Autochecked users, Bureaucrats, Editors, oversight, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers, rollback, Administrators
19,746
edits
User talk:Saggy: Difference between revisions
→Contradictions in the Qur'an and Hadith: Definition of Mat'n needs to be sourced or corrected
(→Contradictions in the Qur'an and Hadith: Definition of Mat'n needs to be sourced or corrected) |
|||
| Line 121: | Line 121: | ||
::::::::::To hightlight it again our page [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muhammads_Miracles] that you pointed to in the begining and you refered to it again, claims ''"His third criteria is mat'n, i.e. the content of a narration must not be in contradiction with the Qur'an."'', but there's no reference for that. According to other sources Matn means "text of the hadith", not "must not be in contradiction with the Quran". Bukhari's criteria of this contradiction cannot apply to other Hadith scholars (it is his own personal opinion). And even if we were to assume such a criteria, we are faced by the question: Is a Sahih hadith being declared invalid simply because of the contradiction? Why was it considered in the first place if it was actually invalid? The hadith was considered authentic because the events narrated actually happened. | ::::::::::To hightlight it again our page [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muhammads_Miracles] that you pointed to in the begining and you refered to it again, claims ''"His third criteria is mat'n, i.e. the content of a narration must not be in contradiction with the Qur'an."'', but there's no reference for that. According to other sources Matn means "text of the hadith", not "must not be in contradiction with the Quran". Bukhari's criteria of this contradiction cannot apply to other Hadith scholars (it is his own personal opinion). And even if we were to assume such a criteria, we are faced by the question: Is a Sahih hadith being declared invalid simply because of the contradiction? Why was it considered in the first place if it was actually invalid? The hadith was considered authentic because the events narrated actually happened. | ||
::::::::::In any case a sourced definition of Matn would be one point. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 05:36, 11 April 2014 (PDT) | ::::::::::In any case a sourced definition of Matn would be one point. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 05:36, 11 April 2014 (PDT) | ||
{{outdent}} | |||
Visiting this again and stressing this point: | |||
:''Mat'n applies to ALL contradictions between the Qur'an and hadith.'' | |||
This is not correct as Mat'n means "the text of the hadith" [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith_studies#Sanad_and_matn] and has nothing to do with "Contradictions between Quran and Hadith". The source article [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muhammads_Miracles#Bukhari.27s_criteria] you linked for Miracles should have the definition of Matn sourced correctly. I believe this is a page that an author made with the username starting with J (forgot the full name). So this line: | |||
:''His third criteria is mat'n, i.e. the content of a narration must not be in contradiction with the Qur'an.'' | |||
is incorrectly implying that Matn = the content of a narration must not be in contradiction with the Qur'an. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 10:57, 11 April 2014 (PDT) | |||
== 1000 years == | == 1000 years == | ||