Why Qur'an Alone Communities Don't Exist

[Neptin]

Peace.

There is a saying among Muslims that "Qur'an alone is just an internet thing." If you log on to this free-minds forum or the Quraniyoon subreddit, you'll find Muslims practicing exclusively by Qur'an. But if you go out of your house, you won't meet any Muslim but Hadithists.

The immediate purpose of religion for most people is to fit in with a community, to belong, to have an identity. The promised eternal salvation of faith is only a secondary expectation of most religionists.

I've been looking into this for a while now. The reason why Hadith based Islam came to dominate Qur'an based Islam is that the latter is more distinctly defined ideology.

Let me explain;

Suppose you have a sunnite Muslimah in headscarf and a Quranite Muslimah without an headscarf on opposite ends of the street. Who is more likely to be identified as Muslim? And who is more likely to be approached by fellow Muslims or non-Muslims curious about Islam?

When people think of Islam, they think of the Muslima with the headscarf. To most passerby, the Muslima without the headscarf could as well be a non-Muslim.

Religious communities distinguish themselves with some kind of brand for recognition, such as headscarf, beards, mosques, Eid in traditional Islam. These brands are essential to help them stand out, to market the religion and bond adherents.

Qur'anists on the other hand don't have any form of brand. Qur'anists don't have to don headscarf, sport a bead, build a site for congregation, celebrate Eid, and don't even have a uniform procedure of prayer.

Not that there is anything Islamically wrong here. But a religious community cannot blossom this way. A religious community without brands will lack any cohesion or recognition.

If the earliest Muslims were Qur'anists, we can assume they quickly lost out to the Sunnites/Shiites as today's Qur'anists, because they differed too considerably among themselves and their creed was too dilute and lacking in brand for recognition or cohesion.

Peace.

[Wakas]

peace,

I've been looking into this for a while now. The reason why Hadith based Islam came to dominate Qur'an based Islam is that the latter is more distinctly defined ideology.

I think you mean "former", unless you meant "latter" in terms of historical timeline.

This is discussed here and there.

He also speculates about what motives might have led to the establishment of this doctrine. The problem, he argues arises from The Quran itself where some commands are explicit while others are vague. For example, a penalty for adultery is clearly defined, while no punishment is laid down for consumption of alcohol: does this mean that drinking of it is allowed? Details such as the penalty for drinking were left to the Prophet and his successors to establish as sunna. God's intent was to allow such details to be changed according to circumstance. But later Muslims were faced with a challenge from non-Muslims and from dissenters in their own community: if commands and prohibitions not found in The Quran are important, why did God not establish these details Himself? And by what authority did the Prophet enforce commands not found in The Quran? In the face of such challenges, and afraid that anarchy would result if the basis for law was undercut, the ulama (Muslim scholars) adopted the idea that sunna is wahy (divine revelation). (p54-55)

Muhammad and the Believers
by Fred M. Donner

University of Chicago professor Fred Donner presents the intriguing view that the early Islamic movement, as presided over by Muhammad, actively included Jews and Christians in the flock as part of a general monotheistic community. It was only later, after Muhammad's death, that a new generation of Muslims began ritualizing Islam with its own distinctive practices, such as the hajj (pilgrimage) and the five daily prayers...He raises many original points, gleaning evidence from everything from coinage to original source documents. Questioning longstanding stereotypes, he argues (and proves) that Muslims are not, by nature, anti-Jewish and also that, based on archeological evidence, Muslims did not routinely tear down churches. The early Muslims, though brutal in war, created a sophisticated and organized civil system. For those curious about Islam's beginnings, no book is as original and as evenhanded as this succinct read.

[Layth]

Salam.

Islam in its true form is never a cult, but a civil and moral system of life.

The monotheist movement seems to spike every few centuries, only to be diluted by human nature to idol worship.

I personally believe a spike is near as the Word is spreading - ever so slowly.

[good logic]

Peace All.
Of course if people who believe a certain religion are in the majority and have a "uniform" ,then it follows that they are easily recognised by their identity by the majority of the world..
Traditional Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Jews, ....etc all have a certain "uniform" and there is no surprise that they are identified easilly by the majority in the world by their "uniform".
GOD s religion on the other hand has no uniform. It is supposed to be universal for all people ,regardless of "uniform" and It is supposed to be worn inside the mind not on the outside body.

So there is no surprise here, quote
"I've been looking into this for a while now. The reason why Hadith based Islam came to dominate Qur'an based Islam is that the latter is more distinctly defined ideology."

However , when the core of these religions is checked the contents do not stand up to scrutiny. Falsehood and fabrications have infected the heart of these religions . But people hold the traditions and defend them strongly.And there is no surprise here either.

GOD bless you all.
Peace.

[Jafar]

There is a saying among Muslims that "Qur'an alone is just an internet thing." If you log on to this free-minds forum or the Quraniyoon subreddit, you'll find Muslims practicing exclusively by Qur'an. But if you go out of your house, you won't meet any Muslim but Hadithists.

And is it a problem?

I'm happy to meet many muslims (not Muslim) when I go out from my house.
Although they do not identify themselves as Muslim.

The immediate purpose of religion for most people is to fit in with a community, to belong, to have an identity. The promised eternal salvation of faith is only a secondary expectation of most religionists.

Yes identity is the main purpose on why Religion was invented in the first place.

Next within the dogma of the religion a boogey man need to be invented to strike FEAR towards those who are outside of the religion. Ridiculously and ironically they call this boogey man as God. After the problem has been invented, they invented a solution to the problem. They call this solution as "salvation". Salvation from what? From an angry God. And from whom the salvation came? Also the same God.  God is angry towards everyone who are outside of the religion. God will not be angry towards those who are inside the religion. Thus to earn salvation from an angry God one is required to join the religion which God will not be angry with. 

Not that there is anything Islamically wrong here. But a religious community cannot blossom this way. A religious community without brands will lack any cohesion or recognition.

I think there is something terribly wrong about the entirety of religion mindset.
They try to build wall between human causing severely lack of cohesion and unity between them.
They spread pride, hatred and fear among human through pitting a group of human (within the religion) against others (those who are outside of the religion).
I think it's a really serious problem.

[Neptin]

And is it a problem?

I'm happy to meet many muslims (not Muslim) when I go out from my house.
Although they do not identify themselves as Muslim.


Yes identity is the main purpose on why Religion was invented in the first place.

Next within the dogma of the religion a boogey man need to be invented to strike FEAR towards those who are outside of the religion. Ridiculously and ironically they call this boogey man as God. After the problem has been invented, they invented a solution to the problem. They call this solution as "salvation". Salvation from what? From an angry God. And from whom the salvation came? Also the same God.  God is angry towards everyone who are outside of the religion. God will not be angry towards those who are inside the religion. Thus to earn salvation from an angry God one is required to join the religion which God will not be angry with. 



I think there is something terribly wrong about the entirety of religion mindset.
They try to build wall between human causing severely lack of cohesion and unity between them.
They spread pride, hatred and fear among human through pitting a group of human (within the religion) against others (those who are outside of the religion).
I think it's a really serious problem.

This sums everything entirely wrong with the "God Alone" philosophy.

People don't just believe in God alone, they believe in many other things. They hold opposing moral position on everything form homosexuality to economics. The "God alone" phrase at this point is a red herring.

Individual views on controversial subject strongly influence them to gravitate towards other individuals bearing similar views, and this is how a community is formed. 

The fear and hatred that you speak of exist with or without religion. And the differing individual views that feed into these fears and hate are not going to disappear in absence of religion.

You might say, "let's all agree to disagree", which is exactly what "God Alone" boils down to. But look, we have evidence that even this won't work. Look no further than the US or UK. If hate and fears among people is not manifested through religion, it will invariably manifests through politics.

[Jafar]

This sums everything entirely wrong with the "God Alone" philosophy.

Well the truest form of "God Alone" is actually the non-existence of others except God.
Including you, me and them..
But yes we're all still far away from such ultimate realization..

People don't just believe in God alone, they believe in many other things. They hold opposing moral position on everything form homosexuality to economics. The "God alone" phrase at this point is a red herring.

That's why introducing another set of belief will not help.
Belief implies not knowing, lack of clarity.
Introducing knowledge and clarity will help the situation but not introducing a new set of yet another dogmatic belief.

Individual views on controversial subject strongly influence them to gravitate towards other individuals bearing similar views, and this is how a community is formed. 

Nothing wrong with this..
As long as grouping based on opinion is fluid and not exclusively maintained, let alone maintained through FEAR or HATE.

That's why religion or other form of tyrannical ideology always mandated exclusivity (you either with us or against us) and shunned freedom of thoughts and opinion.

The fear and hatred that you speak of exist with or without religion. And the differing individual views that feed into these fears and hate are not going to disappear in absence of religion.

True, religion is just another channel to spread pride, fear and hatred.
But if we close the channel (through knowledge and not through yet another pride, fear and hatred) then it will spread less.

And as can be seen in today's world, we see the gradual decrease of influence by religion.
The wall between human created by religion gradually starting to disappear..

Look no further than the US or UK. if hate and fears among people is not manifested through religion, it will invariably manifests through politics.

Politics or to be exact: "motivation for domination" is the main driver on why people invented religion in the first place.
Religion IS a political tool.

Ancient Egyptianism, Babylonian Mardukism, Roman Paganism, Judaism, Islam, Catholicism (later known as Christianity).

And if you look closely on the ideology of:
Facism, Naziism, Stalinism, Kimism (North Korea) contain sparkling resemblance to the above example, thus actually can also categorized as "Religion" by itself.

Religion is an organized ideology invented by a group of people with motivation for control and domination over another group of human beings.

[reel]

Coincidently, I have been pondering upon this also.

Suppose you have a sunnite Muslimah in headscarf and a Quranite Muslimah without an headscarf on opposite ends of the street. Who is more likely to be identified as Muslim?

I might mistake the person for someone from the coldest region or orthodox jewish sect. In the latter, nikab is prescribed though.

And who is more likely to be approached by fellow Muslims or non-Muslims curious about Islam?

But it is known that the scarf is used as repellent. Non-muslims usually do their research online instead of asking someone else.

If the earliest Muslims were Qur'anists, we can assume they quickly lost out to the Sunnites/Shiites as today's Qur'anists, because they differed too considerably among themselves and their creed was too dilute and lacking in brand for recognition or cohesion.

Yet majority of the hadithists would choose Quranic west any day over regions that claim to abide by Islam. Honestly, it seems Muslims were forced into sectarian orthodoxy.

Qur'anists on the other hand don't have any form of brand. Qur'anists don't have to don headscarf, sport a bead, build a site for congregation, celebrate Eid, and don't even have a uniform procedure of prayer.
Not that there is anything Islamically wrong here. But a religious community cannot blossom this way. A religious community without brands will lack any cohesion or recognition.

How do you explain Christianity? Christians don't display their identity either, but they are more in number.

Quran alone Islam at this point will not pick up speed. Here is why:

Sects have more in budget to invest for their religion.

People can't get away from appeal to authority fallacy. I haven't come across any mullah who practiced Islam from Quran alone, yet if he says we are incorrect people believe him.I have a feeling that fox news idea was stolen from sunnis.

Our info sites are mostly banned in middle east and going public is life threatening.

It takes energy to personally study and uphold the scripture. People like to be fed by someone else.

[Neptin]

Well the truest form of "God Alone" is actually the non-existence of others except God.
Including you, me and them..
But yes we're all still far away from such ultimate realization..

I don't get this.

That's why introducing another set of belief will not help.
Belief implies not knowing, lack of clarity.

That's beside the point. The point is that having a defined set of beliefs foster community building and cooperation. That's why the sects, the sunnites and shiites are even more tightly knitted and bonded than Qur'anists. This is the reality.

Introducing knowledge and clarity will help the situation but not introducing a new set of yet another dogmatic belief.

This has never been true in the history of mankind. People reject knowledge and clarity all the time. What is knowledge to you, is myth to another. So, forget about helping anything. Just define your beliefs, build communities with those who share such beliefs and create your brand.

Nothing wrong with this..
As long as grouping based on opinion is fluid and not exclusively maintained, let alone maintained through FEAR or HATE.

That's why religion or other form of tyrannical ideology always mandated exclusivity (you either with us or against us) and shunned freedom of thoughts and opinion.

True, religion is just another channel to spread pride, fear and hatred.
But if we close the channel (through knowledge and not through yet another pride, fear and hatred) then it will spread less.

It won't spread less. It will just divert through the other channels.

And as can be seen in today's world, we see the gradual decrease of influence by religion.
The wall between human created by religion gradually starting to disappear..

The walls of religion are disappearing but new walls are forming in other areas like politics. So there really is no net effect. Compare an irreligious country like the US with a religious one like Saudi Arabia, which is more currently more divided?

When the US was more religious than it currently is, the people were more united. Do you deny? And Americans today, right and left, republicans and democrats are just as divided and bitter towards each other as opposing sects of the same religion.

Politics or to be exact: "motivation for domination" is the main driver on why people invented religion in the first place.
Religion IS a political tool.

Ancient Egyptianism, Babylonian Mardukism, Roman Paganism, Judaism, Islam, Catholicism (later known as Christianity).

And if you look closely on the ideology of:
Facism, Naziism, Stalinism, Kimism (North Korea) contain sparkling resemblance to the above example, thus actually can also categorized as "Religion" by itself.

Religion is an organized ideology invented by a group of people with motivation for control and domination over another group of human beings.

There is good and bad to everything. All those religions, including the polytheistic ones indeed served urgent needs of their time, including maintaining a degree of law and order, as well as uniting the tribesmen which paved way for formation of civilizations.

You can't entirely write them off as tools for tyranny.

[Jafar]

I don't get this.

In time you will..

That's beside the point. The point is that having a defined set of beliefs foster community building and cooperation. That's why the sects, the sunnites and shiites are even more tightly knitted and bonded than Qur'anists. This is the reality.

And the sunnites hates the shiites (and vice versa) more than the Democrats hate the Republicans.
And oh did you know that the Sunnis hate among themselves too?
There are more than 1000 factions within a group named Sunniism.

This has never been true in the history of mankind. People reject knowledge and clarity all the time. What is knowledge to you, is myth to another. So, forget about helping anything. Just define your beliefs, build communities with those who share such beliefs and create your brand.

Not correct, people generally accepted and benefited the revelation of micro-organism, electricity, electro magnetic waves, earth is round, DNAs and millions of other knowledges .And they have benefited greatly from it,

The great part of knowledge compared to merely 'belief' is that the benefits of it's truthfulness is enjoyable to all.
Not only to those who believe.
Inclusivity and NOT exclusivity.

It's OK to not believe in the existence of electricity, you can still bought yourselves a TV set and benefited from it.
It's OK to not believe in the existence of round earth, you can still bought yourselves a mobile phone and benefited from the GPS inside it.

Knowledge is a blessing, belief is a curse..

It won't spread less. It will just divert through the other channels.

Less channels will resulted in less spread..
Look at the current COVID-19 for example..

The walls of religion are disappearing but new walls are forming in other areas like politics. So there really is no net effect. Compare an irreligious country like the US with a religious one like Saudi Arabia, which is more currently more divided?

You should be aware of the division within "The kingdom of Saudi Arabia".
It's far much greater and much brutal than the division in the US.
Saudi Arabia's Lost Princes
https://youtu.be/5Dofn0oDWMw

And it will came to the surface very soon..
When the oil revenue cannot longer sustain the money for obedience transaction between the family members and the regular citizens.

When the US was more religious than it currently is, the people were more united. Do you deny?

You're referring to the US Civil War? 
Oddly enough the 'more religious' southerners during that time, defended the practice of human slavery to the nail and teeth...
Heck why not? They're 'negro', not among us.. not a human but a sub-human.. born to be a slave..

There is good and bad to everything. All those religions, including the polytheistic ones indeed served urgent needs of their time, including maintaining a degree of law and order, as well as uniting the tribesmen which paved way for formation of civilizations.

I never see thing as "good" and "bad", did you found any of my mentioning about "good" or "bad"?
I state that today the mindset of religion is a big problem.

All religion, throughout time, serve the urgent needs for the politicians in power (King, Caesar, Caliph) to 'dominate' and 'control' other human being to become their loyal supporters and their willingness to die in order to expand their area of domination.