After the death of Muhammad but before widespread availability of written copies of the Quran and before the widespread establishment of local Islamic authorities, what was "Islam" in practice to early Muslims (if they didn't necessarily have the whole text or some local authority)?

Based on the Quran alone (and without using any Hadiths etc.), what according to Quran are the core differences between Jews, Christians (i.e., those who worship Jesus as incarnation of God), and the Believers (i.e., those who accept Muhammad as the final Prophet and follow what he preached)?

Why do these girls take these kinds of pictures with the Kaamaandhudu? Do they know about his history?

What are the earliest Arabian Islamic retellings (by Muslims) of the life and teachings/message of Jesus? Did earliest Muslims care equally about all prophets? Or were earlier prophets effectively irrelevant for them because they perhaps viewed Muhammad as conveying the entirety of the teachings?

According to the Quran, are the houris only for Muslim men who reach paradise? Or are the houris also for Muslim women who reach paradise? If so, what would houris do for the women versus men? If not, what (if anything) would the Muslim women get in paradise as per the Quran? What is a houri's role?

Sahih al-Bukhari 6:298 says, "Narrated `Aisha:
The Prophet (ﷺ) and I used to take a bath from a single pot while we were Junub. During the menses, he used to order me to put on an Izar (dress worn below the waist) and used to fondle me. While in I`tikaf, he used to bring his head near me and I would wash it while I used to be in my periods (menses)."

What is the textual history and scriptural purpose of parts of Hadiths like Sahih al-Bukhari 6:298 (about "Fondling a Menstruating Wife")? How could they have originated? How could people have believed that Aisha narrated very personal details in order for it to be included in the Hadith collection?

How do academic scholars interpret, explain, and historicize the presence of contradictions (or perhaps seeming contradictions) in Hadiths such as Sahih Bukhari 157, 158, 159?

I respect Nag Ashwin's artistic freedom, but why is he claiming that he's adapting the original story when he portrays Karna as rescuing Ashvatthama (when it's actually the other way around in the original story)? He should clarify he's departing from epic instead of saying, "I know what I'm doing."

It is true that in the original story/text, Krishna praises Karna's positive aspects, but in the story Karna and Arjuna and most of the main characters also have their flaws along with their positive aspects. However, the issue is that even in the 1st part of Kalki movie, Nag Ashwin doesn't highlight the flawed nature of Prabhas' character enough. There wouldn't have been the "Arjuna vs Karna" debate if Nag Ashwin had clarified that all characters have strengths and weaknesses, but that's of course not the path he chose.

Selectively quoting a text and claiming that it's the source when one departs too much from the source text is disingenuous. Maybe Nag Ashwin should "google how many times" Karna rescues Ashvatthama (directly, as portrayed in the first part of the movie, not indirectly). The answer is 0. And then he should "google how many times" Ashvatthama rescues Karna (directly or indirectly). The answer is at least 3.

Nag Ashwin claimed, "I know what I'm doing." Can he still claim that he knows what he's doing?!

I think I figured out the "issue" with Rao Bahadur. Most decent movies are "one-time watch" movies; there is very little value in watch them for a second time. But Rao Bahadur is a movie that may test one's patience and disengage most on the first watch, but its value is in a "second-time" viewing.

Based on academic scholarship through July 2026, is there any concrete (or very reliable/plausible) evidence that Muhammad recited every single word of the Quran that is used today and was involved in the arrangement of the surahs? Or is the academic consensus that others also influenced the text?

TIL Anil Kapoor debuted as a lead actor in a Telugu movie!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anil_Kapoor#1979%E2%80%931980s:_Rise

Don't know how Toxic is going to turn out, but Geetu Mohandas and the cinematographer of the film have clearly put in at least some effort in the visual symbolisms of various shots