Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

onager

(9,356 posts)
6. Some Muslims would agree with you.
Tue Nov 24, 2015, 08:44 AM
Nov 2015

Stuff written after Mohammed's death is in the hadiths, not the Koran. The hadiths, "sayings of the Prophet," are supposed to be quotes from Mohammed with a direct chain of evidence leading back to Mohammed and the original author of the hadith.

And if you believe that, you may also believe that I'm in Paradise preparing 144 virgins for us right now.

Being able to show a direct linkage back to Mohammed is hugely prestigious in Islam. So it's not surprising that by the 10th century, just a couple hundred years after the religion was invented, the hadiths had already turned into a giant headache. Many were obvious forgeries inserted to benefit specific families or push political agendas. So just like the Xian Bible, the hadiths had to be gone thru and "purified." Which didn't work for very long, like all such projects.

Today, some Muslims believe all hadiths are as sacred as the Koran. Others believe they're all unnecessary additions to the original Word Of Allah and should be junked. And many Muslims, again, treat the hadiths exactly the same way Xians treat the Bible - they pick and choose which hadiths are "authentic," based on their own ideas and prejudices.

For the 1.5 people out there who may be interested, the Hanafi collection is considered one of the most authoritative hadith compilations.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»Atheists & Agnostics»The Doomsday Ideology of ...»Reply #6