Quran says that Jesus Christ died a natural death.

[Firedragon]

From what I understand, a hadith can be classified as explicit or implicit [sarih or hukmi]
If you stick to English, it would be easier.
You are saying that they are not genuine .. authentic .. right?

That's a little different to saying genuine or authentic, but yes you could deem it that way. Because even the word Sahih is can be translated Authentic. But that's based on chain according to some schools, while others take both the mathn and the chain both, also while some other schools would give prominence to the mathn. So one hadith if cherry picked might look authentic because the chain seems sound, but in that chain there could be two things called An Ana, and Thadhlees. If you have any of it, it cannot me deemed Sarih although the hadith will be listed as Sahih.

Point 1. means little really. It could mean that Jesus would not regularly lead the prayer .. whatever.

I told you that one has to jump through hoops to justify it. But it's not the case. You have to really work on building some excuse to justify the contradiction.

Point 2. There could be more than one conflict regards Constantinople. There doesn't just have to be one.

That's another jumping through hoops to justify the contradictions with a lot of effort. You have to use a lot of could-be's and would-be's etc. That happens when someone needs to go back and justify the contradictions to suit their current faith.

Many people believe as you do. i.e. hadiths about Jesus return are unreliable
..but a lot more believe that there are so many of them, by different narrators [ heard the prophet [saw] saying ],
that the return of Jesus AS is fairly certain.

I am not appealing to ad populum or minority. It's not just because they said so, minority or majority.

Where I do agree with you, is that hadith about "the end-times" in general, can be a source of fitna.
..but as I've already stated, so can the Qur'an.
It is about considering all Quranic verses and hadith, and not leaning towards extremist ideologies.

But you don't appeal to the Qur'an as one book. These are just general commentary you are making Muhammad.

..and Allah SWT knows best.

Yep. Wahuwa ala kulli shayin kadheer.

Peace.

 

[muhammad_isa]

That's another jumping through hoops to justify the contradictions with a lot of effort. You have to use a lot of could-be's and would-be's etc. That happens when someone needs to go back and justify the contradictions to suit their current faith.

Not really.
Hadiths were collected by a number of scholars 1300 years ago, and some have apparent contradictions.
You would "throw them all out", and conclude we don't know, and they're probably fabrications.
Others would think that they all mention the return of Jesus, and conclude it is significant.

Peace.

 

[Firedragon]

Hadiths were collected by a number of scholars 1300 years ago,

Which scholar?

You would "throw them all out", and conclude we don't know, and they're probably fabrications.

Maybe you would, but don't project it onto others.

Others would think that they all mention the return of Jesus, and conclude it is significant.

Genetic fallacy. You are wrong because it's you, but others are correct because they are them.

Fallacy after fallacy mate.

Anyway, I would like to know the scholar who collected ahadith 1300 years ago out of Malik, Bukhari, Ahmad, Muslim, Abu Dawud. If you have any manuscripts please present it.

Thanks.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I would like to know the scholar who collected ahadith 1300 years ago out of Malik, Bukhari, Ahmad, Muslim, Abu Dawud. If you have any manuscripts please present it.

OK, perhaps I should have said between 1200 to 1300 ago.
Muwatta is basically a book of fiqh. It doesn't necessarily include the only authentic hadiths.

It is not necessary to believe in the return of Jesus to be a devout Muslim, in any case.
Tawhid and the five pillars is the most important thing.
..and then comes aqidah / fiqh.

However, the OP is arguing about Jesus having died, in order to present Mīrzā G̲h̲ulām Aḥmad, as the "promised messiah" / mahdi.
Your argument is presumably that we don't know, as we can't rely on Quran and hadith to guide us in this respect.
We will just have to wait and see.

What do you believe about "the end times", exactly?

 

[Firedragon]

OK, perhaps I should have said between 1200 to 1300 ago.

Okay. Can you please give me the manuscript from that time? Who is the scholar, who is the narrator, what is the manuscript?

Thanks.

Muwatta is basically a book of fiqh. It doesn't necessarily include the only authentic hadiths.

Muwatta is not only what malik wrote. Please do a bit of research prior to making such statements.

It is not necessary to believe in the return of Jesus to be a devout Muslim, in any case.

Exactly. Totally agreed.

Tawhid and the five pillars is the most important thing.
..and then comes aqidah / fiqh.

Lol. Okay.

However, the OP is arguing about Jesus having died, in order to present Mīrzā G̲h̲ulām Aḥmad, as the "promised messiah" / mahdi.

I am not very well versed in the Ahmadi theology. I have some knowledge of the life story and some writings, but theology is not generally built on established facts but faith, so my knowledge on their theology is poor. I am not aware how they reconcile between Jesus being called the Masih and Mirza also calling himself Masih. THe Bahai theology is a little different because they believe Jesus lived and was ascended, and he returned. Most of these are built on the return of Jesus and the Kaim and Mahdi etc etc.

Must do a bit of a study on the Ahmadi theology. My knowledge is poor.

Your argument is presumably that we don't know, as we can't rely on Quran and hadith to guide us in this respect.

For me, it's not in the Qur'an, and I can't say anything that's not necessary for my theology of Islam. I don't see anything in this belief of all of these eschatological figures which I think are going against the Akal of Islam. I do not follow the Thakleedh school of thought.

My thoughts are not that the Qur'an and ahadith cannot guide us. My thoughts are that they guide us away from this eschatology and they simply don't make sense with contradiction after contradiction. I believe it's inherited from the Christian eschatology and I have done the research in-depth, word by word, letter by letter.

But I also believe that if Muslims do believe in the Christian eschatology, it does not affect their connection to God. It does not matter at all. Even if they are right or wrong it does not matter. So it's only an academic endeavour like researching history. No one is gonna become a sect or be damned to hell due to any of this. That's why I do not like putting people into brackets and calling them sectarian things with immediate effect. Most of those who do that have not done any research on the topic.

Anyway, any one who claims "I know this" but the end up not knowing, and does not ask genuine questions genuinely very rarely have done the due diligence. So ultimately they resolve to bracket you into a sect. It's true what you said in another thread. Muslims are champions at playing the sectarian game.

Peace.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Okay. Can you please give me the manuscript from that time? Who is the scholar, who is the narrator, what is the manuscript?

No. 😁
I've got it wrong again. I'm failing in simple maths.
I refer to the authors of Kutub al-Sittah [ Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawood etc. ] which was written between 1100 and 1200 years ago.

Most of these are built on the return of Jesus and the Kaim and Mahdi etc etc.

Yes.

I do not follow the Thakleedh school of thought.

What's that?

That's why I do not like putting people into brackets and calling them sectarian things with immediate effect. Most of those who do that have not done any research on the topic.

OK.

Muslims are champions at playing the sectarian game.

Peace.

It's a problem, yes.
Peace

 

[Firedragon]

No. 😁
I've got it wrong again. I'm failing in simple maths.
I refer to the authors of Kutub al-Sittah [ Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawood etc. ] which was written between 1100 and 1200 years ago.

I know you got it wrong brother. that's no problem.

Now out of the Sitta, can you provide the scholar, narrator and manuscript dated 1100 to 1200 years ago?

What's that?

Thakleedh is to follow without question or using reason to refute. It's not really blind faith, but outsiders may say it's blind faith.

It's a true tradition in Sunni Islamic tradition.

Muhammad. You have not read the Muwatta, but still made commentary on it. Why don't you actually read it?

And read Mudawwana al Qubra.

Both by Malik Ibn Anas.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Now out of the Sitta, can you provide the scholar, narrator and manuscript dated 1100 to 1200 years ago?

No. It wouldn't be easy to provide.
Only a few pages/fragments exist, as far as I know.

However, let's take Bukhari, for example..

"if we were to keep listing the copies of as-Saheeh that are extant in the manuscript libraries of the world, and how close they were to the time when as-Saheeh was written, and the large numbers of those who copied and checked them, and how trustworthy they were, and how they checked their copies against the authoritative main copies, that would take a great deal of time. It is sufficient for you to go to one of the libraries where manuscripts are kept and ask about Saheeh al-Bukhaari; you will find hundreds of copies with sound chains of transmission going back to Imam al-Bukhaari himself. Al-Fihris ash-Shaamil lists 2327 locations in various libraries in which there are manuscripts of this book."
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/193...opies-of-saheeh-al-bukhaari-and-saheeh-muslim

Thakleedh is to follow without question or using reason to refute. It's not really blind faith, but outsiders may say it's blind faith.
It's a true tradition in Sunni Islamic tradition.

I'm always getting told off for using my akal .. even by you.

Muhammad. You have not read the Muwatta, but still made commentary on it. Why don't you actually read it?

And read Mudawwana al Qubra.

Both by Malik Ibn Anas.

Mmm, it is very interesting.
I have several volumes of Bukhari, which I read extensively when I was younger.

I'm getting "too old in the tooth" to do a lot of study now.
8 children and divorce has just about finished me off. ☹️

I have 5 daughters that studied Islam in a Madrassa.
They studied Arabic, seerah, hadith and fiqh to various levels. They had Arab teachers as well as Asian.
Alhamdulillah

 

[Firedragon]

No. It wouldn't be easy to provide.
Only a few pages/fragments exist, as far as I know.

However, let's take Bukhari, for example..

"if we were to keep listing the copies of as-Saheeh that are extant in the manuscript libraries of the world, and how close they were to the time when as-Saheeh was written, and the large numbers of those who copied and checked them, and how trustworthy they were, and how they checked their copies against the authoritative main copies, that would take a great deal of time. It is sufficient for you to go to one of the libraries where manuscripts are kept and ask about Saheeh al-Bukhaari; you will find hundreds of copies with sound chains of transmission going back to Imam al-Bukhaari himself. Al-Fihris ash-Shaamil lists 2327 locations in various libraries in which there are manuscripts of this book."
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/193...opies-of-saheeh-al-bukhaari-and-saheeh-muslim

I know it's not easy to provide. In fact, it's impossible to provide. It's impossible to provide what does not exist.

Ignoring that fact, cutting and pasting something that did not exist in the time period you are talking about is just an escape. That's how anti islamic polemicists operate. You did the same thing Muhammad.

I'm always getting told off for using my akal .. even by you.

At least you learned something you didnt know.

Mmm, it is very interesting.
I have several volumes of Bukhari, which I read extensively when I was younger.

I'm getting "too old in the tooth" to do a lot of study now.
8 children and divorce has just about finished me off. ☹️

I have 5 daughters that studied Islam in a Madrassa.
They studied Arabic, seerah, hadith and fiqh to various levels. They had Arab teachers as well as Asian.
Alhamdulillah

That's all irrelevant to you claiming things and making commentary about a book you have never ever read in your life.

Just read teh books you are making commentary upon. That's a request so that there is no hypocricy.

By the way, you were absolutely wrong.

Nevertheless, Al hamdulillah, you have five daughters. You are blessed. I wish you and your family every single happiness in life and may Allah give makaam to all your children. Athamannah lahumul hayaath.

Peace.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I know it's not easy to provide. In fact, it's impossible to provide. It's impossible to provide what does not exist.

Ignoring that fact, cutting and pasting something that did not exist in the time period you are talking about is just an escape. That's how anti islamic polemicists operate. You did the same thing Muhammad.

No, I just used my akal.
If you don't agree with what he was saying in the "cut and paste", just say so.

I wish you and your family every single happiness in life and may Allah give makaam to all your children. Athamannah lahumul hayaath.

..and to you and your family. Ameen.

 

[Firedragon]

No, I just used my akal.
If you don't agree with what he was saying in the "cut and paste", just say so.

I didn't tell you you did. You asked me what it was, and I told you. So at least you learned something although you ignored the fact that you cannot provide the scholar, the author, the narrator and the manuscript of the 11th to 12th century hadith writing after changing it twice by two whole centuries because you made a "mistake", twice.

..and to you and your family. Ameen.

Thank you very much. Truly appreciate it.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I didn't tell you you did. You asked me what it was, and I told you. So at least you learned something although you ignored the fact that you cannot provide the scholar, the author, the narrator and the manuscript of the 11th to 12th century hadith writing after changing it twice by two whole centuries because you made a "mistake", twice.

Yes, I learned something.
However, I did not learn that the majority of scholars are wrong to have confidence in Kutub al-Sittah.
The fact that early manuscripts are not available does not lead me to believe that these books have been tampered with, or that many of the hadith are fabricated or political in nature etc.

Naturally, I don't believe that all these ahadith are entirely accurate. There can be no perfection in oral transmission.
..and Allah SWT knows best.

 

[Firedragon]

However, I did not learn that the majority of scholars are wrong to have confidence in Kutub al-Sittah.

That's a generalisation and a deviation from what ever I said as if you didn't ask this question and clarified and again as if you don't understand what I have said.

The fact that early manuscripts are not available does not lead me to believe that these books have been tampered with, or that many of the hadith are fabricated or political in nature etc.

That's even against any kind of Islamic scholarship ever in the history of the universe. Your own "majority of scholars" that appeal to have always held the position that all hadith are not to be blindly believed to be true. So you are even misquoting your own favourite scholars.

Naturally, I don't believe that all these ahadith are entirely accurate. There can be no perfection in oral transmission.
..and Allah SWT knows best.

Just general commentary. Irrelevant to what I have said so far.

First, why don't you read the books you made commentary upon without ever in your life reading them? That would be a better start.

Cheers.

 

[muhammad_isa]

That's even against any kind of Islamic scholarship ever in the history of the universe. Your own "majority of scholars" that appeal to have always held the position that all hadith are not to be blindly believed to be true. So you are even misquoting your own favourite scholars.

I haven't really got any "favourite scholars".
I have relatively little knowledge, as you know.
I am limited to the English language and other people who I have come across.
Most of them are Asian, but I have had contact with Arabs and others.

I have never said that ahadith should be blindly followed.

I am aware that Muslims differ in which ahadith they will accept.
I have always adhered to the opinions of the mainstream salafi / deobandi.

 

[Firedragon]

I haven't really got any "favourite scholars".
I have relatively little knowledge, as you know.
I am limited to the English language and other people who I have come across.
Most of them are Asian, but I have had contact with Arabs and others.

I have never said that ahadith should be blindly followed.
you
I am aware that Muslims differ in which ahadith they will accept.
I have always adhered to the opinions of the mainstream salafi / deobandi.

Ah. But Salafi and Deobandi are polar opposites in all kinds of matters. But that's no topic for now.

Brother. Ahadith are not just "muslims differ" matter. When people differ, you have to look at why they differ. Im sorry but you are not available to think about it. You have your faith in a matter, and you are sticking to it no matter what. That's the reason you will not look at even scholarship. I gave you a list of scholars that you have blatantly rejected. I understand the reason, but I am only pointing it out to you. There are so many issues with the ahadith that you believe in that a lot of people dogmatically hold on to. They ignore scholarship. For example, in one of the hadith that you gave, one of the narrators is Muhammed. Which Muhammed is that? How many Muhammeds are there in the world and even at that time? Many many scholars have shown throughout history that this Muhammed is unknown. Scholars like Dharkuthni has said that this kind of narratives are Daif. But you believe it. And do you know that Bukhari narrates a hadith about Ali where he burns an apostate? Do you know who reported this hadith? It's there in Bukhari's book very clearly. It's a khawarij called Ikrima. Khawarij were the murderers of Ali, and hated Ali, and you will accept that hadith because others says so. This is absurd. It's like believing about the murders done by your leader just because your leaders enemy said it. And Zuhuri is well known to have done Idraj which means when a chain of narrators is missing he will make up a chain just to propagate that hadith.

That's the true story. That's why it is important to give it a thought and study it a little at least before making such humungous claims like Jesus coming back to kill pigs, kill jews and kill the antichrist etc etc.

That's the whole point.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Ah. But Salafi and Deobandi are polar opposites in all kinds of matters. But that's no topic for now.

I know there are differences of opinion .. it's not serious though, imo.

Brother. Ahadith are not just "muslims differ" matter. When people differ, you have to look at why they differ.

Yes, and I concluded long ago that I find the shia and its derivatives are probably inaccurate, with its imamah and
specific hadith canon.

That leaves the rest.

Im sorry but you are not available to think about it. You have your faith in a matter, and you are sticking to it no matter what.

I'm sticking to what I know, yes.

That's the reason you will not look at even scholarship. I gave you a list of scholars that you have blatantly rejected.

I've done nothing of the sort.
I do not reject any scholar you have mentioned, as far as I'm aware.

There are so many issues with the ahadith that you believe in that a lot of people dogmatically hold on to. They ignore scholarship.

Do they?
Some people might.
Are you saying that all salafi scholars ignore "scholarship"?

Many many scholars have shown throughout history that this Muhammed is unknown. Scholars like Dharkuthni has said that this kind of narratives are Daif.But you believe it.

I don't know any better. Perhaps I'm fortunate that I don't.
Some people have a strict criteria when it comes to ahadith, and only accept a few dozen.

And do you know that Bukhari narrates a hadith about Ali where he burns an apostate? Do you know who reported this hadith? It's there in Bukhari's book very clearly. It's a khawarij called Ikrima. Khawarij were the murderers of Ali, and hated Ali, and you will accept that hadith because others says so. This is absurd.

Brother, it's really not my responsibility.
History has been full of conflict and there are many denominations, each with their own idea of authentic hadith.
I go along with ahadith that were in circulation in the "golden age of Islam".
I don't take hadith as seriously as you do, it seems.

I don't say that a sahih hadith must be correct, and nor do the scholars.

That's why it is important to give it a thought and study it a little at least before making such humungous claims like Jesus coming back to kill pigs, kill jews and kill the antichrist etc etc.

That's the whole point.

Yes, I take your point.
However, it can't be denied that the modern state of Israel is founded on a Zionist foundation.
It's a huge problem, that spills over to the rest of the world.

I don't think rejecting a few ahadith will solve it.

 

[Firedragon]

I know there are differences of opinion .. it's not serious though, imo.

They are serious. Another thread later.

Do they?
Some people might.
Are you saying that all salafi scholars ignore "scholarship"?

Lol. Of course. Do you think Salafi "scholars" embrace the entire history? Do you even know what Salafi is? Salafi's are a reformist group. I don't think you know the Salafi movement properly. Nevertheless, Don't keep such dogmatic blind faith on a group like that. It's absurd. It's like tribalism.

I don't know any better. Perhaps I'm fortunate that I don't.

That's possible. Sometimes it is good to not know a lot or not know about somethings. Maybe. But that's not the Islamic way so I can't say this or that conclusively which one is better for life or hereafter or anything of the sort. I am not God.

Brother, it's really not my responsibility.
History has been full of conflict and there are many denominations, each with their own idea of authentic hadith.
I go along with ahadith that were in circulation in the "golden age of Islam".
I don't take hadith as seriously as you do, it seems.

I don't say that a sahih hadith must be correct, and nor do the scholars.

No problem. But all you have done so far is just say they are Sahih. You cut and pasted hadith saying they are sahih. That's the only criteria you had for your faith. Now you are contradicting yourself. Nevermind.

Yes, I take your point.
However, it can't be denied that the modern state of Israel is founded on a Zionist foundation.
It's a huge problem, that spills over to the rest of the world.

My God. How is that even relevant?

I don't think rejecting a few ahadith will solve it.

I think this discussion has run it's course. Now it's getting into a weird area.

Cheers.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Lol. Of course. Do you think Salafi "scholars" embrace the entire history? Do you even know what Salafi is? Salafi's are a reformist group. I don't think you know the Salafi movement properly. Nevertheless, Don't keep such dogmatic blind faith on a group like that..

I don't.
I do consider that they have many learned scholars amongst them, but I don't take it to extreme.

..all you have done so far is just say they are Sahih. You cut and pasted hadith saying they are sahih. That's the only criteria you had for your faith. Now you are contradicting yourself. Nevermind...

Well, I wouldn't pick a hadith classified as "weak" to illustrate a point.
A weak hadith might be true, but is not as reliable, as far as I understand.

My God. How is that even relevant?

I do not agree with a Zionist interpretation of Christianity / Judaism.
The life of this world is a fitna.

The descendants of Ishmael and Isaac .. satan sows enmity between them.
Some acknowledge the Qur'an while others don't.

Allah SWT knows best why.