===================================
Harder to show proof under hudud
The current criminal law is better because it is easier to prove a case beyond reasonable doubt, says DAP's Karpal Singh.Athi Shankar, FMT
Potential criminals will not fear the Islamic hudud law because its burden of proof was harder than current criminal law in the country, DAP chairman Karpal Singhs said today.
Hence, he said hudud law could not serve public interests well because if it was applied, virtually no one could be convicted of crime.
Under hudud, it would be practically impossible to prove a case against an accused without a shadow of doubt.
Comparatively, he suggested that it could be easier to prove a case beyond reasonable doubt under the current criminal law.
For instance, he said the requirement that there must be four witnesses to prove a rape case under hudud would make it impossible to convict a person.
Thus, it would not be able to deter crime and criminals, he said.
“Under hudud, you have to prove a case beyond a shadow of doubt… practically 100%, unlike the present criminal law, which is beyond reasonable doubt.
“Criminals and potential criminals will not fear hudud because they know it will be difficult to prove the charge against them. Hudud law cannot be a deterrent,” he said.
He also said he was never “anti-Islam” because as a MP, he had accepted the Federal Constitution that stipulated the status of Islam as the official religion of the country.
He said he was only opposing the implementation of an Islamic state and hudud law because it was unconstitutional.
Karpal has said that he would sue Bachok MP Nasharuddin Mat Isa for labelling him as “anti-Islam”.
He said he was also ready to face any counter suit to be brought by Nasharuddin. “I am prepared to face him in any court, anywhere,” he said.
===================================================
Pak Yehs opinion :
The opinion by Karpal Singh is the truth. If it is no the truth,then PAS Ulama or any Ulama should try to debate him and show him that what he say is not the truth. The burden of proof now is on PAS Ulamas who are too eager to implement hudud law when the law itself is not fully developed yet.
I hate to say this,but the Shariah Law is still in its infancy, and has caused a great deal of injustice to women especially. This is because the Ulamas and Shariah Lawyers are doing it dogmatically using hearsay hadis as evidence instead of using the Quran and their logic. The use of dogmas cannot be conceived as truths, because such dogmas based on the reliability of hadis which is collected by hearsay cannot be used in any court of law. A hadis that was never in use during prophet Mohammads time and during 300 years after the prophet died is nothing but hearsay. That is the truth of the issue. As long as the hadis is used, then hearsay becomes truth. The hadis just says "It was reported by Mr A who heard it from Mr B who heard it from Mr C, who heard it from the prophet Mohammad that......". This method is exactly what hearsay means. Law based on hearsay is like law based on mythology and someones figment of imagination. No reasoning is required due to it being illogical.
There is a misconception that Secular Law is not Islamic Law. I disagree with that. I think Secular Law is also Gods law, especially when it conforms to Gods requirements, ie the books of God is used by the swearing on the Bible,Torah,or Quran at a Secular Court of Law. Besides the Secular Law is based on reasoning, which is what the Quran calls for, (refer Quran 39:18 " Listen to all views. Choose the best view.These are the guided and the intelligent"). Is it not what The Judges and Lawyers do to choose the best view as required byAllah in the Quran.??? Hence the Secular Law is also Gods law, developed by Jews and Christians using God's books.!!!
As for criminal laws on rape, murder, Shariah/Hudud Law can never be, even half as good as Secular Criminal Laws because of advanced, science based, evidence collecting process and forensic. You can never prove rape and adultery by 4 witnesses.!!! I believe that the procedures in the Secular law especially on Criminal cases be maintained instead of hudud law.
As for Hudud Laws, I had made my stand clear.( refer http://warongpakyeh.blogspot.com/2011/09/hudud-pas-tidak-islamic.html ).
The weakness of the PAS Hudud is that the Ulamas use vain hadis from Bukhari Muslim, to justify the chopping of a kids hand for stealing a blanket. Ironically this hadis implies that the government of prophet Mohammad chops hands even for a paltry offense that do not commensurate with a "proper punishment for the proper offense". As the Quran rightly predicted.Quran 31:6 "Some people use vain hadis to mislead others from Allah's path, without knowledge, and make a mockery of it(Allah's path/Islam"). Proofs : 1) Chopping a hand for stealing a blanket is making a mockery of Islam.
2) Killing the apostate is making a mockery of Islam.
3) Whipping for drnking 4% alcohol in drinks is making a mockery of Islam.
4) Killing a married adulterer is making a mockery of Islam.
That is because the punishment does not commensurate with the crime. Thus an injustice is made in the name of Allah.
Because of these reasons, I cannot accept the use of the Hudud based on Hadis which is of hearsay in nature, as proof or evidence in law. However I shall accept the Quran as the proof, evidence and source of law. And that too after the process of Quran 39:18 is used to debate it. Unfortunately Quran 39:18 had so far been unused by Ulamas who replace it with dogmatic, mythological and hearsay hadis written by liars that make a mockery of Islam.
May Allah give us guidance in our search for the true Islam.
90 comments:
Salam Bro.
How do you interprate surah24:2. Flog the fornicatress and the fornicator with 100 lashes each.Let there be no reluctance in enforcing the laws of God.if youm have faith in God and the Day of Judgement..Let it take place in the presence of a group of believers.
Vary simple,you can use normal police investigation on rape cases and trial in civil court.Ih you found him guilty,instead of sending him to jail ,you flog him 100 time ,not in prison but in Dataran Merdeka where everybody can see.
I think everybody will think twice beforebhe commit rape or Zina.
Same goes with stealing or CBT. You can set the minimum amount say 500 thousand and above.You goes same trial but punishment you cut the hand.And do it in public.I can tell you after this no more cheque bounce,or CBT,or Corruption.
I think the sprit of HuDud panishment more toward to deter crime.i think the currerent punishment under secular law more cruel and unjust.
Take for example if you are found guilty of murder like Atantulya case.Insp.Sairul will be hang to death.but under Hudud law if he can paymblood money to Altantuya family he can go free.
Also if you impose chopping the head for murder under hudud.and do it in public,you might think twice before ou commit crime.
Do you agree bro.
Salam Bro.
How do you interprate surah24:2. Flog the fornicatress and the fornicator with 100 lashes each.Let there be no reluctance in enforcing the laws of God.if youm have faith in God and the Day of Judgement..Let it take place in the presence of a group of believers.
Vary simple,you can use normal police investigation on rape cases and trial in civil court.Ih you found him guilty,instead of sending him to jail ,you flog him 100 time ,not in prison but in Dataran Merdeka where everybody can see.
I think everybody will think twice beforebhe commit rape or Zina.
Same goes with stealing or CBT. You can set the minimum amount say 500 thousand and above.You goes same trial but punishment you cut the hand.And do it in public.I can tell you after this no more cheque bounce,or CBT,or Corruption.
I think the sprit of HuDud panishment more toward to deter crime.i think the currerent punishment under secular law more cruel and unjust.
Take for example if you are found guilty of murder like Atantulya case.Insp.Sairul will be hang to death.but under Hudud law if he can paymblood money to Altantuya family he can go free.
Also if you impose chopping the head for murder under hudud.and do it in public,you might think twice before ou commit crime.
Do you agree bro.
Salam Bro.
How do you interprate surah24:2. Flog the fornicatress and the fornicator with 100 lashes each.Let there be no reluctance in enforcing the laws of God.if youm have faith in God and the Day of Judgement..Let it take place in the presence of a group of believers.
Vary simple,you can use normal police investigation on rape cases and trial in civil court.Ih you found him guilty,instead of sending him to jail ,you flog him 100 time ,not in prison but in Dataran Merdeka where everybody can see.
I think everybody will think twice beforebhe commit rape or Zina.
Same goes with stealing or CBT. You can set the minimum amount say 500 thousand and above.You goes same trial but punishment you cut the hand.And do it in public.I can tell you after this no more cheque bounce,or CBT,or Corruption.
I think the sprit of HuDud panishment more toward to deter crime.i think the currerent punishment under secular law more cruel and unjust.
Take for example if you are found guilty of murder like Atantulya case.Insp.Sairul will be hang to death.but under Hudud law if he can paymblood money to Altantuya family he can go free.
Also if you impose chopping the head for murder under hudud.and do it in public,you might think twice before ou commit crime.
Do you agree bro.
Hudud law ada dalam quran surah 24:2. Sudah jelas apa nak debate lagi.Jika bunoh kena potong kepala berzina kena sebat 100 rotan dan mencuri kena potong tangan,siapa yang berani lakukan jenayah.
Soalnya hukum sekarang kita laksana kan dalam penjara,tapi hukum hudud mesti dilaksanakan di kalayak ramai.Baru ada contoh.
Kita gunakan mahkamah sekarang untok bicara.Siasatan ikut cara modern.Hanya hukumnya diambil apa yang quran suroh.
Sekarang ini hukum bunoh kena ganong jika salah.apa bezanya hukom gantong dengan pancong kepala.dua dua hukom ia akan mati.Tapi dalam hudud ia ada jalan keluar dengan bayar blood money kapada keluarga mangsa.mana lebeh adil.
Salam Mat Kluang,
Thank you for debating with me. Its so dificult to get Ulamas to debate with me. You are no an Ulama are you,?
Mat Kluang said :
How do you interprate surah24:2. Flog the fornicatress and the fornicator with 100 lashes each.Let there be no reluctance in enforcing the laws of God.if youm have faith in God and the Day of Judgement..Let it take place in the presence of a group of believers.
Pak Yehs reply:
I agree with you Quranic hudud. I only disagree with lahwal hadis hudud or vain/false hadis. Even Allah disagree with using of lahwal hadis. Refer Quran 31:6 "Some people use lahwal hadis to mislead others from Allahs path,without knowledge, and make a mockery of it(Allahs patha/Islam)".
The lahwal hadis PAS hudud says that a married fornicator shall be stoned to death. The punishment here does meet the crime and it contradicts 2 other verses in the Quran.Refer http://warongpakyeh.blogspot.com/2008/11/hardying-and-softyang-of-islamic-law.html
Mat Kluang said:
Vary simple,you can use normal police investigation on rape cases and trial in civil court.Ih you found him guilty,instead of sending him to jail ,you flog him 100 time ,not in prison but in Dataran Merdeka where everybody can see.
Pak Yehs reply:
Well if that is the case,it will mean we keep the Secular/Civil Law but amend the punishment for not just Muslim but for everyone,because the Law mut be seen to be fair to all. Why dont PAS propose to implement new rape and fornication laws instead of frightening every maried fornicator with death.
Mat Kluang said:
Same goes with stealing or CBT. You can set the minimum amount say 500 thousand and above.You goes same trial but punishment you cut the hand.And do it in public.I can tell you after this no more cheque bounce,or CBT,or Corruption.
Pak Yehs reply
I agree with you on implementing Quranic laws.It is hadis laws that i disagree. Abdul Hadis quoted a hadis that says the prophet Mohammad choped off the hand of a person stealing a blanket.This is an insult on propet Muhammads and Allahs Islamic government. Are we going tho chop off hands for stealing food.??? Again, the Secular law can be amended to include Quranic Laws after a debate as per Quran 39:18, to accept the best view/interpretation.
Salam Anonymouse,
terima kaseh kerana sudi berbahas.
Saya setyju dengan cadangan guna hudud Quran. Yang saya tidak setuju adalah hudud hadis dan Ulama.
Secular Law boleh di amend untok masukkan Quranic law. Methodology perbicaraan Secular Law lebeh cangih matang dan Islamic dari Hudud dan Shariah. Ini kerana hukum berasaskan dogma Ulama dan bukan bahas ia tuu Quran 39:18 "Dengari semua hujah.Pilih yang terbaik. Mereka ini adalah yang di beri petunjuk dan berintelek.". Kadang2 Undang2 Shariah tidak adil bagi kaum wanita, kerana hadis di guna menganti Quran, dan akal/logik tidak di terima sebagai sumber hukum.
I dont understand this. Will hudud be applied in our current mainstream criminal law? Or will it only apply in our sharia criminal law?
The Civil Law allows for native laws to be implemented together with it by choice. Example the native Iban Laws. Malay Muslims can ask for hudud laws to be implemented on themselves. It an option. This option is already in place in most state laws.
The debate is more of which law ,hudud or secular criminal law is more effective. when you debate the effectiveness of hudud law on rape against the secular laws on rape, of courese the secular laws are more effective because of DNA testing. So Secular law on rape should be used instead.
a'kum ,
from you :
'..The debate is more of which law ,hudud or secular criminal law is more effective. when you debate the effectiveness of hudud law on rape against the secular laws on rape, of courese the secular laws are more effective because of DNA testing. So Secular law on rape should be used instead..'
Might not be. Rape is classified as crime against the state ('hirabah'). As such there is no requirement for the 4 witnesses. Therefore DNA testing etc (ie. the so called lesser evidence) can be used :
4 witnesses in rape??
If you read Quran24:4 carefully , it is about a person who accuses a woman of adultery / zina. However in the case of rape , it is the woman who has the complain.
The requirement for 4 witnesses are for the accusations of
(1) adultery
(2) sodomy
The accuser need to back his / her accusation with 4 witnesses who witnessed the 'sword in the scabbard'. Such is impossible unless the act is done in public. This ruling is more towards ensuring a person's dignity. His / her punishment will be in the hereafter.
Hope this explanation clears your confusion about rape and adultery - they are different issues.
What has been mentioned above is the process of providing evidence and / or testimony. We have not come to the prescribed punishment.
The prescribed punishment for rape , if considered 'hirabah' is per Quran5:33 '..Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,..'
There is also a hadith relating to rape ; Sunan Abu Dawood Book 38, Number 4366:
'..“Narrated Wa’il ibn Hujr: “When a woman went out in the time of the Prophet (P) for prayer, a man attacked her and overpowered [raped] her. She shouted and he went off, and when a man came by, she said: That [man] did such and such to me. And when a company of the Emigrants came by, she said: That man did such and such to me. They went and seized the man whom they thought had had intercourse with her and brought him to her.
She said: Yes, this is he. Then they brought him to the Apostle of Allah (P).
When he [the Prophet] was about to pass sentence, the man who [actually] had assaulted her stood up and said: Apostle of Allah, I am the man who did it to her.
He [the Prophet] said to her: Go away, for Allah has forgiven you. But he told the man some good words [Abu Dawud said: "meaning the man who was seized"], and of the man who had had intercourse with her, he said: “Stone him to death.“..'
Pak yeh.
Susah kita hendak berbicara mengenai hukum hudud kerana saya dapati Pak Yeh tidak percaya kapada Hadith Rasuallah.
Quran hanya belah menyatakan hukum hudud tapi perlaksanaan nya kena lihat apa yang di lakukan oleh Rasuallah.
Macam Quran suroh kita sembayang,cara sembayangnya kita kena lihat apa yang Rasuallah buat.
Dalam Hukum orang berzina mengikut surah 24:2 Quran kata ia disebat 100 kali.Bai orang yang berkawin Rasuallh suroh rejam dengan batu ampai mati.
Satu kesan Hukum Hudud yang amat berkesan dan menakutkan ialah ianya dijalankan di khalayak ramai.Potong kepala dihadapan mesjid salepas sembayang jumaat.Potong tangan depan mesjid lepas sembayang jumaaat.
Hukum civil kita gantong dalam penjara,siapa pun tidak tengok.
Jadi jika orang ramai tengok hukum dijalankan ia akan fikir dua kali hendak berzina atau membunoh.atau mencuri.
Jika tiada saksi kita guna DNA.ini tidak salah asalkan kita boleh bukti ia lakukan.
I think the main issue for me is the name hudud itself - which is interpreted as Islamic laws or based on Islam.
For one, a law that is based on religion (not just Islam) per se will always be considered sensitive and too much emotional baggage. We have seen how the answer to non-Muslims is "you don't know Islam" or you're anti-Islam (re.Nasha-Karpal). This already sets a tone against rational debate. Compared there with secular law, which is simply acknowledged as man-made laws and that can be debated and argued against freely.
We have seen precedences in the past, particularly in the West of how the Church interprets the Bible or pass judgements/rulings as law. This was the birth of the separation of church and state and secularism.
Now on the opinion by Karpal above. You have made your opinion clear on this, and so has another poster by the name of Mat Keluang.
Mat Keluang:
I think the idea of using the most heinous punishment of law as deterrent is abhorent. From your post, it is apparent that you detest adultery and think that is wrong. However, wrong as it is there is no physical harm in this instance and only emotional harm. Compare that to the murder case (e.g. you cited Altantuya) which causes physical harm. You think it's perfectly ok to flog someone for adultery but it's "unjust and cruel' to hang someone for murder (as you mentioned that in Hudud he can pay bloodmoney). I would say most right-thinking people would disagree with you on this.
Adultery will still go on - but in this case people will be reluctant to report each other if they are aware of the severe punishment. So what happens then - we establish peeping squads to keep people in check? CCTVs in houses and bedrooms? Eerily enough, you can see a slight parallel to that happening this days. Where people are so fearful of spying squads and they "act" decently or they get punished. Is this the image that Muslims in Malaysia want to project as a model Islam country. Where the people are good Muslims because there are spying squads and severe punishment if they misbehave??
A second problem is this - what if I disagree with you (e.g paying blood money to settle murder) - can the laws and punishments stated be changed? I can already anticipate the usual loud voices saying that this "divine law" or why go against the wisdom of the past. Furthermore, even Islamic scholars and Muslims have different interpretations, as shown in this blog. I'm not entirely sure, but if I'm not mistaken some of these differences can be traced to the different schools (mazhabs) that follow different leanings and scholars. Which one should we follow? What makes one school more 'correct', and will other schools allow this school to enforce its view? We have seen how our local religious officers are so suspicious of a foreign imam from Masjid Al-Haram spreading Wahabi.
I think what it boils down to is this - implementing Hudud or any religious-based laws carry a huge amount of emotional baggage and as history shows, prone to manipulation and for entrenchment of power. I also agree with pakyehs questions on mixing civil/syariah law as well and why the need to go through all the hassle, which I feel is mostly cosmetic dressing to distinguish against the "filthy/western concept" of secular laws.
-jenny
An opinion piece just published today:
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/article/arguing-for-a-secular-state-ahmad-farouk-musa/
-jenny
Beware !!!
Hudud in the hands of evil politicians will see many opposition hands cut off for alleged corruption and many killed for apostate.
Hudud can be used similar to how ISA was used.
Think about that.!!!
Dont make a mistake that you will regret.!!!
It is not the punishment that deters the crime, but the preventive management,like making everybody rich that eliminates thieves.!!!
I totally disagree with chopping of hands for poor people. i dont mind choppinig the hands of corrupted politicians.
Prevention is better than cure.!!!
Dear jenny,
I totally agree with Ahmad Farouk Musa. Enforcement by police (MacGregors Theory X)of religious duties makes Muslims a hypocrite.
the Quran says,Quran 2:245 "There is no compulsion in religion."
Sory a mistake... Quran 2:256 "There is no compulsion in religion".
You cannot force a person to be good.
You can only preach it to him. Only Allah's inspiration can make a person a good Muslim. Imagine whipping kids just to make them pray. The will not fear Allah but they will fear the cane.That will make them a hypocrite.
If we follow Quran 2:256. there is no need for hudud, especially killing of apostates and adulterers and chopping of hands for petty thieves.
Salam sam1528,
Your defence of hudud on rape is a new and improved version. In the past rapist escape procecution under hudud law all the time, because the victim had to bring 4 witness.
The use of DNA is a secular law that you copied. So why not use secular law rather than call it hudud law.
Anonymouse said :
There is also a hadith relating to rape ; Sunan Abu Dawood Book 38, Number 4366:
'..“Narrated Wa’il ibn Hujr: “When a woman went out in the time of the Prophet (P) for prayer, a man attacked her and overpowered [raped] her. She shouted and he went off, and when a man came by, she said: That [man] did such and such to me. And when a company of the Emigrants came by, she said: That man did such and such to me. They went and seized the man whom they thought had had intercourse with her and brought him to her.
She said: Yes, this is he. Then they brought him to the Apostle of Allah (P).
When he [the Prophet] was about to pass sentence, the man who [actually] had assaulted her stood up and said: Apostle of Allah, I am the man who did it to her.
He [the Prophet] said to her: Go away, for Allah has forgiven you. But he told the man some good words [Abu Dawud said: "meaning the man who was seized"], and of the man who had had intercourse with her, he said: “Stone him to death.“..'
Pak Yehs reply:
You agama hadis Muslims keep on giving lahwal hadis that mocks islam.Refer Quran 31:6 "Some people use lahwal hadis to mislead others from Allahs path, without knowledge,and make a mockery of it(Allahs path/Islam".
No rapist would admit that they did it. Stop making a fool of yourself and other Muslims.!!!
Bukhari and Muslim is guilty of saying that Allah is stuoid and flip floped when He planned 50 a day and had to reduce it to 5 solats a day, in the Israk Mikraj hadis.
Why do you believe in such lies.
a'kum pak yeh ,
I differ in opinion. What I've presented is 'has and always been' and not new nor improved version. However I am interested to know how did you come to the understanding that the victim needs 4 witnesses to prove a case against her rapist. Can you provide the references to your understanding?? As far as I know , there is no such understanding in the Islamic jurisprudence.
You need to provide proof of your claim that in hudood , the victim must provide 4 witnesses (who witnessed the actual rape) against her rapist.
Sunan Abu Dawood Book 38, Number 4366 is an example that you do not need 4 witnesses against rape. You do not agree with it but its just your opinion / assumption that a rapist (at that time) will not admit to such fact. The isnad of the said hadith is sound therefore the hadith is reliable.
The punishment for a convicted rapist under hudood per Quran5:33
(1) killed or crucified
(2) their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides
(3) exile
Do you have a problem with the punishment??
Lashing and / or rajm for adultery / sodomy is a moot point as it is impossible to prove with the condition of 4 witnesses unless the act was done in public.
Islam is not a monolith. The secular laws are actually offshoot from religious laws but been labelled secular as a couple of hundred yrs ago , the church was separated from the state. That is about it.
Salam sam1528
Here is my proof.
Hudud in Terengganu - A Law to Protect Rapist
The Hudud Bill drafted by the Terengganu state government constitutes a gross violation of the principles of justice and equality in Islam.
Under this Bill;
# A woman who reports she has been raped will be charged for qazaf (slanderous accusation) and flogged 80 lashes if she is unable to prove the rape...(by giving 4 witness as required by the Quran..Pak Yehs note)
# An unmarried woman who is pregnan is assumed to have committed zina, even if she has been raped.
# A woman cannot be a witness.
Read more @ http://www.sistersinislam.org.my/news.php?item.300.121
Your use of the hadis is inadmissible in a court of law because the hadis is collected by hearsay. Besides the hadis does not tell how to cath rapist. Rapist who admit they raped are but nonsense. This proves that the hadis you used is nonsense/illogical/unlikely to happen/a fiction of the imagination.
sam1528 said :
The punishment for a convicted rapist under hudood per Quran5:33
(1) killed or crucified
(2) their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides
(3) exile
Do you have a problem with the punishment??
Pak yehs reply :
Allah did not say that. You just made it up.
Where is your proof that Allah said the rapist is to be punished similiar to the punishment for those who persecute Islam as per Quran 5:33 .???
No Quranic verse to show that punishment for rape is Quran 5:33 means no proof. Sorry your hujah is kantoi.
a'kum pak yeh ,
I asked for a reference either from the Quran or hadiths or any Islamic jurisprudence that 4 witnesses to be presented for a rape victim pressing forward with her case against the rapist.
However you did not provide any but just a writeup by 'sisters in Islam' of their interpretation of a so called 'Hudud in Terengganu Bill'. That means your understanding (that to prove rape , the victim needs 4 witnesses) comes from the interpretation of 'sisters in Islam' (who are not even scholars) of the so called bill. You case is extremely weak. Can you present the bill itself and we will compare it with the interpretation of 'sisters in Islam'. This is a fair request.
If you say hadith is hearsay , then all documentation of history is hearsay. A large part of history is the testimony of others with regards to the actual event. The very least , in the science of hadiths we have the isnads , it being measure of reliability of the transmitters. Again , its just your assumption that any rapist will not admit to them raping. We do have in the past people who admitted to have committed rape , murder etc. Your assumption is again , a weak one.
Quran5:33 (sahih international) '..Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be
(1) killed or
(2) crucified or
(3) that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or
(4) that they be exiled from the land.
That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,..'
The arabic word to describe the act of transgression is 'Iitadaa' (اعتداء ), ie.
1) اعتداء علي الارض, Iitadaa Ala Al Ard i.e. Taking a land that does not belong to you
2) اعتداء علي النفس, Iitadaa Ala Al Nafs i.e. Bashing another human
3) اعتداء علي الشرف, Iitadaa Ala Al Sharaf i.e. Sexually raping another human (male of female)
Quran5:33 states of the punishment for 2 crimes
(a) wage war against Allah and His messenger
(b) strive to corrupt or make mischief in the land, َيَسْعَوْنَ فِي الأَرْضِ فَسَادًا (Yasoon Fi Al Ard Fasada)
Isn't rape an act of transgression that is being addressed by (b)??
I don't see my points kantoi but I see you having very weak arguments (hujah yg berpandukan andaian).
Lets see if you publish this response.
Salam sam1253,
Of course I will publish your comment.It is very rae for Ulamas to debate any issue at all. Thats because the are recruited from the failed students in school.
I will patiently show you the logical sequence.
1) 4 witness is required to prove slander of zina, and proof is from the Quran. Agreed.?
2)A rape victim is deemed to slander a man with zina. Agreed.?
3) As such she has to provide 4 witness. Agreed.?
That is how most Islamic States like Saudi,Pakistan,Afganistant, Kelantan and trengganu interprete Gods law. It is stupid, in that it persecutes the victim and protects the rapist. On the other hand the secular law has a new DNA method of catching rapist. This is the oly way now. The way of catching rapist using on hadis is via a confession by the rapist, which is unlikely. Rapist and thieves will never be caught by their ownconfessions.
So Hudud, neither the Quran nor the hadis provides any procedure to cath the rapist. Hence you have to look to Secular law and science.
We are talking about procedure to catch rapist, here and Secular Law had shown the way for hudud to reform its unfair law that discriminate women and protects man the rapist.
I hope you understand my slow talk and logic. This debate on hudud law on rape is over/done.
The debate on the authenticity of hadis:
1)The hadis and its isnad is hearsay in nature.ie the method of "Mr A says Mr Bsays,Mr C says that prophet Mohammad said blah,blah,blah" is hearsay. Because it is collected 3 generations (200-300 years) after the prophet died is further proof that it is hearsay.
2) The prophet Mohamad and his Kalifah espacially Abu Bakar prohibited the use of hadis.And it was never used for 300 years untill Bukhari and Muslim wrote their hearsay hadis book. This is documented is history and the hadis.
3) The Quran/Allah forbid the use of hearsay hadis. refer Quran 31:6 "Some people use lahwal hadis (hearsay/vain hadis)to mislead others from Allahs path,without knowledge, and make a mockery of it(Allahs path/Islam".
I hope this will understang true logic instead of dogmas ceated by "hearsay hadis"/lahwal hadis Ulamas.
May Allah guide to the true Islam. us
Salam sam 1258,
Your effort to prove that rape has the same punishment a making war with Islam and Muslim has no Quranic nor hadis proof. Intepretations of the Quran can be kantoi. and in this case it is kantoi.
Besides the punishment does not mete the crime. A punishment that metes the crime is as per Quran 23:96 "Repel evil with that which is better.We are best aware of that which they alledge".
And as per Quran 2:178 "O you who belirf, retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered.The freeman for the freeman, the slave for the slave, the female for the female.And for him who is forgiven by his brother,procecution according to usage and payment to him, in kindness.This is an elevation and Mercy from your Lord. He who transgresses will have a painful doom".
According to this verse you are allowed to retaliate in kind.For the theif, you can steal from him in like manner, however there is an option to forgive when compensated.This forgiving and kindness is an elevation to higher morals.
Read more @ http://warongpakyeh.blogspot.com/2008/11/hardying-and-softyang-of-islamic-law.html
sam1258 said :
However you did not provide any but just a writeup by 'sisters in Islam' of their interpretation of a so called 'Hudud in Terengganu Bill'. That means your understanding (that to prove rape , the victim needs 4 witnesses) comes from the interpretation of 'sisters in Islam' (who are not even scholars) of the so called bill. You case is extremely weak. Can you present the bill itself and we will compare it with the interpretation of 'sisters in Islam'. This is a fair request.
Pak Yehs reply.
Sisters is Islam are scholars in Law.Its Ulamas who are not scholars of Law, who write weak laws and make a mockery of hudud and Islam.
Your term Ulama or scholar is dogmatic, refering to commercialized University Ulamas recruited from failed students is schools, specialized is a narrow aspect of Islam. The true term of Ulama is a man knowledgeable in all sciences like Ibni Sina,al Farabi etc,etc.
You want the bill? Google yourself in English,malay or arabic.
If waht sisters in Islam said is not true,why dont you debate them. No Ulama ever want to debate them,because they know the will lose in the debate. Ulamas never debate because the belief in dogmas. Dogmatic people like Christians cannot see the truth.
Salam pakyeh
Belajar sedikit terjemahan dan tafsiran al-Quran baru boleh nampak pokok permasalahannya lihat dilink ini
http://matguyver.blogspot.com/2011/10/masalah-terjemahan-al-quran-dari-benua.html
Terima kaseh sdra berhujah. Nampak betul masalah intepretasi Quran boleh berlaku walaupun oleh orang2 arab sendiri. Mungkin mereka ini sengaja misinteptete Quran. mungkin mereka in Syaitan in disguise as Ulamak.
a'kum pak yeh ,
From you :
'..1) 4 witness is required to prove slander of zina, and proof is from the Quran. Agreed.?
2)A rape victim is deemed to slander a man with zina. Agreed.?
3) As such she has to provide 4 witness. Agreed.?..'
This is not logical sequence. Its logical fallacy. What you are basically saying is as follows :
(1) monkey eat bananas
(2) human eat bananas
(3) therefore monkey = humans
You conflate zina and rape. Zina is consensual but rape is forced. That means zina(adultery) <> rape. This is a huge mistake you are making.
Now you are throwing wild accusations of how KSA , Pakistan etc interpret god's law. You have 2 problems here
(1) you are not clear of the difference between zina and rape
(2) interpretation of the law is just an interpretation , not the law.
The arabic description for rape has been provided and it fits the crime per Quran5:33. Hadith has also been provided that there is no such need for 4 witnesses to prove rape , therefore discretionary evidence gathering is permitted. For example , DNA is discretionary evidence gathering. Science do not belong to secular law. Its just a method to gather evidence. All in all you have refuted nothing and proven nothing.
If you have a problem with hadiths , then you need to be consistent , you will have a problem with history as a whole. History to a large extent is a recording by a person of a particular event.
(1) that is why we have the science of isnads. Transmittal of information were by 2 means ; (a) documents (b) oral. The isnads determine the veracity of the oral transmission.
(2) You are arguing from ignorance. Prophet Muhammad(saw) never prohibited the recording of hadiths.
'..The two may be reconciled by noting that the prohibition applied only to the time when the Qur'aan was being revealed, lest it be confused with something else, and that permission was given at other times; or that the prohibition applied only to writing down things other than Qur'aan with the Qur'aan on one thing, and that permission was given to write them separately; of that the prohibition came first and the permission abrogated that, when there was no longer any fear of confusion. This is most likely to be the case..'
refuting hadith rejectors
(3) You are making up your own tafseer. Tafseer ibn kathir :
'..(And of mankind is he who purchases Lahu Al-Hadith to mislead (men) from the path of Allah), he said, "This -- by Allah -- refers to singing.'..'
'..
tafseer ibn kathir Quran31:6
Since you reject hadiths , can you now pinpoint where in the Quran that clarify the ritual of solah?? Sujd (prostration) comes first then rukuk (bowing) or the other way around??
I disagree , you have not provided anything logical apart form a logical fallacy. Your points are not backed up by any references. Such makes your arguments weak.
Again , I hope you publish this response.
a'kum pak yeh ,
The only thing kantoi here is your misunderstanding of Quran5:33. The said verse states of 2 crimes
(1) waging war against the Prophet(saw) and Allah
(2) corrupting or making mischief in the land
Rape is transgression against a community or system etc. Point (2) addresses rape.
Now you are arguing that the death penalty is too harsh for rapist?? Well there are 3 other penalties per Quran5:33 upon the discretion of the judge. There is an age old saying '..don't do the crime if you can't do the time..'.
Quran23:96 / Quran2:178 do not state per your interpretation that you can steal from the thief as payback. The point being in any society , there are rules of governance. Quran2:178 states specifically '..legal retribution for those murdered..'. Stealing or rape in not murder. Again you are confusing the issues in your argument.
A person who committed a crime against society can repent. His repentance insyallah will be accepted by Allah. However it does not absolve him of his crime against the community. He still needs to face the punishment as stipulated by the law unless the aggrieved party forgives him. By repenting means he needs to return the money that he has stolen.
You are not addressing the reality of the issue.
Again , I hope you publish this response.
sam 1258 said :
This is not logical sequence. Its logical fallacy. What you are basically saying is as follows :
(1) monkey eat bananas
(2) human eat bananas
(3) therefore monkey = humans
Pak yehs reply :
I did not say that. Stop puting words in my mouth. This debate is becoming idiotic. You dont even know what logic is.What you are saying above is inferancs and not logic.
sam1258 said:
You conflate zina and rape. Zina is consensual but rape is forced. That means zina(adultery) <> rape. This is a huge mistake you are making.
Pak Yehs reply :
When did I do that./ It is the Shariah judge that did it,based on hudud laws.
sam1528 said :
Now you are throwing wild accusations of how KSA , Pakistan etc interpret god's law. You have 2 problems here
(1) you are not clear of the difference between zina and rape
(2) interpretation of the law is just an interpretation , not the law
Pak yehs reply :
Again you are confused.Read SIS article again. It is not me who is the judge. This confusion happens in Saudi,Pakistan etc where the victim of rape is whiped 80 times and some stoned to death.
sam1528 said :
The arabic description for rape has been provided and it fits the crime per Quran5:33.
Pak yeh sreply :
You lie. read the verse again. There is no rape mentioned when you read it literally. Interpretations can be kantoi and your interpretation is kantoi.
sam1528 said :
Hadith has also been provided that there is no such need for 4 witnesses to prove rape , therefore discretionary evidence gathering is permitted. For example , DNA is discretionary evidence gathering. Science do not belong to secular law. Its just a method to gather evidence. All in all you have refuted nothing and proven nothing.
Pak yehs reply;
Hadis for rape does not require 4 witness,agreed.So the hudud had been revised now.But in the past 4 witness was still required.
DNA is not hudud.It is borrowed from secular law.it is science,yes but developed by Secular people. Muslim nowaday are ignorant of science. Since you copied the use of DNA, just use the secular law then.
i have proven everything and you nothing.
sam1528 said :
If you have a problem with hadiths , then you need to be consistent , you will have a problem with history as a whole. History to a large extent is a recording by a person of a particular event.
Pak Yehs reply "
That is where you are wrong bro. history is written by contemporary people who actually witnessed the incident.Hadis is written by 3rd, 4th,5th parties by hearsay who never met or witnessed the incidents consernibg the prophet Mohammad.
continued....
sam1258 said:
(1) that is why we have the science of isnads. Transmittal of information were by 2 means ; (a) documents (b) oral. The isnads determine the veracity of the oral transmission.
(2) You are arguing from ignorance. Prophet Muhammad(saw) never prohibited the recording of hadiths.
Pak Yehs reply.
1) Idsnad ? what isnad when it is hearsay in nature. Isnad of hearsay.?
It is still hearsay and cannot be accepted in a court of law.
2) Here is my proof the the prophet Mohammad banned the hadis.
1) Abu Saeed al-Khudri said, “We exerted our best to get the Messenger of Allah to allow us to write his hadith but he refused.” Recorded by Al-Baghdadi in Taqyid al-Ilm
2)
Narrated Zayd ibn Thabit:
Al-Muttalib ibn Abdullah ibn Hantab said:
Zayd ibn Thabit entered upon Mu'awiyah and asked him about a tradition. He ordered a man to write it. Zayd said:
The Apostle of Allah ordered us not to write any of his traditions. So he erased it. [Sunan of Abu-Dawood Book 25, Number 3640:]
3) Ibn Saeed Al-Khudry reported that the messenger of God had said,
"Do not write anything from me EXCEPT QURAN. Anyone who wrote anything other than the Quran shall erase it."
4)From Ibn Hanbal:
Zayd Ibn Thabit (The Prophet's closest revelation writer) visited the Khalifa Mu'aawiyah (more than 30 years after the Prophet's death), and told him a story about the Prophet. Mu'aawiyah liked the story and ordered someone to write it down. But Zayd said. " the messenger of God ordered us NEVER to write anything of his hadith,"
5) The famous book, "Ulum Al-Hadith" by Ibn Al-Salah, reports a hadith by Abu Hurayra in which Abu Hurayra said the messenger of God came out to us while we were writing his hadiths and said; "What are you writing?" We said, "Hadiths that we hear from you, messenger of God."
He said, "A book other than the book of God ?!" We said, "Should we talk about you?" He said, Talk about me, that would be fine, but those who will lie will go to Hell. Abu Hurayra said, we collected what we wrote of Hadiths and burned them in fire.
6) In the famous book, "Taq-yeed Al-Ilm", Abu Hurayra said, the messenger of God was informed that some people are writing his hadiths. He took to the pulpit of the mosque and said, "What are these books that I heard you wrote? I am just a human being. Anyone who has any of these writings should bring it here. Abu Hurayra said we collected all these and burned them in fire.
6) Ibn Hanbal in his Musnad book, narrates a hadith in which Abdullah Ibn Omar said, "the messenger of God one day came out to us as if he was going to depart us soon and said, "When I depart you (die), hold to the book of God, prohibit what it prohibits and accept as halal what it makes halal."
7) Again, in the book "Taq-yeed Al-Ilm", Abu Saeed Al-Khudry said, " I asked the messenger of God a permission to write his hadiths, but he refused to give me a permission."
Kalifah yang ban hadis
3)Ali Ibn Abu Talib, in one of his speeches said,
"I urge all those who have writing taken from the messenger of God to go home and erase it. The people before you were annihilated because they followed theHadiths of their scholars and left the book of their Lord." (Sunan Al-Daramy)
continue...
sam1258 said :
3) You are making up your own tafseer. Tafseer ibn kathir :
'..(And of mankind is he who purchases Lahu Al-Hadith to mislead (men) from the path of Allah), he said, "This -- by Allah -- refers to singing.'..'
'..
tafseer ibn kathir Quran31:6
Pak Yehs reply.
kah,kah,kah. The tafsir by Ibni Kathir is a tafsir. And tafsir can be wrong.
Where is there proof that Allah says singing misleads others from allahs pathe. Read it literally please. It is the lahwul hadis that misleads. Dont simply exchange lahwul hadis for singing without any proof.
Ibni Kathir's tafsir is kantoi.!!!
sam1528 said :
Since you reject hadiths , can you now pinpoint where in the Quran that clarify the ritual of solah?? Sujd (prostration) comes first then rukuk (bowing) or the other way around??
All that you want is described in the Quran.That is why Allah says the Quran is coplete. The guidlines on tayamum,no of prayers,tone of voice, prostate. but the details are trasmitted by tradition / practical and not by hadis.
How is it you are ignorant about this.???
continue...
sam1258 said :
The only thing kantoi here is your misunderstanding of Quran5:33. The said verse states of 2 crimes
(1) waging war against the Prophet(saw) and Allah
(2) corrupting or making mischief in the land
Rape is transgression against a community or system etc. Point (2) addresses rape.
Pak Yehs reply :
You are trying hard to proof that itewm (2) is rape. It is not a proof. It is your own opinion or tafsir. The word rape does not appear in the Quran, but since it is a form of zina, the punishment should be double that of zina, may be 200 whips. Stoning to death is not prescribed in the Quram.
If ibni Kathir can kantoi in his tafsir, what more you. Ha,ha,ha.
sam1258 said :
Quran23:96 / Quran2:178 do not state per your interpretation that you can steal from the thief as payback. The point being in any society , there are rules of governance. Quran2:178 states specifically '..legal retribution for those murdered..'. Stealing or rape in not murder. Again you are confusing the issues in your argument.
Pak Yehs reply;
Aw common.! An eye for an eye(takzir), but to forgive is better...with compensation is applicable for every trasgression. it shows that Allah and Muslims are compasionate/loving/forgiving people.
Your "hadis hudud" only shows you vengeance, hatred and Arab babarism. That is what you get when you forsake the Quran for the hadis.!!!
a'kum pak yeh ,
Sisters in Islam led by Zarinah Anwar who is just a lawyer. They are not scholars by any means. Their opinion carries no weight in the Islamic world.
I am pointing out the logical fallacy in your argument. You need to address it , not deny it. You also made a huge mistake in conflating zina and rape in your so called 'logical sequence'. That alone have rendered your argument null and void as your premise is already faulty.
SIS article is just a critique of the Hudood Bill. You need to provide the Bill so that we can compare whether the critic by SIS is relevant or faulty.
Now you are trying to split hairs. Rape do not need to be mentioned by word. Rape in context means transgressing the right of others as addressed by Qursn5:33. Ibn Hazm has included rape in the context of 'spreading mischief' per the verse.
Hudood has never been revised pertaining to rape. Zina and rape are 2 different issues. Its only your opinion that such has been revised as you are confused. To you zina = rape. This is just dead wrong. DNA testing is not a borrowed methodology from secular law. DNA testing is another facet of evidence gathering via scientific methods. It is permitted per hudood laws pertaining to rape. Your complain about muslims and science is irrelevant.
Again you are wrong. A large part of history are also documented via 2nd hand testimony. The isnad system traces the narrators back to the the 1st hand information. '..The Arabs' antipathy to writing in this period is well-known, very few of were literate. Huge stores of knowledge of genealogy and poetry preserved in their prodigious memories; some people being able to recite a hundred thousand verses. There were no books in currency among them; even during the Prophet's lifetime the Qur'an did not circulate in book form. The fact that the Prophet's sayings, legal decisions and deeds, were not generally written down is therefore not surprising in the least. There is also evidence that the Prophet disapproved of the general writing of Hadith in his lifetime for fear that they would become mixed up with the Qur'an, which had not yet been fully revealed, and with which the Muslims had yet to become completely familiar. But this is not to say that he disapproved of memorising of, or acting upon Hadith; on the contrary, he insisted on it..'
'..The idea that much time elapsed between the original hearing and final recording in book form of Hadith as would make them unreliable is found to be completely unfounded when their history as given above is attentively considered, particularly with regard to these early collections, almost all the contents of which found their way into the later collections of al-Bukhari etc., a century later..'
refuting hadiths collected 200 yrs later are unreliable
The above completely demolish your argument about the time lapsed collection of hadiths.
Now you trying to defend the indefensible. Again , I hope you publish this response.
a'kum pak yeh ,
Why are you arguing to accept hadith in the court of law?? It can used as an example or precedence of an ongoing case. Certainly not as evidence. Again , you are not addressing the issue in concern.
Your listing of the various hadiths have already been addressed. It does not negate my argument at all. I repeat my copy paste :
'..'..The two may be reconciled by noting that the prohibition applied only to the time when the Qur'aan was being revealed, lest it be confused with something else, and that permission was given at other times; or that the prohibition applied only to writing down things other than Qur'aan with the Qur'aan on one thing, and that permission was given to write them separately; of that the prohibition came first and the permission abrogated that, when there was no longer any fear of confusion. This is most likely to be the case..'
refuting hadith rejectors
The link I provided has addressed each and every of your issues. Suffice to say , it again has completely demolished your argument.
You should have read the link I provided before you post the hadiths which you think are in support of your argument. Again , I do hope you publish this response
Pak Yeh
Susah kita hendak menjadi orang Islam yang lengkap jika kita menolak hadith.
Hadith yang dikompolkan oleh Bukhary dan Muslim menggunakan methdology yang sukar dicabar kesahihannya.
Katakan kita terima arguement Pak Yeh bahawa Rasuallah melarang menulis hadith,tapi kita tidak dapat melupuskan dalam ingatan paras sahabat,Tabiin dan ulama awal mengingatkan apa yang dilakukan oleh Rasuallah.Apa yang diucapkan dan di perentahkan untok orang 2 Islam melakukan.
Semua ini diturunkan tuun temuun,kapada anak cucu dan sahabat handai dan saudara mareka.Ini lah yang di rekordkan oleh Bukhary.
Jika kita lihat apa yang dilakukan oleh Bukhary merupakan satu kerja yang sukar tapi dia dapat mengasinkan yang benar dan yang bathil.
Saperti yang saya katakan jika Pak Yeh dapat mengeluarkan hujah apa yang di buat oleh Bukhary dan muslim itu salah,bau kita boleh menerima yang haith yang di kompolkan itu salah.
Lagi pun Pak Yeh,mereka ini buat kerja ini kerana Allah dan mereka amat takut kapada seksa Allah.Sebab itu setiap hadith yang Bukhary pileh iyu ia sembayang dua rakaat minta ditunjokkan sama ada ia salah atau betul,
Pak Yeh kita sabagai orang Islam perlu belajar untok melengkapkan ilmu kita.Kita jangan menggunakan lojik dan akal kerana keperchayaan benda yang ghaib tidak boleh digunakan akal.
Pak Yeh tidak percaya isra mikraj.Soal Nabi Muhamad meneima perentaj sembayang.Dalam Quran surat Iqra ayat satu dansurat alNajm ayat lima sampai sepuloh jelas dinyatakan.Jika kita gagal untok menerima tafsir al quran yang di buat oleh ulama tafsir,Bagaimana ?
Rauallah saorang yang idak boleh melakukan kesalahan.Jika ia ceritakan soal ia pergi berjumpa Allah,dan kita gagal meneimanya,ada kah kita mengatakanyang Rasuallah itu berdusta.
Kita boleh menegakan pahaman kita,tapi jikalau majority umat Islam menerimanya bagaimana.
Tak guna kita menegakkan benang basah
Salam,
a'kum pak yeh ,
If you had taken the trouble to read tafseer ibn kathir on Quran31:6 , you would notice that the opinion is from ibn majah , one of the earlier scholars in Islam. You are not addressing the issue that you have been exposed making up your own tafseer despite you being a layman in the exegesis of the Quran. You are now trying to mock your way out of a difficult situation. I would think the opinion of ibn majah takes precedence over yours with regards to the tafseer of Quran31:6. Actually your argument is kantoi as you simply made up your own tafseer despite being a layman in Quranic exegesis.
Sunnah or tradition is part of hadiths. You cannot answer my question can you?? The issue again :
'..Since you reject hadiths , can you now pinpoint where in the Quran that clarify the ritual of solah?? Sujd (prostration) comes first then rukuk (bowing) or the other way around??..'
It appears that you are the ignorant one as you do not even know that the sunnah is part of hadiths.
I am pinpointing to item (2) in response your confused argument , as follows :
'..Your effort to prove that rape has the same punishment a making war with Islam and Muslim has no Quranic nor hadis proof. Intepretations of the Quran can be kantoi. and in this case it is kantoi..'
We are discussing about rape not waging war. You are trying to shift the argument to tafseer of , ha ha , kantoi. The one who has kantoi is you trying to make up your own tafseer despite the fact that you are just a layman in Quranic exegesis.
Explain how can rape be 'a form of zina'?? Rape is forced but zina is consensual. You've got your definitions wrong again. The verse for stoning has been abrogated but the ruling stays. This is a well known opinion in Islamic scholarship.
The ruling for 'eye for an eye' has been there since time in memorial. Of course forgiveness is divine. However repenting to Allah is one thing but it doesn't absolve the crime committed to society. This is a very weak argument from you. Even in secular law , if the criminal repent , he / she still need to face the punishment of their crime. By your logic , secular law is also barbaric.
Nobody forsake Quran for hadiths. This is a strawman argument from you. Again , I hope you publish this response.
a'kum pak yeh ,
Correction - the opinion in tafseer ibn kathir per Quran31:6 is ibn ma'sud not ibn majah. Ibn ma'sud is the sahabah of Prophet Muhammad(saw) and his opinion comes from the highest authority , Prophet Muhammad(saw).
Therefore your make up tafseer pertaining to Quran31:6 carries no weight to the opinion of ibn ma'sud and you just a layman in Quranic exegesis.
By the way , 'lahwal hadith' in Quran31:6 does not mean '..hearsay hadis"/lahwal hadis Ulamas..' as argued by you. It means idle tales (like singing per ibn ma'sud opinion). Refer to corpus Quran :
corpus Quran verse 31:6
You are making one mistake after another but still arguing on your mistakes.
I hope you will publish this response.
sam 1258 said:
Sisters in Islam led by Zarinah Anwar who is just a lawyer. They are not scholars by any means. Their opinion carries no weight in the Islamic world.
Pak Yehs reply :
That is where you are wrong. The best person to understand law are lawyers. Ulamaks withoyt a law degree like Abdul Hadi just make a mockery of hudud law because he is not a lawyer. besides Zarina is a Muslim and if I am not mistaken,she is also a Shariah lawyer.
Let me explain to you the weakness of a hadis that is made into a law.
# 1) From a judge and a lawyers point of view, the hadis that you gave as punishment for rape for example, requires a confession of guilt by the rapist. Would that happen, if he kows that the punishment is death.???
So the hadis as a law is weak in that no rapist would be caught, and because of that rape will be rampant.!!!
Please counter this hujah, if you can.
sam 1268 said :
Now you are trying to split hairs. Rape do not need to be mentioned by word. Rape in context means transgressing the right of others as addressed by Qursn5:33. Ibn Hazm has included rape in the context of 'spreading mischief' per the verse.
Pak Yehs reply :
2) Where in the Quran is rape mentioned literally and not by interpretation.???
I do not accept the word of Ulama. They are not God. The make plenty of mistakes. A belief in the Ulamak is like a belief in Catholic priest who tell lies (trinity) and mislead people. You have not given any Quranic proof.Ibni Huzam is but a man who errs and cannot be accepted as truth.
sam1258 said :
Hudood has never been revised pertaining to rape. Zina and rape are 2 different issues.To you zina = rape. This is just dead wrong.
Pak Yehs reply.
This is the 2nd or 3rd time I am explaining to you.
It is not me but the Hudud judges that do that.Its because the rapist callenges the victims testimony.So it becomes slander/zina case. This is done in the absence of DNA evidence, which is a newly implymented law outside of the hadis and Quran as law. As shariah courts are new in this DNA law, most prefer to use Secular law.
sam 1258 said :
Again you are wrong. A large part of history are also documented via 2nd hand testimony. The isnad system traces the narrators back to the the 1st hand information.
Pak Yehs reply :
Stop this stupid opinion. You have not proven me wrong yet.
2nd hand testimony is still regarded as hearsay, because he did not witness it. That is why history is wriiten to tell lies in support of the ruling party.The merdeka history is one example.Anti British KMM were viled and pro britsh UMNO were made heroes.
sam1257 said:
refuting hadiths collected 200 yrs later are unreliable
pak Yehs reply:
You are saying that the hadis on prophet Mohammad's ban on hadis is unreliable.???
If that is so I too can say that your hadis are unreliable.!!! You are demolishing your owh premise that the hadis is authentic.!!!
That is why Sunnis and Syiah have their own hadis. The whole dammn fact is all hearsay hadis is unreliable.!!!
My proof...Quran 31;6. That is the only real proof we need now. You to proof that lahwal hadis is musik with literaral Quranic proof and not somebodys opinion and tafsir. I am sure you cannot provide that proof. So kantoi again .???
I will debate Quran 31:6 again with you in my next comment.
sam 1528 said :
If you had taken the trouble to read tafseer ibn kathir on Quran31:6 , you would notice that the opinion is from ibn majah , one of the earlier scholars in Islam.
By the way , 'lahwal hadith' in Quran31:6 does not mean '..hearsay hadis"/lahwal hadis Ulamas..' as argued by you. It means idle tales (like singing per ibn ma'sud opinion). Refer to corpus Quran :
Pak Yehs reply :
It is an opinion then not proof.! Opinions can be wrong, especially without proof.!
1) Where is the proof that idle talk or singing or musik is lahwal hadis and misleads others from Allahs path.???
2) Where is scientific evidence that idle talk, musik or singging misleads others from allah path.???
3)Are you saying that Raihan and all singer mislead others from Allahs path.???
4) The point of contention is lahwal hadis is translated as hearsay or vain hadis. Refer Picktalls translation. Hadis means the word of the prophet. How can hadis be translated as idle talk,??? the mean the exact opposite.!!! Ibni kathir has Kantoi daa.
If you disagree with my defination of hadis, you can ask the whole world, and I belief they will agree with me.
You hujah/debate,is based on dogmas, ie Ulamaks opinion rather than Quranic proofs.You should instead use your brains to understand the Quran. Your condition is because of a hadis that says "If you try to interprete the Quran using the akal, you must be prepared to go to hell". which give the Ulama the monopoly to interprete theQuran. This hadis makes Muslims into Muslims into Christians, depending on their priest/Ulamas and not using their brains.!!!
Salam sam1528:
This debate is over unless you can 1) provide literarally translated Quranic verses and not their interpretions and
2) answer all the questions I have put foward, otherwise you will be twisting and turning like a snake to justify your debate.
3) hadis and Ulamaks opinion/tafsir is unacceptable. We can only use Allahs words as truth. Mans words are often full of lies and shit.
Anonymous said...
Pak Yeh
Susah kita hendak menjadi orang Islam yang lengkap jika kita menolak hadith.
Hadith yang dikompolkan oleh Bukhary dan Muslim menggunakan methdology yang sukar dicabar kesahihannya.
Pak Yeh jawab :
Itu opinion/pendapat kamu dan ahli agama hadis sahaja. Alah kata Quran itu lengkap. Mka tak perlu buku2 lain.
Anonymouse kata :
Jika kita lihat apa yang dilakukan oleh Bukhary merupakan satu kerja yang sukar tapi dia dapat mengasinkan yang benar dan yang bathil.
Pak Yeh jawab :
Bukhari Muslim hina Allah, dengan berkata Allah telah silap rancang solat hingga merancang 50 solat sehari,dan menyeba yang menerima nasihat dari nabi Musa dan nabi Isabkan nabi Muhamad, menasihati Allah supaya Allah flip flop jumlah solat itu kapada 5 solat sehari.
Bukan kah itu DUSTA terhadap Allah.!!!!!
Anonymouse kata :
Lagi pun Pak Yeh,mereka ini buat kerja ini kerana Allah dan mereka amat takut kapada seksa Allah.Sebab itu setiap hadith yang Bukhary pileh iyu ia sembayang dua rakaat minta ditunjokkan sama ada ia salah atau betul,
Pak Yeh jawab.
Itu semua khabar andin/hearsay/legenda dan mythology sahaja. Manusia tetap ada dosa. Perkataan manusia banyak tersasul/silap kata dan silap dengar.
Anonymouse kata :
Kita jangan menggunakan lojik dan akal kerana keperchayaan benda yang ghaib tidak boleh digunakan akal.
Pak Yeh jawab:
Itu hadis dan Ulamak yang kata. Allah kata mereka yang tidak guna akal akan masuk neraka.
Anonymouse kata :
Pak Yeh tidak percaya isra mikraj.Soal Nabi Muhamad meneima perentaj sembayang.Dalam Quran surat Iqra ayat satu dansurat alNajm ayat lima sampai sepuloh jelas dinyatakan.Jika kita gagal untok menerima tafsir al quran yang di buat oleh ulama tafsir,Bagaimana ?
Pak Yeh jawab :
Saya percaya pada versi Israk dan mikraj Quran. Yang saya tidak percaya adalah versi Israk mikraj hadis yang berkata Allag flip flop rancang soalat.
Anonymouse kata :
Rauallah saorang yang idak boleh melakukan kesalahan.Jika ia ceritakan soal ia pergi berjumpa Allah,dan kita gagal meneimanya,ada kah kita mengatakanyang Rasuallah itu berdusta.
Pak Yeh jawab;
Ish x 3. Saya tak kata Rasullulah berdusta. Yang saya kata Bykhari Muslim yang berdusta bila kata Allah silap/flip/flop rancang solat.
Anonymouse kata:
Kita boleh menegakan pahaman kita,tapi jikalau majority umat Islam menerimanya bagaimana.
Pak yeh jawab.
Allah sendiri kata majority adalah bersalah dan kafir(tidak nampak kebenaran) Mereka2 ini adalah Yahudi,Christian,Hindu,BhudistTaoist,Athiest dan Muslim agama hadis.
Anonymouse kata :
Tak guna kita menegakkan benang basah
Pak yeh jawab :
Siapa yang menegak kan benang yang basah.??? Kita semua cuba menegakkan kebenaran. Dan kebenaran itu adalah hadis Bukhari Muslim menghina Allah.!!!
a'kum pak yeh ,
This is getting absurd. What makes you think we should only refer to Ustz Hadi?? Why can't we refer to people like Abdel Hakim Murad , Yusof Qardawi?? People like Zarinah Anwar are not in any position to interpret the Quran / Hadith. They cannot even speak / understand arabic. That is the source , people like SIS cannot even read / understand the Quran / HAdith in its original language. It is a handicap.
Confession of guilt is just one facet , it is not absolute in the said hadith. The context of the hadith is that there is no need for 4 witnesses. You are missing the obvious. We are not talking about confession but the evidence process which do not require 4 witnesses for rape. You cannot even separate the chaff from the wheat.
So you do not accept the word of ulama but your own interpretation?? Are you in any position to interpret the Quran?? No wonder you are making one mistake after another in making up your own tafseer.
Then the hudood judges were wrong. This is the message that I have been trying to give you. However I doubt you version of the story.
You are not refuting me in any case but just strengthen my position on hearsay. Whether you like it or not such history has been etched in stone. How can it be hearsay when the narration have been traced back to the first hand witnesses in the isnad??
You are trying to change the argument. The link I provided refutes your notion of time lapsed hadith collection to be unreliable. You still cannot answer but try to change the issue. The difference between sunni / syiah hadiths do not mean its unreliable. You are not addressing the issue at all. You need to refute the argument posted by me.
So far you only provide your unlearned tafseer on Quran31:6. I believe you don't understand arabic. Speaks volume about your make up tafseer.
Lets see if you publish this response.
a'kum pak yeh ,
What empirical evidence do you need as a proof?? Interpret something is not proving something?? Why are you now conflating proof = interpretation??
We need to address first things first. The link I provided of the Corpus Quran have demolished your own made up tafseer that lahwal hadith (Quran31:6) means '..hearsay hadis"/lahwal hadis Ulamas..'. Rather the language itself means 'idle talk'. Therefore it has got nothing to do with the so called 'unreliable hadiths by ulamas' that you have been berating about.
You have been caught square. Now you are changing your strategy to questioning about singing. In short you are trying to shift the argument. We can talk about singing in another discussion. I will not let you derail this argument. The following is pickthall translation (Quran31:6)
'..And of mankind is he who payeth for mere pastime of discourse, that he may mislead from Allah's way without knowledge, and maketh it the butt of mockery. For such there is a shameful doom..'
It does not state anything about vain / hearsay hadith. You are making things up.
There is no such thing as dogma in our discussion. We based it on proper usage of language and its meaning. That is why I provided the Corpus Quran as a reference. The one who is arguing on false premises is you as you do not even have any reference to support your points. The one using logic is me not you.
Lets see if you publish this response.
a'kum pak yeh ,
This debate has been over / done a long time ago when you
(a) conflated zina and rape
(b) made up your own tafseer , Quran31:6
(c) cannot answer where in Quran that states of the rituals of prayers
(1) Refer to Corpus Quran and if you further need , Lane's Lexicon
(2) There is no twisting and turning. All of your questions have been answered with the proper references. You just did not read the references provided
(3) How do you interpret Allah Kalam if you don't even know arabic and have not been schooled in the Quran , Hadith , Islamic History?? In the end you made up your own tafseer but not knowing the language. This is just arrogance from you as you regard Islamic Scholars being people who failed in school. The same can be asked of you. Do you have at least a masters degree from an Ivy League?? If not , I have higher qualifications then you. Try to be humble as humility goes a long way.
Lets see if you publish this response.
Dear sam 1528,
Every thing you are saying now is a repeat of what you have said and I have refuted them and itemised them, so that the debate is under control. I have also given some questions for you to answer. Failing to answer the questions means you are avoiding to debate the issue. That makes the debate ended, because you cannot provide me with the proofs asked.
If you want to continue debating, CnP all the itemized issues in my last comment and start refuting and answering all the questions. that makes it a more controlled debate. Otherwise you will say I have not refuted your issues and I will say you have not refuted my issues and we would be repeating ourselves.
I think that is a fair requirement.
Salam. May allah guide us to the truth.
Like I said your premises on hadis hudud law and quranic hudud law had been refuted. What you should do now is answer the questions I have posed. the we can continue debating
a'kum pak yeh ,
You have refuted nothing and proven nothing. You questions have been answered with the proper references , eg. the so called hearsay of hadith (refer to my previous posts). No counter challenge from you. All you did was to berate about ulamas transmitting hadiths and their wrong tafseer of the Quran but you yourself don't even know arabic.
You are asking for what proof?? Direct translation?? Given by Corpus Quran.
The problem I noticed here is your reluctance to read what has been provided but continue to repeat the issues over and over again. This is not arguing but harping.
Like I stated , this debate ended a long time ago with your mistakes , your confusion of the issues and worst of all you making up your own tafseer. This coupled with your arrogance towards the ulamas whom you claim to be failures in school.
Prophet Muhammad(saw) left behind 2 things -
(1) the Quran
(2) his sunnah
You have discarded (2)
Lets see if you publish this response
Then again this Dr sam1528 might just ignore it so here is my refutations again.
Dr sam1528 said :
This debate has been over / done a long time ago when you
(a) conflated zina and rape
(b) made up your own tafseer , Quran31:6
(c) cannot answer where in Quran that states of the rituals of prayers
Pak Yehs reply :
a)It is not me who conflated (never heard this word) zina and rape.
SIS article explained itself. The rape victim was counter sued for fitnah of zina by the rapist, and end up getting 80 whippings.A married rape victim that was pregnant was also punished by stoning to death. Please refer the cases from Sisters In Islam.
b)I did not tafsir at all. The Arabic word "lahwal hadis"was maintained as a translation. Hadis means the prophet's words. lahwal means vain or hearsay. Its a translation,not a tafsir. A tafsir is changing the meaning of hadis to singing or music as you have done. If you can understand Arabic Dr Sam,you dont need to translate it. Every one on earth will agree that the hadis is prophet Mohammads words. You too will say hadis is the prophets words, unless you tafsir it. We cannot tafsir when the meaning is literal and non aligory.
c)This is another issue. The sequence of actions of the Solat cannot be derived from the Quran. This is done by tradition/practical means and does not need the hadis to detail it. But the times of prayer,the wuduk,the tone of speech are detailed in the Quran. I am sure you a Dr can find the references yourself.
I hope the misunderstandings have been ironed out.
sam 1628 said:
(1) Refer to Corpus Quran and if you further need , Lane's Lexicon
Pak yehs reply:
I have a copy of Lanes Lexicon but not the Corpus Quran.Anyway Quran traslations are available on the internet.
sam 1528 said:
(2) There is no twisting and turning. All of your questions have been answered with the proper references. You just did not read the references provided
Pak Yehs reply:
The why do you still misunderstan the issue of a) so glaringly.
sam1528 said :
(3) How do you interpret Allah Kalam if you don't even know arabic and have not been schooled in the Quran , Hadith , Islamic History?? In the end you made up your own tafseer but not knowing the language.
Pak Yeh :
My Arabic is not that good but I can read Arabic and I have Lanes Lexicon to help me understand better. I am an Engineer, not an Ulamak. But I am schooled in Quran, Sufi and most religions. You are very Arabic and schooled in Quran and Hadis, yet you make cannot even diferentiate between terjumah and tafsir on Quran 311:6.Ha,ha,ha,
sam 1528 said :
This is just arrogance from you as you regard Islamic Scholars being people who failed in school.
Pak yehs reply :
That is the truth is it not.??? Even Dr MAzA said taht the Ulamas are recruited from the "tercorot" in school.
sam 1528 said :
The same can be asked of you. Do you have at least a masters degree from an Ivy League?? If not , I have higher qualifications then you. Try to be humble as humility goes a long way.
Pak Yehs reply :
No I dont have a Master degree. Does it matter anyway.???
So you have a Doctorate is it.???
Does it make a difference.??? Doctorates does not do well in the real world. Doctorates can be bought easily this days.Ha.ha.ha.
Sorry to deflate your ego.
sam 1528 said :
Prophet Muhammad(saw) left behind 2 things -
(1) the Quran
(2) his sunnah
You have discarded (2)
Pak yehs reply.
All the sunnah I need is in the Quran. Nothing said about the hadis. In fact prophet Mohamad banned the hadis.
As for you, you believed in the "sunah of Bukhari and Muslim" (not the sunnah of prophet Mohamad) that says Allah is a stupid solat planner and flip flopped from 50 solats a day to 5 solats a day after listening to prophet Mohamads advice who got it from prophet Musa and Isa as per the Israk Mikraj hadis.
You certainly make a mockery of Islam with you hadis blasphemy of Allah.
For that you are destined for the hellfire.
a'kum pak yeh,
(a) You are now running away from the issue of you conflating zina and rape. If you appeal to SIS article , it means you you have and appeal to the understanding that zina = rape which is wrong. The SIS article is just a critique of the bill. You need to provide the bill for us to make a comparison. You have not done so. You are just citing cases without any references.
(b) Again you are wrong. If you have Lane's Lexicon , you need to refer to to LWH which means idle talk , hadith can mean a few things like report , discourse etc. The background to the verse is that the pagans purchased singing girls to distract Prophet Muhammad(saw) when he was doing his dakwah. Such was the opinion of Ibn Mas'ud who lived , talked and walked with the Prophet(saw). You are just making up your own tafseer but you don't even know what lahwal hadiths means and you claim you have a copy of Lane's Lexicon. Isn't pointless singing idle talk?? What is it?? Hearsay hadiths .... I can only shake my head at such ignorance.
Your tafseer of Quran31:6 is just looking at the translation and then making up what fits you whereas the mainstream muslims look at the background to the verse and make their tafseer from the context of the revelation of the verse.
(c) Tradition and practical equates to sunnah and its captured in the hadiths. That means you cannot do away with the hadiths. No , I cannot find any references in the Quran that details the rituals of solah. Can you pinpoint such for me?? You will have a hard time.
The only misunderstanding is your refusal to admit the shortcoming of hadith rejectors like you as you have discarded the sunnah left by Prophet Muhammad(saw)
(1) If you have a copy of Lane's Lexicon , look under LWH for lahwal. Its gives the same meaning , ie. idle talk
(2) It appears that you are the one twisting and turning. My response to your questions about hadiths have been provided with proper references of scholars. You refuse to read any of them but come back repeating the same issues and pretend nothing happened. You are not arguing but harping.
(3) Too bad for you I too am an Engineer with a masters from a top 10 Ivy League. You are just too arrogant in citing that Islamic Scholars were failures in school just because you have an engineering degree. Again , its just strawman argument that you are saying that I cannot differentiate between translation and tafseer. The word to word translation is idle talk and the tafseer of the majority of scholars is singing ('lahwal hadiths') per the background to the verse. Appears that you prefer to argue on strawman as it is much easier to deal with rather than the real arguments put forth.
To me some take up Islamic Studies is because they are interested in it. I am not like you who think you are better than the Islamic Scholars just because you have an Engineering Degree. In the end , these 'imams' will be the one administrating to your body and leading the jenazah prayers when you die. What about people like Prof Abdel Hakim Murad (timothy winters) of Cambridge or Prof Jonathan Brown of GeorgeTown University a known hadith authority in the western world. You have such narrow thinking and myopic outlook.
To your logic of looking down on Islamic Scholars and comparing your qualifications with mine , you are nothing. When the same is being done on you , you squirm. Such inconsistency in you. Inconsistency is a sign of failure.
Lets see whether you publish this response.
a'kum pak yeh ,
Another ignorant argument from you. Prophet Muhammad(saw) did not ban any recording of hadiths. References has been provided that demolished such myth by hadith rejectors. Yet you refuse to read it but come back with the same issues and pretend nothing happened. This is not debating but harping and whining. Can you address the issue in the proper context??
There is no such thing as sunnah bukhari. Sahih Bukhari is a compilation of the sunnah left by Prophet Muhammad(saw). You cannot even distinguish what is compilation of a sunnah versus a sunnah. This is very poor.
Now you are arguing like an atheist. One of the 6 pillars of iman is to have faith in Allah messengers meaning to believe and follow in what they taught. Prophet Muhammad(saw) actions and statements are captured in the hadiths. The Quran also tells us to believe in the prophets (meaning to follow what they taught). Quran2:177 '..righteousness is [in] one who believes in Allah , the Last Day, the angels, the Book, and the prophets..'.
You don't even know what 'flip flop' entails. Allah accommodated to Prophet Muhammad(saw) request of reducing the solah from 50 to 5. 'Flip flop' means Allah ceded to one request but then changed his mind and reinstated 50 the solah requirement. It did not happen. It is accommodation of request not flip flop. You are one confused person.
I believe you are the one who has committed blasphemy with your statement '..Allah is a stupid solat planner and flip flopped from 50 solats a day to 5 solats a day after listening to prophet Mohamads advice who got it from prophet Musa and Isa as per the Israk Mikraj hadis..'. Again such arrogance from you but you don't even know what 'flip flop' entails.
Such is the thinking of atheists.
Lets see if you publish this response.
sam 1528 said :
You are asking for what proof?? Direct translation?? Given by Corpus Quran.
I have looked at the Corpus Quran translation word for word of Quran 31;6.
There seems to be a mistranslation by the author @ http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=31&verse=6
1)"lahwa" was translated as idle talk
#(Pak Yehs comment : I agree)
2) "hadis" was translated as "idle talk" too.
#(Pak Yehs comment :This I don't agree. You can say lawal means "idle", and "hadis" means "talk" or "sayings".But "hadis" also means the "sayings of prophet Mohammad or any renowned person".
So by Corpus Quran translation "lahwal hadis" becomes "idle talk idle talk", What nonsensical is this.!!! Its a mistranslation no doubt.!!!.For better understanding "lahwal hadis should not be translated at all.This will allow us to use our brains to find out which hadis is misleadings others from Allahs path.)
So sam1528, you are using Corpses Quran mistranslation to mislead others from Allahs path is it.???. Ha,ha,ha.
Where are you now.???
Chikened out.???
No more brain power from your Doctorate.???
Dear sam 1258,
If you are not beaten yet, then we can proceed with another methodology of understanding the Quran.
1) Are you aware of Allah's or the Quran's defination of the word "hadis".???
2) Can we debate on it and finally agree to Allahs defination of the word "hadis" and the word "lahwal hadis".???,
3)Do you understand "the Quran explains the Quran methodology".???
4) Why do you act like you don't have your own brains, by refering to other dead Ulamas brains.???
5) Don't you know that you are being dogmatic/follow blindly by not challenging the terjemah and tafsir/opinion of others.???Ulamas like Bukhari Muslim etc,etc are man and man make mistakes. lots of them in fact.
6)sam 1258 said :
I believe you are the one who has committed blasphemy with your statement '..Allah is a stupid solat planner and flip flopped from 50 solats a day to 5 solats a day after listening to prophet Mohamads advice who got it from prophet Musa and Isa as per the Israk Mikraj hadis..'. Again such arrogance from you but you don't even know what 'flip flop' entails.
Such is the thinking of atheists.
Pak Yehs reply.
I did not say Allah is stupid. I said the hadis of Israk Mikraj makes Allah look stupid.
How can you call me an Athiest for disbelieving a hadis that says Allah could not plan the solat on his own(needing advice from prophet Mohammad) and had to flip flop from 50 to 5.??? Besides I believe in the Quran.That makes me a Muslim. A dis believe in stupid hadis does not make me an Atheist, but makes me a better Muslim.
It is you that is a kafir for believing in a hadis that makes Allah look stupid.
a'kum pak yeh ,
Ha ha , mistranslation of author in Corpus Quran?? By whose authority , yours?? You do not even understand arabic. 'Lahwal hadiths' are 2 words that translates to 'idle talk' or 'idle discourse'. How come you never utilize logic in your thinking?? Your argument is an argument of an unthinking robot.
Again you made yourself appear really bad. Everything you brought up have been shot down but you cannot even answer a simple question of where in the Quran detailing the ritual of solah.
a'kum pak yeh ,
You have been hit left and right and yet you come back for more.
By you wanting to go into the methodology of understanding of the Quran means that you have conceded your arguments about the hadiths.
(1) Ok then , explain to me what is Allah definition of the word hadith?? Provide your reference.
(2) You are going in circles. I have already provided my side of the argument of what in context is 'lahawl hadith' per Quran31:6. You however just use the translation and fit it into what is your whim and fancy. Again , where is your reference??
(3) In any tafseer
- the Quran explains the Quran
- hadith and sira also explains the Quran.
You need to look into 3 angles to get a complete picture in any verse. This is basic tafseer.
(4) I refer to them as the so called dead ulamas are more knowledgeable. You only refer to you own whim and fancy. You don't even have a good understanding of the language and the historical circumstances. That makes your own make up tafseer a dud.
(5) Nobody is following anything blindly. That is why we have the scholars going thru the hadiths and classifying them into different categories. We refer to their works. If you say they are wrong , what is your evidence?? Quran2:111 '.."Produce your proof, if you should be truthful."..'. So far nothing from you except empty claims.
Can you explain to me what does '..Allah is a stupid solat planner and flip flopped from 50 solats a day to 5 solats..' mean?? Such statement is from you per your last post.
The hadiths for Israk Mikraj is mutawatir meaning multiple attestation. By historical methods , it is the closest to or the truth. It doesn't mean Allah did not plan the number of solah. It means Allah is all gracious in accommodating the request of Prophet Muhammad(saw) on behalf of his ummah.
If you claim the hadith is stupid , what is your evidence?? Quran53 describes Prophet Muhammad(saw) ascension. The hadith is his narration of what went on. The said hadith complement the Quran. Therefore to believe in Israk Mikraj is to have faith per the 6 pillars of iman. A person who questions iman is having the behaviour of atheists who only question on materialism (which fails the test for empirical evidence anyway). That has been your line of argument. You are again making up a strawman argument about a hadith that you claim makes Allah stupid. It appears more like you deliberately missed the context of the said hadith.
You claim all the sunnah you need is from the Quran?? Ok then , show me where is
(1) the ritual of solah in the Quran
(2) the zakah of 2.5% in the Quran
You will not have any answers. BTW , where is the proof / records that the early muslims rejected hadiths?? They were the transmitters of hadiths. If you claim these people corrupt the hadiths , to be consistent , you are also claiming that these people also corrupt the Quran as oral transmission is part of Quranic teaching. Looks like everything is stacked up against you.
I have been challenging you with references against your claim of hadiths. You ignored everything but come back harping on the same issues. This is very poor.
Lets see if you publish this response.
sam1528 said...
Ha ha , mistranslation of author in Corpus Quran?? By whose authority , yours?? You do not even understand arabic. 'Lahwal hadiths' are 2 words that translates to 'idle talk' or 'idle discourse'. How come you never utilize logic in your thinking?? Your argument is an argument of an unthinking robot.
Pak yehs reply:
Ha,ha,ha. those who cannot debate talk nonsense.!!! Didnt you see lahwal=idle talk and hadis = idle talk. Two different words cannot have the same meaning.It should have beeh lahwal hadis = idle talk. But no you want to win just for winninjgs sake.
The need for authouruty is irrelevant. I merely pointed out a mistranslation. you disagree,we can refer to an Arabic linguist. You are just in denial,because of blind faith/dogmatic to your bumbling teachers.
Now if you really want authority in the meaning of hadis, let us look at the Quran and Allah as the ultimate authority that all your Gurus can never be.
a) Quran 39;23
"Allah has revealed, the most beautiful Message/ahsanal hadis in the form of a Book, consistent with itself,"
So ahsanahal means beutiful.
Hadis refers to the Book ie the Quran
Here is the meaning of "hadis" as message and ahsanal hadis as "beutiful message". So here is definite proof that hadis means message and lahwal message can mean "ugly/idle message" but you cannot say that hadis means "idle talk" like what the Corpus Quran did.
And there is no mention of singing or music which is insane.
Ahsanal hadis also refers to a book ie the Quran. So lahwal hadis should also refer to a book. Which book it is is up to you to figure out. To me the Israk Mikraj hadis is proof of lahwal hadis or "ugly message" that makes a mockery of Allahs path/Islam.
According to your Gurus Ibni Taqir/ibni Maja it is singing and musik or entertainment that makes a mockery of Allahs path. Care to explain.??? I bet you cannot.!!!
sam 1258 said :
Again you made yourself appear really bad.
Pak yehs reply:
Again you talk like you are drunk.!!!
I manage to detect a mistranslation in your Gurus work. So it is you and your Guru that looks really bad isnt it.???.
sam1528 said
Everything you brought up have been shot down
Pak Yehs reply:
Looks like"menang sorak" and "tin kosong berbunyi".. ha,ha,ha.
sam1528 said
but you cannot even answer a simple question of where in the Quran detailing the ritual of solah.
Pak yehs reply:
It has nothing to do with hudud, the issue we are debating.
Why dont you find out yourself if you are smat enough.
a'kum pak yeh ,
Hmm , has it not occurred to you that in corpus Quran lahwal = idle talk and hadith = idle talk , this means that 'lahwal hadith' = idle talk as these two words are not to be separated?? This is basic language. Appears its not so basic for you.
Again and again you are employing logical fallacy of equating word for word of the word 'hadith' and not context. This is again using the basis of a logical fallacy like
(1) monkey eat banana
(2) human eat banana
(3) (your logic) human = monkey
However this time I have caught you trying to equivocate. Quran39:23 اللَّهُ نَزَّلَ أَحْسَنَ الْحَدِيثِ كِتَـباً مُّتَشَـبِهاً
The verse states of 'ahsanal hadithi kitaban '..meaning the best statement , a book..'. In this verse hadith means statement and kitaban means a book. However you state as follows in your argument '..So ahsanahal means beutiful. Hadis refers to the Book ie the Quran..'(sun 26 9.02pm).
Who are you trying to bluff??
Ok , then what about the following :
Quran93:11 وَأَمَّا بِنِعْمَةِ رَبِّكَ فَحَدِّثْ
'..fa haddith..' which has the context meaning of narrate , report , proclaim , announce
Quran51:24 هَلْ أَتَاكَ حَدِيثُ ضَيْفِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ الْمُكْرَمِينَ
Quran79:15 هَلْ أَتَاكَ حَدِيثُ مُوسَى
'..hadit hu..' which has the context meaning of narration , information , story , discourse
Therefore we see that the word 'hadith' in the Quran has multiple meanings and it needs to be translated according to context. The one who is insane is you and only you as you try to fit the translation and tafseer according to your whim and fancy (not to mention trying to equivocate). In Quran39:23 'hadith' means statement whereas 'kitaban' means a book. You screwed up really badly here.
Referring to the explanation in the Quran , it further strengthens my argument that the translation and tafseer need to be in context of the verse.
I repeat again , everything you brought up has been shot down. The worst part for you is that now you have been caught trying to equivocate.
Ha ha , you are now trying to run from the issue again. You claim all the sunnah is in the Quran but cannot pinpoint to me where in the Quran that states of
(1) rituals of solah
(2) the 2.5% zakah
You are stumbling over yourself in your self contradiction.
If you say the hadiths of israk / mikraj is making a mockery of Allah , israk / mikraj is mentioned in Quran 17 / 53. Are you now mocking the Quran?? Appears so .....
Lets see if you publish this response
Salam Pak Yeh.
Untok membuat tafsir yang betul ayat 31:6 kita perlu lihat kenapa ayat ini diturunkan(As Saheehul Musnad Min Asbaab An Nuzool) maksudnya Thr Authentic Musnad of Reason for the Decending of the Revelation)
Ayat 31:6 diturunkan kerana pada masa itu kerana merujok kapada anNadir ibn al Harith yang selalu membeli buku yang menceritakan sejarah Persian King dan ia membacanya kapada orang2 Quriaysh dalam perjumpaan debgan mereka pada malam hari dan ia mengatan kapada mereka cerita2 ini lebeh baik dari apa yang diceritakan oleh nabi Muhammad.
Ada juga commentor tafsir menyatakan yang ayat ini di turunkan mengenai nyanyian berkaitan dengan soal oal dunia yang tidak memberikan feadah.
Ayat di atas mengesahkan ayat 31:8-9 "
For those who believe and do right actions there are Garden of Deloght to remain in them timelessly forever,Allah promise ia true.He is almighty an All wise"
Pak yeh.
Berhubongan dengan larangan untok menulis hadith,memang betul pada perengkat awal Rasuallah melarang sahabatnya menulis hadith.Ini ada lah kerana penerunan wahyu Quran belum lagi selesai dan ia takut ian ya akan bercampor adok dengan tulisan wahyu.
Di antara compinion Rasuallah saw saperti Umar alKhatab,Zayd b Thabit,Abu Musa alAsari dan Abu Said al Khudari juga melarang Hadith ri catatkan.
Tapi Ali Abu Talib,anaknya alHassan,Anas b Malik Abd Alah b Aar b al As mrngangapnya ianya dibenarkan.Mereka berkata ianya dibuat untok referance meraka.
Waaubagaimana sateah Wahyu Quran sudah habis di kompolkan,Rasuallah saw membenarkan sahabat2 menulis hadith yng diuchapkan.
Dilaporkan Abd Allah b Amr al As menulis apa yang diuchapkan dan ada para sahabat melarang nya berbuat demikian lalu ia pergi berjumpa Rasuallah memina ebenaran untok menuls apa yang di uchapkan.
Katanya" Boleh saya tulis aa yang saya dengan ucapan RasuAllah saw .Nabi mnjawab "Ya" walau pun asa baginda marah atau tenang.jawab Nabi ya.Aku tidak akan mengatakan sesatu kechuali kebenaran.
Juga perlu di ingat samasa Rasuallah telah di tulis Perlembagaan Madinah yang ditulis pada ahu satu Hijrah.Perlembagaan ini mempunyai 47 articles dan merupakan hadith mutawatir.
Berhubong dengan Isra Miraj,samasa Rasuallah kembalinya dari berjumpa Allah dan menerima perentah sembayang ia menceritakan peristiwa itu kapada pendudok Mekah,semua nya tidak percaya kechuali sahabatnya Abu Bakar sebab itu ia di gelar al Sidique.
Saya setuju dengan sam 1528'Pak yeh ini memang keliru fahaman Ugama Islam nya.Pak Yeh tidak percaya dengan Hadith tapi dalam tulisan Pak Yeh ada memyebut keratan Hadith dari Abu Hurairah dan lain lain sahabat Nabi berhubongan larangan penulisan Hadith.
Pak Yeh yang banyak. Sesat ini ialah orang yang mempunyai pelajaran yang tinggi dan ia cuba menggunakan lojik untok memahami ugama Islam.
Ulama Islam saperti Padi lagi berisi lagi dia tundokmdan bukan bersifat angkoh,kerananangkohnitu mermupakan salah sati sifat Syaitan yang tidak mahu tundok dengan perentah Allah.
sam 1528 said :
Everything you brought up have been shot down.
I dont think what you are saying is true. You should not claim victory in a debate. That is not right and unfair. Its the judges or in this case, the readers of this blog that should decide who wins the debate.
The hadis as proof thar Rasullullah baned his own hadis which Pak Yeh submitted was not debated by you. you did gave a link. But that is not debating. The linked article was too brief and inconclusive. There was no concrete refutations to proof that the hadis was unauthentic. Also,Pak Yeh submitted many hadis of the prophet's and his Caliphs', banning of the hadis, but you never refuted it point by point by using the isnad or whatever method.
I doubt whether we can prove or disprove something in the past that we never witnessed.
Keep on debating though. This is a very interesting and intellectual debate which most Ulamas refuse to participate.
sam 1528 said :
Everything you brought up have been shot down.
I dont think what you are saying is true. You should not claim victory in a debate. That is not right and unfair. Its the judges or in this case, the readers of this blog that should decide who wins the debate.
The hadis as proof thar Rasullullah baned his own hadis which Pak Yeh submitted was not debated by you. you did gave a link. But that is not debating. The linked article was too brief and inconclusive. There was no concrete refutations to proof that the hadis was unauthentic. Also,Pak Yeh submitted many hadis of the prophet's and his Caliphs', banning of the hadis, but you never refuted it point by point by using the isnad or whatever method.
I doubt whether we can prove or disprove something in the past that we never witnessed.
Keep on debating though. This is a very interesting and intellectual debate which most Ulamas refuse to participate.
Pak Yeh.
Collection of Hadith by Muhamad b Ismail al Bukhari.(194- 256H)
He travelled widely and devoted sixteen yaers to the compilation sahih l Bukhary which has reminded to this day the most authoritative of all collections.He interview over 1000 haith transmitter in Al Hijaz,Egypt,Nishapur,Merw and Iraq and allegedly collected aBout 600,000 ahadith from which he then seected 9,082 alhaith.He has repeated a hadith which has more than one chain of isnad as the strength and realibility of the snad is deemed to increase with the plurality of its chains of transmission.When such repetitions are taken into account,the original figure of 600,000 is likely to be drastically reced.For a inle hadith is sometimes transnitted.through ten differnt chains of transmission all of which would be in the end just one hadith.
Al Bukhary wrote a good part of his book during his residence in Mecca. Madinah.
Pak yeh.
Al Bukhari chain of isnad has been characterised as to rely in the first place on the narration of hadithnfrom Phrophet by a varifed Companions whse identity as a Companion is free of doubt.This is narrated in turn by two upright followers,or ith one Follower who is verifyed by at least two narrators for aing transmitted haith from Componions.The third link in al Bukhari's chain of isnad consists f an upright and retentive Successsor from whom other narrators( the fourth generation) have also reported.
The fifth linkin al Bukhari isnadvis likely to be al Bukhari own teacher who is an upright and retentive narrator.
He didnot record hadith from narrators whose trusworthiness he doubted.It was important for Bukhari to ensure that at least two people had narrated hadith from the preceing links ,be it Compinions,Follwers or Zsuccessor..
When Bukhari completed his work he shwed it to some of the leading ulama of his time like Imam Ahmad Hanbal,Yahya b Main and Ali b al Madini. And they were please with it. Ali Madini was the most learned min of his time especially on defects of hadith and he express full confidence in al Bukhari.
Pak Yeh with this methdology adopted by al Bukhari,you stii maintained the hadiths are hearsay.
#1)sam1528 said...
a'kum pak yeh ,
Hmm , has it not occurred to you that in corpus Quran lahwal = idle talk and hadith = idle talk , this means that 'lahwal hadith' = idle talk as these two words are not to be separated?? This is basic language. Appears its not so basic for you.
#1)Pak yehs reply.
Iiya ! Dont understand again.
Corpus Quran translated lahwal as idle talk and hadis as idle talk.How can 2 different words have the same meaning especially when they are side by side.??? Can you answer this question please. So the translation of lahwal hadis becomes idle talk idle talk. So this mustt be a mistranslation.
#2)sam1528 said :
Again and again you are employing logical fallacy of equating word for word of the word 'hadith' and not context. This is again using the basis of a logical fallacy like
(1) monkey eat banana
(2) human eat banana
(3) (your logic) human = monkey
#2(Pak yehs reply :
This rubbish you keep repeating is not part of a debate lah. It is just to annoy your opponent(me). Its a stupid and childish action.
The rest of your comments dont make sense at all because you fail to CnP my coment and debate it point by point,like what I have done.
Because of your muddled way of debating you have missed debating and answering most of my questions.
Yet you dare say you have shot down all my points. But anyway I anm able to disprove that the "hadis" does not mean idle nor does it mean talk but it means message of the Book ( Gods Book when it is a wahyu/revealations). So hadis has a meaning of sacred scripture/book.
The other meaning of hadis is the sayings of the prophet . So hadis meand the words of the prophet. and by tafsir lahwal hadis can mean the idle or unauthentic sayings of the prophet.
Again to debate well and under control, this how you do it.
The part which you want to debate you should CnP is like below...
Pak yehs reply:
Ha,ha,ha. those who cannot debate talk nonsense.!!! Didnt you see lahwal=idle talk and hadis = idle talk. Two different words cannot have the same meaning.It should have beeh lahwal hadis = idle talk. But no you want to win just for winninjgs sake.
The need for authouruty is irrelevant. I merely pointed out a mistranslation. you disagree,we can refer to an Arabic linguist. You are just in denial,because of blind faith/dogmatic to your bumbling teachers.
Now if you really want authority in the meaning of hadis, let us look at the Quran and Allah as the ultimate authority that all your Gurus can never be.
a) Quran 39;23
"Allah has revealed, the most beautiful Message/ahsanal hadis in the form of a Book, consistent with itself,"
So ahsanahal means beutiful.
Hadis refers to the Book ie the Quran
Here is the meaning of "hadis" as message and ahsanal hadis as "beutiful message". So here is definite proof that hadis means message and lahwal message can mean "ugly/idle message" but you cannot say that hadis means "idle talk" like what the Corpus Quran did.
And there is no mention of singing or music which is insane.
Ahsanal hadis also refers to a book ie the Quran. So lahwal hadis should also refer to a book. Which book it is is up to you to figure out. To me the Israk Mikraj hadis is proof of lahwal hadis or "ugly message" that makes a mockery of Allahs path/Islam.
According to your Gurus Ibni Taqir/ibni Maja it is singing and musik or entertainment that makes a mockery of Allahs path. Care to explain.??? I bet you cannot.!!!
The proceed to debate it as below sam1528 said,
(...and proceed to debate.
Note on this part of my comments alone you have not answered my question.)
#1)Anyway as Anonymouse Mon Aug 27, 07:50:00 PM GMT+08:00 said, you have not debated and dis proved any of the hadis on banning of the hadis by the prophet Mohamad. In fact your Guru admited there was aban on the hadis but hesaid it was lifted or so. yet the Caliphs banned it after the prophet died. How come.???
then again hadis being hadis, they are unreliable.
Dear sam1528 and all,
This is the summary of our debate.
1) Weaknesses of hudud law on rape, prior to DNA testing is that rape victims are often punished 80 strokes because the rapist counter sued the victim for slander/qazaf. The hadis law states that a rapist can only be caught if he confesses.Please liase with Sister in Islam on real court proceedings.
2)Hudud based on hadis is too babaric, as of the death punishment of apostate and adultery.This hadis laws also contradicts some verses of the Quran. The use of Quran instead of hadis as source of law gives a much more compationate and fair law. Reference is made to my article @ http://warongpakyeh.blogspot.com/2008/11/hardying-and-softyang-of-islamic-law.html
3)The use of hadis was banned by the prophet Mohammad and the Caliphs. As the hadis of banning the hadis cannot be proven unauthentic, we are free to disbelief in the hadis. Besides the Israk Mikraj hadis makes a mockery of Islam by saying Allah planned 50 prayers a day and needs the advice of prophet Mohamad, Moses and Jesus to bring it down to 5 prayers a day. (Note; the Quran's version of Israk Mikraj is accepted, and the hadis version is rejected due to its blasphemy of allah, its non logic and its Greek mythological based aspect.
4) The Quran 31:6 prohibits the use of "lahwal hadis". Mistarnslations of the Quran gives the meaning as "idle talk" and some as "singing/music,enterrtainment",which does not make sense and cannot be proven.
The word "Hadis" as defined by Quran 39:23, gives the meaning a "message" or "sacred text". This meaning of hadis is totally authentic as it derived by the Quran and not by man.
"Lahwal hadis" in Quran 31:6 therefore give the meaning of " ugly(opposite of ahsanal)/misleading/idle mesage or sacred text.
The other meaning of "hadis" as univesally accepted by all is the "sayings of prophet Mohammad". So lahwal hadis can also mean the ugly/ misleadin/idle/lahwal "sayings of the prophet Mohamad" (hadis). Of course if the saying are authentic we will respect it. Howeve because of the prohibition by Allah and the prophet, it is advisable to not use it. Because of many misleading translations the word should be untranslated and left as lahwal hadis. As such there should not be any aguements as to the reliability of a trnslation.
So Allah prohibited "lahwal hadis" and let Muslims interprete it however they like, even by interpreting it as the hadis book of Bukhari/Muslim. Beside Allah says that the Quran is complete and perfect, as such it does not need anothe book to explain it.Saying that the Quran need the hadis to explain it contardicts the Quran and makes the Quran incomplete and Allah in need of man.
Pak Yeh.
Your interpration of ayat 31:6 was wrong.Please refer to azhab Nuzul,(why the ayat was revealed) inorder o get the corrected tafsir.
You are trying to defence something which is not correct.I was suprise as an engineer you cannot differenciate what is right or wrong.Can go proof that the gravity theory by Estine is wrong.?
at keluang said...
Pak Yeh.
Your interpration of ayat 31:6 was wrong.Please refer to azhab Nuzul,(why the ayat was revealed) inorder o get the corrected tafsir.
Pak Uehs reply :
I am using the azhab nuzul.
The reason for the revealation was taht people were misleading others using prophet Mohammads hadis. The ashab nuzul is in the hadis which says that the prophet comanded the written Hadis to be burned. Please check out my submission oh hadis, in my coments above...Fri Aug 24, 04:03:00 PM GMT+08:00
Hallo incek pakyeh??
Bawak jer hadis monyet merejam monyet berzina habis cerita... macamana puak2 hadis hadus nak merasionalkan hadis tuh - planet of the apes... kah,kah,kah,kah...
P/S: Pakyeh puteri tanya anda diblog sy di ruang "chatting" silalah jawab...
anon aug27 7.51 ,
There is no claiming of victory. I am pointing out the weakness of pak yeh's argument of him being a hadith rejector.
What makes you think I did not address pak yeh's argument about '..The hadis as proof thar Rasullullah baned his own hadis which Pak Yeh submitted was not debated by you. you did gave a link..'??
The link has been provided and the excerpt which represents my argument has been posted. What else do you want?? Have you read the reference provided?? So far no counter from either you nor pah yeh. Therefore I take it that this point been conceded by pak yeh. If you have any rebuttal , do post.
Isnad is a chain of narration but not an explanation. The link I provided gave an explanation / rebuttal agaist pak yeh's argument.
Pak yeh.
This ayat 31:6 refers specifically to an Nadr ibn al Harith who used to buy books containing the history of the persian king and read them to Quraysh in their nightly gathering and meetings.He used to say "This is better than what Muhammad recites to you"?
Which kitab azhab al Nuzul you refering to and for your info there are no ayat in al Quran that forbid the written of hadith.
a'kum pak yeh ,
(1) The one who appears to have weak understanding is you not me. Has it occurred to you the translation of lahwal hadith (Quran31:6) is idle talk and the word lahwal hadith is not to be separated?? You are not even addressing my argument but harping and whining about 'mistranslation'.
(2) Pointing out your logical fallacy is part of the debate as this is the 2nd time you are utilizing logical fallacy in your argument. Your argument is just to look for the same word whilc discarding context. Walla!! Suddenly its the same meaning. This is an argument of illogical people.
You are now running away from the issue of you having been caught trying to equivocate. You appealed to Quran39:23 , 'ahsanal hadithi kitaban' which you claim '; 'So ahsanahal means beutiful. Hadis refers to the Book ie the Quran'. Err , the arabic for book in the verse is 'kitaban' not hadith. Furthermore 3 verses have been provided that shows 'hadith' do not mean , ha ha , book. You really screwed up here.
If you say israk / mikraj is 'ugly message' you are insulting the Quran as the Quran narrates about israk / mikraj.
What is it now??
Lets see if you publish this response.
a'kum pak yeh ,
(1) What weakness in hudood law?? For the case of rape there is no need for 4 witnesses and evidence gathering like DNA testing is permitted. You are just appealing to the critique by SIS on the bill. For the 3rd time , your argument holds no water as you have failed to provide the bill for comparison. You are going around in circles.
(2) What type of apostate are we talking about?? What about a peaceful apostate?? Sahih Bukhari vol9 bk92 no424t :
'..A bedouin gave the Pledge of allegiance for embracing Islam to Allah's Apostle, and then he got an attack of fever in Medina and came to Allah's Apostle: and said, "O Allah's Apostle! Cancel my pledge." Allah's Apostle refused to do so. The bedouin came to him again and said, "Cancel my pledge," but he refused again, and then again, the bedouin came to him and said, "Cancel my pledge," and Allah's Apostle refused. The bedouin finally went away, and Allah's Apostle said, "Medina is like a pair of bellows (furnace), it expels its impurities while it brightens and clears its good.'..'
peaceful apostate
Where is the so called execution??
You need 4 witnesses to prove adultery per Quran24:2-5 who actually witnessed 'the rod in the hole'. Indictment is impossible unless such act was / is done in public.
Again , your poor understanding of Islamic Jurisprudence
Lets see if you publish this response
part 1 of 2
a'kum pak yeh
part 2 of 2
(3) The use of hadith was not banned by Prophet Muhammad(saw). Where is your evidence?? Don't repeat your argument with the same hadith. It has been addressed per my reference and so far no counter argument from you. How did the sahabah taught the rituals of solah and the 2.5% zakah?? All these are captured in the hadiths. Again , a strawman argument from you about the so called mockery that Allah reduced the solah from 50 to 5. Has it not occurred to you that Allah knew upfront that Prophet Muhammad(saw) will request for reduction and such was agreed by Allah grace?? Pinpoint where is the so called greek mythology in the said hadith?? This is getting bizarre. You are not providing any counter argument but harping and whining.
(4) This again expose the weakness in your logic. 'Sacred text' or book in arabic is kitaban , so don't try to bluff you way thru. You are trying to force 'beautiful message' to be 'unreliable hadith' utilizing antonyms. Then what about the word 'hadiths' in the 3 other verses Quran93:11 , Quran51:24 , Quran79:15?? Such approach like yours will never work as you are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. We mainstream muslims will also look into the background of the verse (Quran31:6). The nuzul of it is that the pagans purchased singing girls to distract Prophet Muhammad(saw) dakwah per ibn Mas'ud. This is a statement from history. What do you mean it cannot be proven??
You are going in circles chasing your backside. First you want to define 'hadith' in the context of the Quran. You have been caught trying to equivocate by claiming hadith = book apart from numerous meanings of the word per the different verses. Failure to do so , you now want to define hadith being universal accepted term of 'the sayings of Prophet Muhammad(saw)'. This argument is even worse , if you have any consistency in your argument , you are now claiming that the sahabahs distort Prophet Muhammad(saw) sayings. That means the Quran has also been distorted as the suhuf and mushaf was compiled after the demise of Prophet Muhammad(saw). Oral transmission was one facet of Quranic transmission , teaching and preservation. Such unbelievable foolhardy and illogical argument.
All you have are illogical arguments
(1) hudood law is inferior based on SIS critique without actually comparing the bill
(2) hudood law is barbaric without knowledge of Islamic Jurisprudence
(3) that 'lahwal hadith' = unreliable / false hadith per your non logic of equating words utilizing logical fallacy in parallel with antonym of the word.
You are really an engineer???
Lets see if you publish this response.
Mat kluang said :
Pak yeh.
This ayat 31:6 refers specifically to an Nadr ibn al Harith who used to buy books containing the history of the persian king and read them to Quraysh in their nightly gathering and meetings.He used to say "This is better than what Muhammad recites to you"?
Pak Yehs reply :
There is no proof that "This is better than what Muhammad recites to you" misleads others from Allahs path either in those times or at present.
This debate is over unless somebody can debate my conclusion point by point.
Dear sam1528.
Your comments are deleted because you have not followed the procedures of debating point by point by CnP and answering all my questions. You have refused to counter debate points which I have refuted. Anyway what you have commented are repeats/broken records of your other comments and has become rubbish. Besides you dont know how to debate.
You are just giving some dead gurus opinion and links and saying that the dead gurus the link had debated my debates.
Imagine, dead ulamas can reply to my debate without even log in on to my blog.???
Ha,ha,ha. Dream on bro. Try to improve your debating skills first before you start debating again.
And try to use your own brains instead of dead guru's brains, okay.??? Kah,kah,kah.
a'kum pak yeh ,
This is your blog and your rules. I would just say that you have been very disingenuous in your debate. You are just like a headless chicken chasing your backside.
All of your absurd questions have been answered but you just choose to deny them and continue harping and whining on the same things without any counter argument.
You call yourself a muslim who looks forward for a debate?? You just cannot handle a debate where facts are needed for an argument.
Too bad , by censoring my response , you have lost. Its just you and your sour grapes. You wouldn't dare to debate on an open platform.
Pak Yeh.
Difficult to understand the Quran tafsir if you refuse to accept Hadith Sahih.
Anyway how do you tafsir surah 109 Al kafirun .
Mat Keluang,
Why must I believe in the hadis when the prophet Mohammad baned it, and burned it. It is becaue of this ashab nuzul that the Quran 31:6 was revealed. Quran 31:6 is a prohibition of the hadis. Can you proof that lahwaj hadis is not the prophets sayings but idle talk,singing,music and entertainment as mistranslated by your dead Gurus.? If you cannot the you have lost the debate.
Pak Yeh ,Prophet Mohammad saw didnt banned hadith.He told the compinions not to write hadith when the wahyu from Allah is not yet completed.Later when the wahyu was completed He give permmision to Ali Abu Talib to write his hadith.This is in view Islam has spread vary fast in Arab penisular and they need reference on how to perorm the correct ibadah.
Pak Yeh if billion of muslim ummah believe in Hadith you must a new Ulama in 20 century who said we cannot believe in Hadith.surah 31.6 nothing to do with banning hadith.Let me know which kitab tafsir you are refering,let see where is the mistake?
A person asked Abdullah bin Zaid"can you show me how Allah Messanger used to perform ablition.Abdullah Zaid reply in affirmative and asked for water.He poured it on his hands and washed them twice then he rinsed his mouth thrice and washed his nose with water thrice by putting water in it and blowing it out.He wash his face thrice and after that he washed hus forearms up o the elbows twice and thn passed his wet hands over his head from it front to its back and vice versa and then washed his feet up to ankles.Bukhari 143'
Pak Yeh ,how do you baned this hadith.?
Pak yeh.
Surah 2:6 Those who deny your message will not belive whether you warn them or not.
2:7 God has sealed their hearts and hearing and their vision is veiled,a great punishment awaits them.
2:8 Some people say"We believe in God and the Day of Judgment"but are not true believer.
Pak Yeh I hope you are not one of them.
Dear sam 1528
Your comment have been undeleted.You think you have won this debate by using dead Tafsirs of Ibni Kathir ans blog links.??? What you have done is be a dog ie dogmatic to dead Ulamas teachings. Never mind, I let you win this battle. The real big war/big debate is ay the next article posted.
Go on and try to refute/debate it if you have the brains.Please dont ask dead Ulamas to debate me,okay.??? I have also provided a blog link that refutes your link.
Anonymous said...
A person asked Abdullah bin Zaid"can you show me how Allah Messanger used to perform ablition.Abdullah Zaid reply in affirmative and asked for water.He poured it on his hands and washed them twice then he rinsed his mouth thrice and washed his nose with water thrice by putting water in it and blowing it out.He wash his face thrice and after that he washed hus forearms up o the elbows twice and thn passed his wet hands over his head from it front to its back and vice versa and then washed his feet up to ankles.Bukhari 143'
Pak Yeh ,how do you baned this hadith.?
Pak Yehs reply.
There is no need for that hadis. The Quran 5:6 teaches abulution. Times of prayer is also stated in the Quran. The actions are taught by practice/tradition/culture, like how you learn to dance.
Mat Kluang,
For proof of the ban/burn of the hadis, refer to the next article. Try to disproof it. Otherwise you are contradicting Allah,his Mesenger,the Kalifahs and the sahabahs.
What is this blood money stuff you are talking about? Can anyone here bother to explain how this system works? Is it based on Quran or what?
Salam Obiwankenobi,
Blood money is money/compensation taken by the family of the murdered, in place of of the murderer's life.
Reference : AlQuran 2:178 "O you who belirf, retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered.The freeman for the freeman, the slave for the slave, the female for the female.And for him who is forgiven by his brother,procecution according to usage and payment to him, in kindness.This is an elevation and Mercy from your Lord. He who transgresses will have a painful doom".
What is the worth of someones life?
How it is rated?
Care to explain?
How do a freeman who murders a slave man punished?
And vice versa, if a slave murders a freeman.. Is it the slave is murdered in retaliation or the slave have to bring forward a freeman to be sacrified?
Care to explain?
"retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered"
So are you suggesting revenge is blessing of almighty GOD?
In that can, an eye for an eye makes everyone blind ? Rite?
What is the worth of someones life?
How it is rated?
Care to explain?
How do a freeman who murders a slave man punished?
And vice versa, if a slave murders a freeman.. Is it the slave is murdered in retaliation or the slave have to bring forward a freeman to be sacrified?
Care to explain?
"retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered"
So are you suggesting revenge is blessing of almighty GOD?
In that can, an eye for an eye makes everyone blind ? Rite?
Dear obiwankenobi,
why all these questions.? Is it not obvious. If you,the family want to kill the murderer you can,but Allah says to forgive is better, but off course some kind of punishment as per secular law, should be meted. The Quran references can be used as abrogation of all death penalty in Islamic law.
I am against the death penalty. Be it secular law or islamic law.
You mentioned about blood money in return of taking someones life.
You still didnt answer my question how it is rated.
Is it RM1, or RM11? or RM1 million?
Who sets the rate?
For example, lets say John Doe murdered any or your relatives .
You choose to take compensation instead of death penalty on him.
All I want to know is how much are you going to take in terms of monetary value for the death of your relative?
It is a simple and straightforward question.
Either you have the answer or you dont..
If there is a rate prescribed , please enlighten all your blog visitors on that.
I am pretty sure you wont be able to answer my question. The next wise thing to do is not approving any of my comments in your blog.
Lets see how a wise man like you will answer my question. Good lock..
The fomular shall be the murdered's economic wealth or amount of money he is able to generate within his life span.Exceptions to this is by the agreement of the family of the murdered.
Anyway the right formula shall be determined by debating the mater bt by showing proofs of the murdered's worth, and determined by the judge, like any secular law does.
Lawyers debate is key to an agreement, as per Quran 39:8 "Listen to all views. Choose the best.These are the guided,the intelligent."
Rainy season busted my internet modem, I am back and kicking now.
Well, MR WISE@pak yeh, all well said.
The first point, "economic wealth or amount of money he is able to generate within his life span".
This is a logical fallacy. What I am earning now will not be the same as for the coming 15 to 20 years.
For example, please let us know how much wealth you are able to generate within your life span?. Please remember, I am giving you a simple example with plenty of reasoning to back up your statement. Lets see how much sum you will be able to calculate and please let us know.
Your second line of reasoning "Anyway the right formula shall be determined by debating the mater bt by showing proofs of the murdered's worth, and determined by the judge, like any secular law does "
is "subjected to debate" depending on your answer to my first question.
And your third answer "Lawyers debate is key to an agreement, as per Quran 39:8 "Listen to all views. Choose the best.These are the guided,the intelligent." seems to run antiparallel to the blood money system currently practised in Saudi Arabia, the land of ISLAM.
And please3x, dont say Saudi Arabia are not practising true ISLAM to evade my question.
Facts to back up my statement:
In Saudi Arabia, when a person has been killed or caused to die by another, the prescribed blood money rates are as follows:
• 100,000 riyals if the victim is a Muslim man
• 50,000 riyals if a Muslim woman
• 50,000 riyals if a Christian man
• 25,000 riyals if a Christian woman
• 6,666 riyals if a Hindu man
• 3,333 riyals if a Hindu woman.
The rates for female victims is half that for male victims.
Well I didn't see any debate being done here, simply rates set by ISLAMIC Government of Saudi Arabia for human life. Tell me, does human life rated according to his/her faith and gender.
The fact is the so called blood money system is simply baseless and impractical to be adapted in a 21st century world.
No law school in the world"with exception to ISLAMIC sphere" will teach you on subject on how to rate human life.
And I want to stress again that I am against the death penalty, be it Islamic or secular.
The only simple solution is to put all these hardcore criminals in Alcatraz like to island to eat and fend for themselves. They have to grow their own food and take care of their own prison which is their home now. This alleviates the burden on the government in spending money to support the prisoners in life sentences.
Post a Comment