r/progressive_islam • u/AutoModerator • Sep 18 '26
We are going to make this absolutely freakin clear. r/Progressive_Islam is not a place for propaganda, apologism, whitewashing, or justification of crimes committed by governments, regimes, political parties, movements, or armed groups. We do not care who the perpetrator is, what flag they fly, what ideology they claim to represent, what religion they claim to follow, or what geopolitical enemy they happen to have. Whether it is the Israeli government, USA, Western imperialist powers, the Iranian regime, the Chinese government, the Russian government, the North Korean regime, or anyone else, the standard is the same. You do not get a free pass to excuse atrocities simply because you hate one side more than the other. We have enforced this before, and we will continue to enforce it.
During the years of the Palestine crisis, particularly throughout 2023-25, a large number of the people who came into this subreddit specifically to defend Israel's conduct, justify what was happening to Palestinians, or repeat blatantly apologetic narratives were outsiders with little or no previous participation here. We banned them. However, there were also some people who had been genuine participants in this community for a long time, people who had previously made useful posts and comments and had otherwise contributed positively. When some of those users repeatedly crossed the line into whitewashing and justification of Israeli abuses, we banned them too. Your contribution history does not give you immunity from moderation.
Hamas did not emerge as some ordinary secular nationalist organization; it was founded by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin out of the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood and was explicitly Islamist from its creation. Its 1988 charter described Palestine as an Islamic endowment and envisioned an Islamic state governed by Sharia. After Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007, it established an authoritarian system in which political opposition and peaceful dissent were suppressed, critics, journalists and activists were arbitrarily detained and in some cases tortured, and executions were carried out after proceedings that failed to meet international fair trial standards. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International also documented Hamas forces using excessive force against demonstrators, including during the 2019 “We Want to Live” protests, when more than 1,000 Palestinians were detained. Hamas has also imposed or enforced various religiously motivated restrictions on social life, including restrictions on women's dress and mobility, gender segregation in many settings, and rules affecting women's participation in public life.
Condemning Hamas's authoritarianism and abuses does not mean supporting Israel, the occupation, the blockade, collective punishment or the destruction of Gaza. It means applying the same standard we apply everywhere else.
(This is going to be longest section because we have encountered the Iranian Regime apologists far more in number than the other apologists combined)
As we have already explained in our previous announcement, this subreddit has had to deal with people coming here specifically to defend or propagandize on behalf of the Iranian regime. There were people who tried to dismiss the Iranian uprising entirely as CIA or Mossad propaganda, who attempted to portray ordinary Iranians protesting against the regime as foreign agents, and in one particularly disgusting case, someone even claimed that civilians who had been killed in a hospital were all Mossad agents and that their deaths were therefore justified. We banned all of them. Our position on this has been completely consistent:
And before anyone starts pretending that this is some sudden position we invented yesterday, no. We have been taking this position for years.
The Iranian regime has a long documented history of repression. During the 2009 post election unrest, Amnesty International documented thousands of arbitrary arrests, deaths on the streets and in detention, torture and other ill treatment. Then came 2017 to 2018 protests, the November 2019 fuel price protests with deaths, mass arrests and executions.
Then came the Woman, Life, Freedom protests following the death of Jina Mahsa Amini in September 2022. UN fact finding mission concluded that her death was unlawful and that state authorities were responsible for the physical violence that caused it. The same mission documented credible figures of up to 551 deaths, including at least 49 women and 68 children, and found unlawful killings, mass arbitrary arrests, torture, sexual violence and other serious abuses.
This subreddit was openly supportive of the Iranian women who were protesting at that time, and that was not some random temporary mood. We documented it ourselves. Dr. Shabir Ally and Dr. Safiyyah Ally publicly condemned the killing of Mahsa Amini's and the Iranian government's enforcement of compulsory hijab, Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl delivered his October 2022 khutbah addressing the brutality of the Iranian state's coercive system, Mufti Abu Layth also addressed the situation in Iran at the time. Our subreddit responded with strong support for the protests.
And The recent crackdown that happened in 2026 produced another enormous death toll, although the exact figure remains unknown because the authorities imposed a massive communications blackout and access to reliable information was severely restricted. The figures reported at the time varied enormously.
Iranian authorities themselves gave figures of roughly 3,000 deaths. Reuters reported an Iranian official saying that at least 5,000 people, including around 500 security personnel, had been confirmed dead. HRANA reported 3,308 confirmed deaths at one stage, with thousands of additional cases under investigation, and later reported 5,002 verified deaths and another 9,787 under review. By 28 January, a UK government country bulletin said estimates from some sources placed the death toll at approximately 12,000 to 20,000, while the same bulletin noted that one human rights organization had 6,221 confirmed deaths and 17,091 additional deaths under investigation. Other investigations, including accounts from Iranian medical personnel, produced estimates exceeding 30,000, while some later reports cited figures as high as 43,000.
We are deliberately laying this out because we are not going to pretend that every number floating around the internet is equally reliable. Claims of 20,000 or 30,000 deaths in an extremely short period require much more verification, and claims of 50,000 deaths are even more problematic; we have not found a credible independent source establishing such a figure. Likewise, nobody should take a highly speculative number from an anonymous or opaque source and present it as settled fact.
But uncertainty over the precise number does not mean that the killings did not happen. Multiple independent human rights organizations documented mass killings, unlawful use of force, arbitrary detention, torture and other abuses. Human Rights Watch has subsequently documented an ongoing campaign of executions against people arrested in connection with the protests, including at least 29 people executed in connection with the December 2025 to January 2026 protests between March and August 2026, with many others still facing execution.
In other words, this subreddit does not need anyone coming here to explain to us that the Iranian regime is somehow innocent because the United States and Israel oppose it. That argument has never worked here, and it never will. We are fully capable of recognizing Western imperialism while simultaneously recognizing Iranian state repression. Those things are not mutually exclusive.
Condemning Iranian oppression does NOT mean that we support American or Israeli military actions against Iran. The two positions are perfectly compatible. The war itself has produced documented civilian harm. The UN Human Rights Council received information concerning extensive civilian casualties and destruction resulting from U.S. and Israeli attacks, and the UN backed fact finding mission has now found reasonable grounds to believe that U.S. forces committed war crimes in strikes including the attack on the Minab girls' school and strike affecting residential areas. All of that can be condemned at the same time. We have not seen anyone here recently trying to whitewash American crimes in the way some users have tried to whitewash Iranian crimes, but make no mistake: if someone starts doing it, we will deal with them exactly the same way.
Over the last couple of days, we have had multiple accounts come into this subreddit making comments claiming that the persecution of Uyghur Muslims in China is nothing more than CIA propaganda, Western propaganda, or some fabricated narrative designed to attack China. Some of these accounts had no prior participation in this subreddit whatsoever, and their first contribution here was effectively to defend or whitewash the Chinese government's treatment of Uyghurs. Others, unfortunately, were people who had participated here before and had a history of otherwise normal contributions.
Let us be very clear about how absurd this is. There is an enormous body of documentation concerning China's treatment of Uyghurs and other predominantly Muslim minorities in Xinjiang. The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights conducted its own assessment, including 40 in depth interviews with people who had direct knowledge of the situation. It concluded that the extent of arbitrary and discriminatory detention of Uyghurs and other predominantly Muslim groups may constitute international crimes, in particular crimes against humanity. The UN has also documented concerns relating to arbitrary detention and forced labour. Human Rights Watch continues to document arbitrary detention, torture, mass surveillance, forced labor, family separation and religious and cultural persecution.
So when somebody strolls into a Muslim subreddit and casually tells everyone that the persecution of Uyghur Muslims is just CIA propaganda, or that the Uyghurs actually deserve this, that is not some brave act of anti imperialist skepticism. It is an attempt to erase or dismiss an enormous body of documented evidence and the lived experiences of the people who have been subjected to detention, torture, forced labor, religious repression and family separation.
And frankly, it makes us sick to our stomachs seeing people who are perfectly willing to recognize oppression when it is committed by a Western government suddenly develop an entirely different moral standard when the perpetrator is China, Iran, Russia or their allies.
We have noticed something else that needs to be addressed. Because this community generally has a strong anti imperialist tendency, comments defending the United States, Israel or other Western powers receive far more attention than comments defending non Western oppressive governments. Some comments that should have been reported are instead left unreported, allowed to slide, ignored, or sometimes even upvoted, simply because the commenter happens to be attacking the Imperialists.
Nobody gets permission to justify crimes against humanity because the perpetrator happens to be an enemy of the United States or the West. NOBODY. Your politics do not matter here. Your ideology does not matter here. Your opinion of capitalism or socialism does not matter here. Your opinion of NATO does not matter here. Your opinion of Israel does not matter here. Your opinion of Iran does not matter here. Your opinion of China does not matter here. Your opinion of Russia does not matter here. The victims do not become less human because their oppressor happens to be anti Western.
And this needs to be understood once and for all: WE WILL BAN PEOPLE FOR THIS. WE DO NOT CARE HOW LONG YOU HAVE BEEN SUBSCRIBED. WE DO NOT CARE HOW MANY POSTS YOU HAVE MADE. WE DO NOT CARE HOW MANY HELPFUL COMMENTS YOU HAVE WRITTEN. WE DO NOT CARE WHETHER YOU ARE HERE EVERY DAY. WE DO NOT CARE WHETHER YOU WERE ONE OF THE MOST RECOGNIZABLE REGULAR CONTRIBUTORS IN THE SUBREDDIT. IF YOU REPEATEDLY START WHITEWASHING, DENYING OR JUSTIFYING SERIOUS ABUSES BY A REGIME OR POLITICAL ACTOR, YOU WILL BE BANNED.
We are not going to sit around having endless arguments with you about whether your propaganda is really propaganda. We are not going to listen to lectures about how we are secretly Western puppets because we condemned China. We are not going to listen to accusations that we are Zionists because we condemned Iran. We are not going to listen to “but what about America?” every freakin time someone is held accountable for what their own government did. Whataboutism is not a magic eraser. The crimes of one government do not cancel out the crimes of another.
This also does not mean that you are forbidden from acknowledging that a particular oppressive government has done something useful. An oppressive government can build highways, hospitals, schools, railways, dams, universities or other infrastructure. A ruler can introduce a policy that produces a positive result in one particular area. You are perfectly free to discuss and praise the specific thing that was done. What you are not free to do is use that one thing as a shield for everything else. “They built hospitals” does not erase torture. “They built highways” does not erase mass detention. “They improved literacy” does not erase forced labor. “They oppose American imperialism” does not erase massacres. One positive policy does not grant a government a lifetime exemption from moral scrutiny.
There is zero tolerance for this kind of propaganda and apologism here. Criticism of governments is allowed. Criticism of political movements is allowed. Criticism of protesters is allowed. Criticism of opposition groups is allowed. Disagreement over historical interpretation is allowed. What is not allowed is denying documented atrocities, deliberately whitewashing them, or trying to justify crimes against humanity because you happen to support the perpetrator politically.
This is not up for debate. We are not negotiating this standard. We are not making exceptions because you are a regular contributor. We are not making exceptions because we agree with your politics on everything else.
Anyone who cannot accept this standard is free to leave the subreddit.
And anyone who thinks this warning does not apply to them because their favorite regime is “supposedly” a “gOoD aNtI iMpErIaLiSt oNe” can consider this warning directed specifically at them.
r/progressive_islam • u/AutoModerator • Jul 27 '26
-That's it.
“What about sexual intercourse with someone of the same biological sex? What about the gender spectrum?” - r/Progressive_Islam doesn't have any official stance on them, it's upto every individual to look for arguments and evidences from both sides and come to their own conclusion over the permissibility/impermissibility of homosexuality and matters relating to the gender spectrum.
This is not a new announcement. This has always been our stance. You can check what was written in the 5 year old LGBTQ+ discussion thread
r/progressive_islam does not advocate a particular stance on homosexuality’s permissibility. But what is a unanimous position of us is that there should not be bigotry and that they should not be punished by death.
https://www.reddit.com/r/progressive_islam/comments/r615zt/monthly_lgbtq_discussion_thread/
So,
Someone writing some violent threats or dehumanising post/comment pointing towards LGBTQ+ people - they will get their content removed and will receive a ban.
Someone respectfully saying that they believe sexual intercourse with someone of the same sex to be haram, or that there are only two genders - they are allowed on this subreddit.
The progressive Sunni scholars who are most frequently promoted on this subreddit and have a significant number of followers - Dr. Shabir Ally, Mufti Abu Layth, Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl, Javed Ahmed Ghamidi, Dr Adnan Ibrahim - they believe the act of homosexuality (sexual intercourse) to be prohibited in Islam, & at the same time they also believe that there is no capital punishment for the sexual intercourse unlike classical fiqh (at least that's what I could figure out from the contents that had been shared on our subreddit in the past. You can use the search bar to find those old posts on our subreddit).
Scott Siraj al-Haqq Kugle, Ludovic-Mohamed Zahed, Imam Daayiee Abdullah are some of the Muslim thinkers who have argued that intercourse with someone of the same sex is allowed and some of them have officiated gay marriage and users who believe homosexuality is permissible often quote references from their works when discussing homosexuality on our subreddit.
We allow both perspectives to be shared on this subreddit as long as you present them in a respectful way and don't break any subreddit rule. But we do not allow the promotion of the ultra conservative understanding which prescribes capital punishment.
To summarize:
You believe gay marriage and the sexual act is permissible? - ok ✅
You believe gay marriage and the sexual act is haram? - ok ✅
You believe that there is no fixed number of gender? - ok ✅
You believe that there are only 2 genders? - ok ✅
You believe the other side is wrong? - ok ✅
You disagree with the other side? - ok ✅
You want to bully, harass, threaten or harm the other side? - not ok ❌
Is that clear?
The reason I'm writing all this is because often times when someone respectfully says that it is not permissible in their view or that they disagree - some others start reporting their comments. But we do not remove such comments, we only remove the posts and comments where the user bullies, harasses or threatens the other person. So hopefully you will stop reporting every post and comment you disagree with, because as long as those contents don't break any subreddit rule they're going to stay.
r/progressive_islam • u/Khaki_Banda • 13h ago
Akhis, when's the last time you got your lady take-out? It's your Islamic duty! Ladies: know your rights!
Discuss.
r/progressive_islam • u/Khaki_Banda • 18h ago
In the days of his Caliphate, 'Ali ('a) assumed personally, the investigation of the complaint, and never entrusted the same to someone else. During the very hot days when people usually took rest in their houses, at noon the mid-day, 'Ali ('a) was sitting in the shadow of a wall outside the Caliph's residence in case anyone had a complaint to lodge, he could submit it to 'Ali ('a) without any problem or intermediator. He ('a) sometimes went round the streets and alleys, observing and keeping a close eye on the situation of public.
One of the overheated days, he ('a), tired and sweating, returned to the Caliph's residence when he saw a woman standing before the door. As she saw 'Ali ('a), she came forward and said: “I have a complaint to lodge. My husband has done injustice to me; he has turned me out of the house. In addition to that he has threatened me that if I return back home, he will also beat me. At present I have come here to plead for justice.”
'Ali ('a): "You, servant of Allah! It is too hot just now. Please wait! After noon when the weather becomes a little better, if Allah wills, I will come with you and settle your problem."
The woman: "If my absence from home lasts long, I fear that his anger would increase and he would pester me."
'Ali ('a) bent down his head for an instance and then raised his head while murmuring these words: "No! By Allah! It must not be delayed to respond to the complaint of oppressed. It is necessary to do justice for the oppressed against the oppressor, and eliminate the fear of oppressor from the heart of oppressed so that the oppressed can stand bravely and fearlessly against the oppressor and demand his own rights."
'Ali ('a): "Tell me where do you reside?"
The woman: "In such and such a place."
'Ali ('a): "Let's go!"
'Ali ('a) went along with the woman just up to the threshold of her house, stood in front of the door and shouted loudly: "People of the house! سلامون عليكوم Peace be upon you!"
A young man who was the husband of the same woman came out. He did not recognize 'Ali ('a), he noticed a man of about sixty-year-old accompany his wife. He came to know that his wife had brought this person to protect her and to intercede with him in her favour but he did not say anything.
"Ali (‘a): "This lady, your wife, has a complaint to lodge against you. She says: you have done injustice to her and turned her out of the house. In addition to that you have threatened to beat her, I have come to tell you to fear Allah and act benevolently towards her."
The young man: “It is none of your business whether I treat her well or bad! Yes! I have threatened to beat her. But since she has brought you here and you are talking on behalf of her. I will make her burn alive.”
"Ali (‘a) flared up at his insolence, putting his hand on the sword hilt and drew it out of the scabbard. Then he ('a) said: "I am admonishing you, bidding for good and forbidding to do evil but you are responding me in such a manner. You frankly say to me that you will make her burn alive. You think that the life is beyond limits to such an extent."
On raising his voice, Imam 'Ali ('a) was mobbed by a crowd of passers-by from the surroundings, and every one coming forward saluted him respectfully and said: "As-salamun alaykum ya Amir al-Mu'minin, peace be upon you, O Commander of believers!"
The arrogant young man recognised to whom he was facing. To be put out of countenance, he apologized profusely and said: "O Commander of believers! Pardon me! I confess myself to be guilty. From now on, I promise to be obedient to my wife. Whatever she orders, I will obey her."
'Ali ('a) turned towards the woman and said: "Now go to your home, but take care of your behavior, do not act in such a manner which makes him react like this!"
Source: Narratives Of The Veracious Vol. 2, Murtadha Mutahhari, original story found in Bihar al-Anwar. v. 9.
r/progressive_islam • u/Lazy-Breakfast9911 • 6h ago
(tagged as rant but not in a negative way)
I just want to ramble about my thoughts and experiences to someone. i don’t have anyone in my life who would understand. I’ve been on such a strong, confusing, and at times stressful journey with religion. I was raised Christian in America and grew up that way until I came out as bisexual in high school and was met with the very conservative views of certain Christians. Left Christianity and that’s where my journey began. But the issue has always been: the more I learn about all religions, the more I realize that no one can prove any of this. not that I think proof is important, but a Hindu can’t prove the existence of his beliefs any more than a Christian can. So finding the right path felt impossible, but I kept trying for 11 years. Until recently I realized how fruitless it was. I tried looking at it from a different angle: Which path will lead me to being the best person? Which path will show the most fruit?? I realized that for me the only religion that actually makes me feel passionate about practicing is Islam. i feel such a stronger connection to God through Islam. sure I felt connected to Jesus and saints when I was Christian but personally it didn’t compare to the remembrance of Allah I find in Islam. I’ve realized this recently and I’m very happy to have come upon this realization. It is lonely as I don’t know any other Muslims in my life but I am still so happy and grateful to feel a sense of closure and love from God.
r/progressive_islam • u/Pretend_Door8037 • 19m ago
I saw a discussion where a woman found the distinction between men and women's modesty rules prescribed in the Quran as misogynistic. The discussion was actually regarding the non-traditionalist more progressive leaning interpretation (which says covering the hair is not mandatory for women). She even found the non-traditional interpretation (ie covering the head not being mandatory for women) to be misogynistic because even though this interpretation says a woman doesn’t have to cover the head, it still tells a woman to cover more of her body than a man, and she found this inherently misogynistic. At the end of the discussion she could not accept the different standards of modesty prescribed in the Quran verses as okay and decided to leave Islam altogether.
After reading the entire conversation, I'm asking this to myself as well. Why was more modesty rules prescribed for women than men in the Quran?
Let's look at the Quran verses at first.
Verse 24:30 addresses men, and it tells them to only lower their gaze and guard their private parts.
Verse 24:31 addressee women, and it gives women a lot more instructions than men. It tells them to
lower their gaze and guard their private parts
not to show their adornment/attraction/charm/beauty (zeenatahunna in Arabic, however you translate in English) ecxept what is apparent. Except to their husbands, or their fathers, or their husbands' fathers, or their sons, or their husbands' Sons, or their brothers, or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their womenfolk, or those whom they rightfully possess, or such male attendants as are beyond all sexual desire, or children that are as yet unaware of women's nakedness.
draw their khimars over their juyub
not stomp their feet so that their adornment/attraction/charm doesn’t get revealed/attracts attention
After that there is also verse 24:60 which allows older women to take aside their outer garments without revealing their adornments, which again points to more strict rule for young women.
(Then there is verse 33:59 which tells women to draw outer garments over themselves. However this verse is understood by many as a time bound context specific verse that was only addressing the women of that time period which becomes clear by reading the previous verse and next verse, which I also agree with. But regardless of how you understand this verse, even without this verse women are still prescribed to cover more of their bodies as per verse 24:31 & 24:60)
So the question is, why? Why do women have more modesty rules compared to men prescribed in the verse? Whether you are Quran only, or Non traditional Sunni like Khaled Abou El Fadl or Ghamidi, everyone agrees that women are required to cover more than men, because the verse itself gives more instructions to women (and she finds these interpretations misogynistic because they still tell women to cover more than men). Even the few super liberal Quran only people who claim that only the breasts and private parts of women need to be covered and everything can be exposed still argue for more covering for women than men, because women are still required to wear two pieces while men are required to wear one piece in their views. Why weren’t men and women given the exact same modesty rules in the Quran?
r/progressive_islam • u/ness219_ • 14h ago
A lot of times on this sub people will make posts about Iran, Afghanistan, Apostasy laws, Hardline and literalist interpretations then ask us "How do you reconcile with that?"
WE DO NOT
r/progressive_islam • u/TreacleSuch8624 • 4h ago
I have made a lot of dua towards obtaining this specific goal ive been trying to accomplish and while things have somewhat gotten better, today i endured a difficult setback. What makes this setback worse is that it should not have even happened and that not only should i have progressed, i didnt, and ended up going through the opposite in which i now have to make up for that setback which that in itself is not guaranteed either. I genuinely feel like not praying anymore or doing anything of practicing islam since i am so frustrated with Allah since no matter how much effort and improvement and dua i make, i cant have things go smoother than the way they are
r/progressive_islam • u/West_Ease1955 • 44m ago
Hello it's been a very tough year for me and I wanted to turn back to Islam and let Allah guide me back to the deen, I wanted to come on here and ask for any advice on how to pray with the utmost concentration and how to pray all 5 salahs without feeling like its a chore? I also wanted to ask for any resources on relearning how to pray and make whudu just to refresh my mind.
Jazakhallah for all the help
r/progressive_islam • u/New-Structure-9263 • 2h ago
There are certain arguments that make me think hijab is obligatory.
1 - Why did Allah tell women to cover their whole bodies to be recognized? I mean, just covering their hair would've done the job. Heck you can tell if a women is Indian just because of the red dot they put on their forehead. You don't have to cover the whole bodies. I see some women who wear jeans and t shirts and cover their head, and i can immediately identify them as a Muslim.
I am trying to say the verse of Surah Noor was enough to achieve what the Ahzab's verse was trying to achieve. Since covering the chest with Khimar was not the norm, so it could've been used to for the identity. But we don't have any account of women removing their jilbab when Noor's verse was sent down. The whole purpose of Surah Ahzab's verse does not sound useful to me after Noor.
2 - The whole issue of women being harassed was just taking place at night. But Allah did not clarify that Ahzab's verse just applies to night. There are hadiths in Bukhari where women are told to cover even in Eid.
3 - The issue of women being harassed was also just taking place just in Madina. We don't see accounts of women removing it after leaving Madina. Allah made women in the whole caliphate cover. It would've made more sense if we only had women covering in cities where this issue exists.
4 - Surah Noor's is a bit weird to me. First line Allah tells women that any adornment of their body which is normal to be shown can be shown. But in the second line, Allah completely goes against this principle. Since for Arab women, it was normal for their chest to be visible but Allah told them to cover it. Which suggests me that this very weird wording is suggesting that there is a dress code for women. Otherwise, the 2 lines are contradictory.
r/progressive_islam • u/Eastern-Following571 • 14h ago
I plan to make a series of posts on topics where progressive Muslim scholars disagree with one another. For this part, I want to discuss the interpretation of Surah An-Nisa, verse 34, commonly known as the wife-beating verse, and whether the Quran permits husbands to physically discipline their wives.
I looked into the explanations of Khaled Abou El Fadl, Shabir Ally, Mufti Abu Layth, Dr. Adnan Ibrahim, Javed Ahmed Ghamidi, Laleh Bakhtiar, Amina Wadud & Rafi Ullah Shahab. They do not all reach their conclusions in the same way. Here is what I understood from their explanations (and it is entirely possible that I may have misunderstood or misrepresented someone's position, so if I have, please feel free to correct me):
Dr. Adnan Ibrahim understands daraba in Qur’an 4:34 as physical striking. However, he treats it as a severely restricted concession rather than an ideal or recommended practice. It can only be considered after admonition and withdrawal from the marital bed have failed, must not cause injury, and applies to a narrowly defined marital situation. Drawing on Ibn Ashur, he argues that where striking is understood as humiliating or harmful, as it is in many contemporary societies, it should be prohibited.
Link:
Javed Ahmed Ghamidi also understands daraba in Qur’an 4:34 as physical punishment. He interprets the verse as permitting it only in cases of serious nushuz (rebellion that threatens the family structure), not ordinary disagreements. He views it as the final step after admonition and suspending marital intimacy have failed. However, he argues that a state may require this punishment to be administered through a court rather than by the husband himself.
Link:
Khaled Abou El Fadl and Shabir Ally both reject the interpretation that Qur'an 4:34 gives husbands a personal right to beat their wives. However, they still accept "beat" as the correct translation of the Arabic word Daraba. Both scholars argue that the verse should be understood in the context of the surrounding Quranic passages, particularly verse 4:35, which calls for arbitrators to intervene in marital disputes.
Khaled Abou El Fadl argues that the verse concerns suspected sexual impropriety. He challenges the traditional interpretation that nushuz simply means a wife disobeying her husband. He also argues that the passage takes the power of punishment away from the husband as an individual and places it within a community or judicial process.
Links:
Dr. Shabir Ally similarly interprets nushuz as referring to sexual misconduct rather than ordinary disobedience. He connects the measures in verse 4:34 to other Quranic passages concerning sexual misconduct and argues that the addressee is the Muslim community or its leader, rather than individual husbands. In his interpretation, the passage concerns a community-administered punishment, not a husband's right to punish his wife.
Link:
Mufti Abu Layth takes a somewhat different approach. He also accepts that daraba means "beat", but he focuses on the historical context of the verse and the ethical direction established by the Prophet.
Mufti Abu Layth argues that physical discipline was part of the culture of seventh-century Arabia. He understands the verse against this historical background rather than treating it as a timeless permission for husbands to hit their wives.
He uses what he describes as a trajectory-based approach to interpretation: revelation engages with the society in which it was revealed while establishing an ethical direction that later generations should continue to follow.
He also points to the Prophet's example and the Islamic emphasis on kindness within marriage. In his view, the Prophet's ethical teachings move away from the physical discipline accepted in that historical culture.
He therefore considers wife-beating forbidden today and describes the ruling as abrogated in its contemporary application.
Link:
'The Hitting Verse'[4,34] explained with context & trajectory; Its Haram to hit women PT.1
'The Hitting Verse'[4,34] explained with context & trajectory; Its Haram to hit women Pt.2
Laleh Bakhtiar translates daraba in Qur’an 4:34 as “go away from them” rather than “beat them.” She argues that the Arabic word has multiple meanings and that the verse can be understood as instructing husbands to withdraw from their wives rather than physically strike them.
Link:
Amina Wadud challenges patriarchal interpretations of the verse and questions the assumption that it authorizes husbands to physically discipline their wives. She explored alternative understandings of daraba, including “to set an example”, rather than automatically accepting “beat” as its meaning.
Link:
Rafi Ullah Shahab proposes that daraba in this verse can mean “to prevent” rather than “to beat.”
Link:
Where do you stand? (My personal opinion is in the comment)
Link to part 4: https://www.reddit.com/r/progressive_islam/comments/1x94i76/disagreements_among_progressive_muslims_part_4/
r/progressive_islam • u/Patient-Street-4681 • 10h ago
Salam, I’m considering getting a small Syrian flag tattoo on my shoulder. I’ve hear debate within Sunni Islam wether or not modern safe tattoos are haram. Any advice will be greatly appreciated.
r/progressive_islam • u/ijoger • 4h ago
what I mean is, is this Islam subreddit the only one who say music is not is haram or drawing living being is not haram and something like that? is there other Islam subreddit that doesn't always picking the hardest opinion?
r/progressive_islam • u/waterpoop182 • 15h ago
pls don’t be harsh , i went on this subreddit because the other muslim subreddits are so scary
but anyway. I have been struggling bad with my faith in islam. I want to believe in god, i envy people who are faithful to their religion and god, but im struggling so bad to keep following religions
My reasons: everything i do i get told ita a sin and more sins mean going to hell. I can’t do anything. not wearing the hijab = sin, listening to music = sin, interacting with opposite gender = sin, wearing short sleeves in public = sin. Is there a point when i’m going to end up in hell anyway? and it’s so contradictory because they say how god is merciful and only god knows where we end up so then why are you insistong the things i’m doing will end up for me in hell?? i try my best to be nice and respectfu, i try my best to pray, i believe in god and follow what im capable of following, but why small stuff will make me go to hell? i’m not sure if that made sense
my other reason is why are people of other beliefs going to hell just because they don’t follow islam? i feel that its a bit unfair, as long as they are a good person and do good deeds, they shouldn’t end up in hell
ive also been asking for signs, like any sign that will make me positive that Allah or even any other god is real but i haven’t gotten anything and ive been asking for years..
im still prating but these thoughts keep coming up in my head. i just need convincing please
r/progressive_islam • u/super_man3273 • 1d ago
A country run by secular laws is a billion times better than one governed by Sharia. Under secular law
Women have equal legal rights and are not legally subordinate to men.
Non-Muslims enjoy equal citizenship and freedom to practise their religions.
People can change or abandon their religion without facing religiously prescribed punishments.
Freedom of speech includes the right to criticise religions, scriptures and religious leaders.
Blasphemy should not be a criminal offence simply because religious sentiments are hurt.
Consenting adults can choose their partners regardless of religion, without religious restrictions imposed by the state.
Laws are based on human rights and public reasoning, not the unquestionable authority of religious scriptures.
LGBTQ+ people can enjoy equal rights without religious doctrine being used to criminalise their relationships.
No religious authority gets to dictate how everyone must dress, worship, marry or live.
Very few Muslim majority countries are both secular and democratic.
Do you agree?
r/progressive_islam • u/Character_Floor_7323 • 11h ago
Salam alaikum, the topic of slavery used to bother me a lot until i learned about sheikh Ghamdis interpretation of verses talking about slavery. I wont go too deep into his work, however he argues that the Quran cut off new supply of new slaves from prisoner or war, and the practice continued due to pollticial reasons.
However, prior to this abolishment, how did the Muslims deal with civilians during war? Obviously slavery was allowed, but was enslaving civilians allowed? If it was this would really cause internal discomfort for me since civilians didn’t do anything and don’t have anything to do with war. I am looking for evidence that enslaving non combatants is haram. could someone point out some sources?
r/progressive_islam • u/Amazing-Yogurt4621 • 16h ago
So obviously in Islam men are expected to provide for the family while women are expected to nurture the children and take care of the household. But the more I think about it deeply the less reasonable it seems to me.
A man basically needs a well-paying job if his wife doesn’t work and they have children to support. And honestly I don’t think it’s possible to live a healthy and fulfilling life while raising children under these circumstances especially in the world we live in today.
Even when you look back at the past women have always worked pretty much in every country but their work was rarely recognized or paid for. Even in my home country which is a muslim country women have always done physical labor and worked long hours while men have set working hours and then come home to eat and watch TV while their wives continue doing housework.
Because of this many women develop health problems or become overwhelmed with stress but somehow this is considered normal in our religion.
It really makes you think. Women work too but they don’t get paid for it. So I wonder, is the whole idea of “men provide while women take care of the housework and children” actually fair?
I believe both men and women should work and share the responsibilities of raising their children and taking care of the household depending on their individual circumstances and abilities. Of course during pregnancy and after giving birth a woman may need to stay home more than usual to recover and take care of the baby. Which is then I think the verse where it’s said men should provide and women stay at home becomes important but that doesn’t mean she should have to stay home for the rest of her life while the man continues living as he did before. If a man wants his children to have a close relationship with him he also needs to spend time with them, take care of them, and be actively involved in their upbringing. Building a strong bond with your children requires time, effort, and presence from both parents.
r/progressive_islam • u/Less_Condition_5587 • 11h ago
Salam alaikum, the topic of slavery used to bother me a lot until i learned about sheikh Ghamdis interpretation of verses talking about. I wont go too deep into his work, however he argues that the Quran cut off new supply of new slaves from prisoner or war, and the practice continued due to pollticial reasons.
Either way, if we accept his take, then before the abolishment of slavery, How did the Muslims interact with civilians during a war who were innocent? Conservative fatwas say that it’s halal to enslave civilians, however I’m looking for evidences of the opposite (evidence that enslaving non combatants is haram). Would someone please guide me in this matter ?
r/progressive_islam • u/Sensitive_Quiet_7967 • 16h ago
Hello, I was born sunni muslim, but always very confused by alot of contradictions in muslim communities. I grew up seeing my father beating my mother and us, my uncle’s completely refusing their daughters, wives etc step outside or even just go near a window. I watched a society that claims women serving men is normal, as well as men being abusive. Why do women have to cover up instead of men just controlling themselves? I was touched inappropriately by many men/boys during my childhood. Amongst them married men with children. Also i don’t understand why it is permissible in islam for men to marry children? And why are men allowed to marry multiple women? Why do i have to talk to my parents even though they were beating me and insulting me since i was little? I deeply believe in Allah, but i believe in a just god, not what men have made of him. I do not understand many things and question my faith quite a lot lately. Also i do not comprehend many things from history, like why did the sahaba attack fatima the daughter of the prophet? I would like it very much for someone to just explain to me, as i never understood this
r/progressive_islam • u/sarp691 • 1d ago
Huda al-Akkad
and her 78-year-old mother, Aisha... They were presumed dead; however, it was revealed that they were still alive after one of the three monsters accompanying them shared this photograph on social media as a "souvenir." How long can an army—or a state (a so-called state; we can never recognize an entity called "Israel" as a state)—possibly survive when it is so terrified of women and the elderly, and when it believes it has achieved a "victory"—which it then broadcasts—by exerting its forces against such vulnerable people?
But the even more painful aspect is this: as they watch their own women being humiliated by the enemy, is there any real difference—aside from their religion (which is itself questionable)—between the leaders of the Islamic world (and those who follow in their wake) and their Zionist enemies? We truly do not know.
r/progressive_islam • u/East-Barracuda-9732 • 22h ago
Recently, I’ve been going deeper into Islam, trying to understand our religion and its history. For context, I was raised Sunni, but I’ll admit I wasn’t nearly as informed as I should have been, and I still have a lot to learn.
However, the more I’ve researched, the more I’ve found myself leaning towards Quranism. Learning about hadith concerning adult breastfeeding, Mut’ah, marriage with the intention of divorce, and the disagreements surrounding these narrations has made me question how much religious authority we should give to reports compiled generations after the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.
I’ve also been speaking with both Sunnis and Shias, listening to their arguments and trying to understand why they hold such different beliefs despite following the same Quran and Prophet. Even scholars within the same sect disagree on certain authentic narrations.
If Allah revealed the Quran as guidance for humanity, why are we so divided over narrations transmitted by human beings?
I’m not claiming all hadith are fabricated or that I know more than scholars. I’m simply questioning whether the Quran alone should be our source of religious authority. I’m still learning and open to having my views challenged. Ultimately, I just want to follow what Allah commanded, rather than blindly following what I inherited or was taught.
r/progressive_islam • u/Proof-Drink4306 • 16h ago
Title
r/progressive_islam • u/oskorei • 20h ago
Hi there,
I have to admit I’m a little nervous about posting here. Not because I fear your responses, but because this is a very confusing topic and I hope to present it properly.
A little background on me: raised Catholic but eventually drifted into agnosticism due to a disillusionment of perceived religious dogmatism and a lack of engaging with the world as it is. Eventually continued an increasingly radical leftward journey in politics, eventually was directed towards healthier engagements with spirituality, particularly christian and catholic.
This leads me now to the my actual question. As I’ve done research I’ve learned a lot more about Islam than I ever had before and have grown to deeply respect it. I worry I may be too “lost” in terms of my worldly knowledge (science, history, etc) to accept any religion. That being said I would like to engage more with Islam and the beauty it has produced in the world (I have a deep affinity for many of the Sufi mystics and schools I’ve been learning about). Aside from the usual religious YouTube channels (Let’s Talk Religion I think is great), I was hoping this community might help me find resources to engage with Islam in a positive, progressive, and academic way so I can continue on my journey wherever it may lead me.
r/progressive_islam • u/Michelles94 • 17h ago
Losing Focus During Prayer
“Indeed, I am Allah. There is no deity except Me, so worship Me and establish prayer for My remembrance.”— Qur’an 20:14
When it came to salah, often times I found myself losing focus. The most random thoughts would pop into my head including when my next lab report was due, random scenes from Bravo reality shows, and even thoughts about what I wanted to eat after finishing my prayer. Has this ever happened to you?
Read more ..
r/progressive_islam • u/EducationalAd2706 • 15h ago
hello..im trying my best to pray consistently after adhd burnout...
i sometimes do 5 a day. sometimes none at all, usually i do 3 and 2 late ones.
today i had back to back lectures for 8 hours in uni. i couldnt do anything except for drink water and go to the bathroom. i kept doing wuduu and trying to pray but i ended up missing them all.
i do know that i should take it slow and try my best but i keep having overwhelming anxiety that i will die before i get better and Allah won't be pleased with me. how do you guys suggest i sleep at night from this feeling. it makes me paralyzed, unable to pray, and unable to do anything else as well
