Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Post Reply
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Is Umrah during iddah (waiting period for a woman after divorce): Sin or not a sin?
7 years ago  ::  Feb 17, 2010 - 1:13PM #1
Ibn
Posts: 6,037

Salaam


Sunni maulvis are saying "Yes". I say "No" because I do not find it forbidden in the Qur'an. Who is correct? Thanks in advance!


Salaam


Ibn

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.
(Winston Churchill)
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Feb 17, 2010 - 7:32PM #2
visio
Posts: 3,743

Feb 17, 2010 -- 1:13PM, Ibn wrote:


Salaam


Sunni maulvis are saying "Yes". I say "No" because I do not find it forbidden in the Qur'an. Who is correct? Thanks in advance!


Salaam


Ibn




An umrah is a ritual of patience in facing a lifetime.  A time to recollect and reflect of what good and mistakes we had made or incurred during that lifetime.  A divorce is something one didn't expect or desire to happen.  I would say it should be encouraged.  Of course for a woman she may needs a company allowable.>/font>

Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Feb 18, 2010 - 2:29PM #3
Ibn
Posts: 6,037

Salaam


 


She has her brother to go with her. No issue on that point.


Salaam


Ibn

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.
(Winston Churchill)
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Feb 18, 2010 - 7:28PM #4
visio
Posts: 3,743

Feb 18, 2010 -- 2:29PM, Ibn wrote:


Salaam


 


She has her brother to go with her. No issue on that point.


Salaam


Ibn




Really, I still don't see where the idea of alleged sin comes from.   I know there are instances where for a divorced woman to go on an Umrah, a letter from a male children is sufficient to get the necessary entry visa from KSA Authority .  That's what I did when we (myself, my wife and a son of mine) took along my wife's 60-year old, divorced sister (processing was done by the Travel Agent).   But that's nothing to do with theology.  I suspect if there is a hadith backing this edict, then the element of (historical) specific circumstance could have been applied.  And that also cannot be considered theological in context.  How about a male Muslim Jinn breeder wants to repent and Mecca is the right (in my mind)  environment where to get rid of them (the Jinns), would that be considered a sin?  I don't think so because as ALLAH says in the Al-Quran, the good intent and conscience He values most.         

Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Feb 18, 2010 - 7:59PM #5
Ceren
Posts: 1,430

Feb 17, 2010 -- 1:13PM, Ibn wrote:


Salaam


Sunni maulvis are saying "Yes". I say "No" because I do not find it forbidden in the Qur'an. Who is correct? Thanks in advance!


Salaam


Ibn




I will not comment on whether it's haram or not since I'm not a scholar :)


But I think the reason it might not be recommended for a sister to go for `umrah is because in theory the period of iddah is a period to try to reconcile with the husband and to see if one is pregnant. Going away won't work for the reconciliation and scholars have considered that a woman just going out like that can be "fitnah" for her and then a mess can ensue.


The Quran in Surah al-talaq says that women should not go out during their iddah (in the first verse).


Scholars have said that if the wife though is going through a lot of grief, and needs to go see her parents, etc, etc. for "emotional support" then she might do so.


And God knows best.


Ceren


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Feb 19, 2010 - 12:43AM #6
visio
Posts: 3,743

Feb 18, 2010 -- 7:59PM, Ceren wrote:


Feb 17, 2010 -- 1:13PM, Ibn wrote:


Salaam


Sunni maulvis are saying "Yes". I say "No" because I do not find it forbidden in the Qur'an. Who is correct? Thanks in advance!


Salaam


Ibn




I will not comment on whether it's haram or not since I'm not a scholar :)


But I think the reason it might not be recommended for a sister to go for `umrah is because in theory the period of iddah is a period to try to reconcile with the husband and to see if one is pregnant. Going away won't work for the reconciliation and scholars have considered that a woman just going out like that can be "fitnah" for her and then a mess can ensue.


The Quran in Surah al-talaq says that women should not go out during their iddah (in the first verse).


Scholars have said that if the wife though is going through a lot of grief, and needs to go see her parents, etc, etc. for "emotional support" then she might do so.


And God knows best.


Ceren


 




 


Come to think about Surah At-Talaq, the edicts stipulated primarily are an advisory to be imposed on men who are divorcing their wife.   The iddah or cooling off period also serves to ensure all rightful burden of men are given due diligence on ownership, such as the responsibility on the child if the wife is in conception.  In the old days what could have happened the men simply left and disappeared, untraceable. That was cruel.  And the womenfolks were at men's mercy. Even the house they lived in was privifed for by the husband.   In to-days world, the scenario has changed.  There are women who are even  breadwinners of the family.  They have as much right to divorce their husbands, if they chose to.  But there is no equivalent Surah mentioning any advisory for woman to follow.   ALLAHswt must have a good reason why he didn't issue a Surah on the matter.  Perhaps when it comes to divorce, women folks, especially those with children, are the more reluctant party.   May be we want to have look again at Surah At-Talaq for possible circumstatial misinterpretation.  I don't think we can leave the burden to the imam or scholars to interpret all the verses.  They are not the only practioners of Islam on this planet.  They can get carried away too far and repeat the same argument - most of the time.   I hope someone can offer the appropriate hadiths to say it is sinful. 


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Feb 19, 2010 - 10:49AM #7
Abdullah.
Posts: 882

Hi IBN,


not sure about what mainstream Scholars say on this but for now, i'll take your word for it...[there might also be a valid difference of opinion on it]


I think what you really want to discuss here [by the tone of your post] is that only Quran should be followed and not the sunnah/hadiths; am I right? Smile


Well I must say that I was surprised to see you come out as a 'Quran only' or a major Sunnah sceptic and i'm sure you have read some of the debates/discussions on beliefnet of why the Sunnah/hadiths [according to their classifications...] should be followed in addition to the Quran; here is a post that I have culled from the old beliefnet that gives a rather comprehensive explanation; hope that helps:


Many people enquire about why we have to follow the Sunnah when the Quran is supposed to consist of the complete guidance for mankind.

In this thread, inshAllah I will try and give a comprehensive answer to why a Muslim has to follow the Sunnah, in addition to the Quran.

Is it contradictory to follow the Sunnah, when we are supposed to follow the Quran? It is not, for the folloiwng reasons:

In the Quran, Allah orders us to obey and follow the prophet Muhammad [saw], therefore, obeying the sayings of the Prophet [saw] is obeying the Quran; there is no contradiction in the two.

Allah says in the Quran:

Say: Obey Allah and the Messenger, but if they turn their backs, Allah loves not the disbelievers. (3:32)

The above verse [and many others simmilar to it] establishes that we have to obey the Messenger saw [Sunnah] as well as obeying Allah [The Quran].

And whoever obeys the Messenger, thereby obeys Allah (4:80)

Above verse shows that obeying the Messenger [saw], is obeying Allah, as Allah has ordered in the Quran to obey the Messenger [saw].

And whoever disobeys Allllah and His Messenger has gone astray into manifest error. (33:36)

The above verse shows that to not obey the Messenger [saw] [and Allah ofcourse] is to go astray...

Obeying the Messenger [saw] is so important in Islam, that there isn't a single verse where Allah has said in the Quran to obey Him [swt] and not said in the same verse to obey His Messenger [saw].

On the contrary, there are some verses where only the obedience of the Messenger has been mentioned, and there is no reference to the obedience of Allah

And establish salaah and pay zakaah and obey the Prophet so that you may be blessed. (24:56)

And if you obey him (the Prophet), you shall find the right path. (24:54)

This goes to show how absolutely imperative it is to obey the Messenger [saw]

And whatever the Messenger gives you, take it, and whatever he forbids you, leave it. And fear Allah: truly Allah is severe in punishment. [Qur'an 59:7]

The above verse is general in it's meaning, thus it does not only refer to the Quranic verses recited by the Prophet [saw], but also to whatever he says regarding the Deen of Islam, thus every such sayings of the prophet [saw] is indirectly connected to that Quranic verse, so when we follow/obey the Sunnah, we follow/obey that Quranic verse [amongst others]

here is a hadith that clarifies this point further:

Ibn Masud (Allah be pleased with him) narrated that a woman came to him and told him: "You who says: May Allah's curse be on Al-Namisat [a woman who plucks hers or others eye-brows - completely or to be a thin line] and Al-Motanamisat [a woman who asks others to do it for her] and those who tattoo." He said: "Yes." She said, "I read the Book of Allah (Al-Qur'an) from its beginning to its end, I did not find what you have said." He told her: "If you have read it, you would have found it. As for your reading what the Messanger teaches you, take it, and what he forbids you, avoid doing it." She said: "Certainly". He said: "I have heard the Messenger of Allah (salaallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) says: "May Allah's curse be on Al-Namisat." (Bukhari & Muslim)

But how can we know which hadiths are authentic and which are the fabrications of man?

This is where we have to follow and accept the classifications of the hadiths, of the experts of hadiths, that are the hadith Scholars, for us laymen cannot know for sure which hadiths are authentic and whcih are not, from our own personal reasoning, for we are not qualified in the Quranic and hadith sciences, so even if a hadith seems to be contradictory, yet we should rely on the authenticity classification given to it by the experts, for we do not have all the pre-requsite and contextual knowledge to judge the hadith ourselves.

But how can we be sure that the authenticity classifications given to the hadiths by the traditional Scholars are correct, for is it not only the Quran that is protected by Allah and not the hadiths?

This is a common misconception amongst some unorthodox Muslims. The mainstream/traditional view on wether the Sunnah [which has been preserved by the means of preserving it's written and memorised documentation; hadiths] is included in God promise of protection or not, is as follows:

We have undoubtedly sent down the Reminder, and We will truly preserve it. (Al-Qur'an, Surah al-Hijr, 15:9)

The above promise made by Allah is obviously fulfilled in the undisputed purity of the Qur'anic text throughout the fourteen centuries since its revelation. However, what is often forgotten by many Muslims is that the above divine promise also includes, by necessity, the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), for it is the practical example of the implementation of the Qur'anic guidance, the Wisdom taught to the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) along with the Scripture, and neither the Qur'an nor the Sunnah can be understood correctly without recourse to the other.

Hence, Allah preserved the Qur'an from being initially lost by the martyrdom of its memorisers ...

Similarly, Allah preserved the Sunnah by enabling the Companions and those after them (may Allah be pleased with them) to memorise, write down and pass on the statements of the Messenger (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) and the descriptions of his Way, as well as to continue the blessings of practising the Sunnah. Later, as the purity of the knowledge of the Sunnah became threatened, Allah caused the Muslim nation to produce outstanding individuals of incredible memory-skills and analytical expertise, who journeyed tirelessly to collect hundreds of thousands of narrations and distinguish the true words of precious wisdom of their Messenger (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) from those corrupted by weak memories, from forgeries by unscrupulous liars, and from the statements of the enormous number of 'ulama', the Companions and those who followed their way, who had taught in various centres of learning and helped to transmit the legacy of Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) - all of this achieved through precise attention to the words narrated and detailed familiarity with the biographies of the thousands of reporters of Hadith. Action being the best way to preserve teachings, the renewers of Islam also revived the practice of the blessed authentic Sunnah.


www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/Ulum/af...


... This argument accepts that the Holy Prophet () has a prophetic authority for all times to come, and that his obedience is mandatory for all Muslims of whatever age, but in the same breath it claims that the reports of the sunnah being unreliable, we cannot carry out this obedience. Does it not logically conclude that Allah has enjoined upon us to obey the Messenger, but did not make this obedience practicable. The question is whether Allah Allmighty may give us a positive command to do something which is beyond our ability and means. The answer is certainly no. The Holy Quran tself says,

Allah does not task anybody except to his ability.

It cannot be envisaged that Allah will bind all the people with something which does not exist or cannot be ascertained. Accepting that Allah has enjoined upon us to follow the sunnah of the Holy Prophet (), it certainly implies that the sunnah is not undiscoverable. If Allah has made it obligatory to follow the sunnah, He has certainly preserved it for us, in a reliable form.

The following aspect also merits consideration. Allah Almighty has given us a promise in the Holy Quran

Indeed We have revealed the Zikr (ie. the Quran) and surely We will preserve it. (15:9)

In this verse, Allah Almighty has assured the preservation of the Holy Quran. This implies that the Quran will remain uninterpolated and that it shall always be transferred from one generation to the other in its real and original form, undistorted by any foreign element. The question now is whether this divine protection is restricted only to the words of the Holy Quran or does it extend to its real meanings as well. If the prophetic explanation is necessary to understand the Holy Quran correctly, as proved in the first chapter, then the preservation of the Quranic words alone cannot serve the purpose unless the prophetic explanations are also preserved. As quoted earlier, the Holy Book says,

We have revealed to you the Zikr (Quran) so that you may explain to the people what has been sent down for them.

The word ?Zikr? has been used here for the Holy Quran as has been used in the verse 15:9 and it has been made clear that the people can only benefit from its guidance when they are led by the explanations of the Holy Prophet ().

Again, the words ?for the people? indicate (especially in the original Arabic context), that the Holy Prophet?s () explanation is always needed by ?everyone.?

Now, if everyone, in every age is in need of the prophetic explanation, without which they cannot fully benefit from the Holy Book, how would it be useful for them to preserve the Quranic text and leave its prophetic explanation at the mercy of distorters, extending to it no type of protection whatsoever.

Therefore, once the necessity of the prophetic explanations of the Holy Quran is accepted, it will be self-contradictory to claim that these explanations are unavailable today. It will amount to negating the divine wisdom, because it is in no way a wise policy to establish the necessity of the sunnah on the one hand and to make its discovery impossible on the other. Such a policy cannot be attributed to Allah the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.


ccm-inc.org/oldsite/iqra/articles/authsu...

But how comes the hadiths endorse opression, by saying that women should cover more than just the bosoms and not mix freely with men?,

The notion that such rulings are 'oppression' are a common misunderstanding amongst some unorthodox Muslims as well, and regarding these issues, or any issues which we find hard to understand of how they are just, or how they are in harmony with the Quran, we should seek a clearly explained and comprehensive answer from the Scholars, who would then share their deep insight into the religion regarding these matters with us, and we shouldn't just reject them as it apperantly seems to be unjust to our unqualifed minds.

But I dont like all the 'fetters' which the hadith puts on us and I prefer to just stick to the idea that I am following the Quran and not the hadith that has been corrupted by man, so I can live according to the man-made doctrines of the west, whcih suits my desires, surely I can't go wrong if I consider myself to be following the QURAN?, so couldn't I just ignore all of the above and remain iether the rejector of hadiths or a huge critic of it?

Allthough such a notion helps some unorthodox Muslims to keep to their western or desired way of life, but it is frought with dangers, and some of them are mentioned below:

Hadiths are basically of four types:

1] Mutawatir [mass transmitted]

2] Sahih Ahad [rigorously authenticated, but not narrated by enough people to fall under the 'mass transmitted' label]

3] Hasan [well authenticated; whcih falls under the catogory of the lowest degree of Sahih]

4] weak

There is no sin? on anyone that rejects a hadith that has been classified 'weak'...but weak hadiths are not neccassarily untrue, therefore, we should resepct them.

And regarding the rejection of the Sahih hadiths [Mutawatir, sahih ahad, and possibly 'hasan' hadiths are included amongst this catogary], I'd like to now bring to all your attention, the following statements by great Scholars...:

Ahl al-Sunna concur, unlike the Mu'tazila, that authentic lone-narrator [ahad] reports are obligatory to believe and put into practice. Al-Qari relates, on this point, the consensus of the Companions and the Successors. Where scholars differ is whether the same hadiths convey certainty of knowledge (al-'ilm al-yaq) or only the compelling assumption of truth (al-zann al-gh⬩b). These two categories differ insofar as obligatory practice and belief based on certainty of knowledge cannot be denied except on pains of apostasy, while the denial of obligatory practice and belief based on reports compellingly assumed to be true do not constitute apostasy but constitute sin. The scholars do concur that if one disbelieves in a sound lone-narrator report one commits a grave transgression (fisq) and is even considered misguided (d⬬), but does not leave the fold of Islam. Al-Shafi'i, al-Risala (p. 460-461): "If one disbelieves in them [lone-narrated reports], we do not say to him: 'Repent!'" This is clearly unlike disbelief in a mass-transmitted report or in a verse of the Qur'an. [note that mutawatir hadiths are regarded to "convey certainty of knowledge". The statements on this site should be verified, as it certanily gives reason for concern]


www.sunnah.org/msaec/articles/blackdog.h...

"...The proofs for this are mutawatir - mass-transmitted - and to reject them is the mark of misguidance and worse". [Shaykh Jibril]


www.livingislam.org/fiqhi/sp2-gfh_e.html...



Shaykh Hamza Yusuf:

"...One is the neccessity of belief in multipy-transmitted hadith, which have the status of the Quran in their legal and creedal consideration...To reject a multiply [mass] transmitted hadith is akin to rejecting a verse in the Quran and hence is a type of disbelief threatening one's faith. Abu Hasan al-Kharkhi al-Hanafi said "I fear a state of disbelief for one who rejects wiping over the foot coverings"" [because this ruling is based on mutawatir hadith] [taken from book: The Creed of Imam Al-Tahawi, translated, introduced and annotated by Hamza Yusuf; it's a great book!]


Now here is an explanation of why mutawatir hadiths are as authentic as the Quranic verses itself:

(1) Mutawatir: It is a hadith narrated in each era, from the days of the Holy Prophet () up to this day by such a large number of narrators that it is impossible to reasonably accept that all of them have colluded to tell a lie.

This kind is further classified into two sub-divisions:

(a) Mutawatir in words: It is a hadith whose words are narrated by such a large number as is required for a mutawatir, in a manner that all the narrators are unanimous in reporting it with the same words without any substantial discrepancy.

(b) Mutawatir in meaning: It is a mutawatir hadith which is not reported by the narrators in the same words. The words of the narrators are different. Sometimes even the reported events are not the same. But all the narrators are unanimous in reporting a basic concept which is common in all the reports. This common concept is also ranked as a mutawatir concept.

For example, there is a saying of the Holy Prophet (),

Whoever intentionally attributes a lie against me, should prepare his seat in the Fire.

This is a mutawatir hadith of the first kind, because it has a minimum of seventy-four narrators. In other words, seventy-four companions of the Holy Prophet () have reported this hadith at different occasions, all with the same words.

The number of those who received this hadith from these companions is many times greater, because each of the seventy-four companions has conveyed it to a number of his pupils. Thus, the total number of the narrators of this hadith has been increasing in each successive generation, and has never been less than seventy-four. All these narrators, who are now hundreds in number, report it in the same words without even a minor change. This hadith is, therefore, mutaw⴩r by words, because it cannot be imagined reasonably that such a large number of people have colluded to coin a fallacious sentence in order to attribute it to the Holy Prophet ().

On the other hand, it is also reported by such a large number of narrators that the Holy Prophet () has enjoined us to perform two rakat in Fajr, four rakat in Zuhr, Asr and Isha, and three rakat in the Maghrib prayer, yet the narrations of all the reporters who reported the number of rakat are not in the same words. Their words are different. Even the events reported by them are different. But the common feature of all the reports is the same. This common feature, namely, the exact number of rakat is said to be mutawatir in meaning.

As for the mutawatir, nobody can question its authenticity. The fact narrated by a mutawatir chain is always accepted as an absolute truth even if pertaining to our daily life. Any statement based on a mutawatir narration must be accepted by everyone without any hesitation. I have never seen the city of Moscow, but the fact that Moscow is a large city and is the capital of U.S.S.R. is an absolute truth which cannot be denied. This fact is proved, to me, by a large number of narrators who have seen the city. This is a continuously narrated, or a mutawatir, fact which cannot be denied or questioned.

I have not seen the events of the First and the Second World War. But the fact that these two wars occurred stands proved without a shadow of doubt on the basis of the mutawatir reports about them. Nobody with a sound sense can claim that all those who reported the occurrence of these two wars have colluded to coin a fallacious report and that no war took place at all. This strong belief in the factum of war is based on the mutawatir reports of the event.

In the same way the mutawatir reports about the sunnah of the Holy Prophet () are to be held as absolutely true without any iota of doubt in their authenticity. The authenticity of the Holy Quran being the same Book as that revealed to the Holy Prophet () is of the same nature. Thus, the mutawatir ahadith, whether they be mutawatir in words or in meaning, are as authentic as the Holy Quran and there is no difference between the two in as far as the reliability of their source of narration is concerned.

Although the ahadith falling under the first category of the mutawatir, ie. the mutawatir in words, are very few in number, yet the ahadith relating to the second kind, namely the mutawatir in meaning, are available in large numbers. Thus, a very sizeable portion of the sunnah of the Holy Prophet () falls in this kind of mutawatir, the authenticity of which cannot be doubted in any manner.


ccm-inc.org/oldsite/iqra/articles/authsu...



And for any further queries, refer to the following link, which answers the usual arguments put up by Sunnah rejectors and critics:


ccm-inc.org/oldsite/iqra/articles/authsu...


I have mentioned some of the great dangers of being a ahadith critic, and accepting and rejecting hadith according to one's personal opinion.

Now I'd like to bring to all your attention the statement of Shaykh Gibril Haddad of Sunnipath.com, regarding those who reject the Sunnah/Ahadith in it's totality [i.e, the 'Quran only' individuals/groups]:

And if someone were to say: "We do not take except what we find in the Qur'an", that person would be an apostate by consensus of the Community, and would not thereby be obligated to pray more than one rak`a between the going down of the sun and the dark of night, and another one at dawn [cf. 17:78]. For this is the least that has been called salat, and there is no limit (hadd) set for the most in that chapter. One who follows such a position is an idolatrous disbeliever (kafir mushrik)... The only ones to go that path are some of the extremist Rafidis upon whose apostasy consensus has formed in the Community. And success is from Allah Almighty and Exalted. Now, should someone follow only what the entire Community has agreed upon and nothing else, leaving all that they differed about with regard to what the texts mention: such a person is a transgressor (fasiq) by consensus of the Community. These two preliminaries make it obligatory to accept what is transmitted.


www.sunnah.org/fiqh/usul/probativeness_s...

Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Feb 20, 2010 - 7:33PM #8
Ceren
Posts: 1,430

Assalamu `alaykum,


I agree with mostly everything but 2 points:


Feb 19, 2010 -- 10:49AM, Abdullah. wrote:


But I dont like all the 'fetters' which the hadith puts on us and I prefer to just stick to the idea that I am following the Quran and not the hadith that has been corrupted by man, so I can live according to the man-made doctrines of the west, whcih suits my desires, surely I can't go wrong if I consider myself to be following the QURAN?, so couldn't I just ignore all of the above and remain iether the rejector of hadiths or a huge critic of it?

Allthough such a notion helps some unorthodox Muslims to keep to their western or desired way of life, but it is frought with dangers, and some of them are mentioned below:



I really dislike when a Muslim doesn't agree with another, they accuse each other of "following their nafs, and not Allah swt", "following the man-made doctrines of the west", etc, etc.  How do we know this? Do we have access to people's hearts?


I, for some time, was a Quran-only person. It was not because I wanted to "live the western life", or "follow my nafs". I TRULY and HONESTLY believed that hadiths were way too corrupted to base our jurisprudence on them. I truly believed that "pure Islam" meant not basing our religion in flawed narrations, etc, etc.


So why do we have to be so mean towards others who might be mistaken, or in a different path and accuse them of things we can't know? It really irritates me.


 


Feb 19, 2010 -- 10:49AM, Abdullah. wrote:


And if someone were to say: "We do not take except what we find in the Qur'an", that person would be an apostate by consensus of the Community, and would not thereby be obligated to pray more than one rak`a between the going down of the sun and the dark of night, and another one at dawn [cf. 17:78]. For this is the least that has been called salat, and there is no limit (hadd) set for the most in that chapter. One who follows such a position is an idolatrous disbeliever (kafir mushrik)... The only ones to go that path are some of the extremist Rafidis upon whose apostasy consensus has formed in the Community. And success is from Allah Almighty and Exalted. Now, should someone follow only what the entire Community has agreed upon and nothing else, leaving all that they differed about with regard to what the texts mention: such a person is a transgressor (fasiq) by consensus of the Community. These two preliminaries make it obligatory to accept what is transmitted.




Shi`a reject many of the sunni sahih mutawattir. They in fact have a whole different collection of hadith. However, the majority of scholars of ahl sunnah wal jama`h have considered them Muslims.


Thus I don't understand why a person who believes that jurisprudence should be derived from the Quran only can then be classified as a kafir.  This especially since we have, through the hadith in which Jibreel tells our prophet Mohammad what is Islam, Iman and Ihsan, the definition of Islam and thus the definition of Muslim.


And Allah swt knows best.


Ceren

Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Feb 20, 2010 - 8:49PM #9
visio
Posts: 3,743
I do not think that those Muslims who have been wrongly labelled as "Quran only" rejects all of the sayings or the late prophets action based on his interpretation of the Al-Quran. There were matters which we have to follow especially the sunnah aspects of the essential and basic 5 pillars of the Al-Quran - Salat, Fasting, Hajj, Zakat and the Kalimah themselves.[To me this is the sunna aspect and forms that the Al-Quran is strongly emphasised that th edeeds an daction of th eProphet have to be strictly followed.  Others are simply a WANT and not a MUST).   When it comes to the matter of community order there were actions and sayings of the Prophet that, when the Al-Quran is viewed as a whole, leads to a viewpoint that those were circumstantial in its nature.  If it is not considered so, then the whole Al-Quran is is unfairly rendered as contratictory.  What the Prophet was witnessing in the Al-Quran was the absolute nature and disposition of all essential matters with no time bar. His interpretation and action especially on community affairs had elements and/or allowances of timely evolution and circumstancial adjustments.  It was made in accordance to the capacity of the whole community to understand.  One must not carry the emotional and sentimental idea that even the companions knew or understood 100% of what the late Prophet Muhammadsaw was saying or doing. Otherwise, he (Muhammadsaw) wouldn't have (also) said (in his Farewell Sermon on the Hill) that the later generation of Muslims would have understood the Al-Quran and Sunna better that all of his companions and generation of the day.   As I have oft repeatedly said modern Muslims as well as modern mankind as a whole know the abstracts and the unseen (ghaib) better than those generation.  Our comprehension ability is better (in relation to the absolute, guiding and training message of the Al-Quran)

Coming back to the OP, let's read again what the source verse actually say:


At-Talaq 65 :  1   O Prophet!   When you divorce women, divorce them at their Iddah (prescribed periods) and count (cautiously/accurately) their Iddah.   And fear ALLAH your Lord.  And turn them not out of their homes nor shall they leave, except in case they are guilty of some open illegal sexual intercourse.   And those are the set limits of ALLAH.   And whosoever transgresses the set limits of ALLAH, then he has wrong himself.   You know not it may be that ALLAH will afterward bring some new thing to pass. 


There are so many possibilities to interpret this verse.   One such interpretation, both the men and women must not leave their home unless one or the other comes to the critical limit of engaging in an open and illegal sexual intercourse, then one is to leave the home.   Leaving home, here implies without an expressed intention of coming back to the house.  In the ancient society when a husband or, especially a domiciled wife leaves home for several days with one or the other party is informed/knowing, it was, humanly, considered a sin.  This cultural psyche could have easily influenced an interpretation of the verse that ropes in the sin factor. If there is any specific hadith of the Prophet that helps in the interpretation of this verse, it is worth reading it.   Any offer on the specific hadiths?



 


Salaam
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Feb 20, 2010 - 9:19PM #10
visio
Posts: 3,743

Sometimes I can't help thinking about the followings:
To really understand all the available the Hadiths - authentic or non-authentic, we have to draw a lot on our common sense.
But, to really understan dthe Al-Quran, we have to kill all of our common sense.
Isn't it the Muslims who would also proclaim that the late Prophet Muhammadsaw was infallible? In his Ascension (Mi'raj) he met all the greats from Isasaw to Ibrahimsaw.   What or where he was then?  What then is th emeaning of the 2nd.Part of the Kalima - "Muhammad was a Messenger of ALLAH?"  Where was his maqam al-Mahmud?

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook