This articles answers Sam Shamoun "Ramadan: One of the Names of Allah???!!!"
Friday, December 11, 2020
The Name of God
The fear, awe and reverence to God is so deeply rooted in the teachings of Judaism that they may not pronounce what they have construed as His actual proper name
Deut28:58"fear this glorious and awesome name, the Lord, your God".
God Himself, throughout the HB, does not identify any word as His unique, proper name. It is the Jews that have identified these 4 consonantal letters YHWH (the Tetragammaton) as such. The instruction to fear the name YHWH creates difficulties within the text and its interpretation. For example HaShem, Elohim or Adonai replace these 4 consonants whenever they appear in the text. When describing the sacred Ark of the Jews, and speaking of the inscription on it representing these 4 letters, the author of 2Sam6:2 refers to "the name" so as to avoid pronouncing the word.
The biblical instruction of making God's name known to the world is reinterpreted in the sense of making His fame, reputation known. Knowing "about" God is achieved by showing the manner in which His attributes manifested in the world and throughout history. The text however shows that the name was known in ancient times, without any restrictions Gen4:1, just as was the case in the times of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob Gen15:7,17:1,22:14,28:3,13,35:11.
Later however, due to the high awe, and reverence towards the name, the priests forbade the laymen from uttering it, and preserved it among their own descendants. This of course is an unfounded traditional claim, since nobody today can claim to known the correct spelling of the 4 letters, even among those who trace their lineage to the priestly clan. Legend says that the mystery shrouding the correct spelling of the name will continue until the Messianic era where the 4 consonants will be made known to all, and without any restriction.
In Lev24:10-16 there is the story of someone who attempted to pronounce it
"..the son of the Israelite woman pronounced the [Divine] Name and cursed it.. Any man who curses his God shall bear his sin. And one who NOKEV the Name of the Lord, shall be put to death; the entire community shall stone him; convert and resident alike if he NOKVO the [Divine] Name, he shall be put to death."The verb NAKAV appears in many instances, including Gen30:28,Num1:17,Isa62:2 and never means to blaspheme or curse but is equivalent to "saying" or "calling". It is purposefully mistranslated as "blaspheme" in Christian Bibles that seek to bypass the total restriction concerning the uttering of God's name. In fact the very plain reading of the verse reveals the important fact that the person committed not 1, but 2 sins, and that he was not actually executed for cursing God's name, but for pronouncing it. The person pronounced, then cursed the name. For the cursing, the sentence was that he shall "bear his sin" meaning that no atonement would be possible for him and he will carry the burden all throughout his life until it is dealt with by God after his death. For the sin of pronouncing the name, the sentence was that he should be put to death.
In addition to due reverence, there are other pragmatic reasons to avoid pronouncing the 4 letters. It only consists of consonants, which can only result in an incorrect pronunciation to anyone who tries. There is nothing more insulting than mispronouncing someone's name, let alone one used for God.
The pronunciation "Yahweh" or "Jehovah" is based on that used by some of the Church Fathers but even among biblical scholars there is no certainty at all in this matter which is why most prefer to render it simply as YHWH without the vowels. In fact the pronounciation "Yahweh" is a Christians blunder, who took the vowelization which Jews use for ADNY (The aleph has the vowel "ah", the daled has "o", the nun has "ah" and it ends with a yud = AhDoNahY) and applied it to YHWH (They gave the first "ah" to the Y, then the "o" to the H, and finally the last "ah" to the letter vav = YaHoVah, regularily pronounced Yahweh or Jehovah).
Seeing God's name as so sacred that it shouldn't be mentioned is condemned as a great injustice in the Quran 2:114. The remembrance of God, praising Him by His name and attributes is an important part of a worshiper's rituals, continuously commanded in the Quran
87:1"Glorify the name of your Lord, the Most High".
See here how the Quran immidiately corrects and elevates Judaism's defective monotheism. And this is why Muslims do not call Allah their "father". There is no exclusivist relationship between the God of all creation, and the Muslims.
Another forceful way the Quran does so is when it revisits the events at the "burning bush".
In the Quran God reveals Himself to Moses, with words evoking universal, indiscriminate Lordship, words which Moses would later communicate throughout his prophetic career whether in his confrontation with the Egyptian elite, or the Israelites; He is the One Lord besides Whom there are none, the Lord of all worlds/aalamin, a word encompassing in its meaning all human beings in all ages. He will gather and judge every soul indiscriminately based on its individual merit 20:12-16,28:30. The version of the HB again reveals the deep inclination pervasive throughout the Jewish writings, for monolatry and its depiction of an ethno-centred tribal deity
Ex3:6"I am the God of your Father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob".
Similarly in contrast to Ex34:14 neither did Moses report God's name as "the jealous One" nor did he call Him a jealous God (in Numbers 5:14 the same word is used for human jealousy between spouses). Moses instead said that
14:8"if you disbelieve, you and whoever (is) in the earth together, then indeed, God is Self-sufficient, Praiseworthy".
God is Omnipotent and is not in any need of His servants or their worship. This is a major Quranic theme, again in contrast with the pervasive Biblical depiction of God as the jealous husband, going after a treacherous Israelite bride that prostitutes itself to other gods. The Quran makes it clear, it is His servants that need Him. Therefore, He has absolutely no requirement to be jealous. Further, all beautiful and best names belong to Him
7:180,20:8"Allah, there is not god but He. His are the very best names".
The best name is one that possesses the pure and sheer reality of perfection without any mix of its opposite. For example life without death or dominance without defeat
17:110"Call upon Allah or call upon the Beneficient, whichever you call upon, He has the best names".
"HE" refers to the divine Essence, which is not restricted to any name, like Allah or al Rahman/the Beneficient, so long as such a name is the most superior and perfect like the 2 names given in the verse to illustrate -Allah, and al Rahman/the Beneficient-. Also, each and every one of those names refers exclusively to the same Divine Essence. Whether the Essence is addressed as Allah, al Rahman, al Athim, al Ghafur etc. it is still one and the same Being worthy of worship that is being called upon. This is how the Quran intricately and comprehensively restores mankind's original monotheism.
Fear of God, awareness of the seriousness of His threats avoids one from falling into self-complacency, makes one feel obliged at all times to act upon Divine Commands and regard the righteous good deeds as insignificant in the face of divine perfection 7:99,70:24-8. This state of mind further frees one from any tinge of idolatry as it makes one aware that no protector ultimately exists outside of Allah
6:14,51,70,17:111"Praise to Allah, who has not taken a son and has had no partner in [His] dominion and has no [need of a] protector out of weakness; and glorify Him with [great] glorification" 33:17"Say, "Who is it that can protect you from Allah if He intends for you an ill or intends for you a mercy?" And they will not find for themselves besides Allah any protector or any helper".
That notion is such a crucial component of faith that after introducing His identity through His observable attributes, God describes His servants as those who, among other lofty characteristics, fear the seriousness of His threats more than they desire His reward 25:60-77.
Fear however can never be the sole constituent of belief, it must be balanced with 2 other elements; hope 12:87 and love for God
32:16"call upon their Sustainer in fear and in hope"21:90"These people exerted their utmost in righteous deeds and called upon Us with love and fear and they remained humble before Us".
From a philosophical viewpoint, fear, whether in the natural or spiritual world, is an asset without which survival is impossible. But it must be balanced and controlled or else it leads to stagnation and even death. As is taught to us by the Creator, spiritually, fear must be balanced with love and trust.
The correct attitude is to never fall into either extreme, becoming self-complacent or hopeless of God's mercy. This upright perspective leads one to continuously strive to increase safety/iman in Allah.
This balanced attitude is reflected in the saying of the prophet
“If the believer knew what was with Allah of punishment, no one would hope for Paradise; and if the disbeliever knew what was with Allah of Mercy, no one would despair of attaining Paradise".
Elsewhere the Quran describes the successful as those who "hope" to meet their Lord and "hope" for His forgiveness 2:218,18:110. This is a sign of humility, when even within the same verse, those people are reassured that Allah is surely forgiving and merciful, they still keep in mind that salvation is ultimately in God's hands
2:218"Surely those who believed and those who fled (their home) and strove hard in the way of Allah these hope for the mercy of Allah and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful".
The believer in those concepts, the one who knows what God demands of Him and what not, what His Sustainer loves in His servant and what not, continuously toils in the path of truth, without pride and self content. Contrary to the scripturally indefensible concept of an unconditionally loving God, which leads to conceit and self-righteousness, the one striving to meet God's explicit criteria of approval, constantly remains God-conscious. He remains humble, never thinking he is beyond reproach, fearing the seriousness of God's threats as well as hoping for His mercy, until he meets his Creator.
39:23"Allah has sent down the best statement: a consistent Book wherein is reiteration. The skins shiver therefrom of those who fear their Lord; then their skins and their hearts relax at the remembrance of Allah. That is the guidance of Allah by which He guides whom He wills".
The Love is evident in the word IMAN that denotes profound and sincere feeling of safety implying that one is in complete trust of a protective entity, that is, God. One cannot feel safe in an entity without having love for that entity, and knowing in turn that the entity is loving. This is where the Quran explains that this love isnt reciprocal, but more intense when coming from God. He is as al-rahman, the intensification of rahma. The root R-H-M means WOMB.
Therefore in order to imagine what this word actually means one has to picture the womb and what it does to the fetus. It nurtures, protects, provides warmth, love etc. without even the fetus being aware of it.
Allah is the only true deity 2:255,23:116-117,37:95-96,59:22-24,112:1-4. As shown earlier, He can be named by absolutely any name, so long as it is the "best of names", which includes among others, Allah. He isnt restricted to any name or any number of names and all the scholars agree that Allah's names are unlimited so long as they are the best.
There is a prayer by the prophet in which he calls upon Allah by the name He has chosen to reveal to mankind, and those He kept in the unseen
"I ask You by every name belonging to You which You named Yourself with, or revealed in Your Book, or You taught to any of Your creation, or You have preserved in the knowledge of the unseen with You..".
When the prophet urged the people to pay heed to those names, he said those who ahsaa ha/assimilates and applies them -not merely memorize them, see Quran 18:12- in the worship and in everyday life is deserving of a great reward. These Divine Names, which punctuate so many Quran verses inform us about the moral quality that human beings must strive to embody. The believer becomes a vessel of mercy, justice, etc. Naming Allah doesnt imply knowing Allah, or encompassing Him, or giving Him a similitude. Humans exist, but nothing like Allah, who ever-exists. Anyone has experienced mercy or existence, but not to perfection and infinity. The names of Allah dont describe the reality of His attributes, but tell us that He possesses a particular attribute to perfection. To clarify further, the name "all merciful" doesnt describe the reality, the essence of Allah's infinite mercy. It tells us that He possesses the concept of mercy, which we have experience of, to perfection, which we cannot fathom.
To limit God's names would be in effect a restriction on His majesty and God can never be contained, neither physically nor linguistically
17:110"Call upon Allah or call upon, Al-Rahman; whichever you call upon, He has the best names".
The most obvious of these attributes is His attribute of Rahma, or mercy. Al rahman is the most intensive form of rahma. This is because Allah is the most merciful and this is why the attribute of mercy is the only one said to be "written" upon God
6:12,54"your Lord has written mercy on Himself".
The Hebrew equivalent of "rhm", is also found in the Hebrew Bible Deut4:31,Ps86:15 again to stress an important attribute of God from a human perspective. The name was known in the prophetic history
19:58,27:30,43:45"And ask those We sent before you of Our messengers; have We made besides the Most Merciful/Al Rahman deities to be worshipped?"
including by Abraham 19:44, as well as Mary the mother of Jesus, who was inspired
19:26"if you see from among humanity anyone, say, 'Indeed, I have vowed to the Most Merciful/Al Rahman abstention, so I will not speak today to [any] man".
In fact the Quran condemns the Christian contemporaries of the prophet for their outrageous religious deviations in attributing a son to Al Rahman 19:88-95.
In Hymiar around the 380s, the form of worship appears to have undergone a fundamental change, observable not only in Marib and Zafar but also throughout South Arabia. The gods ceased to be worshipped and their shrines, including the huge Awam temple were abandoned. The inscriptions were no longer addressed to the ancient astral gods such as Almaqah, but to a single deity, called the
“Lord of Heaven”
or the
“Lord of Heaven and earth”
who is also called Rahmanan.
Other descriptions are
“God, the Lord of Heaven”
as well as Rahmanan with these attributes. These Inscriptions dated to the end of the 4th century show that the title was first associated with Judaism. But the establishment of a Jewish community there must have occurred much earlier. When the Ethiopian king Abraha invaded Yemen we find inscriptions beginning with the formula,
“with the help of Rahmanan and his Christ,”
which is sometimes extended to a trinity:
“with the help of Rahmanan and his Christ and the Holy spirit ”.
After the rise of Islam, a man from Yamama called Musaylimah renounced his Christian faith and began preaching his own monotheistic religion, claiming to be a messenger of God. He had retained the Christian divine epithet al-Rahman and applied it to himself. He became known by those who followed him, as well as the Arab pagans to whom he preached his religion by "al Rahman". The prophet Muhammad didnt give him any importance, calling him "al-kadhab"/the liar instead, as he is still known today. He was fought and defeated under the caliphate of Abu Bakr, against whom he had rebelled with a force outnumbering those of the Muslims. It is interesting that in contrast, the Quran describes the prophet as rahim/merciful 9:128. It does not name him rahim, as it would entail, just like Musaylimah intended, that the prophet embodied that quality in an absolute sense. The Quran instead stresses that no other god except the One God possesses the attribute of rahman and rahim to perfection 2:163,23:109,59:22 as well as commands the prophet himself to proclaim that reality
21:112,23:118"And, [O Muhammad], say, "My Lord, forgive and have mercy, and You are the best of the merciful."
Most pagans were not aware of "Rahman" as an epithet for the supreme God. Effectively, all religious epigraphic material surveyed until now dated to the 6th century until the rise of Islam in the Mecca area call upon Allah, the name of the supreme God. So when the Quran tells them to
25:60"Prostrate to al-Rahman! they say: And what is al-Rahman? Are we to prostrate to whatever you command us? And it increases their aversion".
Some of them even thought the name indicated a god besides Allah.
It is interesting noting how God, in answer to the derogatory demand to know "what" al rahman is, after giving a glimpse of His identity through the observable mercy pervasive in His creation, cites His servants as being the worldly ambassadors reflecting that attribute of mercy, physically and spiritually sincere and humble, benevolent towards their fellow men, patiently forbearing especially when confronted by the ignorant 25:60-77.
Although this attitude represented the mainstream opposition, we read in some marginal pre-Islamic poems echoes of the Abrahamic legacy. In the invective poem by al A'sha, al-rahman and Allah alternate in consecutive verses. The Quran echoes these beliefs
43:20"And they said, "If the Most Merciful/Al Rahman had willed, we would not have worshipped them".
The word ALLAH was used since pre-islamic times, by the Hanif, the Arab polytheists, and both Arab Jews and Christians. The verse 22:40 states that all people in whose temples Allah's name is mentioned, were encouraged to stand up and defend their sites and rights to worship in them, including churches and synagogues. Elsewhere we read how the pagans recognized Allah as the supreme Creator despite having associated interceding deities to Him 29:60-65,46:28,39:3.
The difference between each group however lies in the attributes they give Him and the manner they describe His interaction with the universe. That is why the Quran in sura kafirun does not negate who/man the disbelievers worship, rather what/ma
109:2"You do not serve what I serve".
The characteristics of the "Allah" of each group are different. What Muslims worship is not the deity of a chosen race, does not rest or slumber after creation, nor enters it. He does not have sons and daughters, nor a consort, and He did not detach Himself from creation after giving it the initial push. More descriptive points can be enumerated showing the monotheistic deficiency of every thought system claiming to worship One Creator with a common name, in contrast to Islam's supreme tawhid. The word "Allah" in itself however, "Who" is meant by it, is not exclusive to Islam.
Up to this day, Arab Jews refer to God as "Allah". The Torah prohibits Jews from pronouncing another god's name
Ex23:13"and the name of the gods of others you shall not mention; it shall not be heard through your mouth".
If Allah was a name unknown to them and the name of another God that the unpronounceable Tetragammaton, they would have never repeated it, much less in prayer. A Jew can even go as far as praying inside a mosque but is forbidden of entering a church under any circumstances. The Arabic "Allah" could thus simply be the contraction of al ilah/the God. The word was so persistently and exclusively used to describe the supreme God that stood above the hundreds of interceding deities that it gradually became equivalent to His proper name among the Arabs, whether the pagans, the hanif, the Jews or Christians.
YHWH, instead of being God's unique, proper name is one of Allah's best names, describing one of His perfect attributes, like al Rahman and endless others, although its correct pronunciation is now forgotten. What strongly corroborates this is that the HB states in Ex6:2-3 that the patriarchs did not known God by the name of YHWH. Yet, as stated earlier, we do read throughout Genesis that from the first humans, down to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, all knew the name YHWH. The way this contradiction is harmonized is by saying that, although previous people knew the name, they did not know its meaning. In Western languages, a name is a label of identification. In Semitic languages, shem (Hebrew) or ism (Arabic) is meant to reveal something of the essence of the entity. Hence the non-exhaustive "names" of Allah given in the Quran and traditions, each evoking an aspect by which His essence manifests. To further corroborate that what is traditionally construed as a mere label of identification of God in Hebrew, is in fact a description of one of God's attributes is seen in
Ex3:13-14"And Moses said to God, "Behold I come to the children of Israel, and I say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they say to me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?" God said to Moses, "Ehyeh asher ehyeh (I will be what I will be)," and He said, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'Ehyeh (I will be) has sent me to you.'"
God here doesnt answer Moses' question with a word, but with a definition, an expression entailing eternity past and future. That notion is found in many Quranic passages 2:255,3:2,28:88,40:65,57:3,55:27. Once God clearly defined the meaning of the label by which Moses was to identify Him, He finally spelled out His "shem"
v15"And God said further to Moses, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'YHWH elohe/the God of your forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.' This is My name forever, and this is how I should be mentioned in every generation".
Moses is thus told to make God known to the Israelites by a label which in the Hebrew language denotes eternity YHWH ELOHE. The Quran conveys in Arabic the same meaning with ALLAHU SAMAD, which Muslims recite in their daily prayers. The traditions also list ALBAQI among the names of Allah, denoting everlastingness. Similarly in the Greek of the New Testament, we find the phrase aioniou theou/the eternal God Rom16:26. Just like the Arabic Quran, the Greek of the New Testament doesnt use the Hebrew tetragammaton YHWH. Nobody will claim that the God John and Jesus spoke of in the NT is other than the God of Moses in the Torah. Writing the tetragammaton is allowed in Jewish tradition, as is done throughout the HB. It is the vowelization and attempted pronunciation that are forbidden. Further, no passage within the NT hints at an awareness of the prohibition to utter the tetragammaton. The NT goes as far as saying that Jesus' name is greater than all names Phil2:9.
We even read that just as Allah was known prior to Islam, the Semitic tribes inhabiting the land of Canaan much earlier than the Israelites also knew YHWH. The very reason, per the Torah, For God deciding to uproot and exterminate those nations, then settling the Israelites instead, was not because of the Abrahamic covenant, but because these nations had become sinners, unworthy to reside in a land previously declared sacred Gen15:16,Deut9,1Sam4:7. The Canaanite were relatives of the Israelites. They were Abrahamic descendants, such as the Moabites descendants of Lot and Edomites whose father is Esau. There is no reason to assume that these Abrahamic tribes did not emulate their common forefather by worshiping YHWH.
But as the generations passed they corrupted that worship until God sent another Abrahamic branch, the Israelites, to uproot and replace them. Similarly Jethro was a Midianite-Kenite. Midian was the son of Abraham, and Kenite in reference to Adam's son, Cain whose descendants lived among all the people of the Levant. Jethro was thus a non Israelite Semite, descendant of Abraham, who had kept the Abrahamic legacy. He proclaims to Moses that YHWH is greater than all false deities Ex18:7-12.
Sam Shamoun "How Allah Stumped Muhammad and His Followers"
These articles answer Sam Shamoun "How Allah Stumped Muhammad and His Followers"
Sam Shamoun "How the One Becomes the Many: The Quran’s Affirmation of Plurality within Unity"
These articles answer Sam Shamoun "How the One Becomes the Many: The Quran’s Affirmation of Plurality within Unity"
Thursday, December 10, 2020
Sam Shamoun "More Islamic Fairytales: The Consequences of Not Saying Insha Allah!"
The ahadith report a vow made by Solomon, that he would sleep with several of his wives in one night, with the various reports numbering them as much as 60, 90, 99 or even 100. In hadith science, when multiple versions of a report having the same narrator chain give different numbers everytime, the understanding is that the number was remembered differently by the narrators because of it being insignificant to the purports of the prophetic saying.
Abu Hurairah is the sole narrator of this hadith and there is no suggestion that he heard it from the Prophet on multiple occasions, meaning the latter cannot be the reason of the contradiction. What might have happened is the prophet spoke on one occasion of Solomon's vow to sleep with an unspecified large number of his wives in one night, as well as the number of wives he had in total. The narrators might have mixed the 2 statements.
I will go round in the night to my ninety wives, and every one of them will give birth to a child (who will grow up) as a horseman and fight in the cause of Allah His companions said to him: Say" Insha' Allah." but he did not say Inshii' Allah. He went round all of them but none of them became pregnant but one, and she gave birth to a premature child. And by Him in Whose hand is the life of Muhammad, if he had said, Insha' Allah (his wives would have given birth to the children who would all have grown up into horsemen and fought in the way of Allah).
The hadith speaks of Solomon desiring to have many male children so as to serve in war for God's cause. He vowed sleeping with a large number of wives for that purpose in a single night, but forgot the angel's inspiring him with expressing his reliance on Allah (other versions mention the angel). Despite his wish, none of the wives he slept with was able to conceive, except for one who gave birth to a premature child that probably died in infancy. The Arabs referred to them as split/divided/half children because of incomplete growth.
Not every failed endeavour is a sign of divine disapproval. Neither does the hadith say that his failure was caused by God so as to punish him. God may either allow the natural flow of causality to follow its course, or alter it as He deems fit. In this case, had Solomon initially relied on God, then God could have rewarded him with success in his objective by altering the course of causality. Practically speaking, most healthy men are able to have sex with a very large number of women in a short time if they interrupt the act with one partner then switch to another. This might have been the reason for Solomon's failure to impregnate his wives.
As to the hadith quoted in some books of tafsir saying that the revelation of sura kahf came much later than the day following the challenge, because the prophet did not utter the phrase "if God wills", presents several internal incoherences, besides it being rejected for having unreliable and unknown narrators in its chain.
It says for instance that once revelation came 15 days later, it contained a rebuke to the prophet. No such reproach exists in sura kahf. Nor are there any traces in any tradition, authentic or else, of the supposed rumors due to the prophet's incapacity to answer the following day as he had promised. Furthermore no link exists between the verse upon which the tafsir and narration are based (18:23-4) and the question asked later on concerning Dhul Qarnayn 18:83.
The verse teaching to never plan anything before relying on God 18:23-4 and upon which the narration is based, is a parenthetical statement inserted in the flow of the discourse about the youths of the cave. It is connected to the previous verse which is about refraining to research into things known only to God, so in the same way one should not make plans for the future without acknowledging that certainty in all matters only belongs to God.
Finally, the narration says sura Kahf came in answer to 3 questions by the Jews (the youths of the cave, the "ruh" and the powerful traveller/Dhul Qarnayn) whereas the sura cites only one question related to one topic, Dhul Qarnayn and then proceeds with the answer.
In contrast there is no link between a question and the story of the youths (a Christian story, irrelevant to the Jews who supposedly asked the question) and neither does the sura respond to the 3rd supposed question about the "ruh". That question was uttered on another occasion and answered in 17:85 which is a much earlier sura than sura kahf.
Sam Shamoun "The Third Caliph’s Abuse of the Quran’s Greatest Compiler"
Zayd ibn Thabit was the main scribe along with several other prominent Qurayshis tasked by Uthman to compile the Quran in book form.
The same Zaid Ibn Thabit was involved with the collection during Abu Bakr's time as well, collecting the revelation in the form of suhuf or loose pages, from both oral as well as written sources that were in the prophet's house. Zayd remembered how
"the prophet was taken from this life while the Quran had not yet been gathered into a book".
The use of "gathered" instead of "written" is significant as it proves its existence in written form, although scattered on different supports. Zaid, after gathering all that was physically available, then demanded two witnesses for each piece, attesting to its oral transmission. Here Zaid was just following the prophet's dual authentication method, oral/textual. It is to be noted, none, not even the prophet himself as attested in the traditions, is able to recite flawlessly from memory each and every time. That is why the Quran was transmitted through massive consensus, with reciters and laymen checking one another for errors, in addition strengthening the transmission process using their physical copies.
To corroborate this great care in performing the task entrusted to him, there are at least 2 recorded incidents where Zayd would not validate a verse despite knowing it by heart from the prophet's mouth, until he found it in written form between the hands of a reliable believer. This was the case concerning the last 2 verses of sura tawba/bara'a, known and cross checked through the memory of several reciters including Zayd, and yet he would not include it in the text unless corroborated by a written copy. Once the unique hard copy of 9:128-129 was found between the hands Abu Khuzaimah al-Ansari it confirmed what the comitee of compilers, including Umar, Uthman, Zaid and Ubay bin Kaab had already memorized and were looking for in the first place. There has never been any doubt accross the spectrum of Islamic sects as to the authenticity of these 2 verses.
This authentication process was even more stringent than the one the other religious texts (hadith, tafsir, fiqh etc.) would later be put through, which already is in itself a method unsurpassed in the world for any other document, let alone religious. This is how serious, meticulous and careful Zayd was in accomplishing his mission
"By Allah, if he (Abu Bakr) had ordered me to shift one of the mountains (from its place) it would not have been harder for me than what he had ordered me concerning the collection of the Qur’an".
Zayd is here speaking retrospectively and implying how the succesfully completed task was a heavy duty obviously hard to accomplish considering the level of care he had imposed upon himself.
This highly noble assignment, entrusted to the young Zayd, did cause resentment among some of the older companions, the most vocal of whom was Abdullah ibn Masud. That resentment was further fueled by the fact ibn Masud had to give up his own personal mushaf. The early Muslims held their Quran writings in high esteem, and ibn Masud compiled his own in greater part based on the recitation learned from the prophet in person. But he now had to give it up in favor of Zayd's approved standardized rasm/orthography. Zayd's compilation was superior to ibn Masud in that its rasm could absorb many potential qiraat while the scripts of the individual copies held by Muslims could not be read in all qiraat.
It is only natural that he, out of pride, who hold on to his "superior" mushaf and by the same token try and discredit Zayd
"'O you Muslim people! I am removed from recording the transcription of the Mushaf and it is overseen by a man, by Allah, when I accepted Islam he was but in the loins of a disbelieving man' - meaning Zaid bin Thabit - and it was regarding this that 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud said: 'O people of Al-'Iraq! Keep the Musahif that are with you, and conceal them. For indeed Allah said: And whoever conceals something, he shall come with what he concealed on the Day of Judgement (3:161). So meet Allah with the Musahif.'" Az-Zuhri said: "It was conveyed to me that some men amongst the most virtuous of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah disliked that view of Ibn Mas'ud".
In this correct rendition of Az-Zuhri's report in Jami' al Tirmidhi, not the misleading translation often used among Islam critics ("Avoid copying the Mushaf and the recitation of this man") several important things transpire. Firstly, the leading companions disapproved of that selfish, prideful stand from ibn Masud. Second, what ibn Masud really resented was not Zayd's capabilities. Rather it was Uthman's decision not to appoint him instead of Zaid as leader of the 2nd committee for the compilation. Al Asqalani discusses that particular point, saying ibn Masud simply was absent from Medina when Uthman urgently appointed the committee. He was in Kufah. Furthermore, because Uthman did nothing more than reproduce the pages compiled under Abu Bakr into one mushaf, and that Zayd Ibn Thabit had already been among the top scribes charged of that compilation, then it was natural to designate him to lead that 2nd compilation.
The other issue ibn Masud had was in giving up his precious mushaf, which he was emotionally attached to
"whenever the prophet and Jibril finished reciting to eachother, i would recite to the prophet as well and he would inform me that my recitation was eloquent".
As already pointed, Zayd was already entrusted with a similar task under Abu Bakr and ibn Masud didnt voice any objection then, as he was now doing under Uthman. Uthman chose Zayd for his experience under Abu Bakr. Despite his initial opposition, ibn Masud eventually understood Uthman's plan and agreed with his effort, surrendering his personal mushaf. As later attested by ibn Qurazi, the mushaf of ibn Masud which he used for recitation and teaching was no different, including in its sura sequence, than the ones of Ubayy and Zaid ibn Thabit. The names of his most illustrious pupils and their transmission of the entire 114 suras of the Quran is also known, names like Alqama, al Aswad, Masruq and many others.
The spurious reports by the historians, saying Uthman ordered the beating of ibn Masud are "fabrications" according to ibn al Arabi and some of the "most well known lies" according to al Dhahabi. The reality is that despite temporary tensions, Uthman and ibn Masud had high regard for one another, with Uthman even leading the funeral prayer at ibn Masud's death in Medina (ibn Saad/Tabaqat).
Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "The Third Caliph’s Abuse of the Quran’s Greatest Compiler"
Sam Shamoun "Allah’s Need for Human Sacrifice to Appease Hell’s Angelic Ruler"(2)
When Abel pointed to the rejection of Cain's offering, he said it was due to his sinfulness or lack of piety. Cain should thus focus on his inner self, reassessing his spirituality and mend his ways instead of being envious 5:27. The nature of the offering in itself is not important, so long as it is done with sincerity and God-consciousness, hence the Quran's silence on the things both brothers offered
22:37"There does not reach Allah their flesh nor their blood, but to Him is acceptable the guarding (against evil) on your part; thus has He made them subservient to you, that you may magnify Allah because He has guided you aright; and give good news to those who do good (to others)".
This is a major point driven through by the Quran. In the HB, God disdainfully rejects Cain's offering for no other reason that
Gen4:3"Cain brought the fruit of the soil"
while Abel
"brought the firstborn of his flocks and the fattest, and the Lord turned to Abel and to his offering"
This sacrificial rite is no more than a symbol of a conscious, selfless offering in God's name of something one cherishes as necessary and valuable. It is not an attempt to "appease" Him who is far above anything that resembles human emotion, nothing of His creation can disturb Him 35:44. Ultimately anything offered to Allah in God consciousness counts as of equal value and merit than a blood offering as stated in 22:37 above. The primary issue is to remain aware of Allah during this universal rite
22:34"To every people did We appoint rites, that they might celebrate the name of God over the sustenance He gave them"
The Quran recognizes the universality of this rite, and then restores it to the right, original course; glorifying God alone, first and foremost.
It is when one loses Allah's pleasure from sight in the process, such as by having one's intentions polluted with sinfulness as occurred to Cain, or by having other deities or motives in mind, that the offering is invalidated. The merit does not lie in the intrinsic value or nature of the offering. Even fasting for Allah's sake by the one who cannot afford an offering is a valid substitute 2:196.
Although the HB echoes that reality when it says
Ps50:8-14"..Will I eat the flesh of bulls or do I drink the blood of he-goats? Slaughter for God a confession and pay the Most High your vows".
Yet in other places, YHWH is depicted as physically delecting with the offering
Lev1:9"Then, the kohen shall cause to [go up in] smoke all [of the animal] on the altar, as a burnt offering, a fire offering, [with] a pleasing fragrance to the Lord".
This is reminiscent of ancient mythologies, more particularly Babylonian, where the gods would partake in the offering together with the offerer. In the HB numbers18 the priests making the offering are the only ones allowed to eat from the dead animal. Gods do not sit on the same table as the laymen. The Quran in sharp contrast allows to
22:28-36"eat of them and feed the poor man who is contented and the beggar; thus have We made them subservient to you, that you may be grateful".
Sam Shamoun "Allah’s Need for Human Sacrifice to Appease Hell’s Angelic Ruler"(1)
In the Quran angels are distinct among one another, created in different grades 35:1 and assigned tasks according to their ranks 2:97,81:19-21. Regardless of their ranks and tasks assigned in the heavens and the earth, angels are in complete awe and submission to their Creator
21:19-20,37:164-6"There is none of us except that he has a specific station; it is we who are filled in ranks; it is we who glorify Allah".
They only act according to Allah's commands 19:64, without exceeding or falling short of their task, never deliberatly rebelling or disobeying
16:48-50,66:6,21:27"They do not exceed Him in speech and they act only according to His command".
They thus all possess a high, unfliching, unwavering spirituality level. The Quran illustrates that reality through a linguistic subtility. It calls the angels barar 80:16 while the righteous humans are called abrar 82:13etc. Both words stem from b-r-r and implies the same thing, to be firmly grounded, ie in one's dutifulness and love for God. The subtle difference lies in that the intensive plural/jamaa kuthra is used for the angels while the lesser plural/jamaa qilla is used for the humans. This is because humans may rebel and sin, while this potentiality is completely ruled out for the angels.
Their tasks include the transmission of a message to prophets or regular people, performance of miracles, fierce guardianship of certain places such as the 19 angels above hell 40:49-50,74:30-31. One of those is named Malik, possibly the leader of those angelic wardens of Hell 43:77. In Semitic languages names have a meaning and Malik, which entails mastership, is here used as a proper name. Had the common word "master" been intended it should have been followed by a qualification as in sura Fatiha describing Allah as "malik yawm eddin". Even if one were to argue that the qualification of mastership over hell is implicitly understood from context, then it would mean that the common word "malik" is a title applicable to each of the 19 masters of Hell. Whether it is the title or the proper noun that is meant, none of those angels, including the most prominent among them, have any authority other than what Allah has granted them. Nor do they have a say as to the fate of the dwellers of hell. This is seen from their cry of help, asking Malik to seek authorization from Allah to end their suffering.
Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "Allah’s Need for Human Sacrifice to Appease Hell’s Angelic Ruler"
Wednesday, December 9, 2020
Sam Shamoun "Is The Quran God’s Word? Pt. 1" (2)
When messengers visited Ibrahim's household, after a tense first encounter, they proceeded by giving him the good news of "A" (a single) son
15:53"surely we give you the good news of a boy, possessing knowledge".
The name of the boy was not directly divulged by the messengers but God informs us that it was Isaac who was meant 11:71. This was a reward from Allah for Ibrahim's patience and obedience, following the successful passing of the trial with the binding and near sacrifice of Ismail
14:39"Praise be to Allah, Who has given me in old age Ismail and Ishaq; most surely my Lord is the Hearer of prayer".
Ibrahim thanks God in this Meccan verse (almost all verses relating the stories of the prophets are Meccan) for granting him only 2 sons as a result of a prayer at a very advanced age. Ibrahim praised God for the grant of only 2 sons, and Jacob came as a nafila/addition 21:72 FROM ISAAC which is why this same verse does not mention Ismail. That is how precise the Quran is, for had it mentioned in one breath Ismail, Isaac and Jacob it would have given the impression that Jacob was Ibrahim's son but by purposefully excluding the firstborn from the list, it implies that the list of names is not meant to be about his direct sons specifically. Further, it is common in classical Arabic to speak of the grand children as coming from one's own wife in order to convey the sense of longevity of lineage 16:72.
From a linguistic point of view, it is interesting to note the intricate manner in which the Quran places words in a context. The name of Ismail is missing from the list of Ibrahim's known, righteous descendants in some verses, such as 21:72. Each context has its own peculiar reason for omitting his name and in 19:49-50, the reason transpires even more.
Ibrahim's progeny is followed by a mention of their honoring, elevating by their own people. This Meccan sura contrasts the Arabs' behavior towards their forefather Ismail with the behavior of the descendants of the Israelites towards their main prophetic figures. Although Ismail was known to the Arabs as their forefather, his spiritual path had been neglected and disfigured. He was only praised and recognized hundreds of years later when Muhammad came and restored his pure monotheistic way, honoring him. It is important noting that the stories of the biblical, and Arabian prophets are all already found in the Meccan suras. Had the prophet in Mecca, been extracting these stories from the previous traditions, he could not have passed over the central figure of Abraham and his progeny. Simply, in this period his primary addressees were the Arab pagans, who already knew of their Ishmaelite ancestry and the Kaaba's Abrahamic connection. The knowledge they lacked however was in regards to Ismail's eminence and righteousness, after centuries of baseless and prejudiced calumnies towards his character, as is amply found in Judeo-Christian traditions.
The Quran thus in this earlier period focuses on honoring Ismail by mentioning him and his virtues aside from Abraham and his known descendants 38:48,21:85,19:54. During that earlier phase the Quran paves the way (through the implicit mention of Ismail as the near-sacrifice instead of Isaac in sura 37) for a revision, in Medina, of the traditional Judeo-Christian exclusivist spiritual worldview (through the Quran's emphatic connection of Abraham to the Kaaba and the change of qibla from Jerusalem to Mecca).
This textual separation of Ismail in the Meccan chapters also points to another reality; the lack of recognition of Ismail by his people and those that followed them, as compared to the others among Ibrahim's progeny, doesnt mean that God Himself is unappreciative of his merits
19:54-55"And mention Ismail in the Book; surely he was truthful in (his) promise, and he was an apostle, a prophet. And he enjoined on his family prayer and almsgiving, and was one in whom his Lord was well pleased".
Herein lies a lesson for all times, the fact that God knows every humble person's worth regardless of that quality being exposed or not in this world, and He will manifest it and reward the person for it, sometimes in this world but always in the hereafter. It is also to be noted that the passage starting at 19:51 likewise mentions several prophets separately and prior to citing Ibrahim, including Moses, showing that the purpose isnt to establish a chronological descendency. This is further seen by the statement concluding the passage, that all previously mentioned names (Ismail, Musa, Harun etc) descend from one or more of the following
19:58"These are they on whom Allah bestowed favors, from among the prophets OF the seed of Adam, and OF those whom We carried with Nuh, and OF the seed of Ibrahim and Israel, and OF those whom We guided and chose".
When verses such as 19:49 speak of Allah giving/wahabna Jacob to Ibrahim that giving does not only signify the giving of a son, for of Moses it is said a few verses further on,
19:53"We gave him his brother Aaron, a prophet"
though Aaron was older than Moses and his brother 20:94,28:34.
It literally means the giving without taking, implying making a favor. Also, in 2:133 Jacob, in a context where he is stressing to his progeny the universality of his forefathers' religion (see 12:38), Jacob is quoted as praising his "fathers" Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq. The often mention of Jacob among Ibrahim's descendants is done as a reminder of God favoring Ibrahim with a righteous posterity, even among his grandchildren, and Jacob was a grand child whom Ibrahim particularly affectioned. Ibrahim is quoted as including him in principle among his own sons when issuing his final spiritual instructions, although the Quran, in introduction to the quote, separates between Jacob and Ibrahim's direct progeny
2:132"And Ibrahim instructed his sons AND Yaqoub: O my sons! Indeed, Allah has chosen for you the religion, so do not die except while you are submitters".
Hebrew scriptures on the other hand are oddly silent on Abraham's relationship with his own sons after Isaac's marriage to Rebecca. Contrary to the above Quran verse depicting his affection for his grandchildren, the HB says nothing about that part of his life. This is odd considering that he lived 175 years and was 100 when Isaac was born. Isaac married when he was 40. 20 years later, when he was 60, his twins Esau and Jacob were born Gen21:5,25:7. Abraham had thus lived on 15 years after his grandchildren's birth. For a scripture that spends chapters and long passages listing useless names of people and places and genealogies, to omit any mention of how the main patriarchs interacted is strange.
Only the muddled way in which Torah was transmitted can explain this neglect, from various sources containing different informations. For example Abraham's death is recorded in Gen25:8 and yet the birth of his grandchildren comes later on, thus contradicting the above data.
Then addressing Ibrahim's wife, the messengers
11:71"gave her the good news of Ishaq and after Ishaq of Yaqoub".
Sarah was not only told that she would give birth, but also that her progeny will continue and this verse makes it clear that Jacob would come from Isaac, not from her
11:72"shall I bear "A" (a single) son.."
which echoes
15:53"the good news of "A" (a single) boy"
given moments before to Ibrahim.
As was said concerning Ibrahim earlier, the text does not necessarily imply that Sara was informed of her future child's name. The verse 11:71 isnt a direct quote of the discussion that occured between her and the messengers, it is God informing us retrospectively of whom the messengers meant when they announced the birth of a child, followed by another. It can also be added that since no direct naming occured, the messengers were not concerned by citing all the great names among Sara's progeny (hence the stop at Jacob), just to establish that she would bear a child and that her progeny would carry on fruitfully, which is a reassurance and satisfaction, especially considering Sara's very late impregnation.
In contrast to his wife, Ibrahim's initial reaction to the good news was an astonishing reiteration of it as he knew that from the point of the natural laws, the birth of such a child by him was a remote matter
15:54"Do you give me this good news in my old age?".
But from God's point, who had already displayed many miracles to him such as the manner in which he was saved from his people, and who in addition had already granted him a firstborn at an old age, Ibrahim knew it was a possibility. So could it hopefully be that this good news is from God, or was it from them
"Of what do you give me good news".
This is followed by a reassuring confirmation by the messengers 15:55 and a rhetorical question by Ibrahim
15:56"He said: And who despairs of the mercy of his Lord but the erring ones?"
This implies "I am not of the erring-ones who despair of God's mercy and if this news is truly from God then I believe it". Ibrahim's wife on the other hand, because she had despaired of one day conceiving, was overcome by grief because she thought that even to God, the realization of such a thing would be far off
11:72"This is a strange thing indeed".
But she was reassured while at the same time rebuked for her skepticism
11:73"Do you deem Allah's command a strange thing? The mercy of Allah and His blessings are on you, O people of the house, surely He is Praised, Glorious".
The name "Isaac" implies laughter, out of joy or mockery, but the name is connected in the HB to Ibrahim's rejoicing and believing the good news of Isaac's birth, reacting with questions which are positive assertions Gen17:17. The name is not related to Sarah's laughter who did not believe and ridiculed, which actually displeased God and caused her, out of fear, to lie and deny having laughed at the news Gen18:12-15.
Both Ishmael, implying divine acceptance of prayers, and Isaac, implying laughter, are names connected to Ibrahim who, at an advanced age, dearly prayed God for a first born and rejoiced at the news of a second son
14:39"Praise be to Allah, Who has given me in old age Ismail and Ishaq; most surely my Lord is the Hearer of prayer".
The circumstances of Isaac's birth thus definitely have a place and purpose in the Quran narrative, as it depicts him as a reward, a pleasant and joyful news to Ibrahim following Ismail's near-sacrifice.
It isnt the case with Ismail. To the Quran narrative, the relevant points in regards to Ismail are his connection to the Kaaba, his early settlement in Mecca, and the incident of his near sacrifice 2:124-131,14:35-41,37:99-113. That is why no mention is made of his mother either. The only thing related as regards his birth is that he was given to Ibrahim at a very old age, as a favor and in answer to Ibrahim's prayers, which parallels with the account in the HB.
So although the existence of a second wife to Ibrahim isnt explicitly mentioned it certainly can be inferred that Ismail and Isaac came from different wives of Ibrahim. As was already stated, Isaac's mother received the good news of a single son and was incredulous that her husband, at an old age, would be able to impregnate her. Yet Ibrahim had already done so once before, per 14:39 above (see in connection with 37:99-113 which was revealed earlier chronologically). Had this occured with her she wouldn't have been sceptical that it could happen again. Even the angelic announcement of a pregnancy to her, sounds like a first-time experience.
Neither could it be that the same woman had Ismail at a young age and that Isaac miraculously came to her later at an age where she wouldnt normally conceive. The verse 11:72 implies that the age gap between Ibrahim and the mother of Isaac is relatively small and according to Ibrahim's words in 14:39, both Ismail and Isaac were given to him at an old age which also means that Isaac's mother must have also been old when both sons were born in case they were both her sons.
Finally the Bible itself corroborates that the age gap between Abraham and Sarah was 30 years, and Ishmael was born when Abraham was 90, meaning Sarah was approx 60, which is beyond the menopausal age.
Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "Is The Quran God’s Word? Pt. 1"
Sam Shamoun "Is The Quran God’s Word? Pt. 1" (1)
The sending of revelation upon a prophet is carried out by an angelic delegation accompanying the spirit 16:2. In 16:102,26:192-4 that particular descending spiritual entity is not named, in another place God singles out the descending entity by name as Gabriel 2:97. The Quran describes the eminence of that particular messenger of revelation
81:19-21"honored messenger, the posessor of strength, having an honorable place with the Lord of the Dominion, One (to be) obeyed, and faithful in trust".
He is one who is mutaAA 81:21 denoting authority and the angels are created in different grades 35:1. His power, honor and unfaltering trustworthiness 26:192-4, his sacredness 16:102, means he is most fit to accomplish this noble task. That is why the Quran always singles him out from among the angels of revelation 2:98,66:4,97:1-4. The mention of an angelic delegation descending with the revelation expresses the prestige of Allah's word and the singling out of one entity from among them denotes the distinct nobility of the one selected to carry it. As noble and honored the carrier of revelation is, He remains under God's authority in the process
2:97"he made it descend to your heart by Allah's command".
This emphasis is meant at dispelling any doubt, in the minds of those that dislike the indirect manner in which God communicates with His prophets, making clear Who the ultimate source of that message is. Not only is the descent commanded by Allah, but it in addition originates from Him
2:99"And certainly WE descended to you clear communications"2:105"Those who disbelieve..do not like..that the good should be brought down to you from your Lord, and Allah chooses especially whom He pleases for His mercy, and Allah is the Lord of mighty grace"26:192-4"And most surely this (ie Quran) is a sending down from the Lord of the worlds. The Faithful Spirit/RUH has descended with it, Upon your heart that you may be of the warners".
The Quran originates from Allah, was commanded to be sent down by Him, through the trustworthy RUH, elsewhere named Gabriel, who is accompanied by a delegation of angels. Elsewhere the Quran, in its surgical use of words and in a similar context of attesting to the otherworldly origin of the Book, says that it is
53:4"a revelation revealed".
Since the most obdurate could still find a way to disbelieve, admitting to the divine origin of the Quran but rejecting the legitimacy of the prophet who could have been given the revelation by an inspired human, God makes it clear, it is a process twice revealed. The first time to the medium, that is Gabriel, and the second time to the prophet's heart, by the inspired medium. Sure no explicit statement says that Gabriel or holylspirit is an angel. Strong indications however point to the descending delegation as always and exclusively angelic. Throughout the Quran, no entity carrying God's will from heaven (revelation, punishment or else) is ever said to be other than angels. It is known that the descending entities fully encompassed by Allah's will in 19:64-5 are angels for whom Gabriel is speaking in the passage. What those attempting to deny Gabriel's identification with the holy spirit are left with is a slightly ambiguous statement in 97:4. And that is if one disregards the aforementioned patterns, as well as linguistic reasons for singling out the spirit from among the angels.
The WAW in 97:4 which is translated in general as AND, also often means inclusion of a particular entity within the general more encompassing entity. The purpose is to create a distinction in terms of prominence relevant to the context. For example the Quran says "and the prophets and Jesus and Moses" 2:136,3:84. It mentions the two in WAW/AND form to mean that they are included but to bring particular attention to those two amongst the prophets. Elsewhere it says 69:14"the earth and the mountains are lifted" or in 55:68"In both of them are fruit and dates and pomegranates". See also 31:16.
Finally, the attempted parallel of the syntax in 97:4 (separating entities part of the same angelic group) with 3:87 fails for the reason that in this verse God, angels and humans are explicitly stated elsewhere as being different entities. No statement in 97:4 or indications elsewhere say that the descending spirit and the angels are different entities, quite to the contrary as previously demonstrated.
Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "Is The Quran God’s Word? Pt. 1"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)