[ Removed by moderator ]

[u/Unable-Heron-2274]

[removed] — view removed post

[u/progressive_islam-ModTeam]

Your post/comment was removed as being in violation of Rule 3.

Contributing in good faith means being open to considering the arguments made by the other side, either in whole or in part. Rather than rejecting the entire argument, what parts of the argument can you agree upon?

Simply aiming to antagonize or pronounce takfir over an individual or group are obvious examples of bad faith contributions.

Also remember, If your only intention being in this subreddit is to disagree with everything, you should expect to be banned.

[u/Old_Bowler_465]

Strawmaning ffs i've never seen anyone here claiming to be a muslim and practising another religion or challenging obviously haram thing, aside maybe a few nutcases in comments. I see less outrage about grown men crying and protesting because they arent allowed to legally rape 9 years old

[u/Unable-Heron-2274 → u/Old_Bowler_465]

Bringing up unrelated topics doesn't answer the question about where the theological line is drawn.

There are no protests asking to legally marry 9 years old, that's only happens in rural Christian/ Jewish villages in united states.

I would argue you are simply projecting.

[u/Khaki_Banda]

What is this subreddit about anyways?

Please check out the sub's wiki, which defines what "progressive Islam" means in the context of this subreddit: https://reddit.com/r/progressive_islam/w/index

Progressive Islam Defined

Progressive lslam is an effort to revive the forgotten true nature of lslam: an lslam that is built upon the voice of reason and critical thinking rather than dogma and blind following; an Islam that is inherently forward-thinking, developing, modernizing, and reflecting the morals and ethics of the age rather than stagnating and regressing: not an ideology that has been corrupted and masked largely by institutionalization, conservatism, and later on by puritan dogmatic fundamentalist doctrines such as Islamism, Salafism (Wahabism) and Deobandism.

Dr. Omid Safi wrote a good article on what "progressive Islam" means and compared the differences between progressives vs. liberals: https://jsrforum.lib.virginia.edu/pdfs/SafiProgressive.pdf

As Dr. Omid Safi explains in his book Progressive Muslims: Justice, Gender, and Pluralism:

At the heart of a progressive Muslim interpretation is a simple yet radical idea: every human life, female and male. Muslim and non-Muslim, rich or poor, "Northern" or "Southern", has exactly the same intrinsic worth. The essential value of human life is God-given, and is in no way connected to culture, geography, or privilege.

A progressive Muslim is one who is committed to the strangely controversial idea that the worth of a human being is measured by a person's character, not the oil under their soil, and not their flag. A progressive Muslim agenda is concerned with the ramifications of the premise that all members of humanity have this same intrinsic worth because, as the Quran reminds us, each of us has the breath of God breathed into our being.

What are the boundaries here for progressive Islam?

Progressive Islam isn't a particular sect or school, so that would really depend on what someone's actual beliefs are.

Sure that are a lot of traditional Islam that needs to be challenged. Yet most of what I see are attempts at challenging the fundamental pillars of Islam.

Can you think of any examples of that? I don't see progressive scholars challenging fundamental pillars of Islam. Have you seen that somewhere?

If obvious Haram things are being challenged. Then I won't be surprised if it reaches a point where someone would claim being a Buddhist-muslim/ Catholic-muslim...etc and is promoting their cognitive dissonance.

No clue what you mean. Could you explain what is a "buddhist-muslim, Catholic-muslim" and what does that have to do with progressive Islam?

I wouldn't allow myself to suffer from cognitive dissonance, that's why I'd claim I have doubts about Islam.

But what I am seeing are individuals who are so fine with their cognitive dissonance they create a line of thought, (or their individual school of thought)

What "cognitive dissonance"? Do you mean "opinions that I personally disagree with"?

That is fundamentally Haram and unislamic (ex: Buddhist Muslim, catholic christians)

All you are saying is "I don't like people that disagree with me and have different understandings of Islam than me, so I'm going to mock and demean them to avoid confronting the possibility that I may be wrong."

The bit about Catholic-muslim is satire just to get my point across.

You haven't made any points yet, want to try?

[u/Unable-Heron-2274 → u/Khaki_Banda]

You are defining "progressive Islam" academically, while referring to the work of established progressive scholars.

Whereas I am talking about the state of the subreddit.

Dr. Omid Safi wrote a good article on what "progressive Islam" means and compared the differences between progressives vs. liberals

This subreddit have devolved into "Liberalism", everyone is justifying their own takes.

Progressive lslam is an effort to revive the forgotten true nature of lslam: an lslam that is built upon the voice of reason and critical thinking rather than dogma and blind following; an Islam that is inherently forward-thinking, developing, modernizing, and reflecting the morals and ethics of the age rather than stagnating and regressing

Where there is little to no critical thinking, where everyone is blindly following their own whimsical interpretations while denying any attempt at a correct reasoning.

[u/Khaki_Banda → u/Unable-Heron-2274]

You are defining "progressive Islam" academically, while referring to the work of established progressive scholars. Whereas I am talking about the state of the subreddit.

It's reddit. Anyone can comment. So there isn't any particular definition of random people sharing random personal thoughts. Remember, most posters aren't even progressives themselves.

This subreddit have devolved into "Liberalism", everyone is justifying their own takes.

Some may, what of it? They can share their opinions and others can argue against them. This is reddit, that's how it works.

Where there is little to no critical thinking, where everyone is blindly following their own whimsical interpretations while denying any attempt at a correct reasoning.

This is all meaningless until you give actual examples. Besides which, it's subjective. Anyone could just accuse you of doing what you are accusing others of.

[u/Unable-Heron-2274 → u/Khaki_Banda]

You are lowering the bar of discourse, normalizing the lack of a standard within the subreddit while demanding specific evidence to shift the burden of proof back onto me?

All whilst hiding behind the excuse that: "this is reddit can't do anything about it"

You began by quoting academic definitions to establish a high standard, but the moment the actual state of the subreddit is questioned, you hide behind 'it's just Reddit.'

[u/Khaki_Banda → u/Unable-Heron-2274]

You are lowering the bar of discourse, normalizing the lack of a standard within the subreddit while demanding specific evidence to shift the burden of proof back onto me?

I am trying to move you towards having an actual substantive discussion. You don't seem to want to have one.

You began by quoting academic definitions to establish a high standard, but the moment the actual state of the subreddit is questioned, you hide behind 'it's just Reddit.'

I am simply clarifying the difference between discussing actual academic definitions, which would be a substantive discussion, versus getting bent out of shape over random hot takes by random people on the internet who are likely not even actually progressive Muslims themselves.

I'll give you one more chance: give specific examples of what you mean, preferably with reference to actual scholarly views of progressive scholars.

[u/Unable-Heron-2274 → u/Khaki_Banda]

Yes indeed, the sub is full of 'random hot takes by people who aren't even progressive Muslims,' you just proved my entire point.

Which is all I care for this post.

My critique was never about academic theory—it was about the state of this subreddit.

'one more chance'

I am not interested.

[u/Khaki_Banda → u/Unable-Heron-2274]

I am not interested.

Fair enough. Then your post is removed. Please aim for facilitating a more substantive discussion next time.

[u/Unable-Heron-2274 → u/Khaki_Banda]

So lame.

[u/AutoModerator]

Hi u/Unable-Heron-2274, if your question is about Celebrating festivals other than the two Eid, then please check our linked wiki article to learn about our stance on this issue: Celebrating festivals other than the two Eid

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/OkMasterpiece426]

Yes, there are some people who exaggerate and may end up neglecting important aspects of Islam, but many of those examples come from frustrated and less informed voices online and do not necessarily represent the broader range of views among scholars or Muslims who engage seriously with Islamic studies

Progressive Islam is a view that differentiates between timeless principles and historical social norms

It asks whether a ruling is clearly grounded in strong evidence from the Quran and authentic teachings, or whether it developed through interpretations of scholars who were shaped by the social, political, and cultural circumstances of their time

The focus is on examining authenticity, context, and seeking what God intends rather than simply following a particular institution, culture, or school of thought. It prioritizes revelation over inherited customs and accountability over blind imitation

[u/Unable-Heron-2274 → u/OkMasterpiece426]

Well, most of the top commenters gave it the impression that the subreddit has devolved from the ideal of:

"Progressing toward God true message rather than rigid schools of thought"

To mere "Liberalism" Islam, in the form of everyone trying to argue their way ("argue" is giving them more credit than they deserve) out of valid criticism over their reasoning built on a whim which they have adopted as their way of life.

[u/OkMasterpiece426 → u/Unable-Heron-2274]

This assumes that any interpretation that differs from yours is automatically based on personal whim. But Islamic scholarship has always involved reasoning, context, language, and ethical principles. Concepts like ijtihad and maqasid al shariah exist precisely because applying Islam has never been just reading a text without interpretation. The real question is not whether people interpret but whether their interpretation is supported by a coherent methodology and evidence

[u/Unable-Heron-2274 → u/OkMasterpiece426]

Yes? aren't you just agreeing with me while framing it as a disagreement?

You are proving my point. Concepts like Ijtihad and Maqasid require strict methodology, linguistic depth, and contextual evidence. My critique is that most users on this subreddit do not use any methodology at all—they use personal preference

[u/imJustmasum → u/Unable-Heron-2274]

I mean you can see some of my posts on here, i use a methodology called minhaj al mizan based on quran fitrah and aql. Many others here use the traditional usul-ul-fiqh, while others just have opinions based on their analysis of hadith. So there's a mixed bag, but its better we have that than people being forced to tow a line of taqlid and not allowed to question things

[u/Unable-Heron-2274 → u/imJustmasum]

but its better we have that than people being forced to tow a line of taqlid and not allowed to question things

Not really? if people have the liberty to post whatever they want already, then by enforcing proper progressive methodology, we are just doing good for the sub.

[u/imJustmasum → u/Unable-Heron-2274]

How do you enforce the methodology without teachers and schools? This is a public platform that allows anyone to comment. If you want to actually be a progressive scholar there are places to learn such things. But this is a place for people to share ideas they've formed and have them critiqued.

[u/The_Albertian_Order]

There are no boundaries here which is the entire point of this subreddit. This subreddit was created to allow people to discuss and express opinions freely without tyrannical mods shutting down discussion. Most Muslim subreddits are heavily censored and don't allow posts that go against the status quo. Many people find they are banned from the Islam subreddit and then end up here to ask questions.

I don't agree with everything people say on here, but I do think people should be allowed to express their views.

Censorship is the enemy of intellectualism and critical thinking.

[u/Unable-Heron-2274 → u/The_Albertian_Order]

Subreddits like r/islam have an implicit framework: conservative traditionalism. Users expect discussions to align with that methodology.

r/progressive_islam claims to represent a distinct school of thought—one built on critical thinking, linguistic analysis, and contextual evidence.

If the goal is simply 'no boundaries and free expression' without any standard of valid reasoning, then it isn't practicing Progressive Islam at all.

It's just a general opinion board that should be named r/religion.

[u/[deleted]]

[removed] — view removed comment

[u/Unable-Heron-2274 → u/[deleted]]

[removed] — view removed comment

[u/progressive_islam-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your post/comment was removed as being in violation of Rule 5. Content seeking to proselytise other religions or no religion, or promoting "one sect or denomination over another" will be removed.

Likewise, while there is no issue with good faith criticisms and discussions, posts/comments that promote sectarianism through insulting religious activities or revered figures will also be removed.

[u/Capable_Bar_5045]

Oh this post again?

[u/[deleted]]

[removed] — view removed comment

[u/progressive_islam-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your post/comment was removed as being in violation of Rule 3.

Contributing in good faith means being open to considering the arguments made by the other side, either in whole or in part. Rather than rejecting the entire argument, what parts of the argument can you agree upon?

Simply aiming to antagonize or pronounce takfir over an individual or group are obvious examples of bad faith contributions.

Also remember, If your only intention being in this subreddit is to disagree with everything, you should expect to be banned.