Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Posted by abdullah On 3:29 AM 12 comments
Comments on a Forged Hadith
Someone told me that a book called “Mishkat” says that our Holy Prophet said: "If there was to be a prophet after me it would have been "Umar "
This is unquestionably untrue. Ponder on these points-
1. When the Shi'as want to prove any thing against the Sunnis they do not quote Shi'a books or Shi'a traditions They quote references from the Sunni books. Therefore, if any Sunni wished to prove to US any virtue Of 'Umar, he should cite references from the Shi'a books. Is it not stark foolishness to quote a Sunni tradition against the Shi'as? Well, even the Hindus and the Christians could easily prove the 'truth' of their religion vis-a-vis Islam if they were allowed to quote from their own books.
2. Even the Sunnis believe that the Prophets must be Ma'sum (infallible) untainted with kufr (infidelity) throughout their lives i.e. even before being invested with prophethood See, for example, "Mawaqif" of Qadi 'Izzududdin, and "Sham-eMawaqif" of Sharif Jurjani. Also refer to "Fiqh-e-Akbar" of Imam Abu Hanifa and its 'Sharh' by Mulla 'Ali Qari.
Now 'Umar was a "Mushrik" (idol-worshipper) for at least 40 years. How could a has-been idol worshipper be a "potential prophet"?
3. Prophets must be top-most in divine knowledge and embellished with other virtues. 'Umar blundered more than 100 times in his judgments and rulings, so much so that once a woman silenced him in an open gathering and refuted his ruling by quoting an 'aya of the Qur'an upon which he was constrained to (Every person is more knowledgeable in religion than 'Umar even the women who sit in seclusion). Is this the qualification of a potential prophet?
4. In the "Sanad" (chain of tradition of this alleged hadith) there is the name of one Musharrih about whom Ibn Jawzi (a well-known Sunni authority on Hadith and Religion) has said:
"Ibn Habban has said that the writings/books of Musharrih became topsy turvy; therefore quoting him in proof is invalid" When the Sunni scholars themselves say that one of the narrators of this 'tradition' was unreliable and confusion was worse confounded in his books how do they expect the Shi'as to believe in such a spurious "hadith"?
Popular Posts (Last 30 Days)
Abdul Kareem Mushtaq - Hum Muta Kiyon Kerte Hain Here is an unbiased debate on 'Muta' from ARY Digital. The host is neutra...
Mutta Aur is Ki Haqeeqat This Book (in urdu) expose the truth about presence of Mutta in history of islam. All Reference are compiled...
Ye sirf ek jhooot hai ki Maula Ali a.s masoom wali-e-khuda wasi-e-rasol s.a.w alamdar-e-parchame-e-islam ,sher-e-khuda, la fatah illa ...
This issue has been a matter of debate since times immemorial and it is this issue which in fact explains why the Shias bear enmity toward ...
Whenever sunnis argue with shias due to their criticism for certain companions, they bring up the hadith of Ashra Mubashra, or shall i s...
Baagh e Fidak