@@BloodofChrist-jx8tethere were "n" numbers of Quran after the death of prophet (pbuh). Your question is like, we are talking about the amount of water in the sea and you are asking what about that bucket of water that you pulled out from the sea. Your question does not make sense.
Right, except Bukhari lived 300 years after Muhammad - how could he possibly verify who is trustworthy? If you don’t have the original documents from close to the time (like the gospels) the hadiths - while I won’t say they are made up - are totally unprovable. Think about it sensibly: Could I write a chain of narration for something not written down in 1724. It makes zero difference what the gospel writers’ names were. You cannot PROVE you claims about the scribes.
Just to answer your question, Prophet Mohammad had 10000 companions who had written and memorized Quran. They are called the generation of Sahaba, their successors called the generation of tabiyi, their successor called tabiyee-tabiyeen. This first 3 generations are called salafi. Among this generation, there are 4 school of thoughts corresponding to all hadiths. So the chain of commands are still like a crystal and how imam bukhari verified 600000+ hadiths and denied 570000+ false hadiths. If you study imam bukhari's life and techniques of his scientific work, you need a half life time to study that. Because he has 30 volumes each having a 1000 pages of root analysis how he verified authenticity and nullified the rest.
@ Thank you for your answer. But all this is Irrelevant. Bukhari could easily have invented all the Hadith and all the chains of transmission because he lived 300 years after Muhammad. I’m not saying he did - I’m just saying there is no external proof of any of the Hadith and the vast majority of the Sira, which was written down even later, is even less fact-based. It’s not just the delay in recording the material but there are specific problems with the Islamic methodology: Eg, are you aware that you can never get back to the Prophet under your system? This is because the Companions do not even have to have been eye witnesses to the events they describe. Or in the same area. Or even older than 1. They just have to have been born and be listed as a companion to get the old blue tick! Under the followers and followers of followers there was just no way to check facts and many of them did invent Hadith for their own reasons, be they sectarian, economic or just a poor grasp of history. By the time the big collectors eg bukhari tried to properly systematise and classify the Hadith too much time had passed - you could never get back those lost 300 years, especially as they were a time of constant warfare, rebellion and theological/ sectarian reinvention. he also admits himself that he discounts anything that would not please Muhammad or his family. Plus he is a Sunni, working for Abbasid bosses so is clearly biased against the Umayyads and the Shia. It’s no more possible to verify any of it than the story of King Arthur. The only good contemporary source on Muhammad is the Qu’ran of which we seem to have the Uthmanic version from only a few decades after his death. Good js perhaps pushing it as the Quran is a very esoteric book that takes no interest in earthly details like places, or named people - hence the attempt to fill in using the Hadiths/ SirA. The Quran genuinely is very good in terms of its proximity to Muhammad’s lifetime and reliable transmission - it is just hard to understand without using externally verified historical context.
I should add, that I’m not an ardent follower of any religion, including atheism, and have no axe to grind theologically. I’m simply giving you the accepted academic standards that drive intellectual development in everything from archeology to ancient Arabic linguistics to astronomy.
1. Scholars had their own ahadith before Al-Bukhari (Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal d. 241 A.H, Imam Malik's Al-Muwatta d.179 A.H). 10 vol set of Musannaf ibn Abu Shaybah (d. 235 A.H). 12 vol set of Musannaf Abdur Razzaq (d. 212 A.H). We have reports the Companions wrote down ahadith of the Prophet. For example, Musnad of Ali ibn Abu Talib. 2. Hadith Criticism is stricter than Western Historical Critical Method. Islamic scholarship took into account forging lies against the Prophet for political purposes. 3. Companion narrated directly from The Prophet must be an eyewitness. 4. Prove Al-Bukhari made things up. He rejected taking a hadith from someone because the person treated his animal unjust. 5. The written Qur'an today is identical to Uthmanic Script which was transmitted 15 years after The Prophet's death by the Companions of The Prophet. We can only know this through hadith narrated by Al-Bukhari. This testifies the truthfulness and veracity of Al-Bukhari. Uthmanic Script identical to The Qur'an we have today is testified by Western scholarship, including Nicolai Sinai, Dr Sean Anthony, Dr Marijn Van Putten, Dr Hythem Sydky. This confirms the narrative of the written Qur'an fixed and closed under the reign of Uthman through the hadith of Al-Bukhari.
I thought the hadiths were explanations of what is in the Quran. The Sunnah might be closer. We keep away from commentaries, They could be misleading.A current example is the Prosperity Christians in the US, they got the total wrong end of the stick on; For those that have will be given more
Hi Quinn, thank you for sharing your honest thoughts. We can understand that for sincere seekers it is a minefield online. Our team on Legions of Knowledge’s goal is partially to reach out to sincere truth seekers such as yourself. Feel free to reach out with any questions you may have. We will continue to share genuine information about why Islam is the truth, and avoid as much as possible contributing to the online entertainment that has sadly arisen around interfaith discussions InshaAllah.
Islamic scholarship had blockchain technology centuries ago.
Why your book asked if you have doubts go to the people of the book
What is the surrounding context?
Which of the Qurans? Is it the one Othman burnt or the ones in different parts of the world?
Here we go again, another ignorant fool who is unaware of the Ahruf, Qira'at and Riwayah.
yes which quran is the correct one? What about the one the goat ate
@@BloodofChrist-jx8tethere were "n" numbers of Quran after the death of prophet (pbuh). Your question is like, we are talking about the amount of water in the sea and you are asking what about that bucket of water that you pulled out from the sea. Your question does not make sense.
Why don't you list them first and highlight their differences? 😂😂 You can't, right, just copy pasted 😂😂
Like we can tell you only KJV has John 5:7, other bibles have a footnote that it is a fabricated, manipulated verse 😂😂. Can you do the same? No? 😂😂😂
Right, except Bukhari lived 300 years after Muhammad - how could he possibly verify who is trustworthy? If you don’t have the original documents from close to the time (like the gospels) the hadiths - while I won’t say they are made up - are totally unprovable.
Think about it sensibly: Could I write a chain of narration for something not written down in 1724.
It makes zero difference what the gospel writers’ names were. You cannot PROVE you claims about the scribes.
Just to answer your question, Prophet Mohammad had 10000 companions who had written and memorized Quran. They are called the generation of Sahaba, their successors called the generation of tabiyi, their successor called tabiyee-tabiyeen. This first 3 generations are called salafi. Among this generation, there are 4 school of thoughts corresponding to all hadiths. So the chain of commands are still like a crystal and how imam bukhari verified 600000+ hadiths and denied 570000+ false hadiths. If you study imam bukhari's life and techniques of his scientific work, you need a half life time to study that. Because he has 30 volumes each having a 1000 pages of root analysis how he verified authenticity and nullified the rest.
@@robiulkabir8812 Listen to this garage. No evidence.
@ Thank you for your answer. But all this is Irrelevant.
Bukhari could easily have invented all the Hadith and all the chains of transmission because he lived 300 years after Muhammad. I’m not saying he did - I’m just saying there is no external proof of any of the Hadith and the vast majority of the Sira, which was written down even later, is even less fact-based.
It’s not just the delay in recording the material but there are specific problems with the Islamic methodology:
Eg, are you aware that you can never get back to the Prophet under your system? This is because the Companions do not even have to have been eye witnesses to the events they describe. Or in the same area. Or even older than 1. They just have to have been born and be listed as a companion to get the old blue tick! Under the followers and followers of followers there was just no way to check facts and many of them did invent Hadith for their own reasons, be they sectarian, economic or just a poor grasp of history.
By the time the big collectors eg bukhari tried to properly systematise and classify the Hadith too much time had passed - you could never get back those lost 300 years, especially as they were a time of constant warfare, rebellion and theological/ sectarian reinvention. he also admits himself that he discounts anything that would not please Muhammad or his family. Plus he is a Sunni, working for Abbasid bosses so is clearly biased against the Umayyads and the Shia.
It’s no more possible to verify any of it than the story of King Arthur.
The only good contemporary source on Muhammad is the Qu’ran of which we seem to have the Uthmanic version from only a few decades after his death. Good js perhaps pushing it as the Quran is a very esoteric book that takes no interest in earthly details like places, or named people - hence the attempt to fill in using the Hadiths/ SirA.
The Quran genuinely is very good in terms of its proximity to Muhammad’s lifetime and reliable transmission - it is just hard to understand without using externally verified historical context.
I should add, that I’m not an ardent follower of any religion, including atheism, and have no axe to grind theologically. I’m simply giving you the accepted academic standards that drive intellectual development in everything from archeology to ancient Arabic linguistics to astronomy.
1. Scholars had their own ahadith before Al-Bukhari (Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal d. 241 A.H, Imam Malik's Al-Muwatta d.179 A.H). 10 vol set of Musannaf ibn Abu Shaybah (d. 235 A.H). 12 vol set of Musannaf Abdur Razzaq (d. 212 A.H). We have reports the Companions wrote down ahadith of the Prophet. For example, Musnad of Ali ibn Abu Talib.
2. Hadith Criticism is stricter than Western Historical Critical Method. Islamic scholarship took into account forging lies against the Prophet for political purposes.
3. Companion narrated directly from The Prophet must be an eyewitness.
4. Prove Al-Bukhari made things up. He rejected taking a hadith from someone because the person treated his animal unjust.
5. The written Qur'an today is identical to Uthmanic Script which was transmitted 15 years after The Prophet's death by the Companions of The Prophet. We can only know this through hadith narrated by Al-Bukhari. This testifies the truthfulness and veracity of Al-Bukhari.
Uthmanic Script identical to The Qur'an we have today is testified by Western scholarship, including Nicolai Sinai, Dr Sean Anthony, Dr Marijn Van Putten, Dr Hythem Sydky. This confirms the narrative of the written Qur'an fixed and closed under the reign of Uthman through the hadith of Al-Bukhari.
I thought the hadiths were explanations of what is in the Quran. The Sunnah might be closer. We keep away from commentaries, They could be misleading.A current example is the Prosperity Christians in the US, they got the total wrong end of the stick on; For those that have will be given more
That’d be cool if it was clear. It’s all so muddy either way.
Hi Quinn, thank you for sharing your honest thoughts. We can understand that for sincere seekers it is a minefield online. Our team on Legions of Knowledge’s goal is partially to reach out to sincere truth seekers such as yourself. Feel free to reach out with any questions you may have. We will continue to share genuine information about why Islam is the truth, and avoid as much as possible contributing to the online entertainment that has sadly arisen around interfaith discussions InshaAllah.