A few questions from someone interested in Quranism
-
Hello,
I'm not a Muslim but I'm currently studying the religion and trying to get more into it. Recently Quranism has caught my eye and there are a few questions I'd like to get more insight on.
First of all, how do you interpret all those verses where the Quran commands to obey both God and the Messenger (the Messenger is almost always mentioned in the same sentence whenever the Quran commands to obey God)? The Quran is completely God's word, not the Messengers. Only in the Sunnah do Mohammad's commands come in. Take for example 465
But no, by your Lord, they will not believe until they make you, , judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in submission.Secondly the Quran and Hadith were both created from the Messenger, by the same people, in the same method. Hadith narrators and hadith preservation are done with the same method and by the same people as thosse who preserved the Quran. Why do you reject one but accept the other?
Then into more verses from the Quran...
What do you think of 4113
And were it not for Allah's grace upon thee and His mercy, a party of them had certainly designed to ruin thee. And they ruin only themselves, and they cannot harm thee in any way. And Allah has revealed to thee the Book and the Wisdom, and taught thee what thou knewest not, and Allah's grace on thee is very great.
Or 3334, where the wives of the Messenger are advised to
And remember what is recited in your houses of the verses of Allah and wisdom. Indeed, Allah is ever Subtle and Acquainted .
What does "wisdom" mean, if not the sunnah? What else is there in their houses?1644
with clear proofs and written ordinances. And We revealed to you the message that you may make clear to the people what was sent down to them and that they might give thought.
So this verse seems to indicate that the Quran also requires the Sunnah, which explains the Quranic message.Indeed, there are many parts of the Quran which would not be intelligible without hadiths. Prayer, fasting, zakat, and hajj are probably the most common ones. These are just ambiguous concepts not explained well in the Quran. Without the hadith, Muslim's wouldn't know how to perform them. Other example would be the "sword verses" and those realated to "killing infidels". Without the historical context provided by Hadith, these verses would be exactly what critics of Islam claim them to be violent commandments urging Muslims to fight against (any and all) disbelievers.
The hadiths give crucial information about islamic practices, the historical context of the Quran, and how to lvie life according to how Mohammad, the best Muslim of all time, did. I don't see the point in completely rejecting all of it. I agree it's important to be more ciritcal of it, even if they are sahih, but completely rejecting hadith, written by the closest companions of the Prophet, seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
I know this is ltos of questions, but I'm genuinely interested in Quranist beliefs! Looking forward to hearing your take on this
-
Salaam.
First of all, how do you interpret all those verses where the Quran commands to obey both God and the Messenger (the Messenger is almost always mentioned in the same sentence whenever the Quran commands to obey God)? The Quran is completely God's word, not the Messengers. Only in the Sunnah do Mohammad's commands come in. Take for example 465
But no, by your Lord, they will not believe until they make you, , judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in submission.Think like this
- Is Messenger= Hadith books of Bukhari/ Tirmidhi/Muslim?
If yes why do they call these books Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Tirmidhi instead of Sahih Muhammad?
If you read the verse beneath 465 you will notice God is talking about people who don't obey God until they are sent a Messenger. Its like they need to be told by a man that they should believe. Otherwise, they won't do a thing.
But no, by your Lord, they will not believe until they make you, , judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in submission.And if We had decreed upon them, "Kill yourselves" or "Leave your homes," they would not have done it, except for a few of them. But if they had done what they were instructed, it would have been better for them and a firmer position .465-66
Secondly the Quran and Hadith were both created from the Messenger, by the same people, in the same method. Hadith narrators and hadith preservation are done with the same method and by the same people as thosse who preserved the Quran. Why do you reject one but accept the other?
- False. There is no doubt that Quran is against such secondary books. But there is more. Consider the following quotes from real hadith collectors of the time
Muhammad b. Yazd al-Muhallab said Shuba said to me ?You almost never come across anyone who would have investigated these adth like my investigation and sought them as I did. I have pondered them but found that not even a third is valid among them (adth).?
"I fear that nothing will lead me to hell more than adth.?
Ibn Qutayba al-Dnawar, al-Marif, v. 1, 501. This quote is also from Shu'ba.
"By God, truly in poetry I am more sound than in adth."
al-Khatib al-Baghd?di, al-J?mi' li-ikhtil?f, 2 139-40
"As long as one provided the isnad one could narrate dubious hadiths, provided that one "disassociate oneself from responsibility for it {al-bar?'a min al- 'uhda)."Abu Abdallah Muhammad Ibn Al-Murahhal (d. 716/1317)Sahih Muslim kitdb si/dt al-mundfiqin wa ahkdmihim, bdb ibtidd' al-khalq wa khalq Adam
"Indeed, in this exemption {istithnd' something makes my soul uneasy. For it is a claim without proof, especially since we have found that many of the hadlth masters not like someone who pays with a counterfeit coin and conceals it? For indeed most people cannot distinguish a forgery from an authentic , so if a master adth scholar presents a adth, it does not occur to people?s hearts but that he has used it as proof because it is authentic."
- A large number of Persians were behind hadith books. Now their past isn't that nice. Do check https//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Zoroastrians
Bukhari's grandfather was forced to become Muslim. Different victims take such thing in different ways. Some will always try to take revenge. The idea of faking to be of a religion is still very common. Christianity is usually a big victim of this.
- There is no way to compare hadith books with Quran.
Quran has its own lock for which it remains safe from corruption. First of all, it is a binary symmetric book. Remove or add one verse to it and people will just know about it. Secondly, the book can be fully memorized even by children. Plenty of people globally do it. Meanwhile, hadiths are going through edits even now. The so called hadith science is extremely flawed. In fact, there is no study out there which confirms that chinese whisper can give out correct stories. Try matching Muhammad of hadith with Muhammad of Quran. They are two different people.
And were it not for Allah's grace upon thee and His mercy, a party of them had certainly designed to ruin thee. And they ruin only themselves, and they cannot harm thee in any way. And Allah has revealed to thee the Book and the Wisdom, and taught thee what thou knewest not, and Allah's grace on thee is very great.
Or 3334, where the wives of the Messenger are advised to
And remember what is recited in your houses of the verses of Allah and wisdom. Indeed, Allah is ever Subtle and Acquainted .
What does "wisdom" mean, if not the sunnah? What else is there in their houses?Sectarians use it to show that wisdom means hadiths or sayings of the prophet. They got this info from Shafi. But his book doesn't show any linguistic proof of how he came to this conclusion. It is just there and his writings very much show that he was just a dishonest marketer.
Truth is that the word Sunnah exists in Quran. But it is called Sunnah of Allah. Shafi claimed that hikmah means wisdom. Note that sectarians don't recite hadiths. Hikmah is right in the verses. We are told to ponder upon the verses. That's how wisdom is understood from them.1644
with clear proofs and written ordinances. And We revealed to you the message that you may make clear to the people what was sent down to them and that they might give thought.
So this verse seems to indicate that the Quran also requires the Sunnah, which explains the Quranic message.I know this is another most misused verse. Check the following verse
And, when Allah took a covenant from those who were given the Scripture, , "You must make it clear to the people and not conceal it." But they threw it away behind their backs and exchanged it for a small price. And wretched is that which they purchased.So this should make us question why doesn't Allah say in the Quran that in addition to scriptures like Gospel and Torah, messengers left their Sunnah. Abraham was also tagged as a great example. Where are his hadith books?
Indeed, there are many parts of the Quran which would not be intelligible without hadiths. Prayer, fasting, zakat, and hajj are probably the most common ones.
Untrue. Full prayers are not even mentioned in hadith books and whatever is available leave the prayer malfunctioning. Their own scholar admits it https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbrj-BvAF8g
Most of the other rituals simply are corrupted by hadiths.These are just ambiguous concepts not explained well in the Quran. Without the hadith, Muslim's wouldn't know how to perform them. Other example would be the "sword verses" and those realated to "killing infidels".
The problem is in the word qatal (kill and fight in english) in the verses. Its other meanings are defeat, explain, teach, etc. In most verses, when qatal is used as kill the infidels they become confusing.
Here is how the sects interpret it
(95) And when the forbidden months have passed, kill the idolaters wherever you find them and take them prisoners, and beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent and observe Prayer and pay the Zakat, then leave their way free. Surely, Allah is Most Forgiving, Merciful.Question to ask here If the first command is to kill them then how to obey the next commands such as take them to prison?
Without the historical context provided by Hadith, these verses would be exactly what critics of Islam claim them to be violent commandments urging Muslims to fight against (any and all) disbelievers.
Nope, Quran has plenty of verses which tell us that Muslims are not allowed to go around randomly fighting against disbelievers.
But if they stop, God is most forgiving, most merciful (2192)
Now if they incline toward peace, then incline to it, and place your trust in God, for God is the all-hearing, the all-knowing (861)Fighting can be done only in self defense. That's all.
The hadiths give crucial information about islamic practices, the historical context of the Quran, and how to lvie life according to how Mohammad, the best Muslim of all time, did.
Nope, living the life of Muhammad through hadiths is same as a little monster trying to live the life of lady gaga. It has nothing to do with Islam.
I don't see the point in completely rejecting all of it.
We find it important.
I agree it's important to be more ciritcal of it, even if they are sahih, but completely rejecting hadith, written by the closest companions of the Prophet, seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
And how does that help? You have the full right to believe in whatever you like. But here we believe
These are the verses of Allah which We recite to you in truth. Then in what hadith after Allah and His verses will they believe?456
Which Hadith, other than this, do they uphold?7750
And We had certainly brought them a Book which We detailed by knowledge - as guidance and mercy to a people who believe.752
And it was not for this Qur'an to be produced by other than Allah , but a confirmation of what was before it and a detailed explanation of the Scripture, about which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds.1037Plenty of other verses say the same. Hence, we reject hadiths.
peace
- Is Messenger= Hadith books of Bukhari/ Tirmidhi/Muslim?
-
Hello,
I'm not a Muslim but I'm currently studying the religion and trying to get more into it. Recently Quranism has caught my eye and there are a few questions I'd like to get more insight on.
Hi,
First of all, how do you interpret all those verses where the Quran commands to obey both God and the Messenger (the Messenger is almost always mentioned in the same sentence whenever the Quran commands to obey God)?
Which messenger?
The Quran is completely God's word, not the Messengers.
Please check 482.
Only in the Sunnah do Mohammad's commands come in. Take for example 465
But no, by your Lord, they will not believe until they make you, , judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in submission.The word Muhammad in the above verse is not from alQuraan but the translator in brackets.
Secondly the Quran and Hadith were both created from the Messenger, by the same people, in the same method. Hadith narrators and hadith preservation are done with the same method and by the same people as thosse who preserved the Quran. Why do you reject one but accept the other?
alQuraan does not support this claim.
Then into more verses from the Quran...
What do you think of 4113
And were it not for Allah's grace upon thee and His mercy, a party of them had certainly designed to ruin thee. And they ruin only themselves, and they cannot harm thee in any way. And Allah has revealed to thee the Book and the Wisdom, and taught thee what thou knewest not, and Allah's grace on thee is very great.No Muhammad is mentioned in this aayat.
Or 3334, where the wives of the Messenger are advised to
And remember what is recited in your houses of the verses of Allah and wisdom. Indeed, Allah is ever Subtle and Acquainted .
What does "wisdom" mean, if not the sunnah? What else is there in their houses?Firstly this aayat is not addressed to the wives of Messenger but wives of alNabi.
Secondly as per 2269 whom ever is given hadith he was given abundant good? If so, then what about those who were given alQuraan?1644
with clear proofs and written ordinances. And We revealed to you the message that you may make clear to the people what was sent down to them and that they might give thought.
So this verse seems to indicate that the Quran also requires the Sunnah, which explains the Quranic message.Today who is going to make clear for us?
And again there is not mention of Muhammad, rasool or nabi in this aayat.
And please check the verse before that 1643. Who is this person, and whom is he going to ask which he does not know?Indeed, there are many parts of the Quran which would not be intelligible without hadiths. Prayer, fasting, zakat, and hajj are probably the most common ones. These are just ambiguous concepts not explained well in the Quran. Without the hadith, Muslim's wouldn't know how to perform them. Other example would be the "sword verses" and those realated to "killing infidels". Without the historical context provided by Hadith, these verses would be exactly what critics of Islam claim them to be violent commandments urging Muslims to fight against (any and all) disbelievers.
The hadiths give crucial information about islamic practices, the historical context of the Quran, and how to lvie life according to how Mohammad, the best Muslim of all time, did. I don't see the point in completely rejecting all of it. I agree it's important to be more ciritcal of it, even if they are sahih, but completely rejecting hadith, written by the closest companions of the Prophet, seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
I know this is ltos of questions, but I'm genuinely interested in Quranist beliefs! Looking forward to hearing your take on this
Instead of going into all this complication and rejecting the clear aayaat of Allah. I would suggest you to hold Allah firmly, that is more than enough to be guided. Ultimately we all need a guidance right?
3101
And how could you disbelieve while to you are being recited the verses of Allah and among you is His Messenger? And whoever holds firmly to Allah has been guided to a straight path.
Even after the aayaat are being recited and His messenger is among us, whoever holds Allah firmly is guided. Just think about it.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path pr
pr -
Hello,
I'm not a Muslim but I'm currently studying the religion and trying to get more into it. Recently Quranism has caught my eye and there are a few questions I'd like to get more insight on.
Peace hraklea and welcome to the forum. ) I'm happy to answer your questions. Hope you stick around.
First of all, how do you interpret all those verses where the Quran commands to obey both God and the Messenger (the Messenger is almost always mentioned in the same sentence whenever the Quran commands to obey God)?
The Qur'an was not sent down as a bound, full, written book. The Qur'an was divided and revealed in parts (17106). In my view, to obey the Messenger is to obey the part of the Qur'an that he recited when a new revelation came.
Secondly the Quran and Hadith were both created from the Messenger, by the same people, in the same method. Hadith narrators and hadith preservation are done with the same method and by the same people as thosse who preserved the Quran. Why do you reject one but accept the other?
God promised that the Qur'an would be guarded from corruption (159). God does not make such promise concerning the hadith.
Supposedly Muhammad said in a hadith for no one to write his words down. People say that he said this because he did not want anyone to get his words confused with those of the Qur'an. Who knows if there was another reason for this though? I do not know much about hadith so please don't take my words as fact.
Supposedly Bukhari said that he collected thousands of hadith but in the end he rejected 99% of them. Okay, but can we be 100% sure that what he decided on is 100% truth? Can we ever really be sure, without having been there?
I think it's important to apply reasoning and logic in our studies. People who belong to a particular sect think that ordinary people aren't fit to interpret Qur'an. They say we are fallible. They say we should trust the companions of the prophet. But why? Weren't the people who transmitted Hadith capable of being fallible too? Even if a piece of information is widely spread and known to many, that doesn't necessarily make it true, does it? And as I said before, only the Qur'an was promised by God to be guarded from corruption. (Note I don't mean to imply that the Qur'an has never been changed - I think a lot of us here agree that the Qur'an has been altered somewhat. But even a book I have read that is critical of the Qur'an admits that the changes have not taken away from the overall theological meaning.)
Every one of us is biased. Even the scholars. Traditional scholars may interpret verses in a way that matches with what the hadith says. But what if that's not the correct way? We cannot take anyone's words or interpretations and accept them as fact. Even the scholars. I am personally trying to keep an open mind to understand every viewpoint, and every meaning. My journey of faith does not stop with saying that I believe (292). My faith will be tested, questioned, and I must examine it all to try to obtain the truth. The issue with sects and every religion is that they claim they have "the truth" and the one path to God. I don't think that's the case. 2969 even implies that there are multiple paths to God. So just with that in mind I prefer not to be a part of a sect or mindset that believes in only one interpretation. The Qur'an warns us against breaking off into sects, and seeking to derive an interpretation that confuses and pins down a specific meaning (37 and 6159). God wants us to be one people.
Personally, I am also a person who does not like to accept anything, concerning a matter as serious as religion, without having read, studied, and trying to thoroughly understand what I profess to believe in. There are a lot of hadith. And I can't even find books that cover all of them. I'm a college student. I don't have the time right now to study hadith, and I don't want to say I believe in something that I have read very little of. I refuse to believe in what I don't know to be true (1736). For now, what time I have to devote to my religious studies will go towards better understanding the Qur'an.
Indeed, there are many parts of the Quran which would not be intelligible without hadiths. Prayer, fasting, zakat, and hajj are probably the most common ones. These are just ambiguous concepts not explained well in the Quran. Without the hadith, Muslim's wouldn't know how to perform them.
These ambiguities in the Qur'an have led to many discussions on this forum, if you search through it and take a look. (As you will be able to see, we all have our own interpretations and opinions concerning the verses.) Take all the verses in the Qur'an about one subject and study it. See what insight the Qur'an does have to say about the subject. If something is not explicitly spelled out, I'm of the opinion that it must not matter that much and there is no "correct" way, because it wasn't included in the Qur'an. (An example is prayer. We all have different meanings of what prayer means to us and how and when it should be performed. I don't think this is as huge as an issue as people make it out to be. We all believe in God, each find our way of remembering or glorifying God, and we each are striving to be good people in life. I think that says a lot in itself. Belief is simple. Religion and sects are what make it complicated.)
Other example would be the "sword verses" and those realated to "killing infidels". Without the historical context provided by Hadith, these verses would be exactly what critics of Islam claim them to be violent commandments urging Muslims to fight against (any and all) disbelievers.
Again, I think it's important to gather all the verses in the Qur'an on violence and put them into the context that is given to us in the Qur'an. I am also of the belief that we are only called to fight in self defense.
Most likely if you have a question about a verse or verses, it is answered here if you search the forum. If it's not, you can always make a forum thread and ask us. )
The hadiths give crucial information about islamic practices, the historical context of the Quran, and how to lvie life according to how Mohammad, the best Muslim of all time, did.
I don't believe that historical context is necessary to understand the Qur'an. Neither do we need to know any more information about Islamic practices other than what is written in the Qur'an. After all, the Qur'an is fully detailed (6114).
I don't believe that I should live my life exactly like a prophet did. I am not a prophet. I am my own person. I don't need to know every single intimate detail of the prophet's life, and I don't understand how any of those details are relevant to me. All the details of the prophets that I should know are in the Qur'an.
There are people who seem to worship Muhammad so much. I don't agree with that. Christians focus on being like Jesus because they believe he was divine and God's son, the perfect example. But Muhammad was just a man. He was a prophet equal to all the other prophets that came before him (2285). My focus is on worshipping God alone. And as I said before, the transmitters of the hadith on the prophet's life were ordinary men who were capable of making mistakes. If I remember correctly, the first full biography of the prophet wasn't even written until at least a century after his death.
I don't see the point in completely rejecting all of it. I agree it's important to be more ciritcal of it, even if they are sahih, but completely rejecting hadith, written by the closest companions of the Prophet, seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
A lot of sectarians say this. The way I see it is that we have our reasons for believing as we do, as I have tried to explain in my own thoughts. They also have their reasons for believing as they do. We can argue about it forever, but until the day when a time machine is developed, we can't know who's "right." So I choose to follow the only thing I believe is right, which is Qur'an. Beyond that, it is up to God to judge us on what we differ about.
I just think it's really sad that so much energy is spent on fighting instead of trying to get along.
I know this is ltos of questions, but I'm genuinely interested in Quranist beliefs! Looking forward to hearing your take on this
I'm on my phone right now so I wasn't able to examine all your questions about the verses you posted, but I hope the answers I did provide give you some insight into my mind. ) Peace.
