Why the Islamic Hadiths are not too reliable

[AgnosTheist]

The Hadiths are a good source of information on Mohammad’s life. But its not 100% reliable. There are obvious errors in it. For example:

usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/056.sbt.html#004.056.830

Bukhari Hadith Volume 4, Book 56, Number 830:
Narrated Abdullah bin Masud:

During the lifetime of the Prophet the moon was split into two parts and on that the Prophet said, “Bear witness (to thus).”

This is a complete lie for nobody else had ever witnessed that alleged event happening hundreds of miles above the earth.

 

[inJESUS]

Why do you believe that the Qur’an came directly from Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)?

After all, the Prophet (pbuh) could have copied the contents from external sources… as many here have frequently said.

why couldn’t he is they already existed before him?

 

[Sister_Amy]

I don’t see how either of your two posts are related.

To Agnos–the person who reported that hadith witnessed it apparently. But you didn’t. That’s why you don’t believe it.

To inJESUS–not sure who you are quoting, but as I’ve pointed out before, we don’t have evidence of Muhammad having access to scriptures of other religions, nor even proof that they existed in the Arabic language, and as we know he was illiterate.

Now, back to the Ahadith (plural of hadith.) There is a science to to study of ahadith, grading each narration based on its chain and content. Without a chain, a hadith is completely useless. Each link in the chain (which is every narrator who transmitted the hadith between the collector and the Prophet saws) must be checked for accuracy, honesty, a good memory, and being a reliable transmitter. Some people are known to not have a good memory, and others are known to have narrated false hadith–so hadith which have them included in the chain do not have a high authenticity.

You can read lots about the authenticity of ahadith here: An Introduction to the Science of Hadith.

 

[inJESUS]

To inJESUS–not sure who you are quoting, but as I’ve pointed out before, we don’t have evidence of Muhammad having access to scriptures of other religions, nor even proof that they existed in the Arabic language, and as we know he was illiterate.

 

[inJESUS]

Narrated 'Aisha:
The Prophet returned to Khadija while his heart was beating rapidly. She took him to Waraqa bin Naufal who was a Christian convert and used to read the GOSPELS in Arabic… (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 605)

1- Khadija ran to Waraqa, not to a pagan , not to a Jew, but to Waraqa in order to take his advice regarding Muhammad. If she did not hold his opinion in high esteem, why then take Muhammad to him? obviously Khadija believed in what her uncle believed in, which is not orthodox Christianity.

2- Waraqa used to read the gospels in Arabic. For how long did he know Muhammad? for years.

3- Waraqa read the gospelS, in plural, not one gospel, as you Muslims assume was given to Issa.

obviously, Muhammad had access to previous scriptures and in Arabic. These are facts, and the other facts is that what is written in the Quran exists before Muhammad so what he uttered is not necessarily the word of God especially that he referred to apocrypha , legends, and rabbinical interpretations. It is much logical to assume he created his own book instead of attributing it to a higher power.

Now whether he was literate or not is irrelevant. An illiterate is neither dumb, nor deaf nor limited, especially someone who started jouneying at the age of 13 and who run business.

Yet Muhammad was not raised by illiterate people, why would he be illiterate? all this illiterate propaganda is used to cast a veil of divine authorship around Muhammad, but we all know no deity is needed in quoting apocrypha and legends and gnostic interpretations.

 

[Sam_777]

The Hadiths are a good source of information on Mohammad’s life. But its not 100% reliable. There are obvious errors in it. For example:

usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/056.sbt.html#004.056.830

Bukhari Hadith Volume 4, Book 56, Number 830:
Narrated Abdullah bin Masud: During the lifetime of the Prophet the moon was split into two parts and on that the Prophet said, “Bear witness (to thus).” This is a complete lie for nobody else had ever witnessed that alleged event happening hundreds of miles above the earth.

Quran clearly states that there are no miracles for Muhammad (Quran 17:90-93).

This link explains in details that fake story:
faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina40928p14.htm

 

[ralphinal]

Sister Amy,

Don’t some Muslims only accept some of the ahadith? In fact, so some not discount some or all of them as unimportant or even false? Is this hadith about the moon spliting considered authentic? Are there any other recorded witnesses to this event or should it be called a vision and not an actual occurance?

 

[Sister_Amy]

inJESUS, why would you think the Jewish scriptures would be in Arabic? And do you think they were? Why would they be in Arabic and not in Hebrew?

Khadeejah undoubtedly took Muhammad to Waraqa because the message he received from Gabriel harkened to Jewish/Christian scrtipure and not to paganism.

And then of course Waraqa (the Christian) told Muhammad that he was a prophet.

 

[Sister_Amy]

Sister Amy,

Don’t some Muslims only accept some of the ahadith? In fact, so some not discount some or all of them as unimportant or even false? Is this hadith about the moon spliting considered authentic? Are there any other recorded witnesses to this event or should it be called a vision and not an actual occurance?

Why would some Muslims only accept some ahadith? Why would they discount some or all as unimportant or false?

As the link I gave above explains, there is a science to the classification of ahadith, which is very precise. Scholars of hadith go through the chains and the content of the ahadith to make a determination about their authenticity. If a hadith is determined to be “weak” or “fabricated” or even “strange” and if it has only one chain, then it usually isn’t used by scholars of Islam. It is not used in Shari’ah for sure. There are some “weak” ahadith floating around, to be sure. But scholars (not people like me, mind you, but real scholars) who study hadith know what they are.

There are six major canonical collections of ahadith. Sahih Al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Sunan Abu Dawud, Musnad Imam Ahmad, and the collections of At-Tirmidhi and An-Nasa’i.

There are other books, but these are the major ones.

The first two are considered the most authentic books, because of the very strict and rigid methodology of the collectors in selecting ahadith. (Muslim was a student of Al-Bukhari.) Imam Ahmad was another well known and reputable muhaddith (person who collected ahadith). While pretty much every single hadith in the Bukhari and Muslim collections is given the highest rating of “sahih” (meaning “sound”) there are ahadith collected by some of the other scholars which have been determined by other scholars to be weak.

There is a very recent scholar named Al-Albaani who was a scholar of hadith (muhaddith) and he went through these books and classed each hadith, and separated them.

So a hadith scholar is qualified to do that, and reject the ahadith which are called “weak.” I’m not. Most people aren’t. Some people just outright hadith because they don’t like or agree with them, which isn’t a practice of the scholars.

Islam isn’t to be a religion of picking, and choosing what we like and don’t. So I don’t like when people do that to hadith–and usually, it’s because they don’t know any better, as they haven’t really studied the religion.

 

[Verisimilitude]

And then of course Waraqa (the Christian) told Muhammad that he was a prophet.

Waraqa did not accept the divinity of Christ, did not convert to Islam, and had no authority to call mohammed a prophet in the same line as past Jewish prophets.

 

[Sister_Amy]

Waraqa did not accept the divinity of Christ, did not convert to Islam, and had no authority to call mohammed a prophet in the same line as past Jewish prophets.

Well, tell that to inJESUS who keeps bringing it up.

 

[Verisimilitude]

Well, tell that to inJESUS who keeps bringing it up.

Ok. Hey, inJesus…see above post.

But how do you reconcile that Sister Amy? It isn’t unreasonable to think Waraqa began to transcribe the Gospels into Arabic. He married Mohammed and his first wife, and might have tutored Mohammed in his search for God before that first vision.

Why do you trust Waraqa’s word and judgement on this very crucial point? The spirit did not identify itself and Mohammed was afraid to the point of near suicide. What if Waraqa was wrong?

 

[Sister_Amy]

Ok. Hey, inJesus…see above post.

But how do you reconcile that Sister Amy? It isn’t unreasonable to think Waraqa began to transcribe the Gospels into Arabic.

So?

He married Mohammed and his first wife, and might have tutored Mohammed in his search for God before that first vision.

Ehh, there is no proof for either statement.

Why do you trust Waraqa’s word and judgement on this very crucial point?

I don’t.

The spirit did not identify itself and Mohammed was afraid to the point of near suicide. What if Waraqa was wrong?

When studying Islam, I did not first come to the conclusion that Muhammad was a prophet, therefore the Qur’an is revelation from God. The process was the reverse.

I read the Qur’an and that alone convinced me that it was revelation, the Word of God, at which point I had to accept the prophethood of Muhammad.

Waraqa’s say on the matter was not the basis for my decision whatsoever.

 

[Verisimilitude]

When studying Islam, I did not first come to the conclusion that Muhammad was a prophet, therefore the Qur’an is revelation from God. The process was the reverse.

I read the Qur’an and that alone convinced me that it was revelation, the Word of God, at which point I had to accept the prophethood of Muhammad.

Waraqa’s say on the matter was not the basis for my decision whatsoever.

I am very curious then what it was in the Qur’an that convinced you if not what convinced Mohammed himself. I think he was justifiably frightened from his first experience at Hira. I accept he had some spiritual visitation at least then. There was a pause in the revelations and when they started again Waraqa had died.

Where does the spirit that visited Mohammed, never witnessed by others, say who/what it was? Mohammed clearly did not know, but accpeted the word of his wife and Waraqa to calm him. His wife did not know, because she went to her cousin, the old blind Ebonite Christian preacher.

If we have only the Qur’an as proof to prove it’s own truth we must rely on who brought it into being and that is Mohammed and the spirit that spoke to him. Let’s say I believe it as faithfully recorded as you to be the word as spoken to Mohammed and being an honest and faithfull man he followed that revelation to the letter making sure before he died all vereses were known as we now know the Qur’an.

I am still left asking; who spoke to Mohammed? He didn’t know. What convinced him? How do you identify and justify the source of the revelations in relation to the one who was giving them to be written?

Mohammed, through that spirit as recorded in the Qur’an contradicts over a thousand years of Jewish history, and 500 years of Christianity with no legitimate authority but the un-identified spirits telling him these things.

Can you give any legitimacy to that spirit?

 

[Sister_Amy]

I am very curious then what it was in the Qur’an that convinced you if not what convinced Mohammed himself. I think he was justifiably frightened from his first experience at Hira. I accept he had some spiritual visitation at least then. There was a pause in the revelations and when they started again Waraqa had died.

No angel visited me in the cave of Hira and reveal the Qur’an to me. What convinced me was the message.

Where does the spirit that visited Mohammed, never witnessed by others, say who/what it was? Mohammed clearly did not know, but accpeted the word of his wife and Waraqa to calm him. His wife did not know, because she went to her cousin, the old blind Ebonite Christian preacher.

I just want to roll my eyes at you. First of all, the “spirit” was witnessed by others. The Angel Gabriel in fact was witnessed by several of Muhammad’s companions. When did he name himself? I don’t know. Certainly Muhammad knew, and certainly the Qur’an confirms it. I don’t presume to know every communication which transpired between Muhammad and the Angel Gabirel.

If we have only the Qur’an as proof to prove it’s own truth we must rely on who brought it into being and that is Mohammed and the spirit that spoke to him. Let’s say I believe it as faithfully recorded as you to be the word as spoken to Mohammed and being an honest and faithfull man he followed that revelation to the letter making sure before he died all vereses were known as we now know the Qur’an.

Isn’t this thread about Hadith?

I am still left asking; who spoke to Mohammed? He didn’t know. What convinced him? How do you identify and justify the source of the revelations in relation to the one who was giving them to be written?

Gabriel revealed the Qur’an to Muhammad. And Muhammad knew. The revelation came in different forms, and the angel appeared in different forms. Anyway, I trust what the Qur’an says about revelation, that Gabriel revealed it to Muhammad.

Once again… this thread is about Hadith.

 

[Verisimilitude]

No angel visited me in the cave of Hira and reveal the Qur’an to me. What convinced me was the message.

Anything specific? I’ve read it a few times looking for the messege with an open mind. I can’t find something to admire.

I just want to roll my eyes at you. First of all, the “spirit” was witnessed by others. The Angel Gabriel in fact was witnessed by several of Muhammad’s companions. When did he name himself? I don’t know. Certainly Muhammad knew, and certainly the Qur’an confirms it. I don’t presume to know every communication which transpired between Muhammad and the Angel Gabirel.

Where is the testimony to support it? Either Qur’an or hadith should record how Muhammed came to believe what first frightened him. The Qur’an does not but ahadith does and that is Waraqa which you have dismissed.

Isn’t this thread about Hadith?

Mohammed may have had control about what went into the Qur’an, but he had no control regarding the other traditions. Do you know of any hadith that clearly identifies Gabriel?

Gabriel revealed the Qur’an to Muhammad. And Muhammad knew. The revelation came in different forms, and the angel appeared in different forms. Anyway, I trust what the Qur’an says about revelation, that Gabriel revealed it to Muhammad.
Once again… this thread is about Hadith.

Why do you trust it? These hadith says he did not know.
(Book #1, Hadith #3)~Bukhari
Narrated 'Aisha: (the mother of the faithful believers) …Then he went to Khadija bint Khuwailid and said, “cover me! cover me!” They covered him till his fear was over and after that he told her everything that had happened and said, “I fear that something may happen to me.”…Waraqa said, “This is the same one who keeps the secrets (angel Gabriel) whom Allah had sent to Moses. I wish I were young and could live up to the time when your people would turn you out.”

Or

A’isha, the wife of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him), reported: The first …Waraqa b. Naufal said: O my nephew! what did you see? The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him), then, informed him what he had seen, and Waraqa said to him: It is namus that God sent down to Musa. Would that I were then (during your prophetic career) a young man. Would that I might be alive when your people would expel you! The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Will they drive me out? Waraqa said: Yes. Never came a man with a like of what you have brought but met hostilities. If I see your day I shall help you wholeheartedly. (Book #001, Hadith #0301)~Muslim

Mohammed stayed in Mecca for something like 13 years before fleeing to Medina since that first call and long before A’isha began telling these stories. In 23 total years of revelations it was assumed but the Qur’an is full of platitudes but not much on legitimate authority.

Which the trustworthy Rooh (Jibrael (Gabriel)) has brought down;
( سورة الشعراء , Ash-Shuara, Chapter #26, Verse #193)

He has been taught (this Quran) by one mighty in power (Jibrael (Gabriel)).
( سورة النجم , An-Najm, Chapter #53, Verse #5)

M. Khan translation is different than Pickthal but still inconclusive to identity since it is speaking about self in context for Mohammed to recite.

26:193 Which the True Spirit hath brought down ~Pickthal

“namus, he-who-keeps-secrets, Rooh, True Spirit, and one mighty in power” all describe what I assume all Muslims think as the Angel Gabriel. I don’t think there is justification to support it since it never says who it is itself. It is not a trustworthy source to be speaking for God particularly when it contradicts what I hold as valid. Why I reject it is easy. Why you accept it is a mystery still.

 

[inJESUS]

inJESUS, why would you think the Jewish scriptures would be in Arabic?

for the same reason they were translated into Greek…there were Arab Jews.

And do you think they were?

 

[inJESUS]

Well, tell that to inJESUS who keeps bringing it up.

what she said is correct. Why should i have a problem with it?

 

[inJESUS]

I just want to roll my eyes at you. First of all, the “spirit” was witnessed by others. The Angel Gabriel in fact was witnessed by several of Muhammad’s companions

. When did he name himself? I don’t know. Certainly Muhammad knew, and certainly the Qur’an confirms it. I don’t presume to know every communication which transpired between Muhammad and the Angel Gabirel. proof?

As to your reply “so” (about Waraqa translating), it is a proof Muhammad had access to Arabic scriptures for years before his sudden encounter with a spirit.

 

[ralphinal]

Why would some Muslims only accept some ahadith? Why would they discount some or all as unimportant or false?

As the link I gave above explains, there is a science to the classification of ahadith, which is very precise. Scholars of hadith go through the chains and the content of the ahadith to make a determination about their authenticity. If a hadith is determined to be “weak” or “fabricated” or even “strange” and if it has only one chain, then it usually isn’t used by scholars of Islam. It is not used in Shari’ah for sure. There are some “weak” ahadith floating around, to be sure. But scholars (not people like me, mind you, but real scholars) who study hadith know what they are.

There are six major canonical collections of ahadith. Sahih Al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Sunan Abu Dawud, Musnad Imam Ahmad, and the collections of At-Tirmidhi and An-Nasa’i.

There are other books, but these are the major ones.

The first two are considered the most authentic books, because of the very strict and rigid methodology of the collectors in selecting ahadith. (Muslim was a student of Al-Bukhari.) Imam Ahmad was another well known and reputable muhaddith (person who collected ahadith). While pretty much every single hadith in the Bukhari and Muslim collections is given the highest rating of “sahih” (meaning “sound”) there are ahadith collected by some of the other scholars which have been determined by other scholars to be weak.

There is a very recent scholar named Al-Albaani who was a scholar of hadith (muhaddith) and he went through these books and classed each hadith, and separated them.

So a hadith scholar is qualified to do that, and reject the ahadith which are called “weak.” I’m not. Most people aren’t. Some people just outright hadith because they don’t like or agree with them, which isn’t a practice of the scholars.

Islam isn’t to be a religion of picking, and choosing what we like and don’t. So I don’t like when people do that to hadith–and usually, it’s because they don’t know any better, as they haven’t really studied the religion.

Thank you. Now what about other recorded witnesses for the moon splitting into two? Where there any? As a rule, most people in a geographic area can see the moon at the same time.