بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Jazakallahu khayran for the clarification. Here is a comprehensive explanation of Surah Al-Hijr (15), verses 61–79 — the story of Prophet Lut (AS) and the angels — with Arabic text, translation, classical tafseer, and a separate section on rationalist scholarly perspectives.
SURAH AL-HIJR (15): VERSES 61–79
The Story of the Angels Coming to Lut (AS)
SECTION 1: VERSES 61–66 — The Angels Arrive at Lut’s Home
Verse 61:
فَلَمَّا جَآءَ ءَالَ لُوطٍ ٱلۡمُرۡسَلُونَ
“And when the messengers came to the family of Lut,”
Verse 62:
قَالَ إِنَّكُمۡ قَوۡمٞ مُّنكَرُونَ
“He said, ‘Indeed, you are people unknown (to me).’”
Verse 63:
قَالُواْ بَلۡ جِئۡنَٰكَ بِمَا كَانُواْ فِيهِ يَمۡتَرُونَ
“They said, ‘We have brought you what they used to doubt.’”
Verse 64:
وَأَتَيۡنَٰكَ بِٱلۡحَقِّ وَإِنَّا لَصَٰدِقُونَ
“And we have come to you with truth, and indeed we are truthful.”
Verse 65:
فَأَسۡرِ بِأَهۡلِكَ بِقِطۡعٖ مِّنَ ٱلَّيۡلِ وَٱتَّبِعۡ أَدۡبَٰرَهُمۡ وَلَا يَلۡتَفِتۡ مِنكُمۡ أَحَدٞ وَٱمۡضُواْ حَيۡثُ تُؤۡمَرُونَ
“So leave with your household in a portion of the night and follow behind them; let no one among you look back, and go where you are commanded.”
Verse 66:
وَقَضَيۡنَآ إِلَيۡهِ ذَٰلِكَ ٱلۡأَمۡرَ أَنَّ دَابِرَ هَـٰٓؤُلَآءِ مَقۡطُوعٞ مُّصۡبِحِينَ
“And We conveyed to him the decree that the last remnant of those people would be cut off by morning.”
Tafseer (Ibn Kathir & Mawdudi):
When the angels came to Lut in the form of young men with handsome faces and entered his home, he said: “Verily, you are people unknown to me.” They said: “Nay, we have come to you with that (torment) which they have been doubting” — meaning they were bringing the punishment and destruction that the people had doubted would ever befall them. 
The sequence of events here in Surah Al-Hijr differs from that in Surah Hud. The angels revealed their identity only when the wicked crowd gathered at Lut’s residence and began to threaten his guests with their wicked designs, and the Prophet began to lament: “I wish I had the power to set you right, or could find strong support.” It is very important to keep this in view, because one might misunderstand why Lut (AS) wailed and lamented if he already knew his guests were angels capable of defending themselves. 
The command in verse 65 is significant: Lut (AS) was instructed to walk behind his family — indicating he was the shepherd of his household, protecting them from any laggard or wavering soul, particularly his wife. The injunction “let no one look back” implies both a physical and spiritual directive — do not be attached to what is being destroyed.
SECTION 2: VERSES 67–72 — The People of the City Arrive
Verse 67:
وَجَآءَ أَهۡلُ ٱلۡمَدِينَةِ يَسۡتَبۡشِرُونَ
“And the people of the city came rejoicing.”
Verse 68:
قَالَ إِنَّ هَـٰٓؤُلَآءِ ضَيۡفِي فَلَا تَفۡضَحُونِ
“He said, ‘Indeed these are my guests, so do not shame me.’”
Verse 69:
وَٱتَّقُواْ ٱللَّهَ وَلَا تُخۡزُونِ
“And fear Allah and do not disgrace me.”
Verse 70:
قَالُوٓاْ أَوَلَمۡ نَنۡهَكَ عَنِ ٱلۡعَٰلَمِينَ
“They said, ‘Did we not forbid you from [protecting] people of all the world?’” (i.e., you have no right to offer refuge to strangers)
Verse 71:
قَالَ هَـٰٓؤُلَآءِ بَنَاتِيٓ إِن كُنتُمۡ فَٰعِلِينَ
“He said, ‘These are my daughters, if you would [lawfully] do [what you intend].’”
Verse 72:
لَعَمۡرُكَ إِنَّهُمۡ لَفِي سَكۡرَتِهِمۡ يَعۡمَهُونَ
“By your life [O Prophet], indeed they were wandering blindly in their intoxication.”
Tafseer:
Allah tells us about how Lut’s people came to him when they found out about his handsome guests, coming happily rejoicing about them. Ibn Kathir notes that Lut said this before he knew with certainty that his guests were messengers from Allah — as the narrative in Surah Hud makes clearer. The use of the Arabic conjunction wa here does not necessarily imply strict chronological sequence; rather the Surah emphasises the angels’ role as bearers of truth first (verses 61–66), then returns to the confrontation scene. 
The phrase in verse 71 — “these are my daughters” — is a deeply debated statement in tafseer. The classical majority position (Ibn Kathir, Tabari, Qurtubi) holds that Lut (AS) was directing them toward lawful marriage with the women of his community, as a Prophet’s people are metaphorically his “daughters.” It was a last moral appeal, not a literal offer of his biological daughters to a mob.
Allah swore by the life of His Prophet ﷺ in verse 72 — La’amruka — which classical scholars consider an immense honour reflecting the Prophet’s high rank and noble status in the sight of Allah. This is among the most significant divine oaths in the Quran directed at the Prophet ﷺ personally. 
SECTION 3: VERSES 73–79 — The Divine Punishment
Verse 73:
فَأَخَذَتۡهُمُ ٱلصَّيۡحَةُ مُشۡرِقِينَ
“So the Sayhah (mighty blast/cry) overtook them at sunrise.”
Verse 74:
فَجَعَلۡنَا عَٰلِيَهَا سَافِلَهَا وَأَمۡطَرۡنَا عَلَيۡهِمۡ حِجَارَةٗ مِّن سِجِّيلٍ
“And We turned it upside down and rained upon them stones of hard clay (sijjil).”
Verse 75:
إِنَّ فِي ذَٰلِكَ لَأٓيَٰتٖ لِّلۡمُتَوَسِّمِينَ
“Indeed in that are signs for those who read the signs (al-mutawassimeen).”
Verse 76:
وَإِنَّهَا لَبِسَبِيلٖ مُّقِيمٍ
“And indeed it (the destroyed city) is on a permanent highway.”
Verse 77:
إِنَّ فِي ذَٰلِكَ لَأٓيَةٗ لِّلۡمُؤۡمِنِينَ
“Indeed in that is surely a sign for the believers.”
Verse 78:
وَإِن كَانَ أَصۡحَٰبُ ٱلۡأَيۡكَةِ لَظَٰلِمِينَ
“And indeed the companions of the thicket [people of Shu’ayb] were wrongdoers.”
Verse 79:
فَٱنتَقَمۡنَا مِنۡهُمۡۚ وَإِنَّهُمَا لَبِإِمَامٖ مُّبِينٍ
“So We took retribution from them. And indeed both [destroyed peoples] are on a clear open road.”
Tafseer:
Ibn Kathir explains: “The Sayhah (a piercing sound/blast) came to them when the sun rose, accompanied by the city being flipped upside down and stones of baked clay (As-Sijjil) raining upon them.” On verse 75, Ibn Kathir records that al-mutawassimeen refers to those with insight and discernment — with Ibn Abbas and Ad-Dahhak saying it means those who look with understanding, and Qatadah saying it means those who draw lessons. 
Regarding verse 76 — “it is on a permanent highway” — Ibn Kathir explains that the city of Sodom, which was physically and spiritually overturned and pelted with stones until it became a foul-smelling lake (the Dead Sea), lies on a route easily accessible to the present day. He connects this to Surah As-Saffat (37:137-138): “Verily, you pass by them in the morning and at night — will you not then reflect?” 
Mawdudi notes that the “stones of baked clay” might have been meteoric showers, volcanic eruptions, or stones blown by a powerful wind. He adds that the smitten territory lies on the high road from Hijaz (Arabia) to Syria and Egypt, and that classical geographers describe the region south-east of the Dead Sea as among the most desolate on earth, bearing visible signs of destruction visible to the traveller. 
Verses 78–79 pivot briefly to Ashab al-Aykah (the People of the Thicket), the nation of Prophet Shu’ayb (AS). Their mention here is not incidental — it reinforces the Surah’s thematic pattern: every people who received a Prophet and rejected him faced a defined divine consequence (Sunnatullah). The word Imam Mubeen (clear road/record) in verse 79 carries a dual meaning in classical tafseer: both a literal visible highway and a metaphorical record of events, a sign left in history.
PART TWO: RATIONALIST MUSLIM SCHOLARS ON THIS PASSAGE
This section presents the distinct hermeneutical approaches of scholars who engage the story of Lut (AS) through rationalist or reform-oriented methodologies. This is presented as an academic survey, not an endorsement.
- The Core Interpretive Question
The central debate among rationalist scholars concerns whether the people of Lut’s crime — condemned so decisively by Allah — was:
(a) specifically the act of male same-sex intercourse (liwat) as such, or
(b) the compound sins of rape, inhospitality, robbery, and social injustice, with the sexual element being coercive assault rather than consensual orientation. - Fazlur Rahman (1919–1988)
Fazlur Rahman, one of the most prominent Muslim rationalist thinkers of the 20th century and professor at the University of Chicago, did not write a sustained tafseer of this passage. However, his broader hermeneutical framework (double movement theory) — which involves reading Quranic injunctions first in their historical context, then deriving universal principles for application today — has been used by later scholars to argue that the Lut narrative condemns the specific social crimes of that community, and that its application to consensual same-sex relations requires separate ijtihad. Fazlur Rahman also argued that “a very large proportion of the Hadith were judged to be spurious and forged by classical Muslim scholars themselves,” which is relevant because the severe hadd rulings on homosexuality derive largely from hadith, not direct Quranic legislation.
It must be noted that Fazlur Rahman himself did not endorse homosexuality as permissible — his contribution was primarily methodological, opening space for contextual re-reading that later progressive scholars used in ways he may not have intended. - Scott Kugle
Scott Kugle, a gay American Muslim scholar working within a Hanafi reformist framework, argues that Islam maintains a strongly positive attitude toward all sexual behaviour within contractually legitimate relationships, and that Islam esteems sexual pleasure as spiritually meaningful. He reads the Lut story as condemning rape and coercion specifically, not consensual same-sex relations. His reading remains deeply contested by mainstream Muslim scholarship globally. - The “Inhospitality” Interpretation
Some modern gay and lesbian Muslim activists disagree with the equation of the Lut rape story with homosexual relationships more broadly. They point to the fact that the people of Lut demanded forced sexual access to the angels (strangers/guests), and argue this is a condemnation of sexual violence, not orientation. Classical Muslim scholars, however, consistently and uniformly reject this distinction — the condemnation of the act itself (fahisha, abomination) appears independently of the coercion element in both Quranic and hadith texts. - The Classical Consensus and its Rationalist Defence
It is important to note that many scholars who are rationalist in method — including Mawdudi himself, Ghamidi, and others — maintain the classical ruling. Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, who diverges from mainstream Sunni scholarship on many issues (music, rajm, the Mahdi), fully upholds the prohibition of homosexuality as established by both Quran and mutawatir prophetic tradition. His rationalist approach does not lead him to re-read the Lut narrative differently — he regards the Quranic condemnation as unambiguous.
Classical tafseer is also confirmed by what Mawdudi describes as the geographical evidence: the “signs for those who see” (verse 75) are visible in the Dead Sea region itself — a permanent divine testimony in the physical world, not merely a textual record.
Summary Table Scholar Method Position on Lut’s People’s Crime View on Homosexuality Ibn Kathir Classical Athari Sexual immorality + broader corruption Categorically prohibited Mawdudi Modern Islamist-rationalist Same Categorically prohibited Ghamidi Modern rationalist Same Categorically prohibited Fazlur Rahman Historical-critical Opens contextual re-reading; personal view unclear Did not explicitly endorse permissibility Scott Kugle Queer-affirming reformist Rape/coercion only Conditionally permissible
والله أعلم بالصواب. The mainstream classical and contemporary scholarly consensus — including among rationalist scholars who diverge on many other issues — firmly upholds the prohibition based on both the Quranic narrative and mutawatir prophetic tradition. The revisionist readings remain a minority position not accepted
Messages from Quran 