Am I An Apostate?

[Citizen X]

Suub sy bara molvi Insaan ka apna dil hy and internally he knows he is wrking but he still dont want to believe in Hadith because how else he can get excuse for the things he wants to do that are not allowed in Islam otherwise.

Quran main to Math Science Physics ka bhe zikr nahi to us ko bhe follow nahi krty bus Quran he parhtay hain ,

its is just an excuse to follow one's own will , not Islam

I'm a grown ass man, happily married, with kids and engage in no vices i.e drinking, drugs, partying, fornication etc etc etc, yet I don't believe that hadith holds any deen in it. So what is it that I want to do that the hadith forbids me to do, so I don't "follow" it.

In fact when I was young and single, and a very staunch believer of hadith as the ultimate guide of deen, I engaged in a lot of activities that can lets say be considered unislamic. That would have been the perfect time in my life to as you people say reject hadith so I could do what I wanted to do, but I didn't.

So your argument really holds no water for me.

 

[Citizen X]

dont worry. just do whatever suits to you, and wait until you reach in the Qabr. everything will become clear.

Oh look mr back peddling coward is back.

 

[hammy_lucky]

An excellent response, especially if it is not a cut and paste and penned by you, even though I might not 100% agree with it. Because it still leaves space for extracting deen and jurisprudence from hadith.

The problem I see is no one is willing to even talk about this subject let alone have an informative debate here. The hadithists response is limited only to posting clips of their imams and mullahs, no one willing to take a pause and give it a rational thought.

I've laid down a dozen different arguments from a dozen different angles and till date no one has stepped up and tried to challenge them or debate the, reason being, one the people who fight tooth and nail about hadith being a major source of deen, really haven't read much hadith themselves and are just blindly defending it. second they also have no clue how hadith science works, what is the history of hadith, how it came into being etc etc.

The need for jurispudence came after the conquered lands and mixing of different cultures and new cities.
There is a difference between religion and culture but at times they are in conflict with each other. Jurispudence provides better understanding of deen. Moral knowledge is exctracted from hadiths.
If applied in a sensible manner it can be a source of guidance and law.
Hadith and Sunnah are two different things.
Hadiths can sometimes but not always guarantee Sunnah. No wonder books were written 200 years later. One good thing came out of these books though was that it brought an end of free floating sayings of the prophet pbuh. These books gave some kind of authenticity.
The harmful aspect is definitely that most people are giving literalist meaning to these hadiths.

 

[Citizen X]

If applied in a sensible manner it can be a source of guidance and law.

I disagree with the law part. Law cannot be extracted from something so controversial and unreliable.

One good thing came out of these books though was that it brought an end of free floating sayings of the prophet pbuh. These books gave some kind of authenticity.

Kind of, yes it put a stop to people inventing new hadith on a daily basis but as we can see, the authentication process was far from flawless, with so many not so sahih hadith making their way into the sahih. But still we cannot assume the remaining to be actually sahih either.

So rather than taking hadith as some great source of deen or jurisprudence. It is better to class them for what they are a record of early Islamic history and biographical record of the Prophet's life.

The harmful aspect is definitely that most people are giving literalist meaning to these hadiths.

Thats the problem with hadith, Muslims on a whole who say they disown groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda and that they do not represent Islam are actually from the point of view of traditional hadithist Islam, following "Islam" more perfectly than anyone else.

And when today the more "religious" a person gets the more he starts following the hadith closely, the more extremist he gets.

On a hypothetical scenario if tomorrow hadith disappeared from the face of the planet. 90% of what we follow, believe and practice believing it to be a part of Islam, disappears, but in an opposite scenario if the Quran were to have never existed and only the hadith, you would barely see any difference in Islam as it being followed and practiced today. And that alone should be huge writing on the wall for the hardcore people, that what passes for Islam today, really has nothing to do with Islam.

What is the new testament part of bible, nothing but hadith as narrated by John, Mark. Matthew and Luke and we are also following in those footsteps only difference is that we still have the original message of Allah with us but we still choose to follow our new testament instead.

 

[hammy_lucky]

I agree with you with the most part.
However please note that a lot of Sunnah is included in these Hadiths.
As far as law is concerned, even the implementation of Quranic laws requires some hadiths or Early Caliphates rulings.
Jurisprudence is the wisdom of the deen.
I personally do believe that Abu Hanifa’s, Imam Jaffer Sadiq and Imam Malik’s methodology was better in law making.
No one is perfect and no one can claim that he knows the will of god. We can only discuss matters with reasoning and arguments. Same goes with Law making too.

 

[Wake up Pak]

Who was the Messenger? Whom Allah asked us to obey in clear words in the Quran?

What next? you telling people that Vine is not haram in Islam because it's called Vine, not Sharaab. What I see you doing is mincing words and that's all. Quran is crystal clear about following the Messenger which clearly means that anyone who deny an authentic hadith is actually going against instructions of the Quran.

How is it mincing the words?
I have put frothed very clearly, how the messenger is connected to the message and, the message is the Quran. Also, I have posted a few verses which tell us that the Messenger's job was to convey the Quran alone nothing more. Here is one again.

“The Messenger’s duty is only to deliver the message: Allah knows what you reveal and what you conceal.” (Qur’an 5:99)

How is it clearly mean that one who denies a hadith is going against the instructions of the Quran? Can you justify your claim from the Quran?

 

[Wake up Pak]

After this explanation you still don't believe in Hadith, I feel sorry for you , He is explained in the most easy way possible

Explain what? Can you elaborate?

 

[Wake up Pak]

dont worry. just do whatever suits to you, and wait until you reach in the Qabr. everything will become clear.

Believe me, I am not worried at all as we all one day be gone but, unfortunately, Muslims have been kept in dark by the so-called sheiks/muftis/alims/moulvi, etc. and, we do not reflect or ponder about, what is being said or written centuries ago.

 

[Hunter_]

The Quran is a guidance for mankind!
Who gave him the right to call anyone an apostate who does not believe in all the ahadith or Sunnah?

the same person who gav e you the

Explain what? Can you elaborate?

Hedayat sirf ALLAH ky haath mian hy, aap ko zid behaz krni hy to kuch nahi ho skta,

 

[Wake up Pak]

the same person who gav e you the

Hedayat sirf ALLAH ky haath mian hy, aap ko zid behaz krni hy to kuch nahi ho skta,

Zid behas kahan say aa gai?
Allah nay aqal dee hay ussay istimal karo. Ghor o fikar karo. Soocho kiya theek hay kiya ghalath hay. Ankhain bundh karkay koi bhi cheez accept nahi karni chaiyay.

 

[miafridi]

How is it mincing the words?
I have put frothed very clearly, how the messenger is connected to the message and, the message is the Quran. Also, I have posted a few verses which tell us that the Messenger's job was to convey the Quran alone nothing more. Here is one again.

“The Messenger’s duty is only to deliver the message: Allah knows what you reveal and what you conceal.” (Qur’an 5:99)

How is it clearly mean that one who denies a hadith is going against the instructions of the Quran? Can you justify your claim from the Quran?

Quran 2:191 – “And kill them(Kafirs) wherever you find them"

Now kindly follow Quran and go on a killing mission, leaving no kafir on earth, else you are not following Quran, right?

No, Because there are countless occasions in the Quran where you have to take the verse in context or you will find yourself to be following the Quran wrongly as evident in the above case. As for the messenger not only Quran is clear about following him but it's also logical not to ignore the sayings/actions of someone who is narrating the Quran for.

Conclusion : If you don't trust his actions/sayings/instructions then why do you trust the Quran reaching to you through his mouth?

 

[miafridi]

These are the same kind of arguments the Shia have been giving to prove imamat from the Quran and that many verses "refer" to Ali r.a

If the hadith were so important why didn't the Prophet s.a.w in his life time not made sure in his life time for hadith to be preserved. After all what would have been more authentic where the Prophet s.a.w himself would have signed off on a collection of hadith. Then there would have been no doubt what so ever.

But the fact of the matter is the Prophet s.a.w forbade people from writing hadith, and said the only thing the people were suppose to write down and preserve was the Quran. Why?

Why di Abu Bakr r.a his closet and longest companion narrate only less than 40 hadith? Why did Umar Ibn Khattab r.a beat Abu Hurrairah and threathed to send him back to Yemen if he didn't stop narrating hadith.

Why did none of the Khulafah Rashidun work towards compiling hadith like they did with the Quran.

Early Islam and Islamic jurisprudence was 100% hadith free, if was later people like Imam Shafi started to insist on hadith, going so far as to say the hadith is on a higher level than the Quran itself.

In history and in current times there have always been people trying to damage the true face of the religion by trying to present false sayings/actions/events/references of the Prophet(P.B.U.H) which is why there is a need for the hadith to be authentic. And the incident where someone is forbidding others from narrating a hadith might be related to authenticity issues.

As for Abu bakkar R.A, lets not discuss that he might have narrated more than 40 hadiths and it is only the writers who failed to document more hadiths coming from him, but if it's 40 hadiths even then isn't it a significant number for someone who would know that Prophet(P.B.U.H) forbade narrating hadiths?

Lastly,

On countless occasions in the Quran.

Translation: Follow Allah and his Messenger.

How do you follow the Messenger? By following what he did and said/instructed.

What is Sunnah/Hadith? Sayings and actions of prophet Muhammed(P.B.U.H).


Conclusion for those who say they only trust Quran: If you don't trust his actions/sayings/instructions then why do you trust the Quran reaching to you through his mouth?

 

[Citizen X]

In history and in current times there have always been people trying to damage the true face of the religion by trying to present false sayings/actions/events/references of the Prophet(P.B.U.H)

Exactly, enemies of Islam, munafiqs, greedy rulers, insincere scholars etc etc knew there was no way possible to change the Quran so they went after the next best thing.

which is why there is a need for the hadith to be authentic.

But unfortunately there is no bullet proof way to authenticate them.

And the incident where someone is forbidding others from narrating a hadith might be related to authenticity issues.

As for Abu bakkar R.A, lets not discuss that he might have narrated more than 40 hadiths and it is only the writers who failed to document more hadiths coming from him, but if it's 40 hadiths even then isn't it a significant number for someone who would know that Prophet(P.B.U.H) forbade narrating hadiths?

All of this is just conjecture so really point in countering this argument, but just to put it in perspective Abu Huraira who knew the prophet for only two years narrated 1000s of hadith. And Abu Huraira is a controversial figure to say the least and yet has the largest number of hadith to his credit.

On countless occasions in the Quran.

Translation: Follow Allah and his Messenger.

How do you follow the Messenger? By following what he did and said/instructed.

What is Sunnah/Hadith? Sayings and actions of prophet Muhammed(P.B.U.H).


Conclusion for those who say they only trust Quran: If you don't trust his actions/sayings/instructions then why do you trust the Quran reaching to you through his mouth?

Like I said this is the same type of argument that the shia present trying to prove imamat from the Quran by quoting out of context partial verses and twisted translations.

One example Surah nissah verse 59. The same verse latter part is O believers! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. Claiming that Allah s.w.t is referring to Ali r.a, as the authority among you. Hence imamat is proved from the Quran itself.

Like that you can take any verse or part of it out of context and make it to mean whatever you want it to, and unfortunately that is what has been going on for ages. in fact in the same surah verse 46. Allah s.w.t give the example of Jews who did the exact same thing.

"Some Jews take words out of context and say, “We listen and we disobey,” ..........playing with words and discrediting the faith."

But read the preceding verses and you get the context and situation or just even the whole verse.

O believers! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. Should you disagree on anything, then refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if you ˹truly˺ believe in Allah and the Last Day. This is the best and fairest resolution.

The preceding verses talk about Prophet Ibrahim a.s and how some people followed him and how some turned away from him and what will happen to those who did not and how to be fair and to judge in fairness and if a dispute rises among you, then refer it Allah and his messenger and those in authority.

How one concludes that this means copy cat the Prophet's s.a.w daily routines and actions as some kind of worship and part of deen or follow even today what he might have said in some situations to a certain person or group of people during his time in a certain situation, specially when there is no real credibility that these actions or saying were actually even said or done by the Prophet or said in this exact manner is beyond rationality.

 

[Citizen X]

Translation: Follow Allah and his Messenger.

Partial out of context translation, read post above for detailed explination

How do you follow the Messenger?

By following the Message that was revealed to the Messenger by Allah s.w.t

What is Sunnah/Hadith?

Sunnah and hadith are two total different things. So this question itself is incorrect. It's like saying What is a banana/aeroplane

Conclusion for those who say they only trust Quran: If you don't trust his actions/sayings/instructions then why do you trust the Quran reaching to you through his mouth?

The Quran was completed and signed off in his lifetime and there were 100s if not 1000s who had memorized it in his lifetime. And if hadith had the same importance he would have made sure of preserving it in his lifetime as well, this didn't happen, in fact as mentioned earlier he ordered against this. All the hadith we have is, this person heard it from this person and then he heard it from this person. Going back 100s of years.

To preserve perfectly 1000s of sayings and actions though this most unreliable and inaccurate of methods is impossible. We in this age of audio, video and extensive record keeping cannot keep track of exact sayings and actions of famous and influential people who died less than a 100 years ago, how is one to believe 1000s of people remembered 1000s of hadith perfectly through centuries just by word of mouth. Not possible.

 

[Wake up Pak]

Quran 2:191 – “And kill them(Kafirs) wherever you find them"

Now kindly follow Quran and go on a killing mission, leaving no kafir on earth, else you are not following Quran, right?

No, Because there are countless occasions in the Quran where you have to take the verse in context or you will find yourself to be following the Quran wrongly as evident in the above case. As for the messenger not only Quran is clear about following him but it's also logical not to ignore the sayings/actions of someone who is narrating the Quran for.

Conclusion for those who say they only trust Quran: If you don't trust his actions/sayings/instructions then why do you trust the Quran reaching to you through his mouth?

Citizen x has explained it in detail so I won't repeat it here.

Find me anywhere in the Quran where it says Follow Allah and his Messenger in its proper context that obeying the Rasool is to follow the ahadith?