Sam Shamoun "Grave Worship: More of Muhammad’s Duplicity Exposed"

Sam Shamoun "Grave Worship: More of Muhammad’s Duplicity Exposed"

The verse 9:94 is in the context of denouncing hypocrisy in war time. More particularily in reference to the expedition of Tabuk.

The importance of that encounter was such that only the most hardened and serious elements were called to join. Although some failed answering the call, the prophet didnt blame them, even praised them as if they had accompanied him. On the other hand the half-hearted people seeking vain excuses, and hypocrites, were told to stay back even though they did not explicitly refuse joining. A small example to corroborate is that of Jadd b. Qays, the chief of Bani Salamah, who was told to remain behind based on his lust for female war captives. This by the way bellies the weak reports where it is the prophet that supposedly encouraged him to go to battle with the prospect of acquiring women captives. Some comentators have said that 9:49 refers to him.  Although their freedom wasnt interfered with, these hypocrites and opportunistic Muslims would later be temporarily ostracized by the community, with the prophet even refusing to accept their zakat. They were neither fought nor killed, but were instead naturally cast away the more the Muslims gained ascendent over their open enemies. Most of them were known through their deeds and sayings, and were thus marked with shame and placed under scrutiny

9:94"And God will behold your deeds, and His Apostle". 

The verb refers to future deeds. It literally says 

"will see Allah your deeds, and His Messenger"

This is a common sentence construction as exists in any language where, for brievty's sake, one does not repeat a verb that applies to two subjects next to each other. The verse joins both Allah and the messenger in one action but does not join the subjects. What is remarkable from the point of view of Quranic precision and consistency is that, because it speaks of witnessing the deeds by others than Allah, in this case His messenger, the verse then stresses that none knows the unseen other than Allah, that He will inform the people of their deeds and judge them. The idea of tawhid, of God's oneness and uniqueness, is this way stressed and preserved

"then you shall be brought back to the Knower of the unseen and the seen, then He will inform you of what you did"  

An important side note as regards the prophet's refusal to allow hypocrites to battle. In the semitic pattern of prophethood, God assists the believers in battle in proportionality to their spiritual condition. The examples are numerous, both in the HB and the Quran. See link below.

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "Grave Worship: More of Muhammad’s Duplicity Exposed"

- Acts17apologetics need the supernatural; angelic help to Abrahamic warriors? (divine assistance in battle)

-Apostate prophet sleeps late; the people of the cave is a legend? (masjid over the youths of the cave)

-Sam Shamoun "Revisiting the Worship and Prayers of Allah" (prayers to the prophet, verse 9:103)

-Sam Shamoun "The Islamic Gods Unveiled Pt. 2 Additional Proof that Islam is Repackaged Arab Paganism" (verse 4:64)

Sam Shamoun "INVOCATION AND WORSHIP: THE ISLAMIC DILEMMA"

Sam Shamoun "INVOCATION AND WORSHIP: THE ISLAMIC DILEMMA"

Although all creatures have life and can be termed as "living", the true, ultimate life belongs to God only. He is the ever-living/al hayy 2:255,40:65. The prophet Daniel states in the Aramaic in which the text was recorded Dan6:26"elaha hayya qayyam". The words carry several implications, including the pervasive pattern throughout the Quran of God being the sole self-sufficient, uncreated, independant entity. He relies on none other than Himself to subsit and will perdure even when all things perish 55:26-7,28:88. Al hayy/the ever living is also a description meant at distinguishing Allah from false deities, as is done in the HB Joshua3:10,1Sam17:26,1Sam17:36,Jer10:9-10,etc., whether they be inanimate entities or living creatures that made themselves or were made into objects of worship 16:20-1. They are neither alive nor are able to keep others alive, they do not exist of their own accord nor can keep others into existence. Their existence depends at all times on the self-sustaining source of all life, Allah. 

The Quran treats all false concepts, including idol worship as ideas invented, blindly passed on by the following generations. They are without any reasonable basis to be found in human instincts or by observing the functionning of the universe, to justify their existence. No strong and clear scriptural basis exists claiming divine origin for any of those ideas. they are falsehoods projected either on physical or abstract entities 

10:66,45:23,53:23"They are naught but names which you have named, you and your fathers; Allah has not sent for them any authority. They follow naught but conjecture and the low desires which (their) souls incline to; and certainly the guidance has come to them from their Lord". 

But whatever form these worshipped entities may be, it is the same evil force hiding behind them and inciting their followers to remain on the deviant path 

19:44,34:41,4:117"and they do not call on anything but a rebellious Shaitan". 

Authentic or not, this is what could have been meant by the report in the sira, that once the statue of al Uzza was destroyed, suddenly appeared 

a naked, wailing Ethiopian woman 

whom the companion killed. That fantastic tale seems to have been drawn from earlier reports which could have found their way even among early anti Muslim polemics by Christians. Among Anastasius' "testimonies" of Muslim/satanic partnership was that of Christian sailors who 

"arrived at the place where those who have reduced us to servitude have their stone and their cult". 

This obviously speaks of the Kaaba and the black stone. The sailors, still having their mysoginistic biblical passages in mind witnessed 

"an indecent and horrible old woman rise from the ground". 

She proceeded to gather the sacrifices made at the altar then took them underground with her.

When the Quran states the worshipped entities will be hurled in hell along with their worshipers 21:98-9,37:22-3 it doesnt mean that the simple fact of worshiping an entity will result in it going to hell because the Quran attaches 2 conditions for such a situation to occur; the entity's unequivocal demand to be worshiped as a deity, the followers' actual worship. Yet in almost all cases those to whom divinity was ascribed were created by the people themselves under the influence of evil forces. It is these evil inciters that will be thrown in hell. So in the case of true prophets or saints who were later worshipped as gods, nothing of their righteousness and of what they earned will be diminished and they will have nothing to fear in the hereafter 21:101-3. They are innocent of their followers innovations and deviations 

21:26-9"Nay! they are honored servants. They do not precede Him in speech and (only) according to His commandment do they act..And whoever of them should say: Surely I am a god besides Him, such a one do We recompense with hell; thus do, We recompense the unjust.." 

To illustrate further, the Quran presents the case of the prophet Jesus who shall be questionned on the Day of Judgment regarding his followers' idolizing and worshiping him, and cleared of any guilt since he never commanded it 5:116-120. Since he acted as God's messenger, then what his followers did in his name should be justifiable from his teachings, among them, the worship of both himself and his mother Mary. It is interesting that, just as his word in defence of his mother's chastity constituted the best testimony of the truth in this world, so to in the hereafter, he will speak on her behalf to clear her from any possible guilt as to the people's worshipping her. Jesus was nothing but a faithful and exemplary servant and prophet of God 43:59, in accordance with the glad tidings of eminence given to his mother before he was born

 3:45"When the angels said: O Mariam! Allah gives you good tidings of a word from Him, whose name is the Massih, Isa son of Mariam, honoured in this world and the hereafter, and he is among those brought near". 

5:116 is a very powerful passage in the sense that those who raised him to the status of divinity and put all hopes of salvation in him will see him being interrogated, humbling himself, then cleared of any responsibility, for the deviations of those claiming to follow him. Like all those who attributed divinity to entities besides God, those claiming to be Jesus' followers will find themselves in a hopeless situation where they will have to answer for their own claims, beliefs, conjecture and deeds.

Although Jesus' testimony is the one most vividly detailed at the divine court of justice, all other sentient entities falsely ascribed divine authority will dismiss those that worshipped them 

16:86"And when those who associated others with Allah see their "partners," they will say," Our Lord, these are our partners [to You] whom we used to invoke besides You." But they will throw at them the statement, "Indeed, you are liars". 

This intricate discourse reveals the seriousness of ascribing partners to God; the guilty do not dare describing them as God's partners, they are "our partners". The worshipped entities on the other hand, frightened by the consequences of such allegation, will quickly throw it back at the guilty. Then, just as Jesus is depicted, they will all humble themselves before God, totally disowning their former worshippers.

Because of this, that these entities never demanded to be idolized, and in addition are totally unaware of it 46:5, they are called "lies" by such prophets as Ibrahim and Hud. They do not perceive such worship. Even if they were made to hear these prayers, they would be utterly powerless in controlling wordly causality and the destineies of their worshippers 

11:50,16:73,19:42,29:17,35:14,37:86,22:62"That is because Allah is the Truth, and that what they call upon besides Him-- that is the falsehood, and because Allah is the High, the Great". 

Contrary to any entity or concept worshiped besides Him, Allah is "the Truth" al haqq, one of God's Quranic attributes signifying the Ultimate Reality or Primal Cause of all that exists. It is therefore natural that only the prayers addressed to him are true and valid 

13:14"To Him is due the true prayer; and those whom they pray to besides Allah give them no answer, but (they are) like one who stretches forth his two hands towards water that it may reach his mouth, but it will not reach it; and the prayer of the unbelievers is only in error".

Because of the absence of any of those powers attributed to them, false deities are in a state of subjugation to the laws of the universe like their worshippers are, uncapable of inflicting evil or bringing any good upon their followers by themselves, not even able to create or catch the most insignificant insect should they all collaborate in their efforts. As contingent entities, they, just like the most saintly personalities of this world 7:188,10:49 stand in contrast to the uncaused cause, the necessary being, under Whose dominion are all benefit or harm that may come upon creation 

6:17-18"And if Allah should touch you with adversity, there is no remover of it except Him. And if He touches you with good - then He is over all things competent. And He is the subjugator over His servants. And He is the Wise, the Acquainted [with all]". 

In the words of the prophet Jeremiah as inspired to him 

Jer10:5"fear them not for they will do no harm, neither is it in them to do good".

Even though the worshipers might profit indirectly in their comunities from idol worship, the harm they will ultimately incure will be disproportionaly higher 22:12-3. Neither can the idols help themselves nor their worshippers from the divine scourge, especially had they truly demanded to be worshiped 

5:76,7:190-8,21:42-3,22:73,35:13"this is Allah, your Lord, His is the kingdom; and those whom you call upon besides Him do not control a straw". 

A particularily strong and yet pragmatic observation the Quran points to in order to illustrate the helplesness of those idols in 22:73 is that, besides their inability to create even an insect like a fly viewed as among the smallest, simplest, bothersome or useless as opposed to the universe of complexities originated by the supreme creator whom they also believe in, should one of these lowly creatures snatch a thing from them, like the offerings often left in front of the idols, these idols would be helpless in getting it back.

That the idol worshipers and all those who worship entities other than or besides Allah, are only worshiping a figment of their imagination incited by evil spirits, clothing them in the garb of extraneous beings and entities, is portrayed on the Day of Judgement. A Divine court will be set up 5:116-119,10:28-29,25:17-19,34:40-2 where the worshipers and all worshiped entities, whether the stone idols, prophets, saints, angels or any other entities whom they had set up as partners with God and rendered those rights to them which belonged to God alone will be gathered. The objects worshipped will be cited as 35:40"your partners" because they had never been divinely sanctionned as "God's partners" and 

34:22"they control not the weight of an atom in the heavens or in the earth, nor have they any partnership in either, nor has He a helper among them". 

A seperation will then be made between them and their worshippers. The stones will be made to speak and along with all other worshiped entities, will declare their disavowal of those who called on them and their unawareness that they had been worshipped 

"It was not us that you served. Therefore Allah is sufficient as a witness between us and you that we were quite unaware of your serving (us)". 

Those things which they thought were their protectors have become their enemies, exposing them as worshippers of falsehood 

25:19,46:6,19:82"They shall soon deny their worshipping them, and they shall be adversaries to them".

 This will be the death blow and desillusion of all worshippers of false deities, realizing that their prayers were in vain; the entities to whom they had ascribed divinity were not even aware of their prayers 

28:64"And it will be said: Call your associate-gods. So they will call upon them, but they will not answer them" 

7:37,40:73-4"Then shall it be said to them: Where is that which you used to set up besides Allah? They shall say: They are gone away from us, nay, we used not to call upon anything before" 

7:53"Indeed they have lost their souls and that which they forged has gone away from them".

In what the writers of the HB describe as the "end of days", meaning in their terminology the ushering of an utopian era, but whose descriptions parallel in many places the Quran's description of the Resurrection and Judgement, a day will come where the worshipers of false deities will be brought low and humbled, their idols disappear and only the true God remain and exalted Isa2.

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "INVOCATION AND WORSHIP: THE ISLAMIC DILEMMA"

- Sam Shamoun "The Islamic Gods Unveiled Pt. 2 Additional Proof that Islam is Repackaged Arab Paganism" (intercession, 4:64, etc.)

- Sam Shamoun "Revisiting the Worship and Prayers of Allah" (praying to Muhammad, supplication etc.)

- Sam Shamoun "NOTES FOR TAUHID DEBATE WITH YAHYA PT. 2" (the blind man)

Sam Shamoun "Muhammad’s Illiteracy Proves that Allah is the Not-So-Powerful One"

Sam Shamoun "Muhammad’s Illiteracy Proves that Allah is the Not-So-Powerful One"

29:48"And you did not recite (tatlu) before it any book (kitab), nor did you transcribe one with your right hand, for then could those who say untrue things have doubted"

Kitab from the root K-T-B means putting things together as in grouping the herd together or closing the lips or stitching, as well as putting letters or ideas together hence the common use in the sense of a book in which letters, ideas and knowledge are gathered. This binding of things together can be in the physical sense, as in the letters and words of a sentence, or the pages of a book. That is why even a single word, verse or page of the Quran is termed kitab, even prior to the completion of the revelation and binding together into a book. The Prophet is also reported as having said before his death 

"I have left amongst you Muslims that which, if you stick to it, you will not be misguided-the book of Allah". 

Quran is a word similarily applicable to a portion as to the whole 43:2-4. The Arabic word mushaf, known since pre-islamic times as seen from a poem of Imru al Qays, was similarily used for the Quran prior to its completion 

"This son of mine reads the mushaf in the daytime". 

Mushaf means assembled writings between 2 covers. Kitab is also used in the metaphorical sense, as in the binding of a thing or knowledge within one's self 6:12,58:22. For instance it is said about Jesus 

19:30,3:48"And He will teach him the kitab and the hukm and the Tawrat and the Injeel". 

Similarily to him, other prophets have been granted 

3:81,6:89"al kitab and al hukma and al nubuwwa". 

Kitab here is in the singular, and common to these prophets. Hukm is for the ability to judge, rule and make decisions, nubuwwa is the gift of prophecy. The implication of the statement being that all these persons had ability to arrive at wise judgements due to the special knowledge collected into them as if they were books of flesh upon whom God is writing. They had also the ability to prophesy, pointing to the divine nature of their knowledge and actions.

Muhammad was an illiterate man like the vast majority of his people. Illiteracy was so common in those days that we have traditions even listing the very few ones that could actually read and write. According to Al-Baladhuri, there werent more than 17 such people among the Quraysh and 11 from the Khazraj and Aws tribes. Despite this high level of illitracy, hundreds carried on most successful and flourishing businesses. It is known that Khadija had given the Prophet a literate slave named Maisara to accompany him on his trips. The Prophet's function in Khadija's business was to ensure the trustworthy transport of her goods, and finalization of her deals.

Muhammad thus, like the near totality of his people, did not read nor transcribe any type of writing before the Revelation. The Quran says, that situation must remain so during the Revelation in order to serve as potential evidence against

29:48"those who say untrue things".

In 25:4-5, the doubters accuse the prophet of having iktataba what his secret human teachers taught him so that it may be "read out to him morning and evening". Iktitab means both to write and to cause to be written ie by someone else. The last part of the verse shows that it is "causing to be written" that is meant otherwise the prophet would not need the revelation to be read out to him by other people day and night.

The prophet's illiteracy is something his opponents never objected to, and the Quran as well as hadith literature contain all types of objections, calumnies and accusations thrown at him, yet nothing about this particular matter. By reiterating the well known fact that he was an illiterate, the Quran cancels the objection of literal plagiarism by copying and transcribing with his hands. However the Quran does not stop there. In the context of answering the objection that the prophet Muhammad plagiarized oral traditions from human sources, it says he was unschooled in the subjects related by the Quran

7:157"Those who follow the apostle, the ummi (uneducated/unschooled) Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own scriptures".

In 2:78 the Jews are called ummiyun so it neither refers to gentiles nor illiterate people. The word is derived from the root Hamza-M-M and it means mother or sources/origin if said as UMM and destination if said as AMM. Ummi means in this context someone who is close to the source or origin and that conceptually means someone lacking education that moves him away. In a more metaphorical sense it is understood as painting the picture of one as ignorant and uneducated as the one coming out of the umm/mother. In the prophet's case this uneducation is in terms of divine scriptures as so often stated in the Quran

3:44,11:49,28:44,12:3,102"This is of the announcements relating to the unseen (which) We reveal to you, and you were not with them..".

Some have said ummiyun refers to the Meccans, yet in 3:20 (a known Medinan sura) the prophet is told to address the people of the book and the ummiyun, those who are uneducated in a religious scripture, which includes the Arabs from Mecca and outside of it.

Another way in which the definition of "mother" applies to Ummi is that it relates to the mother's love of her child so she does not entrust anyone other than herself to educate him. The same is applied to Muhammad whom Allah loved so much He took great care in teaching him. The Quran draws a particularily affectionate description of the manner in which Gabriel approached, bent over from on high to give full attention and inspired the revelation to the prophet

53:5-10"The Lord of Mighty Power has taught him, The Lord of Strength; so he attained completion, And he is in the highest part of the horizon, Then he drew near, then he bowed. So he was the measure of two bows or closer still, And He revealed to His servant what He revealed".

This particular relationship between God and His prophet is subtely reflected through the muqataat, the distinct enounciation of the letters of the alphabet at the beginning of certain suras. Their recitation, and more particularily by the prophet, convey the idea that the transmitter of this message, the "ummi" prophet who is as unlettred and unschooled as one just coming out of his umm/mother, is now in the process of being taught by God Himself, the One claiming to be the source of the communication, teaching His messenger the basic alphabet. There is a reason why the Quran is said to have been "taught" to its audience 55:2.

The prophet dies very shortly after the revelation of the last verse 5:3 therefore it is logical to say that he did not read nor write a book all his life, for the Quranic argument as stated in 29:48 to be completed. It is reported that on his deathbed, he asked for a paper to have something written on it. This doesnt necessarily entail writing himself, but could as well mean he intended to have someone writing his will in his presence. That is what in fact people accused him of in regards to the Quran, as shown earlier. They never accused him of writing himself the Quran, but that he had others writing for him. It is in this light that the various ahadith describing the prophet as having something written have been understood. For example we read

"That the Messenger of Allah said: "Bring me a shoulder blade or tablet." Then he wrote: Not equal are those of believers who sit".

Another version of the same hadith says

"bring me a shoulder blade of a camel, or a tablet, and write: Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home)".

Something else to keep in mind is that illiterate people are often able to read and write very basic words and sentences whose shapes they recognize. That doesnt make them literate. One example is that of a narration that begins by reiterating the fact that "Allah's Messenger used not to write" but he nevertheless was able to recognize the expression "Apostle of Allah" on a paper handed to him by Ali ibn Abi Talib.

One may come back and argue that the prophet Muhammad must have been literate because he was commanded to

96:1"Read in the name of your Lord".

But how could the prophet be told to read from a paper in front of him the very words that are being revealed to him? 
Iqraa or Itlu do not always mean that one is reading something written on a paper, both are commonly used in the sense of reading behind someone or reading from the mind. This is particularly made clear in 75:16-18. The prophet is told by his Instructor (Allah) not to be hasty with the Quran while it is transmitted to him, because

"on Us (devolves) the collecting of it and the reading of it",

ie it is Allah who sets the standard as to how it should be read. So when the Instructor reads it, the follower should follow the words

"Therefore when We have read it, follow its reading".

The verse does not say that first it is read out to the prophet, then he must write it and then read it. It commands him to read as it is read to him

87:6"We shall make you recite (sanuqriuka) so you shall not forget".

Allah was literaly puting the holy words into the prophet's mouth

19:97"We have only made it easy in your tongue that you may give good news thereby to those who guard (against evil) and warn thereby a vehemently contentious people"

and teaching him how to read them out. As the prophecy of Deut18 says

"I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him".

The ahadith describe the prophet's first encounter with the agent of revelation. The experience was so overwhelming that the prophet at first would not let the messenger transmit the revelation, interrupting him. He did not know the purpose of the experience 

"...till suddenly the Truth descended upon him while he was in the cave of Hira. The angel came to him in it and asked him to read. The Prophet replied, "I do not know how to read (a better translation is "what shall i read?")" "The angel caught me (forcefully) and pressed me so hard that I could not bear it anymore. He then released me and again asked me to read, and I replied, "I do not know how to read/what shall i read?" whereupon he caught me again and pressed me a second time till I could not bear it anymore. He then released me and asked me again to read, but again I replied, "I do not know how to read (or, what shall I read?)." Thereupon he caught me for the third time and pressed me and then released me and said, "Read: In the Name of your Lord, Who has created (all that exists). Has created man from a clot. Read and Your Lord is Most Generous...up to..... ..that which he knew not." (96.15)"

Man is apt to forget, and the Prophet was a human being and he too was apt to forget and since the Quran was also a great asset which was being entrusted to him, he would repeat each and every word of the revelation fearing that any of it might slip away from his memory. This verse, telling him he will be made to recite in manner so as to not forget, came as a reassurance, stressing that God has taken upon Himself its impression on his memory. This was not by his own power and leave, being a mortal like anyone else and it is a reminder of this reality that the Quran continues

87:7"Except what Allah pleases, surely He knows the manifest, and what is hidden".

The context of the verse is about intricate, detailed, purposeful divine planing for all things and how nothing escapes God's grasp and knowledge. The prophet's rare occasions of very limited forgetfulness (and his followers and recorders' reminding him) were fully in accordance with that master plan, meant among other things at humbling him as well as to the believers' eyes around him, of his own faillibility as a human being as well of God's being in control of the process of memorization and compilation of the Quran, allowing only what He wills to be temporarily, not completely, forgotten. As a principle, the Quran reminds in many instances of that concept, how this revelation and its very preservation is a mercy from Allah that could be taken away from Muhammad or erase parts of it from the prophet's own memory without him noticing it as said above, therefore man should remain grateful for it and never feel complacent

17:86-7"And if We please, We should certainly take away that which We have revealed to you, then you would not find for it any protector against Us. But on account of mercy from your Lord-- surely His grace to you is abundant".

There is one recorded incident where God caused a permanent blackout among the Muslim community's best reciters

"We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara'at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it: "If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust." And we used so recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgotten it, but remember (this much) out of it: 'Oh people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practise.' (lxi 2.) and, 'That is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection" (xvii. 13)".

What is interesting here is that this report is narrated by up to 15 of the most renowned companions, over a wide geographical distribution, from Basra to Kufah, Mecca to Medina. Nothing is known from the chapter in question except for the vague snippet each narrator remembers. God in His wisdom, has left this trace in the memory of men, and took the rest so as to provide proof of His control over the transmission process of the divine revelation. He may take away what He peases and establish what He wants. With the Jews, this process took the form of punishment. Their books describe God, in answer to their complacency towards divine guidance, the rejection, persecution and killing of the prophets sent in their midst, as interrupting an ongoing guiding revelation Ezek3:26,24:27,33:21-22. 

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "Muhammad’s Illiteracy Proves that Allah is the Not-So-Powerful One"

- Sam Shamoun "Source of Muhammad’s Inspiration – Divine or Demonic?"(1)

Sam Shamoun "None Named John Before the Baptist?"

Sam Shamoun "None Named John Before the Baptist?"

When Zakariya was moved by the wisdom and deep spiritual insight of the young Mary that was put under his guardianship, he began praying God to grant him a child as pious and virtuous, that would help preserve the ways of righteousness among his deviant kinsfolk 

"..And indeed, I fear my successors after me..so grant me from Yourself a successor, Who should inherit me and inherit from the children of Yaqoub, and make him, my Lord, one in whom Thou art well pleased". 

Through His angelic messengers, God responded to Zakariyya's plea 

3:38-9,19:1-7"We give you good news of a boy whose name shall be Yahya: We have not made before anyone his samiyan". 

Zakariyya continued calling upon his Lord for further enlightenment and elaboration, which he kept receiving through the angelic messengers. The same type of back and forth communication would shortly later occur between Mary and God, through the angels 3:38-47. Both Zakariyya and Mary are in these verses addressing Allah through His messengers. God in turn replies through His angelic conduits of revelation. Several angels visited Zakariyya with the good news 3:39. When he expressed his astonishment to his Lord, one of those angelic conduits of revelation swiftly conveyed the live answer from his Lord "He said: So shall it be, your Lord says: It is easy to Me.." The same occured with Mary 3:45-47,19:20-21. This is consistent with the Quranic axiom that Allah only communicates with humans through a barrier or the sending of angelic messengers. 

Samiyan, describing the Zakariyya's future son, stems from S-M-W meaning elevation. It is used for the sky because it is raised high, as well as for a name because when one's name is called he rises, as well as for lofty attributes, because they set apart an entity from a group by raising it in status (see 19:65 in this regard). Literally the verse is saying that none has been "elevated" like Yahya before him. It can be elevation due to his name, or attributes, it is the context that decides and here, to claim that the context speaks of unprecedented appellation would be irrelevant. 

The verse says that none like him was born in Zakariya' family, because in the previous verse it is his own relatives whom he feared, and therefore an assurance was now given to him that the promised son would not be like the other members of his family. This is all the more true if one considers the conditions in which the prophet Yahyah/John, and shortly after Jesus, were raised. They both came to warn the Israelites who had in great majority fallen into spiritual degeneration, under heavy foreign philosophical and spiritual influences, divided into sects, seeking closeness with the pagan Roman authorities, some denying the resurrection, others forsaking the spirit of the Torah for their soulless man-made rituals 

19:12-5"O Yahya, take hold of the Book with strength, and We granted him wisdom while yet a child, And tenderness from Us and purity, and he was one who guarded (against evil), And dutiful to his parents, and he was not insolent, disobedient. And peace on him on the day he was born, and on the day he dies, and on the day he is raised to life". 

Yahya was thus given wisdom and divine knowledge very early on, while still a child, in answer to Zakariya's prayer. In the NT, the angelic announcement of John's birth to Zakariyya clearly shows that it came in answer to the latter's prayers for a son that would distinguish himself among his contemporaries due to his righteousness and capacity to draw back his nation to the straight path Lk1:11-17. John/Yahya's righteousness was such a distinguishing characteristic among his family and people that in the NT Jesus is reported to have described him as such 

Matt11:11"Verily I say unto you, among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist".

That whole part of Zakariyya's life, expressing his basic natural human desire, after many long years of childlessness to have a descendant, and God's compassionate acceptance from his patient servant, and above all his wish for a righteous progeny was lost during the course of the transmission of Christian tradition. The Quran restored it, in honour of both Zakariyya and Yahya.

Yahya and Isa, among other prophets singled out in the Quran similarly are Arabicised versions of the native names of those whom the Greek NT calls Ioannes/John or Iesou/Jesus. John the Baptist, whose Hebrew equivalent is Yohanan, is called up to this day Yahia or Yahia Yuhanna by the Mandaeans who claim to be his disciples, and is referred to as such in their ancient writing the Ginza Rba. It is interesting that the Quran uses a word for him that isnt used for anyone else. It describes Yahya as

 19:13"hananan min ladunna/tenderness from Us" 

which is a paraphrase of the Hebrew Yuhanna/YHWH is gracious. 

As to Jesus, the exact name he had in his original tongue can only be speculated, based on the earliest writings with his name in Koine Greek and translations from Greek. The Greek Iesous is closer to the Aramaic Yeshu. There is also a very close sounding name in Hebrew, derived from the Biblical Yehoshua/Joshua. It was progressively shortened to Yeshua then Yeshu after the exiles returned to Judah from Babylon. In the time of Jesus, this name was common and a person named Yeshu may not have been named by the original Joshua/Yehoshua. The writers of the NT in Matt1:21 attempt to retroproject their Christologies unto Jesus using the etymology of the name. It is used throughout the HB to connote salvation from imminent physical danger but is now widened to include salvation from sin. Christologies aside, through his prophetic function he did save those among his people (the tribe of Israel only) from sin by calling them to he straight path and reforming their mishandling of the law.

More clues as to what his name sounded like can be gleaned from the Peshitta, a Syriac rendition of the Greek NT. The name Isho is used for Jesus which cannot be a transliteration of the Greek Iesous. Syriac sprung from Aramaic, which was spoken in the time of Jesus and most probably his native tongue. The Syriac Isho might have been pronounced the same way, or slightly differently as compared to the Aramaic original. Even in Syriac, the name Isho closely resembles the Arabic Isa. The name, as written in Syriac letters, can be both read as Yeshu and Isho. This might have been a deliberate device by the 2nd century Syriac authors of the Peshitta who sought to represent both Hebrew and Aramaic traditions of Jesus' name. The reason however for Christians to associate Iesous with Yeshua is because of the existence of a Hebrew noun which they think sounds similar and means "salvation"; y'shu'ah. Besides being a feminine word, it isnt even pronounced the same as Yeshua because of the muted first letter "yod".

Recently in Harra (southern Syria and northern Jordan) a safaitic inscription (1st century BCE to 4th century CE) believed to be by desert Christians addresses Jesus as ISA with the triliteral root Ain-Sin-Ya, corresponding to his name in the Quran (al-Jallad). A more fundamental question to ask is why would the Quran re-invent the name of a known figure out of thin air? The Quran is identifying Jesus by the name his audience was familiar with, before, during, and after Islam. The Arabic Isa is a known phenomenon in linguistics called phonosemantic matching. When 2 languages refer to the same thing with a word that is very close phonetically. Isa is a preislamic name which in addition connotes redemption. These 2 factors are what facilitated the identification of the Syriac Isho with the preislamic Isa by Arab Christians. Once more, the character presented in the Quran as Isa cannot be anyone else than the historical, biblical, traditional Jesus. Why would the Quran go out of its way and refer to the main figure of Christianity, while addressing Christians, with a name they never heard of? Pre Islamic Arab Christians adopted Isa because of its etymology as well as close match with the Aramaic Isho. The Quran is addressing these Christians of the Hijaz, not some Christian of the Greco roman world.

The pattern of morphing a name for theological reasons is seen in other cases. For example Jesus' brother is called James. One of the 27 books of the NT was supposedly authored by him. It was opposed by many Christians, including Martin Luther due to its different Christology than Paul's writings, emphasizing the necessity of deeds for salvation. James was part of the small nucleus of Jewish followers of Jesus, centered around Jerusalem, who were in conflict with Paul and who advocated full Torah observance even after Jesus' crucifixion. James' name is in fact, in the original Greek, Jacob. In an effort to eradicate the Jewishness of that movement, the church, in all non-Greek translations of the name have changed Jacob to James.

Similarly Musa's original name isnt Moshe, a word hebrewcised in a way so as to fit a convenient etymology (to pullout/deliver) which is relevant to the context of the story (Musa's deliverance/pulling out from the water). Musa was named in Egypt, by his Egyptian adoptive family according to the HB itself Ex2:10, who would certainly not use the language of their Hebrew slaves for naming one of their own, especially so when the child was to be part of Egyptian nobility. Rabbinic commentaries speculate between several opinions surrounding the event of Musa's appellation, among them that his original name was Munius, later Hebrewcised into Moshe in the HB. It is highly unlikely that Avraham (father of nations) and Moshe (pull out) iterate into the respective originals, since they clearly follow Hebrew etymologies.

At other times, the Hebrew etymology is derived from a foreign name. Adam's whose language could not have been Hebrew, fits the Hebrew word adamah for earth/ground/dust from which he was created

Gen2:7"min ha’adamah". When Adam is preceded by ha/the it means "the man" in a generic sense but always with the earthly origin implicitly intended but if it isnt preceded by the preposition then it refers to a proper name with a meaning directly related to the history of the person in question, as is many times the case in the HB (contrast Gen2:7 with 3:21). The HB also uses ish, enosh, and gever for the human species besides "ha adam".

Although in the HB, Abraham is called Avram/exalted father until his 90s before his name change to Avraham, the Quran calls him since his youth "Ibrahim" 21:60 the Arabic equivalent of "Avraham", and all throughout his life, including after the trial of the sacrifice and consequent blessings, without ever speaking of a name change. "Ibrahim" and "Avraham/father of nations" are both respectively the Arabicised and Hebrewcised forms of the name he had in the language of his native area of Iraq, which was neither Arabic nor Hebrew. The same goes for the Phillistine warrior Goliath/Jalut. What the Jewish scribes did in Abraham's case, was to retrospectively Hebrewcise the native name in a manner that would fit the event of God's promise to his descendants. They simply embellished the story. 

Further, it is a known Biblical style to have one and the same character with several names whose convenient etymologies are relevant to the context, or the intent of the writer. A quiet blatant example is that of Sha'ul/Saul which carries a negative connotation, but whom the Quran names Talut, implying height. The Arabic Talut is derived from t-w-l implying a high stature. This name was known since pre-islamic times as mentioned in a poem by al-samaw'al. It could have been one of the names by which that king was known to the Jews. But the name the Biblical scribes gave him was Sha'ul, implying "to ask". This retrospective appellation was aimed at negatively comparing Sha'ul/Saul to both David and Samuel. Samuel was asked of God 1Sam1 while Saul was asked of the people. Then God answers David while Saul is answered with silence 1Sam14:37,28:6. There is a clear play on the questioning motif by the Biblical writers, who, like their predecessors, frowned upon the election of a Benjamite as their king.

Sam Shamoun "Muhammad: The Best Example of Morality and Virtue?"

Sam Shamoun "Muhammad: The Best Example of Morality and Virtue?"

Islam arrived on the scene when slavery was already a deeply rooted social habit. Islam addresses this issue by first and foremost never placing the acquisition of slaves as a demand of religion. This means that when the institution of slavery is absent altogether from Muslim society, the divine law remains complete. Secondly, it limits the acquisition of slaves by confining it to the war prisoners, specifically those that could not be ransomed, thus forbidding the enslavement of a free person. This is how God gives mastery to those who fight in His ways, over those that seek to extinguish the light of truth. 

As ordained by Islam and as will be seen in details later on, it is but the most logical and humane manner of dealing with the enemy in war; they could obviously not free them at once and re-ignite the war, nor execute them all, nor set up a camp for them in which they would overburden state treasury and demand inefficient logistical organization with poor spiritual and psychosocial impact, but instead were sent among the Muslims themselves who were to treat them as quasi-members of the household

"they (slaves or servants) are your brothers, and Allah has put them under your command. So the one under whose hand Allah has put his brother, should feed him of what he eats, and give him dresses of what he wears, and should not ask him to do a thing beyond his capacity. And if at all he asks him to do a hard task, he should help him therein".

These former enemies could see and experience first hand the values and morals of Islam, after which they could eventually be freed. From all the ways that provided an avenue for slave acquisition, the Quran kept only one, as already said because of it being a logistical necessity, and more importantly, helped protect the captives’ lives as well as offer them a possibility of reform. Possession of slaves in Islam is therefore unrelated to financial wealth. When slaves were bought, it was for the purpose of emancipating them immediately as a righteous benevolent action or to atone for a sin. They only could be acquired as collateral war prisoners, together with their belongings brought at the battlefield such as horses, camels, useful weapons. If they weren't ransomed in exchange of Muslim war prisoners at the hands of the enemy, they were then distributed in Muslim households in which the Islamic label of a "slave" would make the best western modern system of social care pale in comparison 

"Narrated Anas: I served the Prophet for ten years, and he never said to me, "Uf" (a minor harsh word denoting impatience) and never blamed me by saying, "Why did you do so or why didn't you do so?" 

That is why the prophet in a reported case advised against the freeing of a particular slave, although he and the Quran repeatedly encouraged and freed slaves indiscriminately. Some people are better off living and benefitting from that Islamic system than to be left in society to fend for themselves

"Narrated Maimuna, the wife of the Prophet that she manumitted her slave-girl and the Prophet said to her, "You would have got more reward if you had given the slave-girl to one of your maternal uncles". 

To further corroborate that principle, the prophet said about the one 

"who has a beautiful slave girl, so he teaches her good manners, then he frees her, then he married her seeking the Face of Allah by that; then he will be given his reward twice".

Wars, past and present, justified or not, result in death, destruction and misery. The defeated party is always the one bearing the brunt of suffering. Among the consequences of wars, oppression, economic blockades, geopolitical bullying, post colonial damage and the like, that we see till this day, are asylum seekers and refugees fleeing their homeland. Many of them die in the process, never see their families again or simply dont succeed and go back home without a solution. Looking realistically at the situation, one has to determine what would be the best course of action for the victor, ethically, spiritually and economically. Whether they retreat with the loot, in addition instauring a system that keeps drawing upon the local wealth, turning their backs and "closing their borders", or whether they deal with the collateral damages. Once a party is defeated, its resources, including human are at the mercy of the victor. Families lose their pillars of support, leaving women and children helpless. Male refugees die by the hundreds till this day, seeking to feed their families back home, as stated earlier due to all types of oppression. Most of the time for these women, returning to their families adds more misery to an already impoverished community whose resources are lost or to be shared with the victorious party. That is not to speak of the general state of confusion in a community following defeat in war, adding burden upon burden for those left behind. The inevitable result is exile and more misery, or joining the victor whose increased wealth can afford extending the household to war captives and their children. This is the most pragmatic scenario in a war situation.

Muslims are warned however that even in a context of legitimate war, they can never be motivated by the perspective of capturing prisoners or acquiring any type of material gains over the main objective, the complete and entire defeat of their enemies and oppressors 8:67-71. The Quran relates in 8:5-8 how Allah tested the believers' motives in battle in order to purge them from their greed; if they would run after the booty or stand firm with the prophet to defend Islam. When the acquisition of slaves became restricted to battles after which they had to be freed either voluntarily or as a ransom, God warned the Muslims that during battle the motive must be the attainment of the military objectives before any consideration for war gains, and once the objective is fully accomplished, only then the taking of war prisoners and seizing of other spoils is allowed 47:4. In a later verse following the battle of Badr, God admonished those among the Muslims who had shown weakness in their general outlook on life, who had succumbed to their greed and begun capturing war spoils while the battle was still raging and the enemy threat hadnt been entirely contained

 8:67"you desire the frail goods of this world, while Allah desires (for you) the hereafter; and Allah is Mighty, Wise". 

But because God had already permitted the ransoming of war prisoners 47:4 that wealth gathered, although not in accordance with the spirit of the law, was considered lawful 

8:68-9"Were it not for an ordinance from Allah that had already gone forth, surely there would have befallen you a great chastisement for what you had taken to. Eat then of the lawful and good (things) which you have acquired in war, and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful". 

The believers are warned not to repeat this behavior and submit to their greed. They must keep in mind the higher objectives for going to war. They must first entirely subdue the enemy until the threat of war is over, and only then begin taking the enemy's spoils.

So the type of slavery allowed in the Quran, up to this day if the conditions are met, isnt the one where free innocent human beings are captured and sold like a merchandise. In fact the Quran emphatically condemns this type of human trafficking through the story of prophet Yusuf, as will be shown below.

The Quran gives 2 clear options towards war prisoners, either of the 2 can be applied from the moment of their capture following their defeat at the battlefield, until the threat of war has subsided 47:4. They can be given an unspecified favor, such as being taken care off within a Muslim household or even unconditionally freed 2:177. The second option is to be ransomed for benefits of any kind, including monetary compensation as happens when a prisoner is bailed out, or in specific services as would be the case with prisoners doing community works, or in mutual prisoners. 

When a female captive gives birth to her owner's child, her status and conditions change 

"The Messenger of Allah forbade the sale of the (slave) mothers of one's children (umm al walad), they can not be sold, nor gifted, nor inherited. The master will make use of her while he is alive and when he dies she shall be free". 

It is possible that some companions werent aware of the prohibition, and sold these categories of servants. A practice that happened even under Abu Bakr. Nothing indicates the prophet or close companions seeing and allowing the practice, as denoted with the "we" 

“We used to sell our slave women and the mothers of our children (Umahat Awaldina) when the Prophet was still living among us, and WE did not see anything wrong with that”. 

Umar, when he saw people doing it, forbade it in accordance with the prophet's command. 

Should the threat of war cease while there still are prisoners who havent benefited from the above 2 methods, then they can be employed as servants in a Muslim household where they must be treated on an almost equal level as other members of the household 4:36. At that point, if a slave who can offer any good contribution to society decides to be set free can enter into a written agreement with his guardian stipulating the terms and conditions of his manumition 24:33 which would more often than not be a term of service, i.e. you work for me for this many more months in my fields so I can recover my investment. This basically burdens the owner with only those right hand possessions that are of no value to society, after those that were capable of fending for themselves requested and eventually received their freedom. What this essentially means is that the burden of slavery in the end ultimately fell on the owners. Any capable slave that wanted to go into society, earn a living and get married would, and in addition the owner actually must offer financial assistance for the achievement of that objective. 

In fact some of the spendings of zakat are aimed at helping those masters who have entered into a manumition contract (mukataba) with their slaves 9:60. In one narration Anas b. Malik refuses to write a mukataba for a slave, so the caliph ʿUmar orders him to do it, paraphrasing the verse 24:33 ‘Write [a contract] with them if you see good in them!’, and making him swear an oath that he would do so. The majority opinion as attributed to Umar, Uthman, Aisha, and Ibn Umar, as well as the prophet is that the mukatab remains a slave until the last dirham is paid. Ibn Abbas reportedly stated that the slave is freed upon making the contract and merely owes the amount as a debt. Somewhere else we read, including in an alternative view from Umar that the slave is freed and the remainder converted to a debt upon paying half. Ibn Masud said that this occurs after one third or one quarter. The caliph Ali reportedly said that the mukatab attains freedom in proportion to what he has paid off. This seems to match a number of Prophetic hadith that discuss the rights and responsibilities of the mukatab becoming more like a free person the more they have paid off in certain numerically specified juristic matters. All this shows the flexibility of the issue of manumition.

The divine grant of mastery over their enemies doesnt give Muslims sanction to treat them as they wish. As shown above whether in the Quran or through the practice of the prophet, Muslims must treat them with care, almost as full members of a household. The reason being that through an exemplary conduct those former enemies might open their eyes to the real, unfiltered truth of Islam, free from the distortions of those that only seek to disparage it, and possibly reform themselves. The prophet once commented 

"you bring them tied in chains on their necks (capture them in war) and they later embrace Islam". 

This comment was uttered in relation to the verse qualifying Muslims as the best of nations, conditionally on their rightful conduct and forbidding evil. It is precisely this uprightness that turned enemy combatants, captured in war, into Muslims.

However, because the Quran repeatedly speaks of freeing slave as an act of great virtue, it warns against creating situations that could lead to the captivity then ransoming of slaves, through the example of the Jews of Medina. They entered into alliances with warring pagan tribes and fought, killed, enslaved then freed their own brethren while considering it a "pious act" 2:83-85. Such a behavior would not only be against the letter of the law but also its spirit 

"Malik related to me that he had heard that Abdullah ibn Umar was asked whether a slave could be bought on the specific condition that it was to be used to fulfil the obligation of freeing a slave, and he said, "No"...Malik added, "There is no harm, however, in someone buying a person expressly to set him free". 

Malik continues that in his opinion, the best course of action in this case is to exclude non-Muslim slaves. Choice must be made among those who neither were in the process of being freed, nor burdens to the owner due to physical impairment or bearing his child. A Muslim slave belonging to any of those categories is therefore not a valid kaffara/atonement. Even if he wasnt of those categories, Malik describes the slave as mu'min, meaning sincere and pious believer, which has more merit than simply being labelled Muslim. This way the intrinsic worth of the slave is enhanced to the maximum 

"Malik said...There is no harm in freeing a christian, jew, or magian voluntarily, because Allah, the Blessed, the Exalted, said in His Book, 'either as a favour then or by ransom,' (Sura 47 ayat 4) The favour is setting free".

The very fact of calling the manumission of slaves one of the greatest acts of charity, piety and benevolence towards men 2:177,9:60,90:11-18 shows that having them in one's possession is not the preferred way ultimately even though a short term captivity in the specific context of wars is sometimes necessary. 

The captives of the very first Islamic battle of Badr, were freed on ransom (in form of money depending on each prisoner's financial capacities or work like teaching ten Muslim children how to read and write), while those of the tribe of Tay were freed without any ransom. Some would reform themselves and cease their hostilities towards the Muslims, but others would go back headlong into battle whenever the chance to fight and kill Muslims presented itself. 

For example Abu Izza was among the anti-Muslim coalition at Uhud. He had been taken as a prisoner of war at Badr and then released by the prophet without a ransom because he was poor and had a large family. The condition for his release was that he would not take part in further anti-Islamic activities, especially verbal provocations, as he was known for his eloquence. If relatives were captured they could not be separated. It is then that the Quran progressively introduced the notion of freeing slave benevolently as a great virtue. 

As already noted, slaves were a source of livelihood and labor, even to Muslims who had to treat them with care. That is why it is considered a great act of generosity if done unconditionally. Even if the person wasnt prepared to go to such charitable extent, the Quran still encouraged freeing them through other avenues such as atoning for certain sins like missing a fast, breeching a vow made hastily concerning a lawful thing, accidental homicide, and many other small acts common in this society 4:92,5:89,58:3. As an act of virtue, Ali emancipated 1000 slaves, purchasing them from his own money. The Prophet emphatically stated on many occasions that, in the sight of God, the unconditional freeing of a human being from bondage is among the most praiseworthy acts which a Muslim could perform.  

No religion other than Islam promoted the liberation of fellow humans in bondage as an act of humanity and virtue, beautifully reflected in Sura 90. That is a fact the Judeo-Christian critics of Islam, who try misrepresenting Islamic slavery with their twisted biblical paradigm in mind, will have to deal with. The overarching approach of Islam towards slavery, as already seen and as will be further developed, is thus to reduce the access to servitude and expand the way towards freedom.

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "Muhammad: The Best Example of Morality and Virtue?"

1- CIRA International seek specific examples; the prisonners of Badr?

2- CIRA International are sinking: So what is Islamic slavery? 

3- CIRA International uncover Islamic social system; caring for slaves? 

4- CIRA International keep sinking; why Allah allows social inequalities?

5- CIRA International inadvertendly reveal Islamic higher viewpoint; human opposites or complementarity? 

6- Sam Shamoun "Muhammad and the Ten Commandments" (2) (mutah)

7- Sam Shamoun "Quranic Permissibility of Women having Sex with their Slaves"

8- Sam Shamoun about the prophet Muhammad "A WHITE RACIST OWNER OF BLACK SLAVES"

9- dontconvert2islam tries talking Quran, Muslims best of creatures? 

10- dontconvert2islam understands now; conditional honoring of the Muslim nation? 

11- dontconvert2islam is given valuable wisdom; golden rule of the Islamic ummah? 

12- dontconvert2islam is in shock; who are the worst creatures?