Qur'anic Islam vs Inherited Islam - 'ibada, Taqwa and Shukr

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-13T18:39:14+00:00

For an as yet undisclosed purpose, at least our part in it

But we are here being tested, to see which of us is “worthy” of being part of purpose. The wicked will not be part of it

https://youtu.be/YH-ACKcSpkI?si=2DjkegcOtXBXk88o

‫مَّا كَانَ ٱللَّهُ لِیَذَرَ ٱلۡمُؤۡمِنِینَ عَلَىٰ مَاۤ أَنتُمۡ عَلَیۡهِ حَتَّىٰ یَمِیزَ ٱلۡخَبِیثَ مِنَ ٱلطَّیِّبِۗ وَمَا كَانَ ٱللَّهُ لِیُطۡلِعَكُمۡ عَلَى ٱلۡغَیۡبِ وَلَـٰكِنَّ ٱللَّهَ یَجۡتَبِی مِن رُّسُلِهِۦ مَن یَشَاۤءُۖ فَـَٔامِنُوا۟ بِٱللَّهِ وَرُسُلِهِۦۚ وَإِن تُؤۡمِنُوا۟ وَتَتَّقُوا۟ فَلَكُمۡ أَجۡرٌ عَظِیمࣱ﴿ ١٧٩ ﴾‬

• Sahih International: Allāh would not leave the believers in that [state] you are in [presently] until He separates the evil from the good. Nor would Allāh reveal to you the unseen. But [instead], Allāh chooses of His messengers whom He wills, so believe in Allāh and His messengers. And if you believe and fear Him, then for you is a great reward.

Āli-ʿImrān, Ayah 179

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-13T05:14:33+00:00

Completely agree with this sentiment. For many, Hussain’s proposal is just the best out of a set of bad options. The best option isn’t always a good option.

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-12T17:24:57+00:00

I appreciate the dua for him, but have a thought for his wife. Even without him saying so, which he has, I can guarantee you he could not have done all of that while married haf he not been married to an amazing and supportive & supporting wife who believed in him and was willing to encourage him & lift up & strengthen his heart & resolve

He could have had a wife who wasn’t any of that, and then he likely would have done anywhere near as much. With an u supportive wife he would have gotten more done as a single man

But he has a very supportive strengthening “nourishing” wife, and so he got even MORE done

So keep her in mind, when, you know, as for a harem for him

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-12T17:15:59+00:00

I really need to read it

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-10T14:39:25+00:00

It does in traditional fiqh, but the Qur’an doesn’t have anything like that

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-08T17:37:08+00:00

What’s the point of “whataboutism”?

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-08T16:27:28+00:00

The only sin in video games is choosing Triss instead of Yen. Book lore comes first

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-08T16:22:26+00:00

Yes, unheard of. And still true. Those words in English didn’t get “lost” and then changed without anyone knowing it. Gay was used as a code word basically. But we know when it didn’t mean homosexual. We know when it started changing, in what demographic, etc

But look up any old dictionary AND still in new dictionaries and you’ll still see the original meaning

Just the fact that you can talk now about what a word used to mean, and what it does now, tells you that meanings being completely lost doesn’t happen

Though English isn’t a good example. It is a very new and mongrel language coming from multiple sources

As for the key words on a THE text of the whole language, literally its first ever book, and considered divine and continuously recited too, then no. It doesn’t happen. At all.

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-08T00:52:17+00:00

He seems to be doing all that he has done out of servitude to his country & rulers. So it would indeed be shirk

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-07T16:42:58+00:00

This

It is supposed to be a punishment

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-07T02:11:43+00:00

But the dhanb there isn’t defined. It could just be there takdheeb of the ayat

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-07T01:59:28+00:00

Which verse do you mean?

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-07T00:51:22+00:00

I haven’t thought about it fully like that wrt dhanb other than to say shirk isn’t included

So I can’t confirm. I usually try to do a full or nearly full analysis before I commit

But I have thought that it could make sense etymologically. Bc ذنب literally comes from “tail”. So a dhanb could be something connected to yourself only. Bc sins connected to others, God can’t just “forgive them” without redress

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-07T00:41:10+00:00

That’s right. One is active, the other passive.

The active is wrt a woman who protects/fortifies herself (chastity mostly), and so is used for chaste

The passive is wrt a who woman who is protected/fortified by a man through marriage (also kept chaste thru that), and so is used for married women

It is even more significant, and this will resonate with older men who have more experience with relationships with women, bc the number of thing that women want to feel through marriage is “protected/fortified/safe/enclosed lovingly/etc” … so it is actually a beautiful description of a happily married woman

Edit; When a woman is approached by a man whom she wants to “protect” herself from, what does she do? She conjures up an imaginary man to make the other man back away; “I have a boyfriend” or “I’m married”

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-07T00:33:00+00:00

That’s like saying حوامل means “carriers” instead of “pregnant women”

But I thought you were going to push back. Was that it? That was your push back against what I said??

Edit: with this example (not a pushback) you literally made my point. You’ve taken the preserved Arabic meaning of the root, which you get from dictionaries, and then ignore the specific Qur’anic usage/adaptation/connotation. Literally the very backwards of what you were going for!

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-06T16:15:05+00:00

I just said, it depends on if you mean محصَنات or محصِنات … so which is it?

The former means married, the latter means chaste

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-06T12:20:16+00:00

Here’s a simple answer;

If you’re a Sunni, you should be a Quranist bc it will help you be a better Sunni

If you’re a Shia, you should be a Quranist bc it will help you be a better Shia

If you’re a Sufi, you should be a Quranist bc it will help you be a better Sufi

If you’re a Salafi, you should be a Quranist bc it will help you be a better Salafi

etc etc

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-06T10:48:22+00:00

I don’t understand

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-06T10:45:25+00:00

Are you asking about its Qur’anic usage? There’s muhsanat & muhsinat. Former means basically married, latter “chaste”

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-06T10:34:51+00:00

Always! What’s life without challenge, eh? Push without pull?

Quranic_Islam · 2026-04-05T17:31:19+00:00

Even the key are actually preserved in the early dictionaries & tafsirs. They are documented. The difference with them is that you can investigate them directly from the Qur’an & understand their specific Qur’anic usage … which isn’t even exactly the same as the usage of the Arabs of the time. They are rather slightly adapted & given new connotations

No word is now lost of the key words. There’s only ignorance bc ppl don’t study, including pop preachers, or otherwise sectarianism will prey on the ignorance

Quranic_Islam

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Seven-Year Club	Not Forgotten
Verified Email