-
Al-kitaab 62:2 Being Shariah And Sunnah Coming From It
Quran 3:48- al-kitaab and al-hikmah seem to simply be an explanation of al-taurah and al-injeel- not a separate thing. So in 62:2, the same parallel structure would continue:
3:48
Al-kitaab = al-taurah
Al-hikmah = al-injeel
62:2
Al-kitab = yatlu alayhim ayaatihi
Al-hikmah = yuzakihim
So if the ‘al-kitab’ is just recitation of verses which makes a perfect parallel and logical construction between both ayaat, there would be no indication at all in the Quran of any secondary source of religion called the sunnah. This would mean that even if it comes with ijma and tawattur it would be rejected on the basis of having no foundations in the Quran.
The most one could say under this paradigm would be that salah and hajj were that way from the time of Ibrahim SAWS and the prophet SAWS just said as a recommendation rather than as an imperative religious command to read the fatiha and do the other imperatives of salah.
So why would al-kitaab rather refer to the sunnah of eg salah and hajj in terms of adding new things such as the fatiha or certain utterances when the Quran doesn’t say that you have to read the fatiha?
-
2 Replies
-
Al-kitaab 62:2 Being Shariah And Sunnah Coming From It
updated 3 years, 3 months ago
3 Members
·
2
Replies
-
السلام عليكم
There is no second source of religion, there is only one: the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. Ahmad, almost everything you said assumes the Quran to be the book of God when it is not. It is the last book of God. It assumes (quite rightfully, of course) that its audience is already aware of the background. It still states that the purpose of the divine writs is to resolve disputes between people (and not to originate religion). That is also why these divine writs are described by the word الميزان.
Furthermore, the Quran still says اتبعوا ملة ابراهيم حنيفا. This ملة ابراهيم is what we call Sunnah. You are right, Salah and Hajj have been this way from the time of Ibrahim عليه السلام. But ملة ابراهيم is to incorporate in Salah whatever God has revealed to be incorported in Salah. For this ummah, God has enjoined the incorporation of the فاتحة الكتاب and the Quran and so we recite them according to the injunctions of God.
However, the main issue is considering the Quran to be the source of religion. It is not. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم is. I tried to prove that in your other post (hopefully to some success 😆). Read the Quran and ponder over its style and you will find out that the Quran is not here to teach you religion (as in from the get go). It will not start with: to be a Muslim, you have to declare that you witness that لا اله الله ومحمد الرسول الله and then you have to pray Salah and these are the 5 times of prayers and you can get how to offer them through the messenger we sent to you, contact him for further information and then there is Zakah…معاذ الله. It doesn’t go like that at all. It is not here to give you religion, it is here to settle the matters in which people dispute. Doing that, it reinstates a lot of things to show people what the foundations of religion were and to teach us how to use them to extract guidelines for life. I don’t know whether you’ve seen this video or not but, in my opinion, it is a must watch for every student of religion (the first 30 minutes or so in which Ghamidi Sahab explains that the Quran does not begin the enjoining of anything that is part of the Sunnah):
Check it out and do let me know what you think.
-
“وَ” has several uses in Classical Arabic and has been used in different meanings in both these verses. You cannot draw parallel based on semantic understanding of one verse and apply it on another without giving due regard to the whole sentence structure.
In 62:2, ہُوَ الَّذِیۡ بَعَثَ فِی الۡاُمِّیّٖنَ رَسُوۡلًا مِّنۡہُمۡ یَتۡلُوۡا عَلَیۡہِمۡ اٰیٰتِہٖ وَ یُزَکِّیۡہِمۡ وَ یُعَلِّمُہُمُ الۡکِتٰبَ وَ الۡحِکۡمَۃَ ٭ وَ اِنۡ کَانُوۡا مِنۡ قَبۡلُ لَفِیۡ ضَلٰلٍ مُّبِیۡنٍ
The use of “وَ یُعَلِّمُہُمُ” is stopping that direct parallel to be drawn between these two.
Same verse is being repeated with slight changes in 2:129, 2:151 and 3:164
Look at 2:129:
رَبَّنَا وَ ابۡعَثۡ فِیۡہِمۡ رَسُوۡلًا مِّنۡہُمۡ یَتۡلُوۡا عَلَیۡہِمۡ اٰیٰتِکَ وَ یُعَلِّمُہُمُ الۡکِتٰبَ وَ الۡحِکۡمَۃَ وَ یُزَکِّیۡہِمۡ ؕ اِنَّکَ اَنۡتَ الۡعَزِیۡزُ الۡحَکِیۡمُ
Here “وَ یُزَکِّیۡہِمۡ” has been used with reference to both kitab and Hikmah and hence negating your premise.
Look at 2:151:
کَمَاۤ اَرۡسَلۡنَا فِیۡکُمۡ رَسُوۡلًا مِّنۡکُمۡ یَتۡلُوۡا عَلَیۡکُمۡ اٰیٰتِنَا وَ یُزَکِّیۡکُمۡ وَ یُعَلِّمُکُمُ الۡکِتٰبَ وَ الۡحِکۡمَۃَ وَ یُعَلِّمُکُمۡ مَّا لَمۡ تَکُوۡنُوۡا تَعۡلَمُوۡنَ
Here ” وَ یُعَلِّمُکُمۡ مَّا لَمۡ تَکُوۡنُوۡا تَعۡلَمُوۡنَ” is used with an explanatory “وَ” and the sentence structure also doesn’t allow for a parallel to be drawn in this case either.
Secondly, Quran has gives indications to matters of practicality/actions as being a source of religion and to be followed:
ثُمَّ اَوْحَیْنَآ اِلَیْکَ اَنِ اتَّبِعْ مِلَّۃَ اِبْرٰھِیْمَ حَنِیْفًا، وَ مَا کَانَ مِنَ الْمُشْرِکِیْنَ (16:123)
There are several verses in Quran which talk about sharia of Hajj, Fasting but only where there had been some mistakes or misunderstandings on the part of Quraish to set them straight. Similarly it talks about Zakat and Salah but doesn’t mention anything on how to perform them. Such verses clearly indicate that such ibadah have already been initiated by the Prophet (Sws) and Quran is amending only certain Biddahs or misunderstandings, but is not giving a textbook on how to perform all these ibadah.
For them to be a mere recommendation of Prophet (sws), we need a ‘nas’ for that from the Prophet Himself. Regarding Salah, Fasting, and Zakat, Quran is very clear about their obligatory nature of these ibadah. Regarding other matters of ibadah, we will use the same threshold that we use for Transmission of Quran i.e. ijma and tawatur. If something doesn’t fit the criteria, it will not be accepted as religion.
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
