“We strengthened his kingship, and gave him wisdom and sound judgment.” (Qur’an 38:20)

﷽
These verses are a case study that strengthen the position of the Ibadi school that Muslims should not rely upon the Israʼiliyyat material to provide further points of elucidation on any matter of our faith.
Narrated Ubaidullah:
Ibn `Abbas said, “Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Qur’an) which has been revealed to Allah’s Messenger (saw) is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, ‘It is from Allah,’ to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!”
Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7363)
Now we are left with a conundrum.
Read, and reflect, dear readers.
Because this hadith is from Ibn Abbas (ra). Ibn Abbas (ra) is clearly telling us not to rely upon the People of the Scripture while we have the Qur’an.
*Note* Ibn Abbas (ra) according to the hadith clearly states:
“Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything?“
Yet low and behold!
https://quranx.com/Tafsirs/38.21
“(And hath the story of the litigants come unto thee?) Then came to you the story of the opponents of David. (How they climbed the wall into the royal chamber…”
https://quranx.com/Tafsirs/38.22
“How they burst in upon David, and he) David (was afraid of them. They) i.e. the two angels who entered in on David (said: Be not afraid (We are) two litigants, one of whom hath wronged the other, therefore judge aright) justly (between us; be not unjust) do not be partial and transgress not; (and show us the fair way) show us what is right.”
https://quranx.com/Tafsirs/38.23
“(Lo! this my brother hath ninety and nine ewes) meaning 99 wives (while I had one ewe) i.e. one wife; (and he said: Entrust it to me, and he conquered me in speech) this is a similitude which they struck for David in order for him to understand what he did to Uriah.”
https://quranx.com/Tafsirs/38.26
“((And it was said to him): O David! Lo! We have set you as a vicegerent in the earth) We appointed you a prophet king for the Children of Israel; (therefore judge aright between mankind) judge justly between people, (and follow not desire) that as you did regarding Bathseba, the wife of Uriah, who was also David’s cousin (that it beguile you from the way of Allah) from the obedience of Allah. (Lo! those who wander from the way of Allah) from the obedience of Allah (have an awful doom, forasmuch as they forgot the Day of Reckoning) because they forsake working for the Day of Reckoning.”
So now we are in a conundrum. Here are some propositions that require reflection.
- The above hadith is not true because Ibn Abbas (ra) apparently is relying upon information that neither the Qur’an nor the Blessed Prophet (saw) provides.
- The above hadith is true and this tafsir attributed to Ibn Abbas (ra) needs to be put under a microscope and further scrutiny.
- Ibn Abbas (ra) used to believe the statement in the hadith, but later changed his opinion, thus we have the bizarre Israʼiliyyat material in his Tafsir.
- The bizarre Israʼiliyyat material in Ibn Abbas (ra) tafsir is about an earlier position he held and the hadith captures a latter position in which he corrected the error of his ways.
“We strengthened his kingship, and gave him wisdom and sound judgment. Has the story of the two plaintiffs, who scaled the sanctuary, reached you? When they came into David’s presence, he was startled by them. They said, “Have no fear. We are merely two in a dispute: one of us has wronged the other. So judge between us with truth—do not go beyond it and guide us to the right way. This is my brother. He has ninety-nine sheep while I have one. He asked me to give it up to him, overwhelming me with his argument.” David’s ruling was: “He has definitely wronged you in demanding to add your sheep to his. And certainly many partners wrong each other, except those who believe and do good—but how few are they!” Then David realized that We had tested him so he asked for his Lord’s forgiveness, fell down in prostration, and turned in repentance. So We forgave that for him. And he will indeed have closeness to Us and an honourable destination! “O David! We have surely made you an authority in the land, so judge between people with truth. And do not follow whims or they will lead you astray from Allah’s Way. Surely those who go astray from Allah’s Way will suffer a severe punishment for neglecting the Day of Reckoning.” (Qur’an 38:20-26)
We will give our argument that of the questions that are put forward the position of Ibn Abbas (ra) is either position 2 or 4. The Tafsir attributed to Ibn Abbas (ra) has some bizarre assertions.
In order to believe in either proposition 1 or 3 we would need solid answers to the following questions:
A) Why would angels need to: “climb a wall into a royal chamber?” They are angels why do they need to climb or scale anything?
B) Since when did Prophets serve as a litigant in a dispute with angels?
C) Since when did angels have sheep?
D) Where did Ibn Abbas (ra) get the idea that the sheep are actually women? Why would the Arabic text, which clearly states sheep, be seen as a metaphor for women unless one was reliant upon Israʼiliyyat.
As regards what some commentators think, this is a reference to let me remind the readers of the Biblical account that accuses the Prophet.
Regarding the incident of King David and Uriah, it is alluded to in the Qur’an (38:21-25) in the Parable of the Ewes. It becomes evident that King David did commit some mistake with regard to taking Uriah’s wife. But, of course, we don’t say he committed adultery with her.
Allegedly Prophet David (as) commits adultery and is culpable in murder according to the Bible.
“Brothers, I can tell you with confidence that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne.” (Acts 2:29-30)
Next, we have the story of Prophet David (as)
Apparently, if we are to believe the testimony in the Bible concerning David, we find that he was a man who led a woman to commit adultery and committed adultery himself. He lusted after another man’s wife, watched her bath naked. He then had this woman’s husband killed. He tried to hide the fact he made this woman pregnant out of wedlock. This is the same David that, according to Christians, writes all the prophecies concerning Jesus in the 22 Psalms and throughout the Psalms. Even accordingly, David wrote evil things like the following:
“In the morning David wrote a letter to Joab and sent it with Uriah. In it, he wrote, “Put Uriah out in front where the fighting is fiercest. Then withdraw from him so he will be struck down and die.”
If I was to measure the Prophets of the Bible-based upon how some Christians measure the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) I could never become a Christian. I would have to reject the testimony concerning the “prophecies” concerning Jesus in the Psalms.
“One evening David got up from his bed and walked around on the roof of the palace. From the roof, he saw a woman bathing. The woman was very beautiful, and David sent someone to find out about her. The man said, “She is Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam and the wife of Uriah the Hittite.” Then David sent messengers to get her. She came to him, and he slept with her. (Now she was purifying herself from her monthly uncleanness.)
Then she went back home. The woman conceived and sent word to David, saying, “I am pregnant.” “So David sent this word to Joab: “Send me Uriah the Hittite.” And Joab sent him to David. When Uriah came to him, David asked him how Joab was, how the soldiers were, and how the war was going. Then David said to Uriah, “Go down to your house and wash your feet.” So Uriah left the palace, and a gift from the king was sent after him. But Uriah slept at the entrance to the palace with all his master’s servants and did not go down to his house.”
“David was told, “Uriah did not go home.” So he asked Uriah, “Haven’t you just come from a military campaign? Why didn’t you go home?” “Uriah said to David, “The ark and Israel and Judah are staying in tents, and my commander Joab and my lord’s men are camped in the open country. How could I go to my house to eat and drink and make love to my wife? As surely as you live, I will not do such a thing!”
“Then David said to him, “Stay here one more day, and tomorrow I will send you back.” So Uriah remained in Jerusalem that day and the next. At David’s invitation, he ate and drank with him, and David made him drunk. But in the evening Uriah went out to sleep on his mat among his master’s servants; he did not go home.”
” In the morning David wrote a letter to Joab and sent it with Uriah. In it, he wrote, “Put Uriah out in front where the fighting is fiercest. Then withdraw from him so he will be struck down and die.” “So while Joab had the city under siege, he put Uriah at a place where he knew the strongest defenders were. When the men of the city came out and fought against Joab, some of the men in David’s army fell; moreover, Uriah the Hittite died.”
“Joab sent David a full account of the battle. He instructed the messenger: “When you have finished giving the king this account of the battle, the king’s anger may flare up, and he may ask you, ‘Why did you get so close to the city to fight? Didn’t you know they would shoot arrows from the wall? Who killed Abimelek son of Jerub-Besheth? Didn’t a woman drop an upper millstone on him from the wall, so that he died in Thebez? Why did you get so close to the wall?’ If he asks you this, then say to him, ‘Moreover, your servant Uriah the Hittite is dead.’”
“The messenger set out, and when he arrived he told David everything Joab had sent him to say. The messenger said to David, “The men overpowered us and came out against us in the open, but we drove them back to the entrance of the city gate. Then the archers shot arrows at your servants from the wall, and some of the king’s men died. Moreover, your servant Uriah the Hittite is dead.” “David told the messenger, “Say this to Joab: ‘Don’t let this upset you; the sword devours one as well as another. Press the attack against the city and destroy it.’ Say this to encourage Joab.”
“When Uriah’s wife heard that her husband was dead, she mourned for him. After the time of mourning was over, David had her brought to his house, and she became his wife and bore him a son. But the thing David had done displeased the Lord.” (2nd Samuel 11:2-27)
What does the displeased Lord do with David?
“This is what the Lord says: ‘Out of your own household I am going to bring calamity on you. Before your very eyes, I will take your wives and give them to one who is close to you, and he will sleep with your wives in broad daylight. You did it in secret, but I will do this thing in broad daylight before all Israel.’”
“Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.” “Nathan replied, “The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die.” “After Nathan had gone home, the Lord struck the child that Uriah’s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.” On the seventh day, the child died.”
David’s attendants were afraid to tell him that the child was dead, for they thought, “While the child was still living, he wouldn’t listen to us when we spoke to him”. How can we now tell him the child is dead? He may do something desperate.” “David noticed that his attendants were whispering among themselves, and he realized the child was dead. “Is the child dead?” he asked.” “Yes,” they replied, “He is dead.”
“Then David got up from the ground. After he had washed, put on lotions, and changed his clothes, he went into the house of the Lord and worshiped. Then he went to his own house, and at his request, they served him food, and he ate.” “His attendants asked him, “Why are you acting this way? While the child was alive, you fasted and wept, but now that the child is dead, you get up and eat!”
“He answered, “While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept. I thought, ‘Who knows? The Lord may be gracious to me and let the child live.’ But now that he is dead, why should I go on fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.” “Then David comforted his wife Bathsheba, and he went to her and made love to her. She gave birth to a son, and they named him Solomon. The Lord loved him; and because the Lord loved him, he sent word through Nathan the prophet to name him Jedidiah.” (2 Samuel 12:11-25)
Prima Qur’an Comments:
So the Lord (Jesus The Son, The Father, and that third wheel, aka- The Holy Spirit) was displeased with David’s actions. So what do they ultimately do? What do THEY DO to David?
- They kill David’s infant son! Imagine David saying to his son: “Sorry, son but Daddy got into a fling with some other dudes wife and now well lil tyke you’re going to have die for that!”
- They make a decree that David will have his wives taken from him and made to commit adultery in broad daylight. God of the Bible via Prophet Nathan: “What you did displeased me. You know I don’t like it when people commit adultery. To prove my point I am going to decree to have your wives go and commit adultery in broad daylight just to show you how much I dislike adultery!”
- Lastly, they reward David with a son through the wife who cheated on her husband and gave her Solomon who in return became a King of Israel and a Prophet! God of the Bible via Prophet Nathan: “David what you did was very bad and even though I killed your son who did not have anything do with your sexual proprietaries but that is water under the bridge, lesson learned. Thus, I am going give you another son through the same women that cheated on her husband.”
What in the Cinnamon Toast Crunch kind of justice is this?!
Notice the above text states:
” I will take your wives and give them to one who is close to you, and he will sleep with your wives.”
Such a notable threat, but we don’t hear anything of that kind. The text says that I will take your wives and take them to one who is close to David, and he will sleep with your wives. Which begs the question. How certain can we be that this child that Bathsheba had with David was his child at all?
We have no idea how much time has passed since the death of Uriah and although the text goes out of its way to make it seem that he never had intimacy with her for some time, we can’t be entirely certain. Not only that, but apparently, according to the threats issued by the God of the Bible to David that he would take his wives and give them to someone who will commit adultery with them, how certain can we be that this individual is not the father?
Anyway, this is the depiction of the deity of the Bible and the “justice” of that deity. There is absolutely no justification to think that the passage of the (Qur’an 38:20-26) had anything to do with that, at all!
Not only this but the above text is in major contradiction with the above.
“But the children of the murderers he did not execute, according to what is written in the Book of the Law of Moses, in which the Lord commanded, saying, “Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor shall children be put to death for their fathers; but a person shall be put to death for his own sin.” (2 Kings 14:6)
Note that the children of the murderers were not executed. But the above text has:
“You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die.”
Shaykh Dr. Khalan Al Kharousi (H) has an explanation for this. All praise be to Allah (swt).
Dr. Khalan Al Kharousi (h) mentions a very important point. That here and there a particular mufassir (exegete) would look at the Qur’an through the lens of the Israʼiliyyat material. Which brings us that unfortunate bit about Uriah and David. The text of the Qur’an is far, far from this.
Now that is the explanation given by Shaykh Dr. Khalan (h).
There is another explanation given by our teacher, Shaykh Dawud Bu-Sinani (h) of Algeria.
Shaykh Dawud’s explanation is very straight forward. He focuses on the following text:
- So judge between us with truth—do not go beyond it and guide us to the right way.
- David’s ruling was: “He has definitely wronged you in demanding to add your sheep to his.
- Then David realized that We had tested him so he asked for his Lord’s forgiveness, fell down in prostration, and turned in repentance
- We have surely made you an authority in the land, so judge between people with truth. And do not follow whims or they will lead you astray from Allah’s Way
So the straight forward explanation given by Shaykh Dawud Bu-Sinani of Algeria is that the hakim should hear both sides of the story. David (as) upon hearing that one brother had the bulk of the sheep, gave in to his whims and was hasty in coming to a decision. However, he immediately realized this. As if he was going to turn to the second brother and say (now you speak) but by than David (as) already showed himself not to be impartial. Thus, David (as) was quick to turn in repentance to Allah (swt).
For those of you who understand Arabic, do not miss out on this gem of the Ummah, Shaykh Dawud Bu-Sinani (h). Ustadh Nouman Ali Khan attended his lecture series in Oman.
Here is a 7 hour Qur’anic course contains seven chapters dealing with the foundations of faith and the practical rules that a Muslim should follow in order to meet his Lord with a blank page free from the traces of sins and sins!
May Allah (swt) forgive the Ummah!
May Allah (swt) guide the Ummah!
Welcome.
You may also be interested in the following articles:
One of the reasons we also know that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was false because of his misunderstanding pertaining to the Qur’an 4:157 which does not speak of a crucifixion at all. The concept is alien to the Qur’an.
I will reference those Ahmadi who believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is a Prophet as Ahmadi B and those that do not as Ahmadi A
Which of the above two groups do you identify as?
For example you know I follow the Ibadi school, so that much is clear. What may not be clear (as we do not have much literature in English) are particular views or perspectives on matters relating to jurisprudence, theology etc…unless they are known.
So, yes if you have something from the Qur’an and Sunnah in regard to this topic feel free to share.
Otherwise a good place to start between us would be the understanding of Qur’an 4:157 here: https://primaquran.com/2023/06/18/crucifixion-or-impaled-understanding-quran-4157/
Also, it is very challenging to have a sincere dialogue or exchange of ideas when you have written tripe like the following:
“https://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.com/2016/11/the-deviant-ibadis-are-khawarij-lite.html
So here let me challenge you with a simple question.
“The Ibadis cling to their Kharijite foundations and consider, according to their principles, the doers of major sins to be Kuffar (unbelievers).”
Where is the quote from our sources that if a Muslim commits a major sin they are a disbeliever (outside the millat of Islam) ?
Also when you use language like:
“Look how this filthy Kharijite Ibadi is justifying the Kharijite rebellion against Amir-ul-Mu’minin Ali b. Abi Talib (Radiyallahu anhu) and claiming that the latter made a “wrong decision” to fight against the rebellious and renegade Khawarij!”
This does not sound like “love for all hatred for none.” It sounds quite hateful.
The last thing I need is for someone to come on here with the pretention of dialogue.
You made your comment the link to your site is there.
Be quite curious to see this quote.
“The Ibadis cling to their Kharijite foundations and consider, according to their principles, the doers of major sins to be Kuffar (unbelievers).”
I was a fourth generation Qadiani but recently repented completely from Qadianism and accepted mainstream Sunni Islam at the hand of Mufti Sayyid Mubashir Qadiri دامت بركاته
Regarding 4:157 my interpretation is closer to the Ismaili view. Basically, I think it is wishful thinking to deny the event of the Crucifixion, as it is affirmed emphatically throughout the New Testament and also the earliest non-Christian references to Jesus Christ عليه السلام (Josephus and Tacitus).
The Jews arrogantly boasted about having killed Jesus عليه السلام which provoked the Ghirah of Allah سبحانه وتعالى
He therefore says that they didn’t actually kill him it only appeared that way. In reality Allah is the One Who gives death. Surah 8:17 is a beautiful example of this metaphysical concept, where Allah says it was He Who killed the polytheist army at Badr and not the Sahabah رضى الله عنهم
Although the substitution theory is widespread among us Sunni Muslims it is based on the speculative opinion of the Mufassirin and not any Hadith Marfu or anything definitive. The only external source that indicates the substitution theory is the literature of some heretical Gnostics and Docetists who emerged later on in Christian history and were motivated to deny the Crucifixion because they believed Jesus عليه السلام wasn’t a real flesh and blood human but only had the appearance of a human.
Regarding the problem of King David عليه السلام and the story of the Ewes, I have written about it here
https://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.com/2021/12/parable-of-ewe-and-king-david.html
In summary, I think that one can’t understand the Quran without being familiar with the Biblical narrative. The Quran assumes to a great extent that the reader is familiar with the more detailed Biblical narrative. Not that I am affirming everything that is in the Bible on this topic, or in general, because the Bible says King David first committed adultery with Uriah’s wife (God forbid). But if one simply goes by the text of the Quran it is confusing why King David became repentant after the two litigants presented their dispute to him over the Ewes.
“But if one simply goes by the text of the Quran it is confusing why King David became repentant after the two litigants presented their dispute to him over the Ewes.”
This very entry proves this claim as patently false.
“In summary, I think that one can’t understand the Quran without being familiar with the Biblical narrative.”
This is not something I would agree with either.
Have you went to Mufti Sayyid Mubashir Qadiri with your concerns over 4:157 does he concur with you?
The problem that the traditional Sunni view, the Qadiani view, and the Ismaili view is all of them somehow imagine that the context of the Qur’an 4:157 is a reference to Romans, and nailing an individual on a patibulum. It is beyond bizarre.
” I think it is wishful thinking to deny the event of the Crucifixion, as it is affirmed emphatically throughout the New Testament and also the earliest non-Christian references to Jesus Christ عليه السلام (Josephus and Tacitus).”
The point is that even if it were the case it doesn’t reach us as Muslims. The so called “Crucifixion” is alien to the Qur’an.
Allah (swt) has tackled the root of the issue where he has forgiven Adam (as) in surah al baqarah. Genesis 3 is what divides Islam and Christianity not the Crucifixion and the proof of that is Qadiani and Ismaili mis understandings. They accept it as historical in fact, all three interpretations do. But that has not healed any divide.
Allah (swt) in the Qur’an focuses more on the allegations of Christ Jesus (as) being the son of Allah.
The Qur’an 4:155-159 is laser focused on Jewish claims.
1) There are no romans any where in the text.
2) There is no mention of Christians any where in the text.
3) There is no mention of nails anywhere in the text.
4) There is no mention of a cross any where in the text.
5) Most importantly Allah (swt) is not ignorant of Jewish methods of execution.
Qur’an 4:155-159 does not have asbaab an nuzul attached to it.
We do not have an authentic tradition concerning it (even fabricated) to my knowledge.
The Blessed Prophet (saw) did not bring it up during his debate with Christians.
In fact, if you go and read the reports of Munabih Ibn Wahb and others it’s not like they asked him: “Hey what is your understanding of 4:157?” And he replied well you see…
Finally, as regards the so called “Crucifixion” I would be more than happy to have Bart Erhman engage with the following:
You see I am disinterested in the extra biblical information because we have the bible right?
When one reads through the Bible they will be quite shocked how little it actually says.
Quite curious when Jesus begins to speak of the passion (according to the evangelist) he does not say much regarding the execution form. He is surprisingly vague.
Al hamdulillah,
May Allah bless the sincere.
“Sunni Muslim and that I apologize for my harsh tone on the Ibadis on my blog.”
When can we expect you to remove the inaccurate information? Surely this is the hallmark of the sincere?
“Is there another platform we can have a dialogue?”
This is the only platform that I find suitable for those who are interested in learning about the school. This is where I really invest the bulk of my time. I am most likely on my way out of X (twitter) as well.
I don’t do dialogue as in “I am trying to convince you of Christianity, Atheism, Hinduism, This strand of Islam” etc.
Allah (swt) has guided me. So if that is the intention I am afraid you will only find frustration.
This is a platform to learn about the Ibadi school. So if you have inquiry about the school and you are looking into the school insh’Allah will do my level best to assist.
” I have repented and am no longer a Qadiani.”
Could I have the link to the page in your blog in which you have made this known? (leaving Qadianism)
I have only apologized for the tone and harshness of my blog posts on the Ibadis, in sha Allah I will rectify that, not for the information which you consider inaccurate. As far as I am aware the Ibadis do refer to those who commit major sins with the label Kafir even if they intend by it كفر النعم and not the Kufr that expels one from the Millah.
I invite you to check out my YouTube channel where I have videos against the Qadianis and also my repentance video at the hand of my Murshid
The reason I suggest a different platform is because the format of this one is difficult to use with my iPhone. If we are to have a fruitful exchange it would be neat if we could share images or screenshots of books for references etc. At the same time I also think it would be good to dialogue on a platform with more viewership. But if you are more comfortable here that’s fine with me. I would invite you to have a dialogue and share your views in a respectful atmosphere on my YouTube channel. Perhaps we could also dialogue on WhatsApp where audios can be sent back and forth too
“I have only apologized for the tone and harshness of my blog posts on the Ibadis, in sha Allah I will rectify that, not for the information which you consider inaccurate. As far as I am aware the Ibadis do refer to those who commit major sins with the label Kafir even if they intend by it كفر النعم and not the Kufr that expels one from the Millah.”
But your post does not indicate this. Do you see yourself editing those post to indicate this VERY IMPORTANT distinction.
Because leaving it up as is would certainly be deceitful and that would be the end of further contact between us.
Remember, you followed me on twitter, you came to my timeline on twitter under a post and simply stated “The Ibadis are Khawarij”
I have made the appropriate corrections as you requested as a goodwill gesture. I hope now we can continue our dialogue respectfully.
Very much appreciated.
https://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.com/2018/10/ibadikharijite-alliance-with-zionists.html
This one
A major characteristic of the Khawarij is their takfir of Muslims who commit major sins. The Ibadiya claim they are moderates in this regard, but their most authoritative text of Hadith, the Musnad of Rabi bin Habib, includes a chapter entitled:
الحُجَّة عَلَى مَنْ قَالَ: إِنَّ أَهْلَ الكَبَائِرِ لَيْسُوا بِكَافِرِينَ
The proof against the one who says: “Major sinners are not disbelievers”
Which we would translate of course as ingrates, or those ungrateful to the favour of Allah. “disbelievers” gives one another impression.
Our school is not really known for making takfir of other Muslims.
Insh’Allah hopefully one day we can arrange for you to visit Oman and sit with the people of knowledge there.
But if you are at home with ‘Ahl Sunnah Wal Jammah’ –
one of four schools of jurisprudence
one of three schools of aqidah
many paths of inward science than Al hamdulilah.