- Welcome to QM Forum.
News:
Forum Policy
http://quransmessage.com/forum/policy
Recent posts
#1
Resources and Information Portal / Re: Project Root List = new we...
Last post by Wakas - May 31, 2026, 04:58:31 AMGreat news!
Project Root List website has now been optimised for mobile/tablet devices:
https://studyquran.org/PRL/PRLonline.htm
Project Root List website has now been optimised for mobile/tablet devices:
https://studyquran.org/PRL/PRLonline.htm
#2
General Discussions / Re: one way The Quran exposes ...
Last post by Wakas - May 13, 2026, 01:42:53 AMYou have misunderstood https://www.quranvshadith.com/study-method.html
It does not say a reader requires everything in the list or to do everything in the list. It clearly states "I consider the following", then proceeds to discuss what exactly.
Strawman.
It does not say a reader requires everything in the list or to do everything in the list. It clearly states "I consider the following", then proceeds to discuss what exactly.
Strawman.
#3
General Discussions / Re: one way The Quran exposes ...
Last post by relearning - May 11, 2026, 07:36:57 PMand for anyone who wants to see these points explored further i discussed the accessibility and clarity problem in more detail here:
https://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=2978.0
and the broader question of why divine guidance would stop updating precisely when humanity needs it most is here:
https://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=2977.0
the threads are connected. the same root problem appears from different angles. have a look and make up your own mind.
and my sincere letter to God:
https://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=3022.0
https://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=2978.0
and the broader question of why divine guidance would stop updating precisely when humanity needs it most is here:
https://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=2977.0
the threads are connected. the same root problem appears from different angles. have a look and make up your own mind.
and my sincere letter to God:
https://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=3022.0
#4
General Discussions / Re: God Testing Humanity: Crys...
Last post by relearning - May 11, 2026, 07:25:28 PMwhere did i get my criteria? simple. i got them from the basic demands of justice and from the Quran itself. the Quran claims to be clear, universal and for all humanity. i am not bringing external standards to judge it. i am holding it to its own promises. that is not subjective that is the most fair test possible.
on your second and third questions, the fact that no book on earth meets these criteria is not a defense of the Quran. it is an indictment of all claimants equally. if God exists and wants to communicate with humanity, perfect clarity is not beyond divine capability. the absence of such a book doesnt mean the standard is wrong. it means no text has yet met it. including this one. and if you want me to imagine what such a book would look like, here is a start. it would not require a specific language to understand. it would not need centuries of scholarly infrastructure to become functional. it would not produce hundreds of warring interpretations among sincere readers. it would not ask you to believe before you can verify. every human being regardless of background would recognize its divine origin independently without being told first by their parents or culture.
on your fourth question, yes the Quran claims to be clear (12:1, 54:17), a guidance for all people (2:185), sent in the language of the people for fairness (14:4), and something that can be understood by anyone who reflects (54:17). i know what the Quran says. that is precisely why i am asking whether it delivers on those claims in practice. studying a text deeply enough to know its own promises and then asking whether those promises are kept is not ignorance. it is the most honest form of engagement possible.
the question was never how much i studied it. the question is whether it does what it says it does.
and one last thing. the Quran itself claims to include everyone in its message. the shepherd the traveler the orphan the ordinary person going about their life. that is what the text says about itself. but people like you in practice want to limit access to only those who devoted years of their life to classical Arabic and scholarly methodology. do you not see the problem? you are contradicting the very claims of the book you are defending. if the Quran says it is for everyone but your methodology makes it accessible to almost nobody then one of these two things is not true. either the claim of universality is sincere and your methodology betrays it or your methodology is necessary and the claim of universality was never realistic. you cannot have both.
on your second and third questions, the fact that no book on earth meets these criteria is not a defense of the Quran. it is an indictment of all claimants equally. if God exists and wants to communicate with humanity, perfect clarity is not beyond divine capability. the absence of such a book doesnt mean the standard is wrong. it means no text has yet met it. including this one. and if you want me to imagine what such a book would look like, here is a start. it would not require a specific language to understand. it would not need centuries of scholarly infrastructure to become functional. it would not produce hundreds of warring interpretations among sincere readers. it would not ask you to believe before you can verify. every human being regardless of background would recognize its divine origin independently without being told first by their parents or culture.
on your fourth question, yes the Quran claims to be clear (12:1, 54:17), a guidance for all people (2:185), sent in the language of the people for fairness (14:4), and something that can be understood by anyone who reflects (54:17). i know what the Quran says. that is precisely why i am asking whether it delivers on those claims in practice. studying a text deeply enough to know its own promises and then asking whether those promises are kept is not ignorance. it is the most honest form of engagement possible.
the question was never how much i studied it. the question is whether it does what it says it does.
and one last thing. the Quran itself claims to include everyone in its message. the shepherd the traveler the orphan the ordinary person going about their life. that is what the text says about itself. but people like you in practice want to limit access to only those who devoted years of their life to classical Arabic and scholarly methodology. do you not see the problem? you are contradicting the very claims of the book you are defending. if the Quran says it is for everyone but your methodology makes it accessible to almost nobody then one of these two things is not true. either the claim of universality is sincere and your methodology betrays it or your methodology is necessary and the claim of universality was never realistic. you cannot have both.
#5
General Discussions / Re: one way The Quran exposes ...
Last post by relearning - May 11, 2026, 07:22:22 PMwhether i used an AI or not is irrelevant. a valid argument doesnt become invalid based on who or what helped articulate it. that is not engagement that is deflection. and deflection is a luxury no sincere person can afford when the stakes being claimed are eternal.
on your specific points:
first you say even a few verses were enough for early receivers to reach guidance. i accept that. but then why 6000 verses now? if a handful was sufficient for salvation then the rest becomes extra burden extra complexity extra room for error and divergence. and those early receivers were ordinary villagers not scholars. if what was enough for them is not enough for modern humans that raises its own question about what exactly has changed and why the bar keeps rising.
second the fitrah argument is genuinely interesting and i respect it. but the Quran itself says it sent messages in the language of each people precisely because anything else would be unjust (14:4). if language accessibility is a divine principle important enough to be stated explicitly why does correctly understanding this final universal message require years of devotion to a foreign language and culture? the compass is there but you are asking people to learn a foreign cartography to read it.
third on convergence you are counting masses following scholars as convergence. that is not intellectual convergence that is institutional gravity. look instead at how many scholars oppose each other starting from the earliest Muslims themselves. that disagreement has never stopped. billions following the same label tells us nothing about whether the map is actually clear.
fourth the argument addressed the video's own claim directly. if the video overstated that is the video's problem. calling it a strawman without addressing what the video actually said is itself an evasion.
fifth your own methodology page requires knowledge of Arabic grammar cross referencing roots across the entire text consulting multiple scholarly sources knowledge of archaeology biology physics history philosophy logical training years of patience and a God conscious state of mind as a prerequisite for understanding. for the farmer in Indonesia the teenager in Brazil the factory worker in Nigeria people this book claims to address this is not a door. it is a wall described in careful detail. and verse 41:44 offers belief as the solution to the language barrier. but you cannot ask someone to believe before they can understand. that is not clarity. that is a prerequisite disguised as a solution.
sixth if the moral filter only works for people who already have pure hearts and good disposition then it is not guiding diverse humanity it is confirming the already good. expecting a unified product of goodwill from the enormously diverse range of human backgrounds traumas cultures and conditions is not a divine standard. it is an impossible one that conveniently places all failure on the human.
seventh the justice inversion remains unanswered. placing the entire burden of correct understanding on the reader while giving every benefit of doubt to the text is itself a methodological flaw. and notably the Quran itself warns against blindly following ancestors and inherited frameworks. applying that principle only outward never inward toward the text itself is an inconsistency worth sitting with honestly. and i will reply on other post as well
on your specific points:
first you say even a few verses were enough for early receivers to reach guidance. i accept that. but then why 6000 verses now? if a handful was sufficient for salvation then the rest becomes extra burden extra complexity extra room for error and divergence. and those early receivers were ordinary villagers not scholars. if what was enough for them is not enough for modern humans that raises its own question about what exactly has changed and why the bar keeps rising.
second the fitrah argument is genuinely interesting and i respect it. but the Quran itself says it sent messages in the language of each people precisely because anything else would be unjust (14:4). if language accessibility is a divine principle important enough to be stated explicitly why does correctly understanding this final universal message require years of devotion to a foreign language and culture? the compass is there but you are asking people to learn a foreign cartography to read it.
third on convergence you are counting masses following scholars as convergence. that is not intellectual convergence that is institutional gravity. look instead at how many scholars oppose each other starting from the earliest Muslims themselves. that disagreement has never stopped. billions following the same label tells us nothing about whether the map is actually clear.
fourth the argument addressed the video's own claim directly. if the video overstated that is the video's problem. calling it a strawman without addressing what the video actually said is itself an evasion.
fifth your own methodology page requires knowledge of Arabic grammar cross referencing roots across the entire text consulting multiple scholarly sources knowledge of archaeology biology physics history philosophy logical training years of patience and a God conscious state of mind as a prerequisite for understanding. for the farmer in Indonesia the teenager in Brazil the factory worker in Nigeria people this book claims to address this is not a door. it is a wall described in careful detail. and verse 41:44 offers belief as the solution to the language barrier. but you cannot ask someone to believe before they can understand. that is not clarity. that is a prerequisite disguised as a solution.
sixth if the moral filter only works for people who already have pure hearts and good disposition then it is not guiding diverse humanity it is confirming the already good. expecting a unified product of goodwill from the enormously diverse range of human backgrounds traumas cultures and conditions is not a divine standard. it is an impossible one that conveniently places all failure on the human.
seventh the justice inversion remains unanswered. placing the entire burden of correct understanding on the reader while giving every benefit of doubt to the text is itself a methodological flaw. and notably the Quran itself warns against blindly following ancestors and inherited frameworks. applying that principle only outward never inward toward the text itself is an inconsistency worth sitting with honestly. and i will reply on other post as well
#6
General Discussions / Re: one way The Quran exposes ...
Last post by Wakas - May 09, 2026, 03:53:31 PMDid you chatGPT that?
Remember chatGPT is only as good as what is fed into it, and for deep Quran analysis its hit and miss from my experience.
Have you actually read The Quran?
1) it works for the recipients at the time also. They would have used whatever was revealed to them e.g. if they had 2 chapters, then those 2 chapters would have to be understood holistically.
2) see 30:30. It is about potentiality. It can work for for everyone. Many bury it.
3) there is convergence on lots. Yes, billions of people will have, shock horror, different views on things. Proves nothing.
4) It doesn't say it is its only divine feature. Strawman.
5) Nope. Gives us a robust methodology:
https://www.quranvshadith.com/study-method.html
6) see (2) above. A person can be "good" but they are unlikely to be able to naturally incline to all that is good, e.g. from individual to collective societal rules etc. This is where Quran steps up. Natural inclination to good is awesome but it can only take you so far.
And as for that thread you linked to. I replied in it.
5)
Remember chatGPT is only as good as what is fed into it, and for deep Quran analysis its hit and miss from my experience.
Have you actually read The Quran?
1) it works for the recipients at the time also. They would have used whatever was revealed to them e.g. if they had 2 chapters, then those 2 chapters would have to be understood holistically.
2) see 30:30. It is about potentiality. It can work for for everyone. Many bury it.
3) there is convergence on lots. Yes, billions of people will have, shock horror, different views on things. Proves nothing.
4) It doesn't say it is its only divine feature. Strawman.
5) Nope. Gives us a robust methodology:
https://www.quranvshadith.com/study-method.html
6) see (2) above. A person can be "good" but they are unlikely to be able to naturally incline to all that is good, e.g. from individual to collective societal rules etc. This is where Quran steps up. Natural inclination to good is awesome but it can only take you so far.
And as for that thread you linked to. I replied in it.
5)
#7
General Discussions / Re: one way The Quran exposes ...
Last post by relearning - May 08, 2026, 05:12:20 PM #8
General Discussions / Re: one way The Quran exposes ...
Last post by relearning - May 08, 2026, 05:09:33 PMThe idea that the Quran acts as a "moral filter" revealing the reader's own disposition is an interesting one, but it raises several serious problems:
1. The Anachronism Problem
The "read the whole text holistically" method requires a complete, compiled book in the reader's hands. The first receivers had fragments, delivered over 23 years, orally, through a living prophet they could directly question. The holistic interpretive framework being proposed here is a medieval scholarly invention — it simply was not available to the people the revelation was actually addressed to. You cannot retroactively make it the correct reading method without admitting the text needed centuries of human infrastructure to become functional.
2. The Moral Filter Paradox
If the book only works correctly for people who already bring a good moral compass to it, it is preaching to the converted. Those who most need moral reformation will extract justifications for cruelty from the same text — and this framework calls that their fault, not the text's. A divine guide that only successfully guides the already-guided is not really guidance. It is confirmation.
3. The Convergence Failure
If the moral filter were genuinely working — separating sincere from insincere readers and guiding the sincere toward correct understanding — you would expect some convergence among good-faith readers over 1400 years. Instead we have hundreds of competing schools, sects, and interpretations, many held by people of undeniable sincerity and deep scholarly dedication. The filter has not filtered.
4. The Universality Problem
The video's own closing point — that any complex text reveals the reader's disposition — applies equally to Shakespeare, Dostoevsky, or any sufficiently rich human text. If that is the Quran's distinguishing divine feature, it is neither distinguishing nor divine. It is simply what complex texts do.
5. The Justice Inversion
Placing the entire interpretive burden on the reader's moral quality quietly absolves the text of all responsibility for how it has been used throughout history. Centuries of slavery, oppression, and violence justified by this text become solely the moral failure of readers — never evidence of textual ambiguity or inadequacy. That is a remarkably convenient arrangement for the text, and a remarkably harsh one for humanity.
6. The Circular Premise
The framework assumes the receiver must already be a morally inclined person for the book to work as intended. But this raises a question that the argument cannot answer cleanly: is this a divine text that guides people — bad, average, and good alike? Or does it only work for people who are already good? And if the latter, does guidance make any real difference at all? People were already going to be who they are. The book then becomes not a transformer of human character but a mirror of it — which returns us to the question of what exactly is divine about that function.
1. The Anachronism Problem
The "read the whole text holistically" method requires a complete, compiled book in the reader's hands. The first receivers had fragments, delivered over 23 years, orally, through a living prophet they could directly question. The holistic interpretive framework being proposed here is a medieval scholarly invention — it simply was not available to the people the revelation was actually addressed to. You cannot retroactively make it the correct reading method without admitting the text needed centuries of human infrastructure to become functional.
2. The Moral Filter Paradox
If the book only works correctly for people who already bring a good moral compass to it, it is preaching to the converted. Those who most need moral reformation will extract justifications for cruelty from the same text — and this framework calls that their fault, not the text's. A divine guide that only successfully guides the already-guided is not really guidance. It is confirmation.
3. The Convergence Failure
If the moral filter were genuinely working — separating sincere from insincere readers and guiding the sincere toward correct understanding — you would expect some convergence among good-faith readers over 1400 years. Instead we have hundreds of competing schools, sects, and interpretations, many held by people of undeniable sincerity and deep scholarly dedication. The filter has not filtered.
4. The Universality Problem
The video's own closing point — that any complex text reveals the reader's disposition — applies equally to Shakespeare, Dostoevsky, or any sufficiently rich human text. If that is the Quran's distinguishing divine feature, it is neither distinguishing nor divine. It is simply what complex texts do.
5. The Justice Inversion
Placing the entire interpretive burden on the reader's moral quality quietly absolves the text of all responsibility for how it has been used throughout history. Centuries of slavery, oppression, and violence justified by this text become solely the moral failure of readers — never evidence of textual ambiguity or inadequacy. That is a remarkably convenient arrangement for the text, and a remarkably harsh one for humanity.
6. The Circular Premise
The framework assumes the receiver must already be a morally inclined person for the book to work as intended. But this raises a question that the argument cannot answer cleanly: is this a divine text that guides people — bad, average, and good alike? Or does it only work for people who are already good? And if the latter, does guidance make any real difference at all? People were already going to be who they are. The book then becomes not a transformer of human character but a mirror of it — which returns us to the question of what exactly is divine about that function.
#9
General Discussions / one way The Quran exposes who ...
Last post by Wakas - May 08, 2026, 04:31:56 AMA simple yet powerful concept:
#10
Islamic Duties / Re: When the Qur’an commands H...
Last post by Wakas - May 05, 2026, 05:32:46 AMit is self obligated, see 2:197
https://mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-hajj-Quran.html
You are the one who determines it, on topic video e.g.
https://youtu.be/2dJ2dw10UEg
https://mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-hajj-Quran.html
You are the one who determines it, on topic video e.g.
https://youtu.be/2dJ2dw10UEg