So you're not non-muslim ?

Your welcome. God bless you

@@QuranicIslam brother... may I know your email? I have some doubts, and want to ask you some questions

@@ARKAN9765 sure, it's insearchofthequranicislam@gmail.com but the best place to find me where we can chat is on Reddit

Jazakallah for the comment 👍

👍🏼 welcome

Still in prison without trial. Please sign the petitions, links in the pinned comment

@@razak2373 Walaykum asalaam. Because there are universal ethics and morals whose proof is already established in every human heart; not to steal, murder, cheat, lie, aggress, oppress, etc ... They were on the brink of doing much of that because they were divided and enemies. But then the Reminder came and the joining of hearts in friendship through Islam and their belief and submission to God with a submission that prevented those evils ... that is what saved them. Had they just "believed in God" but continued on the path of animosity, injustice, hatred and aggression, they still would have fallen off the brink into Hell For the History; This is talking mainly of the two tribes of the Ansaar who were at war constantly with each other, leading to more and more aggression. Before Islam another war was going to break out between them which could have been worse than the previous.

@@Naseefabdurazack Walaykum assalaam.I don't think it's a problem. It's just a job/character.

Or do you think that you will enter Paradise while such [trial] has not yet come to you as came to those who passed on before you? They were touched by poverty and hardship and were shaken until [even their] messenger and those who believed with him said,"When is the help of Allah ?" Unquestionably, the help of Allah is near(2:214)

@@QuranicIslam Salam. Please provide me the link for the petition, if possible. I couldn't find it.

Inshallah the next one won't take as long

@@minakojuve1891 I don't think Hindus are mushrikeen. Mushrikeen isn't really about idol worship. That's nothing. Please read my comment on Reddit here; www.reddit.com/r/Marifa/comments/djb74x/zina_the_prohibition_of_marrying_mushrikeen/f4g4dte?

@@QuranicIslam pls read archive.org/download/WhatDoesKafirMean

@@minakojuve1891 Sorry ... You've written a lot and I'm very busy right now. But no, the verse is talking about those who say "God is the third OF three" not those who say He is three in one in a trinity. But anyway ... If you think you are clear on the issue then Alhamdulillah. I'll read your replies when I can

@@QuranicIslam I am not clear. What I have written is from an article, Ijust copy pasted so that you can read it. The link to the article is given in the last reply.

Yes of course. Stay blessed

Signed and will share. May Allah protect the sheikh and reward you for your work.

The play list is on my home page ... have a quick look and if you don't find it I'll link it ... just sometimes comments with links don't appear

Amen ... May God bless him. If he ever gets out of the Saudi prisons alive, I will reach out and ask him. My view though is that the the hatred and animosity referred to hear was started by "their people" not by Ibrahim and those with him. That can be seen from the story of Ibrahim in the Qur'an; he was thrown in a fire and his own father (really his uncle) wanted to stone him if he didn't stop preaching. The "until" in the verse isn't really until only. The particle حتى means until and also "so that". But both need an explanation. If you say "until" then it means that because of their intense animosity to monotheism it will never end unless they accept monotheism. "Unless" is also a less common use for حتى If you say it means "so that" then it means that Ibrahim and those with him would also keep to the animosity that the others started because of their monotheism in the hopes of it making them accept monotheism. But the bottom line is that those verses aren't in isolation from the rest of the sura, which directly addresses us with how to act, and it wasn't Ibrahim and those with him who instigated the animosity. Hope that helps Salaams

Qur'anic Islam salam can you help me with this i got this from a salafi Muslim He says that some words u can’t find the meaning just by talking the and Quran refer it as moteshabehat so u need the Hadith to understand it for example in chapter 33 verse 33 god referred to households of prophet Mohammad and confirm that god has cleaned the household and don’t refer to them in oder sections how should we know what exactly mean here of course not every Hadith is genuine so if it’s opposite the Quran then it’s not genuine very simple! How i can i respons to them? Please help! Peace, The Quran alone.

Salaams ... Sorry I only just saw this now. Well it is very simple. Firslty those verses don't concern us in any practical sense. Not everything in the Qur'an is for us. Some extra things are really just for then. Secondly, these verses are not mutashabehat ... they say exactly what they want to say and no more ... that's different than mutashabehat. The problem is in people wanting to know things that God does not want to say. We should submit to that. The household of the Prophet has been purified, and that's that. But of course if you are a real historian you can know from narrations too the actual names.

Qur'anic Islam Thanks alot brother! Your doing good job we really needed Because the Islam is hijacked by Brand Islam followers. We need to work for a peacefull Islam inshallah. Peace🌹the Qur’an alone🌹

@@QuranicIslam where is the evidence its his uncle?

Still in prison, both him and his elder son 'Abbas.

First let your religious mentality be Qur'anic, take hold of a Qur'anic mindsight, then it will be easy to see which Hadiths you can "study". Other than that, you can try to study Hadiths just to understand the history and what happened in early Islam.

Yes ... see Dr Khaled Abou Fadl. Other than him, the closest I personally know was Adnan Ibrahim. Hassan Saqqaf is also good. Ask on my friend's channel; Jamal Ziryab. He knows a lot more than i do and i he as numerous translations as well. But if you want in english, definitely see Dr Khaled Abou Fadl

@@QuranicIslam جزاك الله خير حبيبي

The moral and theological are intertwined when talking about God. Like that God would sent His son (if He had one) to be a blood-sacrifice. Isn't that a moral argument that stems from a theological argument? But in any case, you are making assumptions here and not asking a precise question. For one thing, Quranists arguments (and I assume you mean for rejecting Hadiths? Again, your question is in the air) are not typically moral, they are Qur'anic and historical arguments. Secondly, I don't reject all Hadiths. So I don't know where you want to classify me. And lastly, a very basic theological argument for Quranism is that you should give God enough credit as to believe that He sent a Book that in and of itself is sufficient to guide you not just to salvation and paradise, but to the very _highest_ level of Paradise, spirituality and wisdom. I don't think you understand this space enough to engage in the way you seem to want to. Instead engage with a view to learning from a group themselves what they themselves believe ... not what you learn about them through their detractors

No certainly wasn't misleading. It's actually a direct translation of what he said in Arabic. Maybe it isn't the phrase you want or are used to, but it is what it is, and all I'm doing here is translating as best I can. Tayyib = good, Taahir = pure, Aal = family. He didn't say "household" (Ahlu Baytihi) nor "his blood-relations" ('itratihi) and didn't say "holy" which would probably be "Rabbaniyeen" or "qidisyeen" or something like that. If you want you can confirm all of that with someone who knows Arabic since it seems you don't.

@@QuranicIslam Don't say "certainly " I'm skilled in Arabic and do translate accurately, hence I note this out, so no point in trying to make me appear as a non-Arabic knowing individual as you lastly said. Jazakallah much for translating it, but you could complete your work by being humble First, before my initial criticism, and after you showed me you're accurate in عترته and the other word, I'd say : " أهدف من خلالها الوصول إلى عقلك و قلبك " Is not ".. that i hope reaches the heart " as you said , but it is : "..which i aim through, to reach your mind and heart " or " ..my goal is to reach your mind and heart through it " Back to Our discussion. So.. your translation " and the pure and the good members of his family " translates to و الأفراد/الأعضاء الجيّدين الطاهرين من عائلته However, و آله الطيبين الطاهرين Is " his kind and pure family " طيب هي kind و جيد هي good But no big deal here.. it's alright.. sensitively differently Members of his family is not آله آله : is his family And this is just the 1st minute i watched, Rather than protecting your ego, try conceding that fact It's what i want .. it's what أمانة wants

​@@hsnztn2802 Well, honestly I do stand by that "certainly" because it certainly isn't misleading. I don't think anyone truly skilled in Arabic would call my translation misleading. Maybe it is not how you would want it, but it certainly isn't misleading. And I said it "seems" like you don't, and honestly again, based on what you first said it seemed that you weren't an Arabic speaker, and from this reply it still actually seems that way ... at least not a fluent Arabic speaker. Yes my friend, I know it said "mind and heart" ... do you think when you are reading subtitles in a movie or on a Spanish KZfaq video that they translate word for word? Have you ever done some translating work? Especially for videos ... there is some balancing that you must do between the number of words you right and the time stamps. Sometimes a short phrase in one language would take up too much space in translation, so you try to cut out the extra and just simplify to get the message across. So that's what I did here. I've had to do that a lot. I actually get complaints that it is too fast ... really they mean there is too much to read in little time ... a few of the videos I even slowed down by 15% to give more room for more accurate translations ... but I realize that really isn't the point in these clips. The crux of what is said is while making the language flow and sound nice. Thanks to ShogonV for his advice on that. Try doing your own translation and you will see that you will have to make such compromises. The rest of your comment you are really just being petty for no reason. Throwing Arabic in isn't making me think your Arabic is better by the way, I'm actually becoming more certain that you aren't a native speaker and are still learning. It looks like Google Translate. Before you said "Tayyib and Tahir" was "holy", which seemed to be the important point for you ... now you say Tayyib means "kind"? ... And no, "good" is a better translation for Tayyib, not kind. Jayyid is "good" for things like "good work", something that is done well, usually an action (فعله فأجاد فيه). But Tayyib is about the nature of a thing itself. Like the Qur'an says "made halal for you are good (Tayyibat) things" ... things intrinsically good ... and the verse "good women are for good men, and good men are for good women" (al-tayyibatu litayyibeen, wal-Tayyiboun liltayyibat) ... which is, funnily enough, a verse used (rightly) in Shia Tradition to talk about Ali and Fatima ... both being "good", both Tayyib ... and both for each other. As for "Aal" it is actually a broader meaning even than family. The "Aal" of Pharaoh killed the children of the Bani Israel and took their women ... was it just Pharaoh's immediate family who did that? Of course not, it was his people, his army. Those under him and his authority. Including his "friend" and chief minister, Hamaan. So I'm sorry, but you are out of your depth, as happens when someone things they are "bigger" in something than they truly are. And that is the real meaning of arrogance ... "takkabbur" is to put yourself or see yourself as bigger than you are ... that's why Allah is Al-Mutakabbir but we don't say He is arrogant ... because He truly is as Big as only He knows, in truth and in reality. And if you are able to take real advice, something which is actually learned from Imam Ali, it is that the arrogant ones will usually see arrogance in the humble which isn't even there. Just as hypocrites see the sincere as hypocrites ... because they can not comprehend that they are truly doing what they are doing out of sincerity, they think they must be secretly devious like themselves. I wasn't being arrogant towards you ...and may Allah protect me from protecting my ego ... I have just said what I have seen. My translation wasn't "misleading", there are probably mistakes somewhere and definitely parts that could be better. But certainly not misleading ... the only reasons you said that is because of some sectarian loyalty. And I also see that you really don't seem to have a firm grip on Arabic, and of that I am now more certain, not less. But if you think you can do better, not just in the first minute, then by all means go ahead. The more who translate decent videos like this the better. If you like, as I've sent to many others, I can even email you all of the .srt (subtite) files so you edit them as you like and use them in your own videos. If you don't want to ask, then some you can even download directly from the videos (the ones you see marked with the "cc" for closed captions) ... there are websites that let you do that. You just paste the video link and it will retrieve the subtitle file for you. Lastly, veiled politeness/advice over arrogance is like a snake in the grass. Be wary of it. Unless you are fighting it, then it is a type of self-delusion. The grass hides the sake. Either it is hiding from you in it, or you are hiding it within it ... in which case it is in the direction of hypocrisy. واالله خيرٌ حافظاً وهو أرحم الراحمين والسلام

@@QuranicIslam again, protecting your ego.. إني عربيٌّ ، تكلّمتُها منذ الصّغر، و لا أزالُ أترجم مراراً و الحمدُلله يقولون لي أنّ ترجمتي سلسة مع مراعاة المعنى الحرفيّ، و بعض الجهلة في التّرجمة، و حتّى الذين لا يعرفون اللغة، قاموا بإطلاق صفة " حرفيّة ك google " على ترجمتي كما فعلتَ هنا.. أخي، الحرفيّة ليست مشكلة إن كانت سلسة .. بل تفي بأمانةٍ المعاني المحدّدة التي وضعها المتكلّم الأصلي للفيديو الذي تتمّ ترجمته.. أفدتني بمسألة ال١٥% و كثافة الكتابة و الاضطرار لتقليلها.. لكن أظلّ أصرّ على أنّ المعنى القرآني هو غير المعنى العربيّ العامّ، و كنت لا أزال أقولها لصديقٍ نيجيريّ عربيّته ضعيفة البارحة.. و شرحتُ له تحديداً بأنّ آل محمّد في المصطلح القرآني هم " المطهّرون المقدّسون،" باتّفاق المسلمين..و إلا، فلمَ الصلاة عليهم واجبة إن لم يكونوا مقدسين؟ فمن أراد الصلاة عليهم قال " holy household أو family ", as they're his immediate family و هذا فهم المسلمين لاسيما حسن المالكي، المفكر الكبير أعزه الله و شكر نشره لما خفي بين الناس لا أتكلم عن عصمةٍ ولا ألزمك بفهم أنهم أهل الكساء الخمسة.. لكن كما قلتَ حضرتك، الترجمة لا تُحبَّذُ حرفيا حسب رأيك، فيتغير المعنى، و ها أنتَ قد جعلت المعنى كما لم تردهُ، و ترجمتَ حرفيا و ترجمتك أوحت بأنهم فقط " جيدون " و "أفراد " من عائلته.. و أذهبت أذهن الناس عن أنهم المقدسون الطاهرون باللفظ الجامع " آل " و " أهل " ، و ليسوا أفراد عاديين نحوَ قولك الذي زدتَه و هو "members " و بالمناسبة، لا ذكر ل " أعضاء members " .. فكان الأجدر إيصال المعنى الذي يعلمه المسلمون كمصطلحٍ قرآني هو misleading إن لم يصل بالمعنى.. الآن و قد أوضحت لك أنّ عربيّتي متينة، و لربّما لا تزال تشك في ذلك يا صديقي.. أسأل البشر من أمثالك عدم التنابز بالأمثال بل الإجابة و المجادلة {بالتي هي أحسن} ، فكن أفضل منا جميعا لا عبرَ إدخالِ أمثالٍ حول الأفاعي و ما يخفى عنك في النفس التي تدّعي و ربّما أنتَ على مشارف قذفها بالظن أسألك كما أسأل معظم الناس المدافعين عن كبريائهم أن يتريّثوا بالظّنّ عن من حولهم.. و أن يحسنوا النية و الألفاظ،( بل و التّرجمة أيضاً 😉) ، مستفيداً منك، بنيّتي أمام الله.. و قابلاً عرضك بإرسال المقاطع لي . Srt و شاكراً لك هذه الفرصة للتّحاور و البناء الثّقافي خاتماً بتقديري لجهودك المهمّة (و ليس الهامّة، إن كنت تعرف ما أعني) سائلاً المولى أن يدخل هذا العمل في ميزان حسناتك.. و لا برمَ أنه داخل و هو أجرٌ كبير.. إلا أن الترجمة دقيقة و تحتاج مراعاة، خاصّةً في أمورٍ حسّاسة كهذا اللفظ الذي لديه معنىً تعبّدياً عظيماً عند المسلمين، ألا و خاصّةً أن الله يصلّي عليهم بنفسه جلّ جلاله.. إليك email-ي Hsnztn@gmail.com

​@@hsnztn2802 طيب يا أخي! ... ما دام أنك تجيد اللغة لماذا هذا العنت كله؟؟؟ يعني الخلاصة اللي فهمته من كلامك مو أنك ضعيف في اللغة بس قوي في مذهبيتك ... وعايزني أترجم على وما تعتقد انت في هذا الموضوع ... يعني في النهاية تلفتنا الإثنين في الفاضي على كيفك ... إمكن الترجمة "misleading" لكن فقط من نظرك الإعتقادي ... أما من ناحية اللغة نفسها فقطعا لا وأساساً هذا كلامه هو ... هي لغته هو السنية ... لغته العادية وهي التي ترجمتها ... فإصىرارك أن هذا ليس المعنى القرآني ليس في محله وبعدين غلط ... ليس في القرآن "آل محمد" لكي يكون له مصطلح ... هذا فقط مذهبيتك تتكلم "وليس في القرآن الأمر بالصلاة على "آل محمد الصلاة عليهم مو واجبة قرآنية لو فعلا جعلت القرآن قيدك ... لكنك لخبطت الموضوع أكثر آل مذكورة في القرآن هم آل فرعون فخذها في الاعتبار إذا فعلا تريد المصطلح القرآني "holy household"وفقط الشيعة الذين يقولون No one else says "holy household" in English, and when Shia do say it, it is because of their beliefs not because it is a translation of anything in Arabic, neither Tayyib nor Tahir nor any combination of both. Even most Sufis, with a few exceptions, don't say "holy" household. Read any English books by Sunnis نعم هم الطيبون الجيدون الطاهرون ... كل من لهم هذه الصفات من آل محمد فأنا وشيخ حسن نصلي عليهم ويستاهلون نصلي عليهم حباً للنبي محمد ... لبس فقط أهل الكسآء أو الأئمة ... أنت عكست المعنى لمذهبيتك وتركز على الأشخاص الفي ذهنك أما نحن وشيخ حسن نعني كل الأفراد من آل محمد فيهم تلك الصفات إلى يوم الدين كما نترضى على كل المتبعين بإحسان الخلاصة أنك تقول فهم المسلون والمصطلح القرآني وتقصد فهم الشيعة مصطلحاتهم ثم تريد ان تلزمني ذلك في الترجمة وإلا فأنا أحمي نفسي وكبري صاح؟ No my friend ... what happened was this; your sectarianism was "pricked" by me translating Tayyib = good, Taahir = pure, Aal = family/people and making the first two as conditions for blessings and peace being upon ANY members of the latter ... which is exactly what I wanted to do, and what Shaykh Hassan (whom I've met spoken to and interacted with often) meant ... and also linguistically correct as you well know. Instead you would rather have me have said what Shia would have; "holy". Which isn't a translation, just a belief. So yes it looked like you didn't know Arabic, perfect;y logical conclusion. We are online. What you show by what you write is what you are: تلك آثآرنا تدل علينا فانظروا بعدنا إلى الآثارِ You kept insisting so it seemed like you didn't know Arabic (even adding things like Tayyib doesn't mean good!?! ... which I now see you have deleted) and further saying I'm being egotistic ... because what? ... I translated linguistically and according to what the speaker said instead of according to your "sectarian correction"? So yes it did look exactly like you were hiding your own inadequacies in Arabic with assertions of ego against me. Even this last reply starts off with that assertion. Sorry but no. The bottom line is this; you're Arabic-English is okay, but your sectarianism is stronger and got the better of it here. PS and Edit/update for the above: When it comes to language, I now see that I was wrong about your Arabic ... I got it the wrong way round. Aside from the sectarianism issue, it isn't your Arabic that is weaker than your English, it is your English that is weaker than your Arabic. I only just realized this after I wrote all of the above. Am I right? I myself have the opposite problem. My English is better than my Arabic. I'm Arab but have lived most of my life in the UK, grew up speaking it, but never really studying it until later in life. I've been working in Middle East for over 9 years now. That's why I'm now noticing the phrases you've used that a native English speaker would not use but Arabic speakers do (as I'm sure you have probably seen similar things in my Arabic, even though Arabic is much more varied). Things you said like "hence I note this out" ... "non-Arabic speaking individual" ... "complete your work by being humble" (that's an Arabic expression, not natural English) ... "First" (instead of 'firstly') ... "sensitively differently" ... all of that is not natural English and some just not correct. And of course the central issue of the debate; that you think English speaking Muslims generally say "holy" household. Sorry but we don't. Firstly because most are Sunnis, and secondly because Salafi/Wahhabi influences have made most Muslims think that term is shirk. If you go to a Muslim English bookshop you will rarely ever see the words "holy household" ... and in writing it isn't even used by all Shia. And when Shia translate Aalihi al-Tayyibeen al-Tahireen, if they use the word "holy" then it is extra ... they say "the goodly and pure members of his holy household" or "the goodly and purified members of his holy household", or something like that ... the point is that "holy" is never a translation of Tayyib and Taahir. Trust me on this. ... and I just realized, even your email address is very typical of a native Arabic speaker's email address; no vowels! ... lol I'm not saying all of that to nitpick and start an argument, or to bring you down. I just find it interesting. I KNEW there was something not right ... especially when you started talking about Tayyib/Jayyid/kind/good and all of that nonsense (which it seems you've realized since you deleted it), which is why I said you were making me MORE certain, not less, that you're Arabic wasn't as good as you thought it was ... but it didn't occur to me that it was your English that was the problem, not your Arabic. Why didn't you just say so? Why make this whole fuss? Why not admit the mistake? Why just quietly delete and edit? And then instead keep saying I'm the one being egotistic, protecting my ego and being arrogant? I freely admit my Arabic is not as good as my English, my English is definitely better. And I'm sorry to have to say this, but having coming back to this part of the world where I am originally from, I have to say that "Arabs" just find it so difficult to admit they are wrong or that they don't know something. They like to act like they know everything, especially if they know just a little more than most of their contemporaries ... THAT'S ego. It's a cultural problem here. And because so many seem to have it, they are quick to see it in others, even when it is not there. So I'm sorry, maybe the above is wrong. Maybe you don't have a "sectarianism" issue ... maybe it is just a language issue after all. I don't know. I really don't want to say any more. Anyway, thank you. This has been quite informative actually. I will send you the .srt files as soon as I get the chance. سلام والله خير حافظا وهو أرحم الراحمين

That's not much to work on ...

The first part of that is wrong, and the second part also applies to Sunnis who say we need Hadiths to guided by the Qur'an

@@QuranicIslam no that s wrong we say that every nations has its own profet and revelations so we follow quran and Muhammed pbuh that practiced it so sahabas that followed him were they sunnis or were they all wrong there is no any sunni at least an educated person that claims that hadith is the most important source of islam but it is the secondary source and one of the most important source that we study to know and practice islam no every hadith is correct and goes in the line with the quran but it doesnt mean that we have to reject all what our beloved prophet did and say the atheists would be also justified saying that quran has contradiction and is not clear so you cant say that because of weak and invented hadiths we have to refuse all hadiths because it means that we as followers of the last prophet and his teachings are just saying that we believe in him as the last messenger of God but in words and actions

hadiths with imams sayings are 2 different things in the first one is the word and action of the chosen one Muhammed pbuh and the second one are just imams that can say everything and that refuses some verses in the quran and say our scholars can correct the quran because in some part of it is wrong

@@QuranicIslam and another point a branch of shiism says that Ali pbuh was a prophet so will they enter paradise by saying that the prophet hood was not finished with arriving of muhammed pbuh but with Ali ra

@@admirosmani3765 No my friend. It is just a slogan without reality ... They say Qur'an is primary and Hadith secondary, but in reality that isn't followed. Take one example; they say some Hadiths abrogate verses of the Qur'an.

Yes I know Saeed is very anti-Shia and thinks it is something deviant. But I don't follow his thinking. Both Shia and Sunnism form sects, in some things Shia are right, in some things Sunnis are, and in other things both are wrong. Shia are not much more guided or misguided than Sunnis

@@QuranicIslam he has proven that shiism has nothing to do with islam although shiism may have some islamic beliefs.he does agree that people from either sect can enter heaven.you can find more of his videos on facebook,bitchute or archive by typing 'zakah1'.if you want to know who is going to hell or heaven and what is the meaning of kafir in saeed's viewpoint here is his article (make sure to give me your opinion):archive.org/details/WhatDoesKafirMean

@@QuranicIslam once we filter our wrong beliefs from sonni islam and then call ourselves sonnis,at that point shiism becomes completely different.saeed proved that shias od iran have been killing only SONNIS in both iraq and afghanistan and they don't even deny it.

@@QuranicIslam sorry for spamming too much brother.please get back.

@@SN-qg6jh That's what I mean by his being "off" to me. Shiaism isn't defined by what Iran does anymore than Sunni Islam is defined by what Saudi does. And removing false beliefs from Sunni Islam doesn't change what Shiaism is or is not. To know what Shiaism is or is not, you study it. What I'm interested in isn't "removing wrong beliefs" from Sunni Islam, rather it is about discovering the Islam of the Qur'an and of God and of the Prophet, which is an Islam above both Sunnism and Shiaism and all other sects as well. So I find all these theories quite ridiculous to be honest; Wahhabism was created by Zionist yahood ... Shiaism was created by Zionist yahood ... Sufism was created by freemason yahood ... etc And all of it is besides the point anyway. We deal with people according to how they are now and what they have said or done themselves. If I had time, I would watch all of Saeed's work. But as it is I just don't have the time unfortunately.