01 02 03 10

Friday Freaky Fatwa--Holy Hadith, bells, shoes, dogs, prayers and living in the west

Hadith are not sacred texts but Hadith has become a religion for many Muslims…though I doubt they could technically be called Muslims, as the that word means submitting to one God. Hadith has nothing to do with God.

Hadith are the reason why the words; Islam and Muslim, are seen as dirty words.  Apostasy laws, blasphemy law, stoning women, killing unbelievers, hating Jews and Israel, hating dogs, hating music, hijab and all the other horrors that cause Muslims to be seen as backward, uneducated and untrustworthy.  Hadith caused the Sunni/Shia hate sect.

The Quran says not to follow Hadith, there is even a punishment cited for following Hadith.  There is even a Hadith where Muhammad says not to follow Hadith.  The entire world has been dealing with all the negative effects of Hadith including all the hate, superstition, bad advice and paranoia that come with following Hadith. 
Hadith is the main cause of Muslim hate and Muslim death.   

Hadith is also the foundation for scholars when they answer questions asked in earnest by the believers.  Yes, some of their questions might seem silly or stupid but not as silly, stupid or damaging as the answers given by the scholars.

A Muslim asks a scholar

There are people who say that alarm clocks are haraam because they have music. Is this correct?
And the scholar replies
Praise be to Allah.

Muslim narrated from Abu Hurayrah that the Messenger of Allah said: “The angels do not accompany any group with whom there is a dog or a bell.”
Or, a bell on a dog.  How stupid.  But this would only be for Muslim angels…right?  Obviously the scholars do not want to talk about what the Quran says about dogs.  Allah loves dogs.  Abu was a cat man and didn’t like dogs.  Abu is now a partner to Allah.

And he narrated also from Abu Hurayrah that the Messenger of Allah said: “Bells are the musical instruments of the Shaytaan.”
Abu was probably just extra hungry that day as he would collect Hadith for food.  He was beaten up for telling people stupid stories/Hadith.

Al-Nawawi said: As for bells, it was said that the reason why the angels dislike them is that they are similar to church bells, or because they are one of the hanging things that are forbidden. And it was said that the reason why they are disliked is their sound, which is supported by the report which mentions “the musical instruments of the shaytaan.”
This is all made up crap!  And worse, it is now religion!

The reason why their sound is disliked is that it is akin to musical instruments, which are forbidden.
They are not forbidden in the Quran.  Who else would have the authority to forbid what the Quran has not?

Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar said: To sum up, the sound has two qualities, one which is the strength of the sound and the other is its tune, and because of its musical tune it was prohibited, and the reason was given as being because they are “the musical instruments of the shaytaan.”
Hells bells, hell has bells?  Yeah I don’t think so.  It was Bakr who forbid music.  The scholars have made Bakr a god.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen said: Muhammad told us that the angels do not accompany people with whom there is a bell, because when the animals walk, it will make a sound like music, and it is known that musical instruments are forbidden. End quote.
Open the damn quote.  The Quran does not forbid music; scholars have as they believe they have the same power as God.

With regard to alarm clocks and the like, if they have musical sounds then they are forbidden, because of the general meaning of the evidence that indicates that musical instruments are forbidden. But there is nothing wrong with an ordinary alarm clock.
What the scholars are really saying is; God was an idiot for not saying music is forbidden.  So the scholars are correcting God.  You know that’s gotta be bad!

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen said: As for alarm clocks and the like that do not come under the prohibition, and things that are used beside doors to ask permission to enter – because some doors have a bell to ask permission to enter – there is also nothing wrong with these, and they do not come under this prohibition, because they are not hung around an animal’s neck and the like, and they do not create a tune which is the reason why the Prophet forbade them. End quote.
Right, like there were doorbells in the Arabian Desert?  Pfft!  There’s not even a Hadith on bells!...or alarm clocks.

The Standing Committee was asked: What is the kind of bell that is forbidden? Please note that there are electric bells that make sounds like birds, or bells on alarm clocks where one piece of metal strikes another, and other kinds.

They replied:

The bells that are used in houses, schools and so on are permissible, so long as they do not include anything forbidden, such as resembling the church bells of the Christians, or have musical sounds. In that case they are forbidden for that reason. End quote.
See the kind of crap you start?  This is why Muslims are disliked.

And Allah knows best.
The scholars do not believe that to be true.  Not one quote from the Quran to back up this stupid fatwa.

A Muslim asks a scholar

Is there any basis in sharia for turning over upside-down shoes?
I am seeking reward from Allah when I do that Because people say “I am turning this shoe away from the Countenance of Allah, may He be glorified and exalted.”
This is something that I have had the habit of doing since I was small.
And the scholar replies
Praise be to Allah.

There is no such basis in sharia for turning over a shoe that is upside down. Hanbali regarded going to extremes in that regard as the one of the actions of the ignorant.
Really?  What if the shoe had a bell on it??

He said: Woe to the scholar who does not strive his utmost against the ignorant.  And they threaten the one who they see placing a loaf of bread facedown or leaving an upside-down shoe with its sole pointed towards the sky. End quote.

Ruling of saying the word “woe”

“Woe” is a word used to warn, scare and threaten people.  It is a word that the Arabs say to anyone who falls into deep trouble. Its original meaning is punishment and doom.
If a person uses this word deliberately to threaten and warn someone against doing an action that is contrary to sharia, there is nothing wrong with that. For example, the Prophet said: “Woe” to the heels from the Fire!  Do wudoo’ properly.”

If a person uses this word for everything that he thinks is different to what he thinks, even if the issue is a matter of controversy among the scholars, this is not permissible.

If a person says it deliberately, praying against himself, that is not permissible, unless he says it in a way that is connected to a condition, such as ‘Umar said when he was stabbed: “Woe to me and woe to my mother if I am not forgiven.”
Punish Mother if not forgiven?  WOE!
Stupid scholars!

A Muslim asks a scholar
They were praying one of the prayers at home when the telephone started to ring, and it distracted them with its ringing for a long time. Is it permissible in such cases for the worshipper to take a few steps forwards or backwards and pick up the receiver and say “Allahu akbar” or raise his voice in recitation so that the caller will know that he is praying – by analogy with (the hadeeth with speaks of) opening the door to one who knocks or raising his voice so that he can hear you
And the scholar replies
Praise be to Allah--scholars.

If the worshipper is in the position that you describe and the phone starts ringing, it is permissible for him to lift the receiver, even if he has to move a little way forward or back, or to the right or left, on the condition that he keeps facing the qiblah and he says ‘Subhaan Allaah’ so that the person who is calling will know that he is praying.
Out of nearly 7 billion humans on the planet only 250 million speak Arabic
It was narrated in al-Saheehayn that the Messenger of Allah used to pray whilst carrying his granddaughter. When he prayed’, he would put her down, and when he stood up he would pick her up again. This was when he was leading the people in prayer in the mosque.
This could never happen today as scholars have now forbidden any extra movement in prayer.

Ahmad and others narrated that ‘Aiesha said:“The Messenger of Allah was praying in his house with the door closed. I came to the door and he walked over and opened the door for me, then he went back to his place.” She mentioned that the door was in the direction of the Qiblah.
Aiesha also said Muhammad squatted when he peed, but the male companions who watched him pee said he was standing.

Bukhari narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: “Whoever notices something alarming whilst praying, then men should say ‘Subhaan Allah’ and women should clap their hands.”
So, if you knock on the door of a follower of Hadith and you hear clapping, leave a note.

And Allah is the Source of strength.
Obviously these scholars believe Allah is a screw up as they never quote from Allah, only Hadith.

A Muslim asks a scholar
Can you please reply in detail the hadith which Sufi use the hadith of Aiesha in which she tell to open a window in Prophet’s grave for rain.
And the scholar replies
Praise be to Allah.

The hadeeth referred to was narrated by Abu’l-Jawza’ Aws ibn ‘Abd-Allaah who said: The people of Medina were faced with a severe drought. They complained to ‘Aiesha who said: “Look at the grave of the Prophet and make an opening facing the sky so that there will be no barrier between him and the sky.”
They did that, then it rained until the plants grew and the camels grew exceedingly fat, and it was called the year of the exceedingly fat animals.
The following year was called the year of exceedingly fat Arabs as they ate all the animals.

This is a weak Hadith which cannot be used as evidence for three reasons:
pay attention to this as it’s the screwy way scholars use to determine what is a solid Hadith.  And remember that these Hadith were collected generations after the last companion of Muhammad died or was killed.  There is no written evidence of any Hadith during the life of Muhammad.  Nothing.

1 – Sa’eed ibn Zayd, who was the brother of Hammaad ibn Yazeed, has some weakness. Al-Haafiz said concerning him in al-Taqreeb: he is truthful but confused.
Al-Dhahabi said in al-Mizaan: Yahya ibn Sa’eed said: he is weak.
Al-Sa’di said: It is not evidence; they regard his hadeeth as weak.
Al-Nasaa’i and others said: He is not strong.
Ahmad said: There is nothing wrong with him;
Yahya ibn Sa’eed did not like him.
This you’re to rely on?  Really?  Moving on to number 2

2 – The report stops at ‘Aiesha and it is not attributed to the Prophet. Even if it were solid it would not count as evidence, because it may be that it some of the first believers who may make a mistake or get it right, so we are not obliged to follow it.
Dear scholars, do you have any idea how much these Hadith screw up Islam?

3 – Abu’l-Nu’maan is Muhammad ibn al-Fadl who is known as ‘Aarim. Although he is trustworthy, he became confused towards the end of his life.
Maybe he wasn’t confused but someone else who didn’t like him said he was confused.  Could happen.

 Al-Haafiz Burhaan al-Deen al-Halabi who mentioned him among the confused in his book and said: The ruling concerning them is that the Hadith of those who learned from them before they became confused may be accepted, but it may not be accepted from those who learned from them after they became confused or those concerning whom it is not known whether they learned from him before he became confused or after.
I’m confused now.  Is that the point of Hadith, to confuse people?  I say yes.

I (al-Albaani) say: it is not known whether al-Daarimi heard this report before he became confused or after, so it is not acceptable and cannot be quoted as evidence.
Here’s evidence that they’re full of crap.  Hadith is not sacred texts for the reasons you’ve just read.  They were never meant to be part of the Quran and certainly never intended to become the religion we see here.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said, refuting al-Bakri: The report narrated from ‘Aa’ishah about the opening of a hole towards the sky so that rain could fall onto the grave of the Prophet is not solid, as is not proven.
Other than through Hadith, is there any proof she really lived?  She’s not mentioned in the Quran.  Muhammad is mentioned 4-5 times.

Among the things which prove that it is false is the fact that during the lifetime of ‘Aiesha the house did not have any opening, rather it remained as it was during the life of the Prophet: some of it was roofed over and some of it was open, and the sun used to shine into it, as it is proven in al-Saheehayn from ‘Aiesha that the Prophet used to pray the morning prayer with the sun shining into her room when the shadow had not yet appeared. The apartment remained like that until al-Waleed ibn ‘Abd al-Malik expanded the mosque when he was governor, at which time the apartments were added to the mosque of the Prophet.
Ah, so it was ok to change some things that prophet liked, like add more rooms for the governor.
At that time the room in which the Prophet is buried was incorporated into the mosque and a high wall was built around the apartment of ‘Aiesha which contains the Prophet’s grave. After that the opening was made so that people could enter it when necessary in order to clean it. As for the opening being made during ‘Aiesha’s lifetime, this is an obvious lie. End quote.
Open quote and finish the story.  Aiesha was later captured in battle and never went back to her husband’s home.

Secondly:  Can you believe they’re only on secondly?

This hadeeth is not proof for what the extreme Sufis believe about it being permissible to seek rain by the help of the Prophet Muhammad. You cannot find in the hadeeth anything which indicates that, by any stretch of the imagination.

The most that can be said is that it shows how Allah honoured his Prophet after he died.  This is the blessing of his pure body and his honour before Allah. But that does not mean that it is permissible for the Muslims to go to him and seek his help whilst he is in his grave. The first believers did not do that, rather they opened a hole in the roof of his room so that it might be directly open to the sky, but none of them asked the Prophet for rain, and they did not speak to him concerning that.
But that was after he was dead.  And I know of Hadith where the companions asked Muhammad to make it rain, and he did, and then they asked him to make it stop as their village flooded.

Going to graves to offer supplication beside them, and seeking a response to prayer offered there more than prayer offered elsewhere, is something that was not prescribed by Allah or His Messenger.  It was not mentioned by any of the earlier scholars or righteous men. Rather most of what has been narrated concerning that comes from some of the later figures, after the second century (AH).
Ah is not the same as A.D. 

Thus it is clear that there is no evidence in this report for the Sufis that it is permissible to seek help from the Messenger or to seek to draw closer to Allah by means of him or his status.
And that can be said about every one of the hundreds and thousands of Hadith.

And Allah knows best.
Did you see any of these scholars quote Allah or the Quran?  What does the Quran say about following a messenger over the message?  Here are a few verses, those who have read my blog know there are others.

3:79 It is not possible that a man, to whom is given the Book, and Wisdom, and the prophetic office, should say to people: "Be ye my worshippers rather than Allah's": on the contrary He would say "Be ye worshippers of Him Who is truly the Cherisher of all: For ye have taught the Book and ye have studied it earnestly

3:80 Nor would he instruct you to take angels and prophets for Lords and patrons. What! would he bid you to unbelief after ye have bowed your will (To Allah in Islam)?

3:84 Say: "We believe in Allah, and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and in the Books given to Moses, Jesus, and the prophets from their Lord: We make no distinction between one and another among them, and to Allah do we bow our will

31;6 Wamina alnnasi man yashtaree lahwa **alhadeethi ** liyudilla AAan sabeeli Allahi bighayri AAilmin wayattakhithaha huzuwan olaika lahum AAathabun muheenun
NO Hadith….and there is a serious penalty for following Hadith!  And last

Is it permissible for Muslims who live in secular countries to form Islamic parties, which will be official parties within the framework of the law, but whose aim will be to call people to God?.
Praise be to us…yes, I changed the word.
It is prescribed for Muslims who have the misfortune to live in kaafir states to unite, to form bonds amongst themselves and cooperate with one another, whether that is in the name of Islamic parties or Islamic organizations, because that is a kind of cooperating in righteousness and piety
And we are the Source of strength.  Yes I changed the word there, too.
For those who have followed my blog you will remember how often these scholars tell Muslims to leave “kaafir states’.  But it seems that Muslims were not following that advice as most Sharia run countries are horrible.  So now they change their advice.  They still want Muslims to hate living in the west and to stir up as much trouble as possible, not in Allah’s name, but in the name of the scholars.
I call on all Muslims and non Muslims to challenge the scholars as to the validity and sincerity of their advice.
I challenge all Muslims to dump the religion of Hadith.
I challenge all non Muslims to remind Muslims of the penalty of following Hadith.  Not only the penalty of going to prison or to a insane asylum for following stupid Hadith, but also the penalty of the hereafter.
Where I will be serving bitter fruit.
There is no such thing as a good Hadith in religion.  The most useful purpose of Hadith is for historical context as to why God saw the desert Arabs of the 7th century as the worst of people on the planet, and why they were in such need of a message from God.  To pretend that these were the best of people is ridiculous!  To try and imitate them is insane.  One cannot move forward by living backward.
And for the nuts who want to tell me they are to follow the prophet I say, you are NOT following the prophet you are IMITATING him as in worship! 
If Muhammad didn’t bring the Quran would you still want to imitate him?  Is he more important that the Quran? 
If you believe this is true, then read my blog, To follow or imitate.  Every word is backed up by the Quran.  If you want to call the Quran a lie then don’t be a coward and just say it.

11 12 15