Where can I start my study of the Qur'an, as an absolute beginner, from a strictly Quranist perspective?

Where can I start my study of the Qur'an, as an absolute beginner, from a strictly Quranist perspective?

Are there any books/websites written in a Western language?

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

  1. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    https://quod.lib.umich.edu/k/koran/browse.html

    • 5 months ago
      Nick the Yahwist

      This has no study notes thoughbeit

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        Isn't a Quranist tafsir somewhat paradoxical as a concept? If you need only the Quran to understand the Quran (as Quranists claim), what is the point of a tafsir? And on what basis, mind you, are you even giving that person's tafsir any authority? On what basis is he even writing that tafsir if he's discounting the hadith, the sira, etc. If you've thrown everything out except the Quran, there's no weight behind any individual's attempt at exegesis.

        • 5 months ago
          Nick the Yahwist

          Not him, but I would expect something like the Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible: The text, plus an extensive amounts of footnotes explaining the historical background in which the text was written and proposed meanings of obscure passages from an academic standpoint.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >historical background
            >doesnt accept any transmitted hadith

          • 5 months ago
            Nick the Yahwist

            The historical and cultural background of Arabia is something that could be easily attested with archeological and historical sources instead of with hearsay and made-up fairytales.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            What are your historical sources? Authentic hadiths are ahistoric in what sense?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Authentic hadiths are ahistoric in what sense?
            Muslims reject all hadiths that make Muhammad look bad.

            That sole bias disproves any historical validity of hadiths.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Read this and stop complaining bro
            https://www.kalamullah.com/muqaddimah.html

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Fancy formalism does not disprove what I said.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Hadith terminology is an actual science, what hadiths do muslims falsify though they are authentic? only ignorant kids would do something like that

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            The historical and cultural background of Arabia is something that could be easily attested with archeological and historical sources instead of with hearsay and made-up fairytales.

            If you're discounting the early Muslims as engaging in hearsay and made-up fairytales, whose accounts are you trusting for the purposes of these historical sources? People who don't live in the region they're talking about? People who are at war with the Muslims they're talking about? Well done, you've just replaced the Hadith and the Sira with a bunch of hostile sources with questionable reliability. So much for Quranism.

          • 5 months ago
            Nick the Yahwist

            What are your historical sources? Authentic hadiths are ahistoric in what sense?

            It is perfectly possible to make use of all available accounts, friendly or hostile, and get a good picture of the history by analyzing then critically, without taking anything at face value. This is the Oyishtory board. Come on, you can do better.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Why should i throw all hadith literature out of the window, with its ilm ul rijal and isnads for the manuscripts, for what enemies of muslims have written about them in broad terms? stop larping

          • 5 months ago
            Nick the Yahwist

            >circlejerk: the religion
            Sunnism is a mental illness.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >when in doubt, retort to mocking

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            I see what you're saying and I think we're talking at cross-purposes here. You're talking about a critical analysis of the Quran that incorporates a wide range of both secular and religious sources. This would presumably be of use to people engaged in scholarship/academia independent of any particular religious school of thought. This is of course a perfectly viable text.

            I'm talking about a Quranist tafsir, which by definition cannot include most if not all of those sources because Quranism rejects them and their use on a fundamental level. A Quranist should be no more open to reading your secular exegesis than a traditional tafsir given his rejection of everything outside the Quran. This is my point. All a Quranist tafsir can be is some guy's interpretation of the words in the Quran by reference to nothing but the Quran itself.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Alright, how do you understand the words in the Quran themselves? How do you know the abrogated and abrogating? How do you know the order of revelation of the verses? How do you know when and how much Zakat is taken?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not defending the idea of a Quranist tafsir. I started off by saying that I think it's a paradoxical idea in itself

            Isn't a Quranist tafsir somewhat paradoxical as a concept? If you need only the Quran to understand the Quran (as Quranists claim), what is the point of a tafsir? And on what basis, mind you, are you even giving that person's tafsir any authority? On what basis is he even writing that tafsir if he's discounting the hadith, the sira, etc. If you've thrown everything out except the Quran, there's no weight behind any individual's attempt at exegesis.

            . Any Quranist tafsir will struggle to answer your questions with any authority for this reason. All such a tafsir can ever be is some guy's interpretation of the text with reference to nothing but the text. There simply isn't enough in the Quran itself to give that sort of exegesis serious heft. This is why I think most Quranists are actually attracted to the idea. It creates a much more vague religion rather than one with the kind of legalistic/prescriptive/proscriptive rigour of Islamic orthodoxy.

          • 5 months ago
            Nick the Yahwist

            >A Quranist should be no more open to reading your secular exegesis than a traditional tafsir given his rejection of everything outside the Quran
            Would he? As far as I know, a Quranist is just someone who rejects the sunna, not necessarily someone who thinks the Qur'an is all you need to interpret the Qur'an itself.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            The fundamental interpretive principle of Quranism is tafsir al-qur'an bi al-qur'an (explaining the Quran with the Quran). The moment a Quranist starts using extra-Quranic sources to explain the Quran he's not really a Quranist anymore. He's accepting that there are legitimate extra-Quranic sources that need to be taken into account (whether that be the hadith, your contemporaneous secular sources, or whatever).

  2. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    >study Quran
    >"Quranist"

    Allah guide you aright Anon wth is this, Allah says take a taxshare from the harvest, how much is that share? My God

  3. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    >The Qur'an on The Ins and Outs of War
    https://quran.com/search?page=1&q=War&translations=131,22,171,19

    >The Qur'an on Unbelievers in General
    https://quran.com/search?page=1&q=unbeliever&translations=131,22,171,19

    >The Qur'an encourages you to treat unbelievers as captives:
    https://quran.com/search?page=1&q=Captive&translations=131,22,171,19

    >The Qur'an encourages you treat unbelievers as slaves:
    https://quran.com/search?page=1&q=Slaves&translations=131,22,171,19

    >The Qur'an instructs you on slaughtering animals and people:
    https://quran.com/search?page=1&q=Slaughter&translations=131,22,171,19

    >The Qur'an Tells you all about Christians:
    https://quran.com/search?page=1&q=Christian&translations=131,22,171,19

    Here, enjoy this portrait of Muhammad (مُحَمَّد), The Prophet of Islam and Messenger of Allah.

  4. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Free-minds .org

  5. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    What variant are you studying ?

  6. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    I don't get it- Why you think it's true that some guy talked to an angel in a cave 1500 years ago?

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      I don't care. If the God of Abraham didn't exist, we'd have to invent it anyways.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        You don't a method to study, you can just make stuff up in your mind. If you don't care about truth.

  7. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Don’t waste your time. Islam’s theology is the weakest of the 3 big religions. It’s basically: believe because I say so.

  8. 5 months ago
    Anonymous
  9. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Pretty strange how many Quranist threads are on this board. Not that I'm complaining...
    Muhammad Assad's translation is lame although his footnotes are the best so you may want to check that out.
    And i think Sunni tafsirs are useful as long as you approach them carefully. This website is nice: https://www.searchtruth.com/tafsir/tafsir.php?chapter=30

  10. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    To understand the quran you must become the muslim. The first step should always be to stop washing your hands.

  11. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    the quran is a pile of zoroastrian and gnostic falsehoods

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *