Refuting the Quraniyyoun – Qur’aan Wahdahu 17:46

Accusation:

We must follow only the Qur’an, because Allah has ordained us to mention only Him in the Qur’an.

To prove this, Rashad Khalifah cited the verse 17:46 as follows:

وَإِذَا ذَكَرْتَ رَبَّكَ فِي الْقُرْآَنِ وَحْدَهُ وَلَّوْا عَلَى أَدْبَارِهِمْ نُفُورًا

[Consequently, when you preach your Lord IN THE QURAN ALONE they run away in aversion.]

(Quran, Hadith, and Islam)

In the pamphlet “10 reasons as to why we do not follow books like Bukhari…” the leader of the so-called Good-doers said:

[Mohammad, the Messenger of Allah was ordered to warn people with the Qur’an, (50:45 etc) and ‘QURAN WAHDAHOU’ (17:46) ‘QURAN ONLY’, but not with Bukhari, Muslim etc.]

Answer:

This is a big mistake on their part which proves their ignorance and their bad intention.

The word (وَحْدَه) has (منصوب – Fathah on it).

The word (رَبَّكَ) also is (منصوب).

The word (القُرْآنِ) has (مجرور – Kasrah under it).

This proves that the word (وَحْدَه) agrees with the word (رَبَّكَ) and not with (القُرْآنِ).

Therefore, the translation of this verse is not: (when you mention your Rab in the Qur’an alone), but its translation is (when you mention your Rab Alone in the Qur’an).

In the “The noble Qur’an” in English, the verse has been translated as follows:

[And when you make mention of your Lord Alone in the Qur’an, they turn on their backs, fleeing in extreme dislikeness.]

In the French translation, the verse has been translated as follows:

[Et, quand, dans le coran, tu évoques Ton Seigneur l’unique, ils tournent le dos par répulsion.]

They still do not know how to translate the Qur’an, and yet, they have the guts to claim they understand its teachings better!

When we find that the “leader” of the “Good-doers” has repeated this argument in his pamphlet, we have got the certainty that they are indeed “DUMB”!

You do not know the Arabic language. And I am almost sure that you do not know how to read Qur’an correctly

Inspite of all these, you dare to make Tafsiir and challenge those who, since their childhood, have been studying the Qur’an and the Hadith!!

Author: Abu Layla Shabbir
Translator: Ummu Ibraheem & Yousrina

Refuting the Qur’aaniyyoun on “Hadiith only brings division and confusion”

A Mauritian Qur’aani said concerning the books of Hadith:

[These books create only division and confusion.]

(Impact News, Friday 26 octobre 2007 No 746)

Answer:

(1)

The Sunnah of the Prophet was never the cause of division among Muslims. It is simply the way in which the Ulamaa interpreted the Sunnah that brought differences among the Muslims. Are we to reject the Sunnah of the Prophet because of differences in opinion of the Ulamaa? What kind of reasoning is this??

(2)

Based on this argument, they will have to reject the Qur’an also, because the difference in opinion of the Ulamaa is not only for the Sunnah of the Prophet, but also for the Qur’an. For example, the word “Qar”[1] , does it mean “period of Haid” or “cleanliness after Haid”, this is where the Ulamaa differ in opinion. Are we to reject the Qur’an because of this difference?

(3)

If rejecting the Sunnah of the Prophet was a means to bring unity among the Muslims, the first who should have been united would be the Qur’aaniyyoun. However, when on considering the Qur’aaniyyoun, we find that they also are divided into several groups:

• Ahl-uz-Zikr Wal Qur-aan

– Followers of Abdullaah Jak-ralawi who died in the year 1914 A.

• Ummat Muslimah

Followers of Khwaja Ahmad-ud-Deen who died in the year 1936 A.

• Tulou’ Islaam / Rising Islaam / Parweziste

– Followers of Ghulaam Ahmad Parwez who was born in the year 1903 A.

• Ta’miir Insaaniyat

– Followers of Abdul Khaaliq Malwaadah.

In the year 1979, the movement Ta’miir Insaaniyat had decided to join the movement Ummat Muslimah, but they failed in their efforts. Even in their practices, they are not united. Among them, some claim that there are 5 Swalaat daily; some claim that there are only 3 Swalaat while others claim that there are 2 Swalaat only.

[1] Allah say: (2:228)

وَالْمُطَلَّقَاتُ يَتَرَبَّصْنَ بِأَنفُسِهِنَّ ثَلَاثَةَ قُرُوء

[And divorced women shall wait for three Qar.]

Author: Abu Layla Shabbir
Translator: Ummu Ibraheem & Yousrina Dobir

An Answer to the Quraaniyyoun – Hadiiths are not preserved but Qur’aan is.

In the pamphlet “10 reasons as to why we do not follow books like Bukhari…” the author said:

[Allaah guarantees us that the Qur’aan is preserved (85:21-22) etc, however, ALLAAH does not guarantee us in the Qur’an that Bukhari, Muslim etc are preserved.]

Answer:

(1)

As mentioned in the Qur’aan, Allaah orders the muslims to obey the Prophet and to take him as their model, it is thus impossible for Allaah to refer to us – Muslims of the year 2015 – to follow what was not preserved  (ahaadith) . Allaah’s order in the Qur’aan to follow the Prophet is in itself a proof that the Hadiith of the Prophet is preserved.

For example, if you come to borrow money from me, and I refer you to Bhye Zayd, will it be logical that at this moment, Bhye Zayd’s body has already decomposed in his grave? If this is illogical for us, mere human beings, and then how can it be logical that Allaah will order the Muslims of the year 2000 to follow a Prophet whose teachings were already corrupted during his period itself?

Without any doubt, the teachings and the words of the Prophet still exist nowadays and will continue to exist till Qiyaamah, in such a way that it is easily accessible for anyone who wants to follow Al-Qur’aan in the way prescribed by Allaah. It is only some narrow-minded people who cannot understand this truth.

(2)

We all agree that the Prophet spoke only the truth, and that after his death, some people had attributed lies to him. Is it because of these “lies” of the “liars” that we are to reject the “truth” from the “truthful”?? Where is the logic in this?

If tomorrow a doctor was to tell you that you have cancer, and another one tells you that you do not have this disease, would you, in such a situation, reject medicine or stop visiting doctors? This is not what you would do, instead, you will pay a third and a forth doctor in order to know the truth. Concerning your health, you know that when a doctor is lying or may be mistaken, you have to look for the truth. But concerning the Hadiith of the Prophet , because of the lies or mistakes of some people, you argue for rejecting all what is known as hadiith.

See also: Refutation of Quraaniyyoun – When the hadiiths were compiled
Source: Qur’aan Vs Qur’aaniyyoun
Author: Abu Layla Shabbir
Translator: Ummu Ibraheem & Yousrina Dobir

An answer to Quraaniyyoun on when the hadiiths were compiled !

Rashad Khalifa said:

[It is well known that the first book of Hadith is that of Bukhary, who was born more than 200 years after the death of Muhammad .]

(Quran, Hadith, and Islam)

 Answer:

1. Learn to make difference between “Words of the Prophet Muhammad swallaahu-‘alayhi-was-sallaam ” et “Words of the Prophet that were compiled into book-forms”. If we say that the words of the Prophet were compiled and written 250 years after his death, would anyone be able to say that “the words of the Prophet Muhammad swallaahu-‘alayhi-was-sallaam ” appeared 250 years after the death of the Prophet Muhammad swallaahu-‘alayhi-was-sallaam .

It goes without doubt that “the words of the Prophet and his Sunnah” existed since the time of the Prophet, and that this is what Allah ordained for us to follow.

2. Whoever says that the words of the Prophet were compiled after the death of the Prophet is infact a Jaahil, because Hadith was being written even during the time of the Prophet Muhammad swallaahu-‘alayhi-was-sallaam , and well before Imaam Bukhari. For example, we have the Swahiifah of Hammaam ibn Munabbih[1] which was compiled before the year 60 H. Hammaam had compiled those Hadith from Abu Hurayrah, and Abu Hurayrah died in the year 58 or 59 Hijri.

[1] I have a copy of Swahiifah Hammaam ibn Munabbih at my place. If anyone among the Qur’aaniyoun wants to see it with his own eyes, let him make Tawbah, perform Ghusl, and then he contacts me.

3. How can they say that “the first book of Hadith is that of Bukhari”, when even during our time, we have books of Hadith which we use that have been compiled before Imaam Bukhari (256 H)?

For example, we have books of these Scholars:

• Imaam Maalik (179 H)
• Imaam Abu Daawoud At-Twayaalisi (204 H)
• Imaam Abdur Razzaaq (211 H)
• Imaam Abu Bakr Al-Humaydi (219 H)
• Imaam Ibn Abi Shaybah (235 H)
• Imaam Ahmad (241 H)
• Imaam Daarmi (255 H)

There are many other examples which show that the compilation of the Hadith has been done much before. Imaam Malik’s book, Al-Muwattwa’ is a great example. Imaam Malik was born in Madinah in the year 93 AH. Thus, how could they miss this book? They could have at least said 150 years after the death of the Prophet.

Author: Abu Layla Shabbir
Translator: Y. Dobir & I. Damree
Source: www.islaampure.com