Quranism: Difference between revisions

Within [[Islam]] the two largest sects are the [[Sunni]]s (up to 90%)<ref name="rl"></ref><ref>[http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/295507/Islam Islām] - Encyclopædia Britannica (2010)</ref><ref>[http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/574006/Sunnite Sunnite] - Encyclopædia Britannica (2010)</ref><ref name="pew">[http://pewforum.org/Muslim/Mapping-the-Global-Muslim-Population%286%29.aspx Mapping the Global Muslim Population: A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Muslim Population] - Pew Research Center, October 7, 2009</ref><ref name="pew2">Tracy Miller - [http://pewforum.org/newassets/images/reports/Muslimpopulation/Muslimpopulation.pdf Mapping the Global Muslim Population: A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World's Muslim Population] - Pew Research Center, October 2009</ref> and [[Shiites|Shi'ite]]s (approx 10-20%).<ref name="rl">[http://www.religionfacts.com/islam/comparison_charts/islamic_sects.htm Comparison of Sunni and Shia Islam] - ReligionFacts</ref><ref>[http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/540503/Shiite Shīʿite] - Encyclopædia Britannica Online (2010)</ref><ref name="pew"></ref><ref name="pew2"></ref> Together they make up almost the entirety of Islam. However, there is a small heretical group who are collectively known as "Qur'anists" (also referred to as ''Quraniyoon'', ''Ahle Quran'', or ''hadith rejectors''). They reject the [[Hadith]] (oral traditions) and the [[Sunnah]] (example) of [[Muhammad]], an integral part of Islam, and are viewed by mainstream Islam in much the same way as the Jehovah's Witnesses are viewed by mainstream Christianity (i.e. Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox etc).  

To be a Qur'anist requires a good deal of faith and a considerable lack of theological common sense. If one rejects the Hadith (ie. Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud), the Tafsir (ie. Ibn Kathir, Ibn Abbas, al-Jalalayn, Maududi), and the History (ie. al-Tabari, Ibn Sa'd, al-Waqidi, Ibn Ishaq), then the entire historical context of the Qur'an, along with any proof of Muhammad's existence, is lost. It simply becomes an ancient Arabic document of rambling, repetitive, and often-times confusing, statements and commands. The reader is left with such questions as "Who wrote this and why?" and "Who is Abu Lahab, and why are he and his wife going to be tortured?" and "Why don't these stories match the ones found in the Bible?" and "Who is [[Isa|'Isa]]?" The Qur'anist is ultimately a monotheist who creates their own religion based on a 1400-year-old nonsensical Arabic document.  

The often-leveled charge by the obscure Qur'an-only sects that "Sunni's and Shi'ite's are following a deviant form of Islam by introducing these man-made books," is laughable and the epitome of hypocrisy, considering most of the narrators of hadith are the very same people who passed down the Qur'an itself. The first Muslims ([[Sahabah]]- companions of Muhammad, which include all four [[Caliph|Rightly Guided Caliphs]]) who partook in the Hijra to [[Medina]], ''were not'' Qur'an-only Muslims. The generation of Muslims that followed the death of Muhammad (the [[Tabi'un]]) ''were not'' Qur'an-only Muslims. And the generation of Muslims that followed them (Tabi' al-Tabi'un) ''were not'' Qur'an-only Muslims. Recording and sorting through these narrations in written form was little more than codifying and clarifying already existing beliefs. To suggest that adhering to Muhammad's sunnah constitutes a deviation from pure Islam is ludicrous.

These Qur'an only "Muslims" reject the Hadith, a fundamental aspect of Islam, simply due to it highlighting the immoral truths of Muhammad, early Islam and its numerous [[Islamic laws|laws]]. They may deny this as the reason behind their rejection of Hadith, but this fact is proven by many Qur'anists who alternatively accept Hadith as a historical source but dismiss it as a religious one. Furthermore they reject anything about Muhammad which they claim "contradicts the Qur'anic description of him". This approach is intellectually dishonest and logically unfeasible. Either the Hadith are a valid source of information for Muslims or they are worthless. You cannot pick and choose which bits you want to keep and which bits you want to throw out when the good and the bad all originate from the same sources.  

These are Muhammad's words and are not found within the Qur'an. Therefore, Islam’s First Pillar is utterly meaningless, and impossible to implement, without the work of Muslim historians Ibn Ishaq (704-770 AD) and al-Tabari (838-923 AD). If there is no definition as to what the [[Shahadah]] should be, it can be any arbitrary phrase in any language. In fact there are at-least three different shahadahs used by various Qur'anist sects.

Once again, this is not feasible. The “compulsory congregational [[Salah|prayer]]” is not described in the Qur’an at all. In fact, the Qur’an says that there should be three prayers, none of which it depicts, and the Hadith demands five. The only explanation of the obligatory prostration is found in the Sunnah, and even then it is never described by Muhammad himself. Muslims are performing a ritual without Qur’anic precedence. As such, the Second Pillar is rubble. Qur'anists do not even agree upon the number of daily prayers that should be offered. The various number of prayers should be offered are 0, 2, 3 or 5. Also in the prayer itself, certain Arabic recitations and verses are recited. The Qur'an does not give specifications for these recitations so unless one follows hadiths and traditions, the recitations can be anything for a Qur'anist.

How is that possible when the terms of the [[Zakat]] are omitted from the Qur’an? The first to commit them to paper was Ishaq. A century later, Tabari referenced Ishaq’s Hadith. The only reason Muslims can pay the Zakat is because Ishaq explained it to them.

This is also impossible. The only explanations of the [[Hajj]] are found in the Sunnah. No aspect of the pilgrimage can be performed without referencing the Hadith. Muslims would be lost without it.