RE: Hadiths and deceivers.
April 20, 2018 at 7:29 pm
(This post was last modified: April 20, 2018 at 7:50 pm by WinterHold.)
(April 20, 2018 at 4:15 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: If you going to trust "Sahih" hadiths, yes, they are going to have a poison against Mohammad that absolutely would prove him evil if they were true.
The people who took the position of political, religious, and all levels of leadership, didn't believe in Mohammad, but just as previous revelations were distorted by the very deceivers who the books came to expose and counter with a real genuine leadership to balance the world out, and bring balance and justice to the world by exposing these deceivers and their falsehood, yes, Islam was also infiltrated.
This includes Sunni and Shiite hadiths.
There is poison in both of them. But don't be afraid of hadiths from any one to fall in your cup, for if one wing of a fly is poison, in the other is the cure.
The hadiths although filled with poison are also faced with insights. I suggest ignoring the rating of "good" "authentic" "weak" "established" "trusted" or "fabricated" and rather, only go them if you seek insights into Quran. That is they are only useful to perceives things in Quran and to compliment the Quran and when use towards other, to reinforce a proper interpretation of Quran that is proved by Quran but you start with the hadith to show the view, to show it's not your own and has proof in the legacy of those who knew the Quran best, lest every persons just babbles about the Quran with no proof what so ever claiming they have the right interpretation.
The Hadiths are mere records of the sayings of Muslims around the early Islamic nation; MK.
My opinion that they cannot be trusted, is because people themselves cannot be trusted.
I'll give you an example: back in school, of course you had a student who started a rumor against somebody else. The rumor kept spreading and spreading.
1
That's the Hadith. Good luck validating the right from the wrong; especially when all the people involved are dead.
That's why I take the leap of faith and believe in the Quran only. Hey; after all it is said to be coming from God; so no chance to re-forge it and reshape it. Also, it's not falling under the mercy of "rumors".
The Hadith must be called with what it literally means in English: "Talks and rumors about the Prophet". When you look at the Middle East and the Islamic world; you can understand why it's falling apart: it is standing on "talks and rumors"; i.e the Hadith.
(April 20, 2018 at 4:15 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: The hadiths although filled with poison are also faced with insights. I suggest ignoring the rating of "good" "authentic" "weak" "established" "trusted" or "fabricated" and rather, only go them if you seek insights into Quran. That is they are only useful to perceives things in Quran and to compliment the Quran and when use towards other, to reinforce a proper interpretation of Quran that is proved by Quran but you start with the hadith to show the view, to show it's not your own and has proof in the legacy of those who knew the Quran best, lest every persons just babbles about the Quran with no proof what so ever claiming they have the right interpretation.
Yes just to add; personally I agree with you that the Hadiths are filled with poison, it's because they can't be categorized accurately into right or wrong.
The only rule used to "categorize Hadiths into good, weak, established, trusted, fabricated", is the rule of the "Sanad" or "Knowing of the people who cited the Hadith".
For example; I ate. John saw me. Jake heard that John saw me. Robert heard from Jake that he heard that John saw me.
That is a "Sanad" chain example.
It extends for hundreds of years. And that is how a Hadith is categorized into one of the previous categories: "good, weak, established, trusted, fabricated". That's quite... not legit? How do I know that the "Sanad" is accurate?
That's another problem I personally have with the "Islamic rumors and talks/ Hadiths"; Mystic.
