Edip Yuksel vs. Ali Sina
Round IV
Back
< > Next
|
Dear
Ali:
A participant of the forum, Mirror of Truth,
in another threat answered your argument. You were urging me to join
you in using hadith as a reliable evidence to incriminate Muhammad.
I am quoting his answer, since I agree with all of it and it will
save me time. I will answer some of other arguments of yours after
this excerpt from Mirror of Truth, whose answer is distinguished
with five asterisks:
*****
I'm
writing my first post regarding the actual debate and I note that
some classic AS double talk is beginning to creep into the flow of
debate.
On the one hand - AS bluffs his hand by
stating:
|
Quote:
|
|
"On
the contrary! I will show that the Quran is full of errors
and absurdities and it can’t be a book of revelation
unless the revealer was Satan. The reason I w
ant to clarify the question of hadith is to demonstrate the
fallacy of the position of those who totally deny them. Once
that is established I will have no need for hadith."
|
Well
he launches into an awful lot of pre-amble if he has no need for
hadith. Edip has made it explicit that he does not need nor has any
desire to discuss the hadith.
During this pre-amble AS lists two
possibilities as the motives for the fabrications which I accept.
These are namely:
1. Glorification of an idolized leader. This
would explain hadiths for example that report that Muhammad's
manliness was equivalent to 30 men or whatever number it was. In
trying to make their hero macho they do not realize the absurdity
they create - and the inadvertent slander they commit.
2. The fabrications of enemies whether they
be hypocrite 'believers'/converts or or open enemies. This explains
a great many hadiths that are covert digs at Muhammad. An example is
the cherished hadith of the 'miraj' where Moses acts as the wiser
guide to Muhammad's alleged negotiations with God. Obviously this is
the fabrication of a Jewish convert who asserts the superiority of
Moses' bargaining/knowledgeability.
What Ali Sina discounts and does not mention
at all is that there is another group of hadiths that were
introduced (or supported) in the folklore in order to support the
actions of corrupt leaders. If corrupt leaders/mullahs could justify
their pedophilia or desires to rape and pillage by introducing or
supporting such hadiths then having the absolute power there would
be little reason for them to reject such hadith. Thus the hadith
that obviously makes Muhammad look evil/wicked/stupid etc. become
canonized because it meets the secondary need of the corrupt
leaders.
Thus there are motives for these hadith that
AS has completely ignored.
The sum of it is that whatever the motive
for ahadith - none are required for the purposes of following God's
system - not one.
AS has stated he has no requirement for
them. None of us are shocked and the position to go on sans ahadith
is very tenable. They are fabrications. The absurdity they contain
is enough to convince the free-thinker of that. I would advise that
AS lets go of his love for the hadith that I'm sure rivals the
mullahs in order to make a real contribution to the debate. Let's
move on from the nonsense of ahadith and see what arguments he has
left now.
*****
|
Dear Edip,
You and your friend Mirror
of Truth should practice patience. We will soon come to the Quran.
Mirror
the truth says I did not mention the hadiths that were fabricated to support
the actions of corrupt leaders. This hypothesis is very
unlikely. I find it quite implausible that leaders get together and pay
the scholars who had dedicated their lives to the preservation of what
they thought to be the divine guidance to write that Muhammad married a 6
year old child and consummated his marriage three years later just because
they lusted after 9 year old girls and wanted an excuse. As Ayatollah
Montazeri wrote to me, it is against human nature to have sexual
feelings for children. I totally agree with him. However Muhammad was
a sick man and not a normal human. I doubt we have many “corrupt
leaders” who had filled their harem with 9 year old children. Normal
people find sex with children abhorrent and disgusting. If these rulers
were normal they most likely were not attracted to children. Pedophilia is
not a vice that everyone can do. It is not in human nature.
However,
drinking is something many like. The so called “corrupt rulers” drank
as many of them still do. If that argument had any value, it
would have been more likely for these rulers to fabricate hadiths
licensing drinking than hadiths that legitimize pedophilia.
These
are all excuses of desperate believers who can't stand facing the truth
and can't let go. They rather accept any absurdity than facing the truth.
The perceived solid ground on which they were standing is gone, they are
falling and drowning and desperately try to grab at anything to restore their
faith. Muslims would do all mental gymnastics to avoid accepting the
truth. But they only fool themselves. Facts speak loudly and they are
stubborn.
|
I
want to elaborate little bit more about motivation in fabrication of
hadiths. Ali Sina is treating hadith sources in a simplistic way. I
recommend him to read Mahmud Abu Rayya's book
Adwa
' 'ala al-Sunna al-Muhammadiya (Cairo: 1377/1958). It is one of the
best criticism of history of hadith collection and procedures. The
book allocates 60 pages to motives for fabricating hadith and
documents many of them. People fabricated hadith to even advertise
the dates of a particular town, such as, Ajwa. They fabricated
hadiths to promote submission to the rule Kings. They fabricated
hadith to justify the massacres and tortures of Umayyad or Abbasid
kings…. Ali Sina ignores all these motives and wants us to believe
that any hadith depicting Muhammad as a violent person must be
accepted without question! One of his suggested criteria for
accepting hadith is if "It is consistent with the character of
Muhammad" found in his hostile imagination or in other dubious
hadith books! Accepting this offer is more difficult than to swallow
the prophecies of his favorite psychics. |
I
do not deny that most of the hadiths are fabricated and of course they
have been fabricated for one motive or another. However the fact that many
hadiths are fabricated does not invalidate the correct ones. As I said it
is not difficult to separate truth from falsehood, especially if we see
consistency in those hadiths and confirmation in he Quran.
Back
< > Next
Index
to this debate
|
