sum wrote:Hello Mughal
Your quote -
If I say 5, what sense it makes to you? None. Why not? Because it has no context which could show its purpose and therefore it could make sense to you.
Are the ahadith context for the Koran where Muhammad`s words and deeds are explanations of the Koranic text?
Did Muhammad truly, and without exception, fully understand the meaning of the Koran and act accordingly?
sum
Dear sum, did you see me rejecting ahadith outright? What I am saying is that quran is in different category than hadith because one is said to be word of God and other words of people as people reported certain things. When people reported things some people noticed that some lied and other misrepresented them and yet other misinterpreted them. So it will be good idea to first sort out this problems with each and every hadith book then after that we can see which report may be true or false. Once we have possible true reports then by all means use them to see how things might have been conducting by the prophet and his companions. The quran bears witness that no messenger ever went against God deliberately including muhammad. So end result will be that all reports which cannot be interpreted according to stories in the quran will be rejected as false. This was the rule always when it came to acceptance of hadith reports. The quran must be explained by the quran in light of self evident facts. It is called tafseer al quran bil quran principle.
The real questions are, why people misinterpreted the quran and misrepresented it and who were these people? A lot of it is explained within the quran itself even if one reads faulty translations. After all what was the real fight between Pharaoh and Moses? What was the fight between Noah and chiefs of his people? The quran keeps telling us fight was almost always between messengers of Allah and chiefs of the people to whom these messengers were sent. After messengers defeated chiefs in debate if people supported them then they set up divine kingdom otherwise they took their supporters and shifted to some other place where in they set up the ruling system that God told them. However after the messengers passed away later generations turned back to old bad ways of life and so more messengers were sent to them later and so things kept on repeating. The good and bad was all about proper management of human populations and resources for the good of whole human communities. The question is, how did people change back from divine set up? It is because people became lazy or slack in keeping up with requirements of a good state that is properly organised and regulated on good foundation, so opportunists took over and gradually good state became bad to worst. When that happens people try to change their social contracts therefore scriptures in various way so that they could have things their way from then on. This is why when it comes to quran and hadith same happened after the death of the prophet. A group of mullahs was invented and given the task of misinterpreting the quran and hadith and misrepresenting them in such a way that justified imperialism in the name of God and islam.
So a lot of things that have been invented found their way into books of hadith. This is why whatever imperialist wanted to be lawful in the name of islam they attributed it to the name of prophet. This is why the books of laws that came about in those times are not proper laws of islam. They very clearly contradict quranic framework which ought to be guidelines for formation of laws. This is why the islam preached by mullahs is not islam that we find in the quran text. It is quite straightforward to prove that from words and the way they manipulated them for their ends.
This is why the main task for muslims is to reinterpret things back to original concepts because those concepts have basis in reality where as mullahs islam is imaginary islam based upon their invented make beliefs to suit themselves.
regards and all the best.