Thoughts and Truth from the Impossible Life

Today’s Quran in the light of its early manuscripts

The end of the Quran as Muslims know it

Today’s Quran in the light of its early manuscripts

By Oskar

“The Quran is a record of the exact words revealed by God through the Angel Gabriel to the Prophet Muhammad. It was memorized by Muhammad and then dictated to his Companions, and written down by scribes, who cross-checked it during his lifetime. Not one word of its 114 chapters, Suras, has been changed over the centuries, so that the Quran is in every detail the unique and miraculous textwhich was revealed to Muhammad fourteen centuries ago.” (www.islamicity.com, search for ‘What is the Qur`an?’; accessed 19 May 2011)

The fundamental Islamic belief that no word of the Quran has changed is put in question by a rather unique ancient manuscript, a palimpsest, known as ‘DAM 0 1-27.1.’1 It was discovered by Muslims in 1972 at the ancient Great Mosque of Sana’a in Yemen. According to the latest academic studies, aided by the use of ultraviolet photography, the palimpsest contains many differences when compared with today’s Arabic Quran. They range from different and missing words and dissimilar spelling, to a changed order of Surahs and words within verses. The find is part of a bundle of parchments thought to be the oldest surviving copies of the Quran.

A palimpsest is a manuscript from which a text has been scraped or washed to make room for another one in order to re-use the expensive parchment. Such a process would normally only be done after several centuries. However, in the case of ‘DAM 0 1-27.1’ it took place within the first century of the ‘Hijrah’ (7th and early 8th century AD), shortly after the Uthmanic recension. This is confirmed by the fact that the primary writings that reappeared and the secondary ones that followed, including the corrections of both, were found to be made in the ‘Hijazi’ style of the first Islamic century. The characteristic, irregular lines of that particular style exist in all the four above mentioned developmental stages of the text.

1. The Evidence

The palimpsest known as, ‘DAM 0 1-27.1’ contains at least 38 Quran leaves. They were each written on parchment with an approximate size of 36.5 x 28.5 cm. Since on the majority of the leaves a primary text is visible and both texts contain parts of over 70 % of today’s Quran, the palimpsest must be a remnant of two, previously complete, yet different Qurans. ‘Folio 16r’2below contains Surah 9:70-80 in the less visible primary writing and Surah 30:26-40 in the better visible secondary writing. The numbers on the right side of the image written in cursive type refer to the lines of the earlier, primary text. The normal ones identify the lines in the later, secondary text.

In the following examples changed words from the primary writing are compared with the Standard text (StT). These changes represent only a very small part of a much bigger, in-depth analysis conducted by Dr E. Puin.3

2. Examples

A. Several words are missing within a paragraph leading to a different meaning:4

Sahih International translation: ‘… (if) they turn away, Allah will punish them with a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter. And there will not be for them on earth (any protector or helper.)

Sana’a manuscript, ‘DAM 0 1-27.1’, translation: ‘… (if) they turn away, Allah will punish them in this world. And there will not be for them on earth (any protector or helper.)

The finishing letter, ‘Alif’, in, ‘yatawallaw’‘they turn away’, found in today’s standard text of the Quran is missing in the early manuscript under discussion, as indicated by the empty box with a black frame above. Moreover, in the the verb, ‘yu’addibhum’, ‘he (Allah) will punish them’, found on, ‘Fol. 16r, Z.13’, is not explained with, ‘adaban aliman’‘with a painful punishment’, as in the Standard Text (StT). There one finds, ‘fi‘l-dunya wa-‘l-ahirati’, ‘in this world and in the Hereafter.’ The Sana’a manuscript contains only, ‘in this world’ and therefore fits better with the end of the verse in both versions: ‘And there will not be for them on earth any protector or helper.’

B. Words are different from today’s Quran:5

The word, ‘gahannnamu,’ ‘hell’, found in the Standard Text has been replaced with the synonym, ‘l-naru’, ‘the fire’, found in the box with the interrupted frame. It is almost identical with a parallel text found in today’s Surah 24:57:

The word, ‘yaqsimuna’ in the old manuscript has been changed by the different, yet synonymous, ‘yahlifuna’, ‘they swear,’ in today’s Quran. The words that follow, crossed with horizontal lines, have been reconstructed with certainty. Behind the ‘Kaf’ of, ‘kalimat’, ‘(the) word’, a part of the manuscript is missing. The grey, shaded area indicates uncertainty about the original word. The room left on the parchment allows only for, ‘(ka)limata ‘l kufri’, ‘(the) word (of) the disbelief’, and not the remaining 38 words of the verse found in the Standard Text. The first four of these missing words on the manuscript are again indicated by the white box with the black frame.

Whereas the secondary text of the examined palimpsest comes close to the content of today’s Quran, it is still not 100% identical. None of the numerous changes under discussion are mentioned in the Qirâ’ât literature that is concerned mostly with methods of pronunciation used in the recitations of the Qur’an. The changes are also different from those found in the collections of the Quran by Ibn Mas’ud, known primarily for the absence of Surah 1, 113 and 114, and Ubay bin Ka’b who listed two additional Surahs.6

3. Questions of Muslims answered

A. Why should we listen to Western Orientalist scholars who are known to be against Islam?

Sadly there are not many other scholars who dare to approach the sensitive subject of early Quranic manuscripts in an objective manner. A notable exception was Dr Nasr Abu Zaid, formerly a lecturer in Koranic Studies at Cairo University.7 He argued that the Quran is a literary text which needs to be examined through a literary approach. The highest court in Egypt ruled in 1995 that he was an apostate and therefore his marriage was annulled.

Salim Abdullah, director of the German Islamic Archives, affiliated to the powerful pan-Islamic Muslim World League, is open to critical research too, saying: “I am longing for this kind of discussion on this topic.”8

Since, for the above mentioned reasons, currently no other scholars have done as detailed a research as Dr E. Puin, Saarbrücken, Germany, on the palimpsest, ‘DAM 0 1-27.1’, there was no other option available then the one chosen. However, other eminent scholars have examined different manuscripts and reached the same conclusion that the Quran has a history of textual development.9

B. Was it just a bad copy used by those whom the Uthmanic text had not yet reached?

There are several problems with such an assumption:

1.     The palimpsest ‘DAM 0 1-27.1’ has been proven to actually contain four different Qurans: A complete primary and secondary text, and both showing later corrections. Therefore we are not just dealing with one but four ‘bad copies’ within the first Islamic century. If the Uthmanic text had not yet reached the mosque, upon what basis were the corrections of the two different texts made?

2.     The Great Mosque of Sana’a where the manuscripts were found was built in the 6th year of the Hijrah by one of Muhammad’s companions.10 It was a centre of Islamic learning and as such must have been supplied with Uthman’s text immediately and urgently, since the Qurans found in any mosques have naturally been in use among the Muslims.

3.     Since even the secondary text with the corrections does not resemble the Uthmanic text 100%, the question arises as to why it was not corrected when the ‘Authorized Version’ arrived? To keep a different Quran in an Islamic centre of learning is a recipe for passing on false teachings.

4. Where do we go from here?

It has become clear that the Quran is not a record of the exact words revealed by God. Instead, the palimpsest, known as ‘DAM 0 1-27.1,’ demonstrates clearly that the holy book of Muslims has gone through stages of historical developments. There are at least three ways people can respond to these facts:

A. Anger

There is a right kind of anger, when people are treated unjustly, or God’s will is misrepresented and neglected. While the world could definitely do with more of that kind of righteous anger expressed in productive ways, uncontrolled rage fueled by self-interest is sadly much more common. It is fully understandable that people resent a change of thought about what in many ways lies at the very heart of their faith and society. However, if painstaking examination of evidence has proven certain dearly held beliefs to be false, then it would be foolishness to stubbornly hold on to them, just because one has always done so. Change never comes easy but it is better to bring a painful end to lies than to keep on living in the pain of deception without end.

B. Ignorance

Some people decide to turn a blind eye on the facts discussed so far. They try to live in denial and carry on as usual. After all it has been rather comfortable so far, so they think. Such individuals and communities act a bit like someone who has lived in a small room for a long time. They will be happy with it until they realize that other people live in a spacious house. The truth that the Quran has been changed, not just in transmission but in the actual text as well, has far reaching, potentially life-changing implications.

C. Jesus

Lastly, the third way people can respond to the findings of this academic research is Jesus. He says about himself literally, “I am the way and the truth and the life.”11 He is the answer to the prayer Muslims are to perform five times every day, saying: ‘Show us the straight way, the way of those on whom you have bestowed your Grace…’ Jesus did not say, ‘I am showing you the way into Christianity.’ He simply says, ‘I am the way.’ Eternal life in paradise comes from following him alone. It happens by grace, by an undeserved favour. Jesus wants us to turn around from our old ways and put our faith in him and what he has done for us on the cross. He does not ask people to abandon the good aspects of their culture or to embrace the sinful parts of a Western lifestyle. God will give us the power to be like Jesus in whatever situation we find ourselves in.

Jesus is not only the way but he is also the living word of God. The Quran calls him uniquely, ‘Kalimatullah’ – ‘The Word of God’ (Surah 4:171; cf. Revelation 19:13 & John 1); it is identical with God. The Bible is about Jesus. Many articles have been written to show that it is still trustworthy.12 However, the standard and definition by which the Holy Scriptures of the people of the Book has been revealed and preserved is different from the one given hundreds of years later by Muslims. Whoever examines the Bible on its own terms, praying earnestly and with an open heart for guidance will be blessed. I invite you to do so through a simple e-mail correspondence course. Please contact me to get the first of six lessons.


Footnotes

1 Codex Ṣanʿāʾ DAM 01-27.1 – A Qur’ānic Manuscript From Mid-1st Century Of Hijra, accessed 14th June 2011

2 Elisabeth Puin, “Ein früher Koranpalimpsest aus San’ā’ (DAM 01 -27.1). Teil III: Ein nicht-‘utmānischer Koran” in: Markus Groß / Karl-Heinz Ohlig (Hg.), Die Entstehung einer Weltreligion I. Von der koranischen Bewegung zum Frühislam, INARAH Schriften zur frühen Islamgeschichte und zum Koran, Band 5, Berlin/Tübingen 2010, pages 302-303 (here produced as one picture with permission from Dr E. Puin).

3 Ibid., pages 233-305

4 Ibid., p. 291, Picture copied and text summarized and translated into English with permission of Dr E. Puin.

5 Ibid., pp. 289-290

6 ‘Itqan I’ by Suyuti, p.62, 65, Bukhari, 6, No.521, Fihrist, I, pages 53-57, ‘Masahif’ by Ibn Abi Dawud, pp.180-181

7 Nasr Hamed Abu Zaid: The end of a controversial scholarly legacy, accessed 14th June 2011

8 Querying the KoranThe Guardian, accessed 15th June 2011

9 See for example: ‘HOLY BOOKS have a HISTORY, Textual Histories of the New Testament & the Quran’ by Dr. Keith Small, Avant Ministries, USA, 2010, 1st edition, 126 pages, $ 5, ISBN: 978-1-4507-4077-7, available through www.avantteam.com, or, from the same author, ‘Textual Criticism and Qur’an Manuscripts’, Lexington Books, ISBN-10: 0739142895, available through Amazon.

10 Maktabat al-Jami` al-Kabir (Maktabat al-Awqaf), The Great Mosque, San`a’-Yemen

11 John 14:6

12 What the Qur’an says about the Bible and About the Bible

August 2, 2012 Posted by | Understanding Islam | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Multiple ARABIC Quran Versions

Quran, Mus'haf_Al_Tajweed.

Image via Wikipedia

Evidence of Multiple Arabic Qur’an Versions

Muslim source materials report that at least four different versions of the Aur’an existed before the political order was given to require the books to be burned. (Refer to “al-Tamihid 2, 247). (3)
To begin, at least two versions were written by people close to Based on Muslims sources the differences were great enough to reports differences so serious as to cause one Muslim group to call another group heretics:
During the reign of Uthman, teachers were teaching this or that reading to their students. When the students met and disagreed about the reading, they reported the differences to their teachings. They would defend their readings, condemning the others as heretical. (Abu Bakr Abdullah b. abi Da’ud K. al Masahif)
So a political decision was made to have only one Qur’an. This did not go over well with the original people who created their unique version of the Qur’an. Who were these “chosen’ people ?
Muslim source materials reveal some of these select people who are known to have created their unique version of the Qur’an (Sahih Bakhari, Volume 5, Book 58 Number 150). (4)
I heard the Prophe saying “Learn the recitation of Qur’an from four persons; (a) Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud (b) Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hudhaifa (killed in 633 battle), (c) Ubayy B. Ka’ab and (d) Muadh bin Jabal.”

So a few select people close to Muhammad (as well as other people) thought they knew the Qur’an and collected their personal version. These versions f the Qur’an became widely distributed and used. This is why Muslim soldiers were arguing and calling one another heretics. After the “official” Quran was released and the order was given to burn all other versions, some very bad feeling came out. Let’s begin with mas’ud, who was asked to burn his personal version of the Qur’an.

Muhammad Said, “Learn The Qur’an from Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud
“How can you order me to recite the reading of Zaid, when I recited from the very mouth of the prophet some seventy Surahs ?” “Am I,” asks Abdullah, “to abandon what I acquired form the very lips of the Prophet ?” (Abu Bakr Abudullah b. abi Da’ud “K. al Masahif). (5)
Below is one of the most important questions that Muslims need to answer.

WOULD MAS’UD ACCEPT THE QUR’AN OF TODAY AS BEING PURE
SINCE HE REFUSED TO DESTROY HIS UNIQUE QUR’AN VERSION ?

Since Mas’ud refused to burn his unique version of the Qur’an, it is doubtful that Mas’ud would honestly answer that the Qur’an of toaday is pure. It is important to ask, “Why did Masu’d refuse to give in and destroy his unique version of the Qur’an ?

Mas’ud was a close companion and personal servant of Muhammad. The prophet Muhammad taught the Qur’an to Masu’d in person. Due to his close relationship with the prophet, Mas’ud would have had confidence that he was qualified to create his unique version of the Qur’an.

Mas’ud, moved to Kufa, Iraq where he completed his unique version of the Qur’an (called the Kufan Codex). The unique Qur’an created by Mas’ud was completed years after the most important original manuscript (634 CE) that Hafsah kept until she died in 667 CE. In addition, the Qur’an version creatd by Mas’ud did not have chapters 1, 113 and 114 that are in the ‘official” Quran of today. Is the Qur’an truly pure as believed by Muslims today ?(6)

MUHAMMAD SAID, “LEARN THE QUR’AN FROM UBAYY B. KAAB

Another unique Qur’an was created by Ubayy B. Ka’ab, which became accepted by Muslims living in Syria. Ubayy was a close companion of Muhammad and served as a secretary to Muhammad. Ubayy could recite much of the Qur’an, which he had learned from the prophet Muhammad. Scholars have found that Ubayy’s version different from the “official” Qur’an with two additional chapoters (entitled in Arabic; Surat al-khal and surat al-afd). Since Ubayy was taught the Qur’an by the prophet Muhammad, why doesn’t the “official” Qur’an contain the two additional chapters ?

Ubayy died during the reign of Umar, which was before the “official” Qur’an was created by Uthman. Therefore, Ubayy did no have to witness that his version of the Qur’an was burned by fire. Since Ubayy created a unique versin fo the Qur’an and had learned from the mouth of the prophet Muhammad, would be have agreed with Mas’ud by refusing to give in and destroy his unique version of the Qur’an ?

Due to Uthman’s decision to create an “official” version of the Qur’an, Ubayy’s version of the Qur’an was di\estroyd. It is important to ask, “Is the Qur’an pure ?”

MUHAMMAD SAID, “LEARN THE QUR’AN FROM MUADH BIN JABAL

Muadh bin Jabal was the fourth person chosen by Muhammad to learn how to recite the Qur’an. Appendix E discusses what Muadh bin Jabal reported about Muhammad foretelling the future.

Now consider the original Qur’an called the Hafsah Codex. It was destroyed by Muslims leaders immediately after Hafsah died. It is most important to ask, “Wy did Hafsah not wish to have this most important original manuscript of the Qur’an to be burnt?”

We know that the “official” Qur’an version of today comes from Zaid ibn Thabit, who was the youngest writing member. Zaid, being younger, outlived others who had spent more time with Muhammad. However, in the end it was Zaid’s version of the Qur’an that was selected by Uthman for the “official” Qur’an.

Muslims who had been close to Muhammad become righteously angry when Uthman insisted that only one version of the Qur’an be used. Islamic sources show that the purity of the Qur’an from the days of Muhammad was compromised. If no variants existed, then no book burning party would have been required.

Standard Muslim Response
Muslims believe that seven versions of the Qur’an exist but that only Uthman’s Qur’an is correct. So Muslims disregard the “official” book burning party cited in Muslim source materials. However, this acceptance shows that Muslims are living on “Blind faith” in the “Official” Qur’an.

The Einstein Method approach to finding words from outside time-space supports the conclusion that Muslims are living on “blind faith” alone. If Muhammad could consistently foretell the future, then the Qur’an could be regard as coming from God. However, this has not been demonstrated. The politically motivated book burning party of early Muslim leaders supports that the Qur’an is from a false Gabriel.

******************************************************************************************************************

 

The 5 versions of the Arabic Qu’ran

Translations are bound to have very small,sometimes negligible differences that don’t alter the main message of the texts.
We have had several muslim apologists boast of the one Al Koran in arabic,un touched and unchanged,just like allah delivered it unto his prophet Muhammad.
Some have gone as far as making claims that the Bible is corrupted since it has various translations even though the various English translations have no contrasting messages.

Now we know the English translations of the Koran differ in style of writing so the Muslims tell us the Koran is basically useless in any other language but arabic and claim there is only one Arabic Koran.

What do you say if I tell you that claim is false
There are different Korans and I have proof.

The five current versions of the Koran are:The Transmitter Hafs, who is Hafs ibn Suleyman ibn Al-Mugheerah Al-Asadi Al-Kuufi (d. 180H):
His Qiraa’ah named Hafs from ‘Aasim is the most popular reading of the Quran in the world today, except for some parts of Africa. Hafs was officially adopted by Egypt in 1924. His chain from ‘Aasim:

He heard from ‘Aasim ibn Abu Najud Al-Kuufi (d. 128H) who was Taabi’i, i.e, among the generation following the Sahaabah, who heard from Abu Abdur-Rahman Abdullah ibn Habib As-Sulami, who heard from Uthman ibn Affan and Ali ibn Abi Talib and Zayd ibn Thaabit and Ubayy ibn Ka’b, who heard from the Prophet (PBUH).

The Transmitter Duuri, is Abu ‘Amr Hafs ibn Umar ibn Abdul-Aziz ibn Subhan Ad-Duuri Al-Baghdaadi (d. 246H):
His Qiraa’ah named Duuri from Abu ‘Amr is popular in parts of Africa like Somalia, Sudan as well as in other parts. His chain of from Abu ‘Amr:

He heard from Abu Muhammad Yahya ibn Mubarak ibn Mugheerah Yazidiyy (d. 202H), who heard from Abu ‘Amr Zuban ibn ‘Ala Maziniyy Al-Busriyy (d. 154H), who heard from the Qiraa’aat from Sahaabis Ali and Uthman and Abu Musa and Umar and Ubayy ibn Ka’b and Zayd ibn Thaabit, who heard from the Prophet (PBUH).

The Transmitter Warsh, who is Abu Saeed Uthman ibn Saeed Al-Misri, nicknamed Warsh, (d. 197H):
HIs Qiraa’ah named Warsh from Naafi’ is popular in North Africa. His chain from Naafi’:

He heard from Naafi’ ibn Abdur-Rahman ibn Abu Nu’aim Al-Madani (d. 169H), who heard from Abu Ja’far Yazid ibn Al-Qa’qaa’ and Abu Dawud Abdur-Rahman ibn Hurmuz Al-A’raj and Shaybah ibn Nisah Al-Qaadhi and Abu Abdullah Muslim ibn Jundub Al-Hudhali and Abu Rawh Yazid ibn Ruman, who heard from Abu Hurairah and Ibn Abbaas and Abdullah ibn ‘Ayyaash ibn Abi Rabii’ah, who heard from Ubayy ibn Ka’b, who heard from the Prophet (PBUH).

The Transmitter Suusi:
His Qiraa’ah named Suusi from Abu ‘Amr is also found around the world in small parts.

The Transmitter Qaaluun, who is Imaam Qaaluun:
His Qiraa’ah named Qaaluun from Naafi’ is popular in places like Libya in Africa. His chain from Naafi’:

He heard from Naafi’ ibn Abdur-Rahman ibn Abu Nu’aim Al-Madani (d. 169H), who heard from Abu Ja’far Yazid ibn Al-Qa’qaa’, who heard from Abdullah ibn Abbaas and Abu Hurairah, who heard from Ubayy ibn Ka’b and Zayd ibn Thaabit, who heard from the Prophet (PBUH).

In case Muslim readers should be greatly concerned: The variances between these different versions of the Koran are generally quite small and minor, although there are a substantial number of them. Muhammad Fahd Khaaruun has published a version of the (Hafs) Koran which contains the variant readings from the 10 Accepted Readers in its margins. About 2/3 of the ayat (verses) have some sort of variant reading. The great majority are differences in the vowels inserted in certain words (remembering that the early written kufic texts of the Koran did not include vowels or diacritical marks). There appears to be only one difference that might represent a significant effect on belief, that in surah 2:184. There are many Islamic scholars’ discussions about these many differences. As an example of one, in Hafs, surah 2:140 reads taquluna, while in Warsh, that text is in surah 2:139 and reads yaquluna. Another example: Hafs surah 2:214 reads yaquula while Warsh surah 2;212 reads yaquulu. Muslim scholars agree that such variations do not seriously alter the meaning of statements made in the Koran.

August 2, 2012 Posted by | Israeli-Palestinian Issues, Politics/Government/Freedom, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 17 Comments

Proof the the Quran contains errors and that Mohammad was wrong – Facebook Discussion

العربية: القرآن في متحف التاريخ الطبيعي في نيو...

Master OfUniverse

It is the theory that the qu’ran exists because allah had to send a new messenger when he was unable to protect his word from corruption. Thus, my question is to address the errors in the qu’ran since the intent is to explain need for the qu’ran to exist. If musims are right that the Holy Bible is corrupted (a point in full dispute), then mohammad was wrong when he stated the Holy Bible was correct is the Holy Word of God and it HAS NOT changed since his death. And if mohammad was wrong about God’s Holy Word, then he can’t be a prophet. Thus, we are addressing the real issue (rather than trying to disprove the Holy Bible which means to disprove mohammad).

https://paulmarcelrene.wordpress.com/2010/12/11/contradictions-in-the-quran/

paulmarcelrene.wordpress.com

There are three basic categories of contradictions in the Qur’an: 1. Internal contradictions: Verses contradicting each other or the laws of logic 2. External errors: Verses contradicting the f…

Like ·  · Unfollow Post · Share · 25 minutes ago
    • توصف محمد

      ‎__r OfUniverse addressing issue one by one.1)//# Who suffers loss if Muhammad was wrong? Sura 34:50 commands Muhammad to say, “If I go astray, I go astray only to my own loss,” which is a severe factual error in the Qur’an as well as c…See More

      18 minutes ago · Like ·  1
    • توصف محمد i am answering you violating the code i usually follow…that is, no argument from links!
      better make your argument and quote the source link if you may : )

      14 minutes ago · Like
    • Master OfUniverse But mohammad was WRONG. When he is in error and others follow that error, THEN they suffer the consequences of that error.

      9 minutes ago · Like
    • Master OfUniverse Anyone who follows the error IS accountable for his own error is he not?

      9 minutes ago · Like
    • Master OfUniverse Unless you can show in the Holy Bible or the qu’ran that says you ARE NOT responsible for your own errors/sins/mistakes?

      8 minutes ago · Like
    • توصف محمد ‎__ OfUniverse
      ||”If I am astray, I only stray to the loss of my own soul: but if I receive guidance, it is because of the inspiration of my Lord to me: it is He Who hears all things, and is (ever) near.””IF” means a possibility and FACTUALLY did not happen !||”If I am astray, ||
      Precondition failed means following assertions fail to happen.

      3 minutes ago · Like
    • Master OfUniverse SO then lets discuss the Satanic Verses when mohammad DID go into error.

      2 minutes ago · Like
    • Master OfUniverse And thus led others astray at THEIR peril not just his.

      about a minute ago · Like
    • توصف محمد ‎___OfUniverse why !when you cannot prove a contradiction as you claimed !

      about a minute ago · Like
    • Master OfUniverse I JUST did. You my dear friend have quite a problem. Because WE ALL know he went into error and said so himself and thus he was wrong in his Sura 34:50 as well. Now we have TWO admitted errors.

      a few seconds ago · Like
    • Master OfUniverse Of course, there are many others we can move onto.

August 2, 2012 Posted by | Christianity / God, Politics/Government/Freedom, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Islamic Conduct of War

Page 64

 

The Qur’anic Concept of War

 

This illustrates the boundless hypocrisy and deception of Islam.

 

Note the text in the red box.

 

Destruction of the enemy is the primary objective.

 

Now take a good close look at Al-Anfal 67.


April 29, 2012 Posted by | Politics/Government/Freedom, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Holy Bible not changed says Islam

Some Muslims claim, on no factual grounds, that the original text of the Bible was changed, corrupted or lost. But the Qur’an prohibits Muslims from making such false assertions. Note the Qur’an’s testimony to the Bible:

1. The Quran declares the Bible to be the true revelation from God and demands that Muslims would exercise full faith in the Bible:
Surat 2:40-42,126,136,285; 3:3,71,93; 4:47,136; 5:47-51,
69,71-72; 6:91; 10:37,94; 21:7; 29:45,46; 35:31; 46:11

2. The Quran declares the Bible is the Word of God, and claims that NO ONE can change the Word of God: Surat 6:34; 10:34

Watch this video on The Testimony of the Qur’an to the Bible:
https://www.onlinefilefolder.com/4sLxZqkxSIOkKH

 

Bible

April 23, 2012 Posted by | Christianity / God, Understanding Islam | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

Why did Muhammads close companions write unique versions of the Quran

Why did Muhammad’s close companions write unique versions of the Qur’an?
Why were these unique versions of the Qur’an later destroyed by fire?

When Muhammad died in 632 CE, the Qur’an had not been recorded and collected into a book. Instead, Muslims memorized large portions of the Qur’an. This was especially true of people who knew Muhammad in person. The Qur’an means to recite. It is possible that some of the verses had been recorded on bones, rocks, or hides before Muhammad died. Regardless, it didn’t take long for the early Muslims to decide that they needed to have the Qur’an collected into a book.

The original Qur’an was completed by 634 CE. It is important to understand that a political process is what produced the Qur’an. In 633 CE, a military battle caused 700 Muslims to be killed. A close friend of Muhammad (named Salim) that could recite a large portion of the Qur’an was killed. What would happen if all the close followers of Muhammad were killed? Early Muslims wanted to maintain the purity of the Qur’an as Muhammad had spoken it.

So the original Qur’an of 634 CE was created during the political reign of Abu Bakr. This original Qur’an came to be known as the Hafsah codex (about 10 years later when Hafsah began to maintain it). However, this most important original manuscript of the Qur’an was destroyed by Muslim leaders in 667 CE. (Hafsah was one of Muhammad’s wives. She maintained the original Qur’an until her death in 667 CE. Muslim leaders wanted to destroy the original Qur’an before Hafsah died. But she refused to hand over the codex for burning. She was successful until her death [Refer to Al-Masahif 24] It is most important to ask, “Why did Hafsah not wish to have this most important original manuscript of the Qur’an to be burnt?”).

Based on Muslim sources alone, it appears that the Hafsah codex was one of the last Qur’ans to be willingly destroyed by Muslims. Since the original Qur’an was not accepted, what happened to cause such a drastic change that required the original Qur’an to be destroyed? Why wasn’t the Hafsah codex maintained since it was created (in 634 CE) within two years after Muhammad died (in 632 CE)?

To begin, an excellent procedure was in place during the collection of the original Qur’an. Abu Bakr ordered that the Qur’an could only include words that were vouched for by the testimony of two men. The earliest version of the Qur’an would have been most fresh in the minds of Muhammad’s followers in 634 CE. Is it any wonder why Hafsah refused to release the original manuscript?

The history of how the Qur’an came to be recorded comes from reliable Muslim source materials. These are called the Hadith. Problems for the Qur’an began to occur during the reign of the 3rd political leader of Islam, whose name is Uthman (644 TO 656 CE). It appears that as the Islamic faith spread with military conquest across a large area, the soldiers were reading different versions of the Qur’an. These men wondered, “Is the Qur’an truly as pure as those close to Muhammad believed and taught?”

The 2nd most trusted Hadith is called Sahih Bukhari. In Volume 6, Book 61, Number 510, the story about Muslim soldiers arguing about different versions of the Qur’an reads as follows: [Search on the referenced site to find the number “510” if you want to verify the written literature].

“Hudhaifa was afraid of the different recitations of the Qur’an, so he asked ‘Uthman, “O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Qur’an as Jews and the Christians did before.”

In response to the request, the Caliph Uthman sent a message to Hafsah since she had the most important original manuscript sheets collected about 634 CE. We find written:

“Send us the manuscripts of the Qur’an so that we may compile the Qur’anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you.” Hafsah sent copies to Uthman.

Caliph Uthman had men who knew the Qur’an to assemble it again. We find written:

Uthman then ordered four men to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. After this had been done, the Hafsah codex was returned to her. “Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsah.”

Having obtained this new version, Uthman ordered all other Qur’ans to be destroyed by fire. We find written:

Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur’anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt.

This means that drastic changes occurred. After all, “Why were the other copies and fragments ordered to be burnt?” The answer is found in the original statement: “Hudhaifa was afraid of the different recitations of the Qur’an”

Hudhaifa did not want different versions of the Qur’an. To Hudhaifa, unity of the Qur’an meant unity of all Muslims. If Muslims troops were not united, Islam would crumble.

Since all other copies of the Qur’an were ordered to be burned, what was wrong with them? Is the Qur’an pure as believed by modern day Muslims? Since the decision to burn all other Qur’ans was politically motivated, the Qur’an of today reflects the political whims of early Muslim political leaders, not the prophet Muhammad. Questions like this will never be answered. But it is certain that the Qur’an of today is not the original Qur’an recorded only 2 years after Muhammad died. It is certain that the Hafsah codex would have been the most accurate and original Qur’an of all time. But Muslim political leaders made sure that it was destroyed. So what actually happened in the early years of Islam?

Evidence of Multiple Qur’anic Versions

Muslim source materials report that at least four different versions of the Qur’an existed before the political order was given to have them burned. (Refer to “Al-Tamhid 2, 247).

The four versions were written by people who knew Muhammad in person. Each person created their unique version of the Qur’an. Based on Muslims sources, the differences were serious enough to cause Muslims to be divided. The Islamic source “K. al Masahif” reports differences so serious as to cause one Muslim group to call another group heretics:

During the reign of `Uthman, teachers were teaching this or that reading to their students. When the students met and disagreed about the reading, they reported the differences to their teachings. They would defend their readings, condemning the others as heretical.'[Abu Bakr `Abdullah b. abi Da’ud, “K. al Masahif]

So a political decision was made to have only one Qur’an. This did not go over well with the original people who created their unique version of the Qur’an. Who were these chosen people?

Muslim source materials reveal some of these select people who are known to have created their unique version of the Qur’an. (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 150). [Search on the referenced site to find the number “150” if you want to verify the written literature].

I heard the Prophet saying, “Learn the recitation of Qur’an from four persons: (1)Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud, (2)Salim (who was killed in the 633 CE battle), the freed slave of Abu Hudhaifa, (3)Ubayy B. Ka’ab and (4)Muadh bin Jabal.”

So a few select people close to Muhammad thought they knew the Qur’an and collected their personal version. These versions of the Qur’an became widely distributed and used. This is why Muslim soldiers were arguing and calling one another heretics.

After the “official” Qur’an was released and the order was given to burn all other versions, some very bad feelings came out. The following information from Muslim sources is probably the most important information you can learn about people who actually knew Muhammad in person. Let’s begin with Mas’ud, who was asked to burn his personal version of the Qur’an.

“How can you order me to recite the reading of Zaid, when I recited from the very mouth of the Prophet some seventy Surahs?” “Am I,” asks Abdullah, “to abandon what I acquired from the very lips of the Prophet?” (Masahif” by Ibn abi Dawood, 824-897 AD, pp. 12, 14).

Would Mas’ud accept the Qur’an of today as being pure since he refused to destroy his unique version? Since Mas’ud did not want to have his unique version of the Qur’an destroyed, it is doubtful that Mas’ud would honestly answer that the Qur’an is pure. It is important to ask, “Why did Mas’ud refuse to give in and destroy his version of the Qur’an?”

Mas’ud was a close companion and personal servant of Muhammad. The prophet Muhammad taught the Qur’an to Mas’ud in person. Due to his close relationship with Muhammad, Mas’ud would have had confidence that he was qualified to create his unique version of the Qur’an.

Mas’ud, moved to Kufa, Iraq where he completed his unique version of the Qur’an (commonly called the Kufan Codex). The unique Qur’an created by Mas’ud was completed years after the most important original manuscript (634 CE) that Hafsah kept until she died in 667 CE. In addition, the Qur’an version created by Mas’ud did not have chapters 1, 113, and 114 that are in the “official” Qur’an of today. Is the Qur’an truly pure as believed by Muslims today?

Another unique Qur’an was created by Ubayy B. Ka’ab. He was a close companion of Muhammad and served as a secretary to Muhammad. Ubayy could recite much of the Qur’an, which he had learned from the prophet Muhammad. Scholars have found that Ubayy’s version differed from the “official” Qur’an with two additional chapters (entitled: Surat Al-Khal and Surat Al-Afd). Since Ubayy was taught the Qur’an by the prophet Muhammad, why doesn’t the “official” Qur’an contain the two additional chapters?

Ubayy died during the reign of Umar, which was before the “official” Qur’an was created by Uthman. Therefore, Ubayy did not have to witness that his version of the Qur’an was burned by Uthman’s order. Since Ubayy created a unique version of the Qur’an and had learned from the mouth of the prophet Muhammad, would he have agreed with Mas’ud by refusing to give in and destroy his version of the Qur’an?”

Due to Uthman’s decision to create an “official” version of the Qur’an, Ubayy’s version of the Qur’an was destroyed. It is important to ask, “Is the Qur’an pure?”

Now consider the original Qur’an called the Hafsah Codex. It was destroyed by Muslims leaders immediately after Hafsah died. It is most important to ask, “Why did Hafsah not wish to have this most important original manuscript of the Qur’an to be burnt?”

The “official” Qur’an version of today comes from Zaid ibn Thabit, who was the youngest writing member. Zaid, being very young, outlived the older people who had spent more time with Muhammad. However, in the end it was Zaid’s version of the Qur’an that was selected by Uthman for the “official” Qur’an version.

Muslims who had been close to Muhammad became righteously angry when Uthman insisted that only one version of the Qur’an be used. Islamic sources show that the purity of the Qur’an from the days of Muhammad appears to have been compromised. If no variants existed, then no burning party would have been held.

Muslims believe that seven versions of the Qur’an exist but that only Uthman’s Qur’an is correct. So Muslims disregard the “official” book burning party cited in Muslim source materials. However, it takes “blind faith” to believe and accept this viewpoint.

If Muhammad could consistently foretell the future, then the Qur’an could be regarded as coming from God. However, this has not been demonstrated. The politically motivated book burning party of early Muslim leaders confirms the Qur’an is from a false Gabriel.

English: 11th Century North African Qur’an in ...

March 12, 2012 Posted by | Understanding Islam | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 14 Comments

Multiple Arabic Language Koran Versions Explained

Quran

Evidence of Multiple Arabic Qur’an Versions

Muslim source materials report that at least four different versions of the Aur’an existed before the political order was given to require the books to be burned. (Refer to “al-Tamihid 2, 247). (3)
To begin, at least two versions were written by people close to Based on Muslims sources the differences were great enough to reports differences so serious as to cause one Muslim group to call another group heretics:
During the reign of Uthman, teachers were teaching this or that reading to their students. When the students met and disagreed about the reading, they reported the differences to their teachings. They would defend their readings, condemning the others as heretical. (Abu Bakr Abdullah b. abi Da’ud K. al Masahif)
So a political decision was made to have only one Qur’an. This did not go over well with the original people who created their unique version of the Qur’an. Who were these “chosen’ people ?
Muslim source materials reveal some of these select people who are known to have created their unique version of the Qur’an (Sahih Bakhari, Volume 5, Book 58 Number 150). (4)
I heard the Prophe saying “Learn the recitation of Qur’an from four persons; (a) Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud (b) Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hudhaifa (killed in 633 battle), (c) Ubayy B. Ka’ab and (d) Muadh bin Jabal.”

So a few select people close to Muhammad (as well as other people) thought they knew the Qur’an and collected their personal version. These versions f the Qur’an became widely distributed and used. This is why Muslim soldiers were arguing and calling one another heretics. After the “official” Quran was released and the order was given to burn all other versions, some very bad feeling came out. Let’s begin with mas’ud, who was asked to burn his personal version of the Qur’an.

Muhammad Said, “Learn The Qur’an from Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud
“How can you order me to recite the reading of Zaid, when I recited from the very mouth of the prophet some seventy Surahs ?” “Am I,” asks Abdullah, “to abandon what I acquired form the very lips of the Prophet ?” (Abu Bakr Abudullah b. abi Da’ud “K. al Masahif). (5)
Below is one of the most important questions that Muslims need to answer.

WOULD MAS’UD ACCEPT THE QUR’AN OF TODAY AS BEING PURE
SINCE HE REFUSED TO DESTROY HIS UNIQUE QUR’AN VERSION ?

Since Mas’ud refused to burn his unique version of the Qur’an, it is doubtful that Mas’ud would honestly answer that the Qur’an of toaday is pure. It is important to ask, “Why did Masu’d refuse to give in and destroy his unique version of the Qur’an ?

Mas’ud was a close companion and personal servant of Muhammad. The prophet Muhammad taught the Qur’an to Masu’d in person. Due to his close relationship with the prophet, Mas’ud would have had confidence that he was qualified to create his unique version of the Qur’an.

Mas’ud, moved to Kufa, Iraq where he completed his unique version of the Qur’an (called the Kufan Codex). The unique Qur’an created by Mas’ud was completed years after the most important original manuscript (634 CE) that Hafsah kept until she died in 667 CE. In addition, the Qur’an version creatd by Mas’ud did not have chapters 1, 113 and 114 that are in the ‘official” Quran of today. Is the Qur’an truly pure as believed by Muslims today ?(6)

MUHAMMAD SAID, “LEARN THE QUR’AN FROM UBAYY B. KAAB

Another unique Qur’an was created by Ubayy B. Ka’ab, which became accepted by Muslims living in Syria. Ubayy was a close companion of Muhammad and served as a secretary to Muhammad. Ubayy could recite much of the Qur’an, which he had learned from the prophet Muhammad. Scholars have found that Ubayy’s version different from the “official” Qur’an with two additional chapoters (entitled in Arabic; Surat al-khal and surat al-afd). Since Ubayy was taught the Qur’an by the prophet Muhammad, why doesn’t the “official” Qur’an contain the two additional chapters ?

Ubayy died during the reign of Umar, which was before the “official” Qur’an was created by Uthman. Therefore, Ubayy did no have to witness that his version of the Qur’an was burned by fire. Since Ubayy created a unique versin fo the Qur’an and had learned from the mouth of the prophet Muhammad, would be have agreed with Mas’ud by refusing to give in and destroy his unique version of the Qur’an ?

Due to Uthman’s decision to create an “official” version of the Qur’an, Ubayy’s version of the Qur’an was di\estroyd. It is important to ask, “Is the Qur’an pure ?”

MUHAMMAD SAID, “LEARN THE QUR’AN FROM MUADH BIN JABAL

Muadh bin Jabal was the fourth person chosen by Muhammad to learn how to recite the Qur’an. Appendix E discusses what Muadh bin Jabal reported about Muhammad foretelling the future.

Now consider the original Qur’an called the Hafsah Codex. It was destroyed by Muslims leaders immediately after Hafsah died. It is most important to ask, “Wy did Hafsah not wish to have this most important original manuscript of the Qur’an to be burnt?”

We know that the “official” Qur’an version of today comes from Zaid ibn Thabit, who was the youngest writing member. Zaid, being younger, outlived others who had spent more time with Muhammad. However, in the end it was Zaid’s version of the Qur’an that was selected by Uthman for the “official” Qur’an.

Muslims who had been close to Muhammad become righteously angry when Uthman insisted that only one version of the Qur’an be used. Islamic sources show that the purity of the Qur’an from the days of Muhammad was compromised. If no variants existed, then no book burning party would have been required.

Standard Muslim Response
Muslims believe that seven versions of the Qur’an exist but that only Uthman’s Qur’an is correct. So Muslims disregard the “official” book burning party cited in Muslim source materials. However, this acceptance shows that Muslims are living on “Blind faith” in the “Official” Qur’an.

The Einstein Method approach to finding words from outside time-space supports the conclusion that Muslims are living on “blind faith” alone. If Muhammad could consistently foretell the future, then the Qur’an could be regard as coming from God. However, this has not been demonstrated. The politically motivated book burning party of early Muslim leaders supports that the Qur’an is from a false Gabriel.

******************************************************************************************************

The 5 versions of the Arabic Qu’ran

Translations are bound to have very small,sometimes negligible differences that don’t alter the main message of the texts.
We have had several muslim apologists boast of the one Al Koran in arabic,un touched and unchanged,just like allah delivered it unto his prophet Muhammad.
Some have gone as far as making claims that the Bible is corrupted since it has various translations even though the various English translations have no contrasting messages.Now we know the English translations of the Koran differ in style of writing so the Muslims tell us the Koran is basically useless in any other language but arabic and claim there is only one Arabic Koran.What do you say if I tell you that claim is false
There are different Korans and I have proof.
The five current versions of the Koran are:The Transmitter Hafs, who is Hafs ibn Suleyman ibn Al-Mugheerah Al-Asadi Al-Kuufi (d. 180H):
His Qiraa’ah named Hafs from ‘Aasim is the most popular reading of the Quran in the world today, except for some parts of Africa. Hafs was officially adopted by Egypt in 1924. His chain from ‘Aasim:He heard from ‘Aasim ibn Abu Najud Al-Kuufi (d. 128H) who was Taabi’i, i.e, among the generation following the Sahaabah, who heard from Abu Abdur-Rahman Abdullah ibn Habib As-Sulami, who heard from Uthman ibn Affan and Ali ibn Abi Talib and Zayd ibn Thaabit and Ubayy ibn Ka’b, who heard from the Prophet (PBUH).The Transmitter Duuri, is Abu ‘Amr Hafs ibn Umar ibn Abdul-Aziz ibn Subhan Ad-Duuri Al-Baghdaadi (d. 246H):
His Qiraa’ah named Duuri from Abu ‘Amr is popular in parts of Africa like Somalia, Sudan as well as in other parts. His chain of from Abu ‘Amr:He heard from Abu Muhammad Yahya ibn Mubarak ibn Mugheerah Yazidiyy (d. 202H), who heard from Abu ‘Amr Zuban ibn ‘Ala Maziniyy Al-Busriyy (d. 154H), who heard from the Qiraa’aat from Sahaabis Ali and Uthman and Abu Musa and Umar and Ubayy ibn Ka’b and Zayd ibn Thaabit, who heard from the Prophet (PBUH).

The Transmitter Warsh, who is Abu Saeed Uthman ibn Saeed Al-Misri, nicknamed Warsh, (d. 197H):
HIs Qiraa’ah named Warsh from Naafi’ is popular in North Africa. His chain from Naafi’:

He heard from Naafi’ ibn Abdur-Rahman ibn Abu Nu’aim Al-Madani (d. 169H), who heard from Abu Ja’far Yazid ibn Al-Qa’qaa’ and Abu Dawud Abdur-Rahman ibn Hurmuz Al-A’raj and Shaybah ibn Nisah Al-Qaadhi and Abu Abdullah Muslim ibn Jundub Al-Hudhali and Abu Rawh Yazid ibn Ruman, who heard from Abu Hurairah and Ibn Abbaas and Abdullah ibn ‘Ayyaash ibn Abi Rabii’ah, who heard from Ubayy ibn Ka’b, who heard from the Prophet (PBUH).

The Transmitter Suusi:
His Qiraa’ah named Suusi from Abu ‘Amr is also found around the world in small parts.

The Transmitter Qaaluun, who is Imaam Qaaluun:
His Qiraa’ah named Qaaluun from Naafi’ is popular in places like Libya in Africa. His chain from Naafi’:

He heard from Naafi’ ibn Abdur-Rahman ibn Abu Nu’aim Al-Madani (d. 169H), who heard from Abu Ja’far Yazid ibn Al-Qa’qaa’, who heard from Abdullah ibn Abbaas and Abu Hurairah, who heard from Ubayy ibn Ka’b and Zayd ibn Thaabit, who heard from the Prophet (PBUH).

In case Muslim readers should be greatly concerned: The variances between these different versions of the Koran are generally quite small and minor, although there are a substantial number of them. Muhammad Fahd Khaaruun has published a version of the (Hafs) Koran which contains the variant readings from the 10 Accepted Readers in its margins. About 2/3 of the ayat (verses) have some sort of variant reading. The great majority are differences in the vowels inserted in certain words (remembering that the early written kufic texts of the Koran did not include vowels or diacritical marks). There appears to be only one difference that might represent a significant effect on belief, that in surah 2:184. There are many Islamic scholars’ discussions about these many differences. As an example of one, in Hafs, surah 2:140 reads taquluna, while in Warsh, that text is in surah 2:139 and reads yaquluna. Another example: Hafs surah 2:214 reads yaquula while Warsh surah 2;212 reads yaquulu. Muslim scholars agree that such variations do not seriously alter the meaning of statements made in the Koran.

Related articles

February 9, 2012 Posted by | Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 16 Comments

Uncorrupted Bible Questions

by Princess Christian
Muslims: you say that all the Jews and Christians conspired to corrupt every bible and every manuscript on the face of the earth. Fine, no problem. But can you tell us what our motive would be for doing that? I mean, if we did it to oppose Muhammad, then that means the books were perfect before Muhammad started preaching. Which means there was no reason for Muhammad to come, because there was nothing broken for him to fix. If, as the Qur’an says, we did it simply by misinterpreting the verses (not actually changing the text), then Muhammad didn’t need the Qur’an. He could have simply used the Taurat/Injil we had to teach us the correct interpretation. If we corrupted our verses BEFORE Muhammad came, then you must show us where is the proof of this? And if the Qur’an is the only book that was co-eternal with allah, guarded by him as his complete revelation for all nations, then why didn’t he just send the Qur’an to begin with to save us all the confusion?

February 6, 2012 Posted by | Christianity / God, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 15 Comments

Muslim Prostitution

An example of Allāh written in simple Arabic c...

Image via Wikipedia

Temporary Marriage

Question:
Does Islam have a loophole for sex-on-demand called ‘temporary marriage’?

Summary Answer:
It is called Nikah Mut’ah, a fixed-time arrangement between a man and a woman that dissolves once the duration expires.

The Qur’an:
Qur’an (4:24) – “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)”

Qur’an (5:87) – “O you who believe! do not forbid (yourselves) the good things which Allah has made lawful for you and do not exceed the limits; surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits” Surprisingly the context for this verse (which is found in Bukhari (60:139) is temporary marriage, in this case trading an article of clothing for a few days of access to a woman’s body. By calling this a “good thing,” Muhammad really stood traditional morality on its ear.

From the Hadith:

Muslim (8:3252) – Muhammad clearly allowed his men to use temporary marriage as a sanctioned form of prostitution. (To be fair, the end of the hadith also seems to suggest that the practice was later forbidden. Islamic scholars disagree as to the historical context, and whether or not it is enough to supersede verse 4:24 of the Qur’an).

Additional Notes:

Since temporary marriage is a euphemism for prostitution, the Sunnis believe that it should only be practiced in certain times (such as the lifetime of Muhammad… oddly enough). The Shias take a more liberal position and freely allow the practice.

January 15, 2012 Posted by | Understanding Islam | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

PLAGIARISM BY Mohammad in the Quran

Front of the Quran

Image via Wikipedia

FACT…..

Mohammad had pre-Islamic sources to write his Quran….

The story of the she-camel which leapt out of a rock and became a prophet was known in Arabia long before Muhammad (Suwar 7:73-77; 54:27-29; 91:13-14).- The story of an entire village of people who were turned into apes because they broke the sabbath by fishing was a popular legend in Muhammad’s day (Suwar 2:65; 7:163-166).- The story of Moses and the gushing twelve springs is found in Surah 2:6 0ff and comes from pre-Islamic Arabian legends.- In what is called the “Rip Van Winkle” story, seven men and their animals slept in a cave for 309 years and then woke up perfectly fine (Surah 18:9-26)! This was also a popular story in Arabia at and before Mohammed’s time. This legend was also found in Greek and Christian folks fables from that time and before.- The fable of the pieces of four dead, cut-up birds getting up and flying was well known in Muhammad’s time (Surah 2:260).- The story about the birth of Mary in Surah 3:35-37 appears to be loosely based off of an apocryphal 2nd century work, The Protevangelion of James the Lesser.

Jewish sources that were used when developing the quranic revelation22:

– The Second Targum of the Book of Esther supplied the non-biblical details of the Queen of Sheba‘s visit to King Solomon(Surah 27:17-44).- The Testament of Abrahamprovided the teachings of the Qur’an found in Surah 42:17 and Surah 101:6-9, which relate that on the judgment day, a scale of balance will be used to weigh good and bad deeds, and to make the determination of whether people will be sent to heaven or hell. This Jewish work is also apparently quoted in Surah 87:19.- The story of murderous Cain and the raven (Surah 5:30-31) is found in several Jewish writings, such as the Pirqe of Rabbi Eleazer and the Targum of Jerusalem, both of which pre-date the Qur’an.- The tale of Abraham being delivered from Nimrod’s fire (Suwar 21:51-71; 37:97-98) originated in the Midrash Rabbah on Genesis.

– The Talmud provided the Qur’an with the story of Moses’ resurrection (Surah 2:55-57)

– The story of the golden calf which was made by Israel in the wilderness, in which the image actually leaps out of the fire and moos (Surah 20:80-98), comes from the Pirqe of Rabbi Eleazer.

– Lastly, the seven heavens and hells described at various points in the Qur’an can also be found in the Zohar and the Hagigah, and the hells are further described in the Midrash on the Psalms.

December 12, 2011 Posted by | Understanding Islam | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 15 Comments

Islam’s doctrines of deception

The below article from the The Middle East Forum reveals in vivid details the truth regarding Islam’s official policy of deception and lying to achieve its end of spreading itself and achieving a world wide caliphate in which all non-muslims are forced to convert or killed.

When ever a website or any media exposes any truth that puts Islam in its true light, muslims immediate dismiss it as a “hate” site.  Obviously, they HATE the truth being revealed.  Even this blog has been called a hate site for exposing the truth.  That is really a compliment as it shows that the truth on this blog has touched the accusers in some small way with the truth. (For a further understanding of the Islamic “hate” card being played please see:   https://paulmarcelrene.wordpress.com/2011/06/13/islamophobia-watch-website)

In any case, the The Middle East Forum is a respected and fair website and I recommend it for the article below and every other article I’ve read on it for its accuracy.

The Middle East Forum

by Raymond Ibrahim
Jane’s Islamic Affairs Analyst
October 2008

To better understand Islam, one must appreciate the thoroughly legalistic nature of the religion. According to sharia (Islamic law) every conceivable human act is categorised as being either forbidden, discouraged, permissible, recommended, or obligatory.

“Common sense” or “universal opinion” has little to do with Islam’s notions of right and wrong. Only what Allah (through the Quran) and his prophet Muhammad (through the Hadith) have to say about any given issue matters; and how Islam’s greatest theologians and jurists – collectively known as the ulema, literally, “they who know” – have articulated it.

According to sharia, in certain situations, deception – also known as ‘taqiyya’, based on Quranic terminology, – is not only permitted but sometimes obligatory. For instance, contrary to early Christian history, Muslims who must choose between either recanting Islam or being put to death are not only permitted to lie by pretending to have apostatised, but many jurists have decreed that, according to Quran 4:29, Muslims are obligated to lie in such instances.

Origins of taqiyya

As a doctrine, taqiyya was first codified by Shia Muslims, primarily as a result of their historical experience. Long insisting that the caliphate rightly belonged to the prophet Muhammad’s cousin and son-in-law, Ali (and subsequently his descendents), the Shia were a vocal and powerful branch of Islam that emerged following Muhammad’s death. After the internal Islamic Fitna wars from the years 656 AD to 661 AD, however, the Shia became a minority branch, persecuted by mainstream Muslims or Sunnis – so-called because they follow the example or ‘sunna’ of Muhammad and his companions. Taqiyya became pivotal to Shia survival.

Interspersed among the much more numerous Sunnis, who currently make up approximately 90 per cent of the Islamic world, the Shia often performed taqiyya by pretending to be Sunnis externally, while maintaining Shia beliefs internally, as permitted by Quranic verse 16:106. Even today, especially in those Muslim states where there is little religious freedom, the Shia still practice taqiyya. In Saudi Arabia, for instance, Shias are deemed by many of the Sunni majority to be heretics, traitors and infidels and like other non-Sunni Muslims they are often persecuted.

Several of Saudi Arabia’s highest clerics have even issued fatwas sanctioning the killing of Shias. As a result, figures on the Arabian kingdom’s Shia population vary wildly from as low as 1 per cent to nearly 20 per cent. Many Shias living there obviously choose to conceal their religious identity. As a result of some 1,400 years of Shia taqiyya, the Sunnis often accuse the Shias of being habitual liars, insisting that taqiyya is ingrained in Shia culture.

Conversely, the Sunnis have historically had little reason to dissemble or conceal any aspect of their faith, which would have been deemed dishonorable, especially when dealing with their historic competitors and enemies, the Christians. From the start, Islam burst out of Arabia subjugating much of the known world, and, throughout the Middle Ages, threatened to engulf all of Christendom. In a world where might made right, the Sunnis had nothing to apologise for, much less to hide from the ‘infidel’.

Paradoxically, however, today many Sunnis are finding themselves in the Shias’ place: living as minorities in Western countries surrounded and governed by their traditional foes. The primary difference is that, extremist Sunnis and Shia tend to reject each other outright, as evidenced by the ongoing Sunni-Shia struggle in Iraq, whereas, in the West, where freedom of religion is guaranteed, Sunnis need only dissemble over a few aspects of their faith.

Articulation of taqiyya

According to the authoritative Arabic text, Al-Taqiyya Fi Al-Islam: “Taqiyya [deception] is of fundamental importance in Islam. Practically every Islamic sect agrees to it and practices it. We can go so far as to say that the practice of taqiyya is mainstream in Islam, and that those few sects not practicing it diverge from the mainstream…Taqiyya is very prevalent in Islamic politics, especially in the modern era.”

The primary Quranic verse sanctioning deception with respect to non-Muslims states: “Let believers not take for friends and allies infidels instead of believers. Whoever does this shall have no relationship left with Allah – unless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precautions.” (Quran 3:28; see also 2:173; 2:185; 4:29; 22:78; 40:28.)

Al-Tabari’s (838-923 AD) Tafsir, or Quranic exegeses, is essentially a standard reference in the entire Muslim world. Regarding 3:28, he wrote: “If you [Muslims] are under their [infidels’] authority, fearing for yourselves, behave loyally to them, with your tongue, while harbouring inner animosity for them… Allah has forbidden believers from being friendly or on intimate terms with the infidels in place of believers – except when infidels are above them [in authority]. In such a scenario, let them act friendly towards them.”

Regarding 3:28, the Islamic scholar Ibn Kathir (1301-1373) wrote: “Whoever at any time or place fears their [infidels’] evil, may protect himself through outward show.”

As proof of this, he quotes Muhammad’s companions. Abu Darda said: “Let us smile to the face of some people while our hearts curse them.” Al-Hassan said: “Doing taqiyya is acceptable till the day of judgment [in perpetuity].”

Other prominent ulema, such as al- Qurtubi , al-Razi, and al-Arabi have extended taqiyya to cover deeds. Muslims can behave like infidels – from bowing down and worshipping idols and crosses to even exposing fellow Muslims’ “weak spots” to the infidel enemy – anything short of actually killing a fellow Muslim.

War is deceit

None of this should be surprising considering that Muhammad himself, whose example as the “most perfect human” is to be tenaciously followed, took an expedient view on the issue of deception. For instance, Muhammad permitted deceit in three situations: to reconcile two or more quarreling parties; husband to wife and vice-versa; and in war (See Sahih Muslim B32N6303, deemed an “authentic” hadith).

During the Battle of the Trench (627 AD), which pitted Muhammad and his followers against several non-Muslim tribes collectively known as “the Confederates”, a Confederate called Naim bin Masud went to the Muslim camp and converted to Islam. When Muhammad discovered the Confederates were unaware of Masud’s conversion, he counseled him to return and try somehow to get his tribesmen to abandon the siege. “For war is deceit,” Muhammad assured him.

Masud returned to the Confederates without their knowledge that he had switched sides and began giving his former kin and allies bad advice. He also went to great lengths to instigate quarrels between the various tribes until, thoroughly distrusting each other, they disbanded and lifted the siege. According to this account, deceit saved Islam during its embryonic stage (see Al-Taqiyya Fi Al-Islam; also, Ibn Ishaq’s Sira, the earliest biography of Muhammad).

More demonstrative of the legitimacy of deception with respect to non-Muslims is the following account. A poet, Kab bin al-Ashruf, had offended Muhammad by making derogatory verse about Muslim women. Muhammad exclaimed in front of his followers: “Who will kill this man who has hurt Allah and his prophet?”

A young Muslim named Muhammad bin Maslama volunteered, but with the caveat that, in order to get close enough to Kab to assassinate him, he be allowed to lie to the poet. Muhammad agreed.

Maslama traveled to Kab and began denigrating Islam and Muhammad, carrying on this way till his disaffection became convincing enough for Kab to take him into his confidences. Soon thereafter, Maslama appeared with another Muslim and, while Kab’s guard was down, they assaulted and killed him. They ran to Muhammad with Kab’s head, to which the latter cried: “Allahu akbar” or “God is great” (see the hadith accounts of Sahih Bukhari and Ibn Sad).

The entire sequence of Quranic revelations are a testimony to taqiyya and, since Allah is believed to be the revealer of these verses, he ultimately is seen as the perpetrator of deceit. This is not surprising since Allah himself is often described in the Quran as the “best deceiver” or “schemer.” (see 3:54, 8:30, 10:21). This phenomenon revolves around the fact that the Quran contains both peaceful and tolerant verses, as well as violent and intolerant ones.

The ulema were uncertain which verses to codify into sharia’s worldview. For instance, should they use the one that states there is no coercion in religion (2:256), or the ones that command believers to fight all non-Muslims until they either convert or at least submit to Islam (9:5, 9:29)? To solve this quandary, they developed the doctrine of abrogation – naskh, supported by Quran 2:105. This essentially states that verses “revealed” later in Muhammad’s career take precedence over those revealed earlier whenever there is a discrepancy.

Why the contradiction in the first place? The standard answer has been that, because Muhammad and his community were far outnumbered by the infidels in the early years of Islam, a message of peace and co-existence was in order. However, after Muhammad migrated to Medina and grew in military strength and numbers, the militant or intolerant verses were revealed, urging Muslims to go on the offensive.

According to this standard view, circumstance dictates which verses are to be implemented. When Muslims are weak, they should preach and behave according to the Meccan verses; when strong, they should go on the offensive, according to the Medinan verses. Many Islamic books extensively deal with the doctrine of abrogation, or Al-Nasikh Wa Al-Mansukh.

War is eternal

The fact that Islam legitimises deceit during war cannot be all that surprising; strategist Sun Tzu (c. 722-221 BC), Italian political philosopher Machiavelli (1469-1527) and English philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) all justified deceit in war.

However, according to all four recognised schools of Sunni jurisprudence, war against the infidel goes on in perpetuity, until “all chaos ceases, and all religion belongs to Allah” (Quran 8:39). According to the definitive Encyclopaedia of Islam (Brill Online edition): “The duty of the jihad exists as long as the universal domination of Islam has not been attained. Peace with non-Muslim nations is, therefore, a provisional state of affairs only; the chance of circumstances alone can justify it temporarily. Furthermore there can be no question of genuine peace treaties with these nations; only truces, whose duration ought not, in principle, to exceed ten years, are authorised. But even such truces are precarious, inasmuch as they can, before they expire, be repudiated unilaterally should it appear more profitable for Islam to resume the conflict.”

The concept of obligatory jihad is best expressed by Islam’s dichotomised worldview that pits Dar al Islam (House of Islam) against Dar al Harb (House of War or non-Muslims) until the former subsumes the latter. Muslim historian and philosopher, Ibn Khaldun (1332- 1406), articulated this division by saying: “In the Muslim community, holy war [jihad] is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defence. But Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.”

This concept is highlighted by the fact that, based on the ten-year treaty of Hudaibiya , ratified between Muhammad and his Quraish opponents in Mecca (628), ten years is theoretically the maximum amount of time Muslims can be at peace with infidels (as indicated earlier by the Encyclopaedia of Islam). Based on Muhammad’s example of breaking the treaty after two years, by citing a Quraish infraction, the sole function of the “peace-treaty” (hudna) is to buy weakened Muslims time to regroup for a renewed offensive. Muhammad is quoted in the Hadith saying: “If I take an oath and later find something else better, I do what is better and break my oath (see Sahih Bukhari V7B67N427).”

This might be what former PLO leader and Nobel Peace Prize winner Yasser Arafat meant when, after negotiating a peace treaty criticised by his opponents as conceding too much to Israel, he said in a mosque: “I see this agreement as being no more than the agreement signed between our Prophet Muhammad and the Quraish in Mecca.”

On several occasions Hamas has made it clear that its ultimate aspiration is to see Israel destroyed. Under what context would it want to initiate a “temporary” peace with the Jewish state? When Osama bin Laden offered the US a truce, stressing that “we [Muslims] are a people that Allah has forbidden from double-crossing and lying,” what was his ultimate intention?

Based on the above, these are instances of Muslim extremists feigning openness to the idea of peace simply in order to bide time.

If Islam must be in a constant state of war with the non-Muslim world – which need not be physical, as radicals among the ulema have classified several non-literal forms of jihad, such as “jihad-of-the-pen” (propaganda), and “money-jihad” (economic) – and if Muslims are permitted to lie and feign loyalty to the infidel to further their war efforts, offers of peace, tolerance or dialogue from extremist Muslim corners are called into question.

Religious obligation?

Following the terrorist attacks on the United States of 11 September 2001, a group of prominent Muslims wrote a letter to Americans saying that Islam is a tolerant religion that seeks to coexist with others.

Bin Laden castigated them, saying: “As to the relationship between Muslims and infidels, this is summarised by the Most High’s Word: ‘We renounce you. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us – till you believe in Allah alone’ [Quran 60:4]. So there is an enmity, evidenced by fierce hostility from the heart. And this fierce hostility – that is battle – ceases only if the infidel submits to the authority of Islam, or if his blood is forbidden from being shed [a dhimmi – a non-Muslim subject living as a “second-class” citizen in an Islamic state in accordance to Quran 9:29], or if Muslims are at that point in time weak and incapable [a circumstance under which taqiyya applies]. But if the hate at any time extinguishes from the heart, this is great apostasy! Such, then, is the basis and foundation of the relationship between the infidel and the Muslim. Battle, animosity and hatred, directed from the Muslim to the infidel, is the foundation of our religion. And we consider this a justice and kindness to them.”

This hostile world view is traceable to Islam’s schools of jurisprudence. When addressing Western audiences, however, Bin Laden’s tone significantly changes. He lists any number of grievances as reasons for fighting the West – from Israeli policies towards Palestinians to the Western exploitation of women and US failure to sign the Kyoto protocol – never alluding to fighting the US simply because it is an infidel entity that must be subjugated. He often initiates his messages to the West by saying: “Reciprocal treatment is part of justice.”

This is a clear instance of taqiyya, as Bin Laden is not only waging a physical jihad, but one of propaganda. Convincing the West that the current conflict is entirely its fault garners him and his cause more sympathy. Conversely, he also knows that if his Western audiences were to realise that, all real or imagined political grievances aside, according to the Islamic worldview delineated earlier, which bin Laden does accept, nothing short of their submission to Islam can ever bring peace, his propaganda campaign would be compromised. As a result there is constant lying, “for war is deceit”.

If Bin Laden’s words and actions represent an individual case of taqiyya, they raise questions about Saudi Arabia’s recent initiatives for “dialogue”. Saudi Arabia closely follows sharia. For instance, the Saudi government will not allow the construction of churches or synagogues on its land; Bibles are banned and burned. Christians engaged in any kind of missionary activity are arrested, tortured, and sometimes killed. Muslim converts to Christianity can be put to death in the kingdom.

Despite such limitations on religious freedom, the Saudis have been pushing for more dialogue between Muslims and non-Muslims. At the most recent inter-faith conference in Madrid in July 2008, King Abdullah asserted: “Islam is a religion of moderation and tolerance, a message that calls for constructive dialogue among followers of all religions.”

Days later, it was revealed that Saudi children’s textbooks still call Christians and Jews “infidels”, “hated enemies” and “pigs and swine”. A multiple-choice test in a book for fourth-graders asks: “Who is a ‘true’ Muslim?” The correct answer is not the man who prays and fasts, but rather: “A man who worships God alone, loves the believers and hates the infidels”. These infidels are the same people the Saudis want dialogue with. This raises the question of whether, when Saudis call for dialogue, they are merely following Muhammad’s companion Abu Darda’s advice: “Let us smile to the face of some people while our hearts curse them”?

There is also a philosophical – more particularly, epistemological – problem with taqiyya. Anyone who truly believes that no less an authority than God justifies and, through his prophet’s example, sometimes even encourages deception, will not experience any ethical qualms or dilemmas about lying. This is especially true if the human mind is indeed a tabula rasa shaped by environment and education. Deception becomes second nature.

Consider the case of former Al-Qaeda operative, Ali Mohammad. Despite being entrenched in the highest echelons of the terrorism network, Mohammed’s confidence at dissembling enabled him to become a CIA agent and FBI informant for years. People who knew him regarded him “with fear and awe for his incredible self-confidence, his inability to be intimidated, absolute ruthless determination to destroy the enemies of Islam, and his zealous belief in the tenets of militant Islamic fundamentalism”, according to Steven Emerson. Indeed, this sentiment sums it all up: for a zealous belief in Islam’s tenets, which, as has been described above, legitimises deception, will certainly go a long way in creating incredible self-confidence when deceiving one’s enemies.

Exposing a doctrine

All of the above is an exposition on doctrine and its various manifestations, not an assertion on the actual practices of the average Muslim. The deciding question is how literally any given Muslim follows sharia and its worldview.

So-called “moderate” Muslims – or, more specifically, secularised Muslims – do not closely adhere to sharia, and therefore have little to dissemble about. On the other hand, “radical” Muslims who closely observe sharia law, which splits the world into two perpetually warring halves, will always have a “divinely sanctioned” right to deceive, until “all chaos ceases, and all religion belongs to Allah” (Quran 8:39).

November 23, 2011 Posted by | Understanding Islam | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Muslims the Lamb of God already was offered for your sins

Muslims, the Lamb of God already was offered for your sins!

The Muslim `Eid Al-Adha begins this Sunday at sunset and ends at sunset of Monday. It is the closest thing to Redemption in Islam, however, asserting Islam’s rejection of the Lamb of God offered once-for-all for the sins of mankind. Known as the Feast or Festival of Sacrifice, it is celebrated by Muslims worldwide to commemorate (Qur’an 2:196) the supposed willingness of Abraham (Arabic, Ibrahim) to sacrifice his son Ishmael (Arabic, Isma`il) in obedience to Allah. It is believed by Muslims that the Muslim Allah provided him with a cow instead.

In this `Eid, Muslims offer an animal sacrifice (sheep, ram, goat, camel, cow or buffalo) accounting for more than 100 million animals slaughtered in two days. We call upon Muslims to abandon this ritual and to come to the Lord Jesus Christ who is the Lamb of God already slain for the sins of mankind. He said, “Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28). Sign and pray this prayer sincerely and earnestly:

Lord Jesus Christ,
I declare to You my personal rejection of Islam, its deity, its prophet, its Qur’ān and its immorality. I thank You for coming to earth and dying for my personal salvation. I sincerely confess to You my lost sinful condition, which calls for Your righteous judgment upon me. Often I have disobeyed Your Precious Word and frequently I have broken Your Perfect Laws. Helplessly, I am deeply enslaved to sin. Therefore, I know that I deserve Your just condemnation of me to everlasting punishment in the Lake of Fire. However, now and in this place, I come to You accepting Your death and resurrection on my behalf and for my benefit, as my own Substitute. I ask You, as You have promised in Your Infallible Word, to become my personal Savior and Lord of my lifestyle. I ask You to turn me away from my life of sin, enabling me to make generous restitution to all against whom I have sinned, forgiving all my sins, making me a new creature in Christ, giving me the new birth into the Family of God, and granting me eternal life. I also ask You to help me from now on to live the Christian life pleasing to You. I thank You for answering this my sincere and earnest prayer, by saving me at this moment and in this place. Amen.

My Signature _________________________________

Your friend, praying for your salvation

November 6, 2011 Posted by | Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Quran permits men to marry prepubescent girls

  • Londonistan: How Britain is Creating a Terror ...

    Image via Wikipedia

    The Quran permits men to marry prepubescent girls.

    In the context of divorcing wives, the Quran in Sura 65:1, 4 says:

    65:1 O Prophet, when you (and the believers) divorce women, divorce them for their prescribed waiting-period and count the waiting-period accurately . . . 4 And if you are in doubt about those of your women who have despaired of menstruation, (you should know that) their waiting period is three months, and the same applies to those who have not menstruated as yet. As for pregnant women, their period ends when they have delivered their burden. (Maududi, ibid., vol. 5, pp. 599 and 617, emphasis added)

    Maududi correctly interprets the plain meaning of verse 4:

    Therefore, making mention of the waiting-period for girls who have not yet menstruated, clearly proves that it is not only permissible to give away the girl at this age but it is permissible for the husband to consummate marriage with her. Now, obviously no Muslim has the right to forbid a thing which the Qur’an has held as permissible. (Maududi, vol. 5, p. 620, note 13, emphasis added)

    So the fathers of prepubescent girls may give them away, and their new husbands may consummate their marriage with them. Maududi also rebukes Muslims who deny that this verse is valid. At least he is being consistent. According to traditional Islam, Allah speaks universal truths for all places and all times. If Islam ever spread completely around the world, no one should be surprised if Quran-believing Muslims would lower the marriage age of girls to nine years old.

    This is precisely what happened in Iran after the religious revolution of Ayatollah Khomeini. A girl’s marriage age was lowered to nine years.

    Why should this surprise us? After all, Muhammad was betrothed to Aisha when she was six years old, and he consummated their union when she was only nine.

    The hadith says of her age:

    . . . [T]hen he [Muhammad] wrote the marriage (wedding) contract with Aishah when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed [sic, consummated] that marriage when she was nine years old.

    The Ayatollah Khomeini followed his prophet carefully. He married a girl of ten years old, and encouraged other men to do likewise, saying that fathers should give their daughters away before their first period:

    . . . the Ayatollah himself married a ten-year-old girl when he was twenty-eight? Did she[the Khomeini supporter] know that Khomeini called marriage to a girl before her first menstrual period “a divine blessing,” and advised the faithful: “Do your best to ensure that your daughters do not see their first blood in your house”?

    The following hadith proves beyond doubt that Muhammad pursued Aisha when she was six years old. Abu Bakr is Muhammad right-hand Companion and the father of little Aisha.

    The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for Aisha’s hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said “But I am your brother.” The Prophet said, “You are my brother in Allah’s religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry.” (Bukhari)

    This hadith show spiritual manipulation. Abu Bakr hesitates to give his daughter away because he believes that he is the brother of Muhammad—they are both mature men, after all. The prophet clarifies for him that they are spiritual brothers, not blood brothers, so Abu Bakr’s little girl is lawful for Muhammad to marry. This sort of sexual hunger is wrong in all places and all times. If a modern Muslim were to argue that we should take this marriage in its seventh-century historical context, then that is a step in the right direction. However, why wouldn’t the Allah-inspired prophet receive a message from on high to lead the way past this dubious custom? Instead, he mentions the Quran as proving that he and Abu Bakr are spiritual brothers. Why doesn’t the Quran say that marrying little girls is haram (forbidden)?

    Maybe Muhammad, his book, and his religion would have been evaluated more positively if he had been a pioneer in leading his community to a higher place than bad customs. But this is wishful thinking. Muhammad was too earth-bound.

    Aisha herself recounts this next hadith concerning the moments leading up to the first sexual encounter between fifty-plus-year-old Muhammad and this nine-year-old girl. She was playing on her swing set with her girlfriends when she got the call.

    . . . [M]y mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah’s Blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. (Bukhari)

    The hadith is very revealing. It also has the ring of authenticity. Its imagery comes across clearly. A little girl is playing on her swing set with her girlfriends. Her mother comes out and calls to her. The little girl dashes to where her mother is standing. Running is natural for a child. She is out of breath. She regains her breath. Her mother washes her face—as all mothers do to their playful children. Little Aisha probably got the dirt from too much play. Some female “handlers” got her ready for the wedding. Then the little girl’s mother hands her over to elder Muhammad so that they can have sex. Would little Aisha be confused while Muhammad was committing this act on her?

    Is this really the last and the best prophet for all humankind?

    Further, Muhammad endorses marrying little virgins for the extra thrill it gives a grown man.
  • Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:

    When I got married, Allah’s Apostle said to me, “What type of lady have you married?” I replied, “I have married a matron.” He said, “Why, don’t you have a liking for the virgins and for fondling them?” Jabir also said: Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Why didn’t you marry a young girl so that you might play with her and she with you?’ (Bukhari; see parallel hadiths here and here on this unpleasant topic.)

    Finally, Aisha herself describes how Muhammad and she would have ill-timed sexual encounters, taking baths together:

    Narrated Aisha:

    The Prophet and I used to take a bath from a single pot while we were Junub. During the menses, he used to order me to put on an Izar (dress worn below the waist) and used to fondle me. While in Itikaf, he used to bring his head near me and I would wash it while I used to be in my periods (menses). (Bukhari)

    To repeat, according to Sura 65:4 and Muhammad’s example, is he and his Quran really the best and the greatest prophet and book to lead humankind? The answer to this rhetorical question is clear to those of us whose minds have not been clouded by a lifetime of devotion to Islam: no, they are not the greatest and the best.

    This article analyzes the marriage age of women in the Bible.

    Conclusion

    One way of escape from all of this unpleasantness that liberal Muslims look for is to attribute these two verses to seventh-century Arabia. These were the attitudes and customs back then, so how can we blame Muhammad and the early Muslims? This is a step in the right direction. Not only liberal Muslims, but all of them must get away from Muhammad’s example and many verses in the Quran.

    However, many devout, Quran-believing Muslims, especially those who occupy places of political and legal power, understand what this escape means. They would have to leave behind many passages in the Quran (besides Suras 2:223 and 65:4), and many, many passages in the hadith. But how can they? Their sacred texts are inviolable, especially the Quran. Many regard Muhammad as sinlessly perfect, despite the plain evidence. The hierarchy in many Islamic countries cannot leave Muhammad and the Quran behind, not to mention the hadith. To do so would be to deny pure Islam. What good is it without them?

October 22, 2011 Posted by | Understanding Islam | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

WIFE BEATING IN ISLAM

INTRODUCTION: THE STATUS OF THE WIFE IN ISLAM

One of the more controversial issues in Islam is the Quran’s authorization for husbands to beat disobedient wives. This is found in chapter 4, verse 34. Additional references on wife beating are found in Muhammad’s traditions (hadith), and biographical material (sira). Many people have criticized Islam because of this harsh sanction and many Muslims have written articles seeking to mollify or defend it.

In review of the actual teachings of the Quran, hadith, and sira, Islam is rightly criticized. This command is not only a harsh way to treat one’s wife, it portrays the degraded position of married women in Islam.It will be shown from the Quran, Hadith, Sira, and other Islamic writings that this “Islamic” wife beating is physical and painful.

Before we discuss wife beating, we must review Islam’s viewpoint of women and comprehend the position, or standing, it places her in with respect to her husband. This is fundamental in understanding the command to beat the disobedient wife. Islam views the woman as inferior to the man and as such, places her in a subservient and subordinate position in the marriage relationship. The man is allowed to discipline his wife because he is her superior and responsible for her. He has the authority to beat his wife if he feels she is being disobedient. Wife beating is merely the bad fruit of a bad theological root.

When I first began to study the topic I did not realize that an Islamic marriage is not equivalent to a Christian marriage. Its rules, roles, and requirements are different. In a Christian marriage the husband is given the role as head of the household and the wife is expected to submit to the husband’s leadership. However, she is his equal in terms of social status; she is not inferior to him. In Islam the husband is also the head of the marriage, additionally he is his wife’s manager. Women are considered to be “in-between a slave and free man”. Slaves are not equal to their masters, rather they are subservient, managed, and controlled. Similarly, Muslim wives are inferior to their husbands and are managed and controlled. I am not saying that the wife is the husband’s slave, do not take this to an extreme.

Muhammad’s viewpoint of women was that they “lack self-control” and thus for their own good, and societies’ good, they must be subordinate to and managed by their husbands. Wives must obey. In an Islamic marriage when a man gives his bride a dowry he is accredited the right to manage his wife. By accepting his dowry a woman is giving her husband the right to her regulation.

Muhammad urged his followers to treat their wives well and the Quran’s chapter 4 is full of these sincere admonitions. He did not want to see them beaten without cause and he wanted good marriage relationships. However, his desires for happy marriages and kind treatment do not mitigate the authority he gave men over women or the position he ascribed to women. Wives are to be treated gently and kindly but are still under the man’s authority. If she persists in disobedience to his wishes he has the right, and the responsibility, to beat her to bring her into submission once again, and re-establish a happy marriage.

This article addresses the primary theme of Islamic wife beating and is based upon the teachings of the Quran, Hadith, Sira, and renowned Islamic scholars. Following the conclusion I have a series of appendices that discuss specific issues related to wife beating.

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________

THE QURAN ON WIFE BEATING

Below are 6 English versions of the Quran verse 4:34. This passage lays the foundation for wife beating. I provided all these to show their similarity. These translations are all from recognized scholars. I have corrected some archaic spelling. My comments are in [ ] type brackets.

Men are superior to women on account of the qualities with which God has 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 has of them been careful. But chide those for whose refractoriness you 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! Rodwell[1]

[‘Refractoriness’ means hard or impossible to manage, stubbornly disobedient’].

Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you, take no further action against them. Surely God is high, supreme. Dawood[2]

Men are in charge of women, because Allah has made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah has guarded. As for those from whom you fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High Exalted, Great. Pickthall[3]

Men are the managers of the affairs of women for that God has preferred in bounty one of them over another, and for that they have expended of their property. Righteous women are therefore obedient, guarding the secret for God’s guarding. And those you fear may be rebellious admonish; banish them to their couches, and beat them. If they then obey you, look not for any way against them; God is All high, All great. Arberry[4]

Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in their sleeping places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great. Shakir[5]

Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband’s) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whom part you fear disloyalty and ill conduct, admonish them (first), (next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them means (of annoyance) for Allah is Most High, Great (above you all). Ali[6]

 

COMMENT ON 4:34

The introduction emphasized the husband’s superiority over the wife. 4:34 starts by establishing that precedent. The beginning states: men are “superior”, men have “authority”, men are “in charge”, etc. Muhammad placed the man over the wife; he is her custodian and she obeys him. Then the Quran proceeds to lay out their respective roles, then lists a progression of steps to be followed when dealing with a rebellious wife:

    1. admonish them: The husband is to verbally admonish her
    1. send them to beds apart: If that fails the husband is to sexually desert his wife
  1. beat them: If both measures above fail the husband is commanded to beat his wife.

The husband, as the manager, increases the pressure on his wife to bring her into obedience to him. If beating her doesn’t work they will move towards divorce. (Note that obedience to her husband is not required if he orders her to do something sinful, causes her physical pain, or something she is incapable of doing).

[NOTE: I placed Ali’s version last because I comment on his, (and Muhammad Asad’s) translation and editing of the Quran in Appendix 1].

 

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ON THE QURAN, 4:34

The reason (asbab al-nuzul) behind the “revelation” is detailed by various Muslim scholars. The quote below comes from Razi’s commentary, “At-Tafsir al-Kabir,” on 4:34

“A women complained to Muhammad 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, Allah supposedly revealed 4:34 to Muhammad, after which the prophet said: “We wanted one thing but Allah wanted another, and what Allah wanted is best.”[7]

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________

THE TRADITIONS (HADITH)

The Hadith contains more information on wife beating in the early Islamic community. The Hadith illustrate facets of the husband & wife relationship and mention or depict physical violence against the wife. I will quote several of these to demonstrate the wife’s lower position in the marriage and the exact type of wife beating that occurred in Muhammad’s time, with his approval. In some cases due to the length I will only quote relevant portions of a hadith.

Here is a Hadith from Bukhari[8], vol. 7, # 715, that details Islamic wife beating:

“Narrated Ikrima: ‘Rifaa divorced his wife whereupon Abdur-Rahman married her. Aisha said that the lady came wearing a green veil and complained to her (Aisha) and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah’s messenger came, Aisha said, “I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. 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 as useless to me as this,” holding and showing the fringe of her garment. Abdur-Rahman said, “By Allah, O Allah’s messenger! She has told a lie. I am very strong and can satisfy her, but she is disobedient and wants to go back to Rifaa.” Allah’s messenger said to her, “If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifaa unless Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you.” 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 (that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow.””

Let’s note several items from this Hadith.

1) A woman was beaten by her husband because of marriage discord. The women did not commit any illegal sexual act. She was beaten and bruised because her husband said she was “disobedient” and he thought she wanted to go back to her former husband.

2) Aisha said, “I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!

The woman was badly bruised. Her skin was green. Aisha acknowledged that the Muslim women were suffering (from being beaten) more than the non-Muslim women. Muslims today proclaim that Islam gave women rights but Aisha, the “mother of the believers” said otherwise! She said that the Pagan women were treated better!

3) Muhammad did not rebuke the man for beating his wife. In fact, he reproached the women for saying Rahman was impotent. Even though she was hurt Muhammad accepted her bruises and beating because to Muhammad it was not abuse. In Muhammad’s eyes she deserved the beating.

 

Following are a number of various Hadith relative to wife beating. Again, I have edited several of these because of length.

 

ABU JAHM, A WELL KNOW WIFE BEATER

Sahih Muslim[9], Book 009, Number 3512:

…When my period of ‘Idda was over, I mentioned to him [Muhammad] that Mu’awiya b. Abu Sufyan and Jahm had sent proposal of marriage to me, whereupon Allah’s said: As for Abu Jahm, he does not put down his staff from his shoulder, and as for Mu’awiya, he is a poor man having no property; marry Usama b. Zaid. I objected to him, but he again said: Marry Usama; so I married him. Allah blessed there in and I was envied (by others).

Book 009, Number 3526:

…So I informed him [Muhammad]. (By that time) Mu’awiya, Abu Jahm and Usama b. Zaid had given her the proposal of marriage. Allah’s Messenger 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 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.

Book 009, Number 3527:

…She said: Mu’awiya and Abu’l-Jahm were among those who had given me the proposal of marriage. Thereupon Allah’s Apostle 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).

 

COMMENT

These three Hadith illustrate that some Muslim husbands could legally beat their wives without any retaliatory consequences. Abu Jahm was known to beat his wives and to treat them harshly. Although Muhammad may not have cared for it, wife beating was certainly allowed within the Islamic community.

These hadith also illustrate that wife beating is per the discretion of the husband. Not all Muslim husbands beat their wives as Abu Jahm. There was variation in the Muslim community and this variation existed because the husband determined when it was needed. What may be an unimportant infraction to one husband could be a great offense to another.

 

 

HADITH OF THE SUNAN OF ABU DAWUD[10]

Disciplining the wife was important enough in Islamic thought that Abu Dawud devoted a small chapter dedicated to wife beating in his Hadith collection. Below are two of them.

 

CHAPTER 709 ON BEATING WOMEN

#2141

Iyas Dhubab reported the apostle of Allah as saying: “Do not beat Allah’s handmaidens”, 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”.

#2142

Umar reported the prophet as saying: “A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife”.

 

HADITH OF THE SUNAN OF IBN-I-MAJAH[11]

Like Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah also has a short chapter dedicated to the topic of wife beating.

#1985

Iyas b. ‘Abdullah, the son of Abu Dhubab reported that Allah’s Messenger said, “Do not beat the slave girls (women folk).” Then Umar visited the Holy Prophet and said, “Allah’s Messenger, women have become emboldened towards their husbands. So allow us to beat them. So, they were beaten (when permission was granted). upon this many groups of women went round the family of Muhammad. When it was morning, he, (the Holy Prophet), said, “Seventy women went round the family of Muhammad this night. Every woman was making a complaint against her spouse. You will not find them (1) the best among you.

[The note for (1) says, “The word ula’ika refers to the men who severely beat women and transgress all bound in beating them.”

#1986

Ash’ath b. Qais is reported to have said, “One night Umar arranged a feast. When it was midnight, he got up and went towards his wife to beat her. I separated them both. When he went to bed, he said to me, “O Ash’ath, preserve from me a thing that I heard from Allah’s messenger. (These things are): A man will not be taken to task for beating his wife (for valid reasons) and do not sleep without observing witr prayer.” I forgot the third (exhortation).

 

MUHAMMAD’S WIVES AISHA AND HAFSAH

Being Muhammad’s wife had many great advantages. However, even Aisha and Hafsah (two of Muhammad’s wives) were physically disciplined. Note that in each case when Aisha was struck she was married to Muhammad and she was probably younger than 16 years old.

Sahih Muslim #2127:

…When it was my turn for Allah’s Messenger to spend the night with me, he turned his side, put on his mantle and took off his shoes and placed them near his feet, and spread the corner of his shawl on his bed and then lay down till he thought that I had gone to sleep. He took hold of his mantle slowly and put on the shoes slowly, and opened the door and went out and then closed it lightly. I covered my head, put on my veil and tightened my waist wrapper, and then went out following his steps till he reached Baqi’. He stood there and he stood for a long time. He then lifted his hands three times, and then returned and I also returned. He hastened his steps and I also hastened my steps. He ran and I too ran. He came (to the house) and I also came (to the house). I, however, preceded him and I entered (the house), and as I lay down in the bed, he (the Holy Prophet) entered the (house), and said: Why is it, O ‘Aisha, that you are out of breath? I said: There is nothing. He said: Tell me or the Subtle and the Aware would inform me. I said: Messenger of Allah, may my father and mother be ransom for you, and then I told him (the whole story). He said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?…

Sahih Muslim #3506:

Jabir b. ‘Abdullah reported: Abu Bakr came and sought permission to see Allah’s Messenger. He found people sitting at his door and none amongst them had been granted permission, but it was granted to Abu Bakr and he went in. Then came ‘Umar and he sought permission and it was granted to him, and he found Allah’s Apostle sitting sad and silent with his wives around him. He (Hadrat ‘Umar) said: I would say something which would make the Holy Prophet laugh, so he said: Messenger of Allah, I wish you had seen (the treatment meted out to) the daughter of Kharija when she asked me some money, and I got up and slapped her on her neck. Allah’s Messenger laughed and said: They are around me as you see, asking for extra money. Abu Bakr then got up went to ‘Aisha and slapped her on the neck, and ‘Umar stood up before Hafsa and slapped her saying: You ask Allah’s Messenger which he does not possess. They said: By Allah, we do not ask Allah’s Messenger for anything he does not possess….

Bukhari volume 8, #828

Narrated Aisha: Abu Bakr came to towards me and struck me violently with his fist and said, “You have detained the people because of your necklace.” But I remained motionless as if I was dead lest I should awake Allah’s Apostle although that hit was very painful.

Bukhari volume 7, #132

“Narrated Zam’a, “The prophet said, “None of you should flog his wife as he flogs a slave and then have sexual intercourse with her in the last part of the day.””

 

COMMENT

These four hadith illustrate that striking women was acceptable in early Islam. In the first hadith Muhammad chest-slapped Aisha and “caused her pain”. This action is not “wife beating” in the strictest sense, but it shows that a woman can be struck under certain circumstances. Muhammad’s ego was challenged, and he was probably frightened by seeing her shadow late at night. In his anger he struck Aisha.

The context for the second Hadith is that Muhammad had been very upset because of his wives. He almost divorced them all! His closest friends came to cheer him up. Umar mentioned that he had slapped his wife because she wanted more money than he felt he could give. Muhammad laughed when he heard that. Then he pointed out his wives’ demands for more money. As a result, both fathers were angry and slapped their respective daughters. Physical discipline was used to bring the wives into line. Muhammad didn’t slap his wives but he approved others doing it for him.

The context for the third Hadith is Muhammad delayed breaking of camp to search for Aisha’s necklace. This made things hard for his followers because there was not much water. Abu Bakr struck her violently with his fist. While this is not “wife beating” it again illustrates that striking women, even Muhammad’s wife, was an acceptable form of discipline.

In the fourth hadith Muhammad does not forbid wife beating, rather he didn’t want them beaten severely as Muslim’s slaves were beaten.

These hadith give us glimpses of early Islamic life. They show us how women were thought of and how they were treated. Later Islamic scholars were able to draw from these stories and develop an Islamic system of life and women continued in subjection. If wives were beaten with Muhammad’s approval then that practice would continue. Muslim women today are placed in the same position that Rifaa’s wife was placed: obey or be physically punished. We’ll see several examples of this later.

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________

THE BIOGRAPHICAL MATERIAL (SIRA)

MUHAMMAD’S FAREWELL ADDRESS

Shortly before he died as a result of poisoning by a Jewish woman [12], Muhammad addressed a crowd of Muslims in Mecca. He commented on several issues including the treatment of women. Below is the pertinent quote from Guillaume’s translation of Ibn Ishaq’s “Sirat Rasulallah”.

“You have rights over your wives, and they have rights over you. You have the right that they should not defile your bed and that they should not behave with open unseemliness. If they do, God allows you to put them in separate rooms and to beat them, but not with severity. If they refrain from these things and obey you, they have right to their food and clothing with kindness.Lay injunctions on women kindly, for they are your wards having no control of their persons.”[13]

 

Note here that:

  1. The beating is not to be vicious or severe.
  2. Women are “wards” under men’s control because they cannot control themselves. The Islamic definition of “ward” means a person who has been legally placed under the care of a guardian or court, or a person who is under the protection and control of another. Muslim wives are placed under their husband’s control.

 

The Muslim scholar Ali Dashti translates the fourth sentence from the above passage and comments:

Look after women kindly! They are prisoners, not having control of themselves at all”. The passage’s word in Arabic “awan” translated as “ward” or “prisoners” implies that women are in-between slave and free. In other words, because women are unable control their emotions, men are given authority over them.[14]

 

Like the Hadith, the Sira provide important details on wife beating. The quote above has been used many times by various writers. This is because Muhammad defined a woman’s social status as: “They are prisoners, not having control of themselves at all”, and allowed them to be beaten.

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________

THE SCHOLARS ON WIFE BEATING

Below is a large selection of commentary from some of the greatest scholars in Islam on 4:34. You will notice that their positions are uniform primarily, agreeing upon the superiority of men, the required obedience of the wife, and the right of the husband to beat his disobedient wife. Quranic verses will be in bold font. I would like to thank brother Mutee’a Al-Fadi for doing the translations of Arabic into English for the commentaries of Tabari, Baidawi, and Qurtubi. His testimony is found here: http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Alfadi/testimony.html

 

COMMENTARY OF AL TABARI[15]

Tabari was a Shafi’i scholar and wrote one of the most extensive Quranic commentaries which was used by other Muslim scholars when writing their commentaries. Additionally, Tabari wrote a detailed history focusing primarily upon the Islamic world. This history is available in English as “The History of al-Tabari”.

Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others

This means that men are in charge of their wives in leadership and discipline, because of paying them the dowry; spending their money on them; and providing for their needs. That’s how Allah chooses to excel men over them. That’s what the commentators have agreed on.

Ibn Abbas said {Men are the maintainers of women} means that the woman has to obey her man in all of what Allah has commanded her, this includes the kind treatment of his family, the protection of his money.

Al Dhahaak said: the man is the maintainer of his wife by ordering her to obey Allah. If she refused; then he can beat her not severely.

It was said that this verse was revealed because a man hit his wife on her face, so she came to the prophet (saw). The prophet then wanted to judge in her favor. But Allah revealed { Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others}. Then the prophet called on the man and recited this verse to him and said: “I wanted one thing, but Allah wanted another”.

Al Zahry said: if a man hit his wife or wounded her, he is not to be charged, unless he kills her, then he shall be killed for murdering her.

and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion

Some scholars said: it means those whom you know that they are doing something disobedient. Others said: if you see a questionable behavior by them. Then you ought to advise them and refuse to sleep with them.

{desertion} means: disobeying her husband. Ibn Abbas said: it is when the wife undermined her husband’s position and disobey him.

{admonish them} Ibn Abbas said: by following the Quran. Mujahid said: if a woman deserted her bed and her husband told her : fear Allah and come back to bed and she obeyed him, then he has no right to admonish her.

and leave them alone in the sleeping-places

There are different opinions in interpreting this part of the verse. Some said: it means, do not have intercourse with them. Others like Ibn Abbas said: it means not to share bed with them (not intercourse). Others said: it means, to abandon speaking to them in bed.

Ibn Abbas also said: it means, to stop talking to them, and to be mean to them and not have intercourse with them.

and beat them

It means: admonish them, but if they refused to repent, then tie them up in their homes and beat them until they obey Allah’s commands toward you. Scholars said: the beating that is allowed by Allah is not the severe kind. Ibn Abbas said: not severe.

Also, Ibn Abbas said: abandon her in bed, but if she refused to return, then beat her not severely and do not break her bone. Ibn Abbas said: the beating has to be with light stick or the like.

Al Qassem narrated, the prophet said: “do not abandon your wives except in bed, and when you beat them, do not beat them severely”.

 

COMMENTARY OF IBN KATHIR[16]

Ibn Kathir was also a Shafi’i scholar and is one of the distinguished Islamic scholars. His commentary (tafseer) is a favorite of Sunni Muslims. Excerpts from his commentary on 4:34 follow. The quote is very long, but it is of great value in describing how the woman is positioned in Islam, and it provides the theological justification for her beating. I quote from pages 50 through 53.

“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 a man is better than a woman. Therefore, prophethood and great kingship were confined to men, as the Prophet said, “A people that choose a woman as their leader will not succeed.” This Hadith was narrated by Al-Bukhari. Added to that positions such as the judiciary, etc, … “And because they spend from their means.” Here, Allah refers to the dowry and expenses, which Allah has prescribed in the Quran 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

Therefore, a woman should obey her husband in what Allah has commanded her with regards to his obedience and Allah’s obedience. She should be kind towards his family, protective of his wealth. The statement was also held by Muqatil, As-Sudiy and Adh-Dhahhak.

On the authority of Ali, Ibn Mardawaih 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.””

“Because Allah has made one of them excel the other and because they spend from their means.” Ash-Sha’bi stated that this excellence refers to the bridal money; for if the husband reprimands her, he shall not be punished and if she reprimands him, she will be lashed. “Therefore the righteous among women, are devoutly obedient” to their husbands. “And guard in the husband’s absence” her honor and his wealth. “What Allah orders them to guard.” This part of the verse means that the guarded is he whom Allah has guarded.

Quoting Abu Hurairah, Ibn Jarir narrated: “The Prophet said: “The best among women are the ones who pleases you when you look at her, obeys you when you give her an order and guards herself and your wealth during your absence.” Then the Prophet recited: “Men are the protectors and maintainers of women…””

“As to those women on whose part you see misconduct (nushuzuhunna).” The reference is made to those who show disobedience. It is said that a nashiza – from the verb nashaza = to disobey – is a woman who disobeys her husband’s order, opposes and dislikes him. Therefore, if a husband feels the signs of her disobedience, he should give her advice, threaten her with Allah’s Punishment for her disobedience to her husband. This is because Allah has prescribed that a wife has a duty towards her husband and she should obey him, and that it is unlawful for her to disobey him due to his excellence. The Prophet said in this context: “If I were to order one to prostrate to another, I would order a women to prostrate to her husband due to the greatness of her duty towards him.”

“Refuse to share their beds.” Ibn Abbas said: “A man should advise her if she accepts. Otherwise, he should refuse to share their bed.” Quoting Ibn Abbas, “Sharing the bed means: a man should not have sexual intercourse with his wife, and should turn his back on her in bed. Quoting Muawiyyah Ibn Hida al-Qushairi, it is narrated in the books of Sunan (Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, etc…) and Musnad: “O Allah Messenger! What is a man’s duty towards his wife?” The Prophet replied: “Feed her when you feed yourself, buy her clothes when you buy yourself clothes, do not hit her in the face, do not scold and do not desert her except in the house.””

“And beat them.” If they do not abstain from their disobedience through both advice and desertion. However, the beating should be dharbun ghayru nubrah, 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 nubrah means: The husband should beat his wife lightly, in a way which does not result in breaking one of her limbs or affecting her badly.

“But if they obey, seek not against them means (of annoyance).” If a woman obeys her husband in all what he wants from her, as long as within the boundaries of what is lawful, he should not beat nor desert her.”

 

COMMENTARY OF BAIDAWI[17]

Baidawi was a Persian Shafi’l scholar who was so respected that he was referred to as “The Judge”.

Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others

Men are the maintainers over women just as rulers are over their populous, and Allah gave two reasons for this exaltation:

One is due to the completeness of men’s brain over women’s deficiency, their management skills, and their extra requirement of worship; this is why men were chosen to be prophets; religious leaders; rulers; and enforcers of commandments; legal witnesses in a court of law; fighters in the cause of Allah; receivers of more share of the inheritance and in control of divorce. The other is their duty to pay dowry to their wives and provide for them.

It was told that Sa’ad bin Al Rabee’a wife became disobedient so he smacked her. Then her father went to the messenger (saw) to file his complaint, wherein the messenger ruled in her favor. Then this verse was sent down, at which point the messenger said: we wanted something but Allah wanted another, and Allah knows better.

and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion

if you fear their disobedient

Admonish them

Then advise them

and leave them alone in the sleeping-places

Do not share bed with them, or do not face them when sleeping on the same bed or do not have intercourse with them.

and beat them

Means in a non severe manner.

And these three options have to be followed in the same order

 

COMMENTARY OF THE JALALAIN[18]

This commentary is the work of two men named Jalal. The second Jalal (Suyuti), who was a Shafi’i scholar and a Sufi, and was regarded as being one the greatest Islamic scholars. He finished the work of the first.

Men are in charge of, they have authority over, women, disciplining them and keeping them in check, because of that with which God has preferred the one over the other, that is, because God has given them the advantage over women, in knowledge, reason, authority and otherwise, and because of what they expend, on them [the women], of their property. Therefore righteous women, among them, are obedient, to their husbands, guarding in the unseen, that is, [guarding] their private parts and otherwise during their spouses’ absence, because of what God has guarded, for them, when He enjoined their male spouses to look after them well. And those you fear may be rebellious, disobedient to you, when such signs appear, admonish them, make them fear God, and share not beds with them, retire to other beds if they manifest such disobedience, and strike them, but not violently, if they refuse to desist [from their rebellion] after leaving them [in separate beds]. If they then obey you, in what is desired from them, do not seek a way against them, a reason to strike them unjustly. God is ever High, Great, so beware of Him, lest He punish you for treating them unjustly.

 

COMMENTARY OF IBN ABBAS[19]

Ibn Abbas was Muhammad’s cousin and spent much time with him. He was regarded as being one of the great Muslim scholars of his time.

(Men are in charge of women) they are in charge of overseeing the proper conduct of women, (because Allah hath made the one of them) the men through reason and the division of booty and estates (to excel the other) the women, (and because they spend of their property (for the support of women) through paying the dowry and spending on them, which the women are not required to do. (So good women) He says: those wives who are kind to their husbands (are the obedient) they are obedient to Allah regarding their husbands, (guarding) their own persons and the wealth of their husbands (in secret) when their husbands are not present (that which Allah hath guarded) through Allah’s protection of them in that He gave them the success to do so. (As for those from whom ye fear) know (rebellion) their disobedience to you in bed, (admonish them) by means of sacred knowledge and the Qur’an (and banish them to beds apart) turn your faces away from them in bed, (and scourge them) in a mild, unexaggerated manner. (Then if they obey you) in bed, (seek not a way against them) as regard love. (Lo! Allah is ever High Exalted) above every single thing, (Great) greater than every single thing. Allah has not burdened you with that which you cannot bear, so do not burden women with that which they cannot bear of affection.

 

COMMENTARY OF AL QURTUBI[20]

“Qurtubi was from Cordova, Spain, a Maliki scholar and hadith specialist, he was one of the greatest Imams of Koranic exegesis.”[21]

Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others

They provide for them, and from men come out rulers; princes & warriors, whereas this is not found among women.

This verse was revealed because Sa’ad ibn Al Rabee’a slapped his wife Habibah bint Zaid after she deserted him. After which, her father said: O’ Messenger of Allah, I gave him my daughter (as a bed spread for him) but he slapped her. Then the messenger said: let us judge her husband. So she left with her father seeking judgment. But then the messenger said: come back, this is the angel Gabriel has come down to me. Then Allah revealed: (we willed something but Allah willed another). And in another story: (I willed something, but Allah willed something better).

It was told that due to this incident, Sura 20:114 “…and do not make haste with the Quran before its revelation is made complete to you…” Was revealed.

Abu Raouq said: this verse was revealed because of Jamilah bint Obey and her husband Thabit bin Qais. Al Kalby said: it was revealed because of Omayrah bint Muhammad bin Muslamah and her husband Sa’ad bin Al Rabee’a…Allah has revealed that the reason why men are excelled over women because men are the providers, and hence women will benefit from that. It is also said: men are excelled over women because they have more brain ability…

and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion

If the wife hates and desert her husband

Admonish them

By using Allah’s scripture. It means to remind them of their duties, toward their husbands, which were ordained to them by Allah. The prophet of Allah (saw) said: (if I was to order someone to prostrate to another person, I would have ordered the wife to prostrate to her husband)

and leave them alone in the sleeping-places

Ibn Masud said: it is the intercourse. As said Ibn Abbas and others.

I (Al Qurtubi) said, it is a good thing; since if she loves her husband then this abandonment will be hard on her. But if she despises him, then her disobedient attitude towards him will become the more clearer.

Ibn Abbas said: to leave them alone is to tie them up in their homes just as you would tie your ride. And this is Al Tabari’s own view on this. However, Judge Abu Bakr bin Al Araby renounced Al Tabari’s interpretation on the ground of tying the wife, as he believe that Al Tabari based his view on a strange hadith regarding Asma’ the daughter of Abu Bakr who was married to Al Zubair bin Al Awaam. She used to leave her home often until people began to gossip and fault her husband for that, As a result, Al Zubair blamed his second wife for this and tied Asma’s hair and the hair of his second wife together, then he beat both of them up very severely.

This abandonment is believed by many scholars to be around a period of one month.

and beat them

Allah ordered that men begin by admonishing their wives as a first step, then abandonment, then beating if they refused to repent. This is because men are responsible to straighten their wives up. The beating mentioned in this verse has to do with the kind that is not severe and used for discipline. The kind that does not break the bone. However, it is not a crime if it leads to death. In the same manner a disciplinary will beat his son or student to teach him the Quran and manners.

In a hadith in Sahih Muslim the Prophet said: (fear Allah with your wives. You were given them by Allah’s provision, and you were entrusted with their private parts by Allah’s word. You have the right that they do not allow anyone you dislike into your bed, but if they do, then beat them but not severely) the hadith. It was narrated on the authority of Jabir Al Taweel during Hajj. This means that they should not allow anyone into your home that you dislike whether relatives or foreign women.

Al Tirmithi reported that Amro bin Al Ahwas had attended the Farewell Hajj and heard the messenger of Allah say: “Lo! My last recommendation to you is that you should TREAT WOMEN WELL. Truly they are your helpmates, and you have no right over them beyond that – EXCEPT IF THEY COMMIT A MANIFEST INDECENCY (fahisha mubina = adultery). If they do, then refuse to share their beds and beat them WITHOUT INDECENT VIOLENCE (fadribuhunna darban ghayra mubarrih*). Then, if they obey you, do not show them hostility any longer. Lo! you have a right over your women and they have a right over you. Your right over your women is that they not allow whom you hate to enter your bed nor your house. While their right over them is that you treat them excellently in their garb and provision.”

Atta asked Ibn Abbas: what is the non severer beating. Ibn Abbas answered: using a small stick or the like.

It was reported also that Omar beat his wife and said, I heard the messenger of Allah say: (No man should be asked why he beat his wife).

You need to know that Allah did not allow for beating in his book except in this situation and when the major sins have been committed. Therefore, Allah has made the disobedient of wives equivalent to the commitment of major sins.

And Allah granted this privilege to the husbands over the Islamic authorities (Rulers), and allowed it for them without the need for a judge or witnesses or evidences. They were allowed this because they were entrusted by Allah to handle to take care of their wives.

Al Muhallab said: the permission was given to beat the wives when they refuse to sleep with their husbands. By comparison, if she refuses to serve him too then he is permitted to beat her too.

Her disobedient and refusal to sleep with her husband is a ground for the husband to deny her her allowance and all of her spousal rights, along with that, the husband is allowed to admonish her; refuse to sleep with her; and to beat her. But if she repented, then all of her rights will be reinstituted. The prophet (saw) said: (Allah’s mercy is on the man who hang his beating lash (stick) and disciplined his wife).

 

AL-NAWAWI (Reliance of the Traveller)[22]

Nawawi is one of the great Islamic jurisprudence scholars. He was a 13th century Shafi’i scholar. His work was used by Ahmad Naqib in writing “Reliance of the Traveller”. This book is a “Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law”. From the section m10.12, “Dealing with a Rebellious Wife”, page 540,

“When a husband notices signs of rebelliousness in his wife (nushuz), whether in words, as when she answers him coldly when she used to do so politely, or he asks her to come to bed and she refuses, contrary to her usual habit; or whether in acts, as when he finds her averse to him when she was previously kind and cheerful), he warns her in words (without keeping from her or hitting her, for it may be that she has an excuse. The warning could be to tell her, “fear Allah concerning the rights you owe to me,” or it could be to explain that rebelliousness nullifies his obligation to support her and give her a turn amongst other wives, or it could be to inform her, “Your obeying me is religiously obligatory”). If she commits rebelliousness, he keeps from sleeping (and having sex) with her without words, and may hit her, but not in a way that injures her, meaning he may not (bruise her), break bones, wound her, or cause blood to flow. (It is unlawful to strike another’s face.) He may hit her whether she is rebellious only once or whether more than once, though a weaker opinion holds that he may hot hit her unless there is repeated rebelliousness.”

If the wife does not fulfill one of the above-mentioned obligations, she is termed “rebellious” (nashiz), and the husband takes the following steps to correct matters:

(a) admonition and advice, by explaining the unlawfulness of rebellion, its harmful effect on married life, and by listening to her viewpoint on the matter;

(b) if admonition is ineffectual, he keeps from her by not sleeping in bed with her, by which both learn the degree to which they need each other;

(c) if keeping from her is ineffectual, it is permissible for him to hit her if he believes that hitting her will bring her back to the right path, though if he does not think so, it is not permissible. His hitting her may not be in a way that injures her, and is his last recourse to save the family.

(d) if the disagreement does not end after all this, each partner chooses an arbitrator to solve the dispute by settlement, or divorce.

 

COMMENTARY OF E. M. WHERRY[23]

Wherry was a Christian scholar who studied Islam and compiled a 4-volume set of various commentaries on the Quran. He was also able to identify the criticality of how the women is positioned in Islam and makes some in-depth comments.

Men shall have the pre-eminence. The ground of the pre-eminence of man over woman is here said to be man’s natural superiority over woman. Women are an inferior class of human beings. “The advantages wherein God hath causes the one of them to excel the other” are said by the commentators to be “superior understanding and strength, and the other privileges of the male sex, e.g., ruling in church and state, warring for the faith, and receiving double portions of the estates of deceased ancestors (see Sale in loco). Men are the lords of the women, and women become the virtual slaves of the men. The holy, happy estate of Eve in Eden can never be even approximately secured for her daughters under Islam.

The difference between the home-life of the Christian and that of the Muslim cannot be more clearly indicated than by a comparison of this verse with Gen. ii. 23, Eph. v. 28, and 1 Pet. iii. 7.

 

COMMENTS

All of the scholars agree that a man is to beat a disobedient wife. He can use a stick or use his hand. He is not to break bones but he can beat her like a father beats a disobedient son.

I’ve noted the following:

  • Tabari said: “then tie them up in their homes and beat them until they obey Allah’s commands toward you.”
  • The Jalalain and Ibn Abbas establish man’s superiority over women strongly.
  • The only exception I take with Nawawi’s text is that he says a man cannot “bruise her”. People can bruise very easily, and some bruises could become visible only after the beating. The Hadith show that a woman was bruised and accepted to Muhammad.
  • It is permissible for the husband to beat his wife if she has a bad attitude towards him. Once again, “rebellion” is determined by the husband’s standards. The right of judging rebellion places the husband in a powerful position. He evaluates the woman’s attitudes and actions, makes a judgment, and executes his sentence. If his standards change she will have to change accordingly.
  1. Wherry could see through Muhammad’s rhetoric and state the bottom line: Women are an inferior class of human beings”. That hits the nail on the head and sums up the theology accurately. This is what I noticed after I began to study this topic in depth.

 

_____________________________________________________________________

OTHER ISLAMIC WRITINGS AND STATEMENTS

1) Muslim Clerics on the Religious Rulings Regarding Wife-Beating

This article references many articles and statements by prominent Muslims teaching wife beating: http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Area=sr&ID=SR2704 Below is a quote:

“The husband’s rights on his wife are greater than hers over him.” Another source states, “Men have a supervisory authority on account of the physical advantage they possess…” It is also stated, “When the husband calls his wife to his bed and she disobeys, and he spends the night in anger against her, the angels keep cursing her till the morning.” In addition, “If a woman dies while her husband was pleased with her,” it is explained that “she will enter into Paradise.”

It is a thorough article that details what the Muslims are teaching.[24]

 

2) Here is a video of a Muslim cleric teaching wife beating.[25]

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2007/01/islam_beating_w.html

 

3) Muslim cleric: Some wives need to be beaten.[26]

Concluding his message, the preacher explains to his listeners the three types of women who must be beaten:

“[The Koran says:] ‘and beat them.’ This verse is of a wondrous nature. There are three types of women with whom a man cannot live unless he carries a rod on his shoulder. The first type is a girl who was brought up this way. Her parents ask her to go to school and she doesn’t – they beat her. ‘Eat’ – ‘I don’t want to’ – they beat her. So she became accustomed to beatings; she was brought up that way. We pray Allah will help her husband later. He will only get along with her if he practices wife beating.

“The second type is a woman who is condescending toward her husband and ignores him. With her, too, only a rod will help. The third type is a twisted woman who will not obey her husband unless he oppresses her, beats her, uses force against her, and overpowers her with his voice.”

 

4) Clothes Aren’t the Issue[27]

This article is by a Muslim women, Asra Q. Nomani, who is keenly aware of the extent of Muslim spousal abuse in the West. She challenges Muslims who teach wife beating. Sadly she has not yet admitted to herself that her prophet, Muhammad, who institutionalized wife beating in Islam. Nevertheless, she understands the command’s cruelty.

Verse 4:34 retains a strong following, even among many who say that women must be treated as equals under Islam. Indeed, Muslim scholars and leaders have long been doing what I call “the 4:34 dance” — they reject outright violence against women but accept a level of aggression that fits contemporary definitions of domestic violence.

Not long after I picked up the free Saudi book, Mahmoud Shalash, an imam from Lexington, Ky., stood at the pulpit of my mosque and offered marital advice to the 100 or so men sitting before him. He repeated the three-step plan, with “beat them” as his final suggestion. Upstairs, in the women’s balcony, sat a Muslim friend who had recently left her husband, who she said had abused her; her spouse sat among the men in the main hall.

At the sermon’s end, I approached Shalash. “This is America,” I protested. “How can you tell men to beat their wives?”

“They should beat them lightly,” he explained. “It’s in the Koran.”

He was doing the dance.

 

5) WOMEN IN ISLAM [28]

This books states the justification for Islamic wife beating, page 35:

The family life should be harmonious. If anything goes wrong and there is any misunderstanding four steps are to be taken to deal with such a situation: 1) verbal advice and admonitions, 2) then the family relation is to be suspended, 3) after that slight physical correction (beating slightly) may be administered and the fourth is a family council to settle the differences if there is any.

page 36:

If she still resists, then he is to administer a slight physical correction. He is to scourge her. When he flogs her, he should remember that he is beating his own wife. He should not beat her when he is angry; whatever the cause of his anger could be. The flogging must never leave any marks on her. It should be slight and not very painful.

 

6) THE ISLAMIC WEBSITE http://www.aol40.com/beating.htm [29]

Below are several quotes that the Muslim author wrote justifying Islamic wife beating.

a) “The point however is, Noble Verses 4:34-36 should not be a concern for any Muslim woman, because a good woman should not intentionally disobey her husband in what Allah Almighty has permitted for him upon her and would not flirt with any man from the first place! So on the third time after the prior 2 warnings, she definitely needs some disciplinary measures be taken against her.”

b) “The husband is like a “god” to his wife. Wives need to always honor and respect their husbands:

c) “It is important to know that according to Islam, the husband should always be honored and respected in his home as if he were “god”. It is important for the wife to realize this fact very well. Stubborn wives have no place in Islam:”

d) “Narrated Qays ibn Sa’d: “I went to al-Hirah and saw them (the people) prostrating themselves before a satrap of theirs, so I said: The Apostle of Allah has most right to have prostration made before him. When I came to the Prophet, I said: I went to al-Hirah and saw them prostrating themselves before a satrap of theirs, but you have most right, Apostle of Allah, to have (people) prostrating themselves before you. He said: Tell me , if you were to pass my grave, would you prostrate yourself before it? I said: No. He then said: Do not do so. If I were to command anyone to make prostration before another I would command women to prostrate themselves before their husbands, because of the special right over them given to husbands by Allah. (Translation of Sunan Abu-Dawud, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Book 11, Number 2135)””

e) “The wife is responsible for pleasing her husband and making sure that he is always satisfied. It is her Islamic duty!”

f) “It is also important for the wives to know that according to Islam, their husbands are like their “gods”. If bowing down to other than Allah Almighty in worship was not prohibited in Islam, Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him would’ve ordered the women to bow down to their husbands.”

g) “The only time Islam allows a husband to beat his wife is when she intentionally disobeys her husband in what Allah Almighty has permitted for him upon her or when she flirts or show disloyalty for the third time.”

 

COMMENT

These articles all illustrate the extent that wife beating is being both taught and practiced throughout the world. There are a few Muslim organizations that claim that the translation of “beat” is a poor one. I discuss that in an appendix. But by and large the “beat” definition is accepted by Muslims far and wide.

 

_____________________________________________________________________

CURRENT ISLAMIC WIFE BEATING AROUND THE WORLD

The previous section discussed the writings of various Muslims on the doctrine of wife beating. Below are examples of wife beating. Since I last updated this article many more related articles and events have arisen. I’m going to cut and paste excerpts and links from various articles and give the reader the option to read their entirety.

 

1) Islamic wife beating in America.

Below is an article on wife abuse in the Muslim community. Here are a few quotes, but I encourage everyone to read the article in full.

Wife Abuse in the Muslim Community[30] by Kamran Memon

“While North American Muslims loudly protest the widely-documented Serbian abuse of Muslim women in Bosnia, the abuse of many Muslim women at the hands of their own husbands in North America is hidden and ignored by the community.

Of those who reach a breaking point and seek help, many Muslim women turn to Imams but often find them unhelpful. Imams often tell these women to be patient and pray for the abuse to end. Some imams make the abused Muslim women feel guilty, telling them they have brought the abuse upon themselves and instructing them to go home and please their husbands. Other imams, who are sincerely but mistakenly misinterpreting Islam by putting the importance of family privacy above any harm that might come to the individual woman, tell the women it is wrong for them to discuss their problems with anyone other than their husbands. The Imams’s reactions stem from ignorance, cowardice, or friend-ship or blood relationship with the abusive husbands. Relatively few imams have had the wisdom and courage to tackle the problem head-on. As a result of this, many abused women don’t bother turning to Imams for help.

 

2) Islamic wife beating in Saudi Arabia

Below is an article from the BBC about a famous Saudi woman who was beaten by her husband. Note her comment in bold.

Rania al-Baz suffered multiple fractures.

A TV presenter who says she was beaten by her husband has allowed newspapers to show pictures of her swollen face to highlight domestic abuse. Rania al-Baz said her husband, Mohammed al-Fallatta, beat her so hard earlier this week that he broke her nose and fractured her face in 13 places.

She is recovering in hospital. Police are looking for Mr. Fallatta, an unemployed singer. Reuters news agency says he faces charges of attempted murder. Ms Baz’s mother told Saudi media that Mr. Fallatta beat her daughter regularly.

This time, the mother is quoted as saying, he became infuriated when Ms Baz answered the telephone. After beating her, Mr. Fallatta took her to hospital and fled, her mother reportedly added.

“I want to use what happened to me to draw attention to the plight of women in Saudi Arabia,” Ms Baz said.

Every morning for the past six years, Ms Baz has been the smiling face of a family programme on Saudi television. She is well-known and loved in the kingdom.

The BBC’s correspondent Kim Ghattas says this is probably the first time ever that a case of domestic violence has received media coverage in Saudi Arabia. It is a deeply conservative society, where Islamic Sharia law is strictly enforced and where honour and appearances are hugely important.

The presence of problems such as domestic violence, rape, paedophilia or Aids is often simply not acknowledged our correspondent adds.

“It is considered a husband’s rights that his wife should obey him,” Abeer Mishkhas, of the Saudi English-language newspaper Arab News, told BBC News Online.

“This can involve coercion or violence, and we know that the majority of cases of this kind go unreported and unnoticed.” More and more Saudi women go to civil courts to request divorces on grounds of violence, Ms Mishkhas says.[31]

 

Sandra Mackay in her book “The Saudis[32], comments on the amount of wife beating that goes on there:

pages 138, 139

“Women survive by totally placing themselves in the hands of men. It is in this basic relationship of master and servant that a woman’s physical needs are met….. Restlessness is repressed…. Obedience is security.

 

In 1992, the book “Princess[33] was published. The author, Jean Sasson, used the writings of a close Saudi friend of hers and penned this book.

pages 21, 22

“Although the Koran does state that women are secondary to men…

“The authority of the Saudi male is unlimited; his wife and child survive only if he desires. …From an early age, the male child is taught that women are of little value: they exist only for his comfort and convenience. … Taught only the role of master to slave, it is little wonder that by the time he is old enough to take a mate, he considers her his chattel, not his partner.”

 

3) Islamic wife beating in Spain

Spain has had significant problems with its Muslims. Here a Muslim cleric was sentenced and fined for publishing a book that teaches wife beating.

Spanish Muslim Cleric on Rules For Wife-Beating[34]

On January 14, 2004, Sheikh Muhammad Kamal Mustafa, the imam of the mosque of the city of Fuengirola, Costa del Sol, was sentenced by a Barcelona court to a 15 month suspended sentence and fined € 2160 for publishing his book ‘The Woman in Islam.’ In this book, the Egyptian-born Sheikh Mustafa writes, among other things, on wife-beating in accordance with Shar’ia law.

 

4) Islamic wife beating in Turkey

I have edited non-essential comments from this article taken from Turkish news dated Aug 9. 2000:

http://www.turkishdailynews.com/FrTDN/latest/dom.htm [35]

To beat, or not to beat, a woman. Turkey has recently been witnessing a debate between the Religious Affairs Directorate and the Pious Foundation on the status of women in Islam

In response to the Pious Foundation’s publication, “The Muslim’s Handbook,” which says that it is permissible to beat women, the Religious Affairs Directorate decided to publish a book to correct superstitions about the status of women in Islam.

 

5) Islamic wife beating in Egypt

The Guardian Weekly, a British newspaper on 23/12/1990 printed:

“In 1987 an Egyptian court, following an interpretation of the Koran proposed by the Syndicate of Arab Lawyers, ruled that a husband had the duty to educate his wife and therefore the right to punish her as he wished.”

 

6) Islamic wife beating in Jordan

Reports from Jordan concerning the acceptance of wife beating.

April 10, 2005. Disturbing report on wife beating in Jordan[36]

Mariam highlighted a very disturbing report (in Arabic) published on al-Arabiya’s website that says over 80% of Jordanian women support wife-beating! I’m not sure if this has even a smidgen of truth to it but the figures, released by Jordan’s National Family Council, are quite alarming and disturbing.

According to the report:

• 83% of Jordanian women approve of wife beating if the woman cheats on her husband

• 60% approve of wife beating in cases where the wife burns a meal she’s cooking

• 52% approve of wife beating in case where she’s refused to follow the husband’s orders

Another survey in Jordan[37]

In Mahmoud Rimawi’s column in Al Rai Today a read a ‘very nice’ statistic: 91% of university students polled by the Jordanian Human Right Center approve of wife beating.

An earlier study by another organization found out that a majority of WOMEN also supports the right of a husband to beat the wife. Note: university students, not illiterates.

 

7) Islamic wife beating in Palestine

An article on the state of wife abuse in Palestine[38]

Are Women Well Treated By The Palestinian Authority, As Howard Dean Recently Suggested? September 02, 2003

NEW YORK – In response to the recent statement by former Vermont Governor Howard Dean suggesting that women are well-treated by the Palestinian Authority, the Zionist Organization of America has expressed concern that Dr. Dean’s advisers have not fully informed him about the widespread abuse of women in PA-controlled territories.

Poll Finds Majority of Palestinian Arabs Support Wife-Beating: A September 2002 poll taken by a leading a Palestinian Arab polling agency, the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion, found:

* 56.9% of Palestinian Arabs “believe that a man has the right to beat up his wife if she underestimates his manhood.” …

 

8) Islamic wife beating on AOL

There has been considerable discussion of wife beating on AOL. One Muslim female described how she was continually beaten by her husband. She went to the mosque and talked to the Imams there and asked for their help in dealing with him. They did nothing to help her and they discounted her story. The beatings continued. Finally, he took a baseball bat to her. She went to the police. The husband became a fugitive. After the mosque leaders saw her bruised body they believed her.

The comments from the many Muslims on wife beating are sometimes amusing, sometimes tragic. Some said that the beating was to be done with a handkerchief. Other’s said it was a small twig, other’s said it was not to be done at all, others said it was okay to do if the man was doing it according to Islamic rules, etc.

 

COMMENT

Obviously Islamic wife beating is a significant problem because it is supported and practiced in the worldwide Muslim community. It is not looked down upon in the Islamic world, rather it is extolled! It is much bigger than outsiders think because many Muslim women are unwilling or unable to get help. They accept this abuse as Allah’s will, and not go for help because that would be a greater degree of rebellion towards their husbands and God. This is a tragic dilemma for these unfortunate women. They are trapped between an abusive husband and an abusive god.

If inciting violence against women is illegal they will have to outlaw the Quran!

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________

DAMAGE DUE TO WIFE BEATING

PHYSICAL DAMAGE

There is no need to elaborate on the physical damage that can be done to woman because of being beaten. Suffice it to say that she will suffer bodily harm done from small bruises to welts to injuries to broken bones. Even if it is not “Islamic” to break her bones a husband with the best of Islamic intentions while striking his wife can injure her by accident.

 

PSYCHOLOGICAL DAMAGE

A number of medical studies prove that not only is a women physically damaged by being beaten but she suffers from psychological damage as well. And while the bruises of the beating disappear after a few weeks the psychological damage lasts for years and leaves deeper scars. Here are some excerpts.

1) “Battered”, By Parker, Veronica F[39]

Physical manifestations of abuse range from minor, temporary bruising to permanent impairment and death. But while battering occasionally leaves no scars and few physical symptoms, it almost always causes psychological distress. Researchers have identified low self-esteem, poor self-image, and a propensity to anxiety, depression, and psychosomatic illness as characteristics common to victims of domestic violence.

 

2) “Female victims of spousal violence”[40]

This study employed data from the 1985 National Family Violence Survey to explore the predictors of fear about future abuse among 356 married or cohabiting women whose partners had previously abused them. We found that fear was higher among women whose partners had initiated the violence or who had subjected them to forced sex, or women who felt that their own use of violence would result in disastrous consequences for them. Unexpectedly, having enlisted the help of shelters, lawyers, or therapists was related to greater fear. Accounting for fear at more than one point in time may explain these findings.

One of the more insidious aspects of family violence is the climate of fear that is created for those who are victimized by it. Regardless of whether the violence has been relatively minor, or more severe, relatively infrequent or more routine, the fear that it will reoccur is an ever-present reality.

 

COMMENT

Muslim women are harmed both physically and psychologically by being beaten. These beatings take both a physical and mental toll. Islam’s wife beating is a major social problem yet their clergy insists it should be done. If outlawed or otherwise challenged they claim that their religious rights are violated.

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________

QUESTIONS AND FOOD FOR THOUGHT

Several points need to be raised about 4:34, the Hadith, and Muhammad’s farewell address.

    1. Why does Allah tell men to beat their wives before seeking family council?
  • Why does Allah command wife beating in the Quran but does not command men to love their wives?
  1. How does Muhammad’s statement that women lack self-control and placing men over them effect a woman’s self esteem?
  2. How does 4:34 and Muhammad’s “women are in-between slave and free” comment affect how women are viewed in society and culture?
  3. What is the social and psychological significance for women in the long run knowing they are physically subjected to men and can be beaten by their husbands if men begin to merely suspect that their wives are disobedient?

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________

CONCLUSION

It’s been established that the Islamic source materials command the beating of disobedient wives. Wife beating occurred in early Islam with Muhammad’s approval and it is part of Islam’s theology for family management. This beating is meant to inflict pain in order to bring the wife into submission to her husband. The beating cannot break bones, disfigure, or injure the wife, but can cause pain and bruise her.

Islam states that the man is superior to the woman and positions the wife subordinate to her husband. As her superior he is given authority over her. If she persists in disobedience to him the Quran commands him to beat her. Muhammad institutionalized wife beating and his edict is accepted and supported by the majority of Muslims worldwide.

This legal method of harsh discipline degrades and de-humanizes women. They become servants, they become possessions, they become prized animals that are to be treated kindly but disciplined when the husband feels she is disobedient. There is no way to justify the institutionalized physical and psychological abuse of women commanded by Islam. Islam is not the solution, it is the problem.
Maranatha,
Silas

_____________________________________________________________________

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1: CRITIQUE OF YUSEF ALI’S AND MUHAMMAD ASAD’S NOTES IN THEIR QURAN TRANSLATIONS

ALI

Ali wrote for a Western audience and knew that they reject wife beating. Consequently Ali inserted many of his own words into the Quran’s text to mollify it. Ali inserted 9 different comments in the 4:34 verse. I’ve not found any other verse with that many insertions. Clearly something troubled him enough to cause him to butcher his Quran. Not one other translation adds “lightly” when talking about the beating because there is no “lightly” word in the actual text. Ali was a Muslim apologist and his work here is meant to soften the Quran’s real meaning.

Ali wrote that the beating should be ‘light’. Now examine the Quran’s context: it’s obvious that the beating has to be severe enough to bring her into obedience. It must produce a stronger psychological effect than verbal chastisement and sexual desertion. In other words – it’s got to hurt. Ali did not want to say that because it would mean that Islam is a harsh faith.

 

ASAD

Here are Muhammad Asad’s comments on wife beating found in his translation of the Quran.

“When the above Quran verse authorizing the beating of a refractory wife was revealed, the Prophet is reported to have said: “I wanted one thing, but God has willed another thing – and what God has willed must be best (see Manar V, 74). With all this, he stipulated in his sermon on the occasion of the Farewell Pilgrimage, shortly before his death, that the beating should be resorted to only if the wife “has become guilty, in an obvious manner, of immoral conduct”, and that it should be done “in such a way as not to cause pain (ghayr mubarrih)”; authentic Traditions to this effect are found in Muslim, Tirmidhi, Abu Daud, Nasai and Ibn Majah. On the basis of these Traditions, all the authorities stress that this beating, if resorted to at all, should be more or less symbolic – “with a toothbrush, or some such thing” (Tabari, quoting the views of scholars of the earliest times), or even “with a folded handkerchief” (Razi); and some of the greatest Muslim scholars (e.g. Ash-Shafii) are of the opinion that it is just barely permissible, and should preferable be avoided: and they justify this opinion by the prophet’s personal feelings with regard to this problem.”[41]

 

Asad, like Yusef Ali, wrote with a Western readership in mind. Consequently his comments are intended to make Islam acceptable to the moral Western reader. Although he references the great scholars, his comments contradict what they taught. If Asad were truly familiar with those scholar’s works, he would know that wife beating can be done for both immoral conduct and persistent disobedience.

Another error is that he translates ghayr mubarrih as “not to cause pain”. Guillaume translates it as “not severely”. Ibn Kathir wrote, “not viciously” and both of these allow a degree of pain. How do you beat someone without causing them pain? The two concepts do not go together. If someone says, “I gave him a beating”, be assured it hurt. If I beat you, it will hurt, otherwise it is not a beating.

Asad reaches for straws when he quotes the “symbolic”, “toothbrush” and “handkerchief” rationalizations. “Beat your wife with a handkerchief”? Was he so blinded by his devotion that he actually believed this? The Islamic sources show that in the days of early Islam wife beating was painful and done with the hand or stick.

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________

APPENDIX 2: MUSLIMS’ DEFENSE OF WIFE BEATING

I’ve spoken with Muslims from all over the world about wife beating and received a wide range of responses. These range from, “it is no longer valid today”, to, “the beating must be done with a large toothpick”, to, “wife beating is okay, if done according to Islamic guidelines”, to, “she can get a divorce if she doesn’t like it”, to, “she deserves to be beaten if she disobeys”. Contrary to what the Islamic source materials teach, most Muslim apologists in the West do the 4:34 dance and bend over backwards trying to soften the command. We’ll take a look at some of their mitigations.

 

Excuse 1) “The Quran allows her to divorce if she feels she cannot work out the relationship”.

At first glance this sounds tolerable. The Western reader understands that getting a divorce is not that difficult to obtain and usually the wife receives a monetary settlement.

However in the Islamic world the rules of divorce are quite different. Only recently were Muslim women allowed to get a divorce in Egypt. Elsewhere it is next to impossible to for a woman to obtain a divorce in an Islamic country. Those that do, usually fare poorly when it comes to obtaining any finances from their husbands. The poor women either have to fend for themselves, with many of them having little or no job skills, or have to be grudgingly provided for by their relatives. And as the Jordanian woman remarked, in Islamic society a divorced woman is shamed. She is used goods. Getting re-married will be very challenging.

 

Excuse 2) “The Islamic system for wife beating is perfect, the real problem is that the guidelines for wife beating are not followed by the Muslim men. If everything were done according to the rules then it would be fine.”

The “Islamic guidelines” stipulate that the beating is painful and allows her to be bruised.  When beating her in such a manner, an accident could happen, and the man could break a bone or scar the wife unintentionally.  Or the man may not intend initially to injure his wife but once the beating begins an angry husband could take it too far.  In both cases the wife is damaged severely, and the mental scars remain after the body heals.  The man says “Malish” (sorry), and the woman is left to deal with the pain. These so-called “Islamic guidelines” are a coward’s way for dealing with normal marriage difficulties. “Spousal abuse” by any other name should still be as cruel.

 

Excuse 3) This next excuse is a common one that criminals use to justify their crimes, “she made me do it.” You can find it here as:

What if my wife is stubborn and she intimidates me to either beat her or divorce her when she is angry?[42]

 

How does a wife intimidate her husband into beating her? Does that make any sense to you? I don’t know many people who intimidate others into beating them. After all, isn’t the male superior to the women in Islam? How then does the wife intimidate him? This is ass-backward thinking and the Muslim’s statement above shows the depravity in the Islamic mind. They are willing to grasp at any excuse to justify Muhammad.

 

Excuse 4) This excuse is used most frequently and touched on earlier: “The husband must beat her “lightly”. Below is a quote from one Muslim site.

In case their admonition turns out to be in vain, they should then avoid conjugal relations with them to make them realize the gravity of their disobedient attitude. In case even this step fails to improve the wives’ behavior, the husbands are then advised to beat them lightly.[43]

 

What is a light beating? How would it sound if a man said to his co-workers, “I gave my wife a light beating last night”? Will Muslim women mind having a “light” beating? Sometimes the absurdity of the Muslims doing the 4:34 herky-jerky dance is dumbfounding. Muslim fundamentalists will do and say anything to justify Muhammad’s ignorance and cruelty. In this case we have the “light” beating. But the Islamic source materials say otherwise. Aisha said it herself:

I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!

 

______________________________________________________________________

APPENDIX 3: WHERE TO TURN FOR HELP

A quick search on the net or phone book should provide you with police numbers or call centers that provide help. It is a crime for a husband to assault, i.e. “lightly beat” his wife. There have been recent court cases in which women married to Muslims who abused them have been given protection, custody of the family, and support. Additionally, the abusers have been arrested and charged with a crime. If you know of females being abused by their Muslim husbands you should take action and call the police on their behalf. Below are some groups that can help.

Family Violence and Sexual Assault Institute, 1310 Clinic Drive Tyler, TX 75701, (903) 595- 6600

National Assault Prevention Center, 606 Delsea Drive Sewell, NJ 08080, (908) 369-8972

National Council on Child Abuse and Family Violence, 1155 Connecticut Ave., Suite 400, Washington, DC 20036, (202) 429-6695 or (800) 222-2000

National Institute for Violence Prevention, Box 1035, Sandwich, MA 02563, (508) 833-0731

 

_____________________________________________________________________

APPENDIX 4: REVIEW OF THE WORD “BEAT”

In 4:34 the Arabic word translated as “beat” is “idreb”. The Hans Wehr Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic states that it is a conjugate of the word “daraba” which means primarily “to beat, strike, to hit”[44]. The root of “daraba” is “darb” which means “beating, striking, hitting, shooting, bombing, coining, formation, minting.[45] Other definitions of the word “daraba” are: “to behead, to apply a proverb to, to shoot, to shell, to make music, to sting, to separate, to impose, to cruise, to migrate, etc. Daraba has many meanings too numerous to list and its conjugated derivatives are used similarly in the Quran.

Several Muslim sites attack the translation of this word “beat” and assert that since this word has other meanings, depending on the context, it could also mean verbally chastise. I agree that the context of in which the word appears is critical in determining its real meaning in a passage. And, I believe that we should use the Quran to interpret the Quran, (I don’t mean a circular argument), and find other similar uses of the word in their contexts, to understand how that word can be applied.

So, first note that all of the 4:34 translations of the Quran translate it as “beat” or similar. Obviously the scholars agree on its real meaning.

Second, let’s see how the Quran uses “idreb” to determine what it means by how it is used in other verses. What are the contexts of these uses?

I find that “idrib” is used 12 times in the Quran. Beginning at 2:60 (Using Ali’s translation)

2:60 – “strike” the rock with thy staff…
2:73 – “strike” the body
4:34 – refuse to share their beds, “beat” them…
7:160 – “strike” the rock with thy staff…
8:12 – “smite” you above their necks…
8:12 – and “smite” all their finger tips off them…
18:32 – “set forth” to them the parable
18:45 – “set forth” to them the similitude of the life
20:77 – and “strike” a dry path for them through the sea..
26:63 – “strike” the sea with thy rod
36:13 – “set forth” to them by way of a parable
38:44 – and take in thy hand a little grass and “strike”

 

Not counting 4:34, the word is used in two ways

  1. Eight times it is used in the physical action of striking
  2. Three times it is used in the context of speaking or applying a proverb.

Clearly then, the most frequent context of the word is in physically striking.

What about “applying a parable”?

Examine the context of 4:34. First, the man tries the verbal approach. He admonishes his wife and that fails to bring her into submission. Second, he has stopped sleeping with her and she still refuses to obey. Dealing with her rebellion requires a more severe step. “Applying a parable” won’t do because the verbal has failed already. 4:34 describes a progression of stronger actions so something stronger must be done.

The only contextual conclusion that can be drawn is one of physical punishment, i.e. the physical “beating” meaning most frequently associated with “idreb” in the Quran. Therefore in context, “beat” is the correct translation.

 

_____________________________________________________________________

APPENDIX 5: THE MEANING OF THE WORD “NUSHUZ”

There have been disagreements concerning the meaning of the Arabic word ‘nushuz’. It is translated as ‘refractoriness’, ‘rebellious’, or ‘disobedience’. Muslims who wish to minimize or limit the justification for wife beating have sought to tie it to “sexual immorality”. In other words, “nushuz” implies that the wife is being sexually immoral.

First, review the scholar’s translations: Rodwell uses ‘refractoriness’, Dawood uses ‘disobedience’, Pickthall uses ‘rebellion’, Arberry uses “rebellious”, Shakir uses “desertion”, and Ali uses “disloyalty and ill-conduct”. Disobedience to the husband is the context in all of these. None of the translators translates this as “sexual immorality”.

The Hans-Wehr definition of nushuz found on page 966 translates “nushuz” as:

hostility, discord, violation of marital duties on the part of either the husband or wife, specifically, the recalcitrance of the woman toward her husband, and brutal treatment of the wife by the husband.

 

Re-examine 4:34. The verse first establishes man’s superiority. Then, near the middle of the verse the justification for wife beating is laid out: “As for those from whom you fear “disobedience”. Disobedience is the cause for beating the wife, not sexual immorality. Finally, the cause for the husband to stop the beating is given: “Then if they obey you, take no further action against them. The wife’s “disobedience” is countered by her “obedience.” Therefore, the correct interpretation of “nushuz” is disobedience, or rebelliousness, or equivalent.

 

_____________________________________________________________________

wife-beating.htm

Rev A: 97-08-01, Rev B: 12-30-97, Rev C: 3-19-98, Rev D: 99/02/05, Rev E: April 6th, 1999, Rev F: 6 August, 2000, Rev G: 25 August, 2001, Rev H: 2007/03/03

_____________________________________________________________________

REFERENCES

[1] Rodwell, J. M., “The Koran”, Everyman, London

[2] Dawood, N. J., “The Koran”, Penguin, London, 1995

[3] Pickthall, M., “The Meaning of the Glorious Koran”, Mentor, New York, 1953

[4] Arberry, A. J., “The Koran”, Oxford, 1983

[5] Shakir, M. H., “The Quran”, Tahrike Tarsile Quran, Inc., Elmhurst, NY, 1993

[6] Ali, Abdullah Yusef, “The Quran”, Tahrike Tarsile Quran, Inc., Elmhurst, NY, 1997

[7]“Beyond the Veil”, available from VOM, 918-337-8015

[8] Bukhari, Muhammad, “Sahih Bukhari”, Kitab Bhavan, New Delhi, India, 1987, translated by M. Khan

[9] Muslim, Abu’l-Husain, “Sahih Muslim”, International Islamic Publishing House, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 1971, translated by A. Siddiqi,

[10] Abu Dawud, Suliman, “Sunan”, al-Madina, New Delhi, 1985, translated by A. Hasan

[11] Ibn Majah, Sunan, Kazi, Lahore, Pakistan, 1995

[12] http://answering-islam.org/Silas/mo-death.htm

[13] Guillaume, A., “The Life of Muhammad”, Oxford, 1955, page 651

[14] Dashti, Ali, “23 Years: A Study in the Prophetic Career of Mohammad”, Mazda, Costa Mesa, CA, 1994

[15] http://quran.al-islam.com/Tafseer/DispTafsser.asp?nType=1&bm=&nSeg=0&l=arb&nSora=4&nAya=34&taf=TABARY&tashkeel=0

[16] Kathir, Ibn, “Tafsir of Ibn Kathir”, Al-Firdous Ltd., London, 2000

[17] http://www.islamweb.net/ver2/archive/showayatafseer.php?SwraNo=4&TafseerNo=10&ayaNo=34

[18] http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=4&tAyahNo=34&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0

[19] http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=4&tAyahNo=34&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0

[20] http://quran.al-islam.com/Tafseer/DispTafsser.asp?l=arb&taf=KORTOBY&nType=1&nSora=4&nAya=34e=1&nSora=4&nAya=34

[21] Misri, Ahmad, “Reliance of the Traveler”, Amana, Beltsville, MD, 1994, page 1090

[22] Misri, Ahmad, “Reliance of the Traveler”, Amana, Beltsville, MD, 1994

[23] Wherry, E. M., “A Comprehensive Commentary on the Quran”, TRÜBNER & CO., LUDGATE HILL 1882.

[24] http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Area=sr&ID=SR2704

[25] http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2007/01/islam_beating_w.html

[26] http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40276

[27] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/20/AR2006102001261_pf.html

[28] Hatimy, Said, “Women in Islam”, Islamic Publications, Lahore, Pakistan, 1991

[29] http://www.aol40.com/beating.htm

[30] http://www.steppingtogether.org/article_01.html, and http://www.jannah.org/sisters/wifeabuse.html

[31] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3631743.stm

[32]Mackay, Sandra, “The Saudis”, Signet, New York, 1990

[33] Sasson, Jean, “Princess”, William Morrow and Co, 1992

[34] http://www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2004/0324rosenberg.html

[35] http://www.turkishdailynews.com/FrTDN/latest/dom.htm, and http://archives.cnn.com/2000/books/news/08/10/turkey.wifebeating.ap/index.html

[36] http://www.natashatynes.org/mental_mayhem/2005/04/disturbing_repo.html

[37] http://www.360east.com/?p=429

[38] http://www.zoa.org/2003/09/are_women_well.htm

[39] “Battered”, By Parker, Veronica F, Citation: RN, v58n1, pp.26-29, Jan 1995, Medical Economics Publishing Inc. 1995

[40] Swinford, Steven, “Female victims of spousal violence”, Family Relations, Jan96, Vol. 45 Issue 1, p98

[41] Asad, M., “The Message of the Quran”, Dar al-Andalus, Gilbralter, 1980

[42] http://www.answering-christianity.com/beating_yes.htm

[43] http://www.understanding-islam.com/related/text.asp?type=question&qid=544

[44] Hans Wehr Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, Spoken Language Services, Ithaca, NY, 1976, page 538

[45] ibid page 539

October 19, 2011 Posted by | Understanding Islam | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Contradictions in the Qur’an

العربية: القرآن في متحف التاريخ الطبيعي في نيو...

Image via Wikipedia

There are three basic categories of contradictions in the Qur’an:

1. Internal contradictions: Verses contradicting each other or the laws of logic
2. External errors: Verses contradicting the facts of history or science
3. Verses contradicting the earlier revelations

Internal contradictions:

# Who suffers loss if Muhammad was wrong? Sura 34:50 commands Muhammad to say, “If I go astray, I go astray only to my own loss,” which is a severe factual error in the Qur’an as well as contradicting the teaching of the Qur’an in a number of other verses.
# Allah, Adam, and the Angels. There are a great number of problems and inconsistencies between the several accounts of Adam’s creation, Allah’s command to prostrate before Adam, Satans refusal, etc.
# Who Was the First Muslim? Muhammad [6:14, 163], Moses [7:143], some Egyptians [26:51], or Abraham [2:127-133, 3:67] or Adam, the first man who also received inspiration from Allah [2:37]?
# Can Allah be seen and did Muhammad see his Lord? Yes [S. 53:1-18, 81:15-29], No [6:102-103, 42:51].
# Were Warners Sent to All Mankind Before Muhammad? Allah had supposedly sent warners to every people [10:47, 16:35-36, 35:24], Abraham and Ishmael are specifically claimed to have visited Mecca and built the Kaaba [2:125-129]. Yet, Muhammad supposedly is sent to a people who never had a messenger before [28:46, 32:3, 34:44, 36:2-6]. This article also raises other issues: What about Hud and Salih who supposedly were sent to the Arabs? What about the Book that was supposedly given to Ishmael? Etc.
# What will be the food for the people in Hell? The food for the people in Hell will be only “Dhari” [Sura 88:6], or only foul pus from the washing of wounds [S. 69:36], or will they also get to eat from the tree of Zaqqum [S. 37:66]? Together, these verses constitute three contradictions.
# Can Angels Cause the Death of People? The Qur’an attacks those who worship anyone besides God (e.g. angels or prophets) because those can neither create, nor give life, nor cause anyone to die. Yet, the Qur’an explicitly states that one angel or several angels are causing certain people to die [Sura 4:97, 16:28, 32, 32:11].
# Confusion Concerning Identity of the Spirit and Gabriel (a long discussion of dozens of references)
# ‘Iddah rules for divorced and widowed women appear to be arbitrary and inconsistent.
# Is there a minimum age of marriage for girls?
# To Marry or Not to Marry? The Qur’an forbids believers to marry idolatrous women [Sura 2:221], and calls Christians idolaters and unbelievers [9:28-33], but still allows Muslims to marry Christian women [5:5].
# Will it be accepted of them or not?
# Will Allah reward the good deeds of Unbelievers? S. 9:17 and 9:69 clearly say no. However, S. 99:7 implies yes. Moreover, S. 2:62 promises Christians reward for their good deeds. But S. 9:28-33; 5:17, 72-73 calls Christians idolaters, and S. 9:17 is very clear that idolaters will have no reward.
# Should Muslims Accept Peace or Not?
# Fighting All People Until They Do What?
# Compel them or Not?
# Can They Disbelieve in the Last Day and be Safe?
# Should Muslims show kindness to their parents? On the one hand, the Quran commands all Muslims to show kindness to their parents, even if they are disbelievers [17:23-24, 31:14-15, 29:8, etc.]. On the other hand, it demands not to show any love or friendship to those who oppose Muhammad, even if they are their parents [9:23, 58:22].
# Can one be a believer in God and oppose Muhammad at the same time?
# How many mothers does a Muslim have? Only one [58:2, the woman who gave birth and none else], or two [4:23, including the mother who nursed him], or at least ten [33:6]?
# And it just doesn’t add up: Sura 4:11-12 and 4:176 state the Qur’anic inheritance law. When a man dies, and is leaving behind three daughters, his two parents and his wife, they will receive the respective shares of 2/3 for the 3 daughters together, 1/3 for the parents together [both according to verse 4:11] and 1/8 for the wife [4:12] which adds up to more than the available estate. A second example: A man leaves only his mother, his wife and two sisters, then they receive 1/3 [mother, 4:11], 1/4 [wife, 4:12] and 2/3 [the two sisters, 4:176], which again adds up to 15/12 of the available property.
# How many angels were talking to Mary? When the Qur’an speaks about the announciation of the birth of Jesus to the virgin Mary, Sura 3:42,45 speaks about (several) angels while it is only one in Sura 19:17-21. (This article has received many Muslim responses which are quoted or linked and/or discussed at the end of the article.)
# Further numerical discrepancies Does Allah’s day equal to 1,000 human years (Sura 22:47, 32:5) or 50,000 human years (Sura 70:4)? — According to Sura 56:7 there will be THREE distinct groups of people at the Last Judgement, but 90:18-19, 99:6-8, etc. mention only TWO groups. — There are conflicting views on who takes the souls at death: THE Angel of Death [32:11], THE angels (plural) [47:27] but also “It is Allah that takes the souls (of men) at death.” [39:42] Angels have 2, 3, or 4 pairs of wings [35:1]; but Gabriel had 600 wings. [Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 54, Number 455]
# How many days did Allah need to destroy the people of Aad? One day [54:19] or several days [41:16; 69:6,7]
# Six or eight days of creation? Sura 7:54, 10:3, 11:7, and 25:59 clearly state that God created “the heavens and the earth” in six days. But in 41:9-12 the detailed description of the creation procedure adds up to eight days. (This topic also includes many Muslim responses and further discussion.)
# Quick or Slow Creation? Allah creates the heavens and the earth in six days [7:54] and many Muslims want to be modern and scientific, and make that six eons, but then again, He creates instantaneously [2:117], “Be! And it is”.
# Heavens or Earth? Which was created first? First earth and then heaven [2:29], heaven and after that earth [79:27-30].
# Calling together or ripping apart? In the process of creation heaven and earth were first apart and are called to come together [41:11], while 21:30 states that they were originally one piece and then ripped apart.
# What was man created from? A blood clot [96:1-2], water [21:30, 24:45, 25:54], “sounding” (i.e. burned) clay [15:26], dust [3:59, 30:20, 35:11], nothing [19:67] and this is then denied in 52:35, earth [11:61], a drop of thickened fluid [16:4, 75:37]
# What were jinn created from?
# The descent of the Quran: Piecemeal or all at once?
# Examining the inherent problems with the descent of the Quran
# Is half the Quran already fully detailed?
# Fully Detailed Or Incomplete? The Qur’an claims for itself to be (fully) detailed, that nothing is left out of the book [6:38, 6:114, 12:111, 16:89 etc.]. However there are plenty of important issues which are left unclear in the Qur’an. This article discusses the confusion found in the quranic statements on wine.
# Is the Quran Completely Clear or Not?
# The Perspicuity of the Quran and It’s Mysterious Letters
# Worshiping the Same or a Different God? Muhammad is commanded to speak to the disbelievers: … nor do you worship what I worship [109:3]. However, other verses in the Qur’an state clearly that those disbelieving his message are in fact worshiping the same God, Allah.
# Did the Meccan Polytheist Believe That Allah Was The Supreme Being?
# To Intercede or Not To Intercede? – That is the Question! The Qur’an makes contradictory statements whether on the Day of Judgment intercession will be possible. No: [2:122-123, 254; 6:51; 82:18-19; etc.]. Yes: [20:109; 34:23; 43:86; 53:26; etc.]. Each position can be further supported by ahadith.
# How the Islamic Doctrine of Intercession undermines Allah’s Omniscience
# Where is Allah and his throne? Allah is nearer than the jugular vein [50:16], but he is also on the throne [57:4] which is upon the water [11:7], and at the same time so far away, that it takes between 1,000 and 50,000 years to reach him [32:5, 70:4].
# The origin of calamity? Is the evil in our life from Satan [38:41], Ourselves [4:79], or Allah [4:78]?
# How merciful is Allah’s mercy? He has prescribed mercy for himself [6:12], yet he does not guide some, even though he could [6:35, 14:4].
# Does Allah command to do evil? No [7:28, 16:90]. Yes [17:16, ]. Two examples are also given, where Allah clearly commanded or permitted indecent actions [2:229-230, 2:187].
# Should Muhammad Get Paid Or Shouldn’t He?
# A Contradiction Regarding Muhammad’s Fatherhood
# Will there be inquiry in Paradise? “neither will they question one another” [23:101] but nevertheless they will be “engaging in mutual inquiry” [52:25], “and they will … question one another” [37:27].
# Are angels protectors? “NO protector besides Allah” [2:107, 29:22]. But in Sura 41:31 the angels themselves say: “We are your protectors in this life and the Hereafter.” And also in other suras is their role described as guarding [13:11, 50:17-18] and protecting [82:10].
# Is Allah the only Wali? On the one hand, Allah is supposedly the only wali (protector, helper, friend) [9:116, 17:111, 32:4, 42:28], on the other hand, the messenger and the believers are walis [5:55, 9:71], Allah has walis [10:62], and he raises walis [4:75].
# Does Allah Act Alone Or Does He Have Partners That Assist Him?
# Is Allah the Only Judge or Not?
# Is Allah the only sovereign or isn’t he?
# Are all obedient and prostrating to Allah? That is the claim in 16:49 and 30:26, but dozens of verses speak of the proud disobedience of Satan [7:11, 15:28-31, 17:61, 20:116, 38:71-74, 18:50] as well of many different human beings who reject His commands and His revelations.
# Does Allah forgive shirk? Shirk is considered the worst of all sins, but the author of the Qur’an seems unable to decide if Allah will ever forgive it or not. No [4:48, 116], Yes [4:153, 25:68-71]. Abraham committed this sin of polytheism as he takes moon, sun, stars to be his Lord [6:76-78], yet Muslims believe that all prophets are without any sin.
# Abraham and the Sun
# Abraham’s Monotheism
# Abraham’s Progeny? How the Qur’an messed up Abraham’s family tree
# Did All Prophets Receive the Same Book?
# The event of worship of the golden calf: The Israelites repented about worshipping the golden calf BEFORE Moses returned from the mountain [7:149], yet they refused to repent but rather continued to worship the calf until Moses came back [20:91]. Does Aaron share in their guilt? No [20:85-90], yes [20:92, 7:151].
# Was Jonah cast on the desert shore or was he not? “Then We cast him on a desert shore while he was sick” [37:145] “Had not Grace from his Lord reached him, he would indeed have been cast off on the naked shore while he was reprobate.” [68:49]
# Moses and the Injil? Jesus is born more than 1,000 years after Moses, but in 7:157 Allah speaks to Moses about what is written in the Injil [the book given to Jesus].
# Can slander of chaste women be forgiven? Yes [24:5], No [24:23].
# How do we receive the record on Judgment Day? On Judgement day the lost people are given the Record (of their bad deeds): Behind their back [84:10], or in their left hand [69:25].
# Can angels disobey? No angel is arrogant, they all obey Allah [16:49-50], but: “And behold, we said to the ANGELS: ‘Bow down to Adam’. And THEY bowed down, EXCEPT Iblis. He refused and was haughty.” [2:34]. This article includes links to answers to four Muslim responses.
# How many wings does an angel have? Angels have 2, 3, or 4 wings [35:1]; but Gabriel had 600 wings according to Sahih al-Bukhari.
# Is Satan an angel or a jinn?
# Three contradictions in 2:97 and 16:101-103 Who brings the revelation from Allah to Muhammad? The ANGEL Gabriel [2:97], or the Holy Spirit [16:102]? The new revelation confirms the old [2:97] or substitutes it [16:101]? The Qur’an is PURE Arabic [16:103] but there are numerous foreign, non-Arabic words in it.
# Do not say, “Three”!? It is impossible to recite Sura 4:171 without transgressing the command contained in it.
# The infinite loop problem Sura 26:192,195,196: “It (the Qur’an) is indeed a revelation from the Lord of the Worlds, … in clear Arabic speech and indeed IT (the Qur’an) is in the writings of the earlier (prophets).” Now, the ‘earlier writings’ are the Torah and the Injil for example, written in Hebrew and Greek. HOW can an ARABIC Qur’an be contained in books of other languages? Furthermore, it would have to contain this very passage of the Qur’an since the Qur’an is properly contained in them. Hence these earlier writings have to be contained in yet other earlier writings and we are in an infinite loop, which is absurd.
# Is the Torah like the Qur’an, or is it not? The Muslim claim of the corruption of the Bible leads to a contradiction between S. 2:24 and 17:88 on the one hand, and 28:49 and 46:10 on the other.
# Should Jews and Christians follow the Bible or the Quran?
# “An old woman” and God’s character About the story of Lot: “So we delivered him and his family, – all exept an old woman who lingered behind.” [Sura 26:170-171] And again: “But we saved him and his family, exept his wife: she was of those who lagged behind. [Sura 7:83]. Either this is a contradiction or if indeed Lot’s wife is derogatorily called “an old woman” then this does not show much respect for her as a wife of a prophet.
# More problems with the story of Lot “And his people gave NO answer but this: They said, “Drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure!” [Sura 7:82 & 27:56]. Yet: “But his people gave NO answer but this: They said: “Bring us the Wrath of Allah if thou tellest the truth.” [Sura 29:29]. Obviously these answers are different.
# The “pleasure” of Allah? Is God’s action of punishment or mercy and guidance or misguidance arbitrary?
# Did Abraham smash the idols? The accounts of Abraham, Suras 19:41-49, 6:74-83 differ quite a bit from Sura 21:51-59. While in Sura 21 Abraham confronts his people strongly, and even destroys the idols, in Sura 19 Abraham shuts up after his father threatens him to stone him for speaking out against the idols. And he seems not only to become silent, but even to leave the area (“turning away from them all”).
# What about Noah’s son? According to Sura 21:76, Noah and his family is saved from the flood, and Sura 37:77 confirms that his seed survived. But Sura 11:42-43 reports that Noah’s son drowns.
# Was Noah driven out? “Before them *the people of Noah* rejected (their messenger): They rejected Our servant and said, ‘Here is One possessed!’ And he was driven out.” [Sura 54:9] Now, if he is driven out [expelled from their country] how come they can scoff at him while he is building the ark since we read “Forthwith he (starts) constructing the Ark: Every time that the Chiefs of *his people* passed by him, they threw ridicule on him.” [Sura 11:38] He cannot be both: Driven out and near enough that they can regularly pass by.
# Pharaoh’s Magicians: Muslims or Rejectors of Faith? Did the Magicians of Pharaoh, Egyptians, become believers in the God of Moses [7:103-126; 20:56-73; S. 26:29-51] or did only Israelites believe in Moses [10:83]?
# How many gods did the Egyptians worship?
# Pharaoh’s repentance in the face of death? According to Sura 10:90-92, Pharaoh repented “in the sight of death” and was saved. But Sura 4:18 says that such a thing can’t happen.
# Abrogation? “The words of the Lord are perfect in truth and justice; there is NONE who can change His words.” [Sura 6:115] Also see 6:34 and 10:64. But then Allah (Muhammad?) sees the need to exchange some of them for “better ones” [Sura 2:106, 16:101]. And it is not for ignorant people to question Allah because of such practices!
# Guiding to truth? “Say: ‘God – He guides to the truth; and which is worthier to be followed …?” [Sura 10:35] But how much is left over of this worthiness when we also read: “Allah leads astray whom he pleases, and he guides whom He pleases, …” [Sura 14:4]. And how do we know in which of Allah’s categories of pleasure we fall? How sure can a Muslim be that he is one of those guided right and not one of those led astray?
# What is the punishment for adultery? Flogging with a 100 stripes (men and women) [24:2], “confine them to houses until death do claim them (lifelong house arrest – for the women) [4:15]. For men: “If they repent and amend, leave them alone” [4:16]. 24:2 contradicts both the procedure for women and men in Sura 4. And why is the punishment for women and men equal in Sura 24 but different in Sura 4?
# How are the sexually immoral supposed to be punished?
# The Problem of Divine Sovereignty, Predestination, Salvation and Human Free Will
# Who suffers the consequence of sins? The Qur’an declares that everyone will be held responsible only for his own sins [S. 17:13-15, 53:38-42]. Yet, the Qur’an accuses the Jews of Muhammad’s day for the sins committed some 2000 years earlier by other Jews, e.g. worshipping the Golden Calf idol.
# Will Christians enter Paradise or go to Hell? Sura 2:62 and 5:69 say “Yes”, Sura 5:72 (just 3 verses later) and 3:85 say “No”.
# God alone or also men? Clear or incomprehensible? The Qur’an is “clear Arabic speech.” [16:103] Yet “NONE knows its interpretation, save only Allah.” [3:7]. Actually, “men of understanding do grasp it.” [3:7]
# Was Pharaoh Drowned or Saved when chasing Moses and the Israelites? Saved [10:92], drowned [28:40, 17:103, 43:55].
# When Commanded Pharaoh the Killing of the Sons? When Moses was a Prophet and spoke God’s truth to Pharaoh [40:23-25] or when he was still an infant [20:38-39]?
# When/how are the fates determined? “The night of power is better than a thousand months. The angels and spirit descend therein, by the permission of their Lord, with all decrees.” [97:3,4] “Lo! We revealed it on a blessed night.” [44:3] To Muslims, the “Night of Power” is a blessed night on which fates are settled and on which everything relating to life, death, etc., which occurs throughout the year is decreed. It is said to be the night on which Allah’s decrees for the year are brought down to the earthly plane. In other words, matters of creation are decreed a year at a time. Contradicting this, Sura 57:22 says, “No affliction befalls in the earth or in your selves, but it is in a Book before we create it.” This means it is written in the Preserved Tablet, being totally fixed in Allah’s knowledge before anyone was created. All of the above is contradicted by “And every man’s fate We have fastened to his own neck.” This says that man alone is responsible for what he does and what happens to him. [17:13]
# Wine: Good or bad? Strong drink and … are only an infamy of Satan’s handiwork. [5:90, also 2:219]. Yet on the other hand in Paradise are rivers of wine [47:15, also 83:22,25]. How does Satan’s handiwork get into Paradise?
# Good News of Painful Torture? Obviously, announcing torment and suffering to anyone is bad news, not good news. However, the Qur’an announces the good news of painful torment [3:21, 4:138, 9:3, 9:34, 31:7, 45:8, and 84:24].
# Jinns and men created for worship or for Hell? Created only to serve God [Sura 51:56], many of them made for Hell [Sura 7:179].
# Preferred for Hell? S. 17:70 says that Allah prefers (all) the children of Adam over many of his creatures, but S. 98:6 declares the majority of men to be the worst of creatures, many of them being even created specifically for Hell (S. 7:179).
# Will people stay in Hell forever, or not?
# Will all Muslims go to Hell? According to Sura 19:71 every Muslim will go to Hell (for at least some time), while another passage states that those who die in Jihad will go to Paradise immediately.
# Will Allah disgrace Muslims? On the day of judgment Allah will not humiliate or disgrace the Prophet and those who believe in him [S. 66:8]. However, 19:71 says that everyone will enter Hell, and 3:192 states that whomsoever Allah sends to Hell, is disgraced thereby.
# Will Jesus burn in Hell? Jesus is raised to Allah, [Sura 4:158], near stationed with him [Sura 3:45], worshiped by millions of Christians, yet Sura 21:98 says, that all that are worshiped by men besides Allah will burn in Hell together with those who worship them.
# Is Jesus God or Not? In Sura 16:17, 20-21 and S. 25:3 we find a criterion to distinguish the true God from false gods. Yet, according to S. 3:49, 55, 4:157-158, 5:110, 6:2, and 38:71-72 Jesus satisfies the definition and should be considered true Deity.
# Is Jesus Like Adam? S. 3:59 makes this claim, but how many aspects of likeness are there really?
# Can there be a son without a consort? Allah cannot have a son without a consort [Sura 6:101], but Mary can have a son without a consort because that is easy for Allah [Sura 19:21].
# Who is the father of Jesus? A more involved argument that is difficult to summarize in one sentence.
# Begetting and Self-sufficiency A self-contradiction on account of confused terminology.
# Could Allah have a son? Sura 39:4 affirms and Sura 6:101 denies this possibility.
# Did Jesus Die already? Sura 3:144 states that all messengers died before Muhammad. But 4:158 claims that Jesus was raised to God (alive?).
# One Creator or many? The Qur’an uses twice the phrase that Allah is “the best of creators” [23:14, 37:125]. What other creators are in mind? On the other hand, many verses make clear that Allah alone is “the creator of all things” [e.g. 39:62]. There is nothing left for others to be a creator of.
# From among all nations or from Abraham’s seed? Sura 29:27 states that all prophets came Abraham’s seed. But 16:36 claims that Allah raised messengers from among every people.
# Marrying the wives of adopted sons? It is important that Muslims can marry the divorced wives of adopted sons [Sura 33:37], yet it is forbidden to adopt sons [Sura 33:4-5].
# Messengers were never sent to other than their own people? So it is claimed in Sura 14:4 and 30:47. However, the Bible and the Qur’an, and the Muslim traditions confirm that Jonah was sent to a different nation.
# Messengers Were Sent Only to Their Own People? Sura 14:4 states that never was a messenger sent except in the language of his own people. Yet, the Quran itself claims that Jesus is supposed to be a sign to all people, that the Torah and Gospel are for all people, that Moses was sent to Pharaoh of Egypt, and that Muhammad is sent to all of mankind. The hadith also claim that Noah was sent to “the inhabitants of the earth”.
# Did Allah give a Greek Injil to the Jews?
# What kind of book is the Injil?
# Messengers Amongst the Jinns and Angels? Allah sent only men as messengers [Suras 12:109, 21:7-8, 25:20-21] but there seemingly are messengers from Jinns and Angels [6:130; 11:69,77; 22:75; etc., see article for details].
# Do all of God’s messengers eat food?
# A Messenger from among the beasts? Allah sent only men as messengers [Suras 12:109, 21:7-8, 25:20-21]. Yet, the Qur’an also speaks about a beast that is a messenger from Allah to men [S. 27:82].
# Is Muhammad Only A Warner or a Prophet/Messenger?
# Did the Messengers Perform Miracles?
# Divinely Inspired Ignorance?
# Which Prophets Did the Jews Kill?
# Another eleven contradictions…

External errors:

Science:

# Solomon listening to ants? In Sura 27:18-19 Solomon overhears a “conversation of ants”.
Is this possible based on our knowledge about the mode and complexity of ant communication?
# The stars and the moon The Qur’an teaches that there are seven heavens one above the other [67:3, 71:15], and that the stars are in the lower heaven [67:5, 37:6, 41:12], but the moon is depicted as being in/inside the seven heavens [71:16], even though in reality the stars are much further away from the earth than the moon.
# Qur’an and Science: Section Four in Dr. Campbell’s book
# Qur’an and Embryology
# Can non-living matter think, feel and have a will?
# The human embryonic development
# The place of Sun rise and Sun set
# The Seven Earths
# Stars created to be thrown at devils?
# Sun and moon are subject to man?
# Mountains and Earthquakes
# The impossible conversation
# Solomon and the animals…
# Allah’s forgotten creatures
# Shaking the trunk of the palm tree?
# Thinking with the breasts?
# All things are made in pairs? Sura 51:49 claims that everything is created in pairs. But this is not true! There are quite a number of things that have no counterpart and species where only one gender exists.
# Are Fruits Male and Female?

History:

# The Qur’an Attacks … Christianity?
# Selling Joseph for a few Dirhams? (before coins were even invented)
# Moses and the Samaritan?
# The farthest Mosque?
# Alexander the Great, a Muslim?
# None else was named “John” before John the Baptist?
# Two Pharaohs who crucified?
# Burnt bricks in Egypt?
# How many gods did the Egyptians worship?
# Israel, the Quran and the Promised Land
# Were they utterly destroyed?
# What kind of book is the Injil?
# Jesus was not crucified?
# The anachronistic title al-`Aziz given to Potiphar

(Here is an important question. Muslims affirm that the Qur’an / Islam encourages to seek knowledge. What happens if that knowledge doesn’t match what the Qur’an teaches? I strongly believe that “all truth is God’s truth.” That also means that God will not contradict himself in the “natural” revelation of history and science and in the “special” revelation of his written word. But if the Qur’an contradicts what we so clearly know from history or science, does this indicate that maybe the author of truth in the natural realm and the author of the Qur’an might not be the same? )

The Qur’an in Contradiction to the Earlier Revelations:

Ultimately, the strongest, most serious problem of the Qur’an is that it affirms the scriptures of the Jews and the Christians as authentic and true revelation from God (cf. what the Qur’an says about the Bible), while radically denying central aspects of their message, e.g. the core themes of sacrifice and atonement in the Torah, the crucifixion of Jesus, the deity of Jesus and even the mere messianic title “Son of God” for Jesus, the very nature of God, the fall and the sinfulness of man, necessity and means of salvation, etc. For this reason Muslims had to invent the unwarranted theory of corruption of the earlier scriptures, even against the clear testimony of the Qur’an itself.

In the following some smaller discrepancies between the Qur’an and the scriptures it supposedly confirms.

1. Historical Compressions: Saul, David, Gideon and Goliath
2. A Samaritan tempting the Israelites in Moses time?
3. Prophets and Kings in Israel before the time of Moses?
4. Moses and the Gospel?
5. Punishment for future disobedience?
6. Mary, the sister of Aaron?
7. Pharaoh and Haman?
8. A Pharaoh Who Forgot to Die in Time?
9. Was there a second period of slaying the sons of the Israelites?
10. Moses or Jacob?
11. Did Joseph’s parents go to Egypt?
12. Abraham’s name
13. Abraham and Solomon

Other contradictions in comparison to the Bible:

14. Did God teach Adam the names of the animals?
15. Noah’s Age
16. Were Believers Really Called Muslims Before the Time of Muhammad?
17. The Quran’s Mistakes regarding the Biblical Patriarchs
18. Who Adopted Moses: Pharaoh’s Daughter or Pharaoh’s Wife?
19. Adoption by Adaption analyzes various discrepancies inf the quranic version of the stories of Moses and Joseph.
20. A Flood in the time of Moses?
21. Israel, the Quran and the Promised Land
22. The Quran, Moses and the Tablets of Stone
23. Solomon Working with Demons
24. Israel’s Response to the Covenant: ‘We Obey’ or ‘We Disobey’?
25. Where is the Blood?
26. Divinely Inspired Ignorance?
27. Which Prophets Did the Jews Kill?
28. What kind of book is the Injil?
29. Animal sacrifices for Christians?
30. Why did the Queen of Sheba come to Solomon?
31. Ezra the Son of God?
32. Jesus reached old age?
33. Did the golden calf say ‘Moo’?
34. Did disobedience result in extra commandments?
35. How many messengers were sent to Noah’s people?
Further discussion: Who are those messengers that were rejected by Noah’s people?
36. The Progeny of Abraham?
37. Two young men?
38. How many wings does an angel have?

# More contradictions between Qur’an and Bible

Do they not ponder on the Qur’an?
Had it been from other than Allah,
they would surely have found therein much discrepancy.
— Sura 4:82

Since this verse is claiming that there is “no contradiction / discrepancy” in the Qur’an, therefore itself has to be part of the list of contradictions because it contradicts the existence of the above listed contradictions. Or would you say because it says “much” and the above aren’t “enough of them” yet to qualify for “much”, all is actually fine?

***********************************************************************************************

CONTRADICTIONS WITHIN THE QURAN

“Do they not consider the Quran? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancies.” (Sura 4:82).

This verse is further amplified by the already quoted texts:

“No change can there be in the Words of Allah (Sura 10:64)
“There is none that can alter the Words of Allah (Sura 6:34)

We Christians believe this too. Let us assume for a moment that there is no discrepancy between the message of the Bible and the Quran, which, as we have seen, is not the case, and consider the Quran on its own.

The problem of abrogation.

“When We substitute one revelation for another, – and Allah knows best what He reveals, – they say ‘Thou art a forger: But most of them understand not. Say, the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation from thy Lord in truth.”

“None of our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar–Knowest thou not that Allah hath power over all things?….Would you question your Apostle as Moses was questioned of old?” (Suras 16:101 and 2:106,108).

We should like to find out how a divine revelation can be improved. We would have expected it to have been perfect and true right from the start. Yusuf Ali tries to explain:

“….it means that God’s message from age to age is always the same, but that its form may differ according to the needs and exigencies of the time. Some commentators apply it also to the Ayat (revelation) of the Quran. There is nothing derogatory in this if we believe in progressive revelation.
In Sura 3:7 we are told distinctly about the Quran, that some of its verses are basic and fundamental, and others are allegorical, and it is mischievous to treat the allegorical verses and follow them (literally).” (comm 107).

This is fully acceptable. God has revealed His Word progressively, the revelation being levelled at the comprehension and culture of the people to whom it was first given. Everybody will agree that an allegory should not be taken literally. But what about the law of ‘mansukh’ (=abrogated verse; please note Sura 2:106 does not speak of intellect, culture or progressive revelation with reference to scriptures given prior to Mohammed, but to Quranic verses only!) and ‘nasikh’ (=the verses that take the place of the mansukh verses)? .

We must recognize one important principle: If we want to know what a certain passage really means we have to make a proper exegesis. We have to establish what exactly the text in question was intended to say to the original hearers. How did they understand it? Only having done that can we interpret a text in today’s situation without distortion. There are various possible ways of establishing the original meaning, but one should also look at the very old commentaries and see how they understood and interpreted the text.

The “Tafsir-i-Azizi” explains three kinds of abrogations (=cancellations):

i) where a verse has been removed from the Quran and another given in its place;

ii) where the injunction (command) is abrogated and the letters of the verse remain; !

iii) where both the verse and its injunction are removed from the text

Jalalu’d-Din, says that the number of abrogated verses has been variously estimated to range from 5 to 500 (“Dictionary of Islam”, page 520)

In his ‘Itqan’ he furnished a list of 20 verses, which are acknowledged by all commentators to be abrogated (“Dictionary of Islam”, page 520).

Just a few be mentioned here:

The Qibla (prayer direction) was changed from Jerusalem to Mecca (Sura 2:142-144);

The division of inheritance left by parents or other relatives according to Sura 4:7 had to be equal (a share and a share which has to be determined). This was abrogated and replaced by verse 11, where it is commanded that males must get double the share of females.

The night prayer performed by reciting the Quran ought to be more or less half the time of the night (Sura 73:2). This was changed to as much as may be easy for you (verse 20).

The treatment of adulteresses is to be life imprisonment (Sura 4:15), which was changed to flogging with 100 strokes (Sura 24:2). This despite the leniency prescribed for homosexuals (Sura 4:16) on repenting.

The retaliation in cases of crime, particularly murder, was to be confined to people of equal rank (slave for slave, free for free etc.) (Sura 2:178) This is in disagreement with Sura 5:48 and Sura 17:33 where retaliation is allowed against the murderer only.

The Jihad or Holy War was forbidden in the sacred months (Sura 9:5) but is allowed, even encouraged in verse 36 which replaces the former.

“Sura 2:106 occurs immediately before a series of sweeping changes, or rather modifications, introduced by Muhammad in both the ritual and the legal spheres.The verse thus precedes a change in the Qibla (vss. 115,177,124-151); in the pilgrimage rites (vs. 158); in the dietary laws (vss. 168-l74); in the law relating to talio (vss. 178-179); in bequests (vss. 180-182); in the fast (vss. 182-187); and again in the pilgrimage (vss. 191-203).

Similarly, Sura 16:101 is followed by allusions to modifications in the dietary laws (vss 114-119), and in the Sabbath laws (vs.124)” (“The Collection of the Quran” by John Burton).

Elaborating on this we note that the fast is compulsory “but if any of you is ill or on a journey, the prescribed number (should be made up) from days later. For those who can do it (with hardship) is a ransom, the feeding of one, that is indigent.” (Sura 2:184).

“‘Here one can hardly escape the conclusion that the first verse (i.e. 184) allows a rich man to buy himself out of the fast.” (“Islam” by A. Guillaume). The next verse is said to replace the former. It allows no compensation of any kind for the fast.

In verse 180 of the same Sura “it is prescribed, when death approaches any of you, if he leaves any goods, that he make a bequest to parents and next of kin….”. This is said to be replaced by Sura 4:11, according to which a double portion of inheritance falls to males compared to that of females.

The much discussed “verses of the sword”: “….fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them and seize them, beleaguer them and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (or war).” (Sura 9:5) and “….when you meet the unbelievers (in fight) cut off their necks…” (Sura 47:4) are “said to have cancelled no less than 124 verses which enjoined toleration and patience.” (A. Guillaume).

To us it is surprising to find the mansukh and nasikh verses often near to each other. We judge these to be cases of interpolation.

As stated earlier, we do believe in progressive revelation. The Old Covenant of the Law, as given to Moses, was superseded by the New Covenant of grace, which Jesus introduced. But these developments took place over a considerable time (1 500 years) with many prophetic warnings and predictions in between, so that no arbitrary action may be assumed on the side of God. In the light of this we find it unacceptable that within a space of 20 years a need for change or correction can become necessary. This surely suggests that God is either not all-knowing or else the recorder made a correction.

There are other verses which further add to the confusion:

“If we wished, we could make away with what we have revealed to you!” (Sura 17:86). “We shall teach you to recite it (i.e. the Quran) and you will not forget – except that Allah wills (Sura 87:6-7).

Why should anything be forgotten of an eternal revelation? To “substitute for it something better”? We do admit that an inspired man can err at times, but an inspired book (nazil) cannot!

Zarkasi explains the above concept more deeply. He states (vol. I p. 235):

“The ‘naskh’ (sic) of the wording and recital occured by means of God’s causing them to forget it. He withdrew it from their memories, while commanding them to neglect its public recital and its recording in the mushaf. With the passage of time, it would quite disappear like the rest of God’s revealed Books which He mentions in the Quran, but nothing of which is known today. This can have happened either during the Prophet’s life so that, when he died, the forgotten material was no longer being recited as part of the Quran; or it might have happened after the death of the Prophet. It would still be extant in writing, but God would cause them to forget it. He would then remove it from their memories. But, of course, the naskh of any part of the revelation after the death of the Prophet is not possible.” (“The Collection of the Quran” by John Burton p.97).

We suggest that Allah could have spared us a lot of confusion, doubt and explaining, had He given the better text right from the beginning.

“There was a series of Hadiths designed expressly to give the impression that Muhammad had forgotten part of the revelations. The reports were specific and detailed enough to identify the actual wording of the verses in question. Anas is reported in the two Sahih’s (i.e. al-Bukhari and Muslim) as declaring: There was revealed concerning those slain at Bi’r Ma’una a Quran verse which we recited until it was withdrawn: “Inform our tribe on our behalf that we have met our Lord. He has been well pleased with us and has satisfied our desires.’ (“al-Itqan by Jalal al Din).

‘Abdullah b. al Zubair therefore asked ‘Uthman what had possessed him to include Sura 2:240 in the ‘mushaf’ (document or canon), when he knew it to have been abrogated by Sura 2:234. ‘Because’, he replied ‘Uthman, ‘I know it to be part of the Quran text.’ ‘(ibid.). (“The Collection of the Quran” by John Burton).

A further problem arises from the fact that there is by no means any certainty which verses are mansukh and which nasikh, since the order in which the Quran was written down is not chronological, but according to the length of the Suras. However, even the Suras were not necessarily given in one piece. It happened that a certain portion of a Sura was given, and the next given text would be directed by Mohammed to be added to another Sura, and later again another addition was made to the first again, etc. The Hadis gives no conclusive information about the chronological order either, so that strictly speaking, there is no means of determining which of two disagreeing texts is mansukh, and which nasikh.

In any case we Christians see in this whole subject just a theological gimmick to “explain” contradictions. The quotation:

“No change can there be in the Words of Allah” and “There is none that can alter the Words of Allah. Already hast thou received some account of those Apostles.” or “the other Apostles also said so.” (Suras 10:64 and 6:34).

is contradicted by all those Muslims who claim that the Bible which is admitted to be a revealed book, has been altered and corrupted.

To underline our point let us just look at two passages of the Quran that have not been reconciled in terms of the law of abrogation.

In Sura 41:9-12 we read that the world was created in eight days, in Sura 7:54 we are told it were six days. It is, we suppose, up to the believer to make up his mind which of the two he will accept.

QUESTION: Must we assume that God is inconsistent? Knowing all things, such contradiction surely does not originate from God?

Problems regarding the consistency of Revelation.

The Quran is inconsistent regarding commitments on the part of Allah on which the believer can reckon or on which he can build his life. Commitments that are given are contradicted elsewhere:

“Allah has inscribed for himself (the rule of) mercy”

or

“Allah has prescribed for himself as law to act merciful” (Sura 6:12).

is contradicted in the same Sura: (verses 35-39):

“If it were Allah’s will, he would gather them into true guidance…. Whom Allah willeth he leaves to wander, whom he willeth, he placeth on the way that is straight”.

As we shall see (pp 21ff.), the Muslim’s hope rests on that despairing word:

“IF it pleases Allah.”

This is striking, for even in the Old Testament the believer was aware of the Law of cause and Effect. Once a believer broke any of God’s Laws he was cut-off from God, and was lost and perishing. But if he atoned therefor in repentance according to God’s prescribed ordinance (the sacrifice) his sin was forgiven. God had committed Himself to it. This is even further elaborated in the New Testament:

“If we confess our sins (while we have fellowship with God: vs. 6), He is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (I John 1:9).

We see a definite regression from this standard in the Quran.

We also find it strange to read:

“Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans; and nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say, ‘we are Christians’.” (Sura 5:85)

This is supported to some extent by an explanatory note in the “Mishkat” (IV page 103, note 2380) where we are told that “nearly two-thirds of paradise” will be filled with “the followers of the Holy Prophet and the followers of other prophets will form one-third.” In strange contrast to this are the words of Sura 5:51

“Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends.”

What about being together in Paradise? The reason is just as strange:

“They (Jews and Christians) are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.

It can hardly be said that Jews and Christians have ever protected each other, except that they agree on the authenticity of the Old Testament.

It is said of Mohammed that he was the first to bow down to Allah (in Islam) (Sura 6:14, 163, 39:12). But it is also said of Abraham, his sons and Jacob that they were Muslims (Sura 2:132), and of all earlier prophets who brought ‘books’ (i.e. Moses, David and Jesus) (Sura 28:52-53). Again it is reported of the disciples of Jesus that they were Muslims (Sura 3:52).

All these we view as contradictions. Some would not be of a serious nature, were it not for the claim that the Quran is “nazil” or “brought down” from heaven to Mohammed without the touch of human hand – except for the act of writing itself.

QUESTION: Is there any uncontradicted statement in the Quran on which a Mulsim can rely to have eternal life in heaven?

http://www.answering-islam.org/Nehls/Ask/contra.html

December 11, 2010 Posted by | Christianity / God, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

%d bloggers like this: