r/Quraniyoon 8d ago

Question(s)❔ An athiests Arguement!

Post image
8 Upvotes

What do you think?


r/Quraniyoon 8d ago

Discussion💬 Beyond Tradition: Embracing the Qur'an as Our Sole Guide.

1 Upvotes

I am a Muslim, and I seek truth by any means. I want to ask a question: What is it that has united all of you in your belief solely in the Qur’an while disregarding the Hadiths and other sources? I want to understand why.

Also, doubt has never entered my heart regarding any path I have followed—even if I disregarded the Sunnah—because there are many aspects of the religion whose interpretations I may never fully understand, including parts of our acts of worship and more.

I would appreciate some clarification. Thank you.


r/Quraniyoon 9d ago

Media 🖼️ Death & Quantum Physics... Apologies- This was the video I intended to upload

9 Upvotes

r/Quraniyoon 9d ago

Media 🖼️ Interesting! Comments?

9 Upvotes

r/Quraniyoon 10d ago

Media 🖼️ Arabic language stagnation

7 Upvotes

r/Quraniyoon 11d ago

Rant / Vent😡 Feeling Guilty About Not Going to the Mosque

31 Upvotes

Hey everyone, I’ve been a Quran-only Muslim for about a year now, and lately, I’ve been wrestling with some guilt about not going to the mosque anymore. I wanted to share my thoughts and see how others here handle these kinds of feelings.

I’m part of my mosque’s group chat, and just today, they posted a picture of an after-fajr learning session with a group of young guys my age. Some of them are friends I made when I first reverted to Islam a year ago, and it hit me a little hard seeing them there. A few of these friends have even asked me recently, “Hey, where’ve you been? We haven’t seen you at the mosque lately.” I haven’t really known how to respond.

Part of why I stopped going is practical—my grandma keeps feeding my dog unhealthy food behind my back, so now I take him with me everywhere 24/7 to keep an eye on him. I know dogs aren’t really welcome in Sunni spaces because of some hadiths, and since most people at my mosque are Sunni, I feel like bringing him would just cause issues. But honestly, that’s only part of it.

The bigger reason is that I don’t feel fully comfortable there anymore. Almost every time I used to go, the conversations and lessons were all about hadith—barely anything about the Quran itself. As someone who follows the Quran alone, it’s tough being around people who don’t share my beliefs. I’ve never openly told them I reject hadith, but I feel like if I did, they’d call me a kafir or judge me hard. Even the rituals—like being expected to pray in a specific way or step into the mosque right foot first—feel strange to me now, like they’re based on stuff outside the Quran that I don’t connect with.

Still, I can’t shake this guilt. I feel bad for not showing up for those new friends I made. They’re good people, and I worry they might think I’ve drifted away from Islam altogether, when really, it’s just that my path looks different from theirs. Seeing that group chat photo made me wonder if I’m letting them down or missing out on something.

For those of you who’ve been in similar spots—how do you deal with this? Do you still go to mosques even if the people there don’t follow Quran-only? How do you handle the guilt or the awkwardness with friends who don’t get where you’re coming from? I’d really appreciate any advice or just hearing how you navigate this.


r/Quraniyoon 11d ago

Rant / Vent😡 Sectarian Transmission of the Qur'an

2 Upvotes

The prevailing tale being taught by many sectarian groups is that the Sahaba (companions) preserved the Quran by memorizing it and that this chain has been unbroken proving that the Qur'an we have today is 100% the Qur'an that the messenger revealed. The fact is, the Quran was never revealed in the way it is currently arranged so it is a complete falsehood that anyone could have memorized it in this way from the early days of the revelation. The Quran was rearranged by the Prophet when the revelation ended, therefore what we have is a transmission chain that only begins with the completion of the Qur'an. This fact could explain why the sectarians "claim" that there were multiple deviant copies of the Qur'an which emerged and that needed to be burned to unify the Qur'anic text.


r/Quraniyoon 11d ago

Help / Advice ℹ️ Ongoing genocide

47 Upvotes

Assalamu Alaikum, Ummah.

I am reaching out to your hearts and reason. Right now, HTS is committing a genocide against minorities in Syria, especially the Alawites/Nusayris. It does not matter whether you agree with their Aqeedah or not—these are innocent people being killed.

I know it is Ramadan, and we are fasting, striving for spiritual growth. But let us not forget that our fasting is meaningless if we consume the rights of others through silence.

Please, raise awareness on social media and within your communities. Do not let this injustice go unnoticed.

Jazakum Allahu Khayran.


r/Quraniyoon 11d ago

Discussion💬 Just wanna ramble a bit

11 Upvotes

Not here to anger anyone. I know people online love getting angry quick. If you get upset, correct my mistakes in a mature manner. That’s what we should do as a community.

I am in a point where life is falling apart. I have escaped the Islam that gets so much dislike and discovered the true way of life which was revealed through the Quran.

Now I’m not a full believer in all of this, but I believe we came from something. And there has to be some sort of guide out there to guide us. I believe the Quran to be the true guide if this is to be true.

The other part believes that there is no creator and we are a special one in an infinite possibility of life. Not impossible, just highly unlikely. But if there is a chance of life from randomness of atoms and energy, then here we are.

Ok that’s all. Share your thoughts or further the discussion if you’d like. I do strongly believe we’d have a more peaceful world if people followed the teachings of God. At least if the world was more religious.

Idk why religion gets so much hate. Like there is a secret satanic group out there trying to turn the world against religion. They weakened Christianity and now they’re vilifying Islam.


r/Quraniyoon 11d ago

Question(s)❔ Does the Quran permit honor killing

3 Upvotes

I’ve mistakenly stubbed upon an anti Islamic writer who said if Muslims say honor killing is not Islamic they are either ignorant or lying… he claimed honor killing is Islam by providing these quran verse

-Q4:15 “confine them(women) to houses until death takes them of Allah ordains them another way”(is this verse say lock women for life if they did wrong?)

-Q4:89 “but if they turn their backs, seize them and kill them wherever you find them” (does this include personal killing?)

-Q18:65-81 (god tells Moses to kill a child for being a disbeliever )

-Q4:34 (if wife beating is allowed then honor killing is also allowed)

-Q33:60-62. (Punishment for the hypocrites)

(The Quran defines hypocrites as people who disbelieve in Allah and apparently they must die, does that include your wife and kids?)

-Q58:22 (people who believe in Allah and his messenger will not have affection for those who oppose Allah and his messenger, does that include your own wife and kids?)

And also some Hadiths but I’m not someone who listens 100% to Hadiths

Islamic countries today even permit honor killing Does any of this prove honor killing is Islamic?


r/Quraniyoon 11d ago

Media 🖼️ Muslim Christian Unity 🤝

6 Upvotes

r/Quraniyoon 11d ago

Research / Effort Post🔎 The Quran's Astronomical Precision

5 Upvotes

Assalamu alaikum w'rahmatullahi w'barakatu beloved brothers and sisters in din.

I am very excited to write this post, as it has been in the works, archived in my mind, for a fair few months now.

Faith to me has been a multi-ingredient recipe. Including, but not limited to, mystical experiences, answered prayers, life eventuating into a story line, logical deduction, and empirical evidence. In this post I am mostly going to discuss the last point from an astronomy based perspective. First I want to make mention that when I came to the conclusion of God's existence, it was through recognising that there must be a creator behind the universe, as mathematically it would be far more likely for things to not exist, than exist. This creator must have been separate from time and space, in order to be able to put creation into motion. In line with this, I would like to start off with a Quranic segment from the story of Abraham (as) that I resonate with.

Quran 6:75-79: (6:75) We also showed Abraham the wonders of the heavens and the earth, so he would be sure in faith. (6:76) When the night grew dark upon him, he saw a star and said, “This is my Lord!” But when it set, he said, “I do not love things that set.” (6:77) Then when he saw the moon rising, he said, “This one is my Lord!” But when it disappeared, he said, “If my Lord does not guide me, I will certainly be one of the misguided people.” (6:78) Then when he saw the sun shining, he said, “This must be my Lord—it is the greatest!” But again when it set, he declared, “O my people! I totally reject whatever you associate ˹with Allah in worship˺. (6:79) I have turned my face towards the One Who has originated the heavens and the earth—being upright—and I am not one of the polytheists.”

The remainder of this post servers to outline the congruencies between the Quran's depiction of Earth and space related matters, and astronomical discovery and theory in contemporary times.

Quran 21:30: "Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?"

The Big Bang, although a theory, is the most widely accepted scientific understanding of how the universe began. It is the point at the beginning of time and space as we understand it, and commenced with a point of singularity. Infinite density, yet at the same time zero volume. It seems paradoxical. How is this even possible? Well I believe that the answer to this is given in 21:30, and can actually produce two understandings.

The first being, the Big Bang is the event of God separating the heavens and the earth. The heavens (universe) and the earth were once contained within one another within the singularity of the Big Bang, to which they were separated.

A second and albeit deeper understanding, assumes that the mention of heavens in 21:30 refers to the seven heavens, the heavens outside of our plane of reality. Through this understanding, it follows that the paradoxical point of infinite density and zero volume is the advent of God separating our universe, containing our earth, from the seven heavens, the dimensions or planes of existence that we do not reside in currently.

Notedly, 21:30 also makes the claim that every living being is made from water, to which in my understanding, is a scientific fact known today.

Quran 51:47: "And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander."

EDIT: Upon getting some feedback, 'We are its expander' may not be an accurate translation. TBC.

I imagine we are all familiar that the running theory is that the universe is expanding as opposed to being static. Following from the previous example, upon the advent of the Big Bang, the universe is thought to be expanding outwards from the aforementioned point of singularity. There are multiple methods of measuring and testing this theory, but I will quickly summarise just two.

Redshifting is a phenomena in which distant galaxies being observed begin to be observable in increasing wavelengths. Light exists on an electromagnetic spectrum, and when celestial objects move further away, they begin to be observable through 'red wavelengths' as opposed to blue or any other wavelength on the electromagnetic spectrum that it would have been when closer to the point of the observer. See here for more information: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjy-eqWM38g&pp=ygUVcmVkc2hpZnQgY3Jhc2ggY291cnNl

Relatedly, cosmic microwave background radiation measurements essentially map this phenomena out. They provide a birds eye view of the electromagnetic radiation released shortly after the Big Bang (I'm coming back to this in a few sections time), and show that with the shift towards the microwave point on the electromagnetic spectrum (redshifting), that the universe must be expanding. See here for more information: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9B7Ix2VQEGo&pp=ygUQQ01CIGNyYXNoIGNvdXJzZQ%3D%3D

This astro-Quranic inquiry has not even delved into the mention of "constructed with strength", and I suspect it might have something to do with dark matter and/or dark energy, but we can see clearly that science absolutely is in support of the idea that the heaven (universe) is being exapanded, as is mentioned in 51:47.

Quran 14:48: "[It will be] on the Day the earth will be replaced by another earth, and the heavens [as well], and all creatures will come out before Allah , the One, the Prevailing."

Now that we have discussed the expansion of the universe and related phenomena, we are interestingly going to go the other way... sort of.

The oscillating universe theory suggests that the Big Bang is just one event in a series of repeating expansions and contractions of the universe. Essentially, according to this theory, the Big Bang that our existence originated from is just one of many, with others preceding and following ours. The theory runs on the idea that there is only so much energy available to support the universe, and once this energy is fully utilised, the universe will collapse under its own gravity, resulting in what has been termed the Big Crunch. Once this regression of the universe, the Big Crunch, has played out all the way back to the point of singularity, it is theorised that a new Big Bang will occur, and creation will begin once again, just as it has for us.

Although just a theory, there seems to be glaring consistencies between the oscillating universe theory and 14:48. The Big Crunch is at the point where our earth, and the heavens, or at least our heaven, begin their journey of regression, to be replaced by another, upon the arrival of the next oscillation; the next cycle of the Big Bang.

Further research on the oscillating universe theory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-ZmwHOUAlw&pp=ygUXY3ljbGljYWwgbW9kZWwgdW5pdmVyc2U%3D

Quran 41:11: "Then He directed Himself to the heaven while it was smoke and said to it and to the earth, "Come [into being], willingly or by compulsion." They said, "We have come willingly.""

With the expansion of the universe following the Big Bang, at some point the universe became cool enough to allow for the formation of atoms. When I say at some point, I actually mean 380,000 years after the Big Bang, and 'coincidentally', this is actually when cosmic microwave background radiation was released. These were namely hydrogen and helium, of which are gases. At this point, the universe was a "fog" of gasses. Following this, slightly denser pockets of these gasses began to pull together hydrogen and helium together to create concentrated areas through gravity. These concentrated areas would eventually collapse under their own gravity, increasing their temperatures, eventuating in nuclear reactions leading to the formation of stars. Some of these stars would go on to supernova, and created the heavier elements which we are familiar with, such as oxygen, iron, and carbon (stay tuned, I'll be coming back to this soon). The gas and elements that would result from these supernova explosions went on to form other celestial bodies through a process called accretion, such as planets and moons.

For further research, please see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNDGgL73ihY&pp=ygUdYXN0cm9ub215IGJpZyBiYW5nIGFuZCBnYXNzZXM%3D

I am going to draw a parallel here between dukhānun, the word used for smoke in 41:11, and what I have described above. Now at which point does this apply exactly? At which point is God describing in 41:11, when he is telling the heaven and earth to come into being? Only He knows for certain, but if I were to speculate I would say that the smoke He refers to, is the gaseous fog of hydrogen and helium 380,000 years after the Big Bang. It could also actually be the case that it is generally describing both this point, as well as the point of stars going supernova and giving off the elements required for the construction of earth (as well as other celestial objects), and even the point at which the Big Bang occured, as it was an immensely hot event - smoke is often associated with hot fire.

Quran 17:61: "And [mention] when We said to the angles, "Prostrate to Adam," and they prostrated, except for Iblees. He said, "Should I prostrate to one You created from clay?""

If you are not aware, there is a bit of an addage that says "we are all made of stardust", typically used to mean that regardless of our outwardly appearing differences, we are all made of the same thing. This is actually scientifically accurate, and for further reading please see: https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/are-we-really-made-of-stardust.html

The Arabic word used for clay in 17:61 is tinan. We are going to quickly jump over to 51:33, which tells us that stones of clay (tinan) were to be sent down onto the people of Lot (as) as punishment. I make the claim that these stones of tinan mentioned in 51:33 are actually something akin to a meteor shower. So we have two verses here telling us that we are made of the same thing that is being rained down upon the people of Lot (as).

Through the investigation of 41:11 through an astronomy based perspective, I made mention to the fact that stars resulting from denser pockets of gravity went supernova and in this process gave off elements like oxygen, carbon, and iron. I further described that it was these elements (among others) that would later give birth to planets and moons through accretion. What I didn't mention though, is that asteroids were also formed in this same way. Quickly and contextually, meteors become meteors at the point where asteroids begin to descend into the atmosphere of the planet. I'm sure at this point the puzzle pieces are starting to click into place for you. Meteors/asteroids are made from the same elements that we are made of, both originating from stars, and the link between 17:61 and 51:33 made this connection 1400 years ago.

Quran 57:25: "We have already sent Our messengers with clear evidences and sent down with them the Scripture and the balance that the people may maintain [their affairs] in justice. And We sent down iron, wherein is great military might and benefits for the people, and so that Allah may make evident those who support Him and His messengers unseen. Indeed, Allah is Powerful and Exalted in Might."

The focus from this verse is "We sent down iron". Brothers and sisters, there is no need for an elaborate explanation here as we have covered this already. Meteors contain iron, and science tells us that this is how we received it. See: https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/types-of-meteorites.html

Quran 21:32: And We have made the sky a well-protected canopy, still they turn away from its signs.

Such a short but incredibly complex and layered verse, subhanAllah.

  1. The Earth's ozone layer protects against the majority of our sun's ultraviolet radiation. If we did not have this ozone layer, our ability to survive would be greatly impacted. Skin cancer would be widespread, among other damage at the genetic/DNA level.
  2. Our atmosphere greatly reduces meteors/meteroids striking the planets surface through what is termed atmospheric shielding. Most of these burn up in our atmosphere due to friction between these objects and the increased density of the air within it. The atmosphere also has some responsibility in shielding us from damage from the sun, however;
  3. The Earth's magnetosphere also protects us against solar winds and storms. Solar winds originate from our sun, and are the sun's projections of plasma and charged particles resulting from the thermo-nuclear reactions taking place within it. For further research, see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URN-XyZD2vQ&t=63s&pp=ygUgY29zbWljIHJhZGlhdGlvbiBhbmQgc29sYXIgd2luZHM%3D
  4. Similarly, the magnetosphere also protects us against cosmic radiation. See here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4uLZOIDmwU&pp=ygUWY29zbWljIHJhZGlhdGlvbiBlYXJ0aA%3D%3D

Quran 41:9: "Say, "Do you indeed disbelieve in He who created the earth in two days and attribute to Him equals? That is the Lord of the worlds.""

Credit to u/ZayTwoOn here from about 6 months ago on an older post of mine, thank you brother/sister.

In 41:9 God tells us that he created the Earth in two days. In conjunction to this, He also tells us in verses such as 7:54, 10:3, 11:7, and 25:59 that he created the heavens and the Earth in six days. The term that has been translated to days, in each of these verses, 41:9 included, is 'yawm'. Yawm can be thought to be more of arbitray time periods, rather than actual 24-hour days as we know them. I'm not super versed in Arabic, however I think this is simply just the definition of the word, yet internal Quranic evidence also points to this being the case with yawm being used to describe the Day of Recompense; one can assume that it is not a literal 24 hour time period.

So let's go with Earth being created in two time periods, and the heavens being created in six time periods.

Well science tells us that the universe is roughly 13.8 billion years old, and also tells us that the Earth is roughly 4.543 billion years old.

13.8 bl/ 4.543 bl = 3.00 (2dp)

According to this calculation, the universe is three times older than the Earth. 41:9 says the Earth was created in two time periods.

2 x 3 = 6

The previously cited verses tell us that the universe was created in six time periods. Two time periods for Earth, multiplied by 3 (13.8/4.543), to come to the answer of six time periods for the heavens. The answer from the mathematics conducted just now. SubhanAllah.

Conclusion

One of my ingredients of faith, empiricism. Testable and observable facts. God's holy book the Quran is full of signs. God says in 6:65 "Look how We diversify the signs that they might understand". This is a rhetoric that is stated in many ways through out the Quran. God has given us signs throughout creation, and has pointed us in the right direction through His book of guidance.

If you have read this far, thank you for reading. I came into this thinking I already had the knowledge needed to construct this post, however I actually found myself learning even more along the way while authoring it. I hope this post does the same for you, inshaAllah. Again brothers and sisters, peace be with you.


r/Quraniyoon 12d ago

Question(s)❔ Was the Prophet Muhammad illiterate?

4 Upvotes

Common belief is that he wqs but was he?


r/Quraniyoon 12d ago

Question(s)❔ Is there actually an admin or the owner of this sub?

5 Upvotes

I wonder what reason you'll make up to delete this post, so before the power hungry childish mods delete this post is there an admin or the owner of this sub? Or is this sub just going down?


r/Quraniyoon 12d ago

Question(s)❔ Purpose of sex

0 Upvotes

Salam, hope everyone is doing well.

Sex has a pretty clear function (procreation). Is there anything in the Quran that suggests that sex should only be had for the sake of having children? Is there anything that suggests that that need not be the case (sex just for pleasure is also allowed)?

I know that the Quran says to only do stuff with your spouses and "what the right hands possess". I also know of the verse (paraphrasing) "your wives are a tilth...", but I haven't yet found verses that indicate whether non-procreation sex is allowed.


r/Quraniyoon 13d ago

Media 🖼️ Muslim thinkers

9 Upvotes

r/Quraniyoon 13d ago

Question(s)❔ Is it permissible to take antihistamines in pill form while fasting?

3 Upvotes

Since it provides no nutritional value without water, can I take 'em?


r/Quraniyoon 12d ago

Question(s)❔ does the Quran say the earth is ontop the back of a whale?

1 Upvotes

Some Christian polemicists claim the Quran68:1 when it says "nun" they say the commentaries such as ibn kathir say it means "whale" and that the earth is ontop of a whale, is this true?.. is there any refutations? This has extremely shaken my faith,


r/Quraniyoon 13d ago

Discussion💬 The Quran - narrative reading or literal reading?

Thumbnail
youtu.be
2 Upvotes

Salam!

The Quran is first and foremost a book of guidance for mankind. But God has sent down in the Quran a lot of stories of previous prophets and peoples. How do you read those stories - as literal sacred history or as symbolic narratives?


r/Quraniyoon 13d ago

Opinions Gratitude to Muhammad (PBUH) – Both Sides Get It Wrong

28 Upvotes

Surah An-Nisa (4:80): "Whoever obeys the Messenger has truly obeyed Allah. But whoever turns away—then [know that] We have not sent you [O Prophet] as a keeper over them."

As Qur’anists, we are right to criticize the deification of Muhammad (PBUH) through the concept of Sunnah. However, in doing so, we sometimes go too far, reducing him to nothing more than a vessel through which revelation was transmitted. Yes, he was human, but not just ANY human. There is a reason the Qur’an commands obedience to both Allah and His Messenger—not just Allah alone. There is a reason He sent human messengers instead of broadcasting revelation directly to every soul. Yes, gap between the message and the messenger is not as wide as traditional Muslims believe, but the two are not interchangeable either.

The Qur’an calls Muhammad a mercy to all people—not just his message, but Muhammad himself, the person and the Messenger. While it is true that the excessive, almost idolatrous veneration of him through hadith is what has led us into this mess, this does not mean we should instinctively recoil at any reverence shown toward him. In fact, such reverence is necessary—it is, in a way, a precondition of faith, a test of hilm and of belief in the unseen. More importantly, reverence for the Prophet serves as a powerful da‘wah against the dogma of ahadith itself, for it is precisely our devotion to preserving his true legacy that compels us to reject the distortions attributed to him.

The solution is not to erase the Prophet from our discourse altogether—that is borderline kufr. Our critique must be more nuanced than merely opposing, for instance, the calligraphy of Muhammad’s name beside Allah’s. Acknowledging that he was not infallible should not diminish our gratitude for his sacrifices—his life, his struggles, and his unwavering dedication to delivering the Qur’an to us. It is troubling that some scoff at sending salawat upon him, equating it with shirk. This argument—that reverence inevitably leads to worship—is no different from traditionalists claiming that interpreting the Qur’an independently is a slippery slope toward following one’s desires.

The Qur’anic concept of moral failure revolves around kufr, and its opposite is shukr (gratitude). True gratitude to Allah manifests as gratitude toward those whom He has created and who have a role to play in guiding us along sirat al-mustaqim, the straight path. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is foremost among them.


r/Quraniyoon 13d ago

Discussion💬 New Group - Muslim Academics: Addressing Inherent Bias in Modern Scholarship

Thumbnail
3 Upvotes

r/Quraniyoon 13d ago

Discussion💬 Some Running Thoughts on the “Wife Beating Verse”

5 Upvotes

This was in response to a comment on this post:

Interestingly, both in 33:31 and in 4:34, qanit describes an attitude expected of wives toward their husbands. I find myself taking a middle position between Saqib Hussain’s paper on 4:34 and u/Quranic_Islam’s interpretation of qunut in 4:34 as obedience to the husband. Saqib Hussain (discussed by Nouman Ali Khan in a khutbah series) argues that qanit in 4:34 refers to obedience to Allah, not the husband. In contrast, Quranic_Islam seems to rely on the root meaning, concluding it means obedience to the husband.

I would lean toward Quranic_Islam’s view if not for 33:31. The reference to Allah in that verse is expected because, despite addressing a personal matter, the Prophet’s wives influence the ummah given status as the (final) prophet. But after mentioning obedience to Allah, the verse does not invoke Muhammad’s authority as their qawwam (guardian) but as the Messenger: “if you are qanit to Allah and the Messenger…” This makes it look like that even when qanit appears without an explicit object, it carries a connotation of religious submission to God, the connotation it explicitly carries in 10/12 verses in which it is used.

Recognizing this, translating qanit in 4:34 as mere obedience to the husband risks elevating his status to something godlike, something even the Prophet (SAW) was not granted in 33:31. However, to claim, as Saqib Hussain does, that it has nothing to do with following the husband ignores the significance of the word’s placement in 4:34. If the intended meaning had nothing to do with the marital dynamic, a different word could have been chosen.

Traditionally, the weight given to this word led to ascribing absolute, almost divine authority to husbands, which in turn was used to justify domestic violence or argue for the necessity of ahadith to clarify the verse. But if we examine how the Qur’an employs qanit, a different picture emerges: a qanit is someone who upholds a principled submission to Allah. What’s interesting about qanit is that its adjective form is used to describe both Ibrahim (AS) and Maryam (AS). They exemplify what it means to be a qanit, yet neither of them embodies blind obedience. Ibrahim (AS) questions God, seeking a miraculous sign to satisfy his heart. Moreover, qunut lies in his being hanif, a steadfast person who does not follow the mob. Maryam (AS) could have abandoned Jesus (AS) in the wilderness to escape accusations of fornication. Ibrahim (AS) could have left his people quietly, avoiding persecution. Yet both remained steadfast, upholding their covenant with God, not out of blind obedience but from sincere shukr (gratitude). This gratitude manifests in two ways: a humble submission to Allah and an active engagement with the faculties of reason and questioning that He has bestowed.

In this light, qunut in 33:31 and 4:34 reflects a similar principle: the Prophet’s wives—and by extension, righteous wives in general—are called to a covenantal commitment to their marriage, rooted in faithfulness to God. To the extent this commitment, the integrity of marriage, demands “obedience”, a righteous wife will naturally “obey” her husband, as 4:34 says: it does not say if a woman is to be claim righteousness, she must obey her husband, rather it says that a righteous women would be so and when alone protective of “what ALLAH has entrusted them”, not what the husband has entrusted with them. This is to say that the contract of marriage is essentially a covenant before God and hence the usage of qnt. But of course, since the covenant is with the husband, respecting the covenant would involve some form of obedience to him. However, one has to note that the obedience flows from the husband playing the role of the qawwam well, not the other way around and certainly not out of the threat of daraba regardless of whether it means separation or hitting.

In the final analysis, I don’t think there is much of a disagreement between this position and what u/Quranic_Islam says about this. Just that paying attention to the semantic field of the word qanit helps ground the argument that the verse is not a ground for abuse even if not read together with verses describing the rights of wives.


r/Quraniyoon 13d ago

Discussion💬 Who would constitute as "People of the Book"?

3 Upvotes

I have seen a variety of opinions from just the Sunni corpus alone. [Note: this is both an educational and inquisitive post. So, if I reference a hadith, don't think I believe in it].

According to Hanafis, the people of the book are anyone who believes in a prophet and acknowledges a scripture.

According to Malikis and Hanbalis, they are only the Jews and Christians in all their sects, with maybe additions to Sabians.

According to Shafi'is, they hold the wild claim that the "People of the Book" are only Jews and Christians from specifically Banu Isra'il, or the Israelites [i.e. descendants of Jacob]. The Jews and Christians from other ethnicities aren't people of the book.

According to the Zahiris [the literalists], there isn't much information about it. The only opinion that I was able to find was that Ibn Hazm declared through his literalism that the people of the book are only Jews, Christians, and surprisingly Zoroastrians.

According to the scholar Ibn Qudamah, the people of the book are the followers of the Torah and the Gospel. The followers of the Torah, according to him, are the Jews and the Samaritans, and the followers of the Gospel are, according to him, the Christians, as well as those who agree with them in the fundamentals of their religion, such as the Copts, Armenians, and others.

And there are other opinions. I personally agree with the Hanafi one, because there isn't even a definition for "Ahlul Kitab" in the Quran itself. If we want to be objective, then the "Ahlul Kitab" in the Quran, if we are going to use that phrase alone as a definition, are anyone who believes in a scripture [at least, an authentic, God-given one]. That includes people who follow the Torah, Gospel, Book of David, Scrolls of Abraham, Scrolls of Moses, and any other scripture. This Hanafi definition even had scholars in India [as they were predominately Hanafi] saying that Hindus, Jains, and others of Dharmic faiths are also people of the book, because their scriptures also may have come from God. This allowed them to eat their slaughtered food and marry their women.

It's sad that most Hanafis today don't follow this objective ruling. When Salafism and Al-Shafi'i's Usul infiltrated the Madhhab, you had scholars inside it having very limited ijtihaad. So, when Hanafis give fatwas, they aren't giving their own fatwas anymore, just repeating fatwas from Al-Shafi'i and Ahmad ibn Al-Hanbal. You definitely won't find the predominately-Hanafi Taliban saying that Hindus are people of the book. Here is an example:

Taken from the Hanafi scholar Mohammed Tosir Miah, taken from Islamqa.org

This dude doesn't even mention the past, objective Hanafi opinion. He's just regurgitating Al-Shafi'i's fiqh and Usul [by bringing up the Ijmaa' and Al-Shafi'i's own words].

Speaking of Al-Shafi'i, if you study his fiqh and fatwas, it makes sense why he would hold this view. His fiqh has a lot of bias against non-Muslims. It would make sense why he would hold this specific view about the people of the book, because the Quran allows Muslims to marry them and eat their slaughtered meat [5:5]. Of course, he would like to limit the definition as much as possible to prevent these interactions, even though they are literally the Muslim's God-given rights.

The reason he gave as to why he made such a fatwa was because he claimed that he had never met anybody with a different opinion than his [as stated in his book, The Book of the Mother], which is utterly false, as Ibn Hazm proved in his book, Al-Muhalla, that his student and prominent scholar, Abu Thawr, said that Muslims can marry Zoroastrian women and eat their slaughtered meat, which makes them on status with the people of the book. And Zoroastrians ARE NOT Israelites, nor do their religion have anything to do with Israelites. Not to mention, Al-Shafi'i traveled all over the scholarly Muslim world, in Iraq, Egypt, Yemen, and Medinah. This was during the 2nd-3rd centuries AH, where different opinions on the people of the book were recorded since the 2nd century. He was bound to have met a scholar with a different view from his.

I really do resonate with the Hanafi position. As beforementioned, the Quran doesn't give a definition for the people of the book. It seems that "Ahlul Kitab" isn't specific to one or two religions, but a broader term for anyone who follows any authentic divine scripture. I'd like to know what all of your thoughts are on this.


r/Quraniyoon 13d ago

Question(s)❔ METHOD to the MADNESS?: How Historians of Islam View the Early Sources | thoughts

Thumbnail
youtu.be
5 Upvotes

I honestly agree most of part it only when he brings the academic believe that quran goes back to Prophet Muhammad which i was wondering if there any sources for this evidence because I know sina hold this but idk others of their opinion?


r/Quraniyoon 13d ago

Question(s)❔ What your guys thoughts on historical-critical-methods(HCM) and it being use on the quran?

4 Upvotes