Ijma And Tawatur In The Context Of Wuzu And Acts Which Nullify It
Wudu doesn’t necessarily clean anything, it just give you ihsaas of cleanliness and purity
Those who claim beard as Sunnah have a very broad definition of Sunnah and it includes akhbar-i-ahad for them as well. But no one ever claimed that it was initiated as a part of religion and transmitted through ijma of Sahaba asa religion. Their basis of argument is always Ahad. As for Salah and where to place hands, that is why they are not considered necessary parts of Salah. Amali tawatur losing its form while quoli tawatur not losing, seems like an inconsistency. The same way scholars can amend Sunnah ( as claimed ), the very scholars can amend Quran without even knowing. <font face=”inherit”>The definition of ijma and tawatur enatils that whenever any such thing is amended, the masses will be there to correct it which </font>unfortunately<font face=”inherit”> is not the case with ahad.</font>
And yet we can easily distinguish that from the very ijma and tawatur. If 1300 years are preserved ( for your satisfaction ) through ijma and tawatur, then based on simple extrapolation and theory of probability, the chances of any amendment in first 100 years become very nominal, which makes this evidence overwhelmingly strong. Unless one can counter it with an equally overwhelming evidence by showing a significant discord in the ijma and tawatur that is being transmitted as religion ( both Quran and Sunnah ).
Don’t we have a copy of the mushaf from Uthman (R) s time saved in some museum or something which we can compare to today’s mushaf?
The scholars of fiqh wouldn’t say that you could get sunnah from other than ahadeeth if I’ve understood correctly. The first thing they say when you start to talk about Hadith is how would you know how to pray without Hadith. This shows that they relied more heavily on them rather than the transmission of ijma and tawatur. And if the society was forced to accept them then all records of disagreement would be destroyed and it would be the major opinion to accept Hadith for sunnah and allow them to tweak it
Its of a former category and there has never been any disagreement on its staus as being a nawaqis of wuzu. The same has been transmitted through ijma and have been in practice since then. The best way to disprove it would be to present an equally compelling evidence of both practice and ijma where it is not considered a nawaqis of wuzu.
How do you know there were never any disagreements?