1. Is there any verse in the Noble Qur'an that very clearly and unambiguously state that revelation (wahy) is only and solely that which is contained in the Noble Qur'an?

2. If the Noble Qur'an only contains "ALL" of revelation (wahy), then can they please tell us whether the Hijrah (our beloved Prophet’s Migration from Makkah to Madinah) was done by Allah's Command (wahy) or whether it was done on the sole discretion and wish of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam)? If it was done by Allah's Command, then let them show us where it is in the Noble Qur'an? If it was done on the Prophet's own wish, then why was Prophet Yunus (Alayhi Salaam) a victim of Allah's great displeasure when he abandoned his mission without Allah's consent? Allah thereafter forgave Prophet Yunus’s erroneous decision after Allah saw sincere repentance in him and heard his invocation from the stomach of a huge fish or whale.

3. During the historic signing of the Peace Treaty of Hudaibiyyah, after the Prophet took the oath of allegiance (bay'ah) on the blood and lives of his close companions, but then later, he went against the pleasure of his companions and, on very debasing and disrespectful conditions, signed the Peace Treaty of Hudaibiyyah. Did the Prophet sign this Peace Treaty by the command of Allah, or did he sign this treaty out of his own wish? If he did this out of his own wish, then why did he do the exact opposite of what he had agreed by mutual consultation (Shuraa) with his very close companions? And if the Prophet signed the Peace Treaty by Allah's Command, there let them show us which verse of the  Noble Qur'an state this explicitly or implicitly.

4. Our beloved Prophet predicted many things that are not contained in the Noble Qur'an. Some of these predictions were completed during the Prophet's lifetime and some others were completed just after his demise. There was no prophecy that he had made, recorded in authentic Ahaadith reports, that was proven wrong. What was the means at the Prophet's disposal of such news of the unseen future? If we say that Allah gave this news of the unseen future to the Prophet, then why are these not mentioned in the Noble Qur'an?

5. What is the "BAYAAN" mentioned in the Noble Qur'an (Chapter 75: Verse 19)?

(a) Did Allah take upon Himself to safeguard this "BAYAAN" or not?

(b) If Allah did take upon Himself the responsibility to safeguard this "BAYAAN", did He fulfil His promise to safeguard it? If Allah did fulfil His promise to safeguard it, then tell us how?

(c) If we separate this "BAYAAN" from the Qur'an, then is there any benefit in preserving the mere words of the Noble Qur'an, especially when each person with his personal limited knowledge is free to interpret Allah's Kalaam? And is this “free” interpretation any proof (hujjah) for other Muslims? And if and when the so-called "Quranic Society" or "Markaz-e­-Millah" (Authority/Centre/Capital of the Muslim Nation) happens to come into existence, will it be able to fix these “free” and “liberal-minded” interpretations of Quranic Laws, and will they be regarded as proof (hujjah) for the Muslim Nation at large?

6. The Noble Qur'an was revealed over a period of 23 years. Was the arrangement of the verses of the chapters done by Allah's Command or did the Prophet do this arrangement of the verses by himself, as he thought was best to do? If the arrangement of the verses was not done via inspiration (ilhaam) or revelation (wahy), then how can the Qur'an ever be considered a book of revelation or inspiration or revelation (ilhaami)?




1. If Allah Almighty is not on the Arsh (Throne) or not above, but present everywhere, then from where was the Noble Qur'an being revealed?

(a) For the elevation of the human ego, why does Mr. Parwez take his “Siraat-e-Mustaqeem” above? (Qurani Faisley - Urdu: Page 343).

(b) Why does Allah Almighty reveals His Commands from the “heaven to the earth”? (Nizaam-e­Ruboobiyyah - Urdu: Page 6).




1. If there is no such creation or external (kharijee) existence of angels, then who was bringing the Noble Qur'anic verses down upon the heart of our beloved Prophet?

2. What or who are Jibreel and Mikaa'eel? Who are the "kiraaman kaatibeen"? What is the reality of the THREE thousand and FIVE thousand angels that were sent to help the 313 Muslim warriors in the Battle of Badr?




1. If the practice of the commands of revelation (Wahy) is compulsory only after it is written down in book form, then what about those Prophets who were not given books of revelation but were given commands by Allah? Was it compulsory for their communities (umam) to practise those commands of Allah given to their Prophets by way of revelation (wahy) but which were not written down in book form?  If not, then why were those nations punished for disobeying the commands of Allah received verbally via their respective prophets?

2. The Tawraah was revealed to Prophet Moosa (Alayhi Salaam) only after he was saved from Pharaoh and his people at the place of Tia. If it was not compulsory on the people of Pharaoh to obey the commands of revelation (wahy) which had not until then been recorded in writing, then why were Pharaoh and his people punished by being drowned in the Red Sea?




1. It is claimed by the modernist Parwezis that the Deen of Islam was completed during the Prophet's lifetime as indicated by the verse: "This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My Favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion" (Chapter 5: Verse 3), therefore it is not necessary for the Ahaadith. Then let them answer one question: If the Deen had already been completed at that time, then what is the necessity of the "Markaz-e Millah" (Authority/Centre/Capital of the Muslim Nation) to formulate additional laws and principles?




1. It is claimed by the Parwezis that the Noble Qur'an contains only broad principles.  Its details were, by Allah’s command, left to the Prophet to consult (make shuraa) with his companions and decide laws and principles according to their specific circumstances and period of time. Can these modernist Parwezis give any details of such consultations that was related to matters of the Shari'ah i.e. the number of Salaah, the times of Salaah, the number of raka'aat of each Salaah, its sequence etc., or matters relating to Zakaah and the fixing of its amount, or those related to divorce, or fosterage (radaa'ah), or inheritance, or jihad and its regulations?






1. The Parwezis claim that our Deen must be based on "reality" (yaqeeni), and the Noble Qur'an is the only "absolute reality". But then let us ask them a question: Will those things that the "Markaz-e-Millah" (Authority/Centre/Capital of the Muslim Nation) will explain and decide on the details that do NOT form part of the Qur'an be regarded as "absolute reality"?  Will this become part of our Deen for Muslims to follow?  If these details and decisions “can” become part of our Deen, then why can't the Sunnah of our beloved Prophet become part of the Shari'ah?  If the decisions and explanations of the "Markaz-e-Millah" is not part of our Deen and not incumbent upon us to practise, then what is the benefit of all this so-called revolution?

2. As far those attacks that are made against the whole corpus of Ahaadith of our beloved Prophet as being heresy or illusion (zanni) e.g. humane errors, personal interpretations, personal opinions etc., will the "Markaz-e-Millah" be safe and error free from such kinds of attacks?

3. Up until the time that the "Markaz-e-Millah" is established and the details of the broad principle commands are not formulated, what will be the position of these broad principle commands? Does this mean that up until that time, these broad principle commands will not be compulsory? How will a Muslim practise these broad principle commands of Deen today?

4. Does a host of heresy or assumptions regarding an incident create certainty or evil suspicions? If they create evil suspicions, then why has the Noble Qur'an stipulated the number of witnesses?  But if these create certainty, then why are there so much allegations of heresy against the Ahaadith and that it is NOT a "reality" (yaqeeni)?




1. According to Mr. Parwez, the basic foundational teaching of the Noble Qur'an is that obedience is made only to Allah and no one else. (Maqaam-e-Hadith - Urdu: Page 64). Then what is meant by those Prophets who used to say to their people: "So keep your duty to Allah, fear Him and obey me." (Chapter 26: Verses 108,110,126)?  Should we then believe (ma'aazallah) that these Prophets were concealing this foundational principle of Allah from their people?  By commanding their people to follow them without even mentioning Allah with regards to obedience, were they (ma'aazallah) forcing their people to commit polytheism (shir-k)?

2. If obeying our beloved Prophet is not permissible, then how does it become permissible to obey the "Markaz-e-Millah" (Authority/Centre/Capital of the Muslim Nation)?

3. What is the reasoning and wisdom of Allah behind giving the title of "uswatun hasanah" (the best exemplar) to the personality of the Holy Prophet but not to the Noble Qur'an?




1. Imam Muslim narrated that the Prophet said: "Whoever wrote anything other than the Qur'an, it should be deleted or wiped out".  Is this Hadith of the Prophet (often quoted by the anti-Hadith modernists) not included in the verse wherein Allah says: "He does not speak out of his own desire, but it is revelation revealed" (Chapter 53: Verses 3-4)? If it is included in this verse, then it is a revelation other than the Qur'an (wahy-ul-khafiyy).  If it is not what this verse points to, then why do these Parwezis accept such a Hadith and regard it as a great proof against the writing of the Ahaadith?




1. What is meant when Allah says in the Noble Qur'an: "We shall make you recite so that you will not forget except what Allah wills" (Chapter 78: Verses 6,7)?

2. What is that crime of adultery (fahsh) whose punishment for women is to confine them to their homes until they died, and the number of witnesses is the same as for adultery?  If this crime of adultery (fahsh) is in the Qur'an, then it is a Hadd Punishment.  Can these Parwezis prove to us from any Islamic History books if such a punishment was ever meted out to any woman guilty of such a crime?

3. In his Qurani Faisley (Urdu - Page 164), while mentioning all the punishments (hudood) specified in the Noble Qur'an, why has Mr. Parwez very conveniently left out this crime of "fahsh"?  Has not the punishment of such a crime specified and fixed by Allah in His Noble Qur'an?

4. In this same verse of the crime and punishment of "confinement to their homes until death", Allah has promised to fix another type of punishment.  Did Allah fulfil His promise in this regard?  If Allah did fulfil His promise, then by which verse of the Noble Qur'an chronologically? Also, is this punishment of "confinement to their homes until death" still valid today and applicable or is this punishment no longer applicable i.e. abrogated?




1. Mr. Parwez writes in his Qurani Faisley (Urdu - Page 121) that all the affairs of inheritance are mainly based on representation (qaa'im maqaami). From which verse of the Noble Qur'an can such an important and fundamental principle be proved?  Why did Mr. Parwez just create an illusion or speculation (zann) on this important aspect of Islamic Law and gave his own personal opinion?

2. Can a dead person become an heir?  If a dead person himself cannot become an heir, then how can he be represented (qaa'im maqaami)?

3. In which verse of the Qur'an is there mention of the share of an orphan in the wealth left over after the death of his paternal grandfather?  The Prophet was an orphan of his paternal grandfather Abdul Muttalib, but he did not get a share from his wealth.  Therefore, the share of an orphan from the wealth of his paternal grandfather should have been clearly specified in the Qur'an.  Can these Parwezis show us which verse explicitly states this?

4. On reading the commands in the Noble Qur'an on inheritance, Mr. Parwez writes in his Qurani Faisley (Urdu - Page 113): "The fact is that the Qur'an has completely and totally mentioned all the laws of inheritance in just FOUR short verses. This is done with such great beauty and eloquence that when man ponders over them, then he goes into an ecstasy or frenzy (wajd) with its miraculous verbosity.  Mr. Parwez then goes on to make a mockery of the law of inheritance in the books of Fiqh.

Let us ask these modernist Parwezis to work out the law of inheritance and distribution of wealth of the deceased in the following circumstances:

(a) The wife is to die leaving behind her husband, 3 daughters, and the wife's parents are both alive.

(b) The husband is to die, his wife had already died, but he has only ONE daughter, and the husband's mother is still living.

(c) The wife is to die. She has NO children but she leaves behind her husband, and she has TWO sisters.




1. According to Mr. Parwez, making a bequest is compulsory on every Muslim only because it has been insisted and repeated FOUR times in the Noble Qur'an.  But we know that wherever there is a verse that mentions bequest, there is also mention of the fulfilment of one's debt. Now, just going by this Parwezi logic, if by mentioning the making of bequest FOUR times makes it compulsory upon every Muslim, then by that very same logic, the fulfilment of debt appearing FOUR times in those very same verses, also makes it compulsory for one to take a loan and die without fulfilling it, but include it as part of a Muslim’s bequest.  Does this make any sense?




1. If and when the Markaz-e-Millah establishes the details of Quranic principles of Law, this will never be included in the category of "what Allah has revealed".  But Allah says in the Qur'an: "And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the disbelievers". Thus, whoever judges or makes decisions other than what Allah has revealed, then they are kaafiroon (disbelievers), zaalimoon (wrongdoers) and faasiqoon (disobedient) (Chapter 5: Verses 44,45,47).  Will not the obedience to the details of the broad Quranic principles propounded by the Markaz-e-Millah also be kufr and shir-k?

2. In this present age, is it possible for all the world's governments to be in agreement with ONE Markaz-e-Millah?  If each Muslim country establishes its own Markaz-e-Millah, then each country will interpret the details of Quranic Laws differently according to their own conditions and requirements. On this basis, the result will be various groups and parties with prejudice, disunity and confusion. What will be the Parwezi solution to this outcome?




1. If the Ahaadith is not a proof (hujjah), then why are the Mawdoo' (fabricated) Ahaadith used by the anti-Hadith modernist Parwezis to deny the whole corpus of Hadith; and why is this campaign still prevalent up to this day?

2. If we deny the Ahaadith as proof (hujjah), can we then prove the preservation of the Noble Qur'an?  According to Mr. Parwez, the Ahaadith are heresy and illusions (zanni), then how can we prove the Qur'an to be certain (yaqeeni)?  Surely the internal evidences are NOT proofs by themselves unless and until the preservation of such evidences are not proven by external means.




1. If the Noble Qur'an denies personal wealth or if Allah thinks it better to deny accumulation of wealth by a person, then why were the Laws of Inheritance revealed during the last part of the Prophet's lifetime?

2. If personal wealth is disliked in the Noble Qur'an and NOT permissible in the eyes of Islam, then why does the Qur'an prescribe the punishment of stealing?

3. Why was the command to take Zakaah from people directed to the Islamic State and was revealed towards the last part of the Prophet's lifetime?




1. Huroof Al-Muqatta'aat and Ayaat Al-Mutashaabihaat contain neither a command nor any principle of Islamic Law. When we see no benefit in them as far as Islamic Law is concerned, do we still have to recite such verses or not?  Why did Allah include them in the Noble Qur'an from which we cannot derive any rules or commands, when in Mr. Parwez's view the Qur'an is just only a Book of Law?


Requesting your humble du’as!


Abdul Haq Abdul Kadir

Umhlanga Ridge, Kwa-Zulu Natal, South Africa