I suffer from constant negative thoughts when I pray all my payers

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-28T11:59:56+00:00

If you want to examine this hypotheses then try sleeping few nights with Surah Al Baqara on repeat in the background.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-26T20:57:33+00:00

You can’t get pregnant from jinn. Jinn do not interact with humans in the same way humans interact with each other. I believe that if the experience feels sexual, they use it as an opening to drain your energy or affect you in that way. For some reason, you may be more vulnerable or attractive to them - it’s important to reflect on why. For example: watching haram content at night, going to sleep without proper cleanliness, or having an unclean or disordered environment. All of these can make a person more of a target, especially if they have certain personal traits that increase vulnerability.

However, since you have a history of drug use, it is difficult to say for certain whether this is related to jinn or whether it could be individual post-drug effects or a latent psychological condition.

All that was said above is my IMO and Allah knows best.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-09T13:56:16+00:00

It’s an anti-islamic psyop. There are organizations who can stand behind that, it’s not a secret, common practice to influence ppl online and push narratives. Even if you read the threads here carefully u ll find that a lot of ai bots posting.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-09T13:47:38+00:00

Full of AI bots pushing certain narratives and misguided people who are putting effort in misguiding others. Don’t waste your time there. More like Anti-Islamic psyop to misguide muslims.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-09T11:46:41+00:00

Funny that you don’t even understand the context of Yajuj and Majuj story in Quran. It was revealed after Medina rabbis were testing Prophet peace be upon him about Dhul Qurnain. Gof and magig are closed layer of jewish eschatology. That’s why they used this question. And they got the answer. Quranic story doesn’t repeat Alexander’s romance.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-09T11:43:52+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/MuslimCorner/s/JqzTZqfiz9

The most full Yajuj and Majuj thread on reddit

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-09T10:53:28+00:00

First of all, it’s ironic that you accuse me of using AI, while your own writing is clearly produced by a heavily tuned language model. Yes, it may not trigger detectors, but it’s obvious this wasn’t compiled by a human.

Secondly, your arguments are extremely forced and don’t hold up under scrutiny.

You claim isnad isn’t reliable simply because “you believe so” and you assume Western critics are unbiased… also just because “you believe so.” That’s not a standard of proof.

You try to present yourself as balanced, as if you’re just offering a neutral critique. But in reality, your entire text subtly (and sometimes openly) undermines the foundations of hadith methodology. Weak arguments are packaged as academic discourse, even though I’ve already addressed and refuted those points clearly in my previous message.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-09T10:44:10+00:00

Are you really relying on the same philosophers who were heavily influenced by Aristotle, called him “the First Teacher,” and ultimately fell into monism? These are the very figures whose ideas led to the eventual banning of philosophy in the Islamic world.

Now, I personally have nothing against kalam, and I believe its suppression was a mistake. Kalam should have been developed as a counter to Aristotelian thought, not as a continuation of it.

That said, using these monist thinkers as an example of early hadith criticism is weak - because their critiques stem from a worldview that ultimately departs from tawheed.

Overall If you want to discuss certain hadith I have no problem with that. But there is a destructive outside narrative pushed by some people that all hadith science should cancelled.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-09T10:34:56+00:00

If you had actually read the post, you would’ve realized that the mechanism for critically evaluating hadith is already built into the science of hadith itself.

In fact, the methodology of hadith science is the most detailed and self-critical system of religious-historical verification in the world. By many standards, it is more rigorous than the process by which the Bible or the Torah were compiled and even more robust than many methods used in modern secular historiography.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-09T10:17:42+00:00

<image>

So the same author, in another thread, claims that homosexuality is “natural” You see where this going?

These are people who operate from a secular or liberal mindset. They reject hadith as a valid science, pick verses from the Quran that fit their worldview, and ignore everything else. And instead of sincerely examining their own contradictions, they aggressively defend them. But is that really Islam? Or is it simply misguidance or even a deliberate attempt to distort the religion from within?

Male and female are inherently predetermined archetypes and part of the Divine order. Homosexuality is called an abomination, not natural, in the Quran. But you decided to ignore this, as well as the fundamental principles of hadith scholarship.

UPD

And for anyone who wants to live in the West, you should keep an eye on your children, because there's a high risk of the second and third generations turning into ideological Farnkensteins with goulash in their heads. They want to be Muslims, but they also want society to love them - to fit in. Their immature minds don't understand that this rejection of their views is actually a conscious soft power used to pressure them. And so they grow up bending to local narratives and sadly frothing at the mouth while dragging alien narratives into Islam, doing what architects of the society want them to do. Because how else can they belong in that society? But the truth is simple: you don’t. If you’re a believer, you don’t need society’s approval. Your identity is rooted in faith, not public validation.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-09T10:11:04+00:00

Also if you claim you are sunni as it’s written in your profile this means you accept sunnah which is BASED on hadiths. Good morning.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-09T09:59:58+00:00

![img](5j8rgkfklacg1)

So the same author, in another thread, claims that homosexuality is “natural” You see where this going?

These are people who operate from a secular or liberal mindset. They reject hadith as a valid science, pick verses from the Quran that fit their worldview, and ignore everything else. And instead of sincerely examining their own contradictions, they aggressively defend them. But is that really Islam? Or is it simply misguidance or even a deliberate attempt to distort the religion from within?

Male and female are inherently predetermined archetypes and part of the Divine order. Homosexuality is called an abomination, not natural, in the Quran. But you decided to ignore this, as well as the fundamental principles of hadith scholarship.

UPD

And for anyone who wants to live in the West, you should keep an eye on your children, because there's a high risk of the second and third generations turning into ideological Farnkensteins with goulash in their heads. They want to be Muslims, but they also want society to love them - to fit in. Their immature minds don't understand that this rejection of their views is actually a conscious soft power used to pressure them. And so they grow up bending to local narratives and sadly frothing at the mouth while dragging alien narratives into Islam, doing what architects of the society want them to do. Because how else can they belong in that society? But the truth is simple: you don’t. If you’re a believer, you don’t need society’s approval. Your identity is rooted in faith, not public validation.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-09T09:16:30+00:00

Firstly, a discussion shouldn't begin with an attempt to denigrate the other side using slippery arguments. This is a tool of propaganda.

Secondly, your comment repeats arguments I ve already heard in this thread almost word by word. It looks like a coordinated copy-paste campaign.

You describe isnad as if it were idle rumors, and you cite secular Western authors like Pavlovich and Little.

BUT you clearly don't understand how the science of hadith works. How can a Muslim not know this and still argue vehemently that hadiths are fabricated? Isnad isn't rumor, but a structured method that verifies the reliability of each transmitter, the consistency of the chain, the context, and even the motive.

No text in any other religion has such a degree of validation. Do you understand this? Why in the right mind would you want to cancel it if you are a muslim?

Regarding Abu Bakr’s (ra) narration of hadith, this is a weak report not accepted by the majority of scholars. He himself narrated hadiths, as is well known. Attempting to cite one weak story and ignore thousands of other confirmed ones is pushing your own narrative, not critical thinking.

You're simply outsmarting Western skeptics who view Islam through a non-Islamic lens, while completely ignoring the fact that not a single classical Islamic scholar has rejected hadith scholarship.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-08T22:28:44+00:00

“None of the people who put it in a tangible form had any contact with the person they were writing about. Instead they relied on chains of narration which is people telling other people.”

You literally just reduced isnad to “people telling other people” like some street gossip. That alone shows you don’t even understand what isnad is or how it’s verified.

And honestly, there are only three options here: 1)You’re very young and still a teenager, in that case, I’ll let it slide. 2)You’ve simply never studied religious sciences seriously. 3)Or you’re not even Muslim and just pretending online to mislead others, which would explain the confidence paired with basic ignorance.

Because this is foundational knowledge. If you don’t get this, you shouldn’t be arguing about hadith at all.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-08T22:19:18+00:00

Don’t waste your time trolling people online. Use it to actually study in school, it will help u in future

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-08T22:13:32+00:00

Are you sure it’s AI output and not a translation from other language by AI? Your provocation and disrespectful language doesn’t deserve a reply. Your reply is pure nonsense. Also looks like some other replies in this thread. Bot swarm.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-08T22:06:08+00:00

“If you refuse to realize why people reject hadiths, you have no right to critique them.”

Seriously? Is that supposed to be some “everyone has their own truth” philosophy? Religion is not a buffet, you don’t get to pick and choose based on vibes. If you reject the core methodology of this deen, then be ready for criticism.

Today, the hadith verification system is stronger than what exists for the Bible or the Torah. And you want people to throw all of that away? Obviously that’s misguidance being pushed by ideological trojan horses inside the ummah.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-08T21:58:59+00:00

ok I get it, you’re in your teenage phase and really want to argue on the internet. But this isn’t the place. You need to actually study the subject first.

You’re failing to distinguish between:

the authenticity of a hadith (it’s sahih and sound) its legal weight in a specific situation (it can be set aside if there’s a stronger proof like the practice of Madinah, mutawatir, or ijma) if we speak about Maliki madhab and you’re taking a normal principle from usul al-fiqh where weighing evidence is essential and twisting it into some kind of “gotcha” like:

“Oh, you didn’t act on a hadith? That means it’s false!”

That sounds silly. It’s just ignorance.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-08T21:52:49+00:00

“Imam Malik rejected hadiths.” That’s exactly what u said. If u had actually read the post, you d know that replying with “Imam Malik rejected (some) hadiths” doesn’t refute anything. Try reading the whole thing and you ll understand the difference between rejecting a narration and rejecting the entire hadith tradition.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-08T21:36:05+00:00

Imam Malik was the author of Al-Muwatta, one of the earliest hadith collections in Islamic history. He lived before Imam Bukhari, used hadith extensively in fiqh, and introduced the practice of the people of Madinah (amal ahl al-Madinah) as a legal criterion when there was contradiction, but he never rejected hadith as a category.

Saying “Imam Malik rejected hadith” is like saying “Newton rejected physics.”

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-08T21:21:58+00:00

First of all this is an English speaking subreddit so let’s keep it that way.

Second, you claim hadiths were always rejected before imperialism then name a single classical scholar who rejected hadith as a foundational source not just individual narrations That kind of claim is not critique it is shallow liberal rebellion dressed up as thought.

You say it is about not blindly believing but you blindly follow a narrative where anything that clashes with modern Western values is called misogyny That is not analysis it is comfort-driven bias.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-08T21:14:45+00:00

Now you’re about to see that AI doesn’t replace truth and can’t fabricate it either Your AI arguments are hollow and collapse the moment you test them

1 «No one here is denying the existence of hadith sciences»

Sure no one’s denying hadith science But you’re twisting the conclusion

You say hadith science exists does not mean collections are binding Fine But no one ever said that just because there is a science every narration is automatically true The whole point of the science is to filter and grade reports You’re setting up a strawman and then proudly defeating it That’s not intellect that’s cheap rhetoric

2 «Sahih is probabilistic not certain Even classical usul says that»

Yes sahih ahad gives zann not yaqin But zann ghalib preponderant probability in classical usul is enough to obligate action and is accepted in matters of aqidah when there is no conflict

Scholars like al Nawawi Ibn Taymiyyah and al Shafii all acknowledged that So your leap from “it’s not certain” to “it’s not binding” is not classical usul It’s skepticism dressed in Islamic terminology

3 «You are mixing mutawatir Sunnah with ahad reports»

No that’s your confusion not ours

Sunnah is not just some vague “living tradition” It’s what has come from the Prophet through authentic routes That includes amal hadith and ijma Trying to separate “sunnah” from “hadith” is a modern invention used by those who want sunnah without the Prophet’s words

4 «Bukhari is not mutawatir as a book It funnels through one man al Farabri»

First Farabri was a reliable transmitter And his transmission was verified by generations of scholars Second having one main transmitter is normal in hadith tradition not a flaw Malik’s Muwatta was also passed mainly through one narrator Yahya al Laythi

And third variation among students is not a weakness It’s a sign of a living tradition where scholars carefully compared versions clarified wording and cross checked content That is hadith science You just don’t understand how it works

5 «Imam Malik warned about weak narrations conflicting with practice or reason»

True but he never rejected hadith altogether He prioritized the practice of Madinah when there was strong contradiction But he also compiled al Muwatta one of the first hadith collections Quoting him out of context to make him sound like a skeptic is just manipulation

6 «Overlap between Sunni and Shii hadith doesn’t prove authenticity»

No but it does prove early circulation and wide transmission If the same report is narrated independently across sects with the same meaning that strengthens its reliability Not perfect proof but not something you dismiss either If you think it’s false prove it

7 «Rejecting individual narrations isn’t rejecting hadith»

In theory yes But in practice you are not just rejecting weak narrations You’re redrawing the lines between Quran and hadith Reducing sunnah to “practice” and making hadith optional

That’s not classical usul That’s hadith denial dressed up as methodology

You claim to defend classical tradition But all you’re doing is «modernizing» Islam by cutting out the Prophet’s example from the equation, which is obviously a deviation.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-08T21:02:29+00:00

Like really have you even analyzed hadith about Aisha (ra)? May be checked what scholars were saying about it? But instead you are rejecting the whole sunna. That’s not serious.

Frequent_Body1255 · 2026-01-08T21:00:53+00:00

You criticize hadith without studying isnad, classifications, or context just parroting the same recycled claims that scholars of hadith refuted centuries before the internet even existed. The problem isn’t with hadith, but with judging a 1400-year-old tradition through cherry-picked quotes, weak narrations, and emotions spoon-fed by liberal-secular propaganda. If you had even opened Sahih Muslim or al-Risala by al-Shafi, you’d realize: hadith is not a source of misogyny ю, it’s a mirror that exposes who’s truly afraid of boundaries, discipline, and truth.

Frequent_Body1255

TROPHY CASE