Now rereading my comments/questions above, i say alhamdulillah for the explanation i received on another thread on this site to my above question.

2- Uloom al Hadith- Examining some proofs of those who reject the Sunnah
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1954594440034930732&hl=en

3- Uloom al Hadith- Defining basic hadith terminology by Navaid Aziz
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3982699405534429317&hl=en

The actual question i wish to pose is that i feel far more comfortable following hadeeth than before i started to read your articles, BUT i still do not feel fully comfortable with allowing those PARTICULAR hadeeth whoch seem to abrogate (surely a form of contradiction) quranic verses.

Edited for you.

Genuine question please:

What is the reason and meaning behind the statement that ‘hadeeth cannot contradict the quran’?
– Does this mean that hadeeth with apparently valid isnaad will be regarded as fabricated, if they seem to contradict the quran? If so, how does abrogation fir in here?
– Or do we simply mean that such a scenario could never occur?

I think both of M.M. Azami’s books.

“Using Zarabozo in contrast to Ibn Kathir and Jalalayn (you can add Ibn Ashur to the list as well, I just checked his tafseer and he makes no mention of hadith wrt to this ayah) makes for a very weak argument.”

Sorry took me a while to get back to this point, I was waiting for my answer. This chain of narration goes from me to sh. Waleed’s wife, to sh. Waleed Basyouni himself :)

“As for Sunnah… Waleed says it is well-known that the Qur’aan uses the term ‘dhikr’ to mean Sunnah. That is the tafseer of Ibn Mas’ood (and other Sahaabah) as mentioned by Ibn Al-Qayyim. He mentioned that Ibn Al-Qayyim had access to tafseer that we may not have available now.”

So, no it is not Zarabozo vs. Ibn Katheer, it is Ibn Katheer vs. Ibn Masood.
So take your pick.

Although, I don’t like saying Ibn Katheer vs. Ibn Masood, simply because no where in his tafseer or other books did Ibn Katheer showed any doubts in Sunnah not being preserved.
As I said before, some things are axiomatic and some mufassareen may not feel the need of stating them.

Khair, Sh. Waleed further said:

“Also, we see the term dhikr being used elsewhere in the Qur’aan where it evidently does not mean Qur’aan alone. For example, Allaah says ‘fas’aloo ahladh-dhikri in kuntum laa ta’lamoon’. Here the people of dhikr is not referring to people of Qur’aan alone. it is people of knowledge of the deen… the whole knowledge of the deen which includes the Qur’aan, Sunnah, statements of Sahaabah etc. The ayah that says Allaah will preserve the dhikr, he says, is also referring to the knowledge of the Deen, which includes Qur’aan, Sunnah, etc.

And as I mentioned, Allaah says
‘thumma innaa ‘alaynaa bayaanah’ (Qiyammah: 16-19)

that the explanation of the Qur’aan is going to be done for us by Allaah, and that explanation is in the form of the Sunnah and so is part of what He preserved, wallaahu a’lam”

With that, inshaAllah enough information has been made available for people to read and think, and for further research books have been suggested.

I do ask the readers to please make a sincere du’a to let the truth become clear. It is not from the Sunnah of Allah azzawjal to misguide any who sincerely asks Him for guidance, wAllahu ‘tala ‘alam.

InshaAllah we should be able to move to the next part :)

For example, the hadith of the fly falling into one’s cup should be dipped in completely. Nothing could confirm that as “consistent” so the “intellectuals” ignored it. Until science came to prove that there is an antidote on one side of the fly to the poison on the other. And then suddenly the “intellectuals” found it very worthwhile to quote. Just one example of how the aql has a limit, when competing with revelation.