|
|
|
Hanel... bei Gottes Namen, bitte!
Wenn du etwas als von Gott ertrachtest (was viele Muslime tun), dann MUSS es frei von Irrlehren sein!
Denn fragst du die Gelehrten, was denn (authentische) Ahadith seien, dann sagen sie dir: durch einen sicheren Überlieferungsweg als authentisch erkannter Ausspruch des Propheten!
Ich habe auf meiner "Suche" in den Ahadith so viele Widersprüche erkannt, dass man nicht mehr annehmen kann, dass sie vom Propheten abstammen!
Deswegen - Verfwerfe man sie!
Und folge nichts und niemandem ausser Gott!
Das ist die Wahrheit, ja das ist sie
der Rest, niemals von Gott authorisiert, ist Schrott!
Das folgende ist ein Zitat von Edip Yüksel, der auch ein Gegner der Ahadith ist:
| Zitat: |
1. How can you claim that several thousand sahih hadiths are necessarily false while you cite only a few sahih hadiths which have debatable contents? Is this not generalization from scanty data?
2. Why do you assume that either all sahih hadiths should be rejected or all of them should be accepted? Why not judge each hadith based on its individual merit according to all the available data about its isnad, its transmitters, and so on?
3. Suppose we cease to use hadith as a source of information about the Prophet, his life, and his career. Then we notice that the Qur'an itself says very little about the Prophet's life. It also says nothing about how it was complied.
The historicity of the Quran is based on hadiths. It it form hadiths that we know how the Quran was complied. It is also from hadith that we know about the life of the Prophet.
YUKSEL: Here are my answers:
1. If any book contains a few lies (which we have more than just "few" examples), then, the endorsement of that book is not reliable. If you see dozens of repeated fabrications introduced as trustworthy (sahih) hadith, then, how can you still rely on other narration of the same book?
2. Judging each hadith on its individual merit may seem attractive for those who are not satisfied with God's book, but it is a waste of time and a deceptive method. If the signature of narrators (sanad) cannot provide authenticity about the source of hadith, then, our only guide to decide on the content of hadiths (matn) will be our personal wish or our current inclinations. How can we decide which hadith has a merit? How can we decide which hadiths is accurate? We may say "by comparing them with the Quran!" But, what this really mean? If it is "me" who will compare a hadith to the Quran, if it is again "me" who will judge whether it contradicts the Quran or not, then, I will end up with "hadith" which supports "my" personal understanding of the Quran. In this case hadith cannot function as an explanation of the Quran. They will be confirmation or justification of my understanding of the Quran; with literally tasteless, grammatically lame language.... Furthermore, what about hadiths that bring extra duties and prohibitions?
3. Again, there are many hadiths about the prophet's life which you cannot accept them with a sober mind. They are narrated repeatedly in many so-called authentic books. We cannot create a history out of a mishmash of narration by a subjective method of pick and choose. We can create many conflicting portraits of Muhammad out of those hadiths. As for pure historical events that isolated from their moral and religious implications, they are not part of the religion, and we don't need them for our salvation. I never said "we should not read hadith." In fact, we can study hadith books to get an approximate idea about the people and events of those times. We can even construct a "conjecture" about the history, without attributing them to God or his prophet. Please don't forget that the "history" is not immune of filtration, censorship and distortion of ruling class. You can see many different versions of histories (!) regarding the era of early Islam . Just read Sunny and Shiite histories.
4. We cannot disregard God's frequent assertion that the Quran is detailed, complete, clear, and easy to understand. What do you think about the verse 17:46? "When you preach your Lord, in the Quran ALONE, they run away with aversion."
5. Hadith books are full of contradictory teachings. They eventually lead us to a sanctified and justified secterian division in the name of the Prophet. Their very nature is another proof that hadith collections cannot be divine, since God, characterize his word and religion being not having contradiction: "Why do they not study the Quran carefull? If it were from other than God, they would have found in it numerous contradictions." (4:82). This verse clearly refutes the traditional argument that hadith books contain other revelations besides the Quran, since the followers of Hadith and Sunnah wrongly attribute verses about the Quran to hadith, such as: "Your friend (Muhammad) is not astray, nor is he deceived. Nor is he speaking out of a personal desire. It is a divine inspiration." (53:2-4). Furthermore, verses 39:27-28 describes the Quran and the following verse distinguish the divine teaching from other teachings. "God cites the example of a man who deals with disputing partners, compared to a man who deals with only one man. Are they the same? Praise be to God; most of them do not know." (39:29). Obviously, hadith narrators and collections are "disputing partners," while the Quran is a consistent source.
6. Give me one, only one "hadith" that you think it is necessary for my salvation besides the Quran. If you are not ready to discuss the necessity and accuracy of a single hadith, then please give up from your invitation for hadith and Sunna. |
|
|
|
