Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is a very interesting article re the Hadiths.
[one commentator complained it is pornographic - but that is the typical Muslim who is willing to sacrifice knowledge as the expense of progress for humanity]
My point here is the ignorance of female biology by men and even women [Ayesha] who supposed to have recorded the Hadiths of Muhammad's saying is proof the Hadiths are not divine and should not be divine.
One interesting point is because of the ignorance of female biology and that fatwas [issued by ignorant clergies] are supposedly authoritative has driven a lot of women frantic with worries because they apparently have to perform ghusl almost every hour.
This is a very interesting article re the Hadiths.
[one commentator complained it is pornographic - but that is the typical Muslim who is willing to sacrifice knowledge as the expense of progress for humanity]
My point here is the ignorance of female biology by men and even women [Ayesha] who supposed to have recorded the Hadiths of Muhammad's saying is proof the Hadiths are not divine and should not be divine.
One interesting point is because of the ignorance of female biology and that fatwas [issued by ignorant clergies] are supposedly authoritative has driven a lot of women frantic with worries because they apparently have to perform ghusl almost every hour.
Any views?
Technically a fatwa is a legal decision dealing with a legal issue delivered by a Mufti (Equivalent of a Supreme court judge) sadly many people calling them self clerics have issued what they self-called fatwas. A fatwa has no religious basis to be considered a command.
Except for the 40 Qudsi ahadith a hadith is nothing more and nothing less than an eye witness account of something. Like all eye witness accounts they are only as accurate as the witness's memory and perception. The 40 qudsi are believed to have been divinely Allaah(swt) inspired word's spoken by Muhammad(saws)
The ahadith do contain technical errors as the witnesses were not experts in things like physics and biology, they reported what they saw or heard, in their own understanding and memory.
Here is an interesting interview with Sheik Yasser Habid [controversial figure] where he showed rational maturity and sense. [unless he was using tagiyya]
Here is an interesting interview with Sheik Yasser Habid [controversial figure] where he showed rational maturity and sense. [unless he was using tagiyya]
Point being the Shia consider all Ahadith regarding Aisha to be fraudelent. They claim she was never married to Muhammad, she was not even a Muslim, but was a Jewish woman who after the death of Muhammad(saws) sought to ruin the name of Muhammad(saws)
As only about 10-15% of the world's Muslims are Shi'ite you will find very few Muslims that believe anything al-Habbib says.
Point being the Shia consider all Ahadith regarding Aisha to be fraudelent. They claim she was never married to Muhammad, she was not even a Muslim, but was a Jewish woman who after the death of Muhammad(saws) sought to ruin the name of Muhammad(saws)
As only about 10-15% of the world's Muslims are Shi'ite you will find very few Muslims that believe anything al-Habbib says.
Sheikh Yasser al-Habib did not claim,
"Aisha never married to Muhammad, she was not even a Muslim, but was a Jewish woman who after the death of Muhammad(saws) sought to ruin the name of Muhammad(saws)."
I have listened to most of al-Habid discussions and he make it a point that he is presenting the arguments SOLELY from the Ahadiths and other texts of the Sunni [he called them Bakri]. Btw, why he used the term "Bakri" for Sunni.
From what I have heard, his arguments are very rational.
So far I have not heard any Sunni countering his arguments. What most Sunni did was merely condemn him but did not argue with him with reference to the Ahadiths he quoted.
The fact is the Ahadiths are not reliable at all since they were written up 200 years+ after the death of Muhammad. It is so obvious the Ahadiths cannot be spoken by Muhammad directly. This is really a scam and that is why al-Habid and other Ahadiths critiques take the Ahadiths as 'sitting-ducks'.
It is most likely Aisha did not narrate those hadiths/sayings that was attributable to her. It is most likely some Muslims concocted the sayings hundred+ of years after the death of Muhammad.
In equivalent to their days, these hadiths are like the threads, postings in this internet forum or articles written by various people with different states of mind in the modern era.
Sheikh Yasser al-Habib did not claim,
"Aisha never married to Muhammad, she was not even a Muslim, but was a Jewish woman who after the death of Muhammad(saws) sought to ruin the name of Muhammad(saws)."
I have listened to most of al-Habid discussions and he make it a point that he is presenting the arguments SOLELY from the Ahadiths and other texts of the Sunni [he called them Bakri]. Btw, why he used the term "Bakri" for Sunni.
From what I have heard, his arguments are very rational.
So far I have not heard any Sunni countering his arguments. What most Sunni did was merely condemn him but did not argue with him with reference to the Ahadiths he quoted.
The fact is the Ahadiths are not reliable at all since they were written up 200 years+ after the death of Muhammad. It is so obvious the Ahadiths cannot be spoken by Muhammad directly. This is really a scam and that is why al-Habid and other Ahadiths critiques take the Ahadiths as 'sitting-ducks'.
It is most likely Aisha did not narrate those hadiths/sayings that was attributable to her. It is most likely some Muslims concocted the sayings hundred+ of years after the death of Muhammad.
In equivalent to their days, these hadiths are like the threads, postings in this internet forum or articles written by various people with different states of mind in the modern era.
As for this:
Quote:
I have listened to most of al-Habid discussions and he make it a point that he is presenting the arguments SOLELY from the Ahadiths and other texts of the Sunni [he called them Bakri]. Btw, why he used the term "Bakri" for Sunni.
I am quite certain Bakri is the Farsi name for Bukhari. All of the Ahadith relating to Aisha are in the SahihBukhari compilation. Bukhari is not accepted as authenticate Ahadith by the Shi'ite. Sunni and Shi'ite do not agree on whichof the 1 million or so Ahadith collections are authenticate. Sunni believe 6 are the Shi'ite find 12. We disagree not only which compilations are authenticate, but also how many are.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
