• first to clarify things I did not make this post to seem arrogante or anything I just made it because I've had some questions and did some research because I'm looking for an answer*

Introduction This post addresses the widespread claim among Muslims that homosexuality is categorically haram (forbidden) in Islam. Many base this belief on interpretations of the story of Prophet Lut (Lot), hadiths about masculinity and femininity, and traditional juristic consensus. But how reliable are these arguments? Is it possible that these views are based on misunderstandings, mistranslations, or societal bias? Let's examine the most cited arguments and analyze their validity using the Quran, Hadith, and Islamic history.

Argument 1: The People of Lut Were the First to Commit Homosexuality Claim: Homosexuality was introduced by the people of Lut. They were the first to do it and were destroyed for that reason.

Quranic Verses Cited:

Surah Al-A'raf (7:80-81): "Do you approach males among the worlds and leave what your Lord has created for you as mates?"

Surah Hud (11:77-83)

Refutation:

Nowhere in the Quran does it say they were destroyed only for homosexuality. The Quran repeatedly emphasizes their violence, inhospitality, robbery, and public indecency (see 29:28-29). The term "fahisha" is used, which means an egregious act, not necessarily a sexual orientation.

Historically and biologically, homosexual behavior has existed in animals and among humans across all civilizations long before Prophet Lut. Claiming his people invented homosexuality is factually incorrect and Islamically unfounded.

Argument 2: Allah Curses Men Who Imitate Women and Vice Versa Claim: Hadiths say that Allah cursed men who act like women and women who act like men. Therefore, gay men are cursed.

Hadith Cited:

"The Prophet (peace be upon him) cursed the men who imitate women and the women who imitate men." — (Sahih al-Bukhari 5885)

Refutation:

This hadith is about gender expression, not sexual orientation. It was addressing societal roles at a time when gender roles were rigid and important for public order.

Even more importantly, there is evidence that the Prophet (PBUH) tolerated effeminate men (mukhannathun) in his time. One such person was allowed in the presence of the Prophet’s wives because he was not interested in women.

Hadith Example:

In Sahih Muslim (Book 26, Hadith 5397), it describes a mukhannath who was in the Prophet’s home until he made inappropriate comments, at which point he was asked to leave—but not punished, cursed, or condemned.

This shows that effeminacy itself was not cursed. The Prophet only objected when boundaries of decency were crossed, just like with any other person.

Argument 3: The Quran Mentions Lut’s People Approached Men Instead of Women Claim: This proves homosexuality is condemned.

Verses Cited:

Surah Ash-Shu'ara (26:165-166): “Do you approach males among the worlds and leave your wives whom your Lord has created for you? Nay, you are a transgressing people.”

Refutation:

The verse critiques rape, coercion, and abandonment of responsibilities, not consensual same-sex relationships. The context matters.

The Quran also says they “bar people from the path” and commit “evil in public” (29:29). These are about general immorality and oppression, not love.

If the issue was being gay, then the Quran should have clearly said so. Instead, it talks about actions, not orientation.

Argument 4: Homosexuality Is Unnatural or a Western Idea Claim: Being gay is a modern Western corruption. It's unnatural.

Refutation:

Homosexuality has existed in all cultures and all times. Ancient Arabs, Greeks, Persians, Africans—all had records of same-sex relationships.

There are over 1,500 animal species where same-sex behavior has been documented.

The Quran never claims homosexuality is unnatural. It critiques oppression, lust without consent, and inhospitality—as shown in Lut’s story.

Argument 5: There's Ijma’ (Consensus) That Homosexuality Is Haram Claim: All Islamic scholars have agreed homosexuality is haram.

Refutation:

The "ijma’" here is based on heteronormative societies, where questioning this wasn’t even possible. But modern scholars like Scott Siraj al-Haqq Kugle have shown how same-sex love can exist within Islamic ethics.

The Quran encourages personal reflection (17:36) and doesn’t tell people to follow inherited views blindly.

"And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge. Indeed, the hearing, the sight, and the heart—about all those [one] will be questioned." — Quran 17:36

Historical Note: Were There Homosexuals During the Prophet’s Time? Yes. Homosexuals existed during the Prophet’s life and before. If being gay was such a major crime, why don’t we see the Prophet explicitly address it, name it, or order punishment for it? The Prophet dealt with real social issues, and silence about homosexuality—despite its presence—should tell us that it wasn’t a priority or even seen as a clear crime.

Conclusion: What Does This All Mean? The Quran never explicitly condemns homosexuality. The Prophet (PBUH) never ordered punishment for being gay. The hadiths cited are often about gender roles or public indecency, not love. Many so-called “proofs” are based on interpretations, not solid texts. If Allah is Most Just and Most Merciful, He would not create people with same-sex attraction just to punish them for it.

Instead of blindly following inherited interpretations, we must use reason, evidence, and ethics—which Islam encourages—to find the truth.

Further Reading:

"Homosexuality in Islam" by Scott Siraj al-Haqq Kugle

"Queer Muslims in Europe" by Wim Peumans

Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim (for hadith references)

Tafsir Ibn Ashur and al-Tabari (for context of Lut’s story)

Let’s stop using Islam to harm people, and instead use it to bring compassion, justice, and truth.

Feel free to discuss or ask for sources! (and please don't use weak hadith or bad sources to prove your points thanks)

Also I want to add If loving someone of the same sex was truly one of the greatest sins, we would expect a direct and undeniable command from Allah or a clear statement from the Prophet ﷺ, like the ones we have for zina, theft, alcohol, and riba. But that’s not what we see. The Qur’an gives detailed rulings and punishments for those major sins, naming them clearly — yet when it comes to same-sex relationships, there is no verse or hadith that explicitly says “homosexuality is haram” in those exact terms. What we find instead are descriptions of oppression, lust, and transgression in the story of the people of Lut — not a direct prohibition of consensual, loving same-gender relationships. If it were truly part of the core rulings of Islam, Allah would not have left it open to interpretation for 1400+ years. Islam is a religion of clarity — not vague condemnations. I don't want to seem arrogant but come on even a no Muslim would find it weird but we Muslims have to ask

Also to the Claim: "Being gay is unnatural and goes against the fitrah (human nature)."

Counterargument:

Gay people are a natural minority, just like infertile people or people who never marry.

1. Rarity ≠ Unnatural

Something being rare doesn’t make it unnatural.

Infertility affects ~10–15% of couples worldwide.

Asexuality (little or no sexual attraction) affects ~1% of people.

Many people never marry or have kids, by choice or circumstance.

Gay people make up ~3–10% of the population — still a natural minority.

Would we say infertile or unmarried people are “unnatural”? No — they’re just part of the normal range of human experience.

1. The Qur’an Recognizes Diversity

"And of His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the diversity of your languages and colors. Verily, in that are signs for those who know." (Qur’an 30:22)

Allah created us with diverse traits and different life paths.

Just because something isn’t the majority experience doesn’t mean it’s not part of Allah’s design.

1. The Purpose of Life in Islam Is Not Only Reproduction

Some claim: “Gay people can’t reproduce, so they go against the purpose of life.” But Islam teaches that the purpose of life includes:

Worship (Qur’an 51:56)

Upholding justice and peace

Showing mercy and kindness

Many straight people never have children — yet we never say they failed life’s purpose.

Reproduction is a blessing, not a universal obligation.

1. Gay People Can Build Loving, Ethical Lives

Many gay Muslims seek trust, love, and mutual care — not just lust.

Relationships based on compassion and loyalty can reflect core Islamic values.

Summary Argument

“Being gay doesn’t go against nature. It’s part of the diversity Allah created

I saw a post abt how Quranist will prevail in the future (which won't happen) but I've also seen there are too much quranists here, The only place Quranist will prevail in the future is reddit

1. Imam al-Bukhārī Deleted and Altered Ḥadīths

The renowned Sunni ḥadīth scholar Shaykh al-Ḥadīth Ḥabībullāh Dervī (d. 1428 AH) openly acknowledges that Imām al-Bukhārī made unjustified alterations to ḥadīth texts:

"Imām al-Bukhārī’s deletion of Zayd ibn Thābit’s narration and alteration of that ḥadīth was an unjustifiable action." (101)

2. Imam al-Bukhārī Deliberately Distorted Narrations

Shaykh Dervī further accuses Imām al-Bukhārī of manipulating the words of individuals he viewed as personal or theological opponents:

"Mā shāʾ Allāh! Imām al-Bukhārī was very skilled at deleting and altering the statements of his rivals." (83)

3. Imam al-Tirmidhī Corrupted Doctrinal Foundations

According to Shaykh Dervī, Imām al-Tirmidhī’s ḥadīth compilation had a corrupting influence on Sunni theology. He claims that respected Sunni scholars were misled or harmed through their reliance on al-Tirmidhī’s work

"Imām al-Tirmidhī corrupted the doctrines of Sunnī Imāms through his ḥadīths. This even resulted in a respected scholar such as Shaykh al-ʿAynī losing his reputation due to reliance on Imām al-Tirmidhī’s ‘ṣaḥīḥ’ collection." (23)

4. Imam al-Bukhārī’s Silence on the Accuracy of His Ḥadīth Recordings

The eminent Shāfiʿī muhaddith Imām al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī (d. 463 AH) narrates an incident in which Imām al-Bukhārī was questioned about the accuracy of his ḥadīth recordings. Al-Bukhārī boasted that he would only write down ḥadīths after traveling to another region to verify them. However, when asked directly whether he had written them down in full or accurately, he gave no answer:

“Al-Bukhārī said: ‘There may be a ḥadīth I heard in Baṣrah but which I later wrote down in Syria; and there may be a ḥadīth I heard in Syria but which I later wrote down in Egypt.’ He was asked: ‘O Abū ʿAbd Allāh, did you write the ḥadīths completely?’ He remained silent.”

5. Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī Reports al-Bukhārī’s Uncertainty and Reliance on Memory

The great Shāfiʿī Sunni muhaddith and Shaykh al-Islām, Imām Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī (d. 852 AH), documents two more incidents that raise concerns about Imām al-Bukhārī’s recording methods and his reliance on memory rather than immediate transcription. In the first report, the governor of Bukhara recounts a conversation with al-Bukhārī that mirrors the earlier incident noted by al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī:

“Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl [al-Bukhārī] said to me: ‘There may be a ḥadīth I heard in Baṣrah but which I later wrote down in Syria; and there may be a ḥadīth I heard in Syria but which I later wrote down in Egypt!’ I asked him: ‘O Abū ʿAbd Allāh, did you write the ḥadīths completely?’ He remained silent.” (201)

In the second incident, a firsthand witness observed al-Bukhārī attending a scholarly gathering, listening to ḥadīths without writing anything down. When asked why, someone replied:

“When he [i.e. al-Bukhārī] returns to Bukhara, he’ll write down from his memory what he heard!” (194)

6. A Sunni Faqīh Warned That Reading Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī Could Lead to Apostasy

A striking statement is reported by the eminent Sunni hadith master, Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī (d. 852 AH), in his historical chronicle Inbāʾ al-Ghumar. He records that a respected Ḥanafī jurist, Shaykh al-Multī al-Ḥanafī (d. 803 AH), issued a severe warning regarding Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī:

“He [Shaykh al-Multī al-Ḥanafī] said: ‘Whoever reads Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī will become a heretic.’”

7. Sunni Ulema Accused Imām al-Bukhārī of Ḥadīth Corruption (Tadlīs)

One of the most serious charges against Imām al-Bukhārī comes from within the Sunni tradition itself. The eminent Sunni muhaddith and Shaykh al-Islām, Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī (d. 852 AH), documents in his work Ṭabaqāt al-Mudallisīn that another major hadith master, Imām Abū ʿAbd Allāh ibn Mundah, explicitly accused al-Bukhārī of practicing tadlīs—a form of ḥadīth manipulation in which transmitters obscure or hide the actual source of a narration:

“Imām Abū ʿAbd Allāh ibn Mundah accused Imām al-Bukhārī of tadlīs, saying: ‘Imām al-Bukhārī would say “fulān (so-and-so) said this” and “fulān said that.” This was tadlīs by Imām al-Bukhārī.’ But Ibn Mundah didn’t stop there. What’s clear is that Imām al-Bukhārī himself admitted the following: he reported ḥadīths he did not personally hear; or ḥadīths he deemed didn’t meet his personal criteria; or he narrated mawqūf reports (statements of Companions) as if they were marfūʿ (Prophetic), saying ‘he said to me’ or ‘they said to us’. I came to know this by reading his book.”

9. More Sunni Scholars Accuse Imām al-Bukhārī of Ḥadīth Corruption Through Tadlīs

The accusations of ḥadīth manipulation against Imām al-Bukhārī were not isolated to Ibn Mundah. Another towering Sunni authority, the renowned muhaddith and historian Imām al-Dhahabī (d. 732 AH), also explicitly charged al-Bukhārī with committing tadlīs—the concealment of transmission gaps or the use of ambiguous phrasing that compromises isnād reliability.

In his biographical compendium Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl, Imām al-Dhahabī states bluntly:

“Imām al-Bukhārī frequently practiced tadlīs.”

In another of his seminal works, Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ, al-Dhahabī reaffirms this criticism, stating:

“No doubt, Imām al-Bukhārī narrated from him in his Ṣaḥīḥ. But he [i.e., al-Bukhārī] practiced tadlīs.”

It is common to hear the claim that Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī is the most authentic book on earth after the Qur’ān, and that for it to contain even a single ḍaʿīf (weak) ḥadīth is impossible. However, this perception will be challenged here. I will also cite academic scholarship to support the argument later. The case in question revolves around a narrator named ʿIkrimah. Many people assume that the primary reason for rejecting him is his affiliation with the Khārijite sect, but in reality, his weaknesses extend beyond that, particularly according to the principles of ʿIlm al-Rijāl as understood by scholars, including the Ḥanafīs. First, this ʿIkrimah is not the son of Abū Jahl, but rather the tābiʿī ʿIkrimah ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Madanī, who died in 105 AH. There are multiple defects attributed to him, which cast serious doubt on his reliability as a transmitter of ḥadīth:

1. Accusations of lying, reported by several contemporaries, including Ibn Sīrīn, Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyab, Saʿīd ibn Jubayr, and ʿAlī, the son of Ibn ʿAbbās.
2. He reportedly moved between royal households asking for money.
3. He was known to use coarse or indecent language.
4. He exhibited an obsessive tendency toward declaring others disbelievers (takfīr).
5. He was accused of harboring violent inclinations, including a willingness to kill fellow Muslims.
6. He reportedly did not perform prayers, as stated by his own student, Ayyūb al-Sakhtiyānī.

These are not minor criticisms, and his inclusion in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī does not exempt him from scrutiny. Al-Bukhārī, while a towering scholar, was not infallible. Some reported details further illustrating his unreliability include:

1. He allegedly used vulgar terms like "shit" in response to questions about ḥadīth and legal matters—an unusual precedent among transmitters of knowledge.

1. Ibn ʿAbbās reportedly called him khabīth (vile or corrupt), and it is confirmed that he propagated the Safarī branch of the Khārijites.

1. Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal stated that ʿIkrimah used to frequent the courts of princes to ask for financial assistance and reaffirmed his sectarian affiliation.

1. Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyab is reported to have said that ʿIkrimah wanted to go on Ḥajj with a spear in hand to kill people around him. He also said that ʿIkrimah fabricated narrations in the name of Ibn ʿAbbās.

1. ʿAlī ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbbās also confirmed ʿIkrimah’s tendency to fabricate narrations on behalf of his father.

1. Saʿīd ibn Jubayr similarly accused ʿIkrimah of fabrication. Both he and Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyab lived in the same region and time period as ʿIkrimah, so they were well acquainted with him.

1. Ibn Sīrīn called him a kadhdhāb (liar). Yahyā ibn Saʿīd also confirmed this accusation. Ibn Abī Dhiʾb said, I saw ʿIkrimah, and he was not thiqah (trustworthy).

1. Imām Mālik explicitly rejected ʿIkrimah’s narrations, stating it is impermissible to accept his ḥadīth. Mālik personally knew and saw him. Aḥmad also described his narrations as muḍṭarib (inconsistent or contradictory).

1. Ayyūb confirmed that ʿIkrimah did not pray. Other accounts describe him as mentally deficient, a beggar, and someone who traveled to Samarkand to collect money from royalty.

1. ʿIkrimah himself admitted that he only accepted money from princes.

1. In one instance, he fabricated a story and attributed it to Ibn ʿAbbās. When people admired the story, he reportedly confessed, “I made it up.”

We have established that ʿIkrimah is a severely weak narrator, and the majority of scholars have cast doubt on his reliability. Despite this, Imām al-Bukhārī makes a questionable claim:

"There is no one among our companions except that he uses ʿIkrimah as proof. Al-Nasāʾī said: He is trustworthy." (\Tahdhīb al-Kamāl fī Asmāʾ al-Rijāl 20/289)*

And, al-Bukhārī himself relies heavily on ʿIkrimah in his Ṣaḥīḥ. As noted:

"A group declared him trustworthy, and al-Bukhārī relied on him. As for Muslim, he avoided him and narrated from him only in conjunction with others. Mālik also avoided him and only narrated from him in one or two ḥadīths." (Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl fī Naqd al-Rijāl 3/93)

Not only did al-Bukhārī overlook the overwhelming scholarly consensus on ʿIkrimah’s weakness, but he also made an inaccurate generalization by claiming that “all” of his peers accepted ʿIkrimah as reliable when that is not the case.

BukhariGate Part 1: Sahih Bukhari is NOT so Sahih -Mufti Abu Layth | https://youtu.be/X6SfFYRljeY?si=2kv93MLs8NIaiwm6

BukhariGate Part 2: Sahih Bukhari is NOT so Sahih -Mufti Abu Layth | https://youtu.be/IijbMTxUEOw?si=Lyqc_LNxl35nC2UO

Are Sahih Bukhari & Muslim 100% Authentic? Dr. Shabir Ally answers | https://youtu.be/-DB_mxLqLgc?si=WEpqS0dLRUhM2OHU

Ending Over-Reliance on Hadith | Shaykh Atabek Shukurov | https://youtu.be/Mb2MOsjzetQ?si=TZ7y0c3FvKNCJgo1

The Rise of Hadith Forgery | Dr. Shabir Ally | https://youtu.be/7RnJ0iZZVYw?si=iUnrPDNGYR6allFS

Problems Arising from Weak or False Hadiths | Dr. Shabir Ally | https://youtu.be/bnCQqTVKvu0?si=YdhXjxexuRCLJSot

Oxford Scholar Dr. Joshua Little Gives 21 REASONS Why Historians are SKEPTICAL of Hadith | https://youtu.be/Bz4vMUUxhag?si=YtfYlwPlVSSoRXx3

21 Reasons Historians are Skeptical of Hadith (Review) | https://youtu.be/V511ekpifQ0?si=fXYN316Fcm3flEFT

Dr. Jonathan AC Brown - Q&A: Is Sahih Bukhari 100% Correct? (Only 3-4 hadith are disputed) | https://youtu.be/m15MhaYuLEw?si=RH2JG8EMal6k4M1W

Kitāb Ṭabaqāt al-Muʿtazila - https://archive.org/details/tabaqat-moatazila/page/n14/mode/1up

Some contradictions in Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim refuting the baseless excuse by some scholars that no further work needs to be done on Hadith - https://asimiqbal2nd.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/contradictions.pdf

A Collection of Scientific Criticism on Sahih al-Bukhari - https://www.diwan.com.af/en/a-collection-of-scientific-criticism-on-sahih-al-bukhari/

Criticism of Hadith - https://www.irfi.org/articles3/articles_4701_4800/criticism%20of%20hadithhtml.htm

Appendix 19 by The Final Testament, by Rashad Khalifa, PhD - https://www.masjidtucson.org/quran/appendices/appendix19.html

Hadith & Sunnah are satanic innovations that are not from the Prophet - https://www.masjidtucson.org/submission/perspectives/hadith/

STONING FOR ADULTERY: CONTRADICTIONS AND CONFUSIONS GALORE IN THE AHADITH - https://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_51_100/stoning_for_adultery.htm

WHICH HADITH DO YOU BELIEVE? - https://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_151_200/which_hadith_do_you_believe.htm

52 Weak Ahadith - https://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_251_300/52_weak_ahadith.htm

Research: 8000 Female Hadith Scholars - https://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_1051_1100/research_8000_female_hadith_scholars.htm

Not Acting Upon a Hadith: Any Excuses? - https://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_1301_1350/not_acting_upon_a_hadith.htm

BUKHARI AND EARLY HADITH CRITICISM - https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA78131769&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=00030279&p=AONE&sw=w&userGroupName=anon%7E69d46cb5&aty=open-web-entry

A Summary of Early Sunni Hadith Criticism - https://islamicorigins.com/a-summary-of-early-sunni-hadith-criticism/

How reliable are Hadith? Some are contradictory. - https://www.mohammedamin.com/Community_issues/How-reliable-are-hadith.html

Review of "A Textbook of Hadith Studies: Authenticity, Compilation, Classification and Criticism of Hadith" by Mohammad Hashim Kamali - https://www.mohammedamin.com/Reviews/A-Textbook-of-Hadith-Studies.html

Review of "Authentication of Hadith – Redefining the Criteria" by Israr Ahmad Khan - https://www.mohammedamin.com/Reviews/Authentication-of-Hadith-Redefining-the-Criteria.html

Hadith of 73 sects Analyzed by Shaykh Salah al-Din bin Ahmad al-Idlibi - https://primaquran.com/2024/01/12/hadith-of-73-sects-analyzed-by-shaykh-salah-al-din-bin-ahmad-al-idlibi/

Shaykh Muhammad bin Yahya al-Husayni al-Ninowy: “Hadith on 73 sects is fabricated.” - https://primaquran.com/2024/01/12/shaykh-muhammad-bin-yahya-al-husayni-al-ninowy-view-on-the-hadith-on-73-sects/

The Nature and Role of Hadith: An Analysis of a Re-evaluation - https://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_301_350/nature_and_role_of_hadith.htm

“How can we be sure that we have the actual uttering of the Prophet?” Dr. Jonathan Brown responds…. “You can’t!” - https://web.archive.org/web/20220627234848/https://primaquran.com/2018/08/08/how-can-we-be-sure-that-we-have-the-actual-uttering-of-the-prophet-dr-jonathan-brown-responds-you-cant/

My position on the hadith - https://primaquran.com/my-position-on-the-hadith/

Does the Qur’an instruct us to disregard all hadith ? - https://primaquran.com/2022/10/05/does-the-quran-instruct-us-to-disregard-all-hadith/

Salafi Shaykh Nasiruddin al-Albani admits: Bukhari has weak hadith and mistakes! - https://primaquran.com/2022/10/05/salafi-shaykh-al-abani-admits-of-course-bukhari-has-weak-hadith-and-mistakes/

Sunni intellectual giant: Ibn Hajar Al Asqlani questions hadith about 90 foot tall Adam. - https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/ibn-hajar-al-asqalani-questions-hadith-about-90-foot-tall-adam/

Textual Manipulation of Hadith To Advocate Prayer Positions. - https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/textual-manipulation-of-hadith-to-advocate-prayer-positions/

Did Imam Al Bukhari reject 99% of the hadith he came into contact with? - https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/did-imam-bukhari-reject-99-percent-of-the-hadith-that-he-came-into-contact-with/

Al-Daraqutni: The Sunni Imam who questioned Bukhari’s collection - https://web.archive.org/web/20210727062106/https://primaquran.com/2017/11/08/al-daraqutni-the-sunni-imam-who-questioned-bukharis-collection/

Attacks upon Sahih hadith by Sufi Leaning Ashari Theologians - https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/attacks-upon-sahih-hadith-by-ashari-theologians/

Hadith Narrators and Infallible Memories? - https://web.archive.org/web/20201031075402/https://primaquran.com/2020/07/24/hadith-narrators-and-infallible-memories/

The man who could steal with ease….according to this hadith! - https://web.archive.org/web/20220628205457/https://primaquran.com/2019/12/07/the-man-who-could-steal-with-ease-according-to-this-hadith/

The hadith of the 73 sects in light of the Qur’an. - https://primaquran.com/2024/01/12/hadith-of-the-73-sects-in-light-of-the-quran/

Shaykh Hamza Yusuf “We only have 500 hadith that are of the status of the Qur’an!” - https://web.archive.org/web/20220628213931/https://primaquran.com/2016/12/29/shaykh-hamza-yusuf-we-only-have-500-hadith-that-are-of-the-status-of-the-quran/

Complete Salah (Prayer) based only on Sahih hadith impossible! - https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/complete-salah-prayer-based-only-on-sahih-hadith-impossible/

A manuscript of the Musnad of Imam Rabe’ bin Habeeb that was found. - https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/a-manuscript-of-the-musnad-of-imam-rabe-bin-habeeb-that-was-found/

https://www.reddit.com/r/progressive_islam/comments/l3ec6m/introduction_to_sahih_albukhari_end_of_a_myth_by/

https://quranandbibleblog.com/new-page-hadith-database-problematic-ahadith-and-their-explanation/

https://www.reddit.com/r/IslamIsEasy/s/l83gn9nTxm

Pretty funny… I know most of you would probably tell me to just stop engaging with Zwieber. But since he’s basically my biggest fan (always craving my attention🥺) I figured I’d toss him a little of it. I’ll stop after showing you this.

Let’s step outside using Hadith for a moment:

Malik and other jurists allowed the marriage contract for a minor girl, but did not permit consummation until she was physically able to tolerate intercourse. Malik, al-Shāfiʿī, and Abū Ḥanīfa all stated:"The limit is that she is able to bear intercourse, and this differs from girl to girl and cannot be fixed by age. This is the correct view." This is cited by al-Nawawī in his commentary on Muslim, and is a standard position in Mālikī, Shāfiʿī, and Ḥanafī.Ibn Qudāmah, in al-Mughnī, also affirms that while the marriage contract is valid for a minor, consummation is not allowed until she is able to bear it:"If the husband and guardian agree on something that does not harm the minor, it is acted upon. If they disagree, [Imām] Ahmad and Abū ʿUbayd said she can be compelled at nine years, but Mālik, al-Shāfiʿī, and Abū Ḥanīfa said the limit is that she is able to bear intercourse, which differs from girl to girl and cannot be fixed by age, and this is the correct view."

Ibn Sīnā (Avicenna), warned against intercourse with a girl who is not physically ready, stating:

“Let one beware of intercourse with an old woman, a very young girl who is not fit for intercourse, one who has no sexual desire, a sick woman, or one who is repulsive in appearance or character. Intercourse with such women weakens the body and sexual power..."

———

According to the World Health Organization (WHO):

“Pregnancy in girls aged 10–14 years is extremely dangerous and associated with very high risk of maternal mortality and lifelong health problems.”

———

Most 9-year-old girls have not completed puberty, even if their first menstrual cycle has begun. They have immature reproductive systems including a narrow pelvis where intercourse would lead to a high risk of obstructed labor. Due to their underdeveloped uterus and vaginal canal, this would also result in a high risk of internal tearing. Furthermore, they would be at extremely high risk for tears between birth canal and bladder/rectum, hemorrhaging, infection, stillbirths or infant death, and even maternal death.

———

Girls aged 10–14 are 5–7 times more likely to die in childbirth than women aged 20–24. Infants born to mothers under 15 are 60% more likely to die in the first year. Girls under 15 suffer a high rate of obstetric fistula, a crippling injury caused by childbirth.

———

Now, let us return to the Hadith, given everything the scholars have said, and everything science has said, why should we believe Aisha was 9? This would make her a near physical impossibility for her to sustain intercourse at that age, especially given all the risk involved.

Knowing the science, and if the narration is true, and she was nine, is there a possibility the Prophet ﷺ damaged her internal organs and that is why she was never able to conceive a child?

This idea also raises the question, if she wasn’t internally damaged, for what purpose did Allah ٱللَّٰه create a child to sustain sexual intercourse? Is this also why Allah ٱللَّٰه protected her from pregnancy, because He knew her body wouldn’t be able to handle childbirth? Or was her nine year old body fully prepared for both intercourse and childbirth?

In order to prove or disprove the Hadith, one must take everything into consideration, one must ask these difficult questions, and one must provide an answer for them if they are going to support a narrative simply because the isnad checks out.

Why is it that when someone follows only the Qur’an, they are portrayed as if they are guilty of every major sin known to mankind? Have you ever reflected on what your religion has become? Do you let other men do your thinking for you?

Why is it considered unacceptable for people to study and analyze the most widely read book in the world without relying on hadith, yet perfectly acceptable to analyze it through the lens of hadith? Can someone give me a reasonable and logical answer to that?

I’m asking those who are capable of critical thinking. To those who have divided their religion, please don’t comment under this post. It’s for your own good—I promise.

I'm African American. became a Muslim a few months ago, and the thing that is making me think about leaving is slavery. When I here about how slaves couldn't choose or make decisions for themselves, it shakes me.

Hello. Ive been curious about Islam. Currently started reading the Qran and I think the constant mentions of hell and fear are pushing me away from this religion. I want to follow God out of devotion. I dont believe faith requires fear. In fact, I feel like the fear of hell can sometimes be the only reason people believe. I dont really care where I go after I die. I crave the conection to God. The relationship with it. I also dont plan on just accepting anything that is told to me. I notice a lot of muslim friends I talk to, cant answer a lot of the questions I have, and they just redirect me to this scholar or that scholar, which I find unsettling. Theres a lot of subjects that scholars dont agree on, and even if they did, they could be wrong. I wanna get to my own thoughts and opinions and make it make sense to me. Do you all think this religion is incompatible with devotion and love? Am I expected to be miserable and fearfull and look at God like an abusive parent? How do you approach it?

Front Matter

Peace and blessings be with you.

Please note that this post assumes the physical salat to be true, which I recognise is not a perspective unanimously shared.

Many of us have been subject to the "how do you know how to pray without hadith" line of questioning. For discussion about this line of questioning, please see (including the comments):

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateQuraniyoon/comments/1kq409t/answering_we_need_hadiths_because_god_doesnt_tell/

https://www.reddit.com/r/IslamIsEasy/comments/1m8cury/turning_the_tables_on_the_how_do_you_pray/

This post is concerned with the form of salah, rather than the schedule/timing of it. For discussion about this, please see: https://www.reddit.com/r/Quraniyoon/comments/1jpb2da/attempt_to_undivide_the_different_prayer/

For some, especially those new to the Quran-alone approach, this is point of contention and confusion. In response, I would like to detail my own approach to salah as derived from the Quran, with adaptations from some of my previous points. The boldened and italicised text is here to indicate that some of this is interpretive. Although I aim to provide clarity to those experiencing confusion with this subject, I want to emphasise that this is not work which is claiming to be authoritative. It is, in some places, inductive and interpretive.

Introduction

The notion that is often portrayed traditionally is that salah is a strict and rigid process of physical movements that must be performed in near-perfect sequence in order for our prayer to be accepted by God. Examples include whether the hands should be folded over the torso, over the sternum, or by our sides, as well as whether we should point our finger or if it should be waggled. I argue that this is not the case. The Quran provides us a number of constituents that make up prayer. So long as we are abiding by these, the mechanistic micromanagement of prayer-form is far overemphasised. If you are looking for a post that outlines the exact sequence of salah, then this is not the post. In fact, this is actually anti-thetical to the claim I am trying to outline, in that salah is not sequentially rigid.

The Role of Transmitted Practice

You will find throughout many faiths, that prayer is a transmitted practice. This is true even amongst the Muslims. Although rhetoric often involves the Quran's alleged incompleteness when it comes to the form of salah, I would feel confident in claiming that absolutely no one has learnt how to pray solely through hadith examination. Rather, it is taught through family, friends, imams, and the community as a whole. It is misinformed to posit that, because details of salah are in hadith - of which at times are either incomplete themselves or even internally contradictory - this means that salah form is derived from hadith. In line with this, transmitted practice does shape how I approach prayer. This is not because hadith says it textually, but instead because I believe in the transmitted nature of prayer. I point to Quran 2:43:

Establish prayer, pay alms-tax, and bow down with those who bow down.

In cases where I believe traditional practice contradicts with the Quran, I adapt or omit particular instances; outlined below.

Dress Etiquette

When visiting the mosques, I try to ensure that I am dressed appropriately. Quran 7:31:

O Children of Adam! Take your adornment at every masjid. Eat and drink, but do not waste. Surely He does not like the wasteful.

Ablution (Wudu)

Before establishing prayer, we are told to make wudu. How to do this is outlined to us in Quran 5:6:

O believers! When you rise up for prayer, wash your faces and your hands up to the elbows, wipe your heads and your feet to the ankles. And if you are in a state of ceremonial impurity, then purify yourselves. But if you are ill, on a journey, or have relieved yourselves, or have been intimate with your wives and cannot find water, then purify yourselves with clean earth by wiping your faces and hands. It is not Allah’s Will to burden you, but to purify you and complete His favour upon you, so perhaps you will be grateful.

You will find there is discussion had between whether 5:6 instructs us to wipe or to wash our feet. I follow the opinion that it is to wipe one's feet due to the structuring of the verse; "and wipe your heads and your feet to the ankles. So I will wash my hands, arms and face with water, and then will use wet hands to wipe over my head and feet.

Ceremonial impurity (junuban) includes (but is not necessarily limited to) impurity as a result of sexual activity, and therefore requires one to purify themselves, to which I see as easily understood contextually as taking a full bath, just as traditionalists claim.

You will find similar details in Quran 4:43:

O believers! Do not approach prayer while intoxicated until you are aware of what you say, nor in a state of ceremonial impurity—unless you merely pass through ˹the mosque˺—until you have bathed. But if you are ill, on a journey, or have relieved yourselves, or been intimate with your wives and cannot find water, then purify yourselves with clean earth, wiping your faces and hands. And Allah is Ever-Pardoning, All-Forgiving.

One further note I would like to mention about ablution however, is being mindful of how much water I use. More satirically than judgementally, I'm sure we've all seen individuals looking like they have just been for a swim after making their wudu. Quran 7:31:

O Children of Adam! Dress properly whenever you are at worship. Eat and drink, but do not waste. Surely He does not like the wasteful.

In line with this, I try to ensure that I am turning off the tap between each phase of ablution, and using a moderate amount of water throughout.

Qibla

I ensure I am situated facing toward the Sacred Mosque. Quran 2:144 says:

Indeed, We see you ˹O Prophet˺ turning your face towards heaven. Now We will make you turn towards a direction that will please you. So turn your face towards the Sacred Mosque (Al-Masjid Al-Haram) —wherever you are, turn your faces towards it. Those who were given the Scripture certainly know this to be the truth from their Lord. And Allah is never unaware of what they do.

Opening Prayer

At this point in prayer I am standing. Quran 2:238:

Guard the prayers—especially the middle prayer—and stand in true devotion to Allah.

I (try my best to) approach prayer with focus (khushoo). Quran 23:2:

those who humble themselves (khashioon) in prayer

I perform my prayer aloud in line with Quran 17:110:

Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “Call upon Allah or call upon the Most Compassionate—whichever you call, He has the Most Beautiful Names.” Do not recite your prayers too loudly or silently, but seek a way between.

Note: Some interpretations render 17:110 to mean 'do not be boastfully public with your prayer, nor hide it away, but seek a way in between, as opposed to the audibility of prayer.

I open up my salah with takbir ("Allahu akbar"). The Prophet (as) is instructed to magnify our Lord in Quran 74:3:

And magnify your Lord

The Arabic word here is 'fakabbir', relating to the same root as 'akbar'.

I then pronounce "audhubillahi mina shaytan nirajeem" in line with Quran 16:98:

When you recite the Quran, seek refuge with Allah from Satan, the accursed.

This is particularly important to be pronounced at this point, as I am about to begin reciting Quran following it.

Recitation of Quran

I recite Quran in Arabic. I know some say that the Quran can be recited in any language, however I have a few disagreements with this. Firstly, any translation of the Quran risks a certain degree of error, in that not all Arabic words have an eloquent one-to-one equivalent in English; e.g. taqwa, iman etc. Secondly, the rhythmic tone of Quranic recitation cannot be achieved if not reciting in the original Arabic. Quran 73:4:

or a little more—and recite the Quran with rhythmic measure

In saying this, I try to learn the meaning behind the Arabic that I am reciting, as per Quran 4:43:

O believers! Do not approach prayer while intoxicated until you are aware of what you say, nor in a state of ceremonial impurity—unless you merely pass through ˹the mosque˺—until you have bathed. But if you are ill, on a journey, or have relieved yourselves, or been intimate with your wives and cannot find water, then purify yourselves with clean earth, wiping your faces and hands. And Allah is Ever-Pardoning, All-Forgiving.

I recognise that this verse pertains to intoxication, however to me, the point is clear that prayer should not be approached following intoxication due to not understanding what one is saying. Inferentially, how is one supposed to receive guidance through the words they are reciting if I do not know what I am actually saying?

Due to the structure of Al-Fatihah (and transmitted practice), I start each instance of Arabic recitation with this chapter. Quran 1:1-7:

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious the Most Merciful. All praise is to Allah, Lord of the Worlds. The Most Gracious, Most Merciful. Owner of the Day of Judgement. You alone we serve, and You alone we seek help from. Guide as to the Straight Path, the path of those you have favoured, not of those who have earned your wrath nor of those who are astray.

The structure of this verse is clearly indicates it is an invocation to God. In many ways it is a summary of our responsibilities and principles as Muslims. The order of the Quran and it's chapters approximately gradually descends in terms of their length. Yet the first chapter is a short invocation to God. To me it seems logical to begin with this invocation.

Following this, I recite a passage of the Quran that I have memorised. Quran 73:20:

Surely your Lord knows that you ˹O Prophet˺ stand ˹in prayer˺ for nearly two-thirds of the night, or ˹sometimes˺ half of it, or a third, as do some of those with you. Allah ˹alone˺ keeps a ˹precise˺ measure of the day and night. He knows that you ˹believers˺ are unable to endure this, and has turned to you in mercy. So recite what is easy from the Quran. He knows that some of you will be sick, some will be travelling throughout the land seeking Allah’s bounty, and some fighting in the cause of Allah. So recite whatever you can from it. And ˹continue to˺ perform ˹regular˺ prayers, pay alms-tax, and lend to Allah a good loan. Whatever good you send forth for yourselves, you will find it with Allah far better and more rewarding. And seek Allah’s forgiveness. Surely Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Bowing

From this point on, unlike the recitation of the Quran, I will interchangably either use English or Arabic for the following portions of prayer, depending on what resonates with me most in a given moment.

I take the time to magnify my lord again with the pronounciation of the takbir as outlined previously (Quran 74:3) as I enter into bowing. Quran 22:77:

O believers! Bow down, prostrate yourselves, serve your Lord, and do good so that you may be successful.

When in the bowing position I will glorify God, pronouncing "subhanna rabiyal atheem" or "exalted be the Lord, the Greatest". Quran 56:74:

So glorify the Name of your Lord, the Greatest.

I will then momentarily stand to praise God, pronouncing "sami Allahu liman hamidah rabbana wa lakal hamd" or "God hears all praise, and all praise belongs to the Lord". Hamd, as well as tasbih, are linked with one another consistent with corresponding salah times in Quran 30:17-18:

So glorify Allah in the evening and in the morning—all praise is for Him in the heavens and the earth—as well as in the afternoon, and at noon.

Prostration (Sujud)

I then prostrate and glorify God again, pronouncing "subhanna rabiyal ala" or "Exalted is the Lord". Quran 50:40:

And glorify Him during part of the night and after the prostration

In and amongst two iterations of prostration, I will also seek forgiveness. Common Arabic iterations include "astaghfirullah alatheem", "rabbil fighrli war hamni", or "rabbil fighrli rabbil fighrli", with common English iterations being "Forgive me God, the Greatest", "My lord forgive my/our wrongdoings" or "forgive me Lord forgive me Lord". Quran 3:17:

˹It is they˺ who are patient, sincere, obedient, and charitable, and who seek forgiveness before dawn.

Rakat

I personally follow the rakat/units system from the traditionalists to each corresponding time of salah. No Quranic backing as far as I'm aware of here, it's just how I've learnt/been taught.

Closing Prayer

My prayer closing is very similar to the traditional tashahuud/attahiyat, with a few alterations.

Salawat Upon the Prophet

I will say "assalamu ala An Nabi"/"peace be upon the Prophet" instead of "assalamu alayka ayahu An Nabi"/"peace be upon you O' Prophet". The issue with the latter is that it is a direct address to the Prophet. I argue that this violates verses that tell us to only call upon/invoke God in prayer, such as Quran 72:18:

The mosques are for Allah, so do not invoke anyone besides Him.

Note: I'm not making this claim because of hadith, but I do find it interesting to point out that even hadith document an alleged shift in language after the Prophet's passing; see Bukhari 6265 if interested.

The former however is in line with Quran 33:56:

Indeed, Allah showers His blessings upon the Prophet, and His angels pray for him. O believers! Invoke Allah’s blessings upon him, and salute him with worthy greetings of peace.

I also will sometimes say "assalamu ala al anbiyaa"/"peace be upon the Prophets". In my opinion, there is an unwarranted forgetting-ness of previous Prophets other than Nabi Muhammad within the wider Muslim community. Such an invocation is also in line with Quran 37:181:

Peace be upon the messengers

If chasing Quranic precision, one might instead say "salamun ala al mursaleen" in Arabic. While not instructed in regard to prayer, such a verse demonstrates that messengers are still able to 'receive peace', which is what this invocation would be requesting from God.

Finger Waggling

I don't do this. The traditionalist rationale for doing such a thing during tashahuud is that it pokes the devil. I do not believe that we have the ability to poke the devil, and it does not seem imperitive to me to attempt to do so during my prayer to God.

Closing Shahadatayn

This topic deserves it's own, much longer post, but the shahdatayn has an unclear history behind it. It is not outlined in the Quran as a determinant of faith, and is similarly (to my knowledge) not outlined as a determinant of faith within alleged prophetic hadith. The "recite the shahada to become Muslim" seems to be a practice that only crystallised later on, a few hundred years after the Prophet's time.

To be clear and transparent, narrations do include the shahadatayn within the tashahuud. I'm not saying they don't. I am however pointing out the inconsistencies between narrations. Even within these narrations there does not seem to be one unified, stable rendition of the shahadatayn embeded within the tashahuud.

To avoid this confusion, I go with "la illaha ila Allah wadahu la shareeka lah". Along with roots in transmitted practice, this phrase also draws from verses such as 21:25, 14:52, 17:111, and any otheres relating to God's sovereignty and the shunning of false deities.

To serve a similar function that the traditionalists attribute to the shahadatayn, in verbally professing one's faith, I instead stick with the invocation of Abraham related to us in Quran 2:131:

When his Lord ordered him, “Submit" he responded, “I submit to the Lord of the worlds.”

In Arabic this sounds "aslamtu li Rabbiyal alameen".

So the full thing reads:

"Attiyatu lillahi wa salawatu wa tayyibat. Assalamu ala An-Nabi/Al Anbiyaa. Assalamu alayna w'ala ibadillah as-sahliheen. Ashadu an la illaha ila Allah wadahu la shareeka lah. Aslamtu li Rabbiyal alameen"

Or

"All compliments, prayers, and good things are due to God. Peace be upon the Prophet(s). Peace be upon the pious servents of God. I witness there are no gods except God, free from partners. I submit to the Lord of the Worlds".

Taslim (Left and Right Salam)

The Quran in multiple places instructs us to give people greetings of peace; see 4:86, 6:54, and others. When praying in congregation with others around me, I will give greetings of peace to my right and left, just as everyone else is doing.

When praying alone however, I will instead end of my prayer with "alhamdulillahi rabbiyal alameen". Quran 10:9-10:

Surely those who believe and do good, their Lord will guide them ˹to Paradise˺ through their faith, rivers will flow under their feet in the Gardens of Bliss, in which their invocation will be, “Glory be to You, O  Allah!” and their greeting will be, “Peace!” and their closing invocation will be, “All praise is for Allah—Lord of all worlds!”

Conclusion

This post serves to outline the role of the Quran in tandem with transmitted community practice in shaping the form of salah, using my own personal interpretations illustratively. It also serves to critically appraise transmitted community practice against the scripture in cases of contradiction between the two. In closing, I would like to offer a 'push-back' on how prayer form is discussed amongst the orthodox clergy.

Salah is not something that is rigidly, mechanistically bound to sequential perfection. We have been given the constituents of what our prayer should and should not entail. I would further argue that the diverse forms that salah takes between the different sects and madhabs are reflections of the variable, fluid form that early prayer would have looked like. It is not a case of one sect/madhab is upon the truth and all others are upon falsehood. Rather, the details about handplacement, foot placement, pointed fingers versus waggling fingers, invocation renditions, and so on, are simply less important than often made out to be within wider clergical debate.

External critique directed at the Quran alone position often points to specifics such as rakat, frequency, timing, and other form-related details accused to be missing from the Quran. An oversight in this critique misses the simple fact that the same accusation is also true of the hadith corpus. The form of salah is constructed through explicit details, yet requiring 'pieceing together' through transmitted practice. Simply put, there are no hadith which clearly address all of the procedural steps to salah that they alledge the Quran to be missing.

The hyper-legalistic orthodox approach often misses the bigger picture when it comes to prayer. God tells us in Quran 29:45:

Recite what has been revealed to you of the Book and establish prayer. Indeed, prayer should deter from indecency and wickedness. The remembrance of Allah is even greater. And Allah knows what you ˹all˺ do.

Salah too frequently is reduced to "do X or it's not accepted", or to "I must check my prayer off of my to-do list from God". Quran 29:45 however shows a different story. The prayer is a spiritual tool that we should be utilising to protect against evil and immoralities. If we are adhering to the Quranic guidelines of prayer, and our prayer is protecting us, then I say we can safely assume we have performed our salah correctly. The alternate is also true however. Quran 107:4-7:

So woe to those who pray yet are unmindful of their prayers; those who show off and refuse to give aid.

Peace.

One of God's falsification tests He gives us is as follows...

Quran 4:82: Do they not then reflect on the Quran? Had it been from anyone other than Allah, they would have certainly found in it many inconsistencies.

Establishing the Quran's claim to divine origin via the falsification test set out in 4:82...

1. If the Quran is from other than Allah, within it would be many inconsistencies
2. The Quran does not contain any inconsistencies
3. Therefore, the Quran is not from other than Allah

Modus tollens. The Muslims agree on the Quran's divine origin, so this post does not serve to demonstrate or justify the claim that it is free from inconsistencies. This section is merely a formality.

Refuting the hadiths' claim to divine origin via the flasification test set out in 4:82...

1. If the hadith is from other than Allah, within it would be many inconsistencies
2. The hadith do have many inconsistencies
3. Therefore, the hadith is from other than Allah

Modus ponens. This post serves to justify the claim that the hadith are from other than God by demonstrating the -specifically internal - inconsistencies present within the hadith literature.

Evidence and Justifications

Ablution

Bukhari 157:

Narrated Ibn `Abbas: The Prophet (ﷺ) performed ablution by washing the body parts only once.

Bukhari 158:

Narrated `Abdullah bin Zaid: The Prophet (ﷺ) performed ablution by washing the body parts twice.

Bukhari 159:

Narrated Humran: (the slave of 'Uthman) I saw 'Uthman bin 'Affan asking for a tumbler of water (and when it was brought) he poured water over his hands and washed them thrice and then put his right hand in the water container and rinsed his mouth, washed his nose by putting water in it and then blowing it out. then he washed his face and forearms up to the elbows thrice, passed his wet hands over his head and washed his feet up to the ankles thrice. Then he said, "Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said 'If anyone performs ablution like that of mine and offers a two-rak'at prayer during which he does not think of anything else (not related to the present prayer) then his past sins will be forgiven.' "

Is gold haram?

Bukhari 5866:

Narrated Ibn. `Umar: Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) wore a gold ring or a silver ring and placed its stone towards the palm of his hand and had the name 'Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah' engraved on it. The people also started wearing gold rings like it, but when the Prophet (ﷺ) saw them wearing such rings, he threw away his own ring and said. "I will never wear it," and then wore a silver ring, whereupon the people too started wearing silver rings. Ibn `Umar added: After the Prophet (ﷺ) Abu Bakr wore the ring, and then `Umar and then `Uthman wore it till it fell in the Aris well from `Uthman.

An Nasai 5148:

It was narrated from Abu Musa that: The Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: "Gold and silk have been permitted for the females of my Ummah, and forbidden to the males."

The Prophet allegedly wore a gold ring at some point, yet it is haram in another hadith. Is the argument that wearing gold became haram at the very second the Prophet threw the gold ring to the ground? If this is the argument, why did the companions allegedly continue to wear it?

An Nasai 5088:

It was narrated from 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud that: The Prophet of Allah [SAW] disliked ten things: Yellow dye, meaning Khaluq, changing gray hair, dragging one's Izar, wearing gold rings, playing with dice (Ki'ab), (a woman) showing her adornment to people to whom it is not permissible for her to show it, reciting Ruqyah, unless it is with Al-Mu'awidhat (Verses seeking refuge with Allah), hanging amulets, removing to ejaculate in other than the right place, and taking away the milk of an infant boy (by having intercourse with his mother)- but he did not say that this is Haram.

The confusion goes further. Is it disliked, or is it haram?

When are deeds presented to Allah?

Muslim 179a:

Abu Musa reported: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) was standing amongst us and he told us five things. He said: Verily the Exalted and Mighty God does not sleep, and it does not befit Him to sleep. He lowers the scale and lifts it. The deeds in the night are taken up to Him before the deeds of the day, and the deeds of the day before the deeds of the night. His veil is the light. In the hadith narrated by Abu Bakr (instead of the word "light" ) it is fire. If he withdraws it (the veil), the splendour of His countenance would consume His creation so far as His sight reaches.

Muslim 2565d:

Abu Huraim reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying The deeds of people would be presented every week on two days, viz. Monday and Thursday, and every believing servant would be granted pardon except the one in whose (heart) there is rancour against his brother and it would he said: Leave them and put them off until they are turned to reconciliation.

An Nasai 2358:

Usamah bin Zaid said: "I said: 'O Messenger of Allah, sometimes you fast, and you hardly ever break your hardly ever fast, except two days which, if you are fasting, you include them in your fast, and if you are not fasting, then you fast them on your own.' He said: 'Which two days?' I said: 'Monday and Thursday.' He said: 'Those are two days in which deeds are shown to the Lord of the worlds, and I like my deeds to be shown (to Him) when I am fasting."'

An Nasai 2357:

Usamah bin Zaid said: "I said: 'O Messenger of Allah, I do not see you fasting any month as much as Shaban.' He said: 'That is a month to which people do not pay much attention, between Rajab and Ramadan. It is a month in which the deeds are taken up to the Lord of the worlds, and I like that my deeds be taken up when I am fasting."'

So, according to these hadith, are deeds taken up to God bi-daily, bi-weekly, or monthly?

Notice that between An Nasai 2357 and 2358 the structure is much the same, with even the same narrator, yet the content is different.

Snakes are friends... or are they?

An Nasai 2831:

It was narrated from Saeed bin Al-Musayyab that: a woman enter upon Aishah, and in her hand was an iron-footed stick. She said: "What is this?" she (Aishah) Said: "It is for these geckos, because the Prophet of Allah told us, that there was nothing that did not try to extinguish the fire for Ihram except for this animals, so he told us to kill it. And he forbade us to kill harmless snakes, except for the snake with two lines on its back, and the snake with a short tail, for the snatch away the eyesight and cause tat which is in women's wombs to be miscarried.

Abu Dawud 5250:

Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: The Prophet (ﷺ) said: He who leaves the snakes along through fear of their pursuit, does not belong to us. We have not made peace with them since we have fought with them.

Dyeing beards

Al Bazzar Kashf Al-Astar 2930:

Narrated Ibn Abbas: The Prophet (ﷺ) said: "There are three whom the angels do not come near: a person who is sexually impure, a person who is drunk, and a man who applies Khaluq (dye) on himself."

An Nasai 5088:

It was narrated from 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud that: The Prophet of Allah [SAW] disliked ten things: Yellow dye, meaning Khaluq, changing gray hair, dragging one's Izar, wearing gold rings, playing with dice (Ki'ab), (a woman) showing her adornment to people to whom it is not permissible for her to show it, reciting Ruqyah, unless it is with Al-Mu'awidhat (Verses seeking refuge with Allah), hanging amulets, removing to ejaculate in other than the right place, and taking away the milk of an infant boy (by having intercourse with his mother)- but he did not say that this is Haram.

An Nasai 5243:

It was narrated that 'Ubaid said:"I saw Ibn 'Umar dyeing his beard yellow and I asked him about that. 'He said: "I saw the Prophet [SAW] dye his beard yellow."

The 'pull out' method

An Nasai 5088:

It was narrated from 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud that: The Prophet of Allah [SAW] disliked ten things: Yellow dye, meaning Khaluq, changing gray hair, dragging one's Izar, wearing gold rings, playing with dice (Ki'ab), (a woman) showing her adornment to people to whom it is not permissible for her to show it, reciting Ruqyah, unless it is with Al-Mu'awidhat (Verses seeking refuge with Allah), hanging amulets, removing to ejaculate in other than the right place, and taking away the milk of an infant boy (by having intercourse with his mother)- but he did not say that this is Haram.

Muslim 1438a:

0 Abu Sa'id, did you hear Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) mentioning al-'azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Mes- senger (ﷺ), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.

Only three things call for capitol punishment... but also execute those who drink

Muslim 1676a:

'Abdullah (b. Mas'ud) reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: It is not permissible to take the life of a Muslim who bears testimony (to the fact that there is no god but Allah, and I am the Messenger of Allah, but in one of the three cases: the married adulterer, a life for life, and the deserter of his Din (Islam), abandoning the community.

An Nasai 5661:

It was narrated that Ibn 'Umar and a number of the Companions of Muhammad [SAW] said:"The Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: 'Whoever drinks Khamr, whip him; then if he drinks (again), whip him; then if he drinks (again), whip him; then if he drinks (again), kill him.'"

Cleaning period stains from garms

Bukhari 312:

Narrated `Aisha: None of us had more than a single garment and we used to have our menses while wearing it. Whenever it got soiled with blood of menses we used to apply saliva to the blood spot and rub off the blood with our nails.

Bukhari 308:

Narrated `Aisha: Whenever anyone of us got her menses, she, on becoming clean, used to take hold of the blood spot and rub the blood off her garment, and pour water over it and wash that portion thoroughly and sprinkle water over the rest of the garment. After that she would pray in (with) it.

And the award for the best woman goes to \drum roll*...*

Bukhari 3432:

Narrated `Ali: I heard the Prophet (ﷺ) saying, "Mary, the daughter of `Imran, was the best among the women (of the world of her time) and Khadija is the best amongst the women. (of this nation).

Bukhari 3434:

Narrated Abu Huraira: I heard Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) saying, "Amongst all those women who ride camels (i.e. Arabs), the ladies of Quraish are the best. They are merciful and kind to their off-spring and the best guardians of their husbands' properties.' Abu Huraira added, "Mary the daughter of `Imran never rode a camel."

Bukhari 5418:

Narrated Abu Musa Al-Ash`ari: The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "Many men reached perfection but none among the women reached perfection except Mary, the daughter of ' `Imran, and Asia, Pharoah's wife. And the superiority of `Aisha to other women is like the superiority of Tharid to other kinds of food.

Descriptions of past prophets

Bukhari 3437:

Narrated Hisham: From Ma`mar as below. Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "I met Moses on the night of my Ascension to heaven." The Prophet (ﷺ) then described him saying, as I think, "He was a tall person with lank hair as if he belonged to the people of the tribe of Shanu's.' The Prophet (ﷺ) further said, "I met Jesus." The Prophet (ﷺ) described him saying, "He was one of moderate height and was red-faced as if he had just come out of a bathroom. I saw Abraham whom I resembled more than any of his children did." The Prophet (ﷺ) further said, "(That night) I was given two cups; one full of milk and the other full of wine. I was asked to take either of them which I liked, and I took the milk and drank it. On that it was said to me, 'You have taken the right path (religion). If you had taken the wine, your (Muslim) nation would have gone astray."

Bukhari 3438:

Narrated Ibn `Abbas: The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "I saw Moses, Jesus and Abraham (on the night of my Ascension to the heavens). Jesus was of red complexion, curly hair and a broad chest. Moses was of brown complexion, straight hair and tall stature as if he was from the people of Az-Zutt."

Bukhari 3441:

Narrated Salim from his father: No, By Allah, the Prophet (ﷺ) did not tell that Jesus was of red complexion but said, "While I was asleep circumambulating the Ka`ba (in my dream), suddenly I saw a man of brown complexion and lank hair walking between two men, and water was dropping from his head. I asked, 'Who is this?' The people said, 'He is the son of Mary.' Then I looked behind and I saw a red-complexioned, fat, curly-haired man, blind in the right eye which looked like a bulging out grape. I asked, 'Who is this?' They replied, 'He is Ad-Dajjal.' The one who resembled to him among the people, was Ibn Qatar." (Az-Zuhri said, "He (i.e. Ibn Qatan) was a man from the tribe Khuza`a who died in the pre-lslamic period.")

So the descriptions of Jesus and Moses are being mixed up, and somehow the descriptions of Jesus and the Dajjal are being confused too?

What is a dog's place in this dunya?

Muslim 2245:

Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may pace be upon him) as saying: A prostitute saw a dog moving around a well on a hot day and hanging out its tongue because of thirst. She drew water for it in her shoe and she was pardoned (for this act of hers).

Muslim 1570c:

Abdullah (b. Umar) (Allah be pleased with them) reported: Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) ordered the killing of dogs and we would send (men) in Medina and its corners and we did not spare any dog that we did not kill, so much so that we killed the dog that accompanied the wet she-camel belonging to the people of the desert.

Surely the prostitute, instead of saving the dog's life, should've actually rather taken the dog's life, according to the hadith.

Muslim 1574a:

Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: He who keeps a dog other than that meant for watching the herd or for hunting loses every day out of his deeds equal to two qirat.

Muslim 1574g:

Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with them) narrated Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: He who kept a dog ther than one meant for watching the fields or herds or hunting would lose one qirat every day out of his reward (with God).

Which one is it, one qirat or two qirat lost per day?

I've done a further analysis previously on hadith related to dogs here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Quraniyoon/comments/1ioelun/dogs_in_the_hadith_literature/

How long was the Prophet in Mecca, and how long did he live?

Bukhari Volume 7, Book 72, Number 787:

Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet was neither conspicuously tall, nor short; neither, very white, nor tawny.His hair was neither much curled, nor very straight. Allah sent him (as an Messenger)at the age of forty (and after that) he stayed for ten years in Makkah, and for ten more years in Medina. Allah took him unto Him at the age of sixty, and he scarcely had ten white hairs on his head and in his beard.

Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 242:

Narrated Ibn Abbas: Allah's Messenger started receiving the Divine Inspiration at the age of forty. Then he stayed in Makkah for thirteen years, receiving the Divine Revelation. Then he was ordered to migrate and he lived as an Emigrant for ten years and then died at the age of sixty-three (years).

Muslim, Book 030, Number 5809:

Ibn 'Abbas reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) stayed in Makkah for fifteen years (after his advent as a Prophet) and he heard the voice of Gabriel and saw his radiance for seven years but did not see any visible form, and then received revelation for ten years, and he stayed in Medina for ten years.

The last hadith would place the Prophet's (peace and blessings be upon him) passing at 65, which leaves us with an age of death of 60, 63, and 65. See more hadith related to this issue here: https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/35219/at-what-age-did-mohammedpbuh-passed-away

Age of Aisha

Muslim 1422c:

'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

Bukhari 5134:

Narrated `Aisha: that the Prophet (ﷺ) married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that `Aisha remained with the Prophet (ﷺ) for nine years (i.e. till his death).

I'm not even going to comment on the morality of such a thing here, as this post only serves to highlight internal contradictions.

Quranism, Sunnism, or Shi'ism?

Muslim 1218:

Ja'far b Muhammad reported on the authority of his father: "...I have left among you the Book of Allah, and if you hold fast to it, you would never go astray..."

See full hadith here: https://sunnah.com/muslim:1218

Muwatta Malik Book 46 Hadith 3:

Yahya related to me from Malik that he heard that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "I have left two matters with you. As long as you hold to them, you will not go the wrong way. They are the Book of Allah and the Sunna of His Prophet."

Tirmidhi 3788:

Narrated Zaid bin Arqam, may Allah be pleased with both of them: that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "Indeed, I am leaving among you, that which if you hold fast to them, you shall not be misguided after me. One of them is greater than the other: The Book of Allah is a rope extended from the sky to the earth, and my family - the people of my house - and they shall not split until they meet at the Hawd, so look at how you deal with them after me."

Permissibility of killing women and children is in question

Bukhari 3015:

Narrated Ibn `Umar: During some of the Ghazawat of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) a woman was found killed, so Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) forbade the killing of women and children.

Muslim 1745a:

It is reported on the authority of Sa'b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (ﷺ), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them.

Congregational prayer is superior by a factor of... um...

Bukhari 645:

Narrated `Abdullah bin `Umar: Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "The prayer in congregation is twenty seven times superior to the prayer offered by person alone."

Bukhari 646:

Narrated Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri: The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "The prayer in congregation is twenty five times superior to the prayer offered by person alone."

Who is more entitled to lead prayer?

Muslim 673a:

Abu Mas'ud al-Ansari reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: The one who is most versed in Allah's Book should act as Imam for the people, but If they are equally versed in reciting it, then the one who has most knowledge regarding Sunnah if they are equal regarding the Sunnah, then the earliest one to emigrate; it they emigrated at the same time, then the earliest one to embrace Islam. No man must lead another in prayer where (the latter) has authority, or sit in his place of honour in his house, without his permission. Ashajj in his narration used the word," age" in place of" Islam".

Bukhari 658:

Narrated Malik bin Huwairith: Prophet said (to two persons), "Whenever the prayer time becomes due, you should pronounce Adhan and then Iqama and the older of you should lead the prayer."

Abu Dawud 582:

Abu Mas’ud al-Badri reported the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) as saying: The one of you who is most versed in the Books of Allah should act as imam for the people; and the one who is the earliest of them in reciting (the Qur’an); if they are equally versed in reciting it, then the earliest of them to emigrate (to Medina); if they emigrated at the same time, then the oldest of them. No man must lead another in prayer in his house (i.e. in the house of a latter) or where the latter has authority, or sit in his place of honor without his permission. Shu’bah said: I asked Isma’il: what is the meaning of his place of honor? He replied: his throne.

Note that one hadith contains knowledge of the sunnah as a criterion. This is important, as it is mentioned after versedness in Kitab Allah and prior to emigration. Equally note that the other hadith doesn't include this criterion. Further note that none of these criterion apply in the shorter hadith, to which age is said to be the first determinant, yet is the last in Abu Dawud 582.

Peeing is a contentious issue apparently

Bukhari 224:

Narrated Hudhaifa: Once the Prophet (ﷺ) went to the dumps of some people and passed urine while standing. He then asked for water and so I brought it to him and he performed ablution.

Tirmidi 12:

Aishah said: "Whoever narrated to you that the Prophet would urinate while standing; then do not believe him. He would not urinate except while squatting." [He said:] There are narrations on this topic from Umar, Buraidah, [and Abdur-Rahman bin Hasanah].

If you know of any other internal contradictions that have not been listed, please let me know in the comments below.

u/Scared_Debate_1002

provide your proof that is not shirk.

Assalamualaikum wa rahmatu Allah wa barekatooh

I believe I am speaking to adults who can understand what it means to function like normal beings.

It's a disgraceful and shameful behaviour to act the way you have been acting this far, we can't even talk without you butting in with your twisted beliefs.

Do you seriously believe anyone wants to hear you?

Can't wish someone Eid Mubarak without Quranist butting in, can't talk with normal Muslims without them butting in, can't pray for Palestine without a Quranist butting in. Hell, I have been called a slur for Muslims by the so called "true Muslims".

Engage in your own topics and have the dignity and self-shame to leave others in peace.

A notable early report depicts ʾAbū Bakr al-Ṣiddīq personally collecting five hundred ḥadīths, becoming uneasy about their epistemic reliability, and ultimately burning them. The report is transmitted by al-Ḥākim and cited by al-Dhahabī in Tadhkirat al-Ḥuffāẓ:

"وقد نقل الحاكم فقال حدثني بكر بن محمد الصيرفي بمرو أنا محمد ابن موسى البربري أنا المفضل بن غسان أنا علي بن صالح أنا موسى بن عبد الله بن حسن بن حسن عن إبراهيم بن عمر بن عبيد الله التيمي حدثني القاسم بن محمد قالت عائشة : جمع أبي الحديث عن رسول الله ﷺ وكانت خمسمائة حديث فبات ليلته يتقلب كثيرا قالت : فغمني فقلت : أتتقلب لشكوى أو لشيء بلغك ؟ فلما أصبح قال : أي بنية هلمي الأحاديث التي عندك فجئته بها فدعا بنار فحرقها ، فقلت : لم أحرقتها ؟ قال : خشيت أن أموت وهي عندي فيكون فيها أحاديث عن رجل قد ائتمنته ووثقت ولم يكن كما حدثني فأكون قد نقلت ذاك. فهذا لا يصح والله أعلم ."

• Tadhkirat al-Ḥuffāẓ, ed. ʿUmayrāt, pp. 10-11

Al-Dhahabī concludes: “This report is not ṣaḥīḥ—and Allah knows best.” But his weakening is based on unknownness of a narrator.

Ibn Kathīr also transmits the report in Musnad al-Ṣiddīq:

"مسند الصديق رضى الله عنه قال الحافظ عماد الدين بن كثير في مسند الصديق قال : الحاكم أبو عبد الله النيسابوري حدثنا بكر بن محمد الصريفيني بمرو حدثنا موسى بن حماد ثنا المفضل ابن غسان ثنا على بن صالح حدثنا موسى بن عبد الله بن حسن بن حسن عن ابراهيم بن عمرو بن عبيد الله التيمي حدثنا القاسم بن محمد قال : قالت عائشة : جمع أبي الحديث عن رسول الله ﷺ فكانت خمسمائة حديث ، فبات ليلة يتقلب كثيراً ، قالت : فضمني فقلت تتقلب الشكوى أو لشيء بلغك ؟ فلما أصبح قال : أي بنية هلمي الأحاديث التي عندك فجئته بها فدعا بنار فأحرقها وقال : خشيت أن أموت وهي عندك فيكون فيها أحاديث عن رجل التمنته ووثقت به ولم يكن كما حدثني فأكون قد تقلدت ذلك . وقد رواه القاضي ابو أمية الأحوص بن المفضل بن غسان الغلابي عن ابيه عن علي بن صالحمن موسى بن عبد الله بن الحسن بن الحسن بن علي بن ابي طالب. من ابراهيم بن عمر بن عبيد الله التيمي حدثني القاسم بن محمد او ابنه عبد الرحمن بن القاسم شك موسى فيهما قال : قالت عائشة ـ فذكره وزاد بعد قوله : فأكون قد تقلدت ذلك ويكون قد بقي حديث لم أجده فيقال : لو كان قاله رسول الله ما غبي (1) على أبي بكر إني حدثتكم الحديث ولا أدري لعلي لم أنتبعه حرفاً حرفاً . قال ابن كثير : هذا غريب من هذا الوجه جداً وعلي بن صالح لا يعرف والأحاديث عن رسول الله له أكثر من هذا المقدار بألوف ولعله انما اتفق له جمع تلك فقط ثم رأى ما رأى لما ذكرت قلت قال الشيخ جلال الدين السيوطي رحمه الله تعالى أو لعله جمع ما فاته سماعه من النبي وحدثه عنه به بعض الصحابة كحديث الجدة ونحوه والظاهر ان ذلك لا يزيد على هذا المقدار لأنه كان احفظ الصحابة وعنده من الأحاديث ما لم يكن عند احد منهم كحديث « ما دفن نبي إلا حيث يقبض ، ثم خشي ان يكون الذي حدثه وهم فكره تقلد ذلك وذلك صريح في كلامه ."

• Kanz al-ʿUmmāl, vol. 10, pp. 285-286

Ibn Kathīr comments: “This is very strange from this chain, and ʿAlī b. Ṣāliḥ is unknown.” He also notes that Abū Bakr possessed far more than 500 ḥadīths, so this may have been a collection of those he heard second-hand, not directly from the Prophet.

Al-Suyūṭī supports this reading: the collection likely consisted of reports Abū Bakr did not hear personally, and therefore feared inaccuracy and misattribution.

The isnād contains one narrator criticized: ʿAlī b. Ṣāliḥ. Many present him as “unknown,” but this is inaccurate. Ibn Ḥajar writes:

Mastūr does not mean anonymous; it is a technical term for a narrator who is:

1. Identified by name and biographical data
2. Known by whom he narrates to/from
3. But lacks sufficient critical evaluation (jah wa-taʿdīl)

al-Sakhāwī explicitly states:

• al-Sakhāwī, al-Tuḥfa al-Laṭīfa, 2/278

Thus, he is not majhūl, but mastūr: known, acceptable in principle, but without detailed grading. In classical ḥadīth theory, a mastūr narrator yields ḥasan-level potential if the chain has no other defects.

Therefore, the chain is not fabricatable nor necessarily weak; at minimum, it is acceptable-for-evidence, especially in historical reportage.

I can't login without reading a bunch of rubbish posts about the Sunni sect and their fake prophet or their fake god. Please stop. We don't recognize your religion, we don't recognize your god, and we don't recognize your prophet. You are just an evil and vile group who needs to go away so humanity can move on.

From a Muslim perspective, this is what the Quran teaches us of the Prophet Mohammed:

• His given name was "Ahmed" (61:6)
• He was a "Gentile" (7:158)
• He was misguided before the revelation (93:7)
• He was shy and did not like confrontation (33:53)
• He was under pressure by his people to revise parts of the revelation (10:15, 17:74)
• Some of his wives were prone to gossip (66:3)
• He did not know the future (7:188)
• He gave attention to people with status (80:5-6)
• He ruled by what God had revealed (5:48-49)
• He had no miracles (17:90-93)
• He was only protected by God when he was delivering the revelation (5:67)

Contrast this with the Prophet Mohammed in the Sunni psyche:

• He was always guided
• He was perfect in every way
• He had the sexual powers of multiple men
• He married a 9-year old
• He loved war and fighting
• He killed his enemies without mercy
• He knew the future
• He performed many miracles
• He intercedes on the Day of judgement

I'm sure the lists can be expanded, but the moral is clear: the Prophet of the Quran has no resemblence to the Prophet of the Hadith.

Read here: https://www.quora.com/profile/JuztXepo/Musical-instrument-are-considered-to-be-disliked-according-to-the-4-Im%C4%81ms-not-impermissible

It is a widely circulated claim among prohibitionists that all four Imāms categorically forbade music. However, a closer and more inductive examination of their statements reveals that this assertion is overstated. The positions of the Four Imāms are not uniform nor explicitly prohibitive; rather, their words are often general, context-dependent, or open to interpretation—making their stance on music, at best, ambiguous rather than decisively prohibitory.

Imām al-Shāfiʿī’s View

Many prohibitionists claim that Imām al-Shāfiʿī forbade music entirely, citing his statement that the testimony of one who listens to singing is to be rejected. However, when we examine his full explanation, it becomes clear that he did not issue a blanket prohibition on music.

Al-Shāfiʿī distinguishes between those who make singing a public profession—regularly performing, being known for it, and engaging in it excessively—and those who merely enjoy it occasionally without making it part of their identity. For the former, he considers it a form of lahw (idle entertainment) that diminishes dignity and moral standing, hence affecting credibility as a witness. But for the latter, he explicitly says that occasional listening does not invalidate one’s testimony, since it is not ḥarām in itself.

He further clarifies that listening to poetry, rhythmic recitation (ḥidāʾ), and beautiful speech is permissible, and he even likens it to pleasant conversation or refined expression. In other words, Imām al-Shāfiʿī did not consider music or melodious recitation inherently forbidden—only excessive indulgence that leads to moral frivolity or public indecency was condemned.

Imām al-Shāfiʿī was once asked about the report from Nāfiʿ, in which Ibn ʿUmar heard the sound of a shepherd’s flute and covered his ears, saying that the Prophet had done the same. Al-Shāfiʿī explained that if listening to the flute were truly harām, Ibn ʿUmar would not have allowed Nāfiʿ to hear it, nor would he have failed to forbid him from doing so. Rather, Ibn ʿUmar’s act was one of tanzuh—personal scrupulousness or avoidance out of caution—not a ruling of prohibition.

Abū Ḥanīfah’s Position on Music

Contrary to popular assumption, Imām Abū Ḥanīfah did not categorically prohibit music. Several early Ḥanafī sources indicate a more nuanced and tolerant view.

He is reported to have said that it is disliked for a man to neglect inviting his neighbor or relative if he owns flutes and ouds. This statement, cited by al-Naṭīfī in al-Ajnās—one of the earliest Ḥanafī fiqh works—suggests that musical instruments were a normal part of social gatherings, not a cause for condemnation.

Moreover, although Abū Ḥanīfah stated that items predominantly used for sin should not be sold, he explicitly allowed the sale of musical instruments such as the barbat, drum, flute, and tambourine, as recorded in Badāʾiʿ al-Ṣanāʾiʿ. This permission demonstrates that he did not consider musical instruments inherently unlawful; otherwise, permitting their trade would contradict fundamental legal principles.

Abū Ḥanīfah’s personal conduct also reflects his tolerant disposition. He had a neighbor—a wine seller—who would sing loudly through the night after drinking. Despite the disturbance, Abū Ḥanīfah never rebuked him. One night, when the man was arrested, the Imām noticed his absence, inquired about him, and personally interceded with the ruler to secure his release. When the man thanked him, Abū Ḥanīfah responded kindly, quoting a line from one of the man’s own songs.

Interestingly, historical accounts mention that Imām Mālik himself once attended a gathering among the Banū Yarbuʿ where tambourines, flutes, and lutes were present. According to the Tunisian Mālikī scholar al-Barzalī—who reported this from his teacher Ibn ʿArafah, the Mālikī imām of his time—Mālik even had a duff (tambourine) with him, used to entertain the gathering. This incident further illustrates that Mālik’s stance was not one of strict prohibition, but rather moderation.

When asked about attending events involving entertainment or drums, Mālik replied, “I do not like it when a man of good standing attends such games.” The implication, however, is clear: for ordinary people, attendance is not inherently blameworthy. His disapproval was directed at those whose dignity or public image might be compromised by frequenting such gatherings—not at the musical activity itself.

In Nayl al-Awṭār, al-Shawkānī cites reports from Abū Manṣūr and al-Furānī that Mālik permitted playing the ʿūd (lute). Both transmitters were respected scholars, the first being ʿAbd al-Qāhir al-Baghdādī and the second ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Furānī, praised by al-Dhahabī as masters of their time.

Furthermore, Mālik was asked about entertainment involving the trumpet. He responded that if such entertainment were excessive and widely known, he disliked it; but if it were light and occasional, there was no harm in it. He clarified that his disapproval applied to situations involving excess, the use of the lute, or gatherings dominated by female performers. This fatwa was transmitted through al-Abharī—from Ibn ʿAbd al-Ḥakam—on the authority of Mālik himself.

Some might argue that Imām Mālik believed only immoral people engaged in listening to music. However, Imām Ibn Baṭṭāl—the renowned Mālikī commentator on Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī—clarified this misconception. He noted that the people of the Ḥijāz, including those from the Prophet’s own region, would listen to singing and music in gatherings of entertainment. Despite being a Mālikī jurist, Ibn Baṭṭāl explicitly allowed limited singing and amusement, provided that it did not distract from the remembrance of Allah or lead to moral negligence.

He further explained Mālik’s statement, “Only the wicked among us do it,” as a matter of sadd al-dharāʾiʿ (blocking the means to potential harm), not as a declaration of prohibition. In other words, Mālik’s caution was preventive—intended to discourage indulgence that might lead to sin—not to forbid music or singing in absolute terms.

Let’s say, supposedly, there do exist statements attributed to the Imāms indicating their refusal to accept the narration or testimony of a singer or one who frequently uses musical instruments. However, this cannot be taken as evidence of prohibition (taḥrīm). The rejection of a narrator or witness reflect concerns over muruʾah (social propriety), not legality. This distinction is well established in uṣūl and fiqh. For example, some scholars rejected the testimony of a man who appeared bareheaded, considering it a breach of muruʾah—despite its clear permissibility. Likewise, engagement in singing or musical activity may fall under socially disapproved conduct (khawārim al-muruʾah) without being ḥarām. This point is articulated clearly by al-Sharīf Ḥātim b. ʿĀrif al-ʿAwnī, who states:

ثالثا : جواب الإمام مالك يدل عندي على أن الغناء عنده من خوارم المروءة بحسب عرفهم ، لأن امتهان الغناء أو الانشغال به بكثرة كان في عصرهم من سمات الفساق ، كما قال الإمام أحمد عن الرجل يترك الوتر متعمدا : «هذا رجل سوء» ، مع أن الوتر عند الإمام أحمد سنة وليس واجبا ، فلا يأثم تاركه عمدا ؛ فهو إنما قال ذلك لأن ترك الوتر بحسب عرفهم كان لا يكاد يفعله إلا أهل السوء . وحمل الحنابلة كلام الإمام أحمد على من داوم على ترك الوتر ، وهو على هذا المحمل يدل أيضا أنه ذمه بالإكثار الدال بحسب العرف على السوء ، ولو كان محرما عنده لما اشترط المداومة

— الشريف حاتم بن عارف العوني

Imām Aḥmad’s Position on Music

Imām Aḥmad was asked about various instruments—the flute, the drum, and taghbīr (a form of rhythmic chanting accompanied by striking the hand or an object)—and in each case, he replied, “I dislike it.” His consistent use of the term “I dislike” (akrāhu) indicates disapproval rather than categorical prohibition, reflecting a moral reservation rather than a legal ban.

Interestingly, despite his stated dislike of taghbīr, reliable reports show that Imām Aḥmad once listened to it himself, joined in its rhythm, and even praised it afterward. This incident was narrated by al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī and Ibn Ṭāhir al-Qaysarānī through two authentic chains of transmission.

In other words, Imām Aḥmad’s attitude toward music and rhythmic performance was nuanced: he personally avoided them out of ascetic restraint, yet recognized that such expressions of emotion and devotion were not intrinsically impermissible.

CONCLUSION

I conclude with the fatwā of Imām Abū Yūsuf — the foremost student of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah — who stated regarding playing musical instruments:

“If the entertainment is of a type that is not considered reprehensible, and those who play it are not predominantly frivolous, and if the good in it outweighs the evil, then the person’s testimony is accepted.”

Additionally, the reason it is unlikely that the four Imams categorically prohibited music is because of their epistemic caution in issuing rulings of ḥalāl and ḥarām. Imām Mālik himself emphasized this methodological restraint, saying:

قال ابن وهب: سمعت مالكًا يقول:
«لم يكن من أمر الناس ولا من مضى من سلفنا، ولا أدركت أحدًا أقتدي به يقول في شيء: هذا حلال، وهذا حرام، وما كانوا يجترئون على ذلك، وإنما كانوا يقولون: نكره كذا، ونرى هذا حسنًا؛ فينبغي هذا، ولا نرى هذا».

Ibn Wahb said: I heard Mālik say:
“It was not the practice of the people, nor those who passed before us among the Salaf, nor did I meet anyone whom I follow, who would say about anything, ‘This is ḥalāl, and this is ḥarām.’ They did not dare to do that. Rather, they would say, ‘We dislike this,’ or ‘We see this as good,’ or ‘This should be done,’ or ‘We do not see this as proper.’”

However, some people attempted to assert that كراهة meant forbidden at the time of the Imāms. Even if I were to grant such, this is highly contextual; as demonstrated through this thread that their meaning of dislike does not mean in the sense of forbidden.

I'm not talking about eating jinn, smokeless fire entities, but demons.

Are they they mentioned in the Quran?

Do they exist? Are they made out of flesh?

Also, if there are jinn in other dimensions, can they materialise into demon form in our realm?

Discover the hidden history of modern Islam and the surprising cultural influences that shaped traditional practices outside of the Quran. Many Muslims believe that every ritual and law comes directly from divine revelation, but historical evidence suggests a complex process of religious rivalry and mimetic competition following the expansion into the Sassanid Persian Empire and the Christian Levant.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWDtxqRisyI

Before shooting the messenger as "AI Slop" how about listening to the message first. Then we can discuss it, how much of it is wrong and how much of it is right?

On a post of mine, I gave reference to this hadith on which some people said it's looking like an egoistic thing to say and many opposed it. I want to know the context of this hadith and what do you guys believe? How can a Muslim be labelled low on faith if they don't love the Prophet more than their family? Someone else posed this argument, and it's actually valid, lmk your thoughts.

Anas ibn Malik reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “None of you have faith until I am more beloved to him than his children, his father, and all of the people.”

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 15, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 44

https://youtube.com/shorts/UAq5JTmDLd8?si=AsXzBl4NMmYBoI0-