Archive for the ‘Miracles, Myths, Mistakes and Matters’ Category

“…miracle is: that what appears impossible to man is possible for God.”^[1]

7:203. When you do not produce a miracle [Arabic: biāyatin^[2] – a Sign] that they demand, they say, “Why not ask God for it?” Say, "I simply follow and convey what is revealed to me from my Lord." These verses are the enlightening miracle from your Lord, the guidance and grace for those who accept them. [emphasis added]

7:204. When the Qur’an is read, listen to it with full attention [to comprehend it], and listen to it silently, that you may receive mercy [of a miraculous and blissful understanding and deeper insight].^[3]

Miracles as commonly understood are based upon ‘supernatural’ events that allegedly were witnessed by everyone else and oddly not reported by the actual performer of that miracle. It is the ‘supernatural’ aspect of an alleged miracle which is usually put forth as the basis of truth and an implied argument for existence of God as if God is bereft of a primary proof and needs secondary proofs for His existence.

… what miracle can be more wonderful than human thought? If human thought cannot satisfy persons of the existence of God, how can any miracle?^[4]

The God of Islam does not need ‘supernatural’ miracles to prove His existence. Miracles can only prove a physical aspect but He is non-physical. On the contrary, the logic in Qur’ân is a manifest proof of Him. Such a God is experienced through human thought, contemplation and seeking. On a physical and moral plane He is experienced in our own persons and in our daily lives by observing His attributes at play in the world we live in:

51:20. There are signs on the earth for the people of knowledge and assured faith.

51:21. And (you have signs) in your own persons. Have you no eyes to perceive^[5]

One common theme in all such reported miracles is that they defy the laws of physics as if physics is ungodly and is supposed to disprove God. The proponents of miracles in their advocacy forget that laws of physical universe are made by none other than God Himself. Under Unity of creation, all moral, spiritual and physical laws are in perfect harmony free of any mutual conflict. To justify the miracles, the proponents fail to realize that the alleged miracles could only happen if their God broke His own laws willy-nilly, a laughable preposition. The proponents of miracles will also agree that breaking of law is commonly called as kufr, and the breaker a kafir, be it by breaking the physical law of gravity by jumping from a height and breaking one’s leg or indulging in a moral turpitude. Does God break his own Laws? Not so:

10:64. …There is no changing the words of Allâh; …^[6]

Even though human understanding of laws of physics is still evolving, but such an emerging awareness is incremental where each newer theory is based upon the previously validated laws. A phenomenon does not have to be ‘supernatural’ to be called a miracle; rather the miracle is the outcome of an otherwise non-plausible set of events surrounding the occurrence of that miracle. Miraculous outcomes as laid out in Qur’ân are the outcome of the loggerhead questions in which moral laws trump the physical laws. For example, every law known to man governing physical strength, organizational numbers, economic assets, logistics and resources, social pressures and political alliances, which are needed for success of any system, they were one and all working against Prophet Muhammad. His message had not the remotest chance to succeed, but it did. Now that is a miracle. Just like a physicist who discovers (not creates) laws of physics by experimentation, so does a prophet brings to fore the moral laws by actually living them and history reports the manifestation of those laws which by any secular analysis are miracles. These miracles of prophets are not a transient awe of and illusionist but remain as a working model of virtuous success expected to be repeated in one’s own struggles because the moral and spiritual laws are not the sole prerogative of a prophet rather they exist for the whole mankind.

Whether the supposed ‘supernatural’ events happened or not are not the focus of discussion in this book. Everything and every event in the universe in natural, but is only ‘supernatural’ to the mind of the novice and ignorant. What this book tries to refute are the physics defying details of those events, evidence of which is not found in Qur’ân. Whereas, Qur’ân is full of miracles of ‘extraordinary’ events that otherwise were not possible in the historical context of their occurrence. Miracles in Qur’ân are not physics defying but definitely history setting for their impact that we see in survival of Noah; escape of Abraham from his persecutions; destruction of the pharaoh and exodus of Moses, Aaron and Israelites from Egypt; survival of Jonah from a drowning death; disappearance of Jesus, a convicted man from the midst of Roman Empire; Kaaba remaining intact despite the onslaught on it by a mighty army with elephants and success of Prophet Muhammad despite all odds, to name a few.

The key to understanding miracles from within Qur’ân is for the readers to remove from their minds the historical hearsay. Instead of finding from within Qur’ân the ‘supernatural’ rather one must seek the ‘extraordinary’ events that it brings to light as an example of survival of its truth both in the past and for the reader in the present. It is this assurance of ‘extraordinary’ which gives basis for message of Qur’ân and the principles and laws that it defines which must be used for future course of one’s life individually and for the society collectively. The miraculous end result despite all odds of one standing for the cause of truth, honesty, bravery, patience, perseverance, chastity, equity, equality, charity, morality and justice are at times nothing short of a miracle that otherwise might defy the ordinary rationale and a jaded view that is influenced and enticed by power and the might of the transgressing forces in the society.

“Even today these miracles happen in the sense that, not necessarily an individual, but the cause of truth is always rescued by Allah from destruction by its opponents.”^[7]

Qur’ân even rejects the notion of Miracles or supernatural ‘signs’ as a means to convince the non-contemplating skeptic:

6:109. And they swear by Allâh their most solemn oaths that if there comes to them a (particular) sign they would invariably believe in it. Say, `'(Not to speak of a single sign) there are indeed many signs with Allâh, but what is there to assure you that when that (sign) comes, even then, they will not believe.'

6:110. We shall confound their hearts and their eyes, since they did not believe in it (-God's signs) in the first instance, and We shall leave them alone wandering blindly in their transgression.

6:111. Even if We should send down the angels to them, and the dead should speak to them, and even if We should bring all things together face to face (to them), they would not believe unless Allâh had (enforced) His will. The thing is that most of them persist in ignorance. ^[8]

Objectively, the ‘supernatural’ miracles attributed to Qur’ân have their roots from outside of the Qur’ân. Qur’ân is then erroneously used as a validation of the commonly pervading myths in the minds. Vain efforts are made to justify mythology from Qur’ân. This slippage is usually the outcome in interpreting of references in Qur’ân to some event in history, but the soothsayers instead of using the linguistics of Qur’ân for the ‘extraordinary’ instead seek it for the ‘supernatural’ reasons. This folly is mostly due to lack of understanding of the use of metaphor in the Book. This misunderstanding shall be removed by various examples in the chapters that follow in current section.

[1] 'Ahmadiyya view of miracles in the Quran' – Reply to an objection, by Dr. Zahid Aziz., The Light & Islamic Review. July–September 2003, Volume 80, Number 3. http://www.muslim.org/light/light033.htm#3
[2] Âyatun – Sign; Apparent sign; Mark; Indication; Message; Evidence; Proof, Miracle; Communication; Verse of the Holy Qur’ân (as each of which is a miracle); Previous revelation; Monument; Lofty building that should acquire renown as a sign of greatness. It properly signifies any apparent thing inseparable from a thing not equally apparent so that when one perceives the former, he perceives the other which he cannot perceive by itself, e.g."The party came out with their whole company." Dictionary of The Holy Quran, (c) 2010, Abdul Mannan Omar, p. 38.
[3] Al-Araaf – The Height of Discernment: Shabbir Ahmed.
[4] 'Muhammad The Sign of God' by Shaikh M. H. Kidwai, Islamic Review & Muslim India, p. 521, Vol. V, No. 12, December 1917, The Mosque, Woking, Surrey, England.
[5] Al-Dhâriyât – The Scatters: Nooruddin
[6] Yûnus – Jonah: Nooruddin
[7] 'Ahmadiyya view of miracles in the Quran' – Reply to an objection, by Dr. Zahid Aziz., The Light & Islamic Review. July–September 2003, Volume 80, Number 3. http://www.muslim.org/light/light033.htm#3
[8] Al-Anam – The Cattle: Nooruddin

“…sacrifice means that you lose something which you possessed so that you then have to undergo hardship and loss because of that deprivation.”^[2]

One of the prevalent myths is that Prophet Abraham had repeating dreams to sacrifice his dearest thing. Abraham believed that these dreams are a vision from God. Therefore he complies by sacrificing his various domesticated animals herds, but the dreams keep recurring, till he realizes that his dearest thing is his first born Ismail, who by then had grown up probably into his early teens. Abraham first shares his dream with his wife Hagar and with her consent divulges it to his son, who in turn being an obedient one obliges to be ‘slaughtered’ to the wish of God. Both father and son while on their way to the altar are dissuaded by Satan three times from their ‘holy’ mission. Each time, Abraham throws stones towards Satan to deter its pursuit. When both father and son are at the altar, Abraham covers the face of his son, Ismail and just before he could be slaughtered God commands Abraham to stop, that his sacrificial intention and effort has been accepted, and a ram instead replaces Ismail for the sacrifice. Ever since, the followers of Abraham and Ismail and later the pagan Arabs kept the symbolic sacrificial tradition alive. This practice continued after advent of Prophet Muhammad and is religiously followed in Islam to this date. Essentially, on the day of Eid-ul-Adha, at end of the Hajj, animals are sacrificed to commemorate the sacrifice of Abraham and Ismail. While performing Hajj, the pilgrims throw pebbles at the three symbols of Satan who had tried to deter the sacrificial act of Abraham.

The above account is eerily similar to that of Torah in which it is Isaac instead of Ismail. Abrahamic tradition of sacrifice as commonly believed begets the fundamental question – are Muslims following Torah in terms of a nonsensical slaughter of a son at the hands of his father; that too in the name of a God who needs offerings like Jews, Christians, Hindus and other religions; and above all the sacrifice of human flesh like gods of Incas, Aztecs, Mayas and others^[3]; and all for what moral purpose? Does it not present a moral paradox that Satan was ethically right for the first and only time when it tried to stop Abraham, the prophet from a parricide? The account of Issac’s sacrifice in Torah is as follows:

Genesis 22:1-19. Sometime later God tested Abraham. He said to him, “Abraham!” “Here I am,” he replied. Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.” Early the next morning Abraham got up and loaded his donkey. He took with him two of his servants and his son Isaac. When he had cut enough wood for the burnt offering, he set out for the place God had told him about. On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place in the distance. He said to his servants, “Stay here with the donkey while I and the boy go over there. We will worship and then we will come back to you.” Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and placed it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two of them went on together, Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, “Father?” “Yes, my son?” Abraham replied. “The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?” Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” And the two of them went on together. When they reached the place God had told him about, Abraham built an altar there and arranged the wood on it. He bound his son Isaac and laid him on the altar, on top of the wood. Then he reached out his hand and took the knife to slay his son. But the angel of the Lord called out to him from heaven, “Abraham! Abraham!” “Here I am,” he replied. “Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.” Abraham looked up and there in a thicket he saw a ram caught by its horns. He went over and took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son. So Abraham called that place The Lord Will Provide. And to this day it is said, “On the mountain of the Lord it will be provided.” The angel of the Lord called to Abraham from heaven a second time and said, “I swear by myself, declares the Lord, that because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies, and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.” Then Abraham returned to his servants, and they set off together for Beersheba. And Abraham stayed in Beersheba. ^{[New International Version]}

Among Muslims the misunderstanding of the said sacrifice emanates from misread of the following verses of Quran:

37:100. (And he prayed,) `My Lord! grant me (an issue who is) of the righteous.'

37:101. So We gave him the good tidings of (the birth of) a wise and forbearing son.

37:102. Now, when that (son, Ismâîl) was (old enough) to work along with him, (his father, Abraham) said, `My dear son! I have seen in a dream that I sacrifice you [Arabic: adhbaḥuka]. So consider (it and tell me) what you think (of it).' (The son) said, `My dear father! do as you are commanded. If Allâh will you will find me of the calm and steadfast.'

37:103. Now, (it so happened) when both of them submitted themselves (to the will of God) and he (- Abraham) had laid him (- Ismâîl) down on his forehead [–an act of prayer, submission],

37:104. We called out to him (saying), `O Abraham!

37:105. `You have already fulfilled the vision.' That is how We reward those who perform excellent deeds

37:106. That was obviously a disciplinary test (crowned with a mighty reward,)

37:107. And a great sacrifice was the ransom with which We redeemed him (- Ismâîl)..^[4]

These verses bring to fore certain aspects in Quran that when clarified individually and then understood collectively expunge from minds the Torah like story of a potential human sacrifice.

The aspects touched upon by the incidence of Abraham and Ismail in Quran (verses 37:102-107) are – concept and spirit of sacrifice, test of Abraham, visions of Prophets, the actual sacrifice of Abraham and his family.

Concept of Sacrifice in nature:

The nature as understood by human experience provides a working example of concept of sacrifice outlined in Quran. The inanimate soil sacrifices itself to the plants, which in turn present themselves to animals. Each step of the way, a lower form in nature transforms into next higher and complex formation, till the time that it reaches the human stage. Not an atom is wasted in this food chain. Each atom becomes part of an ever intricate biochemistry and physiology. The inorganic elements transform into organic molecules. The inorganic carbon atoms rearrange themselves into carbon chains, benzene rings and a carboniferous life evolves along the way that has ever increasing volitional quality to it.

Concept of Sacrifice in humans:

Once through sacrifice lower forms reach the human stage, the only higher stages thereafter are the stages of human physicality, morality and spirituality. On the incremental ladder the next higher stage in humans is only achieved when one volitionally sacrifices the previous lower stage. Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in his landmark lecture while answering certain questions brings to fore the said stages and their transitions outlined in Quran as follows^[5]:

The first question relates to the physical, moral and spiritual conditions of man. The Quran observes this division by fixing three respective sources for this threefold condition of man, that is, three springs out of which these three conditions flow. The first of these in which the physical conditions of man take their birth is termed the nafs al-ammara which signifies the "uncontrollable spirit", or the "spirit prone to evil". Thus the Word God says: "Surely (man's) self is wont to command (him to do) evil"–12:53.

It is characteristic of the nafs al-ammara that it inclines man to evil, tends to lead him into iniquitous and immoral paths, and stands in the way of his attainment of perfection and moral excellence. Man's nature is prone to evil and transgression at a certain stage in his development, and so long as he is devoid of high moral qualities, this evil nature is predominant in him. He is subject to this state so long as he does not walk in the light of true wisdom and knowledge, but acts in obedience to the natural inclinations of eating, drinking, sleeping, becoming angry or excited, just like the lower animals.

As soon, however, as he frees himself from the control of animal passions and, guided by reason and knowledge, he holds the reins of his natural desires and governs them instead of being governed them when a transformation is worked in his soul from grossness to virtue he then passes out of the physical state and is a moral being in the strict sense of the word.

The source of the moral conditions of man is called, in the terminology of the Quran, the nafs al-lawwama, or the "self-accusing soul": "Nay, I swear by the self-accusing spirit !"^[6]–75:2.

This is the spring from which flows a highly moral life and on reaching this stage, man is freed from bestiality. The swearing by the self-accusing soul indicates the regard in which it is held. For, the change from the disobedient to the self-accusing soul being a sure sign of its improvement and purification makes it deserving of approbation in the sight of the Almighty.

Lawwama literally means "one who reproves severely", and the nafs al-lawwama (self-accusing soul) has been so called because it upbraids a man for the doing of evil deeds and strongly hates up-bridled passions and bestial appetites. Its tendency, on the other hand, is to generate noble qualities and a virtuous disposition, to transform life so as to bring the whole course and conduct of it to moderation and to restrain the carnal passions and sensual desires so as to keep them within due bound.

Although, as stated above, the "self-accusing soul" upbraids itself for its faults and frailties, yet it is not the master of its passions, nor is it powerful enough to practice virtue exclusively. The weakness of the flesh has the upper hand sometimes, and then it stumbles and falls down. Its weakness then resembles that of a child who does not wish to fall but whose legs are sometimes unable to support him. It does not however, persist in its fault, every failure bringing a fresh reproach. At this stage, the soul is anxious to attain moral excellence and revolts against disobedience which is the characteristic of the first, or the animal stage, but does, notwithstanding its yearning for virtue, sometimes deviate from the line of duty.

The third or the last stage in the onward movement of the soul is reached on attaining to the source of all spiritual qualities. The soul at this stage is in the words of the Quran, the nafs al-mutmainna, or the "soul at rest": "O soul that art at rest, return to thy Lord, well-pleased, well-pleasing, so enter among My servants, and enter My Garden! – 89:27-30.

The soul is now freed from all weaknesses and frailties and is braced with spiritual strength. It is perfectly united with God and cannot live without Him. As water flows with great force down a slope and on account of its great mass and the total absence of all obstacles, dashes down with irresistible force, so does the soul at this stage, casting off all trammels, flow unrestrained towards its Maker.

It is further clear from the words "soul that art at rest with thy Lord, return to Him" that it is in this life, and not after death, that this great transformation is worked and that it is in this world, and not elsewhere, that access to paradise is granted to it. Again, as the soul has been commanded to return to its Master, it is clear that such a soul finds its support only in its Supporter. The love of God is its food, and it drinks deep at this fountain of life and is therefore, delivered from death. The same idea is expressed elsewhere: "He is indeed successful who causes it to grow, and he indeed fails who buries it" – 91:9-10.

In short, these three states of the soul may be called the physical, the moral and the spiritual states of man, Of these, the physical state that in which man seeks to satisfy the passions of the flesh is most dangerous when the passions run riot, for it is then that they deal a death-blow to the moral and spiritual qualities of man, and hence this state has been termed the "disobedient spirit” in the Holy Word of God.

Concept of animal sacrifice:

Islam means submission. All rituals in Islam including daily prayers, fasting, hajj (pilgrimage) and zakat (charity) essentially formalize this ‘submission’ of hearts in outward physical actions as well because body and soul are inseparable and mutually influence each other. This relationship between body and soul can be experienced in a common example – when one’s “soul cries” it manifests itself physically as tearful eyes; a smile “warms a heart.” Similarly, five time daily prayers rekindle the prayerful state that a Muslim lives throughout the day. In this formalization, prostration in payer is the penultimate act of physical submission which naturally creates humbleness of soul before the Almighty. On the reverse, a humbled soul naturally yearns for a physical prostration as well i.e. both body and soul are in total submission. In the same manner, the sacrifice of an animal is symbolic formalization of sacrificing the animal-self as discussed in the lecture above. Further, the sacrificed animal is to be consumed for good of mankind and not be offered as a burnt offering like in Torah:

22:36. We have made the sacrificial animals among the Symbols appointed by Allâh for you. They are of immense good to you. So (whenever you offer them for sacrifice do it) in the name of Allâh (while they) stand (drawn up) in lines. When their flanks collapse, (on being slaughtered), eat from (the meat of) them and feed him who is (in need but) contented and him who begs. In this way We have made these (animals) subservient to you so that you may render thanks.

Unlike Torah, the sacrifice of an animal in Quran is NOT done to please God, Who is beyond all imagined needs. Once the animal-self is annihilated only then can the righteousness take root in oneself:

22:37. It is neither their flesh nor their blood (of these sacrifices) which matters to Allâh but it is guarding against evil and devotion to duty on your part that matters to Him…There does not reach Allah their flesh nor their blood, but to Him is acceptable righteousness…^[7]

Spirit of Sacrifice:

“Quran presented the true concept of sacrifice. It is that God does not need anything from man. The Quran says:

“He (God) feeds and is not fed” (6:14),

“I (God) desire no sustenance from them, nor do I desire that they should feed Me.” (51:57)

What God wants is for you to sacrifice your lower and material desires for a higher purpose. We all want to have physical comforts and to satisfy our material desires, but God tells us that for our moral and spiritual progress, for the betterment of our character, and to make us real human beings, there are times when we must sacrifice, willingly and voluntarily, some of our material possessions for a good cause.

The sacrifice of the animal that is carried out is an expression of our willingness to sacrifice our own animal desires. The Quran clearly says that it is not the flesh nor the blood of the animal that reaches God, but the dutifulness on your part. The sacrifice is accepted if it leads you to be more dutiful, to make a sacrifice of your own self and not of just the animal.” ^[8]

Test of Abraham by God:

While trying to impress upon believers the heart wrenching test and obedience of Abraham and Ismail to God, the synthesized story creates contradictions of its own. For example:

Firstly, it begets a fundamental question, i.e. did not God know the depths of the minds of Abraham and Ismail for which He allegedly had to put them to test for such an inhuman effort? Whereas, on the contrary Quran states:

35:38. Verily, Allâh knows the hidden realities of the heavens and the earth. He knows full well the innermost secret of the minds (of the people).^[9]

64:4. He knows whatever lies in the heavens and the earth and He knows what you conceal and what you do publicly. Allâh knows the innermost thoughts of the hearts.^[10]

Secondly, to begin with, was not Ismail an innocent potential victim? Whereas, Quran forbids victimizing the innocent and no one can be killed unless for the sake of justice, a condition that does not fit in case of Ismail:

6:151. Say, `…(Allâh has also enjoined upon you that you) … that you kill no soul which Allâh has made sacred, except in the cause of justice.’ This has He enjoined you with, so that you may (learn to) abstain (from evil).^[11]

Thirdly, planning to kill an innocent is contrary to character of Abraham, because according to Quran even a follower of Abraham is a doer of good to others, and the doer of good to others does not kill the innocent:

4:125. And who is better in faith than one who submits his whole attention to Allâh and he is a doer of good to others and follows the religion of Abraham, the upright? And Allâh had taken Abraham for a special friend.^[12]

Fourth, for Ismail, a future prophet with his own subsequent mission of a life full of sacrifice, for him to accede to his own killing without a cause, it runs contrary to injunction of Quran where there is a clear commandment against self-immolation:

2:195. … do not cast yourselves to destruction with your own hands…^[13]

Fifth, for Abraham to kill his own innocent son would be violation of Divine will:

4:29. O you who believe…do not kill your people…^[14]

Sixth, such an infantile test to kill one’s innocent son does not fit the man of a high stature and a prophet of the like of Abraham who had already passed much greater tests of putting his own personal life at risk for his mission of prophet-hood at the hands of Nimrod and the clergy in Mesopotamia. Quran confers the status of Imam to Abraham for good of the people, which includes the good for his own son Ismail as well. By any moral standards, killing of an innocent son is not good:

2:124. (Recall) when his Lord put Abraham to test with certain commandments, so he carried them out. (God) said, `Verily, I will make you an Imâm (- a religious leader) for the good of the people.' (Abraham) said (inquiringly), `And from among my progeny (too, do You promise to raise leaders)?' (God) said, `(Yes, but) My (this) covenant does not embrace the wrongdoers.'^[15]

Seventh, it is not even in the very nature of Abraham to imagine hurting anyone, be it his own son, as exemplified by the following verses where he even pleads for forgiveness of the transgressing people of Sodom and Gomorrah, who were soon to face the Divine wrath for their evil ways of life:

11:74. And when awe departed from Abraham and the good tidings came to him, he started pleading with Us for the people of Lot.

Abraham is a highly regarded Prophet in Quran which can be inferred from the following sample verses:

2:135. And they (the Jews and the Christians respectively) said, `Be Jews or be Christians, then you shall be on the right course.' Say, `Nay, but (ours is) the faith of Abraham, the upright, and he was not of the polytheist.'^[17]

3:67. Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but he was upright who had submitted (to the will of God), and he was not one of the polytheists.

3:68. The people nearest to Abraham are surely those who followed him (in the days of his prophethood) and this Prophet and those who believe (in him). Indeed, Allâh is the Patron of the believers.^[18]

6:161. Say, `As for me, surely my Lord has guided me to the exact straight path, the ever true faith, the creed of Abraham the upright, and he was not of the polytheists.' ^[19]

16:120. The truth of the matter is that Abraham was a paragon of virtue; obedient to Allâh, upright, and he was not of the polytheists,

16:121. Highly thankful for His favours. He chose him and guided him on to the exact right path.

16:122. And We granted him great success (and all comforts) of this life, and in the Hereafter he is most surely among the righteous.

Essentially, the message given to Prophet Muhammad is same that was given to Abraham, which makes sense in that spiritual and moral needs of whole human race are the same and the prophets came into the world to full fill these very needs of mankind:

2:136. Say, `We believe in Allâh and in that (the Qur'ân) which has been revealed to us, and what was revealed to Abraham, Ismâîl, Isaac, Jacob and his children, and what was given to Moses and Jesus and (we believe) in what was given to (all other) Prophets from their Lord. We (while believing in them) make no discrimination between anyone of them, and to Him do we submit ourselves entirely.'^[21]

Since the message is the same for all the prophets, then Abraham had to conform to same moral standards that Quran advocates. Unlike pagan rituals, human sacrifice has no place in Islam. Under Islamic standards it is totally absurd to even think of killing an innocent human and that too of children:

6:137. Just (as their associate-gods turned the polytheists away from Allâh) so did they make (even so monstrous a deed as) the killing of their children seem fair to a large number of the polytheists, with the result that they ruin them and that they obscure for them their religion. And if Allâh had (enforced) His will they would not have done so, so leave them alone and that what they forge.

6:140. Certainly, they suffer a loss (those) who kill their children in folly (and) ignorance, and forbid (themselves) what Allâh has provided for them; forging lies in the name of Allâh. They have indeed gone astray and they are not rightly guided.^[22]

It becomes obvious that the make believe slaughtering story creates contradiction against the spirit of Quran. Prophets are not tested by God by them killing others. They are tested by their missions that they undertake in which they themselves could be persecuted and even threatened to be killed by the opposition to their message:

5:70. Surely, We took a covenant from the Children of Israel and We sent Messengers to them. Every time there came to them a Messenger with that (Message) which did not suit their fanciful desires, (they defied him so that) some they treated as liars and others they sought to kill.^[22a]

Visions of Prophets:

Fact is that Prophets are recipients of visions, but there is no confusion for them in those visions, else it could be construed that the medium of Divine communication is flawed. A vision is essentially a prophecy about a future event and not a commandment that is conveyed in a revelation (wahy). A vision is allegorically veiled in symbols and it is within the capacity of prophets to interpret it for its actual meanings.

For example, in the following verses, Joseph while still young of age and much before his prophethood sees certain symbols in his vision that he cannot comprehend and discloses it to his father, Jacob (v. 12:4). Whereas, Jacob, the prophet, fully interprets his son’s prophecy (v. 12:5, 12:101), which finally fulfills later during the life of both when, Joseph, as a grown up and an established prophet is in the high office of the king and his brothers, who had earlier abandoned him, submit in his presence (v. 12:99-100):

12:4. (Remember the time) when Joseph said to his father, `My dear father! I have seen (in a vision) eleven stars and the sun and the moon. I saw them falling down prostrate (before God) because of me.'

12:5. He said, `My dear son! relate not your vision to your brothers lest they should intrigue against you, for satan is to a human being an enemy disuniting.

12:99. And when they all came to Joseph he betook his parents to himself for a restful lodging (making them his personal guests) and said, `Enter the city, if Allâh will, you shall always be safe and secure.'

12:100. And he took his parents to the royal court and they all fell down prostrate (before God) because of him and he said, `My father! this is the real fulfillment of my vision of old. My Lord has made it come true. He has been gracious to me, indeed, when he released me out of the prison and brought you from the desert. (This all happened) after satan had stirred up discord between me and my brothers. Surely, my Lord is Benignant to whomsoever He pleases. He it is, Who is the All-Knowing, the All-Wise.'

12:101. (Addressing his Lord, Joseph then said,) `My Lord! You have bestowed a part of the sovereignty upon me and it is You Who have imparted me true knowledge of the significance of (divine) sayings. O You, the Originator of the heavens and the earth! You alone are my Patron in this world and the Hereafter. Let it be that I die in a state of complete submission (to You), let it be that I join the righteous.'^[23]

Dreams of non-prophets can be confusing to the recipients because they are hidden in allegory and symbolism, for example, the king of Egypt at the time of Joseph saw one:

12:43. Now (it so happened that one day) the king said, `I saw (in a dream) seven fat kine which seven lean ones were eating, and seven green ears of corn and (as many) others withered. You nobles of the court! explain to me the real significance of my dream if you can interpret dreams.'

12:44. They said, `(These are) confused dreams and we do not know the interpretation of such confused dreams.'^[24]

For prophets, dreams are clear messages and prophecies that they can interpret not only for themselves but even for others that we see when Joseph interpreted king’s dream:

12:45 And of the two (prisoners) the one who had got his release and who (now) recalled (Joseph) to his mind after a long time, said, `I will inform you of its (true) interpretation, therefore send me (for the purpose to Joseph in prison).'

12:46 (So he [-the released prisoner] went to Joseph in the prison and exclaimed,) `Joseph, you, the man of truth, explain to us the (real) significance of (a dream in which) seven fat kine which seven lean ones devour; and (of) seven green ears of corn and as many others withered, so that I may return to the people and they may know (the interpretation and thereby your exalted position).'

12:47. He (- Joseph) replied, `You shall sow for seven years working hard and continuously and let what you have harvested remain in its ear excepting a little whereof you may eat.

12:48. `Then there shall follow seven (years of famine) of great severity (and) these (years) shall consume all the stores you have laid by in advance for them except a little which you may have preserved.

12:49. `Then, thereafter shall come a year of rains in which people shall be relieved and in which (season) they will press (fruit and seeds).'^[25]

Similarly, Abraham saw an impending sacrifice of his son which he shares with him. Once both are in agreement to undertake the mission that required to live in Makkah and build the Kaaba, both bow down before God in a thanksgiving prostration. This mission was no less than a lifelong undertaking and a sacrifice for the son to make the desolate Paran as home:

37:102. Now, when that (son, Ismâîl) was (old enough) to work along with him, (his father, Abraham) said, `My dear son! I have seen in a dream that I sacrifice you [Arabic: adhbaḥuka]. So consider (it and tell me) what you think (of it).' (The son) said, `My dear father! do as you are commanded. If Allâh will you will find me of the calm and steadfast.'

37:103. Now, (it so happened) when both of them submitted themselves (to the will of God) and he (- Abraham) had laid him (- Ismâîl) down on his forehead [–an act of prayer, submission],^[26]

Sacrifice of Abraham, Lot, Sarah, Hagar and Ismail – an example to be followed in spirit, individually and collectively:

As a prelude to the discussion about ‘sacrifice’ of Ismail, reader must keep in mind that Ismail was the grandson of Pharaoh of Egypt through his mother, Hagar (– the Egyptian princess^[27]). The mere notion to choose to live forever in the arid Makkah for the cause of monotheism instead of the royal abode that Ismail was entitled to by inheritance in Levant/Egypt^[27a], is no less than a lifelong sacrifice that he submitted to in fulfilment of vision of his father, Abraham. Thus Abraham ‘sacrificed’ his son and the dutiful son submitted to that ‘sacrifice.’

Similar to Jacob, Abraham, the prophet, too would have interpreted the vision that he saw about his son in some future sacrifice of theirs. If it was supposed to be the actual slaughter of Ismail in the dream or vision of Abraham, then at least in the said verses 37:102-107, it did not happen. In Quran there is no mention of slaughter, slaughtering instrument or the ram replacing the son for slaughter, whereas all of that we find only in Torah (Genesis 22:1-19). With this line of thinking a natural question arises about the verse 37:105. If it was a slaughter, then there is a contradiction for the mere fact that Quran states You have already fulfilled the vision (v. 37:105), which Abraham did not because the slaughter did not happen. The key words are already fulfilled the vision, i.e. Abraham had fulfilled some mission already.

37:106. That was obviously a disciplinary test (crowned with a mighty reward,)

37:107. And a great sacrifice was the ransom with which We redeemed him (- Ismâîl).^[28]

Obviously, both father and son did pass some disciplinary test with a great sacrifice that we see in secular history in which Abraham under Divine guidance and vision had to relocate from Palestine/Levant to the desert of Makkah (–Paran^[29]), to be specific mount Marwah (–Moriah^[30]), which is a hillock next to Kaaba, a desolate place. Ismail who is still young, consents to live permanently in Arabia with his parents and essentially sacrifices his whole life for the Divine Mission and to establish monotheism, an ever-lasting spiritual sacrifice with its virtuous returns to this day:

37:108. And We left behind him (- Abraham) among the succeeding generations (the noble salutation to invoke blessings upon him).^[31]

37:109. `Peace be upon Abraham!'

37:110. Thus indeed do We reward those who perform excellent deeds.^[32]

Yes! the succeeding generations after Abraham and his son Ismail and his wife Hagar, pay homage to the sacrifice of the noble family by travelling from far and wide, on foot, by air and by sea, and by any means of any transport they congregate in Makkah during the annual pilgrimage of Hajj in the manner this noble family walked from Levant to Makkah:

22:27. (Prophet!) call on people to make the Pilgrimage, they will come to you on foot and riding on all sorts of lean and fast (means of transport), coming from every distant deep highway (and mount track).^[33]

The pilgrims run between mounts Saffa and Marwah in the footsteps of the mother (–Hagar searching for water, back forth, for his infant, Ismail, till she finds the spring of Zamzam that flows till this day) and pray towards and circumambulate the Kaaba that the father and son later built as the everlasting symbol of Unity of God:

2:158. The Safa and the Marwah are truly among the signs of Allah*; so whoever makes a pilgrimage to the House or pays a visit (to it), there is no blame on him if he goes round them. And whoever does good spontaneously — surely Allah is Bountiful in

rewarding, Knowing.^[34]

22:26. And (recall the time) when We assigned to Abraham the site of the (Holy) House (bidding him), `Associate none with Me and keep My House clean and pure for those who (go round it to) perform the circuits and for those who stay in it (for worshipping Me) devotedly, and for those who bow down, (and) fall prostrate (in Prayer before Me).'^[35]

The pilgrims culminate their spiritual journey with a thanksgiving sacrifice and festivity of slaughtering of animals. It is the symbolic sacrifice for annihilation of the animal-self that they had been actively pursuing all along when they left the comforts of their homes, bore the anguish of travel for weeks and months and had been walking for days in and around Makkah under the scorching sun while covered in only two pieces of unstitched cloth and bowing in unison, shoulder to shoulder next to each other while eliminating all racial, gender or economic divides among themselves. Before the slaughter of animals, they also symbolically throw pebbles at the symbols of Satan to expunge its influences on the minds for the rest of their lives. Towards the end of the pilgrimage, men shave their heads to remove even the last vestige of difference that might emerge from outward appearance between people. The purpose of Hajj is to achieve the unity of mankind under Unity of God and a rebirth of the soul which is free of any blemishes and has a rekindled vigor centered on pristine monotheism in full manifestation of Kalima – ‘There is no God, but Allah, Muhamad is his Messenger’ in every sphere of their remaining lives and the lives they will influence.

This tradition to circumambulate the Kaaba is kept alive by Muslims all over the world when they pray five times daily towards the same House built by father and son. Those who cannot travel to Makkah for Hajj, they celebrate the traditions of the sacred family by performing special Eid-ul-Azha prayers in open grounds in large congregations and sacrifice animals that they enjoy in a festive mood and distribute them as charity. They invoke blessings on Abraham, his family and his creed in each set of daily prayers and the prayers they recite otherwise.

If for a moment we accept that Abraham misinterpreted his dream or the vision in the manner that is attributed to him of trying to actually slaughter his son, then is it not a shame that the whole Islamic world in history and the present had been celebrating, year after year, for fourteen hundred years the ‘mistake’ of the prophet’s interpretation of a vision? Nay, never can a human error of understanding and interpreting a prophecy be a celebrated institution. Rather, it is should be a moment to overlook the error of human judgment.

Yes! `Peace be upon Abraham!' (37:109) and his family who left behind for the world the ultimate personal examples of sacrifices when Abraham, his first wife Sarah and his nephew Lot first fled the persecution first from Iraq to Levant in fulfillment of a vision for establishment of monotheism that we see in the Judaic chain of prophets, the descendants of Abraham and Isaac.

Yes! `Peace be upon Abraham!' and his family – Abraham, his second wife Hagar who moved from Levant to barren Makkah and his first born Ismail who chose to live in Makkah, only with one purpose and that was to uphold and institute the pristine monotheism in letter and spirit and built its symbol, the Kaaba. The Kaaba was subsequently restored to represent perfect and universalized monotheism to this day and till the end of times by Prophet Muhammad, the descendent of Abraham and Ismail:

43:28. And he (- Abraham) made it (- the Divine Unity) a word to abide (as a permanent legacy) among his posterity, so that they might turn (to One God).^[36]

Of note is that first migration of Abraham from Mesopotamia to Levant was to escape persecution:

37:97-99. (His opponents) said, `Build up a pyre for him and throw him into the blazing fire.' Thus they designed a plan against him, but We made them to be the most humiliated. (Abraham) said, `I shall go where my Lord bids me. He will surely guide me right (to the path leading to success in my mission).'^[37]

It is this sacrifice of Abraham’s own sacrifice that Quran acknowledges that he had already done before the sacrificial life-mission of Ismail begins:

37:104. We called out to him (saying), `O Abraham!

37:105. `You have already fulfilled the vision.' That is how We reward those who perform excellent deeds.^[38]

The import of above verses is the next defining moment of Abraham’s ongoing efforts in service of monotheism when he is about to embark on his second mission that needed from his wife Hagar and their son Ismail the sacrifice of their comforts to establish Kaaba. It is the culmination of the vision of Abraham and actual lifelong sacrifice of his son Ismail that we see in the prayers of Abraham in which he acknowledges the settlement of his family in the barren valley of Makkah:

14:35. (Recall the time) when Abraham said, `My Lord, make this (would be) city (of Makkah) secure and a haven of peace, and keep me and my children away from worshipping idol.

14:37. `Our Lord! I have settled some of my children [excluding Sarah and Isaac who were left behind in Levant] in an uncultivable valley (of Makkah), in the vicinity of your Holy House. Our Lord! (I have done) so that they may observe prayer. Then make the hearts of the people incline towards them and provide them with fruits so that they may always give thanks.

14:39. `All true and perfect praise belongs to Allâh Who has given me despite my old age (two sons) – Ismâîl and Isaac. My Lord is of course, the Hearer of prayers.^[39]

Other views…

Refuting the myth of attempted slaughter described at beginning of this chapter, Shabbir Ahmed in his translation of Quran has the following narration:

37:100. (Abraham migrated to Syria and prayed), “My Lord! Grant me a healthy child.”

37:101. So We gave him the good news of a clement son (Ismail ).

37:102. And when he was old enough to strive along with him, Abraham said, “O My dear son! I have a vision that I must give you to a life of test and tribulation for a Noble cause (37:107). So look, what do you think?” He said, “O My father! Do what you are commanded. God willing, you will find me of the steadfast.” [Zibh and Zabh = Sacrifice = Disregard comfort for a Noble cause. Just as Qatl = To subdue, kill, fight, humiliate, bring low]

37:103. As both of them had surrendered themselves (to God), he made Ismail further submit in gratitude.[Contrary to popular tradition, Abraham never envisioned or intended to slaughter his son. God does not play games with His servants. Literal ‘forehead to ground’ = complete submission in gratitude]

37:104. We called unto him, “O Abraham!

37:105. You have already affirmed the vision. We – This is so – We must reward the doers of good.”

37:106. This was a trial, clear in itself. [Leaving the prestigious office of Chief Priesthood in Babylon and now the comfort of Syria for the wilderness of Makkah]

37:107. We exchanged his life for a Momentous Sacrifice. [Please notice here the absence of the Biblical and the traditional myth of a ‘ram’ sent from the heavens. Also, note that slaughtering of a sheep or goat, by no means, can be considered a Momentous Sacrifice. 14:37, 37:102]^[40]

As regards to pilgrims stoning the Satan during the Hajj, if for a moment it is accepted to be true that it is done in memory of Abraham stoning the Satan who tried to dissuade him from slaughtering his son, and prevented a murder, then at least in secular logic for once Satan and God were on the same side of morality, which is impossible. Shabbir Ahmed in his translation of the Quran explains it quite logically in Author's Note and Footnote to the Surah Feel:

… As we have seen in the history of the Empire of Sheba (Surahs An-Naml 27, Saba 34, and Qaaf 50), the Kingdom of Sheba had collapsed in 115 BC. They were overtaken by the Himairis who ruled until 300 CE when other tribes overtook the control of Yemen. They were in turn defeated by the Christian Kingdom of Ethipoia-Abyssinia when they invaded Yemen in 525 CE. Abrahah was then appointed Viceroy of Yemen. The Roman and the Abyssinian Christians longed for converting the idolaters of Arabia to Christianity. They also sought control of the trade routes between Arabia, Persia and the Western Roman Empire. They saw Ka’bah in Makkah as a hindrance to their imperialistic and religious designs. Abrahah, the Viceroy of Yemen made a smart move. Between 550 and 555 CE he built a gorgeous cathedral EKKLESIA in San’aa, Yemen, and invited people and neighboring countries to come for pilgrimage there instead of going to Makkah. When Ekklesia remained unpopular, Abrahah decided to invade Makkah and demolish the Ka’bah. Since he correctly anticipated the presence of hostile tribes en-route, he came up with a 60,000 Strong army aided by thousands of horses, camels and thirteen elephants … As Abrahah’s army approached Makkah, the Makkans who had been alerted by some travelers beforehand, saw flocks of birds that normally fly over caravans in search for food. The Makkans mounted the hills around and threw stones on the troops. The elephants, and in turn, other rides panicked and trampled the soldiers. This incident took place in 570 CE when the exalted Messenger was born. The event carried such significance that the Arabs, in their Calendar, marked it as the “Year of the Elephant” (‘Aam-il-Feel) as a point of reference in history… Three Arabs had guided Abrahah on his way to Makkah through the desert. The pre-Islamic Makkans humiliated the traitors and made out three statutes of them in today's plains of Mina outside Makkah. Then they used to stone those statues every year at the time of Pilgrimage. This ritual was 'Islamized' by Muslim historians naming them as three places where the 'Satan' tried to prompt Prophet Abraham to defy God's command to 'sacrifice' his son. And so, to this day during Pilgrimage, Muslims stone the three pillars calling them the Great, the Medium, and the Small Satan!

^[1] par·ri·cide: noun \ˈpa-rə-ˌsīd\
1[Latin parricida killer of a close relative, from parri- (perhaps akin to Greek pēos kinsman by marriage) + -cida -cide] : one that murders his or her father, mother, or a close relative
2[Latin parricidium murder of a close relative, from parri- + -cidium -cide] : the act of a parricide
Link: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parricide
^[2] “Sacrifice of Abraham” by Dr. Zahid Aziz, The Light & Islamic Review May – June 1998.
^[3] Human Sacrifice – Wikipedia. Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice
^[4] Al-Saffat – Those Ranging in Ranks: Nooruddin
^[5] “The Teachings of Islam, a Solution of Five Fundamental Religious Problems from the Muslim Point of View”, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, p. 1-2, translated into English by Maulana Muhammad Ali – It was read at the Great Religious Conference held at Lahore (Punjab) in December 1896 by Maulvi Abdul Karim. The paper discusses from a Muslim's point of view the five subjects selected for discussion by the conveners of the conference. These five subjects related to (1) the physical, moral and spiritual conditions of man, (2) the state of man in the after-life, (3) the real object of the existence of man and the means of its attainment, (4) the effect of actions in the present life and the life to come, and (5) the sources of Divine knowledge.- pages 22-27, 1968 Edition. Link: http://www.aaiil.org/text/books/mga/teachingsislam/teachingsislam1968.shtml
^[6] [footnote from original publication] I. That is, on every dereliction of duty or on the slightest act of disobedience, being conscious of having offended.
^[7] Al-Hajj – The Pilgrimage: Nooruddin
^[8] “Sacrifice of Abraham” by Dr. Zahid Aziz, The Light & Islamic Review May – June 1998.
^[9] Fatir – Originator: Nooruddin
^[10] Al-Taghâbun – Manifestation of Loss: Nooruddin
^[11]Al-Anam – The Cattle: Nooruddin.
^[12] Al-Nisa – The Women: Nooruddin
^[13] Al-Baqarah – The Cow: Muhammad Ali – Zahid Aziz
^[14] Al-Nisa – Women: Muhammad Ali – Zahid Aziz
^[15] Al-Baqarah – The Cow: Nooruddin
^[16] Hud – Hud: Nooruddin
^[17] Al-Baqarah – The Cow: Nooruddin
^[18] Al- Imran – The Family of Amran: Nooruddin
^[19] Al-Anam – The Cattle: Nooruddin.
^[20] Al-Nahl – The Bee: Nooruddin
^[21] Al-Baqarah – The Cow: Nooruddin
^[22] Al-Anam – The Cattle: Nooruddin.
^[22a] Al-Maidah – The Table Spread with Food: Nooruddin.
^[23] Yusuf – Joseph: Nooruddin
^[24] Yusuf – Joseph: Nooruddin
^[25] Yusuf – Joseph: Nooruddin
^[26] Al-Saffat – Those Ranging in Ranks: Nooruddin
^[27] Hagar: Family Connections—While the Bible gives us no record of Hagar’s genealogy, legend has supplied her pedigree, as being the daughter of Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, the same who coveted the possession of Sarah in vain. This legendary source affirms that the Egyptian princess became so attached to Sarah that she told her royal father that she would accompany her when she returned to Abraham. “What!” cried the king, “thou wilt be no more than a handmaid to her!” “Better to be a handmaid in the tents of Abraham than a princess in this palace,” the daughter replied.[Link: https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/all-women-bible/Hagar]
^[27a] Wikipedia: Levant [Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levant]
^[28] Al-Saffat – Those Ranging in Ranks: Nooruddin
^[29] Genesis 21:19-21. Then God opened her [–Hagar’s ] eyes and she saw a well of water. So she went and filled the skin with water and gave the boy ^[–Ishmael] a drink. God was with the boy as he grew up. He lived in the desert and became an archer. While he was living in the Desert of Paran[–Makkah], his mother got a wife for him from Egypt. ^{[New International Version]
[30]} Genesis 22:2. Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.” ^{[New International Version]
[31]} Al-Saffat – Those Ranging in Ranks: Nooruddin
^[32] Al-Saffat – Those Ranging in Ranks: Nooruddin
^[33] Al-Hajj – The Pilgrimage: Nooruddin
^[34] Al-Baqarah – The Cow: Muhammad Ali – Zahid Aziz[*Footnote: The Safa and the Marwah are two mountains near Makkah. They were the scene of Hagar’s running to and fro in quest of water when left alone with Ishmael in the wilderness. These two mountains now serve as two monuments of the reward which patience brought, and it is as a memorial to Hagar’s patience that they are now gone round by the pilgrims.]
^[35] Al-Hajj – The Pilgrimage: Nooruddin
^[36] Al-Zukhruf – The Ornaments: Noorudin
^[37] Al-Saffat – Those Ranging in Ranks: Nooruddin
^[38] Al-Saffat – Those Ranging in Ranks: Nooruddin
^[39] Ibrahim – Abraham: Nooruddin
^[40] As-Saffaat – Soldiers in Ranks: Shabbir Ahmed

Abraham – a Birdie or an Eagle?^[1]

Birds have been mentioned in various hues and for many reasons in Quran^[2]. The parable of Abraham being taught reformation and resurrection in verse 2:260 at times becomes problematic when read from ‘classical’ sources or from the discourses of advocates of such sources. One such non-quranic fantastic narrative is as follows:

Therefore, Ibrahim caught four birds, slaughtered them, removed the feathers, tore the birds to pieces and mixed the pieces together. He then placed parts of these mixed pieces on four or seven hills. Ibn `Abbas said, “Ibrahim kept the heads of these birds in his hand. Next, Allah commanded Ibrahim to call the birds to him, and he did as Allah commanded him. Ibrahim witnessed the feathers, blood and flesh of these birds fly to each other, and the parts flew each to their bodies, until every bird came back to life and came walking at a fast pace towards Ibrahim, so that the example that Ibrahim was witnessing would become more impressive. Each bird came to collect its head from Ibrahim’s hand, and if he gave the bird another head the bird refused to accept it. When Ibrahim gave each bird its own head, the head was placed on its body by Allah’s leave and power.”^[3]

Such an understanding as above besides being nonsensical, fails the fundamental test of Quran i.e. once dead in this world is dead for ever, be it a human or an animal. It contradicts Quran:

So, it begets one to explore the said verse 2:260 for its context and its purpose. The context encircles the ever pervasive debate between materialism and spiritualism. Materialism believes in the physical modalities and power alone for sustainability of nations, whereas the spiritualism and morality, the symbols of which are the prophets, consider the Divine guidance as the ultimate elixir for revival of the society. It all begins with Abraham, a prophet, in his debate with the king, the materialist:

Of note is that both Abraham and the king are using the same words in their argument, but with a difference, the meanings of those words are spiritual for the former and materialistic for the latter. For example, the implication of the fertility and desolation of the land for Abraham is the presence and the dearth of morality in a nation respectively. Whereas, for the king, it is actual fertility from water and fields that he can control. When Abraham challenges the king of the possibility of sun rising from the west, because he believes in such a capacity of his God, he essentially is speaking of spiritual and moral revival of the otherwise unexpected corners and quarters of the world, in the manner of sun which shines light and wakes people from their slumber, whereas the king is dumbfounded by his incapacity to do such a physical event. If in this parable there were a question in physical domain from Abraham, then he too would not had any answer if the king had made the claim first that he makes the sunrise from the east and could the God of Abraham raise it from the west? In summary, the materialists, even of our times, totally miss the purpose of a prophet and his message, which is none other than reformation of mankind, to bring them back from a morally dead state, heal them of their moral leprosy and blindness and make them spiritually soar like birds^[6].

Sustained moral reawakening can only come about from Divine guidance. Any efforts authored by man in this realm are short lived and inevitably create “Chasm of the Isms” (a separate chapter in this book – link). The rain in Quran is a metaphor for the Divine guidance that comes to humanity for its revival in a similitude of the fertility of an otherwise barren land, via the agency of prophets that were sent to each nation before the final and universal prophet, Prophet Muhammad^[7] and the Quran through him:

With Prophet Muhammad and general humanity as its audience, the subject matter of the verse 2:258 that was centered on Prophet Abraham continues in the next verse where example of another prophet, as evident by it’s opening words – ‘Or consider the case of’ being foretold, is quoted from history about revival of a nation after its wretchedness:

The above verse re-frames the argument of Abraham before the king in that Ezekiel, a (later) prophet when he sees the physical and moral desolation of Jerusalem and its people; he terms it as its death. He wonders if such a township and its people can be restored to their earlier resplendence. Thereafter, as an answer, Ezekiel has a vision with a prophecy spanning a hundred years when Dhul-Qarnain, the Cyrus II, another prophet will restore it – a hundred years after the initial destruction of Solomon's temple and dislodgment of Israelites to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar II and their subsequent sorry state. Since this was visualization into the future, the actual time of the visionary state is no more than a day or a part of a day that is confirmed by food and drink, and the donkey as they have escaped the action of time. It is the vision of Ezekiel^[10] which then foretold the revival of the apparently ‘dead’ Israelites i.e. the (dead) bones how We set them together and then clothe them with flesh.' ^[11] This vision in Book of Ezekiel 40:1-49 covers the rebuilding of Solomon's temple the second time, which was fulfilled subsequently because of Cyrus II who not only repatriated the Israelites to Jerusalem but also funded the reconstruction of the temple^[12]. No wonder, Cyrus II is labeled as a liberator and not as a conqueror in history and is entitled as Messiah by the Jews:

The Book of Ezra narrates a story of the first return of exiles in the first year of Cyrus; for this, Cyrus is addressed in the Jewish Tanakh as the "Lord's Messiah". Glorified by Ezra, and by Isaiah, Cyrus is the one to whom "Yahweh, the God of heaven" has given "all the Kingdoms of the earth"^[13]

The next verse 2:260 completes the subject matter of the previous two verses 2:258 and 2:259, where Abraham is explained the philosophy of how a prophet revives a nation, the main purpose of prophethood:

In the above verse, the parable of domestication of birds is used to explain the principle underlying the reformative efforts of a prophet. A non-domesticated or untamed bird, for example a falcon, by its very nature flees away when approached. Similar to the trainer, in order to overcome the initial tendency of a bird to avoid any training or in case of humans the reformation by a prophet, the prophet has to first attach or incline the audience to himself by kindness, love, affection and wisdom, that we read in the instructions to Prophet Muhammad in Quran as:

The above injunction of kind exhortation we also find for Moses and Aaron when they go before Pharaoh:

Gentleness and humility were also some of the attributes that Prophet Luqman of Ethiopia emphasized when he addressed his son:

Similarly, kindness of heart was fully embodied in Abraham who pleads for mercy on behalf of the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, when he was foretold of their doom:

The kind approach of a prophet and his followers is not limited to their co-believers but must extend to all humanity:

It is only after the followers of a prophet are attached to him, that when the prophet calls them to the way of the Lord for their revival – they will come to you swiftly in the manner of a tamed bird who is now trusting of its keeper (2:260). Because, if the prophet does not display such high morals, to friends or foes alike, then the very people he is sent to revive will disperse around him:

In summary, Abraham is asking God in verse 2:260 how to accomplish his mission of prophethood which is to revive a spiritually and morally dead nation to life. In reply, he is told to first attach and incline his people to himself. Thereafter, it is natural for the Divine guidance to flow without hindrance from the prophet to such attached people. This is the sole methodology for spread of Islam that is starkly visible in history for its proliferation by the personal example and conduct of ordinary sea traders from Arabia into Indonesia. Abraham's words can be prophetic in our times for the sun to rise from the west^[22] only if the torch bearers of Islam make use of the verse 2:260 by attaching their audience to them by an excellent personal example and when they call the people to the way of your Lord with wisdom and goodly and kind exhortation, and argue with them in the most pleasant and best manner (16:125).

P.S. Maulana Muhammad Ali in his Urdu translation and commentary of Quran^[23] deals with the said verses 2:258-260 with an in-depth view on etymology of the words and refutes nonsensical extra-Quranic views about these verses, including the alleged doubts attributed to Abraham and him mincing the birds etc.

[1] Birdie and Eagle are golf terms, used here as a disdain for the long shot and long winded legends that are hurled against Abraham to show that the birds allegedly dismembered by him miraculously came back to life.
[2]Reference to Birds in the Quran: by Dr. Basharat Ahmad English translation of an Urdu article that appeared in Basharat-e-Ahmadiyya, Vol. II, pp. 22–35. Link: http://aaiil.org/text/articles/bash/referencebirdsquran.shtml
[3]http://salaf-us-saalih.com/2009/11/28/four-birds-prophet-ibrahim-peace-be-upon-him/
[4] Al-Muminun – The Believers: Nooruddin
[5] Al-Baqarah – The Cow: Nooruddin
[6] Al-Maidah – The Table Spread with Food: Nooruddin. 5:110. (Again imagine) when Allâh said, `O Jesus, son of Mary! remember My blessing upon you and upon your mother, how I strengthened you with the holy revelation. You spoke to the people (when you were) in the cradle and when of old age, and how I taught you the Scripture and the wisdom and the Torah and the Evangel, and how you determined from clay the likeness of a bird by My leave, then you breathed into it (a new spirit) then it became a soaring being by My leave, and by My leave you absolved the blind, the leprous, and by My leave you raised the (spiritually or nearly) dead to life, and how I warded off the Children of Israel from (putting) you (to death). It was the time when you came to them with clear arguments, but those among them who disbelieved had said, "This is naught but a hoax cutting (us) off (from the nation)".'
[7]Al-Rum – The Byzantines: Nooruddin. 30:47. Indeed, We have already sent Messengers to their (respective) people before you, and they came to them with clear proofs. Then We punished those who had (denied their Apostles and) cut their ties (with God). And it is of course ever incumbent upon Us to help the believers.
30:48.It is Allâh alone who sends forth the winds and they raise (the vapours to form) a cloud which He spreads out in the sky as He will and sets it layer upon layer, and you see the rain falling from its midst. And no sooner does He cause it to fall on whom He will of His servants than they are filled with joy,
30:49. Though shortly before it was sent down upon them they were in a state of despondency.
30:50. Look, therefore, at the evidences of Allâh's mercy! how He breathes life into the earth (making it green and flourishing) after its (state of) death. Surely, He (it is), the same (God), Who will raise the dead to life (in the Hereafter), for He is the Possessor of power over every desired thing.
30:51. And if We send (another kind of blasting) wind and they see it turn yellow (for its having taken the form of punishment) they will even after that continue to disbelieve (for their being engrossed in evil doings).
30:52. And you cannot make the dead hear, nor can you make the deaf hear the call when they retreat turning their backs (on you),
30:53. Nor can you guide the blind out of their error. You can make only those hear who would believe in Our Messages and submit (to Us).
[8] Al-Tariq – The Night Visitant: Nooruddin
[9] Al-Baqarah – The Cow: Nooruddin
[10]Ezekiel 36: 1“Son of man, prophesy to the mountains of Israel and say, ‘Mountains of Israel, hear the word of the Lord……33 “‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: On the day I cleanse you from all your sins, I will resettle your towns, and the ruins will be rebuilt. 34 The desolate land will be cultivated instead of lying desolate in the sight of all who pass through it. 35 They will say, “This land that was laid waste has become like the garden of Eden; the cities that were lying in ruins, desolate and destroyed, are now fortified and inhabited.” 36 Then the nations around you that remain will know that I the Lord have rebuilt what was destroyed and have replanted what was desolate. I the Lord have spoken, and I will do it.’ 37 “This is what the Sovereign Lord says: Once again I will yield to Israel’s plea and do this for them: I will make their people as numerous as sheep, 38 as numerous as the flocks for offerings at Jerusalem during her appointed festivals. So will the ruined cities be filled with flocks of people. Then they will know that I am the Lord.”
[11]Ezekiel 37: 1 The hand of the Lord was on me, and he brought me out by the Spirit of the Lord and set me in the middle of a valley; it was full of bones. 2 He led me back and forth among them, and I saw a great many bones on the floor of the valley, bones that were very dry. 3 He asked me, “Son of man, can these bones live?” I said, “Sovereign Lord, you alone know.” 4 Then he said to me, “Prophesy to these bones and say to them, ‘Dry bones, hear the word of the Lord! 5 This is what the Sovereign Lord says to these bones: I will make breath enter you, and you will come to life. 6 I will attach tendons to you and make flesh come upon you and cover you with skin; I will put breath in you, and you will come to life. Then you will know that I am the Lord.’”…..10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and breath entered them; they came to life and stood up on their feet—a vast army. 11 Then he said to me: “Son of man, these bones are the people of Israel. They say, ‘Our bones are dried up and our hope is gone; we are cut off.’ 12 Therefore prophesy and say to them: ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: My people, I am going to open your graves and bring you up from them; I will bring you back to the land of Israel. 13 Then you, my people, will know that I am the Lord, when I open your graves and bring you up from them. 14 I will put my Spirit in you and you will live, and I will settle you in your own land. Then you will know that I the Lord have spoken, and I have done it, declares the Lord.’”
[12]Ezra 1: 1 In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, so that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom and also put it in writing: 2 “Thus says Cyrus king of Persia: The Lord, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and he has charged me to build him a house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah. 3 Whoever is among you of all his people, may his God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and rebuild the house of the Lord, the God of Israel—he is the God who is in Jerusalem. 4 And let each survivor, in whatever place he sojourns, be assisted by the men of his place with silver and gold, with goods and with beasts, besides freewill offerings for the house of God that is in Jerusalem.” 5 Then rose up the heads of the fathers' houses of Judah and Benjamin, and the priests and the Levites, everyone whose spirit God had stirred to go up to rebuild the house of the Lord that is in Jerusalem. 6 And all who were about them aided them with vessels of silver, with gold, with goods, with beasts, and with costly wares, besides all that was freely offered. 7 Cyrus the king also brought out the vessels of the house of the Lord that Nebuchadnezzar had carried away from Jerusalem and placed in the house of his gods. 8 Cyrus king of Persia brought these out in the charge of Mithredath the treasurer, who counted them out to Sheshbazzar the prince of Judah. 9 And this was the number of them: 30 basins of gold, 1,000 basins of silver, 29 censers, 10 30 bowls of gold, 410 bowls of silver, and 1,000 other vessels; 11 all the vessels of gold and of silver were 5,400. All these did Sheshbazzar bring up, when the exiles were brought up from Babylonia to Jerusalem.
Ezra 2: 1 Now these were the people of the province who came up out of the captivity of those exiles whom Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had carried captive to Babylonia. They returned to Jerusalem and Judah, each to his own town.…..64 The whole assembly together was 42,360, 65 besides their male and female servants, of whom there were 7,337, and they had 200 male and female singers. 66 Their horses were 736, their mules were 245, 67 their camels were 435, and their donkeys were 6,720. 68 Some of the heads of families, when they came to the house of the Lord that is in Jerusalem, made freewill offerings for the house of God, to erect it on its site. 69 According to their ability they gave to the treasury of the work 61,000 darics[a] of gold, 5,000 minas of silver, and 100 priests’ garments. 70 Now the priests, the Levites, some of the people, the singers, the gatekeepers, and the temple servants lived in their towns, and all the rest of Israel[c] in their towns. [English Standard Version]
[13] Wikipedia – Cyrus the Great – Legacy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrus_the_Great#Legacy
[14] Al-Baqarah – The Cow: Nooruddin
[15] Al-Nahl – The Bee: Nooruddin
[16] Al-Shuara – The Poets: Nooruddin
[17] Ta Ha – Perfect Man! be at Rest: Nooruddin
[18] Luqman – Luqman: Nooruddin
[19] Hud – Hud: Nooruddin
[20] Al-Mumtahanah – She that is to be Examined: Nooruddin
[21] Al-Imran – Family of Imran: Nooruddin
[22] Rise of Sun in the West and the Capture of Birds – Dr. Zahid Aziz, The Light & Islamic Review : Vol. 73; No. 4; Jul-Aug 1996; p. 7-10
[23] Bayan-ul-Quran by Maulana Muhammad Ali, footnotes 333-335 for verses 2:258-260. Link: http://aaiil.org/urdu/hq/pdf/holyquranpdf.shtml

Issue 1: Muslims should not take Jews and Christians as friends

The verse 5:51 is often quoted as a broad injunction for Muslims to disassociate themselves from any ties of friendship with all Jews and Christians. That is factually wrong and quoted out of context. The full context of the said verse is discussed below:

5:51. O you who believe! do not take these Jews and the Christians for allies [Arabic: ‘awliya’]. They are allies of one to another (when against you), and whoso from amongst you takes them for allies, is indeed one of them. Verily, Allâh does not guide the unjust people to attain their goal.^[1] [Emphasis added]

The emphasis in the said verse is on “these”, and its use, even if taken for its historical reasons, limits its addressed audience only to those who were among the opposing communities including Jews and Christians of Medina and its vicinity at the time when Muslims of Makkah had migrated to Medina to escape thirteen years of relentless persecution. “these” initially signed alliance treaties but were factually united against the city government of Muslims that was established in Medina under the Prophet. “these” are on record for aiding and abetting attacks on Medina by Makkans. In the use of identifier “these” Quran contextualizes “these” in the verses adjoining the said verse and throughout implores and makes a case to the hostile people of the Book to remedy their antagonism against Islam based upon their current behavior, their historically erroneous stance towards pervious prophets and for them to self-reflect in the virtuous teaching of their own Scriptures. Simultaneously, Quran also identifies for Muslims the attributes of followers of other religions which qualify them to be their friends and allies:

5:50. Do they seek to enforce the law of (the days of) ignorance? [i.e. when might was right, there were no human rights, women were mere property, slavery was rampant etc. before Islam]

Addressing the hidden alliances of the hypocrites of Medina who were strategically aligning on both sides of the divide, on one hand professing to be Muslims and wanting to be counted in their ranks, while on the other hand were colluding with the opponents as well, Quran states:

5:52. Now you shall see those [weak at heart Muslims] in whose hearts is a disease (of hypocrisy) vying one with another towards them (- the Jews and Christians [who were powerful and influential in Medina] to take them for allies). They [i.e. early Muslims of Medina, essentially the hypocrite faction] say, `We are afraid lest a misfortune should befall us [by not siding with the powerful that expectedly were to overcome the nascent Muslim community in Medina].' But it is well nigh that Allâh will bring about a victory or some other (more remarkable) event (in favour of Islam) from Himself; then they will become more remorseful (and ashamed) for what they secretly harboured in their minds.

5:53. And those who have believed will say (at that time), 'Are these they who swore by Allâh their most solemn oaths that they were surely with you?' Their deeds have gone waste (and their machination failed), so that they have become the losers.

Quran outlines the conduct of Jews against the Muslims as the basis for the latter to give up their friendship with “these” referred before:

5:57. O you who believe! do not make those who take your religion lightly and consider it worthless, from among those who were given the Scripture before you and the other infidels, your allies [while they maintain a hostile stance towards Islam and Muslims in turn are enjoined only to withdraw their friendship without any intended aggression]. And keep your duty to Allâh if you are (true) believers.

5:58. And when you call (the people) to Prayer, they [the Jewish communities of Medina] take it lightly [i.e. make mockery] and consider it [-Islam and its prayers] worthless [like a sport i.e. not to be taken seriously and a religion not worth adopting]. They do so because they are a people who do not understand.

5:59. Say, `O People of the Scripture! do you find fault with us [Muslims] only because we believe in Allâh and in that which has been revealed to us, and in that which was revealed before (us [on to you i.e. Torah, Evangel etc.])? Whereas most of you are disobedient (to God) [and flaunt His standards of fairness even in their own religions].'

5:60. Say, `Shall I inform you of those who shall receive from Allâh a recompense worse than that of those (who try to find fault with Us)? They are those whom Allâh has deprived of His blessings and upon whom He brought His displeasure and indignation and of whom He has made (as) apes and swine [in their behavior who copy and imitate each other without thinking and have no moral boundaries and thus degenerate to lower moral level of animals] and who serve the transgressor (- the devil) . It is these who are indeed worse-placed and farther astray from the right path.'

5:61. And when they [Jews of Medina] come to you they say, `We believe,' while, infact, they enter without faith and go out without it. And Allâh knows best all they conceal.^[2] [i.e. they would strategically convert and revert in the then time of state of war with Makkans and were a source of dissent and treason]

Despite the rancor of the opponents, Quran analyzes such behavior of the people of the Book towards Muslims and exhorts them from their own Scriptures to modify their immoral conduct:

5:66. If they had only observed the Torah and the Evangel and that which has been revealed to them (now) from their Lord, [because no Divine Book will endorse such behaviors as above,] they would surely have eaten (of good things) from above them [i.e. spiritual gains] and from under their feet [i.e. material gains], (thus would have enjoyed the boons of the heaven and the earth). [Quran does not measure all members of the opposing tribes with the same yardstick and acknowledges that] Though there is amongst them a community who is moderate (and of balanced mind), yet a large number of them are such that evil are their deeds^[3][which are on record in the secular neo-Islamic history].

Without imposing its own message Quran reminds the people of the Book to follow their own Scriptures for a virtuous behavior and its outcome. In doing so, it places the righteous Jews and Christians at par with Muslims::

5:68. Say, `O People of the Scripture! you stand nowhere unless you observe the Torah and the Evangel [that too teaches unity of God, contrary to their doctrine of Trinity] and that (- Qur'ân) which has (now) been revealed to you from your Lord.' And certainly that which has been revealed [i.e. Quran] to you [all] from your Lord will increase many of them in ordinate rebellion and disbelief; so do not grieve for the disbelieving people.

5:69. Verily, those who have believed and those who judaised and the Sabians and the Christians, whosoever believes in Allâh and the Last Day and does righteous deeds [as taught in their own Scriptures], they shall have no cause of fear nor shall they ever grieve.^[4]

In order to rectify the hostility of opponents of Islam, Quran draws attention to history in which the ancestors of Jews of Medina exhibited antagonism to their prophets and now in the same manner they too were opposing Prophet Muhammad:

5:70. Surely, We took a covenant from the Children of Israel [for upholding unity of God in their beliefs and actions] and We sent Messengers to them. Every time there came to them a Messenger with that (Message) which did not suit their fanciful desires, (they defied him so that) some they treated as liars and others they sought to kill [e.g. Prophets John and Jesus^[5] before and now Prophet Muhammad].

5:71. And they thought there would be no punishment (for them) so they willfully became [morally] blind and deaf [in the same manner as morally low apes and swine – v. 5:60]; (then they sought Allâh's pardon) then Allâh turned to them (with mercy with the advent of Jesus), yet again many of them became blind and deaf. And Allâh is Watchful of what they do.^[6]

Still, Quran only enjoins a temporary halt of relationship with those alluded to in verse 5:51 above because:

60:7. It may be that Allah will bring about friendship between you and those of them whom you hold as enemies. And Allah is Powerful; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.^[7]

Giving up of one’s company with the opponents of Islam by a Muslim can be as short lived as switching from an aggrieving discussion by such people to something else:

4:140. And He has already revealed to you in this Book (the commandment) that when you hear Allâh's Messages being denied and being ridiculed you should not sit with such (absurd people) unless they engage in a topic other than that, for in case (you do not leave their company) you will be indeed like them. Allâh is going to assemble the hypocrites and the disbelievers in Gehenna one and all.^[8]

While expunging any notion of across the board rejection of Jews and Christians by Muslims, Quran is quite clear about what makes a friend or a foe of Muslims:

60:8-9 Allah does not forbid you, with regard to those who do not fight you for religion, nor drive you forth from your homes, that you show them kindness and deal with them justly. Surely Allah loves the doers of justice. Allah forbids you only with regard to those who fight you for religion, and drive you forth from your homes and help (others) in your expulsion, that you make friends of them; and whoever makes friends of them, these are the wrongdoers.^[9]

On the contrary, not surprisingly Quran teaches how to make friends even with those who have evil designs against Muslims that we particularly see as a working example in early Islamic history:

41:34-35. And good and evil are not alike. Repel (evil) with that (benign and graceful way) which is best, and lo, the person between whom and you there is enmity will behave as if he were your warm-hearted friend. Yet it is only the steadfast and patiently persevering who are allowed this (grace) and it is only those who possess a large share of good who are allowed this (moral standard).^[10]

Despite treacherous behaviors by certain sections of other religions, Quran does not lump all the adherents of those religions together as one nor does it claim righteousness for Muslims alone:

3:113. They (- the people of the Scripture) are not all alike. Among these people of the Scripture there are some upright people. They rehearse the Message of Allâh in the hours of the night and they prostrate themselves (in His worship).

3:114. They believe in Allâh and the Last Day and enjoin good and forbid evil, and they vie one with another in (doing) good deeds. And it is these who are of the truly righteous.^[11]

The bottom line alliance to be sought by Muslims is summarized as:

5:55. Your real ally is only Allâh, and His Messenger, and those who believe, who observe Prayer and present the Zakât, and they bow down (in obedience to Allâh).

The current and recent geopolitical history of the world and how it has affected the Muslim nations stands as a testament to the truth and wisdom outlined in verse 5:51 in context of its adjoining verses and the message of Quran in toto.

Dr. Zahid Aziz in his book “Islam, Peace and Tolerance” on pages 37-42 brings to light the subject of verse 5:51 in an even more diversified manner that reader may refer to [pdf – link].

[1] Al-Maidah – The Table Spread with Food: Nooruddin
[2] Al-Maidah – The Table Spread with Food: Nooruddin
[3] Al-Maidah – The Table Spread with Food: Nooruddin
[4] Al-Maidah – The Table Spread with Food: Nooruddin [5] Matthew 17:11-13 – Jesus replied, “To be sure, Elijah comes and will restore all things. But I tell you, Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him, but have done to him everything they wished. In the same way the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.” Then the disciples understood that he was talking to them about John the Baptist. [New International Version]
[6] Al-Maidah – The Table Spread with Food: Nooruddin
[7] Al-Mumtahanah – The Woman Tested: Muhammad Ali – Zahid Aziz
[8] Al-Nisa – The Women: Nooruddin
[9] Al-Mumtahanah – The Woman Tested: Muhammad Ali – Zahid Aziz
[10] Fussilat – Detailed and Clear in Exposition – Nooruddin
[11] Al-Imran – The Family of Amran: Nooruddin
[12] Al-Maidah – The Table Spread with Food: Nooruddin

Of Elephants and the Birds – Trinity vs. Unity^[1]

In or around 570 A.D., Abrahah, the Ethiopian governor of Yemen, a Christian, attacked Makkah. His army included elephants, and by some accounts only one elephant, which were never seen before in Hejaz, a specter that left an everlasting imprint on the Arab memory. On the outskirts of Makkah, Abrahah’s plans were foiled by a ‘heavenly’ intervention in which an obviously un-opposable army was destroyed. Surah Fil (–elephant) refers to this event. In the same year Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was born.

The manner in which said Surah is translated and explained in various exegeses, creates an absurd scenario. Instead of reading the purpose of the Quran which draws attention to the survival of Abrahamic monotheism despite the overwhelming attacks on it, primarily by Christianity, legends are drawn in which flocks of birds appeared over Abrahah’s army and pelted the troops with stones that the birds carried in their beaks till the whole army perished. The closest that one can get to the purpose of the birds in the Surah is that flocks of birds converged on the dead and dying and probably were eating the carrion of dead bodies by pelting them against stones to tear the flesh or the dead had skin manifestation of a pestilence that struck the troops and appeared as if the dead were pelted by small pebbles and they died from small in size but numerous blows. The Surah reads as follows:

A simple point missed by the readers is that the plan of Abrahah’s army is ruined first (verse 105:2) due to an outbreak in its midst before the flocks of birds, probably vultures, arrive on the scene (verse 105:3) for scavenging (verse 105:4). The term – flocks of birds, in no way implies birds in a flight alone. It is a common scene of vultures huddled together as a flock on a carcass. Since there were many carcasses, hence the plural – flocks. The whole event over the period of time has become the source of many legends. If the Surah is plainly read, there is no cause and effect of arrival of birds and ruining of Abrahah’s plans against Ka`bah, rather it is vice versa. Mention of the birds is only in the context of an exemplary end of a now helpless body of aggressors whose malicious plan, against all odds, had already been foiled. Simply put, what the birds did was the final nail in the coffin of a disgrace meted out to an apparently mighty and invincible. The aspect which got imprinted on the memories were the presence of the elephant(s) in the invading army and the flocks of birds converging on the hapless troops.

Of note is that this Surah was revealed in Makkah as a solace to the Prophet when he was facing not only a colossal opposition but an incessant persecution. Its assurance is not only for the Prophet, but also for the Muslims after him.  The Surah prophesies that despite the attacks of the mighty and powerful of any faith on Islam, it will survive and thrive, as it has in the past and so will it in the future – Have you not considered how your Lord dealt with the People of the Elephant? Did He not ruin their plan?

Even though Quran is not a book of history, it is always in step with the logic of history. Consequently, it leaves no room for legends to emanate from its lines, but Quran has no control over the legends that emanate from the minds themselves. Such minds, then try to find validation for their preconceived ideas from a fragmented reading of the Quran. Such twisted logic then attributes to and interjects into Quran fanciful ‘pre-established’ conclusions. A classic and oft repeated case of reading conjectures ‘into’ Quran, rather than reading plain facts ‘from’ Quran.

This event as explained in its details in Ethiopian sources is as follows:

Outbreak of an epidemic in Abrahah’s army in the vicinity of Makkah was not a novelty. In the Encyclopedia of Pestilence Pandemics and Plagues^[4] one finds that the epidemic outbreaks in and around Makkah have been a common occurrences, some of which are excerpted as follows:

Disease on Campaign – … Debilitating diseases did not have to kill combatants to cripple an army; they could simply take so many off active duty as to blunt its effective force….In the later sixth century CE, the Christian Ethiopian prince Abraha (r. c. 525–553) controlled a considerable portion of the Arabia Peninsula. The prince’s military campaign to convert Arabians to Christianity in 569–571 was halted abruptly when smallpox or measles broke out among his troops as they approached the important trading center of Mecca. So weakened were the Ethiopians that they lost what they had controlled in Arabia, an event celebrated in the Koran’s Sura 105. Had Mecca been converted, the life story of Muhammad (579–632), Prophet of Islam, might have been very different… [page 759]

Returning Troops and Refugees –There are many cases in the historical record of armies or military units returning home and bringing with them diseases of all kinds (– venereal diseases). As troops are demobilized, they spread their diseases deep into the population of their home states…In 570 Byzantine troops on campaign near Mecca (Saudi Arabia) contracted a similar disease and, upon return, spread it about the eastern Mediterranean. [page 761]

In the spring of 1831, pilgrims traveling through Mesopotamia and the Arabian Peninsula brought cholera to Mecca during the annual hajj. In three weeks, almost 3,000 pilgrims perished returning to their homes—a situation that would repeat itself throughout the nineteenth century. [page 99]

In 1845 cholera broke out again in Bengal with a bidirectional projection towards

Arabia in 1846 (Aden and Djeddah), arriving in Mecca in November, Mesopotamia (Baghdad, September 1846) and at the coast of the Black Sea (Tibilissi, July 1847). [page 100]

The worst pilgrimage outbreak ever in Mecca during 1865 marked the fourth pandemic when 15,000 of the estimated 90,000 pilgrims died. [page 106]

The fifth pandemic arrived in Mecca from India’s Punjab in 1881 and struck again the following year. Once again, the toll was terrible, estimated at over 30,000 dead among 200,000 pilgrims. [page 108]

Smallpox, too, which is easily transmitted by fomites, is another classic disease of pilgrimage. In the 1930s, an outbreak in Africa was traced to pilgrims, and the last major epidemic in Europe was carried to Yugoslavia by a pilgrim who had contracted it in Mecca. Meningococcal meningitis, which is not only highly contagious but also provokes a carrier rate as high as 11 percent, has been carried to America, Africa, and Asia by returning pilgrims. Less contagious diseases such as tuberculosis, Dengue, and poliomyelitis have also had documented mini-epidemics traced to the gathering and then dispersal of pilgrims. Upper respiratory illnesses are particularly efficiently spread in this way. For instance, while in Mecca, 40 percent of pilgrims get some sort of viral upper respiratory illness, [page 481]

Neisseria meningitides is a pathogen that has long caused seasonal epidemics of meningitis in parts of Africa: the so-called “meningitis belt.” The disease has recently spread more widely. Studies with molecular markers have shown how Muslim pilgrims who brought an epidemic strain of N. meningitides from southern Asia to Mecca in 1987 then passed it on to pilgrims from Sub-Saharan Africa—who, after returning home, were the cause of strain-specific epidemic outbreaks in 1988 and 1989. [page 699]

In last two centuries alone, Makkah has been vulnerable to outbreaks of Cholera epidemics due to the people coming to its precincts from afar:

In November 1846, cholera struck Mecca, killing over 15,000 people in and around the city.^[5] Some 4,000 Muslim pilgrims were estimated to have died in Mecca in 1902. (Mecca has been called a “relay station” for cholera in its progress from East to West; 27 epidemics were recorded during pilgrimages from the 19th century to 1930, and more than 20,000 pilgrims died of cholera during the 1907–08 hajj.)^[6]

Sir William Muir, a no friend of Islam, in his book “Life of Mahomet”^[7] writes the following about Abrahah’s attack on Makkah:

The Viceroy of Yemen Invades Mecca A.D. 570.

In the year A. D. 570, or about eight years before the death of Abd al Muttalib, occurred the memorable invasion of Mecca by Abraha the Abyssinian viceroy of Yemen. This potentate had built at Sana a magnificent cathedral to which he sought to attract the worship of Arabia, and, thwarted in the attempt, he vented his displeasure in an attack on Mecca and its temple. Upon this enterprise he set out with a considerable army. In its train was an elephant;— a circumstance for Arabia so singular that the commander, his host, the invasion, and the year, are still called by the name of 'the Elephant.' Notwithstanding opposition from various Arab tribes, Abraha victoriously reached Taif; a city three days march east of Mecca. The men of Taif protested that they had no concern with the Mecca, and furnished the Abyssinians with a guide, who died on the way to Mecca, Centuries afterwards, men were wont to mark their abhorrence of the traitor by casting stones at his tomb as they passed.

And Threatens the Kaaba;

Abraha then sent forward a body of troops to scour the Tehama, and carry off what cattle they could find. They were successful in the raid, and among the plunder secured two hundred camels belonging to Abd al Muttalib. An embassy was despatched to the inhabitants of Mecca: 'Abraha,' the message ran, 'had no desire to do them injury. His only object was to demolish the Kaaba; that performed; he would retire without shedding the blood of any.' The citizens of Mecca had already resolved that it would be vain to oppose the invader by force of arms; but the destruction of the Kaaba they refused upon any terms to allow. At last the embassy prevailed on Abd al Muttalib and the other chiefs of Mecca, to repair to the viceroy's camp, and there plead their cause. Abd al Muttalib was treated with distinguished honour. To gain him over, Abraha restored his plundered camels but he could obtain from him no satisfactory answer regarding the Kaaba. The chiefs offered a third of the wealth of the Tehama if he would desist from his designs against their temple, but he refused. The negotiation was broken off, and the deputation returned to Mecca. The people, by the advice of Abd al Muttalib, made preparations for retiring in a body to the hills and defiles about the city on the day before the expected attack, As Abd al Matalib leaned upon the ring of the door of the Kaaba, he is said to have prayed to the Deity thus aloud: 'Defend, O Lord, thine own House, and suffer not the Cross to triumph over the Kaaba'. This done, he relaxed his hold, and, betaking himself with the rest to the neighbouring heights, watched what the end might be.

Is discomfited by pestilence.

Meanwhile a pestilential distemper had shown itself in the camp of the viceroy. It broke out with deadly pustules blains, and was probably an aggravated form of smallpox. In confusion and dismay the army commenced its retreat. Abandoned by their guides, they perished among the valleys, and a flood (such is the pious legend) sent by the wrath of Heaven swept multitudes into the sea. The pestilence alone is, however, adequate to the effects described. Scarcely any recovered who had once been smitten by it; and Abraha himself, a mass of malignant and putrid sores, died miserably on his return to Sana.

Muir, in the footnote to the paragraph above, then goes on to contextualize the historical events with the narrative of Surah Fil as follows:

The accounts leave no room to question the nature of the disease having been a pestilential form of small-pox. Wackidi, after describing the calamity in the fanciful style of the Coran, add: 'And that was the first beginning of the small-pox.'^[8] The word signifies 'small stones, ' and the name as applied to the small-pox is probably derived from the gravelly appearance and feeling of the hard pustules. The name, coupled with its derivation, probably gave rise to the poetical description of the event in the Coran: 'Hast thou not seen how thy Lord dealt with the army of the Elephant? Did he not cause their stratagem to miscarry? And he sent against them flocks of little birds which cast upon them small clay stones, and made them like unto the stubble of which the cattle have eaten.'

Historical records support that Abrahah’s army fell prey to an epidemic. His army had to march as a group for over six hundred miles from Yemen. The expedition itself made the troops prone to a contagion because of the close contact over an extended period. The long journey in the desert made the troops vulnerable to poor health and hygiene, both from limited rations of food and water, as well as, the exhaustion from travelling in a desert.

The summary scenario in light of Quran is in which flocks of birds, most likely vultures, gathered upon the dead and dying of Abrahah’s army. Quran only reports the vultures for their typical style of ripping the carrion in their feeding frenzy – (Which tore off flesh from their bodies to eat by) striking them against stones of hardened and petrified clay, and a despicable end to the transgressors – And thus He reduced them to rotten chaff. The dead of Abrahah’s army infested with the pustules of small-pox probably seemed to the onlookers as if smitten with small clay stones^[9]. No matter how one translates the Surah, there is no mention of birds carrying pebbles in their beaks that they smote the army with.

Moral of the Surah is in its first two verses, which assure Divine protection of the Unity against the Trinity and an admonishment to the Trinity for its designs against the Unity.

[1] Attacks on Islam by Latter-Day — "Companions of the Elephant", by Imam Kalamazad Mohammed. Link: http://aaiil.org/text/articles/others/elephant.shtml
[2] Al-Fil – The Elephant: Nooruddin
[3]'Abraha fl. 6th century Orthodox Ethiopia – Dictionary of African Christian Biography. Link: http://www.dacb.org/stories/ethiopia/_abraha.html
[4] Encyclopedia of Pestilence Pandemics and Plagues, Edited by Joseph P. Byrne, volume I, A-M, Greenwood Press, Copyright © 2008 by Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.
[5] Asiatic Cholera Pandemic of 1846-63, UCLA School of Public Health. Link: http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/Snow/pandemic1846-63.html
[6] "Cholera (pathology): Seven pandemics". Britannica Online Encyclopedia. Link: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/114078/cholera/253250/The-first-six-pandemics
[7] The Life of Mahomet, by William Muir LL.D., New Edition, Chapter III, p. xxvi-xxvii, Smith Elder & Co. 15 Waterloo Place, London, 1878.
[8] Footnote: Chapter Fourth – “The Forefathers of Mahomet, and History of Mecca, from the middle of the Fifth Century to the Birth of Mahomet 570 A.D”, p. cclxvi, The Life of Mahomet and History of Islam, To The Era of Hejira, by Sir William Muir, Esq. Vol I. London: Smith, Elder & Co. 65 Cornhill, 1858.

​

[Editorial note: al-jadree – the smallpox; al-hasba – the pustular disease (like small stones)]
[9] Footnote: Chapter Fourth – “The Forefathers of Mahomet, and History of Mecca, from the middle of the Fifth Century to the Birth of Mahomet 570 A.D”, p. cclxvi, The Life of Mahomet and History of Islam, To The Era of Hejira, by Sir William Muir, Esq. Vol I. London:

Smith, Elder & Co. 65 Cornhill, 1858.

Chasm^[1] of the Isms^[2]

In the pursuance of truth in the realm of day to day needs, innately, humanity structures and conduct its lives in framework of isms that from time immemorial have ranged from paganism to secularism, theism to atheism, racism to regionalism, and lately communism to capitalism, to name a few. The conformed fellowship in an ism is multifactorial ranging across freedom of choice, apologetic fellowship, peer pressure or merely ‘a monkey see, a monkey do.’ Not finding the penultimate solution, mankind had and however does create even its own 'religions' or ways of life and not amazingly, those isms attract a zealot following, at least at the origination of that ism. Many a times, a state apparatus is there to nurture, protect and propagate its ism that we witness in recent history in the examples of Catholicism, Colonialism, Communism, Fascism, Nazism and now in Capitalism under the garb of democracy. We have to keep in mind that democracy is a set of values that are inherent in human collective consciousness and are not tied to a particular ism.

Isms at their inception are adopted with much fanfare and high expectations and before long they fizzle out. Another 'better' ism is usually waiting in the wings and takes its place only to face the same fate. One common thread across the failure of isms is that they are either not congruent to human nature, or they let the hedonistic and exploitative tendencies of humans run amok. Some of the isms focused primarily on external aspects of life while others negated the outside and focused on inner development of the individual. Those which focused on both external and internal aspects of life failed from their mutual disharmony. There were no corrective mechanisms built into them and thus could not stand the external challenges or the changing needs of time, hence they crumbled from their inherent brittleness.

For example, Communism at its inception, though had lofty ideals for equality of man, but its unchecked power naturally got vested into oligarchy that inevitably turned its society into a cesspool of incompetence, cronyism and non-accountability. The 'equal man' in communism was to be rewarded equally irrespective of quality and quantity of individual effort, which in turn created lethargy in the society. Despite its goals of equality, the system turned so unstable that it crumbled like a domino from within for the mere fact that its means to achieve equality were not congruent to human nature; it criminalized wealth and dis-incentivized effort. The moral dearth that Communism engendered was only proven by subsequent history that witnessed it, but was prophesized during its full galore – “the rigid laws of Bolshevism, which care only for the body, giving sufficient to live on, will kill the higher sentiments of sympathy and love, qualities which only make life worth living but lacking which humanity must degenerate into the worst barbarism.”^[4]

With industrialization in the concluding couple of centuries, the materialism transformed into Capitalism, which in turn makes every effort to disassociate itself from the underlying goods and their associated risks and primarily focuses on wealth hoarded in individual coffers, the accumulation of which becomes the highest purpose of life. Wealth is measured mostly in currency, which in turn thrives on speculation, in the shadows of which lurks manipulation, and that is just another name of greed. Greed and selfishness by their very attributes have no self- checks on their limits and their natural outcome is tyranny, be it by individuals, corporations or by nations on others. Individuals may still show some remorse but there are no inherent scruples for faceless capitalistic institutions. In the consequent mass hysteria, “evil is taken for a virtue if it wears the cloak of nationalism”^[5]. The only thirst quencher of Capitalism is capital pure and simple and erroneously its many fold development in recent history is touted as a validation of its success, and all the while we turn a blind eye to the humungous destructive nature of the same materialistic growth that it brought up as witnessed by global wars in the last century alone and the cosmos is still restless as never before. In World War I there were 37 million casualties^[6], and in the World War II over 60 million people were killed^[7]. These numbers are from first half of last century alone, touted for growth of it science, industry and free thinking. Ironically, the new standards of ultimate safety of nations are the deterrence of their nuclear capabilities that each ism waves at some other. Are we safer now?

The ism of our times, materialism in the guise of Capitalism stripped of its theories and experienced as it is, has outlasted various isms. Nevertheless, to achieve the capital, the greed if left unchecked will be its unbecoming. In Capitalism, the significant monetary laws are reactive in nature, made only after the fact, when people of a certain class have benefited at the cost of others, but the inherent greed finds ingenious ways to circumvent the existing laws for its next exploitation. Laws at the most can deter greed, but there is no significant public policy to encourage magnanimity. For the have-nots, the access to capital gives rise to an apparent comfort, but the graph curve of happiness which is initially merged with that of capital growth soon disassociates and veers off downwards only to show that capital can buy comfort, but happiness is a non-purchasable commodity by itself. Some might even argue that it is the capital which formulates and controls the law rather than the make-believe vice versa. As long as the capitalist owns the capital of the state, it cares least as to who constitutes the law, because law making itself can be bought and parliaments at times behave more like a board of the financial establishments that they are supposed to contain, rather than representing and protecting the interests of a common humanity and the voter who put them there in the first. Each next law which, if not a loophole for some vested interests, is a weak solder upon an existing solder, where the ever choking weight of the laws gets ever heavier from its layers, without getting rid of the underlying human weakness, the greed. Incentives for making the laws in Capitalism are primarily focused for generating more wealth with a tendency to overlook that wealth in a bigger picture is a means not a goal unto itself. Pharaohs, the capitalists of their time, even tried to take their wealth along with them in to the next world, but did they? Lifespan of wealth for a capitalist in no more than the life of its possessor. Wealth for a capitalist begins with his life and ends with it. In Capitalism, public good is only a secondary gain from a personal interest first. From a capitalist logic, if it is a disproportionate gain, would it not be a waste of an effort to achieve a return that might not be utilized in one’s lifetime, unless Capitalism means wealth without effort which in turn is just another scheme for the exploitation of others. In another example, if one opens the yellow pages (when they used to print them till recently) and compare the number of entries for divorce lawyers versus marriage counselors, would anyone be surprised if the former outnumber the latter by many folds? Is Capitalism missing upon something as simple as marriage and a family among its midst and is it even aware of dissipation of this fundamental societal institution? The spiritual death can be read in the cliché of “the most told story” of Jesus Christ becoming “the most sold story” is not only a joke but a fact under Capitalism.

Man's experimentation with isms is a glaring case in which man repeatedly has lost his freedom while pursuing freedom. Trying to achieve freedom by an ism is almost synonymous with chasing horizon. Every ism promised a 'paradise', irrespective of it being in this world or the next, but failed either to fully specify the route to that paradise or hypothesized a path that was less of a path and more of a hurdle to its 'promised land' but for a privileged few. Each ism of the yore is just another title for the same story of 'paradise lost'. Even now there are many new isms simmering to emerge, to be formulated, proselytized and expectantly to be followed.

Religions in general claim their Divine roots, but in due course, dogmas seep in and hold the faiths hostage by replacing the Divine intelligence from its center-stage with dogmatic beliefs that are embodied foremost by its clergy which uses every means under the sun to be in the pseudo-intellectual spotlight. The clergy by its very definition has conflict of interest as its livelihood is tied to the very enterprise it leads. Instead of a bulwark against dogmas, they become the source of dogmas, because fantasy sells, be it in Disneyland or from the pulpit. However, “pure monotheism would go to the real Fountain Head of all light, but the polytheistic tendency, innate in an undeveloped mind, would blight its judgment and benight its reasoning. Man would take the agent for the principal, the husk for the kernel, the effect for the cause, and the immediate for the ultimate. This psychology creates polytheism. All forms of “isms,” ranging from fetishism to Man-worship, thrive under it.”^[8]

Advocates for any school of thought will claim truth for themselves, while denying it to others. So do Muslims. Only, unbeknown to most Muslims, what sets Islam apart from the rest is that its source of accuracy is the Quran, which is implanted in the nature of human beings. Neither the human beings will be able to move away from his nature, nor will he be able to shed Quran which outlines his nature to begin with:

30:30.So pay your whole-hearted attention to (the cause of) faith as one devoted (to pure faith), turning away from all that is false. (And follow) the Faith of Allâh (-Islam) to suit the requirements of which He has made the nature of mankind. There can be no change in the nature (of creation) which Allâh has made. That is the right and most perfect Faith, yet most people do not know (it). Then set your face upright for religion in the right state the nature made by Allah in which He has made men; there is no altering of Allah’s creation: that is the right religion, but most people do not know (it).^[9]

These sacred words sum up the religion of man. They give quite a new conception of it. They neither speak of prayers nor of offerings nor of sacrifice. To please God or appease an angered Deity, or to create reconciliation between the Creator and the created are not the objectives of religion as set forth in the above quotation. It speaks of something quite different. It refers to our own nature and its various latent constituents. To work them out is our objective, and the way to work them out is the religion revealed to man from the Most High.^[10]

Thus, there is an ever-present self-correction and self-cleansing in interpretation of Islam. Any interpretation or formulation in the name of religion has to be judged through the lens of nature of mankind, because that is the right and most perfect Faith, yet most people do not know (it). With this rock solid foundation of Islam to suit the requirements of which He has made the nature of mankind, raises the natural question that what prevents a Muslim from seeing Islam in a natural and contemporary light? Why cannot Quran as interpreted in general Muslim culture conform to the Laws of Allah, both physical and moral, and their mutual harmony? Will not defying the nature of mankind in interpreting Quran fossilize Islam like the religions of the yore? Is it not the very mind of a Muslim that has created the chasm between nature, man and Islam rather than the word of God?

[1] Merriam-Webster. Chasm –
: a deep hole or opening in the surface of the earth.
: a major division, separation, or difference between two people, groups, etc.
[2] Merriam-Webster. Ism –
: a belief, attitude, style, etc., that is referred to by a word that ends in the suffix –ism
[3]“Robert Frost and the Politics of Poetry” By Tyler Hoffman, (c) 2001, p. 202, University Press of New England, Hanover,, NH 03755.
[4]The New World Order by Maulana Muhammad Ali, p. 47, Ahmadiyyah Anjuman Ishaat Islam Lahore, 1944.
[5]The New World Order by Maulana Muhammad Ali, p. 2, Ahmadiyyah Anjuman Isha’at Islam Lahore, 1944.
[6]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_casualties
[7]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
[8]Islam and Zoroastrianism by Khwaja Kamal ud din, p. 18, Basheer Muslim Library, The Mosque, Woking, pub: 1925.
[9] Al-Rum – The Byzantines: Nooruddin
[10]Explanation of verse 30:30 by Khwaja Kamal ud Din – Message of Islam, Appendix: Religion of Nature – The Woking Muslim Mission and Literary Trust, The Shah Jehan Mosque, Woking, England

Opening Thought: Reason – A Requisite^[1]

“If the Religion taught in the book is a husk and a garb, if it is dogma and formulae, if it is sacrament and priest craft, a symbolism and rituals, and if it hinges upon the personality of its teacher and revolves on certain supposed events in his lifetime, it is not religion, but a superstition, and myth. It is transitory, a fog which cannot stand in the strong rays of the sun of rationality. But if a religion gives you certain broad principles of life to meet your physical, moral, and, spiritual needs, and makes utility to mankind the criteria of ethical virtues and leaves the rest to your judicial discretion and good common sense, while appealing always to your reason for the acceptance of its tenets, it hardly hampers your progress. It, on the other hand, helps your uplift. That such principles have been revealed to man from God, and have been codified, cannot impede our advancement. If axioms and postulates revealed to Euclid have only helped our activities in our mathematical researches, why a broad-basic principle-laying religion can[not] create a moral and ethical inertia. Has not science made progress with bounds and strides, and did it not take place only after we based our researches on certain basic principles? If so we find in every avenue of human activities, why not in the realm of religion?”^[2]

A religion has to appeal to human reason. Qur’ân emphasizes it:

13:03. Verily, in all this there are messages indeed for people who think^[3] [Emphasis added]

Like any book Qur’ân expects its readers to ponder and reflect on its message:

16:44. … We have revealed to you the Reminder that you may explain to mankind (the commandments) that have been sent down to them so that they may ponder and reflect (over it).^[4] [you implies Muhammad, but is not limited to him alone]

A textbook identifies the appropriate age level for its readers. A course in school identifies its prerequisites. Similarly, the fundamental pre-requisite for Qur’ân is the intelligence and thinking power of its reader. The understanding of the Book is limited only by the analytical endeavor of its readers, their existing knowledge, their energy for discovery and curiosity. Qur’ân expresses its disdain for those who do not use their reason in life in general and in the study of Qur’ân in particular:

7:179: Our Law has committed to Hell numerous people, rural and urban; they are living the life of hell. They have hearts that they use not to understand. They have eyes with which they see not, and ears with which they hear not. They are like cattle. Nay, they are even worse. Such are the people who have chosen to live through life in total darkness of ignorance.^[5]

8:22. Verily, the vilest of all creatures in the sight of God are those deaf, those dumb ones who do not use their reason.^[6]

Inherent in “thinking” and “reasoning” is the use of logic, judgment and the right to differ, all of which nurtures intelligence and creativity creating a snowball effect. No one would disagree that the most refined faculty of humans is their intelligence and sense of reason, the bedrock of human progress of material and moral life and their natural amalgam. The reverse of the verse quoted above also implies that failure to use of reason can render one intellectually deaf and dumb, a morally despicable example of human degeneration.

Qur’ân further elaborates on such deafness and blindness:

22:46. Why do they not travel in the land so that they should have hearts that help them to understand and ears which can help them hear? As a matter of fact (when going astray) it is not the (physical) eyes that are blind but blind are the hearts which lie in the bosoms.^[7]

Throughout Qur’ân the power of reasoning is considered a blessing and, therefore, it should not be an obstacle to understanding and following a religion. It is an obstacle to the followers of blind faith.

The Holy Book does not force its reader to accept anything at the expense of his rationality. Personal conviction is the spirit of the Qur’ân, and personal judgment encouraged.^[8]

Qur’ân and Islam do not need the crutches of non-verifiable historical miracles or blind faith from their followers. If miracle is the sole standard for accepting a religion as true, then why don’t people looking for such miracles to authenticate a religion adopt other religions for their respective miracles, since traditionally all religions carry a library of their non-verifiable miracles? The real miracle of Qur’ân is the transformation that it brought about in its followers:

12:108. Say, `This is my path. I call to Allâh. I am on sure knowledge verifiable by reason and (so are) those who follow me. (I believe that) Holy is Allâh. I am not of the polytheists.'^[9]

Qur’ân, thus, sets the standards for knowledge, verifiable by reason, which is commonly referred to as “science.”

Saint Augustine (A.D. 354-430) in his work The Literal Meaning of Genesis (De Genesi ad litteram libri duodecim) provided excellent advice for all Christians who are faced with the task of interpreting Scripture in the light of scientific knowledge. This translation is by J. H. Taylor in Ancient Christian Writers, Newman Press, 1982, volume 41. – Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he hold to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. [1 Timothy 1.7]^[10]

St. Augustine’s words may equally apply to Qur’ân and its interpretation, though with certain caveats. Scientific laws are a subset of His Laws. Discoveries in science are a personal human experience of His Laws. Hence if the human effort in interpreting a Scripture contravenes science, one has to reinterpret the narrow concreteness of the translation, since neither can we reject His Laws in Qur’ân nor of His science.

In the Arabic of Hedjaz in which Qur’ân is revealed, the “Qur’ânic words are too rich in their significations…we need not give them new meanings, nor reinterpret them to satisfy new demands of life. Their connotations are wide enough to denote every new concept…They may become amplified, but on the material already existing.”^[11]

Qur’ân forewarns its readers, including Muslims, against misapplication of its principles by the use of unjustified logic and reasoning.

It is to reverse this loss to loss from unjust reasoning that has pervaded the Muslim thought and sapped its human potential which compels this writer to undertake the current project to clarify the miracles, confute the myths, correct the mistakes, contend the matters and refute the manifest conjectures that over time have been attributed to Qur’ân and by proxy to Islam itself. All this can be achieved by simple and plain reading of the Qur’ân and with a focus on what Qur’ân tells its reader and not by reading one’s own presuppositions into Qur’ân.

[1] This chapter is requoted from “Consumer Guide to God – A Muslim Perspective” by M. Ikram Jahangiri, pub. 2012.
[2] Free Religious Movement, Islamic Review and Muslim India , Vol. IV, No. 12, December 1916, p. 561, The Woking Muslim Mission and Literary Trust, The Shah Jehan Mosque, Woking, England
[3] Ar-Rad – The Thunder: Muhammad Asad
[4] Al-Nahl – The Bee: Nooruddin
[5] Al-A’raaf – The Heights of Discernment: Shabbir Ahmed
[6] al-Anfal – The Spoils of War: Muhammad Asad
[7] Al-Hajj – The Pilgrimage: Nooruddin
[8] Islamic Review and Muslim India, Vol. II, No. I, p. 25, January 1914. The Woking Muslim Mission and Literary Trust, The Shah Jehan Mosque, Woking, England
[9] Yusuf – Joseph: Nooruddin
[10] “Saint Augustine on Science and Scripture” – http://www.pibburns.com/augustin.htm
[11] Introduction to Study of The Holy Quran, by Khwaja Kamaluudin, pp. 20-21, Dar-ul-Ishahat-Kutub-Islamia, Fatamabi Court, 4^th Floor, 17 M Azad Road, Jacob Circle, Bombay. 1939, 1950, 1991.
[12] Isra – The Night-Journey : Nooruddin

There is fanciful thinking by some, or actually by most, that Jesus was conceived without a father. Before we even delve into a discussion of an alleged fatherless conception of Jesus, we have to be cognizant of the fundamental requirement for conception of a child. It needs a father and a mother and in modern times, male and female life-germs. Even God makes such an argument about Himself while rebutting the Christian doctrine of son-ship:

In the above verse it becomes obvious, that even if God were to have a son, God Himself would have needed a consort, or on the flip, Jesus, son of Mary, must also have had an actual human father. Simply put, no father, no son, and that goes for son of Mary as well. The irony is that proponents of virgin birth of Jesus, even from within the Muslims are willing to make an exception for Mary and Jesus, which God cannot afford even for Himself.

But such claim to fame of 'fatherless' Jesus has no bearing in Quran, though it foretold Mary about his birth and her response was:

In this case, Mary, an unmarried chaste woman, asks the obvious – `My Lord! how can I and whence shall I have a child while no man has yet touched me (in conjugal relationship)?’ and God replies with a prophecy – (The Lord) said, `Such are the ways of Allâh, He creates what He will. Superficial reader will jump to the conclusion that Mary conceived Jesus immediately and immaculately, whereas after this dialogue God without breaking His laws of sociology and biology arranged a husband for her that secular history identifies as Joseph the Carpenter^[3]. Jesus was not the only the child, Mary had other children as well^[4]. So she conceived Jesus after her marriage and word of Allah came true in due course i.e. When He decrees a thing He simply commands it, “Be” and it comes to be’ without breaking His own Laws.

Quran makes reference to arrangement of Mary's marriage by the priests of the monastery where she dwelled:

For some intelligent reason best known to their authors, references to chastity of Mary are interpreted for her remaining unmarried, yet getting pregnant. This is absurd and against basic moral values, rather a smear on Mary. If nothing else, marriage is the best and natural guard against “un-chastity”:

Preservation of one’s chastity through marriage is outlined in Quran:

The above verse clearly lays down that a conjugal act within a married relationship is a chaste act, else Islam would transform into doctrine of Christianity of an inborn sin – Job 25:4. How then can man be righteous before God? Or how can he be pure who is born of a woman? [New King James Version]. Thus Mary preserved her chastity through her marriage.

Out of her marriage, birth of Jesus and his attributes are foretold to Mary:

Maryam, mother of Jesus is mentioned by her name on numerous occasions in Quran because of her high status due her piety. As far as father of Jesus (i.e. Joseph) is concerned he is lumped up with general mention of fathers of the prophets:

Similar to verse 3:47 above, elsewhere Quran gives the prophecy of birth of Jesus to his mother, Mary: 

In fulfillment of the prophecy, Mary gets married as mentioned in verse 3:44 above and then she conceives Jesus:

Continuing from above Mary is talking to herself, praying for help or even addressing her husband during her childbirth^[13]:

In Quran creation of every human is the same:

It would be quite fanciful to imagine God making a human cast of clay and then breathing into him His spirit before Adam came to life. Isn’t it simple to think that from clay grow the plants, animals eat the plants, man then eats the salts in clay, the plants and animals to become and stay alive, and to develop his physical and intellectual identity? Elementally humanity comes from clay and returns to clay. Quran puts it quite succinctly when it states We create a human being from an extract of clay. The emphasis is on extract, which in modern interpretation points to carboniferous biology that comes out of clay, of man and every living thing on earth. How true.

Now, going back to birth of Jesus, Quran is quite clear as to how he was created:

i.e. Jesus (PBUH) was born just like Adam (who is a template of mankind) from clay and by natural conception because both belong to mankind:

As far as Adam, the first human to receive the revelation is concerned, that stage for human species took some time in its evolutionary timeframe:

Similar to a skeptic Mary, her uncle Zachariah in his old age was foretold of a child, John. This might seem nothing short of a miracle given Zachariah’s then skepticism for reasons beyond his control:

Note, nowhere Quran mentions Zachariah’s wife being old and postmenopausal, except that she was apparently barren to Zachariah:

In the above verse we find an apparent age difference between Zachariah and his wife, an indication that in the then pervading social norms, older men married younger women, which in secular history also happened with Mary and even Abraham.

Such are the ways of Allâh, He does what He will by some medical treatment as shown by next verses:

Elsewhere as well the narrative of Zachariah and his son John is mentioned:

In the verse 19:9, the phrase about Zachariah – "It is easy for Me, and behold, I have created you before this whereas you (too) were nothing" clearly implies that all births are conceived in the same manner, from the union of mother and father.

Similar to Mary and Zachariah, a skeptical Sarah too is amazed of her being foretold of birth of Isaac in her self-perceived ‘old age’:

In all three examples above, the parents i.e. Mary, Sarah and Zachariah are skeptical for various reasons of their own for them to even possibly imagine having a child, which they did in due course when the prophecies to each one of them unfolded for them.

The advocates of a birth of Jesus without conception from a human father frequently base their case for him being referred in Quran frequently as ‘son of Maryam’ e.g.

Jesus is referred to by his mother’s name either because it is the intention of Quran to expunge the doctrine of innate ‘original sin’ as promulgated in Christianity in which pregnancy of mothers is sinful^[26] or because of the prominent position that Maryam enjoys. She is singularly surrounded in blood relations by various prophets, whose uncle (Zachariah), cousin (John the Baptist) and son (Jesus) were prophets or merely for the fact that in Jewish tradition children are remembered by their mother's name e.g.^[27]

In the above verse, by addressing each other, in Jewish tradition, via their mother did not mean that Moses and Aaron did not have a father.

On the contrary, in Arab tradition, children are usually identified by their father's name unless the mother holds a prominent position, which does not mean either that they do not have mothers or fathers respectively. With changing times and customs, due to children out of wedlock in the present day Western cultures, it would be odd if someone is asked about their fathers. For them it is more prudent and socially acceptable to ask of their mothers. It does not imply that they do not have their fathers.

David is mentioned in Quran of having a son, Solomon, while there is no mention of David’s wife. Does it mean that Solomon came into this world without having a mother?

Quran refers to Mary as daughter of Amran (the father of Moses and Aaron) while it does not mention father of Asiya, the Phaoah's wife, which in turn does not mean that Asiya had no father – see v. 66:11-12 below.^[30]

The chastity of mother naturally has a bearing on her children:

In the above verse in context of a believer, including Jesus, with Mary as an example of purity, note the use of the term him, the male gender rather than her. This removes any misconceptions of 'immaculate' impregnation of Mary without a husband, rather affirms an 'immaculate' Jesus because We breathed into him [, not her,] Our inspiration. Additionally, Jesus was already-existing as an individual from parental conjugation, when We breathed into him Our inspiration after which he became 'immaculate'. This is the same immaculate birth of each human that Quran mentions elsewhere as well:

The reason as to why Jesus is mentioned as son of Mary in Quran is quite eloquently explained in the following excerpt:

Thus, by calling Jesus as son of Mary is another example where The Qur'an is the Watcher over the old Scriptures and guards the Truth in them:

The subject matter of birth of Jesus is further explained in the book ‘Birth of Jesus’^[36] by Dr. Basharat Ahmad, that reader may refer to as well.
 

[1] Al-Anam – The Cattle: Nooruddin
[2] al Imran – The Family of Amran: Nooruddin
[3] Matthew 1:18-25
[4] – Mark 6:3. Is this not the carpenter, the Son of Mary, and brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon? And are not His sisters here with us?” So they were offended at Him. [New King James Version]
– Matthew 13:55. Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses, Simon, and Judas? [New King James Version]
– John 7:3. His brothers therefore said to Him, “Depart from here and go into Judea, that Your disciples also may see the works that You are doing. [New King James Version]
[5] al Imran – The Family of Amran: Nooruddin
[6] Al-Ambiya – The Prophets: Nooruddin
[7] Al-Muminun – The Believers: Nooruddin
[8] al Imran – The Family of Amran: Nooruddin
[9] Al-Anam – The Cattle: Nooruddin
[10] This is a possible reference to the prevailing monasticism amongst the Israelites that Mary belonged to and later the Christians as well – 57:27. …And We placed compassion and mercy in the hearts of those who followed him [–Jesus], but as for monasticism they invented it themselves, We did not enjoin it upon them…. Al-Hadid – The Iron: Nooruddin.
[11] Maryam – Mary: Nooruddin
[12] Maryam – Mary: Nooruddin
[13] The observation is by Shabbir Ahmed.
[14] Mary, similar to Maya , the mother of Siddharta Gautama Buddha, apparently gave birth in the manner of holding on to tree limb to ease the pangs of labor – as depicted in a carving for the latter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_(mother_of_Buddha)#mediaviewer/File:SiddhartaBirth.jpg
[15] Maryam – Mary: Nooruddin
[16] Al-Muminun – The Believers: Nooruddin
[17] al Imran – The Family of Amran: Nooruddin
[18] Al-Zumar – The Multitudes: Nooruddin
[19] Al-Insan – The Human Being: Nooruddin
[20] al Imran – The Family of Amran: Nooruddin
[21] al Imran – The Family of Amran: Nooruddin
[22] Al-Ambiya – The Prophets: Nooruddin
[23] Maryam – Mary: Nooruddin
[24] Hud – Hud : Nooruddin
[25] Al-Maidah – The Table Spread with Food: Nooruddin
[26] Psalm 51:5. Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me. [New King James Version]. See also Romans 5:12-21, 1 Corinthians 15:22.
[27] al-ahmadiyya, p.16, March 1979
[28] Ta Ha – The Perfect Man! be at Rest: Nooruddin
[29] Sad – The Truthful God: Nooruddin
[30] al-ahmadiyya, ‘Jesus had a father’, p.10, January 1979
[31] Al-Tahrim – The Prohibition: Nooruddin
[32] Al-Tahrim – The Prohibition: Nooruddin
[33] Al-Sajdah – The Prostration: Nooruddin
[34] A Reply to the Christian Pamphlet – The History of Hadjie Abdoellah, p. 42-3, by Mirza Masum Beg B.A., Editor, 'The Light' Lahore.
[35] Al-Maidah – The Table Spread with Food: Nooruddin
[36] ‘Birth of Jesus’ by Dr. Basharat Ahmad, revised and edited by Imam Kalamazad Mohammed. Pub: 2005. The Ahmadiyya Muslim Literary Trust of Trinidad and Tobago.

Interpretation of the Qur’ân^[1]: The rule as to the interpretation of the Qur’ân is thus given in the Book itself: "He it is Who has revealed the Book to thee; some of its verses are decisive — they are the basis of the Book — and others are allegorical. Then those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead, and seeking to give it their own interpretation. And none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those firmly rooted in knowledge. They say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord. And none do mind except men of understanding" (3:6). In the first place, it is stated here that there are two kinds of verses in the Qur’ân, namely, the decisive and the allegorical — the latter being those which are capable of different interpretations. Next we are told that the decisive verses are the basis of the Book, that is, that they contain the fundamental principles of religion. Hence whatever may be the differences of interpretation, the fundamentals of religion are not affected by them, all such differences relating only to secondary matters. The third point is that some people seek to give their own interpretation to allegorical statements and are thus misled. In other words, serious errors arise only when a wrong interpretation is placed on words which are susceptible of two meanings. Lastly, in the concluding words, a clue is given as to the right mode of interpretation in the case of allegorical statements: "It is all from our Lord" — meaning that there is no disagreement between the various portions of the Book. This statement has in fact been made elsewhere also, as already quoted (see 4:82^[2]). The important principle to be borne in mind in the interpretation of the Qur’ân, therefore, is that the meaning should be sought from within the Qur’ân, and never should a passage be interpreted in such a manner that it may be at variance with any other passage, but more especially with the basic principles laid down in the decisive verses. This principle, in the revealed words, is followed by "those well-grounded in knowledge."[Footnote 37]^[3] The following rules may, therefore, be laid down:

– The principles of Islam are enunciated in decisive words in the Qur’ân; and, therefore, no attempt should be made to establish a principle on the strength of an allegorical passage, or of words susceptible of different meanings.

– The explanation of the Book should in the first place be sought in the Qur’ân itself; for, whatever it has stated briefly, or merely hinted at, in one place, will be found expanded and fully explained elsewhere in it.

– It is very important to remember that the Qur’ân contains allegory and metaphor along with what is plain and decisive, and the only safeguard against being misled by what is allegorical or metaphorical is that the interpretation of such passages must be strictly in consonance with what is laid down in clear and decisive words, and not at variance therewith.

When a law or principle is laid down, any statement carrying a doubtful significance, or a statement apparently opposed to the law so laid down, must be interpreted subject to the principle enunciated. Similarly that which is particular must be read in connection with and subject to more general statements.

Rules of Qur’ânic interpretation:^[4]A "Statute," says Maxwell in his well-known book on The Interpretation of Statutes," is the will of the Legislature, and the fundamental rule of interpretation, to which all others are subordinate, is that a statute is to be expounded according to the intent of the Legislature. If the words of the statute are in themselves precise and unambiguous no more is necessary then to expound these words in their natural and ordinary sense." If we consider the case-law of the British and American Courts, we can deduce inter alia the following further rules of interpretation:

1. The words of a statute, when there is a doubt about their meaning, are to be understood in the sense in which they best harmonise with the subject of the enactment.

2. The language of a statute must be given its plain literal construction. It must not be strained to make it apply to a case to which it does not legitimately, by its terms, apply.

3. The true meaning of a passage in a statute is to be found not merely in the words of that passage but in conformity with the other parts of the statute. Every clause of the statute should be construed with reference to the context and the other clauses of the statute, so as, so far as possible, to make a consistent enactment of the whole statute. It must be read as a whole in order to ascertain the true meanings of its several clauses, and the words of each clause should be so interpreted as to bring them into harmony with the other provisions.

4. The words and phrases of a particular nature should be read with, and subject to, the words and phrases of a general import and interpreted accordingly.

5. A statute should be so interpreted as not to be inconsistent with the comity of nations or with established natural laws. To avoid a breach of this rule even a narrow construction, if necessary, must be put on it.

6. A statute should be presumed to void absurdity, excess in exercise of power, alteration of previous existing laws, inconsistency, repugnancy, unreasonableness or unnaturalness.

"These legal presumptions," said Lord Bacon in his Advancement of Learning, "are beacons to be avoided – rather than as authorities to be followed." Sir William Blackstone, in his Laws of England, laid down that a statute contrary to natural laws, equity or reason, or repugnant or impossible to perform, must be deemed to be void; and there is no legal sanction for the supposition that every unjust and absurd consequence was within the contemplation of the law.

These rules of interpretation, based as they are on principles of common sense, equity and justice, must be deemed to be of universal application. We do not find any inconsistency in the laws of nature. God made them according to a measure (The Holy Qur’ân, 55:7). The Holy Qur’ân drawing specific attention to the regularity and uniformity of the laws working in nature, says:

"… You see no incongruity in the creation of the Beneficent God, then look again, can you see any disorder? Then turn back the eye again and again; your sight shall come back to you confused while it will get fatigued …. Does He not know Who created? And He is the Knower of the subtleties, the Aware" (Ibid., 67:3, 4, 14).

These verses point to the existence of the Supreme Being as witnessed in the regularity and uniformity of the laws of nature, or in other words the absence of any inconsistency in them, and the succeeding verse calls special attention to the spiritual laws contained in the Book, which also work with uniformity.

The laws of nature, nay creation itself, it has been said, are the acts of God: and divinely revealed books are the words of God. There cannot, therefore, be any inconsistency between the two, or in either of them, and if any interpretation produces such a result it must be rejected.

I will presently deal with the rules of Qur’ânic interpretation which have been laid down by Muslim divines; but the claims of the Holy Qur’ân and the special rules of interpretation which it gives itself must be considered first.

The Holy Qur’ân claims to be a collection of the best teachings (Ibid., 39:27) and a complete guide (Ibid., 10:37) from God, a Book which verifies the previous true revelation (Ibid., 2:89, 101, etc.) and replaces them (Ibid., 16:101). It explains everything (Ibid., 16:89) and is right directing (Ibid., 18:2). It settles all differences (Ibid., 16:64) and was revealed so that all disputes might be judged and settled according to the directions contained in it (Ibid., 5:49). It further claims that, being a Divine revelation, it contains rules of guidance for humanity. It supports them with intelligent arguments (Ibid., 2:185) and needs no champion for its cause, for it meets all objections raised against it with clear proof and convincing arguments (Ibid., 25:33). The Book says:

"Again, on Us (devolves) the explaining of it" (Ibid., 75:19).

It is a distinguishing feature of the Holy Qur’ân that it explains the wisdom of its teachings by means of arguments. It does not only state the basic doctrines and articles of faith, but it also demonstrates their truth by reasons. "This is a book," says the Holy Qur’ân, "whose verses are established with wisdom and set forth with clearness." The Holy Qur’ân also claims that its verses are conformable to others in its various parts (The Holy Qur’ân, 39:23), and that there is no inconsistency or discrepancy to be found in it (Ibid., 4:82). These claims, unique as they are – and no religious Book has ever put forward similar claims – establish more than anything else the Divine origin of the Book.

The Holy Qur’ân further says that it contains, inter alia, verses which are decisive (Ibid., 3:7), and goes on to give its rule of interpretation in the following terms:

"He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then as for those in whose heart there is perversity, they follow the part of it which is allegorical seeking to mislead, and seeking to give it their own interpretation; but none knows its interpretation except Allah; and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding" (Ibid., 3:7).

It is significant that this verse occurs at the beginning of the third chapter of the Holy Qur’ân, which deals with the birth and death of Jesus. It is due to an intentional and dishonest misinterpretation of the allegorical verses that Christian missionaries try to find support from the Holy Qur’ân for their dogmatic beliefs. But the Holy Qur’ân, some fourteen hundred years ago, pointed out that they only follow the allegorical part of it simply to mislead others. To believe and follow them regardless of the decisive verses, according to the Holy Qur’ân, is a perversity which Muslims should avoid.

The Holy Qur’ân lays down certain fundamental principles of Islam and they are contained in the decisive verses. They form the basis of the Book. These principles are unchangeable and are stated in unambiguous terms. The allegorical verses must be interpreted in the light of the decisive verses, and no attempt should be made on the strength of these allegorical verses to set up a principle in conflict with the decisive verses. As the Book decides all matters, the explanation of the words and verses of the Holy Qur’ân should therefore be sought from the Holy Qur’ân itself. Thus the particular should follow the general, and the interpretation of the allegorical verses should be strictly in consonance with the decisive verses. These rules of interpretation are indicated by the words: it is all from Allah and none knows the interpretation except Allah. In other words, that interpretation would be the correct one, and should alone be accepted which renders the allegorical verses conformable to the other parts of the Holy Qur’ân. Keeping these principles in mind Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad has explained the following rules of Qur’ânic interpretation (in Barakat-ud-Du'a, 15-17):

1. A verse should be so interpreted as to be conformable with the other parts of the Book. Inconsistency, repugnancy, unreasonableness and unnaturalness should be avoided; and particularly all allegorical verses should be so interpreted as to become conformable with, and subject to, the decisive verses.

2. God revealed His will to the Holy Prophet and made him understand it. His interpretation of any verse through his Sayings or Sunna (conduct) must be accepted.

3. The interpretation of the Companions of the Holy Prophet must also be accepted.

4. The interpretation of Mujaddids and Aulia Allah (saints) should also be accepted.

5. If the Holy Qur’ân is read with pure and pious mind, it will explain its true meaning itself. If its teachings are acted upon, it will make the meaning clearer still.

6. To understand the spiritual laws and facts stated in the Holy Qur’ân, recourse should be had to the laws of nature.

7. Arabic Lexicon should be taken into consideration, but if a word is used in one sense in one part of the Holy Qur’ân the same import must be attributed to it in the same context.

[1] “Religion of Islam” by Maulana Muhammad Ali, p. 35-36, 6^th Edition, pub. 1990, Ahmadiyya Anjuman Ishaat Islam Lahore.

[2] 4:82. Will they not then meditate on the Qur’ân? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy. – Footnote: The Qur’ân was not written out and given on one occasion, but it continued to be delivered in small portions during twenty-three years under the most varying circumstances. But what is striking throughout the entire revelation is that it keeps up one and the same strain — absolute submission to Allah, entire trust in Him, perfect confidence of future success, a liberal view of humanity, an attitude of charity towards all nations and religions, and goodness to all alike. The spirit of the revelations to the solitary, persecuted, and rejected preacher of Makkah does not differ in these and a hundred other particulars from the spirit of the revelations to the sole temporal and spiritual monarch of Arabia – Al-Nisa – Women: Muhammad Ali – Zahid Aziz

[3] Footnote 37: The subject of the interpretation of the Qur’ânic verses is very appropriately dealt with in the opening verses of the third chapter which begins with a discussion with the followers of Christianity, for, it must be borne in mind, that it is on a wrong interpretation of certain allegorical statements that the fundamental principles of Christianity are actually based. The basic doctrine of the religion of all the prophets in the Old Testament is the Unity of God, but there are a number of prophecies couched in allegorical language having reference to the advent of Christ. The Christians, instead of interpreting these in accordance with the clear words of the principle of Divine Unity, laid the foundations of Christianity on the metaphorical language of the prophecies, and thus by neglect of the true rule of interpretation were misled to such an extent as to ignore the very essentials of the religion of the prophets. Christ was believed to be god on the strength of metaphorical expressions, and the doctrine of the Trinity thus became the basis of a new religion. The epithet "son of God" was freely used in Israelite literature, and was always taken allegorically. The term occurs as early as Gen. 6:2 where the "sons of God" are spoken of as taking the daughters of men for wives. It occurs again in Job 1:6 and 38:7, and good men are no doubt meant in both places. In Ex. 4:22 and many other places, the Israelites are spoken of as the children of God: "Israel is my son, even my first born." The expression is used in the same metaphorical sense in the Gospels. Even in the fourth Gospel, where the Divinity of Christ is looked upon as finding a bolder expression than in the synoptics, Jesus Christ is reported as saying in answer to those who accused him of blasphemy for speaking of himself as the son of God: "Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If He called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world. Thou blasphemest, because I said, I am the Son of God?" (Jn 10:34-36). It is thus clear that even in the mouth of Jesus the term "son of God" was a metaphorical expression, and by taking it literally the Church has destroyed the very foundation of religion. It is to this fundamental mistake of Christianity that the Qur’ân refers by giving the rule for the interpretation of allegorical verses in a discussion of the Christian religion. [Emphasis added]

[4] “Jesus in Heaven on Earth” by Khwaja Nazir Ahmad, Chapter 2 – Islamic Resources, p. 51-54 First U.S.A. Edition 1998. Ahmadiyya Anjuman Ishaat Islam Lahore Inc. U.S.A.

Case Study 1: Fidel or Infidel, Who determines – Man or God?

Before we discuss the loggerhead question of Fidel^[1] vs. Infidel^[2], it necessitates first to determine the very definition of a Fidel in Quran . The core definition for a Fidel is that which the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) applied to himself:

The above delineation of belief is further expanded into its progressive stages in Quran 49:15^[4] for the believers, by their declaration – The believers are those only who believe in Allah and His Messenger, by their immersed belief – then they do not doubt, and then by their actions – and struggle hard with their wealth and their lives in the way of Allah. Such are the truthful ones.

The above core of belief is supplemented to include co-beliefs which only strengthen the core itself:

The nature of man-God connection thus established in above-mentioned verses is a personal and private one in which there are neither intermediaries nor any human approver:

Additionally, Quran delineates the truly faithful from others:

The faithful who believe in Allâh and His Messengers in turn have to fulfill the purpose of their faith by action and various virtuous means, because both the theory and practice of faith have to be synchronous and mutually complementing. For example:

In summary, the principal ingredient for a Fidel is faith in Allah and everything that flows from Him, the Messengers – both human and angels, Book/Scriptures, and awareness of accountability, be it on the Last Day or every day. The core expectations from a Fidel are the deeds of righteousness complemented with payers for conscious awareness of God, self and mankind while presenting Zakat.

With the definition of a Fidel out of the way, the next question needing answer is who determines if someone is infidel or unfaithful in his or her belief? Is it the burden of man or God?

In Quran, to be a Fidel is an undertaking by one’s free will and not by a decree of God:

If contract to be Fidel is solely between the individual and God, so then is its negation by that individual as well. Any oath between man and God is based upon what is in the mind, and not in what is uttered vainly:

The above verse sets in stone that for God, what matters is in the hearts. Can a human peek into the heart of another to determine what resides therein? Never!

Frequently, one comes across fatwas (–religious opinions or judgments), the declarations from pulpit calling a fellow citizen, usually a professing Muslim, an infidel. Not infrequently, the cleric(s) of one sect declare other sect(s) outside the pale of Islam. One wonders how a human can be a judge of a fellow human in the issues of faith and belief which are the sole matters of one's heart. Even worse, how do the people accept such declarations from the pulpits as words and intention of God? Strange are utters of such words and even stranger are the minds which give credence to such a nonsense.
 
In Quran, we find that it is only and only God, Who, by His closeness to the individual knows what's in someone's heart:

Faith is a matter of the heart, an unseen matter to everyone else. As to how pure is the faith of anyone, its judge is not even the Prophets, but only Allah:

On the flip, no pulpit, no matter how zealot it maybe can speak on behalf of Allah as no man can perceive what is in His ‘mind’:

Even the angels cannot peek into someone's thoughts; rather they merely are a witness to the obvious actions and uttered words of the individual:

Thus, if someone professes or for that matter rejects the faith, angels can only record the spoken words or related actions. They have no say in the matters of the 'truthfulness' of the heart of that person. It would be a separate subject matter of what Quran means by angels, which for sure are not the winged creatures depicted in religious art.

In the above verses, a human is totally factored out of the capacity to peep into someone else's mind and dig out the faith or lack thereof. This prerogative is only with the Creator of mankind, which is further explained:

The following verse acts as a preamble for the verses to follow, which brings to light the befuddled matter of belief in which the loudest claims to faith from the pulpit are commonly considered honourable, whereas Quran states the opposite, that – Surely the most honourable of you in the sight of Allâh is he who guards against evil the most, and not by one who carries the noisiest trumpet and wields the so called religious authority:

Anyone can say anything, even profess faith (read fatwa issuer), but in the eyes of God, has no bearing till the words match the underlying mind:

The ‘We believe’ in above verse elucidates the entry point into Islam for each individual. The threshold for being a Muslim is to submit. Only thereafter the faith and its corresponding righteous deeds sinks in with varying degrees of personal effort, commonly known as iman^[18]. Traditionally, the entrance into Islam is the declaration – La ilaha ill-Allah, Muhammad-ur rasul-ullah i.e. "There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah."

The next verse further clarifies the previous one about one's faith, in which actions have to speak louder than the words uttered:

It is a common experience that rarely does one ever come across fatwa issuer(s) who will strive hard with their possessions and their lives in the cause of Allâh (49:15) and hardly guards against evil (49:13).

Interestingly, the following verse mocks the public confessions to win approval of the audience, the modus operandi of the fatwa issuers. The confessions at times can be forced, coerced, voluntary or strategic:

Thus, the above verse lays it out in black and white that God is the sole validator of one’s declared faith, because He alone is the judge of what a person confesses by tongue and what the corresponding belief in the heart is.

The declaratory effort of fatwa mongers to ascribe infidelity to someone else usually has a hidden secondary gain, the nature of which maybe material and/or political, but in doing so they at least imply to include themselves within Islam, while excluding others. Quran ridicules any such a drama: 

The above verses, if read from the perspective of the victim of a fatwa of being declared an infidel, factually put the fatwa issuer in the witness stand instead, who in turn has to equally defend his own faith, by the same standards that he applied on his victim.

How irrelevant in Quran is the issue of ascribing someone as infidel can be judged by the next verse. Even in a state of war, when a Muslim community might be threatened by enemy spies faking as Muslims or the hypocrites within their midst, a professor of faith has to be accepted into the fold of Islam on even a simple gesture of greetings by the latter:

Of note in the above verse is the phrase make proper investigations, which can only be conducted from the observable actions and not by guessing at the thoughts hidden in someone's mind. Quran reminds those who call themselves Muslims, yet others as non-Muslims, or doubt sincerity of others, not to forget that they themselves were such (disbelievers) before that (you accepted Islam) and what they currently claim.

It may be noted that Quran places a high importance to the salutation 'Salam' i.e. 'Peace' because any humble utterer and believer in these words is termed as a servant of God:

In light of the above verses 3:94 and 25:63, it baffles one's mind that there are certain pulpits amongst Muslims which thrive on labeling the proffers of 'Salam' and 'Peace' as Infidels, while the Quran calls the same as servants of the Beneficent.

As to the blind followers of fatwa mongers who declare others infidels, Quran has express revulsion towards them and their fate:

The fatwa mongers tend to be unaware of their haughty and condescending attitude that Quran admonishes against:

Little do such boasters of faith with their haughty attitude know that by the standards of Quran those who dare to declare the Kalima reciters as infidels, their repugnant proclamations are equated with braying of the donkey in Quran or to put it bluntly, they make as ass of themselves by their such attitude and behaviors.

[1] From the Late Latin name Fidelis which meant "faithful"
[2] An unbeliever with respect to a particular religion – Merriam Webster
[3] Al-Zumar – The Multitudes: Nooruddin
[4] Al-Hujurat – The Apartments: Muhammad Ali – Zahid Aziz
[5] Al-Nisa – The Women: Nooruddin
[6] Al-Zumar – The Multitudes: Nooruddin
[7] Al-Zumar – The Multitudes: Nooruddin
[8] Al-Hadid – The Iron: Nooruddin
[9] Al-Baqarah – The Cow: Nooruddin
[10] Al-Baqarah – The Cow: Nooruddin
[11] Qâf – Allah is Mighty: Nooruddin
[12] Al-Maidah – The Table Spread with Food: Nooruddin
[13] Maidah – The Table Spread with Food: Nooruddin
[14] Qâf – Allah is Mighty: Nooruddin
[15] Maidah – The Table Spread with Food: Nooruddin
[16] Al-Hujurât – The Chambers: Nooruddin
[17] Al-Hujurât – The Chambers: Nooruddin
[18] The word iman, generally translated as faith or belief, is derived from amana (ordinarily rendered as he believed) which means, when used intransitively, he came into peace or security; and, when used transitively, he granted (him) peace or security. Hence the believer is called al–mu'min, meaning one who has come into peace or security because he has accepted the principles which bring about peace of mind or security from fear; and God is called al-Mu'min meaning the Granter of security (59:23).
Use of the word Iman in the Qur'an: The word iman, generally translated as faith or belief, is used in two different senses in the Qur'an. According to Raghib, the famous lexicologist of the Qur'an, iman is sometimes nothing more than a confession with the tongue that one believes in Muhammad, as for example in these verses: "Those who believe (amanu) and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does good, they have their reward with their Lord…" (2:62); "O you who believe (amanu)! Believe in Allah and His Messenger and the Book which He has revealed to His Messenger" (4:136). But, as Raghib has further explained, iman also implies the condition in which a confession with the tongue is accompanied by an assent of the heart (Tasdiq-un bi-l-qalb) and the carrying into practice of what is believed (Amal-un bi-l-jawarih), as in this verse: "And for those who believe in Allah and His Messengers, they are the truthful and the faithful ones with their Lord" (57:19).
The word iman is, however, also used in either of the two latter senses, meaning simply the assent of the heart or the doing of good deeds. Examples of this are: "The dwellers of the desert say: We believe (amanna). Say: You believe not, but say, We submit; and faith has not yet entered into your hearts" (49:14). Here belief clearly stands for the assent of the heart as explained in the verse itself. Or, "What reason have you that you believe not in Allah, and the Messenger invites you that you may believe in your Lord and He has indeed made a covenant with you if you are believers" (57:8), where "believe in Allah" means make sacrifices in the cause of truth, as the context shows. Thus the word iman, as used in the Qur'an, signifies either simply a confession of the truth with the tongue, or simply an assent of the heart and a firm conviction of the truth brought by the Prophet, or the doing of good deeds and carrying into practice of the principle accepted, or it may signify a combination of the three. Generally, however, it is employed to indicate an assent of the heart, combined, of course, with a confession with the tongue, to what the prophets bring from God, as distinguished from the doing of good deeds, and hence it is that the righteous, as already remarked, are spoken of as those who believe and do good. – “Religion of Islam” by Maulana Muhammad Ali, p. 91-92, Sixth Edition, printed: 1990.
[19] Al-Hujurât – The Chambers: Nooruddin
[20] Al-Hujurât – The Chambers: Nooruddin
[21] Al-Hujurât – The Chambers: Nooruddin
[22] Al-Hujurât – The Chambers: Nooruddin
[23] “Heresy in Islam or Refutation of Declaring a Muslim an Unbeliever” by Maulana Muhammad Ali, Translated and edited by Sheikh Muhammad Tufail, M.A., p. 24, English edition 1995.
[24] Al-Furqan – The Criterion: Muhammad Ali – Zahid Aziz
[25] Al-Baqarah – The Cow: Nooruddin
[26] Luqman – Luqman: Nooruddin