Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Shari'a, errancies, miracles and science
User avatar
charleslemartel
Posts: 2884
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 2:01 pm
Location: Throne Of Allah

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by charleslemartel »

skynightblaze wrote:
Spoiler! :
Bhagavat Gita 7-24: "The ignorant believe that un-manifest Para Brahma (One God) incarnates or takes manifestations, because they do not completely understand My highest, immutable, incomparable, and transcendental existence."


Bhagavat Gita 7:19-21: "All those who do idol worship, All those who worship demigods are materialistic people."


Yajur Veda 3 "...Of that God you cannot make any images."


Yajur Veda 32:3: "God is formless and bodiless"


Yajur Veda 40 "All those who worship the uncreated things, they are in darkness, and you'll enter more into darkness if you worship the created things."


Rig Veda, Vol.8,1 "All Praise are to Him alone"


Hello yeezevee I do not have detailed knowledge but here are some of the verses. Now if people are shown these verses they will say that we do not worship different GODS but only one GOD.IT is only the way we perceive him is different. However i would refrain from commenting . I dont think so i would be able to defend the questions asked by people so i stay away from religion. Regarding prophets I never heard any prophets name . ITs just the sages that received guidance through GOD. I am not sure whether we can call them as prophets like moses , jesus etc etc because no such names have been glorified.Anyway if you have question regarding hinduism you can ask hindus like Ram, charlesmartel . They would be able to explain you better than me. Religion is not for me . I stay away from it for the simple reason i cannot defend them when questioned.
In this context, I find the most fascinating concept to be that of Brahman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahman" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. This concept of a God sounds ultimate to me.
Islam is a funny religion which is misunderstood by its scholars and correctly understood by ordinary Muslims.
Faith is keeping your eyes shut when looking at the world, and/or keeping your eyes open only for the beauty of the world.

User avatar
charleslemartel
Posts: 2884
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 2:01 pm
Location: Throne Of Allah

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by charleslemartel »

skynightblaze wrote:
Ahmed wrote:The hadith only mentioned that prophet Mohammed told them: I am going to judge between you using the book of Allah
Ofcourse Muhhamad would have never said about following hadith because they didnt exist during his time so how can he ask his followers to follow them? The sunni followers are still not wrong if they follow the hadiths provided hadiths arent a lie.
If the hadiths are true then we can see how muhhamad implemented quran. So following muhhamad from hadiths is like following quran because of the simple belief of muslims that Muhhamad himself cannot violate quran.

In short if hadiths are true then how muhhamad behaved is what quran meant and actually taught because Muhhamad cannot violate quran. SO now if sunni muslims follow hadith they arent wrong because they are following quran by following muhhamad who never violated quran. So even if muhhamad never asked us to follow the hadiths still the sunni muslims following hadiths arent wrong .

To dismiss the sunni muslims you need to prove that the entire hadiths were forged and a lie . IT is then only you can accuse the sunni sect of being misguided.
Dear skynightblaze,

You are an insightful man, and I would never like to find myself arguing against you :)
Islam is a funny religion which is misunderstood by its scholars and correctly understood by ordinary Muslims.
Faith is keeping your eyes shut when looking at the world, and/or keeping your eyes open only for the beauty of the world.

sum
Posts: 6623
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:11 pm

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by sum »

skynightblaze has many talents!

sum

User avatar
AhmedBahgat
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:38 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by AhmedBahgat »

antineoETC wrote:Ahmed bahgat. Re: your following rendering of surah 9:40:

If you do not help him, that is, the Prophet (s), [know that] God has already helped him, when the disbelievers drove him forth, from Mecca, that is, they made him resort to leaving, when they desired to kill him or imprison him or banish him at the council assembly — the second of two (thāniya ithnayn: this is a circumstantial qualifier), that is, one of two, the other being Abū Bakr



First AB: verse 9:40 makes NO mention of Mecca. So on what basis do you deduce that it was "FROM Mecca" that "The Prophet" was driven?

Second: Verse 9:40 does not contain the words "the other being Abu Bakr". You are therefore deducing that "the second of the two" is this "Abu Bakr" whose name is mentioned NOWHERE in the Koran. So on what basis do you deduce this?



Dismissed

User avatar
AhmedBahgat
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:38 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by AhmedBahgat »

skynightblaze wrote:
Ahmed wrote:The hadith only mentioned that prophet Mohammed told them: I am going to judge between you using the book of Allah
Ofcourse Muhhamad would have never said about following hadith because they didnt exist during his time so how can he ask his followers to follow them? The sunni followers are still not wrong if they follow the hadiths provided hadiths arent a lie.
If the hadiths are true then we can see how muhhamad implemented quran. So following muhhamad from hadiths is like following quran because of the simple belief of muslims that Muhhamad himself cannot violate quran.

In short if hadiths are true then how muhhamad behaved is what quran meant and actually taught because Muhhamad cannot violate quran. SO now if sunni muslims follow hadith they arent wrong because they are following quran by following muhhamad who never violated quran. So even if muhhamad never asked us to follow the hadiths still the sunni muslims following hadiths arent wrong .

To dismiss the sunni muslims you need to prove that the entire hadiths were forged and a lie . IT is then only you can accuse the sunni sect of being misguided.
Dismissed

User avatar
AhmedBahgat
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:38 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by AhmedBahgat »

antineoETC wrote:
skynightblaze wrote:However i still feel that he[Ahmedbahgat] has the right to use hadiths against us since we believe them as true.
Ahmed Bahgat is an avowed hadith rejector. I personally don't believe either he or any other Muslims who claim to hold this position truly do so. My view is that this is just a deception ploy to inveigle the unwary into Islam on a false premise - although, like I said, AB may have been propagating this deception so long he has come to half believe it. Notwithstanding, I only ever debate AB and others like him using the Koran alone. It is HE who keeps making references - eg to Abu Bakr who is not explicitly named in the Koran - that can only have been from some non-Koranic source or other. It is a reasonable question to ask just what these non-Koran sources are.
You have been life dismissed

http://www.free-islam.com/modules.php?n ... =3646#3646" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

I think i should have listed "life dismissed" instead of just "dismissed" on the Classic Muslim Answers thread. :lol:
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
AhmedBahgat
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:38 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by AhmedBahgat »

Salam all

In today’s Bukhari Sunnah lesson, we will look at two hadith from his book, the two hadith are from two different chapters, however it seems that both are talking about the same future incident on the judgment day, which means that we should cross reference both of them and see if there is any contradiction between the two, this also should give us another hint to how Bukhari was immaculate in his work, as so many claim such about him, of course the objective of Bukhari to include both hadith in his book should nothing except that we will learn some sunnah from the prophet through them.

Let me start with the first hadith, which Bukhari listed under a chapter that he named احاديت الانبياء , i.e. The hadith of the prophets, sort of Bukhari dedicated a whole chapter to tell us what other prophets said.

Under such chapter Bukhari listed a cub-chapter that he named, قول الله تعالى
انا ارسلنا نوحا الي قومه ان انذر قومك
, i.e. The saying of exalted Allah: Indeed, We sent Nuh to his people (saying): Warn your people…

I assume that Bukhari is going to explain to us the following verse:

71:1 انا ارسلنا نوحا الي قومه ان انذر قومك من قبل ان ياتيهم عذاب اليم

Indeed, We sent Nuh to his people (saying): Warn your people before a painful torture comes to them.

As you can clearly read the above verse: IT DOES NOT NEED ANY ELABORATION, it is so simple for a child to understand, that Allah sent prophet Nuh to his people to warn them before a painful torture comes to them, how complicated.

Let’s have a look at such allegation of hadith, and see how Bukhari will distort the meaning of the above very simple verse by telling us a strange story that should happen on the JD:

Image

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... 3092&doc=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The above hadith is very weird indeed, again there is no sunnah in it what so ever, in fact the second narrator in the chain (of five narrators + Bukhari) stopped of all a sudden, sort of halfway in his story, saying that he totally forgot what the first narrator told him, HOW FUNNY, yet 4 more narrators transmitted such allegation despite they took it from someone who clearly admitted that he forgot the rest of the story.

The chain of narrators goes like this:

Ishaq Ibn Nasr -> Mohammed Ibn Obaid -> Abu Hayan -> Abi Zaraa -> Abi Hurairah

See, Mohammed Ibn Hayan admitted that he forgot the rest of the story that he heard from Ishaq Ibn Nasr. That should be enough to dismiss the whole story, yet four more narrators transmitted it, and even documented it in a book that they want to call it, the book of Allah. Those four confused narrators are as follow:

1- Abu Hayan
2- Abi Zaraa
3- Abi Hurairah

And of course:

4- Bukhari

Let me walk you through such doubtful allegation of hadith that suppose to be Sahih as Bukhari claimed and see if we may learn some sunnah from it:

Mister always doubtful Abu Hurairah is telling us that they went with the prophet for Dawah, i.e. to call others to the way of Allah.

So while they were eating, the prophet was enjoying a piece of meat, so he took a bite from it then said:

I am the master of all people on the day of resurrection, do you know how Allah will gather the first and the last people in one gathering so everyone will see them and hear them. The sun will be near and the people will say to each other: Don’t you realize the misery that is waiting for you? Try to find one who will intercede for you. So the people said: Your father Adam.

So they went to Adam and said to him: O Adam! You are the father of all humans, Allah created you with His hands and blew in you from His Spirit, and commanded the angels, and they prostrated before you, and made you live in the garden, please intercede for us, don’t you see the misery that we are in?

So Adam will reply: My Lord was very angry (supposedly with Adam), and such anger had no likeness before or after, and He prohibited me from the tree but I disobeyed Him, and I only care about my self, I only care about myself (Adam repeated it twice), go to someone else, go to Nuh.

So the (desperate) people went to Nuh and said to him: O Nuh! You are the first of messengers and Allah named you ‘a thankful slave’, please intercede for us, don’t you see the misery that we are in?

So Nuh will reply: My Lord was very angry (supposedly with Nuh), and such anger had no likeness before or after, and I only care about my self, I only care about myself (Nuh repeated it twice), go to the prophet (Mohammed).

So the prophet said: So they come to me, so I prostrate under the throne, and it will be said to me: O Mohammed! Raise you head and ask for intercession and it will be granted, and whatever you ask for will be given.

Abu Hurairah then said that Mohammed Ibn Obaid said: I do not remember the rest of the story.


End of hadith

As you all (Muslims, Mushriks and Kafirs) can clearly see from the above story, THERE IS NO SUNNAH IN IT.

And most certainly it does not explain to us the self explanatory verse 71:1

How confused mister Bukhari have been, I really cannot believe that so many Muslims bought his clear cut non sense and pure crap.

The above allegation serves only one purpose in Bukhari’s plan, to again raise prophet Mohammed to the most highest level any human can ever reach, a level where he will have a say to what Allah decides to do with us. The process is called شفاعة , i.e. Intercession, which I have no problem with, because it is mentioned in the Quran a few times as we will see later on inshaallah, however it was never mentioned as an explicit offering to Mohammed.

What I found very revolting that when the people asked Adam to seek it for them from Allah, he washed his hands clean from them, demeaning himself by stating his sin (what they call the first sin), and while stating that because of his sin, Allah became so angry with him that no likeness of such anger existed before or will exist after that day (I guess), this part of the story contradicts Bukhari hadith # 6961 in which he alleged to us (trying to explain the oneness of Allah) that when Musa tried to corner Adam by mentioning his first sin, Adam slam dunked Musa by telling him that how he can blame him for something that Allah decreed on him before creating him? i.e. THERE SHOULD BE NO NEED FOR SUCH ANGER from Allah towards Adam which have been associated to Him by those hadith narrators (see saying about Allah which what they do not know or have any proof for it), the Quran too contradicts such anger, because it confirmed the fact that Allah gave Adam some words then forgave him, let’s have a look:

Then Adam received from his Lord words, then He turned to him mercifully; surely He is the Relenting, the Merciful.

2:37 فتلقى ادم من ربه كلمات فتاب عليه انه هو التواب الرحيم

How clear from another Quran verse that does not need any explanation by anyone, the verse is self explanatory, that Allah straight after the incident of the tree, talked to Adam and said to him some words (the lesson and the truth that He planned it all before Adam was created). Then Allah turned to Adam mercifully, i.e. Allah forgave Adam. Therefore there was no such need for such massive anger that was associated to Allah, an anger like which there was nothing before and after such incident.

Yet the same hadith contradicted its own story, by telling us that Nuh said the exact same when the people went to him asking him to intercede for them before Allah, the hadith alleged that Nuh said that Allah was so angry, such anger that there was nothing like it before or after. Come on, the hadith just told us that Allah was angry like it before such incident, during the time of Adam, how ridiculous. However while Adam provided a reason for such anger by Allah towards him, Nuh provided no reason for such anger towards him that was alleged and associated to Allah, certainly Allah might have been angry with the people of Nuh who rejected his message, but that does not mean that Allah is angry with Nuh himself, how ridiculous again, I am sure that Allah holds Nuh in high regard, and certainly Nuh won’t let those who believed in him down in a such cheap way of caring only about himself while he was one of the great messengers of Allah, in fact, what Allah enjoined Mohammed of doing, was the exact same that was enjoined upon Nuh by Allah, let’s have a look:

He made law for you of the religion what He enjoined upon Nuh and that which We have revealed to you and that which We enjoined upon Ibrahim and Musa and Isa, that you establish the religion be not be divided therein; hard to the unbelievers is that which you call them to; Allah chooses for Himself whom He pleases, and guides to Himself him who turns (to Him), frequently.

42:13 شرع لكم من الدين ما وصي به نوحا والذي اوحينا اليك وما وصينا به ابراهيم وموسي وعيسي ان اقيموا الدين ولا تتفرقوا فيه كبر علي المشركين ما تدعوهم اليه الله يجتبي اليه من يشاء ويهدي اليه من ينيب

See, we follow the same as what Nuh was following, in fact the same as what all prophets were following, like Ibrahim, Musa and Isa, however can you see that Allah added on us what He sent down to Mohammed, He made law for you of the religion what He enjoined upon Nuh and that which We have revealed to you, and certainly what was revealed to Mohammed is the Quran and nothing else, Bukhari book can not be what was revealed to Mohammed while it is full of contradictions and non sense.

Bukhari books and its likes only divided the ummah into numerous sects, see what was ordained upon all of us and upon all prophets as stated in the same verse: ان اقيموا الدين ولا تتفرقوا فيه , i.e. that you establish the religion be not be divided therein

This lame of hadith even portrayed the prophet in a not very nice manner, see, we are told that the prophet was in a Dawah (calling others to the way of Allah), you expect that the hadith will give us an example of how to call others to the way of Allah, yet all it showed us, the prophet enjoying a meal, then after he took a bite from a piece of lamb, he said all of a sudden, (I guess while his mouth was full of food) that: He is the master of all humans on the Judgment Day (praising himself), and to prove it, he told them a weird story, that was not even completed in the hadith and was suddenly interrupted due to the fact that its rest was forgotten, the moral of the story was nothing but showing that Adam and Nuh will only care about themselves on the Judgment Day, while only Mohammed will be the one who will be granted the power of intersession before Allah

I do not believe that Allah was ever angry in such anger with either Adam or Nuh, especially when I read the following verse:

Indeed Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the family of Ibrahim and the famil of Imran above all the creatures.

3:33 ان الله اصطفى ادم ونوحا وال ابراهيم وال عمران على العالمين


Now, under another chapter that mister Bukhari named التوحيد , i.e. Oneness of Allah from which we have already looked at a few useless hadith above, Bukhari listed another hadith under a sub-chapter that he named: كلام الرب عز وجل يوم القيامة مع الأنبياء وغيرهم , i.e.The words of Allah on the day of resurrection to the prophets and others.

I.e. Bukhari is going to associate words directly to Allah, the story in the following hadith seems to be talking about the same story we read in the above hadith, let’s have a look at it:

Image

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... 6956&doc=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The chain of narrators are three:

Solaiman Bin Harb -> Hammad Bin Zaid -> Mubid Bin Hiala Al-Anzy

So Mubid said that a group of people from Basrah city gathered and went to Anas Bin Malik, a guy named Thabit Al-Banany went with them to ask Anas about the hadith of intercession, so when they arrived to his MANSION (look like mister Anas was very rich, he was living in a mansion), and he was praying the noon prayer, so they asked permission to enter and he allowed them, so Mubid said to Anas: O Aba Hamza (the father of Hamza), these people are from Basrah and want to ask you about the hadith of intercession, so Anas Bin Malik said:

Mohammed said that on the day of resurrection, the people will be wondering around until they come to Adam and ask him to interced for them before Allah, so Adam will tell them: I am not for it, but go and seek it from Ibrahim, he is the friend of the Compassionate (i.e. Adam let the people down)

So they go to Ibrahim (asking him the same), so he tell them: I am not for it, but go and seek it from Musa, he is the one to whom Allah spoke. (i.e. Ibrahim let the people down)

So they go to Musa (asking him the same) so he tell them: I am not for it, but go and seek it from Isa (Jesus), he is the spirit of Allah. (i.e. Musa let the people down)

So they go to Isa (asking the same) so he tell them: I am not for it, but go and seek it from Mohammed. (i.e. Isa let the people down)

Prophet Mohammed continued: So they will come to me (asking me the same), and I will say, I am for it, so I seek permission from Allah and I fall prostrating before Him, and it will be said to me: Raise you head, and say, you will be heard, and ask, you will be given, and seek intercession, it will be granted, so I say: O my Lord! My ummah (my people), Allah will say to me: Go and take out from hell whoever has a belief the weight of small seed. So I do, then I return back and prostrate to Him.

And it will be said to me: Raise you head, and say, you will be heard, and ask, you will be given, and seek intercession, it will be granted, so I say: O my Lord! My ummah, my ummah (my people, my people), Allah will say to me: Go and take out from hell whoever has a belief the weight of an atom. So I do, then I return back and prostrate to Him.

And it will be said to me: Raise you head, and say, you will be heard, and ask, you will be given, and seek intercession, it will be granted, so I say: O my Lord! My ummah, my ummah (my people, my people), Allah will say to me: Go and take out from hell whoever has a belief whose weight smaller than the weight of a seed. So I do.

(It seems that at this moment Anas stopped and they left his mansion) so Mubid continued and said: When we left I told the others, how about while we pass by Hasn (a village or something) we stop at the house of Abi Khalifah and confirm with him what we heard from Anas regarding intercession. So we went to the house of Abi Khalifah and said to him: O Abi Said (the father of Said)! We came to you with something from Anas that we never heard before , so he told us to say it, then we told him what Anas told us, but Abi Khalifah said to us: Anas told me such hadith 20 years ago, and I am not sure if he forgot or deliberately did not tell you the rest of it fearing that you rely on it without doing your best to be saved, so we asked him to tell us the rest of the hadith and he laughed and said: Humans are always in a rush. What happened that Mohammed will return a fourth time and prostrate before Allah then:

It will be said to him: Raise you head, and say, you will be heard, and ask, you will be given, and ask intercession, it will be granted, so Mohammed will say: O my Lord! Give me permission to take out from hell whoever said ‘La Ilah Illah Allah’ (There is no god except Allah), so Allah will say, by My Might and Honor, I will take out from hell whoever said there is no god except Allah.

End of hadith

Clearly this hadith by Bukhari contradicts his other hadith explained earlier in this comment, in the first hadith it was only (Adam, Nuh and Mohammed), while in this hadith, we have (Adam, Ibrahim, Musa, Isa and Mohammed), how obvious, both hadith however share a few things in common, that:

1) Mohammed is higher than the rest of all other prophets and he will have a vital word to what Allah may do so people will be saved.
2) All prophets with the exception of Mohammed will let their people down.
3) There is no sunnah to be learnt from both hadith, even if the second hadith tells us that those who believe in the oneness of Allah are those who declare that there is no god except Allah, because that was nothing new, the oneness of Allah was described clearly by Allah in His Quran and through a 100% Sahih hadith of Mohammed, let’s have a look:

Say: He, Allah, is One.
Allah is He on Whom all depend.
He begets not, nor is He begotten.
And none is like Him.


قل هو الله احد
الله الصمد
لم يلد ولم يولد
ولم يكن له كفوا احد

[The Quran ; 112:1-4]

-> How simple and clear the oneness of Allah as described to us by Allah Himself through 100% Sahih hadith of Mohammed, see the word: قل , i.e. Say, i.e. 100% Sahih hadith of Mohammed.

Bukhari however, in his second hadith above, which suppose to be explaining to us the oneness of Allah, diverted, distracted and confused the matter with something else, that Mohammed will be the only prophet who will seek intercession to anyone who declare the oneness of Allah. In the process he contradicted himself because he talked about the same story in another allegation of his which list to us different prophets in the chain of messengers in his repeated non sensible story.

As if, there were no one who believed in the previous messengers, who may be entitled to their own messengers intercession, it seems that according to the above non sensible hadith that those former believers will miss out because their own prophets declined to offer intercession, and as we have read above that the prophet was only seeking intercession for his ummah, i.e. his people, not the people of other prophets, see the non sense. Some may say that the prophet will seek intercession for them in the fourth time when he asks Allah to allow him to take out from hell anyone who declared that there is no god except Allah (as you can see the second part of the suppose to be shahada is not stated) which may imply that at the fourth time the prophet was seeking intercession to those who believed in the other prophets before Mohammed and dying before Mohammed was sent, because all they needed to have done was to say no god except Allah, a logic that may be acceptable at a glance, then its flaw will become clear in a matter of seconds, because those people before Mohammed who have declared that there is no god except Allah, should be equal to those who believed in Allah and received the message of Mohammed, YET they were left LAST for the prophet to intercede for them and take them out from hell, IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.

Such non sense will be clear if we look at some verses of شفاعة , i.e. Intercession in the Quran:

In a 100% Sahih hadith by Mohammed, Allah told Mohammed to say to the people the following:

39:44 Say: To Allah is the whole matter of intercession; His is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth, then to Him you will be returned.


39:44 قل لله الشفاعة جميعا له ملك السماوات والارض ثم اليه ترجعون

How clear the message is in the above 100% Sahih hadith by Mohammed, simply, the outcome of intercession will not be known until the sinners (who should be believers in Allah) stand before Him and someone intercede for them after permission is given, after that it is up to Allah to accept such intercession or not, the hadith writers however are telling us the outcome of such intercession before hand, that all prophets with the exception of Mohammed will refuse to intercede for their people while Mohammed will do and Allah will quickly grant it for him and does what Mohammed request.

The information that Allah will accept intercession for those who declared that there is no god except Allah, as alleged by the second Bukhari hadith above, is nothing new, it was stated in the Quran, let’s have a look:

They will not have intercession, except he who has taken with the Compassionate a covenant.


19:87 لا يملكون الشفاعة الا من اتخذ عند الرحمن عهدا

-> See the above verse is talking about the sinners that: They will not have intercession, except he who has taken with the Compassionate a covenant., and guess what, that covenant is declaring that there is no god except Allah, i.e. those sinners who have believed and declared so, intercession may be granted to them. Which is like what Bukhari told us in the second hadith above, but with a major difference, which is, Bukhari is telling us that only Mohammed will be the one to intercede and other prophets will decline to do so and only care for themselves, they will not care for their own people who believed in them.

Allah clearly said in the Quran that seeking intercession will be allowed to anyone as long as Allah gives permission and accepts what they will say:

On that day intercession will not benefit except him to whom the Compassionate allows and has accepted from him a saying.


20:109 يومئذ لا تنفع الشفاعة الا من اذن له الرحمن ورضي له قولا


The angels too will be allowed to intercede:

He knows what is before them and what is behind them, and they do not intercede except for him whom He approves and they are from fear of Him apprehensive.


21:28 يعلم ما بين ايديهم وما خلفهم ولا يشفعون الا لمن ارتضي وهم من خشيته مشفقون


There is not one single verse in the Quran that associate intercession explicitly to Mohammed, and most certainly the outcome of the intercession will only be known at such point of time, not before hand, this is when the sinners will feel and conceive the might and power of Allah and that He has full power over all things.

Bukhari however presented it to us as if we know the outcome before hand, that only Mohammed who will intercede for us and Allah will 100% will accept it from him and remove all sinners from hell as long as they had a covenant with Allah before hand, when they declared that there is no god except Him.

One final note regarding the second hadith above, if Anas Ibn Malik refused to tell the people about the fourth time when it is alleged that Mohammed will return for the fourth time before Allah asking Him to allow him to remove all those sinners from hell, who have declared the oneness of Allah before hand, as it was stated above that Anas motive of concealing it was to avoid that the people may totally rely on that and indulge themselves in committing sins as long as they have declared the oneness of Allah, they will be saved, as they would know that the prophet will intercede for them and remove them from hell. Then I say, Bukhari spoiled such careful thoughts by Anas, because now, all of us know that by just declaring the oneness of Allah while indulging in sins all our lives, it will be more than enough for Mohammed to intercede for us and even he will have the power to remove us from hell, Allah is rendered just a mere one of the actors who is acting in a play that was directed by Bukhari, what a load of non sense dear Muslim brothers and sisters.

See, those hadith worshippers do not understand that intercession (logically speaking) has absolutely no value, being in hell or being in paradise, Allah can remove you from either, any time He wills, let’s have a look:

106: So as to those who are unhappy, they will be in the fire; for them therein is exhaling and inhaling,
107: Abiding therein as long as the heavens and the earth endure, except as your Lord wills; indeed your Lord is doer of what He wants.
108: And as to those who are made happy, in the garden abiding therein as long as the heavens and the earth endure, except as your Lord wills; a giving which will never be interrupted.


11:106 فاما الذين شقوا ففي النار لهم فيها زفير وشهيق
11:107 خالدين فيها ما دامت السماوات والارض الا ما شاء ربك ان ربك فعال لما يريد
11:108 واما الذين سعدوا ففي الجنة خالدين فيها ما دامت السماوات والارض الا ما شاء ربك عطاء غير مجذوذ


See, those sinners who will go to hell, will abide in it EXCEPT as Allah wills: as to those who are unhappy, they will be in the fire; for them therein is exhaling and inhaling, Abiding therein as long as the heavens and the earth endure, except as your Lord wills;

And the winners who will go to paradise, will abide in it EXCEPT as Allah wills: And as to those who are made happy, in the garden abiding therein as long as the heavens and the earth endure, except as your Lord wills.

Therefore, the outcome of the intercession by other people is meaningless (logically speaking) because even for those who will enter paradise, Allah can take them out from it whenever He wills, and most certainly He will not and cannot be questioned regarding why He did this, or why He has done that.

Such exclusive Mashi’aa (willing) which belongs only to Allah, was presented to us by Bukhari as if, there is another willing in conjunction with it, (the willing of prophet Mohammed) and through both willing(s), the sinners will be saved, imagine that Mohammed may not intercede for some people, what will happen to them? It has to be UNKNOWN according to the man made books of hadith.

Salam

User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by The Cat »

Hi, AB.
You truly hit something big with this topic of Shirk in Islam. I sure hope you'll write a book about it, both in English and Arabic.
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.

User avatar
AhmedBahgat
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:38 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by AhmedBahgat »

The Cat wrote:Hi, AB.
You truly hit something big with this topic of Shirk in Islam. I sure hope you'll write a book about it, both in English and Arabic.
Inshaallah, it is in my plans, I need to finish my first priority which is translating the Quran and produsing the most accurate English tranlsation ever found on earth (with Allah willing and permission) then get into the publsihing ring to expose them, you won't believe the amount of work just to put one comment together, yet I am surprised that I manage to do it in a very reasonable time, i have a lot of hopes inshaallah

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

AhmedBahgat wrote:
The Cat wrote:Hi, AB.
You truly hit something big with this topic of Shirk in Islam. I sure hope you'll write a book about it, both in English and Arabic.
Inshaallah, it is in my plans, I need to finish my first priority which is translating the Quran and produsing the most accurate English tranlsation ever found on earth (with Allah willing and permission) then get into the publsihing ring to expose them, you won't believe the amount of work just to put one comment together, yet I am surprised that I manage to do it in a very reasonable time, i have a lot of hopes inshaallah
chuckle chuckle, sshh..... this is a hidden message...winkee winkee....chuckle chuckle :lol:
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

antineoETC
Posts: 1910
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 10:53 am

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by antineoETC »

sword_of_truth wrote:Ahmed's point about Muhammed telling people not to talk about him is not being used to prove that Hadith are false. The point, as I see it, is to call into question the religious obligation to follow Hadith.
The trouble is, if one obeys Muhammad on this point one is following a hadith. It is quite illogical.
"Prophet Muhammad...bought, sold, captured, and owned slaves" SOURCE: BBC website
"Muhammad is considered to be a perfect model" SOURCE: BBC website

antineoETC
Posts: 1910
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 10:53 am

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by antineoETC »

AhmedBahgat wrote:You have been life dismissed
Well :cry: :cry: :cry: !In other words, rather than fail to respond to my points by being rude and uncooperative you will fail to respond to my points by not responding at all. And the effective difference is?
"Prophet Muhammad...bought, sold, captured, and owned slaves" SOURCE: BBC website
"Muhammad is considered to be a perfect model" SOURCE: BBC website

User avatar
AhmedBahgat
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:38 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by AhmedBahgat »

Salaam all

In today’s Bukhari sunnah lesson, I collected a few hadith, in which I found that they are clearly contradicting the whole concept of hadith, for me it is like Allah made such hadith worshippers so dumb, deaf and blind to record with their own hands, their convection of the crime they committed against Islam.

The hadith that we will go through today will also tell us a lot about Abu Hurairah, so expect that today’s lesson is going to be a long one, not a quickie.

If you have read my article which I have written about 18 months ago Let’s talk Ibn Magih, you should have noticed the few hadith about the prophet warning his Sahaba, not to talk too much about him, and consequently we read in many other Ibn Magih hadith that many of the Sahaba indeed refrained themselves from talking even ONE SINGLE hadith about the prophet after his death.

Bukhari confirmed such Ibn Magih hadith allegation in his book, let me start with the following hadith:

Image

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... =104&doc=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Again, no sunnah to be found in the above hadith, the hadith is a chat between a couple of guys. The two guys are (Abdallah Ibn Al-Zobair), and his father (Al-Zobair), so Abdallah said to Al-Zobair (the son is asking the father):

I do not hear you saying hadith about the prophet as such person and such person does.

So Al-Zobair replied:

While I never left his company (the company of the prophet), I heard him saying: Whoever lies about me, he should secure his seat in the fire.

End of hadith

Now, think about this:

Al-Zobair reply does not imply that he did not know such amount of hadith as such other people may have, in fact his reply indicates that he knew a lot of hadith, this is clear from his reply, that he never left the prophet, i.e. he deliberately refrained himself from talking about the prophet, why you think he was doing so? See, his reason as stated in the above hadith does not make sense what so ever, this is because he did not hear the prophet saying, Not to talk about him. Period. Rather whoever lies about me, he should secure his seat in the fire., now, Al-Zobair is a fully trusted narrator by Bukhari, i.e. he was never a liar (according to Bukhari criteria), then how come he says such illogical reply?

It is a bit tough to understand, let me clear it for you:

Imagine the following dialogue:

Abdullah: I do not hear you talk about the prophet as such other people do?

Al-Zobair: While I was with him all the time, I heard him saying: Not to talk about me.

And consequently Al-Zobair obeyed the prophet and stopped talking about him after his death, but the allegation about what the prophet said is something else, here it is:

Al-Zobair: While I was with him all the time, I heard him saying: whoever lies about me, he should secure his seat in the fire.

SEE, it is like Al-Zobair is saying: If I talk too much about the prophet, I may lie and go to hell, HOW INSANE

Also, AL-Zobair reply implies that those who talk too much about the prophet may be liars, hadith maniacs as such has to be Abu Hurairah and so many Muslims now days.

The bottom line is this, there is no sunnah in the above hadith, it is not like only those who lie about the prophet or any other prophet for that matter will go to hell, while the other liars who never lie about any prophet may be given respite, HOW INSANE.

Certainly according to the Quran, any liar, being one who lied about the prophet or lied about another ordinary human, will go to hell unless Allah wills otherwise. HOW SIMPLE.

Now, if I really push it hard and try to find any sunnah in the above hadith, then it is simply, WE SHOULD NOT TALK ABOUT THE PROPHET TOO MUCH, now, open your Arabic TV and get any Islamic channel, and see who are the most one they are talking about, Mohammed is the answer, and certainly more than Allah, if you find it hard to get any Islamic channel, just visit your local mosque on Friday prayer and listen to the Khutbah.

What is also funny, that Bukhari listed the above hadith under a chapter that he named العلم , i.e. The knowledge, hmmmm, how come the story been alleged and knowledge are related? I guess we may need some hadith science to find out.

Current score:

Bukhari: 0
Common Sense: 1

The following Bukhari hadith is similar to the above, another known Sahabi who admitted that he refrained himself from talking too much about the prophet, such Sahabi is named Anas, let’s have a look:

Image

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... =105&doc=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As you can see again, no sunnah to be found in the above hadith, the hadith is a chat between a group of people, one of them is named Anas, who told the others, the following:

What prevents me from telling you a lot of hadith about the prophet is that, the prophet said: whoever lies about me, he should secure his seat in the fire.

End of hadith

Same argument as the previous hadith, it is like Anas is saying: If I talk too much about the prophet, I may lie and go to hell, HOW INSANE AGAIN

See, if Anas talks too much about the prophet while being truthful, then he should fear nothing, right, dear Muslim brothers and sisters?

Therefore something does not make sense, certainly the reason for such people to refrain themselves from talking too much about the prophet cannot be what they claimed above, it has to be another alleged message from the prophet telling them directly not to do so, let me remind you with it again from Ibn Magih hadith book:

Image

Source

The saying of Abi Qatada goes like this:

I have heard the prophet while he was on the stand saying:

Be warned of talking too much about me, and whoever says something of what I said then he must speak truthfully and whoever lies by alleging things that I have never said then his seat in hell is secured

See how the prophet warned the people against talking way too much about him: اياكم و كثرة الحديث عني , i.e. Be warned of talking too much about me

The obvious problem that I see here is this, how the people should judge what is classified as: talk too much? See, if we leave it to the people, we should get all possibilities:

- Those who never talked about the prophet at all.
- Those who talked very little about the prophet like Abu Bakr and Ali
-
-
- Those who talked and talk about the prophet too much, like Abu Hurairah, and most Muslims now
- days

The blank area I left above is for many other possibilities in between.

Certainly all those people cannot be right in obeying the command of the prophet Not to talk too much about him, because they all differed in their understanding of how too much is too much. The religion of Islam is very clear in here, you must always go for the safest position, and in such case, NOT TO TALK ABOUT HIM AT ALL. Just let the Quran talks about him, and indeed, the Quran is full of hundreds and hundreds of the truthful sayings of the prophet.

Current score:

Bukhari: 0
Common Sense: 2

Now, it is about time to look at some so called hadith by Abu Hurairah which suppose to teach us some sunnah about the prophet, those hadith are from a guy who was a hadith addict, in clear violation to the alleged prophet order, not to talk too much about him, such man who only accompanied the prophet just under two years before the prophet died -certainly far less than the time Abu Bakr spent with his son in low Mohammed, and certainly far less than the time Aysha spent with her husband Mohammed- yet such man told us thousands and thousands of hadith. In fact, I swear by Allah that once I read a hadith (many years ago) that Aysha accused him of lying about the prophet by saying things that the prophet never did or said, so Abu Hurairah replies back to her by saying that she does not know such about the prophet because she was busy all the time in front of the mirror. I am still trying to find such hadith and inshaallah will find it.

So Abu Hurairah needed to give himself credit, and brainwash the people to be programmed that anything he said must have been truthful, let’s have a look at the following hadith from Bukhari book:

Image

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... =110&doc=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The hadith above is by Abu Hurairah, under a the same chapter named The knowledge, then a sub-chapater named: كتابة العلم , i.e. The writing of knowledge

So, Abu Hurairah is saying:

No one of the companions of the prophet is saying more hadith than me except Abudallah Ibn Amr, because he was writing it and I did not.

End of hadith

Obviously, and certainly there is no sunnah what so ever in the above non sense, they did not even say anything that was said or was done by the prophet.

The hadith is nothing but Abu Hurairah promoting himself regarding the hadith, in which he claims to be the second human to talk most about the prophet, unfortunately someone beat him to position number one, very sad for him, or do you think it was an honesty of him to say so?

Well, the bad news for such both contenders in the world championship of hadith, that it is alleged that the prophet said to someone else that all people should not talk too much about him. I.e. both contenders who are on the top of the ladder of who talks more about the prophet did not really obey the prophet. Or what do you think?

And because the above non sense does not have any sunnah, Bukhari must fail the common sense test:

Current score:

Bukhari: 0
Common Sense: 3

As we go through the next 3 hadith from Bukhari book, you should get some idea about the personality of Abu Hurairah, let me show you the next example, in which Abu Hurairah indirectly contradicted all those hadith narrators who refrained themselves from talking too much about the prophet, let’s have a look:

Image

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... =115&doc=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The above hadith is by Abu Hurairah, in such hadith the people accused him of talking too much about the prophet, so to defend himself he read for them verse 2:159

So Abu Hurairah is saying:

The people are saying that Abu Hurairah talks too much hadith, so Abu Hurairah told them that if it was not for two Quran verses, I would have never said any hadith to you.

Then he recited to them one verse only, how stupid:

Here is the full verse:

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَكْتُمُونَ مَا أَنزَلْنَا مِنَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَالْهُدَى مِن بَعْدِ مَا بَيَّنَّاهُ لِلنَّاسِ فِي الْكِتَابِ أُولَئِكَ يَلعَنُهُمُ اللّهُ وَيَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّاعِنُونَ (159)
Those who conceal what We have sent down from the signs and the guidance after We have explained it to the people in the Book, these are the ones whom Allah shall curse, and those who curse shall curse them.
[Al Quran ; 2:159]

Again and again, THERE IS ABSOUTELY NO SUNNAH IN IT, on the other hand, verse 2:159 is talking about those who conceal the guidance and signs that Allah already EXPLAINED in the Quran, see these words: إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَكْتُمُونَ مَا أَنزَلْنَا مِنَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَالْهُدَى مِن بَعْدِ مَا بَيَّنَّاهُ لِلنَّاسِ فِي الْكِتَابِ , i.e. Those who conceal what We have sent down from the signs and the guidance after We have explained it to the people in the Book,. i.e. thank you mister Abu Hurairah, we do not need your non sense, because Allah already explained His signs and guidance in His book, not Bukhari book, HOW MANIPULATIVE THAT MAN WAS.

Obviously back then it seems most of the people were too dumb or possibly too primitive to buy such clear cut manipulation by Abu Hurairah linking a clear verse that is talking about the Quran, as if it is talking about his own hadith. However according to Abu Hurairah manipulated evidences above, he should never conceal anything, just keep that in mind and let’s see how he contradicted himself later on inshaallah.

Abu Hurairah did not stop there, firstly he tried to link his action of talking too much about the prophet as if it is something ordained by Allah in His Quran, then it seems that the people were still doubting him, so secondly, he came up with his silly excuse that he uses against everyone that accuses him of such, including Omar and Aysha, that they were too busy, while he was sticking to the prophet. So Abu Hurairah continued:

Our brothers of the Muhajireen were busy in the markets, and our brothers from Ansar were busy doing business, but Abu Hurairah was sticking to the prophet so he (the prophet) feeds him and while he (Abu Hurairah) attends what they do not attend and memorize what they do not memorize.

End of hadith

Another hadith that is nothing but Abu Hurairah promoting himself regarding the hadith, in which he associated his action of talking too much about the prophet to Allah by bringing only verse 2:195, despite he told us that two verses make him do so, then he dismissed all Muhajireen and all Ansar in favor of himself alone, that he always attended and memorized what they failed to do because they were busy in the markets or doing business.

The above hadith is not about Mohammed, it is only about Abu Hurairah, and strangely enough the hadith is stated by Abu Hurairah himself. How anyone can buy such non sense? I guess so many did and still do.

I remember very well when I was a child in my home country Egypt, after every Azan on TV, they bring a hadith that was alleged by Abu Hurairah, HOW STUPID, so instead of bringing a Quran verse with some wisdom in it, they shoved in our throats and minds so many hadith by such doubtful man named Abu Hurairah. Certainly many children will grow up brainwashed, do you think I am right in thinking so?

And surely, it is like Bukhari is promoting Abu Hurairah in the above round of hadith while at the same time presenting absolutely no sunnah about the prophet. Therefore Bukhari must fail the common sense test:

Current score:

Bukhari: 0
Common Sense: 4

In the next hadith, Abu Hurairah takes it to the extreme, it is like all the times the people were doubting him and consequently he was always defending his actions, I believe that he wanted to totally shut his so many critics up, so he came up with the following non sense of hadith:

Image

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... =116&doc=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The above hadith is very weird indeed, another incident that was stated by Abu Hurairah himself.

Abu Hurairah said that he said to the prophet:

O messenger of Allah, I hear from you too many hadith that I forget,

So the prophet said to me:

Spread your cloth.

And I did, then he took a part of it with his hand and said to me:

Hug it

And I did and since then I never forget anything.

End of hadith

Again and again and again, no sunnah in the above non sense by Bukhari, it is all about Abu Hurairah promoting himself again in his mission of brainwashing the people to accept his allegations as being something almost divine.

Now, I have to ask, why the prophet did that with Abu Hurairah alone? If the hadith was so important, why he did not do the same with a few hadith narrators so they never forget?

Further more, how the prophet contradicts himself in such clear way? See, Abu Hurairah is telling the prophet that he hears a lot of hadith that he forgets, which complies with the prophet command as we read earlier in Ibn Magih hadith book, that the prophet told them not to say too much hadith about him, i.e. the logical reply from the prophet to Abu Hurairah, should have been, that Abu Hurairah to forget many hadith is something good because that is exactly what he commanded them to do and indeed many were doing it, i.e. not to say too many hadith about him. Yet we read something weird about such man that is alleged by the same man himself, that the prophet did a miracle to him and since then he never forgets.

Certainly ridiculous, and certainly the story should be dismissed, which should also mean that Bukhari must fail the common sense test due to his insistence on promoting Abu Hurairah while at the same time not telling us any sunnah in the process, how stupid:

Current score:

Bukhari: 0
Common Sense: 5

Image

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... =117&doc=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Another strange hadith by Abu Hurairah

Abu Hurairah said:

I memorized from the prophet two things (two groups of hadith), one that I have already spread, and if I spread the other, my throat would have been cut.

End of hadith

Again, no sunnah what so ever, rather an allegation by Bukhari that Abu Hurairah admitted that he is concealing a great part of the hadith because if he said it, he would have had his throat cut.

How come, while the prophet suppose to have exclusively performed on him a miracle in order that he does not forget the plenty of hadith he hears from him?

So, Abu Hurairah suppose to be the only person along with the prophet who know such things that we do not know and been concealed upon us by Abu Hurairah? HOW INSANE

If you read Fath Albary, explaining the above non sense, the suppose to be our Ulamaa were confused to why Abu Hurairah did such thing of concealing a great part of the hadith, so they came up with some silly logic to save him, that such hadith that was concealed must have been the ones that were talking bad about the people in power, i.e. he was fearing them, sort of, he will be killed if those in power hear him saying such hadith about the prophet talking ill about them, (no sense what so ever by such confused Ulamaa), ironically they came up with something to prove their wishful thinking, simply they said that Abu Hurairah used to say:

I seek refuge by Allah from the head of sixty and the leadership of the youth.

So the Ulamaa said that he was referring to Yazid Ibn Maawya when he was a khalifah, sort of Abu Hurairah was saying it encrypted, the so called silly Ulamaa said, Yazid become Khalifah on year 60 Hijri, so Abu Hurairah must have been referring to him when he was constantly seeking refuge by Allah, possibly Yazid was a young khalifah too, anyway, the Ulamaa continued their non sense alleging that Allah granted Abu Hurairah his Dua (call to Allah) seeking refuge by Him from the head of sixty and the leadership of the youth, by causing him to die, one year before such year, i.e. year 59 Hijri.

Well, all in all, Abu Hurairah contradicted himself, by firstly presenting himself to us as one who has been assigned sort of a sacred mission of transferring the hadith to us, which was confirmed by him alleging such non sense of a miracle that was performed upon him by the prophet which made him forget nothing since, yet he comes back to us admitting that he indeed concealed a great part of the hadith, and what is shame, that his reason to conceal it was not obeying the command of the prophet of not talking too much about him, rather fearing for his own safety if he said what suppose to be the truth said by the prophet. HOW RIDICULOUS

There is no doubt that all those people were and are damn stupid, Abu Hurairah, Bukhari, The Ulamaa, and all those people who bought and believed their non sense

Current score:

Bukhari: 0
Common Sense: 6

See, from 6 hadith by Bukhari, we learnt absolutely no sunnah, rather contradictions and confusion, I wonder when the Muslims are going to wake up? I actually doubt that they will wake up, their shirk of hadith is very rooted in them. Now it is my time to seek refuge by Allah

Salam

User avatar
Cassie
Posts: 2523
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 8:32 am

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by Cassie »

Sillly goose ahmed,
Muhammad said not to;

1. lie about him,
2. talk TOO MUCH about him.

Which means Muslims can talk about him, but 'NOT TOO MUCH', and as long as it's the truth.

Pragmatist
Posts: 1785
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 9:20 am

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by Pragmatist »

Cassie wrote:Sillly goose ahmed,
Muhammad said not to;

1. lie about him,
2. talk TOO MUCH about him.

Which means Muslims can talk about him, but 'NOT TOO MUCH', and as long as it's the truth.
Remarkable how AB you know AB he is the guy who first told us he was Krap Kran only plus SELECTED Hadiths ( because they were HERESY sic. :*) ) then said he was Krap Kran ONLY but when he realised that was as STUPID as saying HERESY when he meant HEARSAY retreated to Krap Kran and ORAL Hadith (you know the COMPLETELY HEARSAY HADITHS and the reason he ORIGINALLY used to reject Hadiths in the first place :prop: :prop: ) now feels able to lecture ANYBODY on the Hadiths HE totally rejects.
Does a God create you simply to punish you in Hellfire well PREDESTINATING evil, illogical, sadistic allah DOES.

sword_of_truth
Posts: 884
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 4:36 am

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by sword_of_truth »

sword_of_truth wrote:Ahmed's point about Muhammed telling people not to talk about him is not being used to prove that Hadith are false. The point, as I see it, is to call into question the religious obligation to follow Hadith.



The trouble is, if one obeys Muhammad on this point one is following a hadith. It is quite illogical.
Nope. From a religious perspective, we argue as follows. Assume the Hadith must be obeyed. We use Ahmed's point to conclude that we don't have to obey the Hadith. Contradiction. Of course, it's illogical. It's a contradiction. Hence, we GIVE UP the assumption that we started with that the Hadith must be obeyed, including the one that was used. However, we don't need the original Hadith to conclude that. That's Ahmed's position WITHOUT using ANY Hadith. He is just trying to argue from the perspective of someone else's opinion. Hence, he cannot be guilty of being illogical as you say. He had that opinion WITHOUT the Hadith. He only needs the Hadith for to convince someone who DOES follow Hadith.

I'm not sure his argument is sufficient, but the problem you point out is not an issue. It's just the old tried and true proof by contradiction.
"...if you want my personal preference say I found out that my wife was cheating with me flogging would be too good a punishment."

--fudgy

User avatar
AhmedBahgat
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:38 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by AhmedBahgat »

sword_of_truth wrote:
sword_of_truth wrote:Ahmed's point about Muhammed telling people not to talk about him is not being used to prove that Hadith are false. The point, as I see it, is to call into question the religious obligation to follow Hadith.



The trouble is, if one obeys Muhammad on this point one is following a hadith. It is quite illogical.
Nope. From a religious perspective, we argue as follows. Assume the Hadith must be obeyed. We use Ahmed's point to conclude that we don't have to obey the Hadith. Contradiction. Of course, it's illogical. It's a contradiction. Hence, we GIVE UP the assumption that we started with that the Hadith must be obeyed, including the one that was used. However, we don't need the original Hadith to conclude that. That's Ahmed's position WITHOUT using ANY Hadith. He is just trying to argue from the perspective of someone else's opinion. Hence, he cannot be guilty of being illogical as you say. He had that opinion WITHOUT the Hadith. He only needs the Hadith for to convince someone who DOES follow Hadith.

I'm not sure his argument is sufficient, but the problem you point out is not an issue. It's just the old tried and true proof by contradiction.

If you are not sure if my argument is not sufficient, why not then tell me what sunnah that Muslims should learn from the bukhari hadith that I posted so far?

If you cannot, then my argument is sufficient

User avatar
sunshine
Posts: 827
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 10:26 pm

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by sunshine »

Yosuf Estes, One of the notable Mobot converts, who frequently appears in islamic TV said there would no contradiction in Koran if Muslims dont translate it in other languages specially english. so i suggest AB not to waste his valuable time in world's most accrute translation. Koran can only preserve its accuracy as long as it remains in the 7th century mysterious arabic. :roflmao:
Your beliefs become Your thoughts, Your thoughts become Your words, Your words become Your actions, Your actions become Your habits, Your habits become your Destiny


http://www.faithfreedom.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Pragmatist
Posts: 1785
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 9:20 am

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by Pragmatist »

sunshine wrote:Yosuf Estes, One of the notable Mobot converts, who frequently appears in islamic TV said there would no contradiction in Koran if Muslims dont translate it in other languages specially english. so i suggest AB not to waste his valuable time in world's most accrute translation. Koran can only preserve its accuracy as long as it remains in the 7th century mysterious arabic. :roflmao:
Mohammedans keep trying to use this 'you can only understand it in the Primitive Ambiguous Ancient arabic' excuse completely ignoring the fact that this then blows out of the water all the claims the Krap Kran makes of itself for being 'Clear and EASILY understood' and 'for all men for all time'. It seems Mohammedans have only one object when arguing with Kaffirs and that is to win the argument or rather to convince THEMSELVES and other brain damaged Mohammedans that they have won. Which is an entirely different thing all together. It seems that logical thinking is not possible for Mohammedans and they never seem able to extrapolate the ridiculous things they constantly say in defense of the indefensible to their logical conclusions. So SAD.
Does a God create you simply to punish you in Hellfire well PREDESTINATING evil, illogical, sadistic allah DOES.

Post Reply