Overview of the laws of divorce

The Quran regulates the matters of divorce so that it isnt approached lightly, not caused by transient emotional factors 

65:1,4:19"If you take a dislike to them it may be that you dislike a thing and Allah brings about through it a great deal of good". 

It bans the pre-islamic practice of dhihar/zihar where husbands would arbitrarily physically repudiate their wives, considering them as unlawful as would be their biological mothers 33:4,58:1-4. Such injustice towards the sanctity of both motherhood and the institution of marriage must be compensated through repentance and atonement; charity, fasting or the freeing of a captive. If not, then the wife remains unlawful to the husband, opening the way for her to seek divorce due to the husband not completing his matrimonial rights. 

It is to be noted, the disapproval of that practice was mentioned in surah ahzaab much prior to sura mujaadila, where the options for atonement are given. We read in the traditions of a woman who complained to the prophet that her husband had declared zihar on her. Knowing that the Quran severely disapproved it, the woman, despite the prophet's advise to return to her husband and resume her marital life, sought for a way, on behalf of her husband to regain God's approval. The prophet's advise was due to the man's old age, described in some reports as becoming mentally confused as to his statements. Further, the Quran considers zihar a falsehood that has no bearing on the validity of the marriage. In pre-islamic days, the statement of zihar amounted to divorce. The verses 58:1-4 were then revealed, reiterating the negativity of the practice and opening a way for repentance. Khawlah desired to return to her husband, even pleading for him, but due to her piety, wanted to do so with God's blessing, and God honoured her attitude forever through the revelation of these verses 

"My husband, Aws ibn as-Samit, pronounced the words: You are like my mother. So I came to the Messenger of Allah, complaining to him about my husband. The Messenger of Allah disputed with me and said: Remain dutiful to Allah; he is your cousin. I continued (complaining) until the Qur'anic verse came down..I said: I shall help him with another date-basked ('araq). He said: You have done well. Go and feed sixty poor people on his behalf, and return to your cousin. The narrator said: An araq holds sixty sa's of dates. Abu Dawud said: She atoned on his behalf without seeking his permission". The traditions report that her status among the companions was such that they would stop and listen to whatever she had to say, bowing their heads in humility, calling her "the one whose complaint was heard at the seventh heaven". 

The divorce matter is neither wholly in the husband's nor the wife's hands. If the wife wants a divorce, called khul', due to fear not to honour her marital duties, she is to return her dower so as to obtain separation 2:229. Once a woman complained to the prophet about her new husband’s repulsive physical appearance, and the prophet divorced them by returning the two orchards her husband had given her. The verse also warns against any type of abuse in the matter, such as by mistreating the wife so as to compel her to initiate the divorce and return the dower. The man may also resort to khul', but will not get the dower back, unless marriage has not yet been consummated. In that case he may ask and get up to half of what he gifted, although it would be more considerate to leave the bridal gift altogether to the divorced wife 2:237. 

Once marriage has been consummated and the man initiates a divorce, called talaq, a judge designates two arbiters, one belonging to the wife's family and the other to the husband's 4:35. The arbiters' primary objective is to effect a reconciliation during a counselling period of three months -called idda- where the husband remains financially responsible for his wife 65:1,6. She cannot be turned out of the home, unless the actions leading to the husband announcing the divorce, were immoral. 

The primary purpose of the 3 month cycle is to determine a possible pregnancy. A woman may miss one, even 2 menstruations for other reasons that pregnancy. But she obviously cannot be kept in such situation indefinitely, thus the limit of 3 cycles. If menstruation occurs anywhere within the 3 month time period, pregnancy is ruled out, but the marriage is still not dissolved until the waiting period is over. During that time the husband may not expel his wife nor can she leave, as stated earlier. The reason is that this type of divorce, called revocable, is issued by the husband and wasnt necessarily wanted by the wife. By not leaving the house, perhaps he may have second thoughts and take her back. A revocable divorced woman is still considered to be a wife. 

Divorces for the vast majority of cases are pronounced hastily. Through this device one might still be able to seize a chance at reconciliation. Of course, this period of reflection within the household cannot be done with physical or mental harm 65:6,2:231 the hope being that conjugal relations may resume. Islam is based upon justice, fairness, and human rights; it never approves of oppressive behaviour, especially not in a couple 

"Among His signs is that He created for you spouses from yourselves so that you might find repose with them. And He has placed between you affection and mercy. In that there are certainly signs for people who reflect". 

Many such verses encourage men and women to actively seek and maintain their companionship with God-consciousness. The prophet embodied these Quranic principles 

"The most perfect man in his faith among the believers is the one whose behaviour is most excellent; and the best of you are those who are the best to their women". 

If a woman fears oppression, she must approach the team of arbitrators as stated in the Quran and ask them to advise and council her husband and induce him to observe justice and fairness, and to perform his duties. If he reforms his behaviour, she continues her life with him and if he does not, the case is transferred to the judge who tells him to stop his behaviour, as witnessed by the arbitrators, and perform his duties. If he does not accept, he is obligated to divorce her. If he refuses to do so, the judge himself divorces them and forcefully takes the wife's rights from her husband.

As stated earlier, during the cooling off period of 3 months, the husband may go back to his wife at any time 

2:228"and their husbands have a better right to take them back in the meanwhile if they wish for reconciliation; and they have rights similar to those against them in a just manner".

Once the prescribed time reaches its end, a decision must be taken to 

65:2"either retain them according to acceptable terms or part with them according to acceptable terms". 

For a marriage that breaks up very early on, in fact so early that it has not even been consummated, then there is no use to observe a waiting period of reflection as is the case above. The man is nevertheless required, out of courtesy to 

33:49"provide for them and give them a gracious release". 

This type of divorce is called irrevocable, and takes immediate effect. It may also apply after the consummation of the marriage while conditioning a compensation for the divorce. Husband and wife in this case become unlawful to oneanother and cannot remain alone in the same space without remarrying. Along the same lines is the "triple divorce" which not only ends the marriage irrevocably, but also makes it very hard for the couple to come back together unless the woman remarries someone else and they are both fully consenting for the union, then divorces him, so as to eventually return to the first husband. It should be noted that this method of separation is viewed as sinful, but if pronounced it is still effective.

The reality of human relations is complex and the divine law aims at tempering the hasty nature of people, especially in strained relationships. It does so through a delicate balance between pragmatism and emotional considerations. The intricacies and formalities are disputed among the four main schools of thought in Islamic jurisprudence, which is a continuing example of how sharia is flexible and allows a diversity of opinion so as to accommodate the changing times.

A man may swear not to ever go near his wife again 2:226-7. When this type of oath, called "ilaa'" is issued, the sacred law allows a maximum of 4 months separation. Neither are strained relations allowed to continue indefinitely nor is a man entitled to keep his wife in suspense for as long as he wishes. During this period they must either make a reconciliation, and the man has to atone for his broken oath, or part for good when the 4 months expire, so that they may be free to marry a suitable person of their liking.
 
Once divorce takes place, it is by no means viewed as a stain, rather the start of a new phase with God's blessings 

4:130"if they (should) separate, Allah will enrich each out of His abundance, and Allah is All-Embracing, the Wise". 

The wife gets to keep her dower, a command preceded by an injunction to 

65:2,2:229"let them go with kindness". 

Whatever she has earned during marriage through business activities, she may keep it to herself 4:32 while the husband, even after the divorce is obliged to provide sustenance to his former wife in case she is nursing or is pregnant with his child until she delivers, according to his means 65:6-7. This is based on the overarching principle of male courtesy towards an ex-wife 

2:241"And for divorced women is a provision according to what is acceptable - a duty upon the righteous" 

a principle the prophet was to apply in such eventuality 33:28.

However in an exceptional case it is lawful for him to take back some gifts: when both parties desire legal separation, but the husband desists from divorce because he believes his financial loss, through wealth, assets or property, would be too significant. In such a case, it would be acceptable for the wife to return the gifts to her husband and for the husband to accept them 

2:229"it is not lawful for you to take any part of what you have given them, unless both fear that they cannot keep within the limits of Allah; then if you fear that they cannot keep within the limits of Allah, there is no blame on them for what she gives up to become free thereby". 

The Quran further prevents marrying them to someone else so as to take back their dower 4:32. The mahr/dower, once marriage has been consummated, is the wife's property. It cannot be taken by her husband unless she is proven guilty of immoral conduct 4:19, or if she knows that she will not honour her marital agreements, without any wrongdoing on the husband's part, thereby deciding to end the marriage 2:229,4:4 (khul' divorce as described earlier). In the reverse case, the husband has no right to take back even a fraction of that dower 4:20. It is inconceivable he should take it back after being intimate with her, it would amount to a great sin from him, and humiliation to the wife. Although none can be forced to remain in a marriage one dislikes, even if it is for purely physical reasons as is the case here, the Quran again tries protecting the woman's dignity by discouraging the separation 

4:19"live with them in a proper manner; then if you hate them, it may be that you dislike a thing while Allah has placed abundant good in it".

The Quran then demands mutual understanding regarding the child's future 

65:6"take mutual counsel together, according to what is just and reasonable" 

and if they disagree in the matter then it will be returned to the judge's decision 4:35.

 

Men are particularly reminded in 2:229,2:230 that they cannot abuse of their right to divorce, neglecting the wife's feelings in the process. If he asks to divorce the same wife twice then he may not ask her hand a third time unless she has married another man and he has divorced her. Even if she feels the need to go back to that same man, he remains forbidden to her until she has experienced marriage with another man (muhallil). This not only deters emotionally abusive men, but it serves as an eye opener to women who might be tempted out of fear and psychological control, to keep on pardoning and returning to their abusive relationship. It opens the way to these abused women to go into society free of any blame, and start a new life with another man. 

We find something similar in the HB in Deut24 where a divorced woman that remarries then divorces a second time, becomes forbidden to the man she was first married to. This is speaking of repeated sinfulness and sexual misbehaviour short of adultery. It is different that the problem the Quran addresses, as well as the solution it proposes. It would be of course inappropriate for a man to remarry a woman he had himself divorced for her immoral behaviour. Especially if the second husband divorces her for the same reason, showing an established pattern of behaviour. It would be an acceptance of sinfulness within one's household. The Quran equally forbids the righteous from marrying a sexually immoral person, until that person repents and mends his/her ways 24:1-25. There are no deadlocks in Islam.

A slightly longer period of 4 months and 10 days is to be observed by a widow prior to remarrying, again with the purpose of ascertaining pregnancy but also to allow a dignified mourning of the husband in the eyes of his offspring, close and extended family 2:234. Even if not consummated, the purpose of the husband and wife coming together in the eyes of their family and the people was, theoreticaly, to spend a lifetime together. For the widow to suddenly switch to another relationship for no other reason than emotional/physical attraction would be insensitive. Beyond symbolizing the wife's consideration for the late husband, this period of mourning consolidates the widow's relation with the deceased's children and extended family. During the prescribed waiting period, the widow may be subtly approached for a marriage proposal but can only formalise it at the end of the period 2:235. 

There are however cases where a widow could immidiately remarry upon her husband's death. And that is in case she was pregnant and delivered shortly after his passing 65:4. This way she will find the needed support of a husband/father.

One may ask why the same doesnt apply in the reverse, with the widower having to sit through a period of mourning; the difference is obviously a man doesnt get pregnant. Also, he may have other wives, but most importantly, a man needs someone to care for the household while he is in charge of sustaining the family. The widow on the other hand is maintained from the deceased's estate during the mourning, even if he did not leave a will for that purpose, provided she remains in the same house. It is based on the presuposition that she is receiving money that the majority opinion among the jurists argue she is obligated to stay in the house of her husband for the prescribed time. This is seen from the fact that all agree that in case of rent, if the husband did not leave sufficient wealth behind, then she may go to her own place of safety. Should she decide to and if it is in accordance with the husband's will, she could stay passed the prescribed 4 months and 10 days in the family home, for up to a year, and still live off the deceased's wealth 2:240. After that point the deceased's family are no more obligated to maintain her from the total wealth, and could each receive their prescribed shares, including herself. According to a minority opinion attributed to Ali, Ibn Abbas, Aishah, Jabir bin Zaid, Hasan Al-Basri, she can spend her period of iddah wherever she wants.

The Islamic calendar and the 4 sacred Lunar months

The pre-Islamic Arabs used a combined Lunar/Solar calendar, and would periodically add a month in order to compensate for the shorter lunar year as opposed to the solar year. This resulted in fixing their rituals, like the yearly pilgrimage, to more convenient times from certain aspects. 

However, Islam banned the addition of such months 9:36-7. This meant that the month of Ramadan is now rotating through the year in a 33 year cycle. This avoids the convenient fixation of certain religious practices according to human whims, for purely worldly motives, violating God's established sacred months and allowing an ordinary month to be observed as sacred and vice versa. For example the pre-Islamic Arabs used this practice to avoid the disadvantages for their trade. Banning the intercalary month opens up the way for spiritual improvement, training one to perform his duties at all times of the year and under all circumstances. Also, from the viewpoint of the universality of religion, it is obvious that the periods of fasting and performing Haj cannot satisfy all if they be fixed, always falling in the same season and month in different places-summer or winter or very hot or very cold or rainy or dry or harvesting or sowing-year after year. 

The Islamic time-keeping system is in fact the most scientifically relevant, because it does not require intercallation and thus making its precise reference point known to the day. Lunar calendars are more accurate to keep track of the date, as one can determine dates based on simple observation of lunar phases, which come at the same time each month. Add to this the fact that the Islamic calendar is the only one that is divested from all elements of overt and parenthetical shirk, such as how the days of the week and the months of the year are named.

Much like the pre-Islamic pagan practice, the Hebrew month is based on the moon-cycle and therefore consists of 29/30 days. The year however is accounted for following the solarcycle, but because this creates a difference of +-11 days (Lunar year/354days vs solar year/365days), then adjustments needed to be made in order to allow the fixation of the different festivals (Pesach, Shavuot and Sukkot) to certain seasons (spring, summer and autumn respectively). The solution to having a lunisolar calendar is to periodically insert an extra 30-day month into a year, creating a 13-month year. The Torah however never reckons the time of the sacred rituals and festivals using the sun cycle, but always on a monthly basis according to moon sighting 

Numb28:14"This is the monthly burnt offering to be made at each new moon during the year" 

Ezek46:3"And the people of the land shall [also] prostrate themselves at the entrance of that gate on the Sabbaths and on the New Moons, before the Lord" see also Ps81:4,Ezra3:5etc. 

Neither is there mention of these practices and timing requirements. The reckoning of time is actually stated to be one of the primary function of the moon 

Ps104:19"He made the moon for the appointed seasons".

And a solar calendar isnt more practical that the lunar because of its alignement with the seasons. The lunar is based on the actual sighting of the phases of the moon which is pretty much visible everyday to determine the months, as stated earlier a moon phase occurs every month at the same time. A solar calendar is meant at ensuring that, for those locations that experience several seasons in a year, their seasons will follow a predictable yearly pattern, regardless of scientific accuracy, hence the arbitrary decisions as to what the length of each month is going to be: 28, 29, 30, or 31 days. It is an irrelevant system outdated for our time and age. For instance because a solar year lasts more than 365 days, every once a while a day must be added to catch up with the seasons, it is called a leap year. That day is arbitrarily added to february. 

By contrast, there is nothing arbitrary about the Islamic calendar. Every month is either 29 or 30 days, because the average length of the synodic month is 29.531 days. The extra half day is absorbed into the consideration that each recordable month in terms of whole days will either be 29 or 30 days, and this is determined precisely by the visibility of the observable crescent: it is an observation, not a definition. Thus the time-keeper never has to worry about a cumulative error, and thereby never has a need for intercalation. Furthermore and as already said, because of the regular and consistent motion of the Moon with respect to the Earth, the visibility of the crescent is predictable to a very high degree of accuracy, especially with modern technologies and instrumentation. 

In brief, for date keeping, the lunar calendar is better than the solar which was useful to ancient communities highly depending upon agriculture. To this day, the lunar calendar is highly relevant to Muslims around the world, since in Islam, time keeping is the priority. Religious festivals and sacred months depend on accurate moon sightings. Muslims living, or depending upon Western systems however have adopted the Gregorian calendar to synchronize their daily economic activities with the rest of the world.

As stated earlier, a lunar month accounts for a little less than 30 days on average. In terms of evenly observable moon phases, one could either divide the month into 2 half moons, or into 4 quarters. The interval between 4 quarters seems less lengthy than between 2 halves and thus makes for a better time-keeping method. 4 cycles of 7 days in a month, corresponding to 4 observable moon quarters, is a practical division of time. Such an arbitrary division of a month into 4 weeks is only relevant in recent human development. Effectively, we see that the Quran only attests to the division of an earthly year into 12 lunar months, stating it is a system established since the heavens and earth were created. This of course is an accurate statement, based on observable astronomical phenomena independent of human whims. Unlike the Bible in the context of creation, the Quran therefore does not speak of the division of days within a week. The prophet however in a hadith, named 7 weekdays in which certain earthly arrangements were finalized. The hadith isnt speaking of the creation of heavens and earth, rather selects 7 things that occurred on the earth after its completion, and which were finalized on different weekdays. Had the computation of time known to him been available then, the day at which the selected things were made would correspond to the days listed in the hadith.

Regarding the pilgrimage months.

Ibrahim's struggles and efforts in the way of Allah, he always went through them with prayers revealing his sublime spiritual virtues which led him to become God's Friend and the universal Imam: his prayer for himself in the beginning of his life; his prayer at the time of his emigration to Syria; his invocation to keep his good name alive; his prayer for his progeny and parents, and for the believing men and women; his invocation, after building the House, for the residents of Mecca; his prayer and pleading for a Prophet to be sent from among his progeny. 

Many of the devotional acts of the hajj practiced by the descendants of Ishmael but corrupted with the passage of time, were later restored by the last Ishmaelite prophet as originally practiced and intended, while others were introduced in commemoration of the events that had happened to Ibrahim, representing the remarkable stands taken by him and his family 

3:97"In it are clear signs, the standing place of Ibrahim, and whoever enters it shall be secure". 

Pilgrimage to the Kaaba, an endeavor requiring spiritual will and strength in preparation to a journey of physical and mental sacrifices in remembrance and emulation of some of Ibrahim's experiences, the prototype believer whose example every pilgrim strives to come close to, became an obligatory duty to all individuals able to do it, till the day of resurrection 

"every one who is able to undertake the journey to it; and whoever disbelieves, then surely Allah is Self-sufficient, above any need of the worlds".

The modern era Saudi clan that has overtaken the custody of the holiest sanctuary, clearly are unworthy of that heritage. This is true from their behavior on all levels, whether political, spiritual or even economical. They have locked a surfeit of sustenance within their own dynasty, that could otherwise be a relief for the entire Muslim nation as per Ibrahim's prayer. 

This recklesness is even reflected in their adopted timing for the yearly pilgrimage. 

The Quran places the pilgrimage within a known interval of 2 to 4 days depending on the individual 2:203,22:28 anywhere within known months (plural for 3 or more) 2:197. Inexplicably, these inviolable known months marked for the one willing to dedicate a few days for the hajj, have been restrained to the single month of Dhul Hijja, thus resulting in obvious economical advantages for the corrupt elite but also creating the major known problems associated with such a congested gathering of millions of people. This forcefully led authorities to progressively restrict access to the site and adopt yearly quotas for every country, with a quota high enough to maintain the economical advantage of having millions gathered instead of spreading them over several months, but not too high so as to reach uncontrolable danger levels. And yet the Quran says that any able Muslim should be freely allowed to go there within the appointed months should he so desire, not whether he qualifies for an arbitrary quota 3:97.

Allah states that since the heavens and the earth were created, meaning everything in the universe was finalized, a year is made of 12 months. This is speaking from a human perspective on the earth, as only in our world does a year consist of 12 months. 4 of them were then appointed as hurum/inviolable 9:36.
This must include, at least the aforementioned "known months" of hajj, which the traditions state are only 3. But yet the traditions name these 4 months as being Dhul Qaadah, Dhul Hijjah, Muharram and  Rajab, making Shawwal, which now stands excluded from those 4 months decreed by God, and which they admit is among the "known hajj months", as a month in where the prohibitions can be violated like any other month. 

Another issue is that they have disconnected the last of those 4 months, ie Rajab, from the previous 3 that succeed eachother (Dhul Qaadah, Dhul Hijjah, Muharram). This is a similar attitude than the pre-islamic practice that found it too long to have 3 consecutive months of truce, and so they used to violate the prohibition to fight in the 3rd of those months, Muharram, by postponing the prohibition to the next month, that of Safar.

The Quran's words on the other hand tends more towards making these 4 hurum/inviolable months of God as succeeding one another uninterrupted.

In 9:2-5 it says that, starting from "the day of the great pilgrimage" and until the 4 hurum/inviolable months have passed the treaty violators will be given respite. This means "the day of the great pilgrimage" can only be at the start of the 1st of those 4 hurum/inviolable months after which the respite expires. Several new moons potentially signal the start of hajj, not a single one, which strengthens the notion that hajj may occur within several months 2:189.

The deliberate appointment of a 4 months truce in 9:2-5 cannot be coincidental (why not 2, 5 or 6?) and unconnected to God's decreed 4 hurum/inviolable months, much less so if one considers that the start of these 4 months is at the 1st day of hajj, with the hajj explicitly said to be occurring within a period of 3 or more months. There would have been no reason for the Muslims not to fight the treaty violators who attacked them first and thus reinitiate an open conflict, had this treaty breach not happened very close to the hajj months (3 or more). The Muslims, not wanting to infringe upon the inviolable months (they are only allowed to fight back during an inviolable month if they are aggressed within an inviolable month), decreed that during these 4 consecutive months, they will be a truce after which these treaty violators among the pagans will be fought wherever they are found. There would have been no reasons for the Muslims to issue a 4 months truce starting with the 1st day of hajj, had the known hajj months been only 3 consecutive ones as traditionally believed. They could have just decreed 3 inviolable months after which they would have resumed fighting.

The 4 months are qualified as inviolable because during this entire and complete period, there is a prohibition that must remain in place, uninterrupted, and the only one among all the temporary prohibitions of hajj that applies is the prohibition to initiate war 2:217, hence the Muslims' 4 month truce decreed above. Also, it is the only prohibition that is said to apply for the whole length of the month (among other months during which no fighting is allowed 2:194) contrary to the other prohibitions, like hunting, sexual intercourse or misconduct that only apply during the performance of hajj. 

We see again an obvious connection of those 4 months with the hajj because, besides the direct context of 2:217 which is all about the hajj, the verse itself states that the object of the prohibition is to allow people to go unhindred to the masjid al haram, the inviolable masjid, inside which stands the Kaaba. People from countless nations and tribes flock at this specific location during the prescribed pilgrimmage, some of them inevitably in conflict with one another, since ancient times until today, hence the necessity to observe a truce therein, putting all differences aside and allow each and everyone to freely perform his/her religious duties at anytime during the months marked for hajj. Truce ends after these 4 months have passed, and justice or retaliation, which sometimes requires violence is allowed. 

There is very little room to assume that the 4 hurum/inviolable months of truce 9:2-5 are not the same 4 hurum/inviolable months within a year decreed by Allah 9:36, that they do not succeed eachother and that the "known hajj months" do not span the complete 4 months period 2:197. These months being the 3 traditionally accepted ones of Shawwal, Dhul Qaadah, Dhul Hijjah with the 4th being Muharram, as denoted in the name itself.

One might try arguing that the 4th hajj month, instead of being Muharram could equally be at the start of the accepted 3, ie Ramadan. This is bellied by the simple fact that, for all Muslims, except those living in Mecca itself, they need to travel to do their hajj. Traveling invalidates a fast and so by saying that Ramadan is one of the hajj months makes it impossible for most Muslims willing to hajj therein to perform their obligation to fast.  

Haram carries different implications than sacred/muqaddas. Ramadan is not an inviolable month, because it does not contain an uninterupted prohibition, the prohibition to eat for example is temporarily restricted to an interval of time within each day of the month. In addition, this sacred and blessed month is the only month referred to by name in the Quran, without ever being called haram.

More subtly, 9:28 speaks of a 4months truce related to fighting only, not to the permissibility or not to enter the masjid. That is why, during these 4 months the treaty violators are allowed to freely roam the land 9:2. At the end of that truce, these specific pagans who broke the agreements are to be fought wherever they are found, and this includes in case they are in masjid al haram.

The others pagans, those spoken of in the sura that have been truthful to their pledges and with whom there are different terms to observe and respect 9:4,7 they can still have access to the masjid after the truce, but even they will eventually be banned from entering it, and this ban will be enforced at the end of the year in which this particular proclamation is made. It was made after the hajj season.

In other words the 4months truce ends after the 4 hajj months, when Muharram has passed, after which fighting can resume with the belligerent elements among the polytheists only, while the others, those that respected the agreements will be left free until the end of the year (Safar until the end of Dhul hijjah).

Friday, the day of gathering

Islam adopts a middle course between materialism and asceticism, the physical and spiritual, considers the voluntary rejection of the good and lawful pleasures of life as a transgression, just as the excessiveness in the pursuit of worldly objectives, without any consideration for their higher purpose as a sin 

24:37"Men whom neither merchandise nor selling diverts from the remembrance of Allah and the keeping up of prayer and the giving of poor-rate; they fear a day in which the hearts and eyes shall turn about". 

That balanced mindframe is reflected even in the etiquette to adopt during prayers, where one is to keep his eyes open and thus maintain a connection with the world even in the performance of the prescribed spiritual duties. Whenever it speaks of being benevolent, it also lays stress on not forgetting one's self or abandoning the lawful pleasures of the world, just as, contrary to the purely materialistic mosaic commandment of "be fruitful and multiply", almost every injunction related to materialism and the rightful enjoyment of this world's benefits comes with a reminder of the higher, lasting realities. It recognizes as well as answers and safeguards the legitimate needs of both aspects of man's being, tying together the material aspect, with the higher spiritual reality 

2:168,172,5:87-88,7:32,16:116,28:77"And seek by means of what Allah has given you the future abode, and do not neglect your portion of this world, and do good (to others) as Allah has done good to you"

 62:9-10"when the call is made for prayer on the day of gathering, then hasten to the remembrance of Allah and leave off selling..when the prayer is ended, then disperse abroad in the land and seek of Allah's grace". 

From a linguistic viewpoint, it is interesting noting the Quran's surgical use of words to produce maximum impact on its audience. In that verse from sura jumu'a, it doesnt command to leave off business in general, but specifically selling, which is the most relevant part of every business and the most sought after moment. Historically, the Arabs used to gather on that day to sell off their goods. This is reflected in the precise wordings of the verse. It doesnt call a scattered people to unite and pray in congregation, rather it calls people that are already assembled to leave that which they are busy with, in order to pray. As already noted, it speaks of selling specifically and that is because the Medinans were mainly farming communities and farmers tend to gather on a commonly agreed upon day so as to sell their produce. The Medina Jews, who formed a considerable part of the population, are also reported to have gathered on that day for similar purposes and because the next day was a holiday, the sabbath, during which all work had to stop. 

Jews and Christians have historically disagreed about their respective day. The former have been transgressing the Sabbath since its establishment under Moses, and the latter were split on whether to keep Shabbath or adopt Sunday as the day of gathering and prayer. This disagreement among Christians continues till this day. Allah graced the Muslims and bestowed Friday upon them only, as a reward for following the truth, and kept it away from the former transgressing nations 

"The Messenger of Allah said: 'Allah sent astray from Friday those who came before us, so the Jews had Saturday and the Christians had Sunday.." 

"..They disagreed and Allah guided us aright on whatever they disagreed regarding the truth. And it was this day of theirs about which they disagreed, but Allah guided us to it, and that is Friday for us..."

This command to pray on the day of gathering/yawm al jumua teaches first and foremost the correct balanced mindframe to have in this life, prioritizing the hereafter even at the most rewarding worldly moment, but without sacrificing the pursuit of material benefits altogether. Because of the instability of these early day of Islam, that day of gathering also acquired a political significance. By attending it, the worshipper declared his affiliation and dedication to the cause of the community. That is why it was traditionally the local leader who led the prayer. The case is different today where it is mainly, if only, religious figures that do so and thus the political connotation is no longer present.

Surah Nur and the incident of al-ifk

Abdullah ibn Ubayy ibn Salul is regarded as a leading hypocrite among the Muslim community of Medina. Prior to the prophet's migration to the city and due to his game of tribal alliances, his fame had grown to the extent he was to become the governor of Medina. The arrival of the prophet however frustrated his plans, and he kept that resentment in him despite paying lip service to the religion. The prophet had attained to leadership not through force and instigation of a faction against another, through lies and false pretence as he was doing now, but through love and brotherhood and conviction. This left ibn Salul even more bitter. He was always on the lookout to weaken the Muslims' resolve, unity and the prophet's authority and reputation.

During the confrontation with Bani Nadir, he promised them two thousand warriors in case they decided to remain in their fortified settlements despite the siege by the Muslims. Motivated by this proposition, they decided to take up arms against the prophet. The Muslims besieged them for 20 days, without actual fighting, but when ibn Ubayy's promise didnt materialize, they decided to surrender 

59:11-14"...They will not fight against you in a body save in fortified towns or from behind walls; their fighting between them is severe, you may think them as one body, and their hearts are disunited; that is because they are a people who have no sense". 

Just as the satan whispered false hopes to the Quraysh alliance at the battle of Badr but immediately deserted them as he witnessed the unseen at the battlefield 8:48, so too did the whispering of the satan among the men, in this case ibn Ubayy, abandon the Jews after inciting them into treachery. The Quran alludes to this principles many times, that the satan from among the men or jinn will eventually dissociate themselves from those who willingly followed their footsteps despite the warnings, whether in this world or the next, and will have to stand to account for their deeds.

The incident that exposed him further as a hypocrite and active enemy of Islam was one in which the prophet's household was targeted. He was the instigator of the slander against Aisha, called in the history books al-ifk. Aisha had accompanied the prophet on one of his journeys and was inadvertently left behind. During a stop, she had left the camel carriage so as to relieve herself at a distance, and upon her way back the group had already left. As she says herself, the carriers of the enclosed cabin had no reason to suspect anything unusual, or inquire if she was fine or ready to go 

"The group of people who used to carry me, came and carried my howdah on to the back of my camel on which I was riding, considering that I was therein. At that time women were light in weight and were not fleshy for they used to eat little (food), so those people did not feel the lightness of the howdah while raising it up, and I was still a young lady". 

Among Muslim women the prophet's wives were the ones with the most intergender interaction, as they provided religious counsel and received the prophet's guests. Of course this excluded frivolous talk. Luckily for her Safwan b. Muattal, always travelled behind the prophet's caravan. He was a man known for his piety and dedication to his task, and when he saw her at dawn, felt the call of duty so profoundly that beyond his exclamation as he recognised her "Inna Li l-lahi wa inna ilaihi rajiun" he did not waste any time. He did not seek to inquire what had happened to her and hastily 

"made his shecamel kneel down whereupon he trod on its forelegs and I mounted it. Then Safwan set out, leading the she-camel that was carrying me, till we met the army while they were resting during the hot midday". 

Those with a diseased heart found in this incident an opportunity to cause trouble to the Muslims. As a side note, women in general were allowed to participate in such expeditions, mainly as assistants and sometimes as fighters.

The prophet was informed of the people's talk prior to Aisha. Slander of a sexual nature, whether true or false, tarnish a person's honour, especially when it spreads beyond the household. It causes tension in a couple even if one of the two doesnt believe the public gossip. The prophet, who never accused Aisha of adultery was nevertheless troubled as any man would be. But being the well-mannered person he was known for, he avoided confronting Aisha for a whole month about it, firstly because she was ill during that time, and also to avoid giving any importance to the rumour that had just started. He would thus keep visiting her during her illness, without bringing up the issue. Neither did anyone among her family during that time. 

After a month had elapsed and she was cured, she accidentally came to know of the whole issue, which deeply hurt her. The prophet, after a month of incessant and injurious talk, instead of barging the door of his own house and confronting her alone, allows Aisha enough time to seek support at her parents' home. 

In the meantime, prior to even confronting her, he first consulted with some of his closest companions for advice. The prophet then discredited the accusation publicly so as to enhance the honour of both his wife and Safwan b. Muattal who were accused of wrongdoing. He stood at the pulpit and returned the accusation upon the one that initiated it, so as to paint the liar as guilty instead of the innocent 

“Oh gathering of Muslims! Who will help me against a person who has hurt me with slander about my wife? By God, I only know good about my wife. And they have mentioned a man with her concerning whom I only know good of as well". 

In his tact, the prophet speaks generically about the slander and its author. But the people themselves knew exactly what and who he was talking about, even those among ibn Salul's own tribe. A person among the Aws in the attendance, suggested ibn Salul should be killed. This revived the strong tribal sensitivities between Aws and Khazraj. The Khazraj did not condone ibn Salul's actions but did not like the idea of a foreign clan executing one of their own. It is to be kept in mind that the two clans had been stuck in a cycle of wars that ended with the prophet's arrival in Medina, just 5 years prior. These conflicts had decimated the elite in both camps, with only ibn Salul remaining from the old generation.

The prophet then calmed them down, and saw the time appropriate to openly talk about the matter to Aisha. He wanted to hear the truth from her own mouth, as any man in this situation would. Keeping in mind the prophet himself still did not know if Aisha was aware of the rumour, he nevertheless had to talk about it with her given the proportions it had now reached. So when he approached her, he did it gently, without dignifying the slander. He doesnt mention it directly but instead tells her that people are talking. He then says, should she be innocent of whatever these people are accusing her of, then Allah will protect her through revelation. 

He continues by gently saying that in case of guilt, it would have been because she "slipped". The implication is that anyone, including her, is open to mistakes. But in that case, as is repeatedly taught in the Quran, one should simply reform, repent and never lose hope of Allah's forgiveness. It is astounding that even in such a situation, the prophet was more worried of his wife's relation and duty to Allah than his reputation and honour and societal aspect of the whole matter. He does not tell her that whatever she is accused of has brought shame on his household and reputation. 

In Aisha's mind, because the prophet did as much as mention the matter, despite his tactful approach, was still considered hurtful to her. She still took it as if he had lingering doubts. In a very humane way, just as someone who knows to be innocent in the middle of an avalanche of slander, she felt powerless, that the people's minds, including of the prophet and her parents were made up regardless of what she says. As she left the matter to God, she then narrates how revelation descended upon the prophet, clarifying all things 24:11-20. 

The passage explains that the way it occurred, which includes the timing of the revelation was for a greater good. Revelation, as the Quran says in many places, doesnt come when prophets snap their fingers. This is further poof of the prophet's truthfulness as he could have immediately put out the fire and used the Quran to save his household's honour. Afterall it would have been impossible to falsify his claim of his wife's innocence. In hindsight we see till this day the far reaching consequences of rumour-mongering, and how Prophets arent immune to trials, including of this vicious kind. As history demonstrates, among the believer, prophets are most exposed to hardships. Through them, life lessons are enshrined forever. With that particular incident a believer learns how and when to act in a similar situation. What to say and what to keep, the manner and morals, the correct approach and timing, rights and duties are all made known because it was allowed to happen with the leader of the community who is looked up to as the prime example of conduct. So although Revelation descended in the context of these rumours, restoring the innocents' honour by God Himself while debasing the guilty, its application is timeless.

The prophet had a policy as regards hypocrites in general, consisting of ostracizing them. So despite the desire of some to execute him, he never went after ibn Salul but instead left his fate to God, as implicitly alluded to in the Quran 24:11. This isolation painted him in a corner of shame, even among his own people. Yet still, the prophet never took advantage of the situation so as to avenge himself

"Don't you see 'Umar if I had had him (Abdullah bin Ubai) killed, a large number of dignitaries would have furiously hastened to fight for him. Now, on the contrary, if I ask them to kill him, they will do so out of their own free will." 'Umar replied "I swear by Allâh that the Prophet's judgement is much more sound than mine". 

We even read that upon his death, the prophet attended his funeral and prayed at his grave. The 3 Muslims that accused an innocent woman without bringing forth any evidence were punished as prescribed in sura nur, then forgiven and reintegrated within the community, after their repentance. 

Per the Quran, the punishment for adultery and fornication is 100 lashes for both men and women who are considered equally guilty 24:2-3.  This shows that contrary to popular belief, stoning to death is a Biblical command, not a Quranic one, just as honor killing is found again in the Bible Gen34:1,31 not the Quran. The punishment for adultery in the Quran is preceded by an admonishment to the reader 

"a sura We have revealed and made obligatory and in which we have revealed clear communications that you may be mindful". 

It is a solemn warning against any attempt at widening or re-defining its injunctions. This refutes the traditional interpretation that the adulters must be stoned to death solely for this specific transgression. 

Islamic legislation, as will be shown below, provides guarantees which make it hard for injustice the like of which Aisha was accused of, to take place. It makes it almost impossible for punishment to be inflicted on the basis of suspicion or mistaken identity. Another thing to note is that Islam is a complete code of living, promoting a lifestyle that prevents transgression, such as with the various dresscodes and directives for gender interactions. That is why punishment becomes justified upon individuals that abandon this system in order to deliberately submerge themselves in filth. 

Per the Quran, physical punishment is followed by social alienation of those that are proven guilty of adultery, and that do not decisively repent and mend their ways. Their future marriages may only be between similar sexual offenders. In the process of delivering the prescribed punishment, no leniency is permitted. As a general rule in all offences, when the crime or offence is proven prior to the guilty repenting and mending his/her way, decisiveness and firmness of rule must be observed, and false sentiments, which harm the system of society, must be put away.

As stated in 4:25, the physical punishment for adultery is to be halved when it involves certain women, raised in particular difficult social conditions that may have affected their deed. If the punishment for adultery was death by stoning, then the very idea of halving the punishment of a woman would be absurd. Stoning to death cannot be halved. This verse also establishes that the social context of one caught should be taken into account, at least as far as the Quran is concerned.
 
The only time the Quran allows death to a crime (without specifying the execution method) as an extreme measure, among other severe measures, is murder 2:178 and spreading corruption in the land 5:33. And even in such cases, as well as others like theft where violent punishment is prescribed 5:38-40, physical punishment or death are only used against criminals who insist on transgression before the government is able to seize them. This speaks of people who actually have to be subdued by force so as to safeguard society. This is corroborated in the Arabic language where sariq (masc) and sariqa (fem) are adjectives and denote persistence in the qualified characteristics. 

Just as with the severe punishment for slander and adultery, the punishment prescribed here occur within a society where the just Islamic system is implemented as a whole, where its members earn their living fairly and have the entire right to enjoy it freely and securely, where a portion of their wealth is used to meet the needs of the less fortunate, and where such crime is totally unjustified. That is why when the Muslim state was stricken by famine under the second caliphate, that the government could not guarantee the needs of all of its citizen, Umar suspended the enforcement of the punishment for theft. When a camel belonging to a man of the tribe of Muzaynah was stolen by 2 men, Umar ordered their hands to be cut off. As it appeared that their master kept them hungry, he punished him instead, imposing on him a fine equivalent to the price of two camels. But when the Islamic law is implemented to its fullest, every person's basic needs are ensured. Theft, when it occurs in those conditions means it is a crime meant at increasing one's wealth and status at the expense of others, or at destroying property. The thief in that case is one that deems legitimate acquisition of wealth and status too difficult, so he seeks it through easier but illegitimate means, or has other mischievous intent.
The Quran then counters that perverse mindframe by making it even harder for the one proven guilty to seek wealth in a legitimate manner, permanently reducing him, both in his appearance and abilities.

The Quran does therefore mention the death penalty for certain transgressions. The question then arises as to why would it omit doing likewise in the context of adultery, which is spoken of in greater length than murder and fasad fil ard?

There are 2 ways to reconcile the ahadith of stoning in the times of the prophet and the caliphs, with the Quran. It is highly possible that the prophet imposed it prior to the revelation of sura nur, as some among the companions wondered 

"Narrated Ash-Shaibani: I asked `Abdullah bin Abi `Aufa about the Rajam (stoning somebody to death for committing illegal sexual intercourse). He replied, "The Prophet carried out the penalty of Rajam," I asked, "Was that before or after the revelation of Surat-an-Nur?" He replied, "I do not know".

As no other case of fornication requiring punishment was brought to the prophet until the prophet died, the caliphs afterwards kept practicing stoning based on ijtihad. The cases of stoning in the prophet's lifetime involved married persons and thus the caliphs restricted the words in sura nur to non-married fornicators, who would then be lashed.

Another possibility is that the cases of zina brought to the prophet, and whose details are not completely known, were judged as crimes of widespread corruption/fasad fil ard. The same applies to those cases brought to the caliphs.

The goal of punishments in Islam is to avoid spreading sins and protecting the society as a whole. For example after mentioning the law of retaliation in case of murder, the Quran says that such law is meant to "give life", ie to securize society because it is a powerful deterrent and another means of remaining God-conscious (taqwa) 2:178-9.

Zina in Islam is among the worst sins, due to its vicious ramifications, especially when made public as in the case spoken of in sura 24, hence the 100 lashes. The severity of the punishment for the sin, given the Islamic society in which it occurs, is at the level of its seriousness, and given that severity, a false accusation or an accusation not supported by 4 truthfull eyewitnesses results in 80 lashes for the accuser. The woman's testimony in that case has the same value as her accuser's. Both are made to solemnly swear, several times calling God to witness of their truthfulness and ultimately calling for God's curse on oneself in case of lie.

The Bible in contrast gives no benefit of the doubt to the accused wife, who is considered guilty by default and is made to undergo humiliating and strange rituals to prove her innocence Numbers5:11-31. Without forgetting the fact that in Jewish law, women arent even allowed to serve as witnesses in legal matters in a court of law. In fact a husband simply having feelings of jealousy does not have to take an oath that he is truthfully accusing her, it is the wife that is almost considered guilty by suspicion and who is made to undergo a ritual pertaining to the "law of jealousy". She is to be taken to the priest, along with an offering from her husband, where she is put under oath and God's curse is invoked on her if she is guilty. She is humiliated through the "loosening of her hair" (a bared head is considered a disgrace to a Jewish woman) and made to drink of a cursed, bitter water that will supposedly cause her intense suffering and possibly death in case she is lying. Clearly the biblical law offers no means by which to protect the unjustly accused, more particularly the woman in case of false calumnies. Just as was the case with other ancient nations whose fornication laws were primarily aimed at upholding the honour and property right of fathers, husbands, and higher-status groups.

In the Quran the accuser who cannot bring forth the evidence required will be considered untrustworthy in court 24:4,33:58. Exception is made for the one who sincerely repents, ie publicly withdraws his false accusation, and mends his ways 24:5. The twofold punishment prescribed will always act as a shock therapy that brings about repentance and moral reform. Repentance by the false witness however will not exempt him from physical punishment, which is the victim's legal right and which in addition discourages false testimonies as well as mere circumstantial evidence. Passing on a rumour of slander is a transgression of a lesser degree than issuing an accusation. It is the duty of the Muslim who comes upon such hearsay to assume the best of another and give a lie to the gossip 24:12.

The Quran clearly gives the benefit of the doubt to the one on the receiving end of an accusation. The aim is to put a stop to false accusations, slander and gossip. This mechanism makes sure that similar repercussions are returned upon the false accuser, physically and in his/her reputation. When a society allows its members to freely slander one another with no or very little preemptive measures, it potentially causes its own disintegration starting from the nucleus of the family. And none is safe from harm, from the regular citizen to the most respected authority, as illustrated with the incident of al-Ifk, to such an extent that it brought turmoil within the prophet's household for a full month, interrupting the normal course of affairs at the level of the state. 

Of course, in case one's accusation is true despite the lack of evidence, one is free to divorce the partner, but as basic common sense requires, one is not free to accuse another publicly without strong evidence. 

As can be seen the Quran in matters of chastity goes to great extents to protect the integrity of the righteous members of the community and the spread of sexual misbehaviour; first, in the case of real, proven cases, by providing a strong deterrent, ie the 100 lashes (or half in special cases). Second, in the case of calumnies, by providing a mechanism through which the potential accuser can hardly succeed in his/her scheme, risking bigger repercussions on the accuser than the accused. As a linguistic observation, it is worthwhile noting the Quran's eloquent choice of words as it speaks of slander with yarmuna, picturing one being pelted and injured, it omits the accusation altogether.

The burden of proof demanded by the Quran in cases of adultery is set at a nearly impossible threshold and as is clarified in the sharia, based on the prophetic guidance, the burden upon Muslim judges in cases of zina is not to seek conviction, but getting the individual to withdraw their confession, since practically speaking, due to the high standard of the testimony required, only confession leads one to be convicted. The Judge then encourages the accused to repent and live righteously, meaning What Jesus did in the NT. When a person came to the prophet confessing his adultery, he was repeatedly ignored so as to  to repent and mend his ways 

"A man from the tribe of Aslam came to the Prophet and confessed that he had committed an illegal sexual intercourse. The Prophet turned his face away from him till the man bore witness against himself four times. The Prophet said to him, "Are you mad?" He said "No." He said, "Are you married?" He said, "Yes." Then the Prophet ordered that he be stoned to death, and he was stoned to death at the Musalla. When the stones troubled him, he fled, but he was caught and was stoned till he died. The Prophet spoke well of him and offered his funeral prayer". 

Prior to delivering the sentence, the prophet tried to mitigate the self conviction so as to find him way out 

"Probably you have only kissed (the lady), or winked, or looked at her?" He said, "No, O Allah's Messenger!" The Prophet said, using no euphemism, "Did you have sexual intercourse with her?" The narrator added: At that, (i.e. after his confession) the Prophet ordered that he be stoned (to death)". 

The noble prophet is here trying to make him retract his statement so that his judgement is deferred to the hereafter 

"and whoever commits something of such sins and Allah screens him, it is up to Allah whether to excuse or punish him".

In a similar case the prophet kept postponing the verdict of an adulteress for 3 years 

"There the Ghamidi woman came and said: ‘Allah’s Messenger, I have committed zina (adultery), purify me’ but he turned her away. The next day she said: ‘Allah’s Messenger, why are you turning me away? Perhaps, you turn me away as you turned Ma’iz away. By Allah, I am pregnant.’ He said: ‘Then no (not now), go away until you give birth.’ When she gave birth, she brought the child to him wrapped in a cloth, and said: ‘Here he is, I have given birth.’ He said: ‘Go away and breastfeed him until he is weaned.’ When she had weaned him, she brought the boy to him, with a piece of bread in his hand and said: ‘Here, O Prophet of Allah, I have weaned him, and he is eating food.’ He handed the boy over to one of the Muslim men, then he ordered that a pit be dug for her, up to her chest and he ordered the people to stoned her".

This was the way of the prophet, he prioritized repentance and reform instead of retribution 

"While I was with the Prophet a man came and said, "O Allah's Messenger! I have committed a legally punishable sin; please inflict the legal punishment on me'.' The Prophet did not ask him what he had done. Then the time for the prayer became due and the man offered prayer along with the Prophet , and when the Prophet had finished his prayer, the man again got up and said, "O Allah's Messenger! I have committed a legally punishable sin; please inflict the punishment on me according to Allah's Laws." The Prophet said, "Haven't you prayed with us?' He said, "Yes." The Prophet said, "Allah has forgiven your sin." or said, "....your legally punishable sin".

Because four people would have to be eyewitnesses to the adultrous/fornication act, then how could four people possibly see the act unless they were either commiting their lewdness with the intention of being seen by others (pornography, orgies, etc.) or so heedless that they were not concerned with whether or not someone sees them. Neither of these two things occur except in societies that have become extremely corrupt in regards to sexual morality. It is to be noted however, that the act of fornication, like all sins, remains unlawful even if hidden from the public 

6:120"And abandon outward sin and the inward one; verily those who commit sin soon shall be recompensed with what they used to commit".

As a side note, zina/sex outside the legal bonds, is included as a fahisha but not all fahisha are zina. Fahisha is a broader term that includes anything that is abominable, morally reprehensible, in words or deeds. In 4:15-16 we read of what is to be done in cases of fahisha in general. A woman convicted of fahisha through the testimony of 4 witnesses must be restrained. The Arabic does not entail confinement or imprisonment. She must by all means be prevented from continuing down her course 

"until death takes them or Allah makes a path for them". 

The "path" being, as said in the following verse, forgiveness and freedom in case of sincere repentance and reform. This is in contrast to the prophet-king David's alleged perpetual and unconditional imprisonment of his unfaithful concubines 2Sam20:3. Should the woman not show any signs of reform and insists in her will to misbehave even during the period of restrainment, then she is to undergo an unspecified physical punishment. That particular point is to be determined according to the judge's discretion, depending on the crime. For example if the fahisha is adultery/zina then the type of punishment is specified in sura 24. In all cases, that punishment is to be interrupted as soon as repentance and a clear will to mend her ways are expressed. 

Should the punishment not deterr her or awaken her conscience, then she is to remain in a life of confinement and occasional physical punishment until she decides to stop, repent and mend her ways. The man who is convicted and his crime testified by 4 witnesses must immediately undergo physical punishment, in contrast to women who are allowed a time of reflexion prior, to be interrupted if sincere repentance and will to reform are expressed.

Among all misdeeds included in "fahisha", only adultery requires public punishment. Adultery, when it is committed in such a way that 4 witnesses are able to testify to it, is an evil with far reaching damaging effects within the society. The guilty is made to face the most pious elements of the community during his punishment. The Quran describes these public witnesses as 

"a part of those who have believed".

 This symbolically shows the guilty that his or her act is one that threatens all uprightness, goodness in a community. It is interesting to note here the Quran's stress on the righteousness of the witnesses, those who are the least prone to such transgressions, which bellies the idea that the public nature of the punishment is meant as a deterrent to other potential sinners witnessing the culprit being punished. Rather, the idea of undergoing a severe physical punishment coupled with the humiliation of being exposed to the known pious members of the community is the deterrent. The eyewitnesses to the punishment also serve as a lever to control both the judge and the executer. No abusive punishment can this way be inflicted.

The 4 witnesses testimony is speaking of cases of consensual, non-marital sex. Rape is an aggression which isnt subject to the 4 witnesses rule. A woman is fully within her rights to go to the police and expect them to look for evidence such as DNA, finger prints, and other evidence to catch her rapists. Even the scholars that wrongly treat rape as fornication, have moved beyond the 4 witnesses requirements and have accepted these other factors as valid evidences. It is the verse 5:33 which applies to such a case, regardless of whether the aggressor has his way with the victim 

"Narrated Wa'il ibn Hujr: When a woman went out in the time of the Prophet for prayer, a man attacked her and overpowered (raped) her. She shouted and he went off, and when a man came by, she said: That (man) did such and such to me. And when a company of the Emigrants came by, she said: That man did such and such to me. They went and seized the man whom they thought had had intercourse with her and brought him to her. She said: Yes, this is he. Then they brought him to the Messenger of Allah. When he (the Prophet) was about to pass sentence, the man who (actually) had assaulted her stood up and said: Messenger of Allah, I am the man who did it to her. He (the Prophet) said to her: Go away, for Allah has forgiven you. But he told the man some good words (AbuDawud said: meaning the man who was seized), and of the man who had had intercourse with her, he said: Stone him to death. He also said: He has repented to such an extent that if the people of Medina had repented similarly, it would have been accepted from them". 

The Bible speaks of rape cases, and their consequences. For example if a virgin pledged to another man is raped within city gates, but fails shouting out for help, then both are to be pelted to death. If the aggression occurs out in the field, where nobody would be able to hear her cries regardless, then she is cleared of "tacit consent" and only the rapist is executed Deut22:23-27. As to the case of a single girl, not pledged to any man, then the harsh punishment for the rapist is to pay a sum to the girl's father, marry the girl and never divorce her v27-28! The words in that verse denote coercion by the man, who is now free to keep raping his legitimate wife for the rest of her life. In short, although the Bible clearly mentions rape cases, it fails to prescribe a punishment for the rapist of a single woman who is not pledged to another man.

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. One 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 constitute 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.

Further reading:

- The Islam Issue "Why Muslims should not marry infertile women"

Quranic arguments for God

From a higher perspective, the Quran explains the reason for there being socio-economical, or even psycho-physical differences among humans. All human beings were created with the aim of being Allah's vicegerents on earth. We have been endowed with freewill -which asserts itself through tests and trials- and are compelled to use it to fulfill our role of vicegerency according to our degrees in this world 

6:165"And He it is Who has made you successors in the land and raised some of you above others by (various) grades that He might try you by what He has given you". 

This is according to the divine principles of the Greatest of Judges 11:45,95:8 that what is expected of a person is directly in correlation to that person's condition 65:7.

Just like some trees are made to excell others in fruits 13:4, we are raised in degrees and some of us made to excell others in certain aspects, whether physical or mental, social or economical etc, but it is all done according to an all encompassing wisdom and knowledge that takes into consideration every aspect of our being 6:83. However, if one disregards the materialistic mindframe that blurs the higher realities of existence, the level of difficulty in all cases can be said to be the same; the one with less worldly benefits (financially, in his health etc) has less avenues by which to be religiously and morally accountable but he is required to have a high level of inner discipline, patience and trust in God while the reverse is the case for the more advantaged in terms of worldly benefits; the burden on his inner discipline and steadfastness is less while the means given to him by which to be morally tested are manifold. He can be tested in his wealth, his health and other privileges.

A great part of Allah's scheme of testing the people through their choices in order to gradually purge the hearts, is to test us through our dealings with eachother 

25:20"and We have made some of you a trial for others; will you bear patiently? And your Lord is ever Seeing". 

One of the obvious proof for this is how most often individuals are endowed with benefits, material, physical or abstract, surpassing the basic and reasonable needs. All else will either vanish or be left behind after their passing away for others to benefit from. Through this scheme every human being becomes by virtue of his social existence, a means whereby the moral qualities of his fellow men are put to a test 

"I saw Abu Dharr al-Ghifâri wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a cloak. We asked him about that (how both were wearing similar cloaks). He replied: Once I abused a man, and he complained of me to the Prophet. The Prophet asked me, Did you abuse him by slighting his mother? You are a man who has jahiliyah. He added: Your slaves are your brethren upon whom Allah has given you authority. So if one has one’s brethren under one’s control, he should feed them with the like of what he eats and clothe them with the like of what he wears. You should not overburden them with what they cannot bear, and if you do so, help them (in their hard job)". 

As the HB puts it in 

Prov22:2"The rich and poor meet together: the LORD is the maker of them all". 

God is not only the maker of every human, but also of their conditions, through the laws of the material and physical world He has created, in which almost every 

outcome is the result of a previous action, except when Allah directly intervenes in the chain of causality. The people should therefore, regardless of their circumstances keep in view that ultimate reality in their dealings with oneanother. 

The Quran parallels the diversity in nature, as in the earlier metaphor of the fruit trees, with the system by which mankind is equally subjected to 6:165,11:118,30:22. As said many times in the Book, mankind could have been made a single nation, equal in all aspects, and spiritually upright 42:8. But Allah has decreed there will be diversity in creation whether physical, cultural, material or spiritual through the process of freechoice which was divinely established, sustained every step of the way and encompassed by Allah's power. God is thus ultimately the cause of these differences. To illustrate;

- Some people have been made by Allah to resist better to diseases, others are stronger, taller or more intelligent. This is due to the natural biological processes He established, that can either be triggered by internal reactions and mutations or/and influenced by external, environemental factors that are themselves subject to the divinely decreed law of causation which God dominates with His all encompassing wisdom and power at each instant.
- Some people have been made by Allah to believe, and others to err and this is due to the system of freewill He established and fully controls, according to which one's moral choices shape his spiritual condition and destiny, either darkening his inner spiritual receptivity or enlightening it and making it further receptive to external guidance.
- Some people have been made by Allah to enjoy more worldly, material benefits than others. This again, is the consequence of a chain of causality in God's grasp.

This diversity however isnt viewed in the Quran as a stain purposefully put on the human race. Neither is it allowed by God in order to confuse and separate people, or oppose them. Rather it is allowed, as an outcome of the established system of causality, as a driving force that creates interraction, interdependency, exchanges and positive understanding 

49:13"We have created you of a male and a female and made you nations and tribes that you may know each other. Indeed, the most honourable among you in the sight of Allah is the most fearful (of Allah) among you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing, Aware". 

This is one of the most compelling Quranic proof man is repeatedly told to ponder upon; the divine unity in the face of an interdependant diversity 

43:32"it is We who distribute their means of livelihood among them in the life of this world, and raise some of them by degrees above others, to the end that they might avail themselves of one another's help". 

This is based on the wisdom that no human being should become independent of others, but everyone should remain dependent on the other in various ways 

"Once Sa`d (bin Abi Waqqas) thought that he was superior to those who were below him in rank. On that the Prophet said, "You gain no victory or livelihood except through (the blessings and invocations of) the poor amongst you". 

The Creator is in this way in total contrast with His creation; He is the Self-Sufficient, Sustainer of the universe at each instant. He causes endless, intricate varieties among His creation, through the natural processes He established, and the system of freewill on which He has full control. 

This system established by Allah ultimately creates a web of interdependant diversity necessary for one of the aspects of divine trials; our dealings with eachother. Many fail to perceive this ultimate reality and they are referred to in 

36:47"And when it is said to them: Spend out of what Allah has given you, those who disbelieve say to those who believe: Shall we feed him whom, if Allah please, He could feed? You are in naught but clear error".

God does indeed will for the deprived and weak to be helped, but according to the laws He has established and that benefit both the one who freely offers his help (emotional, material, physical, spiritual, intellectual), as well as the receiver of that help. Others raise an outcry and question divine justice in light of the fact that people are born with varying degrees of socio-economical as well as psycho-physical conditions. That questioning is answered through the divine scheme explained above, as well as the Quranic concept that 

2:156"Indeed, we belong to Allah and indeed we towards Him will return". 

Our whole self belongs to Him and He in reality doesnt owe us a single thing, whatever we receive from Him, since birth and throughout life, little or big, is a favour from Him and serves a higher purpose which can only be beneficial if one accepts God's supreme ownership in all situations

11:9"If We make man taste mercy from Ourselves, (and) then take it off from him, verily he is despairing ungrateful". 

Neither self-conceit nor despair are appropriate if one admits that all things belong to God and return to Him when He decides.

The unbelievers of the time of the prophet disregarded lower social classes, disrespected and discriminated them. They mocked the assemblies of poor people and ex-slaves listening to the prophet, just like prophets were reproached before, the likes of Nuh 11:27-30, assuming that if Allah had truly sent revelation then why didnt He address the elite and rulers of whom Muhammad was not 43:31? In their limited, materialistic mindframe they considered themselves more deserving of divine favours 

6:53"And thus do We try some of them by others so that they say: Are these they upon whom Allah has conferred benefit from among us? Does not Allah best know the grateful?". 

The notion of interdependency, which will lead us to the concept of divine unity, is further pictured through the verses speaking of things created in 43:12,36:36,51:49"azwaj" means "in pairs". This refers to the complementarity prevalent in every single thing. This may include but is not exclusive to, sexual complementarity as in 30:21,16:72. There the Quran addresses the human specie, saying the availability of azwaj (male or female) from among ourselves is meant as a source of security, love and compassion. "azwaj" may be used interchangeably between male and female spouses 2:232,234. 

In the context of creation, some verses 53:45,92:3 mention the creation of the sexual pairs by specifying both genders created; male/dhakar and female/untha. But such verses do not make an absolute assertion that all things have been created that way -in opposite genders- or that all living things reproduce sexually. All languages inherently accept exceptions unless the statement is clearly absolute. The Original Creator may create whatever He wills then modify His original creation as He pleases and deems fit 24:45,35:1. He may even create without the mating of sexual pairs as with Jesus' case.

The primary meaning of zawj (plur.azwaaj) in the Quran, is alien to the sexual pairs, as seen in many instances where it is used 13:3,15:88,20:53,131,26:7,38:58,56:7-10. It denotes the kinds or types -some of them unknown to us 36:36- having common points, linked in a way or the other when used in the plural form. This is just as in any language that speaks of pairs without specifying if the pairing is gender based. The root is Z-W-J and it means when two or more things or people form a unit. 

The use of azwaj in those verses is one of the devices used by the Quran to emphasize the concept of interconnection and complementarity between all kinds created, even when these thing seem to be opposites. Take a pebble on the beach. The minerals that make up this insignificant pebble before it landed on the shore, have affected the cycle of life and induced a chain of events that led to our existence. The context of pairing in 43:12 for example has God saying how He made the earth a "resting place" for us, water coming down from the sky to allow life, ships, that man ingenuously builds using the material put at his disposal by Allah, and cattle for mobility among other uses. In 15:88 and others, the Quran tells the believers not to grieve or pay much attention to some kind (azwaj) of people -having in common their unbelief and hatred for Islam-. In 13:3-4 Allah says He made from all that the earth produces (thamaraat), 2 types. Just as day and night are 2 opposites but remain complimentary, the earthly products come in 2 opposites but complementary types. Those better than others, remain, from a higher viewpoint complementary although apparently opposites. The better one is appreciated thanks to its lesser counterpart it can be compared to, which in turn is the result of a process the plant goes through so as to reduce competition and bring the crop to fruition. 

Even among opposites there is interconnection on all levels, physical or spiritual, and that is the pervasive notion in all the verses speaking of pairing in nature.

The more profound message of the verses speaking of the "azwaj" in creation is understood by their context, which is always that of divine justice and providing proof for the resurrection of the dead and judgement in the next life. The Quran is essentially saying that everything in this varied nature has a complement, without which it is incomplete. If such a thing is the case and that all things have a complement, then how can one deny that this world has its complement in the next life? It is the underlying notion behind the oaths in suras shams/91 and layl/92. These verses depict the concept of interconnection in creation quite well. 

For instance although the sun and the moon, the night and day, light and darkness are seemingly opposing to one another as regards their appearance and temperament as well as the effects they cause, yet they are part of a global machinery in which they work in complete harmony with one another

36:40"Neither is it allowable to the sun that it should overtake/tudrika the moon, nor can the night outstrip/sabiqu the day; and all float on in a sphere". 

Besides it being part of an intricate metaphor, the verse says that if one element or phenomenon oversteps its limits then disorder appears. This sends a message the creatures endowed with intellect and freewill, that they should respect the bounds set for them to prevent disorder. Tudrika is derived from D-R-K and it means reaching. The Sun is prevented from going out of its way and collide with the Moon. Similarly the phenomena of nighttime/daytime cannot ever overcome one another, if daytime comes, nighttime cannot impose itself. When a portion of the earth is facing the sun (daytime), the nighttime phenomenon cannot occur on this same area. The concept of harmonious order of entities and phenomena, each being restrained to its divinely decreed function or place, is a recurrent theme in the Quran.

 
Another example is that of the barrier between fresh and salt water. Those to whom the verse was primarily addressed, the Arabs, were land and sea travellers. They passed through estuaries and points where a river met the ocean to see both bodies of water mixing. The Arabic "bahr" means a vast water expanse, be it the ocean, a big river or lake. None of the verses 25:53,27:61,55:19 say that a barrier prevents them from mixing. In fact it clearly says that they meet and mix/maraja 55:19. The verse immediately follows by saying that despite this mixing, there is an unbreakable barrier between the 2 water types referred to earlier. And it is the phenomenon that sustains life on this earth by keeping the water types perpetually appart, salt and sweet, despite their perpetual mixing when they meet. The verse comes in the context of providing evidence of God's bounties, the primary example being exactly this, the constant phenomenon of having 2 distinct water types available, despite their continuous flow and mixing into one another. Had this phenomenon of evaporation and filtration of salt not existed, life as we know it would have been impossible 

55:21"Which then of the bounties of your Sustainer will you deny?" 

A river meeting the ocean without mixing is not a bounty from God and is irrelevant in stimulating the gratefulness of the reader and audience, which is the whole point of the passage. Another spiritual parallel the verses make with that phenomenon is the existence of 2 types of humans, the spiritually aware and the rest. In this world they mix and mingle on a physical level but will remain separate on the metaphysical sphere. But the Merciful has placed in everyone the potential to thrive spiritually, even the sinner, if he chooses to repent. And so, the verse also states that pearls can be harvested from fresh and saltwater, just as there is spirituality in the righteous as well as the sinner. The imagery is beautiful and uplifting, as opposed to the NT's exclusivist and racist notion of "avoid sharing your pearls with pigs" Matt7. Corals, as a side note, live and grow in seawater but may be found in rivers, such as the massive reef of the Amazon. Corals can also thrive in estuaries, where the 2 bodies of water meet.

In this world, the believers may suffer harm and hardship for adhering to the call of their morality, while the disbelievers profit. That reality can not always last, otherwise this world would be incomplete. Such verses pointing to the universal notion of inter-dependancy also make the believers heed to their own needs and vulnerabilities, whether from a physical/material sense or a spiritual sense, and how Allah alone is independent, self-sufficient 35:15,6:14. Everything is in need of Allah, the Qayyum (Self-subsisting) standing by Himself, the Hayy (Everliving) and all the universe stands because of His eternal endurance, maintainance of life in each instant 2:255,3:2. 

A further metaphysical argument for God's oneness is the pervasive Quranic style of attributing to Allah the consequence of a man's actions, even for the most insignificant things. It is meant to remind that the laws of the universe are caused then allowed by Him, He is the only Independent Cause and the Creator. 

Every automated process we know in this world is designed by many engineers working hard at it. If anyone claims automation can exist without a designer, onus is on him to prove this speculation. Science has no way of knowing if something happened accidentally or there was a planner behind it. Any such claim is as big a superstition as many of the superstitious ideas primitive people used to have. Allah is the Creator of all things in the universe which is why He is consequently 

13:16"the One, the Supreme". 

He is unique and encompassing every thing that exists, and what humans "create" (the verb is used for humans too 29:17) is nothing more than the combination and reshaping of what Allah has already created. That is why He is the best of creators 37:125,23:14. He is 

2:117"badeeu/Innovator and initiator of the heavens and the earth" 

meaning that in His case, contrary to all creative endeavours, He creates without any blueprint, preexisting inspiration, experience, simply through His word 

"and if HE decreed an order done, He only says be and it is". 

In an absolute, pure sense the capacity to create thus belongs to God alone and this is the underlying notion behind other statements like God being the best of those who show mercy despite others being merciful too, the best of the providers 5:114,34:39 the best of judges 10:109 because he is 11:45,95:8"the most just/wisest of judges" or the best of helpers 3:150 being the Almighty that can never be defeated. 

He is the ever-living/al hayy and al qayyum/the standing ie ever remaining, unchanged 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, independent entity. He relies on none other than Himself to subsist 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. 

These appellations therefore when used in their absolute sense, can only be meant for God 

7:180,20:8"to Him belong the most perfect names". 

More subtly He is 

112:2"Allahu ssamad". 

Samad stems from s-m-d which has a wide variety of nuances. All of them, as reported by the companions and the earliest lexicographers, point to the notion of dependancy of others unto the entity on which the word is applied. IT may be applied to God or created entities. But since the created entities always need another samad, and that ultimately every creation depends on Allah in all aspects of existence, only Allah truly possesses that quality in full. 112:2 literally says "Allah IS THE SAMAD" ie Allah is the Self-sufficient source of all needs. 

This verse, more particularly this word "samad" is key in providing philosophical argument for God's existence, through the negation of infinite regress. If, as atheists suggest, this universe does not depend on a first, non-contingent cause, and that it is instead the result of an infinite series of past events then by definition this current universe could not have existed. This is because it would have had to wait for an infinite amount of time past for it come into being. As stated by Al-Ghazali 

"Each number has no end, yet some of them are less than others. This is clearly impossible". 

And 

"In the world there are events with causes. If these events depend upon other events without end, this is impossible and cannot be believed by a rational person". The prophet said "Satan will come to one of you and he will say, ‘Who created this and that?’ until he says to him, ‘Who created your Lord?’ When it comes to this, let him seek refuge in Allah and stop such thoughts". 

We should seek refuge from Allah from asking "who created Allah" not because there is no argument against it, but because the amount of arguments for God's existence as are given both in Quran and ahadith are so manifold and easy to grasp, that the question itself is absurd 

52:35"Were they created by nothing? Or were they the creators of themselves? Or did they create the heavens and the earth? Rather, they are not certain". 

It is a whisper by the devil so as to confuse a simple matter with counterintuitive arguments of infinities and probabilities. 

Nothing escapes causality, in the universe, down to our rational, thinking process which is dependent on it 

"i think therefore i am". 

In contrast things behave unexpectedly on a quantum level. Since subatomic particles form the building blocks of observable reality, does it then follow that observable causality isnt real? That proposition is used by those seeking to solve the problem of infinite regress without resorting to the necessary being. Quantum physics is still in its infancy, meaning it is desperate to appeal to it and rush to conclusions radically contradictory to an observable, testable, repeatedly predictable macro reality. So regardless of what is assumed to be happening on a quantum level, one still cannot escape that we can repeatedly predict the exact effect of a cause on the macro level, meaning we still cannot escape asking what causes these observations. If it isnt due to quantum interactions, then to what? If it is due to quantum activity, then where do these laws even come from? Also, there are probabilistic patterns even on a quantum level. There isnt complete lack of causality, like tiny unicorns popping out. 

Should we deny causality altogether, both on quantum and observable levels, that absolute nothingness preceded the universe, then what is being done at most is denying material causality. At that point we are still justified, rationally, logically, in looking for causality elsewhere, on a metaphysical level, for what caused nothingness to give birth to the universe. Ironically, the most supernatural, magical, sorcery position is that of those arguing against the necessary being, preferring the idea of something popping out of nothing.

We can certainly not invoke randomness as the original cause, for then we would need to explain the predictability of causality within our world, while chaos dominates outside of it. That notion is pervasive throughout the Quran, with statements that the universe follows Truth, that it isnt the result of purposelesness. No accidents exist in a purposeful universe and nothing is unexpected from God's perspective. The Quran pictures that reality as applying to the material world, as well as what, from our limited perspective perceive as random actions of our own volition 57:22-4. 

Neither can cyclical dependency cause our universe as their cannot be an initial cause in a never ending cycle. 

Fundamentally, Why wouldnt logic, reason, causality fit outside the universe just as it does within? Going by this reasoning, how can one be sure logic holds 1 second from now, or 1 million years away from earth? Why the arbitrary lawlessness outside the universe and not somewhere within it?

If we take out the time factor from the universe as proposed by B-Theorists, again, so as to solve the problem of infinite regress without having a necessary being, then the laws of entropy dictate that given enough time this universe will progressively lose heat, dilute and die out. If it regresses infinitely in the past, the universe should have been a dead, cold, dark place by now.
The fact is that all B-Theory models of a timeless universe are highly speculative, just like any other model removing basic observable facts of life, like time and causality. 

Atheists want to prevent the question of what came "before" the big bang since time itself began at the big bang. If that is the case, there cannot have been a "before" that caused it. Besides the paradoxical notion of having something that is both contingent and non-contingent, ie the big bang, cases of cause and effect occurring simultaneously are plentiful. For example jumping in a pool results in water splashing. The cause (body entering the water) and effect (water splashing) are distinct and simultaneous. In fact science itself has been trying to determine, through various models and notions, what occurred "before" the big bang, causing the universe to come into being from non-being. Time simply is the observable change in finite things. And the universe is a finite thing. So one may legitimately ask what brought about the change resulting in the big bang? Most physicists will argue that it was a former universe collapsing, or quantum membranes colliding. This however doesnt resolve the problem of contingency and infinite regress.

Looking at a present event like water flowing, independently of the time factor, we may ask Why does water flow? Why do its atoms bind in such a way? Why are electrons charged the way they are? Etc until we arrive at the fundamental reason that determines these phenomena and which is itself necessary as it is. The mechanical reason why water flows cannot regress infinitely, it has to start at some point

 56:71-2"And have you seen the fire that you ignite? Is it you who produced its tree, or are We the producer?" 

This is another simple phenomenon observable to anyone, and which broadly addresses the impossibility of infinite regress. The verse jumps from the final result in a chain of contingency (the fire) to its most obvious cause (the tree that provides wood) which itself doesnt escape contingency. Just as the unexplainable phenomenon of life cannot regress infinitely and must have initiated in lifeless matter 

15:26"And We did certainly create man out of clay from an altered black mud". 

This implies a necessary being, the Unique Creator Who brings things into being the first time, which are all nuances of the term badii 

6:101"Originator of the heavens and the earth". 

He is the Creator Who gives the initial spark in all things, sustains every intricate mechanism allowing water to flow, fire to burn, or giving life to mankind from dust, just as He sustains every other mechanism in the universe without break 

2:255"Allah - there is no deity except Him, the Ever-Living, the Sustainer of [all] existence. Neither drowsiness overtakes Him nor sleep. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth". 

The independent cause is thus constantly sustaining the universe in all of its most intricate aspects and needs 

20:49-50"[Pharaoh] said, "So who is the Lord of you two, O Moses?" He said, "Our Lord is He who gave each thing its form and then guided [it]". 

Pharaoh believed himself to be a god, but he could not claim to be the necessary being. Like any other created thing, he knew he was contingent, with a beginning and an end, that he is limited by space. Allah, on the other hand 

57:3"He is the First and the Last, the Outer and the Inner, and He is, of all things, Knowing".

Nothing precedes or outlasts Him, nothing is above or beyond Him both in terms of space and knowledge. God is the only eternal, all encompassing entity. How futile is it then to direct worship to anything within the realm of contingency 

41:37"And of His signs are the night and day and the sun and moon. Do not prostrate to the sun or to the moon, but prostate to Allah, who created them, if it should be Him that you worship".

So when pressed to identify on Whose behalf he was speaking, Moses said the Necessary Being upon whom all things depend for creation as well as functioning

34:24"Say, "Who provides for you from the heavens and the earth?" Say, "Allah. And indeed, we or you are either upon guidance or in clear error". 

The answer to the rhetorical question is here quickly given, leaving no room to speculations. The implication is that any contrary position is that of error and delusions, how can anyone rely on anything else than the necessary being that supersedes all contingency? 

55:26-9"Everyone upon the earth will perish, And there will remain the Face of your Lord, Owner of Majesty and Honor. Whoever is within the heavens and earth asks Him; every day He is bringing about a matter". 

The idolaters are repeatedly described in the Quran as recognizing the existence of the Creator as the unique, uncaused cause of all things. Besides their deviations in belief, such as ascribing partners to Him in the dominion, they however in great majority denied the concept of return, let alone accountability before Him in the hereafter. The prophets therefore stressed a complete, comprehensive picture of creation; the very idea of an origin implies a return of all elements to the originator 

27:64"He, Who brings creation into being, then brings it back, and Who provides for you from Heaven and the earth" 

The necessary being therefore is upon Whom all things rely, He can never be detached from creation for a single instant or else all things fall apart 32:5,65:12,30:25,22:65,35:41. This is particularly pointed out in the verses speaking of Allah's establishing Himself upon the throne. 

Further, How do we know the necessary being, the uncaused cause, is a volitional, sentient, self aware entity? 

Firstly, as is seen in the universe, whenever there is a cause, the effect must follow. In the famous example by Al Ghazali, as soon as the sun rises, there is light. Similarly, if the First Cause is a mechanical, non volitional entity, then the effect, ie creation/the universe, must have existed since infinity, not approx 14 billion years ago. He would be forced to create by his very nature as the initial cause, making him limited and contingent on factors outside his control thus taking us back to the problem of infinite regress. That is why the necessary being must be sentient, having freedom of choice, choosing to create at a particular time. 

Second, we see patterns in the universe indicating intentionality. It is further impossible to have 2 independent creators, one deciding to create, the other not. They would limit one another in power and will. And limitations entail contingency, taking us back to the problem of infinite regress.

On a factual level, if we abandon the world of speculations and illusions, we are in a contingent, dependent, temporal universe that follows patterns. This is itself sufficient proof that a necessary being exists who intentionally caused it to be. This higher power must be greater than the universe and not dependent upon anything to sustain itself. These points are stressed over and over again in the Quran, including in sura ikhlas. The contingency argument leads to the necessary being. Metaphysical deductions based on observation of this world cannot go beyond an elementary notion of the necessary being. Human reasoning alone will never attain to knowledge that is beyond experience, such as the various concepts and realities of the unseen. That is the job of revelation to explain. But revelation also states that it shall not describe the fullness of what is currently beyond the reach of human perception. This includes things or concepts like the divine essence, the attributes of God, the realities of the unseen such as angels, heaven and hell. Some of those will appear in their full reality in the hereafter, once the veil of the unseen is lifted and human vision becomes as sharp as steel 50:22,19:38. Other realities remain beyond perception even once humans attain the hereafter. The superiority of the Muslim position in its argumentation for the existence of the necessary being is that its global perspective, using logic, reason, observation, together with revelation does not result in any form of difficulty and contradiction. Divine transcendence is always maintained. The same cannot be said for the way the necessary being is expressed in the other monotheistic faiths.

The Quran gives the basis for which to build upon arguments for God's existence, for both the ancient and modern mind 

3:190"In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and in the alternation of night and day, there are indeed signs for men of understanding/ulul albab" 

the prophet stated in regards to this verse 

"Woe to he who recites it but does not contemplate it’s (meaning)". 

The expression ulul albab stems from the lub which is the inner core of the fruit. In the highly symbolic language of the Arabs, the expression implied that wisdom is deeper than the shell, that one finds nourishment, physical and mental, from seeking the inside of things. The verse is saying that Signs surround us, but are only accessible to those who delve into the inner core of things. Ibrahim is the prime example given in the Quran. As he saw the alternations of night and day, cosmic bodies coming and going, he concluded that there must be something greater than all of them, subjecting them to change, limiting them. Intuitively, the supreme power behind all things is one that is not subject to change, limits, dependency. "Allahu samad" encapsulates that notion. That is how Ibrahim delved into the core meaning of the surrounding occurrences, deriving the signs from them.

Since the creator is always involved with His creation on a material level then shouldnt He also answer the need of the only creature endowed with the capacity to deduce the existence of the Creator? If not, why are we made with that ability, why is our default mental disposition to believe in unseen phenomena? The necessary being is volitional and unlimited, He sustains all causality, but how do we know that He wants us to submit to him? Firstly, submission entails acceptance of a command. If one chooses how to submit it doesnt entail it is as the superior entity desires it. That is where revelation and prophecy come into play, as pledged to Adam and his wife when they left the garden 20:123.

It is well known that genetically, humans are programmed to see life forces – a phenomenon called hypersensitive agency detection – everywhere we go, regardless of whether they’re there or not. Scientists say this might be an ancient defense mechanism that helped us avoid concealed danger, such as lions crouched in the grass or venomous snakes concealed in the bush, but that it also made us "vulnerable" to inferring the existence of invisible agents, such as a benevolent God. That mechanism, labelled "System 1" also encourages us to see things dualistically, meaning we have trouble thinking of the mind and body as a single unit. This tendency emerges quite early: young children, regardless of their cultural background, are inclined to believe that they have an immortal soul. For these reasons, many scholars believe that religion arose as “a byproduct of our cognitive disposition”, ie it would be cognitively unnatural to not believe, and to think of oneself in a non-dualistic way, which is why atheists (Atheism itself is a very recent phenomenon) must fight against that natural urge to believe in an existence with a purpose, that they are a part of something bigger, that life isn’t completely futile. 

Even those who explicitly describe themselves as non-believers, still harbor superstitious and non-rational thought processes. It is also established that inscribed in our DNA, there is a moral compass and sense of justice making us, since the youngest age, prefer good than bad actions.

It is the general guidance referred to 20:50 and instilled in all humans without exception. The Quran thus establishes that man is hardwired with a connection to its Creator. In reference to that intimate relation, the prophet said 

"He who knows his soul knows his Lord". 

On the other hand the Quran warns 

59:19"And be not like those who forgot Allah, so He made them forget their own souls". 

If one ponders on the Quranic argumentation for the divine, one notices that it doesnt try demonstrating God's existence, but rather corrects how humans are to perceive Him and His attributes. Throughout human history, accepting the existence of a deity was not an issue, rather the problem lied in the inability to recognize His true attributes and the manner He interacts with creation.

Surah Ikhlas powerfully captures divine unity, self-sufficiency and uniqueness from the point of view of his attributes, 

112:1-4"He is Allah, AHAD/One". 

AHAD literally translates to "one of", meaning one of His type. One might come back and argue that it is possible for an entity to be unique typologically but it does not negate that other entities might be comparable to it. For example a cat is comparable to a dog although individually they are typologically unique. There are people, namely the Trinitarians who do not deny God's numerical oneness, rather deny directly or indirectly the oneness of His essence which is shared through different typological entities father/son/holyspirit. The rest of the sura negates that proposition through several irrefutable arguments. If Allah was not typologically unique, that there were other types of entities like Him, then they would have some kind of intrinsic power to influence the functioning of the universe. This is the known problem of the imperfect wording in what is supposed to be the ultimate declaration of monotheism in the HB 

Deut6:4"Hear O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One/Echad". 

The wording here although similar to Arabic, negates there being more than one God to Israel, but it doesnt deny the existence of other gods in general. The Quran thus clears the matter, saying that intrinsic power is Allah's prerogative, He is the God upon whom all things depend/samad. Further, none is comparable to Him in any way; 

"Say: He, Allah, is AHAD, Allah is He on Whom all depend, He begets not, nor is He begotten, And none is like Him". 

Allah is therefore supremely One and that is why most translators rendered AHAD in this context as simply "One", encompassing both numerical and typological singularity. We are never told that Allah ascended at some point in time to the role he has throughout the Quran. Allah isnt merely another high god like Marduk, Baal, or Zeus who all took on their position at some point. Allah is the one and only God and has always held the highest position among all of creation, heavenly and wordly. He is never generated nor is limited by anything or anyone 

"when He wills a thing He says "Be" and it is".

He is unique in the midst of diversity 30:22, complementarity, and polarity amongst the various kinds in the universe that work in interconnection. It is one of the major signs man is asked to ponder upon 

51:49"And of everything We have created azwaj (different kinds) that you may be mindful" 

2:164,89:3"Consider the multiple and the One". 

Through all these means and devices 

3:18"Allah (Himself) bears witness that there is no god but He". 

Sura ikhlas is the most explicit statement of tawhid, of the whole Quran. It clears the confusion of those who conjecture on the oneness of the Creator from every aspect. Allah is "one of" His type, but at the same time there is no origin or likeness to His kind. 

38:65-8"and there is no god but Allah, the One, the Subduer (of all). The Lord of the heavens and the earth and what is between them, the Mighty, the most Forgiving".

 Every single time the Quran mentions Allah subduing all of creation, it is preceded by an emphasis on His uniqueness. What necessarily follows from that statement is that neither one that preceded Him has shared that essence, nor one that is begotten by Him. He, in His uniqueness is the subduer of all things outside of Himself. An entity that is unique in every possible way means that there cannot be any point of comparison which one could use in order to begin to imagine Him. Any attempt to compare Him remains infinitely far from His actual reality 

42:11"nothing like a likeness of Him".

These verses speaking of things made in "azwaj" end with 

"there are signs in this for a people who understand". 

Only those devoid of the correct mindframe; intellectual observation through spiritual insight, are unable to appreciate the portent of the signs which the verses direct them to, unable to see the singularity and unity of the Creator opposite the interdependant diversity of creation. Hence, right after God being the ultimate witness to divine unity, the verse 3:18 continues by praising the heavenly creatures and those who have the correct mindframe and thus are able to recognize the higher realities 

"Allah (Himself) bears witness that there is no god but He, and (so do) the angels and the possessors of knowledge, standing firm for justice". 

 The Quran uses simple logical deductions based on the signs in the heavens and earth testifying to the unity of a Single, uncreated and independent Cause. On a philosophical level, the implication from the observance of the universe is that there must have been a single, uncaused cause of all things. This denies the simultaneous existence of several gods. Multiple deities would naturally compete with oneanother, affecting the order of the universe. Having different needs and interests, they would issue contradicting commands

17:111"And say: ‘(All) Praise is Allah’s, Who has not taken unto Him a son; nor has He got any partner in the Sovereignty; and there is not for Him any helper out of humbleness.’ And magnify Him with all magnificence". 

A quick look at the mythologies of polytheist beliefs all throughout the history of mankind, confirms this 

21:22"If there had been in them any gods except Allah, they (the heavens and the earth) would both have certainly been in a state of disorder" 

17:42"If there were with Him gods as they say, then certainly they would have been able to seek a way to the Lord of power" 

23:91"never was there with him any (other) god-- in that case would each god have certainly taken away what he created, and some of them would certainly have overpowered others; glory be to Allah above what they describe!". 

If Allah had partners and more than one god had ruled over the world, each of these gods would have managed and established his control over the realm of his own creations. Consequently different parts of the universe would end up being managed under different laws and systems. Disorder in the universe would ensue but this does not accord with the unity of creation that we witness around us, governed by laws that are the same everywhere in the heavens and the earth.

 This incredible coordination is known by the most atheists of physicists as being on the thinnest of razor edges, where the slightest variation will throw the entire system into disarray. The only conclusion, for those endowed with the proper knowledge, one that works side by side with spiritual awareness, is that the whole thing is designed and in constant control, maintenance and sustenance by a Unique, and Sole Creator 15:21,20:50,25:2,59:1,80:19,87:2-3. 

Multiplicity inevitably leads to differences and in such a vast, intricately related universal system, as described throughout the verses pointing to complementarity in creation, these differences would lead to chaos and opposition instead

27:64"Is He [not best] who begins creation and then repeats it and who provides for you from the heaven and earth? Is there a deity with Allah? Say, "Produce your proof, if you should be truthful". 

Here the Quran states a powerful truth; as the imprint of intelligent design becomes more apparent with every scientific advancement, so to is the fact that the uncaused cause beyond contingency must be singular. Every attempt to explain the existence of the universe in such an evidently planned and deliberate state without acknowledging God’s existence and oneness has proven logically unsustainable. 

Polytheism equally inevitably leads to the idea of gods begetting children and being begotten 16:20 succeeding oneanother or relying on one another in times of incapacity. The necessity of a single, all encompassing God, preceding all things and outlasting them, incorporeal and self-sufficient denies that concept. Sura ikhlas intricately and eloquently discusses and refutes that idea.

Atheists many times argue that the multiplicity of gods across all belief systems entails that all are equally invented, how can one discern truth from falsehood? But, the premise doesnt follow the conclusion, just as the multiplicity of theories to explain something doesnt entail all are false. By a set of logical, testable, rational standards, one can fairly easily filter down the possibilities to a fraction. Similarly the multiplicity of religions can be narrowed down to a few; it should be God-centric, since divinely revealed. It should consequently claim to be the only truth. Being God-centric, it should be universal, all inclusive across every people of the earth, and survive the test of time. This makes it relevant to all aspects of human life, not only from a spiritual and ritualistic perspective, but also social, economical, even political. It must be authentic so as to be a point of spiritual reference, knowledge of God, moral betterment and finally without the trace of any human involvement. Interestingly no other revelation than the Quran claims to be error free, nor protected from corruption in the future sense. No other revelation provides a falsifiable test for all times, not only from the viewpoint of consistency but also from the viewpoint of replication; the linguistic miracle is beyond human capacity.

Our universe was and is continuously created with wisdom and purpose. Such wisdom and purpose are always tied to God's mercy; from the alternation of the day and night providing us with periods of rest and activity 30:23, down to the very clothes we wear which the Quran refers to as "coming down from heaven", everything around us is filled with obvious signs of His power, providence and wisdom, to the point that whichever way one turns his gaze, from the smallest to the biggest 

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

The vastness and complexity of the universe are among the evidences put at mankind's disposal, of the might and all encompassing knowledge of the supreme Creator, as well as the relative insignificance of the human being from the point of view of creation and consequent resurrection 

40:57,79:27,65:12"It is Allah Who has created the seven heavens and the earth and from the later the like thereof. His Command descends between them at all times that you may know that Allah is Omnipotent over all things and His Omniscience encompasses surrounds all things". 

The Quran treats contemplation on that amazing creation as a means by which one may worship the Creator 

3:190-1"Verily in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of the night and the day, there are signs for the possessors of intellects. Those who remember Allah while standing, sitting and lying on their sides, and mediate on the creation of the heavens and the earth, (seriously saying) 'Our Lord! You have not created (all) this in vain! Glory be to you! Save us then from the torment of the Fire'". 

Besides size and complexity, beauty itself is a factor the Quran stresses as an equally important sign pointing to the Creator. Evidently, things could have looked much different than they do and yet even the most common things like an ant or the moon, when observed closely fill us with awe.

Each of God's attributes manifests itself in some way in our world, to provide mankind with indications of a superior being. If we take His attribute of power for instance, among the most compelling and mind-blowing manifestations of it is the physical universe, unceasingly amazing and confusing the greatest minds that ever lived, the deeper they observe and ponder upon it 

67:3-4"Who created the seven heavens one above another; you see no incongruity in the creation of the Beneficent Allah; then look again, can you see any disorder? Then turn back the eye again and again; your look shall come back to you confused while it is fatigued". 

The discovery of countless worlds beyond our solar system, all stranger than the other in terms of their inner conditions, enhance even further the significance of the signs of nature man is repeatedly told to ponder upon, testifying to God's bounty. When one sees how improbable it is for life to be sustained in this seemingly boundless universe, and yet how flourishing it is in our world, how could one negate intent and purpose in creation? And when one adds the element of ease and all encompassing control over originating and sustaining the universe, then how could someone argue that our relative insignificance entails disinterest from the Creator? The more we look into the universe, the more there is in fact indication that we are not insignificant. 

Looking closer to us is the moon. It controls the length of the day and ocean tides, which affect the biological cycles of lifeforms on our planet. The moon also contributes to Earth's climate by stabilizing Earth's spin axis, offering an ideal environment for life to develop and evolve. The size ratio between the earth and its satellite is unique from all the worlds observed until now, and it is this ratio that allows these vital phenomena to occur 

25:2"It is He who has created all things and ordained them in due proportions". 

The self-evident truth in the cosmos of intelligent design is among the major arguments stressed by the messengers. Casting doubt on this clear truth is at odds with human nature 

14:10"Their messengers said, "Can there be doubt about Allah, Creator of the heavens and earth?". 

The passage continues, saying that this reality is self evident to the extent that one can literally see God's imprint in the universe 

14:19"Have you not seen that Allah created the heavens and the earth in truth?" 

The existence of a Creator is now clearer than it ever was. In this age we live in, miracles in the sense of occurrences that bend the expected laws of nature are obsolete. Although the general scenery of creation described in the Quran as a sign to reflect upon is enough to alert the conscious heart to the miracles surrounding us, the advanced tools at our disposal have magnified these miracles to an unprecedented degree, ironically the very tools of those who are often the first to deny God's existence. Those whose minds are bent at denying it are left with nothing more than engaging in sophistry, pushing the boundaries of probabilities to unreasonable extent so as to allow for the most infinitesimal chance for doubt. In the meantime, anywhere mankind concentrates its most advanced scientific observation, the more the signature of an intelligent design is apparent. This reality applies to the vastness of the universe down to machine like programming of the DNA. An entity capable of initiating massively complex information must have preceded all things. That entity must, as a consequence be transcendental ie beyond matter, as well as unbound by time and space which both had a beginning. 

There is an impressive amount of theories to explain the great mystery of how the very first gene and self replicating molecule originated, among them one that focuses on montmorillonite clay. This abundant, inorganic blend of minerals is known to be a chemical catalyst, the crucial precursor to RNA formation, as well as a means by which chemical reactions can be confined and protected until the possible development of cellular membranes. But until now science has been unable to test and repeat any of those suggestions, including the clay model, to produce the first living cell. Even on a theoretical level, the attempts to explain the pathway from non-living to living matter have so far not achieved the states of complexity that are anywhere near that of the simplest known living systems. In fact some have began arguing that the "p-value" (calculated probability for a hypothesis to be true) for nature to produce the complexity of the genetic code is so small that it should be soundly rejected by science. The only counter to this inevitable conclusion is the multiverse theory, the existence of an infinite number of unseen, untestable entities, which is actually just a way of conceding that the only alternative to obvious reality is utter absurdity. The notion of Multiverse is a fallacy. Practically, it is impossible to have a sum of finite things, as is the case of our universe. Each entity in itself must be infinite. If one universe is destroyed, does it result in infinity minus 1? In an infinite pile of marbles, if 2 are taken out, can the rest remain infinite? Further, If one universe is measurable, it must be finite. One cannot measure distances between 2 points in an infinite entity, as it entails that what is beyond these 2 points is measurable. The fact is infinity is an abstract concept inapplicable to anything known and observable in the universe. Even in theory, where do we begin counting and how does an object reach any point in infinity if it goes back endlessly meaning it never started? It is impossible to traverse infinity. One cannot postulate a possibility that is not only counterintuitive, inapplicable in real world, but that also has strong, testable, numerous arguments against it.

Only intelligent minds can produce significant levels of functional information. Since even the simplest lifeforms require high levels of information, the scientific evidence for intelligent design becomes impressive. Even then, one still has to explain how does intelligent design initiate an information without any previous examples, references, experiences. This, the Quran answers through the phrase 

2:117"badeeu/Innovator and initiator of the heavens and the earth". 

The connotation of the word is that, contrary to all creative endeavours, He creates without any blueprint, preexisting inspiration, experience. He does so through His word 

"and if HE decreed an order done, He only says be and it is". 

This is why God is the "best of creators".

This vast universe is a highly complex entity that will keep on evading man's grasp despite his ability to observe it and physically test it. Its complexity is such that God even swears by 

91:5"the building of it" 

as denoted with the impersonal "ma". That complexity however does not entail difficulty to Allah, who brought it to existence through His creative word "Be".