Apostate prophet to Muslim cooks; strict Islamic dietary laws?

In answer to the video "Walking Away From Islam"

Islamic dietary laws are actually simple and wrapped in the principle that an upright, God-conscious being, is aware of the higher realities in all situations, even when feeding himself, contrary to

47:12"those who disbelieve enjoy themselves and eat as the beasts eat".

Allah did not burden mankind with an unrealistic system destined at obstructing human spiritual development rather at elevating humans above their mere materiality. Whenever the divine law became complicated, it was on account of the people's own disobedience. For instance most of the mosaic laws is either due to self imposed restrictions because of the Jews' well known hairsplitting of the law, or punishments for their disobedience. Islam is the path of Ibrahim, who was neither a Jew, a Christian, nor a polytheist, but one who submitted unto Allah. The Quran never tells the prophet and the Muslims to follow the ways of Moses, Solomon, or Jesus, as they were bound by a law meant for a different people.  The whole passage speaking of replacement of an aya with another stresses that the prophethood of Muhammad supersedes the previous systems, including dietary and ritualistic with the example of the sabbath 16:124 and returns the divine system to its original simplicity as was taught to Abraham. The Quran confirming the Torah doesnt entail being bound by its law. Rather it confirms all its truthful statements, including what is found in the Torah itself about the Mosaic law being meant for the Jewish people only, as part of a conditional covenant. This covenant was eventually revoked.

The verse 16:101 reports the people's opposition to changes made by the prophet. The people who are objecting in 16:101 must have precise reference points to know that a newly revealed verse changed a previous one. The type of objection quoted in the verse, open and public negation of prophethood, cannot be referring to Muslims, who would never think their prophet was the Quran's author, nor to the pagans who, despite being convinced he authored it, either through sorcery, jinn possession or with the help of informants, only had a generic knowledge of the Quran's contents. They could not have precise reference points so as to detect a change. This leaves those among the people of the book who both rejected Muhammad's prophethood openly, and had precise reference points so as to detect the changes brought about by new verses. Their reference point was not the Quran which they didnt give much attention to besides for the gist of the prophet's message. The reference was their own scripture. They knew that verses from the Quran, when they heard them, replaced some of those in their hands. This was the main contention they had towards the prophet, the superseding of their scriptures with the Quran, as they still object to this day, in light of the warning in their books that they should Deut13"keep the commandments" if they are told to do otherwise.

A few verses down after mentioning the very basic dietary laws, the Quran refers to the more complex dietary laws of the people of the Book.

This anticipates the objection about God's revealing different sets of dietary laws at different times 16:114-124. So the Quran specifies that these prohibitions, whether the dietary ones or others pertaining to different aspects of their lives, were either the result of divine chastisement for their rebellion, or because of self-imposed restrictions 3:93,4:160-1,6:146,16:118.

The words THULM and BAGHI used in 4:160,6:146 convey the sense of foolish actions, as in transgressions, while thulm has the wider meaning of "misplacing right and wrong". This may happen through direct rebellion or by making things forbidden on oneself by neglecting some teachings and stressing other, hairsplitting conjecture or irrational requests for clarifications to broad and simple directives.

The Quran relates an occasion where, due to their arrogance the religion became a burden on them. Their lack of obedience and will to bend to God's will, or "stiff-necked" as Moses and other prophets labelled them collectively in their scriptures, is demonstrated in 2:67-73. During the incident, they were offensive towards their prophet, accusing him of ridiculing them when he simply conveyed God's command. They had to sacrifice any cow in a ritual that would clarify the confusing circumstances of a murder. They went on asking Moses that he might ask "his lord" as though He was not their Lord, for more and more particulars regarding cow to be sacrificed. After ridiculing their prophet, discrediting God's answers to their demands as unclear because

"to us the cows are all alike",

they finally reluctantly agreed to perform the ritual.

This attitude of obscuring a simple religious directive is not restricted to this particular ordinance. They have done the same in other circumstances and for different reasons, and so God gave them free rein in forging their own laws. This resulted in them following their base desires and idolatrous tendencies

Ezek20:25-26: “Moreover, I gave them laws that were not good and rules by which they could not live. When they passed every first issue of the womb, I defiled them by their very gifts — that I might render them desolate, that they might know that I am the Lord”.

God therefore shackled the rebellious souls of this "stiffed necked" nation with a law, the Torah, that would illuminate their way and lead them to the straight path. Their rebellious nature however took the upper hand, as it did even while Moses was among them performing miracles for all to see. Instead of humbling their selves, gratefully abiding by these directives meant for their own good, as David understood and did Ps19, they progressively took control of the laws, making their application only secondary to the man made practices that "validate them". Their ritualistic obsessions and hairsplitting conjectures basically turned the Divine law into a man made one. And this is another form of idolatry and God let them follow that path as a punishment, as He is described doing in Ezekiel, even letting them enshrine some of those laws in the written Torah. Divine law should instead be agreeable to the human soul, and if its recipients are mature and obedient, which was overwhelmingly not the case of the Israelites in their history, then it should make room for the evolving circumstances of the world. This adaptability however can never compromise the original spiritual principle and intent. This nature and purpose of the Mosaic law was rightly observed since the earliest days of Judeo-christian internal debates. In his dialogue with Trypho, Justin Martyr cites every aspect of the law, including the institution of sacrifice and observance of Sabbath, as burdens forced upon the Jews to contain their tendency to disobedience

"Wherefore, God, adapting His laws to that weak people, ordered you to offer sacrifices to His name, in order to save you from idolatry, but you did not obey even then, for you did not hesitate to sacrifice your children to the demons. Moreover, the observance of the sabbaths was imposed upon you by God so that you would be forced to remember Him, as He Himself said, ‘That you may know that I am God your Savior’ [Ezk 20.20]".

The Mosaic law in most part did not originate at Sinai but progressively came on the Israelites to contain their repeated disobedience and punish their endless conjectures on clear instructions. Many were then retrospectively painted as revealed to Moses since the beginning, and for different reasons. The Sabbath became a day of rest that mimics God's resting from creation Gen2,Ex20,31. Another passage gives a profoundly different reason for Sabbath. It is a remembrance of Egyptian bondage Deut5. This shows the confused manner in which tradition was transmitted prior to being written down.

The conjectures of their law books, obtained through subjective methods of deduction and then put forward as God's ordinances, reached such proportions that in the words of Rashi the famous rabbi and Torah exegete, in reference to the rabbinic disagreements during the era of Hillel and Shammai

“Since the students of Hillel and Shammai fought, there have been many disagreements about Torah to the point that it has become as two separate teachings for all the burdens of subjugation to the Heavens and edicts which they placed upon the Torah” (Bava Metzia 33b).

Put briefly, the creators of the Oral Torah (the sages of the Mishnah and the Talmud) completely ignored the laws of the (Written) Torah, only using them as a convenient framework within which to legislate laws adapted to their own time. These ideas are expressed in the Talmud/Oral Torah, considered as God-given and revealed as the written Torah of Moses is. Their known soulless interpretations and conjectures caused them to create insurmountable legal criteria.

For example some purity rituals must be fulfilled before or just at the start of the Messianic era, but the preconditions are impossible to achieve due to the supposed impurity of the entire community. There is also the sacrifice of a "red heifer" whom none has been able to breed and raise yet, despite the continuous attempts up to this day. It is said that even Solomon, the wisest of all men, tried throughout his life to understand the matter of the red heifer and did not succeed. Despite God punishing them in this manner, letting them complicate the law further upon themselves, so as to wake them up to their degenerate condition, they instead remained stiff necked and disobedient. They are still nowadays elaborating further upon these legal conjectures of their forefathers. Consequently, the Quran alludes to the spiritual barrenness of their hearts through the simile of dry rocks and even harder because

2:74"there are some rocks from which streams burst forth".

Their hard heartedness is a recurrent theme and accusation in their own Books Ezek3:7,Jer5:3etc.

Because these restrictions came either in direct consequence of their sins, so they could not have been intended for a righteous community, or were self-imposed meaning against the original intent, then it was one of the prophet's mission with the Quran to promulgate laws adapted to a new, upright nation that would be a torch bearer of the truth to the world. This is the Quran, making

7:157"lawful to them the good things and makes unlawful to them impure things, and removes from them their burden and the shackles which were upon them".

Now that God's Law has achieved its final and universal character, it has been restored to its original simplicity, as close as it had ever been to the way of Abraham who was neither Jew nor Christian nor a polytheist. God does not burden an obedient people with difficulties they cannot bear

2:286,23:62"And we do not lay on any soul a burden except to the extent of its ability, and with Us is a book which speaks the Truth, and they shall not be dealt with unjustly".

This covers that the divine law cannot be burdensome in and of itself, but also that it may not make the particular circumstances of an individual even harsher and unbearable than they already are. For example forcing a sick person to fast for a month. The religion of Allah is not a burden, and neither is the set of ethical discipline it imposes upon man meant at narrowing down his feel of life 20:2, it rather is meant at enhancing it by deepening his consciousness of right and wrong. It is a blessing meant at purifying mankind or as the Quran says when speaking of the objective of religion being for spiritual tazkiya/purging. Allah calls it His favor and grace

4:113,5:3,2:231"and remember the favor of Allah upon you, and that which He has revealed to you of the Book and the Wisdom".

Here, this favor is described as being in the Book and the Wisdom referring to the body and soul of the Sharia respectively, to its commandments and their philosophy. This phrase is often used to connote the fact that God's guidance is perfectly balanced between both these aspects.