I posted a while ago that I was upset about people accusing him of being a pdf because of the aisha hadith, but I've seen many other hadiths where he is represented in such a horrible way that doesn't align at all with how much represented in the quran.

he's reported to be a war-monger and a murderer (bukhari 4028 and 25), an anti-semite (bukhari 3593), an endorser of the rape of captives (bukhari 5210), egotistical (bukhari 13), a sex maniac (bukhari 7:62:142), a misogynist (bukhari 7:62:124), a racist (bukhari 662), among many other things.

all of this just pushes me away from hadith more and more, this all feels so disrespectful to our prophet, how could they feel so comfortable depicting him in such a way??

Lately it has become almost trending to claim: "I don't believe in a personal God. I believe in some supreme force that created the universe, but it didn't send any prophets or books."

So convenient, isn't it? Yeah, the mystery of existence is solved – there is a God. But any reason for creation?

A deist doesn't answer this question. He rather claim: if you are a good person, why does it matter that you believe in a religion? Some agnostics would agree too.

At first, it sounds very logical indeed – no wonder why so many choose this view. However, here also lies the question that makes the difference: what is good?

Adam probably thought: I know what is good for me. Hitler probably also thought he knows what is good for the humanity. Army of terrorists destroying lives of "non-believers" probably also believe it is good for the world.

The world is so separated by the idea of good – something that is supposed to unite the humanity.

... It is as if we desperately need a guidance. It is as if we are being tested by the One who sent it. It is as if the meaning of the existence, which is so full of suffering, can be justified only by a God that has planned a time to stop it and reward each creature with what he has accumulated.

But how would one know for sure? Why the guidance has to be Quran, not many of the books that some charlatans have wrote?

There is a great answer: Quran doesn't speak to a doubtful mind; it speaks directly to the Witness. Thus, each and everyone knows exactly what it says, but prefers to dismiss it by saying:

"This is no more than the word of a man." (74:25)

Now, this is not an attempt to start a debate. This is but a reminder. We are not speaking to your rational mind, we are just throwing a seed in your heart.

Then whoever wills will remember it. And they will not remember except that God wills. He is worthy of fear and adequate for forgiveness. (74:55-56)

Listen to sounds. Some things cannot be said using words.

💚

I’m having some difficulty understanding Surah Al-Hajj 22:40. I’ve checked various translations, such as Clear Quran and Sam Gerrans’, but they don’t seem to match.

Does Allah really mention churches, synagogues, and mosques in this ayah? How do you interpret this verse?

Also, does the verse mean that churches, synagogues, and mosques were not demolished because Allah willed it? In other words, is the ayah saying that Allah prevented these places of worship from being destroyed?

Thank you.

Noticed as I went to play some of his old videos that his whole channel on youtube is gone.

Sala'am all, I'm a Quranist Muslim, and have studied the Quran for several years, so I wanted to provide a Quranic exegesis of the single polygamy verse in the Quran, and explain why it clearly does not allow polygamy for any reason, and esp. not polygamy with children, as someone falsely claimed on the debatereligion sub recently, but refused to address the verse. Note that the Quran is the infallible word of God to Muslims, so it is the Supreme Law and final word on any given issue:

4:3: And if ye fear that ye will not deal fairly by the orphans, marry of the women [their mothers], who seem good to you, two or three or four; and if ye fear that ye cannot do justice, then one....

I added in "mothers" in parentheses as some translations say mothers, but most say women. I argued at length both in the Qurani sub with (hopefully not) a Quranist arguing polygamy is for whatever desire you wish, AND at the same time was arguing with a non-Muslim in the debatereligion sub that the women whom you can marry are not the orphan children (who aren't women) but their mothers. You can check the word for word translation of the verse for yourself if you doubt my claims, as I like to be transparent: https://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=4&verse=3

Clearly, the verse specifically says that IF you fear injustice to the orphans (children who lost their fathers, as a single mother would still be considered to have orphaned kids without a male provider/guardian), THEN to marry the women (nisa). The word for orphans is both male and female, and refers to fatherless kids (so clearly not adult males and females). Moreover, the word for women, nisa, refers to adult females, not children (esp. mixed sex children). The fear of injustice, which we see mentioned repeatedly throughout the Quran, concerns eating up the wealth of those who lost their fathers but who presumably were left with some inheritance. As their step-fathers, you are to protect their wealth until they "come of age." This is confirmed just a few ayat later, where Allah states:

4:6: Therefore, test the judgment of the orphans in your care, until they reach the age of marriage. And when you recognize mature judgment in them, then hand over their wealth to them. Nor shall you consume it in wasteful spending, or in haste, for fear they will grow up and claim it. Moreover, if the one who is the orphan’s guardian is rich, then let him abstain from it entirely. But if one is poor, then let him consume of it only in accordance with what is right....

Here, we see exactly the potential injustice, as Allah commands those men whom young orphans are entrusted, to not overspend their money. If you are a rich man, you should provide for the orphan kid yourself. If you do not have the means, you should spend cautiously from the inheritance, but not enrich yourself with it. This verse makes clear that the orphans referred to are children who must "come of age," and that the stepfather must not be unjust protecting the inheritance. Moreover, the verse clarifies that children must be of sound judgment or the "age of maturity" (distinct from being a child), before being given their money to spend. That clarifies that children are not capable of sound judgment, cannot enter into financial transactions, and must be protected until they reach the age of majority.

Thus, it's crystal clear that a child (anyone who has not reached the age of sound judgment/maturity), is incapable of entering into a marriage, which is a financial transaction and a solemn covenant (according to Quran), as it requires exchange of dowry, promises, and covenants. In the law, it is a contract, requiring witnesses.

All of this together, completely precludes that you can marry multiple wives for pleasure, for love, or even for convenience. Instead, it is a limited allowance for the sake of orphans, and to protect them (and the widowed single mothers). That is why Allah says, IF you fear injustice to orphans, THEN you may marry 2+ women, but even then only if you can be just.

Finally, using common sense, Allah places a huge emphasis on male and female union, stating that he created Adam's mate as a place of repose and tranquility (His very first spoken command to Adam being to dwell with his wife in sakeena/peace in paradise). In hadith, some would say you must even marry to complete your deen/faith (which I don't agree with, but I do recognize the importance of it). Thus, to the extent there are 50/50 females to males of marriageable age (generally age 18-35, as I'll exclude the elderly where we see disparately more women in old age than men, due to longer life expectancy), if a man married more than one wife (even to protect orphans), when another man is deprived of even one wife or means to satisfy his needs, that would seem haram to me. Meaning, that at some point, if too many men had 2-4 wives, such that some men were left with nothing, that'd be excessive and oppressive to the other men.

Hope that clarifies!

Could someone please explain to me the first revelation of the angel Jibril?

Why in the Bible does the angel Jibril—and often other angels too—greet the listener and even say "do not fear," but the angel Jibril doesn't do the same with the Prophet on Mount Hira?

I want to make clear from the beginning that I’m **genuinely asking this because I want to understand the Islamic answer better**. I’m not trying to attack Islam, mock the idea of Allah, or start an argument. This is something I’ve been thinking about and I’m struggling to make sense of it.

Islam teaches that this life is a test from Allah. But normally, a test makes sense because the person giving the test does not fully know the outcome.

For example, a teacher tests students because the teacher doesn’t know exactly how much each student understood.

But Allah is omniscient.

Before creating me, Allah already knew every choice I would make, every sin and good deed, whether I would believe or disbelieve, and ultimately whether I would enter Jannah or Jahannam.

So what exactly is being tested?

I understand one response is:
**“The test isn’t for Allah to gain knowledge. It allows our choices to actually happen so that we can be judged for what we really did rather than what Allah simply knew we would do.”**

I can understand that argument, but it raises another question for me.

If Allah already knows with absolute certainty that a particular person, if created, will freely make choices that eventually lead them to Jahannam, why create that person in the first place?

Allah doesn’t discover anything from their life because He already knew the entire outcome before they existed.
There is also another part I struggle with:
**Why does knowing whether Allah exists have to be part of the test at all?**

Why couldn’t Allah make His existence completely undeniable to every human being and then test us based on whether we choose to obey Him?

Knowing Allah exists would not necessarily remove free will.

In Islam, Iblis knew that Allah existed. He communicated with Allah and still chose to disobey Him.

So clearly:
**Knowing with certainty that Allah exists ≠ being forced to obey Allah.**

Couldn’t humans therefore have been given the same certainty?

Everyone could know beyond any doubt that Allah exists, that Islam is truly from Him, and what He expects from us.

Then the actual test could be:
**Now that you know God exists, will you obey Him or rebel against Him?**

That seems like it would preserve free will while removing the enormous uncertainty surrounding religion, where sincere people can investigate Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, atheism, etc. and reach completely different conclusions.

So I think my overall question is:
**How does the concept of life being a “test” make sense alongside Allah’s complete foreknowledge? And if the purpose is to test our free choices rather than discover what we will do, why couldn’t Allah make His existence completely certain and test only whether we choose to obey Him, especially when Iblis knew Allah existed and still freely disobeyed?**

And finally, if Allah already knows before creating someone that their life will ultimately end in Jahannam, how should we understand His decision to create that person in light of His justice and mercy?

Again, I’m asking sincerely. I’m interested in the strongest theological/philosophical Islamic explanation for this, not trying to make a “gotcha” argument.

Disclaimer: I did use AI to rewrite my question since English is my third language. Also sorry if this is not the proper place to ask this.

I have severe social anxiety so only looking at pictures of the thousands and thousands of people lining up to walk around Allah’s house makes me sick to my stomache. Also I live in Europe and just above Nisab, so sending a proxy is out of question too, what should I do?

Salaam alaykumn

I want to say this fast for the sake of brevity.

So recently I was enlightened to quranisms truth... but with that meant that I could fall on the crutch that is "the prophet made successful prophecies" that means islam is true...

Which leaves me the question, what are the Quran scientific unsubjective miracles?

And why I ask is, I have seen around that many people's response is "just have faith", and I was brought up to believe in only a religion that had obvious truths to it

And more and more am I confused by its lack of obvious truths... I feel so mixed between basic monotheism and islam. It's like a tight rope I've been over for a few months.

I just need answers, and each time I ask I just get the same thing for other communities of Muslims "thats where faith comes in", and I know I can't believe in a God that requires any Blind faith... I just can't.

there are lots of details about end times in the hadiths.

but in quran lots of stuffs are not mentioned, or contain less detail.

lot of stuffs are even alleged to be copy pasted from judeo- christian sources. i.e. may be fake.

so exclusively using quran verses what are the events that are yet to happen in the future.

ex. appearance of gog and magog.

Assalamu alaikum everyone.

I'm a Muslim trying to understand Qur'anism/Qur'aniyoon better, and I'm hoping people here will be willing to explain their perspective to me. I'm not trying to debate, attack, or tell anyone what they should believe. I'd genuinely like to understand the reasoning behind the position from people who hold it.

I currently approach the Qur'an as the primary and highest religious authority, and I also see value in hadith as secondary evidence, particularly when a hadith appears to explain, corroborate, or provide historical context for something in the Qur'an. However, I don't believe a hadith should be used to override a clear Qur'anic teaching.

So I'm trying to understand where Qur'anists draw that line differently.

A few things I'm particularly curious about:

1. What originally led you to Qur'anism?

Was it primarily a theological conclusion, concerns about hadith authenticity, contradictions between hadith, problems you encountered in traditional scholarship, personal experiences, or something else?

I'm particularly interested in the reasoning rather than simply the conclusion.

2. What do you do with hadith that seem to strongly corroborate the Qur'an?

For example, suppose a hadith:

• agrees with what the Qur'an says,
• doesn't contradict anything in the Qur'an,
• has strong chains of transmission,
• is independently supported by other reports,
• and provides additional historical or contextual information.

Would you still consider it completely non-authoritative, or would you regard it as useful historical evidence even if it isn't considered a source of religious law?

If you reject it as religious authority, what is the reason for that distinction?

3. Is there a difference between rejecting hadith as a source of law and rejecting hadith as historical evidence?

This is something I'm genuinely trying to understand.

For example, could someone say:

>

Would that be considered a Qur'anist position?

4. How do you handle Prophetic practice?

I understand that many Qur'anists distinguish between the Qur'an and later hadith collections.

But do you believe that the Prophet ﷺ had an authoritative Sunnah beyond the Qur'anic text itself, or do you believe that everything religiously binding about his role must ultimately be established directly from the Qur'an?

If the latter, how do you determine which practices attributed to Muhammad ﷺ are historically genuine but not religiously binding?

5. How do you deal with areas where the Qur'an is relatively concise?

For example, salah, Hajj, zakat, fasting, marriage/divorce, etc.

I'm not asking this as a "gotcha." I'm genuinely interested in how Qur'anists reason through these questions when the Qur'an gives the principle or command but doesn't necessarily provide every practical detail.

6. How do you distinguish between a genuinely Qur'an-based interpretation and an individual interpretation of the Qur'an?

This is probably one of my biggest questions.

If two people reject hadith and both sincerely study the Qur'an but reach completely different conclusions, what determines which interpretation is stronger?

Do you rely on:

• Arabic grammar and classical usage?
• The Qur'an explaining itself through other verses?
• Historical context?
• Linguistic scholarship?
• Reason?
• Consensus?
• Something else?

Is hell eternal, I'm pretty sure it is... but like what do you all think?

I’m a math major, and studying mathematics has made me think that God made mathematics to create and order the universe. (Isaac Newton believed this too).

We invented mathematical notation, but we did not invent mathematical truth. The relationships themselves do not depend on us. They existed before humans discovered them and will remain true after us. The physical universe changes constantly; mathematical truth does not. Matter can obey mathematical laws, but it cannot amend them. Doesn’t that sound familiar…

There is a recurring pattern where God directs us toward things in creation. Perhaps, he also is hinting, that in addition to being beautiful—it is mathematical.

Surah 16 : The Bee:

“And thy Lord revealed unto the bees, saying: ‘Take unto yourselves, of the mountains, houses, and of the trees, and of what they are building. Then eat of all manner of fruit, and follow the ways of your Lord easy to go upon.’ Then comes there forth out of their bellies a drink of diverse hues wherein is healing for men. Surely in that is a sign for a people who reflect.”

God specifically tells us that He revealed/gave guidance to the bee, tells the bee to “follow the ways of your Lord,” tells us the bee makes honey, and then tells us that there is a sign here. But it doesn’t seem like the sign is just honey’s healing properties. The bee seems special.

So what happens when we actually study the bee?

Honeycomb geometry corresponds to an optimization result. The regular hexagonal tiling divides a plane into equal areas while minimizing the total perimeter required. Mathematicians suspected this for centuries, but the Honeycomb Conjecture was finally proved by Thomas Hales in 1999.

Bees navigate using the sun and polarized light, and their waggle dance communicates information about the direction and distance of food.

Their behavior is full of geometry, orientation, measurement and optimization.

So, when Allah tells the bee to “follow the ways of your Lord”….any ideas on what “the ways” mean?

Could God be referring specifically to the solar navigation of the bee, or could it be that God is telling the bee to use math, & the reason this is called God’s way is b/c it kind of is his way/method with respect to this universe?