Tag Archives: muslim

In Ibadi theology, a Wali of Allah can sin. One who has true spiritual guardianship can be killed.

“O believers! Stand firm for justice as witnesses for Allah even if it is against yourselves, your parents, or close relatives. Be they rich or poor, Allah is best to ensure their interests. So do not let your desires cause you to deviate. If you distort the testimony or refuse to give it, then Allah is certainly All-Aware of what you do.” (Qur’an 4:135)

﷽ 

The position of the Ibadi school concerning the Wali of Allah. Whoever has attained the rank of wilāyat al-ḥaqīqah (true spiritual guardianship), his guardianship is never nullified under any circumstance. Therefore, there is no room for enmity against him, even if he were to commit grave sins.

However, falsehood is never accepted from him, and if he falls into one of the prescribed punishments of Allah, the punishment of Allah is carried out upon him — yet his guardianship is not revoked.

Indeed, the Messenger of Allah (saw) carried out the punishment of stoning on Māʿiz (may Allah be pleased with him), and instructed his companions to seek forgiveness for him. The same was the case with the Ghamīdī woman. Thus, wilāyat al-ḥaqīqah neither nullifies rights nor abolishes punishments.

The Ghamīdī woman & Ma’iz b. Malik al-Aslami -may Allah be pleased with them both.

‘Abdullah b. Buraida reported on the authority of his father that Ma’iz b. Malik al-Aslami came to Allah’s Messenger (saw) and said:

Allah’s Messenger, I have wronged myself; I have committed adultery and I earnestly desire that you should purify me. He turned him away. On the following day, he (Ma’iz) again came to him and said: Allah’s Messenger, I have committed adultery. Allah’s Messenger (saw) turned him away for the second time, and sent him to his people saying: Do you know if there is anything wrong with his mind. They denied of any such thing in him and said: We do not know him but as a wise good man among us, so far as we can judge. He (Ma’iz) came for the third time, and he (The Blessed Prophet) sent him as he had done before. He asked about him and they informed him that there was nothing wrong with him or with his mind. When it was the fourth time, a ditch was dug for him and he (The Blessed Prophet) pronounced judgment about him and he wis stoned.

Source: (https://sunnah.com/muslim:1695b)

أُرِيدُ أَنْ تُطَهِّرَنِي -I want you to purify me.

He (the narrator) said: There came to him (The Blessed Prophet) a woman from Ghamid and said: Allah’s Messenger, I have committed adultery, so purify me. He (The Blessed Prophet) turned her away. On the following day she said: Allah’s Messenger, Why do you turn me away? Perhaps, you turn me away as you turned away Ma’iz. By Allah, I have become pregnant. He said: Well, if you insist upon it, then go away until you give birth to (the child). When she was delivered she came with the child (wrapped) in a rag and said: Here is the child whom I have given birth to. He said: Go away and suckle him until you wean him. When she had weaned him, she came to him (The Blessed Prophet) with the child who was holding a piece of bread in his hand. She said: Allah’s Apostle, here is he as I have weaned him and he eats food. He (The Blessed Prophet) entrusted the child to one of the Muslims and then pronounced punishment. And she was put in a ditch up to her chest and he commanded people and they stoned her. Khalid b Walid came forward with a stone which he flung at her head and there spurted blood on the face of Khalid and so he abused her. Allah’s Messenger (saw)heard his (Khalid’s) curse that he had huried upon her. Thereupon he (The Blessed Prophet) said: Khalid, be gentle. By Him in Whose Hand is my life, she has made such a repentance that even if a wrongful tax-collector were to repent, he would have been forgiven. Then giving command regarding her, he prayed over her and she was buried.

Source: (https://sunnah.com/muslim:1695b)

Buraida told that Ma’iz b. Malik came to the Prophet and said, “Purify me, Messenger of Allah.” He replied, “Out upon you! Go back, ask Allah’s forgiveness and turn to Him in repentance.” He said that he went back not very far, then came and said, “Purify me, Messenger of Allah,” and the Prophet said the same as he had said before. When this went on till a fourth time he asked, “For what am I to purify you?” and he replied that it was because of fornication. Allah’s Messenger then asked if the man was mad, and when he was told that he was not, he asked if he had drunk wine. A man got up and smelt his breath but noticed no smell of wine, so the Prophet asked him if he had committed fornication, and when he replied that he had, he gave orders regarding him and he was stoned to death. Two or three days later Allah’s Messenger came and said, Ask forgiveness for Ma’iz b. Malik. He has repented to such an extent that if it were divided among a people it would be enough for them all.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/mishkat:3562)

The Key Point: After the execution of the punishment, the Blessed Prophet (saw) did not declare them to be enemies of Allah or eternal denizens of Hellfire. Instead, he spoke well of their repentance and even instructed the companions to pray for them. This prayer (ṣalāt al-janāzah) itself is an act that is only performed for Muslims.

This proves that while their sinful action demanded earthly punishment, their essential faith and status as believers (awlīyāʾ in the true sense) were not completely obliterated. Their sincere repentance preserved their wilāyat al-ḥaqīqah

The 10 sons of Yaʿqūb/Jacob -peace be upon him.

We also believe in the wilāyat al-ḥaqīqah of the ten sons of Prophet Yaʿqūb (peace be upon him) who wronged their brother, fabricated false stories to cover their crimes — their falsehood is not accepted, yet their guardianship is not revoked. It remains upon them, their father, their brother, and our Messenger (peace and blessings be upon them all).

“But My Promise is not within the reach of (zalimin) evil-doers. (Qur’an 2:124)

What did these descendants of Prophet Ibrahim (as) get up to?

They cried, “Our father! We went racing and left Joseph with our belongings, and a wolf devoured him! But you will not believe us, no matter how truthful we are.” (Qur’an 12:17)

These Muwahid, The Ahl Bayt of Jacob (as), Sons of a Prophet lied to their father! Imagine telling your own father that his son (your own brother) was eaten by a wolf! Can you imagine the grief it would bring him?!

Allah (swt) tells us in very vivid language how severe the grief and trauma of Jacob (as). The trauma that Prophet Jacob (as) went through on account of his progeny, the progeny of the Household.

“He turned away from them, lamenting, “Alas, poor Joseph!” And his eyes turned white out of the grief he suppressed.” (Qur’an 12:84)

He replied, “O my dear son! Do not relate your vision to your brothers, or they will devise a plot against you. Surely Satan is a sworn enemy to humankind.” (Qur’an 12:5)

Jacob (as) knew among his ahl bayt were schemers!

“˹Remember˺ when they said ˹to one another˺, “Surely Joseph and his brother ˹Benjamin˺ are more beloved to our father than we, even though we are a group of so many. Indeed, our father is clearly mistaken.” (Qur’an 12:8)

Can you imagine talking about your father (a Prophet) like that?

“Kill Joseph or cast him out to some ˹distant˺ land so that our father’s attention will be only ours, then after that you may ˹repent and˺ become righteous people!” (Qur’an 12:9)

They said, “O our father! Why do you not trust us with Joseph, although we truly wish him well? (Qur’an 12:11)

The Ahl Bayt of Jacob (as) Lie #1 to their father.

“Send him out with us tomorrow so that he may enjoy himself and play. And we will really watch over him.” (Qur’an 12:12)

So he can enjoy himself, Lie #2, and they will watch over him Lie #3.

“Then they returned to their father in the evening, weeping. They cried, “Our father! We went racing and left Joseph with our belongings, and a wolf devoured him! But you will not believe us, no matter how truthful we are.” (Qur’an 12:16-17)

“And they brought his shirt, stained with false blood. He responded, “No! Your souls must have tempted you to do something ˹evil˺. So ˹I can only endure with˺ beautiful patience! It is Allah’s help that I seek to bear your claims.” (Qur’an 12:18)

Look at the extent of their manipulation! Fake tears like actors crying on que! A prop piece—his shirt stained with false blood. Gaslighting their father.

Joseph was eaten by a wolf. Lie #4 Brought a shirt with false blood Lie #5

“Return to your father and say, ‘O our father! Your son (Benjamin)committed theft. We testify only to what we know. We could not guard against the unforeseen.” (Qur’an 12:81)

They claimed their other brother, Benjamin, was a thief and lied to their father, yet again. Lie #6

The Ahl Bayt of Jacob, the guilty among them, finally return in repentance to Allah (swt)

“They admitted, “By Allah! Allah has truly preferred you over us, and we have surely been sinful.” (Qur’an 12:91)

“They begged, “O our father! Pray for the forgiveness of our sins. We have certainly been sinful.” (Qur’an 12:97)

Satan ignited rivalry between the Ahl Bayt of Jacob (as)

“Then he raised his parents to the throne, and they all fell down in prostration to Joseph,1 who then said, “O my dear father! This is the interpretation of my old dream. My Lord has made it come true. He was truly kind to me when He freed me from prison, and brought you all from the desert after Satan had ignited rivalry between me and my siblings. Indeed my Lord is subtle in fulfilling what He wills. Surely He ˹alone˺ is the All-Knowing, All-Wise.” (Qur’an 12:100)

What to make of the sons of Jacob (as) Al Muwahid who lied to their father (a Prophet) because they were jealous of their brother? The sons of a prophet can conspire against their brother.

Their falsehood is not accepted, yet their guardianship is not revoked.

Analysis of the Examples Provided

  1. The Sons of Prophet Yaʿqūb (AS):
    • This example is even more striking and is particularly emphasized in Ibāḍī theology to drive the point home.
    • Their crime was immense: they attempted murder on their brother Yūsuf (AS), threw him in a well, lied to their father, and caused him immense grief. This constitutes major sins involving injustice, deception, and breaking familial ties.
    • Ibāḍī Interpretation: Despite this, the Qur’an never refers to them as disbelievers (kuffār). They are still considered among the prophets’ descendants. Prophet Yaʿqūb (AS) and Prophet Yūsuf (AS) eventually forgave them. Their story ends with forgiveness and family reconciliation.
    • This demonstrates that even such heinous sins did not irrevocably sever their essential connection to the legacy of prophethood and faith (wilāyat al-ḥaqīqah), though they were certainly held accountable for their actions in this world and were rebuked in the Qur’an.

The established principle regarding spiritual guardianship (wilayah) is that one who possesses true guardianship never loses it, regardless of sins committed — we are certain they will die repentant. Thus, we reject their wrong actions while maintaining a connection to their essential spiritual station. The converse is equally true.

An example of the converse being true: Bara’ah al-Haqiqa

The example of Abu Lahab.

May the hands of Abu Lahab perish, and he perish! Neither his wealth nor gains will benefit him. He will burn in a flaming Fire, and his wife, the carrier of kindling,around her neck will be a rope of palm-fibre. (Qur’an 111:1-5)

Some Muslims use a flawed argument about Abu Lahab to prove the truth of the Qur’an, saying: “If Abu Lahab had taken the shahādah, it would have made the Qur’an false.”

This is incorrect. The words of Allah (swt) are absolute truth, whereas Abu Lahab’s actions (if he had ever claimed faith) would have been deception. Allah (swt) has already decreed his fate. He is the very definition of one being in barā’ah ḥaqīqah (the true dissociation), being truly cut off.

If Allah (swt) did not reveal this about Abu Lahab, and he took the testification of faith, he would be in Walayah al-Dhahir – The apparent friendship. This is a matter of jurisprudence.

However, since Allah (swt) revealed his state Bara’ah al-Haqiqah – The real dissociation. This is a matter of theology.

The example of Adam -upon him be peace.

We believe in the true spiritual guardianship of our father Adam (as), while Allah explicitly states in Scripture that he disobeyed and erred, then sought forgiveness and repented. We affirm his true guardianship while disassociating from his wrong actions. Similarly:

“They said: ‘Our Lord we have wronged ourselves souls. If You forgive us not and bestow not upon us Your Mercy, we shall certainly be of the losers’ ” (Quran 7:23) 

“So Adam disobeyed his Lord, and lost his way. Then his Lord chose him, accepted his repentance, and guided him.” (Qur’an 20:121-122)

Thus, Adam-upon him be peace, is in true spiritual guardianship.

The Ahl Bayt of Adam (as). The household of the Prophet Adam (as)

The first murderer in human history was a descendant of a Prophet.

Cain killed his brother Abel.  Both were descendants of the Prophet Adam (as).   Yet, one was righteous and the other became the ‘first’ murderer.  Such that Allah (swt) made an example of this particular incident throughout time.

“So his soul permitted to him the murder of his brother, so he killed him and became among the losers.” (Qur’an 5:30)

And recite to them the story of Adam’s two sons, in truth, when they both offered a sacrifice, and it was accepted from one of them but was not accepted from the other. Said [the latter], “I will surely kill you.” Said [the former], “Indeed, Allah only accepts from the righteous [who fear Him]”. (Qur’an 5:27)

Humanity is not even in its infancy and here we have two descendants of the Prophet Adam (as). One of them has the hallmark of being remembered for all time as being the first murderer. Allah (swt) said that one of them was (mutaqi) righteous, meaning the other was not.

Does the son of Adam (as) get a pass for murdering his brother simply because he is the son of a Prophet?

“Then Allah sent a crow digging in the ground, in order to show him how to bury the corpse of his brother. He cried, “Alas! Have I failed to be like this crow and bury the corpse of my brother?” So he became regretful.” (Qur’an 5:31)

The regret here is not from his action but because he was not able to cover up his action. This son of Adam is in Barā’ah. This son of a Prophet is in Barā’ah

It is from the Sunnah of the Prophet to disavow any Muslim (including a companion) when they commit a sin.

First and foremost, to disavow any Muslim when they commit a sin is from the Sunnah of the Blessed Prophet (saw). This includes the companions.

Narrated Salim’s father:

The Prophet (saw) sent Khalid bin Al-Walid to the tribe of Jadhima and Khalid invited them to Islam but they could not express themselves by saying, “Aslamna (i.e. we have embraced Islam),” but they started saying “Saba’na! Saba’na (i.e. we have come out of one religion to another).” Khalid kept on killing (some of) them and taking (some of) them as captives and gave every one of us his Captive. When there came the day then Khalid ordered that each man (i.e. Muslim soldier) should kill his captive, I said, “By Allah, I will not kill my captive, and none of my companions will kill his captive.” When we reached the Prophet, we mentioned to him the whole story. On that, the Prophet (saw) raised both his hands and said twice, “O Allah, I disavow before You what Khalid has done.” ‏ اللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَبْرَأُ إِلَيْكَ مِمَّا صَنَعَ خَالِدٌ

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4339)

‏ اللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَبْرَأُ إِلَيْكَ مِمَّا صَنَعَ خَالِدٌ- allahuma ‘iiniy ‘abra ‘iilayk mimaa sanae khalid

Core Principles of the Ibāḍī Position on Wilāyat al-Ḥaqīqah

The Separation of Status from Action: A person’s fundamental spiritual state (ḥāl)—their belief, inner conviction, and love for Allah—is distinct from their outward actions. A major sin is a catastrophic failure in action, but it does not automatically annihilate the foundation of faith (īmān) in the heart.

Two Types of Wilāyah: Our scholars often delineate between:

  • Wilāyat al-Ḥaqīqah (True/Essential Guardianship): This is the inner, spiritual reality of being a friend of Allah. It is based on sincere belief, knowledge of Allah (maʿrifah), and righteous intention. This state, once truly attained, is considered by us Ibāḍīs to be a permanent reality that is not nullified by subsequent sin. It is a matter of the heart’s condition, which is known only to Allah.
  • Wilāyat al-Dīn (Religious/Legal Guardianship): This is the outward, legal expression of that friendship. It governs how the community interacts with the individual. This can be nullified by public, major sin because the community must judge based on what is apparent (ẓāhir). Loss of wilāyat al-dīn means the person is no longer considered part of the community of believers in a socio-legal sense; they may be ostracized or subject to legal penalties.

If they sincerely repent, they are put back into Wilāyat al-Dīn. If they have committed an offense that comes under qisas, hadd, or ta’zir, they are dealt with accordingly.

Our examples perfectly explain the consequence of this distinction: the inner wilāyah remains, but the outer consequences of sin are not waived.

To find out more on this please see our article here:

Ibadi positon Contrast with Other Schools

This position places classical Ibāḍīsm in a unique middle ground between other schools:

  • Vs. Khawārij: The Khawārij held that any major sin makes a person a disbeliever (kāfir), nullifying any form of wilāyah and making them eternally damned. The Ibāḍīs vehemently reject this, as shown by our text.
  • Vs. Murjiʾah: The Murjiʾah held that sin does not harm faith at all; a person’s faith remains complete regardless of their actions. We, the Ibāḍīs reject this, insisting that sins have real consequences and that outward wilāyah is lost.

A person’s essential spiritual identity as a friend of Allah (wilāyat al-ḥaqīqah), once truly established through sincere faith, is a resilient reality that is not erased by sin. However, this inner state does not provide immunity from divine law or its consequences in the world. The community must uphold justice (execute punishments, reject falsehood) while maintaining a principled optimism about the depth of Allah’s mercy and the potential for a sinner’s heart to still be oriented toward Him.

Understanding Qur’an 49:9

First, regarding the noble verse: ‘If two groups of believers fight each other…’ (Quran 49:9)
Note here that before identifying which party is the aggressor, Allah says “from the believers” and not “two believing groups”, commanding reconciliation because mistakes may occur. As stated: ‘It is not for a believer to kill another believer except by mistake.’ (Qur’an 4:92) 

Through reconciliation, the aggressor party becomes known and must repent to remain within the circle of faith. If they persist in their aggression, then fighting them becomes obligatory – this being one of Allah’s prescribed limits (hudud), like the punishments for theft, slander, adultery, brigandage, and alcohol consumption. Whoever violates these divine limits must face the prescribed punishment, even if they possess true spiritual guardianship (wilayat al-haqiqah).

This is why Ammar (ra) fought against the Mother of the Believers, Aisha (ra), in the Battle of the Camel while still affirming her status.

The example of Aisha-may Allah be pleased with her.

The amr of Allah belonged with Ali. Ayesha (ra) opposed him and later repented. We also know this because she (Ayesha) — may Allah be pleased with her is in real spiritual guardianship (wilayat al-haqiqah).

Narrated Abu Maryam `Abdullah bin Ziyad Al-Aasadi:

“When Talha, AzZubair and `Aisha moved to Basra, `Ali sent `Ammar bin Yasir and Hasan bin `Ali who came to us at Kufa and ascended the pulpit. Al-Hasan bin `Ali was at the top of the pulpit and `Ammar was below Al-Hasan. We all gathered before him. I heard `Ammar saying, “`Aisha has moved to Al-Busra. By Allah! She is the wife of your Prophet in this world and in the Hereafter. But Allah has put you to test whether you obey Him (Allah) or her (`Aisha).”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7100)

So even though Aisha (ra) is acknowledged by Ammar bin Yasir (ra) to be the ‘wife of the Prophet in this world and in the Hereafter‘, he was not about to leave the commands of Allah (swt).

Whoever violates these divine limits must face the prescribed punishment, even if they possess true spiritual guardianship (wilayat al-haqiqah).

Allah makes known the status of the wives of the Blessed Prophet (saw) when he states:

“The Prophet has a stronger affinity to the believers than they do themselves. And his wives are their mothers.” (Qur’an 33:6)

Yet, Allah (swt) also informs us:

“O wives of the Prophet! If any of you were to commit a blatant misconduct, the punishment would be doubled for her. And that is easy for Allah.” (Qur’an 33:30)

We affirm the true guardianship of Aisha (ra) while disassociating from her wrong action in fighting against the Imam of the Muslims.

Summary of the battle of the camel and the actions of Aisha -May Allah be pleased with her.

Quranic Mandate: Qur’an 49:9 provides a clear command: if two groups of believers fight, Muslims must seek reconciliation. If one group is clearly the aggressor (baghat), the community must fight that oppressive group until it returns to the “command of Allah” (amr Allah).

Historical Application: In the conflict between Imam ʿAlī and the group led by ʿĀ’ishah (ra), Talḥah, and Al-Zubayr, we posit that the amr Allah (the legitimate command and authority) was with ʿAlī. Therefore, the group that took up arms against him was, in that specific instance, the oppressing party (al-bāghiyah).

Theological Principle: This is where we link it to the previous concept. Even though ʿĀ’ishah (ra) holds the rank of wilāyat al-ḥaqīqah (“the wife of your Prophet in this world and in the Hereafter”), this spiritual status does not grant immunity from the consequences of worldly actions that violate divine law and order.

Consequence: Therefore, it became obligatory to oppose her military action and fight to bring that group back to obedience, exactly as ʿAmmār ibn Yāsir (ra) stated. The punishment for this political transgression was the worldly consequence of battle.

Status Preserved: Following the event, ʿĀ’ishah (ra) repented and was deeply remorseful, which is a key point. Her repentance and her esteemed status indicate that her wilāyat al-ḥaqīqah was not nullified by this error in political judgment and action.

Analysis and Further Context:

The ḥadīth we cited is crucial. ʿAmmār (ra) perfectly encapsulates the dilemma and its solution:

  1. Acknowledgment of Status: He begins by unequivocally affirming ʿĀ’ishah’s (ra) unparalleled status and virtue. This establishes the principle of wilāyat al-ḥaqīqah.
  2. Primacy of Obedience to Allah: He immediately follows by stating that this status is not the ultimate factor in deciding political allegiance. The test from Allah is whether Muslims will obey Allah by obeying the legitimate authority He has placed, or obey a person, no matter how esteemed, in opposition to that authority.

The example of Fatima-May Allah be pleased with her.

Narrated `Aisha: Usama approached the Prophet (saw) on behalf of a woman (who had committed theft). The Prophet (saw) said, “The people before you were destroyed because they used to inflict legal punishments on the poor and forgive the rich. By Him in Whose Hand my soul is! If Fatima (the daughter of the Prophet (saw) did that (i.e. stole), I would cut off her hand.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:6787)

Now, does one need to hate Fatima (ra) in order to administer the justice of Allah? How do people reason? Does anyone think that Adam (as) did not love both his sons? Even though one is a murderer?

The core question is about reconciling love/respect for individuals with the obligation to uphold Allah’s laws.

Does one need to hate Fatima (ra) to administer the justice of Allah?

Absolutely not. In fact, the opposite is true. One must love and respect her so much that they will uphold the command of Allah and the Sunnah of His Prophet (saw) even upon her.

The hadith we cited is one of the most powerful illustrations of the principle of blind justice in Islam. The Blessed Prophet’s (saw) statement is the ultimate expression of his commitment to divine justice.

  • Love for Allah and His Law Supersedes Personal Love: The Prophet’s (saw) love for his daughter was immense. But his love for Allah and His commandments was greater. By declaring he would punish her, he was teaching that no personal relationship, no matter how cherished, can stand between a Muslim and the fulfillment of Allah’s law.
  • Administering Justice is an Act of Worship: The judge who would carry out the ruling is not doing it out of personal hatred for the criminal. He is doing it as an act of obedience to Allah, fulfilling a trust (amanah) placed upon him. Carrying out a hadd punishment on a beloved individual would be one of the most difficult tests of faith, precisely because it requires separating personal feelings from divine obligation.
  • True Love is to Want What is Right for Someone: From a spiritual perspective, allowing a beloved person to escape punishment for a crime corrupts their soul and increases their burden of sin in the Hereafter. Enforcing the law, as difficult as it is, serves as a purification for the offender and a deterrent for society. In this sense, administering justice is a form of tough love that seeks the ultimate good of the individual and the community.

Therefore, the reasoning is: We love and honor Fatima (ra) because, first and foremost, she is a righteous believer and second, because she is the daughter of the Prophet (saw). And because we love and honor him, we would uphold his command and his Sunnah without exception, even if it were to apply to her.

People who struggle with this concept often conflate two separate domains:

  1. The Legal Domain (Justice – Haqq Allah/ Haqq al-‘Ibad): This is the realm of objective, applied law. Here, relationships, status, and personal feelings are irrelevant. The law must be applied equally to the prince and the pauper.
  2. The Emotional/Spiritual Domain (Love/Hate): This is the realm of personal feeling and spiritual assessment (wilayah).

The error is to believe that these two domains must be connected—that administering a punishment requires personal hatred, or that loving someone requires being lenient with them regarding Allah’s laws.

The Islamic reasoning, as demonstrated by the prophets, is that these domains are separate and must be kept separate. A judge can deeply love his own son while convicting him of a crime. A parent can love a child while disciplining them. The action is condemned, but the person is still loved.

The example of Ibrahim (as) and his son (as). A Wali of Allah proceeds to kill another Wali of Allah.

If we are to ask is Ibrahim (as) a wali of Allah? The answer would be yes.

If we are to ask the son of Ibrahim (as) a wali of Allah? The answer would be yes.

Yet this did not stop Ibrahim (as) to kill another wali of Allah (his son) because it was an ‘amr (command) of Allah.

“Then when the boy reached the age to work with him, Abraham said, “O my dear son! I have seen in a dream that I sacrifice you. So tell me what you think.” He replied, “O my dear father! Do as you are commanded. Allah willing, you will find me steadfast.” (Qur’an 37:102)

If someone were to say that Ibrahim (as) knew that his son would be spared, then this would hardly be a test of faith or obedience. The point here is that one wali of Allah was asked to kill another wali of Allah in order to show his obedience.

This is when the son of Ibrahim (as) is not known to us to have done any violations that would require the forfeiture of his life.

How much more for those who commit violations that require such a forfeiture?

And can it be said that Ibrahim (as) in carrying out such an act had hatred for his son? 

We seek protection in Allah from that! Of course not! His obedience to Allah (swt) was foremost. 

We judge by the apparent-the dhahir.

‘Abdullah bin ‘Utbah bin Mas’ud reported:

I heard ‘Umar bin Al- Khattab (ra) reported saying: “In the lifetime of Messenger of Allah (saw) some people were called to account through Revelation. Now Revelation has discontinued and we shall judge you by your apparent acts. Whoever displays to us good, we shall grant him peace and security, and treat him as a near one. We have nothing to do with his insight. Allah will call him to account for that. But whosoever shows evil to us, we shall not grant him security nor shall we believe him, even if he professed that his intention is good.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/riyadussalihin:395)

Synthesis with the Concept of Wilayat al-Haqiqah

This brings us full circle to the initial principle of wilayat al-haqiqah:

A person’s spiritual status (wilayat al-haqiqah) does not invalidate their worldly responsibilities or protect them from the consequences of their actions. Likewise, our love and respect for an individual (their spiritual status) does not invalidate the need for justice.

  • Fatima (ra) is revered and loved, but had she stolen, the law would apply.
  • The Sons of Ya’qub (as) were among the chosen family of prophets, but their crime against Yusuf (as) had consequences and they were rebuked in the Qur’an.
  • Cain was the son of a prophet, but he was punished for murder.

In conclusion: Islamic justice is not built on the emotion of hatred but on the principle of objective, divine command. True faith is demonstrated when one can uphold the law of Allah without being swayed by personal love or personal hatred. The greatest examples of this are the Prophets themselves, who administered justice and taught truth, all while maintaining love and compassion in their hearts for their people, even for those who wronged them.

This is why Imam Abu Sa’id al-Kudmi (May Allah have mercy on him) said: ‘We accept no falsehood from the blessed, nor reject any truth from the wretched.’

If you want to learn more about this all too important concept in Islam we recommend the following article:

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Are Ibadis intolerant of other schools? A picture is worth a thousand words.

“And hold firmly together to the rope of Allah and do not be divided. Remember Allah’s favour upon you when you were enemies, then He united your hearts, so you—by His grace—became brothers. And you were at the brink of a fiery pit and He saved you from it. This is how Allah makes His revelations clear to you, so that you may be ˹rightly˺ guided.” (Qur’an 3:103)

﷽ 

As they say a picture is worth a thousand words.

Like any school of Islam of course we believe that our school is upon haqq. Yet our scholars study and take from the works of the great scholars across all schools. That is because we firmly believe on this verse:

“He gives wisdom to whom He chooses, and whoever is given wisdom is blessed abundantly. But only insightful people bear this in mind.” (Qur’an 2:269)

We want more cooperation and harmony among the Muslim Ummah. We want Muslims to work together to solve the challenges confronting this Ummah.

ونحن لا نطالب العباد

فوق شهادتيهم اعتقاداً

فمن اتى بالجملتين قلنا

إخواننا وبالحقوق قمنا

إلا إذا ما نقضوا المقالا

أو أحدثوا في دينهم ضلالا

قمنا نبين الصواب لهم

ونحسبن ذاك من حقهم

And we do not obligate over servants[of Allah] over their shahada any belief. Whoever came with the two testimonies we say our brothers and we treat them with their rights, unless they break the religion; or they created in their religion an error. Than we will show the truth to them, and we will consider this their right.

Source: (From the poem كشف الحقيقة لمن جهل الطريقة for Imam Noor Al-Deen Al-Salemi) -May Allah have abundant mercy on him.

A special prayer meet was organised at Markazu Saquafathi Sunniyya for Sultan Qaboos Bin Said. Grand Mufti of India مفتي جمهورية الهند led the prayer and he requested all believers in India to pray for Sultan Qaboos Bin Said at Mosques and Madrasas.

 

Under the leadership of Umar bin Abdul-Aziz the Ibadi school sent a group of six great scholars, J’afer bin A’Simak, Abu AlHur Ali bin AlHusain Al’Anbri, AlHattat bin Kateb, AlHabab bin Kulaib, Abu Suyan Qanber AlBasri, and Salim bin Thakwan among other unnamed scholars,(May Allah have his mercy upon them all)

Non-Ibadi historians mentioned these delegates to Umar bin Abdul-Aziz though they said with their usual insinuation: “The Khawarij sent him a delegation”. However, they did not mention what happened between them and the Caliph Umar and his acceptance of all their suggestions about spreading justice and purging the country of the Umayyad tradition of cursing Ali from the pulpit. The Ibadi delegation said to Umar, “Muslims are cursing from pulpits in mosques, so this evil tradition must be changed”. Thus, Umar replaced it with the words of Allah: 

“Indeed, Allah orders justice and good conduct and giving to relatives and forbids immorality and bad conduct and oppression. He admonishes you that you remember”, (Qur’an 16: 90)

May Allah (swt) guide the Ummah.

May Allah (swt) forgive the Ummah.

You may also be interested in reading the following:

https://primaquran.com/2024/04/29/do-only-ibadis-go-to-heaven/

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

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:

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

Engaging with the Pseudo-Islamic:

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

﷽ 

This section will be on engaging the Pseudo-Islamic.

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

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

The first being the Hafs Qur’an Only Religion.

THE HAFS QUR’AN ONLY RELIGION

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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].

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Qur’an Only and Uzair

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

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

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

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

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.

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

 Use and abuse of the word hikma by Quranist.

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

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

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

You can read about that here:

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

Is the Qur’an clear?

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

Hafs Qur’an Only religion is intellectually bankrupt.

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

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

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

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

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

The Detailed Qur’an and the Sabeans

SECTION ON AHMADIYYA B OR THE QADIANI MOVEMENT.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

More articles coming insh’Allah…

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Genesis chapter 3 separates Islam and Christianity.

“Then learned Adam from his Lord words of inspiration, and his Lord turned towards him; for He is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful” (Qur’an 2:35-37)

“Say, “Is it other than Allah I should desire as a lord while He is the Lord of all things? And every soul earns not [blame] except against itself, and no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another. Then to your Lord is your return, and He will inform you concerning that over which you used to differ.” (Qur’an 6:164)

 ﷽ 

“Then learned Adam from his Lord words of inspiration, and his Lord turned towards him; for He is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful” (Qur’an 2:35-37)

The above touching heartfelt verse teaches us original forgiveness.. We know that he was forgiven because it was Allah that taught Adam the very words by which to seek reconciliation with The Divine!

Allah! Ar Rahman Ar Raheem! Allah!!!! Most Merciful!!!! The Ever Compassionate!!!!

After he learned to turn towards Allah (swt), he was forgiven. That is it. Full stop!

There is no sin through which death entered the world, causing amoebas and single-celled organisms and everything else to die because of this person’s actions!

Now, dear respected reader, what you read is two different accounts of what happened with Adam and Eve.

You are not reading a Muslim response to Genesis chapter 3. We want to make that very clear.

What you are reading is what God has revealed in the Qur’an.

The choice you need to make is to discern which of these two accounts is true. The account as given by God in the Qur’an or the account as given in Genesis chapter 3.

It is important for you as a Christian, dear reader, to understand that the concepts of Original Sin, Inherited Sin, Total Depravity, Limbo, God Incarnate, the idea of God sending a ‘Son’, the Crucifixion, the Resurrection, Vicarious Atonement, Justification by Faith, Paul’s letters and the entirety of the New Testament all have their basis in Genesis chapter 3.

There is no need for Muslims to engage in any of these other beliefs, because if what God revealed in the Qur’an about Adam and Eve is correct, then all of these Christian beliefs that have their basis in Genesis chapter 3 are in and of themselves irrelevant.

Genesis chapter three is all that stands between Islam and Christianity.

One chapter in the entire Bible is all that separates Islam and Christianity.

If it was not for that chapter in the Bible there would be no Christianity.

That particular chapter gives us the following:

Original Sin

Inherited Sin

Total Depravity

Limbo

The concept of God Incarnate

The need for God to send His Son

The Crucifixion

The Resurrection

Vicarious Atonement

Justification By Faith

Paul’s Letters

The New Testament as a whole.

Adam and the events that unfolded in the Garden of Eden is such a central theme in Christology and if we were to juxtapose the events as related by Genesis chapter 3 with what is revealed in the Qur’an, we will be able to get a deeper appreciation of what is central that divides the two faith traditions.

We will also find out that which brings much needed clarity.

Let us begin with the question:

Who truly committed The First Sin? How does sin enter into the universe?

What does sin mean?

Christians define sin as transgression, lawlessness, and missing the mark.

The first issue to clear up is that Christians are absolutely forced to agree with Muslims on this.

The first sin, missing the mark or transgression against Allah, was done by a non-human entity!

In Christian theology, it is an X-Angel named Lucifer.

In Islamic theology, it is a Jinn named Iblis.

Either way, it was not Adam or Eve (May Allah’s peace be upon them both) that erred first.

“So behold, We said to the angels: “Bow down to Adam: “And they bowed down: not so Iblis: he refused and was arrogant: he was of those who reject Faith. We said: “O Adam! Dwell you and your wife in the Garden, and eat of the bountiful things in that respect as you will, but approach not this tree, or you will run into harm and transgression.”(Qur’an 2:30-37)

Sin enters into the universe via beings created with sovereign choice.

The sovereign choice to obey or to submit to the will of God.

So the position of Islamic theology is clear. Howeve, have you ever read any text anywhere in the Bible that makes the claim that Satan was an X-Angel named Lucifer and that he rebelled against Allah?

There is no such text anywhere in the Bible at all! It is a fable that came into Christian circles from apocryphal sources. The best attempt at trying to glean such a view comes from the following:

“How have you fallen from heaven, the morning star? You have been cut down to earth, You who cast lots on nations.” (Isaiah Chapter 14:12)

Source: (https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/15945)

What did Protestant reformer John Calvin have to say about this text?

“How art thou fallen from heaven! Isaiah proceeds with the discourse which he had formerly begun as personating the dead, and concludes that the tyrant differs in no respect from other men, though his object was to lead men to believe that he was some god. He employs an elegant metaphor, by comparing him to Lucifer, and calls him the Son of the Dawn; 220 and that on account of his splendor and brightness with which he shone above others. The exposition of this passage, which some have given, as if it referred to Satan, has arisen from ignorance; for the context plainly shows that these statements must be understood in reference to the king of the Babylonians. But when passages of Scripture are taken up at random, and no attention is paid to the context, we need not wonder that mistakes of this kind frequently arise. Yet it was an instance of very gross ignorance, to imagine that Lucifer was the king of devils, and that the Prophet gave him this name. But as these inventions have no probability whatever, let us pass by them as useless fables.”

Source: (https://ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom13/calcom13.xxi.i.html)

As Calvin rightly states, it is a metaphor. Otherwise, we have the very awkward situation of calling Jesus ‘Lucifer’ as Lucifer simply means “Morning Star” or a reference to Venus — a star that outshines the others.

Jesus is called “Lucifer” or Morning Star in the following verse in the Bible.

“I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star.” (Revelations 22:16)

There are two other texts that Christians often appeal to as well:

“And he said to them, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.” (Luke 10:18)

This text says nothing about Satan being an X-Angel or that his name was Lucifer etc.

“So war broke out in heaven and Michael and his angels fought against the Dragon and his angels, and the Dragon and his angels prevailed not.” (Revelation 12:7)

This is possibly the closest text as it does mention angels waring with each other in heaven. Yet this text does not mention angels becoming X-Angels, but rather angels at war with each other.

At the very least, the Christian book of Revelation and the Qur’an both point to the fact that a non-human(s) was(were) the first to transgress or sin against Allah; however, there are major points of difference in the two theologies.

In Christian theology, an X-Angel rebelled against Allah. However, in Islamic theology it was a Jinn. In Islamic theology, angels do not go against the divine plan. There is a race of beings known as the Jinn that can go against the divine plan.

So the first question here would be: Why is there not a doctrine of salvation for fallen angels? In Islam, we know that the Qur’an was sent to save humanity and the Jinn.

“So when we (Jinn) heard the guidance, we believed in it. And whoever believes in his Lord will not fear deprivation or burden.” (Qur’an 72:13)

“And We have sent you not but as a mercy for the ‘Alamin.” (Qur’an 21:107)

‘Alamin (mankind, jinn, and all that exists beyond)

“You say you have faith, for you believe that there is one God. Good for you! Even the demons believe this, and they tremble in terror.” (James 2:9)

So, in Islam, any being that sins against Allah (swt) can repent and reconcile with Allah (swt).

“By which Allah guides those who pursue His pleasure to the ways of peace and brings them out of darknesses into the light, by His permission, and guides them to a straight path.” (Qur’an 5:16)

The second question would be: Who wants to go to a heaven where wars break out? I mean people constantly deride the Qur’an for its metaphorical usages of women and wine in paradise; yet the Christian heaven is one of intrigue, assassination attempts, and wars!!!

In Islamic theology, the fall of Iblis (not the fall of humanity) fits logically into the greater picture of Allah’s wisdom.

However, we want to know in Christian theology what is to prevent the next disgruntled angel from trying to create wars and strife in heaven?

Finally, the Qur’an gives us a teaching of original forgiveness!! Allahu Kareem (Allah is Most Generous)

Though Adam did transgress, he was not the first transgressor.

The story of Adam, Eve and the Garden as compared/contrasted by Genesis chapter 3 and the Qur’an.

The whole Genesis account gives us a picture of a capricious divine being that lacks attributes of mercy, wisdom, justice or foreknowledge.

Again, dear truth seeker, contrast again the accounts in Genesis and the Qur’an.

“The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.” (Genesis 6:5-7)

Now, this does not sound like a divine plan at all. This sounds like a plan going terribly wrong.

How can a person find hope in the Christian tradition when Allah himself is in despair?

To attribute despair and regret to Allah is an affront to divine sovereignty and to the understanding that Allah is All-Knowing, All-Aware.

Contrast dear reader the absolute lack of sovereignty, will, and divine foreknowledge as given in the above passage with what Allah has revealed to us in the Qur’an.

“Behold, your Lord said to the angels: “I will create a vicegerent on earth.” They said: “Will you place therein one who will make mischief therein and shed blood?- while we do celebrate Thy praises and glorify your sanctity?” He said: “I know what you know not.” (Qur’an 2:30)

“So set your purpose for the way of life aligned with humanity’s upright nature – the nature (framed) by Allah, in which He has created humanity. There is no altering of the work wrought by Allah. That is the correct way of life, but most men do not know.” (Qur’an 30:30)

The angels look at the crude form of humanity and immediately see the capacity for violence. Also, notice that the angels are basically saying that they praise and worship Allah (swt) as is so what possible purpose does humanity serve?

The response of Allah (swt) is “I know what you know not.” That was a sufficient response to the angels. In other words, there is a plan for humanity.

You should know, dear reader, that in the order of Creation in Islam there are four types of creation with regard to will (choice).

Two in the unseen world.

  1. Angels which oscillate at frequencies of pure light. They do not go against their nature. Thus, there is no concept of fallen angels in Islam.
  2. Jinn are beings which are made from a fire that does not emit smoke. These beings can go against their nature and go against the divine plan.

Two in the natural seen world.

  1. Animals, plants and other living creations that do not go against their nature.
  2. Humanity can go against nature and go against the divine plan.

The first point of agreement between Christianity and Islam concerning Adam and Eve is that they were both blameless and sinless. They also had to have in some sense had the faculties of reasoning and understanding in order to understand commands and prohibitions.

The whole of Christianity is based upon Genesis chapter 3.

That one chapter presents to humanity a bizarre picture of The Divine Being and human destiny. It is the very foundation upon which Christian theology is built.

Whereas the Islamic Theological position is simply surrendering to the will of Allah. Adam and Eve slipped, they were reprimanded and ultimately forgiven.

Whereas in Christology, Adam and Eve were placed in the company of their mortal enemy with absolutely no heads up and no warning!

Can you imagine what kind of loving father puts their children in a garden with a shape-shifting entity intent on hurting the children and when the shape-shifting entity ends up duping the children, not only are the children punished but the whole of humanity is culpable for their slip?

Contrast this with what Allah revealed in the Qur’an.

“Did I not forbid you from the tree and tell you that Satan is to you a clear enemy?” (Qur’an 7:22-23)


So We cautioned, “O Adam! This is surely an enemy to you and to your wife. So do not let him drive you both out of Paradise, for you would then suffer hardship.” (Qur’an 20:177)

“We cautioned, “O Adam! Live with your wife in Paradise and eat as freely as you please, but do not approach this tree, or else you will be wrongdoers.” (Qur’an 2:35)

Adam and Eve were good creatures with a free will. Yet they chose to sin. Why?

  1. Adam and Eve had sovereign free will.
  2. Adam and Eve were not alone. They had an agent provocateur.

We can see that Allah clearly gave warning to Adam and Eve about their enemy and disobeying Allah. In fact, due to this warning about an adversary in Islam, Adam and Eve are more culpable than they are in the Christian tradition! 

Whereas in Genesis 3 there is no indication of any agent provocateur at all! It’s as if Adam and Eve were walking into an ambush!

“God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.” (Genesis 1:31)

“Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made.”(Genesis 3:1)

All that God creates is very good. God created snakes (serpentes) that were very good and very crafty at the same time?

Not only this, but to show you this vengeful portrayal of the Divine has whole entire species (serpentes) or snakes condemned simply because a shape-shifting entity imitated one of their kind!

“So the Lord God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this, “Cursed are you above all livestock and all wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.” (Genesis 3:14)

So even more bizarre is the fact that Satan doesn’t get punished at all in Genesis chapter 3. It is the entire species of snakes (serpentes) that get punished instead!

“Allah said, “Descend, both of you, from here together ˹with Satan˺ as enemies to each other. Then, when guidance comes to you from Me, whoever follows My guidance will neither go astray ˹in this life˺ nor suffer ˹in the next˺(Qur’an 20:123)

What was the snake’s method of locomotion before it was to “crawl on it’s belly?”

Why wouldn’t Allah know that Satan was either a shapeshifter who appeared as a snake (serpentes) or that Satan made it appear that a snake (serpentes) was speaking to them?

It doesn’t justify a punishment upon a whole suborder of animals, namely snakes (serpentes).

So none of this is good! None of this is an accurate portrayal of A Wise and Judicious Creator working in this world. None of this is an accurate portrayal of the attributes of mercy, wisdom, justice, foreknowledge, or will at all!

The whole Genesis account gives us a picture of a capricious divine being that lacks attributes of mercy, wisdom, justice or foreknowledge.

Again, dear truth seeker, contrast again the accounts in Genesis and the Qur’an.

“The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.” (Genesis 6:5-7)

Now, this does not sound like a divine plan at all. This sounds like a plan going terribly wrong.

How can a person find hope in the Christian tradition when Allah himself is in despair?

In the Christian tradition, the agent provocateur is not immediately punished. Rather, wrathful punishment is given to an entire suborder of animals, namely snakes (serpentes). 

To a Muslim reading and reflecting on this, it all seems very bizarre and even a case of misplaced judgement. 

As Allah says in the Qur’an:

“My mercy has encompassed everything.” (Qur’an 7: 156).

Allah (swt) never states that his wrath encompasses everything but his mercy does.

You cannot imagine anything not benefiting from His mercy; otherwise, nothing could have come to existence, and even if so, nothing could have survived.

Even the fact that Satan is able to continue his life is due to Allah’s mercy. When Satan insisted on his wrong behaviour and was cursed, he requested Allah to be given time until the day of Resurrection:

“My Lord. Respite me until the day they will be resurrected.” (Qur’an 15:36)

Allah replied:

“You are indeed among the reprieved until the day of the known time.” (Qur’an 15:37-38)

The very role of Satan/Iblis as laid out in the Qur’an.

He said: “Since you have let me wander off, I’ll waylay them along Your Straight Road; then I´ll come at them from in front of them and from behind them, on their right and on their left. You will not find that most of them are grateful.” (Qur’an 7:16-17)

The whole point of Iblis, the arch enemy of mankind is to show that most of us (humanity) will be kaffir (ungrateful) to Allah (swt).

“And incite whoever you can of them with your voice, mobilize against them all your cavalry and infantry, manipulate them in their wealth and children, and make them promises.” But Satan promises them nothing but delusion.” “You will truly have no authority over My servants.” And sufficient is your Lord as a Guardian.” (Qur’an 17:64-65)

“Allah said, “This is the Way, binding on Me: you will certainly have no authority over My servants, except the deviant who follow you,” (Qur’an 15:41-42)

What is it that Allah makes obligatory on himself? To give certain of his creations choice.

“Allah responded, “Be gone! Whoever of them follows you, Hell will surely be the reward for all of you—an ample reward.” (Qur’an 17:63)

Genesis chapter 3. The Origin of Wrath or the Origin of Forgiveness? Is the woman to blame or are Adam and Eve both culpable?

Apparently, according to the Book of Genesis, after Adam and Eve ate from the tree of good and evil and had a conversation with Allah, they were quite cavalier about the whole ordeal.

Whereas Allah tells us in the Qur’an that the progenitors of the human race were more sensible, whereas they said:

They said, “Our Lord, we have wronged ourselves, and if You do not forgive us and have mercy on us, we will surely be among the losers.” (Qur’an 7:23)

“Then Adam learned from his Lord words of inspiration, and his Lord turned towards him; for He is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful” (Qur’an 2:35-37)

This is the teaching of original forgiveness, and we know that he was forgiven because it was Allah that taught Adam the words by which to seek reconciliation with the divine.

Also, of note that in Islamic theology both Adam and his wife were deceived and both asked for forgiveness, and they were both forgiven. Whereas in Christian theology the woman is the one who was deceived.

“And he succeeded in deceiving them. As soon as the two had tasted [the fruit] of the tree, their nakedness became obvious to them, and they started covering themselves with leaves from the Garden. Their Lord called to them, “Did I not forbid that tree to you and tell you, ‘Satan is your clear enemy?” (Qur’an 7:22)

“And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.” (1 Timothy 2:14)

When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves. (Genesis 3:6-7)

Now pay attention to the above text. The woman was apparently duped by the Snake (Serpentes). However, when she took the fruit and ate it didn’t she realize immediately that she was naked so that she could warn her husband?

Apparently not. The text allows for interpretative story telling. Such that Eve got the fruit (she hadn’t eaten it yet) and then brought some to Adam. They began to eat together and had the joint discovery together. Yet, this is where the text is extremely hurtful to women in a way that the Qur’an never is.

The question now arises.

Did Eve just give Adam the fruit without telling him what it was? Or did Eve tell Adam where that fruit was from, and he ate it anyway?

The text simply does not say.

Imagine a man who steals a fruit from a garden, and he gives it to another man to eat that fruit. In Christian theology, both the man who stole the fruit and the one who ate it are guilty. However, in Islamic theology, as long as the man who eats the stolen fruit is unaware that the fruit is stolen, he is not guilty of eating stolen fruit.

So, in Christian theology, Adam is punished for a sin he very well could have been unaware of! Islamic theology does not allow this type of ambiguity. Especially, in regard to the severity of the consequences of such an action in Christian theology.

The nature of death and dying in Christianity and Islam. Are human beings culpable for the sin and errors of others?

And no burdened soul can bear another’s burden. And if one weighed down by a burden calls another to carry his load, naught of it will be carried, even though he be near of kin. You warn only those who fear their Lord in secret and keep up prayer. And whoever purifies himself purifies himself only for his own good. And to Allah is the eventual coming.” (Qur’an 35:18)

Contrast this with:

“For since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead came also through a human being: For just as in Adam all die, so too in Christ shall all be brought to life.” (1 Corinthians 15:21-22).

“Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people because all sinned. To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.” (Romans 5:12-14).

Death and the nature of death.

“He is the One Who created you from clay, then appointed a term ˹for your death˺ and another known only to Him ˹for your resurrection˺—yet you continue to doubt!”
(Qur’an 6:2)

“We settle whatever We will in the womb for an appointed term, then bring you forth as infants, so that you may reach your prime. Some of you die earlier, while others are left to reach the most feeble stage of life so that they may know nothing after having known much.” (Qur’an 22:5)

“He brings you out as an infant, then causes you to grow into full maturity, and then causes you to grow further so that you may reach old age, while some of you He recalls earlier. All this is in order that you may reach an appointed term and that you may understand.” (Qur’an 40:67)

“His is the dominion of the heavens and the earth. He gives life and causes death, and He is over all things competent.”(Qur’an 57:2)

Allah is the giver of death, the taker of life. One of the names of Allah is the Taker of Life.

Because Allah is also the giver of life.

“Say, “Call upon Allah or call upon the Most Merciful. Whichever name you call -To Him belongs the best names.”(Qur’an 17:110)

“For the wages of sin is death: but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Romans 6:23)

Prima Qur’an Comment: “The wages of sin is death.” So because of what Adam and Eve did not only does this sin get transferred to every newborn child, but amoebas, single-celled organisms, insects, fish, and every type of living thing dies because of this.

This peculiar doctrine leads one to reflect on some of the following points:

  • What kind of world would there be if nothing died?
  • Surely if Allah created predatory animals there would be animals that would be the prey?
  • If Allah ordered Adam and Eve to eat all the fruit, surely the fruit would ‘die’ once it was removed from said tree or plant?
  • What would be the population of the planet if nothing died?

Al hamdulilah! We as Muslims do not have such a bizarre and unnatural doctrine. Death is a natural part of life. In fact, we as Muslims believe that Allah (swt) is Al Hayyu (The Ever Living).

What would be the point of calling Allah ‘The-Ever-Living’ if all living things were to be ‘Ever-living’ as well?

The very fact that Allah, God, is ‘The Ever Living’ in and of itself shows you that the nature of everything else is opposite to that. This includes Adam.

Death is a contrast to life so that we understand the sacredness of life, the sanctity of life, and to appreciate the limited time we have been given to live on such a beautiful planet that offers many delights.

There is an entire Goth subculture in the West. They see death as something beautiful.

There is beauty in things not lasting and a peace in knowing that everything is in transition. It causes one to embrace the moment and to cherish the now. Perhaps more than the busy denizens of the city, the goth appreciates the currency of time, and they understand that, perhaps more than most, one must spend it wisely. 

One of the contributors to Primaquran, ‘Abd al-Mumit’ chose this name because of this very fact.

There is no eternal permanence except Allah. 

If Christians claim that Adam’s death was a ‘spiritual death‘, you have to reflect on the following:

  • Why is there absolute silence on Adam’s reconciliation to Allah in the Book of Genesis?
  • In light of Adam’s knowledge of the tree of ‘good and evil‘, why does the Bible portray Adam and Eve as so cavalier regarding their spiritual estrangement from Allah?

Adam is such a central figure, especially in Christology, and we hear nothing more than that he had some children and then died.

The deity of divine forgiveness and restoration for all or the deity of divine wrath, making pain and suffering the path of redemption for the few.

The God that desires that we are sincere, that we repent with a contrite heart and gives opportunity after opportunity for man to reform.

Do see our article here:

“It is not their flesh, nor their blood, reaches Allah, but it is your piety that reaches him. Thus has He made them subservient to you, that you may magnify Allah for guiding you. And give good news to those who do good.” (Qur’an 22:37)

This statement from the Qur’an is very important.  Accordingly, the first idea of blood sacrifice goes back to the story of Cain and Abel.

The Biblical Version:

“Adam made love to his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said, “With the help of the Lord I have brought forth a man.” Later she gave birth to his brother Abel. Now Abel kept flocks, and Cain worked the soil. In the course of time, Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the Lord. And Abel also brought an offering—fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The Lord looked with favour on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering, he did not look with favour. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast. Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.” (Genesis 4:1-7)

The Version in the Qur’an:

“Recite to them the truth of the story of the two sons of Adam. Behold! They each presented a sacrifice (to Allah): It was accepted from one, but not from the other.  He said: I will most certainly slay you.”Surely,” said the former, “Allah does accept of the sacrifice of those who are righteous.” (Qur’an 5:27)

Prima Qur’an comments:

Notice that in both accounts we are not told of the treachery that one of the brothers did. In fact, up until the point of murder, whatever he did that estranged him from his Lord was kept as a personal matter between him and God.

The Christians get the idea [with absolutely no proof] that Allah favoured Abel’s sacrifice because he brought Allah some fat — a sacrifice from one of his flock. Whereas, according to the Christians, Allah didn’t like the vegetables that Abel brought.

Now think about this for a moment. Doesn’t this make God sound capricious? Of course, it does!  

However, you can read in both accounts in the Qur’an and in the Bible that the reason that one sacrifice was accepted was due to the fact that one was righteous. It was the state of his heart and not what was presented!

So who will it be?

Contrasting a divine being that delights in the blood atonement and suffering from an animal, the outward material things of this world, with that of a divine being that looks at the contents of the human heart.

“The Day when neither wealth nor children shall profit, only the one will be saved who comes before God with a sound heart.” (Qur’an 26:88-89).

“And when they hear what has been revealed to the Messenger, you see their eyes overflowing with tears because of what they have recognized of the truth. They say, “Our Lord, we have believed, so register us among the witnesses.” (Qur’an 5:83)

May Allah Guide them to the truth so that they do not burn in hellfire.

10 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

The Qur’an is created: Collection of Articles.

“Had We sent down this Quran upon a mountain, you would have certainly seen it humbled and torn apart in awe of Allah. We set forth such comparisons for people, perhaps they may reflect.” (Qur’an 59:21)

﷽ 

The first thing you should understand dear reader is that this issue on rather or not the Qur’an is created or uncreated was not discussed by the Blessed Prophet (saw) himself.

This issue was also not addressed by the noble companions of the Blessed Prophet (saw).

This issue came about later. The Umayyads did not restrain the tongue of John of Damascus and it is via his machinations that this debate and intrigue came to the Muslims.

Each side took a position and gave their proofs and justifications.

As regarding making takfir of other Muslims on this issue.

As our teacher, Shaykh Juma Muhammed al-Mazrui, (Hafidhullah) taught us we do not make takfir of other Muslims on this issue.

His Eminence Shaykh Dr Kahlan B. Nabhan al Kharusi, The Assistant Mufti of Oman, (Hafidhullah) has made our position clear:

What is not in dispute between us and the Sunni Muslims.

The things we both affirm about the Qur’an.

  • 1) That Allah (swt) has never been unable to produce speech from all eternity.
  • 2) That the Qur’an does not originate from any other than Allah (swt).
  • 3) It is his Word, His Revelation and that which He sent down.
  • 4) It was revealed in letters and words.
  • 5) It was revealed to the heart of the Blessed Messenger (saw).
  • 6) It is inimitable in its combinations and meanings. No human being can produce the like thereof.
  • 7) It has been narrated from the Blessed Messenger (saw) through firm tawatur

The Truth about the Qur’an: Created or Uncreated? (This article shows some of the proofs and evidences that each side uses to justify their position.)

The theological problems one side has.

This discussion relates to some possible theological conundrums and challenges they can face when holdling the view that the Qur’an is eternal and uncreated.

The position of Sunni/Atheist/Materialist. Allah is worthy of worship based upon auditory perception i.e the ability to be heard.

The Created Qur’an: Yasir Qadhi, Salafis and Atheist.

The position of the Sunni/Neo Platonist. The Monad & the Logos

An uncreated ‘Kun’ by which everything else is created. The ‘kun’ acts as the intermediary between Allah, the transcendant and the material world.

However, the Sunni believe that this uncreated ‘kun’ is not identical to the essence of Allah nor other than Allah’s essence. In our view this is a step away from monotheism and a bridge towards Christology and logos theology.

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (John 1:1)

“Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.” (John 1:3)

Thus for the Ibadi school. The Qur’an is created because Jesus is Not God.

Discussion on (ja’ala) making of the Qur’an in Arabic.

A summary of views on the issue from: Ibadi, Muutazila, Ahl Sunnah & Jahmia.

Every word in the Qur’an is proof that is created by Allah

Saudi translations cannot hide the fact that the Qur’an is created.

Speech of Allah? Is the Qur’an Created? Ash’ari and Salafi perspectives.

Let’s attack Hamza Yusuf….in Ramadan? (The Qur’an is Created)

Sunni Muslims try to convince a Hasidic Jew that the Qur’an is eternal and uncreated. You judge how that went.

Allah’s Word Created or Uncreated? -Mohamed Hijab.

Mohamed Hijab’s excellent argument against the Qur’an being uncreated.

Salafis/Atharis/Wahabbis fled from the Ibadi

The ones in the ummah who make the biggest noise about this issue had chances to have two of their top people debate the issue with us and they fled!

Shaykh Abd al-Aziz ibn Baz refused to debate with Shaykh Ahmed bin Hamad al-Khalili (h)

You can see this student of Bin Baz asking Bin Baz that he had the chance to refute Al Khalili(h) and show that he was upon batil (falsehood) so why did he not take it? Bin Baz replied but what if Khalili (h) has strong evidence then what?

The way the following video is framed it paints a picture as if Bin Baz was the wise one in the situation. As if he was saying: “If I debate him he might have a stronger argument and this will cause the misguidance of many people.”

See for yourself: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/GQa47p88nP0

Saudi Dr. Saad Al-Humid Professor of Hadith Science in Medina flees from debate with Shaykh Saeed Al Qanoubi on the Creation of the Qur’an.

Noble Shaykh Khalid Al Abdali (h)has an excellent 10-part series in Arabic on the Qur’an being created.

Conclusion:

As a Muslim, regardless of whether it is created or not, your duty is to adhere to every single verse in it and believe in it all. We are to continue to ponder upon the Qur’an. To be transformed by it and healed by it.

The Ummah has bigger challenges. Many Muslims today are being led astray. There are many expressions of Islam today, pseudo-groups who follow as Caliphs and Imams, people who do not even know how to recite the Qur’an. It is not even proven that these people know how to recite the Qur’an properly. Yet, people are being duped into following them.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

EF Dawah Discussion with Josh (Jewish) | Is the Quran Being Uncreated Against Tawheed?

“Indeed, We have made it an Arabic Qur’an that you might understand.” (Qur’an 43:3)

﷽ 

We never met this beautiful soul, Joshua. May Allah guide him! He is a very intelligent man. This makes sense. We have a feeling that he is keen on Islam. However, just as he is aware that Judaism has various debates on various issues, he is also smart enough to know that the house of Islam, unfortunately, is not one big happy family.

Probing positions and views before deciding to commit to something IS an intelligent thing to do!

This man, Joshua, had Ali Dawah on the ropes when they were discussing the issue of whether Allah (swt) rested. Because, using a consistent approach, Ali Dawah began to realize he had no scope to argue with the forceful position of this young man. To Ali Dawah’s credit, he didn’t force the issue.

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/does-allah-rest-or-does-allah-settle-or-sit-on-the-throne-judaism-and-the-athari-creed/

Now to this topic: Discussion with Josh (Jewish) | Is the Quran Being Uncreated Against Tawheed?

Abbas: “I don’t think it was its attribute. We, we’ve, I think we’ve answered the question many times that, with the knowledge of Allah, the Qur’an would have existed eternally. See. The actual physical book the mushaaf that was sent down and this is obviously an English translation, but the actual Arabic text when it was written down it is something that once it gets old it’s even burnt or it’s buried or whatever. To dispose of it in a respectful way.”


Abbas: “Burning it is actually not disrespectful in Islam. It’s a valid way of getting rid of an old manuscript that’s damaged and can’t be read, so you would have to have a new copy or whatever and the old one would be respectfully ah sort of ah, you know, gone away with in that way. But the knowledge of Allah, as a Jew, umm I think that you would accept that whatever knowledge Allah has, for example, the Torah itself. Would you say that the Torah itself is something that came into existence or did God have that in his knowledge but bring it into existence when he chose to?

Josh: “So I believe that the Torah was in fact created. Only God himself is uncreated. But everything within the so-called “knowledge” of God is created at some point.”

Abbas: “Right, so then are you saying that there was a time when God did not know of the Torah?”

Joshua: “No, there was not a “time” before it, because God is above time. So God created time. Rather or not God created the Torah before he created time is not something I know.“

Abbas: “So, basically what were saying is that was there ever a moment when God did not know of the Torah?”

Joshua.” In a sense, yes. Prior to the creation of the Torah, there could be no knowledge of the Torah.”

Abbas: “So there was a moment when God had no knowledge of the Torah. (Now there is a moment there where the video does a flash sequence. I do not know if that means the video was edited or that is just a video effect.)”

Joshua: “Yes.”

Hamza: “So you don’t believe God has all full knowledge.”

Joshua, “No because, because knowledge we believe is an attribute of God. God’s omniscience is an attribute of him. Therefore, he created his own omniscience.”

Abbas: “Josh, is that a mainstream Jewish belief? In terms of actual rabbinical grounding. That the Torah, at one point God did not actually know what he was going to say. What God was going to give to Moses.”

Hamza (interrupts): “Josh, do you believe that God knows the future?”

Josh: “Yes, because there is no future when it comes to God. Cause for God all time, past, present and future” (could make out due to Hamza speaking over).

Hamza: “So then God knows what the Torah isn’t it always?”

(The team got Josh to admit they had a point that there could be no ‘before’ as he (Joshua) just admitted that past/present/future….)

Imran: (The best listener out of the bunch, in our opinion) He pivots back to the original question: “Your question was really an interesting one because you, you raised this as a question about Tawhid. And you said that this is uh, it requires an explanation having the Qur’an as an uncreated statement that the Qur’an is uncreated, and then you have Allah, who is eternal. Does it affect Tawhid in any way? That was really underlying thing that I think you were trying to get to. So I am going to give you an analogy. Now, obviously, all analogies are imperfect, and we can’t perfect analogies, particularly when it comes to the Creator. But I am gonna try and give an analogy to drawn on and explain. So you’re speaking, right Josh?”

Josh: “Yes.”

Imran: “Can your speech exist without you?” (Can you exist without speaking)

Josh: “I don’t know. Can my speech. Theoretically there could be my speech without me. I suppose. I’m not sure though.”

Imran: “I would say that that’s clearly, that clearly the answer to that question is No. Um, I don’t know how your thinking…if you did not exist, could your speech exist?”

Josh: “Depends. If my speech has to, if there’s prerequisite to the existence of my speech is the existence of myself.”

Imran: “Sorry, sorry to interrupt you. Your thinking. I don’t understand your thinking process. What you’re doing is your taking this speech and your giving it attributes. Now we agreed that speech is an attribute of the Creator. We’ve agreed this. Like just as speech manifests from you. Now the question is do the attributes exist on their own or not?”

Joshua: “With regard to attributes of myself or attributes of God?”

Imran: “So the analogy is to get you to think about the Creator. I am trying to use yourself as an example just to try and give that. So, for example is: Can your speech exist without you?”

Joshua: “So if we (God forbid) leave God out of this picture for this particular analogy. Um, otherwise it’s going to get far too complicated. Then for sure, then you would be right that my speech could not exist without me.”

Imran: “So now I’m going to say now let’s talk about the Creator. Now I’m going to say the attributes of the Creator can’t exist without the Creator.”

Joshua: “Yes, that’s true.”

Imran: “Yup, so now we don’t have a conflation between were not comparing two different things. The Qur’an is the speech of Allah. It’s an attribute you understand? So now the question comes. When we’re talking about (holds up the Qur’an) the text, do we/are we referring to that attribute or not? So there’s two things and now we have to differentiate this. The attribute we’ve agreed is eternal. Why? Because the Creator is eternal, the attribute is eternal. Therefore, the Qur’an is uncreated and eternal. So now that’s a dealt with thing. This is a (holding up the Qur’an) a creation, like somebody has put these pages together, written the pages and the ink down. This (holding up the Qur’an) is not that attribute.”

Joshua: “I understand the difference between the written Qur’an and the spoken Qur’an that..” (unintelligible as Imran talked over him.)

Imran: “So that means coming to the concept of Tawhid. It doesn’t impact that at all. Another example would be: Creation. One of the attributes of God is that he is the Creator. Now, (we agree with this yeah?) “

Joshua: “Yes.”

Imran: “So the creative command is not separate from the creator in any sense, right?”

Joshua: “I would disagree with that because, prior to because prior to having created anything, how can God be considered to be a Creator? In order to be a Creator you need to have a creation.”

Imran: “So o.k that’s interesting, so I think that you sorry Hamza, you wanna…”

Hamza: “You don’t need to create to have the attribute of a creator you just need to create to demonstrate the attribute.“

Joshua: “But that depends on how we understand what the attribute is. Um so, let me just think about how to explain.”

Hamza: (getting visibly impatient) “Oh o.k before Allah, before God created the universe, you believe God created the universe?”

Joshua: “Yes.”

Hamza: “Did he have the attribute of Creator?”

Joshua: “Before he created anything he did not….”

Hamza: “Did he have the attribute of Creator?”

Joshua: “No.”

Hamza: (Surprised) “No!? How did he create than?”

Imran: “O.K. Let’s change the word for a moment, Josh. Let’s make the word ability.”

Joshua: “Ability? o.k. Did God have the ability to create? Yes.”

Imran: “O.K so that’s the attribute.”

Hamza: “That’s the attribute.”

Joshua: “Oh that’s what you mean when you say attributes.”

Hamza: “The Creation is the manifestation of the attribute. Evidence of the attribute if you like.”

Joshua: “It’s the manifestation of ‘Ah’..” (light bulb moment).

Comments:

Over all, that was a very good exchange. In reality, the question Joshua poses is two-fold in nature.

  1. Is the Qur’an created or eternal?
  2. If it is created or eternal, does this pose a problem for the doctrine of Tawhid?

The first argument brought by Abbas is not a good argument.

The eternity of knowledge does not imply the eternity of the known. Otherwise, all things that have come into being would be eternal! Imagine saying, because Allah (swt) has eternal knowledge about Christ Jesus, that Christ Jesus would be eternal! Christians would just love that!

Imran seemed the more learned of the three, at least in terms of Sunni theology. He got straight to the point. However, Imran did a very clever cart before the horse when he asked:

Can your speech exist without you? Actually, we could ask: (Can you exist without speaking?)

The answer to that is yes. You can exist without speaking.

We affirm the attribute of “speech” for Allah (swt) as Imam Diya al-Din ‘Abd al-Aziza Thamini (raheemullah), says in his Mu’alim:

“Know that speech is sometimes referred to Allah in the meaning of negating dumbness of Him, and it then is to be understood as an essential attribute in the way of such attributes. And sometimes it is referred to Him in the sense of its being one of His actions, and it is then to be understood as such. So the meaning of His being Speaking, according to the first interpretation, is that He is not dumb; and according to the second that He is a Creator of Speech.”

Source: (Ma’alim al-din (Oman: Wizarat al-Turath al-Qawmi wa l-Thaqafah, 1st edition 2:9.)

Now this is where it gets a bit tricky for Sunni theology.

Imran: “So the creative command is not separate from the creator in any sense, right?”

Response: What do you actually mean by the creator and his attributes? Because the Sunni theological position is that the attributes of Allah (swt) are not equal to Allah (swt) nor other than his essence!

This is a very, very BIG problem for Sunni theology.

Questions for the Athari/Salafi school.

So, if the attributes are not identical to the essence or other than the essence, what are they?

Can you prove your claims that the attributes are not identical to the essence using kitab wa sunnah?

Using the Qur’an and the Sunnah?

Will you need to rely upon kalam?

Actually, a VERY GOOD QUESTION FOR ANY SUNNI MUSLIM IS:

What do you mean when you say God is one?’

This may come as a surprise to the readers. They may say the being is one, but can they really, since they also have these attributes that have a quasi/pseudo-being status, in that they are not equal to the being nor other than it?

The second point from Imran

Imran: “So the creative command is not separate from the creator in any sense, right?”

“And the angels called to him as he stood praying in the sanctuary: Allah gives you glad tidings of (a son whose name is) John, (who comes) to confirm A WORD (bikalimatin) from Allah lordly, chaste, a prophet of the righteous. (Qur’an 3:39)

Are we sure that we want to say that Jesus (A WORD) from Allah is not separate from the Creator?

On what consistent basis is Jesus Allah’s word and his spirit and yet be created when the Qur’an is Allah’s word and is eternal and uncreated? On what consistent basis is the claim made?

We are quite certain that Christians are going to be asking themselves why should I leave Christianity, which holds (even in the lesser Arian Christology) that Christ Jesus is a word emanating from the divine nature but sharing the divine nature only to embrace a faith that tells me that Christ Jesus is a word emanating from the divine being but not separate from the divine being?

“His are the creation and the command.” (Qur’an 7:54)


This is answered by the context itself:

Indeed, your Lord is Allah, who created the heavens and earth in six days and then established Himself above the Throne. He covers the night with the day, [another night] chasing it rapidly; and [He created] the sun, the moon, and the stars, subjected by His command. Unquestionably, His is the creation and the command; blessed is Allah, Lord of the worlds. (Qur’an 7:54)

The most that this verse tells us is that, just as Allah (swt) is alone in bringing the universe out of non-being (into being), in the same way, He is alone in the management of it. He has no partner in its creation and in its management. None other than Him has anything of the creation and management. Rather, to HIM alone belong the creation and the command. The meaning here, clearly, is management. And there is nothing in that which even remotely points either to the eternity of the Qur’an or to its contingency.

Examples:

“Maintain with care the [obligatory] prayers and [in particular] the middle prayer and stand before Allah, devoutly obedient.” (Qur’an 2:238)

The middle prayer is not (separated) out of the genus of prayers, the guarding of which has been commanded.

“Whoever is an enemy to Allah and His angels and His messengers and Gabriel and Michael – then indeed, Allah is an enemy to the disbelievers. (Qur’an 2:98)

No one says that Gabriel and Michael are separated out of the genus of angels. The difference between them is relative.

“Indeed, Allah orders justice and good conduct and giving to relatives and forbids immorality and bad conduct and oppression. He admonishes you that perhaps you will be reminded.” (Qur’an 16:90)

No intelligent person will argue about justice being the doing of good, and the doing of good being justice.

The command (amr) of Allah (swt) has been mentioned jointly with what denotes its creation in many places.

“And [remember, O Muhammed], when you said to the one on whom Allah bestowed favor and you bestowed favor, “Keep your wife and fear Allah,” while you concealed within yourself that which Allah is to disclose. And you feared the people, while Allah has more right that you fear Him. So when Zayd had no longer any need for her, We married her to you in order that there not be upon the believers any discomfort concerning the wives of their adopted sons when they no longer have need of them. And ever is the command of Allah accomplished.” (Qur’an 33:37)

“[Remember] when you were on the near side of the valley, and they were on the farther side, and the caravan was lower [in position] than you. If you had made an appointment [to meet], you would have missed the appointment. But [it was] so that Allah might accomplish a matter already destined – that those who perished [through disbelief] would perish upon evidence and those who lived [in faith] would live upon evidence; and indeed, Allah is Hearing and Knowing.” (Qur’an 8:42)

“There is not to be upon the Prophet any discomfort concerning that which Allah has imposed upon him. [This is] the established way of Allah with those [prophets] who have passed on before. And ever is the command of Allah a destiny decreed.” (Qur’an 33:38)

“He arranges [each] matter from the heaven to the earth; then it will ascend to Him in a Day, the extent of which is a thousand years of those which you count.” (Qur’an 32:5)

“Indeed, all things We created with predestination And Our command is but one, like a glance of the eye.” (Qur’an 54:49-50)

“Do the disbelievers await [anything] except that the angels should come to them or there comes the command of your Lord? Thus did those do before them. And Allah wronged them not, but they had been wronging themselves.” (Qur’an 16:33)

All of those examples should be more than sufficient to show our response!

May Allah (swt) open the eyes of the Muslim ummah. May Allah (swt) open the heart of Joshua and bring him to the right way.

If you would like to see more articles on the discussion of the Qur’an, is it created or uncreated? You may wish to see the following:

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/lets-attack-hamza-yusuf-in-ramadan-the-quran-is-created/

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

4 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Mohamed Hijab’s excellent argument against the Qur’an being uncreated.

“Indeed, We have made it an Arabic Qur’an that you might understand.” (Qur’an 43:3)

﷽ 

Mohamed Hijab, who is a known Muslim speaker based in the United Kingdom, has recently put forward some excellent arguments against the idea of the Qur’an being eternal and uncreated (unbeknownst to him).

Now, to be fair, we want to say from the outset that Mohamed Hijab (as far as we know) believes that the Qur’an is eternal and uncreated.

However, it doesn’t seem that he has pondered the implications of his kalaam argument on the subject of the Qur’an being makhluq (created).

Listen carefully to the exchange between Marwan and Mohamed Hijab

The contingency argument.

@1:28:36 listen to Marwan’s question about pantheism and contingency argument.

@1:30:18 Mohamed Hijab gives his reply listen carefully.

“This is a book, and it’s made out of parts and the parts are the pages of the book right. Correct? So these are the pages of the book. I dunno what book. ‘Jewish historical society of England’ …..This is a book, right, and this is the whole of the book, correct? And it’s made out of parts, correct? Now if I pick a part out. Now if I take all parts out of this book, does it remain as a book? If the parts are taken out, then the whole thing is taken out. If that’s conceivable that parts taken out the whole thing is taken out than there is no way that this thing that I’m talking about is necessary and independent. Because necessary and independent means it’s always there and it can never be any other way. It’s a simple as that. You said, well, if it’s inter-dependent, anything which is inter-dependent by definition is dependent because what does the word inter-dependent mean? Interdependent means things which rely upon each other. So, if in order for this book to exist, there’s an inter-dependence or each page relies upon the existence of other pages in this book in order to exist. Then what we’re saying is this thing is dependent, because everything interdependent is, by definition dependent. What is dependence? Something which relies upon something else for its existence. What is inter-dependence? Something which relies upon something else in order to exist. So, in many ways, what you’re saying is, if we admit that it’s dependent than khalas (finished), it cannot be dependent and necessary at the same time.”

@1:33:16 “How do we describe the kul here? How do we describe the whole of this book? How do we describe the whole of this book?  We describe it through its parts, right?  Now if I say I just dissembled all its parts, and it’s maybe what 3-400 pages, and I’ve scattered them around. They still exist, but they exist in a different form. Now what I’m saying is the fact that I can re-arrange them like this I can you see this hundred, I dunno, let me see 208 pages of this book, yeah. If I take the 232 pages and make page 1 and page 232 and make it like munaqis (opposite), so instead of 1,2,3,4,5 it’s 232, 231, etc., etc. I’ve re-arranged it. The fact that now I can rearrange this book means there is nothing necessary about the arrangement and the form of this book. There is nothing necessary about it at all.”

@1:34:27 “The book as it is the way in which the book is now from 1 to 232, the way in which the book is like that the form the sura the shaqil the hakel -what ever word you want to use, the form of the book as it is now can be re-arranged. Now let me give you an example because I feel, I feel like the issue here is we don’t know the difference between contingency in this necessity. Necessity: 2 +2=4. 2+2=4. Is there any way 2+2=4 can be arranged any other way. Can it re-arrange in any other way? Can 2+2=anything other than 4? Which means its necessary. So its impossible to re-arrange 2+2 to equal anything other than 4. It’s eternally that way, it’s necessarily that way and it will continue being that way. It cannot be any other way. Now this is not the same with the arrangement of the parts of this book. The arrangement of the parts of this book can be other ways. This book itself can be another way. Instead of this colour; which I will describe as beige I dunno maybe I’m colour blind. It could have been blue. I can actually paint it right now. I can make it blue. I can , you want me to do? It looks like a historic book I dun want to ruin it. But I can change this book. There is nothing necessary about this book. Now you might say well, if we define necessity as something susceptibility, destructibility and generation. Yeah? And then in the closed system of the universe energy cannot be destroyed. Cannot be destroyed and therefore the atoms will take another form. I’m saying. I am not defining. I’m not defining contingency in only that way. I’m defining contingency in three ways. Number 1. Something that can be any other way. Number one yeah? Number 2. Something susceptibility to destruction and generation destruction yeah? And number 3. Something which relies upon something else for its existence. Now even if you argued that well this cannot be really destroyed because it’s atoms will take other form. I’m saying its still not necessary because it can be arranged in another way. The parts of this whole can be arranged in a way which is currently not arranged. It can be a way which is currently not/is. So which means that it, it meets the criterion of contingency; because it can be another way.”

@1:37:24 “You are confusing eternality and necessity. O.K? It’s conceivable that something can be eternal and not necessary. It’s conceivable how so? Because something can be eternal but rely upon something necessary. And that’s why the ‘ulemah of Islam they differentiated between what is referred to as wajibun an nafsi and wajibun al ghayri which is necessary for its own sake and necessary or in and of itself and necessary because of something else. So for example if I were to say. You have a sun. Let’s say the sun is necessary. The sun yani. Shams yeah? And it’s rays are contingent based-dependent upon the sun. The fact that the rays exist and they are contingent on the sun doesn’t’ mean that just because they are both eternal. The fact that the rays exist and are contingent on the sun doesn’t’ mean that the rays are necessary just because their eternal because they are dependent upon something which is necessary in this case, the sun or the eternal. You get it?

@1:38:37 “Yeah that’s his Ibn Cena beliefs. Yeah well Islamic refutation of the universe being eternal is clearly against the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Al Ghazali had this kind of refutation if you wanna.”

Marwan ask about the attributes of Allah (swt).

@1:39:00 “We affirm all the attributes of God through these kind of argumentations. That is why, there is a point where you need like the Rahma of Allah. The fact that he is ghafu and afuw and raheem and all that stuff. That needs to be affirmed through revelation.”

Marwan ask are these attributes necessary or contingent?

@1:39:19 ‘Yeah all attributes of Allah are necessary.” @1:40:25 “We don’t use the word dependent it’s being controlled by the irada (intention) of Allah. By the will of God. So the verb all the attributes of God are controlled by the will of God. If Allah wants to speak yeah? If Allah wants to speak he wills that and he does that.”

Marwan so they are contingent upon his will?

Listen to how uncomfortable is the response of Mohamed Hijab. The sudden shift. Also notice that Mohamed Hijab does not affirm that Allah is speaking, or is speaking eternally. He attributes the speaking to his will! Al hamdulillah! Thank you!

@1:40:44 “We don’t need to use the word contingent. They are controlled by his will.

I believe at this point Marwan doesn’t really seem to buy it. A quick glance of the ideas upward and simply responds . ‘O.K’

The arguments brought by Mohamed Hijab absolutely decimate the idea that the Qur’an is uncreated.

Its message is dependent upon asbaab an nuzul (occasion of revelation), which conceivably could have been different. According to our brothers from the Sunni denomination, it has text that has been abrogated and that is dependent upon what abrogates and what is abrogated. It is composed of letters and words and sentences that are dependent upon structure to have a coherent meaning. It’s conceivable that the Ahruf /Qir’aat of the Qur’an could be more or less than what they are. It is conceivable that the Qur’an could have been revealed in a language other than Arabic. It is conceivable that the Qur’an itself cannot be necessary, because it is conceivable that Allah (swt) could have had the Torah or any other revelation completely intact and reach us until this very day.

In the words of Fakhr al-Din Al-Razi:

“The impossibility of a word which is composed of letters and sounds being eternal is self-evident to the mind for two reasons:

The first is that a word cannot be a word unless its letters are sequential. The letter uttered before the last that is uttered is originated, and if something’s being originated is affirmed, its eternity is then impossible. So, for the letter following the end of the first, there is no doubt that it originated.

The second is that, if those letters from which the word is composed occurred in one go, the word cannot be. A word composed of three letters can occur in any one of six combinations. If the letters occurred altogether, the words occurring in some of those combinations would not be better than they are occurring in any of the rest. Alternatively, if the letters occurred in succession, then the word is originated.”

Source: (Al-Tafsir al-kabir (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Illmiyyah, 2nd edition, 1:P20.)

Fakhr al-Din took fellow Sunni Muslims of the Hanbali school to task when he says,

“These people are so low as to not deserve mention among the group of the learned. It happened one day that I said to one of them: “If Allah spoke these, then either He spoke them in one go, or in succession. The first is void because the speaking of all these letters in one go will not convey an orderly composition which is a combination in sequence. It necessarily follows that this composition, combined with these successive letters, cannot by themselves be Allah’s speech. The second is void, because if Allah spoke them in succession, then it would be originated.’ When the man heard this statement of mine, he said: ‘It is obligatory for us to affirm and pass on’, i.e., we affirm that the Qur’an is eternal and pass by this statement that we have heard. At that point, I wonder greatly at the safety of this speaker.” 

Source: (Al-Tafsir al-kabir (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Illmiyyah, 2nd edition, 27, 187-88)

May Allah (swt) forgive the Ummah. May Allah (swt) guide the Ummah.

If you would like to read more on the issue of the Qur’an being created, perhaps you may want to read the following articles.

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/lets-attack-hamza-yusuf-in-ramadan-the-quran-is-created/

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/05/ef-dawah-discussion-with-josh-jewish-is-the-quran-being-uncreated-against-tawheed/

If you would like to see more articles featuring Mohamed Hijab you may be interested in the following:

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/05/mohamed-hijab-and-divine-simplicity/

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Allah’s Word Created Or Uncreated? -Mohamed Hijab.

“Indeed, We have made it (ja’alnahu) an Arabic Qur’an that you might understand.” (Qur’an 43:3)

﷽ 

This video was brought to our attention. Here we have our Muslim sister asking Mohamed Hijab about the age-old question about whether Allah’s words (speech) is created.

So what we are going to do is to let you listen to the exchange. We have also transcribed the exchange between Mohamed Hijab and the questioner (referenced as ‘Muslim sister’.) We will then provide our commentary and thoughts on the exchange.

Muslim sister:

“About like the Qur’an being like there, you know the issue about it being created and not created, about how there was a big debate in the past, so I don’t exactly understand like those two sides, like what do people mean when they say it’s created and what do they mean when they say it’s not created because I don’t think either side actually meant that created in terms of written by people so like how yeah so what do they even mean like how do you make sense of it.”

Mohamed Hijab:

“The Muʿtazilah believed that it was was created, it was makhluq. That Allah created the Qur’an. The words were created. They were not…whereas the Ahl Sunnah position is that the words are not created and that the words are exactly are uh, they are a subset of an attribute of Allah (swt) which is speech. So like I’m speaking to you right now, I have the ability to speak, and my speech is a subset of my ability to speak in my capacity to speak. Likewise, Allah (swt) speech is not created, it’s not manufactured. It’s a subset of one of his attributes. So the Muʿtazilah believed that it was created in the same way as human beings are created, or the universe was created. And Ahl Sunnah believed that’s not the case.”

The sister was asked: “Does that make sense?”

Muslim sister:

“Um, I mean, like it just don’t sound like I guess I cannot fully comprehend in (??) not in terms of how it’s possible but rather like, um, are the words kind of emitted at some point and does that omission all…” (interrupted by Mohamed Hijab)

Mohamed Hijab: “Yeah, omission …all right, look, so does Allah (swt) does he umm create?”

Muslim sister: “Yup”

Mohamed Hijab: “Yup.” So he creates. Allah (swt) does he hear all things?

Muslim sister: “Yeah.”

Mohamed Hijab: “Does he see all things?”

Muslim sister: “Yeah.”

Mohamed Hijab: “Yeah? Right, now all of those things are they created? Like did Allah create-Did Allah create an ability for himself to hear?”

Muslim sister: “Oh I see. So, when you say the words are not created like the Qur’an is not created you mean the ability to speak was not created, yeah?”

Mohamed Hijab:

“That Allah’s ability to speak is not created and that the words themselves are not created. They are uh omitted as you mentioned from Allah (swt) in a way that suits his majesty. Which is nothing like the khalq (the creation). But they are not created it’s like-just like Allah (swt) does not create his ability to hear, and he does not create his ability to see and thus, intrinsically, it’s a part its its its an aspect of what he is, not a part. An aspect of what he is. Then, in that case, the same can be said about kalam about speech. That he is not created.”

Muslim sister:

“But what if, like a single verse or like um like um, you know the message itself it’s dependent is it like of um depending on the rule of Allah? Or is it kind it’s not like part of the essence, right? It’s not like unnessary-it was I don’t know how..”

Mohamed Hijab:

“Yeah, I got you, I got you. So the sifat of Allah (swt) are broken down into two. There’s the attributes which are intrinsic and necessary. Actually all of Allah’s attributes are necessary, yeah? But there’s those which are intrinsic. They’re called Al-Sifāt Dhātiyyah. They’re the intrinsic attributes. So, for example that Allah is pre-eternal that he is post-eternal. That he is All-Powerful, that he has all knowledge all of that is meant Sifat Allah (swt) Dhātiyyah, or the intrinsic attributes of Allah. And then you have the will of Allah (swt) Okay? The Will of Allah. And the Will is Allah’s ability to make decisions okay?”

Muslim sister: “okay”.

Mohamed Hijab:

And then then you have another set of sifat or attributes of Allah called Sifat Al Ikhtiyariyah or Sifāt Fi’liyyah -which are the verbal attributes -now verbal attributes refer to that which Allah does and that which Allah does it is linked to Allah’s will. So, when Allah decides something -the verbal attributes are then activated. Okay? As a result of whatever he wills. So some of the uh some of the examples of those is like speech. Allah wills to speak. He shall speak. If he wills not to he will not. If Allah wills to create he will create. If he wills not to he will not. So, the sifat, the attributes which are Sifat al filiyyaha they are connected to the will of Allah (swt)

Prima Qur’an commentary: 

The first point to keep in mind is that the Qur’an and Sunnah are not quoted to the respected Muslim sister. The issue over whether the Qur’an was created or not created did not come up during the time of the companions.  They contended themselves with Allah (swt) is uncreated and everything other than Allah (swt) is created. If only the Muslims were contented with this.

In Mohamed Hijab’s initial response he says:

So like I’m speaking to you right now I have the ability to speak and my speech is a subset of my ability to speak in my capacity to speak. Likewise Allah (swt) speech is not created it’s not manufactured.”

Allah (swt) says:

There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing” [Qur’an 42:11].

So, whenever you get involved in tashbih (comparing Allah to his creation) like Mohamed Hijab does, you run into problems. His comparison breaks down because he (Mohamed Hijab) is a created being. His speech is created. He has the ability to speak, but he had not been speaking before he spoke. He produced a speech on the occasion of it. Allah (swt) could destroy Mohamed Hijab and the entirety of his existence, including his speech.

In the second reply to the Muslim sister Mohamed Hijab says:

But they are not created it’s like-just like Allah (swt) does not create his ability to hear and he does not create his ability to see and thus intrinsically it’s a part its its its an aspect of what he is, not a part.

People like Mohamed Hijab and the bulk of Sunni Muslims who come across as confused about the issue.  Often times they also set up traps that are meant less to have meaningful discussion and more often to win.

Remember Mohamed Hijab said: Allah wills to speak. He shall speak. If he wills not to he will not.

He doesn’t create his ability to hear. We would agree.

He doesn’t create his ability to see. We would agree.

He doesn’t create his ability to speak. We would agree.

—————————————————————————————————

He doesn’t create his ability to hear. Agreed.

He doesn’t create his ability to see. Agreed.

He doesn’t create his ability to create. Agreed.

He doesn’t create his ability to speak. Agreed.

Now we ask:

Is that which he sees created? They say, “Yes”.

Is that which he hears created? They say, “Yes”.

Is that which he speaks created? They are silent.

You see they don’t like the way the question is framed. It is meant as a trap. A possible response to this could very well be: Is that which he speaks to created? They would say yes.

But that wasn’t the question. So you can see they evaded the question. Or they will reply to Is that which he speaks created? They can simply reply: “No.”

Or they could pretend to lay a trap for us:

Is his hearing created? We say, “No.”

Is his seeing created? We say, “No.”

Is his speaking created? We say, “Yes!”

So this is the problem with approaching the Creator using tashbih. Rather, it has to be decided by the decisive text of the Qur’an and the Sunnah. 

Now the last two paragraphs even had us puzzled because we began to say among ourselves.  How is it that Sunni Muslims like Mohamed Hijab differ with us about this? Because he says:

There’s the attributes which are intrinsic and necessary, actually all of Allah’s attributes are necessary yeah? But there’s those which are intrinsic they’re called Al-Sifāt Dhātiyyah. They’re the intrinsic attributes.

Actually, we are glad Mohamed Hijab caught himself because we were wondering what attributes of Allah (swt) he thought were redundant or unnecessary because that creates a whole host of problems. Anyway, he says there are attributes which are intrinsic and necessary.  We (Ibadi) agree.

Mohamed Hijab says:

And than then you have another set of sifat or attributes of Allah called Sifat Al Ikhtiyariyah or Sifāt Fi’liyyah -which are the verbal attributes.”

So some of the uh some of the examples of those is like speech Allah wills to speak he shall speak if he wills not to he will not. If Allah wills to create he will create. If he wills not to he will not.

Excellent! So, if Allah (swt) wants to speak, he will speak. If he wants to create, he will create. Just as what he creates is not eternal, neither is that which he speaks. He has the ability to do both. This is exactly the position of The Ibadi School. (The People of Truth and Straightness.)

However, you will find that, unfortunately, some of Mohamed Hijab’s cohorts have put the attribute of speech into two categories: both Sifat Dhatiyyah & Sifat Fi’liyyah and that is what our article spoke about as well.

May Allah (swt) bless Mohamed Hijab in his efforts for the daw’ah and attempting his level best to explain an issue to our sister that has unfortunately and unnecessarily split the Ummah.

Rather, it has to be decided by the decisive text of the Qur’an and the Sunnah. In the article provided you will see that the textual evidence of our position is in the Qur’an and the Sunnah, starting off with a sahih (sound) hadith in which a well-known companion mentioned verses of the Qur’an is created. This is followed by the clear verse of the Qur’an and other textual proofs.

Both Sifat Dhatiyyah & Sifat Fi’liyyah and that is what our article spoke about as well. This issue was neither discussed by the Blessed Messenger (saw) discussed this issue nor his noble companions.

Unfortunately, some people form theological concepts and impose this upon the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Whereas our methodology is to be guided by the explicit text when available.

May Allah (swt) guide us to what is beloved to Allah (swt). May Allah (swt) guide the Ummah!

May Allah (swt) forgive the Ummah!

You maybe interested in reading:

If you would like to see other articles featuring Mohamed Hijab you maybe interested in the following:

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/05/mohamed-hijab-and-divine-simplicity/

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Saudi translations cannot hide the fact that the Qur’an is created.

“Have the unbelievers not ever considered that the heavens and the earth were one piece and that We tore them apart from one another. From water, We have MADE/CREATED all living things. Will they then have no faith?” (Qur’an 21:30)

﷽ 

The Arabic text above says, “waja’alna” (We have created)

When a person makes something, he/she does it out of other materials made by Allah. For example, a carpenter who makes a table does not create it but he/she merely assembles and joins pieces of wood with nails and glue together.

In other words, he/she has made a table out of materials created by Allah. But when Allah (swt) makes something he makes it out of nothing or out of other materials he has created out of nothing.

“And it is He who has created man from water” (Qur’an 25:54)

The Arabic text above says, “khalaqa” (created). Allah (swt) has used in Qur’an 25:54 and Qur’an 21:30 two different Arabic terms, yet both of these words are synonymous in what they convey.

“It is He who created you from one soul and created from it its mate so that he might dwell in security with her.” (Qur’an 7:189)

In the above text, the first term used is “khalaqakum” (created) and the second term “ja’ala” (created). Again, this shows the interchangeable nature of these two terms.

“Oh, mankind! Fear your Lord, who created you from a single person and created, out of him, his wife.” (Qur’an 4:1)

The above Arabic text is “khalaqakum” (created) and wa “khalaqa”(created). Allah (swt) used the same word twice. Allah (swt) did not use the word “ja’ala” (created) as he did in Qur’an 7:189. This once more shows that the two words convey the same meaning.

“Indeed, We have made it an Arabic Qur’an that you might understand.” (Qur’an 43:3)

 

The Arabic term that is used here is “ja’alnahu” (made/created)

“Truly I am going to create man from clay” (Qur’an 38:71) 

The Arabic term here is “khaliqun” (create) 

Now let us look at Qur’an 38:72

The underlying words in verse 72 have, however, been given contradictory interpretations. 

Professor Abdullah Yusuf Ali has translated them as: “And I breathed unto him of my spirit.”

Yusuf Ali (Saudi Rev. 1985) “When I have fashioned him (in due proportion) and breathed into him of My spirit, fall ye down in obeisance unto him.”
Yusuf Ali (Orig. 1938) “When I have fashioned him (in due proportion) and breathed into him of My spirit, fall ye down in obeisance unto him.” 

While Dr. Al Hilali and Dr. Khan has explained them this way: “And I breathed unto him his soul created by me.”

Muhsin Khan & Muhammad al-Hilali So when I have fashioned him and breathed into him (his) soul created by Me, then you fall down prostrate to him.”

The implication of the first translation is that Allah (swt) has given part of His spirit, so man is the essence of Allah.

This sounds very much like those who say the Qur’an is the essence of Allah.

In the second translation by Dr. Al Hilali and Dr. Khan, it means that Allah created man’s soul and then breathed it into him. This interpretation agrees with those who say that the Qur’an is created.

This is also the way the Sahih International translates it this way: “So when I have proportioned him and breathed into him of My [created] soul, then fall down to him in prostration.” (Qur’an 38:72)

The three translations (Abdullah Yusuf Ali & Dr. Al Hilali /Dr. Khan and Sahih International are all three contradictory and have both been endorsed by the religious institutions in Saudi Arabia.

Fortunately for us, neither of the translators were Ibadi or the so-called, “Khariji” and thus, no sectarian uproar in the Islamic World!!

Unfortunately, this particular issue is complicated by the fact that there is quite a bit of obfuscation on behalf of our brothers from ‘Ahl Sunnah’ and that is because they do not want to tell us if they regard the attributes of Allah (swt) as being identical with the essence of Allah (swt) or being outside the essence of Allah (swt).

If you would like to learn more about the Qur’an being a creation of Allah (swt), you may wish to read the following:

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/lets-attack-hamza-yusuf-in-ramadan-the-quran-is-created/

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/05/ef-dawah-discussion-with-josh-jewish-is-the-quran-being-uncreated-against-tawheed/

https://primaquran.com/2024/01/18/allahs-word-created-or-uncreated-mohammed-hijab/

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized