Questions to all Quranists, about the Shahada

mohf

Salaam Brothers and sisters welcome

Before starting, please let me make it VERY CLEARLY that I am NOT a "hadither" (as some Quranists here call all the other 1.5 billion muslims). I absolutely do NOT believe that ahadiths are neccesary for salvation. Please do not post stuff as "Dude the Quran is fully detailed, explains everything, is very clear, the hadiths are written hundreds of years after our Prophet died " etc., because that is completely fftopic. I am trying to discuss the "extravagent" things "some" Quranists say.

I have been examining the religion of following the Quran without any external references, explanations, interpretations or what ever, and I like the general idea. How ever, I am oftenly comming across very stupid statements made by Quranists, which, are usually made because of their hatred towards all the other muslims.

So I have a few questions. I Would appreciate it if people could answer them.

Do I commit shirk if I say "Muhammad Rasool Allah" (= Muhammad is the messenger of God) ?

A) Yes.
B) No but you must avoid saying it.
C) No.

Do I commit shirk if I say "Ashado inna Muhammad Rasool Allah" (= I witness that Muhammad is the messenger of God) ?

A) Yes.
B) No but you must avoid saying it.
C) No.

Do I commit shirk if I say during my salat "Ashado an La illaha illallah, wahdahu la sharikala, wa ashadu inna Muhammad Rasool Allah" (= I witness that there is no deity other than God, He is alone with no partners, and I witness that Muhammad is the messenger of God) ?

A) Yes.
B) No but you must avoid saying it.
C) No.

Am I a munafiq if I say the same thing as verse 631 is talking about "nashhadu innaka larasulu l-lahi" (= We witness that you are (indeed) the Messenger of God) ?

A) Yes.
B) No but you must avoid saying it.
C) No.

Please choose the most fitting option

A) Pronouncing the second Shahada* is obligatory
B) Pronouncing the second Shahada* is prohibited
C) Pronouncing the second Shahada* is neither obligatory nor prohibited

= "Ashado inna Muhammad Rasool Allah" (= I witness that Muhammad is the messenger of God)

After some people have answered these questions, I will post Quranic references which answer these questions.

I can never repeat it enough I am NOT a hadither. I am someone who is studying the "religion" of following the Quran Alone for a few years. I am not intending to do any hatred or something like that.

May God guide us all,

Peace!

Harun

Peace mohf

I am NOT a "hadither" (as some Quranists here call all the other 1.5 billion muslims).

lolololol

Do u mind if the Monotheists say the other "mainstream" people "Hadither". What should they be called?.....Islam at its face today is "ANYHTING BUT QURAN".

U say that Hadith is not necessary...even one hadith...they will take pleasure in labelling u as apostates and heretics....my own friend(s) have done that with me......

Do u think it is wrong to call people Hadithers....???...they get hold of Hadith with the tightness with which they should hold the "Rope of the Lord" as the Quran says?

Today, in Islam everything is practiced but the Quran
in maktabs everything is taught but the Quran....

and mind u Hadith = that everything...

"In which they can find everything they want?"...Al Quran

No Disrespect.....but mohf IT WILL NEVER PAY to SHOW LIBERALITY IN ADDRESSING THE "ON THE FACE" MUSLIMS....

They won't think twice before excommunicating u.........and I relly and exactly mean u.....havenot ur friends did???

Sorry if I was harsh......

Peace
Harun

Harun

Peace mohf and all friends...

I mean really I am sorry. I could not find better words in real time. It describes the state of affairs in my mind.

I repent seriously if it hurts anyone.

I can't find any place (literally) to burst out rotfl
I have friends only here

So plz don't think otherwise....

Peace

Aamer

In my humble opinion, the answer to all of your multiple choice questions is C. If we believe that Quran is from our creator, Allah, then we are also accepting that Muhammad was his messenger as Allah chose him to deliver the revelation to mankind. Some "Hadithers" haha, go way too far, almost worshiping Prophet Muhammad, but I think there is no harm in simply stating that he was the messenger of Allah. He is given a lot of respect by Allah in the Quran. It's the Hadith which are disrespectful to our beloved Prophet.

Aamer

After thinking about it, I'd say it's safer to leave the Prophets name out of Shahada for two reasons...

It doesn't make sense that the Prophet himself would have said "I testify that Muhammad is the messenger of God"
This verse makes it dangerous and it's safer not to say any other name alongside Allah...

And when God Alone is mentioned, the hearts of those who do not believe in the Hereafter are filled with aversion; and when others are mentioned besides Him, they rejoice!

sushi1992

After thinking about it, I'd say it's safer to leave the Prophets name out of Shahada for two reasons...

It doesn't make sense that the Prophet himself would have said "I testify that Muhammad is the messenger of God"
This verse makes it dangerous and it's safer not to say any other name alongside Allah...

And when God Alone is mentioned, the hearts of those who do not believe in the Hereafter are filled with aversion; and when others are mentioned besides Him, they rejoice!

Also remember the verses that state thay we shall not distinguish between prophets. If we mention one, we have to mention everyone. As Allah says, when it's name is mentioned then this is the way to go - simple as ).

peace

noshirk

Salaam MohF

Do I commit shirk if I say "Muhammad Rasool Allah" (= Muhammad is the messenger of God) ?

A) Yes.
B) No but you must avoid saying it.
C) No.
Respond is C.

Do I commit shirk if I say "Ashado inna Muhammad Rasool Allah" (= I witness that Muhammad is the messenger of God) ?

A) Yes.
B) No but you must avoid saying it.
C) No.
D it is a lie. I cannot testify for for what i have not seen (LA ACH-HADOU ALA MA LAM ACH-HAD)
it is a Shirk only when you say that God told us us to say that. It is not in Quran. It is in Hadith. And then it will be there a mix (shirk) of words of God with other words from unknow sources and attributed to Muhammad.

Do I commit shirk if I say during my salat "Ashado an La illaha illallah, wahdahu la sharikala, wa ashadu inna Muhammad Rasool Allah" (= I witness that there is no deity other than God, He is alone with no partners, and I witness that Muhammad is the messenger of God) ?

A) Yes.
B) No but you must avoid saying it.
C) No.

same answer. It is always a lie whatever you are making, salat or something else.
however if by salat, you mean prosternation towards the cubic stone in desert. Then it is whorshipping of a cubic statue.

Am I a munafiq if I say the same thing as verse 631 is talking about "nashhadu innaka larasulu l-lahi" (= We witness that you are (indeed) the Messenger of God) ?

A) Yes.
B) No but you must avoid saying it.
C) No.

no. it is surely a lie. You can be either Munafiq or simply deceived by false Arbabs. Only God can testify on what is true. He is Alimou el chahada.

Please choose the most fitting option

A) Pronouncing the second Shahada* is obligatory
B) Pronouncing the second Shahada* is prohibited
C) Pronouncing the second Shahada* is neither obligatory nor prohibited

B is most fitting since a Muslim to have to says lies

I am waiting for the quranic references.
I want to thank you for your questions. If you were a hadithist, even questions would have included a lie.

Peace

Bigmo

Salaam Brothers and sisters welcome

Before starting, please let me make it VERY CLEARLY that I am NOT a "hadither" (as some Quranists here call all the other 1.5 billion muslims). I absolutely do NOT believe that ahadiths are neccesary for salvation. Please do not post stuff as "Dude the Quran is fully detailed, explains everything, is very clear, the hadiths are written hundreds of years after our Prophet died " etc., because that is completely fftopic. I am trying to discuss the "extravagent" things "some" Quranists say.

I have been examining the religion of following the Quran without any external references, explanations, interpretations or what ever, and I like the general idea. How ever, I am oftenly comming across very stupid statements made by Quranists, which, are usually made because of their hatred towards all the other muslims.

So I have a few questions. I Would appreciate it if people could answer them.

Do I commit shirk if I say "Muhammad Rasool Allah" (= Muhammad is the messenger of God) ?

A) Yes.
B) No but you must avoid saying it.
C) No.

Do I commit shirk if I say "Ashado inna Muhammad Rasool Allah" (= I witness that Muhammad is the messenger of God) ?

A) Yes.
B) No but you must avoid saying it.
C) No.

Do I commit shirk if I say during my salat "Ashado an La illaha illallah, wahdahu la sharikala, wa ashadu inna Muhammad Rasool Allah" (= I witness that there is no deity other than God, He is alone with no partners, and I witness that Muhammad is the messenger of God) ?

A) Yes.
B) No but you must avoid saying it.
C) No.

Am I a munafiq if I say the same thing as verse 631 is talking about "nashhadu innaka larasulu l-lahi" (= We witness that you are (indeed) the Messenger of God) ?

A) Yes.
B) No but you must avoid saying it.
C) No.

Please choose the most fitting option

A) Pronouncing the second Shahada* is obligatory
B) Pronouncing the second Shahada* is prohibited
C) Pronouncing the second Shahada* is neither obligatory nor prohibited

= "Ashado inna Muhammad Rasool Allah" (= I witness that Muhammad is the messenger of God)

After some people have answered these questions, I will post Quranic references which answer these questions.

I can never repeat it enough I am NOT a hadither. I am someone who is studying the "religion" of following the Quran Alone for a few years. I am not intending to do any hatred or something like that.

May God guide us all,

Peace!

Good points raised. The reason why some Quranist see all this as shirk is due to how they understand what shirk is. Many Quranist came from a Sunni background and in the last decades there has been a strong influence by whats known as salafis. They understood shirk to be intercession and veneration. However shirk if studied properly is radically different than what many assume.

I have reseacrhed more than theirty pagan traditions and have found shirk to be a radically different theology than what is sometimes assumed. Sunnisma nd Shiasm and even Christianity and Judaism have nothing to do with shirk.

I have dealt with this issue here

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9603937.msg299923#msg299923

As can be seen shirk is very different than anything you mentioned. Shirk is a theology and not a behavior. You don't commit shirk, you either believe in it or not. No monotheist can ever commit shirk.

mohf

Sorry, doublepost...
@Mods delete please.

mohf

Do u think it is wrong to call people Hadithers.... ...they get hold of Hadith with the tightness with which they should hold the "Rope of the Lord" as the Quran says?

Yes I think it is wrong. Very wrong. Unless you like to see others to call you and other Quranists by nicknames too.

Quran 4911

O you who believe, let not a people ridicule people; perhaps they may be better than them; nor let women ridicule women; perhaps they may be better than them. And do not insult one another and do not call each other by nicknames. Wretched is the name of disobedience after faith. And whoever does not repent - then it is those who are the wrongdoers.

No Disrespect.....but mohf IT WILL NEVER PAY to SHOW LIBERALITY IN ADDRESSING THE "ON THE FACE" MUSLIMS....
They won't think twice before excommunicating u.........and I relly and exactly mean u.....havenot ur friends did???

Sorry, but what do our friends have to do with this? Personally, I have no problem with my friends. I respect my friends, and they respect me. If you are having problem with friends and it is because of your faith, then there is something else wrong.
If Quranism is the true path, you should show that it is the true path by being the perfect example, not by ridiculing and calling others by offensive nicknames. If that is what you do to your friends, then it is only logical that your friends will do the same to you.

In my humble opinion, the answer to all of your multiple choice questions is C. (?)He is given a lot of respect by Allah in the Quran.

I agree.

And when God Alone is mentioned, the hearts of those who do not believe in
the Hereafter are filled with aversion;and when others are mentioned besides Him, they rejoice!

This verse is obviously sent down for those who believe that God has partners. But when we are saying that Muhammad is God?s messenger, we are not saying he is a partner of God. Surely, I do not think it is obligatory, but neither do I think it is prohibited to say the second shahada. It is no shirk, in contrast to most Christians who make Jesus really a partner of God.

After thinking about it, I'd say it's safer to leave the Prophets name out of Shahada for two reasons...

Well, I am not very sure about that. There is one Quranic story wherein the followers of prophet Musa performed prostration (sujud) for the ?God of Musa? right after they saw God?s signs

Quran 7104-122

And Moses said, "O Pharaoh, I am a messenger from the Lord of the worlds.
obligated not to say about Allah except the truth. I have come to you with clear evidence from your Lord, so send with me the Children of Israel."
said, "If you have come with a sign, then bring it forth, if you should be of the truthful."
So Moses threw his staff, and suddenly it was a serpent, manifest.
And he drew out his hand; thereupon it was white for the observers.
Said the eminent among the people of Pharaoh, "Indeed, this is a learned magician
Who wants to expel you from your land , so what do you instruct?"
They said, "Postpone him and his brother and send among the cities gatherers
Who will bring you every learned magician."
And the magicians came to Pharaoh. They said, "Indeed for us is a reward if we are the predominant."
He said, "Yes, and, , you will be among those made near ."
They said, "O Moses, either you throw , or we will be the ones to throw ."
He said, "Throw," and when they threw, they bewitched the eyes of the people and struck terror into them, and they presented a great magic.
And We inspired to Moses, "Throw your staff," and at once it devoured what they were falsifying.
So the truth was established, and abolished was what they were doing.
And Pharaoh and his people were overcome right there and became debased.
And the magicians fell down in prostration.
They said, "We have believed in the Lord of the worlds,
The Lord of Moses and Aaron."

Points to note

Musa said "I am a messenger from the Lord of the worlds"
After the magicians saw God's clear signs, they became muslims and fell down in prostration; during their prostration, they said "We believe in the Lord of the worlds, the Lord of Musa and Aaron"

Also remember the verses that state thay we shall not distinguish between prophets. If we mention one, we have to mention everyone. As Allah says, when it's name is mentioned then this is the way to go - simple as .

Agree, and also this verse from the story of Yusuf confirms this

Quran 1238

And I have followed the religion of my fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. And it was not for us to associate anything with Allah . That is from the favor of Allah upon us and upon the people, but most of the people are not grateful.

Good points raised. The reason why some Quranist see all this as shirk is due to how they understand what shirk is. Many Quranist came from a Sunni background and in the last decades there has been a strong influence by whats known as salafis. They understood shirk to be intercession and veneration. However shirk if studied properly is radically different than what many assume.

Couldn?t agree more. Most Quranists are in fact ex-traditionalists, and many are influenced by Islamophobes or sects as salafism / wahabism. When they convert to Quranism, they get so much hatred against their old sect that they will find any reason to bash them. And usually, they are then not much different than those islamofobes who are bashing 1.5 billion muslims just because one of them is a terrorists. The same way, I am often reading such extemistic stuff here, and this topic about the second shahada is just one example the sunni?s make something obligatory which has not been made obligatory in the Quran, thus to backfire the sunni?s they attack them by making something kufur/haram while the Quran never said so, and now some Quranists are even calling traditionalists are even calling them mushrikeen...

If you were a hadithist, even questions would have included a lie.

You have actually not answered, but instead tried to avoid to answer questions 2, 3 and 4. However, your answer of question 5 gives more than enough information about you.

Furthermore, can you please tell explain me, what lie this ?question? contains

Am I a munafiq if I say the same thing as verse 631 is talking about "nashhadu innaka larasulu l-lahi"

Am I a liar when I recite the Quran and include 631 as a Quranic verse? If so, is this verse abrogated? Please explain. Don't come with stories from Sunni's or why you think there is no shahada. Explain why someone is a liar if he JUST recited the statement, because the question said just that Am I a munafiq if I said it?

Bigmo

Yes I think it is wrong. Very wrong. Unless you like to see others to call you and other Quranists by nicknames too.

Quran 4911

O you who believe, let not a people ridicule people; perhaps they may be better than them; nor let women ridicule women; perhaps they may be better than them. And do not insult one another and do not call each other by nicknames. Wretched is the name of disobedience after faith. And whoever does not repent - then it is those who are the wrongdoers.

Sorry, but what do our friends have to do with this? Personally, I have no problem with my friends. I respect my friends, and they respect me. If you are having problem with friends and it is because of your faith, then there is something else wrong.
If Quranism is the true path, you should show that it is the true path by being the perfect example, not by ridiculing and calling others by offensive nicknames. If that is what you do to your friends, then it is only logical that your friends will do the same to you.
I agree.
This verse is obviously sent down for those who believe that God has partners. But when we are saying that Muhammad is God?s messenger, we are not saying he is a partner of God. Surely, I do not think it is obligatory, but neither do I think it is prohibited to say the second shahada. It is no shirk, in contrast to most Christians who make Jesus really a partner of God.
Well, I am not very sure about that. There is one Quranic story wherein the followers of prophet Musa performed prostration (sujud) for the ?God of Musa? right after they saw God?s signs

Quran 7104-122

And Moses said, "O Pharaoh, I am a messenger from the Lord of the worlds.
obligated not to say about Allah except the truth. I have come to you with clear evidence from your Lord, so send with me the Children of Israel."
said, "If you have come with a sign, then bring it forth, if you should be of the truthful."
So Moses threw his staff, and suddenly it was a serpent, manifest.
And he drew out his hand; thereupon it was white for the observers.
Said the eminent among the people of Pharaoh, "Indeed, this is a learned magician
Who wants to expel you from your land , so what do you instruct?"
They said, "Postpone him and his brother and send among the cities gatherers
Who will bring you every learned magician."
And the magicians came to Pharaoh. They said, "Indeed for us is a reward if we are the predominant."
He said, "Yes, and, , you will be among those made near ."
They said, "O Moses, either you throw , or we will be the ones to throw ."
He said, "Throw," and when they threw, they bewitched the eyes of the people and struck terror into them, and they presented a great magic.
And We inspired to Moses, "Throw your staff," and at once it devoured what they were falsifying.
So the truth was established, and abolished was what they were doing.
And Pharaoh and his people were overcome right there and became debased.
And the magicians fell down in prostration.
They said, "We have believed in the Lord of the worlds,
The Lord of Moses and Aaron."

Points to note

Musa said "I am a messenger from the Lord of the worlds"
After the magicians saw God's clear signs, they became muslims and fell down in prostration; during their prostration, they said "We believe in the Lord of the worlds, the Lord of Musa and Aaron"

Agree, and also this verse from the story of Yusuf confirms this

Quran 1238

And I have followed the religion of my fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. And it was not for us to associate anything with Allah . That is from the favor of Allah upon us and upon the people, but most of the people are not grateful.

Couldn?t agree more. Most Quranists are in fact ex-traditionalists, and many are influenced by Islamophobes or sects as salafism / wahabism. When they convert to Quranism, they get so much hatred against their old sect that they will find any reason to bash them. And usually, they are then not much different than those islamofobes who are bashing 1.5 billion muslims just because one of them is a terrorists. The same way, I am often reading such extemistic stuff here, and this topic about the second shahada is just one example the sunni?s make something obligatory which has not been made obligatory in the Quran, thus to backfire the sunni?s they attack them by making something kufur/haram while the Quran never said so, and now some Quranists are even calling traditionalists are even calling them mushrikeen...
You have actually not answered, but instead tried to avoid to answer questions 2, 3 and 4. However, your answer of question 5 gives more than enough information about you.

Furthermore, can you please tell explain me, what lie this ?question? contains
Am I a liar when I recite the Quran and include 631 as a Quranic verse? If so, is this verse abrogated? Please explain. Don't come with stories from Sunni's or why you think there is no shahada. Explain why someone is a liar if he JUST recited the statement, because the question said just that Am I a munafiq if I said it?

I agree with you however I do not see this having anything to do with hate. The Quranist persuasion is followed by people of very diverse backgrounds. Its natural that people have their influences and bring them with them. There is a lot of space for individualism in the Quranist persuasion so its natural that people will see the Quran in their own way. The Quran does not mind differences (ikhtilaf) but condemned the ikhtilaf that leads to seperation (iftiraq). What the Quran mentioned explicitly is where you will get agreement and what it mentioned implicitly is where you will find differences. There is nothing wrong with differences as long as it does not lead to seperation from one another.

What happened is that many people were given a definition of shirk that was mostly veneration and intercession. So when they see people making tawaf around the Ka'ba they see that as worshiping a stone. They see shahada that Sunni proclaim as elevating the prophet to God's level. This is because they see it as a veneration and over glorifying. However shirk is not about elevating anything to God's level as much as its about demoting God to human and earthly level. The key here is the false belief that the pagans of Mecca believed in God as the sole creator and sustainer but were still mushriks. So now they believe many Muslims can also be "practicing" shirk. In reality the pagans of Mecca and any other pagan traditions never believed in God as the sole creator or sustainer. Their creation stories tell us about their thology. Its radically different than the monotheist tradition.

P.S just like their is nothingw rong proclaiming Muhamamd is the messenger of God as a declation of faith, there is nothing wrong with proclaiming Jesus as the messenger of God or Noah. Just like there is nothing wrong with proclaiming Jesus as the way to salvation there is nothing wrong with doing the same for David or Abraham.

Harun

Peace mohf,

Yes I think it is wrong. Very wrong. Unless you like to see others to call you and other Quranists by nicknames too.

Brother, Hadither is NOT a nickname or a name invente to ridicule anyone. You call people Christians, Hindus, Buddists, etc etc. Similarly Hadithism is a religion which teaches to follow Hadiths (mind u NOT Quran), Imams, to deitify prophets, to slaughter reason etc etc.

People can call the Monotheists Quranists, but for the sake of agonizing and declaring them to be another sect WITHIN islam, there comes a problem. Has not the Lord called some Sahaba the Hypocrites, some the Mushriks.

Sorry, but what do our friends have to do with this? Personally, I have no problem with my friends. I respect my friends, and they respect me. If you are having problem with friends and it is because of your faith, then there is something else wrong.

My friends also don't have problems with me and my issues. In fact they always support my very stance, except the so called MUSLIM ones, the Mulla Worshippers, the Bearded, the Prophet Deitifiers have abandoned me, call me Kafir and try to revive my faith in their version of islam just because I TOLD them that I could not follow their version anymore. If ur friends don't have problems with u, then u DONT INFACT HAVE any MUSLIM friends.

If Quranism is the true path, you should show that it is the true path by being the perfect example, not by ridiculing and calling others by offensive nicknames. If that is what you do to your friends, then it is only logical that your friends will do the same to you.

Agreed.

But the PERFECT EXAMPLE thing does work in long run. the Lord tells we must REASON with the polytheist, atheists in good manner. Please don't think that it is a ridicule to call them by names. It is just a formal name for distinguishing them.

IT WILL NEVER PAY to SHOW LIBERALITY IN ADDRESSING THE "ON THE FACE" MUSLIMS....

What I mean by this is, u probably misunderstood. If people are adamant on their beliefs that are in fact polytheistic, there is need to be Fundamentalistic, to be point to point, to reason not HARSHLY but EXACTLY and very STRICTLY.

Hope u understand what I am tryin to say.

Peace Bro
Harun

ayyub

I am going to say "C" for all. Muhammad was the prophet of Allah so I don't believe stating so is shirk. In fact in stating so you are just confirming that you are a follower of the message which he delivered (the Qur'an). Though the shahada is not mentioned in the Quran I don't see how it is forbidden by the Quran as there is nothing untrue in the statement. I do agree that some (not all) Quranist take things that Muslims do that are not in the Quran and advise against them because they are not mentioned in the Quran even though the Quran does not forbid it. While at the same time they criticize the Sunni and the Shia for banning things that are not mentioned in the Quran. (Again I would like to say some not all.)

I think you would be interested in reading this article http//americanunitarian.org/grantshahada.htm It's a Unitarian Christian advocating for a Unitarian Christian shahada. (The rest of the site is really informative too) As they believe in one God and Jesus as the messenger of God (and not God himself) I feel they are also submitters to God, not committing shirk and a part of our brethren.

I have also heard the argument brought forth about a Muslim being one who submits to the one God, regardless of whether they are a Jew, Christian or any other name they go by and a momin (believer) is one who believes in the message of the Quran brought by prophet Muhammad. The justification for this is linguistics based on the use of both words in the Quran. I have not done enough independent investigation to comment on this (maybe someone else here has), but there is a logic to this theory and a difference in shahada could distinguish this. (Though I am not saying it is necessarily required to. Just throwing around ideas.) For more on the Muslim/momin theory I suggest you read 'Notes on Islam' by Sir Ahmed Hussain. There is a free kindle download at Amazon http//www.amazon.com/Notes-on-Islam-ebook/dp/B0082X9Z76

Allah knows best.

Jafar

All questions C

You should ask few more questions

Is Shahada important? NO
Is Shahada matter at all? NO It doesn't matter at all.
Where did this entire idea of doing a Shahada originated from? Judaism's SHEMA.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shema_Yisrael

Salam / Peace

Scribbler

Salamun Alaykum.

My answers

C
C
B
C
C

I'm waiting to see the Quranic references which you want to show us.

Yabba_Dabba_Doo

C
C
You are not committing shirk unless you equate Muhammad to the title of god by either deifying him.
B
Now this is something I disliked in Salat as a Hadither. You are putting Muhammad in your prayers as if you are praying to him the same way lots of Christians put the name of Jesus in their prayer when talking to god. The perfect example of this is when Christians say at the end of their prayers "In Jesus's name Amen". You are performing Anthropolatry (worship of a human beings).
Another idiotic example of this is during Tashahhud when you essentially place blessing and ask for peace upon Muhammad and Abraham....who are mortal men and dead (no offense to anyone). If you sincerely believe in their nubbu'wah then you know they are in the fields of Jannah enjoying their rightful paradise. So reciting Tashahhud is essentially almost making a person sound unsure of the nubbu'wah off Abraham and Muhammad. Appreciating the Prophet and his message is different from venerating him to an almost "godlike" status.
Do you really wish to see the Prophet end up the same way as Jesus because of how Christians twisted the message. I have talked to many non-Christians and they themselves know for a fact the deification of Jesus does not come from Abrahamic, Judaic or even "Biblical" roots. It is entirely pagan, just like Catholics and their polytheistic veneration of "Saints". Polytheism (especially int he form of anthropolatry) leaves a dirty taste in my mouth, I would rather eat razor blades and dirt yuck.
So always be sure you draw a THICK, BOLD, WELL SEEN LINE between Tawhid and shirk and be sure you do not fall into the traps of anthropolatry. Anthropolatry is a very new word but you must not be ignorant of what it means. Worship the Lord and the Lord alone, pray to God and God alone, never involve the veneration of men alongside god because sooner or later you will get confused. You do not follow "Muhammad's" words, you follow the word of God and Muhammad "was his messenger and servant". That line appears in almost every Surah of the Qur'an, please remember it and never place Muhammad in any other title.
Now just because I am not a "Muslim" in the traditional sense does not make my words invalid. I dislike polytheism with a passion and I hate anthropolatry above all else because it is "Secret Polytheism". I have told Christians and Hindus the same words as I have now with great haste and happiness.
C
C

Oh dear me, I ranted again -X

noshirk

If you were a hadithist, even questions would have included a lie.

You have actually not answered, but instead tried to avoid to answer questions 2, 3 and 4. However, your answer of question 5 gives more than enough information about you.

Furthermore, can you please tell explain me, what lie this ?question? contains

Am I a munafiq if I say the same thing as verse 631 is talking about "nashhadu innaka larasulu l-lahi"

Salaam

Am I a munafiq if I say the same thing as verse 631 is talking about "nashhadu innaka larasulu l-lahi" NO. You can simply be an honest guy deceived by scholars (false arbabs).

The kind of lie a hadithist will do, is to say that i said that it was a lie and asked me why i said that.
It is an example of question including a lie.

Other Hadithist classical question including a lie
How can we know when to do salat el dhor and el asr without hadiths ?
Response is, of course, el dhor and el asr are never mentionned in quran. Quran have not to fix when and how to make rituals invented by hadiths.

Other example of Hadithits questions
How can we know how many times we have to turn around Kaaba during Hajj without Hadiths?

I like very much Hadithist questions. They are so funny!

Peace

Emil

Do I commit shirk if I say "Muhammad Rasool Allah" (= Muhammad is the messenger of God) ?

A) Yes.
B) No but you must avoid saying it.
C) No.
Answ C. How is that shirk when the Quran itself says Muhammed is the messenger?

Do I commit shirk if I say "Ashado inna Muhammad Rasool Allah" (= I witness that Muhammad is the messenger of God) ?

A) Yes.
B) No but you must avoid saying it.
C) No.
Answ C. Prophet Muhammed is the messenger of God. So is Jesus, Moses, Abraham etc. How can it be shirk to acknowledge one or any of them?

Do I commit shirk if I say during my salat "Ashado an La illaha illallah, wahdahu la sharikala, wa ashadu inna Muhammad Rasool Allah" (= I witness that there is no deity other than God, He is alone with no partners, and I witness that Muhammad is the messenger of God) ?

A) Yes.
B) No but you must avoid saying it.
C) No.
Answ C, but that depends on the reason why you feel like including a prophet in your prayers. Are you praying to God or to Muhammed? God already knows Muhammed is a prophet, you do not need to tell God this, he already knows.

Am I a munafiq if I say the same thing as verse 631 is talking about "nashhadu innaka larasulu l-lahi" (= We witness that you are (indeed) the Messenger of God) ?

A) Yes.
B) No but you must avoid saying it.
C) No.
Answ C. Yet again, why should you not accept prophet Muhammed as a messenger of God? He was one.

Please choose the most fitting option

A) Pronouncing the second Shahada* is obligatory
B) Pronouncing the second Shahada* is prohibited
C) Pronouncing the second Shahada* is neither obligatory nor prohibited
Answ B. If you believe in God and the Quran as the guidance to God's path and that is the only source you need then you should not say the second part of the Shahada. Why? Because it implies that you also believe in hadith as a divine source since the groups that do believe in hadith are the ones that invented the second part of the shahada. This is not based on Quranic evidence.
What you are doing is that you are sending a clear statement (eventhough it might not be your intention) to other muslims and the community that you belong to a certain group, namely Sunni. If you were Shia you would add some more stuff to the shahada. If you are muslim without a sect name added in front of your belief, then you should refrain from following the rituals of the sects. But there is no shirk or anything involved. If you want to be sunni or shia or hindu or christian or anything else, then by all means, say the second, third, fourth or fifth part of the shahada. You are entitled to believe in anything you want. But you would however be quite hypocritical if you follow the rituals of one sect and on the same time reject hadith.

Bender

Am I a liar when I recite the Quran and include 631 as a Quranic verse? If so, is this verse abrogated? Please explain. Don't come with stories from Sunni's or why you think there is no shahada. Explain why someone is a liar if he JUST recited the statement, because the question said just that Am I a munafiq if I said it?

Salaam mohf,

Please reread the verse

631 When almunafiqoona come to you they say We bear witness that you are the messenger of God. And God knows that you are His messenger, and God bears witness that almunafiqeena lakathiboona.

Blue part acknowledges the green part. So how can that be a lie?

I think the misunderstanding comes from 2 things.

wrong understanding of the verse by Rashad Khalifa and people took this as a correct understanding (please correct me if I am wrong about RK, I saw this understanding a long time ago on the submitters forum, so I suppose it was from him, but not sure).
misunderstanding of the word lakathiboona, which is always (or at least almost always) translated as lying.

In the purple part Allah bears witness that almunafiqeena lakathiboona and NOT about what they say in the green part.
What does "lakathiboona" means? The next verse actually explain it a bit further.

632 They have chosen their oath as a deceit, thus they repel from the path of God. Miserable indeed is what they do.
Please check all the other verses where this word is used, for example 942, 9107, 16105

If it was about what their testimony then the purple part of 631 would refer to this, but it clearly refers to almunafiqeena.

Salaam,
Bender

Bigmo

I agree with you all however I do not see this as having anything to do with hate. The Quranist persuasion is followed by people of very diverse backgrounds. Its natural that people have their influences and bring them with them. There is a lot of space for individualism in the Quranist persuasion so its natural that people will see the Quran in their own way. The Quran does not mind differences (ikhtilaf) but condemned the ikhtilaf that leads to seperation (iftiraq). What the Quran mentioned explicitly is where you will get agreement and what it mentioned implicitly is where you will find differences. There is nothing wrong with differences as long as it does not lead to seperation from one another and dividing our ourselves into sects.

What happened is that many people were given a definition of shirk that was mostly veneration and intercession. So when they see people making tawaf around the Ka'ba they see that as worshiping a stone. They see shahada that Sunni proclaim as elevating the prophet to God's level. This is because they see it as a veneration and over glorifying. However shirk is not about elevating anything to God's level as much as its about demoting God to human and earthly level. The key here is the false belief that the pagans of Mecca believed in God as the sole creator and sustainer but were still mushriks. So now they believe many Muslims can also be "practicing" shirk. In reality the pagans of Mecca and any other pagan traditions never believed in God as the sole creator or sustainer. Their creation stories tell us about their theology. Its radically different than the monotheist tradition.

P.S just like their is nothing wrong proclaiming Muhamamad is the messenger of God as a declation of faith, there is nothing wrong with proclaiming Jesus as the messenger of God or Noah. Just like there is nothing wrong with proclaiming Jesus as the way to salvation there is nothing wrong with doing the same for David or Abraham.

My two cents.