.

.

IN THE NAME OF ALLAH, THE BENEFICENT, THE MERCIFUL
-------------- --------------- -------------- --------


"O you who believe! Be careful of your duty to Allah, and be with the truthful." [Noble Quran 9:119]

"If you obeyed most of those on earth they would mislead you far from Allah's way." [Noble Quran 6:116]

Return to the QURAN only - the complete and final STAND-ALONE Divine Message which also contains the authentic sunnah of the beloved Prophet Muhammad (SAAW)

-----------------

I bear witness that NONE is worthy of worship except ALLAH, He has NO partner nor partners, and I bear witness that Muhammad is the slave and Final Messenger of Allah.

--------


Zainabs Lounge blog tracker

Friday, October 14, 2011

"If Imam Hussein isn't in the Quran, how can we accept his martyrdom?"

This sarcastic question has recently become a hot topic for 'combat' by Salafist Hadithists to antagonize ones like myself who don't accept Hadith.   However, I have no problem putting up the facts.  As a truth-seeker, it's a pleasure to expose the truth.

WHY ISN'T THE MARTYRDOM OF IMAM HUSSEIN OR THE INCIDENT OF KARBALA  MENTIONED IN THE QURAN?

To begin with, I'm neither a Shiia nor a Sunni and I dislike sectarianism.  I am just MUSLIM and Alhumdulilah, I'm proud of it.  Having said that, surely I accept ONLY the Noble Quran as my guide and NO other book or books.  And this, your question dear Hadithists, is one of the most irrational ones I've ever been asked.  It's not worth my precious time.  Nonetheless, I will put up a response owing to my passion for the Glorious Quran.

Proof of Imam Hussein in the Quran?  From that view point, no one should believe in the existence of the sahabas.  Are any one of them mentioned in the Quran?   Most importantly, the "bright" idea of calling oneself a Sunni or a Shiia is NOT mentioned in the Quran.  In fact, I can quote at least half a dozen verses which flatly condemn sectarianism.  So why do you guys indulge in sectarianism and sub-sectarianism as the foundation of your Faith?

However, coming back to the topic and based on the question you put, 90% of Islamic history ought be trashed.  But here is the important and indispensable point few reflect upon.  The Noble Quran narrates only selected aspects of history that are necessary for acquiring guidance and moral lessons.  Otherwise, the Quran is NOT a Book of history, prophecy, arithmetic or science etc. (even though it contains many amazing prophecies as well as scientific facts, some discovered as recently as the 20th century).  The Quran is a Book of Divine Guidance firmly based on Monotheism and a complete code of practical life. 

This isn't about the senseless wranglings between Shiias and Sunnis.  It's about logic and principles. Nor is Imam Hussein a sole 'property' of the Shiias alone.  The incident of Imam Hussein dominates world history as a symbol of resistance against injustice and oppression.  The Noble Quran has already mentioned similar past events when injustice and tyranny did not survive nor were they appreciated by Allah The Almighty.  I'm sure I don't need to quote any examples concerning it.   Indeed, Allah knew at the time He revealed the Quran that many more incidents of injustice would arise in future including the one involving Imam Hussein.  But that does NOT mean every one of those future events must be contained in the Quran.  Why?  As mentioned, the Divine Power has already highlighted this vital aspect along with the moral lesson it involves in His Final Message, loud and clear, with direct references to several events in ancient times .... all of which make up the group of allegorical verses, separating them from the substance.   For allegorical verses and verses of substance, refer to Verse 3:7.   If we still cannot get the moral behind those allegorical Quranic narrations, that's our problem .. though not mine.  I do understand them as well as their moral lessons.  But unfortunately many of my brethren don't and hence the sub-standard queries.

Although Allah Almighty has mentioned some remarkable prophecies in the Glorious Quran,  they are of a different category specifically for benefiting, helping and encouraging the Prophet (S) in his mission to spread the message of Monotheism.   Therefore, additional future incidents which do not play a direct role in the Prophet's mission are not included in the Quran.  That again doesn't mean these future events aren't important in the Sight of Allah.

All such events are expected to be preserved as history and heritages by the people namely the learned and conscientious ones, to further enhance the standard of human perception.  Whether we perceive them correctly to benefit our souls with the lessons they teach or squabble over them to divide ourselves is up to us.  In either case, Allah is a constant Witness and will surely question the ones He considers to be the transgressors on the Day of the Tryst.

Though many smaller details of Islamic history have been tampered with by both traditional Sunnis and Shiias, the major incidents remain intact by and large .. one of them being the incident of Karbala.  It's quite definitely one of the most significant ones in Islamic History owing to its far-reaching consequences that exacerbated the future spilt within the pan-Islamic world to the advantage of its enemies.



WHY IS THE INCIDENT OF KARBALA 'HISTORY' AND NOT 'HADITH?'

Though the Shiias might have constructed several interpolations in regard to the incident of Karbala in the form of stories called Hadith (just as the Sunnis have done with their side of the events), when I say that Imam Hussein's martyrdom (or the incident of Karbala) is History and not Hadith, I simply mean the very incident itself .. NOT the plenteous interpolations that have followed in the shape of Hadith.  These interpolations are simply Hadith, NOT the broad and basic event itself which is history.  I repeat .. while I do discard those many little stories on Karbala that fill Shiia Hadith collections, the precise event of Karbala is a historical data and cannot be rejected.   Similarly, many stories and gossips might have been constructed about Muawiyah bin Abu Sufyan and Yazid bin Muawiyah (neither of whom are mentioned in the Quran either) - positive ones in the Sunni Hadith collections and negative ones in the Shiia collections - the precise authenticity of all of which are unconfirmed, the exact truth known to God Almighty only.  But the existence of Muawiyah and Yazid, the introduction of a dynasty rule (first ever in Islam against the principles of the Quran) and their political ideology constitute a vital segment of Islamic history (NOT hadith) which cannot be denied nor overlooked.


WHY IS HISTORY DIFFERENT FROM HADITH?

The reason why History is totally different from Hadith is because the compilation of History involves a very different approach with a completely different set of rules mandatory for authentication.  Yet, History can falter to some extent but because it involves a far more thorough research, it doesn't go as baloney as the bizarre Hadith institution.  Unlike History, Hadith has preserved nothing because it contained nothing to preserve except its own constructions from generation to generation.  That big talk to impress naive about the "science" of Hadith is nothing beyond the notorious "isnad." It is anything but a foolproof evidence of authenticity.  Establishing a fraudulent 'isnad' is no tough job.  An "isnad" that cleverly connects family or social links as a chain of narrators may appear acceptable on the face of it, yet it could be a purely phoney construction.  There is NO research involved in Hadith. 

Many of our jurists boast endlessly about the "science" of Hadith.  But their own boasts have landed them in a strange dilemma.  Many Ahadith may comprise of a seeminlgy correct 'isnad' (or chain of narrators) yet their contents have been found absurd or offensive.  Thus, their entire argument on the authenticity of the "science" of Hadith falls flat on the ground.  Yes, I do not accept Hadith as the sayings of our beloved Prophet (S), not for a minute.  Hadith is the same man-written, unauthentic annexation as the altered Old and New Testaments.  Those of our Sunni and Shiia brethren who believe in the Hadith as being "totally authentic" need to be rational, not hyped.  As justice and fair play demands, they must not indulge in double standards while judging an ideology.  If they reject the altered Bible and Torah for being tampered with human hands (and surely the altered Bible and Torah are NO more authentic), then they should also reject the Hadith on the same criteria.  Hadith has precisely the same problems as the Old and New Testaments. Hadith does not represent the words of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) just as the altered Bibles do not represent the words of Jesus son of Virgin Mary (pbu them).  There's MUCH MORE to say on this which can be found in the extensive Hadith boards of our website.

Conclusion

If anyone still cannot understand or accept the above, the only plausible explanation can be that their heads are filled with clumps of horse feces .  Thus, no need badgering me any more.  Instead visit a neurosurgeon to replace that offensive stuff with some gray matter. Excuse me for forgetting my manners.  But those who insult others shouldn't expect anything different.  What goes around comes around.

Goodbye.  As-salaam Alaikum.

16 comments:

  1. Aslam-o-Alaikum,

    please guide me about the Eid ul Edha with references from holy quran. whether it is compulsory/farz? If so, then whether it is necessary to slaughter goat or cow or camal only? what type of cattle to be slaughtered? whether it should be observed on 10 of zil haj? whether sacrifice of chicken is sufficient?
    Fakir Hussain Rana
    fhranaclm@hotmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  2. Walaikum Salaam.

    Eid-al-Adha in the Quran is not mentioned as a universal celebration for all Muslims. It's one of the obligations of Hajj in commemoration of the incident in Prophet Abraham's (pbuh) life which I'm sure you know. From my understanding, what we call Eid-al-Adha today, is a sacrifice incumbent on pilgrims only, and the food is primarily for feeding the needy and ourselves, marking the completion of Hajj. But it is surely NOT for the purpose of extravagant celebrations involving the rich or privileged as is done at present in almost all parts of the Muslim world. I definitely see it as fard or obligatory for those performing Hajj. But for those not on Hajj, I don't see it as compulsory. However, if those not on Hajj also desire to give sacrifice at the same time for the purpose of feeding the poor and for the sake of Allah, it will surely be an additional good deed for them. Probably a very important good deed as Zil Hajj is an important month, the month of visiting the Kaaba especially for those who have never been there and who can afford to travel. After all, Ibadah and all good deeds for the sake of Allah are plus points for our souls at all times.

    Obviously the sacrifice to be observed by pilgrims should be towards the end of Hajj, which is already referred in the Quran. I suppose a day or two or a few days later might also be okay. These are minor issues and I wouldn't fret too much over them. As long as the intentions are for serving Allah Almighty alone, we can simply use our common sense without transgressing Quranic limits and make our decisions. If Allah wills, He will accept them. But the ulemas and "scholars" must not make their own rules and dub them as "Islamic laws." That's wrong.

    The Quran does not specify which animal to be slaughtered. Thus, we can presume it can be any animal, the meat of which is Halal as per Quranic principles i.e. cattle, sheep, camel or poultry. Many pilgrims and non-pilgrims nowadays also substitute this practice with sending an equivalent amount of money (or whatever one can afford to pay) as charity to the needy. I think this is fine too, provided one does it with pure intentions (niyyah).

    ReplyDelete
  3. Regarding sacrificing a chicken, I would say yes it's okay provided the person cannot afford a more expensive animal. Someone who is financially very hard up but has the desire to spend whatever he can for the sake of Allah and a chicken is all he can afford, I think that would be acceptable in the Sight of Allah because what Allah takes into consideration most is our sincere intent. However, if a multi-millionaire who squanders his wealth on pleasure and yet gives a mere chicken as sacrifice, that would not be right.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You're real rude with the way you answer questions. Seems like you're answering in a snobby disrespectful way, instead of helping people understand. Not being rude my self but watch your tone please.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ Anonymous (who doesn't even have the personality to reveal their name), all what Sister Zainab owes you is rudeness. Despite that, she's been "rude" (I call it honesty) only in the last paragraph suggesting you and your likes to consult a neurosurgeon to replace horse crap with gray matter. Where are your comments on the entire written piece? Your gang boasted at facebook, intruding into Zainab's timeline, that you guys were testing followers of Quran alone with "small doses of questions." Zainab has posted a comprehensive blog entry responding to those "small & big doses" and all you can do is to behave like a school teacher teaching manners after harassing her on facebook. That's enough to underscore your big defeat. Thanks loser. Find a life for yourself.

      Delete
  5. @Anonymous (Nov.18, 2012). How shamelessly you pelt stones from a glasshouse! Watch your own tone first while to come as a guest in someone else's blog, it's not just rude but also commanding .. or should I say, a command of sorts from the gutters.

    I am responding to a heap of sarcasm and insults from people like yourself. Your above comment is the expression of your own guilt. As if that wasn't enough, you good-for-nothing loafers now come to my blog and resume your vandalism telling me to "watch your tone?" Go back and get busy joining your Hell bound train. This blog is not the right venue for uneducated and lowly people whose only response to Truth is belligerence, combat and threats. If you had an ounce of decency inside of you, you would have responded to those many points I've raised to answer your query. But nothing on that. You are a defeated lot. Admit it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous, be focused on the topic and the contents of the article. No one is interested in your supervision to watch the "tone" of others.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Poor Anonymous. Seems like it was one of those days for him when he woke up late in the morning, couldn't find his slippers and then went to the kitchen to discover that his stock of coffee was finished. Thus the tantrums.

    ReplyDelete
  8. They're the same ones who tried to harass me at Facebook and I blocked one of them.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hi Zainab :) First of all i would like to thank you for this article...Not much Muslims Understand their religion Logically instead they believe anything that anyone says; For example : Give a Sajda before the Imam and Ur 7 good deeds ( Naikiyan) Will be rusticated from your Amaal nama..I Mean come on!! This is Islam and these are good deeds not the points of some game..U do 1 good deed u get that 1 deed writeen in your Amaal nama..

    So..moving on to my Question.. WHY do Muslims Read books like Bukhari, Muslim, or ANY other book than the Noble Quran when Allah Has Said this in his clear words:

    "These are God's revelations that We recite to you truthfully. In which hadith other than God and His revelations (The Quran) do they believe?" 45:6


    "Shall I seek other than God as a source of law, when He has revealed to you THIS BOOK fully detailed? Those who received the scripture recognise that it has been revealed from your Lord, truthfully. You shall not harbour any doubt.

    The word of your Lord is complete, in truth and justice. Nothing shall abrogate His words. He is the Hearer, the Omniscient." 6:114-115

    6:114 contains clear confirmation that:

    - God is the only source of law.

    - The Quran has all the details.

    Moving on to another Verse :
    "We did not leave anything out of the book; then to their Lord they will be summoned.” 6:38

    Allah Has clearly mentioned in this verse that there is nothing left out of Quran..Everything you ever need is in it...And as we read in the above verses that The word of your Lord is complete in truth and justice. Nothing shall abrogate His words..Then WHY do Muslims follow Bukhari and Muslim and other thousands of Fabricated, inauthentic and corrupt writings...These books contain nothing but lies..Ofcourse there are some hadith in them which convey good messages ...BUT the fact that Allah Has said that the Quran is complete, this logically leads to the state where we can say that Quran is the Only Book to read and follow...AND These books Bukhari and Muslims contain stuff like this:

    Bukhari : Volume 7, Book 62, Number 6:
    "Narrated Anas: The Prophet used to go round (have sexual relations with) all his wives in one night, and he had nine wives."
    In Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 82, Number 796 we read:

    "A group of people from the Oreyneh and Oqayelh tribes came to the Prophet to embrace Islam, the Prophet advised them to drink the urine of camels! Later on when they killed the Prophet's shepherd, the Prophet seized them, gouged out their eyes, cut their hands and legs, and left them thirst in the desert to die."

    This is the picture which the hadith books depict of the Prophet, a man whom God described in the Quran as being compassionate and of high moral character. The hadith depicts him as a barbarian who gouges people's eyes out and cuts their hands and legs! This is not to mention his prescription for drinking the urine of camels!"

    Is there anything left to say after reading this!?
    Unfortunately i cant talk to anyone about this matter...People say to me that u have a Kaafir thinking..Is being Logical Kaafir? I Hate Sectarianism which is clearly nohting but racism and Hate..i hate the Man made History of Islam! I Only Follow the Quran! and nothing else..Does that make me a Kafir! when Allah said this to me through his book...to only follow the Quran..

    I Hope you Reply Soon sister... :) Keep up the good blogs...they're tremendous..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As-salam Alaykum. Couldn't agree with you more Sunny Baig. Though perfectly compatible with the Quran and logical as these issues are, as a mainstream Muslim one cannot explain them to our so-called ulemas and self-assumed imams, let alone talking to the common people most of whom follow the clerics unconditionally without an iota of reflection. This aspect only adds to the problem.

      Delete
    2. Ok I agree about al Quran is sufficient ~ BUT ~ does this mean you guys don't pray?
      It says to pray in al Quran, but the source of "how and when" are in Hadith are they
      not? Do you pray 5 times a day and if so why do you do so, sincere Question not a
      "sarcastic" whatever this blog seems very hostile but heck, I'm asking. ...Peace...

      Delete
    3. @One VengefulMoFo .... "heck" you're asking like a retard. No sarcasm intended either. The Noble Quran mentions all essentials required for the Monotheistic prayer (salat).
      Copy & paste the following link of our blog entry dated June 2015; read, reflect and come back to your senses instead of clinging on to the forgeries of hadith.

      http://zainabslounge.blogspot.ca/2015/06/the-noble-quran-teaches-method-of.html

      As-salam Alaikum Wr Wb

      Delete
  10. Hi Zainab :) First of all i would like to thank you for this article...Not much Muslims Understand their religion Logically instead they believe anything that anyone says; For example : Give a Sajda before the Imam and Ur 7 good deeds ( Naikiyan) Will be rusticated from your Amaal nama..I Mean come on!! This is Islam and these are good deeds not the points of some game..U do 1 good deed u get that 1 deed writeen in your Amaal nama..

    So..moving on to my Question.. WHY do Muslims Read books like Bukhari, Muslim, or ANY other book than the Noble Quran when Allah Has Said this in his clear words:

    "These are God's revelations that We recite to you truthfully. In which hadith other than God and His revelations (The Quran) do they believe?" 45:6


    "Shall I seek other than God as a source of law, when He has revealed to you THIS BOOK fully detailed? Those who received the scripture recognise that it has been revealed from your Lord, truthfully. You shall not harbour any doubt.

    The word of your Lord is complete, in truth and justice. Nothing shall abrogate His words. He is the Hearer, the Omniscient." 6:114-115

    6:114 contains clear confirmation that:

    - God is the only source of law.

    - The Quran has all the details.

    Moving on to another Verse :
    "We did not leave anything out of the book; then to their Lord they will be summoned.” 6:38

    Allah Has clearly mentioned in this verse that there is nothing left out of Quran..Everything you ever need is in it...And as we read in the above verses that The word of your Lord is complete in truth and justice. Nothing shall abrogate His words..Then WHY do Muslims follow Bukhari and Muslim and other thousands of Fabricated, inauthentic and corrupt writings...These books contain nothing but lies..Ofcourse there are some hadith in them which convey good messages ...BUT the fact that Allah Has said that the Quran is complete, this logically leads to the state where we can say that Quran is the Only Book to read and follow...AND These books Bukhari and Muslims contain stuff like this:

    Bukhari : Volume 7, Book 62, Number 6:
    "Narrated Anas: The Prophet used to go round (have sexual relations with) all his wives in one night, and he had nine wives."
    In Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 82, Number 796 we read:

    "A group of people from the Oreyneh and Oqayelh tribes came to the Prophet to embrace Islam, the Prophet advised them to drink the urine of camels! Later on when they killed the Prophet's shepherd, the Prophet seized them, gouged out their eyes, cut their hands and legs, and left them thirst in the desert to die."

    This is the picture which the hadith books depict of the Prophet, a man whom God described in the Quran as being compassionate and of high moral character. The hadith depicts him as a barbarian who gouges people's eyes out and cuts their hands and legs! This is not to mention his prescription for drinking the urine of camels!"

    Is there anything left to say after reading this!?
    Unfortunately i cant talk to anyone about this matter...People say to me that u have a Kaafir thinking..Is being Logical Kaafir? I Hate Sectarianism which is clearly nohting but racism and Hate..i hate the Man made History of Islam! I Only Follow the Quran! and nothing else..Does that make me a Kafir! when Allah said this to me through his book...to only follow the Quran...

    Hope u reply soon :) Keep up the good blogs...they are tremendous :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Islam is the religion of FITRA (instinct) and it fits perfectly with logic.
      But it's not a religion of the logic. That's called mind-worship & it's
      another form of shirk as mentioned in al Quran. When something is
      logical AND 'feels right' it's likely Islamic. Many logical things here
      just feel wrong. And Islam doesn't go against instinct. ...Peace...

      Delete