Pauls made up vision

Paul himself makes no mention of a conversion on the road to Damascus, whereas Acts of the Apostles has not one, but three accounts:

• At Acts 9:3-8, Paul was blinded by a light and fell down, then heard Jesus, who told Paul that he would be told what to do when he was in the city. His men did not see the light, but heard the voice. They remained standing.

• At Acts 22:6-11, Paul told the people he was blinded by a light and fell down, then heard Jesus, who again told Paul that he would be told what to do when he was in Damascus. This time, his men saw the light but, unlike Paul, were not blinded, and did not hear the voice.

• At Acts 26.13-19, Paul told Agrippa that he saw a brilliant light and heard Jesus, who gave him his mission, but did not command him to go to Damascus. He fell down, but there is no mention of blindness, nor is there any mention of the men seeing or hearing anything, although for some reason they also fell down. He told those at Damascus and Jerusalem about his conversion experience.

Was Acts 9:3-8 the true account of this event, and if so was Paul confused in his two separate accounts? How would we know?

Even conservative theologians acknowledge that Luke was not with Paul on the road to Damascus so, if Luke was the author of Acts, he must have received all three versions from Paul, or at least one version that he subsequently amended for his own reasons and placed in three different contexts.

Rex Wyler says,in The Jesus Sayings, page 43, that historians consider Acts, written in the 90s, an anonymous work that freely mixes history with legend. Authorship some decades after the death of Paul means that this anonymous author would not have received the story from Paul himself. So Paul's conversion on the road to Damascus was either a tradition of unknown provenance or entirely a literary creation written by 'Luke'.

The ‘Shin’ And ‘Face’ Of Allah (Swt) Aqeedah

Posted on August 22, 2006. Filed under: 202 - Advanced Asma wa Sifaat |

Important Principle

al-Mudaf (construct state) is of two main types:

1.     al-Mudaf depicting possession

2.     al-Mudaf not depicting possession

The first type, includes examples such as: Kalam Allah, ‘Ilm Allah, Qudrat Allah (Allah’s Speech, Allah’s knowledge and Allah’s power)

The second type, includes examples such as: Ka’bat Allah, Naaqat Allah (Allah’s Ka’bah, or Allah’s she-camel)

This shows that not everything that is attributed to Allah in Idafa is necessarily His Attribute, for we all know that Ka’ba and the she-camel is NOT Allah’s Attributes.

So how do we know whether the Mudaf such as Kalam, Ka’ba, ‘Ilm, Naaqah, etc, is actually Allah’s Attribute or not?

We only know this by knowing the meaning of the Mudaf.

Hence, because we know the meaning of Kalam, and know also that it does not exist independently, the fact that it is an Attribute to Allah makes Kalam Allah’s Attribute.

On the other hand, because we know the meaning of Ka’bah, and therefore we know that it exists independently, we know that Ka’bah is NOT Allah’s Attribute.

Face

Now bearing this principle in mind, one can only Attribute a Wajh to Allah, if he knows what Wajh means. If he does not know what Wajh means, then he has no authority to attribute it to Allah, for Wajh Allah could easily be the second type of mudaf, like Kab’at Allah.

No scholars can attribute a Wajh to Allah, if they do not know what Wajh means.

Wajh could mean face, as it could also mean a direction.

The scholars could only attribute a Wajh to Allah, if wajh means ‘face’.

They cannot attribute a ‘wajh’ to Allah if it means direction.

Therefore, if the scholars affirm wajh as Allah’s Attribute, they have no choice but to believe that Wajh means a face, and this is what they believed.

A good way of looking at this is to say,

Whosoever held a similitude for Allah from His creation has committed disbelief [kufr], whosoever disputes what Allah has attributed for Himself has committed disbelief [kufr], there is absolutely no similitude [tash’bih] in what Allah taala has described Himself or His messenger; so, whosoever affirms [the attributes] for Allah ta`ala [just] as they have been mentioned in the [qur’anic] verses, and in the authentic reports – that is befitting the Majesty of Allah ta’ala and negates all flaws from Allah ta’ala has truly struck the path of guidance.

But what the mainstream Ash’aris say is quite different. They insist on negating the literal meaning. They say: Yes, Allah has attributed something called ‘wajh’ to himself, but what this means we do not exactly know, although we are certain that it does not refer to wajh literally.

Shin

Ash’aris will argue this point by trying to say,

Let us now take what you say is an attribute of Allah – Shin.

The literal meaning of Shin in the language is:

“The front part of the leg below the knee and above the ankle.”

Now how can you say that by applying a “literal meaning” one does not contradict the “without modality and definition” principle that you claim to be upon?

This is incorrect.

Shin is in and of itself the literal meaning, otherwise, Shin itself will be meaningless.

If in Arabic someone says: inkasarat saaquhu, it literally means: His shin broke. i.e. Shin is the literal meaning itself.

The same statement could be made in relation to a Jinn, i.e. ‘his shin broke’, but is their shin like ours, composed of blood, flesh and bones, between the knee and foot? Allah knows best. However, the meaning of Shin is known.

When they say: ‘The front part of the leg below the knee and above the ankle’, is the Hadd – or the definition of Shin with respect to human beings, something which Ahlus Sunnah does not affirm.

Rather, we constantly state that our affirmation of Allah’s Attributes like Face and Hands is the affirmation of existence (wujud), and not affirmation of any definition (tahdid). Just as we literally believe that Allah exists, without giving his existence any definition. Hence, Allah’s Hands are no different to His existence.

It shuold be pointed out though, that the reason why the latter Ash’aris negated Wajh, ‘Ayn, etc and made ta’wil thereof, is due to Kalami principles that negating composition, divisiblity and multiplicity of eternal.

A Maturidi scholar (Zabidi al-Hanafi, d.~1200AH) mentioned,

Your saying, ‘we take it by its literal meaning, and it is incomprehensible’ is contradictory in itself. If you take by its literal meaning, then ‘as-saq’ mentioned in Suratal-Qalam (ayah 42), is a ‘shin’ which is a part made up of flesh, bones, muscle, and nerves. If you take by that the literal meaning, then you have committed blasphemy, and if you deny it, then how do you claim to take by the literal meaning?

The great Shafi’i traditionist al-Khattabi (d. 388AH) said about the texts pertaining to Allah’s Shin,

This Hadeeth is one where our scholars dreaded saying something, so they passed it on in accordance with the literal meaning of the wording (fa ajrawhu ‘ala dhahiri lafdhihi). They did not explore the depths of its meaning, in accordance with their Madhab of ceasing to give tafseer to anything the essence of which is not encompassed with knowledge (al-Asma wal-Sifat, al-Bayhaqi)

Again, to emphasize, the proper principle is to accept the literal meaning (dhahir) and to negate the modality (kayf).

Quran Preservation & Compilation -1 (Prophet’s lifetime)

نشرت بواسطة: Waqar Akbar Cheema 2:20 AM في Abu Bakr , islam , Muhammad , prophet , Qur'an Preservation and Compilation , Quran compilation , Zaid 3 تعليقات

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم الحمد لله وحده و الصلاة و السلام على من لا نبي بعده و على آله و أصحابه أجمعين

A concise and comprehensive response to the lies and misgivings about Qur’an preservation and compilation during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet- may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.

1. Introduction

Many Orientalists and Christian missionaries have spoken against Qur'an in their bid to create confusions about its impeccable preservation. In this series we shall study in brief the whole process of Qur'an preservation and compilation. Naturally, first to discuss is phase that covers the life of the Holy Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.

2. Memorization: The Primary Means of Qur’an Preservation

One thing that ought to be kept in mind regarding the preservation of the Qur'an is that it was done more through memory than through writing. There was and is great wisdom in this. We see that in the case of earlier Prophets whose teachings were not committed to memory were lost. Sometimes the invaders destroyed the manuscripts and sometimes the scribes intentionally or intentionally made mistakes. So to avoid the same to happen to the Qur'an more emphasis was laid on its memorization though it was put into writing as well.

Therefore we read in Sahih Muslim that Allah Almighty said to the Holy Prophet:

وأنزلت عليك كتابا لا يغسله الماء

“And I sent the Book to you which cannot be washed away by water."[1]

This meant that Qur'an will not be preserved only on scrolls but through some other medium as well. So Muslims right from the beginning gave special attention to memorizing the Qur'an so not only the Holy Prophet -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- himself but scores of his companions learnt the complete Qur'an by heart. They include Abu Bakr, 'Umar, 'Uthman, 'Ali, 'Abdullah bin Masud, Talha, Sa'd, Huzaifa, Ubayy bin Ka'b, Abdullah bin Abbas, Abdullah bin Zubar, 'Abdullah bin Sai'b, Zaid bin Thabit, Abu Hurairah, Abu Darda, Ma'az bin Jabal, Anas bin Malik, Abu Musa Al-'Ashari, Mu'awiyyah, Sayyidah 'Aisha, Sayyidah Umm Salmah, Sayyidah Hafsa and many more.[2]

3- Preservation in writing during the life of the Holy Prophet

But nevertheless Qur'an was also written down and this was done right during the life time of the Holy Prophet -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. And all the later masahif were based on what was dictated by the Holy Prophet himself. We shall see the details shortly.

Holy Prophet -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- had more than 40 companions who usually worked as scribes. The names of these companions have been mentioned in various authentic works.[3] Holy Prophet -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- made special arrangements for the Qur'an to be written. How the Qur'an was written and how it was was checked by the Prophet -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- is evident from the following example:

عن زيد بن ثابت قال: كنت أكتب الوحي لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، وكان «إذا نزل عليه أخذته برحاء شديدة، وعرق عرقا شديدا مثل الجمان، ثم سري عنه» ، فكنت أدخل عليه بقطعة الكتف أو كسرة، فأكتب وهو يملي علي، فما أفرغ حتى تكاد رجلي تنكسر من ثقل القرآن، وحتى أقول: لا أمشي على رجلي أبدا، فإذا فرغت قال: «اقرأه» ، فأقرؤه، فإن كان فيه سقط أقامه، ثم أخرج به إلى الناس

Zaid bin Thabit, one of the chief scribes relates: "I used to write down the revelation for the Holy Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. When the revelation came to him he felt intense heat and drops of perspiration used to roll down his body like pearls. When this state was over I used to fetch a shoulder bone or a piece of something else. He used to go on dictating and I used to write it down. When I finished writing the sheer weight of transcription gave me the feeling that my leg would break and I would not be able to walk anymore. Anyhow when I finished writing, he would say, 'Read!' and I would read it back to him. If there was an omission or error he used to correct it and then let it be brought before the people."[4]

This is a categorical proof that Companions used to write Qur'an in the supervision of the Holy Prophet -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- and got it checked from him before making it public.

Also there are proofs that during the life time of the Holy Prophet -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- the written manuscripts of Qur'an were there. In fact writing of the Qur'an was in practice from the early days of Islam as evident from the incident leading to conversion of one of the closest companions, ‘Umar bin al-Khattab, when he found his sister and brother-in-law with a parchment on which the verses of Surah Taha (chapter 20) were written.[5]

There are some other traditions which indicate that Companions had written copies of complete or incomplete Quran. For example;

عن عبد الله بن عمر رضي الله عنهما: أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم نهى أن يسافر بالقرآن إلى أرض العدو

Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar: “Allah's Messenger forbade the people to travel to a hostile country carrying (copies of) the Quran.”[6]

Obviously these traditions are categorical evidence that the Companions used to have written copies of the Qur’an even during the life time of the Holy Prophet- may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- and that it was not something unusual.

Likewise, there is evidence for the manuscripts of the Qur’an in the instruction of the Holy Prophet –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- to Hakim bin Hizam when he sent him to Yemen as a governor. He said:

لا تمس القرآن إلا وأنت طاهر

“Do not touch the Qur’an except when you are in the state of purity.”[7]

4- Prophet’s encouragement for writing the Qur’an

The Holy Prophet –may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- only arranged for getting every revelation written in front of him he also encouraged the people to write the Qur’an for themselves and leave it after them for their children besides giving them instructions about the manuscripts. Mark the following narration;

عن أبي هريرة، قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: «إن مما يلحق المؤمن من عمله وحسناته بعد موته علما علمه ونشره، وولدا صالحا تركه، ومصحفا ورثه، أو مسجدا بناه، أو بيتا لابن السبيل بناه، أو نهرا أجراه، أو صدقة أخرجها من ماله في صحته وحياته، يلحقه من بعد موته»

It was narrated that Abu Hurairah said: “The Messenger of Allah said: ‘The rewards of the good deeds that will reach a believer after his death are: Knowledge which he taught and spread; a righteous son whom he leaves behind; a copy of the Qur’an that he leaves as a legacy; a mosque that he built; a house that he built for wayfarers; a canal that he dug; or charity that he gave during his lifetime when he was in good health. These deeds will reach him after his death.’”[8]

It is thus clear that Holy Prophet –may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- had the clear motive of not only having the complete Qur’an written but also to get the people make and acquire Qur’anic manuscripts and leave it behind them as heir-looms. Such an arrangement had to be made to see what is now achieved. The following needs to be considered in this backdrop;

Once a number of companions were with the Holy Prophet –may the peace and blessings of Allah. One of them reports;

قلنا: يا رسول الله هل من أحد أعظم منا أجرا، آمنا بك واتبعناك، قال: «وما يمنعكم من ذلك ورسول الله بين أظهركم، يأتيكم بالوحي من السماء؟ بل قوم يأتون من بعدكم يأتيهم كتاب بين لوحين فيؤمنون به ويعملون بما فيه أولئك أعظم منكم أجرا»

We said: ‘O Messenger of Allah! Is there anyone greater than us in earning reward, we believed you and followed you.’ He said: “And what is there that to stops you from it while the Messenger of Allah is amongst you and comes to you with the revelation from the heavens? In fact, there will come a people after you, whom the book will reach [only] in two bindings. They will believe in it and follow whatever is in; they are greater in reward than you.”[9]

5- Claim that Qur’an was not written completely during the Prophet’s time

Orientalists claim that Qur’an was not written in full during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. This is false and the fact is that whole of the Qur’an was indeed written in the supervision of the Holy Prophet but it was not compiled into one collection. This is testified by the statement of Zaid bin Thabit, one of the chief scribes. He said:

قبض النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ولم يكن القرآن جمع في شيء

“The Prophet passed way while the Qur’an was yet not gathered in anything.”[10]

Clearly the word used here is jumia’ which means ‘gathered’ and not ‘written’. And the wisdom behind the fact that Qur’an was completely written but not compiled at one place during the life of the holy Prophet -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- is explained by Al-Khattabi. He said;

إنما لم يجمع القرآن في المصحف لما كان يترقبه من ورود ناسخ لبعض أحكامه أو تلاوته فلما انقضى نزوله بوفاته ألهم الله الخلفاء الراشدين ذلك وفاء بوعده الصادق بضمان حفظه على هذه الأمة فكان ابتداء ذلك على يد الصديق بمشورة عمر

“The Messenger of Allah –may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- did not gather the Qur’an in a mushaf because he had to wait if there was some abrogation of some commands or recitation but when he died and the revelation ceased (and thus abrogation as well); Allah, to fulfill his True Commitment of preservation (of Qur’an) for this Ummah, put this thought into the hearts of the Righteous Caliphs. Then this great task was undertaken by Abu Bakr on the advice of Umar.”[11]

Truly, there is not even an iota of truth in the rant of the missionaries about Qur'an preservation and compilation during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet- on him be the peace and blessings of Almighty Allah. 

-- by Waqar Akbar Cheema

---

[1] Sahih Muslim, Book 40, Hadith 6853

[2] Names of these and other companions who had rendered complete Qur'an to their memory can be found in An-Nashr fil Qira'at al-'Ashr of Al-Jazri and Al-Ittiqan fi ‘Uloom al-Qur’an of Jalaluddin Al-Suyuti

[3] Muhammad Mustafa Al-A’zmi’s book, Kuttaab al-Nabi is comprehensive work on the subject. In it he has given good deal of information about 48 scribes of the Holy Prophet -May the peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all.

[4] Mu'jam Al-Tabarani Al-Awst, Hadith 1913. Dar al-Haramain, Cairo, 1415 AH 
Authenticated by Al-Haithmi in Majma’ Al-Zawaid 8/257, Hadith 13938

[5] Sunan al-Darqutni, Hadith 441, Al-Resalah Publications, Beirut, 2004

Al-Zayl’i said it is a good (jayyid) narration. See Nasab al-Raya (vol.1 p.199 Muhammad 'Awwama ed.)

[6] Sahih Bukhari, Book 52, Hadith 233

[7] Mustadrak al-Hakim, Hadith 6051, Dar al-Kotob al-Ilmiyya, Beirut, 1990

Al-Hakim classified it as Sahih. Al-Dhahabi agreed with him.

[8] Sunan Ibn Majah, Book 1, Chapter 20, Hadith 242. Classified as Hasan by Albani

[9] Al-Bukhari, Khalaq Af’al al-‘Ibad, Dar al-M’arif al-Saudia, Riyadh, 1398 AH vol.1 p.88

Classified as Sahih by Albani in Silsala Sahiha No. 3310

[10] Fath al-Bari, Dar al-Ma’rifah, Beirut 1379 AH vol.9 p.12

[11] Al-Itiqan fil Uloom al-Quran, Haeya al-Masriya al-‘Aamah lil-Kitab, Egypt 1974 vol.1 p.202

Christians Should Not Marry

 October 13th, 2018  Ibn Anwar

Be like Christ and End Marriage: To Follow Jesus Means to End Christianity

by Ibn Anwar

The great irony of the Christian reality is that it continues to exist as the largest religious group on earth solely because its adherents refuse to exemplify their lord and savior Jesus, whom they claim to love ever so much. The existential problem of Christianity is that Jesus’ example guarantees the end of Christianity. Granted that Jesus permitted marriage, but nowhere can a Christian show that he celebrated the institution or dubbed it praiseworthy nor did he encourage it. Catholic priests have got it right in their priestly calling when they make a vow of celibacy as that mirrors the life of Jesus as seen in the Bible. Neither did Jesus have any romantic relationship of any kind nor did he ever get married. Why are Christians hesitant to follow Jesus in this when Jesus declared, ” “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.” (Luke 9:23) As Muslims, we should encourage Christians to follow Jesus (and if possible, encourage them to follow their Jesus to the letter). If Christians are true to their claim that there is no greater example than Jesus, then they, like Jesus, would choose to end marriages and become celibate. We must remind Christians of the hypocrisy of calling themselves ‘little Christs’ (i,e, Christians) when they are not prepared to be like Christ–to be unmarried. They should follow Jesus’ example and restrain from marriage and within a generation or two, Christianity will cease to exist. As a matter of fact, Jesus not only discouraged marriage, he said that marriage is a barrier to the resurrection and in order to be saved and be part of the “age to come,” followers of Jesus should not get married:

“Jesus replied, “The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are considered worthy of taking part in the age to come and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage,” (Luke 20:34-35)

Marriage is against the example of Jesus and if the above verse is true, then Christians are choosing to lose out in the coming kingdom because to be married, in Jesus’ words, is to be unworthy. When will Christians actually follow Jesus and when will they listen to his words? Why do they choose to be unworthy of salvation and desire what Jesus did not desire? They ought to be encouraged to be more like Christ and end Christianity by ending marriage. But to ensure the survival of Christianity, Christians must knowingly and actively choose to disregard and reject not only Jesus’ personal example but also his words and teachings that clearly, to say the least, frown on marriage. But to reject or disregard the example of Jesus and his exhortations means to be unChristian and how can a self-proclaimed Christian exude non-Christian behaviour yet continue to be Christian? Marriage is the ultimate Sophie’s Choice for the Christian believer. If they wish to sustain Christianity, they must reject Jesus, but if they want to follow Jesus, then they must work against the survival of Christianity. There is no way out.

City by the sea, Sūrat l-Aʿrāf 162-164

BEN ABRAHAMSON

Q. Salamu alaikum wa rahmatullah, Rabbi. In Sura al-Aʿraf it mentions a “city by the sea” which caught fish on the Sabbath. Is this mentioned in the Torah?

A. Wa aleikum salaam wa rahmatullah. The ayat that speak about this event are Sūrat l-Aʿrāf 162-164

7:162 But changed, those who wronged among them, word other than that which was said to them. So We sent upon them torment from the sky because they were doing wrong.

7:163 And ask them about the town which was situated by the sea, when they transgressed in the matter of Sabbath, when came to them their fish on the day of their Sabbath visibly and on the day they had not Sabbath they did not come to them. Thus We test them because they were defiantly disobeying.

7:164 And when said a community among them, "Why do you preach a people, whom Allah is going to destroy them or punish them with a punishment severe?" They said, "To be absolved before your Lord and that they may become righteous."

This seems a very clear parallel to Nechemiah 13:16-18. In that chapter Nehemiah rebukes some of the Children of Israel for intermarrying pagan wives without conversion. Their children could not speak Hebrew and they mixed the truth with falsehood. They changed the Law of Torah and permitted the buying and selling of fish on the Sabbath.

16 And the Tyrians [who] sojourned there were bringing fish and all [types of] merchandise and selling on the Sabbath to the people of Judea and in Jerusalem.

17 And I quarreled with the dignitaries of Judea, and I said to them, "What is this bad thing that you are doing-profaning the Sabbath day?

18 Did not your ancestors do this, and our God brought upon us all this calamity, and upon this city, and you are increasing the wrath upon Israel by profaning the Sabbath?"

Ibn Kathir brings that “The village mentioned here is Aylah, on the shore of the Qulzum (Red) Sea.” It is interesting that during the period of the Qur’an the name for Jerusalem was “Alyah”. This would imply that the “city by the sea” was Jerusalem. While Jerusalem is located 50km from the Mediterranean Sea, this is only a 10 hour journey by foot. It is conceivable that from the viewpoint of Makka, this was “by the sea.” Indeed there are reports from travelers during Middle Ages describing Jerusalem as if it were located on the sea.

In both accounts, the word “city” qirya/ir is used.

Ibn Kathir explains about the fish. “They began using deceitful means to avoid honoring the Sabbath by placing nets, ropes and artificial pools of water for the purpose of fishing before the Sabbath. When the fish came in abundance on Saturday as usual, they were caught in the ropes and nets for the rest of Saturday. During the night, the Jews collected the fish after the Sabbath ended.”

The Arabic is “idh tatihim ḥitanuhum yawma sabtihim shurraʿan” (when came to them their fish on the day of their Sabbath visibly). It does not explicitly say who caught the fish. Ibn Kathir understood that they were caught passively in nets. The verse in Nehemiah says the Tyrians sold the fish on the Sabbath, the wicked Jews permitting to themselves the buying of fish on the Sabbath. The word shurraʿan (visibly) is related to “he has ordained”, “an ordained way”, “a law” implying that wicked citizens of the city had changed the law and believed they were doing nothing wrong.

If correct, this account would draw a parallel between what Nehemiah (pbuh) did and what the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was dealing with. In each case, dealing with wicked people who had mixed truth with falsehood.

In the Torah account the wicked were intermarried with pagan Moabites and Ashdodites without conversion. They were lead by Eliashiv the High Priest, who was the son-in- law of Sanballat. Sanballat was the Persian appointed governor of the coast from Tyre to Egypt, and commander of the Jewish garrisons in on the southern border of Egypt. The term “Tyrians” may be a reference to his people. Sanballat is associated with a heretical form of Judaism that gave birth to the Samaritans and Sadducees. Al Jahiz and Ibn Hazm say that the Jews of the Qur’an were Sadducees.

This might also give further insight into the words “but changed, those who wronged among them, word other than that which was said to them.” Here the Prophet (pbuh) was not just talking about the leaders of Medina changing one Torah Law from prohibited to permitted, but the establishment of an entire religious sect based on Torah teachings that were distorted by mixing with pagan elements. In the end, the Prophet (pbuh), like Nehemiah (pbuh), was required to separate the faithful from those who mixed truth with falsehood.

The Myth of Anti-Semitism, and Promoting Hatred of Christians in the Quran

  BY EJAZ NAQVI, MD

There is a prevalent myth among Non-Muslims that the Qur’an promotes hatred of the Jews and Christians, as well as being anti-Semitic. To be frank, this myth is equally prevalent among the Muslims. Both groups are flat out wrong, as I will explain here.

They often quote the following verse.

O You who have believed! Do not take the Jews and Christians as your friends (Auliya). They are friends of one another. … The Qur’an 5:51

The word translated as ‘friends’ is Auliya. Many Quranic translators have indeed used ‘friends’ for it, which actually does NOT mean friends. I have many friends but they are not my Auliya. The word for ‘friend’ in Arabic is variably used as rafeek, sadeek or khaleel. Additionally, other places where Auliya has been used in the Qur’an is for God or Prophet Muhammad in terms of being protector, guardian, and protecting friend, and used in religious and/or political terms. Nowhere else has Auliaya been translated as friends except in this verse.

Moreover, the verse, quite specifically, asks Muslims not to take Al-Yahood (Jews) and Al-Nasaraa (Christians) as allies. “Al” in Arabic refers to something or someone specific. In other words, the passage is about specific group of Jews and Christians., and not about all Jews and all Christians of all times. That is a big generalization, and a mis representation of the teachings of the Qur’an.

Similarly, the same ‘Al’ is also used when referring to Arabs. If we were to assume that Al- in 5:51 refers to all Jews and all Christians, we have to then assume the following verse condemns all Arabs-which is of course not the case.

Arabs-some are good, some bad

The Arabs of the desert are the worst in unbelief and hypocrisy, and most fitted to be in ignorance of the command which Allah has sent down to His Messenger: But Allah is All-knowing, All-Wise. 9:97

But some of the desert Arabs believe in God and the Last Day, and look on their payments as pious gifts bringing them nearer to God and obtaining the prayers of the Messenger. Surely it shall be means of nearness for them. Soon will God admit them to His Mercy: for God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. 9:99

Not all of them were alike:

The Qur’an actually praises Jews and Christians in several places.

O’ children of Israel! Remember My favors which I bestowed upon You; that I exalted you above all other nations.2:47 and 2:122

And there are, certainly, among the People of the Book, those who believe in God, in the revelation to you, and in the revelation to them, bowing in humility to God: They will not sell the Signs of God for a miserable gain! For them is a reward with their Lord, and God is swift in account. 3:199

Not all of them are alike: Of the People of the Book are a portion that stand (for the right): They rehearse [recite] the Signs [revelations] of God all night long, and they prostrate themselves in adoration. They believe in God and the last day, and they enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong and they strive with one another in hastening to good deeds, and those are among the good. And whatever good they do, they shall not be denied it, and God knows those who guard (against evil). (As for) those who disbelieve, surely neither their wealth nor their children shall avail them in the least against God; and these are the inmates of the fire; therein they shall abide. 3:113–116

Among the People of the Book are some who, if entrusted with a hoard of gold, will (readily) pay it back; others, who, if entrusted with a single silver coin, will not repay it unless you remain firm in demanding, because, they say, ‘there is no call on us (to keep faith) with these Gentiles’, and they tell a lie against God, and (well) they know it. Yea, whoever fulfills his promise and guards (against evil)—then surely God loves those who guard (against evil). (As for) those who take a small price for the covenant of God and their own oaths—surely they shall have no portion in the hereafter, and God will not speak to them, nor will He look upon them on the day of resurrection nor will He purify them, and they shall have a painful chastisement. 3:75–77

Breaking bread together and marrying people of the book is allowed

Not only does the Quran NOT prohibit friendship with Jews and Christians, it actually allows marrying them! Moreover, ‘the food of the People of the Book is also made lawful’ refers to social gatherings and breaking bread together.

Today all good clean things have been made lawful for you; and the food of the People of the Book is also made lawful for you and your food is made lawful for them. Likewise, marriage with chaste free believing women and also chaste women among the People who were given the Book before you is made lawful for you, provided that you give them their dowries and desire chastity, neither committing fornication nor taking them as mistresses. 5:5

And the Qur’an commands Muslims to dialogue with Jews and Christians in the best manners.

Do not argue with the People of the Book except in the best manner—except for those wicked amongst them, and say: “We acknowledge what was revealed to us and in what was revealed to you; Our God and your God is the same. To Him we peacefully surrender.”29:46

Muslims don’t have monopoly on paradise

Contrary to popular belief, Muslims do not have a monopoly on the hereafter and salvation. In fact, Jews and Christians, much like any other faith, are promised paradise should they believe in One God and act righteously, much like the commands for Muslims. Verses 2:62 and 5:69 are strikingly similar.

Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve. The Qur’an 2:62

Praise for the Christians and followers of Jesus

Then We sent Our messengers in their footsteps and followed them with Jesus, the son of Mary, and gave him the Gospel. We placed in the hearts of those who followed him kindness and mercy.The Qur’an 57:27

“[Mention] when Allah said, ‘O Jesus, indeed I will take you and raise you to Myself and purify you from those who disbelieve and make those who follow you superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection. Then to Me is your return, and I will judge between you concerning that in which you used to differ’” The Qur’an 3:55

Torah and Gospels are also super critical

Muslims and Non Muslims have pointed out to numerous passages that are super-critical of the Jews, and to lesser extent, the Christians.

I don’t disagree with that assertion.

The Qur’an does indeed criticize Jews and Christians. But it does not criticize all Jews and all Christians. And certainly not all Jews and all Christians of all times- as a group. It is also of note that much of the criticism of Jews in the Qur’an is addressed to the Israelites who accompanied Moses out of Egypt, and their frequent grumblings and their transgression. Additionally, it is critical of the ones at the time of Prophet Muhammad who were hypocritical and/or plotting against the young budding Muslim community in Medina, who were put at risk of being extinct before flourishing as an Umma.

One can easily argue that the Torah has used more harsh words than the Qur’an. Here is a small sample.

The Lord told Moses, “Quick! Go down the mountain! Your people whom you brought from the land of Egypt have corrupted themselves.” Exodus 32:7

Then the Lord said, ‘I have seen how stubborn and rebellious these people are. Now leave me alone so my fierce anger can blaze against them, and I will destroy them.’ Exodus 32:9–10

Then the Lord said to Moses and Aaron, “How long must I put up with this wicked community and its complaints about me? Yes, I have heard the complaints the Israelites are making against me. Now tell them this: ‘As surely as I live, declares the Lord, I will do to you the very things I heard you say. You will all drop dead in this wilderness!…Numbers 14:26-29

Jesus’ criticism of temple leadership, and calling them ‘snakes and sons of vipers’.

The criticism of the Jews is not limited to the Qur’an and the Torah. The Gospels talk about the transgression of the Israelites in much the same way, reminding them of their transgressions, including killing of their prophets. Chapter 23 of Matthews is about Jesus’ severe criticism of the temple leaders at the time.

What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you build tombs for the prophets your ancestors killed, and you decorate the monuments of the godly people your ancestors destroyed. Then you say, “If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would never have joined them in killing the prophets.” But in saying that, you testify against yourselves that you are indeed the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. Go ahead and finish what your ancestor started. Snakes! Sons of vipers! How will you escape the judgment of hell? Matthew 23:29–33

Final Thoughts

To be clear, the Qur’an indeed is often very critical of Jews and Christians. But so are Torah and the Gospels. I have not quoted the critical verses from the Qur’an here since most people are familiar with them and these are frequently quoted by many to show that the Qur’an ‘promotes hatred towards Jews and Christians’.  But if we study the whole Qur’an, we will find that, while it does not sugar coat the bad deeds of anyone, including Muslims, (God Almighty does not need to be politically correct) it often praises Jews and Christians- anyone who meets the criteria of good deeds as set forth by the Almighty.

As Muslims, we cannot generalize, and put all Jews and Christians in the same box ‘because the Qur’an is critical of them’. In fact we should be the last to generalize and stereotype a whole religion and group of people, much the same way we don’t want to be stereotyped. (Remember the golden rule?)

We don’t like it when the passages from the Qur’an are taken out of context. But we should not be doing the same to twist the meaning of the Qur’anic passages to fit into our pre-existing views and biases. We cannot look at a few passages to draw conclusions, and instead need to take a deeper look at the entire corpus before making any conclusions to have a more balanced, more accurate view on a topic.