3:78"There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues: (As they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, "That is from Allah," but it is not from Allah. It is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it"
6:91"the Book which Musa brought, a light and a guidance to men, which you make into scattered writings which you show while you conceal much".
The rabbinical world is divided up to this day on whether their sacred texts should be shared with non-Jews. There is consensus that non-Jews may study the Torah as far as the noachide laws are concerned. These laws are considered binding on all of humanity. The mosaic laws on the other hand concern strictly the Jewish people, hence the oddity of Pauline doctrine and its obsession with freeing mankind from a cursed law that isnt binding on anyone but Jews. Rabbinic opinion suggest that besides the noachide laws, only general and vague answers may be provided to a non-Jew inquiring about the Torah. The prohibition is discussed in the Talmud, which is considered God-given to Moses. The Talmud itself is on a higher level of restriction with even Jewish women forbidden from attempting to learn it due to the household activities they are expected to fulfill
2:75"but when they find themselves alone with one another, they say. "Do you inform them of what God has disclosed to you, so that they might use it in argument against you, quoting the words of your Sustainer?" 3:187"And when Allah made a covenant with those who were given the Book: You shall certainly make it known to men and you shall not hide it; but they cast it behind their backs and took a small price for it; so evil is that which they buy".
2:75-79 "..and a party from among them indeed used to hear the Word of Allah, then altered it after they had understood it, and they know (this)..And there are among them illiterates, who know not the Book, but only lies, and they do but conjecture. Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:"This is from Allah," to traffic with it for miserable price!--Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby".
The Quran in those verses points to several types of misusing the scriptures;
-those who conceal the greater part of the book, reluctantly sharing as little as they can 6:91
-those who throw it completely behind their backs, ignoring it so as to not compromise some worldly profit. In the process, they are also guilty of failing to make it known to the world, as per their function of being the torch bearers of the truth to mankind 3:187.
-those who orally change or insert words in the book while reading it to the layman, passing something off as being part of the book while it isnt 3:78
-those who misinterpret the word of Allah after having fully understood it 2:75. Whether that information was canonized or not is irrelevant. This misinterpretation thus concerns both oral and written material. In Medina, members of the Jewish community were sent to the prophet Muhammad, by their religious authorities, with a hidden agenda. They were trying to settle grave disputes in matters heavily punishable in the light of the Torah. This was just another of their ploys to avoid its harsh laws, which they perfectly understood, hoping that the prophet might have a different ruling "they alter the words from their places, saying: If you are given this, take it, and if you are not given this, be cautious".
This compromising, complacent attitude is a deeply ingrained transgression they have been committing ever since the law was bestowed upon them and throughout their history, despite the scolding of the prophets and the few righteous remnants among them whom the Quran mentions and praises
7:169-170"Then there came after them an evil posterity who inherited the Book, taking only the frail good of this low life and saying: It will be forgiven us. And if the like good came to them, they would take it (too). Was not a promise taken from them in the Book that they would not speak anything about Allah but the truth, and they have read what is in it; and the abode of the hereafter is better for those who guard (against evil). Do you not then understand? And as for those who hold fast by the Book and keep up prayer, surely We do not waste the reward of the righteous"
Virtually all prophets that came to them decried the corruption of their elite, their neglect towards their own justice system
"A Jew and a Jewess were brought to Allah's Apostle on a charge of committing an illegal sexual intercourse. The Prophet asked them. "What is the legal punishment (for this sin) in your Book (Torah)?" They replied, "Our priests have innovated the punishment of blackening the faces with charcoal and Tajbiya." 'Abdullah bin Salam said, "O Allah's Apostle, tell them to bring the Torah." The Torah was brought, and then one of the Jews put his hand over the Divine Verse of the Rajam (stoning to death) and started reading what preceded and what followed it. On that, Ibn Salam said to the Jew, "Lift up your hand." Behold! The Divine Verse of the Rajam was under his hand. So Allah's Apostle ordered that the two (sinners) be stoned to death, and so they were stoned. Ibn 'Umar added: So both of them were stoned at the Balat and I saw the Jew sheltering the Jewess".
According to another version, when the Torah was brought to the prophet who was now seeking to expose the innovations of the rabbis in the specific matter of punishment for adultery, he first respectfully put it on a cushion then said
"I believed in you and in Him Who revealed you".
A holistic understand of both the hadith corpus and the Quran demonstrates that this statement of the prophet is not to be taken in the absolute sense. When in Medina he noticed that Jews would come and read the Torah and explain it to the Muslims, he advised them to adopt a neutral stance, neither believing nor disbelieving in it
"Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say, 'We believe in Allah and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever is revealed to you.' "
This is because the scriptures of the Jews are an amalgam of truth and falsehood, the truthful parts being covered by the statement "whatever is revealed to you". Ibn Abbas would reprimand the Muslims who would seek information from the people of the book in religious matters, on the basis that
"Allah has told you that the people of the scripture changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, 'It is from Allah,' to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything?"
The Quran, the prophet, the companions therefore all advise caution when approaching the previous scriptures, as they contain both truth, which the prophet confirmed and revered in the aforementioned statements, and falsehood.
The prophet then proceeded with exposing the learned ones by making them read by themselves the truthful part of the Torah which they had been hiding
"Bring me one who is learned among you. Then a young man was brought. The transmitter then mentioned the rest of the tradition of stoning".
This hadith depicting the prophet's reverence for the Torah should this be understood in light of other ahadith, as well as the many Quran passages stating that the Torah isnt absolutely corrupt, that despite the manipulations it still contains remnants of truth, hence the Quran being its guardian/muhaymin. The prophet declared his belief not in the entire Torah, but in the specific ruling on the punishment for adultery, and which Ibn Salam, the Jewish convert to Islam instantly recognized as the "divine verse".
It is this corruption in the absolute sense, which some scholars might have been referring to when they said, while commenting on the above report
"if the Torah was corrupted he would not have placed it on the pillow and he would not have said: I believe in you and in the one who revealed you".
This is speaking of complete corruption, which is not what the Muslims believe happened to previous scriptures and traditions.
In legal issues, Jews and Christians living in the Muslim state are not bound by the Islamic law when resolving their own internal affairs. That is how matters were conducted in many parts of the Muslim empire. Dhimmis could deliberate, individually deny, or reform their religious laws to their liking and to fit their desires without any concern about the laws of the state, so long as no conflict occurred between the 2. The historical, and clear Quranic context of these verses 5:41-50 is that of legal retribution. As stated earlier, it begins by telling the prophet that he was not under any obligation to judge their matters when they came to him insincerely, meaning to seek different and more lenient verdicts than what is found in their traditions. It is to be noted that in matters of equal retribution the Quran says that the oppressed or the victim may show magnanimity and forgiveness in order to grow spiritually, an issue the Torah, which also mentions the law of retaliation, does not contain in its proper context. The passage continues telling the prophet that he may turn them away if he wishes, leaving them to resolve their own disputes. But he is nevertheless to judge between them with equity should he decide so, notwithstanding their severe enmity towards him and the fact they were always plotting with the enemies of Islam with the hope of uprooting and exterminating it. What the prophet did at that point was to masterfully expose them for their corrupt mindframe. Had they came to him in truth, he would have judged them in accordance to the Quran, the last revelation superseding all previous ones. But due to their hypocritical stand towards both the Quran, which they didnt believe in, and their own scriptures, whose clear rulings they denied, he referred them back to the law of their Torah, thereby exposing this double game. One might come back with the question that, if the Torah and Injil are corrupt, as the Quran, traditions and history itself attest, why tell Jews and Christians to judge their own internal affairs in light of those scriptures? The answer is firstly because they are not obligated to believe in anything other than what they want to believe. If it suits them to remain in their faith, despite the Quran coming and exposing their falsehood, then they are free to do so. Second, that corruption is not absolute, the passage itself tells them the Torah and Injil contain guidance and light. How then are they to distinguish the right from the wrong?
5:48"And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it".
The Quran is the criterion, confirming certain parts OF/MIN those scriptures, ie those parts containing guidance and light. The last revelation came down showing them the truth and falsehood of their books, the abrogated and the valid. This isnt circular reasoning as the things which the Quran confirms from the Bible are for the most part empirically testable, prophecies, past events and stories whose Quranic version make more sense in light of data both external (archaeology, manuscripts etc) and internal (contradictions) to the biblical text that expose the distortions of the transmitters of the Bible.
Once again:
1. the Quran clearly says that the corruption of previous scriptures and traditions, canonized or not, is not absolute
2. reference to previous traditions doesnt entail full endorsement or that they are wholly true, just as is the case with the Bible's known use of apocryphal material
3. there is no circularity in determining truth from corruption in light of the Quran, as the parallel passages and references can be for the most part independently attested. When for example a common story or principle is internally and externally contradictory in its biblical version but is internally coherent, consistent philosophically, theologically, ethically, with many times even scientific and archaeological backing in its Quranic version, then the probability is that the Quran is in the right.
4. the Quran doesnt need to go around fact checking everything stated in past written and oral traditions so as to determine truth from corruption. When certain broad principles and stories common to both the Quran and previous traditions are established as more sensical in their Quranic version, then big swaths of these previous traditions become highly questionable too.
5. then there is the personality of the message bearer, his high degree of credibility among his nation, the miracles he performed, the miraculous aspect of the Quran, still testable today (contrary to prophetic miracles, including those of Moses, Jesus and Muhammad that are lost in time), all major reasons for its contemporaries to pay very close attention to its statements and give it the benefit of the doubt.
That is why the Quran then continues saying that, although the option of judging their matters in light of their scriptures if they reject the Quran's authority is their full right, they will be held accountable for it
5:49"And judge, [O Muhammad], between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations and beware of them, lest they tempt you away from some of what Allah has revealed to you. And if they turn away - then know that Allah only intends to afflict them with some of their [own] sins. And indeed, many among the people are defiantly disobedient".
As the prophet told Umar
"I have come to you with that which is pure and clear proof. And if Musa was alive, and then you were to follow him and abandon following me, you would certainly have strayed".
If the last revelation supersedes the previous one even if the previous one is still in its pristine state, delivered by its prophet, then how much more should the Quran be authoritative over the previous revelations in their corrupt state?
-the uneducated/ummiyun, who have no access to the text and therefore only know the distorted lies of the learned ones 2:78.
-those who alter the book physically, passing off their modifications as coming from God 2:79. These alterations may be additions and/or subtractions. Al-kitab, the writing/book alludes to a specific text, as the definite article implies, which is subjected to physical corruption. Al kitab is used for the Bible in the same sura. The Quran accuses the Jews of misinterpreting Al kitab while claiming it is from God 3:78 in reference to the HB, just as it exposes the physical corruption of Al kitab 2:79 in reference to the HB. This accusation the Quran makes is the climax of scriptural abuse, fitting into its overall polemic against Jews and Christians. Interestingly, we find similar statements as regards the integrity of the biblical text among early Christians themselves. Justin Martyr in his dialogue with Trypho the Jew made that exact accusation against the Jewish elite whose responsibility was to preserve the Hebrew Bible.
Ibn Abbas, in comment to the verse said
"O the group of Muslims! How can you ask the people of the Scriptures about anything while your Book which Allah has revealed to your Prophet contains the most recent news from Allah and is pure and not distorted? Allah has told you that the people of the Scriptures have changed some of Allah's Books and distorted it and wrote something with their own hands and said, 'This is from Allah, so as to have a minor gain for it".
However there is another statement attributed to ibn abbas saying
“No one can corrupt the text by removing any of Allah’s words from his Books, but they corrupted it by misinterpreting it”.
This is a known defective narration, without any chain of reporters, as noted by the scholars of hadith, including Al Asqalani. What can at most be construed from that statement, assuming it is authentic for argument's sake, is that the incorruptibility is in reference to the heavenly tablet. It can obviously not be speaking of the worldly text which anyone can change. The Quran says all the revealed scriptures are inscribed in umm al kitab/the mother book, inscribed on the heavenly tablet. None can change the words therein but only twist their meaning. Ibn Kathir understood that nuance between the 2 ahadith of ibn Abbas very well. He quotes the weak hadith in his tafsir of 3:78 which speaks of oral misinterpretation. But he also refers to ibn Abbas' authentic comment on 2:79 that speaks of textual corruption by the people of the book. Ibn Kathir quotes other companion views on 2:79, including that of Uthman saying that
"they (the Jews) distorted the Torah. They added to it what they liked and erased from it what they hated and they erased the name of Muhammad peace be upon him from the Torah and for that Allah became angry".
Ibn Kathir and the earliest Muslim belief regarding the oral and textual corruption of the Bible is therefore clearly established, based on the Quran itself. That Muslim position is even reflected in the polemical writings of John of Damascus, some 100 years after the prophet's death
"But some of them say that it is by misinterpretation that we have represented the Prophets as saying such things, while others say that the Hebrews hated us and deceived us by writing in the name of the Prophets so that we might be lost".
As already noted, anyone can remove and alter words from any worldly text at any point in time. And if that is done when not enough human and textual witnesses can independently detect that corruption, then it can easily be disseminated and passed off as true. That is what happened during the successive destructions of the Israelite nation, followed by the attempts of their scribes to re-write what was lost. Al-Razi rightly noted
"It is impossible to have a conspiracy to change or alter the word of God in all of these copies without missing any copy. Such a conspiracy will not be logical or possible".
Al-Razi here is talking of a time when previous scriptures, although in their corrupt state (see his commentary on 5:41), were already widely disseminated and could be independently attested by countless witnesses. Nobody could remove Allah's word nor any other man-made word from it then, without being detected. Corruption of the Torah at that point became only possible through misinterpretation.
Similarly, some stated that the Torah cannot be corrupted, based on the verse saying God's words cannot be changed 6:115. Again, any worldly copy of the Torah can be altered. But so long as there exists the possibility for the original to be reproduced, God's words remain unaffected, only the copy of these words.
The Quran is the speech of Allah, and that speech is with Allah, uncreated, eternal, unchanged like any other attribute of His. The analogy of God's speech to the Quran we touch with our hands or recite from our minds, is as God's mercy which manifests in tangible and abstract things. Both types of manifestations are created means through which God's uncreated attributes of speech and mercy are made known to humans. These attributes arent limited to those particular manifestations
31:27"and If all the trees on the earth were pens, and the sea replenished with seven more seas [were ink], the words of Allah would not be spent".
God's speech is therefore inexhaustive. It can potentially bring into existence a limitless number of words of revelation, among them the Hebrew Torah of Moses or the Arabic Quran of Muhammad
14:4"And We did not send any messenger but with the language of his people, so that he might explain to them clearly".
Allah further states about the revelation to Muhammad, that He
43:3"made it an Arabic Quran".
The eternal speech of Allah takes on in this world the form that is relevant to the divine purpose. The Arabic Quran was thus not continuously spoken since eternity. It is the manifestation in time of God's eternal attribute of speech. Just like we may say a healthy newborn is the manifestation in time of God's eternal attribute of mercy. Assuming for argument's sake that all things in the heavens and the earth are destroyed, including all Torahs and Qurans, the mother of the book that contains all revelations, and even the preserved tablet/lawh mahfuz. So long as the potential to generate a true Quran and Torah exists, then Allah's words that were revealed to Moses and Muhammad remain unaffected. As stated earlier, the physical and abstract things in which God's attributes manifest in this world do not exhaust the attributes themselves, neither do these manifestations share the uncreated essence of the attributes they are representing. This is the problem of Trinitarians. Jesus, a created being, is not merely a manifestation of God's word, rather he incarnates it fully, becoming this divine "person" with contradictory attributes Trinitarian thinkers have been struggling to explain for over 2000 years. Christians are quick to try and parallel the notion of uncreatedness of God's speech as manifested in the Quran, with their idea derived from the Gospel of John where God's uncreated word manifested in Jesus. The two concepts, arent comparable. Further, why would trinitarians even need the Quran to explain the logical and philosophical problems of their theology.
Not a single group within Islam says the Quran was a separate entity floating around next to God since eternity past. This is how some Christians, with their trinitarian worldview, misrepresent the statement that the word of Allah is uncreated. In Christianity, the word is not an attribute but a divine person among others like the father and holy spirit, each with distinct attributes. One man with multiple attributes isnt many men just as One God with multiple attributes isnt many gods. This is tawhid. Yet Trinity says each person is divine but with different attributes, resulting in 3 different gods. The analogy Christians attempt between tawhid and trinity stops at the word of God being eternal. Christians made that word a person with attributes among other distinct persons, while Muslims kept the word as an attribute among others within the essence of the One God. As an aside, since the word or speech of God is not an attribute within the divine essence but a separate divine entity along with 2 others, does it mean that only this divine entity called "word or speech" has the ability to speak and that the other 2 divine entities are mute?
If God's word is a separate divine entity that became flesh in Jesus, what about the words uttered by Jesus who is now divine? Are his words separate divine entities? Further, if the Torah is God's word, as Jews and Christians believe, does that make it divine as Jesus is? These are the kinds of problems Trinitarians are entangled with due to their conjectures on ambiguous matters, instead of relying on firm statements on God's oneness and unity. Muslims on the other hand, despite the early disputes as to whether the Quran was created or not, never went out of the way to declare the attributes of God, like His word, separate divine entities. No Muslim ever believed God's speech to be a separate conscious part. The reason why this issue is often brought up by Trinitarians is that the Quran is the only book that claims to be Allah's direct speech. The Bible doesnt make that claim. The closest one finds is an anonymous claim made about Jesus being God's word. Muslims on the other hand stick to clear and firm statements of scriptures to define their cardinal beliefs, including that "nothing is like a likeness of Him".
2:79 is a timeless warning, addressed to any corrupt scribes among the Jews who would in addition reap profit from such an evil deed. It is not specific to the Jews of the time of the prophet. This means, although that type of corruption did occur, it may have happened before or during the prophet's time as well as both. No contemporary 7th century Jewish writing has survived so as to compare with older manuscripts to know whether this was done during the time of the prophet. And even if such 7th century writing is found, agreeing with older manuscripts, then it still does not negate that the corruption might have occurred much longer before the prophet's time. Another thing to note is that this verse doesnt target the writings of the Christians. The books that these groups follow are not the singular Gospel of Jesus of which the Quran speaks. As the Quran repeatedly says, they follow but mere conjecture. This conjecture has taken the shape of the Greek writings compiled as the New Testament. They are writings that interpret and re-interpret Jesus' words and singular Gospel, giving them a completely different intent. Sometimes this conjecture doesnt take for basis Jesus' Gospel at all, such as with the notion of human depravity and sin atonement.
The Quran thus appropriately tells the Christians to abide by the singular Gospel of Jesus to find the right path that will lead them to the truth of the Quran.
When they did so, in contrast to the corrupt aforementioned groups, when they remained truthful to the scriptures in anyway, shape or form it reached them, trying to follow it to the best of their ability, then their sincerity, unprejudiced reading and understanding of their books led them to inevitably believe in the revelation bestowed on the prophet Muhammad 2:121,83,3:113-115,199,4:162,5:13,66,69,83,7:159-170,17:107-9,28:52-4. This is what occurred in the times of the prophet, even among their most learned figures, just as it occurred throughout time and in our days. The Quran thus expects the Jews and Christians to recognize the truth based on what is in their hands first and foremost. The prophethood of Muhammad and the truth revealed to him make ample theological sense within their own written and oral traditions.
When they behaved with insincerity, hypocrisy towards their books 2:85, then despite having sources of light and guidance in their hands, it availed them nothing
"The Torah and the Gospel are with the Jews and the Christians but what do they avail of them?" (Tirmidhi 2653).
They become followers of deliberate corruption and lies, or mislead by conjecture.
The term Muhayminan, derived from H-M-N means witness and arbiter where the arbiter would be the one to let know which is right and wrong. Besides witnessing and arbitrating it carries at the same time the notion of protecting. So, when the book that came to Muhammad is declared as muhayminan upon the book it means it is the ultimate arbiter in case of dispute or potential misunderstanding in regards to whatever came before it. It declares what truly came from God vs what truly is not from God
45:16-8"And We did certainly give the Children of Israel the Scripture and judgement and prophethood, and We provided them with good things and preferred them over the worlds. And We gave them clear proofs of the matter [of religion]. And they did not differ except after knowledge had come to them - out of jealous animosity between themselves. Indeed, your Lord will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection concerning that over which they used to differ. Then We put you, [O Muhammad], on an ordained way concerning the matter [of religion]; so follow it and do not follow the inclinations of those who do not know".
We see the same pattern of Allah revealing a system, those supposed to uphold it end up turning away from it, in addition causing its corruption. Hence the need for the religion to be restored through the revelation of a new system.
The reoccurring phrase musaddiqan lima bayna yadayhi/declaring true what is before it, is always preceded by a word referring to the Quran either directly as in
10:37"this Quran"
or indirectly as in
12:111"this narrative"
or
3:3,5:48"this book".
It is the Quran in itself that declares the truth of what is before it. Not by pointing to a specific book or tradition and declaring it true, which it never does, but by selecting elements from what came before it, then stating the truthful version. What agrees with it, from whatever source that came before it, is then declared as truly from God and what disagrees with it is truly not from God. Then through its function as a protector of what came before it, the Quran brings back to light what was entirely forgotten or purposefully obscured in the chaotic transmission process of these oral and written traditions.
The phrase bayna yadayhi, lit. between his hands, is an old Arabic metaphor implying presence, availability of several things at the same time. It does not imply concrete, physical presence of the things in question, rather their knowledge or information. It is often translated as "what is before it" in the context of the Judeo-Christian traditions because they were present, whether orally or written in the time of the prophet, and they preceded him in existence. Many have taken this metaphor as referring specifically to the Torah or the Injil, although it never states so. It speaks of "what is between his hands" in a general sense, all that was available. Whether that information was canonized or not is irrelevant.
So there is a truth, present in the time of the Quran and before, scattered in oral and written tradition, which the Quran declares to be true. It is the common thread that the Quran shares with all these contemporary and previous sources. To further corroborate, in 5:48-9 above, it is the only place where it explicitly says what it is referring to with the general statement "between his hands". In this context where it speaks of, and names the scriptures of the Jews and Christians, it would have been the perfect occasion for it to point to the Torah and Injil by name, had the expression been a reference to them both specifically, anytime it is used. Instead of that it points to PART OF/MIN THE Book in the singular
"musaddiqan lima bayna yadayhi MINAL kitab/declaring true what is before it OF the Book".
It doesnt even say part of the books in the plural, in reference to both Torah and Injil present at the time.
The passage opposes 2 Books -Torah and Injil- to one Book which the Quran confirms and guards. It is different to every other context where the Quran says Jews and Christians follow one book. This is because they both read one Bible from their perspective, not many, and the Quran does not name their different books in these passages, contrary to the singular Book which is contrasted to the Torah and Injil in 5:48-9. This singular book is thus the very one repeatedly alluded to, of which past scriptures and traditions, including the Quran, the Torah and Injil, are part of. A section of this global Book was revealed prior to the Quran, and was present in the time of the Quran, scattered in both written and oral tradition. It is this section previously revealed, of this global Book that the Quran guards, protects, confirms. The Quran is that against which anything oral or written, claiming spiritual truth can be measured. It is al-Mizan -the Balance- and al-Furqan -the Criterion/distinguisher 25:1,42:17. It gives weight to the Truth and separates between it and falsehood.
The Quran is therefore the official preserver of the Book and this means that if something is claimed to be in the Book but the Quran says otherwise, then it is not from the Book. If the Quran is silent then it may or may not be of the Book and if the Quran approves it then it certainly is part of the Book.
Furthermore, an important Quranic axiom is that every fragment of revelation is fully revelation. A single word or verse of the Quran is called kitab and Quran. So is the case with Torah and Injil. A single genuine passage of any of these 2 revelations can be termed kitab and Torah or Injil. That is why when it urges the Jews to stand by the Torah and the Christians to stand by the Injil, it does not necessitate the totality of these books is endorsed by the Quran.
A long time ago, the prophet Muhammad explained how to approach the previous scriptures and traditions
“Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them. Say: We have faith in Allah, in what has been revealed to us and what has been revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the tribes of Israel, in what was given to Moses and Jesus, and in what was given to the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we are Muslims surrendering to Him (2:136)”.
This hadith encapsulates the notion of muhaymin/arbitrer. Muslims unambiguously believe in what was revealed to the prophets 2:211,4:136. However, Muslims do not believe nor reject the current scriptures and traditions of the people of the book. This is because by rejecting them, they could inadvertently reject an authentic remnant of the teachings of the prophets. By believing in them on the other hand would carry the risk of accepting things that were never sent by God, nor approved by the prophets. The perfect way for Muslims to maintain the middle ground and not commit any faulty judgement would therefore be to hold fast by the Muhaymin/the arbitrer that has preserved the truth of the previous revelations. This reflects even in the attitude of the classical exegetes. They exhibited no interest in the Jews and Christians of whom they must have had some contemporary knowledge. With very few exceptions such as Ibn Kathir and Zamakshari, we find no reference to the varieties of Jewish and Christian belief and practices.
After declaring its status as the Guardian and Watcher, the Quran states that those legitimate differences between the scriptures that are not the subject of human corruption, were because the laws were subject to their respective time frames
"for every one of you did We appoint a law and a way".
Allah could have prescribed one and the same Law for all, making all of humanity into a single nation but He did not do so for many good reasons. One of these reasons is to test people whether they obey or not what is given to them. Those people, who understand the real nature and spirit of the Divine Way and the position of the regulations in it and are not prejudiced, will recognize and accept the Truth in whatever form it comes. Such people will never hesitate to submit to the new regulations sent by Allah to replace the former ones. To demonstrate the unbiased nature of the Quranic message, it even tells its prophet in a hypothetical scenario that should a revelation be sent from God superseding both the Quran and the Torah, then Muhammad should be the first to follow it and nothing else 28:48-9. This verse isnt arguing from the angle of authenticity, that the new scripture supersedes the previous due to them being flawed. Neither does it give an indication as to whether one of the 2 is partially flawed while the other is pristine. The verse is arguing from the viewpoint of unconditional obedience to God, regardless of the level of authenticity of the current scriptures. Those, who do not understand the true spirit of the Way, whether Muslim or else, but consider the regulations and their details alone to be the Way and who have become static and prejudiced because of their own additions to it, as is the case with the Torah, will reject every new thing that comes from Allah to replace what they already possess
5:48"and if Allah had pleased He would have made you (all) a single people, but that He might try you in what He gave you, therefore strive with one another to hasten to virtuous deeds; to Allah is your return, of all (of you), so He will let you know that in which you differed"22:67"therefore they should not dispute with you about the matter".
But the unbiased, who understand that God's guidance is indiscriminate, not only accept the new revelation but also
13:36"rejoice in that which has been revealed to you".
They read the book
2:121"as it ought to be read".
Consequently they cannot but recognize it as the truth 4:162,5:83.
Just like when the Bani Israil were ordered to follow the Injeel when it was revealed, the same proclamation is made regarding the Quran, now that it has been revealed. It guides them out of the labyrinths of assumptions and conjectures
27:76"Surely this Quran declares to the children of Israel most of what they differ in".
It brings them back to the path they deviated from, when they failed upholding both the Torah and the Injeel 5:66. The only way they can rightly say that they are following their own scriptures is by believing in the Quran as well because these revelations are interconnected:
5:68"Say: O followers of the Book! you follow no good till you keep up the Taurat and the Injeel and that which is revealed to you from your Lord; and surely that which has been revealed to you from your Lord shall make many of them increase in inordinacy and unbelief; grieve not therefore for the unbelieving people".
5:69"If only they had stood fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that was sent to them from their Lord, they would have enjoyed happiness from every side. There is from among them a party on the right course: But many of them follow a course that is evil."
This distinguished group from among them is the one that was led to believe in
"that which has been revealed to you from your Lord"
due to their sincere adherence to their own books. While the other group is the one that not only rejected the Quran, but also increased in their already existing inordinacy consequent to their neglect and distortion of their own books.
2:89-93"..but when there came to them (Prophet) that which they did recognize, they disbelieved in him; so Allah's curse is on the unbelievers. Evil is that for which they have sold their souls-- that they should deny what Allah has revealed, out of envy that Allah should send down of His grace on whomsoever of His servants He pleases..And when it is said to them, Believe in what Allah has revealed, they say: We believe in that which was revealed to us; and they deny what is besides that, while it is the truth verifying that which they have. Say: Why then did you kill Allah's Prophets before if you were indeed believers? And most certainly Musa came to you with clear arguments, then you took the calf (for a god) in his absence and you were unjust. And when We made a covenant with you and raised the mountain over you: Take hold of what We have given you with firmness and be obedient. They said: We hear and disobey. And they were made to imbibe (the love of) the calf into their hearts on account of their unbelief Say: Evil is that which your belief bids you if you are believers"
The corruption of the HB and NT is a historical fact. This corruption is not dictated upon what the Quran says, i.e. it is an objective reality. The Quran simply confirms this objective reality. Even if, for argument's sake we assume that the Quran endorses the Bible's authenticity, despite it speaking of the corrupt writings of the Jewish scribes and the singular Injil of Jesus, which has nothing to do with the multiple Gospels and other Greek writings assembled into the NT, then there is still the inescapable notion of the Quran superseding and abrogating previous revealed, authentic laws and scriptures.
The corruption of the Bible is nothing but the natural outcome of the moral degeneration of the Bani Israel, their heedlessness and carelessness in matters of religion, confirming Moses' predictions Deut31:25-29, Jeremiah's and other prophets' accusations, their lamentations Isa48:8.
When the Quran states scriptures of the past were corrupted and tampered with, it never asserts corruption in an absolute sense. This is precisely why the Quran refers to itself as the Muhaymin (Guardian/Arbitrer), when talking about what is contemporary to it in terms of revealed truths, whether available in oral or written tradition, such as the Torah and Injil. It points out major mistakes in them, filters the Truth from falsehood
21:24"this is the reminder of those with me and the reminder of those before me".
The Quran confirming the past scriptures, as well as any tradition, oral or written, in which divine truths still remain 2:41, means that the principles thought by Muhammad come from a common source and can be found throughout these textual and oral traditions.
It is in this same sense that Jesus confirmed parts of the Torah available to him. He confirmed the truth, by exposing the falsehood, both in the scriptures and traditions of the Bani Israil. Those among them that rejected Jesus were in reality rejecting their Torah which he confirmed.
Now that the Quran came, if the people of the book do not stand firm by it, then they will be violating even their own scriptures which it confirms and fulfils.
In 46:10 the Quran refers to a witness from among the Israelites that believed in the like of his scriptures, meaning the Quran. According to tradition, the verse is speaking of the learned rabbi Abdullah ibn Salam's conversion to Islam. Given his religious knowledge, he knew the Quran abrogates and supersedes, exposes and denies, confirms in places while contradicting in many other places his own scripture, the Torah. But yet it literally says, this rabbi believed in the like of his scriptures. That "likeness" between the Torah and the Quran therefore can only be the statements that fully agree with one another. This is exactly what is meant by Quran confirming the past revelations. It confirms the truth in them in several ways, including exposing what is from God and what is man-made, hence its function as the Muhaymin/guardian,arbitrer as well as fulfilling its prophecies, which the Quran repeatedly echoes and which of course the learned rabbi knew applied to Muhammad
2:146"those to whom We have given the scripture recognize him as they recognize their own sons".
That is also why the minority commentators that rejected the application of the verse to ibn Salam, rather see in it a reference to Moses himself. He was the Israelite witness that testified to one like himself/mithlihi, as clearly stated in the prophecy of
Deut18:18"I will set up a prophet for them, from among their brothers like you and I will put my words into his mouth and he will speak to them all that I command him".
But as attested in history, not all of them remained obdurate
3:199"And most surely of the followers of the Book there are those who believe in Allah and (in) that which has been revealed to you and (in) that which has been revealed to them, being lowly before Allah; they do not take a small price for the communications of Allah; these it is that have their reward with their Lord; surely Allah is quick in reckoning".
These are the righteous among the followers of previous scriptures and who remained truthful to their Books. This sincerity inevitably led them to believe in the Quran
4:162,5:83"But the firm in knowledge among them..believe in what has been revealed to you and what has been revealed before you...and when they hear what has been revealed to the apostle, you will see their eye overflowing with tears on account of the truth that they recognize. They say; our Lord, we believe so write us down with the witnesses".
A subtle aspect worth noting in 2:121 is that since the righteous among them are mentioned, the expression used is "We have given them the Book" not "They were given the Book" conveying the idea that it is God who gave it to them and guided them on account of their righteousness, contrary to those who were given the book without identification of the giver or instructor. This pattern is present throughout the Quran and is actually one of the many examples of its linguistic precision. This is why the people of the book are never told to reject their scriptures in 5:68,69 but rather to stand by not only the Torah and the Gospel, but the Quran, to which the previous scriptures naturally lead to. This has been pointed to in the words "and that which is revealed to you from your Lord". Because it is the "Muhaymin" of their revelations, the guardian of the truth which God himself has pledged to preserve unlike any holy book, the reminder of the pure way of Ibrahim. As to those who would claim, and still do, that they only believe that which has been revealed to them then the Quran answers them that even Prophets that came from among their own people, preaching adherence to their own books were killed by these men, as Jesus put it Mk12:1-12,Matt23:31-37. This charge was levelled against them in the earliest Meccan revelations such as 37:37 before the interaction with them in Medina.
In summary, the passage 5:43-68, states the following;
1. God reveals the Torah.
2. God then reveals the Gospel, and the Bani israel are required to judge by it. They cannot ignore it, despite the fact that they have the Torah. Further, this rejection would be even more grievous considering the fact that the Gospel confirms the Torah as a Book of God.
3. Now God has revealed the Quran, and the people must judge by it, irrespective of the fact that the Gospel and Torah are present, even though in their corrupted forms. The Quran states that the new revelation confirms the Torah and Gospel and guards them.
That is why the whole passage ends in 5:69 with a statement that success in the Hereafter is independent of any appellation, so long as one is obedient to God's revelations throughout time.
Rejecting the last Revelation does not only result in rejecting their own scriptures. It also entails rejection of Gabriel who has revealed it to the Prophet's heart by Allah's Command, not by his own wish. So they were ultimately disbelieving in God
6:33,2:98"Whoever is the enemy of Gabriel for surely he revealed it to your heart by Allah's Command, verifying that which is before it, and guidance and good news for the believers. Whoever is the enemy of Allah and His angels and His apostles and Gabriel and Michael - so surely Allah is the enemy of the unbelievers".
To reject any messenger, as is here stated concerning Moses against whom the Israelites rebelled 44:19 is equal to rejecting the One that sent him. Similarly, Gabriel is one of Allah's honored servants, just like Michael and others; they have no authority except to follow and obey the Divine Commands. That is why the Quran speaks of the belief in the carriers and transmitters of revelation -angels or human messengers- as an article of faith 2:177,285. The verse 2:98 exposes another side of the Israelites' rejection. Their hatred and grudge against Muhammad's prophethood took them to the extent of inventing the tale that Gabriel was an enemy of theirs because he was the Angel of destruction. This in their eyes was among the justified reasons for rejecting Islam. Had the angelic messenger been Michael, who brings prosperity, they would have believed. Whether Islam was true or false, this argument was ludicrous. Angelic messengers, as corroborated in their own books, have no free will and act only according to God's directives. They do not willingly take sides, much less among humans.
Further reading
