Tag Archives: tafsir

March 6, 2026 · 2:11 am

For those Shi’a who do slander Aisha (ra)

“And hold not to the ties of marriage of unbelieving women.”(Qur’an 60:10)

﷽ .

Muslims believe that the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) was guided in every way. This should also include his choice of wife. If the Blessed Messenger (saw) chose Aisha (ra) as his wife, then this choice had to be a blessed and correct decision. Or even more so if Allah (swt) chose her as his wife.

“Concerning verse Qur’an 24:26 (Vile women are for vile men and vile men are for vile women. Good women are for good men and good men are for good women… Majmaʿ al-bayān says: There are a few interpretations proposed for this verse… The third meaning is: “The vile among women belongs to the vile among men, and the vile among men belongs to the vile among women.” This is narrated from Abū Muslim and al-Jubbāʾī. It is also narrated by Imams al-Bāqir and al-Ṣādiq…”

Source: (Tafsir Al Mizan pg 142 https://almizan.org/vol/29/129-154)

First, the Ibadi scholars have already shown the flaws in the Shi’i Imams and their misunderstanding of such verses. 

You can read about that here:

A misunderstanding of Qur’an 24:26: Nasty women for nasty men

Dealing with a report accepted in the Sunni tradition.

Before we move on to the Shi’i narrations concerning the event, we have to deal with a report accepted in the Sunni tradition. The Blessed Messenger (saw), calls `Ali bin Abi Talib and Usama bin Zaid to consult with them. In this narration, Usama bin Zaid (ra) was quick to still the heart of the Blessed Prophet (saw). Whereas the narrators have `Ali bin Abi Talib being a source of waswas. 

For those of our readers unfamilar with waswas. 

Waswas (Arabic: وَسْوَاس) in Islam refers to whispering doubts, intrusive thoughts, or temptations placed in a person’s mind—especially by Shaytan—to cause confusion, doubt, sin, or anxiety.

“When the Divine Inspiration was delayed. Allah’s Messenger (saw) called `Ali bin Abi Talib and Usama bin Zaid to ask and consult them about divorcing me. Usama bin Zaid said what he knew of my innocence, and the respect he preserved in himself for me. Usama said, ‘(O Allah’s Messenger (saw)!) She is your wife, and we do not know anything except good about her.’ `Ali bin Abi Talib said, ‘O Allah’s Messenger (saw)! Allah does not put you in difficulty and there are plenty of women other than she, yet, ask the maid-servant who will tell you the truth.’ On that Allah’s Messenger (saw) called Barira (i.e. the maid-servant) and said, ‘O Barira! Did you ever see anything which aroused your suspicion?” Barira said to him, ‘By Him Who has sent you with the Truth. I have never seen anything in her (i.e. Aisha) which I would conceal, except that she is a young girl who sleeps leaving the dough of her family exposed so that the domestic goats come and eat it.’

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4141)

Dealing with reports accepted in the Shi’i tradition.

Some Shi’i, in their frustration that Allah (swt) had cleared Aisha (ra) of false accusations and honored her, decided that they would fabricate their own vicious story. In doing so, they became people who hold lightly that they will indeed meet Allah (swt) and that Allah (swt) is severe in taking into account.

In their fabrication of Hadith, rather than Aisha (ra) becoming the victim of a vicious rumor, she becomes someone who spreads a vicious rumor.

Yet, these fabricators are not very clever at all. By creating this story, what they are in effect doing is saying that any rumors regarding the chastity of Aisha (ra) are false. There is no basis for them. If so, on what grounds?

“According to Shi’i narrations, this was revealed about Māriyah al-Qibṭiyyah, who was accused [of indecency] by Aisha. Then it narrates from Zurārah: I heard Imam al-Bāqir say: The Messenger of Allah was extremely bereaved upon the death of his son Ibrāhim [from Māriyah]. Aisha told him, “Why are you so upset with him? He was the son of Jarīḥ.” Thus, the Messenger of Allah charged Ali to go after him [Jarīḥ] and kill him. Ali took his sword and went after him. At the time, Jarīḥ al-Qibṭī (the Coptic) was in a garden. Alī knocked on the garden’s door. Jarīḥ went to open the door, but when he saw Alī [from behind the door] he recognized anger in his face. Thus, he went back and did not open the door. Alī jumped over the wall into the garden and followed him. Jarīḥ started running for his life, and when he felt that Alī is about to catch him, he climbed up a palm tree. Alī climbed behind him, and when he got very close to him, Jarīḥ threw himself down from the tree. As he fell down, his private part was revealed, and Alī saw that he had neither the male nor the female organ. Alī returned to the Prophet and told him, “O Messenger of Allah! When you charge me with a task, should I be like a hot iron spike rubbed against fur, or should I verify the matter?” He replied, “Rather, you should verify.” He said, “By the One Who has sent you with truth, he is devoid of what men have, and he is devoid of what women have.” Thus, the Prophet said, “Praise be to Allah Who diverted evil from us Ahl al-Bayt.”

Source: (Tafsir Al Mizan pg 137 https://almizan.org/vol/29/129-154)

Prima Qur’an comments:

Now, dear readers, we want you to reflect on the story that you just read. Instead of making Aisha look (ra) bad, these people from among the Shi’i have insulted the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) as well as Ali.

Now let’s think about the rationality of someone like Aisha (ra) who knows that the Blessed Prophet (saw) is aware of the unseen, and receives revelation about the unseen concocting a story like this, to begin with.

Was she not aware that Allah reveals the unseen to the Blessed Prophet (saw) or not?

Are we really to believe the Prophet Muhammed (saw) didn’t know that Aisha (ra) was allegedly lying?

Are we really to believe that Ali would go chase down a non-Muslim without a chance for the man to be charged, tried, and found guilty?

There were people not comfortable with the idea of the justice of Islam being portrayed as some ill-tempered man charging at a non-Muslim with a sword in hand without even taking the time to explain the charges to him or give him a chance to prove his innocence.

That the poor soul Ibn Jarih wasn’t compensated for his ordeal?

Why would Aisha (ra) choose Mariyah (ra) over any other wife?

These people who fabricated this hadith have insulted the intelligence of the Blessed Messenger (saw).

Aisha(ra) obviously knew IF she concocted such a story that it would have to be something believable. This means there would have had to be an occasion for Mariyah and Ibn Jarih to be together.

This would mean that the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) was negligent of his wife, and was unaware of the condition of Ibn Jarih. The one who narrates this story is one who believes that it is possible for the Blessed Messenger (saw) to be duped by such simple lies.

Certainly, after creating this fabrication, what is very revealing is that all of them seemed to be comfortable with the idea of Ali studiously fixated on a man’s crotch as he fell from a tree. Obviously, if a man’s private area is exposed, the pure of heart averts their gaze right away, whereas the diseased heart would have tarried there for a moment.

Are we really to believe that Ali, instead of averting his gaze, took it upon himself to gawk at another man’s privates?

“Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and guard their chastity. That is purer for them. Surely Allah is All-Aware of what they do.” (Qur’an 24:30)

Are we really to believe that Ali had very harsh words towards the Prophet Muhammed (saw)?

There were certainly more honorable and noble people among the Shi’a who were uncomfortable with Ali having the following terse words for the Messenger of Allah (saw).

“O Messenger of Allah! When you charge me with a task, should I be like a hot iron spike rubbed against fur, or should I verify the matter?”

What we end up finding out from the commentators is that the story is a fabrication all along.

Now, obviously, there are among the Shi’a thinking people who are looking at this story and realizing things are not adding up.

Just look at how the commentators have to try and salvage this story:

“Abd-Allāh b. Bukayr said: I asked Imam al-Sadiq, “May I be your ransom! When the Messenger of Allah ordered the killing of the Coptic man, did he know that he had been lied to or not? Because it was only through Alī’s verification that Allah spared the Coptic man.” He answered, “No! By Allah, he knew [that he had been lied to]. If that was the real intention of the Messenger of Allah[that the Coptic man should be killed], then Alī would not have returned before killing the man. However, the Messenger of Allah only said this apparently so that she Aisha may drop her sin [of false allegation], but she did not drop it and did not mind the killing of a Muslim man [innocently].”

Source: (Tafsir Al Mizan page 138 https://almizan.org/vol/29/129-154)

Prima Qur’an comments:

So what we learn is that the commentators come along and try and salvage this half-baked story.

The student who questions Imam Al Sadiq is either literary fiction invented by Al Sadiq to seemingly give answers to some very obvious holes in the narration. One’s that Al Sadiq saw himself. Or it is an honest objection and line of inquiry that Al Sadiq does his best to answer.

However, it gets even worse!

“Tafsīr al-Qummī, on the authority of Muḥammed b. Jaʿfar, on the authority of Muḥammed b. Īsā, on the authority of al-Ḥasan b. Alī b. Faḍḍāl, on the authority of ʿAbd-Allāh b. Bukayr means that the Prophet pretended to be serious in his command, but between himself and Alī they knew that he does not really mean it.” (Trans.)”

Source: (Tafsir Al Mizan page 138 note 2 https://almizan.org/vol/29/129-154)

Prima Qur’an comments:

Obviously it now raises questions about Ali’s knowledge of the unseen. Because the student (if they are real and not a literary device) when asking Al Sadiq didn’t stop to think about Ali’s knowledge of the unseen. So the commentators have: means that the Prophet pretended to be serious in his command, but between himself and Alī they knew that he does not really mean it.

But that is not what the narration reflects at all! We have Ali asking: “O Messenger of Allah! When you charge me with a task, should I be like a hot iron spike rubbed against fur, or should I verify the matter?”

So we are supposed to believe that the man behind nahjul balagha just speaks redundantly?

What makes this very devestating is that it makes both Imams al-Bāqir and Al Sadiq as people who attributes false reasoning and false shenanigans to the Blessed Prophet (saw)!

Look what the narration states! Go back and read it and see the lies oh Muslim readers!

“the Messenger of Allah only said this apparently so that she Aisha may drop her sin [of false allegation], but she did not drop it and did not mind the killing of a Muslim man [innocently].”

So if Aisha (ra) is allegedly that wicked that she would lie about a wife of the Prophet (saw) and she didn’t mind the killing of a Muslim man [innocently] then surely the Prophet (saw) knew this?! Which in case makes the whole excercise of sending Ali after Jarīḥ (ra)!

If these things can be authentically attributed to Imams al-Bāqir and Al Sadiq then we can only hope they repented before they died and that Allah (swt) saved them from the hellfire.

If these things are not true, then may Allah deal with those Shi’i who unjustly attributed such things to their Imams.


In the end, none of these stories are true or really happened. Ultimately, we know it’s not true because nothing came of the whole story.

The Prophet Muhammed (saw) did nothing to Aisha (ra).

He didn’t divorce her.

You would think that the dignity and the honour and the justice of the Blessed Messenger (saw), who had his son Ibrahim (May Allah cover him in mercy),honour disparaged, and an innocent man’s life put at risk, that the Blessed Messenger (saw) would have done something in regard to Aisha (ra).

He didn’t!

“Moreover, one of His signs is that He created mates for you from yourselves that you may find tranquility in them, and He ordained between you love and compassion.” (Qur’an 30:21)

“And hold not to the ties of marriage of unbelieving women.”(Qur’an 60:10)

If what is narrated is authentically attributed to Imams al-Bāqir and Al Sadiq then what we see is that some of these Shi’I scholars and their wicked hearts became a playground for Iblis. They were so vile as to use the Blessed Prophet (saw) ‘s own son, Ibrahim (May Allah cover him in mercy,) as a plot device to disparage Aisha (ra).

How twisted and dark can one’s heart become?

So the sober-minded among the Shi’a commentators also point out other problems with this fabrication here:

“There are also certain problems with these narrations: First, the story suggested by these narrations does not match the verses, especially verses like: “Surely they who concocted the slander”…(24:11),” Why did not the believing men and the believing women, when you heard it, think well of their own people.”(24:12), and “When you received it with your tongues and spoke with your mouths what you had no knowledge of.” (24:15). These verses indicate that: This was a collaborative plot by a connected network of individuals, who spread the story in order to disrepute the Prophet. That the people were passing the news by their tongues, to the point that it widely diffused among them, and this continued for some time. That they did not respect the Prophet’s divine honor and sanctity in doing so. The story depicted by these narrations is far from these points. The only possible explanation is to say that these narrations have been abridged in their portrayal of the story. Second, the story would necessitate that the legal penalty [of eighty lashes]should be applied to the accuser, but that did not happen. The only possible response to this objection is to say that the verse outlining the penalty for the accusation of adultery [24:4] was revealed quite a while after this story. Not applying the legal penalty for accusation right away poses a problem for both accounts. To dodge this problem, we should conclude that the verses about the story of slander were revealed before the verse about the accusation of adultery (qaḍf).

This means that the only laws that were revealed in the story of slander were the following:

(1) the accused person is innocent as long as no evidence is shown for the accusation; and

(2) accusation of adultery [without evidence] is forbidden [but no legal penalty was decreed for it]. Had the legal penalty for unwarranted accusation been legislated before the story of slander, there would have been no room [for the Prophet] to delay the penalty for such a considerable time or to wait for revelation about it. Also, no accuser would have been spared the penalty in that case. Similarly, if all of the above verses [including both the legal penalty and the story of slander] were revealed together, then there would have been some reference made to their penalty in the verses about the story, at least by having the story come right after the verse about accusation [24:4]. Those who know about the theme and flow of speech would not doubt that verses 24:11—26, “Surely they who concocted the slander…”—are disconnected from their previous verses. In addition, if the legal penalty of those who accuse the Prophet’s wives with adultery were twice, then it would have been mentioned in the verses about the slander. That would have perfectly fit in the verses given their harsh treatment of the accusers with curse and threat of punishment. One may answer the above by saying that perhaps the verses of slander[24:11ff] and accusation [24:4] were revealed together. However, this will only add a further problem to the last one, because it entails that there was a need for two laws but only one was revealed.”

Source: (Tafsir Al Mizan pg 139 https://almizan.org/vol/29/129-154)

Prima-Qur’an comments:

Obviously, they are grasping at straws.

“The only possible explanation is to say that these narrations have been abridged in their portrayal of the story.”

Notice they don’t bring all these narrations together? Because you, the reader, will find even more holes in these fabrications.

“The only possible response to this objection is to say that the verse outlining the penalty for the accusation of adultery [24:4] was revealed quite a while after this story.

So do tell us what the occasion was of 24:4 then? To say that this ayat has been chopped up into two occasions is a real stretch.

Also, tell us who the male architect is here?

“Indeed, those who came with falsehood are a group among you. Do not think it is bad for you; rather it is good for you. For every person among them is what [punishment] he has earned from the sin, and he who took upon himself the greater portion thereof – for him is a great punishment.”(Qur’an 24:11)

In the end, such people are described by Allah (swt).“There is a sickness in their hearts, and Allah only lets their sickness increase. They will suffer a painful punishment for their lies.” (Qur’an 2:10)

May Allah (swt) bless our mother Aisha (ra). May Allah (swt) instill in our hearts love for her. May Allah (swt) bless those sincere and righteous Shi’a who defend her honour against the diseased among them.

For those interested, you may also wish to read the following articles:

“We Shi’i believe the Prophets are Masoom however Aisha…..”

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/sociological-experiment-ali-umar-and-fatima

May Allah (swt) guide the Ummah!

May Allah (swt) forgive the Ummah!

4 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

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

March 5, 2026 · 3:11 am

“We Shi’i believe the Prophets are Masoom however Aisha…..”

“And hold not to the ties of marriage of unbelieving women.” (Qur’an 60:10)

“The Prophet has a stronger affinity to the believers than they do themselves. And his wives are their mothers. As ordained by Allah, blood relatives are more entitled than believers and immigrants, unless you show kindness to your associates. This is decreed in the Record.” (Qur’an 33:6)

﷽ 

If the Shi’i believe that the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) was infallible in every way, this should also include his choice of wives. Rather or not, the Blessed Messenger (saw) chose Aisha (ra) as his wife or Allah (swt) chose her as his wife.

“Indeed, those who falsely accuse chaste, unaware and believing women are cursed in this world and the Hereafter; and they will have a great punishment.” (Qur’an 24:23)


These verses above were revealed on an occasion in which some of the companions made insinuations about the noble wife Aisha(ra). Allah (swt) cleared Aisha(ra) of the insinuations and has clearly questioned the faith of those who would repeat such allegations.

However, if some want to assume that this verse exonerates Maria Al-Qibtiyya (ra) and not Aisha (ra) you would have to wonder why the Blessed Messenger (saw) remained married to Aisha(ra).

Even the Shi’i admit that the Blessed Messenger (saw) never divorced Aisha (ra).

“Moreover, one of His signs is that He created mates for you from yourselves that you may find tranquility in them, and He ordained between you love and compassion.” (Qura’n 30:21

“And hold not to the ties of marriage of unbelieving women.” (Qur’an 60:10)


Now, if the Shi’i want to say the Blessed Messenger (saw) didn’t know, we should ask on what basis they know then? On what basis are they better informed about the wife of the Blessed Messenger (saw) than the Blessed Messenger (saw) is himself!

Even still, the Shi’i will often bring up the following verse and ask if the wives of Lot and Noah (May Allah’s peace be upon his prophets), were either made pure simply by their marriage to these noble prophets or were the best choice for them.

What is interesting about them doing this is that there is not a denial that Aisha(ra) was indeed the wife of the Blessed Messenger (saw).

“Allah sets forth an example to those who disbelieve: the wife of Noah and the wife of Lot. They were both two of our righteous servants, but they acted treacherously towards them, so they availed nothing against Allah, and it was said: Enter the fire with those who enter.” (Quran 66:10)

Let us see how a member of the Ahl Bayt has explained this verse.

“Allah warned ‘A’ishah and Hafsah because they hurt the Prophet (saw). By mentioning the example of the wives of Noah and Lot, saying: Allah explains (an example) a trait (for those who disbelieve) by mentioning the two disbelieving women: (the wife of Noah) Wahilah (and the wife of Lot) Wa’ilah, (who were under two of our righteous slaves) messengers (yet betrayed them) yet opposed them in religion, displaying belief outwardly while hiding their disbelief inwardly, such that they kept their hypocrisy in their hearts; but they did not betray their husbands in the sense that they committed adultery, for no wife of a prophet had ever done this, (so that they the husbands availed them naught) benefited them naught (against Allah) against the chastisement of Allah; i.e. the righteousness of their husbands did not benefit them while they were disbelievers (and it was said (unto them): Enter the Fire) in the Hereafter (along with those who enter) the Fire.”

Source: Tanwir Al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas https://quranx.com/Tafsirs/66.10

Unless someone wants to say that Ibn Abbas (ra) made a flaw in his commentary of the verse, this is what the great scholar has had to say.

If someone says that they do not accept the Tafsir of Ibn Abbas (ra), then this should be noted.

However, the person should be reminded that the verse in the Qur’an does not specify what the betrayal of the wives was.

The other point is this. In the case of Lot (as) and Noah (as), we do not know if their wives were apart of some arranged marriage.

Whereas we know that the Blessed Messenger (saw) chose Aisha (ra) as his wife.

Narrated by ‘Aisha:

Allah’s Messenger (saw) said (to me), “You were shown to me in a dream. An angel brought you to me, wrapped in a piece of silken cloth, and said to me, ‘This is your wife.’ I removed the piece of cloth from your face, and there you were. I said to myself. ‘If it is from Allah, then it will surely be.’ “

Source: https://sunnah.com/bukhari:5125

So the point still stands against those of the Shi’i who hold bad things in their heart towards Aisha (ra).

Was the Blessed Messenger (saw) exercising sound decision-making when choosing Aisha (ra) as a wife?

“O you who believe! Truly, your wives and your children are enemies to yourselves: so beware of them! But if you forgive and overlook, and cover up their faults, truly Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” (Quran 64:14)

Let us see how a member of the Ahl Bayt has explained this verse.

“O you who believe! Indeed, among your wives and children there are enemies for you, so beware of them of obeying them in neglecting the performance of good deeds such as struggling or emigrating — because the reason why this verse was revealed was precisely their obedience of them in such matters. And if you pardon them for their impeding you from such good deeds, justifying it on account of the distress that parting with you causes them, and overlook such enmity and forgive them, then assuredly, Allah is Forgiving Merciful.

Source: Tanwir Al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas https://quranx.com/Tafsirs/64.14

Prima Qur’an comments

This statement, explained by Ibn Abbas(ra), is made specifically (khāṣṣ) to the people that migrated from Mecca to Medina. However, if someone wants to make this verse (ʿāmm) or general, it now applies to anyone who has a wife or children.

By that it COULD mean that Fatima (ra) is an adversary of Ali.

By that, it COULD mean that the children of Ali are an adversary to him. If you are going to take a general meaning of it.

Not only this but the verse COULD imply something that is not as grave as it sounds. Especially as it encourages forgiveness, covering up and overlooking faults.

The Children of Fatima (ra) and Ali are described as a fitna by the Blessed Prophet (saw).

“Beautified for men is the love of things they covet; women children, Qanatir Al-Muqantarah of gold and silver, branded beautiful horses, cattle and well-tilled land. This is the pleasure of the present world’s life, but Allah has the excellent return with him.)” (Qur’an 3:14) and the Ayah after it. Imam Ahmad recorded that Buraydah said, “The Messenger of Allah was giving a speech and Al-Hasan and Husayn came in wearing red shirts, walking and tripping. The Messenger descended from the Minbar, held them and placed them in front of them and said,

«صَدَقَ اللهُ وَرَسُولُهُ إِنَّمَا أَمْوَالُكُمْ وَأَوْلَادُكُمْ فِتْنَةٌ، نَظَرْتُ إِلَى هَذَيْنِ الصَّبِيَّيْنِ يَمْشِيَانِ وَيَعْثُرَانِ، فَلَمْ أَصْبِرْ حَتْى قَطَعْتُ حَدِيثِي وَرَفَعْتُهُمَا (Allah and His Messenger said the truth,` Truly, your wealth and your children are a Fitnah.’ I saw these two boys walking and tripping and could not be patient until I stopped my speech and picked them up.)” This was recorded by the Sunan compilers, and At-Tirmidhi said, “Hasan Gharib.”

Narrated by Buraydah ibn al-Hasib:

The Messenger of Allah (saw) delivered a speech to us; meanwhile, al-Hasan and al-Husayn came upon there stumbling, wearing red shirts. He came down from the pulpit, took them and ascended it with them. He then said: Allah truly said: “Your property and your children are only (fitnat) trial” (Ixiv.15). I saw both of them, and I could not wait. Afterwards, he resumed the speech.

Source: (https://sunnah.com/abudawud:1109)

So what are we to make of the Blessed Messenger (saw) calling the children of Ali and Fatima (ra) a fitna?

Fitna never has pleasant connotations in the Qur’an.

So this COULD be understood as something not so severe as in the usual sense of understanding the word fitna.

In the end, we can say that the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) was Masoom in the choice of his wives, including chief among them the Mother of the Believers, Aisha(ra). She is included among the ‘Ahl Bayt’ and those purified by Allah (swt). The Creator of the universe came to her defense in a revelation of the Qur’an.

As our Creator, who is both merciful and severe in punishment, has reminded us:

“Indeed, those who falsely accuse chaste, unaware and believing women are cursed in this world and the Hereafter; and they will have a great punishment.” (Qur’an 24:23)

You might be interested in reading the following articles:

Purification of the Ahl Bayt
For those Shi’a who do slander Aisha (ra)

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/sociological-experiment-ali-umar-and-fatima/

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

8 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

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

November 6, 2025 · 2:12 am

Is the Qur’an clear?

“It is He who caused the Book to descend to you. In it are verses, that are (muḥkamāt) definitive. They are the essence of the Book and others, ones that are (mutashābihāt) unspecific. Then, those whose hearts are swerving, they follow what was unspecific in it, seeking discord (l-fit’nati) and seeking its interpretation. And none know its interpretation save Allah and those firmly rooted in knowledge. They say, “We believe in it; all is from our Lord.” And none remember, save those who possess intellect.” (Qur’an 3:7).” 

﷽ 

“Biologists as well as philosophers have suggested that the universe, and the living forms it contains, are based on chance, but not accident. To put it another way, forces of chance and of antichance coexist in a complementary relationship. The random element is called entropy, the agent of chaos, which tends to mix up the unmixed, to destroy meaning. The nonrandom element is information which exploits the uncertainty inherent in the entropy principle to generate new structures, to inform the world in novel ways.

Source: (Grammatical Man—Information, Entropy, Language, and Life by Jeremy Campbell. Page 15)

The intent of this entry is so that those who are among the Muslims who come into contact with adherents of the Hafs Qur’an Only religion can have some introspection with regard to their own position.

It is hoped that people may be able to look beyond the oversimplification of issues.

Our colleague was once listening to a lecture by Sheikh Hamza Yusuf where he mentioned that as Muslims we believe that the Creator is One,  we believe the revelation is one; however, the revelation is being refracted through the prism of the human mind.

It reminded them of the famous cover of the Pink Floyd album “The Dark of the Moon.”

They found it an interesting point.

Spect-Prism-sm

Clear has been defined as: 1. easy to perceive, understand, or interpret.

“clear and precise directions”

The quality of being clear, in particular.

The quality of coherence and intelligiblity.

Here are some examples of things that are clear but are they intelligible?

You will understand the meaning of the universe once the ball sings to Jill about the biz. Mace Windu understood the peanut butter sandwich using his clear signals so that the computer would jazz out to Dan Excalibur swimming passing the switchboard flying kites. Very funny though the syntax as he whizzed past the train, who was busy cramming algebraic thoughts into his fish tank.

The answer to five minus five is purple because pancakes don’t have bones.

Anyone familiar enough with the English language should be able to understand every word that we have typed above.

However, would anyone care to tell us what we were talking about above?

If the Qur’an is recited to people who do not understand the Arabic language is it clear to them?

The claim of the Qur’an is that it has has verses that are muḥkamāt and mutashābihāt

“It is He who caused the Book to descend to you. In it are verses, that are (muḥkamāt) definitive. They are the essence of the Book and others, ones that are (mutashābihāt) unspecific. Then, those whose hearts are swerving, they follow what was unspecific in it, seeking discord (l-fit’nati) and seeking its interpretation. And none know its interpretation save Allah and those firmly rooted in knowledge. They say, “We believe in it; all is from our Lord.” And none remember, save those who possess intellect.” (Qur’an 3:7).” 

To us, the Qur’an makes it clear that it is both clear and unclear. If it was not the case, it would not be possible to ‘fitna’ or discord with something that is clear.  We have already stated that in other places one of the sure signs of a cult or sect among Muslims is that they will try and appeal to a ‘controversial’ verse, or a verse that is subject to many interpretations to base their case.   This has happened many times, especially in matters of theology.

For example, the Qur’an has many verses that make it clear that those who enter the hellfire do not escape from it.  However, there are one or two verses that could be interpreted contrary to this.  Thus, instead of taking the multitude of verses that make it clear that the one who enters hellfire does not escape from it, the people of the opposition take those one or two verses that are not entirely clear, and they build their theology upon this.

Proof from the Qur’an: The punishment of hellfire is ever lasting.

Also notice that the above text says: “And none know its interpretation save Allah and those firmly rooted in knowledge.“

If a text or a revelation was clear in and of itself, it would not only be grasped by men of understanding but by anyone.

Often the Qur’an begins a chapter with something ambiguous and then affirms that it is clear.

Examples abound:

“Alif, Lam, Ra. These are the verses of the Book and a clear Qur’an.” (Qur’an 15:1)

“Alif, Lam, Ra. These are the verses of the Clear Book. Indeed, We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur’an that you might understand.”  (Qur’an 12:1-2)

“Ta, Seen, Meem. These are the verses of the Clear Book.”  (Qur’an 26:1-2)

“Ta, Seen. These are the verses of the Qur’an and a clear Book“ (Qur’an 27:1)

“Ta, Seen, Meem. These are the verses of the Clear Book.” (Qur’an 28:1-2)

“Ha Meem, By the clear Book, (Qur’an 43:1-2)

“Ha Meem, By the clear Book, (Qur’an 44:1-2)

There is also something interesting here.  

Allah (swt) informs us throughout the Qur’an that it is possible that his revelation may not be clear to people.

Examples:

“They ask you about intoxicants and gambling: say, “In them, there is a gross sin and some benefits for the people. But their sinfulness far outweighs their benefit.” They also ask you what to give to charity: say, “The excess.” Allah clarifies the revelations for you, that you may reflect,” (Qur’an 2:219)

“Do not marry idolatresses unless they believe; a believing woman is better than an idolatress, even if you like her. Nor shall you give your daughters in marriage to idolatrous men, unless they believe. A believing man is better than an idolater, even if you like him. These invite to Hell, while Allah invites to Paradise and forgiveness, as He wills. He clarifies His revelations for the people, that they may take heed.” (Qur’an 2:221)

“Allah thus explains His revelations for you, that you may understand.” (Qur’an 2:242)


“Do any of you wish to own a garden of palm trees and grapes, with flowing streams and generous crops, then, just as he grows old, and while his children are still dependent on him, a holocaust strikes and burns up his garden? Allah thus clarifies the revelations for you, that you may reflect.” (Qur’an 2:266)

“You shall hold fast to the rope of Allah, all of you, and do not be divided. Recall Allah’s blessings upon you – you used to be enemies, and He reconciled your hearts. By His grace, you became brethren. You were at the brink of a pit of fire, and He saved you there from. Allah thus explains His revelations to you, that you may be guided.” (Qur’an 3:301)

“O you who believe, do not befriend outsiders who never cease to wish you harm; they may even wish to see you suffer. Hatred flows out of their mouths and what they hide in their chests is far worse. We thus clarify the revelations for you, if you understand.” (Qur’an 3:108)

“They consult you; say, “Allah advises you concerning the single person. If one dies and leaves no children, and he had a sister, she gets half the inheritance. If she dies first, he inherits from her, if she leaves no children. If there were two sisters, they get two-thirds of the inheritance. If the siblings are men and women, the male gets twice the share of the female.” Allah thus clarifies for you, lest you go astray. Allah is fully aware of all things.” (Qur’an 4:176)

“Allah does not hold you responsible for the mere utterance of oaths; He holds you responsible for your actual intentions. If you violate an oath, you shall atone by feeding ten poor people with the same food you offer to your own family or clothing them, or by freeing a slave. If you cannot afford this, then you should fast for three days. This is the atonement for violating the oaths that you swore to keep. You shall fulfill your oaths. Allah thus explains His revelations to you, that you may be appreciative.”  (Qur’an 5:89)

“Allah thus explains the revelations for you. Allah is Omniscient, Wise.” (Qur’an 24:18)

“O you who believe, permission must be requested by your servants and the children who have not attained puberty (before entering your rooms). This is to be done in three instances – before the Dawn Prayer, at noon when you change your clothes to rest, and after the Night Prayer. These are three private times for you. At other times, it is not wrong for you or them to mingle with one another. Allah thus clarifies the revelations for you. Allah is Omniscient, Most Wise.” (Qur’an 24:58)

“Once the children reach puberty, they must ask permission (before entering) like those who became adults before they have asked permission (before entering). Allah thus clarifies His revelations for you. Allah is Omniscient, Most Wise.” (Qur’an 24:59)

“The blind is not to be blamed, the crippled is not to be blamed, nor is handicapped to be blamed, just as you are not to be blamed for eating at your homes, or the homes of your fathers, or the homes of your mothers, or the homes of your brothers, or the homes of your sisters, or the homes of your fathers’ brothers, or the homes of your fathers’ sisters, or the homes of your mothers’ brothers, or the homes of your mothers’ sisters, or the homes that belong to you, and you possess their keys or the homes of your friends. You commit nothing wrong by eating together or as individuals. When you enter any home, you shall greet each other a greeting from Allah that is blessed and good. Allah thus explains the revelations for you, that you may understand.” (Qur’an 24:61)


“Know that Allah revives the land after it has died. We thus explain the revelations for you, that you may understand.” (Qur’an 57:17)

Prima Qur’an Comments:

All of these verses, if you removed the phrase ‘Allah thus explains/clarifies the revelations for you’, you could still get an understanding of the verses in question.  However, Allah (swt) knows why He (swt) has decided to further elucidate on selected passages of the Qur’an.

Even when Allah (swt) says ‘We thus explain the revelations for you’ in the above passage about Allah (swt) giving life to the land after it has died, it doesn’t explain or clarify the ‘how’ of it.   It simply says, ‘Know’.

Theological issues concerning the clarity of the Qur’an.

The Shafite Mutzalite ‘Abd al-Jabbar epitomized the Basra Mutazalite position on the principle of clarity. He declared that any form of delayed clarification was impossible not simply because Allah’s justice requires that he make his requirements known, but more importantly because his speech is his created act, and therefore must be good, from which it follows that his every utterance must fulfill its purpose of indicating his will.

This is a very important point that Shaykh Abd al-Jabbar has made.  This is why we know many of the followerse of the Qur’an Only religion are in a very difficult situation theologically speaking.

According to the theory of meaning introduced by Shaykh Abu Ali al-Jubbai’ who was a Mutazalite rival of Shaykh Abd al-Jabbar, the meaning of an utterance is not simply a function of its verbal form, but also of the speaker’s will or intent.

Bottom line. If Allah cannot leave the meaning of his speech unclear, then he cannot leave humans without the evidence needed for reconciling seemingly conflicting texts. The fact that we lack evidence about which text came first must itself be evidence that the text should both be implemented, which is best accomplished by particularization. This is a strong logical proof for the Sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw).

In light of all of the above, would it not be fair to assert that this argument is oversimplified and the issue is a little more nuanced than that?

In fact, the clarity of the Qur’an is not internal to the Qur’an itself!  It is dependent upon thoughtful reflection!

“Thus do We explain the verses for a people who give thought.” (Qur’an 10:24)

The static you hear in an untuned or poorly tuned radio is the random background noise, but the coherent radio transmission signal within that noise requires a radio receiver to decode it.

The receiver performs several critical functions to achieve this:

  • Tuning: It selects a specific frequency from the myriad of radio waves the antenna picks up, filtering out others.
  • Amplification: It strengthens the weak incoming signal to a usable level.
  • Demodulation: This is the actual decoding step. The receiver separates the original information (such as sound or data) from the carrier wave that transported it.
  • Output: It converts the decoded electronic signal into an audible sound or viewable data.


The following verse that we are going to quote caused our colleague to drift off in thought. They mentioned that it was challenging to type this as their eyes welled up with tears, and their heart was overflowing in love for the Beloved Vessel (saw) that Allah (swt) gave such a monumental task to carry!

“If We had sent down this Qur’an upon a mountain, you would have seen it humbled and coming apart from fear of Allah. And these examples We present to the people that perhaps they will give thought. (Qur’an 59:21)

Subhan’Allah!

Our point is that the Blessed Messenger (saw) did not have the medium of his mind like we do when approaching the Qur’an with our limited human reasoning and capacity.  The total and complete understanding of the Qur’an was poured into his heart.  His heart and conscience were light.  There is no prism, no spectrum when it comes to the Blessed Messenger. (saw)

Let us be honest for a second and ask ourselves. How many of us can say we have reached the state of total and complete submission in the way that Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammed (May Allah’s choicest blessings and peace be upon them all) did?

The Proof Is In the Pudding.

The very fact that there is now a proliferation of Qur’an only groups, each vying with each other, each with disparate understandings of a revelation that they in their approach to revelation says ‘is clear as day’.

So we end up with some groups saying the Qur’an requires us to pray 2 times a day, or 3 times a day, and some saying that there is no ritual prayer at all!

However, some of the Quraniyoon will just keep throwing their selective verses of choice at you again and again.

I think the point is missed.  We as Muslims do not disagree with any verse of the Qur’an as being a revelation.  We agree with the Qur’an does it say it ‘explains itself’  and that it is ‘clear’.

Part of that explanation and elucidation comes through the example of the Blessed Messenger (saw) himself.

“It is He Who raised up among the unlettered a Messenger from among them who recounts His signs to them and makes them pure and teaches them the Book and wisdom even though they had been before, certainly, clearly going astray.”  (Quran 25:32)

Teaches them– wayuʿallimuhumu — when you teach or instruct someone you are doing more than simply relaying information. A teacher does not simply pass a student a book and say, ‘here you go‘.

Those who follow the Qur’an Onlyl religion will often claim that the Blessed Messenger is only a letter carrier. There is a deception in saying that his only duty is to convey the message.

Yet this is contradicted by the following:

Say, “Obey Allah and obey the Messenger. But if you turn away, then he is only responsible for his duty, and you are responsible for yours. And if you obey him, you will be ˹rightly˺ guided. The Messenger’s duty is only to deliver ˹the message˺ clearly.”  (Qur’an 24:54)


“But if they turn away [Messenger], remember that your only responsibility is to deliver this revelation clearly.” (Qur’an 16:82)

The second part of instruction is would relate to things that need demonstration.

“When you are with them and you lead them in prayer, let one group of them pray with you—while armed. When they prostrate themselves, let the other group stand guard behind them. Then the group that has not yet prayed will then join you in prayer—and let them be vigilant and armed.” (Qur’an 4:102)

“Say, [O Muhammed], “If you should love Allah, then follow me, [so] Allah will love you and forgive you your sins. And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 3:31)

The above verse is conditional. The love of Allah (swt) is conditional upon love for the Blessed Prophet (saw).

Spect-Prism-sm

“Certainly did Allah confer a favour upon the believers when He sent among them a Messenger from themselves, reciting to them His verses and purifying them (wayuzakkihim) and teaching them (wayuʿallimuhumu) the Book and wisdom, although they had been before in manifest error.”  (Qur’an 3:164)

It stands to reason that the Blessed Messenger (saw) could not ‘purify’ the believers if he himself was not purified!

teaching them (wayuʿallimuhumu) -it cannot be said that I am teaching anyone if I was simlpy just a mail carrier.

The Qur’an itself refutes this.

“And obey Allah and obey the Messenger. But if you turn away, then Our Messenger is only responsible for conveying the message clearly.”(Qur’an 64:12)

The Blessed Messenger (saw) explained the message. That is the purpose of bayan.   This is reflected in the words, deeds, and actions — what we know as the sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw).

To believe that the Blessed Messenger (saw) was not an expositor as someone who lived and imbibed the teachings of the Qur’an is difficult to fathom.

“O People of the Scripture, there has come to you Our Messenger, making clear to you much of what you used to conceal of the Scripture and overlooking much. There has come to you from Allah a light and a clear Book.” (Qur’an 5:15)

“Then do they not reflect upon the Qur’an, or are there locks upon their hearts?”  (Qur’an 47:24)

There are many people who read the Qur’an and it does not do anything to their hearts. That is because the Islam consist of accepting that Muhammed (saw) is the last of Allah’s Messengers. The Blessed Prophet (saw) is that light. So the people who read the Qur’an without that light they read the Qur’an in darkness.

There was no prism, no veil, and no lock upon the heart of the Blessed Messenger (saw)!

So is the Qur’an clear?

Allah (swt) has made it clear that the Qur’an has verses that are muḥkamāt and mutashābihāt.

“In it are verses, that are (muḥkamāt) definitive. They are the essence of the Book.” (Qur’an 3:7)

Then there are verses that are a trial.

“and others, ones that are (mutashābihāt) unspecific. Then, those whose hearts are swerving, they follow what was unspecific in it, seeking discord (l-fit’nati) and seeking its interpretation.” (Qur’an 3:7)

Even then this verse seems directed at the people who are hasty with the Qur’an as Allah (swt) admonishes the Blessed Prophet (saw).

High above all is Allah, the King, the Truth! Be not in haste with the Qur’an before its revelation to you is completed, but say, “O my Lord! advance me in knowledge.” (Qur’an 20:114)

The Qur’an also makes it clear that it requires clarity. We see Allah (swt) himself has to come and introduce phrases such as, ‘Allah thus explains/clarifies the revelations for you’  as if otherwise it wouldn’t be clear.

The Qur’an makes it clear that the Blessed Prophet (saw) would explain the Qur’an and teach it to us.

“Indeed, Allah does not feel shy in citing any parable, be it that of a gnat or of something above it (in meanness). Now, as for those who believe, they know it is the truth from their Lord; while those who disbelieve say, “What could Allah have meant by this parable?” By this He lets many go astray, and by this He makes many find guidance. But He does not let anyone go astray thereby except those who are sinful.” (Qur’an 2:26)

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

6 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

November 5, 2025 · 5:32 am

Who can understand the mutashabih verses? Analysis of Quran 3:7

“He it is Who has sent down the Book upon thee; therein are signs determined; they are the Mother of the Book, and others symbolic. As for those whose hearts are given to swerving, they follow that of it which is symbolic, seeking temptation and seeking its interpretation. And none know its interpretation save Allah and those firmly rooted in knowledge. They say, “We believe in it; all is from our Lord.” And none remember, save those who possess intellect.” (Qur’an 3:7) -The Study Qur’an.

“It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammed], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise – they are the foundation of the Book – and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah . But those firm in knowledge say, “We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord.” And no one will be reminded except those of understanding.” (Qur’an 3:7) -(Sahih International)

﷽ 

By the grace of Allah (swt) we have finally got around to writing this article. This is something we have been meaning to write about for some time now.

We asked some brothers to write their experiences of why they chose the Ibadi school or what drew them to the school. We were quite surprised at the re-telling of one story when we read the following:

“I read Ibadis take Qur’an seriously and don’t make tafsir of it to validate their personal prejudices. They believe only Allah knows the Qur’ans true meaning.”

We were really quite shocked and surprised by this. When we tried to correct the brother on this misunderstanding, he was rather recalcitrant. So we simply asked him where he got this information from.

To his credit, he cited the Qur’an 3:7.  That is fine and good, but he did not cite any Ibadi sources, saying that only Allah knows the Qur’an’s true meaning. The reason he did not cite them is that none exist!  There are no Ibadi sources stating this.

Second, simply using logic, we asked him what was the point of sending a revelation that no one will understand? That is an exercise in futility at best.

Finally, we pointed out to him that his contention (which is certainly not from the Ibadi) was in relation to the mutashabih.

For example, as we read to him the following:

“He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are(muḥ’kamātun) decisive, they are the basis of the Book), and others are allegorical…” (Shakir’s translation)

muḥ’kamātun -which actually can be translated as clear. Or that which does not require further elaboration.

So, even then, we informed him that the muḥ’kamātun verses are certainly not verses in which anyone says that only Allah (swt) knows them. The dispute is rather about the mutashābihātun.

Mutashābihātun is often translated as unspecific, symbolic, allegorical, subject to more than one interpretation or understanding. So the center of dispute is around such verses.

The importance of punctuation.

So here we have two sentences:

I take great pleasure in eating my dog and my plants.

I take great pleasure in eating, my dog, and my plants.

The first sentence would leave the reader with the impression that a person takes great pleasure in eating their dog and their plants.

The second sentence would leave the reader with the impression that the person takes great pleasure in eating, as well as finding pleasure in having a dog and having plants.

The importance of punctuation.

So to try and bring as many of you along as we can, we would encourage you to use the following resource: https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/3/7/default.htm

This will give you an exhaustive list of different translations. The keen eye will note the following:

Translations that state that Allah and people grounded in knowledge know the meaning of the mutashabiha, such as:

“He it is Who has sent down the Book upon thee; therein are signs determined; they are the Mother of the Book, and others symbolic. As for those whose hearts are given to swerving, they follow that of it which is symbolic, seeking temptation and seeking its interpretation. And none know its interpretation save God and those firmly rooted in knowledge. They say, “We believe in it; all is from our Lord.” And none remember, save those who possess intellect.” (Qur’an 3:7) The Study Qur’an.

Translations that state that only Allah knows the meaning of the mutashabiha such as:

“It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammed], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise – they are the foundation of the Book – and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah . But those firm in knowledge say, “We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord.” And no one will be reminded except those of understanding.” (Qur’an 3:7) (Sahih International)

Translations that seem to be ambiguous on the matter due to their punctuation.

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

“It is He who revealed to you the Scripture. Some of its verses are definitive—they are the foundation of the Book—while others are allegorical. Those with deviant hearts pursue the allegorical, seeking discord and seeking its interpretation. However, none knows its interpretation except God and those firmly grounded in knowledge say, “We believe in it; all of it is from our Lord.” Only those endowed with understanding take heed.” (Talal Itani & AI 2024)

“It is God who has revealed the Book to you in which some verses are clear statements (which accept no interpretation) and these are the fundamental ideas of the Book, while other verses may have several possibilities. Those whose hearts are perverse, follow the unclear statements in pursuit of their own mischievous goals by interpreting them in a way that will suit their own purpose. No one knows its true interpretations except God and those who have a firm grounding in knowledge say, “We believe in it. All its verses are from our Lord.” No one can grasp this fact except the people of reason.” (Muhammed Sarwar)

So what is going on here?

Note that the verse states about the people who are firmly grounded/rooted in knowledge will say that: “We believe in it; all of it is from our Lord.”

Note that the verse talks about some people who are hyper-fixated upon the mutashabiha.

“Then, as for those in whose hearts there is perversity, they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation.”

Note that these people are not described as people of knowledge.

The first principle of interpreting the Qur’an is: Tafsir al-Quran bi-l-Quran. (Interpreting the Qur’an by the Qur’an)

The second principle is interpreting the mutashabi (unspecific, allegorical, subject to several interpretations) is to establish its meaning by that which is muḥ’kam (foundational, not requiring further clarity).

For example, the Blessed Prophet (saw) can bring elaboration and elucidation.

“With clear proofs and divine Books. And We have sent down to you the Reminder, so that you may explain to people what has been revealed for them, and perhaps they will reflect.” (Qur’an 16:44)

So, when it comes to our faith, we do not base it upon that which is mutashabi. In fact, the beautiful point of this whole verse is not to muddy the waters but to give the believers a clear sign concerning the people of schism and aberrant doctrines. You will more often than not find misguided sects that will base their framework upon a verse(s) that is/are mutashabi. They base theological doctrines upon such.

The people of sound doctrine interpret the mutashabi in light of the muh’kam. Thus, those firmly grounded and rooted in knowledge of the muh’kam are the best capable of extrapolating the meaning of the mutashabi. Chief among them is the Noble Messenger (saw).

Which brings us to our first point.

If we are to understand Qur’an 3:7 as regarding the mutashbi verses that ‘no one can understand except Allah’ then it means those who hold such a position believe that Muhammed (saw), to whom the Qur’an was revealed did not even know the meaning of such verses.

This notion is refuted by the verse already mentioned:

“With clear proofs and divine Books. And We have sent down to you the Reminder, so that you may explain to people what has been revealed for them, and perhaps they will reflect.” (Qur’an 16:44)

The Blessed Prophet (saw) would explain what has been revealed to them. What has been revealed to them is the Qur’an. If the Blessed Prophet (saw) did not understand it, no one ever would. Thus, we would be given a Qur’an in which much of it is concealed from us.

Also, this verse shows that the Blessed Prophet (saw) comprehended what was revealed to him:

“Exalted is Allah, The True King! Do not rush to recite the Quran before it is (yuq’da) conveyed as revelation (waḥyuhu) , and pray, “My Lord! Increase me in knowledge.”

Is it possible that the Qur’an can be concealed from us?

The answer to that is yes. The Qur’an itself mentions that, due to the sinful and/or arrogant nature of some human hearts, they will never be able to penetrate the Qur’an.

“And We place a covering on their hearts so that they do not comprehend it, and We cause a heaviness in their ears; and when you mention your Lord, the Only True Lord, in the Qur’an, they turn their backs in aversion” (Qur’an 17:46)

“And who is more unjust than one who is reminded of the verses of his Lord but turns away from them and forgets what his hands have put forth? Indeed, We have placed over their hearts coverings, lest they understand it, and in their ears deafness. And if you invite them to guidance – they will never be guided, then – ever.” (Qur’an 18:57)

“Will they then not (yatadabbarūna)meditate on the Qur’an, or are there locks on the hearts?” (Qur’an 47:24)

“This is a Book which We have sent down to you, full of blessings that they may (liyaddabbarū) ponder over its Verses, and that (ulu l-albabi)men of understanding may remember.” (Qur’an 38:29)

It is also our contention that the muh’kam verses could have a mutashabi aspect to them which is brought about through tabbadur (reflection, pondering) and using the methods of sound tafsir that are available to us.

An example:

“None touch (yamassuhu) it except the (l-muṭaharūna) purified.” (Qur’an 56:79)

This verse is generally understood by the fuqaha (people of jurisprudence) as a reference to being clean when touching and handling the mushaf of the Qur’an. This makes sense, as reverence towards the sacred text is the obvious meaning. 

However, we also know that there are people who are not clean who pick up and touch the Qur’an.  Muslims who are not in a state of ablution and people like the demented Christian polemists that ate pages of the Qur’an or the U.S. military that would put the Qur’an into the toilet. (Surely they incurred the curse of Allah, and it remains upon them until they repent). 

muṭaharūna-is also understood to mean angels.

Another way to understand the text of Qur’an 56:79 is to understand that yamassuhu is not like ‘yalmasuhu’.

So, for example, in the Qur’an we have:

“If something good ‘tamasakum’ (comes your way), it grieves them.” (Qur’an 3:120) This does not necessarily mean only to physically touch.

Also, in the preceding verse we have:

“In a well-preserved Record.” (Qur’an 56:78)

  1. In this context, the purified (mataharuna) are indeed the angels and this refers to the Tablet in paradise.
  2. That when it comes to the believers, there is an adaab (mannerism) in how we handle the sacred text.
  3. That only those who are sincere and have purity of intention will be moved by this Qur’an and able, by Allah’s grace, find such meanings via reflection.

Point 3 describes such a state or condition of truth seekers among Christians. 

    “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)

    So when it comes to the reading of the Qur’an 3:7 there are two opinions on the matter.

    One opinion says that the reader of the Qur’an should stop at: “But none knows its interpretation except Allah.” Then (after a brief pause) continue reading: “and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say.”

    The second opinion is that one does not pause, but one should continue reading: “But none knows its interpretation except Allah and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge. They say,”

    So how did this difference come about?

    1. Punctuation marks or (Rumuz al-Awqaf) were added by the scholars after the death of the Blessed Prophet (saw).
    2. Diacritical marks (Tashkeel) to distinguish words or grammatical structures were added by scholars after the death of the Blessed Prophet (saw).

    Rumuz al-Awqaf (Punctuation Marks)

    The following is from http://www.as-sidq.org/durusulQuran/articles/mariful.html#Rumuz

    May Allah (swt) bless them for their work.

    From the above source we find:

    ﻡ  “This letter mim is an abbreviation of al-waqf al-lazim. It means if a stop is not made here, an outrageous distortion in the meaning of the verse is possible. So, it is better to stop here. Some phoneticians of the Qur’an have also called this al-waqf al-wajib or the obligatory stop. But this is not ‘wajib’ of fiqh, which brings sin if abandoned. In fact, the purpose is to stress that making a stop here is the most preferable of all stops (al-Nashr, 1/231).”

    We find this al-waqf al-lazim in Qur’an 3:7 after “except Allah.” This was done with the intention of making the recitation of the Qur’an easier. These additional punctuations, though welcomed for ease of recitation, were neither given by Allah (swt) nor his Blessed Messenger (saw).

    This is also something that follow the ‘Qur’an Only religion’ fail to grasp. That is the very textual history and transmission of the Qur’an.

    “A. L. R. (This is) a Book, with verses that give judgement (uḥ’kimat) and these are expounded upon (fuṣṣilat) – from One Who is Wise and Well-acquainted (with all things).” (Qur’an 11:1)

    An objection based upon improper understanding of the Arabic grammar and syntax.

    Beyond the importance of punctuation.

    The importance of understanding Arabic grammar and syntax and language!

    One objection that is raised is usually by those who do not have a sound grasp of Arabic grammar, or syntax. That objection is as follows:

    “But none knows its interpretation except Allah and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge. They say, “We believe in this it is all from our Lord.”

    So the objection is based upon their misunderstanding that Allah (swt) would not say: “We believe in this it is all from our Lord.”

    But this is not the proper understanding at all. The verse: “We believe in this it is all from our Lord.” Is a reference to : “Those who are firmly rooted in knowledge.” and not to Allah (swt).

    This was a conversation with a brother from the Zaydi school, and we pointed out to him a similar example to this in (Qur’an 18:80) but he has never replied to that point.

    What point is that?

    Let us give context to the verse:

    “As for the ship, it belonged to some poor people, working at sea. So I intended to damage it, for there was a king ahead of them who seizes every ship by force. “And as for the boy, his parents were believers, and we feared that he would pressure them into defiance and disbelief. So we hoped that their Lord would give them another, more virtuous and caring in his place. And as for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys in the city, and there was beneath it a treasure for them, and their father had been righteous. So your Lord intended that they reach maturity and extract their treasure, as a mercy from your Lord. And I did it not of my own accord. That is the interpretation of that about which you could not have patience.”(Qur’an 18:79-82)

    There are three points here:

    1. Causing damage to the boat fa-aradttu (I intended)
    2. The killing of the child and the subsequent replacement of fakhashina (we disliked) fa-aradna (we intended). A. Killing the child (he returns to himself)B. Allah replaces the child with another one. Killing is from Khidr and the Replacing is from Allah.
    3. Causing the boys to reach maturity. Fa-arada rabbuka (Your Lord intended)

    fa-aradttu 1st person singular

    fakhashina 1st person plural perfect verb

    fa-aradna 1st person plural

    fa-arada 3rd person masculine singular

    Not really having the depth of Arabic grammar or syntax, one can make these types of mistakes or rely upon this type of misunderstanding. May Allah help us. 

    A faulty argument used by our side against the other.

    There has been a faulty argument that has been used by those of us who believe Qur’an 3:7 should be understood as: Allah and people grounded in knowledge know the meaning of the mutashabiha.

    It is used to assail those who believe Qur’an 3:7 should be understood as: only Allah knows the meaning of the mutashabiha.

    That argument goes like this.

    To say that we believe in it, but we do not know what it means would be like saying
    we do not know what we believe.

    This is not a fair argument against the other side. The reason being is that first, and foremost, there is no group among the Muslims that feel that they are unncertain about what they believe. We may dispute this. However, every group of Muslims are confident and certain about what the core tenets of their belief are.

    Secondly, Allah (swt) could have such verses to leave us gobsmacked. Also, to humble us.

    “But above those ranking in knowledge is the One All-Knowing.” (Qur’an 12:76)

    Prima Qur’an concluding remarks.

    1. It is not the position of the Ibadis school that only Allah knows the meaning of the Qur’an. You are not going to find this in any of the books by the Ibadi.
    2. The difference in understanding of Qur’an 3:7 has to do with the Rumuz al-Awqaf (punctuation marks).
    3. The dispute is not over the muh’kam but rather over who understands the mutashabi.
    4. As the Blessed Prophet (saw) understood the whole of the Qur’an, it is not possible to render the reading as only Allah knows.
    5. The people firmly rooted in knowledge are those who base their understanding upon the muh’kam.
    6. The people whose hearts are given to perversity and deviation go straight to mutashabi.
    7. The irony is that the understanding of this verse must fall under the category of muh’kam or else it would be mutashabi and thus all who give an understanding of it would be among the perverse. The self-refuting nature of this is evident.
    8. With reflection and understanding that which is mutashabi can become muh’kam.

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

    May Allah (swt) guide the Ummah.

    May Allah (swt) forgive the Ummah.

    Leave a comment

    Filed under Uncategorized

    Tagged as , , , , , , ,

    October 18, 2025 · 4:08 am

    Engaging with the Pseudo-Islamic:

    “We sent them with clear proofs and the Zabur. And we revealed to you the message that you may make clear to mankind what was sent down to them and that they might give thought.” (Qur’an 16:44)

    ﷽ 

    This section will be on engaging the Pseudo-Islamic.

    Pseudo meaning: pretentious, bogus, sham, phoney, imitation, mock, artificial.

    In particular this section of the blog will have all articles related to two Pseudo-Islamic movements.

    The first being the Hafs Qur’an Only Religion.

    THE HAFS QUR’AN ONLY RELIGION

    It is important to understand that we believe that the adherents of the Hafs Qur’an only movement are a distinct religion in much as we respect the way the Baha’i movement is a distinct religion from Islam.

    Insh’Allah this section will deal with common arguments among the federation of sects that are known collectively as the ‘Qur’anist’.

    This section will be refuting their many bold assertions; as well as showing why this particular attempt to re-interpret Islam and make it altogether different religion is deeply flawed.

    Now why are they called the Hafs Qur’an only view? These people will either out of ignorance about the transmission and textual history of the Qur’an refer to their platform as ‘Qur’an Only’ or Quraniyoon. However, the Hafs Qur’an did not fall out of the sky. Thus, is important for them to reflect on why so much foundational trust is put into the men that transmitted the Hafs Qur’an to the exclusion of all other transmissions of the Qur’an.

    At the core of this religion of theirs is a massive epistemological problem.

    In regard to approving comments from followers of the Hafs Qur’an Only Religion we have taken seriously the verse of the Qur’an: “And cooperate in righteousness and piety, but do not cooperate in sin and aggression. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.” (Qur’an 5:2)

    Thus, they would do well to read the article listed below: Is the Qur’an a detailed explanation of all things? to understand the policy on this website that keeps them as well as us from sinning and keeps them consistent with in their worldview. Insh’Allah.

    THE QADIANI MOVEMENT Also known as AHMADIYYA MOVEMENT is a divided movement, split into two competing jama’at or congregations. That is the LAHORI whom we refer to as The Ahmadiyya A and the QADIANI whom we refer to as the Ahmadiyya B.

    As the Qadiani or Ahmadiyyah B believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is a Prophet after The Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw), they have been marked as being outside the millat of Islam. Likewise, they (the Ahmadiyyah B) or Qadiani have made anyone outside of their jama’at to be kafirs. Though, their is some tongue in cheek wordplay see their website. Source: (https://www.alislam.org/articles/are-non-ahmadis-muslim-or-non-muslim-ahmadiyya-muslim-perspective/)

    To the dismay of the Muslim Ummah, The Qadiani have a Khalifa, named MIrza Masroor Ahmed, he lives in Tilford, United Kingdom, where he pays taxes to the United Kingdom. Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali were not known to have paid taxes to a Non Muslim government.

    For future reference all articles addressed to either of the above movements will be found under: AHL AL-QIBLA / AHL AL-KHILAF under: Engaging with the Pseudo-Islamic:

    Why we don’t follow the Qur’an Only Religion.

    Why we don’t follow the “Qur’an Only” religion.

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

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

    Is the Qur’an a detailed explanation of all things? (Prima Qur’an policy on comments from this group)

    Is the Qur’an a detailed explanation of everything?

    Which Qur’an do the followers of the Qur’an Only Religion believe in?

    Which Qur’an does the Qur’an only religion believe in?

    How the followers of the Qur’an Only Religion become Mushriks.

    How the Quraniyoon become Mushriks

    Does the Qur’an Only Religion claim that Al Fatiha is not part of the Qur’an?

    Does the Qur’an Only religion claim that Al Fatiha is not part of the Qur’an?

    How we know the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw) is divine guidance.

    How we know the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw) is divine guidance.

    Qur’an Only Sect Kala Kato Burns Four Children Alive and Continues a Campaign of Terror.

    Qur’an Only sect Kala Kato burns four children alive and continues a campaign of terror.

    Who can understand the mutashabih verses? Analysis of Qur’an 3:7

    Who can understand the mutashabih verses? Analysis of Quran 3:7

    Questions for the Qur’an Only Religion that can’t be swept under a rug.

    Questions for the Qur’an Only religion That Can’t Be Swept Under A Rug.

    Self Proclaimed Prophet: Rashad Khalafa Father of the number 19 theory.

    The self proclaimed Quranist prophet: Rashad Khalifa

    Over it are 19: Critique of the number 19 pattern used by Quraniyoon.

    Over it are 19?

    Refutation that oral traditions came 300 years after the Prophet.

    Even though they used to say that the hadith -oral traditions came some 300 years after the Blessed Messenger (saw).  Praise be to Allah the more educated among them have backed away from that claim. However, this article is here because many in that movement may be unaware.

    See Harold Motzki (a Non-Muslim orientalist and academic) who made short work of that Quranist claim

    Orientalist Dr. Harold Motzki takes ‘Qur’an-Only’ Religion to task

    Prohibition against writing hadith? Refuting the claims of the Quraniyoon.

    The Prohibition against writing hadith?

    Does the Qur’an itself tell us to reject all hadith?

    This article is a nail in the coffin for the entire movement. Some from their movement have commented but ended up leaving in frustration. It looks at their arguments and misquotations of the Qur’an. Also given in this article is an irrefutable example of Allah confirming a hadith to the Blessed Messenger [saw].

    Does the Quran itself instruct us to reject all hadith?

    Qur’an only religion and their confusion in regard to Qur’an 4:157

    The Qur’an Only Religion and their confusion on Qur’an 4:157.

    The appropriate age for a female to marry and bear children according to the Qur’an alone.

    Contrary to what the Quraniyoon may tell you, a woman can get married as young as 12 years old according to the Qur’an.

    https://primaquran.com/2022/10/05/the-appropriate-age-for-a-female-to-marry-and-bear-children/

    The Age of Aisha (ra) and the Highly Detailed Qur’an?

    https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/the-age-of-aisha-and-the-highly-detailed-quran/embed/#?secret=UmvkmjuH0v#?secret=oTvtda14Ml

    The Qur’an Only and Uzair

    The Qur’an Only movement and Uzair

    Did the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) write the Qur’an?

    Our colleague had written a refutation like this many years ago on the ‘Qur’an only‘ web site known as http://www.ourbeacon.com/ or it used to be known as ‘Galaxy Dastak‘. Dr. Shabbir Ahmed founder of the forum had me banned. This was also the last our colleague heard from their former teacher Hamza AbdulMalik. Hamza AbdulMalik used to be the director of IPCI international until he dropped off the radar and re-emerged as a Quranist.

    Well, our colleague may have been removed from the forum but here is the refutation of their arguments for all to see here:

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

    Is Showing Love and Reference for the Noble Prophet Idol Worship? Refutation of the Qur’an Only Religion.

    Is showing love and reverence to the Blessed Prophet considered worship?

    A pre-eminent argument used by ‘Quranist’ ripped to shreds By Dr. Jeffery Lang.

    The most oft-quoted verse used by Quranist is analyzed and ripped apart by a Muslim convert, academic, and professor of math, Dr. Jeffery Lang.

    This is a centerpiece argument used by Edip Yuksel, Sam Gerrans, “Joseph Islam”, Rashad Khilafa, Shabir Ahmed and the lot of them. The reason why this argument is especially devastating coming from someone like Dr. Jeffry Lang is that Dr. Lang is critical of the hadith corpus as we have it today.

    Dr. Jeffery Lang: An Argument Advanced by Quraniyoon Refuted

    Handling the words of the Blessed Prophet. The difference between Ad litteram and Ad sensum transmission.

    The Blessed Sandals. Handling the words attributed to the Prophet Muhammed (saw).

     Use and abuse of the word hikma by Quranist.

    The following is a look how Quranist have both misunderstood the word hikma as a reference to the Qur’an and how they do not understand that it is something that Allah gives his messengers to deal with situations and context not immediately addressed by the revelations they were given.

    Use & Abuse of the word Hikma by the Quran Only religion.

    Hating a hadith just for the sake of hating a hadith.

    This article a hypothetical question is posed. What if a particular ahad hadith turned out to be correct? Especially one that is of a scientific nature? What would the Quranist do in such a scenario?

    You can read about that here:

    https://primaquran.com/2017/01/14/hating-a-hadith-just-for-the-sake-of-hating-a-hadith/embed/#?secret=J77YHpdtAE#?secret=p95SLnQHAH

    Is the Qur’an clear?

    An introduction to this topic. A brief discussion about the Mutazlite Shafi’i theologian Shaykh Abd Al Jabbar.

    Is the Qur’an clear?

    Hafs Qur’an Only religion is intellectually bankrupt.

    The Qur’an Only Religion is intellectually bankrupt

    Salaat in the Qur’an is not ritual prayer? Examining the claim of some Quranist.

    This article looks at one Quranist claim that salat is not ritual prayer. This is what happens when you abandon the understanding of the Blessed Messenger and follow the ‘every man for himself’ approach of the Quranist.

    Salaat in the Qur’an is NOT Ritual Prayer? Examining the claim of some so called Quranist.

    The Qur’an only religion and their confusion in regards to Allah’s judgement.

    The Hafs Qur’an Only Religion and their confusion in regards to Allah’s judgement.

    Nothing left out of this book: The manipulation of the Qur’an Only Religion.

    Nothing left out of this book? The Manipulation of the Qur’an by the Quraniyoon.

    Sam Gerrans Hafs Qur’an Only Advocate: The Qur’an Teaches That The Earth Is Flat.

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

    The Detailed Qur’an and the Sabeans

    The Detailed Qur’an and the Sabeans

    SECTION ON AHMADIYYA B OR THE QADIANI MOVEMENT.

    Ahmadiyya B is not be confused with Ahmadiyya A (The Lahori Jama’at)

    ANWAR SADAT (MUSLIM CANDADIAN PREACHER) FITTING ANSWER TO A QADIANI (AHMADI B) QUESTION.

    https://primaquran.com/2024/01/27/anwar-sadats-answer-to-a-qadiani-ahmadi-question/embed/#?secret=zyVFLY5eNv#?secret=r1M3SchX8N

    CONVERSATION WITH A MEMBER OF THE QADIANI SECT (AHMADI B)

    https://primaquran.com/2016/12/09/conversations-with-a-member-of-the-ahmadi-sect/embed/#?secret=1uOCadqRpx#?secret=EdbGYVLkrx

    REFUTATION OF MIRZA GHULAM AHMAD & THE GREATEST COVER UP IN CHURCH HISTORY?

    https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/refutation-of-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-the-greatest-cover-up-in-church-history/embed/#?secret=CZIvpHAEfk#?secret=PF5U3i75Ym

    More articles coming insh’Allah…

    May Allah Guide the Ummah.

    May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

    2 Comments

    Filed under Uncategorized

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

    October 13, 2025 · 8:58 am

    Is the Qur’an a detailed explanation of everything?

    “Then is it other than Allah I should seek as judge while it is He who has revealed to you the Book explained in detail (mufassalan)?” And those to whom We [previously] gave the Scripture know that it is sent down from your Lord in truth, so never be among the doubters.” (Qur’an 6:114)

    ﷽ 

    “Then is it other than Allah I should seek as judge while it is He who has revealed to you the Book explained in detail (mufassalan)?” And those to whom We [previously] gave the Scripture know that it is sent down from your Lord in truth, so never be among the doubters.” (Qur’an 6:114)

    It was actually these verses that made me realize that we need to stop approving comments from those of the Hafs Qur’an Only Religion.

    Why? Because every comment from an adherent of that faith would try to explain to us what certain verses mean. They would try to expound upon certain verses. Knowing that they are already outside of Islam, we did not want to assist them in their sins.

    The only comments we would approve from them are simply quotes from the Qur’an In Arabic. Nothing else is needed. If we meet one in person, they can simply recite the Qur’an (if they are able). There is no need to expound, explain, propose, elucidate, expand on, elaborate on, spell out, describe etc.

    Because to do that would mean that they (the sects of the Hafs Qur’an Only Religion) are asserting that the Qur’an is not fully detailed. That it needs an outside expositor.

    This verse of the Qur’an we take very seriously

    “And cooperate in righteousness and piety, but do not cooperate in sin and aggression. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.” (Qur’an 5:2)

    So this is why we do not approve comments from adherents of that anymore.  Unless, of course, it is simply the Arabic text of the Qur’an. We do not want to assist them in sin, since by expounding, explaining, proposing, elucidating, expanding on, elaborating on, spelling out, describing they are ascribing to Allah (swt) a lie!

    We are simply helping them to be consistent in their world view. So next time, dear brothers and sisters, if any of them start to take on the role of the Creator (according to their own view) and start to expound, explain, propose, elucidate, expand on, elaborate on, spell out, describe, tell them to cease and desist and give you the Qur’an only!

    These disbelievers claim that Muhammed (saw) is simply a mail carrier, whereas they delegate to themselves a higher role. They do not simply deliver the mail, but rather they expound, explain, propose, elucidate, expand on, elaborate on, spell out, describe the mail.

    In fact, most we met commit blatant shirk because they have relied upon the following: Shabir Ahmed, The Monotheist Group, Rashad Khilafa attempting to translate the meaning of the Arabic into other languages!

    In fact, Allah (swt) asserts with power the following:

    Allah (swt) says: “We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur’an so you people may understand.” (Qur’an 12:2)

    If the All Wise Creator wanted you to use another language to convey the message of Islam, he would have done so. Just as he has done in the past with Aramaic and Hebrew! Where did Allah (swt) give a license to these people to put the guardianship of their soul into the hands of these men?

    “So We have revealed an Arabic Quran to you, in order that you may warn the capital city and all who live nearby.” (Qur’an 42:7)

    “If We had made it a foreign Quran, they would have said, ‘If only its verses were clear! What? Foreign speech to an Arab?’ Say, ‘It is guidance and healing for those who have faith, but the ears of the disbelievers are heavy, they are blind to it, it is as if they are being called from a distant place.” (Qur’an 41:44)

    But the blind followers of the Hafs Qur’an Only Religion have committed shirk by entrusting their guidance to translations done by men rather than to entrust their guidance to Allah (swt). This, of course, is using their own vapid and shallow misunderstanding of the Qur’an.

    This is to judge them based upon the criteria that they have set for themselves, which as we have seen, has lead to:

    1. Hypocrisy by their attempting to explain and elucidate what Allah (swt) says is clear.
    2. Shirk in entrusting their understanding of Allah’s message to men who translate it.

    Now that we have seen how the so-called ” Hafs Qur’an Only Religion” misunderstands the verses, we will now give you the correct understanding of the verses.

    “In their stories there is truly a lesson for people of reason. This message cannot be a fabrication, rather ˹it is˺ a confirmation of previous revelation, a detailed explanation of all things (wataafsila kulli shayin), a guide, and a mercy for people of faith.” (Qur’an 12:111)

    So Allah (swt) has equipped the human being with mantiq (logic), deductive reasoning and abstract thinking, among other cognitive tools. When we look at the Qur’an we do not find the answers to quantum mechanics, how to change a flat tire, or even how to get to Jonathan’s house. Humanity relies upon Google Maps, Mechanics, and Quantum Physicists.

    When we realize that there is a great deal of information that is not contained in the Qur’an, it becomes apparent that: ‘explanation of all things’ is hyperbolic.

    This also becomes readily apparent to all when we look at the following verses as well:

    “Then We gave Moses the Scripture, making complete [Our favor] upon the one who did good and as a detailed explanation of all things (watafsilan likulli shayin) and as guidance and mercy that perhaps in [the matter of] the meeting with their Lord they would believe.” (Qur’an 6:154)

    So, as can be seen from the above verse (Qur’an 6:154) it is similar to (Qur’an 12:111). If what was revealed to Musa (as) is to be taken as a “detailed explanation of all things”, we run into a major, major contradiction and error in understanding.

    That is because the Qur’an came after the Torah and there are things revealed in the Qur’an that are not given to Musa (as). Like, for example, the fact that the Qur’an is in Arabic. That the Qur’an speaks of the Torah being corrupted — which would be self-defeating if the Torah contained information that stated that it had been corrupted while also claiming that it is a “detailed explanation of all things.”

    This is what happens when you have such a vacuous and shallow understanding of the faith.

    May Allah (swt) guide the sincere among them!

    May Allah Guide the Ummah.

    May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

    Leave a comment

    Filed under Uncategorized

    Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

    September 17, 2025 · 3:30 am

    Purification of the Ahl Bayt

    “Also, abide in your houses and do not display yourselves as was the display of the former times of ignorance. And establish prayer and give zakah and obey Allah and His Messenger. Allah intends only to remove from you the impurity of sin, O people of the Prophet’s household, and to purify you with extensive purification.” (Qur’an 33:33)

    ﷽ 

    If one is already pure, there is no need to purify. If one claims there are degrees and grades of purification, then this does not indicate absolute perfection.

    The totally pure cannot become purer and the totally perfect can’t be purified.

    The very verse that the ’12er Shi’i’ rely upon to establish their position gives them trouble from the outset.

    “Also, abide in your houses and do not display yourselves as was the display of the former times of ignorance. And establish prayer and give zakah and obey Allah and His Messenger. Allah intends only to remove from you the impurity of sin, O people of the Prophet’s household, and to purify you with extensive purification.” (Qur’an 33:33)

    This verse is clearly talking about the women of the Prophet (saw) his wives.

    Two points within the verse preclude this being a reference to men.

    Point 1)

    It would be odd to think of any male of the Prophet (saw) household “displaying themselves” in a feminine manner. Unless now people are going to tell us that the males of the ‘Ahl Bayt’ were displaying themselves in a feminine manner in previous times.

    Tabarrajna — display yourselves.

    Understand this in light of the following verse:

    “Also, women of post-menstrual age who have no desire for marriage — there is no blame upon them for putting aside their outer garments but not displaying adornment. But to modestly refrain from that is better for them. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.” (Qur’an 24:60)

    Mutabarrijātin—displaying your adornment

    Point 2)

    Also, do the men of the ‘Ahl Bayt’ abide in their houses? No! Obviously, they don’t.

    Also, note that the text is an admonition to the people of the ‘Ahl Bayt’ who were doing something that deserves admonishment.

    So let us look at the text in context.

    “O wives of the Prophet, whoever of you should commit a clear immorality – for her, the punishment would be doubled two fold, and ever is that, for Allah, easy. And whoever of you devoutly obeys Allah and His Messenger and does righteousness – We will give her reward twice; and We have prepared for her a noble provision. O wives of the Prophet, you are not like anyone among women. If you fear Allah, then do not be soft in speech [to men], lest he in whose heart is disease should covet, but speak with appropriate speech. And abide in your houses and do not display yourselves as [was] the display of the former times of ignorance. And establish prayer and give zakah and obey Allah and His Messenger. Allah intends only to remove from you the impurity of sin, O people of the Prophet’s household, and to purify you with extensive purification. And remember what is recited in your houses of the verses of Allah and wisdom. Indeed, Allah is ever Subtle and Acquainted with all things.” (Qur’an 33:30-34)

    Wives, women, her. The wives of the Prophet (saw) are all pure and purified. These verses, in their context, have absolutely nothing to do with any male relations of the Prophet (saw).

    Keep the following in mind.

    The controversy surrounding the Blessed Prophet (saw) parents.

    The fact that Abu Muttalib did not die as a believer is well known.

    The fact that the Blessed Messenger (saw) is reported to have had three sons, Qasim, Abdullah and Ibrahim (May Allah’s mercy cover them all). None of them lived beyond the age of 2.

    The following verse makes it abundantly clear that Allah (swt) will purify whomever He (swt) wills.

    “So if not for the favor of Allah upon you and His mercy, not one of you would have been pure, ever, but Allah purifies whom He wills, and Allah is Hearing and Knowing.” (Qur’an 24:21)

    O people of the Prophet’s household, and to purify you with extensive purification.

    How does Allah (swt) intend to purify the household?

    1. Then do not be soft in speech [to men], lest he whose heart is disease should covet, but speak with appropriate speech.
    2. And abide in your houses.
    3. Do not display yourselves as [was] the display of the former times of ignorance.
    4. And establish prayer and give zakah.

    However, the Imams of the ’12er Shi’i’ have come along and made a huge exegetical stretch out of these verses.

    So they come along and isolate the following text from context:

    “Allah intends only to remove from you (ʿankumu) the impurity of sin, O people of the Prophet’s household, and to purify you with extensive purification.”

    So they will focus on (ʿankumu) as it is in the masculine form. In Arabic grammar, this is quite natural. The presence of many women but only one man, the pronoun switches to the masculine. So, the presence of the Blessed Prophet (saw) renders this masculine. Members of the household =the women. Whose household? The household of Muhammed (saw)—whom is masculine.

    From this lens, the grammatical argument isn’t a “clue” left by Allah; it’s a “hook” found by later interpreters to hang a doctrine onto a verse that originally had a different, clearer meaning.

    Another example is here:

    “They said, “Are you amazed at the decree of Allah ? May the mercy of Allah and His blessings be upon you (ʿalaykum), people of the house. Indeed, He is Praiseworthy and Honorable.” (Qur’an 11:73)

    Sarah (as) is being addressed in the feminine singular. However, when they address her as a member of the household of Ibrahim (as), the pronoun becomes masculine plural.

    The purification of the wives is on account of the Blessed Prophet (saw). So that his consorts may resemble him in purification and perfection.

    The term l-rij’sa (the impurity) is originally dirt that soiled bodies. It is borrowed here for sins and religious defects. As they render a person’s reputation in this world and the hereafter despised and disliked, like a body stained with dirt.

    Does being a descendant of a Prophet guarantee you to be sinless and free from error?

    Keep in mind the following:

    “Moreover, it sailed with them through waves like mountains, and NOAH CALLED TO HIS SON, who was apart [from them], “O MY SON, come aboard with us and be not with the disbelievers. [But] he said, “I will take refuge on a mountain to protect me from the water.” [Noah] said, “There is no protector today from the decree of Allah, except for whom is given mercy.” And the waves came between them, and he was among the drowned.”(Qur’an 11:42-43)

    Then Allah (swt) informed Noah…

    “So Noah called to his Lord and said, “My Lord, indeed MY SON IS OF MY FAMILY and indeed, your promise is true; and You are the most just of judges! He said, “O NOAH, INDEED HE IS NOT OF YOUR FAMILY; indeed, he is [one whose] work was other than righteous, so ask Me not for that about which you have no knowledge. Indeed, I advise you, lest you be among the ignorant. [Noah] said, “My Lord, I seek refuge in You from asking that of which I have no knowledge. And unless You forgive me and have mercy upon me, I will be among the losers.” (Qur’an 11:45-47)

    “Moreover, remember that Abraham was tried by his Lord with certain commands, which he fulfilled: He said: “I will make you an Imam to the Nations.” He pleaded: “And also (Imams) from my offspring!” He answered: “But My Promise is not within the reach of evildoers.” (Qur’an 2:124)

    If you notice Allah (swt) didn’t write a blank check for the descendants of Abraham. If you were made virtuous by being a descendant of a prophet, then Allah(swt) would have simply granted Abraham’s du’a; however, he did not. He made a caveat, “My promise is not within reach of the evildoers.”

    Is this not interesting? Make Imams of me and my offspring!

    In other words, I will grant your du’a to those who hold on to my commands and strive their utmost to be righteous servants.

    Cain killed his brother Abel. Both were descendants of the Prophet Adam (upon whom be peace). Yet, one was righteous and the other became the ‘first’ murderer. Such that Allah (swt) made an example of this particular incident throughout time.

    “So his soul permitted to him the murder of his brother, so he killed him and became among the losers.” (Qur’an 5:30)

    In reality, if you want to be technical, from the perspective that we all came from Adam, or are ‘Bani Adam’—the children of Adam, we are in reality all descendants of the Prophets.

    Is this not interesting? He murdered his own brother. Both had the blood of a Prophet in their veins.

    We love, and we honour the noble Prophet Muhammed (saw) and his family. However, we have no evidence from the Qur’an to substantiate the position that they were infallible or beyond reproach. No one can establish this from the Qur’an. 

    “Look how We make the signs clear; then look at how deluded they are.” (Qur’an 5:75)

    May Allah Guide the Ummah.

    May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

    Leave a comment

    Filed under Uncategorized

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

    September 10, 2025 · 6:30 am

    A Jewish Argument against the Qur’an.

    “Also, mention when the angels said, “O Mary, indeed Allah gives you good news of a word from Him, whose name will be the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary – distinguished in this world and the Hereafter and among those brought near to Allah. He will speak to the people in the cradle and in maturity and will be of the righteous. “She said, “My Lord, how will I have a child when no man has touched me?” The angel said, “Such is Allah; He creates what He wills. When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, ‘Be,’ and it is. (Qur’an 3:45-47)

    ﷽ 

    “Also, mention, in the book the story of Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place toward the east and she took, in seclusion from them, a screen. Then We sent to her Our Angel, and he represented himself to her as a well-proportioned man. She said, “Indeed, I seek refuge in the Most Merciful from you, so leave me, if you should be fearing of Allah. He said, “I am only the messenger of your Lord to give you news of a pure boy. “She said, “How can I have a boy while no man has touched me and I have not been unchaste? “He said, “Thus it will be; your Lord says, ‘it is easy for Me, and We will make him a sign to the people and a mercy from Us. And it is a matter already decreed.” (Qur’an 19:16-21)

    As Shaykh Ahmed Deedat (r) has mentioned in his Pamphlet “Is the Bible God’s Word?” page 11:

    We do not have the time and space to go into the tens of thousands of — grave or minor —defects that the authors of the Revised Standard Version (RSV) have attempted to revise. We leave that privilege to the Christian scholars of the Bible. Here I will endeavor to cast just a cursory glance at a “half-a-dozen” or so of those “minor” changes.


    1. “Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a VIRGIN shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” (Isaiah 7:14 – AV)
    The indispensable “VIRGIN” in the above verse has now been replaced in the RSV with the phrase “a young woman,” which is the correct translation of the Hebrew word almah. Almah is the word that has occurred all along in the Hebrew text and NOT bethulah, which means VIRGIN. This correction is only to be found in the English language translation, as the RSV is only published in this tongue. For the African and the Afrikaner, the Arab and the Zulu, in fact, in the 1500 other languages of the world, Christians are made to continue to swallow the misnomer “VIRGIN.”

    The argument goes (from the Jews) and the atheists, for that matter, that if the Gospel writer ‘Matthew’ had been inspired and directed by the Holy Spirit, then he (Matthew) would not have relied upon the Jewish Septuagint for the source of his quote.

    Technically, the word almah more than not was used for a young woman that could be married. Being a young, unmarried woman, it was often understood that she was not married and thus, a virgin.

    However, those who argue against this state that the word ‘bethulah’, which actually does mean virgin, should have been used in place of ‘almah’, which has the possibility of being a virgin.

    The website: Jews for Jesus has the following to say:

    https://jewsforjesus.org/publications/issues/issues-v09-n01/almah-virgin-or-young-maiden/

    Whereas the web site Jews for Judaism as this short entry:

    https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/almah-virgin-and-parthenos

    We as Muslims could agree with our Christian apologist and say look, ‘almah’likely means ‘virgin’ and that is good enough.

    The reason that it is not good enough is that the author of the ‘Gospel According to Matthew’ had made some huge blunders when being reliant upon the Greek Septuagint.

    We will give a clear example: Believe us, there are many!

    “When they drew near Jerusalem and came to Bethphage on the Mount of Olives, Jesus sent two disciples, saying to them, “Go into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find an ass tethered, and a colt with her. Untie them and bring them here to me. And if anyone should say anything to you, reply, ‘The master has need of them.’ Then he will send them at once. “This happened so that what had been spoken through the prophet might be fulfilled: Say to daughter Zion, ‘Behold, your king comes to you, meek and riding on an ass, and on a colt, the foal of a beast of burden.’ “The disciples went and did as Jesus had ordered them. They brought the ass and the colt and laid their cloaks over them, and he sat upon them. The huge crowd spread their cloaks on the road, while others cut branches from the trees and strewed them on the road. The crowds preceding him and those following kept crying out and saying: “Hosanna to the Son of David; blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord; hosanna in the highest.” And when he entered Jerusalem the whole city was shaken and asked, “Who is this? “And the crowds replied, “This is Jesus the prophet, from Nazareth in Galilee.” (Matthew 21:1-11)

    This is disastrous. It is disastrous on several accounts. Whoever wrote the Gospel according to Matthew couldn’t have known the original Hebrew text. Instead, the Greek Septuagint was relied upon resulting in the mistaken belief that the so-called “prophecy” was about Jesus riding upon two donkeys!

    Again, look at what Christian scholars have had to say about the matter.

    4-5] The prophet: this fulfillment citation is actually composed of two distinct Old Testament texts, Isaiah 62:11 (Say to daughter Zion) and Zechariah 9:9. The ass and the colt are the same animal in the prophecy, mentioned twice in different ways, the common Hebrew literary device of poetic parallelism. Matthew takes them as two is one of the reasons why some scholars think that he was a Gentile rather than a Jewish Christian who would presumably not make that mistake (see Introduction).

    7] Upon them: upon the two animals; an awkward picture resulting from Matthew’s misunderstanding of the prophecy.

    The source is from: (http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/matthew/matthew28.htm)

    So why could this be a Jewish contention against the Qur’an?

    The Core of the Critique.

    The criticism, as we’ve laid out, follows this logic:

    The Christian Doctrine is Based on a Mistranslation: The Christian belief in a virgin birth prophecy in Isaiah 7:14 relies on the Greek Septuagint’s translation of the Hebrew word almah (young woman) as parthenos (virgin), rather than the more precise Hebrew word for virgin, bethulah.

    Matthew’s Error Demonstrates Human Authorship: The author of the Gospel of Matthew (who used the Septuagint) further demonstrates his human fallibility by misreading Zechariah 9:9, thinking it describes two animals (an ass and a colt) instead of one animal described with poetic parallelism.

    The Qur’an is Therefore Derivative and Human: Since the Qur’an also affirms the virgin birth, the critic argues that its author simply borrowed this “mistaken” Christian doctrine, which itself is based on a Greek mistranslation of a Hebrew text. This, they claim, proves the Qur’an is a human document from the 7th century, not a divine revelation.

    The assumption that the Jew could make is that because Muslims believe in the virgin birth of Mary (May Allah honour her) that the “author of the Qur’an” simply copied the Christian doctrine — which in turn is based upon the Greek Septuagint and has no knowledge of the Hebrew text. Presumably, this makes the Qur’an all too human and not of divine authorship.

    The Qur’an is Independent and Authoritative, Not Derivative.
    This is the most critical point. The Qur’an does not seek to prove the virgin birth by referencing the Hebrew Bible. It does not say, “And this happened to fulfill what was said by the prophet Isaiah…” as Matthew does.

    Instead, the Qur’an narrates the event as a direct, fact revealed by Allah.

    We as Muslims have a straightforward response to this. That is that whoever wrote the ‘Gospel according to Matthew’ was quote-mining the Jewish sacred text to get legitimacy for Jesus as the Messiah. Whereas, for us as Muslims, the Qur’an stands independent of any justification for the miraculous birth of Christ Jesus.

    Muslims could agree with Christian apologists that almah can imply virginity. However, the Islamic position is stronger: We have no theological need to enter that debate. Our belief is not contingent on the interpretation of a single word in a text that could have been altered. Our belief is based solely on the clear, unambiguous words of the Qur’an:

    “She said, ‘How can I have a boy while no man has touched me and I have not been unchaste?’ He said, ‘Thus [it will be]; your Lord says, ‘It is easy for Me…”” (Qur’an 19:20-21)

    The Qur’an uses the phrase “while no man has touched me” (وَلَمْ يَمْسَسْنِي بَشَرٌ), which is an explicit, clear statement of virginity that avoids the ambiguity of the Hebrew almah altogether

    In other words, Christ Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary. This is our belief as Muslims who believe in the words of the Qur’an.

    This was a real event that took place. Where we part with the Christians is this:

    The Christians in particular whoever wrote the ‘Gospel according to Matthew’ felt a need to justify this event by reference to the Hebrew scriptures albeit reliance upon the Greek Septuagint.

    Conclusion:

    The mistakes of Matthew highlight the human process of trying to fit Jesus into Old Testament prophecies, sometimes through forced interpretations and errors from using a translation.

    The Qur’an, by contrast, displays none of this. It is entirely self-contained and authoritative. It does not make interpretive errors about Zechariah or Isaiah because it does not reference them in the first place. It simply states the truth of the event as revealed by Allah.

    Therefore, the argument that the Qur’an “copied” a mistake actually proves the opposite: its independence from the textual corruptions and human errors that affected the previous scriptures. The Qur’an’s account of the virgin birth is not evidence of its human origin but rather of its divine origin, as it provides a pristine, uncorrupted narrative free from the dilemmas of biblical scholarship.

    As Muslims, our belief in this stands apart from needing any proof text or citation from previous scriptures. With Allah is the success!

    May Allah (swt) guide the sincere among them so that they do not perish in ever lasting hellfire!

    May Allah Guide the Ummah.

    May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

    Leave a comment

    Filed under Uncategorized

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

    September 8, 2025 · 7:00 pm

    The Sunni Misunderstanding of Qur’an 4:159 concerning Jesus second coming.

    “And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them.” (Qur’an 4:159)

    ﷽ 

    The misunderstanding of the verse is used as evidence for them to believe in some ‘Second Coming’ of Jesus (as).

    You may look at all the various ways the verse has been translated into English here:

    https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/4/159/

    In this article we will focus on the justifications and proofs as they are given by the respected Mufti Zameel Ur Rahman. That is because what he states is the majority view on the matter.

    Here is what Mufti Zameel Ur Rahman has laid out:

    https://www.themadinanway.com/single-post/2018/03/13/The-Second-Coming-of-%E2%80%98%C4%AAs%C4%81-A-Fundamental-Islamic-Belief

    MUFTI ZAMEEL UR RAHMANS UNDERSTANDING OF QUR’AN 4:159

    Let us examine what Mufti Zameel Ur Rahman has put forward:

    “These verses then state that the Jews will believe in him before he dies. That is, before ‘Īsā (‘alayhissalām) dies (after he defeats the Dajjāl), the Jews that are remaining on the earth will all believe in him as the Messiah/Masīḥ about whom they were foretold. This is the dominant interpretation of the concluding verse that reads: “There will be none from the people of the scripture [i.e. Jews] but will believe in him before his death.” This has been recorded authentically from Abū Hurayrah (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhu) (see below).”

    “Al-Ṭabarī transmits through two chains from Sufyān al-Thawrī from Abū Ḥaṣīn from Sa‘īd ibn Jubayr from Ibn ‘Abbās that he said “before his death” means “before the death of ‘Īsā ibn Maryam”. (Tafsīr al-Ṭabarī, Maktabah Hajr, 7:664) This is an authentic chain.”

    “He also narrates with an authentic chain to the Tābi‘ī, Abū Mālik Ghazwān al-Ghifārī (ca. 25 – 100 H), that he said of this verse: “That is, upon the descent of ‘Īsā ibn Maryam – none from the people of the scripture will remain but will believe in him.” (ibid. 7:665) He also transmits with an authentic chain to the eminent Tābi‘ī, al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī (21 – 110 H), that he said: “Before the death of ‘Īsā. By Allāh! He is now alive in the presence of Allāh; but when he comes down, they will all believe in him.” (ibid.)”

    “This is also transmitted from the mufassir of the Tābi‘īn, Qatādah ibn Di‘āmah. Al-Ṭabarī also transmits authentically from ‘Abd al-Raḥmān ibn Zayd ibn Aslam (d. 182), a mufassir from the Tab‘ Tābi‘īn, that he said of this verse: “When ‘Īsā ibn Maryam descends and then kills the Dajjāl, no Jew will remain on the earth but will believe in him.” (ibid. 7:666)”

    “Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī explains that this is the most correct explanation. (ibid. 7:672) He explains that thus the meaning of the verse is: “[There is none from the people of the book] but will believe in ‘Īsā before the death of ‘Īsā – and that is about a specific [group] of the people of the book; those intended are the people of one particular time from them, not people of all times, who came after ‘Īsā; and that this will occur after his descent.” (ibid. 7:674)”

    “Similarly, Ibn Kathīr says after mentioning this interpretation: “This opinion is the truth,” (Tafsīr Ibn Kathīr, Maktabah Awlād al-Shaykh, 4:342), and further states: “There is no doubt that what Ibn Jarīr said [giving preference to this interpretation] is what is correct, as that is what was intended from the context of the verses.” (ibid. 4:344) As Ibn Kathīr mentions, it is clear from the context that this is what is meant. The verses are talking about the Jews’ claim to have executed ‘Īsā (‘alayhissalām). Allāh says they did not kill or execute him but Allāh raised him up to Himself. Furthermore, not one of them will remain but will believe in ‘Īsā before his actual death. Hence, these verses clearly demonstrate that ‘Īsā (‘alayhissalām) was not killed, but was taken up alive into the sky, and further indicate that he will return and the Jews who remain (after he kills the Dajjāl) will believe in him.”

    Notice that Mufti says,

    “These verses then state that the Jews will believe in him before he dies. That is, before ‘Īsā (‘alayhissalām) dies (after he defeats the Dajjāl).”

    However, that is not what the verse says, and he knows this! If he was simply reading the traditions into the commentary, that is one thing, but forcing them into the text is altogether dishonest!

    “This is the dominant interpretation.” Well, Mufti, on what basis do you say this is the ‘dominant interpretation’ ? Can you tell us the total amount of tafsir literature you studied on this matter to conclude this? Also, if this is the ‘dominant interpretation’, it is by your own admission not necessarily the only one!

    Truth vs. Popularity: The truth is not a matter of democratic opinion but of sound evidence from the Quran itself.

    Next, Mufti seems to quote from a disparate number of tafsir commentaries (albeit selectively). So let’s keep count, shall we?

    Tafsir #1, Ibn Kathir

    Tafsir #2, Ibn Jarir Al-Tabari

    Tafsir #3, Qatada ibn Di’amah

    Looking at the Tafsir of Qatada Ibn Di’amah.

    Qatada Ibn Dia’ama has two traditions — disconnected from unknown sources about (Qur’an 4:157-158)

    • “And it was related to us that the prophet of God, Jesus son of Mary, said to his disciples: ‘Who of you will have my likeness [shibh/shabah] cast upon him and thereby be killed? One of the disciples said, ‘I, Oh prophet of God!’ ‘Thus that man was killed and God protected [mana’a] His prophet as HE RAISED HIM TO HIMSELF.
    • Concerning his statement: “AND THEY DID NOT KILL HIM AND THEY DID NOT CRUCIFY HIM, BUT IT APPEARED SO TO THEM. Qatada said: ‘The likeness of Jesus was cast upon one of his disciples, and he was killed. Jesus had appeared before them and said: “Whoever of you will have my likeness cast upon him will have paradise.” And one said: “Upon me!”

    Prima Qur’an comments:

    1. Qatada Ibn Dia’ama has two traditions from disconnected unknown sources.
    2. This information is from Israʼiliyyat material.
    3. There is a 700 year gap in the chain of transmission!
    4. Also notice how there is no attempt to identify or name the substitute.

    Looking at the Tafsir of Ibn Jarir Al-Tabari

    Al-Tabari cites eleven traditions all going back to Wahb ibn Munabbih concerning (Qur’an 4:157-158)

    Here is the verdict of Al-Tabari:

    “Or the affair was according to what ‘Abd al-Samad related (that is the second tradition) from Wahb ibn Munabbih, that is, that the people who were with ‘Isa in the house scattered from the house before the Jews came upon him. ‘Isa remained, and his LIKENESS was cast upon one of his companions, who still remained with him in the house. And ‘Isa was RAISED UP, and one who was changed in the LIKENESS of ‘Isa was killed. And his companions through that the one CRUCIFIED was ‘Isa, because of what they saw happens to the one who was made to look like him. And the truth of the matter was hidden from them, because his being RAISED UP and the changing of the one who was killed into his LIKENESS happened after the SCATTERING of his friends. and [because] they [had] heard ‘Isa that night announce his death, and mourn because he thought that death was approaching him. And they related what happened as true, but the affair with God was really quite different from what they related. And those disciples who related this do not deserve to be called liars.”

    Source: (Al-Tabari, vol 9, p 374)

    Remember that Al-Tabari is getting his information from Wahb ibn Munabbih, so maybe we spend just a little bit of time on him.

    Remember that Mufti Zameel ur Rahman had the following to say about Mufti Abu Layth on the matter:

    “Recently, an individual has been promoting the misguided belief that the Prophet ‘Īsā (‘alayhissalām) will not return, claiming that this is an idea that has mistakenly been imported into Islām and the teachings of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) from Christianity.”

    Well, let us see if Mufti Zameer ur Rahman would be humble enough to apologize to Mufti Abu Layth concerning Wahb ibn Munabbih:

    “It is not known clearly if he converted to Islam from Judaism or that his father is a convert from Judaism. There are various reports.” “He was known for reporting Isra’ilyyat material. -well known.” “He required a reputation from trustworthy to audacious liar.”

    Source: (Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn Khallikān (d. 1282 CE) and his work Wafayāt al-aʿyān wa-anbāʾ abnāʾ al-zamān (وفيات الأعيان وأنباء أبناء الزمان,) The Obituaries of Eminent Men and the History of the Contemporaries p. 673)

    Ibn Khallikān was a renowned Shafi’i jurist, judge (qāḍī), and historian of the 13th century. He is celebrated for his scholarly rigor and intellectual integrity.

    Ibn Ishaq used his work for the beginnings of Christianity but did not take from him as a source for the Prophet (saw) biography!

    Ibn Khaldun didn’t have a high opinion, mentioning that he frequently told flat lies.

    Source: (“Notices et Extraits des Manuscrits,” xx.part 1, p. 461; De Slane, Ibn Ḥallikan, iii. 673, note 2 | Notices et Extraits des Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque du Roi et autres bibliothèques.

    For the English readers:  (Notices and Extracts from the Manuscripts of the King’s Library and Other Libraries. The Citation (xx.part 1, p. 461): This refers to Volume 20, Part 1, page 461. The article claims that on this page, there is a discussion about Wahb ibn Munabbih that references Ibn Khaldun’s low opinion of him.

    Companions and scholars like Abdullah ibn Mas’ud warned people not to learn Tafsir from the ‘Ahl Kittab’ and his argument was that they may use it to interpolate their own biblical beliefs, teachings and history replacing the Islamic belief and preaching.

    Source: (Dr. Muhammed Husayn al-Dhahabi and his monumental work Al-Tafsīr wa al-Mufassirūn (التفسير والمفسرون, Quranic Exegesis and Its Exegetes Volume 1) 

    Why Dr. Dhahabi’s scholarship is important.

    al-Dhahabi provides a powerful, mainstream Sunni scholarly critique of the very sources that underpin the traditional narrative about Jesus’ death. The reference serves several key argumentative purposes:

    1. Historical Validation of the Problem: Al-Dhahabi meticulously documents how these foreign narratives entered Islamic scholarship. This was primarily through early converts from Judaism and Christianity (like Ka’b al-Aḥbār, Wahb ibn Munabbih, and Abdullah ibn Salam) who, while well-intentioned, began to fill in the gaps in Quranic stories with details from their own traditions. This gives historical credence to the warning from the Companion Abdullah ibn Mas’ud that the article also references.
    2. al-Dhahabi, argues that the classical commentaries on verses like 4:157-159 are contaminated with unreliable material. Al-Dhahabi’s work is essentially a scholarly condemnation of the uncritical acceptance of Isrā’īliyyāt.

    So let us take a look again at what Al-Tabari believed:

    “Or the affair was according to what ‘Abd al-Samad related (that is the second tradition) from Wahb ibn Munabbih, that is, that the people who were with ‘Isa in the house scattered from the house before the Jews came upon him. ‘Isa remained, and his LIKENESS was cast upon one of his companions, who still remained with him in the house. And ‘Isa was RAISED UP,  and one who was changed in the LIKENESS of ‘Isa was killed. And his companions through that the one CRUCIFIED was ‘Isa, because of what they saw happens to the one who was made to look like him. And the truth of the matter was hidden from them, because his being RAISED UP and the changing of the one who was killed into his LIKENESS happened after the SCATTERING of his friends. and [because] they [had] heard ‘Isa that night announce his death, and mourn because he thought that death was approaching him. And they related what happened as true, but the affair with God was really quite different from what they related. And those disciples who related this do not deserve to be called liars.”

    Source: (Al-Tabari, vol 9, p 374)

    Prima Qur’an comments:

    So, basically, in this narrative, Allah (swt) didn’t fool the non-believers, but he actually fooled the believing disciples of Jesus into believing that He (Jesus) was killed—when he wasn’t?!? Also, the 12 disciples couldn’t use logic, deduction and simple basic math and say, (Well, you know Jesus is gone and so is ….such and such disciple) Hey, maybe Jesus didn’t die?! Maybe so-and-so took his place! Notice the obfuscation especially with the quote from Qatada Ibn Dia’ama? We don’t get to know who this legendary disciple is? Who is this masked man? Oh well, you can hear them saying, ‘it doesn’t matter his reward is with his Lord’.

    Looking at the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir

    So what is the view of Ibn Kathir concerning Qur’an 4:157-158?

    “They disobeyed Jesus and tried to harm him in every possible way, until God led His prophet away from them-Jesus and Mary traveled extensively to avoid such persecution. Ultimately, the Jews notified the King of Syria that there was a man in the holy house was was charming and subverting the people. The king wrote to his deputy in Jerusalem to be on guard against this. Moreover, the deputy was instructed to crucify the culprit (Jesus) and place thorns on his head to stop him from harming the flock. The deputy obeyed the order and led a group of Jews to where Jesus was staying with his twelve or thirteen followers. When Jesus was aware that they were after him, he asked for a volunteer to take his place. One stepped forward and was taken by the Jews and crucified, while Jesus was himself raised through the roof of the house. The Jews then announced that they had crucified Jesus and boasted about it. In their ignorance and lack of intellect ,a number of Christians accepted this claim. The fact that the other disciples had seen Jesus raised was ignored. Everyone else though that the Jews had crucified Jesus.”

    Source: (Ibn Kathir, ‘Umdat al-tafsir, ed Ahmad Muhammed Shakir, 5 vols located in: vol 4 pp.28-34)

    Prima Qur’an comments :

    So notice how Ibn Kathir’s commentary is totally different from Al-Tabari on very key points. Again, obfuscation is a common theme. We don’t know if Jesus had 12 or 13 disciples. The brave unsung hero disciple who just jumped at the chance to be killed (we have no idea who he is). However, unlike Al-Tabari, who was ready to accept on face value the claim of Jesus’ disciples — although they were apparently fooled by Allah (swt), Ibn Kathir isn’t ready to pen that on the disciples. Instead, he simply offers that the Christians were ignorant and lacked intellect, so they accepted that Jesus died. The fact that ‘other disciples’ saw what went down was just simply ignored.

    Summary of the Tafsir Sources:

    The three tafsir sources that Mufti Zameer ur Rahman are all ultimately reliant upon anonymous, disconnected chains and sources that are traceable to the very sources (Ahl Kitab) that Ibn Masud warned us about!

    How can Mufti Zameer ur Rahman (and anyone else who holds his position) claim with confidence that they know what (Qur’an 4:157-159) is talking about?  This so-called ‘unified tradition’ holds disparate and conflicting perspectives that are frankly all over the place.

    The testimony of Ibn Masud (ra)

    Al-Barqānī informed me, saying: Abū Bakr al-Ismāʿīlī narrated to us, saying: I heard Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Ḥāfiẓ, and he was asked about tafsīr (Qur’an exegesis): From where should a person begin it? He replied: From the Book of Allah, the Exalted. If that is difficult for him, then he should rely upon the transmitted reports (al-athar). If that is difficult for him, then he should resort to reasoning (al-naẓar). Then he said: It is necessary that above all of this he gives precedence to the Book of Allah. Then he said: I heard Abū al-ʿAbbās Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq al-Thaqafī say: I heard ʿAbdān ibn Aḥmad say: I heard ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Mubārak say: ʿAbd Allāh ibn Masʿūd used to say: ‘Transmit the Qur’an (faithfully), and do not follow the People of the Book, for indeed they relate to you the most false of narrations, and they burden you with their falsehoods.”

    Source: ( Imam Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi Work: Al-Jāmi‘ li-Akhlāq al-Rāwī wa Ādāb al-Sāmi‘ (الجامع لأخلاق الراوي وآداب السامع) – A Compendium of the Ethics of the Narrator and the Etiquette of the Listener.  Volume 1, Page 289 )

    Chapter: The Qurra from among the Companions of the Prophet (saws)

    Narrated Masriq:

    `Abdullah bin `Amr mentioned `Abdullah bin Masud and said, “I shall ever love that man, for I heard the Prophet (saw) saying, ‘Take (learn) the Qur’an from four: `Abdullah bin Masud, Salim, Mu`adh and Ubai bin Ka`b.’ “

    Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4999)

    “Waki’ narrated to us, from Sufyan, from Abu Hasin, from Abu Wa’il, from Abdullah (ibn Mas’ud), who said:

    ‘When the People of the Book narrate to you, do not believe them nor disbelieve them. Rather, say: “We believe in what has been revealed to us and what has been revealed to you.”‘”

    Source: (Al-Musannaf by Ibn Abi Shaybah, Dar al-Taj, Riyadh (1st ed., 1409 AH), Volume 6, Page 101, Hadith Number 29990.)

    The testimony of the Blessed Prophet (saw).

    Narrated Abu Huraira:

    The people of the Book used to read the Torah in Hebrew and then explain it in Arabic to the Muslims. Allah’s Messenger (saw) said (to the Muslims). “Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say, ‘We believe in Allah and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever is revealed to you.’ “

    Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7362)

    Conclusion: In the Ibadi school we will take the firm testimony of the Blessed Prophet (saw). We will take the advice of one of the best people to learn the Qur’an from, Ibn Masud (ra). What we will not do is take the testimony of a person who is narrating Israʼiliyyat with a 700-year gap in the chain of transmission. What we will do is disobey the Blessed Prophet (saw) by taking this material from the people of the book as if they inform us about our religion!

    You find that the Sunni and the Shi’i get themselves into a huge exegetical mess over this.  They somehow imagine that Qur’an4:157 is speaking about something the Romans are claimed to have done to Jesus!  

    We discussed this here:

    Crucifixion or Impaled? Understanding Qur’an 4:157

    Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama (The People of Truth and Straightness) The Ibadi school and Quran 4:159

    How does the Ibadi school understand Qur’an 4:159?

    “And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them.” (Qur’an 4:159)

    The death mentioned here could refer either to the death of Jesus (as) or to the death of each and every Jew. The text lends itself to both meanings.

    1. It is important to note that from the (Qur’an 4:153-to 4:159) the entire theme is directed towards Jews.
    2. None among the Jews that Jesus preached to but that it is a prerequisite for them to believe in him before their death.
    3. Jesus is a witness against those who witnessed his preaching and rejected him.
    4. If the people died believing in Jesus, then he would be a witness for them, not against them.
    5. This is confirmed by: “I said not to them except what You commanded me – to worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord. And I was a witness over them as long as I was among them; but when you caused me to die, You were the Observer over them, and You are, over all things, Witness. (Qur’an 5:117)
    6. Who else would he be a witness against?
    7. What is so special about those particular Jews who are alive when Jesus (as) supposedly returns is that they get to witness and see Jesus (as) whereas the Jews who have lived for the last 2000 years simply died upon batil (falsehood)?

    If we believe in the interpretation that Mufti Zameer ur Rahman gives (and those like him) they need to answer the following questions:

    1. Why would Jesus be a witness against them if they all died believing in him?
    2. Wouldn’t Jesus be a witness against those who did not believe in him?
    3. If you interpret it, none must believe in him, but before their death, surely thousands of Jews and Christians died without believing Jesus was a prophet.
    4. How can this apply to Christians if they already believe in him?
    5. How do you answer that if it meant to believe in him as a prophet before his alleged return, then he wouldn’t need to be a witness against them anyway.
    6. Prove grammatically that Qur’an 4:159 is a break in theme from 4:153 onwards and refers to some future eschatological event.
    7. Prove grammatically and thematically that the verse in question includes Christians.

    Further Proofs:

    “And when Allah will say: O Jesus son of Mary! did you say to men, Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah, he will say: Glory be to You, it did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say); if I had said it, You would indeed have known it; You know what is in my mind, and I do not know what is in your mind, surely you are the great Knower of the unseen things. I did not say anything to them except what you commanded me with: That worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord, and I was a witness over them as long as I was among them, but when you caused me to die (Arabic: Tawafaytani), you were the watcher over them, and you are witness of all things.” (Qur’an 5:116-117)

    There are several things to take from the above passage:


    1) This dialogue takes place on the Day of Judgment, where Prophet Jesus suggests that he has no knowledge of what has happened since his demise on Earth and after his ministry ended. “I was a witness over them as long as I was among them.”

    2) From the discussion, it is clear that Prophet Jesus only came to Earth once, acting as a witness over his people. If indeed there was a ‘second coming‘ before the Day of Judgment, he would have full knowledge of what had happened since his first departure. After all, he abolished the Jizya and forced the Christians to convert to Islam. This conversation with Allah (swt) would make little to no sense.

    3) Imagine if the ahadiths that are put in the mouth of the Blessed Prophet (saw) were true for a moment. So now Jesus (as) comes back and everyone becomes a Muslim. The Dajjal is defeated. Jesus (as) gets married. Then Allah (swt) causes Jesus (as) to die.

    Then we have Jesus (as) saying after he dies to Allah (swt):  “I was a witness over them as long as I was among them, but when you caused me to die, you were the watcher over them, and you are witness of all things.”

    A rather bizarre understanding, it seems.

    Especially if we take the following text into consideration: “And there is none from the People of the Scripture but that he will surely believe in Jesus before his death.” (Qur’an 4:159)

    It is clear to all whom Allah has lifted the veils that Qur’an 5:116-117 is talking about Jesus (as) earthly life and ministry.

    The very presence of Jesus creates a bizarre redundant time paradox if we are to believe the Sunni position.

    Think about it.

    Look at the verse again: Imagine that Allah is saying this to Jesus, who came down from the skies, fought the Dajjal, got married and died.

    “Allah said, O Jesus, I shall cause you to die and will raise you up to Me and shall purify you of the ungrateful disbelieving people, and shall place those who follow you above those who deny the truth, until the Day of Judgement; then to Me shall all return and I will judge between you regarding your disputes.” (Qur’an 3:55)

    If Jesus is alive in the heavens, why is he not aware of this already?

    Why is he not aware that Allah has already cleared him of falsehood by the Qur’an?

    Even if he wasn’t aware after 2000 plus years, then surely he would have access to the Qur’an when he came back to Earth? Would he not be aware of the text that had already cleared him? Can you imagine Jesus (as) attending the tarweeh prayers in Ramadan and hearing Qur’an 5:116-117 being recited? 

    Whereas if we understand the text (Qur’an 3:55) as a revelation from Allah [swt] to his Prophet Jesus (as) it at the time of his death, it comes across as very comforting and reassuring. That Allah [swt] is the cause of your death, and you will return to your lord as the statement: “Indeed, to Allah we belong and to Allah we shall return.” That he [Jesus] will be cleared of false accusations. That his followers will be superior over the detractors on the day of judgment.

    Sunni Muslims begin to take a new approach to Qur’an 4:159

    Jesus bin Maryam will come down to them. Their leader will step backwards so that Jesus can come forward and lead the people in prayer, but Jesus will place his hand between his shoulders and say to him: “Go forward and pray, for the Iqamah was given for you.” Then their leader will lead them in prayer. When he has finished, Jesus (as), will say: “Open the gate.” So they will open it and behind it will be Dajjal with seventy thousand Jews, each of them carrying an adorned sword and wearing a greenish cloak. When Dajjal looks at him, he will start to melt as salt melts in water. He will run away, and Jesus (as), will say: “I have only one blow for you, which you will not be able to escape!” He will catch up with him at the eastern gate of Ludd, and will kill him. Then Allah will defeat the Jews, and there will be nothing left that Allah has created which the Jews will be able to hide behind, except that Allah will cause it to speak – no stone, no tree, no wall, no animal – except for Al-Gharqad (the box-thorn), for it is one of their trees, and will not speak – except that it will say: “O Muslim slave of Allah, here is a Jews, come and kill him!“

    Source: https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah:4077

    In our discussion with respected Dr. Shaykh Shadee El Masry (and a recent clash he had with the Ahmadi religion) We were curious as to the way Dr. Shadee translated Qur’an 4:159

    We never did get an answer to which Arabic word(s) he used to translate the text into ‘Hardly’. Do you, the reader, the truth seeker, see what is happening here? We Love Dr. Shaykh Shadee Elmasry and if you are in his community, Allah-willing, you are in good hands. However, sometimes people will be tenacious in defending the indefensible.

    The Jews and Christians will be at each other’s throat until the day of judgement

    “Every one of the People of the Book will definitely believe in him before his death.” (Qur’an 4:159) If you were to take the standard Sunni misunderstanding this would flatly contradict the following:

    “And the Jews say, “The hand of Allah is chained.” Chained are their hands, and cursed are they for what they say. Rather, both His hands are extended; He spends however He wills. And that which has been revealed to you from your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. And We have cast among them animosity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection. ” (Qur’an 5:64)

    “And from those who say, “We are Christians” We took their covenant; but they forgot a portion of that of which they were reminded. So We caused among them animosity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection. And Allah is going to inform them about what they used to do.” (Qur’an 5:14)

    So the above verses do not give one the impression that Jesus (as) is going to come back and sing kumbaya with the Jews and the Christians. 

    We would not be surprised if some really desperate (clutching at straws) interpretation came that argued. Yes, Jesus (as) will bring the Jews and & Christians together, but they will still have animosity and hatred among them!!  

    Which begs the question: Why is he coming back?

    Those of the Jews and Christians who see the truth and embrace insh’Allah are upon the path of safety. Those of the Jews and Christians who see the truth and reject it will be in hellfire.

    “Indeed, that is My Path—perfectly straight. So follow it and do not follow other ways, for they will lead you away from His Way. This is what He has commanded you, so perhaps you will be conscious ˹of Allah˺” Qur’an 6:153)

    “O mankind! Surely has come to you a convincing proof from your Lord, and We (have) sent down to you a clear light.” (Qur’an 4:174)

    Our final point. We finish where we began.

    “This is the dominant interpretation.” Well, Mufti, on what basis do you say this is the ‘dominant interpretation’ ? Can you tell us the total amount of tafsir literature you studied on this matter to conclude this? Also, if this is the ‘dominant interpretation’, it is by your own admission not necessarily the only one!

    Truth vs. Popularity: The truth is not a matter of democratic opinion but of sound evidence from the Quran itself.

    So dear respected readers which understanding of Qur’an 4:159 do you accept as being more cogent?

    The Sunni position.

    The position of Mufti Zameer ur Rahman, Ahl Sunnah Wal Jammah and the mufassirun — whom rely upon hearsay and disconnected chains coming often from anonymous sources.

    A position that allows for whispering, speculation, doubt and uncertainty?

    A position that ignores the advice of one of the four we are to learn the Qur’an from—none other than Ibn Masud (ra)? 

    A position that structures a belief that goes against the Sunnah? “Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them.”

    The Ibadi position.

    A position that takes the sincere council of one of the four we are to learn the Qur’an from—none other than Ibn Masud (ra)? 

    A position that does not go against the clear Sunnah. A position where we do not disbelieve them but we certainly do not build a belief based upon their reports.

    A position that ask if it is reasonable to accept a 700 year gap in the chain of transmission as admissible evidence.

    A position that is primarily reliant upon  Tafsir al-Quran bi-l-Quran. (Interpreting the Qur’an by the Qur’an).

    A position that allows the Qur’an to be interpreted by the use of other passages in the Qur’an, the use of grammar, context and theme?

    A position that provides certainty and conviction?

    May Allah Guide the Ummah.

    May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

    6 Comments

    Filed under Uncategorized

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

    September 8, 2025 · 6:03 pm

    Jesus will be a sign for the coming of the hour? Abuse of Qur’an 43:61

    “And indeed, it surely is a knowledge of the Hour. So do not be in doubt about it, and follow Me. This is the Path Straight.” (Qur’an 43:61)

    ﷽ 

    This text also has to be one of the most used and abused texts of the whole of the Qur’an. It is used to assert the so-called “2nd coming” of Christ Jesus. The fact that this is the ‘go to’ verse when anyone is trying to assert that the Qur’an affirms the “2nd coming” of Christ Jesus shows you just how weak their argument is.

    Such people are better off using the ahadith to argue their position.

    Let us start off with a major problem and contradiction with this understanding.

    Narrated Abu Hurairah:

    That the Prophet (saw) said: “There are three, for which, when they appear, a soul will not benefit by its faith, if it did not believe before the Signs: Ad-Dajjal, the Beast, and the rising of the sun from its setting place” – or “from the west.”

    Source: https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi:3072

    The majority of Sunni Muslims believe that Jesus (as) is coming a second time. Those who believe  that he is coming after the Dajjal. Remember, according to the above hadith and many like it faith does not benefit a person anymore!

    “Do they wait for anything except that the angels should come to them or your Lord should come or that there come some of the signs of your Lord? The Day that some of the signs of your Lord will come no soul will benefit from its faith as long as it had not believed before or had earned through its faith some good. Say, “Wait. Indeed, we [also] are waiting.” (Qur’an 6:158)

    It is very clear that when these signs happen, the faith and belief of those who came before will be rejected. Part of being a believer is to believe in the unseen.

    “Who believe in the unseen, establish prayer, and donate from what We have provided for them.” (Qur’an 2:3)

    Those signs spoken of in Qur’an 6:158 will be so clear that after their appearance will neither avail the unbeliever to repent of his unbelief nor the disobedient to forsake his disobedience. So what would the point of Jesus (as) coming back and converting people to Islam (either by sword or by choice) when their belief counts for nothing any way?

    Note how the text is being translated from the Qur’an corpus.

    http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=43&verse=61#(43:61:1)

    Also, when you go to the following link: https://quran.com/43/61

    Look how they translate it into English.

    This is how they translate it into English for the unsuspecting reader:

    “And indeed, Jesus will be [a sign for] knowledge of the Hour, so be not in doubt of it, and follow Me. This is a straight path.”

    Yet when you click on the vocalization of the Arabic and how it is rendered, something eye-opening occurs.

    Their own exact translation is “And indeed it“, yet the English they wedge in there “Jesus”.

    So let’s take a look at some other disparate translations.We will use the following as a tool:

    https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/43/61/default.htm

    Muhammed Asad, Abdl Haleem & Mohamed Shafi translations have the “it” as the passage referring to the Qur’an.

    Shabir Ahmed has ‘it’ as a reference to the Qur’an, but unlike Muhammed Asad and Abdul Haleem and Mohamed Shafi, he has the Qur’an talking about an “oncoming Revolution” rather than “the hour”.

    Yusuf Ali’s Saudi version just goes all in!

    “And (Jesus) shall be a Sign (for the coming of).”

    Prima Qur’an comments: So, according to that translation, not only is it Jesus, but he is a Sign as well!

    Safi Kasas has Jesus in brackets but, unlike Yusuf Ali, he puts the [a sign] in brackets as well.

    Abdul Hye goes all in with the second coming. “And he (Jesus) is a KNOWN SIGN.”

    Dr. Munir Munshey gets carried away with: “In fact he, (and his fatherless birth) is a sign”

    Then we have the Mustafa Khattab translation, really overselling it with their translation,

    “And his ˹second˺ coming is truly a sign for the Hour. So have no doubt about it, and follow me. This is the Straight Path.”

    Muhsin Khan & Muhammad al-Hilah (another Saudi translation) have it as: “And he (Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) shall be a known sign.”

    Dr. Mohammed Tahir ul Qadri takes a que from his Salafi opponents and follows their lead with: “And surely (when) he, (Isa[Jesus], descends from heaven), he will be a sign…”

    Ali Unai just goes on a tangent: “Surely he (Jesus) (brought into the world without a father, and granted such miracles as reviving the dead) is a means to knowledge of the Last Hour.”

    Hamid S. Aziz is more neutral, non-committal in translation:

    “And most surely it is (the above events or the Quran or he, Jesus) is a sign of the knowledge of coming of the Hour (of Resurrection and Judgment). Therefore have no doubt about it and follow Me: this is the Straight Way.”

    Muhammad Taqi Usmani has it as: (‘Isa)

    Syed Vickar Ahamed has it as: “And (Isa)

    Farook Malik has it as: He (Jesus)

    Maududi has it as: “Verily he [i.e, Jesus)

    Rashad Khalifa has a bizarre translation: “He is to serve as a marker for knowing the end of the world, so you can no longer harbor any doubt about it.”

    The Monotheist group — taking a que from their former mentor and master, Rashad Khalifa, has it as “He” and this becomes “a lesson for the Hour”

    Are those who think the verse is a reference to Jesus justified?

    Well, if you look at the surrounding context of the verse, the immediate context is about Jesus.

    The verses before:

    “Jesus was not but a servant upon whom We bestowed favor, and We made him an example for the Children of Israel.And if We willed, We could have made [instead] of you angels succeeding [one another] on the earth.” (Qur’an 43:59-60)

    As well as the text after.

    “And when Jesus brought clear proofs, he said, “I have come to you with wisdom and to make clear to you some of that over which you differ, so fear Allah and obey me.” (Qur’an 43:63)

    So this could be a reason why some have considered 43:61 to be about Jesus.

    However, as you will see when we see the over-arching theme of Qur’an 43 as well as whom the immediate audience is, that justification will quickly disappear.

    What about Arabic grammar?

    A closer look at the Arabic text. “wa-innahu”, this is the 3rd person masculine singular object pronoun. We have third-person pronouns in English as well. We have object pronouns—me, you, him, her, it.

    Secondly, the word “biha” is a 3rd person feminine singular personal pronoun. So this further clarifies how “wa-innahu” should be understood.

    “And indeed, it surely is a knowledge of the Hour. So do not be in doubt about it, and follow Me. This is the Path Straight.” (Qur’an 43:61)

    So, to support their claim, they would have to go against Arabic grammar!

    What is the overarching theme of Qur’an 43?

    Do not just look at the verses immediately before or after. Read all the verses before and after.

    Verses 43:2-5 are references concerning the Qur’an.

    43:14 is a reference concerning the resurrection.

    43:21 is a reference to the Qur’an.

    43:31 is a reference to the Qur’an.

    43:35 is a reference to the hereafter.

    43:43-44 are both references to the Qur’an.

    Yes, Allah spoke about Jesus (as) in the past tense. Just as Allah spoke about Moses (as) in the past tense. Allah spoke about Abraham (as) in the past tense.

    Not only this but think about this. Who is the immediate audience of the Qur’an 43:61?

    The immediate audience is the pagan Quresh. How is some “2nd coming” of Jesus supposed to be an argument for the oneness of Allah (swt), or the truth of the resurrection to that immediate audience?

    What is more sensible?

    Understanding A)

    “And indeed, he (Jesus) surely is a knowledge of the Hour. So do not be in doubt about it(second coming of Jesus), and follow Me. This is the Path Straight.” (Qur’an 43:61)

    How are you asking a group of pagan idolater Quresh to not be in doubt concerning it to believe in some second coming of Jesus (as) that they will never witness?

    In what universe does this make sense?

    Understanding B)

    “And indeed, it surely is a knowledge of the Hour. So do not be in doubt about it, and follow Me. This is the Path Straight.” (Qur’an 43:61)

    Or, are a group of pagan idolater Quresh being asked to believe in the Qur’an (it) with arguments about the hereafter and resurrection that they can ponder and believe in during their own lifetime?

    Which of the two understandings of the verse above is more sensible?

    Not only this, we still have to contend with the fact that, as per our other articles, Jesus(as) has died. That Muhammed (saw) is the last and final Prophet. The text of the Qur’an should be in harmony with one another. The supposition that the Qur’an supports the idea that Jesus (as)is not based upon solid evidence.

    May Allah (swt) open the eyes of the people.

    You may also wish to read:

    The Sunni Misunderstanding of Qur’an 4:159 concerning Jesus second coming.
    The definitive proof from the Ibadi school that Jesus is dead and will not return.
    Examination of the word tawaffā in the Qur’an. As it relates to the death of Jesus.
    Is Shaykh Imran Hosein Correct on The Return of Jesus?

    https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/what-happened-to-jesus-and-how-did-he-die/

    May Allah Guide the Ummah.

    May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

    Leave a comment

    Filed under Uncategorized

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