The Islam Issue "Muhammad explains non-Menstral bleeding"

The Islam Issue "Muhammad explains non-Menstral bleeding"

"Sneezing, drowsing and yawning during prayer, also menstruation/hayd, vomiting and nose bleeding come from the devil". 

Some misleading critics have unfortunately tried associating that hadith, despite its weakness, with the prophet's statement elsewhere in regards to a woman's frequent bleeding. The prophet told her that was not hayd/menstruation. This in itself discards the attempted association of the 2 statements by the critics. 

He further says that this bleeding is from a aarq/vein 

"That is not menstruation, rather that is a vein". 

He is evidently speaking of a ruptured blood vessel. That rupturing, as he says elsewhere is caused by a rakd/running from the womb, not from the devil. The blood from the womb ran fast causing the vein to break 

"That is not menstruation, rather it is a rakd min/from the womb". 

Rakd means running. It has been rendered in some english translations as "kick". This is because the running in concrete is done with the legs that kick the ground, however the word can apply to other things that run, including blood in the veins as is clearly meant here by the prophet.

The Islam Issue "Abu Darda testifies to Quranic corruption"

The Islam Issue "Abu Darda testifies to Quranic corruption"

Scholars contemporary to Uthman, such as Abu ad-darda' made comparative studies between the mushaf of Medina and the others that were dispatched to the provinces to teach people the correct reading. 

The findings revealed no variation in the skeletal structure but a total of 40 single letters differences scattered over 6 mushafs. These 6 mushafs were not private copies based on the ones approved and sent by Uthman, but were the very ones compiled under his watch then dispatched throughout the Muslim territories. This shows that these variants were known and approved. The compilers might have left them in because they agreed with the authenticated prophetic qiraat. This is the view of al Dani who stated that because Uthman could not accomodate all the qiraat in a single mushaf, he spread them throughout the masahif. 

Although the Medina mushaf was lost during the unrest that followed Uthman's assassination, based on the comparative notes left by the scholars that studied it, the present day Quran is in perfect congruence with what has been transmitted to us from the Medina mushaf. 

That is why Uthman is depicted as unbothered by copies based on his standardized text having grammatical flaws in them, to be disseminated because eventually "the Arabs will be able to recite it correctly". Again, this isnt speaking of errors in the script. Uthman would never have allowed such phenomenon be spread under his watch and despite his compilation efforts. These mistakes pertain to recitation. 

It isnt straightforward to grasp for non Arabs but some words if written in accordance with a particular recital can change the structure of that word. For example having 2 dots above a letter in one recital, but 1 dot in another. Or having an added ya at the end of a word. This may confuse the one unfamiliar with that particular recital and trying to read the word. Here is a similar situation 

"When the writing of the Mus-haf was finished, it was brought to ‘Uthmaan and he looked at it, then he said: You have done well. I see something but we will be able to correct it according to our dialect". 

Uthman saw something written differently from the way Quraysh would pronounce it, as happened with the word taaboot, which can be written with 2 different taa. He promised and did correct it according to the dialect of Quraysh.

Further reading answering The Islam Issue "Abu Darda testifies to Quranic corruption";

- Islam critiqued wakes up with the wrong foot...(variant reading of surah layl)

The Islam Issue "Sources of Islam: Quran 18:83-18:102"

The Islam Issue "Sources of Islam: Quran 18:83-18:102"

The Alexander Romances, although often believed by critics of Islam as being the source of the Quranic Dhul Qarnayn, has an unclear date of composition, spanning between the 4th and 16th centuries. That is why it is legitimate to speculate that the borrowing charge against the Quran has less ground to stand on than the reverse, with the various authors of the romances actually inspiring themselves throughout time by the Quran and its comentaries.

The Alexander Romances is thought to be based on the lost Greek writing called Pseudo Callisthenes whose closest copy is a 5th century Armenian translation. What is of concern to Islam critics are the shallow and far fetched similarities between the Quran and the Syriac translation, of which no manuscript exists prior to the 18th century, and in which by the way Alexander is never given the title "two horned".

As to the 14th-16th century Ethiopic translation in which he is called "two horned", besides being irrelevant in trying to establish the title by which Alexander was known around the time of the revelation of the sura in 620, it is important noting that this work contains the authors' interpretative opinion and is based on earlier Arabic translations.

But back to the Syriac translation which is of main interest to the accusers.

Although originally believed to have been finalized towards the mid 7th century CE, this Syriac legend of Alexander ends with a passage about the gates built by Alexander and stresses parallels between him and Heraclius, the Byzantine Emperor. More importantly this same passage retrospectively "prophecizes" the invasion of the Huns in 515 CE and the coming of Heraclius in 629 CE, leading scholars to assume the passage is a later addition, written as a Byzantine propaganda shortly before the Muslim conquest of Syria around 634CE. It additionally speaks of an independent and major Arab Kingdom which can only be equated with the early Caliphate. In that conquest the Persians are contrasted with the Sassanids, and the Greeks with the Romans. This pushes the finalization of the passage to post date the revelation of sura Kahf pre-620CE. (as a side note even if one would be to assume the sura is Medinan then the onus is on him to prove it post dates the finalization of the Syriac romance).

Similarily and towards the late 7th century, a Syriac Christian adaption of the Alexander romance, called the Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius, was written as a response to the Muslim invasions equating Gog and Magog with the Muslims. Other factors have led scholars to push the final composition of the passage further to between the 8th and 15th century, as it was clearly reshaped as a means by which the author sought to console, through parallelisms, the Christians who had lost Constantinople to the Ottomans.

In short besides the Armenian translation which was itself reedited in the 13th century, all other versions have their earliest manuscripts post dating the Quran by centuries. This means that all these texts were written in an Islamic environment, including the Armenian translation, which could have affected the later development of the Alexander Romances.

Now although late manuscripts themselves arent problematic, they become so when one attempts establishing a borrowing claim from text to text. Besides the proven additions, it is impossible to determine what the Syriac text looked like towards its earliest potential time of inception, in 629CE. Even if one takes this earliest estimate, it still leaves the Syriac author with long enough time to be exposed to the Quranic Dhul Qarnayn, again revealed pre-620, orally or textually, integrating the Quranic elements so as to fit and embelish the Christian agenda as was done a few decades later in Pseudo-Methodius.

Even Josephus and Jerome's respective works with short passages alluding to a wall built by Alexander are known evolving texts and their earliest manuscripts post date the Quran by hundreds of years, and were both finalized when Pseudo-Methodius had gained sweeping influence accross europe. Finally, there exists zero proof that the similarities between the romances and Dhul Qarnayn were in oral circulation all over the middle East and Europe prior to the revelation of sura kahf circa 620CE while plenty evidence exists pointing to the finalization of all available versions of the romances, more particularily the passages with Quranic similarities, after the revelation of the sura and the spread of Islam.

Even if for argument's sake these traditions were in circulation, then it would still do nothing to undermine the Quran's authenticity. All these sources draw on earlier lost sources, as shown earlier, with the life stories of Cyrus the Great being the main inspiration.

And once more, similarities doesnt entail borrowing. One first has to establish that the supposed (illiterate) author of the Quran had access to the similarities. One then has to explain how he cherry picked among a long list of books and traditions, besides other philosophies and thought systems, to form a well knit, flawlessly intricate narrative in its literary form that left the masters of eloquence of the time dumbfounded, as well as depth of contents that has not finished unravelling its subtleties. 

Why wasnt the source ever exposed nor came out to denounce him, leaving him reap the fruits of their labor. How wasnt this source detected given the largely exposed lifestyle of the time, the open circumstances in which the prophet lived and received revelation, as well as many other factors, not the least being that the Quran never claims to be relating something unknown in that particular narrative, repeatedly says it is a revelation in a long tradition of revelations. 

This means the superficial similarities might be remnants of revealed truths that eventually found their way into these apocrypha. In those writings from which the Quran supposedly draws, one can many times see how the superficial similarities are poorly weaved into the fabric of the story. The apocryphal writer, or his source, was aware of certain elements of the story but poorly integrated them in the whole account.

This is precisely why the Quran refers to itself as the Muhaymin (Guardian), when talking about the textual and oral traditions contemporaries to it. It points out major mistakes in them, filters the Truth from falsehood 

21:24"this is the reminder of those with me and the reminder of those before me". 

The Quran confirming the past scriptures, as well as any tradition, oral or written, in which divine truths still remain 2:41, means that the principles taught by Muhammad come from a common source, which Muslims believe is the Source of creation, and can be found throughout these textual and oral traditions. This is pointed to in the common phrase "musaddiqan lima bayna yadahi". With the passage of time these traditions were burdenned with additions, suffered from corruption and/or neglectful transmission. The Quran then acts as a criterion that distinguishes truth from falsehood. 

Therefore, and for argument's sake, to Muslims, it is irrelevant whether a story bearing similarities with a Quranic passage was even in circulation during and before Islam. It is even less relevant to Muslims whether the similarities were cannonized in the Bible or not. By what standard is the current Bible canon more reliable than the apocrypha? And what proof is there that the unknown Bible compilers rejected these traditions based on these points common to the Quran? Does the current Bible canon even claim to relate every single aspect of the life of its Biblical characters? Is it quiet possible that during the tumultuous process of transmission of the Bible, more particularily the HB which was lost at least twice as recorded in the Bible itself, some parts of the overall transmitted traditions were retained by the editors charged with reconstituting the lost text, and who reflected their own socio-cultural background in the process? Could they have been Selecting what was appropriate for their storytelling purposes and what was not? Of course from a secular viewpoint, the Quran, as a later text, is irrelevant in determining the authenticity, original versions or actual beliefs of those who originated or penned the previous oral and written traditions, canonized or not. But then so is the NT irrelevant in determining those matters from the HB, just as within the HB itself parts are far removed in time and space from other parts, making certain books insignificant when exploring these matters from earlier or later books. However, as soon as one introduces the divine into the equation, then all groups Jews-Christians-Muslims are equal in their claims as regards the authority of one scripture over another. The only factor from a non-secular view point enhancing one claim over another, would be the group with the most authentic, contradiction-free scripture.

In today's mainstream academia, no Islamicist asserts the Quran was influenced by the textual and oral traditions of its milieu, let alone copies from them. Simply because there is no possibility to know whether the human mind who supposedly authored the text had access to those traditions or understood them. What academics do at most, is present what they see as similarities, without disregarding or minimizing the vast differences. On the other side of the spectrum are Judeo-Christian religious zealots and apologists whose methodology and ideas are vastly inherited from their medieval peers' polemical writings. In order to enforce their untenable, unproven claims of borrowing, they retrospectively cherry pick convenient snippets from within larger stories that have very little to do with the corresponding Quranic passages. Then, not only do they disregard the significant differences loaded with theological meanings, but go on magnifying the tiniest similarities to the maximum so as to serve their paradigm. In the process, they inadvertently attribute to Muhammad an encyclopediac knowledge of texts and traditions, as well as an army of unseen informants from a variety of backgrounds and cultures following him around. This weak methodology can be applied to any thought system so as to build up a case for plagiarism. 

The Judeo-christian scriptures themselves relate, through the successive prophets and inspired personalities, different stories that were known to the addressees. This doesnt mean their statements were inspired by these traditions floating around. Rather, the common truths found between these traditions, and the statements of the prophets come from God. There is a myriad of similarities between the HB and stories, texts, inscriptions, including the Ugaritic mention of Adam and Eve, the Mesopotamian myth of Gilgamesh where he is cheated of immortality by a snake who eats a plant (had Gilgamesh eaten it, it would have made him immortal. The elements are the same but play out differently). There are other such myths circulating in Babylon where the Israelites spent a long time in exile, of a hero tricked out of immortality through the device of a plant/food. One could extend the parallelism with the laws of Hammurabi, or the global flood, among many examples, all predating Moses' supposed writing of the Torah. Some of these similarities might be due, as in the Quran, to being remnants of ancient truths partially preserved by these different cultures. But other biblical parallels with predating writings and traditions obviously are copies of unsophisticated legends floating in the region. The oldest and original account of creation in the Bible isnt found in Genesis but in Isaiah, Job or the Psalms. God in these crude stories divides the seas and fights off aquatic monsters. The same is found in the Ugaritic tablets and in a language very similar to Hebrew, with the myth that creation began when the storm god Baal vanquishing the god of the sea Yam and his sea monster-serpent-dragon helpers. Isa27:1 has a very close wording to what a Canaanite says about Baal 

"When you killed Litan, the fleeing serpent, annihilated the twisty serpent, the potentate with seven heads". 

One shouldnt forget that the canonization of the Bible was a long and controversial process, influenced by men with doctrinal bias, and that the current Biblical text is far from being a valid criterion of what truly constitutes divine knowledge from purely human invention.

The Islam Issue "Girls Urine is worse than boys"

The Islam Issue "Girls Urine is worse than boys"

"from Um Qays Ibn Mihsan that she brought a baby boy of her’s who was not yet eating food to the Messenger of Allah (Sallalahu Alayhi Was-Sallam) and he sat him in his arms and he urinated on his garment, so the Messenger of Allah called for some water and sprinkled over it but did not wash it".

This is simple pragmatism. As anyone whose had male children knows, or who was in close contact with them, including while playing, carrying or cleaning them, when they suddenly urinate, the urine generally spreads dropplets on a wide surface. And this is something that happens very often at this stage of their development. Cleaning thoroughly the whole surface everytime, be it one's clothes or other object would be cumbersome. Girls' urine on the other hand tends to spill onto a narrower area, easier to clean, hence the recommendation to clean that specific soiled area thoroughly 

"Water should be sprinkled on the urine of a baby boy, and the urine of a baby girl should be washed away". 

It speaks of washing away the girl's urine, not the entire clothes on which it fell. However when a baby boy starts eating a more varied diet, meaning at a later stage when such urine accidents are less frequent, and that in addition the quantity of urine has increased, then the ruling of conveniency is lifted and a more thorough washing is prescribed.

Further reading on the subject;

Acts17apologetics overly hygienic; Prophet allowed using polluted water?

The Islam Issue "Muhammad violates Islamic law"

The Islam Issue "Muhammad violates Islamic law"

The condemnation in sura nur of suspicion, false charges and gossip in the context of slander, is extended elsewhere general matters 

33:70"be careful of (your duty to) Allah and speak the right word" 

49:12"avoid most of suspicion, for surely suspicion in some cases is a sin, and do not spy nor let some of you backbite others. Would one of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? By no means, [since] you would hate it". 

Dishonouring a Muslim brother is likened to consuming the flesh of his dead body. Making mention of ‘dead body’ is owing to the fact that backbiting is done behind people’s back in the same manner that the dead are unable to defend themselves. It is such a gross and cowardly act that the limbs of the backbiter will be made to testify against him 17:36. 

All people therefore have the benefit of the doubt and Muslims are told to assume the best rather than the worst in people, unless there are solid reasons for suspicion, especially if they are from one's own community 24:12-18. 

One's privacy, including the privacy of public figures, cannot be compromised based on suspicion 49:4-5,24:27-29. The code of law of many developed nations do not issue a search warrant unless there is solid evidence to back up an accusation. This notion reaches such an extent in Islam that one of the early caliphs suspected that a particular individual was committing adultery, jumped over his wall and caught him in the act. The man protested that even the caliph had no right to spy on him in this manner, to which the caliph relented, continued his inspection of the city and mentioned nothing of the man's identity to anyone. 

As always, when trying to understand a Quranic passage and even more so a particular hadith, it is with the aforementioned relevant information that one should interpret all related topics. For example when the prophet told Ali to go kill a man rumoured of adultery with Maria the copt, without requiring first the high standard of testimony, then it should be understood, as it was by the scholars of hadith, including as early as Jaafar al Saadiq, that the prophet was teaching those who slandered Maria, that presuppositions can be totally baseless and harmful. It is to be kept in mind that the prophet told Ali that whatever mission he sends him to accomplish, he must first make a proper investigation prior to acting as per the prophet's orders 

"Ali said: I said: O Messenger of Allah, when you send me on a mission, should I go and do what you tell me to do (with no delay) or witness and find out what someone who is not there cannot find out? He said: 'Witness and find out what someone who is not there cannot find out".

Ali acted exactly as per the prophet's recommendations, and as it turned out, the man in question was an eunuch, who was consequently left unbothered. The whole incident strongly demonstrated the prophet's as well as the Quran's repeated warnings against false suspicions. This eunuch's name was Jaarih and was gifted to the prophet along with Maria by an Egyptian notable, to serve Maria within the prophet's household. Common sense dictates that the prophet was aware of Jaarih's condition and that the Egyptian ruler had told him about it.  There is a reason why the hadith compiler himself did not include that narration in his book of legal judgments and so he did not understand it as setting a legal precedent. Furthermore this was by no means the only rumor spread by the prophet's malicious opponents. There are other occasions where the prophet and his household, as reported both in the Quran and ahadith were the unjust targets of slander and never did the prophet adopt such unilateral, punitive measures against the accusers or the alleged culprits. On would expect to find a precedent, a pattern indicating the prophet's supposed inclination for impulsive, arbitrary judgements the likes his opponents claim in regards the incident with Jaarih.

The Quran reforms society in matters of preservation of sexual morality in the most intricate of ways, not only through issuing threats of sanctions and punishments. Sura nur, the sura of chastity, begins with stipulating the punishment of adulterers, then paves the ground for a sound marriage, speaks of modest clothing for both men and women, prohibiting lecherous staring, warns against slander, ending with children's taking permission at the time of entering parents’ room, so as to preserve them too from being exposed to inappropriate situations. Even immature children are taught not to enter the parents’ room without permission at least at three special times (before morning ritual prayer, after night prayer, and at noon time when parents are taking rest).

The principle of not sitting in judgement of other people's hidden motives the moment they declare their faith or good intentions is again reflected in Nuh's answer to the unbelievers. They questioned his followers' motives because of their past behaviour, but he answered that he is not concerned with their past and they will only have to answer to God when they meet Him. Only then their true worth will be established 11:31,26:111-5. This principle extends to the followers of any system that leads them to 

6:52"call upon their nurturing Lord in the morning and the evening, they seek His face". 

Muslims should not to be repulsed by such people whose beliefs may not fully answer to the demands of the Quran. Rather they should provide help, explanation and clarifications. Ultimately, 

"neither are you answerable for any reckoning of theirs, nor are they answerable for any reckoning of yours, so that you should drive them away and thus be of the unjust".

Similarly a woman who deserts her husband for the sole sake of her new faith, not for any worldly issues, and solemnly declares her Islam, then, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, this must constitue enough proof of her truthfulness, and she must be integrated within the community. This is because God alone is fully aware of the reality of the hearts 

60:10"examine them; Allah knows best their faith". 

Wisdom and spiritual awareness are not the monopoly of the elite, and neither is social status a criteria of truth. The Quran demonstrates this point as it quotes the chiefs and the elders of the community who comforted themselves in their opposition to the Quran by arguing that had there been any truth to it, they, as the most eminent and cultivated members of society would have been in the forefront to accept it. Yet only the common people, ie of lesser wisdom and intelligence have adopted it 46:11. 

Consequently a society may judge only by external evidence, which comprises a person's words and deeds for only Allah knows what is in the hearts of men 3:29,29:10-11. These hidden thoughts will be inevitably brought to light 47:29, but in the meantime none can perceive the disease of another person's heart except when it surfaces through his social affinities 58:22 or his behavior 

47:30"And if We please We would have made you know them so that you would certainly have recognized them by their marks and most certainly you can recognize them by the intent of (their) speech" 

and even if one succeeds in hiding his disbelief in this world or seems to meet the standards of righteousness, it does not mean in any way that such a one will succeed in escaping justice in the Hereafter 9:105.

The Islam Issue "Scientific miracles part 2: The Big bang and Quran 21:30"

The Islam Issue "Scientific miracles part 2: The Big bang and Quran 21:30"

The Quran is meant to provide spiritual, not scientific guidance. The miraculous way of the Quranic speech, its description of the universe and nature made sense to the ancient people all the while maintaining sufficient flexibility and space so that when the intellect and knowledge of men reach its peak, then that same Book becomes a permanent evidence. 

For example the verses 2:22,20:53,40:64 draw the image of a comfortable and protective tent with a sheltering binaa' above (the word is applied to tents and canopies and the like used by Bedouins). The ancients, just like us today, would firstly understand that the binaa' provides them with protection which in turn would ignite their God-consciousness and gratitude 

88:18-20"And the heaven, how it is reared aloft, And the mountains, how they are firmly fixed, And the earth, how it is made a vast expanse". 

This is the spiritual intent of the verses and if that is appreciated then the Quran has fully reached its objective. The readers and listeners can then go after the collateral, indirect and ambiguous meanings. They may inject their own erroneous views of nature onto the broad and ambiguous terms by equating binaa' with a solid physical canopy, just like we can blend our current scientific knowledge with the general words, so as to equate binaa'/structure with the protective atmosphere and upwards such as the magnetosphere. The Quran's ambiguous wording on the other hand would neither confirm nor negate any of the 2 interpretations. The only explicit stance of the Quran is as regards the spiritual portent of the verse, which both ancient and modern readers can grasp regardless of their understanding of nature.

It is worthy of note that although the Quran was revealed in the backward milieu of pre-Islamic Arabia, it nevertheless repeatedly calls its audience and readers upon reflection and observation of every aspect of creation, most often the universe, in order to increase in spirituality, not in scientific discovery. It is not one of the Quran’s goals to tell everything about the universe; its main goal is to guide its audience to the apparent significances that they can see with their eyes and feel. This is why the Quran only speaks of the apparent significances like the sky, earth, mountains, sun, moon, clouds and so on. 

Whether we look at nature and the universe according to ancient beliefs or in light of the latest discoveries, our appreciation and awe of these phenomena, how they are regulated and preserved, is not diminished. Regardless of what we may call these laws, they continue to serve as evidence of the truth and of God’s power which is manifest in 

3:190"the creation of the heavens and the earth and in the succession of night and day".

This not only pertains to astronomy but other aspects of the observable nature, spoken of with just enough depth to be relevant spiritually, while maintaining a neutral wording so as to avoid either confirming or blatantly rejecting the scientific notions of the ancients. The Quran was not sent to clear their misunderstandings, rather to clear their ignorance of the higher realities of our existence, and which are present in every aspect of nature 

2:115"so whichever way you turn, there is the Face of Allah". 

It would have been counterproductive for the Quran to blatantly mention unknown science facts. It carried the risk of deflecting the audience's attention from the deeper message, confusing them further during the delicate process of spiritual reform. Early Muslims appreciated the spiritual portents of these verses but were then free to delve deeper into the unintended scientific aspect, interpreting it in accordance with their own views. We do the same today and others will continue after us, the more scientific advancements are made. 

To the spiritually aware, for whom all observation of nature is seen through the prism of God-consciousness, these advancements are simply unravelling further God's might. Islamically, this is the correct approach to all scientific endeavor. When devoid of the spiritual angle, observation of nature only scratches the surface of reality 

30:7-8"They know what is apparent of the worldly life, but they, of the Hereafter, are unaware. Do they not contemplate within themselves? Allah has not created the heavens and the earth and what is between them except in truth and for a specified term. And indeed, many of the people, in [the matter of] the meeting with their Lord, are disbelievers".

All Quranic facts are absolute, and non falsifiable which isnt the case for most scientific facts, because they are the evolutionary product of the human mind as it goes from the primitive to the complex. In the course of human search of knowledge, previous postulates evolved from a speck of truth, to half truth to certain truth then many times only to revert back to ignorance. Most of what we knew, know and will know as science facts always prove in the course of time to be transient.

That is why the modern trend of seeking science "fact" or "errors" in the Quran, while science itself is undergoing an evolutionary process through the human medium of reasoning, is a fundamental mistake in approaching the meanings of the Quran. This book doesnt need its “credibility” enhanced by means of technical, mathematical, or quantitative data. The Quran is an integrated and consolidated whole that is in no need of scientific confirmation, while science is in need of constant substantiation as it keeps moving from one theory to another. Finite man will never be able to produce infinite science; man will never be able to produce eternal facts.

Now as to 21:30, the Quran states the heavens and earth were closed, then pictures life coming forth by tearing its way, an imagery often employed in religious scriptures 1Kings8:35,2Chronicles7:13,Deut28:12. 

It is to be firstly understood it doesnt say heavens and earth were closed or joined together, rather that each on their own were closed. It is a phenomenon the addressees are told to observe in order to substantiate the spiritual import of the verse. The implication of both heavens and earth opening is that rain showers down from heaven (from the clouds 13:17,16:65,18:45,24:43,30:48,35:9,43:11) and vegetation germinates from the earth after ripping it apart 

"Do not those who disbelieve see that the heavens and the earth were closed up, but We have opened them/fataqnahum; and We have made of water everything living, will they not then believe?" 

86:11-12"I swear by the raingiving heavens, And the earth splitting (with plants)" 

80:25-26"We pour down the water, pouring (it) down in abundance, then We cleave the earth, cleaving (it) asunder".

The Quran often employs this image of God as the Almighty, giver of life and energy, causing life/action "to tear its way forth". The divine name "al-fatir" whose root meaning is "to split" is linked to that effect of creation through splitting 6:14. 

It is narrated that Amr b. Ubayd once went to Muhammad al-Baqir (a descendant of the prophet through his grandsons) to test him through a question. He asked:

 “May I be your ransom! What is the meaning of His words: Do not those who disbelieve see that the heavens and the earth were closed up, but We have opened them (21:30)? What does it mean to be ‘closed up’ and ‘opened up’?” Abu Jaʿfar (that is, al-Baqir) replied: “The heavens were closed up, not sending down rain; and the earth was closed up, not sprouting any plants. Thereafter God opened up the heaven with rain and opened up the earth with vegetation.” Given this answer, Amr b. ʿUbayd had nothing to say, could not find any objection, and went on his way".

6:95"Indeed Allah is the one who cracks open/faliq the seed and the fruit pit, including He makes the living come out of the dead and makes the dead come out of the living. This is Allah for you so how come you get mislead"

6:96"He is the Cleaver/faliq of the Daybreak"

113:1"I seek refuge with the Lord who breaks apart and brings forth everything/rabbil falaq"

Faliq from F-L-Q is used for something that cracks open and makes way for a new beginning or a new entity. It is used for example for the egg that hatches and brings about a new bird or as in the above instances with the cracking open of the seeds in order to have a new plant sprout. Because most things in nature come to existence after a former entity cracks open, the term F-L-Q is used for "creation" even when that creation does not necessarily include breaking a former entity, as illustrated in 6:96. Such verses come in the context of resurrection and are meant to show that it is easy for God to bring us back to life as He brings to life the heavens and the earth that were closed up/dead 

16:65,25:49,30:19,32:27,35:9,36:32-3,41:39,50:9-11,43:11"And He Who sends down water from the cloud according to a measure, then We raise to life thereby a dead country, even thus shall you be brought forth". 

One may argue that the seed is not necessarily dead but dormant or something like that. In Arabic, linguistically, and as demonstrated in the Quran, death is defined by inactivity and life is defined as activity. God has allowed this earth to be the cradle of the cyclic occurrence of life and death, the continuous repetition on a micro/macro scale, of activity and inactivity of every element on the earth, including the elements that make us, that will eventually return to their previous inactive state and then reintegrate the living 39:21,77:25 as a symbol of the resurrection 

"Most surely there is a reminder in this for the men of understanding" 

29:20"Travel in the earth and see how He makes the first creation, then Allah creates the latter creation; surely Allah has power over all things". 

The Creator is perfectly aware of 

34:2"what penetrates into the earth and what emerges from it and what descends from the sky and what ascends into it". 

Besides the refusal to accept ultimate accountability, it is the negation of that particular knowledge of God that led them to technically negate the concept of resurrection, the knowledge of the whereabouts of every atom composing a body when scattered throughout the earth and consequent capacity to gather them back 

32:10"when we have become lost in the earth, shall we then certainly be in a new creation?" 

Through several angles, the Quran answers this objection, the original creation of man from dispersed dust is no different than his recreation once he returns to scattered dust. In fact so comprehensive will the process be than even the conscience, the soul, is preserved from the moment of death 39:42. In the words of Muhammad Asad, this definition comprises things physical and spiritual: waters disappearing underground and reappearing; the metamorphosis of seed into plant, and of decaying plant into oil and coal; traces of old artifacts and entire civilizations buried in the earth and then reappearing within the sight and consciousness of later generations of men; the transformation of dead bodies of animals and men into elements of nourishment for new life; the ascent of earthy vapours towards the skies, and their descent as rain, snow or hail; the ascent towards the heavens of men’s longings, hopes and ambitions, and the descent of divine inspiration into the minds of men, and thus a revival of faith and thought and, with it, the growth of new artifacts, new skills and new hopes: in short, the endless recurrence of birth, death and re-birth which characterizes all of God’s creation.

We are thus in need of the One who put in place, and sustains this sytem, for spiritual guidance and life in this world as well as the hereafter regardless of whether we recognize Him and accept Him 

35:15"O men, you are they who stand in need of Allah, and Allah is He Who is the Self-sufficient, the Praised One".

The often repeated image of life splitting the earth appart 80:25-32 is metaphorically used in 13:31 for God's guidance, through the Quran, causing "the earth to be torn asunder".

The Islam Issue "The fate of the Ibn Masud codex"

The Islam Issue "The fate of the Ibn Masud codex"

The notion of Umar supposedly realizing that "a verse was lost" after the events of Yamama is found in a Munqat’i (broken chain) report. This grade in hadith science means it lacks rigorous authentication, it doesnt however necessarily mean it is fabricated 

"Umar was once looking for the text of a specific verse of the Qur’an (he vaguely remembered). (To his deep sorrow), he discovered that the only person who had any record of that verse had been killed in the battle of Yamama (and that the verse was consequently lost)". 

Everything between brackets is absent from the actual Arabic 

"Umar bin al Khattab enquired about a verse from the Book of Allah and was told it had been with/maa' a certain person who had been killed on the day [battle] of Yamama. Upon which he [Umar] said ‘Verily we belong to Allah’ and ordered the Qur’an [to be gathered] and so it was compiled". 

The preposition maa'/with indicates two things being together, in a physical sense, ie the memorizer with a written copy of a particular verse. Umar, like many other contemporaries was a memorizer, he was simply looking for a written copy of the verse he knew. Nothing in the report implies lack of knowledge, forgetfulness or complete loss.

The true meaning therefore, as corroborated by the history is that the written copy of a certain known verse was with by someone who had been killed. This was the very reason Umar consulted with Abu Bakr to compile the Quran in book form. The early companions wanted to establish a parallel process of compilation and preservation, combining memorization and writing, both corroborating and authenticating oneanother.

Further reading answering The Islam Issue "The fate of the Ibn Masud codex"

- CIRA International unveil Islamic scandal; Uthman burns different Qurans?

- Islam Critiqued wont humble himself; Hudhayfa reports different Qurans?

- Acts17apologetics seek the details; how was the compilation done? (ibn Masud opposes Zayd)

- Islam critiqued wakes up with the wrong foot..(missing suras and other differences in ibn Masud's codex)

- Islam critiqued may want to dig deeper; what about al-Hajjaj?

The Islam Issue "Gods house of plagiarism"

The Islam Issue "Gods house of plagiarism"

Abraham was 86 according to the biblical account Gen16:16, when Hagar gave birth to Ishmael. The root of the name in both Hebrew/ishma and Arabic/ismaa implies "hearing". This is because in both the Bible and the Quran, Abraham desperately prays God for a son. In the Bible God "hears" both his and Hagar's prayers Gen15,16 while the Quran cites only Ibrahim's prayers for a righteous son 37:100-1 and which Allah heard/ismaa. He thus named that firstborn son he longed for Ismaail/Ishmael (a similar Biblical case is Samuel whom his mother called so because 1Sam1:20"I asked him of the Lord"). 

Ismail was the manifestation of Allah's acceptance of Ibrahim's prayers 

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". 

It is to be noted that both Ishmael and Ismail are appropriation into Hebrew/Arabic of the name which Abraham gave to his son in his native Babylonian language. Ismail's birth was a miracle given Ibrahim's old age, and God, throughout the prophetic history caused women to bear children in miraculous circumstances, Mary the mother of Jesus being one of them 

19:20,3:47"Allah creates what He pleases; when He has decreed a matter, He only says to it, Be, and it is".

The Abrahamic connection with the Arabs, Mecca, the Kaaba was deeply ingrained in the minds of the prophet's addressees. There was no tension nor polemics in that regards, neither with the polytheists, nor with the Jews and Christians among the Arabs. This bellies the notion that, whomever the critics alledge wrote the Quran, needed to invent that connection. 

Recently for instance Joseph Witztum argued the Quranic Ishmael-binding narrative and building of the Kaaba by both Ibrahim and his son, find inspiration in a Syriac Homily by Jacob of Serugh. Besides Witztum's admission that the Abrahamic connection with the Meccan Ishmaelites is attested in non Muslim pre-Islamic sources (Theodoret and Sozomon), meaning the Quran did not need re-adapting a story to make a point that was already accepted, no evidence exists for the Homily in question circulating among the Arabs of the peninsula, including Jews and Christians. Especially not among the laymen, making the information complicated to access, even more so in the Arabic language. No loan words or linguistic similarities appear in the parallel passages. The similarities are isolated and out of context. For example the homily speaks of Abraham and Isaac building an altar. Although there is mention of both Ibrahim and Ismail engaging in construction, there is no altar or sacrifice in the Quranic context. Neither were the Kaaba nor the altar to sacrifice the enigmatic "only son", which could never have been Isaac the second-born, the only spiritual constructions by Abraham. The Bible recounts how he built places of worship to God throughout his journeys Gen12:6-8,13:4,18. That Abrahamic practice we are told in the HB, was left to his posterity that similarly built places of worship symbolized by stones erected as pillars Gen28:10,18-22, ie the "foundations" which Ibrahim and Ismail "raised" 2:127.

On a more general note, the idea the Arabs needed to express their thoughts, even their sacred history in a foreign language, such as Syriac is untenable. Christoph Luxenberg famously stated that the Syro-Aramaic used in Edessa and its environs is the original language of the Quran, not Arabic, despite the Quran itself repeatedly saying about itself it is evident Arabic, in the language of the messenger's people 12:2,13:37,26:195,46:12,16:103,19:97,44:58,14:4. One may add that the consensus of all Arabs after Islam, regardless of their scholarly, political and tribal background is that the Quran has been revealed in the Qurayshi dialect, whose language was known for its eloquence. Neither does Luxenberg explain how this language might have come to dominate in far away Hijaz to such an extent that it would form the basis of the sacred writings of its inhabitants, nor does he present the slightest evidence that there existed in Mecca and its surroundings an Arab community under intense Christian influence. These claims run along the same lines as those of the Protestant theologian Gunter Luling who theorized in the 1960s that this area was thoroughly christianized by Muhammad’s lifetime, and Mecca was a significant Christian town ruled by the Quraysh, a Christianized tribe that worshipped in the Kaaba, a Christian church built with an orientation toward Jerusalem. This assertion however remains unsubstantiated whether from Muslim or Christian sources, just as his assumption of a massive Christian presence in central and northwestern Arabia.

There are no Arabic inscriptions written in the Syriac script whereas there are quite a number of them written in Nabataean Aramaic script, the recognized origin of the Arabic script. Arabic was widely spoken in the Middle East by the 7th century CE, particularly in the region of the former Nabataean kingdom. This very evolution presumes frequent writing of Arabic in the Nabataean script. Some inscriptions prove that Arabic had already long been used for sacred expression, such as the Oboda inscription, and possibly also the ones found in the Madaba area. There is also Epiphanius of Salamis’ testimony as to the praises to a virgin deity sung in Arabic by the inhabitants of Petra and Elusa.

A well known Meccan inscription dated to AH 98/717 CE is variously attributed to a bishop of Najran in southwest Arabia named Quss ibn Sa‘ida, or else to one of the pre-Islamic kings of Yemen. Regardless of the authenticity of that attribution, the accumulation of pre-islamic evidence, including a vast wealth of poetry, does point to them belonging to that period. The pre-Islamic Arabic texts are nothing but the visible tip of the iceberg. Most of the hidden material is lost through the effect of time or in the process of being discovered. The point is that there is a substantial tradition of writing and speaking Arabic. Why would then the Quran's supposed authors need to express their sacred traditions in a far away foreign language?

Further reading answering The Islam Issue "Gods house of plagiarism"

The Qibla change

- CIRA international do geopolitics; why change Qibla? 

- CIRA international explore early Muslim dilemma; praying to Jerusalem?

- CIRA international expose a great conspiracy; people hiding the true qibla? 

- CIRA international find monotheistic discrepency; God is present in a direction?

- CIRA international find deeper meanings to Qibla change; a new nation under God? 

Abraham and the Kaaba

- Islam Critiqued is restless; Muhammad connects Mecca to Abraham?

- Islam Critiqued denies Biblical prophecies; no trace of the Ishmaelite nation? 

- Islam Critiqued seeks footprints in the sand; Abraham passes by the Kaaba? 

- Islam Critiqued finds Abraham's successors; the hanif remnants?

- Islam Critiqued stuck with a problem; Abrahamic practices in Mecca? 

- Islam Critiqued needs names; hanifs in the time of Muhammad? 

- Islam Critiqued ditches human depravity; Arabs corrupting Abrahamic legacy? 

- Islam Critiqued finds hope; traces of monotheism in pre-Islamic times?

- Islam Critiqued keeps finding patterns; the straying of the Semites?

- Islam Critiqued needs secular views; any sign of Mecca?

- Islam Critiqued asks non-Muslims; no trace of Mecca?

- Islam Critiqued looks for the illusive shrine; the universal Kaaba? 

- Islam Critiqued digs up Greek sources; the ancient Meccan town is found? 

The only son

- Apostate prophet revises history; Isaac was Abraham's only son?

- Apostate prophet wonders at simple words; what is an only son? 

- Apostate prophet revists Abraham's prayer; Ishmael was dedicated to Allah? 

- Apostate prophet falls for biblical drama; Hagar carries Ishmael into the desert? 

- Apostate prophet exposes bible editors; Abraham sends his family to die? 

The seven sleepers

- Islam Critiqued is sceptic of his own tradition; the seven sleepers in the Quran? 

The Islam Issue "Muhammads treatment of military widows"

The Islam Issue "Muhammads treatment of military widows"

 

"And she said that the messenger of Allah said: “go and throw sand in their mouths“."

This translation is false. It literally says 

"And I (Aisha) zaamtu/thought/conjectured that the prophet said "go and put dust in their mouths".

The prophet did not forbid weeping for one's deceased, but the tradition of "fake wailing" where women are incited to do so at funerals. This tradition is still seen in many cultures around the world, including Muslim. He said 

"If a hired mourner (a woman who is hired to wail during funerals) does not repent before she dies, she will be raised on the Day of Judgement wearing a garment of tar and an armour of blistering puss.” 

He also said 

"Allaah does not punish for the weeping of the eye or the sadness of the heart, but He punishes for this –pointing to his tongue –or that this [what the tongue utters] is forbidden". 

Crying from sadness at a cherished person's death is normal, and the prophet himself many times did so, even years after the person's passing. The prophet described that type of sadness as

"a mercy which Allah has placed in the hearts of his slaves. Allah bestows His Mercy on the merciful among His slaves". 

What is disapproved is the abovementionned practice, the wailing and lamenting as it many times leads to overstepping the religious bounds and questionning God's justice and purpose behind the incidents of life 

"He who slaps the cheeks, tears the clothes and follows the tradition of the Days of Ignorance is not from us". 

The approved manner of mourning however is one where 

"The eyes are shedding tears and the heart is grieved, and we will not say except what pleases our Sustainer. O Ibrahim! Indeed we are grieved by your departure". 

Among those words which the mourner may utter are reminders of the goodness of the deceased, prayers of mercy, forgiveness, wishing him/her the reward of Paradise, and acceptance of the overall design of creation 

2:156"Truly! To Allah we belong and truly, to Him we shall return".

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)