Biblical eschatology is one where all nations will be forcefully bowing at the Jews' feet. Prior to the messiah's arrival and universal recognition Isa59:19-20, there will be mass slaughter of those that do not believe in the Jewish God. None will be required to "believe" in the Jewish Messiah because his universal rule will be an undeniable fact that will usher an utopian era -that is, for the Jews- where only one truth reigns supreme, that of the Hebrew Bible, after every other belief system is abolished and erased, its people destroyed. This will happen by natural calamity or others means like God's jealous and furious fire of destruction, a process often likened to that of a smith selecting through fire the trash from the precious metal, concretely resulting in "purifying" the people's hearts and lips. Once the cleansing process is over, all will prostrate to the One true God
Zeph3:8-9,Zech14:9-17"And the Lord shall become King over all the earth; on that day shall the Lord be one, and His name one".
Some modern apologists have attempted to negate that idea of universal forceful conversion using Micah4:5. It is ironic that this same verse is used in rabbinic comentaries to prove the opposite. The context itself speaks of the streaming of nations into Jerusalem to learn Judaism, God's judgement of nations afar, in a time where
"all peoples shall go, each one in the name of his god, but we will go in the name of the Lord, our God, forever and ever".
The non-Jews "going" to their false gods implies "going for destruction" in contrast to the Jews who will go on "forever". This will usher a time not only of religious monopoly but of forcible, physical subjugation of all non-Jewish peoples, made to crawl like abject creatures to the Jews' feet, in fear of Micah7:17"our God", transfering in addition all their riches to their new masters
Isa66:12"like a flooding stream",
or be destroyed
Zech14,Isa45:22"Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth, for I am God, and there is no other"
Isa49:23"And kings shall be your nursing fathers and their princesses your wet nurses; they shall prostrate themselves to you with their face on the ground, and they shall lick the dust of your feet, and you shall know that I am the Lord, for those who wait for Me shall not be ashamed"
Isa60:"..And foreigners shall build your walls, and their kings shall serve you..For the nation and the kingdom that shall not serve you shall perish, and the nations shall be destroyed...And the children of your oppressors shall go to you bent over, and those who despised you shall prostrate themselves at the soles of your feet..".
The end of the book of Isaiah is repleat with such references of "glad-tidings" to the Jews towards the end of times, the messianic era, a time where
Isa66:23"all flesh shall come to prostrate themselves before Me"
and where the remaining lucky survivors will see all around them
"the corpses of the people who rebelled against Me, for their worm shall not die, and their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorring for all flesh".
This represents, according to Zech13:8-9 roughly 2/3 of the world population, exterminated, with 1/3 remaining for having converted to Judaism. Following their subjugation and destruction, the wicked will be sentenced to gehinnom (see Rashi on Ps6:11).
The Quran isnt the Greek Testament to have well established antisemitic rant in it. Historically, Jewish animosity against Muhammad was such in Medina that they turned against their own religion and their own Semite brethren's pure call to monotheism, preferring to ally with the paganism which Moses and other biblical prophets fought. Their prophets in addition warned them not to ever ally and coexist with pagans ever. They were again going through the same spiritual failures, as their forefathers did when they were influenced by the pagan people's religions although they were supposed to guide the nations
5:80"You will see many of them befriending those who disbelieve; certainly evil is that which their souls have sent before for them, that Allah became displeased with them and in chastisement shall they abide".
The Quran relates how they openly favoured polytheism to Islamic monotheism in order to appease the Meccans. This is unsurprising to anyone familiar with their history as described on their own books, treacherously allying with one another's pagan enemies for the fleeting benefits of this world. The traditions give the reason for that political move, the Meccans were hesitant to form an alliance with the Jews on account of their obvious closeness to Islam. The traditions speak of a delegation of Medinite Jews sent to Mecca after the battle of Uhud and publicly bowed to the Meccan idols in order to comfort them in their position against the Muslims and appease their reluctance
2:109,4:51"Have you not seen those to whom a portion of the Book has been given? They believe in idols and false deities and say of those who disbelieve: These are better guided in the path than those who believe".
This attitude of the Jews toward Quraysh and their favoring of the latter's paganism over the monotheism of Muhammad was in sharp contrast with the attitude of the Christian Negus of Abyssinia who sheltered and protected the early days persecuted Muslims of Mecca. This is the proper, historically accurate context of
5:82"Certainly you will find the most violent of people in enmity for those who believe (to be) the Jews and those who are polytheists, and you will certainly find the nearest in friendship to those who believe (to be) those who say: We are Christians; this is because there are priests and monks among them and because they do not behave proudly".
Christians in addition, contrary to the Jews, do not hold the arrogant belief of a special relation with God; their "priests and monks" teach them humility. Christians also reject the Jewish notion of unconditional, everlasting chosenness as the leading spiritual nation to mankind, drawing them closer to the Muslim understanding of religion from that aspect.
It is to be noted that in pre-islamic times when the Medinite Arabs of Aws and Khazraj were permanently in a state of war, the Jews of Bani Qaynuqa and Nadir were allied with Khazraj, while the Bani Qurayzah was allied with Al-Aws. Thus, in the course of their warfare, Jews would kill, expell or ransom Jews in alliance with pagans
2:84-85"And when We made a covenant with you: You shall not shed your blood and you shall not turn your people out of your cities; then you gave a promise while you witnessed. Yet you it is who slay your people and turn a party from among you out of their homes, backing each other up against them unlawfully and exceeding the limits; and if they should come to you, as captives you would ransom them-- while their very turning out was unlawful for you".
This attitude was a twofold crime from the viewpoint of Mosaic Law and had already occurred in the course of their history. During the revolt of the Maccabees and Jews had joined the pagan enemy ranks, fighting their own people. Even prior, when they were divided, a party joined the Phillistines and fought their fellow brethren, but changed sides when the situation turned to the other Jews' advantage 1Sam13:21. So lacking in faith had they become towards the end of Solomon's reign and after him, and neglectful of what was once their holiest site that under Jehoash the king of Israel, they invaded and plundered their own temple, taking even hostages among the rival kingdom of Judah, the king included 2Kings14:13-14.
Again later on the king Pekah of Israel would ally himself to Rezin king of Syria to attack and subdue the Judeans of king Ahaz, killing tens of thousands, taking many more captives among their women and children, as well as loots and plunders. They eventually gave up these loots following a severe rebuke from a prophet among them. King Ahaz of Judah in turn allied with the Assyrians to fight back the Israel-Syrian alliance, which proved to be a double edged sword since he became completely subdued to the Assyrian king, paying him from the Temple's riches 2Kings15,2Chron29.
Even while Jeremiah's prophecy of destruction by the Babylonians was being inflicted, when the king of Judah called for the release of all Jewish slaves, including those held by their priests, they reluctantly abided by the command. Their reluctance to free their own brethren was such that moments later they turned back upon their word and forcibly recaptured those freed Jewish slaves Jer34:7-11. Even in such eye opening moments, they still remained obdurate in their disbelief. In the times of Moses, and just as they came out of their Egyptian bondage, they showed similar disdain in freeing their own enslaved brethren Jer34:13-14.
So corrupt and greedy the majority of the elite has always been that, just following the nation's release from the Babylonian captivity, the wealthy would force their poor brethren to sell their own sons and daughters to repay their loans, and would then resell them to the heathen, those pagans whom Moses was instructed to wipe out the face of the earth. The prophet Nehemiah heavily condemned their behavior and urged them to return the children to their families ans cancel the loans they had given to the poor Neh5.
This pattern reveals a deep defect in their outlook on life, summed up in the Quran as such
59:13"You are certainly greater in being feared in their hearts than Allah; that is because they are a people who do not understand".
The Medina Jews feared more the prophet's retaliation for their mischievous activities, instead of fearing God. A sensible person knows where ultimate authority comes from. He will avoid every such thing as may call for God's punishment, even if he has to confront enmity along the way. On the other hand, he will come out to accomplish any duty which Allah has enjoined on him, whether he is opposed and hindered by all the powers of the world. But a senseless man, devoid of spirituality thinks strictly in wordly terms, without any higher perspective in mind. To him, divine power is an abstract concept while human power is all that matters. They would thus, shortly before the advent of Islam, ransom their mutual captives in obedience to that very same Law and it is this glaring inconsistency to which the Quran alludes next
"..and if they should come to you, as captives you would ransom them, while their very turning out was unlawful for you. Do you then believe in a part of the Book and disbelieve in the other?"
The historicity of the Jews of Yathrib can be divided into 2 main categories, those that arrived much before the common era into the lands of those whom they viewed as their cousins, and those that joined later following the 2nd destruction of the Temple. The community, although split into about 20 tribes with the most prominent being the Qurayza, Nadir and Qaynuqa, was very well established both politicaly and economicaly in the fertile areas of Yathrib. They had built fortresses there, in anticipation of possible invasion by neighboring Arab tribes. This was before the Aws and Khazraj reached and settled in the centre of Yathrib. Through a game of alliances, the Jewish tribes tried their best to remain as the main source of power in Yathrib.
At one point, Aws and Khazraj asked the Jews for an agreement of peaceful business cooperation, which was accepted as it did not compromise their political and economical ascendant. They in addition benefited from the expertise of the Arabs in the areas of agriculture and business.
Soon later, however, a shift in power occurred in Yathrib, due to demographics, with the Arabs starting to seriously outnumber the Jews. They therefore broke their agreement a number of times and attacked some of Aws and Khazraj which prompted these latter 2 to unite, and in addition to ask for the help of Abu Jubayla the king of Qassan, in modern day Syria. With the help of his army they defeated the Jews of Yathrib and from that point on the tribes of Aws and Khazraj remained in power in Yathrib and the Jews continued to live with them in a powerless position. This is when the enmity between Aws and Khazraj started.
According to some historians, aiming to reclaim their power, the Jews of Yathrib were the main cause of this enmity between the two tribes. The Jews had not only become disunited, but through a game of alliance and incitements among the Aws and Khazraj, they were competing with one another to regain dominion over the city, which led to the previously mentionned wars among Jews. This enmity and the fights that were caused by it continued till when Aws and Khazraj decided to invite the Prophet of Islam to their city. The migration of the Prophet changed the whole scenario in Yathrib which then was renamed Medina.
This self-contradiction, this favoring of idolatry over monotheism and the encouragement of pagan forces to rise against the monotheistic forces would reach its peak in the Month of Shawwal 5/626 when the Jewish leaders of Bani Nadir and Qaynuqa who were mercifully left to migrate with their wealth and families after their defeat in battle, and settle in Khaybar, covenanted with the leaders of Quraysh (promising them a whole year's crop from their Jewish settlement of Khaybar in case of victory), Kinanah and Ghatafan tribes among others to unite as one front against the Muslims. It is to be noted, the Jews of Khaybar did not show any hostility toward the Muslims until the leaders of Banu Nadir -Salam ibn Abu al Haqiq, Kinanah ibn Abu al Haqiq/Huqayq (also named ibn al Rabi'), and Huyayy ibn Akhtab- settled among them. The Muslims were struck with panic when news of the huge coalition of almost all tribes of the Arabian Peninsula (enemies and allies alike) were preparing to attack Medina.
The Prophet consulted with Salman the Persian, and decided to dig a trench in preparation. All Muslims were put at at task, including the Prophet who worked with his hands alongside his companions lifting the dirt, encouraging the Muslim workers, and exhorting everyone to multiply his effort. The women and children were removed to the interior and placed within fortified walls. The battle known as Battle of the Trench/Ditch/Confederates or al-Khandaq/Ahzab started.
The Quran speaks of their failures and rebellions under various prophets, as well as their multiple divine destructions, in a passing manner without delving much over the details, as if it is seeking to spare them some dignity, just as it does not report the scale of their prophets' loathing of them. This is among the facets of divine mercy, the like of which was inculcated to the prophet Yusuf/Joseph.
When his brothers and former persecutors were within his powerful grasp, as he had all authority and right to exert justice and revenge, he instead, in his legendary patience, dignity and magnanimity with which God had established him since his youngest years, he still gave them the benefit of the doubt
"Do you remember what you did with Yusuf and his brother while you were jahill?"
Yusuf's tact and mercy manifest in that opening statement by saying, in an investigating, ambiguous tone that what they did was in a time where they were ignorant, meaning that they are expected to know better by now and not repeat the misdeed he passingly alludes to. Second, he doesnt even make it personal by speaking in the first person "me" but instead by alluding to himself in the third person.
Then when they recognize him, instead of making them feel the lowest by boasting of how life has vindicated him so that now he is the highest, he immediately attributes his status to God, it is a favor which isnt on account of any personal achievements, he is no different than them. In addition God's favor, he says, is within anybody's reach, not just himself
"surely he who guards (against evil) and is patient (is rewarded) for surely Allah does not waste the reward of those who do good".
One can hardly think of a more intricately humble, merciful address than this, given the circumstances. And the rest of the dialogue, which is more akin to Yusuf giving moral lessons to his brothers without demeaning them, is full of similar wording. When he declared that Allah forgives them, again avoiding to make it personal "I forgive you", and that no blame will henceforth be attached to them, Yusuf remained consistent and respected that declaration a little later on when he saw his childhood vision unfolding, he only mentioned God's favor in protecting him during his years of imprisonment, without saying anything of his much more dangerous ordeal of being thrown in a well by his brothers. Whatever evil had occured between he and his brothers -he is wording the statement so as to leave open the possibility that he might be equally blameable although he never did anything wrong to warrant the cruelty with which his older brothers treated him in his childhood- was because
"Shaitan had sown dissensions between me and my brothers".
Not only he puts himself as potentially having equal share of responsibility for the conflict, he attributes the source of evil to Shaytan, not even his brothers who stand blame free just as he had previously pledged. These kind of intricacies as are contained in just a few verses among many other verses within that specific story of the prophet Yusuf's life, clearly cannot have been devised by any human being orally and publicly transmitting an account without any chance at going back to a previous statement to correct and edit himself to improve his overall eloquence and coherence
"this is of the announcements relating to the unseen (which) We reveal to you, and you were not with them when they resolved upon their affair, and they were devising plans".
This is the kind of divine mercy with which the Quran treats them. When it points out some of the dark periods of their history, it isnt done wantonly or inappropriately but always in a specific context and to draw a moral lesson, both for them as a nation and anyone hearing and reading it. A parallel reading of the list of incidents starting from 2:40, with the same ones related in their books reveals the mild manner in which God has spared them further humiliation by not detailing their dark past.
This past the Quran says was "thrown behind the backs" of their educated elite, unknown to the majority of the Quran's addressees, even among the Jewish laymen of the time. Even if we taken into account the loathsome words that later Muslim scholars, the likes of ibn Qayyim, describe them with; tricksters, conspiracists, liars, slanderers, consumers of usury and bribe, killers and rejecters of prophets etc. every single one of those accusations and more, are directed at them collectively in their own sacred writings.
The Quran also, almost every time it cites one of those past failures, demarcates between the transgressors and the upright among them so as to not condemn them collectively although they have failed collectively to uphold the covenant they were bound to with God as a community.
Throughout time, they were a fringe among the masses, and remained truthful to the scriptures in anyway, shape or form it reached them, trying to follow it to the best of their ability. Their sincerity, unprejudiced reading and understanding of their books led some of them, from the times of the prophet where they “recognized him like their sons” to our own times, to inevitably believe and enter the fold of Islam 2:121,83,3:113-115,199,4:162,5:13,66,69,83,7:159-170,17:107-9,28:52-4.
That separation is done in the apocalyptic hadiths as well, where in a time where several supernatural events will occur, including inanimate objects and plants pointing to those among them that will side with the dajjal to murder innocents, they are said to be on both sides of the conflict between good and evil. Those on the wrong side (Muslim,B54,H99), in opposition to the returned prophet Jesus will be completely eliminated, together with their allies among all religious groups including Christians and deviant Muslims who will seek to kill other Muslims (Sunan Ibn Majah 179, Sahih Bukhari 1881, Musnad Ahmad 3546, al-Buhur al-Zakhirah 1/493). The same destruction will befall them as was done to previous nations that sought to destroy the messengers and their followers. The Quran in 17:8 alludes to a future destruction of the mischief makers among them. They will not constitute the entire world Jewish population but a fraction of it that will believe in the dajjal as their promised messiah (Sahih Muslim 2944). The dajjal is thus the arch-deceiver, not an "anti-christ" although among his actions is that he will oppose the returned Jesus, besides opposing the Mahdi and all those that shall side with him.
Their biblical history speaks at length of the wrongdoings of the majority of them, despite the presence of a few righteous among them, and how those sins have often plunged most of their community into suffering, and for several generations, as pledged by God in their scriptures Ex20 and later observed in Jeremiah for instance when the nation was decimated by the sword and famine, from the youngest to the oldest, men and women, if not taken captives.
The principle that God judges men individually, and not in groups does not negate the infliction of collective suffering even because of the misdeeds of a few, and this is an objective reality. Such reality may repeat itself with any community, including the Muslims 8:25 which is why believers of all times have been urged by their prophets to purge evil from their communities, hasten each other to good deeds and guard one another from evil. Muslims are warned, through examples of the past, to choose very carefully their leaders because when such elite and rulers begin their mischief, they drag most of the community with them in corruption and lead it to destruction
17:16"And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction".
As happened in the past, the Almighty may punish a whole nation for the crime of a single individual if that whole nation sanctions it, directly or passively. As stated by Ezekiel in his warnings to Israel, the righteousness of the few will not deliver the guilty when the time comes Ezek14:20, although it may delay it Prov28:2. If the efforts of those few righteous remnants fall on deaf ear and that the decreed punishment is if such a scale that even the righteous cannot escape it, their reckoning will be with God, as the prophet stated
"If Allah sends punishment upon a nation then it befalls upon the whole population indiscriminately and then they will be resurrected (and judged) according to their deeds. "
The reason why Jews are addressed as monolith, whether in the Quran or their own books and prophets following Moses is that because from all people, and up to this day, no community claims continuity to their ancestors and the rights and obligations placed on them than the Israelites. They were bound as a nation by a covenant in which they entered while being persuaded, one can even say compelled, by the sight of miracles.
The terms of the covenant were that should they breach it, then it would result in their rejection from God's grace as a whole, even if not all of them transgress. However this prided covenant was, and still is, in great majority and even sometimes entirely disregarded, with them only laying claim to the favors which were in fact conditional to obedience (land grant, divine protection from enemies, light unto the nations etc). This is actually one other reason to call them out for their sins as a single unit, to show them that if they want to lay claim on the favors conditionaly bestowed upon their ancestors, then they should equally recognize as a nation the less glorious parts of their history.
Another thing to consider is that the Quran, which is often accused of being anti-Jewish or antisemitic actually spares the Israelites and is much more tempered and balanced in its description of their early history than their own scriptures, down to the Christian writings and Jesus' outright insults towards them. Jesus himself was no antisemite, but his followers, the descendants of Greek and Roman pagans, certainly were and gladly used the crude depictions and insults that Jesus reportedly makes of his fellow "vipers" and "sons of satan". Jesus' racial slur is so intense, the general feel of the Gospels so anti-semitic that one can only conclude they had been written by Gentiles.
In answer to the video "The Unknown History of Islam 09 - Racism and the Islamic Slave Trade"
Authenticity of the Quran isnt contingent on whether we have in our hands manuscripts written or approved by Uthman. The authentification and transmission of the Quran was always, since the time of the prophet, primarily oral. The strong oral tradition is the reason why we find reports stating that the process of compilation was never a priority until memorizers started dying out in battles. The priority given to oral transmission is a phenomenon ongoing today and will remain so. It is irrelevant to Muslims whether we have many or few manuscripts attesting to our Quran, even if those few are found to be filled with errors and differences in comparison to what we have today. Neither would the availability of early manuscripts confirming the written text we have today, constitue strong proof for the Quran's authenticity.
Someone with enough power and authority could have decided to write the first Quran compilation and disseminate it as the original left by the prophet. This however would have only been possible if the Muslim tradition, like the Judeo-Christian one, had neglected its strong oral tradition. So what would really challenge the Quran's authenticity is whether we have a variety of conflicting and competing traditions, primarily oral. Assuming for argument's sake that there are textual variations among manuscripts, or that we have no manuscripts belonging to Uthman, who by the way wasnt the first but the second compiler of the Quran into book form, is irrelevant, even laughable to a Muslim audience when trying to undermine the Quran's preservation. Because again, that preservation was, is and always will be, primarily oral.
Trying to criticize the Quran from that angle is thus a fruitless effort, especially when the critic is coming from a background whose religious texts have a known history of neglectfulness or total loss of textual tradition. Such criticism only is valid from the view point of these critics because in the transmission process of their own tradition, they have entirely disregarded the oral aspect.
Written texts and manuscripts thus become crucial to them in order to validate and authenticate their current scriptures and beliefs, even though such attestation in and of itself isnt strong proof of authenticity.
So, coming from such a poor background in terms of oral tradition, it is thus but natural for these critics to boast of their numerous manuscripts in comparison to the Quran, even though these early manuscripts of theirs contradict one another and sometimes are very damaging to their current pillars of faith. To this we may add the revisions and corruptions of the text, unknown or confused authorship, broken transmission chain, or even loss of the language of the person to whom the text is ascribed.
All these, and other issues are problems that plagued the Biblical traditions, even to the point that the majoritarily accepted canons was different throughout the ages, even today with different Judeo-christian traditions having their own canon as God's word. Nothing even remotely similar happened to the Quran.
Again, we are comparing an oral society that made the progressive transition towards written with its first ever book, the Quran, of which we have abounding 1st and 2nd century Hijra manuscripts, comparing it with a well established written society. This Graeco-Roman written civilization is expected to have abounding written evidence for its central scriptures. Yet its manuscript attestation, the earlier we go back to the source, the more scant, obscure and inconsistent it becomes. The theory of late (post 200AH) composition of the Quran has been discarded even among the most hardened revisionists and orientalists, in light of the substantial and constantly increasing discoveries of 1st century hijri (622-719CE) Quranic manuscripts. The total texts extracted from these early manuscripts amount for over 90% of the current Quranic text. Contrast this with the single credit card size manuscript remnant of the NT whose dating is disputed somewhere along the 1st century CE. The issue of individual scribal errors is natural, to anyone who knows the various difficulties of copying a lengthy text prior to the printing era. The more essential question would be whether these individual errors were reproduced on a large enough scale so as to corrupt the majority of the transmitted text. This of course never occurred with the Quran, due to its dual, oral/written, mode of transmission. Even the variant readings, approved by the prophet, recorded and attested in books of tafsir, even those readings that change the skeletal Uthmanic text (a tiny minority of all variants and which are not contradictory), were never scripturally transmitted on a scale that would alter the majority of manuscripts throughout time. This again, attests to the well known and established phenomenon of mass oral transmission, as is done to this very day. These textual variations were for the most part restricted to companion codices, meant for the companions' personal use, hence their label by the scholars as companios' readings.
The script chosen for the Uthman compilation was Kufic, a script still readable today thanks to the dual preservation and transmission of the Quran, textual and oral. Some misinformed and misleading critics have tried arguing that the Kufic script did not appear until the late 8th century in an effort to push forth the dating of the Uthman codices exposed at Samarkand and Topkapi. That assertion is totally devoid of any historical basis since it is known that Kufic is the earliest script from which the others developed. That assertion is mainly based on a misquote of Martin Lings who was actually referring to the calligraphic perfection of the script, not its genesis.
The Kufic script was known in Mesapotamia at least 100 years before Kufa was even founded, which was during the period of Umar in the 17th year of hijra/638CE. The reason for the layman confusion is because the script is named after the city of Kufa, though it did not originate there. The Kufic script in fact originated in the town of Hira and the Kufans inherited and took on that script that later became known as Kufic, the adopted script of the major learning center of the Islamic world. Several rock inscriptions, as well as coinage, scattered throughout Egypt, Syria, Iraq or the Hijaz attest to the prominence of the Kufic script in Muslim lands already in the 1st century AH.
To further corraborate the point, the manuscripts found in Sanaa were Kufan manuscript, and those are dated the first century hijra.
It is also well known that early Quran manuscripts are present in museums worldwide, besides those that are in private collections in the west and those that were lost or destroyed. A huge collection was kept in Germany, but destroyed during the Second World War. Even the manuscripts present in Muslim museums are available as copies in the non-Muslim countries, such as the Uthman Samarkand codex that has numerous copies disseminated wordlwide in private and public hands. There are countless 1st century Hijra (622-719CE) Quran fragments, as well as a 99% complete manuscript of that period, the Huseini mosque Cairo manuscript.
Other Kufic Quranic manuscripts from 1st and early 2nd century hijra are found in museums today, like the ones of Austria and Bahrein. In fact even the style of the script of the Samarkand codex which the missionaries want to push the dating as far as the late 8th century, this same style is found in inscriptions from the 1st century of hijra in the form of dated Kufic inscriptions, predating Uthman's collection of the Quran.
In answer to the video "The Unknown History of Islam 09 - Racism and the Islamic Slave Trade"
The discontinuation of the line of prophethood is among the reasons that necessitated the protection of the final revelation to mankind, a revelation containing all previous books 98:2-3 as here reflected in the declaration of faith
2:177"believe in Allah and the last day and the angels and the Book and the prophets".
3:23,5:44,4:44,51"Have you not considered those to whom a portion of the Book has been given? They buy error and desire that you should go astray from the way".
This indicates that the Torah and Injil were not the final words of God, but portions of one Book 6:156. The Quran in fact uses that established pattern of continuous revelation, to comfort the prophet, telling him that should his adressees disbelieve in that same pattern that is now bestowed upon him, then let him now, people preceded him that wholeheartedly believed in it. Further, their rejection does not compromise the honor and credibility of that lofty institution of prophethood. Instead of grieving, or even doubting, the prophet should follow the guidance of his predecessors who held fast by the revelation that came to them 6:84-90. All previous revelations are part of one Book called the Mother of the Book/umm al kitab which the Quran is also part of
43:4,13:39,2:236"and remember Allah's favour to you, and that which He has revealed to you of the Book".
The previous revelations forecasted the final revelation in the form of the Quran 4:47. This draws attention to an important truth: all the revealed scriptures contain the same spiritual and moral principles. They cannot contradict eachother and their only differences reside in that they were made to conform to the language of the addressees
26:192-6"And most surely this is a revelation from the Lord of the worlds. The Faithful Spirit has descended with it, Upon your heart that you may be of the warners, In plain Arabic language. And most surely the same is in the scriptures of the ancients".
The Quran then verifies the truth of these divine portions of the one Book and offers a clear global explanation of it
10:37,20:133"Has not there come to them a clear evidence of what is in the previous books?".
This is why it is said to be the Guardian and Arbitrer/Muhaymin and a clear explanation of THE Book (singular) of which past scriptures including the Quran are part of 5:48-9,10:37. This single scripture containing all past revelations as well as the Quran is said to be highly secure, purified and preserved, exalted and honored, inaccessible to evil interference and only between the hands of the most honourable custodians 26:193,56:77-80,80:13-16,81:19-21,88:22. It has been engraved in the lawh mahfuz/the preserved tablet 85:21-2, hence it being referred to in the opening verses of sura baqara as it is dhaalika al kitab/that book or writing, denoting distance through the pronoun, because its katb/writing is done in a far heavenly place. In contrast the Quran speaks of this/hadha al Quran denoting closeness because its recitation is being done in this world.
Another instance of the Quran's surgical use of words.
The Quran, being from the same God and containing the same basic wisdom and truths of ancient scriptures 6:91,26:196,29:46 speaks highly about the Torah and Injeel. They are referred to as sources of mercy, wisdom, guidance and light 5:43,44,46,7:154,11:17,28:43,46:12 as well as criterions of truth and falsehood (furqan) clarifying all things 2:53,21:48,28:43,37:117. It even cites them sometimes as sources of guidance hand in hand with the Quran 28:48-9. Because again, they are never said to be totally corrupted.
Read with the knowledge of the Quran, whose function is to be the muhaymin/protector and arbitrer, one can discern the guiding parts of previous oral and written traditions from the portion that were corrupted, either purposefully or through neglect.
In 46:12 it says the Torah came prior to the Quran, as a guide and mercy. It is this guiding and merciful aspect of the Torah that the statement musaddiqan/declaring true, refers to, not simply the Torah. It doesnt say declaring "it" true. This is seen by the rest of the verse, paralelling the guidance and mercy of the Torah with the Quran being a warner and giver of glad tidings. Again we see, the Quran only confirms the truthful aspects of past oral and written traditions, which the Quran never claims were entirely blotted out.
This restricted aspect of the Quran's confirmation of the Torah is made clear in 6:154-7. The passage starts again with a praise of the Torah as being a book of mercy and guidance, followed by a parallel statement about the Quran, echoing stricly the merciful and guiding aspect of the Torah
"And this is a Book We have revealed, blessed; therefore follow it and be God-conscious that mercy may be shown to you".
The Torah contains many things that are neither guiding, nor sources of mercy, and other things that erroneous or even outright blasphemous about God and His prophets. The Quran does not confirm these things, and sometimes openly rejects them.
In answer to the video "The Unknown History of Islam 09 - Racism and the Islamic Slave Trade"
Allah has repeatedly pledged throughout the Quran that He will structure and compile, explain and protect the Quran from falsehood
15:9"Verily, we have sent down the Reminder, and, verily, we will guard it".
This verse comes in answer to the prophet's opponents, trying to discredit him with taunts and sarcasms. It tells them this reminder is divinely sent, meaning not the product of the person they are objecting to. So in reality they are opposing God who sent it. And even if they try to oppose the One who sent it, the only way being to tamper or destroy His communications, then the verse tells them in the form of a strong affirmation, this revelation will remain firmly guarded.
As a side note, "the reminder/al dhikr" is a general word that may be used to anything that serves the function of reminding. This reminding can be done in many ways, including orally. It is the context that defines what is meant by it.
In 15:9 above it means the Quran, whether written or recited from memory. The pledge of protection despite the people's opposition to Muhammad refers only to the Quran in that passage.
In 16:43, the reminder/al dhikr refers to whatever served the function of reminding prior to the Quran, and this includes both written and oral traditions of the Jews and Christians, in totality.
In 21:105 the dhikr still refers to whatever served the function of reminding prior to the Quran, but this time, to the exclusion of certain Judeo-Christian scriptures, namely the Psalms and all that came after it. Dhikr here refers to what was divinely inspired prior to the Psalms of David.
In 40:53-4 the dhikr/the reminder is in reference to what served as a reminder of the truth to the Israelites only, and which they inherited from Moses. This means the Torah exclusively. All these verse prove that the generic word dhikr/reminder is flexible and its application depends on the context of its use; it does not mean the same thing everytime it appears, and not everything that the Quran says about it in a context, applies to another context.
Just as when it refers to both the Quran and the Torah with the general word "writing/kitab" doesnt mean they are one and the same writing, or that what it says in the context of the writing being the Quran, also applies to the Torah because it is also called a writing in another passage. The same goes for other dual applications of general words to both the Quran and previous scriptures, such as criterion, guidance, light etc.
Other pledges of divine protection of the Quran are found in
75:17-19"Surely on Us (devolves) the collecting of it and the reciting of it. Therefore when We have recited it, follow its recitation. Again on Us (devolves) the explaining of it"
41:42"No falsehood can approach it from before or behind it: It is sent down by One Full of Wisdom, Worthy of all Praise"
4:82"Will they not then ponder on the Quran, Had it been from other Than God, they would surely have found therein Much discrepancy".
It is only following reflection that one doesnt find contradiction in it, this means that should one study it superficially, he would find faults in it.
In answer to the video "The Unknown History of Islam 09 - Racism and the Islamic Slave Trade"
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 writen 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 taught by Muhammad come from a common source and can be found throughout these textual and oral traditons. It also means the coming of Muhammad and the Quran prove the prophecies of the Torah and Gospel as true 6:20,7:157,61:6. It is in this same sense that Jesus confirmed and fulfilled the Torah and the Prophets. He confirmed the truth in them, exposing the falsehood, oral or textual, and he fulfilled the prophecies related to himself
Matt5:17-20,19:16-19,Quran5:46"And We sent after them in their footsteps Isa, son of Marium, verifying what was before him of the Taurat and We gave him the Injeel in which was guidance and light, and verifying what was before it of Taurat and a guidance and an admonition for those who guard (against evil)".
The Bani Israil who rejected Jesus were in reality rejecting their Torah. 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 fulfills. 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 comentators 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".
In answer to the video "The Unknown History of Islam 09 - Racism and the Islamic Slave Trade"
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. It 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.
The Dead Sea scrolls discovered in 1950 in Jordan are dated between 150 BCE and 70 CE meaning there is still over 1000 years of history between this time period and the time of Moses, let alone Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael. But this is besides the point since no Torah was found among the scrolls of Qumran nor any book of the NT. The Dead Sea Scrolls contain many non-canonical manuscripts such as the Books of Enoch, Jubilees, Tobit, Sirach, additional psalms, etc., that were not ultimately canonized, as well as "Sectarian" speaking of the beliefs of smaller groups within Judaism. There is even a Book in the canonized Bible that is not found in the DSS, namely the Book of Esther. Less than 40% of the documents found are classified as Biblical. The oldest known Torah fragment is from the silver scrolls dating back to 700BCE and contains Numbers 6:24-26.
The written Torah was completely destroyed, along with the first Temple. It was rewritten by Ezra through "divine miracle" according to Jewish traditions, obviously as it was majoritarily forgotten despite their claims of unbroken chain of transmission up to Moses. In fact there are even indications of that "chain" having broken even in 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, 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.
