Our dear Ayaz and his "true facts" and the hadith part deux

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Mar 14, 2008 at 08:04

Now our dear Ayaz is running our of finding evidence in the Qur'an that islam is not only the religion of the Arabs and that Muhammad was sent to all of mankind now he is quoting the hadith.

>Authentic documented hadiths:

ReallY? and why do we have hadith saheeh wa hadith da3eef? and why do we have isnads? and why is the hadith literature anachronistic (see Ignaz Goldziher) could it be because the hadith was made up by the 3ulama in the 3rd century of Islam when the hadith literature was "collceted"?

>Muslim reports in his Sahih: Ibn Abi `Umar told us, Marwan Al-Fazari told us, from Yazid bin Kisan, from Ibn Abi Hazim that Abu Hurayrah said that it was said, "O Messenger of Allah, pray against the idolators." He said:

(I was not sent as a curse, rather I was sent as a mercy.)

Do you think that in this case the matn of this hadith is used as a tool for Quranic tafseer and in fact the hadith is not an idependent historical source? what do you think ya ayuha al-fahlawi al-kabeer? And where does it say in Q21:107 wa ina arsalna muhammad karahmatun that Muhammad was sent as mercy. You will not find it in the Qur'an

This was recorded by Muslim. Imam Ahmad recorded that `Amr bin Abi Qurrah Al-Kindi said: "Hudhayfah was in Al-Mada'in and he was mentioning things that the Messenger of Allah had said. Hudhayfah came to Salman and Salman said: `O Hudhayfah, the Messenger of Allah ﴿would sometimes be angry and would speak accordingly, and would sometimes be pleased and would speak accordingly. I know that the Messenger of Allah ﴾ addressed us and said:

>(Any man of my Ummah whom I have insulted or cursed when I was angry -- for I am a man from among the sons of Adam, and I get angry just as you do. But Allah has sent me as a Mercy to the Worlds, so I will make that ﴿my anger﴾ into blessings for him on the Day of Resurrection.") This was also recorded by Abu Dawud from Ahmad bin Yunus from Za'idah.

But you know the final nail in the coffin of the hadith as an historical source is the following:

"Bukhari is said to have examined a total of 600,000 traditions attributed to the prophet; he preserved some 7000 including repetitions, or in other words dismissed some 593,000 as inauthentic. If ibn Hanbal examined a similar number of traditions he must have rejected about 570,000 his collection containing some 30,000 again including repetitions. Of ibn Hanbal's traditions 1,710 including repetitions are transmitted by the companion ibn Abbas. Yet less than 50 years earlier one scholar had estimated that ibn Abbas had heard 9 traditions from the prophet while another thought that the correct figure might be 10. if ibn abbas had heard 10 traditions from the prophet in the years around 800 but over a 1000 by 850 then how many had he heard in 700 or 632? even if we accept that 10 traditions of ibn Abbas' traditions are authentic how do we identify them in the pool of 1,710? we do not even know whether they are to be found in this pool, as opposed to that of the 530,000 traditions dismissed on the ground that their chains of authorities were faulty. under such circumstances it is scarcely justified to presume hadith to be authentic until the contrary has been proven." (see P. Crone)

So much for the authentic hadith

Stay tuned for more

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".