Tag Archives: muhammed

October 21, 2025 · 2:13 am

Critique of the argument that Muhammed wrote the Qur’an.

“Proclaim! (or read!) in the name of thy Lord and the One whom Cherishes, Who created” (Qur’an 96:1)

﷽ 

We have seen this issue raised by Christians repeatedly.   We have also remembered Dr. Anis Shorrosh using it in his debate with Dr. Jamal Badawi.  Debate: (Qur’an word of God or word of Muhammed?)

It is one of the reasons why we choose the Yusuf Ali translation above.  

One could ask: what was God thinking?

You are approaching a man that is obviously illiterate, and you’re asking him to read, again and again….and yet again.

However, the narrative shows that the term ‘Iqra‘ can mean read (as from a book) or recite, or repeat (as in a repetition).

What we find fascinating is that the account of the Blessed Messenger (saw) and his receiving of the revelation are not found in the Qur’an.  Rather, it is found in secondary sources.  We think this is very profound.

In the Bible, we would read the historical bits, get some revelation as well as the thoughts of the narrators all mixed in together.

The very fact that the Qur’an does not have a detailed narrative of how the Blessed Messenger (saw) received the revelation speaks well for the Prophet (saw), the Qur’an, and the veracity of Islam.

In fact, it is one of the most remarkable things for us. Because we never hear in the Bible what that was like.  What is that moment like when you encounter the divine?  What is it like to know that you are being appointed as a Prophet of God?  What is your mental state? How does that feel?

That has to be indescribable beyond words! Powerful!

In the Bible, we are just given the impression that one day the Holy Spirit moved Matthew to write, so he picked up his pen and off he went. Not really inspiring. Rather lackluster for a divine encounter.

“So if you are in doubt, [O Muhammed], about that which We have revealed to you, then ask those who have been reading the Scripture before you. The truth has certainly come to you from your Lord, so never be among the doubters.” (Qur’an 10:94)

Question: If Muhammed (saw) were in the habit of reading and writing, he wouldn’t need to ask the people of the book anything. He could simply go to their text for verification.

Now, this is, of course, assuming that they had their text with them.

However, the interesting thing about this passage is asking the Blessed Messenger (saw) to verify the truth outside the Qur’an or at the very least corroborate with what the divine directive was, by checking outside references.

No doubt those who follow the ‘Qur’an Only Religion’ would like to dismiss the dominant narrative for two reasons.

Our colleague was in an exchange with Dr. Shabbir Ahmed, @ our Beacon http://www.galaxydastak.com refuting the points he made that the Blessed Messenger (saw) was the one who wrote the Qur’an.  Needless to say, he was banned from the forum for ‘not participating in the project’.

He was initially invited there by a friend and former teacher, Hamza Abdulmalik from IPCI. He believes his former teacher was testing the waters before he decided to leave Islam for the “Qur’an Only Religion“.

The two reasons that ‘Qur’an Only Religion’ would want to reject the dominant narrative are these:

  1. The very first word ‘iqra‘ suggests that the Qur’an is composed in a language that has depth, nuances, clarity, and ambiguity.    This takes the wind out of one of their sails. Namely, that the Qur’an is clear; which usually means “Agree with our interpretation.”
  2. The very first word ‘iqra’ also suggests that the Qur’an would be transmitted through both written and oral means. The idea that the Qur’an would be transmitted orally is problematic to those who castigate oral transmission in its entirety.

Understand that point 2. above is their sole reason for making the claim that the Blessed Prophet (saw) wrote the Qur’an. It is because they do not like the idea of the Qur’an being preserved through oral transmission.

This might cause other uncomfortable thoughts like: “What else may be preserved through oral transmission?“

The “Qur’an Only Religion” does not like the historical narrative that has been passed down to us about how the Blessed Messenger (saw) received the revelation.

Let us see if their perspective holds true.

“Read in the name of your Lord Who created. He created man from a clot. Read and your Lord is Most Honorable,” (Qur’an 96:1-3)

If the Blessed Messenger (saw) is being asked to ‘read‘ rather than recite/repeat, where is this text at?

In other words, whoever is telling Muhammed (saw) to read, what exactly is he being asked to read? Is it a divine template? Is this an ethereal revelation that is appearing like a holographic image?

Wouldn’t it make sense to say, ‘write‘?

So let us deal with the next point.

“Who taught (to write) with the pen. Taught man what he knew not.”  (Qur’an 96:4-5)

So the “Qur’an Only Religion” will say, “How can Muhammed be taught by the PEN if he cannot write?“

However, this assumes two things.

  1. That this verse does not generally address the gift of literacy, which is a blessing from Allah (swt).
  2. That Muhammed (saw) is the one being addressed here.  After all, the verse does say, taught man (plural)…
  3. . To suggest that the above verse is imperative. Meaning that Allah (swt) has taught every person to read that would be incorrect. Vast swathes of humanity still cannot read. The proliferation of literacy is a modern phenomenon.

“In honored sheets, exalted and purified, In the hands of scribes noble, virtuous.” (Qur’an 80:13-16)

It would have been a perfect occasion to say, “I will teach you the use of the pen, or I will teach you that which you know not.”

In fact, we never get an example of the Blessed Messenger (saw) reading the Qur’an to anyone.  However, we do have examples of him reciting it.

“A messenger from Allah, reciting pure pages.” (Qur’an 98:2)

“Move not thy tongue concerning the (Qur’an) to make haste therewith. It is for Us to collect it and promulgate it; but when We have promulgated it, follow thou its recital’ (Qur’an 75: 16-19).

Why not ‘move not thy eyes‘ concerning the Qur’an?

Why not ‘move not thy pen‘ concerning the Qur’an?

It is interesting to note here that the Blessed Messenger (saw) was told to not be hasty in his recitation; nothing about ‘move not thy pen‘ concerning the Qur’an.

Now we are going to use a translation of the Qur’an that we think is one of the worst possible. Interestingly enough, this translation gets as close as is grammatically possible to supporting the proposition that the Blessed Messenger (saw) wrote the Qur’an.

So we are going to use a translation that actually favours our interlocutors (Qu’ran only Religion) in this regard.

“Neither did you (O Muhammed SAW) read any book before it (this Quran), nor did you write any book (whatsoever) with your right hand. In that case, indeed, the followers of falsehood might have doubted.”  (Qur’an 29:48) – Muhsin Khan translation.

We would encourage the readers to see how this verse is translated from disparate translations from translators with disparate theological backgrounds etc…

http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/29/48/default.htm

The reason we chose the ‘Muhsin Khan’ translation above; is because it can give the impression that Muhammed (saw) didn’t read any book before the Qur’an; meaning he can now! Nor has he (saw) written any book (until now!!)…

So let us put our focus on the second part of this verse…

“In that case, indeed, the followers of falsehood might have doubted.”

Let us say that for the sake of argument we take the understanding of those who claim the Blessed Prophet (saw) wrote the Qur’an. Meaning that, suddenly, Muhammed (saw) is now able to read and write.

How does that alleviate the doubt of unbelievers?

It seems the argument being made is that “Haha, you can’t doubt that the Qur’an is a product of Muhammed because he can read and write, and therefore wrote it!

Erm…….. (stares off blankly into space)….. are we missing something here?

What argument is that?  Seriously?

We would encourage anyone to carefully read how “Qur’an Only Religion” will posture in regard to the above verse.  They half quote it.

Let us look at some of their other claims.

“Moreover, they say, “Legends of the former peoples which he has written, and they are dictated to him morning and afternoon.” (Qur’an 25:5)

We actually found this argument to be very desperate.  The fact that (unbelievers) alleged that the Blessed Messenger (saw) wrote down the Qur’an is now proof that he actually did write the Qur’an?

This is a specious argument for anyone who is intellectually honest.

“We know indeed that they say, “It is a man that teaches him.” The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.” (Qur’an 16:103)

“Moreover, the Unbelievers would almost trip you up with their eyes when they hear the Message; and they say: “Surely he is possessed!” (Qur’an 68:51)

Let’s stop for a moment on this above claim.  The claim that ‘he is possessed.’ 

This is a very fascinating and insightful claim against our Blessed Prophet (saw). The unbelievers ascribed to the Qur’an a supra natural origin. They were just not ready to say that it came from Allah. However, the fact that even they ascribed to it a supra natural origin is quite powerful.

Let us follow the fuzzy logic given to us by these people who claim that the Blessed Messenger (saw) could read and write the Qur’an.

So here it is:

Just because the (unbelievers) charged Muhammed (saw) with writing the Qur’an, does it also follow that a man taught him the Qur’an?

Just because the (unbelievers) charged Muhammed (saw) that he was possessed means that it is true?

So those people who make such claims would do well to remember it was non-Muslims who charged that the Prophet Muhammed (saw) wrote the Qur’an.

The first claim that the Blessed Messenger (saw) wrote the Qur’an came from (unbelievers).  That is the company that followers of the ‘Quran Only‘ religion are in; not the company we would like to be in.

Another text they would use.

“And if he had invented false sayings concerning Us We surely should have seized him by his right hand (or with power and might), And then severed his life-artery.” (Qur’an 69:44-46)

There is certainly a lot to be desired in this translation.

Invented is taqawwala -this should have been translated as spoken

That word is nowhere being used for writing.

See the following: http://corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=qwl#(69:44:2)

sayings is l-aqawili

So this should read: “And if he had spoken some sayings over Us, We surely should have...”

seized him –la-akhadhna-can be translated as to take or to seize or to call to account.

his right hand-bil-yamini-can be translated as hand or oath.

So this should read: “And if he had spoken some sayings over Us, We surely should have seized him with power and might.”

Alternatively, it could read: “And if he had spoken some sayings over Us, We surely would have called him to account for his oath.”

The first part is how we understand the second part. If someone is speaking and saying it would make sense to say, ‘we seize him by his tongue.’

That is why that argument put forward by the ‘Hafs Qur’an Only Religion’ is easily dismissed. When someone is speaking lies, why is the attention directed towards the hand?

So let us take their understanding and translate it the way they want to: “We surely should have seized him by his right hand.”

Why doesn’t the text before it say:

“So if he had written false sayings concerning Us.”

None of them dare to translate as written.

https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/69/44/

“Had he uttered any other teachings.”-Rashad Khilafa

“Also, had he attributed anything falsely to Us.”-The Monotheist Group.

In fact, the only person trying to be sly among the Quraniyoon in their translation is Shabir Ahmed

“So if he had ascribed his sayings unto Us.” -Shabir Ahmed

Why handle the Qur’an in such a false manner? Why the deception? What is the agenda here?

Was the Qur’an only revealed to those who were literate?  Even today, there are vast areas of the world where people cannot read and write. What of the situation in the past? What was the situation of slaves, farmers, and people from other trades?

How was a textual Qur’an distributed to all of these people? If that is the case, why is there a dearth of written Qur’anic material from the early period?

“However, if they turn away, you are responsible only for conveying the message clearly.” (Qur’an 16:82)

If the Blessed Messenger (saw) was writing the Qur’an and the Qur’an is clear, there would be no need for him to explain anything to anyone. He would simply tell them to refer to the book itself!  Better yet to their own written copies, parchments, etc. I think we know better.

We think the idea that the Blessed Messenger (saw) wrote the Qur’an is both intellectually lazy and the result of wanting to skirt around the issue of the preservation through oral transmission of the Qur’an.

We think that issues are nuanced, and sometimes a little more academically challenging than we are ready to admit.  Some answers are simply not microwavable.

Something else we want to point out.   Was it possible that the Blessed Messenger (saw) learned to recognize and understand some words in the Arabic script over time? Of course!

When our colleague was the Executive Docent Officer at the Singapore Sultan Mosque and leading the ATMT (Awareness Through Mosque Tour) program, they used to have fun showing copies of the Qur’an to curious non-Muslims.

They would open a page of the Qur’an that had many usages of the word ‘Allah‘ in Arabic. They would point out the word.  They would then ask them to find that word anywhere on the two pages.  They did without fail!   They asked them to read that word, and they said, ‘Allah’!

For example, they have highlighted the word ‘Allah’ in the Arabic text below.  See if you can find at least 3 other examples of it.   

quran-t

This was a great interactive experience for our colleague and them.  Our point here is that it’s possible that the Blessed Messenger (saw) was able to recognize words (after all they are simply symbols) and say or repeat what they mean.

“Neither did you (O Muhammed SAW) read any book before it (this Quran), nor did you write any book (whatsoever) with your right hand. If that was the case, indeed, the followers of falsehood might have doubted.”  (Qur’an 29:48)

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

5 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

September 19, 2025 · 1:15 pm

Blowing on Knots. Saving Muslim Marriages

And they learn from them that by which they cause separation between a man and his wife. But they do not harm anyone through it except by permission of Allah. And the people learn what harms them and does not benefit them. But the Children of Israel certainly knew that whoever purchased the magic would not have in the Hereafter any share. And wretched is that for which they sold themselves if they only knew.” (Quran 2:102-103)

﷽ 

Is it not curious that, out of all the things that people learned concerning magic that an emphasis is put on causing separation between a man and his wife? That there are extremely dark forces at play working against the foundations of a family should be something that we really think about.

In Islam, marriage completes half of one’s faith. 60% of Shari’ah law is focused on the family.

There is a significant gap between the holistic guidance of the Qur’an and Sunnah and the often-mechanistic application of certain legal rulings, particularly concerning marriage and divorce.

The Reality of Supra-Natural Forces and Their Target.

The Qur’an explicitly confirms the existence of magic and the efforts of Shaitan to sow discord, especially within the most sacred of institutions: the family.


“The Shaitan only desires to cause enmity and hatred to spring in your midst by means of intoxicants and games of chance, and to keep you off from the remembrance of Allah and from prayer.” (Qur’an 5:91)

“If an evil impulse from Shaitan provokes you, seek refuge with Allah; He is All-hearing and all-knowing.” (Qur’an 7:200)

“And march forth in the way of forgiveness from your Lord, and for Paradise as wide as the heavens and the earth, prepared for the pious. Those who spend in prosperity and in adversity, who repress anger, and who pardon the people; verily, Allah loves the good-doers.”(Qur’an 3:133-134)

“So whatever you have been given is but enjoyment for this worldly life, but that which is with Allah is better and more lasting for those who believe and put their trust in their Lord. And those who avoid the greater sins, and illegal sexual intercourse, and when they are angry, they forgive.” (Qur’an 42:36)

It can be seen from the aforementioned verses that enmity, anger, hate are things that Shaitan provokes us with. We also see that tempering our anger and forgiveness are more wholesome.

“Say: ‘I seek refuge with the Lord of Daybreak, from the evil of duality, and from the evil of the darkness as it gathers and from the evil of those who blow on knots (l-‘uqadi) and from the evil of an envier when he envies.'” (Qur’an 113:1-5)

From those who ‘blow on knots‘. The term ‘l-uqadi’ .

This term is used in the following instances of the Qur’an:

“There is no blame upon you for that to which you indirectly allude concerning a proposal to women or for what you conceal within yourselves. Allah knows that you will have them in mind. But do not promise them secretly except for saying a proper saying. And do not determine to undertake a (uq’data l-nikahi)marriage contract until the decreed period reaches its end. And know that Allah knows what is within yourselves, so beware of Him. And know that Allah is Forgiving and Forbearing.” (Qur’an 2:235)

“And in case you divorce them even before you have touched them, and you have already ordained for them a marriage-portion, then give her one half of what you have ordained except in case the women remit, or he in whose hand is the (uq’datu l-nikahi) knot of marriage remits; that you remit is nearer to piety. And do not forget the virtue of grace among yourselves; surely Allah is Ever-Beholding of whatever you do.” (Qur’an 2;237)

When you look at those instances of the word, it becomes apparent that ‘blow on knots‘ means ‘blow on marriages’. “Devise plots against marriages.”

The phrase “those who blow on knots” (an-naffathati fil ‘uqad) has a primary meaning referring to sorceresses who literally tie knots and blow spells upon them. However, the linguistic drawn to the “knot of marriage” (‘uqdat an-nikah) in verses 2:235 and 2:237 is a powerful and valid tafsir (interpretation). It highlights that one of the primary objectives of these dark forces is to unravel the sacred bond (‘aqd) between spouses. This is not a minor issue; it is a direct assault on half of a Muslim’s faith.

Aqad literally means to ‘tie’ or to ‘bind’. In English, we have the interesting idiom of ‘tying the knot‘ as a reference to getting married.

The Arabic word Khul means to ‘untie or to disrobe’.

Whereas the word Talaq means to abandon or rid oneself of something.

“Definition of “divorce” (talaq) Literally, the word “divorce” (talaq) means to abandon a thing or get rid of a thing. When an animal tied with a string is untied it is called talaq. If the tied with a string she-camel is untied, the Arabs mention this state as: “talaqa al-naqata talaqan” 23 (The she-camel has been released).”

Source: (Pg 15. Islamic Law of Marriage and Divorce by Shehza Sham)

So, if the term Talaq means to untie, to abandon or to get rid of something, it makes no sense to say to someone “I abandon you” thrice, because in order to be abandoned the second time or the third time just like saying ‘I untie you thrice’.  In order to be ‘untied’ a second or third time, you would need to be tied or in a state of ‘aqad’ for a second or third time.

If we take into account that supra-natural forces are at work in bringing about discord in Muslim marriages, why is it not taken into the calculation by certain Muslim jurists and especially those influenced by ‘tassawuf’ when deciding the fate of Muslim marriages?

Here is something that those of our brothers of the Ahl Sunnah need to take on board. If you believe the following haidth, we have a question for you.

Narrated Aisha:

Magic was worked on Allah’s Messenger (saw) so that he used to think that he had sexual relations with his wives while he actually had not (Sufyan said: That is the hardest kind of magic as it has such an effect)…….the hadith is longer.

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:5765)

If you believe the best of creation, the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw), could be affected by magic to the extent that it created a false reality in his personal life, then it is a form of arrogance for any scholar or jurist to dismiss the possibility that ordinary Muslim couples could be acting under similar influences of anger, hatred, miscommunication, and irrational behavior provoked by Shaitan.

Until today, there has been no meaningful engagement in regard to this question. 

We also need to keep the following verses in mind:

“O Prophet! When any of you divorce women, divorce them during their period of purity and calculate their ‘idda carefully. And have fear of Allah, your Lord. Do not evict them from their homes, nor should they leave, unless they commit an outright indecency. Those are Allah´s limits, and anyone who oversteps Allah´s limits has wronged himself. You never know, it may well be that after that Allah will cause a new situation to develop.” (Qur’an 65:1)

Even though this is what the Qur’an clearly states, the jurist will allow couples’ marriages to be dissolved without asking questions like:

“Did you intend to divorce your wife while she was in menses?”

If the answer is yes, then you cannot intend to divorce your wife while she is in her menses.

If the answer is “I don’t know”, then again, you cannot intend to divorce your wife on an “I don’t know.”

Yet, we, unfortunately, know of many Muslims who have gone through the divorce process, and they have informed us that the judge, the counselor, didn’t even bother to ask this question. Most unfortunate.

Another aspect of the revelation that unfortunately gets ignored is the following:

“Then, when they have reached their term (3 months), take them back in kindness or part from them in kindness, and call to witness two just men among you, and keep your testimony upright for Allah. Whoso believes in Allah and the Last Day is exhorted to act thus. And whosoever keeps his duty to Allah, Allah will appoint a way out for him…” (Qur’an 65:2)

People do not realize it, but it is very possible for people to part amicably. Sometimes a woman cannot produce children, and she has the option to be a co-wife. Whereas, if a man cannot produce children, he does not have the option to be the co-husband.

People can decide to amicably part if having biological children is an absolute deal-breaker in a relationship. They may find, for various other reasons, that they are not suitable as partners.

Yet, unfortunately, once again, the judges or the counselors do not ask about the emotional state of the man/wife when words are uttered? The answer is no.

“If any men among you divorce their wives by Zihar (calling them mothers), they cannot be their mothers: None can be their mothers except those who gave them birth. And in fact, they use words (both) iniquitous and false: but truly Allah is one that blots out (sins), and forgives (again and again).” (Qur’an)

This verse clearly repudiates those men who would use an idiom or simply a verbal expression to divorce women. This verse is also clear when coupled with other verses about having just two witnesses present, and consultation that it repudiates instant divorce simply through pronunciation.

“They are invited to the book of Allah to settle their dispute”. (Qur’an 3:23)

“And this is a Book which We have revealed as a blessing, so follow it and be righteous, that you may receive mercy”. (Qur’an 6:155).

“Lo! this Qur’an guides to that which is most upright”. (Qur’an 17:9)

The Juristic (Fiqh) Response vs. The Holistic (Tazkiyah) Approach

The Problem: In many contemporary contexts, these two streams have become separated. A judge in a civil or family court, or even an imam acting in an advisory capacity, often wears only the hat of the jurist. They apply the law as a set of rules without the accompanying spiritual and pastoral context that is essential for dealing with something as sensitive as divorce.

The Qur’anic procedure for divorce is not a mere utterance but a process designed for contemplation and reconciliation.

Divorce during Menses (Tuhr): The ruling in (65:1) to divorce women during their period of purity is precisely to prevent a rash decision made in a state of emotional turmoil (which can sometimes coincide with a wife’s menses). A man who says “I divorce you” in a fit of rage during her menses has transgressed Allah’s law. The juristic consensus is that such a divorce is still legally effective but is considered bid’ah (reprehensible innovation) and a sin.

The practical consequence is that the marriage is often considered dissolved, and the crucial pastoral step of questioning the validity of the intention and context is skipped.

The Role of Witnesses and Kindness: Verse (65:2) emphasize kindness, witnesses, and a measured process. This stands in stark contrast to the instantaneous, often unilateral, and highly emotional divorces that occur. The Qur’anic ideal is a mediated separation, not a sudden outburst.

Before any divorce is finalized, a mandatory mediation process should be instituted that involves:

  • Questioning the emotional state and intention at the time of the utterance.
  • Investigating possible external factors (family interference, financial stress, etc.).
  • Recommending ruqyah (Qur’anic healing) if there is a legitimate suspicion of magic or evil eye.
  • Exhausting all avenues for reconciliation, as the Qur’an commands.

May Allah (swt) sanctify and bless all of your marriages. May Allah (swt) protect you all from the evil eye. May you and your spouse work out your differences. May Allah (swt) make your wife or wives appear as the most loving and beautiful of women. May Allah (swt) make your husband appear to you as the most kind, generous, understanding and handsome of men.

You might be interested in reading the following articles:

Did Imam Al-Shafi’i say you could marry your own daughter?
The position of the Ibadi school on marrying Ahl Kitab

https://primaquran.com/2023/04/05/can-a-child-of-fornication-adultery-be-an-imam/

Adultery and Post Fornication Marriages -Shaykh Juma Muhammed al-Mazrui

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/polygyny-and-redundant-revelation/

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/05/the-hypocrisy-of-bidi-talaq-innovated-divorces-weighed-against-the-wisdom-of-the-quran/

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 9, 2025 · 9:10 am

Why Jesus Is Not The Name of God.

“O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Isa, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So, believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, “Three”; desist – it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs.” (Qur’an 4:171)

﷽ 

The name of God and the name of Jesus are distinctly different.

“The victor I will make into a pillar in the temple of my God, and he will never leave it again. On him, I will inscribe the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from my God, as well as my new name.” (Revelation 3:12)

Prima Qur’an Comment:

From the above text it can be seen that ‘the name of my God‘ AND ‘my new name‘ are distinctly different.

This becomes obvious from the fact that Jesus is a common name, like John, James, or Peter. The above text of Revelation 3:12 was taken from a ‘Red Lettered‘ New Testament, where the words of Jesus are in red.


JESUS IS NOT THE NAME OF GOD…

Many times, our Christians tell us that Jesus is the name of God. It is a name ‘above every name’. After all, how can a person have a personal relationship with God if you don’t know the name of God? I guess that sounds reasonable.

However, what most Christians are not aware of is the fact that the Hebrew language does not have a ‘J‘. So, if the Jews spoke Hebrew, you know they didn’t pronounce Jesus with a ‘J‘.

The other point that is not realized so readily by our Christian sisters and brothers is that Jesus is really quite an ordinary name. It has no power in and of itself. It was a very common name then and it’s still a common name.

In fact, seeing that Spanish is ranked as the number 3 language in the world, Jesus, pronounced ‘Hey Zeus,‘ is a very common name among men in the Latin American community.

So, this is a rather uneventful name. It would be the equivalent of calling someone Chaz, or Lester or Herbert in English.

Feel free to go to Google Translate and listen to how the name ‘Jesus’ is pronounced.

Go to Google Translate and just listen to the name “Jesus” as it is pronounced in Spanish and Greek.

Go to Google Translate and just listen to the name “Jesus” as it is pronounced in Spanish and Greek.

Even more revealing is the fact that Jesus is a ‘bastardized’ (apologies for the terminology) Latin version of the name Yehoshua in Hebrew, or in other words, Joshua.

The name Yeshua appears 29 times in the Tanach.

Yehoshua (Joshua) of Nun is called Yeshua in Nechemyah (Nehemiah) 8:17. Yeshua is the name of the Cohain HaGadol (the high priest) in the time of Zerubavel in Ezra 3:2. It is the name of a Levite under King Hizkiyah (Hezekiah) in 2 Chronicles 31:15. There is even a city called Yeshua in the negev of Yehudah in Nechemyah11:26.

Yeshua is also a shortened version of the word Yehoshua, much like Bill is for William.

Before anyone gets angry with us using the word ‘bastardized’ in relationship to Jesus (may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him), one must realize that the word ‘bastardized’ means—to modify, especially by introducing discordant or disparate elements.

Source: http://dictionary.reverso.net/english-cobuild/bastardize

After all, you take a very common name, Joshua, which means — ‘God is my salvation’ and turn it into this Latin that sounds a lot like a former Greek god ‘Zeus’.

Remember when the evangelist screams out in the name of ‘Jeeeee zuuus’. Or the Spanish speaker yells out on stage, “In the name of ‘Hey Zeus’.” Jesus /Zeus.

Hey Zeus. Hail Zeus.

HEY ZEUS! HAIL ZEUS!

In the Qur’an the son of Mary is called ‘Isa‘ or ‘Esau‘.

Recall that Hebrew was a dead language for a long time. It was only when Eliezer Ben Yehuda used the Arabic language to help revive Hebrew that it became a vibrant language again.

Source: https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-eliezer-ben-yehuda-is-turning-in-his-grave-over-israels-humiliation-of-arabic-1.5472510

“One prominent pioneer was Eliezer Ben-Yehuda, the famed Jewish lexicographer widely hailed as the reviver of modern Hebrew, and whose revivalist legacy rested on a genuine recognition of the essential role of Arabic in the rebirth and resurrection of modern Hebrew.“

It is quite possible that some Christians may find it strange to use the name ‘Esau‘ or ‘Isa‘ in place of ‘Jesus‘ as there is a passage in the Bible that says that ‘God hates Esau‘.

“The oracle of the word of the Lord to Israel by Malachi. “I have loved you,” says the Lord. But you say, “How have you loved us?” “Is not Esau Jacob’s brother?” declares the Lord. “Yet I have loved Jacob, but Esau I have hated.” (Malachi 1:1-3)

God hates Jesus but loves Jacob?

Imagine if in place of the word ‘Esau’ you had the word ‘Joshua’. You would have a very interesting passage in the Bible of God saying, “But Jesus, I hate.”

Let’s continue with Eliezer Ben Yehuda.

Since Hebrew, Aramaic, and Arabic are all based upon the same Semitic vowel system, Eliezer used the Arabic language.

A language that was still living and had wide currency to decipher the pronunciation and understanding of the Hebrew language.


“Jesus” was a common name back in the day. In Acts 13:6 there was a magician named Bar Jesus.

“When they had travelled through the whole island as far as Paphos, they met a magician named Bar-Jesus who was a Jewish false prophet.”

In Colossians 4:11 there was a contemporary of Paul called Jesus-Justus

“And Jesus, who is called Justus, who are of the circumcision; these alone are my co-workers for the kingdom of God, and they have been a comfort to me.”

Another interesting example of two people called “Jesus” side by side in the following text:

So, when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, “Which one do you want me to release to you: Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called the Messiah?” (Matthew 27:17).

So, the people had the choice to have Jesus ‘son of the father‘ or Jesus ‘called Messiah‘ killed.


So, the name “Jesus” was a common name, like John, James or Mary.

This doesn’t sound like a ‘Name Above All Names’ to me. It sounds rather common and uneventful.

Do Christians Feel Power in The Name of Joshua?

We are whether we can call upon the name of Joshua and be saved? It is, however, the same as “Jesus”. Why should only the ‘bastardized‘ form of the Latin version of ‘Yehoshua‘ be the only name for salvation?

In other words, is the Christian mission only done in English? No it is not!

So, if there are Jews, wouldn’t they be screaming out ‘Yehoshua‘ in the congregation?

That being the case, why couldn’t they scream out ‘Joshua‘ as it is the Anglicized form?

Joshua Christ?


Imagine using terms like Joshua Christ! Imagine Christian missionaries asking people to accept faith in Joshua? Imagine Benny Hinn jumping up and down and healing people in the name of Joshua! Or imagine John Hagee being slain in the spirit of Joshua Christ!

What about the name Immanuel?

Immanuel is also a common Jewish name which means ‘God is with us‘.

Maher-shalal-hash-baz was called Immanuel in Isaiah 8:8

“It shall pass into Judah and flood it all throughout up to the neck it shall reach; It shall spread its wings the full width of your land, Immanuel!”

So, for Christians to say, “Hey look, there is a prophecy that says he will be called Immanuel, We can tell them that Maher-shalal-hash-baz was also called Immanuel.”

In Matthew 1:23 we read: “Behold, the virgin shall be with a child and shall bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which translated means, “God with us“.”

That this is an example of a failed prophecy plain pure and simple. It’s amazing the lengths that Christian apologists will go through to make this all add up.

In the end, I think that the position of Islam and the Qur’an is very clear. ‘Isa is an Arabized form of the word ‘Esau’. He was born of a virgin named Mariam (Mary).

There is much to be said about the fact that Christians use a name like Jesus (a common name like John, James, or Mary) when describing the ineffable name of the creator.

Maybe there is a way out of this. Maybe, after all, The Creator is not a person, much less person(s).

Since, after all, the words ‘person’ and ‘personality’ come from the Greek word ‘persona’ which means ‘a mask’. Think about it! Tri-Theist Christians believe in a God that is One Being that wears three masks.

In the end, “Jesus” is just a common name, like Chuck, or Daryl or Lester.

We sincerely hope people will read the Qur’an and learn as much as they can about Islam. We hope that Allah Most High opens the breasts and hearts of humanity and that Allah Most Merciful guides us all to what he loves.

“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 Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

October 5, 2022 · 1:01 am

Some faces that day will be radiant. Looking at their Lord. Will we see Allah?

“(Some) faces, that day, will be radiant. Looking towards their lord.” (Qur’an 75:22-23)

﷽ 

May Allah (swt) reward brother Assad, the servant of Allah (swt) who did the translation from our noble Shaykh and teacher.

From his book “Bughyat al-Rāqī fī Sharḥ Khulāṣat al-Marāqī” By Shaykh Rashid bin Salim Al-Busafi (h)

The Impossibility of Seeing Allah (SWT): Evidences and Analysis.

1. Qur’anic Evidence: The Permanence of Non-Perception

Surah al-An’am 6:103

{لَّا تُدْرِكُهُ الْأَبْصَارُ وَهُوَ يُدْرِكُ الْأَبْصَارَ وَهُوَ اللَّطِيفُ الْخَبِيرُ}
“Vision perceives Him not, but He perceives [all] vision; and He is the Subtle, the Acquainted.”

  • Linguistic Analysis:
    • “لَا” (Lā al-Nāfiyah): Implies permanent negation (“visions do not and will never perceive Him”).
    • “الْأَبْصَارُ” (Al-Abṣār): Plural of baṣar (vision), emphasizing all types of sight fail to perceive Him.
    • Divine Contrast: Allah’s complete perception of creation vs. creation’s inability to perceive Him underscores His transcendence.
  • Context: The verse is a declarative praise, not a reproach, confirming Allah’s incomparability.

Surah al-A’raf 7:143: The Case of Prophet Musa (AS)

{قَالَ لَن تَرَانِي}
“[Allah] said, ‘You will never see Me.'”

  • “لَن” (Lan) vs. “لَا” (Lā):
    • “لَن”: Stronger negation, implying eternal impossibility (not just in this world but also the Hereafter).
    • Context: A rebuke to the demand for visual perception, linked to the Israelites’ disbelief (Qur’an 2:55).
  • The Mountain’s Destruction:
    • Allah’s tajallī (manifestation) to the mountain reduced it to dust, proving physical creation cannot endure His manifestation.
    • Logical conclusion: If a mountain cannot withstand Allah’s presence, how could human vision perceive Him?

3. Linguistic and Theological Principles

A. Meaning of “Idrāk” (الإدراك):

  • Literally: “To catch up/comprehend fully” (e.g., “أدركته بيدك” = “You grasped it with your hand”).
  • In the Qur’an: Used for complete perception, not mere sight (e.g., “إِنَّا لَمُدْرَكُونَ” [7:38] = “We are overtaken”).

B. The Three Parts of Ayah 6:103:

  1. Negation of Perception (لَّا تُدْرِكُهُ الْأَبْصَارُ).
  2. Allah’s Full Perception (وَهُوَ يُدْرِكُ الْأَبْصَارَ).
  3. Divine Attributes (وَهُوَ اللَّطِيفُ الْخَبِيرُ).
    • “Al-Laṭīf”: The Subtle (beyond physical perception).
    • “Al-Khabīr”: The All-Aware (knows creation’s limitations).

C. Muqābala (Contrastive Rhetoric):

  • The juxtaposition of “لَّا تُدْرِكُهُ الْأَبْصَارُ” and “وَهُوَ يُدْرِكُ الْأَبْصَارَ” emphasizes asymmetry: Creation’s incapacity vs. Allah’s omnipotence.

Refutation of “Seeing Allah in the Hereafter”

A. Qur’an 75:22-23: {وُجُوهٌ يَوْمَئِذٍ نَّاضِرَةٌ إِلَىٰ رَبِّهَا نَاظِرَةٌ}

  • “نَاظِرَةٌ” (Nāẓirah): Does not necessarily mean “seeing”:
    • Alternate meanings: “Awaiting” (e.g., Qur’an 3:77: “وَلَا يَنظُرُ إِلَيْهِمْ” = “He will not look upon them”).
    • Context: Contrast between radiant faces (awaiting mercy) and gloomy faces (fearing punishment).
    • The correct meaning is confirmed through the context it has been mentioned in, so the Al Nathar (النظر) comes with the meaning of waiting even if it was preceded by (Ila) إلى

“Indeed, those who exchange the covenant of Allah and their [own] oaths for a small price will have no share in the Hereafter, and Allah will not speak to them or look at them on the Day of Resurrection, nor will He purify them; and they will have a painful punishment.” (Qur’an 3:77)

So is it said that, those who sell out Allah’s covenant and their own oaths for a small price, is it said that Allah doesn’t see them in the Akhira?!

This Ayah came in the context of describing the day of judgment, and the day of gathering to be exact. And that’s by the proof of its context {{On that Day ˹some˺ faces will be bright,() Awaiting the mercy of their lord ()And ˹other˺ faces will be gloomy,() ا ِض َرةٌ ُو ُجوهٌ َيْو َمِئٍذ } {.in anticipation of something devastating ن )22ٰ )ى َّ لَ ِإ َنا ِظ َرةٌ )23ِ )إ َرِّب َها َت ن ُظ َبا ِس َرةٌ )24ُّ )ن َوُو ُجوهٌ َيْو َمِئٍذ َأ َع َل َأ ُيف َها ْ ِ ٌرة َقِفا َب { so if (Nathira) (ناظرة (was of the meaning of seeing then it won’t be except on that day; because he described that by saying (on that day) (ذٍيومئ (and those who differ with us they have not agreed on it happening on the gathering, add to that, the ayah came with the style of comparison between two types of faces, so these are radiant, happy, waiting for the mercy of its lord, while the others are contorted and gloomy expecting what will break their backs from punishment. So, it’s in pity waiting for it to come. Add to that that the description by faces in this ayah means the known organ which the feelings appear on. What is in the soul. What the soul is feeling will be expressed on the face. As the contentment and happiness can be identified through his face, and fearful and frightened can also be identified by his face, and the face organ is not the organ responsible for seeing.

B. Hadith of the “Two Gardens”:

  • Claim: The ridā’ al-kibriyā’ (Cover of Majesty) is the only barrier to seeing Allah.
  • Rebuttal:
    • The “barrier” is an eternal attribute of Allah’s majesty, not a temporary veil.
    • Asserting its removal implies Allah changes His essence, which is impossible.

C. Theological Absurdity:

  • If seeing Allah were possible, it would necessitate:
    1. Spatial limitation (violating His transcendence).
    2. Change in divine attributes (e.g., “pride” being removed).

5. Critique of Pro-Visual Perception Arguments

A. Misinterpretation of “نَاظِرَةٌ”:

  • Error: Assuming it means “seeing” despite contextual evidence to the contrary.
  • Qur’anic Precedent: “وَلَا يَنظُرُ إِلَيْهِمْ” (3:77) cannot mean “He does not see them,” as Allah is All-Seeing.

B. Anthropocentric Fallacy:

  • Claiming “seeing Allah is the ultimate reward” reduces worship to physical gratification, contrary to the Qur’an’s emphasis on spiritual nearness (e.g., “قُرْبًا إِلَى اللَّهِ” [3:45]).

C. Quotes from Classical Scholars:

  • Ibn al-Qayyim’s Attribution to al-Shafi’i:“If Muhammed ibn Idris [al-Shafi’i] knew he would not see his Lord in the Hereafter, he would not have worshipped Him.”
    • Rebuttal: This contradicts the Qur’anic principle that worship is due to Allah’s lordship, not contingent on visual perception.

This is not acceptable to us. It is as if one links to Imam al-Shafi’i the belief of the Atheist!

And they hold that seeing Allah is the thing that made Allah the Exalted worthy to be worshiped, and that if he Allah Tabaraka wa Ta’ala was not seen in the Akhira then he was not worthy to be worshiped in this dunya, and to you some of what they said: we find ibn Al Qayyim links to Imam Shafi’e that he said “if Mohammed bin Idrees did not known that he won’t see his lord in the akhira then he wouldn’t have worshiped him” and he said “I oppose ibn Aliyyah in everything even in saying La Illaha Illa Allah, as I say: la Illaha Illa Allah that can be seen in the akhira, and he says: La Illaha Illa Allah that cannot be seen in the Akhira…” and in another narration he said “ If Mohammed ibn Idrees was not certain that he’ll see Allah Azza Wa Jal he wouldn’t have worshiped him”. And this is talk that makes bodies grasp, and minds flabbergasted, as this is the Quran within our hands, we do not find that that the worship of Allah the Exalted was conditioned in any position of it with seeing him swt!! This is the belief of the Atheist!  

You may see for yourself!

Imam ash-Shafi’i Seeing Allah in The Hereafter

Conclusion

  1. Qur’an 6:103 and 7:143 definitively negate the possibility of seeing Allah in any form.
  2. Linguistic, contextual, and theological analysis confirms “نَاظِرَةٌ” refers to awaiting divine reward, not visual perception.
  3. The idea of “seeing Allah” contradicts His transcendence, immutability, and incomparability.

Final Note: Worship is grounded in acknowledging Allah’s perfection, not in physical encounters.  

You may be interested in reading the following:

The Proper Understanding of Musa (as) Request of Seeing Allah.
Those who do good will have the finest reward and more.
Shaykh Juma commentary on Seeing the Lord as you see the moon
On Seeing Allah
Is Distance Necessary to See Allah (swt)? Response to Dr. Hamza Bakri
Salafis debate Ibadis on the issue of seeing Allah in the hereafter.
Seeing Allah: What Every Christian Should Ask Every Salafi. The Form/Shape of Allah?
Madhkali Salafi Faris Al Hammadi The 60 cubit tall Allah?
Irrefutable Proof that the Salafi God is one that can take human form.
Dr. Muhammed Salah teacher of the Salafi Sect Lies about Moses Seeing Allah.
Salafi preacher: We will see Allah’s face in paradise!
Salafi Shaykh Muqbil Al Wadi’i Hadith in Sahih Muslim on Seeing Allah is actually weak!

May Allah (swt) guide you dear reader!

May Allah (swt) guide the Muslim ummah!

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

October 4, 2022 · 2:02 am

Salafi preacher: We will see Allah’s face in paradise!

“The Originator of the heavens and the earth; He made mates for you from among yourselves, and mates of the cattle too, multiplying you thereby; there is nothing like unto Him; and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11)

The faculties of seeing (tudriku) cannot grasp Him, and He grasp all–seeing (yudriku), He is the All-Subtle and All-Aware.” (Qur’an 6:103)

“Allah has promised the believing men and believing women Gardens beneath which rivers flow. They shall abide in it. There are delightful dwelling places for them in the Gardens of Eternity. They shall, above all, enjoy the good pleasure of Allah. That is the great achievement.” (Qur’an 9:72)

﷽ 

My friend had his brother in law send him these clips by a preacher from the Salafi sect claiming people will ‘see the face of Allah’ in the paradise.

The preacher in the above video says:

“O Rabb, show Your Face.” “We want to look at You.” “So Allah (swt) Orders for the Hijab to be removed. And the Hijab of Allah Is Light (Noor).” “And you will see your Lord Like you see the sun at its noon Or the moon at its full. ” “There will be faces looking at their Lord. Looking so much so that Allah” (swt)

“May Allah makes us of those who will lay eyes On the Blessed Face of Allah” (swt)

You ever notice how these people talk about seeing the ‘Face of Allah’ ? Why don’t they ask to see the foot of Allah? Why don’t they ask to see the two right hands of Allah? Why don’t they ask to see the shin of Allah? Why would it be shameful to ask that? Does Allah (swt) have attributes that are shameful? Astaghfiurllah! Of course not!

When I asked this of a brother his response was:

“I guess because the face is considered to be the seat of beauty in human beings.”

Right! However,

 
“There is nothing like unto Him; and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11)

AS FAR AS ALLAH (SWT) REMOVING SOME HIJAB….WELL THINK AGAIN!

Curious to see more?

Like where Imam Shafi’i is reported to have said that if he knew he would not see Allah (swt) he would not worship him, even though Allah (swt) NEVER made that a condition of worshipping him.

Imam ash-Shafi’i Seeing Allah in The Hereafter

Curious to see where our brothers play fast and loose with various text to get you to believe that you will see Allah (swt) on the day of judgement?

On Seeing Allah

Allah (swt) has already told us what the great attainment is! It is not seeing his face!

“Allah has promised the believing men and believing women Gardens beneath which rivers flow. They shall abide in it. There are delightful dwelling places for them in the Gardens of Eternity. They shall, above all, enjoy the good pleasure of Allah. That is the great achievement.” (Qur’an 9:72)

You might benefit from reading the following articles:

Those who do good will have the finest reward and more.
Some faces that day will be radiant. Looking at their Lord. Will we see Allah?
Shaykh Juma commentary on Seeing the Lord as you see the moon
The Proper Understanding of Musa (as) Request of Seeing Allah.
Is Distance Necessary to See Allah (swt)? Response to Dr. Hamza Bakri
Salafis debate Ibadis on the issue of seeing Allah in the hereafter.
Dr. Muhammed Salah teacher of the Salafi Sect Lies about Moses Seeing Allah.
Seeing Allah: What Every Christian Should Ask Every Salafi. The Form/Shape of Allah?
Madhkali Salafi Faris Al Hammadi The 60 cubit tall Allah?
Irrefutable Proof that the Salafi God is one that can take human form.
Salafi Shaykh Muqbil Al Wadi’i Hadith in Sahih Muslim on Seeing Allah is actually weak!

May Allah (swt) guide us to what is beloved to Allah (swt).

May Allah (swt) Guide the Ummah.

May Allah (swt) Forgive the Ummah.

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,