Salaat in the Qur’an is NOT Ritual Prayer? Examining the claim of some Quranist.

“Shall I seek other than Allah as a source of law, when He has revealed to you this book that in places explains itself? Those who received the scripture recognize that it has been revealed from your Lord, truthfully. You shall not harbor any doubt.” (Qur’an 6:114)

I start off with this particular verse because many of the misguided individuals who follow one or more of the competing sects of the Quranist religion will often quote this as saying that the Qur’an has everything you need to understand all aspects of Islam.

However, they like to rely upon a poorly translated version of the Arabic mufassalan as ‘explained in details‘.

Interpretation is important.  How we understand various verses in the Qur’an is also very important.

“O you who have believed, be supporters of Allah, as when Jesus, the son of Mary, said to the disciples, “Who are my supporters for Allah ?” The disciples said, “We are supporters of Allah.” And a faction of the Children of Israel believed and a faction disbelieved. So We supported those who believed against their enemy, and they became dominant.” (Qur’an  61:14)

“Who is it that would loan Allah a goodly loan so He may multiply it for him many times over? And it is Allah who withholds and grants abundance, and to Him, you will be returned.” (Qur’an 2:245)

You alone we worship and you alone we ask for help.”  (Qur’an 1:5)

You can see that a whole multitude of Quraniyoon from Sam Gerrans/ Joseph Islam/ Free-Minds/ Monotheist Group they struggle with the verses above.

Why is that? It is simple. Because if we were to allow the Qur’an to speak on it’s apparent meaning than all Muslims, like myself, including those who follow the Quraniyoon religion like  Sam Gerrans, Shabir Ahmed, Rashad Khalifa, Joseph Islam, Aisha Musa, everyone at the Free Minds and Monotheist Groups could all rightly be accused of shirk.

Shirk-associating partners/objects/ with Allah.

Every one of us uses and employs the use of the internet, youtube, social media as helping to get across our message. We are not relying solely upon Allah (swt), that is if we are to take this verse on a very literal basis.


Take for example

Look at how Quranist juggle and struggle with Qur’an 1:5

The Clear Quran, Dr. Mustafa Khattab You ˹alone˺ we worship and You ˹alone˺ we ask for help.

Though Mustafa Khatta is NOT a Qur’an Only Muslim is it not interesting in a translation self-described as ‘The CLEAR Quran’ that we have ‘alone’ with the apostrophe.

[The Monotheist Group] (2011 Edition) You alone we serve, and You alone we seek for help.

Or in the case of Shabir Ahmed of ‘Our Beacon’ a shameful and total butchering of the translation to avoid the problem altogether. Behold!

Shabbir Ahmed (Realizing these facts), we affirm to obey Your Commands only and ask You to help us as we do that.
Rashad Khalifa You alone we worship; You alone we ask for help.

Sam Gerrans –

Thee alone we serve And from Thee alone we seek help.

So you can see that the ‘Quranist‘ struggle with this all the while accusing those who follow Islam of shirk.

As I digress why would I assert this?  I assert this because each and every one of these various competing self-proclaimed Qur’aniyoon groups all have to DEFINE the ARABIC language.

They will assert that this word means this or it means that.  Guess what they rely upon?  They rely upon Arabic lexicons, dictionaries, secondary sources to define what the words mean in the Qur’an itself.   This brings us to their preserved translation of mufassalan. -that which explains itself at places.

“Shall I seek other than Allah as a source of law, when He has revealed to you this book fully detailed? Those who received the scripture recognize that it has been revealed from your Lord, truthfully. You shall not harbor any doubt.” (Qur’an 6:114)

If this verse is understood in the way that the self-proclaimed Quraniyoon relies upon than it is an error.

There is nowhere in the Qur’an in which a list of all the words are given with their various understandings, imports, meanings, and nuances. Only the meanest of people would argue against this most important fact.

So if we are to look at the following verses above and taken them literally it would mean.

  1. The Qur’an has everything inside of it -which it doesn’t.  In fact, the very verse that says it is ‘fully detailed‘ does not ironically tell us what this entails!  You can only use deduction to say ‘all matters relating to jurisprudence or law‘.
  2.  That Jesus was blaspheming in asserting that Allah (swt) has supporters or helpers or that the Creator of the Universe would need assistance or support.
  3. The blasphemous assertions that Allah (swt) needs loans or is capable of receiving loans.
  4.  The idea that every time someone goes to see a doctor, lawyer, specialist of any kind that we are all going against “you alone we ask for help.”    In this regards Dr. Shabir Ahmed alone was devious enough to recognize this, and thus, blatantly shredded the Arabic text in his molested translation.

Because I am not afraid to show what the opposing views are let me give you some attempts by a self-proclaimed adherent of the Quran only religion whom will tell you that the Salaah is NOT ritual prayer.

Here is one such video.

I would encourage you to watch the above video in its entirety and then watch the following video:

So in the first video Salaah is simply doing good things.  Personally, even in the first video, I felt Joseph really struggled to explain the ‘middle salaah‘.

“Be ever mindful of prayers, especially the middle prayer; and stand up before Allah in devotion. (Qur’an 2:238)

It is such a strained reading of the Arabic text.  It is another example of a human being making the Qur’an conform to their thought process rather than the other way around.

However, this person cannot escape the following verse in the Qur’an.

O you who believed! When the call is made for congregational prayer then proceed to the remembrance of Allah and leave trade; that is better for you if you knew. And when the prayer has ended, disperse within the land and seek of Allah’s grace, and remember Allah often that you may succeed.” (Qur’an 62:9-10)

I have done Jospeh favour above by translating the Arabic word Juma -as a congregation.

At 3:48 he says, ‘Is this additional third Salaah, it is it SEEMS SO.‘   You have to ask yourself at this point if the Qu’ran produces certainty or if it gives rise to conjecture like this what is the point?

Does that sound ‘fully detailed‘ to you?

@ 3:52 Joseph says, ‘Remember that this that once we understand that the salaah sessions have nothing to do with rituals than we won’t be so nit-picky about the number of Salaahs , the Qur’an gives us a minimum of two salaahs a day, two salaah sessions...’

@5:26  “This is my opinion once again this is my opinion.”

Again this person just like many other self-proclaimed Quraniyoon do not have cogent arguments or even a very clear thought process behind the things that they are saying.

So let us get this right. The Salah is not a ritual prayer but yet Allah demands that we meet to discuss the Qur’an in the morning and the evening?   So  Salaah is not a ritual in terms of movements and directions, but it certainly is a ritual in terms of the timings we have to meet?

The other thing is Joseph is quite literally all over the place in that this verse most assuredly does instruct a timing for congregational prayers.

All Muslim groups, competing groups through mass transmitted practice have held congregational prayers on Friday.  The only dissenting view here is from these people who come online and say ‘this is my opinion‘ and this ‘seems so‘.

From the same people who claim the rest of us deny what is ‘fully detailed‘ and ‘clear‘.

Remember that Joseph says at 4:04  “The Qur’an gives us a minimum of two salaahs a day.” 

Now think about this, people.  If salaah is supposed to be just reflecting on Allah, reading the Qur’an and being a good person why even emphasize a number?  Why even say 2?   Why even emphasizes timing?  This all seems very redundant, especially from a creator that has given all things in detail.

The other thing that I wish Joseph would think about is this. If he says it could be any day, these congregational salaah’s than why is he so certain that ‘guard the middle salaah‘ isn’t just talking about this middle salaah and not extremes in behavior?

Or maybe -who knows that he will walk this position back.


Self-proclaimed adherents of the  ‘Quran Only Religion’ are certainly not in agreement on the very basic issue of Salaah.


Now seeing that these sects are not in agreement with one another as some of them indeed agree that Salaah is a type of ritual prayer I focused this article on those who don’t agree with it.


I find that they have nothing cogent nor consistent. Saying, “this is my opinion” or, “it seems so” is not from a book that ‘contains all the details‘ but from a mind befuddled and confused.


May Allah (swt) guide us to that which is beloved to Allah (swt).



Filed under Uncategorized

13 responses to “Salaat in the Qur’an is NOT Ritual Prayer? Examining the claim of some Quranist.

  1. Mmhhmmm.. So i think, what you’re saying is that these Quran only Muslims need to have more solid and concrete grounds, am i right? Because salaah is one of the most important things in Islam.

    I like how you give some examples of taking some verses too literallly. Some Quran only Muslims use the verse “your job (O Muhammad) is only to deliver (balagh)” (3:20).
    They use verses like these to conclude that the job of the messenger is simply to deliver like a post man- just deliver and his job is done- like FedEx.

    In reality, if taken a greater look, the verse is actually saying that, if we can’t convince a person to accept Islam, then our job is only to deliver. It simply means that our job is not to force someone to accept Islam, instead, just deliver the message to them. So this verse is to contrast between forcing and delivering rather than delivering and explaining, demonstrating, the verse.
    If the job of the messenger is simply being a fed ex, than God might have just sent an angel or just send down the book without messenger (like dropped from the sky or something).

    • The example you have is a great example. The Prophet saw was obviously a judge in matters of dispute as the Quran has situations and circumstances where people are judged.

      So yes more than a mail man.

      • More than just a judge, also, i must say. He is a role model, he led the believers from being in the worst social state (makkah) into the best. There’s certainly so much to learn from the sira. It is easier to deduce the manhaj from the Quran by looking at the prophet’s saw mission.

      • Absolutely! The interesting thing is these people who claim the Prophet (saw) was simply just a mail man and didn’t clarify, explain, expound, elucidate etc have absolutely no qualms with the following:

        1) Some of them have said Rashad Khilfa is a prophet -so they follow his exegesis of the Qur’an. This exegesis includes removing two verses from the Qur’an.

        2) The groups that split off from him because they found that the 19 theory didn’t pass muster among them Shabir Ahmed Galaxy Dastak and his cult -like forum in which I challenged him to debate on the issue of the Prophet (saw) being literate -and was subsequently barred from the forums. (Thanks by the way to Hamza Abdul Malik from IPCI in Queens New York ) for sticking up for me at the time.

        3) The Monotheist Group /Free Minds who split and argue vehemently on their forums it gets brutal.

        4) The bulk of Indo-Pakistanis self styled intellectual Qur’an only Muslims who have never demonstrated any competence in the Arabic language.

        5) Us converts who are disillusioned with traditional Islam and yet feel the pull of the Holy Qur’an and thus we grab up a few lexicons and Arabic/English dictionaries and we are off to the races.

        This is what they have. So isn’t it odd for a book that they claim is “highly detailed” -and “clear” that they spend an awful allot of time speculating, guessing, musing over certain verses of the Holy Qur’an and that’s fine.

        But If Imam Shafi’i, or Malik, or Imam As Sayuti or Az Zamakshari were to do the same (people who are albeit way way more qualified) than of these people, so if these past luminaries did exactly what these people do on their forums (albeit with more grasp and depth) than it is absolutely wrong!

        That is a laugh riot! Actually I take that back its utterly shameful.

  2. Abdullah

    Salaam my brothers in Islam,

    May Allah bless you and guide us all to Siraatee Mustaqeem!

    The Quran does not say that the Messenger was nothing more than a post man! The Quran must be understood as a complete text and not just taken out of context. The Qur’an makes it clear that Allah sent the Messenger (AS) to Recite the Verses, purify them, teach them the Book and Wisdom. But here’s the catch brothers… what do these things actually mean Qur’anically speaking? After a careful study of Qur’anic Verses you will see that ALL these refer back the Quran itself! Here’s my analysis:

    1 – Reciting (Yatloo) the Verses (Ayatihi) : I think it’s obvious that this is referring to the Quran! You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to figure this one out.

    2 – Purifying them (yuzakkeehim): Question: Who is the one who purifies? Allah or His Prophet? Read verses 2:174, 3:77, 4:49, and 24:21. It’s obvious that it is Allah ALONE who purifies whom He wills.

    3 – Teaching them the Book (wayu’Allimuhumu alkitab): The Prophet didn’t just recite the Verses and say “Have a nice day”. He obviously sat with the believers and taught them the Quran. I mean you can’t just know the Qur’an by hearing it once! The Prophet must have recited it to them over and over again until they memorized and understood it.

    4 – And Wisdom (walhikmati): The Qur’an itself is the Wisdom! Wisdom is simply an attribute of the Quran. Just like Guidance, Mercy, Good tidings, Healing, Blessing, a Light, Clear proof, Criterion are all attributes of the Book.

    Consider the following Verses:
    “This is what We recite to you, [O Muhammad], of [Our] verses (Ayati) and the precise [and wise] message (waththikrilhakeem)”. {3:58}

    “Alif-Lam-Ra. These are the Verses of the Book (the Quran) Al-Hakim. (tilka ayatulkitabilhakeem)”. {10:1}

    “That is from what your Lord has revealed to you (awha ilayka), [O Muhammad], of wisdom (mina alhikmati)”. {17:39}

    “Ya-seen. By the wise Qur’an. (Walqur-anilhakeem)”. {36:1-2}

    “And indeed there has come to them news (in this Quran) wherein there is (enough warning) to check (them from evil), Perfect wisdom (Hikmatun baalighatun) (this Quran), but (the preaching of) warners benefit them not”. {54:4-5}

    As you can see brothers, The Wisdom in these Verses is referring to the Qur’an itself. How can we say this is referring to the Hadeeth literature??? So are you telling me that the believers had to wait 200 years after the Prophet (AS) died for Bukhari and Muslim to come along with the Wisdom??

    All of Allah’s Books came with Wisdom! Read the following Verse:

    “And (remember) when Allah took the Covenant of the Prophets (annabiyyeena), saying: “Take whatever I gave you from the Book (kitabin) and Hikmah (wahikmatin)”. So, was Musa (AS) given another book other than the Torah which contained wisdom in it?? And was Eisa (AS) given another book other than the Injeel which contained Wisdom?? Come one man!

    I can never understand why we don’t pay any attention to the Qur’an! We are too busy with what the Ulema, the Fuqaha, the Mufassireen, the Muhaditheen, the Shiyookh, and the Imams say. I’ll take Allah’s Book over these any day thank you very much.

    Salaam brothers.


    • Bismillah ir rahman ir raheem,

      Salam Abdullah, first and foremost your comments are not relating to the gross mistake that self proclaimed “Quran Only” Muslims have made concerning the salaah.

      The mistake that they make is very similar to the one you have made in your comment here.

      Cherry picking words in context that suit you. Example being thus,

      “After a careful study of Qur’anic Verses you will see that ALL these refer back the Quran itself! Here’s my analysis:”

      This is patently false. Only a reckless reading of the Holy Qur’an would yield such results.

      We have dealt with that in our article here:

      One such quote from the Holy Qur’an itself is enough to absolutely repudiate the claims made by Abdullah above.

      “And Allah will teach him the Book and Wisdom (hikma) the Law and the Gospel.” (Holy Qur’an 3:48)

      It would certainly be odd if we understood this to be, “And Allah will teach him the Book, and the Qur’an and the Law and the Gospel.”

      Notice here that Hikmah is juxtaposed along side both the Torah and the Injeel with each being made distinct from one another.

      What is odd about the claims made by brother Abdullah and the rest of the self proclaimed Quran Only Muslims is that they do believe that the Prophet Muhammed (saw) was in fact simply just a mailman.

      So it is in tongue in cheek when they say otherwise.

      We can ask Abdullah for example.
      1) Was Prophet Muhammed (saw) ever a judge for the Muslims?

      2) If the Qur’an is clear in all matters why would the Prophet (saw) need to unpack it’s message for anyone?

      3) A follow up to point 2 above is hikma itself implies penetrating insights and understanding that may not be readily available to anyone. So again as along point 2 we can see this is not the case.

      Example being:

      “And marry not women whom your fathers married, except what has already passed; indeed it was shameful and most hateful, and an evil way.” (Holy Qur’an 4:22)

      This also applies equally to a women a man’s father has married contractually and to women he has had intercourse with outside of marriage.

      Although the Holy Qur’an is not clear on this point. So this is a case of hikma –or discernment. Or other jurist may call it analogical reasoning.

      It’s also pretty obvious when one has even a cursory understanding of these various supposedly ‘Quran Only’ sects that they themselves come to vastly different understandings themselves over something like the Salaah.

      Let’s leave traditionalist and hadith centric Muslims alone for a moment the chaos that reigns among “Qur’an Only” Muslims is equally if not more embarrassing.

      So the very bizarre position of the “Quran Only” Muslims like brother Abdullah with his hadith didn’t come until 200 years latter and makes no attempt at all to interact with Orientalist Harold Motzki (Not a Muslim) who has repudiated this claim.

      The very bizarre position is that o.k the Prophet (saw) wasn’t simply a mail man o.k check.

      However, some how the wisdom that the Prophet (saw) imparted to his community was not even attempted to passed on?

      Lets look at Abdullah’s closing statement:

      ““And (remember) when Allah took the Covenant of the Prophets (annabiyyeena), saying: “Take whatever I gave you from the Book (kitabin) and Hikmah (wahikmatin)”. So, was Musa (AS) given another book other than the Torah which contained wisdom in it?? And was Eisa (AS) given another book other than the Injeel which contained Wisdom?? Come one man!”

      Indeed Come on man! It is a wonder how he could make a statement like this and not reflect upon it.

      ““Take whatever I gave you from the Book (kitabin) and Hikmah (wahikmatin)”

      So lets plug in Abdullah’s logic here:

      “Take what ever I give you from the Book and the Book” Isn’t that redundant?

      Also note that Abdullah in a very sly way says “So was Moses (AS) given another BOOK other than the Torah which contained wisdom in it?? and was Eisa (AS) given another BOOK other than the Injeel which contained Wisdom?? Come on man!”

      I could press Abdullah on the Injeel=a book to begin with but I’ll let that slide…..for now.

      Where does this book book stuff come from Abdullah? You do know that Muslims believe that the hadith started as ORAL TRADITIONS.

      You are aware of this correct? So when a person understands it as the Torah and the Hikmah -moses judgement , insights than it becomes clear as a day.

      When we understand it as the Injeel and Jesus insights it becomes clear as day.

      The other issues that self proclaimed Qur’an Only Muslims can ‘t seem to wrap their heads around is why doesn’t Allah (swt) simply send the revelation DIRECTLY to all of us.

      Why use Moses, Jesus, Muhammed (peace and blessings be upon them all) at all? Why the use of these intermediaries?

      Here is the total truth about all these self proclaimed Qur’an only Muslims rather it be brother Abdullah above, Sam Gerrans, Shabir Ahmed and Galaxy Dastak, or Monotheist Group, or Rashad Khilafa, or Free Minds or any of them is that you will NOT FAIL to go to their forums and web pages and see countless discussions, debates, and arguments over the UNDERSTANDING of certain verses and words in the Holy Qur’an.

      So imagine that! So it’s o.k for these Qur’an Only Muslims to argue, and debate, and analyze and muse over certain words and terms and phrases in the Qur’an and that’s FINE.

      But if the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) were to explain, elaborate, elucidate, extrapolate , muse, ponder, reflect over and than this was picked up by his companions and passed down ORALLY…

      Than no we can’t have that! It’s a bizarre double standard at its finest.

      Lastly maybe Abdullah can find that conclusive verse ANY WHERE in the Holy Qur’an that tells us to take the Qur’an alone.

      I have looked for it and I have looked for it and I cannot find it.

      I have however found two verses you people THINK advocates that position.

      “Allah! There is no god but He: of a surety He will gather you together against the Day of Judgment, about which there is no doubt. And whose hadith can be truer than Allah’s?” (Holy Qur’an 4:87)

      Who would argue against this point? Human beings can deliver mercy and compassion but who can be more merciful and compassionate than the one who is The Most Merciful & The Most Compassionate?

      Thus hadith can be true but Allah’s hadith is the most true; for who can be truer than Allah?

      For example in hopes that this clear to those whom Abdullah and the Qur’an Only people are leading astray on this matter.

      “Shall I seek other than Allah for judge, when He it is Who hath revealed unto you (this) Scripture, fully explained? Those unto whom We gave the Scripture know that it is revealed from your Lord in truth. So be not among the doubters.” (Holy Qur’an 6:114)

      So the verse above makes it clear that only Allah (swt) is the judge. Yet we find the following:

      “The woman or man found guilty of sexual intercourse – lash each one of them with a hundred lashes, and do not be taken by pity for them in the religion of Allah, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a group of the believers witness their punishment.”
      (Holy Qur’an 24:2)

      Now dear reader if you do not see with your own eyes that HUMAN BEINGS are very much involved in the case above, producing proofs, evidences, make judgement etc -than may Allah bless you!

      In fact I hope one day we get to see one a “Qur’an Only” village, commune, city, etc because than we get to see the real life implementation of many of these verses.

      That should make for a real treat!


      “When the Prophet disclosed a hadith in confidence to one of his consorts, and she then divulged it (to another), and Allah made it known to him, he confirmed part thereof and repudiated a part. Then when he told her thereof, she said, “Who told you this? “He said, “He told me Who knows and is well-acquainted (with all things).” (Holy Qur’an 66:3)

      It would be very difficult to imagine a Messenger of Allah (swt) confirming part of a hadith (The Qur’an) and repudiating part of a hadith (The Qur’an)if the word hadith was used exclusively of the Holy Qur’an. This is the death blow to the position of which ‘Qur’an only Muslims‘ are unable to escape from.

      So dear readers you can see that our brother Abdullah and the myriad competing Qur’an Only sects have no solid basis for their claims.

      With Allah is the victory.

      • IGotQuestions

        So tell us then which so called hadiths should we accept? Sunni? Shia? Sufi? The so called ‘Ibadhi’ sect that you supposedly follow now? Then after selecting the sect, which subgroup hadiths will you then accept? Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi, Hanbali, 12r Shia, Zaidi
        Shia, Ismaili Shia, Dawoodi Bohra, etc. What a complete and utter mockery of the religion.

      • So tell us which of these Qur’an only groups got it right or are you going to dodge the question and say “I’m a Muslim only I follow the Qur’an only” I mean which of you got it right? Obviously you don’t pay close attention to what I write at all. Me following the ‘Ibadi’ if you read the article I maintained that I still have a Prima-Qur’an perspective and always will. You must have missed that.

        The problem with you Qur’an rejectors because that is what you are in essence. Hence your complete inability to interact in any meaningful way with any of the points that I brought up to Abdullah.

        So which group of Qur’an Only Muslims do we follow? Is salaah prayer? Is it five times a day? Is it three times a day? It is a gathering , is a reminder to do good?

        One is reminded of the following verse.

        ” And they have no knowledge thereof. They follow but a guess, and lo! a guess can never take the place of the truth..” (Holy Qur’an 53:28)

    • IGotQuestions

      Well said brother Abdullah. Stick to the Quran and not the vast amount of disarray and confusion and contradiction that is found in the ahadith.

      • Ah if it were only that simple. The absolute Godsend that the various competing sects and divisions among the “Quran only sects” the absolute Godsend is that the arrival of such groups and their infighting proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is simply not that easy.

        So I find that statement to be absolutely candy.

  3. Abdullah

    My brother in Islam,

    May Allah bless you and your family.

    I think I have not made myself clear enough or you are missing the point! When I said: “After a careful study of Qur’anic Verses you will see that ALL these refer back the Qur’an itself”. I was referring to Verses 2:129, 2:151, 3:164, and 62:2 where it specifically mentions the Messenger (AS) who recites to them the Verses, purifies them, teachers them the Book and Wisdom. I was saying that the Wisdom here specifically refers to the Quran because it is an attribute. How do I know this? Because Allah Himself says it:

    “Alif-Lam-Ra. These are the Verses of the Book (the Qur’an) Al-Hakim. (tilka ayatulkitabilhakeem)”. {10:1}

    “Ya-seen. By the wise Qur’an. (Walqur-anilhakeem)”. {36:1-2}

    Allah is saying: These are the “VERSES of a BOOK of WISDOM” and “By the WISE QUR’AN”. Just like Allah says that the Qur’an is Guidance and Mercy:

    “And We had certainly brought them a Book (bikitabin) which We detailed by knowledge (fassalnahu ala ilmin) – as guidance (hudan) and mercy (warahmatan) to a people who believe”. {7:52}

    Surely, you’re not suggesting that the ‘Guidance’ and the ‘Mercy’ are 2 separate things?? They’re both referring to the Qur’an which are both ATTRIBUTES of the Allah’s Book!

    Here’s another verse to ponder over:

    “And We had already given Moses and Aaron the criterion (alfurqana) and a light (waDiyaa’an) and a reminder (wathikran) for the righteous”. {21:48}

    The fact that Allah mentions 3 things in the Verse above does NOT mean they’re referring to 3 different things brother. It simply means that the Torah that was given to Moses and Harun (peace by upon them both) was a Criterion, a Light, and a Reminder for the righteous! They’re simply attributes of the Torah!

    Consider the following Verse which is directed at the Wives of the Prophet (AS):

    “And remember what is recited (yutla) in your houses of the verses of Allah (ayatillahi) and wisdom (walhikmati). Indeed, Allah is ever Subtle and Acquainted [with all things]”. {33:34}

    Well, how exactly did the Wives of the Prophet RECITE (Yutla) the Wisdom if it wasn’t the Qur’an??? I can’t imagine Aisha sitting down in her home RECITING something like “I heard Abdullah Ibn Umar say that he heard the Messenger of Allah (AS) say: the best of you are those who are best to their wives”. Was she reciting it like she recited the Quran in a melodious voice? That would be be very strange indeed!

    Here’s another Verse to ponder over:

    He grants Hikmah (alhikmata) to whom He pleases, and he, to whom Hikmah (alhikmata) is granted, is indeed granted abundant good. But none remember (will receive admonition) except men of understanding (olool-albaab). {2:269}

    Allah says that He grants Wisdom to Whom He wills and that ONLY men of understanding will remember (or receive admonition). Notice the words ‘Olool-albaab’ in Arabic which translates to Men of understanding. Well, who are these men of understanding?? Pay attention to the next verse:

    “It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise – they are the foundation of the Book – and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah . But those firm in knowledge say, “We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord.” And no one will be reminded except those of understanding (olool-albaab)”. {3:8}

    The men of understanding are those who believe in ALL of the Qur’an and that it contains 2 types of Verses. Again, it relates back to the Qur’an itself!

    Here’s another verse:

    “[This is] a blessed Book which We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], that they might reflect upon its verses (liyaddabbaroo ayatihi) and that those of understanding would be reminded (olooal-albab)”. {38:29}

    The men of understanding are those who REFLECT upon the VERSES! Again, relating back the the Qur’an!

    Here’s another verse for you brother:

    “Who listen to speech (alqawla) and follow the best of it. Those are the ones Allah has guided, and those are people of understanding (oloo al-albab)”. {39:18}

    This verse is talking about the Quran (read the context) and it’s saying that the men of understanding are those who LISTEN to the speech (The Qur’an) and FOLLOW the best of it.

    Again and again Allah refers back to the Quran! And yet we still insist on looking for answers outside of Allah’s Book. Can’t we see that the Qur’an is completely consistent with itself???

    You said:
    “Take what ever I give you from the Book and the Book” Isn’t that redundant”.
    I don’t know why you cannot see that the wisdom is an ATTRIBUTE of the BOOK?? Just like guidance is an attribute, mercy is an attribute, glad tidings is an attribute? They’re not redundant at all and I find it very strange that you’d even say this.

    You said:
    “Lastly maybe Abdullah can find that conclusive verse ANY WHERE in the Holy Qur’an that tells us to take the Qur’an alone.”

    Ask yourself this question brother: What did the Prophet Muhammed (AS) follow? He ONLY followed that which was REVEALED to him:

    “Say, [O Muhammad], “I do not tell you that I have the depositories [containing the provision] of Allah or that I know the unseen, nor do I tell you that I am an angel. I only follow (attabi’u) what is revealed to me.” Say, “Is the blind equivalent to the seeing? Then will you not give thought?”. {6:50}
    See also verses 6:106, 7:203, 10:15, 46:9.

    You said:
    “Where does this book book stuff come from Abdullah? You do know that Muslims believe that the hadith started as ORAL TRADITIONS.”

    Well guess what? This is exactly what the Jews did before us and look where it got them! The Jewish Rabbis say that Moses was given the WRITTEN TORAH and also the ORAL Torah. They uphold the ORAL TORAH which is also known as the Talmud and they forget above the Torah. Consider this statement by Jewish Rabbis:

    “The “Written Torah” was transcribed by Moses “from the mouth of the Almighty” and is contained within the Torah scroll. The “Oral Torah” incorporates the traditions handed down from Sinai but not (initially) put in writing, as well as the interpretations and rulings formulated by the sages of each generation”.

    Apparently, it wasn’t until the second century after Moses (AS) that the Rabbi’s started to write down these ORAL traditions:

    “This decline in the number of knowledgeable Jews seems to have been a decisive factor in Rabbi Judah the Prince’s decision around the year 200 C.E. to record in writing the Oral Law. For centuries, Judaism’s leading rabbis had resisted writing down the Oral Law. Teaching the law orally, the rabbis knew, compelled students to maintain close relationships with teachers, and they considered teachers, not books, to be the best conveyors of the Jewish tradition. But with the deaths of so many teachers in the failed revolts, Rabbi Judah apparently feared that the Oral Law would be forgotten unless it were written down”.

    Sounds just like Hadeeth literature to me!

    Peace out my brother 😊


  4. And how about the verse of wudū’? If we aren’t being ordered by God to undertake a ceremony of ritual cleansing before a ritual prayer, then what exactly is it before which we are meant to be washing specific limbs? Very confusing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s