What is “Islam”? Facts Lost in Translation

The term Islam takes on different meanings depending on a person’s creed, ethnicity, political views, or social background. In the practical world, there is no objective form, much like other religions. It is is simply shaped by individual experiences and subjective lenses. Why? Without a unified historical or contextual foundation, varied interpretations create divergent definitions. This article provides a brief historical and contextual foundation, seemingly unbeknownst to many, that God explicitly provides. This context then ought to shape the meaning of everything, which I posit has been lost with the advent of modern religion.

So did God intend a religion called “Islam”?

If we examine the premodern world, the concept of religion as an institutionalised system didn't exist, so it is logical that the formalised religion of Islam was not what God was talking about. The message's focus was on guiding people to uphold certain principles and codes rather than prescribing a defined "religion" in the modern sense.

But does this mean revelation and prophetic teachings are just as nebulous as the ‘Religion of Islam’? Not at all.

God has consistently called the Semites to the tradition (مِلّةَ) of the Patriarchs - Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac and Jacob. That tradition is the civilisational manifestation of the primordial pre-Abrahamic ways, such as those of Noah and his offspring. When the Israelites abandoned the pledge to uphold the Abrahamic covenant and establish God's code, it was offered and taken up by the Ishmaelites, led by their divinely-appointed clansman Muhammad. In this final iteration, God universalised the code for all humans (and not just one group like the Israelites), thereby encompassing and unifying all other legitimate monotheistic traditions under the Ishmaelite banner.

In the language of the Ishmaelite legacy, God refers to this primordial tradition as Hanīfiyyah - الحَنِيفِيَّة (from the trilateral root h-n-f) and its people as the Hunafā - those who lean or incline towards God (حنفاء لله). The word isn't just found in Arabic but predates it and can be found in the Egyptian hieroglyphs. Aside from this key reference, God uses varying descriptive terms in Arabic for humans associated with this primordial tradition based on context. For example: 

  • In the context of describing those who affirm God’s sovereignty as opposed to those who deny it, God refers to them as the faithful to God (مُؤْمِنون بالله). 
  • In the context of those who uphold the Abrahamic tradition by acknowledgement and compliance to the entire code as opposed to merely adopting aspects of it and inventing breakaway variants like the Jews and Christians (who claim the tradition of Abraham) are described as the fully subservient to God (مُسْلِمون لله).
  • In the context of describing those who adamantly and persistently strive in the King’s cause, God references them as the persevering (الصابِرون)
  • In the context of describing those who stand by their pledges, and who act in accordance to what they claim, God references them as the integrious (الصادِقون)

In grammar, all of these agent nouns denote the performer of the action. In English, the "- er" suffix is used to create nouns that describe someone or something that does the action indicated by the base verb.

Therefore, when we translate the word مُؤْمِن to believer, in the context of the final message we are referring to faithful/loyal subjects of the supreme King - those who have confidence in their Lord. When we translate the word مُسْلِم to submitter, in the context of the final message we are intentionally referring to those who allege adherence to the entire code like the Patriarchs, rather than Jews and Christians who have broken away from the Patriarchs' tradition. Why does it go back to the Patriarchs? Well because God explicitly tells us that this is the backstory to His reference to 'submission':

Who but a fool would forsake the tradition of Abraham? We have chosen him in this world and he will rank among the righteous in the Hereafter. His Lord said to him, ‘Devote yourself (أسْلِم) to Me.’ Abraham replied, ‘I devote myself (ُأسْلِمْت) to the Lord of the Universe’ whilst commanding his sons to do the same - as did Jacob: ‘My sons, God has appointed the code for you, so make sure you devote yourselves to Him (مُسْلِمون), to your dying moment.’ Were you there to see when death came upon Jacob? When he said to his sons, ‘What will you serve after I am gone?’ They replied, ‘We shall serve your God and the God of your fathers, Abraham, Ishmael, and Isaac, the only one to be served, it is to Him that we submit (له مُسْلِمون).’ That community passed away. What they earned belongs to them, and what you earn belongs to you: you will not be accounted on the basis of their (good) deeds. They say, ‘Become Jews or Christians, and you will be rightly guided.’ Say: ‘No, (we are committed to) the tradition of Abraham, the godly primordial monotheist (حَنِيفًا), who did not claim sovereignty for another.’ [Quran 2:130-135]

In the ancient world there was no proper noun (name) for this tradition, but the tradition itself was simply referred to as what it is: The tradition of the patriarch Abraham (مِلّةَ إبراهيم) and his righteous descendants (وذُرّيّته). It means:

  1. To affirm the sovereignty of God, the Lord of Abraham, with loyalty and allegiance.
  2. To acknowledge the tradition of the Patriarchs, Hanīfiyyah, with a sense of fraternal belonging to it, a cognisance of its history, and strong solidarity with its cohort.
  3. To openly and humbly receive God’s royal decrees and comply with the entirety of the code with its final amendments, a Law (شِرْعَة) and a Way (مِنْهاج), universalised for all via the Ishmaelite legacy.
  4. To take a pledge to establish the code, support it, and uphold it - across all realms of life.
  5. To study the mission of the righteous before us as case studies in how to establish the entire code and serve the King, and walk their path in supporting and upholding the code.

But doesn't God label people "Muslims"?

No, not as a proper noun. As explained above, the final message was sent via the Arabic language, but words ought to be translated in translations, not transliterated (unless a relative equivalent does not exist). There has been an inconsistent practice of transliterating certain Arabic words instead of translating them, in what is obviously an ideological endeavour - otherwise there would be no logic in doing so. Further, semantic translations rather than pragmatic translations entirely confuse English readers. An example frequently cited to substantiate "Muslim" as a proper noun (name) is: "He has named you Muslims" [Quran 22:78]. Firstly, translating 'sammākum' here as 'named' is inaccurate. Secondly, transliterating "Muslim" is misplaced. In context, this is actually what God says:

Strive hard for God as is His due: He has chosen you and placed no hardship in the code1, the tradition of your forefather Abraham2. He has referred to those like you as the completely submissive (هُوَ سَمَّىٰكُمُ ٱلۡمُسۡلِمِینَ) both in the past and in this [message]3, so that the Messenger can bear witness about you and so that you can bear witness about other people4. (Quran 22:78)

Now here is a brief breakdown:

1 The code is relaxed, in that regulations have been relaxed after the punitive legislations introduced to it because of the disobedient Hebrews, about whom God said: "This is how We penalised them for their disobedience." [Quran 6:146] However, now that the Law is for all people, those punitive laws have been removed as amendments to the Law. Hence the final messenger of God said, "I was sent with primordial monotheistic godliness (الحَنِيفِيَّة) that is relaxed (السَمْحَة)." [Ahmad]

2 God was speaking to the Ishmaelites, the descendants of Abraham, inciting his tradition (مِلَّة).

3 God is motivating Ishmaelite subservience by referring to the loyal as those who have truly submitted to the King by adherence to the entire code - unlike the Jews and Christians - throughout time. Here, God alludes to the reference made by Abraham and Ishmael about their descendants: "Our Lord make us both subservient to You (مُسۡلِمَیۡنِ لَكَ) and make our descendants a community subservient to You (أُمَّةࣰ مُّسۡلِمَةࣰ لَّكَ)." (Quran 2:228). He also alludes to the Hebrew Prophets: "We revealed the Torah with guidance and light, and the Prophets who had submitted to God (ٱلنَّبِیُّونَ ٱلَّذِینَ أَسۡلَمُوا۟), judged according to it for the Jews. So did the rabbis and the scholars in accordance with that part of God’s Scripture which they were entrusted to preserve, and to which they were witnesses." (Quran 5:44) This appeal to the tradition of Hanīfiyyah is also emphasised where God speaks of the final Prophet's apostles as being the same as those of old: "Muhammad is the messenger of God. Those who are with him...You see them kneeling and prostrating, seeking God’s bounty and His good pleasure: on their faces they bear the marks of their prostrations. This is how they are pictured in the Torah and the Gospel." [Quran 48:29]

4 Muhammad will bear witness about the Ishmaelites in whether they upheld the pledge to adhere to the entire code unlike their Israelite cousins who broke off to create a faction (Judaism, and later Christianity). Jesus too will do so with regards to the Israelites and Christians: "I told them only what You commanded me to: “Serve God, my Lord and your Lord.” I was a witness over them during my time among them." [Quran 5:117] Ironically, the pledge to adhere to the entire code and not create a "religion" is made absolutely clear in God's dictate:

From the code, He has laid down for you all the same exhortation that He gave Noah, which We have also revealed to you (Muhammad) and which We enjoined on Abraham and Moses and Jesus: ‘Uphold the code and do not divide into factions within it’. What you call the Ishmaelite pagans to (i.e. the unified tradition) is hard for them; God chooses whoever He pleases for Himself and guides towards Himself those who turn to Him. They all divided, out of rivalry, only after knowledge had come to them...Those after them, who inherited the Scripture, are in disquieting doubt about it. So call people to that commandment and follow the straight path as you have been commanded. Do not go by what they desire, but say, ‘I have faith in whatever scripture God has sent down. I am commanded to bring justice between you. God is our Lord and your Lord - to us our deeds and to you yours, so let there be no argument between us and you. God will gather us together, and to Him we shall return.’ [Quran 42:15]

So is the tradition of the Patriarchs and the “religion of Islam” synonymous?

Islam might be closer to the primordial ideal than any other variant, but in the West it has become a variant nonetheless - driven by a postcolonial reaction, immigrant interests, and ethnocultural norms. Pointing out this obvious fact should not be spurned (which is in fact the behaviour of the Israelites that God disparages: see 5:70), but welcomed because it exposes the devil’s plans whilst also helping us to understand why things have been going wrong for a while. It invites a deeper reflection on how to return to the original call of serving God with the same vigour, fervour, and clarity as the righteous Ishmaelites and Israelites.

The tradition of the Patriarchs is far grander and sophisticated than modern Islam - whilst simpler in matters of the Law. It is civilisational. It is rational and sensible. It is a life mission. It is to serve the King, at His pleasure, in what He wants. This civilisational mission, rooted in serving the King and upholding His true and holistic code, is the foundation that can unite the Children of Adam on what empowers them to flourish, and strengthens them to be stalwarts in service to the supreme King. It transcends the modern religion of Islam and calls humanity back to the path of Abraham, where the true objective is not the establishment of "religion" but God’s sovereignty on Earth through the code He ordains - in the interests of all of His subjects.


Why I do the Ramadan Quran Program

For years I’ve encouraged laymen to read this most enchanting book. Some had simply fallen into acceptable heedlessness and always prioritised other things not getting around to it. They claimed to believe in the Quran but had no idea what it is that they believe because they hadn’t read it.

Many would tell me that they’d read it but not fully understood it. Others who’d been on numerous Quran courses would detail how pedantically they’d broken down the etymology of a word, or the numerous meanings for a phrase, but when I’d ask what the point of the actual verse or passage was I’d get a blank stare. Most would confess that whilst the content of those courses was interesting, they didn’t get much in terms of the bigger picture or that which was deeply action guiding or heart settling.

I asked myself: why do so many sincere people struggle to read it or to get what they’ve read?

Then, what I had been taking for granted dawned on me.

These lovely people don’t have any context for the divine message - where it sits in human history and it’s civilisations.

  • They don’t know the events God’s referring to nor their significance.
  • They don’t get why God’s talking to Jews and Christians in a ‘Muslim’ book.
  • They don’t get what God means by the various terms He employs.
  • They don’t get the logic of His ‘signs’.
  • They struggle to keep up with the message’s ebbs and flows.

The true religion of God that He speaks of in the Quran is alien because they’re already socialised into thinking about islam in a certain way. And it all holds them back. They’re taught a pre-conceived understanding of what God wants and says, which (mis)shapes their reading, makes it seem disjointed, and lacking coherence. Some understandably give up early on, others struggle their way through - only to end up severely unfulfilled or baffled.

For the majority of Muslims, the Quran quite frankly isn’t compelling or transformative. Most have no idea what God actually says - they believe in the idea of the Quran (as ‘something’ from God) more than taking it as truly functional guidance. It’s not hard to read, it’s actually quite easy. And when you get what God’s actually saying it’s downright addictive - a book you don’t want to put down. You’re in conversation with God.

  • Its law isn’t restrictive, it’s liberating.
  • Its ideals aren’t pie-in-the-sky, they’re practical.
  • Its references aren’t opaque, they’re illuminating.

It provokes the deepest and hardest soul searching you’ve ever done. It’s personal discovery. It’s serious therapy. An emotional rollercoaster: you’ll cry, you’ll laugh. Your crushed ego will feel deeply offended. Your chest will feel lightened with the baggage you shed. Your intellect will expand and your logic will strengthen. You’ll feel silly for things you believed or assumed. You’ll know God is alive and close by. You’ll feel mocked (by virtue of your own silliness) and scorned (for nefarious proclivities), but also feel special, loved and protected. You’ll make sense of your life. You WILL be transformed.

Most importantly, you’ll learn that it’s not calling you to the religion you’ve taken for granted. It goes far beyond ‘religion’ - it calls you to a 5000 year tradition of wholesomeness and something else entirely.

These aren’t big claims, these are literally the testimonies of past attendees. Having personally taken them on this journey has been an absolute honour.

Join The Ramadan Quran Program 2024 going through the transformative process above and living a true Ramadan experience. Make this the year EVERYTHING changed and got to know what it all means.

  • Live online (Zoom) 45 mins to 1 hour after Maghrib (GMT)
  • Pre-recorded podcasts for summary and context
  • 5 days a week, 1-1.5 hour sessions throughout Ramadan
  • Recordings available for 2 months post-Ramadan

To check out the Program, please click HERE


Is there ‘barakah’ in the sounds of the Quran?

This article is to clarify where ‘barakah’ actually comes into play when reading the Quran, according to God Himself. To begin with, there are three distinctions I’d like to make:

  • Reading mindfully: To read something one understands (semantics) and pay attention to the content (pragmatics).
  • Reading without understanding: To read something one understands without paying much attention to the content (semantics but no pragmatics).
  • Phonemic practice: To sound out the vowelised Arabic script of the Quran not understanding what is being sounded out (no semantics nor pragmatics).

None of these distinctions are intended to be pejorative: they are merely terms I intend to use so that the points I make here in good faith are clear.

My point in this post (like all others I write on this theme): 

It is one of the greatest obligations (wujūb) in the shari’ah to read the Quran mindfully. That means reading the Quran in a language we understand and paying attention to what God said. Bar legitimate impediments, sufficing with phonemic practice is wrong. God puts it plain and simple.

Read more


Verse analysis of 2:114

Who could be more wicked than those who prohibit the mention of God’s name in His places of worship and strive to ruin them? Such people should not enter them without fear: there is disgrace for them in this world and painful punishment in the Hereafter.

Qur'an 2:114

Some religious personalities have been using this verse to argue that the temporary suspension of congregational prayers during lockdown is wrong. However, the brief points listed here outline how using this verse for such a conclusion is unsound.

How so?

Read more


Which Prophet is the Best?

It is a common feature of modern Islam to present its religion as a unique, 1400-year-old religion of Arab origin, with Muhammad identified exclusively as "the Prophet of Islam.” This characterisation is so pervasive that even when many Muslims acknowledge a deeper historical connection to earlier Patriarchs, for all practical purposes this link is, at best, tenuous.

To reinforce the perception of modern Islam as an exclusively distinct religion, Muslims can often employ several methods. These range from dismissing any utility of the Israelite scriptures (based on interpolations or scribal mistakes), to exceptionalising the final message of God as the only message from God, or the final messenger as the only one worthy of consideration and as an example. There are various ways in which many Muslims do this, but this article focuses specifically on the concept of Prophetic "superiority" which has been one of the primary tools used to establish this narrative.Read more


What's the water under God's throne?

“It is He who created the heavens and the earth in six periods, and His throne extends over the water, so as to test which of you does best…”
Qur'an 11:7

This post explores what God might mean by ‘waters’. As a caveat I’m not suggesting that what I’m about to present is a conclusive interpretation, it’s simply an exploration which is all we can really do with such verses, and I often enjoy intelligent godly theories presented by others. I don’t believe there’s a need to be conclusive with such reports (akhbar) - God did not provide us with the finer details precisely because He wants us to use our intellects and ponder the cosmos in a way that inspires deep reverence and awe, which is relative to the individual since the depth people require is personal.

What prompted these thoughts, as with all scholarly insights I suppose, were initial questions such as does 'water' here refer to the type on earth, like a lake or ocean floating about somewhere out there? Of course, put like this it sounds quite bizarre. One thing we tend to overlook when it comes to things beyond our immediate perceptions is that whilst God uses human representations for things out there (how else would humans understand what was being said?) it does not mean that their absolute reality is as humans understand the representations. Even in this verse, when God uses the term ‘throne’, no sensible person claims that God is sitting (as a human does) on a giant throne made of wood, metal or jewels which is simply floating about somewhere beyond the universe. It’d be somewhat anatopistic, that is, something out of its proper place. But then why would God choose the word throne (or ‘arsh in Arabic)? Well reasonably, because what God is literally talking about is best represented to the average human mind through a word she already recognises.

So hopefully having made that clear, what might the ‘water’ over which the throne sits be? A new experiment, the findings of which were published last week in Nature, confirms the existence of “superionic ice” with Quanta Magazine reporting that ‘Across the solar system, at least, more water probably exists as superionic ice — filling the interiors of Uranus and Neptune — than in any other phase, including the liquid form sloshing in oceans on Earth, Europa and Enceladus…All the previously known water ices are made of intact water molecules, each with one oxygen atom linked to two hydrogens. But superionic ice, the new measurements confirm, isn’t like that. It exists in a sort of surrealist limbo, part solid, part liquid. Individual water molecules break apart. The oxygen atoms form a cubic lattice, but the hydrogen atoms spill free, flowing like a liquid through the rigid cage of oxygens.’ However, ‘Depending on whom you ask, superionic ice is either another addition to water’s already cluttered array of avatars or something even stranger. Because its water molecules break apart, said the physicist Livia Bove of France’s National Center for Scientific Research and Pierre and Marie Curie University, it’s not quite a new phase of water. “It’s really a new state of matter,” she said, “which is rather spectacular.”’ To be clear, I’m not saying the water beneath the throne is superionic ice for sure but I’m exploring (as the sahabah and scholars after them would characteristically do) the idea that it could possibly be a type of superionic ice, but also quite plausibly, a completely new state of matter that we have yet to come across - or even conceive of.

Can we know more, and did the Prophet tell us anything? Well interestingly, al-Bukhari reports that the Prophet began to explain the affairs of the beginning of creation, but it was missed by Imran b. Husayn as he was called away! A delegation from Yemen came to see the Prophet saying, “We come offering peace to the messenger of God, to learn about the faith, and to ask how all of this began?” The Prophet began to explain, “God was present and there was nothing else (of the cosmos) besides Him, and the throne was above the water, and He wrote in the dhikr before everything occurred, then He created the seven heavens.” Imran b. Husayn was then called away to his camel which had run off and resultantly missed the rest of the explanation. He lamented afterwards, “I wish I had left the camel!”

We haven’t much related to us from the Prophet in regards to what the water is, and we don’t know whether he touched upon it whilst Imran b. Husayn was absent. However, it seems the conversation amongst the sahabah didn’t stop there. Sa’eed b. Jubayr relates that the prophetic companion Abdullah b. Abbas was asked in reference to this verse, “and what is the water on?” He replied, “a wind,” which if it was something he was relating from the Prophet (and not his own ijhtihad), might refer to a vast ocean of cosmic charged particles which sits under the ‘water’.

But what’s the purpose of all of this? Here we are called on to ponder the magnitude of God’s creation - we know how colossal the Pacific Ocean is, so imagine a superionic ice that extends for trillions (to the power of trillions, and far far more) lights years! To even begin to contemplate magnitude and reality here is mind-boggling, and it ought to bear on us the insignificance of man and his affairs, or the nature of the power he foolishly thinks he has. It induces a far deeper consideration of the oft-repeated phrase ‘God is great.’

In this way, the possible meaning of the continuing verse “so as to test which of you does best” is that God tells us of the throne and the waters “to try his servants to consider and deduce (values) such as His complete (divine) abilities and the resurrection of the soul” as al-Qurtubi suggests, and then to use the faculties of the intellect as Qatadah put it, to recognise God’s supreme majesty rather than ignoring what such knowledge suggests and living out a life devoid of God. al-Dah’hak opined that “does best” means offers the most appreciation,” ostensibly from considering and deducing such values. The use of the intellect and a show of appreciation to God are two fundamental principles that flow through the Book of God, and sit centrally in the meta-narrative that informs our existential purpose, something I hope to map out gradually for believers seeking a holistic understanding of their relationship and engagement with the Most High.


The Qur’an: Songs, Sounds, or Meanings?

The current status quo has meant that we marvel at those who memorise the Qur'an, and commend its articulation as phonemes. Is this the particular status-quo that God intended, and is it okay to say this is enough?

God said of the Qur’an and revelation:

  • ‘This is a blessed Scripture which We sent down to you, for people to think about its messages, and for those with understanding to take heed.’ (Q 38:29)
  • ‘This, too, is a blessed Scripture which We have sent down; follow it and be conscious of your Lord, so that you may receive mercy - lest you say, ‘Scriptures were only sent down to two communities before us: we were not aware of what they studied.’ (Q 6:155-156)
  • ‘Be devoted to God (rabbani) in that you teach the Scripture and in that you study it.’ (Q 3:79)

There is nothing in the Qur’an that tells us that God seeks the mere articulation of Arabic phonemes, and when we think about it, to treat a message like this in any other context would be quite strange. The assumption that mere recitation or memorisation, whether of ourselves or our children, is a saving grace, is deeply misplaced.

How so?

Ziyad b. Labid said: The Prophet mentioned something and then said, “…that shall be in times when knowledge (in the form of guidance) is gone.” I said: "Messenger of God, how shall (such) knowledge disappear when we recite the Qur'an, and have our children recite, and our children shall have their children recite it until the Day of Judgment?" He said, “Woe to you Ziyad, I considered you the most intelligent man of Madinah! Do not these Jews and Christians recite the Torah and Bible, but know little of what is in it?"
Ibn Majah

So is this not the case with western Muslims? Do we not rejoice at the thought of beautifully sung exotic sounds - believing that being moved by melody is a ‘spiritual’ effect (which in fact can equally go for various genres of music)? The Qur'an points to understanding rather than sounds: ‘Will they not contemplate the Qur'an? Do they have locks on their hearts?’ (Q 47:24)

Due to this misfocus the purpose of revelation is being lost. As the hadith of Ziyad intimates, knowledge (in the form of guidance) remains in the Quran. What type of knowledge? It is popularly assumed it is ‘religious’ knowledge, reserved for the Maulana/Alim types, but this deeply incorrect. God guided the ‘normal’ man through the Quran, in his daily political, social, and economic life, imbuing every step with an ethical and productive trajectory.

There is no ‘Muslim leadership’ without knowledge of what’s in the Qur'an. Leadership isn’t merely to make PR statements or to assume some secular pursuits but to know what God wants and to help guide people to it, to champion it, and to seek to preserve it. We are at liberty to ask: do Muslim leaders represent an ethnic group called ‘Muslims’, or do they represent believers? If it is the latter, then surely they should be those who are most informed in the Qur'an, and on social and political matters. Equally, there is no ‘da'wah’ without knowledge of what’s in the Qur'an, both in method and in objective, otherwise what exactly are we calling to? There is no discussion on social inclusion, integration, or the ‘common good’ without knowledge of what God has said in terms of fundamental objectives. The Qur'an is the basis of everything ‘Islamic’ and without intimate enquiry any ‘Islamic’ or ‘Muslim’ related claim is rendered redundant.

Whilst there exists a culture to have our children memorise the book of God, often to accrue some form of social capital amongst other Muslims, consider this: Imam Malik was asked about seven year old child made to memorise the Qur'an. He said "I don't think that is appropriate." al-Abhari said in explanation: 'Malik disliked it, because if a person memorises it this quickly he cannot properly retain it, knowing the parameters it sets. The path of he who learns the Qur'an is that he studies it, unearthing it's laws and knowing the parameters it sets, according to his ability, and a child in most cases is unable to do this. The Companions would remain with one long surah studying it, uncovering all the ahkam within it.' (Sharh al-Jami', Ibn Abd al-Hakam)

Many overlook the notion of specific Qur'anic guidance on contemporary issues, but only because they do not know how to benefit from the revealed word or extract that guidance, and having been witness to many a charlatan stating generalities or far-fetched interpretations that rail against common-sense, they understandably conclude, often subconsciously, that the guidance of the Qur'an is abstract or non-existent. However, the Qur'an is explicitly relevant to 21st century western issues, in fact, most of it is in plain sight. What we clearly have to do is commit some time to giving this knowledge its due, otherwise we proceed merely with Improvised Religion. The Prophet explicitly warned of the state of Christianity or Judaism - despite ‘reciting’ revelation, they had little guidance because of ignorance concerning what revelation contains, and neglecting to learn how to be informed in their personal, social and political affairs by it, or how to operationalise it. Essentially, it led to great deviations from what God wants.

This is something we all ought to reflect upon, and seek to address, preferably together!


Meaning IS the reason for reading the Qur’an

For quite a while, many scholars and preachers have called for believers to understand the scriptures revealed by God and to engage the divine message, yet the majority of British Muslims do not, opting instead to hastily get through the Qur’an as Arabic phonemes (units of sound), and as many times as possible. It’s absurd, and only the devil could make us believe the situation is both logical and/or acceptable.

To believe pronouncing phonemes suffices is to undermine the entire reason why messengers were sent to mankind, “They were messengers bearing good news and warning so mankind have no excuse before God…” (Q 4:165) We’re told that it’ll be said to the disbelievers at the gates, “Were you not sent your own messengers to recite the revelations of your Lord to you and warn you that you’d meet this day?!” (Q 39:71) Of course, by “recite revelation” the gatekeepers will not mean pronouncing Arabic phonemes, but reading and understanding what God said. Understanding is inherent in all of these verses (and many more) since they wouldn't be valid points otherwise, yet the bizarre status-quo has most of us doing something else and then presenting poor arguments to justify it.

Having discussed this with many people, I've come to see a general pattern of conversation and debate. So to summarise, here is a brief presentation that attempts to provide a holistic understanding towards Qur’an recitation in Q&A form. Please bear in mind that I do not utilise every argument nor every response to possible retorts, it merely concerns itself with the oft-invoked sources and arguments used to justify the ill-informed status quo.

Read more


The social practice of Qur'an khatms

Some people have asked about the social practice of ‘Qur'an khatms’, where people gather to finish the Qur'an (usually in an hour or so) and follow it up with a delicious feast.

This practice is more evident in some cultures than others, and much has been said against it and in defence of it, from it being encouraged to being considered a blameworthy innovation (bid’ah). I have no intention to get into the wrangling, and I feel that if we consider it with some common-sense reasoning (as God encourages us to do), we’d come to a reasonable conclusion.

Firstly, let's determine what exactly takes place:

1. Groups of people get together to hum Arabic for ambiguously defined ‘barakah’ (blessings).
2. It is claimed that the entire Qur'an will be read, yet each person simply hums their allotted small portion independently, so nobody actually reads the entire thing.
3. No guidance is taken from the book of guidance, nor is the Qur'an even understood - neither the allotted portion, nor in any holistic sense.

Personally, I find it deeply offensive to treat guidance and a message from God in this way. In any other context, would we take an informative and direction-giving letter sent to us, break it up into arbitrary parts, get a bunch of people to hum those parts to themselves in a language they little understand, and then bizarrely claim: 1. that we’ve read the entire letter, and 2. that the author of the letter not only wanted this but would be ecstatic about the strange thing we’ve just done? I think most of us would say no, and in any setting it would be deemed mockery.

Some will now more generally point to hadiths that discuss blessings of Qur'anic recitation. I hope it's becoming increasingly clearer that all of these narrations are in the context of the Qur'an being understood and such blessings (i.e. benefits) being the result of understanding, contemplation and practical application.

To be clear, I'm not negating reading the Qur'an individually or in a group, and those who sit with me witness the Qur'an's primacy in all things. I want us to do Qur'an more, not less, but certainly not as phonemes. Our homes and religious institutions should be alive with the sound of God’s guidance and deep explorations/contemplations on the divine word.

This is a message to all people, so that they may be warned by it, and know that He is the only God, and so that those who have minds may take heed.
Qur'an 14:52


Are you a Muslim or a Believer?

In the Qur’an, God speaks about faith/īmān from various perspectives. One that is highly relevant to the ways in which we identify faith and the faithful today lies in 49:14, where God distinguishes between Submitter (muslim) as a political identity and those who truly believe.

Read more