Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf al-Firabrī : The Unknown Man On Whose Shoulders Traditional Islam Stands On.

[Citizen X]

What is Hikmah in the Qur’an?
In every case, “Wisdom” is taught in addition to the Book............is divinely taught guidance besides the Qur’an

WRONG! AGAIN! The Quran explains itself so let the Quran decide what it means rather than just twisting and contorting the words of the Quran to justify hadith

2.269 : He grants wisdom to whoever He wills. And whoever is granted wisdom is certainly blessed with a great privilege. But none will be mindful ˹of this˺ except people of reason.

2.231 : but remember the blessing of GOD upon you and that which has been revealed to you of the Book and the Wisdom by which HE admonishes you . And beware of GOD and know that GOD is aware of all things.

4.54 : Or do they envy the people for what GOD has given them of HIS favour ? For We had already given the family of Abraham the Book and the Wisdom , and We gave them a great kingdom .

﴾4.113 ﴿ And if not for the favour of GOD upon you and HIS mercy , a faction among them would have intended to mislead you , but they only mislead themselves , and they cannot harm you at all . For GOD has revealed to you the Book and the Wisdom and has taught you what you did not know . And the favour of GOD upon you has been great.

So Allah says wisdom is a great privilege, that he gives to anyone he wishes, prophets Ibrahim, Lut and Dawood as well us been given that hikhma, that deep understanding and insight. It is NOT even remotely possible to conclude from the Quran that is some external source of the deen. A concept which the Quran admonishes again and again. The word used for guidance in the Quran is هُدًۭى Hudan or Huda. When the Quran says its a clear book in a clear language. You are just trying to muddy it by injecting your own biases into it.

What’s illogical is believing that:

• Allah sent a Messenger for 23 years
• He led the ummah in prayer, fasting, Hajj, battle, contracts, family law
• The companions lived with him, learned from him, implemented his rulings
• Then somehow… we’re supposed to ignore all of it?

Talk about strawman! That was his job as a Prophet to establish Allah's deen on this earth so it would survive and flourish and not die through war or small numbers. What he left for the rest of humanity i.e till the end of time was the message Allah revealed through him. The Quran. He didn't leave the 95% of the deen of Allah scattered in bits and pieces with 1000s of men each having a seperate piece of the puzzle hoping 100s of years later some Irani Mullahs with be able to piece the deen of Allah back. Not is this not only illogical it is down right ridiculous to believe such nonsense!

You quote 45:6 to claim “hadith” is condemned, but ignore that the Qur’an itself is called hadith in many places:.......If “hadith” always means falsehood — then the Qur’an refutes itself.

You don't read the replies much do you? Just in too much of a hurry to get your reply out. One of the first verses I qouted to you was.

77:50 So in which hadith after it will they believe ?

Read post #12 in this thread

Rest of reply was either repetition or just ad hominem attacks and strawman fallacies.

There is absolutely no where you can find a clear verse where you can find Allah asking us to follow somekind of scripture outside of the Quran.

Trying to prove hadith from the Quran is even worse than when Shia's try to prove Imammat and Waliyat from the Quran. Because the Quran doesn't endorse any of this.

 

[عؔلی خان]

You said:

"How does obeying God and His Messenger mean we must follow man-made Hadith..."

Let’s be precise.

You keep dodging the actual Qur’an

Here’s what the Qur’an says:

• “Obey Allah and obey the Messenger...” (4:59)
• “Take what the Messenger gives you and abstain from what he forbids.” (59:7)
• “We sent down the Book to you so that you may explain to people what was revealed...” (16:44)
• “He teaches them the Book and the Wisdom...” (2:151, 62:2)
• “Whoever opposes the Messenger after guidance has been made clear… We will leave him to what he has chosen.” (4:115)

You haven’t answered a single one of these.

You keep demanding a “clear verse.” I’ve now given you at least five.

Your response?

Deflect with Hadith preservation history — not Qur’anic refutation.

You’re Avoiding the Qur’an Because It Doesn’t Support You​

Your claim: “Hadith are man-made and full of contradictions.”
Then show me:

• Name three authentic (Sahih) Hadith with proven isnad that contradict the Qur’an.
• Name three that are “insults” — and prove they’re fabricated using hadith methodology.

You won’t — because you’re not interested in filtering authentic from weak Hadith.
You’re throwing out the entire Sunnah, which the Qur’an commands us to obey.

That’s like rejecting math because some people got wrong answers once.​

You said,

“Hadith was written 200 years later”

False.

• Hadith were memorized, taught, and written during the Prophet’s time.
  
  • The Sahifah of Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-As is one of many early written collections.
  • Imam Malik’s Muwatta was compiled in the 100s AH, less than a century after the Prophet’s passing.
• The formal compilations (like Bukhari, Muslim) came after generations of transmission and vetting.

If writing date = invalidity, then the Qur’an itself would be questionable — because the compiled mushaf was finalized under Uthman (RA), not in the Prophet’s lifetime.

Yet you accept it.

Why? Because of chain-based transmission — the same science used in Hadith.

You can’t have it both ways.
​

---

You claim to obey the Qur’an. But when the Qur’an tells you:

• Obey the Messenger
• Follow his judgment
• Take what he gives
• Avoid what he forbids

…you say: “That doesn’t mean Hadith!”

So let me ask you this:

• If not through Hadith and Sunnah — how do we obey the Prophet?
• How do we “take what he gives” if we’re not allowed to preserve what he gave?

You can’t answer, because your entire model collapses the moment Prophetic guidance is treated as meaningful.

You don’t have a Qur’anic Islam.

You have a Messengerless Qur’an — and that’s a contradiction of the very Book you claim to follow.​

 

[عؔلی خان]

You said:

“There is absolutely no verse where Allah commands us to follow something outside the Qur’an.”

You’ve already been shown these:

• “Obey Allah and obey the Messenger...” (4:59, 8:20, 24:54, 64:12)
• “Take what the Messenger gives you, and abstain from what he forbids.” (59:7)
• “Let those beware who go against his command...” (24:63)
• “We sent down the Reminder so you may explain to the people what was revealed to them.” (16:44)
• “Whoever opposes the Messenger after guidance has been made clear to him...” (4:115)

All of these are commands from Allah.

If the Prophet’s only job was to “deliver the Qur’an,” these verses would be redundant.

You don’t get to call yourself a Qur’an follower and then ignore half a dozen verses from the Qur’an.

The Qur’an Commands Obedience to the Messenger — And You’re Running from It​

---

​

Hikmah = Guidance alongside the Book​

Your entire objection to “Hikmah” boils down to:

“Allah gives Hikmah to whom He wills.” (2:269)

Yes, exactly — and He gave it to His Messenger, and commanded him to teach it alongside the Book:

• “...reciting to them Your verses and teaching them the Book and the Wisdom.” (2:129, 2:151, 62:2)

This is a pairing, not poetic repetition. Tafsir from Ibn Kathir, Al-Shafi‘i, Al-Qurtubi, and others affirms:

Hikmah = the Sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH)

You haven’t quoted a single reputable mufassir. Instead, you keep asserting, “The Qur’an explains itself!” while ignoring when it says:


“The Messenger explains it.” (16:44)​

---

77:50 and 45:6: “Hadith” doesn’t mean what you think it means

You keep repeating:

“So in what Hadith after it will they believe?” (77:50, 45:6)

Let’s explain this for the last time:

• “Hadith” means speech, report, narrative — depending on context.
• In 45:6 and 77:50, Allah is condemning those who reject divine revelation and instead chase after idle talk, false tales, and mythology.

You’re trying to use that word to throw out the Prophet’s own teachings — but that backfires.

Because the Qur’an itself says:

• “Has there come to you the hadith (narration) of Musa?” (79:15)
• “We relate to you the best of hadith (stories).” (12:3)

If “hadith” always meant evil or false, the Qur’an would be condemning its own verses.

Your "logic" collapses on its own weight.​

---

You said:

“The Prophet's job was to deliver the Qur’an — not leave behind a deen scattered in bits and pieces.”

But the Prophet (PBUH):

• Taught prayer through action
• Judged disputes
• Led battles
• Commanded zakat
• Explained ayat (see Ibn Abbas)
• Was obeyed by the companions in ways not written in the Qur’an

And you want us to believe that none of this mattered? That the people who:

• Memorized the Qur’an
• Transmitted it to us
• Defended it in battle

...somehow became innovators and liars when it came to the Prophet’s teachings?

That’s not just flawed. It’s an insult to the very people Allah says:

• “The first and foremost from the Muhajirun and Ansar... Allah is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him.” (9:100)

You trust their Qur’an, but reject their Sunnah?

That’s not Qur’an-only Islam. That’s ego-only Islam.

You’re not following the Prophet’s example — and you know it​

---

You’ve now:

• Ignored the Qur’an’s commands to obey the Messenger
• Denied what Hikmah means in classical tafsir
• Misused “Hadith” verses out of context
• Refused to engage with scholarly tradition
• Reduced Islam to a slogan: “Just the Qur’an”

But you still haven’t answered the core question:

How do you obey the Prophet — without preserving what he said, did, or taught?

You can’t.

Because the Qur’an doesn’t support your model — it destroys it.​

Let the readers decide who is actually submitting to the Qur’an.

 

[2kamatka]

You guys have so much time on your hands, it seems almost like that you are getting paid for it. Always fighting about some unreal issues

 

[عؔلی خان]

2kamatka ,

You said:

“You guys have so much time on your hands... always fighting about some unreal issues.”

Let’s be crystal clear:

These are not “unreal issues.”

• When someone tells Muslims they don’t have to pray,
• That Sawm doesn’t mean fasting,
• That Zakat isn’t a command,
• That the Prophet’s (PBUH) example is irrelevant,
• And that Islam has no rituals at all...

…that’s not a side-topic.

That’s an attack on the very definition of being Muslim.​

---​

​

Why this matters:​

No Prophet ever came without a message AND a method.

And what these Quranists are doing is:

• Undermining the method
• Questioning the Prophet
• Redefining Islam while calling it “pure Qur’an”

That’s not reform — that’s religious disfigurement.​

---

And yes, I'm responding seriously — because the youth are watching.​

You may treat this like some casual “philosophical idea,”
but young Muslims are reading these Quranist propaganda posts — and they’re being confused.

These individuals intentionally post this content under “Islamic Corner” sections on Muslim forums to create doubt from within. Just look at how many such posts the OP — along with his like-minded group — has made under “Islamic Corner” on this forum alone. And this is just one platform.

Now imagine how many more they’re spreading on other forums, every single day.

Teenagers are reading this and wondering:

• “Do I really have to pray five times?”
• “Is fasting just metaphorical?”
• “Maybe Hadith is unreliable…”

And from that seed of doubt, rituals drop, then beliefs drop, and finally Islam drops altogether.​

---

So no — I am not “wasting time."​

I am doing what the Prophet (PBUH) said would happen:

• “There will come a time when a man reclining on his couch will say: ‘We have the Qur’an, and that is enough for us.’”
  (Abu Dawud 4604, Sahih by al-Albani)

• We were told this ideology would appear.
• We were warned it would sound intellectual.
• But we were also told to hold firmly to the Sunnah when it happens.

I am not “fighting over nothing.” I am contributing to the defense of the legacy of the Messenger (PBUH) of Allah —something every Muslim is obligated to do. And that’s never a waste of time.​

 

[Citizen X]

You’ve already been shown these:

• “Obey Allah and obey the Messenger...” (4:59, 8:20, 24:54, 64:12)
• “Take what the Messenger gives you, and abstain from what he forbids.” (59:7)
• “Let those beware who go against his command...” (24:63)
• “We sent down the Reminder so you may explain to the people what was revealed to them.” (16:44)
• “Whoever opposes the Messenger after guidance has been made clear to him...” (4:115)

All of these are commands from Allah.

How can any of this even remotely mean follow any thing or any other scripture outside of the Quran. JUST HOW? You are just re[eating yourself and refuse to read and understand the Quran with an unbiased mind. AGAIN conflating messenger with prophet AGAIN Traditionalist trickery of partial Quotes. Not going to dismantle these verses which have been done more than once in this thread already.

Hikmah = Guidance alongside the Book

This is the only the way I can express how I truly feel after I spent an entire post shooting down wildly absurd argument that hikmah some how means guidance which then somehow means hadith. Its like we're going round in circles.

This is a pairing, not poetic repetition. Tafsir from Ibn Kathir, Al-Shafi‘i, Al-Qurtubi, and others affirms:

IF you haven't noticed, I really don't care what your Abu Fulans and Al Dhumkans have to say about this. We are supposed to follow the Quran not these Abu Fulans and Abu Dhumkans opinions.

“So in what Hadith after it will they believe?” (77:50, 45:6)

Let’s explain this for the last time:

• “Hadith” means speech, report, narrative — depending on context.
• In 45:6 and 77:50, Allah is condemning those who reject divine revelation and instead chase after idle talk, false tales, and mythology.

You’re trying to use that word to throw out the Prophet’s own teachings — but that backfires.

Because the Qur’an itself says:

• “Has there come to you the hadith (narration) of Musa?” (79:15)
• “We relate to you the best of hadith (stories).” (12:3)

If “hadith” always meant evil or false, the Qur’an would be condemning its own verses.

Your "logic" collapses on its own weight.

ABSOLUTE CLEAR PROOF YOU DO NOT READ WHAT THE OTHER PERSON RESPONDS WITH. This is the second time you have come up with this strawman fallacy which I had responded to in my previous post.

You don't read the replies much do you? Just in too much of a hurry to get your reply out. One of the first verses I qouted to you was.

77:50 So in which hadith after it will they believe ?

Read post #12 in this thread

From post #40 in this thread

No wonder you just keep repeating yourself because you don't bother to even read what the other person has said.

You said:

“The Prophet's job was to deliver the Qur’an — not leave behind a deen scattered in bits and pieces.”
But the Prophet (PBUH):

• Taught prayer through action
• Judged disputes
• Led battles
• Commanded zakat
• Explained ayat (see Ibn Abbas)
• Was obeyed by the companions in ways not written in the Qur’an

Yes that was the Prophet's job while he was alive and among his people, so he could give Islam a proper base and flourish?

So how does this refute my argument of of leaving behind 95% of the deen scattered in bits and pieces among 1000s of men hoping centuries from now someo one would come and compile it for the Muslim ummah.

And you want us to believe that none of this mattered? That the people who:

• Memorized the Qur’an
• Transmitted it to us
• Defended it in battle

...somehow became innovators and liars when it came to the Prophet’s teachings?

Sigh! You already tried this failed traditionalist trickery of trying to equate the mass transmission of the Quran with your hadith which according to your own sources 95% of is khabar wahid. I would call this a FAIL!


AND even if lets say for the sake of argument this was true. You sahih hadith is not sahih as proven to you multiple times from you own hadith sciences. Of course like all traditional hadith apologists you have also tried AND failed miserably to close that gaping hole by bending your own rules to accommodate Frabri. Because without your beloved Sahih Bukhari your religion crumbles down into a pile of dust.

AND FINALLY IF YOU ARE NOT GOING TO BOTHER TO EVEN READ THE ENTIRE POST BEFORE RUNNING OF AND SHOOTING OFF A REPLY PLEASE DON'T BOTHER REPLYING AT ALL.

 

[عؔلی خان]

You said:

"How can any of this mean to follow anything other than the Qur’an?"

Let’s answer clearly:

When Allah says: “Obey the Messenger” (طَاعَةُ الرَّسُولِ)​

If the Messenger’s only job was to transmit the Qur’an:

• Why does Allah say:
  
  “Take what the Messenger gives you and abstain from what he forbids.” (59:7)
  
  
• Why does Allah threaten punishment for going against the Prophet’s personal judgment:
  
  “Let those beware who go against his command...” (24:63)
  
  
• Why does He say the Prophet is to explain the Qur’an to the people?
  
  “...so that you may explain to mankind what has been sent down to them.” (16:44)

That is guidance outside the text — endorsed by the Qur’an itself.

You haven’t answered this. You’ve shouted over it.

Screaming Doesn’t Change Revelation

​

---


Your claim: “Hikmah doesn’t mean Hadith.”

No one said Hikmah = Hadith in every case.

But in every place where Allah pairs "Book and Hikmah", He is referring to divinely guided teachings alongside revelation:


“Reciting to them Your signs and teaching them the Book and the Wisdom.” (2:129, 2:151, 62:2)

Ask any Arabic linguist: This is not ta’keed (emphasis) or badal (repetition).

This is conjunction — meaning two distinct things.

And your own argument defeats you: If "Hikmah" was already included in "Book" — the verse becomes pointless repetition.

You’ve responded with emojis, but not grammar. That’s not a counterargument.​

---

​

On Hadith science — you keep yelling “khabar wahid” as if that ends the conversation.​

That’s like yelling "single narrator = invalid" — ignoring that:

• Sahih Bukhari includes hundreds of mutawatir (mass-transmitted) reports.
• No ruling in Islam is taken from weak narration alone.
• Even khabar wahid is accepted in aqidah and law — if the narrator is trustworthy.

That’s your ignorance of Hadith science, not my inconsistency.

​

---

​

You rely on mocking and repetition. I rely on Qur’anic verses.​

I’ve cited:

• 4:59
• 59:7
• 24:63
• 16:44
• 33:21
• 9:33
• 48:28

You’ve replied with:

• Strawmen
• Sarcasm
• “I already explained it” (but never did)
• Rejection of scholars you never studied

At this point, it’s clear:

You’re not trying to understand.
You’re trying to dismantle — and disguise it as "pure Qur'an."


​

---

What I'm witnessing isn’t sincere inquiry. It’s ideological vandalism.


You, Quranists, want an Islam:

• With no prayer method
• No Prophet’s example
• No Zakat calculations
• No spiritual structure

And when called out, you scream

“Sunnah is man-made!”

The Qur’an warns about exactly this kind of arrogance:


“When it is said to them: Follow what Allah has revealed, they say, 'Rather, we follow what we found our forefathers upon.'” (2:170)


In this case,

they follow what fits their ego — and reject the Messenger who embodied the Qur’an.

​

---

You mock scholars as "Abu Fulan" — yet quote no serious tafsir yourself, while hiding behind an alias like "Citizen X."

You won’t even use your real name — yet you take aim at giants of Islamic scholarship.

Ibn Kathir. Al-Qurtubi. Al-Shafi‘i. Al-Tabari.

These are not just “opinions” — they are the very people whose understanding of Qur’anic Arabic, tafsir, and fiqh has been relied upon for over 1,000 years. Their work isn’t followed blindly — it’s studied, preserved, and taught in every corner of the Muslim world.


And you?

You quote memes, YouTube videos, anonymous bloggers, and random reinterpretations — while claiming you alone have the Qur’an figured out?

Let’s be honest:

What are your credentials?

What authority do you have to claim “hikmah doesn’t mean this” or “the verse doesn’t mean that”?

You’re hiding behind an internet handle, dismissing centuries of scholarship, and yet you demand to be taken seriously?

That’s not intellectual integrity — that’s evasion dressed as revolution.​

 

[Citizen X]

You said:



Let’s answer clearly:

When Allah says: “Obey the Messenger” (طَاعَةُ الرَّسُولِ)​

If the Messenger’s only job was to transmit the Qur’an:

• Why does Allah say:
  
  “Take what the Messenger gives you and abstain from what he forbids.” (59:7)

And for the Nth time that verse is about distribution of war booty among the people has absolutely nothing to do with hadith. I know hadith apologist just love to partially quote this verse because that is the closet they have to something that could somewhat justify their hadith. And if they print the entire verse then people can see through the ruse.

Why does Allah threaten punishment for going against the Prophet’s personal judgment:

Again mixing things up. In context while reading the preceding and following verses clearly showing people how to behave in the presence of the prophet, the proper etiquette and respect to be shown - While he was alive and with his people Does the prophet call to you every now and then? And if he does please tell me how someone who has passed away 1400yrs ago talks to you today? There are passages of the Quran that are time bound. Like 55.53, can you enter the prophets house unless he gives you permission for a meal today? And leave once you are done having your leave because that is annoying to the prophet but he is too shy to say so himself? Can that happen today.

AND don't say thats a general command which teaches us good manners. I have friends who don't need permission to come into my house, and I would rather they stay around for "casual talk" afterwards rather than leave. In fact today it is considered bad manners to show up for an invitation, the just eat quickly and then immediately leave afterwards.

• “...so that you may explain to mankind what has been sent down to them.” (16:44)

That is guidance outside the text — endorsed by the Qur’an itself.

Yes explained. If I tell you something, you don't get it the first time or don't fully get it I'll explain it to you, so you can understand and reflect. HOW does that even remotely by the farthest stretch of the imagination means we need to follow the hadith? Just how!?!?

But in every place where Allah pairs "Book and Hikmah", He is referring to divinely guided teachings alongside revelation:

Is Allah short on words? Does he not have the vocabulary? When Allah wanted it to mean guidance he used the word guidance. Huda or Hudan. The Quran explains itself but you hadith apologists refuse to believe it because then it will make your hadith i.e religion redundant.

Lets see how the Quran explains what is hikmah.

Taking the main points from the following verses
Do not associate partners with Allah (17:22)

Be kind to parents (17:23)

Give to the needy (17:26)

Do not be arrogant (17:37)

Walk humbly and speak moderately (17:37)

And finally Verse 17:39

That is from what your Lord has revealed to you, [O Muḥammad], of Hikmah. And, [O mankind], do not make [as equal] with Allāh another deity, lest you be thrown into Hell, blamed and banished.

So the Quran has clearly explained what the hikmah that was revealed to the Prophet was. Not some manmade books

Now to your The Book and the Hikmah when mentioned together mean hadith. Verse 3:48 And Allah will teach him (Prophet Isa) the book and the wisdom, the Torah and the Gospel. Does this mean Allah gave Isa the torah AND Injeel and what Kitab and what wisdom or as you claim divine knowledge is he talking about? Is Prophet Isa is also getting the Quran (Al Kitab) and Prophet Muhammads hadith ( Hikmah )too along with the Torah and injeel? So obviously hikmah in no way can mean your hadith in any usage.

And your own argument defeats you: If "Hikmah" was already included in "Book" — the verse becomes pointless repetition.

Allah repeats so many things over and over again are they all also pointless repetition?

Sahih Bukhari includes hundreds of mutawatir (mass-transmitted) reports.

ABSOLUTE WHITE BLANTANT LIES

Just goes to show, like every other hadith apologist on this forum you don't have the foggiest idea about your own hadith or even have ever read much of them at all and all your "knowledge" is from chatgpt and whatever result comes top in google. The most generous number given by your own scholars like Suyuti is between 10 to 20 mutawattir hadith in the entire Sahih Bukhari and if you want to go with the strict standards by the likes of Al Asqalani one of the more famous narrators of Bukhari only 2 or 3 hadith can be said to be mutawattir

And this might come as a surprise to you. In the entire hadith corpus the most generous figure given by once again Suyuti is around 113 hadith to be mutawattir and by his own admission that number is reached by only counting hadith that are similar in meaning but not similar in wording and transmission i.e less than 1% of hadith in the entire hadith corpus can be classified as muttawatir and that too by stretching the definition of mutawatir.

That’s your ignorance of Hadith science

I'm gonna try to hold in my laughter here

Even khabar wahid is accepted in aqidah and law — if the narrator is trustworthy.

Like I said earlier this is NOT a good thing but a real dangerous thing. And one of the biggest problem with following hadith. Scholars come along and change classification of hadith all the time. Like the ruling that cupping does not break the fast later changed that it does. And then later again they found that hadith to be weak and went back to the original.

Before some jurists ruled that a maternal grandmother doesn’t inherit, based on a khabar wāḥid that excluded her. Later, the ruling was revised, and maternal grandmothers were included in inheritance law.

So imagine how many Grandmothers either benefited wrongly or were wronged badly ( depending on how you look at it ) because of law based on khabar wahd and since 95% of hadith is khabar wahid and traditional Islam majority of which is based on hadith has a 95% chance that any crucial part of it can change. As deemed fit by Abu Fulanas and Ibn Dhumkanas.

• 4:59
• 59:7
• 24:63
• 16:44
• 33:21
• 9:33
• 48:28

Have explained it and proved these have absolutely nothing to do with hadith at all, more than once and by more than one person

You mock scholars as "Abu Fulan" — yet quote no serious tafsir yourself

Comprehension problems much, when I don't care about Abu Fulanas and Dhimkanas why would I care about their tafisirs serious or not.

The Only Tafsir I care about is Allah's tafsir

25:33 وَلَا يَأْتُونَكَ بِمَثَلٍ إِلَّا جِئْنَـٰكَ بِٱلْحَقِّ وَأَحْسَنَ تَفْسِيرًا

These are not just “opinions” — they are the very people whose understanding of Qur’anic Arabic, tafsir, and fiqh has been relied upon for over 1,000 years. Their work isn’t followed blindly — it’s studied, preserved, and taught in every corner of the Muslim world.

Who cares? Does Allah tell me to follow them or follow Allah and the Quran? And I don't follow their version of mushrik Islam so they mean absolutely nothing to me. I only use them to prove a point to their people. Like using examples from the bible to show christians how corrupted it is.
Pundits, monks and rabbis have done the same but much harder and for more centuries than these Abu fulanas so shall we now follow them?
Time and numbers is a slippery slope if you start providing them as evidence for your hadith.

You, Quranists, want an Islam:
With no prayer method

• No Prophet’s example
• No Zakat calculations
• No spiritual structure

Oh look more lies and false allegations.

What authority do you have to claim “hikmah doesn’t mean this” or “the verse doesn’t mean that”?

Allah gave that authority, Allah gave me Aqal and common sense and instructed me to use those to understand and ponder the deen of Allah. So I will follow the it according to my Aqal and god given commonsense not yours and not Abu Fulanas and not Abu Dhimkanas and not blindly follow this mullah and that imam.

Surah Al-Anfal (8:22) “Indeed, the worst of creatures in the sight of Allah are the deaf and dumb — those who do not use reason.”
—
Surah Al-Furqan (25:73): “And those who, when reminded of the verses of their Lord, do not fall upon them deaf and blind.”

 

[عؔلی خان]

You mock scholars as "Abu Fulans" — yet you quote no serious tafsir, present no credible methodology, and hide behind a pseudonym. Not even your real name.

Ibn Kathir. Al-Qurtubi. Al-Shafi‘i. Al-Tabari.

These are names every serious student of the Qur’an engages with — not because we follow them blindly, but because they knew the language, context, fiqh, and usul better than you or I ever could.

You, on the other hand, rely on memes, anonymous YouTube preachers, and cherry-picked mistranslations.

And yet you claim intellectual credibility?

What credentials do you hold to confidently override 1,400 years of preserved Islamic tradition?

What authority do you have to claim “hikmah doesn’t mean this” or “the verse doesn’t mean that”?

You’re hiding behind an internet handle, dismissing centuries of scholarship, and yet you demand to be taken seriously?​

If Allah gave you ‘aql and common sense, He gave it to them too — except they dedicated their lives to mastering Arabic grammar, Qur’anic sciences, and the Prophetic legacy. Not posting under fake usernames mocking those before them.


You keep calling their legacy "man-made religion." But let’s be clear:

You are not bringing people back to the Qur’an — you are trying to erase the Messenger from it.​

There is nothing new in what you're pushing. Every sect that deviated from the jama‘ah started by rejecting authority, mocking scholarship, and appealing to “just the Qur’an.” That road doesn't lead to divine guidance — it leads to personal opinions elevated as religion.


Let the readers ask themselves:


Whose Islam is this?

A nameless account quoting no classical scholar, denying consensus, ritual, and Prophetic example…

Or

a tradition taught, preserved, and practiced generation after generation — from the Prophet’s time till ours?

 

[Citizen X]

You mock scholars as "Abu Fulans" — yet you quote no serious tafsir, present no credible methodology, and hide behind a pseudonym. Not even your real name.

Ibn Kathir. Al-Qurtubi. Al-Shafi‘i. Al-Tabari.

These are names every serious student of the Qur’an engages with — not because we follow them blindly, but because they knew the language, context, fiqh, and usul better than you or I ever could.

You, on the other hand, rely on memes, anonymous YouTube preachers, and cherry-picked mistranslations.

And yet you claim intellectual credibility?

What credentials do you hold to confidently override 1,400 years of preserved Islamic tradition?

What authority do you have to claim “hikmah doesn’t mean this” or “the verse doesn’t mean that”?

You’re hiding behind an internet handle, dismissing centuries of scholarship, and yet you demand to be taken seriously?​

If Allah gave you ‘aql and common sense, He gave it to them too — except they dedicated their lives to mastering Arabic grammar, Qur’anic sciences, and the Prophetic legacy. Not posting under fake usernames mocking those before them.


You keep calling their legacy "man-made religion." But let’s be clear:

You are not bringing people back to the Qur’an — you are trying to erase the Messenger from it.​

There is nothing new in what you're pushing. Every sect that deviated from the jama‘ah started by rejecting authority, mocking scholarship, and appealing to “just the Qur’an.” That road doesn't lead to divine guidance — it leads to personal opinions elevated as religion.


Let the readers ask themselves:


Whose Islam is this?

A nameless account quoting no classical scholar, denying consensus, ritual, and Prophetic example…

Or

a tradition taught, preserved, and practiced generation after generation — from the Prophet’s time till ours?

Oh what an emotional rant! So after being exposed as a liar and knowing absolutely nothing about the hadith you defend blindly tooth and nail you have degraded down to shoot the messenger instead rather than try to refute the message.

Your Abu Fulans and Ibn Dhimkan mean nothing. They are not above Allah or the Quran. Your tradition also has 0 value in fact following tradition blindly is what has led to this corruption. Quran warns us not to follow tradition blindly.

"And when it is said to them, 'Follow what Allah has revealed,' they say, 'Rather, we will follow that which we found our fathers doing.' Even though their fathers understood nothing, nor were they guided?"
— Surah Al-Baqarah (2:170)

And when it is said to them, "Come to what Allāh has revealed and to the Messenger," they say, "Sufficient for us is that upon which we found our fathers." Even though their fathers knew nothing, nor were they guided? - 5:104

And when it is said to them, "Follow what Allāh has revealed," they say, "Rather, we will follow that upon which we found our fathers." Even if Satan was inviting them to the punishment of the Blaze? -31:21

In fact, they say, “We found our forefathers following a way, and we are following in their footsteps.” -43:22

And just as well your Jamah also means nothing and if you would have read the Quran whenever it talks about majority its in a negative sense

If you were to obey most of those on earth, they would lead you away from Allah’s Way. They follow nothing but assumptions and do nothing but lie - 6:116

Are you not familiar with such a concept as internet anonymity? Specially in this day and age. Only a fool reveals his real identity online in public forums and groups and if you have done so I strongly advise you to take steps to mend that situation.

And why do you have a problem with that anyways? You don't even the know the identity of the biggest narrator of hadith, your Mr Kat aka Abu Hurairah. At best you have a strong "ijmah" on who or what even his actual name it could be Abd al-Rahman ibn Sakhr al-Dawsi or it could also be Abd al-Rahman ibn Sakhr but no one with absolute certainty knows.

Your biggest book is Bukhari and its biggest narrator is Abu Hurairah so basically you are following the religion of Abu Hurairah. That is if we are to believe that the Bukhari is sahih, which it is not. See the problem here. You are following the religion of Abu Hurairah, Bukhari or Frabri. Anything but the deen of Allah from the Quran. If the cap fits wear it.

Thats why the Prophet will lament on the day of judgement Oh lord indeed my people have abandoned the Quran. He won't say they have abandoned the hadith or my sunnah.

Once you removed your bias, programming and lifetime indoctrination and read the Quran with an open mind you will realize how wrong you were.

May Allah bless you with guidance and hikmah to come back to the deen of Allah and the Quran and abandon manmade books, rituals and traditions.

 

[Wake up Pak]

And for the Nth time that verse is about distribution of war booty among the people has absolutely nothing to do with hadith. I know hadith apologist just love to partially quote this verse because that is the closet they have to something that could somewhat justify their hadith. And if they print the entire verse then people can see through the ruse.

Again mixing things up. In context while reading the preceding and following verses clearly showing people how to behave in the presence of the prophet, the proper etiquette and respect to be shown - While he was alive and with his people Does the prophet call to you every now and then? And if he does please tell me how someone who has passed away 1400yrs ago talks to you today? There are passages of the Quran that are time bound. Like 55.53, can you enter the prophets house unless he gives you permission for a meal today? And leave once you are done having your leave because that is annoying to the prophet but he is too shy to say so himself? Can that happen today.

AND don't say thats a general command which teaches us good manners. I have friends who don't need permission to come into my house, and I would rather they stay around for "casual talk" afterwards rather than leave. In fact today it is considered bad manners to show up for an invitation, the just eat quickly and then immediately leave afterwards.



Yes explained. If I tell you something, you don't get it the first time or don't fully get it I'll explain it to you, so you can understand and reflect. HOW does that even remotely by the farthest stretch of the imagination means we need to follow the hadith? Just how!?!?


Is Allah short on words? Does he not have the vocabulary? When Allah wanted it to mean guidance he used the word guidance. Huda or Hudan. The Quran explains itself but you hadith apologists refuse to believe it because then it will make your hadith i.e religion redundant.

Lets see how the Quran explains what is hikmah.

Taking the main points from the following verses
Do not associate partners with Allah (17:22)

Be kind to parents (17:23)

Give to the needy (17:26)

Do not be arrogant (17:37)

Walk humbly and speak moderately (17:37)

And finally Verse 17:39

That is from what your Lord has revealed to you, [O Muḥammad], of Hikmah. And, [O mankind], do not make [as equal] with Allāh another deity, lest you be thrown into Hell, blamed and banished.

So the Quran has clearly explained what the hikmah that was revealed to the Prophet was. Not some manmade books

Now to your The Book and the Hikmah when mentioned together mean hadith. Verse 3:48 And Allah will teach him (Prophet Isa) the book and the wisdom, the Torah and the Gospel. Does this mean Allah gave Isa the torah AND Injeel and what Kitab and what wisdom or as you claim divine knowledge is he talking about? Is Prophet Isa is also getting the Quran (Al Kitab) and Prophet Muhammads hadith ( Hikmah )too along with the Torah and injeel? So obviously hikmah in no way can mean your hadith in any usage.


Allah repeats so many things over and over again are they all also pointless repetition?


ABSOLUTE WHITE BLANTANT LIES

Just goes to show, like every other hadith apologist on this forum you don't have the foggiest idea about your own hadith or even have ever read much of them at all and all your "knowledge" is from chatgpt and whatever result comes top in google. The most generous number given by your own scholars like Suyuti is between 10 to 20 mutawattir hadith in the entire Sahih Bukhari and if you want to go with the strict standards by the likes of Al Asqalani one of the more famous narrators of Bukhari only 2 or 3 hadith can be said to be mutawattir

And this might come as a surprise to you. In the entire hadith corpus the most generous figure given by once again Suyuti is around 113 hadith to be mutawattir and by his own admission that number is reached by only counting hadith that are similar in meaning but not similar in wording and transmission i.e less than 1% of hadith in the entire hadith corpus can be classified as muttawatir and that too by stretching the definition of mutawatir.


I'm gonna try to hold in my laughter here


Like I said earlier this is NOT a good thing but a real dangerous thing. And one of the biggest problem with following hadith. Scholars come along and change classification of hadith all the time. Like the ruling that cupping does not break the fast later changed that it does. And then later again they found that hadith to be weak and went back to the original.

Before some jurists ruled that a maternal grandmother doesn’t inherit, based on a khabar wāḥid that excluded her. Later, the ruling was revised, and maternal grandmothers were included in inheritance law.

So imagine how many Grandmothers either benefited wrongly or were wronged badly ( depending on how you look at it ) because of law based on khabar wahd and since 95% of hadith is khabar wahid and traditional Islam majority of which is based on hadith has a 95% chance that any crucial part of it can change. As deemed fit by Abu Fulanas and Ibn Dhumkanas.


Have explained it and proved these have absolutely nothing to do with hadith at all, more than once and by more than one person


Comprehension problems much, when I don't care about Abu Fulanas and Dhimkanas why would I care about their tafisirs serious or not.

The Only Tafsir I care about is Allah's tafsir

25:33 وَلَا يَأْتُونَكَ بِمَثَلٍ إِلَّا جِئْنَـٰكَ بِٱلْحَقِّ وَأَحْسَنَ تَفْسِيرًا


Who cares? Does Allah tell me to follow them or follow Allah and the Quran? And I don't follow their version of mushrik Islam so they mean absolutely nothing to me. I only use them to prove a point to their people. Like using examples from the bible to show christians how corrupted it is.
Pundits, monks and rabbis have done the same but much harder and for more centuries than these Abu fulanas so shall we now follow them?
Time and numbers is a slippery slope if you start providing them as evidence for your hadith.


Oh look more lies and false allegations.

Allah gave that authority, Allah gave me Aqal and common sense and instructed me to use those to understand and ponder the deen of Allah. So I will follow the it according to my Aqal and god given commonsense not yours and not Abu Fulanas and not Abu Dhimkanas and not blindly follow this mullah and that imam.

Surah Al-Anfal (8:22) “Indeed, the worst of creatures in the sight of Allah are the deaf and dumb — those who do not use reason.”
—
Surah Al-Furqan (25:73): “And those who, when reminded of the verses of their Lord, do not fall upon them deaf and blind.”

Why are you wasting your time on this Ignorant person who keeps posting the same thing repeatedly? He does not have anything to back up his claim.

 

[Citizen X]

Why are you wasting your time on this Ignorant person who keeps posting the same thing repeatedly? He does not have anything to back up his claim.

So eventually they will be caught up in their own lies and get exposed as he just did. Read my #47
It always goes the same way, eventually they get emotional and start attacking you rather than your arguments all the while getting exposed that they know absolutely nothing about their own hadith which they defend so vehemently but don't know anything about.

I can guarantee you 99.9% don't know about these serious technical issues with their hadith. I can say that because I didn't either.

Stay tuned I am doing a part 2 on this subject. Inshallah I will post it later today or by tomorrow.

 

[عؔلی خان]

You mock tradition, yet offer none. You attack scholars, yet hide behind a pseudonym. And now, you insult entire generations of Muslims — companions included — because it’s easier than engaging honestly.


Let’s unpack the irony.

You say:

"I only follow Allah and His Qur’an."

But that Qur’an was delivered, taught, practiced, explained, implemented, and safeguarded by the very men you now belittle as “Abu Fulan” and “Dhumkana.” You quote the Qur’an — that they preserved for you. Your entire argument rests on a book compiled, transmitted, and taught by the same people whose legacy you're trying to discredit.

You hide behind internet anonymity, yet dismiss centuries of transmission and rigorous scholarship. Where’s your chain of knowledge? Where’s your isnād? Who taught you Arabic grammar, uṣūl al-tafsīr, or balāghah? How are you interpreting divine scripture with no sanad, no scholarly background, no qualifications, and — let’s be honest — no accountability?

You dismiss:

• Ibn Kathir
• Al-Qurtubi
• Al-Shafi‘i
• Al-Tabari

…yet quote YouTube videos and forum rants as though they hold equal weight.


The Qur’an repeatedly commands:


“Obey Allah and obey the Messenger…” (4:59, 64:12)

That Messenger is Muhammad (PBUH)— not you, not your opinion, and not your private reinterpretation.


You talk about “blind following”? Ironically, what you are doing is blind rejecting — tossing out everything inconvenient, refusing to see 1400 years of scholarly work, and replacing it with your own unchecked thoughts.


And then there’s this gem:

"I follow Abu Huraira's religion if I follow Hadith."

Really? So by your logic, anyone who narrates a verse of the Qur’an has now become the object of worship? By that standard, are you worshipping the Sahaba every time you recite the Qur’an?


That’s not logic. That’s desperation.


And finally, don’t talk about the Prophet lamenting those who abandon the Qur’an — while simultaneously rejecting the very Messenger Allah entrusted with its delivery, explanation, and implementation.


“And We sent down the Reminder to you [O Prophet], so that you may clarify to mankind what was revealed to them.” (Qur’an 16:44)

You want to discard that role, reduce the Messenger to a postman, and reinterpret the entire religion by yourself.


That’s not scholarship.
That’s not submission.
That’s self-prophethood.

What credentials do you hold to confidently override 1,400 years of preserved Islamic tradition?

What authority do you have to claim “hikmah doesn’t mean this” or “the verse doesn’t mean that”?

You’re hiding behind an internet handle, dismissing centuries of scholarship, and yet you demand to be taken seriously?


I follow the Qur’an and the Messenger — because the Qur’an commands it. You follow your own opinions — and call it Islam.​

 

[عؔلی خان]

You previously said:

“Why do you bow and protest to a man-made cube structure made of rocks, cement, and iron? Isn't it a Shirk?”

Let’s be very clear here — this isn’t just a misguided statement. It borders on open mockery of one of the most sacred symbols in Islam. If you believe that Muslims are committing shirk by facing the Kaaba in prayer, then you are essentially accusing the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and the entire ummah — past and present — of shirk.


That’s not just dangerous rhetoric, it raises serious doubts about your own understanding of Islam. And given how casually and publicly you made that statement, one has to ask: Do you even consider yourself a Muslim?


Because no believing Muslim would refer to the Kaaba, the Qiblah ordained by Allah, as a “man-made cube” with contempt — as if the Ummah is worshipping bricks. The Kaaba is not worshipped. It is a direction, a symbol of unity for the believers, as ordained in the Qur’an itself:


“So turn your face toward al-Masjid al-Haram…”
(Surah Al-Baqarah 2:144)

If you reject that, you’re not just challenging Hadith — you’re openly denying the Qur’an.

You and your cohort may want to parade yourselves as thinkers, reformers, or Quran-only purists — but in truth, you're just recycling the same Quranist propaganda that has confused many and guided none.

And before questioning others, let’s be honest — you hide behind a pseudonym and offer no credentials, no scholarship, and no sources, except meme videos and snide remarks. You called our scholars “Abu Fulans” and dismissed 1,400 years of scholarship as if your YouTube rabbit hole gives you more insight than Imam al-Shafi‘i or Ibn Kathir.


Enough theatrics. If you truly have the courage of your convictions, tell us clearly:

Do you believe in the Kaaba as Qiblah as ordained by the Qur’an? Or do you reject even that?​

 

[عؔلی خان]

To Citizen X and Wake up Pak :


You claim I “don’t know anything” about Hadith — but what have you brought to the table besides misquotes, mockery, and YouTube videos?


Let’s talk about consistency.


Wake up Pak , you are the one who said Muslims “bow to a man-made cube” — implying the Kaaba is an object of shirk. You called it cement and iron. Now suddenly you're concerned with Islamic credibility?

Let me remind you what you said:

“Why do you bow and protest to a man-made cube structure made of rocks, cement, and iron? Isn’t it a Shirk?”

That statement alone is enough to question whether you even believe in the Qur’an, because Allah clearly commanded:

“So turn your face toward al-Masjid al-Haram…”
(Surah Al-Baqarah 2:144)

If you have a problem with that command, you’re not arguing with us — you’re arguing with Allah. So before lecturing others on Hadith, maybe clarify your own aqeedah first.

---

Citizen X , As for your dramatic announcement of “Part 2” like you're releasing a documentary — please spare us the trailer. Every post so far has followed the same formula:

• Quote verses out of context
• Twist language and ignore grammar
• Call centuries of scholars “Abu Fulans”
• Present no tafsir, no usul, no Arabic structure — just conclusions

You say 99.9% of us, the mainstream Muslims, don’t understand hadith. But you speak as if you’re part of the 0.1%, with no credentials, no real knowledge — just Google search results and misplaced confidence.

You mock people for using names of scholars like Ibn Kathir, Imam Al-Shafi‘i, Al-Qurtubi, as if 1,400 years of intellectual heritage means nothing. But when you speak, you expect to be taken seriously? You can’t even post under your real name.

Let’s be clear: I respond not for your approval — but for those silently reading, especially the youth. They deserve to know that Islam is not reduced to memes and mockery, but grounded in revelation, Prophetic explanation, and the scholarship that preserved it.

And yes, when I defend that — it's not emotion. It's responsibility.


So please, go ahead and post “Part 2.” I’ve read “Part 1” a thousand times from different usernames, recycled with the same tired claims. None of it changes the fact that your position has no backing from the Qur’an, the Sunnah, or the Ummah.

Let me ask you again:

What credentials do you hold to confidently override 1,400 years of preserved Islamic tradition?

What authority do you have to claim “hikmah doesn’t mean this” or “the verse doesn’t mean that”?

You’re hiding behind an internet handle, dismissing centuries of scholarship, and yet you demand to be taken seriously?​

In Sha Allah, I’ll be here, upholding the legacy of the Prophet (PBUH) — not reinventing Islam in the comments section.

 

[Wake up Pak]

@Wake up Pak , you are the one who said Muslims “bow to a man-made cube” — implying the Kaaba is an object of shirk. You called it cement and iron. Now suddenly you're concerned with Islamic credibility?

Let me remind you what you said:


That statement alone is enough to question whether you even believe in the Qur’an, because Allah clearly commanded:


If you have a problem with that command, you’re not arguing with us — you’re arguing with Allah. So before lecturing others on Hadith, maybe clarify your own aqeedah first.

Please quote the complete verse and then let me know if it talks about the Kaaba or something else.

 

[Wake up Pak]

And for the Nth time that verse is about distribution of war booty among the people has absolutely nothing to do with hadith. I know hadith apologist just love to partially quote this verse because that is the closet they have to something that could somewhat justify their hadith. And if they print the entire verse then people can see through the ruse.

Again mixing things up. In context while reading the preceding and following verses clearly showing people how to behave in the presence of the prophet, the proper etiquette and respect to be shown - While he was alive and with his people Does the prophet call to you every now and then? And if he does please tell me how someone who has passed away 1400yrs ago talks to you today? There are passages of the Quran that are time bound. Like 55.53, can you enter the prophets house unless he gives you permission for a meal today? And leave once you are done having your leave because that is annoying to the prophet but he is too shy to say so himself? Can that happen today.

AND don't say thats a general command which teaches us good manners. I have friends who don't need permission to come into my house, and I would rather they stay around for "casual talk" afterwards rather than leave. In fact today it is considered bad manners to show up for an invitation, the just eat quickly and then immediately leave afterwards.



Yes explained. If I tell you something, you don't get it the first time or don't fully get it I'll explain it to you, so you can understand and reflect. HOW does that even remotely by the farthest stretch of the imagination means we need to follow the hadith? Just how!?!?


Is Allah short on words? Does he not have the vocabulary? When Allah wanted it to mean guidance he used the word guidance. Huda or Hudan. The Quran explains itself but you hadith apologists refuse to believe it because then it will make your hadith i.e religion redundant.

Lets see how the Quran explains what is hikmah.

Taking the main points from the following verses
Do not associate partners with Allah (17:22)

Be kind to parents (17:23)

Give to the needy (17:26)

Do not be arrogant (17:37)

Walk humbly and speak moderately (17:37)

And finally Verse 17:39

That is from what your Lord has revealed to you, [O Muḥammad], of Hikmah. And, [O mankind], do not make [as equal] with Allāh another deity, lest you be thrown into Hell, blamed and banished.

So the Quran has clearly explained what the hikmah that was revealed to the Prophet was. Not some manmade books

Now to your The Book and the Hikmah when mentioned together mean hadith. Verse 3:48 And Allah will teach him (Prophet Isa) the book and the wisdom, the Torah and the Gospel. Does this mean Allah gave Isa the torah AND Injeel and what Kitab and what wisdom or as you claim divine knowledge is he talking about? Is Prophet Isa is also getting the Quran (Al Kitab) and Prophet Muhammads hadith ( Hikmah )too along with the Torah and injeel? So obviously hikmah in no way can mean your hadith in any usage.


Allah repeats so many things over and over again are they all also pointless repetition?


ABSOLUTE WHITE BLANTANT LIES

Just goes to show, like every other hadith apologist on this forum you don't have the foggiest idea about your own hadith or even have ever read much of them at all and all your "knowledge" is from chatgpt and whatever result comes top in google. The most generous number given by your own scholars like Suyuti is between 10 to 20 mutawattir hadith in the entire Sahih Bukhari and if you want to go with the strict standards by the likes of Al Asqalani one of the more famous narrators of Bukhari only 2 or 3 hadith can be said to be mutawattir

And this might come as a surprise to you. In the entire hadith corpus the most generous figure given by once again Suyuti is around 113 hadith to be mutawattir and by his own admission that number is reached by only counting hadith that are similar in meaning but not similar in wording and transmission i.e less than 1% of hadith in the entire hadith corpus can be classified as muttawatir and that too by stretching the definition of mutawatir.


I'm gonna try to hold in my laughter here


Like I said earlier this is NOT a good thing but a real dangerous thing. And one of the biggest problem with following hadith. Scholars come along and change classification of hadith all the time. Like the ruling that cupping does not break the fast later changed that it does. And then later again they found that hadith to be weak and went back to the original.

Before some jurists ruled that a maternal grandmother doesn’t inherit, based on a khabar wāḥid that excluded her. Later, the ruling was revised, and maternal grandmothers were included in inheritance law.

So imagine how many Grandmothers either benefited wrongly or were wronged badly ( depending on how you look at it ) because of law based on khabar wahd and since 95% of hadith is khabar wahid and traditional Islam majority of which is based on hadith has a 95% chance that any crucial part of it can change. As deemed fit by Abu Fulanas and Ibn Dhumkanas.


Have explained it and proved these have absolutely nothing to do with hadith at all, more than once and by more than one person


Comprehension problems much, when I don't care about Abu Fulanas and Dhimkanas why would I care about their tafisirs serious or not.

The Only Tafsir I care about is Allah's tafsir

25:33 وَلَا يَأْتُونَكَ بِمَثَلٍ إِلَّا جِئْنَـٰكَ بِٱلْحَقِّ وَأَحْسَنَ تَفْسِيرًا


Who cares? Does Allah tell me to follow them or follow Allah and the Quran? And I don't follow their version of mushrik Islam so they mean absolutely nothing to me. I only use them to prove a point to their people. Like using examples from the bible to show christians how corrupted it is.
Pundits, monks and rabbis have done the same but much harder and for more centuries than these Abu fulanas so shall we now follow them?
Time and numbers is a slippery slope if you start providing them as evidence for your hadith.


Oh look more lies and false allegations.

Allah gave that authority, Allah gave me Aqal and common sense and instructed me to use those to understand and ponder the deen of Allah. So I will follow the it according to my Aqal and god given commonsense not yours and not Abu Fulanas and not Abu Dhimkanas and not blindly follow this mullah and that imam.

Surah Al-Anfal (8:22) “Indeed, the worst of creatures in the sight of Allah are the deaf and dumb — those who do not use reason.”
—
Surah Al-Furqan (25:73): “And those who, when reminded of the verses of their Lord, do not fall upon them deaf and blind.”

https://twitter.com/x/status/1914018974217736446

 

[عؔلی خان]

Please quote the complete verse and then let me know if it talks about the Kaaba or something else.

You asked for the verse? Let’s go straight to it.


"So turn your face toward al-Masjid al-Haram. And wherever you are, turn your faces toward it."

— Surah Al-Baqarah (2:144)


This verse explicitly commands Muslims to face the Kaaba — located at al-Masjid al-Haram — as our Qiblah in prayer. It is not metaphorical. It is not optional. It is not a matter of “cement and iron.” It is a divine command.

Some reminders for context:

• The Prophet (PBUH) prayed toward Jerusalem before this verse was revealed.
• When Allah changed the Qiblah to the Kaaba, it was a turning point in Islamic identity and unity.
• No Muslim believes the Kaaba is worshipped — it is a direction of worship, as Allah ordained.

So Wake up Pak , let’s not play semantics. You called the Kaaba a "man-made cube made of cement and iron" and questioned why Muslims bow toward it — even implying shirk.

That’s not just misleading — it borders on slander against the entire Muslim Ummah.​

The Kaaba was:

• Built by Ibrahim (A.S.) and Ismail (A.S.)
• Ordained in the Qur’an
• Faced by the Prophet (PBUH)
• Honored by every believing Muslim

You now want to dance around technicalities — but the words you used are on record.

http://imgur.com/MjdEl05

http://imgur.com/a/B2OTYHy

So the real question is:


Are you willing to admit that your claim was wrong and disrespectful?

Or will you continue playing word games while claiming “intellectual honesty”?

Let’s see.

 

[عؔلی خان]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1914018974217736446

I see what you're trying to do — posting a video clip about “religious intolerance” in response to a discussion about Qur’an verses and Hadith.

Let’s be clear:

- This is not a debate about social behavior.
- This is not about general kindness or tolerance.
- This is a direct theological discussion about the legacy of the Prophet (PBUH), the authenticity of Hadith, and the meaning of key Qur’anic verses.

Posting a random social commentary video to shift the conversation is not intellectual engagement. It’s an attempt to change the topic because the arguments raised against you and Citizen X are too strong to refute directly.

Let’s get back to the issue:​

• You mocked the Kaaba as a “man-made cube.”
• You dismissed Hadith using flawed arguments already addressed.
• You and Citizen X have been challenged with direct Qur’anic evidence, historical facts, and context — and now you respond with memes, tweets, and moral lectures?

I am not falling for these diversion tactics.

This forum is not your personal stage for deflective theatrics. If you have a real counterargument — based on Qur’an, Sunnah, or scholarship — present it. Otherwise, posting emotional distractions only shows the bankruptcy of your position.

Let’s keep this discussion where it belongs:
On the truth, not Twitter clips.

 

[Wake up Pak]

You asked for the verse? Let’s go straight to it.


"So turn your face toward al-Masjid al-Haram. And wherever you are, turn your faces toward it."

— Surah Al-Baqarah (2:144)


This verse explicitly commands Muslims to face the Kaaba — located at al-Masjid al-Haram — as our Qiblah in prayer. It is not metaphorical. It is not optional. It is not a matter of “cement and iron.” It is a divine command.

Some reminders for context:

• The Prophet (PBUH) prayed toward Jerusalem before this verse was revealed.
• When Allah changed the Qiblah to the Kaaba, it was a turning point in Islamic identity and unity.
• No Muslim believes the Kaaba is worshipped — it is a direction of worship, as Allah ordained.

So Wake up Pak , let’s not play semantics. You called the Kaaba a "man-made cube made of cement and iron" and questioned why Muslims bow toward it — even implying shirk.

That’s not just misleading — it borders on slander against the entire Muslim Ummah.​

The Kaaba was:

• Built by Ibrahim (A.S.) and Ismail (A.S.)
• Ordained in the Qur’an
• Faced by the Prophet (PBUH)
• Honored by every believing Muslim

You now want to dance around technicalities — but the words you used are on record.

http://imgur.com/a/B2OTYHy

So the real question is:


Are you willing to admit that your claim was wrong and disrespectful?

Or will you continue playing word games while claiming “intellectual honesty”?

Let’s see.

So, wherever you are, your face should be towards Masjid Al Haram? As per your interpretation, it means that even if you are walking, your face should be at Masjid Al Haram? Does it make any sense?