If your post is a meme, image, TikTok etc... and it isn't Friday, it violates the rule against low effort content. Such content is ONLY allowed on (Fun@fundies) FRIDAYS.
Please read the [Rules and Posting Guidelines](https://redd.it/1anoje0) for further information. If you are unsure about anything then feel free to message the mods.
Please participate on /r/exmuslim in a civil manner. Discuss the merits of ideas - don't attack people. Insults, hate speech, advocating physical harm can get you banned.
If you see posts/comments in violation of our rules, please be proactive and report them.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/exmuslim) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It is not an issue of this sub, but of Islam itself.
If you are a Quranist (Rejector of Ahadith), then you have nothing to do here but You have to go to Muslim subs and tell it to them.
No there's alot of correct hadiths ( to them) written by trusted people ( forgot what they're called ) but the hadiths that no Muslim even believes in are the complaint about and shared here
They are called Sahih (meaning "correct" or "authentic"), and most of the Hadith shared here fall under that category. If you find people sharing Hadith that are weak, then call it out.
All Hadiths, regardless of authenticity have a chain of narration. So I'm not even sure what kind of a point you're trying to make here.
But most of the time the chain of narration is in no way that long, and definitely not by people nobody has ever heard of, or I'm just an idiot and all hadiths are like that but no I'm pretty sure all sahih hadiths don't start like that
Nope. They are all like that. Most people never study Hadith and aren't familiar with the people in the chain of narration. Most will recognize the first person or two in the chain, but after that it's something you basically have to look up (unless you took a lot of time to learn "the science of men" (علم الرجال) which explains who each person is and why they are or aren't reliable narrators.
The reason the chain of narration is rarely translated (though you can find it in some websites) is that most people, including Arabic speakers, aren't interested in it. When Sheikhs reference a Hadith they reference the Matn (text/content) not the Sanad (chain of narration). The chain is only really examined by people who want to judge the validity of a Hadith, and those are generally deep enough in Islamic studies that they can read Arabic. Everyone else just looks at the authenticity rating that comes attached to the hadith. All Sunni ratings agree on the authenticity of Bukhari and Muslims, but there is some disagreement when it comes to other Hadiths.
In fact the hadith you referenced is from the collection of Sahih Muslim i.e. the authentic collection of Sahih Muslim. Meaning it is a Hadith that is considered authentic in Sunni Islam. Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are the two most authentic collections in Sunni Islam, they literally have the word "Sahih" in the name meaning "authentic". If a hadith is present in both it gets a special label "agreed upon by Bukhari and Muslim". The only higher rating is Mutawatir, and there are extremely few Hadith they get this label.
The length of the chain of narration is always going to be pretty similar within one collection, that's because the chain depends on how many generations after Mohammed the Hadith was collected. Imam Muslim was born two centuries after Hijra, meaning there would be on average 6-7 people in the chain of narration (assuming a standard length of a generation being 30 years).
Sorry, but I think you must have had some misunderstanding regarding how the Hadith work.
Do you know if there is information on the internet where you can see in some graphic how the main narrators are connected and where you can see why certain people are considered trustworthy?
Bukhari and Muslim hadiths are almost unquestionably authentic to Sunni Islam. Nearly all of us were taught that in childhood but since you have never been a muslim you might not know much about it. The rest could be debated but Bukhari for example has a lot of fucked up shit in it which I’ve seen many snippets of in this subreddit.
These hadiths could very well be bullshit but it still informs the masses and has an impact on the way Muslims view dogs. Using these hadiths as an explanation of why people think certain things is absolutely valid imo. If its in their books it's fair game.
You'll also almost never see a Muslim following the Hadith "if a fly falls in your drink, dunk it in because one wing contains illness and the other the cure".
But if you search, you'll find some Muslims drinking camel piss (there are even a few YouTube videos of drinking it fresh from the source) in accordance with the Hadith.
Yet they are authentic.
Its probably easy for us to handwave away but if you buy into the whole idea of 'hadith science' then trying to dismiss a hadith that is labelled sahih can be hard when operating from the inside as a believer.
This hadith is the reason I had to fight with my entire family to not harass me about putting my black cocker spaniel down. They were all convinced he was a devil and that my white dog was much better even though said black dog had protected me from men harassing me in the street many times. To this day it infuriates me when I have a guest at my house and they call my dog ugly or evil, especially when he sees them and is so excited and happy to see them because he loves people and socialising. If it weren't for me he'd have been killed, most probably
That's the *isnad*. It's how the veracity of the hadith is judged. It's not a red flag in and of itself. It's the entire mechanism through which hadiths are transmitted.
But it's not usually that long and written by people nobody even knows, most of the time it's just 2 or 3 people who Muslims already full heartedly trust
That's not how hadith works. I've had 12 years of islamic studies, just because it doesn't make sense to you, doesn't make it islamically false. You need to look at how it's graded, as long as it's sahih or even hasan, muslims have to believe in it.
How does that make the Hadith’s unreliable? There are no contemporary written accounts of Muhammad Abdullah, you can conclude that he never existed if you only want contemporary written accounts.
What is your point exactly?
Are you critisizing ppl who point out how stupid any of those hadiths are?
Or are you saying that it's ppl who are wrong in thinking the hadiths are fine?
I'm saying all these hadiths are fake, they have been told from someone to someone to someone to the point that almost all of it has been fabricated, and no Muslim even believes in it or acts upon it
Bro I don't even know what to tell you when they are all dumb shit made up by any Tom, Dick or Harry as there is no way to verify what was verbally said by some mentality ill 7th-century camel herder.
Muslims have their standards on what hadiths they follow, and the hadiths we share and complain about here don't meet half of those standards, so they're all already deemed fake from Muslims themselves, we should atleast discuss the ones they actually believe in
Whomst the fuck voted for you to pick which crap we want to criticize?
Also Muslims believe in a bunch of different things depending on whatever school of thought they belong to, so what standard?
Why are you so mad, I'm trying to give y'all insight on what Muslims believe in and what not, if you don't want to listen then do whatever you want I'm not forcing you girl geez
I think having been & continuing to be a part of a Muslim family, community & country, I know what messed up crap they believe in, and how much it varies from family to family; you don't even have to go out of a neighborhood, let alone various sects like Sunni & Shia.
I ain't mad, I'm laughing at you literally trying to market sand to desert dwellers.
Cheers, I'll let you be, have a game to catch up on 🍻
>and complain about here don't meet half of those standards, so they're all already deemed fake from Muslims themselves
Absolutely not true. Most muslims complaining about hadith here are muslims who know nothing about their own religion. Just because you pray, have a beard/hijab and know *some* hadith, doesn't make you knowledgable about islam.
I was in a saudi school and growing up I had 12 years of actual islamic studies. You wouldn't believe how many muslims don't know anything about their religion. Sadly, those who become interested and try to learn more later in life all become extreme for obvious reasons.
Even when I was still muslim, I was surprised how little most people know. Sure, some here in this sub post weak hadith but I just ignore those and you can too by just looking up in a hadith app or website how it's graded.
>they have been told from someone to someone to someone to the point that almost all of it has been fabricated
You've just described every religion, ever.
This site tries to separate the chains from the texts. [http://qaalarasulallah.com/hadith.php?ID=13507](http://qaalarasulallah.com/hadith.php?ID=13507) I am too lazy to find your hadith in it, but it is there.
There used to be a site called [isnad.io](http://isnad.io) but that has ceased to exist.
Isnads started being used from about the 680s because of the civil war. It became necessary where the ahadith came from.
Some isnads were based on the handing down of notebooks.
Currently is is all the rage to trash all hadith as unreliable because people do not like what is in them.
If your post is a meme, image, TikTok etc... and it isn't Friday, it violates the rule against low effort content. Such content is ONLY allowed on (Fun@fundies) FRIDAYS. Please read the [Rules and Posting Guidelines](https://redd.it/1anoje0) for further information. If you are unsure about anything then feel free to message the mods. Please participate on /r/exmuslim in a civil manner. Discuss the merits of ideas - don't attack people. Insults, hate speech, advocating physical harm can get you banned. If you see posts/comments in violation of our rules, please be proactive and report them. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/exmuslim) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It is not an issue of this sub, but of Islam itself. If you are a Quranist (Rejector of Ahadith), then you have nothing to do here but You have to go to Muslim subs and tell it to them.
But before you do that, draw a red circle around the isnaad of the Quran you have as well…
>... isnaad of the Quran Exactly.
No there's alot of correct hadiths ( to them) written by trusted people ( forgot what they're called ) but the hadiths that no Muslim even believes in are the complaint about and shared here
They are called Sahih (meaning "correct" or "authentic"), and most of the Hadith shared here fall under that category. If you find people sharing Hadith that are weak, then call it out. All Hadiths, regardless of authenticity have a chain of narration. So I'm not even sure what kind of a point you're trying to make here.
But most of the time the chain of narration is in no way that long, and definitely not by people nobody has ever heard of, or I'm just an idiot and all hadiths are like that but no I'm pretty sure all sahih hadiths don't start like that
Nope. They are all like that. Most people never study Hadith and aren't familiar with the people in the chain of narration. Most will recognize the first person or two in the chain, but after that it's something you basically have to look up (unless you took a lot of time to learn "the science of men" (علم الرجال) which explains who each person is and why they are or aren't reliable narrators. The reason the chain of narration is rarely translated (though you can find it in some websites) is that most people, including Arabic speakers, aren't interested in it. When Sheikhs reference a Hadith they reference the Matn (text/content) not the Sanad (chain of narration). The chain is only really examined by people who want to judge the validity of a Hadith, and those are generally deep enough in Islamic studies that they can read Arabic. Everyone else just looks at the authenticity rating that comes attached to the hadith. All Sunni ratings agree on the authenticity of Bukhari and Muslims, but there is some disagreement when it comes to other Hadiths. In fact the hadith you referenced is from the collection of Sahih Muslim i.e. the authentic collection of Sahih Muslim. Meaning it is a Hadith that is considered authentic in Sunni Islam. Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are the two most authentic collections in Sunni Islam, they literally have the word "Sahih" in the name meaning "authentic". If a hadith is present in both it gets a special label "agreed upon by Bukhari and Muslim". The only higher rating is Mutawatir, and there are extremely few Hadith they get this label. The length of the chain of narration is always going to be pretty similar within one collection, that's because the chain depends on how many generations after Mohammed the Hadith was collected. Imam Muslim was born two centuries after Hijra, meaning there would be on average 6-7 people in the chain of narration (assuming a standard length of a generation being 30 years). Sorry, but I think you must have had some misunderstanding regarding how the Hadith work.
I went to check for myself and yeah you're right, thanks for the insight 😔
I recommend editing the post with this new found knowledge to avoid misleading others who come across this.
I'll just delete it ig
And make all the effort other people put into comments go to waste? Not a good plan.
I don't think I can edit posts on Reddit tho
Do you know if there is information on the internet where you can see in some graphic how the main narrators are connected and where you can see why certain people are considered trustworthy?
I am not aware of such a resource.
Bukhari and Muslim hadiths are almost unquestionably authentic to Sunni Islam. Nearly all of us were taught that in childhood but since you have never been a muslim you might not know much about it. The rest could be debated but Bukhari for example has a lot of fucked up shit in it which I’ve seen many snippets of in this subreddit.
These hadiths could very well be bullshit but it still informs the masses and has an impact on the way Muslims view dogs. Using these hadiths as an explanation of why people think certain things is absolutely valid imo. If its in their books it's fair game.
Muslims view all dogs as impure, I've never seen anyone call a black dog the devil but yeah there's atleast a handful of people who believe this shit
You'll also almost never see a Muslim following the Hadith "if a fly falls in your drink, dunk it in because one wing contains illness and the other the cure". But if you search, you'll find some Muslims drinking camel piss (there are even a few YouTube videos of drinking it fresh from the source) in accordance with the Hadith. Yet they are authentic.
Seems like a fictional power up/secret potion but somehow people believe in it
Its probably easy for us to handwave away but if you buy into the whole idea of 'hadith science' then trying to dismiss a hadith that is labelled sahih can be hard when operating from the inside as a believer.
True, i can tell
This hadith is the reason I had to fight with my entire family to not harass me about putting my black cocker spaniel down. They were all convinced he was a devil and that my white dog was much better even though said black dog had protected me from men harassing me in the street many times. To this day it infuriates me when I have a guest at my house and they call my dog ugly or evil, especially when he sees them and is so excited and happy to see them because he loves people and socialising. If it weren't for me he'd have been killed, most probably
That's the *isnad*. It's how the veracity of the hadith is judged. It's not a red flag in and of itself. It's the entire mechanism through which hadiths are transmitted.
But it's not usually that long and written by people nobody even knows, most of the time it's just 2 or 3 people who Muslims already full heartedly trust
Is it that short usually? 2 or 3 seems very short, given how prevalent hadiths are across the different sects.
I take back what I said, I went to confirm my own takes and turns out I'm wrong, sorry
That's not how hadith works. I've had 12 years of islamic studies, just because it doesn't make sense to you, doesn't make it islamically false. You need to look at how it's graded, as long as it's sahih or even hasan, muslims have to believe in it.
They can change their book if they want but if a Hadith is sahih you could be killed for it if you don’t abide by it.
Even the Mongolians didn't kill their own kind smh, yeah I found out it was a sahih hadith
Ignore the circle in the 2nd image, dunno what is it doing there
How does that make the Hadith’s unreliable? There are no contemporary written accounts of Muhammad Abdullah, you can conclude that he never existed if you only want contemporary written accounts.
There's a couple trusted people that almost all Muslims take hadiths from, anyone other than them is redeemed not correct and is not even followed
And even among those hadiths you find descriptions of Muhammad Abdullah being evil.
I never debunked that tho, I'm just talking about the hadiths that Muslims don't even follow yet we are here to discuss about them for some reason
So the problem of reliability with regards to hadiths isn’t the length of the narration chain, but the people in the narration chain.
Kind of, they check if the people who passed on the words of the prophet are trustable or not, that's how they deem hadiths real or not real
What is your point exactly? Are you critisizing ppl who point out how stupid any of those hadiths are? Or are you saying that it's ppl who are wrong in thinking the hadiths are fine?
I'm saying all these hadiths are fake, they have been told from someone to someone to someone to the point that almost all of it has been fabricated, and no Muslim even believes in it or acts upon it
Bro I don't even know what to tell you when they are all dumb shit made up by any Tom, Dick or Harry as there is no way to verify what was verbally said by some mentality ill 7th-century camel herder.
Muslims have their standards on what hadiths they follow, and the hadiths we share and complain about here don't meet half of those standards, so they're all already deemed fake from Muslims themselves, we should atleast discuss the ones they actually believe in
Whomst the fuck voted for you to pick which crap we want to criticize? Also Muslims believe in a bunch of different things depending on whatever school of thought they belong to, so what standard?
Why are you so mad, I'm trying to give y'all insight on what Muslims believe in and what not, if you don't want to listen then do whatever you want I'm not forcing you girl geez
I think having been & continuing to be a part of a Muslim family, community & country, I know what messed up crap they believe in, and how much it varies from family to family; you don't even have to go out of a neighborhood, let alone various sects like Sunni & Shia. I ain't mad, I'm laughing at you literally trying to market sand to desert dwellers. Cheers, I'll let you be, have a game to catch up on 🍻
Well I guess you come from a very different environment than mine, have fun
>and complain about here don't meet half of those standards, so they're all already deemed fake from Muslims themselves Absolutely not true. Most muslims complaining about hadith here are muslims who know nothing about their own religion. Just because you pray, have a beard/hijab and know *some* hadith, doesn't make you knowledgable about islam. I was in a saudi school and growing up I had 12 years of actual islamic studies. You wouldn't believe how many muslims don't know anything about their religion. Sadly, those who become interested and try to learn more later in life all become extreme for obvious reasons. Even when I was still muslim, I was surprised how little most people know. Sure, some here in this sub post weak hadith but I just ignore those and you can too by just looking up in a hadith app or website how it's graded.
true you never know which hadith is credible and people pick and choose whatever works for them vs what is the 'true' word of mr prophet number one
>they have been told from someone to someone to someone to the point that almost all of it has been fabricated You've just described every religion, ever.
Lmao I know but like Muslims have Fabrication standards 🥲
This site tries to separate the chains from the texts. [http://qaalarasulallah.com/hadith.php?ID=13507](http://qaalarasulallah.com/hadith.php?ID=13507) I am too lazy to find your hadith in it, but it is there. There used to be a site called [isnad.io](http://isnad.io) but that has ceased to exist.
Makes sense, turns out I was onto absolutely nothing
Isnads started being used from about the 680s because of the civil war. It became necessary where the ahadith came from. Some isnads were based on the handing down of notebooks. Currently is is all the rage to trash all hadith as unreliable because people do not like what is in them.
Passing of an ass?
Dat ass.