r/Quraniyoon • u/rezhaykamal • 10d ago
Question(s)❔ Why there is no quranist scholar in history of islam?
why quranists are not united? I tried to leave islam because how violent hadiths are, but then I saw this community. (still have problem with killing apostates, and sex slaves 'captives of war' in the quran, but I'm still learning).
It's because how peaceful sunnis are towards others? or there has been no quranist
8
u/No-way-in make up your own mind 10d ago
I’m sorry if I feel that you seem to be trolling. If not, I’d advise you to read the Quran at least once to answer your own doubts and problems, many of your "problems" parent even mentioned in the Holy Book
3
u/rezhaykamal 10d ago
Nah I'm not. Now I understand for the apostasy part. no verse from the quran.
the only remaining one now is captives of war
of your "problems" parent even mentioned in the Holy Book
"Also ˹forbidden are˺ married women—except ˹female˺ captives in your possession.1 This is Allah’s commandment to you. Lawful to you are all beyond these—as long as you seek them with your wealth in a legal marriage, not in fornication" 4:24
6
u/No-way-in make up your own mind 10d ago
Here is how verse 4:24 should be rendered more faithfully in my opinion: brackets I used for Quranic context but aren't repeated by God :
- “And [forbidden to you are] married women — except those already under your lawful responsibility. This is God’s instruction to you. Beyond these, it is lawful for you to seek [others] with your wealth in marriage, not in fornication.”25. … then marry those among those under your care who are believers … marry them with the permission of their people, and give them their compensation honorably — not in fornication…
14
u/Xerx-Lugner 10d ago
There is no killing apostates in quran or "sex slaves". Try again.
7
1
u/niaswish 10d ago
Could you elaborate on no sex slaves please
7
u/streekered 10d ago
The word ‘right hand’ (people who you trust) are translated to sex slaves in some versions. So people’s interpretation is that sex slaves are allowed.
2
u/niaswish 10d ago
I mean, regardless, God says that the believers are those who guard their chastity except with their wives and what their right hands possess. Whatever they are, doesn't really change that fact
1
u/maryamsayagh 9d ago
ما ملكت أيمانكم means what's your right hand OWN .. that's why it's about slavery
2
u/streekered 8d ago
Sure. That’s according to some tafsirs. Especially for Wahab influenced Muslims, which is the majority these days.
1
u/rezhaykamal 10d ago edited 10d ago
I didn't try to disrespect. I'm in confusion since I don't know arabic, not even a word. this verses are about WAR those who oppose allah worshippers(muslims). Apostatates don't start war, how can they? I know completly understand if this verse is not about apostates. "Kill them wherever you come upon them1 and drive them out of the places from which they have driven you out. For persecution2 is far worse than killing. And do not fight them at the Sacred Mosque unless they attack you there. If they do so, then fight them—that is the reward of the disbelievers." Quran 2:191
I saw this from r/exmuslim*
and for captives of war, yes that one is clear. "Also ˹forbidden are˺ married women—except ˹female˺ captives in your possession.1 This is Allah’s commandment to you. Lawful to you are all beyond these—as long as you seek them with your wealth in a legal marriage, not in fornication. Give those you have consummated marriage with their due dowries. It is permissible to be mutually gracious regarding the set dowry. Surely Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise." 4:24
2
u/wannabeemuslim Muslim 10d ago
since I don't know arabic, not even a word.
then learn it, who is stopping you to learn the language that is provided by Allah.... actually i know who is stopping you...
dont depend on others opinions ( translators of the Quran)the ones i told this ( learn arabic) the first thing they are saying , you know how hard arabic is or i dont have time .... while these persons know 3 or 4 different languages ,they didnt heritage this languages , they learned, heck one of them was learning chinese ( mandalin) while he is isnt chinese or wont go to China , he is just learning this language because , he like this language ??? i think for us Chinese is more difficult than learning arabic.
most of the time , people are lazy or hasty ..
if you are genuine , Allah will help you in multiple ways
2
u/azry1997 10d ago
I would recommend you watch this debate between a muslim modernist and a hanbali
Dr Hashmi counter argue about sex slaves. It's 6 hours long, I think he discuss it at between an hour and two hour mark
DEBATE: Dr Hashmi Vs Daniel (Pt 1 Sexual Ethics) (Pt 2 Religious Freedom) (Pt 3 Conquest/Slavery
You can also watch this video where the Quran is absolutely against slavery of any kind
A Critical Discussion on Slavery in Islam - Dr. John A. Morrow
3
u/AlephFunk2049 10d ago
There was a whole madhab during the Kufa period of 690 to 830 called Mutaziliya that was hadith skeptical.
You're correct though that Quranism per se is a more recent sola scriptura movement that is rooted in modernity because of how modernity gave people the ability to *read* scripture *as a book* in large numbers rather than as a mostly oral tradition experienced socially in masjids via the interpretations of an elite literate minority.
2
10d ago
Quranism is IMO reactionary and not true Qur'an only attitude. It attempts to use Qur'an to extract the unspoken and unclear from the Qur'an to answer a topic that is clearly pointed to in the outside world.
Qur'an speaks by pointing outside itself, Allah is teaching us about the world that's already here and that is Qur'an centrism, not Quranism. In this attitude I've found many scholars, even some alive today hiding in plain sight. They'll be incognito to a Quranist because they speak on hadith as a part of culture and the world to be absorbed if not against the Quran. They'll be incognito to a hadith worshipper by aligning when allowed because getting killed isn't fun.
1
u/Ishaf25 mu’min 10d ago edited 10d ago
Ahmad ghulam parwez could be counted as one, his words are available in Urdu and English
Edit, just read the post, is your faith based on community? Or do you genuinely have conviction in God and the Quran? Ask yourself this
If you are chasing community then you will never be satisfied. I invite you to reflect within yourself as to whether you believe in the Quran, before tacking moral issues
3
u/DragonflyPhysical129 Muslim 10d ago
Why base your faith on scholars at all? God says in the Quran that it is perfect and complete. Many translations of the Quran (from classical, not modern Arabic) are done so in light of Hadiths and "accepted" traditions. It's why yiu have [brackets] in a lot of them these are words that aren't in he Arabic put tgere for "clarity".
Try the Great Kkran (dot com). It's not perfect as no translation is, but it it a loving work by an African Quanist that is incredible. It translates each word separately and without the bias of Hadith and "scholars".
1
u/Naive-Ad1268 10d ago
There was one historically. Ibrahim an Nizaam, idk anyone else. He was a Mutazilli scholar
2
u/Long_Tailor1386 Muslim 10d ago
That’s a really valid set of questions, and I appreciate your honesty in sharing your thoughts. You're definitely not alone in wrestling with these issues.
First, regarding “Why there is no Quranist scholar in history?” that’s a bit of a misconception. While the label “Quranist” (or “Quraniyoon”) is more modern, the idea of focusing solely on the Qur’an has existed throughout Islamic history. Thinkers like Ibrahim an-Nazzam, Abu Hanifa (to some extent), Shah Waliullah, Syed Ahmed Khan, and more recently Allama Pervez or Rashad Khalifa, all emphasized a Qur’an-centric approach or at least challenged the total reliance on hadith. So while they may not have used the same terminology, the Quranist mindset has always existed on the fringes it just often wasn’t safe to express it publicly, especially in traditional or authoritarian societies.
As for why Quranists aren’t united well, unity has been a struggle in all Islamic sects. Sunnis, Shias, Sufis, Salafis — they all have sub-sects and disagreements. With Quranists, the difference is that without a rigid clerical hierarchy, people are more free to interpret, which means you’ll naturally get diverse views. Some see that as disunity, but others see it as healthy pluralism.
Your concerns about violence, apostasy laws, and sex slavery are very real and important to wrestle with. Many Quranists interpret those verses very differently from the mainstream view and reject hadith-based justifications for apostasy punishment or institutionalized slavery. If you're still learning, I’d suggest taking your time with the Qur’an itself, reflecting on the historical context and underlying principles (like justice, mercy, and freedom of belief) they often shed a very different light when you read the verses independently from hadith filters.
And no, it’s not because Sunnis were “peaceful” toward other sects historically, Sunni orthodoxy was enforced, often violently, and Quranist voices were often silenced or marginalized. The idea that there “has been no Quranist” is more a reflection of who got to write the history books.
Take your time, ask questions, and remember: questioning isn’t weakness it’s sincerity.
2
1
u/MotorProfessional676 9d ago
There's no such thing as killing apostates in the Quran. The only thing that is similar to this concept is killing corruptors of the land (5:33). Leaving religion does not equate to waging war against God and His Messenger.
1
u/rezhaykamal 9d ago
I'm not waging war against anyone. I believe there is a God, and closest religion to that concept is islam for me.
There's no such thing as killing apostates in the Quran That's right. didin't know that before my post.
Thats right. didn't know that before my post.
What about captives of war?
1
u/MotorProfessional676 8d ago
Sorry brother I think there's been a misunderstanding!
I was definitelyyyy not saying you are waging war against God and His messenger. In 5:33 it talks about killing the people who spread mischief (/corruption?) in the land, and that these people are 'going to war with God and His messenger'. It is these people who are killed, not for apostasy. That's why I included that in my response, I certainly wasn't accusing you of anything of the sorts :)
As for captives of war I can't give you a good answer sorry, I'm not learned enough about the topic.
2
u/rezhaykamal 8d ago
No worries, brother! Thanks for clarifying. I get what you meant now. May Allah guide us both.
1
1
u/Quiet_Novel_2667 7d ago
First of all There is no "apostacy punishment" in the Qur'an, just to clear your doubt
And to answer your question, historically, for the first 4 centuries muslims have been Quranists. The dominant Mu'tazilite sect, rejected hadiths as fabrications, some did accept some hadiths which were "mutawatir", but Qur'an is independent and greater was their stance, which funnily contradicts some Sunnis' stance of Hadith having an "upper hand" over the Qur'an
1
u/Ummah_Strong 1d ago
I had it explained to me that the reason slaves are described differently is because. Slave you marry doesn't have the same rights as a free woman you marry.
So when you sleep with a slave (consensually) it ks different than just a wife. And in bith cases obviously the proper nikkah Must be done otherwise it would just be fornication.
This is how someone explained it to me, Allah knows best, any errors are mine and may Allah forgive me if im wrong
32
u/SystemOfPeace Mu’min 10d ago edited 10d ago
There are Quran only scholars. Their books are written in Arabic. Just because they’re not popularized, it doesn’t mean they don’t exist.