Коранистите са малка група, която отхвърля хадисите и сунната, която е критично важен компонент в исляма. Те са отхвърлени като вероотстъпници от традиционната група мюсюлмани - сунити и шиити.

Ислямът е Корана

В исляма двете най-големи общности са сунитите (до 90%)[1][2][3][4][5] и шиитите (приблизително 10-20%).[1][6][4][5] Заедно те съставляват почти целия ислям. Въпреки това, има малка група, която е известна като коранисти, или отхвърлящи хадисите. Те отхвърлят Хадисите(устните традиции) и Сунната(примерът) на Мухаммад.

Отхвърлени като вероотстъпници

Според сунити и шиити, хадисите са неразделна част от мюсюлманската вяра. 11ти век андалуският теолог и учен от Малики мазхаба пише:

Сунната е разделена на два вида. Първият е консенсусът, предаван от масите на масите. Това е едно от доказателствата, които не оставят оправдание за отричане и няма разногласия по тях. Който отхвърли този консенсус, е отхвърлил една от текстовите разпоредби на Аллах и е извършил вероотстъпничество. Вторият тип сунна се състои от доклади на установени, надеждни самотни разказвачи с непрекъснати вериги. Конгрегацията на улемите на Общността каза, че този втори тип прави практиката задължителна. Някои от тях казаха, че това прави знанията и практиката задължителни.[7]
Ибн Абд ал-Барр - Джами Байан ал-Илм (2:33)

Според много високопоставени фигури в университета Ал-Азхар, най-уважаваният авторитет в исляма (и който също приема шиитския Фикх като пета школа на ислямската мисъл),[8] Коранистите не са мюсюлмани:

Д-р Юсеф Елбадри, член на Висшето събрание по ислямските въпроси, обвинява коранистите, че имат странна логика, защото разчитат само на целия Коран; докато самият Коран - както той твърди - се нуждае от Сунната. Д-р ЕЛбадри се чуди какво казват коранистите за стихове като: "Който се подчинява на пратеника, се подчинява на Бог?" Д-р Елбадри добави това тези коранисти се заблудиха и трябва да се считат за вероотстъпници.
. . .

Д-р Мохамед Саид Тантауи, шейхът на АЛ-Азхар отговори, казвайки, че онези, които призовават да се разчита само на целия Коран, са невежи и не познават религиозните правила, защото идеите в сунната идват от Бог, но е поставено в думи от пророка (мир на праха му). Освен това Сунна обяснява и изяснява правилата, споменати в целия Коран.
. . .
Д-р Махмуд Ашур, член на Комитета за ислямски изследвания, че Суната наистина е източник на ислямския шериат и че тези, които го отричат, са нелогични, защото е невъзможно да се разбере исляма без Суната. Д-р Ашур подчертава това отричането на сунната струва на коранистите загубата на вярата им. След това той призова за защита на исляма срещу тези коранисти, които планират да унищожат исляма и представляват най-голямата заплаха за исляма и мюсюлманите. Накрая той обвини коранистите, че са шпиони и агенти на други сили, целящи да унищожат исляма отвътре, но Бог ще защити неговата религия, както обеща.
. . .

Д-р Мохамед Абделмонем Елбери, професор в Училището по хадиси и обяснения към университета Ал-Азхар, подчерта, че повечето мюсюлмани винаги са били съгласни относно валидността на сунната, независимо дали е словесната или практическата сунна. „Целият Коран ни нарежда да се подчиняваме на Пратеника тъй като тези, които не го правят, не са истински вярващи,"

Съвременни учени като Джибрил Хадад коментират отстъпническото като цялостното отричане на доказателствеността на сунната според сунитското течение, като пишат „не може да си представим, че човек отхвърля цялата доказателственост на сунната и остава мюсюлманин".[9]

Великият мюфтия на Пакистан също е критикувал коранистите в своите (опровергаващи хадиси), той казва:

Коранът, който те твърдят, че следват, отрича вярата на онзи, който откаже да се подчини на Пратеника (с.а.с.) и не приема неговото решение: „Но не - кълна се в твоя Господ! - те не ще станат вярващи, докато не те сторят съдник за всеки възникнал спор помежду им; после не намират затруднение у себе си относно онова, което си решил и напълно се подчиняват.” [ан-Ниса 4:65 – тълкуване на значението]

Why it is not possible

The Qur'anists have a major dilemma on their hands. Indeed, it is one of the reasons why reforms to Islam are an impossibility. The Qur'an alleges that it is entirely composed of Allah’s commands, not Muhammad’s, yet the Qur'an itself orders Muslims to obey the Messenger.

He who obeys the Messenger, obeys Allah: But if any turn away, We have not sent thee to watch over their (evil deeds).
Коран 4:80

If you do not know what the Messenger had ordered, then this is impossible. The Qur’an also commands Muslims to follow the Messenger’s example, yet the only place this example is established is in the Sunnah. Without the Hadith, you cannot know Muhammad. Without knowing Muhammad, there is no Uswa Hasana. If you doubt the Hadith you are doubting the entirety of Islam. If you reject the hadiths, then you are in-turn rejecting Islam by going against the orders of the Qur'an and are therefore apostate/murtad/kafir (whichever may apply). Ultimately, to remain faithful to Allah and the Qur'an, the hadiths cannot be rejected.

Islam means submission (contrary to popular belief that it means peace), and more specifically it means submission to the will of Allah. What is the will of Allah, one may ask. Qur'an-only Muslims would have us believe that the Qur'an clearly defines what exactly Allah's will is. But this is not the case.

For one thing, the Qur'an is full of contradictory verses and commands; sometimes commanding believers to seek out and kill pagans (Коран 9:5), other times commanding Muslims to leave pagans to practice their polytheistic religions in peace (Коран 109:1-6). Without the Hadith there would be no Abrogation, the Qur'an can then be interpreted in multiple ways. The pacifist can decide to take from it a peaceful message by deliberately ignoring or twisting violent verses whereas the sadist can easily interpret a violent message by focusing on such verses as are found in Surah 9]]. Both Muslims could be selectively justified by the Qur'an because of its contradictory messages from Muhammad-in-Mecca versus Muhammad-in-Medina.

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

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

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

Other verses

(We sent them) with Clear Signs and Books of dark prophecies; and We have sent down unto thee (also) the Message; that thou mayest explain clearly to men what is sent for them, and that they may give thought.
Коран 16:44

The message (Qur'an) is explained and elaborated upon by the Prophet. Preserving the message (Qur'an) also requires preserving the Sunnah which explains the message, as the previous verse states.

Whatever Allah has restored to His Messenger from the people of the towns, it is for Allah and for the Messenger, and for the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the wayfarer, so that it may not be a thing taken by turns among the rich of you, and whatever the Messenger gives you, accept it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep back, and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; surely Allah is severe in retributing (evil)
Коран 59:6

This verse asks Muslims to follow everything Mohammad gives them, and abstain from everything he forbids. That means they are commanded by Allah to follow the Sunnah.

Five Pillars of Islam

The concept "5 pillars in Islam" is practiced and preached widely in the Muslim world and is a crucial part of the Muslim way of life. Yet this concept is not described or defined in the Qur'an in any way. It is only found in the hadith. Looking at the pillars individually, four out of five of Islam’s Pillars would not make any sense without the Hadith, therefore making Islam impossible to practice.

Shahadah

Allah’s Apostle said: “Islam is based on (the following) five (principles):
1. To testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle.”

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

Salah

“2. To offer the (compulsory congregational) prayers dutifully and perfectly.”

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

Zakat

“3. To pay Zakat.”

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

Hajj

“4. To perform Hajj.”

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

Sawm

“5. To observe fast during the month of Ramadan.”

Sawm, the final pillar of Islam is also not described in the Qur'an, the “perfect, detailed, and final revelation to mankind”. Though the Qur'an describes the fast, without the Hadith, Muslims wouldn’t know why Ramadan was so special to them. The accounts of the meaning of Ramadan are in the Traditions, initially chronicled by Ishaq and then copied by Bukhari, Muslim, and Tabari.

Strangely, the one pillar that is actually described in the Qur'an, is actually a borrowed pagan ritual Qusayy invented pre-dating Muhammad's Islam. Qusayy's family took a cut on merchandise sold during the “truce of the gods” fairs of Ramadhan.

See Also

External Links

Links from Muslims

References