Islam critiqued makes psycho analysis; Angry prophets, false prophets?

In answer to the video "Muhammad, Psychology and Satan"

The prophet Muhammad did feel immense guilt during his mission. The Quran would repeatedly explain that he shouldnt at all, the sinners' rejection wasnt due to some inner flaw in him or the message he was conveying, yet the prophet, like all prophets, grieved over the doom of his nation. But in Muhammad's case, his grief was much more intense since he initiated the end of prophethood. He would pray for the sinners to be forgiven, even the hypocrites, at a stage of his prophethood in Medina when such individuals tried destroying the Muslims from within. The Quran would tell him that such empathy is misplaced and fruitless 9:80. Yet when the one known as the leader of the hypocrites passed away, the prophet still offered funeral prayers for him, after which the Quran forbade him this attitude 

"When `Abdullah bin Ubai (the chief of hypocrites) died, his son came to the Prophet and said, "O Allah's Messenger! Please give me your shirt to shroud him in it, offer his funeral prayer and ask for Allah's forgiveness for him." So Allah's Messenger gave his shirt to him and said, "Inform me (When the funeral is ready) so that I may offer the funeral prayer." So, he informed him and when the Prophet intended to offer the funeral prayer, `Umar took hold of his hand and said, "Has Allah not forbidden you to offer the funeral prayer for the hypocrites? The Prophet said, "I have been given the choice for Allah says: '(It does not avail) Whether you (O Muhammad) ask forgiveness for them (hypocrites), or do not ask for forgiveness for them. Even though you ask for their forgiveness seventy times, Allah will not forgive them. (9.80)" So the Prophet offered the funeral prayer and on that the revelation came: "And never (O Muhammad) pray (funeral prayer) for any of them (i.e. hypocrites) that dies." (9. 84)".

His forbearing forefather Abraham before him similarly argued with God to spare people deserving to be wiped out for their sins 11:75-6. Ibrahim pleads with God for the whole nation of Lut, not only for Lut. Not because he sided with the sinners but to avert the death of everyone, sinners and righteous alike, including Lut. Hence the statement that "Lut is in it" of 29:32 in reaction to the first encounter with the messengers, as they said they will destroy everyone in the town. This type of intercession is not about forgiveness, as in the prohibition of 9:113. Abraham's "intercession" in Genesis is the same. He pleads for the town by virtue of the righteous in it, even if "perhaps ten will be found there". These potential 10 are Lut's few followers alluded to in the Quran 29:32. It is worthwhile noting here the Quran's rectification of typical HB naive anthropomorphisms. God has to go personally to Sodom to confirm the news that came to Him about the wickedness of its people Gen18:21. Then begins the unrealistic back and forth bargaining with Abraham where God says what He would do depending on what He finds out once He gets to the city. The Quran, as it always does in its retelling of defective HB narratives, protects God's omniscience 

29:32"We are more knowing of who is within it. We will surely save him and his family, except his wife. She is to be of those who remain behind".

Moses too, following the same pattern, is shown interceding for the Israelites 7:155. He also intercedes for the Egyptians 7:134-5. This is because in the Quran, contrary to the HB account, the purpose of the successive plagues was to make the sinful people, including Pharao, mend their ways. 

The primary prophetic function however, is delivering warnings and glad tidings. Intercession is not what prophets are sent for, rather a natural result of their empathetic disposition towards their own people and families who are among their addressees. It is a personal choice by the prophets, not a divine requirement. Throughout the Quran, the prophet is referred to with the word nadhir, though often simply rendered "warner" the term in classical Arabic implies the type of warning of an imminent danger stemming out of genuine concern and compassion for the addressee. But it isnt simply an emotional, erratic, or difficult to grasp type of warning. Rather it is made clear and obvious 67:26"I am only a nadhir mubin/obvious, clear warner".

Christians see prophetic intercession as necessarily flowing from their unbiblical "loving God" mantra, because it fits their father-son/sacrifice plot. However, the normal course of action in the prophetic pattern is that rejection eventually leads to destruction of an entire nation save the prophets and their righteous followers (if there are any). That is why at the golden calf incident, prior to Moses pleading for the community, God says 

Ex32:10"Now leave Me alone, and My anger will be kindled against them so that I will annihilate them, and I will make you into a great nation". 

Everyone besides Moses it seems, was implicated, from close or far with idolatry. God then reconsiders what He would have normally done, which is to wipe out everyone at once, leaving it to the Israelites themselves to purge their ranks from those more directly involved in the sin. 3000 apostates were slaughtered in a day, with many more marked for death pending execution. The second day, thinking enough was done to earn the remaining guilty forgiveness, Moses intercedes once more but is rejected, as the chapter ends with the statement that "the Lord struck the people with a plague, because they had made the calf that Aaron had made". A similar situation occurs with the incidents of the scouts. The Israelites anger YHWH again, He decides to wipe everyone out, Moses intercedes, but only gets a delayed punishment. Instead of exterminating the whole nation right away, God decreed for them a 40 years desert wandering during which the land would be entirely prohibited to enter. The purpose was to eliminate the generation of guilty, making place for others that would in turn be tried with the privilege of entering the blessed land, together with those that had not shown distrust in God at the initial command Numb14:1-39. Through this 40 years "slow death" God caused a separation between the obedient and the defiant as reflected in Moses' prayer in the Quran 5:25. Although Moses accepted God's decree, understanding that the guilty only got what they deserved, it nevertheless grieved him to see them in that condition "grieve not for the iniquitous".

Jesus, on the day of resurrection will be confronted to the delusion of his followers who ended up idolizing him and his mother. In response he will completely dissociate himself from their sin, declaring his submission to God alone. He will then leave the matter in Allah's hands, whether He deems it fit to punish them. And finally, Jesus, forbearing and empathetic like all prophets towards their followers, will suggest the possibility of forgiveness by virtue of Allah's might and wisdom 5:116-8.

Muhammad once said

"My example with my nation and my people is that I see them trying to jump into the fire, and I’m holding onto their belt trying to drag them out, and they want to try to disobey me and jump into the fire".

During some of his khutbas he would speak with so much concern and passion of the impending danger of the day of judgement that his otherwise radiant merciful face would be transformed, his eyes turning red, his voice increasing along with his anger and fear

9:128"Indeed, there has come unto you an Apostle from within yourselves: heavily weighs upon him [the thought] that you might suffer [in the life to come], full of concern for you [is he, and] full of compassion and mercy toward the committed Muslims".

Of course no prophet would remain emotionless or with a blank, expressionless face when addressing his people with warnings. It would have been interesting to have access to preserved descriptions of Moses' face when he tore his clothes appart from desperation and asked God to terminate his life Numbers11 from frustration of having to deal with the constant opposition of his people, as described throughout the book of Exodus.

One also may wonder what would have been Jesus' face like, and his gesticulations for instance when he was angered by his close disciples' repeated incapacities to understand his implicit messages or when he kicked out the money-lenders from the Temple, threatened the Israelites with divine judgment, which includes destruction, for their rejection of him. An even more imposing sight would have been to see and hear Jesus as he went off on his tirade against the Jewish elite calling them all sorts of injurious names from "sons of hell" to "race of vipers" etc. terms that would later gladly be picked up by the Roman and Greek former pagans turned Christian antisemites, in their persecutions of those responsible for the death of their hero. That is besides YHWH's dragon like description, fuming through his nostrils as he issued his threats of punishment Jer17:4.

As he was grieved and over passionate in his admonitions, God would advise the prophet Muhammad not to destroy himself with sorrow, belief cannot be imposed on anyone 18:6,26:3,35:8. The Quran tells him not to show impatience for their lack of receptivity and to go on with his mission as bidden. The success of his mission doesnt depend on the people accepting his message at all costs, rather to bring about a wilful intellectual and moral revolution for the establishment of a righteous society. The process must be natural, not supernatural, so that people might naturally enter this exemplary society based on their rationality, high ideals, best principles of life.

If he cannot endure that lengthy and emotionally painful process patiently, and if he imagines that a miracle, conforming to their whims would break their spiritual inertion, then God tells him, he should try by himself to bring about such a Sign and search for it in the heavens and the earth but at the end he will understand that

6:33-6"Only those accept who listen; and (as to) the dead, Allah will raise them, then to Him they shall be returned".

In other words, and as Jesus tells the Pharisees that similarly challenged him for a sign

Mk8:11-13"Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign? I tell you the truth, no sign will be given to it."

Jesus categorically denied them the performance of Signs, and effectively, Jesus never appeared to those very people who demanded him a miracle after his alleged resurrection. Whoever follows this Quran does it for his own good and whoever rejects it, then Muhammad is only a warner

27:92,20:54,10:41"And if they call you a liar, say: My work is for me and your work for you; you are clear of what I do and I am clear of what you do".

He was sent with the truth and to create discipline by setting practical examples, with the same basic warnings as the messengers and prophets of old 35:24,53:56 so that

25:57"he who will, may take the way to his Lord". 

Islam critiqued finds compromising clue; Quran believes in magic?

In answer to the video "Muhammad, Psychology and Satan"

The Quran, as seen earlier through the word SIHR, commonly translated magic or sorcery, means an act of deception of the senses. That deception is fully encompassed by God's knowlegde and power, not allowing it to affect anything or anyone except by His own will, meaning it has no power in and of itself

"they can harm none thereby save by God's leave".

It further states that the only thing one can be sure of, is that seeking such a means of deception is harmful to the seeker himself, and will never benefit him in anyway

"they acquire a knowledge that only harms themselves and does not benefit them".

This is demonstrated by the clear declaration of the 2 angelic messengers of Babylon, Harut and Marut, telling the people not to become deniers of the truth by misusing what was revealed upon them from knowledge. But that is exactly what many did. Following the examples and whisperings of evil beings (men or jinn), they began practicing the knowledge acquired from the messengers in deceitful ways, contrary to the original intent, ultimately harming themselves only and not benefiting from the practice in anyway, shape or form. Had the "sorcery" ritual been succesful in its evil objective, they would have found some kind of benefit in it, yet the Quran negates that this endeavour can result in any kind of benefit.

We find that notion reflected in the ahadith where the prophet stated 

“There is no ‘adwaa (contagious diseases), no tiyarah (bird omens), no haamah (various superstitions in regards to dead people), and no Safar (unlucky month in pre-islamic times or the bite of a serpent inside the belly causing hunger)”. 

Each of these processes may only have an effect if God allows it. Contagious diseases were known to the Arabs, and the prophet stated 

“Flee from the leper as you would flee from a lion” 

just as he warned 

"the cattle suffering from a disease should not be mixed with healthy cattle". 

This is meant so as to avoid infections. However, one should keep in mind that nothing has any effect unless God allows the process to occur 

“The Messenger of Allah said: ‘There is no ‘Adwa, no omen, and no Hamah.’ A man stood up and said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, what if a camel has mange and another camel gets mange from it?’ He said: ‘That is the Divine decree. Who causes the mange in the first one?’”

The prophet here, as well as the Quran in many places, convey the notion of ultimate monotheism, Allah as the only uncaused cause, as the ultimate cause of all things and processes. The pre-islamic Arabs either removed Allah from the equation when attempting to explain an observable phenomenon like infection, or invented a cause, like bad omens.

It is with such perspective in mind that the passage of sura falaq where we seek protection with God from the

113:4"nafathat fil uqad"

must be understood. The phrase lit. means "the blowers on knots". It was an idiom in pre-Islamic Arabia designating all supposedly occult endeavours. The Quran negates that such practices can benefit in any way the one that resorts to them and has labelled them a sin. The sin consitsts not in that they might possibly harm anyone using magical powers but in the very thought of possessing some supernatural abilities without God's license. 

When we seek protection from the evil of those who practice occultism, not from their actions or supposed powers and effects, we recognize the principle already stated in

2:102"they can harm none thereby save by God's leave".

We put our trust in God against all evil endeavours, not to undo any kind of magic spells. Just as the 2 angels' noble teachings can be used in an evil manner, contrary to the original intent, the Quran itself can be misused in a similar way, contrary to its original intent. There are verses, the mutashabihaat, that allow mutliple understandings because of the general nature of their words and context, as well as the subject treated, and all are acceptable so long as they agree with the rules of language and the muhkamat verses. But as stated in the passage speaking of the issue, those in whose heart their is perversity go after the mutashabihaat solely to create confusion, through ascribing arbitrary conclusions to those verses 3:7. As regards Harut and Marut, the verse 2:102 isnt specific on the nature of the revelation upon the angels. But what is known is that it was a divine revelation, not magic or deceptive tricks. 

The verse speaks of 2 groups transmitting knowledge to completely different ends;

- the shayateen (men or jinn) that teach sihr/trickery combined with what they learned from the angels, for sinful ends. The reason they would need to do so would be to deceive the people into thinking that sihr is a divinely condoned practice. This is done up to this day with charlatans using Quranic passages in fanciful ways and rituals. This includes the use of devices upon which one puts his trust instead of Allah

"the prophet said: Verily, spells, amulets, and charms are acts of idolatry".

Even Quran amulets, although not a prophetic practice, all schools of Islamic thought agree that their only virtue is in reminding one to invoke the sacred words they contain.

- the angels that teach divine revelation, warning their audience of whom they perceived the inclination to disbelief, not to misuse that knowledge to evil ends and thereby damage their soul. Some did not heed the warnings and only learned from them the bits that cause harm. As already explained and as seen everyday, the Quran itself can be misused in such a manner, with people taking bits of passages, stripping them from the direct and wider context, then applying that knowledge in harmful ways.

As a side note on 113:4, if we disregard the idiomatic understanding of the verse it can be understood in a different way that equally fits the context. Nafathat is the plural of naffath, which is an intensive nominative from nafatha, meaning primarily he blew. But nafatha also can be taken for inspiring ie influencing the mind. Uqad, the plural of uqdah doesnt only mean knots but also judgments, management, regulating and ordering of one's affairs, a promise of obedience or vow of allegiance. Naffathat fil uqad can also thus be those who put evil suggestions into the resolution of men or into the management of their affairs.

What should finally be kept in mind as a decisive Quranic position whenever those issues of magic, or witchcraft are presented as some influencing factors in wordly causality, is that Iblis himself, the archdeceiver and ultimate external source of evil is presented in the Quran as no more than a mere whisperer, unable to coerce in any way those that listen to his suggestions, hence his description "waswas ilkhannas"/the whisperer that withdraws.

Islam critiqued finds example of integrity; The uncompromising prophet?

In answer to the video "Muhammad, Psychology and Satan"

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. Much to their dismay, 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. During that time the prophet 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". 

In short, they did all that could be done to defeat his resolve. But just as he repeatedly, from the onset of his mission, rejected any compromise in religion, even less with the basic concept of monotheism 10:104. Since the earliest Meccan verses, he was admonished to distance himself from all rijz/filth 74:5. The mufassirun have included all kind of spiritual evils under that term, idolatry, sinfulness, impurity etc. The wording here does not imply a previous tendency or involvement in those evils. It assumes a scenario so as to enforce the point that everyone is liable to punishment for transgression 

10:106"And do not invoke besides Allah that which neither benefits you nor harms you, for if you did, then indeed you would be of the wrongdoers".

The conditional form of the second part of the verse shows that the premise is a warning, not an accusation. There are many such statements where the prophet is urged to stay away from someone or something that is against the truth revealed to him 26:113,28-86-8 or to behave in a certain way that is upright 

33:1"O Prophet, fear Allah and do not obey the disbelievers and the hypocrites. Indeed, Allah is ever Knowing and Wise. And follow that which is revealed to you from your Lord. Indeed Allah is ever, with what you do, Acquainted". 

Their hopes of finding common ground between Islam and their ancestral beliefs which they showed they werent truly attached to and were ready to compromise so long as their worldly interests were preserved, was definitely shattered with the very first word of sura kafirun 

"Say: O kafirun". 

That simple word "qul/say" unambiguously showed them that what the prophet was presenting, his answer to their offers, wasnt his that he would be in a position to negotiate; a third party was sending a message through him and, contrary to them, was so firm in his position that a forceful announcement of dissociation had to be made. That opening word reveals another important point, the sending authority wants to make a strong, unforgiving statement and is pushing the messenger to communicate it despite his often described soft character, gentleness and even sometimes reluctance to transmit a particular message, as described in the Quran.

The second verse elaborates 

109:2"I do not serve that which you serve". 

It follows by refuting any possibility of amalgamating Islam's monotheism with the polytheism of its addressees 

"Nor will you worship that which I worship". 

The next verse increases the intensity of the declaration of acquittal as it shows that the prophet never even considered worshiping their idols before his prophetic call so how could they imagine he would make any compromise with them now that he has received the Quran 

"Nor did I worshiped that which you worshipped". 

This is thus the monotheistic pattern of the prophet, his constancy that began before his call. He had dissociated himself from all practices linked to polytheism, and was wandering in search of guidance as to how to properly worship the One Creator. 

Muhammad was always troubled by witnessing the bestial behavior, the families who viewed a firstborn daughter as a disgrace and would burry her alive among other savage practices and the polytheism of the idol worshipers. The Quran pictures an intense scene on the day of Resurrection, where the parents responsible of such horrendous act would be so contemptible in God's sight that they would not be addressed regarding the killing of their infant. So undeserving are they of being directly spoken to that God will turn to the victim, the one without a voice in this world and even if she had one would not be heard, and ask her if there exists any minutest fault for which she might have deserved to be murdered in that way 81:8-9. In their savagery, short mindedness and lack of God-consciousness they would sometimes not even spare their sons, for fear of poverty and lack of sustenance 6:151. It is to be noted that this abhorrent practice has perdured throughout time, and in a more widespread fashion in the form of abortion, most often for the same kinds of reasons. Fear of being able to sustain a child, in any aspect, can never be a reason for taking away his right to live 17:31. Sustenance at its source, does not reach anyone but by God's leave. 

The temptations of Mecca had no power over the disciplined soul of Muhammad whose prime concern was contemplation. He did not like to frequent the Meccan social gatherings and activities. Sometimes when overcome by the pain of such sights, he would retire for meditation in a small cave known as Hira on the Mountain of Nur two miles from Mecca, he would fast and spend long hours in contemplation far from vice, immorality and idol worship. The cave is an extremely isolated small crevasse high in a mountain which even those passing very near to it, if they ever ventured at that desolate, rocky and hardly accessible place, would not notice. Only those who have been there can understand its remoteness and isolation. It is as if the prophet was drawn to this place, suitable for a spiritual retreat.
Muhammad was taking a different direction than his people, advancing on his path of evolution and spiritual perfection, although being totally unaware of the requirements of the true faith, solely relying on his innate moral uprightness with which every human being is born and which compelled him at most to be repulsed by the ungodly habits and rituals around him and at least to never participate in their practices. For example he is said to have been keen to avoid the idols placed at Safa and Marwah while making runs between those places. 

The report by abd al Mundhir, a known falsifier and fabricator of traditions unanimously rejected as unreliable stating the prophet once sacrificed an offering to an idol prior to his prophethood has been discarded by all hadith scholars. 

Such was the situation of the hanif remnants among the Arabs, those that tried maintaining the legacy of Ibrahim, retiring away from their community, to the desert, a cave or against the walls of the very house built by their forefathers Ibrahim and Ismail whom they constantly remembered, searching and wondering about the original and complete manner in which they should worship the Almighty but that was now almost entirely lost and forgotten.  

The ingrained guidance which Allah has equipped all mankind with, although allowing the possibility of avoiding the great moral harms and reasonably coming to believe in the most basic tenets of correct faith (monotheism and hereafter), it cannot explain the complete and exact requirements of the Creator whom the upright person is convinced of. Despite his awareness in those fundamental principles, the person therefore remains lost and ineffective in his search for an explicit guidance to know his obligations, how he should discharge them, how he should direct all possible aspects of his life in total subservience to God. Such person remains wandering in perplexity in search of the truth until he is shown the ultimate and precise manner in which his Creator is to be served 

12:3,42:52,93:6-7"Did He not find you an orphan and gave you shelter? And found you lost and guided you?". 

It is important to note here it doesnt speak of being lost from the straight path. One can be on the straight path all the while yearning and unsuccessfully looking for the best and ultimate way to progress on it, until it is shown explicitly. The difference between a prophet and philosopher is that the former, after seclusion and deep insight gets the truth and wisdom from God whereas the latter arrives to a glimpse of it or sometimes falls short of it by himself. Consequently, we find that the books of ancient philosophers, and of those that developed their theories after them, could not stand the test of subsequent criticism, resulting either in exposing flaws or entirely discrediting their lines of thought. As to the branch of philosophy that claims to investigate the realm of metaphysics through rational thought, the Quran categorically denies these attempts since it states that the concepts of God, Hereafter and revelation are parts of the knowledge of the unseen/ghayb, meaning beyond the reach of human perception. That knowledge is only imparted through revelation and thus all true metaphysical endeavors depend on it. Although the Quran continuously encourages humanity to inquire into and reflect upon the visible world to acquire knowledge, and understand through it the rational need for the resurrection, judgement and hereafter, in the case of knowledge of the unseen, it aims to guide the individuals during that process 

96:4-5"He taught mankind that which they did not know". 

Any philosophy that is not guided is in great error when dealing with the metaphysical realm, a realm transcending our sense-experience, making its direct intuition or experience impossible. 

That condition the prophet was in, of seclusion and desperate seeking of the truth, as well as God's remedies to his concerns, inner questions and difficulties, is captured in sura duha and sharh. So, just as God, in answer to Ibrahim and Ismail's prayers, showed them the manner in which they and those after them should engage in worshipping Him 2:124-131, as was done to Adam who was taught the manner in which to invoke God and seek forgiveness 2:37,7:23,20:122 God showed the true rituals to Muhammad in answer to his spiritual quest, restoring them to their true form and purpose after they had been disfigured with time. There is a lesson of humility, for a servant to reverently ask his master for the best way to please him, as Ibrahim asked his Lord, and to not be self-conceited in thinking that one knows best how to outwardly behave when addressing the Lord of creation just as one wouldnt disrespect the basic conduct to have when facing a mere worldly ruler. The form of a ritual is just as important as the sincerity in its execution.

In the musnad we read of a neighbor overhearing a conversation that occurred between the prophet, prior to his call, and Khadija at their home 

"wallaahu laa a'budu allaat wal uzza walaahu laa a'budu abadan" 

"I dont worship al-laat and al-uzza and i will never worship them". 

This could have only happened when they had just been married. Had the prophet been a worshipper of the idols prior to his call or during his marriage for some time, he would have had to provide some explanation for his sudden change of attitude, yet we read Khadija respecting his position without showing any sign of surprise 

"leave that al-laat, leave that al-uzz".

Islam critiqued digs up old calumnies; The prophet Muhammad, bewitched, possessed, or neither of the 2?

In answer to the video "Muhammad, Psychology and Satan"

There is no connection between the charge of demonic possession, and the hadiths about the prophet being bewitched.

Magic or witchcraft are qualified with the word sihr, from the root S-Ha-R meaning to make things look other than what they actually are, ie deception. There are 3 ways one can try and achieve that objective; the trick or slight of hand, the chemistry and the psychological manipulation, all of them meant at deceiving one into perceiving something else than what is actually occuring. These practices have therefore no intrinsic power. Sorcery at that time consisted of worshipping the jinn and straying from monotheism and that is why the Quran and the traditions warn against these practices.

Throughout the Quran, sorcery has always been associated with evil-mindedness, perverse beliefs, evil deeds and terrifying intimidation of people. It in addition is an act of apostasy to believe in the influence of false gods and the jinn who were worshipped in the process. Muslim jurists the likes of Malik ibn Anas considered sorcery as a manifestation of its practitioner’s perverted faith and prescribed punishments for it.

When relating Moses' public confrontation with Pharaoh's sorcerers, the Quran says that they

7:116"saharoo aAAyuna alnnasi/they tricked the eyes of the people",

the point being that magic is about tricking the eyes to think that what it sees is reality when it is not. There are some reports in hadith literature speaking of people attempting to bewitch the prophet, and even succeeding for a short lapse of time, confusing him in conjugal matters. In Bukhari and Muslim, the time span under which the prophet was affected is said to be 40 days. Weaker reports as narrated by ibn Saad from ibn al Hakam speak of 6 months. None however speak of whatever the prophet was afflicted with as "black magic". The scholars have referred to it as illusion, in conformity with the meaning of the word as stated earlier. It is known that to the prophet, besides being dutiful in his prophetic task of conveying the divine message, an area beyond the reach of evil interference, his second priority was being dutiful as a husband. Due to his outstanding daily responsibilities, the Quran gave him leeway in that aspect and yet, as attested in the traditions he would do his utmost to spend in an equal amount of time with each of his wives. Since this aspect of his private life was most important to him, he thus felt confused in that specific matter and in nothing else, by whatever evil had affected his perception of reality. It is not like the author of the illusion had intended to affect this specific matter in the prophet's life. Assuming the reports as true for argument's sake, a crafty magic trick/illusion can certainly confuse anyone momentarily, in any kind of matter, just as what happened to Moses as he was deceived by the sorcerers' slight of hand 20:66. 

Both Moses and Muhammad were eventually given the inner strength by God to heal from the effect. Further, something which is highly inconvenient to those Islam critics who mainly use those reports to discredit the prophet, he actually is described therein as receiving a vision indicating the author of the sihr as well as the location of the device he used. False prophets dont receive divine visions and after finding the device, the prophet doesnt destroy it because God cured him, meaning the tool used had no power in and of itself. 

"Those around him said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, should we not head toward that evil person and kill him?’ He said: ‘As for me, Allah has cured me, and I dislike causing evil to other people’. This is of the forbearance of the Messenger of Allah”.

To further corroborate the prophet, in such cases simply advised observing a certain diet, relevant to his own environment, composed of 7 ajwa dates of the type growing in Aliya near Medina, eaten over 7 days at breakfast as a means by which the body is detoxified as well as safeguarded from the psychological manipulations of sihr (the health benefits of that diet were thought to keep the mind sharp and aware against such endeavors).

This is far from, and not even comparable to the absurd idea proposed in the Greek Testament of Christians able to neutralize deadly poison in Jesus' name.

It is to be kept in mind however that the supposed confusion the prophet was victim of, never pertained to divine comunications, an area time and again declared as protected from any interference, human or else, from its descent from heaven until it is delivered to the prophet's heart and transmitted to the people. The Quran for example, in the context of truthfulness of prophethood and divine origin of the Book, repeatedly denies the claims made by his contemporaries that he might be demon possessed or under the effect of the jinn 16:98-100,26:221-3,69:41-2,81:22-25 or under a spell or that he is himself a magician/sorcerer 17:47-8,25:8-9,38:4,51:52-6 as other prophets were similarily calumnied.

Islam critiqued witnesses devilish attacks; Satan opposes the messengers?

In answer to the video "Muhammad, Psychology and Satan"

Before getting into the story of the satanic verses, 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 occured 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.

A prophet accused of demon possession?

In answer to the video "Muhammad, Psychology and Satan"

Demon possession, a calumny among many others that the prophet Muhammad and prophets before him, including Jesus in the NT, were charged with, was unrelated to the satanic verses polemic. It was in relation to what they perceived as the Quran's supernatural eloquence. They werent ready to accept that it could come from a human, much less from God, so they settled for demonic agents.

Islam critiqued invokes the devil; can the Quran be satanic?

In answer to the video "Muhammad, Psychology and Satan"

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 puting 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.

CIRA international possible travel to Mecca; origin of hajj rituals pagan?

In answer to the video "Sin and Salvation, Part 3 - Does Allah Love Sinners?"

Josephus in his Antiquites speaks of the Arabs as Ishmael's descendants, way before the time of Muhammad, almost 500 years, saying they circumcized their children at 13 years old, as was still done in the times of the prophet, to commemorate their forefather Ishmael. 

Uri Rubin (Professor, Tel Aviv University) "The pre-Islamic Abrahamic sacredness of the Kaaba is clearly demonstrated in the belief that Abraham's footprints could be seen on one of its sacred stones. This belief is reflected in the very early verses attributed to Abii Talib in which numerous pre-Islamic places of worship are described in a manner which is totally independent of the phraseology of later Islamic sources. The verse referring to Abraham's' footprints reads "wa-mawtii Ibrahima fi l-sakhri ratbatun 'ala qadamayhi hafiyan ghayra na'ili/By Abraham's footprint in the rock still fresh / with both feet bare, without sandals". Later on, Muslim tradition applied to the stone bearing Abraham's footprints the Quranic epithet "Maqam lbrahim". Even the view that the haram, i.e., the sacred territory of Mecca, was founded by Abraham may be regarded as pre-Islamic in origin. Muhammad b. Habib (d. 245H/859), has recorded in his Munammaq a remarkable report saying that Quraysh once asked Thaqif to become their partners in the Meccan haram, in return for equal partnership of Quraysh in the territory of Wajj which was owned by Thaqif. Thaqif refused saying: "How can you be partners in a land in which our father settled, and dug it out of the rocks with his bare hands, without iron tools. And you have not founded the haram by yourselves. It was Abraham who founded it". In other words, Thaqif maintained that Quraysh had no right to make transactions with the Meccan land due to its Abrahamic sacredness. Later on, Muhammad established the haram of Medina on the model of the Abrahamic haram of Mecca".

There is a reason why virtually every non-Muslim writer that witnessed the rise of Islam, from polemicists the likes of John of Damascus that had every reason to refute Muslim claims, to Sebeos in Armenia and beyond, regardless of precise dating and authorship of the works attributed to various Judeo-Christian elite accross the region, almost all of them refer to the Abrahamic ancestry of Muhammad and the Muslims. In a short Nestorian chronicle, the Khuzistan Chronicle written around 660, in the section concluding the death of Heraclius, the writer says

"the victory of the sons of Ishmael who overpowered and subdued these two strong empires, came from God."

The chronicler further observes

"Regarding the dome of Abraham, we have been unable to discover what it is except that, because the blessed Abraham grew rich in property and wanted to get away from the envy of the Canaanites, he chose to live in the distant and spacious parts of the desert. Since he lived in tents, he built that place for the worship of God and for the offering of sacrifices. It took its present name from what it had been, since the memory of the place was preserved with the generations of their race. Indeed, it was no new thing for the Arabs to worship there, but goes back to antiquity, to their early days, in that they show honour to the father of the head of their people. Hasor, which scripture calls "head of the kingdoms" (Joshua 11:10), belongs to the Arabs, while Medina is named after Midian, Abraham's fourth son by Qetura; it is also called Yathrib. And Dumat Jandal [belongs to them], and the territory of the Hagaraye, which is rich in water, palm trees and fortified buildings. The territory of Hatta, situated by the sea in the vicinity of the islands of Qatar, is rich in the same way; it is also thickly vegetated with various kinds of plants. The region of Mazon also resembles it; it too lies by the sea and comprises an area of more than 100 parasangs. So [belongs to them] too the territory of Yamama, in the middle of the desert, and the territory of Tawf, and the city of Hira, which was the seat of king Mundar, surnamed the "warrior;" he was sixth in the line of the lshmaelite kings".

Even among the polytheist Arabs, remnants of rites commemorating the Abrahamic legacy were maintained. For example, though they used to sacrifice animals on various idol altars at different places, their sacrificing of animals at Mina at the time of the pilgrimage was only in pursuance of the Abrahamic tradition. It was no sacrificing for any particular idols or their idols in general.

Neither any idol nor any altar was there at Mina or Arafat. The ritual of sa'i or running between the two hills of Safa and Marwah is among God's signs. Just like foreign idols were brought to Mecca and integrated into the Kaaba, corrupting the Abrahamic legacy, some idols were placed on these hills. We read in the history books what caused this innovation.

When 2 lovers named Assaf and Naila hid inside the Kaaba to be intimate, Allah turned them to stone statues. Associating this with a miracle, the Quraysh placed them each on one of the 2 hills, and as the generations passed, took them for deities. The association of the site with paganism repulsed some early Muslims, but God told them plainly not to worry, for the Safa and Marwa are among His signs, regardless of how the sinful generations mishandled them

2:158-9"Surely the Safa and the Marwa are among the signs appointed by Allah...Surely those who conceal the clear proofs and the guidance that We revealed after We made it clear in the Book for men, these it is whom Allah shall curse, and those who curse shall curse them (too)".

The re-institution of this location as a monotheistic pilgrimage site comes in the context of patience in adversity and trust in Allah, just as Hagar was as she frantically searched for help, running back and forth between these 2 hills, when she was settled in the location by Abraham, together with her infant child Ismail. The practice of tawaf at the Kaaba, the circlings/circumambulations symbolizes the notion that all human endeavours ought to have the idea of God and His oneness for their centre.

Although the Quran itself does not require a specific number of circumambulations 2:125,22:26 the prophet used to circle the Kaaba 7 times and sometimes more. There is nothing special about the number seven in Islamic rituals and it doesnt even appear in the daily religious practices. It is only if one focuses on a certain number(s) as is done by these 2 youtubers, who by the way are obsessive compulsive in regards to the famous 3 of their religion, 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.

The number seven entails a vast quantity in classical Arabic. This could have been the reason the prophet told his followers to repeat certain hajj rituals 7 times. With this notion in mind, the appropriateness of that number to certain hajj rituals becomes clear. Circling 7 times means that every possible thought and deed should have God at its center. Stoning the devil 7 times implies his casting away from every possible thought and deed. That is also why we refer to him in every day speak as well as in religious contexts, as "al shaytan alrajim/the pelted devil". HE is pelted in thoughts and deeds through one's obedience to Allah. Pelting the stone walls during pilgrimage symbolizes this obedience to God, in contrast to disdain for the devil. With every stone that is disdainfully thrown, in contrast, a remembrance of Allah's greatness is uttered. The traditions speak of the devil appearing to Abraham as he was on his way to execute God's vision in regards to Ismail. Jibril instructed him to pelt the devil, who retreated then reappeared 3 times in total and every time Ibrahim listened to God's command to stone him. The pilgrims follow this example of Ibrahim, symbolizing their casting away of the devil by pelting 3 stone walls.

Running 7 times between safa and marwa symbolizes trust in God despite the hardships of life, just as Hagar demonstrated in that same place, again, with the number 7 implying intensity of the trials of life, just as Hagar went through a difficult trial there.

As regards this number 7 by the way, what transpires from the HB Bible is that it is YHWH himself who attaches particular importance to that number, which was by the way, his day of rest following the difficult task of creating the world. In Josh6:1-8 prior to helping the Israelites with a miracle, YHWH insists that several deeds should be done 7 times precisely.

It is important noting, the Quran itself, throughout the verses laying out the hajj rituals 2:196,5:95-6,22:26-37etc doesnt link these rituals to Ibrahim, although it gives credit to Ibrahim for having initiated worship at the site and instaured the pilgrimage.

This was part of the Quran's denationalization test of the Kaaba, placing it above any national pride, making its primary purpose to be a location where the one God is praised by all of humanity indiscriminately. These rituals should be done in God's name only. Every capable Muslim is bound by to perform them at some point 3:97 with an upright state of mind before and during the journey 2:197.

CIRA international seeking paganism in Islam; Quran endorses jinn beliefs?

In answer to the video "Sin and Salvation, Part 3 - Does Allah Love Sinners?"

Besides the notion of evesdropping jinn which the Quran denies, other superstitions associated with the jinn, and rejected by the Quran, is the supposed possibility for humans to master them. The Quran refutes that belief through the story of the prophet Solomon.

He was given unlimited mastery over them, had the capacity to summon and use the jinn, the evil as well as the good ones, at will, and for the accomplishement of positive actions only 27:17,38-41. This however was a favor from God and was done by God's express command. Their subjection, despite the rebellious nature of the sinful ones among them, was not of Solomon's own will or power and the jinns concerned had no say in the matter or else they would face God's chastisement. They were under God's complete control in the process 21:81-2 meaning Solomon by himself had absolutely no special ability that allowed him the possibility to master them the way he did, use them at will and without any fear of having to render an account 34:12,38:36-38. In Jewish oral tradition however, it is stated that Solomon was overpowered by one of those demons, Ashmadai who chased him from his throne.

That such an eminent personality, favored by God and drawn near to Him, a prophet imparted knowledge of the unseen like all prophets, was not able to control the jinn except by God's will is an emphatic rejection of the claim that some random people with alleged powers have the capacity to summon them at will, and make them perform certain tasks (most of the time for evil purposes) or obtain hidden knowledge (another belief concerning the jinn rejected by the Quran 34:14). On a more specific note, it also negates the notion that solomon himself, contrary to the suspicions and calumnies of some of his contemporaries and the subsequent generations, used to practice the occult sciences

2:102"And they followed what the Shaitans chanted of sorcery in the reign of Sulaiman, and Sulaiman was not an unbeliever, but the Shaitans disbelieved".

We see traces of these allegations even in the Jewish historian Josephus' works. He relates how Solomon had, through incantations and the use of the occult sciences, mastery of demons, could perform exorcisms. He speaks of a Jew contemporary to him that made use of these Solomonic practices. Obviously the people misinterpreted Sulayman's ability, granted to him by God, of controling entities of the unseen for his own benefit. Such falsehood is abundantly found in a wide variety of Solomonic lore, including the 5th century CE Testament of Solomon, each drawing from oneanother as well as other lost sources, written and oral. Particularly among Greek Christians that used amulets, medallions seals or rings with his name.

What we find in certain Jewish traditions in regards his perception of the language and behavior of birds, is that his ability wasnt a divine gift but due to his mastery of ornithomancy, an occult science involving birds (Pesika de-Rav Kahana, Ecclesiastes Rabbah). Here again, just as it does with his other supernatural abilities where clearly states they were divinely granted gifts to him, and that Solomon was humbly grateful to his Lord, it introduces the story of Solomon's interraction with the brid messenger with a prayer

27:19"My Lord, grant me that I should be grateful for Your favor that You bestowed on me and on my parents, and that I should do good such as You would be pleased with, and make me enter, by Your mercy, into Your servants, the good ones".