Topic initiated on Wednesday, October 12, 2016 - 12:52 AM
|Understanding the Sunnah - Module 4|
Can you please clarify what the "next chapter is from the following ?
v. Usage of the term ‘Sunnah’
In common usage, the word Sunnah is loosely applied to all the actions of the Holy Prophet (sws). The Sunnah literally means ‘the well trodden path’. In common religious terminology, the word is used for all the actions and sayings of the Holy Prophet (sws) that we may find in the H~adi#th Literature (discussed in next chapter). This is the layman’s usage of the word and should not be confused with the technical term of Sunnah as used in jurisprudence.
This was getting very interesting and I was disappointed to see there was nothing following this, Chapter 4 is the end of this subject.
Is there another course to register in to carry on this topic, if so which one?
I have also found that the course material (text) actually supports my arguments from my post re: "Understanding the Sunnah - Module 1" and find the text often contradicts itself.
For instance my argument that the AUTHENTICATED Hadith should be part of the evidence or proof. This is strengthened by the fact that from my understanding to achieve authentication it must be witnessed by a number of individuals saying the same thing and agreed upon by at least 2 or 3 Islamic scholars. If I am incorrect on any point please correct me.
If you think about this logically this is a form of Tawatur (seeking Consenus) practiced by the Prophet swt.
Text contained in this course state :
If there were no books on Hadith, the Sunnah would have still been there with the same authenticity and same clarity. And now when we have the Sunnah and the Hadith literature side by side with us, we do not need the confirmation of Sunnah from the books on Hadith. Instead we would confirm the authenticity of Hadith from comparison with the Sunnah.
In effect it is admitted that the Hadith, irrespective of whether there was or wasn't Sunnah, it was consulted to confirm that the Prophet swt did or said something, this was in fact proof it happened. So then to argue the point that the Hadith is not required is dangerous.
Why? As I stated in my initial post if we are merely to accept, as is happening here, someone saying " You must do this/ say this (whatever it may be) because it is Sunnah of the Prophet swt." we are mere deaf, dumb and blind followers. If we are told something we have the right to ask for the proof. You cannot point (or say that ) it is Sunnah and not be able to back this up. The only way to back this up is by written historical records accounting for the instances in question.
The argument of not relying on "historical" documentation is laughable. So what are you saying, that because the Hadith is a historical document it is inaccurate, unreliable and cannot be trusted? If so why write anything down. We should rely on people passing knowledge by word of mouth to each other ?
My counter to this is consider the use of Chinese Whispers. In this you have a gathering of people. You get one person to go to one person and whispher something in their ear, you then instruct that person who receives the whisper to tell this to someone else. this is repeated until there is no one left but the originator. The last person to receive the whisper then in front of everyone tells the originator what the message was.
It is proven that the message originally given has dramatically changed.
I think the logic of this module is wanting and does not support the argument.
Please inform me what Islamic School of Jurispudence this study group follows.
Edited by: kidatheart on Wednesday, October 12, 2016 6:15 PM