The Anvil of Truth: 12/25/20

Friday, December 25, 2020

Sam Shamoun "Muhammad and Wife Beating"

As unambiguously stated by Aisha

"The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, did not strike a servant or a woman, and he never struck anything with his hand".

This statement made long after the prophet's death, by itself is enough to negate any attempt at misrepresenting any related incident from the prophet's life and cast it in a bad light. But this isnt enough to the hatemongers. The intellectual dishonesty is such that they quote and misrepresent an incident involving the same Aisha who said the prophet never hit a woman, in their bid to disparage him.

The part of the hadith in question which is misunderstood is

"He struck me on the chest which caused me pain".

The Arabic lahaza does not denote striking, rather a nudge, and neither does the complete hadith justify the malicious misinterpretation of the critics. Being of gentle, forbearing character with his wives, as attested by too many ahadith to list, and even echoed in the Quran, the prophet in that hadith is depicted as silently leaving Aisha's quarter at night so as to not wake her up and going to a cemetery to pray for the dead, then hastily returning to the conjugal bed where he encountered Aisha suspicious of him. That is when he engaged Aisha physically by pushing her chest, not with the intention of beating or causing pain but to grab her attention as he is reported to have done in other cases

"The Prophet struck my chest with his hand and he said.."
"I informed the Prophet that I could not sit firm on horses, so he stroke me on the chest with his hand and I noticed his finger marks on my chest. He invoked, 'O Allah! Make him firm and a guiding and rightly-guided man.." Etc.

This physical manner in engaging a person to grab his/her attention was often done before teaching the important lesson that follows. In another narration the prophet said

"The most complete of the believers in faith are those with the best character, and the best of you are the best in behavior to their women".

Many ahadith are of the same import. For example the prophet used a particular expression in reference to women nature

"Treat women nicely, for a women is created from a rib, and the most curved portion of the rib is its upper portion, so, if you should try to straighten it, it will break, but if you leave it as it is, it will remain crooked. So treat women nicely".

According to al Albani and sheikh al Arnaout, the allusion to a rib is metaphorical, and this is obvious for several reasons. "ka dhilaa/like ribs" is used in other narrations figuratively. Even the Quran alludes to nature rather than physical origin when it says that 21:37"man has been created from hastiness". Also, had the hadith been speaking of the physical origin of women then it would have mentioned the first or a particular woman as created from a rib. The prophet here is giving a subtle and pragmatic lesson in gender relationships. Just as a rib would break if one uses force against its naturally curved shape, a woman will break, and the relation with her husband as well, should one try to forcefully change her particular nature and character so as to fit one's tastes. And just as leaving the rib undisturbed will make it retain its natural shape, complete passivity in a relationship will make the woman keep her natural character (regardless of whether that character is good or bad). If a man therefore wants to try changing some traits in a woman, so as to make her more suited to his own personal disposition, then one should neither use force, nor be disinterested and detached, rather one should always be tactful.

In 2 other weak and discarded reports, Aisha is said to have been physically corrected with a slap by her father Abubakr, contrary to the prophet's will, because of her questioning the prophet's justice, out of her spousal jealousy. In the first case she protested with a rhetorical question

"Do you not say you are the Messenger of Allah? Will you not do justice?"

Clearly here she isnt doubting Muhammad's prophethood but appealing to it in relation to her own perception of what justice should be in that particular case

"Abu Bakr heard what I said and he was vehement. He came up to me and slapped my face. The Messenger of Allah – peace and blessings of Allah be upon him – said, “Take it easy, O Abu Bakr!” He said, “O Messenger of Allah, did you hear what she said?” The Messenger of Allah – peace and blessings of Allah be upon him – said, “A jealous woman cannot tell the bottom of the valley from its top".

In the second case, as she asked the prophet to face Abubakr for his opinion on a conjugal issue, before letting him talk she adjured him

"O Messenger of Allah, say it right!” and Abu Bakr slapped her, saying, “Do you tell the Messenger of Allah to put it right?"

Knowing the inadmissibility of domestic violence within the prophet's household, abused Muslim women would openly report their issues to the prophet or his wives. In one case, a woman came to Aisha accusing her husband of violence. Because

"It was the habit of ladies to support each other"

Aisha reported the issue to the prophet in a very partial manner

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

Aisha's statement doesnt imply that the suffering in question is related to violence from husbands. It is an exaggerated appeal to emotion that has nothing to do with Islam condoning domestic violence, especially considering the "evidence" presented

"the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her A GREEN SPOT on her skin".

The most that can be deduced is that the case brought to her attention included domestic abuse besides the sufferings which Muslim women were facing at the time. And these were many, including deprivations, losing their husbands to war, emigration. It is further important noting that the woman in question, once in the presence of her husband in front of the prophet doesn't cite domestic abuse as a reason for her divorce request. The "evidence" she initially presented to Aisha was of course anything but incriminating. She instead proceeded by revealing her true intentions, as she falsely accused her husband of being impotent. Once that charge was proven to be a lie, the husband uncovered her secret for seeking a divorce

"she is disobedient and wants to go back to Rifa'a."

At that point the woman does not deny the charge. She had clearly come to the prophet, like other women used to, knowing that he would not tolerate domestic abuse. She assumed he would unconditionally side with her against her husband if she presented herself as victim of violence.

If Muslim women truly were most abused and Islam condoned it then the last place these women would go to, to present their issues would be the prophet's household. The prophet said in connection to that and other similar incidents

"Many women have come to the family of Muhammad complaining about their husbands striking them. These men are not the best among you".

The prophet would consequently warn women against marrying Muslim men known for their violent temper, as seen from his advise to Fatima bint Qais

"As for Abu al-Jahm, he frequently beats women. Rather, you should marry Usamah".

The prophet went as far as calling a man a sinner for rejecting his repeated command to stop abusing his wife. The woman had sought refuge with the prophet, knowing his position on the issue of domestic abuse. The prophet took her word for granted, warning the man to put an end to the abuse

"O Allah, you must deal with Al-Walid, for he has sinned against me twice".

He immidiately sided with Habibah bint Sahl who sought his approval to divorce her abusive husband

"Take what she owes to you and let her go her way".

How could one believe the report according to which Ali, in front of the prophet's eyes gave

"a violent beating"

on one of Aisha's servants? The presence of that report in the sira books is no proof of anything, especially considering that none of the historians commented on its authenticity. Further, the story is part of the incident of Al-Ifk, which is detailed in the authentic narrations, including the part about Aisha's servant and Ali, and yet the beating part is absent. One of the only reported times when the prophet actually gave the benefit of the doubt to the husband in a case of domestic abuse brought before him was when

"a woman who came to God’s Messenger when he was with him and said, “My husband, Safwan b. al-Mu‘attal, beats me when I pray, makes me break my fast when I am observing it, and does not pray the dawn prayer till the sun rises.” Safwan was present, so he asked him about what she had said and he replied, “Messenger of God, as for her statement that I beat her when she prays, she recites two surahs and I have forbidden her to do so.” God’s Messenger said to him, “If it had been one surah it would be enough for people.” He continued: “As for her statement that I make her break her fast when she is observing it, she keeps on fasting (referring to fasting which is not obligatory), and I am a young man who cannot contain himself.” God’s Messenger said, “A woman may fast only with her husband’s permission".

Through another chain, the hadith continues

"As for her statement that I do not pray until the sun rises, we are a people belonging to a class, and that (our profession of supplying water) is already known about us. We do not awake until the sun rises. He said: When you awake, offer your prayer".

For a reason, the prophet felt that the woman's accusation against Safwan were suspicious, and it turned out that he was right. The woman was obviously exaggerating and inflating her points of contention with Safwan, knowing that the prophet would not tolerate domestic abuse. This is a similar case to the aforementioned one brought to Aisha.

The Quranic command is not to strike, hence the silence on the modus operandi. The purpose is to address the issue of violent men who would be inclined to strike their wives whether with their hand, a stick or chain (see article below).

And this, although the verse was revealed in ancient Arabia, in a time when the world as a whole viewed beating one’s wife as a right in the male dominated patriarchal society. Islamic judges of the classical era, based on the prophet's example and many reported sayings on husband-wife etiquette, used to frequently dissolve marriages based on domestic abuse, with the wife keeping her belongings and dowry and the husband responsible for spousal maintenance, requesting compensation and protection for the women, discouraging and admonishing husbands from comitting any type of violence against their wives.

The 2nd caliph, Umar once meted out a punishment, a beating on a man as a result of him causing trouble and being harsh to his wife

“Umar sent an arbitrator to a couple, but he returned without succeeding in reconciling them; whereupon he [‘Umar] BEAT HIM saying, “Almighty God says, ‘If they desire amendment [reconciliation], Allah will make them of one mind’ [Quran 4:35].“ So the man returned and with [good] intention[s] and gentleness toward them, he reconciled them.”

This bellies the statement attributed to Umar where, after a man intervened to prevent him beating his wife, reported from the prophet

"No man shall be asked for the reason of beating his wife".

This specific statement within the incident is deemed weak and rejected by the hadith authorities. Even if taken as it is, the statement doesnt give free rein to wife beating. It rather prevents making private household issues known publicly.

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "Muhammad and Wife Beating"

- Acts17apologetics warn women; Quran allows domestic torture?

Sam Shamoun "Muhammad and Wife Beating: Postscript"

Umaima Asma al-Jawniyya/Jauniyya was a widow (also described as imra'a meaning an adult woman). Her father had offered her hand to the Prophet, prior to her arrival in Medina, declaring that she was inclined towards him. The dower was agreed upon with the prophet according to ibn Saad. The short marriage ended in divorce following her refusal to approach the prophet intimately, due to her prejudice that

“Can a princess give herself in marriage to an ordinary man?”

This woman from the aristocracy in addition was constantly accompanied by her dayah/mid-wife who was now her hadinah/governess. The prophet was no king although he could have opted for a lavish lifestyle without it diminishing an iota of his truthfulness as an envoy from God. But he chose otherwise and this reflected in the simple lifestyle within his household even at a time when the community had conquered the rich agricultural lands of Khaybar.

Being the daughter of the tribal chief, she was not prepared to forego her material benefits in exchange of a life of spirituality and austerity. The noble prophet did not stigmatize her for her choice, neither did he coerce her into intimacy despite having formalized the union. He gently let her go to her family, courteously gifting her with 2 clothes

33:28-9"say to your wives: If you desire this world´s life and its adornment, then come, I will give you a provision and allow you to depart a goodly departing".

Sam Shamoun "The Quran Confirms: Ishmael Cannot Be the Ancestor of Muhammad!"

Prophets were successively sent to humanity due to its disintegration, to bring it back to its original state when it was a single ummat 2:213. Prophets and warners were thus sent to every community/ummat 10:47,16:36,35:24. These warners will be called to testify against their community on the Day of Judgement 4:41,16:84.

This does not mean that every land and village had a prophet although Allah could have done it 25:51, but when the unaltered teachings of a prophet reaches a people who begin practising it then it is enough for them to be considered part of that specific prophet's ummat, even after that prophet's death as reflected in Ibrahim and Ismail's prayer 2:128. The Muslims that passed away, of today and the future can all be considered to be the prophet Muhammad's ummat. The Quran clearly uses ummat in this sense, regardless of the individuals composing that ummat being contemporaries or not.

In 2:133-4 for example the prophets Ibrahim, Ismail, Isaac and Jacob and their people are said to be one and the same ummat/nation, since they all shared the same principles of life and religion. Their descendants remained in their ummat until the teachings of these prophets became so heavily corrupt that their umma is said to have "passed away". This is stressed again in 2:140-1.

All this shows that those who are included in an ummat, share several common characteristics. The word is mainly used in a physical sense for a common ethnicity or in a spiritual sense for a community composed of individuals linked together by deeply ingrained principals, regardless of time, space or ethnicity. That is why Allah says He could, against their freewill, make all mankind a single ummat (ie spiritually) like it originally was 11:118,16:93.

This means 2 people can share the same physical ummat without belonging to the same spiritual ummat. The prophet Muhammad, his followers, rejecters and even forefathers who had completely strayed from the right path, all belonged to one physical ummat, because they were all Arab Ishmaelites. But the spiritual ummat, only included Muhammad, his followers and the believers who submitted themselves to God whether past, present or future as here stated when addressing the prophet Muhammad and his followers, in conclusion to the stories of several eminent prophets and pious personalities of the past

21:92"this ummat of yours is a single ummat".

They become an ummat within another ummat

3:104"And from among you there should be a party/ummat who invite to good and enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong, and these it is that shall be successful".

Sam Shamoun "Does the Quran confirm the Bible and the Canonical Gospels?"

Some say the word injil is what is called in Arabic Taarib. This is a phenomenon common to all languages, when a foreign word is converted and adopted, without necessarily retaining the original meaning. Injil is thus the Arabized form of the Syro-Aramaeic ewwangelion which is itself borrowed from the Greek evangelion/good news. Koin Greek was the lingua franca around Jesus' time and thus many words crossed from it, into local languages including Syriac, Aramaic, Hebrew. Although, like his contemporaries Jesus could certainly speak the Koine Greek, his language according to scholarship was one of the aforementioned 3.

The Quran only recognizes one among several -canonical or not- gospels as it speaks of "Injil" in the singular. It is described as a revelation stamped into Jesus's heart since his infancy 3:3,48,19:30 a source of guidance, admonition, light and wisdom 3:48,5:44,46 verifying the Torah that precedes it 3:50,5:46 while abolishing to the Jews the self imposed restrictions of their man-made soulless traditions, as well as giving glad tidings of a prophet to come after Jesus 61:6.

Jesus either put himself into writing or asked his followers to eventually write down what was revealed to him since infancy of wisdom, teachings, prophecies, warnings and admonitions 7:157. This writing process was most probably done in his lifetime. As stated earlier, Koine Greek was the language of education. The Septuagint Greek translation of the Torah was more popular among Jews than the Hebrew text. It would have taken someone highly literate in Greek to write down Jesus' teachings. Jesus himself preached his revelation in Aramaic and/or Hebrew. These teachings were translated into Greek and written, as confirmed in standard scholarship. This original compilation was named ewangelion/Injil. The process was done under Jesus' watch as the Quran says he was given and taught this singular Injil. Greek however wasn't Jesus' language so it was necessary to ensure he would not overlook a mistake in the translation process. Hence Allah's repeated statements that He will teach Jesus the Injil. Interestingly, when Jesus speaks as an infant about the revelation he was inspired with, he called it scripture 19:30. This is because the Greek Injil was still not compiled. Jesus therefore was taught the scripture and its wisdom, which he preached in the language of his people, as well as taught the Torah, and the Injil compiled in Greek

3:48"And He will teach him the Book, and [the] wisdom, and the Taurat, and the Injeel".

The previous Israelite prophets followed the same pattern of committing the revelation to writing, including Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel or Habakkuk, Iddo and others 2Chr11:2,12:5,15,13:22. Solomon had his wise utterings, that were either put into writing in his lifetime or later, compiled from scattered supports under the reign of Hezekiah Prov25:1.

It thus certainly is an established trend within the line of the prophets of Israel, of which Jesus fully adhered to, to commit to writing, whether themselves or by others, in their lifetime or later, the revelation bestowed upon them. That reality hasnt escaped the rabbinical commentaries, see for example Rashi on Iddo.

While part of Jesus' scripture, or what his first followers remembered and compiled, made it in its uncorrupted form into the current Greek compilation of writings called in English the "New Testament", another part did not make it. This could have either been due to negligence, forgetfulness, or some was discarded and worse yet obscured and tampered with as it did not fit the message, ideas and bias of the unknown Greek writers and later compilers and editors

5:14-15"..those who say, We are Christians, We made a covenant, but they neglected a portion of what they were reminded of..".

That corruption occurred very early on following Jesus' departure, with a big part of his close disciples failing the test of remaining steadfast on the path prescribed by a prophet, similarly to what happened to Moses' 40 days absence. Part of that inner circle, together with the new converts of the pagan Roman world, retrospectively painted their own interpretations and biases into Jesus' original teachings which could have been available to them in written and/or oral form. Textual criticism has generally accepted the existence of texts predating the current gospels and which inspired the anonymous evangelists

"In the interval between the death of Jesus (c. 30 CE) and the composition of the first gospel (Mark, around 70 CE), the sayings of Jesus, like those of other holy men and philosophers, were remembered, rendered into Greek retold, revised and recast in such common forms as chreiai (also termed aphorism, pronouncement stories, and apophthegmata,), parables, logia (sayings), apokalypseis (revelations), prophecies, macarisms and woes and gnomai (maxims). A similar process took place with narratives about Jesus, including stories of controversy with his contemporaries (now told in the light of the early church’s own contentious encounters with its neighbors) and accounts of miracle working." (Margaret M. Mitchell – Professor Birmingham).

The current NT is in great majority a compilation of writings about Jesus, not of Jesus, and while containing some elements of what was revealed to him, the Injil, is in great majority a combination of texts compiled during great political and religious turmoil, reflecting the bias of its writers. The victorious sect, among many other early conflicting christian sects, that thus became "orthodoxy" did not let any competing texts it could lay hands on to survive, either by physically destroying it or discrediting it and leaving it to disappear with time. During this gradual process, what was viewed as authoritative was separated from a much larger body of early Christian literature. This period was most important in shaping and spreading official Christian thought, yet almost nothing is known as to how, when, and by whom this process was brought about. The result is that although early Christianity was composed of various sects in Paul's days, we have not a single text from them. Instead, the vast bulk of surviving material is solely what was approved by the victorious "orthodoxy" who did not win because of being more truthful or closer to Jesus' teachings, but their more effective convincing capacity especially among the gentile elite. Thus in the earliest centuries after Jesus’ death it was possible for any Christian group to produce its own gospel, which it deemed represented a more accurate understanding of Jesus and his life.

That is why the Quran refers to the Book in the hands of its Christian addressees as Injil in the singular; it only recognizes whatever remains from Jesus' revelation among other multiple canonized scriptures in Christian hands, as true. Ibn Ishaq speaks of the paraclete prophecy as authored by John in his Gospel, based on Jesus' revelation from God

"Among the things which have reached me about what Jesus the Son of Mary stated in the Gospel which he received from God for the followers of the Gospel, in applying a term to describe the apostle of God, is the following. It is extracted from what John the Apostle set down for them when he wrote the Gospel for them from the Testament of Jesus Son of Mary".

The statement does not imply that the entire Gospel of John was word for word based on Jesus' testimony. It certainly contains elements FROM that testimony, including the prophecy ibn Ishaq quotes in reference to the prophet Muhammad. It is part of the singular Injil revealed to Jesus, found scattered throughout Christian writings. For Christians to know which part of this compilation of books in their hands is the pristine truth, they have to discard what disagrees with the Quran's teachings regarding Jesus.

The Quran similarly alludes to the suhuf/pages of Abraham and to some of the divine verities they contain and share with both the Quran and the Torah 53:36-38,87:18-19. It is also interesting to note that rabbinical tradition attributes the authorship of the book of Psalms to 9 different others besides David, including Adam (Although not a prophet in Judaism), Malchizedek and Abraham.

For the guidance of all mankind, God sent down revelation to chosen individuals who put into writing -not necessarily in the form of a book- the teachings, wisdom and principles revealed to them. Some of these writings are explicitly mentioned in the Quran, like the aforementioned Suhuf/pages of Nuh and Ibrahim, or the Torah as well as the writings of Moses.

The Torah is a revelation 5:44 but is not explicitly named in the Quran as given to Moses. This is because the Torah is in reality a compilation of writings and traditions, some revealed to Moses, some to other prophets. The writing given to Moses is distinctively referred to as a set of tablets, in which the necessary religious instructions were inscribed

7:145"And We ordained for him in the tablets admonition of every kind and clear explanation of all things; so take hold of them with firmness and enjoin your people to take hold of what is best thereof".

This is well established in modern academia that Moses could not have authored the totality of the 5 books that currently constitute the Torah. The Quran describes the Torah as a scripture containing guidance and spiritual light, as well as laws for the prophets of Israel to judge by 5:43-44. Moses or someone after him, a prophet or pious individual, compiled both the revelation to Moses and the revelations that preceded him, as the Torah. There is indication that what the Quran refers to as Torah/Tawrat excludes the writings and traditions of the prophets that came after Moses. The Torah came after Abraham and Jacob 3:65,93 and the prophets of Israel were bound by it as stated earlier. The only scripture that the Quran mentions after these prophets, is the Injil given to Jesus 5:46.

The Quran further speaks of the Zabur (psalms, az‑Zabur from the root al‑mazbur means 'the written') of David, the aforementioned Injil of Jesus, and the Quran of Muhammad. Not all revealed books are listed in the Quran just as it makes it clear that there are many more prophets than those it chose to highlight. The Quran does explain that the writings of the Muslims and the people of the book are portions of the complete book that is with Allah.

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "Does the Quran confirm the Bible and the Canonical Gospels?"

1-Acts17apologetics protest the divine practice; God allows bible corruption?

2-Acts17apologetics deny Biblical scholarship; Quran confirms past scriptures?
3-Acts17apologetics find an obscure expression; musaddiqan lima bayna yadayhi?
4-Acts17apologetics hit rock bottom; the state of Biblical writings?
5-Acts17apologetics take a brief look at sura ma'ida; confirmation of the corrupt Bible?
6-Acts17apologetics find a balanced view; absolute Biblical corruption?

7-Dontconvert2islam finds compromising hadith; the prophet accepts the Torah as true?

Sam Shamoun "Quranic Permissibility of Women having Sex with their Slaves"

Ma malakat aymanukum, simplicitly rendered "concubines" by the opponents of Islam, are people from both genders, men or women, who were neither freed as a favor nor ransomed, but singled out from the rest of the captives and taken under a guardian's wing in his household because obviously not all captives were taken in.

They also become sexually lawful outside wedlock to the guardian that has taken charge of them. It is to be noted here, although they can be treated as concubines, this however does not mean that they systematically were.

The prophet had in his household several such women living side by side with his wives, to aid and assist for the daily and nightly tasks of receiving at anytime people seeking all kinds of advises and help. The right hand posessions are people from both genders as already pointed

24:33"And (as for) those (Walladheen) who ask (Yabtaghoona) for a writing from among those whom your right hands possess give them the writing (Fa Kaatibuuhum)"

Ma Malakat aymanikum must cover both males and females because if they were only females it should be "wallaati" or "wallaa'i" instead of Walladheen, "yabtaghuna" (without the waw) instead of Yabtaghoona, "Fa Kaatibuuhuna" instead of Fa Kaatibuuhum.

This further proves that the expression, right hand posession does not automatically denote concubine relationship, and anyone claiming the opposite should be able to prove that it was accepted for male or female guardians to have sexual relations with their MALE right hand posession.

Verses such as 24:33,58 speak of those MMA and how they should mingle with the rest of the household. 16:71 is a warning to those guardians who fail to live up to their moral and material responsibilities towards those categories under their care, stating that such failure amounts to a denial of God's blessings and of His unceasing care for all His creatures.

MMA (ma malakat aymanikum) are individuals that fall under a Muslim man's authority. A Muslim woman does not find herself in a situation where she would become responsible with maintaining war captives. Although there are rare cases of Muslim women allowed by the prophet to take up arms on the battlefield, war prisoners never fell in their possession. This is because, as a rule, Muslim women have no financial burden within a household. And Islam obviously advocates a patriarchal model of society. The only way for a Muslim woman to have a male/female MMA is if the male guardian puts one under her disposal. That MMA remains under the Muslim man's guardianship in the process. In that case, for practical purposes the mistress is allowed to unveil in her servant's presence. But then ethical rules of conduct are observed, making the servant so long as he remains in his status, among the categories of mahram males (non-marriageable). Such rules are observed even within secular societies in the workspace where opposite genders interact.

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "Quranic Permissibility of Women having Sex with their Slaves"

1-dontconvert2islam tries talking human rights, what happened at Awtas?

2-dontconvert2islam examines Quran; Islam allows sex with married women?

3-dontconvert2islam dislikes the semitic traditions; Muslims have sex slaves?

4-dontconvert2islam exposes Jesus' teachings; Christian sex slavery?

Sam Shamoun "Revisiting the Worship and Prayers of Allah"

Throughout time, the opponents of the prophets, because of their incapacity at denying the forceful arguments presented, reckoned that the only way in which they could tone down their ever increasing influence on the masses was to besmear their character and integrity

Ezek21:5"O Lord God, they say of me, 'Is he not an inventor of parables?".

Among their attacks, they would twist their prophecies publicly and deride the revelations

Ezek33:30-31"the members of your people who talk about you beside the walls and in the entrances of the houses..And they will come to you as a public gathering, and they will sit before you as My people, and they will hear your words but not fulfill them; instead they make them into jokes with their mouth; their heart goes after their gain".

These talks did cause them grief and sorrow however they were relieved knowing that God is their witness and, along with the angels, constantly showers them with blessings.

Concerning the prophet who is the first and foremost in submission, obedience and devotion to Allah 6:14,39:11-12 we are told that

33:56"Allah and His angels send blessing/yusallun upon the Prophet".

Divine blessings are showered on him as was done with past prophets and messengers 37:113 such as Ibrahim, Ismail, Ishaq, Yaqoub, Musa or Ilyas. The Quran tells us to praise, these eminent personalities, remember their exalted status among later generations 37:108,119,129,38:45-49. Muslims consequently remember them along with all the righteous in the daily prayers. To add to the sense of appreciation from Allah, yusallun is in the present form, which conveys the sense of perpetuity and continuity of a state in classical Arabic. This makes the prophet constantly under Allah's blessings.

When Allah and His angels yusallun on the prophet just like Allah and His angels yusallun on the believers 2:157,33:42-43,40:7-9 it does not mean the ritual salaat of worship. Neither does the word yuqimu precede it 4:103 nor does it say ila/to or for, rather aala/upon. There is no hint at anyone praying to any other than Allah, much less of Allah praying to someone else. Confusing doctrines such as these are found in Trinitarianism, with separate divine entities contingent on oneanother, praying, begging, receiving things, and needing permission from eachother.

Salat stems from s-l-y. It is used in concrete for the horses in a race whose heads connect with the lower back of the one in the front. In the vivid conceptual language of the Arabs, it became a metaphor for closeness in connection, reaching of a goal. All these apply to the ritual salat to God. The goal is Allah with whom a person connects through worship of Him exclusively, the One to Whom all praise is due in the Heavens and Earth and in the Hereafter 34:1. When the angels do salat upon (not to) the believers, the goal are the believers with whom the angels connect by worshipping Allah so that He communicates His blessings on them. At no point are the believers worshipped by the angels, although they are intended in the angels' worship to Allah. Similarly God tells the believers to do salat on their prophet 33:56. Their goal is the prophet and they connect with him by worshipping Allah so that He communicates His blessings on him. Never is the prophet worshipped, intentionally or not.

The prophet Muhammad is commanded to reciprocate, and do salat on the people 9:103 as it will give them a sense of relief. Never did the prophet worship any believer.

Finally when Allah does salat upon (not to) someone, such as the prophet, then similarly Allah's goal is the prophet with whom He connects, not by worshiping him, but by communicating His blessings on him. Salat is not equal to worship but may include it. Salat is a connection with a goal. The type of connection and goal are different depending on the sender and receiver. Between created entities their goal is to connect with oneanother, never through worshipping one another, rather through worshipping Allah that he might send his blessings. When God is the sender of salat unto His creation, He establishes connection with it not by worshipping it or any other entity, but by blessing it with His guidance 33:43.

Had the action of Allah doing salat involve the worship of another entity so that it might bless another, then the result would instead be for that worshipped entity itself to cause the blessing. But the guidance comes from Allah alone

"He it is Who does salat upon you, and His angels that He might bring you forth from the darkesses into the light, and He is merciful to those who put their trust in Him".

Again, when someone does salat on another who isnt worthy, he will not receive Allah's mercy. This shows again, the implication of doing salat is to communicate something from Allah upon another, never from another divine entity. Consequently the prophet is told that he should not do salat (yusalli) on the disbelievers when they die because they have been forbidden from Allah's forgiveness 9:80,84.

The result of Allah doing salah upon someone is therefore to bestow goodness from Himself on the person. But because mercy best encapsulates goodness from Allah, we find in the Quran and ahadith the salah from Allah equated with mercy from Himself

2:157"Those are the ones upon whom are salawaat from their Lord and mercy. And it is those who are the [rightly] guided".

The WAW which is translated in general as AND, also often means inclusion of a particular entity within the general more encompassing entity. The purpose is to highlight one aspect of the more encompassing concept. Salah from Allah therefore includes mercy, as well as other good things one may think of. Al Bukhari reports from Sufyan Ath-Thawri that

"The Salah of the Lord is mercy".

He also reports that

"Allah's Salah is His praising him".

The following narration, although weak also explains what is meant by the salah of Allah

“The Israelites said to Musa: Does your Lord pray? Musa said: Fear Allah, O Sons of Israel! Allah said: O Musa! What did your people say? Musa said: O my Lord, You already know? They said: Does your Lord pray? Allah said: Tell them My prayer for My servants is that My Mercy should precede My Anger. If it were not so, I would have destroyed them.”

In another equally weak narration

“He (the Prophet PBUH) asked: ‘What is His Salah?’. He (Gabriel) said, He says: ‘Perfect, Most High is the Lord of the angels and the Spirit, My Mercy overwhelms my wrath.'”

The same reasoning applies to the greeting of "salaam" which is a supplication to Allah, that He might bestow peace on another. When Allah in turn greets with "salaam" He is bestowing peace from Himself upon another

11:48"It was said: O Nuh! descend with peace from Us".

To the dwellers of heaven, their peace will manifest by Allah appeasing their hearts to the fullest

5:45-7"in the midst of gardens and fountains. Enter them in peace, secure. And We will root out whatever of rancor is in their breasts".

No entity obtains salaam unless shown the way by Allah

20:47,5:16"God shows unto all that seek His goodly acceptance the paths leading to peace/salaam and, by His grace, brings them out of the depths of darkness into the light and guides them onto a straight way".

In sura yasin, when someone receives the word of peace from Allah, the verse ends by stressing Allah's mercy, because it is only through His mercy that peace enters the hearts of the believers 36:58.

A comparable terminology is in regards to the concept of intercession. Speaking of the hereafter, the prophet said

"Then the prophets and Angels and the believers will intercede, and (last of all) the Almighty (Allah) will say, 'Now remains My Intercession. He will then hold a handful of the Fire from which He will take out some people whose bodies have been burnt, and they will be thrown into a river at the entrance of Paradise, called the water of life. They will grow on its banks, as a seed carried by the torrent grows. You have noticed how it grows beside a rock or beside a tree, and how the side facing the sun is usually green while the side facing the shade is white. Those people will come out (of the River of Life) like pearls, and they will have (golden) necklaces, and then they will enter Paradise whereupon the people of Paradise will say, 'These are the people emancipated by the Beneficent. He has admitted them into Paradise without them having done any good deeds and without sending forth any good (for themselves).' Then it will be said to them, 'For you is what you have seen and its equivalent as well.'"

The word for intercession here is Shafa'a which is linguistically different than tawasul. Shafaa of Allah is not a pleading action to another God. The people of paradise here recognize that it is Allah Himself who caused those people to enter heaven. This will be the ultimate act of Mercy, hence the people of paradise referring to Allah as al Rahman. Those sinners for whom Allah did not allow any intercession will ultimately be honoured by the shafa'a of Allah Himself, once their sins have been cleansed in the hellfire. The shafaa of Allah is to come between the person and his punishment, then doing as He pleases and deems fit; which is to take the person out of hellfire and place him in paradise. Shafaa between human beings entails that someone, allowed by Allah, comes between Allah and another person so as to honour and uplift that person.

By now it has been made clear, salat is an action that does not always include worship, neither by the sender nor to the receiver of the salat. Further it is not exclusive to the prophet Muhammad. He is a nabi like all the others between whom Muslims should never discriminate 3:84. Nor is the command to salla reserved for the prophets; it is a universal and recommended action between all believers equally.

A similar terminology is God's repeated command that the believers should "aminu" in the prophet. Although often translated "believe", that rendition doesnt do full justice to the word which literally means to "make oneself safe in an entity" ie fully trust it. So the believers are to fully trust their prophet and feel safe in him just as he does in them 9:61.

Finally, the tashahhud during prayer mentions the prophet, but also oneself and all righteous servants of God, present or not. The prophet said

"When you send Salam on me, send Salam on all the Messengers, for I am one of the Messengers".

None of those individuals are glorified, nothing is expected from them, nor are they believed to be able to perceive these words of prayers directly. Calling upon them emphasizes their presence in one's mind. At all moments, God is glorified and asked to send His peace and mercy on them. Talking in this manner to someone absent and beyond sensory perception, dead or alive, doesnt deify the person. This is done very frequently in everyday life. Nothing is expected in return from that person nor is he thought to directly perceive what is said. This is in stark contrast with the worship of saintly personalities as is widely practiced in Catholicism. Saints hear the prayers directly, and are expected to fulfil particular needs of the devotees, either through their own power, or through intercession with a higher stationed entity.

In ancient times, the practice of necromancy consisted in conversing with the dead, inquiring and receiving answers from them through dreams or while awake. The occultist would lie in graveyards, dig up bones and speak to the dead person seeking answers for future matters. The practice seems to have been widespread among the Israelites in the time of Isaiah (Isa8:19). Of course all this is far from the Islamic prayer in which Muslims ask God to bless the prophet, their own selves and all the righteous present or not.

In Islam, dead people, believers and disbelievers alike, are alive in an intermediary realm until the day of resurrection 2:154,3:169,40:46. An inviolable barrier is placed between us and them preventing any type of interaction between these parallel realms 23:99-100.

The only manner for those alive in that realm to know of things happening in our world, is indirectly. If God decides to convey to them information from the present world. For instance the prophet said

"‘Allah has angels who travel around on Earth conveying to me the Salams of my Ummah".

In addition, there are deeds they have left behind that can benefit them. Things such as an ongoing benevolent action that benefit people down the line (like planting a tree or digging a well) or beneficial knowledge, or a righteous child who will pray for his dead parent.

This is a major Quranic theme, exemplified by the prophet and stressed upon the Muslims; that the best, most beneficial deeds are those that have God and one's fellow human being as motivating factor, no matter how insignificant

"Allah's Messenger said, "While a man was on the way, he found a thorny branch of a tree there on the way and removed it. Allah thanked him for that deed and forgave him".

However the deceased wont be aware of those deeds while they are performed in his name, including prayers, until they are raised

"A man's status will be raised in pradise and he will ask, How did I get here? He will be told, By your sons' duaa for forgiveness for you".