I come from a Christian backround but am considering islam.truly understanding classical theistic divine simplicity led me to Tawheed,but I heard that sunni islam rejects divine simplicity so I am confused to what proofs there are in your system for Tawheed? I heard that in orthodox islam God's attributes are not identical or numerically the same as his essence(Though I heard that in the Maturidi it was but I don't think thats true,yet they deny absolute Divine simplicity),so it seems he can have posterior metaphysical parts wich make him up. why then cannot there be one essence and three 'persons' or subsisting relations like the eternalist modalists hold(catholics) or even three essences giving rise to three persons each(like Social trinitarians believe)? Am I wrong that God has parts in orthodox islamic schools like Maturidi or A'shari? if God is absolutely simple,or if he is absolutely one it would follow that he is absolutely simple wouldn't it,and then it would follow that there can be no internal subsisting relations(like the FSH modalism of the catholics) in a absolutely simple being wich would be a step towards absolute monotheism. But orthodox islam has denied this conception if I am correct? From what angle would the orthodox muslim argue against the Trinity in it's two understandings(Eternal Father-son-spirit modalism of the classical theists and the veiled Tritheism of the Social Trinitarians who reject divine simplicity like Platinga and some modern protestants)is basically what I'm asking? wouldn't a being who's essence is identical to its existance be absolutely simple?A being who's essence is not identical to it's existance is Created.the definition or synonym of a uncreated unconditioned being is a being that has its essence and existance as one and the same,yet from what I've studied this would lead to absolute Divine simplicity wich only the Imamiyah affirm? What am I getting wrong here?and from your perspective as a a'shari or maturidi what are the lists of philosophical arguments for Tawheed against multiplicity of entities as subsisting relations in one essence as the catholics hold,and there being three unique essences and three persons as the social trinitarians hold?

As selamu Aleykum Brothers and Sisters, I have hard waswasa when i Play Videogames which contains false religions or false gods as example the Greek ones. I have read a lot about it that playing such games is not kufr as long as you don't believe in this falsehood. I still have waswasa that I could have done kufr when I play. I generally have waswasa about kufr. I know that playing these games are sinful but If I could prefer I would like to live with a sin and not with kufr al Akbar like any of us. So what can I do against these thoughts I keep repeating la illaha il Allah when I see something shirk.

I am looking for a professional answer to the following question. I have read books claiming that Allah is not a "God." One of the authors is famous. While technically analyzing the statements of the author, I need a certain level of knowledge in Arabic. **Question:** >If we translate the phrase of the Kalimat al-Tawhid ("La ilaha illa Allah") as "There is no God, only Allah," then, if Allah is definitively not a god, the particle illa (إِلَّا) should technically indicate an exception munqati' (disconnected exception) rather than muttasil (connected exception). My question is purely technical, not philosophical: If Allah is definitively not a God, then in the phrase Kalimat al-Tawhid, is the exception particle munqati' or muttasil? I seek an **authoritative** answer, as I couldn't find a definitive explanation anywhere online. I am aware that "Allah" is a proper noun, whereas "God" is not. Therefore, I understand that the name "Allah" cannot be translated as "God." However, this does not necessarily mean that "Allah" is definitively not a "God". --- Here is a quote from the author: >The Meaning Of The Word Of Unity The Word of Unity: La ilaha illallah, comprises the foundation of the Islamic faith. > >Taken literally, it means: There is no god, only Allah. > >If we evaluate its meaning… La means No, ilaha means god, i.e. there is no god. > >Note that, the first part of the word of unity is a denunciation: there is no god, there is no deity, after which it establishes the realityilla Allah, there is ONLY ALLAH! > >It is of paramount importance that we understand how big a mistake it would be to evaluate and translate this statement according to the colloquial language spoken by the Arab population today. > >Let us give an example. The Arabic statement: La rajulun illa Ali can be translated literally as: ‘There is no real man except/but Ali’ or ‘There is no man like Ali’ or ‘Among the men none are Ali’s alike’ (note that all of these statements denote there are in fact other men, but they are not like Ali). However, when the word illa is used in conjunction with the word ALLAH it does not mean ‘a god like Allah’, that is, it should not be understood as ‘there other gods, but none are like Allah’, as the very meaning denoted by the word ALLAH invalidates this supposition from the onset. > >Just as the auxiliary verb was (khaane), when used in conjunction with Allah, loses its general meaning and is taken as the present simple tense, when the word except (illa) appears next to the word Allah it also loses its general connotation and is taken to mean only. Here is an example: > >KhaanALLAhu gafurur rahiyma cannot be translated as ‘Allah was Ghafur and Rahim’as the qualities denoted by the Names of Allah cannot be subject to time; they are ever present and ever effective. > >Similarly, illa Allah cannot mean except Allah, which denotes the existence of others, but must be understood as only Allah! > >The compositional qualities of the One to which the word Allah refers, does not accept the existence of another, especially that beside itself. > >Hence, khaane, illa and all other expressions that denote time and (other) existence must be construed appropriate to the meaning of Allah when used in conjunction with it. Otherwise, it will inevitably result in the conception of a god beyond! > >Now examining the Word of Unity: There is no God, there is only Allah in light of this consideration, the first message that we are given is There is no god. Only after this definite denunciation we are told ILLA ALLAH. As explained above, because the word illa is used besides the word Allah the only correct construal of this statement can be ONLY ALLAH as opposed to except Allah or but Allah for there is no other being in existence to which Allah can be compared to or excluded from! Therefore, in order for the UNITY and ONENESS (non-duality) of the Islamic faith to be communicated correctly, the Word of Unity must be understood and translated accurately. > >Indeed, there is only Allah, and Allah is not a god to be deified, idolized or worshipped, as per the message ‘there is no god’! In fact, Allah isn’t even a god that is beyond man and creation! > >So, what is worship as opposed to servitude? > >To deify or worship something necessitates the existence of a god. That is, the very act of worshipping someone or something means there is a worshipper and one that is worshipped. This leads to duality. There is a you as an individual, and then there is your god who is beyond you, and you worship this god. Clearly, this is an interaction between two parties. We may say then, that worship, in this context, refers to the collection of all the activities that are done in respect to this earthly or heavenly (exterior) God.

So my question is, is it right for a sunni to deem of christians who believe in the trinity as polytheists? what scholars agree with this? is there a consensus?

I’m Christian and want to convert but I haven’t seen any firm proofs of tawheed. The Quran has two arguments but I am not convinced by them.not because they’re wrong but because I need more analysis of these arguments. Any arguments from kalam?

Pantheism (Pan = all, theism=God) is the view that God is all. Although some definitions describe pantheism as the view that God is the universe or God is nature, the more general definition is that these (universe, nature) are manifestations of God. See this . In other words, pantheism defines God as the totality. All matter, energy, space and time. The universe and every other universe which may exist. All creators and all destroyers. All things, ideas, forms. Every-thing and every-nothing. In sum, He is the representation of the oneness of all. Is this conception of God compatible with Islam? If not, why not and If yes, why yes?

if there are two divine beings,and because they are all fully divine they have the same nature,wouldn't their wills always be in agreement since the will comes from the nature? how then can Quran:23:89-92 and Quran 21:22 be true?

Is there any proof from the sunnah or Qur'an that tawhid should be categorised into 3 parts. I've seen many scholars particularly of the Ashari creed opposing this while a few scholars such as Al Tabari, Ibn Taymiyya, Ibn Al Qayyim and later Muhammad Ibn Abd Al Wahhab saying that tawhid is divided into 3 categories: Tawheed al-Ruboobiyyah (Oneness of Divine Lordship), Tawheed al-Uloohiyyah (Oneness of Divinity) and Tawheed al-Asma’ wa’l-Sifaat (Oneness of the Divine Names and Attributes). Which one is the correct view (if possible to answer)?

What is Tawhid in islam according to quran and hadeed? Please explain it in detail. And what are the different types of Tawhid

Here in Bangladesh, govt. is building big statues of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman (leader of out freedom war). But it is a matter of surprise that, majority of our people 83% are against it. Even Mujib even was against him. But, now as we can see, most of the media is trying to show us Scholars (I don't know whether they are fake munfique scholars with bribe given to them) talking that statues are permitted in Islam. In Bangla language, we use the word "Murti" for statues. But there is also a less commonly used word "Vaskarya". They both refer to the same thing. Govt. is trying to tell us that Vaskarya is not Murti. And the govt. is building these statues in every district in our country beside road. So TV Channels and medias are bought by govt. My question is, are building these statues actually permitted in Islam?

What, if anything, is _fundamentally_ unique about Islam? Obviously there are different stories, texts, and traditions associated with Islam than with other religions. But if we cut away all the fluff from all the world religions... Is there anything that stands out as unique about the core of Islam? To clarify what I'm asking: * Many religions have prophets that claim to speak on behalf of god(s). * Many religions have scriptures, often claimed to be inspired by their god(s). * Many religions report miracles, or other supernatural phenomena. * Many religions claim to be the only "true" religion. * Many religions claim to offer forgiveness of sin. * Many religions claim to be historically based and accurate. * Many religions claim to improve society. If Islam just has a "better version" of all of these points, it sounds like Islam is fundamentally the same as most/all other religions, it's just "more completely evolved," so to speak. So what I'm asking for is any characteristics of Islam that are **fundamentally unique and important**, and not just improvements on existing ideas.

A‘oothu bi kalimaatil-laahit-taammaati min sharri maa khalaq. “I seek protection in the perfect words of Allah from every evil that He has created.” Isn't seeking refuge in the perfect words of Allah shirk? What is the ruling when it comes to seeking refuge?

Is it allowed to say that "this person saved my life"? And also "If it was not for him I would have been dead"? Also "We won the match because of him"? Are these statements contradicting to Tawhid because ALLAH'S name has to be used in them instead of People?

While it is useful as an academic and scholastic approach to divide Tawheed into categories for further in depth understanding - are the ones who believe and preach it **as if it was an integral** part of Islam an act of innovation? There's quite a worrying trend amongst students of knowledge where they put the division of Tawheed in 3 as a necessity - oblivious to the fact that it could be divided more or even shortened if put forth in a new scholastic and academic model.

What is genuineness of narration/report which approximately says that Umer(May Allah be pleased with him) cut down the tree at hudaibia in order to prevent people from committing acts of innovation ? The tree under which approximately 1400 companions(May Allah be pleased with all of them) pledged with Prophet(Peace be upon him)

This question was from a Hindu That Islam is based on tawheed oness of Allah (god) if I believe that God has no image no idol not begotten doesn't have wife or child and believe in his uniqueness BUT don't accept prophet Muhammad saw and quran to be relevant to him, still do I have chance to enter jannah. From my point of view he is correct because there are many hadiths which the PRIMORDIAL SIN in islam that puts you in hell for eternity is shirk and it will be not forgived otherwise you have chance....and there is hadiths which says a man came to prophet claimed that he has love for surah ikhlas then the prophet saw said your love for this surrah will enter you jannah ( indicating that to enter jannah aleast you have to be monotheist)

If Islam strives against idolatry, can you explain why when Muhammad returned to Mecca and destroyed the false idols, he intentionally left the Ka'bah which is now centric to Islam. I think I understand that the Ka'bah seems like more of a connection to Allah though Abraham, but praying in the direction of the Ka'bah, isn't that somewhat hypocritical?

Does "All praise is due to Allah" in the Opening of the Quran mean that all praise is due to Him as opposed to only some praise, or that all praise is due to Him and not to be directed at anything/anyone else?

I was once listening to a ruler of a non muslim nation saying that " I will give the power to the people of this country" And i said to myself that "no you will eat it up all by yourself'. Is this regarded as something that shows support for democracy?and is it regarded as going against the Shariah even though the leader was of a nation that was originally disbelieving.

What is the meaning of Shirk and the meaning of Tawheed ? What is the difference between these two? I tried searching for the difference but could not find it.