“Say, “You will not be accountable for our misdeeds, nor will we be accountable for your deeds.” (Qur’an 34:25)
“Allah will judge between you on Judgment Day regarding your differences.” (Qur’an 22:69)
﷽
Some people ask what our view or understanding of Ibn Muljam is. Before understanding the positions that may exist concerning Ibn Muljam it is important for one to be familiar with various positions in regard to Ali ibn Abu Talib.
You can find the three stances that are found in the school here:
How can an individual be both in walayah and bara’ah with the righteous?
Possible scenario.
Person A left Gwadar Port. The people of that place know person A to be upright and fair dealing. However, Person A, when he arrives in Port Bell, is known to swindle and cheat people.
The righteous people at Gwadar port judge based upon his outward actions. The righteous at Port Bell judge based upon his outward actions.
The actions of the person in Port Bell never reach the people of Gwadar port.
The Ibadi and Ibn Muljam.
First, one has to realize that the early community of Muslims who differed with Ali’s decision at Siffin were not very fond of the Umayyads. Thus, it is not difficult to imagine that every grievance one had with the Umayyads would most likely would have implicated Ali in some way shape or form.
In a recent interview, Shaykh Sassi Ben Yahyateen from Tunisia (h) mentioned Ibn Muljam.
Interviewer: In my research, I found a historical accusation I don’t want to believe, so I will ask you about it. It is said that the Ibadis venerate and sanctify Abdul Rahman ibn Muljam, who killed Imam Ali (may Allah be pleased with him). What is your response?
Shaykh Sassi: You will not find in any reliable, respected book the sanctification of Abdul Rahman ibn Muljam.
Interviewer: What is the stance of Ibadis…
Shaykh Sassi:and Abdul Rahman ibn Muljam is not Ibadi. They say he was Sufri.
Interviewer: So, what is your stance on this figure?
Shaykh Sassi: We do not attack or sanctify any person in our books. If the accusations of murder are proven, he will be held accountable for it. We do not exonerate anyone. Conversely, you will not find cursing of any person in our books.
Interviewer: So, the murder is not proven in your narrations?
Shaykh Sassi: The murder is proven. But who killed? Who incited? Who planned? This is found in Hisham Ja’it and found in other books that explain it.
Prima Qur’an comments: “and Abdul Rahman ibn Muljam is not Ibadi. They say he was Sufri.“
With due respect to the esteemed Shaykh, Ibn Muljam was neither Ibadi nor Sufri. That is because these political/juristic distinctions did not happen until later.
One of our teachers Shaykh Hilal Al Wardi when asked about Abdur-Rahman Ibn Muljam gave a fair and balanced perspective concerning him (Abdur-Rahman Ibn Muljam).
As the Shaykh said, in general, no one speaks well or ill of him However, out of the thousands of Ibadi scholars that existed down through the ages there are some exceptions to the general rule.
Three examples of those exceptions.
For example: Abdullah ibn Muhammed ibn Barakah (r), a major scholar of the Ibadi school. He explicitly states in it the disavowal (al-bara’ah) of Ali, disavows Ali, and the allegiance (walayah) to Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljam, and being pleased with him, and praying for mercy on him (tarahhum).” Meaning “May Allah have mercy on Ibn Muljam, and may Allah be pleased with him”, and disavows Ali ibn Abi Talib.
So this is the view of the respected Shaykh. It is not a view that all the Ibadi scholars agree with.
The second example.
In The book Al-Siyar wa-l-Jawabat li-‘Ulama’ wa-A’immat ‘Uman which was compiled and edited by Sayyidah Ismāʻīl Kāshif, who published the collection of these historical Ibadi text we find a view that states:
“We said to them: Likewise, Allah commanded Ali to fight them, so it is not permissible for him to abandon that nor to consider it forbidden to kill them until they fulfill the command of Allah.” This is evidence of the disbelief and misguidance of Ali, and the correctness and justice of the people of Nahrawan. “Then Ali (Allah scattered his command) was killed by Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljam out of anger for Allah, and that was permissible for him because he killed him.” Allah! “Those who command justice from the people. May Allah have mercy on Abd al-Rahman.”
This is the view of those who put Ali in bara’ah. When you see the word ‘disbelief’ yes you can read that as kufr. You have to understand that kufr for us is of two types. One that expels form the millat of Islam and one that does not. The example for Ali ibn Abu Talib is the example of that which does not expel from the millat of Islam.
So there are three things in relation to Abdur-Rahman ibn Muljam.
That he took the right of the people of Al Nahrawan. Ali killed them with injustice and Abdur-Rahman was applying Qisas. *
That Abdur-Rahman Ibn Muljam fell in love with a woman named Qatam bint Shajna and that he chanced upon her while she was broken with grief over the loss of loved ones at Al Nahrawan. Abdur-Rahman Ibn Muljam proposed to marry her at which she wanted as dowry the head of Ali Ibn Abu Talib.
That Al-Ash’ath bin Qais, the double agent was not done sabotaging Ali. That Mu’awiya received word of what happened at Nahrawan and how people were deeply displeased with Ali’s actions (we saw the cooling in relation between Ali and Ibn Abbas-ra) and we also noted that Ibn Abbas (ra) was with Ali at the battles of Jamal and Siffin but absent at Nahrawan. Mu’awiya received word of the people’s displeasure sent Al-Ash’ath bin Qais who chanced upon Abdur-Rahman Ibn Muljam and hatched the plot to kill Ali.
*Note* There are historical reports that Abdur Rahman Ibn Muljam was with Ali in the killing of the people of Al Nahrawan, felt guilt and remorse and wanted to make amends by extracting vengeance upon Ali. The other is that he was with the people of Al Nahrawan all the while.
Other information is that he migrated during the Caliphate of ‘Umar (ra) And that he had received knowledge of Islam at the hands of Mu’aath ibn Jabal (ra) he was among the people of piety, and jurisprudence and among the and he was among the qurrā and the people of Fiqh and worship.
So for us in the Ibadi school we don’t have this view that the blood of the people of Nahrawan is cheap and Ali’s blood is expensive. Just like we do not say the blood of an Arab is expensive and the blood of the Non Arab is cheap.
Justice is blind to status, lineage, or political allegiance.
No one is above the law.
We remind the people of what Allah (swt) says:
“That is why We ordained for the Children of Israel that whoever takes a life unless as a punishment for murder or mischief in the land—it will be as if they killed all of humanity; and whoever saves a life, it will be as if they saved all of humanity.” (Qur’an 5:32)
If anyone has an issue with Shaykh Hilal’s comments then this person would take issue with the Blessed Prophet (saw) himself who said:
Narrated `Aisha:
Usama approached the Prophet (saw) on behalf of a woman (who had committed theft). The Prophet (saw) said, “The people before you were destroyed because they used to inflict the legal punishments on the poor and forgive the rich. By Him in Whose Hand my soul is! If Fatima (the daughter of the Prophet (saw) did that (i.e. stole), I would cut off her hand.”
No one from among the Muslims is exempt from the justice of Islam, regardless of their status, clan, heritage etc.
So it could simply be that Abdul Rahman Ibn Muljam wanted revenge for the death of his loved ones, friends, and family who fell to Ali’s army. There are some people who among Muslims that believe that the blood of Ali is expensive and the blood of other Muslims is cheap. No, this is not the case at all. Nonetheless Allah (swt) is the final judge. In regard to Abdul Rahman Ibn Muljam acting as some type of lone wolf. The last he knew is that the people of Nahrawan were unjustly attacked by Ali’s forces. To his (Ibn Muljam’s) knowledge there was no peace treaty or terms reached with Ali or his forces. Thus, being in a state of war he continued to act as a person in a state of war whose last legitimate authority was attacked and killed.
“Two years later Seyyidina Ali was murdered by one Ibn Muljam in 40H (661 CE) to avenge the massacre of the relatives of his wife at the battle of Nahrawan. The conspiracy to kill him was hatched, according to Jalaluddin Assyuti, In Mecca, not in Basra where there was a large concentration of the people of Nahrawan. The identity of Ibn Muljam is not known but some historical sources allege that he was a Khariji, and so they accuse the Khawarij including the Ibadhis, of having murdered Seyyidna Ali. Today some Muslim leaders bitterly complain that the Western media unjustifiably accuse Muslims in general of terrorism because of the tragedy which happened in the World Trade Center in New York on 11th of September, 2001 and perpetrated by a group of young men belonging allegedly to the Islamic faith. But the same Muslim leaders had been in the forefront in accusing Ibadhis today for a crime which was committed by one man almost 1400 years ago. Allah will punish the individual who murdered Seyyidna Ali but not all future generations belonging to a particular sect or madh-hab.”
Source: (pg.152 Ibadhism The Cinderella of Islam by Shaykh Soud H. Al-Ma’awaly)
Prima Qur’an comments: So you can see by the title of Seyyidina in front of the name Ali that Shaykh Soud H. Al-Ma’awaly is among those who believe that Ali repented for his actions. Though, we do not know on what basis he says that Allah (swt) will punish Ibn Muljam for his actions if the news of Ali’s repentance did not reach Ibn Muljam or as stated above no news of a cessation in hostilities reached him (Ibn Muljam). Allah knows best.
Lastly, Nahrawan & Karbala. Can you imagine if those of our school commemorated the atrocity of Nahrawan in the way that many Shi’a do with Karbala. Think about it. Imagine if every year people from the Ibadi school commemorated the massacre of the Muslims of al Nahrawan with poems, and wailing, and public displays of anger and sadness. How is that helpful to the unity of Muslims to commemorate such historical tragedies?
And a large majority of those killed from Ahl Nahrawan were companions and thousands of Muslims and the majority of those killed from Ahl Nahrawan that day were from the best of people on the earth that day and the most ascetic. Amongst them were those who fought the battle of Badr; those who gave allegiance under that tree and reciters and the best of the tabi’un.
Indeed, Allah Almighty purified them and praised them in the Quran, where He said: “Certainly was Allah pleased with the believers when they pledged allegiance to you, [O Muhammed], under the tree” (Qur’an 48:18)
And it is well known that whomever Allah purifies becomes among the people of wilaya (divine allegiance/guardianship). So how is it that, in the end, they label the Ibadiyya as Kharijites, as if they are challenging Allah by passing a judgment upon them that is contrary to Allah’s judgment?!!
So as regard Ibn Muljam and the killing of Ali rather it was done with justice or not done with justice. It is best to leave it to history. However, if people want to be emotional about it we can propose the following.
We can say to those filled with emotion: “You make du’a that if Ali was not killed with justice that the one who killed him will be dealt justly by Allah and we will say Amin along with you.Likewise make du’a that if the people of Nahrawan were not killed with justice that the one’s who killed them be dealt justly by Allah and we will say Amin along with you.
“If some of you do believe in what I have been sent with while others do not, then be patient until Allah judges between us. He is the Best of Judges.” (Qur’an 7:87)
Simple. No one from our school has any reason to be uncomfortable. So that is that, and let us move forward as an Ummah.
Our way is to be civil and to move on from the issues of the past.
This is unlike those Sunni Muslims on social media who come to the defense of the Umayyads dynasty and they frequently post pictures of Ali with his head severed. Or those Shi’i who made an entire film disparinging Umar ibn Al Khattab (ra) or who frequently insult Lady Aisha (ra).
If you have found this post educational you may enjoy the following:
This section will be miscellaneous information on a wide range of topics. This section does not necessarily reflect the views or attitudes of either the Ibadi school or adherents of the school.
Do note some links are broken. We are in the process of restoring those links.
Allah willing we will continue to update this section and organize it accordingly as well:
“That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal to you. And you were not with them when they cast their pens as to which of them should be responsible for Mary. Nor were you with them when they disputed.”(Qur’an 3:44)
﷽
“This is the Book in which there is no doubt, a guide for the righteous. Those who believe in the unseen, and perform the prayers, and give from what We have provided for them. And those who believe in what was revealed to you, and in what was revealed before you, and are certain of the Hereafter.” (Qur’an 2:3-4)
The Qur’an is a book of which there is no doubt. It is for those who believe in the unseen. It is for those who are certain in the life to come. It is for those who believe in what was revealed before the Blessed Prophet (saw).
Those who are skeptical of those points will quite naturally arrive at different conclusions. So that is of no consequence for the believer.
“As for those who persist in disbelief, it is the same whether you warn them or not—they will never believe. Allah has sealed their hearts and their hearing, and their sight is covered. They will suffer a tremendous punishment.” (Qur’an 2:6-7)
Now, historians and orientalists cannot speak of the supernatural as these are matters of belief. They are beyond their point of historical investigation. However, we are always thrilled when we find historians and Orientalists corroborating the testimony of narratives in the Qur’an by finding manuscripts or parchments of information that, though not verbatim, closely mimic what Allah (swt) has revealed before. This is the understanding of the believer.
Do we find some information from various cultures that preceded the coming of the Blessed Prophet (saw) that seems to corroborate the beliefs of Islam? Yes! That is not scary! That is exciting!
Recall what Allah (swt) himself informed us of:
“We surely sent a messenger to every community, saying, “Worship Allah and shun false gods.” But some of them were guided by Allah, while others were destined to stray. So travel throughout the land and see the fate of the deniers!” (Qur’an 16:36)
Remember we are not responsible for the conclusions or perceptions of others.
If we look at the above graph. We can see that in block B the apparent (the dhahir) is that there are parchments, manuscripts, scrolls, oral traditions, inscriptions etc. that come before the Qur’an. However, when we look at block B, the haqiqah (the reality) is that Allah’s knowledge of what really happened precedes the information in B.Because of that reality, what is in C (The Qur’an) actually precedes the information in B. This is precisely why this hobbyhorse of orientalist and those who use the historical critical method is of absolutely no consequence for the believing Muslim.
We Muslims have been the first critics of our own sources. The clash of historical narratives between the Ibadi, Sunni and Shi’a is proof positive of this. The grading of the ahadith and the mention of variants in the transmission of the Qur’an have not come from people who lost faith, agnostics or atheists. They came from us, as believers. Subhan’Allah!
These other Johnny Come Lately types, HCM, etc., welcome to the party!
History and Miracles.
We don’t believe that miracles are historical. This does not mean that we do not believe that miracles did not happen. We just don’t believe that history can capture them.
Case in point: An Indian king, Cheraman Perumal, was reported to have seen the moon split. History can report such data, but it does not necessarily confirm nor interpret the data.
This particular entry is directed towards Christians. It is rather shameful that they have taken the approach that they have in these matters. Given that they too claim to believe in the unseen. They claim to believe in a Creator that can narrate past events that present people were not privy to.
“Then she brought him to her people, carrying him. They said, “O Mary, you have certainly done a thing unprecedented. O sister of Aaron, your father was not a man of evil, nor was your mother unchaste.”But she pointed to the babe. They said: “How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?” He said: “I am indeed a servant of Allah: He has given me revelation and made me a prophet; And He hath made me blessed wheresoever I will be and has enjoined on me Prayer and Charity as long as I live; He has made me kind to my mother, and not overbearing or miserable; So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)”! Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute.”(Qur’an 19:27-34)
“When Allah will say, “O Jesus, Son of Mary, remember My favor upon you and upon your mother when I supported you with the Pure Spirit and you spoke to the people in the cradle and in maturity; and [remember] when I taught you writing and wisdom and the Torah and the Gospel; and when you designed from clay like the form of a bird with My permission, then you breathed into it, and it became a bird with My permission, and you healed the blind and the leper with My permission; and when you brought forth the dead with My permission; and when I restrained the Children of Israel from [killing] you when you came to them with clear proofs and those who disbelieved among them said, “This is not but obvious magic.”(Qur’an 5:110)
“And a messenger to the Children of Israel, who will say, ‘Indeed I have come to you with a sign from your Lord in that I design for you from clay like the form of a bird, then I breathe into it and it becomes a bird by permission of Allah. And I cure the blind and the leper, and I give life to the dead – by permission of Allah. And I inform you of what you eat and what you store in your houses. Indeed in that is a sign for you, if you are believers.” (Qur’an 3:49)
Prima Qur’an comments:
In this article, we will give a response to those Christians who use as a polemic against Muslims the claim that the Qur’an contains apocryphal material in it and therefore cannot be a revelation from Allah (swt).
Now, of course, they will claim that there are more than the three verses of the Qur’an we quoted above as being from apocryphal material. However, we have chosen to focus on these three, as they are most often used by Christian polemicists in debates with Muslims.
Now, personally, we find this particular line of Christian attack against Islam amusing. However, they have to eventually come up with something, right?
Now let’s look at and listen carefully to what these Christians are actually disputing with us about.
*Note*
They are not raising the issue of “healing the blind.“
They are not raising issues against “curing people affected by leprosy.”
They are not raising issues against “give life to the dead.”
They are not disputing these points because they are miracles attributed to Christ Jesus that they find in their accepted canonical text. We will come to the term canonical in a moment.
What they are disputing is:
Jesus speaking as an infant
Jesus creating birds out of clay
Why do they dispute about these miracles?
Because they are not in what they accept to be their canonical text.
So what do the terms apocryphal and canonical mean?
Canonical in relation to Christian scriptures means:
“A biblical canon or canon of scripture is a set of texts (or “books”) which a particular religious community regards as authoritative scripture. … Believers consider canonical books as inspired by God or as expressive of the authoritative history of the relationship between God and his people.”
Apocryphal in relation to Christian scriptures means:
“Biblical or related writings not forming part of the accepted canon of Scripture; or writings or reports not considered genuine.”
So, if a Christian were to come to us and say that these statements in the Qur’an are found in apocryphal sources, the first thing you have to keep in mind that what they are actually saying isthat it is apocryphal according to their particular sect of Christianity!
The reason that is important is as follows: As we write this to you on 11/4/2024, Christendom has still not settled the issue of what is and is not apocryphal for the whole of Christianity.
Glaring examples are the following:
Depending on how you want to word it, you could say that the Protestants have 7 fewer books in their version of the Old Testament. Or you could say that the Roman Catholics have 7 extra books in their Old Testament that they accept to be inspired and not apocryphal.
Yet the Orthodox Church has additional Old Testament texts (or if you want to be neutral, the Protestants and Catholics have less). The same can be said for the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.
The same goes for the New Testament.
What is canonical is an issue that is still not settled among them.
The Chaldean Syrian Church does not accept the following as canon:
In fact, many Protestant Christians have declared Mark 16:8-20, & John 7:53–8:11 to not be canonical.
You have to wonder about the Protestant Christian theologians like John Calvin, Martin Luther, and others who most likely held such passages to be canonical. Yet there are Christians who do not agree with the idea that such passages are non-canonical. These Christians very much believe that Mark 16:8-20, &John 7:53–8:11 are inspired scripture.
So what is the point that is being made?
The point is that when a Christian says to us that those verses in the Qur’an are allegedly taken from apocryphal sources, it is important to understand that:
That though it may be apocryphal for that particular Christian, we can’t say for certain that it was apocryphal for the other Christians.
To keep in mind that what is and is not apocryphal has been and continues to be an internal dispute among Christians.
If the Christian is to counter by saying, “Can you name for me any Christian denomination today that accepts such and such text as canonical?”
The answer to that is: “No we can’t.” Many Christian sects and denominations over time have long perished. Most often the information we do have about them comes from their opponents.
What is also interesting, and we hope Muslims reading this bear in mind, is that no Christian committed to a consistent world view in which the supernatural happens can tell us that:
Jesus did not speak as an infant.
Jesus did not create birds out of clay.
This assertion is also supported by the text they accept as canon. Namely, the following:
“And Jesus did many other miracles in the presence of his disciples which are not written in this book: But these are written that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you might have life through his name” (John 20:30-31).
Prima Qur’an comments:
Now this writer, apparently inspired by Allah, felt that it was necessary to inform his readers that Jesus did many other miracles that are not contained within this book.
“There are many more things that Jesus did. If all of them were written down, I suppose that not even the world itself would have space for the books that would be written.” (John 21:25)
Prima Qur’an comments: Though we can all agree this statement is hyperbole, yet it is obvious that the writer knew that there was much more information about Jesus that could be shared.
Now, a possible Christian objection to our understanding of John 20:30-31 is that ‘the many other miracles that are not present in this book‘ could only be a reference to the miracles listed in Matthew, Mark, Luke that are not in the Gospel according to John.
The response to this is that it is simply an assumption.
It could be that:
It could be a reference only to the miracles present in Matthew, Mark, Luke that are not in the Gospel, according to John.
It could be a reference to miracles that are not present in any of those Gospel accounts.
It could be a reference to miracles present in Matthew, Mark, Luke as well as those not present in any Gospel accounts.
Christians could well ask: “Why wouldn’t these accounts of Jesus speaking as an infant or making birds out of clay make it into any of the Four Gospels commonly accepted among all of Christendom?”
Well, we have a clue about that from a text we have already mentioned.
“And Jesus did many other miracles in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you might have life through his name” (John 20:30-31).
Prima Qur’an comments: This Gospel writer is telling us that he is informed about other miracles, but the seven particular miracles that he has selected is so that we may believe that Jesus is:
The Christ
The Son of God
Having eternal life through his name.
So, in the example of this Gospel writer, we have the reasons plainly stated why some miracles were chosen over others. Whereas for the other Gospels it’s hard to discern why they may have left out certain miracles.
For example, John’s Gospel includes the story of Lazarus rising from the dead. I’m puzzled why such an awesome event is not recorded by the other Gospels. Or Jesus turning water into wine is only included in the Gospel, according to John.
Equally puzzling is the following awesome account, which is not recorded by any ancient documents outside of Matthew itself.
“And behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. And the earth shook, and the rocks were split. The tombs also were opened. And many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many. When the centurion and those who were with him, keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were filled with awe and said, ‘Truly this was the Son of God’” (Matthew. 27:51-54).
There are no extra-biblical sources that mention this awesome event. Surely witnessing such an event would have been worthy of mention somewhere. In fact, this particular text created controversy even among conservative Christians when New Testament scholar and associate professor of theology Michael Licona raised questions about this text.
You can read about where Christians have done some damage control concerning this at the following:
So, again, going back to the Christian inquiry into why some awesome and miraculous events are recorded by some sources and not others, we can only surmise as to the motives behind this.
Why is it that Jesus speaking as an infant is recorded in some sources and not others?
Why is that Jesus making birds out of clay recorded in some sources and not others?
Why is it that the Gospel of Mark is now considered not to have a resurrection narrative, but other sources have it?
Why is it that Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead from some sources and not others?
Why is it that Jesus turned water into wine from some sources and not others?
Why is that only the Gospel of Matthew has this narrative about the mass resurrections of people appearing to many in the city?
Another interesting point to note is that, in the case of the Christian tradition that many of us will encounter today, Roman Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants of many types, we have 30 years of the life of Christ Jesus that is completely missing altogether!
“Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli.” (Luke 3:23)
So imagine all the people who needed to be healed, those who needed salvation, and what does the current Christian canon tell us about the early life of Jesus? Its silence about the early life of Jesus is awkward, to say the least.
It is honestly both shocking and disappointing that Christians would use these types of arguments against the Qur’an. It absolutely reeks of atheism, smacks of radical skepticism, and is stepped in a worldview bereft of the supernatural.
For us, as Muslims, we are informed about what happened concerning Jesus through divine revelation. As Allah (swt) says to the Blessed Messenger (saw):
“That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal to you. And you were not with them when they cast their pens as to which of them should be responsible for Mary. Nor were you with them when they disputed.” (Qur’an 3:44)
Also, notice that when the Christians make their particular claim about the Qur’an, they more often than not do present the sources which they claim the Qur’an takes the following from:
Speaking as an infant.
Creating birds out of clay.
We also find it interesting that Muslims don’t ask them for their sources.
The Christian polemicist usually has two sources in mind for this:
Those sources are: The Infancy Gospel of Thomas & The Protoevangelium of James.
“This little child Jesus when he was five years old was playing at the ford of a brook: and he gathered together the waters that flowed there into pools, and made them straightway clean, and commanded them by his word alone. 2 And having made soft clay, he fashioned thereof twelve sparrows. And it was the Sabbath when he did these things (or made them). And there were also many other little children playing with him.
“And a certain Jew when he saw what Jesus did, playing upon the Sabbath day, departed straightway and told his father Joseph: Lo, your child is at the brook, and he has taken clay and fashioned twelve little birds and has polluted the Sabbath day. 4 And Joseph came to the place and saw: and cried out to him, saying: Why are you doing these things on the Sabbath, which it is not lawful to do? But Jesus clapped his hands together and cried out to the sparrows and said to them: Go! and the sparrows took their flight and went away chirping. 5 And when the Jews saw it they were amazed, and departed and told their chief men that which they had seen Jesus do.”
Source: (Infancy Gospel of Thomas Chapter 2:1-5)
Prima Qur’an Comments:
This narrative speaks about Jesus creating 12 birds. The emphasis on the number 12 is there twice. This must relate to the 12 disciples. Whereas in the Qur’an we find no mention of this.
“Indeed I have come to you with a sign from your Lord in that I design for you from clay like the form of a bird, then I breathe into it and it becomes a bird by permission of Allah.” (Qur’an 3:49)
There is no mention of Jesus doing this act on the Sabbath Day. There is no mention of Jesus creating 12 birds. It is interesting to note that the Qur’andoes not name the number of Jesus’ disciples. Christians have not addressed this.
It would be interesting to know where the writer(s) of the ‘Infancy Gospel of Thomas’ got their information from. The earliest possible date of authorship is 80 A. D to 250 A. D. This is also roughly the time that the date of authorship is ascribed to ‘The Epistle to Titus‘, which is considered canonical by Christians today. These scholars date the epistle from the 80 A. D up to the end of the 250 A. D.
Source: (Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Anchor Bible, p. 662)
“And when Jesus was five years old, there fell a great rain upon the earth, and the boy Jesus walked up and down through it. And there was a terrible rain, and He collected it into a fish-pond, and ordered it by His word to become clear. And immediately it became so. Again He took of the clay which was of that fish-pond, and made of it to the number of twelve sparrows. And it was the Sabbath when Jesus did this among the boys of the Jews. And the boys of the Jews went away and said to Joseph His father: Behold, thy son was playing along with us, and he took clay and made sparrows, which it was not lawful to do on the Sabbath; and he has broken it. And Joseph went away to the boy Jesus, and said to Him: Why have you done this, which is not lawful to do on the Sabbath? And Jesus opened His hands, and ordered the sparrows, saying: Go up into the air and fly; nobody shall kill you. And they flew, and began to cry out, and praise God Almighty. And the Jews seeing what had happened, wondered, and went away and told the miracles which Jesus had done.”
Source: (Infancy Gospel of Thomas Chapter 4)
Prima Qur’an Comments:
This story is very similar to the one in the ‘Infancy Gospel of Thomas’. What becomes apparent is that both of these sources are relying upon some oral tradition–one in which does not have a chain of transmission.
Now here is what is interesting about the Protoevangelion Jacobi or Infancy Gospel of James. One of the Christian polemicists that used this type of attack upon the Qur’anwas himself put in a difficult position in relation to this text.
@19:20 Ehrman asks: “What other documents are found in P72 as this is a document that resonates with you?”
James responds, “There are some non-canonical documents in P72 …
Ehrman replies, “Right, so I am just wondering about you resonating with this document”. Do you think that the scribe thought what he was copying was scripture?“
James, “Well, I don’t think you can simply jump to the conclusion that, because scribes included books in a single codex that they believed that everything within that codex was necessarily scripture.” There are sorts of works that were considered to be beneficial to people that were included in codices that were not necessarily canonical.”
Ehrman, “Yeah, I just think that it was odd that that particular manuscript was one that you resonated with because it’s the earliest attestation that we have of the protoevangelium jacobi.” (The Infancy Gospel of James) ..
Prima Qur’an Comments:
In other words, you can’t know for certain if the scribe who was copying this text (obviously from an even earlier source) was transcribing what he thought was divine writing! Especially in light of the fact that it is in the same genre of manuscripts that are generally described as “the most significant” papyrus of the New Testament to be discovered so far.
“Now, when the Lord Jesus had completed seven years from His birth, on a certain day He was occupied with boys of His own age. For they were playing among clay, from which they were making images of asses, oxen, birds, and other animals; and each one boasting of his skill, was praising his own work. Then the Lord Jesus said to the boys: The images that I have made I will order to walk. The boys asked Him whether then he was the son of the Creator, and the Lord Jesus made them walk. And they immediately began to leap; and then, when He had given them leave, they again stood still. And He had made figures of birds and sparrows, which flew when He told them to fly, and stood still when He told them to stand, and ate and drank when He handed them food and drink. After the boys had gone away and told this to their parents, their fathers said to them: My sons, take care not to keep company with him again, for he is a wizard: flee from him, therefore, and avoid him, and do not play with him again after this.”
Source: (The Arabic Infancy Gospel of Jesus)
Prima Qur’an Comments:
This text has Jesus not only making birdsbut apparently donkeys, oxen, and other (undisclosed) animals out of clay. There is an inquiry about him being the son of the Creator. There is no mention of the sabbath or any mention of the animals being of any number.
It’s thought that this Gospel has its origins in Syriac sources in the 5th or 6th century.
“We find what follows in the book of Joseph the high priest, who lived in the time of Christ. Some say that he is Caiaphas. He has said that Jesus spoke, and, indeed, when he was lying in His cradle, said to Mary His mother: “I am Jesus, the Son of God, the Logos, whom you have brought forth, as the Angel Gabriel announced to you; and my Father has sent me for the salvation of the world.”
Source: (The Arabic Infancy Gospel of Jesus).
Prima Qur’an Comments:
There is no mention of Mary carrying Jesus as a baby. There is no mention of the people asking Mary where this baby came from. This text has Jesus addressing his mother, the Qur’an has him addressing the people. The text above is filled with Christian doctrine: Jesus is the Son of God, he has a ‘Father’ and he was sent for the salvation of the world.
None of this is found in the account of the Qur’an.
Conclusion:
The attacks that Christian polemicists have leveled towards the Qur’anare the kind one would expect from radical skepticism, and a worldview bereft of the supernatural.
We can see that these sources the Christians point to have important details and radically different theological statements that we do not find at all within the Qur’an.
More telling is that Christians do not even quote these sources, or give the details of the accounts. Many of the people they speak to will not go and double-check the sources for themselves.
The fact that some Christians find these sources apocryphal is of no concern to us as Muslims. We as Muslims do not rely upon them or accept them as revelation either. Our acceptance of what is stated in the Qur’an comes from our faith in it as divine revelation and in what Allah (swt) himself has stated:
“That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal to you. And you were not with them when they cast their pens as to which of them should be responsible for Mary. Nor were you with them when they disputed.” (Qur’an 3:44)
Just as our faith in Jesus as the Messiah, the Word of Allah, and the Son of Mary are not dependent upon any book of the New Testament (even if the whole of Christendom) accepts it as canonical.
Christians themselves cannot totally rule out the possibility of Jesus having spoken as an infant or having given life to the clay birds based upon the following evidence:
“And Jesus did many other miracles in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you might have life through his name” (John 20:30-31).
As well as the fact that the Gospel writers themselves have admitted to leaving out particular miracles that did not suit their desired goals.
“The truth is from your Lord, so never be among the doubters.”(Qur’an 2:147)
“And when they hear what has been revealed to the Messenger, you see their eyes overflowing with tears because of what they have recognized of the truth. They say, “Our Lord, we have believed, so register us among the witnesses.” (Qur’an 5:83)
May Allah (swt) guide the truth seekers!
If you enjoyed this article you may enjoy the following:
“You do not guide someone you love, but God guides anyone He wishes. He is quite Aware as to who are guided.” (Qur’an 28:56)
﷽
These are hadith that are brought against the Ibadi. They will say to us, how can some in your school put him in bara’ah when you have hadith like this?! The man was loved by Allah and his Messenger.
We do appreciate the passion as well as the question. Now this question is not directed to those in the Ibadi school who put Ali in walayah. Rather, it is directed towards those who have him in bara’ah.
As the majority are layman and people who have not delved into historical matters, the majority position is wuqoof.
So insh’Allah, we will examine the claims made in these hadith and respond to them.
The claim begins by quoting one of these hadith. In fact, if we are to be truthful, often our opponents are not honest people or they themselves innocent of the situation. Some of the dishonest will try and quote one hadith and hope you do not look at all the hadith being transmitted.
The first that can be said is that these hadith are ahad. They cannot be used to establish matters of aqidah for us. The majority view of our scholars is that none of the companions are in wilayat al-haqiqah-the real guardianship other than the wives of the Blessed Prophet (May Allah be pleased with them all and may the peace and blessings be upon our Prophet).
The hadith on the flag of Khaibar.
Narrated Sahl:
On the day (of the battle) of Khaibar the Prophet (saw) said, “Tomorrow I will give the flag to somebody who will be given victory (by Allah) and who loves Allah and His Apostle and is loved by Allah and His Apostle.” So, the people wondered all that night as to who would receive the flag and in the morning everyone hoped that he would be that person. Allah’s Messenger (saw) asked, “Where is `Ali?” He was told that `Ali was suffering from eye-trouble, so he applied saliva to his eyes and invoked Allah to cure him. He at once got cured as if he had no ailment. The Prophet (saw) gave him the flag. `Ali said, “Should I fight them till they become like us (i.e. Muslim)?” The Prophet (saw) said, “Go to them patiently and calmly till you enter the land. Then, invite them to Islam, and inform them what is enjoined upon them, for, by Allah, if Allah gives guidance to somebody through you, it is better for you than possessing red camels.”
Suhail reported on the authority of Abu Huraira that Allah’s Messenger (saw) said on the Day of Khaibar:
I shall certainly give this standard in the hand of one who loves Allah and his Messenger and Allah will grant victory at his hand. Umar b. Khattab said: Never did I cherish for leadership but on that day. I came before him with the hope that I may be called for this, but Allah’s Messenger (saw) called ‘Ali b. Abu Talib and he conferred (this honour) upon him and said: Proceed on and do not look about until Allah grants you victory, and ‘Ali went a bit and then halted and did not look about and then said in a loud voice: Allah’s Messenger, on what issue should I fight with the people? Thereupon he (the Prophet) said: Fight with them until they bear testimony to the fact that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger, and when they do that then their blood and their riches are inviolable from your hands but what is justified by law and their reckoning is with Allah.
`Ali happened to stay behind the Prophet (saw) and (did not join him) during the battle of Khaibar for he was having eye trouble. Then he said, “How could I remain behind Allah’s Messenger (saw)?” So `Ali set out following the Prophet (saw) , When it was the eve of the day in the morning of which Allah helped (the Muslims) to conquer it, Allah’s Messenger (saw) said, “I will give the flag (to a man), or tomorrow a man whom Allah and His Apostle love will take the flag,” or said, “A man who loves Allah and His Apostle; and Allah will grant victory under his leadership.” Suddenly came `Ali whom we did not expect. The people said, “This is `Ali.” Allah’s Messenger (saw) gave him the flag and Allah granted victory under his leadership.
“Tomorrow I will give the flag to somebody who will be given victory (by Allah) and who loves Allah and His Apostle and is loved by Allah and His Apostle.”
This indicates that Ali loves Allah (swt) and His Blessed Messenger (saw). It also indicates that this love is reciprocal.
“I shall certainly give this standard in the hand of one who loves Allah and his Messenger.”
This text indicates that Ali loves Allah (swt) and His Blessed Messenger (saw). However, it does not indicate that the love is reciprocal. In other words it does not indicate that Allah (swt) or his Messenger (saw) love him.
““I will give the flag (to a man), or tomorrow a man whom Allah and His Apostle love will take the flag,” or said, “A man who loves Allah and His Apostle.”
This text indicates confusion on what was actually stated.
This indicates to us that the hadith is muḍṭarib .
What is a muḍṭarib Hadith?
In Islamic Hadith sciences, a hadith is classified as muḍṭarib (meaning “shaky,” “agitated,” or “inconsistent”) when:
It is transmitted in multiple, contradictory ways (either in the chain of narrators or the text itself).
The opposing versions are of equal strength.
Because they are equally weighted, scholars cannot easily choose one version as the “correct” one over the other, leaving the absolute wording in doubt.
Applying the Concept to the Khaibar Text
If we look closely at the phrasing of the Prophet’s prophecy on the eve of Khaibar across all compiled sources, there is a clear textual Idtirab (inconsistency) regarding who loves whom:
Because these chains are all sound(narrated by premier companions and recorded in the Sahihayn), textually they clash with each other. They are of equal weight.
Why This Matters Theologically
This is exactly why your previous point carries so much weight. If a researcher isolates the Abu Hurairah variant (Muslim 2405), the theological conclusion is completely different from the standard narrative.
If the wording is unilateral (“he loves Allah”), the text only proves outwardly the companion’s intense loyalty and faith. It leaves the question of whether Allah reciprocated that love completely unstated.
Does this indicate that Ali is in wilayat al haqiqah (the real guardinship)? No. Because wilayat with the Prophets (peace be upon them all) is also in the dhahir (apparent).
“Ibrāhīm’s plea for his father’s forgiveness was only because of a promise he had made. But when it became clear that his father was an enemy of Allah, he (tabarra-a) disassociated from him. Indeed, Ibrāhīm was tender-hearted and forbearing.” (Qur’an 9:114)
This hadith is weak. One of the evidences that we use to establish that it is weak is that it contradicts the Qur’an. It has the Blessed Prophet (saw) displaying behavior in his prophecy that makes him as being one negligent of Allah (swt). May Allah (swt) forgive us.
“Tomorrow I will give the flag.”
“I shall certainly give this standard.”
“I will give the flag (to a man.”
“AndNever say(lā taqūlanna)about anything, “Behold, I shall do this tomorrow,”Without adding, “if Allah so wills!” But if you forget, then remember your Lord, and say, “I trust my Lord will guide me to what is more right than this.” (Qur’an 18:223-24)
This hadith goes against history.
Unless one wants to say the correct version is that Ali loved Allah (swt) and the Blessed Prophet (saw) and that is what the companions and the generation after them understood from the above narration. That is because if it is understood from the other way meaning , ‘Allah (swt) and his Blessed Prophet (saw) loved him’. It means the companions were completely oblivious to this or they simply didn’t care and attacked Ali anyway.
Different wordings.
The Prophet (saw) did not say if Allah wills and this hadith goes against the Qur’an.
It has the Prophet (saw) going against what Allah (swt) commands.
This hadith should be Mutawātirbut it is only ahad.
Logically, if the Blessed Prophet (saw) gathered his entire army on the eve of a major military victory and made a sweeping public declaration about who would receive the flag tomorrow, that event should have been witnessed and transmitted by hundreds, if not thousands, of people. It should be textually Mutawātir(mass-transmitted in identical wording across every single generation).
But structurally, it isn’t. It is classified as Ahad (solitary/isolated), split into narrow, competing chains of transmission (Isnad) that trace back to only a handful of individual Companions (mainly Sahl bin Sa’d, Salama bin Al-Akwa, and Abu Hurairah).
This reality presents two massive historical and structural problems:
1. The Bottleneck Problem (Why isn’t it Mutawātir?)
To be Mutawātir, a report needs a large volume of narrators at every single level of the chain. Even if 1,500 companions heard the Prophet say those words at Khaibar, the transmission immediately bottlenecked.
Only a few individuals actively chose to quote it to the next generation (Tabi’un). Because the vast majority of the army went home and didn’t formally establish a teaching chain for this specific sentence, the text legally lost its Tawatur status and fell into the Ahad category.
2. The Inevitable Result: Idtirab (Inconsistency)
Because the text relies on a few solitary paths (Ahad), it was stripped of the self-correcting safety net that a mass-transmitted Mutawātir text enjoys.
When hundreds of people repeat a sentence, memory errors get filtered out by the majority. But when only three or four narrow lines carry a quote down through the decades, any slight slip in a narrator’s memory, any paraphrasing, or any theological bias stands out immediately. This is precisely why we see the Idtirab we discussed earlier:
One line says: “Who loves Allah…”
Another says: “Whom Allah loves…”
Another says: “Both…”
The Critical Takeaway
By realizing that this hadith is Ahad and not Mutawātir, we have exposed the exact vulnerability that allows for these theological contradictions.
The hadith contradicts historical data.
Ibn Taymiyya said the following:
“Similarly, his statement: “Hating him (Ali) is a sin that no good deed can outweigh,” if someone hates him (Ali) and is an unbeliever, then his unbelief is what makes him miserable, and if he is a believer, then his faith benefits him even if he hates him (Ali).”
Source: (Minhaj As-Sunnah by Ibn Taymiyya Volume 3 page 26)
“Those who exonerate Uthman while criticizing Ali are greater, more devout, and better than those who exonerate Ali while criticizing Uthman, such as the Zaydis. It is well known that those among the Companions, the successors, and others who fought, cursed, and condemned Ali were more knowledgeable and devout than those who support him and curse Uthman.“
Source: (Minhaj As-Sunnah by Ibn Taymiyya Volume 3 page 5)
Prima Qur’an Comments: So given the historical data and the historical facts this also tells us that Ali was certainly not among some group of ten promised paradise.
Also, this does not mean that the incident at Khaibar itself was not historical but the historical reality afterwards can only indicate the following:
a) With the companions Ali only had the outward wilayah. Also known as Walāyah al-Ẓāhir(The apparent friendship).
b) The statement in the transmission “who loves Allah and his Messenger” must have been deemed more authentic by them. Meaning that Ali did indeed outwardly display love for Allah (swt) and his Blessed Messenger (saw) but it was not reciprocal.
This is the only explanation that makes sense of the historical data. Given the fact that they as Ibn Taymiyya stated, ‘who fought, cursed, and condemned Ali ‘. Also given the statement of Ibn Taymiyya that hate towards Ali does not harm one’s faith.
Hypothetical scenario
Let us say the hadith concerning the flag of Khaibar was Mutawātir. Let us say that they did not contain any variant. The wording was: Tomorrow, by the will of Allah, I will give the flag to somebody who will be given victory (by Allah) and who loves Allah and His Apostle and is loved by Allah and His Apostle.
This could mean that those Ibadi who hold Ali in walayah would be correct. That is to say that Ali repented for his actions in Siffin and Nahrawan. That he had a good ending. Allah knows best.
If you have enjoyed this article you may find the following beneficial.
“He has created you (all) from a single soul; then made its mate from it. He has sent down(wa-anzala)eight types of livestock for you. He creates you in your mothers´ wombs, one creation following upon another creation in three [stages of] darkness. Such is Allah, your Lord. Control belongs to Him; there is no god except for Him. Yet you disregard [Him]!” (Qur’an 39:6)
“He has (nazzala) sent down upon you, [O Muhammed], the Book in truth, confirming what was before it. And He revealed the Torah and the Gospel.” (Qur’an 3:3)
﷽
Shaykh Khalid Al Abdali (h) explains.
The Ibadi say that the Qur’an is created. What is your opinion on this, and what does it mean? What is the issue here? I hear people asking me: the Ibadi say that Allah brought the Qur’an into existence. So what is your opinion? It’s as if they are saying there are two groups: one group says that Allah Almighty brought the Qur’an into existence, and another group says that Allah did not bring the Qur’an into existence. So what is your view?
My view is that He brought it into existence, because creation — some people think creation means [something like] hair and blood. He created death. You know that death is a created thing among the created beings. Death, death, death, death is created. Alright.
Then he says: Is the Qur’an created or uncreated? What kind of question is this? This is a wrong question. Say to me: Did Allah send down the Qur’an or did He not send it down? I say to you: He sent it down, because we all believe that He sent it down, and it is His speech and His revelation, clearly.
Alright, let us focus on this issue: The Qur’an is the speech of Allah, without doubt. No one has a problem with that. I say that the Qur’an is the speech of Allah; Allah sent it down. Correct or not?
Do you have camels, cattle, sheep, goats in your country? Alright, did Allah send them down or create them? A little child, this young one, this offspring — did Allah create them or send them down? Look, if someone asks like this, what would you say? He would say, “He created them.” May Allah bless you. Since you answered, you first — Allah willing, you will read the verse for us. Give us the mushaf (Quran). He knows it by heart.
“I seek refuge with Allah from Satan the accursed. He created you from one soul, then made from it its mate, and sent down for you of the cattle eight pairs.” — Once with “sent down” and once with “created”? “Of the cattle eight pairs” — “sent down”? Or “created”? “Sent down, sent down, sent down” — or “created”? Let’s see. “Sent down” — “sent down” — “sent down.” He focuses on the question: “sent down” or “created”? “Of the cattle” — so He sent them down. When did you see this verse? First time you see it today? First time you focus on it, yes. Because I told you, many Muslims hear but do not read. Not him, but this is an example so you understand.
“Send down” — therefore, Ibn Kathir said regarding this verse: “Send down” means “created.” Something — the interpretation of Ibn Kathir here. Whoever wants to read: “And He sent down for you of the cattle eight pairs” — meaning He created for them from the cattle eight pairs. Enough, enough. “Send down” means “created.” Do you understand? Yes. Therefore, he is amazed at people who do not want to understand this issue. They may become fanatical — “not allowed,” “disbelief,” “not allowed,” “no way.” You say the truth, but you do not know. Emotion has taken you because so-and-so was imprisoned and beaten, then released. While so-and-so who said the opposite was imprisoned, beaten, slaughtered, and killed, yet you did not grieve for him, even though he was the one with the truth — you grieved for this one. Do you understand? Therefore, focus well.
The Qur’an — Allah Almighty brought it into existence. It did not exist, so He brought it into existence. Is it possible for Allah Almighty to have His life go away? Can a attribute of Him go away?
Some people say: The speech of Allah is an attribute of Him. Who told you — from your destruction? Listen. One day I ask: Do you know that one whose attribute is from his destruction? His speech — is it his speech or not his speech? He says: “It is an attribute of Him, from His attributes.” From his destruction, from His attributes. Why did he say? Because of His speech. And who told you that speech can be an attribute? Do you understand? Therefore, I give you advice: Most Muslims on earth say that the Qur’an is created, except a small group that terrorizes Muslims. They say “no,” and they clothe falsehood for people. Why? Because the Ash’aris — according to them — either the internal speech or the Qur’an. The internal speech is uncreated, but this Qur’an is created. They write this in their books. So this small group that dominates the world says to people regarding these Ash’aris: Are there two Qur’ans? Why? Because they say: “Internal speech” and “Qur’an” — internal speech is uncreated, and the Qur’an is created. Do you understand it? Cut.
Look, the issue of the creation of the Qur’an is not, meaning, of great benefit. Unfortunately, Muslims made it bigger than its actual worth. Had they remained silent and all said: “The Qur’an is the speech of Allah, Allah sent it down, His revelation” — enough, Almighty Allah speaks the truth — enough. But do not come and say to people: “Say ‘uncreated,’ and it is not allowed to say ‘created.’ No, no, I do not agree with you.” Let us agree together: “The Qur’an is the speech of Allah, His revelation, and His sending down. He sent it down, revealed it, and it is Allah’s speech.” Agreed? No problem. We stop here, and this belief accommodates all Muslims. Beware of saying to the one who speaks the truth that you are upon falsehood. Do you understand? Yes.
What is the reason? It is said: It was a Jew or a Christian — Abu Shakir al-Daysani — it is said it was one of them who said that Jesus is the word of Allah. So they said: If it (the word) is uncreated, then Jesus is uncreated. Thus, they confused the Islamic world.
Prima Qur’an comments: Online reference for Ibn Kahtir is the following:
((And He has sent down for you of cattle eight pairs.) means, He has created for you from among the cattles, eight pairs. These are the ones that are mentioned in Surat Al-An`am, eight kinds — a pair of sheep, a pair of goats, a pair of camels and a pair of oxen.) -Tafsir Ibn Kathir.
For those who would like to read more on this subject you may enjoy the following:
“Say: What! shall I seek a Lord other than Allah? And He is the Lord of all things; and no soul earns (evil) but against itself, and no bearer of burden shall bear the burden of another; then to your Lord is your return, so He will inform you of that in which you differed.” (Qur’an 6:164)
“No soul burdened with sin will bear the burden of another. And if a sin-burdened soul cries for help with its burden, none of it will be carried—even by a close relative.” (Qur’an 35:18)
“And most certainly they shall carry their own burdens, and other burdens with their own burdens, and most certainly they shall be questioned on the resurrection day as to what they forged.” (Qur’an 29:13)
“That no bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another, and that man shall have nothing but what he strives for.” (Qur’an 53:38-39)
﷽
Before we dive into this it is helpful for us to bring some additional verses of the Qur’an as well as a sacred transmission reported from the Blessed Prophet (saw).
“And fear the Day when you shall be brought back to Allah. Then shall every soul be paid what it earned, and none shall be dealt with unjustly.” (Qur’an 2:281)
“Verily We! We shall raise the dead. And We write down that which they send before and their footsteps. And everything We have counted up in a Book luminous.” (Qur’an 36:12)
Two additional translations of Qur’an 36:12
“Truly, We give life to the dead and We write down what they put forward and their effects. We counted everything in a clear record.” (Qur’an 36:12)
“Surely We will give new life to the dead, and We are recording whatever (deeds) they send before them and whatever effects they leave behind. Every thing is fully computed by Us in a manifest book of record.” (Qur’an 36:12)
It was narrated from Mundhir bin Jarir that his father said:
“The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: ‘Whoever introduces a good practice that is followed, he will receive its reward and a reward equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest.. And whoever introduces a bad practice that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'”
1) Fear the day that you will be returned to Allah.
This is the first information we should know. On this Earth, we are living and breathing, and one day we will die. When we die our body dies. However, the soul remains and that soul will return to Allah (swt). Whether you like it or not. Whether you believe it or not.
2) Then every soul will be compensated for what it has earned. Good earnings or bad earnings.
3) They will not be treated unjustly. This should make us happy as well as absolutely terrify us simultaneously.
Why is that? It makes us happy because now we know that Allah (swt) does not want only to punish us. Allah (swt) is not looking for an excuse just to throw us in hellfire. So this is very comforting to the believers.
Now it is also terrifying to know He is treating us justly because if Allah (swt) accounts for every single thing that we do—all mistakes, infractions, shortfalls—it is frightening., it is frightening.
4) Surely we give life to the dead. On the day of resurrection all the dead will be brought back to life. We will be reunited with our bodies, flesh and all. We will be waiting for the decree of Allah.
5) We write down what they have sent before and their footprints.
When you die your record goes before Allah and your footprints…
What is meant by the footprints (or traces) as other translations put it?
Imagine if you will someone walking in the desert and they are just passing by and the people coming after him they do not see the man but they see the footprints on the sand. They can see that someone has passed by here. They will acknowledge that someone has passed by.
This has to do with our deeds!
Example: Someone is selling drugs to young kids and this drug dealer dies. So in his record it is recorded that this person was drug dealer and sold drugs (end of story).
However, there is something added to the book which is the footprints (traces).
Now those small boys whom the drug dealer sold the drugs to they became addicted they became criminals they grew up to become drug dealers themselves.
So guess what? Who takes that burden who takes that responsibility? The initial drug dealer.
Of course those people are responsible for their own actions that they have acquired, yet, we cannot forget the initial drug dealer is responsible for this cascading chain of events and so the initial drug dealer shares in the evil that his actions wrought!
So this should make every one of us extremely cautious about what we do, what we say, and our influence upon others. So don’t think when you die you will only be rewarded for what you did. You will be rewarded for all the good that you initiated and others followed and were encouraged by. Likewise you will be punished for all the evil, wrongdoing, misguidance, lies, cheating etc. that others emulated, followed and in turn encouraged others to emulate.
If you make a video and post it on YouTube showing people how to break into a house, how to crack an encryption, and then, look, it goes viral.
Look at that word, viral! It now spreads and multiplies how evil is the return.
It was narrated from Mundhir bin Jarir that his father said:
“The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: ‘Whoever introduces a good practice that is followed, he will receive its reward and a reward equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their rewardin the slightest.And whoever introduces a bad practice that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'”
Jarir b. Abdullah reported that some desert Arabs clad in woollen clothes came to Allah’s Messenger (saw). He saw them in sad plight as they had been hard pressed by need. He (the Holy Prophet) exhorted people to give charity, but they showed some reluctance until (signs) of anger could be seen on his face. Then a person from the Ansar came with a purse containing silver. Then came another person and then other persons followed them in succession until signs of happiness could be seen on his (sacred) face. Thereupon Allah’s Messenger (saw) said:
He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect. And he who introduced some evil practice in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their’s being diminished in any respect.
“And most certainly they shall carry their own burdens, and other burdens with their own burdens, and most certainly they shall be questioned on the resurrection day as to what they forged.” (Qur’an 29:13)
“Truly, We give life to the dead and We write down what they put forward and their effects. We counted everything in a clear record.” (Qur’an 36:12)
So in simple terms none of us will get rewarded for the good that others do or punished for the evil that others do. However, we can have shared reward and shared punishment based upon the influence of good or evil that we have upon others.
May Allah (swt) rectify our condition and cause us to be examples of good for others to emulate!
The fact that Allah (swt) does not cause us to bare the burdens of the sins of others is an established fact that even the Jews and Christians can find remnants of in their teachings:
“And when there came to them a Messenger from Allah, confirming what was with them, a faction of those who were given the Scripture threw the Scripture of Allah behind their backs, as though they didn’t know.” (Qur’an 2:101)
“And the little ones that you said would be taken captive, your children who do not yet know good from bad—they will enter the land. I will give it to them and they will take possession of it.” (Deuteronomy 1:39)
“And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 18:3)
All little children are those to whom the kingdom of heaven belongs. Therefore, all little children are persons without sin.
“The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them.” (Ezekiel 18:20)
“The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.” (Deuteronomy 24:16)
“Yet he did not put the children of the assassins to death, in accordance with what is written in the Book of the Law of Moses where the Lord commanded: “Parents are not to be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their parents; each will die for their own sin.” (2 Kings 14:6)
“Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” said Jesus, “but this happened so that the works of God might be displayed in him.” (John 9:3)
The above texts record that the child will not bear the sin of their father. Therefore, all men are not born totally depraved.
At the very least this position as outlined in Islam, Judaism, and some interpretations of Christianity such as: Eastern Orthodox, and those Christian Churches and Churches of Christ often called: “Campbellites” have this as a common perspective.
In short: No one is punished for another’s sin. Everyone is rewarded or punished for their own deeds. And additionally, one is held accountable for the chain of influence they initiate—good or evil.
May Allah make us among those who leave behind good footprints (athar hasan) and protect us from being a means of misguidance. Amin.
“Also mention in the Book (the story of) Isma’il: He was (strictly) true to what he promised ( l-waʿdi), and he was a messenger (and) a prophet.” (Qur’an 19:54)
“Then do they not reflect (yatadabbarūna) upon the Qur’an, or are there locks upon [their] hearts?” (Qur’an 47:24)
﷽
Allah describes Isma’il as one who was true to what he promised.
We want to give credit first and foremost to Muhammed b. Yusuf b. ‘Isa b. Salih Atfayyish, the luminary of Islam and Shaykh in the Ibadi school. May Allah have mercy on him.
The following is taken from Taysir al-tafsir volume 12, pages 131 to 142 and volume 6 pages 447 to 449.
Every time the Qur’an mentions prophets in a sequence and Ishaq (Isaac) and Isma’il (Ishmael)are mentioned, Isma’il always comes before ishaq.
” Or were you witnesses when death approached Jacob, when he said to his sons, “What will you worship after me?” They said, “We will worship your God and the God of your fathers, Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac one God. And we are Muslims to Him.” (Qur’an 2:133)
“Say, “We have believed in Allah and what has been revealed to us and what has been revealed to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Descendants and what was given to Moses and Jesus and what was given to the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we are Muslims to Him.” (Qur’an 2:136)
“Or do you say that Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Descendants were Jews or Christians? Say, “Are you more knowing or is Allah ?” And who is more unjust than one who conceals a testimony he has from Allah ? And Allah is not unaware of what you do.” (Qur’an 2:140)
“Say, “We have believed in Allah and in what was revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Descendants, and in what was given to Moses and Jesus and to the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we are Muslims to Him.” (Qur’an 3:84)
“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)
“Praise to Allah, who has granted to me in old age Ishmael and Isaac. Indeed, my Lord is the Hearer of supplication.” (Qur’an 14:39)
“So We gave him good news of a forbearing son. And when he reached the age to work with him, he said, ‘O my dear son, I have seen in a dream that I must sacrifice you. So tell me what you think.’ He said, ‘O my father, do as you are commanded. You will find me, if Allah wills, among the patient.’ So when they had both submitted themselves, and he laid him on his forehead, We called out to him, ‘O Abraham, you have already fulfilled the vision.’ Indeed, this is how We reward the good-doers. That was truly a revealing test. And We ransomed him with a great sacrifice. And We left for him among later generations [the salutation], ‘Peace be upon Abraham.’ This is how We reward the good-doers. He was truly one of Our faithful servants. We gave him good news of Isaac—a prophet, and one of the righteous.” (Qur’an 37:101-112)
“And surely Our messenger-angels came to Abraham with good news. They greeted him with ‘Peace!’ And he replied, ‘Peace be upon you!’ Then it was not long before he brought them a roasted calf. But when he saw their hands not reaching for it, he found them strange and felt fear of them. They said, ‘Fear not. We have been sent to the people of Lot.’ And his wife was standing by, and she laughed. Then We gave her good news of Isaac, and after Isaac, Jacob. She said, ‘Woe to me! Shall I give birth while I am an old woman and this, my husband, is an old man? Indeed, this is an astonishing thing!’ They said, ‘Are you astonished at the command of Allah? May the mercy of Allah and His blessings be upon you, people of the house. Indeed, He is Praiseworthy, Glorious.'” (Qur’an 11:69-73)
“And [mention] when Abraham said, ‘My Lord, make this city [Mecca] secure and keep me and my sons away from worshipping idols. My Lord, indeed they have led astray many among the people. So whoever follows me, then he is of me; and whoever disobeys me – indeed, You are Forgiving and Merciful. Our Lord, I have settled some of my descendants in an uncultivated valley near Your sacred House, our Lord, that they may establish prayer. So make hearts among the people incline toward them and provide for them from the fruits that they might be grateful.'” (Qur’an 14:35-37)
“And [mention] when We made the House a place of return for the people and a place of security. And take, [O believers], from the standing place of Abraham a place of prayer. And We charged Abraham and Ishmael, [saying], ‘Purify My House for those who perform Tawaf and those who are staying [there] for worship and those who bow and prostrate [in prayer].’ And [mention] when Abraham said, ‘My Lord, make this a secure city and provide its people with fruits – whoever among them believes in Allah and the Last Day.’ [Allah] said, ‘And whoever disbelieves – I will grant him enjoyment for a little then I will force him to the punishment of the Fire, and wretched is the destination.’ And [mention] when Abraham was raising the foundations of the House and [with him] Ishmael, [saying], ‘Our Lord, accept [this] from us. Indeed You are the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing. Our Lord! Make us both submissive to You and [raise] from our descendants a nation submissive to You. Teach us our ways of worship and turn to us mercifully. Indeed, You are the Most-Relenting, the All-Merciful.'” (Qur’an 2:125-128)
“Has the story reached you of the honored guests of Abraham? When they entered upon him and said, ‘Peace.’ He answered, ‘Peace, [you are] a people unknown.’ Then he turned to his family and came with a fat [roasted] calf. And he placed it near them; he said, ‘Will you not eat?’ Then he felt from them a sense of fear. They said, ‘Fear not,’ and gave him good news of a knowledgeable boy. Then his wife approached with a loud cry, and she struck her face and said, ‘A barren old woman!’ They said, ‘Thus has said your Lord. Indeed, He is the Wise, the Knowing.'” (Qur’an 51:24-30)
Prima Qur’an comments: Based upon the above data, the following points can be made.
The narrative of the Qur’an.
The son is a child, but old enough to walk, talk, and reason with his father (“O my dear son, I have seen in a dream that I must sacrifice you. So tell me what you think.’ He said, ‘O my father, do as you are commanded. You will find me, if Allah wills, among the patient).
Isaac’s birth announcement (Qur’an 11:69-73) comes after the sacrifice narrative in the textual order, implying the sacrifice occurred before Isaac was even conceived or was born.
Every time the Qur’an mentions prophets in a sequence and Isaac and Isma’il are mentioned Isma’il always comes before Isaac.
The Messengers who came to Abraham did not eat the food offered to them.
Sarah laughs in astonishment that the messengers will not eat the food offered to them.
There are no contradictory accounts about who laughs.
There are no conflicting narratives about Ishmael being a teenager or a toddler.
Abraham settles some of his descendants in Mecca. He accompanies those descendants. There is no story of Abraham abandoning his wife and son to the desert due to rivalry and jealousy.
There is a maze of contradictions in the biblical narrative.
The Eviction of Ishmael: A Teenager or a Baby?
The most prominent contradiction occurs in Genesis 21, when Sarah demands that Abraham evict Hagar and Ishmael. If we follow the ages explicitly stated in the text up to this point, the math creates a bizarre visual picture.
The Explicit Timeline Math
Genesis 16:16 – Abraham is 86 years old when Ishmael is born.
Genesis 21:5 – Abraham is 100 years old when Isaac is born. (Ishmael is now 14 years old).
Genesis 21:8 – Isaac grows and is weaned. In the ancient Near East, infants were typically weaned between the ages of 2 and 4.
Therefore, by the explicit chronology of the text, Ishmael must be between 16 and 18 years old when he and his mother are cast out into the wilderness of Beersheba.
The Narrative Contradiction
Despite Ishmael mathematically being a grown teenager, the vocabulary and imagery used by the author in Genesis 21 paint him as a tiny, helpless infant or toddler:
Genesis 21:14: Abraham takes bread and a skin of water, gives them to Hagar, “putting them on her shoulder, along with the child” (yeled in Hebrew).” A mother does not carry a 17-year-old young man on her shoulder alongside supplies.
Genesis 21:15: When the water runs out, Hagar “cast the child under one of the bushes.” The Hebrew verb tashlekh implies throwing, dropping, or gently placing down a helpless child, not a teenager who is physically larger than his mother.
Genesis 21:16: She walks away because she cannot bear to watch the child die.
Genesis 21:19-20: God opens her eyes to a well, and she goes to “fill the skin with water and give the boy a drink.” God then promises to protect the lad, and he “grew up.”
The Discrepancy: The theological timeline demands Ishmael be an adult/teenager so Isaac can be the younger miraculous child. But the narrative imagery in Genesis 21 completely breaks down unless Ishmael is a small child or infant. Scholars argue that Genesis 21 originally belonged to a source where Ishmael was born much later, or where Isaac’s birth happened much sooner.
Who is the “Only Son”?
Another major narrative contradiction appears during the binding of Isaac (the Akedah) in Genesis 22.
God commands Abraham:
“Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah…” (Genesis 22:2)
Later in the New Testament we have:
“By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son, of whom it was said, ‘Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.'” (Hebrews 11:17-18)
Critical scholars do not believe that Paul wrote Hebrews.
“For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman.” (Galatians 4:22)
The Contradiction
By this point in the text, Ishmael is alive and well. Even though he was sent away into the desert, he is still Abraham’s biological firstborn son.
Later in Genesis 25:9, Ishmael returns to join Isaac in burying their father Abraham, proving they remained in contact and Ishmael was recognized as a son.
“His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,” (Genesis 25:9)
The “Laughing” accounts
This is a thematic contradiction regarding who laughs at the promise of Isaac’s birth, which alters the character dynamics. The name Isaac (Yitzhak) literally means “he laughs” or “laughter.”
Genesis 17:17 (Abraham Laughs): When God tells Abraham that 90-year-old Sarah will bear a son, Abraham falls on his face and laughs to himself in disbelief. God tells him, “No, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac.”
Genesis 18:12 (Sarah Laughs): Soon after, three visitors reiterate the promise. This time, Sarah laughs to herself in disbelief. God asks, “Why did Sarah laugh?” Sarah denies it out of fear. But God says, “Yes you did laugh!”
Genesis 21:6 (Joyful Laughter): After Isaac is born, Sarah shifts the meaning of the laugh entirely: “God has brought me laughter, and everyone who hears about this will laugh with me.”
God also said to Abraham, “As for Sarai your wife, you are no longer to call her Sarai; her name will be Sarah. I will bless her and will surely give you a son by her. I will bless her so that she will be the mother of nations; kings of peoples will come from her.”Abraham fell facedown; he laughed and said to himself, “Will a son be born to a man a hundred years old? Will Sarah bear a child at the age of ninety?” (Genesis 17:15-17)
“Then one of them said, “I will surely return to you about this time next year, and Sarah your wife will have a son.” Now Sarah was listening at the entrance to the tent, which was behind him. Abraham and Sarah were already very old, and Sarah was past the age of childbearing. So Sarah laughed to herself as she thought, “After I am worn out and my lord is old, will I now have this pleasure?” Then the Lord said to Abraham, “Why did Sarah laugh and say, ‘Will I really have a child, now that I am old?’ Is anything too hard for the Lord? I will return to you at the appointed time next year, and Sarah will have a son.” Sarah was afraid, so she lied and said, “I did not laugh.” But he( God) said, “Yes, you did laugh.” (Genesis 18: 10-15)
“Sarah said, “God has brought me laughter, and everyone who hears about this will laugh with me.” And she added, “Who would have said to Abraham that Sarah would nurse children? Yet I have borne him a son in his old age.” (Genesis 21:6-7)
Proving from the Qur’an that Ishmael was to be sacrificed and not Isaac.
It all comes down to the placement of (Qur’an 11:69-73).
We will place (Qur’an 11:69-73) before narrative of the sacrifice. Then we will place (Qur’an 11:69-73) after the narrative of the sacrifice.
In the standard arrangement of the Qur’anic surahs (not chronological revelation but canonical order), Surah 37 (the sacrifice narrative) appears before Surah 11 (the announcement of Isaac). However, even in the chronological order of revelation, the narrative logic demands that the sacrifice comes first.
So let us place (Qur’an 11:69-73) before sacrifice narrative.
We have a couple of choices.
There was ishmael and isaac. This is the Jewish, and Christian narrative.
There was only ishmael. This is the Islamic narrative.
There was only isaac. No one holds this position.
The Premise (granted for argument)
Isaac is the only son. There is no Ishmael.
The Problem
In Surah 11:69–73, the angels announce to Abraham:
You will have a son named Isaac.
After Isaac, you will have Jacob (Isaac’s descendant).
The Test in Surah 37
God commands Abraham to sacrifice his son.
The Logical Consequence
If the announcement of Isaac and Jacob comes before the sacrifice.
Then this entails.
Abraham knows that Isaac will have a son named Jacob.
Abraham also knows that if he sacrifices Isaac now, Isaac will die childless.
Therefore, Jacob will never be born.
The promise of Jacob becomes impossible if Isaac dies before fathering him.
The two promises contradict each other:
(a) “You will have Isaac and his descendant Jacob” vs. (b) “Sacrifice Isaac”
The Only Resolution
The announcement of Isaac and Jacob in Surah 11:69–73 MUST come AFTER the sacrifice event in Surah 37.
Because:
If the announcement comes after, then Abraham passed the test without knowing that his lineage would continue.
The test was maximal: he was willing to lose his only son and with him, any future lineage.
After the test is passed, God then announces Isaac and Jacob as a reward and confirmation of the promise.
Therefore
The son sacrificed in Surah 37 cannot be Isaac, because Isaac is not yet announced at the time of the sacrifice. If the son were Isaac, the announcement of Isaac and Jacob would have to come before the sacrifice—which creates a logical contradiction (a son cannot both be promised to have a descendant and be commanded to be sacrificed before that descendant can be born).
The sacrificed son is Ishmael.
“Then do they not reflect (yatadabbarūna) upon the Qur’an, or are there locks upon [their] hearts?” (Qur’an 47:24)
The second major proof.
“We gave him good news of Isaac—a prophet, and one of the righteous.” (Qur’an 37:112)
This clearly indicates that Isaac is not the mentioned son intended to be sacrificed (Al-Dhabih). Rather, it is Ishmael. For if Isaac were [the intended one], or if the intention was a general, non-specific statement, He would have said: “And We gave him the glad tidings that he would be a prophet from among the righteous.” But since He explicitly distinguished Isaac by his name, it is fitting that he is a different son than the one previously mentioned [the one to be sacrificed].
The words “a prophet” and “from among the righteous” function as circumstantial qualifiers (Hāl) that are predetermined/destined (Muqaddarah) regarding Isaac. This means that he would exist externally as a prophet firmly rooted in righteousness, though that state was not yet present at the exact moment the glad tidings were given.
Muslims are not dependent upon the Bible for anything at all!
The Qur’an’s source is Almighty Allah
We simply point out the errors and the conflict contained in that upon which the Jews and Christians rely upon.
From the theological perspective of the Muslim, the Qur’an is not changing or altering anything. The Qur’an, as a revelation of Almighty God, comes to restore not alter the narrative.
Some important points for Jews and Christians to reflect upon.
God’s continued interest in Ishmael even after he was removed from Sarah’s camp.
“God was with the boy as he grew up. He lived in the desert and became an archer.While he was living in the Desert of Paran, his mother got a wife for him from Egypt.” (Genesis 21:20-21)
That which is claimed as the ‘Torah’ among the Jews and Christians never portrays Ishmael as a polytheist. In fact, after he and his mother were asked to leave God was still involved in the life of Ishmael. It stands to reason that Ishmael taught his people what he (Ishmael) was taught by his father (Abraham) about God.
Christians and Jews never really bothered to explore when and if that relationship became severed. Nor have they explored if or when God was no longer interested with the descendants and affairs of Ishmael.
The Christian claim that Muhammed (saw) is not a descendant of Isma’il.
Wathila b. al-Asqa’ reported:
I heard Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: Verily Allah granted eminence to Kinana from amongst the descendants of Isma’il, and he granted eminence to the Quraish amongst Kinana, and he granted eminence to Banu Hashim amonsgst the Quraish, and he granted me eminence from the tribe of Banu Hashim.
Those who claim descent from Qahţān were called al-‘Arab al-Āribah (The Arabizing Arabs) while the descendants of Ismā’īl were called Al-‘Arab al-Musta’ribah (The Arabized Arabs). The Quraysh, the tribe of the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) belonged to the class of Arabized Arabs and they were the Northern Arabs.
The Blessed Prophet (saw) comes from Ismail (as) whom is the progenitor of the musta’rab. This means they became Arab via adoption of the language and customs.
One thing that Christians cannot do is to say with 100% certainty that Muhammed (saw) is not a descendant of Isma’il.
What is certain is that Isma’il is of the seed of Abraham. This is something that Jews nor Christians deny. We are not dependent upon their genealogical records. In the case of Christianity this is especially so because until today they cannot get right the genealogical records of Christ Jesus.
Mecca seems so far for Abraham to have traveled to?
Based on the biblical itinerary, the total journey from Ur to Canaan by way of Haran would have been approximately 1,050 miles (1,690 km). So why is it that Abraham can travel this far but not to Mecca?
Keep in mind the Muslim tradition about Abraham, Ismā’īl and the Kabba is not dependent upon the Jewish or Christian tradition.
The Pentateuch tself is not relied upon by historians as an accurate telling of events.
The Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) itself does not explicitly claim that Moses wrote the entire five-book collection. These are claims made by tradition. So if Moses did not write it who did? It would also have to be aware of the debates surrounding whether or not the Pentateuch is considered a verbal or written inspiration.
1. Centuries removed from the source. 2. Compiled by multiple sources. 3. Lack of external corroboration. For example, the scale of the exodus has no external corroboration. Nothing from Egyptian, Canaanite, or Mesopotamian historical archeological records. 4. Post Mosaic additions. Passages such as the account of Moses’ death.
Based upon the Bible who has the superior genetic line? Abraham’s child with Hagar or Abraham’s child with Sarah?
“So after Abram had been living in Canaan ten years, Sarai his wife took her Egyptian slave Hagar and gave her to her husband to be his wife.” (Genesis 16:3)
Abraham is said to reveal that his wife Sarah is his sister. They share the same father but not the same mother.
Abraham says:
“Besides, she really is my sister, the daughter of my father though not of my mother; and she became my wife.” (Genesis 20:12)
Accordingly the god of the Bible found no other partner suitable for Abraham. Even though later this god revealed the following:
“‘If a man marries his sister, the daughter of either his father or his mother, and they have sexual relations, it is a disgrace. They are to be publicly removed from their people. He has dishonored his sister and will be held responsible.” (Leviticus 20:17)
“Cursed is anyone who sleeps with his sister, whether the daughter of his father or the daughter of his mother.” (Deuteronomy 27:22)
“I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.” (Genesis 12:3)
So now will this god curse himself? Will the god of the Bible curse himself since he says cursed is anyone who sleeps with his sister and the Bible claims Sarah is Abrahams sister?
All this talk about nothing.
Here we go. Here is the secret sauce that Christians scholars would prefer their people not to think about.
The prophecy of being blessed through Abraham’s offspring has not yet been fulfilled during Christ time on Earth!
“Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord, and that he may send the Messiah, who has been appointed for you—even Jesus. Heaven must receive him until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets. For Moses said, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you must listen to everything he tells you. Anyone who does not listen to him will be completely cut off from their people.’ Indeed, beginning with Samuel, all the prophets who have spoken have foretold these days. And you are heirs of the prophets and of the covenant God made with your fathers. He said to Abraham, ‘Through your offspring all peoples on earth will be blessed.’”(Acts 3:19-25)
We would encourage you to see how the various Christian sects interpret the above text. Especially the phrase: ‘times of refreshing‘. What you will find out is that accordingly, the prophecy was partially fulfiled in Jesus and is only completely fulfilled when he returns and starts to kill everyone who does not believe in him!
Also, notice the word ‘offspring’ and not specifically the line of Issac.
“But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’ (Luke 19:27)
How are all the people of the earth to be blessed when Jesus comes back and starts slaughtering a good number of those who will not accept him as king?
Textual corruption of Genesis 16:12. Defaming of Ishmael.
“And he will be a fruitful man, his hand in all, and the hand of all in him“
The Preposition Pivot: “Against” vs. “With”
Notice that for the second half of the phrase (yado vakol veyad kol bo), the Hebrew words are identical in both texts.
The entire difference in English translations comes down to the Hebrew preposition בּ (Bēth / “ba-” or “bo”). This preposition is highly fluid and can mean “in,” “with,” “against,” or “by” depending on the context:
The “Against” Interpretation: When a text pairs a “hand” coming into or upon someone (yado ba…), it is standard Hebrew idiom for opposition or striking (similar to the English phrase “to lay a hand on someone”). Because the Masoretic text starts with “wild ass” (a creature of conflict), translators render the preposition as “against.”
The “With” Interpretation: If you read the Samaritan variant where the verse starts with “fruitful man,” rendering the preposition as “against” creates a jarring contradiction. A “fruitful, blessed man” wouldn’t logically be in constant warfare. Therefore, translators smoothing out the Samaritan text interpret the exact same preposition as “with” or “engaged with” to maintain internal consistency.
However, look how the Christians have tampered with the text in their translations here:
“He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers.” (New International Version).
However, even in the above link there is an admission of a textual variant that changes the meaning.
“And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.” (KIng James Bible and New King James Version)
““He will be a wild donkey of a man, His hand will be against everyone, And everyone’s hand will be against him; And he will live to the east of all his brothers.” (NASB 1995 NASB 1997. )
The New International version quoted above also has: Or live to the east / of
“He will be fertile of man. His hand will be with everyone. And everyone’s hand will be with him. And he will live among all his brothers.” (Genesis 16:12)
Source: (The Israelite Samaritan Version of the Torah: First English Translation Compared with the Masoretic Version (Edited and Translated by Benyamim Tsedaka and Sharon Sullivan, Eerdmans Publishing, 2013) page 34)
You may also be interested in reading the following:
“And when Ibrahim was tried by his Lord with certain words, which he fulfilled.” (Qur’an 2:124)
“Then when he reached with him the (age of) working he said, “Oh my son! Indeed, I have seen in the dream that I am sacrificing you, so look what you see.” He said, “Oh my father! Do what you are commanded. You will find me, if wills Allah, of the patient ones.” (Qur’an 37:102)
“Then when they submitted and Ibrahim laid him on the side of his forehead for sacrifice. We called out to him: “Oh Ibrahim! You have already fulfilled the vision.” Indeed this is how We reward the good-doers. For this was obviously a clear trial.” (Qur’an 37:103-106)
“And we ransomed him with a tremendous sacrifice. And we left for him the hereafter. Peace be on Ibrahim. Thus we reward the good doers. Indeed he was of Our believing slaves. And we gave him glad tidings of Isaac, a Prophet among the righteous.” (Qur’an 37:107-112)
﷽
There was some really interesting, and engaging back and forth between Mustafa Akyol & Dr. Abdullah bin Hamid Ali on these text. Mustafa Akyol appealed to the mystic Ibn al-Arabi in the exchange.
Abdullah bin Hamid Ali: He is the Founding Director of the Lamppost Education Initiative. He serves as an associate professor of Islamic law and Prophetic Tradition at Zaytuna College in Berkeley, California (2007-present). He holds a Ph.D. in Cultural and Historical Studies in Religion (2016) and an M.A. in Ethics and Social Theory (2012) from the Graduate Theological Union. He obtained his B.A. (ijaza ‘ulya) in Islamic Law (Shariah) from the prestigious Al-Qarawiyin University of Fes, Morocco in 2001. He is an Ashari in theology and a Maliki in matters of jurisprudence.
Mustafa Akyol: Mustafa Akyol: He is a journalist and columnist. Notable for his post-modernist and liberal reform views. Since 2018, Akyol has been a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank founded and financially supported by the Koch brothers, right wing politicians.
This blog entry is in regard to an exchange that happened between Abdullah bin Hamid Ali and Mustafa Aykol. We provide our comments when necessary.
Now Mustafa Akyol had made the following post:
Mustafa Akyol stated:
“It is worth pondering: Did God really command Abraham (initially) to sacrifice his son? Many Muslims & other Abrahamic monotheists may say, “yes.” But there is an alternative view in Islam: There was no such divine command. Abraham just misinterpreted his dream.”-Mustafa Akyol
(The page is from my book, “Reopening Muslim Minds.”)
“Why is this important? Because the dominant view supports divine command theory: Whatever God commands, that is ethically right. The other view envisions a principled God: He will only command what is objectively ethical.” -Mustafa Akyol
Prima-Qur’an comments: The obvious problem with Mustafa’s assertion is who or what decides what a principled God would entail? Who also decides what is objectively ethical?
Abdullah bin Hamid Ali responds.
This post was responded to by Dr. Abdullah Bin Hamid Ali with:
To which Mustafa Aykol responded with:
To which Dr. Abdullah bin Hamid Ali responds with:
Prima-Qur’an comments: At this point in the exchange, Dr. Abdullah Bin Hamid Ali noted that Mustafa Akyol had transmitted errors made by others in the past. In particular to viewpoints attributed to the Hanafi school that they did not hold.
Rejoinder from Mustafa
Prima-Qur’an comments: There are a number of problems with the mystic Ibn Al Arabi’s view. He seems that Allah (swt) had veiled him from the truth of the matter.
From the text posted above:
“The state of sleep is the plane of the Imagination and Abraham did not interpret [what he saw], for it was a ram that appeared in the form of Abraham’s son in the dream, while Abraham believed what he saw [at face value] So his Lord rescued his son from Abraham’s misapprehension by the Great Sacrifice [of the ram], which was the true expression of his vision with God, of which Abraham was unaware.”
“Have you not considered what the Apostle of God said to Abu Bakr concerning the interpretation of visions when he said, “I was right in some cases and mistaken in others?” Abu Bakr asked him to acquaint him in which of them he had been right and in which wrong, but he did not tell him.”
“Thus were the cattle [symbols for years of scarcity and plenty. Had he been true to the vision he would have killed his son, for he believed that it was his son he saw, although with God it was nothing other than the Great Sacrifice in the form of his son.”
“Thus Joseph’s master says, If you will interpret the vision. Interpretation means to pass from the form of what one sees to something beyond it. Thus were the cattle [symbols] for years of scarcity and plenty. Had he (Ibrahim) been true to the vision he would have killed his son, for he believed that it was his son he saw, although with God it was nothing other than the Great Sacrifice in the form of his son.”
Prima-Qur’an comments: Ibn Al Arabi as someone making egregious blunders one after the other.
Ibn Al Arabi the one who did not have the dream knows better than Ibrahim himself what the dream entailed?
Ibn Al Arabi doesn’t help his case by stating that Yusuf (as) can interpret his dream correctly but Ibrahim (as) cannot! That is indeed very weak.
Why relate the supposed conversation between Abu Bakr (ra) and the Blessed Messenger (saw) if we are to be let down with…” but he did not tell him”
So now Ibn Al Arabi does what the Prophet (saw) himself did not do?
“he (Ibrahim) been true to the vision he would have killed his son,” Did Ibn Al Arabi not read the Qur’an when Allah (swt) states: We called out to him: “Oh Ibrahim! You have already fulfilled the vision.” What does Ibn Al Arabi think would have happened had that voice not called out?
Rejoinder Dr. Abdullah Bin Hamid Ali
Prima-Qur’an comments: Apparently this is what Dr. Shehzad Saleem conveys what Javed Ahmed Ghamidi says as well. You can see that here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPR-hzoROaw
So Javed Ahmed Ghamidi & Mustafa Akyol are of the same view here.
Prima-Qur’an comments: To be quite honest, Dr. Abdullah Bin Hamid Ali has already shown us the clear response in his initial reply.
Questions:
What were those words that Ibrahim was tried with?
“And when Ibrahim was tried by his Lord with certain words, which he fulfilled.” (Qur’an 2:124)
“Then when they submitted and Ibrahim laid him on the side of his forehead for sacrifice. We called out to him: “Oh Ibrahim! You have already fulfilled the vision.” Indeed this is how We reward the good-doers. For this was obviously a clear trial.” (Qur’an 37:103-106)
“Then when they submitted” Can it be said that Ibrahim and his son submitted to Satan?
Can it be said that they both submitted to something false (faulty interpretation of a dream)?
“We reward the good-doers” Can it be said that Satan rewards the doers of good?
For this was obviously a clear trial. What is there a clear trial in sacrificing a sheep or lamb? That is something people were accustomed to.
Prima Qur’an summary: What did we learn from this exchange?
This text is a reference to Ibrahim (as) being tried by Allah (swt) by certain words which he fulfilled.
The son (undisclosed) at this point. Was patient with what his father saw in his dream. His father Ibrahim (as) saw that he was to sacrifice his son.
When they had submitted (the son by submitting to the father’s authority and by this the vision given by Allah) and the father by submitting to the vision from Allah (swt). The submission itself was the fulfillment of the vision. Not the sacrificing of anything. The vision was already fulfilled.
“The answer of the Believers, when summoned to Allah and His Messenger, in order that He may judge between them, is no other than this: they say, “We hear and we obey“: it is such as these that will attain felicity.” (Qur’an 24:51)
Lastly, we see that immediately after this were the glad tidings of the second son of Ibrahim (as). That is the Prophet Isaac (as). Think about it. The willingness to sacrifice a son and not only is he sparred, but an announcement of a second son!
You were willing to sacrifice your son to Allah (swt) due to this tremendous test via submission you were awarded two sons! Subhan’Allah!
But as for those who defiantly disobeyed, their refuge is the Fire. Every time they wish to emerge from it, they will be returned to it while it is said to them, “Taste the punishment of the Fire which you used to deny.” (Qur’an 32:20)
“Indeed, the righteous will be in pleasure, And indeed, the wicked will be in Hellfire. They will [enter to] burn therein on the Day of Recompense, And will not be removed from it.” (Qur’an 82:13-16)
﷽
There seems to be some bizarre hadith that are accepted among Sunni Muslims that indicate that Muslims who are destined for hellfire would be ransomed by the hellfire by a Christian or a Jew. Thus, the Christian or the Jew would go to hellfire in place of the Muslims!
We will give the hadith that the Sunni Muslims rely upon for this as well as some of the justifications put forward by their scholars. Then we will give the Ibadi critique of these hadith and why they do not meet our standards.
The hadith that are brought forward to support this are as follows:
Abu Musa’ reported that Allah’s Messenger (saw) said:
When it will be the Day of Resurrection Allah would deliver to every Muslim a Jew or a Christian and say: That is your rescue from Hell-Fire.
Abu Burda reported on the authority of his father that Allah’s Messenger (saw) said:
No Muslim would die but Allah would admit in his stead a Jew or a Christian in Hell-Fire. ‘Umar b. Abd al-‘Aziz took an oath: By One besides Whom there is no god but He, thrice that his father had narrated that to him from Allah’s Messenger (saw).
Abu Burda reported Allah’s Messenger (saw) as saying:
There would come people amongst the Muslims on the Day of Resurrection with as heavy sins as a mountain, and Allah would forgive them and He would place in their stead the Jews and the Christians. (As far as I think), Abu Raub said: I do not know as to who is in doubt. Abu Burda said: I narrated it to ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, whereupon he said: Was it your father who narrated it to you from Allah’s Apostle (saw)? I said: Yes.
It seems that there is also a belief held among Sunni Muslims that every person has a place for them in hell and in heaven. This is coupled with the belief that there is a pre-destined and pre-scribed number of people destined for both hell and heaven.
Allah (swt) has never described the hellfire as a place in which it becomes full.
“The Day We will ask Hell, “Are you full?” And it will respond, “Are there any more?” (Qur’an 50:30)
Prima Qur’an comments: In trying to answer why the Jews and Christians in particular are singled out , the Ash’ari, Maliki, Sufi, Al-Qadi ‘Iyad said:
“Because every accountable person has a place in Paradise and a place in Hell, whoever believes truly, his place in Hell will be replaced with a place in Paradise, but for the one who does not believe it will be the opposite, and it will be as if the disbelievers took the places of the believers in Hell. Moreover, because Allah has sworn to fill Hell, it will be filled with the disbelievers so as to save the believers from the Fire. So in that regard they are like a ransom for the believers. Perhaps the reason why the Jews and Christians are singled out for mention is because they are well known for their opposition to the Muslims and for being their opposites with regard to believing in the Messenger, which dictates that they should be saved.” End quote from Mirqaat al-Mafaateeh (8/3525).
Prima Qur’an comments: For us we do not accept the reasoning of Qadi ‘Iyad.
Furthermore the site says:
“On the Day of Resurrection there will be a Jew or a Christian for every Muslim, who will be his ransom from the Fire. That does not contradict the fact that some Muslims sinners will enter the Fire for their sins, so that Allah may purify them thereof, because they will enter it, then they will be brought out of it by Allah’s mercy, then they will enter Paradise, where they will inherit what would have been the disbelievers’ places in it, because Allah has forbidden it to the disbelievers.”
Prima Qur’an comments: The above comment is to be dismissed for the following reasons:
There is absolutely not a single statement or example anywhere in the Qur’an of the believer entering the hellfire. Not one.
There is absolutely not a single statement or example anywhere in the Qur’an of the disbelievers leaving the hellfire. Not one.
On the basis of Aqidah (Creed) the above statement makes no sense. Because if there is a place reserved in hell and heaven for every person created are we truly to believe that the Blessed Prophet (saw), The Prophets in general, small children and so forth have an abode in hellfire? May Allah forgive us and guide us to the truth.
On the basis of Mantiq (Logic) the above statement makes no sense. It’s as if the belief is there is an abode in heaven and hell for all creation but one takes the place of the other, which means there would be empty or reserved spots in both heaven and hell if this was a one to one to every person who has ever lived.
“The words of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), “Allah (swt) will give every Muslim a Jew or a Christian, and He will say: This is your ransom from the Fire.” Indicate that this bounty will include all the Muslims, with no exceptions, because ransom is salvation, as mentioned above, and salvation will be for every Muslim. That is not contradicted by the fact that he may enter the Fire, because his entering it will be for the purpose of purification.”
Prima Qur’an comments: The above comment is dismissed for the following reasons:
“Allah (swt) will give every Muslim” is contradicted by text that state: “There would come people amongst the Muslims.” So which did the Blessed Prophet (saw) say?
On the basis of Aqidah (Creed) the above statement makes no sense. Because if there is a place reserved in hell and heaven for every person created are we truly to believe that the Blessed Prophet (saw), The Prophets in general, small children and so forth have an abode in hellfire? We seek refuge in Allah from such beliefs!
There is absolutely not a single statement or example anywhere in the Qur’an of the believer entering the hellfire. Not one.
There is absolutely not a single statement or example anywhere in the Qur’an of the disbelievers leaving the hellfire. Not one.
The Ibadi objection.
Our core argument is that these ahadith contradict the clear, unambiguous muhkamat of the Qur’an.
The wicked will not be removed from Hell (82:13-16). This directly contradicts the idea that anyone leaves Hellfire after entering.
Disbelievers will be told “Taste the punishment… you used to deny” (32:20). There is no escape clause.
Therefore, any hadith that suggests:
A Jew or Christian can be a “ransom” for a Muslim, or
Any believer will enter Hellfire (even temporarily), or
Any disbeliever will leave Hellfire
must be shadh (anomalous) or munkar (rejected), regardless of its chain. A sahih chain does not override a sahih text (the Qur’an).
For the Ibadi, this is sufficient to reject these hadith.
The Ibadi Mustalah al-Hadith. We focus on illah (pl. ‘ilal) which refers to a subtle, hidden defect that undermines the authenticity of a hadith, despite its chain of narrators appearing perfectly sound on the surface.
First thing we can notice is that in the matn (the actual text) of the hadith there are some quite notably strange peculiarities.
Defect #1
“Umar b. Abd al-‘Aziz took an oath: By One besides Whom there is no god but He, thrice that his father had narrated that to him from Allah’s Messenger.”
This shows that Umar b. Abd al-‘Aziz took issue with the transmission and demanded that the narrator swear an oath regarding it.
Defect #2
If he was satisfied with the oath he would not need to have included that in the transmission. However, the one who transmits includes the doubt and includes the oath.
The defects as discussed above indicates the narration was mawquf (stopping at a Companion) or mudtarib (shaky). Swearing an oath is not a method of authentication in hadith sciences—it reveals doubt.
Defect #3.
Why the mention of Jews and Christians being a ransom and not mention the Sabians or Zoroastrians or others? What makes the Jews and Christians particularly targeted?
This suggests takhsis (specification) without a Qur’anic basis. If Hell must be filled, any disbeliever would suffice. Mentioning Jews/Christians alone hints at polemical or historical insertion (e.g., early Muslim-Jewish-Christian disputes).
Defect #4. Some what related to defect #3 is that Seeing that the Jews and Christians are Mushrik, why not just simply say that the Mushrik are a ransom?
Defect #5. The conflicting nature of the text:
a) There would come people amongst the Muslims
b) No Muslim would die but Allah would admit
c) Allah would deliver to every Muslim
So is it every Muslim or a group from among the Muslims? That is a huge difference.
A clear idtarab (confusion) in the matn. A prophetic statement would not vacillate between universal and partial inclusion.
Defect #6. Abu Raub said: I do not know as to who is in doubt. Meaning he has doubts about who has doubts about this transmission: Did Umar b. Abd al-‘Aziz express doubt about the transmission, or was doubt expressed about Umar b. Abd al-‘Aziz’s transmission?
This is a sanad collapse. When transmitters themselves cannot identify the source of doubt, the hadith becomes majhul (unknown) and is discarded.
The Ibadi school, Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama (The People of Truth and Straightness) have more than sufficient reasons to dismiss the above hadith. The attempts to explain them by Sunni scholars are not convincing.
We also want to share with you (the respected readers) an easy identifier to show that a hadith which has been classified as ‘sahih’ (sound) itself has doubtful things within it.
Many of you have possibly read our article in which we ripped apart a hadith classified as ‘sahih’ that was attributed to the Blessed Prophet (saw).
“Abu Umamah saw heads (of the Khawarij) hanging on the streets of Damascus. He said: ‘The dogs of the Fire and the worst dead people under the canopy of the heavens. The best dead men are those whom these have killed.’ He then recited: On the Day when some faces will become white and some faces will become black… (3:106) until the end of the Ayah. I said to Abu Umamah: ‘Did you hear IT from the Messenger of Allah (saw)?’ He said: ‘If I had not heard IT but one time, or two times, or three times, or four times – until he reached seven – I would not have narrated it to you.”
Now, we also want to share with you two more hadith and then we want to discuss something about the matn or text. It is absolutely relevant to this blog entry.
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet (saw) said, “A group of Israelites were lost. Nobody knows what they did. But I do not see them except that they were cursed and changed into rats, for if you put the milk of a she-camel in front of a rat, it will not drink it, but if the milk of a sheep is put in front of it, it will drink it.” I told this to Ka`b who asked me, “Did you hear it from the Prophet (saw) ?” I said, “Yes.” Ka`b asked me the same question several times. I said to Ka`b. “Do I read the Torah? (i.e. I tell you this from the Prophet.)“
Now what is very eye opening is that in the hadith above about a group of the Children of Israel turned into rats, or the hadith about the khawarij being the dogs of hellfire, or about Jews and Christians being ransom for Muslims from hellfire.
There are three things that the keen eye will notice about all of these hadith transmissions.
There is doubt expressed in the transmission.
One of the transmitters is having big doubts about what is being transmitted to him.
The inclusion of the doubt is included in the transmission rather than omitting it altogether.
We have extremely rigid methods for accepting narrations attributed to the Blessed Messenger (saw).
There are theological views among the Sunni Muslims that teach things that have no basis in the Qur’an.
Among them are:
That a believer can enter into hellfire.
That a person may exit the hellfire.
Because the reality of these beliefs is established among the theological schools of Sunni Muslims, it has led them to have some subpar standards for grading and accepting narrationsattributed to the Blessed Messenger (saw).
If you have found the above entry beneficial we invite you to read the following:
“Complete the pilgrimage and minor pilgrimage for Allah.” (Qur’an 2:196)
﷽
May Allah (swt) bless and accept the noble Shaykh for teaching us how to perform the Hajj in accordance with the Qur’an and Sunnah. May all who follow this guide remember the blessed Shaykh in their du’a and may this teaching be a witness for the Shaykh on the day of reckoning. Amin.
Hajj Step by Step | From the Prohibitions of Ihram to the Exit of Umrah | Shaykh Abdul-Munim bin Rashid Al-Saidi
Allah is the Greatest, Allah is the Greatest, Allah is the Greatest. There is no god but Allah.
In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. All praise is due to Allah, Lord of all worlds, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master Muhammad, his family, and all his companions.
To proceed: I greet you, my brothers and sisters watching, with the beautiful, blessed greeting of Islam: Assalamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh (May peace, mercy, and blessings of Allah be upon you all).
We are pleased to meet again for the second part of the jurisprudence course on the rulings of the rituals of Hajj and Umrah. We ask Allah, Glorified and Exalted, to make it full of goodness, benefit, and utility, and to grant us and you reward and blessing.
In our last meeting, we stopped after the person in a state of ritual consecration (Ihram) had entered Ihram and assumed the state of a Muhrim (one in Ihram). As long as he is a Muhrim, there are a number of things he is prohibited from doing, called the prohibitions of Ihram. These are matters he is forbidden from, and he cannot do any of them. If he does any of them, specific legal rulings apply.
What are these prohibitions, and what are these things that the pilgrim must avoid?
First, I note that abstinence is required only during the period of Ihram. Before his Ihram, he is not forbidden from these things, and after exiting his Ihram (Tahalul), they become permissible for him. So this prohibition is during the state of Ihram, from the start of the Talbiyah (chanting) until the Tahalul from the ritual he has entered.
Some of these prohibitions are specific to men, some specific to women, and some common to both. What are these prohibitions?
Let us all watch the following clip on the rulings of Hajj.
Question: What are the prohibitions of Ihram for Hajj and Umrah for men and women in general?
Answer: The prohibitions of Ihram for men and women are three categories:
What is prohibited for both males and females.
What is prohibited only for males.
What is prohibited only for females.
As for what is prohibited for both males and females:
Removing head hair by shaving or other means, due to the saying of Allah: “And do not shave your heads until the sacrificial animal has reached its place of slaughter.” The majority of scholars include the hair of the rest of the body by analogy with head hair.
Trimming or cutting fingernails or toenails, by analogy with shaving hair, according to the well-known view of scholars.
Using perfume after entering Ihram, on one’s clothes, body, or anything else, due to the Prophet’s (saw) statement about the Muhrim: “He should not wear a garment touched by saffron or wars (a yellow dye).”
Concluding a marriage contract, due to the Prophet’s (saw) saying: “The Muhrim should not marry, nor arrange a marriage for himself or others, nor propose marriage.”
Sexual touching with desire, such as kissing, caressing, hugging, etc.
Sexual intercourse, due to Allah’s saying: “The Hajj is during well-known months. So whoever has made Hajj obligatory upon themselves therein [by entering Ihram], there should be no sexual relations, no wicked conduct, and no arguing during Hajj.”
Killing game animals, due to Allah’s saying: “…and hunting of the land is forbidden to you as long as you are in Ihram.” So the Muhrim is not permitted to hunt or kill game, whether directly, indirectly, or by assisting in its killing through guiding, pointing, handing over a weapon, etc.
As for what is prohibited only for men (and permissible for women):
Covering the head with something that adheres to it, like a turban, cap, or head cover, due to the Prophet’s (saw) statement about the Muhrim who was thrown by his mount at Arafat: “Do not cover his head.”
Wearing sewn garments – meaning wearing what is tailored to fit the body parts, whether covering the whole body like a hooded cloak (Burnus) or shirt, or part of it like pants, leather socks, socks, or gloves. This is based on the hadith of the Prophet (saw) when asked what the Muhrim should wear; he said: “He should not wear a shirt, nor a turban, nor a Burnus, nor pants, nor leather socks.”
As for women: She may cover her head and wear whatever clothes she wishes while in Ihram, provided she does not display her adornment (Tabarruj), she should not wear gloves (for hands), nor a face-veil (Niqab), and she should not cover her face unless non-mahram men are passing close by, in which case she may cover her face. And Allah knows best.
So, when the pilgrim enters Ihram and performs the Talbiyah, he becomes a Muhrim and is prohibited from these forbidden things.
What does he do from the moment of Ihram until he reaches Makkah to perform this ritual (Umrah)?
He must recite the Talbiyah frequently throughout the journey, from the moment of Ihram at the Miqat (designated point) until he sees the Sacred House of Allah. He should say it often. It is narrated from the Prophet (saw) that on the Day of Resurrection, those who recited the Talbiyah will have witnessed for them everything to their right and left. The man should raise his voice with the Talbiyah – this was the practice of the companions of the Messenger of Allah (saw). As for the woman, she should not raise her voice but recite it in a low voice audible only to those next to her.
So the Muhrim, whether man or woman, continues reciting the Talbiyah frequently until he reaches Makkah and sees the Sacred House. There, he stops the Talbiyah and begins performing the rituals of Umrah.
The rituals of Umrah include: Tawaf (circumambulation), praying two Rak’ahs behind Maqam Ibrahim (Station of Abraham), Sa’yi (walking) between Safa and Marwah, and then Tahalul (exiting Ihram).
The first is Tawaf. Tawaf has conditions that the pilgrim performing Umrah must adhere to. The Umrah is not valid, nor is the Tawaf, unless these three conditions are met:
Purity (Taharah) from ablution (Wudu): The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “Tawaf is a prayer, except that Allah has permitted speaking during it. So whoever speaks, should speak only good.” Therefore, the one performing Tawaf must maintain his Wudu throughout the entire Tawaf and until he completes the two Rak’ahs behind Maqam Ibrahim.
The Tawaf must encompass the entire Kaaba: Meaning that no part of his body enters inside the Kaaba; rather, he must go around the entire Kaaba. (Some may ask if the pilgrim can enter any part of his body into the Kaaba – we will clarify this shortly).
He must complete seven circuits (Ashwat) around the Kaaba – no less, and no more than seven. Acts of worship are Tawqifiyyah (based on divine prescription, not personal opinion). It is not valid for the pilgrim to add or subtract anything from the practice of the Messenger of Allah (saw), who said: “Take your rituals from me.”
Just as Tawaf has conditions, it also has recommended practices (Sunnan). The pilgrim should strive to adhere to them:
First Sunnah: Al-Idtiba’ – Exposing the right shoulder. Before starting Tawaf, he takes his upper garment (Rida’) from his right shoulder, passes it under his armpit, and places it over his left shoulder. This is a Sunnah. When does he do it? For all seven circuits. After completing the seventh circuit, he returns his garment to its normal state.
Second Sunnah: Ar-Raml – Walking with quick, short steps (not running). This is specific to men. He does this during the first three circuits only, from the Black Stone to the Yemeni Corner. When he reaches the Yemeni Corner, he walks normally. If he cannot due to severe crowding, there is no sin if he leaves Ar-Raml.
Third Sunnah: Kissing the Black Stone if he can reach it without causing crowding or harm to others. If he cannot (the usual case during Hajj due to crowding), the sensible person should not approach that place to avoid harming or being harmed. He then has another option: to face it, raise his hands, and say “Allahu Akbar” without kissing.
Fourth Sunnah: Touching (Istilam) the Yemeni Corner – touching it with his hand without kissing it or kissing his hand. If he cannot, he does not gesture or say Takbir.
Fifth Sunnah: Supplication (Dhikr) – The one performing Tawaf should frequently remember Allah with all types of Dhikr. The minimum is to say Al-Baqiyat As-Salihat (the enduring good deeds). Each of us has needs when going to this pure place; he should ask Allah in any language, as Allah understands all languages. Is there a specific Dhikr? No specific Dhikr is required during Tawaf except in one place: between the Yemeni Corner and the Black Stone. The Prophet (saw) would say there: “Rabbana atina fid-dunya hasanah, wa fil-akhirati hasanah, wa qina ‘adhab an-nar” (Our Lord, give us in this world good, and in the Hereafter good, and protect us from the punishment of the Fire). For the rest of Tawaf, there is no required specific Dhikr.
My advice to my brothers and sisters is to occupy themselves with venerating the ritual, not paying attention to the actions of others, and seeking Allah’s pleasure. You will find people busy with useless talk, taking pictures with phones, or even having audio/video calls with others in other countries. All of this contradicts the veneration of this blessed ritual. Venerating the rituals of Allah stems from the piety of hearts.
Earlier, we mentioned that the pilgrim must avoid letting any part of his body enter inside the Kaaba during Tawaf. (Visual description of the Kaaba, the Black Stone, the Yemeni Corner, the door, Maqam Ibrahim, and the curved wall called Al-Hijr or Hateem). The common mistake is entering the area between Al-Hijr and the Kaaba. This space is actually part of the Kaaba, as is that wall, based on the foundations laid by Ibrahim and Isma’il (peace be upon them). Whoever performs Tawaf must avoid entering this space or placing his hand on top of the wall. A hand placed on that wall has not circumambulated the Kaaba as Allah commanded: “Let them circumambulate the Ancient House” (22:29).
(Clip showing how to perform Tawaf, from entering the Sacred Mosque until after praying the two Rak’ahs).
After finishing Tawaf at the Sacred House, the pilgrim moves to the second ritual: Sa’yi between Safa and Marwah.
Upon entering the path leading to the Mas’a (place of Sa’yi), he enters through Bab as-Safa. It is Sunnah, when approaching Safa, to recite the verse: “Indeed, As-Safa and Al-Marwah are among the symbols of Allah. So whoever makes Hajj to the House or performs ‘Umrah, there is no blame upon him for walking between them. And whoever volunteers good – indeed, Allah is Appreciating and Knowing.” (2:158).
He recites this, then when he reaches Safa, he faces the Qibla, raises his hands, and makes the supplication narrated from the Prophet (saw), repeating it three times and supplicating between them. Then he descends towards Marwah, remembering Allah, and it is Sunnah for the man only to walk quickly (Ramal) between the two green markers. When he reaches Marwah, he supplicates as he did at Safa (without reciting the verse), completing one circuit. He returns to Safa the same way. Each time he goes from Safa to Marwah or Marwah to Safa counts as one circuit. He continues until he ascends Marwah on the seventh circuit.
The two green markers are the lights found in the Mas’a. The man runs quickly in this area. The woman does not run. A common question: What should a man do if he is with women he might lose during Sa’yi? The solution is to take a specific path – either the far right edge or the far left edge of the Mas’a, not the middle. When he reaches the start of the green markers, he runs. At the end of the running area, he stops at the corresponding pillar and waits for the women, who walk normally, to catch up.
After completing Sa’yi, nothing remains of the Umrah rituals except Tahallul (exiting Ihram). For the man, this is done by taking some hair from all over the head, not just one part. Some take only from one side – this contradicts the Sunnah. The legal principle is to cover the entire head. Since the Mutamatti’ pilgrim will need to shave on the 10th of Dhul-Hijjah, he should shorten (Taqseer) his hair after finishing Umrah, using scissors or a machine, covering the whole head.
As for the woman, she shortens or cuts from the end of her hair by about a fingertip’s length. She gathers all her hair at the back and cuts the end by the length of a fingertip. I remind believing sisters heading to the Sacred House that shortening hair to exit Umrah (or Hajj on the 10th) must be done in a covered place away from men’s eyes, as a woman’s hair is ‘Awrah (must be covered). Secondly, she should do this immediately upon returning to her lodging, before getting busy with something else, so she doesn’t forget and then do something prohibited in Ihram. Can she cut her own hair? Yes, there is no sin in that, Allah willing.
After this Tahallul – either by shortening for the man or cutting a fingertip’s length for the woman – the person performing Umrah has exited his Ihram. For the Mutamatti’ pilgrim, he puts on his normal clothes, and everything prohibited during Ihram becomes permissible. As for the Qarin (performing Hajj and Umrah together) and Mufrid (performing Hajj alone), they remain in their Ihram until the 10th day of Dhul-Hijjah, after completing the actions of that day.
With this, we conclude this blessed episode at the end of the actions of the Umrah rituals. We ask Allah, Glorified and Exalted, to accept righteous deeds from us and you. In the next episode, we will talk about the rituals of Hajj, by the permission of Allah.
We will meet you in the next meeting.
Assalamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh.
Allah is the Greatest, Allah is the Greatest, Allah is the Greatest. There is no god but Allah.
Prima Quran 