Category Archives: Uncategorized

My Belief In An Eclectic Qur’an

“We have given you the seven (l-mathani) consistency duplicated AND the glorious Qur’an.” (Qur’an 15:87)

My belief that the Qur’an that we have today is eclectic. However, that is nuanced. The term eclectic means drawling from several sources. So if someone ask me are you saying that the Qur’an is drawling from ‘several sources’?

My answer to that is an emphatic, “No!”. The Qur’an is from Allah (swt) given the Angel Gabriel and communicated to the Blessed Messenger (saw).

So that is regards the ultimate source. That being said, I do believe that the Qur’an we have in our possession is an eclectic Qur’an. I believe that Qur’an to be a composition of the various authorized modes of reading the Qur’an.

“We have given you the seven (l-mathani) consistency duplicated AND the glorious Qur’an.” (Qur’an 15:87)

It is interesting that the text here says the seven consistently duplicated or supported AND the Qur’an. Yet, traditionally this is understood as a reference to surah al fatiha. So is al fatiha part of the Qur’an or not? Is it something separate from the Qur’an?

Though this argues in favour of the Maliki and Hanafi view that basmallah is not a verse in front of al fatiha, it argues against the position of Shafi’i, Ahmed, the Ibadi, the 12er Shia and the Zaydi that the basmallah is a verse in front of al fatiha.

When we look at the other example of where mathaniya is used we see something quite interesting.

“Allah has sent down the finest report in a (mathaniya) consistently duplicated Book. The skins of those who dread their Lord tingle with it; then their skins and hearts are softened up for remembering Allah. Such is Allah´s guidance; He guides anyone He wishes by means of it, while anyone whom Allah lets go astray will have no one to guide him.” (Qur’an 39:23)

What is interesting is that this above verse tells us that mathaniya is the Qur’an. That this mathaniya is consistently duplicated. In other words, it’s message does not contradict other parts of its’ message.

“Will they not then ponder on the Qur’an? If it had been from other than Allah they would have found therein major incongruity. .” (Qur’an 4:82)

So it is my understanding that these mathaniya the refer to the 7 Ahruf of the Qur’an. I understand Ahruf as ways forms and modes.

Abdullah ibn Abbas reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Gabriel, upon him be peace, taught me to recite the Quran in one reading and I requested another. I continued to ask for more until he stopped at seven readings.

Ibn Shihab said, “It reached me that these seven readings are united in the matter. There is no difference in what they allow and forbid.”

Source: (Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 4705, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 819)

Umar ibn al-Khattab reported: I heard Hisham ibn Hakim reciting the Surat al-Furqan in a way different from how I recited it and how it was taught to me by the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him. I was about to argue with him, but then I waited until he finished and I tied his shirt around his neck and took him to the Prophet. I said, “Indeed, I heard this man recite in a way different from what you taught me!” The Prophet said to me, “Bring him to me.” Then, Prophet said to him, “Recite.” He recited and the Prophet said, “As it has been revealed.” Then, the Prophet said to me, “Recite.” I recited and the Prophet said, “As it has been revealed. Verily, the Quran has been revealed in seven dialects. Recite whichever of them you find easy.

Source: (Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 2287, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 818)

Abdullah ibn Mas’ud reported: A man was reciting a verse which I had heard differently from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him. I took his hand and brought him to the Prophet and he said, “Both of your recitations are goodDo not differ, for the nations before you were destroyed by their differences.

Source: (Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 2279)

May apologies I don’t necessarily make the best charts but this is how I understand the Qur’an preservation and why I say the Qur’an we have today is an eclectic Qur’an.

The Qur’an I believe has one source. That source is Allah (swt).

The Qur’an was initially transmitted as Qur’an (A) Qur’an (B) Qur’an (C) Qur’an (D) Qur’an (D) Qur’an (E) Qur’an (F) Qur’an (G) not that each set (A-G) was absolutely different from one to the other but that where Allah (swt) deemed necessary it was revealed in a way, mode, or style more suitable for the particular people.

However, think about when we say the words ‘The’ and ‘Qur’an’. The is definitive article in English and Qur’an is a noun- a reference to a revelation that is compound unity. The Qur’an is a collective. It is a collection. This is true not only for it orally, but also in the way it was revealed. Qur’an A,B,C,D,E,F,G are all Qur’an. Some would say why not call it Qur’ans (plural) but this would not be proper.

To me this explains variants in the Qur’an manuscripts. Those that are authentically preserved and transmitted show that. The vast majority of the Muslim world uses the 1924 Qur’an produced by scholars from Al Ahzar (May Allah bless them for their efforts).

Now the problem that sceptics/atheist/agnostics will have is that we do not necessarily have complete “original” physical copies of transmitted Qur’an A,B,C,D,E,F,G.

Uthman and the Qur’an.

One of the things that is certain is that when Uthman burned the Qur’an that many of the companions need not wish to hand over to him their codices. In fact this whole exercise seems more or less like an exercise in power on behalf of Uthman than anything noble and Allah (swt) knows best.

The standard story we are told is that apparently some newly converted Muslims were arguing over ways of pronouncing the Qur’an. So we are somehow led to believe that Uthman wanted to stop people arguing about differences of the Qur’an by burning physical copies of collections of a revelation that is primarily transmitted orally!!

What on Earth was Uthman thinking? How does burning physical copies of a revelation that is primarily transmitted orally stop the variant readings from being recited or the styles of recitation of being followed? No one has ever seem to be able to answer this with a straight face.

I will have more on Uthman and some insights from an Ibadi perspective (not Sunni or Shi’a narrative) on why some companions found him to be treacherous in the latter part of his reign and that many companions that this act of essentially putting himself as an authority over the Qur’an was deeply problematic theologically speaking.

One of the things that should put hearts and minds at rest is this. These variant readings that Atheist, Agnostics and Ex Muslims go on and on about, well, what actually they say?

Do they have different teachings?

Do they blatantly contradict each other?

Are they giving us different sets of data?

My answer to all of that is that they do not. I believe that the Qur’an was faithfully transmitted. When I say THE QUR’AN I mean Qur’an (ABCDEFG) and that as long as we have any part of (ABCDEFG) as a transmission we have the Qur’an.

Certainly the idea of the Qur’an being transmitted in a linear way is hardly defensible. Yet, if we have a proper understanding that the Qur’an is not just one this or one that, the questions that sceptics bring up amount to a nothing burger. Allah (swt) knows best.


Filed under Uncategorized

Update for Prima Qur’an come 2021

I hope this entry reaches you all in the best of health and faith.

I will get straight to it. I may not have the financial resources to maintain the site for the year of 2021. Therefore almost all of the links and url addresses will be thrown off. What ever you wish to take, book mark, screen shot, save and so forth please do that now.

I will try and remedy this in the near future Allah-willing.


Filed under Uncategorized

Blessed Mawlid An Nabi

“We sent thee not, but as a Mercy for all creatures.” (Quran 21:107)

May Allah lighten the punishment of hellfire all those scholars who claim our beloved Prophet (saw) would approve of such following horrors as the killing of one’s wife and her pregnant baby…

Sunan Abu-Dawud Book 38, Number 4348
Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas:
“A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) was informed about it.
He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.
He sat before the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and said: Apostle of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.
Thereupon the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.” 


 Now with the recent beheading of the French teacher it has to be asked is this simply a Muslim extremist?  Is this person from Al Qaeda or from ISIS?  No, unfortunately it is a classical position held by classical scholars whom furnish lots of proofs that anyone who insults the Blessed Messenger (saw) is to be killed.   




One of the most  murderous text that you will find does not come form Al Qaeda or ISIS but from a book beloved by Sufi Muslims the world over. That book is “Al Shifa” by Qadi Iyad.  Qadi Iyad is a mainstream Sunni Muslim of the Maliki school of jurisprudence.  I wonder if Mufti Abu Layth considers Qadi Iyad a “Maliki Don”. 


You can see for yourself:   


The following link does more damage to our faith than 1000 David Woods, Abdullah Sameers, Christian Princes, Sam Shamouns, or Abdullah Gondals combined….


Because even for me when I read ahadith that ascribe very atrocious acts to the Blessed Messenger (saw) I start to wonder about other narrations that off set this. I begin to wonder about the Jewish lady who threw rubbish on the Prophet (saw) home almost daily until she was sick and the Prophet (saw) inquired about her and so he went to visit her.  However, the above link suggest IT WAS ALL A RUSE… 


Read for yourself not from an islamic phobic web site, not from Spencer, or Hatun, or Shamoun or Gondal or Sameer or Wood but from Qadi Iyad. 



The reasons why the Prophet pardoned some of those who harmed him It might be asked why the Prophet did not kill the Jew who said to him, “Death be upon you” when this is a curse,[15] and why he did not kill the other man[16] who said in this respect, “This is a dividing out by which the face of Allah is not intended.” When he annoyed the Prophet by saying that, the Prophet said, “Musa was harmed by worse than this,”[17] and was patient. And why he did not kill the hypocrites who used to harm him often.

Know that at the beginning of Islam the Prophet used to court people’s friendship and he made their hearts incline to him. He made them love belief and adorned it in their hearts and he treated them gently to encourage them. He said to his Companions; “You are sent to make things easy. You were not sent to scare people away.” He said, “Make things easy and do not make them hard. Soothe and do not scare away.”[18]

He said, “Let it not be said that Muhammad killed his Companions.”[19] The Prophet cajoled the hypocrites and unbelievers, was cheerful in their company and lenient to them and endured their harm. He was patient when they were coarse. But it is not permitted for us to be patient with them in such cases. Allah says, “You will continue to come upon some act of treachery on their part, except for a few of them, so pardon them and overlook.” (5:15) Allah says, “Repel with that which is better and the one between whom and you there is enmity will be as if he were a close friend.” (41:35) That was because people at the beginning of Islam needed to be brought close. People are unanimous about that.

Once Islam was firmly established and Allah had given it victory over all other deens, any such detractor that the Muslims had power over and whose affair was well-known was put to death. A case in point is that of Ibn Khatal and others whom the Prophet said should be should killed on the Day of the Conquest and those among the Jews and others whom it was possible to kill by assassination. There were others who were captured but rectified their behaviour before they came into the Prophet’s company and joined the group of those who manifested belief in him. Among such people who had harmed him were Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf,[20] Abu Rafi’,[21] an-Nadr ibn al-Harith[22] and ‘Uqba ibn Abi Mu’ayt. 




Certainly this is down right frightening.


Filed under Uncategorized

Atheist Argument Against the Veracity of the Qur’an.

“And if anyone from the polytheists asks for your protection ˹O Prophet˺, grant it to them so they may hear the Word of Allah, then escort them to a place of safety, for they are a people who have no knowledge.” (Qur’an 9:6)


One of the things that the Atheist have used before against the Qur’an the following argument:

As Muslims we accept the Qur’an 100% as the words of Allah (swt).

Even though the words of Iblis (Satan) are in the Qur’an.

For example:

“He said: My Lord! Because You have sent me astray, I verily shall adorn the path of error for them in the earth, and shall mislead them every one….” (Qur’an 15:39)

Now when we as Muslims read this are we to understand that quote as the words of Allah (swt) or the words of Iblis?  or are they words of Allah (swt) quoting Iblis?


Is Allah (swt) quoting Iblis ad-verbatim or is Allah (swt) simply re-constructing what happened using His (Allah’s) own words? In other words not an exact account but simply the ‘gist’ of what happened?

There is dialogue and conversation between non believers and believers.

“And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fights against them. How perverse are they!” (Qur’an 9:30)

Now when we as Muslims read this are we to understand that quote as the words of Allah (swt) or the words of Unbelievers;  or are they words of Allah (swt) quoting Unbelievers?

Is Allah (swt) quoting Unbelievers ad-verbatim or is Allah (swt) simply re-constructing what happened using His (swt) own words? In other words not an exact account but simply the ‘gist’ of what happened?


There is dialogue of Prophets.

“But when Jesus became conscious of their disbelief, he cried: Who will be my helpers in the cause of Allah? The disciples said: We will be Allah’s helpers. We believe in Allah, and bear  witness that we have surrendered .” (Qur’an 3:52)


So here is where the dilemma comes in.

Now when we as Muslims read this are we to understand that quote as the words of Allah (swt) or the words of Jesus & his disciples;  or are they words of Allah (swt) quoting Jesus & his disciples?

Is Allah (swt) quoting Jesus & his disciples ad-verbatim or is Allah (swt) simply re-constructing what happened using His (swt) own words? In other words not an exact account but simply the ‘gist’ of what happened?

We have to ask ourselves are these actual quotations?  So here are our choices.

1) I Allah (swt) quoting these statements ad-verbatim?

2) Allah (swt) is not quoting ad-verbatim and thus giving us the ‘gist’ of what is said.


Here are possible solutions/problems with both option 1)  & option 2).

1) It does not seem that these are actual statements ad-verbatim.

Anyone who has studied the Qur’an; or even listen to it understands that there is a fluid, tonal , rhythmic melody that rhymes along the way.

Is it highly unlikely that this is the way that Iblis talked,  normal people talk or even the Prophets talk.

To give an example.  It is highly unlikely that the Prophets talked like this:

“And I give you glad tidings from your Lord, so share your wealth and do not hoard.  If you chase after vain desires you will be bored. You cannot simply do of your own accord.  This advise is to be taken and not to be ignored.”

So for example the Qur’an has this rhythmic cadence  ‘Qul huwallahu ahad.  Allahu Samad.  Lam yalid wa lam yulad. Walam yakul lahu kufuwan ahad.’

Hopefully some scholar of any of the Muslim groups could come forward and give convincing arguments that this is how…

Prophets spoke….

Iblis spoke….

or even the unbelievers as they engaged with believers.


2) Allah (swt) is not quoting ad-verbatim and thus giving us the ‘gist’ of what is said.  Or you could say giving us an account but not the actual speech or quotes.

If this is correct it sets forth an interesting precedent.  In that the Allah (swt) is not say that it is important for any of us to have the actual events of anything; but an approximation of those events.  The ‘gist’ if you will.


Also, this is further proof that the Qur’an cannot be the eternal speech which it is rather obvious to anyone that Allah (swt) is reformatting the words, sentence structure of what transpired in the past to conform to an Arabic grammatical and syntax structure that will be revealed in real time. 

If this is the case, than those who believe in lone narrator hadith will have room to maneuver.  As they do not believe that all the hadith reports are necessarily ad-verbatim transmitted, but transmitted faithfully enough so as to give the ‘gift’ of what the Blessed Messenger (saw) said.

Likewise the Christians would have considerable room to maneuver. Because now we would be presented with a theology that says  it would be possible for Allah (swt) to present the ‘gist’ of the message of Christianity through disparate manuscripts without them being an ‘actual’ or ‘ad-verbatim’ account.

I have no good answers to the over all assertions put forward. You can tell from the comment section below this post that many Muslims thought I was out of line for this discovery. 

I would simply say Wallahu ‘Alim  (Allah knows best)



Filed under Uncategorized

I Love You. I Hate You. It depends.


Allah makes the believers steadfast with the firm Word ˹of faith˺ in this worldly life and the Hereafter. And Allah leaves the wrongdoers to stray. For Allah does what He wills.” (Qur’an 14:27)


I love you, I hate you, it depends.

One of the more fascinating curiosities that I have observed among fellow Muslims, as well as people of other faiths is how subjective they view God’s interaction and dealings with other people, which is curiously reflected through their own feelings towards said individual(s).


Case in point. Let us say that I happen to like a brother Hamza. Hamza is a good friend of mine. Hamza and I believe pretty much the same things about the religion.


So when Hamza gets a marriage proposal, gets married, has a child, graduates, gets promoted, gets a raise, gets recognition as a friend of Hamza’s I tend to say ,”Mash’Allah. Allah (swt) has indeed blessed you with so much.”


However, when Hamza gets a rejected for marriage proposal, gets a divorce, loses a child to cancer, fails grad school, gets fired from his job, gets a chronic illness I tend to say, “Mash’Allah, Allah test the ones he loves. This is because Allah loves you and wishes to bring you closer to him.”


So now lets’ talk about brother Hameed. Hameed is someone I despise. I just don’t like him. I don’t like the way he talks, the way he walks, the way he carries himself. I don’t like that he belongs to a different manhaj then me. But even if he did belong to the same manhaj as me, I just don’t sync with Hameed.


So when Hameed gets a marriage proposal, gets married, has a child, graduates, gets promoted, gets a raise, gets recognition as an enemy of Hameed I tend to say ,”Allah is distracting Hameed with the dunya. Hameed prefers the dunya to the remembrance of Allah (swt). This is a trial from Allah for him.”


However, when Hameed gets a rejected for marriage proposal, gets a divorce, loses a child to cancer, fails grad school, gets fired from his job, gets a chronic illness I tend to say, “Hameed is getting exactly what he deserves. This is from the balla/the wrath of Allah (swt). Hameed is one of the ungrateful servants of Allah, if indeed he serves him at all.”


You see the point brothers/sisters? Often, how we feel towards an individual or individuals or another group or sect or people, that will interpret and inform what we feel their station or status is before Allah (swt). We look at Allah’s relationship to that individual(s), sect, group, people, through our own lenses.


I don’t know how many times I have seen these exact scenarios play out and almost without fail a persons situation rather perceived as success or test will be seen as both positively or both negatively depending upon our own feelings towards that individual.


We play judge and jury when in reality none of us knows the condition and state of another individual and their relationship to their Creator.



Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The permission of temporary shirk to prove a point.

Indeed, those you call upon besides Allah are servants like you. So call upon them and let them respond to you, if you should be truthful.”(Qur’an 7:194)


This is actually quite interesting.


So recently when discussing with a friend of mine he had brought this verse to my attention. What he suggested is that it looks as if Allah (swt) is giving temporary permission to commit shirk in order to prove a point.


The verse is compounded by problems if we pause and reflect for a moment.

What actually was the intention of Allah (swt) to tell people to call upon other deities? What did Allah think would be proved by people doing exactly that?


Let us say for example that I was a Christian and I wanted to prove that Jesus was God. So I say, “Well, Jesus please show these heathen that you are indeed the one true God!” What happens if at that particular moment the ground began to shake? What if a seismic event just so happens to occur at that particular moment? So would the logical conclusion be: “Jesus is God?”


Let us say for example that I believed in Odin. I was tired of all the mockery and I took Allah (swt) up on his challenge. So I say, “Odin give us a sign answer us that you are the true God.” Suddenly the lightning strikes the ground near us, and the thunder clap is so deafening that we almost have a heart attack! What is the logical conclusion? “Odin is God?”

Are these observable evidences coincidence or proofs that these deities are who their followers claim them to be?


The verse in question above seems a rather curious way to go about proving /disproving the rival claims of other faith traditions. In particular the phrase: “So call upon them and let them respond to you..” As no specific period of time is given. For example we also have this statement in the Qur’an:

Call upon Me, I will respond to you.” (Qur’an 40:60)


So, the Palestinians who get bombed daily by the Israeli military when they call upon Allah (swt) to deliver them from oppression does it happen?


When a simple villager in Syria is held hostage by Al Nusrat/ISIS, Hezbollah, FSA/Syrian Army (pick one) and he watches his 17 year old daughter get raped before him and he beseeches Allah (swt) with tears and long suffering and agony in his heart, “Oh Allah, Ya Latif, I am begging you, I associate no partner with you, please do not allow my daughter to suffer this shame, this indignity.”


Yet, he is forced to watch at gun point as she is raped. So what would we as Muslims say about these instances? We could say that Allah (swt) is not obligated to answer. Allah (swt) heard their prayers and he has a wisdom in what is transpiring.


So if Allah (swt) is not expected to “perform on the spot” than why would Jesus, or Odin, or any other deity that people worship be expected to “perform on the spot” or be obligated to answer at all?


So the challenge does seem a bit strange. Especially in light of the following verses:

And when they said, “O Allah , if this should be the truth from You, then rain down upon us stones from the sky or bring us a painful punishment.”  But Allah would not punish them while you, [O Muhammed], are among them, and Allah would not punish them while they seek forgiveness.” (Qur’an 8:32-33)


So here the disbelievers issue their own challenge to Allah (swt). They ask that stones be sent down upon them from the sky. Yet ,the response seems like an escape clause.


  1. The Prophet Muhammed (saw) is among them.

  2. Allah (swt) will not punish them while they seek forgiveness.

I am not sure that I understand the response, “while you are among them.” because Allah (swt) can do anything. He can send down an entire asteroid upon Madinah and have it destroy everyone and the Prophet Muhammed (saw) and the believers could remain unscathed.


For example we are told that Noah was among his people when the wrath of Allah came down upon them. Noah was saved and the son was overwhelmed by the flood.

The son replied: “I will betake myself to some mountain: it will save me from the water.” Noah said: “This day nothing can save, from the command of Allah, any but those on whom He has mercy! “And the waves came between them, and the son was among those overwhelmed in the Flood.” (Qur’an 11:43)


Allah would not punish them while they seek forgiveness.”


This is also curious considering these were haughty people who issuing the same sort of challenges that Allah (swt) issued to them about their gods.


So what my friend was mentioning to me is that if seems that when Allah (swt) was pressed for action the response is evasive and the tone becomes soft and re-conciliatory.


This might be why we have the wait and see” verses.


Wait, and I, too, will be waiting with you.” (Qur’an 11:122)

Say, “Wait. Indeed, we [also] are waiting.” (Qur’an 6:158)

Say, “Do you await for us except one of the two best things while we await for you that Allah will afflict you with punishment from Himself or at our hands? So wait; indeed we, along with you, are waiting.” (Qur’an 9:52)

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Ibn Abbas and Tahrif of the Qur’an?


Indeed! It is we who reveal the Reminder, and lo! We verily are its Guardian.” (Qur’an 15:9)


I believe about two months back a brother had sent me an article to look at. I believe the original article is found here:



I will leave the statements of this person in the black text. My response will be in

blue text. So let us begin.


The person in the above article says the following:


Those of you who are regular readers of my articles will be familiar with the name of Sahabi Abdullah Ibn Abbas (b.619-d.687). He has been previously cited on TheIslamissue for his cosmological views of the earth being spread on the back of a giant whale, citing chapter 68 verse 1 of the Quran as evidence, as well as his belief that the sun has literal setting and rising places on earth in a hint to chapter 18:86-90 of the Quran.”

His statements are regular citations by me and other individuals in the area of Islamic criticism for a few reasons, but the main one being the prayers that Muhammad made for Ibn Abbas regarding Quranic knowledge. For instance, in Ibn Majah 166 Muhammad said: “O Allah, teach him wisdom and the (correct) interpretation of the Book ”. In Bukhari 75 he said:  “O Allah! Bestow on him the knowledge of the Book (Qur’an).”

These statements of Muhammad hold such immense weight Islamicly speaking because, if the opinions and statements of Ibn Abbas are wrong, then it demonstrates that Allah did not answer Muhammads prayer. If they are correct then his words are Islamic fact.”

With that in mind, I would to present authentic narrations traced to Ibn Abbas which explicitly state that the current Uthmanic Quran contains errors in the form of mistakes committed by scribes, as well as deletions of entire sections of verses.”

My response: So this person is making two statements at the outset.

  1. That Allah (swt) answered the Prophet’s prayer.
  2. If Allah (swt) answered the Prophet’s prayer than what Ibn Abbas says is Islamic fact.


Let’s deal with the first point.

The idea that Allah (swt) always grants the request of the Blessed Messenger (saw) is refuted by Ibn Abbas (r.a) himself!

In fact It is quite lazy on behalf of the author to be unaware of this. In Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir of Ibn Abbas under Qur’an 28:56 we find:

(Lo! You) O Muhammed (guide not) know not (whom you love) whom you love to accept faith (Abu Talib) but Allah guides) He gives success and leads (whom he will) to His religion Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and their fellow believers (And He is best aware of those who walk aright) to His religion.”


So it is possible that Allah (swt) didn’t grant the request of the Blessed Messenger (saw) concerning Ibn Abbas (r.a).


Let’s deal with the second point.

You will find that the author of this piece loves to make a big deal out of brackets. Well is it not interesting that he happens to make a point using a bracketed word not in the original text?

Look what the author said above:

O Allah, teach him wisdom and the (correct) interpretation of the Book.” If you leave out the bracketed word you have: “O Allah, teach him wisdom and the interpretation of the Book.” Nothing about being infallible.

Point of fact there is no group among the Muslims today that takes the Tafsir of Ibn Abbas (r.a) as the final say on any matter. We don’t even have the original tafsir of Ibn Abbas (r.a)! A convenient point that the author of the article left out. In fact the authorship of Tanwir al-Miqbas is disputed.


For the benefit of my Muslim sisters and brothers I would encourage you to read the first 10 pages (a very quick read) here:


The author continues:


Evidence 1: Quran 26:214 has a deleted portion


In todays Uthmanic Quran, chapter 26 verse 214 reads as follows:


And warn thy tribe of near kindred,

Quran 26:214


However Ibn Abbas completely disagreed and said that the words “and thy group of selected people among them” is meant to be a part of the verse. This statement can be found in the hadith collections of Bukhari and Muslim:


Sahih-Bukhari 4971:

Narrated Ibn Abbas:  When the Verse:–’And warn your tribe of near-kindred, and thy group of selected people among them’ was revealed Allah’s Apostle went out, and when he had ascended As-Safa mountain, he shouted, “O Sabahah!” The people said, “Who is that?” “Then they gathered around him, whereupon he said, “Do you see? If I inform you that cavalrymen are proceeding up the side of this mountain, will you believe me?” They said, “We have never heard you telling a lie.” Then he said, “I am a plain warner to you of a coming severe punishment.” Abu Lahab said, “May you perish! You gathered us only for this reason? ” Then Abu Lahab went away. So the “Surat:–ul– Lahab” ‘Perish the hands of Abu Lahab!’ (111.1) was revealed.

Bukhari 4971


Sahih-Muslim 208a:


It is reported on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas that when this verse was revealed: “And warn thy tribe of near kindred and thy group of selected people among them” the Messenger of Allah set off till he climbed Safa’ and called loudly: Be on your guard! They said: Who is it calling aloud? They said: Muhammad. They gathered round him, and he said: O sons of so and so, O sons of so and so, O sons of ‘Abd Manaf, O sons of ‘Abd al-Muttalib, and they gathered around him. He (the Apostle) said: If I were to inform you that there were horsemen emerging out of the foot of this mountain, would you believe me? They said: We have not experienced any lie from you. He said: Well, I am a warner to you before a severe torment. He (the narrator) said that Abu Lahab then said: Destruction to you! Is it for this you have gathered us? He (the Holy Prophet) then stood up, and this verse was revealed:” Perish the hands of Abu Lahab, and he indeed perished” (cxi. 1). A’mash recited this to the end of the Sura.

Muslim 208a


An interesting thing to note, is that the official translations for these narrations used by websites like QuranX completely distort the words of Ibn Abbas. The Bukhari translation simply doesn’t translate “and they group of selected people among them” into English. The Sahih-Muslim translation does, however those words are put into brackets to make the reader think it is not part of the original. The Arabic in both is also obfuscated as they both include brackets around the Uthmanic verse while not bracketing the Ibn Abbas addition.


My comments:

“And warn thy tribe of near kindred.”

“and thy group of selected people among them.” 

If we can accept that the Qur’an is an eclectic text, not in the sense of deriving information from various sources, but deriving information from various transmissions of the Qur’an than we do not have a problem here.



Evidence 2: Deletion has taken place in 18:79-80


In the Uthmanic Quran we read today, verses 18:79-80 read as follows:


As for the ship, it belonged to poor people working on the river, and I wished to mar it, for there was a king behind them who is taking every ship by force. And as for the lad, his parents were believers and we feared lest he should oppress them by rebellion and disbelief.

Qur’an 18:79-80


Ibn Abbas however believed that the true Quran said the king took the “serviceable” boats by force and, referring to the boy, “he was a disbeliever”. This can be found in Sahih-Bukhari 4727:


Narrated Sa`id bin Jubair: I said to Ibn `Abbas, “Nauf-al-Bakali ” claims that Moses of Bani Israel was not Moses, the companion of Al-Khadir.” Ibn `Abbas said, “Allah’s enemy tells a lie! Ubai bin Ka`b narrated to us that Allah’s Messenger () said, ‘Moses got up to deliver a sermon before Bani Israel and he was asked, ‘Who is the most learned person among the people?’ Moses replied, ‘I (am the most learned).’ Allah then admonished Moses for he did not ascribe all knowledge to Allah only (Then) came the Divine Inspiration:– ‘Yes, one of Our slaves at the junction of the two seas is more learned than you.’ Moses said, ‘O my Lord ! How can meet him?’ Allah said, ‘Take a fish in a basket and wherever the fish is lost, follow it (you will find him at that place). So Moses set out along with his attendant Yusha` bin Noon, and they carried with them a fish till they reached a rock and rested there. Moses put his head down and slept. (Sufyan, a sub-narrator said that somebody other than `Amr said) ‘At the rock there was a water spring called ‘Al-Hayat’ and none came in touch with its water but became alive. So some of the water of that spring fell over that fish, so it moved and slipped out of the basket and entered the sea. When Moses woke up, he asked his attendant, ‘Bring our early meal’ (18.62). The narrator added: Moses did not suffer from fatigue except after he had passed the place he had been ordered to observe. His attendant Yusha` bin Noon said to him, ‘Do you remember (what happened) when we betook ourselves to the rock? I did indeed forget (about) the fish…’ (18.63) The narrator added: So they came back, retracing their steps and then they found in the sea, the way of the fish looking like a tunnel. So there was an astonishing event for his attendant, and there was tunnel for the fish. When they reached the rock, they found a man covered with a garment. Moses greeted him. The man said astonishingly, ‘Is there any such greeting in your land?’ Moses said, ‘I am Moses.’ The man said, ‘Moses of Bani Israel?’ Moses said, ‘Yes,’ and added, ‘may I follow you so that you teach me something of the Knowledge which you have been taught?’ (18.66). Al-Khadir said to him, ‘O Moses! You have something of Allah’s knowledge which Allah has taught you and which I do not know; and I have something of Allah’s knowledge which Allah has taught me and which you do not know.’ Moses said, ‘But I will follow you.’ Al-Khadir said, ‘Then if you follow me, ask me no question about anything until I myself speak to you concerning it.’ (18.70). After that both of them proceeded along the seashore. There passed by them a boat whose crew recognized Al-Khadir and received them on board free of charge. So they both got on board. A sparrow came and sat on the edge of the boat and dipped its beak unto the sea. Al-Khadir said to Moses. ‘My knowledge and your knowledge and all the creation’s knowledge compared to Allah’s knowledge is not more than the water taken by this sparrow’s beak.’ Then Moses was startled by Al-Khadir’s action of taking an adze and scuttling the boat with it. Moses said to him, ‘These people gave us a free lift, but you intentionally scuttled their boat so as to drown them. Surely you have…’ (18.71) Then they both proceeded and found a boy playing with other boys. Al-Khadir took hold of him by the head and cut it off. Moses said to him, ‘Have you killed an innocent soul who has killed nobody? Surely you have done an illegal thing! ‘ (18.74) He said, “Didn’t I tell you that you will not be able to have patient with me up to..but they refused to entertain them as their guests. There they found a wall therein at the point of collapsing.’ (18.75-77) Al-Khadir moved his hand thus and set it upright (repaired it). Moses said to him, ‘When we entered this town, they neither gave us hospitality nor fed us; if you had wished, you could have taken wages for it,’ Al- Khadir said, ‘This is the parting between you and me I will tell you the interpretation of (those things) about which you were unable to hold patience.’…(18.78) Allah’s Messenger () said, ‘We wished that Moses could have been more patient so that He (Allah) could have described to us more about their story.’ Ibn `Abbas used to recite:– ‘And in front (ahead) of them there was a king who used to seize every serviceable boat by force. (18.79)…and as for the boy he was a disbeliever.”
Bukhari 4727


This hadith can also be found in Tirmhidi 3149 and was classed Sahih by Darussalam and Hasan-Sahih by Tirmhidi. Note that the English translation of the Sahih-Bukhari hadith distort the words of Ibn Abbas by adding brackets around the world “serviceable”.


My comments: You will not fail to note that in the hadith that is quoted the following:

“Sufyan a sub narrator said.”

“The narrated added”

“The narrated added”

So we don’t even know if these are the words of Ibn Abbas as the hadith has words that are indicative of sickness.

Furthermore let’s look at the words of contention: 

serviceable boats would be an obvious addition to explain that the boats taken were serviceable as a king wouldn’t take not serviceable boats.

he was a disbeliever” Well, this actually has been explained by the Qur’an itself: 

and we feared lest he should oppress them by rebellion and disbelief.” (Qur’an 18:80)


Evidence 3: Quran 24:27 contains a “mistake”


The current Uthmanic Quran for chapter 24 verse 27 reads as follows:


O you who believe! Do not enter houses other than your own houses until you ascertain welcome and saluted their inmates; this is better for you, that you may be mindful.” Quran 24;27


Ibn Abbas however disagreed. He is recorded as saying there is a mistake committed by the scribe who wrote the verse down. This is recorded in multiple places such as Al-Mustadrak 3496 and tafsir Tabari.


Al-Mustadrak 3496:

Narrated Mujahid: Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) used to say about the statement of Allah ‘{do not enter houses other than your own houses until you ascertain welcome}’ It is a mistake by the scribe’ (actually its) ‘seek permission’’

Mustadrak 3496
Hadith grade:

Sahih according to Al-Hakim and Dhahabi


Tafsir Tabari, Volume 18 page 146:


Ibn Bashar <– Muhammad bin Jaffar <– Shu’aba <– Abi Bashir <– Sayd bin Jubayr <– Ibn Abbas about this verse ‘{O you who believe! Do not enter houses other than your own houses until you ascertain welcome and saluted their inmates}’ . He said: ‘It is a mistake by the scribe.‘{until you seek permission and saluted their inmates}’. 

Tafsir Tabari 24:27


Ibn Hajar, when mentioning the Tabari narration among others, stated the following:


Sa’id ibn Mansur, al-Tabari and al-Bayhaqi in al-Shi’b have narrated through a Sahih chain that Ibn Abbas used to recite “until you seem permission” and used to say: ‘The scribe made a mistake’.
Fath al-Bari, Volume 11 page 8


Another very interesting thing to note are the comments by the various scholars of tafsir. From their words it is quite clear that were in panic over this Ibn Abbas testimony:




Be aware that the statement by Ibn Abbas is one that requires consideration because it questions the authenticity of the Quran that has been narrated by Tawatur and that it necessitates one to accept the authenticity of the Quran (over that) which has not been narrated by Tawatur and opening those two doors will question the authenticity of whole Quran.

Tafsir Razi 24:27

See also: Tafsir Ibn Adil, Tafsir Abu Hayyan, Tafsir Alusi Baghdadi,


My comments:

“Ascertain Welcome” and “Seek permission” are quite the same thing. 

Seek permission and saluted their inmates. In this case no one panicked.  Razi simply mentioned the possible implications and stated that we are going with tawatur, the over whelming mass testimony and transmission. 


Evidence 4: A mix up in 17:23


In todays Uthmanic Quran, chapter 17 verse 23 reads as follows:


Thy Lord hath decreed, that ye worship none save Him, and (that ye show) kindness to parents. If one of them or both of them attain old age with thee, say not “Fie” unto them nor repulse them, but speak unto them a gracious word.

Qur’an 17:23


however Ibn Abbas disagreed, and was recorded in tafsir Razi volume 10 page 70 as saying:

Maimon bin Mehran narrated from Ibn Abbas that he said:

The actual word in this verse was ‘ووصى’ but ‘و’ got mixed with ‘ص’ that is why it is recited as ‘وَقَضَىٰ رَبُّكَ’. Then he said: ‘Had it been fate then none would have disobeyed Allah as it would have been impossible to go against fate of Allah’. This narration was narrated from him by Dahak and Saeed bin Jubair and this is the Qirat of Ali and Abdullah.

Tafsir Razi 17:23


Commenting on the authenticity of this Ibn Abbas claim, Ibn Hajar said:


A similar narration comes in regards to ‘And your Lord has commanded that you shall not serve (any) but Him’ He said: ووصى and و has joined صSayd bin Mansur narrated it with a great chain from him’
Fath al-Bari, Volume 8 page 373



Tafsir scholars much like in the previous section, also absolutely panicked at this evidence of corruption:




I know this saying is very weird as it no doubt opens the gates of Tahreef and changes in the Tareeq of Quran and if it is accepted then it will mean that Quran is out of protection and it will take out Quran from the status of Hujja and no doubt that it will open great criticism in religion” 

Tafsir Razi 17:23


Comments: Two Arabic letters got mixed up.

Yet we are told this is the Qir’aat of Ali (r.a) and Abdullah (r.a)


Evidence 5: Drowsy scribe makes a mistake in 13:31


I’m the current Uthmanic Quran we read the following for 13:31:


Had it been possible for a Lecture to cause the mountains to move, or the earth to be torn asunder, or the dead to speak, (this Qur’an would have done so). Nay, but Allah’s is the whole command. Do not those who believe know that, had Allah willed, He could have guided all mankind? As for those who disbelieve, disaster ceaseth not to strike them because of what they do, or it dwelleth near their home until the threat of Allah come to pass. Lo! Allah faileth not to keep the tryst.

Qur’an 13:31


Ibn Abbas however insisted that this is incorrect and is recorded as saying (from Al-Itqan):


Ibn Abbas recited this verse as ‘ He was told that it is ‘أَفَلَمْ يَا۟يْـَٔسِ ٱلَّذِينَ’ to which Ibn Abbas replied: “The writer has written but I think that he may not have been wakeful at that time of writing this word. 
Al Itqan fi Uloom al Quran, Volume 1 page 238


Commenting on the authenticity of this statement of Ibn Abbas, Ibn Hajar said:

.ل‏ And Tabari and Abd bin Hamid narrated with a Sahih chain containing all the narrators from the rijal of Bukhari, from Ibn Abbas that he recited “‏أفلم يتبين‏” and said that the writer had written it يَا۟يْـٔwhen he was drowsy.
Fath al Bari, Volume 8 page 373


My comments:

If this writer of this piece interestingly enough made a scribal error when he says, “’Im the current Uthmanic Quran we read the following for 13:31”

Allahu Akbar! Is it not interesting how our Creator works? So this person who is trying to cast aspersions on the transmission of the Qur’an under a heading on: 
“Scribal errors”

writes: “I’m the current Uthmanic Quran we read the following for 13:41” Look at that! just that one slip of the pen or lack of alterness when typing completely changes the meaning of the sentence!

So is this person wanting to alert us to something IN the Qur’an? Or, is this person trying to convince us that they themselves are the current Uthmanic Qur’an? Of course not.


So if this is a scribal error it is not a problem. This is the opinion that is attributed to Ibn Abbas (r.a) on the matter.


Evidence 6: A deleted portion from 2:198


The current Uthmanic Quran records chapter 2 verse 198 this way:



It is no sin for you that ye seek the bounty of your Lord. But, when ye press on in the multitude from ‘Arafat, remember Allah by the sacred monument. Remember Him as He hath guided you, although before ye were of those astray.

Quran 2:198


The Ibn Abbas recitation however, went like this:


Sahih-Bukhari 1770:


Narrated Ibn Abbas: Dhul-Majaz and `Ukaz were the markets of the people during the Pre-Islamic period of ignorance. When the people embraced Islam, they disliked to do bargaining there till the following Holy Verses were revealed:– There is no harm for you If you seek of the bounty Of your Lord during the Hajj season.’

Bukhari 1770


Some might argue that this is not evidence of corruption because of the inclusion of brackets in the modern editions of Bukhari. However, this is not a particularly great argument as the older editions don’t actually have brackets included. For instance, the Sultani edition (Circa 1893):




My comments:

It is no sin for you that ye seek the bounty of your Lord.”

There is no harm for you If you seek of the bounty Of your Lord (During the Hajj season.”

This is not a particular strong argument at all.


The use of parenthesis and brackets dates back to the 1500s in the English language. I personally do not know when they are first used or introduced in the Arabic language. Thus, the argument is not a strong argument at all on account of the author himself not looking at what commentators have said about the text, circa 1893 or obviously prior to it.


Evidence 7: Deletion from 4:24


In the Uthmanic Quran, chapter 4 verse 24 reads as follows:


And all married women except those whom your right hands possess (this is) Allah’s ordinance to you, and lawful for you are (all women) besides those, provided that you seek (them) with your property, taking (them) in marriage not committing fornication. Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as appointed; and there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is appointed; surely Allah is Knowing, Wise.

Quran 4:24


However Ibn Abbas believed that there should be an additional part of the verse. We read in Tafsir Manthur by As-Suyuti, whom is quoting the sources of the testimony:


Narrated Abed bin Hamid, ibn Jarir, al-Anbari in his book al-Musahif and al-Hakim and he declared the chain as Sahih from Abi Nadhra who said: ‘I recited before Ibn Abbas ‘ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers’. Ibn Abbas said: ‘ye derive benefit from them for a specific period’. I said: ‘We don’t recite it like this’. Ibn Abbas said: ‘By Allah it was revealed like that.’

Tafsir Manthur 2/140-141

The source of Al-Hakims narration which he declared Sahih is Al-Mustadrak volume 2 page 334, narration 3192. This was also declared as Sahih by Dhahabi according to the conditions of Imam Muslim.


 My comments:

Then as to those whom you profit by 

Ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowries as appointed.”

ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers.”

“ye derive benefit from them for a specific period.” 

Even if it was established that it was revealed the way that Ibn Abbas had stated, it was shown to him that others do not recite it like that. Which again is not a problem if we have an eclectic Qur’an that derives from all the various modes of transmission. 


Notice that the author uses a different wording even before the “disputed” part? Then as to those whom you profit by. That is why I have re-phrased it as “Ye derive benefit from them”


Evidence 8: Ibn Abbas testified to the Satanic verses


Those who have researched Islam, especially from a skeptical standpoint will likely have heard of the story of the Satanic verses incident, however those whom read the story are most likely to read the accounts from Tabaris history and Ibn Ishaqs Sira. However whilst these traditions are generally either Mursal or weak or both, there are many less known hadiths that can be traced to Ibn Abbas with sahih chains of narration. For instance from Suyutis Tafsir Manthur:



Al-Bazaar and Al-Tabarani and Ibn Mardaweh and al-Ziya’ have narrated through a chain of all trustworthy narrators by the way of Sayd Bin Jubayr, from Ibn Abbas that The Messenger of God recited: “Have you seen al-Lat, al-‘Uzza and Manat, the third, the other?” and Satan cast onto his tongue: “Those high gharaniq: their intercession is to be hoped for! And the Mushrikun were greatly pleased by this and said: “He has mentioned our gods.” So Jibril came to him and said: “Recite to me what I brought you!” And he recited: “Have you seen al-Lat, al-‘Uzza and Manat, the third, the other? Those high gharaniq: their intercession is hoped for!” He said: “I did not bring you this! This is from Satan!, or he said: “This is from Satan! I did not bring you these”. So God sent down: “And We did not send before you any messenger or prophet, but when he desired, Satan cast something into his recitation” to the end of the verse.

Tafsir Manthur 22:52


Suyuti is not 100% correct in his attributions of the report. He mistakenly attaches this particular narration to Musnad Al-Bazzar and Mujam Al-Kabir by Tabarani. However, the narrations in those books are also Sahih:


Yusuf b. Hammad al-Basri <– Umayyah b. Khalid al-Basri <– Shu’bah b. Hajjaj Al-Basri <– Abu Bishr Ja‘far b. Abi Wahshiyyah al-Basri al-Wasiti <– Sa‘id b. Jubayr <– Ibn ‘Abbas: When the Prophet was in Mecca, he recited, “Have you seen al-Lat, al-‘Uzza and Manat, the third, the other?” And there ran upon his tongue “Those high gharaniq: intercession from them is to be hoped for! The Mushrikun of Mecca heard this and were pleased by it. This greatly distressed the Messenger of God. So God sent down: “We have not sent before you a Messenger or a Prophet but that when he tamanna, Satan cast something into his umniyyah’, then God removes that which Satan casts and establishes His Signs clearly.”

Musnad Bazzar hadith examined


Al-Husayn b. Ishaq al-Tustari and ‘Abdan ‘Abd Allah b. Ahmad [al-Ahwazi al-Jawallqi <– Yusuf b. Hammad <– Umayyah b. Khalid <– Shu’bah <– Abu Bishr <– Sa‘id b. Jubayr <– Ibn ‘Abbas.

The same hadith is also cited from the Tafsir of Ibn Mardawayh by al-Diya’ al-Maqdisi in his Mukhtarah and by al-Zayla‘I in his Takhrij ahadith al-Kashshaf. Al-Diya’ al-Maqdisi provides Ibn Mardawayh’s full isnad:

Ahmad b. Musa Ibn Mardawayh Al isbahani <– his father, Musa b. Mardawayh Al isbahani <– Ibrahim b. Muhammad b. Mattuwayh al-isbahani <– ‘Ali b. al-Husayn b. Junayd al-Razi AND Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Asim al-Razi <– Yusuf b. Hammad al-Basri <– Umayyah b. Khalid al-Basri <– Shu’bah b. Hajjaj al-Basri <– Abu Bishr al-Basri <– Said b. Jubayr al-Kufi <– Ibn ‘Abbas: the Prophet recited Surat al-Najm, and when he reached, “Have you seen al-Lat, al-‘Uzza and Manat, the third, the other?,” Satan cast onto his tongue: Those high gharaniq: their intercession is to be hoped for!” When he reached the end of it, he made the sajdah, and the Muslims and Mushrikun made the sajdah [with him]. So God sent down: “We have not sent before you a Messenger or a Prophet but that when he tamanna, Satan cast (something),” to His words, “the suffering of a barren day”: the Day of Badr.

Tabarani/Mardawayh hadith examined


While some scholars such as Haythami have attempted to dispute the authenticity of the statement based on the content, they are authentic chains and they were deemed as such for instance by Qadhi Uthmani in his tafsir Mazhari for the verse, whom said the hadiths are “successive and strong”. Furthermore, there is yet another narration this time appearing in Samarqandis tafsir. While this narration has not been authenticated by the hadith scholars, its chain is no doubt authentic.


Al-Khalil b. Ahmad Al-Sijzī al-Samarqandi <– Ibrahim b. Muhammad b. Mattuwayh Al-Ishaban <– Ja’far b. Muhammad al-Tayalisi al-baghdadi <– Ibrahim b. Muhammad Ar’arah al-Basri al-baghdadi <– Abū ‘Asim al-Nabil al-Dahhak b.Makhlad al-Makki al-Basri <– Uthman b. Al-Aswad al-Makki <– Sa‘id b. Jubayr <– Ibn Abbas: The messenger of God recited: “And Manāt, the third, the other.” Then he said: Those high Gharāniq: indeed, intercession from them is to be hoped for!” So the Mushrikūn said, “He has mentioned our Gods.” Then the verse (22:52) was sent down.

Samarqandi narration examined


My response: 

The author himself says:  “Sayuti is not 100% correct in his attributions of the report. He mistakenly attaches this particular narration to Musnad Al Bazzar and Mujam Al-Kabir by Tabarani.”   

That even someone of the caliber of Shaykh Ibn Hajar Al Haythami disputes the authenticity of the reports. Quoting one Qadhi as a definitive statement for chains of transmission that are admittedly an issue of dispute is not solid evidence at all. 



From the evidence provided, it should become clear to the reader that the claim that the Quran is free from corruption is severely weakened as Ibn Abbas, the man with the knowledge and interpretation of the Quran lists at least 7 mistakes and endorses the Satanic verses. These opinions of Ibn Abbas are also well known among the Quran scholars, but reject them simply because it proves the Quran is a corrupted scripture.

If that isn’t telling, I don’t know what is.”


My response:


What is telling is that the author of the article no doubt put together what he/she felt was a great critique of the transmission of the Qur’an bringing out what he/she felt were the strongest proofs available.  They came up empty handed.  All praise be to Allah.




Filed under Uncategorized

Not All of Allah’s Revelation is in the Qur’an.

Behold! Allah promised you one of the two parties, that it should be yours: You wished that the one unarmed should be yours, but Allah willed to justify the Truth according to His words and to cut off the roots of the Unbelievers.” (Qur’an 8:7)


Does anyone recall when Allah (swt) made this promise to the Blessed Messenger (saw)? Where is that statement at anywhere in the Qur’an?


Allah promised that the Muslims would either gain the caravan of Abū Sufyān, or defeat the army of Abū Jahl. However, this promise made by Allah is not found anywhere in the Qur’ān.


It was conveyed to the believers by the Blessed Prophet, however the verse states ‘Allah promised you’ and not ‘the Prophet promised you’. Hence the Blessed Prophet (saw) received the promise from Allah through unrecorded revelation that is not included in the Qur’an!


All of the Qur’an is revelation but not all of Allah’s revelation is in the Qur’an.


We all know that the Injil, Torah, Zabur and Suhuf are all revelation and yet not all of them are scrolls or books. In fact not all revelation that Allah (swt) gives is recorded in books or scrolls.


Every Prophet received revelation but not all prophets did receive a book.


Indeed, We have revealed to you as We revealed  to Noah and the prophets after him. And we revealed  to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, the Descendants, Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and Solomon, and to David We gave the Zabur.” (Qur’an 4:163) 


There is no book or revelation that was recorded or written down that was given to Noah (a.s).


And it was revealed to Noah, that, “No one will believe from your people except those who have already believed, so do not be distressed by what they have been doing.” (Qur’an 11:36)  



There is no kitab of Noah. None at all. The Qur’an does not mention this. It is clear assumption. Allah (swt) can clearly inform us if they did like when he mentions the suhuf (scrolls) of Ibrahim.



It is safe to assume however, that Ishamel and Issac (upon both be peace) had access to the Suhuf of Abraham. Though the Qur’an does not say this.

Jacob (a.s) it is hard to tell.

Jesus (a.s) had the Injil.

Aaron (a.s) is safe to say he had the Torah of Moses.

Solomon and David (upon both be peace) had the Torah of Moses, and David had the Zabur. Though the Qur’an does not say that Solomon had access to the Torah.

Job and Jonah both possibly had access to the Torah. Though the Qur’an does not say this.


However, the following point is still very strong.


Every Prophet received revelation but not all prophets did receive a book.



This verse states that the aforementioned Prophets all received revelation, but it is known that many of them did not receive a book. If revelation was confined to the books, then every Prophet would have received one. The fact many Prophets did not receive a book demonstrates that there exists revelation outside of these books.



All of the Qur’an is inspired but not everything that Allah inspired is in the Qur’an.


And your Lord revealed  to the been, saying: Choose your habitations in the hill and in the trees and in that which you have built.” (Qur’an 16:68)


We know that bee’s do not have a kitab (book).


Allah (swt) sent revelation to the disciples of Jesus to let them have firm belief in Jesus.


And when I revealed to the disciples, “Believe in Me and in My messenger Jesus.” They said, “We have believed, so bear witness that indeed we are Muslims.” (Qur’an 5:111)

And We revealed to the mother of Moses, “Suckle him; but when you fear for him, cast him into the river and do not fear and do not grieve. Indeed, We will return him to you and will make him of the messengers.” (Qur’an 28: 73)

Women received revelation. Yet, we do not say that the mother of Moses received a book other than what Moses was given, the Torah.


And when Our verses are recited to them as clear evidences, those who do not expect the meeting with Us say, “Bring us a Qur’an other than this or change it.” Say, “It is not for me to change it on my own accord. I only follow what is revealed to me. Indeed I fear, if I should disobey my Lord, the punishment of a tremendous Day.” (Qur’an 10:15)


Further proof that the Blessed Messenger (saw) received revelation other than the Qur’ān is that the compilation of the Qur’ān is not in its chronological order. Verses revealed in Makkah are found in Madanī chapters and vice versa. Likewise chapters revealed in Madina come before chapters revealed in Makkah. The arrangement of verses within surahs, and the arrangement of the surahs within the Qur’ān could only have been done by the Blessed Messenger (saw) based upon revelation from Allah. As Allah commands the Blessed Messenger (saw) to say:


It is not for me to change it of my own accord.”




And We made them leaders guiding by Our command. And We revealed to them the

revealed doing of good deeds, establishment of prayer, and giving of zakah; and they worshiped us.” (Qur’an 21:73) 


The Blessed and Noble Prophet (saw) his doing of good, his establishing of the Prayer and his method of giving Zakah are all revelation. Those who reject the clear verses of Allah (swt) are none but the disbelievers. The establishment of the prayer and the amount of giving the zakah are revelation not recorded in the Qur’an.


Say, “If I should err, I would only err against myself. But if I am guided, it is by what my Lord reveals to me. Indeed, He is Hearing and near.” (Qur’an 34:50)


A method for establishing the hadith. It is possible the Prophet (saw) said something that is in error. However, it contradicts established facts and observable reality, it can be rejected as it is in error.


Say, “It has been revealed to me that a group of Jinn listened and said, “Indeed, we have heard an amazing Qur’an.” (Qur’an 72:1) 


This had to have happened before this proclamation. Yet, we do not find any where else in the Qur’an where Allah (swt) informed the Blessed Messenger (saw) of this information. Notice the text does not say, “It is now being revealed to me.” “I am now proclaiming to you this information”


When the Muslims arrived in Madina, the Blessed Messenger (saw) commanded them to pray facing Jerusalem. This continued until Allah (swt) revealed:

So turn your face toward al-Masjid al-haram.” (Qur’an 2:144)


Some of the non Muslims criticised this order, and demanded to know why the Qiblah was originally Jerusalem, but had now been changed. So Allah revealed:


We did not appoint the Qiblah that you were on except to distinguish the ones who follow the messenger from the ones who would turn back on their heels.” (Qur’an 2:143)



In other words this was a test from Allah. However, although Allah attributes the appointment of the previous Qiblah to Himself, this appointment is not found anywhere in the Qur’ān. It was the Blessed Messenger (saw) who told the believers to face Jerusalem, based upon revelation from Allah. This revelation was not part of the Qur’ān, and hence was unrecited revelation.



Filed under Uncategorized

The Detailed Qur’an and the Sabeans

Indeed, those who believed and those who were Jews or Christians or Sabeans – those who believed in Allah and the Last Day and did righteousness – will have their reward with their Lord, and no fear will there be concerning them, nor will they grieve.” (Qur’an 2:62)


Indeed, those who have believed and those who were Jews and the Sabeans and the Christians and the Magians and those who associated with Allah – Allah will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection. Indeed Allah is, over all things, Witness.” (Qur’an 22:17)


Indeed, those who have believed and those who were Jews or Sabeans or Christians – those who believed in Allah and the Last Day and did righteousness – no fear will there be concerning them, nor will they grieve.” (Qur’an 5:69)


So in this “highly detailed” book that “leaves nothing out” who and what are the Sabeans? If we asked the followers of the Qur’an Only Religion what they thought. 

If Joseph Islam, Sam Gerrans, Hamza Abdul Malik, Javed Ghamidi, Shabir Ahmed, Edip Yuksel, Aisha Musa, Qur’an Centric where to all have a conference together and you asked them;  “Who are the Sabeans?” Please give me as many Qur’an references and quotations as humanly possible.


What would you come up with?

Edip Yuksel and his co-translators decided to simply throw in the towel. They decided that the Qur’an itself doesn’t explain what the word means so they rely upon the hadith literature!  

This is what they give you instead.

Surely those who acknowledge, and those who are Jewish, and the Nazarenes, and those who follow other religions, any one of them who acknowledge God and the Last day, and do reform, they will have their reward with their Lord, with no fear over them, nor will they grieve.*” (Qur’an 2:62 A Reformist Translation) 

So they just leave the Sabeans out altogether.

When it comes to 5:69 we are just given a footnote that says, “005:069 See 2:62 “


“Those who acknowledge, the Jews, the Converts, the Nazarenes, the Zoroastrians, and those who have set up partners; God will separate between them on the day of Resurrection. For God is witness over all things.” (Qur’an 22:17 A Reformist Translation)

So here you can see in (Qur’an 22:17) the Sabians get translated as ‘the Converts’ where as in (Qur’an 2:62) they just get left out completely. 


So Edip Yuksel, Layth Saleh al-Shaiban & Martha Schulte-Nafeh came with the following: 



Source (Reformist Translation of the Qur’an pg. 65)

Apparently Layth Saleh al-Shaiban who is the translator didn’t tell us a source that says: “SaBaA means to be an apostate.” The “detailed Qur’an”  that “doesn’t leave anything out of the book” certainly does it tell us this. One of the three mentioned above wrote:

“As for the word Sabiene, it is a  mistranslated as a proper name by the majority of commentators.”  So which classical commentator understands the word in the way that they do?  One of them wrote: “In fact, it derives from the Arabic word SaBaA, meaning to be an apostate, or ‘the follower of other religions’. Hadith books use this word as an accusation of Meccan mushriks directed against Muhammed when he started denouncing the religion of his people, they described his conversion to the system of Islam with the verb ‘SaBaA’.   

In fact, it derives from the Arabic word SaBaA, meaning to be an apostate, OR ‘the follower of other religions’. Where does the “highly detailed” Qur’an that “leaves nothing out of the book” mention this?

Why couldn’t they cross reference the word with another word in the Qur’an? 

Why is Edip and his co-authors/translators referencing the hadith books? Why is the Qur’an not sufficient enough to tell us what the word means? Also,

Edip and his co-authors/translators must think that Allah (swt) has some deficiency when using language. Notice they say, that SaBaA could mean: apostate/follower of other religion/


The true religion with Allah is Islam(l-is’lamu). Those who were given the Book were not at variance except after the knowledge came to them, being insolent one to another. And whoso disbelieves in God’s signs. God is swift at the reckoning.” (Qur’an 3:19)

If Allah (swt) was meaning that all of those people who believe in God, the Last Day and Work Righteousness he could have just said: “l-is’lam”.  If what is intended by Edip’s thinking is a submitter to God?  Also, unfortunately, Edip’s understanding of the verse leaves Buddhism out in the freezing cold.   

So does Sabian mean: Apostate/Convert/ Or the very vague: Follower of Other Religions?  Obviously putting the word Apostate in the verses will be very awkward. 


This is how it would look for the curious: 


“Those who acknowledge, the Jews, the Apostates, the Nazarenes, the Zoroastrians, and those who have set up partners; God will separate between them on the day of Resurrection. For God is witness over all things.” (Qur’an 22:17 A Reformist Translation)

Surely those who acknowledge, and those who are Jewish, and the Nazarenes, and the Apostates, any one of them who acknowledge God and the Last day, and do reform, they will have their reward with their Lord, with no fear over them, nor will they grieve.” (Qur’an 2:62 A Reformist Translation) 

Simply bizarre. Absolutely no explanation is given on why Allah (swt) would mention converts (presumably to Islam) in these verses when they would already be believers. 


So let us plug in “follower of other religions”. This is how it would look for the curious: 


“Those who acknowledge, the Jews, the followers of other religions, the Nazarenes, the Zoroastrians, and those who have set up partners; God will separate between them on the day of Resurrection. For God is witness over all things.” (Qur’an 22:17 A Reformist Translation)

Surely those who acknowledge, and those who are Jewish, Nazarenes, and those who follow other religions, any one of them who acknowledge God and the Last day, and do reform, they will have their reward with their Lord, with no fear over them, nor will they grieve.” (Qur’an 2:62 A Reformist Translation) 


The problem with the Reformist Translation beyond trying to make the Qur’an say what one wants it to say is that it looks less and less like it came from a Creator and more and more like a confused, jumbled mess.

Little wonder the only praise the book got was from fellow Qur’an Only Religious believers, those who want to liberalize Islam and oh yes, ‘One anonymous Sunni scholar” (of course…wink, wink).

Here is how a Creator who is trying to convey to us that he sent one system for humanity, and that there is no delineation between any of the systems would convey his message:

“Surely those who acknowledge God and the Last Day, and do reform, they will have their reward wit their Lord, with no fear over them, nor will they grieve.”  There you go. Very simple. 


Sam Gerrans takes a stab at it. In his: “Qur’an a Complete Revelation” we have nothing novel there.


“Who are the Sabeans according to this detailed book?”-Sam Gerrans 

“I dunno but I have a pretty good guess.”-Edip Yuksel.

“Ah sweet bro let me copy that down!”-Sam Gerrans. 


Those who heed the warning and those who hold to Judaism and the Nazarenes And the Sabaeans Whoso believe in God and the Last day and works righteousness: They have their reward with their lord and they need not fear Nor will they regret.” (Qur’an 2:62 A Complete Revelation Sam Gerrans)


His foot note says:

‘Arabic s-b-‘. This root is also associated in the early Islamic literature with followers of other faiths, or with apostates. I am indebted to Edip Yuksel et al for this point.” 


“Those who heed warning And those who hold to Judaism and the Sabaeans and the Nazarenes Whoso believes in God and the Last Day and works righteousness: They need not fear Nor will they regret.” (Qur’an 5:69 A Complete Revelation Sam Gerrans)


“Those who heed warning and those who hold to Judaism And the Sabaeans And the Nazarenes and the Majus And those who ascribe a partnership God will decide between them on the Day of Resurrection. God is a witness over all things.” (Qur’an 22:17 A Complete Revelation Sam Gerrans)


And he has a footnote that reads in regards to the Majus

“Muhammad Asad comments here:

“Al-majus: the followers of Zoroaster or Zarathustra (Zardusht), the Iranian prophet who lived about the middle of the last millennium B.C, and whose teachings are laid down in the Zend-Avesta. They are represented today by Gabrs of Iran and, more prominently, by the Parsis of India and Pakistan. Their religion, though dualistic in philosophy is based in belief in God as the Creator of the universe.”  So as regards Sabeans , Gerrans has decided to leave the word transliterated into English and has copy pasted Edip et all and what they have said. 

Those who follow the Qur’an Only Religion have absolutely no recourse to this word Sabean other than to reference early Islamic literature.

The word appears three times in the “highly detailed revelation” that apparently leaves nothing out, is clear, and explains itself. This among many many other reasons I do not find the Qur’an Only Religion to be cogent. 



Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

“The Qur’an teaches that the Earth is flat” -Sam Gerrans (Qur’an Only Advocate)

Verily! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and in the alternation of night and day, there are indeed signs for men of understanding.” (Qur’an 3:190)


For those who do not know, follower of the Qur’an Only Religion and translator of the Qur’an, Sam Gerrans believes that in his deep study of the Qur’an that the conclusion is: We live in a stationary, flat earth, with a solid firmament above us. You can see his full discussion here:


Sam Gerrans pictured above. 


This is the picture that Sam uses in the thumbnail to the video above (with his own modifications) 


Now it is not clear if Sam Gerrans believes that we have a universe or if that is also part of the deception. In his thumbnail he puts God “outside” of the Creation, or so it seems.IN his thumbnail (not included in the picture above) he has the “Heaven of Heavens” and than God is “above” it. Or so it seems. Because if it’s all flat we don’t really know if God is “above” the Creation or below it.

Theology is not a strong point of those who follow the Qur’an Only Religion so it hard to glean rather or not Sam believes that Allah(swt) is outside of space/time.


This was the belief of the ancient people that the Earth that we live in is flat. 


The tree you saw, which grew large and strong, whose top reached the sky and was visible to all the earth.” (Daniel 4:20)


This is the belief of those who believe in a flat Earth. No such tree has existed or ever will exist, because in a spherical world it is impossible to see such an object. Not to mention the fact that objects appear smaller/larger via distance to that object.


“When he had reached the departure of the sun and found it departing in a murky spring and found a people nearby

We said: O Dhu’l-Qarnayn: thou shalt either punish or take concerning them good.” (Qur’an 18:86)


Why Sam feels the need to translate into English “thou shalt” in the 21 century is beyond me. To each their own I guess.


Now I would personally offer to do this for Sam Gerrans, and I hope others would join in on this fun little project. That we get different people who live in different time zones (unless that to is part of the conspiracy) and as the sun “sets” in my area some one else who is experiencing 1:00pm can tell us if the sun has “departed” or not.


Now the only place on the Earth (in my limited knowledge of topography and geography) that might fit this description would be Iceland where they experience the “midnight” sun with 6 months of darkness. Yet, I am really really hoping that Sam does not believe that during that 6 months of darkness that the rest of us who do experience sunlight are under some kind of mass hallucination.


At this point it sounds like we are all captive in the “Dark City” than anything else.  Interestingly, Dark City is a film I found on Netflix recently and decided to watch. Since the film has been out for some time I believe it is safe for me to say that basically the inhabitants of the Dark City are humans who have been kidnapped by a dying race of alien beings. They change the memories around of the inhabitants and keep them in almost like a spell induced sleep. The place they live on is a flat disk (craft) and no one can ever seem to find the outer limits of this city (because there is none).   


This is how many of the translations of the Qur’an look when dealing with the verse of the sun “setting in a murky spring”


Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of dark mud, and he found near it a people. Allah said, “O Dhul-Qarnayn, either you punish or else adopt among them goodness.” (Qur’an 18:86) 


This is side by side with Gerrans translation:

“When he had reached the departure of the sun and found it departing in a murky spring and found a people nearby

We said: O Dhu’l-Qarnayn: thou shalt either punish or take concerning them good.” (Qur’an 18:86) 


Now either the Qur’an is using language that describes how some human beings perceive their reality (which is very damaging to the claims of Sam Gerrans), or we are confronted with the reality that the Qur’an contradicts observable phenomena. Observable phenomena which is tawatur -continuous mass testimony.

The sun neither sets nor departs. It is part of the language that is used even in the 21st century unlike “thou shalt”.   

For example: 


For example: It was part of the language of the people when welcoming the Blessed Prophet (saw).

ṭala‘a ‘l-badru ‘alaynā -The full moon rose over us

min thaniyyāti ‘l-wadā‘ -From the valley of Wada‘

The people of Mecca did not believe that the moon rose from the valley of Wada. This was with in the poetic expression of the people. However, from their observable perspective they most likely did believe that the moon literally rose (though not necessarily from the valley of Wada).


Now if I had to choose between the following: 

1) Their is a massive conspiracy out there to deny the truth of a flat Earth, where the water some how doesn’t fall off the edge, and there is some ice wall /or barrier we cannot penetrate.   


2) Sam Gerrans is part of some psy-ops that is out to make the Qur’an look absurd.   


If I had to choose between the two I would say that 2 is more likely. The problem is that science itself is often very dumb and I do mean very dumb when interacting with people who believe the Earth is hallow, or the flat-Earth people like Sam Gerrans. 


Take for example this video by Neil Tyson who’s first point is very dumb. So Neil’s first point is that Flat Earther’s believe that other planetary bodies are spherical/round. Actually, I know some that don’t believe that at all. They don’t believe in other planets or that we even have a universe! (Not sure Sam Gerrans stance on this.) 


However, look at this image and study it for a moment. Why do you think it is extremely dumb to use 2D images of 9 disc pointed one way and one 2D image of a disc pointed another way to prove that all 10 of the disc are spherical? 


Where as the next point is more cogent and people like Sam Gerrans really struggle to explain this. 


So yes I am more likely to believe that Sam Gerrans is a part of a psy-ops that wants to make the Qur’an look bad than I am willing to believe there is a massive conspiracy to deny that our Earth is flat. 


This is an Islamic Globe dated from the early 1800s. Source:




1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized