In answer to the video "Sin and Salvation, Part 6 - Sin in Christianity"
Just as a prelude, this youtuber claims that humans can only be holy through Christ. Yet Throughout the book of Leviticus in the HB, the speech is interrupted every now and then in between very intricate purity rituals, reminding the higher reason for the practice
"You shall be holy, for I, the Lord, your God, am holy".
Having said that, we get to the issue bothering him. The only context where blood sacrifice is an obligation is when the Temple of Jerusalem is built and the people living close to it are allowed to bring their animals there. Without a Temple Jews are forbidden from bringing sacrifices. When the Temple is rebuilt in the messianic age, animal sacrifices will resume. This by the way undermines the Christological notion of the human god/lamb's once and for all atoning sacrifice.
The concept that blood offering is a primordial requirement for sin atonement, isnt found in Jesus' sayings but in
Hebrews9:22"And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission".
Nowhere in the Jewish Scriptures do you find the message that without blood there is no remission. Besides the HB being filled with prayers of forgiveness and admonishment to repent, with or without an offering, such a notion renders meaningless the Lord's prayer in the NT. Jesus would have been teaching his followers a useless prayer of forgiveness.
Lk11"Forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone who sins against us"
What is further striking is that throughout Acts, where the apostles give a number of speeches in order to convert others to the faith, the notion of Jesus' death as an atoning sacrifice is absent.
The mistake that atonement of sin requires a blood sacrifice comes from a mis-reading of Lev17 where Jews are forbidden from eating blood and told its only purpose is on the altar or to be thrown away into the dirt Lev17:13, but nowhere does it say that only blood atones.
The Torah is very specific on what types of sacrifices are brought, and for what purpose (thanksgiving, celebration, gifts to God, atonement of very specific sins, guilt, etc.). There are various types of offerings and very few had anything to do with sin. All of this is explained in Leviticus. The offerings range from animals, money, flour, incense, etc. and of course never human beings, as in the Christian model, something the God of the HB abhors.
Even then, repentance is still required along with the offering for the expiation of the specific sin to be complete. But one always finds the overarching principle that sacrifice is nothing compared to the foremost thing: obedience
1Sam15:22"Does the LORD delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as much as in obeying the voice of the LORD ?"
Of course God does not delight in something of lesser value than another, like a human would delight in sweets rather than more valuable wholesome foods. David says:
Ps69:30-31"I will praise the name of God with a song, and will magnify him with thanksgiving. [This] also shall please the LORD better than an ox [or] bullock that hath horns and hoofs"
see also Prov15:8,16:6,Isa58:3,5,Jer4:1-2,7:3,22-23,25:5,26:3-6,36:3,7,50:20.
This obedience of course translates into following God's commandements. The Abrahamic religions are religions of faith and deeds. The Abrahamic God did not entangle mankind in a system only His intervention can resolve, through the dramatic sending of His son/self to be beaten and murdered. He did not burden mankind with what they cannot bear, so as to purposefully condemn them.
Blood atones, but there are many other types of atonements for sins that were ordained long before the presence of a Temple, such as the time between the Exodus from Egypt and the arrival at Mount Sinai as alluded to by
Amos5“Did you bring me sacrifices and offerings forty years in the wilderness, people of Israel?"
These parallel ways for sin atonement, other than blood, also applied during and when the temple was destroyed
Deut4:27-31"Adonai will scatter you...But from that place you will seek out Adonai your God, and you will find Him if you seek Him out with all your heart and all your being...and you will start listening to His Voice, because Adonai your God is a compassionate God.."
What is damaging however from a Christological perspective is that the prophets of the HB did envision a time where such a thing would happen. None said a thing about believing in Jesus or any other messianic claimant, as an alternative way to be accepted by God. Instead, they were commanded by God Himself to turn to Him in prayer and repentance Hos3,14,1Kings8:46-50. This would have been the perfect occasion in scripture to integrate Jesus in the grand scheme of divine salvation. But it doesnt.
Here are some of these ways which the prophets prescribed for sin atonement, nothing about believing in Jesus or the messiah;
- repentance and confession 2Sam12:13-14,Jonah3:10,Lev26:40-42,Ezek18:21-32,33:11-16,Hosea6:6,Ps32:5,Prov21:3,Isa55:7. This way was preached by all prophets for the removal of sin because God is forgiving
Ps86:5,Numbers14:20"Then the LORD said, 'I do forgive, just as you have asked".
David was forgiven simply through repentance as referenced earlier in 2Sam12:13. Not only that, he is also told in Ps51:18-19 that in regards to this very sin, no blood was required of him. If David's sin could be forgiven without blood, what prevents the notion from applying to other sins, just as the HB teaches in countless places?
- truth, justice, love and charity Micah6:6-8,Prov16:6,Daniel4:27
- prayer whether sincerely made by Jews or non-Jews Hos14:2-3,1Kings8:46-52,Daniel9:19,2Chron7:13-14,6:24-40,Prov15:8,Jonah3:5-10. Numerous passages, including Hosea 14, say how prayers have taken the place of sacrifices. This is reflected in
Ps51:17"The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit, and a broken and contrite heart"
and
Hos6:6"I desire kindness and not sacrifices, the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings".
In Ps40:6 we learn that while God does place an importance on blood sacrifice, He puts more importance on penitence and the resolve to do better.
- suffering as a means of refinement Deut8:16,Isa48:10,Ps105:19
- death Isa22:14
- flour offerings to be placed on top of the fire offering, not necessarily on top of the blood Lev5:11-13. This could be done by placing this particular flour offering on top of other flour offerings Lev6:11 the same way as one blood offering is placed on top of another Lev4:35. This type of offering was brought by the poor, who could by definition, not afford sacrificing an animal. Flour is not mixed with the previous offering of another person, nothing indicates it was. Blood is usually sprinkled on the side of the alter, the rest drained at its base. Flour is placed on top. Nowhere do we see that the blood is placed where sin offerings are placed. The pieces of the animal offering placed on top have had their life blood drained long ago. Lev1:9 even insists these parts be washed first. At no point is there any requirement for the meal offering (flour here) be mixed with blood on top of the altar. How will it even burn if it is soaked with blood?
- money Ex30:15
- jewelry Num31:50
- incense Num17:11-12
In fact we even read that even while the Temple is standing, it is no guarantee that blood sacrifice will expiate for sins Lev26:31. Obedience is the primary requirement for a sacrifice to be accepted, as stated earlier. Blood does not "automatically" atone
Prov15:8,21:27"the sacrifices of the wicked are an abomination before the Lord".
Even while the Temple is standing, a penitent heart is what makes the blood expiate the sins. That is why in the absence of a Temple and the impossibility to bring a sacrifice, atonement for sins is still achieveable.
In answer to the video "Sin and Salvation, Part 6 - Sin in Christianity"
After the tree incident, God curses the serpent with "arur atah" which is never used next when He addresses Adam and Eve. God tells them "arurah ha'adamah", cursed is the earth/ground. This speaks of the earth/ground that Adam will have to work - but God does not curse Adam nor Eve. This is the major point lost by Christians, God did not curse (arur) Adam nor Eve by causing them to unwillingly inherit a sinful nature to their descendants; they were punished (not cursed = arur) with the pain from childbirth, subjugation of women to men, and having to work for food. This has nothing to do with sin or cursing man with a sinful nature.
As to Gen3:15, the seed of Eve spoken of, refers to mankind in general because God here is addressing Eve. Similarily in Gen16:7 Hagar's seed refers to her Ishmaelite descendants because she is being addressed, not Abraham. The passage of Gen3 isnt figurative and its plain reading is obvious, refering to the enmity between serpents and humans. Some Christians like to see in that passage an allegory of Jesus' utter defeat of Satan, which obviously didnt happen. Satan is still active even among those that are most adamant in their belief in him, such as Paul 1Thess2:18. Paul also made the false prophecy that this anticipated defeat shall happen very shortly Rom16:20. 2000 years later, sin still exists, even among those that accepted Jesus, just as it remains a threat to those that sincerely repent 1Jn1:8,3:8-9.
Whether man is a sinner by nature or not is immaterial to Judaism since it teaches the way to repentance and reconciliation with God.
The Torah says man has an inclination towards evil from youth not birth Gen8:21 but that doesnt make everyone a sinner from birth, having inherited Adam's sin, nor does it mean one is in a state of being from which he must be "saved". In fact even the non Jewish king of Tyre was found to be Ezek28:15"perfect in your ways from the day you were created until wrongdoing was found in you". Each person is accountable for his own sins and can find the way to forgiveness through sincere repentance and resolve in walking aright Ezek18:20-22,Deut24:16,2Kings14:6,Jer31:30,Job34:23.
In answer to the video "Muhammad Was Spiritually Disturbed; Paul Wasn't (PvM 19)"
Besides these superstitious beliefs associated with the jinn, the Quran rejects other forms of popular occult sciences, like magic and witchcraft that were wrongly attributed to the prophet Sulayman by some of his contemporaries and those that followed 2:102.
Obviously the people misinterpreted Sulayman's ability, granted to him by God, of controling entities of the unseen for his own benefit. Such falsehood is abundantly found in a wide variety of Solomonic lore, including the 5th century CE Testament of Solomon, each drawing from oneanother as well as other lost sources, written and oral. Particularly among Greek Christians that used amulets, medallions seals or rings with his name.
Magic or witchcraft are qualified with the word sihr, from the root S-Ha-R meaning to make things look other than what they actually are, ie deception. There are 3 ways one can try and achieve that objective; the trick or slight of hand, the chemistry and the psychological manipulation, all of them meant at deceiving one into perceiving something else than what is actually occuring. These practices have therefore no intrinsic power. Sorcery at that time consisted of worshipping the jinn and straying from monotheism and that is why the Quran and the traditions warn against these practices.
Throughout the Quran, sorcery has always been associated with evil-mindedness, perverse beliefs, evil deeds and terrifying intimidation of people. It in addition is an act of apostasy to believe in the influence of false gods and the jinn who were worshipped in the process. Muslim jurists the likes of Malik ibn Anas considered sorcery as a manifestation of its practitioner’s perverted faith and prescribed punishments for it.
When relating Moses' public confrontation with Pharaoh's sorcerers, the Quran says that they
7:116"saharoo aAAyuna alnnasi/they tricked the eyes of the people",
the point being that magic is about tricking the eyes to think that what it sees is reality when it is not. There are some reports in hadith literature speaking of people attempting to bewitch the prophet, and even succeeding for a short lapse of time, confusing him in conjugal matters. In Bukhari and Muslim, the time span under which the prophet was affected is said to be 40 days. Weaker reports as narrated by ibn Saad from ibn al Hakam speak of 6 months. None however speak of whatever the prophet was afflicted with as "black magic". The scholars have referred to it as illusion, in conformity with the meaning of the word as stated earlier. It is known that to the prophet, besides being dutiful in his prophetic task of conveying the divine message, an area beyond the reach of evil interference, his second priority was being dutiful as a husband. Due to his outstanding daily responsibilities, the Quran gave him leeway in that aspect and yet, as attested in the traditions he would do his utmost to spend in an equal amount of time with each of his wives. Since this aspect of his private life was most important to him, he thus felt confused in that specific matter and in nothing else, by whatever evil had affected his perception of reality. It is not like the author of the illusion had intended to affect this specific matter in the prophet's life. Assuming the reports as true for argument's sake, a crafty magic trick/illusion can certainly confuse anyone momentarily, in any kind of matter, just as what happened to Moses as he was deceived by the sorcerers' slight of hand 20:66.
Both Moses and Muhammad were eventually given the inner strength by God to heal from the effect.
Further, something which is highly inconvenient to those Islam critics who mainly use those reports to discredit the prophet, he actually is described therein as receiving a vision indicating the author of the sihr as well as the location of the device he used. False prophets dont receive divine visions. After finding the device, the prophet doesnt destroy it, he didnt need to. God cured him, meaning the tool used had no power in and of itself.
"Those around him said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, should we not head toward that evil person and kill him?’ He said: ‘As for me, Allah has cured me, and I dislike causing evil to other people’. This is of the forbearance of the Messenger of Allah”.
To further corroborate the prophet, in such cases simply advised observing a certain diet, relevant to his own environment. He advised eating 7 ajwa dates of the type growing in Aliya near Medina, over 7 days at breakfast as a means by which the body is detoxified as well as safeguarded from the psychological manipulations of sihr (the health benefits of that diet were thought to keep the mind sharp and aware against such endeavors). This is far from, and not even comparable to the absurd idea proposed in the Greek Testament of Christians able to neutralize deadly poison in Jesus' name.
It is to be kept in mind however that the supposed confusion the prophet was victim of, never pertained to divine communications, an area time and again declared as protected from any interference, human or else, from its descent from heaven until it is delivered to the prophet's heart and transmitted to the people. The Quran for example, in the context of truthfulness of prophethood and divine origin of the Book, repeatedly denies the claims made by his contemporaries that he might be demon possessed or under the effect of the jinn 16:98-100,26:221-3,69:41-2,81:22-25 or under a spell or that he is himself a magician/sorcerer 17:47-8,25:8-9,38:4,51:52-6 as other prophets were similarly calumnied.
That deception, commonly called magic or sorcery, is fully encompassed by God's knowledge and power, not allowing it to affect anything or anyone except by His own will, meaning it has no power in and of itself
"they can harm none thereby save by God's leave".
It further states that the only thing one can be sure of, is that seeking such a means of deception is harmful to the seeker himself, and will never benefit him in anyway
"they acquire a knowledge that only harms themselves and does not benefit them".
This is demonstrated by the clear declaration of the 2 angelic messengers of Babylon, Harut and Marut, telling the people not to become deniers of the truth by misusing what was revealed upon them from knowledge. But that is exactly what many did. Following the examples and whisperings of evil beings (men or jinn), they began practicing the knowledge acquired from the messengers in deceitful ways, contrary to the original intent, ultimately harming themselves only and not benefiting from the practice in anyway, shape or form. Had the "sorcery" ritual been succesful in its evil objective, they would have found some kind of benefit in it, yet the Quran negates that this endeavour can result in any kind of benefit.
We find that notion reflected in the ahadith where the prophet stated
“There is no ‘adwaa (contagious diseases), no tiyarah (bird omens), no haamah (various superstitions in regards to dead people), and no Safar (unlucky month in pre-islamic times or the bite of a serpent inside the belly causing hunger)”.
Each of these processes may only have an effect if God allows it. Contagious diseases were known to the Arabs, and the prophet stated
“Flee from the leper as you would flee from a lion”
just as he warned
"the cattle suffering from a disease should not be mixed with healthy cattle".
This is meant so as to avoid infections. However, one should keep in mind that nothing has any effect unless God allows the process to occur
“The Messenger of Allah said: ‘There is no ‘Adwa, no omen, and no Hamah.’ A man stood up and said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, what if a camel has mange and another camel gets mange from it?’ He said: ‘That is the Divine decree. Who causes the mange in the first one?’”
The prophet here, as well as the Quran in many places, convey the notion of ultimate monotheism, Allah as the only uncaused cause, as the ultimate cause of all things and processes. The pre-islamic Arabs either removed Allah from the equation when attempting to explain an observable phenomenon like infection, or invented a cause, like bad omens.
It is with such perspective in mind that the passage of sura falaq where we seek protection with God from the
113:4"nafathat fil uqad"
must be understood. The phrase lit. means "the blowers on knots". It was an idiom in pre-Islamic Arabia designating all supposedly occult endeavours. The Quran negates that such practices can benefit in any way the one that resorts to them and has labelled them a sin. The sin consitsts not in that they might possibly harm anyone using magical powers but in the very thought of possessing some supernatural abilities without God's license. When we seek protection from the evil of those who practice occultism, not from their actions or supposed powers and effects, we recognize the principle already stated in
2:102"they can harm none thereby save by God's leave".
We put our trust in God against all evil endeavours, not to undo any kind of magic spells. Just as the 2 angels' noble teachings can be used in an evil manner, contrary to the original intent, the Quran itself can be misused in a similar way, contrary to its original intent.
There are verses, the mutashabihaat, that allow mutliple understandings because of the general nature of their words and context, as well as the subject treated, and all are acceptable so long as they agree with the rules of language and the muhkamat verses. But as stated in the passage speaking of the issue, those in whose heart their is perversity go after the mutashabihaat solely to create confusion, through ascribing arbitrary conclusions to those verses 3:7. The verse isnt specific on the nature of the revelation upon the angels. But what is known is that it was a divine revelation, not magic or deceptive tricks.
The verse speaks of 2 groups transmitting knowledge to completely different ends;
- the shayateen (men or jinn) that teach sihr/trickery combined with what they learned from the angels, for sinful ends. The reason they would need to do so would be to deceive the people into thinking that sihr is a divinely condoned practice. This is done up to this day with charlatans using Quranic passages in fanciful ways and rituals. This includes the use of devices upon which one puts his trust instead of Allah
"the prophet said: Verily, spells, amulets, and charms are acts of idolatry".
Even Quran amulets, although not a prophetic practice, all schools of Islamic thought agree that their only virtue is in reminding one to invoke the sacred words they contain.
- the angels that teach divine revelation, warning their audience of whom they perceived the inclination to disbelief, not to misuse that knowledge to evil ends and thereby damage their soul. Some did not heed the warnings and only learned from them the bits that cause harm. As already explained and as seen everyday, the Quran itself can be misused in such a manner, with people taking bits of passages, stripping them from the direct and wider context, then applying that knowledge in harmful ways.
As a side note on 113:4, if we disregard the idiomatic understanding of the verse it can be understood in a different way that equally fits the context. Nafathat is the plural of naffath, which is an intensive nominative from nafatha, meaning primarily he blew. But nafatha also can be taken for inspiring ie influencing the mind. Uqad, the plural of uqdah doesnt only mean knots but also judgments, management, regulating and ordering of one's affairs, a promise of obedience or vow of allegiance. Naffathat fil uqad can also thus be those who put evil suggestions into the resolution of men or into the management of their affairs.
What should finally be kept in mind as a decisive Quranic position whenever those issues of magic, or witchcraft are presented as an influencing factor in wordly causality is that Iblis himself, the archdeceiver and ultimate external source of evil is presented in the Quran as no more than a mere whisperer, unable to coerce in any way those that listen to his suggestions, hence his description "waswas ilkhannas"
In answer to the video "Muhammad Was Spiritually Disturbed; Paul Wasn't (PvM 19)"
Let us see how this favorite of Islam's opponents holds up to scrutiny.
This noble Book is not the result of some human whim. It was an inspiration to Muhammad 42:52, whose descent is independent of his will and desires 53:3.
Allah says of his messenger
69:44-47"if the messenger were to invent any sayings in Our name, We should certainly seize him by his right hand, And We should certainly then cut off the artery of his heart: Nor could any of you withhold him (from Our wrath)".
The prophet wont be able to successfully pass off something false as divinely inspired because by the manner of his sudden death, those around him will understand that the prophecy of preservation came true and that what he was about to utter, or started uttering was false. Should he even misinterpret and lie over the true meaning of what is revealed to him, his heart would be sealed and he would become like the worst rejectors among his nation, blindly wandering on 42:24. Other verses issue similar warnings against tampering with the Quran to such an extent that it was imprinted in the psyche of the memorizers and all the believers.
When the malicious critics of Islam try using this divine pledge of protection, something no other scripture has ever had, against the prophet, they do nothing but shoot themselves in the foot. For instance when they connect the symptoms of the prophet's death, years after ingesting a poison, to the statement in 69:45-47 about instantly (not progressively) seizing and putting him to death should he try passing off as revelation something that isnt, then they are still testifying inadvertently to the Quran's authenticity; The prophecy came true and the false prophet, God forgive them for that saying, was put to death and prevented.
When they quote from the false, discredited and discarded story of the "satanic verses" where the prophet says
"I have fabricated things against God and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken"
then they are equally attesting to the preservation of the Quran. The same report states that this supposed "coming back to his senses" was caused by Gabriel, who
"came to the Messenger of God and said, "Muhammad, what have you done? You have recited to the people that which I did not bring to you from God, and you have said that which was not said to you".
Even if we assume in the worst case, just for argument's sake, that the prophet did pass off as revelation something that wasnt, then there is still the inescapable fact that he was under constant watch, immediately reprimanded for his deed, and the false revelation pointed and discarded from the rest.
Before getting into the story itself, it is important to note, we Muslims take Allah's word for it, He bears witness that what has been revealed to His Prophet has been done
4:166"with His knowledge, and the angels bear witness too and Allah is sufficient for a witness".
Merely coming down from the heavens was not sufficient to prove its divine origin. It could have been done through satanic agencies, or could have been polluted with confusing falsehood had God not made all necessary arrangements that no evil spirit could interfere with it. God and the angels commanded to deliver the Quran 2:97,80:11-16 bear witness that the revelation right from the start of its descent, to its reaching down to the prophets and up to its communication and delivery to the people is duly protected and guarded against change and alteration, from whatever source it might come. And God encompasses his messenger and protects him from any evil interference during all these processes
10:61,72:26-28"He makes a guard to march before him(the messenger) and after him, so that He may know that they(the messengers) have truly delivered the messages of their Lord, and He encompasses what is with them, and He records the number of all things"
19:64"and we(angels of revelation) do not come down but by the command of your Lord; His is whatever is before us and whatever is behind us and whatever is between these".
All prophets were confronted to the machinations of evil spirits, trying to interfere with their desire to establish the truth. They did so through any means they could, such as by inciting their enemies further against them, propagating falsehood, attempting to make them compromise some of their principles with their enemies', but God protects His message from corruption and ultimately defeats their falsehood and obstacles, and establishes the Truth instead 6:56,22:51-55,41:26,68:9,10:15,17:73-4.
Whatever the devil creates from obstacles to counter the messengers' desires, ie their desires to establish the truth, becomes a trial for the people. This is speaking of the difficulties experienced by the messengers and their followers in the face of adversity. The people respond differently to these trials. Some go further in their rejection and doubts. Others become persuaded of it being the Truth based on the simple observation that, had the revelation been false and leading people astray, evil forces wouldnt have been so restless and agitated in their opposition. We see this phenomenon today, all around us and the restless but fruitless efforts by the opponents of Islam, trying hard to convince Muslims to abandon their faith. Also, the unwavering stance of the messengers in the face of these obstacles provides further proof for their selflessness and sincerity, more particularly in the basic notion of monotheism which evil entities were most focused against 10:104-6.
The satanic verses polemic, regardless of its authenticity, perfectly fits this scheme by the evil entities -human and jinn- to oppose the messengers' desire to establish the truth. With it, they try creating doubt and confusion in the mind of the people.
This story, from an authentic viewpoint is rejected by ibn Ishaq who is himself among the transmitters, as quoted by Tabari in introduction to the story "
About this story Imam Muhammad bin Ishaq, the compiler of sirah, was asked, he said: ‘This is from the fabrication of the heretics.’ And he wrote a book on the issue".
As to the chain coming from ibn Abbas, it has the known liar and forger al Kalbi in the isnad. More on that point further below.
Nowadays, even among western scholars of Islam, studies by the likes John Burton, Uri Rubin, Jaakko Hämeen-Anttila, Gerald Hawting, Nicolai Sinai and Patricia Crone have all expressed profound reservations about the historicity of the story. It is also discarded through simple textual analysis. The alleged verses do not fit the passage in 53:19-23 which actually is a condemnation of idol worship, as well as the larger context which reinforces the incorruptibility of the divine revelation, affirms God's all encompassing power and negates intercession which is what the polytheists precisely believed regarding their lesser gods. The sura itself begins with a forceful announcement that
53:2-5"Your companion [Muhammad] has not strayed, nor has he erred, Nor does he speak from [his own] inclination. It is not but a revelation revealed, Taught to him by one intense in strength.."
From a textual criticism viewpoint, the story fails miserably; not a single manuscript exists proving its existence. The main words that constitute the passage are unique to it, not found anywhere in the Quran. This is the criteria of authenticity known as "hapax legomena". Not only that, but al gharaaniq/the cranes is a word that the Arabs have nowhere used to describe their gods, whether in their poetry or in their speeches.
Despite these irrefutable basic facts, the story was used in the past and nowadays to create doubts in the minds of the believers and to obstruct the establishment of the truth. And this despite the fact that it isnt a Quranic statement, nor a prophetic tradition, not even an authentic statement of one of the Companions. At best it is a statement of a tabi’i, ie non-eye witness expressing what he considered to be the reason for the revelation of a particular passage.
Al Albani for instance grades the chain through ibn jubayr from ibn Abbas as sahih mursal, meaning in hadith terminology going back to a non contemporary to the prophet, a tabi'i. Ibn Kathir before him considered at best the chains to be mursal, adding that none are sahih. This is because we have a statement from ibn Abbas in sahih Bukhari that the prostration in sura najm occurred at the end of the sura, not its middle, and in a different context, as Muslims still do today. This contradicts the information that came down to us through weaker chains in the story of the gharaaniq. Al Qurtubi thus rightly observes that the isnad of the story is munkar/disconnected and that it
"was not mentioned by anyone from the people of authenticity".
Al Razi, long before, in his tafsir al kabir rejected the story on the same basis. What is further interesting is that according to Al-Bazzar as quoted by ibn Kathir, he could not find any chain to the story that was not disconnected, except the one with the forger al-Kalbi in it.
In summary, not a single chain goes back directly to the prophet, or to a companion, while we have companion reports about the incident without the storytelling part of the satanic verses. One of the narrators, al Muttalib, was in fact a polytheist at the time of the recital of surah najm/53, and he was among the few (Musnad 8034) who did not prostrate when everyone else did. Prostration in sura najm has nothing to do with the prophet's alleged compromising stance. Prostration is required at the end of the sura, in relation to an actual command to prostrate, long after the section where the satanic verses were supposedly included. Nor is prostration required solely in sura najm but rather at 15 other occasions scattered throughout the suras of this mighty Quran. So despite the fact that the authentic narrations do speak of prostration at the recital of sura najm/53 yet nothing is said of the satanic interference or the whole polemic surrounding the revelation of the passage starting at v19.
The authentic reports relate how the first time the sura was publicly recited, it had such an impact upon the listeners that not only the Muslims followed the prophet's prostration, but many among those present from the pagan Quraysh were equally overwhelmed and fell with their faces to the ground. What can at most be deduced is that this polemic was invented to cover up this sudden defection, or temporary complacent attitude by some idolaters, with a few of them remaining standing out of pride. It is important to mention here that both the Quran and ahadith relate the mesmerizing effect the recitation of the Quran had upon both believers and disbelievers. Regardless of contents, the language itself, like captivating music, had such impact upon a people known for their deep appreciation of eloquent language and poetry, that they would call it magic, sorcery, produced with assistance of the jinn etc. The staunchest enemies of the prophet would listen in secret to the recital of the Quran at night. These were a people who recognized and understood, highly valued eloquent speech. They would fall down prostrate in admiration of the most eloquent poets, as al Farazdaq did to one of Labid's poems. This is a point difficult to recognize unless one is familiar with the standards of the Arabic language, and the culture of the time. As an illustration, we may see even today, people loving a type of music regardless of how conflicting with their values the lyrics are, even dancing to it.
Also, no historical connection exists between sura 53 and 22, the first revealed 5 years into the prophetic call and the latter in Medina or for the earliest estimates 8 years after sura 53.
Finally, regardless of authenticity (no matter how strong the evidence against the story is presented, Islam's restless enemies will keep regurgitating it), there is nothing embarrassing about the satanic verses story. It depicts how the prophet and the revelation were ultimately protected through divine intervention. This, contrary to discrediting the Quran, enhances its credibility as miraculously preserved. Further, this story places the Ishmaelite prophet right along the pattern of the biblical prophets. Those orientalists and Judeo-Christian critics conveniently brush aside the depiction of their prophets; deceived by sorcery (Moses) or influenced by evil to the point they become murderers, adulters and even idolaters (Aaron, David, Solomon). But contrary to their ishmaelite counterpart, God did not even intervene to straighten them in the process.
As to Criteria of embarrassment, it doesnt constitute an argument in favour of the story's authenticity. Christians invented and transmitted the infancy Gospel of Thomas' wicked, murderous Jesus as a child. Does it mean it is true because the author was Christian and would therefore not make up something shameful about Jesus? In the history of Islam, as in Judeo-Christianity, people invented things in regards to their own religious figures for all sorts of reasons, whether to advance a wicked or pious agenda. Second, what is embarrassing in a context isnt in another. For example the story can easily be seen as a pious fabrication, to prove that God protects His messengers, as shown earlier.
In answer to the video "Muhammad Was Spiritually Disturbed; Paul Wasn't (PvM 19)"
This weak charge will be easily done away with, after this little introduction. In the bible we read how the rebellious trend of the Israelites did not abate all throughout their exodus from Egypt Ex16:3 and beyond, as decried by all prophets subsequent to Moses.
At one point they quarrelled to such an extent with Moses that they almost stoned him to death, thus showing their mistrust and very shallow belief in God that had just lead them out of slavery, showing them all sorts of miracles along the way, Who fed them with heavenly food Ex16:4-15,17:1-4.
In their incessant insolence they did not spare Moses even in his private, conjugal matters, causing God Himself to wrathfully descend on the culprits Numb12,Ex2:21. Disregarding the burning fire of God that almost consumed the camp because of their ingratitude, this continuous attitude would reach a point where Moses would even ask God to spare him the burden of prophethood on such wretched people by terminating his own life, which actually is an indirect thought of suicide Numb11.
Now we get to the charge levelled by this youtuber, of supposed suicidal thoughts of the prophet Muhammad at the beginning of his revelational experience.
Firstly, this incident with Moses described earlier, together with that of Jesus, form at least 2 scriptural examples of alleged suicidal tendencies among Biblical figures. Jesus, who saw the moral injustice and strife of the world he lived in, felt that if he killed himself, it would benefit the world. He devised an elaborate plan of crucifixion, instead of jumping off a cliff or slashing his wrists, one which would be an appeal to gain the sympathy of others Jn10:17-8. One may add that the idea was initially planted into Jesus' mind through a satanic suggestion
Matt4"Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down".
There are other ways to look at Jesus' death all of them as damaging to the Christian position; assuming it was not a satanic suggestion, Jesus' death was a wilful suicide sketched with his co-equal divine partners prior to his incarnation
Jn3:16"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son".
If not willful, then forced suicide since Jesus begs his father 3 times to relieve him from this impending crucifixion whose eventual occurrence he knew about long ago, but backed off from at the last moment, until he submits to the Father's will
Lk22"not my will but yours be done".
As to the Bukhari report in which the prophet is described as being so sad when revelation stopped for a longer time than usual that he contemplated throwing himself off high mountains, the part speaking of suicide is separate from the rest of the hadith (we have heard) and without isnad, as noted by Bukhari. The same hadith is reported in several compilations as well as Bukhari itself, without any mention of the suicide part, which is a weak report without basis. Such a rumour might have originated in someone seeing the prophet frequently retreating to the surrounding hills, as he naturally did when revelation was interrupted, and then drew the wrong assumption about suicide. That assumption which began to circulate got mixed up with real facts. There is also the issue of Gabriel depicted as repeatedly dissuading the prophet from his attempts, as if one supernatural appearance and reassurance wasnt enough.
As a final sidenote, contrary to the Quran and the traditions, neither the HB nor the NT condemn suicide although several people are reported to have done it and/or thought of it, including Moses and Jesus as shown above. Coming from such an incomplete background, the critics have no basis to accuse any Muslim figure of supposedly contemplating suicide.
In the Quran we read
5:32"For this reason did We write upon the children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men".
This ordinance in the Quran is universal, both for unjustly murdering or preserving a soul. This important nuance clears its corruption by the Jews to whom the instruction was also issued. Anyone familiar with the manner in which they indulge in hair splitting conjecture in religious laws knows for example how they distinguish between themselves and non-Jews in their Talmudic tradition. This absolves them from certain moral obligations in particular situations. In that particular issue they modified the universality of the principle to make it apply solely to a Jewish soul, that consequently takes on a more sacred character
"whosoever destroys a single soul of Israel, Scripture imputes [guilt] to him as though he had destroyed a complete world; and whosoever preserves a single soul of Israel, Scripture ascribes [merit] to him as though he had preserved a complete world".
The Quran further adds a clause of self-defence and application of justice to the moral principle, a clause which is present in the law of and teachings of every prophet of God
"unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land".
This clause in addition outlaws suicide
6:151"and do not kill the self that Allah made forbidden to violate except by the right".
The "right" being the establishment of justice in the case of manslaughter or corruption in the land. It even isnt permissible to desire death, as per the prophet's saying
"Let none of you wish for death on account of an affliction that befalls him. If he has no alternative, let him pray, O Allah! Give my life so long as the life is good for me, and take away my life if death is good for me".
From a higher, spiritual perspective, the Quran says mankind has a purpose and sufferings actually contribute positively to its achievement. The harder the situation the higher the opportunity to attain that purpose. Islam is the only religion that gives a positive outlook on life and satisfactorily answers the issue of evil, hardships and suffering.
In answer to the video "Muhammad Was Spiritually Disturbed; Paul Wasn't (PvM 19)"
Nobody witnessed Paul's vision of Jesus and even the accounts given in the NT contradict themselves about what was allegedly seen or heard. No Apostles witnessed the alleged crucifixion, they all fled according to the NT Matt26:56. Nobody saw an angel telling Mary about the risen Jesus. No Apostles witnessed Jesus talking to Satan, no Apostles witnessed Mary giving birth to Jesus and they didnt see the angels. There were no witnesses to the Holy Spirit descending upon the various prophets within the HB that spoke to Israel.
General revelation, descending upon people indiscriminately happenned only once in the history of mankind and was stopped quickly, upon the people's request, fearing they would die as already shown above. And for the already shown reasons, prophecy needs a special kind of eligibility, preparation, and purity of soul. All the wires of the vast electrical system of a city cannot be expected to receive the same high amount of electricity that immediately arrives into the initial thick wires directly from the main generator. Hence the vain and misplaced requests of some of the prophet Muhammad's contemporaries to experience revelation like he did
2:118-9,74:52,6:124"We will not believe until we are given the like of what was given to God's messengers. Allah knows best where to place His messengership".
The Quran is the testimony of God not based upon whether we see an angel coming to Muhammad or not, the Quran is the testimony of God based upon its own internal evidence. We know an angel came to Muhammad because of the Quran, not the other way around
36:2-3"by the Quran full of wisdom, Most surely you are one of the messengers",
the wisdom of this Quran is the evidence that it is from God and that Muhammad is His prophet. Prophets are those whom God chooses to speak with, and their authority comes by the signs that God manifests to people. Belief in Prophets isnt based upon who is witnessing what, its dictated by what they bring to establish their Prophethood. We have the Quran, Christians never saw the resurrection and dont even have one Bible.
The first revelation was thus inspired to Muhammad, who unlike Jeremiah or Isaiah had no established prophetic tradition to console or support him mentally, on a blessed night 44:3 also referred to as lailatul qadr 97:1, during the month of Ramadan 2:185.
Muhammad went back to Khadija to whom he recounted the event. She immediately trusted him and accepted Islam. A slight nuance however between Muhammad and Jesus is that while Jesus was opposed by his closest relatives, Muhammad was first and foremost recognized and accepted by his own bossom friends and people of his household. They knew him intimitely and would have detected the inconsistent actions and thoughts of a deceiver abroad and at home. This is strongly corroborative of his sincerity.
Jesus on the other hand was rejected in his hometown and by his family, despite his own parents knowing of the wonderful circumstances of his birth and childhood! His own mother, who gave birth to him miraculously, and his brothers James and Jude even thought he had gone mad Mk3. Khadija also appeased the prophet's fears of the consequence of having accepted the burden of prophecy with all the religious, social and political changes it would imply in his sordid and violent environement of the Age of Ignorence, the Jahiliyya.
As the prophet Ezekiel sat bewildered for 7 days among the people without uttering a word Ezek3:15 following a similar shocking first encounter with the revelational experience, so did the prophet Muhammad seek to recuperate ahead of his mission. Against all political and economical wisdom, his wife Khadija decided to fully support him and reliquish her prestigious status and succesful commerce. Muhammad was given the Kawthar 108:1; the term covers the abundance of grace, wisdom and knowledge, mercy and goodness, spiritual power and insight.
Through these faculties he was able to achieve, through his works, dignity in this world and in the hereafter, and was able to lead and establish a nation that would bear the torch of truth to the world. Muhammad would receive clear revelations from on high through dreams 8:43, wakefulness 17:1, through the holyspirit 26:193-4.
In answer to the video "Muhammad Was Spiritually Disturbed; Paul Wasn't (PvM 19)"
At around the age of 40, Muhammad would retire in al Hira where he would meditate, and his loving wife Khadija would bring him food to help him in the process. A narration from Aisha relates how 6 months prior to that momentous event, the prophet had dreams every single night of happenings that would occur the following day. He was being prepared in an increasing manner to be in touch with the metaphysical realm. During one of those seclusions, Muhammad, extremely respected for his wisdom, truthfulness, honesty, charity and honourable character, is formally introduced to his momentous mission with the first revelation, consisting of the first 5 verses of Sura Al Alaq
96:1-5"Recite in the Name of Your Lord Who created. He created the human being from a clot. Recite and your Lord is Most Honourable, Who taught (to write) with the pen, taught the human being what he knew not".
The one who taught Muhammad these heavenly words was the same whom he would see in his dreams months prior. This led him to think at first that he was hallucinating. So when he first resisted the command to "read". In answer, the angelic visitor repeatedly hugged him with strength so he would know he was not hallucinating, that his experience was tangible and real. After resisting and interrupting three times and pressed three times, Muhammad allowed Jibril to reveal the verses in totality and recited exactly as he was commanded.
We're not talking of God or the angel of God, wrestling with a prophet, and that prophet overcoming him, as is alleged in regards to prophet Joseph in the Biblical account.
The prophet Muhammad's encounter with the metaphysical realm is very realistically depicted. He is a normal human being whose first reaction is fear and denial upon seeing a supernatural creature in a remote location, alone. That fear and confusion however did not pertain to the revelation itself, which he flawlessly recited when pressed the third time.
As he was comforted by his entourage, then confirmed in his prophethood by the old Waraqa, his disbelief dissipated. That short and shocking introduction to revelation was followed by a long period, where no such supernatural encounter occurred. This is highly corroborative of the prophet's sincerity, as he was expected to keep on receiving revelation to enhance his credibility and corroborate his extraordinary claims. But as time passed, up to 3 years according to tradition, the prophet himself, despite his initial terror started longing for Jibril to return. When he did, it was again a magnificent but shocking sight
"While I was walking I heard a voice from the sky. I looked up towards the sky, and behold! I saw the same Angel who came to me in the Cave of Hira', sitting on a chair between the sky and the earth. I was so terrified by him that I fell down on the ground. Then I went to my wife and said, 'Wrap me in garments! Wrap me in garments!' They wrapped me, and then Allah revealed: "O you, (Muhammad) wrapped-up! Arise and warn...and desert the idols." (74.1-5) Abu Salama said....Rujz means idols." After that, the Divine Inspiration started coming more frequently and regularly".
This time, the prophet did not resist uttering the revelation. Thereafter his heart was progressively accustomed to bearing the connection with the metaphysical realm through concise revelations, he would not experience fear and terror whenever the angel appeared. In fact, contrary to his initial resistance, a little after his first encounter, the prophet became so eager in memorizing, understanding and communicating the revelation, that he would hastily repeat what Gabriel inspired him, as he was receiving it. The Quran came to check him on that anxiousness, and to appease his fear
75:16-9"Move not your tongue with it, [O Muhammad], to hasten with recitation of the Qur'an. Indeed, upon Us is its collection [in your heart] and [to make possible] its recitation. So when We have recited it, then follow its recitation. Then upon Us is its clarification [to you]".
It is important to emphasize, prophethood came totally unexpectedly to him
28:86"And you did not expect that the Book would be inspired to you, but it is a mercy from your Lord".
He in addition never entertained, prior to it, the idea of political and religious leadership. As his early critics among the notables themselves objected, he was unimportant from that perspective prior to claiming prophethood and to them, such a weighty message, if true, should only be delivered to a notable 43:31. He did not display any such intent prior to it as his opponents themselves could not deny, nothing out of the ordinary in his demeanor and ambitions as would have been evident for anyone with political aspirations, besides his notoriety as a trustworthy and upright individual 10:16. That is also putting aside his state of shock following his vivid encounter with the divine, revealing utter unpreparedness for its implications. To these may be added the well-known facts of his denial of any desire for material gains out of his mission and, more particularly, his turning down of the Quraysh leaders' repeated offers of wealth, leadership and power to him in lieu of his abandoning his mission or compromising some of its tenets as repeatedly alluded to both in the Quran and traditions.
The exact process of revelation is a process unknown to humans and the prophets themselves do not understand its intricate details 17:85 however from the prophet Muhammad's testimony in the oral tradition where he describes the way he felt it coming to him, we know it could sometimes be a very powerful and internally violent experience. Especially so the very first revelation of sura Alaq that left him overwhelmed, exhausted and terrorized. But he never thought he was being visited by evil entities like the jinn, that were believed to come to the poets with eloquent words. The prophet never doubted that his encounter was with an angelic entity, as described earlier. The Quran unequivocally identifies the carrier of God's word to the prophet as the angel Gabriel. And although no self-serving reports exist where the angel of revelation formally introduces himself, we do have many reports where the prophet identifies the agent of revelation as Gabriel.
In the darkest times of his prophetic mission, towards the beginning, the prophet Muhammad would often retreat in fear, as any human being would be in that situation. Violent opposition and derision, intense sacrifices and possible death, are the lot of the prophets, especially at the beginning of their call. Revelation would come to comfort him and pull him out of that state of mind. He would be told to rise and through acts of devotion, to prepare himself spiritually to be able to bear what is about to come down on him from on high
73:5"Surely We will make to light upon you a weighty Word".
The Quran often uses the image of vastness, greatness found in nature and more particularly the mountains when it wants to express the massive importance of a thing, more specifically of this Revelation
14:46,10:22-23,42:33,59:21"Had We sent down this Quran on a mountain, you would certainly have seen it falling down, splitting asunder because of the fear of Allah, and We set forth these parables to men that they may reflect".
This kind of imagery, again pictured in 13:31, is meant at contrasting those whose hearts are more inert and harder to penetrate by divine guidance, than a massive mountain would be. This literary style also serves the purpose of picturing the importance of Revelation; it takes a special kind of creature with a special kind of internal disposition to be able to bear it, in addition to bearing the consequences of having to communicate it. The word used in sura sharh to describe what kind of burden Muhammad was relieved from through God's expansion of his chest is wizr, used for something nearly unbearable
94:1-3"Have We not expanded for you your breast, And taken off from you your burden, Which pressed heavily upon your back".
What is rendered "pressed heavily" is anqada which actually is used when something is about to break. The prophet Moses at the beginning of his call and prior to his confrontation with Pharao requested from God the same spiritual relief and strengthening 20:25. We see here how the Quran consistently keeps its notions, although scattered all throughout the divine writings, connecting them together.
There are narrations speaking of the effects of revelation, not only on the prophet but on those around him; his camel would sit and sink into the sand, a close companion whose knee happened to be under that of the prophet almost shattered. When he described it at times coming to him "like" the sound of a bell (meaning something similar but not the same) it was to convey to his addressees in terms they could relate to, what he was personally experiencing.
All of the various manifestations of revelation on him were far removed from any sign of neuronal illness, as some malicious critics have recently suggested, since he never lost consciousness or memory during the process. The slander of epilepsy, unsurprisingly finds its source 200 years following the prophet's death by the pens of Bible loving Christians the likes of Theophanes. The Arabs knew what was the disease of epilepsy, even had a word for it. Once Ibn Abbas narrated
“This black lady came to the Prophet and said, ‘I get attacks of epilepsy/sara'a and my body becomes uncovered; please invoke Allah for me.’ The Prophet said (to her), ‘If you wish, be patient and you will have (enter) Paradise; and if you wish, I will invoke Allah to cure you.’ She said, ‘I will remain patient,’ and added, ‘but I become uncovered, so please invoke Allah for me that I may not become uncovered.’ So he invoked Allah for her".
None of his revelational experiences as reported in the ahadith conform to the symptoms of a mental illness. When he was first visited by Gabriel who compelled him the "Read". He was fully conscious and returned home terrified. When the painful ringing of a bell occurs, he retains what was revealed to him then recites it. His companions witnessed sweat drops forming on his forehead even on cold days, after which he would recite the revelation. When the burden of revelation descended on him and his face turned red on account of its intensity, Ubida b. Samit said he would then begin reciting. Similar events would precede a recitation, as witnessed by his companions, such as when his camel's legs would sink in the sand or a person's leg above which the prophet's leg was resting would almost crush from the weight.
Even though some physical effects of the revelation may resemble those of epilepsy, such as trembling and foaming, they could as well be due to the intensity of the process upon his body. This effect (trembling or foaming) was not generalized and again, immediately after the prophet would gain lucidity and begin to recite. Epileptic seizures are for the most part followed by a state of confusion and amnesia. The Prophet experienced revelation in all situations, when he was seated, standing, walking or riding, morning and evening, and even when he was talking to others, whether friends or foes. Revelation would come unexpectedly and cease just as suddenly. It would last only for a very brief period.
The prophet's experience, besides being witnessed as it occurred to him and changed his demeanour, or when it physically affected things around him, is also attested in the ahadith, speaking of a man appearing out of nowhere on several occasions in the life of the prophet and the community. That person would then take on a leading role, including to teach the prophet and his followers, publicly, the daily prayers, as well as to command him and the Muslim soldiers, to besiege the treacherous tribe of Bani Qurayza. These are not trivial issues, whether from the point of view of the religion, or the life of the community, showing that the prophet, although the uncontested leader of his people, was not acting from his own accord in essential matters. The ahadith relate several other encounters with the same man, unknown to the closest companions, appearing in unlikely circumstances among the people, then disappearing, and always in slightly different physical shape. He would be identified as the angel Jibril whenever the people inquired to the prophet. This "man" was around the prophet and the community from the very beginning, as the prophet was taught the first revelation, to other instances where the companions witnessed him teaching the Quran to the prophet, to when they saw him visit the prophet when he became sick. In terms of resemblance, the prophet likened him to a companion named Dihya. Someone else once confused him with Dihya too. Dihya as a side note, was not influential in the community in any way, even after the prophet's death did not attain to any leading position, neither was he among the closest companions whose decisions were considered by the prophet, nor was he knowledgeable so as to contribute to the Quran. Despite this closeness of interaction, none among the community was able to get a hold of the mysterious visitor, or could interact with him once the purposes of his visits were over. Medina's population at the time was around 20.000, the type of social life was very open and each individual had a very large network of friends and kinsfolk. It would have been impossible for this man to escape the people's grasp, let alone the numerous hypocrites who were always on the lookout to discredit the prophet, had he been known or been living in or anywhere near Medina. Other appearances were observed during battles, with men dressed as the occasional visitor of the prophet was
"Narrated Sa`d: On the day of the battle of Uhud, on the right and on the left of the Prophet were two men wearing white clothes, and I had neither seen them before, nor did I see them afterwards".
Just as the first revelation of the Quran caused him extreme fatigue, as well as overwhelmed him emotionally, we see the same pattern in regards to the revelational experience of the prophets of the HB. When the word of God descends it is described as Deut33:2"fiery", and prophets the likes of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel stated concerning the revelational experience that it can be
Isa8:11"overwhelming"
Jer20:9"And it was in my heart like a burning fire"
and Ezek2:2,8"the spirit entered me when He spoke to me, and it stood me on my feet...hearken to what I speak to you, open your mouth and eat what I give you..".
Daniel fell in a swoon when the angel Gabriel began speaking to him Dan8:15-18. He lost consciousness a second time when the angelic carrier of revelation visited him and spoke to him directly Dan10:4-9. The angel Gabriel, after having assumed the shape of a human being, infused Daniel with strength in order for him to regain consciousness and be able to speak Dan10:10-19.
Obviously none of this pattern among the Israelite prophets and the Ishmaelite prophet parallel with Saul/Paul's encounter with a shining light. Similarly, the Pharisees' reaction was justified in Acts2:13 when they mockingly alluded to people on the day of pentecost as a group of drunkards, for their odd, erratic behavior and incomprehensible speech; this type of effect that the indwelling spirit of holiness supposedly had on them was something unheard of in the prophetic history. No prophet who received the holyspirit ever behaved in such a manner, whether the prophets of the HB down to the last Ishmaelite prophet.
Concerning Malachi, it is described as
Mal1:1"The burden of the word of the Lord to Israel in the hand of Malachi".
Again when comparing true inspiration to the alleged prophetic dreams of false prophets God states
Jer23:29"Is not My word so like fire? says the Lord, and like a hammer that shatters a rock?".
There always is an element of compulsion, implying that when God chooses an individual to be the recipient of revelation, prophecy seizes him against his will, as alluded to by Ezekiel who was fearfully setting himself to confront a highly sinful nation of Israelites
Ezek3:14,11:5"and I went, embittered in the wrath of my spirit, and the hand of the Lord became strong upon me..Then the spirit of the Lord fell upon me".
Depending on the manner in which it is communicated it can be extremely terrorizing, the prophet Amos compares it to the roaring of a lion Amos3:8, and when revelation was collectively bestowed upon the Israelites, they even thought they would die, begging Moses to put a halt to the experience by becoming their sole intermediary with God Deut5:23-27. There are also mention of various degrees of revelation intensity, such as in Numbers11:17 speaking of God intensifying the spirit of prophecy that was filling Moses, or doubling the power of the spirit of prophecy from a prophet to another, from Elijah to Elisha who effectively was granted double the miracles than his master Elijah 2Kings2:9. It is also important emphasizing that the medium of revelation is always angelic, just as with the prophet Muhammad.
The weightier the revelation in terms of implications and importance, the more intense and overwhelming it is to the human recipient. One cannot compare the revelation to Zakariyya of a future child, to the revelation of the Torah and the covenant experienced by the Israelites at Mt Sinai who consequently thought they would die, or to the revelation bestowed upon Muhammad, one that could shatter a mountain if it was made to descend on it. The Quran speaks of the capabilities and prestige of the carriers of revelation to Muhammad's heart so as to highlight this weightiness. There is a reason why Waraqa the Christian in his old age, after learning of what had occurred with Muhammad immediately declares it is namus, the Arabic transcription of the Greek nomos meaning Law or Torah. Waraqa recognized that what Muhammad experienced was the same as had once happened to Moses with the sending down of the Torah on Sinai.
In answer to the video "The Quran and the Sun Setting in Muddy Spring"
The hadith stating the sun prostrates beneath the divine throne; it firstly is noteworthy that this particular report has been a controversial topic among Muslim scholars even before the scientific era. It wasnt because of scientific advancements that Muslims debated over its meaning. Some held that the sun stopped all motion during prostration, while others believed it did not.
Second the hadith does not give the cause of sunset, whether it is due to the sun's movement or not. Neither does it say that the sun sets under the throne. Also, the phenomenon of the sun's prostration and glorification of God is unknown to us, as said in the Quran 17:44. The sun isnt a human being for us to try and imagine it prostrating and glorifying God as we do. Thus solar prostration and rising from prostration, as spoken of in the hadith are both unrelated to observable physical motion. That is why even in medieval times, scholars understood that the sun is in perpetual movement regardless of rising/setting or prostrating, as further stressed in 36:38.
The divine throne according to the Quran 2:255 and the prophetic sayings, is an entity that encompasses all that exists. So whichever position the sun, and any other created thing is at any point, it is always encompassed by and underneath the divine throne
"the seven heavens in relation to the Kursi are like a ring thrown into a waterless desert. And the superiority of the Arsh over the Kursi is like the superiority of the desert over that ring".
So the sun does not need to reach a specific spot to be underneath the throne and then perform the prostration.
Simply, during its perpetual orbital course accross the galaxy, there are times where it prostrates underneath the throne. At the time of sunset when the prophet was speaking, the sun was on an course until it glorified God in an unfathomable manner. This doesnt mean that every time a sunset occurs, it coincides with this phenomenon. It could happen at anytime of the day or night, and one of those time at which it occured was at sunset on the Arabian peninsula when the prophet made the statement. Also, this "permission to rise" cannot be related to what is perceived as sunrise. Because this "rising" happens from the same place where permission was asked. Trying to argue for the opposite implies that sunrise must happen from the same place as sunset, which is absurd. It says this "rising" occurs after prostration underneath the throne. It is rising from prostration, not rising from sunset.
Among several views reported by ibn Kathir, is that prostration of the sun is at midnight. Even this medieval geocentric view does not connect the sun's prostration to sunset, which happens much earlier than midnight
"(The first view) is that it refers to its fixed course of location, which is beneath the Throne, beyond the earth in that direction. Wherever it goes, it is beneath the Throne, it and all of creation, because the Throne is the roof of creation and it is not a sphere as many astronomers claim. Rather it is a dome supported by legs or pillars, carried by the angels, and it is above the universe, above the heads of people. When the sun is at its zenith at noon, it is in its closest position to Throne, and when it runs in its fourth orbit at the opposite point to its zenith, at midnight, it is in its furthest position from the Throne. At that point it prostrates and asks for permission to rise, as mentioned in the Hadiths. Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Dharr (may Allah be pleased with him) said, "I was with the Prophet in the Masjid at sunset, and he said..."
He further reports the view that the sun never stops motion, regardless of sunrise and sunset. This doesnt agree with the interpretation that prostration and permission to rise entails temporary stop.
The hadith attributed to Abu Dharr where the prophet says the sun sets in a muddy spring is unreliable. The hadith authorities only graded the chain of narrators as reliable (sahih al isnad) but not the matn (content) because it contradicts the more reliable matn cited earlier. This is something very important to consider for those wishing to approach the Islamic texts hastily then run away with their faulty conclusions. In hadith science, it isnt because a chain of narrator is reliable that the content is necessarily accepted, hence the classification "sahih al isnad". Here again is the more reliable version of the hadith, in which no mention of the muddy spring is made
"Narrated Abu Dharr: The Prophet asked me at sunset, "Do you know where it goes (a weaker chain says "sets")?" I replied, "Allah and His Messenger know better." He said, "It goes till it prostrates Itself underneath the Throne. It then takes the permission (ie to rise from prostration), and it is permitted. Soon it will prostrate, but it will not be accepted from it, and it will ask permission (to rise from prostration), but it will not be permitted. It will be said to it; "return to where you came from". So it will rise from its place of setting. And that is the interpretation of the Statement of Allah: "And the sun runs on its fixed course, for an appointed term. That is the designing of the All-Mighty, the All-Knowing".
This is the most trustworthy and authentic narration cited by both Bukhari and Muslim, in which they have purposefully left out the bit about
"setting in murky water".
From all the channels of transmission, only one has these words, making it a hadith with anomaly/shaad which is a subgroup of weak reports. A noteworthy observation is that this hadith was uttered much later than sura kahf relating Dhul Qarnayn's journeys. Had the companions understood the verse of setting in a body of water literally, they would have applied it to the situation, yet they didnt.
Further, the hadith is unrelated to Dhul Qarnayn's story. It is a comment on verse 38 of sura yasin, which is a verse about the day of resurrection. It speaks of the sun "running", which fits the sun's movement across the galaxy. The word denotes rapid movement contrary to the perceived motion of the sun during the day. The sun is "running", perpetually to its place of rest, its end point. During that perpetual course, it prostrates underneath the all encompassing divine throne. The hadith then describes apocalyptic events. It tells us what will happen when that time comes. When it reaches its decreed end, the sun will be in a state of prostration, but that prostration will be rejected. Neither will it be allowed to rise from prostration. Instead, it will be told to revert to where it came from prior to its prostration. That sudden change in course will make it appear to be rising from where it set.
