Tas-hih Al Bukhari (Authenticating Bukhari)

[AhmedBahgat]

تصحيح البخاري

Salam All

The other day I was watching one of the big Mushriks in Al Azhar named Dr Abdul Muhddi Abdul Qader, I was shocked to see him praising Bukhari while being proud of it and say: 'they even swear by Bukhari', I cut this clip out of the whole video, here it is:

In a way, the public statement by that hadith expert when he said that they swear by Bukhari is a clear cut evidence that he is Mushrik, he and others like him are considering Bukhari as someone whom we may swear by, I actually believe that their hearsay hadith suggest that we may only swear by Allah and not anyone else.

To be honest, I don't like Bukhari, however after watching that video I felt that I may have prejudice against him, despite I never took any attention of that man early in my life, his books meant nothing to me, for example his hadith books are confusing and are nothing but repeating what he heard, yet he repeated the repetitions, for example, his hadith collections are about 7000, about 2500 are unique and the rest (4500) are repetitions to those 2500 , no intellect in it whatsoever, in all my life the religion of Islam meant nothing but the Quran, the hadith for me was nothing but mere teachings from humans that must be qualified by the Quran and the common sense to accept it, this is how a religion makes sense to me, it should be based on what the God said and possibly anything else said by any human who elaborated on what the God said without contradicting it, violating it, nor opposing it. I was eager to know, why Bukhari came 200 years after the prophet and decided to collect his hadith and call it Sahih, I wanted to go deep into studying his personality and mentality if I can through what is said about him trying to be as fair as possible, so I collected a few articles from a few web sites which are pro Bukhari, and only one article from a web site that is anti Bukhari, I put all in one document and decided to study it thoroughly trying to find any hints to help me explore Bukhari personality and mentality, I hope this small research will be useful for all including myself, I will start with the few articles by those who are in his favour (there are zillions indeed) or at least neutral then I will end it with only one article by one of those who are anti Bukhari, I will add my comments in between if I have any inshaallah:

They say:

His name is Muhammad Ibn Ismail Ibn Ibrahim Ibn al-Mughirah Ibn Bardizbah al-Bukhari

Early life (810-820)

Bukhari was born in July 20, 810 CE (Shawal 13, 194 AH ) in the city of Bukhara, in what is today Uzbekistan. His father, Ismail Ibn Ibrahim, was a known hadith scholar that died while Bukhari was young.

Ahmed says:

Clearly Bukhari was born at least 180 years after the prophet died, it makes me wonder when I read what Allah said this in this verse:

This day have I completed for you your religion and completed My favour on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion; but whoever is compelled by hunger, not inclining wilfully to sin, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
[The Quran ; 5:3]

اليوم اكملت لكم دينكم واتممت عليكم نعمتي ورضيت لكم الاسلام دينا فمن اضطر في مخمصه غير متجانف لاثم فان الله غفور رحيم

-> See, This day have I completed for you your religion and completed My favour on you , so how come for about 180 years after that day the Muslims needed another book(s) in addition to the Quran after it was completed as Allah told us in 5:3 above?, we know well that Allah told us that the prophet should explain to us things that we may differ about it, this is based on the fact told to us that the prophet was given/taught 3 things:

1) Al Kitab
2) Al Hikmah
3) Things that he didn't know before

Logically speaking, the above three favours given to Mohammad can mean 3 different things or can mean one thing (Al Quran), I have no problem to accept both understandings, however, regardless if those three things being different to each other or mean one thing (Al Quran), at the end of the day what the prophet said SHOULD NEVER CONTRADICTS HIS TEACHER who is Allah, this is a must logic because it makes no sense that a teacher teaches someone something and orders him to teach it to others, then that person elaborate in a way that contradicts his teacher, if this relation between the teacher and his student is a human-human relationship then possibly the student have developed knowledge that give him the ability to contradict his teacher but when that relationship is a God-human relationship then in no way the human will contradict His teacher while elaborating on what the Teacher said.

Now, if Bukhari intentions was to document those elaborations by the prophet that were only Quran elaboration then this should be fine and noble of course, that is assuming he filtered the Quran elaboration hearsay and dropped anything that contradicts the Quran, this is due to what I explained earlier, the humans student can never contradict the Divine Teacher, but Bukhari didn't do that, he included many hearsay that contradict Allah in His Quran, as well many hearsay that were in no way a Quran elaboration, well, how I can describe the many hearsay he included while it has no relation to the Quran whatsoever, possibly, fairy tales, how about Asatir Al Awaleen, The tales of the ancients, we should see many examples of these later on inshallah.

They say:

Sunnis praise his memory, saying he was:

Endowed by nature with great intellectual powers, although he was physically frail. He possessed a sharp and photographic memory, and a great tenacity of purpose, which served him well in his academic life

Ahmed says:

Many children at the age of 10 are endured with great memory, this does not really make them intellect, they might be of course, however in the case of Bukhari, while he might have had a great memory, it seems when he created his books he lacked a lot of common sense, this was clear when he included hearsay that defame the prophet and portray him as a violent, rude and sexual freak which contradicts the Quran in what it said about the great prophet, here is a sample to what Allah said about Mohammed:

3: And most surely you shall have a reward never to be cut off.
4: And most surely you conform (yourself) to sublime morality.
[The Quran ; 68:3-4]

وَإِنَّ لَكَ لَأَجْرًا غَيْرَ مَمْنُونٍ (3)
وَإِنَّكَ لَعَلى خُلُقٍ عَظِيمٍ (4)

-> See what Allah told us about Mohammed: And most surely you conform (yourself) to sublime morality. , and due to that reason and many others, Allah told us as well about him: And most surely you shall have a reward never to be cut off. , there is no way Allah will reward Mohammed with a reward that never be cut off while Mohammed was not conforming himself to sublime morality, i.e. there is no way that we accept a hearsay that indicates the slightest that Mohammed was not conforming himself to sublime morality and if we do then it means we accept that what Allah told us above is not true astaghfar Allah.

Now, regarding Bukhari academic life, I say he was like in a prison, he was so influenced by his father profession (if a call it so) as a Muhadith (hearsayer), so he decided at a very early age to be the same after his father death, I'm sure he was influenced by many other Muhadiths (hearsayers) at that time, it seems for the first few hundred years after the prophet died, to be a Muhadith was prestigious and would have gained the Muhadith respect and admiration from the people around, it is quite understandable to almost reach a conclusion that this is where Satan always attack us, he does one or the other, either he tries to make us reject and kill the messengers while they are alive (sure he succeeded many times) or he tries the opposite when they die, i.e. he makes us praise them really hard and hold them in a HOLY level so we commit shirk, (again this was done many times with many prophets), those few hundred years after Mohammed death was the critical period for Satan to concentrate on, he used the respect and admiration the people had for the prophet to make them think that if they are Mudatheen (hearsayers) about him then they will gain the same respect and admiration, what a plan by Satan, it worked and is working very well indeed in all generations since prophet Idris (Ossoris) who was not far from prophet Adam. In fact if you remember the story of Adam and how Satan tricked him, sort of Satan convinced Adam that if they eat from the forbidden tree he will be sort of HOLY, Mukhallad, see, even with prophet Adam while no other human yet to follow Adam message Satan tried to make Adam believe that he can be Holy.

So for Bukhari, instead of using his memory to spend his academic life in studying Allah words (Al Quran) he spent it in studying the hearsay because at that time this is what would have given him respect and admiration it seems the flawed people at that time felt that they had enough Quran. I have to say that this gained respect and admiration is another vulnerability that must have affected his ego later on in his life as we will see.

They say:

Sunnis also state that he developed a power and speed of memory which seemed miraculous, even to his contemporaries


Ahmed says:

What is so miraculous about it if the whole human even if a dumb one is full of miracles?, I actually knew many kids that had an amazing memory, I won't call it miraculous though, I consider that even if the brain is dead (like dumb) but alive it is very miraculous enough to me. However I can't take this gift from him, I hope he used it properly though.

They say:

It is said by the age of ten, Imam Bukhari had memorised 70,000 hadith by heart with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace)

Ahmed says:

Hmmmm, do you think a kid like that will have any time to memorise the Quran?, well I reckon a kid like that who managed to memorise 70,000 hadith by heart with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet will have no bloody time to memorise one Quran verse. Let's do some calculations:

Let's say an hour is a time (yet hard) to perfectly memorise one hadith and its complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet, so 10 years old Bukhari needed 70,000 hours to achieve what is said above.

70,000 hours = 2916 days

2916 days = 8 years

Opps, Bukhari was 10 years at the time, oh yeh he spent his life since 2 years old 24 hours a day bloody memorising 70,000 hadiths with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet, would that make any sense to a child?

Well, what is more revolting that how they confirmed that he actually memorised 70,000 hadiths with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet at the age of 10?, I guess someone must sit there and listens to him saying the hadith then somehow confirms it with something recorded that is available, that is in no way an easy and realistic task but let's just assume it happened and they needed 15 minutes to confirm that this 10 years old kid perfectly memorised a haidth, i.e. to just test Bukhari and confirm that he indeed memorised 70,000 hadith with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet they needed 2 bloody years working 24 hours a day, again it does not add up to me.

You know how it adds up, it can only make sense if they just took what it was claimed about Bukhari for granted or at least they tested him in a few hundred hadiths and took the rest of his thousands for granted, but that has nothing to do with Islam because the Quran orders us to reject MOST conjectures even if MOST of it is true, it looks to me that the whole hadith/muhadith thingy at that time was like a game to reach fame and gain the respect and admiration of other humans.

That was Bukhari in his first 10 years of life, as you can see above, nothing was mentioned about his experience with the Quran at that age which I found it shame and goes against Bukhari and his followers.

They say:

Early education (820-826)

He underwent his early education under the guidance of his mother in his native city and by the age of eleven he finished his elementary studies and started to study hadith.

Ahmed says:

The above statement by pro Bukhari raised my eye brow, how come he spent his first 10 years memorising 70,000 hadith with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet and they say above that he started studying the hadith at the age of 11?. (We have a done a rough estimate that he needed about 8 years to achieve his 70,000 hadiths in memory as well about two years to test him and confirm that he indeed memorised all those 70,000 hadiths with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet at the age of 10).

It also seems to me that Bukhari as a child hardly had any time to study for his elementary studies during his first 10 years of life to be able to finish it by age 11.

See the statement above that he started studying the hadith at age 11 is a clear contradiction because the same people told us that he spent his first 10 years memorising the hadith, which I consider as a hadith study unless he was just acting like a parrot which was parroting 70,000 hadiths with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet while absolutely not understanding anything of it. Also, how come they claim that he had a teacher who was teaching him the hadith during those 10 years, then they tell us that he started studying the hadith at the age of 11?

They say:

During those studies, he at one time he corrected one of his teachers,

Ahmed says:

Hmmm, so what?, I did it many times before in my first years of studying computers at TAFE college in Australia, in fact the teacher used to even ask me for answers when she got stuck, I left the course due to incompetency at their end and just continued on my own, that does not make me smart though, I was just able to comprehend a specific subject better than others while at the same time I lacked many things that others were far able to comprehend than me (even in the computer industry), the bottom line is this, even if he was a master in the hearsay hadith and obviously if all what we read so far is true, he must have been a hadith master, that does not make him a religion master, indeed it's fair to say that so far it seems that he lacked the knowledge of the Quran, not even once we read that he memorised one verse from the Quran, see, you can be a master in something but surely you will lack the knowledge of other things, being a master in one aspect does not mean mastering other aspects.

They say:

who laughed at the audacity of the young student. Bukhari persisted and referred to the books, who showed him to be correct.

Ahmed says:

See how the game was played, the teacher laughed at him, then Bukhari insisted and proved his position using books that was not his. i.e. Bukhari didn't really invent anything using any intelligence or logic to refute his teacher, rather used his strong memory and he was able to remember what was in those books that he read.

It is like this, I say it was red, you say it was blue, and we read in a book that it was blue, nothing smart by you in here, you just have a good memory, that's all.

They say:

At the age of sixteen, he had learned the knowledge of all the scholars of hadith of Bukhara, as well as everything contained in the books which were available to him.

Ahmed says:

Therefore it is fair to say that Bukhari spent his first 16 years of life, studying nothing but hadith, at this age he mastered all knowledge by the scholars of hadith of Bukhara (obviously all that hearsay was said in a non Arabic speaking area), as well he mastered everything contained in the books which were available to him,. however I found this statement by them lacks logic because how they know that he learned everything contained in the books which were available to him?, it is really an unrealistic statement, not that he didn't rather there is no way for them to know that.

They say:

Arabian peninsula travels

At age of sixteen, he, together with his brother and widowed mother made the pilgrimage to Mecca. From there he made a series of travels in order to increase his knowledge of hadith.

Ahmed says:

As you can see, he was a hadith maniac, so far he showed no interest in the Quran (the real words of his God), what I find strange is their use of the word Hadith, as if it is something specific to what was alleged about Mohammed, as if the word is sort of a fact despite the fact that it was never used in the Quran as such, indeed the word HADITH was used numerous times in the Quran to refer mostly to itself, let's have a look at a few examples (note: I will leave the word Hadith untranslated), the word means Saying:

In their histories there is certainly a lesson for men of understanding. It is not a HADITH which could be forged, but a verification of what is before it and a distinct explanation of all things and a guide and a mercy to a people who believe.
[The Quran ; 12:111]

لَقَدْ كَانَ فِي قَصَصِهِمْ عِبْرَةٌ لِّأُوْلِي الأَلْبَابِ مَا كَانَ حَدِيثًا يُفْتَرَى وَلَكِن تَصْدِيقَ الَّذِي بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ وَتَفْصِيلَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ وَهُدًى وَرَحْمَةً لِّقَوْمٍ يُؤْمِنُونَ (111)

-> Allah is telling us that the Quran : It is not a HADITH which could be forged , i.e. all believers in the Quran agree that they believe that the Quran is a hadith that is not forged, on the other hand they all also agree that the sayings alleged about the prophet maybe forged and indeed they agree that many of it is forged, for example Bukhari himself told us that out of 600,000 hadith alleged about the prophet, he only managed to authenticate about 7000 of them, i.e. about 593,000 hadiths might have been forged according to Bukhari himself.


Do they not consider the kingdom of the heavens and the earth and whatever things Allah has created, and that may be their doom shall have drawn nigh; what HADITH would they then believe in after this?
[The Quran ; 7:185]

أَوَلَمْ يَنظُرُواْ فِي مَلَكُوتِ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ وَمَا خَلَقَ اللّهُ مِن شَيْءٍ وَأَنْ عَسَى أَن يَكُونَ قَدِ اقْتَرَبَ أَجَلُهُمْ فَبِأَيِّ حَدِيثٍ بَعْدَهُ يُؤْمِنُونَ (185)

-> Allah is telling us that there is no other Hadith after the Quran which people may believe in or cause people to believe in Allah: what HADITH would they then believe in after this? , the word THIS is referring to the Quran, in effect 7:185 is telling us that there should be no other HADITH after the Quran that we should believe in or there is no other hadith after the Quran that can cause people to believe.


So leave Me and him who rejects this HADITH; We will overtake them by degrees, from whence they perceive not:
[The Quran ; 68:44]

فَذَرْنِي وَمَن يُكَذِّبُ بِهَذَا الْحَدِيثِ سَنَسْتَدْرِجُهُم مِّنْ حَيْثُ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ (44)

-> Allah in this verse is talking about those who reject the Hadith of the Quran : So leave Me and him who rejects this HADITH;, those who reject the Hadith of the Quran will be punished as follow: We will overtake them by degrees, from whence they perceive not , this means there is no punishment to reject any other hadith but the Quran. i.e. those confused Muslims who accuse the hadith rejectors of kufr are nothing but a bunch of liars.


Allah, there is no god but He-- He will most certainly gather you together on the resurrection day, there is no doubt in it; and who is more true in HADITH than Allah?
[The Quran ; 4:87]

اللّهُ لا إِلَهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ لَيَجْمَعَنَّكُمْ إِلَى يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ لاَ رَيْبَ فِيهِ وَمَنْ أَصْدَقُ مِنَ اللّهِ حَدِيثًا (87)

-> Allah is telling us that there will be no HADITH that is 100% truthful in addition to His Hadith : and who is more true in HADITH than Allah? , the hadith advocates are aware of this verse that is why they always say Bukhari hadith in his book is the second most authentic after the hadith of Allah in His Quran, i.e. the Hadith of Allah in His Quran is better than the Hadith of Bukhari in his sahih books, but that does not mean we should follow it in addition to Allah Hadith, if we do then this must constitute SHIRK because we were ordered to only rule with what Allah has sent down as I will show later on inshaallah, i.e. we were ordered to only rule by the Hadith of Allah, in addition to that we were also told that the true believers are those who hear the sayings and follow THE BEST OF IT, this is very important point indeed and everyone must look at it very careful, let me explain it in a better way:

The Arabic word Hadith means Sayings

The Arabic word Qawl means Sayings

i.e. Hadith = Qawl = Sayings

In the above verses, we have seen the Quran being called Hadith i.e. Sayings, now let me show you a verse where the Quran was also called Qawl i.e. Sayings:

Most surely it is the QAWL of an honoured messenger,
[The Quran ; 81:19]

إِنَّهُ لَقَوْلُ رَسُولٍ كَرِيمٍ (19)

-> I left the word Qawl untranslated, in the above verse the Quran was described as the Qawl of an honoured messenger: it is the QAWL of an honoured messenger , i.e. the Quran is the sayings of the prophet, i.e. if we follow the Quran alone then we are indeed following the true HADITH OF THE PROPHET

In fact if you read the Quran thoroughly you should notice that the prophet was ordered numerous times to Qul??, Qul??, Qul??, Qul?? i.e. Say??, [b]Say??, [b]Say??, [b]Say??, i.e. the Quran is the TRUE HADITH/QAWL (SAYINGS) of Mohammed.

Now, after proving that the Quran is also Qawl, i.e. Sayings, in the next verse Allah is telling us that the true believers who are on true guidance are those who listen to the Qawl (Sayings) and follow the BEST of it:
[b]
Those who listen to the QAWL, then follow the best of it; those are they whom Allah has guided, and those it is who are the men of understanding.
[The Quran ; 39:18]

الَّذِينَ يَسْتَمِعُونَ الْقَوْلَ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ أَحْسَنَهُ أُوْلَئِكَ الَّذِينَ هَدَاهُمُ اللَّهُ وَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمْ أُوْلُوا الْأَلْبَابِ (18)

-> See, الَّذِينَ يَسْتَمِعُونَ الْقَوْلَ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ أَحْسَنَهُ , i.e. the verse is talking about Those who listen to the QAWL, then follow the best of it; , i.e. those who listen to the Sayings and follow the best of it, we have been told that they are the ones on true guidance: those are they whom Allah has guided, and those it is who are the men of understanding. , can you see the words men of understanding. , while it is an accepted translation, the Arabic words means those who have BRAINS Aulu Al Albaab. i.e. those who listen to the sayings and follow the best of it are those whom Allah has guided them and they are the ones who have brains.

The above verse may lead to a conflict, because for those Muslims who say ok we read the Qawl of humans in the human hadith (like Bukhari) and we read the Qawl of Allah in His Quran and we found that Allah Qawl is the best so we are obliged to only follow the best according to 39:18 above, however the human hadith advocates may accuse them of whatever fallacy because they think that they (the hadith rejectors) were the judge to rule for themselves that Allah Qawl (sayings) is the best, but this is not true, indeed it was Allah Himself who ruled that His Hadith is the BEST, let's have a look:

Allah has revealed the best HADITH, a book conformable in its various parts, repeating, whereat do shudder the skins of those who fear their Lord, then their skins and their hearts become pliant to the remembrance of Allah; this is Allah's guidance, He guides with it whom He pleases; and (as for) him whom Allah makes err, there is no guide for him.
[The Quran ; 39:23]

اللَّهُ نَزَّلَ أَحْسَنَ الْحَدِيثِ كِتَابًا مُّتَشَابِهًا مَّثَانِيَ تَقْشَعِرُّ مِنْهُ جُلُودُ الَّذِينَ يَخْشَوْنَ رَبَّهُمْ ثُمَّ تَلِينُ جُلُودُهُمْ وَقُلُوبُهُمْ إِلَى ذِكْرِ اللَّهِ ذَلِكَ هُدَى اللَّهِ يَهْدِي بِهِ مَنْ يَشَاء وَمَن يُضْلِلْ اللَّهُ فَمَا لَهُ مِنْ هَادٍ (23)

-> See how it was said in 39:23, اللَّهُ نَزَّلَ أَحْسَنَ الْحَدِيثِ , i.e. Allah has revealed the best HADITH , now considering 39:18 where Allah also told us about those who are guided by Him and are men of understanding that they only follow the best of sayings after they listened to all, THIS MEANS THOSE WHO ARE TRULY GUIDED BY HIM AND PERFECTLY UNDERSTAND HIS MESSAGE SHOULD ONLY FOLLOW THE QURAN (THE BEST OF HADITH ACCORDING TO ALLAH), this argument should be a killer to the human hadith advocates, if they manage to understand it then I'm sure it will spin them around and I'm sure they will have nothing to say.

To be continued

[AhmedBahgat]

تصحيح البخاري

Salam All

The other day I was watching one of the big Mushriks in Al Azhar named Dr Abdul Muhddi Abdul Qader, I was shocked to see him praising Bukhari while being proud of it and say: 'they even swear by Bukhari', I cut this clip out of the whole video, here it is:

In a way, the public statement by that hadith expert when he said that they swear by Bukhari is a clear cut evidence that he is Mushrik, he and others like him are considering Bukhari as someone whom we may swear by, I actually believe that their hearsay hadith suggest that we may only swear by Allah and not anyone else.

To be honest, I don't like Bukhari, however after watching that video I felt that I may have prejudice against him, despite I never took any attention of that man early in my life, his books meant nothing to me, for example his hadith books are confusing and are nothing but repeating what he heard, yet he repeated the repetitions, for example, his hadith collections are about 7000, about 2500 are unique and the rest (4500) are repetitions to those 2500 , no intellect in it whatsoever, in all my life the religion of Islam meant nothing but the Quran, the hadith for me was nothing but mere teachings from humans that must be qualified by the Quran and the common sense to accept it, this is how a religion makes sense to me, it should be based on what the God said and possibly anything else said by any human who elaborated on what the God said without contradicting it, violating it, nor opposing it. I was eager to know, why Bukhari came 200 years after the prophet and decided to collect his hadith and call it Sahih, I wanted to go deep into studying his personality and mentality if I can through what is said about him trying to be as fair as possible, so I collected a few articles from a few web sites which are pro Bukhari, and only one article from a web site that is anti Bukhari, I put all in one document and decided to study it thoroughly trying to find any hints to help me explore Bukhari personality and mentality, I hope this small research will be useful for all including myself, I will start with the few articles by those who are in his favour (there are zillions indeed) or at least neutral then I will end it with only one article by one of those who are anti Bukhari, I will add my comments in between if I have any inshaallah:

They say:

His name is Muhammad Ibn Ismail Ibn Ibrahim Ibn al-Mughirah Ibn Bardizbah al-Bukhari

Early life (810-820)

Bukhari was born in July 20, 810 CE (Shawal 13, 194 AH ) in the city of Bukhara, in what is today Uzbekistan. His father, Ismail Ibn Ibrahim, was a known hadith scholar that died while Bukhari was young.

Ahmed says:

Clearly Bukhari was born at least 180 years after the prophet died, it makes me wonder when I read what Allah said this in this verse:

This day have I completed for you your religion and completed My favour on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion; but whoever is compelled by hunger, not inclining wilfully to sin, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
[The Quran ; 5:3]

اليوم اكملت لكم دينكم واتممت عليكم نعمتي ورضيت لكم الاسلام دينا فمن اضطر في مخمصه غير متجانف لاثم فان الله غفور رحيم

-> See, This day have I completed for you your religion and completed My favour on you , so how come for about 180 years after that day the Muslims needed another book(s) in addition to the Quran after it was completed as Allah told us in 5:3 above?, we know well that Allah told us that the prophet should explain to us things that we may differ about it, this is based on the fact told to us that the prophet was given/taught 3 things:

1) Al Kitab
2) Al Hikmah
3) Things that he didn't know before

Logically speaking, the above three favours given to Mohammad can mean 3 different things or can mean one thing (Al Quran), I have no problem to accept both understandings, however, regardless if those three things being different to each other or mean one thing (Al Quran), at the end of the day what the prophet said SHOULD NEVER CONTRADICTS HIS TEACHER who is Allah, this is a must logic because it makes no sense that a teacher teaches someone something and orders him to teach it to others, then that person elaborate in a way that contradicts his teacher, if this relation between the teacher and his student is a human-human relationship then possibly the student have developed knowledge that give him the ability to contradict his teacher but when that relationship is a God-human relationship then in no way the human will contradict His teacher while elaborating on what the Teacher said.

Now, if Bukhari intentions was to document those elaborations by the prophet that were only Quran elaboration then this should be fine and noble of course, that is assuming he filtered the Quran elaboration hearsay and dropped anything that contradicts the Quran, this is due to what I explained earlier, the humans student can never contradict the Divine Teacher, but Bukhari didn't do that, he included many hearsay that contradict Allah in His Quran, as well many hearsay that were in no way a Quran elaboration, well, how I can describe the many hearsay he included while it has no relation to the Quran whatsoever, possibly, fairy tales, how about Asatir Al Awaleen, The tales of the ancients, we should see many examples of these later on inshallah.

They say:

Sunnis praise his memory, saying he was:

Endowed by nature with great intellectual powers, although he was physically frail. He possessed a sharp and photographic memory, and a great tenacity of purpose, which served him well in his academic life

Ahmed says:

Many children at the age of 10 are endured with great memory, this does not really make them intellect, they might be of course, however in the case of Bukhari, while he might have had a great memory, it seems when he created his books he lacked a lot of common sense, this was clear when he included hearsay that defame the prophet and portray him as a violent, rude and sexual freak which contradicts the Quran in what it said about the great prophet, here is a sample to what Allah said about Mohammed:

3: And most surely you shall have a reward never to be cut off.
4: And most surely you conform (yourself) to sublime morality.
[The Quran ; 68:3-4]

وَإِنَّ لَكَ لَأَجْرًا غَيْرَ مَمْنُونٍ (3)
وَإِنَّكَ لَعَلى خُلُقٍ عَظِيمٍ (4)

-> See what Allah told us about Mohammed: And most surely you conform (yourself) to sublime morality. , and due to that reason and many others, Allah told us as well about him: And most surely you shall have a reward never to be cut off. , there is no way Allah will reward Mohammed with a reward that never be cut off while Mohammed was not conforming himself to sublime morality, i.e. there is no way that we accept a hearsay that indicates the slightest that Mohammed was not conforming himself to sublime morality and if we do then it means we accept that what Allah told us above is not true astaghfar Allah.

Now, regarding Bukhari academic life, I say he was like in a prison, he was so influenced by his father profession (if a call it so) as a Muhadith (hearsayer), so he decided at a very early age to be the same after his father death, I'm sure he was influenced by many other Muhadiths (hearsayers) at that time, it seems for the first few hundred years after the prophet died, to be a Muhadith was prestigious and would have gained the Muhadith respect and admiration from the people around, it is quite understandable to almost reach a conclusion that this is where Satan always attack us, he does one or the other, either he tries to make us reject and kill the messengers while they are alive (sure he succeeded many times) or he tries the opposite when they die, i.e. he makes us praise them really hard and hold them in a HOLY level so we commit shirk, (again this was done many times with many prophets), those few hundred years after Mohammed death was the critical period for Satan to concentrate on, he used the respect and admiration the people had for the prophet to make them think that if they are Mudatheen (hearsayers) about him then they will gain the same respect and admiration, what a plan by Satan, it worked and is working very well indeed in all generations since prophet Idris (Ossoris) who was not far from prophet Adam. In fact if you remember the story of Adam and how Satan tricked him, sort of Satan convinced Adam that if they eat from the forbidden tree he will be sort of HOLY, Mukhallad, see, even with prophet Adam while no other human yet to follow Adam message Satan tried to make Adam believe that he can be Holy.

So for Bukhari, instead of using his memory to spend his academic life in studying Allah words (Al Quran) he spent it in studying the hearsay because at that time this is what would have given him respect and admiration it seems the flawed people at that time felt that they had enough Quran. I have to say that this gained respect and admiration is another vulnerability that must have affected his ego later on in his life as we will see.

They say:

Sunnis also state that he developed a power and speed of memory which seemed miraculous, even to his contemporaries


Ahmed says:

What is so miraculous about it if the whole human even if a dumb one is full of miracles?, I actually knew many kids that had an amazing memory, I won't call it miraculous though, I consider that even if the brain is dead (like dumb) but alive it is very miraculous enough to me. However I can't take this gift from him, I hope he used it properly though.

They say:

It is said by the age of ten, Imam Bukhari had memorised 70,000 hadith by heart with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace)

Ahmed says:

Hmmmm, do you think a kid like that will have any time to memorise the Quran?, well I reckon a kid like that who managed to memorise 70,000 hadith by heart with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet will have no bloody time to memorise one Quran verse. Let's do some calculations:

Let's say an hour is a time (yet hard) to perfectly memorise one hadith and its complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet, so 10 years old Bukhari needed 70,000 hours to achieve what is said above.

70,000 hours = 2916 days

2916 days = 8 years

Opps, Bukhari was 10 years at the time, oh yeh he spent his life since 2 years old 24 hours a day bloody memorising 70,000 hadiths with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet, would that make any sense to a child?

Well, what is more revolting that how they confirmed that he actually memorised 70,000 hadiths with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet at the age of 10?, I guess someone must sit there and listens to him saying the hadith then somehow confirms it with something recorded that is available, that is in no way an easy and realistic task but let's just assume it happened and they needed 15 minutes to confirm that this 10 years old kid perfectly memorised a haidth, i.e. to just test Bukhari and confirm that he indeed memorised 70,000 hadith with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet they needed 2 bloody years working 24 hours a day, again it does not add up to me.

You know how it adds up, it can only make sense if they just took what it was claimed about Bukhari for granted or at least they tested him in a few hundred hadiths and took the rest of his thousands for granted, but that has nothing to do with Islam because the Quran orders us to reject MOST conjectures even if MOST of it is true, it looks to me that the whole hadith/muhadith thingy at that time was like a game to reach fame and gain the respect and admiration of other humans.

That was Bukhari in his first 10 years of life, as you can see above, nothing was mentioned about his experience with the Quran at that age which I found it shame and goes against Bukhari and his followers.

They say:

Early education (820-826)

He underwent his early education under the guidance of his mother in his native city and by the age of eleven he finished his elementary studies and started to study hadith.

Ahmed says:

The above statement by pro Bukhari raised my eye brow, how come he spent his first 10 years memorising 70,000 hadith with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet and they say above that he started studying the hadith at the age of 11?. (We have a done a rough estimate that he needed about 8 years to achieve his 70,000 hadiths in memory as well about two years to test him and confirm that he indeed memorised all those 70,000 hadiths with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet at the age of 10).

It also seems to me that Bukhari as a child hardly had any time to study for his elementary studies during his first 10 years of life to be able to finish it by age 11.

See the statement above that he started studying the hadith at age 11 is a clear contradiction because the same people told us that he spent his first 10 years memorising the hadith, which I consider as a hadith study unless he was just acting like a parrot which was parroting 70,000 hadiths with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher, and his teacher's teacher, all the way to the Prophet while absolutely not understanding anything of it. Also, how come they claim that he had a teacher who was teaching him the hadith during those 10 years, then they tell us that he started studying the hadith at the age of 11?

They say:

During those studies, he at one time he corrected one of his teachers,

Ahmed says:

Hmmm, so what?, I did it many times before in my first years of studying computers at TAFE college in Australia, in fact the teacher used to even ask me for answers when she got stuck, I left the course due to incompetency at their end and just continued on my own, that does not make me smart though, I was just able to comprehend a specific subject better than others while at the same time I lacked many things that others were far able to comprehend than me (even in the computer industry), the bottom line is this, even if he was a master in the hearsay hadith and obviously if all what we read so far is true, he must have been a hadith master, that does not make him a religion master, indeed it's fair to say that so far it seems that he lacked the knowledge of the Quran, not even once we read that he memorised one verse from the Quran, see, you can be a master in something but surely you will lack the knowledge of other things, being a master in one aspect does not mean mastering other aspects.

They say:

who laughed at the audacity of the young student. Bukhari persisted and referred to the books, who showed him to be correct.

Ahmed says:

See how the game was played, the teacher laughed at him, then Bukhari insisted and proved his position using books that was not his. i.e. Bukhari didn't really invent anything using any intelligence or logic to refute his teacher, rather used his strong memory and he was able to remember what was in those books that he read.

It is like this, I say it was red, you say it was blue, and we read in a book that it was blue, nothing smart by you in here, you just have a good memory, that's all.

They say:

At the age of sixteen, he had learned the knowledge of all the scholars of hadith of Bukhara, as well as everything contained in the books which were available to him.

Ahmed says:

Therefore it is fair to say that Bukhari spent his first 16 years of life, studying nothing but hadith, at this age he mastered all knowledge by the scholars of hadith of Bukhara (obviously all that hearsay was said in a non Arabic speaking area), as well he mastered everything contained in the books which were available to him,. however I found this statement by them lacks logic because how they know that he learned everything contained in the books which were available to him?, it is really an unrealistic statement, not that he didn't rather there is no way for them to know that.

They say:

Arabian peninsula travels

At age of sixteen, he, together with his brother and widowed mother made the pilgrimage to Mecca. From there he made a series of travels in order to increase his knowledge of hadith.

Ahmed says:

As you can see, he was a hadith maniac, so far he showed no interest in the Quran (the real words of his God), what I find strange is their use of the word Hadith, as if it is something specific to what was alleged about Mohammed, as if the word is sort of a fact despite the fact that it was never used in the Quran as such, indeed the word HADITH was used numerous times in the Quran to refer mostly to itself, let's have a look at a few examples (note: I will leave the word Hadith untranslated), the word means Saying:

In their histories there is certainly a lesson for men of understanding. It is not a HADITH which could be forged, but a verification of what is before it and a distinct explanation of all things and a guide and a mercy to a people who believe.
[The Quran ; 12:111]

لَقَدْ كَانَ فِي قَصَصِهِمْ عِبْرَةٌ لِّأُوْلِي الأَلْبَابِ مَا كَانَ حَدِيثًا يُفْتَرَى وَلَكِن تَصْدِيقَ الَّذِي بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ وَتَفْصِيلَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ وَهُدًى وَرَحْمَةً لِّقَوْمٍ يُؤْمِنُونَ (111)

-> Allah is telling us that the Quran : It is not a HADITH which could be forged , i.e. all believers in the Quran agree that they believe that the Quran is a hadith that is not forged, on the other hand they all also agree that the sayings alleged about the prophet maybe forged and indeed they agree that many of it is forged, for example Bukhari himself told us that out of 600,000 hadith alleged about the prophet, he only managed to authenticate about 7000 of them, i.e. about 593,000 hadiths might have been forged according to Bukhari himself.


Do they not consider the kingdom of the heavens and the earth and whatever things Allah has created, and that may be their doom shall have drawn nigh; what HADITH would they then believe in after this?
[The Quran ; 7:185]

أَوَلَمْ يَنظُرُواْ فِي مَلَكُوتِ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ وَمَا خَلَقَ اللّهُ مِن شَيْءٍ وَأَنْ عَسَى أَن يَكُونَ قَدِ اقْتَرَبَ أَجَلُهُمْ فَبِأَيِّ حَدِيثٍ بَعْدَهُ يُؤْمِنُونَ (185)

-> Allah is telling us that there is no other Hadith after the Quran which people may believe in or cause people to believe in Allah: what HADITH would they then believe in after this? , the word THIS is referring to the Quran, in effect 7:185 is telling us that there should be no other HADITH after the Quran that we should believe in or there is no other hadith after the Quran that can cause people to believe.


So leave Me and him who rejects this HADITH; We will overtake them by degrees, from whence they perceive not:
[The Quran ; 68:44]

فَذَرْنِي وَمَن يُكَذِّبُ بِهَذَا الْحَدِيثِ سَنَسْتَدْرِجُهُم مِّنْ حَيْثُ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ (44)

-> Allah in this verse is talking about those who reject the Hadith of the Quran : So leave Me and him who rejects this HADITH;, those who reject the Hadith of the Quran will be punished as follow: We will overtake them by degrees, from whence they perceive not , this means there is no punishment to reject any other hadith but the Quran. i.e. those confused Muslims who accuse the hadith rejectors of kufr are nothing but a bunch of liars.


Allah, there is no god but He-- He will most certainly gather you together on the resurrection day, there is no doubt in it; and who is more true in HADITH than Allah?
[The Quran ; 4:87]

اللّهُ لا إِلَهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ لَيَجْمَعَنَّكُمْ إِلَى يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ لاَ رَيْبَ فِيهِ وَمَنْ أَصْدَقُ مِنَ اللّهِ حَدِيثًا (87)

-> Allah is telling us that there will be no HADITH that is 100% truthful in addition to His Hadith : and who is more true in HADITH than Allah? , the hadith advocates are aware of this verse that is why they always say Bukhari hadith in his book is the second most authentic after the hadith of Allah in His Quran, i.e. the Hadith of Allah in His Quran is better than the Hadith of Bukhari in his sahih books, but that does not mean we should follow it in addition to Allah Hadith, if we do then this must constitute SHIRK because we were ordered to only rule with what Allah has sent down as I will show later on inshaallah, i.e. we were ordered to only rule by the Hadith of Allah, in addition to that we were also told that the true believers are those who hear the sayings and follow THE BEST OF IT, this is very important point indeed and everyone must look at it very careful, let me explain it in a better way:

The Arabic word Hadith means Sayings

The Arabic word Qawl means Sayings

i.e. Hadith = Qawl = Sayings

In the above verses, we have seen the Quran being called Hadith i.e. Sayings, now let me show you a verse where the Quran was also called Qawl i.e. Sayings:

Most surely it is the QAWL of an honoured messenger,
[The Quran ; 81:19]

إِنَّهُ لَقَوْلُ رَسُولٍ كَرِيمٍ (19)

-> I left the word Qawl untranslated, in the above verse the Quran was described as the Qawl of an honoured messenger: it is the QAWL of an honoured messenger , i.e. the Quran is the sayings of the prophet, i.e. if we follow the Quran alone then we are indeed following the true HADITH OF THE PROPHET

In fact if you read the Quran thoroughly you should notice that the prophet was ordered numerous times to Qul??, Qul??, Qul??, Qul?? i.e. Say??, [b]Say??, [b]Say??, [b]Say??, i.e. the Quran is the TRUE HADITH/QAWL (SAYINGS) of Mohammed.

Now, after proving that the Quran is also Qawl, i.e. Sayings, in the next verse Allah is telling us that the true believers who are on true guidance are those who listen to the Qawl (Sayings) and follow the BEST of it:
[b]
Those who listen to the QAWL, then follow the best of it; those are they whom Allah has guided, and those it is who are the men of understanding.
[The Quran ; 39:18]

الَّذِينَ يَسْتَمِعُونَ الْقَوْلَ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ أَحْسَنَهُ أُوْلَئِكَ الَّذِينَ هَدَاهُمُ اللَّهُ وَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمْ أُوْلُوا الْأَلْبَابِ (18)

-> See, الَّذِينَ يَسْتَمِعُونَ الْقَوْلَ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ أَحْسَنَهُ , i.e. the verse is talking about Those who listen to the QAWL, then follow the best of it; , i.e. those who listen to the Sayings and follow the best of it, we have been told that they are the ones on true guidance: those are they whom Allah has guided, and those it is who are the men of understanding. , can you see the words men of understanding. , while it is an accepted translation, the Arabic words means those who have BRAINS Aulu Al Albaab. i.e. those who listen to the sayings and follow the best of it are those whom Allah has guided them and they are the ones who have brains.

The above verse may lead to a conflict, because for those Muslims who say ok we read the Qawl of humans in the human hadith (like Bukhari) and we read the Qawl of Allah in His Quran and we found that Allah Qawl is the best so we are obliged to only follow the best according to 39:18 above, however the human hadith advocates may accuse them of whatever fallacy because they think that they (the hadith rejectors) were the judge to rule for themselves that Allah Qawl (sayings) is the best, but this is not true, indeed it was Allah Himself who ruled that His Hadith is the BEST, let's have a look:

Allah has revealed the best HADITH, a book conformable in its various parts, repeating, whereat do shudder the skins of those who fear their Lord, then their skins and their hearts become pliant to the remembrance of Allah; this is Allah's guidance, He guides with it whom He pleases; and (as for) him whom Allah makes err, there is no guide for him.
[The Quran ; 39:23]

اللَّهُ نَزَّلَ أَحْسَنَ الْحَدِيثِ كِتَابًا مُّتَشَابِهًا مَّثَانِيَ تَقْشَعِرُّ مِنْهُ جُلُودُ الَّذِينَ يَخْشَوْنَ رَبَّهُمْ ثُمَّ تَلِينُ جُلُودُهُمْ وَقُلُوبُهُمْ إِلَى ذِكْرِ اللَّهِ ذَلِكَ هُدَى اللَّهِ يَهْدِي بِهِ مَنْ يَشَاء وَمَن يُضْلِلْ اللَّهُ فَمَا لَهُ مِنْ هَادٍ (23)

-> See how it was said in 39:23, اللَّهُ نَزَّلَ أَحْسَنَ الْحَدِيثِ , i.e. Allah has revealed the best HADITH , now considering 39:18 where Allah also told us about those who are guided by Him and are men of understanding that they only follow the best of sayings after they listened to all, THIS MEANS THOSE WHO ARE TRULY GUIDED BY HIM AND PERFECTLY UNDERSTAND HIS MESSAGE SHOULD ONLY FOLLOW THE QURAN (THE BEST OF HADITH ACCORDING TO ALLAH), this argument should be a killer to the human hadith advocates, if they manage to understand it then I'm sure it will spin them around and I'm sure they will have nothing to say.

To be continued

[Fati]

Selam to all,

So far this is one of the best article to prove that the only hadith authorized by God is Quran. It is short but to the point.

Thank you brother Ahmed for writing this and God bless you for your sincere efforts?

I want to translate this into my language (Albanian) for my people and hope to have your permission?

Selam
Fati

[AhmedBahgat]

[AhmedBahgat]

[AhmedBahgat]

Hello all,

They say:

He went through all the important centres of Islamic learning of his time, talked to scholars and exchanged information on hadith. It is recorded that he stayed at Basrah for four or five years, and in the Hijaz for six; while he travelled to Egypt twice and to Kufah and Baghdad many times.

Ahmed says:

See, I was not wrong when I classified Bukhari as a hadith maniac, he was living for one thing only, to collect hadith and put it in a book that carries his name, the outcome of his reckless act was simple, most Muslims shirked Allah words with his words and bundled both as one sharia to follow. You will always hear those Mushrikoon saying Quran and Sunnah, it is actually rare to hear a Muslim saying I follow the Quran alone.

They say:

When the authorities in Basrah received information of his arrival, they fixed a time for him to deliver a lecture.

Ahmed says:

Again, Bukhari was travelling the world to only promote his hadith experience which I don't doubt at all, however I thought somone with such great memory will use this gift given to him from Allah to spread His words and not the human words, for Bukhari, collecting the hadith and putting it in a book was far more important to him than promoting the teachings and guidance inside the Quran.

They say:

At the lecture, he was able to confine himself only to such Hadith as he had received on the authority of the early Hadith scholars of Basrah, and had nonetheless been unknown to the audience.

Ahmed says:

As you can see, Bukhari didn't invent anything other than his criteria to which hadith out of the 600,000 he should include in his book or not, all those hadiths in Bukhari book are not his words, it is a clear cut case of HEARSAY. where he is also the only judge to include or reject any hearsay of it. Ironically his criteria was only based on other hearsay regarding the reputation of those narrators, obviously his criteria was his own, that is why one of his students (Muslim) created his own hearsay book that is based on his own criteria and not Bukhari's criteria. For the Ummah though, they just got confused to which criteria they should follow so they invented a new term in Arabic called (Sahihain), which is the dual form of (Sahih) i.e. the two authentic (referring to both hearsay books of Bukhari and his student Muslim). I might ask those confused Muslims: you claim that Sahih Bukhari is the second most authentic book after the Quran, how about Sahih Muslim?, is it on the same level of Sahih Bukhari?, if yes then why you only say Bukhari is the second most authentic book, it should be, Bukhari and Muslim books are the second most authentic books after the Quran, but if you say no, Bukhari book is more authentic than Muslim book, then why you call both books Sahihain?

They say:

While in Baghdad, he was tested by ten Hadith scholars. They changed the Isnad and text of one hundred hadith, and asked Bukhari about them during a public meeting.

Ahmed says:

What a silly game, it seems the hadith was the only thing that the people at this period of life was talking about, nothing strange really, it is the human nature to follow hearsay and conjectures, I have to remind them with what Allah said in the Quran:

36: And most of them do not follow (anything) but conjecture; surely conjecture will not avail aught against the truth; surely Allah is cognizant of what they do.

37: And this Quran is not such as could be forged by those other than Allah, but it is a verification of that which is before it and a clear explanation of the book, there is no doubt in it, from the Lord of the worlds.

38: Or do they say: He has forged it (Al Quran)? Say: Then bring a chapter like this and invite whom you can other than Allah, if you are truthful.
[The Quran ; 10:36-37]

وَمَا يَتَّبِعُ أَكْثَرُهُمْ إِلاَّ ظَنًّا إَنَّ الظَّنَّ لاَ يُغْنِي مِنَ الْحَقِّ شَيْئًا إِنَّ اللّهَ عَلَيمٌ بِمَا يَفْعَلُونَ (36)
وَمَا كَانَ هَذَا الْقُرْآنُ أَن يُفْتَرَى مِن دُونِ اللّهِ وَلَكِن تَصْدِيقَ الَّذِي بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ وَتَفْصِيلَ الْكِتَابِ لاَ رَيْبَ فِيهِ مِن رَّبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ (37)
أَمْ يَقُولُونَ افْتَرَاهُ قُلْ فَأْتُواْ بِسُورَةٍ مِّثْلِهِ وَادْعُواْ مَنِ اسْتَطَعْتُم مِّن دُونِ اللّهِ إِن كُنتُمْ صَادِقِينَ (38)

-> See, وَمَا يَتَّبِعُ أَكْثَرُهُمْ إِلاَّ ظَنًّا , i.e. And most of them do not follow (anything) but conjecture , that is what Bukhari and his pals of hadith experts follow, they only follow hearsay (conjectures), well, I have a message for them: surely conjecture will not avail aught against the truth , also they should be aware that: surely Allah is cognizant of what they do

-> There is a strong message in the following verse: وَمَا كَانَ هَذَا الْقُرْآنُ أَن يُفْتَرَى مِن دُونِ اللّهِ , i.e. And this Quran is not such as could be forged by those other than Allah,, i.e. NO OTHER GOD OTHER THAN ALLAH WHO CAN PRODUCE SOMETHING LIKE THE QURAN, i.e. if anyone claim to have something like the Quran then they should being the god who author it to prove their case, that is why most people understand the sura like challenge wrong, they think it is only like in the linguistic aspect, despite LIKE IT means (LIKE IT IN ALL ASPECTS), i.e. in addition to the linguistic aspect, its source must also be like it, i.e it has to be from another god. That is why they will never meet the Quran challenge. The following verse will make it clearer:

-> See what it says: Or do they say: He has forged it (Al Quran)? , but we know well that according to Allah this Quran can never be forged:

It is not a HADITH which could be forged, but a verification of what is before it
[The Quran ; 12:111]

However, everyone knows that the hearsay hadith about Mohammed may be forged, Bukhari himself told us that 593,000 hearsay about Mohammad might have been forged that is why he refused to include them in his Sahih book, what is strange that Allah has told us numerous times that the Quran is a verification to all other scriptures sent, i.e. the corruption in these scriptures can be identified by comparing them to the Quran, yet those hadith advocates refuse to use the Quran to verify their hearsay hadith, it is like they hold their hearsay hadith in higher regard than the Bible and Torah, despite the Bible and Torah were books sent from the same God as the Quran was sent, despite Allah ordered us to BELIEVE in those earlier scriptures He sent and He never ordered us to believer in such human hear say called Sahih Bukhari. THEIR SHIRK IS EVIDENT but because THEIR SHIRK IS WELL ROOTED, it is going to be damn hard for them to get rid of it, an example of this fallacy by them is stoning the adulterers, Allah CLEARLY ordered us in His Quran to flog any adulterer 100 lashed in public while no compassion should be offered and while a group of believers should witness their punishment, but Bukhari told us that he heard people saying that the prophet was doing something else, he was killing the adulterers EVEN after they repented, Bukhari is telling us the he heard that the prophet modified Allah rule, Bukhari is telling us that he heard someone saying that the prophet said that Allah only meant flog those adulterers who are not married but for those married ones, they must be killed by stoning, and now for us as Muslims we must take both rules (Allah in His Quran to flog the unmarried adulterers) and (Bukhari in his hearsay and conjectures to kill the married ones), well I am not going to do that, THIS IS CALLED SHIRK, I can NOT follow conjectures like them, Allah ordered me to avoid MOST conjectures EVEN if MOST of it is a possible truth, conjectures will never prevail over the truth, that is what Allah has just told us in 10:36 surely conjecture will not avail aught against the truth, surely Allah is cognizant of what they do

-> Now, for Allah to refute them when they claim that the Quran may have been forged, He challenged them to bring a sura like it: Say: Then bring a chapter like this, the ignorant think that this is the end of the challenge, well we need to read the rest of it of course and invite whom you can other than Allah, if you are truthful., see the condition for the sura like challenge, THEY MUST BRING THOSE GODS OTHER THAN ALLAH WHO ARE THE AUTHORS OF THE ALLEGED QURAN ALIKE BOOKS, this is the only way for them to prove that they are truthful and there is another god who authored a sura like a sura in the Quran.

For the hearsay hadith however, there is no challenges, everyone, including Bukhari, Muslim, all the Muslims, all the enemy of Islam and all the kafirs agree that the hearsay human hadith about Mohammad is forged. WE DO NOT NEED TO PROVE IT BECAUSE BUKHARI TOLD US THAT THERE ARE 593,000 HADITHS LIKE THOSE 7000 HADITHS HE AUTHENTICATED.

They say:

He said that he was not familiar with those hadith, recited the un-changed versions and said that they had probably inadvertently recited them wrongly. This was repeated by four hundred scholars in Samarkand.

Ahmed says:

Of course, what else do you expect from a hadith maniac who memorised 70,000 hadith by heart at the age of 10 including their full chain of narrators going from him to his teacher and all the way to the prophet, this is indeed amazing, if I just consider that every hadith is like one Quran verse and we know that the Quran is about 6235 verses, then Bukhari at the age of 10 managed to memorise more than 11 Qurans. Yet we never heard that he memorised the whole Quran by the age of 10.

To be continued

[AhmedBahgat]

Hello all,

They say:

He went through all the important centres of Islamic learning of his time, talked to scholars and exchanged information on hadith. It is recorded that he stayed at Basrah for four or five years, and in the Hijaz for six; while he travelled to Egypt twice and to Kufah and Baghdad many times.

Ahmed says:

See, I was not wrong when I classified Bukhari as a hadith maniac, he was living for one thing only, to collect hadith and put it in a book that carries his name, the outcome of his reckless act was simple, most Muslims shirked Allah words with his words and bundled both as one sharia to follow. You will always hear those Mushrikoon saying Quran and Sunnah, it is actually rare to hear a Muslim saying I follow the Quran alone.

They say:

When the authorities in Basrah received information of his arrival, they fixed a time for him to deliver a lecture.

Ahmed says:

Again, Bukhari was travelling the world to only promote his hadith experience which I don't doubt at all, however I thought somone with such great memory will use this gift given to him from Allah to spread His words and not the human words, for Bukhari, collecting the hadith and putting it in a book was far more important to him than promoting the teachings and guidance inside the Quran.

They say:

At the lecture, he was able to confine himself only to such Hadith as he had received on the authority of the early Hadith scholars of Basrah, and had nonetheless been unknown to the audience.

Ahmed says:

As you can see, Bukhari didn't invent anything other than his criteria to which hadith out of the 600,000 he should include in his book or not, all those hadiths in Bukhari book are not his words, it is a clear cut case of HEARSAY. where he is also the only judge to include or reject any hearsay of it. Ironically his criteria was only based on other hearsay regarding the reputation of those narrators, obviously his criteria was his own, that is why one of his students (Muslim) created his own hearsay book that is based on his own criteria and not Bukhari's criteria. For the Ummah though, they just got confused to which criteria they should follow so they invented a new term in Arabic called (Sahihain), which is the dual form of (Sahih) i.e. the two authentic (referring to both hearsay books of Bukhari and his student Muslim). I might ask those confused Muslims: you claim that Sahih Bukhari is the second most authentic book after the Quran, how about Sahih Muslim?, is it on the same level of Sahih Bukhari?, if yes then why you only say Bukhari is the second most authentic book, it should be, Bukhari and Muslim books are the second most authentic books after the Quran, but if you say no, Bukhari book is more authentic than Muslim book, then why you call both books Sahihain?

They say:

While in Baghdad, he was tested by ten Hadith scholars. They changed the Isnad and text of one hundred hadith, and asked Bukhari about them during a public meeting.

Ahmed says:

What a silly game, it seems the hadith was the only thing that the people at this period of life was talking about, nothing strange really, it is the human nature to follow hearsay and conjectures, I have to remind them with what Allah said in the Quran:

36: And most of them do not follow (anything) but conjecture; surely conjecture will not avail aught against the truth; surely Allah is cognizant of what they do.

37: And this Quran is not such as could be forged by those other than Allah, but it is a verification of that which is before it and a clear explanation of the book, there is no doubt in it, from the Lord of the worlds.

38: Or do they say: He has forged it (Al Quran)? Say: Then bring a chapter like this and invite whom you can other than Allah, if you are truthful.
[The Quran ; 10:36-37]

وَمَا يَتَّبِعُ أَكْثَرُهُمْ إِلاَّ ظَنًّا إَنَّ الظَّنَّ لاَ يُغْنِي مِنَ الْحَقِّ شَيْئًا إِنَّ اللّهَ عَلَيمٌ بِمَا يَفْعَلُونَ (36)
وَمَا كَانَ هَذَا الْقُرْآنُ أَن يُفْتَرَى مِن دُونِ اللّهِ وَلَكِن تَصْدِيقَ الَّذِي بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ وَتَفْصِيلَ الْكِتَابِ لاَ رَيْبَ فِيهِ مِن رَّبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ (37)
أَمْ يَقُولُونَ افْتَرَاهُ قُلْ فَأْتُواْ بِسُورَةٍ مِّثْلِهِ وَادْعُواْ مَنِ اسْتَطَعْتُم مِّن دُونِ اللّهِ إِن كُنتُمْ صَادِقِينَ (38)

-> See, وَمَا يَتَّبِعُ أَكْثَرُهُمْ إِلاَّ ظَنًّا , i.e. And most of them do not follow (anything) but conjecture , that is what Bukhari and his pals of hadith experts follow, they only follow hearsay (conjectures), well, I have a message for them: surely conjecture will not avail aught against the truth , also they should be aware that: surely Allah is cognizant of what they do

-> There is a strong message in the following verse: وَمَا كَانَ هَذَا الْقُرْآنُ أَن يُفْتَرَى مِن دُونِ اللّهِ , i.e. And this Quran is not such as could be forged by those other than Allah,, i.e. NO OTHER GOD OTHER THAN ALLAH WHO CAN PRODUCE SOMETHING LIKE THE QURAN, i.e. if anyone claim to have something like the Quran then they should being the god who author it to prove their case, that is why most people understand the sura like challenge wrong, they think it is only like in the linguistic aspect, despite LIKE IT means (LIKE IT IN ALL ASPECTS), i.e. in addition to the linguistic aspect, its source must also be like it, i.e it has to be from another god. That is why they will never meet the Quran challenge. The following verse will make it clearer:

-> See what it says: Or do they say: He has forged it (Al Quran)? , but we know well that according to Allah this Quran can never be forged:

It is not a HADITH which could be forged, but a verification of what is before it
[The Quran ; 12:111]

However, everyone knows that the hearsay hadith about Mohammed may be forged, Bukhari himself told us that 593,000 hearsay about Mohammad might have been forged that is why he refused to include them in his Sahih book, what is strange that Allah has told us numerous times that the Quran is a verification to all other scriptures sent, i.e. the corruption in these scriptures can be identified by comparing them to the Quran, yet those hadith advocates refuse to use the Quran to verify their hearsay hadith, it is like they hold their hearsay hadith in higher regard than the Bible and Torah, despite the Bible and Torah were books sent from the same God as the Quran was sent, despite Allah ordered us to BELIEVE in those earlier scriptures He sent and He never ordered us to believer in such human hear say called Sahih Bukhari. THEIR SHIRK IS EVIDENT but because THEIR SHIRK IS WELL ROOTED, it is going to be damn hard for them to get rid of it, an example of this fallacy by them is stoning the adulterers, Allah CLEARLY ordered us in His Quran to flog any adulterer 100 lashed in public while no compassion should be offered and while a group of believers should witness their punishment, but Bukhari told us that he heard people saying that the prophet was doing something else, he was killing the adulterers EVEN after they repented, Bukhari is telling us the he heard that the prophet modified Allah rule, Bukhari is telling us that he heard someone saying that the prophet said that Allah only meant flog those adulterers who are not married but for those married ones, they must be killed by stoning, and now for us as Muslims we must take both rules (Allah in His Quran to flog the unmarried adulterers) and (Bukhari in his hearsay and conjectures to kill the married ones), well I am not going to do that, THIS IS CALLED SHIRK, I can NOT follow conjectures like them, Allah ordered me to avoid MOST conjectures EVEN if MOST of it is a possible truth, conjectures will never prevail over the truth, that is what Allah has just told us in 10:36 surely conjecture will not avail aught against the truth, surely Allah is cognizant of what they do

-> Now, for Allah to refute them when they claim that the Quran may have been forged, He challenged them to bring a sura like it: Say: Then bring a chapter like this, the ignorant think that this is the end of the challenge, well we need to read the rest of it of course and invite whom you can other than Allah, if you are truthful., see the condition for the sura like challenge, THEY MUST BRING THOSE GODS OTHER THAN ALLAH WHO ARE THE AUTHORS OF THE ALLEGED QURAN ALIKE BOOKS, this is the only way for them to prove that they are truthful and there is another god who authored a sura like a sura in the Quran.

For the hearsay hadith however, there is no challenges, everyone, including Bukhari, Muslim, all the Muslims, all the enemy of Islam and all the kafirs agree that the hearsay human hadith about Mohammad is forged. WE DO NOT NEED TO PROVE IT BECAUSE BUKHARI TOLD US THAT THERE ARE 593,000 HADITHS LIKE THOSE 7000 HADITHS HE AUTHENTICATED.

They say:

He said that he was not familiar with those hadith, recited the un-changed versions and said that they had probably inadvertently recited them wrongly. This was repeated by four hundred scholars in Samarkand.

Ahmed says:

Of course, what else do you expect from a hadith maniac who memorised 70,000 hadith by heart at the age of 10 including their full chain of narrators going from him to his teacher and all the way to the prophet, this is indeed amazing, if I just consider that every hadith is like one Quran verse and we know that the Quran is about 6235 verses, then Bukhari at the age of 10 managed to memorise more than 11 Qurans. Yet we never heard that he memorised the whole Quran by the age of 10.

To be continued

[amuslim]

Peace AhmedBahgat,

Thank you for sharing this article. That 70000 hadith thing was quite a feat by young Bukhari, like your reasoning. Also, it is funny how this whole thing about his life is about hadith and nothing about Quran as you mentioned. Sad that thats all that they focus on. Cant wait to read the rest. Thanks.

Wa Salaam

[AhmedBahgat]

[AhmedBahgat]

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam All,

They say:

Travels in the Islamic world

Already, in his eighteenth year, he had devoted himself to the collection, study, proof-reading, organizing (arrangement) of traditions (Hadiths).

Ahmed says:

Ironically we the Muslims are required to follow an 18 years old teenager describing the religion to us based on his own criteria while most prophets started talking religions at the age of 40. Again, no evidence of any Quran experience at that age, only hadith and nothing but hadith. Well it has to be said as follow: only conjectures and nothing but conjectures despite the book that is called Al Haqq, The Truth which is the Quran was sitting on his bookshelf Muhggura, Abandoned, no wonder the Prophet will say this on the JD:

And the Messenger cried out: O my Lord! surely my people have treated this Quran as a forsaken thing.
[The Quran ; 25:30]

وَقَالَ الرَّسُولُ يَا رَبِّ إِنَّ قَوْمِي اتَّخَذُوا هَذَا الْقُرْآنَ مَهْجُورًا (30)

-> An example of such people from Qawm (People of) Mohammed who forsake the Quran for foolish non sense has to be Bukhari, (Allah knows best), there is no doubt that when Allah orders us to reject MOST conjectures even if MOST of it is a possible truth, it means that accepting MOST conjectures is a FOOLISH act that violates what Allah ordered. What makes it more foolish that it came on the expense of the Quran, the book that a life time is not enough to fully comprehend it. Indeed the Quran is the hardest book a human will ever need to comprehend but when you do it will become one of the easiest books to follow, no question about it, we just don't need to confirm anything thing in it if we believe in it, just read/hear it and concentrate on reading/hearing it as Allah told us, unlike the haidth when its chain of narrators that we have to read may be far longer than the hearsay hadith itself in addition to the hard language used in the hadith body itself, what a total waste of time man.

What really puzzles me that the order was clear that we should rule with what Allah has revealed, that was not something new with the religion of Islam, it was the exact same order for the previous people (They should have ruled with what Allah revealed to them) whom they had no books of hearsay hadith that describe to them what their prophets were doing in their daily life, like having sex with their wives for example or having a bath with their wives while they had their periods. no doubt that such non sense by Bukhari which he included in his hearsay book contradict the Quran, Allah is telling us to totally avoid our wives when they are having the period yet Bukhari is telling us that he heard some people saying that Mohammed was bathing with his wives while they had the period, Bukhari even dared to include in his foolish non sense book that he heard someone saying that he heard that the prophet was even covering their bottom half and approaching them through the top half while they were having the period, here is what Allah told us to do when our wives are having the period:

And they ask you about menstruation. Say: It is a harm; therefore keep aloof from the women during the menstrual discharge and do not go near them until they have become clean; then when they have cleansed themselves, go in to them as Allah has commanded you; surely Allah loves those who turn much (to Him), and He loves those who purify themselves.
[The Quran ; 2:222]

وَيَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الْمَحِيضِ قُلْ هُوَ أَذًى فَاعْتَزِلُواْ النِّسَاء فِي الْمَحِيضِ وَلاَ تَقْرَبُوهُنَّ حَتَّىَ يَطْهُرْنَ فَإِذَا تَطَهَّرْنَ فَأْتُوهُنَّ مِنْ حَيْثُ أَمَرَكُمُ اللّهُ إِنَّ اللّهَ يُحِبُّ التَّوَّابِينَ وَيُحِبُّ الْمُتَطَهِّرِينَ (222)

-> See how it is presented in 2:222, Allah is telling us that the people asked Mohammed about menstruation, And they ask you about menstruation. , so the Teacher of Mohammed (Allah) is teaching Mohammed to reply to them as follow: Say: It is a harm; therefore keep aloof from the women during the menstrual discharge and do not go near them until they have become clean;, three Arabic words are used that irrefutably indicate that we should never come near them while they have the period, the words are : أَذًى , اعْتَزِلُواْ and لاَ تَقْرَبُوهُنَّ, Azza, Iettazilu and La Taqrabuhunna, i.e. harm, keep aloof from and do not go near them , at least these words mean that we should never approach them for any sexual desire while they are having the period.

Therefore, if Mohammed was taught as such by Allah in 2:222 then Mohammed suppose to have taught the people as such after they asked him ( they ask you about menstruation), (Say.), then how come mister Bukhari wants us to believe his authenticated hearsay that he included in his sahih book which clearly show that the prophet was doing the opposite:

Here is a Bukhari hearsay hadith telling us the Mohammed was reading the Quran while leaning on Aysha's legs when she was sitting down and while she had the period:

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.

Here is my poor translation to it:

Abu Naim Alfadl Bin Dakin TOLD us that he HEARD Zuhaira SAYIINS about Mansour Bin Saffiah that his mother TOLD him that Aysha TOLD her:

The prophet (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) was leaning on my legs when I sat down while I had the period then he used to read Al Quran

Hmmmm, so the prophet was so desperate to read the Quran while leaning on Aysha legs who was sitting and having her period, possibly the prophet was reading verse 2:222 above?, well what else I can say?, yeh here is something I have to say:

Who the hell is Abu Naim Alfadl Bin Dakin? (Abu Naim Alfadl Bin Dakin TOLD us)

And who the hell is us? (Abu Naim Alfadl Bin Dakin TOLD us)

And who the hell is Zuhaira? (that he HEARD Zuhaira)

And who the hell is Mansour Bin Saffiah? (SAYIINS about Mansour Bin Saffiah)

And who Saffiah? (that his mother TOLD him)

Can you see the chain of HEASAY?

Well, some hadith advocates may defend the above non sense and say but that was not sex, it was something noble which is reading the Quran (yep reading 2:222), ok let's look at the next one in Sahih Bukhari:

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.

Here is my poor translation to it:

Qubaisah TOLD us that Suffian Bin Mansour SAID about Ibrahim who SAID about Alaswad, who SAID Aysha SAID:

I was bathing with the prophet (Salla Allahu Allaihi Wa Sallam) from the same water container and both of us were JUNUB, and he used to order me to cover my bottom half and approach me while I'm having the period, he also used to get his head out for me to wash it while he was MUTTAKKIF and I was also having the period

Now this is disgusting and has to be a clear cut lie, not only that this Bukhari hearsay tell us that the prophet violated 2:222 which he supposed to have taught the people and himself, but it also portray Aysha as a non decent wife who was talking about sexual secrets between herself and her husband to strangers.

What makes total non sense is this, as if the prophet while he was MUTTAKKIF (seeking refuge by Allah in isolation), needed someone to wash his head, as if he can't wash his head alone.

Again can you see the chain of HEARSAY?

My regular inquiry stands, who the hell are those new people, Qubaisah, us, Suffian Bin Mansour , Ibrahim and Alaswad?

The above non sense was repeated by Bukhari in his sahih but through different chain of hearsayers whom we absolutely know nothing about but more hearsay, Bukhari wants us to take what they said for granted:

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.

Here is my poor translation to it:

Abu Alnumaan TOLD us that Abdul Wahid TOLD us that Shaibani SAID that Abdullah Bin Shaddad SAID that he HEARD Maimoona used to SAY:

The prophet (Sallah Allahu Alaihi Wa Sallam), if he wanted to approach any of his wives (for foreplay), he orders her to cover her bottom half while she is having the period

What a load of non sense man, that has to be an image of a sexual freak who deliberately violated 2:222 that he supposed to have used as an answer to those asking him about menstruation, Astaghfar Allah

If the above non sense is related in anyway to the Quran teachings, I say yes, it only contradicts the Quran in two aspects:

1) It violates 2:222
2) It violates what Allah told us about Mohammed that he was conforming himself to sublime morality.

Back to my point that I raised earlier that all religions sent from Allah must be ruled by what Allah sent down in His scriptures NOT what the human conjecture or invent, let's have a look at those clear verses:
.
43: And how do they make you a judge and they have the Taurat wherein is Allah's judgment? Yet they turn back after that, and these are not the believers.

44: Surely We revealed the Taurat in which was guidance and light; with it the prophets who submitted themselves (to Allah) judged (matters) for those who were Jews, and the masters of Divine knowledge and the doctors, because they were required to guard (part) of the Book of Allah, and they were witnesses thereof; therefore fear not the people and fear Me, and do not take a small price for My communications; and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers.

45: And We prescribed to them in it that life is for life, and eye for eye, and nose for nose, and ear for ear, and tooth for tooth, and (that there is) reprisal in wounds; but he who foregoes it, it shall be an expiation for him; and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust.

46: And We sent after them in their footsteps Isa, son of Marium, verifying what was before him of the Taurat and We gave him the Injeel in which was guidance and light, and verifying what was before it of Taurat and a guidance and an admonition for those who guard (against evil).

47: And the followers of the Injeel should have judged by what Allah revealed in it; and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the transgressors.

48: And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth, verifying what is before it of the Book and a guardian over it, therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their low desires (to turn away) from the truth that has come to you; for every one of you did We appoint a law and a way, and if Allah had pleased He would have made you (all) a single people, but that He might try you in what He gave you, therefore strive with one another to hasten to virtuous deeds; to Allah is your return, of all (of you), so He will let you know that in which you differed;

49: And that you should judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their low desires, and be cautious of them, lest they seduce you from part of what Allah has revealed to you; but if they turn back, then know that Allah desires to afflict them on account of some of their faults; and most surely many of the people are transgressors.

50: Is it then the judgment of (the times of) ignorance that they desire? And who is better than Allah to judge for a people who are sure?
[The Quran ; 5:43-50]

وَكَيْفَ يُحَكِّمُونَكَ وَعِندَهُمُ التَّوْرَاةُ فِيهَا حُكْمُ اللّهِ ثُمَّ يَتَوَلَّوْنَ مِن بَعْدِ ذَلِكَ وَمَا أُوْلَئِكَ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ (43)

إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَا التَّوْرَاةَ فِيهَا هُدًى وَنُورٌ يَحْكُمُ بِهَا النَّبِيُّونَ الَّذِينَ أَسْلَمُواْ لِلَّذِينَ هَادُواْ وَالرَّبَّانِيُّونَ وَالأَحْبَارُ بِمَا اسْتُحْفِظُواْ مِن كِتَابِ اللّهِ وَكَانُواْ عَلَيْهِ شُهَدَاء فَلاَ تَخْشَوُاْ النَّاسَ وَاخْشَوْنِ وَلاَ تَشْتَرُواْ بِآيَاتِي ثَمَنًا قَلِيلاً وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ (44)
وَكَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِيهَا أَنَّ النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ وَالْعَيْنَ بِالْعَيْنِ وَالأَنفَ بِالأَنفِ وَالأُذُنَ بِالأُذُنِ وَالسِّنَّ بِالسِّنِّ وَالْجُرُوحَ قِصَاصٌ فَمَن تَصَدَّقَ بِهِ فَهُوَ كَفَّارَةٌ لَّهُ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ (45)

وَقَفَّيْنَا عَلَى آثَارِهِم بِعَيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ مُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَآتَيْنَاهُ الإِنجِيلَ فِيهِ هُدًى وَنُورٌ وَمُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَهُدًى وَمَوْعِظَةً لِّلْمُتَّقِينَ (46)

وَلْيَحْكُمْ أَهْلُ الإِنجِيلِ بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فِيهِ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ (47)

وَأَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ بِالْحَقِّ مُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَمُهَيْمِنًا عَلَيْهِ فَاحْكُم بَيْنَهُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ وَلاَ تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءهُمْ عَمَّا جَاءكَ مِنَ الْحَقِّ لِكُلٍّ جَعَلْنَا مِنكُمْ شِرْعَةً وَمِنْهَاجًا وَلَوْ شَاء اللّهُ لَجَعَلَكُمْ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً وَلَكِن لِّيَبْلُوَكُمْ فِي مَآ آتَاكُم فَاسْتَبِقُوا الخَيْرَاتِ إِلَى الله مَرْجِعُكُمْ جَمِيعًا فَيُنَبِّئُكُم بِمَا كُنتُمْ فِيهِ تَخْتَلِفُونَ (48)

وَأَنِ احْكُم بَيْنَهُم بِمَآ أَنزَلَ اللّهُ وَلاَ تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءهُمْ وَاحْذَرْهُمْ أَن يَفْتِنُوكَ عَن بَعْضِ مَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ إِلَيْكَ فَإِن تَوَلَّوْاْ فَاعْلَمْ أَنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللّهُ أَن يُصِيبَهُم بِبَعْضِ ذُنُوبِهِمْ وَإِنَّ كَثِيرًا مِّنَ النَّاسِ لَفَاسِقُونَ (49)

أَفَحُكْمَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ اللّهِ حُكْمًا لِّقَوْمٍ يُوقِنُونَ (50)

-> Verse 43, Allah is talking about the Jews And how do they make you a judge and they have the Taurat wherein is Allah's judgment?, simply Allah is telling Mohammed that the Jews will reject his ruling because they had the Torah which had Allah Judgment but yet they never followed it Yet they turn back after that, and these are not the believers., the hadith advocates may say, ok, here is a verse that Allah clearly talks about Mohammed ruling, I say, excuse me, the verse is comparing the rejection of Mohammed ruling with their rejection of Allah Judgment in the Torah, this has to mean that Mohammed ruling was nothing but what Allah ruled in His Quran, this will be clearer as we read the following verses

-> Verse 44, Allah is explaining to Mohammed what was in the Torah, we know already that the previous verse told us that the Torah contains Allah Judgment yet the Jews rejected it as they will reject the Quran: Surely We revealed the Taurat in which was guidance and light;, see what the Torah had, It was also used by Moses to rule with what Allah revealed to him:with it the prophets who submitted themselves (to Allah) judged (matters) for those who were Jews,, HOW CLEAR IT CAN GET?, but look how the verse ended: وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ , i.e. and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers. , THIS HAS TO BE SCAREY to those who rule by what Allah didn't reveal, like stoning the adulterers for example, or approaching our wives for foreplay while they have the period.

-> Verse 45, Here is a sample of Allah Judgment in the Torah: And We prescribed to them in it that life is for life, and eye for eye, and nose for nose, and ear for ear, and tooth for tooth, and (that there is) reprisal in wounds; but he who foregoes it, it shall be an expiation for him;, LOOK HOW THIS VERSE ENDED AGAIN: وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust. , ANOTHER SCAREY WARNING TO THOSE MUSHRIKOON WHO RULE BY WHAT ALLAH DIDN'T REVEAL.

-> Verse 46, Now Allah is talking about another group of people, the Christians, And We sent after them in their footsteps Isa, son of Marium, verifying what was before him of the Taurat, can you see how the message of Jesus could never contradict the message of Moses, in fact the message of Jesus was to verify and filter the corruption of the messages before it, this is because all these messages are from the same God. Jesus was not ruling according to his own desires, he was given the Injeel that should include Allah Judgment exactly as it happened with Moses and the Torah and We gave him the Injeel in which was guidance and light, and verifying what was before it of Taurat and a guidance and an admonition for those who guard (against evil). , but did the Christians ruled with what Allah sent down to them in Al Injeel?, it does not look like it because a new message was sent after it to verify it and filter the corruption from it, the Christians were ordered however to rule with Al Injeel that was sent down to them as we read in the next verse:

-> Verse 47: here is the order for the Christians to rule with what Allah sent down to them in Al Injeel: And the followers of the Injeel should have judged by what Allah revealed in it; can you see the words IN IT?, well look how for the third time another verse ended وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ , i.e. and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the transgressors. ANOTHER HORRIFYING MESSAGE FOR THOSE WHO RULE WITH WHAT ALLAH NEVER SENT DOWN IN HIS BOOKS, look how they are described as FASIQOON, i.e. the transgressors

-> Verse 48: and here is the last message from Allah before the JD And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth, verifying what is before it of the Book and a guardian over it,, see how this time the Quran is not only to verify the previous scriptures but is a guardian over them as well, unlike the Injeel which was only to verify the Torah but was not a guardian over it, this is because the Quran is the final message and is preserved by Allah Himself, no more messages before the JD and the humans will never be able to corrupt the message of the Quran this time, now Mohammed was ordered to rule with what is in the Quran not according to his desires exactly as Jesus and Moses were ordered:therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed,, and here is a warning that Mohammed should never follow their low desires and do not follow their low desires (to turn away) from the truth that has come to you; this truth that has come to Mohammed is nothing but the Quran, however mister Bukhari is telling us that he heard that Mohammed was still following their low desires of stoning the adulterers as it is documented in their corrupt Torah, mister Bukhari also wants to convince us that Mohammed was killing the apostates according to the Jews corrupt Torah while Allah warned him not to follow their low desires, how we know that this stoning to the apostates and the adulterers in the Torah was indeed ordained by Allah and not corruption by the Jews?, we can only verify that if we compare it with what Allah ruled in the Quran, EXACTLY AS ALLAH TOLD US TO DO TO VERIFY WHAT WAS REVEALED BEFORE IT, the next bit (however) may imply that they had different set of rules to what was sent down last: for every one of you did We appoint a law and a way, , so the Jews may indeed were killing the adulterers and apostates as ordained by Allah in their set of rules and laws sent down to them, Mohammed however was ordered to rule with what Allah sent down to him in the Quran. This complex issue to why Allah does this?, well firstly Allah does what He wants without being questioned, secondly He actually explained why He sent us slightly different messages:and if Allah had pleased He would have made you (all) a single people, but that He might try you in what He gave you,, therefore we have nothing to whine about really, it's totally up to Him, what we can do is this therefore strive with one another to hasten to virtuous deeds; to Allah is your return, of all (of you), so He will let you know that in which you differed;, see, He will rule and let us know in which we differed.

-> Verse 49, we read the same order and warning to Mohammed to rule with what was revealed to him and never follow their low desires: And that you should judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their low desires,, the warning not to follow them was stressed again and be cautious of them, lest they seduce you from part of what Allah has revealed to you;, ironically mister Bukhari hearsay hadith imply that the prophet was following their low desires in killing the adulterers and apostates.

-> Verse 50: Allah is summing it beautifully in this verse, Allah is comparing His ruling with the humans rulings: Is it then the judgment of (the times of) ignorance that they desire?, look how this great verse ended: وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ اللّهِ حُكْمًا لِّقَوْمٍ يُوقِنُونَ , i.e. And who is better than Allah to judge for a people who are sure?

I have to repeat those strong message to those Mushrikoon hoping they wake up before one hell of a distressful day:

>>> وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ , i.e. and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers. , (5:44)

>>> وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust. , (5:45)

>>> وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ , i.e. and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the transgressors. , (5:47)

>>> وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ اللّهِ حُكْمًا لِّقَوْمٍ يُوقِنُونَ , i.e. And who is better than Allah to judge for a people who are sure?, (5:50)

To be continueed

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam All,

They say:

Travels in the Islamic world

Already, in his eighteenth year, he had devoted himself to the collection, study, proof-reading, organizing (arrangement) of traditions (Hadiths).

Ahmed says:

Ironically we the Muslims are required to follow an 18 years old teenager describing the religion to us based on his own criteria while most prophets started talking religions at the age of 40. Again, no evidence of any Quran experience at that age, only hadith and nothing but hadith. Well it has to be said as follow: only conjectures and nothing but conjectures despite the book that is called Al Haqq, The Truth which is the Quran was sitting on his bookshelf Muhggura, Abandoned, no wonder the Prophet will say this on the JD:

And the Messenger cried out: O my Lord! surely my people have treated this Quran as a forsaken thing.
[The Quran ; 25:30]

وَقَالَ الرَّسُولُ يَا رَبِّ إِنَّ قَوْمِي اتَّخَذُوا هَذَا الْقُرْآنَ مَهْجُورًا (30)

-> An example of such people from Qawm (People of) Mohammed who forsake the Quran for foolish non sense has to be Bukhari, (Allah knows best), there is no doubt that when Allah orders us to reject MOST conjectures even if MOST of it is a possible truth, it means that accepting MOST conjectures is a FOOLISH act that violates what Allah ordered. What makes it more foolish that it came on the expense of the Quran, the book that a life time is not enough to fully comprehend it. Indeed the Quran is the hardest book a human will ever need to comprehend but when you do it will become one of the easiest books to follow, no question about it, we just don't need to confirm anything thing in it if we believe in it, just read/hear it and concentrate on reading/hearing it as Allah told us, unlike the haidth when its chain of narrators that we have to read may be far longer than the hearsay hadith itself in addition to the hard language used in the hadith body itself, what a total waste of time man.

What really puzzles me that the order was clear that we should rule with what Allah has revealed, that was not something new with the religion of Islam, it was the exact same order for the previous people (They should have ruled with what Allah revealed to them) whom they had no books of hearsay hadith that describe to them what their prophets were doing in their daily life, like having sex with their wives for example or having a bath with their wives while they had their periods. no doubt that such non sense by Bukhari which he included in his hearsay book contradict the Quran, Allah is telling us to totally avoid our wives when they are having the period yet Bukhari is telling us that he heard some people saying that Mohammed was bathing with his wives while they had the period, Bukhari even dared to include in his foolish non sense book that he heard someone saying that he heard that the prophet was even covering their bottom half and approaching them through the top half while they were having the period, here is what Allah told us to do when our wives are having the period:

And they ask you about menstruation. Say: It is a harm; therefore keep aloof from the women during the menstrual discharge and do not go near them until they have become clean; then when they have cleansed themselves, go in to them as Allah has commanded you; surely Allah loves those who turn much (to Him), and He loves those who purify themselves.
[The Quran ; 2:222]

وَيَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الْمَحِيضِ قُلْ هُوَ أَذًى فَاعْتَزِلُواْ النِّسَاء فِي الْمَحِيضِ وَلاَ تَقْرَبُوهُنَّ حَتَّىَ يَطْهُرْنَ فَإِذَا تَطَهَّرْنَ فَأْتُوهُنَّ مِنْ حَيْثُ أَمَرَكُمُ اللّهُ إِنَّ اللّهَ يُحِبُّ التَّوَّابِينَ وَيُحِبُّ الْمُتَطَهِّرِينَ (222)

-> See how it is presented in 2:222, Allah is telling us that the people asked Mohammed about menstruation, And they ask you about menstruation. , so the Teacher of Mohammed (Allah) is teaching Mohammed to reply to them as follow: Say: It is a harm; therefore keep aloof from the women during the menstrual discharge and do not go near them until they have become clean;, three Arabic words are used that irrefutably indicate that we should never come near them while they have the period, the words are : أَذًى , اعْتَزِلُواْ and لاَ تَقْرَبُوهُنَّ, Azza, Iettazilu and La Taqrabuhunna, i.e. harm, keep aloof from and do not go near them , at least these words mean that we should never approach them for any sexual desire while they are having the period.

Therefore, if Mohammed was taught as such by Allah in 2:222 then Mohammed suppose to have taught the people as such after they asked him ( they ask you about menstruation), (Say.), then how come mister Bukhari wants us to believe his authenticated hearsay that he included in his sahih book which clearly show that the prophet was doing the opposite:

Here is a Bukhari hearsay hadith telling us the Mohammed was reading the Quran while leaning on Aysha's legs when she was sitting down and while she had the period:

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.

Here is my poor translation to it:

Abu Naim Alfadl Bin Dakin TOLD us that he HEARD Zuhaira SAYIINS about Mansour Bin Saffiah that his mother TOLD him that Aysha TOLD her:

The prophet (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) was leaning on my legs when I sat down while I had the period then he used to read Al Quran

Hmmmm, so the prophet was so desperate to read the Quran while leaning on Aysha legs who was sitting and having her period, possibly the prophet was reading verse 2:222 above?, well what else I can say?, yeh here is something I have to say:

Who the hell is Abu Naim Alfadl Bin Dakin? (Abu Naim Alfadl Bin Dakin TOLD us)

And who the hell is us? (Abu Naim Alfadl Bin Dakin TOLD us)

And who the hell is Zuhaira? (that he HEARD Zuhaira)

And who the hell is Mansour Bin Saffiah? (SAYIINS about Mansour Bin Saffiah)

And who Saffiah? (that his mother TOLD him)

Can you see the chain of HEASAY?

Well, some hadith advocates may defend the above non sense and say but that was not sex, it was something noble which is reading the Quran (yep reading 2:222), ok let's look at the next one in Sahih Bukhari:

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.

Here is my poor translation to it:

Qubaisah TOLD us that Suffian Bin Mansour SAID about Ibrahim who SAID about Alaswad, who SAID Aysha SAID:

I was bathing with the prophet (Salla Allahu Allaihi Wa Sallam) from the same water container and both of us were JUNUB, and he used to order me to cover my bottom half and approach me while I'm having the period, he also used to get his head out for me to wash it while he was MUTTAKKIF and I was also having the period

Now this is disgusting and has to be a clear cut lie, not only that this Bukhari hearsay tell us that the prophet violated 2:222 which he supposed to have taught the people and himself, but it also portray Aysha as a non decent wife who was talking about sexual secrets between herself and her husband to strangers.

What makes total non sense is this, as if the prophet while he was MUTTAKKIF (seeking refuge by Allah in isolation), needed someone to wash his head, as if he can't wash his head alone.

Again can you see the chain of HEARSAY?

My regular inquiry stands, who the hell are those new people, Qubaisah, us, Suffian Bin Mansour , Ibrahim and Alaswad?

The above non sense was repeated by Bukhari in his sahih but through different chain of hearsayers whom we absolutely know nothing about but more hearsay, Bukhari wants us to take what they said for granted:

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.

Here is my poor translation to it:

Abu Alnumaan TOLD us that Abdul Wahid TOLD us that Shaibani SAID that Abdullah Bin Shaddad SAID that he HEARD Maimoona used to SAY:

The prophet (Sallah Allahu Alaihi Wa Sallam), if he wanted to approach any of his wives (for foreplay), he orders her to cover her bottom half while she is having the period

What a load of non sense man, that has to be an image of a sexual freak who deliberately violated 2:222 that he supposed to have used as an answer to those asking him about menstruation, Astaghfar Allah

If the above non sense is related in anyway to the Quran teachings, I say yes, it only contradicts the Quran in two aspects:

1) It violates 2:222
2) It violates what Allah told us about Mohammed that he was conforming himself to sublime morality.

Back to my point that I raised earlier that all religions sent from Allah must be ruled by what Allah sent down in His scriptures NOT what the human conjecture or invent, let's have a look at those clear verses:
.
43: And how do they make you a judge and they have the Taurat wherein is Allah's judgment? Yet they turn back after that, and these are not the believers.

44: Surely We revealed the Taurat in which was guidance and light; with it the prophets who submitted themselves (to Allah) judged (matters) for those who were Jews, and the masters of Divine knowledge and the doctors, because they were required to guard (part) of the Book of Allah, and they were witnesses thereof; therefore fear not the people and fear Me, and do not take a small price for My communications; and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers.

45: And We prescribed to them in it that life is for life, and eye for eye, and nose for nose, and ear for ear, and tooth for tooth, and (that there is) reprisal in wounds; but he who foregoes it, it shall be an expiation for him; and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust.

46: And We sent after them in their footsteps Isa, son of Marium, verifying what was before him of the Taurat and We gave him the Injeel in which was guidance and light, and verifying what was before it of Taurat and a guidance and an admonition for those who guard (against evil).

47: And the followers of the Injeel should have judged by what Allah revealed in it; and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the transgressors.

48: And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth, verifying what is before it of the Book and a guardian over it, therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their low desires (to turn away) from the truth that has come to you; for every one of you did We appoint a law and a way, and if Allah had pleased He would have made you (all) a single people, but that He might try you in what He gave you, therefore strive with one another to hasten to virtuous deeds; to Allah is your return, of all (of you), so He will let you know that in which you differed;

49: And that you should judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their low desires, and be cautious of them, lest they seduce you from part of what Allah has revealed to you; but if they turn back, then know that Allah desires to afflict them on account of some of their faults; and most surely many of the people are transgressors.

50: Is it then the judgment of (the times of) ignorance that they desire? And who is better than Allah to judge for a people who are sure?
[The Quran ; 5:43-50]

وَكَيْفَ يُحَكِّمُونَكَ وَعِندَهُمُ التَّوْرَاةُ فِيهَا حُكْمُ اللّهِ ثُمَّ يَتَوَلَّوْنَ مِن بَعْدِ ذَلِكَ وَمَا أُوْلَئِكَ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ (43)

إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَا التَّوْرَاةَ فِيهَا هُدًى وَنُورٌ يَحْكُمُ بِهَا النَّبِيُّونَ الَّذِينَ أَسْلَمُواْ لِلَّذِينَ هَادُواْ وَالرَّبَّانِيُّونَ وَالأَحْبَارُ بِمَا اسْتُحْفِظُواْ مِن كِتَابِ اللّهِ وَكَانُواْ عَلَيْهِ شُهَدَاء فَلاَ تَخْشَوُاْ النَّاسَ وَاخْشَوْنِ وَلاَ تَشْتَرُواْ بِآيَاتِي ثَمَنًا قَلِيلاً وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ (44)
وَكَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِيهَا أَنَّ النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ وَالْعَيْنَ بِالْعَيْنِ وَالأَنفَ بِالأَنفِ وَالأُذُنَ بِالأُذُنِ وَالسِّنَّ بِالسِّنِّ وَالْجُرُوحَ قِصَاصٌ فَمَن تَصَدَّقَ بِهِ فَهُوَ كَفَّارَةٌ لَّهُ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ (45)

وَقَفَّيْنَا عَلَى آثَارِهِم بِعَيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ مُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَآتَيْنَاهُ الإِنجِيلَ فِيهِ هُدًى وَنُورٌ وَمُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَهُدًى وَمَوْعِظَةً لِّلْمُتَّقِينَ (46)

وَلْيَحْكُمْ أَهْلُ الإِنجِيلِ بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فِيهِ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ (47)

وَأَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ بِالْحَقِّ مُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَمُهَيْمِنًا عَلَيْهِ فَاحْكُم بَيْنَهُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ وَلاَ تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءهُمْ عَمَّا جَاءكَ مِنَ الْحَقِّ لِكُلٍّ جَعَلْنَا مِنكُمْ شِرْعَةً وَمِنْهَاجًا وَلَوْ شَاء اللّهُ لَجَعَلَكُمْ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً وَلَكِن لِّيَبْلُوَكُمْ فِي مَآ آتَاكُم فَاسْتَبِقُوا الخَيْرَاتِ إِلَى الله مَرْجِعُكُمْ جَمِيعًا فَيُنَبِّئُكُم بِمَا كُنتُمْ فِيهِ تَخْتَلِفُونَ (48)

وَأَنِ احْكُم بَيْنَهُم بِمَآ أَنزَلَ اللّهُ وَلاَ تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءهُمْ وَاحْذَرْهُمْ أَن يَفْتِنُوكَ عَن بَعْضِ مَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ إِلَيْكَ فَإِن تَوَلَّوْاْ فَاعْلَمْ أَنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللّهُ أَن يُصِيبَهُم بِبَعْضِ ذُنُوبِهِمْ وَإِنَّ كَثِيرًا مِّنَ النَّاسِ لَفَاسِقُونَ (49)

أَفَحُكْمَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ اللّهِ حُكْمًا لِّقَوْمٍ يُوقِنُونَ (50)

-> Verse 43, Allah is talking about the Jews And how do they make you a judge and they have the Taurat wherein is Allah's judgment?, simply Allah is telling Mohammed that the Jews will reject his ruling because they had the Torah which had Allah Judgment but yet they never followed it Yet they turn back after that, and these are not the believers., the hadith advocates may say, ok, here is a verse that Allah clearly talks about Mohammed ruling, I say, excuse me, the verse is comparing the rejection of Mohammed ruling with their rejection of Allah Judgment in the Torah, this has to mean that Mohammed ruling was nothing but what Allah ruled in His Quran, this will be clearer as we read the following verses

-> Verse 44, Allah is explaining to Mohammed what was in the Torah, we know already that the previous verse told us that the Torah contains Allah Judgment yet the Jews rejected it as they will reject the Quran: Surely We revealed the Taurat in which was guidance and light;, see what the Torah had, It was also used by Moses to rule with what Allah revealed to him:with it the prophets who submitted themselves (to Allah) judged (matters) for those who were Jews,, HOW CLEAR IT CAN GET?, but look how the verse ended: وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ , i.e. and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers. , THIS HAS TO BE SCAREY to those who rule by what Allah didn't reveal, like stoning the adulterers for example, or approaching our wives for foreplay while they have the period.

-> Verse 45, Here is a sample of Allah Judgment in the Torah: And We prescribed to them in it that life is for life, and eye for eye, and nose for nose, and ear for ear, and tooth for tooth, and (that there is) reprisal in wounds; but he who foregoes it, it shall be an expiation for him;, LOOK HOW THIS VERSE ENDED AGAIN: وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust. , ANOTHER SCAREY WARNING TO THOSE MUSHRIKOON WHO RULE BY WHAT ALLAH DIDN'T REVEAL.

-> Verse 46, Now Allah is talking about another group of people, the Christians, And We sent after them in their footsteps Isa, son of Marium, verifying what was before him of the Taurat, can you see how the message of Jesus could never contradict the message of Moses, in fact the message of Jesus was to verify and filter the corruption of the messages before it, this is because all these messages are from the same God. Jesus was not ruling according to his own desires, he was given the Injeel that should include Allah Judgment exactly as it happened with Moses and the Torah and We gave him the Injeel in which was guidance and light, and verifying what was before it of Taurat and a guidance and an admonition for those who guard (against evil). , but did the Christians ruled with what Allah sent down to them in Al Injeel?, it does not look like it because a new message was sent after it to verify it and filter the corruption from it, the Christians were ordered however to rule with Al Injeel that was sent down to them as we read in the next verse:

-> Verse 47: here is the order for the Christians to rule with what Allah sent down to them in Al Injeel: And the followers of the Injeel should have judged by what Allah revealed in it; can you see the words IN IT?, well look how for the third time another verse ended وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ , i.e. and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the transgressors. ANOTHER HORRIFYING MESSAGE FOR THOSE WHO RULE WITH WHAT ALLAH NEVER SENT DOWN IN HIS BOOKS, look how they are described as FASIQOON, i.e. the transgressors

-> Verse 48: and here is the last message from Allah before the JD And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth, verifying what is before it of the Book and a guardian over it,, see how this time the Quran is not only to verify the previous scriptures but is a guardian over them as well, unlike the Injeel which was only to verify the Torah but was not a guardian over it, this is because the Quran is the final message and is preserved by Allah Himself, no more messages before the JD and the humans will never be able to corrupt the message of the Quran this time, now Mohammed was ordered to rule with what is in the Quran not according to his desires exactly as Jesus and Moses were ordered:therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed,, and here is a warning that Mohammed should never follow their low desires and do not follow their low desires (to turn away) from the truth that has come to you; this truth that has come to Mohammed is nothing but the Quran, however mister Bukhari is telling us that he heard that Mohammed was still following their low desires of stoning the adulterers as it is documented in their corrupt Torah, mister Bukhari also wants to convince us that Mohammed was killing the apostates according to the Jews corrupt Torah while Allah warned him not to follow their low desires, how we know that this stoning to the apostates and the adulterers in the Torah was indeed ordained by Allah and not corruption by the Jews?, we can only verify that if we compare it with what Allah ruled in the Quran, EXACTLY AS ALLAH TOLD US TO DO TO VERIFY WHAT WAS REVEALED BEFORE IT, the next bit (however) may imply that they had different set of rules to what was sent down last: for every one of you did We appoint a law and a way, , so the Jews may indeed were killing the adulterers and apostates as ordained by Allah in their set of rules and laws sent down to them, Mohammed however was ordered to rule with what Allah sent down to him in the Quran. This complex issue to why Allah does this?, well firstly Allah does what He wants without being questioned, secondly He actually explained why He sent us slightly different messages:and if Allah had pleased He would have made you (all) a single people, but that He might try you in what He gave you,, therefore we have nothing to whine about really, it's totally up to Him, what we can do is this therefore strive with one another to hasten to virtuous deeds; to Allah is your return, of all (of you), so He will let you know that in which you differed;, see, He will rule and let us know in which we differed.

-> Verse 49, we read the same order and warning to Mohammed to rule with what was revealed to him and never follow their low desires: And that you should judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their low desires,, the warning not to follow them was stressed again and be cautious of them, lest they seduce you from part of what Allah has revealed to you;, ironically mister Bukhari hearsay hadith imply that the prophet was following their low desires in killing the adulterers and apostates.

-> Verse 50: Allah is summing it beautifully in this verse, Allah is comparing His ruling with the humans rulings: Is it then the judgment of (the times of) ignorance that they desire?, look how this great verse ended: وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ اللّهِ حُكْمًا لِّقَوْمٍ يُوقِنُونَ , i.e. And who is better than Allah to judge for a people who are sure?

I have to repeat those strong message to those Mushrikoon hoping they wake up before one hell of a distressful day:

>>> وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ , i.e. and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers. , (5:44)

>>> وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust. , (5:45)

>>> وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ , i.e. and whoever do not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the transgressors. , (5:47)

>>> وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ اللّهِ حُكْمًا لِّقَوْمٍ يُوقِنُونَ , i.e. And who is better than Allah to judge for a people who are sure?, (5:50)

To be continueed

[amuslim]

Peace Ahmedahgat,

Thanks for the welcome. MashaAllah, I personally liked how you ended it. It seems that Allah made those verses specifically for the muhadithoon, how striking. You know, in the Quran, there are several verses like that, where one verse after another Allah seems to repeat the same message.

[23:84] Say, "To whom belongs the earth and everyone on it, if you know?"
[23:85] They will say, "To GOD." Say, "Why then do you not take heed?"
[23:86] Say, "Who is the Lord of the seven universes; the Lord of the great dominion?"
[23:87] They will say, "GOD." Say, "Why then do you not turn righteous?"
[23:88] Say, "In whose hand is all sovereignty over all things, and He is the only one who can provide help, but needs no help, if you know?"
[23:89] They will say, "GOD." Say, "Where did you go wrong?"

84
Qul limani al-ardu waman feeha in kuntum taAAlamoona
85
Sayaqooloona lillahi qul afala tathakkaroona
86
Qul man rabbu alssamawati alssabAAi warabbu alAAarshi alAAatheemi
87
Sayaqooloona lillahi qul afala tattaqoona
88
Qul man biyadihi malakootu kulli shay-in wahuwa yujeeru wala yujaru AAalayhi in kuntum taAAlamoona
89
Sayaqooloona lillahi qul faanna tusharoona


Again, another great segment, thanks for sharing. Hope they don't put a fatwa out on you, keep the Truth!

Wa Salaam

[AhmedBahgat]

[AhmedBahgat]

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam All,

They say:

For that purpose he travelled all over the Islamic world, all the way to Egypt, Syria, Arabia, and Iraq, seeking hadith narrators and listening to them. It is said that he heard from over 1,000 men, and learned over 600,000 traditions, both authentic and rejected ones, and thus became the acknowledged authority on the subject

Ahmed says:

Bukhari was not happy with his 70,000 hadith that he learnt in his first 10 years of life, he wanted more, far more indeed, now Bukhari at a later age learned another 530,000 hearsay after talking with more than 1000 hearsayers, Bukhari was fully aware that many of those 600,000 hearsay may have been forged, it makes no sense to expect that the prophet since the age of 40 (when he started his message) till his death at the age of 63 has narrated 600,000 hearsay, this means the prophet was saying a hadith every 20 minutes 24 hours a day, so Bukhari knew that this is impossible, so he only included about 7000 of those 600,000 hearsay, the fatal mistake of Bukhari though that he admitted that many of his 7000 sahih hadith are Daif, i.e. Weak, yet he included them in his book, the hadith advocates and his followers defend his foolish act and say, he included them so the Ummah be aware that those hearsay that are Daif.

Hmmm, I say, don't you think if he didn't include it from the first place NO ONE WILL BE TALKING ABOUT IT?, well and if that defence by his followers is true then why he didn't include his 593,000 possibly forged ones so the Ummah will be aware of it too?

I say this 600,000 hadith that he learnt is as ludicrous as his 70,000 hadith he memorised by the age of 10, in fact if he needed 8 years to memorise 70,000 hadith with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher and from his teacher to his teacher's teacher and all the way to the prophet then Bukhari needed 68 years working 24 hours a day to be able to achieve that.

Opps, Bukhari only lived for about the same number of years (there is actually a conflict to how many years he lived and what year he died), again it does not make any sense, and again how they bloody confirmed this hearsay that he indeed memorised this huge number of hearsays that is equivalent to more than 96 full Qurans? If we consider that one hadith = I Quran verse in length, it can only make sense if they just took the hearsay about Bukhari himself for granted.

They say:

After sixteen years' absence he returned to Bukhara, and there drew up his al-Jami' al-Sahih, a collection of 7,275 tested traditions, arranged in chapters so as to afford bases for a complete system of jurisprudence without the use of speculative law.

Ahmed says:

Now we can see that Bukhari's plan was born, which was to make another book next to the Quran in clear violation to what the prophet clearly said in their hearsay, let's have a look:

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.

The above hearsay is not from Bukhari hearsay book, but from Ahmed hearsay books,

Here is my poor translation to it:

Abi Saeed Al Khudry SAID, Ishaq Ibn Isa TOLD me that Abdul Rahman Bin Zaid TOLD us that his father SAID about Attaa Bin Ysaar who SAID that Abu Hurairah SAID:

We were sitting down writing what we hear from the prophet (Sallah Allahu Alaihi Wa Sallam), he (the prophet) entered the room and asked us: What are you writing?, we said: we are writing what we hear from you, he (the prophet) said: another book next to Allah book?, we said: it is what we hear from you, he (the prophet) said: then write Allah book, uphold Allah book, no other books but Allah book, uphold Allah book, Abu Hurairah said: so we collected all what we wrote and burnt it, then we asked the prophet, can we talk about you?, he (the prophet said) yes you can and feel no shame of it, and whoever lie about me deliberately, his seat in hell will be secured, Abu Hurairah said: can we talk about Bani Israel?, he (the prophet) said: yes you can and feel no shame of it, whatever you will say about them, most certainly there is more wonder in them to what you say about them.

While the above hearsay is not from Bukhari books, it is from another respected Muhadith, his name is Ahmed, in addition to that the main narrators (first and last) (Abi Saeed Al Khudry and Abu Hurairah) are two of the most respected early Muhadiths, therefore according to Ahmed book, the Sahaaba were ordered by Mohammed not to write any book next to Allah book, though they were allowed to talk about Mohammed verbally, and this should be the inherited Sunnah that will be transferred from them to us through a word of mouth like how we pray for example.

Now, Bukhari, Muslim, Ahmed and their likes didn't listen to that hearsay about Mohammed, they totally ignored it and it became normal to write books about what Mohammed said that is not related to Allah book in any way. According to the above hearsay, they were only ordered by Mohammed to write the Quran ONLY this because the Quran is the true hadith of Mohammed: (Qul, Qul, Qul, Qul), (Say, Say, Say, Say)

However the above hadith still classified as conjectures this is because we don't know if it happened or not, however it seems that the above hadith is qualified by the Quran and the common sense.

If you look again at what they said about Bukhari above, their statement clearly says that his book named al-Jami' al-Sahih, the Authenticated Collector is meant to be a book of law, see what they said: a collection of 7,275 tested traditions, arranged in chapters so as to afford bases for a complete system of jurisprudence without the use of speculative law. , i.e. another law book next to Allah law book, ands sure following both is a clear cut case of SHIRK especially when one contradict the other, the underlined part in their statement made me really laugh, the whole books of hearsay hadith are indeed nothing but speculative, yet they are telling us: without the use of speculative law , as if stoning the adulterers is not speculative, as if killing the apostates is not speculative, as if approaching the wives while they are having their perods for sexual desire is not speculative. It's amazing what they claim and want to convince us with.

They say:

His book is highly regarded among Sunni Muslims, and considered the most authentic collection of hadith (a minority of Sunni scholars consider Sahih Muslim, compiled by Bukhari's student Imam Muslim, more authentic).

Ahmed says:

I will tell those sunni what the great prophet said in the above hearsay hadith by Abi Saeed Alkhudry, Other books next to Allah book?, now I'm not a prophet so I must say to them :ARE YOU NUTS?

You can also see the confusion of those sunni Muslims, they disagree to which book is more authentic, Bukhari or his student Muslim?, oh yeh let's make every one happy and call both Sahihain, i.e. the two authentic

They say:

Most Sunni scholars consider it second only to the Qur'an in terms of authenticity.

Ahmed says:

Of course they so, this is called SHIRK, however some more confused Muslims even believe that Bukhari book is more authentic than Allah book. See what this Muslimah named (jinn in a bottle) from FFI web site said over there:

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam All,

They say:

For that purpose he travelled all over the Islamic world, all the way to Egypt, Syria, Arabia, and Iraq, seeking hadith narrators and listening to them. It is said that he heard from over 1,000 men, and learned over 600,000 traditions, both authentic and rejected ones, and thus became the acknowledged authority on the subject

Ahmed says:

Bukhari was not happy with his 70,000 hadith that he learnt in his first 10 years of life, he wanted more, far more indeed, now Bukhari at a later age learned another 530,000 hearsay after talking with more than 1000 hearsayers, Bukhari was fully aware that many of those 600,000 hearsay may have been forged, it makes no sense to expect that the prophet since the age of 40 (when he started his message) till his death at the age of 63 has narrated 600,000 hearsay, this means the prophet was saying a hadith every 20 minutes 24 hours a day, so Bukhari knew that this is impossible, so he only included about 7000 of those 600,000 hearsay, the fatal mistake of Bukhari though that he admitted that many of his 7000 sahih hadith are Daif, i.e. Weak, yet he included them in his book, the hadith advocates and his followers defend his foolish act and say, he included them so the Ummah be aware that those hearsay that are Daif.

Hmmm, I say, don't you think if he didn't include it from the first place NO ONE WILL BE TALKING ABOUT IT?, well and if that defence by his followers is true then why he didn't include his 593,000 possibly forged ones so the Ummah will be aware of it too?

I say this 600,000 hadith that he learnt is as ludicrous as his 70,000 hadith he memorised by the age of 10, in fact if he needed 8 years to memorise 70,000 hadith with their complete chain of narrations going from him to his teacher and from his teacher to his teacher's teacher and all the way to the prophet then Bukhari needed 68 years working 24 hours a day to be able to achieve that.

Opps, Bukhari only lived for about the same number of years (there is actually a conflict to how many years he lived and what year he died), again it does not make any sense, and again how they bloody confirmed this hearsay that he indeed memorised this huge number of hearsays that is equivalent to more than 96 full Qurans? If we consider that one hadith = I Quran verse in length, it can only make sense if they just took the hearsay about Bukhari himself for granted.

They say:

After sixteen years' absence he returned to Bukhara, and there drew up his al-Jami' al-Sahih, a collection of 7,275 tested traditions, arranged in chapters so as to afford bases for a complete system of jurisprudence without the use of speculative law.

Ahmed says:

Now we can see that Bukhari's plan was born, which was to make another book next to the Quran in clear violation to what the prophet clearly said in their hearsay, let's have a look:

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.

The above hearsay is not from Bukhari hearsay book, but from Ahmed hearsay books,

Here is my poor translation to it:

Abi Saeed Al Khudry SAID, Ishaq Ibn Isa TOLD me that Abdul Rahman Bin Zaid TOLD us that his father SAID about Attaa Bin Ysaar who SAID that Abu Hurairah SAID:

We were sitting down writing what we hear from the prophet (Sallah Allahu Alaihi Wa Sallam), he (the prophet) entered the room and asked us: What are you writing?, we said: we are writing what we hear from you, he (the prophet) said: another book next to Allah book?, we said: it is what we hear from you, he (the prophet) said: then write Allah book, uphold Allah book, no other books but Allah book, uphold Allah book, Abu Hurairah said: so we collected all what we wrote and burnt it, then we asked the prophet, can we talk about you?, he (the prophet said) yes you can and feel no shame of it, and whoever lie about me deliberately, his seat in hell will be secured, Abu Hurairah said: can we talk about Bani Israel?, he (the prophet) said: yes you can and feel no shame of it, whatever you will say about them, most certainly there is more wonder in them to what you say about them.

While the above hearsay is not from Bukhari books, it is from another respected Muhadith, his name is Ahmed, in addition to that the main narrators (first and last) (Abi Saeed Al Khudry and Abu Hurairah) are two of the most respected early Muhadiths, therefore according to Ahmed book, the Sahaaba were ordered by Mohammed not to write any book next to Allah book, though they were allowed to talk about Mohammed verbally, and this should be the inherited Sunnah that will be transferred from them to us through a word of mouth like how we pray for example.

Now, Bukhari, Muslim, Ahmed and their likes didn't listen to that hearsay about Mohammed, they totally ignored it and it became normal to write books about what Mohammed said that is not related to Allah book in any way. According to the above hearsay, they were only ordered by Mohammed to write the Quran ONLY this because the Quran is the true hadith of Mohammed: (Qul, Qul, Qul, Qul), (Say, Say, Say, Say)

However the above hadith still classified as conjectures this is because we don't know if it happened or not, however it seems that the above hadith is qualified by the Quran and the common sense.

If you look again at what they said about Bukhari above, their statement clearly says that his book named al-Jami' al-Sahih, the Authenticated Collector is meant to be a book of law, see what they said: a collection of 7,275 tested traditions, arranged in chapters so as to afford bases for a complete system of jurisprudence without the use of speculative law. , i.e. another law book next to Allah law book, ands sure following both is a clear cut case of SHIRK especially when one contradict the other, the underlined part in their statement made me really laugh, the whole books of hearsay hadith are indeed nothing but speculative, yet they are telling us: without the use of speculative law , as if stoning the adulterers is not speculative, as if killing the apostates is not speculative, as if approaching the wives while they are having their perods for sexual desire is not speculative. It's amazing what they claim and want to convince us with.

They say:

His book is highly regarded among Sunni Muslims, and considered the most authentic collection of hadith (a minority of Sunni scholars consider Sahih Muslim, compiled by Bukhari's student Imam Muslim, more authentic).

Ahmed says:

I will tell those sunni what the great prophet said in the above hearsay hadith by Abi Saeed Alkhudry, Other books next to Allah book?, now I'm not a prophet so I must say to them :ARE YOU NUTS?

You can also see the confusion of those sunni Muslims, they disagree to which book is more authentic, Bukhari or his student Muslim?, oh yeh let's make every one happy and call both Sahihain, i.e. the two authentic

They say:

Most Sunni scholars consider it second only to the Qur'an in terms of authenticity.

Ahmed says:

Of course they so, this is called SHIRK, however some more confused Muslims even believe that Bukhari book is more authentic than Allah book. See what this Muslimah named (jinn in a bottle) from FFI web site said over there:

[ala]

peace ab,

thanks for posting that! it was very well written!

[AhmedBahgat]

[AhmedBahgat]

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam All,

They say:

Theological position

His theological position was conservative and anti-Mu'tazili;

Ahmed says:

I was really surprised to why he was anti-Mu'tazili, I read about them briefly and it seems to me when this school of thought emerged, it was to fight the religion corruption that started to spread in Islam

Here is a breif info from the net regarding their origin:

They say:

Mu'tazilah (المعتزلة al-mu`tazilah) is a theological school of thought within Islam. It is also spelled Mu'tazilite, or Mu'tazilah.

Mu'tazili theology originated in the 8th century in Basra (Iraq) when Wasil ibn Ata (d. 131 A.H./748 A.D.) left the teaching lessons of al-Hasan al-Basri after a theological dispute regarding the issue of Al-Manzilah bayna al-Manzilatayn (described below); thus he and his followers, including 'Amr ibn 'Ubayd (d. 144 A.H./ 761 A.D.), were labelled Mu'tazili . Later, Mu'tazilis called themselves Ahl al-Tawhid wa al-'Adl ("People of Divine Unity and Justice") based on the theology they advocated, which sought to ground Islamic creedal system in reason.

Though Mu'tazilis later relied on logic and different aspects of early Islamic philosophy and Greek philosophy, the truths of Islam were their starting point and ultimate reference. The accusations leveled against them by rival schools of theology that they gave absolute authority to extra-Islamic paradigms reflect more the fierce polemics between various schools of theology than any objective reality. For instance, Mu'tazilis adopted unanimously the doctrine of creation ex nihilo, contrary to the Muslim philosophers who, with the exception of al-Kindi, believed in the eternity of the world in some form or another. It was the philosophers, not the Muslim theologians generally speaking, who took Greek philosophy as the starting point and the master conceptual framework for analyzing and investigating reality.

From early days of Islamic civilization, and because of both internal factors including intra-Muslim conflicts and external factors including interfaith debates, several questions were being debated by Muslim theologians, such as whether the Qur'an was created or eternal, whether evil was created by God, the issue of predestination versus free will, whether God's attributes in the Qur'an were to be interpreted allegorically or literally, etc. Mu'tazili thought attempted to address all these issues.

Ahmed says:

I would like to say that I'm not one of them, in fact I know little about them, I just started to know them lately and sure will read more about them, not to follow them, I don't follow a group neither a sect, I only follow the Quran and I have been labelled all my life as Muslim. Period

It seems to me that the Mutazilah uses logic more than conjectures, and this of course complies with the Quran message and of course it contradicts Bukhari because Bukaru uses conjectures more than logic, that is why Bukhari was anti-Mutazilah, I wonder why Bukhari back then had the right to be anti-Mutazilah while now days, others don't have the right to be anti-bukhari?

Also it seems that their unanimous support of the doctrine ex nihilo is qualified by the Quran, Ex nihilo is a Latin term meaning out of nothing. It is often used in conjunction with the term creation, this is very logical because when anything is created, it was nothing before it is created, even if it happens in a few stages, like something changed to another thing, i.e. we can say that the another thing is created from the something, now where did the something come from?, if the something was the first stage then it came from nothing, this must lead to; everything is logically created from nothing, what is wrong with that?, as if Allah can not create the heaven and earth unless they were something else before hand, as if all Allah can do was just order it to change to the heaven and earth, let's look at the following verse:

81: Is not He Who created the heavens and the earth able to create the like of them? Yea! and He is the Creator , the Knower.

82: His command, when He intends anything, is only to say to it: Be, so it is.
[The Quran ; 36:81-82]

أَوَلَيْسَ الَّذِي خَلَقَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ بِقَادِرٍ عَلَى أَنْ يَخْلُقَ مِثْلَهُم بَلَى وَهُوَ الْخَلَّاقُ الْعَلِيمُ (81)
إِنَّمَا أَمْرُهُ إِذَا أَرَادَ شَيْئًا أَنْ يَقُولَ لَهُ كُنْ فَيَكُونُ (82)

-> See, in verse 36:81, Allah is telling us that He is able to create another heaven and earth: Is not He Who created the heavens and the earth able to create the like of them?, Yea! and He is the Creator , the Knower., now, if all of a sudden we see another heaven and earth, wouldn't that mean that the second heaven and earth are created from nothing?, it has to be, because the second heaven and earth don't exit at present, to Allah, the matter of creating another heaven and earth from nothing is like this: His command, when He intends anything, is only to say to it: Be, so it is. , see, anything is created from nothing by Allah.

To make it easy to understand, look at the following chain, the symbol '>' means 'changed to':

Nothing > A > B > C > D > ........> Z

This means, A and B and C and D and ........ Z are created from nothing. Very simple, no complications required. They were wasting their time on silly arguments.

Also the above non sense of an argument which caused division within the Muslims at that time, lead to another silly argument that taunted Bukhari for the rest of his life, it is whether the Qur'an was created or eternal, others started to ask other silly questions like whether evil was created by God, these silly questions are still asked till today by the ones who know nothing about God.

Firstly for the Quran, of course its words are logically created, because before the words were said, there was NOTHING that we know of it, now the words are not really a physical creature like heaven and earth, that is why I stated logically created, and sure after the logical creation of the Quran words Allah delivered it to us then they will stay eternal, even the human words will stay eternal, in fact every word we say is documented in a book for everyone of us and on the day of account, theses words may be the reason to win or lose eternally, i.e. our words will last for eternity after we say it.

Therefore the Quran is created and became eternal the moment it was created, the Injil and the Torah words are also created and eternal, even for those who corrupted them using their own words, their own words are logically created by them and will be eternal for them.

Finally, for the evil, of course Allah created the bad jinns and the bad humans, however Allah does not think for them, it seems He gave both brains , Allah wants everyone that will be held questionable on the JD to think for his/her/its own self. What Allah allowed to happen is this, Allah allowed the bad jinns to try and influence the humans, the bad jinns chose to be bad (no force is put on them - satan story confirms that), and the humans may choose to follow that influence by the bad jinns, again, no force is put on the humans, however the humans can not see the jinns but the jinns can see the humans, the jinns influence will be the only aspect to affect us, this is one awesome plan by the God who is totally free to do what He wants and can never be questioned to why He did what He wanted, for example, if Allah created us and put all of us in hell, then we can do nothing about it even if we all unite against Him, this means we can never be able to question Him. What Allah also did that He told us about His plan and He told us that He can forgive any sin but to reject His messages. Allah in control to allow the evil to happen or to prevent it from happening per incident, how it works, this is totally beyond our knowledge and even if we are knowledgeable to how Allah does it, yet we will never be able to change it nor question Him, so why wasting our minds in silly arguments, if they say Allah created evil actions, I say no He didn't, but Yes He created the ones who will commit the evil actions, if that should logically lead that He then created evil actions because He created the ones who did it, then fine, Allah created evil actions under that logic which I accept, so tough luck to all of us, we can do nothing about it.

They say:

he enjoyed the friendship and respect of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, and was persecuted because he held to Ibn Hanbal's views in matter of creed (Arabic: Aqidah), specially that the Qur'an is not created.

Ahmed says:

See, how this silly argument regarding the Quran creation caused problems to Bukhari.

They say:

His legal views appear to have been Shafi'ite and he has been verified by notable scholars (Ibn Hajar, Imam Subki) as a Shafi'ite.

Ahmed says:

He was just another human following what other humans conjecture about the God using the human words instead of using what the God said Himself.

They say:

Archery

He is also said to a have been a very good archer, gaining skill as a recreation. His Amanuensis is said to have written that Bukhari "often went out to practice his aim, and only twice during his sojourn with him did he see him miss the mark."

Ahmed says:

Good for Bukhari, it's a nice sport of course, I just don't know how he managed to also play sport while memorising all those thousands of hadiths since he was a child.

They say:

Legacy

His repeated trials and triumphs won him recognition as the greatest Hadith scholar of his time by all the major authorities with whom he came in contact, including Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Ali ibn al-Madini, Abu Bakar ibn Abi Shaybah, Ishaaq Ibn Raahawayh, and others.

Ahmed says:

If Bukhari was the greatest hadith scholar of his time, why his student Muslim decided to do the same?, did Muslim think that Bukhari's work was not complete nor perfect, or it was nothing but an assurance to gain the recognition of the greatest hearsayers of their time?

They say:

Sunni view

Sunni Muslims view him as one of the greatest scholars of Islam, a great man for whose work the world's Muslims have a lot in debt.

Ahmed says:

I have no debt to anyone but Allah, why I owe Bukhari if his books are nothing but conjectures and many of it defame the great prophet?, why I owe Bukhari if what he did was a clear violation to what the prophet ordered not to write anything said by him but the Quran according to their hearsay hadith?

They say:

A Sunni source describes him thus:

Throughout his life, al-Bukhaaree displayed the character of a devout and pious Muslim scholar. He was rigorous in the observance of his religious duties, ensuring that rather than relying on charity he always lived by means of trade, in which he was scrupulously honest. Once he lost ten thousand dirhams on account of a minute scruple. A good deal of his income, in fact, was spent on helping the students and the poor. It is said that he never showed an ill-temper to anyone, even when there was more than sufficient cause; nor did he bear ill-will against anybody. Even towards those who had caused his exile from Neesaaboor, he harboured no grudge.

Ahmed says:

Great, the sunnis will never say anything bad about Bukhari even if it is clear as light like his cowardly act of throwing his own money into the ocean so he does not defend where he got it from, they held him in the highest of regards, some even swear by him, sort of like swearing by Allah, you know, like Shirk. You have to know that all those sunnis took what is halal and what is haram from Bukhari, despite Allah has warned us in the Quran not to ever say this is halal and that is haram, whatever we say about Allah if not qualified by the Quran has to be a lie against Allah.

They say:

Shi'a view

Shi'a do not have a very esteemed view towards him. However, this negative view is not comparable to the extremely negative view that Shi'a have towards, for example, Yazid I or Al-Hajjaj bin Yousef. In Shi'a view, Bukhari strove to preserve Islam, a commendable effort in Shi'a view.

Ahmed says:

Of course Bukhari contributed well to the division of Islam into sects, here is the two major Islamic sect holding different views about the same man and other men.

They say:

Shi'a point out to other Sunni scholars whom they feel did not have this bias, for example, Bukharis student Imam Muslim,

Ahmed says:

See, Bukhari student Muslim followed his teacher footsteps, he also contributed to the division of Islam into sects.

They say:

whom did include the hadith of the two weighty things in his Sahih Muslim,

Ahmed says:

That hadith is about the final sermon when it is alleged that Mohammed said that he is e leaving to us Quran and Sunnah for the sunnis however Quran and Ahl al-Bayt (his family) for the shi'a, see they liked Muslim because Muslim included the one about Quran and Ahl al-Bayt which suits their cult teachings, exactly as the sunnis say it was Quran and Sunnah, which again suits their cult teachings, EVERY ONE IS JOICED WITH WHAT THEY HAVE, this is exactly what Allah told us about them, let's have a look:

30- Then set your face upright for religion in the right state-- the nature made by Allah in which He has made men; there is no altering of Allah's creation; that is the right religion, but most people do not know'

31- Turning to Him, and be careful of (your duty to) Him and keep up prayer and be not of the polytheists

32- Of those who divided their religion and became sects, every sect rejoicing in what they had with them
[The Quran ; 30:30-32]

فَأَقِمْ وَجْهَكَ لِلدِّينِ حَنِيفًا فِطْرَةَ اللَّهِ الَّتِي فَطَرَ النَّاسَ عَلَيْهَا لَا تَبْدِيلَ لِخَلْقِ اللَّهِ ذَلِكَ الدِّينُ الْقَيِّمُ وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ (30)
مُنِيبِينَ إِلَيْهِ وَاتَّقُوهُ وَأَقِيمُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَلَا تَكُونُوا مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ (31)
مِنَ الَّذِينَ فَرَّقُوا دِينَهُمْ وَكَانُوا شِيَعًا كُلُّ حِزْبٍ بِمَا لَدَيْهِمْ فَرِحُونَ (32)

-> Here is the order to only hold the religion of Allah :Then set your face upright for religion in the right state-- the nature made by Allah in which He has made men; there is no altering of Allah's creation; that is the right religion, but most people do not know, this upright religion is described to us in the Quran.

-> This up right religion of Allah is nothing more than :Turning to Him, and be careful of (your duty to) Him and keep up prayer and be not of the polytheists, in very short words

-> As well not being of the polytheists, we are orderd not to be like those who divide their religion and become sects like the sunni and shi'a and :Of those who divided their religion and became sects, every sect rejoicing in what they had with them. ironically there is a third version of that last sermon hearsay, it is alleged in it that the prophet said the he is leaving the Quran alone to us.

Here are all the allegations of what the prohhet said in regards to what he is leaving for us:

1) I leave with you Quran and Sunnah, (this is the sunni cukt claim)

2) I leave with you Quran and Ahl al-bayt , (this is the shi'a cult claim)

3) I leave for you the Quran alone you shall uphold it.

For the first two allegations I don't need to bring any hearsay to prove it, the sunni and shi'a cults know well those hadiths, for the last allegation that the prophet said that he is leaving the Quran. Period and we should uphold it, here is a partial extract from a lengthy hadith in Sahih Muslim,

The Book of Pilgrimage (Kitab Al-Hajj)
hadith no 2803, fourth paragraph

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/007.smt.html

The first claim of ours on blood-revenge which I abolish is that of the son of Rabi'a b. al-Harith, who was nursed among the tribe of Sa'd and killed by Hudhail. And the usury of she pre-Islamic period is abolished, and the first of our usury I abolish is that of 'Abbas b. 'Abd al-Muttalib, for it is all abolished. Fear Allah concerning women! Verily you have taken them on the security of Allah, and intercourse with them has been made lawful unto you by words of Allah. You too have right over them, and that they should not allow anyone to sit on your bed whom you do not like. But if they do that, you can chastise them but not severely. Their rights upon you are that you should provide them with food and clothing in a fitting manner. I have left among you the Book of Allah, and if you hold fast to it, you would never go astray. And you would be asked about me (on the Day of Resurrection), (now tell me) what would you say? They (the audience) said: We will bear witness that you have conveyed (the message), discharged (the ministry of Prophethood) and given wise (sincere) counsel. He (the narrator) said: He (the Holy Prophet) then raised his forefinger towards the sky and pointing it at the people (said):" O Allah, be witness. 0 Allah, be witness," saying it thrice. (Bilal then) pronounced Adhan and later on Iqama and he (the Holy Prophet) led the noon prayer. He (Bilal) then uttered Iqama and he (the Holy Prophet) led the afternoon prayer and he observed no other prayer in between the two.

-> See, I have left among you the Book of Allah, and if you hold fast to it, you would never go astray, THERE IS NO MENTION THAT HE LEFT HIS SUNNAH OR AHL ALBAYT IN THIS HADITH BY MUSLIM, ONLY THE QURAN AND HE EVEN TOLD US THAT IF WE HOLD FAST TO IT, WE WOULD NEVER GO ASTRAY

They say:

and also Sunni scholars that had the opposite view. For example, Hakim al-Nishaburi included a very high number of pro-Ahl al-Bayt hadith in his book entitled Al-Mustadrak alaa al-Sahihain,

Ahmed says:

See, here is another one looking for fame like Bukhari and Muslim, so to reach it quick, he named his book Al-Mustadrak alaa al-Sahihain, which a mixture of the two books of Bukhari and Muslim and of course based on Hakim own criteria.

They say:

some hadith of which he claimed fulfilled Bukharis criteria of authenticity. Hakim however was accused by some of Shi'ism, and of including spurious narrations whilst declaring them sound ' such that Sunni scholar adh-Dhahabi, author of Talkhis al-Mustadrak (an overview of the hadith in Hakim's book), lamented: "It would have been better if al-Hakim had never compiled it. Another example would include Ali al-Hamdani, the author of Mawaddat al-Qurba.

Ahmed says:

No doubt that Bukhari and Muslim had successfully planted the seed for many to follow their footsteps, they all contributed to the division of Islam and they all are in clear violation to Allah orders and even Mohammed orders in their hearsay hadith

To be continued

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam All,

They say:

Theological position

His theological position was conservative and anti-Mu'tazili;

Ahmed says:

I was really surprised to why he was anti-Mu'tazili, I read about them briefly and it seems to me when this school of thought emerged, it was to fight the religion corruption that started to spread in Islam

Here is a breif info from the net regarding their origin:

They say:

Mu'tazilah (المعتزلة al-mu`tazilah) is a theological school of thought within Islam. It is also spelled Mu'tazilite, or Mu'tazilah.

Mu'tazili theology originated in the 8th century in Basra (Iraq) when Wasil ibn Ata (d. 131 A.H./748 A.D.) left the teaching lessons of al-Hasan al-Basri after a theological dispute regarding the issue of Al-Manzilah bayna al-Manzilatayn (described below); thus he and his followers, including 'Amr ibn 'Ubayd (d. 144 A.H./ 761 A.D.), were labelled Mu'tazili . Later, Mu'tazilis called themselves Ahl al-Tawhid wa al-'Adl ("People of Divine Unity and Justice") based on the theology they advocated, which sought to ground Islamic creedal system in reason.

Though Mu'tazilis later relied on logic and different aspects of early Islamic philosophy and Greek philosophy, the truths of Islam were their starting point and ultimate reference. The accusations leveled against them by rival schools of theology that they gave absolute authority to extra-Islamic paradigms reflect more the fierce polemics between various schools of theology than any objective reality. For instance, Mu'tazilis adopted unanimously the doctrine of creation ex nihilo, contrary to the Muslim philosophers who, with the exception of al-Kindi, believed in the eternity of the world in some form or another. It was the philosophers, not the Muslim theologians generally speaking, who took Greek philosophy as the starting point and the master conceptual framework for analyzing and investigating reality.

From early days of Islamic civilization, and because of both internal factors including intra-Muslim conflicts and external factors including interfaith debates, several questions were being debated by Muslim theologians, such as whether the Qur'an was created or eternal, whether evil was created by God, the issue of predestination versus free will, whether God's attributes in the Qur'an were to be interpreted allegorically or literally, etc. Mu'tazili thought attempted to address all these issues.

Ahmed says:

I would like to say that I'm not one of them, in fact I know little about them, I just started to know them lately and sure will read more about them, not to follow them, I don't follow a group neither a sect, I only follow the Quran and I have been labelled all my life as Muslim. Period

It seems to me that the Mutazilah uses logic more than conjectures, and this of course complies with the Quran message and of course it contradicts Bukhari because Bukaru uses conjectures more than logic, that is why Bukhari was anti-Mutazilah, I wonder why Bukhari back then had the right to be anti-Mutazilah while now days, others don't have the right to be anti-bukhari?

Also it seems that their unanimous support of the doctrine ex nihilo is qualified by the Quran, Ex nihilo is a Latin term meaning out of nothing. It is often used in conjunction with the term creation, this is very logical because when anything is created, it was nothing before it is created, even if it happens in a few stages, like something changed to another thing, i.e. we can say that the another thing is created from the something, now where did the something come from?, if the something was the first stage then it came from nothing, this must lead to; everything is logically created from nothing, what is wrong with that?, as if Allah can not create the heaven and earth unless they were something else before hand, as if all Allah can do was just order it to change to the heaven and earth, let's look at the following verse:

81: Is not He Who created the heavens and the earth able to create the like of them? Yea! and He is the Creator , the Knower.

82: His command, when He intends anything, is only to say to it: Be, so it is.
[The Quran ; 36:81-82]

أَوَلَيْسَ الَّذِي خَلَقَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ بِقَادِرٍ عَلَى أَنْ يَخْلُقَ مِثْلَهُم بَلَى وَهُوَ الْخَلَّاقُ الْعَلِيمُ (81)
إِنَّمَا أَمْرُهُ إِذَا أَرَادَ شَيْئًا أَنْ يَقُولَ لَهُ كُنْ فَيَكُونُ (82)

-> See, in verse 36:81, Allah is telling us that He is able to create another heaven and earth: Is not He Who created the heavens and the earth able to create the like of them?, Yea! and He is the Creator , the Knower., now, if all of a sudden we see another heaven and earth, wouldn't that mean that the second heaven and earth are created from nothing?, it has to be, because the second heaven and earth don't exit at present, to Allah, the matter of creating another heaven and earth from nothing is like this: His command, when He intends anything, is only to say to it: Be, so it is. , see, anything is created from nothing by Allah.

To make it easy to understand, look at the following chain, the symbol '>' means 'changed to':

Nothing > A > B > C > D > ........> Z

This means, A and B and C and D and ........ Z are created from nothing. Very simple, no complications required. They were wasting their time on silly arguments.

Also the above non sense of an argument which caused division within the Muslims at that time, lead to another silly argument that taunted Bukhari for the rest of his life, it is whether the Qur'an was created or eternal, others started to ask other silly questions like whether evil was created by God, these silly questions are still asked till today by the ones who know nothing about God.

Firstly for the Quran, of course its words are logically created, because before the words were said, there was NOTHING that we know of it, now the words are not really a physical creature like heaven and earth, that is why I stated logically created, and sure after the logical creation of the Quran words Allah delivered it to us then they will stay eternal, even the human words will stay eternal, in fact every word we say is documented in a book for everyone of us and on the day of account, theses words may be the reason to win or lose eternally, i.e. our words will last for eternity after we say it.

Therefore the Quran is created and became eternal the moment it was created, the Injil and the Torah words are also created and eternal, even for those who corrupted them using their own words, their own words are logically created by them and will be eternal for them.

Finally, for the evil, of course Allah created the bad jinns and the bad humans, however Allah does not think for them, it seems He gave both brains , Allah wants everyone that will be held questionable on the JD to think for his/her/its own self. What Allah allowed to happen is this, Allah allowed the bad jinns to try and influence the humans, the bad jinns chose to be bad (no force is put on them - satan story confirms that), and the humans may choose to follow that influence by the bad jinns, again, no force is put on the humans, however the humans can not see the jinns but the jinns can see the humans, the jinns influence will be the only aspect to affect us, this is one awesome plan by the God who is totally free to do what He wants and can never be questioned to why He did what He wanted, for example, if Allah created us and put all of us in hell, then we can do nothing about it even if we all unite against Him, this means we can never be able to question Him. What Allah also did that He told us about His plan and He told us that He can forgive any sin but to reject His messages. Allah in control to allow the evil to happen or to prevent it from happening per incident, how it works, this is totally beyond our knowledge and even if we are knowledgeable to how Allah does it, yet we will never be able to change it nor question Him, so why wasting our minds in silly arguments, if they say Allah created evil actions, I say no He didn't, but Yes He created the ones who will commit the evil actions, if that should logically lead that He then created evil actions because He created the ones who did it, then fine, Allah created evil actions under that logic which I accept, so tough luck to all of us, we can do nothing about it.

They say:

he enjoyed the friendship and respect of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, and was persecuted because he held to Ibn Hanbal's views in matter of creed (Arabic: Aqidah), specially that the Qur'an is not created.

Ahmed says:

See, how this silly argument regarding the Quran creation caused problems to Bukhari.

They say:

His legal views appear to have been Shafi'ite and he has been verified by notable scholars (Ibn Hajar, Imam Subki) as a Shafi'ite.

Ahmed says:

He was just another human following what other humans conjecture about the God using the human words instead of using what the God said Himself.

They say:

Archery

He is also said to a have been a very good archer, gaining skill as a recreation. His Amanuensis is said to have written that Bukhari "often went out to practice his aim, and only twice during his sojourn with him did he see him miss the mark."

Ahmed says:

Good for Bukhari, it's a nice sport of course, I just don't know how he managed to also play sport while memorising all those thousands of hadiths since he was a child.

They say:

Legacy

His repeated trials and triumphs won him recognition as the greatest Hadith scholar of his time by all the major authorities with whom he came in contact, including Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Ali ibn al-Madini, Abu Bakar ibn Abi Shaybah, Ishaaq Ibn Raahawayh, and others.

Ahmed says:

If Bukhari was the greatest hadith scholar of his time, why his student Muslim decided to do the same?, did Muslim think that Bukhari's work was not complete nor perfect, or it was nothing but an assurance to gain the recognition of the greatest hearsayers of their time?

They say:

Sunni view

Sunni Muslims view him as one of the greatest scholars of Islam, a great man for whose work the world's Muslims have a lot in debt.

Ahmed says:

I have no debt to anyone but Allah, why I owe Bukhari if his books are nothing but conjectures and many of it defame the great prophet?, why I owe Bukhari if what he did was a clear violation to what the prophet ordered not to write anything said by him but the Quran according to their hearsay hadith?

They say:

A Sunni source describes him thus:

Throughout his life, al-Bukhaaree displayed the character of a devout and pious Muslim scholar. He was rigorous in the observance of his religious duties, ensuring that rather than relying on charity he always lived by means of trade, in which he was scrupulously honest. Once he lost ten thousand dirhams on account of a minute scruple. A good deal of his income, in fact, was spent on helping the students and the poor. It is said that he never showed an ill-temper to anyone, even when there was more than sufficient cause; nor did he bear ill-will against anybody. Even towards those who had caused his exile from Neesaaboor, he harboured no grudge.

Ahmed says:

Great, the sunnis will never say anything bad about Bukhari even if it is clear as light like his cowardly act of throwing his own money into the ocean so he does not defend where he got it from, they held him in the highest of regards, some even swear by him, sort of like swearing by Allah, you know, like Shirk. You have to know that all those sunnis took what is halal and what is haram from Bukhari, despite Allah has warned us in the Quran not to ever say this is halal and that is haram, whatever we say about Allah if not qualified by the Quran has to be a lie against Allah.

They say:

Shi'a view

Shi'a do not have a very esteemed view towards him. However, this negative view is not comparable to the extremely negative view that Shi'a have towards, for example, Yazid I or Al-Hajjaj bin Yousef. In Shi'a view, Bukhari strove to preserve Islam, a commendable effort in Shi'a view.

Ahmed says:

Of course Bukhari contributed well to the division of Islam into sects, here is the two major Islamic sect holding different views about the same man and other men.

They say:

Shi'a point out to other Sunni scholars whom they feel did not have this bias, for example, Bukharis student Imam Muslim,

Ahmed says:

See, Bukhari student Muslim followed his teacher footsteps, he also contributed to the division of Islam into sects.

They say:

whom did include the hadith of the two weighty things in his Sahih Muslim,

Ahmed says:

That hadith is about the final sermon when it is alleged that Mohammed said that he is e leaving to us Quran and Sunnah for the sunnis however Quran and Ahl al-Bayt (his family) for the shi'a, see they liked Muslim because Muslim included the one about Quran and Ahl al-Bayt which suits their cult teachings, exactly as the sunnis say it was Quran and Sunnah, which again suits their cult teachings, EVERY ONE IS JOICED WITH WHAT THEY HAVE, this is exactly what Allah told us about them, let's have a look:

30- Then set your face upright for religion in the right state-- the nature made by Allah in which He has made men; there is no altering of Allah's creation; that is the right religion, but most people do not know'

31- Turning to Him, and be careful of (your duty to) Him and keep up prayer and be not of the polytheists

32- Of those who divided their religion and became sects, every sect rejoicing in what they had with them
[The Quran ; 30:30-32]

فَأَقِمْ وَجْهَكَ لِلدِّينِ حَنِيفًا فِطْرَةَ اللَّهِ الَّتِي فَطَرَ النَّاسَ عَلَيْهَا لَا تَبْدِيلَ لِخَلْقِ اللَّهِ ذَلِكَ الدِّينُ الْقَيِّمُ وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ (30)
مُنِيبِينَ إِلَيْهِ وَاتَّقُوهُ وَأَقِيمُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَلَا تَكُونُوا مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ (31)
مِنَ الَّذِينَ فَرَّقُوا دِينَهُمْ وَكَانُوا شِيَعًا كُلُّ حِزْبٍ بِمَا لَدَيْهِمْ فَرِحُونَ (32)

-> Here is the order to only hold the religion of Allah :Then set your face upright for religion in the right state-- the nature made by Allah in which He has made men; there is no altering of Allah's creation; that is the right religion, but most people do not know, this upright religion is described to us in the Quran.

-> This up right religion of Allah is nothing more than :Turning to Him, and be careful of (your duty to) Him and keep up prayer and be not of the polytheists, in very short words

-> As well not being of the polytheists, we are orderd not to be like those who divide their religion and become sects like the sunni and shi'a and :Of those who divided their religion and became sects, every sect rejoicing in what they had with them. ironically there is a third version of that last sermon hearsay, it is alleged in it that the prophet said the he is leaving the Quran alone to us.

Here are all the allegations of what the prohhet said in regards to what he is leaving for us:

1) I leave with you Quran and Sunnah, (this is the sunni cukt claim)

2) I leave with you Quran and Ahl al-bayt , (this is the shi'a cult claim)

3) I leave for you the Quran alone you shall uphold it.

For the first two allegations I don't need to bring any hearsay to prove it, the sunni and shi'a cults know well those hadiths, for the last allegation that the prophet said that he is leaving the Quran. Period and we should uphold it, here is a partial extract from a lengthy hadith in Sahih Muslim,

The Book of Pilgrimage (Kitab Al-Hajj)
hadith no 2803, fourth paragraph

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/007.smt.html

The first claim of ours on blood-revenge which I abolish is that of the son of Rabi'a b. al-Harith, who was nursed among the tribe of Sa'd and killed by Hudhail. And the usury of she pre-Islamic period is abolished, and the first of our usury I abolish is that of 'Abbas b. 'Abd al-Muttalib, for it is all abolished. Fear Allah concerning women! Verily you have taken them on the security of Allah, and intercourse with them has been made lawful unto you by words of Allah. You too have right over them, and that they should not allow anyone to sit on your bed whom you do not like. But if they do that, you can chastise them but not severely. Their rights upon you are that you should provide them with food and clothing in a fitting manner. I have left among you the Book of Allah, and if you hold fast to it, you would never go astray. And you would be asked about me (on the Day of Resurrection), (now tell me) what would you say? They (the audience) said: We will bear witness that you have conveyed (the message), discharged (the ministry of Prophethood) and given wise (sincere) counsel. He (the narrator) said: He (the Holy Prophet) then raised his forefinger towards the sky and pointing it at the people (said):" O Allah, be witness. 0 Allah, be witness," saying it thrice. (Bilal then) pronounced Adhan and later on Iqama and he (the Holy Prophet) led the noon prayer. He (Bilal) then uttered Iqama and he (the Holy Prophet) led the afternoon prayer and he observed no other prayer in between the two.

-> See, I have left among you the Book of Allah, and if you hold fast to it, you would never go astray, THERE IS NO MENTION THAT HE LEFT HIS SUNNAH OR AHL ALBAYT IN THIS HADITH BY MUSLIM, ONLY THE QURAN AND HE EVEN TOLD US THAT IF WE HOLD FAST TO IT, WE WOULD NEVER GO ASTRAY

They say:

and also Sunni scholars that had the opposite view. For example, Hakim al-Nishaburi included a very high number of pro-Ahl al-Bayt hadith in his book entitled Al-Mustadrak alaa al-Sahihain,

Ahmed says:

See, here is another one looking for fame like Bukhari and Muslim, so to reach it quick, he named his book Al-Mustadrak alaa al-Sahihain, which a mixture of the two books of Bukhari and Muslim and of course based on Hakim own criteria.

They say:

some hadith of which he claimed fulfilled Bukharis criteria of authenticity. Hakim however was accused by some of Shi'ism, and of including spurious narrations whilst declaring them sound ' such that Sunni scholar adh-Dhahabi, author of Talkhis al-Mustadrak (an overview of the hadith in Hakim's book), lamented: "It would have been better if al-Hakim had never compiled it. Another example would include Ali al-Hamdani, the author of Mawaddat al-Qurba.

Ahmed says:

No doubt that Bukhari and Muslim had successfully planted the seed for many to follow their footsteps, they all contributed to the division of Islam and they all are in clear violation to Allah orders and even Mohammed orders in their hearsay hadith

To be continued

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all,

This comment is going to be short, in reply to the following:

They says:

Al-Bukhari claimed to have received traditions from over 1,000 traditionists, and his fame as a scholar grew rapidly. In Nishapur he attracted larger crowds than the leading scholar of tradition, who out of jealousy accused al-Bukhari of heresy.

Ahmed says:

See, his fame grew rapidly, it is very well understood that jealousy grew with it as well, this is not his problem though rather a problem of his generation who abandoned the Quran and only followed man made conjectures and consequently they divided themselves, then prosecuted each other and even killed each other , they accused Bukhari of heresy, which is any opinions or doctrines at variance with the official or commonly known position, i.e. Bukhari himself was accused with what they accuse most Quran aloners today, very strange indeed, I believe this is due to Bukhari involvement in the silly Quran creation dispute, on the other hand I don't accuse Bukhari of heresy, I accuse him of hearsay, let's look at the definition of hearsay and you should see that Bukhari books are nothing but hearsay:

Definitions of hearsay:

They say:

-> Rumor: gossip (usually a mixture of truth and untruth) passed around by word of mouth

-> Heard through another rather than directly; hearsay information

-> Hearsay in its most general and oldest meaning is a term used in the law of evidence to describe an out of court statement offered to establish the facts asserted in that statement. Hearsay is generally not admissible in common law courts because it is of suspect value, but there are many exceptions to this prohibition.

-> Second-hand evidence, generally consisting of a witness's testimony that he/she heard someone else say something.

-> Evidence based on what the witness has heard someone else say, rather than what he/she has personally experienced.

-> Statements made out of court by someone other than the person testifying in court, which are offered to prove a matter in court.

-> Evidence presented by a witness who did not see or hear the incident in question but heard about it from someone else. With some exceptions, hearsay generally is not admissible as evidence at trial.

-> Information given to a witness by another person. The witness did not see the information first hand. The witness does not have personal knowledge of the original event. Hearsay is not admissible in court.

-> Testimony of an individual that is not from his or her personal knowledge, but from what the witness has heard another person say.

-> An out of court statement made by the declarant offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.

-> Refers to statements made by persons other than the person testifying. The statement is a mere repetition of what the witness has heard others say out of court, and is offered as proof in the matter on which the witness is testifying. Generally, hearsay evidence is not admissible and is excluded from consideration by the trier of fact; however, there are numerous exceptions. ...

-> Testimony by a witness who relates, not what he/she knows personally, but what others have told him/her or what he/she has heard said by others. Generally such testimony is not admissible in evidence although there are numerous exceptions to this general rule.

-> Evidence which does not proceed from the personal knowledge of the witness, but is a repetition of an out-of-court statement and is offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. The general rule, subject to various exceptions, is that such statements are inadmissible because they rely on the truth and veracity of outside persons not present for cross-examination.

Ahmed says:

Indeed the above human law that most hearsay has to be dismissed is an order from Allah in the Quran:

O you who believed! Avoid most of conjectures, for surely conjectures in some cases is a sin, and do not spy nor let some of you backbite others. Does one of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? But you abhor it; and be careful of (your duty to) Allah, surely Allah is Oft-returning (to mercy), Merciful.
[The Quran ; 49:12]

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اجْتَنِبُوا كَثِيرًا مِّنَ الظَّنِّ إِنَّ بَعْضَ الظَّنِّ إِثْمٌ وَلَا تَجَسَّسُوا وَلَا يَغْتَب بَّعْضُكُم بَعْضًا أَيُحِبُّ أَحَدُكُمْ أَن يَأْكُلَ لَحْمَ أَخِيهِ مَيْتًا فَكَرِهْتُمُوهُ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ تَوَّابٌ رَّحِيمٌ (12)

-> See how it is was said by Allah to the believers: يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اجْتَنِبُوا كَثِيرًا مِّنَ الظَّنِّ إِنَّ بَعْضَ الظَّنِّ إِثْمٌ , i.e. O you who believed! Avoid most of conjectures, for surely conjectures in some cases is a sin , this is the exact same as dismissing MOST hearsay because even in courts if the hearsayers integrity is high, their hearsay have to be dismissed still, in 49:12 Allah is telling us to avoid most conjectures, you expect that the reason to avoid MOST of it is because MOST conjectures are false but Allah didn't say that, He said avoid MOST conjectures because SOME of it is false, i.e. avoid MOST conjectures even if MOST of it is true, exactly as the human law in court.

Therefore, Bukhari, Mulsim and their likes are nothing but hearsayers promoting conjectures, Bukhari, Muslim and their likes are part of that chain of conjecture, so in a way Bukhari Muslim and their likes are not just telling us that all those hearsayers in their chain of hearsay are people of high integrity but Bukhari, Muslim and their likes are also people of high integrity and we Muslims should take that without questioning it, we can't bloody question it despite their hearsay is telling us that the great prophet was not doing what the Quran told him to do in clear violation to what the prophet was ordered to do by Allah:

Follow what is revealed to you from your Lord; there is no god but He; and withdraw from the polytheists.
[The Quran ; 6:106]

اتَّبِعْ مَا أُوحِيَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ لا إِلَهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ وَأَعْرِضْ عَنِ الْمُشْرِكِينَ (106)

-> See what the prophet was ordered to do : Follow what is revealed to you from your Lord , but Bukhari was telling us that the prophet was not following what was revealed to him,

Did the prophet listened to the above order?, of course he did:

203: And when you bring them not a revelation they say: Why do you not forge it? Say: I only follow what is revealed to me from my Lord; these are clear proofs from your Lord and a guidance and a mercy for a people who believe.

204: And when the Quran is recited, then listen to it and remain silent, that mercy may be shown to you.
[The Quran ; 7:203-204]

وَإِذَا لَمْ تَأْتِهِم بِآيَةٍ قَالُواْ لَوْلاَ اجْتَبَيْتَهَا قُلْ إِنَّمَا أَتَّبِعُ مَا يِوحَى إِلَيَّ مِن رَّبِّي هَذَا بَصَآئِرُ مِن رَّبِّكُمْ وَهُدًى وَرَحْمَةٌ لِّقَوْمٍ يُؤْمِنُونَ (203)
وَإِذَا قُرِىءَ الْقُرْآنُ فَاسْتَمِعُواْ لَهُ وَأَنصِتُواْ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُرْحَمُونَ (204)

-> See what the prophet was saying to the kuffar after they accused him of forging the Quran: Say: I only follow what is revealed to me from my Lord; these are clear proofs from your Lord and a guidance and a mercy for a people who believe., now what can be clear proofs from our lord and a mercy for the people who believe?, THERE IS NOTHING BUT THE QURAN, this is because the hadith of Bukhari Muslim and their likes is not from Allah : these are clear proofs from your Lord , Bukhari and his likes are not our lord. This guidance sent to us from our lord is nothing but the Quran, see what the next verse is saying: And when the Quran is recited, then listen to it and remain silent, that mercy may be shown to you.

The prophet himself asked the kuffar, to bring another book FROM ALLAH better than the torah and injil so he follow it:

Say: Then bring some (other) book from Allah which is a better guide than both of them, (that) I may follow it, if you are truthful.
[The Quran ; 28:49]

قُلْ فَأْتُوا بِكِتَابٍ مِّنْ عِندِ اللَّهِ هُوَ أَهْدَى مِنْهُمَا أَتَّبِعْهُ إِن كُنتُمْ صَادِقِينَ (49)

-> See, Say: Then bring some (other) book from Allah which is a better guide than both of them, (that) I may follow it, if you are truthful., and if the Mushrikoon from the Muslims agree that the Book of Allah (the Quran) is the best then according to 28:49 we don't need to follow another book even if it is from Allah unless it is better than the Quran and yet has to be from Allah

To be continued

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all,

This comment is going to be short, in reply to the following:

They says:

Al-Bukhari claimed to have received traditions from over 1,000 traditionists, and his fame as a scholar grew rapidly. In Nishapur he attracted larger crowds than the leading scholar of tradition, who out of jealousy accused al-Bukhari of heresy.

Ahmed says:

See, his fame grew rapidly, it is very well understood that jealousy grew with it as well, this is not his problem though rather a problem of his generation who abandoned the Quran and only followed man made conjectures and consequently they divided themselves, then prosecuted each other and even killed each other , they accused Bukhari of heresy, which is any opinions or doctrines at variance with the official or commonly known position, i.e. Bukhari himself was accused with what they accuse most Quran aloners today, very strange indeed, I believe this is due to Bukhari involvement in the silly Quran creation dispute, on the other hand I don't accuse Bukhari of heresy, I accuse him of hearsay, let's look at the definition of hearsay and you should see that Bukhari books are nothing but hearsay:

Definitions of hearsay:

They say:

-> Rumor: gossip (usually a mixture of truth and untruth) passed around by word of mouth

-> Heard through another rather than directly; hearsay information

-> Hearsay in its most general and oldest meaning is a term used in the law of evidence to describe an out of court statement offered to establish the facts asserted in that statement. Hearsay is generally not admissible in common law courts because it is of suspect value, but there are many exceptions to this prohibition.

-> Second-hand evidence, generally consisting of a witness's testimony that he/she heard someone else say something.

-> Evidence based on what the witness has heard someone else say, rather than what he/she has personally experienced.

-> Statements made out of court by someone other than the person testifying in court, which are offered to prove a matter in court.

-> Evidence presented by a witness who did not see or hear the incident in question but heard about it from someone else. With some exceptions, hearsay generally is not admissible as evidence at trial.

-> Information given to a witness by another person. The witness did not see the information first hand. The witness does not have personal knowledge of the original event. Hearsay is not admissible in court.

-> Testimony of an individual that is not from his or her personal knowledge, but from what the witness has heard another person say.

-> An out of court statement made by the declarant offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.

-> Refers to statements made by persons other than the person testifying. The statement is a mere repetition of what the witness has heard others say out of court, and is offered as proof in the matter on which the witness is testifying. Generally, hearsay evidence is not admissible and is excluded from consideration by the trier of fact; however, there are numerous exceptions. ...

-> Testimony by a witness who relates, not what he/she knows personally, but what others have told him/her or what he/she has heard said by others. Generally such testimony is not admissible in evidence although there are numerous exceptions to this general rule.

-> Evidence which does not proceed from the personal knowledge of the witness, but is a repetition of an out-of-court statement and is offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. The general rule, subject to various exceptions, is that such statements are inadmissible because they rely on the truth and veracity of outside persons not present for cross-examination.

Ahmed says:

Indeed the above human law that most hearsay has to be dismissed is an order from Allah in the Quran:

O you who believed! Avoid most of conjectures, for surely conjectures in some cases is a sin, and do not spy nor let some of you backbite others. Does one of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? But you abhor it; and be careful of (your duty to) Allah, surely Allah is Oft-returning (to mercy), Merciful.
[The Quran ; 49:12]

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اجْتَنِبُوا كَثِيرًا مِّنَ الظَّنِّ إِنَّ بَعْضَ الظَّنِّ إِثْمٌ وَلَا تَجَسَّسُوا وَلَا يَغْتَب بَّعْضُكُم بَعْضًا أَيُحِبُّ أَحَدُكُمْ أَن يَأْكُلَ لَحْمَ أَخِيهِ مَيْتًا فَكَرِهْتُمُوهُ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ تَوَّابٌ رَّحِيمٌ (12)

-> See how it is was said by Allah to the believers: يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اجْتَنِبُوا كَثِيرًا مِّنَ الظَّنِّ إِنَّ بَعْضَ الظَّنِّ إِثْمٌ , i.e. O you who believed! Avoid most of conjectures, for surely conjectures in some cases is a sin , this is the exact same as dismissing MOST hearsay because even in courts if the hearsayers integrity is high, their hearsay have to be dismissed still, in 49:12 Allah is telling us to avoid most conjectures, you expect that the reason to avoid MOST of it is because MOST conjectures are false but Allah didn't say that, He said avoid MOST conjectures because SOME of it is false, i.e. avoid MOST conjectures even if MOST of it is true, exactly as the human law in court.

Therefore, Bukhari, Mulsim and their likes are nothing but hearsayers promoting conjectures, Bukhari, Muslim and their likes are part of that chain of conjecture, so in a way Bukhari Muslim and their likes are not just telling us that all those hearsayers in their chain of hearsay are people of high integrity but Bukhari, Muslim and their likes are also people of high integrity and we Muslims should take that without questioning it, we can't bloody question it despite their hearsay is telling us that the great prophet was not doing what the Quran told him to do in clear violation to what the prophet was ordered to do by Allah:

Follow what is revealed to you from your Lord; there is no god but He; and withdraw from the polytheists.
[The Quran ; 6:106]

اتَّبِعْ مَا أُوحِيَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ لا إِلَهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ وَأَعْرِضْ عَنِ الْمُشْرِكِينَ (106)

-> See what the prophet was ordered to do : Follow what is revealed to you from your Lord , but Bukhari was telling us that the prophet was not following what was revealed to him,

Did the prophet listened to the above order?, of course he did:

203: And when you bring them not a revelation they say: Why do you not forge it? Say: I only follow what is revealed to me from my Lord; these are clear proofs from your Lord and a guidance and a mercy for a people who believe.

204: And when the Quran is recited, then listen to it and remain silent, that mercy may be shown to you.
[The Quran ; 7:203-204]

وَإِذَا لَمْ تَأْتِهِم بِآيَةٍ قَالُواْ لَوْلاَ اجْتَبَيْتَهَا قُلْ إِنَّمَا أَتَّبِعُ مَا يِوحَى إِلَيَّ مِن رَّبِّي هَذَا بَصَآئِرُ مِن رَّبِّكُمْ وَهُدًى وَرَحْمَةٌ لِّقَوْمٍ يُؤْمِنُونَ (203)
وَإِذَا قُرِىءَ الْقُرْآنُ فَاسْتَمِعُواْ لَهُ وَأَنصِتُواْ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُرْحَمُونَ (204)

-> See what the prophet was saying to the kuffar after they accused him of forging the Quran: Say: I only follow what is revealed to me from my Lord; these are clear proofs from your Lord and a guidance and a mercy for a people who believe., now what can be clear proofs from our lord and a mercy for the people who believe?, THERE IS NOTHING BUT THE QURAN, this is because the hadith of Bukhari Muslim and their likes is not from Allah : these are clear proofs from your Lord , Bukhari and his likes are not our lord. This guidance sent to us from our lord is nothing but the Quran, see what the next verse is saying: And when the Quran is recited, then listen to it and remain silent, that mercy may be shown to you.

The prophet himself asked the kuffar, to bring another book FROM ALLAH better than the torah and injil so he follow it:

Say: Then bring some (other) book from Allah which is a better guide than both of them, (that) I may follow it, if you are truthful.
[The Quran ; 28:49]

قُلْ فَأْتُوا بِكِتَابٍ مِّنْ عِندِ اللَّهِ هُوَ أَهْدَى مِنْهُمَا أَتَّبِعْهُ إِن كُنتُمْ صَادِقِينَ (49)

-> See, Say: Then bring some (other) book from Allah which is a better guide than both of them, (that) I may follow it, if you are truthful., and if the Mushrikoon from the Muslims agree that the Book of Allah (the Quran) is the best then according to 28:49 we don't need to follow another book even if it is from Allah unless it is better than the Quran and yet has to be from Allah

To be continued

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all,

They say:

The "Sahih"

The title of al-Bukhari's collection of traditions, Sahih, means "sound," and it refers to his precept of including only traditions which he considered as being of certain authenticity according to his own rigid criteria.

Ahmed says:

I actually disagree that the Arabic word Sahih means Sound, the Arabic word Sahih means True, surely True is not equal to Sound, so it refers to Bukhari precept as TRUE, they also admitted above that the authenticity of all those thousands of Bukhari hearsay which he considered/labelled TRUE were being selected according to his own rigid criteria, now I have to ask all, should something that is rigid for Bukhari be rigid to others?, of course not, it can only be rigid to others if that something was created by the opinions of others, the SHORA that the Quran taught us, Bukhari didn't consult anyone but himself, he was the investigator, the defence, the prosecutor and the judge, all at once, no wonder that his student Muslim wanted to do the exact same, this must expose them and their flaws that when they created all these hearsay books, everyone picked and chose according to his own desires and not according to the whole Ummah desires based on Shora:

36: So whatever thing you are given, that is only a provision of this world's life, and what is with Allah is better and more lasting for those who believe and rely on their Lord.

37: And those who. shun the great sins and indecencies, and whenever they are angry they forgive.

38: And those who respond to their Lord and keep up prayer, and their rule is to take counsel among themselves, and who spend out of what We have given them.
[The Quran ; 42:36-38]

فَمَا أُوتِيتُم مِّن شَيْءٍ فَمَتَاعُ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَمَا عِندَ اللَّهِ خَيْرٌ وَأَبْقَى لِلَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَلَى رَبِّهِمْ يَتَوَكَّلُونَ (36)
وَالَّذِينَ يَجْتَنِبُونَ كَبَائِرَ الْإِثْمِ وَالْفَوَاحِشَ وَإِذَا مَا غَضِبُوا هُمْ يَغْفِرُونَ (37)
وَالَّذِينَ اسْتَجَابُوا لِرَبِّهِمْ وَأَقَامُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَأَمْرُهُمْ شُورَى بَيْنَهُمْ وَمِمَّا رَزَقْنَاهُمْ يُنفِقُونَ (38)

-> See how the above verses describe the true believers who should be united under the religion of Allah: and what is with Allah is better and more lasting for those who believe and rely on their Lord. , And those who. shun the great sins and indecencies, and whenever they are angry they forgive. , And those who respond to their Lord and keep up prayer, , and and their rule is to take counsel among themselves , however Bukhari, Muslim and their likes didn't do that, everyone went with his own ruling to what to take as a sahih (true) hearsay about Mohammed ignoring the others rulings, no doubt that their reckless action was a major contributor to the division of Islam that we the Muslims are in 2007 have inherited over a period of 1200 years and still heading for more division unless they wake up.

They say:

These criteria were mainly concerned with the reliability of the transmitters mentioned in the chain of transmission of the traditions leading back to the original relator and with the formal perfection of this chain.

Ahmed says:

This is ridiculous because the number one criteria that they should have had which is common sense was dropped in favour of accepting Zunn [/b]Conjecture[/b] regarding the reputation of some people, this meant for Bukhari that if those people talk non sense while he assumed that they are of high integrity then their non sense must make sense some way or another. However this would have never worked and will never work with those who have brains because the non sense will never make sense to them. Falsehood is destined to perish.

They say:

Al-Bukhari is reported to have chosen his "sound" traditions from among some 600,000.

Ahmed says:

You will actually find that all pro Bukhari web sites and books always mention this 600,000 conjecture about him, as if this is a very good reason for us to accept his other 7000 or about sahih (true) ones, quite frankly I found this 600K allegation goes against the hadith as a whole, this is because Bukhari told us that only 1.23% is sahih (true), i.e. 98.77% is false or at least doubtful, yet he included doubtful ones (according to his own admission) along with his so called sahih ones. Imagine that Bukhari extracted his 7000 sahih (true) hadith out of 10,000 alleged ones, this will make the hadith we heard about the prophet 70% sahih and only 30% false, this is the only way that we can consider the hadith from the first place if we are reasonable (at least over 50% is true), let me give you a simple example (I agree it is not identical but I believe it is close enough):

Bukhari in his own criteria dismissed people if their integrity is not 100% clean, i.e. if those people were known to be saying 90% of their talk as truthful and 10% as being doubtful, then it was more than enough to dismiss them and consider them as doubtful, applying Bukhari's criteria on the hadith (as an entity) then according to Bukhari, by us knowing from him that 98.77% is doubtful then it is more than enough for us to dismiss his whole bloody hadith. For Bukhari when he looked at his chain of narrators and learnt that one of them said ONE LIE only, it was enough for him to dismiss all the truthful things that person said, for us we don't know such people, we only look at the hadith as one entity as we look at the Quran or any other book for that matter. Ignoring the 593,000 hadith Bukhari rejected and by looking only at what he included, yet he admitted that some of what he included are doubtful, we have also seen a few that he included that defy common sense like his allegation that the prophet used to approach his wives for sexual desires while they were having their period in clear violation to 2:222, again according to Bukhari's own criteria, it is enough for us to dismiss his whole hadith.

They say:

His collection contains 7,397 traditions with complete chains of transmission, of which 4,635 are repetitions. The great mass of the traditions relate sayings or actions of the prophet Mohammed, though a few relate statements of his Companions.

Ahmed say:

See what he also included : though a few relate statements of his Companions , I have read many of those type of hadith, when I read them I always wonder, why he included such hearsay despite the prophet was not the first one in his chain of hearsay?

They say:

Al-Bukhari has sometimes been criticized for stretching the meaning of traditions for his purpose.

Ahmed says:

They never told us what was his propose though other than to teach Islam and spread the religion of Allah as documented in His Quran, for me his purpose seems to be seeking fame, respect and admiration regardless and irrespective of the Quran words. In addition to stretching the meaning of the traditions I also accuse him (in some cases) of not providing any meaning at all, let's look at Bukhari encounter with 2:223, the one after 2:222 that he told us many times that the prophet violated, let's have a look:

Your wives are a tilth for you, so go into your tilth when you like, and do good beforehand for yourselves, and be careful (of your duty) to Allah, and know that you will meet Him, and give good news to the believers.
[The Quran ; 2:223]

نِسَآؤُكُمْ حَرْثٌ لَّكُمْ فَأْتُواْ حَرْثَكُمْ أَنَّى شِئْتُمْ وَقَدِّمُواْ لأَنفُسِكُمْ وَاتَّقُواْ اللّهَ وَاعْلَمُواْ أَنَّكُم مُّلاَقُوهُ وَبَشِّرِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ (223)


Let's see what Bukhari had to say trying to explain 2:223 to us:

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=0&Rec=6525

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.

See in the above image,

Here is my poor translation to it:

Ishaq INFORMED us that Alnadr Ben Shamil INFORMED us that Ibn Awn TRANSFRRED from Nafi that he SAID, when Ibn Omar read the Quran he didn't speak until he finished it all, one day I was watching him reading sura Al Baqrah until he reached 2:223 then he told me: Do you know why this verse was revealed?, I said: No, he said: It was revealed for BLAH and BLAH

I could not find any better word than BLAH and BLAH to suit the Arabic words KAZA Wa KAZA, the word KAZA means nothing other than a street language for BLAH as far as I believe, i.e. the hadith above didn't really tell us why 2:223 was revealed, just BLAH and BLAH, bloody amazing, what is more amazing that Bukhari seemed to have recognised that he provided no explanation to 2:223 so he included another hadith under the above one as seen in the image, I only translated the first one so far, the second one which have a bit of a red square on it as seen in the above image is a real joke, this is because you think that he brought it trying to provide an explanation after the first hearsay that only told us 2:223 was revealed because of BLAH and BLAH, let's have a look at my poor translation to his second hearsay:

And Abd Alsamad TOLD me that Ayoub TRANSFERRED from Ibn Omar that he SAID, 2:223 means approach the wives in ........

Also, Mohammed Ben Yahya TRANSFERRED it from his father who TRANSFERRED it from Obaid Allah who TRANSFERRED it from Nafi who TRANSFERRED it from Ibn Omar

-> See the part inside the red square, simply Bukhari left it blank because he was not sure of what Ibn Umar said, I wonder why he called his book sahih (true) then?

-What made me really sick is this, a person in the name of Albari, created another book that he based it on Bukhari book, Albari named his book, Fath Albari Bi Sharh Sahih Albukhari, i.e. Albari introduction in explaining Sahih Al Bukhari, yeh why not, let's be famous too and make more books based on the famous ones, you know like Hakim al-Nishaburi who made his book Al-Mustadrak alaa al-Sahihain, which is a mixure of the two books of Bukhari and Muslim, it seems Albari either was after fame or at least he recognised that Bukhari book sahih book is confusing so he needed to explain it in another book.

Let's look at mister Albari explanation to Sahih Al Bukhari regarding the above two confusing hearsay, the following is in the same link as the two hadith above:

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.

The part numbered 1 in blue is really useless, for example mister Albari is trying to explain who is Isahaq so he told us Isahq is Ibn Rahwiah, hahahah, as if we know the second to know the first, this is just total crap man, in that blue section, mister Albari is also telling us that Abd Alsamad is Ibn Abd Alwarith Ibn Saeed, hahaha, yeh sure. So what?

In the second box numbered 2 in red, Albari is telling us that in all copies it was not said where we should approach our wives, i.e. it was left blank, i.e. they don't know, however Albari elaborated by telling us that someone in the name of Hameedi said it should be in the vagina, another guy in name of Barqani agreed with Hameedi that it should be in the vagina, however Albari contradicted both saying that what those two guys (Hameedi and Barqani) say that 2:223 means to approach our wives in the vagina contradicts what the authenticated story that is known about the same hadith from Ibn Omar so Bukhari left it BLANK as seen in the section numbered 3 in red , Albari continued and said that it was commonly known that 2:223 means to approach the wives in the anus, even Mohammed Ibn Sahnoon wrote a section of a book on that subject, also Ibn Shabban wrote a book about it and they explained that Ibn Omar said that 2:223 means to approach the wives in the anus.

This is disgusting, sick and made me wants to puke, now the liars are telling us that 2:223 means to approach our wives in the anus, they use Ibn Omar as their evidence because they consider him a man of integrity, that man of integrity manipulated 2:223 to suit his own low and stinky desire, many Muslims that I know followed his sick and retarded footsteps, his manipulation is clear through his interpretation to the word أَنَّى , Anna, which implies time, i.e. it means WHENEVER, but the liars want it to be WHEREVER, i.e. instead of Approach your wives WHENEVER you desire, they want it Approach your wives WHEREVER you desire, and they bloody desire the anus as Albari just told us in his explanation to Sahih Al Bukhari, well I have two surprises for such sick people who want to defy logic and use the anus for sexual desires while it's clear as light to what the anus was designed for:

Firstly, an important word is used in 2:223 to metaphorically describes our wives, the word is حَرْثٌ , Harth, I.e. tilth, this word is associated with the reproduction of plants, i.e. you plant the seed and the plant should produce Harth (tilth), this clearly and irrefutably indicates that we should approach them in the vagina because this is the only way that they can produce harth (tilth) to us, i.e. children.

Secondly, Allah clearly told us to only approach them from the vagina in the verse before it, 2:222, let's have a look again:

And they ask you about menstruation. Say: It is a harm; therefore keep aloof from the women during the menstrual discharge and do not go near them until they have become clean; then when they have cleansed themselves, go in to them as Allah has commanded you; surely Allah loves those who turn much (to Him), and He loves those who purify themselves.
[The Quran ; 2:222]

وَيَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الْمَحِيضِ قُلْ هُوَ أَذًى فَاعْتَزِلُواْ النِّسَاء فِي الْمَحِيضِ وَلاَ تَقْرَبُوهُنَّ حَتَّىَ يَطْهُرْنَ فَإِذَا تَطَهَّرْنَ فَأْتُوهُنَّ مِنْ حَيْثُ أَمَرَكُمُ اللّهُ إِنَّ اللّهَ يُحِبُّ التَّوَّابِينَ وَيُحِبُّ الْمُتَطَهِّرِينَ (222)

-> See how Allah ordered the men to stay away from their wives while they are having the period then when they become cleansed: يَطْهُرْنَ فَإِذَا تَطَهَّرْنَ فَأْتُوهُنَّ مِنْ حَيْثُ أَمَرَكُمُ اللّهُ , here is the translation by Shakir that I used earlier and here, then when they have cleansed themselves, go in to them as Allah has commanded you , this may be a flawed translation because it may imply that the command of Allah is to just approach the wives (regardless from where), the perfect translation should be as follow: then when they have cleansed themselves, go in to them FROM WHERE Allah has commanded you , the words FROM WHERE are the perfect translation to the Arabic words مِنْ حَيْثُ , pronounced as Min Haithu, with this perfect translation the verse meaning becomes clear and logical, i.e. we can only approach the wives from the vagina because this is the only place that we are commanded by the Creator to insert our male organs into it, Allah created the anus for something else that is obvious to a child, that obvious thing was not obvious for Ibn Omar, a person that Bukhari holds in high regard, possibly Bukhari was ashamed to report Ibn Omar non sense so Bukharu reported it to us as saying Blah and Blah then Bukhari elaborated by another hadith where he left it blank. (I seek refuge by Allah)

They say:

His work became authoritative for the traditions it contained,

Ahmed says:

And who made it authoritative?, I'm sure it was not Allah who made it so

They say:

not for the views expressed by the author, and it is generally accepted by Sunnite Moslems as the most authoritative book after the Koran.

Ahmed says:

Yeh it is generally accepted by Sunnite Moslems as the most authoritative book after the Koran and in the process the committed SHIRK, let me remind our Sunni friends with a couple of Quran verses:

Or have they associates who have prescribed for them in the religion that Allah does not sanction? And were it not for the word of judgment, decision would have certainly been given between them; and surely the unjust shall have a painful punishment.

[The Quran ; 42:21]

أَمْ لَهُمْ شُرَكَاء شَرَعُوا لَهُم مِّنَ الدِّينِ مَا لَمْ يَأْذَن بِهِ اللَّهُ وَلَوْلَا كَلِمَةُ الْفَصْلِ لَقُضِيَ بَيْنَهُمْ وَإِنَّ الظَّالِمِينَ لَهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ (21)

-> See, أَمْ لَهُمْ شُرَكَاء شَرَعُوا لَهُم مِّنَ الدِّينِ مَا لَمْ يَأْذَن بِهِ اللَّهُ, i.e. Or have they associates who have prescribed for them in the religion that Allah does not sanction?


But say not - for any false thing that your tongues may put forth,- This is lawful, and this is forbidden, so as to ascribe false things to Allah. For those who ascribe false things to Allah, will never prosper.
[The Quran ; 6:116]

وَلاَ تَقُولُواْ لِمَا تَصِفُ أَلْسِنَتُكُمُ الْكَذِبَ هَذَا حَلاَلٌ وَهَذَا حَرَامٌ لِّتَفْتَرُواْ عَلَى اللّهِ الْكَذِبَ إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَفْتَرُونَ عَلَى اللّهِ الْكَذِبَ لاَ يُفْلِحُونَ (116)

-> See how the verse started But say not - for any false thing that your tongues may put forth,-, see how what is about to be said is already described as FALSE, let's see what we should never say : هَذَا حَلاَلٌ وَهَذَا حَرَامٌ , i.e. This is lawful, and this is forbidden, again it was described as lies associated to Allah: لِّتَفْتَرُواْ عَلَى اللّهِ الْكَذِبَ ٌ , i.e. so as to ascribe false things to Allah , the problem for those who suggest that this is halal and that is haram without being it sanctioned by Allah is simply as follow: For those who ascribe false things to Allah, will never prosper.

To be continued

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all,

They say:

The "Sahih"

The title of al-Bukhari's collection of traditions, Sahih, means "sound," and it refers to his precept of including only traditions which he considered as being of certain authenticity according to his own rigid criteria.

Ahmed says:

I actually disagree that the Arabic word Sahih means Sound, the Arabic word Sahih means True, surely True is not equal to Sound, so it refers to Bukhari precept as TRUE, they also admitted above that the authenticity of all those thousands of Bukhari hearsay which he considered/labelled TRUE were being selected according to his own rigid criteria, now I have to ask all, should something that is rigid for Bukhari be rigid to others?, of course not, it can only be rigid to others if that something was created by the opinions of others, the SHORA that the Quran taught us, Bukhari didn't consult anyone but himself, he was the investigator, the defence, the prosecutor and the judge, all at once, no wonder that his student Muslim wanted to do the exact same, this must expose them and their flaws that when they created all these hearsay books, everyone picked and chose according to his own desires and not according to the whole Ummah desires based on Shora:

36: So whatever thing you are given, that is only a provision of this world's life, and what is with Allah is better and more lasting for those who believe and rely on their Lord.

37: And those who. shun the great sins and indecencies, and whenever they are angry they forgive.

38: And those who respond to their Lord and keep up prayer, and their rule is to take counsel among themselves, and who spend out of what We have given them.
[The Quran ; 42:36-38]

فَمَا أُوتِيتُم مِّن شَيْءٍ فَمَتَاعُ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَمَا عِندَ اللَّهِ خَيْرٌ وَأَبْقَى لِلَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَلَى رَبِّهِمْ يَتَوَكَّلُونَ (36)
وَالَّذِينَ يَجْتَنِبُونَ كَبَائِرَ الْإِثْمِ وَالْفَوَاحِشَ وَإِذَا مَا غَضِبُوا هُمْ يَغْفِرُونَ (37)
وَالَّذِينَ اسْتَجَابُوا لِرَبِّهِمْ وَأَقَامُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَأَمْرُهُمْ شُورَى بَيْنَهُمْ وَمِمَّا رَزَقْنَاهُمْ يُنفِقُونَ (38)

-> See how the above verses describe the true believers who should be united under the religion of Allah: and what is with Allah is better and more lasting for those who believe and rely on their Lord. , And those who. shun the great sins and indecencies, and whenever they are angry they forgive. , And those who respond to their Lord and keep up prayer, , and and their rule is to take counsel among themselves , however Bukhari, Muslim and their likes didn't do that, everyone went with his own ruling to what to take as a sahih (true) hearsay about Mohammed ignoring the others rulings, no doubt that their reckless action was a major contributor to the division of Islam that we the Muslims are in 2007 have inherited over a period of 1200 years and still heading for more division unless they wake up.

They say:

These criteria were mainly concerned with the reliability of the transmitters mentioned in the chain of transmission of the traditions leading back to the original relator and with the formal perfection of this chain.

Ahmed says:

This is ridiculous because the number one criteria that they should have had which is common sense was dropped in favour of accepting Zunn [/b]Conjecture[/b] regarding the reputation of some people, this meant for Bukhari that if those people talk non sense while he assumed that they are of high integrity then their non sense must make sense some way or another. However this would have never worked and will never work with those who have brains because the non sense will never make sense to them. Falsehood is destined to perish.

They say:

Al-Bukhari is reported to have chosen his "sound" traditions from among some 600,000.

Ahmed says:

You will actually find that all pro Bukhari web sites and books always mention this 600,000 conjecture about him, as if this is a very good reason for us to accept his other 7000 or about sahih (true) ones, quite frankly I found this 600K allegation goes against the hadith as a whole, this is because Bukhari told us that only 1.23% is sahih (true), i.e. 98.77% is false or at least doubtful, yet he included doubtful ones (according to his own admission) along with his so called sahih ones. Imagine that Bukhari extracted his 7000 sahih (true) hadith out of 10,000 alleged ones, this will make the hadith we heard about the prophet 70% sahih and only 30% false, this is the only way that we can consider the hadith from the first place if we are reasonable (at least over 50% is true), let me give you a simple example (I agree it is not identical but I believe it is close enough):

Bukhari in his own criteria dismissed people if their integrity is not 100% clean, i.e. if those people were known to be saying 90% of their talk as truthful and 10% as being doubtful, then it was more than enough to dismiss them and consider them as doubtful, applying Bukhari's criteria on the hadith (as an entity) then according to Bukhari, by us knowing from him that 98.77% is doubtful then it is more than enough for us to dismiss his whole bloody hadith. For Bukhari when he looked at his chain of narrators and learnt that one of them said ONE LIE only, it was enough for him to dismiss all the truthful things that person said, for us we don't know such people, we only look at the hadith as one entity as we look at the Quran or any other book for that matter. Ignoring the 593,000 hadith Bukhari rejected and by looking only at what he included, yet he admitted that some of what he included are doubtful, we have also seen a few that he included that defy common sense like his allegation that the prophet used to approach his wives for sexual desires while they were having their period in clear violation to 2:222, again according to Bukhari's own criteria, it is enough for us to dismiss his whole hadith.

They say:

His collection contains 7,397 traditions with complete chains of transmission, of which 4,635 are repetitions. The great mass of the traditions relate sayings or actions of the prophet Mohammed, though a few relate statements of his Companions.

Ahmed say:

See what he also included : though a few relate statements of his Companions , I have read many of those type of hadith, when I read them I always wonder, why he included such hearsay despite the prophet was not the first one in his chain of hearsay?

They say:

Al-Bukhari has sometimes been criticized for stretching the meaning of traditions for his purpose.

Ahmed says:

They never told us what was his propose though other than to teach Islam and spread the religion of Allah as documented in His Quran, for me his purpose seems to be seeking fame, respect and admiration regardless and irrespective of the Quran words. In addition to stretching the meaning of the traditions I also accuse him (in some cases) of not providing any meaning at all, let's look at Bukhari encounter with 2:223, the one after 2:222 that he told us many times that the prophet violated, let's have a look:

Your wives are a tilth for you, so go into your tilth when you like, and do good beforehand for yourselves, and be careful (of your duty) to Allah, and know that you will meet Him, and give good news to the believers.
[The Quran ; 2:223]

نِسَآؤُكُمْ حَرْثٌ لَّكُمْ فَأْتُواْ حَرْثَكُمْ أَنَّى شِئْتُمْ وَقَدِّمُواْ لأَنفُسِكُمْ وَاتَّقُواْ اللّهَ وَاعْلَمُواْ أَنَّكُم مُّلاَقُوهُ وَبَشِّرِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ (223)


Let's see what Bukhari had to say trying to explain 2:223 to us:

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=0&Rec=6525

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.

See in the above image,

Here is my poor translation to it:

Ishaq INFORMED us that Alnadr Ben Shamil INFORMED us that Ibn Awn TRANSFRRED from Nafi that he SAID, when Ibn Omar read the Quran he didn't speak until he finished it all, one day I was watching him reading sura Al Baqrah until he reached 2:223 then he told me: Do you know why this verse was revealed?, I said: No, he said: It was revealed for BLAH and BLAH

I could not find any better word than BLAH and BLAH to suit the Arabic words KAZA Wa KAZA, the word KAZA means nothing other than a street language for BLAH as far as I believe, i.e. the hadith above didn't really tell us why 2:223 was revealed, just BLAH and BLAH, bloody amazing, what is more amazing that Bukhari seemed to have recognised that he provided no explanation to 2:223 so he included another hadith under the above one as seen in the image, I only translated the first one so far, the second one which have a bit of a red square on it as seen in the above image is a real joke, this is because you think that he brought it trying to provide an explanation after the first hearsay that only told us 2:223 was revealed because of BLAH and BLAH, let's have a look at my poor translation to his second hearsay:

And Abd Alsamad TOLD me that Ayoub TRANSFERRED from Ibn Omar that he SAID, 2:223 means approach the wives in ........

Also, Mohammed Ben Yahya TRANSFERRED it from his father who TRANSFERRED it from Obaid Allah who TRANSFERRED it from Nafi who TRANSFERRED it from Ibn Omar

-> See the part inside the red square, simply Bukhari left it blank because he was not sure of what Ibn Umar said, I wonder why he called his book sahih (true) then?

-What made me really sick is this, a person in the name of Albari, created another book that he based it on Bukhari book, Albari named his book, Fath Albari Bi Sharh Sahih Albukhari, i.e. Albari introduction in explaining Sahih Al Bukhari, yeh why not, let's be famous too and make more books based on the famous ones, you know like Hakim al-Nishaburi who made his book Al-Mustadrak alaa al-Sahihain, which is a mixure of the two books of Bukhari and Muslim, it seems Albari either was after fame or at least he recognised that Bukhari book sahih book is confusing so he needed to explain it in another book.

Let's look at mister Albari explanation to Sahih Al Bukhari regarding the above two confusing hearsay, the following is in the same link as the two hadith above:

Thumbnail, click to enlarge.

The part numbered 1 in blue is really useless, for example mister Albari is trying to explain who is Isahaq so he told us Isahq is Ibn Rahwiah, hahahah, as if we know the second to know the first, this is just total crap man, in that blue section, mister Albari is also telling us that Abd Alsamad is Ibn Abd Alwarith Ibn Saeed, hahaha, yeh sure. So what?

In the second box numbered 2 in red, Albari is telling us that in all copies it was not said where we should approach our wives, i.e. it was left blank, i.e. they don't know, however Albari elaborated by telling us that someone in the name of Hameedi said it should be in the vagina, another guy in name of Barqani agreed with Hameedi that it should be in the vagina, however Albari contradicted both saying that what those two guys (Hameedi and Barqani) say that 2:223 means to approach our wives in the vagina contradicts what the authenticated story that is known about the same hadith from Ibn Omar so Bukhari left it BLANK as seen in the section numbered 3 in red , Albari continued and said that it was commonly known that 2:223 means to approach the wives in the anus, even Mohammed Ibn Sahnoon wrote a section of a book on that subject, also Ibn Shabban wrote a book about it and they explained that Ibn Omar said that 2:223 means to approach the wives in the anus.

This is disgusting, sick and made me wants to puke, now the liars are telling us that 2:223 means to approach our wives in the anus, they use Ibn Omar as their evidence because they consider him a man of integrity, that man of integrity manipulated 2:223 to suit his own low and stinky desire, many Muslims that I know followed his sick and retarded footsteps, his manipulation is clear through his interpretation to the word أَنَّى , Anna, which implies time, i.e. it means WHENEVER, but the liars want it to be WHEREVER, i.e. instead of Approach your wives WHENEVER you desire, they want it Approach your wives WHEREVER you desire, and they bloody desire the anus as Albari just told us in his explanation to Sahih Al Bukhari, well I have two surprises for such sick people who want to defy logic and use the anus for sexual desires while it's clear as light to what the anus was designed for:

Firstly, an important word is used in 2:223 to metaphorically describes our wives, the word is حَرْثٌ , Harth, I.e. tilth, this word is associated with the reproduction of plants, i.e. you plant the seed and the plant should produce Harth (tilth), this clearly and irrefutably indicates that we should approach them in the vagina because this is the only way that they can produce harth (tilth) to us, i.e. children.

Secondly, Allah clearly told us to only approach them from the vagina in the verse before it, 2:222, let's have a look again:

And they ask you about menstruation. Say: It is a harm; therefore keep aloof from the women during the menstrual discharge and do not go near them until they have become clean; then when they have cleansed themselves, go in to them as Allah has commanded you; surely Allah loves those who turn much (to Him), and He loves those who purify themselves.
[The Quran ; 2:222]

وَيَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الْمَحِيضِ قُلْ هُوَ أَذًى فَاعْتَزِلُواْ النِّسَاء فِي الْمَحِيضِ وَلاَ تَقْرَبُوهُنَّ حَتَّىَ يَطْهُرْنَ فَإِذَا تَطَهَّرْنَ فَأْتُوهُنَّ مِنْ حَيْثُ أَمَرَكُمُ اللّهُ إِنَّ اللّهَ يُحِبُّ التَّوَّابِينَ وَيُحِبُّ الْمُتَطَهِّرِينَ (222)

-> See how Allah ordered the men to stay away from their wives while they are having the period then when they become cleansed: يَطْهُرْنَ فَإِذَا تَطَهَّرْنَ فَأْتُوهُنَّ مِنْ حَيْثُ أَمَرَكُمُ اللّهُ , here is the translation by Shakir that I used earlier and here, then when they have cleansed themselves, go in to them as Allah has commanded you , this may be a flawed translation because it may imply that the command of Allah is to just approach the wives (regardless from where), the perfect translation should be as follow: then when they have cleansed themselves, go in to them FROM WHERE Allah has commanded you , the words FROM WHERE are the perfect translation to the Arabic words مِنْ حَيْثُ , pronounced as Min Haithu, with this perfect translation the verse meaning becomes clear and logical, i.e. we can only approach the wives from the vagina because this is the only place that we are commanded by the Creator to insert our male organs into it, Allah created the anus for something else that is obvious to a child, that obvious thing was not obvious for Ibn Omar, a person that Bukhari holds in high regard, possibly Bukhari was ashamed to report Ibn Omar non sense so Bukharu reported it to us as saying Blah and Blah then Bukhari elaborated by another hadith where he left it blank. (I seek refuge by Allah)

They say:

His work became authoritative for the traditions it contained,

Ahmed says:

And who made it authoritative?, I'm sure it was not Allah who made it so

They say:

not for the views expressed by the author, and it is generally accepted by Sunnite Moslems as the most authoritative book after the Koran.

Ahmed says:

Yeh it is generally accepted by Sunnite Moslems as the most authoritative book after the Koran and in the process the committed SHIRK, let me remind our Sunni friends with a couple of Quran verses:

Or have they associates who have prescribed for them in the religion that Allah does not sanction? And were it not for the word of judgment, decision would have certainly been given between them; and surely the unjust shall have a painful punishment.

[The Quran ; 42:21]

أَمْ لَهُمْ شُرَكَاء شَرَعُوا لَهُم مِّنَ الدِّينِ مَا لَمْ يَأْذَن بِهِ اللَّهُ وَلَوْلَا كَلِمَةُ الْفَصْلِ لَقُضِيَ بَيْنَهُمْ وَإِنَّ الظَّالِمِينَ لَهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ (21)

-> See, أَمْ لَهُمْ شُرَكَاء شَرَعُوا لَهُم مِّنَ الدِّينِ مَا لَمْ يَأْذَن بِهِ اللَّهُ, i.e. Or have they associates who have prescribed for them in the religion that Allah does not sanction?


But say not - for any false thing that your tongues may put forth,- This is lawful, and this is forbidden, so as to ascribe false things to Allah. For those who ascribe false things to Allah, will never prosper.
[The Quran ; 6:116]

وَلاَ تَقُولُواْ لِمَا تَصِفُ أَلْسِنَتُكُمُ الْكَذِبَ هَذَا حَلاَلٌ وَهَذَا حَرَامٌ لِّتَفْتَرُواْ عَلَى اللّهِ الْكَذِبَ إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَفْتَرُونَ عَلَى اللّهِ الْكَذِبَ لاَ يُفْلِحُونَ (116)

-> See how the verse started But say not - for any false thing that your tongues may put forth,-, see how what is about to be said is already described as FALSE, let's see what we should never say : هَذَا حَلاَلٌ وَهَذَا حَرَامٌ , i.e. This is lawful, and this is forbidden, again it was described as lies associated to Allah: لِّتَفْتَرُواْ عَلَى اللّهِ الْكَذِبَ ٌ , i.e. so as to ascribe false things to Allah , the problem for those who suggest that this is halal and that is haram without being it sanctioned by Allah is simply as follow: For those who ascribe false things to Allah, will never prosper.

To be continued