PrimaQuran on The Ibadi School

Image result for the promised neverland

From ‘The Promised Neverland’, a manga By Kaiu Shirai and Posuka Demizu

I can safely say that this is bar none the most useful and comprehensive articles I have seen for very many years for Muslims in the West (and elsewhere). It is clearly the product of many years of sincere questioning and learning. And I’m saying that as a non-Ibadi Maturidi. I think this is an indispensable article for converts and Muslims alike and I hope it is widely read and re-blogged so that people can arm themselves against valid doubts that would otherwise cause the best of us to leave the faith – since only morally and intellectually bankrupt people are convinced by the types of abysmal apologetics Muslims have to endure. In line with this actually being good and useful, Muslims will no doubt hasten their own demise by ignoring it for some nonsense by celebrity Salafis like Jonathan Brown, but regardless a huge thanks to PrimaQuran for this. (The rest of his site is packed with indispensable articles too BTW).

Original article here:

Why I now follow the Ibadi school


                 By Prima Quran


Bismillah ir rahman ir raheem, Allahumma Salli Ala Muhammed.

And those who strive for Us – We will surely guide them to Our ways. And indeed, Allah is with the doers of good. (Holy Qur’an 29:69)

“Verily, this is My way, leading straight: follow it: follow not other paths: they will scatter you about from His great path: thus does He command you, that you may be righteous.” (Holy Qur’an  6:153

Before I begin this entry I would like to say two things.

I still love respect, honor, cherish and wish to work with all Muslims. 

  1. I have and will continue to love and respect and work with my Muslim brothers who are Sunni and Shi’a.  I will continue to love and respect and work with all Muslims rather you are Salafi or Sufi.
  2.  Second thing I would like to say is that these are my thoughts and reflections. I do not wish to cause any ill feelings towards any of the Muslims.   Please know I will speak very candidly about my own conclusions.


A brief over view on why I started Prima-Qur’an.

As those of you know who have been following my blog Prima-Qur’an that it is the result of  unanswered questions that I have had in my years of being with the group that calls itself ‘The Ahl Sunnah’.    I think that many Muslims who are in the field of daw’ah (calling people to Islam) do not appreciate that just because a person becomes a Muslim does not mean that they do not have anymore questions about Islam.

Also it is very important to remember that just because we give someone an answer it doesn’t mean that the answer is intelligible, sensible or coherent.

For many of us as converts it is a continuous process of taking on new information as it is being presented , weighing and evaluating this information.

The struggle of us converts. 

We are converts are told that “Islam is simple” only to find out much latter it is anything but simple -at least not the Islam that is currently being presented to the multitudes.

We are told that the Shahadah is “I bear witness that there is only one God and Muhammed is the Messenger of God”  only to find out that the “correct Shahadah” entails taking on the theological, juristic, philosophical, historical baggage of the group who administered the Shahadah to us.

Examples being:

“I bear witness that there is one God and Muhammed is the Messenger of God, and Dawatus Salafiyyah is correct in all issues of fiqh and aqidah and that Bukhari is infallible and if Al Abani, Uthaymee and Bin Baz say something that it must be true, and the by the way the Qur’an is uncreated and Allah has a foot but not like other foots.”

“I bear witness that there is one God and Muhammed is the Messenger of God, and that the books of Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi , Ibn Majah, are the books we rely upon, that I bear witness that I will choose between any of the four schools of jurisprudence, Maliki, Shafi, Hanbali and Hanafi, and there are two schools of aqidah I can choose from , yet I’m not suppose to make taqlid in aqidah, and eventually when I get around to it or  when he finds me I will be guided to a Sufi Tariah who will take care of my spiritual affairs and guide me to safe shores.”

“I bear witness that there is one God and Muhammed is the Messenger of God, and we are to be guided by the 12 Imams, and only the Ahl Bayt are the sources of true knowledge of true guidance, and temporary marriage is a thing.”

When those of us as converts take the Shahadah I believe we do so for various reasons but why we feel comfortable with saying that declaration is that we do come to some rational, emotional, spiritual understanding that there is One Almighty Creator.

We either are moved by the call to prayer, the congregational prayer, the treatment by fellow Muslims, something we read in a translation of the Holy Qur’an, something that pulls us in that direction; and if this man Muhammed (saw) is the who has imputed this information we have no problem in accepting that he must be the envoy, ambassador, messenger and prophet of this One Almighty Creator.

So now we have taken the shahadah, to the thunderous sounds of Takbir! Allahu Akbar! (God is Greater).  The warm embraces of fellow Muslims.  So now we are Muslims, members of 1.6 billion community world wide.   Feels amazing right?


Now here comes the fine print.  Now we will be expected to embrace and defend the historical, philosophical, theological, juristic world view of the bunch we took our Shahadah with.

So as I stated above I was never comfortable with the ‘packaged deal’.  Now certainly I understand that Islam means submission.  I certainly understand that our ego is like a wild horse that needs to be broken. I certainly understand that we are all of us products of presuppositions. I certainly understand that we are slaves of Allah (swt).

Yet in the same breadth I certainly understand when a position or view is not based upon  facts or something solid,  I certainly understand when a position or a view is cacophonous and discordant.

I can sit with learned pious and well meaning people from sunrise until sunset and still understand when there are woeful inconsistencies in a viewpoint.  I can even look a person in the eye and glean from it that they themselves are not certain of what they are saying.  I am capable of all of that by the grace of Allah (swt).


I also want to make a few other points before talking about my decision to follow the Ibadi school.   I will discuss what I feel the Ibadi school gives me closure on and how it aligns with my own research and findings, with more discoveries to be made.

I also want to make it a point that my world view as a Muslim is still very much Prima-Qur’an.   The Ibadi school doesn’t expect anyone to practice Taqlid.  This is a breath of fresh air for me because I will always uphold the Holy Qur’an over any ahadith, fiqh, ijtihad that I feel clashes with a fundamental teaching or precept in the Holy Qur’an.



I believe not only we as convert Muslims but many born and raised Muslims read many of the ahadith concerning many of the companions and cannot possibly walk away with the impression that these people were all angels and saints.

The civil wars among the companions is all to easily swept under the rug by “Ahl Sunnah.”    Statements like “when lions fight dogs bark” is not a very intellectual or serious way to address the matter. Why  differences among companions were so serious as to have them thrust swords into one another and even killed each other is definitely an issue that needs addressed.

Well listen to what this respected Sunni scholar and researcher of hadith Professor Jonathan Brown has to say:

“There are even reports from the early historian al-Mada’ini that Mu’awiya encouraged systematic forging and circulation of hadiths affirming the virtues of the caliphs and Companions at Ali’s expense.”(cited from Al-Mada’ini’s Kitab al-ahdath; Ahmad b Sa’d al-Din al-Miswari, Al Risala al-munqidha min al-ghiwaya fi turuq al riwaya, pp. 51-55)” This citation is found in Dr. Jonathan Browns book “Hadith Muhammad’s Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World page 7o

“That the collective impunity of the Companions was a later construct of the Sunni worldview is evident when one finds occasional minor Companions listed in early books of weak hadith transmitters.” Source: ( Hadith: Muhammed’s Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World’ by Dr. Jonathan Brown page 88)

This is why for example you have forged hadith like the one about the “10 promised paradise”.

“The Prophet said, “On the Day of Resurrection a group of companions will come to me, but will be driven away from the Lake-Fount, and I will say, ‘O Lord those are my companions!’ It will be said, ‘You have no knowledge as to what they innovated after you left; they turned apostate as renegades.” (Book #76, Hadith # 585 Bukhari)

Say: “I am no bringer of new-fangled doctrine among the messengers, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I follow but that which is revealed to me by inspiration; I am but a Warner open and clear.” (Holy Qur’an 46:9)

“There are quite a number of authentic traditions in which Companions describes other Companions as kadhdhabin (liars) in relating hadith. Sunni scholars hold taht kadhdhab in these cases only means “being in grave error.” Suhaib H. Abdul Ghafar, Criticism of Hadith Among Muslims with Reference to Sunan Ibn Maja (IFTA: 1984), pp. 59-63. Also, G.H.A. Juynboll, Muslim Tradition, Cambridge (1983), pp., 190-206.”

From Professor Jeffery Lang’s Book: Losing My Religion A Call for Help pg.211

Notice we don’t hear from Professor Jeffery Lang anymore. Why is that?  Because people who don’t accept the “package deal” get silenced.

There is no way intellectually that I can accept the mental gymnastics that the Ahl Sunnah go through in order to salvage this doctrine.

This is honestly very sad.  The contributions of Ahl Sunnah to the Ummah of Muhammed (saw) are gargantuan. May Allah (swt) reward everyone of their scholars for the most sincere efforts.  Yet, unfortunately they feel compelled to propagate the Islam of the machine and the Islam of the empire.

The only groups of Muslims who are willing to acknowledge that the companions were in error and did injustice are the Shi’a and the Ibadi.

So what happens is because of this doctrine many of the Ahl Sunnah feel cheated, duped or lied to and many of them eventually do become Shi’a.  Either 12er or Zaydi.


First it is important to understand that just as the Ahl Sunnah has undergone transformation through history so have the ‘Shi’a’ or the ‘Partisans of Ali’.    Just like the Ahl Sunnah there are certainly many aspects of the ‘Shi’a that are attractive.

Yet, I am not ready to believe that people like Abu Bakr As Siddiq and Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both) were shysters.   The whole idea of adorning oneself in black and being almost in a constant state of mourning carries such a weight of gloom and it seems so hung up on a moment in time, a constant reflection of a crisis in the early Muslim community.

Allah (swt) says about martyrs.

“And do not say about those who are killed in the way of Allah , “They are dead.” Rather, they are alive, but you perceive [it] not.”  (Holy Qur’an 2:154)  If you truly believe someone is a martyr that is a cause of rejoice. It is only a symbol of betrayal and mourning if your aspirations are fixated upon this world.

The whole idea of Muslims being ruled through the family of the Prophet (saw) is not something I find support for in the Holy Qur’an nor the idea of being ruled by 12 or even 7 Imams.

So though I agree with the Shi’a brothers that it is not possible that all the companions were angels and saints who did no wrong, it is also not possible for me to stay fixated upon that point in Muslim history.   With due respect to my Shi’a brothers they seem like they are always look back with no future other than hanging hopes upon a Mahdi Salvic figure.

Also if the things that Shi’a say about Ali and the Ahl Bayt are true it only leaves me unfortunately with not very positive thoughts concerning Ali.   For example if it is your divine right to rule over the people who can you just sit back and allow Abu Bakr and Umar to reign?

Understandably he ruled over a very difficult time in Muslim history but if Ali was to be this Imam that the Shi’a claim with all the attributes that entails, ruling for 5 years does seem very lackluster.

Lastly  if I was to be a Shi’a I would also have to apply the same scrutiny to Ali as I do other companions. In other words I could agree and do agree that Ali is the fourth of the Rashidun Kaliphs.  Ali was unjustly opposed by Talha, Zubayr and latter Muaviya.

So technically I am a shi’a (supporter of Ali) on these points.

However, if the companions can make errors in judgement, and commit wrongdoing I would have to be consistent and apply the same criteria to all companions including Ali.

I have done exactly that and I have found Ali to be in error in the battle of Siffin in his arbitration with Muaviya.   This brings me to my second point.


The Ahl Sunnah believe that Muslims must be ruled from a Caliph and that this Caliph has to come from the tribe of the Quresh.  Again unfortunately Ahl Sunnah has come to support the Islam of the machine and of the empire.

The Shi’a believe that the Muslims have to be ruled by the Ahl Bayt (The Prophets Family).

The Ibadi believe that any upright and righteous Muslim can lead the Muslims. This view is egalitarian and more based upon the evidences we find in the Sunnah.

Narrated Anas bin Malik:

Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) said, “You should listen to and obey, your ruler even if he was an Ethiopian (black) slave whose head looks like a raisin.”


Ahl Sunnah claim that the leader should be selected by a group of men. However, we can see dynastic hereditary rule throughout Muslim history.  We know among the Ottomans that Sultans had brothers killed at young ages so that their rule would not be challenged. This is hardly a recipe for justice.

The Shi’a claim that the rule is through the ‘Ahl Bayt’ simply being a descendant of the Prophet (saw) is qualification enough.   This is something soundly refuted by the Holy Qur’an.

“And remember that Ibrahim was tried by his Lord with certain commands, which he fulfilled: He said: “I will make thee an Imam to the Nations.” He pleaded: “And also (Imams) from my offspring!” He answered: “But My Promise is not within the reach of evil-doers.” (Holy Qur’an 2:142)

Allah (swt) told Ibrahim that simply being a descendant of a prophet is not criteria enough to be as ruler.

This can be clearly seen in the Ahl Bayt of Noah.

“He said: “O Noah! He is not of thy family: For his conduct is unrighteous. So ask not of Me that of which you have no knowledge! I give  you counsel, don’t act like the ignorant!” (Holy Qur’an 11:46)

The Ibadi position is that the righteous in the community they will come together through consultation and elect the leader.

“And those who have responded to their lord and established prayer and whose affair is [determined by] consultation among themselves, and from what We have provided them, they spend.” (Holy Qur’an 42:38) 

In fact here is something interesting.

Hussein Ghubash, delegate of the United Arab Emirates to UNESCO,
Chairman of the G77 in Paris and author of “Oman-The Islamic Democratic Tradition” he sees the Ibadi school as a proto democratic tradition.   Al hamdulillah!

You can see the link here:

So it is very possible with the Ibadi school to have representative democracy where representatives are chosen and ultimately they choose the Imam/ Kaliph.


Al hamdulilah I can say that with full confidence that the Ibadi school embraces what Allah (swt) teaches us in the Holy Qur’an about being one humanity and what has been related to us by the Blessed Messenger (saw).

As we have already seen the Ahl Sunnah and the Shi’a will have it that the destiny of humanity be that we will be ruled by Arabs simply by virtue of them being Quresh or being Imams from the family of the Prophet (saw).

Among the Ahl Sunnah these are opinions from Imam Shafi’i

We see the following regarding the kafa’a for marriage in the classic Shafi’i manual of Islamic law titled‘Umdat as-Salik wa ‘Uddat an-Nasik(Reliance of the Traveller and Tools of the Worshipper):

والكفاءةُ في: النسَبِ والدِّينِ والحريةِ والصَّنعةِ وسلامة العيوبِ المُثْبِتَةِ للخِيار، فلا يُكافئ العجميُّ عربيةً، ولا غيرُ قُرَشيٍّ قُرشيَّةً، ولا غيرُ هاشميٍّ أو مُطَّلبيٍّ هاشميةً أو مطَّلبيةً، ولا فاسقٌ عفيفةً، ولا عبدٌ حرةً، ولا العتيقُ أو من مسَّ آباءَهُ رِقٌّ حرةَ الأصلِ، ولا ذو حِرفَةٍ دنيئةٍ بنتَ ذي حِرفةٍ أرفعَ، كخياطٍ بنتَ تاجرٍ، ولا معيبٌ بعيبٍ يُثْبِتُ الخِيارَ سليمةً منهُ، ولا اعتبارَ باليسارِ والشيخوخةِ، فمتى زوَّجها بغَيْرِ كُفءٍ بغَيرِ رضاها ورِضا الأولياءِ الذينَ هم في درَجتهِ فالنِّكاحُ باطلٌ، وإن رَضُوا أو رضيَتْ فليسَ للأبعدِ اعتراضٌ.
(Taken from the section of Kafa’a in the chapter of Nikaah in the text)
Translation: Kafa’a (Suitability in marriage for a female) is in the lineage (ancestry of the man), and in religiousness, and his being a free man (not a slave), and in his profession, and his being free of defects that can cause the annulment of the marriage. And the ajami (non-Arab) is NOT suitable for an Arab woman, and a non-Qurayshi is NOT suitable for a Qurayshi woman (Quraysh was the trtibe of the HOly Prophet (S)), nor is a non-Hashimi or non-Muttalabi suitable for a Hashimi or Muttalabi woman ( Hashimites are the members of the clan to which the Holy Prophet (S) belonged to, and Muttalabites are the descendants of the grandfather of the Holy Prophet(S)). Nor is an immoral man suitable for a virtuous woman, nor is a slave suitable for a free woman, nor is a freed slave or one whose ancestors were touched by slavery suitable for a (free) woman whose ancestors were free. Nor is a man of a lowly profession suitable for the daughter of someone with a noble profession, such as a tailor wanting to marry a tradesman’s daughter.

We can see the following are NOT kafa’a (suitable for marriage) for women:

  • Non-Arab men for Arab women
  • Non-Qurayshi man for a Qurayshi woman
  • Non-Hashimi or non-Muttalabi for a Hashimi or Muttalabi woman
  • Sinful man for virtuous a woman
  • A slave or a freed slave for a free woman
  • A free man but one whose ancestors might have been slaves for a free woman whose ancestors were not slaves
  • A man with a lowly profession for a woman whose father has a noble profession


We also have the opinion of  Ibn Taymiyyah in his (IqtiDaa’ Siraat al-Mustaqeem, volume 1, page 419) the following:

فإن الذي عليه أهل السنة والجماعة اعتقاد أن جنس العرب أفضل من جنس العجم عبرانيهم وسريانيهم رومهم وفرسهم وغيرهم وأن قريشا أفضل العرب وأن بني هاشم أفضل قريش وأن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أفضل بني هاشم فهو أفضل الخلق نفسا وافضلهم نسبا
Indeed it is the belief of the Ahlus-Sunnah wal Jama’ah that the race of Arabs is superior to the race of non-Arabs, the Hebrews (Jews), the Syrians (Arameans), the Romans (Europeans), the Persians, and others. And indeed the Quraysh [tribe of the Prophet (S)] is the most superior among the Arabs. And indeed the Banu Hashim [the clan of the Prophet (S)] is the most superior among the Quraysh. And indeed the Prophet, may the Blessings and Peace of Allaah be upon him, is the most superior of the Banu Hashim, for he is the most superior of all creation by his own self, and also the most superior among them because of his lineage (ancestry).

The links to this information USED TO BE HERE:

Wonder why this was taken down??

This is not the case for the Ibadi.

The proto-Ibadi school gained wide acceptance all across North Africa, the Sahara because of sticking to the message of the universality of humanity.

I am quite sure and quite confident that Muslims of all ethnic and racial backgrounds do not want to trade the current world order of Western Hegemony and White Centers of Power only to go to a world of Arab Hegemony and Arab Centers of Power.

No body wants to trade one system of oppression for another.   This has mislead and misguided many among the Arabs to call black people abeed (slave) when in reality all of us are slaves.    Or you will find it taboo for Arabs to call their children ‘Bilal’.

The Ibadi position on the fraternity of humanity is based upon the following:

O men! Behold, We have created you all out of a male and a female, and have made you into nations and tribes, so that you might come to know one another.Verily, the noblest of you in the sight of God is the one who is most deeply conscious of Him. Behold, God is all-knowing, all-aware. (Holy Qur’an 49:13)

“But the Jews and the Christians say, “We are the children of Allah and His beloved(hibbaohu).” Say, “Then why does He punish you for your sins?”Rather, you are human beings from among those He has created.He forgives whom He wills, and He punishes whom He wills. And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them, and to Him is the [final] destination.”  (Holy Qur’an 5:18)

Abu Nadrah reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, is reported to have said:

“O people, your Lord is one and your father Adam is one. There is no favor of an Arab over a foreigner, nor a foreigner over an Arab, and neither white skin over black sin, nor black skin over white skin, except by righteousness. Have I not delivered the message?   (Source Musnad Ahmad 22978, Grade: Sound 


(It is also the school not clingy to the past or holding out for some fatalistic future).

Now before I begin my argument here let me say clearly that we as Muslims should never ever give up the Palestinian cause.  We should always demand justice for the Palestinians and the right to a homeland and self determination.

Now why would I say the Ibadi school has the best chance to make peace with Jews and Israel?   I not only say that but I say the Ibadi school is the school with the most hopeful outlook for the future.

In the Ibadi school there is absolutely 100% no belief that a Mahdi will come or that Jesus will return again and kill all of the Jews and instigate Armageddon.

Think about it.  Logically Israel is a nuclear armed power based by another super power. Already Saudi Arabia, U.A.E, Bahrain, and other states have had meetings and delegations from Israel.

Again I don’t think normalization with Israel should come at a cost of abandoning the Palestinian people or their cause.

Yet if you were an Israeli think tank and you are forced to deal with a Sunni world that has a core belief that some time in the future Jesus will show up and give your people the choice to accept Islam or die how hopeful would peace prospects be with such people?

The Ibadi position is in line with Allah (swt) told us in the Holy Qur’an. Christ Jesus is dead.  Not only this but the Ibadi school does not hang its hopes or future on some possibly distant messianic figure,  Christ Jesus or Mahdi.

To me this makes the Ibadi school the school of the future because it is teaching us to live in the here and now and to be practical.  That Muslims needs to work together to solve the problems of today.  We cannot hang our hopes by thinking any moment now some apocalyptic figure will pop up and than he will ‘get even with the kuffar!‘.

How long have we been waiting any way?

Unfortunately both the Ahl Sunnah and the Shi’a are either living in the past being legacies of the clash between the Ummayad Caliph Muawiya and the supposed rights of the Ahl Bayt;  or they are looking off to the distant horizon for some salvation figure.

The Ibadi school is living in and dealing with the present reality.  The Ibadi school is not defined by its past and is willing to move beyond that.  The Ibadi school is not hanging its hope in some fatalistic fashion to some future salvation figure.



A) The Ibadi school does not believe in Tahrif of the Holy Qur’an. The Ibadi school believes that we have the entire Qur’an with us.

Probably the most difficult (and not well known) position for me to accept as a Muslim from ‘Ahl Sunnah’ was the idea that we do not have the entire Qur’an but only the Qur’an Allah (swt) intended for us to have.

The Ibadi position is based upon what Allah (swt) says in the Holy Qur’an.

And recite that which hath been revealed unto you of the Scripture of thy Lord.There is none who can change His words, and you will find no refuge beside Him. (Holy Qur’an 18:27)

“We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it.” (Holy Qur’an 15:9)

The scholars of Ahl Sunnah claim the following:

a) There are large portions of the Holy Qur’an that are simply missing (because they were forgotten)!

b) There is some Qur’an that is not in the Qur’an that Muslims have today; but found in extra Quranic material -namely the ahadith.

Umar said, “I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, “We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book,” and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession.” Sufyan added, “I have memorized this narration in this way.” ‘Umar added, “Surely Allah’s Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him.” (Bukhari, vol. 8, bk. 82, no. 816)

Zirr ibn Hubaish reported: “Ubayy ibn Ka’b said to me, ‘What is the extent of Suratul-Ahzab? ‘I said, ‘Seventy or seventy-three verses’. He said, ‘Yet it used to be equal to Suratul-Baqarah and in it we recited the verse of stoning’. I said, ‘And what is the verse of stoning’? He replied, ‘The fornicators among the married men ( ash-shaikh)) and married women (ash-shaikhah), stone them as an exemplary punishment from Allah, and Allah is Mighty and Wise.”‘ (As-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur’an , p.524).

“It is reported from Ismail ibn Ibrahim from Ayyub from Naafi from Ibn Umar who said: “Let none of you say ‘I have acquired the whole of the Quran’. How does he know what all of it is when much of the Quran has disappeared? Rather, let him say ‘I have acquired what has survived’”. (As-Suyuti, AlItqan fii Ulum al-Quran page 524)

‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with, her) reported that it had been revealed in the Holy Qur’an that ten clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five sucklingsand Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) died and it was before that time (found) in the Holy Qur’an (and recited by the Muslims). (Saheeh Muslim Book 008, Number 3421)

We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bar’at I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it: “If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust.” (Sahih Muslim, Vol. 2, 501).

Before I begin I would like to say that I would consider myself a fairly open minded Muslim. I would also consider myself able to accept a wide range of opinions and views with in the Islamic tradition.

However, when it comes to anyone trying to undermine the revelation of the Holy Qur’an and thus undermine Islam in the process I am not open to such a position.

B) The Ibadi school does not hold anthropomorphic views on the attributes of Allah (swt).

“Indeed, those who pledge allegiance to you, [O Muhammad] – they are actually pledging allegiance to Allah. The hand of Allah is over their hands. So he who breaks his word only breaks it to the detriment of himself. And he who fulfills that which he has promised Allah – He will give him a great reward.” (Holy Qur’an 48:10)

There are only three ways to interpret this verse consistently.

  1. Allah’s hand is a literal hand and their hands are literal hands.
  2. Allah’s hand is a hand but unlike other hands is over their hands (which are unlike other hands).
  3.  Allah’s power and authority is over their power and authority.

Interpretation 3 is the most sensible interpretation.

We see this in the following example: “Except from their wives or those theirright hand posses, for indeed they will not be blamed.” (Holy Qur’an 23:6

It is not logical to think of woman or any person being in someone’s hand.  The understanding of “hand” here is power or authority.

“Verily, it is not the eyes that grow blind, but it is the hearts which are in the breast that grow blind.” (Holy Qur’an 22:46)  Here the heart is attributed with blindness or conversely seeing and these things are allegorical and not to be taken by its outward meaning. 

People who have interpreted the various claimed attributes of Allah (swt) by their apparent outward without giving interpretation have ran into enormous difficulty.

For example:

“And do not invoke with Allah another deity. There is no deity except Him. Everything will be destroyed except His Face. His is the judgement, and to Him you will be returned.” (Holy Qur’an 28:88)

If you interpret this by its apparent meaning without comparing it to anything or giving it an interpretation  you have the understanding of everything of Allah (swt) , his shin, foot, hands, etc will be destroyed except his (Allah swt) face.   This gives the very illogical idea of the Creator being composed of parts and the possibility that some aspects of the Creator can be vanquished and others cannot.

C)  The Ibadi school does not believe that we will see Allah (swt) in the hereafter. 

Personally this is another “packaged deal”  from Ahl Sunnah that I always thought was very strange.  I can personally understand how Sunni Muslims who follow the Salafi perspective on Allah (swt) and his attributes have reconciled themselves to the idea that they will see Allah (swt).        However, it has always come as extremely inconsistent for the those Sunni Muslim who call themselves Ashari or Maturdidi to uphold the view.

They (Ashari/Maturdidi) claim that Allah (swt) is not time/space and yet they are adamant about seeing Allah (swt).   Though I have noticed many of them soften the stance with ‘beatific vision’

Narrated Masruq:

I said to ‘Aisha, “O Mother! Did Prophet Muhammad see his Lord?” Aisha said, “What you have said makes my hair stand on end! Know that if somebody tells you one of the following three things, HE IS A LIAR: Whoever tells you that Muhammad saw his Lord, IS A LIAR.” Then Aisha recited the Verses:

‘No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision. He is the Most Courteous Well-Acquainted with all things.’  (Holy Qur’an 6:103)

‘It is not fitting for a human being that Allah should speak to him except by inspiration or from behind a veil.’ (Holy Qur’an 42:51)

(Al Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 378)

This should be evidence and clear enough.  Yet, you will be surprised the lengths that people will go to.  Once they have certain ahadith that say things instead of sticking with the clear teachings of the Holy Qur’an they will go to great lengths to make the Holy Qur’an confirm to their ahadith!

D) The Ibadi school believes that the  Holy Qur’an is created. 

Now for me personally from the moment I took the Shahadah, sat with Muslim brother hood, followed the Salafi Manhaj,  went to the Rihla at Zaytuna in 2001, and adopted the Maliki school I have never ever felt comfortable with this. I have looked into it and I just cannot believe as an aqidah position that the Holy Qur’an is uncreated and eternal.

*Note* The idea that the Holy Qur’an is eternal and uncreated is an agreed upon position by all of the Ahl Sunnah, this means Salafis Sunnis and Sufis Sunnis, it means those who follow the madhab of Bin Baz, Uthaymeen and Al Abani  (may Allah’s mercy be upon them all. and those who follow the madhabs of Malik, Shafi’i and Abu Hanifa (may Allah’s mercy be upon them all).

Now as mentioned above about the ‘seeing of Allah’ in the afterlife I can understand why Salafi  Sunni Muslims of Ahl Sunnah accept this. However, the Ashari Sunni Muslims of Ahl Sunnah have to really go through some great lengths to defend this position.

Yet, when it comes to the Holy Qur’an being eternal and uncreated this is a position I can understand how the Ashari accept this but for the Salafi Muslims it is clear kalaam.  They have to impose theological suppositions about Allah (swt) rather than allow the text to speak.

“Indeed, We have made it an Arabic Qur’an that you might understand.” (Holy Qur’an 43:3)

Allah (swt) has clearly said that he has made the Qur’an.

“And thus We have revealed to you an inspiration of Our command. You did not know what is the Book or [what is] faith, but We have made it a light by which We guide whom We will of Our servants. And indeed, [O Muhammad], you guide to a straight path.” (Holy Qur’an 42:52)

Is the Qur’an a thing or nothing?
If the Qur’an is nothing than let that stand on the record.

If the Qur’an is a thing than be reminded of what Allah (swt) says:

“That is Allah , your Lord; there is no deity except Him, the Creator of all things, so worship Him. And He is Disposer of all things.” (Holy Qur’an 6:102)

“We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?” (Holy Qur’an 2:106)

Abrogation is omission, removal and it is impossible for that which is eternal. The idea that some part of Allah’s essence of ‘speech’ would be ‘better’ than other parts merits pensive reflection.

Before this We wrote in the Psalms, after the Message (given to Moses): My servants the righteous, shall inherit the earth.” (Holy Qur’an 21:105)

Where is this revelation and action that preceded the eternal uncreated Holy Qur’an?

“Has there not been over Man a long period of Time, when he was nothing – (not even) mentioned?”  (Holy Qur’an 76:1)

I can answer this question. If the Holy Qur’an is eternal and uncreated the answer is no, because Man is being mentioned in the very verse asking the question.

“No mention comes to them anew from their Lord except that they listen to it while they are at play.” (Holy Qur’an 7:52)

Muhdath in Arabic means newly made. And since it’s newly made it cannot be eternal. i.e. It came after being nothing which means “Created

We also need to ask about the hadith Qudsi is this the speech of Allah? As such is it eternal and uncreated as well?   What about the Torah, the Injeel and the Zabur?

All I want to say is that I am more at peace and I feel more confident that the Ibadi school has accepted conclusions from clear text in the Holy Qur’an rather than to impose their theology upon the Holy Qur’an.  Al hamdulillah!

I also want to say I do not make takfir of anyone who believes that the Holy Qur’an is eternal and uncreated. However, I just want to say best of luck to you when debating the Christians!

E) The Ibadi school believes that Allah (swt) is absolutely one. The Ibadi school does not believe that Allah is a ‘unified being’ as being taught by Ahl Sunnah.

That is to say that Allah swt is composed of various attributes-some of which will be destroyed others of which will remain.   (This is what the Salafi Aqidah teaches).   The Salafi Aqidah also tells Muslims that that creed is divided into various sub categories.

Tauhid Rububiyyah, Tauhid Uluhiyyah and some times Tauhid Al Hakimiyyah.

You will never find the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) teaching such things or dividing doctrine up as they do. These are ‘their’ terminologies and wordings nothing more.

Also The Ahl Sunnah think of Allah (swt) as a unified being in much the same way that Trinitarian Christians believe that Allah (swt) is a unified being.

*Note* You will NEVER find the word ‘tauhid’ any where in the Holy Qur’an.

You will NEVER find the word ‘tauhid’ in the ahadith about the Prophet Muhammed (saw) is relation to the the oneness of Allah (swt).

You will only find the word ‘tauhid’ in the ahadith attributed to the Prophet Muhamed (saw) as in calling people to ‘tauhid’.  Why is he calling people to ‘tauhid’?  He is calling THEM (plural) to ‘tauhid’ to ‘unify’ and be a ‘united’ people.

The Prophet Muhammed (saw) , the Blessed Messenger (saw), the Beloved of Allah (swt) he NEVER taught that Allah (swt) IS A TAUHID.

Nor does the Ibadi school remain unclear about about the relationship between the essence of Allah (swt) and the essential attributes of Allah (swt).

For example the Ashari Sunni Muslims are not certain about their positions in regards to the essence of Allah (swt) and the essential attributes.

“In other words, the Mu’tazaila assert that the attributes of God are His essence itself; claiming that He is All-Knowing and All-Mighty in essence, and not through [the attributes of ] knowledge and power. We state (as maintained by the Companions, tab’in and others from the jurist) – that the attributes of God are neither His essence itself, nor anything independent to his Essence, this is because His attributes are never separate from His essence and that has always been pre-eternally and always will be, contrary to the attributes of mankind. [Minah ar-Rawd al-Azhar 96 | Daw al-Ma’awli li Bada’ al-Amali 23].

Source: (pg 101 The Beneficial Message & The Definitive Proof In the Study of Theology -Muhammad Salih Farfur Translation and Notes by Wesam Charkawi)

*Note* Notice how they say, “We state (as maintained by the Companions…..)    Very sad.    It is obvious that the Ashari Sunni Muslims believe that the attributes of Allah (swt) are in a static relationship with Allah (swt).   They are a sort of quasi existence.

Please see also:

“They claimed that the logical consequence of the “Attributes of Forms” was “multiplicity of beginning-less entities” (ta’addud al-qudama’). This reasoning was refuted by the entirety of Ahl Al-Sunna scholars. see al-Buti, Kubra al-Yaqinat Al-Kawniyya (p. 119 n.).
The Attributes are neither the Essence Itself nor other than It (al-sifat laysat ‘aynu al-dhat wa la ghayraha), as in the school of
Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama’a.” Al-Qari, Daw’al-Ma’ali (p.5)

Source: (Pages 7 & 8 Correct Islamic Doctrine/Islamic Doctrine  Volume 2 By Ibn Khafif, translated by Gibril Fouad Haddad

This is no refutation at all!

The assumption of an attribute which can be described neither by existence nor by nonexistence is the assumption of something which is in the middle between existence and nonexistence, between affirmation and negation, but this is something absurd!

“Say, “My Lord has only forbidden immoralities-what is apparent of them and what is concealed- and sin, and oppression without right, and that you associate with Allah that for which He has not sent down authority, and that you say about Allah that which you do not know.” (Holy Qur’an 7:33)

Again I want to be clear that I don’t make takfir of Sunni Muslims for the belief that Allah (swt) is a tauhid (a unified being) or that Allah (swt) has attributes that are neither defined by existence or non -existence.

All I will say is that it is a doctrine that never brought peace to my heart. I also want to say good luck with the Christians!

F) The Ibadi believe that hellfire is eternal for those who commit major sins and for the polytheist.  

Personally I can remember be quite elated and jubilant at the idea that the Prophet Muhammed (saw) will make shafat and that because of this shafat the entire Ummah will enter into paradise.

However, this idea takes the sting out of the hellfire. It makes us complacent, even when we read how awesome and gruesome the punishment of the hell fire is, many of us as Muslims can , could and in fact do become complacent.  We treat the hellfire as a minor threat.

I also feel that such a position is held on to because it is not politically correct to tell the polytheist that they will be in the hellfire.

This differs from Sunni Muslims who believe that those who commit major sins among Muslims will be let out of the hellfire.

We can see from the Holy Qur’an that the idea of hellfire being a temporary abode is a theological position attributed to the Jews.

“And they say: “The Fire shall not touch us but for a few numbered days:” Say: “Have ye taken a promise from God, for He never breaks His promise? or is it that ye say of God what ye do not know?” (Holy Qur’an 2:80)

“That is because they say: The Fire will not touch us save for a certain number of daysThat which they used to invent has deceived them regarding their religion.” (Holy Qur’an 3:24)

“To those who reject Our signs and treat them with arrogance, no opening will there be of the gates of heaven, nor will they enter the garden, until the camel can pass through the eye of the needle: Such is Our reward for those in sin.” (Holy Qur’an 7:40)

As we know a camel will NEVER pass through the eye of a needle. May Allah (swt) protect us all from the hellfire.

And those who were but followers will say: If a return were possible for us, we would disown them even as they have disowned us. Thus will Allah show them their own deeds as anguish for them, and they will not emerge from the Fire. (Holy Qur’an 2:167)

“But those who reject (God) – for them will be the Fire of Hell: No term shall be determined for them, so they should die, nor shall its Penalty be lightened for them. Thus do We reward every ungrateful one!” (Holy Qur’an 35:36)

“Their wish will be to get out of the Fire, but never will they get out therefrom: their penalty will be one that endures.” (Holy Qur’an 5:37)

“The belief of us Ibadis is that whoever enters the Fire from among the muwahhid disobedient and those who associate partners (mushriks) will remain therein permanently, not for a finite period. In the same way, those who enter Paradise from among the righteous servants of Allah will not come out of it. For both places are permanent stay.” -Shaykh Ahmad b. Hamad al-Khalili Mufti of Oman

Usually some of the internal evidence that people use to try and say that the hellfire punishment is temporarily are the following two.

“One day will He gather them all together, (and say): “O  assembly of Jinns! Much (toll) did you take of men.” Their friends among men will say: “Our Lord! we made profit from each other: but (alas!) we reached our term – which you didst appoint for us.” He will say: “The Fire be your dwelling-place: you will dwell therein for ever, except as Allah wills.” for thy Lord is full of wisdom and knowledge.” (Holy Qur’an 6:128)

Those who are wretched shall be in the Fire: There will be for them therein (nothing but) the heaving of sighs and sobbing, They will dwell therein for all the time that the heavens and the earth endure, except as your Lord wills: for thy Lord is the (sure) accomplisher of what He plans.”  (Holy Qur’an 11:106-107)

“By degrees shall We teach thee to declare (the Message), so you shall not forget,Except as Allah wills: For He knows what is manifest and what is hidden.” (Holy Qur’an 87:6-7)

The expression “except as your Lord wills or as Allah wills” means exactly that, what is the will of Allah. So in the case of the Prophet (saw) it is not the will of Allah (swt) that he forget.  Just as it is not the will of Allah (swt) as seen by very clear verses above that the polytheist and those who have committed the major sins to be released from hell fire.

Another example of that this time of the inhabitants of heaven.
“And those who are blessed shall be in the Garden: They will dwell therein for all the time that the heavens and the earth endure, except as thy Lord wills: a gift without break.” (Holy Qur’an 11:108)

“And leave those who have taken their religion for a play and an idle sport, and whom this world’s life has deceived, and remind (them) thereby lest a soul should be given up to destruction for what it has earned; it shall not have besides Allah any guardian nor an intercessor…” (Holy Qura’n 6:70)

Let us say for the same of argument that this particular theological position of the Ibadis is wrong.  What harm is there in acting on it as if it is correct? Surely there is only gain and a strong warning for us.   This is the best insurance is to treat the matters of one’s final destination with utmost concern and sincerity.


Here are some unique aspects about the Ibadi school when it comes to jurisprudence , usul ul fiqh.

Point 1) The Ibadi school is the oldest living legal school. 

When Jabir bin Zaid died the first Sunni Imam, Abu Hanifa was only thirteen years old, while Imam Malik was just being born.

Abu ash-Shatha, was a direct student of many of the Prophet’s Companions in both Hijaz and Iraq such as Ibn Abbas,Aisha, Ibn Mas’ud, (May Allah be pleased with them all).

He was fully aware of the Hijazi school of hadith and the Iraqi school of ra’y.

Thus he was well informed and able to make decisions based upon this exposure.

Point 2) Companions opinions and actions do not serve as independent proof.

A whole host and range of things are looked into before making legal decisions.

Point 3) The Ibadi school is against the idea of Taqlid.

If one is able to do to or make ijtihad they should do so.  One should take the strongest proofs based upon sound methodological principles.

Point 4)  “Abrogation is never permitted in the reports of the Law-Maker because His Knowledge is not refreshed, and He is not ignorant of anything that happens, and He does not reveal but the truth.” -Ahmed bin Hamad al-Khalili

Point 5)  Against the idea that every Mujtahid is correct.  

It is possible that people can describe certain aspects of an issue and both can be correct. However, when Mujtahids arrive at completely different conclusions logically one cannot be correct.

Point 6)  Ever Evolving ‘Ijma or Consensus. 

Unlike the Ahl Sunnah where once a consensus is reached it basically has the status of revelation. This is unfortunate because it seeks to uphold a scholastic class rather truth.  Often new evidence is discovered or a new reality may come about that will demand change.

In the Ibadi school the consensus can and indeed has changed.

Examples of that being:  Issues like rather or not to do the Friday Prayer in the absence of a just ruler.  Rather or not righteous non-Ibadi who do not couple right action with right belief go to heaven or not.    Softening of stance on Uthman and Ali where as earlier Proto-Ibadi school was often more harsh towards the two Caliphs the latter attitude has changed.

This makes me hopeful on two points of ‘classical jurisprudence’ that I have always had difficult with as a Muslim.

A) Punishment for Adultery being stoning.

B) The Punishment for Apostasy being death.

On point A)  Egyptian author Fahmi Huwaydi mentions in his Hatta la Takuna Fitna, p. 132

He brings up the point about the proto-Ibadi did not believe in stoning for adultery.

You cannot halve stoning to death.

“If any of you have not the means wherewith to wed free believing women, they may wed believing girls from among those whom your right hands possess: And Allah has full knowledge about your faith. You are one from another: Wed them with the leave of their owners, and give them their dowers, according to what is reasonable: They should be chaste, not lustful, nor taking paramours: when they are taken in wedlock, if they fall into shame, their punishment is half that for free women. This (permission) is for those among you who fear sin; but it is better for you that you practice self-restraint. And Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.” (Holy Qur’an 4:25)

and on Point B) With the Ibadi school not having a fixed ‘ijma, the fact that Taqlid is frowned upon this position is amenable to change based upon proofs, evidences and rigorous debate.

In other words the Ibadi school is amenable to change in ways that the Ahl Sunnah are not due to equating ‘ijma to revelation’  and the way the 12er Shi’a assign infallibility to their Imams in jurisprudence.

This to me also strong proof that the Ibadi school is the school of jurisprudence for the future and future generations.

The Ibadi school has strong mechanisms that protect the sanctity of sex, marriage and the family in general. 

The Ibadi school does not accept mutah marriage and nor does it allow divorce without witnesses.

Too many marriages in Ahl Sunnah end in dissolution and heartache because the man is entrusted with one word ‘Talaq”.

The majority of shari’ah laws in the Holy Qur’an focus on and deal with the sanctity of the family.  It is difficult to imagine that the family ,the bedrock of any functioning society or civilization would be utterly and completely dissolved with one word.

This runs contrary to the clear text of the Holy Qur’an.

“They are invited to the book of Allah to settle their dispute”. (Holy Qur’an 3:23)

“And this is a book which We have revealed as a blessing, so follow it and be righteous, that you may receive mercy”. (Holy Qur’an 6:155).

“Lo! this Qur’an guides to that which is most upright”. (Holy Qur’an 17:9)

“Thus when they fulfil their term appointed, either take them back on equitable terms or part with them on equitable terms; and take for witness two persons from among you, endued with justice, and establish the evidence (as) before Allah. Such is the admonition given to him who believes in Allah and the Last Day. And for those who fear Allah, He (ever) prepares a way out.”

The Ahl Sunnah even accept divorce of women while they are in their menses! They call it ‘Bidati’ and still allow it.

O Prophet! When any of you divorce women, divorce them during their period of purity and calculate their ´idda carefully. And have fear of Allah, your Lord. Do not evict them from their homes, nor should they leave, unless they commit an outright indecency. Those are Allah´s limits, and anyone who oversteps Allah´s limits has wronged himself. You never know, it may well be that after that Allah will cause a new situation to develop.” (Holy Qur’an 65:1)

If any men among you divorce their wives by Zihar (calling them mothers), they cannot be their mothers: None can be their mothers except those who gave them birth. And in fact they use words (both) iniquitous and false: but truly Allah is one that blots out (sins), and forgives (again and again).” (Holy Qur’an)

This verse clearly repudiates those men who would use an idiom or simply a verbal expression to divorce women.  This verse is also clear when coupled with other verses about having  two just witnesses present, and consultation that it repudiates instant divorce simply through  a statement, ‘Talaq’.

Also notice the following verse:

“Men are in charge of women by right of what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend for maintenance from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in their husband’s absence what Allah would have them guard. But those wives from whom you fear disobedience -first advise them: then if they persist , refuse to share the bed with them; and finally strike them. But if they obey you once more seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand. And if you fear dissension between the two, send an arbitrator from his people and an arbitrator from her people. If they both desire reconciliation, Allah will cause it between them. Indeed, Allah is Ever Knowing and Acquainted with all things.” (Holy Qur’an 4:34-35)

This revelation itself would be a perfect context to simply tell men to say ‘talaq’. In this context Allah (swt) is addressing a husband who is under great duress over a wife who is openly rebellious and contentious.  Yet, great effort is there in telling man to restrain himself, not have copulation and even if he’s push to his limits to act out his behavior he may strike her.   Even than the following verses speaks about arbitration and reconciliation.

There is nothing in there about simply saying ‘talaq’.

To be honest with you when you look at all the heavy weights of Ahl Sunnah, the intellectual, philosophical, theological, philological, legalistic contributions to the Ummah of Muhammed (saw) it is highly disappointing that this is the best that they could do in safeguarding the sanctity of marriage.

Articles like this speak for themselves.

I will also add that as a man who could be a father to a daughter one day I cannot allow my daughter to enter into a marriage with any man who holds the position in jurisprudence that Sunni Muslims hold.  I owe that much to any future daughters that Allah (swt) may bless me with, and I owe that much to the sanctity of marriage and the family.

Lastly the fruit of the Ibadi school of Islam as seen in Oman.

Now in Oman,  Shia, Sunni and Ibadi Muslims pray together in the Masjid.  It is the one country in the middle east in which different groups of Muslims are not fighting and killing each other.  Look at Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and other places the sectarianism is horrific and bringing great evil every where.  It will be a miracle if the children of those countries do not grow up to become averse to religion altogether.

In Oman there is a very rich and flourishing Sunni and Shi’a communities.

Not only this but Hindus have temples and Christians have their churches there.

The people of Oman, it’s government guided by principles of wisdom and tolerance do not in any way shape or form feel threatened by multiculturalism.

They (the Ibadi Muslims) in Oman have openly extended invitations to Sunni Muslims of the Salafi Manhaj like Yusuf Estes:

As well Imam Khalid Yasin here:

and Mufti Menk here:

As well as Sunni Muslims of the Sufi persuasion like Shaykh Hamza Yusuf here:

As well world famous Dr. Adnan Ibrahim,  as you can see here:

This particular video moved me to tears because you can see he is deeply touched by the love and warmth that he received by his Muslim brothers in Oman.

So with that said this is an over view of my decision -part and parcel of my journey.

I have been very straight forward and have not minced my words nor my thoughts on matters that had weighed on my heart and mind for a very long time.

I want to say that I love all Muslims, all the Ahl Qiblah, be you Salafi, Sufi, Sunni or Shi’a in your orientation.  I bare no hate or ill will towards any of you.  I will always do what I can with in my means to be of assistance to my Muslim brothers.

“And strive for Allah with the striving due to Him. He has chosen you and has not placed upon you in the religion any difficulty. [It is] the religion of your father, Abraham. Allah named you “Muslims” before [in former scriptures] and in this [revelation] that the Messenger may be a witness over you and you may be witnesses over the people.” (Holy Qur’an 22:78)

“And hold firmly to the rope of Allah all together and do not become divided. And remember the favor of Allah upon you-when you were enemies and He brought your hearts together and you became, by His favor, brothers. And you were on the edge of a pit of the Fire, and He saved you from it. Thus does Allah make clear to you His verses that you may be guided.” (Holy Qur’an 3:103)


5 thoughts on “PrimaQuran on The Ibadi School

  1. I agree, this is clearly “the product of many years of sincere questioning and learning”. It makes me all the more sad that this sincerity becomes invisible when the author speaks of Christianity. I nearly fell off my chair when I read : “Trinitarian Christians believe that Allah (swt) is a unified being.”
    WHAT ????
    Clearly, the author is unaware of things called creeds that have set the standards of Christian beliefs for two millenia, and is relying here on some (unreferenced) fourth-hand hearsay.

  2. Bismillah ir rahman ir raheem,

    As salamu ‘alikum wr wb,

    Thank you very much MMMCLMRU for your very thoughtful comments. I hope that indeed it is helpful to many Allah-willing.

    As regards Catholic Commentator I am very aware of the various Christian beliefs.

    If you as a Catholic, (assuming here that means Roman) as opposed to other forms of Catholics do not believe in the God whom is Three Distinct Persons (not identical) in one Being, I’m always open to understand how you personally understand the Nicene and Athanasian creeds.

    “Clearly, the author is unaware of things called creeds that have set the standards of Christian beliefs for two millenia, and is relying here on some (unreferenced) fourth-hand hearsay.’ I have also noted here the lack of reference.


    • Primaquran : thanks for your kind reply, but you clearly didn’t get my point.
      Although you say you “noted” your lack of reference in the older quote of yours, in your reply you add YET ANOTHER unreferenced, alleged “Christian dogma” quote (which I discuss below). As of now, we’re still entirely in the dark as to what is your source for your “awareness of various Christian beliefs”, or your alleged “unified” Christian God.

      Now, regarding your “Trinitarian” quote :
      “the God whom is Three Distinct Persons (not identical) in one Being”

      First, I presume the “m” in whom is a typo, so you really meant :

      “the God who is Three Distinct Persons (not identical) in one Being”

      This is still not very fluid English, so I assume what you mean is

      “the God who is MADE OF Three Distinct Persons (not identical) in one Being”

      which is clearly contrary to Trinitarian doctrine (God is the uncreated creator and cannot be made of anything ; for example, the Athanasian creed says “… not three uncreated, but one uncreated …”).

  3. : ) Greetings. It is nice to see you have found a version of Islam that fits your nafs.

    There are many attractive things about the Ibadiyyah.

    Now get on a plane and go study for a few years with Ibadi scholars : )

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s