In answer to the video "All The Things That Satan Does (Ridiculous Islamic Teachings)"
Besides the twofold message that there is wisdom in having some things not known to us, that one should not ask about minutiae related to the religion which may have the opposite effect of making it obsessive compulsive, hard to follow and the potential danger of falling out of religion, the verse 5:101 also carries a timeless import in regards to one's understanding of the Quran itself.
It teaches one not to be hasty, but instead wait for the detail that will elaborate on a topic requiring further explanation. This detail, present in the book, will not cause the religion to become a burden. It will eventually appear as one progresses through the Quran with an open heart, as it is being revealed to oneself. For these reasons, the Quran is to be approached with patience 75:16, one should ponder and meditate on its verse before forming any adverse opinion.
God's law as originally intended is meant at providing spiritual purification. It would then be contrary to that purpose for God to make it complicated. He has lightened our burdens through a simple and natural sharia
22:78"and has not laid upon you an hardship in religion".
Man, being a creature endowed with freewill, has a frail spirituality 4:28 that makes him lack resolve when a moral crisis arises. That spiritual weakness is only a natural outcome of an original, untrained spiritual state just as a newborn is physically weak. Only the appropriate training, spiritual or physical can make one overcome the challenges, abstract or concrete 70:19-35. Therefore to facilitate the attainment of that goal, the sharia has been made simple and appealing to man's nature
2:185,5:6"Allah does not desire to put on you any difficulty, but He wishes to purify you and that He may complete His favor on you, so that you may be grateful".
Had Allah wished
2:220"He would certainly have caused you to fall into a difficulty; surely Allah is Mighty, Wise".
Even after mentioning clear prohibitions, the Quran stresses the soulful nature of the Sharia by declaring lawful these same things whenever the circumstances make it too burdensome to abide by them 5:3. God's law is thus very close to human nature, it does not run contrary to it, rather it is the disobedience to the law of the Creator that is unnatural. Neither is a person expected to be over-zealous in his religious duties
24:53"reasonable obedience (is desired); surely Allah is aware of what you do".
Sincerity, not perfection is required and so if one stumbles during the pursuit of the right course, God is forgiving 4:17,53:32. One can therefore clearly see that this notion of the naturalness and simplicity of the divine law is not based on some whims by the Muslim scholars and jurists, but on Quranic indications which occur so frequently that they cannot be mere metaphors. It is the principle of facilitation/taysir of the sharia as stated in
2:185“God wills that you shall have ease, and does not want you to suffer hardship”.
This verse is treated as belonging to the category of muhkam/decisive or explicit verses, corroborated by many others cited above. The traditions reflect that Quranic axiom
“I was sent to people with the lenient, tolerant, True Religion”
or
“Do [good] deeds that are within your capacity”
or
“This religion is very easy and entails no hardship".
The prophet instructed Muadh as he sent him to Yemen
“Facilitate things for the people and do not make things difficult for them. Be kind and lenient [both of you] with the people, and do not be hard on them and give the people good tidings and do not reject them,”.
Based on the traditions and the Quran, the scholars have thus asserted that making things easy/taysir is one of the higher objectives of the Sharia. It aims at protecting the life, property, and dignity of the whole community without causing inappropriate hardships. Throughout the ages, despite the mindless islamophobic rant, nations have been receptive to the teachings of Islam without any difficulty or hardship.
This is evidenced by the transformation that Islam has brought about in the daily lives of the Arabs, the Persians, the Copts of Egypt, the Berbers, the Tartars, the people of India, the Chinese, and the Turks, without these peoples facing any difficulty in discarding their age-old bad habits, or being compelled to abandon their good customs.
In answer to the video "Zakir Naik Declares: "Jesus Is the God of Muhammad!""
Per Jn14:16 the Father is the only sender of the paraclete and none else. Jesus saying he will send the paraclete in Jn15:26 depends entirely on the will of the Father. As Jesus says, the paraclete comes from the Father and goes out from the Father. Jesus will send him to the world through his prayers Jn14:16 to the Father. The sending of the paraclete depends entirely and exclusively on the Father and Jesus saying he will send him simply means that he will ask God to send him per Jn14:16. It doesnt say the paraclete will come to the people speaking in Jesus' name, but that the Father will send him in Jesus' name meaning at his request as reflected in other translations, because Jesus will pray the Father for this
"And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another paraclete"
Muhammad the son of Ishmael is the result of the preceding prophets' prayers like Abraham' prayers to God in the Quran to raise a prophet among his descendants settled in the area that will bring them to the straight path.
In answer to the video "All The Things That Satan Does (Ridiculous Islamic Teachings)"
This favorite of the misinformed critics of Islam will be addressed shortly, but in introduction it would be appropriate to mention one particular story.
The Quran relates an occasion where, due to their arrogance the religion became a burden on them. Their lack of obedience and will to bend to God's will, or "stiff-necked" as Moses and other prophets labelled them collectively in their scriptures, is demonstrated in 2:67-73. During the incident, they were offensive towards their prophet, accusing him of ridiculing them when he simply conveyed God's command. They had to sacrifice any cow in a ritual that would clarify the confusing circumstances of a murder. They went on asking Moses that he might ask "his lord" as though He was not their Lord, for more and more particulars regarding cow to be sacrificed.
After ridiculing their prophet, discrediting God's answers to their demands as unclear because
"to us the cows are all alike",
they finally reluctantly agreed to perform the ritual. The truth is that they were trying to delay it through their hairsplitting demands because they sought to hide the truth about the crime. This command to sacrifice a cow comes in the context of manslaughter as described in Deut21, with the taking of oaths over the blood of the sacrificed cow.
The Quran gives details on the first time this command was issued to the Israelites and their reaction when they actually had to put it to practice, their final acceptance of the command without any intention and conviction despite their prophet answering all their objections. When it was performed for the first time, the ritual resulted in the resurrection to life of the victim. This exposed what they were trying to hide as well as provided a living proof for the concept of bodily resurrection.
The Jews disagreed on this issue for long and for centuries until the coming of Jesus and his own miraculous evidence for the resurrection. Because of the dramatic demonstration, the ritual remained inscribed in their justice code as a means of atonement for an unsolved murder. It is interesting to note that in the time of Moses, other similar miracles were performed, such as when
Numbers21:9"Moses made a copper snake and put it on a pole, and whenever a snake bit a man, he would gaze upon the copper snake and live".
Together with condemning them for their rebellious trend, the passage above hints at another reality. Through this Quran as was done with the sending of prophets among them, God is 2:72 mukhrijun/continuously unveiling their lies.
However their disobedient trend would continue after that, their
2:74"hearts hardened after that, so that they were like rocks, rather worse in hardness; and surely there are some rocks from which streams burst forth, and surely there are some of them which split asunder so water issues out of them, and surely there are some of them which fall down for fear of Allah".
The verse eloquently increases the effect of its simile on the audience. It first gives a recognizable, observable point of reference that is already strong in itself, a dry rock. It then carries its audience's imagination further by alluding to abstract imageries that are stronger in intensity. This gradual rhetorical device achieves a stronger impact on the minds than immediately jumping to the most intense simile. This simile was relevant to the historical context of the Israelites. When they needed water they had seen it gush forth from one solid rock. They had seen how a mountain crashed down, humbled by Allah's glory 7:143. But their hearts, devoid of faith and fear of God remained rigid despite the intensity of miracles and divine favors they witnessed.
Their hard heartedness is a recurrent theme and accusation in their own Books Ezek3:7,Jer5:3etc. This attitude of obscuring a simple religious directive is not restricted to this particular ordinance. They have done the same in other circumstances and for different reasons, and so God gave them free rein in forging their own laws. This resulted in them following their base desires and idolatrous tendencies
Ezek20:25-26: “Moreover, I gave them laws that were not good and rules by which they could not live. When they passed every first issue of the womb, I defiled them by their very gifts — that I might render them desolate, that they might know that I am the Lord”.
There is a reason why the Torah we have today includes a list of 613 codes for the Israelites to live by. God from the onset as He established a covenant with this "stiff necked" nation, had to check their heavy propensity for deviation. This was done through a set of laws meant at controlling them, keeping them on the straight path. Their rebellious nature however quickly took the upper hand, as it did even while Moses was among them performing miracles for all to see. Instead of humbling their selves, gratefully abiding by these directives as David did Ps19, they progressively took control of the laws, making their application only secondary to the man made practices that "validate them". Their ritual obsessions and hairsplitting conjectures basically turned the Divine law into a man made one. Divine law should instead be agreeable to the human soul, and if its recipient are mature and obedient, which was overwhelmingly not the case of the Israelites in their history, then it should make room for the evolving circumstances of the world. This adaptability however can never compromise the original spiritual principle and intent. This nature and purpose of the Mosaic law was rightly observed since the earliest days of Judeo-christian internal debates. In his dialogue with Trypho, Justin Martyr cites every aspect of the law, including the institution of sacrifice and observance of Sabbath, as burdens forced upon the Jews to contain their tendency to disobedience
"Wherefore, God, adapting His laws to that weak people, ordered you to offer sacrifices to His name, in order to save you from idolatry, but you did not obey even then, for you did not hesitate to sacrifice your children to the demons. Moreover, the observance of the sabbaths was imposed upon you by God so that you would be forced to remember Him, as He Himself said, ‘That you may know that I am God your Savior’ [Ezk 20.20]".
The Mosaic law in most part did not originate at Sinai but progressively came on the Israelites to contain their repeated disobedience and punish their endless conjectures on clear instructions. Many were then retrospectively painted as revealed to Moses since the beginning, and for different reasons. The Sabbath became a day of rest that mimics God's resting from creation Gen2,Ex20,31. Another passage gives a profoundly different reason for Sabbath. It is a remembrance of Egyptian bondage Deut5. This shows the confused manner in which tradition was transmitted prior to being written down.
In addition to the above example of divine stiffening of the law as a punishment, their scholars reached sometimes ridiculous heights of hairsplitting conjectures, which they obtained through subjective methods of deduction and then put forward as God's ordinances. Put briefly, the creators of the Oral Torah (the sages of the Mishnah and the Talmud) completely ignored the laws of the (Written) Torah, only using them as a convenient framework within which to legislate laws adapted to their own time. These ideas are expressed in the Talmud/Oral Torah, considered as God-given and revealed as the written Torah of Moses is.
Their known soulless interpretations and conjectures caused them to create insurmountable legal criteria.
For example some purity rituals must be fullfilled before or just at the start of the Messianic era, but the preconditions are impossible to achieve due to the supposed impurity of the entire community. There is also the sacrifice of a "red heifer" whom none has been able to breed and raise yet, despite the continuous attempts up to this day. It is said that even Solomon, the wisest of all men, tried throughout his life to understand the matter of the red heifer and did not succeed.
The religion of Allah is not a burden, and neither is the set of ethical discipline it imposes upon man meant at narrowing down his feel of life 20:2, it rather is meant at enhancing it by deepening his consciousness of right and wrong. It is a blessing meant at purifying mankind or as the Quran says when speaking of the objective of religion being for spiritual tazkiya/purging. Allah calls it His favor and grace
4:113,5:3,2:231"and remember the favor of Allah upon you, and that which He has revealed to you of the Book and the Wisdom".
Here, this favor is described as being in the Book and the Wisdom referring to the body and soul of the Sharia respectively, to its commandments and their philosophy. This phrase is often used to connote the fact that God's guidance is perfectly balanced between both these aspects.
Allah has not ordained a soulless sharia concerned only with the body of deeds. The Quran constantly parallels internal with external purity and warns Muslims not to fall into the error of those before them, namely the Jews, who neglected the spirit of the Sharia for soulless external rituals and exaggerated legal hair-splittings, superstitious restrictions and regulations.
The prophet Muhammad actually came as a mercy to them and to relieve them from these shackles 7:157.
Allah has restored the Sharia to its original simplicity in order to lighten our burdens 2:286,4:27-8 because
"man is created weak".
This means man's weakness is due to the fact that he cannot by himself find the true path, he is in need of Allah's guidance. That is why the preceding verses speak of Allah's will to guide mankind, turn to us mercifully and lighten our burdens. 2:286 also implies that Allah could burden mankind with a difficult Sharia as a form of punishment as was done with the Israelites and as plainly stated in the book of Ezekiel quoted above. When we create an innovation and complicate the Sharia on ourselves, then we will charge ourselves with greater burdens than God asked of us. God allows this to happen as a form of punishment.
What Allah demands from us is not unreachable and He does not impose what is beyond our power and understanding. This is why Allah expects us to answer the call of religion with
2:285"We hear and obey".
It is an unconditional declaration of faith and obedience to a system which is not meant, as already said, at narrowing down man's feel of life through ethical discipline and other teachings of the Quran but on the contrary, to enhance it by deepening his consciousness of right and wrong 20:2.
With the above issues in mind, one can appreciate why the Quran tells the audience not to insist on investigating the unimportant things or minute details of a story. It diverts not only oneself but also others from the moral and spiritual import of the narration 18:22. Similarly the Quran warns the Muslims not to ask questions about the things regarding which the Sharia is purposely silent 5:101 because such questions call for answers that tighten the limits of a directive, and then people are not able to follow them and as a result invite the wrath of God, as what happened directly and indirectly with the Israelites. God wants that a directive be followed the way it is given. Difficulties should not be created by asking to explain what is concise and by asking to limit and restrict what is absolute and in fact
5:102"A people before you indeed asked such questions, and then became disbelievers on account of them"
2:108"Would you then ask your Prophet such questions as were asked of Moses in former times? and whoever adopts unbelief instead of faith, he indeed has lost the right direction of the way".
The simplification of the Sharia/Law leaves room for human common sense and judgement, allowing different nations and communities to frame laws for themselves to meet new and changed situations. The Quran has laid down a handful of laws as explicit, while most provide a foundation and philosophical framework by which things can be negotiated, as long as it is in accordance with the principles of morality and wisdom laid down in the Book. The Prophet is reported to have said:
“The most sinful person among the Muslims is the one who asked about something which had not been prohibited, but was prohibited because of his asking”.
He further said
“God has set boundaries, so do not transgress them; He kept silent on certain things out of mercy for you rather than forgetfulness, do not ask about them”.
As is clear, the Quran doesnt prevent the honest debate and search of knowledge. Many Quranic verses begin with questions that are stated very compactly and their real purport becomes evident through their answer
2:189"They ask you concerning..".
The verse 5:101 rather warns against questioning that could lead to unnecessary complications in religious laws. In addition, and as demonstrated through the Israelites' example, such questioning also stems for shallow belief and hypocrisy. Asking questions, politely humbly with pure intent is never disallowed. The angels were permitted to voice questions to God directly 2:30. No religion says, almost at the end of every argument for its truth, to reflect, ponder, think for themselves. It invites sceptics to bring forth any constructive criticism and argument. As just stated, the epitome of that principle is the angels' questioning God's plan for creation, questioning God Himself and yet they arent condemned at anytime. Justified curiosity is not wrong but even encouraged
21:7,16:43"ask those who possess knowledge if you do not know”.
In 58:1 a reference is made to an incident in which a pious woman had to face a severe difficulty regarding a religious issue; instead of becoming frustrated and showing distrust in God, she presented her case before Him and His Prophet with purity of intentions. Her difficulty was resolved and her case set forth as an example in the Quran: that of a person who adopted the correct attitude when troubles came her way.
In answer to the video "All The Things That Satan Does (Ridiculous Islamic Teachings)"
Neither Allah, the angels, the prophet nor his followers hated dogs in an absolute sense, nor any other animals, as seen from the many traditions, the Quran itself and the understanding of the scholars towards the fair physical and emotional treatment of all animals. Cynophobia is rather abounding in the HB, as will be shown later.
The prophet did not mind his grandsons having a puppy in his own house, until the incident with Jibril mentioned below.
There was once an interval of several days where revelation stopped and which distressed the prophet. He began thinking that he had done something wrong, or that, as his opponents taunted him, that Allah had abandoned him. Once revelation descended in the form of sura duha/93 he was told that neither was the case, and that this interruption obeys to a higher reality independent of anyone's whims. This bellies the notion that the reason of the interruption had anything to do with the prophet, whether in deeds (such as having a dog at home) or thoughts. This is further borne out by the fact that the prophet did receive revelation in different locations and conditions, and that a time finally arrived where revelation was about to descend on him. Jibril came to him and told him to prepare to receive revelation at his home. But when it did not occur as announced, it was this time due to a worldly reason specific to his home
"Jibril came to me and said; "Indeed I had come to you last night, and nothing prevented me from entering upon you at the house you were in, except that there were images of men at the door of the house, and there was a curtain screen with imagines on it, and there was a dog in the house. So go and sever the head of the image that is at the door so that it will become like a tree stump, and go and cut the screen and make two throw-cushions to be sat upon, and go and expel the dog." So the Messenger of Allah did so, and the dog was a puppy belonging to Al-Husain or Al-Hasan which was under his belongings, so he ordered him to expel it".
The details of the hadith vary depending on the chain, but the primary point remains that angels do not enter houses where specific things are found.
Angels are not superhumans. They are a different creature. They have likes and dislikes, capacities and limits different than humans. For example the traditions relate how the angel Gabriel himself was limited and could not ascend to where the prophet Muhammad was permitted to enter during the mi'raj. The hadith here does not specify the reason for singling out dogs, so we can only conjecture. A legitimate question one might ask is, since the interruption had nothing to do with an issue with the prophet, that revelation did and could descend anywhere outside his home, with Jibril even coming to him just a night before and at a different location to announce his imminent visit, then why didnt Jibril just choose another place than the "problematic" home in order to reveal sura duha?
What is first important noting is that these are not any type of angels, but the angels of revelation. Regular persons arent visited by such angels anyway so the issue of keeping dogs inside doesn't necessarily apply to anyone and any circumstance. But seeing how the noblest of them would refrain entering upon a prophet for that reason, makes one appreciate that, besides the representation of unidentified male figures, there must be an intrinsic reason in the dog in question. And this is understood through a contextual analysis of the report. This reveals an important point, one ever stressed by hadith commentators. When one tries to understand a hadith, which is a snippet of a larger statement, it cannot be done in a vacuum but in light of its time and circumstances, the potential question/remark the prophet was reacting/answering to, as well as the vast corpus of extra Quran material so as to establish a pattern of thought and behavior.
A glaring example is the report
"Evil omen is in the women, the house and the horse".
The narrator did not report the context of the prophet's statement, which was in fact a condemnation of what some pre-islamic Arabs believed and what contemporary Jews said. There are even reports where the prophet equates belief in bad omen with shirk.
As to dog, they were extensively used by the Arabs in the prophet's time, for specific purposes and not as pets. The angelic instruction not to keep dogs inside homes could be due to the particular breed of the prophet's environment, one that can potentially be harmful, hence its use to ward off danger. It could have been that this breed of dogs was not meant to be, neither for its own good or the good of the owner, kept in a closed space. The prophet, by allowing a seemingly harmless puppy in his home as a pet so as to please his grandsons, could have given or started a potentially harmful (not sinful) trend in the community. As in many cases, some special circumstances, sometimes having to do with the prophet and sometimes with other members of the community, were used by Allah as a means by which to illustrate what is more appropriate and beneficial for society.
After this incident, the prophet became more aware of the issue of human interaction with the dogs of his environment, which he might have taken too lightly. He allowed domesticated dogs for useful purposes in farming, herding, guarding or hunting but discouraged keeping them as pets, inside the homes, except if it is for self-defense. It would be oppressive and cruel to keep these types of dogs and any other such animal as pets. They are unsuited to remain in a confined environment. This could have been another reason for the angelic instruction.
“The reward of a person who keeps a dog for reasons other than herding, hunting, or agriculture is decreased every day by a qiraat".
As a side note, how did this visitor know of the presence of a puppy, hidden somewhere in the house?
Historically there was a problem of disease transmitting dogs in Medina, who carried rabies. These were stray dogs that in addition, were ferocious and attacked people. Although the problem existed, the prophet as a leader in Medina had not turned his attention to it prior to the incident involving Jibril.
The term used in some ahadith is kalb al aakur/biting, wild or rabid dog. The expression covered not only dogs but different types of wild beasts roaming the desert
"Malik said, about the "kalb akur" which people were told to kill in the Haram, that any animals that wounded, attacked, or terrorised men, such as lions, leopards, Iynxes and wolves, were counted as "kalb akur"".
As to the dog specie, the harmful ones were recognized by their pitch black color, as the prophet stated in his khutbah on the matter
"If it were not that dogs were a nation among nations, then I would order that they be killed. So kill every one among them that is all black".
During that same khutbah, some people asked what should be done with other dogs, namely the domesticated ones, to which the prophet stated they should be spared. This was a clarification of his statement that dogs, as a nation like any other isnt intrinsically evil/harmful, and should therefore not be indiscriminately killed, but there are evil/harmful elements among them who should be.
Due to the problems they caused, the prophet referred to these black dogs as devils, as is often used in Arabic in reference to something harmful. We're not talking of chihuahuas here but specially aggressive dogs. The fear they instilled, and consequent distraction, caused prayers to be disrupted if they approached while one is performing the rituals. Even what we consider today as pet dogs are put to death by the authorities when deemed too dangerous. There is thus nothing insensitive or extraordinary in the prophet's decision, in light of the reality of his time. Following the prophet's khutbah, some people were over-zealous in the application of the command, killing dogs indiscriminately
"Allah's Messenger ordered us to kill dogs, and we carried out this order so much so that we also kill the dog coming with a woman from the desert. Then Allah's Apostle forbade their killing. He (the Prophet further) said: It is your duty the jet-black (dog) having two spots (on the eyes), for it is a devil."
Dogs are not impure in and of themselves otherwise the Quran would not have made it permissible to consume the game hunted by trained dogs/mukalibeen 5:4. It also specifically mentions the dog that slept for years next to a group of righteous people 18:18. These people and their dog had divine miracles performed on them.
The simple fact is the Quran had many occasions to declare these animals impure or evil but did not. Even in the case of wild/street dogs, impurity does not equal to mistreatment. In a report the prophet said
"A prostitute was forgiven by Allah, because, passing by a panting dog near a well and seeing that the dog was about to die of thirst, she took off her shoe, and tying it with her head-cover she drew out some water for it. So, Allah forgave her because of that".
In a similar narration where a man went down a well to save a dog from thirst, the people reacted, asking
"O Allah's Messenger, Is there a reward for us in serving (the) animals?" He replied, "Yes, there is a reward for serving any animate".
There is thus a general principle, well established in the Quran and traditions as regards animal and environmental welfare
"When Allah's Messenger was asked about donkeys, he replied, "Nothing particular was revealed to me regarding them except the general unique verse which is applicable to everything: "Whoever does goodness equal to the weight of an atom (or small ant) shall see it (its reward) on the Day of Resurrection".
This is because, according to the prophet
"In every living being there is a reward for charity"
further
"There is no Muslim who plants a tree or sows seeds and then a bird, or a person, or an animal eats from it except that it is regarded as a charity for him"
and
"If someone kills so much as a sparrow or anything larger without a just cause, then Allah the Exalted will ask him about it on the Day of Resurrection".
There would have been ground for general assumptions as regards the Islamic stance on dogs, had there been similar depictions as the ones found in the Bible, in which one finds nothing but Contempt and negative metaphors of dogs. Whether in the mouth of Jesus in Matt7 who parallels human wickedness to the most hated animals to a Jew, dogs and pigs, or in the writings of the prophets of the HB. Down to the book of Revelation22, dogs are associated with the most wicked dwellers of hell. Even the price for which a dog, any dog, is sold is forbidden to be brought into the Temple for a vow
Deut23"you shall not bring a prostitute's fee or the price of a dog, to the House of the Lord, your God, for any vow, because both of them are an abomination to the Lord, your God".
This is a reoccurring theme; dogs, like swine and other morally degenerate people like prostitutes and sorcerers are intrinsically evil and hateful. YHWH's cynophobia, not that of His angels or the humans, is such that He cannot stand their presence or anything related to them in His most sacred site.
In answer to the video "All The Things That Satan Does (Ridiculous Islamic Teachings)"
Muslims dont just utter the bismillah before eating. bismillah is repeated more than a 100 times in the Quran. God begins his speech with his own great name so that all that follows is associated with Him. The words in that formula teach the supplicant that Love and Mercy are God's primary attributes in relation to man, and he should therefore reciprocate this attitude upon every endeavor which he begins with it.
When we associate all our activities with God's compassionate and loving attributes, we are on one hand remembering God's favor, then erforming the task with a will to reflect that favor. In this way that action would neither be rendered null and void, nor remain incomplete; it has been started in the name of Allah, and negation and annihilation cannot reach that sacred name. The very first verse revealed to the prophet's heart was to
96:1"Read in the name of your Lord Who created".
The revelation ofthis Quran is a consequence of God's compassion, His mercy
55:1-2"The Beneficent (Al-Rahman), Taught the Quran".
In answer to the video "All The Things That Satan Does (Ridiculous Islamic Teachings)"
There are numerous Quran and prophetic sayings stressing the importance in the sincere performance of the spiritual duties. Laziness in these matters was so loathed and reprimanded by the prophet that he is reported as using a derogatory Arabic expression, in reference to one who oversleeps past the morning prayer
"He is a man in whose ears (or ear) Satan had urinated".
Urination has been used as a metaphor for corruption in Arabic, as attested by the earliest hadith scholars in reference to the hadith, and attributing this action to the devil as being performed in one's ears is a symbolism for the devil's corruption of one's self to the point the faculty to hear is willfully disregarded, leading one to ignore the call to prayer being heard.
The insistence of the prophet to pray and encourage others to do so, was of course not only restricted to simple physical attendance but included a broad range of related issues that all reflected one's sincerity in practice and consciousness of the seriousness of the undertaking.
For example he reportedly used the vivid imagery of the devil being pleased when seeing someone yawning and entering the mouth of the one that doesnt put his hand in front of it.
Firstly, it is obvious the devil cannot but be pleased by any sign of human weakness, especially in a spiritual context. The hadith in question comes in the context of prayer, a moment where the devil is doing his utmost to deviate one's spiritual concentration. One could be tired or sleepy while praying, and yawning is the physical manifestation of that state. To try and prevent it or raise one's hand if it occurs is a sign of composure and self-awareness, let alone basic presentation etiquette -among others encouraged in both the Quran and hadith when about to solemnly address the Creator. The devil entering the mouth of the one who yawns improperly during prayer, illustrates that he has successfully exploited that specific weakness at a crucial moment, has defeated one's sense of self awareness and spiritual composure. Satanic entities from among the jinn have the property to enter the human body so that they might whisper their suggestions whenever one lowers his spiritual guard
"He (the prophet) said: The devil flows in man as the blood flows in him. I feared that he might inject something in your hearts".
Satanic entities lurk around in everyday affairs, awaiting any moment of inattention where they can enter people's minds and hearts, especially at prayer times.
In another report the prophet employed the image of one whose head is transformed into that of a donkey for preceding the imam during prayer. It is obviously not literal since he alludes to those that have already done so but were not transformed. Calling someone a donkey is equivalent to say he is stupid. To understand the image conveyed one has to picture the awkwardness of being the sole person in a room out of synchronization with all others.
This is another one among many misunderstood ahadith, often derided by critics of Islam, which need to be understood in terms of imagery.
For example the ahadith saying the satan passes wind upon hearing the call to prayer while running off fast and far away is obviously meant at depicting his intense loathing of it, and fear. To illustrate one can refer to the popular depictions (real or fake) of exorcisms and their physical effects on those undergoing it. Also in that particular hadith, what is rendered "passing wind" is the Arabic "dart", which is amply used in Arabic literature in other ways, including to escape, to disapprove, all of which equally apply in the context of the hadith.
It is very common in Arabic parlance of the past and today, to figuratively speak of Satan as influencing and/or adding to one's afflictions, physical or spiritual.
Other Semitic languages have this feature as well, as seen from Jesus' calling Peter "satan" in the NT Matt16:23, that when someone or something is associated with the devil, most of the time it is understood as a metaphor for its evil consequences. When some reports depict Satan as staying in one's nose at night, and that one should rinse it thrice (the number is just a recommendation not a strict obligation, and by the way a threefold repetion of the same action in religion is amply found within Christian rituals), it never states that such an action "flushes" Satan out. The prophet is here obviously giving a disease prevention advise and relief. It was addressed to desert people who surely experienced respiratory discomfort from sleeping in the dry desert climate. Rinsing the nose thrice helps decongesting it, humidifying it to ease breathing, but more importantly flushing out harmful dust and sand particles, things causing harm and hence the figurative association with Satan. The Prophet said,
"When the darkness of night comes, or in the evening, collect your children, for the devil is abroad at that time, and when an hour of the night has passed let them free and shut the doors, making mention of God’s name, for the devil does not open a shut door. Tie up you buckets, mentioning God's name; cover up your vessels, mentioning God’s name, even though you should just put something on them, and extinguish your lamps".
This again is plain common sense, while always relying on Allah for the outcome of things. Evil, whether coming from the men, jinn or anything else can and will affect all that was mentioned without precautions and relying on Allah. Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr said: In this hadeeth there is a command to close doors of houses at night. This is a Sunnah which is enjoined to protect people against the devils of mankind and the jinn. Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar said: Ibn Daqeeq al-‘Eid said: in the command to close doors there are both religious and worldly benefits which protect lives and wealth from evildoers, and especially the devils.
It is interesting that among the critics of such ahadith are those who believe in Satan and demons entering people and animals' bodies, taking full control of their victims.
In answer to the video "All The Things That Satan Does (Ridiculous Islamic Teachings)"
There are narrations speaking of the effects of revelation, not only on the prophet but on those around him; his camel would sit and sink into the sand, a close companion whose knee happenned to be under that of the prophet almost shattered. When he described it at times coming to him "like" the sound of a bell (meaning something similar but not the same) it was to convey to his addressees in terms they could relate to, what he was personally experiencing.
As a side note, the hadith saying the
"bell is the musical instrument of the Satan"
obviously is speaking of the real, physical thing unlike the similitude the prophet was using in reference to a certain type of revelation, further it isnt speaking of bells used at any occasion but for musical purposes that invite devilish, inappropriate behavior. It is well established in classical Arabic, let alone Semitic languages in general as seen from Jesus' calling Peter "satan" in the NT Matt16:23, that when someone or something is associated with the devil, most of the time it is understood as a metaphor for its evil consequences.
For example in Medina the Muslims are reported to have suggested using bells at first to signal the arrival of the time of prayer, although eventually someone was designated to vocally call the people to prayer.
The Quran never came to correct the prophet's worldviews in terms of knowledge of nature and general causality, neither of his contemporaries but rather guide him and the rest of humanity through him, to the most complete, advanced human spiritual knowledge
"The Messenger of Allah and I passed by some people who were at the top of their date palms. He said: “What are these people doing?” They said: “They are pollinating them, putting the male with the female so that it will be pollinated.” The Messenger of Allah said: “I do not think that it is of any use.” They were told about that, so they stopped doing it. The Messenger of Allah was told about that and he said: “If it benefits them, let them do it. I only expressed what I thought. Do not blame me for what I say based on my own thoughts, but if I narrate something to you from Allah, then follow it, for I will never tell lies about Allah, may He Glorified and Exalted is He.” He continued in another version "You know better about your worldly affairs".
The divine protection therefore only pertained to the Quran which is the source of that perfect spiritual knowledge. The prophet was "uswa hasana" in his application of the Quran, not how he ate (When he said to eat with the right hand exclusively it was because the left was reserved for cleansing oneself. This is again, far from being a ritualistic obsession, a pragmatic approach to general hygiene), slept or saw the nature around him. This phrase in no way implies that he was a perfect creation.
Many verses urge him and those with him to seek God's forgiveness for shortcomings and the prophet used to implore God daily to be protected from sins. Anyone is free to imitate his lifestyle and adopt his worldviews as found in extra Quranic writings, if one finds any personal benefits in doing so but that isn't a religious requirement nor relevant to it, and that is explicitly stated in the Quran itself.
With that in mind, when the prophet made deductions as related in the ahadith, pertaining to his natural environement, general causality and basic observation of certain phenomenon, it is only expected from him that they would fit what the ancients of his time would find "plausible".
These views however, right or wrong, no matter how extraordinary they might seem in light of our current knowledge, have no bearing on the Quran itself, which is again, pledged to be fully protected.
It would have been interesting to have had written records of how the previous prophets saw the world, as we have with Muhammad, and see who among them held the most "unscientific" personal views. There are many examples to be extracted from the ahadith, most of them inappropriately derided and misunderstood by modern people, although none of them are falsifiable and even if proven wrong, as said above, have no bearing on the Quran itself. Here are a few quotations alluded to by this youtuber.
In answer to the video "Answering Muslims: God's Resting Place"
2:255"His chair (kursiyyahu) extends over the heavens and the earth" 20:5"The Beneficent One, Who is established (istawa) on the Throne (arsh)" 7:54"Surely your Lord is Allah, Who created the heavens and the earth in six periods of time, and He is firm in power (thumma istawa alal arsh)"
In all the seven instances where God is spoken of in the Quran as "istawa alal arsh/established on the throne" 7:54,10:3,13:2,20:5,25:59,32:4,57:4 this expression is connected with a declaration of His having created the universe. Nothing symbolizes dominion more in human psyche than the image of a powerful king sitting on his throne and ruling his kingdom. Allah however is not like any human king. He is the King of Kings Who not only possesses a mighty throne, but is the sustainer of that throne
23:116"So exalted be Allah, the True King; no god is there but He, the Lord of the Throne/arsh".
This means, despite Him being the absolute ruler of all that exists, He stands by Himself and does not need the support of a throne. This is a major point in the Quran's depiction of creation. At no point is there any hint or reference to God needing a time of rest, or break from a tiresome endeavour.
As to the statement "established over/on" that generally accompanies the mention of the throne, it does not entail "sitting". It is important to emphasize, whenever there is mention of Allah being in a location, the only understanding that is open to us is in terms of implication relevant to each context. The "how" is beyond any human being's grasp since outside our experience. This, again, is a principle of interpretation established in the Quran and the teachings of the prophet.
For instance it says Allah is at all times nearer than one's jugular vein 50:16. The implication is that His knowledge and control encompass every aspect of every human being's life, at each instant of their existence. It also says Allah's face is visible wherever one looks 2:115. How is Allah's face simultaneously present in whatever direction one lays his eyes is beyond human understanding but the implications are clear; the spiritually aware perceives in all aspects of creation and at all moments the divine will and design. Interestingly, in the very verse talking of Allah's establishing Himself above the throne, it says
57:4"He is with you wherever you are".
Again, His simultaneous presence above the throne and with every human at all moment shows that He is absolutely transcendent, unbound by space and time, or any other type of restriction. This is an unfathomable notion to our minds, hence the uselessness of seeking the "how". The implications of that statement however are clear; God has unrestricted sway over all that exists, including the throne itself which is a creation.
God's presence, not appearance, during His communion with Moses follows this exact pattern of religious terminology 27:7-9,28:29-30.
The same understanding applies to the hadith describing Allah descending
"every night to the lowest heaven when one-third of the night remains"
so as to bless and forgive those that request it. Just as Allah is closer, at each instant, than the jugular vein, with all humans wherever they are, His face simultaneously visible all around us at all moments, all the while being established over the throne, His presence in the lowest heaven at a certain point in time is an unfathomable concept to the human mind. The implications of the statement however is understood by the information provided; such descent is accompanied by a manifestation of His attribute of mercy which is more prominent during that interval to those that seek it.
The Quran, as well as the prophet, draw the boundaries of our understanding of those verses. What we can seek to understand, and what is a fruitless effort, as pointed to earlier. Him encompassing all of existence from close and far simultaneously, as well as being in a certain place at a certain time, is unlike any concept we can imagine. We can however understand the implications of those descriptions.
Again, when Allah 87:1"the Most High" is 6:61,16:50"above" or in the heavens (which He created), the expression is understood as denoting his all encompassing sway and dominion, that there cannot be something higher than Him in the sense of perfection, exaltedness. Such verses cannot be taken in isolation of the principles of interpretation mentioned earlier, as well as the numerous statements of Allah's all encompassing presence unrestricted by time and space. In fact, in connection to Allah being "above", we read that He does not "reside" in a fixed place
6:3"He is Allah in the heavens and in the earth".
We find in certain passages of the HB principles that similarly protect divine transcendance despite descriptions of God acting within time and space. Among such restrictive verses we read that
Isa33:5"The Lord is exalted, for He dwells on high".
That dwelling place is somewhere in the
Amos9:6"upper stories in Heaven"
which He has built. These chambers are above the solid canopy of the earth upon which He sometimes sits Isa40:22,Ps104 in order to
Ps33:13-14"oversees all the inhabitants of the earth".
The heavens strictly belong to him, while humans were made for the earth Ps115:16. In a closer sense, in the context of the Temple of Jerusalem, God is said to dwell among His people 1kings8:27. This is where the prophet Solomon salvages divine transcendance and provides an axiom by which to understand such "restrictive" Biblical verses. He states here that no location on the earth and neither of "the heaven of heavens" can contain Him. By definition, infinity cannot be limited in quantity or quality. This passage, which is in congruence with the Islamic principles mentioned earlier, refute the Hellenistic misappropriation of the HB by the NT authors. Jesus being fully God limits the infinite to a location. If the divine essence was not limited to a location when Jesus walked the streets of Jerusalem, then it means Jesus was not fully God. Solomon's words are decisive and closed to any misinterpretation. God manifests His presence through His attributes, not by entering His creation.
The Quran has also warned that these type of ambiguous verses are a test to those in whose heart there is perversity 3:7. They will deny the explicit verses that shed light on the right manner to approach these passages, preferring to apply their own desires and notions unto them. Trinitarians will often reply that God can do whatever He wishes. God surely has power over all things, but the contention here isnt about what God can or cannot do. God doesnt contradict Himself or negate His attributes, including Majesty and Self-sufficiency. Entering creation compromises both. This also opens the way for speculation, can God, for whatever theological construct, also incarnate into a worm? If not why not?
With those principles in mind we may further understand the implications of Allah "coming". We do not and cannot fathom how Allah can come within space and time, but we certainly can know the implications of that statement. Besides the hadith mentioned prior which entails mercy, in the Quran it means the execution of His command or of His threatened punishment. Similarly, the HB states in the context of divine chastisement visiting a wicked people, that God swiftly comes "riding" the clouds to destination Isa19:1,Ps104:3 or is transported by majestic angels Ps18:10. More in line with the Quranic imagery is God "descending" on the sinners for punishment or on a people for battle Isa31:4,Micah1:3 or "coming with a strong hand" to mete out retribution upon the heathens Isa40:10.
The idea of tiredness is completely excluded from God's creative work 46:33. God's establishment over the throne, which is itself a creation sustained by Him, symbolises His constant dominion upon all that exists. He has not relinquished His rule in favour of others nor has He made the whole of His creation or any part of it independent like a clock running by itself. He has instead remained at all times the sole Sustainer upon Whom the functioning of all things depend. The ending of these verses with
"surely His is the creation and the command"
refer precisely to this; after creation comes the command, symbolized by the establishment on the throne
32:5"He manages and regulates every affair from the heavens to the earth. Then, it will go up to him, in one Day, the space whereof is a thousand years of your reckoning".
In fact the Quran is silent about a seventh day in the history of creation, where the Bible depicts God as seemingly collapsing on a throne following a tiresome task. Rather, God creates in six days only and then controls His creation, including the throne upon which He is established. Had His management abandoned the world of existence for one single moment, the organization of them all would have perished 22:65,35:41.
In the HB, despite being One that Isa40:28"neither tires nor wearies", the crudely depicted Hebrew God is one that needed "resting" after "finishing" the monumental task of creating the universe, a pre-measured and finalized work
Isa40:12"Who measured water with his gait, and measured the heavens with his span, and measured by thirds the dust of the earth, and weighed mountains with a scale and hills with a balance?"
also Isa48:13.
This concept borders with the polytheistic beliefs of many people around the world, including the Arabs of the Hijaz, who attributed the act of creation to the One God supreme, who then for many various reasons, left it either partially or completely, to the interceding deities or lesser gods to administrate the natural processes. The perfect monotheism of Islam is far detached from these incomplete and primitive depictions of God.
Ibrahim's discussion with the unnamed ruler of his nation (later Quran commentaries identify him with Namrud/Nimrod) was precisely about this notion of God's omnipresence in the created world. What transpires from the portion of the debate quoted in the Quran is that the point of contention was not God's existence, rather His presence in man's life. The ruler gave examples implying that God is not concerned with all worldly matters, is mostly absent from man's life. Ibrahim refuted that point by reminding him of God's constant command of the natural laws upon which all life depends. He did so after the king's heedlessness to the first argument; God is the origin of the mechanism of life and death which all organisms are subject to. The ruler used ridicule to maintain his position, in the manner that the arrogant possessors of power often do. Instead of considering the deeper meaning of Ibrahim's argument, he alluded to the giving of life and death in an indirect manner; as a worldly king, he also had the power to inflict death and give or allow life. This exposed his spiritual heedlessness. Ibrahim then dumbfounded him with an argument he could not, even with his spiritual shallowness and corrupt belief in God, dismiss as he had previously done.
As has been made clear by now, God establishing Himself on the throne evokes dominion, and in the comprehensive language of the Quran conveys that Allah governs the whole of His creation, including the throne itself. He has kept all the powers by Himself, and whatever is taking place in each and every part of the universe is happening with His command and permission
30:25"And one of His signs is that the heaven and the earth subsist by His command".
Allah at no point becomes unconcerned with His creation, especially not man for whom he took the responsibility of making arrangements for his guidance, protection and fulfilment of his needs. This is done by providing means by which both aspects of the human being can thrive; the spiritual, through the innate perception of higher truths 23:78,46:26,67:23,76:2 as well as sending divine guidance 2:38-9,7:35-6,20:123 and the physical through the continuous maintenance of the universe and its laws 35:41. There is a reason why the Quran, in its surgical precision, describes Allah with His attribute of infinite mercy, when it mentions His establishment over the throne that encompasses all of creation
20:5"The Beneficent One/al Rahman, Who is established on the Throne".
No word enshrines the concept of constant care of every aspect of the functioning of the universe, more that the superlative Qayyum which reoccurs in the Quran, and no verse comprehensively explains it like ayat al kursi does 2:255. As denoted with "musiun" 51:47 which carries the meaning of expanding, the universe is not a finished work, but in continuous expansion, with new manifestations of God's creation
87:2"Who creates, then makes complete".
If creation in the universe is an ongoing phenomenon then how could one deem it far fetched and difficult to re-create the universe along with the humans after their destruction? These verses most often come in the context of providing proof for the resurrection. God has not just created this universe and left it alone after giving it the initial push. The same underlying notion is in 64:1. He isnt just the first cause after which He has no role in the affair. He is ruling over it and sustaining it at every moment
35:13,7:54"Who created the heavens and the earth in six periods of time, and He is established on the Throne; He throws the veil of night over the day, which it pursues incessantly; and (He created) the sun and the moon and the stars, made subservient by His command; surely His is the creation and the command; blessed is Allah, the Lord of the worlds".
Day and night are not following each other by themselves but by the Command of Allah Who could change the present system totally. But it is by His love and mercy that the system is maintained so as to allow life to thrive. God's love and mercy for His creation is a recurrent theme in the Quran and the idea of divine "detachment" from human destiny is in complete opposition to that concept. The combined statements that Allah is simultaneously above the throne as well as close to all things in existence, strikes the perfect balance between all encompassing transcendence and careful implication on an individual level.
This negates the atheist world-view, our universe is not a closed, continuous and self-perpetuating material universe. Every part of every process is brought about by Allah, whether creation of rain, the development of seeds, rotation of planets, from the cosmic to the cellular, man doesnt stand alone. Material causality is thus treated as a delusion 40:62 while constant divine creation is a reality 87:1-3.
40:7"Those who bear the throne and those around it celebrate the praise of their Lord and believe in Him and ask protection for those who believe.." 39:75"And you shall see the angels going round about the throne glorifying the praise of their Lord; and judgment shall be given between them with justice.." 69:16-7"And the heavens shall be rent asunder, for that Day it shall be frail and shall collapse. And the angels shall be on the sides thereof; and above them eight shall bear on that day your Lord's throne"
These verses speaking of the entites bearing the Throne and being near it on the Day of Judgement, do not say that God is or will be seated on this "Throne". As stated earlier, Allah is in no need of the throne for support, rather it is the throne that is constantly sustained by its Creator. Beyond its symbolism, the reality and function of the throne is something known to God only. In contrast, we read in the HB
1Kings22:19"I saw the Lord seated on His throne, and all the host of heaven were standing by Him on His right and on His left"
or also in Isa6:1,37:16,Ezek1,2,3 all picturing God carried by angelic creatures, seated on His throne. He is also pictured as accompanied by innumerable chariots and angels during certain "important" movements Ps68:18. Even the statement of ibn Abbas describing the kursi as Allah's footstool does not come close to the biblical depiction, neither does he state that Allah is seated on the throne
"The Kursi is the place where the Qadamain (feet) of Allah rest and the Arsh, no one knows its extent except Allah".
It is to be noted here that the statement is not attributed to the prophet.
The picture painted in the Quran carefully preserves divine transcendence all the while taking human imagination as close as possible to the divine essence. When subjects look at their king, the closest thing to him is his throne. Yet here at no point is Allah seated on His throne. Instead, powerful and compassionate angels are bearing it, in complete submission to the will of the mighty King. Seeing those majestic entities submitted in this manner is awe inspiring, and the fact that the King Himself does not need to appear to create such an effect, increases the feeling of amazement.
In answer to the video "Jeremiah 8:8 - Scripture Twisting 101"
If we go back in time, in light of the information present in the HB itself, the issue of preservation becomes even more damning.
We read, as far back as the first or second generation following Moses
Judges2:10"After that whole generation had been gathered to their ancestors, another generation grew up who knew neither the Lord nor what he had done for Israel".
This is unsurprising, why would one expect a people to remain faithful to Moses' teachings and preserve them accurately years following his death when during his own lifetime, his 40 days absence was enough to make them revert to idol worship, despite having just witnessed all kinds of supernatural occurrences testifying to the truth of what he was bringing. In light of all that they were made to witness from miracles and guidance, one would expect them to be sincerely obedient to God and deeply united yet the opposite happenned. From the onset, there was not a single fundamental thing of religion to which they adhered.
They had serious differences in every aspect of religion; so much so, they lost many of them just because of this attitude. And if it was so that early on in their history when they had been freshly established and tied to God with a covenant then what is to say of the later times filled with troubles, wars, exiles and enslavement? Or as is said in the Talmud of tradition given to Moses at Sinai and then forgotten,
“they were forgotten and re-established” (Sukkah 44a, Megillah 3a).
To succesfully achieve this re-establishment the rabbis openly state it is acceptable to resort to sophistry (Ketubot 103b). A similar example to Ezra is that of Otniel son of Kenaz who is credited with "restoring" some 3000 laws that were forgotten during the mourning over Moses’ death and other
"1700 analogies from minor to major, analogies by equivalent words, and obligations derived from a meticulous scrutiny of the Scriptural text were forgotten during the mourning over Moses’ death" (Temurah 16a).
There are other examples attesting not only to forgetfulness as to the contents of the books, let alone complete despise towards them Hos8:12, but also to their whereabouts. For example during the reign of Joshiah and while the Temple was being repaired, the high priest came across a manuscript not knowing what it was until it was presented to the King who rent his clothes appart upon recognizing it 2kings22. Interestingly, that period of 7th century BCE coincides with the time critical Biblical scholarship places the composition of the current HB. It is important to emphasize, the text says what was found was "the" Torah not "a" Torah.
Talmudic rabbis explain this difficulty by stating that the uniqueness of this find, and the fact nobody knew a priori what it was, doesnt mean no other Torah was in circulation, rather that it was written in a forgotten script very few could read. Consequently the king whose subjects had sunk into idolatry sent emmissiaries to
“Go and inquire of the Lord for me and for the people and for all Judah about what is written in this book that has been found. Great is the Lord’s anger that burns against us because our fathers have not obeyed the words of this book; they have not acted in accordance with all that is written there concerning us”.
This specific Torah, according to the Damascus Document, was none other than the original Torah fully revealed to Moses and sealed in the Ark of the Covenant 5 centuries ago in the times of Joshua. The detailed, written law was unknown to the masses all that time. The Ark itself was lost to the Phillistines and in the times of Solomon, its sole contents were the 2 tablets 1Kings8:9. There are also mention of entire pieces having been purposely burned by the corrupt elite, such as the scroll of Jeremiah Jer36:23 as mentionned earlier, and even though it was re-writen later Jer36:27-32, it reveals the complete careless attitude of the comunity's most prominent figures towards sacred texts.
Jeremiah, Hosea and others often lamented at their behavior and manipulations Jer8:8,Hosea4:6etc Too many factors have accumulated leading to the physical loss of the entire Torah, since the breaking of the oral transmission chain right after Moses, followed by blatant neglectfulness if not purposeful destruction of scriptures and their misinterpretations resulting in a faulty and corrupt oral tradition, combined with their successive massacres, destruction of their holiest sites and writings, forced exiles and assimilation into foreign cultures and all elements are there for the loss of the original. Hence the claims of divine intervention through Ezra to restore it, even having to transliterate the hebrew into Aramaic so the people would be able to read.
Ezra was the founder of the "Great Assembly", the institution that provided religious guidance to the Jews during the second temple era (520BCE – 70CE). These 120 men are said to have "finalized" the Hebrew Bible and enacted many laws, under the prophet Ezra's authority who was divinely inspired. They, after much debates, decided what to include in the final canon of the Tanakh/Hebrew bible. This era however is covered in darkness and not much is known of what was happening with the Jewish community.
The identity of these “Men of the Great Assembly” isnt even known.
In fact Israelite tradition isnt even sure in which language the Torah was given to them originally, whether it was ancient Hebrew, Assyrian, or Samaritan or whether it was later changed to Samaritan as a punishement (Sanhedrin 21b,22a,Y'rushalmi M'gillah 10a - chapter 1 halachah 9). In the process, they even forgot how to pronounce God's name hence the use of the tetragammaton. What is agreed upon is that upon his return from the Babylonian exile and into Israel, Ezra rewrote the HB in Hebrew but using the Aramaic alphabet (the lingua franca of those days). Their level of forgetfulness, as reflected in the issue of the language of revelation also reflects in their forgetfulness of the correct forms of certain ending letters, which made it impossible for them to recall the laws of Moses alluded to earlier until the intervention of Otniel son of Kenaz (Shabbat 104a). The Talmudic rabbis basically just decided on the letter forms to use, giving the current meaning to the text. Even though all Jews and rabbis agree to the rule which forbids the innovation of anything not said at Sinai, things can be recalled through discourse or any other means available, and the conclusion will be considered as having been given at Sinai.
The result is a Torah text nowadays far from being monolithic. There are 3 different Torah editions (Koren, Adi/Leningrad, Mosad HaRav Kook) each meticulously proofread from dozens of Torah scrolls on parchment then reproduced based on majority concordances between these scrolls. These 3 editions however have over 100 letter differences among them, which leaves one wondering as to the number of differences between the scrolls which were used by the proofreaders, if after all their efforts there were still 100+ letter differences.
That is without even getting into the issue of the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds, words of the midrash and the Zohar, showing that the Torah scrolls the Tanaaim (10-220CE) and Amoraim (200-500CE) had before them were different from the texts we have. This, as a side note, discredits the modern phenomenon of seeking Torah codes in a text whose original is unknown: one who works codes according to the Leningrad text or the Zohar text or according to the text used in the Talmud and the midrash will find, in each text, different results.
It is an undisputed fact that; - there are parts of the Torah that must have been written long after Moses' death (Burial, Dan, etc)
- that Ezra at least re-introduced the people to the Torah (see Nehemia8) if not added rituals to festivals such as "Sukkot" that the Jews never knew about until he showed up Neh8:17 while the details of this ritual are found in Lev23 which was supposedly written by Moses.
- that Ezra is known as "the scribe", compared to none other than the one who received the Law, ie Moses who is seen as the greatest of prophets in the Talmud Sanhedrin 21b-22a
- that even in the mainstream Jewish tradition there is acceptance that Ezra at least made minor edits to the Torah
- that there is an entire book from 2,000 years ago (albeit a few hundred years after Ezra's time) that claims Ezra wrote the current version of the Torah (2Esdras14). The Talmud states:
“Reish Lakish said, ‘at first the Torah was forgotten by Israel; Ezra came from Babylon and established it'” (Sukkah 20a).
- that Ezra initiated the particulars of the prayer ritual
Medieval rabbis could not counter Muslim polemics regarding the corruption of their scriptures as there exists no foundational narrative to the genesis of the text, how these Scriptures came into being and were shaped as a book. There is no explicit “transmission chain” self-referentially described in the Hebrew Bible or in post-biblical canonical literature. Medieval Karaites, Jews that only adhered to the written Torah, exposed the embarassing traditions which the rabbis hid in these interfaith discussions with Muslims. Karaism was in fact born in Muslim lands. By interracting with Muslims Jews became aware of the problems related to the preservation of their HB, as is reported in their rabbinic traditions.
Thus in answer to Muslim polemics, they would primarily attack these Jewish traditions, in an effort to blot out the embarrassing parts and re-write the transmission history of the text. Qirqisani, the leading Karaite theologian and exegete of Baghdad said
"They (the Rabbanites) assert that the Torah which is in the hands of the people is not the Torah which Moses – on whom be peace – brought, but was composed by Ezra, for they say that the Torah brought by Moses perished and was lost and disappeared. This amounts to the destruction of the whole religion. Were the Muslims to learn of this, they would need nothing else with which to revile and confute us, for some of their theologians argue against us, saying: “Your Torah is not the Torah brought to Moses.” Against one who makes this claim we proclaim that he is lying out of a desire to contradict, and that they are reduced to this because they have nothing to say and need an argument. But were they to discover this teaching of the Rabbanites – may God forgive them – the field would be open to them and they would need nothing else".
To this, he offers the poor reply that
"There are two implications to this (claim) – one is that he who changed this (the text of the Bible) and altered it was wiser and more knowledgeable than the prophets who wrote it; and it is extremely implausible that Ezra and Nehemiah were wiser than Moses, may he rest in peace,..and wiser than the Creator..and if it were so that he changed Scripture and altered it and took out of it what was not found to be of benefit, would the shamefulness remain in its place and the disgracefulness not be removed? All the more so if what they say, namely, that the Torah which is in our hands was collated and composed by Ezra – if this were so, and there was no one besides him that would have compelled him to say that this was so and (to say) “I am the one who has changed it and fashioned it in this way”– he could have just (re-)written it in the way he wanted and left the matter hidden, without informing anyone that he had changed it!"
Karaites deflected Muslim accusations of tahrif of their Hebrew Bible, by implying that if there is a form of falsification in Judaism, it only occured in the oral Torah, the books of the Mishnah and Talmud. It was necessary to them to reject the oral Torah's preservation so as to deny the information it contained as regards the written Torah's corruption. Eventually Karaism was declared a heresy by the rabbis, due to its denial of the authenticity of the oral tradition. The mouvement failed gaining dominance due to several factors; the Jewish people's turbulent history of oppression and exile, raised their rabbinic authorities as heroes of preservation and survival in the face of the complete annihilation of their identity. That mentality of the layman perdured in time due to Judaism's position as a minority religion, forcing it to dilute ideological dissent so as to retain a sense of community and survive. Also, Jewish Karaism had a strong zionist ideology. The demolition of their Jerusalem center by the Crusade of 1099 proved this ideology unattainable and brought about their dispersal and absorption in the Karaite pockets of Egypt, Byzantium and Spain.
