Islam critiqued is a zealous journalist; Ask as many questions as you like, but remain God-conscious?

In answer to the video "Was Muhammad a False Prophet?"

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 Jews, in their arrogance, lack of obedience and will to bend to God's will, ie "stiff-necked" as Moses and other prophets labelled them collectively in their scriptures is demonstrated in 2:67-73 with their offensive behavior towards their prophet.

They accused him of ridiculing them when he simply conveyed God's command to sacrifice any cow in a ritual that would provide the community with answers as to the confusing circumstances surrounding 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 which cow was 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 rethorical device achieves a stronger impact on the minds than immidiately 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”.

God therefore shackled the rebellious souls of this "stiffed necked" nation with a law, the Torah, that would illuminate their way and lead them to the straight path. Their rebellious nature however 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 meant for their own good, as David understood and did Ps19, they progressively took control of the laws, making their application only secondary to the man made practices that "validate them". Their ritualistic obsessions and hairsplitting conjectures basically turned the Divine law into a man made one. And this is another form of idolatry and God let them follow that path as a punishement, as He is described doing in Ezekiel, even letting them enshrine some of those laws in the written Torah. Divine law should instead be agreeable to the human soul, and if its recipients 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 remembrence 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 punishement, 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 refering 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 exagerated 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.

Islam critiqued delves to the dark side; How satanic are these verses?

In answer to the video "Was Muhammad a False Prophet?"

Let us see how this favorite of Islam's opponents holds up to scrutiny. 

This noble Book is not the result of some human whim. It was an inspiration to Muhammad 42:52, whose descent is independent of his will and desires 53:3. Allah says of his messenger

69:44-47"if the messenger were to invent any sayings in Our name, We should certainly seize him by his right hand, And We should certainly then cut off the artery of his heart: Nor could any of you withhold him (from Our wrath)".

The prophet wont be able to successfully pass off something false as divinely inspired because by the manner of his sudden death, those around him will understand that the prophecy of preservation came true and that what he was about to utter, or started uttering was false. Should he even misinterpret and lie over the true meaning of what is revealed to him, his heart would be sealed and he would become like the worst rejectors among his nation, blindly wandering on 42:24.

Other verses issue similar warnings against tampering with the Quran to such an extent that it was imprinted in the psyche of the memorizers and all the believers.

When the malicious critics of Islam try using this divine pledge of protection, something no other scripture has ever had, against the prophet, they do nothing but shoot themselves in the foot. For instance when they connect the symptoms of the prophet's death, years after ingesting a poison, to the statement in 69:45-47 about instantly (not progressively) seizing and putting him to death should he try passing off as revelation something that isnt, then they are still testifying inadvertently to the Quran's authenticity; The prophecy came true and the false prophet, God forgive them for that saying, was put to death and prevented. 

When they quote from the false, discredited and discarded story of the "satanic verses" where the prophet says

"I have fabricated things against God and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken"

then they are equally attesting to the preservation of the Quran. The same report states that this supposed "coming back to his senses" was caused by Gabriel, who

"came to the Messenger of God and said, "Muhammad, what have you done? You have recited to the people that which I did not bring to you from God, and you have said that which was not said to you".

Even if we assume in the worst case, just for argument's sake, that the prophet did pass off as revelation something that wasnt, then there is still the inescapable fact that he was under constant watch, immediately reprimanded for his deed, and the false revelation pointed and discarded from the rest.

Before getting into the story itself, it is important to note, we Muslims take Allah's word for it, He bears witness that what has been revealed to His Prophet has been done

4:166"with His knowledge, and the angels bear witness too and Allah is sufficient for a witness".

Merely coming down from the heavens was not sufficient to prove its divine origin. It could have been done through satanic agencies, or could have been polluted with confusing falsehood had God not made all necessary arrangements that no evil spirit could interfere with it. God and the angels commanded to deliver the Quran 2:97,80:11-16 bear witness that the revelation right from the start of its descent, to its reaching down to the prophets and up to its communication and delivery to the people is duly protected and guarded against change and alteration, from whatever source it might come. And God encompasses his messenger and protects him from any evil interference during all these processes

10:61,72:26-28"He makes a guard to march before him(the messenger) and after him, so that He may know that they(the messengers) have truly delivered the messages of their Lord, and He encompasses what is with them, and He records the number of all things"  

19:64"and we(angels of revelation) do not come down but by the command of your Lord; His is whatever is before us and whatever is behind us and whatever is between these".

All prophets were confronted to the machinations of evil spirits, trying to interfere with their desire to establish the truth. They did so through any means they could, such as by inciting their enemies further against them, propagating falsehood, attempting to make them compromise some of their principles with their enemies', but God protects His message from corruption and ultimately defeats their falsehood and obstacles, and establishes the Truth instead 6:56,22:51-55,41:26,68:9,10:15,17:73-4.

Whatever the devil creates from obstacles to counter the messengers' desires, ie their desires to establish the truth, becomes a trial for the people. This is speaking of the difficulties experienced by the messengers and their followers in the face of adversity. The people respond differently to these trials. Some go further in their rejection and doubts. Others become persuaded of it being the Truth based on the simple observation that, had the revelation been false and leading people astray, evil forces wouldnt have been so restless and agitated in their opposition. We see this phenomenon today, all around us and the restless but fruitless efforts by the opponents of Islam, trying hard to convince Muslims to abandon their faith. Also, the unwavering stance of the messengers in the face of these obstacles provides further proof for their selflessness and sincerity, more particularly in the basic notion of monotheism which evil entities were most focused against 10:104-6.

The satanic verses polemic, regardless of its authenticity, perfectly fits this scheme by the evil entities -human and jinn- to oppose the messengers' desire to establish the truth. With it, they try creating doubt and confusion in the mind of the people. This story, from an authentic viewpoint is rejected by ibn Ishaq who is himself among the transmitters, as quoted by Tabari in introduction to the story

"About this story Imam Muhammad bin Ishaq, the compiler of sirah, was asked, he said: ‘This is from the fabrication of the heretics.’ And he wrote a book on the issue".

As to the chain coming from ibn Abbas, it has the known liar and forger al Kalbi in the isnad. More on that point further below.

Nowadays, even among western scholars of Islam, studies by the likes John Burton, Uri Rubin, Jaakko Hämeen-Anttila, Gerald Hawting, Nicolai Sinai and Patricia Crone have all expressed profound reservations about the historicity of the story. It is also discarded through simple textual analysis. The alleged verses do not fit the passage in 53:19-23 which actually is a condemnation of idol worship, as well as the larger context which reinforces the incorruptibility of the divine revelation, affirms God's all encompassing power and negates intercession which is what the polytheists precisely believed regarding their lesser gods.  The sura itself begins with a forceful announcement that 

53:2-5"Your companion [Muhammad] has not strayed, nor has he erred, Nor does he speak from [his own] inclination. It is not but a revelation revealed, Taught to him by one intense in strength.." 

From a textual criticism viewpoint, the story fails miserably; not a single manuscript exists proving its existence. The main words that constitute the passage are unique to it, not found anywhere in the Quran. This is the criteria of authenticity known as "hapax legomena". Not only that, but al gharaaniq/the cranes is a word that the Arabs have nowhere used to describe their gods, whether in their poetry or in their speeches.

Despite these irrefutable basic facts, the story was used in the past and nowadays to create doubts in the minds of the believers and to obstruct the establishment of the truth. And this despite the fact that it isnt a Quranic statement, nor a prophetic tradition, not even an authentic statement of one of the Companions. At best it is a statement of a tabi’i, ie non-eye witness expressing what he considered to be the reason for the revelation of a particular passage. 

Al Albani for instance grades the chain through ibn jubayr from ibn Abbas as sahih mursal, meaning in hadith terminology going back to a non contemporary to the prophet, a tabi'i. Ibn Kathir before him considered at best the chains to be mursal, adding that none are sahih. This is because we have a statement from ibn Abbas in sahih Bukhari that the prostration in sura najm occurred at the end of the sura, not its middle, and in a different context, as Muslims still do today. This contradicts the information that came down to us through weaker chains in the story of the gharaaniq. Al Qurtubi thus rightly observes that the isnad of the story is munkar/disconnected and that it

"was not mentioned by anyone from the people of authenticity". 

Al Razi, long before, in his tafsir al kabir rejected the story on the same basis. What is further interesting is that according to Al-Bazzar as quoted by ibn Kathir, he could not find any chain to the story that was not disconnected, except the one with the forger al-Kalbi in it.

In summary, not a single chain goes back directly to the prophet, or to a companion, while we have companion reports about the incident without the storytelling part of the satanic verses. One of the narrators, al Muttalib, was in fact a polytheist at the time of the recital of surah najm/53, and he was among the few (Musnad 8034) who did not prostrate when everyone else did. Prostration in sura najm has nothing to do with the prophet's alleged compromising stance. Prostration is required at the end of the sura, in relation to an actual command to prostrate, long after the section where the satanic verses were supposedly included. Nor is prostration required solely in sura najm but rather at 15 other occasions scattered throughout the suras of this mighty Quran. So despite the fact that the authentic narrations do speak of prostration at the recital of sura najm/53 yet nothing is said of the satanic interference or the whole polemic surrounding the revelation of the passage starting at v19. The authentic reports relate how the first time the sura was publicly recited, it had such an impact upon the listeners that not only the Muslims followed the prophet's prostration, but many among those present from the pagan Quraysh were equally overwhelmed and fell with their faces to the ground. What can at most be deduced is that this polemic was invented to cover up this sudden defection, or temporary complacent attitude by some idolaters, with a few of them remaining standing out of pride. It is important to mention here that both the Quran and ahadith relate the mesmerizing effect the recitation of the Quran had upon both believers and disbelievers. Regardless of contents, the language itself, like captivating music, had such impact upon a people known for their deep appreciation of eloquent language and poetry, that they would call it magic, sorcery, produced with assistance of the jinn etc. The staunchest enemies of the prophet would listen in secret to the recital of the Quran at night. These were a people who recognized and understood, highly valued eloquent speech. They would fall down prostrate in admiration of the most eloquent poets, as al Farazdaq did to one of Labid's poems. This is a point difficult to recognize unless one is familiar with the standards of the Arabic language, and the culture of the time. As an illustration, we may see even today, people loving a type of music regardless of how conflicting with their values the lyrics are, even dancing to it.

Also, no historical connection exists between sura 53 and 22, the first revealed 5 years into the prophetic call and the latter in Medina or for the earliest estimates 8 years after sura 53.

Finally, regardless of authenticity (no matter how strong the evidence against the story is presented, Islam's restless enemies will keep regurgitating it), there is nothing embarrassing about the satanic verses story. It depicts how the prophet and the revelation were ultimately protected through divine intervention. This, contrary to discrediting the Quran, enhances its credibility as miraculously preserved. Further, this story places the Ishmaelite prophet right along the pattern of the biblical prophets. Those orientalists and Judeo-Christian critics conveniently brush aside the depiction of their prophets; deceived by sorcery (Moses) or influenced by evil to the point they become murderers, adulters and even idolaters (Aaron, David, Solomon). But contrary to their ishmaelite counterpart, God did not even intervene to straighten them in the process.

As to Criteria of embarrassment, it doesnt constitute an argument in favour of the story's authenticity. Christians invented and transmitted the infancy Gospel of Thomas' wicked, murderous Jesus as a child. Does it mean it is true because the author was Christian and would therefore not make up something shameful about Jesus? In the history of Islam, as in Judeo-Christianity, people invented things in regards to their own religious figures for all sorts of reasons, whether to advance a wicked or pious agenda. Second, what is embarrassing in a context isnt in another. For example the story can easily be seen as a pious fabrication, to prove that God protects His messengers, as shown earlier.

Islam critiqued the restless woman defender; harsh hijab?

In answer to the video "Was Muhammad a False Prophet?"

The issue of women covering up is present in both the Quran and Christian scriptures

1Cor11:6"For if a woman will not veil herself then she should cut off her hair, but if it is disgraceful for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her wear a veil...for man was not created from woman but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman but woman for man".

The HB states in addition, an indiscrete woman, regardless of her physical beauty and attire is as disfigured as a swine with a golden ring around its snout Prov11:22.

The code of interaction between opposite genders in the Quran isnt meant at discouraging or prohibiting it at all. The prophet's own wives interacted with visitors on a daily basis seeking their religious counsel.

What the Quran does, as with every aspect of human life, is to infuse it with God-consciousness so as to elevate the human being above the mere animalistic, material aspect of his existence. The Quran injects intergender interaction with modesty, chastity pragmatic caution that is beneficial both for the person itself and society at large. For example it is disallowed to greet the opposite gender through physical contact (handshake or kiss) instead of reciprocal smiles, good words and courteous gestures.

This is clear through the wording

24:30-31"yaghuddun min absarihim/to cast down of/from their look".

Its not saying to avoid looking altogether but to avoid staring, men and women alike. Looking at oneanother for a legitimate need like communication or identification does not constitute unhealthy staring with lustful motives. Neither is physical contact forbidden in the absolute sense, as the prophet would not take his hand away from a slave girl seeking his help and comfort 

"Any of the female slaves of Medina could take hold of the hand of Allah's Messenger and take him wherever she wished".

As can be seen, the Quran in intergender relationships focuses on self-restraint. This is not an unrealistic demand that suppresses or prevents social development. On the contrary it gives it a healthy turn, reducing the chance for misplaced thoughts and misunderstandings, as is so common in any culture when opposite genders interact.

The verse sets a standard for Muslim men and women, starting from the first contact which is visual, telling them both to approach the opposite gender with the correct mindframe, regardless of the person's suggestive or explicit behavior towards them. This not only helps the person itself to keep his morality in check, but also sends the right signal to the other person who is in turn morally stimulated in case of misbehavior.

The Islamic dresscode has the same twofold purpose, it conditions the person wearing modest clothing to adopt a healthy attitude when about to go in public, as well as sends a healthy signal to other people who are in turn influenced to modify their own behavior when interacting with the opposite gender. Women in addition, because they tend to wear ornaments, are told to put an additional level of caution

“They should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments”24:31.

The dangers to the general atmosphere of chastity in any society, in any culture, are very real and observable nowadays as it was case throughout times past, whenever these elementary rules of opposite gender interaction are neglected. The prophet even refered to as devils those women who arouse sexual attraction through their misbehavior

"Allah’s Messenger – may peace be upon him – saw a woman, then he came to his wife, Zainab, who was tanning leather, and fulfilled his desire, then he went out to his Companions and said: “A woman comes in the form of a devil and goes in the form of a devil. If one of you sees a woman, let him go to his wife, for that will repel what he feels in his heart".

In Arabic the word for devil can be used for any entity that causes evil. As noted by the scholars of hadith, this narration is speaking of women dressed inappropriately in the public space. During the advent of Islam, more specifically in Medina where the hadith is supposed to have been spoken, sexual promiscuity and prostitution were known features of that society.

It is ironic, as a side note, that Christians "haters of the flesh" and anything sexual, often raise the aforementioned hadith to undermine the prophet's credibility. As if the embodiment of piety, as reflected by their priests who cannot marry, is the one who denies himself the pleasures of the flesh, regardless of it being legitimate or not. They forget what is stated in their own books as regards the 50 year old prophet David who murders a brave soldier to satisfy his uncontrollable lust towards the married Batsheba (younger than 10 in Jewish tradition). The incident did not reduce an iota of his truthfulness as a prophet of YHWH.

Far from behaving in such a shameful manner as described by the lying pens of Israel, the prophet Muhammad provides the most rational and upright manner to satisfy one's natural urges. Not through murders, rape or adultery but by coming together with one's own wife. Notice also the contrast between David's incident and the one in the hadith; Batsheba did not purposefully provoke David's lust but was simply making her toilet in her private area while the hadith talks of unchaste women in public provoking men.

Returning to the issue of Islamic modesty, the dress code isnt only meant for women, but both men and women whenever opposite sexes outside the familiar circle interact 24:30-31. The Quran uses Khumur and Julbab, a kind of head covering, for the woman's clothing 33:59. Far from being a form of subjugation rather it is the degradation of women judged on their looks and overexposed physically, in the Western media which is a form of subordination to the lust of men, and insulting to women.

As said earlier, the hijab conditions both men and women to adopt a proper inter gender attitude, leading even those that tend to be abusive among the men, those who do not, as per the passage's instruction, lower FROM their gaze, to regard women in a dignified manner and value them for their character, intelligence, moral qualities

“That they should be known as such and not molested”33:59.

For the woman, and the men too whom the Quran commands to dress with modesty, the adoption of such a dress code leads to more positive body image, less reliance on media messages about beauty ideals, and appearance than those who do not. Again, to emphasize the fact women, regardless of their suggestive or explicit behavior, their respect or not of the Islamic dress code, are not to be looked at in a lustful manner, men are to

24:30"cast down from their looks"

as well as

"guard their modesty".

This injunction comes before addressing even the issue of wearing the hijab. This puts first the responsibility on men and how they must behave towards women

 "The Prophet said, 'Beware! Avoid sitting on the roads." They (the people) said, "O Allah s Apostle! We can't help sitting (on the roads) as these are (our places) here we have talks." The Prophet said, ' l f you refuse but to sit, then pay the road its right ' They said, "What is the right of the road, O Allah's Apostle?" He said, 'Lowering your gaze, refraining from harming others, returning greeting, and enjoining what is good, and forbidding what is evil".

Notice once more the realism of the  Quran; it emphasizes lowering the gaze when addressing men, regardless of what the woman is wearing, because naturally, a woman's attractiveness is primarily in her physical features. But of course, not all men abide by this ordinance and thus to further protect women in the public sphere, it tells them to observe a modest and covered dresscode. Men too should dress modestly, but men do not need to go to the extent of wearing a head cover so as to avoid lecherous staring. Contrary to women, male attractiveness is not primarily in his physical features, but in his status, wealth, ambition, capacity to provide protection etc. 

There is a reason why even modern secular societies, which do not impose modesty and censorship in interaction between the genders and who in consequence experience tension, including harassments, as well as clashes between sexes are resorting more and more to physical separations between the 2 in the public sphere.  These rules of modesty apply across the social spectrum, to both free people and slaves who adopt Islam as their religion, and who, through their code of living signal to the outside world that they are not open to indecency. Nothing in the Quran's wording indicates an exemption of the rules of modesty for any member of the Muslim community, men or women. In the prophet's time, war prisoners, including women were non-Muslims in the vast majority of cases and so were not required to wear and follow the Islamic code against their will. There were also Muslim servants of course who, of convenience were exempt from covering their head as they went about doing their work in and out of the house, which obviously entailed being frequently seen by men. This however left them vulnerable to molestation by the hypocrites and the non-Muslims of Medina who didnt abide by the rules of lowering their gaze and avoiding unnecessary gender interaction. Regular Muslim women were obligated to observe the dresscode, screening their appearance. This constitutes an advantage in such mischievous atmosphere, as it dissuades lechery but at the end, regardless of a woman's attire, if a man is bent on acting inappropriately towards women and disregard the prescribed code of conduct, he will still abuse any type of woman he comes across. When commentators spoke of the female dresscode as a means by which free and slave women were separated, they were stating a fact related to how such society worked as described earlier. None of them said that Muslim slave women were generally forbidden or exempt from the same dresscode as regular Muslim women. Commenting on 33:59 ibn Hazm writes 

"The nakedness of a woman is her entire body excluding the face and palms only. The free man and male servant, the free woman and maidservant are equal in this respect; there is no difference… As for differentiating between the free woman and maidservant, then the religion of Allah Almighty is one, creation and nature are one. All of that in respect to free women and maidservants is the same, unless there is an explicit text to distinguish between them in any way such that it can be applied". 

This view is the default one in accordance with the wording of the Quran. Later jurists, to accommodate their leaders and environments used precedents from the time of the prophet and the companions to allow more flexibility in regards the dresscode of the servants. The accommodation most in line with the prophet's time was to allow women servants to unveil their hair and other minor body parts during their household activities. Just as mistresses are allowed, in the Quran itself 24:31 and for convenient reasons to unveil in front of their male servants 

"The Prophet brought Fatimah a slave which he donated to her. Fatimah wore a garment which, when she covered her head, did not reach her feet, and when she covered her feet by it, that garment did not reach her head. When the Prophet saw her struggle, he said: There is no harm to you: Here is only your father and slave".

No prophetic precedent exists however for the practice of letting slaves show their naked breasts, chests, or backs in public. And this, despite the prophet having several of those servant girls helping around his wives, just as many Muslim households had. Had there been a clear precedent, or that the Quran allowed it, Imam Malik ibn Anas wouldnt have publicly revolted against the practice in Medina to the point he asked the caliph to prevent it. As other schools of law had already allowed it, the caliph did not go against it. The jurists that came after the time of the companions, pushed these rulings of convenience to unhealthy extents, as seen with imam Malik's disapproval. But it seems the jurists themselves felt the need to introduce a caveat, as noted by ibn Taymiyya 

"Slave women during the Prophet’s time didn't use to cover themselves like free women, while their chances of spreading Fitna were less, and their ruling was like of the old women who didn’t need to take Hijab as Quran said in verse 60 of Surah Noor. But as far as the beautiful Turkish slave women of today are concerned, then they could not be compared with the slave women of the time of prophet Muhammad. These beautiful Turkish slave women should thus cover whole of their bodies and to safeguard themselves from the eyes of men".

Ibn Umar's "inspection" of slave girls at the market, as he put his hand in between their breasts and the area of their lower hips, was done above their clothes. Although this practice, which never occurred in the prophet's time or that of the companions is certainly questionable, it was obviously not done with sexual motive; it was done over the clothes and not directly on the breasts themselves. Slaves were seen as a commodity which had to be physically inspected by the buyer. As stated by ibn Taymiyyah 

"The default position is that the nakedness of a maidservant is like a free woman, just as the nakedness of a male servant is like a free man. When she takes on an occupation and duties, her prohibitions are reduced in comparison to a free woman, as a concession to her in showing only what needs to be shown… As for the back and chest, it remains in the default position". 

The misunderstood notion that slave girls were totally exempt from wearing the veil, and even forbidden from doing so is unfounded in the Quran, in the practice of the prophet and his companions. What one may find at most is a disputed statement showing Umar, during his caliphate, forbidding a slave girl from covering her head. This could have been to differentiate her as a servant inside the household, in which the incident occurred and where guests were received. Due to a servant's function of attending the guests and household chores, the ample Julbab would have been inconvenient, and hence the exemption from wearing it. This means the servants were now wearing clothes more revealing of their body features, not because these features were openly exposed but because their clothes were closer to the body to allow better movements 

"Anas bin Malik said: “The servants of Umar, may God be pleased with him, served us, revealing their hair, and their breasts were moving". 

A point to note is that Umar only requested his servant woman's head be uncovered and no other body part, neither did he make a general statement about slave women. Also, having female servants dressed for their work does not entail the Muslim guests are allowed to transgress the command of lowering their gaze, ie looking beyond what is necessary, which applies to all situations beyond their wives and own servants. Ibn Taymiyyah continues elsewhere 

"As for attractive Turkish maidservants, this cannot possibly be as it was in the time of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him. It is an obligation for them to cover their whole bodies from being looked at".

Islam critiqued finds another good reason; piecemeal revelation guarantees better preservation?

In answer to the video "Was Muhammad a False Prophet?"

As already alluded to previously, the prophet's opponents would critisize the periods during which no new verses were revealed and recited by him

7:203"And when you bring them not a revelation they say: Why do you not forge it? Say: I only follow what is revealed to me from my Lord; these are clear proofs from your Lord and a guidance and a mercy for a people who believe".

Consequently, at various places in the Quran, the Prophet is told to exercise resolve and patience 20:113-4 until the whole of the Quran is revealed to him, and he needs not worry as the arrangement of it rests on Allah 25:32 and no falsehood can approach it 41:42.

 The One upon whom its establishement in the prophet's memory is entirely dependant upon, and who could therefore either take it away completely or erase chunks of it from the prophet's mind without him even noticing it 17:86-7,87:6-7 will take care of arranging it in the form of a Book with an ultimate recital structure which he and all Muslims will be bound to follow in the future. If any directive needed further explanation, it will be done so at this last recital, and in this manner this book will stand completed in every way after memorization, collection and arrangement and explanation by the Almighty Himself

75:16-19"Do not move your tongue with it to make haste with it, 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".  

This Divine arrangement gives the Quran a unique feature, it can be read a few verses at a time as anyone can see for himself. One can open it at any page and start reading, even skipping the beginning of the Book and starting in its middle, in most cases even starting at any verse on a page without going back many verses to know what it is speaking of and will still gain a lesson of wisdom.

The Divine structuring of the Quran was solidified by the promise to protect it 15:9, one of the fullfilments of this promise is to guard from extinction the Arabic language in which the Quranic message was coded. Unlike ancient Hebrew in which the HB was put to writing and the Aramaic of Jesus, which both became extinct, classical Arabic flourished and developed since the revelation of the Quran. A language that was confined to the tribes of the Arabian peninsula 1,400 years ago has since developed into the lingua franca of peoples from the extremities of Asia to the farthest corners of Africa. And another fullfilment is that besides all the scholarly scrutiny of the skeptics, no discrepencies can be found in it

4:82"Had it been from other Than God, they would surely have found therein Much discrepancy".

The gradual process solidified the Quran in the believers' hearts 28:51, as a sign of Allah's pledge to secure it and preserve it. Consequently the Prophet would memorize each verse as it was revealed, recite it to the "Scribes of the Revelation" (kuttab al-wahy) who would write it down immediately, in the manner of prophets of old. Jeremiah for instance dictated his prophecies to his disciple Baruch son of Neriah, when God commanded him

Jer30:1"Write for you the words that I have spoken to you, on a scroll"  

Jer36:4"And Jeremiah called Baruch the son of Neriah, and Baruch wrote from Jeremiah's mouth all the words of the Lord that He had spoken to him, on a roll of a book".

The prophet Jeremiah was literate and also wrote a scroll by himself Jer51:60.

It is stated in many traditions that whenever a portion of revelation was received by the Prophet, he told his followers to write a verse before such and such a verse and after such and such a verse, thus indicating its place and position in the Quran. The suras were memorized and recited in that order, in perfect accordance with the divine will

75:16-19"Do not move your tongue with it to make haste with it, 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".

A final arrangement and recital occured twice the year the Prophet died, permitting to secure it from any eventual loss or doubts. The process of memorization as well as writing down of the revelations had thus started right from the beginning of the Prophet's mission.

This dual process of preservation had the additional advantage of checking the one with the other. The Prophet specially emphasized the practice of memorization and attached great merit to it. That the revelations were not collected into one compilation before his death but rather on all kinds of available supports (palm-leaves, bones, parchments..), was because these continued to come down till the last day of the Prophet's life. Yet, as already stated, he had arranged the separately revealed pieces into surahs and had also set the order of the surahs of the Quran.

By the very nature of things the collection of the surahs into one compilation had to be done after his death; and that is exactly what was done by his immediate successor, Abu Bakr. And in doing so, he did not miss the implication of the Prophet's practice of having the Quranic texts both written down and committed to memory. Hence in making the compilation he required the written text to be compared with the memorized text, and vice versa, and nothing was included in the compilation that did not meet this strict criterion.

Also, even when the written compilation was completed, the process of memorization was not discouraged or discontinued, so that even today Muslims can count in their ranks thousands of huffaz.

No other book went through this process of memorization followed by writing in a precise manner even as far as the numbering of the verses instructed by the archangel Gabriel, they were all redacted years even centuries after the message was sent.

Islam critiqued finds benefits instead of harm; the great impact of partial revelations?

In answer to the video "Was Muhammad a False Prophet?"

In the second part of the verse 25:32, God outlines some of the major benefits of this gradual process of revelation

"Thus that We may strengthen thereby your heart; and We have recited it in (clear) reciting".

This concise statement implies a deep impression on the minds, causing a smooth acceptance of its Laws. It would not be possible if all the Commandments and the whole system of life had been sent down all at once. The process of diverting a people from the social norms which they are accustomed to and which have nurtured their ideas and ideals, to make them question and acknowledge the errors of the systems which they grew up believing in, emulating generations of their ancestors, to make them assimilate the laws and wisdom of the Book which was going against their ancient practices, the process had to be gradual

17:106"And it is a Quran which We have revealed in portions so that you may read it to the people by slow degrees, and We have revealed it, revealing in portions"  

28:51"We have caused this word [of Ours] to reach mankind step by step, so that they might [learn to] keep it in mind".

Since the beginning, the prophet, despite his fear and reluctance is assured that he will be led and guided every step of the way, in his words and deeds, when the time is appropriate until his momentous mission is complete.

The parallel is made with all natural phenomena as they pass through various gradual stages before reaching the culminating point 87:1-18. Here is an example of an instance of gradual reform through piecemeal revelation. The prophet for example used to freely receive in his own house and at all times, righteous or less righteous people seeking knowledge from him or from any of his wives. Initially his wives would not wear a hijab in their interactions with house guests but the more people came, the more improper the situation could potentially become in terms of attraction and false hopes.

This wasnt an issue from the side of his wives but rather from some male visitors. Although the prophet, in his usual pattern of leniency and unsuspiciousness towards his people, did not deem it necessary at that point to instate an etiquette of behavior and appearance in those circumstances, the fact is that the situation became such that, regardless of what the prophet judged was appropriate or not, the potential for harm required a change in the rules. Umar, contrary to the prophet, and who was of more suspicious mentality had perceived the potential evil of the situation and would urge the prophet to do something about it by veiling his wives

"O Messenger of Allah, the righteous and the sinful enter your house, so why don’t you tell the Mothers of the Believers to [remain behind] a veil?"

Umar did not request a revelation but a personal command from the prophet yet he rejected Umar's wishes and would not change anything to the situation. He could have instructed the visitors right there and then, in line with Umar's advise, without having to wait for any revelation. This is an important nuance often missed by the critics of Islam. Having more foresight than Umar, the prophet knew that this situation required divine revelation to create a change. But as stated in the Quran, the prophet had no control over the timing of revelation.

None knows his creation better than the Creator and the best manner in which behavioral guidance can be implemented is by issuing it when the situation obviously requires it, enough people are prepared for it (Umar being one of those) and the need for a solution/guidance becomes evident. It is in this manner that Allah confirmed Umar's wisdom and knowledge of the religion

 "My Lord agreed with me in three things". 

This does not mean that Umar was the only person whose higher principles would be corroborated by Quranic revelation. Besides the hijab ordinance, Umar cited as examples of Allah confirming his judgement with the direction of prayer, which not only he but other Muslims including the prophet longed for, as well as his advise to the prophet's wives that they should stop taking advantage of his gentle character and leniency. The Quran's revelation being gradual, and many times circumstancial, contains passages that answer specific queries, even the desires of groups of people or individuals, if they are appropriate. Such appropriateness may be positive or negative to those involved. For example some wished for the promised punishment to descend, which they regretted once it came.

Some Muslims longed for the command to fight to be issued until revelation came 4:77, others wanted clarifications to practical matters and were answered 

5:101"O you who have believed, do not ask about things which, if they are shown to you, will distress you. But if you ask about them while the Qur'an is being revealed, they will be shown to you". 

A woman became known as "the one whose complaints were heard in the seventh heaven" due to the revelation of 58:1-4 answering her concerns.

It is to be noted the recipient of the Revelation does not automatically become a prophet. Moses' mother received wahi/revelation 20:38-9,28:7 and Mary, the mother of Jesus as well. Some close companions of a prophet, including those of Jesus or Muhammad were divinely inspired 5:111,58:22. The hadith for example describe how the adhan, the call to prayer, was first instituted, when 2 companions were simultaneously divinely inspired in their dream.

Angels 8:12 and even animals such as the bees 16:69 may receive inspiration from Allah. The phenomenon extends also to inanimate objects, including the earth 99:5 or the heavens 41:12. There are therefore different kinds of wahy; for the bee its instinctive behaviour related in the verse has been hardwired in its nature through wahy/inspiration. To the non-prophets it can be the inspiration with an idea or the correct manner in conducting an affair.  In this sense, humans can inspire others 19:11. For the prophets, their wahy is the expression of Divine will for the guidance of men.

As far a the Quranic wording closely resembling Umar's intuition, it firstly is important to note the Quran isnt God's autobiography for it to be cast wholly in the form of 'I' and 'me'. It quotes many different speakers, past, contemporaries to it, or future, like prophets, angels, regular believers or close companions of Muhammad, jinn, Iblis and more. It even sometimes quotes inanimate entities made to speak for a specific purpose. All this is achieved while actively interacting with the reader or audience, sometimes involving it in the flow of the discourse. It remains in all cases God's word, whoever it quotes.

Secondly anyone may become the recipient of revelation, as shown earlier, without making him/her a prophet.

As to Umar's sagacity and correct deductions in relation to veiling the prophet's wives, his opinion could have been influenced by other factors. Several inappropriate incidents occurred showing how tight and crowded the space had become around the prophet. The incidents related in the tradition, which are by no means exhaustive, occurred in places and moments that should otherwise be private or intimate. The prophet's wife, Sawda was recognized while passing in an open area by night, then called out from a gathering of people, when about to go relieve herself. Aisha's hand touched that of a male guest, something that he might have done deliberately keeping in mind the diversity of people and their intentions that visited the prophet at all times. It occurred while they were jointly eating from a plate within the household of the prophet. A verse then came to impose a certain decorum of interaction between the genders inside the busy household of the noble, humble and gentle prophet 33:53.

Etiquettes of behavior when entering people's houses is by no means allocated to the prophet's house exclusively, but to all members of the community 24:27. Reform of gender interaction, which included in pre islamic Arabia, promiscuity, prostitution, and sexual harassment of women, did not initiate with 33:53 but much before. This verse came as a culmination of the previous mental preparation of the believers against what was normal behavior to their society. Some people, as already pointed, were mentally ready ahead of others and felt great discomfort at Muslim women, more particularly those of their beloved prophet, being victim of malicious intent. The prophet however did not wait for, or restrict himself to revelation to instil basic social manners

"The Messenger of Allah said, "Permission is to be sought thrice. If it is accorded, you may enter; otherwise, go back".

There is nothing special about the odd number 3 but it is commonly understood even nowadays that knocking once, twice or 4 times isnt a proper way of announcing oneself at someone else's home. This instruction also teaches to not remain too long outside a person's home since that person might have his own reasons for not opening the door or answering back.

Besides this gradual educative purpose of the piecemeal system of revelation, the "strengthening of the hearts" also refers to the constant good tidings to the obedient servants in the midst of daily persecution and obstacles. The numerous prophecies and promises of success in both lives to the patient served this purpose. They were assured of ultimate success time and again to fill them with hope to carry on their mission

16:102"that it may establish those who believe and as a guidance and good news for those who submit".

This mission was to create a movement of faith and righteousness to combat disbelief and sin. The piecemeal revelation guided that movement in all its stages to suit its requirements on different occasions. It did so for example by elaborating on certain previous concise statements, either by a longer revelation in a different place or by addition of relevant information within the same previously revealed verse. We have classical examples reported in the hadith books, like 2:187 and 4:95 where the scribe present, who was being dictated the concise then more elaborate revelation, describes how the event occured supernaturally. It is a Quranic principle that one should not ask about things that if answered would render a simple directive complicated. But one may ask while revelation is descending and will be answered 5:101 as documented regarding ibn Um Maktum's concern upon hearing verse 4:95. The difference between the 2 attitudes is that of sincerity. The first one hears a directive, reflects on it and comes back after a while with conjecture, as if he is trying to avoid it. On the other hand the one expressing a concern directly when hearing a command does so out of genuine concern for a condition preventing him from immediately implementing the directive. 

The gradual revelation, progressive elaboration also gives the audience the feeling that it is being closely followed, listened to, attended to and corrected by its Sustainer, answering relevant questions of law or theology, questions by the believers or disbelievers alike, providing strong argument in favor of the truths it propounds or to counter false notions

25:32"And they do not bring to you an example except that We brought to you the truth and best of explanation".

Again this is not a strange phenomenon in the prophetic history, especially when it comes to the issue of further elaboration/explanation of a previous concise statement or ruling. See Jn3 for example.

17:106 also explains the important point that, despite this gradual system, the Quran is nevertheless one integral whole and can therefore, be properly understood only if it is considered in its entirety, if each of its passages is read in the light of all the other passages it contains. 

Islam critiqued delves into the metaphysical; nature mirrors the divine pattern?

In answer to the video "Was Muhammad a False Prophet?"

Just as in this world daytime and its light and heat are essential and so are the darkness and stillness of the night, in a similar manner, the trials of happiness and sorrow, ease and difficulty, affluence and poverty are essential for mankind's spiritual development. It is through these circumstances that the Almighty tests a person's gratitude and patience.

The prophet is thus assured that the stiff opposition he faced, the little following and meager resources he had and the interruption of revelation did not mean that his Lord had abandoned him or was displeased with him: these circumstances are a trial and test to train and instruct him in order to fully prepare him to bear his responsibilities.

Just as night and day are necessary phases this material life needs going through to develop, so to is our spirituality bound to pass through bright and dark moments in order for it to be trained and purified

93:1-3"By the morning brightness And (by) the night when it darkens, Your Lord has not bidden you farewell, nor has He become displeased".

An interesting linguistic observation testimony once more to the Quran's surgical use of words is that, just after illustrating the fact that revelation, through its phases of interruptions and descent, obeys to an established pattern very similar to the natural and transient phenomena of daylight and darkness of night, the Quran then eloquently consoles its messenger. It does so by negating any thought in his mind that such interruptions, even if long, indicate complete cessation or displeasure by God

93:3"Your Lord has not bidden you farewell, nor has He become displeased".

One does not "bid farewell" to a hated but to a loved person and so the verse uses the particle ka/you in order to establish a link with the prophet

"bidden YOU farewell".

This connection is broken in the second part of the verse with qalaa/displeased, because it implies a situation of conflict between enemies or hated people. The Arabic text makes the distinction more obvious. The sura goes on reminding him of what the revelation brought him in the past and what it was about to bring to him soon for it could not be that the Prophet to whom the Quran was revealed, should remain unsuccessful in bringing about the transformation for which it was revealed 20:1. He should therefore remain patient, and his burdens will be removed 94:1-8, steadfast on the right path along with his followers.

The Quran relates how the prophet's opponents among the pagans and the People of the Book did everything to make him compromise his revealed principles with theirs, forge verses or deliberately corrupt them but the message was divinely protected from the interference of the evil ones -men and jinn- from its descent from heaven all the way to its uttering by the prophet who was repeatedly warned 2:145,10:37,42:15 and never allowed to yield one bit to them despite the hardships he and his followers suffered.

Like the prophets of old, who despite the pressure to alter the divine messages and make them more appealing he answered

2:120,10:15,13:37,17:75,68:9,69:44-7,40:66"Say: I am forbidden to serve those whom you call upon besides Allah when clear arguments have come to me from my Lord, and I am commanded that I should submit to the Lord of the worlds".

As reflected is sura qalam, which is among the earliest Meccan suras, pressure was already being imposed on the prophet at the onset of his mission to change and compromise his message. It is to be noted, when the Noble Book unapologeticaly warns its messenger in the context of temptation to yield to his opponents, these frequently seen conditional statements do not mean that the prophet was actually tempted in doing so.

There are many implicit meanings to these warnings, including that regarding the obligation to abide by the divine law/sharia, there is no difference between a prophet and a regular believer.

The second thing is that, seeing that the prophet is warned, how much more should they be careful of their responsibilities in upholding the principles of this revelation.

And finally, seeing and hearing that the messenger is in no position to change anything in Allah's ordinances, the enemies should know that it would be fruitless to even think of approaching him with such objective.

When the prophet Micaiah the son of Imlah was under the same kind of pressure, he answered, knowing the dangerous repercussions of refusing to yield to the rejecters

1Kings22:14"As the Lord lives, for what the Lord will say to me, that will I speak".

The prophet Isaiah was equally warned not to yield to the disbelievers' requests Isa8:11 who, unhappy with his strong warnings and admonitions, would openly demand that he should forsake the straight path, the true God and give them false prophecies

Isa30:10-11"You shall not prophesy for us true things. Speak to us with smooth talk; prophesy mockery". 

The prophet's opponents practiced deception upon him, and tempted him with greed, held out threats, and raised a storm of false propaganda against him, and persecuted him and applied economic pressure and social boycott against him. Yet the prophet did not compromise an iota of what was revealed to him, even in the direst Meccan period. Although he did experience fear at the consequences, never did he withhold a word that needed to be uttered in the face of his opponents, so as to soften their stance. Even when his uncle and protector Abu Talib was pressured by a Meccan delegation to withdraw his tribal protection of Muhammad and the Muslims, he firmly replied: 

"0 my uncle, if they placed the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left hand to cause me to renounce my task, verily I would not desist therefrom until Allah made manifest His cause or I perished in the attempt". 

The prophet then turned to depart until Abu Talib called him back

 "Say whatever you please; for by the Lord I shall not desert you ever".

It is to be stressed that the prophet took this stance when his uncle, his last resort, seemed on the verge of letting him down. This attitude, besides the established reputation he had as a man of great integrity by his friends and foes, before and after the revelation, confirm the testimony of God Himself about His chosen one 

68:4"And indeed, you are of a great moral character".

The Quran also presents situations where the prophet is showing fear in communicating certain revelations to his people 5:67,33:37 fearing their reaction, judgements or tauntings but the Quran would compel him to keep transmitting what he is receiving, not to ever

11:12"give up part of what is revealed to you"

showing how he wasnt acting according to his whims

2:120"If you (Muhammad) give in to their whims and desires despite the knowledge that has reached you, you will have no protector or helper against Allah".

Islam critiqued reveals another pattern of the prophets; Piecemeal revelations?

In answer to the video "Was Muhammad a False Prophet?"

The 114 suras of the Quran were revealed on a period of 22 years, 5 months and 14 days: 13 years in Mecca and the rest in Medina, as and when it was required.

This system of occasional, piecemeal revelation applies to all prophets. Ezekiel for example and other prophets in the HB were granted a vision of their entire individual book and its content which they will be responsible to later communicate and put into writing Ezek2:9-10. They still had to follow directions and commands revealed at specific times in answer to certain events.

There are ample examples of biblical prophets, including Moses who received revelation in answer to specific incidents, whether having to do with the prophet's own personal life or concerning the comunity at large.

There are even situations in the Hebrew Bible where the solution to a situation is deffered until God reveals the answer Lev24:12.

According to Jewish tradition, the entire Torah was given to Moses in 2 parts; the first during the year after the exodus, then followed a 38 years hiatus after which the rest was revealed.

David is reported to have told his followers to wait for God's decision as regards a possible strike on an enemy 1Sam22:3. Moses received oral instructions for 40 years and long before the events of Sinai, see for example Ex12:49,13:9,16:4,28,18:19-20 all refering to Torah and Law before Moses went to Mt Sinai. This process is meant at smoothly establishing socio-religious reforms, among other benefits as will be pointed out later. Gradual revelation also ensures a continuous connection between the receiver/prophet and the Source, providing him further comfort and legitimity in the face of the unavoidable persistent, increasing opposition, as well as answers to new challenges and questions.

Muhammad went through the same process for 23 years, just like Jeremiah was inspired with warnings and glad tidings to his people for 23 years Jer25:3. This was objected to by the Quraysh, and, ironically, by the People of the Book themselves, just as missionaries do today, in ignorance of their prophetic history

4:153,25:32"Why has not the Quran been revealed to him all at once?".

Yet had the request been granted, it would still not prevent the rebellion and disbelief of those that requested it in the first place, since the demand did not stem from sincere hearts seeking to confirm their belief and intuition, rather it was a mocking challenge and an excuse to justify their rejection 6:7.

Sometimes even the sincere early Muslims would grow impatient if long periods would pass without a new revelation 47:20, yet the precedent in the history of the prophets, per the HB as shown earlier, is that prophets received prophecy only when God desired it. Some would go months or years or even never again without communication from God.

This created in the prophet the yearning to receive the whole of the Quran as soon as possible. But he was told to show patience through prayer and remembrence of God, and to wait for the decree of the Almighty, not worry about the opposition and idle talk of people. God will deal with these people and He is sufficient to do this 76:23-6. This is because the prophet never asked to be the recipient of revelation, so that it is his responsibility to prove the truths and premises it presents. His authority rests exclusively in delivering the message, not in deciding its timing or contents.

As a side note, studies have been made of the prophet's speech patterns by regrouping all sayings attributed to him, authentic or not, and it has been shown that the Quran, a book revealed over a period of 23 years, uses patterns not only different to the messenger but also that were unknown to the masters of eloquence of the time all the while retaining deep, intricate meanings.

The Quran also depicts him in situations of extreme grief and anguish as he apparently felt abandonned, deprived of his divine support in the midst of the soul tearing taunts and ever growing spiritual conflicts with his opponents. This grief led him to the point he thought his Lord had become displeased with him on account of some error he had done, and had forsaken and left him to fight the battle between truth and falsehood alone. But he was told to remain patient in such moments otherwise he might compromise his divine mission 68:48, to keep conveying the message relentlessly despite the opposition. Slackness in this regard and in such a crucial time would help his opponents in attaining their objective 28:86. A passage even came down quoting the angels themselves, the carriers of revelation, justifying their silence by the fact that they act in obedience to a Higher, all encompassing Authority

19:64-5"And we do not descend but by the command of your Lord; to Him belongs whatever is before us and whatever is behind us and whatever is between these, and your Lord is not forgetful. The Lord of the heavens and the earth and what is between them, so serve Him and be patient in His service. Do you know any one equal to Him?"

Neither the prophet nor even the angels are free to decide the timing of revelation; there can be a break in the process whenever Allah deems it fit, and a continuation whenever He wills it. Although that process would sometimes put him in difficulty opposite his detractors, it in fact supported his credibility that the revelation was not his invention and he had no control over it.

Islam critiqued are passionate; Jesus loves his enemies?

In answer to the video "Was Muhammad a False Prophet?"

Finally, Jesus' "love your enemy", which most Christians uneducated in their own scriptures like quoting, does not refer to all kind of enemies, only to a certain type, those to whom if replied with good and magnanimity may reform themselves and become our friends, as stated in the Quran

"It may be that Allah will bring about friendship between you and those whom you hold to be your enemies among them".

It is a call to try and show love to those who do not necessarily love us, with the hope of them changing their attitude towards us. In a passage absent from the oldest manuscripts of Luke over a wide geographical distribution, Jesus while on the cross prays to the Father 

Lk23:34"forgive them, they do not know what they are doing". 

Again, the words here are conditional and do not concern those who opposed him knowingly, and whom he condemned in his lifetime. The prayer is to those who engage in harmful behavior from ignorance. These are the type of "persecuters" Jesus, and any other prophet prayed for, because they might mend their ways once truth has been properly exposed to them.

The concept of unconditional divine "love" not only is beyond common sense, as it would encourage the oppressor in the sin and even turn the passive victim into an accomplice in the crime, but in addition this notion is one that is alien to all scriptures. Both the Quran and the previous scriptures clearly define what God loves and what He doesnt

Prov8:17"I will love those who love me, and those who seek me eagerly will find me"  

Prov15:9"The way of a wicked man is an abomination of the Lord, but He loves him who pursues righteousness".

The Greek writings themselves reflect that notion in several places as previously mentioned, including in

Jn14:21"he that has my commandments, and keeps them, he it is that loves me: and he that loves me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him".

God certainly loves his creatures, but not the ones that willfully disobey, rather until they repent. God doesnt love the stubborn sinner but the repentent sinner. 

Nothing about loving those that do not love Him, and are defiantly sinful. In fact, immediately after stating that God 

Jn3:16"so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son" 

a restriction states to who that love extends 

"Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned". 

Further, despite the  

1Jn3"great love the Father has lavished on us...This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not God’s child". 

God certainly loves his creatures, but not the ones that wilfully disobey, until they repent. God doesnt love the stubborn sinner but the repentent sinner.

There is a reason why Love of Truth and aversion towards everything false and sinful is the natural outcome of the acceptance of the straight path. One becomes in a heightened state of spiritual awareness, constantly longing to be increased in divine knowledge and wisdom. IT is however important to keep in view that the Quran here is not speaking of hatred towards the sinful person itself.

There are countless verses encouraging rectitude and compassion indiscriminately even towards one's enemies, and regardless of the person's religion or lack thereof. Religious hatred is hatred for evil and evil deeds. This again, demonstrates the supreme pragmatism of the Quran; infatuated love and destructive hatred completely miss the mark. One hates for the sake of God and loves for the sake of God. One hates the evil deed because it harms the sinner, just as one loves the good deed because it brings one closer to guidance.

The prophet encapsulated that notion when  he spoke of a category of people whom the prophets and martyrs themselves will envy on the day of resurrection 

"The best faith is to love for the sake of Allah, to hate for the sake of Allah, and to work your tongue in the remembrance of Allah. Mu’adh said, “What is it, O Messenger of Allah?” The Prophet said: That you love for the people what you love for yourself, and you hate for the people what you hate for yourself, and that you speak goodness or remain silent".

The HB surely echoes the theme of religious hatred although it amalgamates hatred towards the individual itself as reflected in David's

Psalms119:104-5,139:21-22"From Your precepts I shall gain understanding; therefore, I hate all ways of falsehood. Your words are a lamp for my foot, and light for my path...Did I not hate Your enemies, O Lord? With those who rise up against You, I quarrel. I hate them with utmost hatred; they have become my enemies"

as well as Solomon's Proverbs2:7-10,13:5.

We may also add the fact that Jesus, Besides distancing himself from the spiritually unclean while calling them dogs and pigs Matt7:6, Jesus also purposely spoke to the spiritually dead, as the ones alluded to above, in parables, knowing that however clear his language is they will not understand him, thus conforming the prophecy of Isaiah according to which a category of transgressors will never be spiritually receptive

Mk4:10-12,Matt13:13-15"Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed...lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them".

Jesus did not love and pray for these "enemies", he on the contrary kept them far from the truth, in line with David who "hated" the lame and blind Jebusites 2Sam5:8.

Jesus clearly states in it that he keeps speaking in parables to the spiritually blind "in order that" they do not understand

"otherwise they might turn and be forgiven".

He uses parables to teach and lead astray at the same time. It teaches his followers and confuses his rejecters and he purposely continues in this manner "otherwise" the rejecters might turn and repent, meaning he could have taught them in another manner than in parables but didnt, to achieve the purpose of NOT having them reform themselves.

Note Jesus is quoting Isaiah6's prophecy where YHWH is sending Isaiah to some sinful nation. Isaiah foretells that nation's doom and prior to this these people have their spiritual senses sealed as a punishment. Isaiah is to further confuse them (make the heart...) "otherwise" they might mend their ways. It is in this exact sense that Jesus in Matt13 is referencing Isaiah, hence the words that the prophecy is fulfilled in his contemporaries. He was confronted to people whose spiritual senses were sealed by God as a punishment as he stated earlier.

To fulfill Isaiah's text he does exactly like him, confusing them further as a form of worldly punishment for their rejection of him, through unintelligible parables that will prevent any possibility for them to reform themselves. This theme isnt unique to Isa6, elsewhere God has

Isa29:10"poured upon you a spirit of deep sleep, and He has closed your eyes; the prophets and your heads who stargaze, He has covered".

This sealed their understanding to all the vision which Isaiah was putting before them

"And the vision of everything has been to you like the words of a sealed book, which they give to one who can read, saying, "Now read this," and he shall say, "I cannot, for it is sealed".

To those who only pay lip service to the Law, the hypocrites who only fear God outwardly

Isa29:14"I will continue to perform obscurity to this people, obscurity upon obscurity, and the wisdom of his wise men shall be lost, and the understanding of his geniuses shall be hidden".

This complete loss of wisdom will perdure until an unspecified day where the spiritualy dead wil "see" and "hear" again v18.