Muhammad’s ﷺ Message between the Qur’an and Tradition: How Did Its Concepts Turn from a Project of Liberation into a Sectarian System?

Introduction

When the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ came, his aim was not merely to institute new rituals of worship. Rather, he carried a comprehensive civilizational project to reshape the relationship between the human being and the Creator, and between the human being and society. The Qur’an did not come to establish a priestly class or an absolute religious institution. It came as a liberatory message grounded in freeing human beings from servitude to other human beings and existing systems, building an independent moral conscience, establishing social and economic justice, and opening a space for reason to think and reflect.

Within a few decades, a small community in the Arabian Peninsula became a nation with a universal message. Over the centuries, however, it began to lose some of its vitality because of political struggles for power, the infiltration of ideas from other nations and ancient cultures, the influence of Isrāʾīliyyāt narratives, and the emergence of a class of jurists and religious institutions tied to political authority.

Thus Islamic tradition took shape, often becoming an authority higher than the Qur’an itself, leading to rigidity, sectarianism, and divisions.

First: The Concept of God and His Attributes

In the Qur’an, God is close to the human being, directly accessible, just, and merciful:

﴿وَنَحْنُ أَقْرَبُ إِلَيْهِ مِنْ حَبْلِ الْوَرِيدِ﴾ (And We are closer to him than his jugular vein.) [ق: ١٦]

﴿إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَظْلِمُ النَّاسَ شَيْئًا﴾ (Indeed, God does not wrong people in the least.) [يونس: ٤٤]

The relationship with God is therefore direct, with no intermediary and no human authority above it. This is the foundation of Islam’s liberatory project.

In later tradition, however, philosophical debates emerged over the divine attributes, compulsion and predestination, and the vision of God, until doctrine became a dialectical discipline far removed from Qur’anic simplicity. The emphasis came to rest on theological minutiae rather than the practical realization of liberation and ethics.

Second: Divine Unity

In the Qur’an, divine unity is not merely belief in God’s existence, but comprehensive liberation from every absolute authority other than God: ﴿أَلَّا تَعْبُدُوا إِلَّا اللَّهَ﴾ (That you worship none but God.); that is, no servitude to kings, priests, money, or any worldly authority.

In tradition, however, the emphasis shifted to dividing divine unity into lordship, divinity, and names and attributes. The social and political dimension of liberation disappeared, leading to a retreat of the spirit of liberation in everyday practice.

Third: Associating Partners with God, Unbelief, and Hypocrisy

In the Qur’an, these concepts concern conduct and ethics, not identity: unbelief is the denial of truth, associating partners with God is granting absolute authority to something other than God, and hypocrisy is moral duplicity.

﴿وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَن يَقُولُ آمَنَّا بِاللَّهِ وَبِالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ وَمَا هُم بِمُؤْمِنِينَ﴾ (Among the people are those who say, “We believe in God and the Last Day,” yet they are not believers.) [البقرة: ٨]

In later tradition, however, these terms became political and social instruments, known today as means of declaring others unbelievers and fomenting doctrinal and sectarian divisions.

Fourth: The Forbidden and the Reprehensible

In the Qur’an, prohibitions are few and focus on injustice, usury, corruption, and consuming people’s wealth wrongfully: ﴿وَأَحَلَّ اللَّهُ الْبَيْعَ وَحَرَّمَ الرِّبَا﴾ (God has permitted trade and forbidden usury.).

In tradition, however, the scope of the forbidden and the reprehensible expanded considerably, until religion became, in the eyes of many, merely a long list of prohibitions, far removed from the ethical spirit of social and economic liberation.

Fifth: The Transformation of the Religious Scholar

As the Islamic state expanded, the religious scholar ceased to be a seeker of truth and became a guardian of the institution: protecting tradition, justifying political authority, and preserving intellectual stability. Independent juristic reasoning thus became an instrument of control, and departure from established practice a threat to the order.

In the early period, the scholar’s role was closer to that of an interpreter of the text, exercising independent judgment, sometimes erring and sometimes arriving at the correct conclusion, and seeking God’s intent through reflection and free discussion. Yet as the state expanded and religious institutions tied to political authority took shape, his position gradually began to change. He was no longer always expected to discover the truth so much as to protect the existing system.

The result: religion shifted from a living movement in search of truth and justice to a rigid institutional structure that preserves what has become established over the centuries.

Sixth: Isrāʾīliyyāt and the Influence of Earlier Cultures

As the Islamic state expanded and different peoples and cultures entered Islam, narratives later known as Isrāʾīliyyāt seeped into some works of Qur’anic exegesis and history. These were stories and accounts drawn from Jewish and Christian traditions. Over time, these narratives began to infiltrate popular religious consciousness, until many people thought they were part of religion itself.

Among the most prominent names associated with this phenomenon is Kaʿb al-Aḥbār, a man who had been a Jew from Yemen and then declared his conversion to Islam during the time of ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb. He was known for transmitting many narratives from Jewish tradition into the emerging Islamic milieu.

For the most part, these narratives did not directly concern rulings of religious law. Rather, they revolved around stories of the prophets and details of their lives, obscure historical events, and interpretations of certain verses. The problem, however, was not merely their transmission, but their gradual infiltration into some works of exegesis and religious storytelling without sufficient scrutiny, opening the door to the conflation of human narratives with Qur’anic discourse.

For this reason, a number of later scholars, such as Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Kathīr, warned against this phenomenon, emphasizing that many of these accounts cannot be relied upon as a source for understanding revelation and must be read with extreme caution.

Seventh: The Relationship with the Children of Israel

The Qur’an speaks of the Children of Israel in a clear and explicit tone when criticizing some of their historical positions, particularly on matters such as concealing the truth despite knowing it, distorting texts or interpreting them to serve worldly interests, and envy toward new messages:

﴿وَدَّ كَثِيرٌ مِّنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ لَوْ يَرُدُّونَكُم مِّن بَعْدِ إِيمَانِكُمْ كُفَّارًا حَسَدًا مِّنْ عِندِ أَنفُسِهِم﴾ (Many of the People of the Book wish they could turn you back into unbelievers after your belief, out of envy arising from within themselves.) []

The Qur’anic message here does not speak of an ethnic conflict, but of an epistemic and historical conflict over the monopolization of religious truth. The transfer of prophethood and scripture from the Children of Israel to another nation was an event that shook a religious structure accustomed to seeing itself as the center of revelation.

From this perspective, many of the tensions that emerged in early Islamic history can be understood: the conflict was not merely a doctrinal disagreement, but a struggle over religious authority and who possessed the right to interpret revelation.

Eighth: The Emergence of the Sunna as a Parallel Source of Legislation

The Qur’an used the word sunna to mean divine law in history: ﴿سُنَّةَ اللَّهِ فِي الَّذِينَ خَلَوْا﴾ (God’s established way with those who passed before.). Later, however, the Sunna became an independent source of legislation, allowing the formation of strata of jurists who established the political and religious system, sometimes above the Qur’anic text itself.

Ninth: Abandoning the Qur’an and Reflection

﴿وَقَالَ الرَّسُولُ يَا رَبِّ إِنَّ قَوْمِي اتَّخَذُوا هَذَا الْقُرْآنَ مَهْجُورًا﴾ (And the Messenger said, “My Lord, my people have taken this Qur’an as something to be abandoned.”) [الفرقان: ٣٠]

Abandonment is not merely ceasing to read; it means the absence of reflection, action, and ethical application, which allowed jurisprudence serving political authority and rigid traditions to dominate religious life.

Tenth: Reason versus Transmitted Authority

The Qur’an urges the use of reason and thought: ﴿أَفَلَا يَعْقِلُونَ﴾ (Will they not then reason?), and ﴿أَفَلَا يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْآنَ﴾ (Will they not then reflect upon the Qur’an?). Later tradition, however, reinforced the tendency to reject any departure from transmitted authority and adherence to precedent, weakening critical thinking in religious understanding.

Eleventh: Concepts of Worship

In the Qur’an, acts of worship are a means of social reform: prayer purifies the self, zakāt is economic justice, and marriage is social stability. In tradition, however, they often became rituals detached from everyday life, without a direct connection to the ethical and social dimension.

Twelfth: The Qur’an as an Authority for Life

The Qur’an presents an integrated system: ethical, economic, social, and political. Yet its role receded in favor of jurisprudence serving political authority, inherited traditions, and religious authority, allowing sectarianism, rigidity, and divisions to emerge.

Conclusion

The Qur’an is a living project of liberation, justice, and thought, while tradition has become an instrument of control tied to political authority, rituals, and divisions. The gap between the original text and institutional tradition is the root of present challenges.

Any genuine renaissance therefore begins with rediscovering the Qur’an as a living source of guidance and applying it in practice to society, away from rigidity and sectarianism.