This is my poll, in answer to skynightblaze's poll based on a wrong premise (as always)...
I don't think that the Prophetic hadiths are legally binding since they are frontally rebuked by the Koran:
16.116: And, for what your tongues describe, do not utter the lie, (saying) This is lawful and this is unlawful,
in order to forge a lie against Allah; surely those who forge the lie against Allah shall not prosper.
We shall note that ''what your tongues describe'' frontally rebuff the oral basic of the hadiths too!
And I don't think that they can be historically that accurate either... as even archeology attests so!
viewtopic.php?p=168239#p168239" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirat_Rasu ... usefulness" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Without any trustable biography, the earliest coming out -200 years after his death (Ibn Hisham)-, hadiths can only be conjecturals.It is often noted that a coherent image of Muhammad cannot be formed from the literature of sīra,
whose authenticity and factual value have been questioned on a number of different grounds.
Wim Raven lists the following arguments against the authenticity of sīra:
1. The fact that no sīra work was compiled during the first century of Islam.
2. The many discrepancies exhibited in different narrations found in sīra works.
3. Later sources claiming to know more about Muhammad then earlier ones.
4. Discrepancies compared to non-Muslim sources (like the Doctrina Jacobi).
5. Some parts or genres of sīra, namely those dealing with miracles, are not fit as sources....
Furthermore, the authenticity of the poetry included by Ibn Ishaq has also been questioned by later Muslim historians,
like Ibn Sallam al-Jumahi and Ibn Nadim, who both censured Ibn Ishaq for including poetry that was either impossible to
belong to ancient periods in Arab culture or has been attributed to persons not known to have written any poetry.
viewtopic.php?p=168960#p168960" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Muhammad" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Harald Motzki: ''On the one hand, it is not possible to write a historical biography of the Prophet without being accused of using the
sources uncritically, while on the other hand, when using the sources critically, it is simply not possible to write such a biography.''
For more: The Hadiths' Perfidy
viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8185" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;