this episode and others like it are clear evidence that the meaning of certain verses could be hidden from the Companions—or from some of them—so they would ask the Prophet, and he would clarify it for them. It is therefore impermissible to regard such questions from them as improbable and, on that basis, to dismiss sound hadiths, as Nashashibi has done. His book, which he entitled “True Islam,” gives the unmistakable impression that its author sets little store by the Sunnah; for him the sole authority is the Quran—nothing else. Hence he says of himself (p. 67): “We are Quran-only Muslims!” It is well-known that the hallmark of these Quranites is to reject authentic hadiths on the flimsiest pretext—not because their isnad is defective, but simply because their content conflicts with personal preferences. In this book he follows the same path, discarding many sound reports, a large number of which are in the two Sahihs. For now we merely list the relevant pages: 35–36, 85–86, 116–17, 142, 149, 150, 154, 212, 240–41, 276–77, 278. And I ask: what would Nashashibi—and those beguiled by the glitter of his prose—say to someone who denied the tashahhud (testification of faith) in the prayer, or who refused to accept that a menstruating woman is excused from prayer and fasting during her period, alleging that God mentions only standing, bowing, and prostrating in the Quran, and nowhere exempts her from these acts? Would they side with such a denier, or repudiate him? If they sided with him—God forbid—they would have gone far astray and departed from the community of Muslims. If they repudiated him, then they would be right; and whatever argument they use against the denier is exactly the argument we use against