Quote:
Originally Posted by afchic
I am not trying to be difficult with this, I am really not. I am just trying to wrap my mind around what I have studied, what I have experienced, and what I read from the QPs.
I understand there are many different ways of practicing Islam. Wahabbism being one of the most extreme. With that being said, if all muslims can agree that Mohammed is the most perfect individual that ever lived, and therefore his Haddiths should be followed, then why all the different interpretations?
If there are different interpretations, what is there to say that one of these sects decides that maybe they should look at things in a new light?
|
Scholarly Consensus. Once the scholars agree - it becomes SCARED LAW and can NEVER be changed. Search here and it should come up...I've discussed at length here before on this with footnotes from RELIANCE OF THE TRAVELLER (get a copy
)...
Couple links on Scholarly Consensus:
http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/...5&postcount=11
http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/...nsensus&page=2
75-80% of the islamic jurisprudence is IDENTICAL. The disgreement is over the credibility of the different hadiths - which do you weight more heavily? This impacts the interpretation of the law SOME.
Here's the easiest example to explain it - Which story has more credibility based on the witnesses...(effectively "John told Mary that she saw Muhammed do this or say that" vs what "Tommy heard Susie say Muhammed did..." - do you belive the first or the second more? Which carries more weight)