TenQ:

You will agree with me that far much more knowledgeable Muslim scholars have noticed this problem that not all hadiths can be trusted, therefore they made stringent rules with respect to trusted chains of narrators to grade every hadiths as
Sahih
Hassan
Daif
Mawdu

Muslim Clerics say that the fact that a Hadith is graded Daif doesn't mean it is false. It just mean that the chain of narration isn't strong.

But I think your argument should be applicable to the Qur'an too. Why should we trust the RECITATION of Hafs when we have written Qur'an dating far back in time.

Secondly, if the hadiths should all be discarded because of Trust issues, it proves that Muslims generally are UNTRUSTWORTHY bunch of LIARS!
If Muslims can lie this much, how can we trust their Qur'an?

Muslim clerics said this and muslim clerics said that. You amuse me ooo. You are the one that said the prophet even forbade the writing of Hadith and here you are quoting the words of those who insist on following what does not have the approval of God and his messenger, in order to make sure I agree with you that they are worth following.
Look what you should know is that in any ideology be it secular or theological, people tend to always corrupt and change it to fit their prejudices. It happened with the children of Israel, especially when Moses left them to be with God almighty, it take them just forty days to introduce worshipping of the calf. You can imagine what will happened after a long period of time. It happened with the Christian so much that a convention was held to determine what the right doctrines are. Yes I am talking about the nicene convention. It happened with the Muslim after the prophet was gone too. Thus, you have the Hadiths and most of the things that were foreign to Quran. It is nothing new. But what is important is God truth is there for everyone who care to find out in all of these scriptures that were written down. For example, an honest reading of the bible will tell you that Jesus Christ is not a God and also the term son of God was not literal.
You said:
But I think your argument should be applicable to the Qur'an too. Why should we trust the RECITATION of Hafs when we have written Qur'an dating far back in time.

This shows you are not paying attention to the point I have been making. You just wish to force Hadith down my throat. When did I say I trust either of the Hadith. I am just pointing that for you to see them as the fabrication that they are. And no there is no how you are going to apply the argument to the Quran. The Quran was a speech from God to the prophet and as soon as it was revealed it got written down, with the prophet permission, unlike the hadith nobody ever authorised it. So if you are being sincere there should be no copy of Hadith then. Mind you the earliest collection of Hadith you see me referring to, were even collected long after the prophet was gone and like I said most of the Hadith did not have the prophet name in them. So how do you compare the two?
By written Quran written way back, you mean that one at Birmingham right? Because that is the oldest Quran so far? I will want you to point the differences between that Quran and the hafs Quran?

TenQ:

The earliest hadiths are worse, I've read a few some long time ago. I prefer to use ONLY accepted hadiths as my source, thus, I comply with your wish.

You Muslims rejected the earliest hadiths. Many of the earlier Sira and Tareekh are not even translated into English language. Modern Muslim scholars said they only accept the hadiths complied by Imam Bukhari, Muslim, An-Nasa'i, Abi Dawud, at-Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah

Now, we were forced to use only hadiths within your selection only for us to hear that the Hadiths are in grades of Sahih, Hassan, Daif and Mawdu. Unfortunately, if I get you rightly, you even totally reject ALL of them.

For us who are non muslims, these books give us a great insight into Islam beyond your preferred Narrative.

Even if you reject them as theological sources, it is still useful as a historical source

You are not getting my point. What I meant by "As most of the Hadith in the earliest collections stopped at the companions or contain the opinions of the companions on certain issues. But in the later collections all of a sudden the words were said to have come from the prophet" is in the earliest collections where you have an hadith that reported that a certain companion X said that ABC is 123. The same Hadith will be reported in the later collections like this a certain companion X said that he heard his father said that the prophet said that ABC is 123. How did the later collector of Hadith arrived at inserting the prophet name where the earliest collector didn't? This is the question nobody is asking. This is the question they the user of such sources don't want being asked. Obviously someone had to add the name of the prophet to give whatever concoctions he is selling some form of authority. This is what they called Hadith. This is what they call science. From which the tafsir, Fiqh and all other sources were derived. So this is what my reply is all about.

TenQ:

I agree with you.
Mohammed himself did forbid Muslims from writing hadith about him BUT you Muslims love and rever him so much that you collected everything about your prophet to aid your religion.

Up till recently, Muslims have no issues or problems with the hadiths because there are many embarrassing things reported of Mohammed.

Unfortunately, when the biographer of any history writes about themselves things that are demeaning or uncomfortable, such is most likely true. (Because self Biographies like photographs are designed to present the BEST of the actors even if it is a lie or exaggeration)

I think the problem of Muslim is like
Will you believe us if Christians claim that Jesus was misrepresented by his enemies as crucified on the cross: that Jesus vanished before the eyes of the Jews is actually the real story (despite the fact that we have report of his death in the Bible)

The fact that you don't like the stories is not a prove that the hadiths are fabrications.
For example :
The fact that Mohammed married Zainab (the wife of his adopted son) may be an uncomfortable truth, but it did happen in real time. Should Muslims deny it?
If the history is denied, does it change the reality?

Finally, you Muslims respect Aisha so much and any hadith from her is taken seriously. Aisha know many private things about Mohammed as his wife than even his companions.

What is wrong in marrying the divorced wife of an adopted son? Is he your biological son? The Quran is clear on the women we can marry.
Please remove me from the list of Muslims that attributed saying to people who certainly did not say anything.

TenQ:

I wouldn't want us to start another bout of arguments on these because there are objections to each of your points.

The important thing of essence to note is that
1. Mohammed forbid the Muslims from writing stuffs about him
2. Muslims out of reverence and good faith decided to collect hadiths of their prophet
3. The vast majority of the narrators of the hadiths meant well and the collectors (Bukhari, Muslim etc) did their best to sanitizer, filter and organise these hadiths
4. With time Muslim scholars graded these hadiths as Sahih, Hassan, Daif or Mawḍū.
5. Unfortunately, some of the reports of what was classed as even Sahih are DISTURBING to modern Muslims


The Question is simple :
1. Should we discard the Hadiths, Tafsir and Tarikhs as FALSE simply because they said things we are not comfortable with?
2. Do we think our Islam is better now than the early Muslims who wrote these things about Mohammed?
3. When seem to trust the memory of Arabs with the Qur'an BUT why do we now doubt their memory when the speak of Mohammed?
4. Would you have accepted this kind of argument from Christians if we had the same situation?

Answer to question number 4 is if the Christian believe in another source other than the bible I will not even listen to him. The reason you are asking this question majority of the people believe Hadith and other books are part of the sources in Islam. And if you look way back, you see the prophet and his companion only use Quran. Nothing more. Are you now telling me I am wrong by insisting you bring your evidences from what you and I know the prophet came with? Why is this so hard for you to understand? Why the hell do I need Hadith when you say the prophet even forbade it and yet his companions continue writing it? Whoever believes this is accusing the companions too of disobedience to the prophet. I will I follow something born out of disobedience to the order of God and his messenger? Please tell me why?

Trust the memory of Arabs with Quran? I trust the words of Allah over anything. And he is the one who promise to guide and protect the Quran from corruptions. 15:9 .

TenQ:

I wouldn't want us to start another bout of arguments on these because there are objections to each of your points.

The important thing of essence to note is that
1. Mohammed forbid the Muslims from writing stuffs about him
2. Muslims out of reverence and good faith decided to collect hadiths of their prophet
3. The vast majority of the narrators of the hadiths meant well and the collectors (Bukhari, Muslim etc) did their best to sanitizer, filter and organise these hadiths
4. With time Muslim scholars graded these hadiths as Sahih, Hassan, Daif or Mawḍū.
5. Unfortunately, some of the reports of what was classed as even Sahih are DISTURBING to modern Muslims


The Question is simple :
1. Should we discard the Hadiths, Tafsir and Tarikhs as FALSE simply because they said things we are not comfortable with?
2. Do we think our Islam is better now than the early Muslims who wrote these things about Mohammed?
3. When seem to trust the memory of Arabs with the Qur'an BUT why do we now doubt their memory when the speak of Mohammed?
4. Would you have accepted this kind of argument from Christians if we had the same situation?

My brother is not about discarding what we are not comfortable with. Like you said there is no legitimate backing for the collection and writing of them And Like you have seen demonstrated in this thread by me, the moment you place it side by side with the Quranic verse you see how alien most of the rules derived from Hadith are to the Quranic principle. Like I said try as you may, you can never ever find all this rubbishes in the Quran, that alone should tell you something.
Please bring bring forth your objections I am waiting. As soon as I am able I will answer them.

Let me ask you one question have you really study Hadith? Like the origin of these Hadith? Have you compared the earliest hadith and the later ones? I am asking you this question, because if you did you will doubt that the prophet of I slam really said such things. As a Cristian I don't have to bother you with this questions, but since you insist on the reliability of such sources, I am challenging you to get yourself the earlier Hadiths like Muwatta, Mussanaf ibn shayba, Mussanaf asan'a then compare them with the later Hadith collection like Sahih Bukhari, Muslim etc. This will tell you much about how those narrations were falsely attributed to the prophet. As most of the Hadith in the earliest collections stopped at the companions or contain the opinions of the companions on certain issues. But in the later collections all of a sudden the words were said to have come from the prophet, just to give weight to it. These are things that should make any sincere believer question the Hadith.

Allow the Quran to speak without interruption from all these narrations containing whims and prejudices of rulers, men, Arab and even the dynasties.

TenQ:


Unfortunately,
This is TenQ writing and not Advocatejare.

You can be sure I have evidence for everything I write about Islam.
Now I have gotten some of you to start denying your Hadiths.

If you think ANYTHING is untrue according to your Islamic sources then, bring it on. Otherwise, consider adopting the Truth

The denial of Hadith did not start today, brother. It is as old as the Quran. What do you think Quran 6:112-114 is saying? The fact is there is no Hadith until after the prophet death. The questions you should be asking is who authorised following the Hadith? Yeas 6:112-114 had already answered that.

TenQ:



You will note that I have not based my arguments on the hadiths alone. I have based it on your TRADITIONS found in your religious books such as the Hadiths, Tafsir and the Historical books.

It is a conjecture to believe that Islam was practiced by Abraham, Isaac, Jacob etc otherwise, your religion would be identical with the Religion on the Jews. I still maintain my stance on this sir. Islam is incomprehensible without these other books of the Hadiths, Tafsir and other Islamic historical books. By the Qur'an alone, you would be praying 3times and NOT 5 times per day.

My tradition you say. Still trying to force Hadith down my throat? . When were the said traditions written? What was Imam Malik, the author of Muwatta, or Bukhari the author of Sahih Bukahari using to pray before they compile the Hadith? Does that mean people were not praying between the period of prophet Muhammad death and when those books were collected? Answer these questions before moving to another topic. Can you please stay on topic? Most of the things you keep throwing in other to avoid answering my questions, have answers. Five daily prayers not in the Quran. Yes they are. Like I told you, the reason Salat details can't be found in the Quran is that Salat is not a strange concept even among the polytheist of Mecca. The only thing is they directed their worship to the idols in the Kaábah, instead of the God of Abraham Allah. Check the following verse about the polytheist performing salat. 8:35 "Their contact prayers(Salat) at the shrine(Kaábah) were no more than a mockery..... " and this one about Muhammad even before the nightly journey were he was "allegedly", given the fifty prayer. 96:9-10 "Have you seen the one who enjoins. Others from praying(Sallah)?"

So, there is no need to give details of what was already known. It is like I said. If you are going to ask me were I get my prayers from, just look at the billions of Muslim praying in the world, despite the difference in sect have the basics details of the prayer the same. hell even the Samaritan Jews pray the way the Muslim pray too. Are you going to ask them what hadith they get their prayers from? It is simple, practices get passed down from generation to generation. That is why in the bible you reference how some apostle of God fell on their faces, even though the present day cristian and Jews don't do that. Telling me that without Hadith, I can't pray, is like telling a Fulani person without a book on how to make fura da nono, that was written today, he/she can not make the Fura and Nono. It silly asking that question.

TenQ:

Qur'an 4:24 and

Qur'an 24:33 sir.

You are going to use the above verses Mut'ah? Where is Mutáh here help me understand please.

4;24 said "Also prohibited are the women who are already married, unless they flee their disbelieving husbands who are at war with you.* These are God's commandments to you. All other categories are permitted for you in marriage, so long as you pay them their due dowries. You shall maintain your morality, by not committing adultery. Thus, whoever you like among them, you shall pay them the dowry decreed for them. You commit no error by mutually agreeing to any adjustments to the dowry. God is Omniscient, Most Wise."

Where is Mut'ah here too?

24:33 Those who cannot afford to get married shall maintain morality until God provides for them from His grace. Those among your servants who wish to be freed in order to marry, you shall grant them their wish, once you realize that they are honest. And give them from God's money that He has bestowed upon you. You shall not force your girls to commit prostitution, seeking the materials of this world, if they wish to be chaste. If anyone forces them, then God, seeing that they are forced, is Forgiver, Merciful.

TenQ:

Qur'an 65:4 speaking about divorcing wives who have not started menstruation.

I know you will bring this up. Let me quote the verse here and from the source that seeks to promotes such understanding. 65:4 "As for your women past the age of menstruation, in case you do not know, their waiting period is three months, and those who have not menstruated as well. As for those who are pregnant, their waiting period ends with delivery.1 And whoever is mindful of Allah, He will make their matters easy for them."
The bolded above is what the translator choose to put there obviously to support the notion that Quran permits child marriage. I will tell you why the above translation is wrong and is just their to serve certain people interests, prejudices and whims. First the translation violate the Quranic condition for marriage in 4:6 "And test the orphans (to see) that they have reached marriageable (age). If you find them of sound judgement" بَلَغُوا النِّكَاحَ means marriageable age. .
Secondly, the translation of the Arabic word lam yahidna as who have not menstruated is wrong because it suggest that they will do in the future, in this way they have not yet menstruated, which will give the meaning of someone who have not attained puberty(prepubescent). Well the Arabic word lam(لَمْ) which is being translated as "have not", also appear in 112:3-4 The same word was used to show God did not beget, nor was he begotten. Lam(did not/Never) yalid(beget) wa lam(never) yulad(begotten). I hope you understand thhe game the translators playing now. Lam appropriately means never/did not. Till today there exist women who experience a condition known as amenorrhea, a condition where a woman fails to have menstrual periods. It is called primary amenorrhea when the woman has never menstruated. So this is what the verse is talking about.

TenQ:

2. How will you know how to slaughter from the Qur'an alone
Unfortunately, you need the Tafsir to understand Qur'an 22:36 as one can only imply that Allah speaks of sacrifice here

Why do we kill animal(slaughter)? Sacrifice or eating? The purpose of the sacrifice is stated in the same verse. Go back and read. Don't act like you don't know the question has been answered.

TenQ:

But you have no guarantee of salvation in Islam. What you have is a guarantee for the fire of hell even though TEMPORARILY!

Quran 19:71
There is not one of you who will not go down to it (the fire), that is a fixed Decree of your Lord
Quran 19:72
Then, We will save those who were cautious of Us, but the harmdoers shall be left there hobbling on their knees

After all you muslims enter the fire, THEN Allah will THEREAFTER remove the good muslims and leave others in the fire.

What is the original purpose if you claim that Islam and Christianity has been corrupted. You must at least show us that which has NOT been corrupted as a standard. Is the Religion of the Jews also corrupted? How?

Ohyoudidnt:
Salam bro. May Allah enrich you. Indeed they know do not allow them to lure you into much arguments.

We send the messengers only as deliverers of good news and warners. Those who disbelieve argue with false argument, in order to defeat the truth thereby. They take My Verses, and the warnings, for a joke. (18:56)

It seems Tenq pleasures in continuing arguments even when he rationally sees differently. Don't let him waste your time. I believe there are more rewarding acts than his enduring debates.

Besides it is not enough to profess the Shahzad we will be tested for sincerity and steadfastness. We can share what we know of truth but know the shayatin are ever trying to mislead and deceive.

You have spoken your truth but the attempt at corruption through hadith is and will be there for as long as Allah leaves. We are not to convince but share information and maybe learn a thing or two from them even if for sake of just knowing. May Allah aid us in our lives and practice of the Deen.
Laqum deenikum waliyadeen

Peace brother. Yes I have something rewarding doing. Out of the little time I have, I will try as much as possible to reply him as best as I can. When I can't I will just read and perhaps chuckle.

As for learning from Hadith, I think the Quran is enough for me.

TenQ:

Of course we know that the hadiths were collected much later and so were most of the historical books of Islam and the Tafsir.
The traditions and the history were what people collected as the hadiths, tafsir and history of Islam.
1. How will you know how to pray from the Qur'an alone
2. How will you know how to slaughter from the Qur'an alone
3. Would you not be practicing Mutah from the Qur'an alone?
4. From the Qur'an alone won't you be practicing marriage of pre-puberscent girls and divorcing them?

The problem is that the Qur'an is in fragments and incomplete without the other books. For instance, from the Qur'an alone can you tell me the meaning of Messiah? From the Qur'an alone can you tell me who Israel is?

This is a big problem sir. The problem was hidden all along simply because only the Rich Scholars could afford the collection of the full library of compilation of the books of hadiths, Tafsir and History of Islam. But now, the internet broke this barrier plus the barrier of the mastery of the Arabic language.




But it wasn't Aisha alone who gave narrations of the report of stoning and breastfeeding in the hadiths. They ALL agreed the the verses USED to be RECITED as part of the Qur'an.
Of course, this is not the only verses acclaimed by early Muslims to be absent from the Qur'an of Uthman. Many of these were forgotten and some remembered in fragments.



I think the reasons these hadiths and Tafsir especially came in were to explain the Context of the verses of the Qur'an especially as Islam began to spread to areas with knowledgeable Jews and Christians on matters of History in the earlier revealed scriptures disputing with the Islamic claims
It is impossible to explain from the Qur'an alone
1. The denial of the Crucifixion of Jesus
2. The seeming Prophethood of Zhulqanain
3. Mohammed not knowing with certainty if he's going to paradise or hell fire
4. All Muslims entering the fire of Hell (but later removed)
5. Mary mother of Jesus mistaken for Mariam daughter of Amran who was sister of Aaron and Moses

Without the Hadiths and Tafsir and the Historical books, no body would be able to make sense of the Qur'an. It's like a book that dropped right out of the blues that even though is expected to be a follow up of the earlier revealed scriptures contradict it so much that they can't be bound together in a single volume (like the old and new Testament).

Denying the Hadiths, Tafsir and the Islamic Historical books creates other dilemma and unsolvable problems for Islam.

But why would these sincere Muslims of Old write damning things about their beloved Prophet? You will agree with me that Fabrications in religion are usually done by people to embellish the truth to make it more grander, nicer and glorious. Report of events that are seemingly Raw, Unpolished and Derogatory are usually Truths as the events happened.

You made many points and I am going respond to them. You sounds just like the supporters of Hadiths and for a good reason. You need the Hadith to attack the Quran.

The point you made about needing Hadith to pray, fast etc, is a weak point. Because, I ask a question which you or any supporter of Hadith has not answered yet. If Hadith, were collected long after the prophet was gone, what were the Muslims then praying with? And also I need you to back up your claim were you said Hadith teaches prayers and other aspect of the religion. Please, provide the Hadiths that gie the details of salat, like you asked me to do? I dare you or any one to provide that Hadith. The point you people seems to miss is you think the Muslim prayer, fasting and hajj begins with Muhammad. The Quran always remind us that these practices are nothing new. Abraham, Jacob, Isaac, Ismail etc did perform salat(Check Quran 8:35, 9:54, 16:123, 21:73, 22:27, 28:27).

Practicing Mutah from Quran alone? Where exactly do you have that in the Quran?

Where do you get it from the Quran that someone can marry a pre-puberscent girl?

No 2? Haba bro did you have to bring that up. The Quran has answered that already checked Quran 22:36.

knowing the meaning of Messiah and who Israel is has nothing to do with my salvation or truth. The point you and most Muslims seems to missed is Quran is not a book of stories. There is a reason it calls itself the Furqan. The truth is Islam as well as Christainity had been corrupted and made to deviate from its original purpose. This is what Quran will correct if we give it the chance. Just let the Quran speaks for itself. Stop imposing meanings from external sources or your heart desire. It is easy to understand for the sincere seeker(Quran 54:17).

Please, don't forget to provide pure Quranic text that encourages Mutah and marrying pre-puberscent girls.

TenQ:


I appreciate your observation, unfortunately,
1. There is no Islam without the hadiths
2. Muslim scholars have tried to sanitise the hadiths by grading them as Sahih, Hassan, Daif and Fabricated. All the hadiths I've quoted are Sahih except for the one of tame sheep eating the Qur'an which is Hassan.
3. Except Muslims generally by nature are liars, there is no reason for most of the hadiths being untrustworthy
4. Since non of you modern Muslims were around at the writing of the hadiths, how can you prove that the hadiths are untruthful?
5. I am sure you dont practice Mutah, unfortunately, this you got from the hadiths not the Qur'an.


Aisha had a written copy BUT she also has a reason to hide the copy of the verse on stoning (and breastfeeding) so that the case of adultery may not be revisited over her after the death of Mohammed. Of course, there were other hadiths that reported that the RECITATION of the verses used to be done by Muslims .

I agree that a lot of historical truths about Islam is embarrassing to modern Muslims and thus, you want to DELETE it from Islam if possible. It's not only about the hadiths alone but also about the oldest set of historical books about Islam. Unfortunately, the Qur'an cannot stand alone as an Islamic source for Muslims.

Thanks and have a good night rest sir

No islam without Hadith? Did you know the Hadith at most came 200 years letter after the death of prophet Muhammad? Go search when was Muwatta Imam malik(One of the earliest Hadith) was collected. So you mean to tell me people have not been practicing Islam until the Hadiths were collected long after Muhammad was gone?

She has hidden her own copy of the stoning, and yet she said it used to be there. Does this sound like someone trying to hide something? The thing I am trying to tell you is there is no event of Gharaneeq and neither is there law approving stoning of adultery. Guess where we can find that. Yeah, in the bible. I think someone tried smuggling the Jewish law into Islam and sine there is no basis for it from the Quran. He or her manufactured such stories.

A lot of historical truth you say. Yet these embarrassing accounts can't be found in the Quran, unless in invented sources that were fabricated long after the apostle of God was gone?
So,if you want to know what Muhammad had said or done, then pick up a Quran. This is how you know. The coomand of what he should and should not do, were given in there. That is how you know what is truth or not. Unless you and your opponent are trying to say he disoby the commands.
Who grade as Sahih? God or his appostle? You need to dig deeper into the history of Hadith, you will understand that Hadith is an attempt by satan to corrupt the pure teachings contains in the Quran. Oh the all-knowing God, the creator of all has foreseen this and forecast it in the Quran, in the following verses 6:112 "We have permitted the enemies of every prophet-human and jinn devils-to inspire in each other fancy words(like goat eating revelations) in order to deceive. Had your willed they would have not done it. You should disregard them and their fabrications."
Ignoring such fabrications: This what I am doing and Iurge you and your opponent to do the same.

TenQ:
Sorry for the late reply, I was placed on Ban by the Nairaland Bots!

My argument is that the verse on Breastfeeding was DELETED from the Quran and not on the meaning of the remaining verses

I showed you several evidences that the verses used to be RECITED up to the time of the death of Mohammed.
Suddenly check throughout the whole Quran, we cannot find it again.

What Happened?
Deleted by people who took offence of it.

All the Hadiths below show that Allah revealed the verse of Breastfeeding Adult men in the Qur'an


Sunan an-Nasa'i 3307: Book 26, Hadith 112
It was narrated that 'Aishah said:
"One of the things that Allah, the Mighty and Sublime, revealed" -(one of the narrators) Al-Harith said (in his narration): "One of the things that were revealed in the Qur'an"- "was that ten known breast-feedings make marriage prohibited, then that was abrogated and changed to five known breast-feedings. Then the Messenger of Allah passed away when this was something that was still being recited in the Qur'an."

Sunan Ibn Majah 1942: Book 9, Hadith 98
It was narrated that 'Aishah said:
“Once of the things that Allah revealed in the the Qur'an and then abrogated was that nothing makes marriage prohibited except ten breastfeedings or five well-known (breastfeedings).”



Sunan Ibn Majah 1944: Book 9, Hadith 100
It was narrated that 'Aishah said:
“The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.”



Are you now convinced or the hadiths are all FABRICATIONS!?






The Hadiths above showed that
1. The verse of Breastfeeding was Revealed by Allah
2. The verse used to be recited up to the time of the death of Mohammed
3. There was no evidence to show that the verse was completely abrogated: what was abrogated was a reduction from ten times breastfeeding to five time breastfeeding

If you can provide the Quran of Abu Bakr or the Quran of Uthman, we may find it

The hadiths were recorded by Muslims for Muslims. Why would they tell damaging lies about their esteemed prophet.

By the way, all the three hadiths I presented are Sahih

Only Aisha spoke about her own written verse that was eaten by a ame sheep. The verse as you can see were memorised and recited.

Well what I understand from the Quran, is most of narrations in hadith are somewhat at odds with the Quranic teaching. Hadith look like the work of someone who has never seen nor read the Quran. If you are sincere researcher you would have noticed that by now. At best, I can say Hadith is a work of people trying to understand the Quran, in their own way. I have proofs to demonstrate how hadiths had been fabricated and attributed to the belove prophet of God(Muhammad). But that is beyond the scope of our discussion.

Only Aisha spoke about her own written verse that was eaten by lame sheep? Is that all you have to say to wave the irregularities in the story away? A revelation that was said to be revealed in the presence of multitudes of people both from the polytheists and the believer side. You mean to tell me Only Aisha recorded it? Haba oga! If others recorded there own did the goat ate them too? We might want to also know why the goat is so selective.

You see I don't care about what the Hadith said as I don't believe in them. I am just pointing irregularities in the story for you to thinl and reflect, if the hadith has anything to do with the Quran. I am not here to argue with you. In fact I am happy. Perhaps this will make them think and see what this Hadith are truly are.

ImoleNaija:
Long Live The ECOWAS President!

Jagaban, oko iya awon haters .




As ECOWAS President, do you now expect Tinubu to fold his arms when there are pressing issues?


You must be taking ECOWAS for Nigeria. Other members of the union also have stakes in this.

I understand that. But what I don't understand is what do Nigeria and other ECOWAS members state stand to gain from invading Niger?

TenQ:

Who deleted the verse of breastfeeding of adult men from the Quran of Allah?

No one has been able to answer the question.

I was not laughing at you but at the way this people can not defend the fairy tales they chose to believe in.
As for whether that verse is talking about breast feeding, you know you are being mischievous. That verse is simply telling us that our adopted children are not our biological son. Just like your wife will never be your mother just because you say so. Read from verse 4 to get the context.


My question to you is where in the Quran does it says a woman can let a fully grown male adult suck her breast, so that he can be considered her foster son?
If the hadith claim goat or sheep ate the verse, the Hadith also claimed that these companions are memorizers of the Quran, did the sheep ate up the one in their memory too? Besides it was claimed that as soon as the prophet received revelation he will utter it and his scribes(not one ooo) will write it down. So if that is the case each verse of the Quran has more than one copies. So if the goat or whatever ate one, another copy of same verse should be available right? So we should still find it in the Quran right? Unless you are suggesting after the goat ate that copy and discovered how sweet it is and decided to visit the remaining copies of that breast feeding verse? Imagine a goat looking for Mushaf of the Quran at that time selecting which one is talking about breast feeding or stoning to death and adulterers or not, ignoring those that are not talking about breast feeding etal. and eating up the one that do(You can see, I read Hadith to amuse myself).
So, you see the more you looked at the stories as presented in the Hadith, you will know it has nothing to do with Muhammad neither his followers at that time.

vicdom:

Lol... Wow! but how did you get to know kogi this much? I'm surprised ooo. I been think say you go misyan make I rush quote, but the info you put up there are correct and I'm shocked.

As in eh... the guy know the state well. Sometimes as an Igala man I forget that Bagana a community in Omala are not Igala. Also Akpanya, in Igalamela/Odolu who have a mixture of both Igbo and Igala. As for Bassa ah no fit forget that one.
The guy is accurate, though the population of the non-igala speaking community in Odolu and Omala is negligible.

Oboto700:
start the packing now.. Liverpool is losing.. you guys don't k learn and it beats my imagination.. Liverpool won on Sunday and also did on Wednesday right.. you are expecting them to win today again..haba.. the worst they can get here is a draw

And dem forget say dis Bournemouth na d same team wey nearly beat Arsenal. What were they expecting? Another 7-0 win?

TenQ:

I must render my heart of appreciation to you for your knowledge and insight into one of the two questions posed. You have done extremely well in answering the question of if there is another verse in the Qur'an that says Jubril was sent to Mohammed. I wish other Muslims do well enough to take such questions seriously and study rather than play gymnastics.

I will agree with you on this:
Qur'an 2:97 seem to say that Jubril was sent to convey the Qur'an into the heart of Mohammed. This is in line with the Tafsirs on Qur'an 2:97 by Al-Abbas, Al-Jalalayn and Ibn Kathir (with a detailed background).

Thank you once again on this.


So, my dear friend,
1. How do we reconcile the apparent difference in the statement of Allah in Qur'an 6:7-10 AND Qur'an 2:97.

Because,Qur'an 6:7-10 emphatically says no Angel was sent either in human for nor angel form to Mohammed while Qur'an 2:97 seem to say that Jubril was sent to convey the Qur'an into the heart of Mohammed.

2. If Jubril was not sent physically to Mohammed, where did we get the story of Mohammed's first encounter with Jubril in the cave and the encounter of IQRA and the account that Jubril resemble Dihya bin Kalbi , visitations of Jubril to the house of Mohammed, Umar even testified of Jubril came before them as a man with extremely white clothing and extremely black hair.

Are all these stories manufactured by enemies of Islam?


Let me stop here as I await your response.
Thank you!

Thank you for your kind words.
What I deduced from your post from the presentation and your reasoning is you are intelligent as well as sensible. However, I am beginning to sense something from your reply to my comment. There is this vibe you are giving out now. Something like, you are here to argue and not have a discussion. Let me make myself categorically clear by saying I am not here to argue with you. I am here to have a civil discussion.

Why I am feeling this way is that, I pointed out in my earlier comment that, the verse you quoted was a response to one of the statement of the disbelievers - that the angels have to had accompanied Muhammad, physically appearing before they believe. Now what is so irreconcilable here? Please state clearly what need to be reconciled as regards to 6:7-10 and 2:97.

You will notice in my reply to your post, I did not bother talking about the incident at the cave of HIRA. I have a strong reason for doing that. So, as someone who hold on to what Muhammad came with only(Quran), I will leave them to come and answer the question.

Nice question!!! Your intelligence shone through this post and I am not saying this to flatter you. Let me start answering this question by putting everything in its proper context. I will assume you have no ulterior motive behind the post but an honest question that needs clarification.

So on this, Quran 6:8
وَقَالُوا۟ لَوْلَآ أُنزِلَ عَلَيْهِ مَلَكٌۭ ۖ وَلَوْ أَنزَلْنَا مَلَكًۭا لَّقُضِىَ ٱلْأَمْرُ ثُمَّ لَا يُنظَرُونَ
They say, “Why has no angel come with him?” Had We sent down an angel, the matter would have certainly been settled , and they would have never been given more time ˹to repent˺.

The first things we need to know is that the polytheists and the disbelievers of Makkah made so many statement, as their rejected the idea of Muhammad messengerhood, one of which the above verses responds to. In Quran 25:7 this statement is attributed to the disbelievers And they said, "How come this messenger eats the food and walks in the markets? If only an angel could come down with him, to serve with him as a preacher!"

The disbeliever wanted to see the angel physically assisting Muhammad in delivering the message to them, before they believed him. So, it is a mistake for you to think that Allah claims not to send an angel with the revelation to Muhammad.

1. Is there any other verse(s) in the Quran that says clearly that an Angel was sent to Mohammed?

Yes there is. Your answer is in Quran 2:97 and other places in the Quran Say, "anyone who opposes Gabriel should know that he has brought down this(Quran) into your heart(not a physical book), in accordance with God's will, confirming previous scriptures, and providing guidance and good news for the believers."

I hope I have answered your question?

ArewaNorth:


His mental sickness is a feeling of what he stands for is the only way and no other way than his. Nobody hates him, people only hates his persistent parallel opinion with general public. May be u only see his speeches but the guy isn't fit for public office!

Care to give us an example to back up your claim?

Oksman:

Many obstacles on the road for BAT's presidential ambition. Yes he has every right to make that comment after all, MKO was denied victory in an election that was obvious he had won, and those who perpetrated the act where still hanging around the corridors of power. Tinubu is not the only one guilty here, even now the agitations going on in the country is because the agitators do not believe in one Nigeria period!

Considering the fact abiola was voted across the nation and he even won in the north, in the said election, it is unnecessary making such an unguarded statement.

Weathered:
you sound dumber and duller than a Fulani cross border cow.

So a leader of a group is not part of the group. A leader of a cult is not a cultist?
A leader of IPOB, who founded ipob and is their oga, running and directing the organisation is not a member of the organisation?

Your education was either interrupted or you're a complicit criminal.

" Are you a member of the proscribed IPOB?" Isn't the same as " is ipob proscribed"?

Now for many of you okpa-consuming dullards. IPOB remains a proscribed group until any further judgment sets the previous judgment aside.

Kalu knows it's case close if he answered yes to being IPOB. He know it's game over.

Merchant of confusion and deceit like you criminals can only deceive the illiterate Igbo public.

It is just like saying Buhari is not a citizen of Nigeria but the president of Nigeria. How can a nonmember of a group become a leader of the group?
The guy is trying to tell you a non-yoruba is the alaafin of Oyo. That guy defence no legit at all.

This is the first time I am seeing an oloshoic masquerade.

FBIBOT:
this guy is turning into a legend ó... Him don sample almost every lady for nollywood


Aunty which mission be that....

Missionary mission oooo. Don't mind the olodo.

We the association of Stingy Men Association of Nigeria, will not gree. Aka gum Okoro. Publicity Secretary PMAN.

TheMostComplex1:


What's FFK then?

Woman traffic warder.

Tetrahedron:
Ofcourse he stole it to build his own bridge probably in his compound

Just like tinubu driving 2 bullion vans of public funds into his compound in broad day light

See better yarn. Atiku be bridge builder. Tinubu be bridge builder. Buhari be bridge destroyer. So, it is evident this job, was carried out by the trio, after the not so truthful pastor Osibande prayed for them.

kaysy:
The bank is STERLING BANK and the account name reads KOGI STATE SALARY BAIL OUT ACCOUNT

Detective kaysy, shey na sherlock holmes train you ni. I am impressed.

narit:
Hmmmmm, reading this post brings back some memories, giving me a nostalgic feelings about the past. If am to share my scammed stories I doubt I will have all the time to finish it. Seriously, i have been scammed numeriously.

Infact during my teenage years, I famously earned the nickname "BOLO" (meaning a very sluggish person). I like to believe this was as a result of my very timid nature and placing huge trust in people. Two qualities which I completely lack today. Let me quickly share with you all one of my foolishly scammed moment.

Back in 1999, when I was in my teenage year's, my mum gave me 2500 to go and buy kerosene.
I sluggishly collect the gallon of the kerosene given to me and the money not knowing I won't be coming back with any of them. I sluggishly set out on my journey, when I got to the place I was to buy the kerosene, there were lot of people their as a result of kerosene scarcity then. So we had to form a queue, I was the last on the queue, after waiting for like 30minutes on the queue.

This rough looking guy came up to me and told me leg his paining him that he has been here since morning and he his thirsty, he asked me if I could get him nylon water, from a little distantance from where we are. I told him okay, he brought out #5 and gave it to me as I was going, he told me to bring my keg and my money so as to help me buy it when it get to my turn. Without hesitation as a result of my slow mind I quickly gave him the money and my keg.

I guess you all know what happened from here. When I got back he was gone. I went back home without a finch of sadness within me, I guess this was as a result of my slow mind. I told my mum exactly this "ma when I got there, one guy collected everything you gave me and give me nylon water. This is the nylon water he gave me" It was when the slap was coming, before it hits me, my brain within a Seconds processed all that has happened to me that day, and I knew I have messed up and it is too late. Till this very day my left eye have not completely healed from that slap.

I swear if my mother fit read and I show her your story, she go say na me write am. I had similar experience and it is what I am about to share before I saw your reply to the post. Thanks for sharing on my behalf

Boko haram terrorising us for north. Now, so-in-law terrorising father-in-law? Oh Lord Save Us.

Most people who comment on this post did not read the post. If they did, then they don't understand the content of the post. Ah just dey laff at some pips ooo.

Mr Seun, is Nairaland in recession? Because, lately, the topics on front page are all about, Broke this, broke that.