest.

And the Hadith you cited in reference to assault on folks like Charlie, it is actually authority that has the right to carry out punishment not citizens. But since there is no law enacted to curb such jokes, and it is considered freedom of speech, then, it becomes a problem. So don't tell me there weren't Muslims that condemned attack on Hebdo. They said in order to avoid future occurrence govt around the world should enact a law banning satirical jokes about religious figures. You and I know they would not. So let's just deal with it.


Simple definition of BLASPHEMY. Blasphemy is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence to a deity, or sacred things, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable

Let's see what their Bible says about blasphemy.


"But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of eternal sin.” Mark 3:29


Blasphemy law in judeo-christian religion is capital punishment (stoning to death or by hanging) Leviticus 24:10-23. And just because they no longer up hold their religious laws doesn't mean it is not in their Book.

So since you cited our religious text, even though not all Muslim countries condone blasphemy law, it is a fact that blasphemy law exists in non Muslim Books such as Judeo-christian. They simply chose to disregard it.

So in that case why do you worry about Hadith?.

Did I not tell you?.


Here we go... This is what happens when freedom is not checked.

Watch the video

https://www.facebook.com/100005604317866/posts/869643003232502/

Fate of Blasphemers in Muslim world

Apostasy and Blasphemy seem to go hand in hand. You'll have noticed this in the cases I listed for hadith #5, most convicted apostates in the Muslim world also face charges of blasphemy. But here are a few exceptions with satirical commentary.

1. Aasia Bibi
A Pakistani Christian convicted of blasphemy in 2010 and sentenced to death. But is still in prison till date. Her personal account on the event leading to her arrest can be read here; https://nypost.com/2013/08/25/sentenced-to-death-for-a-sip-of-water/

She'd been in a heated quarrel with a Muslim co-worker and it deteriorated into snide remarks about Jesus and Muhammad.
Here are the words that incriminated her;
Aasia: I'm not going to convert(to Islam). I believe in my religion and Jesus, he died for the sin of man. What did Muhammad do for man? Why should I convert to Islam?

Auzubillah Minash Shaitan Rajeem! Damn it!! Kill this woman already. Why's the court still waiting?

How dare you Aasia, how dare you!? Do you understand what this mean!? You've insulted the noble Prophet Muhammad(SAW), the greatest man to ever live, the greatest Prophet of Allah!! Jesus will return as a Muslim, he'll follow the sunnah of Prophet Muhammad(SAW), he'll finally die a Muslim and we'll bury him in the tomb we've reserved for him beside Prophet Muhammad(SAW)'s tomb in Madina.

How dare you compare Jesus with our Prophet. We respect Jesus, but Prophet Muhammad(SAW) is the greatest Prophet. Ever! Aasia, you've been sentenced to death deservedly, you brought this upon yourself.

But Aasia, there is hope for you. You know, Islam is a religion of peace. We Muslims respect human lives, we don't want to kill you. We want to spare you. But you just have to convert, convert to our peaceful religion.

Say this, repeat after me;
Ash-hadu 'an laa'i-laa-ha 'il-lal-laa-hu
wa 'ash-ha-du 'anna mu-ham-ma-dan 'ab-du-hoo wa ra-soo-luh

Say it and we'll revoke your death sentence.

See? It's easy. Allah is most forgiving, most merciful. Is there any religion on earth that grant blasphemers this much mercy?

2. Salman Rusdie
In 1988, Salman Rusdie published The Satanic Verses. A novel with a subplot that borrows elements from traditional Islamic history. Rushdie's characters were rough analogs of traditional Islamic characters including the Prophet. But Rushdie portrays these characters in a much negative light.
There was immediate outrage, fatwas were issued, Rushdie and all those who partook in writing, editing and publishing the books were condemned to death. As weeks and months followed, several of Rushdie's editors and publishers would be hunted and slain by fanatic Muslims.
Rushdie at UK at the time of publishing is still alive today, thank to British government security.

See? These kuffars have been insulting our religion for ages. Now, I know I haven't read The Satanic Verses and I know I will never read it. But damn, I swear Rushdie insulted our religion. This is what they said, right?

Why would anyone insult a beautiful religion like Islam? I mean seriously, have they read Ibn Kathir, have they read At tirmidhi, have they read Ibn Ishaq or At Tabari.

We take our religion very serious, unlike these kuffars. Wallahi, we will kill those who insult Islam, we will behead them, we will not spare a single one of them. We cannot continue like this.

You keep repeating yourself my man. We love you but you continue to prove me right (that you have ulterior motives). This is why I never supported your stance even though you make some reasonable argument sometimes.

I want you to sincerely read on Aafia Siddiqui from various sources.

Peace

Response to more damage control

We received even more damage control from a particular reader. This reader is dedicated, very dedicated to distracting us, by collecting stories from the western world to justify what we condemn in the Muslim traditions. He is non-stop, he is relentless and even when we expose all flaws in his analogies, he keeps coming.

He writes that; "I want you to sincerely read on Aafia Siddiqui from various sources".

Why not? We've exposed the injustice by fanatic Muslims and their religious traditions for so long, it is only justice that we turn our attention to the injustice by fanatic Christians and their religious tradition.

As we read Aafia Siddiqui, we could not help but feel bad for the poor woman. This Pakistani have been persecuted and incarcerated by American Christian court for insulting Christianity. A US Christian politician that spoke in her defense was assassinated, just as Salman Taseer was assassinated for defending Aasia Bibi. An American Muslim representative that spoke in her defense was assassinated, just as Shabbaz Bhatti was assassinated for speaking in defense of Aasia Bibi.

We wholeheartedly, agree with this reader. We see that Aasia Bibi's sentence by the Pakistan court is justified, given the US court sentence on Aafia Siddiqu for the same offense as Aasia Bibi.

In the near future we will open a thread on Christian traditions, how these traditions sanction all kinds of injustice and human right violations and how modern Christians continue to observe these traditions.

At the end of the day, you agreed with my point when you said

As we read Aafia Siddiqui, we could not help but feel bad for the poor woman. This Pakistani have been persecuted and incarcerated by American Christian court for insulting Christianity. A US Christian politician that spoke in her defense was assassinated, just as Salman Taseer was assassinated for defending Aasia Bibi. An American Muslim representative that spoke in her defense was assassinated, just as Shabbaz Bhatti was assassinated for speaking in defense of Aasia Bibi.

We wholeheartedly, agree with this reader. We see that Aasia Bibi's sentence by the Pakistan court is justified, given the US court sentence on Aafia Siddiqu for the same offense as Aasia Bibi.

In the near future we will open a thread on Christian traditions, how these traditions sanction all kinds of injustice and human right violations and how modern Christians continue to observe these traditions.

@underlined is exactly my point. So why worry yourself about muslims when you admitted to this fact yourself?. What's the point of saying this

even when we expose all flaws in his analogies, he keeps coming.

when you in fact, proved my point by citing Aafia Siddiqui? What flaws?.

Stop wasting your time over what you can not control.

Blasphemy by Muslims against Islam

Hadith books are notorious for negative portrayal of the Prophet. Take an example in hadith on Aisha's marriage and consummation at the childhood age of 9. Hadith report that Aisha at the time was so young that she still played on swings and with dolls along with her girl-friends. For a child at this age to be exposed to sex is child molestation.
By crediting these hadith, the Muslims indirectly portray Muhammad a child molester, pedophile. Today, non-Muslims blaspheme by directly calling Muhammad a child molester, but Muslims are not innocent victims of 'hate speech' in any case. They are just as blasphemous as the non-Muslims.

The books of hadith pack so much details of Muhammad's sexual life that it makes one wonder if Muhammad really was the modest bashful man that Muslims visualize him as. Hadith exist on Muhammad cohabiting with a captive woman in a tent guarded by his companion after the defeat of Khaybar.
https://sunnah.com/bukhari/67/94
The History of al- Tabari, Volume 39, page 185

Hadith on Muhammad having intercourse with all his wives(9 or 11) in a single night also exists.
https://sunnah.com/bukhari/5/21

But as the Muslim community is bereft of enlightenment and intellectual honesty, the hadith are rarely ever admitted and all the grievances are channeled on those non-Muslims that express low opinions of Muhammad after reading such hadith.

They harm and murder people for simply criticizing Muhammad, for saying Muhammad did nothing for humanity. Then, they go to the mosque to 'send greetings' to Muhammad. And they say the are protecting the reputation of Muhammad.

According to one of my readers;

Maybe you should ask yourself what they have turned Jesus to in the name of freedom of speech. Jesus is nothing but a p*rnstar to them. So, no there is no room for trash talk against prophet of Islam. He's not for sale.

Apparently, this person sees himself as the personal protector of Muhammad's reputation, the Muhammad that his own traditions slander remorselessly. Kind of like an abusive spouse protecting their spouse from an aggressive neighbor. Yet, look again at Muslim traditions narrating Muhammad's nightly intercourse with 9 wives, Muhammad's sexual power of 10 men. "Who" is depicting "Who" a p*ornstar? Isn't this psychological projection of guilt?

Now, even with Muslims criminalizing blasphemy in their countries and protesting against blasphemous cartoons in the West, they are still doing a poor job in protecting Muhammad's reputation. Much poorer than Christians do to protect Christ's reputation. Christians do not revere religious texts that record questionable and filthy details about Christ. Even the harshest critics of Christianity respect Jesus, never call him a rapist, pedophile, slave master, misogynist or murderer.

Unfortunately, this is not the case for Muhammad. As Muslims from the onset revere religious texts that bear degrading and shameful reports on Muhammad, they open the door for character assassination of their own prophet. They then constantly need to defend his reputation. Kind of like a man trying to rescue his family from a house fire started by his own cigarette.

The issue of Aisha's marriage to the prophet (saw) is not really issue for me anymore. I used to worry about it. But now that we read history of medieval marriageable age, it becomes obsolete argument to use Aisha's marriage to insult the prophet.

If a girl was marriageable at age 12 in the middle ages, and a girl still legally marriageable at 15 in modern Western world, then it is really irrelevant to talk about Aisha(ra).

I'm aware of blasphemous ahadith. This is not legal justification for blasphemers.

Hadith #7
Hadith breeding stupidity and Ignorance

Sahih al-Bukhari » Book of Oneness, Uniqueness of Allah

Narrated Abu Dharr:
I entered the mosque while Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) was sitting there. When the sun had set, the Prophet (ﷺ) said, "O Abu Dharr! Do you know where this (sun) goes?" I said, "Allah and His Apostle know best." He said, "It goes and asks permission to prostrate, and it is allowed, and (one day) it, as if being ordered to return whence it came, then it will rise from the west." Then the Prophet (ﷺ) recited, "That: "And the sun runs on its fixed course (for a term decreed)," (36.38) as it is recited by `Abdullah.

I stumbled upon this hadith very recently and my first reaction on reading it was laughter. For days, this hadith continued to crop into my mind, cracking me up even after a bad day.

Argument for Hadith
Do not interpret this literally. The sun prostration is not the same as human prostration. The hadith is not saying that the sun disappears from the sky after sunset to prostrate somewhere.

Then what is it saying? What is it saying? If anything, it is saying that when we no longer see the sun after sunset, it is prostrating to its Lord. Which mean, the sun does not prostrate at day time while shining in the sky, it prostrate after sunset. But at sunset in one part of the world, the same sun is actually brightly shining in the sky at another part of the world.

This is the problem with even a symbolic or non-literal interpretation of the above hadith? It is self contradictory.
Please, notice the Prophet's supposed question; "Do you know where the sun goes?" How else do you interpret "goes" here? It clearly hint that the sun breaks from its function of igniting the sky.

Sincerely speaking the fabricators of these hadith, were ignorant folks that that had no basic knowledge of astronomy. They did not understand the Qur'anic verse in question, so what did they do? They derived an half-ass interpretation and fabricated an hadith to cover their ass. Now, when their descendants today proclaim hadith explain the Qur'an, they are actually referring to ignorant and stupid hadith like the above.

Woow, brother. You don't think you owe everyone greetings of Eld Mubarak?. It gets to the point where you can't even greet your brothers and sisters on these days of Eld?. Or this eld too is "nonesense"?. Nawa for you ooo

Anyways, the Hadith you brought up has different versions. Perhaps you picked the one that sounds silly to you?. I honestly do not have problems with it at all.


The simplest answer is that what the Prophet (saw) may be describing is not something that we can observe in the dimensions that we live in. There are plenty of phenomena that the Qur'an and the Prophet (saw) talk about that are more "unscientific" than this.


Take, for example, the hadith about sins causing black spots on our heart. Or the verse 83:14 in the Qur'an about hearts getting "rusted." Or whatever else. Clearly, there is something going on that we can't observe physically. The methodology of the Prophet (saws) and the early generations was to affirm what we know to be true, either from reason or from revelation. If there appears to be a contradiction, then it just means we haven't fully got to the bottom of the matter yet.


And since you claimed to believe in Quran only, why not condemn these verses also?. If you search in the Qur'an you will find a lots of Verses that tell us that the sun does prostrate.

In Surat al-Hajj (22:18) the prostration of the sun is clearly mentioned!


In other suwar (surahs) it's mentioned that all creations do prostrate like in Surat an-Nahl(16:49) and Surat al-Hashr (59:24).


In other places we find that they do prostrate but in their own way like in Suart al-Isra' (17:44) and Surat an-Nur (24:41).


And, yes, when the sun set in Africa for instance it is working elsewhere. But this is not the point. Point is, before it rises elsewhere where it is?. Remember sometimes it takes a while before sun rises?. If you read other visions of the Hadith you brought up, and even this one say "it asks for permission". How?, I don't know. Other versions say sometimes Allah denies it permission to rise. I believe this to be true for obvious reasons.

I know there are fake ahadith but I don't think you are sincere in your critisms. Weather forecast is enough to tell you that sun does gets delayed before it rises sometimes. This could be the time permission to rise is denied. I believe this Hadith is valid.

Wallahu Alam

Another Argument for Hadith #7

And, yes, when the sun set in Africa for instance it is working elsewhere. But this is not the point. Point is, before it rises elsewhere where it is?. Remember sometimes it takes a while before sun rises?. If you read other visions of the Hadith you brought up, and even this one say "it asks for permission". How?, I don't know. Other versions say sometimes Allah denies it permission to rise. I believe this to be true for obvious reasons.

I know there are fake ahadith but I don't think you are sincere in your critisms. Weather forecast is enough to tell you that sun does gets delayed before it rises sometimes. This could be the time permission to rise is denied. I believe this Hadith is valid.

Where is the sun prior it rising time?
The sun is still relatively in its orbit where people in other part of the world see it brightly shinning. Just before sunrise in Lagos, the sun is already brightly shining in Dubai. If sunrise in Lagos is delayed, it doesn't change the fact that the sun is already in the sky. But the writer wants to believe it is still prostrating and seeking permission to rise, whereas that same sun is already visibly shining in the sky in Dubai.

Please, keep in mind that the sun only prostrates after it has set according to this hadith.

Delay in sunrise may be due to atmospheric factors that obstruct the solar radiation from reaching us. This does not practically mean the sun is still absent when it's suppose to have risen.

The writer accuse me of insincerity in my criticism, but it's funny. Any one who took senior secondary school Geography lessons on Earth rotation will laugh in the face of the above hadith. I'm thus surprised to find many traditionalists defending this hadith. Whether this is borne out of ignorance or desperation to defend about just any sahih hadith, I can't tell.

What about the Qur'anic verses on the sun prostration?
I personally understand that the sun does not need a break at sunset to prostrate, it prostrates while its functions as a lamp. I believe the sun prostrate at sunrise, mid morning, noon afternoon, dusk, twilight etc. I don't believe the sun has specific time for prostration.

usermane:


Delay in sunrise may be due to atmospheric factors that obstruct the solar radiation from reaching us. This does not practically mean the sun is still absent when it's suppose to have risen.

this is the point here but you used scientific terms to shield yourself. You agree it does gets delayed sometimes. That's my point

What about the Qur'anic verses on the sun prostration?
I personally understand that the sun does not need a break at sunset to prostrate, it prostrates while its functions as a lamp. I believe the sun prostrate at sunrise, mid morning, noon afternoon, dusk, twilight etc. I don't believe the sun has specific time for prostration.

I don't disagree with this

Damage Control, Again

this is the point here but you used scientific terms to shield yourself. You agree it does gets delayed sometimes. That's my point

So, because the morning is cloudy and the sun is not visible at 6.00 AM, it mean the sun has not risen yet but still waiting for permission?

Do you forget that some days even in the afternoon, the sun radiation may as well be occluded, giving the impression that the sun is absent? Is it bowing and asking permission to rise at this point?

Of course, none of these change the fact that the sun is always there in space, whether we see it or not. Your theory that the sun goes to bow at sunset and wait for permission to rise contradict the fact that the same sun is already in the sky elsewhere.

I have always known that when sun set somewhere it is sunrise elsewhere. My question is, at some point, despite differences in time zones where some countries are ahead of another, for instance, i think Saudi is ahead of many countries. At the time of this post, New York is 3PM and it is sunshine outside while Saudi is 10PM. That's 7 hrs difference. It is sunset at 7:30PM in New York and 2:30AM in Saudi. Obviously there isnt sun around that time. So where is sun at that moment? Bcus at some point, most likely the entire countries would be at night simultaneously with hrs differences. Where is the sun at that moment? That's really my point though.

Remember entire African continent is at night at the time described above, and EU too.

Muslim Ignorance in the 21st century

In every part of the world, there are ignorant people. So this is not intended to bash Muslims. In fact, we agree that there are enlightened Muslims in the Muslim community today, but they are held back by the ignorant ones in their community.

We have explained the ignorance behind the #7 hadith, but it is unfortunate we still have a reader trying to make sense of the hadith. He cannot understand that at no point in time will all of the earth be experiencing night hours or absence of sunlight. So we leave him, we are no Geography professor and we do not see it our responsibility to teach basic Geography.

The problem of ignorance in the Muslim world is not a result of religious adherence. It is possible to be religious yet still enlightened and progressive. But this can only happen if the religion is truly from God, not man-made religions like Sunnism, Shiism, Catholicism, Pharisaic Judaism etc. filled with superstitions, barbarity and fallacies.

In the middle ages, the Muslim world was relatively more enlightened than the Christian world. Heretic Christians, Jews and other minorities would flee persecution from Christian world to become dhimmis in Muslim world. Women and slaves in the Muslim world enjoy more rights than in Christian world.

This is because in the early centuries of Islam, Qur'an was the only accessible revered text, hadith writing and duplication were still at infancy and it was really impossible for an individual to access so many hadith at the click of a button like we can today. Unrestricted by ignorant hadith like #7, some Muslims were able to harness the scientific and philosophical knowledge of Greek literature, culminating in the so called Golden Age of Islam. For these reasons, for much of history, the Muslim world remained more progressive than Christian world.

Towards the end of the middle ages, the Christian world started awakening. First with the Protestant reformation, followed by the era of enlightenment. They began to develop technologically, socially and military enough to overpower the Muslim caliphate ruled by the Ottomans.

Slavery was first abolished by the West, men, women & minorities have more rights in the Christian dominated west. Persecuted minorities including Christians, Jews, heretic Muslims, apostates now flee from Muslim world to the Christian world.

Technology, Medicine, Economics, Literature, Military, Music, Human rights; the Muslim countries have very little to offer in these areas. Despite the oil wealth of Saudi Arabia or Iran, these countries have very little incentives for migrants except a robust tax free salary and perhaps very low crime rates. In fact, rather than invest for human progress, these countries invest in exporting their ignorant Muslim creed across their borders.

All you have to do is to prove this.

Empiree:
. At the time of this post, New York is 3PM and it is sunshine outside while Saudi is 10PM. That's 7 hrs difference. It is sunset at 7:30PM in New York and 2:30AM in Saudi. Obviously there isnt sun around that time. So where is sun at that moment? Bcus at some point, most likely the entire countries would be at night simultaneously with hrs differences. Where is the sun at that moment? That's really my point though.

Remember entire African continent is at night at the time described above, and EU too.

We all know that when sunset in a region it is sunrise elsewhere. But I say this is not the case all the time. My post above is a case study. Europe and Africa only have 6-7 hrs diff max, which means at some point they are both in the dark. Same applies to America and Asia The only exception I see is the unhabitable island of Howland and very few other island with longest time zones like Kiribati etc

More Hadith breeding stupidity and ignorance

Hadith #7.2
Sunan Abi Dawud » Book of Combing the Hair
Narrated Abdullah ibn Mughaffal:
The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) forbade combing the hair except every second day.

Combing hair? Something as hygienic as combing hair daily is forbidden daily, thus contributing to poor hygiene. I'll like to know how many imams teach these to the ignorant audience that frequently listen and nod to their sermons.

Hadith #7.3
Sahih al-Bukhari » Book of Good Manners and Form
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "Allah loves sneezing but dislikes yawning; so if anyone of you sneezes and then praises Allah, every Muslim who hears him (praising Allah) has to say Tashmit to him. But as regards yawning, it is from Satan, so if one of you yawns, he should try his best to stop it, for when anyone of you yawns, Satan laughs at him."

So what exactly does Satan gains from making us yawn? Just a laugh? Satan is amused by babies and children yawning? If this is the case, why is yawning much associated with tiredness, sleeplessness or hunger?

Also, what's so special about sneezing that Allah loves it, is there any evidence in Hadith aside scholarly interpolation?

Hadith #7.4
Sahih al-Bukhari » Book of Beginning of Creation »
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "The (Hell) Fire complained to its Lord saying, 'O my Lord! My different parts eat up each other.' So, He allowed it to take two breaths, one in the winter and the other in summer, and this is the reason for the severe heat and the bitter cold you find (in weather).

We're back to basic Geography again. This is the kind of ignorance and stupidity that the so called madrasahs especially in rural parts of the Muslim worlds specialize in teaching children.

I've hinted it before, the so called golden age of Islam could not have happened if there was widespread appreciation of hadith like these.

Peace!

usermane:
More Hadith breeding stupidity and ignorance



Combing hair? Something as hygienic as combing hair daily is forbidden daily, thus contributing to poor hygiene. I'll like to know how many imams teach these to the ignorant audience that frequently listen and nod to their sermons.

Why stress yourself over what you have no control?. You can find anything if you are determined, which is what you are doing. I am sure if you type "USERMANE IS STUPID" on search engines, something will come up. It is about determination.

Islam encourages hygiene to the fullest. The Hadith you quoted might be in part. Like for instance it is said that a man came to the prophet (saw) and the prophet was like does he not have oil?. This means "you can't even tidy your hair". The man looked dirty perhaps was the reason he said something like you can't even comb your hair once in a while?".

This is just my opinion based on various reports I read on this. So you might have quoted this Hadith in isolation. Take a look at this attachment

Argument Hadith #7.2

Hygiene is encouraged in Hadith. In fact there are Hadith where the Prophet advised combing of unkept hair. Islam encourage regular hair combing.

Regular as in every two days, right? That's enough to keep the hair tidy according to Hadith. It's OK to wake up on Monday morning looking at the mirror and say;

"Well, that's not looking unkempt, I combed it yesterday. So this will do till tomorrow morning. For now, let me get ready for my job interview at 9:00 AM"

Untidy hair may not look unkept. It may look just fine to the owner but when you get out to meet people, they surely know you did not comb. Sure, it might not look disgusting like a caveman's and your collegues might be able to deal with it. But regardless, I don't think anyone wants to deal with such a situation.

^^^

Sir, why do you wanna suffocate over text?. There are bunch of people in NYC with unkempt hair man. They prolly need your help if you so much care.

Regardless what the hadith says, islam encourages hygiene the best way we can. You are one looking for shit in a sh1thole and you will ALWAYS always find sh1t

And i am sure you know cleaningness in islam is half of faith.

Empiree:
^^^

Sir, why do you wanna suffocate over text?. There are bunch of people in NYC with unkempt hair man. They prolly need your help if you so much care.

Regardless what the hadith says, islam encourages hygiene the best way we can. You are one looking for shit in a sh1thole and you will ALWAYS always find sh1t

And i am sure you know cleaningness in islam is half of faith.

Cleanliness is half of faith but combing the hair daily is forbidden in the faith?

Nothing changes the fact that this Hadith is completely a joke, ridiculous! The messenger prohibiting trivial thing as combing the hair every morning. Combing the hair! It is sin to comb your hair daily??!! How silly.

Look man, ever since you proved your ignorance on basic Geography and your nonchalance to Muslim immigration to land of imperialists, I have been questioning your sanity.

usermane:


Cleanliness is half of faith but combing the hair daily is forbidden in the faith?

Nothing changes the fact that this Hadith is completely a joke, ridiculous! The messenger prohibiting trivial thing as combing the hair every morning. Combing the hair! It is sin to comb your hair daily??!! How silly.

okay, the Hadith is fake or quoted in isolation. Now what. Combing hair DAILY is ABSOLUTELY halal. Besides, I don't see original Arabic manuscripts. The whole hadith might be valid but the matn might be corrupted due to translation.

Look man, ever since you proved your ignorance on basic Geography and your nonchalance to Muslim immigration to land of imperialists, I have been questioning your sanity.

yea man. I am 100% SANE the world has evolved beyond the hadith in question and what you are saying. But the Hadith maybe active in the future. The whole world is extremely mixed right now. As for the sun, I simply wanted to frustrate you but definitely sun does prostrates to Allah due to this ayah of Quran 17:44. So you can not possibly deny this.

Hadith as faulty basis for Tafsir.

The Book of God is self explanatory, this is the belief of those who have faith in it. The verses of Qur'an interpret each other in a way that it is possible to understand the Qur'an without resorting to tonnes of volumes of external man-made sources.

If Muslims read and fail to understand the verses, this is their own shortcoming, not an indication that Qur'an vaguely explain Islam. Yet, the Muslim who are too dumb or deceitful opt instead to supplant the Qur'an with traditions of their fathers. Whenever the the Qur'an doesn't confirm their traditions they accuse the Qur'an of ambiguity; where the Qur'an contradict their traditions, they abrogate the verse or undermine its significance.

If for argument sake, we accept Hadith as basis or context for Qur'an interpretation(Tafsir), there are still a few problems.

1. Only few verses specifically address certain verses. It's left for the reader of hadith to decide which hadith applies to certain verses. This will be a cumbersome task for the Qur'an interpreter as they'll have to sift through countless hadith to assign each verse to the relevant hadith.

Traditional Muslims have no specific count of the total number of hadith in existence. Outside the 6 main hadith books, there are over 15 other Hadith collections in Sunnite Islam. These collections remain mostly untranslated and unavailable in soft copy, so the the average Muslim cannot access them. So much for wanting to understand the Qur'an.

2. The few hadith that specifically address certain verses often screw up in interpretation. Because their supposed context or application for the verses remain unconvincing.

For example;

A. Hadith #7 attempt to intepret Qur'an 36:38

"And the sun Runs its fixed course For a term (decreed). that is The Decree of (Allah) The Exalted in Might, The All- Knowing." (36.38)

The "fixed course of the sun" according to the hadith is its course from space to an unknown location(Throne of God) where it bows and returns back to space, and the circle is repeated daily(sunset to sunrise). Again, anyone with an understanding of basic Geography will scoff or laugh at such an interpretation.

But apparently, there are Muslims within the community who try to make sense of such an interpretation either out of intellectual dishonesty or just plain stupidity.

B. Hadith attempting to explain Qur'an 24:31

Sahih al-Bukhari » Prophetic Commentary on the Qur'an
Narrated Safiya bint Shaiba:
`Aisha used to say: "When (the Verse): "They should draw their veils over their necks and bosoms," was revealed, (the ladies) cut their waist sheets at the edges and covered their heads and faces with those cut pieces of cloth."

So they covered their faces right, but where did this verse mention face? You've got it, "Nowhere". Also, they covered their head? Or you mean their hair? No, there is a difference between the two. Covering the head does not equate to covering the hair. Beside, where is head mentioned in this verse?

The directive of the interpreted phrase is to cover their bosoms, so why didn't these women cover their bosom with their cut piece of cloth? Since when did bosom come to imply face and head?

You can see, these hadith do not consistently explain the Qur'an convincingly, they distort it with interpolation to produce ridiculous interpretation that even the traditionalists reject.

A few of them may be spot on concerning the verses but it remain a fact that hadith are not the ideal context or application of Qur'an that they are touted to be.

There is no doubt there are several ways to interpret and explain Quran, some of which are: Quran explains Quran. Hadith, sahaba, science, philosophy, history, intellect, spirituality etc. The best of it is Quran explains Quran. No one doubts this. All of these are useful tools. Quran does sits in judgement over everything else.

However, you can not underline hadith(and sunnah) bcus it tells us practical and historical backgrounds. It is true there are unfounded stories we can always dump. But when it comes to obligatory worship, this is practical. I need not go over bcus we have talked about this for years now. You end up like christians when you want to pray salat. You just read Quran theoretically to derive your own way. This is not acceptable. You can not claim you are right while ignoring ulama who came much before you. You are welcome to criticize any ahadith you think are inappropriate, but do your homework very well before you undertake this course.