I challenge all Quranists.
-
Thank you to be just as specific as previously. Sure you realize that the source of EVERYTHING is ALLAH?
478 Wherever you may be, death will overtake you, even if you should be within towers of lofty construction. But if good comes to them, they say, "This is from Allah "; and if evil befalls them, they say, "This is from you." Say, "All are from Allah ." So what is with those people that they can hardly understand any statement?
If you think you are truthful about your statement above. Please bring proof that you ("we", "ourselves" as you said) are the primary source of all these sects that call themselves Muslims that came out early and later in the Islamic history. Like Shiaism, sufiism, etc., instead of ALLAH.
LaA Ilaaha Illa ALLAH
in that sense then Allah is the source of everything and any other answer is FALSE, so if your teacher asks you what's the source of the Nail river the answer is Allah if you say the lake of Victoria then you made a false answer and you get 0.
-
Salaamun alaikum Stranger1990,
I would prefer this question to be phrased as such 'Prove to me that the method of understanding Islam through Quran-alone is correct while the method of Quran+hadith is wrong'. If you like to phrase the question this way, here is my answer
Firstly, what is our benchmark? As in, 'correct' by whose measurement? My benchmark is Quran itself. To me, Quran, as the expression of Allah's will must tell me how exactly I should go about understanding it's teachings. And it does. Very comprehensively, I might add.
The ahlusunnah insist that we cannot understand Islam without hadith as the hadith documents the sayings and deeds of the Prophet. So why didn't the Quran clearly tell us this? Do you know of the serious divergences which exist within hadith scholarship? Muhaddith even differ on the DEFINITION of a sahaba which is crucial in determining the last link in the hadith isnad. So if we insist that we cannot understand Islam without hadith, then we must conclude that the Prophet didn't do his job. He didn't even define what a sahaba is.
Alternatively, we could adopt the Quranist mindset. Quranists say that only Quran can be source of Islam. Therefore, whatever teachings of the Prophet we want to find, we find it straight from one source. We may disagree with the tafseer but at least we know what our parameters are. God did do his job, if you could look at it from a Quranist perspective.
hope that answers your question.
-
Salaamun alaikum Stranger1990,
I would prefer this question to be phrased as such 'Prove to me that the method of understanding Islam through Quran-alone is correct while the method of Quran+hadith is wrong'. If you like to phrase the question this way, here is my answer
Firstly, what is our benchmark? As in, 'correct' by whose measurement? My benchmark is Quran itself. To me, Quran, as the expression of Allah's will must tell me how exactly I should go about understanding it's teachings. And it does. Very comprehensively, I might add.
The ahlusunnah insist that we cannot understand Islam without hadith as the hadith documents the sayings and deeds of the Prophet. So why didn't the Quran clearly tell us this? Do you know of the serious divergences which exist within hadith scholarship? Muhaddith even differ on the DEFINITION of a sahaba which is crucial in determining the last link in the hadith isnad. So if we insist that we cannot understand Islam without hadith, then we must conclude that the Prophet didn't do his job. He didn't even define what a sahaba is.
Alternatively, we could adopt the Quranist mindset. Quranists say that only Quran can be source of Islam. Therefore, whatever teachings of the Prophet we want to find, we find it straight from one source. We may disagree with the tafseer but at least we know what our parameters are. God did do his job, if you could look at it from a Quranist perspective.
hope that answers your question.
Then why didn't Allah just send the Qur'an to the Arabs without a messenger? they wouldn't need a Messenger.
-
By the way I noticed your name, do you worship the Qur'an?
-
in that sense then Allah is the source of everything
in Quranic sense, then yes Allah is the source of everything. then why did you say this
ok. I should have been more specific. What I meant when I said primary source of Islam, we consider ourselves the primary source of all these sects that call themselves Muslims that came out early and later in the Islamic history. Like Shiaism, sufiism, etc.
How did you think first of "we, ourselves", and did not mention ALLAH when it comes to ISLAM? Do you think that is an acceptable statement to anyone who believe in ALLAH? I don't find that acceptable, hence my inquiry.
and any other answer is FALSE, so if your teacher asks you what's the source of the Nail river the answer is Allah if you say the lake of Victoria then you made a false answer and you get 0.
Enough sidestepping. Are we talking about Nail river here or are we talking about ISLAM?
You have not brought any proof. Even the source of river can be proven simply by following it in the direction opposing its flow, I think the teacher would appreciate that.
Why don't you try to do the same with ISLAM? Follow the history back. Bring proof. Or admit that your second statement on this matter was just as inaccurate as the first one. "Inaccurate" is a soft word. Don't forget that other people might comment on those statements with much stronger words.
LaA Ilaaha Illa ALLAH
-
stranger,
The very fact you think the Quranist position it taken from Rashad Khalifa shows your monumental lack of knowledge on this subject.
Have you not heard that even in Traditional sources, they openly admit Hadith collections were systematically collected and burned, people jailed for spreading Ahadith, bans were in place during and after the prophet's time, early Caliphs openly disproved of writing them, that the first public Ahadith compiler did so under duress, Shafi was opposed by many schools of thought around the Muslim world etc.
It's all there in your history, if you care to read it. Here is a nice intro
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/Rethinking_Tradition_Modern_Islamic_Thought.htm -
Ok. Correct me if I'm wrong but my understanding of a Deist is someone who believe there's a god but he doesn't believe that we supposed to worship him or he even sent Prophets or religion is something important, right?
How the first 5 ayat of Al Baqarah support your beliefs?
Definitions vary and reason for posting Qur?an definition (i.e. my beliefs) at the beginning.
Intended audience...
21
22
23
24
25This is not really a very specific answer, the blind man in surat Abasa is not rebuked by Allah by the way.
Obviously stating the obvious that the blind man was not reprimanded; you asked
Quote from stranger1990 on Today at 065855 AM
What qualities someone must have to interpret the Qur'an?Specifically answered ?Desire to see clearly? and gave specific examples
801
802
803551
552 -
in Quranic sense, then yes Allah is the source of everything. then why did you say this
How did you think first of "we, ourselves", and did not mention ALLAH when it comes to ISLAM? Do you think that is an acceptable statement to anyone who believe in ALLAH? I don't find that acceptable, hence my inquiry.
Enough sidestepping. Are we talking about Nail river here or are we talking about ISLAM?
You have not brought any proof. Even the source of river can be proven simply by following it in the direction opposing its flow, I think the teacher would appreciate that.
Why don't you try to do the same with ISLAM? Follow the history back. Bring proof. Or admit that your second statement on this matter was just as inaccurate as the first one. "Inaccurate" is a soft word. Don't forget that other people might comment on those statements with much stronger words.
LaA Ilaaha Illa ALLAH
We follow the same religion of Prophet Muhammad we follow his steps and the steps of the khulfa alrashideen and the righteous leaders who followed them.
the first sect that came out of us was Shiaism, at the start it was political movement then after time they started making there own sect. before the creation of this shia sect there was only one Islam.
-
Then why didn't Allah just send the Qur'an to the Arabs without a messenger? they wouldn't need a Messenger.
You're assuming that the 'need' of a messenger includes the messenger's so-called explanations. It does not. Quran does not authorise him to add his own explanations to it.
Furthermore, if you allege that hadith are explanations to Quran, you must account for the severe contradictions between Quran and hadith. It's like they teach two different ideologies.
-
stranger,
The very fact you think the Quranist position it taken from Rashad Khalifa shows your monumental lack of knowledge on this subject.
Have you not heard that even in Traditional sources, they openly admit Hadith collections were systematically collected and burned, people jailed for spreading Ahadith, bans were in place during and after the prophet's time, early Caliphs openly disproved of writing them, that the first public Ahadith compiler did so under duress, Shafi was opposed by many schools of thought around the Muslim world etc.
It's all there in your history, if you care to read it. Here is a nice intro
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/Rethinking_Tradition_Modern_Islamic_Thought.htmActually Prophet Muhammad forbidden the writing of hadith on his companions(they used to write what he says) he told them not to write what he says until they are finished of writing the whole Qur'an.
and when Prophet Muhammad died, his companions didn't know what to do with his body or where to bury him, Abu Bakr said that he heard him saying all the Prophets are buried where they die.
That is a simple example of using hadith even when it was not recorded yet, ofc you won't believe the story, lets assume the story is true, the Qur'an was not collected anytime before the 3th Khalifa, and that was long time after the Prophet's death. and prophet Muhammad's instructions was to write the whole Qur'an before writing what he says.
-
Definitions vary and reason for posting Qur?an definition (i.e. my beliefs) at the beginning.
Intended audience...
21
22
23
24
25Obviously stating the obvious that the blind man was not reprimanded; you asked
Specifically answered ?Desire to see clearly? and gave specific examples
801
802
803551
552I'm sorry are you a Muslim? do you believe that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger?
-
You're assuming that the 'need' of a messenger includes the messenger's so-called explanations. It does not. Quran does not authorise him to add his own explanations to it.
Furthermore, if you allege that hadith are explanations to Quran, you must account for the severe contradictions between Quran and hadith. It's like they teach two different ideologies.
Did his companions REALLY need him? if Yes could you answer why with some details?
And what contradictions? could you give me examples?
-
Did his companions REALLY need him? if Yes could you answer why with some details?
And what contradictions? could you give me examples?
Yes, the messenger fulfilled a role. See 3/164 for example. He performed
- tilawah of al-kitab
- teaching al-kitab and hikmah
- purified them
The best contradiction is the concept of freedom of religion. Sunnism totally reject this while Quran gives full freedom to believe in islam or not.
-
Salaam
We follow the same religion of Prophet Muhammad
I agree with a note we are trying to.
the first sect that came out of us was Shiaism, at the start it was political movement then after time they started making there own sect. before the creation of this shia sect there was only one Islam.
This is why we must study the history to trace back what the one Islam is. That, and the Quran itself, which we believe is what has been revealed to The Prophet.
If you can't bring the proof it's alright. Just study the history for your own benefit. Please be careful when making statement on something as important as the "source of Islam".
Pardon me but i'm not into your challenge. I'm only responding to this
I'll ask some questions if anyone could answer them.
I took that word 'anyone' literally. So let's finish the rest of my response to you
You = Quranists
What is Quranists, then? Do you know that "Quranists" may just be a label, a name? Are you accusing this "Quranists" of something you don't know? You didn't say "some of you". In fact, you didn't even say "Quranists" in that specific question -- in the beginning you said "anyone", remember?
Now that you have clarified/corrected your question, please address it to the ones you're addressing. I myself am not mocking RK and his teachings. I took them as something that i must verify myself against the Quran.
I didn't talk about responsibility, I'm talking about beliefs do you share the same beliefs with the other Quranists?
Then i'm the one who's talking about responsibility. Aren't we responsible for any belief we choose to believe in? What part of "LaA Ilaaha Illa Allah" do you not understand as a belief? I said the one that united us "best", and IMO, there is nothing better to unite muslimin than the belief "LaA Ilaaha Illa Allah".
I didn't say scholars guide people, I didn't even mentioned guidance. I only asked you if you could name them.
I did say that and i will repeat it again Surely even the most bestest quranist scholar can't guide anyone. ALLAH guides whomever He will.
I know some names, but i don't see how it would benefit this discussion, so i wouldn't answer that. And you haven't clarified "all time" by the way, but forget about it.
My point is that you must verify for yourself anyone's (including scholars' work on ISLAM against the Quran. If you intend to study their works then you may PM the mods for suggestions.
Are you saying that the Qur'an is understandable by anyone? not only the one who have enough knowledge in Islam(sharia/Deen) and Arabic language?
How would you "have enough knowledge in Islam", if you don't study Quran? The message in Quran, if translated correctly, will be understood by anyone with Hearing, Sight and Heart. Most verses regarding actions of believers are straightforward. However, there are also many cases when the Quran verses is translated inaccurately or taken out of context. That is why we need to study the Quran ourselves and strive in learning and discussion, instead of taking others' interpretation on the Quran as is. The ones who understand the Quranic Arabic have responsibility to explain to those who don't, and those who don't understand it must learn with his best effort and practice it. More understanding will be given after we practiced what we have previously understood.
7516 Don't move with it your tongue to hasten with it
7517 Indeed upon Us is its collection and its reading
7518 Then when We read it, then follow its reading
7519 Afterwards, upon Us is its explanationI'm not into debates because it serve no purpose other than distraction from the Deen itself. As someone previously replied, well-intended discussion would be far better. My suggestion for you (and myself) is to avoid debates and do Amilu SaliHat as much as we can.
May ALLAH be willing to guide us.
Salaam.
LaA Ilaaha Illa ALLAH
-
Yes, the messenger fulfilled a role. See 3/164 for example. He performed
- tilawah of al-kitab
- teaching al-kitab and hikmah
- purified them
The best contradiction is the concept of freedom of religion. Sunnism totally reject this while Quran gives full freedom to believe in islam or not.
So Allah says that he sent to the believers a Messenger to TEACH them Al-kitab which is QURAN
why would they need someone to teach them the Quran? I thought Qur'an is clear it doesn't need teaching
And he doesn't only teach Qur'an he also teach wisdom.
And who is better teacher then Prophet Muhammad ? not me or you or your father or mine or bin Hanbal or Bukhari.
that's not a contradiction, means you don't force people to convert into Islam, it doesn't mean Muslims can disbelieve as they like.
by the way why you call yourself AbdualQuran? do you worship it?
-
I'm sorry are you a Muslim? do you believe that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger?
Yes ? as stated...
...reason for posting Qur?an definition (i.e. my beliefs) at the beginning.
24 and those who believe with what was descended to you?
It's clear who "to you" (God bless him) is referring, not present to teach anyone although the examples to follow are ...
12111 In their narration (stories there) had been an example to those of the pure minds/hearts (it) was not an information/speech to be fabricated and but confirmation (to) which (is) between his hands and detailing/explaining/clarifying every thing, and guidance, and mercy to (a) nation believing.
Peace
-
instead of throwing at me coped questions with 3-4 options like if I'm in a quiz with limited answers assuming only one is true I asked you to ask me with your own questions
Actually Bro Edip did wrote those questions by himself, so those are his own questions.
Well, if you don't want to be limited by the choices, you can answer anyway you want, btw. I am curious about how you will answer those questions. Would you?
-
So Allah says that he sent to the believers a Messenger to TEACH them Al-kitab which is QURAN
why would they need someone to teach them the Quran? I thought Qur'an is clear it doesn't need teaching
Teaching them doesn't mean giving them new information about it. He could have even given them ayaat which explains other ayaat.
And he doesn't only teach Qur'an he also teach wisdom.
Al-hikmah is an aspect of Quran. 17/39 mentions teachings of al-hikmah taught in 17/22-38.
And who is better teacher then Prophet Muhammad ? not me or you or your father or mine or bin Hanbal or Bukhari.
Ok, tell me how you access the teachings of 'Prophet Muhammad'?
that's not a contradiction, means you don't force people to convert into Islam, it doesn't mean Muslims can disbelieve as they like.
Actually, ANYONE can believe or disbelieve as they like
10/99If it had been thy Lord's will, they would all have believed,- all who are on earth! wilt thou then compel mankind, against their will, to believe!
As for 2/256 which u quoted above, there are no conditions given in the ayah itself. Those conditions were imposed by your mufassireen.
-
1- your sect is the only true one
2- Ahlu Alsunnah Waljammah are false
Those who follow The Quran alone are not a sect. In fact, sects have nothing to do with Muhammad and the teachings of God.
3103 Hold firmly to the rope of God, all of you, and do not be divided. Remember God's blessing upon you when you were enemies and He united your hearts, then you became, with His blessing, brothers; and you were on the verge of a pit of fire and He saved you from it. Thus, God clarifies for you His signs, so that you may be guided.
3105 Do not be like those who divided and differed after the proof had come to them. For them is a painful retribution.
6159 Those who have divided their obligation ("deen" and become sects, you have nothing to do with them. Their matter will be with God, then, He will inform them of what they had done.
Who authorized the title "Sunni"? Was it God?
2278 Strive in the cause of God properly. He is the One who has chosen you, and He has made no hardship for you in the obligation ("deen", the creed of your father Abraham; He is the One who named you 'the peaceful' ("al muslimeen" from before as well as in this. So let the messenger be witness over you and you be witness over people. So uphold the bond and bring forth the betterment and hold tight to God, He is your patron. What an excellent patron, and what an excellent supporter.
Muhammad was to follow Abraham. Also, please show us in The Quran where it says that we should follow the sunna/hadiths of Muhammad.
2530 The messenger said, "My Lord, my people have forsaken this reading (quran)."
-
Actually Prophet Muhammad forbidden the writing of hadith on his companions(they used to write what he says) he told them not to write what he says until they are finished of writing the whole Qur'an.
and when Prophet Muhammad died, his companions didn't know what to do with his body or where to bury him, Abu Bakr said that he heard him saying all the Prophets are buried where they die.
That is a simple example of using hadith even when it was not recorded yet, ofc you won't believe the story, lets assume the story is true, the Qur'an was not collected anytime before the 3th Khalifa, and that was long time after the Prophet's death. and prophet Muhammad's instructions was to write the whole Qur'an before writing what he says.
Ahh, and that explains away the burning of hadith collections because......... ? Oh wait, it doesn't.
It is a pity you evade the points made, and continue to repeat what you have been told is true, without evidence.
But in any case, I'm interested in this comment of yours "he told them not to write what he says until they are finished of writing the whole Qur'an."
Specific evidence please?
