We Found Our Parents Doing This: Can Inherited Belief Be Evidence of Truth?

Author: Berk KÖKSAL
Date: September 30, 2026
Location: Mersin

The central purpose of this article is to consider the verses together with other related verses and to reflect, sincerely and deeply, on what bearing witness to the oneness of GOD means in human life in terms of knowledge, justice, truthfulness, and submission.

Peace. Peace be upon you.

No one enters the world as an empty page. We are born into a language. Before we are old enough to examine them, we usually receive our names, our family habits, our community’s understanding of right and wrong, its fears, hopes, forms of worship, and the things it treats as sacred. That is an unavoidable beginning. But is a beginning the same thing as evidence?

This is the question that unsettles me most in this reflection: If millions of people held a belief before me, does that make the belief true? If a practice has continued in my family for generations, does that prove that GOD authorized it? Or can a human being gradually mistake inherited familiarity for investigated knowledge precisely because the nearest beliefs are often the hardest to examine?

In Finding Is One Thing, Understanding Is Another: The Verse in the Age of Search Engines, I reflected on the distance between reaching information and understanding it. In Deep Reverence for GOD: Ego, Disrespect, and the Inner Reality of Crossing the Boundary, I considered the danger of placing human judgment before GOD’s measure. Here the same question becomes more personal. The authority in front of me may not be a stranger. It may be my mother, my father, my family, my society, my childhood, and the religious language that feels most familiar to me.

The point is not to belittle parents. Nor is it to dismiss tradition merely because it is old. The deeper question is this: What determines truth: the age of a source, the number of people who hold it, family loyalty, or GOD’s revelation, knowledge, guidance, and personal responsibility?

Summary:

1. “We Follow Only What We Found Our Parents Doing”

2:170

وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمُ ٱتَّبِعُوا۟ مَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ قَالُوا۟ بَلْ نَتَّبِعُ مَآ أَلْفَيْنَا عَلَيْهِ ءَابَآءَنَآ أَوَلَوْ كَانَ ءَابَآؤُهُمْ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ شَيْـًٔا وَلَا يَهْتَدُونَ

When they are told, “Follow what GOD has revealed herein,” they say, “We follow only what we found our parents doing.” What if their parents did not understand, and were not guided?

Onlara “TANRI’nın burada vahyettiğine uyun” denildiğinde, “Biz sadece ebeveynlerimizi yaparken bulduğumuz şeye uyarız” derler. Ya ebeveynleri anlamadılarsa ve rehberlik edilmemişlerse?

2. Can an Inherited Statement Become Speech about GOD Without Knowledge?

2:169 — He only commands you to commit evil and vice, and to say about GOD what you do not know.

3. “It Is Sufficient for Us”: When Tradition Claims to Be Enough

5:104 — When they are told, “Come to what GOD has revealed, and to the messenger,” they say, “What we found our parents doing is sufficient for us.” What if their parents knew nothing, and were not guided?

4. Three Measures: Knowledge, Guidance, and the Enlightening Scripture

31:20 — Do you not see that GOD has committed in your service everything in the heavens and the earth, and has showered you with His blessings— obvious and hidden? Yet, some people argue about GOD without knowledge, without guidance, and without the enlightening scripture.

31:21 — When they are told, “Follow these revelations of GOD,” they say, “No, we follow only what we found our parents doing.” What if the devil is leading them to the agony of Hell?

5. Following Footsteps: Does the Age of a Practice Make It True?

43:22 — The fact is: they said, “We found our parents carrying on certain practices, and we are following in their footsteps.”

43:23 — Invariably, when we sent a warner to any community, the leaders of that community would say, “We found our parents following certain practices, and we will continue in their footsteps.”

43:24 — (The messenger) would say, “What if I brought to you better guidance than what you inherited from your parents?” They would say, “We are disbelievers in the message you brought.”

6. “What Are These Statues?” Learning to See the Object of Inheritance Again

21:52 — He said to his father and his people, “What are these statues to which you are devoting yourselves?”

21:53 — They said, “We found our parents worshiping them.”

21:54 — He said, “Indeed, you and your parents have gone totally astray.”

7. “Can They Hear You?” Testing Belief with Functional Questions

26:70 — He said to his father and his people, “What is this you are worshiping?”

26:71 — They said, “We worship statues; we are totally devoted to them.”

26:72 — He said, “Can they hear you when you implore?

26:73 — “Can they benefit you, or harm you?”

26:74 — They said, “No; but we found our parents doing this.”

8. Invented Innovations and an Inherited Religious Reality

12:40 — “You do not worship beside Him except innovations that you have made up, you and your parents. GOD has never authorized such idols. All ruling belongs to GOD, and He has ruled that you shall not worship except Him. This is the perfect religion, but most people do not know.

9. “GOD Has Commanded Us to Do It”: Turning Tradition into Divine Command

7:28 — They commit a gross sin, then say, “We found our parents doing this, and GOD has commanded us to do it.’’ Say, “GOD never advocates sin. Are you saying about GOD what you do not know?”

10. “Had GOD Willed”: Using Destiny to Escape Responsibility

6:148 — The idol worshipers say, “Had GOD willed, we would not practice idolatry, nor would our parents, nor would we prohibit anything.” Thus did those before them disbelieve, until they incurred our retribution. Say, “Do you have any proven knowledge that you can show us? You follow nothing but conjecture; you only guess.”

11. The Same Excuse Repeated: The Message Has a Task, and So Does the Human Being

16:35 — The idol worshipers say, “Had GOD willed, we would not worship any idols besides Him, nor would our parents. Nor would we prohibit anything besides His prohibitions.” Those before them have done the same. Can the messengers do anything but deliver the complete message?

12. “We Simply Followed in Their Footsteps”: Does Blaming the Parents Remove Responsibility?

7:173 — Nor can you say, “It was our parents who practiced idolatry, and we simply followed in their footsteps. Will You punish us because of what others have innovated?”

13. Blind Footsteps: There Is Movement, but Is There Guidance?

37:69 — They found their parents astray.

37:70 — And they blindly followed in their footsteps.

37:71 — Most of the previous generations have strayed in the same manner.

14. Is the Majority Evidence?

6:116 — If you obey the majority of people on earth, they will divert you from the path of GOD. They follow only conjecture; they only guess.

15. Conjecture Is No Substitute for the Truth

10:36 — Most of them follow nothing but conjecture, and conjecture is no substitute for the truth. GOD is fully aware of everything they do.

16. Verifying Inheritance: Responsibility for Hearing, Eyesight, and the Brain

17:36 — You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them.

49:6 — O you who believe, if a wicked person brings any news to you, you shall first investigate, lest you commit injustice towards some people, out of ignorance, then become sorry and remorseful for what you have done.

17. When Tradition Becomes Institutional: Religious Authority and the Danger of Taking Human Beings as Lords

42:21 — They follow idols who decree for them religious laws never authorized by GOD. If it were not for the predetermined decision, they would have been judged immediately. Indeed, the transgressors have incurred a painful retribution.*

9:31 — They have set up their religious leaders and scholars as lords,* instead of GOD. Others deified the Messiah, son of Mary. They were all commanded to worship only one god. There is no god except He. Be He glorified, high above having any partners.

18. Examining All Words, Following the Best, and Devoting the Whole Life to GOD Alone

39:18 — They are the ones who examine all words, then follow the best. These are the ones whom GOD has guided; these are the ones who possess intelligence.

6:161 — Say, “My Lord has guided me in a straight path—the perfect religion of Abraham, monotheism. He never was an idol worshiper.”

6:162 — Say, “My Contact Prayers (Salat), my worship practices, my life and my death, are all devoted absolutely to GOD alone, the Lord of the universe.

6:163 — “He has no partner. This is what I am commanded to believe, and I am the first to submit.”

6:164 — Say, “Shall I seek other than GOD as a lord, when He is the Lord of all things? No soul benefits except from its own works, and none bears the burden of another. Ultimately, you return to your Lord, then He informs you regarding all your disputes.”

19. Arabic Word Roots: Following, Finding, Understanding, and Guidance

2:170 — When they are told, “Follow what GOD has revealed herein,” they say, “We follow only what we found our parents doing.” What if their parents did not understand, and were not guided?

Other Claims

31:14 — We enjoined the human being to honor his parents. His mother bore him, and the load got heavier and heavier. It takes two years (of intensive care) until weaning. You shall be appreciative of Me, and of your parents. To Me is the ultimate destiny.

31:15 — If they try to force you to set up any idols beside Me, do not obey them. But continue to treat them amicably in this world. You shall follow only the path of those who have submitted to Me. Ultimately, you all return to Me, then I will inform you of everything you have done.

Conclusion

2:170 — When they are told, “Follow what GOD has revealed herein,” they say, “We follow only what we found our parents doing.” What if their parents did not understand, and were not guided?

17:36 — You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them.

39:18 — They are the ones who examine all words, then follow the best. These are the ones whom GOD has guided; these are the ones who possess intelligence.

6:164 — Say, “Shall I seek other than GOD as a lord, when He is the Lord of all things? No soul benefits except from its own works, and none bears the burden of another. Ultimately, you return to your Lord, then He informs you regarding all your disputes.”

1. “We Follow Only What We Found Our Parents Doing”

Verse

2:170 — Arabic
وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمُ ٱتَّبِعُوا۟ مَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ قَالُوا۟ بَلْ نَتَّبِعُ مَآ أَلْفَيْنَا عَلَيْهِ ءَابَآءَنَآ أَوَلَوْ كَانَ ءَابَآؤُهُمْ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ شَيْـًٔا وَلَا يَهْتَدُونَ

2:170 — English
When they are told, “Follow what GOD has revealed herein,” they say, “We follow only what we found our parents doing.” What if their parents did not understand, and were not guided?

2:170 — Türkçe
Onlara “TANRI’nın burada vahyettiğine uyun” denildiğinde, “Biz sadece ebeveynlerimizi yaparken bulduğumuz şeye uyarız” derler. Ya ebeveynleri anlamadılarsa ve rehberlik edilmemişlerse?

Source: kuranteyit.com

Reflection on the Verse

For me, 2:170 asks one of the most unsettling questions about tradition in remarkably simple language. On one side stands the call, “Follow what GOD has revealed herein.” On the other stands the answer, “We follow only what we found our parents doing.” The verse does not leave a human being without family, but neither does it make family the final measure of truth. (2:170)

What first strikes me is that the verse does not say the parents were malicious. It asks something else: “What if their parents did not understand, and were not guided?” A person can be sincere, deeply loved, and well intentioned, yet still fail to understand or be guided in a particular matter. Love is not automatic proof of correctness. Kinship does not generate knowledge. (2:170)

This forces me to look more critically at my own beliefs. Hearing something since childhood is not the same as examining it before the verses. Familiarity does not turn a practice into a command from GOD. In fact, the hardest thing for me to question may not be what is most foreign to me, but what has become most familiar.

The verse does not assign me the task of judging my parents. It assigns me the task of examining the reason for my own following. Why do I believe what I believe? Because I see it in what GOD revealed, or because everyone around me always said it? If the second reason carries the greater weight, 2:170 is no longer merely a story about people long ago. It turns toward my own mind.

2. Can an Inherited Statement Become Speech about GOD Without Knowledge?

Verse

2:169 — He only commands you to commit evil and vice, and to say about GOD what you do not know.

Reflection on the Verse

The verse immediately preceding 2:170 does not leave the issue at the level of simply continuing a mistaken habit. The danger extends to saying about GOD what one does not know. This proximity matters to me. A religious sentence can be inherited, repeated, and eventually acquire the status of “known truth” in a person’s mind. Yet repetition is not knowledge. (2:169, 2:170)

I may have heard a statement from my father, who heard it from his father. A community may have repeated the same sentence for centuries. But the length of the chain does not, by itself, prove that its first link was authorized by GOD. If I then say, “GOD said this,” “GOD prohibited this,” or “GOD commanded this,” the matter is no longer merely personal opinion. I am speaking about GOD. (2:169)

For that reason, truthfulness in religion is more than avoiding deliberate lies. It also means refusing to present what I do not know as though I knew it. “This is what I was taught” and “This is what GOD ruled” are not equivalent statements. One reports my personal history. The other makes a claim about divine authority.

This verse slows me down before I speak, especially when a religious sentence feels very familiar. A foreign claim is easy to question. A sentence heard since childhood can pass through the mind without ever being asked for its source. Perhaps one beginning of reflection is learning to look again at the familiar as though it were newly heard. (2:169)

3. “It Is Sufficient for Us”: When Tradition Claims to Be Enough

Verse

5:104 — When they are told, “Come to what GOD has revealed, and to the messenger,” they say, “What we found our parents doing is sufficient for us.” What if their parents knew nothing, and were not guided?

Reflection on the Verse

The word that arrests me in 5:104 is “sufficient.” Inherited practice is not merely followed; it is declared adequate enough to remove the need for further examination: “What we found our parents doing is sufficient for us.” That sentence carries the comfort of a closed question. (5:104)

The feeling is understandable. Reexamining everything is tiring. Family, society, and religious surroundings provide ready-made answers, and ready-made answers feel safe. But the question that follows interrupts that safety: “What if their parents knew nothing, and were not guided?” Something can feel sufficient to me and still be wrong. A false answer can also provide psychological closure. (5:104)

The danger of tradition, then, may not be only that it carries incorrect information. It may also make the need for investigation disappear from view. Once I say, “I already know,” I can close the door through which knowledge might enter. The sensitive question is not only what a religious inheritance teaches me, but whether it leaves room for me to test what I have received.

When I apply the verse to myself, I have to ask: When a verse is placed before me, is my first impulse to approach the verse, or to protect what I already practice? If “that is not how we do it” becomes my automatic defense, the word “we” may quietly have moved ahead of “what GOD has revealed.” (5:104)

4. Three Measures: Knowledge, Guidance, and the Enlightening Scripture

Verse

31:20 — Do you not see that GOD has committed in your service everything in the heavens and the earth, and has showered you with His blessings— obvious and hidden? Yet, some people argue about GOD without knowledge, without guidance, and without the enlightening scripture.

31:21 — When they are told, “Follow these revelations of GOD,” they say, “No, we follow only what we found our parents doing.” What if the devil is leading them to the agony of Hell?

Reflection on the Verse

31:20 places three absences together in the case of people arguing about GOD: knowledge, guidance, and the enlightening scripture. Then 31:21 immediately gives the answer of following what one’s parents were found doing. That sequence suggests a set of measures by which inherited belief can be tested. (31:20, 31:21)

Does the claim rest on knowledge? Is it consistent with guidance? Does it have a basis in the enlightening scripture? For me, these questions must carry more weight than “My family did this.” The subject of the argument in 31:20 is GOD Himself. A person defending the words of a family, group, or teacher may actually be making claims about GOD. (31:20)

31:21 also prevents me from imagining tradition as a neutral shelter. “What if the devil is leading them to the agony of Hell?” The fact that a path comes through family does not make the path safe. Not everything inherited is wrong; the verse does not say that. But inheritance is not a certificate of protection either. (31:21)

Here the difficult side of submission becomes visible to me. Submission is easy if it means only continuing what I was already taught. The harder test appears when revelation and habit pull in different directions. At that moment, what I truly regard as authority becomes visible.

5. Following Footsteps: Does the Age of a Practice Make It True?

Verse

43:22 — The fact is: they said, “We found our parents carrying on certain practices, and we are following in their footsteps.”

43:23 — Invariably, when we sent a warner to any community, the leaders of that community would say, “We found our parents following certain practices, and we will continue in their footsteps.”

43:24 — (The messenger) would say, “What if I brought to you better guidance than what you inherited from your parents?” They would say, “We are disbelievers in the message you brought.”

Reflection on the Verse

The repeated image in 43:22-24 is following footsteps. The person is not merely receiving information from the past; the path of the past becomes the person’s own route. Even more strikingly, 43:23 places this response in the mouths of community leaders. Tradition can therefore be protected not only inside families, but by social authority. (43:22, 43:23)

An ancient practice can produce two powerful reactions in me. One is reverence: “If it has survived this long, there must be wisdom in it.” The other is fear: “Who am I to question it?” Yet 43:24 moves the measure away from age and toward the quality of guidance: “What if I brought to you better guidance than what you inherited from your parents?” (43:24)

The comparison is not old versus new. The verse does not say that old is bad or that new is good. The comparison is between what has been inherited and better guidance. Time, therefore, is not by itself a measure of truth.

I can still say today, “This has been done for centuries.” That may be historically accurate, but it is not the same as proof of divine authorization. Likewise, a new idea is not correct merely because it is new. My measure cannot be age. It has to be guidance. (43:22-24)

6. “What Are These Statues?” Learning to See the Object of Inheritance Again

Verse

21:52 — He said to his father and his people, “What are these statues to which you are devoting yourselves?”

21:53 — They said, “We found our parents worshiping them.”

21:54 — He said, “Indeed, you and your parents have gone totally astray.”

Reflection on the Verse

Abraham’s question in 21:52 makes me stop: “What are these statues to which you are devoting yourselves?” Sometimes, in order to ask what something is, one has to see it without the anesthesia of familiarity. If an object, ritual, or religious symbol has been present since childhood, a person may learn how to live around it without ever asking what it really is. The question disappears. (21:52)

The answer again turns to the parents: “We found our parents worshiping them.” Notice what is not offered. There is no proof that these things created them, hear them, or were commanded by GOD. The answer reports continuity: it existed before us. (21:53)

Abraham’s response is severe: “Indeed, you and your parents have gone totally astray.” The verse does not make the existence of an earlier generation into an untouchable zone of correctness. An error does not become truth because two generations repeat it. Nor does it become revelation merely because ten generations preserve it. (21:54)

This gives me courage to look again at things in my own life that carry the label “sacred.” The object may not be a statue. It may be a concept, a title, an institution, a ceremony, or a sentence. Do I really know what it is, or do I merely know how everyone around me behaves toward it?

7. “Can They Hear You?” Testing Belief with Functional Questions

Verse

26:70 — He said to his father and his people, “What is this you are worshiping?”

26:71 — They said, “We worship statues; we are totally devoted to them.”

26:72 — He said, “Can they hear you when you implore?

26:73 — “Can they benefit you, or harm you?”

26:74 — They said, “No; but we found our parents doing this.”

Reflection on the Verse

26:70-74 opens the same issue through another method. Abraham first asks what is being worshiped, then asks concrete questions: Can they hear when you call? Can they benefit you or harm you? (26:70-73)

These questions matter because they test the emotional force of inheritance against the authority being assigned to the object. A person may have been devoted to something for years. It may be surrounded by family memories, communal identity, fear, and affection. Yet the question remains simple: Is the power you assign to it real? (26:72, 26:73)

The answer returns to the same place: “No; but we found our parents doing this.” The distance between “No” and “but” reveals something difficult about the human mind. Evidence may collapse while habit remains standing. A person can see that a reason has failed and still allow belonging to take the place of the reason. (26:74)

This becomes a hard question for me: If the reason for one of my beliefs collapses, can I let the belief go? Or will I continue carrying a structure whose justification is gone because “everyone does it,” “my family does it,” or “I have always known it this way”? Reflection is not only gaining new knowledge. It can also mean giving up reasons that no longer survive examination.

8. Invented Innovations and an Inherited Religious Reality

Verse

12:40 — “You do not worship beside Him except innovations that you have made up, you and your parents. GOD has never authorized such idols. All ruling belongs to GOD, and He has ruled that you shall not worship except Him. This is the perfect religion, but most people do not know.

Reflection on the Verse

In 12:40, “you and your parents,” “innovations that you have made up,” and the absence of GOD’s authorization appear in the same statement. For me, the central concept is authorization. The existence of something in religious life is not the same as its authorization by GOD. (12:40)

Human beings can create powerful realities by naming things. A person, institution, ritual, or concept can be assigned a special religious status. Once the name is repeated across generations, the status can begin to feel as though GOD had given it from the beginning. But 12:40 returns ruling to GOD: “All ruling belongs to GOD.” (12:40)

This shows me that religious inheritance is not made only of actions. Language is inherited too. The titles given to people, the names attached to practices, and the authority carried by those names can all pass from one generation to another. Tawhid therefore cannot stop at looking for physical statues; I also have to look at the authority-world created by words.

No matter how old a name is, it cannot generate an authority GOD never gave it. That is the clean boundary I see here: names do not determine religious authority; GOD does. (12:40)

9. “GOD Has Commanded Us to Do It”: Turning Tradition into Divine Command

Verse

7:28 — They commit a gross sin, then say, “We found our parents doing this, and GOD has commanded us to do it.’’ Say, “GOD never advocates sin. Are you saying about GOD what you do not know?”

Reflection on the Verse

7:28 shows inherited practice moving one step further. The people do not stop at “We found our parents doing this.” They add, “GOD has commanded us to do it.” Tradition is presented as divine command. (7:28)

The response immediately returns to knowledge: “Are you saying about GOD what you do not know?” I feel the seriousness of religious responsibility here. Continuing a custom is one thing. Placing GOD’s name behind the custom is another. In the second case, a person is not merely preserving tradition; the person is speaking on behalf of GOD. (7:28)

This boundary matters to me today. I can say, “This is what we do.” I can say, “This is how I understand it.” I can say, “This seems right to me.” But the moment I say, “GOD commanded this,” I carry the responsibility of showing the basis for the claim. The seriousness of religious language begins at this point.

Justice toward tradition requires the same discipline. I cannot condemn a custom as contrary to GOD merely because it is foreign to me. Nor can I proclaim it a command of GOD merely because it is familiar. Knowledge is required in both directions. (7:28)

10. “Had GOD Willed”: Using Destiny to Escape Responsibility

Verse

6:148 — The idol worshipers say, “Had GOD willed, we would not practice idolatry, nor would our parents, nor would we prohibit anything.” Thus did those before them disbelieve, until they incurred our retribution. Say, “Do you have any proven knowledge that you can show us? You follow nothing but conjecture; you only guess.”

Reflection on the Verse

In 6:148, the idolatry and prohibitions associated with the parents are defended with the sentence, “Had GOD willed…” Human beings attempt to move responsibility away from their own choices and into the language of GOD’s will. The answer again returns to knowledge: “Do you have any proven knowledge that you can show us?” (6:148)

This makes me think that tradition can be protected not only by appealing to the past, but also by using theological language. “If so many people do this, GOD must allow it,” or “If our parents practiced it, perhaps it was meant to be” can quietly transform what happened into proof of what is right. Yet the verse keeps a distance between existing practice and proven knowledge. (6:148)

The final sentence is severe: “You follow nothing but conjecture; you only guess.” A long history does not manufacture certainty. Without evidence, a claim can remain conjecture even after generations. (6:148)

I need the same distinction in my own thinking: “This happened” and “This is right” are different statements. History can establish that a practice existed. Its existence does not automatically prove GOD’s approval.

11. The Same Excuse Repeated: The Message Has a Task, and So Does the Human Being

Verse

16:35 — The idol worshipers say, “Had GOD willed, we would not worship any idols besides Him, nor would our parents. Nor would we prohibit anything besides His prohibitions.” Those before them have done the same. Can the messengers do anything but deliver the complete message?

Reflection on the Verse

16:35 repeats almost the same excuse found in 6:148: “Had GOD willed…” The person’s own idolatry, the parents’ practice, and invented prohibitions are all defended through that sentence. (16:35)

But the verse ends with an important boundary: “Can the messengers do anything but deliver the complete message?” This makes me think about the responsibility that cannot be transferred to another person. A message can be delivered, but no one can believe for me, investigate for me, or submit for me. (16:35)

This also matters for religious authority. If even the messenger is described within the responsibility of delivering the message, how could I expect a scholar, leader, teacher, or parent to carry my own responsibility? A person can point me toward a verse, teach me something, or ask me a question. But that person cannot bear witness to truth in my place.

The comfort of inheritance often spreads responsibility across a group: “This is what all of us were taught.” The verse returns me to the individual question. Once the message reaches me, I must ask not only, “What was I taught?” but also, “What am I following, and why?”

12. “We Simply Followed in Their Footsteps”: Does Blaming the Parents Remove Responsibility?

Verse

7:173 — Nor can you say, “It was our parents who practiced idolatry, and we simply followed in their footsteps. Will You punish us because of what others have innovated?”

Reflection on the Verse

7:173 closes another final defense: “It was our parents who practiced idolatry, and we simply followed in their footsteps.” Psychologically, this is a powerful statement. A person sees himself not as an originator, but as the last link in a chain: “I did not invent this. It came to me.” (7:173)

That is true of many beliefs. We do not invent them. They arrive before we can evaluate them. Yet the question in the verse brings responsibility back to the individual. The fact that inheritance reached me does not permit me to place all responsibility for continuing it on earlier generations. (7:173)

For me, this is also a matter of justice. A person does not choose the family into which he is born. A child does not choose what will be taught. But as a person’s capacity to hear, see, think, investigate, and decide grows, another area of responsibility opens.

The same principle also moves forward in time. I cannot excuse careless transmission by saying, “The next generation can investigate for itself.” I may become someone else’s parent, teacher, writer, or influence. A sentence I repeat without examining today may become tomorrow’s “We found our parents doing this.”

13. Blind Footsteps: There Is Movement, but Is There Guidance?

Verse

37:69 — They found their parents astray.

37:70 — And they blindly followed in their footsteps.

37:71 — Most of the previous generations have strayed in the same manner.

Reflection on the Verse

37:69-71 compresses the whole problem into a few short statements: the parents were found astray, their footsteps were followed blindly, and many previous generations strayed in the same way. Continuity is present, but continuity is not guidance. (37:69-71)

The word “blindly” matters to me. Following is not always wrong. Human beings learn by following teachers, parents, and people with experience. The problem is not following itself; it is abandoning seeing, understanding, and testing. (37:70)

That is why I need to preserve the difference between religious inheritance and blind imitation. I can receive knowledge from the past. But treating it as verified merely because it comes from the past is another matter. The past can give me a starting point. It cannot become the final court of truth.

These verses also challenge the emotional weight of many generations. “Could so many generations have been wrong?” feels like a powerful question. 37:71 shows that age and repetition alone do not create a safe harbor. Repetition can make a claim more familiar. It does not change the measure of truth.

14. Is the Majority Evidence?

Verse

6:116 — If you obey the majority of people on earth, they will divert you from the path of GOD. They follow only conjecture; they only guess.

Reflection on the Verse

Inherited belief is often reinforced not only by family, but by numbers. “Everyone knows this,” “Most people do this,” and “Can so many people be wrong?” create a powerful sense of security. 6:116 removes the majority from the position of automatic proof. (6:116)

The verse does not tell me that a minority is always right. That would be another conclusion not stated by the verse. The point is more careful: following the majority can divert a person from GOD’s path, and the majority can operate through conjecture and guessing. Number, by itself, is not an epistemic measure. (6:116)

This is both freeing and demanding. It is freeing because fear of standing apart should not decide what I call truth. It is demanding because I can no longer use “everyone says so” as a substitute for examination.

The same applies to justice. I cannot speak unfairly about a person merely because most people do. I cannot call a religious claim GOD’s ruling merely because most people repeat it. Numbers do not cancel the responsibility to investigate.

15. Conjecture Is No Substitute for the Truth

Verse

10:36 — Most of them follow nothing but conjecture, and conjecture is no substitute for the truth. GOD is fully aware of everything they do.

Reflection on the Verse

10:36 simplifies the issue further: “Conjecture is no substitute for the truth.” For me, this establishes a basic distinction when evaluating inherited belief. I can hold a very strong conviction. It can have lived with me since childhood. I can feel emotionally certain when defending it. But feeling certain and possessing truth are not the same thing. (10:36)

Conjecture does not always look like ignorance. It can look highly organized and secure. If I was born inside a complete system, that system may provide ready answers to every question. My lack of doubt may not mean I possess proof. It may mean I never examined another possibility.

Reflection, therefore, is not the worship of doubt. Nor is the goal permanent indecision. Reflection is an effort to keep the mind honest enough not to present conjecture as truth. If there is evidence, follow the evidence. If there is not, be able to say, “I do not know.”

The statement in 2:32, “We have no knowledge, except that which You have taught us,” becomes especially meaningful here. Recognizing the boundary of knowledge may not be weakness in faith. It may be a form of knowing one’s place.

16. Verifying Inheritance: Responsibility for Hearing, Eyesight, and the Brain

Verse

17:36 — You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them.

49:6 — O you who believe, if a wicked person brings any news to you, you shall first investigate, lest you commit injustice towards some people, out of ignorance, then become sorry and remorseful for what you have done.

Reflection on the Verse

17:36 gives the question of this article a personal task: “You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself.” Hearing, eyesight, and the brain are then connected to responsibility. Belief may be inherited, but responsibility does not disappear through inheritance. (17:36)

49:6 shows the ethical dimension of investigation. Incorrect information does not produce only intellectual error; it can lead to injustice toward other people. Verification is therefore not merely a cold academic habit. It is part of justice. (49:6)

In Finding Is One Thing, Understanding Is Another, I reflected that finding a verse is not the same as understanding it. Here another layer appears: inheriting a statement is not the same as verifying it. The sentences I have heard most often may be precisely the ones I am least likely to test.

This is not disrespect toward family. Investigating a report does not mean declaring the person who brought it an enemy. In the same way, testing religious information received from my family against revelation does not mean devaluing my family. I do not have to choose falsely between love and truth.

My responsibility is to remain just toward the people I love and truthful when I speak about GOD. (17:36, 49:6)

17. When Tradition Becomes Institutional: Religious Authority and the Danger of Taking Human Beings as Lords

Verse

42:21 — They follow idols who decree for them religious laws never authorized by GOD. If it were not for the predetermined decision, they would have been judged immediately. Indeed, the transgressors have incurred a painful retribution.*

9:31 — They have set up their religious leaders and scholars as lords,* instead of GOD. Others deified the Messiah, son of Mary. They were all commanded to worship only one god. There is no god except He. Be He glorified, high above having any partners.

Reflection on the Verse

An inheritance that begins in the family can become institutional. 42:21 speaks about religious laws decreed without authorization from GOD. 9:31 directly names the danger of setting up religious leaders and scholars as lords instead of GOD. (42:21, 9:31)

When I read these verses together, I see that tradition does not live only through the sentence “our parents did this.” It can become stronger through titles, institutions, chains of teaching, and religious authority. The person may no longer be following only a parent, but the belief that “the people who know religion say so.”

This requires care. I do not derive from these verses the claim that knowledgeable people should never be consulted. The problem is not that a person carries knowledge. The danger begins when the person is moved into an independent position of ruling beside GOD. 9:31 draws the boundary with the language of taking people as “lords.” (9:31)

In The Messenger Is the Quran, the Quran Is the Living Messenger, I reflected on preserving the distinction between the message and its carrier. The same sensitivity applies here to family and religious institutions. A teacher can be valuable. A scholar can offer important information. But when I confuse the source of ruling with the person explaining the ruling, inherited religion needs to be examined again from the standpoint of tawhid.

The hardest question turns back toward me: When I see tension between a person’s words and a verse, which one do I instinctively try to protect? If I begin bending the verse in order to protect the person, the location of authority may already have shifted. (42:21, 9:31)

18. Examining All Words, Following the Best, and Devoting the Whole Life to GOD Alone

Verse

39:18 — They are the ones who examine all words, then follow the best. These are the ones whom GOD has guided; these are the ones who possess intelligence.

6:161 — Say, “My Lord has guided me in a straight path—the perfect religion of Abraham, monotheism. He never was an idol worshiper.”

6:162 — Say, “My Contact Prayers (Salat), my worship practices, my life and my death, are all devoted absolutely to GOD alone, the Lord of the universe.

6:163 — “He has no partner. This is what I am commanded to believe, and I am the first to submit.”

6:164 — Say, “Shall I seek other than GOD as a lord, when He is the Lord of all things? No soul benefits except from its own works, and none bears the burden of another. Ultimately, you return to your Lord, then He informs you regarding all your disputes.”

Reflection on the Verse

39:18 places a very different kind of person opposite blind following: those who “examine all words, then follow the best.” Not every word is rejected, and not the first word heard is automatically accepted. Listening, examining, and following are separated into a conscious process. (39:18)

For that reason, I do not see investigation as an enemy of submission. If investigation is not merely a way to enthrone my own ego as final authority, it can lead toward a more conscious submission. In 6:161-164, the direction becomes explicit: the straight path, monotheism, life and death devoted absolutely to GOD alone, no partner beside Him, and no lord sought other than GOD. (6:161-164)

What replaces inherited certainty is not emptiness. Nor does the Quranic picture here require a lonely religion in which no one learns from anyone. The center changes. Family, teacher, leader, society, and personal opinion are no longer placed above GOD as final authority.

The end of 6:164 carries, for me, the most personal conclusion of this article: no soul benefits except from its own works, and none bears the burden of another. My family cannot carry the accountability of my belief for me. I cannot carry theirs either. That is liberating and heavy at the same time. (6:164)

Inheritance can give me a beginning. Submission cannot be inherited on my behalf. Testimony cannot be inherited either. Someone else’s saying “GOD is One” does not make GOD the only authority in my life. I have to live that testimony through my own choices, truthfulness, and responsibility.

19. Arabic Word Roots: Following, Finding, Understanding, and Guidance

Verse

2:170 — When they are told, “Follow what GOD has revealed herein,” they say, “We follow only what we found our parents doing.” What if their parents did not understand, and were not guided?

Reflection on the Verse

The Arabic structure of 2:170 carries the intellectual tension of the passage through several words that face one another inside the same verse.

ٱتَّبِعُوا / نَتَّبِعُ — t-b-ʿ (ت ب ع) belongs to the semantic field of following. What is striking is that the same root appears for two different directions. First comes the call to follow what GOD revealed; then comes the answer, “we follow” what was found among the parents. The issue is not following as an action. The decisive question is what is being followed. On one side is revelation; on the other is inherited practice. (2:170)

أَنزَلَ — n-z-l (ن ز ل) belongs to the field of descending and sending down, and in the verse it marks the source of revelation. The people are not being asked merely to exchange one human custom for another. The tension concerns the order of authority between what GOD sent down and what was found in inherited practice. (2:170)

أَلْفَيْنَا — l-f-w (ل ف و) appears here with the sense “we found.” Their reason is that they found their parents upon a practice. This word makes me think about the difference between receiving something ready-made and establishing its truth. Finding something already present explains how it reached me; it does not, by itself, prove that it is true. (2:170)

ءَابَآءَنَا — ʾ-b-w (أ ب و) is rendered in the authorized translation as “our parents.” The power of kinship is not denied, but neither is it placed beyond the measures of knowledge and guidance. Those closest to us remain human beings whose understanding and guidance cannot simply be assumed. (2:170)

يَعْقِلُونَ — ʿ-q-l (ع ق ل) belongs to the field of understanding and reasoning. The verse does not ask only whether the parents were respected or sincere; it asks whether they understood. Transmission is therefore not identical to comprehension. A practice can pass through generations without the act of transmission proving that the people transmitting it understood its basis. (2:170)

يَهْتَدُونَ — h-d-y (ه د ي) belongs to the field of guidance. At the end of the verse, understanding and guidance stand side by side. That pairing matters to me. A person can know a system thoroughly and still not be rightly guided, or can be sincere while lacking knowledge. The verse does not elevate family bonds above these measures. (2:170)

Placed together, the structure of the verse becomes even clearer to me: You will follow—but what? What you found, or what was sent down? Is there understanding? Is there guidance? These four questions form, for me, the heart of examining inherited belief.

Other Claims

Verse

31:14 — We enjoined the human being to honor his parents. His mother bore him, and the load got heavier and heavier. It takes two years (of intensive care) until weaning. You shall be appreciative of Me, and of your parents. To Me is the ultimate destiny.

31:15 — If they try to force you to set up any idols beside Me, do not obey them. But continue to treat them amicably in this world. You shall follow only the path of those who have submitted to Me. Ultimately, you all return to Me, then I will inform you of everything you have done.

Reflection on the Verse

Several different claims can be made about this subject. Without allowing them to control the main structure of the article, I want to consider a few of them cautiously within the boundaries established by the verses.

One approach might say that 2:170 and similar verses reject everything received from family. Yet 31:14 explicitly commands honoring and appreciating parents, while 31:15, even when drawing a boundary against idolatry, says to continue treating them amicably in this world. I therefore cannot derive from these verses the conclusion that family bonds themselves are worthless. The issue is not being a parent. The issue is the limit of obedience when another authority is placed beside GOD. (31:14, 31:15)

Another approach might say, “Everything inherited from the ancestors is wrong; what is new must be right.” The verses considered here establish no such measure of novelty. In 43:24, the contrast is not “newer guidance” but “better guidance.” Sanctifying the new merely because it is new would therefore be no safer than sanctifying the old merely because it is old.

A historical reading might argue that these passages speak only about the idolatrous practices of specific ancient communities and should not be applied to believers today. The verses certainly had historical audiences, but measures such as personal verification in 17:36, examining all words in 39:18, and the possibility that the majority follows conjecture in 6:116 carry the question into a broader field of knowledge and responsibility. I find it safer to read the older stories not as a reason to feel superior to the past, but as a mirror for examining my own way of following.

Another claim may be that religious knowledge requires expertise and that ordinary people must therefore rely on tradition or scholars. Benefiting from expertise and taking a human being as a lord are not the same thing. The boundary of 9:31 matters here. I can learn from a specialist, but when I place that person’s word ahead of GOD’s revelation, a different relationship has formed. I do not conclude from this article that every person must know everything alone. My conclusion is narrower: No human authority removes my responsibility not to attribute unsupported rulings to GOD.

Conclusion

Verse

2:170 — When they are told, “Follow what GOD has revealed herein,” they say, “We follow only what we found our parents doing.” What if their parents did not understand, and were not guided?

17:36 — You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them.

39:18 — They are the ones who examine all words, then follow the best. These are the ones whom GOD has guided; these are the ones who possess intelligence.

6:164 — Say, “Shall I seek other than GOD as a lord, when He is the Lord of all things? No soul benefits except from its own works, and none bears the burden of another. Ultimately, you return to your Lord, then He informs you regarding all your disputes.”

Reflection on the Verse

I return to the question at the beginning: Can inherited belief be evidence of truth?

The verses considered together in this article show me that receiving a belief from one’s parents does not automatically make that belief false, but neither does it make it true. Inheritance is a pathway of transmission. Evidence requires more than transmission. The question in 2:170 stands exactly at that point: “What if their parents did not understand, and were not guided?” (2:170)

I can love my family. I can be grateful for the good they taught me. I can respect the experience of those who lived before me. I can learn from a teacher, benefit from a researcher’s work, and experience solidarity within a religious community. None of those things is, by itself, the problem.

The problem begins when love becomes evidence, belonging becomes revelation, habit becomes ruling, and human authority begins occupying the place of GOD’s authority.

That is why 17:36 assigns me the responsibility of verification. Hearing, eyesight, and the brain are not merely tools for navigating ordinary life; they also carry responsibility in relation to information. I should not turn what I heard from another person into a definitive claim about GOD without examining it for myself. (17:36)

39:18 does not leave the end of investigation in permanent doubt. Words are examined, and the best is followed. The aim is not indecision. It is conscious following. This distinction matters to me. Reflection is not refusing to commit to anything. It is learning to commit with a cleaner reason. (39:18)

6:164 returns final responsibility to the individual: no one bears another’s burden. When I read this, I do not think that “my ancestors did this,” “my teacher said this,” “my community believed this,” or “the majority practiced this” can serve as final defenses. They may explain my history. They cannot carry the responsibility of my choice. (6:164)

Perhaps the fairest way to examine inherited belief is not to insult the past, but to give the past its proper place. My parents are not my Lord. Scholars are not my Lord. Religious leaders are not my Lord. The majority is not my Lord. My own intellect and ego are not my Lord either.

My Lord is GOD.

The decisive question therefore changes from “What did my ancestors do?” to “What did GOD reveal, and what am I doing in response?”

Inheritance may be the first voice that reaches me. It does not have to be the final word.

Note

2:32 — They said, “Be You glorified, we have no knowledge, except that which You have taught us. You are the Omniscient, Most Wise.”

GOD knows best.

Source: kuranteyit.com