Debate Material- Is the Quran God’s Word

The following article is written to aid Christians in refuting Muslim claims for the divine origin of the Quran and Islam. Permission is granted to any one interested in using the material either in public or private discourse as long as the purpose is to glorify the Lord Jesus Christ. We do not welcome any use of this material in a manner that is both degrading to Muslims and unworthy of true biblical Christianity. (cf. 2 Timothy 2:24-26)

With this just stated we now proceed to the arguments against Islam.

The Necessity of the Sunna For An Understanding of the Quran:

A Muslim that professes to be Sunni cannot reinvent new meanings or interpretations for the Quran. A Sunni Muslim must look towards the Sunna of his prophet and discover how the first community of Muslims understood the verses of the Quran.

One Muslim writes:

In Islam, the Arabic word sunnah has come to denote the way Prophet Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah, lived his life. The Sunnah is the second source of Islamic jurisprudence, the first being the Qur'an. Both sources are indispensable; one cannot practice Islam without consulting both of them. The Arabic word hadith (pl. ahadith) is very similar to Sunnah, but not identical. A hadith is a narration about the life of the Prophet or what he approved - as opposed to his life itself, which is the Sunnah as already mentioned.

 

In M. M. Azami's Studies in Hadith Methodology and Literature, the following precise definition of a hadith is given,

 

According to Muhaddithiin [scholars of hadith -ed.] it stands for 'what was transmitted on the authority of the Prophet, his deeds, sayings, tacit approval, or description of his sifaat (features) meaning his physical appearance. However, physical appearance of the Prophet is not included in the definition used by the jurists.'

Thus hadith literature means the literature which consists of the narrations of the life of the Prophet and the things approved by him. However, the term was used sometimes in much broader sense to cover the narrations about the Companions [of the Prophet -ed.] and Successors [to the Companions -ed.] as well.

The explosion of Islam in the 7th and 8th centuries confronted Islamic scholars with a daunting task: to preserve the knowledge of the Sunnah of the Prophet. Hence the science of hadith evaluation was born. We recommend that you read the "Introduction to the Science of Hadith" below to understand the tremendous efforts that were required to sift the true reports from the false reports. The success of the early scholars is also captured below by some collections of hadith. (http://islamicweb.com/?folder=quran)

 

Renowned Muslim scholar Dr. Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips, comments on the sources Muslims must appeal in order to understand such things as possession:

From the aforementioned arguments, it may be concluded that those who deny the possibility of diabolical possession rely on only two sources- Qur’anic texts and logic- while those who affirm it rely on three- Qur’anic texts, texts from the Sunnah and logic. According to the correct methodology of Qur’anic interpretation outlined by Ibn Katheer in the introduction of his exegesis of the Qur’aan, the interpretations of the Sunnah are essential for determining the correct understanding of the Qur’anic text. Ibn Katheer wrote,

If it is asked what is the best method of interpretation, the reply is that the most correct method is that of [interpretation of] the Qur’aan by the Qur’aan. This is because what has been generalized in one place has been specified in another. If an explicit explanation is not found in another verse, then the answers are found in the Sunnah, for it explains and clarifies the Qur’aan. In fact, Imaam Muhammad ibn Idrees ash-Shaafi’ee said, "Whatever the Messenger of Allaah ruled was based upon what he understood from the Qur’aan…

Due to this fact, the Messenger of Allaah stated,

‘I have been given the Qur’aan and something similar to it along with it.’

He meant the Sunnah, because the Sunnah was revealed to him as the Qur’aan was revealed, except that it was not recited as the Qur’aan was recited. (Philips, The Exorcist Tradition in Islaam [Dar Al Fatah; Sharjah U.A.E., 1997], pp. 87-88 bold emphasis ours)

Furthermore, a Muslim must also not create new meanings for Arabic words of the Quran. Instead he must see how the first Muslims understood the Arabic and what meanings they gave to these words. As Abdullah Yusuf Ali noted:

"Every serious writer and thinker has a right to use all the knowledge and experience he possesses in the service of the Qur’an. But he must not mix up his own theories and conclusions, however reasonable, with the interpretation of the Text itself, which is usually perfectly perspicuous, as it claims to be. Our difficulties in interpretation often arise from various causes, of which I will mention just a few:

"(1) Arabic words in the Text have acquired other meanings than those which were understood by the Apostle and his Companions. All living languages undergo such transformations. The early Commentators and Philologists went into these matters with a very comprehensive grasp, and we must accept their conclusions. Where they are not unanimous, we must use our judgment and historic sense in adopting the interpretation of that authority which appeals to us most. We must not devise new verbal meanings." (Yusuf Ali as cited by Dr. William Campbell, The Qur’an and the Bible in the light of History and Science [Middle East Resources PO Box 96 Upper Darby PA 19082), pp. 9-10)

 

Failed Prophecies

Preservation of the Quran

We are told in S. 15:9 that Allah will preserve the Quran:

We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).

Yet, the authentic Islamic traditions show that the Quran is missing many verses as well as chapters.

 

What the Scholars Have to Say

Much like the Bible, the Quran has thousands of variants distributed throughout the extant MSS. This is a point that is admitted by Orientalists and Muslims alike.

Noted European archaeologist Arthur Jeffery wrote a book, Material for the History of the Text of the Qur'an, documenting the variant readings between the competing codices in circulation prior to the Quran's standardization under Uthman. Jeffery claims that "when we come to the accounts of 'Uthman's recension, it quickly becomes clear that his work was no mere matter of removing dialectal peculiarities in reading [as many Muslims claim], but was a necessary stroke of policy to establish a standard text for the whole empire."

He continues, "there were wide divergences between the collections that had been digested into Codices in the great Metropolitan centers of Madina, Mecca, Basra, Kufa and Damascus." Thus, "Uthman's solution was to canonize the Madinan Codex and order all others to be destroyed." Jeffery then states, "there can be little doubt that the text canonized by 'Uthman was only one among several types of text in existence at the time." (Jeffery, pp. 7-8)

 

He concludes that "it is quite clear that the text which 'Uthman canonized was only one out of many rival text... [and] there is grave suspicion that 'Uthman may have seriously edited the text he canonized." (Ibid. ix-x)

The well-known scholar W. Montgomery Watt, commenting on the variant readings between the codices of Abdullah Ibn Masud and Ubay Ibn Kab, writes:

"No copies exist of any of the early codices, but the list of variant readings from the two just mentioned is extensive, running to a thousand or more items in both cases." (Watt, Bell's Introduction to the Qur'an [Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1970], p. 45)

British Scholar Sir Norman Anderson states:

"So, although it is true that today the Kufan text of Hafs is accepted almost everywhere in the Muslim world, the claim commonly made by Muslims that they have ipsissima verba of what Muhammad actually said, without any variant readings, rests upon an ignorance of the facts of history." (Anderson, Islam in the Modern World [Leicester: Apollos, 1990], p. 47)

 

Islamicist Alfred Guillaume states in regards to the variant readings of the Holy Bible and the Quran:

"The only difference between the Qur'an and the Bible today is that the Christian Church in the interest of truth, carefully preserved the variant readings... whereas the Muslims at the time of Uthman deemed it expedient to destroy as far as possible all the evidences of different readings of the Qur'an in the cause of standardizing one text for the whole of the Muslim... These facts must also always be considered against the background of further evidence from the Hadith that the Qur'an today is still not complete." (Anderson, pp. 20-21)

L. Bevan Jones sums it up:

"… while it may be true that no other work has remained for twelve centuries with so pure a text, it is probably equally true that no other has suffered so drastic a purging." (Jones, The People of the Mosque [London: Student Christian Movement Press, 1932], p. 62)

 

The Evidence From Islamic Traditions

1. Quran Is Incomplete

"Many (of the passages) of the Qur'an that were sent down were known by those who died on the day of Yamama ... but they were not known (by those who) survived them, nor were they written down, nor had Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman (by that time) collected the Qur'an, nor were they found with even one (person) after them." (Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al-Masahif, p. 23).

According this source, portions of the Quran that had been memorized by those slain in the battle vanished, never to be found again.

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:

'Umar said, Ubai was the best of us in the recitation (of the Qur'an) yet we leave some of what he recites.' Ubai says, 'I have taken it from the mouth of Allah's Apostle and will not leave for anything whatever.' But Allah said: None of Our revelations do we abrogate or cause to be forgotten but We substitute something better or similar (2.106)" (Bukhari Volume 6, Book 61, Number 527)

Narrated Ibn Abbas:

Umar said, "Our best Qur'an reciter is Ubai and our best judge is 'Ali; and in spite of this, we leave some of the statements of Ubai because Ubai says, 'I do not leave anything that I have heard from Allah's Apostle while Allah: "Whatever verse (Revelations) do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten but We bring a better one or similar to it." (2.106) (Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 8)

These missing verses cannot be referring to abrogated parts of the Quran which were no longer essential since even the abrogated parts still form part of the text today.

This is why Ibn Umar would say:

It is reported from Ismail ibn Ibrahim from Ayyub from Naafi from Ibn Umar who said: "Let none of you say 'I have acquired the whole of the Qur'an'. How does he know what all of it is when much of the Qur'an has disappeared? Rather let him say 'I have acquired what has survived.'" (as-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur'an, p.524).

2. Suras Added or Deleted

The Islamic traditions agree that certain Muslim reciters included extra suras not found in the present text of the Quran. For instance, Ubay Ibn Kabb was considered one of the best Muslim reciters, being dubbed "the Master of the Quranic Reciters." Yet, interestingly Kabb included two extra suras, which he claimed were part of the revelation:

"Written in the text of Ubayy ibn Ka'b were the Fatihal-kitab (the Opening Surah) and the Mu'awwi-thatayni (the Charm Surahs) and Allahumma innaa nasta'iinka (the opening words of Suratul-Khal' meaning 'O Allah, we seek your help') and Allahumma ayyaaka na'budu (the opening words of Suratul-Hafd meaning 'O Allah, we worship you')". (as-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur'an, p.153).

Here are the two suras in their entirety:

Surat al-Hafd

You (alone) we worship, and to You (alone) we pray and lie prostrate, and to You (alone) we proceed and have descendants. We fear Your torture and hope for Your mercy. Truly Your torture will overtake the infidels.

Surat al-Khal'

O Allah, You (alone) we ask for help and forgiveness. We speak appreciatingly of Your goodness. Never do we disbelieve You. We repudiate and disbelieve anyone who follows immorality.

 

Interestingly, Ubay was not the only one who included these suras into his codex. According to al-Suyuti, both Ibn Abbass and Abu Musa also included them as part of their text. (Al-Itqan, p. 154)

 

QUESTION FOR THE DEBATER

Why are these suras not part of the Quran today seeing that Muslim reciters such as Ubay claimed that God revealed them as part of the text?

Another Muslim considered an authority in Quranic recitation was Abdullah Ibn Masud:

Narrated Masriq:

'Abdullah bin 'Amr mentioned 'Abdullah bin Masud and said, "I shall ever love that man, for I heard the Prophet saying, 'Take (learn) the Qur'an from four: 'Abdullah bin Masud, Salim, Mu'adh and Ubai bin Ka'b." (Bukhari Volume 6, Book 61, Number 521)

 

Masud made the following claim:

Narrated 'Abdullah (bin Mas'ud): By Allah other than Whom none has the right to be worshipped! There is no Sura revealed in Allah's Book but I know at what place it was revealed; and there is no Verse revealed in Allah's Book but I know about whom it was revealed." (Bukhari Volume 6, Book 61, Number 524)

 

Yet, in spite of his claiming to know the exact place each Sura and verse was revealed, Masud not only rejected the two extra suras of Kabb but omitted three additional chapters from his codex as well! This makes Masud's Quran only 111 Suras in length. Interestingly, Bukhari records that Masud and Kabb were in disagreement over this very issue:

 

Narrated Zirr bin Hubaish:

I asked Ubai bin Ka'b, "O Abu AlMundhir! Your brother, Ibn Mas'ud said so-and-so (i.e., the two Mu'awwidh-at do not belong to the Quran)." Ubai said, "I asked Allah's Apostle about them, and he said, 'They have been revealed to me, and I have recited them (as a part of the Quran)," So Ubai added, "So we say as Allah's Apostle has said." (Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 501)

 

QUESTION FOR THE DEBATER

Whose testimony should we accept, that of Masud or that of Kabb? Do we agree that Allah only revealed 111 chapters or do we accept the 116 chapters of Kabb's codex? Furthermore, why is it that the Uthmanic text contains 114 chapters, three more than that of Masud and two short from that of Kabb?

 

3. Missing Verses

The hadiths also supply us with evidence that there are missing verses:

 

Missing Part On The Fatherhood Of Muhammad:

Yusuf Ali records that S. 33:6 in the text of Ubay read differently from the Uthmanic text. The Uthmanic text presently reads:

 

"The prophet is closer to the believers than their own selves, and his wives are their mothers."

 

Yet Ubay's codex read:

 

"The prophet is closer to the believers than their own selves, and he is a father to them, and his wives are their mothers."

Hence, Yusuf Ali states:

 

"In spiritual relationship the Prophet is entitled to more respect and consideration than blood-relations. The Believers should follow him rather than their fathers or mothers or brothers, where there is conflict of duties. He is even nearer - closer to our real interests - than our own selves. In some Qiraats, like that of Ubai ibn Ka'b, occur also the words 'and he is a father to them,' which imply his spiritual relationship and connect on with the words, 'and his wives are their mothers.' Thus his spiritual fatherhood would be contrasted pointedly with the repudiation of the vulgar superstition of calling any one like Zaid ibn Haritha by the appellation Zaid ibn Muhammad (xxxiii. 40): such an appellation is really disrespectful to the Prophet." (Ali, The Holy Qur'an, p. 1104, f. 3674)

 

Missing Part On Asr Prayer

Yahya related to me from Malik from Zayd ibn Aslam from al-Qaqa ibn Hakim that Abu Yunus, the mawla of A'isha, umm al-muminin said, "A'isha ordered me to write out a Qur'an for her. She said, 'When you reach this ayat, let me know, "Guard the prayers carefully and the middle prayer and stand obedient to Allah."' When I reached it I told her, and she dictated to me, 'Guard the prayers carefully and the middle prayer and the asr prayer and stand obedient to Allah.' A'isha said, 'I heard it from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.’" (Malik's Muwatta, Book 8, Number 8.8.26)

 

Yahya related to me from Malik from Zayd ibn Aslam that Amr ibn Rafi said, "I was writing a Qur'an for Hafsa, umm al-muminin, and she said, 'When you reach this ayat, let me know, "Guard the prayers carefully and the middle prayer and stand obedient to Allah."' When I reached it I told her and she dictated to me, 'Guard the prayers carefully and the middle prayer and the asr prayer and stand obedient to Allah.’" (Malik's Muwatta, Book 8, Number 8.8.27)

 

Compare it with today's present text:

 

"Be guardians of your prayers, and of the midmost prayer, and stand up with devotion to Allah." S. 2:238 Pickthall

 

Missing Verse On Suckling

 

Narrated Aisha:

It had been revealed in the Qur'an that ten clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five sucklings and Allah's Apostle (peace_be_upon_him) died and it was before that time (found) in the Qur'an (and recited by the Muslims). (Sahih Muslim, Book 8, Number 3421)

 

Missing Verse On Stoning

 

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:

'Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." 'Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him." (Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 82, Number 816; See also: Vol. 8, No. 817 and Vol. 9, No. 424)

 

Missing Bismillah

 

Ibn 'Abbas asked `Uthman what possessed him to place surat al Anfal, one of the mathani, with Bara'a, one of the mi'in, join them with no bismillah between them and place them among the seven lengthy suras. `Uthman replied that often the Prophet received quite long revelations. He would call for one of the scribes and say, 'Put these verses in the sura in which so-and-so occurs.' Anfal was among the first of the Medina revelations and Bara'a among the last. Since its contents resembled those of Anfal, `Uthman took it to belong with it, for the Prophet had died without explaining that it was part of it. (p. 164, Jalal al Din `Abdul Rahman b. abi Bakr al Suyuti, al Itqan fi `ulum al Qur'an, Halabi, Cairo, 1935/1354, pt 1, p. 60)

Malik had a shorter explanation for the absence of this bismillah. The beginning of Bara'a fell out and its bismillah fell out with it. (p. 164-165, Jalal al Din `Abdul Rahman b. abi Bakr al Suyuti, al Itqan fi `ulum al Qur'an, Halabi, Cairo, 1935/1354, pt 1, p. 65)

 

Missing Part On "Valley of Riches"

 

Anas b. Malik reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: If there were two valleys of gold for the son of Adam, he would long for another one, and his mouth will not be filled but with dust, and Allah returns to him who repents. (Sahih Muslim, Number 2284)

 

Ibn'Abbas reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: If there were for the son of Adam a valley full of riches, he would long to possess another one like it, and Ibn Adam does not feel satiated but with dust. And Allah returns to him who returns (to Him). Ibn 'Abbas said: I do not know whether it is from the Qur'an or not; and in the narration transmitted by Zuhair it was said: I do not know whether it is from the Qur'an, and he made no mention of Ibn 'Abbas. (Sahih Muslim, Number 2285)

 

In light of the preceding evidence, can any Muslim honestly claim that the Quran has been completely preserved?

 

4. Traditions Which Show Muslims Accusing Each Other Of Tampering With The Quran

 

Interestingly, both Muslims of the past and present have accused each other of adding or omitting portions from the Quran:

 

Hudhaifah therefore said to Othman: "Oh Commander of the Faithful, be careful of the people." He answered, "What is the problem?" Hudhaifah said, "I took part in the expedition against Armenia where there were Iraqis as well as Syrians. But the Syrians follow the reading of the Qur'an according to Ubai ibn Ka`b, and they say some things which the Iraqis have not heard, so the latter accuse them of unbelief. In the same way the Iraqis, who follow the reading of Ibn Mas`ud, read some things which the Syrians have not heard. and the Syrians accuse them of unbelief. Restrain this people before they differ in the book, as do the Jews and the Christians."

Accordingly Othman sent to Hafsa, saying, "Send us the sheets that we may copy them into the volumes. Then we shall return them to you." Hafsa therefore sent them to Othman. Then he commanded Zaid ibn Thabit and Abdullah ibn al Zubair and Said ibn al As and Abdullah ibn Harith ibn Hisham, and they copied them into the volumes. And Othman said to the company of the three Quraishites, "When you differ, you and Zaid ibn Thabit, in any portion of the Qur'an write it in the dialect of the Quraish, for verily it came down in their dialect." And they did so until, when they had copied the sheets into the volumes, Othman restored the sheets to Hafsa. And he sent to every region a volume from what they had copied, and commanded regarding everything of the Qur'an besides it, in every sheet and volume, that it should be burned. (Mishkat al-Masabih, trans. James Robson [Ashraf Lahore, 1963], p. 185 Bukhari transmitted from Anas bin Malik)

These traditions clearly affirm that the Syrians had readings not known to the Iraqis and vice-versa. These readings had nothing to do with dialectal variations since variations in dialect would not result in the parties not having heard verses contained in the other codices. Furthermore, who gave Uthman the right to burn codices written by eye and ear witnesses of Muhammad? One Muslim who refused to submit his codex to burning was Abdullah Ibn Masud:

Hudhaifah went on to say, "O Abdullah ibn Qais, you were sent to the people of Basra as their governor (amir) and teacher and they have submitted to your rules, your idioms and your reading". He continued, "O Abdullah ibn Mas'ud, you were sent to the people of Kufa as their teacher who have also submitted to your rules, idioms and reading". Abdullah said to him, "In that case I have not led them astray. There is no verse in the Book of Allah that I do not know where it was revealed and why it was revealed, and if I knew anyone more learned in the Book of Allah and I could be conveyed there, I would set out to him". (Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al-Masahif, p.14).

 

"The people have been guilty of deceit in the reading of the Qur'an. I like it better to read according to the recitation of him (Prophet) whom I love more than that of Zayd Ibn Thabit. By Him besides Whom there is no god! I learnt more than seventy surahs from the lips of the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him, while Zayd Ibn Thabit was a youth, having two locks and playing with the youth." (Ibn Sa'd, Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, Vol. 2, p. 444)

Interestingly, the charge that Muslims have tampered with the text is not limited solely to the past. There are certain Shiite Muslims who hold to the belief that Uthman omitted portions of the Quran that spoke favorably of Ali. (W. St. Clair-Tisdall, A Manuel of the Leading Muhammedan Objections to Christianity [London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1904], p. 59; B. Todd Lawson, "Notes for the Study of a Shi'i Qur'an," in Journal of Semitic Studies [Autumn 1991], vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 279-96)

 

Furthermore, even today there are some Shiite Muslims that claim to have two genuine suras that forms part of their Quranic text:

Sura Al-Nurain

"O you who believe, believe in the two lights. He has revealed them unto you, warning you against the torture of the Great Day - two lights emanating from one another, for I am the All-Hearing and the All-Knowing. Truly those who fulfill Allah's pledge and his Apostle's verses shall be rewarded with Paradise. Those who disbelieve by breaking their covenant and what they have pledged to do before the Apostle shall be thrown into hell, for they did injustice to themselves and disobeyed the supporter of the Apostle. Therefore, they shall be caused to drink from the Hamim River in hell. Truly Allah is the light of heaven and the earth as he wills, and he has chosen his angels and apostles and made believers of those whom he created. All do whatever he wills. There is no god but him - the Merciful and the Compassionate. Those who came before them cheated their apostles, and so I have stricken them with my cunningness vehemently and painfully. O Apostle! Preach my admonition, for they shall know. Those who fulfill their pledge to you are likened to me to be rewarded by Paradise. Truly Ali is one of the pious. We have sent Moses and Aaron, being appointed his successor, yet they disobeyed Aaron. Be of good patience! They will become old. We have given you judgment, just as we did to other apostles before you. We have appointed a guardian to you from them, that they might return. Truly Ali is devout, lying prostrate at night, warning as regards the Last Day, and hoping for the mercy of his Lord. Say: "Should those who act unjustly be treated equally, while they know my torture?"

Source: Mohammad Azat Darwaza, Al-Qur'an al-Majid, page 60 and Mohammed Ahmed Maal Allah, Al Shi'a wa Tareef Al Quran; also see Theodor Nöldeke: Geschichte des Qorans Zweite Auflage, völlig umgearbeitet von Friedrich Schwally, Zweiter Teil: Die Sammlung des Qorans, Leipzig [Dieterich'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung] 1919, Seiten 102-103 (see also this article: http://answering-islam.org/Quran/Miracle/nurain.html)

Sura Al-Wilaya

On the name of the all merciful God

You who are believers, believe in the prophet and the saint (patron, God-man) "which is Ali Bin Abi Taleb, Mohammed cousin" which we sent, they will guide you to the strait path.

A prophet and a saint "belong to" each other, and I am the all knowing, the experienced.

Those who do (obey) God's covenant they "deserve" comforting paradises.

And those who if it read to them our verses, they contradict it.

[Meaning: If somebody (unknown) were to read the verses (from the Qur'an) to them, they reject would it.]

They have a great (big) place in Hell, if they called in the day of judgement: where is the unfair, the contradictory for the messengers?!

The messengers don't leave them "without" the truth, and God "will not allow them" to win (appear, show) till a short time.

Praise your lord "and" thank "him", and Ali "Ali Bin Abi Taleb, Mohammed cousin" "one" from the witnesses.

Source: "ALThWRh AL'YARANYh FY MYzAN AL'sLAM" (The Iranian revolution in the balance of Islam), published in Egypt (see also this article: http://answering-islam.org/Quran/Miracle/wilaya.html)

 

The issue of whether these two suras are authentic is immaterial to our discussion. What is relevant to our discussion is the fact that these two suras prove that Muslims are not in agreement over the issue of whether the Quran has been perfectly preserved down through the ages without any omissions or additions.

Finally, Muslim followers of Rashad Khalifah claim that Sura 9:128-129 was not originally part of the Quranic text. This is why in their version of the Quran these two verses have been omitted. (See related articles: http://www.moslem.org/9128.htm and http://www.moslem.org/sura9.htm)

 

The Roman Victory Over the Persians

Another failed prophecy includes S. 30:2-4:

"The Roman Empire has been defeated - in a land close by: But they, (even) after (this) defeat of theirs, will soon be victorious - within a few years."

As the prophecy stated the Byzantines did become victorious over the Persians who had at first defeated them. Yet, there are fundamental problems with this alleged prophecy:

According to Yusuf Ali the Arabic word for "a few years," Bidh'un, signifies a period of three to nine years; yet according to some scholars the victory did not come until nearly twelve years later. The Persians defeated the Byzantines and captured Jerusalem at about A.D. 614 or 615. The Byzantine counter-offensive did not begin until A.D. 622 and the victory was not complete until A.D. 625, making it a period between ten to eleven years, not "a few years" alluded to in the Quran.

The original Quranic text had no vowel marks. Thus, the Arabic word Sayaghlibuna, "they shall defeat," could easily have been rendered, with the change of two vowels, Sayughlabuna, "they (i.e. Romans) shall be defeated." Since vowel points were not added until some time after this event, it could have been quite possible for a scribe to deliberately tamper with the text, forcing it to become a prophetic statement.

This fact is solidified by Muslim commentator al-Baidawi. C.G. Pfander mentions Baidawi's comments on the variant readings surrounding this passage:

"But Al Baizawi shatters the whole argument of the Muslims by informing us of certain varied readings in these verses of Suratu'r Rum. He tells us that some read (Arabic text appears here) instead of the usual (Arabic text appears here) and (Arabic text appears here) instead of (Arabic text appears here). The rendering will then be: 'The Byzantines have conquered in the nearest part of the land, and they shall be defeated in a small number of years,' &c. If this be the correct reading, the whole story about Abu Bakr's bet with Ubai must be a fable, since Ubai was dead long before the Muslims began to defeat the Byzantines, and even long before the victories which Heraclius won over the Persians. This shows how unreliable such Traditions are. The explanation which Al Baizawi gives is, that the Byzantines became conquerors of 'the well-watered land of Syria' (Arabic text appears here) and that the passage predicted that the Muslims would soon overcome them. If this is the meaning, the Tradition which records the 'descent' of the verses about six years before the Hijrah must be wrong, and the passage must belong to A.H. 6 at earliest. It is clear that, as the vowel points were not used when the Qur-an was first written down in Cufic letters, no one can be certain which of the two readings is right. We have seen that there is so much uncertainty about (1) the date at which the verses were 'sent down', (2) the correct reading, and (3) the meaning, that it is quite impossible to show that the passage contains a prophecy which was fulfilled. Hence, it cannot be considered to be a proof of Muhammad's prophetic office." (C. G. Pfander, Mizan-ul-Haqq- The Balance of Truth, revised and enlarged by W. St. Clair Tisdall [Light of Life P.O. Box 18, A-9503, Villach Austria], 279-280) [emphasis ours]

This being the case, no Muslim can confidently tell us what the true reading of the text is and hence cannot insure us that this verse originally predicted the Byzantine victory over the Persians.

It amazes us that a prophecy from God would not specify the exact time of the victory, seeing that God is all-knowing and all-wise, declaring the end from the beginning. For God to guess that the Byzantines would win in "a few years" as opposed to specifying the exact year, is inconsistent with the belief in an Omniscient, Omnipotent Being. Hence, it is unlikely that the true God would actually make such a prophecy.

Interestingly, some Muslims fail to comment on the phrase "a few years" seeing that this actually hinders the point Muslims seek to make. They also do not mention the fact that Abu Bakr believed "a few years" meant that the Byzantines were going to win in three years:

"This passage refers to the defeat of the Byzantines in Syria by the Persians under Khusran Parvis. (A.D. 615 - 6 years before the Hegira). However, the defeat of the Persians should take place soon--"in a small number of years". In the light of this prediction, Abu-Bakr undertook a bet with Ubai-ibn-Khalaf that this prediction would be fulfilled within three years, but he was corrected by Mohammed who stated that the "small number" is between three and nine years (Al-Baizawi). Muslims tell us that the Byzantines overcame their enemies within seven years. The fact, however, is that the Byzantines defeated Persia in A.D. 628 (Al-Baizawi commentary). That was twelve years after the prediction of Mohammed. Consequently this passage does not qualify as a prophecy, particularly as the time between prophecy and fulfillment was far too short, and in addition the event was easily predictable." (Gerhard Nehls, Christians Ask Muslims [Life Challenge, SIM International; Africa, 1992], pp. 70-71)

In light of the preceding considerations, we must conclude that this prophecy failed to materialize in the manner described by the Quran.

Meaningless Quranic Words

There are certain letters in the Quran which has baffled Muslims till this day. The letters are those that appear at the beginning of certain chapters:

	Alif Lam Ra- Suras 10, 11, 12, 14, 15.
	Alif Lam Mim- Suras 2, 3, 29, 30, 31, 32.
	Alif Lam Mim Ra- Sura 13.
	Alif Lam Min Sad- Sura 33.
	Ha Mim- Suras 40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46.
	Ha Mim 'Ain Sin Qaf- Sura 42.
	Sad- Sura 38.
	Ta Sin- Sura 27;
	Ta Sin Mim- Suras 26, 28.
	Ta Ha- Sura 20.
	Qaf- Sura 50.
	Ka Ha Ya 'Ain Sad- Sura 19.
	Nun- Sura 68.
	Ya Sin- Sura 36.

Muhammad Asad admits:

"About one-quarter of the Qur'anic suras are preceded by mysterious letter-symbols called muqatta'at ('disjointed letters') or, occasionally, fawatih ('openings') because they appear at the beginning of the relevant suras. Out of the twenty-eight letters of the Arabic alphabet, exactly one-half- that is, fourteen- occur in this position, either singly or in varying combinations of two, three, four, or five letters. They are always pronounced singly, by their designations and not as mere sounds- thus: alif lam mim, or ha mim, etc.

"The significance of these letter-symbols has perplexed the commentators from the earliest times. There is no evidence of the Prophet's having ever referred to them in any of his recorded utterances, nor any of his Companions having ever asked him for an explanation. None the less, it is established beyond any possibility of doubt that all the Companions- obviously following the example of the Prophet- regarded the muqatta'at as integral parts of the suras to which they are prefixed, and used to recite them accordingly: a fact which disposes effectively of the suggestion advanced by some Western orientalists that these letters may be no more than the initials of the scribes who wrote down the individual revelations at the Prophet's dictation, or of the Companions who recorded them at the time of the final codification of the Qur'an during the reign of the first three Caliphs.

"Some of the Companions as well as some of their immediate successors and later Qur'anic commentators were convinced that these letters are abbreviations of certain words or even phrases relating to God and His attributes, and tried to 'reconstruct' them with much ingenuity; but since the possible combinations are practically unlimited, all such interpretations are highly arbitrary and, therefore, devoid of any real usefulness…" (Asad, The Message of the Qur'an [Dar al-Andalus Limited, 3 Library Ramp Gibraltar, rpt. 1993], App. II, p. 992)

After summarizing several different interpretations, Asad concludes:

"…and so, in the last resort, we must content ourselves with the finding that a solution of this problem still remains beyond our grasp. This was apparently the view of the four Right-Guided Caliphs, summarized in these words of Abu Bakr: 'In every divine writ (kitab) there is [an element of] mystery- and the mystery of the Qur'an is [indicated] in the openings of [some of] the suras." (Ibid., p. 993)

Even A. Yusuf Ali states:

"As shown in Appendix I (Sipara 3), the Abbreviated Letters are mystic symbols, about whose meaning there is no authoritative explanation. If the theory advanced in n. 25 to ii 1 has any validity, and the present group A.L.R. is cognate to the group A.L.M., we have to consider and form some idea in our minds as to the probable meaning of the variation… But no one should be dogmatic in speculation about mystic Symbols." (Ali, The Holy Qur'an- Introduction to Sura X [Yunus], p. 481)

We are also told in Ali's footnote 25, p. 17, that the meaning A.L.M.:

"…Much has been written about the meaning of these letters, but most of it is pure conjecture. Some commentators are content to recognize them as some mystic symbols, of which it is unprofitable to discuss the meaning by mere verbal logic. In mysticism we accept symbols as such for a time being: their esoteric meaning comes from the inner light when we are ready for it…"

Ibn Kathir notes:

"The 'ulama do not agree as to the interpretation of <Alif-Lam-Mim> and other similar letters at the beginning of some suras. They have been given the following interpretations:

1.The letters belong to Mutashabih (allegorical) verses, whose meaning is known only to Allah.

2.They are the names of Allah.

3.They have meaning, and Allah did not reveal them in vain and without a purpose. Those ignorant people who say that the Qur'an contains words for mere worship, that have no meaning whatsoever- are certainly in great error. There is no doubt that the letters at the beginning of some Surahs have a meaning: we say about them only what is authentically said about them by the Prophet. Otherwise, we say nothing further about them and recite the verse <'We believe in it; it is all from our Lord.'> (3:7).

As for the wisdom behind these letters, some scholars have said it is:

1.To alert the polytheists so that they might listen to the words of Allah. This is a very weak reason in light of the fact that such disconnected letters do not appear at the beginning of every Surah. Besides al-Baqarah and al-'Imran that follows it, both start with these letters, and both were revealed in Madinah where there were no polytheists.

2.Others believe that they are an example of the miraculous wonder of the Qur'an and the people are unable to confront it. This opinion is held by many scholars, including the Sheikh of Islam, Ibn Taymiyya. This opinion is borne out by the fact that all disconnected letters mentioned in the Qur'an are followed by a mention of the Qur'an itself and its revelation by Allah, Lord of the worlds. For example: <Alif-Lam-Mim. This is the Book ...> (2:1), <Ha. Mim. By the Book that makes things clear, that is this Qur'an)> (43:1), <Alif-Lam-Mim. Allah! There is no god but Him, the Living, the Self-Subsistent. He has revealed to (Muhammad) the Scripture> (3:1-3). <Alif-Lam-Ra. (This is) a Scripture which We have revealed unto you (O Muhammad) ...> (14:1) (Tafsir Ibn Kathir-Part 1 Surah Al-Fatiha Surah Al-Baqarah, ayat 1 to 141, Abridged by Sheikh Muhammad Nasib Ar-Rafa'i [Al-Firdous Ltd., London 1998], pp. 55-57; bold italic emphasis ours)

 

That Ibn Kathir's second explanation is unconvincing is seen by the fact that certain suras begin by mentioning the Quran without the mysterious letters preceding it. For example S. 18:1 begins:

 

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah, Who hath sent Hs Servant the Book, and hath allowed therein no Crookedness. (cf., S. 24:1; 25:1; 39:1-2; 52:1-3; 55:1-2; 97:1)

 

In other suras, we find the letters appearing without any reference to the Quran. One such sura is S. 191-2:

 

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. Kaf. Ha. Ya. Ain. Sad. (This is) a mention of Zakariya.

And:

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. Alif-Lam-Mim. Do men think that they will be left alone on saying, "We believe", and that they will not be tested? S. 29:1-2 (cf. S. 30:1-2; 68:1)

The late Christian writer, 'Abdallah 'Abd al-Fadi, wrote:

"Our question is: Considering that only God knows the meaning of these words, as Muslims claim, what do they benefit us? God never inspires a man with profitless words; His words are clear and His oracles are a guidance to the people." (Al-Fadi, Is the Qur'an Infallible? [Light of Life, PO Box 13, A-9503 Villach, Austria], p. 297)

QUESTION FOR THE DEBATER

Since Muslims such as Asad clearly admit that there is no report suggesting that Muhammad spoke about these mysterious letters in his recorded utterances, where did the Companions come up with such a practice especially since these letters left them perplexed as to their meanings? Furthermore, no report has come down to us indicating that the Companions had inquired Muhammad on the meaning of these mysterious letters. This is indeed strange since had these letters been part of the original revelation why would the Companions not have asked about their meaning? This seems to suggest that scribes added these letters much later and hadiths were then forged to establish their authenticity.

Fables of the Quran

The Quran contains myths and fables that were well known during the time of Muhammad. The Quran testifies that the unbelievers accused Muhammad of borrowing fables already known to them and claiming it as revelation from God:

Of them there are some who (pretend to) listen to thee; but We have thrown veils on their hearts, So they understand it not, and deafness in their ears; if they saw every one of the Signs, they will not believe in them; in so much that when they come to thee, they (but) dispute with thee; the Unbelievers say: "These are nothing but TALES OF ANCIENTS." S. 6:25

When Our Signs are rehearsed to them, they say: "We have heard this (before): if we wished, we could say (words) like these: these are nothing but TALES OF ANCIENTS." S. 8:31

When it is said to them, "What is it that your Lord has revealed?" they say, "TALES OF ANCIENTS!" S. 16:24

"Such things have been promised to us and to our fathers before! they are nothing but TALES OF ANCIENTS!" S. 23:83

And they say: "TALES OF ANCIENTS, which he has caused to be written: and they are dictated before him morning and evening." S. 25:5

"It is true we were promised this,- we and our fathers before (us): these are nothing but TALES OF ANCIENTS." S. 27:68

But (there is one) who says to his parents, "Fie on you! Do ye hold out the promise to me that I shall be raised up, even though generations have passed before me (without rising again)?" And they two seek Allah's aid, (and rebuke the son): "Woe to thee! Have faith! For the promise of Allah is true." But he says, "This is nothing but TALES OF ANCIENTS!" S. 46:17

When to him are rehearsed Our Signs, "TALES OF ANCIENTS", he cries! S. 68:15

When Our Signs are rehearsed to him, he says, "TALES OF ANCIENTS!" S. 83:15

According to the Quran, Solomon had animals under his control and actually would have conversations with them much like the way humans do:

"And there were gathered together unto Solomon his armies of the jinn and humankind, and of the birds, and they were set in battle order; Till, when they reached the Valley of the Ants, an ant exclaimed: O ants! Enter your dwellings lest Solomon and his armies crush you, unperceiving. And (Solomon) smiled, laughing at her speech, and said: My Lord, arouse me to be thankful for Thy favour wherewith Thou hast favoured me and my parents, and to do good that shall be pleasing unto Thee, and include me in (the number of) Thy righteous slaves. And he sought among the birds and said: How is it that I see not the hoopoe, or is he among the absent? I verily will punish him with hard punishment or I verily will slay him, or he verily shall bring me a plain excuse. But he was not long in coming, and he said: I have found out (a thing) that thou apprehendest not, and I come unto thee from Sheba with sure tidings. Lo! I found a woman ruling over them, and she hath been given (abundance) of all things, and hers is a mighty throne. I found her and her people worshipping the sun instead of Allah; and Satan maketh their works fairseeming unto them, and debarreth them from the way (of Truth), so that they go not aright; So that they worship not Allah, Who bringeth forth the hidden in the heavens and the earth, and knoweth what ye hide and what ye proclaim…" S. 27:17-25

Muslim Muhammad Asad must allegorize this passage since he was seemingly aware of the difficulty in viewing this historically:

"In this instance, Solomon evidently refers to his own understanding and admiration of nature (cf. 38:31-33 and the corresponding notes) as well as to his loving compassion for the humblest of God's creatures, as a great divine blessing: and this is the Qur'anic moral of the LEGENDARY story of the ant." (Asad, p. 578, n. 17)

Now compare this fable with the credible historical version of the Holy Bible:

"God gave Solomon wisdom and very great insight, and a breadth of understanding as measureless as the sand on the seashore. Solomon's wisdom was greater than the wisdom of all the men of the East, and greater than all the wisdom of Egypt. He was wiser than any other man, including Ethan the Ezrahite-wiser than Heman, Calcol and Darda, the sons of Mahol. And his fame spread to all the surrounding nations. He spoke three thousand proverbs and his songs numbered a thousand and five. He described plant life, from the cedar of Lebanon to the hyssop that grows out of walls He also taught about animals and birds, reptiles and fish. Men of all nations came to listen to Solomon's wisdom, sent by all the kings of the world, who had heard of his wisdom." 1 Kings 4:29-34

The Quran even claims that both the winds and jinns (demons) were subservient to Solomon:

"And to Solomon (We subjected) the wind strongly raging, running by his command towards the land which We had blessed. And of everything We are the All-Knower. And of the Shayâtin (devils) (from the jinns) were some who dived for him, and did other work besides that; and it was We Who guarded them." S. 21:81-82

"So, We subjected to him the wind, it blew gently to his order whithersoever he willed, And also the Shayâtin (devils) from the jinns (including) every kind of builder and diver, And also others bound in fetters. [Saying of Allâh to Solomon]: ‘This is Our gift, so spend you or withhold, no account will be asked’." S. 38:36-39

Ibn Kathir in his commentary on Solomon 's control over the winds states that Solomon was using the wind to travel by a flying carpet!

Muslim Alhassan Albasri claimed:

Solomon was traveling on his carpet from Damascus to have lunch in "Istcher", then he moved from there to Kabel to spend the night. Between Damascus and Istcher a month traveling for the one that is traveling fast. And between Istcher and Kabel a month traveling for the one who is traveling fast.

Muhammad Asad states:

"In this as well as in several other passages relating to Solomon, the Qur'an alludes to many POETIC LEGENDS which were associated with his name since early antiquity and had become part and parcel of Judeo-Christian and Arabian lore long before the advent of Islam. Although it is undoubtedly possible to interpret such passages in a 'rationalistic' manner, I do not think that this is really necessary. Because they were so deeply ingrained in the imagination of the people to whom the Qur'an addressed itself in the first instance, these legendary accounts of Solomon's wisdom and magic powers had acquired a cultural reality of their own and were, therefore, eminently suited to serve as a medium for the parabolic exposition of certain ethical truths with which this book is concerned: and so, without denying or confirming their MYTHICAL character, the Qur'an uses them as a foil for the idea that God is the ultimate source of all human power and glory, and that all achievements of human ingenuity, even though they may sometimes border on the miraculous, are but an expression of His transcendental creativity." (Asad, p. 498, n. 77)

Another Quranic fable includes S. 18:9-23, 25-26 and the Story of the Sleepers of the Cave. According to this tale, several youths and their dog fled to a cave where according to one version of the story they slept for 309 years.

Once again, here is Asad:

"…We may, therefore, safely assume that the LEGEND of the Men of the Cave- stripped of its Christian garb and the superimposed Christian background- is, substantially, of Jewish origin... But whatever the source of this LEGEND, and irrespective of whether it is of Jewish or Christian origin, the fact remains that it is used in the Qur'an IN A PURELY PARABOLIC SENSE: namely, as an illustration of God's power to bring about death (or 'sleep') and resurrection (or 'awakening'); and, secondly, as an ALLEGORY of the piety that induces men to abandon a wicked or frivolous world in order to keep their faith unsullied, and of God's recognition of that faith by His bestowal of a spiritual awakening which transcends time and death." (Ibid., p. 439, n. 7)

And,

"The future tense in sayaqulun points once again to the LEGENDARY character of the story as such, and implies that all speculation about its details is irrelevant to its parabolic, ethical purport." (Ibid., p. 442, n. 31)

In fact, Asad often points out the fact that many of the Quranic tales are legendary, mythical. Note the following comments:

Asad on S. 2:102

"…At any rate, it is certain that from very ancient times Babylon was reputed to be the home of magic arts, symbolized un the LEGENDARY persons- perhaps kings- Harut and Marut; and it is to this LEGEND that the Qur’an refers with a view to condemning every attempt at magic and sorcery, as well as all preoccupation with occult sciences in general." (Ibid., p.22, n. 83)

Asad on S. 2:259

"…The story told in this verse is obviously a PARABLE meant to illustrate God’s power to bring the dead back to life… The speculation of some of the earlier commentators as to the ‘identity’ of the man and the town mentioned in this story are without any substance, and may have been influenced by TALMUDIC LEGENDS." (Ibid., p. 58, n. 253)

Asad on S. 18:50

"…This short reference to the oft-repeated ALLEGORY of God’s commands to the angels to ‘prostrate themselves before Adam’ is meant, in the above context, to stress man’s inborn faculty of conceptual thinking…" (Ibid., p. 446, n. 52)

And,

"… As regards Satan’s SYMBOLIC ‘rebellion’ against God, see notes 26 on 2:34 and note 31 on 15:41." (Ibid., p. 447, n. 55)

 

When we turn to Asad’s notes to S. 2:34-35 on the story of Adam, Eve and the Garden something interesting emerges:

"… Lit., ‘the garden’. There is a considerable difference of opinion among the commentators as to what is meant here by ‘garden’; a garden in the earthly sense, or the paradise that awaits the righteous in the life to come, or some special garden in the heavenly region? According to some of the earliest commentators (see Manar I, 277), an earthly abode is here alluded to- namely, an environment of perfect ease, happiness and innocence. In any case, this story of Adam is OBVIOUSLY one of the ALLEGORIES referred to in 3:7." (Ibid., p. 9, n. 27)

Again,

"… As in the parallel account of this parable of the Fall in 2:35-36, the dual form of the address changes at this stage into the plural, thus connecting once again with verse 10 and the beginning of verse 11 of this surah, and making it clear that the story of Adam and Eve is, in reality, an ALLEGORY of human destiny… In this deeper sense, the ALLEGORY of the Fall does not describe a retrogressive happening but, rather, a new stage of human development…" (Ibid., p. 205, n. 16)

Asad on S. 18:60

"…In this instance, it evidently marks a connection, with verse 54 above (‘many facets have We given in this Qur’an to every kind of lesson [designed] for [the benefit of] mankind’), and introduces an ALLEGORY meant to illustrate the fact that knowledge, and particularly spiritual knowledge, is inexhaustible… The subsequent PARABLE of Moses and his quest for knowledge (verses 60-82) has become, in the course of time, the nucleus of INNUMERABLE LEGENDS with which we are not concerned here… There is no doubt that this Tradition is a kind of ALLEGORICAL introduction to our Qur’anic PARABLE… As for the ‘junction of the two seas’, which many of the early commentators endeavored to ‘identify’ in geographical terms (ranging from the meeting of the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean at the Bab al-Mandab to that of the Mediterranean Sea and the Atlantic Ocean at the Straits of Gibraltar), Baydawi offers, in his commentary on verse 60, a purely ALLEGORICAL explanation…" (Ibid., pp. 448-449, n. 67)

And,

"…In the Tradition on the authority of Ubayy ibn Ka’b (referred to in note 67) this mysterious sage is spoken of as Al-Khadir or Al-Khidr, meaning ‘the Green One’. Apparently this is an epithet rather than a name, implying (according to popular LEGEND) that his wisdom was ever-fresh (‘green’) and imperishable: a notion which bears out the assumption that we have here an ALLEGORIC FIGURE symbolizing the utmost depth of mystic insight accessible to man." (Ibid., p. 449, n. 73)

Asad is not alone in acknowledging that the Quran contains ancient tales of the Arabs and of the Judeo-Christian communities. Abdullah Yusuf Ali, in his famous translation of the Quran, also acknowledges this fact.

Ali On S. 2:55

"…We have hitherto had instances from Jewish traditional Taurat (or Pentateuch). Now we have some instances from Jewish traditions in the Talmud, or body of exposition in the Jewish theological schools…" (Ali, The Holy Qur’an-Translation and Commentary, p. 30, n. 70)

Ali On S. 2:70

"…The gushing twelve springs from a rock evidently refers to a LOCAL TRADITION well known to Jews and Arabs at Mustafa’s time… The Jewish Tradition would be based on Exod. xvii. 6: ‘Thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it that the people may drink…" (Ibid., p. 32, n. 73)

Ali On the Jews fishing on the Sabbath Day

"…There must have been a Jewish tradition about a whole fishing community in sea side town, which persisted in breaking the Sabbath and were turned into apes…" (Ibid., p. 34, n. 79)

Ali On Abraham being tossed in the Fire

"…traditionally the fire incident is referred to a king called Nimrud… if Nimrud 's capital was in Assyria, near Ninevah (site near modern Mosul), we may suppose either that the king 's rule extended over the whole of Mesopotamia, or that Abraham wandered north through Babylonia to Assyria." (Ibid., p. 837, n. 2725)

"…Can we localize Nimrud? If LOCAL TRADITION can be relied upon, the king must have ruled over the tract which includes the modern Nimrud, on the Tigris, about twenty miles south of Mosul. This is the site of the Assyrian ruins of great interest, but the rise of Assyria as an empire was of course much later than the time of Abraham. The Assyrian city Kalakh (Calah), and archaeological excavations carried out there have yielded valuable results, which are however irrelevant for our commentary." (Ibid., p. 533, n. 1565)

And,

"…In Arab tradition there is the story of Abraham. Nimrud tries to burn him to death, but on account of Abraham's faith the fire became a means of safety for Abraham…" (Ibid., p. 1714, n. 6055)

The late Syed Abu-Ala' Maududi concedes the fact that the Quranic story of the drowning of the Pharaoh at S. 10:90-91 finds parallels in the Talmud:

 

"…Though this is not mentioned in the Bible, it is explicitly recorded in the Talmud in the following words: ‘Who is like Thee, O Lord, among the gods?’" (Towards Understanding the Qur’an-Vol. IV, Surahs 10-16, an english translation of Tafhim al-Qur’an by Zafar Ishaq, assisted by A.R. Kidwai [The Islamic Foundation (printed and bound in Great Britain by the Cromwell Press), rpt. 1999], p. 63, n. 91)

We conclude this section with the words of Faruq Sherif:

Some Legendary Figures

In the course of developing its teachings, the Qur’an frequently cites the example not of prophets and sages of ancient times, but also of some LEGENDARY, MYTHICAL or even FICTITIOUS persons. Chief among these is Khidr, the Evergreen who, though not mentioned by name, is recognised as the mysterious person (the possessor of divinely-inspired knowledge of the secret sources of life) whom Moses met on his ALLEGORICAL journey… Another LEGEND prominently described in the Qur’an is that of the ‘seven sleepers’ or the ‘Companions of the Cave’ also mentioned in another section of this book. In this connection mention is made of the angels Harut and Marut who taught magic at Babylon, but warned the people that the teaching was imparted to them only to try them. In the commentaries of the Qur’an Harut and Marut have been identified with the two fallen angels of Jewish tradition who, having sinned on earth, were hung by their feet over a well for punishment.

A summary is given below of the contents of the Qur’an relating to three LEGENDARY figures: Dhulqarnain, Luqman, Qarun. A section is also included on Pharaoh who, although a historical person, often appears in the Qur’an as an archetype for autocracy. The experiences or characteristics of these MYTHICAL or SEMI-MYTHICAL figures are included to serve a salutary example or a dissuasive lesson to believers." (Sherif, A Guide to the Contents of the Qur’an [Garnet Publishing, 8 South Court South Street, Reading, RG1 4QS UK, 1995], pp. 94-95)

Need we say more?

Questionable and Pornographic Language of the Quran

The Virgin birth of Christ

The Quran describes Jesus’ virginal conception and birth in seemingly graphic and tasteless language:

And (remember) her who guarded her SEXUAL ORGAN (Arabic-farjahaa): We breathed into her from Our Spirit, and We made her and her son a Sign for all people. S. 21:91

And Mary the daughter of ‘Imran, who guarded her SEXUAL ORGAN (Arabic-farjahaa) and We breathed INTO IT of Our spirit; and she testified to the truth of the words of her Lord and of His revelations, and was one of the devout (servants). S. 66:12

Mahmoud M. Ayoub contrasts the birth narratives of the Gospel of Luke with that mentioned in the Quran:

"The language of this verse (author- Luke 1:35) is clearly circumspect. It implies no sexual union or divine generation of any kind. Furthermore, while Luke’s description agrees with both in form and spirit with the Qur’anic idea conception of Christ, the language of the Qur’an IS FAR MORE GRAPHIC AND OPEN TO INTERPRETATION." (Christian-Muslim Encounters, ed. Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad & Wadi Z. Haddad [University Press of Florida, 1995], p. 67)

He goes on to say:

"…Then of Mary He (author-allegedly God) continues: ‘And she who guarded well [lit. fortified] her chastity [lit. GENERATIVE ORGAN], and thus We breathed INTO HER of our spirit, and We made her and her son a sign [or miracle, ‘Aya] for all beings’ (S. 21:90-91)…

"In the second instance the Qur’an speaks of Mary as a righteous woman who lived in strict chastity and obedience to God: ‘And Mary daughter of ‘Imran who guarded well her GENERATIVE ORGAN farjaha, and thus We breathed INTO HER of our spirit’ (S. 66:12). THE BOLD AND GRAPHIC STATEMENT APPEARS TO HAVE SHOCKED TRADITIONISTS AND COMMENTATORS, so that most of them tired to cover it up with different and FARFETCHED signification or glosses over it with out comment…

"Ibn Kathir interprets the phrase ‘guarded well her generative organ’ to mean: ‘safeguarded and protected it. Guarding well ihsan signifies chastity and high birth.’ He comments on the phrase, ‘and thus We breathed into it of our spirit’ thus ‘that is, through the angel Gabriel. This is because God sent him to her, and he took for her the form of a man of good stature (S. 19:17). God commanded him to breathe INTO THE BREAST OF HER CHEMISE. HIS BREATH WENT DOWN AND PENETRATED HERE GENERATIVE ORGAN, AND THUS CAUSED HER TO CONCEIVE JESUS… (Ibid.)

Finally:

"Abu Ja’far al-Tusi, the jurist doctor of the Shi’i community, as well as his well known disciple al-Tabarsi, read the words, ‘We breathed into it’ literally. Al-Tusi says: ‘It has been held that Gabriel BREATHED INTO MARY’S GENERATIVE ORGAN then God created Christ in it’…" (Ibid., p. 68)

Wife Beating

One sad aspect of Muhammad's sunna is that Muslim men are given the privilege of beating their wives if the women show signs of rebellion:

"Men are superior to women on account of the qualities which God hath gifted the one above the other, and on account of the outlay they make from their substance for them. Virtuous women are obedient, careful, during the husband's absence, because God hath of them been careful. But chide those for whose refractoriness ye have cause to fear; remove them into beds apart, and SCOURGE THEM: but if they are obedient to you then seek not occasion against them: verily, God is High, Great!" S. 4:34 Rodwell

The embarrassment of this passage has led Muslim scholars to redefine scourging as a light tap which leaves no mark. An example of such a view is Ibn Kathir:

<And beat them.> if they do not abstain from their disobedience through both advise and desertion. However, the beating should be Dharbun ghayru mubrah, i.e. light, according to the hadith narrated in Sahih Muslim, on the authority of Jabir, who had quoted the Prophet as saying in his farewell pilgrimage: "And fear Allah in women, for they are your aides, and their duties towards you is that your beds should not be shared with someone you dislike. Therefore, if they disobey you, beat them lightly, and your duty towards them is that you should maintain and buy them clothes in a reasonable manner."

Scholars said: Dharbun ghayru mubrahun means: The husband should beat his wife lightly, in way which does not result in breaking one of her limbs or affecting her badly. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, part 6, p. 53 bold italic emphasis ours)

Notice that even in Ibn Kathir's translation of S. 4:34 the command to beat one's wife sticks out clearly. Furthermore, there is absolutely no justification in beating women even if that beating is mild. This is simply inhumane to say the least.

Some Muslims also appeal to Hadiths where it is reported that Muhammad disallowed wife abuse. Yet, unfortunately for these Muslims the preceding statement from Ibn Kathir that at the time of the Farewell Pilgrimage Muhammad gave the command to beat women cancels out such an attempt to deny spousal abuse. In fact, other traditions clearly show Muslims beating their wives with Muhammad's approval:

"…the above verse (i.e., 4:34) was revealed in connection with a woman who complained to Mohammad that her husband slapped her on the face (which was still marked by the slap). At first the Prophet said to her: 'Get even with him,' but then added: 'Wait until I think about it.' Later on the above verse was revealed, after which the Prophet said: 'We wanted one thing but Allah wanted another, and what Allah wanted is best.’" (Ar-Razi, At-tafsir al-Kabir on Q. 4:34)

Ibn Kathir reports:

On the authority of Ali, Ibn Mardawih narrated: "A man from al-Ansar came with a woman to the Prophet, then the woman said: 'O Allah's Messenger! Her husband who was known as so and so from al-Ansar had hit her and that had affected her face.' The Prophet replied: 'He should not have done that.’ Then, the verse, <men are the protectors and maintainers of women. >, as far as discipline is concerned, was revealed. Therefore, the Prophet said: 'You wanted something and Allah wanted something else.'" (Ibid., pp. 50-51 italic emphasis ours)

In Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Number 715 we find another woman who was beaten severely enough that a green bruise was found on her body.

Narrated Ikrima:

Rifa'a divorced his wife whereupon Abdur-Rahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by the beating.) It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, Aisha said, "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing woman. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" When Abdur-Rahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him, but he is impotent, and is useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment. Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient and wants to go back to Rifa'a." Allah's Apostle said to her, "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa'a unless Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you." Then the Prophet saw two boys with Abdur-Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that Abdur-Rahman said, "Yes." The Prophet said, "you claim what you claim (i.e., that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow."

We notice two things from this Hadith. First, Aisha attests that Muslim women were suffering more than any other women. Second, Muhammad never once corrected Abdur-Rahman for beating his wife so hard as to leave a bruise on her body but focuses instead on his wife's allegations and motives.

In Sunan of Abu Dawud, # 2141 we read:

Iyas Dhubab reported the apostle of Allah as saying: "Do not beat Allah's hand maidens," but when Umar came to the apostle of Allah and said: "Women have become emboldened towards their husbands," he (the prophet), gave permission to beat them. Then many women came round the family of the apostle of Allah complaining against their husbands. So the apostle of Allah said, "Many women have gone round Muhammad's family complaining against their husbands. They are not the best among you."

And, in # 2142 Umar reported the prophet as saying:

"A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife." When Ash'ath Ibn al-Qays discovered Umar b. Khattab beating his wife, Umar stated: "Memorise three things from me, which I memorised from the prophet, who said: 'The man is not to be asked why he beat his wife…" (Ibn Kathir on Q. 4:34, taken from a Hadith reported by Abu Dawood, al-Nisa'i and Ibn Magah)

In Sahih al-Bukhari Volume 7, Number 132 Muhammad said:

"None of you should flog his wife as he flogs his slave and then have sexual intercourse with her in the last part of the day."

In other words, it is all right to flog women, only not as hard as slaves, or on the day a person decides to have intercourse with them. This exposes Islam's harsh treatment of both women and slaves.

Another time where a woman was beaten occurred shortly after an incident involving Muhammad's youngest wife, Aisha. According to the traditions, after the Muslims were returning to Medina from the campaign of Banu al-Mustaliq, Aisha fell behind. Safwan Mu'attal ibn al-Salami found her stranded and brought her back to the camp. A rumor began to spread that Safwan and Aisha had committed adultery, causing Muhammad to distrust his young wife.

In order to get to the heart of the matter, Ali ibn Abu Talib decided to question Aisha's female servant in the presence of Muhammad about the latter's wife. Haykal notes,

"The servant was called in and Ali immediately seized her and struck her painfully and repeatedly as he commanded her to tell the truth to the Prophet of God." (Husayn, The Life of Muhammad, p. 336)

According to Mishkat Al-Masabih's translator, in his footnote of Fatwa by Qazi Khan, that beating a wife mildly is:

"allowed in four cases (1) when she does not wear fineries though wanted by the husband, (2) when she is called for sexual intercourse and she refuses without any lawful excuse, (3) when she is ordered to take a bath (to clean herself) from impurities for prayer and she refuses and (4) when she goes abroad without permission of her husband." (Mishkat, Bk.1, section "duties of husband and wife," f. 138)

This is confirmed by Abu Dawud in his notes on #2141 and #2142:

"This shows that wives should obey their husbands," and, "This means that a man tries his best to correct his wife, but if he fails to do so, he is allowed to beat her as a last resort. This tradition never means that a husband should beat his wife without any valid reason."

In fact, the hadiths record Muhammad singling out one Muslim for having the reputation of being a great wife beater!:

Fatima bint Qais (Allah be pleased with her) reported that her husband divorced her with three, pronouncements and Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) made no provision for her lodging and maintenance allowance. She (further said): Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said to me: When your period of 'Idda is over, inform me. So I informed him. (By that time) Mu'awiya, Abu Jahm and Usama b. Zaid had given her the proposal of marriage. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: So far as Mu'awiya is concerned, he is a poor man without any property. So far as Abu Jahm is concerned, he is a great beater of women, but Usama b. Zaid... She pointed with her hand (that she did not approve of the idea of marrying) Usama. But Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon himn) said: Obedience to Allah and obedience to His Messenger is better for thee. She said: So I married him, and I became an object of envy. (Sahih Muslim, Book 009, Number 3526) Fatima bint Qais (Allah be pleased with her) reported: My husband Abu 'Amr b. Hafs b. al-Mughira sent 'Ayyish b. Abu Rabi'a to me with a divorce, and he also sent through him five si's of dates and five si's of barley. I said: Is there no maintenance allowance for me but only this, and I cannot even spend my 'Idda period in your house? He said: No. She said: I dressed myself and came to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him). He said: How many pronouncements of divorce have been made for you? I said: Three. He said what he ('Ayyish b. Abu Rabi'a) had stated was true. There is no maintenance allowance for you. Spend 'Idda period in the house of your cousin, Ibn Umm Maktum. He is blind and you can put off your garment in his presence. And when you have spent your Idda period, you inform me. She said: Mu'awiya and Abu'l-Jahm (Allah be pleased with them) were among those who had given me the proposal of marriage. Thereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: Mu'awiya is destitute and in poor condition and Abu'l-Jahm is very harsh with women (or he beats women, or like that), you should take Usama b. Zaid (as your husband). (Sahih Muslim, Book 009, 3527)

We must ask the Debater the following question. Does Muhammad's allowance of Muslim men to beat rebellious wives show signs of integrity? What women would view Muhammad as honest and trustworthy seeing that he favors domestic abuse?

S. 4:34 also points out the fact that Allah has made man superior to woman. This superiority is not due solely to position as we find in the Holy Bible, but also includes the fact that Allah has given men superior qualities over women. This idea is restated in S. 2:28:

"…Women have such honorable rights as obligations, but their men have a degree above them."

 

Ibn Kathir on 4:34 states:

In this verse Allah says that the man is the leader over the woman and is the one who disciplines her if she does wrong. <Because Allah has made one of them excel the other.>, this is because men are better than women, and man is better than woman. Therefore, prophethood and kingship were confined to men, as the Prophet said: 'A people that choose woman as their leader will not succeed.' This hadith was narrated by Al-Bukhari. Added to that positions such as judiciary, etc…. <And because they spend from their means.> Here, Allah refers to the dowry and expenses, which Allah has prescribed in the Qur'an and Sunnah; and given a man is better than a woman, it is appropriate that he be her protector and maintainer, as Allah says: <But men have a degree over them.> (2:228). (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, part 6, p. 50 bold italic emphasis ours)

 

And Ibn Kathir on 2:228:

 

<But men have a degree over them.>, that is, men have a degree over women as far as virtue, behavior, status, obeying orders, expenditure, fulfilling duties, and grace in both worldly life and the Hereafter… (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, part 2, p. 204)

Unlimited Concubines For Sex

The Quran also allows Muslims the right to have an unlimited amount of slave girls for sex:

If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or that which your right hands possess. That will be more suitable to prevent you from doing injustice. S. 4:3

According to Ibn Kathir, the phrase "that which your right hands posses" refers to the slave girls in the possession of Muslim men:

The Ayah commands, if you fear that you will not be able to do justice between your wives by marrying more than one, then marry only one wife, OR SATISFY YOURSELF WITH ONLY FEMALE CAPTIVES, FOR IT IS NOT OBLIGATORY TO TREAT THEM EQUALLY, rather, it is recommended. So if one does so, that is good, and if not, there is no harm on him… (Tafsir Ibn Kathir-Abridged Volume 2 Surat Al-Baqarah, Verse 253, to Surat An-Nisa, Verse 147, parts 3-5, p. 375)

 

Temporary Marriages-Mut’a

One shameful aspect of Islam is the practice of temporary marriages called mut'a. This practice granted Muhammad's followers the privilege of gratifying their carnal desires with women for a temporary time period at a very cheap price:

And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery. And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what ye do by mutual agreement after the duty (hath been done). Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise. S. 4:24 Pickthall

 

Ibn Kathir comments:

 

"… <And how could you take it back and you have gone in unto each other.> (4:21): the general meaning of which was given as evidence for Mut'a Marriage (Marriage for an intended short time) which was, undoubtedly, PREVALENT at the onset of Islam, but was abrogated thereafter. Ash-Shafi'i and a group of scholars were of the opinion that Mut'a Marriage had once been permitted but was later invalidated on two occasions. Some were more assertive than that, while others have made it lawful only if necessary. The majority of scholars, however, have opposed this view. The correct statement is mentioned in Sahih Al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, on the authority of Ali Ibn Abu Talib: 'The Prophet forbade Mut'a Marriage and the meat of local skylarks (a type of bird) on the Day of Khaibar.'

"It is narrated in Sahih Muslim, on the authority of Ar-Rabi' Ibn Sabrah Ibn Ma'bad Al-Juhani, who had quoted from his father, who had participated in the Conquest of Makkah with the Prophet who said: 'O, People! I have permitted you to do Mut'a Marriage and Allah has forbidden it until the Day of Judgment. Therefore, whosoever is married to a woman through this type of marriage, should release them and should not take anything back from Mahr you have given them.' According to Muslim, it was said during Hujjatal Wadaa' (Farewell Pilgrimage). This Hadith has other meanings in the Book of Al-Ahkaam." (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, abridged by Sheikh Muhammad Nasib Ar-Rafa'i [Al-Firdous Ltd., London; First edition 2000], part 5, pp. 29-30 italic emphasis ours)

 

The Hadith supplies several examples of such marriages:

Abdullah (b. Mas'ud) reported: We were on an expedition with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and we had no women with us. We said: Should we not have ourselves castrated? He (the Holy Prophet) forbade us to do so He then granted us permission that we should contract temporary marriage for a stipulated period giving her a garment, and 'Abdullah then recited this verse: 'Those who believe do not make unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, and do not transgress. Allah does not like trangressers" (al-Qur'an, v. 87). (Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3243)

 

Jabir b. 'Abdullah and Salama b. al-Akwa' said: There came to us the proclaimer of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and said: Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) has granted you permission to benefit yourselves, i. e. to contract temporary marriage with women. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3246)

Abu Nadra reported: While I was in the company of Jabir b. Abdullah, a person came to him and said that Ibn 'Abbas and Ibn Zubair differed on the two types of Mut'as (Tamattu' of Hajj 1846 and Tamattu' with women), whereupon Jabir said: We used to do these two during the lifetime of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him). Umar then forbade us to do them, and so we did not revert to them. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3250)

 

Finally:

Rabi' b. Sabra reported that his father went on an expedition with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) during the Victory of Mecca, and we stayed there for fifteen days (i. e. for thirteen full days and a day and a night), and Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) permitted us to contract temporary marriage with women. So I and another person of my tribe went out, and I was more handsome than he, whereas he was almost ugly. Each one of us had a cloak, My cloak was worn out, whereas the cloak of my cousin was quite new. As we reached the lower or the upper side of Mecca, we came across a young woman like a young smart long-necked she-camel. We said: Is it possible that one of us may contract temporary marriage with you? She said: What will you give me as a dower? Each one of us spread his cloak. She began to cast a glance on both the persons. My companion also looked at her when she was casting a glance at her side and he said: This cloak of his is worn out, whereas my cloak is quite new. She, however, said twice or thrice: There is no harm in (accepting) this cloak (the old one). So I contracted temporary marriage with her, and I did not come out (of this) until Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) declared it forbidden. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3253)

What kind of prophet would sanction such immorality? Is not this type of temporary marriage a form of legal prostitution since the intent in the marriage is sexual gratification as opposed to marital union and family upbringing? And how does this maintain the integrity of the women who are simply provided material gifts for the degrading of their bodies in satisfying the sexual lust of men acting as untamed animals?

Sex In Paradise

The Holy Bible states that there will be no sexual activity in heaven:

 

Jesus replied, "The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection." Luke 20:34-36

Our joy in heaven is to be in God’s holy and perfect presence:

 

Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away." He who was seated on the throne said, "I am making everything new!" Then he said, "Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true." He said to me: "It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life. He who overcomes will inherit all this, and I will be his God and he will be my son. But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars--their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death." Revelation 21:1-8

Yet the Quran teaches that men will be granted access to a paradise that is purely carnal:

As to the righteous, they will be in gardens and in happiness... (to them will be said,) "Eat and drink ye with profit and health, because of your (good) deeds." They will recline (with ease) on thrones (of dignity) arranged in ranks; and We shall join them (in the original: marry them) to companions with beautiful, big and lustrous eyes… And We shall bestow on them, of fruit and meat, anything they desire. S. 52:17, 19, 20, 22 (see also 4:57; 76:12-22; 55:54-56; 47:15)

Even more astonishing is this description:

"Surely for the godfearing awaits a place of security, gardens and vineyards, and maidens of SWELLING BREASTS (kawa'eb), like of age, and a cup overflowing." S. 78:33 Arberry (see also Dawood, Rodwell)

 

Ibn Kathir, one of Islam's premiere commentators, notes:

 

"Kawa'eb" – "SWELLING AND FIRM, NOT SAGGING." (Quoted from M. Rafiqul-Haqq and P. Newton, Place of Women in Pure in Islam, p. 30 – you can read it online.

 

To imagine that God