“And when your Lord said to the angels, I am going to place in the earth a khalif, they said: Will You place in it such as shall make mischief in it and shed blood, and we celebrate Your praise and extol Your holiness? He said: Surely I know what you do not know.” (Qur’an 2:30)
﷽
This proclamation of Allah (swt) and the subsequent response of the angels is very interesting.
The first point to establish is that the proclamation of Allah (swt) needs to be clear and without ambiguity.
The second point is that the angels understood from the word that Allah (swt) used two possiblities.
Yuf’sidu. That it entails the possiblity that the khalif can do mischief.
wayasfikul-dimāa. That it entails the possibility that the khalif can be the cause of bloodshed and violence.
This both astonishing and astounding in that this is the initial reaction of these noble beings.
In Islamic teachings the angels are pure and love purity. They do not dwell among or around the places that are impure.
Out of all the possible responses of the angels the initial response to this word chosen by Allah (swt) is recoil.
The response of Allah (swt) was not to correct them, or even to suggest that they are wrong. Allah (swt) simply responds with: “I know what you do not know.”
If a person were to offer a child a banana one would not really think much of it. We don’t think that the banana would harm the child. It surely does not have the properties of being sharp or dangerous. It certainly is not going to cut them.
However, if a person were to offer a knife to a child, one may wonder the intention behind it. A knife is a tool. It can be used as an instrument to cut items that may otherwise be cumbersome to deal with as a whole. However, a knife can also be used to injure either oneself or others.
Yet, also notice that the angels said: “and we celebrate Your praise and extol Your holiness?”
In other words, they did not deny the possibility of this word khalif in addition to creating mischief and shedding blood, that it too could celebrate and praise Allah. However, from the perspective of the angels, the creation of this khalif seems redundant.
The word khalif did not entail (at least to those angelic recipients of the word) one who would be flawless, infallible, rightly guided, necessarily just.
Just as it did not entail as such to those angelic recipients of the word, it does not entail as such to the Ibadi school.
We want just leaders. We want to be ruled by the just and the righteous.
The word khalif to those angelic recipients of the word understood that with it could come the possibility of violent upheaval.
All citizens of just governance always pray and hope for a peaceful transition of power. However, often, the transition of power does not come about by peaceful means.
“O humanity! Eat from what is lawful and good on the earth and do not follow Satan’s footsteps. He is truly your sworn enemy. He only incites you to commit evil and indecency, and to claim against Allah what you do not know.” (Qur’an 2:168-169)
﷽
The more one learns about Salafi aqidah the more Christianity makes allot of sense.
Proposed debate scenario:
Opening presentation. Thank you all for joining me for tonights debate Trinity vs Tawhid.
I want to address the audience tonight and suggest the real question: “How many is God?” Or “How complex is God?”
You see both the Christian and the Muslim, we both agree God is one but we also both agree that God is a unity. Trinity means three in one. Tawhid means: unity or coming together.
Yes in the NT we cannot find Jesus using the exact phrase I am God. However we do find him saying I am.
We don’t find the word tawheed in the Qur’an. Yet Muslims believe it is threaded throughout the Qur’an.
I’d like to challenge my Muslim opponent tonight to find me one verse any verse where Allah says: “My nature is simple”.
We have the mystery of the union of god and flesh. The Muslim, the mystery of how an attribute can be eternal and represented in temporal form.
We have the mystery of the trinity. The Muslim, the mystery of Allah’s unity where attributes are not identical to the essence nor other than it.
For my Muslim opponent indeed the Muslims treat sin as something trivial even hell is a brief sojourn. For us sin is darkness, seperation from God and yearns for redemption.
On and on it goes….
Rather than saying Allah is alien the clever Christian quotes the anthropomorphic similarities….bridging that chasm.
christ ate, slept, and wept.
Allah walks, chuckles and appears before men.
“I tell you if God can cast his voice in the burning bush he can certainly join with flesh!! Hallelujah!”
“Follow not that whereof you have no knowledge. Lo! the hearing and the sight and the heart – of each of these it will be asked.” (Qur’an 17:36)
﷽
A very interesting discussion Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn al-’idlibī, a contemporary Muḥaddīth using matn critique to show that the age of Aisha(ra) as reported in Bukhari and understood by the majority does not add up when all evidence and factors are considered.
This is all too important because time and time again we hear that anyone who challenges the hadith corpus is some modernist Muslim who has no grounding in his/her faith.
Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn Ibn Aḥmad al-’idlibī was born in 1948 in the Syrian city of Aleppo* He is Shāfi‘ī in lineage and got a PhD in Islamic sciences with a specialty in Ḥadīth from the Dār al-Ḥadīth al-Ḥassīniyah in Morocco in 1980. He has taught Ḥadīth sciences at several Arab universities, including the Kulliyah al-Darāssāt al-’islāmiyah wa al-‘Arabiyah in Abu Dhabi and the Kulliyah al-Sharī‘ah in the United Arab Emirates. * in the comments section a man who is claimed to be his grandson wanted the city of birth changed from Idlib to Aleppo. I have made the changes accordingly.
21 He has a website where his publications and media appearances are posted.
He is famous for writing a 22 detailed response 23 to a Salafī critique against the ’Āsh‘arī theological school.24 His first publication (probably a rework of his PhD thesis) is a detailed research that tries to prove that textual (matn) criticism of prophetic Aḥadīth has been part of Islam since its beginnings.25 The Aisha-age-traditions are not discussed in it, but he provides many examples of famous Aḥadīth that are found in the Ṣaḥīḥ collections, which has been criticized by many foundational scholars, including ‘Ā’īsha who was famous for criticizing traditions that spoke in a denigrating manner about women or traditions with anthropomorphic contents.26
This book in my eyes shows the key element in al-‘idlibī’s approach to the Ḥadīth corpus whereby traditions are determined firstly by contents, and not just by isnād. Although scholars of Fiqh have always applied textual criticism, over the centuries the authenticity level of the isnād became more and more decisive in accepting a tradition and increased the reluctance to reject it.27 Al-’idlibī on the other hand points out that to declare an isnād authentic (ṣaḥīḥ) it needs to comply to five conditions, while there are numerous reasons for a text (matn) to contain a mistake (’asbāb al-Wahm kathīrah).
Only a tradition which is deemed both ṣaḥīḥ in isnād and matn can overcome its probable truth factor (ghalab ‘alā al-Ẓann), but it still isn’t multiple transmitted (lā yatawātar) and thus doesn’t gain the certain truth factor (maquṭū‘a) of a multiple transmitted tradition (al-Mutawātir). When a tradition has 28 an authentic isnād but deviant contents (’isnād ṣaḥīḥ wa matnahu shādh) it is classified as weak and deficient (ḍa‘īf) and can be rejected.29 Al-’idlibī thus clearly presents an ’usūlī methodology in judging and classifying traditions .30, although he never references his methodology to any ’usūlī scholar.
Jonathan Brown calls this approach ‘Late Sunni Traditionalism’, which is a revival of the ’Ahl al-Rā’y juristic methodology whereby ”jurists, not hadith scholars, with the ultimate authority in determining the authenticity and implication of a hadith“, making jurists ”responsible for content criticism“.31 Al-’idlibī is clearly influenced by, or follows a similar vision as, the late ’Aẓharī scholar Muḥammad al-Ghazālī (d. 1996 CE) who saw a Ḥadīth only as truly ṣaḥīḥ if it didn’t contain a hidden flaw (‘illā) or contradict more reliable evidence.32 It is this methodology which we will also find in his discussion on the Aisha-age-traditions.
Al-’idlibī’s analysis on the age of marriage of ‘Ā’īsha
Although I was acquainted with English works on the age of ‘Ā’īsha, and knew there were already Arabic discussions on this matter from the 1950s 33, I hadn’t come across any work in Arabic until I saw a blog post by professor Mohammed Fadel (University of Toronto) where he recounted his meeting with al-’idlibī and had posted a link to al-’idlibī’s essay.34 While reading I noticed he used many similar sources and arguments as the English works, but because he used classical terminology it didn’t feel apologetic. That he wrote a specific essay on it shows that the age presented in the traditions were probably disconcerting to him, but by applying his methodology and terminology this apologetic element isn’t present.
In the essay, he points out that because the Aisha-age-traditions are of ṣaḥīḥ status, there is no avoiding in studying it. If we take his ’usūlī methodology in mind, it means that the ṣaḥīḥ status of the isnād demands that the matn must also be checked for an error (wahm), so that its probability status (ẓann) can be judged.
Secondly, he says he came across some articles on this subject by some scholars, and he wanted to write about it to “sharpen some scientific thoughts in the condoning indifference on the positions of weakness”.
Meaning, he wants to point out to people that they remain too much indifferent to possible weaknesses in historical sources. Thus according to him, his objective is not to simply discredit the Aisha-age traditions because he rejects the possibility of the Prophet marrying an underaged girl, but to use it as an example of how people easily overlook mistakes in generally accepted sources. Just as his book on matn criticism tries to prove the classical practice of it, and thus its authenticity level as an Islamic methodology, this essay tries to show the necessity and usefulness of such criticism.
In his analysis he tries to determine ‘Ā’īsha’s age by determining:
The age difference and the birth-year of her older sister ’Asmā’
The possibility she experienced and narrated events at a certain age
The words used to describe her
When she converted to Islam
When her father married her mother
The way she was proposed as a possible spouse for the Prophet
He does this by using both graded and ungraded narrations, thus collecting as much evidence to prove there is a conflict between the gathered evidence and the original narration under question.
Part of his argument is also based on the idea that it is unreasonable that she was four or younger at certain events (2.) and when she was proposed to the Prophet (6.), which uses assumptions about a child’s capability and the way seventh-century culture discussed possible spouses. It thus not simply an argument based on the clear textual and linguistic comparison, but also involves the idea of what is reasonable. All this taken together is enough proof for al-’idlibī to declare the Aisha-age-traditions as containing an error (wahm), and thus being defective (ma‘lūl).
Translation of al-’idlibī’s essay
The transmitted Ḥadīth in the estimated age of the honorable ‘Ā’īsha on the day of marriage contract and marriage
In the name of Allah Most Merciful ever Merciful.
Praise to Allah numerous good blessed praising such as loving and pleasing our Lord, and praise to Allah whom by His blessings completes the righteous, the Lord completes through the good, and seals for us through the good, through Your beneficence and grace and honor, O Honored of the honored.
A Ḥadīth is transmitted about the Prophet, salutations of Allah upon him and peace 36, that the marriage-contracted (‘aqada)37 honorable ‘Ā’īsha, Allah’s pleasure upon her 38, and her years were six years and he married her [when she was] nine years. And is this Ḥadīth authentic in transmission chain (isnād) and textual contents (matn)?? [There] is no avoiding from its study.
I came across an article about this important subject written by some researcher in weakening (taḍa‘īf) that Ḥadīth regarding transmission chain and textual contents, and I found that one [can get] possible gain (al-Mumkin al-Istifādah) from it in the sharpening.
(al-Taqāṭ) of some scientific thoughts in the condoning (al-Taghāḍī) on the positions of
weakness (nuqaṭ al-Ḍu‘f), for the leaving [of this condoning] (al-Khurūj) through constituent result (bi natījah mu’assisah) on evidence (al-’Adilah) and conductive indications (al-Qarā’īn al-Muwaṣṣilah) towards the rational correct expression, by Allah’s authority.
And for necessary clarification (li ḍarūrah tajliyah) of the aspect of the rational correct (wajh al-Ṣawāb) in this important issue from the issues of the noble Prophetic biography and the reported tradition so this research supported through evidence in the history of the birth of honorable ‘Ā’īsha (rA‘), and estimation of her age (miqdār ‘umrahā) at the time the marriage-contract [was placed] upon her from the Messenger of God (ṣA‘ws) and her age at the time of her wedding. And in this [there are] two said issues:
The first saying is well known (al-Mashūr): Is that he marriage-contracted her and she was a girl of six years and he married her and she was a girl of nine. They take through what is established on it from her saying in ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and others, which means that she’s born after the Prophetic mission (ba‘ada al-Ba‘thah al-Nabawiyah)39 by four years.
The second saying: Is that he marriage-contracted her and she was a girl of fourteen years and he married her and she was a girl of eighteen years, which means that she was born before (qabla) the mission by four years.
The evidence of the first saying:
Al-Bukhārī, Muslim, and others reported from Ṭariq on Hishām bin ‘Arwah on his father on ‘Ā’īsha that the Prophet (ṣA‘ws) married her and she was a girl of six years, and he consummated with her and she was a girl of nine years. And Muslim’s transmission is from Ṭarīq Mu‘ammar on al-Zuhrī on ‘Arwah on ‘Ā’īsha
And Ibn Ḥanbal and Muslim’s transmission is from Ṭarīq al-’Aswad bin Yazīd al-Nakha‘ī on ‘Ā’īsha. And the wording “he married her (tazawwajahā)” 40 is intended with the meaning of marriage-contract (al-‘Aqd), and this is the objective (al-Maqṣūd) here.
And the Ḥadīth it’s transmission chain (sanad) is ṣaḥīḥ. And it’s certainly incorrect (’akhṭā’) as an opinion (ẓann) that Hishām bin ‘Arwah is isolated (tafarrada) in its transmission and that it is from his imagination (’awhāmahu).41
The evidence of the second saying:
1 – ‘Ā’īsha is younger than her sister ’Asmā’ (rA‘) with 10 years, and ‘Asmā’ was born before the Hijrah by twenty-seven years, meaning before the Prophet mission by fourteen years, and this means that ‘Ā’īsha was born before the Hijrah by four years.
Ibn ‘Asākir reported in the “Tārīkh Damashqi” through its sanad on ibn ’Abī al-Zanād that he said: ”’Asmā’ the daughter of ’Abū Bakr was older than ‘Ā’īsha by ten years.“42
And ’Abū Na‘īm said in the “Ma‘rifah al-Ṣaḥābah” in the biography (tarjamah) of ’Asmā’:” She was born before the history 43 by twenty-seven years, and she died seventy-three years later in Makkah after her son killed ‘Abd Allah bin al-Zubayr in [those] days, and she was a hundred years.“44 And [that] which confirms this report in the knowing the year of birth of ’Asmā’ is what ’Abū Na‘īm reported such about her that she said: ”I saw Zayd bin ‘Amrū bin Nafīl and supporting himself on the wall of the Ka‘abah, he said: Oh community of Quraysh, none of you today is on the religion of Abraham other than I.“ 45 Zayd had passed away and the Quraysh was building the Ka‘abah before He [God] send down a revelation on the Messenger of God by five years. Such was reported by Ibn Sa‘ad in the “al-Ṭabaqāt” on Sa‘yd bin al-Musayb 46, meaning [this] was before the Hijrah by eighteen years, thus her age was nine years [when] she heard this as that time.
And this is logical (ma‘aqūl), because anyone recollecting what was heard from him (yaḍbuṭ mithl hadhā al-Samā‘ minhu) cannot be anything other than predominantly nine (tisa‘a fī al-Ghālib). And ibn al-’Athīr in the “’Asad al-Ghābah”: ’Abū Na‘īm said: ”She was born before history by twenty-seven years.“47 And ibn ‘Abd al-Birr said in “al-istī‘āb”: ”And ’Asmā’ passed away in Makkah in Jumādī al-’Awwalā year seventy-three [after Hijrah], and at her death, she had reached a hundred years.“48
2 – Al-Bukhārī reported on ‘Ā’īsha (rA‘) that she said: ”Indeed He sent in Makkah on Muḥammad (ṣA‘ws), while I proceeded to play (li-jāriyah ’ala‘abu), {But surely the Hour is their appointed time, and the Hour is calamitous and bitter} 49, and what was sent down of chapter al-Baqarah and al-Nisā’ except what was already with him.“ 50
Al-Qurṭubī says in his commentary (tafsīr): Ibn ‘Abbās said: ”Between the sending down of this verse and between [the battle of] Badr were 7 years“51. And when it is as such, this means that it was sent down before the Hijrah by five years and after the [Prophetic] mission by eight.
And ibn Sayd said in the “al-Muḥkām” and ibn Manẓūr in ” 52 Lisān al-‘Arab”53: ”al-Jāriyah: The youthful from the women (al-Fatiyyah min al-Nisā’).“ And al-Fatiyyah is the juvenile woman (al-Shābbah). And they applied (yuṭaliqūn….‘alā) the word “al-Jāriyah” for the girl in her adolescence (fatā’īhā) and juvenileness (shabābahā) until the appearance of coming and going [of her menstrual period].54
So how much is the age of ‘Ā’īsha with the sending down of the Exalted His saying {But surely the Hour is their appointed time, and the Hour is calamitous and bitter} which was sent down after the [Prophetic] mission by eight years?!
Concerning the first saying her age is four years and a girl of four isn’t called jāriyah as the first saying outlines. As for the second saying, her age is placed with the sending down of the verse estimating (thantī) ten years and thus is harmonious (al-Mansajim) with the meaning of al-Jāriyah.
3 – al-Bukhārī transmitted on ‘Ā’īsha (rA‘) that she said: ”I didn’t understand my parents except that they professed the religion [of Islam], and no day would pass except with the visit of the messenger of God (ṣA‘ws) at the morning daylight and night. So when the Muslims were tested [by being persecuted] Abū Bakr went out-migrating towards Ethiopia, and when he reached al-Ghimād early he was met by Ibn al-Daghnah…” [till the end of the] tradition.
The aspect of interference from this narration are two issues:
First of the two is that a child cannot know the custom (al-‘Āddah) professed by the majority of the people from its religious conversion and its religiosity (tadayyun) and its condition (aldīhu) by the religion of others at four years, and if ‘Ā’īsha was born four years after the [Prophetic] mission, and her first awareness (‘ayahā) of her surroundings in the 8th year [of the Prophetic mission] then her statement “I didn’t understand my parents except that they professed the religion [of Islam]” is a result without use; because Abū Bakr was known to have been one of the earliest converts to Islam, and [his wife] ’Umm Rūmān became Muslim in Mecca in early times, as Ibn Sa‘ad said.
However if she was born before the mission by four years, and her first awareness of her surroundings in the first year of the mission, that statement is useful. And is that – it explains she begins to become aware of her surroundings – she sees the condition of both of them professing the religion of Islam, and not only one condition.
And this proves that she was born before the mission with approximately four years, and this is proven in other evidence.
Second, of the two is that her statement ”So when the Muslims were tested [by being persecuted] Abū Bakr went out-migrating towards Ethiopia“ is a turning point (Ma‘ṭūfā) on her realization of her parents and they two professed the religion is so candid in that when she was was aware to this event (al-Ḥuduth) and the departure of the companions from Mecca for the migration to Ethiopia was in the middle of the fifth year from the mission and their migration second for her in the last of the fifth or beginning of the sixth.
And if ‘Ā’īsha was born four years after the mission it was possible for her to be aware of that event in the beginning of the sixth year, and because she was born before the mission with four years, thus this means the possibility of her awareness for that with clarity (bi-wuḍūḥ).
4 – Muḥammad bin ’isḥāq said in the Prophetic biography in mentioning ’Asmā’ as one of the first who became Muslim: ”Then people from the Arab tribes submitted, from them Sa‘īd bin Zayd bin ‘Amr bin Nafīl and his wife Faṭimah bint al-Khaṭāb, and ’Asmā’ bint Abū Bakr, and ‘Ā’īsha bint Abū Bakr and she was young (ṣaghīrah)….then Allah the Exalted commanded His Messenger (ṣA‘ws) that he proclaim (yaṣda‘) with what came with him. And that he announces through His command to mankind, and call towards Allah the Exalted, and maybe he concealed something and hide through it that command with its appearance, so it was broadcasted years after the mission, then God the Exalted said {So proclaim what you have been commanded, and turn away from the idolaters}.55
And Ibn Kathīr transmitted some of this text with the meaning as said: ”Ibn ’isḥāq said: Then Allah commanded His Messenger (ṣA‘ws) after three years after the mission through that he proclaimed with what he was commanded, and that he endured on whom are idolaters.“56 And Ibn ’isḥāq’s statement means here that ‘Ā’īsha became Muslim during the time of the secret call [to Islam] (fitrah al-Da‘wah al-Siriyah) after the mission, and that she was young, and if that fitrah time period was 3 years, ‘Ā’īsha may have been brought in to some of the gatherings of the Muslims at the end of the fitrah.
And on the statement that she was born after the mission by four years, this cannot be right in principle because she wasn’t born after.
In regards to the second statement, her age would be six years or seven. Perhaps ibn ’isḥāq mentioned her as being amongst the first Muslims in spite of her young years as a respect for her father Abū Bakr (RA‘) and consisted the turning point (Ma‘ṭūfah)57 of her sister ’Asmā’ who was older than her by ten years.
5 – al-Ṭabarī says in his “Tārīkh”: ”Abū Bakr married in the pre-Islamic times (al-Jāhiliyah) Qutīlah ibnah ‘Abd al-‘Uzzā and she fathered for him ‘Abd Allah and ’Asmā’, and he also married in the pre-Islamic times ’Umm Rūmān bint ‘Amir and she fathered for him ‘Abd al-Raḥman and ‘Ā’īsha, so all these four children were born from his two wives whom their [marriage] oaths were taken in the pre-Islamic times.“58 So these historical texts are candidly obvious in that ‘Ā’īsha (rA‘) was born before the Prophetic mission.
6 – Ibn Abī ‘Āṣam transmitted in the first and second, and al-Ṭabarānī in the “al-Mu‘jam al-Kabīr” and al-Ḥākim in the “al-Mustadarak” on ‘Ā’īsha (rA‘) that Khawlah bint Ḥākim, the wive of ‘Uthmān bin Muẓa‘ūn (rA‘), said in Mecca to the messenger of God (ṣA‘ws): ”In other words, the messenger of God desists from marrying? He said: And who [do you suggest]? She said: Do you want a young woman (bakrā) or an old woman (thayibā)? He said: So who is the young woman? She said: The daughter of the most beloved of Allah’s creation to you, ‘Ā’īsha bint Abī Bakr. And he said: Who is the older woman? She said: Sawdah bint Zama‘ah. He said: So go and mention me to both of them.“59
The context (al-Siyāq) proves that Khawlah (rA‘) wanted to speak to the messenger of Allah (ṣA‘ws) after the passing of the honorable Khadijah, because from that moment he had no wife, and in the purpose (Ghāyah) is improbable that she speaks to him in this case about her who is of the age of six years!! However when she is a girl of fourteen years then this is reasonable (ma‘qūl), and seems that this is correct (al-Ṣaḥīḥ).
– And there is no doubt that together these proofs and external indications on the statement in that the Prophet (ṣA‘ws) married ‘Ā’īsha and her age being eighteen years is proven by strong proof that this is correct.
And in regards to what is established about ‘Ā’īsha from that the messenger of God married her and she was of nine years, and it is unavoidable that this is an error (wahmā). And she (rA‘) lived – [based] on the deciding statement here – seventy-five years. So perhaps she was afflicted (’aṣābahā) by forgetfulness (al-Nisayān) in this matter, thus its narration is erroneous (al- awahhum).60 And the error of the narrated statement (tawahhīm al-Qawl al-Murawī) about ‘Ā’īsha (rA‘) doesn’t escape it, and that from the gathered evidence and indications which presents its conflict (khilāfahi).
– The summary of the research:
Based on the gathering of evidence and indications that the honorable ‘Ā’īsha (rA‘) was born before the mission by four years, and she was marriage-contracted (‘aqada ‘alayhā) by the messenger of Allah (ṣA‘ws) in the tenth year of the mission and her age was fourteen years, before the Hijrah by three years. And married her at the end of the first year after the Hijrah and her age were eighteen years.
The mentioned tradition in specifying the age of ‘Ā’īsha by six years on the day of the marriage-contracting and nine years on the day of marriage are authentic in the chain of transmission (ṣaḥīḥ al-’isnād), however, it conflicts with the researched texts and historical indications. Thus it is defective (ma‘lūl) because it is from those that are erroneous (al-’Awhām).
The imams (rA) stated that the narration when its contents (matn) conflicts with what is stronger evidence from reliable history, it is thus rejected (yuradd), because it is proven that it is in some way unsound (al-Khalal) through an occurring cause of the error (al-Wahm) in the single narration.
And Allah knows best.
And praise is to Allah, Lord of the worlds.
References:
19 See a discussion on this in Jonathan A.C. Brown, Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet’s Legacy (London: Oneworld, 2014), 145-148. Early 20th century Orientalist writing caused some discussions on this among higher classes and some intellectuals in Egypt, but it is the post-1990 era when this discussion seemed to have returned in Arabic, in far more Arab countries among the larger population, and by scholars trained in Islamic sciences.
26 For example, a famous tradition transmitted by Abū Hurayrah claims that the prayer is nullified when a donkey, dog or woman passes in front of the praying men, ‘Ā’īsha scolded Abū Hurayrah for this. Another famous saying by her is that “anyone claiming Muḥammad saw Allah is lying, as God cannot be seen by human eyes”, whereby she refuted the still dominant belief that Muḥammad’s night journey to heaven was in a bodily form.
27 Wael B. Hallaq, “The Authenticity of Prophetic Ḥadîth: A Pseudo-Problem”, Studia Islamica, No. 89 (1999), 75-90.
28 A Mutawātir is a Ḥadīth or saying (khabar) which is transmitted in every stage of the stages of the sanad by multiple transmitters (general agreed-upon requirement is 10 transmitters), whereby it can be rationally be concluded that these transmitters could not have agreed upon a fabrication (’ikhtilāq). A Mutawātir provides necessary knowledge (al-‘ilm al-Ḍarūriyya). Any ṣaḥīḥ tradition that doesn’t confirm to these criteria, but has an authentic isnād, is of the status of Aḥād (singular transmission) only provides conditional knowledge (al-‘ilm al-Mutawaqqif), which needs further investigation. Maḥmūd al-Ṭaḥḥān,Taysīr Muṣṭalaḥ al-Ḥadīth (Riyadh: Maktabah al-Ma‘ārif li-lNushr wa al-Tawzī‘a, 1425 AH), 23-25, 27.
29 al-’idlibī, ibid, 33.
30 For the difference between’usūlī and ’athārī methodology, see Hallaq, ibid, 79-85. For a classical ’usūlī exposition, see Abū Ishāq al-Shāṭibī, al-Muwāfiqāt fī ’usūl al-Sharī‘ah (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘ilmiyyah, n.dt.), 4:3-21.
31 Jonathan A.C. Brown, Hadith: Muhammad’s Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World (Oxford: Oneworld, 2009), 262.
32 Brown, ibid, 263. See the first two chapters in al-Ghazālī’s The Sunna of the Prophet between the People of the Fiqh and the People of the Ḥadīth (al-Sunnah al-Nubuwiyyahbayna ʾAhl al-Fiqh wa ʾAhl al-Ḥadīth) (translated by Aisha Bewley, Istanbul: Dar al-Taqwa,2009).
33 See footnote 19 above. Brown also points out that other known ‘Late Sunni Traditionalist’ scholars as ‘Alī Goma‘a also have written arguments against the Aisha-age-traditions, I hope to compare these in later writing.
35 I have transliterated important words between brackets (), my additions to the text to amplify readability between [], and I stay as close to the Arabic sentence structures as possible by retaining the long sentences as much as possible. al-’idlibī refers to several sources without precise references (he doesn’t use footnotes in this essay), when I could trace the exact citations in the mentioned works I have added them in footnotes. I have added dates of death of the mentioned historians to show the period they were working in (which was mostly centuries after the compilers of Ḥadīth).
36 Translation of ṣalā Allah ‘alayhi wa salam, in the rest of the translation abbreviated as: (ṣA‘ws)
37 The contracting of marriage refers to the agreement between the guardians and/or prospected spouses on the wish to get married and on the amount of dowry. The root-word ‘aqada literally means making a knot (thus the English expression on marriage as “tying the knot” comes very close) and is used for contracts, agreements etc. It can be used to refer to the contracting of the marriage and the existing marriage itself as a form of contract. In classical Sharī‘ah constructs, betrothal (khiṭbah), contracting the marriage (‘aqd), and consummating it are separate acts whereby the first is an unofficial agreement between parties, the second an officializing agreement between parties with a dowry, while the latter is generally when the female is deemed physically ready. [al-Zuḥaylī, ibid, 7:23-26, 43-65. Brown, Misquoting Muhammad, 143]
38 Translation of raḍī Allah ‘anhā, in the rest of the translation abbreviated as: (rA‘)
39 Throughout most of the essay, al-’idlibī uses only al-Ba‘ath, the mission, to refer to the advent of the Prophetic mission. Although I will sometimes add ‘prophetic’ between brackets, I mostly just translate it literally with ‘the mission’, but it is best read as ‘advent to the Prophetic mission’. It is generally accepted that the Prophet received his first revelation in 610 CE, thirteen years before the Hijrah.
40 See footnote 3 above.
41 Here al-’idlibī dismisses the attempts by some apologists to try to find a weakness in the transmission chains of the Aisha-age-traditions to discredit them. See footnote 18 above.
42 Abū al-Qāsim ibn al-‘Asākir (d. 571 AH), Tārīkh Damashqi (Dār al-Fikr al-Ṭabā‘h wa al-Nushr wa al-Tawziya‘, 1995), 69:8. The isnād is not graded, thus its authenticity compared to the Aisha-age-traditions is unknown.
43 The history here means the Hijrah in 623 CE, when the Meccan Muslims migrated to Medina, which soon after was turned into the starting point of the Islamic calendar, and thus, history.
44 Abū Na‘īm al-’Aṣbihānī (d. 430 AH), Ma‘rifah al-Ṣaḥābah (Riyadh: Dār al-Waṭan li-lNushr, 1998), 6:3253. See also ibn al-‘Asākir, ibid, 69:9. Again the isnād is not graded, thus its authenticity compared to the Aisha-age-traditions is unknown.
48 ibn ‘Abd al-Birr (d. 463 AH), al-istī‘āb fī Ma‘rifah al-Ṣaḥābah (Beirut: Dār al-Jīl, 1992), tradition 6705, 7:7. Ungraded isnād. See also in al-‘Asākir, ibid, 69:8.
49 Qur’ān 54:46.
50 al-‘Asqalānī, ibid, 7:290. Isnād graded ṣaḥīḥ.
51 Shams al-Dīn al-Qurṭubī, Jāma‘a al-Aḥkām al-Qur’ān (Cairo: Dār al-Kutub al-Miṣriyah, 1964), 17:146. Ungraded isnād. The battle of Badr occurred in 2 AH (624 CE).
52 Bin Sayd al-Mursī, al-Muḥkām wa al-Muḥīṭ al-‘Aẓim (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘ilmiyyah, 2000), 7:625-626 (under the heading al-Shīn wa al-Bā’, the root of al-Jāriyah is jarā).
60 Wahm is a technical indication within the classical Ḥadith sciences: ”When an error (wahm) is discovered through external indications (al-Qarā’īn) and the gathered the paths [of transmission], then it is defective (al-Mu‘allal)“, al-‘Asqalānī, Nukhbah al-Fikr fī Muṣṭalaḥ Ahl al-Athār (Cairo: Dār al-Ḥadīth, 1997), 8.
Dr. Shaykh al-Din al-idilibi (Surely he received his reward with Allah).
You may also be interested in reading the following article by the Shaykh:
“Indeed, those who came with falsehood are a group among you. Do not think it bad for you; rather it is good for you. For every person among them is what he has earned from the sin, and he who took upon himself the greater portion thereof – for him is a great punishment. Why, when you heard it, did not the believing men and believing women think good of one another and say, “This is an obvious falsehood”? Why did they not produce for it four witnesses? And when they do not produce the witnesses, then it is they, in the sight of Allah, who are the liars. And if it had not been for the favor of Allah upon you and His mercy in this world and the Hereafter, you would have been touched for that in which you were involved by a great punishment. When one tongue received it from another and you uttered with your mouths something/that you knew nothing about. You deemed it to be a trifle while in the sight of Allah it was a serious matter. And why, no sooner than you had heard it, did you not say: “It becomes us not even to utter such a thing? Holy are You! This is a great slander.” Allah admonishes you: If you are true believers, never repeat the like of what you did. Allah makes clear to you his verses. Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.” (Qur’an 1-18)
﷽
From the perspective of the Qur’an Only Religion, all one can say is that something happened, to someone, somewhere. There are many, many details that are left out of this passage alone, let other parts of the Qur’an.
Who are those who come with falsehood? Qur’an answer: irrelevant.
The nature of the falsehood/allegation? Qur’an answer: irrelevant.
We can only assume, based upon the key phrase, “Why did they not produce for it four witnesses?” That someone, somewhere, accused somebody of either adultery/fornication. That is the best we can surmise from the text. Interestingly, this section ends with “Allah makes clear to you his verses.”
So recently, a follower of the Qur’an Only Religion who goes by the moniker of “The British Muslim” decided that the Qur’an just doesn’t clarify the age of Aisha (ra). So he decided to make this video:
So, instead of going to the text that he felt “left nothing out” and is “highly detailed”, he went to extraneous sources to satisfy his curiosity. However, this is inconsistent with the methodology of the Qur’an Only Religion. The Qur’an Only Religion teaches us that all we need is the Qur’an, the whole Qur’an, and nothing but the Qur’an. Even though, for some odd reason, Allah (swt) associated himself with a human being. Muhammed (saw) was used as a vehicle to convey his message, even though Allah (swt) states clearly he could have done otherwise.
Yet for some reason(in the warped thinking of the Qur’an Only community), having the divine speech pass through the vehicle of a human being is not shirk (associating a partner with Allah).
In reality, the position of the Qur’an Religion with regard to Aisha (ra) is this: Aisha who? Who is she? Why does she even matter? She doesn’t. The Qur’an does not mention her at all. All we know is that some guy named Muhammed (saw) received the Qur’an. There is no mention of his last name or his father’s name. Nothing. It’s just Muhammed, nothing more and nothing less.
The truth of the matter is that, from a Qur’an Only perspective, it does not give a specific appropriate age for getting married. This has been made abundantly clear is this article:
In this article we were interacting with the material from a member of the Qur’an Only Religion that goes by the pseudonym ‘Joseph Islam’ and perhaps he was uncomfortable with the very obvious fact that Allah (swt) decreed that WOMEN start ovulating at 11 and 12 and can conceive children. You may be interested in seeing our conversation with a member of the Qur’an Only Religion. Even he acknowledged that the Qur’an doesn’t stipulate an age for marriage. However, he had tried in his own way to force the Qur’an to say what he felt was the appropriate age for marriage.
You may also be interested in reading the following:
“And those who no longer expect menstruation among your women-if you doubt, then their period is three months, and those who have not menstruated. And for those who are pregnant, their term is until they give birth. And whoever fears Allah-He will make for him of this matter ease.” (Qur’an 65:4)
﷽
The Qur’an — like the Bible, does not set down the age for marriage.
“And those who no longer expect menstruation among your women—if you doubt, then their period is three months, and those who have not menstruated. And for those who are pregnant, their term is until they give birth. And whoever fears Allah—He will make ease for him in this matter.” (Qur’an 65:4)
The above verse can be used to suggest that a person can marry a girl who has not even had menses. In science, one of these terms is called Amenorrhea.
As long as there is ovulation, a woman can still get pregnant.
Again, the Qur’an does not give a definite age requirement. It simply gives some guidelines.
For example:
“Test the orphans, until they reach balaghu; then, if you perceive in them the right judgment, deliver to them their property; consume it not wastefully and hastily ere they are grown. If any man is rich, let him be abstinent; if poor, let him consume in reason. And when you deliver their property to them, take witnesses over them; Allah suffices for a reckoner.”(Qur’an 4:6)
This text says nothing about the age of marrying any female. It is simply stating that their property will be held in trust until two things happen.
A) Is that the female is balaghu. Says absolutely nothing about what age would be appropriate for marriage.
B) That this female can have her property delivered to her when you ‘perceive in them the right judgment’.
The word balagha comes from the root word blgh, which means ‘to reach’ or ‘to attain’. Today it is used to reference eloquence in speech. Or at the very least, being fluid in speaking.
People try and make what they perceive to be a logical jump by surmising that if one has to be in ‘the right judgment’ to take ownership of property, that this implies somehow a female who is a ‘teenager’ or ‘young adult’ would also need to be in ‘the right judgment’ to bare children.
Well, according to the designer Allah — who knows best — that is not the case. Insh’Allah, we will discuss this further down the article in the section on analyzing this through evolution.
We think of nothing more insulting to women than to ask them to take an IQ test to determine cognitive awareness. Before we get married, we need you to take a test to determine the following:
Your ability to reason.
Memory — ability to recall information.
Problem-solving skills.
Verbal ability.
Mental acuity.
Spatial awareness
This cruel interpretation of the text would not allow for vulnerable women to get married. We are talking about women with emotional disorders (there are an array of them).
Abu Musa narrated that : The Messenger of Allah said: “There is no marriage except with a Wali.”
What is interesting about the above hadith is that the Hanafi school understands this to refer to the above category of women (vulnerable women due to various facts) as a nikah is a contract and she can:
a) have a guarantor for her marital contract — a wali
b) not have a guarantor for her marital contract.
Orphans are not necessarily people with no assets or no wealth. Maybe not appropriate here, but no one thinks of Bruce Wayne (the character) otherwise known as ‘Batman’ as someone with no wealth or assets. An orphan, rather, is someone (anyone) who, if they do not have guardians and guarantors, can be taken advantage of.
Note the following verse:
“And as for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys in the city, and there was beneath it a treasure for them, and their father had been righteous. So your Lord intended that they reach maturity (ashuddahuma) and extract their treasure as a mercy from your Lord. And I did not of my own accord. That is the interpretation of that about which you could not have patience.”(Qur’an 18:82)
ashuddahu comes from an Arabic root meaning fully tight, a rope that is pulled from both ends so that it is firm and not loose. (Indicating that they are now standing straight on their feet)
The following verse dispels any idea about females needing to be in ‘the right judgment’ to bare children.
“Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has made one of them to excel the other, and because they spend their means on them.” (Qur’an 4:34)
Also, notice something else about the text above in “let him consume in reason” — maybe a poor man who has taken in orphans that he has a right over some of their property/wealth in reason. It does not specify any amount. This is delegated to an authority outside the Qur’an. If there is any dispute, an arbiter or legal authority will be brought in.
“O you who have believed, let those whom your right hands possess and those who have not [yet] reached puberty among you (yablughu l-huluma minkum) ask permission of you [before entering] at three times: before the dawn prayer and when you put aside your clothing [for rest] at noon and after the night prayer. [These are] three times of privacy for you. There is no blame upon you nor upon them beyond these [periods], for they continually circulate among you — some of you, among others. Thus does Allah make clear to you the verses; and Allah is Knowing and Wise. And when the children among you reach puberty(balagha l-atfalu minkumu l-huluma), let them ask permission [at all times] as those before them have done. Thus does Allah make clear to you His verses; and Allah is Knowing and Wise.” (Qur’an 24:58-59)
There are several keywords one can look into in the above text:
Aftal-meaning children or toddlers.
Balagha hulm (it is tied with the wet dream) is a sign of puberty. Why do you think the word hulum, which is connected to dreams, is connected with balagh?
Qur’an 21: 5 & Qur’an 12:44.
Balagha (eloquence and clearness) Bulugh (a boy or a girl reaches the age of clarity)
These two words above have the same trilateral root in the Arabic language and are closely connected together.
A Muslim preacher absolutely shuts the Christian antagonist down with one simple question.
We love Brother Sabeel and his gentle character. (We pray that Allah continues to bless and support him.) This video we feel was a missed opportunity to both capitalize and educate Christians on a fundamental point that they constantly use to assail the Blessed Messenger (saw)
Now notice that this man is quite combative. His body language, invading personal space, everything about him is combative. He is trying to corner this Muslim brother, Sabeel Ahmed, over the age of Ayesha (ra)
Sabeel Ahmed is, of course, one of those Muslims who are apologists who often don’t state plainly their view on something. Now notice that @14:30 the whole flow of this exchange completely changes for a moment. Once, the man made the mistake of saying ‘according to this book (the Bible), marriage to a child is wrong.’ Sabeel asked him simply to show him where this was stated? Show him one verse. The man IMMEDIATELY disengaged eye contact and turned towards the other man.
Sabeel Ahmed (May Allah bless him for his efforts) did not do three things here.
Point out that getting married does not equate to consummation in the marriage. For example, Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette did not consummate their marriage for seven years, to cite a famous example.
In many parts of the Indian subcontinent—Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, and some Muslim communities—historical child marriage did not mean the couple began marital life immediately.
Instead, it typically involved:
Marriage ceremony (vivāha / nikāḥ) at a young age
A purely social and ritual event intended to “join the families” or fulfill cultural norms.
Gṛha-praveśa (the bride entering the husband’s home) years later
This was the actualstart of married life.
Consummation only after puberty
Consummation was normally delayed until the bride reached maturity. Many communities explicitly forbade cohabitation or intercourse until then.
This is actually from the Qur’an.
“There is no blame if you divorce womenbefore the marriage is consummated or the dowry is settled. But give them a compensation—the rich according to his means and the poor according to his. A reasonable compensation is an obligation on the good-doers. And if you divorce them before consummating the marriage but after deciding on a dowry, pay half of the dowry, unless the wife graciously waives it or the husband graciously pays in full. Graciousness is closer to righteousness. And do not forget kindness among yourselves. Surely Allah is All-Seeing of what you do.” (Qur’an 2:236-237)
It should be noted that in Islam the schools of jurisprudence need consent from the woman or they need her not to object. Consent is not something attainable from a child.
2. He didn’t stay focused on that point! 16 minutes of intense discussion, and he let that man right off the hook. If he could get the man to admit that the Bible does not give an age for marriage, he could have:
3. Ask the man on what basis he objects to it?
SCIENCE / EVOLUTION — on what AGE is appropriate for a female to bear children.
Let us say, for the sake of argument, that you put aside religion and culture for a moment. Let us argue from the perspective of biological science. According to evolution, when is a Homo sapien female able to have a child?
“That was the Way (sunnata) of Allah in the case of those who passed away of old, and you will not find any change in the Way (lisunnati)of Allah.” (Qur’an 33:62)
So, whatever comes about that is also corroborated by science is something that Allah has decreed. We believe there is no Muslim who would dispute this.
“Girls usually get their first menstrual period when they’re 12 or 13. It’s a sign that your body is maturing, so that one day if you want to, you should be able to have a baby.”
So, for all the atheists and agnostics and those who decry that there is no objective morality and yet attack Islamic oral traditions that ascribe to the Blessed Messenger-saw that he married a female at a very young age, it should be noted that nature has determined that the moment a female has menses and produces eggs -she can have a baby.
There is no one that can dispute this.
That means that if we completely remove religion from the picture, nature—aka—evolution has decreed that a human female is viable to propagate her species at a certain age range.
It has nothing to with education, it has nothing to do with mental capacity and everything to do with her ability to have children.
So the Qur’andoes not give any particular requirements or age. This is left up to good common sense, and what is appropriate from one culture to the other.
We have even had conversations with U.S. Americans about the appropriate age for people to be together, and they were all over the map.
However, what we did find interesting is that, among progressive /liberal types in the United States, all types of couple arrangements are acceptable, such as LGBT, people who are swingers, or share their partners, etc.
Yet, they really do frown upon age disparity. Whereas in Asia we have seen and witnessed very often 10 and 15 year age gaps between couples.
Al Pacino (81 years of age) started dating Noor Alfallah (28) when they started dating back in 2022.
Elvis Presley was 24 when he started dating Priscilla Presley, who was then 14. The People of the United States loved Elvis and his music and people at the time were not outrated over the apparent age gap.
Final Thoughts. People have taken this whole age of Aisha (ra) and made a mountain out of a molehill. This is likely due to conditioning and social surroundings. It is interesting that this is not a Jewish objection or a Hindu objection. In other words, it is interesting to know which cultures have objections to which things and why. We would encourage you to read the comments on this article and the exchange we have had with others. As mentioned, the number of Muslim men we have personally encountered that are married to a female under the age of 21, let alone 16 or 12 is 0. When something like that does happen, it becomes international news as if an airplane went down in some remote part of the world. Islam gives some parameters on the basis for a male or female to be eligible for marriage. It does not give any artificial boundaries.
We have personally asked: “Your daughter is 18 and a man who is 45 has an interest in marrying her. Do you let it transpire?” His response was a resounding no, and that tells you all you need to know about the artificiality of such positions to begin with.
As regards the hadith on the matter, they are ahad dhani, lone narrator reports, which means it is speculative in nature.
The hadith could be true and Aisha (ra) could have simply guessed her age. Some people in our team have met Indonesians who are not certain of their age due to not having birth certificates. One could claim they are 17, yet in reality be 14. One could assume they are 11 and in reality be 13.
This article claims up to 25% of children in Indonesia do not own birth certificates. This also complicates matters for those Indonesian women wanting to work as domestic helpers over seas. Agencies require certain age requirements and this often becomes difficult to ascertain with 100% accuracy.
“He gives wisdom to whom He wills, and whoever has been given wisdom has certainly been given much good. And none will remember except those who understand.” (Qur’an 2:269)
﷽
“He gives wisdom to whom He wills, and whoever has been given wisdom has certainly been given much good. And none will remember except those who understand.” (Qur’an 2:269)
Is there anything internal in the above verse that even remotely suggests that it is a reference to the Qur’an?
Are adherents of the ‘Qur’an Only religion’ seriously going to contend that Allah has only given wisdom to Quranist who understand their particular approach to the Qur’an?
Are adherents of the ‘Qur’an Only religion’ seriously going to contend that Allah has not given wisdom to people who are not Muslims?
In the above verse it is clear that wisdom is neither a reference to the Qur’an or to the Sunnah. It is a reference to discernment in general.
Hikma — understood as ‘wisdom’ or ‘discernment’, has been used and abused by both the traditionalists and the various sects of the ‘Qur’an Only religion‘
The traditionalist will try and conflate the term hikma to only mean ‘the sunnah’ of the Blessed Messenger (saw).
They are partially correct, but the term is a bit more nuanced.
They will end up taking this term hikma and then conflating it with sunnah, such that it now is in reference to all the deeds, actions, and sayings of the Blessed Messenger (saw).
That is simply not true. We believe it was Imam Al Shafi’i who was among the first to make this assertion.
While it can be a reference to all the deeds, actions, and sayings of the Blessed Messenger (saw), it does not necessarily need to be.
The ‘Qur’an Only religion‘, in their rush to refute any authority other than their own individual interpretations of the Qur’an, say that hikma is in reference to only the Qur’an.
They are partially correct as well, but it is not the whole picture.
Now certainty it would be correct to say that the Qur’an is hikma. It can be a reference to the Qur’an. However, the inverse is not true.
To say that every instance of the word hikma refers to the Qu’ran is simply not true. This is where we begin to understand the nuanced meaning and application of the term hikma.
“And Allah will teach him the Book and Wisdom (hikma) the Law and the Gospel.” (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.”
Does anyone think that Jesus (as) taught the Qur’an?
It would also be odd if we understood this to be, “And Allah will teach him the Book, and the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammed, the Law, and the Gospel.”
However, notice something in the text of Qur’an 3:48.
Followers of the Qur’an Only religion will use as an argument that things mentioned in conjunction with one another do not necessarily mean that they are separate.
For example:
“And We had already given Moses and Aaron the criterion and a light and a reminder for the righteous.” (Qur’an 21:48)
So, here in this context, the Torah is being described as a criterion and a light and a reminder. These are three descriptions of the Torah, not three separate sources of guidance.
Whereas we also have an example of three mentioned together that are not the same. In the following verse is mentioned Allah [swt], the angels and all mankind. These three do not equate to being the same.
“Surely those who disbelieve and die while they are disbelievers, these are those on whom is the curse of Allah and the angels and all mankind.” (Qur’an 2:168)
So in what context is the grammar being used in the verse relating to Jesus?
“And Allah will teach him the Book and Wisdom (hikma) the Law and the Gospel.” (Qur’an 3:48)
Jesus is being taught the Book, the Hikma, the Law, and the Gospel.
The Arabic transliteration is: wayu’allimuhu l-kitaba wal-hik’mata wal-tawrwata wal-injila.
The Law and the Book and the Gospel are not the same things. It stands to reason that, given the grammar of this verse from a perfect All-Knowing being, that the hikma is a reference to something distinct from the Gospel in a way that the Torah is distinct from the Gospel.
“And when Jesus brought clear proofs, he said, “I have come to you with wisdom (hikma) and to make clear to you some of that over which you differ, so fear Allah and obey me.” (Qur’an 43:63)
How odd would that be if we understood it to be,
“And when Jesus brought clear proofs, he said, “I have come to you with the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammed and to make clear to you some of that over which you differ, so fear Allah and obey me.”
It would also certainly be odd if we understood it as:
“And when Jesus brought clear proofs, he said, “I have come to you with the Qur’an and to make clear to you some of that over which you differ, so fear Allah and obey me.”
“And remember the verses of Allah and the wisdom (Prophet’s sayings) which are recited in your houses. Surely, Allah is Courteous, Well-Acquainted.” (Qur’an 33:34)
Some adherents of the Qur’an Only religion have argued that wisdom here must be Qur’an because the prophetic sayings cannot be considered as being ‘recited’. They believe that ‘recited’ is only a reference to the Qur’an.
The Qur’an refutes this point.
“And they followed instead what the devils had recited during the reign of Solomon.” (Qur’an 2:102)
The Arabic yut’lā – can also mean recounted or rehearsed.
We wanted to make this entrance very brief insh’Allah. There is a huge error in the misunderstanding of the Qur’an by adherents of the ‘Qur’an only religion‘.
If they really looked at the Qur’an and reflected upon it they would not have fallen into such an egregious error.
Hikma is discernment. It is the ability to discern. It is penetrating understanding or insight. The Blessed Messenger (saw) was granted hikma.
Thus, when we hear of the term hikma in relationship to the revelation, we can understand it to mean his exposition of the Qur’an. That would be his Sunnah.
Hikma does mean that Allah (swt) granted him penetrating insights into the Qur’an.
This is obvious from the following verse:
“And obey Allah and obey the Messenger. But if you turn away, then Our Messenger is responsible only for conveying the message clearly.” (Quran 64:12)
For example:
“They ask you about menstruation. Say, “It is painful, so keep away from women during their menstruation, and do not approach them until they are purified. When they are purified, you may approach them the way God has ordained you.” God loves the repentant and the purified.” (Qur’an 2:222)
So for example are we to live in a seperate house? Are we to be in seperate rooms? Are we not to eat dinner with them?
“This legal scheme has a surprising impact on Jewish women and their periods. Under Jewish religious laws, a woman is considered “impure” during her menstruation days (“niddah”) and must follow a “purifying” ritual prior to entering and consummating a marriage, as well as during married life itself.”
“Niddah” requires that a woman experiencing her menstruation remain distant from her husband or husband-to-be. She must maintain physical distance (e.g., sleeping in separate beds during her “impure” days) for seven “clean” days, where she checks with cloth that she has no blood in her cervix. This ritual concludes with a “Mikveh” ceremony, where she purifies herself by dipping into a pool of water. Only when this ritual has concluded is the woman “pure” and allowed to consummate the marriage”
It is obvious that the use of hikma would be to know how to employ the Qur’an on issues that are not explicitly mentioned by the Qur’an. The Sunnah provides that clarity.
How to relate the Qur’an to context.
An example:
“And marry not women whom your father married, except what has already passed; indeed it was shameful and most hateful, and an evil way.” (Qur’an 4:22)
This also applies equally to a woman a man’s father has married contractually and to women he has had intercourse with outside of marriage.
Although the Qur’an is not clear on this point. So this is a case of hikma — or discernment. The Sunnah provides clarity on this matter.
Who knows how followers of the Qur’an Only religion deal with this? They are in open rebellion to the idea that anything is an authority outside the Qur’an.
Even though Allah (swt) has said:
“O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best way and the best in result.(Qur’an 4:59)
The life of the Blessed Prophet (saw) is an example of how Muslims should interact with the world around them.
The hikma that has become the mass transmitted sunnah, is his understanding of the Qur’an in all matters.
“He gives wisdom to whom He wills, and whoever has been given wisdom has certainly been given much good. And none will remember except those who understand.” (Qur’an 2:269)
So it is a failure of insight for the adherents of the ‘Qur’an only religion’ to not see that the word hikma was given to the Blessed Messenger (saw) as penetrating insights.
The reason why the various sects of the ‘Qur’an Only religion’ are very uncomfortable with this is due to the fact of their very strained interpretations that the Qur’an ‘explains everything in detail’—which to them leaves no room for expositions, interpretations, or sources of guidance outside of it.
May Allah (swt) guide us to what is beloved to Allah (swt).
“It is He who caused the Book to descend to you. In it are verses, that are (muḥkamāt) definitive. They are the essence of the Book and others, ones that are (mutashābihāt) unspecific. Then, those whose hearts are swerving, they follow what was unspecific in it, seeking discord (l-fit’nati) and seeking its interpretation. And none know its interpretation save Allah and those firmly rooted in knowledge. They say, “We believe in it; all is from our Lord.” And none remember, save those who possess intellect.” (Qur’an 3:7).”
﷽
“Biologists as well as philosophers have suggested that the universe, and the living forms it contains, are based on chance, but not accident. To put it another way, forces of chance and of antichance coexist in a complementary relationship. The random element is called entropy, the agent of chaos, which tends to mix up the unmixed, to destroy meaning. The nonrandom element is information which exploits the uncertainty inherent in the entropy principle to generate new structures, to inform the world in novel ways.
Source: (Grammatical Man—Information, Entropy, Language, and Life by Jeremy Campbell. Page 15)
The intent of this entry is so that those who are among the Muslims who come into contact with adherents of the Hafs Qur’an Only religion can have some introspection with regard to their own position.
It is hoped that people may be able to look beyond the oversimplification of issues.
Our colleague was once listening to a lecture by Sheikh Hamza Yusuf where he mentioned that as Muslims we believe that the Creator is One, we believe the revelation is one; however, the revelation is being refracted through the prism of the human mind.
It reminded them of the famous cover of the Pink Floyd album “The Dark of the Moon.”
They found it an interesting point.
Clear has been defined as: 1. easy to perceive, understand, or interpret.
“clear and precise directions”
The quality of being clear, in particular.
The quality of coherence and intelligiblity.
Here are some examples of things that are clear but are they intelligible?
You will understand the meaning of the universe once the ball sings to Jill about the biz. Mace Windu understood the peanut butter sandwich using his clear signals so that the computer would jazz out to Dan Excalibur swimming passing the switchboard flying kites. Very funny though the syntax as he whizzed past the train, who was busy cramming algebraic thoughts into his fish tank.
The answer to five minus five is purple because pancakes don’t have bones.
Anyone familiar enough with the English language should be able to understand every word that we have typed above.
However, would anyone care to tell us what we were talking about above?
If the Qur’an is recited to people who do not understand the Arabic language is it clear to them?
The claim of the Qur’an is that it has has verses that are muḥkamāt and mutashābihāt
“It is He who caused the Book to descend to you. In it are verses, that are (muḥkamāt) definitive. They are the essence of the Book and others, ones that are (mutashābihāt) unspecific. Then, those whose hearts are swerving, they follow what was unspecific in it, seeking discord (l-fit’nati) and seeking its interpretation. And none know its interpretation save Allah and those firmly rooted in knowledge. They say, “We believe in it; all is from our Lord.” And none remember, save those who possess intellect.” (Qur’an 3:7).”
To us, the Qur’an makes it clear that it is both clear and unclear. If it was not the case, it would not be possible to ‘fitna’ or discord with something that is clear. We have already stated that in other places one of the sure signs of a cult or sect among Muslims is that they will try and appeal to a ‘controversial’ verse, or a verse that is subject to many interpretations to base their case. This has happened many times, especially in matters of theology.
For example, the Qur’an has many verses that make it clear that those who enter the hellfire do not escape from it. However, there are one or two verses that could be interpreted contrary to this. Thus, instead of taking the multitude of verses that make it clear that the one who enters hellfire does not escape from it, the people of the opposition take those one or two verses that are not entirely clear, and they build their theology upon this.
Also notice that the above text says: “And none know its interpretation save Allah and those firmly rooted in knowledge.“
If a text or a revelation was clear in and of itself, it would not only be grasped by men of understanding but by anyone.
Often the Qur’an begins a chapter with something ambiguous and then affirms that it is clear.
Examples abound:
“Alif, Lam, Ra. These are the verses of the Book and a clear Qur’an.” (Qur’an 15:1)
“Alif, Lam, Ra. These are the verses of the Clear Book. Indeed, We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur’an that you might understand.” (Qur’an 12:1-2)
“Ta, Seen, Meem. These are the verses of the Clear Book.” (Qur’an 26:1-2)
“Ta, Seen. These are the verses of the Qur’an and a clear Book“ (Qur’an 27:1)
“Ta, Seen, Meem. These are the verses of the Clear Book.” (Qur’an 28:1-2)
“Ha Meem, By the clear Book, (Qur’an 43:1-2)
“Ha Meem, By the clear Book, (Qur’an 44:1-2)
There is also something interesting here.
Allah (swt) informs us throughout the Qur’an that it is possible that his revelation may not be clear to people.
Examples:
“They ask you about intoxicants and gambling: say, “In them, there is a gross sin and some benefits for the people. But their sinfulness far outweighs their benefit.” They also ask you what to give to charity: say, “The excess.” Allah clarifies the revelations for you, that you may reflect,” (Qur’an 2:219)
“Do not marry idolatresses unless they believe; a believing woman is better than an idolatress, even if you like her. Nor shall you give your daughters in marriage to idolatrous men, unless they believe. A believing man is better than an idolater, even if you like him. These invite to Hell, while Allah invites to Paradise and forgiveness, as He wills. He clarifies His revelations for the people, that they may take heed.” (Qur’an 2:221)
“Allah thus explains His revelations for you, that you may understand.” (Qur’an 2:242)
“Do any of you wish to own a garden of palm trees and grapes, with flowing streams and generous crops, then, just as he grows old, and while his children are still dependent on him, a holocaust strikes and burns up his garden? Allah thus clarifies the revelations for you, that you may reflect.” (Qur’an 2:266)
“You shall hold fast to the rope of Allah, all of you, and do not be divided. Recall Allah’s blessings upon you – you used to be enemies, and He reconciled your hearts. By His grace, you became brethren. You were at the brink of a pit of fire, and He saved you there from. Allah thus explains His revelations to you, that you may be guided.” (Qur’an 3:301)
“O you who believe, do not befriend outsiders who never cease to wish you harm; they may even wish to see you suffer. Hatred flows out of their mouths and what they hide in their chests is far worse. We thus clarify the revelations for you, if you understand.” (Qur’an 3:108)
“They consult you; say, “Allah advises you concerning the single person. If one dies and leaves no children, and he had a sister, she gets half the inheritance. If she dies first, he inherits from her, if she leaves no children. If there were two sisters, they get two-thirds of the inheritance. If the siblings are men and women, the male gets twice the share of the female.” Allah thus clarifies for you, lest you go astray. Allah is fully aware of all things.” (Qur’an 4:176)
“Allah does not hold you responsible for the mere utterance of oaths; He holds you responsible for your actual intentions. If you violate an oath, you shall atone by feeding ten poor people with the same food you offer to your own family or clothing them, or by freeing a slave. If you cannot afford this, then you should fast for three days. This is the atonement for violating the oaths that you swore to keep. You shall fulfill your oaths. Allah thus explains His revelations to you, that you may be appreciative.” (Qur’an 5:89)
“Allah thus explains the revelations for you. Allah is Omniscient, Wise.” (Qur’an 24:18)
“O you who believe, permission must be requested by your servants and the children who have not attained puberty (before entering your rooms). This is to be done in three instances – before the Dawn Prayer, at noon when you change your clothes to rest, and after the Night Prayer. These are three private times for you. At other times, it is not wrong for you or them to mingle with one another. Allah thus clarifies the revelations for you. Allah is Omniscient, Most Wise.” (Qur’an 24:58)
“Once the children reach puberty, they must ask permission (before entering) like those who became adults before they have asked permission (before entering). Allah thus clarifies His revelations for you. Allah is Omniscient, Most Wise.” (Qur’an 24:59)
“The blind is not to be blamed, the crippled is not to be blamed, nor is handicapped to be blamed, just as you are not to be blamed for eating at your homes, or the homes of your fathers, or the homes of your mothers, or the homes of your brothers, or the homes of your sisters, or the homes of your fathers’ brothers, or the homes of your fathers’ sisters, or the homes of your mothers’ brothers, or the homes of your mothers’ sisters, or the homes that belong to you, and you possess their keys or the homes of your friends. You commit nothing wrong by eating together or as individuals. When you enter any home, you shall greet each other a greeting from Allah that is blessed and good. Allah thus explains the revelations for you, that you may understand.” (Qur’an 24:61)
“Know that Allah revives the land after it has died. We thus explain the revelations for you, that you may understand.” (Qur’an 57:17)
Prima Qur’an Comments:
All of these verses, if you removed the phrase ‘Allah thus explains/clarifies the revelations for you’, you could still get an understanding of the verses in question. However, Allah (swt) knows why He (swt) has decided to further elucidate on selected passages of the Qur’an.
Even when Allah (swt) says ‘We thus explain the revelations for you’ in the above passage about Allah (swt) giving life to the land after it has died, it doesn’t explain or clarify the ‘how’ of it. It simply says, ‘Know’.
Theological issues concerning the clarity of the Qur’an.
The Shafite Mutzalite ‘Abd al-Jabbar epitomized the Basra Mutazalite position on the principle of clarity. He declared that any form of delayed clarification was impossible not simply because Allah’s justice requires that he make his requirements known, but more importantly because his speech is his created act, and therefore must be good, from which it follows that his every utterance must fulfill its purpose of indicating his will.
This is a very important point that Shaykh Abd al-Jabbar has made. This is why we know many of the followerse of the Qur’an Only religion are in a very difficult situation theologically speaking.
According to the theory of meaning introduced by Shaykh Abu Ali al-Jubbai’ who was a Mutazalite rival of Shaykh Abd al-Jabbar, the meaning of an utterance is not simply a function of its verbal form, but also of the speaker’s will or intent.
Bottom line. If Allah cannot leave the meaning of his speech unclear, then he cannot leave humans without the evidence needed for reconciling seemingly conflicting texts. The fact that we lack evidence about which text came first must itself be evidence that the text should both be implemented, which is best accomplished by particularization. This is a strong logical proof for the Sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw).
In light of all of the above, would it not be fair to assert that this argument is oversimplified and the issue is a little more nuanced than that?
In fact, the clarity of the Qur’an is not internal to the Qur’an itself! It is dependent upon thoughtful reflection!
“Thus do We explain the verses for a people who give thought.” (Qur’an 10:24)
The static you hear in an untuned or poorly tuned radio is the random background noise, but the coherent radio transmission signal within that noise requires a radio receiver to decode it.
The receiver performs several critical functions to achieve this:
Tuning: It selects a specific frequency from the myriad of radio waves the antenna picks up, filtering out others.
Amplification: It strengthens the weak incoming signal to a usable level.
Demodulation: This is the actual decoding step. The receiver separates the original information (such as sound or data) from the carrier wave that transported it.
Output: It converts the decoded electronic signal into an audible sound or viewable data.
The following verse that we are going to quote caused our colleague to drift off in thought. They mentioned that it was challenging to type this as their eyes welled up with tears, and their heart was overflowing in love for the Beloved Vessel (saw) that Allah (swt) gave such a monumental task to carry!
“If We had sent down this Qur’an upon a mountain, you would have seen it humbled and coming apart from fear of Allah. And these examples We present to the people that perhaps they will give thought. (Qur’an 59:21)
Subhan’Allah!
Our point is that the Blessed Messenger (saw) did not have the medium of his mind like we do when approaching the Qur’an with our limited human reasoning and capacity. The total and complete understanding of the Qur’an was poured into his heart. His heart and conscience were light. There is no prism, no spectrum when it comes to the Blessed Messenger. (saw)
Let us be honest for a second and ask ourselves. How many of us can say we have reached the state of total and complete submission in the way that Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammed (May Allah’s choicest blessings and peace be upon them all) did?
The Proof Is In the Pudding.
The very fact that there is now a proliferation of Qur’an only groups, each vying with each other, each with disparate understandings of a revelation that they in their approach to revelation says ‘is clear as day’.
So we end up with some groups saying the Qur’an requires us to pray 2 times a day, or 3 times a day, and some saying that there is no ritual prayer at all!
However, some of the Quraniyoon will just keep throwing their selective verses of choice at you again and again.
I think the point is missed. We as Muslims do not disagree with any verse of the Qur’an as being a revelation. We agree with the Qur’an does it say it ‘explains itself’ and that it is ‘clear’.
Part of that explanation and elucidation comes through the example of the Blessed Messenger (saw) himself.
“It is He Who raised up among the unlettered a Messenger from among them who recounts His signs to them and makes them pure and teaches them the Book and wisdom even though they had been before, certainly, clearly going astray.” (Quran 25:32)
Teaches them– wayuʿallimuhumu — when you teach or instruct someone you are doing more than simply relaying information. A teacher does not simply pass a student a book and say, ‘here you go‘.
Those who follow the Qur’an Onlyl religion will often claim that the Blessed Messenger is only a letter carrier. There is a deception in saying that his only duty is to convey the message.
Yet this is contradicted by the following:
Say, “Obey Allah and obey the Messenger. But if you turn away, then he is only responsible for his duty, and you are responsible for yours. And if you obey him, you will be ˹rightly˺ guided. The Messenger’s duty is only to deliver ˹the message˺ clearly.” (Qur’an 24:54)
“But if they turn away [Messenger], remember that your only responsibility is to deliver this revelation clearly.” (Qur’an 16:82)
The second part of instruction is would relate to things that need demonstration.
“When you are with them and you lead them in prayer, let one group of them pray with you—while armed. When they prostrate themselves, let the other group stand guard behind them. Then the group that has not yet prayed will then join you in prayer—and let them be vigilant and armed.” (Qur’an 4:102)
“Say, [O Muhammed], “If you should love Allah, then follow me, [so] Allah will love you and forgive you your sins. And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 3:31)
The above verse is conditional. The love of Allah (swt) is conditional upon love for the Blessed Prophet (saw).
“Certainly did Allah confer a favour upon the believers when He sent among them a Messenger from themselves, reciting to them His verses and purifying them(wayuzakkihim) and teaching them (wayuʿallimuhumu) the Book and wisdom, although they had been before in manifest error.” (Qur’an 3:164)
It stands to reason that the Blessed Messenger (saw) could not ‘purify’ the believers if he himself was not purified!
teaching them (wayuʿallimuhumu) -it cannot be said that I am teaching anyone if I was simlpy just a mail carrier.
The Qur’an itself refutes this.
“And obey Allah and obey the Messenger. But if you turn away, then Our Messenger is only responsible for conveying the message clearly.”(Qur’an 64:12)
The Blessed Messenger (saw) explained the message. That is the purpose of bayan. This is reflected in the words, deeds, and actions — what we know as the sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw).
To believe that the Blessed Messenger (saw) was not an expositor as someone who lived and imbibed the teachings of the Qur’an is difficult to fathom.
“O People of the Scripture, there has come to you Our Messenger, making clear to you much of what you used to conceal of the Scripture and overlooking much. There has come to you from Allah a light and a clear Book.” (Qur’an 5:15)
“Then do they not reflect upon the Qur’an, or are there locks upon their hearts?” (Qur’an 47:24)
There are many people who read the Qur’an and it does not do anything to their hearts. That is because the Islam consist of accepting that Muhammed (saw) is the last of Allah’s Messengers. The Blessed Prophet (saw) is that light. So the people who read the Qur’an without that light they read the Qur’an in darkness.
There was no prism, no veil, and no lock upon the heart of the Blessed Messenger (saw)!
So is the Qur’an clear?
Allah (swt) has made it clear that the Qur’an has verses that are muḥkamāt and mutashābihāt.
“In it are verses, that are (muḥkamāt) definitive. They are the essence of the Book.” (Qur’an 3:7)
Then there are verses that are a trial.
“and others, ones that are (mutashābihāt) unspecific. Then, those whose hearts are swerving, they follow what was unspecific in it, seeking discord (l-fit’nati) and seeking its interpretation.” (Qur’an 3:7)
Even then this verse seems directed at the people who are hasty with the Qur’an as Allah (swt) admonishes the Blessed Prophet (saw).
High above all is Allah, the King, the Truth! Be not in haste with the Qur’an before its revelation to you is completed, but say, “O my Lord! advance me in knowledge.” (Qur’an 20:114)
The Qur’an also makes it clear that it requires clarity. We see Allah (swt) himself has to come and introduce phrases such as, ‘Allah thus explains/clarifies the revelations for you’ as if otherwise it wouldn’t be clear.
The Qur’an makes it clear that the Blessed Prophet (saw) would explain the Qur’an and teach it to us.
“Indeed, Allah does not feel shy in citing any parable, be it that of a gnat or of something above it (in meanness). Now, as for those who believe, they know it is the truth from their Lord; while those who disbelieve say, “What could Allah have meant by this parable?” By this He lets many go astray, and by this He makes many find guidance. But He does not let anyone go astray thereby except those who are sinful.” (Qur’an 2:26)
“He it is Who has sent down the Book upon thee; therein are signs determined; they are the Mother of the Book, and others symbolic. As for those whose hearts are given to swerving, they follow that of it which is symbolic, seeking temptation and seeking its interpretation. And none know its interpretation save Allah and those firmly rooted in knowledge. They say, “We believe in it; all is from our Lord.” And none remember, save those who possess intellect.” (Qur’an 3:7) -The Study Qur’an.
“It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammed], 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.” (Qur’an 3:7) -(Sahih International)
﷽
By the grace of Allah (swt) we have finally got around to writing this article. This is something we have been meaning to write about for some time now.
We asked some brothers to write their experiences of why they chose the Ibadi school or what drew them to the school. We were quite surprised at the re-telling of one story when we read the following:
“I read Ibadis take Qur’an seriously and don’t make tafsir of it to validate their personal prejudices. They believe only Allah knows the Qur’ans true meaning.”
We were really quite shocked and surprised by this. When we tried to correct the brother on this misunderstanding, he was rather recalcitrant. So we simply asked him where he got this information from.
To his credit, he cited the Qur’an 3:7. That is fine and good, but he did not cite any Ibadi sources, saying that only Allah knows the Qur’an’s true meaning. The reason he did not cite them is that none exist! There are no Ibadi sources stating this.
Second, simply using logic, we asked him what was the point of sending a revelation that no one will understand? That is an exercise in futility at best.
Finally, we pointed out to him that his contention (which is certainly not from the Ibadi) was in relation to the mutashabih.
For example, as we read to him the following:
“He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are(muḥ’kamātun) decisive, they are the basis of the Book), and others are allegorical…” (Shakir’s translation)
muḥ’kamātun -which actually can be translated as clear. Or that which does not require further elaboration.
So, even then, we informed him that the muḥ’kamātun verses are certainly not verses in which anyone says that only Allah (swt) knows them. The dispute is rather about the mutashābihātun.
Mutashābihātun is often translated as unspecific, symbolic, allegorical, subject to more than one interpretation or understanding. So the center of dispute is around such verses.
The importance of punctuation.
So here we have two sentences:
I take great pleasure in eating my dog and my plants.
I take great pleasure in eating, my dog, and my plants.
The first sentence would leave the reader with the impression that a person takes great pleasure in eating their dog and their plants.
The second sentence would leave the reader with the impression that the person takes great pleasure in eating, as well as finding pleasure in having a dog and having plants.
This will give you an exhaustive list of different translations. The keen eye will note the following:
Translations that state that Allah and people grounded in knowledge know the meaning of the mutashabiha, such as:
“He it is Who has sent down the Book upon thee; therein are signs determined; they are the Mother of the Book, and others symbolic. As for those whose hearts are given to swerving, they follow that of it which is symbolic, seeking temptation and seeking its interpretation. And none know its interpretation save God and those firmly rooted in knowledge. They say, “We believe in it; all is from our Lord.” And none remember, save those who possess intellect.” (Qur’an 3:7) The Study Qur’an.
Translations that state that only Allah knows the meaning of the mutashabiha such as:
“It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammed], 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.” (Qur’an 3:7) (Sahih International)
Translations that seem to be ambiguous on the matter due to their punctuation.
“He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding.” (Shakir)
“It is He who revealed to you the Scripture. Some of its verses are definitive—they are the foundation of the Book—while others are allegorical. Those with deviant hearts pursue the allegorical, seeking discord and seeking its interpretation. However, none knows its interpretation except God and those firmly grounded in knowledge say, “We believe in it; all of it is from our Lord.” Only those endowed with understanding take heed.” (Talal Itani & AI 2024)
“It is God who has revealed the Book to you in which some verses are clear statements (which accept no interpretation) and these are the fundamental ideas of the Book, while other verses may have several possibilities. Those whose hearts are perverse, follow the unclear statements in pursuit of their own mischievous goals by interpreting them in a way that will suit their own purpose. No one knows its true interpretations except God and those who have a firm grounding in knowledge say, “We believe in it. All its verses are from our Lord.” No one can grasp this fact except the people of reason.” (Muhammed Sarwar)
So what is going on here?
Note that the verse states about the people who are firmly grounded/rooted in knowledge will say that: “We believe in it; all of it is from our Lord.”
Note that the verse talks about some people who are hyper-fixated upon the mutashabiha.
“Then, as for those in whose hearts there is perversity, they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation.”
Note that these people are not described as people of knowledge.
The first principle of interpreting the Qur’an is: Tafsir al-Quran bi-l-Quran. (Interpreting the Qur’an by the Qur’an)
The second principle is interpreting the mutashabi (unspecific, allegorical, subject to several interpretations) is to establish its meaning by that which is muḥ’kam (foundational, not requiring further clarity).
For example, the Blessed Prophet (saw) can bring elaboration and elucidation.
“With clear proofs and divine Books. And We have sent down to you the Reminder, so that you may explain to people what has been revealed for them, and perhaps they will reflect.” (Qur’an 16:44)
So, when it comes to our faith, we do not base it upon that which is mutashabi. In fact, the beautiful point of this whole verse is not to muddy the waters but to give the believers a clear sign concerning the people of schism and aberrant doctrines. You will more often than not find misguided sects that will base their framework upon a verse(s) that is/are mutashabi. They base theological doctrines upon such.
The people of sound doctrine interpret the mutashabi in light of the muh’kam. Thus, those firmly grounded and rooted in knowledge of the muh’kam are the best capable of extrapolating the meaning of the mutashabi. Chief among them is the Noble Messenger (saw).
Which brings us to our first point.
If we are to understand Qur’an 3:7 as regarding the mutashbi verses that ‘no one can understand except Allah’ then it means those who hold such a position believe that Muhammed (saw), to whom the Qur’an was revealed did not even know the meaning of such verses.
This notion is refuted by the verse already mentioned:
“With clear proofs and divine Books. And We have sent down to you the Reminder, so that you may explain to people what has been revealed for them, and perhaps they will reflect.” (Qur’an 16:44)
The Blessed Prophet (saw) would explain what has been revealed to them. What has been revealed to them is the Qur’an. If the Blessed Prophet (saw) did not understand it, no one ever would. Thus, we would be given a Qur’an in which much of it is concealed from us.
Also, this verse shows that the Blessed Prophet (saw) comprehended what was revealed to him:
“Exalted is Allah, The True King! Do not rush to recite the Quran before it is (yuq’da) conveyed as revelation (waḥyuhu) , and pray, “My Lord! Increase me in knowledge.”
Is it possible that the Qur’an can be concealed from us?
The answer to that is yes. The Qur’an itself mentions that, due to the sinful and/or arrogant nature of some human hearts, they will never be able to penetrate the Qur’an.
“And We place a covering on their hearts so that they do not comprehend it, and We cause a heaviness in their ears; and when you mention your Lord, the Only True Lord, in the Qur’an, they turn their backs in aversion” (Qur’an 17:46)
“And who is more unjust than one who is reminded of the verses of his Lord but turns away from them and forgets what his hands have put forth? Indeed, We have placed over their hearts coverings, lest they understand it, and in their ears deafness. And if you invite them to guidance – they will never be guided, then – ever.” (Qur’an 18:57)
“Will they then not (yatadabbarūna)meditate on the Qur’an, or are there locks on the hearts?” (Qur’an 47:24)
“This is a Book which We have sent down to you, full of blessings that they may (liyaddabbarū) ponder over its Verses, and that (ulu l-albabi)men of understanding may remember.” (Qur’an 38:29)
It is also our contention that the muh’kam verses could have a mutashabi aspect to them which is brought about through tabbadur (reflection, pondering) and using the methods of sound tafsir that are available to us.
An example:
“None touch (yamassuhu) it except the (l-muṭaharūna) purified.” (Qur’an 56:79)
This verse is generally understood by the fuqaha (people of jurisprudence) as a reference to being clean when touching and handling the mushaf of the Qur’an. This makes sense, as reverence towards the sacred text is the obvious meaning.
However, we also know that there are people who are not clean who pick up and touch the Qur’an. Muslims who are not in a state of ablution and people like the demented Christian polemists that ate pages of the Qur’an or the U.S. military that would put the Qur’an into the toilet. (Surely they incurred the curse of Allah, and it remains upon them until they repent).
muṭaharūna-is also understood to mean angels.
Another way to understand the text of Qur’an 56:79 is to understand that yamassuhu is not like ‘yalmasuhu’.
So, for example, in the Qur’an we have:
“If something good ‘tamasakum’ (comes your way), it grieves them.” (Qur’an 3:120) This does not necessarily mean only to physically touch.
Also, in the preceding verse we have:
“In a well-preserved Record.” (Qur’an 56:78)
In this context, the purified (mataharuna) are indeed the angels and this refers to the Tablet in paradise.
That when it comes to the believers, there is an adaab (mannerism) in how we handle the sacred text.
That only those who are sincere and have purity of intention will be moved by this Qur’an and able, by Allah’s grace, find such meanings via reflection.
Point 3 describes such a state or condition of truth seekers among Christians.
“And when they hear what has been revealed to the Messenger, you see their eyes overflowing with tears because of what they have recognized of the truth. They say, “Our Lord, we have believed, so register us among the witnesses.”(Qur’an 5:83)
So when it comes to the reading of the Qur’an 3:7 there are two opinions on the matter.
One opinion says that the reader of the Qur’an should stop at: “But none knows its interpretation except Allah.” Then (after a brief pause) continue reading: “and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say.”
The second opinion is that one does not pause, but one should continue reading: “But none knows its interpretation except Allah and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge. They say,”
So how did this difference come about?
Punctuation marks or (Rumuz al-Awqaf) were added by the scholars after the death of the Blessed Prophet (saw).
Diacritical marks (Tashkeel) to distinguish words or grammatical structures were added by scholars after the death of the Blessed Prophet (saw).
ﻡ “This letter mim is an abbreviation of al-waqf al-lazim. It means if a stop is not made here, an outrageous distortion in the meaning of the verse is possible. So, it is better to stop here. Some phoneticians of the Qur’an have also called this al-waqf al-wajib or the obligatory stop. But this is not ‘wajib’ of fiqh, which brings sin if abandoned. In fact, the purpose is to stress that making a stop here is the most preferable of all stops (al-Nashr, 1/231).”
We find this al-waqf al-lazim in Qur’an 3:7 after “except Allah.” This was done with the intention of making the recitation of the Qur’an easier. These additional punctuations, though welcomed for ease of recitation, were neither given by Allah (swt) nor his Blessed Messenger (saw).
This is also something that follow the ‘Qur’an Only religion’ fail to grasp. That is the very textual history and transmission of the Qur’an.
“A. L. R. (This is) a Book, with verses that give judgement (uḥ’kimat) and these are expounded upon (fuṣṣilat) – from One Who is Wise and Well-acquainted (with all things).” (Qur’an 11:1)
An objection based upon improper understanding of the Arabic grammar and syntax.
Beyond the importance of punctuation.
The importance of understanding Arabic grammar and syntax and language!
One objection that is raised is usually by those who do not have a sound grasp of Arabic grammar, or syntax. That objection is as follows:
“But none knows its interpretation except Allah and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge. They say, “We believe in this it is all from our Lord.”
So the objection is based upon their misunderstanding that Allah (swt) would not say: “We believe in this it is all from our Lord.”
But this is not the proper understanding at all. The verse: “We believe in this it is all from our Lord.” Is a reference to : “Those who are firmly rooted in knowledge.” and not to Allah (swt).
This was a conversation with a brother from the Zaydi school, and we pointed out to him a similar example to this in (Qur’an 18:80) but he has never replied to that point.
What point is that?
Let us give context to the verse:
“As for the ship, it belonged to some poor people, working at sea. So I intended to damage it, for there was a king ahead of them who seizes every ship by force. “And as for the boy, his parents were believers, and we feared that he would pressure them into defiance and disbelief. So we hoped that their Lord would give them another, more virtuous and caring in his place. And as for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys in the city, and there was beneath it a treasure for them, and their father had been righteous. So your Lord intended that they reach maturity and extract their treasure, as a mercy from your Lord. And I did it not of my own accord. That is the interpretation of that about which you could not have patience.”(Qur’an 18:79-82)
There are three points here:
Causing damage to the boat fa-aradttu (I intended)
The killing of the child and the subsequent replacement of fakhashina (we disliked) fa-aradna (we intended). A. Killing the child (he returns to himself)B. Allah replaces the child with another one. Killing is from Khidr and the Replacing is from Allah.
Causing the boys to reach maturity. Fa-arada rabbuka (Your Lord intended)
fa-aradttu 1st person singular
fakhashina 1st person plural perfect verb
fa-aradna 1st person plural
fa-arada 3rd person masculine singular
Not really having the depth of Arabic grammar or syntax, one can make these types of mistakes or rely upon this type of misunderstanding. May Allah help us.
A faulty argument used by our side against the other.
There has been a faulty argument that has been used by those of us who believe Qur’an 3:7 should be understood as: Allah and people grounded in knowledge know the meaning of the mutashabiha.
It is used to assail those who believe Qur’an 3:7 should be understood as: only Allah knows the meaning of the mutashabiha.
That argument goes like this.
To say that we believe in it, but we do not know what it means would be like saying we do not know what we believe.
This is not a fair argument against the other side. The reason being is that first, and foremost, there is no group among the Muslims that feel that they are unncertain about what they believe. We may dispute this. However, every group of Muslims are confident and certain about what the core tenets of their belief are.
Secondly, Allah (swt) could have such verses to leave us gobsmacked. Also, to humble us.
“But above those ranking in knowledge is the One All-Knowing.” (Qur’an 12:76)
Prima Qur’an concluding remarks.
It is not the position of the Ibadis school that only Allah knows the meaning of the Qur’an. You are not going to find this in any of the books by the Ibadi.
The difference in understanding of Qur’an 3:7 has to do with the Rumuz al-Awqaf (punctuation marks).
The dispute is not over the muh’kam but rather over who understands the mutashabi.
As the Blessed Prophet (saw) understood the whole of the Qur’an, it is not possible to render the reading as only Allah knows.
The people firmly rooted in knowledge are those who base their understanding upon the muh’kam.
The people whose hearts are given to perversity and deviation go straight to mutashabi.
The irony is that the understanding of this verse must fall under the category of muh’kam or else it would be mutashabi and thus all who give an understanding of it would be among the perverse. The self-refuting nature of this is evident.
With reflection and understanding that which is mutashabi can become muh’kam.
May Allah (swt) guide us to what is beloved to him.
Say, “Have you considered: if the Qur’an is from Allah and you disbelieved in it, who would be more astray than one who is in extreme dissension? We will show them Our signs in the horizons and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that it is the truth. But is it not sufficient concerning your Lord that He is, over all things, a Witness? Unquestionably, they are in doubt about the meeting with their Lord. Unquestionably He is, of all things, encompassing.” (Qur’an 41:52-54)
﷽
If the Qur’an is all that is needed for any person, why would Allah (swt) say that he would show us signs on the horizons and within ourselves until ‘It‘—becomes clear that ‘It‘—the Qur’an—is the truth?
So the question becomes: how do they know that the Qur’an is complete?
For example, there is absolutely nowhere in the entirety of the Qur’an that says “this Qur’an will consist of so many chapters, verses, and letters.” Why do they accept the Qur’an in the arrangement it is now in? What proof does the Qur’an Only religion have to suggest that surah al Fatiha should be placed first and surah an nass last?
Of course, someone could quote the following text: “We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it against corruption.” (Qur’an 15:9)
Yet, this is absolutely beside the point. Everyone would agree with this statement. But the point is that “It” is not internally defined.
Ironically, the adherents of the Qur’an only religion cannot even get past the first verse of the Qur’an without coming to a major decision.
Is “Bismillah ir rahman ir raheem” a verse at the beginning of Surah Al Fatiha or not?
There is absolutely no way to substantiate this claim internally. The irony of ironies here is that rather or not the ‘bismillah’ should be included at the beginning of Surah Al Fatiha is left up to criteria outside the Qur’an to determine!
“Indeed, it is We who have sent down to you, [O Muhammed], the Qur’an, progressively.” (Qur’an 76:23)
Everyone agrees that ‘Basmalla’ is a verse inside the Qur’an.
“It is from Solomon and is (as follows): ‘In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful:” (Qur’an 27:30)
However, why are the followers of the Qur’an Only religion in dispute on rather or not this should occur at the beginning of every chapter or not?
You can go to one Quran Only website and find them not including the bismillah as a verse included before every chapter here: http://www.free-minds.org/quran/PM/2
Whereas other followers of the Qur’an Only religoin openly disputes with those at free-minds.org. You can see the “submitters’ here:
“And We have bestowed upon thee the Seven Oft-repeated (verses) and the Grand Qur’an.” (Qur’an 15:87)
This may be the only place where the Qur’an mentions a section of itself outside another section. In other words, if we are to believe this verse as revelation, it clearly states for us to look out for the ‘seven oft repeated’. Yet, interestingly there is ambiguity surrounding this very verse. That is if we abandon the tradition altogether.
There is a very interesting observation.
It is interesting that the Qur’an mentions that these verses are ‘seven oft repeated’. This can only be confirmed outside the text as we do not find these verses reoccurring in the Qur’an at all.
Who are these people?
“And when you said to the one on whom Allah bestowed favor, and you bestowed favor, “Keep your wife and fear Allah, ” while you concealed within yourself that which Allah is to disclose. And you fear the people, while Allah has more right that you fear Him. So, when Zayd had no longer any need for her, We married her to you in order that there would not be upon the believers any discomfort concerning the wives of their adopted sons when they no longer have need of them. And ever is the command of Allah accomplished” (Qur’an 33:37)
Who is Zayd?
Why is he mentioned in the Qur’an?
What are these verses all about?
What was it that the Blessed Messenger (saw) concealed that Allah (swt) was about to make known?
How does Allah ‘marry’ someone to the Blessed Messenger (saw) ?
“May the hands of Abu Lahab be ruined, and ruined is he. His wealth will not avail him or that which he gained. He will burn in a fire of flames and his wife — the carrier of firewood. Around her neck is a rope of fiber.” (Qur’an 1:1-5)
Who is Abu Lahab?
Why is he mentioned in the Qur’an?
What are these verses all about?
Who is his wife?
What did they do to deserve these descriptions of them from the Almighty?
What major doctrines of Islam would we lose if any of those verses were not in the Qur’an?
Why does Allah (swt) need or even desire to communicate his message through any medium at all?
Be it textual, oral or human. Why not just reveal the revelation directly to each individual directly? Surely Allah (swt) is capable of doing all things.
Why does the Qur’an constantly point to outside sources to verify its claims and veracity?
Some points of consideration:
“Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find mentioned in what they have in the Torah and the Gospel, who enjoins upon them what is right and forbids them what is wrong and makes lawful for them the good things and prohibits for them the evil and relieves them of their burden and the shackles which were upon them. So those who have believed in him, honored him, supported him and followed the light which was sent down with him — it is those who will be the successful.” (Qur’an 7:157)
This verse is very explicit in that the veracity of its statement stands on whether the People of the Book (Ahl Kitab) actually find mention of the Blessed Messenger (saw).
The veracity of the entire Qur’an rests in Muslims being able to prove this claim. The proof of this claim rests in sources outside the revelation itself.
“Say, “Have you considered that which you invoke besides Allah ? Show me what they have created of the earth; or did they have a partnership in the heavens? Bring me a scripture before this or a trace of knowledge, if you should be truthful.” (Qur’an 46:4)
“This Qur’an narrates to the Children of Israel most of what they are in dispute over.” (Qur’an 27:76)
In order to verify this claim, one would have to be intimately familiar with outside sources of reference; in particular, they would have to have a great deal of information concerning the disputes of the Children of Israel.
It is clear that the Qur’an is not a self enclosed eco system.
“It is He Who has sent down to thee the Book: In it are Verses that are entirely clear; they are the foundation of the Book: others are not entirely clear. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is not entirely clear, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord:” and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.” (Qur’an 3:7)
﷽
It is our humble opinion that the verse above in the Qur’an is a very wise and beautiful criterion for establishing when someone or some group is trying to create dissension among the ranks of the Muslims. Namely, when they are trying to create sectarian views and/or break away from the faith of Islam altogether.
It has been our experience time and again that every time we run into some pseudo-Islamic group that want us to join their particular theological, juristic or spiritual understanding of Islam, they will more often than not quote those verses that are not entirely clear. They will attempt to give fixed meanings to verses that are not entirely clear. Rather, what they should do is fear Allah and be humble.
These people should say rather, ‘This is what it could mean.’ ‘This is a possible meaning or an interpretation of the verse.’
One such group is the ‘submitters’. As they have also split into several groups over the years, or there has arisen dissension in their ranks, we will give you links to their websites so that you can read from their perspectives and form your own conclusion. Ultimately, Allah alone is the source of guidance.
We have included two additional websites that are ‘spin-offs’ from the submitters -splinter groups. Those that, over the course of time, ended up having some differences between each other.
These, to our limited knowledge, are the more prominent websites that espouse the view of following one of the many sects among the Qur’an alone religion.
What is interesting is that submission.org claims that the Qur’an is divinely protected and safeguarded by an interlocking mathematical code based upon the number 19.
“Over it are nineteen. And We have not made the keepers of the Fire except angels. And We have not made their number except as a trial for those who disbelieve – that those who were given the Scripture will be convinced and those who have believed will increase in faith and those who were given the Scripture and the believers will not doubt and that those in whose hearts is hypocrisy and the disbelievers will say, “What does Allah intend by this as an example?” Thus does Allah leave astray whom He wills and guides whom He wills. And none knows the soldiers of your Lord except Him. And mention of the Fire is not but a reminder to humanity. (Qur’an 74:30-31)“
What the submission.org people advocate is that this verse above refers to the phrase ‘bismillah ir rahman ir raheem‘ which is translated as ‘with the name of Allah the Most Gracious the Most Merciful’. That this phrase is key to the interlocking mathematical code that the Qur’an is based upon.
To us, the numbernineteen above in context refers to the angels, or ‘soldiers’ who are guarding the hellfire. However, if it is unclear what the number nineteen is a reference to, then this is exactly what Allah warned us about in the (Qur’an 3:7) “But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is not entirely clear, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings…”
The submission.org people also make an issue of the letters that will often appear at the beginning of many chapters of the Qur’an.
For example:
Alif Laam Meem Raa (Qur’an 13:1)
Alif Laam Meen (Qur’an 3:1)
Alif Laam Meem (Qur’an 2:1)
These letters, standing alone at the beginning of chapters, have puzzled many Muslim scholars. However, submission.org attempts to give fixed meaning to that which is not entirely clear.
Rashad Khalifa (chief architect) of submission.org also completely ignored what Allah said by taking two verses out of the Qur’an!
He took them out because the letters in the verses did not tally with his number nineteen interlocking mathematical code.
“We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it.” (Qur’an 15:9)
So for 1400 years, the Qur’an had these ‘two extra verses’ and no one noticed that until Rashad Khalifa came with his interlocking mathematical code based upon the number nineteen?
The number 19 interlocking mathematical code has not been shown to work with other ahruf/qira’at*of the Qur’an.
*Note. ahruf/qira’at refer to different transmissions of the Qur’an and ways of recitation. Allah willing, we will have some entries about this in the future as well.
To us, these facts alone make the claims of Rashad Khilafa very dubious.
Here is a glaring inconsistency for anyone to investigate for themselves.
You will see them give their take on the prayer. Now notice something very interesting when it comes to the call to prayer (azaan)
This is what they have written:
Azaan is not a part of the Contact Prayers, nor is it required. But it has become a tradition in the Muslim communities to summon the people to prayer through a loud announcement. The original Azaan used to conform with the Quran’s teachings and became corrupted with time.
Originally, the call to prayer consisted of: (1) Allahu Akbar (God is Great), 4 times. (2) Laa Elaaha Ellah Allah (There is no other god beside God), once. Many years later, some people added Muhammad’s name to the Azaan. This violates God’s commandments in 2:136, 2:285, 3:84, 4:150, and 72:18. Later, other groups of Muslims added the names of Ali and his family. Today, the Azaan is severely corrupted throughout the Muslim world and constitutes idol worship, not submission to God ALONE.
Prima Qur’an comments:
1 Notice that there is no problem with the call to prayer being accepted as a handed-down tradition or practice in the Muslim community?
2. “The original Azaam used to conform with the Quran’s teachings, and became corrupted with time.” Notice that they do not even furnish any evidence or proof for this.
3. “Originally, the call to prayer consisted of.” Again noticed that no proof is furnished of how the call to prayer was ‘originally’.
4. When Muslims say in the call to prayer that Muhammed is the Messenger of God, submission takes things too far by declaring it idol worship.
Under the section:
What Nullifies Ablution
“Digestive excretions through the intestines, including gas, solids, or urine nullify ablution. Sleeping also nullifies ablution, since one becomes unaware. Thus, one may observe a number of Contact Prayers with one ablution, provided he or she does not go to the bathroom, pass gas, or fall asleep.”
Notice absolutely no reference from the Qur’an.
2.The Intention
“In your own language, secretly or audibly, state your intention that you are about to observe the Contact Prayer. Remember to state the time (dawn, noon, afternoon, sunset, or night).”
Notice absolutely no reference to the Qur’an. Why would I have to say my intention? Isn’t God aware of what I am about to do?
3. “Raise your hands to the sides of your face: Your thumbs touch your ears, and the palms of your hands face forward.”
Notice absolutely no reference from the Qur’an.
5. The Standing Position:
“You are now standing with your arms resting naturally at your side. Some people place the left hand on the stomach, and the right hand on top of the left hand. Either position is correct – you may place your hands on your stomach while standing, or you may let your arms hang down by your sides.”
Notice absolutely no reference from the Qur’an. How does he know that ‘either position is correct’? The Qur’an does not say anything on the matter!
The Contact Prayers and The Quran’s Mathematical Code
“As noted above, the Dawn, Noon, Afternoon, Sunset, and Night Prayers consist of 2, 4, 4, 3, & 4 units, respectively. When we put these 5 numbers next to each other we get 24434, and this number is a multiple of 19 (24434 = 19 x 1286). The common denominator of the Quran’s code is 19. This phenomenon confirms that the number of units for each Contact Prayer has been preserved intact, but the sequence 2, 4, 4, 3, and 4 is also confirmed.”
Now notice how contrived this is! He claims that the sequence of 2, 4, 4, 3, and 4 is confirmed. Where is it confirmed? Well, accordingly, you can place 24434 divided by 19 and get 1286! Hmm well, o.k! So what is so special about 1286? Also, notice we could shift the number of units around. For example, we could say the night prayer is 2 units, the dawn prayer is 3 units, the sunset prayer is 4 units, the afternoon prayer is 4 units, the noon prayer is 4 units and we would get 23444. In fact, you could shift it around a number of ways.
This is completely contrived! If you don’t believe that, just read on and see what he says concerning the Friday Prayer.
The Friday Prayer
“The Friday Congregational Prayer (Salat Al-Jum`ah) is so important, a whole sura is entitled “Friday” and a commandment is decreed in Verse 62:9 to observe this prayer. Every Submitter – man, woman, and child – is commanded by God to observe the Friday Congregational Prayer.”
“The Friday Prayer replaces the Noon Prayer every Friday. Instead of 4 units, the Friday Prayer consists of listening to two sermons delivered by the Imam, and two units of prayer.”
Where does he get this from? The Qur’an does not say that. Let us see if we use his formula of 19. 22434/19 =1180.7368. Hmm, well o.k. What is so special about 1180.7368?
We have given the links above to their web sites. As far as we are concerned this whole idea of the Qur’an is based upon the number 19 is more arbitrary than anything else.
However, not all of the Qur’an only groups that broke away from Islam to form their own religion direct their anti-tradition stance simply based upon the number 19. Many of the followers of the Qur’an only religion also have broken off from Rashad Khilafa. They do not buy into the number 19 claim. Many of them simply refer to verses contained within the Qur’an itself.
Examples:
“Shall I then seek a judge other than Allah? When it is He Who has revealed to you the Book fully detailed?” (Qur’an 6:114)
“Should We treat the ones who have surrendered the same as those who are criminals? What is wrong with you, how do you judge? Or do you have another book which you study? In it, you find whatever you wish to find?” (Qur’an 68:36-38)
“Have you considered those who were asked to accept judgement from Allah’s Book? When they are asked to accept judgement from Allah’s Book, some of them turn their backs and walk away!” (Qur’an 3:23)
“These are the verses of Allah which we rehearse to you with the truth. Then in what Hadith will they believe in after Allah and His verses? (Qur’an45:6).”
Here are some of the many reasons why we feel it is not practical to take from the Qur’an alone. We will also present some reasons why it can be problematic to take from the Qur’an alone.
1) The position of Qur’an Only Religion simply divorces the Qur’an from history. The Qur’an becomes devoid of any context. There are many verses in the Qur’an that address the Blessed Messenger (saw) and his community. Anyone who even has a cursory reading of the Qur’an will see this is the case. There is no doubt that there is an intimate relationship between the Qur’an and the Blessed Messenger (saw), as well as his community. The Qur’an was revealed in ‘real-time’ to address the needs and concerns of the community.
Allah never says in the Qur’an that we cannot look outside the Qur’an for guidance and elucidation. Allah simply reminds us that the Qur’an is the final criterion for this.
“And they say: “None will enter Paradise unless he is a Jew or a Christian.” Those are their desires. Say: “Produce your proof if you are truthful.” (Qur’an 2:111)
Now can you imagine Allah commanding us to tell the Jews and Christians to produce their proof/evidence, and we do not have people who are qualified to do that? It doesn’t make any sense. You can imagine that the Jews and Christians will indeed produce their proof/evidence. If the claim to produce your proof is a sincere claim, then we have to examine what they produce.
“Say, “I do not find within that which was revealed to me] forbidden to one who would eat it unless it is a dead animal or blood spilled out or the flesh of swine – for indeed, it is impure – or it is disobedience, dedicated to other than Allah. But whoever is forced, neither desiring nor transgressing, then indeed, your Lord is Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 6:145)
So could we understand from this verse that it is perfectly fine for us to cook food with bone marrow from swine, and we could also consume swine fat. We could technically cook with pig lard. The command in the Qur’an is very clear that the prohibition is only against the flesh of swine. Believe it or not, this is the opinion of the scholar Ibn Hazm. He rejected Qiyas (analogy) though he later modified some of his positions. Ibn Hazm was a follower of Dawud Az-Zahiri and promoted a literal interpretation of the Qur’an.
“Permitted to you, on the night of the fasts, is the approach to your wives. They are your garments and ye are their garments. Allah knoweth what you used to do secretly among yourselves, but He turned to you and forgave you; so now associate with them, and seek what Allah Has ordained for you, and eat and drink, until the white thread of dawn appear to you distinct from its black thread; then complete your fast till the night appears.” (Qur’an 2:187)
How are we to obey this ruling of the Qur’an if we were to live in parts of Alaska, Finland, Norway, and Sweden when there are 6 months of darkness and 6 months of light? If we live in that region, do we just not fast at all?
“And establish prayer and give zakah and bow with those who bow [in worship and obedience].” (Qur’an 2:43)
How much are we to pay for the zakah?
“O you who have believed, when you rise to perform the prayer, wash your faces and your forearms to the elbows and wipe over your heads and wash your feet to the ankles. And if you are in a state of janabah, then purify yourselves. But if you are ill or on a journey or one of you comes from the place of relieving himself or you have contacted women and do not find water, then seek clean earth and wipe over your faces and hands with it. Allah does not intend to make difficulty for you, but He intends to purify you and complete His favor upon you that you may be grateful.” (Qur’an 5:6)
Those who are familiar with the Shafi school of jurisprudence know that they understand ‘have contacted women‘ means simply touching a woman. That, by simply touching a woman, a person would need to perform their ablutions. This is due to an ambiguity in the Arabic word for ‘touch’ or ‘contacted’. So does the phrase above ‘you have contacted women‘ mean sexual intimacy or simply touching them?
“As to the thief, male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment,by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power.” (Qur’an 5:38)
Would this verse mean a child who steals ice cream from a shop? Would it mean any theft regardless of the monetary value? What happens if the person has one hand? Does that also get lobbed off? What happens if the person has no hands, but is simply an assistant thief? For example, we help a person to steal by filling his or her pockets with items. In this case, we are both stealing something. This person has no hands, so what is the punishment here?
One could go on and on with this.
Conclusion:
It is clear from the Qu’ran itself that it does not explicitly prohibit Muslims from taking other sources of guidance. There is no such verse in the Qur’an that would not allow us to quote the hadith. There is not a single prohibition in the Qur’an. The Qur’an only warns us to be on guard against false teachings. The Qur’an teaches us that it is the filter for any source of guidance. That, ultimately, the Qur’an is the source of guidance. To take the Qur’an alone presents many problems, simply because the Arabic language lends itself to an array of interpretations or understandings. If we were to take a literal approach to the Qu’ran without recourse to customs, analogy, logic, deduction, inference, etc, it would present us with many conundrums.
Prima Quran 
