Wednesday, November 18, 2020

Sam Shamoun "Muhammad and the Ten Commandments" (3)


The miraculous victory of Badr greatly troubled the idolators and the Jews of Medina. They felt that their position was now degenerating into one of weakness and isolation. Only 2 years after his migration, the Prophet of God had managed to brake the traditional pattern of power distribution in the desert. The enemies of Islam would meet clandestinely and encourage the composition and recitation of divisive poetry. 

Ka'ab ibn Ashraf, a Jewish chieftain of Banu Nadhir, was a poet of considerable fame and he used to recite in the gatherings fiery poems inciting the people to rise up against Islam. This was a clear breeching of the Medina covenant of peace with the Muslims, non partisanship which eachother's enemies. ibn Ashraf's particularity as compared to the other non Muslims and hypocrites that secretly disliked Islam and conspired against it, is that he openly joined the Meccan ranks with whom the community was at war, becoming a propaganda tool that composed eulogies mourning the Meccan chiefs slain in the battle of Badr and defamed Muslim women. 

The closest one can come to the kind of impact this kind of poetry had in Arabian tribal life in those days, is to remember the role propaganda played during the world wars of the 20th century, more particularly the 2nd one. The chief propagandists among the Nazis were regarded as top priority targets by Western authorities. The issue here is thus not that of low-level disparaging comments and mockeries, rather the kind of criticism with deadly ramifications. The Quran and hadith contain many instances of the prophet and the Muslims being the targets of mockery and ridicule, both in times of political weakness and strength, yet neither responded in kind nor retaliated violently. The Quran for instance in sura tawba relates how the Medina hypocrites would engage in injurious talk about the prophet, and this at a time where the Muslim community had become powerful. The only response they got from the prophet was that he socially ostracized them, refusing their charity donations, and leaving their fate to Allah in the Hereafter 
9:66"If We pardon one faction of you - We will punish another faction because they were criminals". 
As to Kaab, his animosity was such that it is said the verse 4:51 speaking of Jews believing in idols alludes to him, when he accompanied a delegation from Medina to Mecca in search of an alliance against the Muslims, and publicly bowed to the idols to reassure the suspecting Quraysh 
"Your are people of Scripture and Muhammad has a Scripture and we are not completely sure that this is a scheme that you devised. So if you want us to go along with you, you have to prostrate to these two idols and believe in them". 
But being a coward he never attended the battles himself, preferring to plot and incite behind closed doors. His role in galvanizing the Quraysh prior to the battle of Uhud is well known, his wife herself is reported to have warned him that his life was at threat because of his actions. Although the prophet said that Kaab was deserving of being put to death since he should be treated as a combatant, he nevertheless did not plan the execution. It is to be noted that any modern government seeking to preserve the survival of its people in times of war, would look to target specific opponents whose death would have a more significant impact in the long-run in terms of avoiding further bloodshed. 

He was thus incited out of his hiding place and killed, which succesfully prevented an all out war with the Bani Nadir. Other opinions say his assassination occured after the battle of Uhud in response to an attempted murder of the prophet.

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "Muhammad and the Ten Commandments"

Sam Shamoun "Muhammad and the Ten Commandments" (2)


Mutah is a form of marriage where the time period is previously agreed upon by both parties. This practice was allowed, some jurist argue temporarily and others that that it is still valid. It is a commitment entailing rights and duties on both consenting parties, as well as clear restrictions. This includes, according to the law schools that still allow it, child support, or the observance of idda by the woman prior to entering into any type of relationship with another person. 

This practically destroys the rampant prostitution industry. A prostitute cannot wait for weeks and months between each client. This kind of contract between 2 consenting parties can only be motivated by a mutual desire for physical/emotional affection, not economical considerations. Of course a woman might encounter financial difficulties and be tempted to use a temporary marriage contract to get support from a husband for given time. This then would be similar to a marriage of interest, where true intentions are hidden, and which the woman can end through divorce once her goal is attained. Except that with mutah the timeframe is clearly stipulated, leaving no room for deception. A man will enter into that union, knowing his wife is primarily interested in financial security for a given time. Again, it is a process the woman cannot repeat except 3 menstrual cycles after the end of her marriage. One may come back saying that men arent bound by the iddah, which opens the way for them to have successive and frequent mutah unions. One could of course always find a way to abuse the system, applying it against its spirit whether it is mutah or any other divine directive. 

In practice this is only possible in a society that is careless of its sexual morality and the well being of its people. Just as none will marry its daughters to whomsoever desires it, none will accept them doing mutah with the first person that comes. Neither would one accept them going with a serial abuser of marriages/divorces, similarily none would like them being with a serial abuser of mutah. There is no place for frivolity in such unions. The fact is, there are bound to be situations, such as during long travels or exiles, where men and women, married or not, will find themselves needing physical/emotional contact for a time. This was particularily the case during the tumultous years of wars, exiles, uprooting of the early Muslims. Muslim warriors who many times had not seen their wives left behind prior to their migration to Medina, in addition were encamping for weeks in preparation of, and during warfare, and that had now under their wing female captives were allowed to seek by common accord this type of temporary marriage. When that time expires, the 2 are free to part ways or enter into a formal marriage contract. 

As appears from the ahadith, one doesnt go to the extent of willing to self-castrate so as to refrain from sex, if the last contact with one's wife was recent 
"We used to participate in the holy wars carried on by the Prophet and we had no women (wives) with us. So we said (to the Prophet). “Shall we castrate ourselves?” But the Prophet forbade us to do that and thenceforth he allowed us to marry a woman (temporarily) by giving her even a garment". 
The prophet is reported to have recited 5:87 in relation to that ordinance on temporary marriage. The verse warns against transgression in one's enjoyment of the lawful things. The Muslim soldiers didnt have free rein in enjoying sexual contact with their captives. They had to do so, as stated earlier, by way of mutual agreement. The verse 5:87 was recited, but not revealed on that occasion. It was used in other instances to demonstrate a point to the believers. For example with Bilal and Uthman ibn Mazuun who had adopted ascetic lifestyles. The prophet disapproved and told them not to be overzealous in religion to the extent of denying themselves the lawful pleasures of life.

It is easy to speak abstractly of the notion of sexual restraint in all situations when practically, without regulation as in mutah, these situations lead to corrupting both the individual and the society. Men and women who cannot marry for all sorts of personal, circumstancial reasons, or those that want to marry but prefer knowing the future partner intimately first before taking the big leap, will eventually succomb to their desire after some time. Mutah provides regulation in case both are in agreement. Mutah can never be forced on anyone. 

The Quran does not explicitly mention the practice, although the general wording in 4:24 can be interpreted as allowing it. Al-Tabari cites different early opinions while concluding himself that it is now impermissible. The verse uses istimtaatum, which can be used for any type of enjoyable relationship, whether permanent or temporary, as well as in contexts unrelated to marriages 46:20. The case that the verse still covers temporary marriages can be seen by the fact that the prophet allowed then disallowed mutah twice in his lifetime (at Khaybar then at conquest of Mecca). This is because there are situations to which it applies and others where it doesnt, as shown earlier. The Muslims relied on the prophet's judgement 
"The Messenger of Allah gave permission for Mut'ah, so I and another man went to a woman from Bani 'Amir and offered ourselves to her (for Mut'ah). She said: 'What will you give me?' I said: 'My Rida' (upper garment).' My companion also said: 'My Rida'.' My companion's Rida' was finer than mine, but I was younger than him. When she looked at my companion's Rida' she liked it, but when she looked at me, she liked me. Then she said: 'You and your Rida' are sufficient for me.' I stayed with her for three (days), then the Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever has any of these women whom he married temporarily should let them go". 
One therefore can understand why ibn Abbas stuck to the exegetical reading of the verse 
4:24"Then as to those whom you profit by (for an appointed time) give them their dowries as is due".
He might have understood the prophet's last ban as circumstantial like the first, while the majority of the companions thought the last ban was permanent.

As a side note, the word mutah is also used in the context of hajj, called hajj altamattu'/mutah of hajj. It allows one to perform umrah (the lesser pilgrimmage) and the complete hajj on the same trip. Some Muslims after the prophet's death were not sure of the permission and thus went to several close companions for inquiry 
"Muslim al-Qurri reported: I asked Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with them) about Tamattu’ in Hajj and he permitted it, whereas Ibn Zubair had forbidden it. He (Ibn ‘Abbas) said: This is the mother of Ibn Zubair who states that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) had permitted it, so you better go to her and ask her about it. He (Muslim al-Qurri said): So we went to her and she was a bulky blind lady and she said: Verily Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) permitted it". 
This complete version of the hadith shows what Asma meant when she confirmed the practice of the mutah of women as is found in the shorter version of the hadith in Musnad Abi Dawud.


Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "Muhammad and the Ten Commandments"

Sam Shamoun "Muhammad and the Ten Commandments" (1)


The Quran relates how the ISraelites repeatedly asked to see God. This eagerness, described in their own books, to literally see God reflects in the crude and primitive anthropomorphic expressions that abound in the Hebrew writings. At times it would ironically appear that what we have in front of us is man creating God in his own image, likeness and form rather than the other way around Gen1:26. 

God for example would speak face to face with Moses Ex33:11,Numbers12:6-8. But knowing the difficulty and incompatibility of promoting monotheism while at the same time having a God incarnate, Jewish scribes have injected the text with many explicit passages in light of which one can interpret the ambiguous ones so as to safeguard the notion of pure monotheism. So although Moses spoke to God face to face, in reality no one can see God's Face Ex33:20, not even Moses who had to be covered and stand away until God passed so he could have a glimpse of God's "back" Ex33:22-23. "panim el panim", which literally means 'face-to-face' becomes an idiom to convey the exclusive closeness and intimate relation Moses had with God with whom he communicated directly, not through dreams, visions or through an angel as He did with all other Israelite prophets. 

With those explicit axioms in mind, one can begin understanding why God had to appear to the Israelites through a dark cloud Ex19:9. The purpose was to strengthen the Israelites' trust in Moses by overawing them with this experience 
Ex20:20"in order that His awe shall be upon your faces, so that you shall not sin". 
The Torah reports the traumatic experience 
Ex19:16"thunder claps and lightning flashes, and a thick cloud was upon the mountain, and a very powerful blast of a shofar, and the entire nation that was in the camp shuddered". 
The phenomenon of God manifesting Himself in this world clearly is in a non-incarnate sense, rather through actions and at most, dramatic occurences. This dreadful "representation" of God began to instruct the terrified Israelites. But they could not bare seeing and hearing God. Had they be seeing a human incarnation of God, they wouldnt have had any problem. Instead they begged Moses to be their sole intermediary with God, fearing that if the manifestation continued, they would die Ex20:15-21,Deut4:12-13,5:1-5,23-27. 

The fear of death for seeing God was apparently deeply instilled into the hearts of the pious Israelities, who knew by experience what had befallen their forefathers who had even so much as asked for it. Gideon thought he would die simply for having seen an angelic messenger in human form Judges6:22-3. Same for Samson's father Judges13:21-22.

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "Muhammad and the Ten Commandments"

Sam Shamoun "Quran’s Multiple Creators: More Proof of Islam’s Triadic Deity"


During Jesus' prophetic mission, the Israelites to whom he was preaching the return to the straight path kept rejecting him, despite the miracles he performed. Some of these miracles the Quran mentions 3:46,49,5:110-114,19:28-34, while the NT ommits
Jn20:30"Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book"  
Jn21:25"Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written".
The Quran makes it clear, these miracles of Jesus, bringing the dead to life among other things, would not have been possible without God's license. They were performed with the "ithn" of Allah 3:49 which means with His knowledge and approval. Jesus was given whatever abilities he had by God, as a favor 5:110. In fact the Quran connects all the miracles that marked Jesus life, with Allah's permission, as signs meant to distinguish both Jesus and his mother 5:110. God this way defeated in His final revelation and until the resurrection, the slanderous talk of some among Mary's contemporaries and those that followed, who wanted to put a stain on her and abase her. Jesus as well as his mother were chosen to be made jointly, "A" single sign of the power of the Maker and Creator over all things 23:50,21:91. With every miracle Jesus performed by God's permission, it had the double effect of elevating Mary against the slanderers and strengthening Jesus' mission.

But again, these miracles, Jesus did not obtain them on his own and neither could express them except with his Maker's license
40:78"and it was not meet for a messenger that he should bring a sign except with Allah's permission".
This message was so embeded in Jesus' teachings that he proclaimed it since infancy and all throughout his prophetic carreer, surprisingly in a wording found almost verbatim in the NT although in a different context
19:36,3:51"Surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, therefore worship Him"  
Jn20:17"I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God".
Jesus' direct disciples understood well this distinction and never saw him as the originator of miracles; he was but a means of their manifestation. Just as the staff of Moses was, or like every naturally occuring phenomena through which Allah manifests His will. In 5:111-115 Jesus' close circle did not request Jesus to send down a table-spread. Rather they asked him to invoke his Sustainer, if He would consent to this miracle so that their hearts are reassured through it. They knew that this man whom they saw as sent by God, a prophet, was but a means through which God manifested His will.

This reflects in Jesus' own reported sayings in the NT Jn17:6-8,13:3,8:28,5:30,Matt28:17-19,Mk2:10 where he teaches his audience he is given everything and cannot do anything on his own Jn10:25. He further emphasizes this reality by invoking Allah's name during and after the performance of miracles Jn11:40-43. He was fully dependant of God's power when he exorcised demons Lk11:21,Matt12:28. Neither did he forgive sins, but stated a fact, in the passive form "your sins are forgiven".

What happened, by the way to the blood pre-requisite for atonement, allegedly established by Jesus himself since Genesis? Jesus in this statement doesnt take God's place but uses a circumlocution for God: “your sins are forgiven” means “they are forgiven by God” as he said "the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” Mk2:5-10. He states himself that he is given that authority. He is authorized to declare forgiveness on God's behalf, the same way priests think they can do. In fact in a passage absent from the oldest manuscripts of Luke over a wide geographical distribution, Jesus while on the cross prays the Father to forgive his killers, instead of forgiving them himself 
Lk23:34"Father forgive them, they do not know what they are doing".
It is however difficult to blame the branches of Christianity that have misunderstood the NT's sometimes blurred lines between the Creator and His creation. 

The transmitted oral traditions of Jesus were put to writing not by Jews like him with a Semitic concept of the Divine but by gentile converts who understood and transmitted these traditions through the lens of their previous Hellenistic thought system. That is why we find "difficult" passages obviously tainted with Roman Mithraism, the likes of Jesus telling regular people that they should strive to become
Matt5:48"perfect just as your father in heaven is perfect".
Nothing is more abhorred in Semitic monotheism, of which Jesus was part of, to suggest that the Creator could in any way be brought to the level of his creation.

The unsurmountable difficulty Trinitarians face is that Jesus, contrary to God as depicted throughout the Bible, never asks to be worshiped. This is because he was a prophet, and prophets never departed from the pattern of complete obedience and servitude to the supreme authority that sent them among the people 
3:79-80"It is not meet for a mortal that Allah should give him the Book and the wisdom and prophethood, then he should say to men: Be my servants rather than Allah's; but rather (he would say): Be worshippers of the Lord because of your teaching the Book and your reading (it yourselves). And neither would he enjoin you that you should take the angels and the prophets for lords; what! would he enjoin you with unbelief after you are Muslims?" 
The long line of prophets supported one another in that principle, never departing from it by virtue of the covenant they had entered into with their Lord 
3:81"God made a covenant with the Prophets: “If after what I have vouchsafed to you of the Scriptures and wisdom, there comes to you a messenger confirming the truth of what you have in your possession, you shall believe in him and you shall help him. Do you,” said He, “affirm this and accept the obligation I lay upon you in these terms?” They answered: “We do affirm it.” Said He: ‘Then bear witness, and I am also a witness with you". 
Here the Quran overlooks the time intervals which separated the messengers, and groups them all in one majestic scene with God, addressing them all at the same time.


Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "Quran’s Multiple Creators: More Proof of Islam’s Triadic Deity"

Sam Shamoun "Allah Promises to Obliterate the Quran"


28:88 comes in the context of Allah's supreme sovereignty. It does not say all things will be destroyed by Allah. It says everything in the heavens and the earth, including those hypotethically close as the polytheists assumed about Allah's partners, or as Christians do in regards to Jesus, Mary, the Holy spirit and other saintly figures, are perishing save His Glorious Self 28:88. This rules out the idea of independant, intrinsic power and will, to any entity in the heavens and the earth, animate or inanimate, that ever existed and that ever will, except for Allah. All things are dependant on Him at each moment of their existence. 

55:26-27 speaks of things in our present world.

Assuming for argument's sake that all things in the heavens and the earth will be destroyed, including the mother of the book and the preserved tablet/lawh mahfuz, it still would not affect Allah's word and speech. These heavenly entities are, just like wordly Quran copies, things on which Allah's word has been reproduced.