Tag Archives: hadith

October 28, 2025 · 2:12 am

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

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

﷽ 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why is that? It is simple. Because if we were to allow the Qur’an to speak on its apparent meaning, then all Muslims could rightly be accused of shirk. 

This would include those who follow the Quraniyoon religion, like Sam Gerrans, Shabir Ahmed, Rashad Khalifa, Hamza Abdul Malik, Aisha Musa. Everyone in the Free Minds and Monotheist Groups could all rightly be accused of shirk.

Shirk-associating partners/objects/ with Allah.

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

Take, for example, https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/1/5/default.htm

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sam Gerrans –

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

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

As we digress, why would we assert this?

We assert this because each one of these various competing self-proclaimed Qur’aniyoon groups all have to DEFINE the ARABIC language.

They will assert that this word means this, or it means that. Guess what they rely upon?

They rely upon Arabic lexicons, dictionaries, secondary sources to define what the words mean in the Qur’an itself.

This brings us to their preserved translation of mufassalan — that which explains itself in places.

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

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

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

So, if we were to look at the following verses above and take them literally, it would mean:

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

Let us give you a prime example of some attempts by a self-proclaimed adherent of the Qur’an only religion who will tell you that the Salaah is NOT a ritual prayer.

Here is one such video.

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

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

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

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

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

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

We have done Jospeh a favour by translating the Arabic word Juma — as a congregation.

At 3:48 he says, ‘Is this additional third, Salaah, it is it SEEMS SO.‘

You have to ask yourself at this point if the Qu’ran produces certainty or if it gives rise to conjecture like this. What is the point?

Does that sound ‘fully detailed’ to you?

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

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

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

So let us get this right. The Salah is not a ritual prayer, but yet Allah demands that we meet to discuss the Qur’an in the morning and the evening?

So Salaah is not a ritual in terms of movements and directions, but it certainly is a ritual in terms of the timings we have to meet?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Prima Qur’an Conclusion:

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

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

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

You may also be interested in reading the following:

Does the Qur’an Only religion claim that Al Fatiha is not part of the Qur’an?
Is the Qur’an a detailed explanation of everything?

May Allah (swt) guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

14 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

October 27, 2025 · 12:14 am

The Qur’an Only Religion is intellectually bankrupt

“O you who have believed, fear Allah, and speak words of appropriate justice.” (Qur’an 33:70)

﷽ 

We find the “Hafs Qur’an Only” Religion to be intellectually bankrupt.  

Beyond the idea of saying that ‘I bear witness that Muhammed is the Messenger of Allah’ upon entering Islam, or saying Salawat upon the Blessed Messenger (saw) to be acts of shirk—or association of partners with Allah (swt), they really have little more to offer in theology.

We find no attempt at all to discuss theological issues about the attributes of Allah in any meaningful way.

No discussion on issues like free will and determinism, no discussion on whether we see Allah in the hereafter, rather souls remain in hell or are released, rather Allah is divinely simplistic in being or unity, rather the Qur’an is created or uncreated, rather than who or what creates actions, nor any meaningful definition of the sifat of Allah (swt). 

Just rail against Hadith. It is all they can bring to the table as to the rest….good luck!

As regards the Quraniyoon. 

We can’t think of a greater diabolical system for the systematic dismantling of Islam.  

We are talking about communal worship and communal bonding and the masjid as a place of khutbah calling for social justice. Erased.

At what point is this platform not a sting or intelligence operation to dismantle islam as a political and ideological source that challenges western hegemony?

Look how fragmented Protestant churches are. 

But imagine now, we don’t even have a church. Just private study circles that splinter into another private study circle. You are left with your translation of the Qur’an and your own individual speculations. 

The claim they make is that the Qur’an is sufficient and clear, yet we keep seeing YouTube videos of them popping up wanting to explain Allah’s kitab and in the process refute other Qur’an only views.

The Arabic language itself becomes the ultimate arbiter of truth and not the Qur’an.

Allah doesn’t need a book, he can give direct gnosis.

What is the degree of fluency that you need before you start telling people what Allah is and is not saying based upon your personal speculation?  

Look at all other faith traditions; Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, etc….

Why is it they all have structure, ritual and suddenly these people want to come along and dismantle it?

The success of that movement = handing over the so-called third world over to complete dominion of the West.

At the end of the day, this movement turns the Qur’an into a simple self-help book.  You could find it in the same section as a book with the title ‘a road to a better you.’  

In fact, one of them mentioned recently that you don’t even need the Qur’an! The Qur’an is just a shortcut! 

Nor have we seen among those who follow the Hafs Qur’an Only Religion any meaningful attempt to engage in theological issues.

Yet the only thing that the adherents of the “Hafs Qur’an Only Religion” can offer is constant railing against Hadith literature.

We have a feeling that many of these people (at least those we met) are well-educated but don’t really have insight and wisdom. It is possible that many of them were exposed to the very heavy-handed tactics of traditional Muslims.   It would make anyone want to run away from it all.

The fact that many of the adherents of the “Hafs Qur’an Only Religion” rely heavily upon orientalist writings is very telling.

When we announced what our intentions were for this blog, a Quraniyoon follower approached us. She was (is) a level-headed woman.  Her husband is of Pakistani origin.   They raise money for charitable causes… and work with NGOs.

Her husband was quite excited to learn that we put emphasis upon the Qur’an.

Yet, he was unable to answer questions about the textual history of Islam, that the concept of the number (19) MIGHT work for certain qir’aat of the Qur’an, but not for others.

That we can’t even speak about “over it are 19” until we have established that the basmallah is indeed a verse over every surah of the Qur’an.


How do we do that?!!

Submission.org has appealed to extra-Qur’anic material to prove their claims.

We respected their identity, but we parted ways, telling the husband (who got easily irritated) that we did not believe in their ‘Hafs Qur’an only Religion.’

We turned down funding from this couple because we will not promote a cause that we don’t believe in nor do we find to be intellectually viable at all.

We have found that many among the ‘Hafs Qur’an only Religion’, for the most part, are as easily agitated, turned up, and unfocused as are many traditionalist Muslims.

So yes, the ‘Hafs Qur’an Only Religion’ may be a rallying cry for Muslims who have had it up to their neck with ‘traditionalists’.

Yet it is important for those Western Muslims, those in Turkey, Kuwait, Pakistan, India, Malaysia, Egypt, or anywhere else who are enamored with the ‘Hafs Qur’an Only Religion’  to understand just how intellectually bankrupt the position is. It’s just almost like they have these small support groups which become echo chambers for their ideas. All we ever see is railing against the hadith.

A movement that cannot interact with the compilation and transmission of the Qur’an in any meaningful way, nor a movement that interacts with the theological questions that have gripped the Muslim ummah is not a movement or position we would want to invest my trust in.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

 

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

October 26, 2025 · 11:37 pm

Which Qur’an does the Qur’an only religion believe in?

“It is certainly We Who have revealed the Reminder, and it is certainly We Who will preserve it.” (Qur’an 15:9)

﷽ 

Before having any kind of meaningful dialogue or discussion with people from the Qur’an Only religion, it is best not to assume anything.

The biggest assumption is to assume that they accept as Qur’an what you accept as Qur’an.

For example: Do they believe in the Qur’an, in which chapter 9 has 127, verses or the one that has 129 verses?

To our knowledge, it is only a certain sect within the federation of sects of the Qur’an Only Religion that has removed the last two verses of chapter 9.

“There certainly has come to you a messenger from among yourselves. He is concerned by your suffering, anxious for your well-being, and gracious and merciful to the believers. But if they turn away, then say, “Allah is sufficient for me. There is no god except Him. In Him I put my trust. And He is the Lord of the Mighty Throne.” (Qur’an 9:128-129)

However, if you look again, it is perhaps that chapter 9 contains 128 verses. That is because Rashad Khilafa supposedly found the missing basmalah.

https://www.masjidtucson.org/quran/frames/

No Basmalah*

[9:1] An ultimatum is herein issued from GOD and His messenger to the idol worshipers who enter into a treaty with you.

Footnote

*9:1 The absence of Basmalah from this sura is not only a profound sign from the Almighty Author of the Quran that this sura has been tampered with, but also represents an awesome miracle in its own right. See the details in Appendices 24 & 29.

It is more than obvious that the above issue cannot be internally resolved within the Qur’an.

Which brings us to the next question.

The status of the Basmalah.

  • The basmalah is a separate verse at the beginning of every soorah. This would
  • imply that the basmalah is the first verse of every soorah.
  • The basmalah is only a part of a verse at the beginning of every soorah. In other
  • words, the basmalah is the first part of the first verse in every soorah, and not a
  • separate verse.
  • The basmalah is a verse only at the beginning of Soorah al-Faatihah, and not for
  • other soorahs.
  • The basmalah is a separate verse, not a part of any soorah, that has been placed at
  • the beginning of the soorah. In other words, the basmalah is not to be counted as
  • a verse in any soorah, but is a verse ofthe Qur’aan.
  • The basmalah is not a verse ofthe Qur’aan, but rather a phrase which is used
  • distinguish one soorah from another.

Source: (Introduction to the sciences of the Qur’an by Yasir Al Qadhi pg 157.)

Which Qur’an do Qur’an Only Religion adherents subscribe to?

The one in which the basmalah is a verse in front of every chapter of the Qur’an (except chapter 9).

The one in which the basmalah is a verse in front of every chapter of the Qur’an (including chapter 9) -Rashad Khilafa, for example.

The one inw hich the basmalah is not a verse in front of every chapter of the Qur’an (including chapter 9).

Should Bismillah-ir-Rahman-ir-Rahim reoccur 113 times or not?

First point of agreement.

First it should be pointed out that all Muslims are in agreement that Bismillah ir rahman ir raheem is a part of the Qur’an in chapter 27 verse 30 which says,

“It is from Solomon, and is (as follows): ‘In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful:

(Qur’an 27 verse 30)

Now, rather, that is something that Solomon (as) himself wrote as a letterhead will become part of the discussion when we discuss which Qur’an do the Qur’an Only Religion adherents believe in. The one in which Al Fatiha is included as a chapter or the one in which Al Fatiha is simply a du’a.

Second point of agreement.

Let us look at the second point of agreement among Muslim scholars. All Muslims are in agreement that chapter 9 of the Qur’an entitled ‘Repentance or At Tawbah’ does not have the basmalah in front of it. It simply begins as such,

  1. A (declaration) of immunity from Allah and His Messenger, to those of the Pagans with whom you have contracted mutual alliances:-
  2. Go then, for four months, backwards and forwards, throughout the land, but know that you cannot frustrate Allah (by your falsehood) but that Allah will cover with shame those who reject Him. (Qur’an 9:1-2)

It was only when the Qur’an Only Religion came along and split from Islam did you have those who said that basmalah is part of the chapter.

Now, either way you look at it we have the Qur’an intact with us.

  1. Either we have the Qur’an without one verse reoccurring 113 times in front of 113 chapters.
  2. Or we have the Qur’an with one verse reoccurring 113 times in front of 113 chapters.

As we come from the Ibadi school and the position with us is that basmalah is a part of the verse of every chapter of the Qur’an except chapter 9.

We will give our evidence. None of which is found in the Qur’an. That is because, once again, this is an issue in which relying upon the Qur’an alone is not solvable.

Four reasons why the basmalah is a verse at the beginning of every Surah.

Where do they stand on the issue? The, Ibadi, Jafari, and the students of Imam Shaf’i believe that the basmalah is a verse that is to reoccur 113 times at the beginning of 113 chapters of the Qur’an. The students of Abu Hanifa believe that the basmalah does not reoccur 113 times at the beginning of 113 chapters of the Qur’an.

Let us give four reasons why we believe the basmalah is what the Ibadi, Jafari, followers of Shafi say it is. Three of the reasons will be valid reasons for anyone approaching the matter. The other reason is more theological, that it will only be acceptable for Muslims but a matter of skepticism for non-Muslims.

So let us start off with the reason that it is theologically acceptable for Muslims but a point of skepticism among non-Muslims.

Reason 1)

When it comes to the Qur’an, there cannot be difference of opinion about what constitutes the Qur’an. Since the Qur’an, difference cannot be held about it. And denying the Qur’an is unbelief. If something is doubtful or a matter of debate among Muslims, it is not given clarity. We do not believe that any passage that is in dispute among Muslims can be revelation based upon this internal evidence in the Qur’an.

“We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it.” (Qur’an 15:9)

Reason 2)

The fact that all Muslims agree that chapter 9 of the Qur’an does not start with basmalah is a very strong point for it being included in other places of the Qur’an. The Basmallah was historically used as a marker to indicate where a chapter would begin or end. So, in reality, the Muslim community was not sure if this surah /chapter 9 was a continuation of surah/chapter 8 or not. So, in reality, how many chapters the Qur’an is divided into is a matter of disputation; that being the case, whether a chapter would begin with basmalah or not is also a matter of dispute.

Reason 3)

And We have bestowed upon thee the Seven Oft-repeated (verses) and the Grand Qur’an. (Qur’an 15:87)

That is because the Qur’an today have the basmalah in front of every chapter of the Qur’an and one assumes that the Al Fatiha is such. What the Ibadi, Shafi’, Jafari do is that they include basmalah as the very first verse of Al Fatiha. For them, verses 6 and 7 constitute one verse together.

This is not the case for the Hanafi, who believe that the last portion of Al Fatiha ‘Siratal ladheena an amta alayeem ghayril maghdubi ‘alayheem waladalin’ is to be composed of one verse not two. Yet they recite the basmalah silently.

In the name of the merciful and compassionate

1Praise belongs to Allah, the Lord of the worlds,

2The the merciful, the compassionate,

3The, the ruler of the day of judgment!

4You alone we worship. You alone we ask for help.

5Guide us in the right path,

6The path of those You are gracious to;

7not of those You earned your wrath; nor of those who have gone astray.

The Different Traditions of Verse Numbering

There are seven primary systems of verse numbering in classical Islam:

  1. Kūfī (adopted in Iraq — followed by most Hanafis)
  2. Madani (first)
  3. Madani (second)
  4. Makkī
  5. Shāmī (Syrian)
  6. Basrī
  7. Ḥimṣī

These differ slightly — not in text — but in where a verse boundary is marked.

SchoolVerse division of the last partNotes
Hanafi (Kūfī tradition)One combined verses: 6️⃣ Ṣirāṭ al-ladhīna an‘amta ‘alayhim, 7️⃣ ghayril-maghḍūbi ‘alayhim wa laḍ-ḍāllīn“Bismillāh” not counted as verse 1
Maliki (Madanī tradition)One combined verse: 6️⃣ Ṣirāṭ al-ladhīna an‘amta ‘alayhim, 7️⃣ ghayril-maghḍūbi ‘alayhim wa laḍ-ḍāllīn“Bismillāh” not counted as verse 1
Ibāḍī (Basrī)The last portion — “Ṣirāṭ al-ladhīna an‘amta ‘alayhim ghayril-maghḍūbi ‘alayhim wa laḍ-ḍāllīn” — is counted as a single verse“Bismillāh” is counted as verse 1

Another chart one may find useful is the following:

School“Bismillāh” Revealed?Part of al-Fātiḥah?Read aloud?Verse count system
Ḥanafī✅ Yes❌ No❌ SilentKūfī
Mālikī✅ Yes❌ No❌ omittedMadanī
Shāfiʿī✅ Yes✅ Yes✅ AloudMakkī
Ḥanbalī✅ Yes❌ No (dominant)✅/❌ Usually silentKūfī
Zaydī✅ Yes❌ No✅ AloudKūfī
Jaʿfarī (Imāmī)✅ Yes✅ Yes✅ AloudKūfī
Ibāḍī✅ Yes✅ Yes✅ AloudBasrī

This would seem to clarify the issue but it does not.


Reason 4)

It was narrated that Anas in Malik said:

“One day when he-the Prophet (saw)- was still among us, he took a nap, then he raised his head, smiling. We said to him: ‘Why are you smiling, O Messenger of Allah?’ He said: ‘Just now this Surah was revealed to me: In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Verily, We have granted you (O Muahmmad) Al-Kawthar. Therefore turn in prayer to your Lord and sacrifice (to Him only). For he who hates you, he will be cut off.’ Then he said: ‘Do you know what Al-Kawthar is?’ We said: ‘Allah and His Messenger know best.’ He said: ‘It is a river that my Lord has promised me in Paradise. Its vessels are more than the number of the stars. My Ummah will come to me, then a man among them will be pulled away and I will say: “O Lord, he is one of my Ummah” and He will say to me: ‘You do not know what he did after you were gone.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/nasai:904)

Al-Fātiḥah is it a surah of the Qur’an or not?

The Qur’an Only Religion is split on this matter.

It is evident that one who follows the Qur’an Only Religion by the name of Hamza Abdul Malik has two other followers of the Qur’an Only Religion on the run!

Hamza Abdul Malik is a Qur’an only advocate. His position is that Al-Fātiḥah is not part of the Qur’an. It is a du’a. Whereas the other followers of the Qur’an Only Religion advocate that Al-Fātiḥah is part of the Qur’an.

https://www.youtube.com/@onlythetruthmatters4869

He has an entry titled: Reciting Al-Fatiha in Ritual Salat is UNQURANIC.

We thought this was interesting. Here, in a discussion with Muhammed Shaikh, Hamza Abdul Malik begans to explain how he would translate Salah into English. Muhammed Shaikh was interested in how he (Hamza Abdul Malik) would define the word. Is it not ironic that Hamza Abdul Malik goes to pick up a book on Arabic grammar! He is not using the Qur’an to define the meaning. So it really makes you wonder if the Arabic language itself is not the ultimate arbiter of truth.

Notice @2:57:13 he goes to pick up

This group may have found a way to get around the issue of Al Fatiha by dismissing Al Fatiha altogether. However, the question of the basmalah still remains for the other chapters of the Qur’an. There is no internal Qur’an Only system to get out of this.

So, let it be clear that when you speak to followers of the Qur’an Only Religion, the very first question that one needs to ask them is which Qur’an is that they believe in?

As we have seen, we cannot even get past basmalah, and we encounter major disputes among them.  Disputes which cannot be solved with regard to reference to the text or not.

Is the basmalah part of al fatiha or not?

What number system is used for al fatiha?

Are 6️⃣ Ṣirāṭ al-ladhīna an‘amta ‘alayhim, 7️⃣ ghayril-maghḍūbi ‘alayhim wa laḍ-ḍāllīn a single verse or two seperate verses?

Is Al Fatiha itself part of the Qur’an?

Are the last two verses of Surah 9 part of the Qur’an?

They cannot seem to be in agreement with this. The irony of the Qur’an Only Religion is that they cannot agree on what the Qur’an is.

For those interested, here is an entire lecture just on the basmalah, by His Eminence Shaykh Dr Kahlan al Kharusi.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

October 25, 2025 · 2:11 am

The self proclaimed Quranist prophet: Rashad Khalifa

“And whoever Allah guides, none can lead astray. Is Allah not Almighty, capable of punishment?” (Qur’an 39:37)

﷽ 

Rashad Khalifa, self-proclaimed prophet who is best known for rejecting 2 verses of the Qur’an that did not fit into his number 19 theory. 

Namely the following:

“There certainly has come to you a messenger from among yourselves. He is concerned by your suffering, anxious for your well-being, and gracious and merciful to the believers. But if they turn away, then say, “Allah is sufficient for me. There is no god except Him. In Him I put my trust. And He is the Lord of the Mighty Throne.” (Qur’an 9:128-129)

“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 a fixed meaning. 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 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 sectarianism.

It has been our experience time and again that every time we run into some group that wants 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 established.  

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 with each other.

www.masjidtuscon.org

www.submission.org

free-minds.org

ourbeacon.com

These, to our limited knowledge, are the more prominent websites that espouse the view of the Quranist.

Now this group, the ‘submitters’ and their leader, Rashad Khalifa was really made popular through the acknowledgment of Saudi-financed international Muslim debater Shaykh Ahmed Deedat (May Allah have mercy on him).

Shaykh Deedat says,”I am personally indebted to Dr. Khalifa for opening my eyes on this subject. May Allah grant him long life to selflessly serve the cause of Islam.”

With such a ringing endorsement by a well-known personality in the Muslim world, the Trojan horse was welcomed.

Rashad Khalifa claimed that he was a prophet of Allah.

Submission Perspective” of September 1989:

“THROUGH GABRIEL, I WAS COMMANDED TO MAKE THIS ANNOUNCEMENT: after I die, millions of believers will know that I REPRESENT THE MESSIAH THE JEWS HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR, THE CHRIST CHRISTIANS HAVE BEEN EXPECTING, THE MEHDI THE MUSLIMS HAVE BEEN PRAYING FOR. I am God’s Messenger of the Covenant.”

The source is here: https://submission.org/x/SP_Sep_89.pdf

The idea that there is any prophet after the Blessed Prophet Muhammed [saw] is absolutely crushed by the following verse:

“Muhammed is not the father of any man among you, but he is the messenger of Allah and the Seal of the Prophets, and Allah is ever Aware of all things.” (Qur’an 33:40) 

“But those whose heart is perversity follow the part thereof that is not entirely clear, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings…”(Qur’an 3:7) 

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!

You can read all about his claims here:

https://submission.org/two_false_verses_deeper_look.html

Note some of his claims with no references. Ironically, he uses oral traditions to support his claims.

“As a matter of fact, 19 years after the death of Muhammed, the scribes wanted to honor the prophet by adding two fake verses at the end of Sura 9. Ali was outraged and vehemently maintained that the word of God, written down by the hand of His final prophet, must never be altered. When he was installed as the fourth Khalifa, a 50-year war erupted between the new Khalifa and his supporters on one side, and the distorters of the Quran on the other side. The distorters of the Quran finally won the war, and the “official” history that came to us represented the victors’ point of view.”

Prima Qur’an Comment: Where is the source for this claim?

He continues…

“The first peacetime ruler after this lengthy and disastrous war was Marwan Ibn Al Hakam (died 65 AH/684 AD). One of the first duties he performed was to destroy the original Quran, the one that was so scrupulously written by the Prophet’s own hand, “fearing it might become the cause of new disputes”.

Prima Qur’an Comment: Where is the source for this claim? 

Indeed, Rashad Khalifa’s double standard in regard to Qur’an 33:21 is telling. He accepts this because it fits into his presupposition in regard to the number 19 being a mathematical code.

“The story about the verse in Sura 33 (al-Ahzab) is the only case in al-Bukhari that accords a special status to Khuzaima’s testimony. But this is odd because Zaid himself says he heard the verse from Muhammed, making him a second witness.”

What is bizarre about Rashad’s claim here is he seems ignorant of the process behind the collection of the Qur’an. Anyone could have said that they heard a verse from the Blessed Messenger [saw]. However, what was needed was the testimony of two people to corroborate what was written down. They wanted written and oral testimony. This oral testimony was to be of 2 people who were alive and could be questioned.

Based upon Rashad’s claim about Marwan Ibn Al Hakam, how can he or any of his followers know for certain that there are not perhaps more verses left out that actually fit into his presupposition of the 19 interlocking mathematical code?

Even more interesting and something Rashad obviously didn’t think about how does he not know that these reports are not made with a more insidious concept in mind:

The concept of abrogation?

WHAT WAS RASHAD’S MOTIVE?

So what is the real motivation for finding a mathematical code for determining what is and what is not the Qur’an?

It is the same motivation that Qur’an only religion have when trying to say that the Blessed Messenger [saw] wrote the Qur’an. This is said to deny the authority of the oral transmission of the Qur’an.

So Rashad Khalifa’s code of 19 is the intention, the motivation behind it is because Quranist until this very day are absolutely clueless about what constitutes the Qur’an.

How do they know it is 114 chapters?

How do they know it is 6,236 verses?

How are they able to know whether ‘bismillah’ is part of the Qur’an before every surah or not?

They have absolutely no recourse internally to solve these dilemmas. In fact, the same can be said for all quranist. Hence, the number 19 mathematical code gives them a plausible system to use. 

In spite of the many sectarian differences among Muslims, all Muslims have been in agreement with the text of the Qur’an. The only internal issue has been the status of the ‘bismillah’.

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 refers to different transmissions of the Qur’an and different ways of recitation.   

To us, these facts alone make the claims of Rashad Khalifa very dubious.

Here is a glaring inconsistency for anyone to investigate for themselves.

If you go to the following links:

http://submission.org/#/d/how_to_perform_contact_prayer.html

http://www.masjidtucson.org/submission/practices/salat/howtoperformsalat.html

You will see them give their take on the prayer.  Dear readers, 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 Azaan 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..

Now, if you continue reading the links above on the ‘Contact Prayers’, it gets worse…

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.”  

Prima Qur’an Comments: 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).”  

Prima Qur’an Comments: Notice absolutely no reference from the Qur’an.  

3. “Raise your hands to the sides of your face“…

“Your thumbs touch your ears, and the palms of your hands face forward.”

Prima Qur’an Comments: 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.”

Prima Qur’an Comments: 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

Rashad Khalifa continues to make things up.

Observe:

“As noted above, the Dawn, Noon, Afternoon, Sunset, and the 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.”

Prima Qur’an Comments:

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, dear readers, notice you could shift the number of units around.  For example, you 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 I 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

Rashad continues:

“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.”

Prima Qur’an Comments:

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?

Also, where does he get that ‘every man, woman, and child is commanded by God to observe Friday Congregational Prayer?’

We have given the links above to their websites. There is no censorship.  As far as we are concerned, this whole idea of the Qur’an being based upon the number 19 is more arbitrary than anything else.

However, not all the Qur’aniyoon groups direct their anti-tradition stance simply based upon the number 19.  Many of the adherents of the Hafs Qur’an Only Religion have broken off from Rashad Khalifa. They do not buy into the number 19 claim.  As mentioned before, they are a broad federation of sects that usually coalesce around one personality. It is then this personality that becomes their source of their hermeneutics.

This, itself, is ironic because they will also claim tongue in cheek that the Qur’an is ‘clear’ or ‘detailed’ and yet, will rely upon such personalities to explain things away for them. Subhan’Allah. 


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)

Certainly, an interlocking mathematical code based upon 19 is a huge detail that people have been missing for 1300 plus years!

Rashad Khalifa and all those who follow him believe that the true Qur’an is only known through this code.

This is a conversation that took place between Ahmed Mateen and Arnold Yasin Mol on a Quranist forum.

“Rashad also found two verses as false based on his code!”—Ahmed Mateen

“This was his interpretation based on the Hafs count, interpretation of Hadith and History. Many other studies have shown the 2 verses do belong there. And Rashad never believed other verses were corrupted. In all of his personal research, only two did not fit his counts.”-Arnold Yasin Mol

“So statistically, this is a very good result. But he made many mistakes in many counts, so the research must be ongoing.”—Arnold Yasin Mol

“And also, how could we know, using the code, if some chapters or verses have not been removed from the Quran already?”—Ahmed Mateen.

“Inner structure and other results as for example, the many times Rahman, Raheem, Allah, and so on is used. If there were any removed, then this count would have been corrupted immediately.”—Arnold Yasin Mol.Arnold’s response is dismissive. The fact that, according to Rashad, he had already found 2 verses that did not fit his pattern and that, according to Arnold that the research is ongoing and Rashad had made many mistakes on many counts, one cannot outright dismiss what Ahmed Mateen is asking.

Lastly, we wanted to bring up the issue of Rashad’s character. We saved this segment for last because we would rather deal with Rashad’s inconsistencies first.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashad_Khalifa You can read under the section “criminal charges.”

That is the molestation of a 16-year-old girl in which Rashad, instead of waiting for Allah to exonerate him as he does his prophets, pleaded ‘no contest’. In legal terms in the U.S., it is a tacit way to admit to being guilty of something and throwing yourself at the mercy of the courts. The hope is that, since you did not tax the court system through multiple legal proceedings that they would go easy on you.

Interestingly enough, Rashad Khalifa was a very well-connected person.

The fact that the criminal database records of Arizona have him on record as still being alive certainly raises an eyebrow.

“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)

May Allah Guide the Ummah. 

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

October 24, 2025 · 5:30 am

How the Quraniyoon become Mushriks

“They have taken their rabbis and monks as well as the Messiah, son of Mary, as lords besides Allah, even though they were commanded to worship none but One God. There is no god except Him. Glorified is He above what they associate!” (Qur’an 9:31)

﷽ 

“But no, by your Lord, they will not believe until they make you, judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in submission.” (Qur’an 4:65)

“With clear proofs and divine Books. And We have sent down to youthe Reminder, so that you may explain to people what has been revealed for them, and perhaps they will reflect.” (Qur’an 16:44)

“They have taken their rabbis and monks as well as the Messiah, son of Mary, as lords besides Allah, even though they were commanded to worship none but One God. There is no god except Him. Glorified is He above what they associate!” (Qur’an 9:31)

The above verse does not tell us in what way they have taken their rabbis or monks (basically their learned people as lords besides Allah).   It only tells us that they have done this. However, when one goes to the places of worship of the Jews and Christians, we do not find them worshiping their scholars. 

It is through the Sunnah that this information is made known to us.

(They took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah, and the Messiah, son of Maryam) 9:31.

Imam Ahmad, At-Tirmidhi and Ibn Jarir At-Tabari recorded a Hadith via several chains of narration, from `Adi bin Hatim, may Allah be pleased with him, who became Christian during the time of Jahiliyyah. When the call of the Messenger of Allah reached his area, `Adi ran away to Ash-Sham, and his sister and several of his people were captured. The Messenger of Allah freed his sister and gave her gifts. So she went to her brother and encouraged him to become Muslim and to go to the Messenger of Allah. `Adi, who was one of the chiefs of his people (the tribe of Tai’) and whose father, Hatim At-Ta’i, was known for his generosity, went to Al-Madinah. When the people announced his arrival, `Adi went to the Messenger of Allah wearing a silver cross around his neck. The Messenger of Allah recited this Ayah

(They took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah). `Adi commented, “I said, `They did not worship them.”’ The Prophet said (Yes they did. They (rabbis and monks) prohibited the allowed for them (Christians and Jews) and allowed the prohibited, and they obeyed them. This is how they worshipped them.)

The Messenger of Allah said to `Adi,(O `Adi, what do you say? Did you run away (to Ash-Sham) so that ‘Allahu Akbar’ (Allah is the Great) is not pronounced Do you know of anything greater than Allah What made you run away? Did you run away so that `La ilaha illallah’ is not pronounced? Do you know of any deity worthy of worship except Allah? The Messenger invited `Adi to embrace Islam, and he embraced Islam and pronounced the Testimony of Truth.

The face of the Messenger of Allah beamed with pleasure, and he said to `Adi,(Verily, the Jews have earned the anger (of Allah) and the Christians are misguided.) Hudhayfah bin Al-Yaman, `Abdullah bin `Abbas and several others said about the explanation of (They took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah…) that the Christians and Jews obeyed their monks and rabbis in whatever they allowed or prohibited for them. This is why Allah said,(while they were commanded to worship none but One God), Who, whatever He renders prohibited is the prohibited, whatever He allowed is the allowed, whatever He legislates, is to be the law followed, and whatever He decides is to be adhered to;(None has the right to be worshiped but He. Hallowed be He above what they associate (with Him).) Meaning, exalted, sanctified, hallowed above partners, equals, aids, rivals or children, there is no deity or Lord worthy of worship except Him.

Say, “My Lord has only forbidden open and secret indecencies, sinfulness, unjust aggression, associating with Allah —a practice He has never authorized—and attributing to Allah what you do not know.” (Qur’an 7:33)

The Hafs Qur’an Only Religion has already splintered into several sects. Each of these sects coalesce around their favourite preacher or public figure. This preacher or public figure is the one who expounds, explains, proposes, elucidates, expands on, elaborates on, spells out, describes, tells them to cease and desist.

The Qur’an was revealed in Arabic.

“Certainly, We have made it a Quran in Arabic, so perhaps you will understand.” (Qur’an 43:3)

The Qur’an is an Arabic Qur’an. The Qur’an does not tell us what degree of fluency is needed before one starts instructing people on what Allah is permitting and forbidding.

Say, “My Lord has only forbidden open and secret indecencies, sinfulness, unjust aggression, associating with Allah —a practice He has never authorized—and attributing to Allah what you do not know.” (Qur’an 7:33)

So, given that the vast majority of people who follow the Hafs Qur’an Only religion do not go to the Qur’an directly but depend upon these figureheads to tell them what is haram and halal, they are in the same position as the Jews and Christians. 

Even those who tell them what the Qur’an says (an irony considering they claim it is self-sufficient), even those themselves, are not really proficient in the Arabic language. 

However, you know what is better than this? Proficiency in the Arabic language coupled with the fact that Allah (swt) has directly appointed you to teach the people.

“But no, by your Lord, they will not believe until they make you, judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in submission.” (Qur’an 4:65)

“With clear proofs and divine Books. And We have sent down to youthe Reminder, so that you may explain to people what has been revealed for them, and perhaps they will reflect.” (Qur’an 16:44)

This is what happens when one detaches themselves from the Sunnah of the Blessed Prophet (saw).

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

October 23, 2025 · 4:39 am

Is showing love and reverence to the Blessed Prophet considered worship?

“Allah and His angels send blessings to the Prophet: O you that believe! Send blessings on him, and salute him with all respect.” (Qur’an 33:56)

﷽ 

What an honour it is that Allah, exalted and glorified above all else, has singled out his beloved Messenger (saw) to be singled out for praise and blessings. The one who’s very name means the praiseworthy!

This article is written to refute the extremist view of the (Hafs Qur’an only Religion) as well as others that believe that we as Muslims when we say: “ashadu an la ilaha illalah wa ashadu an muhammadur rasoolullah” (I bear witness that there is no God except God and I bear witness that Muhammed is the Messenger of God.) is a form of shirk!

For those who do not know, shirk is the most heinous sin in Islam. It is the association of partners with God.

Here are links to a website that espouses a view that is both extreme and unwarranted.

https://web.archive.org/web/20230930040405/https://submission.org/Making_Salawat.html

*Note* For some reason the link was not working. However, was able to retrieve it via the archives.

Muslims have handed down the tradition that when we enter into Islam we bear witness of foremost importance that there is only one God worthy of worship. We also bare witness that we accept as God’s Messenger, the one who brought his message.

Tawassul and Istigatha according to the Ibadi school.

“In which their prayer will be, “Glory be to You, O Allah!” and their greeting will be, “Peace!” and their closing prayer will be, “All praise (l-ḥamdu) is for Allah—Lord of all worlds!”
(Qur’an 10:10)

Note that in the above verse it says that all the hamd (praise) is for Allah. Yet, Allah (swt) himself says the following:

“And from [part of] the night, pray with it as additional [worship] for you; it is expected that your Lord will resurrect you to a praised (maḥmūdan) station.” (Qur’an 17:79)

“And those who believe and do righteous deeds and believe in what has been sent down upon Muhammed – and it is the truth from their Lord – He will remove from them their misdeeds and amend their condition.” (Qur’an 47:2)

“And when Isa son of Marium said: O children of Israel! surely I am the messenger of Allah to you, verifying that which is before me of the Taurat and giving the good news of an Messenger who will come after me, his name being Ahmed, but when he came to them with clear arguments they said: This is clear magic.” (Qur’an 61:6)

Muhammed and Ahmed both derive from the Arabic root meaning “praise” (hamd). Muhammed means “the praised one,” while Ahmed means “the more/most praiseworthy”.


Root word: Both names come from the Arabic root word “ḥ-m-d,” which means “praise”. This root is found in phrases like “Al-hamdu lillah” (praise be to God).

Mahmud, Muhammed and Ahmed. All mean one worthy of praise, praiseworthy.

So we should not be concerned with followers of the Hafs Qur’an Only Religion come along and say that Muslims who say Tashahhud or Shahada are associating partners with Allah.

Mentioning another along Allah (swt) in our prayers or testification of faith is far from worshipping that person.

There are many places in the Qur’an where Allah is mentioned alongside the Noble Messenger (saw).   There are also many places in the Qur’an where Allah is mentioned alongside his blessed angels.

“O you who have believed, fear Allah and give up what remains of interest if you should be believers. And if you do not, then be informed of war from Allah and His Messenger. But if you repent, you may have your principal – you do no wrong, nor are you wronged.” (Qur’an 2:278-279)

It would have been easy enough just to say ‘a war from Allah’.

“Indeed, those who disbelieve and die while they are disbelievers – upon them will be the curse of Allah and of the angels and the people, all together.” (Qur’an 2:161)

Again, it would have been enough to say the ‘curse of Allah’.

“Those – their repayment will be that upon them is the curse of Allah and the angels and the people, all together.” (Qur’an 3:87)

Again, it would have been sufficient to say ‘the curse of Allah’.

Those who annoy Allah and the Prophet, Allah curses them in this life and in the hereafter.” (Qur’an 33:57)

Annoying the Blessed Prophet (saw) is deserving of a curse just as if one were to annoy Allah (swt).

“He who obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah; but those who turn away – We have not sent you over them as a guardian.” (Qur’an 4:80)

Here the Qur’an has compared obeying the Messenger to obeying Allah himself.  Assuredly, this is more than sufficient proof testifying that the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) is the Messenger of Allah is not idol worship.  Such a notion is truly absurd, to say the least.

What did Rasul Allah (saw) think when Angel Gabriel (as) said:

”Indeed this, your religion, is one religion, and I am your Lord, so worship Me.” (Qur’an 21:92)

Was Gabriel (as) making ‘shirk’ when he said that?

Here is something else for people who hold such a view to think about.

“You alone do we worship; You alone do we ask for help.” (Qur’an 1:5)

So are we to understand that if one were to ask the doctor to cure our children, we are now associating partners with Allah?

If one were to hold a belief that if they were to pursue a university degree that it would somehow help their lot in life that this would be tantamount to an association of partners with Allah?

What is important for the person to realize is that the Creator is in control of all affairs. The Creator is Sovereign.  If one were to believe that the doctor himself can cure their child, then yes, this is an association of partners with Allah.  If one were to believe that the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) can guide us independent of Allah, then yes, that is in error.  If one were to believe that their university degree will, in and of itself, guarantee them a livelihood, then yes, this necessitates a dangerous position. If one believes that a knife can cut them independently of the power of Allah (swt), then yes, that is in error.

Adherents of the Qur’an only Religion do not think deeply about these things because their religion is theologically bankrupt.

However, if we believe that Allah has endowed the doctor with the ability to cure our child, and that Allah has blessed the Noble Muhammed (saw) with the ability to guide, and that our degree could increase our chances of getting employment by Allah’s grace, then this is the proper focus.

The focus, of course, should always be Allah (swt).

It is said that this world that we live in is also known as Darul Asbaab– a world of means.

Asbaab can mean ’cause’, ‘reason’.

So we live in a world of cause and effect.

When a Muslim does something kind to another Muslim, one will usually say to the other ‘JazakAllahu Khayran‘ (thanks be to God who gave the provision). If you were ignorant of this, you might say to a Muslim, ‘Thank you, brother’. The Muslim may respond, “Al hamdulilllah wa ShukrAllah” (All the praise be to Allah and Thanks to Allah). Notice that the praise and the thanks are deflected away from the person and directed to Allah.


However, if someone says ‘you’re welcome‘, it is not haram (forbidden) nor are they committing blasphemy. No one would assume that if a person said ‘you’re welcome‘ that they are making a claim to divinity.

The reason one says jazakAllahu Khayran to a person is that there is a recognition that Allah (swt) is giving you provision through this person. 

Examples in the Qur’an of people making sujud -prostration to other than Allah.

“So he raised his parents upon the throne, and they bowed to him in prostration. And he said, “O my father, this is the explanation of my vision of before. My Lord has made it a reality. And he was certainly good to me when he took me out of prison and brought you here from bedouin life after Satan had induced estrangement between me and my brothers. Indeed, my Lord is Subtle in what He wills. Indeed, it is He who is the Knowing, the Wise.” (Qur’an 12:100)

“When Joseph said to his father: O my father. Lo. I saw in a dream eleven planets and the sun and the moon, I saw them prostrating themselves unto me.” (Qur’an 12:4)

Allah (swt) himself orders the prostration of all the angels and jinn to Adam.

“And when We said to the angels, “Prostrate to Adam,” and they prostrated, except for Iblees. He said, “Should I prostrate to one You created from clay?” (Qur’an 17:61)

Say, “Indeed, my prayer, my rites of sacrifice, my living and my dying are for Allah, Lord of the worlds.” (Qur’an 6:162)

After the Death of the Noble and Blessed Prophet (saw) Abu Bakr (ra) said this very eye opening statement:

Narrated `Aisha:

Abu Bakr came riding his horse from his dwelling place in As-Sunh. He got down from it, entered the Mosque and did not speak with anybody till he came to me and went direct to the Prophet, who was covered with a marked blanket. Abu Bakr uncovered his face. He knelt down and kissed him and then started weeping and said, “My father and my mother be sacrificed for you, O Allah’s Prophet! Allah will not combine two deaths on you. You have died the death which was written for you.” Narrated Abu Salama from Ibn `Abbas : Abu Bakr came out and `Umar , was addressing the people, and Abu Bakr told him to sit down but `Umar refused. Abu Bakr again told him to sit down but `Umar again refused. Then Abu Bakr recited the Tashah-hud (i.e. none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and Muhammed is Allah’s Messenger (saw)) and the people attended to Abu Bakr and left `Umar. Abu Bakr said, “Amma ba’du, whoever amongst you worshipped Muhammed, then Muhammed is dead, but whoever worshipped Allah, Allah is alive and will never die. Allah said: ‘Muhammed is no more than an Apostle and indeed (many) Apostles have passed away before him ..(up to the) grateful.’ ” (3.144) (The narrator added, “By Allah, it was as if the people never knew that Allah had revealed this verse before till Abu Bakr recited it and then whoever heard it, started reciting it.”)

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:1241)

Let us look at this statement:

“Abu Bakr said, “Amma ba’du, whoever amongst you worshipped Muhammad, then Muhammad is dead, but whoever worshipped Allah, Allah is alive and will never die.”

Subhan’Allah! That means that the love and devotion that the companions had for the Blessed and Noble Prophet (saw)…..bordered on….understand? It bordered on…but it did not exceed! It did not cross that threshold!

May Allah open the Eyes and Hearts of the Ummah.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

13 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

October 22, 2025 · 11:25 pm

Dr. Jeffery Lang: An Argument Advanced by Quraniyoon Refuted

“And woe, that day, to those that reject the truth! Then in what hadith, after this, will they believe?” (Qur’an 77:49-50)

﷽ 

“And woe, that day, to those that reject the truth! Then in what hadith, after this, will they believe?” (Qur’an 77:49-50)

This is certainly their pre-eminent verse. It is a mega verse verse among all the Quranist.

Many people who believe in the ‘Hafs Qur’an Only Religion’ will often advance this particular verse of the Qur’an to advance their position.

Here is an interesting argument put forward by Dr. Jeffery Lang, one of the greatest Muslim minds of our age.

“It is doubtful that hadith in these passages refers to the narratives relating to the deeds and utterances of the Prophet. In the first place, it came to have this restricted meaning in Islamic scholarship well after his lifetime. Secondly, it is inconceivable that while the Prophet was alive his enemies preferred his hadith to the Qur’an or were promoting them in an effort to undermine his mission. Instead, hadith must carry here one of its more common connotations, such as speech, chitchat, conversation, prattle, gossip, tales, report, or account.”

Source: (pg. 174 “Losing My Religion: A Call for Help-Jeffery Lang”)

There are two points to be gleaned from this.

a) In the first place, it came to have this restricted meaning in Islamic scholarship well after his lifetime.

This is true, and Dr. Jeffery Lang has an irrefutable point here.

b). Secondly, it is inconceivable that while the Prophet was alive his enemies preferred his hadith to the Qur’an or were promoting them in an effort to undermine his mission.

This is also an excellent point! Why on earth would the enemies of the Blessed Messenger (saw) use his hadith over the Qur’an? In fact, why would they use his oral narrations at all?

So let us break this verse down:

“And woe, that day, to the rejectors of truth!” -This statement is talking about those who are rejecting the Qur’an. It is directed towards an immediate target audience, towards a future impending doom.

That is why the adherents of the Quran Only Religion are at a loss to try to use this statement as a reference to those who use hadith. You can shut them down every single time.

Jeffery Lang (May Allah have abundant mercy on him).

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

October 21, 2025 · 2:13 am

Critique of the argument that Muhammed wrote the Qur’an.

“Proclaim! (or read!) in the name of thy Lord and the One whom Cherishes, Who created” (Qur’an 96:1)

﷽ 

We have seen this issue raised by Christians repeatedly.   We have also remembered Dr. Anis Shorrosh using it in his debate with Dr. Jamal Badawi.  Debate: (Qur’an word of God or word of Muhammed?)

It is one of the reasons why we choose the Yusuf Ali translation above.  

One could ask: what was God thinking?

You are approaching a man that is obviously illiterate, and you’re asking him to read, again and again….and yet again.

However, the narrative shows that the term ‘Iqra‘ can mean read (as from a book) or recite, or repeat (as in a repetition).

What we find fascinating is that the account of the Blessed Messenger (saw) and his receiving of the revelation are not found in the Qur’an.  Rather, it is found in secondary sources.  We think this is very profound.

In the Bible, we would read the historical bits, get some revelation as well as the thoughts of the narrators all mixed in together.

The very fact that the Qur’an does not have a detailed narrative of how the Blessed Messenger (saw) received the revelation speaks well for the Prophet (saw), the Qur’an, and the veracity of Islam.

In fact, it is one of the most remarkable things for us. Because we never hear in the Bible what that was like.  What is that moment like when you encounter the divine?  What is it like to know that you are being appointed as a Prophet of God?  What is your mental state? How does that feel?

That has to be indescribable beyond words! Powerful!

In the Bible, we are just given the impression that one day the Holy Spirit moved Matthew to write, so he picked up his pen and off he went. Not really inspiring. Rather lackluster for a divine encounter.

“So if you are in doubt, [O Muhammed], about that which We have revealed to you, then ask those who have been reading the Scripture before you. The truth has certainly come to you from your Lord, so never be among the doubters.” (Qur’an 10:94)

Question: If Muhammed (saw) were in the habit of reading and writing, he wouldn’t need to ask the people of the book anything. He could simply go to their text for verification.

Now, this is, of course, assuming that they had their text with them.

However, the interesting thing about this passage is asking the Blessed Messenger (saw) to verify the truth outside the Qur’an or at the very least corroborate with what the divine directive was, by checking outside references.

No doubt those who follow the ‘Qur’an Only Religion’ would like to dismiss the dominant narrative for two reasons.

Our colleague was in an exchange with Dr. Shabbir Ahmed, @ our Beacon http://www.galaxydastak.com refuting the points he made that the Blessed Messenger (saw) was the one who wrote the Qur’an.  Needless to say, he was banned from the forum for ‘not participating in the project’.

He was initially invited there by a friend and former teacher, Hamza Abdulmalik from IPCI. He believes his former teacher was testing the waters before he decided to leave Islam for the “Qur’an Only Religion“.

The two reasons that ‘Qur’an Only Religion’ would want to reject the dominant narrative are these:

  1. The very first word ‘iqra‘ suggests that the Qur’an is composed in a language that has depth, nuances, clarity, and ambiguity.    This takes the wind out of one of their sails. Namely, that the Qur’an is clear; which usually means “Agree with our interpretation.”
  2. The very first word ‘iqra’ also suggests that the Qur’an would be transmitted through both written and oral means. The idea that the Qur’an would be transmitted orally is problematic to those who castigate oral transmission in its entirety.

Understand that point 2. above is their sole reason for making the claim that the Blessed Prophet (saw) wrote the Qur’an. It is because they do not like the idea of the Qur’an being preserved through oral transmission.

This might cause other uncomfortable thoughts like: “What else may be preserved through oral transmission?“

The “Qur’an Only Religion” does not like the historical narrative that has been passed down to us about how the Blessed Messenger (saw) received the revelation.

Let us see if their perspective holds true.

“Read in the name of your Lord Who created. He created man from a clot. Read and your Lord is Most Honorable,” (Qur’an 96:1-3)

If the Blessed Messenger (saw) is being asked to ‘read‘ rather than recite/repeat, where is this text at?

In other words, whoever is telling Muhammed (saw) to read, what exactly is he being asked to read? Is it a divine template? Is this an ethereal revelation that is appearing like a holographic image?

Wouldn’t it make sense to say, ‘write‘?

So let us deal with the next point.

“Who taught (to write) with the pen. Taught man what he knew not.”  (Qur’an 96:4-5)

So the “Qur’an Only Religion” will say, “How can Muhammed be taught by the PEN if he cannot write?“

However, this assumes two things.

  1. That this verse does not generally address the gift of literacy, which is a blessing from Allah (swt).
  2. That Muhammed (saw) is the one being addressed here.  After all, the verse does say, taught man (plural)…
  3. . To suggest that the above verse is imperative. Meaning that Allah (swt) has taught every person to read that would be incorrect. Vast swathes of humanity still cannot read. The proliferation of literacy is a modern phenomenon.

“In honored sheets, exalted and purified, In the hands of scribes noble, virtuous.” (Qur’an 80:13-16)

It would have been a perfect occasion to say, “I will teach you the use of the pen, or I will teach you that which you know not.”

In fact, we never get an example of the Blessed Messenger (saw) reading the Qur’an to anyone.  However, we do have examples of him reciting it.

“A messenger from Allah, reciting pure pages.” (Qur’an 98:2)

“Move not thy tongue concerning the (Qur’an) to make haste therewith. It is for Us to collect it and promulgate it; but when We have promulgated it, follow thou its recital’ (Qur’an 75: 16-19).

Why not ‘move not thy eyes‘ concerning the Qur’an?

Why not ‘move not thy pen‘ concerning the Qur’an?

It is interesting to note here that the Blessed Messenger (saw) was told to not be hasty in his recitation; nothing about ‘move not thy pen‘ concerning the Qur’an.

Now we are going to use a translation of the Qur’an that we think is one of the worst possible. Interestingly enough, this translation gets as close as is grammatically possible to supporting the proposition that the Blessed Messenger (saw) wrote the Qur’an.

So we are going to use a translation that actually favours our interlocutors (Qu’ran only Religion) in this regard.

“Neither did you (O Muhammed SAW) read any book before it (this Quran), nor did you write any book (whatsoever) with your right hand. In that case, indeed, the followers of falsehood might have doubted.”  (Qur’an 29:48) – Muhsin Khan translation.

We would encourage the readers to see how this verse is translated from disparate translations from translators with disparate theological backgrounds etc…

http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/29/48/default.htm

The reason we chose the ‘Muhsin Khan’ translation above; is because it can give the impression that Muhammed (saw) didn’t read any book before the Qur’an; meaning he can now! Nor has he (saw) written any book (until now!!)…

So let us put our focus on the second part of this verse…

“In that case, indeed, the followers of falsehood might have doubted.”

Let us say that for the sake of argument we take the understanding of those who claim the Blessed Prophet (saw) wrote the Qur’an. Meaning that, suddenly, Muhammed (saw) is now able to read and write.

How does that alleviate the doubt of unbelievers?

It seems the argument being made is that “Haha, you can’t doubt that the Qur’an is a product of Muhammed because he can read and write, and therefore wrote it!

Erm…….. (stares off blankly into space)….. are we missing something here?

What argument is that?  Seriously?

We would encourage anyone to carefully read how “Qur’an Only Religion” will posture in regard to the above verse.  They half quote it.

Let us look at some of their other claims.

“Moreover, they say, “Legends of the former peoples which he has written, and they are dictated to him morning and afternoon.” (Qur’an 25:5)

We actually found this argument to be very desperate.  The fact that (unbelievers) alleged that the Blessed Messenger (saw) wrote down the Qur’an is now proof that he actually did write the Qur’an?

This is a specious argument for anyone who is intellectually honest.

“We know indeed that they say, “It is a man that teaches him.” The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.” (Qur’an 16:103)

“Moreover, the Unbelievers would almost trip you up with their eyes when they hear the Message; and they say: “Surely he is possessed!” (Qur’an 68:51)

Let’s stop for a moment on this above claim.  The claim that ‘he is possessed.’ 

This is a very fascinating and insightful claim against our Blessed Prophet (saw). The unbelievers ascribed to the Qur’an a supra natural origin. They were just not ready to say that it came from Allah. However, the fact that even they ascribed to it a supra natural origin is quite powerful.

Let us follow the fuzzy logic given to us by these people who claim that the Blessed Messenger (saw) could read and write the Qur’an.

So here it is:

Just because the (unbelievers) charged Muhammed (saw) with writing the Qur’an, does it also follow that a man taught him the Qur’an?

Just because the (unbelievers) charged Muhammed (saw) that he was possessed means that it is true?

So those people who make such claims would do well to remember it was non-Muslims who charged that the Prophet Muhammed (saw) wrote the Qur’an.

The first claim that the Blessed Messenger (saw) wrote the Qur’an came from (unbelievers).  That is the company that followers of the ‘Quran Only‘ religion are in; not the company we would like to be in.

Another text they would use.

“And if he had invented false sayings concerning Us We surely should have seized him by his right hand (or with power and might), And then severed his life-artery.” (Qur’an 69:44-46)

There is certainly a lot to be desired in this translation.

Invented is taqawwala -this should have been translated as spoken

That word is nowhere being used for writing.

See the following: http://corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=qwl#(69:44:2)

sayings is l-aqawili

So this should read: “And if he had spoken some sayings over Us, We surely should have...”

seized him –la-akhadhna-can be translated as to take or to seize or to call to account.

his right hand-bil-yamini-can be translated as hand or oath.

So this should read: “And if he had spoken some sayings over Us, We surely should have seized him with power and might.”

Alternatively, it could read: “And if he had spoken some sayings over Us, We surely would have called him to account for his oath.”

The first part is how we understand the second part. If someone is speaking and saying it would make sense to say, ‘we seize him by his tongue.’

That is why that argument put forward by the ‘Hafs Qur’an Only Religion’ is easily dismissed. When someone is speaking lies, why is the attention directed towards the hand?

So let us take their understanding and translate it the way they want to: “We surely should have seized him by his right hand.”

Why doesn’t the text before it say:

“So if he had written false sayings concerning Us.”

None of them dare to translate as written.

https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/69/44/

“Had he uttered any other teachings.”-Rashad Khilafa

“Also, had he attributed anything falsely to Us.”-The Monotheist Group.

In fact, the only person trying to be sly among the Quraniyoon in their translation is Shabir Ahmed

“So if he had ascribed his sayings unto Us.” -Shabir Ahmed

Why handle the Qur’an in such a false manner? Why the deception? What is the agenda here?

Was the Qur’an only revealed to those who were literate?  Even today, there are vast areas of the world where people cannot read and write. What of the situation in the past? What was the situation of slaves, farmers, and people from other trades?

How was a textual Qur’an distributed to all of these people? If that is the case, why is there a dearth of written Qur’anic material from the early period?

“However, if they turn away, you are responsible only for conveying the message clearly.” (Qur’an 16:82)

If the Blessed Messenger (saw) was writing the Qur’an and the Qur’an is clear, there would be no need for him to explain anything to anyone. He would simply tell them to refer to the book itself!  Better yet to their own written copies, parchments, etc. I think we know better.

We think the idea that the Blessed Messenger (saw) wrote the Qur’an is both intellectually lazy and the result of wanting to skirt around the issue of the preservation through oral transmission of the Qur’an.

We think that issues are nuanced, and sometimes a little more academically challenging than we are ready to admit.  Some answers are simply not microwavable.

Something else we want to point out.   Was it possible that the Blessed Messenger (saw) learned to recognize and understand some words in the Arabic script over time? Of course!

When our colleague was the Executive Docent Officer at the Singapore Sultan Mosque and leading the ATMT (Awareness Through Mosque Tour) program, they used to have fun showing copies of the Qur’an to curious non-Muslims.

They would open a page of the Qur’an that had many usages of the word ‘Allah‘ in Arabic. They would point out the word.  They would then ask them to find that word anywhere on the two pages.  They did without fail!   They asked them to read that word, and they said, ‘Allah’!

For example, they have highlighted the word ‘Allah’ in the Arabic text below.  See if you can find at least 3 other examples of it.   

quran-t

This was a great interactive experience for our colleague and them.  Our point here is that it’s possible that the Blessed Messenger (saw) was able to recognize words (after all they are simply symbols) and say or repeat what they mean.

“Neither did you (O Muhammed SAW) read any book before it (this Quran), nor did you write any book (whatsoever) with your right hand. If that was the case, indeed, the followers of falsehood might have doubted.”  (Qur’an 29:48)

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

5 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

October 19, 2025 · 9:32 am

Nothing left out of this book? The Manipulation of the Qur’an by the Quraniyoon.

“And who is more unjust than one who invents a lie about Allah or denies His verses? Indeed, the wrongdoers will not succeed.” (Qur’an 6:21) 

 ﷽ 

Now one thing you will immediately notice when dealing with the hafs Qur’an only religion is that most of them do not even speak Arabic. Most of them try and appeal to converts (who have very poor or weak Arabic). They have a reason for doing this, because they prey upon the fact that you do not understand the Arabic and thus, are able to manipulate what the text says.  

A prime example is their manipulation of this verse: 

“We did not leave anything out of this book.” (Qur’an 6:38)

Now, as this website is directed primarily to an English-speaking audience, let us ask you this. 

You may wish to see the various ways it has been translated here: https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/6/38/#gsc.tab=0

You will note that ‘The Monotheist Group’ -a quranist translation has rendered the Arabic as:

“And there is not a creature on the earth, nor a bird that flies with its wings, except they belong to nations like you belong. We did not leave anything out of the record; then to their Lord they will be gathered.” (Qur’an 6:38)

The verse in full actually states: 

“All the creatures on earth, and all the birds that fly with wings, are communities like you. We did not leave anything out of this book. To their Lord, all these creatures will be summoned.” (Qur’an 6:38)

Is there a difference between saying: 

“We did not leave anything out of this book.” and 

“We did not leave anything out of the book.”  

If one were to say ‘the book‘, then this is vague. What book are we actually referring to? If we say ‘this book‘, then we are referring to a book that is actually with me.

The Arabic word used here is l-kitabi. L-kitabi need not necessarily be a reference to the Qur’an at all. 

It is the same word that is used in the following verses: 

“And there followed them successors who inherited the book, taking the commodities of this lower life and saying, “It will be forgiven for us.” And if an offer like it comes to them, they will take it. Was not the covenant of the book taken from them that they would not say about Allah except the truth, and they studied what was in it? And the home of the Hereafter is better for those who fear Allah, so will you not use reason?” (Qur’an 7:169)   

It is very obvious that l-kitabi is not a reference to the Qur’an in the above text.  

“And We conveyed to the Children of Israel in the book that, “You will surely cause corruption on the earth twice, and you will surely reach haughtiness.” (Qur’an 17:4) 

It is very obvious that l-kitabi is not a reference to the Qur’an in the above text as it was sent down to the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw).

“And do not argue with the People of the book except in a way that is best, except for those who commit injustice among them, and say, “We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you. And our Allah and your Allah is one; and we are Muslims to Him.” (Qur’an 29:46) 

It is very obvious that l-kitabi is not a reference to the Qur’an in the above verse.

“Have you not considered those who practice hypocrisy, saying to their brothers who have disbelieved among the People of the Book, “If you are expelled, we will surely leave with you, and we will not obey, in regard to you, anyone – ever; and if you are fought, we will surely aid you.” But Allah testifies that they are liars.” (Qu’ran 59:11)  

Can you imagine Allah (swt) calling (ahli Qur’an) people of the Qur’an liars? Obviously, l-kitabi above is not a reference to the Qur’an. 

Indeed, they who disbelieved among the People of the book and the polytheist will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. Those are the worst of creatures.” (Qur’an 98:6) 

Can you imagine Allah (swt) saying those who disbelieve among the (ahli Qur’an) will be with the polytheists in hell forever? It is obvious that l-kitabi above is not a reference to the Qur’an.   

The logical contradiction.  

“We did not leave anything out of this book.” (Qur’an 6:38)

In order for this verse to be true in the way that those who follow the Qur’an only religion would have us to believe, this verse would have to be the last verse revealed in the Qur’an. If any other verses come after it, this entails a logical and absolutely devastating blow to their position.  

The Qur’an was not sent down all at once. 

“And those who disbelieve say: Why is not the Quran revealed to him all at once? Thus, that We may strengthen your heart thereby. And We have revealed it to you gradually, in stages.” (Qur’an 25:32)  

Also, if they don’t know the last verse of the Qur’an to be revealed that is also a logical and devastating blow to the way they understand the verse. Because it means that what was revealed first and last has been left out of the Qur’an! This is important for their argument.  

Allah (swt) has clearly told us that he has not included everything in the Qur’an. 

“And messengers, We have mentioned unto you before, and messengers, We have not mentioned unto you; and Allah spoke directly to Moses.” (Qur’an 4:164) 

So how exactly do we understand this verse in a way that is consistent with not only logic but with the Qur’an itself?  

“And the book will be placed open, and you will see the criminals fearful of that within it, and they will say, “Oh, woe to us! What is this book that leaves nothing small or great except that it has enumerated it?” And they will find what they did present before them. And your Lord does injustice to no one.” (Qur’an 18:49) 

Are we really to understand this to mean: “So as for he who is given the Qur’an in his right hand, he will say, “Here, read my Qur’an!” No. That is ridiculous.

It is very obvious that l-kitabi (this book) above is not a referee to the Qur’an at all. Rather, it is a reference to the book that contains each and every single act that we have done. The Qur’an, for example, obviously does not contain each and every evil small or great that humans have done.  

So as for he who is given his book in his right hand, he will say, “Here, read my book! (Qur’an 69:19) 

“But as for he who is given his book behind his back.” (Qur’an 84:10) 

Are we really to understand this as “But as for he who is given his Qur’an behind his back?”

It is best if we understand (Qur’an 6:38) in light of a verse that will help bring clarity to the confusion of those who follow the myriad of sects of the Qur’an Only Religion. 

It is crystal clear that the above text is a reference to the book of deeds. The verse is talking about disbelievers on the day of judgement.

If only they were guided to reflect upon the following verse:


“There is no creature on earth whose sustenance is not undertaken by Allah. He knows where it lives and where it rests. Everything is in a Book that is clear.” (Qur’an 11:6) 

It should be more than obvious that both the verses above refer to some celestial register where the minutia of all things are kept, and not to the Qur’an.  

Prima Qur’an Conclusion: 

The verse (Qur’an 6:38) itself does not indicate if it is talking about the Qur’an or not.  

There is no way out of this airtight argument from an intra-Qura’n perspective. Accept that the verses mentioned above are talking about the book of deeds that is with Allah (swt). 

The followers of the Qur’an Only Religion don’t want to accept this because it completely nukes one of their central talking points.  It takes a talking point away from them that they use to scam the masses. 

Dear readers, those people who follow the Qur’an only religion more often than not have very poor and weak knowledge of the Arabic language. Many of them can barely speak it, if at all. You do not see them offering to recite to you the Qur’an in Arabic, with proper recitation. The level of understanding of Arabic among them is quite atrocious. This is not to be mean; however, to be brutally honest. This is why they rely upon such very weak arguments to present their case.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

 

4 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

October 18, 2025 · 4:08 am

Engaging with the Pseudo-Islamic:

“We sent them with clear proofs and the Zabur. And we revealed to you the message that you may make clear to mankind what was sent down to them and that they might give thought.” (Qur’an 16:44)

﷽ 

This section will be on engaging the Pseudo-Islamic.

Pseudo meaning: pretentious, bogus, sham, phoney, imitation, mock, artificial.

In particular this section of the blog will have all articles related to two Pseudo-Islamic movements.

The first being the Hafs Qur’an Only Religion.

THE HAFS QUR’AN ONLY RELIGION

It is important to understand that we believe that the adherents of the Hafs Qur’an only movement are a distinct religion in much as we respect the way the Baha’i movement is a distinct religion from Islam.

Insh’Allah this section will deal with common arguments among the federation of sects that are known collectively as the ‘Qur’anist’.

This section will be refuting their many bold assertions; as well as showing why this particular attempt to re-interpret Islam and make it altogether different religion is deeply flawed.

Now why are they called the Hafs Qur’an only view? These people will either out of ignorance about the transmission and textual history of the Qur’an refer to their platform as ‘Qur’an Only’ or Quraniyoon. However, the Hafs Qur’an did not fall out of the sky. Thus, is important for them to reflect on why so much foundational trust is put into the men that transmitted the Hafs Qur’an to the exclusion of all other transmissions of the Qur’an.

At the core of this religion of theirs is a massive epistemological problem.

In regard to approving comments from followers of the Hafs Qur’an Only Religion we have taken seriously the verse of the Qur’an: “And cooperate in righteousness and piety, but do not cooperate in sin and aggression. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.” (Qur’an 5:2)

Thus, they would do well to read the article listed below: Is the Qur’an a detailed explanation of all things? to understand the policy on this website that keeps them as well as us from sinning and keeps them consistent with in their worldview. Insh’Allah.

THE QADIANI MOVEMENT Also known as AHMADIYYA MOVEMENT is a divided movement, split into two competing jama’at or congregations. That is the LAHORI whom we refer to as The Ahmadiyya A and the QADIANI whom we refer to as the Ahmadiyya B.

As the Qadiani or Ahmadiyyah B believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is a Prophet after The Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw), they have been marked as being outside the millat of Islam. Likewise, they (the Ahmadiyyah B) or Qadiani have made anyone outside of their jama’at to be kafirs. Though, their is some tongue in cheek wordplay see their website. Source: (https://www.alislam.org/articles/are-non-ahmadis-muslim-or-non-muslim-ahmadiyya-muslim-perspective/)

To the dismay of the Muslim Ummah, The Qadiani have a Khalifa, named MIrza Masroor Ahmed, he lives in Tilford, United Kingdom, where he pays taxes to the United Kingdom. Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali were not known to have paid taxes to a Non Muslim government.

For future reference all articles addressed to either of the above movements will be found under: AHL AL-QIBLA / AHL AL-KHILAF under: Engaging with the Pseudo-Islamic:

Why we don’t follow the Qur’an Only Religion.

Why we don’t follow the “Qur’an Only” religion.

Not All of Allah’s Revelation is in the Qur’an.

Not All of Allah’s Revelation is in the Qur’an.

Is the Qur’an a detailed explanation of all things? (Prima Qur’an policy on comments from this group)

Is the Qur’an a detailed explanation of everything?

Which Qur’an do the followers of the Qur’an Only Religion believe in?

Which Qur’an does the Qur’an only religion believe in?

How the followers of the Qur’an Only Religion become Mushriks.

How the Quraniyoon become Mushriks

Does the Qur’an Only Religion claim that Al Fatiha is not part of the Qur’an?

Does the Qur’an Only religion claim that Al Fatiha is not part of the Qur’an?

How we know the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw) is divine guidance.

How we know the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw) is divine guidance.

Qur’an Only Sect Kala Kato Burns Four Children Alive and Continues a Campaign of Terror.

Qur’an Only sect Kala Kato burns four children alive and continues a campaign of terror.

Who can understand the mutashabih verses? Analysis of Qur’an 3:7

Who can understand the mutashabih verses? Analysis of Quran 3:7

Questions for the Qur’an Only Religion that can’t be swept under a rug.

Questions for the Qur’an Only religion That Can’t Be Swept Under A Rug.

Self Proclaimed Prophet: Rashad Khalafa Father of the number 19 theory.

The self proclaimed Quranist prophet: Rashad Khalifa

Over it are 19: Critique of the number 19 pattern used by Quraniyoon.

Over it are 19?

Refutation that oral traditions came 300 years after the Prophet.

Even though they used to say that the hadith -oral traditions came some 300 years after the Blessed Messenger (saw).  Praise be to Allah the more educated among them have backed away from that claim. However, this article is here because many in that movement may be unaware.

See Harold Motzki (a Non-Muslim orientalist and academic) who made short work of that Quranist claim

Orientalist Dr. Harold Motzki takes ‘Qur’an-Only’ Religion to task

Prohibition against writing hadith? Refuting the claims of the Quraniyoon.

The Prohibition against writing hadith?

Does the Qur’an itself tell us to reject all hadith?

This article is a nail in the coffin for the entire movement. Some from their movement have commented but ended up leaving in frustration. It looks at their arguments and misquotations of the Qur’an. Also given in this article is an irrefutable example of Allah confirming a hadith to the Blessed Messenger [saw].

Does the Quran itself instruct us to reject all hadith?

Qur’an only religion and their confusion in regard to Qur’an 4:157

The Qur’an Only Religion and their confusion on Qur’an 4:157.

The appropriate age for a female to marry and bear children according to the Qur’an alone.

Contrary to what the Quraniyoon may tell you, a woman can get married as young as 12 years old according to the Qur’an.

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/05/the-appropriate-age-for-a-female-to-marry-and-bear-children/

The Age of Aisha (ra) and the Highly Detailed Qur’an?

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/the-age-of-aisha-and-the-highly-detailed-quran/embed/#?secret=UmvkmjuH0v#?secret=oTvtda14Ml

The Qur’an Only and Uzair

The Qur’an Only movement and Uzair

Did the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) write the Qur’an?

Our colleague had written a refutation like this many years ago on the ‘Qur’an only‘ web site known as http://www.ourbeacon.com/ or it used to be known as ‘Galaxy Dastak‘. Dr. Shabbir Ahmed founder of the forum had me banned. This was also the last our colleague heard from their former teacher Hamza AbdulMalik. Hamza AbdulMalik used to be the director of IPCI international until he dropped off the radar and re-emerged as a Quranist.

Well, our colleague may have been removed from the forum but here is the refutation of their arguments for all to see here:

Critique of the argument that Muhammed wrote the Qur’an.

Is Showing Love and Reference for the Noble Prophet Idol Worship? Refutation of the Qur’an Only Religion.

Is showing love and reverence to the Blessed Prophet considered worship?

A pre-eminent argument used by ‘Quranist’ ripped to shreds By Dr. Jeffery Lang.

The most oft-quoted verse used by Quranist is analyzed and ripped apart by a Muslim convert, academic, and professor of math, Dr. Jeffery Lang.

This is a centerpiece argument used by Edip Yuksel, Sam Gerrans, “Joseph Islam”, Rashad Khilafa, Shabir Ahmed and the lot of them. The reason why this argument is especially devastating coming from someone like Dr. Jeffry Lang is that Dr. Lang is critical of the hadith corpus as we have it today.

Dr. Jeffery Lang: An Argument Advanced by Quraniyoon Refuted

Handling the words of the Blessed Prophet. The difference between Ad litteram and Ad sensum transmission.

The Blessed Sandals. Handling the words attributed to the Prophet Muhammed (saw).

 Use and abuse of the word hikma by Quranist.

The following is a look how Quranist have both misunderstood the word hikma as a reference to the Qur’an and how they do not understand that it is something that Allah gives his messengers to deal with situations and context not immediately addressed by the revelations they were given.

Use & Abuse of the word Hikma by the Quran Only religion.

Hating a hadith just for the sake of hating a hadith.

This article a hypothetical question is posed. What if a particular ahad hadith turned out to be correct? Especially one that is of a scientific nature? What would the Quranist do in such a scenario?

You can read about that here:

https://primaquran.com/2017/01/14/hating-a-hadith-just-for-the-sake-of-hating-a-hadith/embed/#?secret=J77YHpdtAE#?secret=p95SLnQHAH

Is the Qur’an clear?

An introduction to this topic. A brief discussion about the Mutazlite Shafi’i theologian Shaykh Abd Al Jabbar.

Is the Qur’an clear?

Hafs Qur’an Only religion is intellectually bankrupt.

The Qur’an Only Religion is intellectually bankrupt

Salaat in the Qur’an is not ritual prayer? Examining the claim of some Quranist.

This article looks at one Quranist claim that salat is not ritual prayer. This is what happens when you abandon the understanding of the Blessed Messenger and follow the ‘every man for himself’ approach of the Quranist.

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

The Qur’an only religion and their confusion in regards to Allah’s judgement.

The Hafs Qur’an Only Religion and their confusion in regards to Allah’s judgement.

Nothing left out of this book: The manipulation of the Qur’an Only Religion.

Nothing left out of this book? The Manipulation of the Qur’an by the Quraniyoon.

Sam Gerrans Hafs Qur’an Only Advocate: The Qur’an Teaches That The Earth Is Flat.

“The Qur’an teaches that the Earth is flat” -Sam Gerrans (Qur’an Only Advocate)

The Detailed Qur’an and the Sabeans

The Detailed Qur’an and the Sabeans

SECTION ON AHMADIYYA B OR THE QADIANI MOVEMENT.

Ahmadiyya B is not be confused with Ahmadiyya A (The Lahori Jama’at)

ANWAR SADAT (MUSLIM CANDADIAN PREACHER) FITTING ANSWER TO A QADIANI (AHMADI B) QUESTION.

https://primaquran.com/2024/01/27/anwar-sadats-answer-to-a-qadiani-ahmadi-question/embed/#?secret=zyVFLY5eNv#?secret=r1M3SchX8N

CONVERSATION WITH A MEMBER OF THE QADIANI SECT (AHMADI B)

https://primaquran.com/2016/12/09/conversations-with-a-member-of-the-ahmadi-sect/embed/#?secret=1uOCadqRpx#?secret=EdbGYVLkrx

REFUTATION OF MIRZA GHULAM AHMAD & THE GREATEST COVER UP IN CHURCH HISTORY?

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/refutation-of-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-the-greatest-cover-up-in-church-history/embed/#?secret=CZIvpHAEfk#?secret=PF5U3i75Ym

More articles coming insh’Allah…

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,