Wednesday, April 8, 2020

Acts17apologetics defends the weak; Adoption disallowed in Islam?

In answer to the video "How Muhammad Seduced His Adopted Son's Wife"

Another crucial component of that marriage relates to the pre-Islamic perspective on adopted children. At the time, Arab custom considered adopted children as blood children. Besides being against nature, they would also pass onto them the adopter's genealogy and name, thus confusing their identity. The overarching Quranic principle of preserving the adopted's true identity, as will be shown later, negates any practice that compromises this issue. This includes the modern practice of 'closed adoption' which usually conceals any disclosure of information such as the identities of the biological kin. Even if for some other reason the biological father is unknown it is still not a reason to confuse their identity by giving them the adoptive family's name because it neither corresponds to truth nor reality. In all cases, adopted persons can be addressed as brethren in religion or friends and there is no blame if they are sometimes referred to as sons metaphorically, out of affection, just as one would do with any person regardless of there existing blood relations or not 2:220,33:4-5. What the Quran does is abolishing the unnatural, unpractical, and even dangerous implications of treating non-relatives as blood relations while counterbalancing with an emphasis on practicality and moral duties towards the adopted. In Islam, the relation with an adopted person is that of guardianship, tutelage, training, protection, until he/she is mentally and physically able to enter into society, possibly using his/her own inheritance to live their life independently 4:2-7. It is not a father/mother - child relationship. 

Keeping the adopted's original identity secures his specific rights, and inherited wealth that are in the adoptive father's responsibility. This wealth is forbidden to be approached or released 6:152, until the child is fully grown and mature, having reached a mariageable age and intellectual maturity/rushd. After repeated testing by the guardian and once he is reasonably convinced of them having reached maturity, he may allow them to start up their own life anew 4:2,6,8,10. The property will be returned in the presence of witnesses in order to make sure that the guardian's judgement in the matter was sound. Before that time, the guardian is warned not to consume with extravagance and hastiness the orphan's wealth and if he is a rich man then he should abstain altogether from even touching the property.

The purpose of the Quran, again, as is the case with safeguarding their identity, is so that orphans are given the best chance to kick start their own life when they are able to. However, the Quran adds its usual pragmatic instruction that if the guardian is poor then "let him eat reasonably" "out of" the profits of the orphan's capital, not "from" the capital itself lest it is eaten up completely 4:5.

Then the Quran reminds again the God-fearing people, the spiritual aware, not to fall back to the previous unjust sytems of share and swallowing the weak orphans' property because their offspring could very well be in the same situation 4:9. This particular verse does not tell the people to show mercy and compassion, they are told to fear Allah as He is quick in requiting evil. It is a threat that whatever they swallow unjustly by usurping orphan's rights, is equal to swallowing fire into their bellies 4:10. Their soul is already burning for their deeds.

In pre-Islamic times, orphans were abused by men who would take them under their wing only to take advantage of them not having any close relatives for protection and dispossessed them of their property which they rightfuly inherited, replacing it with worhtless belongings 4:1-2. The Quran, like past scriptures Prov23:10-11, strongly reprimended this type of injustice as already shown. It laid stress on the relation between good care, kindness and compassion, as well as respect and honor towards the orphans with success in the Hereafter 107:1-3,93:9-10,89:17.

The HB echoes that notion Prov14:13. The emphasis of the Quran is such that even the sincere believers became affraid of taking orphans under their care lest they would act unjustly towards them. But they were reassured that Allah knows the sincere welldoers. They should mingle with the orphans as they do with any of their Muslim breathren, with sincerety of heart 2:220 caring for them patiently and compassionately 4:36,90:11-17, considering their needs whenever giving for charity 2:177,215.

This is what qualifies one as among
90:18"the people of the right hand". 
Preserving the adopted's identity opens the possibility for inheritence rights besides those of the natural heirs 4:8,33. If the adoptive parents had no children or desire to give a specific portion of the inheritence to the adoptive child or else, they can do it in writing or even before their death 4:11-12. It also prevents compromising the legitimate inheritence of biological offspring, even in some cases in Wesern societies making the adopted the complete heir in lieu of the blood children.

Preserving the adopted's identity avoids the risk of accidental incest. Another obvious problem is the lack of medical advantages of not knowing one's biological family. Islam does it utmost to guarantee the well being of the weak people of society, including the orphans, while at the same time making it clear they need to preserve their real identify and not be confused with one's own children. This isnt a negation of adoption but rather of the practice of joining their name to one's own name and compromising their and the biological offspring's rights 33:4-5.

This was the opportunity to erase these customs unfortunately still existing nowadays among non Muslims. Such a behavior is nothing short of identify theft, in addition making someone believe they are real children of the household in which they grow up. When such children realize the truth they suffer much disappointment and grief. It is the responsibility of the entire community to help children in need. They should be taken in and nurtured but again, not confused with one's own children.

Adoption in the Quran is thus more of a long term foster care which while offering guardianship for the individual, does not legally assume any biological kinship and rights. The Quran's stance therefore isnt against adoption, which is never banned, but against confusing the adopted person's identity.

All these crucial societal reforms are first introduced through admonishment in sura Ahzab 33:4-5 and then with the practical example of the prophet's marriage proposal to Zaynab, now ex-wife of an adopted son. This clearly drew a distinct line from any biological connection with the adoptive family. Nothing could strike harder and clearer at the root of that deeply ingrained belief other than a union one would consider incestuous precisely due to that notion. And none other than the most eminent member of a community, one whom an entire nation looks up to as the epitome of morality could do a better job at setting the example.

The point of the marriage of the prophet and Zaynab was therefore to implement a social reform, and the prophet, being the moral authority of his comunity as well as last transmitter of divine law 33:40, was the most apt in enforcing it. It is in that reform of principles that Muslims are obliged and commanded to follow the prophet's example. Marrying the ex-wives of their adoptive sons is neither a command nor necessity since the reform was already implemented by the prophet. But it should however never be hindered by all the false notions spoken of earlier and which the Quran came to reform, hence the statement that
"there should be no difficulty for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons, when they have accomplished their want of them".

But the prophet was at first reluctant to publicly announce the command to marry her and concealed it in his heart, fearing public reaction, until Allah brought it to light and definately ended the notion that adopted children were blood children
33:37"and you concealed in your soul what Allah would bring to light, and you feared men, and Allah had a greater right that you should fear Him. But when Zaid had accomplished his want of her, We gave her to you as a wife...and Allah's command shall be performed. There is no harm in the Prophet doing that which Allah has ordained for him; such has been the course of Allah with respect to those who have gone before".
And the 3rd repercussion of this marriage was to lift the burden which society put upon divorced women who were degraded and often couldnt remarry. The degradation of divorced women is still present in the Bible Matt5:31-32 and many societies throughout the world. That marriage, to a divorced woman, ex-wife of an adopted son, who in addition was now considered of far lower rank than the prophet because of her previous union with a manumited slave brought down all theses social stigmas, unjust notions and illogical practices.

So deeply were these customs anchored that to counter balance them the prophet, in addition to having practically exposed their falsehood with his marriage, according to history further stressed the psychological reform by giving the most public and generous marriage ceremony to his guests than he had done with all his other marriages.

Acts17apologetics create a victim; Prophet forces Zayd to abandon his wife?

In answer to the video "How Muhammad Seduced His Adopted Son's Wife"

Zayd complained many times to the Prophet and wanted to divorce her at one point but the prophet would keep telling him to be patient and keep his own wife, for the command was meant at accomplishing a higher and beneficial objective
33:37"And when you said to him to whom Allah had shown favor and to whom you had shown a favor: Keep your wife to yourself and be careful of (your duty to) Allah".
Taqul, when used in the simple present in classical Arabic conveys the notion of persistence and continuity of a state, ie the repeated attempts of the prophet at hindering the seperation. Nothing less could have been expected from the noble prophet who many times is depicted as a fatherly figure to his people, providing them with sincere and pragmatic advises in their private lives
"Anyone who incites a woman against her husband or a slave against his master is not one of us".
But the situation did not improve and Zayd finally divorced her, about a year after they united and he had no more desire for her of any sort
"when Zaid had accomplished his want of her".
The marriage thus ultimately failed. Both sides couldnt surmount their differences and reform themselves. But this failure did not mean that the objective of the ordinance failed. This prejudiced society that was gradually being reformed was shown, through the union of people originating from both extremities of society and under a messenger of God's blessing, that the oft repeated Quranic principle that a person's merit should only be measured by his righteousness and God-consciousness, as strongly stressed just 2 verses prior 33:35, is a reality all members of the Muslim community must learn to deal with, even in such intimate areas as marriage.

Critics argue that the union's failure did not help to bring about the reform that the command was supposed to bring, but the object of the command was not to make a union work after several years of marriage, despite the parties' freewill so the objection is irrelevant. The object was to show in what a person's true merit lies in and this was succesfully established since the taboo surrounding the union of 2 persons from different social origins was broken.

Acts17apologetics reveal 7th century scandal; marriage to Zaynab?

In answer to the video "How Muhammad Seduced His Adopted Son's Wife"

The eighth wife of the Prophet was Zaynab bint Jahsh of the Asad tribe. This particular marriage had multiple aims. Zaynab was the Prophet's first cousin, from a noble lineage and at first, the prophet arranged her to unite with Zayd ibn Haritha, a slave he had freed from his guardians, and whom he then adopted. It was unthinkable at the time for such unions to happen between the daughters of the aristocracy and a slave even if he was freed.

This was a radical step taken by the Prophet in order to bring down the sense of superiority the Arabs had over slaves.

The process had already started through the countless verses of the Quran speaking of dealing with the weak people of society including slaves as one would deal with his own family 4:36 that it is allowed to marry from among them 4:3,25,24:32,33:50 since the primary criteria distinguishing the people including for marriage, is piety 25:77,34:7,49:13. By persuading both Zayd himself who was hesitant and Zaynab along with her family who were skeptical as well, the marriage did finally happen and the Quran alludes to the context of skepticism as regards the prophet's decision in introduction to the story 33:36.

But Zaynab could not overcome the deeply ingrained social class system she was brought up with.

That she had personal tastes and requirements (unrelated to religion) that werent met in the person of Zayd (social status), doesnt make her sinful. It just exposes her limits in terms of self-sacrifice as regards her materialistic outlook of life. She would have been praiseworthy had she been able to restrain that aspect of her personality but she certainly isnt condemned for failing to do so. Even the prophets' wives that are told to kindly divorce him and go live their own life without any disaproval put on them, should they be unable to deal with the humble lifestyle inside his household 33:28-29.

Apostate prophet does not see it; opponents's impatience to the divine system?

In answer to the video "The Origin of the Hijab - Allah Takes Orders From a Man"

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.

Apostate prophet studies prophecy; wisdom in partial revelations?

In answer to the video "The Origin of the Hijab - Allah Takes Orders From a Man"

In 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 instaure 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 and beneficial. 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. Just as there are no OCD symptoms with people writing children's books and stopping at the number 10, the same is the case for most people counting until 3 before starting something, jumping etc. It is only if one focuses on a certain number(s) that erroneous conclusions are drawn. The prophet repeated, and asked people to repeat certain things a variety of times, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or even 20, all depending on appropriateness, common sense, educational or preaching purposes, or cultural understanding of his time.

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 occurred 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.

Apostate prophet belongs to a known community; the opponents of the sequential revelation?

In answer to the video "The Origin of the Hijab - Allah Takes Orders From a Man"

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".

Apostate prophet finds pattern of prophecy; piecemeal revelations?

In answer to the video "The Origin of the Hijab - Allah Takes Orders From a Man"

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 below. 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 taught a lesson; was Abraham commanded to sacrifice his only son?

In answer to the video "Abraham's Only Son- Genesis 22"

In a dream Allah
2:124"tried Ibrahim with certain words".
Ibrahim had formerly shown great spiritual resolve by steadfastly opposing the religious practices of his people and relatives, even when they attempted murdering him. He turned away from his nation and migrated. He made the painful step of leaving, by Allah's command, his wife and infant son in an area of dry land, where no food and water or any inhabitants could be found. He was now being tested a step further as an upholder of God's way and will. The aim was this time, through his attachement to that progeny he had so long desired and prayed for, to make him reach the climax of prophethood by becoming the universal leader (Imam) of monotheism 2:124. 

This was another step in Ibrahim's journey, freeing himself from desires of prestige, wealth, women and children and turning with total surrender and progressing with complete devotion to the Lord
37:99"Surely I fly to my lord; He will guide me".
Ibrahim was put through this difficult trial when he was already a great Prophet and Messenger of Allah. When he sacrificed his connection to his homeland and idolatrous father, God re-established these broken connections. Ibrahim, the prototype of the religious outcast, was saved from his polytheistic environment, resettled in a better place and granted a righteous offspring. No sooner was all this achieved that once more, all is compromised through a new test of obedience. Would Abraham fall into complacency or be prepared to repeat his former sacrifice of social belonging for the sake of God? 

Abraham demonstrated again his unshakeable obedience to God, giving it precedence over human loyalties under all circumstances, just as the subsequent prophets would teach their followers, including Jesus and Muhammad.

Neither he nor his son failed the test of their trust in God; they both willingly set the stage for the sacrifice. Ismail, aware of the hardship ahead humbled himself to God, does not give himself any credit in the matter, instead asked to be increased in patience 37:102. Contrast this attitude of Ismail with the Biblical account where the son of the sacrifice is a passive participant. Up to the last moment when Abraham was about to slit his throat, he is unaware of the divine command and of his father's intentions towards him Gen22.

Ibrahim then placed his only beloved son, raised his hand with the knife but was stopped from going further
37:105"you have made the vision true..Most surely this is a manifest trial".
This shows that the reality of Ibrahim's vision was that he was GOING to sacrifice his son and not that he had sacrificed him. The act of slaughtering was therefore not part of the divine vision since it was not needed for its fulfilment, rather the preparedness to do it amounted to its fulfilment. God did not want him to sacrifice his son, but wanted to detach his heart fully, test his trust for a higher objective that included the dedication of Ismail (and his descendants through him) to the worship of Allah. This is Islam's essence, God wants nothing from His servants other than that they submit themselves to Him totally, with nothing too precious to be given up, including life itself. When both Ibrahim and Ismail demonstrated their Islam, what was left was flesh and blood, which the Quran says is secondary compared to submission 22:37 and which was thus substituted by another type of flesh and blood.

Again, the Quran never says that Allah ordered Ibrahim to sacrifice his son, but speaks of Ibrahim being tried with
"certain words"
like Adam received
2:37"some words"
that taught him how to perform repentance. The dream was symbolic and its fulfillment consisted in the preparedness in sacrificing his son, just like the fulfillment of the prophet Joseph/Yusuf's symbolic dream of celestial bodies bowing before him consisted in having his close family members prostrating to him
12:4,100"When Yusuf said to his father: O my father! Indeed, I saw eleven planets and the sun and the moon, I saw them prostrating to me...And he raised his parents upon the throne and they fell down in prostration before him, and he said: O my father! this is the significance of my vision of old; my Lord has indeed made it to be true".   
Ishmael was ransomed with a great sacrifice 37:107. The text does not say what that sacrifice was and what is it that made it great but as we continue reading, we see a clear correlation with the great institution of yearly sacrifice at the hajj and this heavenly ransom. It is the prime symbol by which Abraham is commemorated, as stated in the next verse
37:108"and we left for him a good name among the succeeding generations".
Until now and throughout the Muslim world, the courage and trust of Ibrahim in his Lord, his complete detachment from all worldly benefits, including the most precious gifts for God's sake, are remembered through the day of sacrifice ('id al adha). The theological significance of both the near sacrifice and the settlement of Ishmael away from Canaan had the clear purpose of making Abraham the leader(imam) of mankind and the establishment of a monotheistic sanctuary that would eventually guide mankind to the Abrahamic path.

So the whole thing had nothing to do with sin atonement, as retrospectively claimed by the NT writers that applied the incident to Jesus' death. This selective application, considering that Abraham's son was never sacrificed but rather saved by God, also ignores the unequivocal mosaic prohibition of human sacrifices of any kind Deut12:30-31,18:9-12,Jer19:4-6. It is an act of abomination and among the explicit examples given is that of the sacrifice of a son by his father, which eerily resembles the trinitarian idea. God's anger towards this action is because He never commanded such a thing, not because they were made to another deity. God did not command Abraham to sacrifice his son in Genesis, just as He did not command the sacrifice of Ishmael in the Quran. In Genesis it says, to "take him up", using ambiguous words as a means by which Abraham's trust in God is tested. The purpose was for Abraham to understand God's will based on His former promises. 

Neither did the sacrifice have for purpose to establishment a covenant. This had occurred prior, and included Ishmael. Isaac's particularity from a covenantal perspective is the land grant to his descendants, of which Ishmael wasnt part of. This, even the Quran agrees with; the Israelites, because of Abraham's obedience, were promised to be settled in the holy land, as a matter of test, whether they would remain on the straight spiritual path or not. Further, following the near-sacrifice, Abraham is told
 Gen22:16-18"I swear by myself, declares the Lord, that because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies, and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me". 
None of those divine blessings apply to the Israelites, while all can easily reflect the trajectory of the Ishmaelites, and the climax being the revival of the Abrahamic way with the rise of the last Ishmaelite prophet.

To further elaborate on the incompetence of the transmitters of biblical tradition prior to it having been put unto writing, in Gen17:1-19 after announcing Isaac's future birth, God promises to establish through his line
"an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him".
How could God then demand Isaac's sacrifice while Abraham knew Isaac would live and have many descendants? Why would God change his name from Avram/exalted father to Avraham/father of nations, in connection to that promise and then almost immediately after request him to sacrifice his "only son"? It would render the whole goal of the sacrifice as a test of his loyalty to God meaningless. Because of this absurdity, the Talmud presents different opinions with some suggesting that it was actually Abraham that was testing God and not the other way around, since Abraham was already aware that God had made a promise to him through Isaac. This is because a valid test is when one isnt sure of the outcome.

That difficulty in the text reflects down to the NT in Hebrews 11 which attempts to explain a contradiction. If God himself promises Abraham a covenant through Isaac, there is no reason for him to think God is a liar. Abraham will simply go on with the command all the while knowing the outcome (Isaac will live and fulfill the covenant). That is in fact exactly what Hebrews11 suggests, postulating that Abraham even thought beforehand that God would raise Isaac back from the dead after the sacrifice in order that the covenant be fulfilled through his line, just as He had promised prior to the test.

It may be argued that this objection applies to Ismail too as he was also promised many children but the difference is that Isaac's promise of many descendants was made BEFORE his birth, whereas Ismail was already born and THEN the promise was made, meaning it happened AFTER the event of the sacrifice.

Islam critiqued seeks support; scholars undecided on the child of sacrifice?

In answer to the video "Abraham's Only Son- Genesis 22"

The sequence in 37:99-113 shows Abraham asking God for a son. Ishmael, whose name itself means "God-hears", was the only one from his progeny that Ibrahim prayed God for. And this happened early on in Ibrahim's life, as he set himself to leave his land and people, disconnecting himself from his nation. He then naturally begged God to provide him with a righteous child so as to restore this broken connection. God directly answers the prayer, appeasing the heart of his devout servant. But later on, when Allah was about to raise Ibrahim to the status of guide/imam of mankind, father and son are put through a test. It occured once the boy reached his working age (which corresponds with Ismail's age of 13-14 right before the birth of isaac). When they both willingly fulfilled the command, God blessed Abraham with another son, Isaac as a reward. This concluding announcement of Isaac's birth would have been a redundancy had it been mentioned a few verses earlier. Also, the good news of Isaac came at a much later time in Ibrahim's life 11:72. 

The network of Quranic evidence together, all point to Ismail as the son of the sacrifice, while none, within the Book, support the Isaac view. The strongest argument in support of that later opinion is that the unnamed son is a "good news" to Ibrahim, while Isaac is also twice described as "good news" 37:112,51:28. This only works assuming Ishmael was no "good news", which he certainly was, as explained earlier. 

Further, the unnamed son is described in the same passage as forbearing and steadfast, like Ismail is 21:85. This fits the character of one going through a difficult test. Isaac is never qualified as such. Similarly, Ismail is one messenger prophet who was
19:54"truthful to his promise".
The stress laid on that quality is due to him fulfilling a word which would lead to what he thought meant to give up his own life in obedience to the divine will
37:102-3"O my son! I have seen in a vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: now see what is thy view!" (The son) said: "O my father! Do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills, one of the steadfast!" So when they had both submitted..."
The reports stating that the sacrificed is Isaac are part of the Israeliyyat transmitted by those who converted among them like Kaab al-Ahbar and it was only transmitted as sign of trust. None of those reports go back to the prophet or his companions. Reuven Firestone, who is the leading scholar quoted by misinformed critics, admits that those opinions endorsing Isaac which he deems are earliest, were developed in a biblical milieu when
"Early Muslims naturally turned to Biblicists for information regarding legends found both in the Quran and the Bible".
All later opinions endorsing the Isaac theory eventually go back to such discarded reports that fooled them. With the conversion of many believers of former scriptures to Islam, the early Muslim authorities went to great lengths trying to curb the influence of Israeliyyat on Quranic exegisis and traditions. Although they could not completely stop the phenomenon, one notable example is that of the 4th Caliph Ali who threatened to flog those that interpreted David's encounter with the litigants in the Quran in light of the Biblical tradition. That however did not stop some of the classical commentators from doing so. Every book of exegesis (Yusuf Ali's commentary is often misrepresented and misquoted, he does not endorse the Isaac theory) or biography or even history would mention the argument that took place on the topic. However, some would follow the argument by outlining the truth and others wouldn't add any commentary.

Many, most of those quoted by Islam critics are even found sometimes on both sides of the argument and this is because they were reporting both opinions. The most classic examples are those often quoted from Tabari, such as reports from Abu Kurayb, Ya’qub, Ibn Humayd or Ibn Bashshar who all relate both sides of the argument. Reuven Firestone himself admits that
"Most of al-Tabari’s traditions, however, place the location of the Sacrifice in the area of Mecca" and that "The battle between the two kinds of exegesis was probably won by the Mecca-Ishmael school even before the time of al-Tabari".
As he notes, even those faulty reports endorsing Isaac place the sacrifice in and around Mecca, which shows the baselesness of their opinions. The strongest reports going back to pillars of Islamic scholarship all endorse the position that the sacrificed was Ishmael, the likes of Ali, Ibn Umar, Abu Hurayrah, Abu Tufayl, Saad Ibn Jubayr, Mujâhid, al-Sha'by, Al-Hasan al-Basri, Muhammad Ibn Kaab al-Qardhy, Saad Ibn al-Musayyab, Abu Jaafar Muhammad al-Bâqir, Abû Sâlih, al-Rabî' Ibn Anas, Abû Amr Ibn al-Alâ', Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and others.

The unanimous position of the scholars of hadith is that the Sacrificed is Ishmael. This is supported by Quran, sahih reports from the Companions and Followers and reports rated Marfu' (tacit approval) of the Prophet.

This opinion was famous among the Arabs before the advent of Islam and it was transmitted from generation to generation in tawatur and it was also mentioned in the pre islamic poetry of Umayyah Ibn Abi al-Salt.

The Muslim scholars have solved this case a long time ago and, very early in the history of Islam, the popular Islamic tradition has integrated the fact that Ishmael was the sacrificed.

Islam critiqued despises Abraham; an insensitive husband sending his wife and child to die?

In answer to the video "Abraham's Only Son- Genesis 22"

The claim that Ishmael and Hagar were cast into Paran as a result of some wife jealousy is patently false, and as the Quran states, Ishmael was re-located by the command of God for a particular purpose, by Abraham, and neither were there conflicts between the wives or the brothers who are even depicted as attending their father's funeral together in the HB itself Gen25:9. This means, and just as the Quran states, there were frequent trips throughout the years between the 2 locations, where both Abraham and Ishmael resided, involving at least Abraham as per the Quran, and implicitly Ishmael as per the HB since he was aware of his father's condition.

Abraham in addition, would never commit an act so be-smearing of any sensitive person. People dont just send their other wife and child into the midst of the wilderness to end the bickering of their wives. If this was the case, Abraham would have simply let Hagar and Ishmael reside in some tent in a nice place and not the desert wilderness, where they were to suffer from extreme thirst to the point the infant child, in addition ill on account of Sarah's evil eye, was on the verge of death.

But the scribes needed to depict Abraham as giving the "final order" as it would be tantamount to declaring Ishmael not a legitimate heir. Abraham was this way openly dissatisfied with Ishmael's actions and behavior, and all this with God in the background giving the directive
Gen21:12"in all that Sarah saith unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall seed be called to thee".
As a side note, although some progressive religious feminist Jews like presenting this verse as if women should sometimes be listened to and highly regarded, it isnt so in their own Talmudic writings, where there "sages" depict them as secondary to men and should be especially disregarded in spiritual matters (Bava Metzia 59a). One can only wonder why would God depose Ishmael from his birthright due to some mistreatment of his younger brother but on the other hand maintain the favors bestowed upon Isaac and subsequent Israelite prophets despite their reported treacheries and evil deeds.

Anyway, now that it has been established that Ishmael isnt part of any inheritence, cast away geographically and stripped from his birthrights by his own father, the scribes, obviously writing long after the events could not but mention his being made into a separate nation Gen21:13.

And Abraham is not a typical human being, in the Quran's words
11:75"forbearing, tender-hearted, oft-returning to Allah".
He is a prophet, known for his empathy, piety and obedience to God, as well as notorious in the Bible for his arguing with YHWH himself to spare the lives of innocent strangers Gen18 and yet here he is suddenly incapable of pleading with a wife for his own beloved, and sick son. To claim he would place his wife and child in the desert for the sake of the petty jealousy of Sarah is a smearing campaign. It isnt normal behavior, let alone behavior for a Prophet of God. The scribes knew this so although they speak of Abraham's reluctancy Gen21:9-11, he nevertheless submits to his wife's alleged request and casts his beloved firstborn -heavily ill on top of that if one is to believe the Jewish tradition quoted earlier- into the wilderness. And as is often the case in the Hebrew Bible, God Himself is taking sides in those tribal conflicts
"Be not displeased concerning the lad and concerning your handmaid; whatever Sarah tells you, hearken to her voice, for in Isaac will be called your seed".
The Quran and the traditions state that it was for a clearer plan of which we see evidence today in the manifestation of the altar in Mecca known as the Kaaba. It is the prime symbol of the oneness of God throughout the whole world and will forever be, until the Day of Judgement.

Abraham's divine blessings indiscriminately extending to the righteous among his offspring, Ishmael's vital role in making this possible through his willing submission during the test of the sacrifice, all this clearly was against the scribes' tribal prejudice and notion of exclusive, unconditional chosenness.