Quran and Hadith

Angela wrote: abuzaid wrote: This thread was originally launched by angel....... She was asking about Quran and Hadith.. I think she is smiling like this  now. Well, actually, I'm more . I was more looking at a more general thing, but used stoning as a specific incident. I thought I had figured out a few things about Sharia and the roles of Hadith and Quran.......  now I'm just even more confused.  When you start pulling in opinions of men who aren't prophets...then it goes awry.

I understand your confusion given that you come from a gentile background where jurisprudence is nearly non existant in terms of Judaic legal philosophy and Islamic legal philosophy.

Keep in mind that Muslims do not view a revelation as something that just falls from the sky and something magical from heaven allows anyone to pick it up and derive law. FUrthermore, Christian need for law is nearly non-existant, and the main use of the Torah is too find Jesus in it.

For Muslims, we have a detailed path that we aim to walk. The generalities are not in dispute, but the details are something we aim to know.

The Prophetic scope of authority covers teaching the revelation, not just vocalizing the revelation. The scope of prophethood of Muhammad (saw) included particularizing various verses in the Quran.

His scope also included receiving revelation that is not recited. This source is looked upon as a valid source for exegesis of the Quran and for matters of jurisprudence.

This might be demonstrated with your bible. Unknown to most Christians, your TORAH was never meant to be interpreted without the Oral tradition, which is based upon the teachings and explanations of Moses. Trying to interpret the Torah without another source has never been a problem for Christians because you have no need to derive law.  

So we have a revelation, a prophet to explain it, and then we need something after the prophet, which would be the most knowledgable person who learned from the prophet of the revelation and gave instructions and explanations. The most learned became the one who was able to help the average worshiper in matters of religion.

Whether or not a man gives a ruling is irrelevant here,because we are not talking about just any men, but men who were students personally trained and approved of by the Prophet (saw)himself. Your faith has been defined my a man who never met Jesus, yet your faith is nearly defined by him (Paul). Paul was not a prophet. So as a Muslim, I would say that we would not go as far as Christians in following a man in terms of faith, but we do know that a scholar is an authority.

The excuses that the Quran is only talking about unmarried women seems rather week.  (my opinion)  More of an excuse.  Besides, the Hadith are not dated....how do you know if the stonings were before or after the revelation in the Quran?

It is not an "excuse", it is "exegesis", and the word in the Quran does not signify if the person is married or not, the word simply means "unlawful sex", and is ambiguous about the status of the person. It does not particularize.

The hadith are clear that the prophet (saw) ordered the lashes for unmarried men and women, and stoning for married men and women. There is absolutely no change in this behavior from the time of the Prophet until the third generation.

This act is so mass narrated that it would be impossible for a mistake to have been made.

Keep in mind that this interpretation has not been argued by the greatest minds that have lived in the last 1200 years because Muslims hate women or free love, but because the evidence provides such a sound and strong argument, and those who have stated otherwsie have based their opinion on a "weak" argument, and this group has been in such a small minority that it has never effected the status of rajm in Islam until the 20th century when some Muslims have decided it is more important to agree with secular kafirs than the Prophet and his companions.

As for the companions and what they did after Mohammed (pbuh)?  I don't mean any insult by this, but they were JUST men, they weren't Prophets.  Therefore, fallible.  Its all what God commanded isn't it?> Better safe than sorry.

The companions ordered stoning, and has nothing to do with fallibility. It has to do with "confidence". Stoning is so widely mass narrated that it is its own proof.

Narrated Ash Shaibani: I asked 'Abdullah bin Abi Aufa, 'Did Allah's Apostle carry out the Rajam penalty ( i.e., stoning to death)?' He said, "Yes." I said, "Before the revelation of Surat-ar-Nur or after it?" He replied, "I don't Know."

Uncertainty does not allow one to derive "any kind of certainty". This hadith is not the proof used for rajm, nor is it proof to discontinue it. This thread has supplied many of the accounts and the position for the use of stoning has been the strongest argument and put forth for 1200 years.

I appreciate your interest and patience in this thread.

Kindest regards 

minuteman wrote:    I have answered to the best of my knowledge. I do not believe that a punishment is in the Hadith only and that is death penulty. I do believe that The punishment for the adulterer in the Torah is stoning to death. I also believe that the punishment of the adulterer in the Quran is not stoning to death. This being a serious matter, why did not Allah mention it in the Quran. When Allah could do it in the Torah then why He did not do it in the Quran???

Brother, you are entitled to your opinion and I cannot judge you for your view, only Allah can truly Judge, but I ask you as a brother in Islam to be cautious when you are dealing with non-Muslims, especially Christians who are strangers to the idea of a prophetic authority in addition to a "revelation". Your views are simply your personal opinions and do not actually represent the reality of Islam and the principles of fiqh that have been in place since the fourth generation.

Your above explanaiton reflects the assumption that you have tried to rest your belief on:The Quran should contain a capital punishment or else it should not exist.

Your assumption is unfounded, as you cannot explain the role of the Prophet in his use of the punishment, the Sahaba, the tabi'in, and their followers. You will not come out and say they are wrong, in fact, you will not provide any solid stance on their use of the punishment.

Your assumption is entirely ambiguous on the scope of Prophethood. You do not want to say that the Prophet (saw) was wrong, or someone lied about his use of the punishment, yet you want to say that you do not believe in the use of rajm because it is in the sunnah, not the Quran.

Your grounds for rejecting the punishment are simply unfounded, and while I do not think ill of you for your thoughts, I only ask that you do not try and give the presumption to non-Muslims that your opinion is the stronger opinion that is followed by Muslims. Your personal view is simply that, your view. 

There are people who want to take charge of the Quran by a hadith. I do not allow it. It will be the Quran which will explain and take charge of the Hadith. Hadith will never take charge of the Quran.

Thats fine Brother, but your position is not the qualified posiion of the Prophet (saw), and the first three and four generations. This is simply your personal views, and you should not allow non-Muslims to assume that your view is a strong argued position. No one is allowing the Hadith to "take over", I have already explained to you, multiple times, how the issue works. The hadith does not "take over". This is another infactual assertion that you have tried to put forth before. 

You say, "  It will be the Quran which will explain and take charge of the Hadith", brother, this is simply infactual, without any bases in the principles of fiqh. You are trying to assert your personal feelings onto the realm of juresprudence. Your statement also implies that you ideas of the scope of prophethood is something entirely different than what reality dictates.

You are still etirely ambiguous on your views of the "scope of Prophetic Authority", Islam views his scope as being a source to interpret Quran, and I can give many, many examples. In exegetical matters, yes, the first source is Quran explains Quran, but the next source is Prophet (saw) explains Quran, and this is used quite often on issues of rulings. Rajm is such a case, and I have already explained it to you over and over, and you simply reply with your same baseless assertions, unfounded assumptions, and opinion after personal opinion, and you assert your persoanl views as if it is fact.

Hadith is to serve the Quran and Sunnah, not to take charge of them. Of course Hadith has its importance but that is after the Quran and Sunnah (The practice of the holy prophet). We will always follow the Quran first. Then we will see the practice of the holy prophet s.a.w.s. After that we will consider the Hadith (the sayings and reports /traditions).

Rajm does not deny that the Quran is the primary source of guidance. This has already been argued and I will not repeat myself.

If any one will read the first verse of the Surah Noor (chapter 24) he/she will be convinced that the chapter had been revealed with obligatory orders and clear (Bayyan) orders (Aayaat) so that people may remember the advice and the orders. It says that orders are bayyan (very clear). That is followed by the words, "Give 100 lashes to the adulterer man and woman, both of them......" Any one who believes that the punishment for the adulterers is not 100 lashes means that he has some other source of information over and above that given in the Quran. And that must be some secret info too. To say that in this chapter , the adulterer is meant to be an unmarried adulterer. That is the secret meaning. From where they got that meaning??? Allah says that orders are very clear and self explainatory. But some Mullas, on some authority, on some traditions and reports in the books of Hadith, they say that stoning was practiced in the life time of the prophet s.a.w.s. and even after that.  I agree that it was done in the time of the prophet. But for how long?? And to whom?? Once there was a case of Jewish lady. At another time it was a believing Muslim man. It is important to know how long that was done.

You have already been responded to regarding Surah An-noor, with hadith as supporting evidence, and you have also ignored the first four generations, and their views and the entire methodology of legal rulings in the shariah. You have already ranted about Mullahs. Brother, you have already been replied to regarding everything you just wrote. You are free to have your own personal views, but do not try and push these unargued, unproven, personal opinions off on non-believers as if your personal feelings represent "Islam".

 Sorry to disturb your peace of mind fatima. Please be comfortable. The Surah Noor was revealed in 05 Hijrah. Suppose that the prophet s.a.w.s. was applying the punishment of stoning for the adulterers before the revelation of Surah Noor. Could you please tell me on what account, on what instruction or order from Allah was he doing that?? Can you present that order or text?? I admit that he was using Rajm as the punishment. I agree to that.

I am rather busy now. I will come back to you soon with the rest of the matter. Thanks.

 I have answered to the best of my knowledge. I do not believe that a punishment is in the Hadith only and that is death penulty. I do believe that The punishment for the adulterer in the Torah is stoning to death. I also believe that the punishment of the adulterer in the Quran is not stoning to death. This being a serious matter, why did not Allah mention it in the Quran. When Allah could do it in the Torah then why He did not do it in the Quran???

 There are people who want to take charge of the Quran by a hadith. I do not allow it. It will be the Quran which will explain and take charge of the Hadith. Hadith will never take charge of the Quran.

 Hadith is to serve the Quran and Sunnah, not to take charge of them. Of course Hadith has its importance but that is after the Quran and Sunnah (The practice of the holy prophet). We will always follow the Quran first. Then we will see the practice of the holy prophet s.a.w.s. After that we will consider the Hadith (the sayings and reports /traditions).

 If any one will read the first verse of the Surah Noor (chapter 24) he/she will be convinced that the chapter had been revealed with obligatory orders and clear (Bayyan) orders (Aayaat) so that people may remember the advice and the orders. It says that orders are bayyan (very clear). That is followed by the words, "Give 100 lashes to the adulterer man and woman, both of them......"

Any one who believes that the punishment for the adulterers is not 100 lashes means that he has some other source of information over and above that given in the Quran. And that must be some secret info too. To say that in this chapter , the adulterer is meant to be an unmarried adulterer. That is the secret meaning. From where they got that meaning??? Allah says that orders are very clear and self explainatory. But some Mullas, on some authority, on some traditions and reports in the books of Hadith, they say that stoning was practiced in the life time of the prophet s.a.w.s. and even after that.

 I agree that it was done in the time of the prophet. But for how long?? And to whom?? Once there was a case of Jewish lady. At another time it was a believing Muslim man. It is important to know how long that was done.