Ustadh Nouman Ali Khan claimed that criticising hadith transmission means criticising the Quran transmission itself. Mufti Abu Layth refuted that flawed logic
Imam Malik lived in Medina and only had 1700 hadiths, but imam Ahmed Hanibal who was born a few decades later suddenly collected 30 000 hadiths. That does not make sense..
Woah it’s literally like some of these teachers are throwing the Quran under the bus with this ‘criticising Hadith=criticising the Quran’ logic. And people call Mufti Abu layth a deviant, sellout, even ‘kafir’ etc!
But when they are told, "Follow what God has bestowed from on high," some answer, "Nay, we shall follow [only] that which we found our forefathers believing in and doing." Why, even if their forefathers did not use their reason at all, and were devoid of all guidance? 2:170
I am shocked that how can Nauman ali khan commit such blunder. I thought he’s a genius scholar. But this much basic topic he slips in. Really shocking for me. So sad.
﴿أَفَلا يَتَدَبَّرونَ القُرآنَ وَلَو كانَ مِن عِندِ غَيرِ اللَّهِ لَوَجَدوا فيهِ اختِلافًا كَثيرًا﴾ [An-Nisā’: 82] (82) Then do they not reflect upon the Qur’ān?[203] If it had been from [any] other than Allāh, they would have found within it much contradiction.
Dear revert brother/sister in Imaan, I am very glad that you have recognised the truth God has revealed in the Quran and couldn't resist Islam. I am your brother all the way from India. I am a revert Muslim too. I hope and pray my advice helps you in your journey. I would like to advise you to take your deen primarily from the Quran and become more Quran-centric in your understanding of Islam. You may turn to Hadith to fulfill the obligations set by Allah such as Salah (Daily prayers), fasting, Hajj, charity, and moral goodness. But not when it tries to push Arabian culture as Islam, created sectarian mindset, and tries to demonise the character of the nobleProphet (Pbuh) or when it clearly contradicts the Quran. For people of sound intellect who like to think deeply, there are many aspects of Hadiths which appear quite spurious and even in direct contradiction with the Quran. You need to be particularly careful when certain stories found in the Hadith collection (compiled more than 200 years after the Prophet), portray the Prophet’s (pbuh) noble character in very poor light. I would advise you to not believe everything blindly because Muslims make you believe in those spurious stories with a lot of zeal, which they have been made to believe through years of institutionalised sectarian indoctrination. I would advise you to exercise caution when exploring the Hadith canon. But the Quran being God’s final revelation is fully protected from human corruption. However, while the other secondary sources of Islamic knowledge may contain some prophetic truth within it, but not believe everything which Muslims have been made to believe through these books is as pure as the Quran. Do bear in mind that Muslims are good people and are very sincere in what they believe about the Hadiths. So it's ok to avoid disagreements when it comes to issues which emerge from certain problematic Hadeeths. Even early Islamic history seems highly distorted due to these man-made ‘holy’ books and this understanding of Islam by new Muslims does create many problems for the Muslim community around the world. I pray Allah always guides you to HIS WAY, and not some sectarian way, made up by people after the Prophet left this world and that Allah keeps you protected from satanic deceptions in matters of faith. Ameen. In my 15 years experience, most Muslims are very Hadith-centric and expect reverts to follow Islam which is predominantly from Hadeeths and not the Quran. Most Muslims are only aware of the beautiful side of hadeeth corpus but are generally kept unaware of the problematic side so if if you blindly follow things which are not from the Quran, you may end up making all kinds of enemies for yourself especially your own family will find you very problematic. But it's not the case when you're more Quran centric in your understanding and practice of Islam. If you would like to have a zoom conversation to discuss these issues, do let me know. I would love to be of some help, purely for the sake of Allah and Allah’s deen.
Not all the Companions transmitted Hadiths and hadiths goes back to the Companions, this is where the investigation is, that of those who attributed the Hadiths to this or that Companion.
If what Numan Ali says is true why Is imam Sulaymaniyah Hafs and imam Asim accepted by sunnis in Quranic riwiyah but rejected in ahadith? The Shia accept them in both but sunnis couldn’t claim this.
Quran had to come as a book/tablet. That's how the previous revelations came according to God. Its an insult to believe chapters were written here and there. Then also Quran rhymes and that makes it easy to memorize. People like nouman ali will say anything to save their employment. It is the duty of the masses to check validity of their bold claims.
The grammatical rules say that "مَا" can be negative with perfect (past) verbs and perfect nouns only. However, to sabotage the statement of the Quran and to bring their falsification in the translation, our scholars take imperative verbs, imperfect verbal nouns or elative nouns such as "أَرْسَلْ" seen in Quranic compound "أَرْسَلْنَا" and "أْنْزِلْ" in "أْنْزِلْنا" as perfect (past) verb which is against and outside the linguistic rules. This is because by taking such imperfect verbal nouns to mean a past or perfect verb they actually want to prove that sending or revealing the messages of God was the practice of the past. However, the Quran has been using these imperfect verbs for a reason which tell us that revelations or God’s message never stops and sending messages and coming revelations is an ongoing process. In fact, "أَرْسَلْ" in the compound of "أَرْسَلْنَا " is not a past or perfect verb, but an imperfect impetrative or command verb in which it is commanded to do the work related to it but when the same imperative or command verb comes with an object pronoun, such as a first person plural objective pronoun"نَا " coming at the end of the compound of "أَرْسَلْنَا ". In such a case, the same verb becomes the infinitive verb, that is, the unlimited verb, in which there is no command to do something, but a cause, a reason or a purpose is emphasized in performing the action of such verbs. In this sense, ""أَرْسَلْنَا actually states that "the reason for our sending" or "the cause of our sending". Hence, the words "وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن رَّسُولٍ إِلاَّ لِيُطَاعَ" are actually saying, "The only reason of Our sending a message is to obey or comply with". In other words, infinitive command is being given in the compound of "َْأَرْسَلْنَا" that whenever Our message comes, it is obligatory to obey. Imperfect verb does not mean a defective item, but is an Arabic grammatical term used for a verb or a verbal noun the work of which has not yet been completed and which is still going on or will continue. However, those conmen who take "أَرْسَلْ" and "أنزِلْ" as perfect or past verbs have not yet been able to answer my simple question that if the Quranic words "أَرْسَلْ" and "أنزِلْ" are imperfect or past verbs, then what would they call actual past verbs like "رَسَلَ" and "نَزَلَ" and how will they make imperative or command verbs from root words "رسل" and "نزل" in the pattern of other imperative or command verbs such as imperative or command verb "اکتب" is made from its root "کتب" and "اجلس" is made from its root "جلس" and so on??? However, it is a different matter that they have not permanently deleted the imperative or command verbs of root words "رسل" and "نزل" from their dictionaries and other records, and they purposely stopped using them because history testifies that these people used to burn the pages and pages of written memoirs to erase their records and their history so that no one could find any evidence of any of their statements and later they can misrepresent as they wish to manipulate things. For example, manipulating the meaning of the Quran, they claim that their central shrine was built by Prophet Ibrahim and they give its reference from the Quran by destroying the historical evidence of its construction so that people would be forced to automatically admit that if the Quran was saying this, it would be 100% correct. But very few people know the fact that the Quran does not make such a statement in its own words. On the contrary, by putting a bone in the mouth of dogs like Ibn Kathir, all these fictions were deliberately fabricated in the Arabic commentaries of the Quran and the Quran was understood from these fabricated interpretations of Arabic. When the Quran was already existed in their own plain, simple and straightforward Arabic language, several hundred years later, the purpose of translating the Quran into Arabic was to make the Quran the only meaning of what they were giving. Simply because the language is ours, the meaning will also be ours!
You're right. If Ifsnad entered our spiritual tradition 100 years after the death of the messenger pbuh then that doesn't necessarily mean it was the same way that the Quran was taught. I've encountered this idea of the Quran being transmitted as an oral and practiced tradition before.
Yes... And the first 2 Caliphs rejected it to usurp authority... The current version of the Quran was later compiled w/out chronology ~17 years after the passing of Prophet Muhammad (MPBUH), in the time of Caliph Usman.
Exactly that's why allah purified ahyl bayt and gave an infallible chain in the ahyl bayt. From the prophet Muhammad pbuh to imam ali to imam Hassan and imam hussien to imam zayn abideen to his son imam baqir to his son imam jafar sadiq and because they are infallible this makes it the perfect chain
cute noumane so u claime that 1 the people who so called protected the quran protected the ahadith. hmm mou3awiya begs 2 differ. 2 so the prophet who was tasked as messenger didnt wrote it down. even tho writting was manditory given by allah to idriss. ( or do you wanna say oumie means illiterate ) 3 sunna of the prophet ? did he had a own authority to make it up or did he had to follow milaat ibrahim ? 45:9 and many other ayas dont really proof he had that freedom ) 4 allah said he will protect the quran na3am. but who promised you to protect the ahadith ? isnt the best hadith already the quran ? 5 if questioning the hadith means questioning the quran. why do many so called sahih ahadith have missing links in the sinsilaat ? and why had they to get compiled by non arabs like boukhari with atleast a century after the prophet ? 6 wasnt rule nr 1 of accepting a hadith to have a quranic refference. so whats about the sahih ahadith about women being omens of bad luck and urine to just name a couple ?
Sunni Tradition wasn't written for a long period of time between Rasool s.a.w and compilation of hadiths. While Quran was compiled while Khulafa of Muslims were alive. Transmission of a book is way more authentic and different than oral Transmission of hadith. There is total oral Transmission and even if we look today, like in Pakistan, we have contradictory opinions about history thats just 10 years old let alone 100 year gap ( between hadith Transmission )
Wasn’t the Quran transmitted by mouth hundreds of years before being written down? So were the hadith. It would seem from the islamic view, the Quran started from God, but who can say if its oral transmission was precise until it was written down? Whereas the hadith was always authored by man -But in each case chains of narration were relied upon. Effectively the Quran as victim to the same flawed human forces.
Memorization of Quran just means you're a data bank. Doesn't mean your special Allah uses of his servants who he wills , and they will recite the book but it won't pass their throats
The Abbas dynasty were sunnis not shia. Actually imam jafar sadiq rejected helping them overthrow the ummayyad dynasty. So has nothing to do with shia because shia dont believe in taking caliphate by force. This is a Sunni concept
The problem that non of sahih alboukhari hadiths are contradicting Quran it's just the false understanding of hadith or Quran "btw it had to be sahih not one of moualaqat alboukhari
Bukhari Hadith... I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, So according to this hadith, the prophet was commanded to fight people untio they accept Islam... Surely that command must be there in Quran... So we check up the Quran and we have this verse where command of Allah is given.. Had your Lord so willed ˹O Prophet˺, all ˹people˺ on earth would have certainly believed, every single one of them! Would you then force people to become believers? 10:99 This is just one example, and if one does not do mental gymnastics, and use God given common sense, its not hard to see the contradiction... But no.. We need to worship Bukhari and Muslim, how can they make mistake?
@@louaymasbah4720 Do you know what is the most embaressing thing here... So a person, most likely an intelligent and educated person is willing to believe that certain books ( Bukhari and Muslim ) are 100 % correct, and its one thing that he has not read them cover to cover, and its another that he has not even opened those books, and then that same intelligent person goes to social media and tell other muslims that they are supposed to believe in those books. How do I know this? If you had read only 2 first chapters of Bukhari or Muslim, you would have found this hadith. Its in second chapter of Bukhari, Kitabul Eman and in First chapter of Muslim which is also Kitabul Eiman... And then this hadith is repeated so many times in those books with so many different chains that hadith scholars have called this hadith to be Mutawatir... And the hadith does not tell us the targetted people but does the context even count? I would have no problem with this hadith if its wording were like the wording of Quran.. That is... Fight them until there is no more fitnah, but wording simply says that I am commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no God but one and I am messenger of Allah...
@@omerali2690 wow my friend as an arab when you didn't say the hadith in arabic i didn't pay attention about it I'm not supposed to memorize all the hadiths the hadith is أمرت أن أقاتل الناس ، حتى يشهدوا أن لا إله إلا الله ، وأن محمدا رسول الله ، ويقيموا الصلاة ، ويؤتوا الزكاة ، فإذا فعلوا ذلك عصموا مني دماءهم وأموالهم إلا بحق الإسلام ، وحسابهم على الله تعالى and you need to know that the biggest problem with some salafistes that they understand hadiths and quran without the historical context you need to know the historical context to know who are the people that are referred to and why did mohammed pbuh said it
So many great scholars disagree in simple things, this is the sign , that nothing can be 100% preserved , including the hadiths and Quran I know Muslims will disagree But ask any non Muslims, the Quran is not perfect , it can't be word of God It could be an inspiration by prophets, that all
what? "mufti" abu layth is not a teacher except for fools. Abu layth should never be taken for any religious knowledge. The only people who do are those who want to find the cheapest, most leninant, most bizarre fatwas. He is rejected by all scholars and so he should be.
