not anti sharia, not a liberal, not tagging any sect. someone sent me the charikar clip again this week with "see, your religion" typed under it, third time this year.. and every time I either go quiet or say "thats not islam" with nothing behind it. so I sat down and actually checked. both halves below, references on everything, go verify me

WHAT THE CLIP IS

charikar, parwan, 8 dec 2022. 27 ppl lined up in a football stadium, the clip says 10 women 17 men, lashed in front of a crowd.. the taliban said adultery, theft, "other corruption". and it wasnt a one off, its a system now. UNAMA counted 274 men, 58 women and 2 boys publicly flogged in just six months, mostly for adultery and "running away from home". the UN rapporteur counted 276 ppl between jan and aug 2024, 46 women, 63 of them in a single day in june.. an afghan rights group, AHRDO, pulled 2,745 names off the taliban's OWN court announcements, feb 2022 to april 2026. one woman got 15 lashes for wearing a long coat instead of a burqa. another one, with an intellectual disability, was raped at a checkpoint, her family went to complain, and SHE got sentenced. 20 lashes, two months.. none of this is cnn. its their own press releases

THE HALF THATS TRUE

I'm not gonna do the thing where I pretend the text isnt there. 24:2, hundred lashes for the unmarried man and woman, "and let a group of the believers witness it". so public, yes, its in the ayah.. and for married ppl the hadith say rajm, Muslim 1690. thats real too. if someone tells you islam has no corporal punishment at all they're lying to you or to themselves

so the question isnt whether the punishment exists. it does.. the question is who gets it, on what proof, by which process, and how. and thats where the stadium and the deen go in opposite directions, and not slightly

THE PROOF THEY NEED, AND DONT HAVE

24:4 comes literally two ayahs after the lashing one. whoever accuses a woman and cant bring FOUR witnesses, lash HIM eighty times and never accept his word again.. four eyewitnesses to the act itself. not two ppl in a room, not a phone, not "everyone knows". umar ra tested this on his own governor, mughira. four men came. three said we saw it. the fourth, ziyad, said I saw them in a position but I did not see the act.. umar lashed the three and let mughira walk. a governor. accused by three men. walked. coz number four told the truth about what he didnt see

and if theres no four witnesses then only confession works, so look at what the prophet ﷺ did with confessions, coz this is the bit that wrecked me when I read it properly. ma'iz walks up and says I've done zina. the prophet turns his face away. ma'iz goes round the other side, says it again. turns away again.. four times, and only after the fourth does he even speak, and the first thing he says is, are you mad. Bukhari 6815. then, maybe you just kissed her, or winked, or looked.. Bukhari 6824. ma'iz says no. then he asks in words so blunt that bukhari notes "he used no euphemism". the man was hunting for an exit. any exit. and when ma'iz ran during the stoning and ppl chased him down and finished it, he said why didnt you leave him, maybe he'd have repented. Tirmidhi 1428, hasan. Abu Dawud 4419.. the ghamidiyya woman comes, confesses, pregnant. he says go, till you give birth. she comes back with the baby. go, till its weaned. Muslim 1695. he sent a woman who confessed to zina home for two years and she had to come back a third time

and hazzal, the man who told ma'iz to go confess in the first place.. the prophet said to him, if you had covered him with your cloak it would have been better for you. abu dawud 4377, chain is weak, I'll say that myself, but muwatta malik and ahmad carry the same line and no madhab ever rejected it. another guy comes, says I did a hadd crime, punish me. the prophet asks him nothing. prays. then says, your prayer just covered it. Bukhari 6823

so the sunnah of the man who RECEIVED 24:2 is.. look away, four times. ask if he's drunk or mad. offer him kissing and winking as excuses. send her home with the baby. tell the witness he should have shut up.. now play the clip again

WHAT THE TALIBAN ARE ACTUALLY DOING

1. "running away from home". not a crime. not hanafi, not shafi'i, not anyone. no hadd, no ta'zir, no text, nothing. its pashtunwali in a white turban.. and its the second most common charge on UNAMA's list

2. that number 39. keeps coming up, 39 lashes, 39 lashes. thats hanafi ta'zir, abu hanifa said discretionary punishment has to stay below the lowest hadd which is 40, so qazis give 39.. ta'zir is for an actual crime that has no fixed penalty. ta'zir for no mahram, for a coat, for being raped and daring to report it.. thats not fiqh, thats a man with a stick who learned one fiqh word

3. confessions in a cell. richard bennett, the UN rapporteur, documented taliban courts refusing lawyers to defendants, including kids. in classical fiqh a zina confession has to be voluntary, repeated, explicit, and you can take it back any time, including halfway through the punishment, and the hadd dies the second you do.. hanafis say if he runs, stop, running is retraction. a confession squeezed out in a taliban basement is worth exactly nothing in the court of the man who turned his face away four times

4. the raped woman gets lashed. 24:33, whoever is compelled, Allah after their compulsion is forgiving. umar ra had a case, slave girl raped by a man, he flogged the man and exiled him and did NOT touch her, Bukhari 6949, and bukhari titles the chapter "if a woman is forced there is no hadd on her".. four madhabs, zero disagreement. the taliban's own records have women walking in to report rape and walking out sentenced for "relations outside marriage". thats not a loose reading. thats the ruling, inverted

5. idra'u al hudud bi al shubuhat. push the hudud away with doubts. the chain to the prophet in Tirmidhi 1424 is weak, saying it before someone else does, but umar and ibn mas'ud said it in their own words and all four schools built the courtroom on it.. "if the imam errs in pardoning its better than if he errs in punishing". a stadium full of ppl convicted in weeks is not a court that errs on the side of pardon. it doesnt err on that side ever

6. even the lash itself has rules, and they dont bother. hidaya, mughni, whip with no knots, moderate, spread across the body, never the face or head or private parts, man standing, woman sitting, clothes on.. the point is shame, not injury. their own case files have a woman with a bleeding head wound before her sentence was even announced

THE BIT THAT CHANGED HOW I SEE IT

how often did muslims actually do this. historically. the ottomans ran sharia courts for 600 years across three continents.. rudolph peters went through the court records, book is "crime and punishment in islamic law", and found ONE documented stoning for zina in the whole empire. istanbul, 1680. and even that one caused uproar among the ulama of the time. the hundred lashes case was nearly as rare, coz the four witness bar was built so it almost never clears.. courts did ta'zir, fines, quiet stuff, and mostly they did nothing, coz the sunnah told them to look away. a punishment thats on the books and almost never lands is a warning. a punishment that lands on 2,745 ppl in four years is a government with a hobby

and before anyone says pakistan is different.. zia's hudood ordinance, 1979. took zina, stripped out the fiqh safeguards, and inside a few years raped women were sitting in jail for zina coz they couldnt produce four men. safia bibi, blind, raped, convicted of zina in 1983, let out only after the whole country screamed.. took till 2006 to fix. same mistake, our flag, our mullahs cheering

SO

next time someone types "see, your religion" under that clip, this is what I'm sending them. the punishment is real and I'm not embarrassed by a text. the man who received that text spent his life making it almost impossible to apply and praised ppl for hiding each other's sins.. the taliban are flogging ppl for things that arent crimes, on confessions any qazi who'd finished his own books would throw out, and flogging the rape victim while the rapist keeps his uniform. if you want to judge islam, judge it by the four witness rule, by umar letting the governor walk, by hazzal getting told off for talking, by six hundred years of ottoman qazis who couldnt bring themselves to do it.. that is the religion. the stadium is what you get when men who never finished the hidaya get handed a country

Simple..

Not tagging any sect, not naming any madrasa, not anti-ulama.. I love the real scholars, I quote them below. This is about the guy on the loudspeaker in your mohalla and the uncle who forwards him. Every point has a reference, go check me, I'd rather be corrected than wrong.

1. "AURAT KI AWAZ BHI PARDA HAI"

Quran 33:32 tells the Prophet's wives: don't speak softly to men, speak in a proper manner.. meaning speak. Sahaba learned half the deen from Aisha ra, out loud. Umar ra appointed Shifa bint Abdullah as inspector of the Madinah market (Ibn Hajar, al-Isabah), a woman supervising male traders, with her voice. Hanafi position, the one Pakistan follows: a woman's voice is NOT awrah, Ibn Abidin says it straight in Radd al-Muhtar 1/406. What's not allowed is making it soft and melodic for strangers. That's it. A girl answering in class is not a sin. A girl giving a presentation is not a sin.

2. "TASVEER HARAM, VIDEO HARAM"

Says the maulvi with a YouTube channel. Honest version: this one is a real ikhtilaf. Mufti Taqi Usmani sb and most Indo-Pak ulama say photos = picture making = haram. Most Arab scholars from all four madhabs say no, the hadith on image makers is about creating images from imagination to rival Allah's creation, a camera only reflects what Allah already made. Shaykh Bakhit al-Muti'i of Azhar wrote a whole book on it a hundred years ago, al-Jawab al-Shafi. So two things. One, say "scholars differ", not "haram, khatam". Two, if you're going to pick the haram side, don't pick it for us and the halal side for your channel.

3. "AURTEIN MASJID NAHI JATEEN"

The Prophet ﷺ said: do not prevent the female servants of Allah from the mosques of Allah. Bukhari 900, Muslim 442. When Ibn Umar ra narrated this and his own son said "we will prevent them", Ibn Umar got furious: I narrate to you from the Messenger of Allah and you say we will prevent them? Yes, there's another hadith that her home is better for her (Abu Dawud 567). Better for her, her choice. Not "banned". A mosque in Pakistan with zero women's space is culture, not sunnah. Masjid e Nabawi had women in it, every prayer.

4. "KUTTA NAJIS HAI, GHAR MEIN RAKHNA HARAM"

Quran 5:4 allows eating what your trained dog hunts. 18:18, the people of the cave had a dog and Allah mentioned it with love. The hadith everyone quotes (Bukhari 5480) says whoever keeps a dog that is NOT for hunting, herding or guarding loses reward daily. So a guard dog, a farm dog, a working dog, textually fine. The Maliki madhab doesn't even consider the dog najis. What the texts do discourage is a dog kept inside the house for no purpose, I'm not going to hide that part. But "kutta kafiron ka janwar hai", no. That's us.

5. "DOOSRI SHAADI KE LIYE BIWI KI IJAZAT NAHI CHAHIYE, 4 SUNNAT HAI"

Half true, and the half they skip is the whole point. 4:3 gives the permission with a condition in the same breath: if you fear you won't be just, then ONE. 4:129 says you will never be fully just between wives however hard you try. When Ali ra wanted a second wife while married to Fatima ra, the Prophet ﷺ stood on the mimbar and said no, Fatima is a part of me, what hurts her hurts me (Bukhari 3729, 5230). Yes, the hadith also mentions it was Abu Jahl's daughter, but read his words, he said "I hate to see her troubled", he counted his daughter's pain as a reason, out loud, publicly. Fiqh-wise I'll concede it: the first wife's consent is not a condition for the nikah to be valid, no madhab says it is. And Pakistani law (Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961, section 6) also doesn't need her consent, it needs written permission from the Arbitration Council, she's just asked and gets a representative. Skip that and you owe her full mahr on the spot plus up to a year in jail. So "ijazat nahi chahiye" is technically right. "4 sunnat hai" is not. The sunnah was one wife for 25 years, and a man who told Ali no.

6. "JAHEZ ISLAMI HAI, FATIMA RA KO BHI MILA THA"

Jahez is a Hindu custom we kept and renamed. In Islam money flows from the groom to the bride, that's mahr, 4:4, "give women their mahr as a gift". Fatima ra's few items (a bed, a leather pillow stuffed with grass, a water skin, a hand mill) were bought with the money of Ali ra's OWN mahr. He sold his armour, the Prophet ﷺ told him to use that money. That's Ali paying for Ali's house. And the Prophet gave nothing like this to his other three daughters. If it was sunnah it would've been for all four. A father bleeding for a fridge and a motorcycle is not sunnah, it's extortion with a dupatta on it.

7. "BIRTHDAY HARAM, CAKE KAATNA KUFR"

There is no verse, no hadith on birthdays. None. Ibn Baz and Ibn Uthaymeen said haram, imitation of non-Muslims. Qaradawi, Dar al-Ifta Egypt, many Hanafi and Shafi'i scholars say it's a worldly custom (urf), allowed if nothing haram is in it. The Prophet ﷺ fasted on Mondays and when asked why, he said that's the day I was born (Muslim 1162). So pick a side, fine. Calling a 7 year old's cake kufr is the only thing in that room that's actually against the deen.

8. "CIGARETTE SIRF MAKRUH HAI" (the one they go SOFT on)

Funny how the strictness disappears here. Quran 2:195, don't throw yourselves into destruction. 4:29, don't kill yourselves. Hadith: la darar wa la dirar, no harm and no reciprocating harm (Ibn Majah 2341). Al Azhar: haram. Dar al-Ifta Egypt: haram. Saudi Permanent Committee: haram. OIC Fiqh Academy: haram. Ibn Baz, Ibn Uthaymeen: haram. "Makruh" was the ruling from the 1600s when nobody knew what it does to lungs. The maulvi lighting a Gold Leaf right after the khutba about music being haram.. yeah.

9. "WO DOOSRE MASLAK WALE KAFIR HAIN"

Bukhari 6104. If a man says to his brother "O kafir", it returns to one of them. The Prophet ﷺ put a price on that word so we'd stop throwing it. Pakistan throws it like confetti. Every sect in this country has a maulvi who has made takfir of every other sect, which by this hadith means at least some of them have made takfir of themselves.

10. "TARJUMA MAT PARHO, GUMRAH HO JAO GE"

The Quran asks: do they not ponder the Quran, or are there locks on their hearts? 47:24. A blessed book, that they may reflect on its verses, 38:29. We have made the Quran easy to remember, so is there anyone who will take heed? 54:17. Allah told you to think about it and a man told you not to read it. Reciting Arabic you don't understand for 30 years and never once asking what it says is like signing your own nikah nama without reading it. Read a translation. Read two. That's what the book itself is asking.

NOW THE 3 WHERE THEY'RE RIGHT AND WE MOCK THEM

Fair is fair.

Beard. It's not a maulvi invention. The Prophet ﷺ ordered it (Bukhari 5892), three madhabs say wajib, Shafi'is say makruh to shave. You can disagree on the fist-length detail, but "beard is just culture" is wrong, I'm sorry.

Handshake with women. Aisha ra said the Prophet's ﷺ hand never touched any woman's hand even when taking bay'ah, he took their pledge by words only (Bukhari 5288). They're right on this one and we call them backward for it.

Namaz. Every single one of them, every sect, every mohalla, says pray five times. That one is not up for debate and no "but the maulvi is a hypocrite" cancels it. His hypocrisy is his file. Your namaz is yours.

The point isn't "maulvis bad". The point is that a lot of what we're handed as Islam is Punjab, or Arabia's culture, or somebody's ego, with a Quran cover on it. Deen is simple enough to check. So check. Ask me anything below, I'll answer with a reference or I'll say I don't know.

(Sincere questions, no fights, over at r/theislam)

Not talking about big theology.. Talking about the stuff your uncle, parents, elders and your school teacher repeated, and you've believed since you were seven without anyone ever showing you where it's written.. I went and looked for each one.. Short receipts, one per item, all checkable on sunnah.com or quran.com in under a minute.. If one of these is yours, don't be annoyed at me, be annoyed at whoever told you without a source..

The sun didn't rise the day Bilal RA didn't give adhan..

Not in Bukhari, not in Muslim, not in any of the six books, not in Ahmad, not anywhere with a chain.. Hadith scholars call this la asla lahu, it has no origin.. What's actually reported is Bilal RA struggling to finish the adhan after the Prophet ﷺ passed coz he broke down at "ashhadu anna Muhammadan".. That's moving enough.. Nobody needed to add the sun..

Your namaz isn't accepted if your shalwar covers your ankles..

Isbal below the ankles, with pride, is a sin, Bukhari 5783.. Without pride, scholars differ.. But not one of the four madhhabs says the prayer itself is invalid or needs repeating.. The report ppl use for "not accepted" is disputed among the muhaddithin, and even those who take it read it as the sin of isbal, not a broken salah.. Fix the trousers, sure.. But your Fajr counted..

Touching a dog breaks your wudu, and dogs are najis..

Bukhari 174, Ibn Umar says dogs used to walk in and out of the Prophet's ﷺ mosque and nobody sprinkled water after them.. 5:4 lets you eat what a trained dog catches in its mouth.. Bukhari 2322, keeping a dog for farming or guarding, no sin.. The Maliki school holds the dog itself is tahir, pure.. What's agreed is the saliva in a vessel needs washing, Muslim 279.. That's it.. Nobody's wudu ever broke coz a dog brushed their leg..

Women can't visit graves..

Muslim 977, "I used to forbid you from visiting graves, now visit them".. General, not men only.. Muslim 974, Aisha RA asks the Prophet ﷺ what to say at graves and he teaches her the dua.. You don't teach a dua for a place someone can't go.. Bukhari 1283, he finds a woman crying at a grave and tells her to be patient.. He doesn't tell her to leave.. The forbidden thing is wailing and the old jahili rituals, not the visit..

A widow in iddat can't see the sky, the moon, or any man..

Iddat is four months ten days, 2:234, she stays in her home and doesn't remarry.. That's the ruling.. Muslim 1483, Jabir RA's aunt was divorced and someone told her she couldn't go out, she asked the Prophet ﷺ and he said go out and harvest your dates, you might give charity from it.. The moon thing, the sky thing, the covering the windows thing.. Pure culture.. Not one line of fiqh..

Neil Armstrong heard the adhan on the moon and became Muslim..

He didn't, he never claimed to, and it annoyed him enough that the US State Department sent a message to its embassies in 1983 asking them to tell Muslim countries it wasn't true.. He died a Christian in 2012.. Islam doesn't need an astronaut.. Delete the forward..

Drinking water standing up is haram..

Bukhari 1637, Ibn Abbas says the Prophet ﷺ drank zamzam standing.. Bukhari 5615, Ali RA drinks standing in front of ppl and says, some of you dislike this, but I saw the Prophet ﷺ do it.. Sitting is better, there's a hadith encouraging it, Muslim 2024.. Better isn't haram.. Your uncle who slaps the glass out of your hand, show him 5615..

Music is haram, all scholars agree, end of discussion..

The majority position is that instruments are haram, that's true, and there's a report in Bukhari 5590 they lean on.. But "all scholars agree" is false.. Bukhari 987, two girls singing with a duff in Aisha's RA room on Eid, Abu Bakr RA objects, the Prophet ﷺ says leave them.. Ibn Hazm, one of the biggest names in Andalusian fiqh, held music permissible and wrote a whole treatise on it.. Ghazali in the Ihya laid out conditions under which listening is fine.. You can hold the strict view, plenty of serious ppl do.. What you can't say is that there's no discussion.. There's been one for a thousand years..

A wife is obligated by sharia to cook and clean..

Hanafi fiqh, the school Pakistan follows, says domestic work isn't a legal obligation on the wife, it's her kindness, and the husband owes her food, clothing and housing, nafaqah, regardless.. Bukhari 676, Aisha RA asked what the Prophet ﷺ did at home, she said he served his family, kana fi mihnati ahlihi, and went out when the adhan was called.. He stitched his own sandals and patched his own clothes.. If the best of men did his own housework, "it's her job by Islam" isn't Islam..

A woman's voice is awrah, she can't speak to men..

33:32 tells the Prophet's ﷺ wives not to speak softly in a way that tempts, and then says speak in an appropriate manner.. Speak.. Aisha RA taught hadith to men for decades and some of the biggest tabi'in learned from her behind a curtain.. Women asked the Prophet ﷺ questions in the mosque in front of everyone, Bukhari 130.. The majority of scholars say the voice isn't awrah.. Modesty in how you speak, yes.. Silence, no..

Praying without a topi is invalid or wrong..

A man's awrah in salah is navel to knee.. Head isn't in it.. Covering it is adab and it's reccomended, and there's nothing wrong with the cap, wear it.. But there is no hadith making it a condition, and no madhhab says the prayer's deficient without it.. Half the ppl who'll fight you on this pray in a shirt so tight it shows more than a bare head ever did..

If you miss Fajr and the sun's up, it's gone, just skip it..

Bukhari 597, "whoever forgets a prayer or sleeps through it, let him pray it when he remembers, there's no expiation except that".. The only forbidden window is the actual moment of sunrise, sunset, and noon zenith, a few minutes each.. After the sun's clear of the horizon you pray your Fajr as qada.. Half of Pakistan is losing a fard every morning coz someone told them it expired..

Sleeping after Asr makes you lose your mind, and cutting nails at night is bad luck..

The sleeping after Asr narration is listed in the books of fabrications, Ibn al Jawzi put it there centuries ago.. The nails at night one doesn't even have a fake hadith, it's just something someone's nani said.. Sleep when you're tired.. Cut your nails when they're long.. Allah didn't legislate your schedule..

Sunnis fast on Ashura for Imam Husayn RA..

Bukhari 2004, the Prophet ﷺ came to Madinah, found the Jews fasting Ashura for the day Musa AS was saved from Firawn, and said we have more right to Musa than you, and fasted it.. That's fifty years before Karbala.. Husayn RA was five years old.. The fast has nothing to do with him, in either direction.. Grieve him seperately, and honestly.. Don't move his story onto a fast that was already there..

Black cats, owls, and black threads for nazar..

Bukhari 5757, "la adwa wa la tiyara", no contagion by superstition and no evil omens.. The Prophet ﷺ liked good omens and forbade bad ones flat out.. Nazar itself is real, Muslim 2188, and the protection for it is ruqya, the muawwidhatayn, dua.. Not a thread on a wrist, not a chilli hanging on the door, not a cat crossing the road meaning you should go home.. If you're wearing the black thread for protection, that's the one thing in this list that's actually a problem, not just a mistake..

That's fifteen..

There's more, in advance, that 'talking while eating is a sin' , no, it's not, it's sunnah, prophet Muhammad PBUH litrally started telling a whole story while eating, but you should make sure not to throw food out of your mouth to others plates like some biological glock. Anyway.. I stopped coz the post was getting long.. Drop the ones you grew up with below, and if you think one of mine is wrong, bring the reference.. I'll apologise, and please correct me if I'm wrong..

Sidenote.. is where I do these properly, with the sources laid out.. Come check the ones you don't believe..

Simple..

I got called badtameez at an Islamic gathering (I usually don't attend these kind of gatherings where women's are teacher, js because they're wise, not knowledgeable.. And the reason is explained below.. Btw I think women's can be better then men about Islam. ) yesterday..by the end the aunty apologised to the whole room, so idk who was the badtameez one..

ok so context.. dars type thing at a relative's place. aunties on the sofas, couple uncles, us lot at the back on the floor like always. aunty leading it is talking about how Allah is with us at all times, fine, good stuff, no issue.. and then she drops this. almost word for word

"Jab Kaaba ban raha tha na, Allah khud aa kar mazdooron ke saath baith jata tha, unke saath kaam karta tha.."

and everyone nods. subhanAllah from like three corners. I actually froze.. looked at my cousin, bro was nodding too. I wanted to say something right there, I swear I had it on my tongue, but its her dars, twenty ppl, my mother literally next to me.. so I shut up. told myself not my place. let it go.

lasted ten minutes lol

a girl asks her, "Aunty shaadi pe gaane bajana theek hai..??"

and she goes, "Beta duniya dari bhi nibhani hoti hai, itna sakht nahi hote, Allah dilon ko dekhta hai.."

and that was it for me. couldnt anymore. I said, "Aunty maaf kijiye ga, ek baat samajh nahi aa rahi.. abhi aapne kaha Allah Kaaba pe aa kar mazdooron ke saath baithta tha.. wo Quran mein kahin nahi hai, Allah khud kehta hai uske jaisi koi cheez nahi.. wo aapne aise bola jaise sab jaante hain.. aur jis cheez pe baat clear hai us pe duniya dari..?? jo likha hi nahi wo pakka, jo likha hai usme gunjaish..??"

room went quiet. she said, "Beta ye buzurgon se suni hui baatein hain, tum abhi chhote ho.."

before I could even open my mouth, uncle from the side, "Tum ilm waalon se aise baat karte ho..?? ye tameez hai..?? Badtameez.."

I turned to him. "Uncle aapko pata hai ye kahan likha hai..??"

"Mujhe pata hona zaroori nahi, unhon ne kaha hai to hoga.."

"To phir aap kis cheez ko defend kar rahe ho..?? aapko nahi pata, unko nahi pata, aur galat main hoon..?? main sirf pooch raha hoon kahan likha hai.. agar hai to bata dein, main abhi sab ke saamne maafi maangta hoon.."

"Bas karo, ye baat karne ka tareeqa nahi hai.."

and ok on the tareeqa part he wasnt fully wrong, I'll get to that. but I didnt stop. coz nobody, not ONE person in that room had said the actual thing was right. they were only saying I was wrong for asking. thats a different thing and everyone knew it.

so I took my phone out. opened the quran app. said, "Aunty bas ek minute, ye dekh lein phir main chup.."

and I read it out. Surah Shura, laysa ka-mithlihi shay.. uske jaisi koi cheez nahi. then Baqarah 127, Ibrahim aur Ismail (AS) deewarein utha rahe hain, dua kar rahe hain, rabbana taqabbal minna.. and I said, "Yahan poora scene hai.. Ibrahim hain, Ismail hain, dua hai.. teesra koi nahi hai. Allah ka baith kar kaam karna kahin nahi hai.. aur ye choti baat nahi aunty, ye Allah ke baare mein baat hai.. aur aap ye dars mein keh rahi hain, log ghar ja kar apne bachon ko bolenge.."

she didnt say anything for a bit. then, and I'll give her this much, she said, "Theek hai beta.. agar Quran mein nahi hai to maine ghalat kaha.. maine bhi suni sunai baat aage kar di, Allah maaf kare.. aap sab bhi maaf karna, main ne ghalat bataya.."

uncle just looked away. no sorry from him obviously. someone changed the topic to whose daughter is getting married in december and that was that. my mother still got the looks. I was still the badtameez one in the car on the way back, "sab ke saamne zaroori tha..??" etc etc

and I'm not even fighting the song thing here btw thats its own debate. I'm saying the standard flipped in ten min depending on what was convinient.. and when I pointed at it the first answer wasnt "yahan likha hai", it was "tum chhote ho" and "badtameez". think about that.

WHERE I WAS WRONG

my tone. by the time uncle got involved there was an edge in my voice that shouldnt have been there.. woman my mothers age, twenty ppl. Quran tells us how to speak even to parents, "do not say to them even uff" (17:24). and this aunty wasnt lying out of malice, she was repeating what she was told, she proved that at the end by actually taking it back. I should've waited. gone to her after, alone. I didnt.. that part is on me and I'm not pretending otherwise.

WHERE I WASNT WRONG

the content. this isnt a difference of opinion. its a made up story about Allah.

"There is nothing like unto Him" (42:11)

"And when Ibrahim was raising the foundations of the House with Ismail, 'Our Lord accept this from us'" (2:127)

no third worker. no Allah sitting down.. and the quran literally describes ppl saying "we follow what we found our fathers upon" (2:170) and asks back, even if their fathers understood nothing..?? thats "buzurgon se suna hai" in one ayah. 1400 years ago.

and the Prophet ﷺ said "whoever lies about me intentionally, let him take his seat in the Fire" (Bukhari 1291). if thats the weight for a false hadith.. imagine making up an action for Allah Himself and saying it in a dars.

"BUZURGON SE SUNA HAI" WAS NEVER A SOURCE

not even for the Sahaba. Ibn Umar (RA) once said the dead get punished by their family crying over them and Aisha (RA) corrected him publicly, said he misheard (Bukhari 1288). son of Umar. senior sahabi. nobody said "tum ilm waalon se aise baat karti ho". thats how this deen survived.. ppl checking each other with the text in hand, not with "tum chhote ho".

and the Prophet ﷺ warned about exactly that room. "Allah does not take away knowledge by snatching it from people, but by taking away the scholars, till when none remain, people take ignorant leaders who give verdicts without knowledge, so they go astray and lead others astray" (Bukhari 100)

Adi ibn Hatim (RA) heard "they took their priests and monks as lords" and said we never worshipped them.. and the Prophet ﷺ said, didnt they make halal what Allah made haram and you followed them..?? "that was your worship of them" (Tirmidhi 3095). following a person over the text. thats the actual danger. pointing at it isnt badtameezi, its the opposite.

THE PART THAT ACTUALLY SCARES ME

if I hadnt said anything she says it at the next dars. and the next. fifty kids hear it, say it with confidance in their own drawing rooms in twenty years.. and the one kid who asks "kahan likha hai" gets the badtameez treatment, and one day that kid stops asking. and then maybe stops believing. not coz of Islam.. coz of the culture we wrapped around it and called it respect.

we have to stop this. this culture is ruining our Islam, quietly, in rooms exactly like that one, and its dressed up as adab so nobody touches it. and if that means we have to teach our parents, then we have to. with adab, one on one, ayah open on the phone.. but we HAVE to. respect for elders is deen. staying silent while Allah is being described wrong is not, and I'm done letting the second one hide behind the first.

next time I'll do it the right way. after, alone, softer. but I'm doing it.

if youve been in a room like this, or you think I'm still wrong somewhere, say it.. we made r/theislam for exactly this. sources on the table, no "buzurgon se suna hai".

Simple..

Been seeing this go around again, the finial on top of Gumbad e Khizra "looks like horns" or "a trident" and people asking why the Prophet's ﷺ dome has a satanic symbol on it instead of a crescent.. And some of the pics going around are edited "before/after" ones, so lets clear that first.. Those are fake, that crescent version of this dome never existed.. BUT, and I checked this, the older Mamluk wooden dome did have a small brass crescent on it, put there around 1360 by Sultan al-Nasir Hasan.. The Ottomans rebuilt the dome in 1818 and topped their rebuild with their own alem.. So nobody "removed" anything off this dome, but a moon was up there once..

So what is it..?? It's an Ottoman alem.. The current dome was rebuilt by Sultan Mahmud II in 1818 and painted green in 1837, and Ottoman finials came in a few shapes.. Crescent, wheat, and the tulip.. That's a tulip.. Three petals opening upward on the stacked bulbs, same design you see on Ottoman minarets all over Istanbul..

Why a tulip on the most important dome in the world..?? Because in Ottoman script the word for tulip, lale, is written with the exact same letters as Allah.. lam alif lam ha.. It was their visual dhikr.. It's on the Blue Mosque tiles, it's litrally what Laleli Mosque is named after.. They put the closest thing they had to the Name over the Rawdah.. That was the intention..

Now the "horns" part.. Ask yourself where the picture of a devil with horns and a pitchfork comes from.. It's medieval European church art borrowing Poseidon's trident and the Greek god Pan.. Islam has no visual symbol for Shaytan.. None.. So when we look at an Ottoman tulip and see "satanic", we're importing Christian iconography and then panicking about it on our own building..

And the crescent people want instead..?? That's Byzantine.. Constantinople's symbol before the Ottomans took it and kept it.. The Prophet ﷺ never saw a crescent on a masjid in his life.. So the "fixed" version actually swaps one Ottoman symbol for another one..

Someone will bring Bukhari 5952, the Prophet ﷺ broke anything in the house with a cross on it.. Fair, and it's a real principle.. But the cross was and is an actively worshipped object of a living religion.. Nobody worships a tulip alem.. The ruling is about objects of veneration, not about things that vaguely remind you of a cartoon..

Now my own opinion, and it's seperate from the facts above.. I think the Ottomans made a mistake here.. Not a haram one, an unwise one.. The Prophet ﷺ said leave what makes you doubt for what doesn't make you doubt (Tirmidhi 2518).. And in Bukhari 2035 he was walking with his own wife Safiyyah at night, two sahaba passed by, and he stopped them and said "this is Safiyyah".. They were shocked he'd even think it needed saying, and he said Shaytan runs in man like blood and I feared he'd put something in your hearts.. He had done nothing wrong and still removed the doubt himself..

That's the standard.. If a symbol on the most looked at dome in the Ummah can be read two ways by a sincere person, then it's the wrong symbol for that dome, however beautiful the intention.. The crescent isn't from the Prophet's time either, but nobody on earth looks at it and sees anything else.. A tulip that needs an evening of research to explain is a tulip in the wrong place.. Imo it should've stayed the moon..

Same energy as the prayer mat videos btw.. "Hidden faces in the design".. That's your brain doing pattern matching, it's called pareidolia and it's why you see faces in plugs and clouds.. If you want the actual sunnah on this, Bukhari 373, the Prophet ﷺ prayed in a patterned garment and had it removed because it distracted him.. So yeah, buy a plain mat.. Not because of demons.. Because you'll concentrate better.. That's the whole ruling and it was always enough..

Point being.. Before we recieve a forward and start seeing Shaytan on the Prophet's ﷺ dome, maybe check what the people who built it actually meant.. It took me an evening.. The answer was more beautiful than the conspiracy, and the honest criticism of it is better than the fake one..

Simple..

Sidenote: join me on my sub r/theislam for eye opening knowledge about Islam..

Been seeing this go around again, the finial on top of Gumbad e Khizra "looks like horns" or "a trident" and people asking why the Prophet's ﷺ dome has a satanic symbol on it instead of a crescent.. And some of the pics going around are edited "before/after" ones, so lets clear that first.. Those are fake, that crescent version of this dome never existed.. BUT, and I checked this, the older Mamluk wooden dome did have a small brass crescent on it, put there around 1360 by Sultan al-Nasir Hasan.. The Ottomans rebuilt the dome in 1818 and topped their rebuild with their own alem.. So nobody "removed" anything off this dome, but a moon was up there once..

So what is it..?? It's an Ottoman alem.. The current dome was rebuilt by Sultan Mahmud II in 1818 and painted green in 1837, and Ottoman finials came in a few shapes.. Crescent, wheat, and the tulip.. That's a tulip.. Three petals opening upward on the stacked bulbs, same design you see on Ottoman minarets all over Istanbul..

Why a tulip on the most important dome in the world..?? Because in Ottoman script the word for tulip, lale, is written with the exact same letters as Allah.. lam alif lam ha.. It was their visual dhikr.. It's on the Blue Mosque tiles, it's litrally what Laleli Mosque is named after.. They put the closest thing they had to the Name over the Rawdah.. That was the intention..

Now the "horns" part.. Ask yourself where the picture of a devil with horns and a pitchfork comes from.. It's medieval European church art borrowing Poseidon's trident and the Greek god Pan.. Islam has no visual symbol for Shaytan.. None.. So when we look at an Ottoman tulip and see "satanic", we're importing Christian iconography and then panicking about it on our own building..

And the crescent people want instead..?? That's Byzantine.. Constantinople's symbol before the Ottomans took it and kept it.. The Prophet ﷺ never saw a crescent on a masjid in his life.. So the "fixed" version actually swaps one Ottoman symbol for another one..

Someone will bring Bukhari 5952, the Prophet ﷺ broke anything in the house with a cross on it.. Fair, and it's a real principle.. But the cross was and is an actively worshipped object of a living religion.. Nobody worships a tulip alem.. The ruling is about objects of veneration, not about things that vaguely remind you of a cartoon..

Now my own opinion, and it's seperate from the facts above.. I think the Ottomans made a mistake here.. Not a haram one, an unwise one.. The Prophet ﷺ said leave what makes you doubt for what doesn't make you doubt (Tirmidhi 2518).. And in Bukhari 2035 he was walking with his own wife Safiyyah at night, two sahaba passed by, and he stopped them and said "this is Safiyyah".. They were shocked he'd even think it needed saying, and he said Shaytan runs in man like blood and I feared he'd put something in your hearts.. He had done nothing wrong and still removed the doubt himself..

That's the standard.. If a symbol on the most looked at dome in the Ummah can be read two ways by a sincere person, then it's the wrong symbol for that dome, however beautiful the intention.. The crescent isn't from the Prophet's time either, but nobody on earth looks at it and sees anything else.. A tulip that needs an evening of research to explain is a tulip in the wrong place.. Imo it should've stayed the moon..

Same energy as the prayer mat videos btw.. "Hidden faces in the design".. That's your brain doing pattern matching, it's called pareidolia and it's why you see faces in plugs and clouds.. If you want the actual sunnah on this, Bukhari 373, the Prophet ﷺ prayed in a patterned garment and had it removed because it distracted him.. So yeah, buy a plain mat.. Not because of demons.. Because you'll concentrate better.. That's the whole ruling and it was always enough..

Point being.. Before we recieve a forward and start seeing Shaytan on the Prophet's ﷺ dome, maybe check what the people who built it actually meant.. It took me an evening.. The answer was more beautiful than the conspiracy, and the honest criticism of it is better than the fake one..

Simple..

Sidenote: join me on my sub r/theislam for eye opening knowledge about Islam.

this took me 3+ weeks of digging before i'd even type it out..

so if u're coming to fight.. bring ur sources.. i already brought mine..

first.. i'm not gonna run from the hadith..

bukhari says 6 at nikah.. 9 at consummation.. it's sahih.. from her own mouth..

a muslim who hides that loses before he opens his mouth..

so that's out in the open..

but ur whole case is one number from one chain..

and the quran.. the one book that's actually protected..

doesn't mention her age anywhere.. not a single verse..

hadith are human transmission bro..

sahih means the chain checks out.. it doesn't mean the number can't slip..

that's literally why usul exists.. quran is qat'i.. hadith is dhanni..

the book is certain.. the hadith is the best effort of men..

and men slip on numbers.. all the time..

now the math.. the part that took the weeks..

asma bint abu bakr was aisha's elder sister..

she died in 73 hijri at 100 years old..

ibn kathir records it.. al-dhahabi records it.. ibn ishaq records it..

multiple sources.. not one..

100 minus 73.. asma was 27 at the hijrah..

asma was 10 years older than aisha..

ibn abi al-zinad's report.. al-dhahabi kept it in siyar a'lam an-nubala..

27 minus 10..

aisha was 17 at the hijrah..

nikah in mecca.. consummation in medina.. first or second year after..

that's 17.. 18.. 19..

not 9..

and her actual life doesn't fit a child anyway..

she was already engaged to jubayr ibn mut'im before the prophet's proposal came..

a society that demanded a woman's consent for marriage

doesn't betroth a toddler to a grown man first..

she carried water at uhud with the other women..

and sahih muslim itself records the prophet sent away anyone under 15 from battle..

so either she wasn't at uhud.. or she wasn't 9..

both can't stand at once..

she narrated 2000+ hadiths and led an army against the caliph..

a child bride widowed at 18 doesn't become the authority imam malik deferred to..

those are the receipts of an adult.. not a kid..

and bout the chain itself.. this is the part that cost me the most time..

the 6/9 number flows almost entirely through hisham ibn urwah..

and he only narrated it after he moved to iraq in his old age..

the iraqi scholars of his own time flagged his memory there..

meanwhile imam malik in medina.. the man who learned from aisha's own students..

never recorded a single number about her age..

a story that's absent where she actually lived..

and appears only later.. from an old man whose memory was being questioned..

that's not a proof.. that's a flag on the chain..

and now this is where ur whole attack runs out of road..

even if u take the 9 as literal..

u're holding a 7th century number up against a 21st century clock..

girls in that era became women the moment they reached maturity..

that was every civilization.. not one..

rome set 12 for girls..

jewish custom.. 12..

medieval europe married off its princesses as children..

margaret beaufort was a mother at 13..

byzantium.. persia.. same age.. same norm..

u don't judge a society from 1400 years ago by ur 2026 school laws..

that's not logic.. that's anachronism..

and anachronism isn't an argument.. it's a costume..

so pick ur poison..

if u trust the hadith.. 9 was normal for that time.. ur outrage is modern..

if u trust the calculation.. she was 17 to 19.. ur outrage is wrong..

either way ur gotcha dies on arrival..

and the one thing that survives every version of this story..

she loved him.. she chose him.. she praised him till her last breath..

and she became the teacher of a civilization..

not a victim.. a scholar..

ur argument needs a traumatized child..

history hands u a happy woman who outsmarted every man of her era..

u were sold a story bro..

i js put the receipts on the table..

go check em urself..

Simple..

Mine darling in the Franxx after episode 18.

I've been reading a lot of books and have read a few web novels too.. But now I'm thinking of starting another one, and I'm really confused between these three..

All of them seem insanely good.. And that's exactly why I can't decide..

I want opinions from people who have read them.. Just give me a push on which one I should start first.. Which one would you recommend??

Edit: lenght is not a problem.

Tbh the first few panels were sloppy.. But the art was exceptional after that.. And.. Ig.. It was a decent 1st chapter..

I've gone through most of the names people suggested... Can we try something a bit sadder and different.. maybe with a love vibe..?

Edit: actually you can recommend manga aswell..

Ts so damn peak!!

Its a manhwa 'SUPERHUMAN ERA'

And damn, the creagraphy is so peak.. But the peakest thing isn't that.. It's the extream action! The impectful punches and moves and the art is js so damn sick!.. It's definitely gonna be in my top 5 best action manwahs. I'm on Ch 15 so no spoilers..

doesn't matter who u are..

muslim.. not muslim.. ex muslim.. never touched a quran..

this still applies..

everything u know about this book..

u got from someone else..

a parent.. a mullah.. a reddit thread.. a headline.. a tweet..

everyone's got a version..

almost nobody checks the original..

i'm not here to convert anyone..

i'm asking u to do smth for urself..

read one page with translation..

not coz someone told u to..

coz u owe it to urself to know what's actually in the most read book on earth..

u check reviews before a movie..

u google before u go somewhere new..

don't let strangers decide what this book says for u..

js one page tonight..

Simple..

Mine : Attack titan

Mine:

1. Berserk (manga) "if my one hit don't kill you, you'll wish it had"

2. Akame ga kill (anime) "my desire to kill her, is because I love her so dearly"

3. Kingdom. (manga) "My King, if ever I were to fall to the hands of the enemy, please seek out Xin, He will definitely..."

This post is js for Muslims. And there's no offence to any non Muslim brother.

js a thought before the next war..

we keep fighting bout a book most of us never sit with..

not blaming anyone.. i was the same paki special.. whole squad knows the comment sections by heart but not page two..

so try this tonight.. 10 minutes.. quran with translation.. not as ammo for the next argument.. as a letter written TO u..

recite it slow.. understand what it's js said.. let it be strange and personal again..

one page a day quietly humiliates a thousand comment wars..

whoever's in.. open it tonight and tell me what hit u..

Simple..