The Quran is free from scientific errors, and this is another miracle in itself. No one can extract scientific errors from it except by imposing a biased interpretation from their imagination, or by imposing one possible interpretive aspect that the language or expressions used do not require and making it the intended meaning with 100% certainty while there exists another equally strong possible interpretive aspect that contains no scientific error, or due to ignorance of the Arabic language, or by binding the Muslim to every word and letter mentioned in an ancient commentary as if that ancient commentator lived in an intellectual vacuum on planet Mars unaffected by the prevailing culture and environment, so he sometimes tries to twist words or overuse metaphors to reconcile the Quran with his era's culture, thinking that his era's culture reflects reality and the Quran cannot contradict reality in his opinion, so he interprets it thus with good intention, and finally fragmentation. Here is an example of each case: 1- Biased interpretations from imagination. Allah says: "It is not allowable for the sun to reach the moon, nor does the night overtake the day, but each, in an orbit, is swimming." So someone comes and interprets this verse and tells you that the Messenger thought the sun actually revolves around the earth, and this is pure nonsense - a biased interpretation from the beginning, as you assume beforehand that the Quran is human speech then interpret it according to this bias in line with the prevailing culture of its revelation era. So you say he thought the sun's real, actual orbit was this apparent movement in the sky around the earth. But the verse itself does not mention or specify the sun's orbit around what? This is an addition from your imagination only. The verse mentions that the sun is in an orbit swimming. The moon is in an orbit swimming. Night and day are in an orbit swimming. It does not specify what revolves around what? The sun's orbit is its movement in the sky. The moon's orbit is its movement in the sky. The orbit of night and day is the earth's orbit, as the earth moves in the sky, and since night and day are phenomena attached to planet earth, through the earth's swimming in an orbit, they swim with it in an orbit in the sky. So swimming in an orbit here means translational movement from place to another place in the sky around something, not rotation around oneself, otherwise the verse's meaning would become the sun and moon rotating around themselves, not their translational movement from place to place in the sky as well. By the way, most ancient commentators mentioned in their commentaries that (each) here refers to the sun, moon, and stars, despite the verse not mentioning stars, because they did not know how night and day could be in an orbit swimming like the sun and moon with translational movement in the sky??? Their culture was earth's fixity. The alternation of night and day is not expressed by such a strange phrase (in an orbit they swim) but was expressed by turning and insertion. For information: movement is entirely relative and dependent on the inertial reference from which you observe. So even saying that the sun revolves around the earth is not a scientific error as long as you say this is from an earthly observer's perspective only and not an absolute truth - it is indeed a reality and not a mere optical illusion, but from this perspective only if you take the earth as your inertial reference. From an external spatial perspective, the earth revolves around the sun, exactly like the sun's movement - from the perspective of an observer within the solar system, the sun is relatively stationary and the planets revolve around it, but from the perspective of an observer from the center of the Milky Way galaxy, for example, the sun with the planets moves around the galaxy's center and the sun is not stationary from a galactic perspective. Therefore, the Quran does not specify what revolves around what - it only mentions that the sun, moon, and earth (night, day) move in orbits in translational movement in the sky. 2- Forcing one interpretive aspect compulsorily. Among the most famous examples here are the verses of Surat At-Tariq that say: "So let man observe from what he was created. He was created from a fluid, ejected, Emerging from between the backbone and the ribs." So someone comes and says this is a clear scientific error because semen does not emerge from between the spine bones and chest. But this is only one possible interpretive aspect, and you cannot assert with 100% certainty that this is the intended meaning. Rather, there is another interpretive aspect no less strong {actually stronger because it is supported by context, as all pronouns in the sura refer to man, not to the ejected fluid - "Indeed, He, to return him, is Able," "Then man will have no power or any helper"} than the other interpretive aspect, which is that the pronoun in "emerging" refers to man, not the ejected fluid, so the verse's meaning would be the fetus emerging from between the spine bones and chest. This interpretation has support in ancient commentaries as well and is not exclusively modern interpretation. Ibn Atiya says in his commentary: "His saying: 'Emerging from between the backbone and the ribs,' Qatada, Al-Hasan, and others said: meaning: from between the backbone of each of the man and woman and their ribs, and Sufyan and Qatada also and a group said: from between the man's backbone and the woman's ribs, and the pronoun in 'emerging' could refer to man, and could refer to the fluid." There are also many suspended narrations saying that in the testicle is the growth of creation, which means this was common knowledge. 3- Ignorance of the Arabic language. An example is someone saying that the Quran made a grave scientific error because it says bees eat from fruits, while the truth is that bees do not eat ripe fruits but feed on flower blossoms. This is great ignorance of the Arabic language, as fruits in Arabic means everything that emerges from the earth or comes from tree produce, so blossoms are fruits in Arabic. Ibn Faris says in Maqayis Al-Lugha: "Fruit is something that generates from something, gathering, then other things are carried upon it metaphorically." By the Quran's own text: "Who has made for you the earth a bed and the sky a ceiling and sent down from the sky, rain and brought forth thereby from the fruits provisions for you. So do not attribute to Allah equals while you know." In Ibn Jarir At-Tabari's commentary he says: "He means by that He sent down rain from the sky, so He brought forth with that rain from what they planted in the earth from their crops and plantings, fruits as provision for them as food." So the meaning of "fruits" in this verse is everything that water brings out and grows from plants, fruits, and flowers. 4- Binding the Muslim to every big and small thing said by an ancient commentator. For example, he binds you to Allah’s saying: "Then He directed Himself to the heaven while it was smoke" that the smoke here means water vapor, while the first and original linguistic meaning of the word smoke is that which results from combustions and explosions and consists of a mixture of gases with solid materials suspended in it, but of course the nature of gases and suspended solid materials is different in both (fire smoke/cosmic smoke). The word smoke can linguistically be applied to anything resembling fire smoke, meaning a mixture of gases with suspended solid materials. The author of Maqayis Al-Lugha - Ibn Faris says in the entry (dakhan): "(dakhan) The dal, kha, and nun is one origin, which is what comes from fuel, then everything resembling it is likened to it." All space agencies indeed call these clouds that dominate the universe's volume (most of the volume of baryonic matter in the universe to this hour is in the form of interstellar medium and intergalactic medium, which resulted from primordial gas after the Big Bang - simple proportions of this gas clumped into complex structures while most of its volume remained in gaseous form to this hour as interstellar and intergalactic medium) to this hour the term "smoke" due to the extreme visual similarity between smoke and them. You find on NASA's website, for example, an image titled "Cosmic Smokescreen." So he diverts the word from its original, first meaning and what comes to any mind when hearing such a word, using the excuse that the ancients were influenced by their era's culture which saw water vapor or water as the universe's origin, not something fiery that produces smoke. 5- Fragmentations. The solid dome as an example: The Qur’an presents the sky in ways that cannot be reconciled with the idea of a rigid, solid dome. According to the text: Foldable: It can be rolled up like scrolls (21:104). Expanding: It is described as stretching or expanding “and indeed We are its expander” (51:47). Celestial bodies move within it, “each in an orbit swimming” (21:33), “ya‘ruju fīhā” (57:4), “fa-ẓallū fīhi ya‘rujūn” (15:14). Within and inside its interior, not beneath, not passive motion attached to a solid rotating dome but swimming, active motion. Unsupported by concrete pillars: It is raised without visible pillars, “He raised the heavens without pillars that you can see” (31:10). These qualities contradict the notion of a solid rigid structure. Solid rigid matter does not generally fold, expand, contain motion of celestial bodies within itself, or remain suspended without supports. The Qur’an emphasizes natural causes, not arbitrary miracles, in the functioning of the universe. If the sky were a concrete dome, God would have created supports and highlighted them, as He often takes pride in His creation, yet the text explicitly denies such supports. Therefore, verses like "God holds the sky from falling to earth" cannot be interpreted as supporting the solid dome myth. What God means in this verse is explicitly mentioned in three other verses. Arabs call anything above them "sky": rain is sky, meteors are sky. The Qur'an, in three other explicit verses, explains what it means for the sky to fall: it means something from the sky falling: "Or you make the sky fall upon us in pieces as you have claimed, or bring Allah and the angels before us" (Al-Isra 17:92) "Then cause a fragment from the sky to fall upon us, if you are truthful" (Ash-Shu'ara 26:187) "Do they not see what is before them and what is behind them of the sky and the earth? If We willed, We could cause the earth to swallow them or cause fragments from the sky to fall upon them. Indeed in that is a sign for every servant who turns back [to Allah]" (Saba 34:9) These verses mean that God prevents what exists within the sky from falling, not the blue thing you see itself, as the word sky means anything above us (outer space itself + things within it). This is basic Arabic language before any revelation; anything above you is called sky in Arabic. This is not modern patching; this is classical Arabic. The Qur'an itself, for example, calls clouds sky: "Have they not seen how many generations We destroyed before them, whom We had established in the earth such as We have not established you? And We sent the sky upon them pouring down abundantly" (Al-An'am 6:6). It calls the air in which plants grow sky: “A good word is like a good tree—its root is firm and its branches reach into the sky” (Ibrahim 14:24). It even calls the roof or ceiling of a person’s home “sky,” as in the verse: “Whoever thinks that Allah will not support him in this world and the Hereafter, let him stretch out a rope to the sky, then cut it, and see if his plan will remove what enrages him.” (Al-Hajj 22:15) And so on, atheists cannot extract errors except by isolating verses and making things up through their biases and imagination. Verses like “the protected ceiling” or “the splitting of the sky” must be interpreted in harmony with the Qur’an’s broader description rather than forcing the concept of a rigid dome onto isolated passages.

I've read that once Muhammad SWT stopped an entire caravan in a desert to search her wife's lost necklace. While I understand this shows how much he loves his wife, this must have created annoyance among other Sahabas. Q1. According to islam what is the takeaway here? As a husband we should look after our wife even if it creates a discomfort to others? Q2. Muhammad SWT could also ask the caravan to move ahead and camp somewhere comfortable, while he searches for the necklace. Why didn't he do that?

There is a hadith about Umm Hani approaching the Prophet (ﷺ), and she asked him for a good deed that she could do because she had become old and weak. The Prophet (ﷺ) said that if she said Subhanallah 100x, it would be equivalent to freeing 100 slaves from the children of Ismail, and if she said Alhamdullilah 100x, it would be equivalent to sending 100 horses to battle in the way of Allah for jihad, and if she said Allahuakbar 100x, it would be as if you dressed 100 camels to get sacraficed in Hajj. I can't find much information about the validity of this hadith online, so does anybody know if it is authentic or not?

I heard few sahaba's they got the ticket to heaven when they are in the earth: like **Umar R.A** and **Abubakar** 1. How many else got there?

Is sunnah prayer from Allah or from muhammad (saw), because it is called sunnah and sunnah is related to muhammad ( saw).

I watched a video (I can't remember where I watched it) that says exchanging two different things of different prices is riba (interest) as per Islam, and it was told by the Prophet (Peace be upon him). I'll give some examples. 1. I give two $500 worth of phones to my friend and gain a laptop that is worth $1000. 2. I give two $500 worth of phones to my friend and gain a laptop that is worth $1500. 3. I create a mobile app worth $1000 and get a $1000 worth of laptop. 4. I create a mobile app worth $1200 and get a $1000 worth of laptop. How and when will these scenarios come under riba (interest) or not?

>

إِنَّ اللَّهَ وَمَلَائِكَتَهُ يُصَلُّونَ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ ۚ يَا > أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا صَلُّوا عَلَيْهِ وَسَلِّمُوا > تَسْلِيمًا

> > Allah and His Angels send blessings on the Prophet: O ye that believe! > Send ye blessings on him and salute him with all respect. **Surah Ahzaab verse 56** I have to think about this from a long time why Allah has to send his blessing toward Muhammad (saw). I mean Allah have All the power of the world and he accepts all blessing of mankind and every other living thing, then why He have to send his blessing?
I am sorry if I did not get the proper translation cause I don't know how to speak Arabic.

The society of Muslims needs to be guided by caliph after prophet Mohammad (PBUH). Hence, after the death of holy prophet (PBUH), a caliph was assigned to guide and rule the Muslims. According to my findings in noble Qur'an, God has assigned the caliph. For example, Moses the prophet (PBUH) didn't ask people to form a Shura for choosing a successor when he left for Miqat. > Moses said: "O’ Allah) assign me a vizier from my family, (that is) my > brother Aaron (Haroon) ...,”(Allah) said: "We granted your requests, > O’ Moses.”(20:29-36) . Or in another verse, Allah the exalted, directly mentions the word "Caliph": > يَا دَاوُودُ **إِنَّا جَعَلْنَاكَ خَلِيفَةً** فِي الْأَرْ‌ضِ فَاحْكُم > بَيْنَ النَّاسِ بِالْحَقِّ وَلَا تَتَّبِعِ الْهَوَىٰ فَيُضِلَّكَ عَن > سَبِيلِ اللَّـهِ ۚ إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَضِلُّونَ عَن سَبِيلِ اللَّـهِ > لَهُمْ عَذَابٌ شَدِيدٌ بِمَا نَسُوا يَوْمَ الْحِسَابِ > > [We said], "O David, indeed **We have made you a successor** upon the > earth, so judge between the people in truth and do not follow [your > own] desire, as it will lead you astray from the way of Allah." > Indeed, those who go astray from the way of Allah will have a severe > punishment for having forgotten the Day of Account.(38:26) But I didn't find other clues mentioning the authority of the prophet or people. Please let me know if others except God has such an authority. Support your answer using Qur'an and Hadith.

Whenever I pray to Allah swt to make things good and make a particular thing easy for me and solve the issue in a better way, then only after few days something bad happens about that issue. Else it gets more worst or it becomes impossible for me or for my family to tackle it.

I were commenting against someone who was talking about the marriage of the prophet pbuh and Aisha peace be upon her too. The person I was commenting against said something like why would God let the perfect model for Earth marry a child when we know in today’s society that it could cause numerous health problems if a man and a young woman were to engage in sexual relationships and that it would leave people committing illegal acts in today’s society. God would’ve known that marrying people significantly younger or older can be bad so why would god set out such a bad example for the humans even though the prophet was supposed to be the perfect example. Please include Hadith and Quranic verses if possible.

Is it regarded as immoral to marry a young girl in Islam given that prophet Muhammad married Aisha when she was 6-7 and had her consummated when she was around 10? Generally, is everything Muhammad did considered as desirable, expected and/or good behavior for Muslims nowadays?

Why Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala did not call our prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam) like "Ya Muhammad!..." in the Holy book Quranul Karim? Is it okay to address with this if anything Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala told addressing our prophet? Example: وَأْمُرْ أَهْلَكَ بِالصَّلَاةِ وَاصْطَبِرْ عَلَيْهَا لَا نَسْأَلُكَ رِزْقًا نَّحْنُ نَرْزُقُكَ وَالْعَاقِبَةُ لِلتَّقْوَى Is it okay to translate like: "And (**Hey Muhammad Sallallhu Alaihi wa Sallam!**) enjoin prayer upon your family [and people] and be steadfast therein. We ask you not for provision; We provide for you, and the [best] outcome is for [those of] righteousness."(20:132) The Imam of our local mosque said, "Allah subhanahu wa ta'la never called Rasulullah Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam with his name, because, calling by one's name is not that respectful. So, Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala avoided it. But used in case of other prophet so that people could understand the respect of our prophet (pbuh). So, translating like this is not permissible."

My daughter accidentally without our knowledge drank her aunt's breast milk which she collected in a feeder. So is her aunt now my daughter's foster mother? She drank only two to three drops.

I’m just wondering about this ruling on asking questions about Islam. Some say it’s discouraged and some say it’s haram but my question is would it be considered kufr if you ask too many questions about Islam. So in my case I asked “it doesn’t make sense, why does Prophet Muhammad love us more than our mother loves us if he didn’t meet us in the first place?” Edit: is my question in quotations considered doubt

Could you please provide an explanation for this with accuracy

According to Sunnis, mut'ah (temporary marriage) was allowed before but later the Prophet salallahu alayhi wassalam abolished it. It is based on the following hadiths (traditions): > In the Two Sahihs, it is recorded that the Leader of the Faithful `Ali > bin Abi Talib said, "The Messenger of Allah prohibited Mut'ah marriage > and eating the meat of domesticated donkeys on the day of Khaybar > (battle).'' In addition, in his Sahih, Muslim recorded that Ar-Rabi' bin Sabrah bin Ma'bad Al-Juhani said that his father said that he accompanied the Messenger of Allah during the conquest of Makkah, and that the Prophet said, > O people! I allowed you the Mut'ah marriage with women before. Now, > Allah has prohibited it until the Day of Resurrection. Therefore, > anyone who has any women in Mut`ah, let him let them go, and do not > take anything from what you have given them. What is the evidence that the Shia used to allow it? Are there any conditions to perform Mut'ah ? What happens to the woman and her children after the Mut'ah marriage ends?

I have heard from several pious and sincere Muslims I met in my travels who claimed that the Islamic Prophet Muhammad has been prophesied in the Bible. But, unfortunately they could not show me any clear evidence in the Bible. Being a follower of Jesus Christ I have read the Bible several times. However, I have never found once in the Bible about the coming of a prophet called Muhammad. Sometimes I wonder if it is a mere claim or a claim with evidence.

Asalamualikum, Ive had this question for sometime now, but Im too afraid to ask someone in person. Prop Muhammed is deemed as the best prophet of all time, and that there were times when rock spoke about him, trees moved for him.Where as it is said that Prop Suleman had great control over all the realms , the Jins, the Animals, The Wind, the Sea etc. Didnt prophet Muhammed have the same power over all the realms, if yes then why did you not use them in the wars he fought. Thanks in Advance.

**Sahih Muslim #2015** Maimuna reported that one morning Allah’s Messenger was silent with grief. Maimuna said: Allah’s Messenger, I find a change in your mood today. Allah’s Messenger said: Gabriel had promised me that he would meet me tonight, but he did not meet me. By Allah, he never broke his promises, and Allah’s Messenger spent the day in this sad mood. Then it occurred to him that there had been a puppy under their cot. He commanded and it was turned out. He then took some water in his hand and sprinkled it at that place. When it was evening Gabriel met him and he said to him: You promised me that you would meet me the previous night. He said: Yes, but we do not enter a house in which there is a dog or a picture. Then on that very morning he commanded the k!lling of the dogs until he announced that the dog kept for the orchards should also be k!lled, but he spared the dog meant for the protection of extensive fields or big gardens. ****Sunan Abi Dawud #2845** (Sahih - Al Albaani)** Narrated Abdullah ibn Mughaffal: The Prophet (ﷺ) said: Were dogs not a species of creature I should command that they all be k!lled; but k!ll every pure black one. **Sahih al-Bukhari #3323** Narrated Abdullah bin `Umar: Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) ordered that the dogs should be k!lled. I have no idea how this is justifiable. From whatever justifications I've seen, they say its 1) The "dogs" are not dogs but hyenas, wolf, etc, if thats really the case then the scholars wouldn't cite these hadiths to say why we shouldn't pet dogs, or in the worst case to prove that its Sunnah to k!ll black dogs (even if they are not evil). 2) The dogs were disease causing and violent hence the Prophet allowed the k!llings - however they donot cite any authentic references for this, its just an assumption. So from whatever material available, im getting the picture from the first hadith that the he ordered the k!llings of dogs just because a puppy under his bed prevented Angel Gabriels from entering his house. If there is any better explaination to these hadiths please mention it below.

Salam! I have come across a sort of a troubling narration about Prophet PBUH's marriage with Sawda R.A: https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi:3040 At first I was like maybe it was just Sawda R.A being afraid of divorce and Prophet PBUH actually did not actually initiate it but then I came across an article online which quoted a mursal report from some Ibn Sa'd book that the Prophet PBUH actually initiated the divorce and Sawda R.A in order to save her marriage gave her night to Aisha R.A. It has given me some more doubts than when I came across the narration in tirmidhi... This isn't sitting well with me... I'm sure I'm missing some context here. The Prophet PBUH cannot just simply decide to divorce his older wife one day?? Besides arent there other traditions for the revelation of that verse (4:128) too? Can you please take a look and see what the authentic narrative says about this whole situation? JzkAllah Khair!