Witness

[Sardar Miyan]

What the Ayaat in Quran about witness? One man or two women? Thanks

[wanderer]

Firstly, this is only applicable in the matter of debt. Secondly, the second woman is only needed IF the first is not able to provide adequate witness. If she is, no need for second woman is needed. This is because back then, women had little education, and therefore there was a greater chance that they would err.
Regards
wanderer

[Sardar Miyan]

Is the same method applicable to Hadith narrations also as one person narratiing the Hadith is not reliable.

[wanderer]

I don't really understand what you are getting at here but this verse (2:282) is specifically talking about debt.
Regards
wanderer

[Sardar Miyan]

I just wanted to tell the Forum members if this rule can be applied to acertain if a Hadit narrations are
true since all Hadith narrations were passed on by only one person. I mean only the applicability.

[deleted]

Peace. So what then would be your perspective on all the Hadith that the Hadith collectors didn't include in their books?

[Sardar Miyan]

My contention is that all the Ahadith are unreliable as they paased on through umpteen number of poeople but the witness is only" ONE "!!!!

[Nura]

Salam all

These hadiths with one initial witness are called ' Ahad hadiths' . Not all hadiths are Ahad but majority are. The Quran calls for two witnesses for financial dealings but four for fornication. If we say at least two witnesses should be needed to take any ahadith seriously, then another person with a preference for four witnesses, can also quote the verse for fornication requiring four witnesses and say that hadiths that do not have four witnesses cannot be taken seriously. All these verses have a context and they should be applied within that context. Taking rulings out of context and applying them elsewhere may cause mayhem.

Quran says that in what ahadith other than the Quran will we believe in? The Quran goes out on a limb and declares mumins to believe only in Quran and follow only it's laws. The only reason for not following hadith is one of authority. The Quran gives no religious authority to ahadith, this is what matters.

Something can be the truth even if there is no witness present there. That is why the Quran speaks about being careful and not commiting sins and lying etc, when we are alone. Because there is always one witness present, God. God witnesses everything, even when we think there is no other human witness. A hadith can be true, even if it has zero witness or one, but the issue remains that ahadiths are not religiously binding.

[Sardar Miyan]

Because all the Hadith narrations are Ahad therefore not reliable. So witness for any transaction is also
applicable to Hadith also.Thoug Quran mentions not rely on Hadith but for most of Muslims treat the Ahadith on par with Quran. A renown Muslim Scholar has agreed with my point of vieiw therefore to keep the Muslims away from believing Ahadith I thought to write about two witnesses.

[Nura]

Salam brother Sardar Miyan

It is nice to hear that a traditional scholar agreed with you. But, brother with respect, I do not think that this two witness requirement is applicable here. Let me explain my point of view, during hadith transmission the first person is always the Prophet and then someone else who transmitted it from the prophet,  so they can always say that someone saw the prohet doing this or saying this and the prophet should be enough. And they will be right. The Quran was also written by only one person as the witness, the prophet, the prophet was also the only person to witness the revelation of verses most of the times. I am not saying that I believe that hadith and Quran were transmitted in the same way by the same people. Hadith was compiled centuries after the death of the prophet.  But, the point is most verses of the Quran had only one human witness and that is the prophet and we believe that one human when it comes to the Quran. These hadith believers can easily question us that then why not believe the prophet with hadith, it is him who said them! No one can prove this with certainty. But a possibilty that some hadiths are true is always there. But this is also true that nothing outside the Quran is religiously binding on us. After all every hadith cites the prophet as the source.

Keep in mind we also do not have contemporaneous complete copies of the Quran, the oldest complete copy of the Quran dates decades after the prophet. I believe in the Quran because of it's arguments and how it speaks to me, not because of any other reasons. Revelation does not require two people to witness it. This will be a weak argument and easily refuted by many people.

The best way that I found to call anyone to the Quran-centric approach was to ask them to show me a verse from the Quran, where any other source is given any religious authority. No one has been able to show me a verse till now. Most people become convinced from this argument of authority. Authenticity of hadiths has a lot of loopholes and most people can actually give really good arguments for authenticity of hadiths but no one till now could give me a justification for hadiths having any religious authority from the Quran.

The two witness requirement remains a requirement for debt, and in this day and age everything is recorded electronically which does not even need two witnesses. The point is to prevent fraud and to protect the weak, not the number of witnesses. The main idea is always to serve justice.

Two people witness requirement for hadiths is not a God approved testing method. It is no different than 19 ers method of mathematics to verify the Quran. This is not God approved, no where in the Quran does God require two human witnesses to verify religious verses. God never said that at least two human witnessess is required for something to be considered scripture or religiously binding. This two person rule has no connection with judging the authenticity or authority of hadiths.

[Sardar Miyan]

You are complicating the matter by mentioning Quran. The Quran is word of God and which was revealed Prophet and turn he memorized put it in writing and passed on to the Ummah. This is unique
 thing which cannot be compaired with the Hadith which is a set fairy tales brought up by Ajami people
distract Muslims from Book of Allah.The prophet asked the Ummah not write any Hadith as a result of
of which all Khulfa burnt their Hadith collections. Please dont compare Quran with Hadith. Thanks

[Nura]

Salam Sardar Miyan

I did not compare the Quran with hadith. Please read my post carefully. I have said the Quran and the hadith was not transmitted the same way. But the human source of the Quran is also the prophet. Why are you accepting Quran as an ahad transmission? The Quran is an Ahad transmission at the first level. After the prophet transmitted the quran to his scribes, the Quran was transmitted en masse, mutawatir. I hope u know this. At the first level the Quran revelation was only witnessed by the prophet. Also, not all hadiths are ahad, there are mutawatir hadiths!

Before anyone accuses me of being a traditionalist, I would like to say that I am Quran-centric, all my posts have always reflected that. I have never used hadiths to prove or disprove any religious issue.

With respect, you are oversimplifying a grave matter. And then using a ruling which was never meant to become a ruling to determine hadith authenticity. This is intellectually dishonest. With respect u r quoting information from the hadith whenever it serves your purpose! U r cherry picking , one should be consistent with their approach. Where in the Quran does it  say that the four caliphs were asked to burn hadiths? The hadith books say this. Where exactly in the Quran did u find this information that the prophet asked not to write anything else down from him? Again the source is hadith. Sorry to say , but your approach is not Quran-centric! You are using other sources to make claims about Islam. You cannot accept the hadiths whenever they have something favorable to say about your viewpoint but ignore the hadiths at other times. This is not intellectually honest. You are using hadith sources whenever you are finding them convenient. I have just pointed out logical loopholes in your approach.

There is no reason to require at least two witnesses to declare a hadith as religiously binding.  The Quran does not sanction this approach. There are many hadiths with more than one witness. These hadiths are called mutawatir hadiths. This is a fact. Are u then saying that mutawattir hadiths are religiously binding? First of all the claim u r making that all hadiths have one witness is untrue! Anybody can easily verify this. And then your approach will need to justify why exactly should we not follow mutawatir hadiths? Please explain to me then using your two witness theory why shouldn't people follow mutawatir hadiths?

The answer is simple. The Quran does not give religious authority to any other source. I think I have said enough about this in other posts as well. This is going to be my last post regarding this issue. Maybe we will not see eye to eye with this, but we have agreed on other topics previously, I will just agree to disagree with you brother and move on.

If you do go foreward with your plans, then I wish you all the best, and hope you don't face any problems. What you are attempting to do is admirable, calling people to God. May Allah reward you for your efforts brother.

[yahya]

Assalam alikum sardar miyan I was just wondering as a side note who is the renown muslim scholor who agreed with you about hadith I would like to know his name also I agree with you just too know ☺