This hadith from tirmidhi says - > Abu Sa'eed narrated: "On the Day of Badr, the Romans had a victory > over the Persians. So the believers were pleased with that, then the > following was revealed: 'Alif Lam Mim. The Romans have been defeated, > up to His saying: 'the believers will rejoice - with the help of > Allah... (30:1-5)'" He said: "So the believers were happy with the > victory of the Romans over the Persians." From the wording, it sounds like it was revealed on the day Romans were victorious.

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.

Assalamu Alaikum Brothers in Islam, Can you please help me understand as to why in Surah Baqarah the verse 149 is repeated again in 150? > So from wherever you go out [for prayer, O Muhammad] turn your face toward al- Masjid al-Haram, and indeed, it is the truth from your Lord. And Allah is not unaware of what you do. **[Surah Baqarah : 149]** and > And from wherever you go out [for prayer], turn your face toward al-Masjid al-Haram. And wherever you [believers] may be, turn your faces toward it in order that the people will not have any argument against you, except for those of them who commit wrong; so fear them not but fear Me. And [it is] so I may complete My favor upon you and that you may be guided. > **[Surah Baqarah : 150]**

وقال ابن أبي حاتم : حدثنا أحمد بن سنان ، حدثنا أبو معاوية عن الأعمش ، عن خيثمة قال : قال عبد الله يعني : ابن مسعود إن النطفة إذا وقعت في الرحم ، طارت في كل شعر وظفر ، فتمكث أربعين يوما ، ثم تتحدر في الرحم فتكون علقة . What is the authenticity of this hadith mentioned in Tafsir ibn Kathir in Sura 23 ayat 14 . Probably it is Against observation.Help me kindly

What is meant by the sky being built or a building? For example in these next two verses Quran 2:22 and Quran 40:64 the word بِنَآءًۭ is used which i think means building. Quran 40:64 > "It is Allāh who made for you the earth a place of settlement and the sky a structure [i.e., ceiling] and formed you and perfected your forms and provided you with good things. That is Allāh, your Lord; then blessed is Allāh, Lord of the worlds." and Quran 2:22 > "[He] who made for you the earth a bed [spread out] and the sky a ceiling and sent down from the sky, rain and brought forth thereby fruits as provision for you. So do not attribute to Allāh equals while you know [that there is nothing similar to Him]." and in Quran 50:6 the word used is بَنَيْنَـٰهَا which means built i think > "Have they not looked at the heaven above them - how We structured it and adorned it and [how] it has no rifts?"

So this ayah in Holy Quran (4:140) states, "He has already revealed to you in the Book that when you hear Allah’s revelations being denied or ridiculed, then do not sit in that company unless they engage in a different topic, or else you will be like them.1 Surely Allah will gather the hypocrites and disbelievers all together in Hell." Does this ayah include every instance of kufr/shirk including fantasy ones like a movie where there is a fictional god or a book about greek mythology? Or is it refering to explicitely denying or mocking a particular verse of Holy Quran? Also the ones has done it, has he commited a major sin or a minor sin?

AOA, I've come to know that Ibn Abbas, a companion of Holy Prophet, wrote a Tafseer on Quran but unfortunately it got corrupted or fabricated by what many Islamic scholars call Israelites. However, many Tafseers regarded as extremely authentic like Ibn Kathir have quotes or reports taken from Ibn Abbas. So does it make certain Tafseers like these full or error too or were they filtered out properly?

Allah has said that He would destroy everything, so would He destroy the Kursi too and does that mean that Allah will destroy everything and He will be the only one who will remain in the end?

I want to know how the Arabic language explains this verse Surah Isra verse 1 "Glory be to the One Who took His servant ˹Muḥammad˺ by night from the Sacred Mosque to the Farthest Mosque whose surroundings We have blessed, so that We may show him some of Our signs. Indeed, He alone is the All-Hearing, All-Seeing." Initially Allah swt refers to himself in the third person (glory be to the one who-) and then later refers to himself as We (the royal we in English) which switches to first person and then later addresses himself again in the third person saying "he is the all hearing" , Can anyone who speaks arabic explain this because in English it would be odd. The simplest conclusion would be to assume that in "we may show **him** -" and "indeed **he** is the all hearing" both are referring to same person , can someone explain why this is not the case

The alleged error is that the quran refers to that semen creates the embryo but it is the sperm cells and not the semen itself, 1 sperm cell + ovum = embryo not semen+ovum sense semen is a lot of spermcells How can this be explained ? The author of the Qur'an describes the formation of a human embryo from fluids emanating from the man (and possibly also of the woman). This reflects the contemporary, but incorrect, view that the embryo is initially formed out of semen stored in the womb. In fact, semen is the vehicle for the sperm cells, one of which fuses with a woman's ovum in her fallopian tube, and the resulting cell divides and travels back into the womb for implantation. While English translations mention a "drop of seed", or "drop of sperm", the Arabic word in question literally means a small amount of liquid, a euphemism for semen.

I heard before we can't see the heaven, but do these verses mean that we are able to? I kind of am having doubts. What is the meaning when seeing how the sky is built? Quran 67:3 > And who created seven heavens in layers. You do not see in the creation of the Most Merciful any inconsistency. So return [your] vision [to the sky]; do you see any breaks? Quran 50:6 > Have they not looked at the heaven above them - how We structured it and adorned it and [how] it has no rifts?

> وَلَا تَكُونُوا۟ كَٱلَّذِينَ نَسُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ فَأَنسَىٰهُمْ أَنفُسَهُمْ > ۚ أُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْفَـٰسِقُونَ > > "And do not be like those who forgot Allah, so He made them forget > themselves. It is they who are ˹truly˺ rebellious." [Surah Al Hashr, > ayah:19] My question is what it means to "forget oneself?" How does it manifest in our daily lives? Examples based on the world in 2025/signs of it, are preferable to make it easier to relate & to self-reflect to improve inshaAllah.

I have read multiple interpretations regarding this verse. I found that scholars have mentioned different sayings about the latter portion of the ayah "أنا له لحفظون" about who does the pronoun له refer to in the verse. Some say this refers to Prophet Muhammad S.A.W. I just wanted to know that is there any principle due to which the widely one is accepted is it refers to الذكر itself and if it's agreed upon. Please guide me I'm trying to clear my doubt regarding this for a quite long. Since there's an akhbari scholars saying that there is differences in interpretation of this ayah and therefore cannot be used as evidence for divine preservation. He also quotes Sunni tafsirs to support his claim. His arguments are causing doubts in my mind.

in Quran 21:33 and Quran 36:40 the verses mention the day and the night and the sun and the moon in an orbit swimming. What is meant by the sun not being able to overtake the moon? Does that mean the sun cant rise at night, or does it mean the sun cant collide with the moon? And I already know the sun has its own orbit, but in these verses the way the day and night and sun and moons orbits are mentioned seems relative to each other and it wouldnt make sense that the suns orbit around the galaxy affects the day and night Could the orbitting of the sun and moon mean from our perspectives? Like how we see the sun rise and set and the same with the moon? Or would this interpretation not work with the word "falak". Also what is meant by the orbitting of the day and night? It seems to mean from our perspective so would the same apply for the sun and moon? I'm really struggling to understand this and would really appreciate an explanation because this causes me a lot of doubts

There's a range of translations of Quran 54:17 ; here are some examples: > And in truth We have made the Qur'an easy to remember; but is there any that remembereth? -- M. M. Pickthall > We have made it easy to learn lessons from the Quran. Is there anyone who would receive admonition? -- Wahiduddin Khan > And indeed, We have made the Qur'an easy for direction and guidance, but is there anyone who will take advice? -- Dr. Mohammad Tahir-ul-Qadri > We have really made this Qur'an easy (to understand)! Is anyone there to heed? -- Dr. Munir Munshey It seems there's two major interpretations of this ayat: - The Qur'an is easy to understand. This could be in order to help everyone, despite their level of education. I've also seen it argued that the repetitive nature of the Qur'an is evidence to support this interpretation. > The Qur'an's guidance for man’s conduct are plain and easy to understand and act upon... > ...Masha Allah, how easy Allah has made it for us to memorise the Qur’an and increase our rewards. -- Productive Muslim - Admonishion in the Qur'an is easy to understand. "Do good and get closer to paradise. Do bad and get closer to punishment". > Some people have misconstrued the words yassarnal- Quran to mean that the Quran is an easy Book; no knowledge is required to understand it so much so that a person even without the knowledge of the Arabic language, can write a commentary on it, and can deduce any injunctions he likes from its verses independent of the Hadith and Islamic Law, whereas the context in which these words occur, indicates that they are meant to make the people realize this: One means of the admonition are the dreadful torments that descended upon the rebellious nations, and the other means is this Quran, which guides you to the right path by argument and instruction. -- Islamic Studies It's unclear which is correct. (And I cannot exclude the possibility that both of these interpretations are simultaneously correct.) **Question**: Should Qur'an 54:17 be interpreted as meaning the Qur'an is intended to be simple to understand? Answering this is probably going to require familiarity with the Arabic: > وَلَقَدْ يَسَّرْنَا الْقُرْآنَ لِلذِّكْرِ فَهَلْ مِن مُّدَّكِرٍ

in the quran 7 157, its translated that >“˹They are˺ the ones who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whose description they find in their Torah and the Gospel." What does this mean? cause it appears from the words used in the translation that its talking in present tense but the tawrat and injeel didnt even exist at that point it was corrupted, so is the verse actually talking about when each of these books were around?

I heard from shias that 5:55 is talking about Ali (AS), even in sunni sources, I just wanted to know if that's true. Also I'm sorry if I sound weird it's my second time being on website and I'm still a minor, so thanks for whoever will answer this question. السلام عليكم ورحمه الله وبركاته

There's a particular surah in my phone but am struggling to know the reciters of the surah because I collected the surah through xender from someone and I want to download the remaining surah. How can I do it?

What does Allah mean when He says: > Have they not considered how Allāh begins creation and then repeats it? Indeed that, for Allāh, is easy. (29:19) I understand that He originated creation. But what is meant by, > "and then repeats it"? How have scholars interpreted this?

> To Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth; He creates what he wills. He gives to whom He wills female [children], and He gives to whom He wills males. **Or He makes them [both] males and females**, and He renders whom He wills barren. Indeed, He is Knowing and Competent. -- Qur'an 42:49-50 These ayat came up in my previous question https://islam.stackexchange.com/q/35022/17163 *Question*: Should "Or He makes them [both] males and females" be interpreted as referring to intersex people? It seems plausible that this instead refers to instances of male-female twins.