u/DhulQarnayni

Q 5:6 contains the phrase “aw lāmastum al-nisāʾ,” which is interpreted differently by the Shafi and Hanafi schools. Shafi scholars understand it as ordinary physical touching, while Hanafi scholars understand it as sexual intercourse.

There are also reports of different interpretations among the Companions. From a historical-critical reading of the Quran, its language and its historical context, which interpretation makes more sense: ordinary touching or sex?

The Quranic Cosmology as an Identity in Itself (Mohammad Ali Tabatabaʾi, Mehr Dad and Saida Mirsadri)

The Quranic Cosmology as an Identity in Itself By Mohammad Ali Tabataba'i and Saida Mirsadri ?

I understand that the number 19 is important in the Bahá’í faith and that you also respect and give importance to the Quran. So I’m curious how you understand the statement that this number (19) can give certainty to those with Scripture and can increase faith of believers?

Q4:159 says that every one of the People of the Book will believe in him before his death and that on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them.

If Jesus had already died, how can this verse mean that the People of the Book will believe in him before his death? The Quran also seems to know that not all Jews believed in Jesus.So why would it say that all of them will believe in him before his death?

Does this suggest that Jesus' death is still in the future like before or on the Day of Judgment? If not, how do those who believe Jesus already died according to the Qur'an explain the wording and context of 4:159?

The verse says that Dhul-Qarnayn reached a place where he found people who could barely understand him? Does Alexander romance contain a similar episode?

Also, does this episode appear in the Syriac Alexander Legend?

When we compare manuscripts, we often see differences in spelling such as whether an extra alif is written or not. For example, ʿālamīn is written without an alif in the Cairo edition, while some other manuscripts or inscriptions include it. But the Basmala seems to always have the same spelling, with the same number of letters. Why is that?

Also why is the alif omitted in the words bismi and raḥmān in the Basmala, when the same words can also be written with an alif? For example, bismi appears with an alif in Q 96 while the Basmala consistently uses the form without it. What explains this difference in spelling?

I'm interested in the historical-critical interpretation of Q 74:30–31. Specifically, how do academic scholars understand the historical context of the verse saying that the number was made "only as a test for those who disbelieve," so that "those who were given the Scripture may attain certainty," "those who believe may increase in faith," and "those who were given the Scripture and the believers may not doubt"? What are the main historical-critical explanations proposed in academic scholarship?

When i was a child, i thought the story of Ibrahim breaking the idols made a really good point. After breaking them he tells the people to ask the biggest idol who did it, showing that the idols can't speak or do anything on their own.

But later i started wondering if the same logic could be applied to the Quran. For example, if someone burns or tears up a copy of the Quran and says, "If these are words from God, let God stop me or punish me," nothing supernatural seems to happen. Likewise, many Muslims pray for Allah's intervention during tragedies (Take Palestine for example) but we don't see obvious miraculous intervention.

So why doesn't the same reasoning apply here? What is the difference between Ibrahim's argument against idols and someone making a similar argument about the Qur'an or Allah's apparent lack of direct intervention? I'm curious how Quranists would answer this.