BIG BIG DISCLAIMER : INI BUKAN SAYA TULIS OK. TOLONG JANGAN MARAH SAYA. TO ALL SUICIDE BOMBERS, THUMBS OFF THE RED BUTTON OK. THIS IS FROM MALAYSIAN INSIDER, WRITTEN BY A FAWAD AHMED.
MAY ALLAH PROTECT THEM BOTH.
I HAVE SOME COMMENTS AT THE END. YOU CAN CLICK THE LINK TO READ THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE. REMEMBER I DID NOT WRITE THIS.
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/article/the-hadith-must-be-re-examined-fawad-ahmed
The hadith must be re-examined – Fawad Ahmed
Published: 16 March 2015 8:50 AM
On February 3, 2015, the world was horrified when the criminals known as Isis burned alive Jordanian pilot, Moaz al-Kasasbeh in a cage. My horror was doubled when I learned that this heinous act has its counterpart in the narrations attributed to Prophet Muhammad (S) and His Companions, known as the hadith:
'Abu al-Nu‘man Muhammad ibn al-Fadl related to us: Hammad ibn Zayd related to us from Ayyub from Ikrimah who said: “Ali burnt some people (apostates) and this news reached Ibn 'Abbas, who said, "Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, 'Don't punish (anybody) with Allah's Punishment.' No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him"' (Sahih Bukhari Vol 4, Book 52, No. 260).
How could one of the most righteous companions of Prophet Muhammad (S), Ali (RA), have burnt alive apostates? The other companion, Ibn Abbas, was apparently not much better. He would have "killed them" as well, if not burned them!
How do we reconcile this narration with the benevolent injunction of the Quran, "Let there be no compulsion in religion" (2:256)? How are we Muslims to be taken seriously on any human rights platform if narrations such as these taint our belief system?
Before proceeding further, let us examine the history of the hadith. Traditionally, Muslim historians claim that shortly after Prophet Muhammad's death, hundreds of thousands of narrations attributed to him and his companions began to circulate in the Islamic world causing mass confusion as to how to follow the Prophet's example.
Enter the six most prominent hadith scholars 200-300 years after the Prophet's death: Imams Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawood, ibn Majah, Tirmizi, and Nisai. (These are Sunni hadith scholars. Please note the Shias have their own separate scholars and books.) They independently sifted through tens of thousands of reports. In the case of Bukhari, we are told he sifted through 600,000 (!) narrations, settling on a little over 7,000 as "sahih" or authentic.
The methodology used by these scholars to authenticate hadith was "isnad", or chain of narration of the reports, from generation to generation. The isnad methodology emphasized verification of the character and memory of the narrator, rather than using the Quran or reason as guides. Can Chinese whispering be taken as solid evidence for any serious belief system?
In any case, the six Sunni hadith collections, as they stand today, are considered unquestionable by traditional religious authorities and have become the basis of Islamic jurisprudence.
But recently, bold Malaysian scholar Kassim Ahmad was met with controversy and some scholars declared him an apostate for suggesting that "the hadith are sectarian, anti-science, anti-reason and anti-women."
Indeed, what are we to do with hadith that prescribe death for blasphemy and apostasy? Should we stone adulterers as numerous "sahih" narrations mention or choose the Quranic path of forgiveness for the repentant adulterer (26:68-71) and decidedly non-lethal punishment for the habitual adulterer (24:2)?
Should we marry off a nine-year old to a 53-year-old man according to the Bukhari tradition, or wait until the poor child is of sufficient age to sign a legal contract, consent and to handle finances (4:6, 4:19, 4:21). Are not thousands of innocent lives being destroyed in these unholy unions every year? Others such as this justify Isis sex slavery and "sexual jihad":
Narrated Abdullah, "We used to participate in the holy wars carried on by the Prophet and we had no women (wives) with us. So we said (to the Prophet ). "Shall we castrate ourselves?" But the Prophet forbade us to do that and thenceforth he allowed us to marry a woman (temporarily) by giving her even a piece of cloth, and then he recited: "O you who believe! Do not make unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you" (Sahih Bukhari Book 60, No. 139)
Aside from these human rights violations, some sahih narrations are so pornographic in nature that one is left bewildered as to what guidance is intended and who was the voyeur behind the narration. See for yourself but please be forewarned.
Traditionalists argue that without the narrations, our religion is not complete. They frequently cite verses such as this: 33:21: "Verily, in the Messenger of Allah you have an excellent example, for everyone who looks unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembers Allah much."
But, which hadith books should I use to understand the Prophet's example, the Sunni or Shia ones? Does not the Quran compare sectarians to idolaters 30:31-32? Did the Prophet (S) judge other than with the Quran? Was his character anything but the Quran?
History is witness that the most luminous period of Islamic history was the first 200 or so years after the Prophet (S). Were these early Muslims lost, awash in hundreds of thousands of false reports, waiting for hadith scholars to rescue them from the abyss three centuries later? Did the Quran state that such authorities would arise and be unchallengeable? Quite the contrary, the Quran forbids blind following even in itself:
25:73: "And who, whenever they are reminded of even the Revelations of their Lord, do not fall at them deaf and blind (with deaf and blind acceptance)."
So who concocted the narrations that violate human rights, contradict Quranic injunctions, violate reason, and slander the Prophet and his companions?
If we piece together the evidence, the hadith collections served the purpose of the corrupt Abbassid caliphs, the elite rich, and the priest class. The liberating and versatile Quran, meant for all times, had to be chained down with man-made dogmas to meet the needs of this evil trio. In those times when religion and state were one and the same, anyone who converted was akin to a traitor and harsh penalties had to be justified.
Harems needed to be stocked, with age no bar, so child marriage and sex slavery were promoted. To keep women in line, their rights had to be degraded and stoning was introduced from the Bible (how conspicuously rare is the male stoning victim in the Muslim world?).
Free minds threatened priesthood and hence the Arts and Sciences had to be disparaged and superstitions promoted. The remaining herd of Muslims, following like sheep, did not pay heed to the warning of the Quran:
9:31: "They take their rabbis, priests and monks to be their Lords besides Allah."
In conclusion, there are traditions that do reflect the Divine Light of the Quran. Those should be respected.
But those which promote human rights violations, contradict the Quran, slander the Prophet and his companions, or are anti-reason, are fuel for the likes of Isis and a source of shame in front of non-Muslims and our children. God calls the Quran the best hadith repeatedly (4:87, 7:185, 39:23, 56:81, and 77:50, many more) and has guaranteed the preservation of only one Book:
15:9 "Behold, it is We Ourselves Who have sent down this Reminder (the Quran), and behold, it is We Who shall truly guard it."
There is no such guarantee for man-made books. The hadith must be reexamined! – March 16, 2015.
* Fawad Ahmed, MD, is the blogger/founder of Quranaissance.com.
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider.
* FOR THE PRESERVATION OF HEALTH MIGHT I ALSO ADD THAT INDEED THIS "is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not represent the views of OUTSYED THE BOX BLOG".
- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/article/the-hadith-must-be-re-examined-fawad-ahmed#sthash.b1cA9hA0.dpuf
Ok my comments : This article appeared yesterday on Malaysian Insider. Since then it has been reposted, forwarded and has also been commented upon. I received it yesterday via WhatsApp.
Already the braindead have begun to disparage the writer - the usual reaction by the 'golongan yang tidak cukup oksigen mengalir ke dalam otak'.
Rule No 1 - shoot the messenger. Shoot the messenger, especially when you dont know, cannot understand or disagree with the message.
Rule No 2 - After that crawl back inside your coconut shell.
Another commenter said, you must understand classical Arabic before you can comment on this topic etc.
For those who agree with this viewpoint, please show your classical arabic credentials before you send me your comments. Otherwise your comments will be deleted instantly.
Remember - no classical arabic credentials, no comment. Fair enough? Because it is you who insists that without classical Arabic you cannot comment on this topic.
But just as a statement of fact there are hundreds if not thousands of native Arab speaking Muslims alive today who also raise the same points, the same debates and the same disputes.
Dont believe me? You can visit freeminds.org, submission.org, Submitters International, quranaissance.com etc and meet many of them. They are native Arab speakers and also scholars of Islamic history, Usul, Fiqh etc.
Then there are also about 50 million Shiah Arabs who reject the Sunni narrative. Of course this must include their scholars. They are all native speakers of Arabic as well as scholars themselves.
There are another 60 million Persian speaking Shias who also reject the Sunni narrative. They have rejected the Sunni narrative for over a 1000 years. Their Ayatollahs are all learned in classical Arabic as well. Of course they have their own narratives - which the Sunnis reject.
So the questioning, debating, rejection of these narratives has been going on for sometime. It is not new.
A friend of mine raised an interesting point that the Sunni writer Imam Ghazali (famed for his book Ihya Ulumuddeen) does not refer Bukhari at all in all his writings. Thats interesting.
Why did Imam Ghazali NOT make even one reference to Bukhari? Can anyone answer? Or will it be 'Shoot the messenger' again?
Anyway the reason the writer Dr Fawad Ahmed is able to say all these things and still remain unmolested is because he lives in the United States. Dr Fawad Ahmed a physician by training is the son of another physician and Quran scholar Dr Shabbir Ahmed. His father Dr Shabbir Ahmed (of Pakistani roots) is a well known writer and scholar of the Quran.
Dr Shabbir Ahmed does not claim to be a "religious leader" but he has a huge following all over the world. Mostly the intelligentsia and the academics support his views. The not intelligentsia type no need to do anything ok? Relak brader.
Conclusion : The Internet is really making the religious folks squirm.
Now anyone with a smartfone, a laptop or tablet can access huge quantities of original sources and research material just with the touch of your finger at home, on the bus, on the train, by the beach or anywhere.
And they are able to compose and post intelligent and thought provoking articles, questions and discussions on the Internet which then reaches the whole world at light speed.
Until the advent of the Internet, 1.6 billion muslims in the world could only listen to the Friday sermons without questioning. Millions of people listen to ceramahs everyday without questioning. They are not allowed to think or criticise or question.
This has been going on for over 1000 years. So maybe you can understand why they are in the dumps of human history for such a long time.
Questioning means you cannot disagree. If you disagree you will be branded an apostate, a deviant etc etc.
There is another by product or side effect of this "cannot question" culture. This 'cannot question' culture has created an intellectually challenged class of human beings called the religious preachers.
The religious preachers do not have to use intelligence to disprove those who do not agree with them. Their method is very simple. They just label critics as deviants, apostates etc. In Syria the ISIS just cuts off the heads of people they dont agree with.
What a fantastic method of preserving their intellectual deficiency. Now you understand why they are so dumb. 'Tidak perlu menggunakan akal dalam semua perkara'. End of story.
I think that period is coming to a quick end with the advent of the Internet. Information is now at everyone's fingertips.
Here is that question I raised earlier. Can anyone here who is reading this please provide an intelligent answer. Please DO NOT, I repeat PLEASE DO NOT create your own answer out of thin air. Jangan jadi David Copperfield ok.
Better go and ask the scholars first, double check with the scholars first before you even attempt to answer this simple question.
The scholars say that almost every detail of the prophet's life has been recorded. What he ate, how he ate, how he slept at night, how many strokes for the prophet to comb his hair (40 strokes), the treaties he signed, his life with his companions, his children, his wives, etc. Even his personal habits are recorded in detail.
Yet there is no record of all the Friday sermons preached by the Prophet.
The command to pray is said to have come down during the third year of the prophet's mission. The prophethood is said to have lasted 23 years. So for at least 20 years (or maybe more) the prophet must have prayed, including the Friday prayers.
That means there should be over 1000 Friday sermons (20 x 52 wks = 1040) during his life as the prophet. Even if we chop this number by half (ie 10 years) there should be 520 Friday sermons.
But where are all these 1040 Friday sermons?
There is only the prophet's very first sermon delivered at a place called Quba. However this first sermon is not recorded in Bukhari. It is mentioned in a book called Zad Al-Ma’ad (Provisions of the hereafter) by someone called ibn Al-Qayyim.
So why are the Prophet's Friday sermons NOT found in the Bukhari? Or are they? I am willing to be corrected on this.
And where are all the remaining over 1000 sermons?
In contrast the Shia 'narrative' includes the book Nahjul Balagha by Imam Ali. This book is actually a collection of 240 Friday sermons by Imam Ali. So the Friday sermons were important.
We know the prophet's favorite food, his favorite wife, his favorite grandsons, his legal rulings etc but where are the complete collections of the Prophet's Friday sermons?
Suicide bombers, thumbs off the red button. Just try to answer the question intelligently. No David Copperfield magic ok.