Is Islam true?

Fredifreeloader wrote: ahmad - you seem to be implying that i am not using "authentic resources".

Noop, I am not implying this, yet authentication of references is a right of all readers and its provision is obligatory for all authors. In this sense, you have not answered my question as yet when I said "..you have not quoted the work of Maulana anywhere in your posts as well as many of his indicated references "[]" are glaringly missing due to your cut and paste procedures from his work."

Fredifreeloader wrote: you are saying i think, by the quotation you give, that the punishment for hadd crimes must be found in the quran.  what can you bring to bear in support of this?

Didn't I supply with the basic definition of "hadud" with proper reference to this? What else do you need? Open up any "Islamic jurisprudence" book and you shall find this definition. It was this irony that forced Maulana Maududi to extract something from the Quran to support his view and we have seen it how miserable his presentation was in this case. Don't you agree with me on this at least?

Fredifreeloader wrote: it also raises the question of which quran, bearing in mind that the penalty of adultery is stoning, which is not found in the quran of today.  but it used to be - see bukhari vol8 book82 nos. 816,817, also vol9 book92 no.424, also muslim book17 no.4194.  this evidence comes from people who knew a quran you do not know.

Yes indeed "stoning for adultary" is yet another example which I strongly oppose to be in existence if we believe in the Quran that we have with us. Your example to allude some "other Quran" from the remarks on this issue by Hz. Umar (the second Muslim Caliph) doesn't merit any consideration because of the gradual nature of its revelations during the life time of Prophet Mohammad. This is where the verses concerning abrogation comes into our understanding. However, I do also know that some Muslims have tried to extrapolate on these verses to show the validity of punishment of adultary through stoning to death. Nevertheless, it is very clear that by the end of the compilation of Quran during the life time of Prophet Mohammad, this punishment had been 'abrogated' from it. Therefore, I strongly reject this notion of punishment and if you are interested to discuss upon this, my plearure, open up another topic discussion on this issue and let not amalgamate everything in this big thread, which is becoming increasingly difficult for the people to follow all from its 40 pages.

A little word of understanding when we say "authentic" hadith, we imply to the process of scrutinizing of each and every hadith through "Ilam ul hadith" (a knowledge of critical scientific process and analysis) that must be passed. Some scholars of Islam has applied this critical analysis during their process of collection of ahadith and some have not. Those who have applied it during their collection, are known as "sahih" ahadith. However, whenever any hadith is used to support a particular opinon, especially on the matters of framing a law, all evidences are liable to be scrutinized through this process of Ilam ul hadith and only then declared "authentic". Yes, more chances are for "sahih" ahadith to pass this test, but that doesn't mean that "all sahih" would definitely pass this test. Moreover, as the modern day knowldge is increasing by the passage of time, more stringent and thorough is becoming this science of validation of ahadith. Its a continual process. I hope this shall make it a little more clear to your understanding of how any such reference must be used. That is why, Quran becomes the highest such authority in Islamic law, especially when dealing with "hadud" cases.