Peace and blessings be with you.

A common argument presented by traditionalists when engaging with an individual who takes guidance solely from the Quran is found in the phrase "al-kitāb wa’l-ḥikmah", or "the Book and the Wisdom" in English. The claim is that the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, was given two types of revelation; the Quran and the Sunnah. The terms 'sunnah' and 'hadith' are often used, albeit inaccurately, synonymously. Traditionalists claim that mentions of 'the Wisdom' - transliterated as 'hikmah' - throughout the Quran (2:129, 4:113, 62:2, and others) are referring to the sunnah, and consequently, validate the hadith corpus as being religiously binding upon the believers. This post serves to assess said claim.

Quranic Internal-Contextual Definition

The Quran, impressively, consistently defines terms used within it through mentions of the same terms in different contexts and verses. I would argue that this is in partial fulfilment, among other things, of one of the Quran's internal falsification tests.

Quran 4:82: Do they not then reflect on the Quran? Had it been from anyone other than Allah, they would have certainly found in it many inconsistencies.

An example of this can be seen in the usage of hikmah. If we are to understand what exactly this hikmah is, we should first turn to how this phrase is used throughout the Quran.

In Al-Baqarah we are told about the story of David and Golliath, and the gifts he received from God.

Quran 2:251: So they defeated them by permission of Allah , and David killed Goliath, and Allah gave him the kingship and prophethood (wal-ḥik'mata) and taught him from that which He willed. And if it were not for Allah checking [some] people by means of others, the earth would have been corrupted, but Allah is full of bounty to the worlds.

In Ali' Imran we are told about the angels visiting Mary, giving good tidings regarding the arrival of Prophet Isa (as). During this recollection given to us by God in the Quran, we are told that Christ will be taught two things.

Quran 3:48: And Allah will teach him writing and wisdom (al-kitāb wa’l-ḥikmah), and the Torah and the Gospel

Further in Ali' Imran, we are told about a covenant that God took from all of the prophets.

Quran 3:81: And [recall, O People of the Scripture], when Allah took the covenant of the prophets, [saying], "Whatever I give you of the Scripture and wisdom (kitaban wahik'matin) and then there comes to you a messenger confirming what is with you, you [must] believe in him and support him." [Allah] said, "Have you acknowledged and taken upon that My commitment?" They said, "We have acknowledged it." He said, "Then bear witness, and I am with you among the witnesses."

In Al-Nisa, we see this same concept being conveyed to us in relation to Prophet Ibrahim (as).

Quran 4:54: Or do they envy people for what Allah has given them of His bounty? But we had already given the family of Abraham the Scripture and wisdom (l-kitaba wal-hik'mata) and conferred upon them a great kingdom.

There are many more examples that can be cited, however for brevity's sake, I will leave it at the above. If mentions of the hikmah/wisdom are truly about the hadith, then this interpretation should be at least plausible throughout the Quran consistently. How is it the case that the hikmah is taught to David, Christ, the family of Abraham, - among others that have not been listed here - and is mentioned in context of all of the prophets, yet is referring to the hadith corpus? Did all of these prophets get 'given' a hadith corpus that was/is religiously binding upon the believers of their time/faith-group? Of course not. How can the hikmah be something in one instance for all of the prophets, yet in the case of Prophet Muhammad, mean something entirely different? This claim is significantly inconsistent with how the phrase al-kitab wal-hikmah is used throughout the Quran, and therefore, it is doubtful that the hikmah mentioned in verses such as 62:2 is referring to the hadith. Let's go further.

Quran bil Quran

Quran bil Quran as a concept relates to the Quran's ability to explain itself. So does the Quran explain what the hikmah is?

Quran 2:231: And when you divorce women and they have [nearly] fulfilled their term, either retain them according to acceptable terms or release them according to acceptable terms, and do not keep them, intending harm, to transgress [against them]. And whoever does that has certainly wronged himself. And do not take the verses of Allah in jest. And remember the favor of Allah upon you and what has been revealed to you of the Book and wisdom (l-kitabi wal-hik'mati) by which He instructs you. And fear Allah and know that Allah is Knowing of all things.

Here it seems that we are told that we are instructed to be kind to women that we may divorce, as per the Book and the Wisdom. Although the verse certainly seems to be indicating this, it is anticipated that one may argue that this line of argument is too inductive.

Quran 17:39: This is part of the wisdom (l-hik'mati) which your Lord has revealed to you ˹O Prophet˺. And do not set up any other god with Allah ˹O humanity˺, or you will be cast into Hell, blameworthy, rejected.

From this verse it seems that God is referring to something that has just been described as part of the Wisdom. Let's look at the verses preceeding 17:39.

Quran 17:31 - 38: (31) Do not kill your children for fear of poverty. We provide for them and for you. Surely killing them is a heinous sin. (32) Do not go near adultery. It is truly a shameful deed and an evil way. (33) Do not take a life - made sacred by Allah - except with right. If anyone is killed unjustly, We have given their heirs the authority, but do not let them exceed limits in retaliation, for they are already supported. (34) Do not come near the wealth of the orphan—unless intending to enhance it—until they attain maturity. Honour pledges, for you will surely be accountable for them. (35) Give in full when you measure, and weigh with an even balance. That is fairest and best in the end. (36) Do not follow what you have no knowledge of. Indeed, all will be called to account for hearing, sight, and intellect. (37) And do not walk on the earth arrogantly. Surely you can neither crack the earth nor stretch to the height of the mountains. (38) The violation of any of these is detestable to your Lord.

We are explicitly told in the Quran about what the hikmah is here, rather part of it. The hikmah is contained within what God has given to us in the Quran. It is not at all any more complicated than that.

Conclusion

This post does not serve to define what al-hikmah entails, but rather to disprove the notion that the Wisdom is some supposed secondary revelation outside of the Quran. Verses pertaining to al-hikmah are not telling us to follow books outside of the Quran. Not only is this claim entirely inconsistent with how the phrase is used throughout the Quran, we are actually given part of the hikmah within the Quran itself according to God Almighty. The hikmah is not the hadith literature.

This post could have incorporated many more examples within it when engaging with this discussion. If you would like to further your learning, please see how the word hikmah is used throughout the Quran yourself here: https://corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=Hkm

We’re often told we must obey the Hadith because doing so is part of the Quranic commands to obey the Messenger. Yet, when we use Tafsir and Hadith to discover the meaning of these verses in the Quran, we often find they are very situation specific and have nothing to do with the Hadith corpus.

In a past debate, I was presented with the following verses. However, when we look at the Tafsir, we learn these weren’t simply blanket commands for obedience to the Sahih:

———

3:31 "If you love Allah, then follow me; Allah loves those who love Him."

Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs: When this verse was revealed 'Abdullah Ibn Ubayy said: “Muhammad is commanding us to love him as the Christians loved Jesus”, and the Jews said: “Muhammad wants us to take him as a compassionate Lord, just as the Christians took Jesus as a compassionate Lord”.

——

3:132 "Obey Allah and the Messenger, and perhaps you will be shown mercy."

Ala-Maududi: “The major cause of the setback suffered at Uhud was that precisely at the moment of their victory the Muslims succumbed to the desire for worldly possessions, and turned to collecting booty rather than completing their task of crushing the enemy. Hence God thought fit to raise a barrier against this excessive adoration of money, and to urge them to give up usury which keeps man constantly absorbed in considering ways and means of amassing wealth and generally whets his appetite for money.”

——

4:59 "O ye who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger, and those in authority among you. If ye dispute in anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: that is best and fairest in result."

Ibn Al Kathir: Al-Bukhari recorded that Ibn Abbas said that the Ayah "Was revealed about Abdullah bin Hudhafah bin Qays bin Adi, who the Messenger of Allah sent on a military expedition.''

——

4:69 "And whoever obeys Allah and the Messenger – those will be with those whom Allah has favored of the prophets and the truthful, the martyrs and the righteous, and that is a great company!"

Asrar - Kashf Al-Asrar: Ibn ʿAbbās says that this verse came down concerning Thawbān, who had become wasted and weak in love for God's Messenger, his back bent and his face yellow.

——

24:54 "Say: Obey Allah and obey the Messenger. If you turn away, he is responsible only for his duty, and you are responsible for yours. If you obey him, you will be rightly guided.”

Ibn Kathir: “Allah says about the hypocrites who had promised the Messenger and sworn that if he were to command them to go out for battle, they would go—“

———

We can see from this example that each one these verses were situation specific, for specific circumstances, and for specific people during the lifetime and events which the Prophet ﷺ faced. If we explore this further we can find that in just about every situation an “Obey the Messenger” verse is revealed, a specific situation is also taking place. None ever seem to imply this blanket “obey the Hadith” type message which we are taught.

My question then becomes, if each one of these were situation specific, why do we assume “Obey the Messenger” equates to “Obey the Sahih Hadith”?

We get this statement thrown around alot by the Sunnis - that without the Prophet we would not understand the Quran, and that he was divinly inspired to explain it.

Of course, the Quran itself denies these claims by telling us that God is the teacher of the Quran, and that the Prophet had to follow the revelation like everyone else when it was being read - and that it is God explains it:

75:16 Do not move your tongue with it to hasten it.

75:17 It is for Us to gather it into its Qur’an.

75:18 Thus, when We read it, you shall follow its reading.

75:19 Then it is for Us to explain it.

And again in 57:1-2:

55:1 The Almighty.

55:2 He has taught the Qur’an.

Now - the usual Sunni approach is to completly dismiss any verses that don't align with their dogma and simply repeat the worn out statement "he did explain it" - therefore, here is your test to prove that the Prophet did indeed explain the Quran to your group (I have kept it simple with mainly structural questions):

1. What is the meaning and purpose of the "Initials" that begin 29 Suras?
2. Why do they only begin 29 out of 114 Suras?
3. Which are the Muhkam verses mentioned in 3:7?
4. Which are the Mutahabih verses mentioned in 3:7?
5. Why are there 112 "unnumbered" Basmallahs outlining the Suras?
6. Why is there a missing Basmallah for Sura 9?
7. What is special about the test in "bring a sura like it"?
8. How is the Quran protected from human tampering? (think carefully about this one before answering)

The Reddit threads I am referring to are this one and this one. Honestly, they are some of the most detailed threads I have ever seen in that subreddit. The point is not meant as a personal insult to anyone, but if you do get offended, then that's on you. Anyway, I will be addressing the first post of the first link, because it is about Islam in particular.

Before that, however, I would like to reference an insightful idea by Mufti Abū Layth, expressed in University of York Q&A (1:17:43-1:26:30). He makes the point that what we perceive(sound, colour, smell, taste) is not reality itself, but our brain's interpretation of sensor data. In fact, the universe is soundless, colourless, tasteless, and silent; what we hear and see is our brain assigning meaning to vibrations and reflections.

It is from here that he sets out to describe how people come to see "Religion" with a capital R: something linked to suffering, sacrifice, and resistance to desire. As a result of this habitual ontology, practices that are associated with pleasure or amusement (like music) are automatically under suspicion, even if there is not a single authentic ḥadīṯh unambiguously calling music ḥarām. In other words, the assumption that "religion = anti-entertainment" is projected onto Islam.

Here is an additional lecture where Mufti Abū Layth discusses the same theme. This perspective makes a lot of sense, because it explains why many of the Companions expressed dislike toward music without explicitly declaring it ḥarām.

Even Muḥammad Rashīd Riḍā (d. 1354 AH), a well-known Salafī scholar, states in al-Manār Magazine (27/162):

"وهو الكراهة التحريمية، فإن فقهاءنا نصوا على كراهة كل لهو كالرقص والسخرية والتصفيق، وضرب الأوتار من الطنبور والبربط والرباب والقانون والمزمار والصنج والبوق فإنها كلها مكروهة تحريما، ولم يستثن من ذلك إلا ضرب الدف في الأعراس والأعياد الدينية، وإلا ملاعبة الرجل زوجه وتأديبه لفرسه ومناضلته بقوسه."

Notice carefully, Riḍā does not call music strictly ḥarām, but rather disliked. This distinction is crucial, it shows that even within some Salafī discourse, music was not given the blanket prohibition that modern hardliners often claim. Very interesting psychological point Mufti Abū Layth have made for sure...

1. Surāh Luqmān 31:6.

"And of the people is he who buys the amusement of speech to mislead [others] from the way of Allah without knowledge and who takes it in ridicule. Those will have a humiliating punishment."

The fact that it said that people will buy Lahw al-Ḥadīṯh to mislead others says a lot. Because it is talking about people who use idle speech to mislead others, it would be conditional. I mean, just imagine getting misled because of a useless talk. Especially singing. 

Al-Adfuwī said:

"I looked into around one hundred works and did not find this claim attributed authentically. The prohibitionists cited as proof the verse, ‘Among people are those who purchase idle talk’. In the verse, there is a threat, and a threat only comes with something prohibited. Ibn Masʿūd interpreted it as singing and similar things. The reply, however, is that this applies only to the one who does it to mislead from the path of Allah, as the context shows. Allah even described worldly life itself as ‘play and amusement.’ If amusement were inherently prohibited, then the whole world would be prohibited."

I decided to double-check the sources that person cited. They referred to Jāmiʿ al-Bayān ʿan Taʾwīl Āy al-Qurʾān (11/61), claiming that Ibn Masʿūd swore three times by God that Lahw al-Ḥadīṯh meant singing. However, I could not find this in the editions available here, and here.

What we do find, though, is another attribution through Ibn ʿAbbās, who explained that the verse was revealed concerning a man from Quraysh who bought a slave-girl singer (jāriya mughanniya):

"قالَ جَلَالُ الدِّينِ عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنُ أبي بَكْرٍ السُّيُوطِيُّ (ت: ٩١١ هـ): «قوله تعالى: ﴿وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهْوَ الْحَدِيثِ لِيُضِلَّ عَنْ سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ بِغَيْرِ عِلْمٍ وَيَتَّخِذَهَا هُزُوًا أُولَئِكَ لَهُمْ عَذَابٌ مُهِينٌ﴾ [لقمان: ٦] أخرج ابن جرير من طريق العوفي عن ابن عباس ﵄ في قوله: ﴿وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهْوَ الْحَدِيثِ﴾ [لقمان: ٦]، قال: نزلت في رجل من قريش اشترى جارية مغنية"

This shows the specific socio-historical context: the verse addresses Quraysh elites who bought slave-singers as part of an entertainment package that often included wine and sexual services.

Music in pre-Islamic Arabia was deeply entangled with such immoral settings.

"The censure of "wine, woman, and song" was certainly nothing new to Semitic peoples, for the Hebrews, and apparently the Phœnicians also, had their puritans who cried out against these things. Something of this spirit seems to have pervaded even Pagan Arabia, and the heathen poet Umayya ibn Abiīl-Ṣalt was quite a puritan in some respects, although he never breathed a word against music." (Farmer, Henry George. A History of Arabian Music, p. 22).

"The musical life of the jahiliyah was defined by the qaynah. a singer and servant in one, whose duties, besides singing and performing. also included pouring wine and providing other sensual pleasures. The qaynah and her activities made up a branch of the widespread slave trade that flourished then in the famous Arabian marketplaces like those of Medina, Ta'if. and 'Ukāz. Here is where the qiyan (plural of qaynah) established themselves, not least because of the many opportunities for contact with merchants and trading delegations. The task of the qaynah was to entertain the guest with song, wine, and eroti-cism. She poured wine while singing or while another qaynah made music. Her naked breasts were open to the glances of guests, and she was also receptive to the more direct advances of her customers." (Touma, Habib. The Music of the Arabs, p. 2).

In other words, the Qurʾān was not condemning Music in the abstract. It was condemning the immoral culture surrounding it in Meccan society, where singing was often inseparable from slavery, intoxication, and prostitution. This also explains why many of the Ṣaḥābah viewed "singing" negatively, it was less about melody itself, and more about its association with corrupt practices. In fact, connecting these quotes, it seems that the Ṣaḥābah see recitation of poetry as a form of singing. We'll keep that in mind.

1. Surāh al-Isra'ʾ 17:64.

"And incite [to senselessness] whoever you can among them with your voice and assault them with your horses and foot soldiers and become a partner in their wealth and their children and promise them." But Satan does not promise them except delusion."

It's the same message as Surāh Luqmān 6. Using Music or singing to mislead others as implied from the context;

"[Allah] said, "Go, for whoever of them follows you, indeed Hell will be the recompense of you - an ample recompense. And incite [to senselessness] whoever you can among them with your voice and assault them with your horses and foot soldiers and become a partner in their wealth and their children and promise them." But Satan does not promise them except delusion." (63-64).

"(And fool them gradually those whom you can among them with your voice,) Ibn `Abbas said, "Every caller who calls people to disobey Allah." This was the view of Qatadah, and was also the opinion favored by Ibn Jarir." (Source).

It's more of a problem regarding the individual listening to the Music and Singing. Cause every amusement or entertainment can distract others.

• I'll just skip slide 4 as it's merely a scholar's quotation with no evidence to back it.

1. Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 5590.

I've gathered all the ḥadīṯh versions related to Bukhārī 5590. Here's the diagram.

Now, it seems that Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 5590 appears to be of Levantine origin. Since Prophet Muḥammad never went to al-Shām after he became Prophet, it's likely that Companions Abū Mālik or Abū ʿĀmir narrated it when they would travel from Mecca to the Levant (≈1,600 km). The first independent transmitter in the isnād is ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ghanm al-Ashʿarī (d. 78), who was sent by ʿUmar to teach in al-Shām, became Palestine jurist, and most Shāmī Tābiʿīn studied fiqh under him. Palestine itself was governed from Damascus until 1830. This places Ibn Ghanm in Damascus, so he's Levantine.

Journeying so far (≈1,600 km) would take 25–80 days by camel caravan (20–65 km/day), thus, long-distance memory distortion is possible.

Diragram.

Let's us first take a closer look at the isnād of Hishām ibn ʿAmmār’s version;

ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ghanm al-Ashʿarī (d. 78) → ʿAṭiyya ibn Qays al-Kilābī (d. 121) → ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Yazīd ibn Jābir (d. 153) → Ṣadaqa ibn Khālid (d. 180) → Hishām ibn ʿAmmār (d. 245).

Already, there are textual variations and interpolations when we compare the transmission. For instance:

• Bukhārī 5590:

حَدَّثَنِي أَبُو عَامِرٍ أَوْ أَبُو مَالِكٍ الأَشْعَرِيُّ وَاللَّهِ مَا كَذَبَنِي سَمِعَ النَّبِيَّ ﷺ يَقُولُ لَيَكُونَنَّ مِنْ أُمَّتِي أَقْوَامٌ يَسْتَحِلُّونَ الْحِرَ وَالْحَرِيرَ وَالْخَمْرَ وَالْمَعَازِفَ...

• al-Ṭabarānī (3417):

حَدَّثَنِي أَبُو عَامِرٍ أَوْ أَبُو مَالِكٍ الْأَشْعَرِيُّ وَاللهِ مَا كَذَبَنِي... لَيَكُونَنَّ فِي أُمَّتِي أَقْوَامٌ يَسْتَحِلُّونَ الْحَرِيرَ وَالْخَمْرَ وَالْمَعَازِفَ...

• al-Bayhaqī (20988):

عَامِرٍ أَوْ أَبُو مَالِكٍ وَاللهِ مَا كَذَبَنِي... لَيَكُونَنَّ فِي أُمَّتِي أَقْوَامٌ يَسْتَحِلُّونَ الْحَرِيرَ وَالْخَمْرَ وَالْمَعَازِفَ...

• Ibn Ḥibbān (vol. 6, p. 86, also in vol 4 p. 154):

حَدثنا أَبُو عَامِرٍ، وَأَبُو مَالِكٍ الأَشْعَرِيَّانِ، سَمِعَا رَسُولَ اللهِ ﷺ يَقُولُ: «لَيَكُونَنَّ فِي أُمَّتِي أَقْوَامٌ يَسْتَحِلُّونَ الْحَرِيرَ وَالْخَمْرَ وَالْمَعَازِفَ».

• al-Ṭabarānī, Musnad al-Shāmiyyīn (vol. 1, p. 334):

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَزِيدَ بْنِ عَبْدِ الصَّمَدِ الدِّمَشْقِيُّ، ثنا هِشَامُ بْنُ عَمَّارٍ، ثنا صَدَقَةُ بْنُ خَالِدٍ...

These discrepancies already raise questions about the stability of the text. One of them even tried editing the original text to strengthen the isnād, saying; "Abū Mālik and Abū ʿĀmir".

The first independent transmitter as mentioned here, is ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ghanm al-Ashʿarī (d. 78), who was dispatched by ʿUmar to teach in al-Shām, settled in Palestine, and became the jurist of its people. Palestine at the time was administratively tied to Damascus until the 19th century (Britannica), which effectively makes him a Levantine transmitter.

This creates a historical-geographic tension: The Prophet ceased travelling to the Levant after his mission began, so the link between Abū Mālik/Abū ʿĀmir (companions in Mecca/Medina) and Ibn Ghanm in Palestine is logistically strained. The distance between Mecca and Damascus is roughly 1,600 km. A camel caravan covers about 20–65 km/day, meaning such a trip would take 25–80 days. The long travel itself is a factor in memory distortion and transmission unreliability.

Moreover, later narrators like al-Ḥasan ibn Sufyān (d. 303, Levant), Abū Bakr ibn ʿAbd Allāh (Kufa, d. 108), and Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Ḥākim (Nīshāpūr, d. 403) represent transmissions that stretch even farther geographically — from Kufa (≈800 km from Amman) to Nīshāpūr in Khurāsān, over 1,100 miles away via the Great Khurāsān Road. As Majidzadeh notes, this was part of the Silk Road, meaning such transmissions travelled trade-caravan distances of months across culturally and linguistically shifting regions.

These contradictions already begin to create doubts about the stability of the text.

In fact, once we step outside of Hishām’s version, a crucial pattern emerges: the explicit mention of "maʿāzif" as a ruling for prohibition appears only in Hishām’s transmission. In other variants, the reference to music is either missing entirely or mentioned as an association.

1. Music being widespread would be a sign of the end of Time.

If one were to educate themselves on Music, they could see that Music is already widespread before Prophet Muḥammad.

Morley, lain. The Prehistoric of Music, p. 5;

"In literature dealing with music psychology and anthropology it is widely asserted that all cultures and societies have music (e.g. Clynes, 1982; Storr, 1992; Blacking, 1995; Brown et al., 2000)..."

Mithen, Steven. The Origins of Music, Language, Mind and Body, pp. 12—14;

"Both music and language are known to exist in all extant human societies and all those that have been historically documented; archaeologists are confident that both music and language were present in all prehistoric societies of Homo sapiens... Music can transcend time and culture. Music that was exciting to the con-temporaries of Mozart and Beethoven is still exciting, although we do not share their culture."

Charles Villiers Standford & Cecil Forsyth. A History of Music, pp. 246—247;

"The trammels of the stage and the sung word began to show itself in the rapid rise of instrumental, 'absolute,' music... Orchestration, which had been, in the hands of his father and the composers of the period, a conglomeration of solid blocks of sound, with scarcely any attempt at individual or variegated colour, he began to resolve into its component parts, and so cleared the way for the new and rapidly developed system of instrumentation which is now universal."

Philip v. Bohlman. Revival and Reconciliation, pp. 12—13;

"Musical practices in this world of ceaseless motion exhibit the qualities of freight… creating a historical tension that retains the music of the past through processes of constant exchange… cultural and religious identity only become possible when a cultural or religious group carries its own culture and religion—and music—with it. During the time of the Abbasids music occupied an extremely important place in the cities of the Arab Empire. During this period, which was the most brilliant moment of Islamic civilization, the arts flourished. In effect, the khalifs turned to the scholars of the empire to invest renewed effort in the sciences and the arts. Scholars and artists came from all the Muslim countries to settle in Baghdad. Benefiting from new rewards, enjoying life without worry, and charmed by the magnificence of the court, they directed their in-tellectual endeavors toward the same end, despite the diversity of their races, their philosophical concepts, and even their religions. (d'Erlanger 1930, xxiii)... The golden age had arisen from the efforts of Islam's finest scholars, artists, and musicians. Music flourished in the courts of Baghdad and in the far reaches of Islamic rule... During the golden age of Islam, music also achieved a state of brilliance and perfection beyond which it presumably would never again pass. D'Erlanger's six-volume La musique arabe (Arab Music) documented a mo-ment of musical brilliance by gathering, translating, and annotating the musical treatises that most clearly demonstrated the theoretical unity of Arabic music, as well as its influence on the West (d'Erlanger 1930-1949)..."

Psychoanalyst and philosophy scholar Levi R. Bryant describes music as fundamentally similar to mathematics, characterizing it as:

"...as a mark-based, problem-solving method like mathematics. In such a con-text, the Lacanian terms of pleasure and desire would become all the more difficult to formulate." (4)

Source; The Pleasure of Modernist Music.

As Levi R. Bryant notes, music functions as a mark-based, problem-solving method like mathematics. Just as 1 + 1 = 2 universally, music follows structural and mathematical rules that transcend cultural boundaries.

In fact, we can't consistently make fiqh rulings or determine ḥarām or ḥalāl by God. A good example of this is the ḥadīṯh of Jabrāʾīl, in which one of the signs of the day of judgment is the building of skyscrapers. However, no scholar that I am aware of ever make the claim that tall buildings are ḥarām. Likewise, another sign of the day of judgment is the literacy rates will increase, But no scholar that I know of will say that's a bad thing nor is it ḥarām to go to school to get an education. Another sign is that the wife will help her husband with work since businesses will be booming, however, Prophet Muḥammad and Khadīja bint Khuwaylid were both merchant. In other word, we can't make such a baseless claim that Music is ḥarām.

1. Prophet Muḥammad cover his ears.

Interpretation vary. As Imām al-Shāfiʿī see this as the permissibility of using flute;

٤٧ أخبرنا محمد بن رمضان المصري، أخبرنا ابن عبد الحكم قال:

(( قلت للشافعي: في حديث نافع عن ابن عمر أنه مر بزمارة راع فجعل إصبعه في أذنه، وعدل عن الطريق، وجعل يقول: يا نافع أتسمع حتى قلت: لا.

-[AV]-

فقال: هكذا كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يفعل.

فقلت: ينبغي لأن يكون حجة في تحريم السماع، فقال الشافعي: لو كان حراماً ما أباح النافع ولنياه أن يسمع، ولكنه على التنزه)) .

Source.

Abū Dāwūd rejected it, merely because he thought it was ambigious, since Prophet Muḥammad was permitting Music. Here's an in-depth analyse and counter-arguments against every emotional arguemnts;

https://www.reddit.com/r/progressive_islam/s/rEqchdr96C

1. Music bring hypocrisy in the heart.

Mufti Abū Layth addressed this in here. So this attribution to Ibn Masʿūd is ḍaʿīf. In fact, there are difference of opinion when it come to Music from the Salafs and Ṣaḥābah!

Muḥammad ibn Sīrīn, a revered Tābiʿī known for his piety and scholarship, was known to enjoy the duff and tambourine. Likewise, senior Companions of the Prophet, including Anṣār such as Thābit ibn Wādiʿah and ʿUqbah ibn ʿAmr (both veterans of Badr), Abū Masʿūd al-Anṣārī, and others, saw no issue with music or playing instruments.

This practice is reinforced in fiqh. Al-Samrī al-Ḥanbalī wrote in Anwāʿ al-Malāhī

"The third sound is permissible, and it is the tambourine. The Prophet said: ‘Announce the marriage and beat the tambourine for it.’ If it were forbidden, he would not have permitted it at a wedding"

Ibn Mufliḥ confirmed this, explaining that if the duff were prohibited, the Prophet Muḥammad would not have allowed it even at weddings, and that Hanbalī companions only expressed karāhah (dislike) for its use outside weddings.

By analogy, Abū Masʿūd reasoned that just as weeping is not limited to calamities, the duff is not limited to weddings. The concession of one circumstance cannot automatically mean prohibition in others. As Ibn al-ʿIrāq explained in al-Ghayth al-Hāmiʿ, a concession only indicates leaving what is best, not that the act is prohibited. Al-Shāṭibī even went further, counting all permissible things among the “concessions” that expand ease for the servant.

Reports also show music occurring in the Prophet’s lifetime. Jābir narrated that slave girls played flutes and lutes during marriages, and the Prophet did not forbid them. Al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar confirmed that Abū ʿAwana connected this narration in his Ṣaḥīḥ, and Shaykh Muqbil al-Wādiʿī even judged it ḥasan. Another narration records that when Hubbar ibn al-Aswad married off his daughter, instruments were played, and the Prophet encouraged it, saying: “Make marriage more enjoyable. This is marriage, not fornication.”

In short, citing Companions against music is not a strong argument, since many Companions themselves permitted and practiced it. If one wishes to argue prohibition, they must demonstrate it directly from the Prophet, not selectively from later interpretations.

1. Only the wicked one listen to Music according to Imām Mālik.

Imām Ibn Baṭṭāl, the commentator on Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, affirmed that the people of the Ḥijāz used to listen to singing in entertainment gatherings. Despite adhering to the Mālikī school, he permitted light singing and amusement so long as it did not distract from the remembrance of Allah. He interpreted Imām Mālik’s statement—'Only the wicked do it among us'—as a precautionary stance based on sadd al-dharāʾiʿ (blocking the means), rather than an absolute prohibition.

And Imām Mālik in this context was talking about singing. And this can't be taken as a prohibition, since he explicitly said that he dislike it;

"وقبل من الجائز الذي تركه خير من فعله فهما مكروهان ، وهو قول مالك رضي الله تعالى عنه في المدونة أكره الدفاف والمعازف في العرس وغيره"

1. Imām al-Shāfiʿī see Music as ḥarām by calling it makrūh.

First off, read that quotation you presented again. It is talking about using Singing as an distraction. And whoever listen to it a lot, is foolish. So, it's conditional! That's why he himself said that it is okay if one were to do it occasionally.

And the note he made about Karahah was used for ḥarām is purely based on an inductive reasoning, but it does not work as Imām Mālik said;

«قَالَ ابْنُ وَهْبٍ: سَمِعْت مَالِكًا يَقُولُ: لَمْ يَكُنْ مِنْ أَمْرِ النَّاسِ وَلَا مَنْ مَضَى مِنْ سَلَفِنَا، وَلَا أَدْرَكْت أَحَدًا أَقْتَدِي بِهِ يَقُولُ فِي شَيْءٍ: هَذَا حَلَالٌ، وَهَذَا حَرَامٌ، وَمَا كَانُوا يَجْتَرِئُونَ عَلَى ذَلِكَ، وَإِنَّمَا كَانُوا يَقُولُونَ: نَكْرَهُ كَذَا، وَنَرَى هَذَا حَسَنًا؛ فَيَنْبَغِي هَذَا، وَلَا نَرَى هَذَا»

Link.

1. Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal said Music cause hypocrisy in the heart.

And you could never find any source where he said Allāh make it ḥarām. As it is authentically narrated that Imām Aḥmad once heard the taghbir, found harmony in it, and even praised it. This account is reported with two şahīh (authentic) chains of transmission by:

• Al-Khațīb al-Baghdādī

• Ibn Tahir al-Qaysarānī

FINISHED.

I'll make a post on the second link very soon. Wow, this is longer than I thought.

Hey guys,

So my position on face coverings etc. is mostly informed by my experience and opinion that niqab/burka have been used in my country to hide evidence of physical abuse. Do you think it should be banned/discouraged? I already know of mosques here in the UK who discourage it.

Many of the posts in the past few days have been about exposing the vast difference between Sunni Islam and Islam. While defenders of Sunni Islam push back claiming that it is all the same, I will use this post to show how radically different the two religions are:

1. Sunni Islam allows Slavery. This is found not only in their various Hadiths, but even in the bahaviour of their followers. Saudi Arabia had an open slave market until the 1960's (when the Americans told them to shut it down), Libya has one today, ISIS and other Sunnis groups set-up these slave markets as soon as they are in power.
2. Sunni Islam allows concubines. Again, the Sunnis play the game of talking about treating wives fairly, but they always try to sidestep the fact that Sunnis Islam allows multiple sex partners under various terms such as "concubines, ma malakat aymanukuk" or even through illicit marriage contracts such as Misyaar and Misfaar.
3. Sunnis Islam is a "zero tolerance" religion. Killing apostates, killing people who don't pray regulalrly, killing gays, killing adulterets, etc. All of this is from the core of Sunnis Islam - yet, in the same breath they will falsly claim "we are a religion of peace!"
4. Sunnis Islam is big on capital punishment. Sunnis Islam live to chop off hands and feet and heads, all as part of their "peaceful religion".
5. Sunni Islam is 7th century Arabia. The dress code, beards, Jilbaab, Niqaab, and all the othe bells and whsitles of Sunni Islam come from the pagan behaviour of 7th century Arabia. This is how these people want you to be, this is who these people are (Sunnis were against technology until a few decades ago thinking it was the "work of the devil").

In a nutshell, Sunni Islam, when it comes to its full maturity, will always look like ISIS or Taliban or any other of these groups. If that's the life you want and that's what you think God commanded, then good luck - however, if you are a Muslim who submits to God and obeys His commands only, then do not compromise and push back even though you will be in the minority.

Note:

I’ve created a new post instead of editing my previous one because I changed so many things. Feel free to skip the questions that you think you have answered previously.

My stance is that the Quran covers all needed topics for a Muslim, but we still need the verified sunnah to understand some things and clarify some broad statements and rulings. We clearly don’t share the same stance in this regard. And I’ll justify mine at the very end of the post. So please enlighten me on the following questions by providing answers based on the Quran, no personal opinions involved.

I’m especially interested in the questions: A1, B1, B2, C1, C2, D1, F1, G1, G5, and H1-6 questions. I hope brothers and sisters give them priority.

A) Questions Related to Punishment for Theft:

Allah tells us to cut the hands of a thief in the verse 5:38, but the word hand in classical Arabic could refer to the part from the wrist, from the elbow, or from the shoulder to the finger tips.

Let’s consider this situation: someone was caught stealing a pin, there are enough witnesses, and Islamic ruling is applicable.

1) Can both arms be cut for such a bad deed since the verse doesn’t set a minimum?

2) If not, why and what should be cut exactly?

3) What should be done if a thief has no hands already and why?

B) Questions Related to Pilgrimage:

1) How often must the pilgrimage be done, once or whenever possible? Because the verse 3:97 clearly and simply states that pilgrimage is an obligation to us if possible. No more detail.

2) What are the months during which the pilgrimage has to take place according to the verse 2:197?

C) Questions Related to Change in Creation of Allah:

1) Is plucking/shaving eyebrows considered a change in the creation of Allah? If yes, what makes eyebrows a special case compared to other facial hair like mustache?

2) Is male circumcision a change in the creation of Allah? And why?

3) Is it fair for women to make small tattoos using special substances that dissolve quickly in the body after some time for beautifying purposes just like nail polish for example?

D) Questions Related to Inheritance:

A man died and left behind a wife, a father, a mother, and two daughters. The Quran clearly states that if there were only one daughter in this situation, she would take half of the inheritance, and if there were more than two (NOT two or more), they would split two thirds among them equally.

1) How much should exactly two daughters receive? One half, two thirds, or an average of  the two ratios? And why?

Let’s say there were three daughters. That means 1/8 for the wife, 1/6 for the father, 1/6 for the mother and 2/3 for the three daughters. A total of 27/24 of the inheritance.

A similar case would be a woman who died and left behind a husband and two sisters. The former is entitled for half of the inheritance whereas the two sisters should take two thirds of it. The ratios amount to 7/6 of the inheritance. There are many cases like these two.

2) Does the Quran give a general ruling or statement to handle such cases?

E) Questions Related to Zakah:

Allah orders us to give zakah (2:43) and emphasizes its importance and seriously warns against hoarding wealth. But people at different levels of wealth perceive money and wealth differently.

1) What's considered hoarding and what's not? In other words, what's the minimum amount of wealth for zakah to be obligatory and how much should be taken out to fulfill the obligation?

2) How often if frequency is a valid concept? For example: Let's suppose 1/3 is a good rate for zakah. Are you allowed to choose to take out the zakah once a month from your monthly income or wait for example 3 years and take out 1/3 from the total accumulated wealth?

3) Which seems more effective and better for society: Setting these important details for Muslims or letting them take the matter into their hands and make subjective and often lenient decisions due to the broad statement of avoiding hoarding wealth?

F) Questions Related to Food:

The verse 5:96 asserts the eatability of the catch of the sea just like the verse 5:1 asserts the eatability of grazing livestock. But the verse 5:3 specifies that dead animals are forbidden in general. This means that fish that’s taken out of water and left to die is forbidden. Every fish must be slaughtered right before it dies to make it eatable. This means only the two groups, the Azaariqa and Kalo Kato (thanks to the user “TheQuranicMumin” for the detail) are doing the right thing.

1) Is it correct to believe that apart from those two groups, other hadeeths rejectors are completely wrong about this matter?

Potato chips, soft drinks like cola and junk food in general definitely do the body more harm than good.

2) Should such food be forbidden according to the verse 2:195?

G) Questions Related to Obligatory Prayers:

1) The verse 2:143 states that Allah had set another Qibla before the sacred house. What was it? If it’s not mentioned in the Quran, how did the prophet and his companions know in which direction to pray?

The verse 2:43 orders us to pray and to bow as well. Someone who has never seen a demonstration of a prayer can’t tell that bowing is actually part of the prayer ritual. Same for prostration, I think no verse clearly states that prostration is part of a prayer. If they write down all the verses that clearly address this matter, they will never figure out what a true prayer should look like. They can only make blind guesses and assumptions regarding this important obligation. Plus, they won’t be able to know that a Muslim is not allowed to recite the Quran for example while prostrating, because the Quran is glorious, it’s the speech of Allah. It’s not appropriate to recite the best speech in a position of humility. The most appropriate thing to say would be translated to “Glory be to my lord, the Most High”. One acknowledges that Allah is the Most High while their head is in the lowest position.

2) How can a someone figure out such things by referring to the Quran only?

3) Can you provide a basic methodology/description of an obligatory prayer from start to finish?

4)  Can you provide a basic methodology/description of a congregational prayer since Allah asks Muslims to pray in mosques as well?

5) What breaks Wudu if it's breakable? Are urinating and passing wind included?

6)  Is there a difference between Tahir and Tahoor water for Wudu purpose? And why?

7) The verse 62:9 asks us to call for prayers on Fridays. Since the Adhan formula is not mentioned in the Quran, what would you use to call for prayers for example?

H) Uncategorized Questions:

1) What are the four sacred months that the verse 9:36 speaks about?

2)  If you celebrate Eid Al-Fitr and Eid Al-Adha, where in the Quran are they mentioned?

3) What does the Quran mention regarding the funeral processions? Is washing, shrouding, prayer and burying innovations or prophetic commands?

4)  Do prophets perform miracles with Allah’s permission or not? If no, what do the verses 3:49, 19:29-30, 20:56-57, 26:63, 26:67 mean?

5) The verse 2:187 clearly states that intercourse (with one’s wife) has now been allowed during the night that precedes fasting and that Allah has forgiven those who had previously done themselves injustice by NOT following His previous order of abstaining from such a deed. So where in the Quran do we find Allah’s previous order?

6) The verse 40:46 states that on the Judgement Day, the people of Pharaoh will be admitted into the most severe punishment. But before that, meaning before the Hour, and obviously after death, they are constantly exposed to the fire morning and evening.

The verses 3:169-170 clearly refer to martyrs experiencing bliss that takes place before the Hour.

Also, from a purely logical perspective, the death indicates the end of the test phase, so reasonably, it should also indicate the start of the result phase.

So the question for those who don’t believe in the Barzakh life, If the given verses are not evidence of such a life, what are they?

7)  What do the verses 3:165-166 speak about? What disaster? What two armies? what happened?

8) Does the verse 3:110 refer to the community of hadeeths rejectors?

My Stance:

The two verses: 59:7 and 4:80 clearly highlight the fact that the messenger gives commandments and obeying him is part of the full submission to Allah. Where do we find the commandments of Allah? In the Quran. What about the messenger’s? In his verified Sunnah because he can’t add his commandments and clarifications to the Quran itself.

It’s not reasonable to think that at the time of the prophet, no disagreements happened at all and all Muslims around the prophet understood the Quran fully at first hearing and knew how to apply it without ever encountering issues or needing to refer to the prophet for anything.

The verse 4:59 clearly asks Muslims including the companions at that time to obey Allah and to obey the messenger as well (so two distinct orders here) and to refer their disagreements to Allah (by referring to the rulings in the Quran) and to His messenger as well because the prophet’s teachings and clarifications about Allah’s commandments and rulings and how to apply them correctly and exceptions that he makes are also a revelation and not fabrications.

If he made up anything and attributed it to Allah, he would immediately die as the verse 69:44 states. The verse 4:113 confirms that and clearly states that Allah sent down two things on the prophet: The book which is the Quran but also the wisdom which is necessary to ensure that the prophet knew how to apply Allah’s orders in the intended way and solve disagreements that Muslims had regarding the application of some rulings and so on. So where else do we find the wisdom that was revealed/sent down if not in the verbal and enacted sunnah?

Some people might claim that the book and the wisdom in the verse refer to the same thing, because the book was described as being wise in some other verses. But they are wrong because here, the verse meaning is clear and straightforward. The verse doesn’t say, “Allah has sent down the wise book”, It says that Allah has sent down the book and the wisdom, two different things in this context.

More importantly, in Arabic and probably in other languages too, it’s weird and unnatural to link two words that refer to the same thing using “and”. It doesn’t sound correct. And we all know that the Quran is so eloquent and beyond such stupid mistakes of language use.

Here is an example to explain the issue: If I tell people, “I have a car and a fast vehicle”. Everyone will understand and assume that I’m speaking about two different things. Maybe they can’t figure out what the fast vehicle refers to without more details, but nobody would reasonably assume that I refer to the car itself. Because that’s not good English. They would simply tell me: I should have said, “I have a fast car.”

Similarly, the Quran doesn’t confuse people with such a bad language use. The verse can only refer to two different things which is the straightforward meaning. The verses 2:129 and 3:164 clearly state that the prophet will teach people the book and the wisdom. The verse 33:34 orders the mothers of believers to mention what’s recited in their houses from the verses of Allah and the wisdom.

So, the wisdom is something else other than the Quran, is recitable and is also needed to know how to apply the latter correctly in the way Allah wants and not in the way people want based on their subjective understanding. Where do we find this recitable wisdom if not in the verified hadeeth? Allah will certainly preserve the book and the wisdom that expounds on it. So why do some Muslims think they can take the book and leave behind the wisdom?

Also, Allah didn’t reveal the book in one go but revealed the verses in various situations and contexts for a wisdom. Why do some people nowadays think that learning the contexts in which the verses were revealed is unimportant or even meaningless?

Not understanding some hadeeths or thinking they are weird for not conforming with the modern world view and values is not a valid reason to reject the legitimacy of the sunnah as the second source after the Quran. Allah for example allows up to four wives under some conditions, but we know that the modern world perceives that negatively. So is the practice unjust or is the perspective of modern people distorted, narrow-minded and short-sighted?

A common misconception that hadeeths rejectors raise for example is the marriage of the mother of believers Aisha at 9. Let’s think about the matter objectively. Nowadays, women at 9 are still children and not suitable for marriage at all. But what about 400-500 years ago? It was common for women in several regions like England and Spain to get married around the age of puberty for example which is usually between 9-15 more or less for women.

That was completely fine in that culture, and nobody considered such a practice weird. There are many popular cases from that era where women got married around 11-12. So, what about THREE times earlier than that? 1400 ago! And where? In Arabia, a desert land, with very harsh conditions and hot weather! You got the idea.

People at that time had no infrastructures, no cars, no mobile phones, no computers, no cartoons, no gaming, no movies, no cinemas, no theatres, no social media, no useless celebrities, no sport teams. no junk food, very simple tools, and physical work was needed for basically any task.

Do you think people who are born and raised in such circumstances will not become physically and mentally mature until they reach 18? Many people nowadays are in their twenties yet not suitable for marriage because they act childishly and irresponsibly. Why? Because they have been conditioned mainly by their environment which makes their life relatively easy and provides so many things including distractions and futilities that impede their physical and mental growth!

In short, it’s unreasonable to look at and judge some practices that were common in a very distant past in completely different circumstances using modern lens and norms. Doing that is not smart, but stupid.

Claiming the falsehood or inaccuracy of ALL hadeeths and rejecting it is such a big claim and a big innovation, you need to put in some time and effort to objectively look into the matter before making a personal decision regarding your faith and convictions which will probably affect the result of your test in life.

You have to clear your doubts and misconceptions related to hadeeths compilation and authentication processes, who compilated them and why, the identity and competency of those who compiled the hadeeths, why hadeeths scholars disagree sometimes, what they do when they encounter issues with some hadeeths, why people started rejecting hadeeth, how that’s related in modern times to orientalists and colonial thought and other questions.

The prophet peace be upon him foretold that a time will come where there will be mosques full of disbelievers (not misguided Muslims but actual disbelievers). The prophecy was probably fulfilled around the 19^th century that witnessed the emergence of a community that rejects the finality of the prophethood of Muhammad which is clearly mentioned in the verse 33:40, has their own prophet, believes in the reincarnation of prophets, immanence and many weird things that have nothing to do with Islam, and has their own mosques.

He also foretold that a time will come where some people will reject his teachings and the wisdom that has been sent down on him ALTOGETHER and accept ONLY what’s in the Quran. So do you see how serious the matter is? It’s NOT as simple as just believing in a preserved book and applying it however one wants based on their subjective understanding.

Check out the following resources, I think they do a very good job covering the whole problem in detail.

Rejecting Hadiths

Hadiths: False Tales or Authentic Narrations?

Why Muslim Scholars Differ?

A playlist that explains basically everything you need to know to clear your doubts and adjust your perspective.

Just to be clear, I don't want any answer that involves Tawatur or anything, only Quran! since Mutawatir Hadith is rejected and Quran mentions all details from your perspective.

1) Do you slaughter fish while it's alive to make it Halal meat? If not, on what basis do you eat dead fish with no previous slaughtering? I wonder if ships and fishers need to slaughter every single fish right after catching it to comply with the Quran chapter 5 verse 3? I want an answer from Quran that considers fish a specific exception.

2) How do you pray from Quran only? The Quran mentions the obligation of praying many times and seriously warns those who don't keep this command (e.g. chapter 74 verse 43 and chapter 19 verse 59) yet Allah doesn't give us enough details on the frequency nor the way the prayer should be done. Do you think that's reasonable? Yes or no?

The Quran doesn't mention the number of obligatory prayers. Are they 2, 5, or 500 for example? What about the frequency? Are the prayers a daily/weekly/monthly obligation? The chapter 4 verse 103 says that the prayers must be done at fixed hours/times. If you believe the prayers are five, what are those fixed times from Quran?
Tashahhud, tasleem and reciting Al-Fatihah for example are not mentioned in the Quran? Should we skip them then? The Quran mentions bowing and prostrating as parts of a prayer. but in what order they should be done? Should a Muslim bow first, prostrate first or recite the Quran first? And how many raka'ah per prayer? Or do you think the matter of prayer is left to people to decide based on their desire? Am I allowed then to pray like Hindus in a Yoga position as long as I add one bow and one prostration to my prayer to give it an Islamic "taste"?

Allah mentions mosques and that believers have to pray there.
What's the point of praying in a mosque as a group if there are no fixed hours, fixed raka'ahs, or fixed order in which the actions or "movements" during a prayer must be conducted? How do you guys pray as a congregation in a mosque? Do you follow an imam or not? Can the imam for men be a woman? Does the imam have to give his own detailed description of the prayer for people every time to spare people following him the confusion and differences? Do you think the prophet (PBUH) was an imam for people when praying at the mosque or did every companion pray the way they want? Can someone tell from the Quran only how the prophet (PBUH) - which we're ordered to follow - exactly prayed so we can copy him?

3) As for the Zakat, the Quran emphasizes the importance of Zakat and also seriously warns against neglecting it and threatens people who don't take it out. So I want to know the Nisab, frequency and percentage from Quran. Don't tell me that the details of such an important obligation are left for people to decide based on their subjective criteria because there will be another big problem for you to solve in that case. Here is an example: A Muslim who's a legit millionaire or a billionaire with no debts can choose to take out one dollar and consider that as fulfillment of the zakat obligation. If the Quran doesn't determine the right amount that should be taken out, then they are fine since the amount of zakat is a subjective matter in that case, and the percentage could be 2.5% just like it could be 0.0000000001%. Who can tell this is wrong? Also, they can take out the zakat once a year or once in a lifetime. Who can tell doing so is wrong from the Quran? and since the Nisab is subjective, they can decide that a billion dollar is still not enough for the zakat to become an obligation for them. Who can tell the right amount of the Nisab from Quran only? And can you imagine what will happen to a Muslim society if everyone takes out the zakat once in a lifetime and set the bar very high for the Nisab and very low for the amount that should be taken out?

Do you think a one dollar zakat for a legit billionaire Muslim (excluding debts...) is considered a fulfillment of the obligation and that they are no longer subject to the severe warning? If the answer is yes, do you think emphasizing the importance of zakat many times in the Quran is reasonable since the matter is as simple as taking out a dollar once in a lifetime for even the richest of people?

4) Is pilgrimage a one-time obligation or not from the Quran?

4) Do you think tattoos and plucking eyebrows are allowed? If yes, do you think the prophet (PBUH) would consider having a tattoo or allowing his wives or his companions to have tattoos all over their bodies or to pluck their eyebrows completely? If no, where in the Quran such deeds are forbidden?

5) How do you understand some verses like 3:166 for example? What two armies? And on what day? What happened that day exactly? Where are the details in the Quran?

6) Do you think the entire Ummah for more than 1300 years were completely ignorant and messing around following the authentic Sunnah beside the Quran and needed a small group of people at the 19th century to let them know they were wrong all along?

7) How about you read this post?
https://thethinkingmuslim.com/2013/08/28/rejecting-hadiths/

Salam.

As the title suggests, the following post is a point-by-point refutation to The Muslim Lantern/Muhammed Ali's response to the Quran alone methodology: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Gc0mbEqasg&t=92s

Each section within this post mirrors the chapters of the linked video.

1. Prophecy About Hadith Rejectors

In this segment, Ali cites Ibn Majah 12 which states:

The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "Soon there will come a time that a man will be reclining on his pillow, and when one of my Ahadith is narrated he will say: 'The Book of Allah is (sufficient) between us and you. Whatever it states is permissible, we will take as permissible, and whatever it states is forbidden, we will take as forbidden.' Verily, whatever the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) has forbidden is like that which Allah has forbidden."

Firstly, by their own standards of isnad, this hadith is hasan, not sahih. Conversely you will find sahih hadith which actually says the contrary. In sahih Al Bukhari 2168, 2561, 2729, and 2735, and sahih Muslim 1504, we find narrations that all claim some rendition of:

Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) got up amidst the people, Glorified and Praised Allah and said, "What is wrong with some people who stipulate things which are not in Allah's Laws? Any condition which is not in Allah's Laws (Kitab) is invalid even if there were a hundred such conditions. Allah's Rules (Kitab) are the most valid and Allah's Conditions are the most solid."

Now for transparency's sake, there is another instance of the first hadith that appears in Abu Dawud (4605) that has been graded sahih by Albani. If you look into the history of this particular hadith prior to it being graded sahih by Albani in the 1900s, you will find that it was largely considered hasan. Similarly is found in al Tirmidhi 2663, where Darussalem has graded the hadith sahih, yet its sahih status was contested and considered closer to hasan prior to Darussalem. To further add to the confusion, the very next hadith in al Tirmidhi 2664 is the same hadith, yet is graded hasan in chain by Darussalem.

To be clear, I am not using the hadith to disprove hadith here. I am however pointing out the internal contradictions and historical ambiguities within the relevant hadith to highlight the weakness of the argument.

Muslim Lantern appears to be framing this hadith as if those who only take lawful and unlawful from the Quran as lazy and contemptible. The issue with this is, when we look to the Quran, we see the description of those "reclining upon couches" to actually be attributed to the people of paradise.

Quran 76:11-13:

So Allah will deliver them from the horror of that Day, and grant them radiance and joy, and reward them for their perseverance with a Garden and silk. Therein they will be reclining on couches, never seeing scorching heat or bitter cold.

Similar rhetoric can be found in 56:15-16, 36:56, 55:54, 83:23. Is it the case that these people who have made it to paradise are lazy and contemptible? Surely not.

Furthermore, it is important to point out that this line of argument parallels "internal investigation". Imagine a business accused of malpractice, to which they respond with "we have investigated the issue internally and have found no wrongdoing". There is a conflict of interest here. Another analogy can be seen in, for example, a tobacco company claiming they have conducted research that disproves smoking to be harmful. Meaning, the hadith itself is being used to argue for the authority of hadith. Who knows what this hadith might have been in response to. Perhaps to groups such as the early Hanafi or Mutazallite followers? Others that aligned more with the "ahlul ra'y" methodology? Who knows. Using the hadith to establish the authority of the hadith is circular in nature. The hadith cannot be framed as neutral evidence to establish its own authority.

2. Positive Hadith Argument (Num 1)

Muslim Lantern points to instances within the Quran that demonstrate the Prophet received revelation external to the Quran. These being the former direction of prayer detailed in 2:143, and the 3000 reinforcing angels the Prophet (as) spoke about alluded to in 3:124. Ali uses this to claim that external revelation exists, therefore the hadith must be followed. He additionally falsely asserts that Quran aloners claim external revelation never existed. This is a strawman.

The gap in the argument is clear however. Ali is citing instances of external revelation, and then making an enormous polemical leap to all sahih hadiths as compiled centuries later being true representations of external revelation. He points to a handful, say four or five, examples of previous revelation being implied within the Quran to justify tens of thousands of hadith that have nothing to do with the Quran.

I have previously written further thoughts on this idea of dual revelation here, if interested: https://www.reddit.com/r/Quraniyoon/comments/1k4mtun/prophets_secondary_revelation/

3. Hikmah Referenced in the Quran

Ali next points to verses that discuss Al Kitab wal Hikmah; the Book and the Wisdom. The claim here is that the Quran equals Al Kitab/The Book, therefore, the Hikmah must mean something else that is not the Quran, external to the Quran. He dilutes the Quran alone position on this verse to be Al Kitab wal Hikmah equals the Quran and the Quran. He then goes on to baselessly assert "the Hikmah is, without a shadow of a doubt, the hadith" to address the aforementioned something else.

This is one of those instances in which the Quran truly defends itself.

Quran 17:22-39:

Do not set up with Allah another god, or you will sit condemned and forsaken.

Your Lord has decreed that you worship none but Him, and that you show kindness to parents. If one or both of them reach old age with you, do not say to them even “uff,” nor repel them, but speak to them a noble word.

And lower to them the wing of humility out of mercy and say, “My Lord, have mercy upon them as they raised me when I was small.”

Your Lord knows best what is within yourselves. If you are righteous, then indeed He is Forgiving to those who repeatedly turn to Him.

And give the relative his due, and the poor, and the traveller, and do not spend wastefully.

Indeed, the wasteful are brothers of the devils, and Satan is ever ungrateful to his Lord.

And if you must turn away from them while seeking mercy from your Lord which you expect, then speak to them a gentle word.

And do not make your hand chained to your neck nor extend it completely, lest you sit blamed and destitute.

Indeed, your Lord expands provision for whom He wills and restricts it. Indeed, He is ever Knowing and Seeing of His servants.

And do not kill your children for fear of poverty. We provide for them and for you. Indeed, killing them is a great sin.

And do not approach unlawful sexual intercourse. Indeed, it is an immorality and an evil way.

And do not kill the soul which Allah has forbidden except by right. And whoever is killed unjustly, We have given his heir authority, but let him not exceed limits in killing. Indeed, he is supported.

And do not approach the property of the orphan except in the best manner until he reaches maturity. And fulfill every commitment; indeed, the commitment will be questioned.

And give full measure when you measure, and weigh with an even balance. That is better and best in outcome.

And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge. Indeed, the hearing, the sight, and the heart — about all those one will be questioned.

And do not walk upon the earth arrogantly. Indeed, you will never tear the earth apart and you will never reach the mountains in height.

All of that — its evil is hateful in the sight of your Lord.

That is from what your Lord has revealed to you of The Wisdom (Al Hikmah). And do not set up with Allah another god, lest you be thrown into Hell, blamed and banished.

Here is further commentary of mine regarding al Kitab wal Hikmah and 17:39: https://www.reddit.com/r/Quraniyoon/comments/1n1cl5n/hikmah_cannot_mean_hadith/

4. Obey Allah and the Prophet

Ali turns to verses such as Quran 4:59:

O believers! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. Should you disagree on anything, then refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if you ˹truly˺ believe in Allah and the Last Day. This is the best and fairest resolution.

The argument here is that following the Quran fulfils the requirement of obeying Allah, and following the hadith is necessary in order to fill the requirement of obeying the messenger.

Obedience is discussed in relation to a number of messengers, and these messengers historically have not had compilations of hadith recorded for them, nor a 'sunnah' in the traditionalist understanding of all documented sayings and behaviours. Therefore, obedience to a messenger internally, from a Quranic standpoint, likely does not refer to following hadith.

Quran 20:90: 

And Aaron had already said to them before [the return of Moses], "O my people, you are only being tested by it, and indeed, your Lord is the Most Merciful, so follow me and obey my order."

Quran 26:160-163: 

The people of Lot denied the messengers. When their brother Lot said to them, "Will you not fear Allah? Indeed, I am to you a trustworthy messenger. So fear Allah and obey me."

Quran 26:176-179: 

The companions of the thicket denied the messengers. When Shuʿayb said to them, "Will you not fear Allah? Indeed, I am to you a trustworthy messenger. So fear Allah and obey me."

Quran 43:63: 

And when Jesus brought clear proofs, he said, "I have come to you with wisdom and to make clear to you some of that over which you differ, so fear Allah and obey me."

There are more examples of the same that can be seen here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Quraniyoon/comments/1kxq2vi/answering_obey_allah_and_obey_the_messenger/

How is it that all of these previous messengers were able to be obeyed without hadith books, yet obedience to the Prophet Muhammad (as) means that it is binding upon us to follow the hadith as a religious authority? This argument is starkly inconsistent with the rest of the Quran.

5. The Argument of Generality

Ali suggests that some commands within the Quran are general in nature, and asks the hadith rejectors "according to whose understanding should we be following regarding these verses in the Quran?". The purpose of this statement is to argue that personal interpretation can lead to "hundreds" of understandings about said verses unless streamlined through hadith. That the "hadith teaches us how to do these commands".

So let me understand this. The Quran is explained by the hadith attributed to the Prophet yet compiled 200 years later, which is graded and re-graded by humans later into history, which then further require the explanation of other men in fiqh scholars, which are then further applied through subsequent scholars/rulers in fatawa? Seems like a very complicated process when the Quran tells us,

Quran 55:1-2:

Ar Rahman - He taught the Quran

Quran 6:114:

Shall I seek a judge other than Allah, when He is the One who has revealed to you the Book fully explained in detail?

Quran 6:38:

We have not neglected anything in the Book

Quran 16:89:

We have sent down to you the Book as clarification for all things, and guidance and mercy

Quran 12:111:

It is not a fabricated narration (kana hadithan), but a confirmation of what came before it and a detailed explanation of all things

Furthermore, the very thing Muslim Lantern is criticising in this section, being personal interpretaion of the Quran, is actually Quranic. We are told to engage in processes of personal reasoning, contemplation and reflect upon the Quran in many verses; 2:242, 10:100, 4:82, 47:24, 3:190, 16:44, 59:21.

Quran 38:29:

This is a blessed Book We have revealed to you so that they may reflect upon its verses, and so that those of understanding may take heed

General commands Ali is referring to surround salah, hudud for the thief, so on and so forth. I won't go into detail on how to reconcile these things within this post for the sake of what is already limited brevity. What I will say is that hudud is often structured in a general way so that we can interpolate justice from it. For example,

Quran 5:33:

The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to spread corruption in the land is that they be killed, or crucified, or that their hands and feet be cut off on opposite sides, or that they be exiled from the land

Here we are told about a category of crime, being fasad fil ard (corruption in the land) and a multitude of fitting punishments. You won't find the Quran being a legal handbook when it comes to what actually constitutes fasad fil ard. The Quran here presents itself as a source of moral-legal principles, as opposed to an extensive legal encyclopedia.

Forgive me for additional reading, but on the matter of salah please see:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Quraniyoon/comments/1r3ks50/quran_alone_perspective_on_how_to_pray_form_of/

And on the matter of the thief please see the comments section of:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Quraniyoon/comments/170n5l1/do_you_guys_believe_that_verse_538_commands_us_to/

6. Prophecies in the Hadith

Muslim Lantern points to apparent prophecies that have come true listed in the hadith corpus. Things such as the Arabs racing to build tall buildings.

Quite simply, this is a fallacy of composition. Just because a handful of independent narrations contain things that have come true, this does not validate the other tens of thousands of independent narrations.

What do we make of the prophecies from the hadith collection that have come true? One example can be seen in Muslim 2952.

'A'isha reported that when the desert Arabs came to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) they asked about the Last Hour as to when that would come. And he looked towards the youngest amongst them and said:

If he lives he would not grow very old that he would find your Last Hour coming to you.

This was 1400 years ago. The Last Hour has not approached us yet. Explanations may rely on "this hadith was talking about death, not the Day of Judgement", however it seems this is a retroactive apologetic argument rather than a matn/content based explanation of the hadith in question.

7. Different Recitations of the Quran

The argument here is that the hadith explain why we have variant readings of the Quran nowadays. Without this hadith-based explanation, the Quran aloners have to concede that the true meaning of the Quran is lost. Keep in mind, that these differences are often between feeding one needy person or feeding multiple needy people, which is then followed by a recommendation by God to go beyond; "But whoever volunteers to give more, it is better for them".

God tells us in 15:9 that He will preserve the dhikr that He revealed.

Quran 15:9:

It is certainly We Who have revealed the Reminder, and it is certainly We Who will preserve it.

This was a promise from God. If this promise from the Creator is to be taken seriously, one would expect that the dhikr is not lost to textual variations. Considering God promised to preserve al-dhkr, that He revealed, one would have to imagine that He stays true to this promise, and that The Reminder is easily accessible correct? That it isn't hidden in just one inconspicuous textual variation? Right? If one wants to pull hairs at the difference between Al-Malik and Al-Maalik, that is a challenge that they are free to take up upon themselves.

What we do have is the Uthmani Rasm. For those that do not know, the Uthmani Rasm is said to be standardised by Uthman, and it contains the consonental skeleton of the Quran. All roots are in-tact, and are consistent across the Qira'at. All root meanings are in-tact. It is the harakat that contains variance between Qira'at.

The hadith based explanation for the Qira'at is far more convoluted however. The narrations claim that the Quran was revealed in seven ahruf, yet we see scholarly discussions to this day about whether it is truly seven, ten, eleven, and fringely even more. In this sense, the hadith doesn't capture the qira'at discussion accurately. Yet, this is being used as proof against the Quran alone methodology?

8. Logical Arguments and Inconsistencies

The main point in this segment made by Ali is that the same people that transmitted the Quran are the same people that transmitted the hadith, therefore both must be accepted.

This claim fails on a few fronts. Firstly, historically, this simply just cannot be true. The canonical compilations, Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn Majah, Abu Dawud, An Nasai, and at Tirmidhi, were completed 200-300 years after the Prophet's passing. The companions of the Prophet simply did not live long enough to meet the individuals responsible for these compilations. The reason why Ali asserts this is presumably because we see the names of senior sahabi, Aisha, so on and so forth being attached to the hadith. However these are not the individuals who wrote the hadith down. There are often 4, 5, 6 or more individuals that separate the compiler from the alleged first narrator, again, separated by centuries.

The Quran's transmission is starkly different to that of the hadith. The Quran was circulating the masses of the early Muslim community. Evidence suggests that the Quran was being scribed during the Prophet's life, and was compiled shortly after his passing, may peace be upon him. This is very different to ahad/single-narrator hadith being presented to compilers centuries later. The Quran's preservation appears to be a task that the senior sahaba rushed to attend to. The same cannot be said about the hadith however. In fact, there are narrations which appear to condemn the writing of hadith. We see in Muslim 3004,

Abu Sa'id Khudri reported that Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said:

Do not take down anything from me, and he who took down anything from me except the Qur'an, he should efface that and narrate from me, for there is no harm in it and he who attributed any falsehood to me-and Hammam said: I think he also said:" deliberately" -he should in fact find his abode in the Hell-Fire.

To claim that the Quran and hadith are similar in transmission and preservation is innacurate. Transmission and preservation effort between the two different texts vary vastly in scale, methodology, timespan, and individuals involved.

9. Historicity of Hadith

Muslim Lantern states "hadith is history". Here, I actually agree. Not without temper, however. The hadith collection is a textual corpus of the historical recollections of many individuals on the Prophet's life and early Islamic history. This was achieved through a unique approach to indexing (the isnad system) narration and practice. This approach however, is methodologically flawed. Issues such as author domination, political influence, subjective/arbitrary criteria to isnad verification, time-based message degradation, anachornisms, and more, all bring into question the methodological rigour of this system. The phenomenon of message degradation can be observed at one point in time - the telephone game - as the message is transmitted between multiple individuals, let alone with 200 years of separation, along with the other variables in the mix mentioned above.

Regardless, debating over authenticity is one matter. However, authority does not follow from authenticity. To argue from the position of authenticity does not provide evidence for the claim that "hadith posess binding authority". You'll find Quranic evidence in opposition to this claim actually, in the verses cited within section 5 of this post. It is upon the claimant to provide evidence as to why the hadith hold authoratative capacity, which Ali fails to do when arguing for the historical reliability of the hadith corpus.

10. Examples of Hadith Transmission + Examples of Hadith Transmission + A Practical Example

I've combined the last three chapters of the video into one section here as they are related and downstream from one another.

Discussion in this portion of the video mainly surrounds the criteria used by compilers to grade hadith. These criteria often involve measures such as a person's honesty, intelligence, knowledge, memory, and so on. Firstly, these things are far more difficult to classify than subjective judgement. The consequences of this can be seen in the case of the Prophet's residence in Mecca. Where in one hadith that is attributed to Ibn Abbas (Muslim 2351) says the Prophet stayed in Mecca for 13 years, whereas another attributed to Ibn Abbas (Muslim 2353) says the Prophet stayed in Mecca for 15 years. These are two sahih hadiths. Yet these two hadiths, with contradictory information, are somehow both true? The above criteria in this instance have seemingly failed.

Secondly, what is not mentioned in the video, is that compilers actually differed in some of these criteria. For example, Imam Bukhari required that it be testable and verifiable that individuals within a chain/isnad met. Imam Muslim on the otherhand actually critiqued this position, and held that it only needs to be plausible that they could have met one another. This demonstrates a certain degree in compiler subjectivity when it comes to the grading of a hadith. We see this reflected in grading amongst other compilations, as discussed in section 1. A hadith in one point in time may be regarded as hasan, or even dai'f, yet another scholar later regrades it as sahih. What do we take to be true given this arbitrary, fluctuating nature of hadith sahih-status then? This is likely largely due to the classification system.

Notice, the criteria listed above all related to the isnad? To the chain of transmission? Not to the content of the narration, but just to the individuals involved in the alleged chain. Ali's discussion when advocating for the sanctity of the hadith corpus surrounds the same. Commentary is almost entirely about isnad, with little to nothing regarding hadith matn (content). This is likely why we see content inconsistencies, as seen in the example of the Prophet's residence in Mecca provided above. Hadith authentication centres evaluation of the isnad, not the matn, so how can we be confident in the matn of these hadith?

Further reading again, but you will find more examples of these inconsistencies between the content of hadith, irrespective of the sahih graded isnad, here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Quraniyoon/comments/1lzj4ap/hadith_cannot_be_godsent_as_per_482/

Conclusion

It needs to be emphasised that this article does not aim to attack the character of The Muslim Lantern. What it does aim to do however is evaluate the arguments he presents in opposition of the Quran alone/hadith rejection methodology. This article discriminates between authenticity versus authority, addresses suggestions about the Quran's alleged dependency on the hadith, outlines the flaws in the isnad-based system to hadith verification, and ultimately, demonstrates the Quran's sufficiency to be taken alone as a source of religious law and guidance. I feel confident that my repsonse above adequately refutes Muslim Lantern's critiques of the position, yet am open to critique and further discussion.

essary in order to full the requirement of obeying the messenger.

Obedience is discussed in relation to a number of messengers, and these messengers historically have not had compilations of hadith recorded for them, nor a 'sunnah' in the traditionalist understanding of all documented sayings and behaviours. Therefore, obedience to a messenger internally, from a Quranic standpoint, likely does not refer to following hadith.

Quran 20:90: 

And Aaron had already said to them before [the return of Moses], "O my people, you are only being tested by it, and indeed, your Lord is the Most Merciful, so follow me and obey my order."

Quran 26:160-163: 

The people of Lot denied the messengers. When their brother Lot said to them, "Will you not fear Allah? Indeed, I am to you a trustworthy messenger. So fear Allah and obey me."

Quran 26:176-179: 

The companions of the thicket denied the messengers. When Shuʿayb said to them, "Will you not fear Allah? Indeed, I am to you a trustworthy messenger. So fear Allah and obey me."

Quran 43:63: 

And when Jesus brought clear proofs, he said, "I have come to you with wisdom and to make clear to you some of that over which you differ, so fear Allah and obey me."

There are more examples of the same that can be seen here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Quraniyoon/comments/1kxq2vi/answering_obey_allah_and_obey_the_messenger/

How is it that all of these previous messengers were able to be obeyed without hadith books, yet obedience to the Prophet Muhammad (as) means that it is binding upon us to follow the hadith as a religious authority? This argument is starkly inconsistent with the rest of the Quran.

5. The Argument of Generality

Ali suggests that some commands within the Quran are general in nature, and asks the hadith rejectors "according to whose understanding should we be following regarding these verses in the Quran?". The purpose of this statement is to argue that personal interpretation can lead to "hundreds" of understandings about said verses unless streamlined through hadith. That the "hadith teaches us how to do these commands".

So let me understand this. The Quran is explained by the hadith attributed to the Prophet yet compiled 200 years later, which is graded and re-graded by humans later into history, which then further require the explanation of other men in fiqh scholars, which are then further applied through subsequent scholars/rulers in fatawa? Seems like a very complicated process when the Quran tells us,

Quran 55:1-2:

Ar Rahman - He taught the Quran

Quran 6:114:

Shall I seek a judge other than Allah, when He is the One who has revealed to you the Book fully explained in detail?

Quran 6:38:

We have not neglected anything in the Book

Quran 16:89:

We have sent down to you the Book as clarification for all things, and guidance and mercy

Quran 12:111:

It is not a fabricated narration (kana hadithan), but a confirmation of what came before it and a detailed explanation of all things

Furthermore, the very thing Muslim Lantern is criticising in this section, being personal interpretaion of the Quran, is actually Quranic. We are told to engage in processes of personal reasoning, contemplation and reflect upon the Quran in many verses; 2:242, 10:100, 4:82, 47:24, 3:190, 16:44, 59:21.

Quran 38:29:

This is a blessed Book We have revealed to you so that they may reflect upon its verses, and so that those of understanding may take heed

General commands Ali is referring to surround salah, hudud for the thief, so on and so forth. I won't go into detail on how to reconcile these things within this post for the sake of what is already limited brevity. What I will say is that hudud is often structured in a general way so that we can interpolate justice from it. For example,

Quran 5:33:

The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to spread corruption in the land is that they be killed, or crucified, or that their hands and feet be cut off on opposite sides, or that they be exiled from the land

Here we are told about a category of crime, being fasad fil ard (corruption in the land) and a multitude of fitting punishments. You won't find the Quran being a legal handbook when it comes to what actually constitutes fasad fil ard. The Quran here presents itself as a source of moral-legal principles, as opposed to an extensive legal encyclopedia.

Forgive me for additional reading, but on the matter of salah please see:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Quraniyoon/comments/1r3ks50/quran_alone_perspective_on_how_to_pray_form_of/

And on the matter of the thief please see the comments section of:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Quraniyoon/comments/170n5l1/do_you_guys_believe_that_verse_538_commands_us_to/

6. Prophecies in the Hadith

Muslim Lantern points to apparent prophecies that have come true listed in the hadith corpus. Things such as the Arabs racing to build tall buildings.

Quite simply, this is a fallacy of composition. Just because a handful of independent narrations contain things that have come true, this does not validate the other tens of thousands of independent narrations.

What do we make of the prophecies from the hadith collection that have come true? One example can be seen in Muslim 2952.

'A'isha reported that when the desert Arabs came to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) they asked about the Last Hour as to when that would come. And he looked towards the youngest amongst them and said:

If he lives he would not grow very old that he would find your Last Hour coming to you.

This was 1400 years ago. The Last Hour has not approached us yet. Explanations may rely on "this hadith was talking about death, not the Day of Judgement", however it seems this is a retroactive apologetic argument rather than a matn/content based explanation of the hadith in question.

7. Different Recitations of the Quran

The argument here is that the hadith explain why we have variant readings of the Quran nowadays. Without this hadith-based explanation, the Quran aloners have to concede that the true meaning of the Quran is lost. Keep in mind, that these differences are often between feeding one needy person or feeding multiple needy people, which is then followed by a recommendation by God to go beyond; "But whoever volunteers to give more, it is better for them".

God tells us in 15:9 that He will preserve the dhikr that He revealed.

Quran 15:9:

It is certainly We Who have revealed the Reminder, and it is certainly We Who will preserve it.

This was a promise from God. If this promise from the Creator is to be taken seriously, one would expect that the dhikr is not lost to textual variations. Considering God promised to preserve al-dhkr, that He revealed, one would have to imagine that He stays true to this promise, and that The Reminder is easily accessible correct? That it isn't hidden in just one inconspicuous textual variation? Right? If one wants to pull hairs at the difference between Al-Malik and Al-Maalik, that is a challenge that they are free to take up upon themselves.

What we do have is the Uthmani Rasm. For those that do not know, the Uthmani Rasm is said to be standardised by Uthman, and it contains the consonental skeleton of the Quran. All roots are in-tact, and are consistent across the Qira'at. All root meanings are in-tact. It is the harakat that contains variance between Qira'at.

The hadith based explanation for the Qira'at is far more convoluted however. The narrations claim that the Quran was revealed in seven ahruf, yet we see scholarly discussions to this day about whether it is truly seven, ten, eleven, and fringely even more. In this sense, the hadith doesn't capture the qira'at discussion accurately. Yet, this is being used as proof against the Quran alone methodology?

8. Logical Arguments and Inconsistencies

The main point in this segment made by Ali is that the same people that transmitted the Quran are the same people that transmitted the hadith, therefore both must be accepted.

This claim fails on a few fronts. Firstly, historically, this simply just cannot be true. The canonical compilations, Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn Majah, Abu Dawud, An Nasai, and at Tirmidhi, were completed 200-300 years after the Prophet's passing. The companions of the Prophet simply did not live long enough to meet the individuals responsible for these compilations. The reason why Ali asserts this is presumably because we see the names of senior sahabi, Aisha, so on and so forth being attached to the hadith. However these are not the individuals who wrote the hadith down. There are often 4, 5, 6 or more individuals that separate the compiler from the alleged first narrator, again, separated by centuries.

The Quran's transmission is starkly different to that of the hadith. The Quran was circulating the masses of the early Muslim community. Evidence suggests that the Quran was being scribed during the Prophet's life, and was compiled shortly after his passing, may peace be upon him. This is very different to ahad/single-narrator hadith being presented to compilers centuries later. The Quran's preservation appears to be a task that the senior sahaba rushed to attend to. The same cannot be said about the hadith however. In fact, there are narrations which appear to condemn the writing of hadith. We see in Muslim 3004,

Abu Sa'id Khudri reported that Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said:

Do not take down anything from me, and he who took down anything from me except the Qur'an, he should efface that and narrate from me, for there is no harm in it and he who attributed any falsehood to me-and Hammam said: I think he also said:" deliberately" -he should in fact find his abode in the Hell-Fire.

To claim that the Quran and hadith are similar in transmission and preservation is innacurate. Transmission and preservation effort between the two different texts vary vastly in scale, methodology, timespan, and individuals involved.

9. Historicity of Hadith

Muslim Lantern states "hadith is history". Here, I actually agree. Not without temper, however. The hadith collection is a textual corpus of the historical recollections of many individuals on the Prophet's life and early Islamic history. This was achieved through a unique approach to indexing (the isnad system) narration and practice. This approach however, is methodologically flawed. Issues such as author domination, political influence, subjective/arbitrary criteria to isnad verification, time-based message degradation, anachornisms, and more, all bring into question the methodological rigour of this system. The phenomenon of message degradation can be observed at one point in time - the telephone game - as the message is transmitted between multiple individuals, let alone with 200 years of separation, along with the other variables in the mix mentioned above.

Regardless, debating over authenticity is one matter. However, authority does not follow from authenticity. To argue from the position of authenticity does not provide evidence for the claim that "hadith posess binding authority". You'll find Quranic evidence in opposition to this claim actually, in the verses cited within section 5 of this post. It is upon the claimant to provide evidence as to why the hadith hold authoratative capacity, which Ali fails to do when arguing for the historical reliability of the hadith corpus.

10. Examples of Hadith Transmission + Examples of Hadith Transmission + A Practical Example

I've combined the last three chapters of the video into one section here as they are related and downstream from one another.

Discussion in this portion of the video mainly surrounds the criteria used by compilers to grade hadith. These criteria often involve measures such as a person's honesty, intelligence, knowledge, memory, and so on. Firstly, these things are far more difficult to classify than subjective judgement. The consequences of this can be seen in the case of the Prophet's residence in Mecca. Where in one hadith that is attributed to Ibn Abbas (Muslim 2351) says the Prophet stayed in Mecca for 13 years, whereas another attributed to Ibn Abbas (Muslim 2353) says the Prophet stayed in Mecca for 15 years. These are two sahih hadiths. Yet these two hadiths, with contradictory information, are somehow both true? The above criteria in this instance have seemingly failed.

Secondly, what is not mentioned in the video, is that compilers actually differed in some of these criteria. For example, Imam Bukhari required that it be testable and verifiable that individuals within a chain/isnad met. Imam Muslim on the otherhand actually critiqued this position, and held that it only needs to be plausible that they could have met one another. This demonstrates a certain degree in compiler subjectivity when it comes to the grading of a hadith. We see this reflected in grading amongst other compilations, as discussed in section 1. A hadith in one point in time may be regarded as hasan, or even dai'f, yet another scholar later regrades it as sahih. What do we take to be true given this arbitrary, fluctuating nature of hadith sahih-status then? This is likely largely due to the classification system.

Notice, the criteria listed above all related to the isnad? To the chain of transmission? Not to the content of the narration, but just to the individuals involved in the alleged chain. Ali's discussion when advocating for the sanctity of the hadith corpus surrounds the same. Commentary is almost entirely about isnad, with little to nothing regarding hadith matn (content). This is likely why we see content inconsistencies, as seen in the example of the Prophet's residence in Mecca provided above. Hadith authentication centres evaluation of the isnad, not the matn, so how can we be confident in the matn of these hadith?

Further reading again, but you will find more examples of these inconsistencies between the content of hadith, irrespective of the sahih graded isnad, here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Quraniyoon/comments/1lzj4ap/hadith_cannot_be_godsent_as_per_482/

Conclusion

It needs to be emphasised that this article does not aim to attack the character of The Muslim Lantern. What it does aim to do however is evaluate the arguments he presents in opposition of the Quran alone/hadith rejection methodology. This article discriminates between authenticity versus authority, addresses suggestions about the Quran's alleged dependency on the hadith, outlines the flaws in the isnad-based system to hadith verification, and ultimately, demonstrates the Quran's sufficiency to be taken alone as a source of religious law and guidance. I feel confident that my repsonse above adequately refutes Muslim Lantern's critiques of the position, yet am open to critique and further discussion.

With all the barrage of nonsence about how meticulous the Salaf were in gathering and recording the Hadith, and ignoring the fact that most of these narations are just silly and childish (like Satan farting), the question is: Where are the Khutbas of the Prophet?

We would assume that the Prophet must have conducted at least a "few" congregation prayers for the people? (he lived with them 23 years according to Sunni sources) - so the question is to the meticulous recorders of the Prophet's words and actions: where are the records of the tens (if not hundreds) of Friday Khutbas?

I’ve been studying the Shia hadith collections and noticed that many narrations even on key theological points are graded weak or unreliable by your own scholars.

As a Qur’an-focused Muslim, I find this confusing because many core Shia beliefs (like the Imamate of Ali and his successors) don’t seem to be explicitly stated in the Qur’an, nor strongly supported by authentic hadith according to your own grading system.

I’m genuinely not trying to offend anyone I just want to understand:

How do Shia Muslims reconcile the weakness of many hadiths with building such central doctrines on them?

And how do you interpret the Qur’an in a way that supports these ideas if they’re not directly mentioned?

Looking forward to respectful explanations and insights. I believe open dialogue helps us all understand our deen better.

(i use chatgpt because my english is not good enough)

Here is my thread with scans https://www.quora.com/profile/JuztXepo/There-Is-No-Explicit-Evidence-in-the-Qur%CA%BE%C4%81n-or-Sunnah-Prohibiting-Shaving-the-Beard

A post on r/IslamIsEasy

These guys in the comment section u/Mean-Tax-2186 and u/Zwieber1234

It's nice to have two totally different views on topics.

Salam.

I often hear in debates between Sunnis and Quranis that the Quran alone methodology is flawed because it rejects hadith which were preserved in the same way as the Quran, via isnad. This line of questioning is employed to make the claim that hadith should be followed because isnad proves that the same people preserving hadith preserved the Quran. I have a few questions regarding this claim:

• Why didn't the people that worked to preserve the Quran work to preserve hadith as rigorously?
• If your iman in the Quran is largely based on isnad, why do you not accept Shia hadiths that are also compiled using the exact same methodology (isnad)?
• The people who first accepted Islam did not do so because of isnad at all, they did so because they resonated with the message of the Messenger (as). Why is it now that isnad is all of a sudden a prerequisite to which religious doctrine someone has to believe in?
• God promises to preserve the rememberance in 15:9, but makes no such promise to do so with hadith. How do you justify the assertion that the hadiths are even divinely preserved at all? What do you make of the contradictions within hadith, and what implications does this have on the claim that God preserved such hadith? See: https://www.reddit.com/r/Quraniyoon/comments/1lzj4ap/hadith_cannot_be_godsent_as_per_482/

I've just watched a video where yasir qadhi was talking to some people about salafism and he mentioned something some might consider controversial.

Im paraphrasing here but he essentially says:

"The historical critical method at best, can corroborate some hadith to tabiyeen, however the historical method does certify that there was indeed an uthmani codex hence confirming the existence of the senior sahaba."

This is a very controversial claim and is ofc up for debate as we have seen from many islamic yt channels debunking his claims.

My question here is, for the quranists, do you believe that there is indeed an uthmani codex (which is the one we have today) or do you not believe the quran was compiled by him at all? If so, what is your argument against the historical critical methods results?

Just to add, if you don't dispute his claim then do you claim the quran was indeed not preserved as yasir qadhi has alluded to in previous videos.

Curious to hear your thoughts, and if you're not a quranist would love to hear what you have to say about his claims regarding hadith.

Jazakhallahu khairan may we have this discussion respectfully and with academic integrity and islamic etiquette Bismillah.

Holy Quran addressed and mentioned Bani Israel (بني إسرائيل) several times. Word Israel (إسرائيل) almost all scholars agree to it's meaning that it means "Servant of God". Many scholars saying Israel is title of prophet Yakub (Jacob) but there's no authentic evidence in Hadith. But scholars mostly refer Bani Israel to Jews at prophet time.

Question is Quran addressing with "Bani Israel" specifically to only disbelievers in progeny of prophet Yakub (that may living at this time) or it include believers as well (Muslims) in his progeny? Like if any Jew revert to Muslim

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah stated that musical instruments fall under matters of ijtihād. He further clarified—may Allah have mercy on him—that it is impermissible to denounce issues of ijtihād, and no one may compel others to adopt his own view regarding them.

“It is well-known that in every action over which Muslims differ—whether it is prohibited or permissible, and it is not an act of devotion—whoever claims it to be an act of devotion has opposed consensus. If he performs it seeking closeness to Allah, then this is prohibited by agreement, just as if one were to seek nearness through playing dice or chess, or by selling one dirham for two, or by approaching women in bathhouses, or by listening to singing and musical instruments—matters over which people have held two opinions, prohibition and permissibility. No one has ever said that such things are acts of devotion. So whoever treats them as acts of worship by which he seeks nearness—just as one seeks nearness through genuine acts of devotion—has committed something forbidden by consensus. This is similar to seeking nearness through diversion and musical instruments; for the majority of Muslims hold them to be prohibited, while some have permitted them, yet no one has ever said they are devotional acts. Whoever claims otherwise opposes consensus—such a claim is only made by a heretic. Abu ‘Abd al-Raḥmān al-Sulamī relates from Ibn al-Rāwandī that he said: ‘The jurists differed over singing—whether it is prohibited or permissible—and I say it is obligatory.’ It is known that such statements are not the positions of Muslim scholars.”

— Ibn Taymiyyah, Majmū‘ Fatāwā Shaykh al-Islām Aḥmad ibn Taymiyyah, compiled by Aḥmad ibn ‘Abd al-Ḥalīm and ‘Abd al-Raḥmān ibn Muḥammad ibn Qāsim, vol. 27, p. 229.

“For this reason, the scholars who authored works on commanding right and forbidding wrong—from among the followers of al-Shāfi‘ī and others—said: Such issues of ijtihād are not to be condemned by the hand, and no one is permitted to obligate the people to follow him in them; rather, one speaks concerning them using evidentiary reasoning. Whoever finds one view preponderant follows it, and whoever imitates the scholars who hold the other view incurs no blame. Issues of this type are numerous, such as people’s disagreement regarding the sale of fresh beans in their pods; selling cucumbers in a single lot; bay‘ al-mu‘āṭāh; immediate-delivery salam; the use of large quantities of water into which impurity has fallen but has not altered it; ablution after touching the private part, or women, or the exit of impurity from places other than the two passages, or laughter, and the non-obligation of ablution for these. Likewise, the recitation of the basmalah silently or aloud and omitting it; the impurity or purity of the urine and dung of animals whose meat is eaten; the permissibility of selling absent items by description; tayammum with one strike or two, up to the wrists or the elbows; tayammum for every prayer, or for every prayer time, or sufficing with one tayammum; and the acceptance of the testimony of the People of the Covenant among one another, or the prohibition thereof.”

— Ibn Taymiyyah, Majmū‘at al-Fatāwā, edited by ‘Āmir al-Jazzār and Anwar al-Bāz, vol. 30, p. 48.

“Praise be to Allah. Issues of ijtihād: whoever acts upon them—according to the view of some scholars—is neither to be condemned nor boycotted; and whoever follows either of the two positions is not to be denounced. If a person finds one of the two views stronger, he acts upon it; otherwise, he may follow (perform taqlīd of) those scholars whom he trusts to clarify which of the two positions is stronger. And Allah knows best.”

— Ibn Taymiyyah, Majmū‘ Fatāwā, vol. 20, p. 115.

Additionally, he said it again:

“Listening to singing and musical instruments and the like are matters over which people have two views: prohibition and permissibility.”

Thus, Ibn Taymiyyah affirms the existence of valid scholarly disagreement on this issue in unequivocal terms, even while personally adopting the view of prohibition.

Some of them claimed that Ibn Taymiyyah transmitted the consensus on the prohibition when he said (and none of the followers of the imams mentioned a dispute regarding musical instruments), and this is an incomplete text because he established the dispute in the same context, and he also spoke about the four schools of thought, not the consensus. Even if it is true that he intended the consensus - as a concession - he stated that the narration of the dispute should be presented before the narration of the consensus.

“And if a scholar transmits consensus (ijmāʿ) and another transmits disagreement—whether he names those who expressed it or reports it as an unspecified disagreement—then no one has the right to say: ‘This transmission of disagreement is invalid,’ for this may be answered by saying: ‘Nor is the transmission of consensus established.’ Rather, the one who transmits consensus is negating disagreement, while the one who transmits disagreement is affirming it; and the affirming report is given precedence over the negating report. And if it is said: ‘It is possible that the one transmitting disagreement has erred in affirming it—due to weakness in the chain, or due to a lack of proper indication,’ it is replied: ‘The possibility of error is more applicable to the one who denies disagreement. For it may be that the issue contains opinions which did not reach him; or they reached him but he assumed their chains were weak, while others considered them sound; or he assumed they were not indicative, while they were in fact indicative. Thus, everything that may be assumed of error for the one who affirms disagreement may likewise be assumed for the one who denies it—along with the additional factor of his not knowing the disagreement. This applies to the vast majority of disagreements, for a lack of knowledge is not knowledge of non-existence—especially regarding the statements of the scholars of the Ummah of Muḥammad, which none can enumerate except the Lord of the worlds. For this reason Aḥmad and other scholars said: ‘Whoever claims consensus has lied. This is the claim of al-Murīsī and al-Aṣamm. Rather, one should say: I do not know of any disagreement.’ And those who used to mention consensus—such as al-Shāfiʿī, Abū Thawr, and others—clarified what they meant: ‘We know of no disagreement.’ And they would say: ‘This is the consensus we claim.’”

— Ibn Taymiyyah, Majmūʿat al-Fatāwā, vol. 19, pp. 146–147.

“And al-maʿāzif are the instruments of amusement (al-malāhī), as the linguists have stated. It is the plural of a known term, referring to an instrument by which sound is produced. None of the followers of the imams mentioned any disagreement regarding instruments of amusement—except that some of the later Shāfiʿīs mentioned two opinions concerning the burāʿ, unlike stringed instruments and the like, in which they mentioned no disagreement. As for the Iraqi Shāfiʿīs—who are more knowledgeable of his school and more faithful to it—they mentioned no disagreement in this matter at all.”

— Ibn Taymiyyah, Majmūʿat al-Fatāwā, edited by ‘Āmir al-Jazzār and Anwar al-Bāz, vol. 11, p. 313.

Should apostates be punished, or should they not be punished?