The Messenger

1. Is the messenger a mere “post-man”?. Even if we sent down to them a physical book, written on paper, and they touched it with their hands, those who disbelieved would have said, "This is no more than clever magic." (Quran 6:7) The above verse clearly shows us that had GOD revealed a book straight from the sky, this would not have helped those who did not wish to believe. Therefore, it was GOD’s plan that a messenger delivers the book to the people over a set period of time that they may study and understand it. ‘A Quran that we have separated, in order that it may be understood by the people over a long period, although we sent it down all at once.’ (Quran 17:106) 2. What was the role of the messenger? "Say, "I am not different from other messengers. I have no idea what will happen to me or to you. I only follow what is revealed to me. I am no more than a profound warner." (Quran 46:9) It is GOD's system on Earth "sunna" that He constantly sends messengers to warn and save communities before they annihilate themselves by following other than GOD's perfect religion. The role of the last Prophet of Islam was to also 'warn' his community as well as the world: "We thus reveal to you an Arabic Quran to warn the mother of communities and all around it, and to warn about the Day of Summoning that is inevitable. Some will end up in Heaven, and some in Hell." (Quran 42:7) It is this very 'message' that has now reached over 1 billion human beings to save their very souls! Yet, even though this difficult and profound message has reached all these people, most are still claiming that this is not what the messenger delivered, and that we should follow his example!. ‘The messenger of GOD has set up a good example for those among you who seek GOD and the Last Day, and constantly think about GOD.’ (Quran 33:21)

The courage, patience, devotion, and love of GOD that the messenger displayed are all exemplary examples for us to follow. The messenger faced a terrifying challenge in delivering GOD’s words to a people who were accustomed to a way of life and traditions, which contradicted the very system of GOD. It was this sole messenger that stood in the face of overwhelming odds, continued to have faith and patience, and always knew that he must serve GOD Alone, even if all the odds were telling him otherwise. ‘Do you expect to enter Paradise without being tested like those before you? They were tested with hardship and adversity, and were shaken up, until the messenger and those who believed with him said, "Where is GOD's victory?" GOD's victory is near.’ (Quran 2:214) The Quran not only contains the laws of GOD, but it also contains the beautiful examples of the prophet: - His dealing with the idol worshippers; - His compassion towards the believers (3:31); - His love and constant remembered of GOD (33:21); - His human fear of failing (2:214); - His dealing with his wives rebellion; - His dealing with his adopted son’s problems (33:27); - His weakness in paying attention to the rich and powerful (80:1-12); All these and many more examples are contained within the precious book that GOD has honored. His, is like the exemplary example of Abraham with the idol worshippers: ‘A good example has been set for you by Abraham and those with him. They said to their people, "We disown you and the idols that you worship besides GOD. We denounce you, and you will see nothing from us except animosity and hatred until you believe in GOD ALONE’ (Quran 60:4) The life of the messenger gives us frail humans HOPE that it is indeed possible to live the way of GOD (as described in the Quran) and to uphold His covenant in light of all adversity. Without the messenger’s example, we may not even had bothered to read or study the Quran for fear that it was an ‘impractical’ book which assumed too much of a fictional utopian society. 3. Do we follow the messenger?. ‘The messenger said, "My Lord, my people have deserted this Quran." (Quran 25:30)

Once a person understands the words of GOD, then he/she is responsible to live that life and uphold the covenant with GOD as did Lot once he heard the message delivered by Abraham: ‘Lot believed with him and said, "I am emigrating to my Lord. He is the Almighty, the Most Wise." (Quran 29:26) 4. Do we respect the messenger? ‘Surely, those who lower their voices at the messenger of GOD are the ones whose hearts are prepared by GOD to become righteous. They have deserved forgiveness and a great recompense.’ (Quran 49:3) None of us hear will ever blaspheme the message of the Quran, nor would we allow any such thing to occur with our knowledge or presence. It is this respect of the ‘word of GOD’ that the messenger himself delivered which shows our respect and devotion to him. ‘He has instructed you in the scripture that: if you hear GOD’s revelations being mocked and ridiculed, you shall not sit with them, unless they delve into another subject. Otherwise, you will be as guilty as they are. GOD will gather the hypocrites and the disbelievers together in Hell.’ (Quran 4:140) 5. Do we love the messenger? ‘Some people set up others to rival GOD, and love them as they love GOD. Those who believe love GOD the most. If only the transgressors could see themselves when they see the retribution! They will realize then that all power belongs to GOD alone, and that GOD's retribution is awesome.’ (Quran 2:165) What else is left for us to say? We respect and follow the messenger by upholding that which he delivered, but as for our love; There is only ONE who is worthy of absolute love. The One who initiated the heavens and the earth, the One who created life and death, the One who’s hand guides the hearts of those who believe. ‘Is One who creates like one who does not create? Would you now take heed?’ (Quran 16:17) How can we even dare to love any other than GOD?

‘If you count GOD's blessings, you cannot possibly encompass them. GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.’ (Quran 16:18) Stay with GOD...there can never be anywhere else to go, but to Him.

Obey God & the Messenger
Many people site the Quraanic Verses that command us to Obey Allah and Obey the Messenger, and say that Obeying Allah and obeying the Messenger are two different things - Obeying Allah is to obey the Quraan and obeying the Messenger is to obey the books of Hadith. They point that if obeying the Messenger was the same thing as obeying Allah's Quraan, then Allah would have only said Obey Allah. These people say that Allahs inclusion of obey the Messenger implies that the Messenger is saying EXTRA things outside of the Quraan that we must obey. The thing that many proponents of Hadith forget is that Allah does not leave it to speculation as to what the people are to obey. The Ayaat do not end at Obey Allah and obey the Messenger, but they continue to include what the duty of the Messenger is: And obey Allah and obey the messenger and be cautious; but if you turn back, then know that only a clear deliverance of the message is (incumbent) on Our messenger <wa ma_ alar rasu_li il lal balaghul mubin (5:92) And Allah has made for you of what He has created shelters, and He has given you in the mountains places of retreat, and He has given you garments to preserve you from the heat and coats of mail to preserve you in your fighting; even thus does He complete His favor upon you, that haply you may submit. But if they turn back, then on you devolves only the clear deliverance (of the message) <wa ma_ alar rasu_li il lal balaghul mubin. (16:81-82) And if you (o people) reject (the truth), nations before you did indeed reject (the truth); and nothing is incumbent on the messenger but a plain delivering (of the message) <wa ma_ alar rasu_li il lal balaghul mubin.(29:18) And obey Allah and obey the messenger, but if you turn back, then upon Our messenger devolves only the clear delivery (of the message) <wa ma_ alar rasu_li il lal balaghul mubin.(64:12) Say: Obey Allah and obey the messenger; but if you turn back, then on him rests that which is imposed on him and on you rests that which is imposed on you; and if you obey him, you are on the right way; and nothing rests on the messenger but clear delivering (of the message) <wa ma_ alar rasu_li il lal bala_ghul mubin. (24:54) Now, if we look at these Ayaat, we notice that Allah has clearly pointed out the duty of the Messenger, i.e. that he must DELIVER the Clarity <Balaghul Mubeen. We have seen that the Clarity or the Message of the Messenger is the Quraan. Here we will look at another important term used in the Quraan. This term is Balagha, meaning the reaching, or delivery of the Messenger.

The word Messenger is derived from the word Message. A Messenger delivers a Message. To Obey the Messenger would thus mean to obey the message he is delivering. We have seen in the previous chapters that the Messenger is teaching, preaching, explaining and living by the Quraan. Here again we will see that his delivery <Balagha is the Quraan: Here is the <haza is a delivery <balaghu for Humans; let them take warning therefrom, and let them know that He is One God; let the People of Understanding take heed (14:52) This Ayah points to IT <haza, meaning THIS IS (pointing to the Quraan itself) is the delivery of the Messenger. This is further clarified in the following Ayah: Before this We wrote in The Zabur, after the Zikar: My righteous servants shall inherit the earth. Verily in this is a message <Balaghan for the servants of Allah (21:105-106) However, some people says that 21:106 is pointing to 21:105 and not to the Quraan. They still have no answer to 14:52. However, we will not pursue this further as Allah does not leave His Message to speculation, but He Defines what He means. Let us continue to read the Quraan: O Messenger! Proclaim <Baligh what is sent down to you <ma Unzila Ilaika from your Lord. If you do not, you would not have fulfilled and proclaimed His message: and Allah will defend you from people. For Allah Guides not those who Reject (5:67) Here the Balagh is defined as that which is being sent down on the Prophet from Allah <unzila. We have seen in the previous chapters what was being sent down was nothing but the Quraan. However, a sick heart might still insist that there was EXTRA something that was sent down and that EXTRA something is in the Hadith books. Thus we continue to read the next Ayah after 5:67, where Allah further explains the nature of what was being sent down: Say: O people of the Book! You have no grounds to stand upon unless you stand fast by The Torah and The Injeel and all the rest that has come down to you from your Lord. It is what is SENT DOWN to you that increases in most of them their obstinate blasphemy. But sorrow you not over people without faith (5:68) Here what is being sent down on the Prophet is compared with the Torah and the Injeel, i.e. it is the Quraan. It is further explained that Allah has sent down<anzala the Book with the Prophets:Mankind was one single nation, and Allah established Prophets giving glad tidings and warnings, and with them He sent down <anzala The Book in Truth. (2:213) It is He Who sent down <nazala to you, in Truth, the Book (3:3).

But people say that not only the Book was sent down but also an EXTRA revelation known as al-Hikma (The Wisdom) was also sent down. They site some Ayaat from the Quraan to this effect. One of them is related here: For Allah has sent down <anzala to you the Book and the Wisdom and taught you what you knew not (4:113) We will, inshaAllah deal with Al-Hikma later in another chapter. But for now, we will site a couple of Quraanic Ayaat to show that the Book is INCLUSIVE of the Hikmah, and the Al-Hikma that is being sent down is the Quraan: Those who conceal what Allah has sent down<anzala in the Book , and purchase for them a miserable profit - they swallow into themselves nothing but fire; Allah will not address them on the Day of Resurrection, nor purify them : grievous will be their penalty (2:174) Here we notice that the warning is ONLY given for concealing the Book, and not the Hikmah. Does this mean that those who conceal the Hikmah in the books of Hadith will not be punished No, but the answer is that The-Book is inclusive of the Hikmah and concealing the Book would automatically conceal the Hikmah. Because Allah sent down<nazala the Book in Truth, but those who seek causes of dispute in the Book are in a schism far (2:176) If Hikmah is separate from the Book, then it means that it would be ok to seek causes of dispute in the Hikmah as it is ONLY the Book that is mentioned above. Here, I digress. Let me get back to the word Balagha. There is no point in dwelling on speculations when one has the weightiest evidence Say: What thing is most weighty in Evidence Say: Allah is a Witness between me and you; this QURAAN has been revealed to me by inspiration that with it <BIHI I may warn you and all whom it reaches <BALAGHA (6:19) Here the Messenger clearly establishes what his BALAGHA is It is the Quraan. Thus to insist without proof that the Messenger was supposed to deliver something else besides the Quraan is to oppose the Quranic verdict itself that he was to deliver the Message of the Quraan only. But the argument does not end here. People point out that Obey Allah and Obey the Messenger should mean that obedience to the Messenger is separate from Obedience to Allah. This is absurd, as the Messenger does not have any authority except for the reason that he is SENT by Allah. Had Muhammad not been a Messenger of Allah would people obey him The answer is NO. Thus Obedience to the Prophet is BECAUSE he is the Messenger of Allah. Thus the two are NOT mutually exclusive obedience - one is highly dependent on the other. It is the same as saying eat an apple and eat its nutrition. Here is further Evidence from the Quraan that they are the same:

And an announcement from ALLAH AND HIS MESSENGER to the people on the day of the greater pilgrimage that ALLAH AND HIS MESSENGER are free from liability to the idolaters; therefore, if you repent, it will be better for you, and if you turn back, then know that you will not weaken Allah; and announce painful punishment to those who disbelieve (9:3) Now, did the people hear Allah giving this announcement of immunity The answer is No!. It was only from the LIPS of His Messenger, Muhammad, that they heard this announcement of immunity. Yet it is supposed to come from both Allah and His Messenger. Or do people think that one announcement came from Allah and ANOTHER came from the Messenger Allah does not speak to all the people. What He does is that He chooses a human being as His instrument and communicates through that instrument. Who among the companions of the Prophet ever heard any of Allahs commandments from Allah DIRECTLY NONE!. How can they OBEY Allah then In that case, according to your twisted logic all Allah had to do was say Obey the Messenger as it is ONLY through the LIPS of the Messenger that they are hearing the Quraan. The following Ayah again establishes that Obedience to Allah and His Messenger is ONE and the SAME thing: O you who believe! Obey Allah and Obey the Messenger and do not turn back from HIM <anhu while you hear (8:20) Here the believers are identified to be those who were listening to the Messenger who delivers the Quraanic laws to them, as the singular pronoun anhu (from him) indicates. This confirms that Allah and His Messenger are not two separate sources of law to be obeyed, but that the source of Divine law to be obeyed is ONLY Allah and ONLY the people are able to hear these divine laws through the LIPS of His Messenger. Then peoples ignorance of the Quraan is further exposed when in desperation they site the examples of other Prophets like Nuh, Lut, Hud and Salih in the Quraan and say that in Ash Shuara ( Surah 26) people are commanded to obey these Prophets. People say that since these Prophets did not have a book, then to obey them would mean that obedience to Messenger is DIFFERENT from Obedience to Allah. The Quraan refutes this claim as I have shown above already. But in addition, the Quraan confirms that at each time in history Allah has given a Book. Either the Prophets themselves were given Books, or there already was a Book by a previous Prophet to which they were calling the people: And those to whom We have given the Book rejoice in that which has been revealed to you, and of the confederates are some who deny a part of it. Say: I am only commanded that I should serve Allah and not associate anything with Him, to Him do I invite (you) and to Him is my return. And thus have We revealed it, a true judgment(HUKMAN) in Arabic, and if you follow their low desires after what has come to you of knowledge, you shall not have against Allah any guardian or a protector. We did send messengers before

thee, and appointed for them wives and children: and it was never the part of a messenger to bring an Ayah except as Allah permitted (or commanded). For each PERIOD IS A BOOK (revealed). (13:36-38) In no uncertain terms has Allah announced here that each Prophet had a Book in his time. Prophethood and Book is always tied together: It is not (possible) that a man, to whom is given the Book, and Wisdom, and the prophetic office, should say to people: Be ye my slaves rather than Allah's: on the contrary (He would say) Be ye slaves of Him Who is truly the Cherisher of all: For ye have taught the Book and ye have studied it earnestly. (3:79) This Ayah ties Prophethood to the Book. Otherwise, if we take the baseless claim that certain Prophets came without any Book then this Ayah would be limited Only to those Prophets who came with the Book, and therefore those Prophets who came without the Book can still tell people to be their slaves rather than Allahs Further the Quraan explicitly tells us that Allah gave the Book to Nuh and Lut and their Progeny: We gave him Isaac and Jacob: all (three) guided; and before him, We guided NUH, and among his progeny, David, Solomon, Job, Joseph, Moses, and Aaron. Thus do We reward those who do good; and Zakariya and John, and Jesus and Elias: all in the ranks of the righteous. And Isma'il and Elisha, and Jonas, and LUT; and to all We gave favor above the nations. (To them) and to their fathers, and progeny and brethren: We chose them, and we guided them to a straight way. This is the guidance of Allah: He giveth that guidance to whom He pleases, of His worshippers. If they were to join other gods with Him, all that they did would be vain for them. These are they to whom We gave the BOOK and the wisdom and the prophecy; therefore if these disbelieve in it We have already entrusted with it a people who are not disbelievers in it (6:84-89) And certainly We sent Nuh and Ibrahim and We gave to their offspring the (gift of) prophecy and the Book; so there are among them those who go aright, and most of them are transgressors (57:26) The above Ayaat make it clear that ALL Prophets came with Allahs Message in some form of a Book, and that obedience to the Messenger is obedience to Allahs Words that the Messengers are delivering. Whether these words are preserved or not is another matter. But as far as the Quraan is concerned the Book has been recorded and preserved. And as I have shown before that the revelation delivered by the Prophet Muhammad was nothing but the Quraan, and therefore, to obey the Messenger we must obey the Quraan. Besides, the speculation that obedience to Allah and obedience to the Messenger are separate conflicts with the explicit Quraanic statement that Allah does NOT share anyone in His Law or Hukm: Surely the Hukm (Law and Judgment) is for none but Allah (12:40) He does not make anyone His associate in His Hukm (Law and Judgment) (18:26)

The Messenger himself is made to testify that the Law and the Judgment is only from Allah as revealed through the Messenger in His Book: Shall I seek a Law-giver other than Allah When He it is Who has revealed to you the Book distinctly elucidated. (6:114) Thus, the proponents of Hadith are only relying on conjecture when they say that obey the Messenger means to obey EXTRA commandments outside of the Quraan; they have no evidence from the Quraan to back up this claim - only conjecture: Most of them follow nothing but conjecture: truly conjecture can be of no avail against truth. Verily Allah is well aware of all that they do. (10:36) Obey God and Obey the Messenger Taken from the site: ( The hadith followers in their earnest attempt to advocate the legality of following the hadith and sunna of the prophet, play on a corrupted interpretation of the Quranic command to "obey God and obey the Messenger". They claim that obeying God is to obey the Quran while as obeying the Messenger is to obey his hadith (personal sayings) and his sunnah (methods). They add that if obeying the Messenger was the same thing as obeying God's Quran, then God would have only said Obey God. Thus to their understanding, God's inclusion of "obey the Messenger" implies that the Messenger has his own set of religious teachings outside of the Quran that we must obey. With the guidance of the Quran, the error in this claim can easily be exposed. In the light of the Quran it can easily be seen that to "obey the Messenger" is to obey the message he delivered (the Quran) and nothing else.

1- The necessity to say "obey the Messenger": The inclusion of the phrase "obey the Messenger" after "Obey God" serves a number of important causes: A- Who among the companions of the Prophet ever heard any of God's revelations directly from God? No one! Consequently, they cannot obey God except through Muhammad's delivery of the Quran. This once again makes it necessary for God to command people to obey the messenger since he is the one who delivers to them God's message. Moreover, the messenger did not just deliver the Quran and vanish! The prophet spent all his years from the time he first received the revelation till his death inviting all people to believe in and follow the Quran. Hence it is necessary for God to say to all humans to obey the messenger who is inviting them to follow the Quran.

B- The Quran was revealed to Muhammad in order that he would deliver it to a community which was primarily composed of idol worshippers but also some followers of the previous scripture like the Jews and the Christians (Nasara). Once again, and for the benefit of the followers of the scripture that we understand the neccessity of the phrase "obey the Messener". To make this clear, let us assume that the command in the Quran did not contain the phrase "obey the Messenger" but was only a command to "Obey God". Immediately, the Jews and the Christians (Nasara) would say : But we already obey God, God has sent us the scripture and we obey it!" Hence, the phrase "obey the messenger" which is enclosed in the message he (Muhammad) delivered to them (Quran) endorses the Quran itself as being the last revelation form God to all humans. The Quran was revealed to mankind so as to supercede all previous scripture: "Then we revealed to you (O Muhammad) this scripture, truthfully, confirming previous scriptures, and SUPERSEDING them." 5:48

2- The duty of the Messenger: "And obey God and obey the messenger and be cautious; but if you turn back, then know that the SOLE DUTY of the messenger is the deliverance (of the message)" 5:92 "And obey God and obey the messenger, but if you turn back, then upon Our messenger is the SOLE DUTY of the clear delivery (of the message)" 64:12 Now, if we look at these Ayaat, we notice that God has clearly pointed out the ONLY duty of the Messenger, i.e. that he must DELIVER the message (Quran). The word Messenger is derived from the word Message. A Messenger delivers a Message. If there were no message there would not be a messenger. To Obey the Messenger would thus mean to obey the message he is delivering.

3- Is it obey "Muhammad" or "obey the Messenger"? God is the most efficient in expressing any meaning. All Quranic words are chosen by God to convey a precise meaning. We never read anywhere in the Quran words like "Obey God and obey Muhammad" or obey Jesus, or Moses..........always the word messenger........this is to emphasise once again that what is to be obeyed is the "message" of God and not the personal words or views of the messenger.

As mentioned earlier, the word Messenger is derived from the word Message. If there were no message there would not be a messenger. To Obey the Messenger would thus mean to obey the message he is delivering.

4- The only "message" revealed to Muhammad was the Quran: In reply to this Quranic truth, the proponents of hadith claim that they have no problem with the fact that the only duty of Muhammad was to deliver the message, but they quickly add that the hadith and sunna of Muhammad are part of the "message" and were inspiration from God! They base such claim on a corrupted interpretion of 53:3-4. As a matter of fact, they claim that besides the hadith of Muhammad (which they claim was inspired) they claim that Muhammad received additional revelation directly from God outside the Quran which they call the 'Hadith Al-Qudsy' or the 'sacred hadith'! For more info on the corruption of 53:3-4, please see: The corruption of 53:3-4 With the guidance of the Quran we can quickly establish that Muhammad did not receive ANY revelation from God other than the Quran. Yes the prophet was inspired by God in certain personal matter, an example of that is found in 66:3 where God inspired the prophet regarding the truth of a domestic issue. However, this was mere inspiration from God and not revelation. The difference between inspiration and revelation is that God inspires all humans (note how God inspired the mother of Moses). God also inspires the animals (example of that is in 16:68 where God tells us how He inspires the bees). This is different from revelation which is specificaly an inspired scripture which contains religious laws and prohibitions. Note here that hadith followers uphold the hadith and sunna as the second source of Islamic law besides the Quran, and by doing so they elevate the hadith to the status of revelation. We are told in the Quran that the prophet did not receive any revelation from God other than the Quran: "Say (Muhammad): What thing is 'Akbar Shahada' (greatest testimony)? Say: God is a Witness between me and you; this QURAN has been revealed to me by inspiration that with it I may warn you and all whom it reaches (BALAGHA)" 6:19 This testimony which God describes as "Akbar Shahada" "Greatest Testimony" commands Muhammad to testify that He received the Quran from God. This testimony speaks of only one revelation received by Muhammad from God which is the Quran. If Muhammad truly received other revelation from God other than the Quran, would we not

find any mention of it in the Quran? Would God hide the fact that He gave Muhammad revelation outside the Quran and then command us to obey it? Moreover, to insist that every word uttered by the prophet was even inspiration (let alone revelation) is once again to show ignorance with the Quran. We are given in the Quran six different cases where the prophet committed errors for which he was reprimanded by God. The question here is how can someone who's every word is inspired by God commit ANY errors? Could God be inspiring mistakes to His prophet!!!

5- God promises to preserve the Quran and nothing else: "Absolutely, we have revealed the 'Zhikr' (Quran), and, absolutely, we will preserve it." 15:9 These words proclaim God's promise to preserve the Quran. We do not read anywhere else in the Quran that God would preserve the personal sayings of the messenger. In actual fact, God did not preserve His Own previous scripture (Torah and Injeel), why would He preserve the human words of one of His servants? Is God elevating His servant to be a legislating god besides Him when God tells us that the SOLE duty of the messenger is to deliver His message? But that is not all, we are told in the Quran that anything which is not from God would ultimately contain many contradictions and corruptions: "If it were from other than God, they would have found in it numerous contradictions." 4:82 Despite these clear ayat, the followers of hadith have made claims that their cherished hadith books (primarily Bukhari and Muslim) are fully authentic (Sahih) and without corruption! Do they not believe God's words in 15:9 and 4:82?

6- The command to follow the Quran and nothing else: In the Quran God commands all believers to follow the Quran Alone, this command is found in numerous verses, the following are examples: "These are God's revelations that We recite to you truthfully. In which Hadith other than God and His revelations do they believe?" 45:6

"Shall I seek other than God as a source of law, when He has revealed to you this book fully detailed?"6:114 This clear command once again confirms that obeying the messenger is confined to obeying the "message" he delivered from God (Quran) and nothing else.

7- Are we commanded to follow the Sunna of Muhammad? The followers of hadith and Sunna use a corrupted meaning of 33:21 to imply that we should follow the methodology of the messenger and thus we need to follow his Sunna! To expose the corruption and manipulation in such claim, let us first read 33:21 "The messenger of God has set up a good example for those among you who seek God and the Last Day, and constantly think about God." 33:21 From these words we note that God is very specific in describing the capacity in which the prophet has set a good example. The good example lies in his constant thinking of God and how he sought God and the last day. Sadly, the worshippers of hadith and Sunna have reduced this glorious ayat so as to imply that we should eat as the prophet ate, sleep as he did and even enter the toilet with the same foot which he used!!! .... this is among many other ridiculous do's and do not's that fill the books of hadith. To make the issue undisputable, God has told us in the Quran that the only Sunna is the Sunna of God. No where in the Quran is there any mention of the Sunna of Muhammad!!!! "You will find that the Sunna of Allah is the only Sunna" (33:62....35:43.....48:23)

8- Was the messenger authorised by God to issue any teachings besides the Quran? God asserts to all believers that prophet Muhammad was commanded not to teach any other teachings, otherwise he would incur severe punishment from God: "It (the Quran) is a revelation from the Lord of the universe. Had he (Muhammad) uttered any other teachings, We would have grabbed him by the right, and We would have severed his Wateen (Major artery of the heart), none of you could have helped him."69:43-47

Those who insist that the prophet left us a second source of religious law (hadith) are either accusing the prophet of disobeying God's commands in 69:43-47, or do not really understand the Quran.

9- The instructions left by the prophet In accordance to 6:114, 69:43-47 and many other clear cut ayat, prophet Muhammad himself commanded his people not to write his own hadith, this is documented in Muslim and other books: "Do not write down anything of me except the Quran. Whoever writes other than that should delete it" (Ahmed, Vol. 1, page 171.....also Sahih Muslim) For the first 200 years after the death of the prophet, and in accordance with his instructions, the writing of his hadith was forbidden. The first one to document a comprehensive collection of hadith was Al-Bukhari (Note that Al-Bukhari was born in the year 194 After Hijrah). Even if we were to follow the hadith (which we are not), how accurate can a collection of sayings documented two centuries after the death of the prophet be? The peculiar matter here is that the followers of hadith do not wish to obey the Quran nor do they want to obey the instructions left by the prophet! In their blind and stubborn adherence to the tales told by the likes of such narrators as Abu Huraira and others they make an astonishingly ridiculous claim. They claim that the prophet issued these instructions (not to write his hadith) only in the first period of revelation and only because he was worried that his hadith would be mixed up with the Quran! They add that these instructions were cancelled in his later years! Well, if that was the case, why did they wait two whole centuries before documenting the hadith? Did it take two centuries to prepare a copy of the Quran that did not have hadith mixed with it!!! Moreover, by saying this ridiculous claim (that the prophet was afraid that his hadith would be mixed up with the Quran) they once again show their ignorance with the Quran. In Sura 75 we are assured that God would secure the safe collection of the Quran: "It is WE who will collect it into Quran." 75:17 This promise from God about the safe collection of the Quran, plus the promise in 15:9 for the preservation of the Quran reduces the claim of the hadith followers (that the prophet was worried that his words would get mixed up with the Quran) to utter nonesense. It is either they do not believe God or they do not believe the prophet's trust in God's ability!

10- Did the prophet really follow other than the Quran? The answer to this question is decisively dealt with in the Quran. We read: "Then we revealed to you this scripture, truthfully, confirming previous scriptures, and superseding them. You shall rule among them in accordance with God's revelations, and do not follow their wishes if they differ from the truth that came to you" 5:48 God's command to the prophet to follow what was revelaed to him (Quran) is loud and clear. The importance of this command is emphasised as the same words "You shall rule among them in accordance with God's revelations" are repeated in ayat 49. If we are to follow the prophet we must thus follow what he was commanded to follow, and that is the Holy Quran.

Glorifying Mohammed
This very common phrase (AL-SALAT ALA AL-NABI and AL-TASLEEM) derives from the following verse: "God and His angels ‘Yossalloon ala al Nabi’, O you believers you shall ‘Salloo alayhee’ and ‘Sallemoo tasleema’." (33/56) Since this is a clear command from God, we must surely obey it. However, and before obeying this command we must first understand the meaning of it. We notice that the verse contained two commands, the ‘Salla ala al Nabi’ and the ‘Tasleem’. First we should inspect the present interpretation of these words among Muslims today, then we must find out whether this interpretation is in line with the one contained in the Quran. To do this, the easiest method is to ask any Muslim as to what is the meaning of the simple and widely spoken words ‘Salli ala al Nabi’. Strangely enough, when most Muslims are asked as to what these words mean they are not really sure! The reader is welcomed to try this himself. The simple question asked is: ‘When you say ‘Salli ala al Nabi’ what do you really mean? Are you praising the prophet? Are you imploring him so that he may intercede on your behalf on judgment day, are you praying God to grant the prophet His highest mercy? or what? Sadly this widely repeated phrase has become a number of things except the one thing that it was really meant to be! For one thing it has become a means to break up arguments! If two Muslims get involved in a heated argument you would find one of them saying to the other: "Why don’t you ‘tesallee ala al Nabi’?"!!! Similarly if one Muslim is about to ask a favor of the other he often starts with the same words: "Sallee ala al Nabi", after which he would get into what he really means to say! We must pose here and wonder, is the aim behind Allah’s command (Sura 33, verse 56) is to provide us with an effective tool to break up arguments or to facilitate the obtaining of favors from one another?!! Obviously not! The verse informs us that God and his angels do the same ‘Salla ala al Nabi’, but surely God does not get in heated arguments with anyone nor does He ask favors from anyone! If the common Muslim has not made up his mind as to the meaning of the words he repeats many times a day, what then is the opinion of the ‘Moffasereen’ (the interpreters)?

First they will say that God has exclusively honored Muhammad when He said : "God and His angels Yossalloon ala al Nabi (for the prophet)" Immediately, their claim is exposed by Quranic evidence. In the Quran we read that God and His angels do the same to all believers and not just to the prophet: "He is the one who ‘Yessallee alaikom’ (for the believers) and His angels, to deliver you out of darkness into the light" (33/43) we also read : "These (the believers) have deserved ‘Sallawat’ from their Lord and mercy, they are the guided ones." (2/157) …… again the same meaning, but the matter does not end there, in Sura 9 we find God commanding the prophet to do the same for the believers : "Take from their money a charity to purify them and sanctify them, and ‘Salli alaihom’ for your ‘Sallawat’ reassures them. God is Hearer, Omniscient." (9/103) Now if this verb ‘Yessalli’ is done by Allah to the believers, also by the prophet to the believers, how can the interpreters say that it is an exclusive honor bestowed by God on the prophet?!!! To wiggle out of this tricky situation the interpreters have fabricated a ridiculous excuse. They claim that the word ‘Sallawat’ has no less than five different meanings!! 1- First they will say that when God does the ‘Sallat’ to the prophet it means honoring exclusively. 2- When God does the ‘Sallat’ to the believers it means granting them His mercy. 3- When the angels do the ‘Sallat’ to the prophet it means constantly praising him. 4- When the angels do the ‘Sallat’ to the believers, or when the prophet does it for the believers, it is in the sense of imploring God’s mercy for them. 5- When the believers do the ‘Sallat’ to the prophet it is a sign of loving him and following him. If the word (Sallat) in the Quran can have all these meanings then the Quran is indeed a collection of ambiguous puzzles!

To believe that God may say one simple word and imply five different meanings is to imply that the Quran is vague and crooked! The important fact is that after all that, and as it turns out, none of these five meanings is correct! To verify that let us study the use of the word ‘Sallat’ in the Quran. Immediately we find that the word ‘Sallat’ has been mentioned in the Quran in two different context : a- The ‘Sallat’ for Allah, which is an act of worship, as used in the following verse : "I am God; there is no other God beside Me, Thus you shall worship me and observe the ‘Sallat’ to commemorate Me." (20/14) b- The ‘Sallat’ of the prophet on the believers or of the believers on the prophet as mentioned in previous verses. The difference between the two uses of the same word all depends on the letter or the word that comes immediately after the word ‘Sallat’. The word ‘Sallat’ is either followed by the Arabic letter ‘L’ which means (to, for) as in: "……..observe the ‘Sallat’ to commemorate Me." (Sura 20, verse 14) This first use, means the act of prayer, which is done exclusively for God. The word ‘Sallat’ can also be followed by the Arabic word ‘Ala’ which means (on) as in all the previous verses. Now, if ‘Sallat for’ means the act of worship of God, what is the meaning of the word ‘Sallat on’ as the one done for the prophet or the believers?

Before we analyze this second meaning, which has been the cause of all the corruption, we must first clarify a vital point. Consider the following example: A father tells his son: ‘Like I wash my face, you too wash your face.’ The logic of this simple sentence suggests that since the father does one thing and asks the son to do it as well, then it implies that the same action done by the father is done by the son. It is not logical to assume that the father means to say: ‘When I wash my face I mean to wipe my face with water but when you wash your face my son it means you should wash your feet!!’

Going back to (Sura 33, verse 56), and since the two verbs (Yossalloon and Salloo) are used in the same verse, without any insinuation of a change in meaning, then by logic they must have the same meaning. Consequently, when God informs us that He and the angels (Yossalloon ala al Nabi), then in the same sentence commands us to do the same, we must understand that it is of the same meaning. Here we reach the heart of the matter. What is the meaning of (Sallat ala al Nabi) that can be done by God and by the believers equally? The same thing that is done by God must be done by the believers, as per the previous example. First, and to give the interpreters the benefit of the doubt, let us look at the five different meanings they have suggested for the word ‘Sallat ala al Nabi’ and try to find out if any of these meanings can possibly be done by God and also by the believers : 1- God bestowing honor on His servant: This can be done by God to any of His servants, but it is not in the authority of any human to honor another human on behalf of God. 2- To grant mercy: Again this may only be done by God to any of His servants, all humans are themselves in need of God’s mercy, they do not have it within them to grant one another God’s mercy. 3- To constantly praise: God is too exalted ( Al Moutaali ) and proud ( Al Moutakaber) than to constantly sing the praises of any of those He has created. On the other hand, the Quran teaches the believers that the only one worthy of constant praise is God. 4- To implore God’s mercy: This may be done by believers but it does not make sense for God to implore Himself. 5- As a sign of following someone: Again may not be done by God be exalted. He does not follow anyone. From this brief analysis it is clear that some of these interpretations may be done by God, while others may be done by human beings but there is not one interpretation that could apply to God and human beings equally. What then is the correct meaning of these words? The only meaning for the words ‘Sallat ala al Nabi’ that is found in the Quran and that can apply to God, His angels and to the believers alike is to ‘support the prophet’. God and His angels indeed support the prophet and by the same token God commands the believers to support His prophet. This correct meaning is confirmed by Quranic verses : 1- God supports His prophet :

"We have bestowed upon you (O Muhammad) a great victory, whereby God forgives your past sins, as well as future sins, and perfects His blessings on you, and guides you in a straight path. Additionally, God will support you with an unwavering support." (48/1-3) 2- The angels commanded by God to support the prophet : "Your Lord supports you with three thousand angels, sent down (to support you)." (3/124) 3- Believers commanded to support the prophet of God : "(You shall give) to the needy who immigrated. They were evicted from their homes and deprived of their properties, because they sought God’s grace and pleasure, and because they supported God and His messenger. They are the sincere ones." (59/8) "If you fail to support him (the prophet), God has already supported him. Thus when the disbelievers chased, him and he was one of two in the cave, he said to his friend, ‘Do not worry, God is with us’, God then sent contentment and security upon him, and supported him with invisible soldiers." (9/40) "Those who believe in him (the prophet), respect him, SUPPORT HIM and follow the light (the Quran) that was sent down with him are the truly successful ones." (7/157) It is clear from these verses that God commands believers to do three things regarding His prophet : 1- To believe in him. 2- To support him. 3- To obey and follow his message (the Quran). Thus the correct meaning of the words ‘Sallat ala al Nabi’ is to support the prophet. Since the prophet is now dead and no longer with us then it is not possible to support him personally. The support now is directed to his message which is the Quran. With that correct meaning of the word, it is right to think that when God ‘Yessallee ala al Momeneen’ it means He supports them and guides them out of the darkness. This meaning is indeed confirmed in the verse : "He is the one who ‘Yessallee alaikom’ (supports you), together with His angels, to lead you out of the darkness into the light." (33/43)

Similarly when God and His angels ‘Yessalloo ala al Nabi’ it is in the sense that He supports the prophet together with His angels. God does not go around repeating the words ‘Sallee ala al Nabi’, ‘Sallee ala al Nabi’ !!! Similarly when the prophet ‘Yessalle ala al Momeneen’ (believers), as God commanded him in (Sura 9, verse 103), it is in the sense, that is he is to support them. Obviously God’s command to His prophet in this verse does not mean that the prophet should go around saying ‘Sallee ala Zeid’, ‘Sallee ala Ali’, ‘Sallee ala Belal’ !! It is important here to inspect some of the ‘hadith’ that are related to the ‘Sallat ala al Nabi’ and verify their agreement with the Quran. One of the very famous ‘hadith’ goes that the prophet said that whoever does not ‘Yessallee ala al Nabi’ will not attain the prophet’s ‘Shafa’a’ (intercession) on judgment day. Various other ‘hadith’ indicate that the prophet emphasised his wish that the believers should say these words for him. Here we must wonder, did the prophet really ask this of the believers? And if not why? As stressed earlier in this book, the verification of any concept, saying or ritual must be based on whether this concept is in agreement with the Quran or not. To verify these ‘hadith’ let us first read the following verses : "Do not ask them for a return, you simply deliver this reminder for all the people." (12/104) "I have not asked you for any return. My return comes only from God. I have been commanded to be a submitter." (10/72) "Say I do not ask you for any return" (38/86) These verses assert the fact that the prophet never asked the believers for anything in return for delivering God’s message to them. It is indeed far more respectful to think of the prophet as he who’s mission was much more noble than to go around saying do this for me or do that (e.g. if you do not visit my grave I will not intercede for you, and if you do not ‘Tessallo alaya’ I will not do that for you ......etc.) Another of the cherished ‘hadith’ implies that the prophet instructed Muslims to say a specific prayer for him. The words of this prayer are as follows : ‘Aaty (grant) Sayedna (our Master/Lord) Muhammad the way, the virtue and the highest degree and deliver him to the praise worthy status that You promised him, You do not break Your promises.’ This simple everyday prayer contains various violations of the teachings of the Quran:

1- To believe that the prophet has asked the believers to do something for him is in violation of the previous Quranic verses that command the prophet to ask for no return whatsoever from the believers. The only return he will receive will be from God. 2- It is indeed wrong in the sight of God to call anyone our Lord except He. "Or have they set up other Lords besides Him, God is the only Lord and Master" (42/9) 3- The one who uses such a prayer is the one who either never read the Quran or has read it but does not really believe it! This is because Sura 48 confirms that God has informed the prophet that He has forgiven him all his sins, past and future : "We have bestowed upon you (O Muhammad) a great victory, whereby God forgives your past, as well as future sins." (48/1-2) What this great sign of mercy from God to his prophet means is that Muhammad is secured the highest reward in the hereafter (since he is forgiven all his sins). As a result, no prayer could elevate his position any higher (since there is none better than he who has been forgiven all sins in advance!). 4- The words ‘you do not break your promises’, are to say the least insulting to God. The utterance of these words can only mean that whoever speaks them is not really sure if God will keep His promise and that a small reminder will come handy !! Instead, when a true believer reads in the Quran that God has forgiven the prophet all his sins, will consider the matter a closed one. He will not need to remind God of His promises. If this is the correct meaning of the words ‘Sallat ala al Nabi’, then what is the meaning of the word ‘Tasslleem’ as in ‘Wa sallemoo tasleema’ (Sura 33, verse 56)? Sadly, the corrupted interpreters have found another corrupted meaning to these words as well. They claim that these words are a command from God to salute the prophet and send him our greetings! This is based on their false interpretation of the word ‘Tasleema’ to mean greetings! This is contrary to the meaning of the word in the Quran as will be demonstrated, but before doing that we must consider all similar words to ‘Tasleem’ that are used in the Quran. 1- Islam: Which means submission to the will of God as in: "The only religion approved by God is Islam" (3/19) "Anyone who adopts other than Islam as his religion, it will not be accepted from him, and in the Hereafter he will be with the losers.’ (3/85)

2- Salam: Which means greetings as in: "Do not say to the one who offers you Salam (greetings), ‘You are not a believer....." (4/94) 3- Salm: Which is the opposite of war as in: "If they are inclined towards Salm (peace), then so shall you and put your trust in God. He is the Hearer, the Omniscient." (8/61) 4- Saleem: Which means without defects as in: "That is the day when neither money nor children will be of any use, only the ones who come to God with a heart that is Saleem (without defects, pure) (will be saved)." (26/88-89) 5- Istisllam: Which means surrender as in: "Stop them and ask them, ‘How come you do not help one another?’ On that day they will be Mostaslemoon (in total surrender)." (37/25-26) 6- Soullaman : Which means a ladder as in: "And if their rejection gets to be too much for you, you should know that even if you dug a tunnel through the earth, or climbed a Soullama (ladder) into the sky, and produced a miracle for them (they still would not believe)...." (6/35) 7- Tasleem: Which means recognition and acceptance. As in the subject of this search (33:56) It is noteworthy to mention that the word ‘Taslleem’ is found in only three verses in the Quran, and in all three verses it means to recognize and endorse: "Never indeed, by your Lord; they are not believers until they come to you to judge in their disputes, then have no objection to your judgment and ‘Yessallemoo Taslleema’ (totally accepting and endorsing it)." (4/65) His messenger had promised us, indeed God and His messenger have been truthful. All this strengthened their Iman and Taslleem (faith and recognition)." (33/22) "God and His angels ‘Yessalloo ala al Nabi’ (support him). O you who believe you shall ‘Salloo alayhee’ (support him) and Sallemoo Taslleema , ( fully recognize him and accept him as the messenger of God)." (33/56)

A very simple and effective way of proving that the word ‘Tasslleem’ means recognition and not greetings as the corrupters would have us believe, is to substitute each of these two words, first (recognition), then (greetings) in place of the word ‘Tasslleem’ in each of the previous verses and see which one of the two words make more sense. Let us start with the word greetings: - ".........they are not believers until they come to you to judge in their disputes, then have no objection to your judgment and greetings" !! - ".....indeed God and His messenger have been truthful. All this strengthened their Iman and greetings" !!!!! It is obvious that the substitution of the word greetings in these verses makes no sense whatsoever. However if we insert the word recognition in place of ‘Tasslleem’ all three verses will make perfect sense. The correct meaning of verse 56 of Sura 33 is thus: "God and His angels support the prophet, O you who believe you too shall support him and fully recognize and accept him (as the prophet of God)." Indeed it makes perfect sense that God should command the believers to support His prophet and totally accept him rather than to be primarily concerned in people going around saying (Sallee ala al Nabi) without understanding what it really means and sending our greeting to the prophet who is dead and can no longer hear us, (see Sura 35, verse 14). However, the corrupters have come up with the most absurd scenario to justify the need to constantly greet the prophet. They claim that the prophet is alive in his grave, that he can see us when we visit his grave, that he hears us when we greet him and actually replies to our greetings!! This absurd fabrication is once again in contradiction to various Quranic verses. FIRST Indeed the prophet is alive, however he is definitely not in his grave but up somewhere in the kingdom of God. This is confirmed by various verses that indicate that the righteous are not dead but are alive and prosperous in God’s Kingdom. SECOND The prophet does not return the greetings simply because the Quran affirms that those who died cannot hear us, and thus cannot respond to us:

"Those you call on other than Him (your Lord) do not possess as much as a seed’s shell. If you call on them they cannot hear you. Even if they heard you they cannot respond to you...." (35/13-14) The Quran states that a barrier separates the dead from the living : "A barrier will separate them from this world till the day they are resurrected." (23/100) For all that, the correct meaning of (Sura 33, verse 56) is: "God and His angels support the prophet, O you who believe, you too shall support him and fully recognize and accept him (as the prophet of God)." This accurate and precise meaning is asserted and authenticated in the following verse: "Those who believe in him (the prophet), and respect him, and support him, and follow the light (the Quran) that was brought down with him, those are the truly successful ones." (7/157) This verse includes all that God commanded us to do for the prophet : 1- To believe in him, which corresponds to (Sallemoo Tasleema) in 33:56 2- To support him which correspond to (Salloo Alayhee) in the same verse. 3- To obey him (to follow the message that was revealed to him, which is the Quran). This is what God commands any people to do for their prophet, whether they are the people of Moses, Jesus or Muhammad. The importance of this last verse is profound since it exposes the corrupted interpretation of three prime concepts : 1- ‘Sallemmo Tasllemma’ is a command from God to the believers to recognize and believe in His prophet, it is not a command from God for them to send him greetings!!! 2- ‘Salloo Alayhee’ is a command from God to the believers to support His prophet, it is not a command to the believers to go around like parrots repeating ‘Salli ala al Nabi’ without even knowing what it means! 3- To obey the prophet is a command from God to the believers to follow the light (Quran) that He has revealed to His prophet (7:157), it is not a command to follow that which is falsely attributed to the prophet, and called his Sunna, and which was never mentioned in the Quran, not even once! The only Sunna authorized in the Quran is the Sunna of God.

Was Prophet Mohammed Illiterate?
Muslim scholars and the entire Muslim world will tell us that prophet Mohammed was an illiterate man who could not read or write. They tell you this information to make the miracle of the Quran sound even more miraculous disregarding that such statements create some obvious questions: - According to historians, the prophet Mohammed encouraged his followers to learn to read and write and teach others the same so as to spread knowledge throughout the world. How is it that a man who led by example never learnt to read and write himself?. - The Quran was transmitted to us through the prophet Mohammed’s own lips over a period of 23 years. Is it conceivable that the man who was in contact with God’s words and who was careful to have them written down and copied never bothered to learn to read what he was having written?. - The prophet Mohammed was reputed to be a skilful tradesman, having done some successful enterprises for his first wife “Khadija”. Any student of history knows that numbers as we know them weren’t developed until decades after the prophet’s death. All trade was done with letters having numeric values (A=1, B=2, G=3, D=4, H=5, etc..). How could the prophet be a successful trader without knowing the letters?. Although the above questions may seem obvious to any rationale human being, they do not appear so to those who have engulfed themselves in fabricated tales where truth and deception mix. The case that Islamic scholars use to prove that the prophet Mohammed was illiterate is the use of the word “Ummy” in the Quran when referring to the prophet. The scholars have said that “Ummy” means “Illiterate” and that God is the one who supports this story. Let us look at ALL the verses in the Quran which use the word “Ummy”: “…and tell those who have received the scriptures and the Ummien have you submitted? …” (3/20) “And from the people of the scriptures are those whom if you entrust him with an ounce he will return it to you, and those whom if you entrust him with a Dinar he will not return it to you unless you are persistent, that is because they said: We have no obligation to the Ummien, and they say upon God falsehood while they are fully aware“(3/75) “The ones who follow the Ummy messenger prophet whom they find written in their Torah and Gospel…” (7/157) “And from them are Ummien who do not know the scriptures except wishes and they only follow conjecture” (2/78)

“He is the One Who sent to the Ummien a messenger from amongst them…” (62/2) “…believe in God and His messenger the Ummy prophet who believes in God…” (7/158) For the sake of clarity I have kept the word “Ummy” in its original form without translating it so the reader may draw his/her own conclusions. If we, as the Islamic scholars have previously done, use the word “Illiterate”, then we get some strange and non-sensible verses. The Arabs of Mecca were very well known for their strength in poetry and their deep grasp of the Arabic language. These people were neither Jews nor Christians, but they believed that they followed the religion of Abraham. Since the Arab’s were never recipients of any heavenly scripture then they could be correctly described as “Gentiles”, and since the prophet Mohammed was raised from amongst the Arabs then he too was a “Gentile” before receiving the scriptures. Therefore, a more accurate translation of the word "Ummy" would be "Gentile" since a gentile is a term used on any who have not received the scriptures, which is exactly what the Arabs were, and NOT "Illiterate" as people would have us believe.

Did Abraham Tell a Lie?
- Ibrahim broke the Idols and then lied about it, how true is this concept? - He placed the axe on the shoulder of the big idol to shift accountability, right? - Also, he gave false evidence to the priests, right? - Then he blamed the chief idol, you agree? - He recognized the power of the idols - they can work, think, act and quarrel, right? - Ibrahim is such a dishonest prophet! Right?

Lets find out the truth! Ibrahim(pbu) is one of the most prominent prophets of Islam. Allah(swt) addressed him as 'friend'. He is the chief architect to build the original Kaba. The religion Islam inherited so many things directly from him. Many scholars say that he founded the religion Islam in the first place. The very ritual of animal sacrifice at the time of Id-ulAdha is based on the incidence pertaining to Ibrahim(pbu). Most of the rituals of annual Hajj is based on commemorating prophet Ibrahim(pbu). Other than our very own prophet Muhammad(pbuh), he is the only prophet who we Muslims mention in each prayer. We seek to Allah(swt) to bless us as He blessed the followers of prophet Ibrahim(pbu). Ironically, many Muslims derive immense pleasure when they knowingly and unknowingly denigrate such a great prophet. These Muslims derive satisfaction when they claim that this great prophet practiced wrong doings. Due to our sheer ignorance, these Muslims see many of our prophets as cheat, liar, supporter of idolatry, instigator of shirk and guilty of many other crimes.

Did Ibrahim(pbu) tell lies? Most of the Muslims have come to accept that Ibrahim(pbu) used to tell lies. They believe that according to records, he told lies in three major occasions! They gather false or weak Hadith to support their ignorant claims, they gather endorsement by contemporary scholars who also think Ibrahim(pbu) told lies. Most Muslims accept the pronouncement of these scholars on its face value and never question if such a great prophet could ever do such a crime. These Muslims read one or two incorrect translations and think well, the Quran says Ibrahim(pbu) lied. Whereas, in reality the Quran never said that Ibrahim(pbu) lied. It is these scholars of Islam who are acting dishonestly and falsifying the truth. They are suggesting that telling occasional lies are accepted norm of Islam. Prophets did it!!!! The Quran specifically tells in verse 3:161 that no prophet could act dishonesty.

3:161 No prophet could (ever) act dishonestly if any person acts dishonestly he shall, on the Day of judgement, restore what he misappropriated..... (Yusuf Ali's translation) We know the incidence of Idol breaking by prophet Ibrahim(pbu). Time and again we have heard stories of how he broke the idols with an axe, sleazy details of how he placed the axe on the shoulder of a big idol. Then when he was questioned, how he told the audience that he did not break the idols, rather the big idol broke the smaller ones! These scholars invented various sections and sub sections of self made injunctions to declare that under certain circumstances it is permissible to tell lies! You will find lengthy writing by such scholars whereby they justify and mystify Ibrahim's lies. They will argue with you saying how could Ibrahim(pbu) tell the truth in front of the audience who would have killed him if he told the truth! So according to them it was OK when he resorted to falsification for the sake of truth! Will someone answer if he could not tell the truths in front of an audience why was he a prophet in the first place? What kind of a prophet was he who preached falsehood and lies rather than the Truth? Was he preaching Islam mixed with falsehood and lies, because he was afraid of crowds?

Analysis of verse 21:63 Verse 21:63 is the only place in the Quran where the events leading to Ibrahim(pbu) breaking the idols are described. First let us critically analyze the verse and understand the meaning of each of the words in the sentence. Qala: He said Bal: But, of course, by all means, indeed, rather F'alahu: (passive participle) someone did it Kabiruhum: The big one of them Haza: This F'asaalu hum: Ask them, question them In: If Kaanu yantiqun: They can speak, they can talk, It is very important to note that there is a small punctuation mark signifying pause (waqf) in the sentence right after 'Qaala bal f'aalahu'. According to Arabic grammar, the meaning of the punctuation (waqf) is much like comma (,) usage in English. This sign alone or in combination of circle or other word means a very brief pause. The reader may pause here briefly, but is recommended to continue with the sentence. The sign simply demarcates one part of the sentence from the other in bringing out the meaning. If this sign means absolutely nothing, why is it inserted here? Why is the sentence not like another sentence where the sign is not at all there? Obviously, the insertion of the sign bears some significance. Strangely enough, the under-mentioned scholars refuse to pause or

acknowledge the presence of this punctuation mark, rather they want to pause at a different place of their choice.

Samples of Incorrect Translations Here are some examples of famous commentators who became victims of wrong translation. If you do not see names of other familiar commentators of the Qur-an here, most likely they have translated this verse correctly. Al-Hilali & Muhsin Khan: (Abraham) said: "Nay, this one, the biggest of them (idols) did it. Ask them if they can speak!" Yusuf Ali: He said: "Nay, this was done by this The biggest one! Ask them if they can talk." Rashad Khalifa: He said, "It is the big one who did it. Go ask them, if they can speak." J.M. Rodwell: He said: "Nay, that their chief hath done it; but ask ye them, if they can speak." T.B. Irving: He said, "Rather the biggest one of them did it. Ask them if they are able to speak up." Ahmad Ali: "No", he said, "It was done by that chief of theirs. Ask him in case they can speak." Muhammad Sarwar: I think the biggest one of them has broken the smaller ones. Ask them if they are able to speak.

N.J. Dawood: 'No', re replied, 'It was their chief who smote them. Ask them if they can speak.' Muhammad Asad: He answered: "Nay, it was this one, the biggest of them, that did it; but ask them [yourselves] - provided they can speak." Pickthall: He said: But this, their chief hath done it. So question them, if they can speak. Ibrahim did not reply saying "No" When Ibrahim(pbu) was asked whether he broke the idols, his reply was very tactful. Neither did he say 'Yes', nor did he say 'No'. His answer was passive "someone did it." This "someone" could be him, another person or the big idol or just anybody. There was no dearth of truth that someone truly did it. Instead of asking him, he wanted the audience to ask the victims directly. Let the victims testify if they can. The audience realized that these idols that they think as their gods, couldn't even protect themselves! How on earth these idols can be their gods! They realized futility of idol worshipping. Yusuf Ali, Hilali & Khan, Ahmad Ali, Asad, Dawood and Rodwell used the word "No" or "Nay" - to mean that Ibrahim(pbu) flatly denied that he broke the idols. In the Arabic verse 21:63 there is no word that would mean "Nay". So how on earth these commentators found this negation? What are they trying to justify? The verse does not say Ibrahim(pbu) blamed the biggest idol. If he said "No" - that is a lie, if he said the biggest idol broke it, that is another lie. So it is a lie upon a lie. Some commentators made him lie once, some twice. But all of them made him guilty of several other offences in addition to telling lies. How did the scholars commit such a major mistake? The answer is simple: 1st , they ignored the punctuation sign, 2nd, they changed the position of words in the Arabic verse, 3rd, they changed the grammar of the Arabic verse, 4th, or they blindly followed the interpretation of Ibn Kathir et. al., without critically analyzing the verse 5th, and most likely these scholars were influenced by the oft-repeated story of Ibrahim telling lies

All the commentators translated the verse as: Bal haza kabiruhum fa'lahu. According to them the meaning of this transposed verse is: Rather/No, This big one of them did it. This translation is grammatically not correct to the Arabic words. Fa'lahu, a passive participle, does not mean "did it" - rather "someone did it".

Why a wrong interpretation? The wrong interpretation evolved due to a "minor" mistake made by earlier scholars. This small mistake slowly gathered more dirt as time passed by. Ibn-Kathir and some other tafseer understood it in the wrong way. Yusuf Ali, Rodwell and Pickthall understood it that way without applying reasoning. The later day commentators simply followed them blindly. The result is that these contemporary commentators changed the words of Allah! Close attention to the verse 21:63 reveals that there is no word that would mean "No" or "Nay". We all regard Ibn-Kathir as a great commentator of the Quran. However, he was no more than a human being - he was subject to err like any other human being. Contrary to the verse 3:161, the conventional interpretation of the idol-breaking incidence suggest prophets can act dishonestly. It would be wrong to ascribe unquestionable authority on Ibn Kathir It would be wrong to perceive him as infallible. If his commentary goes against teachings of the Quran, we must give importance to the Quran and not his or any other commentary. The Quran does not say Ibrahim(pbu) used an axe to break the idols. He could have broken those fragile idols by hand, by smashing them on the floor or by striking them with any object. Use of an 'axe' was probably invented to bring in some ferocity in the prophet's temper and action. The Quran does not say the infamous 'axe' was placed on the shoulder of the biggest idol. This is another invention of the story-tellers. Benefit of doubt may be given to the use of an 'axe' , but Ibrahim never ever placed the axe on the shoulder of the biggest idol.

Just a Lie? Or More Serious Offence? In order to validate the conventional understanding and one weak (false!) Hadith, should we still accuse Ibrahim(pbu) of false statement? Is this just a lie or is there other serious offence in here? Many people incessantly tried to justify that Ibrahim could tell lies, or it is permissible to tell lies under certain circumstances. The moment we put the word "No" in Ibrahim's(pbu) mouth, we are making him culprit of several other grave offence as under:

1. Ibrahim(pbu) is telling an outright lie. A lie is a lie is a lie. 2. When Ibrahim(pbu) blamed the biggest idol, he is avoiding accountability by blaming a third person (object). 3. When asked if he broke the idols, Ibrahim(pbu) is giving a false deposition in front of the gathering. 4. By admitting that the biggest idol broke the smaller ones, Ibrahim(pbu) is standing a false witness. 5. Ibrahim(pbu) being a staunch critique of idol worshipping, at least at that moment admitted that biggest idol has ability to act and do things that idols cannot do. This is nothing but supporting idolatory. Will any civilized society and nation of past and present accept false witness, false deposition, lies, shifting accountability etc as acceptable practice? Is any of this acceptable practice in Islam? Does Islam teach us these crimes? If you commit any of these crimes, will Allah forgive you? You tell me.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful