Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
power

Nahjol-Balagha vs Sahih Ai- Bukhari

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

So in summary, there is no authentic chain for this book that is valued so highly by you. What a joke.

How about you bring any chain for your most important alleged "biographies" of the Prophet(SAWW). You have ibn Hisham and ibn Ishaq however you have no early original copies of any of these and none of these sunni alleged "seerahs" has any isnad or chains of narration at all. Only the alleged writings of students of ibn Hisham or ibn Ishaq. That's a joke.

Edited by Abdul-Rahman Brent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
erm mohammedmufti, as far as im aware you got absolutely annhialated by dr assad in the hadith/ science thread, he didnt leave you with a leg to stand on. what are you talking about you are waiting for one of us to respond? dr assad killed it

Lol, did you even read the thread you disappeared from? We neither followed the rules that were organized and merely brought up the scientific material related to the use of urine in medicine. Dr.Asad (from his search if you bothered to look) even essentially brought corroborating evidence (see 3, 8, etc. - if you can't access the articles Dr. Asad mentioned than I can bring which ones you want inshaAllah) for the fact. What was agreed upon (in contradiction to the 12er fuqaha we also mentioned) was that urine should not be consumed raw in the present time - that the sharh of the narration is that the men were sick and that people don't just randomly drink urine. There was no 'debate' or 'annihilation' as there was nothing to disagree on.

And yes, I was waiting for a 12er from you two to respond. Before we started, we agreed on a set of rules. When one hadeeth was finished, than it was the turn of the 12ers to bring a narration from your books in that genre (science + ahadeeth). Nobody did so...

Keeping track of time has everything to do with astronomy. All religious calendars...

This is untrue, Earthly events have also been used to keep track of time. I'm already familiar on a basic level with methods of keeping track of time, and calendar systems and I will again suggest the book by al-Biruni (rah) (you might like it, it has some notable 12er interpolations and the subject matter is interesting enough :P). There is only one thing that is necessary in keeping track of time - an event. It doesn't even need to be recurring; a regularly recurring event (such as revolutions of luni-solar bodies) is just the basis that was adopted to keep track of time, for Muslims, because of the encouragement of Allah (swt) - and for non-Muslims, because of it's regular recurance and the increased reliability in time tracked by them. But time itself doesn't need astronomy to be calculated, and you only just included an exclusivity in your kalaam to deprive secular or non-religious scientists from those who keep track of time (perhaps because you realized that time as it is kept even in our time is based on many non-astronomical calculations). And in any calender, even those with an astronomical basis, you have several salient nonastronomical features, such as additional divisions into useful groups (like 7-day weeks for example or 30 day months used by Georgian calendars). We have examples from the enlightenment and modern times of time-tracking within a day using water, or even on an atomic level. And we have several examples of non astronomical calender systems such as those employed by the Mayans (the ones they used that weren't solar) which had fixed number of days.

But anyways, I will take a look at the other thread and try to get a better idea of where you're coming from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is untrue, Earthly events have also been used to keep track of time. I'm already familiar on a basic level with methods of keeping track of time, and calendar systems and I will again suggest the book by al-Biruni (rah) (you might like it, it has some notable 12er interpolations and the subject matter is interesting enough :P). There is only one thing that is necessary in keeping track of time - an event. It doesn't even need to be recurring; a regularly recurring event (such as revolutions of luni-solar bodies) is just the basis that was adopted to keep track of time, for Muslims, because of the encouragement of Allah (swt) - and for non-Muslims, because of it's regular recurance and the increased reliability in time tracked by them. But time itself doesn't need astronomy to be calculated, and you only just included an exclusivity in your kalaam to deprive secular or non-religious scientists from those who keep track of time (perhaps because you realized that time as it is kept even in our time is based on many non-astronomical calculations). And in any calender, even those with an astronomical basis, you have several salient nonastronomical features, such as additional divisions into useful groups (like 7-day weeks for example or 30 day months used by Georgian calendars). We have examples from the enlightenment and modern times of time-tracking within a day using water, or even on an atomic level. And we have several examples of non astronomical calender systems such as those employed by the Mayans (the ones they used that weren't solar) which had fixed number of days.

But anyways, I will take a look at the other thread and try to get a better idea of where you're coming from.

Well its not what i was looking for. I do know that there are civilizations that dont use astronomy to measure time. Bahai's 19 month calendar of 19 days (or something to that effect comes) to mind.

But the religious calendars that do not use fixed days in a year policy all use astronomy. There is a distinct difference between the Islamic model and the non Islamic models. Does Birhuni know the difference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah) (salam) ,

Brother, if you read my last post in the thread, I mentioned I am not sure how to authenticate a hadith, I was wondering if Bro Macissac, .InshaAllah. or Jondab Azdi, could bring any authentic hadith of scientific value, I will present the unbiased references for or against it and let readers make decision for themselves. I did that in the previous topic and I didn't run away nor avoid what I said I can do at present......

BTW, you look at the references located by SciFinder Scholar, there is no_solid_proof_of camel's urine (by itself) to be effective for any known medical condition and ref 8 is about camel's milk, not urine (I swear, you google that and see how much fun people get out of this topic :squeez: ). Interestingly the study of camel's urine is only done by Muslim Scientists (mostly in Egypt, Yemen and Saudi Arabia) and published in low impact factor journals :huh: (just some thing to think about)!

I don't believe in bashing others, rather exploring and learning and Insha Allah I will continue to do so.......

And yes, I was waiting for a 12er from you two to respond. Before we started, we agreed on a set of rules. When one hadeeth was finished, than it was the turn of the 12ers to bring a narration from your books in that genre (science + ahadeeth). Nobody did so...
Edited by Dr_Asad_77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brother, if you read my last post in the thread, I mentioned I am not sure how to authenticate a hadith, I was wondering if Bro Macissac, .InshaAllah. or Jondab Azdi, could bring any authentic hadith of scientific value, I will present the unbiased references for or against it and let readers make decision for themselves. I did that in the previous topic and I didn't run away nor avoid what I said I can do at present......

I didn't accuse you of running away. Also, if you read the earlier posts (where I posted rules that MDM also agreed on), we had agreed that we will agree to the standard that the hadeeth you present is accepted unless it is proven contradictory. We wouldn't discuss it's merti based on isnaad, but on science and manuscript evidence. It doesn't matter what the level of authenticity is based on isnaad on this discussion but rather whether the particular hadeeth you bring conforms to science. The idea is to bring narrations which show some kind of insight which shouldn't have been available to men 1,000 years ago. The reason we discussed the urine narration first (even though it wouldn't comply with the idea of finding narrations of scientific "miracles") is because it was being discussed elsewhere and I thought it ought to have been settled there.

BTW, you look at the references located by SciFinder Scholar, there is no_solid_proof_of camel's urine (by itself) to be effective for any known medical condition and ref 8 is about camel's milk, not urine (I swear, you google that and see how much fun people get out of this topic :squeez: ). Interestingly the study of camel's urine is only done by Muslim Scientists (mostly in Egypt, Yemen and Saudi Arabia) and published in low impact factor journals :huh: (just some thing to think about)!

I don't believe in bashing others, rather exploring and learning and Insha Allah I will continue to do so.......

Regarding 8, I know what it's about. Did you read it?

The use of camel urine isn't a matter that would interest outside scholars as it would Muslim ones because of these traditions, so it comes as no surprise that these studies are not published by Western scholars. You will readily find material though from Western scholars about the use of urine from other animals, such as steeds, which are available to them. This really has nothing to do with camel urine being less effective but that camel's a regional animal. And from my post, the essence that was derived was not specificlly about camel urine, but the use of urotherapy in general (since the fuqaha, whom I presented from 12er madhab, took the narration and applied it to all animals who are considered taahir/paak). If you read the my first post on the narration, that's clearly the essence I derived from the narration. What we are looking for is the essential point of what the Prophet (saw) is saying, not factors that can be claimed to be influenced by regional/cultural necessity. Specification of camels was secondary.

Edited by MohammadMufti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IS THIS A JOKE? LOOOL EVEN A "SUNNI" WOULD AGREE THAT THE WORD OF THEIR "FOURTH RIGHTLY GUIDED CALIPHE" IS ABOVE THE STORIES AND TRADITIONS WHICH HAVE BEEN COMPILED TOGETHER YEARS AFTER SUCH EVENTS, WELL IF THEY REALLY BELIEVE THAT IMAM ALI (as) IS THEIR 4TH ANYWAY LOL

BUT AS FOR ME HE IS MY 1ST IMAM (as) I WOULD OBVIOUSLY HAVE TO SAY NAHJOL BALAGHA LOL @ THE QUESTION, PATHETIC LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you have to speak in all-caps? Nahjul Balagha itself was compiled years after the event, after the major collections...

What about your Sunni sources, note for sunni "Seerah" of the Prophet(SAWW). Your book is from ibn Hisham who died in 833 C.E.

As for the one "sunni" before him ibn Ishaq; who died in either in 761 C.E. or 767 C.E. On his work read:

Ibn Ishaq wrote several works, none of which survive. His collection of traditions about the life of Muhammad survives mainly in two sources:

a edited copy, or recension, of his work by his student al-Bakka'i, as further edited by Ibn Hisham. Al-Bakka'i's work has perished and only Ibn Hisham's has survived, in copies. (Donner 1998, p. 132)

an edited copy, or recension, prepared by his student Salama ibn-Fadl al-Ansari. This also has perished, and survives only in the copious extracts to be found in the volumimous historian al-Tabari's. (Donner 1998, p. 132)

end quote.

So note that none of your originals from ibn Ishaq even exist today!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you have to speak in all-caps? Nahjul Balagha itself was compiled years after the event, after the major collections...

Majorty of sunni ulma's weren't evan ARAB'S and that is a another issue in itself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Majorty of sunni ulma's weren't evan ARAB'S and that is a another issue in itself

What kind of sick racist mentality are you people raised on? In any case, your nifaaq even in your bigotry is clearly showing - how many of the prominent marja's today are actually 'Arab?...

Completely also avoids what I said, "Do you have to speak in all-caps? Nahjul Balagha itself was compiled years after the event, after the major collections..."

Edited by MohammadMufti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who said anything about inauthentic chain. The product does not need a chain. Its from an infallible source which means the product is free from error. A chain on the contrary would make mistakes and reduce the authenticity of the product.

This is the proof Shia have that the Imams are infallible. They make no mistakes.

So it was Ali [radia Allahu 'anhu] in person who gave you this book so that you don't need any chain for it?

And are you suggesting that everything in NB is authentic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fine, so here goes the claim that you don't have a Sahih book because you only consider the Quraan to be sahih.

Now, what makes you so sure that nothing inauthentic was inserted into a book that popped up hundreds of years after its alleged author?

Edited by Muhawir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now, what makes you so sure that nothing inauthentic was inserted into a book that popped up hundreds of years after its alleged author?

If you understood the Quran in terms of the qualities of the Rightly Guided then you would have understood what is the pre-requisite information that a Rightly Guided must possess. When you open the very first sermon, you get your answer.

Secondly this matter of authenticity and signs of Allah are being handled with your bro mo mufti in this regard. You may ask the specifics in that thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, you didn't answer my question nor do I find an answer in the first sermon nor in your discussion with brother Mohammad. So tell me how do you know that nothing inauthentic was inserted in that book that popped up hundreds of years after its alleged author?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, you didn't answer my question nor do I find an answer in the first sermon nor in your discussion with brother Mohammad. So tell me how do you know that nothing inauthentic was inserted in that book that popped up hundreds of years after its alleged author?

Its not surprising that you dont understand what is Rightly Guided as per the definition of the Quran which is why you feel i didnt answer the question. On the contrary, I have answered your question perfectly. Let me discuss this with bro mo mufti on the relevant thread. If you feel he is falling short, you may squeeze into the conversion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What kind of sick racist mentality are you people raised on? In any case, your nifaaq even in your bigotry is clearly showing - how many of the prominent marja's today are actually 'Arab?...

Completely also avoids what I said, "Do you have to speak in all-caps? Nahjul Balagha itself was compiled years after the event, after the major collections..."

Surely the NOTION of DIGOTRY and NIFAAQ is the platform your instititiuon, of Monotherism is based upon.

Also you inherited the mentality of the umayyad's which is clearly apparent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YES I HAVE 2 TYPE IN CAPS WHAT DIFFERENCE IS IT TO YOU? AND YEAH SO YOU MEAN TO TELL ME THE PEOPLE WHO COMPLIED BUKHARI ARE MORE RELIABLE THEN EMAM ALI (as) LOOL JUST HOW MUTAH IS ALLOWED IN THE QURAN BUT YOU DONT FOLLOW IT? DIFFERENT DEBATE ALL TOGETHER THOUGH MAN WALLAHI SOMETIMES AKHI I GET CONFUSED ISNT IMAM ALI (as) UR 4TH "CALIPHE" I DIDNT KNOW BUKHARI WAS HIGHTER THEN ONE OF YOUR "4HT RIGHTLY GUIDED COMPANIONS" ANYWAY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Are Nahjul Balagha and Sahih Bukhari even comparable? One is according to one source revolving around the life of Imam 'Ali (as) and the other is a collection of the Prophet Muhammed's (pbuh) hadiths and their narrators. The form of collection is completely different, and they are compilations based on two different people. Therefore you can't say "this one is better than that one" because you're comparing apples and oranges.

Just remember that only the Qur'an is perfect, and comparing other earthly books and saying "my book is better than yours!" is childish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(salam)

Are Nahjul Balagha and Sahih Bukhari even comparable? One is according to one source revolving around the life of Imam 'Ali (as) and the other is a collection of the Prophet Muhammed's (pbuh) hadiths and their narrators. The form of collection is completely different, and they are compilations based on two different people. Therefore you can't say "this one is better than that one" because you're comparing apples and oranges.

Just remember that only the Qur'an is perfect, and comparing other earthly books and saying "my book is better than yours!" is childish.

Great points; it's funnier that the sunnis don't seem to mention there alleged "Seerah" is only from ibn Hisham 200 years after the Prophet(SAWW) lived.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely the NOTION of DIGOTRY and NIFAAQ is the platform your instititiuon, of Monotherism is based upon.

Also you inherited the mentality of the umayyad's which is clearly apparent.

Emotional whining - nothing addressed, as usual.

And if the mentality of the Umayyad's is opposite to your racist and jahiliya mentality of 'Arab-worship, than may Allah (swt) continue to bless me with this mentality of the Ummayyis and save me from the sick ideas you were just preaching. If you'd like to address the concerns I raised with your absurd statement, than please do, (here they are)

YES I HAVE 2 TYPE IN CAPS...

Okay, well when you mature and one to speak on a more civilized level than do come back and try again and inshaAllah I'll entertain what you raise. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emotional whining - nothing addressed, as usual.

And if the mentality of the Umayyad's is opposite to your racist and jahiliya mentality of 'Arab-worship, than may Allah (swt) continue to bless me with this mentality of the Ummayyis and save me from the sick ideas you were just preaching. If you'd like to address the concerns I raised with your absurd statement, than please do, (here they are)

Okay, well when you mature and one to speak on a more civilized level than do come back and try again and inshaAllah I'll entertain what you raise. :)

.o.k. enough of this childish bickering, so tell me something do find anything in N-B which controdict's the quran and sunna. And also if the narrator's,

of this Hadeeth were shia or sunni. Prophet(saw) said im am the city ali(as)is the gate, this hadeeth is categorically reffering ALI(as) knowlegde

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.o.k. enough of this childish bickering, so tell me something do find anything in N-B which controdict's the quran and sunna. And also if the narrator's,

of this Hadeeth were shia or sunni. Prophet(saw) said im am the city ali(as)is the gate, this hadeeth is categorically reffering ALI(as) knowlegde

As for NB, I will inshaAllah be discussing that more in-depth with your brother. In any case, the mere fact that something doesn't contradict Qur'aan doesn't automatically make it true. If I call you an imbecile (on account of your sickening beliefs about 'Arab superiority), than this doesn't contradict the Qur'aan at all. Does that mean the statement is true? Of course not, and I'm sure you would deny such a claim.

As for this particular saying about Ameer ul Mumineen's (ra) knowledge, than a city has multiple gates, but the narration isn't useful to us except that it highlights his (ra) fadail.

ahlelbayt[dot]com/articles/hadith/city-of-knowledge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As for NB, I will inshaAllah be discussing that more in-depth with your brother. In any case, the mere fact that something doesn't contradict Qur'aan doesn't automatically make it true. If I call you an imbecile (on account of your sickening beliefs about 'Arab superiority), than this doesn't contradict the Qur'aan at all. Does that mean the statement is true? Of course not, and I'm sure you would deny such a claim.

As for this particular saying about Ameer ul Mumineen's (ra) knowledge, than a city has multiple gates, but the narration isn't useful to us except that it highlights his (ra) fadail.

ahlelbayt[dot]com/articles/hadith/city-of-knowledge

Your analogy is very shallow; (nothing personal) quran and Sunna do not entertain these

Types of notion However NB will give you philosophy, theology, tawhed, ethics, eulogies of

(saw) and holy quran, the real master piece in the NB is Tawhed which quite frankly I have never seen in Sunni book’s

Your concern with NBis that it obliterates your core believe, so you will never accept the integrity

Of imam ali(as)

Hadeth Ali (as) is with quran, quran is with Ali (as) please state were the narrator’s were Shia or Sunni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your analogy is very shallow; (nothing personal) quran and Sunna do not entertain these

Types of notion However NB will give you philosophy, theology, tawhed, ethics, eulogies of

(saw) and holy quran, the real master piece in the NB is Tawhed which quite frankly I have never seen in Sunni book’s

Your concern with NBis that it obliterates your core believe, so you will never accept the integrity

Of imam ali(as)

Hadeth Ali (as) is with quran, quran is with Ali (as) please state were the narrator’s were Shia or Sunni

It's not an "analogy", it's the sharh. Only an imbecile, a liar or a bid'ati who has a pre-established notion he is trying to prove would need to hide the fact that cities have multiple gates and have had multiple gates since the time of Rasul (saw) - especially large cities...

As for NB and Sunna' texts and your rubbish claims - as I said, I'm discussing it with your brother and would rather spend time on the topic with somebody who actually (apparently) knows about the book...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not an "analogy", it's the sharh. Only an imbecile, a liar or a bid'ati who has a pre-established notion he is trying to prove would need to hide the fact that cities have multiple gates and have had multiple gates since the time of Rasul (saw) - especially large cities...

As for NB and Sunna' texts and your rubbish claims - as I said, I'm discussing it with your brother and would rather spend time on the topic with somebody who actually (apparently) knows about the book...

Barakallah this SUNNI MUFTI is Opening his Mind !!!

Multiple gates and Ali(as) is One of the gates, The 11 Imaams are the other Gates ?

Otherwise what Bukhari and Muslim are talking about in their Hadiths of 12 Caliphs, Imams or Commanders ?

Qur'an Says, o You Who believe , After Hajj, Dont Enter your homes by the Back Door or jumping your Walls, ENTER BY THE DOOR.

This Has Been Said to Bani Isra'il When They Were Ordered to Enter By the Gates While Bowing Down.

Now The SUNNI, Which Gate is your Islam Entrance ? The BAAB UL MADINAT UL ILM or You Hijacked Islam by Windows ?

We Do not Know Anything , MUFTI The PHAROAH of Intelligence can Teach us Something on these UNKNOWN GATES of The CITY OF KNOWLEDGE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...