Autochecked users, Bureaucrats, Editors, oversight, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers, rollback, Administrators
19,746
edits
User talk:Saggy: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Contradictions in the Qur'an and Hadith: mission of the site
(→Contradictions in the Qur'an and Hadith: mission of the site) |
|||
| Line 132: | Line 132: | ||
:::His third criteria is regarding ''mat'n'' (text), i.e. the text/content of a narration must not be in contradiction with the Qur'an. | :::His third criteria is regarding ''mat'n'' (text), i.e. the text/content of a narration must not be in contradiction with the Qur'an. | ||
::So its clear that Matn means just "text" and not "no contradiction between Quran and hadith". --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 03:57, 12 April 2014 (PDT) | ::So its clear that Matn means just "text" and not "no contradiction between Quran and hadith". --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 03:57, 12 April 2014 (PDT) | ||
:::Pointing out contradictions between Quran and hadith is a criticism of Islam. Our site's mission is criticism of Islam (or to provide "an accurate and comprehensive resource on Islam" as currently mentioned in the [[WikiIslam:Frequently_Asked_Questions#What_is_the_purpose_of_WikiIslam.3F|FAQ]], which is even more inclusive), not whether certain criticism is seen as favorable to certain minority sects of Islam like Quran-only. | |||
:::And as I mentioned (sorry if I'm repeating some points), this certain criticism is not seen as favorable to the majority of Muslims who do believe in the hadith. The Matn contradiction issue is Bukhari's opinion and cannot invalidate all problematic hadiths, (definitely not other hadiths like Muslim and neither his own) just because he said so. In short again that means we should not be excluding criticism of Islam because it is favoring a minority sect. And again, we will have a full picture of the situation when there is an actual article to review which there is none at this time. Its just text in a Sandbox. In an article like this Quran/hadith contradiction issue, we definitely want to point out clearly that people can not simply reject Sahih hadiths for whatever reason. There was a reason they were considered Sahih. Sometimes a certain issue is covered in multiple Hadiths which adds to the strength of what the Hadith is saying. If there are multiple Hadith collectors (Muslim and Bukhari for example) that is even more evidence that a Hadith's content actually happened and it is difficult to reject that hadith. So we should wait to see what an article looks like in the end to give a full opinion. The other issue again is, if Contradiction is the reason to reject a hadith, Quranic verses which contradict each other also have a problem. As for Atheistig's article, I dont know what that situation was and perhaps we missed a chance on making a valid article but I dont know enough details. Having an article that mentions Quran/hadith contradictions provides motivation for further strengthening the position that it is not possible to reject hadiths and definitely not Sahih hadiths, so it provides motivation for further improving the "Quran only - Why it is not possible" article or any other content like that. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 04:21, 12 April 2014 (PDT) | |||
== 1000 years == | == 1000 years == | ||