maar wel op basis van wat men de profeet, vrede zij met hem, heeft zien doen. volgens de sunnah, je kan er niet onderuit dat zonder de uitleg van de salaat men nu hoogstwaarschijnlijk al niet meer zou weten hoe dat zou moeten.
plots niet vinden? ik heb de gehele verzameling hier op mijn pc, met zoekmachine en al, hoe kan het dan dat hij het niet vind? dont blame me, blame de zoekmachine dan
wat mijn verhaal staaft vind ik terug ja, omdat ik mijn verhalen staaf als ik ze vertel
je ontloopt nog steeds het antwoord op mijn ja/nee vraag. waarom ben je niet duidelijk?
omdat mijn mleven hier niet ter sparke staat. Je negeert 100 den argumenten:
The advocates of Hadeeth put forward a specious argument mandating the acceptance of the 'sunna' and the following of it.
Briefly their argument goes as follows:
'God sent down the scripture, the Qur'an, through the Prophet Muhammad - the final emissary from God and whom God describes as a mercy to all mankind - by way of a constitution, laying down broad guidelines. We are commanded by God to obey the Prophet, take what he gives us, refrain from what he prohibits and follow his excellent example. It is obligatory to follow the Prophet's example because he was divinely inspired in everything he did and said and was, as the recipient of the Qur'an, the best candidate to expound It. Furthermore, Muhammad was given the 'hikmah', wisdom, which was sent down by God to him to enable him to teach us the details of our religion and its proper practice, legislating the good things and prohibiting the evil. In addition, Muhammad, as a mercy to all mankind, will intercede on behalf of his 'ummah', followers, on the Day of Judgment with God. Al-Bukhari and the other 'righteous predecessors' spent their entire lives collecting, examining, sorting and sifting the 'aHadeeth which are the residual wisdom of the Prophet and therefore the example we are to follow.'
Their argument is based on their misunderstanding of the numerous verses in the Qur'an which enjoin us to obey God and the Messenger; the most commonly quoted of which are: chapter 4, An-Nissa', verse 59, which reads, in part, "O you who believe obey God and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you...", and verse 80 which says, in part, "Whoever obeys the Messenger has obeyed God."; chapter 3, Ali-'Imran, verse 31 which commands: " Say 'If you love God you shall follow me' God will love you and forgive your transgressions. God is Forgiver, Most Merciful." and verse 32, which dictates " Say 'Obey God and the Messenger'..."; the preceding verses, they claim, dictate obedience to the prophet. They also quote, probably the most abused verse in the Qur'an, chapter 59, Al-Hashr, verse 7 which says, in part, "...Whatever the Messenger gives you, you shall take and whatever he prohibits, you shall refrain from." to legitimize and mandate the acceptance of the Hadeeth and the 'sunna'.
They adduce chapter 33, Al-Ahzaab, verse 21, which states "You have, in the Messenger of God, an excellent example for whomever seeks God and the Last Day and constantly commemorates God." This verse enjoins following the example of the prophet.
They present another passage, based, we hasten to add, on a non-sequitur as we shall, God willing, later show, to argue the veracity and correctness of Hadeeth, namely chapter 53, An-Najm, verses 2, 3 and 4, which state "(2) Your friend was not astray nor was he misled. (3) Nor does he speak of his own desire. (4) It is none but inspiration divinely inspired" From this last verse they go so far as to claim that every word issuing from the mouth of Muhammad is 'inspiration divinely inspired'.
Finally, chapter 2, Al-Baqarah, verse 151, states, in part "...Such as sending into you a Messenger from among you to recite our revelations to you and to purify you and teach you the Book and Wisdom..." This verse, of course, is vital to their argument since it purports to support their belief that God sent down two distinct revelations, the Book, that is the Qur'an, and Wisdom, supposedly the 'sunna'.
The above verses are the ones most frequently presented by the proponents of Hadeeth to support their argument that the Messenger through his legacy, the 'aHadeeth, is, by God's command, to be obeyed, posthumously, we might add, unconditionally.
They do not, it is worthwhile noting, quote any verses to support their contentions that Muhammad was empowered to expound the Qur'an or that he will intercede with God on their behalf on the Day of Judgment. They support these contentions only from the Hadeeth. This is not surprising since there are no verses that would readily, even superficially, convey this meaning; a major leap of logic is required.
-------------------------------
en nu het tegenargument!
Let us take a close look at the parameters of Al-Bukhari's claims.
He claims to have been tutored by more than one thousand teachers, to have collected, examined and classified six hundred thousand 'aHadeeth of which he memorized more than one hundred thousand. We are not told that he had any assistants or helpers. Now, if we allow one single hour to process each Hadeeth he would have had to work non-stop for about seventy years. Since the work involved is time consuming and arduous, because each Hadeeth would have had to be traced back to the Prophet Muhammad through a long transmission chain each link of which must be closely examined to determine if the reporter partook of strong drink, and for such attributes as integrity, moral rectitude, astuteness, truthfulness, mental alertness, and, not least, soundness of memory; one would imagine that it would take considerably more than one single hour to process each Hadeeth. Add to that the fact that each chain might consist of as many as six or seven individuals of successive generations all but one of whom are dead, and one can readily see the magnitude of this daunting task.
At this juncture one might reasonably ask: was it physically possible for Al-Bukhari to have examined that many 'aHadeeth? The answer is no! If that is the case, then Al-Bukhari's own credibility becomes suspect. If in fact he did examine that many 'aHadeeth then could he have possibly given the work due care? The answer is, again, no! He is said to have completed the work in sixteen years. This means that he could not have devoted more than fifteen minutes to process each Hadeeth all told, including, presumably, the two genuflection prayer he is said to have offered before recording each Hadeeth. In either case we are left with a highly questionable situation.
These questions are basic and go to the root of the problem at hand. How Islamic scholars, who claim to be 'scientific', could have failed to pose them is, to say the least, puzzling. Even more puzzling, if they did, in fact, pose these questions, is their very ready acceptance of obviously absurd and evidently unscientific answers.
Even more disquieting is the enormous importance ascribed to Al- Bukhari, Muslim and the other 'saheeh' tomes in Islamic religious literature. The 'sharee'ah', Islamic canon law, is drawn mainly from the 'sunna' as are the everyday religious practices and anyone not following, let alone rejecting, the 'sunna' is considered to border on apostasy 'murtad'. The punishment for apostasy, 'ridda' according to the 'sunna' is death. The Qur'an does not lay down any punishment to apostasy. Chapter 2, Al-Baqarah, verse 256 states, in part "There shall be no compulsion in religion; the right path is now distinct from the wrong path..."
Apart from any questions speaking to the integrity of the content of Hadeeth, logic dictates that it should play no role whatsoever in either exegesis or jurisprudence.
God tells us that the Qur'an is fully detailed and complete. Chapter 6, Al-An'am, verses 114 - 115 state "(114) Shall I seek other than God as an arbiter, when He is the one who revealed to you
the Book explained in detail? Those to whom We have given the Book know that it was revealed by your Lord in truth. So be not among those who harbour doubt. (115) The word of your Lord
is complete in truth and justice. Nothing shall alter His words and He is the Hearer, the Omniscient.".
These verses clearly and unequivocally state that the Qur'an is fully detailed and complete. God Himself tells us that. Thus, in light of the foregoing, one might conclude that any Hadeeth - regardless of whether it issued from the lips of the prophet or of its quality - that conforms with the Qur'an is not needed since it can add nothing to, or enhance our understanding of the Qur'an which, according to God, is fully detailed and complete. If, on the other hand, it does not conform with the Qur'an, it is false and must be discarded. So, one might legitimately ask, what need is there for Hadeeth? Again, the honest answer is none!
So much for the logic of accepting Hadeeth. As for following it, this is risky business indeed! Accepting any matter of religion other than that which is specifically sanctioned by God - regardless of its intrinsic merit - is tantamount to idol-worship. God has sanctioned only the Qur'an. Read what chapter 42, Ash-Shura, verse 21 in part, states, "Or do they have partners who decree for them matters of religion not sanctioned by God?..."
There are other reasons for not accepting the 'aHadeeth.
Even a perfunctory perusal of Al-Bukhari's, Muslim's or any of the other works reveals very serious shortcomings. The 'sahaah' authors concentrated only on examining the transmission chain 'sanad' and failed, deliberately it seems, to consider the content 'matn' or substance, assuming, instead, that the impeccable credentials of the individuals reporting the Hadeeth - who will never report anything they had not themselves witnessed or heard from the Prophet himself or from other equally reliable reporters as the case may be - will guarantee the veracity of the Hadeeth.
Consequently, and not surprisingly, they attribute to the Prophet, may peace be upon him, sayings and actions that are contrary to reason and good sense or involving knowledge of future events - which, one might add, is specifically denied in the Qur'an - or things that are devoid of any useful subject matter and, in many instances, reprehensible behavior.
Other 'aHadeeth are slanted in favor of one or another of the political factions that came into being long after the prophet's death, most notably the Bani-Umayya who usurped power from the rightful ruler Ali Ibn Abi-Talib. Al-Bukhari betrays his own anti-Ali feelings for he relates very few 'aHadeeth through Ali and does not include ones that favor him but relates many that are inimical to Ali and has included a whole section on Mu'awiya, Ali's arch enemy. Muslim, in fairness, holds a more balanced view.
There are, of course, numerous 'aHadeeth that contradict the Qur'an outright and others, especially ones coming through Abu-Hurayra, that are distinctly rabbinical in nature and content.
The most commonly stated justification for Hadeeth is that it teaches the 'salat' (obligatory prayer).
Al-Bukhari has a whole section called 'The Book of Prayer' and what is most amazing is that it does not contain a single Hadeeth that teaches the obligatory prayer. It contains mostly reports of people who purportedly saw the Prophet do or say certain things relating to the prayer and only one Hadeeth where he is reported to have taught one man, whom he had seen perform the prayer incorrectly, to pray. But the Hadeeth, as reported, says that the Prophet instructed the man in how to carry out the physical actions, kneeling and bowing, and to recite any part of the Qur'an failing to cite the number of bowing and kneeling or to mention the required recitation of "Al-Fatihah" the omission of which, we are told by other 'aHadeeth nullifies the prayer. There is one other Hadeeth, "Pray in the way you have seen me pray", but this Hadeeth does not teach the prayer either.
There are no 'aHadeeth that give the number of 'rak'ah', bowings and kneeling, for each prayer, or, for that matter the rate of 'zakat', the self-administered obligatory 'income' tax.
Surely, had the Prophet been instructed by God to teach the obligatory prayer, as they claim, God would have, in view of its paramount importance, clearly told him so in the Qur'an. Had God instructed him - in some way outside of the Qur'an - he would have unambiguously and persistently proclaimed it to the people and would have taught them the prayer in detail just as the Qur'an does when we are instructed to carry out the ritual washing. Chapter 5 'Al-Ma'ida', verse 6 says, in part, "O you who believe, when you determine to offer the prayer you shall wash your faces and your arms to the elbows, and wipe your heads and wash your feet to the ankles. If you were ritually unclean from coïtusual intercourse you shall bathe..."
In this verse the Qur'an not only gives us detailed instructions for the 'wudu'', but also gives us the conditions precedent - ritual cleanliness after coïtusual intercourse - the conditions that nullify the 'wudu'' - discharge of human waste - as well as the alternative, 'tayammum', again fully detailed, in case clean water is not readily available or not recommended where the supplicant is sick. The instructions are succinct and comprehensive.
Contrast that with the paucity of instruction in a sea of marginally relevant 'aHadeeth. If one were to peruse the whole section on prayer and many other 'aHadeeth dealing with the subject of prayer, one might, with a great deal of patience, emerge with what resembles the obligatory prayer; but there are no 'aHadeeth that clearly and unambiguously teach the prayer, citing the actions and the required recitations, their order and number, the number of 'rak'ah' in each, the number of prayers in the day and their prescribed times.
Now let us examine Hadeeth from the Qur'anic point of view.
We shall, God willing, endeavor to put the verses most commonly cited by the advocates of Hadeeth, in support of their argument, in their correct Qur'anic perspective by accepting their straight forward meanings at face value. This is how we are to read the Qur'an. God describes the Qur'an at chapter 39, Az-Zumar, verse 28, "
An Arabic Qur'an without any ambiguity that they might be righteous."
This last verse and Chapter 6, Al-An'am, verses 114 and 115, quoted above, unequivocally state that the Qur'an is clear, complete and fully detailed. If the Qur'an, as God Himself states, is complete and fully detailed, then It, ipso facto, cannot be clarified or completed since It is already fully detailed, clear and complete.
This argument is logically unassailable, yet Islamic scholars fail to see its logic and still insist on the need for Hadeeth, which leads to the inescapable conclusion that they do not, at least fully, believe God when He says that the Qur'an is clear, fully detailed, complete and contains no contradictions. Only then would their position make any sense, for if they do believe God, as they emphatically claim, they would accept that the Qur'an is clear, fully detailed, complete and contains no contradictions and thus does not need Hadeeth or anything else to explain, elucidate or complete It.
The conclusion that must be drawn from their insistence on the role they ascribe to Hadeeth is that they only partially believe God. If they do believe that the Qur'an is complete and fully detailed then they must believe that it contains contradictions in order to allow for a role for Hadeeth and 'sunna'. The corollary is that if they accept that the Qur'an is free of contradiction then they cannot believe that it is complete and fully detailed; otherwise their position would be logically untenable.
Such confused thinking is not surprising given that these people believe, accept and defend contradictory 'aHadeeth and will even seriously consider that the 'sunna' can abrogate the Qur'an since the 'sunna' is in fact divinely inspired revelation and therefore comes from the same source as the Qur'an except that it, unlike the Qur'an, is not in 'recitable' form. Many scholars of Islam actually believe this to be the case and believe that the words of Muhammad, may peace be upon him, a mere mortal, can take precedence over those of the Almighty Creator or even abrogate them. The prophet, like Jesus, will disown all those who claim to love him and would make such idolatrous allegations in his name.
