8th Aralık 2008



The issue about women has had the most additions to the established religion. Women were lowered to the level of a slave, of a servant employed in household affairs and a sex instrument at the disposal of her husband, justified in the light of concocted hadiths and sectarian interpretations and viewpoints. The majority of the fair sex, unable to make any distinction between what is truly revealed and what is fabricated, continued to trudge along the path designated by men who went on preaching the words reported to have been told by the Prophet to the effect that paradise lay under the feet of mothers. We shall presently see how sincere their approach to womankind has been.




















The basic target has been to render a woman a slave of her husband, making her unconditionally loyal to him. Subservience to one’s husband was considered to be a devotional act.

Were I to ordain prostration to human beings I would have decreed that women should prostrate themselves before their husbands because of the debt they owe them. (Tirmizi, Rada, Abu Davud, Nikah, Ahmad bin Hanbal, Musnad, Ibn Maja, Nikah)

Even though her husband’s body be smeared from head to foot with pus and the wife cleans it by licking him, yet her debt to him would still remain unsettled. (Ibn Hajar al Haytami, Ahmad bin Hanbal, Musnad)

O women! Were you ever to realize the debt you owe your husbands you would not hesitate to wipe the dust off their feet by rubbing your cheeks on them. (Hafýz Zahabi, Great Sins)

Women’s devotion and intellect are defective. (Sahihi Bukhari)

You curse much and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have seen no creatures lacking in intelligence and devotion except you who can tempt man. (Muslim, Iman, Ibn Maja, Fiten)

The mentality that makes a woman captive of her man makes her destined for hell and defective in devotional attitude, conflicting thereby with the explicit remarks contrary to the Quran.

A good woman is like a magpie among one hundred crows.
(Sahihi Bukhari )

O womankind! Give alms and repent. I have observed that the majority of the inmates of hell consist of women.
(Muslim, Iman, Ibn Maja, Fiten)


In addition to the hadiths that condemn her, the admission of woman to paradise depends on her husband’s satisfaction and approval.

If a woman dies, she may go to paradise if her husband happens to be satisfied with her. (Riyazus Salihin)

The laudable woman is she who endures her husband’s frivolities and occasional unfaithfulness, thanks to which she will be admitted to paradise. (Religious Information for Women)

Such observations often encountered in the books of Muslim, Bukhari, Týrmizi, Muvatta and Shiite sources, have their roots from the periods of the Omayyads and Abbasids. No such vilification of woman exists in the Quran. The eligibility for heaven according to the Quran depends on the devotion exhibited by a person regardless of the sex involved.

49/13 – O people! We created you from a single pair of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may recognize one another. The best among you in the sight of God is the most righteous.
49 The Rooms, 13

As we can see, the Quran makes no distinction between nations, tribes and sexes. Yet, woman has been considered as an instrument likely to lead a man to hell.

There are four things that invalidate a man’s prayer: a black dog, a donkey, a pig and a woman. (Sahihi Muslim, Salat, Tirmizi Salat, Abu Davud, Salat)

There are three things that are inauspicious: a woman, a house and a horse. (Abu Davud, Týb, Muslim, Salam, Bukhari, Nikah)



Imam Sharani and Imam Ghazzali, two of the foremost representatives of the mentality that sees women as inauspicious, agents who invalidate one’s prayer, have bequeathed the following mine of information to future generations.

A man may have lost his teeth and become ugly while his wife happens to be young and very beautiful. It is possible that such a woman, who may have gone out to the market or to other places where she may have been invited, sees handsome men and upon her return home is reluctant to be responsive to her husband’s amorous advances. This is the result of the visit of a woman to markets and social gatherings to say the least. (Imam Sharani,Ubudul Kubra)

May God’s curse be upon those whose profession is tattooing and who have their bodies tattooed, and upon those who have the hair on their cheeks removed and their teeth re-fashioned. (Sahihi Bukhari)

Those who wear wigs, pluck their eyebrows, make or have tattoos on their bodies are cursed. (Abu Davud, Tarajul)

If a woman wears a wig, has her arms and face tattooed or uses beauty spots or has her face and eyebrows plucked by tweezers and changes her appearance, she is cursed. (Imam Sharani, Ubudul-Kubra)

According to a hadith the companions and disciples of the Prophet had the shutters of the house tightly closed to prevent their wives from seeing men passing by and used to beat those who peered outside. (Imam Ghazzali- Ihya u Ulumiddin)

See that your women remain somewhat hungry without going too far, and deprive them of beautiful apparel. For if they have their bellies full and are dolled up, they are sure to be tempted by outside attractions. Whereas, if they are somewhat hungry and not so well dressed, they will stay at home. (Ibnul Jawzi, Mawzuat, Suyuti, Leali, Ibn Arrak, Tanzihushsharia)

Don’t let your women put on smart dresses, since if they are dolled up, their hearts will leave home. (Imam Ghazzali- Kimyayý Saadet, Ibn Abi Shayha, Musannaf)

A woman who has to go out shall abide by the following principles once she has obtained the consent of her husband:

1- To be dressed dowdily,
2- To behave as if she is not actually out.
3- To bow her head and be careful not to look at the face of strangers.
4- To avoid crowds.
5- To avoid places frequented by men.
6- To prefer deserted side-streets.
7- To finish her work quickly and return home.
(Imam Ghazzali, Ihyayý Ulumiddin)


Those, who through such absurd injunctions, tried to project their jealousies over others and transformed them into religious commands , gave Islam an area open to attacks. Here are a few more remarks about women, decreed by Imam Ghazzali:

A woman has seven properties:

1- She is like an ape with her strong desire to get all dressed up;
2- She is like a dog as she is loath to be poor;
3- She is like a snake because of her overbearing pride both to her husband and to others;
4- She is like a rat when she sells household goods;
5- She is like a scorpion as she is a backbiter;
6- She is like a fox as she sets up traps for men;
7- She is like a sheep as she obeys her husband. (
Imam Ghazzali, Ihyayý Ulumuddin)

The ideal woman is the one of the sheepish kind! The woman deprived of all freedom is not even allowed to go on pilgrimage. The woman is not allowed to go a distance of more than 90 km (55 miles) without the accompaniment of her next of male kin (father, uncle, brother, husband). Under the circumstances a woman who cannot persuade a next of kin to accompany her cannot even fulfill her binding duty of hajj. God has made no distinction of sex in this binding duty. A woman’s performing her prayer in the mosque came to be prohibited by fabricated hadiths since she would then have to go out. Thus a woman’s prayer at home is indicated to be more meritorious than the prayer she would have performed in the mosque.

9/71 – The believing, men and women, are allies of one another.
9 Repentance, 71

How do they expect that the man and the woman will establish this alliance, given the fact that even their speaking to each other is forbidden? The continuation of the verse mentions that those who will bring about this alliance will be rewarded by God’s mercy. If the said mercy has been withheld in communities alleging to be Muslims, it may be due to their disobedience in this respect.

Among the Hanafis even the voice of the woman must be hushed so that the man may not listen to it. (Fýkhus Siyra)

You are allowed to speak only with your mahrem (husband, father, nephew…). (Ibn Kathir)



With the segregation of men and women, women became isolated, and were not allowed to have male friends, so much so, in fact, that even conversations between women were to be conducted in whispers to prevent men from hearing their voices. However, in case of an emergency, a woman was allowed to address men only if she had filled her mouth with pebbles.

She was not allowed to perform her prayer when menstruating, nor could she read the Quran or keep the fast during her period. The Quran merely mentions that one should not have sexual intercourse with a menstruating woman. If God had desired that she should not recite the Quran or keep the fast, He certainly would have made it explicit.

2/22 – They ask you about menstruation. Say: “It is harmful. So keep away from women during menstruation, and do not approach them until they are relieved of it.” (2 The Cow, 222)

As we can see, the Quran gives every detail that a person requires. Yet, women’s acts have been restricted by segregating them, by preventing them from performing the Friday prayer. The restrictions imposed on them, which do not exist in the Quran, are considered abominations. The concoctions went as far as fabricating hadiths that declared anyone complying with a woman’s word would perish. Such an idea is utterly against the philosophy of the Quran.

Do not take counsel from women; oppose them, for opposition to womankind brings prosperity. (Suyuti, Leali, Ibn Arrak, Tanzihush Sharia)

Whoever obeys his wife, God will throw him into hell.
(Ibn Arrak II, 215)


There is nothing in the Quran to suggest that certain offices are prohibited to women; consequently, they may rise to the position of president, caliph, judge, imam or muezzin (caller to prayer). Everything is permitted unless explicitly prohibited by the Quran. Freedom is the principle while prohibition is an exception; moreover if there are any exceptions, they are explicitly stated in the verses of the Quran. Thus, there are no obstacles for women who desire to attain the above positions.

A community headed by a woman is a doomed community.
(Ibn Hanbal Musnad, Tirmizi-Fitan Nesai- Kudat, Bukhari Fiten)

The opponents of Aisha, the Prophet’s wife, who had taken command of the situation during the Jamal incident, must have concocted this fabricated hadith. Süleyman Ateþ makes the following comment: “The hadith in question must be alluding to Aisha. However, had the Prophet said something like it, Aisha would not have been given the mission in question, and Talha and Zubayra would not have tolerated this. The authenticity of this hadith that contradicts the Quran is dubious” (Süleyman Ateþ, Commentary of the Quran).

Those who invent hadiths to support their own political views also ignore the description of the Queen of Sheba. Verses 22 and 44 of Sura The Ant mention the community ruled by a woman. We observe her described as an intelligent and wise woman prudent in that she does not take risks in exposing her community to precarious situations. There is not a single suggestion in the Quran to the effect that a woman cannot be a ruler.

Don’t teach women how to read or write. Let them be trained in sewing and see that they recite the Sura The Light.
(Ibnul Jawzi-Mawzuat)


If a man calls his wife to bed and the wife refuses, the angels curse her till the early hours of the morning. (Bukhari)

The men worried about being refused fabricated this hadith that alluded to the Prophet. Women deprived of their right to divorce came thus under men’s oppression.

If a woman obtains a divorce, she will not savor the scent of heaven.
(Religious Information for Women)

In the Quran expressions like ‘Divorced Women’ (see 2 The Cow, 228-241) may have both meanings: namely, a woman who has obtained a divorce or one who has been divorced. Considering that there is no explicit prescription in the Quran making the act of divorce exclusive to men, women should, in principle, enjoy the same right.

Another hadith says:

God will not answer the prayer of a woman who dabs on perfume before entering the mosque, unless she goes home and cleanses herself by total ritual ablution of her body. (Avnul Mabul)

Men putting on perfume is commendable while women doing so are stamped with having committed a sinful act. The rationale is that men are aroused by beautiful scents. The fact that women may also feel the same sensation does not occur to them. Furthermore, why was this not foreseen in the Quran?

Unless the place where a woman had been sitting cools off, it must not be occupied by a man. (Religious Information for Women)

This hadith generates many complications in modern urban life as one can readily see.



It all begins in the stories about Adam and Eve. Nowhere in the Quran do we come across anything about the temptation of Adam by Eve. If we read inbetween the lines of 7 The Purgatory, 11 and 28, we can see that both Adam and Eve had been tempted by Satan. Moreover, the legend that Eve had been created from Adam’s rib is not mentioned anywhere in the Quran.

Another unjustified claim often made about the Quran is that it addresses men solely. Ninety percent of the verses address both sexes. There are also verses that address only men or women. Anyone who seriously reads the Quran will see that the Quran addresses the general public and not a single sex.

33/35 – For Muslim men and women; for believing men and women, for devout men and women, for men and women who are patient and constant, for men and women who humble themselves, for men and women who give in charity, for men and women who fast, for men and women who remember God a great deal, for them has been prepared forgiveness and great rewards. 33 The Parties, 35

Although the greater part of the Quran addresses the general public, there are also verses that address women and men separately.



One must be reminded of the fact that Islam extends over a great space of time and embraces a vast portion of the earth’s geography that enjoys varying climates. There are communities of people ranging from the smallest of tribes to the greatest of empires, dealing in such a wide range of activities so that agricultural pursuits alternate with industrial ventures in diverse social and political milieus and cultural backgrounds, of different customs. The universality of the Quran befitting every situation, differing customs, conditions and milieus has been achieved thanks to the vastness of its latitude. So far we have covered the attempts at the creation and the perpetuation of an ‘Arabic Islam’ in which the turban, the robe with long sleeves reaching down to the ankles and the wearing of a beard were some of the conspicuous characteristics; these attempts had untoward effects on the spread of Islam. The elbowroom that the Quran has conceded to mankind allows the people of different cultural backgrounds to wear their customary apparel. The same holds true for polygamy. Polygamy is not prohibited in the Quran; however, it is not especially promoted and encouraged.

Different cultural backgrounds had different practices. In communities where a great many of the male population died in battle and the balance between the male and female population was disrupted, polygamy had become indispensable. In agricultural societies where crowded families wielded immense power, polygamy had been the solution to lighten the burden of women in household affairs, and there were times when the wives went to look for consorts for their husbands. In Islam, the intention to marry is expressed by both sides and the woman does enjoy the right to divorce her husband. In other words, in cases where there are matrimonial disputes in a family, the wife is free, according to the Quran, to ask for a divorce. The so-called prohibition for the woman to have recourse to divorce, or the supremacy of the decision of her family on that issue has nothing to do with the Quran, but are merely traditional practices. Polygamy was not only a product of Eastern cultural background since it has also found favor in the West under certain conditions. In the wake of the two world wars such a solution was sought, and an article that appeared in the Daily Mail had suggested polygamy as the only solution on the grounds that there had been a considerable rise in the female population. In 1949 the people in Bonn, to be precise, women’s associations, had applied to the authorities concerned demanding that the institution of polygamy be incorporated into the constitution. The European authoress Annie Besant, who made an assessment of the plight of the Western post-war cultural and social situation, writes as follows: “Monogamy no longer exists in the West. What prevails at present is an irresponsible state of polygamy. When a man has had enough of his mistress, he abandons her, after which the abandoned woman gradually falls prey to the state of a prostitute. Her plight is much worse than the state of the woman who happens to be one of the wives of a single husband. If we take into consideration this state of affairs, we must own that we Westerners are far from being justified in condemning the institution of polygamy. Rather than being defiled, seeking a refuge, deprived of all affection and care, abandoned with her illegitimate children, dispossessed of all rights of inheritance and submitting in servility to the pleasure of any chance encounter, to enjoy the honor of being one of the lawful wives of a man and live in his household is far better.”



As we have already pointed out, polygamy is not an obligation; it is left to the husband’s discretion, although in certain communities it is even encouraged by the female spouse. The Quran prohibits solely the consumption of dead animals, blood, pork, and, last but not least, animals slaughtered in the name of some being other than God. All other edible material is allowed. For instance, dog meat is a favorite dish in China. The ways and manners differ according to the geographical and social status of a community. However, what is considered to be lawful should not be interpreted as a devotional act. This important point has often been misconceived by the communities whose ways differ from each other. So long as the Quran has not explicitly stated that a given thing or act is prohibited, the said thing or act is lawful; it is not against Islam. For instance, going to a wedding party in Hawaii wearing shorts, painting one’s face with various colors like American Indians, belching or passing gas may be deemed normal in certain cultures. Muslims living among these communities may live up to their standards without being accused of non-compliance. The Quran is neutral in this respect. The Quran speaks neither in favor of nor against such acts. Just as it is irrelevant to attribute to the religion such injunctions as “Islam commands you to eat dog meat,” or “Islam commands you to go to a wedding party in shorts,” it is equally irrelevant to say “Polygamy is sanctioned by Islam.” The act favored and ordered by Islam and the act that is free just because it is not forbidden are two different things.

Under normal conditions in peacetime, we observe a quasi equality between the male and female populations. This is a sign that polygamy is an exception. The Quran states that monogamy should be observed if a husband is not sure of being partial to any one of his wives.

4/3 – But if you fear you cannot treat them with equality, marry only one. 4 The Women, 3

Polygamy is foreseen in the Quran. However, it is neither recommended nor forbidden. Man is free to choose. He may or may not take more than one wife. The Quran addresses, as we have mentioned at the beginning of the present book, mankind, people with different cultures, in different periods of history, in time of peace and of war, the agricultural and industrial communities, the big states as well as the small insular inhabitants. The Islam preached in the Quran is not exclusive to a single civilization, a single industrial community, a single place where peace reigns. The Omayyads and Abbasids contrived to introduce foreign elements into Islam and succeeded to implant their local tribal customs as if they were dictates of Islam (like growing a beard, wearing a robe with full sleeves and long skirts, wearing a turban and living a polygamous life) since there was nothing against such practices. Today one is free to shave and wear trousers, wear a necktie and prefer monogamy without offending Islam in any way whatsoever. In these there is nothing offensive against Islam. On the other hand, recognizing the uniqueness of God, helping the poor, keeping the fast are the prescriptions of the Quran and were part of the injunctions that both the Omayyads and Abbasids had had to observe, and require contemporary Muslims and the future Muslim generations to abide by them.



The wives of the Prophet and the stories about them are not mentioned in the Quran. The story of the Prophet’s marriage with a nine year old girl is again a fabrication of the hadiths. 99% of the stories told about the Prophet’s wives have their origin in the hadiths. They may be correct or not. One fact is certain though; they are not reliable.

33/52 – No other women are lawful for you after this. 33 The Parties, 52

Prior to the revelation of this verse, what had been lawful for the public at large was also lawful for the Prophet. This verse, however, introduced a restraint for the Prophet, a restraint not applicable to other men. The wives of the Prophet, like all other women, married him by their own free will. The Prophet, following the customs of the time, contracted marriages without infringing on the injunctions of the Quran. Whatever we are supposed to know is there in the Quran. Any further concern by us is irrelevant. The message of the Quran revealed to the Prophet is the religion transmitted to us through him. The private life of the Prophet may be evaluated by going back to the times and conditions that prevailed in his era. We are not in a position to pass judgment by having recorded reported hadiths. In point of fact, one of the useless and vain discussions on the issue has been the result of the servile obedience and unshakeable acceptance of the fabricated hadiths.



Nowhere in the Quran is it mentioned that two women are equivalent to one man as a witness. For instance, the testimony of four witnesses is required to prove adultery, and in the Quran no discrimination is made between male and female witnesses, only the number of witnesses is mentioned. However, there is a misunderstood instance described in Sura The Cow, 282, related to time loans. According to this verse, the loan received must be evidenced by a written document, and the presence of witnesses during its execution is required. This is a commercial contract that should not harm the scribe or the witnesses. It is a well-known fact that when material interests are at play, people are reluctant to give testimony. The Quran charges this heavy duty to two men. Take note that only two men are mentioned. A phrase such as ‘or four women’ does not appear. Thus, a woman who rarely deals in commercial affairs, and is weaker in the face of likely pressures and oppressions is protected. Should two men be unavailable and only one is accessible, then the required number would be one man and two women. In this way, the obligation to bear testimony is realized, and should an untoward situation occur later, an encounter between a man and a woman is avoided. Let us assume that a dispute arose about the amount of the loan. The woman, who will have to face one man failing to agree on the amount in question, cannot avoid experiencing stress and pressure. Whereas if there are two women in the picture, they can put up a bold face against the man and the ill-intentioned witnesses will be in a difficulty to put pressure on the women. This practice, which protects women from undue pressure, has been wrongly interpreted and made a generality of this particular case. Except for this particular instance, there is no other discrimination elsewhere in the Quran. Had this been a general principle, God would have made it explicit simply by stating that the testimony of one male witness corresponds to the testimony of two female witnesses.

We have to take note of the statement that runs: “Do not injure either the scribe or the witness. Otherwise you risk swerving from the right path.” The pressure both the witness and the scribe labor under may be imagined and the rationale of the verse can be better understood.


One other verse misinterpreted happens to be Verse 34 of Sura The Women. We would like to quote here from two authors. “This verse does not allude to the incontestable superiority of man,” says Yaþar Nuri Öztürk. “The reference is made to the difference between men’s and women’s respective constitutions. Yet, most of the commentators that have had recourse to willful misinterpretation of the Quranic verses to serve their own ends explained away the expression ‘qawwam’ mentioned in the Quran to mean overlordship, justifying in this way man’s despotism. The term ‘fadribu’ mentioned in the Quran has been reduced to having a single meaning while it actually has more than one. Approaches that aimed to vilify woman in every instance could not have done otherwise. ‘Fadribu,’ having as its root darb has more than 30 meanings, of which the most important are ‘to strike,’ ‘to beat,’ ‘to exit,’ ‘to go out,’ ‘to take a walk’ (see Ibn Mansur, Lisan ul Arab, under the entry for darb). Under the circumstances, ‘fadribu’ may assume the following meanings: 1- To send out; 2- To force out from somewhere; 3- To beat. The first two are certainly more rational and compatible with human psychology and law.” Edip Yüksel’s comment on this misinterpretation is as follows: “While the words ‘errijalu kavvamune alennisai’ should be interpreted as ‘men watch over women’ or ‘men are responsible for women’s upkeep,’ all the commentaries in Turkish that I have come across have interpreted it to assume the meaning of sovereignty over women. Why do our commentaries attach such discordant meanings as “master, lord” to the Arabic word ‘qawwam’ instead of attaching to it meanings like “watching over, sustaining, maintaining.” The root of the word ‘qawwam,’ is ‘qwm.’ You may go over all the verses where the derivatives of this root are used, and you will fail to find an expression meaning overlord or master. When the expression ‘badehum’ in the verse in question is addressed only to men using the pronoun hum, the meaning that comes out will be ‘Some men are superior to other men.’ However, this meaning is at odds with the context. On the other hand, if the pronoun hum is addressed to a mixed group of men and women, then we have ‘God has made some men and some women superior to other men and women.’ Another acceptable rendering would be ‘God endowed everyone with different merits and characteristics.’ The word ‘idribuhanna’ in Sura The Women has been translated as ‘beat those women.’ Before dwelling on this particular expression, I should like to bring to your attention an assessment of the matrimonial relations in the Quran. The following is said in 30 The Romans, 21: ‘And among His signs is this, that He created for you mates from among yourselves, that you may dwell in tranquility with them, and He has put love and mercy between you. Verily in that are signs for those who think.’ Thus, the objective in marriage is love and mercy. The word ‘daraba’ in Arabic has an infinite number of meanings; namely: to mint, to go on strike, to beat, to hold, to play. For instance the word ‘idrib’ means to go out. The Arabic-speaking people in North Africa still use this word in this sense. While looking for the exact meaning of a word in a given context we must be fastidious and use our common sense. For example if ‘daraba’ mentioned in 13 The Thunder, 17 had been translated as ’to beat’ instead of ’to explain,’ an absurd meaning would come out of it and the result would be ‘God beats truth and falsehood in this way.’ On the other hand, the word ‘nushuz’ in Verse 34 of Sura The Women has been translated as a disobedient, brawling woman. The word actually has a wider range of significance covering such meanings as flirting, licentiousness, illicit sexual relations. As a matter of fact when we inquire into its meaning in the given context, the second meaning seems to be more appropriate. Verse 34 of Sura The Women teaches the husband how to treat his unfaithful wife. It falls upon the husband to admonish his wife in the first place. If the woman continues to flirt with others, the husband will separate their bed. And if even this does not help and the woman begins to enter into adulterous relationships, then the husband will send her out. To beat a woman that infringes on the marriage contract would not be a solution. To part with her should be the solution even if this be painful.



In the distribution of the estate, money etc. of a deceased person, the written will takes precedence. The fundamentalist Islamist dared to modify this explicit statement of the Quran and asserted the principle “No will has been foreseen for inheritors.” According to the Quran, the will takes precedence, followed by the debts of the deceased. In 5 The Feast, 106 and 2 The Cow, 180, we can observe the advice given regarding the execution of the will. On the other hand, in 4 The Women, 11-12 it is ordained that the sharing of inheritance takes place after settling the provisions foreseen in the will and the outstanding debts. While studying inheritance falling to the shares of men and women within the general framework of the Quran, we should do well to understand the flow of money and economic relations involved in the Quran. According to the Quran, during the enactment of the marriage contract, a man gives a certain sum of money (either in cash, gold etc.). (This money is given to the wife and not to her parents.) As the sum in question has not been determined, the woman who will be abandoning her home and may become destitute may also ask to be given a home or a car, etc. If they mutually agree on the consideration, the marriage contract takes effect. In case the woman’s own wealth is enough to support her, she may opt for a ring or a gift of some sort. The Quran ordains that this consideration be duly given. However, the consideration in question must be agreed upon by both parties. Moreover, the man assumes the responsibility to take charge of the support of his wife and offspring. In the case of a divorce, the support of the children and, if the mother is nursing her child, the upkeep of the female spouse also falls to the man. Thus the woman receives not only the consideration agreed upon, but also the allowance to support herself and her children. In case the widow’s assets are not sufficient to support her, then every god-fearing believer has the charge of contributing to her living (2 The Cow, 241). As one can readily see, the money of the man charged with many responsibilities is continually divided. And God has apportioned for the male child an inheritance twice as much as He has dispensed for the female child (4 The Women 11). Details of inheritance can be seen in Verses 11, 12, and 176 of The Women (both parents inherit one sixth of the estate in equal shares).

Now, other considerations may be brought forth in our day stating that there are women who earn a living nowadays, some are even wealthy, etc. Let us remember that the first principle is what is bequeathed in the will.



4/32 – You shall not covet the equalities bestowed upon each other by God. Men have a share in what they earn, and women have theirs in what they earn. 4 The Women, 32

We can see that both men and women have their respective superiorities, neither of them being superior to the other in an absolute sense. To say that man is superior to woman in every respect or to claim an absolute equality between the sexes is irrational. 2 The Cow, 32 beautifully indicates the mutually complementary character of the sexes. “For God well knows what He has created.” Omniscient God has arranged everything according to His perfect order. This order has been secured, sometimes by the imposition of a provision and sometimes by the purposeful absence of it. The adaptability of the provisions of the Quran according to the time, the culture and the community owes its unity to the prevailing conditions to this flexibility. The traditionalist mentality that has failed to conceive this miraculous approach of the Quran has had the audacity to impose restrictions absent in the Quran.




4/124 – If any do deeds of righteousness, be they male or female, while believing, they will enter heaven and not the least injustice will be done to them. 4 The Women, 124

16/97 – Whosoever works righteousness, whether man or woman, while believing, we will surely grant them a happy life in this world, and we will surely pay them their recompense for their righteous works.
16 The Ant, 97

The real life according to the Quran is the life of the hereafter. The life of this world is but a short journey whose ultimate end is the life hereafter. The superiority among human beings is achieved by good deeds and no distinction or discrimination is made in favor of the male population as compared to the female population.


posted in ENGLISH ISLAM | 0 Comments

8th Aralık 2008



In Chapter 2 of this book we saw that the Quran was a self-sufficient source for Islam and that there was no need for any additional source. In this chapter we shall be studying the way the hadiths were collected and assembled. The hadiths were not dictated by the Prophet and were not intended to be shaped into book form. Consequently, it cannot constitute a companion volume to the Quran. With reference to their self-contradictory and illogical character, and their inconsistency with the Quran, we shall refer you to Chapters 6, 7 and 8.
















The literal meaning of hadith is ‘word.’ It means primarily a communication or narrative in general whether religious or not, and it has the particular meaning of a record of actions or sayings of the Prophet and his companions; while the word Sunna means ‘path followed, trodden path, custom.’ According to the usual explanation, Muhammad’s sunna comprises his deeds and sayings as well as his unspoken approval. (For the use of the concept of sunna, see Chapter 16.) The sunna that the Quran refers to will also be examined in this chapter. The words hadith and sunna are often used interchangeably in nearly all publications since patterns of behavior are expressed in words. For instance, Dr. Subbi es Salih, from the University of Lebanon, explains this in the following manner: “The experts on traditions have acknowledged that hadith and sunna have been interchangeably used in books. Both concepts refer to a word, an act, a statement or an attribute of the Prophet.” This is also applicable to the present book.

We propose to go back to the days of the Prophet before starting to examine the hadiths and return to our own day. The hadith scholars themselves admit that the Prophet did not allow scribes to take down his sayings. Two authoritative books on hadiths, Muslim and Musnad by Ýbni Hanbal, founder of the Hanbali religious sect, make the following comment: “Take down nothing other than the verses revealed. Anyone that may have written any of my sayings, let him destroy it” (Muslim, Sahih-i Muslim Kitab-ý Zühd, Hanbal, Musnad). The hadith quoted by Darimi is as follows: “The companions of the Prophet asked him permission to take down his sayings. They were refused” (Darimi, es-Sunen). The hadith transmitted by Alm Hatib is as follows: “While we were engrossed copying the hadiths, the Prophet came and asked what we were doing. We are copying your sayings, we replied. Is your intention to create a book other than God’s Book? People that preceded you swerved from the straight path because they dared write books other than God’s Book” (Al Hatib, Takyid). And Tirmizi had this to say: “We asked permission to copy the sayings of God’s messenger, but he refused to give it” (Tirmizi, es-Sünen, K. Ilm).

In books on hadiths and in books claiming to be the source of the established religion, it is explicitly acknowledged that the Prophet had prohibited the copying of his sayings, and the reason was to prevent the mixing up of the verses of the Quran with his own sayings. According to the traditionalists, the hadiths should have as much authority as the Quran; they are suggested to be the source of religion as much as the Quran. If this is so, in fact, how come then the Prophet prohibited the copying of his sayings? Why did he tolerate gaps that were likely to occur in the revealed religion, the adulteration of his sayings during the process of their transcription, or the omission of his words? The Quran speaks of copying with the use of pen, of committing to paper one’s will and debts owed. This being the case, is it possible that the Prophet should prohibit the transcription of his sayings were they to be considered another source of Islam? Had he forestalled the copying of a source of religion, wouldn’t he have been instrumental in causing Islam to remain incomplete? As we shall be seeing in the forthcoming pages, the number of contrived traditions is considerable. Had the hadiths constituted another source of Islam, the Prophet would certainly have dictated them and spared the interpolation of an infinite number of sayings reported to have been uttered by him. As far as the source of Islam is concerned, we well know that the Quran is self-sufficient. The first person who was aware of this fact was the Prophet himself. Committing traditions to paper was far from being his wish. The Prophet, who was well advised in every respect, had banned the copying of his sayings as he knew that the human character was inclined to idolize prophets and was liable to sow dissension. Today, we are in a position to appreciate once more the foresight of the Prophet. The very fact that he had forbidden the transmission of his sayings is enough to convince those who are wary.



Ahmed Emin draws the following chart to represent the garbling of traditions transmitted: “Were we to make an expository display of the hadiths, we would be confronted with a pyramid, the summit illustrating the period of God’s messenger. As we go down we observe the gradual expansion toward the base. Yet, the ideal should have been the reverse; for, the companions of the Prophet best knew what the Prophet uttered. As they were to pass away, the number of those who knew the words uttered by the Prophet would decrease and the pyramid would have changed its position and turned upside down. Yet, we observe that the number of hadiths is even greater under the Omayyads than during the lifetime of the Prophet” (Ahmed Emin, Duhaul Islam). According to some scholars there are over two million hadiths. Two of the most reliable books on hadiths are the one of Bukhari and the one of Muslim. The hadiths contained in the former are reported to have been selected from among 600,000 and in the latter this number is 300,000. The one of Davud contains hadiths selected from among 500,000, the one of Malik Muvatta, founder of a religious sect, contains hadiths selected from among 100,000 and the one of Musnad contains hadiths selected from among 750,000. Given the fact that the prophethood of the Prophet lasted for about 23 years, the number of days he would have acted as prophet would have been 23 x 365 = 8395. If two million is the number representing the totality of the hadiths, the number of hadiths per day would be 200. The result to be obtained after 200 years after the death of the Prophet would be inconceivably misleading. It is alleged that the authors of hadiths used to know them by heart and that they had selected from among them those that had appeared the most reliable to them. In order to declare the exact number of hadiths that someone had in store, he should have written them somewhere and counted; whereas no one can possibly assert that he has in his repertory 600,000 hadiths.



Supposing for an instant that the claim was admitted, the situation would be even more frightful. Muslim declares that he has not included in his book every one of the hadiths alleged to be authentic (Muslim). According to his argument the hadiths are a source of Islam; yet, he leaves out some, though acknowledged to be genuine. According to this logic, Islam would be riddled with loopholes. Given that we cannot be sure of the fact that a hadith left out by Muslim is not omitted by another compiler, this account of traditionalist logic declares itself to be incomplete. Bukhari who announced that the hadiths are a source for Islam, included in his book only 6000-7000 hadiths although he had in his store 600,000, i.e. 1%. The rest, 99% of the whole, did not gain admission, either because he deemed them not trustworthy or irrelevant. Had the hadiths been a source of Islam, we would have been at the mercy of Bukhari and his skill of selection. Had the hadiths been useful, assuming that the 99% left out did not include what was essential, the mentality of those who acknowledge the hadiths to be a source of Islam would have to admit the fact the Islam would irretrievably be lacking in many respects. Given the fact that Bukhari is no more and that there is no one who claims that he has in store the said 99% of the hadiths that Bukhari asserted to have in his repertory which he did not commit to paper or transmit through other means, we should have been considered members of a patchy religion.

Let us try to make an assessment of the 600,000 hadiths in Bukhari’s bundle. Let us assume that Bukhari had nothing else to do in life except deal with hadiths; that he did not sleep, that every one of the hadiths was authentic and that he spared two hours to check whether a particular hadith was authentic or not, testing the dependability of the transmitters chain. The space of time in question would be 130 years. If we consider that there were instances of checking the authenticity of a given hadith by setting off on a journey that sometimes took days, Bukhari’s carrying out this test would take thousands of years. In brief, we can safely assert that Bukhari’s testing the authenticity of the hadiths and his sorting them out is illogical.

The Quran is an established text. We cannot say the same thing for the hadiths. There is no end to unconfirmed reports. As no established text existed, the compilation of hadiths was liable to be mixed with alien elements. We must be grateful to God Who has not put us in a condition in which we would be in need of a source another than the Quran. And thanks to Him we are now the members of a perfect religion. We must divest ourselves from every element alien to Islam, getting rid of hadiths that sow dissension and of hadiths unjustifiably attributed to the Prophet, claiming predominance over the Quran and be illumined by the dazzling light of the Quran, the perfect finished work.



The attitude of the Prophet toward the copying of his sayings was also adopted by the Four Caliphs (Abu Bakr, Omar, Osman and Ali) who succeeded him. We shall see in Chapter 11 how the caliphs put a ban on the copying of hadiths and had those committed to paper burned. At first sight, there is nothing surprising in the fact that those who had witnessed events during the lifetime of Muhammad narrated what they had heard and seen to each other. The fact that the companions of the Prophet cross-examined people who claimed to have heard the Prophet say this and that, requiring them to produce a witness, their prohibition to commit to paper the sayings of the Prophet during conversations held in which he was a part, are evidences that show the Prophet’s caution was also maintained by his followers. The four caliphs also had followed suit and prohibited the writing of hadiths despite the fact that they knew many of the sayings of the Prophet, in the wake of his demise. If there is anyone to say the contrary, why not ask him to produce a compilation dating from that date?

Harevi said: “Neither the companions of the Prophet, nor those followers in point of time, the ones that lived after Muhammad was dead, but had conversed with at least one of his companions wrote any of his sayings. They just transmitted them by word of mouth. There is no exception of this outside of one or two instances. Being afraid of their sinking into oblivion, Omar bin Abdulaziz, in a letter addressed to Abu Bakr al-Hazm, wanted him to try to research traditions and have them copied.” The Caliph Yazid bin Abdulmalik who succeeded him after the latter’s decease dismissed Abu Bakr al-Hazim and his collaborators from this job after the death of Omar bin Abdulaziz. Afterward, Caliph Hisham is accepted to have been the first compiler of hadiths of Ez-Zurhi. Mahmud Abu Rayye, who tells these developments in detail, mentions the pressure exerted. “The tabiyyun (those who lived after Muhammad was dead but had conversed with at least one his companions) who were given the task of collecting the hadiths assumed the duty under coercion. The fact that the companions of the Prophet had not undertaken such a task daunted them. ’We felt uneasy as we committed the traditions to paper, but the administrators forced us to this’” said Az Zuhri (Mahmut Abu Rayye, Clarification of Sunna). Ghazzali said that the second generation after Muhammad looked askance at the copying of hadiths, merely advising their memorization (Ghazzali, Iha-yý Ulum-iddin). The first period in which the hadiths were studied individually was the time of the Abbasids. This study, Muvatta, made available toward the end of the second century after the Hijrah belongs to Maliki, the founder of the religious sect Maliki. Ibn Ferhun, on his book entitled Ed dibae al Muzahhab, says that Malik had collected some 10,000 hadiths, revising them on a yearly basis, that very few had been left at the end, and that had he lived a few years more he would have dismissed them altogether. Musnad comes next, the work of Ibn Hanbal, founder of the religious sect ‘Hanbal.’ In the work of Hanbal who died in 241 after the Hijrah, we observe the inclusion of many sayings without a serious approach, and without differentiating between the authentic traditions and the inauthentic ones, based on the ongoing rumors at the time.

Up until the arrival of Bukhari, no effort was spent to sift the traditions classifying them according to their degrees of authenticity. It was Bukhari first who initiated the classification of hadiths according to their degrees of authenticity. However, this study failed to bring it to fruition. The dates of decease of the prominent researchers on hadiths are as follows: Bukhari, 256 A.H.; Muslim, 261 A.H.; Ibn Mace, 273 A.H.; Abu Davud, 275 A.H.; Tirmizi, 279 A.H.; Nesei, 303 A.H. The Shiites have a different collection. The Sunnis and the Shiites refute each other’s compilation. The formation into book form of the collected sayings of Muhammad according to the Shiites is of a later date. The dates of decease of the prominent researchers on the hadiths are as follows: Kulani, 329 A.H.; Babuvay, 381 A.H.; Jafar Muhammad Tusi, 411 A.H.; Al Murtaza, 436 A.H.

If a given statement of Mahmud II, Ottoman Sultan, had not been recorded in a history book and had come down to us by hearsay, how far could we rely on its authenticity? Who would have relied on it to be the authentic utterance of the Sultan, claiming that his words had come down following the direct line in a chain? The time that elapsed since the death of Mahmut II who died in 1839 AD up to now is much shorter than the space of time that separates the death of the Prophet from the date when the first compilation of the hadiths in the form of a book appeared. The time that elapsed between the date of the passing away of the Prophet and some famous books of hadiths was twice as long as this interval of time. For reasons we shall be stating in Chapter 5, at the time of the prominent transmitters of hadiths tens of thousands of hadiths had already been concocted in a way that a sifting was impossible. The fact that these compilations contain innumerable traditions contradictory and conflicting with the Quran, logic and other hadiths, was the method they used show once again the disastrous results of the quest for sources other than the Quran. The simile of the pyramid we mentioned above had been inflated by pseudo-hadiths already. Instead of following the path of the Prophet and of the caliphs and raising objections to the copying of the hadiths, they committed to paper an infinite number of hadiths whose authorship they falsely attributed to the Prophet, giving great harm to the world of Islam along with uttered slandering and abusive statements on behalf and for the love of the Prophet. The pretext of the Christians who deified Christ has been the love they had for him. However, neither the convincing arguments of the transmitters of the hadiths, nor the alleged reasons of Christians could justify their ends.



The word sahaba is used for all Muslim individuals who had the privilege of seeing the Prophet, even from a distance. This definition of Bukhari has received general acceptance. In the well-known hadith compilations, the honesty, the reliability of the memory, and the faith of persons who claim to have heard a certain saying of Muhammad reported were questioned to check the veracity of the allegation or for rejection of testimony. Yet, no one’s lifetime would suffice for the examination as to honesty, reliability of memory and checking of other qualifications of reporters up until the third century AH.

Abu Shame said: “Views on transmitters of hadiths present great diversity; while a particular transmitter is the most reliable one among others for some, for others he happens to be the most accomplished liar.” For instance, he may be a trustworthy transmitter according to Ikrim and Bukhari, but a perjurer for Muslim. This instance may be multiplied. Among these the most striking example may be Bukhari’s refusal to include in his compilation any of the traditions transmitted by Abu Hanifa as he declared him to be one of the most unreliable of transmitters. The founder of the foremost representative and revered figure of traditional Islam happens to be unreliable according to the most prominent compiler of hadiths. The contradictory accounts encountered about hadiths, subject of controversy, among members of the board of examiners, abounds, and are as many as those existing between the hadiths themselves. We refrain from going into detail, as it is useless and may be tiresome.

All these hadiths were first attributed to the companions of the Prophet as the last link in the chain of information, to be eventually traced back to the Prophet. Persons, who came after the companions, also became a bone of contention even though they were ultimately questioned. Nowhere in the Quran do we encounter a passage where it is said that every person who saw the Prophet is a reliable person. Quite the reverse is the case, many of those who confessed to be confirmed Muslims were censured. The Quran states also that the hypocrites had infiltrated the community of true believers. It is said that not even the Prophet knew all of the double-dealers (9 Repentance, 101). One cannot imagine how the hadith imams may have distinguished them, given the fact that not even the Prophet could tell them apart. How can they assert that what they accepted as reliable was, in fact, not worthy of confidence? Can one claim that these people knew what the Prophet did not know, 200 hundred years after his death? The clashes and accusations of infidelity among some of the companions are evidence that the self-styled companions also may not have been trustworthy after all. The mentality that hypothesizes the fact that a companion should be considered ipso facto a reliable source is liable to err. As G.H.A. Juynboll has pointed out, if the assumption that the companions are trustworthy people is challenged, the logic behind the structure of hadiths would go on the rocks. We shall be dealing with this issue when we take up the case of contrivers of hadiths.



The unreliability of hadiths transmitted may be illustrated with a game played among children. Suppose a sentence of ten words is to be transmitted from one ear to the next along a chain of ten students and try to evaluate the result by checking if the initial word spoken in the first ear is exactly the same as the one announced by the tenth in the chain. The transmission of hadiths took place in the course of a space of time of 200 years. And the communication was made over hill and dale by hearsay. Even though we were blindfolded to the reasons for the concoction of hadiths and to assume the chain to have been perfect, and acknowledging the good will of the transmitters, the end results should still be considered doubtful.

A large majority of the public, uninformed of the true state of affairs, believes that the hadiths are the unadulterated sayings of Muhammad as uttered by him. Even the transmitters of hadiths are uncertain of this. A great number of the compilers and Bukhari himself are of the opinion that it is enough to keep the meaning of a transmitted hadith rather than literally committing it to one’s memory. This led to the interpolation of individual opinions into the transmitted sayings of Muhammad; the opinions of those unwilling to confess to themselves their inability to understand them. Given the fact that not every transmitter had an infallible memory capable to implant in his mind all that had been transmitted, he had to rest satisfied with what remained in store, resulting in variant semantic points of view. In spite of this, Bukhari as well as Abu Hanifa and Shafi, heads of the two leading religious sects, have deemed the semantic consideration and hearsay evidence sufficient in their assessment of the true meaning of a hadith.

It is generally accepted by transmitters of the hadiths that the largest congregation the Prophet had addressed in his lifetime was when he delivered his farewell sermon, and it is estimated that more than one hundred thousand people attended it. Yet the sermon, to which more than one hundred thousand people bore testimony, appeared different in written texts according to the reporters; this may demonstrate the production of multiple conflicting interpretations and variants in the hadiths each alleged to have directly originated from the Prophet.

It was said that not the literal rendering of a hadith but its meaning could be transmitted; yet, when there was something omitted in the sentence claimed to have been uttered by the Prophet, the interpretations had been liable to variations. When Aisha, the Prophet’s wife, heard from Abu Hurayra, who had attributed to the Prophet the words: “House, woman and horse may bring bad luck,” she said: “I swear by Almighty God that the Prophet uttered no such thing.” This conviction was widespread during the time of pre-Islamic Arabian paganism but had a different wording: “If there is bad luck, one must look for it in one’s woman, horse or house.” As one can see, this saying attributed to Aisha may be interpreted differently according its wording and context.

All these considerations played a role in the controversies provoked among the transmitters of the hadiths. Many hadiths reported by Muslim were unfounded according to Bukhari and vice-versa. Whereas, among the hadiths transmitted by the founders of the four orthodox religious sects, no distinction was made about their degree of authenticity. The four imams founded their sects disregarding the criteria of the authors of Kutub-ý Sitte (6 renowned hadith books). Of these, Abu Hanifa, the founder of the most prominent of the four sects, blind to his poor knowledge of hadiths, and dodging the hadiths, gave preeminence to his own views for which he was censured by the Imams and was declared an unreliable person by Bukhari.



We saw that the companions of the Prophet were considered infallible, and that without distinction they were judged to be honest people, worthy to be taken at their word. When the books of hadiths began to be committed to paper, neither a companion of the Prophet nor anyone who had seen any of his companions was alive. From the time of the Prophet to the copying of the hadiths six or seven generations had gone by, so that when one transmitted the hadiths he had to go six or seven generations back. Bukhari was the first person who took up this task systematically and the hadiths began to be transmitted without tracing their origin to a particular person. Given the fact that Bukhari lived in the 200s AH, keeping in mind the chain of transmitters of the traditions without any preset system is illogical. Kasým Ahmad, who criticized the transmission of the hadiths, quotes in his book Hadiths and Islam the following names:

1- The Prophet
2- Omar Ibn Hattab
3- Ibn Vakkas
4- Ibn Ibrahim at Taimi
5- Yahya Ibn- Said al Ansari
6- Sufyan
7- Abdullah Ibn Zubeyr
8- Bukhari1- The Prophet
2- Aisha
3- Urvan Ibn Zubayr
4- Ibn Shiab
5- Ukail
6- Al Baith
7- Yahya Ibn Bukhair
8- Bukhari

When the hadiths began to be transmitted, even the link that succeeded the link that had followed the generation after Muhammad had passed away. In other words, persons who could check the reliability of transmitters had already died. Assuming, though illogically, that all the companions were indeed truthful, considering that a good many people of the generation that followed the companions’ age had died when the copying of the hadiths began, the checking of their reliability would still be impossible. Therefore, the criteria that the transmitters had adopted are unfounded and in vain.

On the other hand, it is also impossible to control the reliability of those who were living at the time. For, during the copying of the hadiths, Muslims were scattered over a vast geography. It was not practical for the copiers to reach the last links of transmitters by camel. Moreover, one could never be certain that those who might have reached them were reliable. A short visit and interview would not suffice to reveal the character of a man. How can a phenomenon like religion, which must be based on sound principles, be founded on such subjective criteria?

We see in the hadith ,iImams the sectarian mentality in superman’s garb. This hero is supposed to have in his memory hundreds of thousands of hadiths and be able to conjure them up at any given moment deciding on their veracity. There are people whom he had never set eyes on, persons who had already died when he came into the world; yet, he was confidant that they must have been honest and reliable. He had also the power to establish contact with people on camel back and cover distances that not with a helicopter at his command could he have covered such territory. He also had the genius to distinguish the honest and reliable from the unreliable and dishonest. Yet, these were the qualities attributed to the Imams, transmitters of hadiths. We pass over in silence the legend of spiritual supremacy.



The transmitter of a hadith who rests content with the assumption that all reporters in the chain of transmitters were honest people, without feeling the need to question them, accepts it as correctly transmitted. Such hadiths are called ahad. The most reliable hadiths that comprise these ahad hadiths belong in particular to Bukhari and Muslim and the six books called Kutub-ý sitte. The traditionalist Islamist holds onto his weapon of excommunication in order to have his convictions accepted and declares that anybody who questions the truth of a hadith is declared an outcast. One should bear in mind that both Bukhari and Muslim had repudiated each other’s arguments in the compilation of their respective books. However, traditionalists consider a divine grace the disagreement between learned men on tenuous arguments, while our different opinions will likely send us to hell. The Shiites do not accept any hadith book compiled by the Sunnis. The objections, raised by Al-Mu’tazila, and the Kharidjites, members of the earliest of the religious orders of Islam, to the copying of hadiths and their acceptance as a religious source, the announcement of some theologians (Kelamcýlar) that the hadiths are but suppositions, the controversies of Shafi in Basra because of his recourse to sources other than the Quran, and the quotations of the responses of Al- Murdjia, extreme opponent of Kharidjites, in books on hadiths are examples for the objections raised against the compilation of the hadiths. Those who question the defenders of Islam as put forward in the Quran and challenge the argument that the hadiths should not be considered as a source of Islam, by asking: “Do you consider yourselves pioneers in disseminating such a message, since up until now no one has come up with such a claim?” are ignorant of the events we have mentioned. Ever since their dawn, the hadiths have been an object of strong reservations as to their validity as a source of Islam. However, the central authority hushed up the counter arguments. We are neither the pioneers in this, nor is the claim new. The Islam of the Quran existed from the very beginning without the addition of hadiths. The hadiths were a late attachment and served as something equal to the Quran.



As we saw in Chapter 3, the Quran is a self-sufficient, detailed, explicit book that contains everything that a Muslim should know. The Quran has no need for hadiths. When we are faced with a question that puzzles us, we must look for it in all the verses of the Quran related to the issue and learn all about it. To assess the Quran within the framework of adulterated hadiths is to mystify and pervert it. In order to hear the voice of the Quran without interferences, we must turn our ears solely to the Quran.25/33 – There is not an example they advance to which We do not give you the truth and the best commentary. 25 The Distinguisher, 33

God declares that He provides the best commentary. God’s revelations are complete in themselves without the need for recourse to other commentaries.

The hadiths related to the occasion in which a particular revelation had come down (esbabý nuzul) seem to be even more numerous than other hadiths. The commentaries on the Quran in circulation are replete with hadiths – which have not been subjected to any sifting process as to their authenticity – and interspersed with old Jewish legends. The fact that the reasons given for the revelation in connection with a particular occasion vary considerably among various commentaries and are adulterated with irrelevant stories demonstrates the extent of distortions involved. Ibn Hanbal, a traditionalist and founder of a sect himself said: “There is not a single hadith related to the occasion (esbabý nuzul) on which a particular hadith was revealed.”

The main problem is the confinement of intellects by established religious sects. This is still more relevant when we think about the variety of irrational interpolations. Interpreters of the Quran based on sectarian approaches tried not to deviate from the path indicated by their sects and consequently made false constructions. The infinite variety of contradictory hadiths on the occasions in which revelations were made has been a rich source of exploitation by sectarian commentators. As a matter of fact, several transmitters, to suit their own ends, had coined the majority of these hadiths during their compilation.

In the ‘Introduction’ of Elmalý Hamdi Yazýr’s commentary, there is a private understanding of his with the official authority. In Chapter 5 of this ‘understanding’ it is said that the commentary is in conformity with the body of creeds of the madhab (sect) Hanafiya and of the Sunnis. The ‘ideological commentary,’ according to Mehmet Aydýn, or the ‘sectarian commentary’ we prefer to use, is apparent from the very start of Elmalýlý’s work. No matter how wide his knowledge may be, how far can a commentary produced by those whose intellects are hinged on a sect not sanctioned by God, be dependable? The efforts of those who have tried to interpret the Quran in the light of the hadiths served no purpose other than to lead the seekers of truth down a blind alley; the seekers may have been imams or sheikhs, and the causative agents, hadiths or the occasions when the revelations were made.



The greatest trouble caused to the commentaries on the Quran based on the hadiths related to the occasions on which the revelations were made has been their use by the impious to equate them with Islam. The book of Salman Rushdi’s is an example of this. According to contrived hadiths it is alleged that one day, as the Prophet was engrossed in the recitation of the Quran, Satan penetrated his soul and caused him to praise the divinities Lat, Menat and Uzza and made him utter complimentary words about them; and persuaded Muhammad to recognize these divinities as intercessors with God. Ibn-i Kutayba also confirms this in his hadith book entitled Tevilu Muhtelifi’l Hadis.According to the hadiths, however, the Prophet declared what he had uttered did not originate from him but were the words of Satan. We have witnessed the public censure leveled at Salman Rushdi and Homeini’s anathema that paved the way to diplomatic crises. Nevertheless, no one put the blame on those who had reserved a place for these hadiths, the real culprit.


We observe that there is an escalation of Quran commentaries in the market filled with legends and stories about the occasions on which the revelations had occurred. This approach has made the impression that the verses revealed were restricted to single cases and were confined to a given time bracket. This attitude casts a shadow on the universality and the timeless quality of the Quran. 81 The Rolling, 27, repudiates this approach: “This is a reminder for all the worlds.” And 2 The Cow, 185 states: “…in which was sent down as a guidance for the people.” On the other hand, God gave the reasons for the revelations of particular verses in the Quran when He thought it relevant. For instance, the verses introduced by the phrase ‘They ask you so and so, tell them that….” And when He chooses not to mention anything, it follows that we need not know the whys and wherefores of the revelation in question. Those who considered the Quran insufficient, have regretfully felt the need to have recourse to adulterated commentaries and have caused interferences in the resonant voice of the Quran. One thousand four hundred years ago, the Quran displayed in its vast array of revelations the mysteries lying behind natural phenomena including the roundness of the earth, the movements of the sun and the earth, the barrier between two bodies of flowing water mixing with each other; scientific phenomena discovered only in the course of the last century. The commentators who intended to expound the meaning of the Quran indulged in ridiculous fantasies like the following commentary by Ibn Kathir of Sura The Cow, 29 and Sura The Pen, 1.

“When God desired to create that which He wanted to create, He produced vapor out of thin water. The vapor rose above the surface of the water and He called this rising thing sky meaning heights. Then He solidified the water transforming it into a single mass; afterward He tore it to pieces and within two days, on Sunday and Monday, shaping them into seven unities. The earth He created resting on a fish, the very fish mentioned as Nun in the Sura The Pen. The fish was in the water and the water rested upon rocks; while the rocks stood on a large stone where no vegetation flourished. An angel carried the stone; the angel was upon a rock, which is the wind. The rock is the same rock mentioned by Luqmaan as in the following passage: ‘There was neither the sky nor the earth, the fish moved and the earth shook, mountains came to be implanted on them.’”



Reference is made to Verse 185 of Sura The Purgatory; ‘hadith’ means ‘word’ in Arabic. As a matter of fact, it made allusion to the hadiths (words, sayings) that were to be ascribed to Muhammad with a view to disparaging the integrity of the uniqueness of the Quran. The transmitters of the hadiths might have used other synonyms to express the same thing such as agval (words), ahbar (news, messages) or hikma (wise saying); the tacit consensus among the transmitters of the hadiths on the use of this word is one of the miracles of the Quran.

12/111 – It is not a word (hadith) invented, but a confirmation of what was sent before it, a detailed exposition of all things and a guide and a mercy to any such as believe. 12 Joseph, 111

In this verse, the fact that the Quran is not a word invented, and that it is a detailed exposition of all things is stressed; a fact to which the traditionalists have remained blind. The Quran states that the Quran is not a fabricated word (hadith).

18/6 – Following after them in grief, if they believe not in this word (hadith). 18 The Cave, 6

What is meant by the expression ‘in this word’ is the Quran. The verse indicates that the lack of faith in the Quran will sadden Muhammad. The Prophet never told anybody to take down his sayings. Had his sayings constituted a source for Islam, he would have had his sayings copied and would have been in distress to see his words fall on deaf ears. The only hadith (word) that the Prophet fought for was the Quran. The Quran makes no reference to any hadith other than itself. Had the words of the Prophet been a second source of Islam next to the Quran, this would have been declared in more than one verse of the Quran. There is not a single verse on the issue and the use made of the word ‘hadith’ in the Quran is strong evidence of the adulteration of the concept of hadith.

45/6 – These are God’s signs that We recite to you truthfully. In which word (hadith) other than God and His signs do they believe?
45 Kneeling, 6

Such is the question asked by God. The meaning that is obtained from the answer that comes out of the behaviour of the traditional defenders of Islam and the imitators of Sunni and Shii madhabs, is:: “We believe in Bukhari, Muslim, the sayings of the Twelve Imams, Abu Davud and b. Mace.”

4/87 – And whose word (hadith) can be truer than God’s?
4 The Women, 87

52/34 – Let them produce a word (hadith) like this, if they are truthful. 52 The Mount, 34

Claiming that in the famous book of hadiths of Abu Davud it is pointed out that the Prophet was entrusted with the Quran and similar hadiths, they try to engage in a rescue operation to save the sayings of the Prophet. However, this wish fulfillment falls short of the mark. For the sayings of Muhammad cannot be equated with the Quran, let alone the fact that the bulk of the sayings ascribed to the Prophet is larger than the Quran. Moreover, the hadiths, representative of the traditionalist mind, conflict with the above verse.

31/6 – Among the people, there are those who spread frivolous words (hadiths) to mislead others from the way of God, and take it in vain. For such there will be a humiliating penalty. 31 Luqmaan, 6

In verse 7 of the same sura we read: “When our signs are rehearsed to such a one, he turns away in arrogance, as if he heard them not as if his ears are deaf announce to him a grievous penalty.” If those who turn a deaf ear to the sayings of the Quran because of their sectarian fanaticism were to read these verses not merely for the pleasure of the built-in melody of the recital but to try to understand the meaning, they will surely be in a position to understand better what we are trying to clarify. The word hadith with reference to the Prophet is used in the Quran on two instances:33/53 – “Enter not the Prophet’s houses until leave is given you for a meal …and when you have taken your meal; disperse without tarrying, lost in a hadith (word).” 33 The Parties, 53

66/3 – When the Prophet disclosed a hadith in confidence to one of his consorts, and she then divulged it, and God made it known to him… 66 Prohibition, 3

The use made here of the word hadith is not related in some way or another to Sunni and Shiite sectarian opinions. The fact that the word hadith in these verses is used merely to refer to the sayings of Muhammad are of great importance for our discussion. God, the prescient, uses the word hadith not in a Sunni and Shiite religious context, but to refer to the Prophet’s own words. Moreover, in both instances, the word hadith is use in a bad sense. On the other hand, the word sunna is used in the Quran in the combination – sunnatallah meaning ‘the way of God.’ (We shall see this in Chapter 16.)

The word idjma (general agreement in opinion and decision of legalists) and its derivatives, considered to be another source of Islam, again has a negative connotation. This is evidence that the Quran also repudiates ijma just like in the case of sunna and hadith. (For the derivatives of ijma, see 3 The Family of Imran, 157; 3 The Family of Imran, 173; 7 The Purgatory, 48; 10 Jonah, 58; 10 Jonah, 71; 12 Joseph, 19; 17 The Children of Israel, 88; 20 Taha 60; 20 Taha 64; 22 The Pilgrimage, 73; 26 The Poets, 38; 26 The Poets, 39; 26 The Poets, 56; 28 The History, 78; 43 Vanity, 32; 54 The Moon, 44; 54 The Moon, 45; 70 The Heights, 18; 104 The Backbiter, 2.)



There is no doubt that there are tens of thousands of hadiths ascribed to the Prophet. Those that contradict the Quran, that introduce additional provisions, and that are self-evidently illogical and unreasonable are surely pure inventions. The hadiths that introduce new things into Islam are evidently the result of a manipulation conflicting with the verses of the Quran that confirm the fact that Quran is an accomplished work that comprises all that a man needs to understand. The remaining hadiths may be authentic provided they do not clash with the Quran. We stress the probability of their authenticity by using ‘may.’ On the other hand, we can identify, up to a certain extent, the authentic ones, without being one hundred percent sure. For those that are authentic and those that are invented originate from the pens of the same authors and date from the same time. A little after 200 AH Bukhari, Muslim and others tried to probe into the hadiths to find out the authentic ones, however without success. Now that we are in 1400 AH, we cannot possibly cope with this task. A saying in perfect accord with the Quran belonging to a Muslim may well have been thought to have been said by the Prophet. We shall see in Chapter 5 the counterfeiters who concocted hadiths in the belief that their action would serve the interest of Islam. These hadiths may well be the sayings of the so-called good-willed people. “Wherever you come across a beautiful saying, don’t be afraid to ascribe it to the Prophet” was often used as an expression by the transmitters and collectors of hadiths. This fact and the probabilities make up our viewpoint. We must beware of recognizing an anonymous saying in perfect conformity with the Quran having no validity in fact and ascribing it to the Prophet. If we are to abide by word of the Prophet, this word must be the Quran He transmitted to mankind. The word pronounced in the Quran is God’s own word although spoken through a man. By complying with the message carried by the Prophet, we shall have conformed ourselves both to the Prophet and to the Quran.



We have tried to describe the attitude of the Prophet in the present Chapter. We shall deal with the outlook on hadiths of the Four Caliphs in Chapter 11. What must be the reason for our desire for going over this with a fine-tooth comb in trying to detect the authentic hadiths while the Prophet, and afterward, the Four Caliphs, had prohibited the transmission of hadiths and even caused them to be burned? Satisfactory information related to the Prophet is already contained in the Quran. Moreover, to dissect them is an impossible task. Having studied the reasons exposed in Chapter 37 the additions brought in Islam, you can see better our defensive argument on the issue. Even though a particular hadith happens to be in perfect accord with the Quran, there still is the likelihood of our falsely ascribing it to the Prophet. For not every word that fits the Quran’s message is the Prophet’s word. The Quran is the Book that guides man to the straight path. Whoever may have said a word in support of it has surely spoken the truth. Some will accuse us for failing to pay due respect to the Prophet. Nevertheless, those who speak of a spell cast on the Prophet, invent absurd suppositions on his sexual life and place the earth on a fish are the ones lacking in respect. How can one trust in the words of these people? To turn a deaf ear to the hadiths is the consequence of respect and love for the Prophet, a confirmation of the fact that God only has the exclusivity of Islam. Just like in the case of Christ, for whose love people went as far as to declare him God, there have been those who have said that they loved the Prophet, but afterward said that he had been under a spell. The prophets desire that we believe in God; they hate to be deified.

The acts of the followers of prophets should be in perfect conformity with the revealed religion. They are displeased with praise as practiced by certain fawning Christians.


posted in ENGLISH ISLAM | 1 Comment

8th Aralık 2008



There have been in the past instances of idolization of prophets and saints, concoctions of manuals and divisions among the devotees into factions against the explicit warning of God’s admonitions.

The objection raised by the clergy to printing and translating the Bible is an example of the biased approach of fanaticism. “It is true that by the invention of printing, the number of books marked a tremendous increase, contributing to the education of the public at large; however, it is also a fact that differences of opinions and dissensions among the public followed a similar trend. Men were henceforth asking questions and calling to doubt the tenets inculcated into their brains. They read, understood and prayed in their own tongues. Under the circumstances there was no more need to consult priests to be enlightened on religious issues. This was naturally to the detriment of the clergy. In order to keep them immune, the religious precepts should be the exclusivity of the clergy.” It was the clergy that had forestalled and retarded the development of sciences. The division into factions and sects of the clergy led to untold bloodshed. The public who tried to pray in its own tongue was subjected to the ordeal of excommunication, of granting of indulgences, of papal inquisitions to combat so-called heresies.






The Suras The Cattle, 154, and The Purgatory, 145 are in the same vein. Despite the fact that the Jews had in their hands the revelation that had been sent down to them through Moses, they created additional authorities under the names of Mishna and Gamara. The fanatics of Judaism had much in common with those of Islam.

5/44 – Surely we have sent down the Torah, having guidance and light. By it did the prophets who submitted themselves (to God) judge for the Jews and the rabbis and the doctors of law, because they were required to guard the Book of God and they were witnesses…
5 The Feast, 44

5/47 – The people of the Gospel shall judge in accordance with God’s revelations therein. And those who do not judge in accordance with what God has revealed are transgressors. 5 The Feast, 47



The oldest New Testament in our hands today is a Latin translation. This Gospel, originally revealed in Aramaic, is no more. We do not know what the original words were that found their equivalent in Latin as ‘Father’ and ‘Son.’ However, even in the Latin version we observe that these words are used not only for Christ but also for the whole of mankind. Every one of God’s creatures is referred to as Son and God, Father.

45 – So that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven.
Bible – Matthew 5:45

17 – “I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.” Bible – John 20:17

The expressions ‘son’ and ‘father’ are but metaphorical expressions.

35 – Jesus heard that they had cast him out and having found him he said: “Do you believe in the son of man?” New International Bible, John 9:35

35 – Jesus heard that they had cast him out, and when He had found him, He said to him, “Do you believe in the Son of God?” The New King James Version, John 9:35

We invite you to pay attention to the transformation of the expression ‘Son of Man’ mentioned in the first Gospel into ‘Son of God’ in the King James Version. In the following verse in the Gospel according to Matthew it is interesting to note the adulteration of the expression ‘father’:

And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Bible- Matthew, 23:9



We observe that no man is to be called ‘father’ on earth since the only father is the One who is in heaven. ‘Father’ is the biological begetter of man. It is our belief that the expression translated with the word ‘father’ here must have corresponded to a word that connoted the Creator. However, the translations are not to blame in the first place, since an impartial observer must have interpreted the expression, taking into consideration its metaphorical meaning.

The interpreters of Catholic and Orthodox sects are of the opinion that the name ‘son’ is metaphorically used for believers and in the true sense for Jesus. This debatable issue is rendered still more difficult since the original Gospel is not available, whereas the Quran is there in its original form. Therefore, it easy to sort out what is foreign to the God’s revelation. We must be reminded here of the fact that the church was the clergy. The tribunal that decided to put Christ to death consisted of rabbis. The greatest injury inflicted to the revealed religions has been by certain rabbis, priests and imams.

9/31 – They take their rabbis and their monks to be their lords in derogation of God. 9 Repentance, 31

9/34 – There are indeed many among the rabbis and priests, who in falsehood devour the substance of people and hinder then from the way of God. 9 Repentence, 34

It is a pity that the Muslims listen to these words as if a fairy story were being told. These stories are in fact parables told to set an example for the future of mankind. The clergy had been ascribed the attribute of divine authority while in Islam imams assumed the divine authority having the power to issue fatwas, ijtihads and sectarian decrees! Just like in the case of Christianity that does not fail to find pretexts for justifying the ways that the Catholic and Orthodox clergy have adopted, so have the Islam of traditionalists. Desmond Tutu, the Nobel Prize winning priest from South Africa, has the following to say about how the Church exploits religion for material ends. “When the missionaries came over to Africa we had our lands and they had their Bible. Then they told us to close our eyes and pray. When we opened our eyes, however, we saw that the Bible was in our hands and the land was in their possession.”

There are examples to follow in all these for the Jews and the Christians as well as for the Muslims. The followers of these three religions cannot truly understand their religion unless they shove away the sects and their chiefs. What is preached today is neither the religion of the original Bible, nor of the Torah, nor of the Quran. The dictates of the sects, the saints and rabbis have replaced them. What was human was disguised in a holy garb, so that the holy was coupled with human interpolations. Another perversion in religions has been to mystify the manifest truths of the scriptures by willful shifting of the meanings of words.

5/13 – They alter the words from their places and neglect a portion of that whereof they were reminded. 5 The Feast, 13

2/75 – Seeing that a party of them heard the words of God, and perverted it knowingly after they understood it. 2 The Cow, 75




An instance of the alterations made in the Torah and the Gospels is the misinterpretation of passages that made allusions to the advent of Muhammad.

7 – And I will shake all nations, so that the treasures (Himada) of all nations shall come in and I will fill this house with glory, says the Lord of Hosts. 8 – The silver is mine and the gold is mine, declares the Lord of Hosts. 9 – The latter glory of this house shall be greater than the former, says the Lord of Hosts. And in this place I will give peace (shalom), declares the Lord of Hosts. Haggai 2:7-9

The Hebrew word ‘himada’ mentioned under Verse 7 of Haggai stems from the same root as H M D. in the Arabic language which is the root of the name ‘Muhammad’ carrying more or less the same meaning. Thus the name of the Prophet or the meaning of his name is mentioned with reference to a glorious event that was to take place in future. The advent of Muhammad that succeeded the Bible and addressed his message announcing God’s existence for billions of years was that glorious event. The word shalom (peace) in Verse 9 also comes from the same root as the word Islam.

15 – If you love me, you will keep my commandments.
16 – And I will ask the Father and He will give you another Helper (Paraclete) to be with you forever Bible – John 14:15-16

7 – Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper (Paraclete) will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you.

8 – And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment. John 16:7-8

20 – He confessed and did not deny, but confessed: “I am not the Christ.”

21 – And they asked him: “What then? Are you Elija?” He said: “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” And he answered: “No.” John 1:20-21




According to the quotations above, it is clear that another prophet was expected. The history has not witnessed any other person who assumed the qualities of a prophet other than Muhammad. The fact that the words peryclitos and Muhammad have the same connotation must not be interpreted as pure coincidence. Prof. Maurice Bucaille has criticized the interpretation according to which the word paraclete meant the Holy Spirit (Gabriel) and contended that the word paraclete made allusion to a prophet whose advent had been foretold. The point, according to him, is not a question of inspiration by the Holy Spirit, but has the connotation, as in Greek, of spreading among men. The Greek words aquo and laleo can be interpreted as having to do with physical bodies having the organs of hearing and speech, which cannot be ascribed to the Holy Spirit. Therefore, he says, the paraclete in the Gospel according to St. John refers to a physical being like Christ himself endowed with the senses of hearing and speaking. The Greek text definitely requires this. He is convinced that Christ had foretold the advent of a prophet that was to succeed him, a person endowed with the sense of hearing and speech through which he would be communicating God’s message to mankind. The available texts’ treatment of the Holy Spirit seem to have been altered on purpose with a view to changing the meaning inherent in the message that heralded the advent of a prophet after Jesus Christ. This was due to the wishes of the clergy to see Christ as the last of the prophets.




15 – Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 – You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles?
17 – So every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. 18 – A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. 19 – Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 – Thus you will recognize them by their fruits. Matthew 7:15-20

Nowhere in any of the gospels it is said that no other prophet will come. The following criteria is given in the gospel: “Examine the fruit and distinguish the one who is a liar.” If no other prophet had been predicted to come after Jesus Christ, he might have said “Whoever comes after me claiming to be a prophet, he is a liar.” The method that Jesus suggested to tell the true and false prophets apart is sufficient proof of the advent of a prophet after Jesus. This fact should constitute acceptable evidence for the Christians. Somebody who came after Jesus, who believed in one God, who put his trust in God, who loved Him and was instrumental in establishing societies that had got rid of their idols, could not be any person other than Muhammad.

Despite all these explicit evidences and signs in the Old Testament and the New Testament, rabbis and Christian clergy have vied with one another to hush them up.;The viewpoints of the Catholic or Orthodox churches, the Pope in Rome and the archbishops whose names are not mentioned in any one of the gospels seem to be more authoritative than the scriptures for the majority of the Christian population.

We vent our anger at popes and archbishops, the Catholic and Orthodox sects; yet, we have a natural affection for the Sunni and Shii sects, the hadiths and the sectarian imams!


posted in ENGLISH ISLAM | 0 Comments

8th Aralık 2008



There have been no controversial points between sectarians on the questions of God’s unity, compassion, omnipotence, the hereafter and fundamental creeds, exceptions being made of certain heretics in the minority who exalted Ali, son-in-law of Muhammad, or of the incarnation of God in sheikhs. Yet there has been a wide divergence of opinions between the religion propounded in the Quran and the religion preached by sectarians on the issue of God as the unique lawgiver. According to the Quran, the only lawgiver is God, and the Quran embraces the totality of God’s commandments to the believers. The sectarians, however, first dared to represent Muhammad as God’s assistant in the establishment of Islam, later adding the Prophet’s companions, then the sectarian imams and certain sheikhs who were to assume the garb of reference sources. They contributed to the creation of a religious code outside the scope of the Quran. This sounded a discordant note in terms of religious practices. Whether a given act was lawful or not depended on the approval or disapproval of an imam whose opinion was equated with the word of the Quran. For example, God forbade the drinking of blood, the eating of dead animals, adultery and homicide. The sectarian imams added to this list of prohibitions, the consumption of mussels, the chiseling of statues, men’s wearing gold trinkets. The majority of these were supposedly based on hadiths. Thus God’s authority to impose prohibitions was shared by mortals.






ü DAWN PRAYER (Salat Al-Fadjr)

ü EVENING PRAYER (Salat Al-Isha)

















One of the great scandals that took place had to do with faith. Two groups of opponents emerged. According to one, the Quran was a product of creation, while for the other it was eternal. This clash of opinions gave rise to no inconsiderable antagonism between the parties. The Sunnis arrived at a conclusion, according to which the Quran had existed from eternity. The Sunni view that transformed the Quran, the only source of Islam, into one of the numerous reference sources of religion, that dared cancel Quranic verses claiming that on which they had been written were eaten by a goat, displayed its illogicality by attributing the Quran to eternal existence.

Irrelevant additions were made to Islam, those making the additions convinced that they were authorized to perfect it. Among such absurd contentions was, for instance, the question as to whether God’s compassion and grace had existed per se from eternity in God and with God or were created afterward.

Comments made in hadiths that gave the impression that God was not omnipotent caused problems for the various sects but the controversies were eventually ended.. The general public, followers of these sects, has certainly no idea of such hadiths, among which ‘God’s feeling the cold of His finger on the back of the Prophet’ and ‘God’s lighting up paradise by uncovering His calf’ are not only funny but also exceedingly preposterous. Such ‘religious’ considerations have provided the unbelievers with stuff for ridiculing the religion.

The interpolation in the religion of such concepts as ‘agony in the grave,’ and descriptions of hell and paradise outside the context of the Quran and the taking them for a part of the religion should be considered heretical approaches with respect to the hereafter. We must dispose of such unfounded creeds remaining outside the Quran.



Correct interpretation of the prayer commanded to the faithful is of great importance for the Islam of the Quran. The traditionalist mentality conceives that what is preached in the Quran is not sufficient to understand its due performance. This concern of traditionalists demonstrates that they are ignorant of what religion is. One should take care to accept certain principles for oneself and try to conceive it in that framework. Once the source of religion is made clear in the mind, we should try to understand the way to pray, how to keep the fast etc. with reference to it. In other words the way prayer must be performed will be conceived in the light of the knowledge one will draw from that source. One should not attempt to formulate the source in the image of one’s own mind. If one sees any discrepancy between what is practiced and what is actually preached in the Quran, one should do well to understand what is stated in the Quran and not try to change its contents.

Prayer has been described to its minutest detail in the Quran. Yet, this failed to satisfy the commentators who felt themselves compelled to add further details. However, we do not claim that certain things are unlawful. For instance, reciting the Sura Fatiha, the first Sura, the opening chapter of the Quran, in every prayer is not a binding duty, yet doing so is commendable. The error lies in the fact that this obligation was introduced later on and that the Quran did not contain it.

To say that a particular act has not been explicitly stated for the performance of the prayer does not mean that that act is against the Quran. The only thing is that one should know that it is not ordained by God. For instance, the error is not in reciting the verse Fatiha as such, but in saying that its recital whenever one gets up during the prayer is ordained by God. We advise you to pay attention to our comments on this issue as we proceed. Now, the following are the steps one should follow in the performance of the ritual prayer:



Ablution is mentioned in the Quran only as a prerequisite to precede the performance of prayer. Otherwise, there is no requirement for being in ritual purity when one steps in a mosque, for reciting the Quran and for any worship other than salat, the ritual ordained in the Quran. The following two verses mention the ablution one performs before the prayer and the total ritual ablution necessitated after sexual contact. Whatever we are expected to know are then contained in the following two verses.

5/6 – O you who believe, when you rise up for prayer, wash your face and your hands up to the elbows, and rub your head, and your feet till the heels. And if you are in a state of ceremonial impurity (junub) due to sexual contact, then purify yourself. And if you are sick or on a journey, or one of you comes from the privy, or you have had contact with women and you cannot find water, you shall observe tayammum (dry ablution), by touching the soil, then rubbing your face and hands. God desires not to place a burden on you but He wishes to purify you and that He may complete His favor on you, so that you may give thanks.
5 The Feast, 6

4/43 – O you who believe! Go not near prayer when you are intoxicated till you know what you say. Nor after sexual contact without bathing. If you are ill, or on a journey, or come from the privy, or contacted women, and you cannot find water, you shall observe tayammum (dry ablution), by touching soil, then rubbing your face and hands. God is Pardoner, Forgiver. 4 The Women, 43


1) Reason for performing ablution before the prayer and for the total ritual ablution.

We can deduce from the contents of the above verses that both kinds of ablutions are required before performing the salat (ritual prayer), 5 Sura The Feast, 6 states that ablution must be performed before prayers and in 4 The Women, 43 it is made clear that a person who had sexual contact should not perform the prayer unless he/she washed his/her entire body.


2) When to perform the ablution

At the end of each of the above verses it is indicated how to proceed when water necessary for performing the ablution is not available. The state that annuls the canonical purity is made clear: when one has just relieved nature and returning from the gait (Arabic word meaning pit) used for a water-closet or privy; we have avoided using the word ‘bathroom’ where one can perform things other than merely relieving nature. No other act or state can necessitate the renewal of ablution such as bleeding or eating of camel flesh.


3) When to perform the ghusl (total ritual ablution)

Contacting women (coition), the state of junup (denoting in Arabic the state of one who has had a sexual relation) necessitates the entire washing of the body before one can perform the prayer. In no other state is one commanded to take a bath. The word “junub” whose root is “janp” means “togetherness, proximity,” that is sexual contact.


4) How to perform the ablution

In the beginning of Sura 5 The Feast, 6 the manner of performing ablution is described. In the text, the imperative “wash” is followed by direct objects “face and hands up to the elbows,” and the imperative “rub” is followed by direct objects “the head and feet down until the heels.” Were someone to say to you “Wash the bathroom and the kitchen and wipe the hall and the entrance,” you would surely understand that the entrance must be wiped and not washed. Yet, for some reason or other all the Sunnis interpreted the ‘rubbing’ act that preceded the direct object ‘feet’ as ‘washing ’ rather than ‘wiping.’ Nor can we deduce from the order in which the direct objects are quoted the rubbing act as an interim act and that it is reserved solely for the head. For, in the sequence, we have first the face and hands, which is followed by the head before going down to the feet. Therefore the imperative ‘wash’ cannot possible apply to feet. The conventional practice is due to the interpretation of fabricated hadiths. Among the Shiites, for instance, the feet are rubbed by hand according to their hadiths. It is not our aim to refute the hadiths by reference to other hadiths, but to show the contradiction between the sects. Süleyman Ateþ, who draws attention to the fact that many a companion used to rub their feet during the performance of ablution, gives an account of the Arabic version of the act as follows: “God Almighty has commanded us to wash two principal body parts: the face and the arms. The imperative ‘wash’ is followed by direct objects ‘the face and the arms.’ He ordered that the two body parts be rubbed; namely, the head and the feet down to the heels. It follows that the face and the arms are to be washed. Likewise, the two direct objects of the imperative ‘rub’ are the head and the feet. These are then the two body parts to be rubbed. There is a fine point that supports this. The first of the two direct objects following the imperative ‘wash’ refers to a single body part while the second one indicates a pair (i.e. two hands). Likewise, the first of the two direct objects that follow the imperative ‘rub’ refers to a pair (i.e. two feet)” (Süleyman Ateþ, Encyclopedia of the Quran, Vol. 1, Ablution).

While performing the ablution, the face and the arms up until the elbows are washed; the head and the feet up to the heels are wiped. That is all. However, anyone who chooses so may rinse his mouth, wipe the nape of his neck, wash his feet including the heels, while reciting verses or special devotional lines. One thing is certain, all these are not binding. God has made clear the manner the ablution is to be performed.


5) The total ablution (for ceremonial impurity)

We already made it clear that this total ablution is required after sexual contact. Two Arabic words explain what we are supposed to do. In Sura 5 The Feast the word ‘tahara’ means to be cleansed and in Sura 4 The Women the word ‘ghusl’ means to wash. There are no detailed accounts of what one is to do, no such imperatives as ‘wash this part and that part of your body up to this and that level.’ ‘Rinse your mouth three times and clean your nose by inhaling water into your nostrils and blowing it out three times,’ ‘Do not leave a speck of your body unwashed, pour water first over your right shoulder then over your left one.’ Given the fact there are no such indications, one should understand from the verb gasala, merely to wash. The word tahara is cleansing. Anyone who takes a bath is considered to have performed the total ablution. Even a child would understand what the command ‘Wash!’ means. And yet grown people are at a loss to interpret the command, without realizing the fact that their lack of understanding results from their own incapacity to comprehend the bare reality. To compensate for their shortcomings, they blame the Quran and accuse it of insufficiency while referring to books wherein such details are supplied to supplement it.


6) What to do when water is not available

Under normal conditions, the scarcity of water is not a daily occurrence. When exceptionally no water is available, man is told to perform the ablution by tayammum, i.e. rubbing one’s hands with earth and applying them on one’s face and hands.



In Sura 2 The Cow, 144, 149, 150, Muslims are commanded to turn toward Mescidi Haram (Mecca) while performing the prayer. If a performer of prayer cannot properly determine which way to turn, he may still perform his prayer knowing of the omnipresence of God (2 The Cow, 115).



There is no particular prescription for the clothes to wear during the performance of the prayer (salat). A person performing the prayer individually may wear anything. When daily prayers are performed in congregation, a person must wear his/her beautiful apparel (see 7 Purgatory, 31) From 2 The Cow, 125 and 22 The Pilgrimage, 26 it is understood that the place where prayer is performed must be kept clean.



In 4 The Women, 103 it is said: “Prayers are commanded for believers at stated times.” Salat (prayer) is a worship during which the individual is in the presence of God. There is no doubt about the fact that the Quran has indicated the exact times when one is to perform one’s prayer. We are referring to those binding prayers as ordained by God. Salat (ritual prayer) is a praiseworthy prayer. It is a way of turning oneself toward God and remembering Him. In this sense it is a prayer that can be performed any time; however, not every prayer that one can perform is binding. For instance, if he/she so feels, a man/woman may perform salat even at midnight although this is not required of him/her. There is no doubt that the Prophet and his companions did perform prayers at times other than the appointed times. Nevertheless, the traditionalist mentality, ignoring the fact that the only source of religion was the Quran, conceived and declared that some of these prayers were binding, others being sunna. Instead of reverting to the Quran, they preferred to emulate the companions of the Prophet and of those near him. According to the Sunnis the number of times that a man shall perform the salat is 5; namely, before the break of dawn, at noon, in the afternoon, in the evening and at night. On the other hand, for the Shiites this number is three. In former times this number had been two or three among the Kharidjis.

The prayers that have not been explicitly indicated in the Quran may well have been performed by the Prophet himself, the Caliphs or the Shiis. It is certainly commendable that one prays outside the appointed hours, but they should not be considered as binding. The error is partly due to the misinterpretation of hadiths. Now we are going to discuss the names and the hours of performance of salats as declared “binding” in the Quran.



DAWN PRAYER (Salat Al-Fadjr)

The Arabic word salat means ‘to establish a link (with one’s Creator).’ Used together with the word ‘ikama’ for performing the ritual prayer. The dawn prayer is mentioned in Sura 24 The Light, 58 with the name al-fadjr. The word al-fadjr means the time from daybreak until the rise of the sun. The time is referred to in the following Sura:

11/114 – And keep up prayer at the two extremities of the day at the approach of the night. Surely good deeds take away evil deeds.
11 Hud, 114

The Arabic word nahari means day and layl night; tarafayn nahari means the two extremities of the day. On the other hand taraf means side, end, extremity, contiguity. What is meant then is the dawn and the sunset which comprise the early morning and the evening prayers. To make it clearer the expression ‘zulafan minal-layl’ (at the approach of the night) is used to signify the time portion in which night is bordering on the day.

The dawn prayer is mentioned in Sura 24 The Light, 58 in which also the time of prayer is indicated. The time is also referred to in Sura Hud, 114. In other words the time for the morning prayer is the time that extends from the first rays of the day until the rise of the sun.




It is mentioned in Sura 24 The Light, 58 that the word isha means the time extending from sunset until the darkness sets in. The same word is also mentioned in the 12th sura, verse 16, and the 79th sura verse 46.

24/58 – O you who believe! Permission must be requested by your dependants and those who have not yet reached the age of puberty. On three occasions: before dawn prayer, at noon when you change your clothes and after the evening prayer. These are your three times of undress. 24 The Light, 58

Some translators interpreted the evening prayer as late-night prayer. The reason may have been the disrobing of persons when they are back home from the last prayer of the day they have performed. However, the word “isha” means clearly the evening time. Therefore the expressions “night prayer” or “late-night prayer” are not correct.

The times for the dawn prayer and the evening prayer are foreseen in Sura 11 Hud, 114. When one of the prayers is performed at dawn the other will be the prayer performed symmetrically in the evening. The time of the evening prayer is the approach of the night, too. Moreover, there is another verse that refers to the time of the evening prayer:

17/78 – You shall observe prayer at the decline of the sun till the darkness of the night and the recital of the Quran at dawn. Surely the recital of the Quran at dawn is witnessed. 17 The Children of Israel, 78

The expression the “declining of the sun” (duluk ul-shams) means, of course, the sunset. So the time extending from sunset until the darkness sets in is the time during which one can perform one’s prayer. It is interesting to note that the time of dawn is also stressed along with the evening prayer in the continuation of the verse. The reciting of the Quran at dawn also seems to be considered important.

The times indicated for prayers are inherent in the names of the prayers, i.e. the dawn prayer and the evening prayer. Moreover, the times for prayers are foreseen in 11 Hud, 114. In 24 The Light, 58 the fact that the dawn prayer is the first prayer and the evening prayer is the last prayer is implied.




It is stated in the Quran:

2/238 – Guard the prayers and the middle (the most excellent) prayer and stand up truly obedient to Allah. 2 The Cow, 238

There are no other verses indicating the times for prayers other than the verses in which the times for the dawn prayer and the evening prayer are indicated, and the above verse. With the one being at one side, the other at the other side of the day, the salat al wusta must take place between these prayers. Given the fact that in all cultures the day is the time that man wakes up and the night is for the night rest, this salat is to be performed during the day. (In 17 The Children of Israel, 79, the midnight prayer was commanded only to the Prophet.)

According to another view, the word wusta also means “the most excellent” and does not refer to a salat particularly, but to keeping the prayers and performing them in the most excellent manner. The word wusta is also mentioned in the following suras: 2 The Cow, 143; 5 The Feast, 89; 68 The Pen, 28 and 100 The Gallopers, 5. An examination of it in these contexts will reveal the true meaning of the expression.

As one can see, there is no mention of salat performed five times a day. Nor is it made clear what is to be recited during the performance of prayer, while bowing or prostrating. Even we do not encounter any indication in the hadiths whether a prayer should be long or short. Many particulars came to be formed by the private opinions of the sectarians. There are a great number of hadiths about the Prophet’s performing prayers of long and short duration. The sectarians have limited the act that had been left to the discretion of the individual and compelled their imitators to act likewise. It is clear in the Quran that there are no particular verses dictated by the Quran to be recited during certain phases of the prayer, whether standing, bowing or seated. As a matter of fact, had the hadiths been correctly interpreted, the conclusion would not have differed. The sects have overcrowded the requirements of prayers with their own inventions.

On the other hand, one cannot derive from the hadiths the traditional five times of the prayer. There are some hadiths proving the Prophet keeping the number of times to three. The Shiites for instance, who perform the salat three times a day, relate the fact to their own body of hadiths. The Shiite attempt at combining the five times into three may have originated from the idea of a compromise of the two schools. Nowhere in the Quran do we come across an expression for combining the prayers. It is clear that the binding prayers are those ordered in the Quran. What makes a prayer performed on time is its being executed at the apportioned time and not the number of bowings or prayers recited in the course of it. Like the Shiites, the Sunni sects Shafi, Maliki and Hanbali have tolerated the combining of the prayer times. Some thought that this should be left to the discretion of the individual, and for some, to certain special circumstances.

However; for, anybody who feels like performing it more than a certain number of prayers, may well go ahead. The determination of the number of prayer times at five is the suggestion of the Sunni sects. Had the number been really 5, the fact should have explicitly been stated in the Quran. Considering that in Sura 17 The Children of Israel, 79 a special midnight prayer had been commanded for the Prophet only, if God so desired He would certainly have laid down the times of prayers to five. The conventional performance of prayers at other times, like in the afternoon and late at night, the exact time of which is uncertain, has ended by imposing them as binding with a view to putting into an order the acts of remembering God and repeating His name. To make the times of these prayers a binding duty is unacceptable.

30/17 – So glory be to Allah when you enter the evening and when you enter the morning.

30/18 – And to Him be praise in the heavens and the earth, and at the time of noon. 30 The Romans, 17-18



The minimum number or prayers has been indicated; however, but the number of prayers that can be performed is not limited. It may be five or more. Those who witnessed the performances of the Prophet’s companions at other times as well (for instance, in the afternoon and at night) ended by declaring them also binding. Were we to deduce from the habits of certain people the number of times one should pray, there would be many more salats supposedly commanded like the evvabin, kushluk and kusuf prayers. In conclusion, the number of times is stated in the Quran and it must be considered a principle. God has left no missing part in His Book.

As a matter of fact, the pilgrims perform the salat three times a day. Considering that minute particulars are stated in the Quran about the requirements for the performance of the ritual (including what a person who had to have his hair trimmed should do), why is there no mention of anything anywhere in the Quran about the shortening of the number of prayers during the pilgrimage? Had the number commanded been five, why is it not stated so?



The fact that the number of times of the salat foreseen to be performed was not five and the traditional performance of the supplemental prayers in the afternoon and at night were not binding had already been advocated by the Kharidjies and the members of the religious school, Mutezila. Those who tried to prove that the number of times that salat was to be performed in the course of a day was five had also concocted a fabricated hadith according to which, as we have already said, the Prophet, during his ascension to the presence of the Almighty, receives the message that the number of prayers is fifty. Whereupon, the Prophet, on his way back, runs across Moses who finds the number too high and advises him to refer to God so that He may make a reduction in the said number. Upon request, God reduces the number. But Moses, still not satisfied with the result, asks him to go and renew his plea, which he does. After many such comings and goings the number is reduced to five, at which the Prophet is reluctant to go any further despite the fact that Moses insists on it. According to this hadith, it appears that God is incapable of assessing the potential of man and the Prophet is an ignoramus, while Moses proves to be his advisor and the regulator of God’s schemes and the savior of the Muslim community. The conclusive evidence of the number 5 is based therefore on this fabricated hadith. The fact that there are hadiths dating prior to the ascent to heaven of the Prophet that say that the number of prayer times was but two, one in the dawn and one at evening (see Bukhari) is evidence that the number had been augmented following the ascent. If that had been the case and the number was two, why then does the Quran not mention that the number had been brought up to five afterward? One might assert only that the ‘middle prayer’ had been added afterward as stated in Sura The Cow, 238. Why are the afternoon and night prayers not clearly indicated in the Quran?



Salat is performed with a view to remembering God (20 Taha, 14). However, it is performed in stated times and on a clean state, i.e. having performed ablution. It is a prayer performed even when there is a war going on.

4/102 – When you are with them, and stand to lead them in prayer, let one party of them stand up with you, taking their arms with them; when they finish their prostrations, let them take their position in the rear. And let the other party come up which has not yet prayed and let them pray with you… 4 The Women, 102

It appears that salat existed even from the time of Abraham (14 Abraham, 40). Even the heathen people who had captured the Kaaba, where Abraham used to pray, performed the ritual prayer, though in a strayed fashion (8 The Spoils of War, 35). The habit to pray had been abandoned afterward because of the lust of past generations.19/59 – But after them there followed a posterity who missed prayers and followed after lusts; soon, then, will they face destruction.
19 Mary, 59

The salat involves three main acts: namely, kýyam (standing up), ruku (bowing) and suju (prostration). Although there is no mention in the Quran about the obligation to recite it while performing the salat, we are told that the Quran is described as a remembrance (zikr) of God. This is an indication that in performing the salat the Quran is our guide. His compassion, beneficence, grace, creation of hell and paradise, among other things, and omniscience are all mentioned in the Quran. In performing the salat we are not obliged to recite the Quran in the Arabic language. While there is not even the mention of the obligation to recite the verses of the Quran, how are we to deduce that what is to be recited should be in Arabic, since a person who keeps on repeating words he has learned by memory is unable to concentrate on the words his lips pronounce? In this way, the automatic repetition of verses in a language other than one’s own risk having their meaning lost. You may have witnessed many performers of the salat confess to have been thinking about other things while their lips kept repeating the words learned by heart.4/43 – O you who believe! Approach not prayers while intoxicated until you can understand all that you say… 4 The Women, 43

The above verse indicates the importance of a clear mind during the salat in which God’s name is to be pronounced and the individual is obliged to understand what he is saying. If understanding is important, how can a man, who speaks no Arabic, understand what he is reciting? What difference can there be between a person whose mind is clear reciting verses the meaning of which he does not understand and the intoxicated whose mind is clouded?

The Quran commands man to ask for help from God with patience (2 The Cow, 45). How can a man who performs his salat not, in his vernacular, ask for help from God? Do those who are against the performance of salat in one’s own tongue not prevent the fulfilment of this command? All the minor formal details in the performance of the salat may be duly obeyed, but real communication of the individual between him and his God is thus hampered due to Arabophilia. To summarize:

1) During the salat one praises God, therefore one’s consciousness must be clear (20 Taha, 14).
2) Salat requires pious reverence and awe (23 The Believers, 2).
3) Salat restrains a person from evil deeds (29 The Spider, 45).

Praying in one’s vernacular is essential for the establishment of communication between the individual and his Creator. If you accept the fact that not everybody can learn the Arabic language, praying in one’s tongue becomes indispensable.

72/18 – The places of worship are for God, so invoke not any one along with God. 72 Jinn, 18

It is worth remembering that help is asked only from God and not from prophets, from so-called awliya (saints) and from the departed.



There is no concept of rakat in the Quran. Had God so wanted He would have indicated the number of rakats during the salat. Rakat is the unit of prayer consisting of kýyam (standing), ruku (bowing) and suju (prostrating). Now the number of times expected to be repeated during a salat are in general practice as follows: at the Morning Prayer, two rakats, at the noon prayer, four rakats and at the evening prayer, three rakats. These numbers may also be interpreted to mean ‘any number of times a person wishes to perform.’ It is clear that these numbers have again been set down by sectarians as a binding duty. The companions and the Prophet himself may have performed a definite number of rakats, especially during congregational prayers just to render the ritual uniform so as to avoid confusion. Likewise, certain acts during prayer like raising one’s hands to one’s ears before starting the prayer, saluting by turning one’s head to the right and to the left, and in certain sectarian practices, to slap one’s knees to indicate the end of the salat are in this category. These acts may be performed, as there is nothing against them in the Quran. But to transform them into binding requirements is wrong. A person may perform a salat consisting of ten rakats in three minutes while another may perform a salat consisting of just one rakat for hours on end. There is no reason indicated for the importance of the number of rakats. God has not compelled us to count the number of rakats during the prayer.

Some have deduced from the indication that there is nothing wrong with shortening the duration of salat during wartime as mentioned in Verses 101, 102, 103 of Sura The Women that the salat should be performed at least in two rakats. “Given the fact that a shortened prayer consists of one rakat, the entire prayer should be of two rakats.” They bring as evidence to this the following facts: as the Prophet led two congregations, two rakats were performed in all. We are of the opinion that shortening of prayer does not entail the reduction of the number of rakats but of the duration of the prayer. A salat of one rakat may last hours while a salat of two rakats may take less than a minute. The shortening does not refer to the reduction in the number of rakats but in the duration of the prayer. In war the damage that the enemy may inflict is related not to the number of rakats but to the duration of the prayer. As we have already noted there is no mention of rakats in the Quran. The reason why we reckon a prayer in terms of rakats must be due to our conventional habits. The expression ‘la junahoun’ in the Quran in Sura 4 The Women, 103 translated as ‘There is no blame’ is also used elsewhere to dispel the anxiety of Muslims. For instance, in Sura 2 The Cow, 198 the same expression is used to indicate that the pilgrims may freely circle Safa and Marva. Even in the absence of this verse there would have been no obstacle for the circling by the Muslims of these areas. Likewise, with reference to the shortening of the salat, the question is to indicate that there is no inconvenience in doing so. Otherwise, there is no verse indicating the duration. It may be that Muslims have felt uneasy to have performed the salat shorter in wartime and that they were comforted by this expression. In Sura 2 The Cow, 198 also the expression ‘la junahun’ is used meaning that it is no sin to seek the bounty of the Lord.

Logically speaking the number of rakats cannot possibly contribute to the essence of salat. The name of God is not recited more when the number of rakats is more. A person may spend longer time during a rakat and repeat the name of God as many times as he thinks fit. Those, who limited the number of rakats, thought that the same salat must not be repeated more than once they thus limited the times that God’s name was to be recited. So, God has left to the discretion of the individual to choose the number of rakats he will perform.



The prayers recited during the salat must be not too loud nor said to oneself.

17/110 – Do not utter your salat (prayers) too loudly, nor secretly; you shall use a moderate tone. 17 The Children of Israel, 110



The verses that refer to this salat are as follows:

62/9 – O you who believe! When the call is proclaimed to prayer on Friday (the day of Congregation) hasten earnestly to the remembrance of God and leave off business that is best for you if you but knew!

62/10 – And when the prayer is finished then you may spread through the land and seek of the bounty of God. And continue to remember God frequently that you may succeed.

62/11 – When some of them come across a business deal, or some entertainment, they rush to it and leave you standing! Say “What God possesses is far better than entertainment or the business. God is the best provider. “ 62 The Congregation, 9-11

From the above we understand that:

1 – Friday, (the day of congregation) is the day of assembly and when the call to prayer is heard man must abandon his work and proceed to perform the congregational prayer;

2 – It is clear that the time set for it is during the working hours, between the morning (fajr) and the evening (isha) prayers.

3 – Upon the conclusion of the prayer everybody goes back to his work; so it is not a holiday.

4 – It must be performed in congregation, unlike the other salats that can be performed individually.

5 – No distinction is made for man or woman. (Not even in the hadiths can one come across such a prohibition.) The Ommayads and Abbasids invented the rumor that the Friday prayer is for men only.



Verses 101, 102 and 103 of the Sura The Women describe the prayer to be performed during a war.

In such an eventuality, while one group performs the prayer, another group will be on the watch. The praying individuals shall not abandon their weapons (weapons may be set aside during torrential rains, sickness, wounding); at the end of the prayer the name of God is pronounced.



2/239 – If you fear to pray while walking or riding, but when you are in security, remember God in the manner He has taught you, which you knew not before. 2 The Cow, 239

This shows clearly that the prayer must be made at the appointed times regardless of the circumstance.



Although there is no particular prescription for the performance of salat before the coffin of a dead person, in Verse 84 of Sura The Repentance it is indicated that no salat must be performed for traitors who betrayed Muhammad. Therefore we must deduce that salat may be performed at the funerals for persons who did not betray Muhammad.



There is no prescribed call to prayer in the Quran. Whenever a congregational service is to be held, as in the case of Friday prayer, it is only too natural that a call be proclaimed (62 The Congregation, 9). As the manner the call is to be made has not been described, the call may be made either in one’s own tongue or in Arabic, whether by human (man or woman) voice or through loudspeakers.

There is no mention of call to prayer dictated by the Prophet following a revelation. According to the hadiths, those who came to pray too early complained of having been obliged to abandon work and the latecomers of having missed the congregational performance. Various suggestions were made to find a middle course. Following a dream (see Abu Davud as Sunan), the human voice gained precedence. According to another hadith, Bilal has added on his own initiative, the words ‘As-salatu hayrun Minan Nawm’ (prayer is more favorable than sleep) to the call to prayer for the dawn prayer. It follows from this that the call to prayer could be executed according to circumstances, as it was not a binding duty commanded by the Quran. We have been saying that whatever is not dictated by the Quran is left to the discretion of the individual. The reason why we have thought it advisable to remind our readers of this fact since traditionalist Islamists have maintained that the call to prayer cannot be in the vernacular but must be in the Arabic language. Actually this is the expression of their own idea (true or not) without any foundation in religion. Something is certain; the call to prayer has not been revealed and is left to the discretion of the individual.



103 – Once you complete your salat (prayer), you shall remember God while standing, sitting or lying down on your side. 4 The Women, 103

God should also be remembered after the performance of salat. As foreseen in the Sura The Women, 103, individuals have developed the habit of remaining seated after the conclusion of the prayer to remember God. This is all very well. But we must remember this is not a binding duty and we are free to remember God also in other postures.



The Quran describes the contribution for God’s approval using various expressions, such as alms, charity or “feeding of the poor” (74 The Hidden, 44); “who strive with their goods” (4 The Women, 95).

Although we have been told to use part of our assets for the benefit of the poor, nowhere in the Quran do we come across the prescription of a definite amount like 1/40. It was the sects that had determined this rate. However, this corresponded to cash in gold or silver. According to the assets involving camels, sheep etc. the rates differed. For instance the rate of the crop was 1/10. If the water you use to irrigate your field was brought from somewhere else the rate fell to 1/20. All these rates are not mentioned in the Quran. It is worth while to make a note of the fact that the said rates are irrational. Why should a person who is a possessor of gold and silver give 1/40 of his assets while a farmer gives 1/10 of his assets? Are farmers richer than the possessor of accumulated wealth? Or is farming a more lucrative source of income than commerce? How are the rates for possessors of camels and sheep evaluated, and in what do these differ?

The word infak is mentioned in the Quran, which means both to spend for God’s sake and for spendings destined for other purposes:

8/36 – The unbelievers spend (infak) their wealth to hinder from the path of God and so will they continue to spend. 8 The Spoils of War, 36

On the other hand, the word sadaqa (alms, charity) is used only for spendings made for God’s sake.

9/103 – Of their goods take alms (sadaqa) that you may cleanse and purify (zaka) them 9 Repentance, 103

Here the Arabic words sadaqa and zaka seem to be synonyms, spendings made in the path of God signifying purification. While we can equate the sadaka (charity) with zekat (alms), we can also interpret the zekat in broader terms. In this sense, zekat would mean a purification to which all our potentialities would contribute. An individual can make donations of all his assets and perform thereby the duty commanded to him while he can at the same time perform this duty by enabling others to benefit from his store of knowledge. The Quran makes the following statement about the persons to whom one may donate one’s assets.

2/177 – For your relatives, for orphans, for the needy, for the wayfarer, for those who ask and for the ransom of slaves. 2 The Cow, 177

2/115 – They ask you what they should spend (infak). Say: “Whatever you spend that is good, is for parents and relatives and orphans and those in want and for wayfarers, and whatever you do that is good. God knows it well.” 2 The Cow, 115

2/173 – For those in need, who are engaged in the service of God, who are not able to move about in the land. The unaware may think that they are rich due to their dignified appearance. You can know them from their faces, they beg not importunately. God is surely cognisant of good things that you spend (infak). 2 The Cow, 173

9/60 – Alms (sadaqa) shall go to the poor, the needy, the workers who collect them, those hearts that have been recently reconciled, those in bondage, those in debt, in the cause of God, and to the wayfarer. Such is God’s commandment. God is all-knowing and most wise.
9 Repentance, 60

The persons to receive alms are indicated. The amount or the rate is not mentioned with a mathematical proportion in the Quran, but it is said:

2/219 – And they ask you what they should spend (infak). Say “What you denote.” God thus clarifies His signs, in order that you may consider.
2 The Cow, 219

In the Quran the portion to be spent as alms (zekat) is not expressed in ratios, like 1/40, 1/10, etc. In some translated versions the expression used is “excess,” and “beyond your needs.” In the Arabic version the word used is afw, of which the literal meaning is “pardon, forgiving.” What is actually meant however is donation. Those who are interested in further possible significations of this word are referred to the following verses: 2 The Cow, 187; 3 The Family of Imran, 152-155; 5 The Feast, 95-10;, 9 Repentance, 43; 42 Consultation, 40; 64 Mutual Blaming, 14.

The Quran condemns stinginess and commands that we give to our kind what He has made a gift of to us for His sake. The Quran makes private property lawful but commands man to use his intelligence to bring about social balance by freely giving away what He has provided us with. The Quran teaches us that the poor have rights to our assets (Sura 70 The Heights, 24-25) and that by giving to them a portion of our assets we purify (zekat) ourselves.

16/7 – God has favored some of you over others in the means of subsistence. But those who have been favored with more do not give of their means to their dependents so that they may become equal with them. Do they deny God’s beneficence? 16 The Honey Bees, 7

9/34 – O you who believe! There are indeed many among the rabbis and priests who in falsehood devour the substance of people and hinder them from the way of God. 9 Repentance, 34

The person who will dispose of his assets for God’s sake shall not forget that the real owner of his assets is God. He will bear in mind all the verses to this effect in the Quran and perform this devotional act. As one can deduce from the above quoted verses, this donation will continue until everybody becomes socially equal to each other.

Is it worthwhile to note that we should take care that our charities are not intercepted by swindler religionists. In this devotional scheme everybody will make his contribution suiting his relative standing.

65/7 – Let the man of means spend according to his means: and the man whose resources are restricted let him spend according to what God has given him. God puts no burden on any person beyond what He has given him. 65 Divorce, 7

God ordains that our spending in the way of contributions may be both open and concealed, although He prefers the latter alternative.

13/22 – And spend of what We have given them, secretly or openly.
13 The Thunder, 22

2/271 – If you give alms openly, it is well. But if you do it secretly and give to the poor, that is better. 2 The Cow, 271

However a man giving alms must not show off.

2/262 – Those who spend their substance in the cause of God and follow not up their gifts with reminders of their generosity or with injury, for them their reward is with their Lord: on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

263 – Kind words and the covering of faults are better than charity that hurts. God is Rich, Kind.

264 – O you who believe! Cancel not your charity by reminders of your generosity or by injury, like those who spend their substance only to show off, but believe neither in God nor in the Last Day.
2 The Cow, 262-263-264

Fabricators of principles have laid down a rule according to which in order that alms are given, an asset must have remained for at least a year in the possession of a person. Most of the rich people, owners of holdings, never let their riches lie idle but keep them running. Considerations like ‘debtors are not supposed to give alms,’ or ‘no alms should be given from raw material used in the production process’ are not valid, for holding owners and factory owners who produce on a credit basis will not be obliged to give any alms while the housewife who has on her arms golden bracelets will have to give away 1/40 of them and the farmer 1/10 of his harvest. According to another interpretation of traditionalists, no alms are supposed to be given for transportation means. That means a person owning a luxury car will be exempted from alms while the farmer who gathers 10 kg of tomatoes will have to give away one kg. All this remains outside the context of the Quran.

3/92 – By no means shall you attain righteousness unless you give of that which you love and whatever you give God is fully aware thereof.
3 The Family of Imran, 92


The following verses contain everything about the prescribed fast:

2/183 – O you who believe! Fasting is prescribed to you as it was prescribed to those before you. That you may learn self-restraint.

2/184 –For a fixed number of days, Iif one is ill or traveling, an equal number of other days may be substituted. Those who have difficulty to do it should compensate by feeding a poor person. But it is better for person who gives more of his own free will,. And it is better for you that you fast, if you only knew.

2/185 – Ramadan is the month in which the Quran was sent down, as guidance to man, also as clear proof and a standard. Those of you who witness this month shall fast. Those who are ill or traveling may substitute the same number of other days. God wishes convenience, not hardship for you, so that you may complete prescribed period, and to glorify God for guiding you, and be grateful.

2/187 – Permitted to you on the night of the fasts is the approach to your wives, they are your garments and you are their garments. God knows what you used to do secretly among yourselves; but he turned to you and forgave you. So now approach to them, and seek what God has ordained for you. Eat and drink until you can discern a white thread from a black thread by the dawn. Then complete your fast till the night appears. 2 The Cow, 183, 184, 185, 187


To summarize:

1. Fasting is a binding duty (2 The Cow, 183).

2. Fasting is kept in the month of Ramadan (2 The Cow, 185); Ramadan is the month in which the Quran was revealed. Ramadan is a calendar month. The whole thing may be calculated by observation of the movements of the moon. However, today we do not have to observe the phases of the moon since they are observed with modern instruments.

3. Those who cannot keep the fast for reasons of health or travel may break their fast and compensate for it later (2 The Cow, 184). It is worth mentioning here that there is no evidence in the Quran about a man’s obligation to fast for 61 days should he break his fast without justification. This is an fabricated story concocted by hadiths and sects. There are certain cases, however, in which a fast must be kept as a retribution;.namely, with reference to certain shortcomings in the performance of the Hajj (2 The Cow, 196), like the two months fasting for having caused, by mistake, the death of a believer, and for having failed to emancipate a believing slave (4 The Women, 92). In Sura 5 The Feast, 89 it is foreseen for those who have broken their oath to keep the fast as an expiation; the same thing is mentioned in Sura 5 The Feast, 95 with reference to those who kill game while on pilgrimage. In Sura 58 The Female Disputant, 4, two months of successive fasting has been foreseen for those who put down their wives by calling them their mothers or sisters. One can see that for the expiation of certain offenses fasting is ordained. Had there been a punishment for breaking one’s fast on purpose, the Quran would have mentioned it. Moreover, among the offenses mentioned above, the probability of the occurrence of some is infinitesimal.

4. The individuals who would have difficulty in keeping the fast are commanded to effect redemption by feeding a poor man. Certain sectarians tried to restrict the state of ‘difficulty in keeping the fast’ to such excuses as old age or incurable diseases. Such interpretations are again interpolations in God’s commands. Had God so desired He would have made such a restriction Himself. Muslims are expected to assess their situations keeping in mind God’s proximity to them and will remember that fasting is better as laid down in Sura 2 The Cow, 185.

5. The time to begin fasting is daybreak. The indication is the discernment by the eye of a white thread from a black one; the simile is said to have its origin in the semblance of the horizon as a thread. The end of the fasting is the end of the day as stated in Sura The Cow, 187.

6. Husbands may approach their wives at night time during the month of Ramadan (2 The Cow, 187). Fasting without eating or drinking anything and being abstinent in sexual intercourse are commanded upon us during the time in the course of which the fasting is a binding duty. Bleeding, vomiting, swearing, quarreling reported to invalidate a fast have no justifiable grounds, they are fabrications.



The Hajj is described in the following verses: 2 The Cow, 158, 189, 196, 198, 199, 200 and 203; 3 The Family of Imran, 97; 5 The Feast, 1, 2, 95, 96, 97; 9 Repentance, 3; 22 The Pilgrimage, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 29.To summarize:

1 – Hajj is the pilgrimage to the Kaaba. According to the Quran men and women have to perform the Hajj at least once in the course of their lifetime provided they are able to do so. (3 Ali Imran, 97). Those who can afford it are commanded to go on pilgrimage. Sectarians tried to restrict the meaning of ‘affording’. This is unacceptable; for, had He wanted to do so God would have made that restriction. The verb ‘to afford’ may have more than one meaning, such as ‘not to be a slave’, ‘to be rich enough to bear the cost involved’ and last but not least ‘to be in good health.’ Yet all these meanings are rather subjective. Individuals are to decide whether they are in a position to perform the pilgrimage by appealing to their conscience.

2 – The Hajj is a ritual dating back to the time of Abraham (22 The Pilgrimage, 26, 27).

3 – In Sura 2 The Cow 197 it is said that the months of pilgrimage are well known. Attention must be drawn to the fact that the word ‘months’ is in plural. Yet, in our day, the pilgrims restrict the time during which they will perform the pilgrimage and create stampedes with serious consequences. The pilgrimage is a custom known since Abraham. When one speaks of spring, the months of March, April and May come to mind, for instance. The said months of pilgrimage were also the months during which fighting was banned. Tribes around the Kaaba observed this ban. Even the heathens that succeeded Abraham kept observing this custom with a few exceptions and considered themselves as the protector of the Kaaba. They viewed those months as months when their trade would thrive. We can deduce from the contents of Sura 8 The Spoils of War, 34-35 that they considered themselves guardians as well. The fact that the sacred months mentioned in Sura 2 The Cow, 194 (after two verses, the Hajj is mentioned), the fact that fighting in the sacred months is a great offense mentioned in Sura 2 The Cow 217 in which it also is made clear that hindering from God’s way and denying Him and the Sacred Mosque and turning its people out are still graver with God, the fact that in the Sura 5 The Feast, 2 pilgrimage is mentioned, together with the Sacred Month, and the fact that in Verse 97 of the same sura, the Sacred Month and the Kaaba are mentioned together make it clear that the Sacred Months are the months during which the Hajj is performed.

In Sura 9 Repentance, 2-36 we read that the months in question are four successive months and in Sura 2 The Cow, 189 that the said months are lunar months. All this points to the fact that the pilgrimage can be performed in the course of four successive months during which fighting is banned. The first of these months is called in Arabic ‘Dhu-l-Hijjah’ which means the ‘month of pilgrimage.’ The names of the following months, respectively, are ‘Muharram, Safar and Rabiulawal.’ The word Rabiulawal is a compound word made up of the word rabiul (four) and awal (first) which is followed by the month called Rabiulahir which means the succeeding four. Rabiulawal owes its name to its being the fourth and last of the Sacred Months. Considering that the first month of the lunar calendar is Muharram, the month called Rabiulahir is the fourth month of the lunar calendar. This explains why the name of this month is the ‘succeeding fourth one.’ If one fails to see that the month Rabiulawal is the fourth of the Sacred Months, one cannot see clearly why the month Rabiulahir is the ‘succeeding’ fourth. This proves once more that the beginning of the Sacred Months is Dhu-li Hijjah and the last is the month of Rabiulawal. Thus, the pilgrimage is a devotional act performed in the space of time of four months.

4 – Quarreling, the perpetration of evil deeds and sexual relations are forbidden during the Hajj (2 The Cow, 197),

5 – During the Hajj the individual is forbidden certain things that are lawful (like sexual intercourse). . Ihram means, in fact, that the individual abstains from certain things (like sexual contact) during the pilgrimage. However, the word refers today to the garment that the pilgrim wears during the Hajj. The Quran has no such connotation. One other thing that is prohibited during the Ihram is hunting; Sura 5 The Feast, 95 mentions that the pilgrims shall not kill game. However, this is restricted to hunting on land. Pilgrims may go fishing. To whomever kills game intentionally, the compensation is the like of what he kills from the cattle, as two just persons will judge, as an offering to be brought to the Kaaba, or the compensation is the feeding of the poor or the equivalent in fasting (5 The Feast, 95).

6 – In case an individual infringes on the law that prohibits the land hunt, he has to offer a sacrifice the kind of which is to be determined by two persons. He may also compensate for his offence by keeping the fast or feeding the poor (5 The Feast, 95).

7- Umra means ‘visit.’ The hajj is performed at a prescribed date while umra may take place at any time. In Sura 2 The Cow, 196 we read ‘Accomplish the pilgrimage and the visit for God.’ In other words, the event must not be an occasion of political propaganda, exploitation of personal interests, etc. Following the conclusion of the ritual of pilgrimage the pilgrim makes sacrifices and is commanded not to shave his heads until the offering reaches its destination. The individuals who are sick or have an ailment of the head may effect compensation by fasting or giving alms or sacrificing. And when he is secure, whoever profits by combining the visit with the pilgrimage should take whatever offering is easy to obtain. If he cannot afford it, he should fast three days during the Hajj and seven days on his return. This is for those whose household is not in the Sacred Mosque (2 The Cow, 196).

8 – The sacrifice requires the pronunciation of the name of God. A portion of the meat of the slaughtered animal is eaten by the person making the sacrifice, and the rest is distributed among the poor (22 The Pilgrimage, 28). During the ritual one must purify oneself from all pollution, and vows made must have been performed (22 Hajj, 29). Sura 22 The Pilgrimage, 29 says that the individual should accomplish his needful acts of cleansing. The Hajj being the place of encounter of huge crowds, the hygienic rules must be observed. Sura 48 The Victory, 27 may be evaluated in this light wherein it is said that the faithful will enter the Sacred Mosque, if God pleases, in security, head shaved and hair cut short. The circling of the Kaaba will be accomplished in a cleansed state (22 The Pilgrimage, 29). On the other hand, the place where the pilgrimage ritual is to take place must be kept clean and in a pure state (22 The Pilgrimage, 26).

9 – When one comes down from Mount Arafat to Mesai Haram, God will be praised (2 The Cow, 198).

10 – Then pardon will be asked for from God (2 The Cow, 199).

11 – Following the completion of the ritual, God will be praised with heart and soul (2 The Cow, 200).

12 – God will be praised during the appointed days. But if anyone hastens to leave in two days, there is no blame on him. And whoever wants can stay longer (2 The Cow, 203).

13 – Sura 2 The Cow, 159 says that the Safa and Marwah are truly among the signs of God; so whoever makes a pilgrimage to the House or pays a visit to it, there is no blame on him if he goes round them. Yet, the sectarians have fabricated the running between the two hills and made it appear as a binding duty. The elderly and the disabled are compelled to do this despite the fact that this is not mentioned in the Quran. The transportation of the elderly on stretchers serves to benefit the stretcher-bearers. However, although this is not commanded, there is no blame for those who would prefer to do it as the Quran suggests.

14 – There is no such thing as the stoning of Satan. The execution of the duty of pilgrimage in the space of time that is spread over four months, the recognition of the fact that shuttling between Safa and Marwah is not compulsory will make the ritual of pilgrimage a safe and secure act during which thousands of people will not lose their lives. This has been a cause of the death of multitudes. Strange rituals performed around the Black Stone also are not indicated in the Quran. On the other hand, contrary to what has been said by commentators, a woman may well go on the Hajj by herself, a person may use perfume and wear any appearal with or without seams. The zamzam water, caps and prayer rugs that the pilgrims on their return are said to be obliged to bring home have no foundation. http://www.quranic.org/quran_article/36/faith_prayer_alms_fasting_and_pilgrimage.htm

posted in ENGLISH ISLAM | 1 Comment

8th Aralık 2008



Once the Quran came to be deemed not self-sufficient and the need was felt to supplement it with hadiths and ijtihads, the rise of numerous sects was inevitable. The four sects prevalent today of the Sunni and Shii sects have had the largest followers among many that have emerged in history.

According to one hadith a man’s calf should be covered, according to another it might be uncovered; according to a commentary of a hadith bleeding would render a man canonically unclean, according to another, touching a woman’s hand would have the same effect. Those who were responsible for corrupting religion by reverting to sources other than the Quran tried to come to a settlement of such issues by having recourse to sects. In this way, the Islam of the Quran was transformed to the Islam of the sectarians. On the other hand, it so happened that the founder of a sect took into his head to enjoin the covering of a man’s body from the waist down to his knees based on a certain hadith, while another denied the authenticity of it. The founder of another sect thinks otherwise and disregards such a prohibition. The fact is that a given hadith was liable to be interpreted differently, but not the Quran since it is the unique source of Islam.














Sectarian chiefs (imams) reverted to different hadiths from which they tried to derive conclusions and lay down rules in their capacity as lawgivers in subjects left to man’s discretion. The result was the emergence of a new religious composition. In terms of approach, this new structure was no different than Catholicism or Orthodoxy. There have been people who have been of the idea that these sectarian imams had always had the best intentions and there was no end to their sacrifices in the name of religion; consequently, they turned a blind eye to the actual state of affairs and ignored the criticism leveled at them. These sectarian imams who had been given almost absolute authority had been free to issue decrees, laying down or repealing rules at their discretion, and consequently declared an infinite number of things lawful and unlawful, greater in number than what the Quran contained. The names given to the prominent sects were: Hanafi, Shafi, Maliki, Hanbali and Shii.

6/159 – As for those who divide their religion and break it up into sects, they do not belong with you. He will then inform them of everything they had done. 6 The Cattle, 159


For instance, the person who refuses to perform the prayer is flogged according to the Hanafi sect, but is killed according to the Hanbali, Shafi and Maliki sects. The latter three sects commit a heinous crime, the greatest sin according to the Hanafi sect, while cruelty is attributed to the Hanafi sect that flogged but abstained from murdering the culprit according to the other sects. In accordance with the mentality that divides the religion, God will sort out the Muslims depending on their sects and judge the flogging of the Hanafi and approve his act, while He will do the same thing with regard to the murder of the Shafi and mark it with approval. The person refusing to perform the prayer killed by a Hanafi will be sent to hell, but if he is killed by a Shafi, the act will be one deserving the reward in paradise. No matter what the number of followers of such paradoxical religious concepts is, how can one of a sound mind consider them seriously? The approach that preferred to imitate rather than cogitate and declared the Quran incomprehensible by the layman has immersed the public into abysmal ignorance. Can God have revealed the religion and made it exclusive to these sectarians? Yet, He addresses humanity saying ‘O people!’ and makes no reference to the Four Imams.

Despite the verses of the Quran that say there is no compulsion in religion and that contain no provision for those who do not perform the act of worship required of them, why do the imams, at their discretion, pronounce their respective judgments, all of which are admissible, though incompatible?

There are people who claim that differences between the sects are insignificant, that the Hanafi sect suits better the town dweller, while the Shafi sect suits better the villagers! With such inept remarks, they lured people to fancy apish manners. The sects have taken different shapes and moved away from the basic tenets of the Quran and almost become dissimilar creeds. The sectarian imam interprets the hadith he chooses at his discretion, according to his own view of life and supersedes the Quran and the hadiths. Dissent from the true and unique religion of the Quran is only too apparent in their attitude.

3/105 – Be not like those who are divided amongst themselves and fall into disputations after receiving clear signs. 3 The Family of Imran, 105



If those seeking salvation in division seriously read the Quran rather than the fabricated hadiths, they will see for themselves that division into factions and the setting up of sects that differ in what is lawful or not is but damnation.

Another fabricated hadith runs as follows: “If one tries to acquire correct and sound views but commits an error, he acquires merit in God’s sight, and if one who tries hard to acquire correct and sound views proves to be right in his judgment his merit in God’s sight is doubled.” This invented hadith enabled one to interpolate into the religion one’s own opinion and gave the impression that someone who strove hard to acquire correct and sound views gained the blessing of God even though he may have erred in his attempt. Based on this claimed hadith, the sectarian imams had been free to interpolate into the religion their own views and ideas under the guise of ray (opinion), kýyas (analogy), jtihad (initiative) or fatwa (legal viewpoint) on legal matters. The words, the great majority of which had been wrongly attributed to the Prophet and to the Prophet’s companions and taken for God’s own word like the Quran and the thousands of additions made by sectarian imams who had deemed themselves authorized to formulate their judgments about the words spoken before them and to impose them as religion, make up the history of present-day Islam. In other words, the Quran + the hadith decided upon at his own discretion by the sectarian imam + the commentaries of the Quran by the sectarian imam + the deductions by the sectarian imams through analogy and ijtihad (initiatives) + the deductions by the sectarian imams according to their evaluation of the companions of the Prophet + the fatwas decreed on events that occurred afterward make up Islam. This was the equation created. The traditionalism, the sectarianism and the religion based on hadiths into which were added the fatwas and ijtihads pronounced by the imams who had succeeded the first imams who embraced their points of view have made up what Islam is conceived to be at present. The controversial points such as whether or not the cologne would cleanse one or not, and if it were sprinkled on one should one renew one’s ablution, or if a cigarette should be declared to be lawful or unlawful formed the basis of later additions, each sect adopting a different viewpoint.

Another alleged hadith was the one that foresaw the division of the Muslim community into seventy-three factions of which only one was to be admitted to paradise, the rest going to hell. The person who had announced this was no other than Muaviya (Darimi, Siyer). This hadith allowed each one of the sects to consider itself the future dwellers of paradise and to condemn the others to eternal punishment in hell. This so-called hadith enabled the Sunnis to condemn the Shiites as reprobates and the future inferno dwellers and the Shiites to convict the Sunnis as reprobates and the future inferno dwellers. Conversely, the imitators of the four principal sects styled as Sunni ended by interpreting and explaining away their mutual accusations in a reconciliatory manner and decided that the followers of the four sects might be eligible for paradise while the Shiites were outcasts. In reality, having judged the Quran not sufficient enough, each party takes its own imam for its guide and follows the imam’s injunctions as if they were the revelations of God.



Yaþar Nuri Öztürk explains in his book, Islam in the Quran, the damages caused by sectarianism: “One of the ways to tell lies in the name of God has been to transform the sects into religions. When each of the sects has become a religion on its own and each of the sectarian imams has turned into a prophet that admits no censure, the establishment of the proportion and divine contribution in the prevalent religion becomes impossible for the masses and a chaos results under the guise of religion. Despite the lapse of hundreds of years in between, nobody dares to bring a change in these tabooed interpretations. This is nothing but cruelty and defamation of God. Because of this cruelty, when the true Islam scholars and honest officials in charge of the religious practice attemptto explain the religion in its true garb, they encounter difficulties and are met by accusations. The remedy to this would be an iconoclastic approach, leaving God the unique authority. This is because pure religion is the exclusivity of God (39 The Throngs, 3). Those who do not feel at home in the face of this exclusivity and dare to share God’s authority are reprobates.”



Yaþar Nuri Öztürk, realizing the obstacle created by the Islam of sects to the Islam professed in the Quran, has described the devastation caused by sects by giving concrete examples in his book, Naked Warning (Çýplak Uyarý), in a chapter entitled Chaos of the Religious Anthology Ascribed to God, said: “The restlessness is due to the mixing of God’s religion with the anthology of religion created by men. God’s religion is the one revealed by God Himself in His book, explicit and detailed and about which there is no doubt. The messenger of the Book is Muhammad. This is the Islam of the Quran. The authors of the anthology of religion are copartners and have created a compilation challenging the uniqueness of the fountainhead of Islam. The books are more than one, the leaders are more than one and the communities are more than one. It is like a corporation. Instead of the unity and harmony existing in religion as such, there exist but chaos and discord in this anthology. All the resulting desultoriness originates from lack of unity and the plurality of its authors. There is an absolute lack of authority in the anthology. ‘According to the opinion of…’ has been the phrase of introduction in many instances. God’s will, having been dodged, the consequence has been but a turmoil in which sects, factions, groups, parties, religious orders, etc. have had their part to play. In these, two persons of the same denomination who act with the same intention are judged differently according to their respective groups, one being condemned, the other declared not guilty of the act they performed.”



The masses happen to be the followers of a given sect without being aware of their true aspect and let themselves be instructed what the books on ‘Islamic catechism’ provide them with. For instance, the great majority of Turkish population claims to belong to the Hanafi sect. Yet, as they are ignorant of the fact that the filling or crowning of teeth is prohibited by their sect, they have their teeth filled or crowned. Under the circumstances, their ablution and consequently their prayer becomes null and void according to the viewpoint of their Hanafi sect. Clichés and threats have rendered the sectarianism into some sort of chauvinism and racism. Not to belong to the Sunni sect has been almost equated with heathenism. The same thing holds true as regards the Shiites and Alawis. Their approach to the Sunni is similar. The only alternative that is avoided by the masses who should be enlightened on this issue is the refutation of all the sects and the return to the unique source of Islam: the Quran!

The founders of the sects interpreted the Quran and the hadiths according to their idiosyncrasies, made a selection of the Quranic verses and hadiths transmitted peculiar to their characters, laid down rules under the guise of ra’y (opinion) and ijtihad (initiative) in the domains left to the discretion of the individual, and ended by establishing supremacy over the Quran and the hadiths. The exercise of this power received bitter censure not only from those who deemed the Quran self-sufficient, but also from the hadith imams who came after the sectarian imams we keep on criticizing. One of the major issues they contested was the prevalence of the personal opinions and viewpoints of the sectarian imams. Certain transmitters of the hadiths leveled criticism at the sectarian imams accusing them of inventing hadiths that best suited their own opinions. The criticism of accusing Hanafi, founder of the largest sect, of unreliability by Bukhari, the most renowned among the authors of hadith books, is an example of the depreciation of the sectarians by the authors of hadith books. The consequence has been present-day Islam, which is far from being the Islam of the Quran, not even the Islam based on an infinite number of invented hadiths. The Islam practiced today is the system established by sectarian imams. During the period when they established their sects there was neither a Bukhari nor a Muslim. Nor had the hadiths been sorted out according to the likelihood of their authenticity. In other words, the sects had been formed at a time when there was no trace yet of the Kutub-u Sitte (the six renowned books of hadiths). By this we try to stress the fact that the percentage of the invented hadiths was much higher than a good many hadith books. It is sad to observe that the great majority of people believe their sect to be tantamount to Islam and are unaware of the fact that it is at variance in many respects with the injunctions contained in the Quran. The Quran laid down explicit rules in certain domains leaving others to the discretion of the individual allowing the religion to conform to the time and milieu in question. The sects, on the other hand, believing that there had been gaps left by God in His revelation, ventured to intervene and tried to fill up the so-called gaps, bringing religion to clash with many a situation and even with human conditions.



Idjma (consensus) also is mentioned as one of the sources outside of the Quran. The Sunnis define idjma as the consensus on a given issue reached by all the scholars. Yet, what we are going to observe presently is at odds with the arguments. Although idjma may be adopted as a fact among the Sunnisects, if we take a look at the history of Islam there is hardly any issue outside the purview of the Quran on which consensus has not been reached. For instance on such issues as the prohibition to perform prayer for menstruating women, the fact that the number of prayers should be five in the course of the day, the barring of the way for women to rise to the position of the head of state, the stoning to death of the married committing adultery there is consensus among all the Sunni sects. But this viewpoint belongs to the Sunnis exclusively; for, according to the Kharidjis a menstruating woman may perform her prayers, a woman may rise to the position of the head of state, the number of prayers may be less than five, the adultress shall not be stoned to death.,These views had already been expressed from the very start of the foundation of the sect. This illustrates once again that the Quran, which does not contain prescriptions on such issues, should be adopted as the only reliable source. So long as one was not satisfied with what the Quran lays down explicitly, the rise of a plurality of sects was inevitable. Although under the heading of Sunna they try to show the unity of sects, the readers will presently see for themselves that the situation is not as it is alleged and that the lawful and the unlawful differ according to most of them.


Those whose intentions have been to deceive people have invented hadiths that praised their sectarian imams while depreciating their opponents, the imams of other sects. To consolidate the link of the followers to the sectarian imams, stories are told about the scholarship and devotion of the founders of the sects. The most incredible cock-and-bull story we have heard has been Abu Hanifa’s vision of God in his dreams more than one hundred times. In order to attach people to their own creeds they had recourse to such hyperboles. It is difficult however to tell if the author of such invented stories had been the founders themselves or their students or followers.

We are of the opinion that those who at present style themselves Hanafis are far from being linked to Abu Hanifa. Abu Hanifa was nicknamed Ahl-i Ray (authorized to pronounce legal opinions). This was a consequence of his laying down rules that the Quran did not contain. All the hadith scholars, especially Shafi, and later, Bukhari took exception to this attitude that disregarded the hadiths. Yet, the Hanafi sect today is entirely based on hadiths. They try to base every viewpoint of the Hanafi sect on a hadith. Nevertheless, according to historical records the reason for the murder of Abu Hanifa was his qualification as “lawgiver.” The Hanafi sect has been transmitted to us under the sovereignty of the powers that be who had assassinated Abu Hanifa. As a matter of fact, Abu Yusuf, acknowledged as the number 2 figure to succeed Abu Hanifa (the person who had ventured to kill somebody who disliked squash, as this was against the Sunna) became the authority that issued fatwas attached to the group that had killed Abu Hanifa. The preaching of his master’s views under the rule of the powers that be – murderers of the master – that had raised him to his actual office was certainly tainted with ideological prejudices and sectarianism. One of the reasons is the concoction of hadiths by sectarians with a view to justifying their own viewpoints. Most of the hadith books were written after the establishment of sects. Whatever Abu Hanifa’s views may have been, the sect called Hanafi we have been commenting on is the one that is being applied at present.




A careful survey would show that the foundations of the Sunni ideas and the religion based on hadiths had been laid by Imam Shafi, founder of the Shafi sect. After Shafi, except for certain cases about which there is explicit injunction in the Quran, a provision of the canonical law had to be based on one or more hadiths (Montgomery Watt, What is Islam?). The same opinion is expressed by Ýlhami Güler in the following way: “One must not forget that the core of the history of Islamic thought expressed in the Kutub-i Sitte and especially in Bukhari’s work to which has been attributed an epistemological worth almost equal to the Quran, largely consists in Shafi’s reducing the Sunna to ‘gayrý metluv vahiy’. The hadith culture, which up until Shafi, had been differently interpreted and depended on, verbal intellect had come to be expressed in written form after Shafi and assumed a dogmatic quality and an importance almost equal to the Quran (First Quran Symposium, Arkun Tarihiyyatu’l-Fikril’l-Arabi). Osman Taþtan described the manner by which the foundations of the Sunna conception of today had been laid down by Imam Shafi: “Shafi’s emergence changed the situation. Shafi, separated the Prophet’s Sunna from the community’s Sunna and raised the latter in legal terms to a level equal to the Quran. The idea was to show the highest respect to the prophethood of Muhammad and contribute to it. Actually, this put an unbridgeable gap between the Prophet and the community. In this way the Sunna had been mixed with the revelation in a melting pot. The last thing to do would be to merge the sayings of the Prophet’s companions with them. These theoretical approaches had widened the scope of the revelation that came to be extended to cover first the Sunna and then the sayings of the companions. This meant extending the divine revelation to cover human words (First Quran Symposium).” We did not want to reserve a wide space for the history of sects in the present book. Anybody who examines the history of sects may see for himself the attacks on the Hanafi sect by Shafi and the fact that the sects Maliki, Hanbali and Shafi are not branches of one single sect called Sunni, but are sects on their own. The table we shall be giving presently will make clear the wide differences between them. These sects, which originally were separate from each other, had come to be gathered under one heading by the contribution of Imam Ghazzali, rector of the Nýzamýya Madrasa under the influence of political authority. The revelation was one contained in the Quran before it was divided into conflicting sects. The objective was to acquire extraneous sources and try to challenge the divine authority.

3/103 – Hold on firmly together to the rope of God, and be not divided among yourselves. 3 Family of Imran, 103



We shall observe in the table below the conflicts between the sects and the way God’s Islam came to be differently conceived. We have spared here the intrinsic differences between the sects themselves. Just to give you an instance, it is acknowledged that there was wide divergence between Abu Hanifa’s opinions and the ideas of his followers; Abu Yusuf, Muhammad…. In our table we limit ourselves to the variations between various sects. Those who believe in what has been transmitted by their ancestors but willing to know the core of their creed should, after examining the tables given below, come to a decision before getting rid of all of them and return to the only revelation contained in the Quran.


Hanafi Maliki Shafi Hanbali

1. Skin of a dead animal
unlawful lawful unlawful lawful

2. Flesh of beasts fed on dirt
– lawful – unlawful

3. Eel
lawful – – unlawful

4. Man’s wearing red
abominable lawful unlawful abominable

5. Man’s wearing yellow
unlawful lawful unlawful unlawful

6. Playing ud, recorder, drum, etc. abominable lawful lawful unlawful

7. Crow flesh unlawful lawful unlawful unlawful

8. Horse flesh unlawful lawful – –

9. Mussels
unlawful lawful – –

10. Oysters
unlawful lawful – –

11. Lobsters
unlawful lawful – –

12. Swallows lawful lawful unlawful unlawful

13. Eagles
unlawful lawful unlawful unlawful

14. Bats unlawful abominable unlawful unlawful

15. Ablution before circumambulation in pilgrimage
duty (wacip) binding duty binding duty binding duty

16. Rehearsing of Fatiha in the first two rekats during prayer.
duty binding duty binding duty binding duty

17. Tasbih in kneeling and prostrating
sunna – sunna duty

18. Rehearsing suras after the fatiha during the first two rekats
duty permissible sunna sunna

19.Rehearsing basmala before the fatiha
sunna abominable binding duty duty

20. Interval between feet during prayer in the standing position
3 inches 16 inches 8 inches 16 inches

21. Vitr prayer
duty sunna sunna sunna

22. Man who touches a boy becomes canonically unclean
no yes no no

23. Does greeting during prayer make one canonically unclean?
yes no – –

24. Interval allowed from the person during prayer.
40 fathoms 1 fathom 3 fathoms 3 fathoms

25. To utter words other than the prayer during prayer annuls it
yes no no no

26. Using a wrong word during the prayer annuls it
yes no no no

27. Sighing during the prayer annuls it
yes no yes yes

28. Is the urine of beasts whose flesh is edible clean? yes no yes no

29. Is the sperm of edible beasts clean?
yes yes no no

30. Number of binding duties in ablution
4 7 6 7

31. Is there an obligatory order of acts during ablution?
no no yes yes

32. Must acts performed during ablution follow an unbroken succession?
no yes no yes

33. Number of sunnas of ablution
17 8 30 20

34. Is the use of miswak sunna?
yes no yes yes

35. Washing hands, face and arms three times sunna?
yes no yes yes

36. Is the three times anointing the head during ablution a sunna?
no no yes yes

37. Is the rubbing of ears inside & outside a sunna?
yes yes yes no

38. How many times must the ears be rubbed during ablution?
once once three times once

39. The number of acts that annul one’s ablution
12 3 5 8

40. Does touching one’s sexual organ annul the ablution?
no yes yes yes

41. Does laughter during pray (salat) annul the ablution
yes no no no

42. Do eating camel flesh and washing the body of the dead annul the ablution?
no no no yes

43. Does uncertainty annul the ablution?
no no no yes

44. Does bleeding annuls the ablution?
yes no no yes

45. Is expression of intention necessary before ablution?
yes no no no

46. Number of reasons for total ablution (gasala)
7 4 5 6

47. Number of binding duties related to total ablution
11 5 3 –

48. Person not performing the pray because of neglect or idleness
is jailed& killed if killed if killed if
beaten& he doesn’t he doesn’t he doesn’t
killed repent repent in repent in 3 days 3 days

49. If the words are not rehearsed successively will call for prayer (ezan) be valid
yes yes no no

50. Can a person who doesn’t speak Arabic rehearse the words of ezan in his tongue?
no yes no yes

51..Must formal resolve be expressed in ezan?
no yes no yes

52. Is greeting permissible during the ezan?
no no no yes

53. Must one rehearse the Fatiha at every prayer? Is it a binding duty?
yes no no no

54.Is salam a binding duty at the end of every prayer?
no to one to one to both
direction only direction only directions

55. Parts of a man that should be covered?
From navel privy parts & from navel from navel
to the knee buttocks to the knee to the knee

56. Portion of a corpse for ritual cleaning before burial
2/3 ½ a portion a portion

57. Must water enter the mouth and nostrils during ritual washing of the corpse
no yes yes no

58. Should person who died during hajj (pilgrimage) be incensed
with perfume and face covered?
yes yes no no

59. Who will conduct the salat performed in honor of the dead?
sultan- person next of person
head of state that the dead kin that the dead
had indicated had indicated

60. Special proscription for the time of performance of salat in honor of the dead?
5 3 every time 3

61 Can body be buried at a location other than the one where death occurred?
yes yes no no

62. Should intention to fast be expressed by word of mouth
yes yes no yes

63. Should a person renew his intention to fast every day in Ramadan?
yes no yes yes

64. Does bleeding annul fasting?
no no no yes

65. Chattel a person owes that bars zakat giving?
all assets gold&silver no all assets
except for grains prescription

66. Should a man or woman give zakat on their jewelry?
yes no no no

67. Should zakat be given on cash?
yes yes yes no

68. Rate of zakat on metals?
1/5 1/5 1/40 1/40

69. No. of conditions related to zakat to be given on traded assets
4 5 6 2

70. Should zakat be given on any valuable thing unearthed?
yes no no yes

71. Should zakat be given on honey produced?
yes no no yes

72.Should zakat be given on land devoted to pious foundations?
yes yes no no

73.Should zakat be given on land rented or held in tenure to be cultivated ?
no yes yes yes

74. Should zakat be given on olives?
yes yes no yes

75.Should zakat be given on cattle fed on foddle or worked in the field?
no yes no no

76. Age of sheep and goat at which they are liable for zekat?
For sheep 1 For sheep 1 For sheep 1 For sheep 1/2
For goat 1 For goat 1 For goat 2 For goat 2

77. Can a woman go to hajj unaccompanied by her husband?
no yes yes no

78. Can a person unable to go on hajj appoint a proxy?
yes no yes yes

79. Number of requirements for hajj?
2 4 5 4

80. Is it permissible that the stone hurled at Satan does not fall on the jamra during pilgrimage?
yes no no no

81. Is it permissible to give food to a poor who is not a Muslim?
yes no no no

82. Is it unlawful to sit on silk, to lean against it or to use it as tapestry?
no yes yes yes

83. Is it permissible for a boy to wear silk?
no no yes yes

84. Is it permissible to use a cup ornamented with silver while taking
ablution or drink from?
yes no no no

85. Is trimming the beard unlawful?
yes yes no yes

86. Is backgammon unlawful?
no yes yes yes

87. Is chess unlawful?
yes yes no yes

88. Should the debts of a dead be paid?
no yes yes no

89. What portion of things unearthed in one’s own land are due to the state?
1/5 0 0 0

90. Is the usurper cultivator of land the owner of the produce he obtains?
yes yes yes no

91. Time within which a contract can be modified or terminated?
3 days according 3 days according to
to the need contract

92. Beast sexually assaulted
killed not killed not killed should be
flesh nor flesh edible flesh edible killed


93. Number of times the cudgel shall be applied to inflict punishment to a drinker of wine or other inebriating substance?
80 80 40 80

94.Will a person stinking or vomiting wine be punished with a cudgel?
no yes no no

95. Can the estate of a religious apostate killed be given to his inheritor?
yes no no no

96. Should a woman renegade be killed?
no yes yes yes

97. Should letting some die by abandoning, imprisoning and leaving him to starve be considered as premeditated murder?
no yes yes yes

98. Can a woman act as a judge?
yes no no no

99. Is a dog a clean animal?
no no yes yes

100. Should a muezzin be paid for his act?
no yes yes no


posted in ENGLISH ISLAM | 0 Comments

8th Aralık 2008




Aşağıdaki tabloda verilen örnekleri aklımızı kullanarak incelediğimizde, vahiy merkezli bir anlayışa sahip olanlar şunu göz ardı edemezler; mezhepler arasında farklar olsa bile, bu fark, haram-helal boyutunda olmamalı. Güvenlik, sağlık, ekonomik, temizlik gibi  konulardaki bu farklılıklar görüş ve yorum farklılığı düzeyinde kalmalı. Buna uygun davranmayanların günahkar olacağı iddiası açık bir delil gerektirmektedir. Tıpkı günümüzde şeker, iç yağlar, hamurlu yiyecekler, gıda standardları, temizlik ve sağlık açısından giyim standardı vb. konularda uzmanlar arasında görüş ve yorum farklılıkları elbette olabilir.


Uzman din bilginleri, kendi kanaatlerine göre şunu yemenin veya içmenin ya da giymenin yahut kullanmanın sakıncalı olabileceğini ve belki Allah tarafından sorgulanacağımızı elbette dile getirebilir. Helal diye nitelenenlerin de daha yararlı, iyi veya güzel olacağını dile getirebilirler. Halk da bu görüş ve yorum farklılıkların da uygun gördüğünü tercih edebilir.

Yeni gelişen şartlarda yeni sorunlara yeni çözümlerin getirilmesi tabiidir. Görüş ve yorum farklılıklarını “haram” veya “helal” diye nitelediğimizde mezheplerin görüşleri, görüş ve yorum farklılığı olmaktan çıkıp “din” olarak algılanmaya başlıyor. Belki mezhep imamları bunları doğrudan haram veya helal olarak nitelemediler, bu nitelemeler sonradan oluştu. Ancak günümüzde ortaya çıkan bu farklılığın ciddi bir sorun olduğu bilinmelidir. Herhangi bir şey, Allah’a göre hem haram, hem helal olamaz. Allah’ın dininde asla çelişki olmaz. Bkz. Nisa: 82 Unutmayalım ki dinde çelişki izlenimi uyandırmak, onun hakkında doğru bilgi sahibi olmayan insanları ateist, agnostik veya deistliğe sürüklemektedir.



posted in MEZHEPLER-ANLAYIŞLAR | 14 Comments