Tag Archives: Islam

November 3, 2025 · 7:38 pm

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

“And for their saying, “Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah.” And they did not kill him nor did they impale (ṣalabūhu) him; (وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَٰكِنْ شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ)but it was made to appear to them so. Those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no certain knowledge of it, but only follow conjecture. For certainly, they did not kill him.” (Qur’an 4:157)

﷽ 

Once again, this shows why it is problematic to take the Qur’an alone. We can glean the meaning of words via the process of Tafsir al-Quran bi-l-Quran. (Interpreting the Qur’an by the Qur’an).  However, there are times when you need to appeal to external references to get the full grasp of what is being conveyed.

Sam Gerrans, one of the followers of the Qur’an Only religion, has translated the text of Qur’an 4:157 as:

“157 And for their saying: “We killed the Messiah,1 Jesus,2 son of Mary,3 the messenger of God,” — and they killed him not nor crucified4 him, but it seemed so5 to them; and those who dispute concerning it are in doubt thereof, no knowledge have they thereof save the pursuit of conjecture — and they killed him not of a certainty.”

Source: (https://reader.quranite.com/verses/chapters?chapter=4&page=4)

Notice that Sam has a note (4) by the word ‘crucified’.

Or put to death by stake. Arabic: ṣalaba. By convention the Traditionalist has understood ṣalaba as to crucify. That understanding is, perhaps, at odds with what Qur’anic usage indicates. In the Qur’an, Firʿawn is called the Lord of Stakes (38:12, 89:10) — which collocation is typically rendered thus by the Traditionalist himself. This fact certainly suggests that the form of capital punishment meted out by Firʿawn featured a stake. The options available for killing a man on a stake are limited. In close proximity to the verb commonly rendered crucify (ṣalaba) Firʿawn threatens that punishment will be inflicted ‘on the trunks of date-palms’ (20:71) — thus lending credence to the notion that the trunks of date-palms were trimmed and sharpened to facilitate impalement. In addition, Firʿawn threatens to cut off hands and feet from alternate sides before executing the punishment in question (7:124, 20:71, 26:49). Attempting to crucify one thus disfigured would be both impractical and run the risk of creating morbid farce — which itself would defeat the point of most of what benefits a tyrant from the public torture of his enemies: the creation of fear. Finally, a date-palm does not possess a crossbar, nor can one readily be made from a second date-palm — a requisite item if we are discussing crucifixion in an intellectually honest manner. However, I render ṣalaba and ṣallaba throughout as to crucify, as per the norm, and confine my dissent to the notes.

Prima Qur’an comments. Sam is correct in that by interpreting the word here in the other places where it is mentioned, you do not get the understanding of a crucifixion. A patibulum with nails placed in the hands and feet.

At least Sam is on board in recognizing that Qur’an 4:157 does not speak of a  crucifixion.

However, in his notes he states: ‘Or put to death by stake.’ This is where reliance upon extra Qur’an information comes into play. Because it is via that extra Qur’anic material that one realizes that Jews do not crucify people at all. It is not part of their repertoire.

In fact, to suggest that Qur’an 4:157 should be rendered as  crucifixion as the Shi’i and Sunnis do would render the Qur’an of human origin. It is not possible that Allah (swt) would be ignorant of Jewish methods of execution.

The Jews Don’t Crucify People. Great exchange with Rabbi Dov Stein.

Another follower of the Qur’an Only religion, Edip Yuksel, in his Reformist Translation would render Qur’an 4:157 as follows:

“We understand that Jesus was not conscious when they crucified his body.” Jesus’person was already terminated, and he was at his Lord.

However, on the Islamawakened website it has Edip saying:

For their saying, “We have killed the Messiah Jesus the son of Mary, the messenger of God!” They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them as if they had. Those who dispute this are in doubt of him, they have no knowledge except to follow conjecture; they did not kill him for a certainty.

So it looks as if Edip is prepared to lie about Allah (swt) and equally worse impute to Allah (swt) ignorance of Jewish methods of execution.

We can look at a few more translations by those who follow the Qur’an Only religion.

https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/4/157

Shabbir Ahmed translates the Qur’an 4:157 as:

“And for claiming, “We killed the Messiah Jesus son of Mary, Allah’s Messenger.” They never killed him and never crucified him. But it appeared so to them and the matter remained dubious to them. Those who hold conflicting views on this issue are indeed confused. They have no real knowledge but they are following mere conjecture. Very certainly, they never killed him.”

The Monotheist Group translates Qur’an 4:157 as:

“And their saying: “We have killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, messenger of God!” And they had not killed him, nor crucified him, but it appeared to them as if they had. And those who dispute are in doubt regarding him, they have no knowledge except to follow conjecture; they did not kill him for a certainty.”

Rashad Khalifa translates Qur’an 4:157 as:

“And for claiming that they killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of GOD. In fact, they never killed him, they never crucified him – they were made to think that they did. All factions who are disputing in this matter are full of doubt concerning this issue. They possess no knowledge; they only conjecture. For certain, they never killed him.”

Another follower of the Qur’an Only religion that goes by the name of Joseph Islam has the following to say in regard to Qur’an 4:157.

https://www.quransmessage.com/articles/jesus%20crucifixion%20FM3.htm

There are many places where Joseph Islam has fumbled.

First, he renders Qur’an 4:157 as:

“That they said (in boast), “Indeed (Arabic: Inna), We killed Jesus Christ, the son of Mary, the Messenger of God”. And they killed him not, nor did they crucify (Arabic: Salabuhu) him, but it appeared so to them (Arabic: Shubbiha), and indeed those who differ in it are surely in doubt (Arabic: Shakkin), with no (certain) knowledge(Arabic: Ilmin), but only follow assumptions (Arabic: Zani), for certainly they did not kill him”

Joseph acknowledges the double denial.

(2)    GOD’S RESPONSE TO THE CLAIM OF THE JEWS BY ANALYSING SOME KEY ARABIC TERMS

God’s initial response is two-fold.

(a) They did not kill him

(b) They did not cause Prophet Jesus (pbuh) to die ‘in a well known manner’ (Arabic: Salabuhu)

Joseph then proceeds to tell us:

The word ‘Salabahu’ is formed from the Arabic root word: Sad-Lam-Ba which means:

To put to death by crucifixion, to extract marrow from bones, to put to death in any well known manner of killing.

Please see related article [1] below.

To be crucified one would need to ‘die‘ on the cross / pole or stake. Death by this manner can range from a few hours to days and can be a result of blood loss, hypovolemic shock, infection related sepsis or by dehydration. However, for crucifixion to be complete, death would be necessary.

Therefore, the primary significance of the word ‘Salabahu’ means to put to death in a well known manner. This may mean by a process of crucifixion, but is not restricted to it.

Prima Qur’an comments: The claim that Sad-Lam Ba which means: ‘To put to death by crucifixion.’ is probably one of the biggest lies that LANE. E.W, Edward Lanes Lexicon has ever fostered. One that Joseph had decided to repeat.

Joseph continues:

007:124

“I will certainly cut off your hands and your feet on opposite sides, then will I will crucify you all together (Arabic: uSALIBANNAkum)”

A popular translation above renders the word ‘Salibanna’ as crucify when all the Arabic implies is a ‘well known manner of death’ at the time of Pharaoh’s reign which may or may not imply crucifixion on a cross.

Prima Qur’an comments:

Again, Joseph is trying to escape reality. Neither does SALIBANNA mean in a ‘well known manner of death’. This is Joseph’s way of saying I do not know, neither does the Qur’an give clarity on the matter.

In fact, by saying ‘well known manner of death’ one would need to be familiar with the types of death that were implemented. This would mean, of course, appealing to information that is external to the Qur’an.

So let us go back and analyze what Joseph had stated:

Joseph acknowledges the double denial. This is something virtually all followers of the Qur’an only religion ignore. The double negation.

(2)    GOD’S RESPONSE TO THE CLAIM OF THE JEWS BY ANALYSING SOME KEY ARABIC TERMS

God’s initial response is two-fold.

(a) They did not kill him

(b) They did not cause Prophet Jesus (pbuh) to die ‘in a well known manner’ (Arabic: Salabuhu)

Prima Qur’an comments: The well known manner of execution by the Jews is stoning. After stoning, the Jews impale an individual. This is a post-mortem suspension punishment. Kindly see the article above with Rabbi Dov Stein.

Once one realizes this, we can dispense with:

  1. Sunni views of some other individual being made to look like Jesus and this person was put on a cross.
  2. Qadiani views of Jesus being on a cross and then taken down alive.
  3. Ismaili views of Jesus dying on a cross (as a body) not as a soul.

Another follower of the Qur’an Only religion has his own twist. Allah kills Jesus, not the Jews, but his corpse is taken up into heaven.  Later he (Jesus) will be resurrected. 

Dear reader, you may not fail to notice the dancing around the verse Qur’an 4:157.

This Shuaib Abdullahi translates Qur’an 4:157 as:

“And their saying, “Indeed, we killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah,” when they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but it was made to appear so to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him for certain.”

Source: (https://thegreatkoran.com/chapter/4/)

Conclusion: Out of all of them, Sam Gerrans came the closest. Yet, he admittedly follows the tradition! “However, I render ṣalaba and ṣallaba throughout as to crucify, as per the norm, and confine my dissent to the notes.” Joseph Islam tried to skirt around the fact that, according to the Qur’an alone methodlogy the Qur’an does not give clarity on the matter. Thus, he implores the ‘well known manner of death’. This in and of itself is an appeal to extra Qur’anic data.

For those interested, please see our article here:

Crucifixion or Impaled? Understanding Qur’an 4:157

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

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

November 2, 2025 · 8:10 pm

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

“It is He Who has sent down to thee the Book: In it are Verses that are entirely clear; they are the foundation of the Book: others are not entirely clear. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is not entirely clear, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord:” and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.” (Qur’an 3:7)

﷽ 

It is our humble opinion that the verse above in the Qur’an is a very wise and beautiful criterion for establishing when someone or some group is trying to create dissension among the ranks of the Muslims.  Namely, when they are trying to create sectarian views and/or break away from the faith of Islam altogether.

It has been our experience time and again that every time we run into some pseudo-Islamic group that want us to join their particular theological, juristic or spiritual understanding of Islam, they will more often than not quote those verses that are not entirely clear.  They will attempt to give fixed meanings to verses that are not entirely clear.  Rather, what they should do is fear Allah and be humble.

These people should say rather, ‘This is what it could mean.’  ‘This is a possible meaning or an interpretation of the verse.’

One such group is the ‘submitters’.   As they have also split into several groups over the years, or there has arisen dissension in their ranks, we will give you links to their websites so that you can read from their perspectives and form your own conclusion.  Ultimately, Allah alone is the source of guidance.

We have included two additional websites that are ‘spin-offs’ from the submitters -splinter groups. Those that, over the course of time, ended up having some differences between each other.

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 following one of the many sects among the Qur’an alone religion.

What is interesting is that submission.org claims that the Qur’an is divinely protected and safeguarded by an interlocking mathematical code based upon the number 19.

“Over it are nineteen. And We have not made the keepers of the Fire except angels. And We have not made their number except as a trial for those who disbelieve – that those who were given the Scripture will be convinced and those who have believed will increase in faith and those who were given the Scripture and the believers will not doubt and that those in whose hearts is hypocrisy and the disbelievers will say, “What does Allah intend by this as an example?” Thus does Allah leave astray whom He wills and guides whom He wills. And none knows the soldiers of your Lord except Him. And mention of the Fire is not but a reminder to humanity. (Qur’an 74:30-31)“

We have discussed this at length here:

The self proclaimed Quranist prophet: Rashad Khalifa

What the submission.org people advocate is that this verse above refers to the phrase ‘bismillah ir rahman ir raheem‘  which is translated as ‘with the name of Allah the Most Gracious the Most Merciful’.  That this phrase is key to the interlocking mathematical code that the Qur’an is based upon.

To us, the number nineteen above in context refers to the angels, or ‘soldiers’ who are guarding the hellfire.  However, if it is unclear what the number nineteen is a reference to, then this is exactly what Allah warned us about in the (Qur’an 3:7) “But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is not entirely clear, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings…”

The submission.org people also make an issue of the letters that will often appear at the beginning of many chapters of the Qur’an.

For example:

Alif Laam Meem Raa (Qur’an 13:1)

Alif Laam Meen (Qur’an 3:1)

Alif Laam Meem (Qur’an 2:1)

These letters, standing alone at the beginning of chapters, have puzzled many Muslim scholars. However, submission.org attempts to give fixed meaning to that which is not entirely clear.

Rashad Khalifa (chief architect) of submission.org also completely ignored what Allah said by taking two verses out of the Qur’an! 

He took them out because the letters in the verses did not tally with his number nineteen interlocking mathematical code.

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

So for 1400 years, the Qur’an had these ‘two extra verses’ and no one noticed that until Rashad Khalifa came with his interlocking mathematical code based upon the number nineteen?

The number 19 interlocking mathematical code has not been shown to work with other ahruf/qira’at*of the Qur’an.

*Note. ahruf/qira’at refer to different transmissions of the Qur’an and ways of recitation.   Allah willing, we will have some entries about this in the future as well.

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

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

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.  Now notice something very interesting when it comes to the call to prayer (azaan)

This is what they have written:

Azaan is not a part of the Contact Prayers, nor is it required. But it has become a tradition in the Muslim communities to summon the people to prayer through a loud announcement. The original Azaan used to conform with the Quran’s teachings and became corrupted with time.


Originally, the call to prayer consisted of:
(1) Allahu Akbar (God is Great), 4 times.
(2) Laa Elaaha Ellah Allah (There is no other god beside God), once.
Many years later, some people added Muhammad’s name to the Azaan. This violates God’s commandments in 2:136, 2:285, 3:84, 4:150, and 72:18. Later, other groups of Muslims added the names of Ali and his family. Today, the Azaan is severely corrupted throughout the Muslim world and constitutes idol worship, not submission to God ALONE.

Prima Qur’an comments:

1 Notice that there is no problem with the call to prayer being accepted as a handed-down tradition or practice in the Muslim community?

2. “The original Azaam used to conform with the Quran’s teachings, and became corrupted with time.”  Notice that they do not even furnish any evidence or proof for this.

3. “Originally, the call to prayer consisted of.” Again noticed that no proof is furnished of how the call to prayer was ‘originally’.

4. When Muslims say in the call to prayer that Muhammed is the Messenger of God,  submission takes things too far by declaring it idol worship.

Under the section:

What Nullifies Ablution

“Digestive excretions through the intestines, including gas, solids, or urine nullify ablution. Sleeping also nullifies ablution, since one becomes unaware. Thus, one may observe a number of Contact Prayers with one ablution, provided he or she does not go to the bathroom, pass gas, or fall asleep.”

Notice absolutely no reference from the Qur’an. 

2.The Intention

“In your own language, secretly or audibly, state your intention that you are about to observe the Contact Prayer. Remember to state the time (dawn, noon, afternoon, sunset, or night).”

Notice absolutely no reference to the Qur’an.  Why would I have to say my intention? Isn’t God aware of what I am about to do?

3. “Raise your hands to the sides of your face: Your thumbs touch your ears, and the palms of your hands face forward.”

Notice absolutely no reference from the Qur’an. 

5. The Standing Position:

“You are now standing with your arms resting naturally at your side. Some people place the left hand on the stomach, and the right hand on top of the left hand. Either position is correct – you may place your hands on your stomach while standing, or you may let your arms hang down by your sides.” 

Notice absolutely no reference from the Qur’an. How does he know that ‘either position is correct’?  The Qur’an does not say anything on the matter!

The Contact Prayers and The Quran’s Mathematical Code

“As noted above, the Dawn, Noon, Afternoon, Sunset, and Night Prayers consist of 2, 4, 4, 3, & 4 units, respectively. When we put these 5 numbers next to each other we get 24434, and this number is a multiple of 19 (24434 = 19 x 1286). The common denominator of the Quran’s code is 19. This phenomenon confirms that the number of units for each Contact Prayer has been preserved intact, but the sequence 2, 4, 4, 3, and 4 is also confirmed.”

Now notice how contrived this is! He claims that the sequence of 2, 4, 4, 3, and 4 is confirmed. Where is it confirmed?   Well, accordingly, you can place 24434 divided by 19 and get 1286!  Hmm well, o.k!  So what is so special about 1286?  Also, notice we could shift the number of units around.  For example, we could say the night prayer is 2 units, the dawn prayer is 3 units, the sunset prayer is 4 units, the afternoon prayer is 4 units, the noon prayer is 4 units and we would get 23444.   In fact, you could shift it around a number of ways.

This is completely contrived!  If you don’t believe that, just read on and see what he says concerning the Friday Prayer.

The Friday Prayer

“The Friday Congregational Prayer (Salat Al-Jum`ah) is so important, a whole sura is entitled “Friday” and a commandment is decreed in Verse 62:9 to observe this prayer. Every Submitter – man, woman, and child – is commanded by God to observe the Friday Congregational Prayer.”

“The Friday Prayer replaces the Noon Prayer every Friday. Instead of 4 units, the Friday Prayer consists of listening to two sermons delivered by the Imam, and two units of prayer.”  

Where does he get this from?  The Qur’an does not say that.  Let us see if we use his formula of 19.  22434/19 =1180.7368.   Hmm, well o.k. What is so special about 1180.7368?

We have given the links above to their web sites. As far as we are concerned this whole idea of the Qur’an is based upon the number 19 is more arbitrary than anything else.

However, not all of the Qur’an only groups that broke away from Islam to form their own religion direct their anti-tradition stance simply based upon the number 19.  Many of the followers of the Qur’an only religion also have broken off from Rashad Khilafa. They do not buy into the number 19 claim. Many of them simply refer to verses contained within the Qur’an itself.

Examples:

“Shall I then seek a judge other than Allah? When it is He Who has revealed to you the Book fully detailed?” (Qur’an 6:114)

“Should We treat the ones who have surrendered the same as those who are criminals? What is wrong with you, how do you judge? Or do you have another book which you study? In it, you find whatever you wish to find?” (Qur’an 68:36-38)

“Have you considered those who were asked to accept judgement from Allah’s Book? When they are asked to accept judgement from Allah’s Book, some of them turn their backs and walk away!” (Qur’an 3:23)

“These are the verses of Allah which we rehearse to you with the truth. Then in what Hadith will they believe in after Allah and His verses? (Qur’an45:6).”

Here are some of the many reasons why we feel it is not practical to take from the Qur’an alone.   We will also present some reasons why it can be problematic to take from the Qur’an alone.

1)  The position of Qur’an Only Religion simply divorces the Qur’an from history.  The Qur’an becomes devoid of any context.  There are many verses in the Qur’an that address the Blessed Messenger (saw) and his community.  Anyone who even has a cursory reading of the Qur’an will see this is the case.  There is no doubt that there is an intimate relationship between the Qur’an and the Blessed Messenger (saw), as well as his community.   The Qur’an was revealed in ‘real-time’ to address the needs and concerns of the community.

Allah never says in the Qur’an that we cannot look outside the Qur’an for guidance and elucidation. Allah simply reminds us that the Qur’an is the final criterion for this.

“And they say: “None will enter Paradise unless he is a Jew or a Christian.” Those are their desires. Say: “Produce your proof if you are truthful.” (Qur’an 2:111)

Now can you imagine Allah commanding us to tell the Jews and Christians to produce their proof/evidence, and we do not have people who are qualified to do that? It doesn’t make any sense.  You can imagine that the Jews and Christians will indeed produce their proof/evidence. If the claim to produce your proof is a sincere claim, then we have to examine what they produce.

“Say, “I do not find within that which was revealed to me] forbidden to one who would eat it unless it is a dead animal or blood spilled out or the flesh of swine – for indeed, it is impure – or it is disobedience, dedicated to other than Allah. But whoever is forced, neither desiring nor transgressing, then indeed, your Lord is Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 6:145)

So could we understand from this verse that it is perfectly fine for us to cook food with bone marrow from swine, and we could also consume swine fat. We could technically cook with pig lard.  The command in the Qur’an is very clear that the prohibition is only against the flesh of swine.  Believe it or not, this is the opinion of the scholar Ibn Hazm. He rejected Qiyas (analogy) though he later modified some of his positions.  Ibn Hazm was a follower of Dawud Az-Zahiri and promoted a literal interpretation of the Qur’an.

“Permitted to you, on the night of the fasts, is the approach to your wives. They are your garments and ye are their garments. Allah knoweth what you used to do secretly among yourselves, but He turned to you and forgave you; so now associate with them, and seek what Allah Has ordained for you, and eat and drink, until the white thread of dawn appear to you distinct from its black thread; then complete your fast till the night appears.”  (Qur’an 2:187)

How are we to obey this ruling of the Qur’an if we were to live in parts of Alaska, Finland, Norway, and Sweden when there are 6 months of darkness and 6 months of light? If we live in that region, do we just not fast at all?

“And establish prayer and give zakah and bow with those who bow [in worship and obedience].” (Qur’an 2:43)

How much are we to pay for the zakah?

“O you who have believed, when you rise to perform the prayer, wash your faces and your forearms to the elbows and wipe over your heads and wash your feet to the ankles. And if you are in a state of janabah, then purify yourselves. But if you are ill or on a journey or one of you comes from the place of relieving himself or you have contacted women and do not find water, then seek clean earth and wipe over your faces and hands with it. Allah does not intend to make difficulty for you, but He intends to purify you and complete His favor upon you that you may be grateful.” (Qur’an 5:6)

Those who are familiar with the Shafi school of jurisprudence know that they understand ‘have contacted women‘ means simply touching a woman.  That, by simply touching a woman, a person would need to perform their ablutions.  This is due to an ambiguity in the Arabic word for ‘touch’ or ‘contacted’.   So does the phrase above ‘you have contacted women‘ mean sexual intimacy or simply touching them?

“As to the thief, male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment,by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power.” (Qur’an 5:38)

Would this verse mean a child who steals ice cream from a shop?  Would it mean any theft regardless of the monetary value?  What happens if the person has one hand? Does that also get lobbed off?  What happens if the person has no hands, but is simply an assistant thief?  For example, we help a person to steal by filling his or her pockets with items.  In this case, we are both stealing something.  This person has no hands, so what is the punishment here?

One could go on and on with this.

Conclusion:

It is clear from the Qu’ran itself that it does not explicitly prohibit Muslims from taking other sources of guidance.  There is no such verse in the Qur’an that would not allow us to quote the hadith. There is not a single prohibition in the Qur’an.  The Qur’an only warns us to be on guard against false teachings. The Qur’an teaches us that it is the filter for any source of guidance.  That, ultimately, the Qur’an is the source of guidance.   To take the Qur’an alone presents many problems, simply because the Arabic language lends itself to an array of interpretations or understandings.  If we were to take a literal approach to the Qu’ran without recourse to customs, analogy, logic, deduction, inference, etc, it would present us with many conundrums.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

8 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

November 1, 2025 · 2:12 am

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

“So for their breaking of the covenant, We cursed them and made their hearts hard. They distort words from their usages and have forgotten a portion of that of which they were reminded. And you will still observe deceit among them, except a few of them. But pardon them and overlook [their misdeeds]. Indeed, Allah loves the doers of good.” (Qur’an 5:13)

﷽ 

By the grace of Allah (swt), this entry will take a look at a very important hadith that is attributed to the Blessed Messenger (saw).

Several Companions of the Blessed Prophet (saw) allowed narrating ḥadīth by meaning (riwāyah bil-maʿnā) rather than by exact wording (riwāyah bil-alfāẓ).

Allah (swt) says in the Qur’an:

“We have not sent a messenger except in the language of his people to clarify for them. Then Allah leaves whoever He wills to stray and guides whoever He wills. And He is the Almighty, All-Wise.” (Qur’an 14:4)

“Indeed, We have made this easy in your own language so perhaps they will be mindful.” (Qur’an 44:58)

“Sufyan Al Thawri used to say: “When you see a man show strictness in the wordings of hadith, now that he is advertising himself.” He narrated that a certain man began to question Yahya ibn Sa’id Qattan (d. 198) about a specific wording inside a hadith. Yahya said to him; “Ya Fulan! there is not in the whole world anything more sublime the Book of Allah, yet He has permitted that its word be recited in seven different dialects. So do not be so strict!”

Source: (Cf. al-Shaf’i, al-Risala p.274).

This argument was brought forward by the illustrious scholar Sufyan Al Thawri.

Some examples of the above:

The difference between “Malik” (مَلِك) and “Maalik” (مَالِك) in Surah Al-Fatihah is one of the most well-known distinctions between the two canonical recitations (riwayat) of the Quran: Hafs ‘an ‘Asim and Warsh ‘an Nafi’.

First, We should confirm the exact difference: Hafs uses “Malik” (King) while Warsh uses “Maalik” (Master/Owner). It’s important to explain this isn’t a contradiction but a valid variant rooted in the oral transmission of the Quran.

Both readings are linguistically sound and are supported by the Arabic language.

  • مَلِك (Malik): Derived from the root م-ل-ك (M-L-K), which relates to kingship, sovereignty, and dominion. It emphasizes authority and power to rule.
  • مَالِك (Maalik): Also derived from the same root م-ل-ك (M-L-K), but in the pattern of fa’il, which emphasizes ownership and possession.

Another example: (Qur’an 3:146)

Phrase in Hafs:

وَكَأَيِّن مِّن نَّبِيٍّ قَاتَلَ مَعَهُ رِبِّيُّونَ كَثِيرٌ
Transliteration: “Wa ka-ayyin min nabiyyin qātala ma’ahu ribbiyyūna kathīr…”

Phrase in Warsh:

وَكَأَيِّن مِّن نَّبِيٍّ قَاتَلِ مَعَهُ رِبِّيُّونَ كَثِيرٌ
Transliteration: “Wa ka-ayyin min nabiyyin qātali ma’ahu ribbiyyūna kathīr…”

For example above look what we have quoted:

Allah (swt) says in the Qur’an:

“We have not sent a messenger except in the language of his people to clarify for them. Then Allah leaves whoever He wills to stray and guides whoever He wills. And He is the Almighty, All-Wise.” (Qur’an 14:4)

Is that a lie? Allah (swt) most certainly did not say that in the Qur’an. That is because what we have given you is an English translation of the meaning and not the Arabic. The Qur’an was revealed in Arabic.

Does this mean now that every time someone were to quote the Qur’an in another language that they are lying or are they giving us the meaning? Because any time you translate something into another language it is not adverbatim.

This is the difference between Ad litteram and Ad sensum.

Ad litteram:

  • Meaning: “To the letter”; literal and exact.
  • Focus: Preserving the original wording, structure, and grammatical form as closely as possible.
  • Example: A translation that is word-for-word and may sound awkward in the target language but is an exact replica of the source text. An example of this is the phrase: parlez vous francais when rendered ad litteram in English would be: Speak you French?

Ad sensum:

  • Meaning: “To the sense” or “according to the meaning.”
  • Focus: Conveying the idea or spirit of the original text, even if it requires deviating from the literal wording.
  • Example: A translation that sounds natural and fluent in the target language by rephrasing or restructuring sentences to capture the original idea.

WHOEVER LIES ABOUT THE PROPHET

وَسُئِلَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ﷺ عَنْ رَجُلٍ يُحَدِّثُ بِالْحَدِيثِ فَيُقَدِّمُ وَيُؤَخِّرُ فِي كَلَامِهِ، فَقَالَ:
«لَا بَأْسَ بِهِ مَا أَدَّى الْمَعْنَى».

The Messenger of Allah saw was asked about a man who narrates Hadith but switches the order of its phrases. He said: “There is no harm in it as long as he conveys the meaning.”

Source: (النص العربي (ص ٣٨٩): al-Ḥākim al-Tirmidhī’s Nawādir al-Uṣūl, p. 389 (Dār al-Jīl edition)

The mutawatir -mass transmitted reports attributed to the Blessed Messenger (saw).

Even in the example of what is considered to be a mass-transmitted report attributed to the Blessed Messenger (saw), it has come down to us in two forms.

Narrated by ‘Abdullah bin Az-Zubair: “I said to my father, ‘I do not hear from you any narration (Hadith) of Allah’s Apostle as I hear (his narrations) from so-and-so?” Az-Zubair replied. l was always with him (the Prophet) and I heard him saying “Whoever tells a lie against me then (surely) let him occupy, his seat in Hell-fire.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:107)

Narrated by Anas: “The fact which stops me from narrating a great number of Hadiths to you is that the Prophet said: “Whoever tells a lie against me intentionally, then (surely) let him occupy his seat in Hell-fire.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:108)

“Whoever lies about me willfully, let him take right now his seat in the Fire!” A mass-narrated (mutawatir) hadith reportedly from many companions in Al Bukhari and Muslim.

One version is narrated by Ibn Abbas by Ahad with three chains, al Tirmidhi (hasan), and with a sound chain—Ibn Abi shayba begins with the words “Avoid relating my words except what you know for sure.”

Source: (The Four Imams & Their Schools by Gibril Fouad Haddad page 132)

Narrated by Ali: “The Prophet said, “Do not tell a lie against me, for whosoever tells a lie against me then he will surely enter the hell-fire.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:106)

We also have the following hadith:
Narrated by Al-Mughira: “I heard the Prophet saying, “Ascribing false things to me is not like ascribing false things to anyone else. Whosoever tells a lie against me intentionally, then surely let him occupy his seat in Hell-Fire.” I heard the Prophet saying, “The deceased who is wailed over is tortured for that wailing.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:1291)

Prima Qur’an Comments:

There is nothing to preclude that the Blessed Prophet (saw) said both of those statements. That is because, in reality, one does not contradict another. A person who relates from the Blessed Prophet (saw) the meaning of what he says is no different from one who conveys Islam in another language quoting Allah from the Qur’an in the local vernacular. 

Analyzing the above hadith:

Narrated by ‘Abdullah bin Az-Zubair: ” I said to my father, ‘I do not hear from you any narration (Hadith) of Allah’s Apostle as I hear (his narrations) from so and so?” Az-Zubair replied. l was always with him (the Prophet) and I heard him saying “Whoever tells a lie against me then (surely) let him occupy, his seat in Hell-fire.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:107)

Prima Qur’an Comments: In the above hadith there is no prohibition against narration of hadith. We see this from the information: “as I hear (his narrations) from so-and-so.”  This information does not contradict the other information lying about him intentionally. This may be the reason that Az-Zubair did not narrate. He felt that he may slip in this regard. 

This can be seen from the other hadith:

Narrated by Anas: “The fact which stops me from narrating a great number of Hadiths to you is that the Prophet said: “Whoever tells a lie against me intentionally, then (surely) let him occupy his seat in Hell-fire.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:108)

Prima Qur’an Comments: Now Anas is obviously narrating hadith. However, he is relating that he is doing his level best to be circumspect in the transmission of the hadith. This even with the caveat of: “whoever lies against me intentionally.”

Which brings us to another interesting hadith.

We also have the following hadith:
Narrated by Al-Mughira: “I heard the Prophet saying, “Ascribing false things to me is not like ascribing false things to anyone else. Whosoever tells a lie against me intentionally, then surely let him occupy his seat in Hell-Fire.” I heard the Prophet saying, “The deceased who is wailed over is tortured for that wailing.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:1291)

Prima Qur’an comments: Here Al Mughira is concerned with lying about the Prophet (saw) intentionally. He also then mentions a piece of information concerning the Blessed Prophet (saw) that he thinks is correct. He stated: “The deceased who is wailed over is tortured for that wailing.” 

Now please see the following Hadith

“Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Ubaidullah bin Abi Mulaika: One of the daughters of ‘Uthman died at Mecca. We went to attend her funeral procession. Ibn ‘Umar and Ibn Abbas were also present. I sat in between them (or said, I sat beside one of them. Then a man came and sat beside me.) ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar said to ‘Amr bin ‘Uthman, “Will you not prohibit crying as Allah’s Apostle has said, ‘The dead person is tortured by the crying of his relatives.?” Ibn Abbas said, “Umar used to say so.” Then he added narrating, “I accompanied Umar on a journey from Mecca till we reached Al-Baida. There he saw some travelers in the shade of a Samura (A kind of forest tree). He said (to me), “Go and see who those travelers are.” So I went and saw that one of them was Suhaib. I told this to ‘Umar, who then asked me to call him. So I went back to Suhaib and said to him, “Depart and follow the chief of the faithful believers.” Later, when ‘Umar was stabbed, Suhaib came in weeping and said, “O my brother, O my friend!” (on this ‘Umar said to him, “O Suhaib! Are you weeping for me while the Prophet said, “The dead person is punished by some of the weeping of his relatives?” Ibn Abbas added, “When ‘Umar died I told all this to Aisha, and she said, ‘May Allah be merciful to Umar. By Allah, Allah’s Apostle did not say that a believer is punished by the weeping of his relatives. But he said, Allah, increases the punishment of a non-believer because of the weeping of his relatives.” Aisha further added, “The Quran is sufficient for you (to clear up this point) as Allah has stated: ‘No burdened soul will bear another’s burden.’ ” (35.18). Ibn Abbas then said, “Only Allah makes one laugh or cry.” Ibn Umar did not say anything after that.

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:1286)

Prima Qur’an Comments: So this is a powerful example. From the information we are provided above both Al-Mughira and Umar had the position that the Blessed Prophet (saw) said: “The dead person is punished by some of the weeping of his relatives?”

However, Aisha says: “Allah’s Apostle did not say that a believer is punished by the weeping of his relatives. But he said, Allah, increases the punishment of a non-believer because of the weeping of his relatives.”

However, her additional point of “The Quran is sufficient for you” to clear up this point as Allah has stated:”No burdened soul will bear another’s burden.’ ” (35.18) Actually, this does not clarify matters. 

That is because the verse does not speak about believers or disbelievers. One would wonder how this verse speaks about the punishment of a non-believer because of the weeping of his relatives and not the believer? 

This would once again show the supremacy of the Blessed Sunnah. That is because Aisha (ra) must have received some insight in regard to this verse that was not even known to Ibn Abbas.

Obviously, among the companions who heard things from the Blessed Messenger (saw) were those who knew better than others on various issues. 

So you can see on the issue of whether someone is punished in the grave because of the weeping of the relatives, that the companions themselves had differences of opinion on this issue. It is an important issue. 

Notice that when the matter was brought before Aisha that she appealed to the Qur’an. She quoted a verse that could be used to describe believers or unbelievers equally. However, she must have had some insight that shows this verse is applicable to the believers and not the unbelievers. 

Notice that Aisha prefaces her statement with: May Allah be merciful to Umar. This is followed by an oath ‘By Allah’.

The importance of not changing the meaning of what is conveyed from the Blessed Prophet (saw).

“So for their breaking of the covenant, We cursed them and made their hearts hard. They distort words from their usages and have forgotten a portion of that of which they were reminded. And you will still observe deceit among them, except a few of them. But pardon them and overlook [their misdeeds]. Indeed, Allah loves the doers of good.” (Qur’an 5:13)

An example from the New Testament.

Simple changing of words or changing the place of words drastically alter theology.

“That evening after sunset, the people brought to Jesus all the sick and demon-possessed. The whole town gathered at the door, and Jesus healed many who had various diseases. He also drove out many demons, but he would not let the demons speak because they knew who he was. (Mark 1:32-34)

In the narration given to us above, it is said that the people brought ‘all’ of those who were sick and demon-possessed; but that Jesus healed ‘many’.

“When evening came, many who were demon-possessed were brought to him, and he drove out the spirits with a word and healed all the sick.” (Matthew 8:16)

In the narration given to us above it is said that the people brought ‘many’ of those who were sick and demon-possessed; but that Jesus healed ‘all’.

This is a simple changing of words, yet it has a huge theological impact. A Jesus who can heal ‘all’ is far better than a Jesus who simply healed ‘many’.

If they brought many and that number was 20, Jesus healed all.
If they brought all and that number was 20, Jesus healed many; possibly 15.

The addition or subtraction of one word can completely change the meaning of something.

Example:

All the apples in the basket are good.

All the apples in the basket THAT are good.

In the first sentence, we can see that all the apples are good. In the second sentence, we can see that the addition of the word ‘that’ tells us that not all the apples in the basket are good. In this case, one would need to use caution.

Conclusion:

There is no harm in relating the hadith of the Blessed Messenger (saw) via (riwāyah bil-maʿnā). Yet this in and of itself has its conditions. The Qur’an itself came to us by various routes of transmission. In our day-to-day  calling to Islam we quote from the Qur’an in the vernacular of the people we speak to. It is very important not to make the Blessed Prophet (saw) or Allah (swt) say what he did not say.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , ,

October 31, 2025 · 1:10 pm

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

And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know it. (Qur’an 2:42)

﷽ 

We have done a review of Dr. Jonathan Browns’ book here:

https://primaquran.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/book-review-hadith-muhammeds-legacy-in-the-medieval-and-modern-world/

We mentioned in that review the following concerning Dr. Brown’s book:

The section “Western debates over historical reliability” is an absolutely essential read for those highly critical of Hadith literature.

Especially the section on ‘Western Evaluation‘.

Where he quotes from the works of Nabia Abbott, David Powers, Fred Donner, and Harold Motzki, all who do not dismiss Hadith literature outright.

These are the names of scholars that those people who reject the hadith in totality would prefer you do not know about.

In fact, one of the claims by people who reject the hadith in total is that that textual hadith came along some 250–300 years after the Blessed Messenger (saw).

Here is a German orientalist, Dr. Harald Motzki, who takes the followers of the ‘Qur’an only Religion‘ to task for this assertion.

The following entry is a must-read for anyone who holds the assertion of textual hadith coming some 250–300 years after the Blessed Messenger (saw).

The_Muannaf_of_Abd_al-Razzaq_al-anan

We have yet to see anyone from the ‘Qur’an Only’ movement interact with any of Dr. Motzki’s material in any meaningful way at all.

This is worth a read if we are looking at being fair and honest.

Again, we feel that the Prima-Qur’an approach, as embodied by the Ibadi school, is a middle ground between rejecting the traditions in their entirety, and accepting the traditions in their entirety.

“The Musannaf of Abd al-Razzaq al-San’ani as a Source of Authentic Ahadith of the First Century A.H.” – by Harald Motzki

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

October 30, 2025 · 2:07 am

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

“Behold! Allah promised you one of the two parties, that it should be yours: You wished that the one unarmed should be yours, but Allah willed to justify the Truth according to His words and to cut off the roots of the unbelievers.” (Qur’an 8:7) 

 ﷽ 

Does anyone recall when Allah (swt) made this promise to the Blessed Messenger (saw)? 

Where is that statement at anywhere in the Qur’an? 

Allah promised that the Muslims would either gain the caravan of Abū Sufyān, or defeat the army of Abū Jahl. However, this promise made by Allah is not found anywhere in the Qur’ān.  

It was conveyed to the believers by the Blessed Prophet (saw). However, the verse states ‘Allah promised you’ and not ‘the Prophet promised you’. Hence, the Blessed Prophet (saw) received the promise from Allah through unrecorded revelation that is not included in the Qur’an!  

All the Qur’an is revelation, but not all of Allah’s revelation is in the Qur’an. 

Note this position is very distinct from Sunni Islam. In Sunni Islam, the position is that we do not have all the Qur’an, we only have the Qur’an that Allah intended for us to have. 

The Ibadi position is that not only do we have the Qur’an Allah intended for us to have, but we have all the Qur’an. 

You can read more about that here: 

Lost/Forgotten chapters of the Qur’an a Proof/Miracle for Islam?

We all know that the Injil, Torah, Zabur and Suhuf are all revelations and yet not all of them are scrolls or books. In fact, not all revelation that Allah (swt) gives is recorded in books or scrolls. 

Every prophet received revelation but not all prophets did receive a book.  

By book here we mean a mushaf, a text or a physical text. This also makes sense when one considers the bulk of humanity throughout human history have been without the ability to read or write a language.

“Indeed, We have revealed to you as We revealed to Noah and the prophets after him. And we revealed  to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, the Descendants, Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and Solomon, and to David We gave the Zabur.” (Qur’an 4:163)  

There is no book or revelation that was recorded or written down that was given to Noah (as). 

“And it was revealed to Noah, that, “No one will believe from your people except those who have already believed, so do not be distressed by what they have been doing.” (Qur’an 11:36)   

There is no kitab of Noah. None at all. The Qur’an does not mention this. It is clear assumption. Allah (swt) can clearly inform us if they did like when he mentions the suhuf (scrolls) of Ibrahim (as).

It is safe to assume however, that Ishamel and Issac (upon both be peace) had access to the Suhuf of Ibrahim (as). Though the Qur’an does not say this.

Misunderstanding concerning ‘Book’ and revelation.

Many people when they think of book they think of a muṣḥaf. The confuse and conflate the two.

muṣḥaf

Root: The word muṣḥaf (مُصْحَف) comes from the Arabic root ṣ-ḥ-f (ص ح ف), which relates to writing on sheets or pages.

Base word: From this root we get ṣaḥīfah (صَحِيفَة), meaning a sheet, page, or written document — plural ṣuḥuf (صُحُف), as in Qur’an 87:18 “Ṣuḥufi Ibrāhīma wa Mūsā” — “The scriptures of Abraham and Moses.”

kitāb

The triliteral root k–t–b (kāf–tā’–bā’) is the foundation of a large semantic field in Arabic relating to writing, inscribing, recording, or decreeing.

maktūb (مكتوب) = “written, destined”

All of the revelation of Allah (swt) is in what is known as the Mother of the Book. Or the Book of Decrees. In fact, everything that Allah (swt) has ever decreed is in a cosmic register.

“No calamity befalls on the earth or within yourselves except that it is in a Book before We bring it into being. Indeed, that is easy for Allah.” (Qur’an 57:22)

“And We have enumerated everything in a Clear Record.” (Qur’an 36:12) -Imām Mubīn

“With Him are the keys of the unseen; none knows them except Him. Not a leaf falls but He knows it… nor anything fresh or dry but it is in a Clear Book.” (Qur’an 6:59) -Kitāb Mubīn

“Every soul is held in pledge for what it has earned … [the record] is in an inscribed book.” (— Qur’an 83:7–9) & (Qur’an 83:18–20) -kitāb marqūm

Allah eliminates what He wills or confirms, and with Him is the Mother of the Book. (Qur’an 13:39) -Umm al-Kitāb

“And indeed it is, in the Mother of the Book with Us, exalted and full of wisdom.” (Qur’an 43:4) -Umm al-Kitāb

“On a guarded tablet.” (Qur’an 85:22) -Lawḥ Maḥfūẓ

Jesus (as) had the Injil. 

Aaron (as) is safe to say he had the Torah of Moses. 

Solomon and David (upon both peace) had the Torah of Moses, and David had the Zabur. Though the Qur’an does not say that Solomon had access to the Torah. 

Job and Jonah both possibly had access to the Torah. Though the Qur’an does not say this. 

However, the following point is still very strong. 

 Every prophet received revelation, but not all prophets did receive a book.  

This verse states that the aforementioned Prophets all received revelation, but it is known that many of them did not receive a book. If revelation was confined to the books, then every Prophet would have received one. The fact many Prophets did not receive a book demonstrates that there exists revelation outside these books.  

This point deeply troubles followers of the Qur’an Only Religion. The reason should be obvious.

All the Qur’an is inspired but not everything that Allah inspired is in the Qur’an.  

“And your Lord revealed to the been, saying: Choose your habitations in the hill and in the trees and in that which you have built.” (Qur’an 16:68) 

We know that bee’s do not have a kitab (book).  

Allah (swt) sent revelation to the disciples of Jesus to let them have firm belief in Jesus.  

“And when I revealed to the disciples, “Believe in Me and in My messenger Jesus,” they said, “We have believed, so bear witness that indeed we are Muslims.” (Qur’an 5:111)

“And We revealed to the mother of Moses, “Suckle him; but when you fear for him, cast him into the river and do not fear and do not grieve. Indeed, We will return him to you and will make him one of the messengers.” (Qur’an 28:73)

Women received revelation. Yet, we do not say that the mother of Moses received a book other than what Moses was given, the Torah.  

“And when Our verses are recited to them as clear evidence, those who do not expect a meeting with Us say, “Bring us a Qur’an other than this or change it.” Say, “It is not for me to change it on my own accord. I only follow what is revealed to me. Indeed, I fear, if I should disobey my Lord, the punishment of a tremendous day.” (Qur’an 10:15) 

Further proof that the Blessed Messenger (saw) received revelation other than the Qur’ān is that the compilation of the Qur’ān is not in its chronological order. Verses revealed in Makkah are found in Madanī chapters and vice versa. Likewise, the chapters revealed in Madina come before chapters revealed in Makkah. The arrangement of verses within surahs, and the arrangement of the surahs within the Qur’ān could only have been done by the Blessed Messenger (saw) based upon revelation from Allah. As Allah commands the Blessed Messenger (saw) to say:  

“It is not for me to change it of my own accord.”  

“And We made them leaders guiding by Our command. And We inspired (wa-awḥaynā) to them the doing of good deeds, establishment of prayer, and giving of zakah; and they were worshippers of Us.” (Qur’an 21:73)


The Blessed and Noble Prophet (saw) his doing of good, his establishing of the Prayer and his method of giving Zakah are all revelation. Those who reject the clear verses of Allah (swt) are none but the disbelievers. The establishment of the prayer and the amount of giving the zakah are revelations not recorded in the Qur’an.  

“Say, “If I should err, I would only err against myself. But if I am guided, it is by what my Lord reveals to me. Indeed, He is Hearing and near.” (Qur’an 34:50)  

A method for establishing the hadith. It is possible the Prophet (saw) said something that was in error. However, if it contradicts established facts and observable reality, it can be rejected as it is in error. 

“Say, “It has been revealed to me that a group of Jinn listened and said, “Indeed, we have heard an amazing Qur’an.” (Qur’an 72:1)  

This had to have happened before this proclamation. Yet, we do not find anywhere else in the Qur’an where Allah (swt) informed the Blessed Messenger (saw) of this information. Notice the text does not say, “It is now being revealed to me.” “I am now proclaiming to you this information.”  

When the Muslims arrived in Madina, the Blessed Messenger (saw) commanded them to pray facing Jerusalem. This continued until Allah (swt) revealed:

“So turn your face toward al-Masjid al-haram.” (Qur’an 2:144) 

’Some of the non-Muslims criticized this order, and demanded to know why the Qiblah was originally Jerusalem, but had now been changed. So Allah revealed:  

“We did not appoint the Qiblah that you were on except to distinguish the ones who follow the messenger from the ones who would turn back on their heels.” (Qur’an 2:143) 

“the ones who follow the messenger from the ones who would turn back on their heels.”

Subhan’Allah. Is it not interesting that those who follow the Qur’an only religion do exactly this?  

In other words, this was a test of Allah. However, although Allah attributes the appointment of the previous Qiblah to Himself, this appointment is not found anywhere in the Qur’ān. It was the Blessed Messenger (saw) who told the believers to face Jerusalem, based upon revelation from Allah. This revelation was not part of the Qur’ān, and hence was an unrecited revelation. 

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

22 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

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

October 29, 2025 · 3:55 pm

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

“And if you differ in any matter among yourselves, then refer it back to Allah and His Messenger, if you do believe in Allah and the Last Day.” (Qur’an 4:59)

“Say: “O People of the Book! You have no ground to stand upon unless you stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord.” It is the revelation that comes to you from your Lord that increases most of them in their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. But sorrow you not over (these) people without faith.” (Qur’an 5:68)

 ﷽  


We are not going to leave Islam for the Religion for the federation of shallow and vacuous sects that are collectively known as the “Hafs Qur’an only religion.” A federation of competing sects that say we ignore what Allah (swt) says. 

They themselves cannot even agree on what the prayer is. They supposedly believe that Allah (swt) is clear. They supposedly believe that Allah (swt) wanted us to pray…..something….somehow…. That simply is not clarity. 

Allah (swt) clearly told us to accept “all the revelation” that has come to us. 

“So do you believe in part of Scripture and disbelieve in part?” (Qur’an 2:85) 

In reality, these Qur’an rejectors (for that is what they are) do exactly this. They accept certain parts of the Qur’an and reject others. In fact, we do not think it is right to even call them “Qur’an Only” because the truth is, they are Qur’an partially, which renders them disbelievers.  

“Whosoever judges not according to what Allah has sent down—they are the ungodly.” (Qur’an 5:47) 

“Whoso judges not according to what Allah has sent down—they are the ungrateful.” (Qur’an 5:44)

“Whoso judges not according to what Allah has sent down—they are the evil­doers.” (Qur’an 5:45)

Very powerful verses. Whoever does not judge according to what Allah has sent down are ungodly, ungrateful and evildoers. An apt description for the Qur’an rejectors. And what exactly is it that Allah has sent down? 

Well, Allah (swt) has also sent down the following verses: 

“And if you differ in any matter among yourselves, then refer it back to Allah and His Messenger, if you do believe in Allah and the Last Day.” (Qur’an 4:59) 

Allah has also sent down the following: 

“It is not for any believer, man or woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decreed a matter, to have the choice in the affair. Whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has gone astray into manifest error.” (Qur’an 33:36) 

“When they are called to Allah and His Messenger to judge between them, lo, a party of them swerve aside; but if they are in the right, they will come to him submissively. What, is there sickness in their hearts, or are they in doubt, or do they fear that Allah and his Messenger may be unjust towards them ? Nay, but those—they are the wrongdoers”. (Qur’an 24:48-50) 

“All that the believers say, when they are called to Allah and His Messenger, to judge between them, is that they say, `We hear, and we obey’; those—they are the successful.” (Qur’an 24:51) 

Allah AND his Messenger have decreed a matter. Allah AND his Messenger. Why the redundant language? Why not simply say Allah alone?

So do those who follow the Qur’an only religion (Qur’an rejectors) accept these verses or not? In reality, they do not. They believe that the sovereign Creator of the universe uses redundant language! May Allah (swt) guide them! 

They clearly do not judge by what Allah (swt) has sent down because in what Allah (swt) has sent down is the Qur’an, which says that we are to submit to the judgement of Allah and his Messenger.  

So let us unpack this. When we take the Qur’an as a whole. We can see that there is:

  1. The judgement of Allah (swt).

“So judge between them according to what Allah has sent down, and do not follow their caprices.” (Qur’an 5:48)

  1. The judgement of the Messenger of Allah (swt).  “If they come to you, judge you between them, or turn away from them; if you turn away from them, they will hurt you nothing; and if you judge, judge justly between them; Allah loves the just”. (Qur’an 5:42) 

Both are sources of judgement. 

However, the judgement of Muhammed (saw) can be over-ruled by the judgement of Allah (swt). We made this abundantly clear in our article here:

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

The judgement of the Blessed Prophet (saw) cannot overrule the judgement of Allah (swt).  

Out of all judgements, the judgement of Allah (swt) is the best and Allah (swt) has made that clear here:

“Is it the judgement of the times of ignorance they are seeking? Yet who is fairer in judgement than Allah, for a people having conviction?” (Qur’an 5:50)

Who is fairer in judgement than Allah? Again, it is not that others cannot judge, it’s just that Allah’s judgement is the best judgement and no one argues against that.

Just like the Qur’an nowhere, and we repeat nowhere says that we are to reject all the hadith, it simply tells us that there is no better hadith than that of Allah, and no one can argue against that. 

Allah (swt) has made it clear that when he has given his judgement on a matter, that is what we are to go by. Allah (swt) has made that clear here: 

“Surely We have sent down to you the Book with the truth, so that you may judge between the people by what Allah has shown you. So be not an advocate for the traitors”. (Qur’an 4:105)  

Which is exactly the Prima-Qur’an position. Not to not take anything above the Qur’an. The Qur’an is the filter. 

So what about what Allah (swt) has not shown therein?

Well, unlike what the Qur’an only religion teaches, we believe that Allah (swt) is very clear about this. Allah (swt) says:

“But no, by you Lord! They will not believe till they make you the judge regarding the disagreement between them and then find in themselves no impediment touching your verdict, but surrender in full submission”. (Qur’an 4:65)

The above verses clearly explain the sacred duty of litigants in a disagreement or dispute to take recourse to the Messenger of Allah (swt) and no other person. It also places upon the litigant the solemn duty of complete submission to his judgement.  

What is interesting is that the followers of the “Qur’an only religion”, also known as Qur’an rejectors, are to take their own interpretations of the scripture as guidance and yet reject the guidance of the Messenger of Allah! 

 “O two companions of the prison! Are many different deities better, or Allah, the One, the Irresistible? You do not worship besides Him, except names which you and your ancestors have forged, for which Allah has sent down no authority. The Judgement is for none but Allah. He has commanded that you worship none except Him. That is the standard religion. But most of humanity does not know.” (Qur’an 12:39-40) 

So is Allah (swt) saying that no one can judge but Allah? 

It would be very weird to give human beings laws about punishing adulterers and fornicators, protecting the rights of orphans, property, bringing forth witnesses and testimony and having no court system, no laws and no judges. 

“Consume not your goods between you in vanity; neither proffer it to the judges, that you may sinfully consume a portion of other men’s goods, and that wittingly.” (Qur’an 2:188) 

So, is Allah (swt) saying that no one can judge but Allah?

It is very clear that when Allah and his Messenger have given clear-cut rulings we are not to contravene them at all.

It would be very curious to give human beings laws about punishing adulterers and fornicators, protecting the rights of orphans, property, bringing forth witnesses and testimony and having no court system, no laws and no judges. 

“Consume not your goods between you in vanity; neither proffer it to the judges, that you may sinfully consume a portion of other men’s goods, and that wittingly.” (Qur’an 2:188) 

“And if there should be a group among you who has believed in that with which I have been sent and a group that has not believed, then be patient until Allah judges between us. And He is the best of judges.” (Qur’an 7:87) 

Allah (swt) has clearly mentioned other judges than him. First and foremost are the verses that have already mentioned the Blessed Prophet (saw) also being a judge.  

Allah (swt) has clearly mentioned the steps that believers are to take when having disagreements.  

“And if you differ in any matter among yourselves, then refer it back to Allah and His Messenger, if you do believe in Allah and the Last Day.” (Qur’an 4:59) 

“And whatever you are at variance on, the judgement thereof belongs to Allah. That then is Allah, my Lord; in Him I have put my trust, and in Him I turn penitent.” (Qur’an 42:10)  

Just like those who have misrepresented the position of the Ibadi school in the following verses: 

“Moreover, if two factions among the believers should fight, then make settlement between the two. But if one of them oppresses the other, then fight against the one that oppresses until it returns to the ordinance of Allah. And if it returns, then make settlement between them in justice and act justly. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.” (Qur’an 49:9)

You can read more about that here:

Pro Alid YouTube channel throws Ibn Abbas under the bus!

So it is not that we do not believe in arbitration but that we do not concede to arbitration on a matter in which Allah (swt) has already made the law clear

. We seek the judgement and the guidance and the arbitration of the Blessed Messenger, the Prophet Muhammed (saw). We do this because it is the judgement of Allah (swt) that we do so on any matters in which Allah (swt) has not shown us.

It is not that no one on Earth has the ability to heal, but Allah is the best of healers. 

It is not that no one on Earth can assist, but that Allah is the best of helpers. 

It is not that no one on this earth can give love, but Allah is the best of those who give love. 

It is not that no one on this earth can give mercy, but Allah is the best of those who give mercy.

It is not that we cannot take hadith, but that the hadith of Allah is the best. 

It is not that we cannot take from other sources that claim to be revelation, but Allah is regulator muhayminun over them.

It is not that we cannot take judgement from other than Allah, but that when Allah has made his judgement clear, we do not take other than it. 

It is not that we cannot take judgement from other than Allah, it’s just that Allah’s is the best and final judgement.  

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.  

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

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 , , , , , , , , , , ,