Jump to content


- - - - -


Photo
- - - - -

Sunni Hadiths.


11 replies to this topic

#1 whoaretheshia

whoaretheshia
  • Basic Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 29 November 2009 - 01:44 AM

What do shia's think about Sunni Hadiths? Such as Sahih Albukhari?

#2 yahossein

yahossein

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPip
  • 536 posts
  • Interests:Not much

Posted 29 November 2009 - 07:12 PM

(bismillah)
(salam)

Salam.

Well personally I view the hadith book itself as not totally Sahih as i think it is impossible for any book to be sahih. However i think it has merits. There are defintely hadiths to be taken on board.

Some shia view it all as unauthentic which in my opinion is silly as there is plenty of hadith in Sahih Bukhari that is authentic. But also some of it will not be authentic.

Sunnis view is it is ALL perfect which again i believe to be naive. There are thousands of hadiths in Sahih Bukhari. To thing there are not some that have been fabircated or distorted whether intentionally or unintentionally or accidently is very naive.

But yea theres definitely hadith that i certainly believe are authentic. This goes the same for Sahih Muslim and Tirmidhi.

Edited by yahossein, 29 November 2009 - 07:13 PM.


#3 89jghur32

89jghur32

    Member

  • Unregistered
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,832 posts
  • Religion:ÇáÅÓáÇã
  • Interests:Implementing the Amman Message

Posted 29 November 2009 - 08:42 PM

Sahih Bukhari contains hadith that are authentic by the standards of Imam Bukhari. Many of the hadith are sahih, but some are not.

Amongst the Sunnis you will have two opinions regarding collections of hadith:

1) All accepted collections fall under Allah's protection of scripture, and such are Sahih as a whole.
2) Allah's protection of scripture does not extend to hadith, so the collections contain some hadith that are authentic and some unauthentic.

I am of the second view. Textualists follow the first opinion.

It is my understanding that the Shia are also of the second view.

Edited by ninjaslim, 29 November 2009 - 08:46 PM.


#4 Qa'im

Qa'im

    The Hadith Guy

  • Mods
  • 4,621 posts
  • Religion:Islam

Posted 29 November 2009 - 09:15 PM

(salam)

The difference between Sunni and Shi'i ahadith are mostly in methodology.

We collect most of our ahadith from the 12 Imams (as). As inheritors of the religion, both spiritually and politically, it is incumbent that the Imams (as) know and understand Islam as it was revealed. Otherwise, confusion will arise over fiscal and critical issues, and parts of Islam will not be preserved. The A'immah are the protectors of the Sunnah. Because of this belief in Imamah, we believe the A'immah (as) can relay the religion purely and perfectly, and therefore it is permissible and encouraged to derive the religion from them.

The other method (used by the Sunni Muslims) is to derive the Sunnah from any Muslim who knew the Prophet (pbuh) personally, such as his companions, wives, and family. However, we do not use this method for most of our ahadith, because anyone outside of the 14 (as) can:

1) Forget a portion of the Sunnah
2) Misunderstand a saying or action of the Prophet (pbuh)
3) Unintentionally or intentionally add or omit to the Sunnah
4) Contradict each other or contradict the Prophet (pbuh)
5) Lie

We believe Allah did not put this religion on an unstable ground, where the Sunnah (which is half the religion) can get lost, forgotten, or whatever. Instead, the Sunnah is protected just as the Qur'an is protected, to insure the finality and purity of His Message.

Sahih al-Bukhari is a Sunni Muslim collection of ahadith of the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh), which Sunnis believe to be fully sahih. It does not contain every hadith, nor does it contain every sahih hadith, but rather it is one collection of many. That said, why we don't agree with Sahih al-Bukhari's infallibility is because of our disagreement of a- the Sunni hadith collection methodology, and b- our disagreement of some of the major narrators Sunnis hold with high esteem.

That doesn't mean we totally dismiss the work; I think it is a formidable collection with a lot of effort put into it. We can take some of the ahadith with the narrators and subnarrators we agree with, but we disagree that all of the narrations are sound.

#5 Lord Botta

Lord Botta

    Member

  • Unregistered
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,642 posts
  • Religion:Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama'a

Posted 30 November 2009 - 02:04 AM

The other method (used by the Sunni Muslims) is to derive the Sunnah from any Muslim who knew the Prophet (pbuh) personally, such as his companions, wives, and family. However, we do not use this method for most of our ahadith, because anyone outside of the 14 (as) can:

1) Forget a portion of the Sunnah
2) Misunderstand a saying or action of the Prophet (pbuh)
3) Unintentionally or intentionally add or omit to the Sunnah
4) Contradict each other or contradict the Prophet (pbuh)
5) Lie


You speak as if there are no narrators between the collectors of your hadith and the Imams. Those narrators too are capable of falling into those five categories.

#6 A true Sunni

A true Sunni

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,606 posts

Posted 30 November 2009 - 06:09 AM

probably the one worrying aspect of the 6 Sahih books is the issue of Hadit Saqlain. Classic Sunni teachings of recent years emphasise that Hadith Saqlain was Quaran and Sunnat.
However there does not seem to a Quaran and Sunnat hadith-e-Saqlain contained in the 6 Sahih books. rather the hadiith Saqlain in the 6 Sahih books is Quaran and Ahlebait . This version of Hadith Saqlain is contained in the virtues of Hz Ali (as) in Sahih Muslim.

Sahih Bukhari has a heading Quaran and Sunnat but it does not contain Quaran and Sunnat version of Hadith Saqlain leading me to assume it is not in Sahih Bukhari.

If anyone knowsany different I would be grateful

#7 89jghur32

89jghur32

    Member

  • Unregistered
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,832 posts
  • Religion:ÇáÅÓáÇã
  • Interests:Implementing the Amman Message

Posted 30 November 2009 - 07:25 AM

probably the one worrying aspect of the 6 Sahih books is the issue of Hadit Saqlain. Classic Sunni teachings of recent years emphasise that Hadith Saqlain was Quaran and Sunnat.
However there does not seem to a Quaran and Sunnat hadith-e-Saqlain contained in the 6 Sahih books. rather the hadiith Saqlain in the 6 Sahih books is Quaran and Ahlebait . This version of Hadith Saqlain is contained in the virtues of Hz Ali (as) in Sahih Muslim.

Sahih Bukhari has a heading Quaran and Sunnat but it does not contain Quaran and Sunnat version of Hadith Saqlain leading me to assume it is not in Sahih Bukhari.

If anyone knowsany different I would be grateful


My local imam has always taught Quran and Ahl-ul-Bayt.

#8 Hassan2jz

Hassan2jz

    Bodybuilders Dungeon

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,307 posts
  • Location:Sydney, Australia
  • Interests:Islam and Politics, Being massive, Looking good, Expensive cars, Keeping it halal.

Posted 30 November 2009 - 07:34 AM

I also think there are many legit hadith, some of them are virtually the same as many Shia hadith.

That said, I don't like how some Sunnis claim that there is no doubting the authenticity of the hadith in those texts, when
there are clearly some dubious hadith (i.e such as the infamous 'suckling' hadith amongst various others)

I think the following should apply to all hadith, Sunni or Shia, as per Ninjaslim:

Allah's protection of scripture does not extend to hadith, so the collections contain some hadith that are authentic and some unauthentic.

Can't get simpler then that.

Edited by Hassan2jz, 30 November 2009 - 07:38 AM.


#9 macisaac

macisaac

    واقفي

  • Unregistered
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,701 posts
  • Location:The City of Champions
  • Religion:الإسلام
  • Interests:Loving my Queen

Posted 30 November 2009 - 07:36 AM

You speak as if there are no narrators between the collectors of your hadith and the Imams. Those narrators too are capable of falling into those five categories.



True to an extent, however there's a pretty big difference in the case of Sunni hadiths where they are puporting to record orally transmitted sayings (it took a long time before Sunnis actually believed it to be lawful to write them down instead of just passing them orally) that had been said over a twenty some year period (though in the case of Sunni hadiths it's more a two - three year period since the major narrator of them only knew the Prophet (pbuh) for that relatively short period of time) compiled around two hundred years after their purported reporting, to the case of Shi`i hadiths from the Imams (as) wherein the time span is over three hundred years of recording from a large multiplicity of different companions of the Imams (as). Sure there's room for error in the latter, but the sheer span of it and the ability to compare individual narrations with the accepted beliefs and practices that had been instilled over those centuries amongst the followers of the Imams (as) would tend to separate the wheat from the chaff.

#10 A true Sunni

A true Sunni

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,606 posts

Posted 30 November 2009 - 07:38 AM

My local imam has always taught Quran and Ahl-ul-Bayt.

wow must be Brelvi. Most mosques I knw are dominated by Wahhabis. Local muslims only know Quaran and Sunnat.

#11 Lord Botta

Lord Botta

    Member

  • Unregistered
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,642 posts
  • Religion:Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama'a

Posted 30 November 2009 - 01:14 PM

True to an extent, however there's a pretty big difference in the case of Sunni hadiths where they are puporting to record orally transmitted sayings (it took a long time before Sunnis actually believed it to be lawful to write them down instead of just passing them orally) that had been said over a twenty some year period (though in the case of Sunni hadiths it's more a two - three year period since the major narrator of them only knew the Prophet (pbuh) for that relatively short period of time) compiled around two hundred years after their purported reporting, to the case of Shi`i hadiths from the Imams (as) wherein the time span is over three hundred years of recording from a large multiplicity of different companions of the Imams (as). Sure there's room for error in the latter, but the sheer span of it and the ability to compare individual narrations with the accepted beliefs and practices that had been instilled over those centuries amongst the followers of the Imams (as) would tend to separate the wheat from the chaff.


Macisaac, I don't see the relevance of mentioning that Sunni hadith took a while to compile. Oral transmissions are accepted by both are sect. One doesn't need to record it into writing for a hadith to be accepted as authentic. Furthermore, I don't see the significance of attacking the idea that masaneed took a while to compile. The only difference between the two stages (writing down hadith and compiling them in forms of masaneed) has to do with organization.

As for the duration between the death of the source to the collection of the masaneed, the time span isn't all that different between the collection of our major masaneed and the death of the source. In our case, it is the Prophet (pbuh), and in your case, it would have to be Ja'afar Al-Sadiq. Also, I believe that bringing up the three hundred year time span isn't all that strong of an argument since the majority of your narrations came during a short period of time. Bringing up three hundred years of infallibles actually points to the lack of effort put into compiling Shia hadiths, since Ahlul Sunnah have done such a great job with just twenty three years of the presence of an infallible.

In any case, we can go on and go comparing the pros and cons of Sunni vs Shia hadith sciences, however, most of that would be irrelevant to the topic. Be my guest if you want to go ahead with doing so though.

#12 89jghur32

89jghur32

    Member

  • Unregistered
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,832 posts
  • Religion:ÇáÅÓáÇã
  • Interests:Implementing the Amman Message

Posted 30 November 2009 - 01:24 PM

wow must be Brelvi. Most mosques I knw are dominated by Wahhabis. Local muslims only know Quaran and Sunnat.


He is not Barelwi. He is Sunni Shafii.



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users