❖ Claim by Hadith-Rejecter Parwez: No Disagreement Possible Through the Qur’an
Parwez asserted that the Qur’an is entirely free from contradiction and that if it alone were accepted as the ultimate authority, all disagreements would cease.
✔ “The Qur’an is free from contradiction”
“The Qur’an presents its freedom from contradiction as a proof of being from Allah.”
(Tolu-e-Islam, March 1978, p. 40)
✔ “If the Qur’an alone is accepted as authority, disagreements will vanish”
(Tolu-e-Islam, August 1984, p. 14)
✔ “The Qur’anic teachings are clear and devoid of contradiction”
(Tolu-e-Islam, 1952, p. 42)
✔ “The Qur’an claims: ‘Had it been from other than Allah, they would have found much contradiction in it.’”
(Tolu-e-Islam, April 1959, p. 8)
✔ “Believing that multiple interpretations of practical life matters exist in the Qur’an is a sign of ignorance of Qur’anic teachings.”
(Tolu-e-Islam, April 1959, p. 9)
❖ Parwez’s Contradictory Stance: Disagreement is Possible in the Qur’an
Despite the above, Parwez later divided the Qur’an into two sections:
◉ Principles of Life (Fixed Values): These are clear and not open to disagreement.
◉ Facts of the Universe and Metaphysics: These depend on human knowledge and understanding, and disagreement is possible in this area.
(Tolu-e-Islam, March 1985, p. 6)
❖ Critical Questions Regarding Parwez’s Theory
➊ What is the Qur’anic proof for dividing its content into “principles of life” and “metaphysical truths”?
➋ If the Qur’an’s claim is “Had it been from other than Allah, you would have found much contradiction in it,” then how can contradictions be accepted in metaphysical matters?
❖ Reality of Parwez’s Theories
✦ Nature of Metaphysical Realities
Philosophy and modern science demonstrate that metaphysical realities cannot be comprehended by reason alone.
✔ Philosophy: Modernism claimed to comprehend reality through reason, while Postmodernism completely excluded metaphysics.
✔ Richard Rorty, a renowned modern philosopher, declared that the possibility of religion and metaphysics is obsolete.
❖ This exposes Parwez’s unfamiliarity with both philosophical reasoning and contemporary scientific discourse.
❖ The Reality of Interpretive Differences in the Qur’an
Parwez claimed:
“Multiple interpretations of the Qur’an are not possible. Disagreement is due to conflicting traditions.”
(Tolu-e-Islam, February 1962, p. 13)
“Different sects prioritize their own ideology over the Qur’an.”
(Tolu-e-Islam, August 1962, p. 10)
However, the truth is:
➊ Interpretive differences are part of human nature.
➋ Differences in interpretation may arise from good faith or bias.
➌ Parwez considered every form of disagreement among Muslims to stem from ill intent.
❖ Interpretive Disagreements Among “Qur’an-Only” Groups
Even among “Qur’an-only” groups like Tolu-e-Islam and Balāgh al-Qur’ān, there are interpretive differences regarding Qur’anic verses.
Examples:
◈ “Lahm al-Khinzīr” (Flesh of Swine):
— Chakralwi: Refers to glandular meat.
(Tafsīr al-Qur’ān bi al-Qur’ān, Vol. 1, p. 136)
— Parwez: Refers to swine flesh.
(Mafhūm al-Qur’ān, p. 62)
◈ “Junub”:
— Chakralwi: Refers to bad dreams.
(Tafsīr al-Qur’ān, Vol. 3, p. 27)
— Parwez: Refers to the state of major ritual impurity.
(Lughāt al-Qur’ān, p. 442)
❖ Conclusion
➊ Interpretive disagreement is inevitable due to human intellectual limitation and natural diversity in understanding.
➋ The solution lies in the light of Hadith and Sunnah, which serve as practical explanations of the Qur’an.
➌ Parwez’s claim is flawed: His theory that “accepting the Qur’an alone as authority will end all disagreement” is disproven by differences among Qur’an-only groups themselves.
➍ Consensus (Ijmaʿ) is essential: The final resolution to interpretive disagreements lies in the consensus of the Ummah, a principle recognized by the majority of Islamic scholars.
