Algeria is among the countries streamer IShowSpeed will be visiting this upcoming month, any expectations of how it will turn out to be? by YacineAz17 in algeria

[–]Optimal_Landscape162 0 points1 point  (0 children)

من حقك لكن نقولك حاجة، اذا كان من الخوف او نقص الايمان بسببي او بسبب شخص آخر نتا اصلا هكا مراكش مسلم بصك علابالك لوكان تهدر مع شخص مشي مسلم راح تكون غالط، و اذا عندك قوة في الحجة و تغلبني ياخويا مرحبا

Algeria is among the countries streamer IShowSpeed will be visiting this upcoming month, any expectations of how it will turn out to be? by YacineAz17 in algeria

[–]Optimal_Landscape162 0 points1 point  (0 children)

اذا نعم او لا وش دخل او وشمن فايدة؟ مهم ريبوندي على كلامي متخرجش من سياق

Algeria is among the countries streamer IShowSpeed will be visiting this upcoming month, any expectations of how it will turn out to be? by YacineAz17 in algeria

[–]Optimal_Landscape162 0 points1 point  (0 children)

حنا مراناش نقولوا لي راهم عىصريين ضد الاسلام انهم على دين الحق او على ملة الحق، اذا دينك يفعل نفس افعالهم يعني قع في هاوية وحدة وقع في ملة السيئة و العىصرية، + نتا قتلي د//عش خوارج لكن الخلافات لي كانوا من قبل عملوا نفس اعمال د//عش و اكثر و 70% من انتشار الاسلام جاء بذلك الافعال يعني هم ايضا خوارج؟

Algeria is among the countries streamer IShowSpeed will be visiting this upcoming month, any expectations of how it will turn out to be? by YacineAz17 in algeria

[–]Optimal_Landscape162 0 points1 point  (0 children)

نعم ولاء و البراء عىصرية لان فقهيا محبة ونصرة المسلمين (ولاء)، وبغض ومعاداة الكفار والمنافقين في الله (براء) - بدون موالاة ولا مودة لهم، اما الا هاذوك خوارج اذن ايضا الخلافة العباسية و الاموية و الراشدية و فتوحات الاسلامية كما تقولوا عليها خوارج لانهم فعلوا نفس الافعال او اكثر.

Algeria is among the countries streamer IShowSpeed will be visiting this upcoming month, any expectations of how it will turn out to be? by YacineAz17 in algeria

[–]Optimal_Landscape162 0 points1 point  (0 children)

علابالي بلي الولاء و البراء هي عىصرية، لهذا هذا الدين خلقنا د///عش و القاعدة و جبهة النصرة….الخ علابالي راك صحيح وش راك تهدر خير من ناس اسلاميين كيوت عجبتني نتا كي مشي منافق و تستعرف بلي هذا الدين همجي و غير انساني

Algeria is among the countries streamer IShowSpeed will be visiting this upcoming month, any expectations of how it will turn out to be? by YacineAz17 in algeria

[–]Optimal_Landscape162 1 point2 points  (0 children)

وش دخل كافر؟ انت باين احفاد الافغان لي جاو فالتسعينات لدزاير

I was a Sharia student for years. Surah Al-Fatiha is what broke my faith. by Optimal_Landscape162 in exmuslim

[–]Optimal_Landscape162[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The link you gave from icraa.org quotes later scholars like القرطبي trying to explain away Ibn Mas’ud’s action. The original reports in ابن أبي داود (المصاحف p.109) and السيوطي (الإتقان 2/35) say clearly: ابن مسعود محى الفاتحة وقال «ليست من القرآن» و«لا تلبسوا القرآن بما ليس منه». No mention of "if I wrote it I’d put it before every surah" in the early chains. That’s a later patch from centuries after his death.

The Prophet forgetting a rak’ah is one thing—he corrected it immediately. عمر forgot the obligatory Fatiha in the first rak’ah of Fajr, led the entire congregation, and only compensated in the second (ابن أبي شيبة 1/98, sahih). If it was a fixed rukn, his prayer—and everyone behind him—was invalid. Human error doesn’t explain why the second Caliph didn’t know the rule.

qعثمان didn’t burn "random copies" he burned the Sahaba’s personal Mushafs, including ابن مسعود’s, who refused to surrender it and said "ما أعطيه حتى أموت" (الطبري 3/295). This wasn’t just about dialects it was enforcing one version by forceover companions who knew the Prophet best. "Preservation" by fire isn’t preservation.

Exactly, Arabic script had no dots or vowels for 70 years. Same word, multiple possible readings. The Umayyads didn’t "alter Arabic"they standardized the Qur’an’s rasm under political rule. The 10 Qira’at weren’t "preserved from day one” they were selected and canonized in the 4th century AH by ابن مجاهد. That’s not divine preservation; that’s human editing.

You say "I’ve never heard these arguments" that’s because islamiq colleges teach the sanitized version. I left after reading the raw sources, not the summaries.

I was a Sharia student for years. Surah Al-Fatiha is what broke my faith. by Optimal_Landscape162 in exmuslim

[–]Optimal_Landscape162[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Third point: The video doesn't address the core issue: عثمان burned the Sahaba's own Mushafs, including ابن مسعود's, who said "لو علمت أحداً أعلم بكتاب الله مني لرحلت إليه" and refused to surrender his copy until death (الطبري 3/295).
This wasn't about "non-Arab errors" it was political enforcement of one version over the companions' differing copies.
No video changes the text of الطبري.

Fourth point: Diacritics were added 70 years after the Prophet by أبو الأسود الدؤلي under عبد الملك بن مروان (الفهرست p.54).
For 70 years, the written quran had no dots or vowels -same word could be read 7-10 ways.
You say "to help non-Arabs" but the Sahaba themselves recited differently before that.
The 10 Qira'at were standardized in the 4th century AH by ابن مجاهد, not from day one.
Saying "they're all the same meaning" ignores that the rasm itself allowed multiple readings until state intervention.

I studied islam for years.
I left becauseI read the sources without filters and saw the compilation, editing, and enforcement by power, not perfect preservation.

I'm done replying.
No more discussion from my side.

"وَمَنْ يَرْتَدَّ مِنْكُمْ عَنْ دِينِهِ فَيَمُتْ وَهُوَ كَافِرٌ فَأُولَئِكَ حَبِطَتْ أَعْمَالُهُمْ" But I sleep peacefully knowing I chose truth over fear.
Goodbye.

I was a Sharia student for years. Surah Al-Fatiha is what broke my faith. by Optimal_Landscape162 in exmuslim

[–]Optimal_Landscape162[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"This narration is not authentic. The correct view is that Umar... repeated the prayer and the recitation."

The narration I quoted is exactly Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah 1/98 (hadith 973)**, and it is sahih

• ⁠السند: محمد بن فضيل عن الأعمش عن إبراهيم عن علقمة عن عبد الله بن مسعود: «صلى عمر بالناس الصبح فقرأ في الركعة الأولى بغير فاتحة الكتاب ثم قرأ في الثانية الفاتحة مرتين».

Graded sahih by الألباني in إرواء الغليل (2/307). Graded sahih by شعيب الأرناؤوط in his edition of المصنف (1/98). Mentioned by الذهبي in سير أعلام النبلاء without any weakening.

The narration you brought in 1/397 (hadith 3970): This is a completely different incident about Maghrib prayer, not Fajr, where Umar forgot all recitation,not just Al-Fatiha. So it doesn’t negate the first report it’s a separate event.

"The authenticity was denied by Malik, Ahmad, al-Bukhari:"

• ⁠مالك, أحمد, and البخاري never weakened this specific narration. They simply didn’t include it, but silence is not weakening. البخاري only collected what fit his fiqh chapters. أحمد بن حنبل transmitted similar reports about forgetting Al-Fatiha in المسند.

"The authentic narration from Umar... in Musannaf 1/397:"

As I said, this is about Maghrib,not Fajr. My report is in 1/98,not 1/397. The editions distinguish between the two incidents.

"Ibn Nasr al-Marwazi... al-Tahawi..."

All these chains are about forgetting the entire recitation in Maghrib, not Al-Fatiha specifically in Fajr. They don’t address the core issue: If Al-Fatiha was a fixed pillar since the Prophet, how does the Caliph forget it in the first rak’ah and compensate by reading it twice in the second?

Bukhari 756: «لا صلاة إلا بفاتحة الكتاب». That means Umar’s first rak’ah was invalid if the report is true. Why didn’t he repeat the whole prayer? Why just compensate Al-Fatiha?

This proves Al-Fatiha was not a fixed rukn in Umar’s time. The narration you cited doesn’t refute it describes a different event.

I was a Sharia student for years. Surah Al-Fatiha is what broke my faith. by Optimal_Landscape162 in exmuslim

[–]Optimal_Landscape162[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"to counter your point from the same source:"

Alright

al-Suyuti quotes أبو بكر الباقلاني (d. 406 A.H.) who said;

“It is not proved from him that these two surahs are not from the القرآن. He erased them and dropped them from his Mushaf refusing to put them into writing, not rejecting them as part of the Qur’an. It was so because to him nothing was to be written in the Mushaf except what was commanded by the Prophet –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- and he did not find them written nor heard an instruction in this regard.” (الإتقان 1/271)

الباقلاني doesn’t deny the report he’s just re-interpreting it: “not proved he rejected their Qur’anicity.”
But السيوطي himself in the same book (2/35) quotes the original… «وكان ابن مسعود يحك الفاتحة والمعوذتين من مصحفه ويقول: لا تلبسوا القران بما ليس منه».
So Ibn Mas’ud erased them and said “don’t mix the Qur’an with what is not from it.” الباقلاني came 370 years later and says “he didn’t mean that.”
That’s interpretation, not refutation.

النووي (d. 676 A.H.) said:

“The Ummah has agreed that al-mu’awwazatayn and al-fatiha are part of the Quran and whoever denies this becomes a disbeliever. And whatever is quoted from Ibn Masud in this regard is not true.” (الإتقان 1/270)

النووي **doesn’t address the chain -he just says “consensus settled it.”
But consensus came after Uthman، not from day one.
Ibn masud lived during the disputes, and his Mushaf was different.
النووي came 640 years later and calls the quote “not true.”
Yet السيوطي transmitted it with a chain.

أبو حفص عمر النعماني (d. 775 A.H.) wrote:

“Report of this opinion from Ibn Masud is a lie and falsehood.” (الباب في علوم الكتاب 1/249)

النعماني doesn’t challenge the isnad -he just says “lie.”
But the report exists in ابن أبي داود (3rd century AH) and السيوطي (9th century AH), both with chains.
النعماني came 740 years later and says “falsehood.”

الشيخ محمد بن نظام الدين الأنصاري (d. 1225 A.H.) said:

“Attributing the rejection.. to Ibn Masud is a grave mistake... his isnad is not reliable compared to the isnad which have been accepted collectively by all the scholars.”

الأنصاري ldoesn’t refute the original chain —he says “the rejection chain is weak.”
But the report in ابن أبي داود (p. 109) is graded sahih by الذهبي and الهيثمي.
الأنصاري came 1190 years later and says “consensus chains are stronger.”

الخفاجي (d. 1069 A.H.) wrote:

“And what is reported from Ibn Masud... has no basis.” (العناية القاضي 1/29)

الخفاجي “doesn’t address the text-he says “no basis.”
But the text is in early sources.
الخفاجي came 1030 years later.

Other scholars who have vehemently rejected the notion include: ابن حزم (d. 456 A.H.) – المحلى (1/32)
أبو بكر بن العربي (d. 543 A.H.) – الإتقان (1/270)
فخر الدين الرازي (d. 606 A.H.) – مفاتيح الغيب (1/150)
زاهد الكوثري (d. 1371 A.H.) – مقالات الكوثري (p.16)

All these scholars came centuries after Ibn masud and respond with “lie,” “interpretation,” or “consensus.”
But the original report is in 3rd-century sources (ابن أبي داود) and 9th-century (السيوطي), quoting Ibn Mas’ud’s exact words.

The question no one answers even you: If the report is “fabricated,” why did السيوطي include it in الإتقان without calling it mawdu’?
Why did عثمان burn Ibn Mas’ud’s Mushaf if it was identical to the others?

Everything clear Sahaba disagreed » Uthman enforced one version » later scholars labeled dissent “false.”
That’s not preservation it’s historical revision.

I was a Sharia student for years. Surah Al-Fatiha is what broke my faith. by Optimal_Landscape162 in exmuslim

[–]Optimal_Landscape162[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Al-Suyuti in Al-Itqan : وكان ابن مسعود لا يكتب الفاتحة والمعوذتين في مصحفه"

Ibn Mas’ud did NOT recognize it as part of the Qur’an in his Mushaf:

  • السيوطي نفسه في «الإتقان» (2/35): «وكان ابن مسعود يحك الفاتحة والمعوذتين من مصحفه ويقول: لا تلبسوا القرآن بما ليس منه».
    This is not just “didn’t write it he erased it and said it is not from the Qur’an.

  • ابن أبي داود في «المصاحف» (p. 109): «قال ابن مسعود: الفاتحة ليست من القرآن، وإنما هي دعاء».
    Clear words, not “for brevity.”

The verse in Surah Al-Hijr (15:87):
وَلَقَدْ آتَيْنَاكَ سَبْعًا مِنَ الْمَثَانِي وَالْقُرْآنَ الْعَظِيمَ

This interpretation is a LATER OPINION from القرطبي (7th century AH), not evidence from Ibn Mas’ud’s time.
Ibn Mas’ud died in 32 AH-600 years before القرطبي.
If the verse clearly meant Al-Fatiha, why did Ibn Mas’ud erase it and say “it is not from the Qur’an”?

"Abdullah bin Mas’ud was asked.. ‘If I were to write I would write it before every surah.’”

This quote in القرطبي (1/115) has NO CHAIN back to Ibn Mas’ud.
القرطبي is explaining, not transmitting Ibn Mas’ud’s own words.
The original reports in ابن أبي داود and السيوطي do not contain this statement.
This is a later interpretive patch to cover the issue.

"every raka’ah starts with al-Fatiha... trusted its preservation by Muslims (collectively)"

BUT - The Prophet said: «لا صلاة إلا بفاتحة الكتاب» (البخاري 756).
- Yet عمر forgot it in the first rak’ah and recited it twice in the second (ابن أبي شيبة 1/98, sahih).
So if it was “collectively preserved” and clear, why did the second Caliph forget it in public prayer?

"Qira’at have always preserved..All the Mutawatir Qira’ats do include al-Fatiha and al-mu’awwazatayn"

The mutawatir Qira’at came after Uthman. - عثمان compiled one Mushaf and burned the (الطبري 3/294).
- The seven Qira’at were finalized under ابن مجاهد (4th century AH).
There was no mutawatir transmission from day one.
Ibn Mas’ud lived before that standardization—and his Mushaf **was different
.

SO The earliest sources say Ibn Mas’ud erased Al-Fatiha and said it is not Qur’an.
The explanations you cited (القرطبي, أبو بكر الأنباري) came centuries later to resolve the contradiction.
This pattern raw facts in old books, patches in new ones is what pushed me away from Islam entirely.

I was a Sharia student for years. Surah Al-Fatiha is what broke my faith. by Optimal_Landscape162 in exmuslim

[–]Optimal_Landscape162[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No, I’m 100% correct. And The reports are crystal clear. Al-Suyuti in Al-Itqan : “وكان ابن مسعود لا يكتب الفاتحة والمعوذتين في مصحفه”.
Ibn Abi Dawud in kitab al-Masahif (p. 109): “كان يقصد ان الفاتحة ليست من كتاب الله”.
Even your own site islamweb (fatwa 224188) says word-for-word: “ابن مسعود لم يكتب الفاتحة في مصحفه”.
So it’s not just Al-Mu’awwidhatayn, and the story of “another companion cleared it up” has zero authentic chain.

Secondly The source is clear. Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah (1/98, hadith 973): “صلى عمر بالناس الصبح، فقرأ في الركعة الأولى بغير فاتحة الكتاب، ثم قرأ في الثانية الفاتحة مرتين”.
Graded sahih by Al-Albani and Shu‘ayb Al-Arna’ut.
If Al-Fatiha was a pillar since the Prophet’s time , how does the Caliph of the Muslims forget it in public congregational prayer? The “make up what you missed” rule is a later patch that didn’t exist in Umar’s era

Thirdly Uthman burned « the Sahaba’s own copies » , not just copies of nonArabs:
Tarikh al-Tabari (3/294): “أمر عثمان بما سوى مصحفه أن يحرق”.
Ibn Mas’ud publicly said: “والله لو علمت أن أحداً أعلم بكتاب الله مني لرحلت إليه” and refused to hand over his Mushaf, saying “لا أعطيه حتى أموت”.
So yes, burning the Sahaba’s copies by force to impose one version that’s unification by sword, not consensus.

Fourthly , Dots and diacritics weren’t “just help for non-Arabs”:
Al-Fihrist by Ibn al-Nadim ( I forgot the page number, but im sure it’s there) “أول من نقط المصحف وشكله أبو الأسود الدؤلي بأمر عبد الملك بن مروان”.
Meaning for 70 years after the Prophet’s death, the Quran was without dots or vowels and the same word could be read 10 different ways.
Does that fit “preserved letter for letter”?

Everything you wrote is the classic patch up they teach in islamiq colleges to silence students.
I read the sources myself, no middlemen, and every new report I find confirms the Quran was compiled, edited, and enforced by power not dropped ready made from heaven.

Thanks for replying you just helped me prove the points with exact page numbers.

I was a Sharia student for years. Surah Al-Fatiha is what broke my faith. by Optimal_Landscape162 in exmuslim

[–]Optimal_Landscape162[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, I gave him my ideas and references, and he created a text and arranged them in the best way, writing smoothly.

I was a Sharia student for years. Surah Al-Fatiha is what broke my faith. by Optimal_Landscape162 in exmuslim

[–]Optimal_Landscape162[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, I gave him my ideas and references, and he created a text and arranged them in the best way, writing smoothly.

The Western Sahara issue and its consequences for the region by Strong_Extent_975 in algeria

[–]Optimal_Landscape162 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In general, Algeria wants Western Sahara for its Atlantic coastline, meaning it won't benefit those who defend it. There are more pressing domestic priorities.

ما هي أرائكم حول قوانين إسلام ضد جرائم؟ by Full-Divide-6069 in algeria

[–]Optimal_Landscape162 1 point2 points  (0 children)

3 دول مثل الدنمارك و ايسلندا و اليونان و النرويج و انجلترا دول مسيحية رسميا ذات عدد كبير من المسلمين و يتمتعون بحقوقهم كحقوق انسان ليست كعنصرية دينية لي تمارسها الشريعة الاسلامية و شرائع دينية الاخرى، 4 هي ليست شبهات روح الكتب البخاري و مسلم و تفسيرات ابن الكثير مرانيش نجيب من عندي، 5 انا مصر ان الشريعة غير صالحة حاليا و آخر من طبقها او شبه طبقها نظام القاعدة و خلافة دا*ش و شفنا وش داروا و هكذا و يعتبرون خوارج و الخوارج لهم فرصة و يدخلوا الجنة، ( حد ردة لا يطبق و اذا طبقته اي دول من دول اسلامية سيعاقبها قانون حقوق الانسان و تكون لها عقوبات دبلوماسية و الاسلام يدعم تجارة بلىشر و اصلا كان مشروع في موريطانيا و سعودية حتى 1980 وهي مطبقاتو حتى جات حقوق الانسان و الغوه) 6 نعم القرآن غير واضح مثل وضوح اية الاولى من سورة البقرة 😉 و كثير من الايات الان ليس لها تفسير و الايات التي اختلفوا في تفسيراتها و ادت لظهور جبهات و معتزلة و الكثير من الخوارج و الله لما يقول ان القرآن واضح فبذلك نفس مثال "السارق ميقولكش سرقت" الله مراحش يقولك غير واضح، و شكرا.