“They have taken their rabbis and monks as well as the Messiah, son of Mary, as lords besides Allah, even though they were commanded to worship none but One God. There is no god except Him. Glorified is He above what they associate!” (Qur’an 9:31)
﷽
“But no, by your Lord, they will not believe until they make you, judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in submission.” (Qur’an 4:65)
“With clear proofs and divine Books. And We have sent down to youthe Reminder, so that you may explain to people what has been revealed for them, and perhaps they will reflect.” (Qur’an 16:44)
“They have taken their rabbis and monks as well as the Messiah, son of Mary, as lords besides Allah, even though they were commanded to worship none but One God. There is no god except Him. Glorified is He above what they associate!” (Qur’an 9:31)
The above verse does not tell us in what way they have taken their rabbis or monks (basically their learned people as lords besides Allah). It only tells us that they have done this. However, when one goes to the places of worship of the Jews and Christians, we do not find them worshiping their scholars.
It is through the Sunnah that this information is made known to us.
(They took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah, and the Messiah, son of Maryam) 9:31.
Imam Ahmad, At-Tirmidhi and Ibn Jarir At-Tabari recorded a Hadith via several chains of narration, from `Adi bin Hatim, may Allah be pleased with him, who became Christian during the time of Jahiliyyah. When the call of the Messenger of Allah reached his area, `Adi ran away to Ash-Sham, and his sister and several of his people were captured. The Messenger of Allah freed his sister and gave her gifts. So she went to her brother and encouraged him to become Muslim and to go to the Messenger of Allah. `Adi, who was one of the chiefs of his people (the tribe of Tai’) and whose father, Hatim At-Ta’i, was known for his generosity, went to Al-Madinah. When the people announced his arrival, `Adi went to the Messenger of Allah wearing a silver cross around his neck. The Messenger of Allah recited this Ayah
(They took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah). `Adi commented, “I said, `They did not worship them.”’ The Prophet said (Yes they did. They (rabbis and monks) prohibited the allowed for them (Christians and Jews) and allowed the prohibited, and they obeyed them. This is how they worshipped them.)
The Messenger of Allah said to `Adi,(O `Adi, what do you say? Did you run away (to Ash-Sham) so that ‘Allahu Akbar’ (Allah is the Great) is not pronounced Do you know of anything greater than Allah What made you run away? Did you run away so that `La ilaha illallah’ is not pronounced? Do you know of any deity worthy of worship except Allah? The Messenger invited `Adi to embrace Islam, and he embraced Islam and pronounced the Testimony of Truth.
The face of the Messenger of Allah beamed with pleasure, and he said to `Adi,(Verily, the Jews have earned the anger (of Allah) and the Christians are misguided.) Hudhayfah bin Al-Yaman, `Abdullah bin `Abbas and several others said about the explanation of (They took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah…) that the Christians and Jews obeyed their monks and rabbis in whatever they allowed or prohibited for them. This is why Allah said,(while they were commanded to worship none but One God), Who, whatever He renders prohibited is the prohibited, whatever He allowed is the allowed, whatever He legislates, is to be the law followed, and whatever He decides is to be adhered to;(None has the right to be worshiped but He. Hallowed be He above what they associate (with Him).) Meaning, exalted, sanctified, hallowed above partners, equals, aids, rivals or children, there is no deity or Lord worthy of worship except Him.
Say, “My Lord has only forbidden open and secret indecencies, sinfulness, unjust aggression, associating with Allah —a practice He has never authorized—and attributing to Allah what you do not know.” (Qur’an 7:33)
The Hafs Qur’an Only Religion has already splintered into several sects. Each of these sects coalesce around their favourite preacher or public figure. This preacher or public figure is the one who expounds, explains, proposes, elucidates, expands on, elaborates on, spells out, describes, tells them to cease and desist.
The Qur’an was revealed in Arabic.
“Certainly, We have made it a Quran in Arabic, so perhaps you will understand.” (Qur’an 43:3)
The Qur’an is an Arabic Qur’an. The Qur’an does not tell us what degree of fluency is needed before one starts instructing people on what Allah is permitting and forbidding.
Say, “My Lord has only forbidden open and secret indecencies, sinfulness, unjust aggression, associating with Allah —a practice He has never authorized—and attributing to Allah what you do not know.” (Qur’an 7:33)
So, given that the vast majority of people who follow the Hafs Qur’an Only religion do not go to the Qur’an directly but depend upon these figureheads to tell them what is haram and halal, they are in the same position as the Jews and Christians.
Even those who tell them what the Qur’an says (an irony considering they claim it is self-sufficient), even those themselves, are not really proficient in the Arabic language.
However, you know what is better than this? Proficiency in the Arabic language coupled with the fact that Allah (swt) has directly appointed you to teach the people.
“But no, by your Lord, they will not believe until they make you, judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in submission.” (Qur’an 4:65)
“With clear proofs and divine Books. And We have sent down to youthe Reminder, so that you may explain to people what has been revealed for them, and perhaps they will reflect.” (Qur’an 16:44)
This is what happens when one detaches themselves from the Sunnah of the Blessed Prophet (saw).
“Allah and His angels send blessings to the Prophet: O you that believe! Send blessings on him, and salute him with all respect.” (Qur’an 33:56)
﷽
What an honour it is that Allah, exalted and glorified above all else, has singled out his beloved Messenger (saw) to be singled out for praise and blessings. The one who’s very name means the praiseworthy!
This article is written to refute the extremist view of the (Hafs Qur’an only Religion) as well as others that believe that we as Muslims when we say: “ashadu an la ilaha illalah wa ashadu an muhammadur rasoolullah” (I bear witness that there is no God except God and I bear witness that Muhammed is the Messenger of God.) is a form of shirk!
For those who do not know, shirk is the most heinous sin in Islam. It is the association of partners with God.
Here are links to a website that espouses a view that is both extreme and unwarranted.
*Note* For some reason the link was not working. However, was able to retrieve it via the archives.
Muslims have handed down the tradition that when we enter into Islam we bear witness of foremost importance that there is only one God worthy of worship. We also bare witness that we accept as God’s Messenger, the one who brought his message.
“In which their prayer will be, “Glory be to You, O Allah!” and their greeting will be, “Peace!” and their closing prayer will be, “All praise (l-ḥamdu) is for Allah—Lord of all worlds!” (Qur’an 10:10)
Note that in the above verse it says that all the hamd (praise) is for Allah. Yet, Allah (swt) himself says the following:
“And from [part of] the night, pray with it as additional [worship] for you; it is expected that your Lord will resurrect you to a praised (maḥmūdan) station.” (Qur’an 17:79)
“And those who believe and do righteous deeds and believe in what has been sent down upon Muhammed – and it is the truth from their Lord – He will remove from them their misdeeds and amend their condition.” (Qur’an 47:2)
“And when Isa son of Marium said: O children of Israel! surely I am the messenger of Allah to you, verifying that which is before me of the Taurat and giving the good news of an Messenger who will come after me, his name being Ahmed, but when he came to them with clear arguments they said: This is clear magic.” (Qur’an 61:6)
Muhammed and Ahmed both derive from the Arabic root meaning “praise” (hamd). Muhammed means “the praised one,” while Ahmed means “the more/most praiseworthy”.
Root word: Both names come from the Arabic root word “ḥ-m-d,” which means “praise”. This root is found in phrases like “Al-hamdu lillah” (praise be to God).
Mahmud, Muhammed and Ahmed. All mean one worthy of praise, praiseworthy.
So we should not be concerned with followers of the Hafs Qur’an Only Religion come along and say that Muslims who say Tashahhud or Shahada are associating partners with Allah.
Mentioning another along Allah (swt) in our prayers or testification of faith is far from worshipping that person.
There are many places in the Qur’an where Allah is mentioned alongside the Noble Messenger (saw). There are also many places in the Qur’an where Allah is mentioned alongside his blessed angels.
“O you who have believed, fear Allah and give up what remains of interest if you should be believers. And if you do not, then be informed of war from Allah and His Messenger. But if you repent, you may have your principal – you do no wrong, nor are you wronged.” (Qur’an 2:278-279)
It would have been easy enough just to say ‘a war from Allah’.
“Indeed, those who disbelieve and die while they are disbelievers – upon them will be the curse of Allah and of the angels and the people, all together.” (Qur’an 2:161)
Again, it would have been enough to say the ‘curse of Allah’.
“Those – their repayment will be that upon them is the curse of Allah and the angels and the people, all together.” (Qur’an 3:87)
Again, it would have been sufficient to say ‘the curse of Allah’.
Those who annoy Allah and the Prophet, Allah curses them in this life and in the hereafter.” (Qur’an 33:57)
Annoying the Blessed Prophet (saw) is deserving of a curse just as if one were to annoy Allah (swt).
“He who obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah; but those who turn away – We have not sent you over them as a guardian.” (Qur’an 4:80)
Here the Qur’an has compared obeying the Messenger to obeying Allah himself. Assuredly, this is more than sufficient proof testifying that the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) is the Messenger of Allah is not idol worship. Such a notion is truly absurd, to say the least.
What did Rasul Allah (saw) think when Angel Gabriel (as) said:
”Indeed this, your religion, is one religion, and I am your Lord, so worship Me.” (Qur’an 21:92)
Was Gabriel (as) making ‘shirk’ when he said that?
Here is something else for people who hold such a view to think about.
“You alone do we worship; You alone do we ask for help.” (Qur’an 1:5)
So are we to understand that if one were to ask the doctor to cure our children, we are now associating partners with Allah?
If one were to hold a belief that if they were to pursue a university degree that it would somehow help their lot in life that this would be tantamount to an association of partners with Allah?
What is important for the person to realize is that the Creator is in control of all affairs. The Creator is Sovereign. If one were to believe that the doctor himself can cure their child, then yes, this is an association of partners with Allah. If one were to believe that the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) can guide us independent of Allah, then yes, that is in error. If one were to believe that their university degree will, in and of itself, guarantee them a livelihood, then yes, this necessitates a dangerous position. If one believes that a knife can cut them independently of the power of Allah (swt), then yes, that is in error.
Adherents of the Qur’an only Religion do not think deeply about these things because their religion is theologically bankrupt.
However, if we believe that Allah has endowed the doctor with the ability to cure our child, and that Allah has blessed the Noble Muhammed (saw) with the ability to guide, and that our degree could increase our chances of getting employment by Allah’s grace, then this is the proper focus.
The focus, of course, should always be Allah (swt).
It is said that this world that we live in is also known as Darul Asbaab– a world of means.
Asbaab can mean ’cause’, ‘reason’.
So we live in a world of cause and effect.
When a Muslim does something kind to another Muslim, one will usually say to the other ‘JazakAllahu Khayran‘ (thanks be to God who gave the provision). If you were ignorant of this, you might say to a Muslim, ‘Thank you, brother’. The Muslim may respond, “Al hamdulilllah wa ShukrAllah” (All the praise be to Allah and Thanks to Allah). Notice that the praise and the thanks are deflected away from the person and directed to Allah.
However, if someone says ‘you’re welcome‘, it is not haram (forbidden) nor are they committing blasphemy. No one would assume that if a person said ‘you’re welcome‘ that they are making a claim to divinity.
The reason one says jazakAllahu Khayran to a person is that there is a recognition that Allah (swt) is giving you provision through this person.
Examples in the Qur’an of people making sujud -prostration to other than Allah.
“So he raised his parents upon the throne, and they bowed to him in prostration. And he said, “O my father, this is the explanation of my vision of before. My Lord has made it a reality. And he was certainly good to me when he took me out of prison and brought you here from bedouin life after Satan had induced estrangement between me and my brothers. Indeed, my Lord is Subtle in what He wills. Indeed, it is He who is the Knowing, the Wise.” (Qur’an 12:100)
“When Joseph said to his father: O my father. Lo. I saw in a dream eleven planets and the sun and the moon, I saw them prostrating themselves unto me.” (Qur’an 12:4)
Allah (swt) himself orders the prostration of all the angels and jinn to Adam.
“And when We said to the angels, “Prostrate to Adam,” and they prostrated, except for Iblees. He said, “Should I prostrate to one You created from clay?” (Qur’an 17:61)
Say, “Indeed, my prayer, my rites of sacrifice, my living and my dying are for Allah, Lord of the worlds.” (Qur’an 6:162)
After the Death of the Noble and Blessed Prophet (saw) Abu Bakr (ra) said this very eye opening statement:
Narrated `Aisha:
Abu Bakr came riding his horse from his dwelling place in As-Sunh. He got down from it, entered the Mosque and did not speak with anybody till he came to me and went direct to the Prophet, who was covered with a marked blanket. Abu Bakr uncovered his face. He knelt down and kissed him and then started weeping and said, “My father and my mother be sacrificed for you, O Allah’s Prophet! Allah will not combine two deaths on you. You have died the death which was written for you.” Narrated Abu Salama from Ibn `Abbas : Abu Bakr came out and `Umar , was addressing the people, and Abu Bakr told him to sit down but `Umar refused. Abu Bakr again told him to sit down but `Umar again refused. Then Abu Bakr recited the Tashah-hud (i.e. none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and Muhammed is Allah’s Messenger (saw)) and the people attended to Abu Bakr and left `Umar. Abu Bakr said, “Amma ba’du, whoever amongst you worshipped Muhammed, then Muhammed is dead, but whoever worshipped Allah, Allah is alive and will never die. Allah said: ‘Muhammed is no more than an Apostle and indeed (many) Apostles have passed away before him ..(up to the) grateful.’ ” (3.144) (The narrator added, “By Allah, it was as if the people never knew that Allah had revealed this verse before till Abu Bakr recited it and then whoever heard it, started reciting it.”)
“Abu Bakr said, “Amma ba’du, whoever amongst you worshipped Muhammad, then Muhammad is dead, but whoever worshipped Allah, Allah is alive and will never die.”
Subhan’Allah! That means that the love and devotion that the companions had for the Blessed and Noble Prophet (saw)…..bordered on….understand? It bordered on…but it did not exceed! It did not cross that threshold!
“Verily! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and in the alternation of night and day, there are indeed signs for men of understanding.” (Qur’an 3:190)
﷽
The above image is an ‘Islamic’ Globe dated from the early 1800s.
For those who do not know, follower of the Qur’an Only Religion and translator of the Qur’an, Sam Gerrans believes that in his deep study of the Qur’an that his conclusion is the following:
The Qur’an is clear. We live on a stationary, flat earth, with a solid firmament above us.
You can see his full discussion here:
Sam Gerrans pictured above.
This is the picture that Sam uses in the thumbnail to the video above (with his own modifications).
Now it is not clear if Sam Gerrans believes that we have a universe or if that is also part of the deception. In his thumbnail he puts God “outside” of Creation, or so it seems. On his thumbnail (not included in the picture above) he has the “Heaven of Heavens” and then God is “above” it. Or so it seems. Because if it’s all flat, we don’t really know if God is “above” the Creation or below it.
Theology is not a strong point of those who follow the Qur’an Only Religion; thus, it is hard to glean whether Sam believes that Allah(swt) is outside of space/time.
This was the belief of the ancient people that the Earth that we live on is flat.
“The tree you saw, which grew large and strong, whose top reached the sky and was visible to all the earth.” (Daniel 4:20)
This is the belief of those who believe in a flat Earth. No such tree has existed or ever will exist, because in a spherical world it is impossible to see such an object. Not to mention the fact that objects appear smaller/larger via distance to that object.
“When he had reached the departure of the sun and found it departing in a murky spring, he found people nearby. We said: O Dhu’l-Qarnayn: thou shalt either punish or take concerning them good.” (Qur’an 18:86)
Why Sam feels the need to translate into English “thou shalt” in the 21st century is beyond us.
Now we would personally offer to do this for Sam Gerrans, and we hope others will join in on this fun little project. That we get different people who live in different time zones (unless that too is part of the conspiracy) and as the sun “sets” in our area someone else who is experiencing 1:00pm can tell us if the sun has “departed” or not.
Now, the only place on Earth (with our limited knowledge of topography and geography) that might fit this description would be Iceland, where they experience the “midnight” sun with 6 months of darkness. Yet, we are really hoping that Sam does not believe that, during those 6 months of darkness, that the rest of us who do experience sunlight are under some mass hallucination.
This is how many of the translations of the Qur’an look like when dealing with the verse of the sun “setting in a murky spring.”
“When he had reached the departure of the sun and found it departing in a murky spring, he found people nearby. Allah said, “O Dhul-Qarnayn, either you punish or else adopt among them goodness.” (Qur’an 18:86)
This is side by side with Gerrans translation:
“When he had reached the departure of the sun and found it departing in a murky spring and found people nearby
We said: O Dhu’l-Qarnayn: thou shalt either punish or take concerning them good.” (Qur’an 18:86)
Now either the Qur’an is using language that describes how some human beings perceive their reality (which is very damaging to the claims of Sam Gerrans), or we are confronted with the reality that the Qur’an contradicts observable phenomena. Observable phenomena which is tawatur — continuous mass testimony.
The sun neither sets nor departs. It is part of the language that is used even in the 21st century, unlike “thou shalt”. For example:
For example, it was part of the language of the people when welcoming the Blessed Prophet (saw).
ṭala‘a ‘l-badru ‘alaynā -The full moon rose over us
min thaniyyāti ‘l-wadā‘ -From the valley of Wada‘
The people of Mecca did not believe that the moon rose from the valley of Wada. This was with in the poetic expression of the people. However, from their observable perspective, they likely did believe that the moon literally rose (though not necessarily from the valley of Wada).
Now if we had to choose between the following:
1) 1) There is a massive conspiracy out there to deny the truth about a flat Earth, where the water somehow doesn’t fall off the edge, and there is some ice wall /or barrier we cannot penetrate.
OR
2) Sam Gerrans is part of some psy-op that is out to make the Qur’an look absurd.
If we had to choose between the two, we would say that 2 is more likely. The problem is that science itself is often not very bright, not very intelligent at all when interacting with people who believe the Earth is hallow, or the flat-Earth people like Sam Gerrans.
Take, for example, this video by Neil Tyson whose first point is very dumb. So Neil’s first point is that Flat Earthers believe that other planetary bodies are spherical/round. Actually, we know some that don’t believe that at all. They don’t believe in other planets or that we even have a universe! (Not sure Sam Gerrans stance on this.) However, look at this image and study it for a moment. Why do you think it is not very bright to use 2D images of 9 discs pointed one way and one 2D image of a disc pointed another way to prove that all 10 of the discs are spherical?
Whereas the next point is more cogent and people like Sam Gerrans really struggle to explain this.
So, yes, we are more likely to believe that Sam Gerrans is a part of a psy-op that wants to make the Qur’an look bad than we are willing to believe there is a massive conspiracy to deny that our Earth is flat. However, one’s beliefs need to stand on the merit of their own claims.
It’s fascinating that the people who claim that the Qur’an alone is sufficient for complete guidance are at the same time making videos for their followers offering ‘guidance’, commentary and responding to doubts or questions about what the Qur’an is saying or teaching, like the Qur’an on its own is actually not sufficient for complete guidance. Or how about the fact that these same individuals then start disagreeing or refuting other ‘Qur’an alone’ teachers due to not considering one another’s understanding and interpretation of certain verses to be correct, despite both sides claiming the Qur’an alone is sufficient.
You may also be interested in reading the following:
“And woe, that day, to those that reject the truth! Then in what hadith, after this, will they believe?” (Qur’an 77:49-50)
﷽
“And woe, that day, to those that reject the truth! Then in what hadith, after this, will they believe?” (Qur’an 77:49-50)
This is certainly their pre-eminent verse. It is a mega verse verse among all the Quranist.
Many people who believe in the ‘Hafs Qur’an Only Religion’ will often advance this particular verse of the Qur’an to advance their position.
Here is an interesting argument put forward by Dr. Jeffery Lang, one of the greatest Muslim minds of our age.
“It is doubtful that hadith in these passages refers to the narratives relating to the deeds and utterances of the Prophet. In the first place, it came to have this restricted meaning in Islamic scholarship well after his lifetime. Secondly, it is inconceivable that while the Prophet was alive his enemies preferred his hadith to the Qur’an or were promoting them in an effort to undermine his mission. Instead, hadith must carry here one of its more common connotations, such as speech, chitchat, conversation, prattle, gossip, tales, report, or account.”
Source: (pg. 174 “Losing My Religion: A Call for Help-Jeffery Lang”)
There are two points to be gleaned from this.
a) In the first place, it came to have this restricted meaning in Islamic scholarship well after his lifetime.
This is true, and Dr. Jeffery Lang has an irrefutable point here.
b). Secondly, it is inconceivable that while the Prophet was alive his enemies preferred his hadith to the Qur’an or were promoting them in an effort to undermine his mission.
This is also an excellent point! Why on earth would the enemies of the Blessed Messenger (saw) use his hadith over the Qur’an? In fact, why would they use his oral narrations at all?
So let us break this verse down:
“And woe, that day, to the rejectors of truth!” -This statement is talking about those who are rejecting the Qur’an. It is directed towards an immediate target audience, towards a future impending doom.
That is why the adherents of the Quran Only Religion are at a loss to try to use this statement as a reference to those who use hadith. You can shut them down every single time.
Jeffery Lang (May Allah have abundant mercy on him).
“Proclaim! (or read!) in the name of thy Lord and the One whom Cherishes, Who created” (Qur’an 96:1)
﷽
We have seen this issue raised by Christians repeatedly. We have also remembered Dr. Anis Shorrosh using it in his debate with Dr. Jamal Badawi. Debate: (Qur’an word of God or word of Muhammed?)
It is one of the reasons why we choose the Yusuf Ali translation above.
One could ask: what was God thinking?
You are approaching a man that is obviously illiterate, and you’re asking him to read, again and again….and yet again.
However, the narrative shows that the term ‘Iqra‘ can mean read (as from a book) or recite, or repeat (as in a repetition).
What we find fascinating is that the account of the Blessed Messenger (saw) and his receiving of the revelation are not found in the Qur’an. Rather, it is found in secondary sources. We think this is very profound.
In the Bible, we would read the historical bits, get some revelation as well as the thoughts of the narrators all mixed in together.
The very fact that the Qur’an does not have a detailed narrative of how the Blessed Messenger (saw) received the revelation speaks well for the Prophet (saw), the Qur’an, and the veracity of Islam.
In fact, it is one of the most remarkable things for us. Because we never hear in the Bible what that was like. What is that moment like when you encounter the divine? What is it like to know that you are being appointed as a Prophet of God? What is your mental state? How does that feel?
That has to be indescribable beyond words! Powerful!
In the Bible, we are just given the impression that one day the Holy Spirit moved Matthew to write, so he picked up his pen and off he went. Not really inspiring. Rather lackluster for a divine encounter.
“So if you are in doubt, [O Muhammed], about that which We have revealed to you, then ask those who have been reading the Scripture before you. The truth has certainly come to you from your Lord, so never be among the doubters.” (Qur’an 10:94)
Question: If Muhammed (saw) were in the habit of reading and writing, he wouldn’t need to ask the people of the book anything. He could simply go to their text for verification.
Now, this is, of course, assuming that they had their text with them.
However, the interesting thing about this passage is asking the Blessed Messenger (saw) to verify the truth outside the Qur’an or at the very least corroborate with what the divine directive was, by checking outside references.
No doubt those who follow the ‘Qur’an Only Religion’ would like to dismiss the dominant narrative for two reasons.
Our colleague was in an exchange with Dr. Shabbir Ahmed, @ our Beacon http://www.galaxydastak.com refuting the points he made that the Blessed Messenger (saw) was the one who wrote the Qur’an. Needless to say, he was banned from the forum for ‘not participating in the project’.
He was initially invited there by a friend and former teacher, Hamza Abdulmalik from IPCI. He believes his former teacher was testing the waters before he decided to leave Islam for the “Qur’an Only Religion“.
The two reasons that ‘Qur’an Only Religion’ would want to reject the dominant narrative are these:
The very first word ‘iqra‘ suggests that the Qur’an is composed in a language that has depth, nuances, clarity, and ambiguity. This takes the wind out of one of their sails. Namely, that the Qur’an is clear; which usually means “Agree with our interpretation.”
The very first word ‘iqra’ also suggests that the Qur’an would be transmitted through both written and oral means. The idea that the Qur’an would be transmitted orally is problematic to those who castigate oral transmission in its entirety.
Understand that point 2. above is their sole reason for making the claim that the Blessed Prophet (saw) wrote the Qur’an. It is because they do not like the idea of the Qur’an being preserved through oral transmission.
This might cause other uncomfortable thoughts like: “What else may be preserved through oral transmission?“
The “Qur’an Only Religion” does not like the historical narrative that has been passed down to us about how the Blessed Messenger (saw) received the revelation.
Let us see if their perspective holds true.
“Read in the name of your Lord Who created. He created man from a clot. Read and your Lord is Most Honorable,” (Qur’an 96:1-3)
If the Blessed Messenger (saw) is being asked to ‘read‘ rather than recite/repeat, where is this text at?
In other words, whoever is telling Muhammed (saw) to read, what exactly is he being asked to read? Is it a divine template? Is this an ethereal revelation that is appearing like a holographic image?
Wouldn’t it make sense to say, ‘write‘?
So let us deal with the next point.
“Who taught (to write) with the pen. Taught man what he knew not.” (Qur’an 96:4-5)
So the “Qur’an Only Religion” will say, “How can Muhammed be taught by the PEN if he cannot write?“
However, this assumes two things.
That this verse does not generally address the gift of literacy, which is a blessing from Allah (swt).
That Muhammed (saw) is the one being addressed here. After all, the verse does say, taught man (plural)…
. To suggest that the above verse is imperative. Meaning that Allah (swt) has taught every person to read that would be incorrect. Vast swathes of humanity still cannot read. The proliferation of literacy is a modern phenomenon.
“In honored sheets, exalted and purified, In the hands of scribes noble, virtuous.” (Qur’an 80:13-16)
It would have been a perfect occasion to say, “I will teach you the use of the pen, or I will teach you that which you know not.”
In fact, we never get an example of the Blessed Messenger (saw) reading the Qur’an to anyone. However, we do have examples of him reciting it.
“A messenger from Allah, reciting pure pages.” (Qur’an 98:2)
“Move not thy tongue concerning the (Qur’an) to make haste therewith. It is for Us to collect it and promulgate it; but when We have promulgated it, follow thou its recital’ (Qur’an 75: 16-19).
Why not ‘move not thy eyes‘ concerning the Qur’an?
Why not ‘move not thy pen‘ concerning the Qur’an?
It is interesting to note here that the Blessed Messenger (saw) was told to not be hasty in his recitation; nothing about ‘move not thy pen‘ concerning the Qur’an.
Now we are going to use a translation of the Qur’an that we think is one of the worst possible. Interestingly enough, this translation gets as close as is grammatically possible to supporting the proposition that the Blessed Messenger (saw) wrote the Qur’an.
So we are going to use a translation that actually favours our interlocutors (Qu’ran only Religion) in this regard.
“Neither did you (O Muhammed SAW) read any book before it (this Quran), nor did you write any book (whatsoever) with your right hand. In that case, indeed, the followers of falsehood might have doubted.” (Qur’an 29:48) – Muhsin Khan translation.
We would encourage the readers to see how this verse is translated from disparate translations from translators with disparate theological backgrounds etc…
The reason we chose the ‘Muhsin Khan’ translation above; is because it can give the impression that Muhammed (saw) didn’t read any book before the Qur’an; meaning he can now! Nor has he (saw) written any book (until now!!)…
So let us put our focus on the second part of this verse…
“In that case, indeed, the followers of falsehood might have doubted.”
Let us say that for the sake of argument we take the understanding of those who claim the Blessed Prophet (saw) wrote the Qur’an. Meaning that, suddenly, Muhammed (saw) is now able to read and write.
How does that alleviate the doubt of unbelievers?
It seems the argument being made is that “Haha, you can’t doubt that the Qur’an is a product of Muhammed because he can read and write, and therefore wrote it!
Erm…….. (stares off blankly into space)….. are we missing something here?
What argument is that? Seriously?
We would encourage anyone to carefully read how “Qur’an Only Religion” will posture in regard to the above verse. They half quote it.
Let us look at some of their other claims.
“Moreover, they say, “Legends of the former peoples which he has written, and they are dictated to him morning and afternoon.” (Qur’an 25:5)
We actually found this argument to be very desperate. The fact that (unbelievers) alleged that the Blessed Messenger (saw) wrote down the Qur’an is now proof that he actually did write the Qur’an?
This is a specious argument for anyone who is intellectually honest.
“We know indeed that they say, “It is a man that teaches him.” The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.” (Qur’an 16:103)
“Moreover, the Unbelievers would almost trip you up with their eyes when they hear the Message; and they say: “Surely he is possessed!” (Qur’an 68:51)
Let’s stop for a moment on this above claim. The claim that ‘he is possessed.’
This is a very fascinating and insightful claim against our Blessed Prophet (saw). The unbelievers ascribed to the Qur’an a supra natural origin. They were just not ready to say that it came from Allah. However, the fact that even they ascribed to it a supra natural origin is quite powerful.
Let us follow the fuzzy logic given to us by these people who claim that the Blessed Messenger (saw) could read and write the Qur’an.
So here it is:
Just because the (unbelievers) charged Muhammed (saw) with writing the Qur’an, does it also follow that a man taught him the Qur’an?
Just because the (unbelievers) charged Muhammed (saw) that he was possessed means that it is true?
So those people who make such claims would do well to remember it was non-Muslims who charged that the Prophet Muhammed (saw) wrote the Qur’an.
The first claim that the Blessed Messenger (saw) wrote the Qur’an came from (unbelievers). That is the company that followers of the ‘Quran Only‘ religion are in; not the company we would like to be in.
Another text they would use.
“And if he had invented false sayings concerning Us We surely should have seized him by his right hand (or with power and might), And then severed his life-artery.” (Qur’an 69:44-46)
There is certainly a lot to be desired in this translation.
Invented is taqawwala -this should have been translated as spoken
So this should read: “And if he had spoken some sayings over Us, We surely should have...”
seized him –la-akhadhna-can be translated as to take or to seize or to call to account.
his right hand-bil-yamini-can be translated as hand or oath.
So this should read: “And if he had spoken some sayings over Us, We surely should have seized him with power and might.”
Alternatively, it could read: “And if he had spoken some sayings over Us, We surely would have called him to account for his oath.”
The first part is how we understand the second part. If someone is speaking and saying it would make sense to say, ‘we seize him by his tongue.’
That is why that argument put forward by the ‘Hafs Qur’an Only Religion’ is easily dismissed. When someone is speaking lies, why is the attention directed towards the hand?
So let us take their understanding and translate it the way they want to: “We surely should have seized him by his right hand.”
Why doesn’t the text before it say:
“So if he had written false sayings concerning Us.”
“Had he uttered any other teachings.”-Rashad Khilafa
“Also, had he attributed anything falsely to Us.”-The Monotheist Group.
In fact, the only person trying to be sly among the Quraniyoon in their translation is Shabir Ahmed
“So if he had ascribed his sayings unto Us.” -Shabir Ahmed
Why handle the Qur’an in such a false manner? Why the deception? What is the agenda here?
Was the Qur’an only revealed to those who were literate? Even today, there are vast areas of the world where people cannot read and write. What of the situation in the past? What was the situation of slaves, farmers, and people from other trades?
How was a textual Qur’an distributed to all of these people? If that is the case, why is there a dearth of written Qur’anic material from the early period?
“However, if they turn away, you are responsible only for conveying the message clearly.” (Qur’an 16:82)
If the Blessed Messenger (saw) was writing the Qur’anand the Qur’an is clear, there would be no need for him to explain anything to anyone. He would simply tell them to refer to the book itself! Better yet to their own written copies, parchments, etc. I think we know better.
We think the idea that the Blessed Messenger (saw) wrote the Qur’an is both intellectually lazy and the result of wanting to skirt around the issue of the preservation through oral transmission of the Qur’an.
We think that issues are nuanced, and sometimes a little more academically challenging than we are ready to admit. Some answers are simply not microwavable.
Something else we want to point out. Was it possible that the Blessed Messenger (saw) learned to recognize and understand some words in the Arabic script over time? Of course!
When our colleague was the Executive Docent Officer at the Singapore Sultan Mosque and leading the ATMT (Awareness Through Mosque Tour) program, they used to have fun showing copies of the Qur’an to curious non-Muslims.
They would open a page of the Qur’an that had many usages of the word ‘Allah‘ in Arabic. They would point out the word. They would then ask them to find that word anywhere on the two pages. They did without fail! They asked them to read that word, and they said, ‘Allah’!
For example, they have highlighted the word ‘Allah’ in the Arabic text below. See if you can find at least 3 other examples of it.
This was a great interactive experience for our colleague and them. Our point here is that it’s possible that the Blessed Messenger (saw) was able to recognize words (after all they are simply symbols) and say or repeat what they mean.
“Neither did you (O Muhammed SAW) read any book before it (this Quran), nor did you write any book (whatsoever) with your right hand. If that was the case, indeed, the followers of falsehood might have doubted.” (Qur’an 29:48)
“The Jews say, “Uzair is the son of Allah,” while the Christians say, ‘The Messiah is the son of Allah.” Such are their baseless assertions, only parroting the words of earlier disbelievers. May Allah condemn them! How can they be deluded ‘from the truth’?’ (Qur’an 9:30)
﷽
Imagine for a moment that you are a follower of the Hafs Qur’an only religion. Your understanding of the Qur’an as a follower of this religion is that:
It is the only source of guidance, not the primary source.
That it is highly detailed, and your understanding is that it, and it alone contains absolutely everything you need.
Have you ever seen a meaningful discussion between a follower of the hafs Qur’an only religion and a follower of Judaism on the question of Uzair being the son of Allah, where the Quranist uses the Qur’an alone?
Let’s look at what the Qur’an does tell us.
It mentions an individual named Uzair (mentioned once in the entire Qur’an) whom the Jews would call the son of Allah.
Now let us look at the situation with the Christians. This is an easier claim to engage with. The Christians will openly admit they believe that Jesus is the Messiah and that he is the son of God. Even if they are Unitarians or Jehovah’s Witnesses. We have yet to come across any Christian who does not make this baseline claim about Christ Jesus. Secondly, we can look to their sacred text and see these claims being made about Jesus there.
So how does a follower of the Hafs Qur’an only religion use only the above text to engage with a follower of Judaism on the issue of the claim of Jews that Uzair is the son of God?
That is, how do those who claim to follow the Hafs Qur’an only engage with Jews in a meaningful way?
“The Jews say, “Uzair is the son of Allah,” while the Christians say, ‘The Messiah is the son of Allah.” Such are their baseless assertions, only parroting the words of earlier disbelievers. May Allah condemn them! How can they be deluded ‘from the truth’?’ (Qur’an 9:30)
The above verse is sufficient for belief. However, it is not sufficient for proofs and evidences.
“Produce your proof if what you say is true.” (Qur’an 2:111)
Imagine a world where Allah (swt) tells the Blessed Prophet (saw) to ask the Jews and Christians to produce the proofs of what they say, but we are under no obligation to do so?
“And who is more unjust than one who invents a lie about Allah or denies His verses? Indeed, the wrongdoers will not succeed.” (Qur’an 6:21)
﷽
Now one thing you will immediately notice when dealing with the hafs Qur’an only religion is that most of them do not even speak Arabic. Most of them try and appeal to converts (who have very poor or weak Arabic). They have a reason for doing this, because they prey upon the fact that you do not understand the Arabic and thus, are able to manipulate what the text says.
A prime example is their manipulation of this verse:
“We did not leave anything out of this book.” (Qur’an 6:38)
Now, as this website is directed primarily to an English-speaking audience, let us ask you this.
You will note that ‘The Monotheist Group’ -a quranist translation has rendered the Arabic as:
“And there is not a creature on the earth, nor a bird that flies with its wings, except they belong to nations like you belong. We did not leave anything out of the record; then to their Lord they will be gathered.” (Qur’an 6:38)
The verse in full actually states:
“All the creatures on earth, and all the birds that fly with wings, are communities like you. We did not leave anything out of this book. To their Lord, all these creatures will be summoned.” (Qur’an 6:38)
Is there a difference between saying:
“We did not leave anything out of this book.” and
“We did not leave anything out of the book.”
If one were to say ‘the book‘, then this is vague. What book are we actually referring to? If we say ‘this book‘, then we are referring to a book that is actually with me.
The Arabic word used here is l-kitabi. L-kitabi need not necessarily be a reference to the Qur’an at all.
It is the same word that is used in the following verses:
“And there followed them successors who inherited the book, taking the commodities of this lower life and saying, “It will be forgiven for us.” And if an offer like it comes to them, they will take it. Was not the covenant of the book taken from them that they would not say about Allah except the truth, and they studied what was in it? And the home of the Hereafter is better for those who fear Allah, so will you not use reason?” (Qur’an 7:169)
It is very obvious that l-kitabi is not a reference to the Qur’an in the above text.
“And We conveyed to the Children of Israel in the book that, “You will surely cause corruption on the earth twice, and you will surely reach haughtiness.” (Qur’an 17:4)
It is very obvious that l-kitabi is not a reference to the Qur’an in the above text as it was sent down to the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw).
“And do not argue with the People of the book except in a way that is best, except for those who commit injustice among them, and say, “We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you. And our Allah and your Allah is one; and we are Muslims to Him.” (Qur’an 29:46)
It is very obvious that l-kitabi is not a reference to the Qur’an in the above verse.
“Have you not considered those who practice hypocrisy, saying to their brothers who have disbelieved among the People of the Book, “If you are expelled, we will surely leave with you, and we will not obey, in regard to you, anyone – ever; and if you are fought, we will surely aid you.” But Allah testifies that they are liars.” (Qu’ran 59:11)
Can you imagine Allah (swt) calling (ahli Qur’an) people of the Qur’an liars? Obviously, l-kitabi above is not a reference to the Qur’an.
Indeed, they who disbelieved among the People of the book and the polytheist will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. Those are the worst of creatures.” (Qur’an 98:6)
Can you imagine Allah (swt) saying those who disbelieve among the (ahli Qur’an) will be with the polytheists in hell forever? It is obvious that l-kitabi above is not a reference to the Qur’an.
The logical contradiction.
“We did not leave anything out of this book.” (Qur’an 6:38)
In order for this verse to be true in the way that those who follow the Qur’an only religion would have us to believe, this verse would have to be the last verse revealed in the Qur’an. If any other verses come after it, this entails a logical and absolutely devastating blow to their position.
The Qur’an was not sent down all at once.
“And those who disbelieve say: Why is not the Quran revealed to him all at once? Thus, that We may strengthen your heart thereby. And We have revealed it to you gradually, in stages.” (Qur’an 25:32)
Also, if they don’t know the last verse of the Qur’an to be revealed that is also a logical and devastating blow to the way they understand the verse. Because it means that what was revealed first and last has been left out of the Qur’an! This is important for their argument.
Allah (swt) has clearly told us that he has not included everything in the Qur’an.
“And messengers, We have mentioned unto you before, and messengers, We have not mentioned unto you; and Allah spoke directly to Moses.” (Qur’an 4:164)
So how exactly do we understand this verse in a way that is consistent with not only logic but with the Qur’an itself?
“And the book will be placed open, and you will see the criminals fearful of that within it, and they will say, “Oh, woe to us! What is this book that leaves nothing small or great except that it has enumerated it?” And they will find what they did present before them. And your Lord does injustice to no one.” (Qur’an 18:49)
Are we really to understand this to mean: “So as for he who is given the Qur’an in his right hand, he will say, “Here, read my Qur’an!” No. That is ridiculous.
It is very obvious that l-kitabi (this book) above is not a referee to the Qur’an at all. Rather, it is a reference to the book that contains each and every single act that we have done. The Qur’an, for example, obviously does not contain each and every evil small or great that humans have done.
So as for he who is given his book in his right hand, he will say, “Here, read my book! (Qur’an 69:19)
“But as for he who is given his book behind his back.” (Qur’an 84:10)
Are we really to understand this as “But as for he who is given his Qur’an behind his back?”
It is best if we understand (Qur’an 6:38) in light of a verse that will help bring clarity to the confusion of those who follow the myriad of sects of the Qur’an Only Religion.
It is crystal clear that the above text is a reference to the book of deeds. The verse is talking about disbelievers on the day of judgement.
If only they were guided to reflect upon the following verse:
“There is no creature on earth whose sustenance is not undertaken by Allah. He knows where it lives and where it rests. Everything is in a Book that is clear.” (Qur’an 11:6)
It should be more than obvious that both the verses above refer to some celestial register where the minutia of all things are kept, and not to the Qur’an.
Prima Qur’an Conclusion:
The verse (Qur’an 6:38) itself does not indicate if it is talking about the Qur’an or not.
There is no way out of this airtight argument from an intra-Qura’n perspective. Accept that the verses mentioned above are talking about the book of deeds that is with Allah (swt).
The followers of the Qur’an Only Religion don’t want to accept this because it completely nukes one of their central talking points. It takes a talking point away from them that they use to scam the masses.
Dear readers, those people who follow the Qur’an only religion more often than not have very poor and weak knowledge of the Arabic language. Many of them can barely speak it, if at all. You do not see them offering to recite to you the Qur’an in Arabic, with proper recitation. The level of understanding of Arabic among them is quite atrocious. This is not to be mean; however, to be brutally honest. This is why they rely upon such very weak arguments to present their case.
“We sent them with clear proofs and the Zabur. And we revealed to you the message that you may make clear to mankind what was sent down to them and that they might give thought.” (Qur’an 16:44)
﷽
This section will be on engaging the Pseudo-Islamic.
In particular this section of the blog will have all articles related to two Pseudo-Islamic movements.
The first being the Hafs Qur’an Only Religion.
THE HAFS QUR’AN ONLY RELIGION
It is important to understand that we believe that the adherents of the Hafs Qur’an only movement are a distinct religion in much as we respect the way the Baha’i movement is a distinct religion from Islam.
Insh’Allah this section will deal with common arguments among the federation of sects that are known collectively as the ‘Qur’anist’.
This section will be refuting their many bold assertions; as well as showing why this particular attempt to re-interpret Islam and make it altogether different religion is deeply flawed.
Now why are they called the Hafs Qur’an only view? These people will either out of ignorance about the transmission and textual history of the Qur’an refer to their platform as ‘Qur’an Only’ or Quraniyoon. However, the Hafs Qur’an did not fall out of the sky. Thus, is important for them to reflect on why so much foundational trust is put into the men that transmittedthe Hafs Qur’an to the exclusion of all other transmissions of the Qur’an.
At the core of this religion of theirs is a massive epistemological problem.
In regard to approving comments from followers of the Hafs Qur’an Only Religion we have taken seriously the verse of the Qur’an: “And cooperate in righteousness and piety, but do not cooperate in sin and aggression. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.” (Qur’an 5:2)
Thus, they would do well to read the article listed below: Is the Qur’an a detailed explanation of all things? to understand the policy on this website that keeps them as well as us from sinning and keeps them consistent with in their worldview. Insh’Allah.
THE QADIANI MOVEMENT Also known as AHMADIYYA MOVEMENT is a divided movement, split into two competing jama’at or congregations. That is the LAHORI whom we refer to as The Ahmadiyya A and the QADIANI whom we refer to as the Ahmadiyya B.
As the Qadiani or Ahmadiyyah B believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is a Prophet after The Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw), they have been marked as being outside the millat of Islam. Likewise, they (the Ahmadiyyah B) or Qadiani have made anyone outside of their jama’at to be kafirs. Though, their is some tongue in cheek wordplay see their website. Source: (https://www.alislam.org/articles/are-non-ahmadis-muslim-or-non-muslim-ahmadiyya-muslim-perspective/)
To the dismay of the Muslim Ummah, The Qadiani have a Khalifa, named MIrza Masroor Ahmed, he lives in Tilford, United Kingdom, where he pays taxes to the United Kingdom. Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali were not known to have paid taxes to a Non Muslim government.
For future reference all articles addressed to either of the above movements will be found under: AHL AL-QIBLA / AHL AL-KHILAF under: Engaging with the Pseudo-Islamic:
Refutation that oral traditions came 300 years after the Prophet.
Even though they used to say that the hadith -oral traditions came some 300 years after the Blessed Messenger (saw). Praise be to Allah the more educated among them have backed away from that claim. However, this article is here because many in that movement may be unaware.
See Harold Motzki (a Non-Muslim orientalist and academic) who made short work of that Quranist claim
Does the Qur’an itself tell us to reject all hadith?
This article is a nail in the coffin for the entire movement. Some from their movement have commented but ended up leaving in frustration. It looks at their arguments and misquotations of the Qur’an. Also given in this article is an irrefutable example of Allah confirming a hadith to the Blessed Messenger [saw].
Did the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) write the Qur’an?
Our colleague had written a refutation like this many years ago on the ‘Qur’an only‘ web site known as http://www.ourbeacon.com/ or it used to be known as ‘GalaxyDastak‘. Dr. Shabbir Ahmed founder of the forum had me banned. This was also the last our colleague heard from their former teacher Hamza AbdulMalik. Hamza AbdulMalik used to be the director of IPCI international until he dropped off the radar and re-emerged as a Quranist.
Well, our colleague may have been removed from the forum but here is the refutation of their arguments for all to see here:
A pre-eminent argument used by ‘Quranist’ ripped to shreds By Dr. Jeffery Lang.
The most oft-quoted verse used by Quranist is analyzed and ripped apart by a Muslim convert, academic, and professor of math, Dr. Jeffery Lang.
This is a centerpiece argument used by Edip Yuksel, Sam Gerrans, “Joseph Islam”, Rashad Khilafa, Shabir Ahmed and the lot of them. The reason why this argument is especially devastating coming from someone like Dr. Jeffry Lang is that Dr. Lang is critical of the hadith corpus as we have it today.
The following is a look how Quranist have both misunderstood the word hikma as a reference to the Qur’an and how they do not understand that it is something that Allah gives his messengers to deal with situations and context not immediately addressed by the revelations they were given.
Hating a hadith just for the sake of hating a hadith.
This article a hypothetical question is posed. What if a particular ahad hadith turned out to be correct? Especially one that is of a scientific nature? What would the Quranist do in such a scenario?
Salaat in the Qur’an is not ritual prayer? Examining the claim of some Quranist.
This article looks at one Quranist claim that salat is not ritual prayer. This is what happens when you abandon the understanding of the Blessed Messenger and follow the ‘every man for himself’ approach of the Quranist.
“Verily, in the messenger of Allah, you have a good example for him who looks unto Allah and the Last Day and remembers Allah much.” (Qur’an 33: 21)
﷽
“The believers are only the ones who have believed in Allah and His Messenger and then doubt not but strive with their properties and their lives in the cause of Allah. It is those who are truthful.” (Qur’an 49:15)
“When the Prophet disclosed a hadith in confidence to one of his consorts, and she then divulged it (to another), and Allah made it known to him, he confirmed part thereof and repudiated a part. Then, when he told her thereof, she said, “Who told you this? “He said, “He told me Who knows and is well-acquainted (with all things).” (Qur’an 66:3)
It would be very difficult to imagine a Messenger of Allah (swt) confirming part of a hadith (The Qur’an) and repudiating part of a hadith (The Qur’an) if the word hadith was used exclusively of the Qur’an.
This is the death blow to the position from which the followers of the Quraniyoon religion are unable to escape from.
“The worst animals before Allah are the deaf and dumb, those who do not use their reason.” (Qur’an 8:22)
Let us see if those people who follow the Quraniyoon religion are capable of using their intellect when they discuss with Muslims.
The first point of consideration
For anyone who would use their faculties of intellect would be this. If we are going to use a hadith that supposedly prohibits the use of writing hadith and yet these very hadith are found in hadith canons that have been collected, collated and written down, it stands to reason that those who included the very hadith of prohibition would have cogent and viable reasons to write the hadith down themselves!
We have never come across anyone from the federation of Quraniyoon sects that alleges that these hadith came into the hadith corpus by accident.
In other words, those who collect the hadith canons are aware of those hadiths. That is sensible, right? Couldn’t we all agree that is a logical first acknowledgment?
After all, they are relying upon the work of al-Khatib al Baghdadi titled: “Tqid al-‘Ilm”
Let’s move to the second point.
The second point.
This line of attack from the Quraniyoon religion involves using circular reasoning.
Imagine that you follow any number of sects from the Quraniyoon religion. Now your premise is that all the hadiths are false:
Based upon that premise, what would be your logical conclusion?
The Quraniyoon have some very foggy thinking about deep matters.
The irony is that the vast majority of them from any sect of the Quraniyoon have never even bothered to look at the science of hadith themselves. They have just taken this argument without investigating it.
Ironically, this makes them guilty of blind trust.
For example, those who use these hadiths and come to the conclusion that these hadiths give accurate information. On what basis do they assert this?
Is it because of the sanad-chain of transmission? If that is the case, then what is their actual problem with Hadith?
If not, then it shows a fatal flaw in their thought process here.
It reminded us of when one of our bloggers at primaquran hosted a group of tourists when doing guided Mosque tours in Singapore. This man suddenly blurted out, “There is no truth! Nothing is true!” So our colleague turned and asked him, “Is that true?”
The third point.
This point is very important. There is not a single hadith anywhere from the Blessed Messenger [saw] that forbids the oral transmission of hadith.
That is an open challenge to anyone from any sect of the Quraniyoon.
Let us repeat that:
There is not a single hadith anywhere from the Blessed Messenger [saw] that forbids the oral transmission of hadith.
What we do have are hadith attributed to the Blessed Messenger [saw] that discourage people from writing down anything other than the Qur’an.
However, this itself has a context and we will come to that soon enough.
Abu Sa’id Khudri reported that Allah’s Messenger (saw) said:
“Do not take down anything from me, and he who took down anything from me except the Qur’an, he should efface that and narrate from me, for there is no harm in it and he who attributes any falsehood to me—and Hammam said: I think he also said:” deliberately” -he should, in fact, find his abode in the Hell-Fire.”
No prohibition against the oral transmission of hadith.
Fourth point.
Quoting hadith like this is actually a strong point against the Quraniyoon religion.
The reason being is that it shows that the companions must have been writing things from the Blessed Messenger (saw) other than the Qur’an to the point that it needed to be addressed.
The intention behind the proclamation of not writing anything down from the Blessed Messenger (saw) besides the Qur’an is the fear that other material would get mixed up with the Qur’an.
We should also keep in mind that writing materials were scarce.
We have proof of this.
Examples:
Source: Ahmed Von Denfer’s book: An Introduction to the sciences of the Qur’an pages 21–22
You can see that in the Mushaf of Ubay bin Ka’b that he included two du’a from the Blessed Messenger [saw] as well as a hadith from him.
“I heard Ibn Az-Zubair who was on the pulpit at Mecca, delivering a sermon, saying, “O men! The Prophet used to say, “If the son of Adam were given a valley full of gold, he would love to have a second one; and if he were given the second one, he would love to have a third, for nothing fills the belly of Adam’s son except dust. And Allah forgives he who repents to Him.” Ubai said, “We considered this as a saying from the Qur’an till the Sura (beginning with) ‘The mutual rivalry for piling up of worldly things diverts you..’ (102.1) was revealed.”
How do the people who follow the Quraniyoon religion answer this?
We as Muslims have the answers to it. It puts ease and tranquility into the hearts and the minds of the believers. Whereas the position of the Quraniyoon fills the mind and heart with doubts and whispers from the enemy.
Fifth point.
The hadith must be understood in the context of not mixing the hadith of the Blessed Messenger (saw) with his recommended supplications and the Qur’an because of the following evidence:
If the statement is understood in the way those of the Quraniyoon want the masses to understand, then it would indicate that the Blessed Messenger (saw) went against the instructions of Allah (swt).
If the Prophet (saw) forbade the writing down of anything other than the Qur’an, then he would have gone against the Qur’an itself!
“O you who have believed, when you contract a debt for a specified term, write it down. And let a scribe write it between you with justice. Let no scribe refuse to write as Allah has taught him. So let him write and let the one who has the obligation to dictate. And let him fear Allah, his Lord, and not leave anything out of it. But if the one who has the obligation is of limited understanding or weak or unable to dictate himself, then let his guardian dictate with justice. And bring to witness two witnesses from among your men. And if there are not two men, then a man and two women from those whom you accept as witnesses-so that if one of the women errs, then the other can remind her. and let not the witnesses refuse when they are called upon. And do not be weary to write it, whether it is small or large, for its specified term. That is more just in the sight of Allah and stronger as evidence and more likely to prevent doubt between you, except when it is an immediate transaction that you conduct among yourselves. For then there is no blame upon you if you do not write it. And take witnesses when you conclude a contract. Let no scribe be harmed or any witness. For if you do so, indeed, it is grave disobedience in you. And fear Allah. And Allah teaches you, and Allah is Knowing of all things.” (Qur’an 2:282)
Allah (swt) himself demands a written record for credit transactions.
Sixth point.
Recall that we mentioned the prohibition on writing the hadith came with a context, and we will come to that soon enough.
Writing down the hadith was not prohibited from those who had trouble with memory retention.
“There was a man among the Ansar who would sit with the Messenger of Allah (saw), and he would listen to the Ahadith of the Prophet (saw) and he was amazed with them, but he could not remember them. So he complained about that to the Messenger of Allah (saw). He said: ‘O Messenger of Allah! I listen to your Ahadith, and I am amazed, but I can not remember them.’ So the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: ‘Help yourself with your right hand’ and he motioned with his hand as if writing.'”
Conclusion: This is more than sufficient evidence to refute the claims of those who say that the Blessed Messenger (saw) forbade the writing of hadith.
One thing is certain: no one can claim that the Blessed Messenger (saw) forbade the oral transmission of hadith.
“But there are, among men, those who purchase lahwa alhadith (vain hadith), without knowledge (or meaning), to mislead (men) from the Path of Allah and throw ridicule (on the Path): for such there will be a Humiliating Penalty.” (Qur’an 31:6)
﷽
This idea to reject all the hadith has no basis in the Qur’an. It is an Anti-Quranist position.
To say that the Qur’an instructs Muslims to reject all the hadith would be to reject the Qur’anitself!
How could I make such a claim? Because Allah (swt) calls the Qur’an, “hadith” within the Qur’an itself!
For example:
Then leave Me alone with such as reject this (hadith) alhadith by degrees shall We punish them from directions they perceive not. (Qur’an 68:44)
So we can see from the beginning that Allah (swt) saw fit to refer to the revelation itself as Hadith.
Also, the Qur’an makes a distinction between hadith in chapter 31, verse number 6 as follows:
“But there are, among men, those who purchase lahwa alhadith (vain hadith), without knowledge (or meaning), to mislead (men) from the Path of Allah and throw ridicule (on the Path): for such there will be a Humiliating Penalty.” (Qur’an 31:6)
Here the Qur’an is warning us against lahwa alhadith (vain hadith). If Allah (swt) so wished he could have simply used the word ‘hadith’.
If there are ‘lahwa alhadith’—vain hadith, then it stands to reason there are hadith that are not vain, fruitless, or futile.
The Qur’an is a book in which nothing has been left out.
“We have not neglected anything in the Book, then to their Lord shall they be gathered.” (Qur’an 6:38)
It would have been sufficient to say do not believe in any hadith other than this hadith – the Qur’an. However, we do not find such a verse in the entirety of the Qur’an!
For example, we could say to you, “You may eat all the apples in the basket.” We can also say, “You may eat all the apples in the basket that are good.”
The first sentence indicates that it is permissible to eat every apple contained in the basket. The second sentence indicates that some apples in the basket may not be good, so use discretion.
So, most unfortunately religion has come along to challenge Islam. This religion is known as ‘Quraniyoon‘ are actually ascribing deficiency to Allah (swt). May Allah (swt) forgive us!
THE QUR’AN REFERENCES HADITH OUTSIDE OF IT.
There are some examples in the Qur’an that refer to hadith outside the Qur’an.
What would be the point of referencing hadith outside the Qur’an if all hadith were useless and utterly futile? Why reference Hadith if they did not contain some newsworthy information?
Example 1)
“Has the hadith reached you, of the honored guests of Abraham?” (Qur’an 51:24)
If one continues to read through the verses, they will see that this is obviously a recounting of the events that are contained within Genesis chapter 18: 1-15 of the Bible.
Example 2)
“Has the hadith of Moses reached you?” (Qur’an 20:9)
If one continues to read through the verses, they will see this is obviously a recounting of the events that are contained within Exodus chapter 3: 1-5 of the Bible.
Allah (swt) never says that all hadith are baseless or lies.
Allah (swt) simply informs us that it is Allah (swt) that is the best to relate a hadith. We find that in the following verse of the Qur’an.
“Allah! There is no god but He: of a surety He will gather you together against the Day of Judgment, about which there is no doubt. And whose hadith can be truer than Allah’s?” (Qur’an 4:87)
Who would argue against this point? Human beings can deliver mercy and compassion, but who can be more merciful and compassionate than the one who is The Most Merciful & The Most Compassionate?
Thus, hadith can be true, but Allah’s hadith is the truest; for who can be truer than Allah?
ALLAH CONFIRMS HADITH OF PROPHET MUHAMMED OUTSIDE THE QUR’AN? YES!
“When the Prophet disclosed a hadith in confidence to one of his consorts, and she then divulged it (to another), and Allah made it known to him, he confirmed part thereof and repudiated a part. Then when he told her thereof, she said, “Who told you this? “He said, “He told me Who knows and is well-acquainted (with all things).” (Qur’an 66:3)
It would be very difficult to imagine a Messenger of Allah (swt) confirming part of a hadith (The Qur’an) and repudiating part of a hadith (The Qur’an) if the word hadith was used exclusively of the Qur’an. This is the death blow to the position of which ‘Qur’an only Muslims‘ are unable to escape.
It would also be hard to imagine that if all hadith outside the Qur’an were absolutely false, how could the Blessed Messenger (saw) confirm part of a hadith that was false in the presence of his Lord?
For example, there are ahadith in the collection called Bukhari that relate to this particular incident. You can read more about the above verse and the events surrounding it here:
We personally have no reason to discount this hadith of giving an accurate portrait of the events that happened. In fact, it is in the context of this entire event that the Allah (swt) reprimands the Blessed Messenger (saw) for his error as well.
“O Prophet! Why do you hold to be forbidden that which Allah has made lawful to you You seek to please your wives. But Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” (Qur’an 66: 1)
This hadith in Bukhari and other sources also recounts what is known in historical circles as ‘the principle of embarrassment’.
Hadith can refer to inspiration or dreams that Allah (swt) gives people in their sleep.
“Thus will your Lord choose you and teach you the interpretation of hadith and perfect His favor to you and to the posterity of Jacob – even as He perfected it to your fathers Abraham and Isaac before! for Allah is full of knowledge and wisdom.” (Qur’an 12:6)
“The man in Egypt who bought him, said to his wife: “Make his stay (among us) honourable: maybe he will bring us much good, or we shall adopt him as a son.” Thus did We establish Joseph in the land, that We might teach him the interpretation hadith. And Allah has full power and control over His affairs, but most among mankind know it not.” (Qur’an 12:21)
“Twice we can see that Allah (swt) mentions that he will teach Joseph the interpretation ofhadith. In both instances, it is a reference to dreams.
“Behold! Joseph said to his father: “O my father! I did see (in a dream) eleven stars and the sun and the moon: I saw them prostrate themselves to me!” (Qur’an 12:4)
Now with him, there came into the prison, two young men. Said one of them: “I see myself (in a dream) pressing wine.” said the other: “I see myself (in a dream) carrying bread on my head, and birds are eating, thereof.” “Tell us” (they said) “The truth and meaning thereof: for we see you are one that does good (to all).”He said: “Before any food comes (in due course) to feed either of you, I will surely reveal to you the truth and meaning of this before it befalls you: that is part of the (duty) which my Lord hath taught me. I have (I assure you) abandoned the ways of a people that believe not in Allah and that (even) deny the Hereafter.” (Qur’an 12:36-27)
“And the king said: Surely I see seven fat kine which seven lean ones devoured; and seven green ears and (seven) others dry: O chiefs! explain to me my dream, if you can interpret the dream.” (Qur’an 12:43)
“O, Joseph!” (he said) “O man of truth! Expound to us (the dream) of seven fat kine whom seven lean ones devour, and of seven green ears of corn and (seven) others withered: that I may return to the people and that they may understand.” (Qur’an 12:46)
This is obviously a recounting of the events that are contained within Exodus chapter 41: 1-36 of the Bible.
As Muslims, if we are to believe that the dreams we receive from Allah (swt) are all revelations, then we are going to have to radically change our concepts of revelation.
Allah quotes Jewish oral traditions (hadith) as revelation revealed to them!
“That is why We ordained for the Children of Israel that whoever takes a life—unless as a punishment for murder or mischief in the land—it will be as if they killed all of humanity; and whoever saves a life, it will be as if they saved all of humanity.” (Qur’an 5:32)
“Therefore, Adam the first man was created alone, to teach you that with regard to anyone who destroys one soul from the Jewish people, i.e., kills one Jew, the verse ascribes him blame as if he destroyed an entire world, as Adam was one person, from whom the population of an entire world came forth. And conversely, anyone who sustains one soul from the Jewish people, the verse ascribes him credit as if he sustained an entire world.”
Allah (swt) gives us the corrected version. In some manuscripts, the phrase reads “a single soul” (נפש אחת) without “of Israel” (מישראל) is read.
The version without “of Israel” expresses a universal humanistic ethic — the value of any life.
The version with “of Israel” restricts it to Jewish life.
The differences is noted here: שִׁנוּיֵי נוּסְחָאוֹת ש״ס מִשְׁנָיוֹת וִילְנָא — that is, “Textual Variants of the Mishnayot in the Vilna Shas”.
Here are the major variant readings found in the Shinuye Nussachaot of the Vilna edition and other manuscripts:
Version
Key Phrase
Meaning
Vilna Mishnah (common printed)
“כל המקיים נפש אחת מישראל כאילו קיים עולם מלא”
“Whoever sustains one soul of Israel, it is as if he sustained an entire world.”
Kaufmann Manuscript (oldest Mishnah MS)
“כל המקיים נפש אחת כאילו קיים עולם מלא”
“Whoever sustains one soul, it is as if he sustained an entire world.” (No “of Israel”)
Parma & Cambridge MSS
Also omit “מישראל”
Same universal form
Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 37a)
Usually includes “מישראל”
Narrower: “one soul of Israel”
The point is that nothing like this is found in any variation of the TNCH that we have in our possession today.
This is also more than sufficient evidence to show the Quranist position is anti-academic and anti-historical.
We could elaborate more on this, but we believe what is provided is sufficient to prove the following.
1) The Qur’an does not tell Muslims to reject all hadith,
2) The Qur’an does not tell Muslims to accept all the hadith.
3) The Qur’an makes it clear that hadith does not necessarily refer to divine revelation itself.
4) The Qur’an makes it clear that no hadith could be truer than the hadith of Allah (swt).
“Allah! There is no god but He: of a surety He will gather you together against the Day of Judgment, about which there is no doubt. And whose hadith can be truer than Allah’s?” (Qur’an 4:87)
This statement lets us know that even if hadith reach a state of mutawattir (mass transmitted), they still cannot clash with the clear teachings of the Qur’an.
Remember that this blog is called PRIMA QURAN
So what is Prima-Qur’an?
Prima is from the Latin word which simply means ‘first’ or ‘foremost’.
Prima Qur’an is about using the Qur’an, primarily for guidance in matters of theology, jurisprudence, and spirituality.
Prima-Qur’an rejects any source that clashes with the teachings of the Qur’an.. It is about Muslims going back to the Qur’anfirst. It is about Muslims looking to the Holy Qur’an first and foremost for guidance and healing.
The position of Prima-Qur’an is distinct from the religion of the Quraniyoon religion.
Quraniyoon is a religion that broke away from the religion of Islam. If the truth is told in reality they reject the Qur’an as well.
We have yet to encounter any person from the Quraniyoon that can give us a text anywhere from the Qur’an where it tells us to disregard all the hadith.
Prima Quran 
