Sam Shamoun "Some Grammatical Mistakes of the Quran" (4)

Sam Shamoun "Some Grammatical Mistakes of the Quran" (4)

One can only try arguing for an inconsistency if the exception never repeats in a similar grammatical context. It isnt the case here. All throughout the Quran, there are similar appeals to exceptional grammatical rules in order to eloquently convey an idea. In 38:21-3 the singular khasmi/litigant is used for 2 litigants. One of the reasons is that, in this deeply intricate story, the litigants were both one in principle and objective, even physically synchronized. Jesus and Mary are qualified as a singular sign from God 23:50,21:91. 

The prophet Ibrahim is described to be by himself an ummat/nation 16:120 because of embodying the qualities that could make an entire nation to succeed, being the leader/imam of mankind 2:124. There is a prophetic saying similar to it, where the righteous hanif, Zayd ibn Amr is an ummah by himself. In 22:19 ikhtasamu/they dispute, is in the 3rd person plural instead of the dual form like its subject. This is because, it refers to 2 composite groups; believers and non-believers, are composed of many individuals. The same occurs in 49:9. In 41:11 Heaven and earth prior to being shaped and formed, were scattered elements. We thus see again the dual and plural. 

As to 66:4 it is permissible to use the plural instead of the dual when appended to a pronoun. In addition, as noted in tafsir al Jalalayn, from the viewpoint of eloquence, in this specific case it helps create more fluidity in the verse 

"the use of the plural qulub instead of the dual qalbayn is on account of the cumbersomeness of putting two duals together in what is effectively the same word".

Sam Shamoun "Some Grammatical Mistakes of the Quran" (3)

Sam Shamoun "Some Grammatical Mistakes of the Quran" (3)

In 2:16-20,6:46,36:66-67 Allah speaks of those who have consciously "bought" error instead of guidance as having done so while putting 

"their fingers into their ears because of the thunder peal, for fear of death...The lightning almost takes away their sight; whenever it shines on them they walk in it.."

In the parable, the thunder is the light of divine guidance. Their spiritual receptivity is so weak that it almost blinds their senses. They timidly attempt to explore it, by cautiously putting "their fingers into their ears" and veiling their eyes. This shows that they originally turn away their spiritual senses before the seal/death of those senses by God 

"if Allah had pleased He would certainly have taken away their hearing and their sight". 

The implication of the statement is that He does not will their immediate punishment. They bring this fate upon their own selves, although their spirituality is still somewhat receptive and are given opportunities to mend their ways 

36:66"And if We please We would certainly put out their eyes, then they would run about groping for the way, but how should they see?" 10:42-4"And there are those of them who hear you, but can you make the deaf to hear though they will not understand? And there are those of them who look at you, but can you show the way to the blind though they will not see? Surely Allah does not do any injustice to men, but men are unjust to themselves". 

But because of Allah's system of freewill in matters of faith, the people will be left to make good or bad use of their spiritual receptivity without compulsion 

6:104"Indeed there have come to you clear proofs from your Lord; whoever will therefore see, it is for his own soul and whoever will be blind, it shall be against himself" 46:26"and We had given them ears and eyes and hearts, but neither their ears, nor their eyes, nor their hearts availed them aught". 

The parable in 2:16-20 is similar to the aforementioned one of the thunder. The similitude of this group of disbelievers, having the prophet in their midst, is like when one  istawqada/builds up and intensifies a fire in the pitch of dark. That one is the prophet of God. The light of this fire eventually becomes so intense that it illuminates all around it and yet God takes it away from them, throwing them back in the darkness they were in. The image of God taking the light of guidance away is a consequence of them choosing to reject it.

Sam Shamoun "Some Grammatical Mistakes of the Quran" (2)

Sam Shamoun "Some Grammatical Mistakes of the Quran" (2)

4:64,21:25,67:17-18,70:40-1,31:10-11,25:45"Have you not considered (the work of) your Lord, how He extends the shade? And if He had pleased He would certainly have made it stationary; then We have made the sun an indication of it"

As so often in the Quran, the sudden change, within one and the same sentence, from the pronoun We or I to He, or from We to God, breaks the monotony of the speech and thus keeps the reader/audience's attention alert. Besides that literary purpose, its higher, spiritual meaning is to impress upon the listener or reader the notion that God is not a person but an all-embracing Power that cannot be precisely defined or even adequately referred to within the limited range of any human language 

16:51"And Allah has said: Take not two gods, He is only one Allah; so of Me alone should you be afraid". 

This is a typical example of the well known and established pre-islamic style of iltifat. A dim resemblance of that ancient mode of expression can even be found in the Hebrew Bible, for example 

Zech10:12"And I will strengthen them by the Lord, and by His Name they shall walk, says the Lord". 

See also Ps50:22-23,81:17.  Here again the text shifts midsentence between God and the prophet, sometimes overlapping in a way that makes unclear who the speaker is Isa10:12,Jer8:17-9:1,11:17,Amos3:1-7.

Iltifat means transition, but the Quran makes its former use by the masters of poetry of the time pale in comparison. Here is another example 

15:95-99"Surely We will suffice you against the scoffers. Those who set up another god with Allah, so they shall soon know. And surely, We know that your breast straitens at what they say. Therefore celebrate the praise of your Lord, and be of those who make obedience". 

God is here mentioned more than once and through different pronouns, so that we have a multiplicity of viewpoints:
- the 1st person plural of majesty to assure the Prophet "We will suffice you". It is an established style in classical Arabic to refer to a powerful, authoritative entity in the plural 23:99. God of course does not need to convey His royalty through such words; it is the people who need it. Semitic languages used the plural to convey the sense of majesty since before the Torah or the Quran. God communicates with the people in the language they understand, and so He chose to convey the notion of majesty in those terms as well, but with higher eloquence. Something interesting is that the Quran, a Book that unequivocally stresses divine unity, protects the concept so as to avoid any ambiguity whenever the 1st person plural (never the 2nd or 3rd persons plural) WE/NAHNU is used. The direct context immediately states that God is One, either through the use of the singular Allah/Rabb, or through, elaboration or switch in pronouns, as in 

17:2"And WE gave Musa the Book and made it a guidance to the Children of Israel, saying; do not take a protector besides ME (not US)". 

Something else to keep in mind is that, the prophets who conveyed these revelations in which God uses the royal plural in reference to Himself, never spoke of God indirectly with a 3rd person plural pronoun "they" or "them". The Quran took the concept of royal plural, which was well known in semitic languages (see for example the HB in Mal1:6,Gen3:22,Gen24:9,Ex7:1) to a different, sophisticated literary level.  

- the second viewpoint that the style of iltifat offers in that passage 15:95-99 is that of the mockers. They serve another God beside Allah "Those who set up another god with Allah". God is here distancing Himself from them. This style is called tabaaid in Arabic, or distancing, meant at expressing the speaker's disgust towards the addressees who arent worthy of being directly spoken to. 

- and the 3rd viewpoint that the style of iltifat offers in that verse is that of the Prophet, he should serve his caring, reassuring Lord and Sustainer "We know that your breast straitens at what they say".

A longer statement would have been needed to convey these implicit meanings had "normal" grammatical rules been followed. 

There is a reason why the masters of eloquence of the time could not but call the Quran magic and sorcery. In fact not only magic but obvious magic 37:15.

These grammatical shifts, whether person/numbers/addressees/verb tenses/case marker/noun instead of pronoun, etc, are thus not haphazardly injected in the flow of the text. 

Another sub category of iltifat is the use of nouns instead of pronouns. The aim is to create a sense of exclusivity. For example in 2:115 where Allah's name is repeated 3 times instead of using a pronoun. Stating the name of Allah, moreover, in the 3 successive statements makes each statement absolute, independent and quotable.

The entire Quran is a discourse from Allah alone, transmitted to the prophet Muhammad by the angel Gabriel. It isnt God's autobiography for it to be cast wholly in the form of 'I' and 'me'. It quotes many different speakers, past, contemporaries to it, or future, like prophets, angels, regular believers or close companions of Muhammad, jinn, Iblis and more. It even sometimes quotes inanimate entities made to speak for a specific purpose. 

All this is achieved while actively interacting with the reader or audience, sometimes involving it in the flow of the discourse. It remains in all cases God's word, whoever it quotes, whoever it "commands to proclaim" as denoted with the recurrent "qul".

When Allah speaks through the prophet starting with "qul", the words spoken afterwards do not become the words of the speaker, for example 

39:10"Qul (Say/Proclaim/Declare/State/Mention), “O My servants who have believed, fear your Lord. For those who do good in this world is good, and the earth of Allah is spacious. Indeed, the patient will be given their reward without account."

In the Hebrew Bible, the book of Ezekiel is full of verses addressing the prophet beginning with "say".

By its nature as a flowing speech, it would be contrary to eloquence for the Quran to constantly cut its flow whenever it is about to quote a character, especially while relating a dialogue. That is why the text is highly elliptical, with eloquent and appropriate omissions that never disturb its flow and precision.  This dramatic style of the Quran puts the audience in a position where they seem to hear the words directly from the speakers — not through a narrator.

Many times the revelation quotes Allah directly, or another entity without starting with the "qul" formula or without "x person said or replied". The style and contextual indicators are therefore enough to determine who the speaker is, whether it is during an exchange between several interlocutors, or when it is reporting the statement of a single entity. That person is then either directly quoted, paraphrased, or instructed on what to say in a given situation, context or ritual. Among the examples concerning the believers specifically, the Quran instructs them how to start certain endeavors or suras of the book with the "bismilla", or teaches them either within a larger sura or in a complete sura, like sura fatiha, how to verbally seek Allah's guidance.

 In the HB God says to Moses 

Ex33:19"I will proclaim the name of the Lord before you"

ie I will teach you how to worship Me. In the book of Jeremiah, after a long admonishment, the prophet begins quoting, without any transition, a prayer of repentance to be uttered by the believers Jer3:22-5. 

Iltifat is a device also used for other than God, and similarly for specific eloquent purposes such as the switches from 2nd to 3rd persons to create an effect of distancing of displeasure 16:72,47:23, distancing of honouring 30:38 or helplessness 10:22. The shift in addressees as in 17:63 with them/you creates a powerful effect: anyone that follows Satan at any time or place is thus addressed directly by God with this strong warning, rather than merely being informed that any one of 'them' will meet with such a reward. 

A further note on the concept of plural in reference to God in the HB. Jews often used fatherly and godly names to describe all sort of things: in 2Corin4:4,Exod7:1 Satan, Moses are called god (theos, elohim). When Moses was made "elohim to Pharaoh", his nature was not reconfigured into 3 entities in 1. Similarly, in the beginning elohim created the universes Gen1:1. The plural elohim does not denote a plurality of God's nature. If the meaning of this word were to be plural, then the verbs would agree, also being in the plural. The word for "created" is "barah" in the singular. And although Elohim is followed by the plural k'doshim, the very next word after it is the singular "he" pronoun, referring to God. The use of the plural simply is a literary device to evoke grandeur and majesty, and is often used in the Tanakh and the Quranic language as well.

The "im" at the end of Eloh-im is an intensive construct of the singular Eloah ps18:32,114:7 as is used at the end of many words that are not plural Gen19:11(blindnesses), Lev19:24(praises), Ps45:15(gladnesses), Ezek25:17(vengences). 

To know if elohim is singular or plural it must be in a sentence where it either receives a plural suffix, a plural verb, a plural adjective. The only times where Elohim is followed by plural verbs is when referring to heathen deities Exod20:3, which ironically could be seen as a little hint to those who use that literary construct to defend a concept seen by many as pagan. 

The other times where elohim is followed by plural is when the addressee is a heathen as in Gen20:13, where Abraham speaks to Abimelech. Everywhere else in the surrounding text the singular verb form is used with elohim. 

The same is the case with the plural adjective hayyim connected to the majestic plural elohim in Sam17:26,36,Jer10:10,23:36 while all surrounding verbs with Elohim are in the singular. It is to be noted that the singular form of "hayyim" is used elsewhere with Elohim 2Kings19:4,16,Isa37:4,17. Elohim, when referring to God in the Greek of the NT is always the singular "theos". YHWH speaks of Himself as “I” and “Me” and is referred to as “You” (singular) and “He” and “Him” thousands of times. Elohim simply doesnt hint to 2,3, or a million godhead within one, so it offers no support for the trinity.

When it is translated in the plural for example Ps8:5,82:1,Exod18:11,21:6,22:8,9,Gen35:2,and in all these cases nobody will think elohim constitutes a plurality of persons within one. When elohim is translated in the singular Ex22:20,1Sam28:12-13 again no trinitarian will say the english translation of the word constitutes a plurality of persons within one.

The HB describes God with singular pronouns over 11000 times. Singular pronouns tell us that God is a single Individual. The expression "let us" of Gen1:26 is isolated and doesnt indicate duality, trinity or a hundred members of the godhead. Again, the pluralization of words for intensification of the meaning is common in semitic languages. Many examples have already been given, and in different contexts, another one being Ezra 4:18. Just as Isa44:24 says it is Myself not Ourselves "who spread out the earth" Jesus says in Matt19:4,Mk10:6,13:19 etc that HE or God, not WE, created all things alone. And again in In Heb4:4 God not Jesus or the holy spirit rested from the work of creation. Similarly in 

Job38:4"Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?"

not We.

  
The Midrash Rabbah cited in Rashi’s commentary on 

Gen1:26"Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachman said in the name of Rabbi Yonathan: At the time when Moses was engaged in writing the Torah, he had to set down what happened on each (of the six) days of creation. When he got to the verse "And God said, 'Let us make man in our image, after our likeness' " (Gen. 1:26), Moses said before Him: "Master of the universe, why do You give heretics an excuse? (they will say that there are numerous deities!)" He replied: "You write! and whoever wishes to err, let him err.""

Sure there must have been Israelites who understood some of these texts in a polytheistic manner, hence this midrash. Read on their own certain passages can be understood in a polytheistic fashion if one so chooses. But the overwhelming fact that the HB fails to give a single example that MUST be read in a polytheistic fashion justifies that all these texts in their canonical context are monotheistic. 

Sam Shamoun "Some Grammatical Mistakes of the Quran" (1)

Sam Shamoun "Some Grammatical Mistakes of the Quran" (1)

Contrary to the dead languages of the Bible, whether they are ancient Hebrew, ancient Greek or Aramaic, millions of people have a very strong grasp of the Arabic of the Quran. Not only that, but very effective and strong and vast tools to help them understand it whether the vocabulary, usage, grammar and also secondary explanation through Hadeeth. 

The other particularity of Arabic is it became the centralizing force of the whole empire. People started to learn Arabic to communicate, both on the level of the common man, as well as the scholars. Kufa and Basra were part of the Persian Empire, but they became centers of learning as far as the nuances of Arabic were concerned. Many of the contributors to the development of Arabic grammar were Persians, meaning the Arabic language was the defining feature of this new civilization, irrespective of the cultural shift. Egyptians speak Arabic, the Syrians speak Arabic, the Jordanians, the Iraqis, besides the whole Gulf Region for a reason. Somalians and Sudanese and other cultures speak Arabic as a common language. There was no vaccum between now and then, as far as Arabic is concerned. Even the intricacies of the language that were common to the poets have been preserved through the scholarship. All books of lexicons and linguistics on Arabic were produced while the language was alive and spread throughout, contrary to other ancient languages whose lexicons were produced in a vacuum, when they essentially became dead, by an elite and only for that elite. 

The Catholic Church kept the language of the Bible locked for a 1000 year in a Latin language which was far beyond the comprehension fo the vast majority of the people, prohibiting its translation. As said earlier, this Latin is itself translated from a dead Greek language that wasnt even the language of Jesus and his followers, and that was the vehicle of sophisticated pagan thought. 

In the case of the Quran, the blueprint of its ancient language, expressions and words used in pre-islamic and early post-islamic literature is available for anyone learning classical Arabic today. And this, despite the evolution of Arabic through the centuries and countries it spread to, or the changing conditions that burdened many words with new, sometimes introducing completely opposite meanings than originally intended.

 All these linguistic tools however have been understood as secondary when approaching the Quran. The primary approach by the great commentators in understanding the language of the Quran was to compare it by the way the Quran itself makes use of it. 

That is why it is humorous when people speak of grammatical errors of the Quran. Especially when such critics have no grasp of the Quranic language and much less the grammar of later classical Arabic which itself relies on the Quran. There isnt even a contemporaneous written text to the Quran that we know of from which the Quran could possibly deviate. The Quran in fact is the first ever Arabic book, the first writing that marked the transition of the Arabs from an oral to written culture. Therefore, from the onset, to assert grammatical errors in the Quran is untenable. The Quran simply spoke in the dialect of the Quraish tribe with all their peculiarities and standards of language 

"And We did not send any messenger but with the language of his people, so that he might explain to them clearly" "Indeed, we have revealed this as an Arabic Quran so that you may understand".

The only real standard of comparison would be another writing, form of literature, grammar rules from the Quraish tribe contemporaneous with the Quran. Also, many languages today provide exceptions to their standard grammatical usages. Today's classical grammar 'rules' can be at variance with the Quran on which it has heavily relied on as a source, but to suggest the Quran is at variance with the grammar known to us today is illogical. Finally for anyone to come up and claim a "grammatical mistake in the Quran" would need to establish that this Book was not accepted by the classical and modern Arabs to be a piece of unmatched eloquence, that the linguists did not hold it to be a source material for their work, that they did not substantiate their liguistic findings based on its verses.

Sam Shamoun "Allah Repenting and Changing His Mind"

Sam Shamoun "Allah Repenting and Changing His Mind"

40:3"The Forgiver of the faults and the Acceptor of repentance, Severe to punish, Lord of bounty; there is no god but He; to Him is the eventual coming" 39:53,85:14"And He is the Forgiving, the Loving". 

God is Merciful those who do not persist in their transgression, disregard and dishonor of the sanctity of religion. The capacity to repent is recognized by Allah as a deed requiring great strength and resolve. Allah in turn immediately appreciates that deed by accepting the person in His boundless mercy. One must turn to Allah with remorse and resolve, otherwise even the plea of the noblest of men on a sinner's behalf will not lead to his forgiveness 63:5-6. 

In fact Allah's mercy is such, that even when one shows the initial spark of good will, then Allah immediately assits the person in strengthening his resolve

 9:118"then He turned to them (taaba) that they might turn (liyatubu) to Him". 

The concept of tawba stems from TWB. It entails one turning to another to re-bond with it. This "re-bonding" can either be through repentance from sin, in the case of the sinner, or through facilitation of that repentance, through divine guidance. Allah has already decreed that He will forgive the repentent sinner, guide him upon the straight path, erase his faults and ward off from him the chastisement of this life and the next. This is far from the athropopathic language found in the HB 

Gen6:6"The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled". 

Similarly, Allah decreed that a revealed system will be shaped and reshaped throughout time depending on the people's circumstances. It can even be hardened to punish a nation for its disobedience, as what happened to the Jewish people. There is therefore no "change" in God's "mind" whenever He decides to forgive instead of punish, or to abrogate one revealed system, replacing it with another.

It is amazing to note that sin, which is synonymous with estrangement from God, does not stop God Himself from making the first step towards reconciliation with His creatures. He first turns to us mercifully, opening the gates of forgiveness, it is then up to us to walk through it. Those who follow the guidance and find strength along the way, Allah has made it obligatory for Himself to accept their repentance and purify them from their sin

 2:160"these it is to whom I turn (mercifully)" 4:17"Repentance with (on) Allah is only for those who do evil in ignorance, then turn (to Allah) soon, so these it is to whom Allah turns (mercifully)". 

Allah has promised His servants that He would accept the repentance of the sincere; and He does not break His promise. Muslims trust God's word and do not need Him to send His own self in human form to be humiliated and crucified so as to prove His ability to forgive.

Sam Shamoun "Allah – The All Guessing and Hopeful One" (2)

Sam Shamoun "Allah – The All Guessing and Hopeful One" (2)

Here are the true events behind the revelation of portions of sura Fath

More than 6 years after the Hijra, Muslims were still prohibited from performing their pilgrimage at the sacred House of Ibrahim and Ismail. This prohibition applied only to the Muslims among all the Arabs of the Peninsula while it was open to all pagan tribes, enemies and friends alike during the sacred months when fighting was forbidden. 

The fact is that the Quraysh had no authority over the Kaaba which had always belonged to all Arab tribes, each going there to worship a particular idol. Their function was providing all the services to the pilgrims such as hijabah (maintenance of the house and guardianship over its keys), siqayah (water and dates for the pilgrims), rifadah (provision of food to the pilgrims), nadwah (chairmanship of all convocations held) etc. 

The Muslims suffered greatly from this situation and especially the Muhajirun (immigrants) who were also banished from their Meccan homes.

In the month of Dhul-Qi'dah 7/629, the Prophet saw a vision in which he was told to go perform the umrah in Mecca (lesser pilgrimage), unarmed, and without any fear for safety. After announcing his vision, the Prophet set out to Mecca with about 1500 of his Companions but many of the bedouin tribes allied to him decided to stay in Medina, not trusting the Quraysh 48:11. Even though they knew the Muslims were coming unarmed and for religious purposes because of the messenger which the prophet had sent to them, it did not prevent the Quraysh from mobilizing their army outside Mecca. They sent Budayl of the tribe of Khuzaah to tell the prophet he will be forbidden entry to Mecca. In case he would disregard the ban, their army would intercept and fight him. Muhammad openly declared that the Muslims weren't intent on fighting, despite their assurance of victory based on their previous battles with the Meccans, but should they be provoked and attacked, they will stand firm and fight back regardless of their lack of preparedness for such outcome. Budayl went back with the report. Urwah one of the notables, went to the prophet after hearing the report, and taking advantage of this rare occasion for a diplomatic exchange between the 2 sides since the beginning of military hostilities, started reproaching the prophet. Why did he severe his ties with his former clan and family for an amalgam of people of all colors, socio-ethnical-tribal origins? It was unheard of in the tribal preislamic mindset. 

Urwah spent a considerable amount of time among the Muslims, seeing the way of Islam and the prophet's personality firsthand. Unable to convince the Muslims to turn back, he returned to the Quraysh to whom he related his amazement at the Muslims' upright behavior, the esteem they had for their prophet. 

After Urwah, a man of the Kinanah tribe was sent to the Muslims and upon his arrival, seeing the Believers preparing their sacrificial offerings and thus leaving no doubt as to their intentions of peacefully entering Mecca for religious purposes, returned to the Quraysh and reported what he had seen. He advised the Meccans to let the Muslims enter the town peacefully and perform their umrah. Having reached a stalemate, the prophet sent Uthman to the Quraysh. Because the negotiations took long, rumors spread that Uthman was killed or imprisoned. On the spot, the prophet gathers everyone and pledges not to return unless Uthman is avenged should the rumors be true, despite the believers being completely unprepared for a military confrontation. All people accepted the pledge except a few. 

This allegiance to the Prophet and Islam became known as the Covenant of al Ridwan and just like the Covenant of Aqabah with the Ansar, it is a landmark in Muslim history as it showed the strength of the bonds which tied the Prophet and his companions, and their readiness to face any dangers or threat to the cause of Islam. The verse 48:10 of sura fath, revealed upon the return of the Muslim pilgrims to Medina, after the signing of the treaty of hudaybiyya and once all matters were settled, crystallized that loyalty 

"Indeed, those who pledge allegiance to you, [O Muhammad] - they are actually pledging allegiance to Allah. The hand of Allah is over their hands. So he who breaks his word only breaks it to the detriment of himself. And he who fulfills that which he has promised Allah - He will give him a great reward".

Regardless of whether Uthman was dead or alive, the very fact that the prophet and the believers made that pledge showed the extent of their trust in one another and in their cause, hence Allah Himself described as bearing witness among them and promising them a great reward. This show of unity and determination startled the Quraysh and led to the release of Uthman. Uthman's return did not change anything as regards the pledge of unity in the face of injustice, as well as God's witnessing of the believers' sincerity. His return was a mercy and reward to the believers who were now spared certain death. The pledge further served the purpose of distinguishing believers from hypocrites. As Uthman returned, he informed the Prophet of the success of his negotiations. He convinced the Meccans, who were now sure of the Muslims' purely religious intentions, but they were still firm in not allowing them entrance to the city, out of pride. The Meccans also feared that an armed conflict during the sacred months would result in a loss of trust from all pagan tribes who would never feel secure in the future during their pilgrimage. Such a situation would have had grave consequences on the prosperity and reputation of Mecca.

Now the Quraysh sent Suhayl to end the dispute. He requested for a signed written agreement formulated in a manner that would not compromise his faith nor that of the Muslims. It was to be written in the name of Allah (instead of the typical Muslim formulation that adds the attributes rahman/rahim) and signed in the name of Muhammad ibn Abdullah (instead of Muhammad rasul allah/prophet of Allah). Although some companions protested at the wording out of pride, the prophet in his far-sightedness and humility accepted since from a purely objective perspective no falsehood or denial of faith could, in anyway be derived from the choice of words. The points of the agreement that most caused controversy were that umrah would not be allowed this year but the following one (this would preserve the Quraysh's dignity) and that until then no converts among the Meccan men (it doesnt include women, and the Muslims used that subtlety to shelter sincere Meccan women converts in accordance with 60:12) would be allowed to leave for Medina and remain in it. The son of Suhayl himself, who was tortured by his father for his conversion to Islam, and managed to escape and join the Muslims during those very negotiations had to be turned back, but not after the prophet made sure he would not be returned to his father's household. This convert, along with another one would later escape to a town in between Mecca and Medina from where they would harass Quraysh caravans until the Quraysh themselves allowed them to join the Muslim community of Medina.

All these decisions, despite his peer pressure, were made by the prophet with a clear vision he knew would soon materialize, as described in sura fath.

History has shown that this pact was the product of profound political wisdom and farsightedness and that it brought about consequences of great advantage to Islam: by accepting the right of Muslims to perform pilgrimage the Meccans had for the first time recognized Islam as a religion, Muhammad was not viewed as a rebel anymore but as a political leader of a rising Islamic state. What is interesting from the point of view of the sura's subtle choice of words, is that Hudaybiyya, in the sura's openning statement is not called a victory for Muslims but specifically, to the prophet himself

 "fatahna laka (not lakum)". 

In hindsight, the companions would recall the episode differently

"Do you (people) consider the conquest of Mecca, the Victory (referred to in the Qur'an 48:1). Was the conquest of Mecca a victory? We really consider that the actual Victory was the Ar-Ridwan Pledge of allegiance which we gave on the day of Al-Hudaibiya (to the Prophet) . On the day of Al-Hudaibiya we were fourteen hundred men along with the Prophet Al-Hudaibiya was a well, the water of which we used up leaving not a single drop of water in it. When the Prophet was informed of that, he came and sat on its edge. Then he asked for a utensil of water, performed ablution from it, rinsed (his mouth), invoked (Allah), and poured the remaining water into the well. We stayed there for a while and then the well brought forth what we required of water for ourselves and our riding animals". 

But Muslims were initially disheartened, banned from performing pilgrimage despite the long trip, yet still obeyed the prophet over their overwhelming emotions. They were so restless that Allah describes the heavenly tranquillity sent to appease them, as being injected in their hearts 48:4. The usual wording is that Allah descends tranquillity upon the believers or their hearts. In this case however their emotions necessitated a more intense healing. The believers thus accepted the prophet's command of turning back to Medina despite wanting to invade Mecca and seek revenge. A year later, the relief and reward for all the community would come in the form of the peaceful conquest of Mecca, the ultimate form of victorious conquest, not resulting from destruction of a nation and people.

Up to that time, the treaty provided a relative peace era on the Meccan front which allowed Islam to spread faster than it ever did, allowing the Muslims to strengthen their knowledge of Islam. This era of peace allowed Muslims and non-Muslims to visit eachother and interact on account of their family relationships and trade connections. Many Meccans started visiting Medina, and stayed there for months. They got acquainted with the teachings of Islam and were deeply impressed by the righteous conduct and moral integrity of the Muslims. Islam gained many converts in its ranks during that period. It even allowed the Prophet to start addressing the Kings and rulers of the neighboring territories.

Two years after the signing of the treaty, a procession of 2000 Muslims animated by faith, bursting with religious enthusiasm, was pulling forward toward the universally revered sanctuary. The Quraysh learned of the arrival so they evacuated the whole town as the treaty demanded and erected tents on the mountain side. It was a unique spectacle, defying history itself; the Meccans were witnessing the man they mocked, starved, banished circumambulating the Kaaba with 2000 following him in every move and his mu'adhin, the freed slave Bilal whom they tortured standing on the roof of the Sacred House, still full of idols and giving the call to prayer. This sight softened the hearts of even some of the most prominent opponents to Islam. Such was the case of Khalid ibn al Walid the greatest soldier of the Quraysh and their hero of the Battle of Uhud, who lost family members at the hands of the Muslims, who addressed his people saying 

"It has become absolutely clear to any person with the least intelligence that Muhammad is neither a poet possessed nor a magician inspired. His words are truly the words of God, of the Lord of the Universe. It follows then that every man with common sense ought to follow him". 

Khalid's conversion was followed by Ibn Talhah, the guardian of the Kaaba and many others. This miracle witnessed by the pagans from their mountains, the promise of God fulfilled through his Prophet would play a decisive role in the imminent return of the Muslims, with Mecca opening its gates without struggle. 

It only is once one takes a step back and looks at the global picture and the intricate consequences of the initial journey of umrah that one understands the reason of the vision that triggered the expedition; just as Ibrahim's vision was that he was going to sacrifice his son, not that he had actually slaughtered him, Muhammad's vision was that he was going to perform umrah, not that he had actually performed it on that initial trip.

Sam Shamoun "Allah – The All Guessing and Hopeful One" (1)

Sam Shamoun "Allah – The All Guessing and Hopeful One" (1)

The Quran states that reliance on Allah must be an established mindframe, in all endeavors 

18:23"And do not say of anything: Surely I will do it tomorrow, Unless Allah pleases". 

The phrase "In sha Allah" means that the action is predicated upon Allah's will. When an action is predicated upon Allah's will, it could either mean that Allah may or may not allow its fulfillement, or that the fulfillement of a certain action is willed by Allah but the WHEN is only known to Him 

48:27"Certainly Allah had shown to His Messenger the vision with truth: you shall most certainly enter the Sacred Mosque, if Allah pleases, in security.." 

The expression therefore does not denote uncertainty on Allah's part. It is not connected to the divine knowledge, but to the divine will. 

Similarly, the statements from God where conditional statements about the future are made, do not entail uncertainty on His part. Rather the implication is that the outcome is conditional to the actions of the subjects, although God already knows both the action and the outcome. For example, after issuing the challenge of creating the like of the Quran, Allah says 

2:24"And if you do not, and you will not, then be mindful of the Fire whose fuel is men and stones, which is prepared for the disbelievers". 

Elsewhere, the Quran states 

7:168"And We cut them up into nations in the earth, some of them righteous, and some of them otherwise; and We tried them with good things and evil, that perhaps (laallahum) they should return". 

Here again, the ending conditional statement isnt connected to Allah's knowledge, rather to the freewill of the people. Either they respond positively and return to righteousness, or ignore the signs and remain sinful. A similar Arabic word is AASA, also rendered "perhaps" as in 

17:8"Perhaps/AASA your Lord will have mercy on you". 

The verse is not expressing God's uncertainty, rather the fact that Allah's mercy applies depending on the person's choice, as seen with the rest of the verse 

"But if you reverted, We will revert. And We made hell a jail for the ones who are ungrateful". 

Had the verse not used AASA in relation to Allah's mercy, it would mean that the future is fixed and the people will receive it regardless of their spiritual condition. Again 

4:84"So fight in the cause of Allah O Prophet. You are accountable for none but yourself. And motivate the believers to fight, so perhaps/AASA Allah will curb the disbelievers’ might. And Allah is far superior in might and in punishment". 

Allah will not defeat the disbelievers unconditionally, regardless of the believers faith when engaging their enemies. Divine assistance is contingent on full trust in God on the battlefield. 

If God willed, He could erase all traces of corruption resulting from man's misuse of his freewill, and He could make all mankind follow the straight path whether they wished to or not, canceling the capacity of freechoice 6:35. But after giving man the inner (understanding of good and evil) and outward (divine revelation, surrounding signs) tools to fulfill the role for which he was created -worship Allah through his freewill-, God has decreed that there will be no coercion in religion 2:256,18:29. Absence of coercion does not imply that it is beyind Allah's power to enforce the unity of mankind 

42:8,2:253,5:48,6:35,149,11:118"And if your Lord had pleased He would certainly have made people a single nation". 

But making mankind one nation would discharge it from its accountability as God's vicegerent, a creature placed above most others. It would cancel its ability to rise in spiritual merit, even above the angels who worship Allah out of compulsion. People are left to make their own choices despite Allah's will for them being clearly laid out 6:148,150. Allah, who maintains the laws of causality, allows the outcomes of their deeds even though He might disapprove them 

17:38"All of that, the sin of it, is hateful in the sight of your Lord".

Guidance is made available to all, and signs of Allah's presence are available whichever way one looks 2:115. There is therefore no need to force anyone in walking aright.