Salam mualaykum !! my question is: can I reduce contact with my father who was never in my life nor did not that do much for me ? He is making me something that could potentially affect my life and my other sibling’s while being really toxic. What can do about that? I’ve been patient with him for years but it is getting out of hand. He doesn’t even care whether I am going through something’s or not . None my other siblings even talks to him but now I am on the edge of doing the same thing but I don’t want to go against sharia . His mental abuse is stressing me out! Please help

It's known that not all prophets and messengers weren't mentioned by name in the Quran. Neither Quran narrates their lives in very great detail. However, we get some related or corroboratory information from the hadiths. But none of them are in that great details as they were narrated in Qisas Al-Anbiyas, e.g. by Ibn Kathir. How did those authors compile the stories of the prophets and messengers? What were their sources?

As this question has been asked previously, or rather, it has been asked in a different, more simple way; There is no clear or sufficient answer that I can find. Let me premise this by saying, I have no hostility towards Muslims. Or Christians. I was a student of 'Philosphy and Religion' (not 'of' Religion) and focused on Islam and Christianity primarily. I'm self-taught Arabic with English as my first language, being born in America. Debate is just a pastime for me. I enjoy it. Some people like video games, debate is my video game. No more, no less. With that being said, I also need to add that my question is not simply that the representation of the Trinity is incorrect, that's only a portion. This is a three part problem that I'm curious how Muslims will, or would, answer. **Surah 5:116** >"وَإِذْ قَالَ ٱللَّهُ يَـٰعِيسَى ٱبْنَ مَرْيَمَ ءَأَنتَ قُلْتَ لِلنَّاسِ ٱتَّخِذُونِى وَأُمِّىَ إِلَـٰهَيْنِ مِن دُونِ ٱللَّهِ ۖ قَالَ سُبْحَـٰنَكَ مَا يَكُونُ لِىٓ أَنْ أَقُولَ مَا لَيْسَ لِى بِحَقٍّ ۚ إِن كُنتُ قُلْتُهُۥ فَقَدْ عَلِمْتَهُۥ ۚ تَعْلَمُ مَا فِى نَفْسِى وَلَآ أَعْلَمُ مَا فِى نَفْسِكَ ۚ إِنَّكَ أَنتَ عَلَّـٰمُ ٱلْغُيُوبِ" **English Translation** - *I use a combination of Pickthall and Saheeh International as they seem to be the most accurate to the Arabic we can get when combined, as well as some direct translations where it makes sense in English)* >And when Allah said: O Jesus, son of Maryam! Did you ever say to the people: Take me and my mother (as) **two gods** (إِلَـٰهَيْنِ 'ilāhayni') beside Allah? He said: Glory be to you! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say). If I had said it, then surely You would have known it. You know what is (hidden) in myself (nafsī), and I know not what is (hidden) in Yourself (nafsika). Indeed, you are the All-Knower ('allāmu) of the unseen I'm going to address the two main issues I can see clearly through the time I've speant studying and hopefully a sufficient response could be given to interact with, which would be excellent, as that is the goal. - The first issue would be the one addressed most often. Here we can see that part of the 'Trinitarian belief' is, as in other ayah, being questioned and 'falsified.' However, we also know that the Trinitarian belief is not, 'Allah, The Son, and Mary.' I don't think I need to explain the makeup of the Christian's Trinity for anyone here, but of course this is incorrect. I have seen some Muslims argue that it is possible that there was a time where some Christians actually were taking Jesus and Mary as gods along with Allah. This is incorrect for a couple reasons. First, if people were worshiping Mary and Jesus as gods with Allah, then they wouldn't be Christians. Christianity, the term Christian, was defined a long time before Muhammad. Regardless, Allah *should* know the Christian belief at that time. Secondly, any people who take Jesus and Mary as gods would also not be considered Christian because in Christianity, whether or not any Muslim or other religions understands it or agree with it, is a monotheistic Religion by definition. Therefore, no one saying something akin to even Jesus and The Father being two gods would be Christian whatsoever. Or the Holy Spirit (Ruh Al Qudus) - The next main issue I see, besides Allah not knowing the Trinity there, is Allah asking Jesus if he took himself and Mary as gods alongside him. There's a couple problems here. First, even **if** the Trinitarian belief replaced the Holy Spirit with Mary, and Allah said Ruh Al Qudus instead, Jesus would not be lying by saying he did not. Again going back to the 'two gods' issue. The Trinitarian belief, Christianity, again, is one God. Then, as the ayah says, Allah is the 'allāmu,' the All-Knower, and of course he is also named so in the Qur'an. The other two ayah about the Trinity simply have Allah telling them to desist from saying 'three' or no 'two-thirds, as statements rather than questions or questioning anyone. So, the All-Knower, asking Jesus if he did 'some thing' seems odd when surely his statement alone would be enough. Such as, rather than making a point to question Jesus, he would say, he told Jesus of what his followers claim, then having Jesus state that is not what he taught. That would be simple enough and end the debate. Yet it would still lack any meaning unless Mary and 'two gods' was changed. Immediately afterwards, in ayah 117, he tells Allah that he only said what Allah ordered him to say. This is something the 'allāmu would surely know. Now it becomes that we have no answer from the Qur'an whether or not Jesus confessed to not teaching that he, the father, and Holy Spirit **are God.** The common argument against this is that it is for narrative purposes to specifically show Jesus denying it. I ask that we don't get bogged down on this one specific aspect of 117, but to take it in its entirety. This is why I prefaced with Jesus saying 'no,' would not oppose the Trinitarian belief. Of course Jesus did not tell people to take him **and** his mother as two gods with Allah. He did not teach that himself and The Father were two gods, or himself and the Holy Spirit were two gods. Therefore, what is the purpose of this ayah? I want to add some more evidence to my points before fully concluding so that any response can get directly to the point and hopefully a straight answer. For Christians, they would argue and show documentation that the belief of the Trinity was being preached as early as 1CE. This could be refuted, so we can simply go with what cannot be refuted in context to the ayah. We can at least say, as a matter of fact, that the doctrine of the Trinity was finalized at the First Council of Nicaea in 325CE. Therefore showing that the doctrine was well-established long before the time of Muhammad. This is irrelevant to an all-knowing God, however, this is just evidence to show that the doctrine was with the Christians long before, and totally established by, the time of Muhammad. Now to conclude with points, my opinion, and another common refutation, as well as sources. Another refutation that I have, surprisingly, heard, is that this ayah, 116, isn't even talking about the the Trinity, and is talking about some group that believed this. That is an obvious problem. The people who followed Christ, Jesus, are Christians. If people believed that Jesus and Mary were gods, and Jesus is just saying, no I didn't say this, and whatever niche group Allah could be talking about, would mean that this ayah actually serves no purpose as nobody believes this is what Jesus taught. Besides the fact that scholars agree, tafsirs explain, that it is talking about this belief, I'd rather want to believe that **all** ayah in the Holy Qur'an actually have meaning behind them, some purpose for being told. In the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, he in fact does state that this is not about Allah not having the knowledge, but about admonishing his people who call themselves **Christians** and the one who they call 'God' (Jesus) is himself admitting to the contrary. Now he has established this is speaking about Christians, followers of Christ and his teachings, not some niche group of people who worship Jesus and Mary as two gods. Ibn Kathir, however, seems to leave out Mary altogether while also changing the implication from them being 'two gods' to simply the correct Christian belief that they say Jesus is God. This is not at all what the ayah is saying and I see Ibn Kathir as either being completely dishonest or refusing to address the ayah properly, although I have not read his tafsir in Arabic, and while I could be missing something (I'll double check) I highly doubt it would lend strength to a refutation. Again, even if Jesus denies this here and says that is not what he taught people, it remains true and says nothing, as no Christian, now or at the time of Muhammad or prior, believes/d Christianity teaches that Jesus, and any other person's in the Trinity, are more than one God. Once more, the doctrine of the Trinity, One God, three hypostatic unions, was already well-established. As for my opinion, for this ayah to be a clear, and detailed explanation of all things, it should directly refute the actual doctrine of the Trinity. To say, Jesus, did you say/teach that you, the Holy Spirit, and I *are God?* Or even replacing Maryam with ruh Al Qudus would suffice but the word 'ilāhayni' has to be removed from the text either way. **Sources For Context** *'The Qur'an is a detailed explanation of all things (in the revelation) - Quran, Surah 12:111* *Allah addressing to falsify the Trinity, the other ayah about the Trinity - Quran, Surah 5:73, 4:171, and 5:116 (this ayah) is directly referenced in multiple sources as one of the three ayah referencing the Trinity* **Finalization of the doctrine of the Trinity at the First Council of Nicaea** - *Kauffman, Timothy F. (May–June 2016). "Nicæa and the Roman Precedent" (PDF). The Trinity Review (334, 335). Archived (PDF) from the original on 12 August 2016. Retrieved 22 June 2016* *"Trinity: The role of Constantine in the Nicene creed". www.bible.ca. Retrieved 29 September 2021* *Fairbairn, Donald (2009), "Life in the Trinity, Downers Grove:" InterVarsity Press, ISBN 978-0-8308-3873-8, retrieved 24 February 2014* **Earliest existing reference of the Trinity** - *Theophilus of Antioch (AD 115–181) ref. "Philip Schaff: Fathers of the Second Century: 0107=101 – Christian Classics Ethereal Library". ccel.org. Retrieved 27 April 2023.*

The conversation between Prophet moses and Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is well documented during the meraj of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Did the following conversation take place on meraj of prophet moses? > The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "Adam and Moses argued with each other. Moses said to Adam. 'O Adam! You are our father who disappointed us and turned us out of Paradise.' Then Adam said to him, 'O Moses! Allah favored you with His talk (talked to you directly) and He wrote (the Torah) for you with His Own Hand. Do you blame me for action which Allah had written in my fate forty years before my creation?' So Adam confuted Moses, Adam confuted Moses," the Prophet (ﷺ) added, repeating the Statement three times. Sahih al-Bukhari 6614

If my father, my wife and myself conduct qurbani i.e. one goat qurabani per person, is it ok to distribute two out of those three goats in poor and needy and keep one goat for self. Rather than distributing two portions of each goat individually. Its just a semantics question. The intent is the same.

The Qur'an is full of verses where it tells you that Allah loves you if X. That is, on one condition. For example, in Sura 3 Ayah 32, it is said that "Allah does not love those who do not believe". And, that Allah's love is conditional, makes me think something... Allah is supposed to be the highest conceivable being, isn't He? If you can find a being who has more perfection than Allah, that being is the one who is God (not the other). For example, if there is a being more perfect than Allah, Allah would no longer be God, because God by definition is perfection and the absolute. Okay, so God is the perfection of good. OK, and the ultimate moral perfection, love, right? Because there is no greater expression of kindness than love. So, if Allah is God, he should show the highest degree of love possible and no being could surpass him (since he is God). But the Qur'an says that Allah's love is partial and conditional, the expression of his love is not total and perfect (he does not love everyone, and he only loves you if you repent, and go with him). If Allah does not show the highest degree of love possible, he is not perfect, then he is not God? In Christianity it is not so, Christ loves even his enemies. Christ died on the cross loving those who crucified and killed Him. Hence the famous phrase "Father, forgive them, they do not know what they are doing". Or even in the Sermon on the Mount, where Christ said that "blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven."Or "blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be satisfied." The love of the Christian God is absolute and unconditional, God loves us all. How is this argument refuted?

Salam brothers and sisters, I'm a new revert so i'm sorry if this is a stupid question but I saw a clip on twitter of Mr.Daniel Haqiqatjou saying that moon landing was essentially faked and that humans can't develop the means of space travel. and then I came across this verse 55:33 يٰمَعۡشَرَ الۡجِنِّ وَالۡاِنۡسِ اِنِ اسۡتَطَعۡتُمۡ اَنۡ تَنۡفُذُوۡا مِنۡ اَقۡطَارِ السَّمٰوٰتِ وَالۡاَرۡضِ فَانْفُذُوۡا​ؕ لَا تَنۡفُذُوۡنَ اِلَّا بِسُلۡطٰنٍ​ۚ‏ i want to know is it the correct interpretation of this that space travel is not possible?

I suffer from allergies and a runny nose often, and when I’m fasting, I sometimes sniff when I feel it (nasal drainage) coming down my nose, or I just blow my nose. Other times, I feel it go down to my throat from my nose by itself and I have no choice but to swallow it sometimes and coughing to spit it out can be difficult. Does this break my fast

There are many cases, specially for the Muslims living in non-Muslim countries, that a non-Muslim woman draws her hand towards a Muslim man to greet him with shaking hands, or a non-Muslim man tries to shake hand with a Muslim woman. What to do in this situation?

I have just recently heard about Zoroastrianism. I was curious to see what it was and surprised because a lot of the beliefs are similar to Islam for example monotheism, heaven/hell, prayer in a certain direction, originating from the Middle East, 5 times a day prayer, good vs evil, judgment after death, etc. A savior figure is also believed to come towards the end of times. It came before Islam where Zoroaster claimed he had a divine vision and therefore he began teaching others of monotheism. I have never heard of him before and I don’t think he’s mentioned anywhere in the Quran, but I’m not sure. Is it possible he was a prophet from Allah?

Does the Quran have divine protection from transmission errors or does it just happen to be error free because of the Muslim's diligence in copying it and checking it from master copies? Did Allah make any promises that the Quran could not develop an error?

It’s well known in the time of the Prophet(ﷺ), Zoroastrians made up the Majority of Bahrain which is Morden day eastern Arabia. We have Hadiths of the Prophet ordering the expulsion of Jews and Christians and Polytheists. It has been narrated by 'Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim. The Prophet (ﷺ) on his death-bed, gave three orders saying, "Expel the pagans from the Arabian Peninsula” But with the Magians/Zoroatrians there are no such Hadiths expect to the contrary. We have Hadiths where the Prophet collects Jizya from Bahrain and they stay there until Umar and he lets them stay and pay Jizya. Narrated `Amr bin Dinar: I was sitting with Jabir bin Zaid and Amr bin Aus, and Bjalla was narrating to them in 70 A.H. the year when Musab bin Az-Zubair was the leader of the pilgrims of Basra. We were sitting at the steps of Zamzam well and Bajala said, "I was the clerk of Juz bin Muawiya, Al-Ahnaf's paternal uncle. A letter came from Umar bin Al-Khattab one year before his death; and it was read:-- "Cancel every marriage contracted among the Magians between relatives of close kinship (marriages that are regarded illegal in Islam: a relative of this sort being called Dhu-Mahram.)" Umar did not take the Jizya from the Magian infidels till Abdur-Rahman bin Auf testified that Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) had taken the Jizya from the Magians of Hajar. So how do the scholars explain this? Are Magians the only ones among the religions allowed to reside in Arabia?

Salam, in Kitab al-Masahif of Ibn Abi Dawood the author provids some variant quotes of the Mushaf of ibn Mas'ud. I also heard that we have some (other) quotes in tafsir books. Can we make the whole Mushaf of ibn Mas'ud today or are there some missing parts and that's why everyone claims it's lost? or maybe we have conflicting hadeeth about the same verse. I dont understand. Thanks you

As the title says; **Which scholars argue that mentioning Gods name while slaughtering is not obligatory?** Of course it doesn't have to be a list with all scholars ever holding that opinion, but as many as possible without making it to hard. ---------- **Some background (Maybe not relevant to the question itself):** Now, there are a few I know of like Ibn Rushd and Chams Ad-din Ar-ramli. *(I guess most of the Shafi'i scholars do too, but I am not sure about that, so correct me if I am wrong.)* > 6:121 **And do not eat of that upon which the name of Allah has not been mentioned**, for indeed, it is grave disobedience. And indeed do the devils inspire their allies [among men] to dispute with you. And if you were to obey them, indeed, you would be associators [of others with Him]. Basically Ibn Rushds argument is that this verse ain't talking about mentioning Allahs name, but rather that we should not eat dead animals (mayta), which if we read the reason for this revelation (asbab nuzul), we might find that conclusion more logical: > قال المشركون : يا محمد أخبرنا عن الشاة إذا ماتت من قتلها ؟ قال الله قتلها " ، قالوا : فتزعم أن ما قتلت أنت وأصحابك حلال ، وما قتل الكلاب والصقر حلال ، وما قتله الله حرام ، فأنزل الله تعالى هذه الآية . > The polytheists said: O Muhammed! Tell us about the sheep, who is the one killing it when it dies? He said: Allah killed it. They said: So you claim that what you and your companions kills, is halal and what dogs and birds kills is halal and (then you claim) that what God kills is haram? Then the verse was reveled by God: "And do not eat of that which the name of Allah has not been mentioned" > > References in Arabic from Tabari Tafsir Also found in Asbab Nozol (english translation here ) Therefore his conclusion is that the verse is about prohibition of dead animals. Also this famous hadith is used to prove that mentioning Allahs name is not a condition for the meat to be lawful when slaughtering: > Narrated Aisha: The people said to the Prophet (ﷺ) , "O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! Here are people who have recently embraced Islam and they bring meat, and we do not know whether they had mentioned Allah's Name while slaughtering the animals or not." The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "You should mention Allah's Name and eat." Chams Ad-din Ar-ramlis understanding of that verse is that it rather means "Do not eat of that upon which the name of Allah has not been metioned (i.e other names, like Hubal, Allat, other "god" names, meaning Allahs name wasn't mentioned) You find this mentioned in page 211 and 212 in this PDF (أثر الإختلاف في القواعد الأصولية في إختلاف الفقهاء) So, basically, I wonder how many other (and which) scholars follow these opinions.

Well, Sunni Muslims believe in four Califs after the holy prophet S.A the fourth of which being the first Imam of Shia Muslims. However, they respect all The Fourteen Infallibles (not sure about how they believe in Imam Mahdi Aj. though) in Shia Islam according to both Quran (verses about Ahl-ol-Beit A.S.) and Hadith from the holy Prophet S.A. . Now the question is if Sunni Muslims agree on that the holy Prophet of Islam has given the title of Sadiq (honest and truthful) to the sixth Imam of Shia Muslims, Imam Ja'far Sadiq A.S., why they do not follow the teaching of him, being introduced as truthful by the holy prophet, instead of e.g. his students not being nominated to any attribute by the holy prophet S.A if I am right? To me, if the holy prophet has accepted such a position for 13 people after him among all his companion and children (children of Fatimah S.A. to be more explicit), God being talked about them as them being infallible (Al-Ahzab:33) then why a Muslim may follow others talking different than those holy and innocent people? I mean if they were wrong they were not of such a position in the eyes of prophet and for Allah, were they? And if they are not wrong why to follow others giving Fatwa sometimes in complete different ways? Hope that the question is clear enough for the answers also to be clear. --- **Edit**. To emphasize the point in question let put the matter as follows: If I was a non-Muslim and I was to become a Muslim, just after confessing in uniqueness of Allah Azza-va-Jalla and that Muhammad --peace be upon him-- is his prophet I required first to know which school in Islam to obey. If I have no precise knowledge of Quran and Hadith, when all Muslim brothers know their own school to be the right one, how can I decide which one to follow? Maybe there should be a hint for me to decide, based on Quran or/and Hadith equally accepted by all different schools of Muslims. If it is a relevant expectation, then does there exist any hint in Quran or/and Hadith accepted by all Muslim brothers? Shia claims there are some, and maybe many, one of them is asked about here, that Sadiq (truthful) is an attribute (and not a forename) accepted by all Muslim brothers to be given to Imam Ja'far-ibn-Muhammad Sadiq by the holy prophet --peace be upon him-- around a century before Imam's birth date, and that Imam Sadiq --peace be upon him-- is one from whom the majority of Shia's Fiqh is derived. That is Shia Muslims believe majority of their Fiqh is already approved by the holy prophet --peace be upon him-- when he called his son "Al-Sadiq". Is this hint acceptable by Sunni brothers? And if not, do they have their own hints to override this and the other hints used by Shia brothers? Do such hints exist for all the branches of the Sunni's, Hanbali, Shaafe'ee, Maaleki, and etc.? That is, if it is proved to someone that Shia Islam is not the one which should be followed, does exist a hint that explain which Sunni school should he follow then? In other words, the questioner tries to understand why Sunni brothers don't agree upon the Shia's hints, and that do they have their own hints then or not? **NOTE**: *I am trying to ask the question as neutral, I really want to know if these reasoning by Shia Brothers are considered as reasonable or unreasonable by other Muslims, and if not reasonable then why? And that if the answer to the previous question is no then what is their own reasonable hints (based on Quran and Hadith accepted by all the Muslims) to prefer their own school over the Shi'ite's based on them? This is a general question with a general scope but at the same time I have specified its scope to one single question about Imam Sadiq --peace be upon him-- for the question to meet the conditions of an acceptable question to Islam.SE.*

Assalamu Alaikum Brothers in Islam, Regarding etiquettes of eating : > It was narrated from Ibn ‘Abbas that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “When one of you eats food, let him not wipe his hand until he has licked it or has someone else to lick it.”(ibn Majah ) What does the part "or has someone else to lick it" mean? In what context can this be understood? How can it be lawful to lick another person's finger? Please clarify this.

Me and my family are shifting to a new place in 2 weeks Inshallah. But unfortunately that apartment has only 2 bedrooms. I only have 1 sister and we have love for each other. I and 15 and she is 17. We used to sleep together in same bed till I was 12 but then our parents transferred me to the 3rd bedroom. We both have our own single bed but my question is that can we sleep in the same room?

I'm currently a teen Sunni Muslim who wants to become a Shia. I have researched myself and found that my heart is on the Shia side of Islam and I agree with more of the Shia side. Although is there a process of becoming a Shia Muslim? My family is Sunni although I do not want to tell them yet. But I want to start living my life as a Shia Muslim e.g. Praying, Reading The Quran, etc.

Does it break my wudu if: 1. I use a towel and change my clothes? 2. I become completely naked and then wear the fresh clothes?

Hello I just have one question I'm an american who grew up not knowing any other language except for english is it okay if I read the english Quran I would like to know if I can read the english version of the Quran since I don't know much arabic