Sam Shamoun Examines Meherally's LIES AND DECEPTION: Silas: Recently I received an email from Meherally in which he states:
"Here is the URL to my recent rebuttal to your article." Fair enough. When someone writes a rebuttal, it is hoped that he has taken the time
to understand what he is rebutting, understands the actual points in the material he
objects to, and sufficiently counters those points. We have the right to examine
Meherally’s work and see if it is credible. Meherally's work is found here
responding to my paper Muhammad and
the Bible. My esteemed colleague, Mr. Sam Shamoun, had already written an analysis of
Meherally's "rebuttal." I have only added a few comments to his work.
Hence the reader may see our work switch back and forth from first person to second,
to third. It should not be difficult for the informed reader.
A LOOK AT MEHERALLY'S CRITIQUE OF SILAS' "MUHAMMAD AND THE BIBLE"
Sam Shamoun Examines
Meherally's LIES AND DECEPTION:
Silas: Recently I received an email from Meherally in which he states: "Here is the URL to my recent rebuttal to your article."
Fair enough. When someone writes a rebuttal, it is hoped that he has taken the time to understand what he is rebutting, understands the actual points in the material he objects to, and sufficiently counters those points. We have the right to examine Meherally’s work and see if it is credible.
Meherally's work is found here responding to my paper Muhammad and the Bible.
My esteemed colleague, Mr. Sam Shamoun, had already written an analysis of Meherally's "rebuttal." I have only added a few comments to his work. Hence the reader may see our work switch back and forth from first person to second, to third. It should not be difficult for the informed reader.
Sam: I choose to call Meherally's response a deception for several reasons. First in order to call our readers' attention to Meherally's ad hominem slurs. Do note that Meherally begins his article with the bold claim that Silas' article is a falsehood and a deception. This is presumably done in order to poison the minds of Meherally's readers from seriously considering Silas' arguments. Yet, all Meherally has managed to do throughout his article is to expose his shoddy scholarship. As I shall shortly demonstrate the only one who is promoting falsehood and lies is Meherally.
Instead of attacking a person's character and/or using cheap polemical tricks, Meherally needs to show respect to those whom he opposes. His attacks do nothing to help his case but only expose his immature and unprofessional attitude.
With that said, I now turn my attention to Meherally's "response."
FALSEHOOD AND DECEPTION
The word "BIBLE" and/or the phrase "THE HOLY BIBLE" or their Arabic equivalents did not appear in the Qur'an that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) used to recite in his days. Neither do they appear in the copies of the Qur'an that the Muslims do recite today. Furthermore, if one was to do the key-word search for the words BIBLE, OLD TESTAMENT or NEW TESTAMENT within the majority of the translated ENGLISH TEXTS of the Glorious Qur'an, the results would be ZERO. In other words, these words or phrases DO NOT appear in these translated texts of the Qur'an. To claim that the author of this article - Silas, (which could be a pen name) who uses the following sub-heading, was in reality not aware of the above mentioned facts, is to say that the author's work could not be relied upon. To say otherwise, would be to admit that Silas is the master of DECEPTION.
The noteworthy sub-heading to be found within the article by Silas:
C. THE QURAN STATES THAT THE BIBLE IS TRUE
Meherally’s thrust here is that since the word "Bible" is not found in English translations of the Quran, then my assertion "THE QURAN STATES THAT THE BIBLE IS TRUE", is false.
At this point, I need to say to Meherally, "Meherally! Before you rebut anything, please read all of it!!! Otherwise you appear to be a barking dog or a braying donkey." If Meherally would have bothered to read all of my article, he would have found where I address his question. Meherally is not the first person to make such an objection. Consequently, I specifically addressed this in Section D, Muslim objection #2. So much time would be saved if people bothered to read, and then be able to understand what they read.
Further, Meherally has evidently not even bothered to thoroughly read the Quran. The claim that "Bible", "Holy Bible" or their Arabic equivalents do not appear in the Quran is blatantly false. The term Bible comes from the Greek word Biblos, and simply means "Book." Instead of expecting to find Bible in the Arabic Quran we should see if whether the Quran refers to the Holy Bible by its Arabic equivalent, namely Kitab meaning Book. This is precisely what we find the Quran calling the previous revelation:
"The Jews say, The Christians are not (founded) upon anything. And the Christians say, The Jews are not (founded) upon anything. And yet THEY READ THE BOOK." S. 2:113
Ibn Ishaq presents the historical situation that led to the "sending down" of this verse:
"When the Christians of Najran came to the apostle the Jewish rabbis came also and they disputed one with the other before the apostle. Rafi' said, You have no standing, and he denied Jesus and the Gospel; and a Christian said to the Jews, You have no standing and he denied that Moses was a prophet and denied the Torah. So God sent down concerning them: The Jews say the Christians have no standing; and the Christians say that the Jews have no standing, and yet they read the scriptures. They do not know what they are talking about. God will judge between them on the day of resurrection concerning their controversy, i.e. each one reads IN HIS BOOK THE CONFIRMATION OF WHAT HE DENIES, so that the Jews deny Jesus though THEY HAVE THE TORAH in which God required them BY THE WORD OF MOSES TO HOLD JESUS TRUE; while IN THE GOSPEL IS WHAT JESUS BROUGHT IN CONFIRMATION OF MOSES AND THE TORAH HE BROUGHT FROM GOD: so each one denies WHAT IS IN THE HAND OF THE OTHER." (Alfred Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad [Oxford University Press, Karachi], p. 258; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Ibn Ishaq clearly states that during Muhammad's time the TAURAT OF MOSES and the GOSPEL OF JESUS were both extant and in the HANDS of the Jews and Christians. Second, the Book that the Jews and Christians were both reading was none other than the Holy Bible. Since the Holy Bible in use at the time of Muhammad CONTAINED both the Old and New Testaments, we see how blatantly false Meherally's assertion is.
Furthermore, the Quran states:
Those to whom We have given the Book STUDY IT AS IT SHOULD BE STUDIED: They are the ones that believe therein: Those who reject faith therein,- the loss is their own. S. 2:121
"It is not for a man to whom is given the Book and wisdom and prophecy that he should then say to people, Be worshippers of me in place of God. But rather, Be true teachers, since you TEACH the BOOK and you STUDY IT EARNESTLY." S. 3:79
Again, the Book that Jews and Christians were teaching from was the Holy Bible.
The Muslim commentary, "Tafsir-ul-Qur'an", by Maulana Abdul Majid Daryabadi, states on 2:113 that:
"The fact that both sides appealed to the same source of authority - served also to narrow and intensify the struggle" "The new religion ... asserted that it had been founded to fulfill the mission of Judaism, and endeavored to prove the correctness of this allegation, FROM THE BIBLE, the very book upon which Judaism is founded."
Daryabadi illustrates the fact that there are Quranic commentators and scholars which recognize that the "Book" or "Scripture" in question is indeed the Holy Bible. Other scholars include the late Muslim translator Muhammad Asad. Asad readily acknowledged that Kitab can refer to the Bible and translated it as such. All bold, italic and capital emphasis ours:
And, behold, there are indeed some among them who distort THE BIBLE with their tongues, so as to make you think that [what they say] is from THE BIBLE, the while it is not from THE BIBLE; and who say, "This is from God," the while it is not from God: and thus do they tell a lie about God, being well aware [that it is a lie]. S. 3:78 (Asad, The Message of the Qur'an [Dar Al-Andaulus, Gibraltar, rpt. 1994], p. 157)
O followers OF THE BIBLE! ... O followers OF THE BIBLE! S. 5:15, 19 (Asad, p. 144)
And so We have cast enmity and hatred among the followers OF THE BIBLE ... If the followers OF THE BIBLE would but attain to [true] faith and God-consciousness, we should indeed efface their [previous] bad deeds, and indeed bring them into gardens of bliss; S. 5:64-65 (Asad, p. 157)
Say: "O followers OF THE BIBLE! You have no valid ground for your beliefs unless you [truly] observe the Torah and the Gospel, and all that has been bestowed on you by your Sustainer!" S. 5:68 (Asad, p. 158)
Asad also translated Kitab as Old Testament!:
THE FOLLOWERS of THE OLD TESTAMENT demand of thee [O Prophet] that thou cause a revelation to be sent down to from heaven S. 4:153 (Asad, p. 133)
These verses demonstrate the falsehood in Meherally's claim that the terms Bible, Old and New Testaments and/or its Arabic equivalent do not appear in the Quran or its translations. Meherally seems to have been aware of his falsehood and therefore very shrewdly qualified his statement with:
... Furthermore, if one was to do the key-word search for the words BIBLE, OLD TESTAMENT or NEW TESTAMENT within the MAJORITY of the translated ENGLISH TEXTS of the Glorious Qur'an, the results would be ZERO ...
That Meherally could say that the majority of English translations do not contain the terms Bible or Holy Bible implies that he was aware of the fact that there were some translations that do contain these terms like that of Asad's. This becomes more likely since Meherally elsewhere quotes from Asad's translation (, , , , ).
Since Meherally uses Asad's translation, then he must have been aware that in certain places Asad translated the Arabic word Kitab as "Bible."
I also want to point out that Meherally's statement:
Additional evidence that the Quran confirms the entire Bible, and not just the Taurat, Psalms and the Gospel, includes the following passages:
"The Messenger believeth in what hath been revealed to him from his Lord, as do the men of faith. Each one (of them) believeth in Allah, His angels, HIS BOOKS, and His messengers. 'We make no distinction (they say) between one and another of His messengers.' And they say: "We hear, and we obey: (we seek) Thy forgiveness, our Lord, and to Thee is the end of all journeys." S. 2:285
Behold! the angels said: "O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, held in honor in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah. He shall speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. And he shall be (of the company) of the righteous." She said: "O my Lord! How shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?" He said: "Even so; Allah createth what He willeth: When He hath decreed a plan, He but saith to it, Be, and it is! And Allah will teach him THE BOOK and Wisdom, the Torah and the Gospel," S. 3:45-48
"O you who believe! believe in Allah and His Messenger and the Book which He has revealed to His Messenger and THE BOOK which He revealed before; and whoever disbelieves in Allah and His angels and His messengers and the last day, he indeed strays off into a remote error." S. 4:136
Then will Allah say: "O Jesus the son of Mary! Recount My favor to thee and to thy mother. Behold! I strengthened thee with the Holy Spirit, so that thou didst speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. Behold! I taught thee THE BOOK and Wisdom, the Torah and the Gospel. And behold! thou makest out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, by My leave, and thou breathest into it and it becometh a bird by My leave, and thou healest those born blind, and the lepers, by My leave. And behold! thou bringest forth the dead by My leave. And behold! I did restrain the Children of Israel from (violence to) thee when thou didst show them the Clear Signs, and the unbelievers among them said: This is nothing but evident magic." S. 5:110
(To his son came the command): "O John! take hold of THE BOOK with might": and We gave him Wisdom even as a youth, S. 19:12
"But We had not given them BOOKS which they could study, nor sent messengers to them before thee as Warners." S. 34:44
We sent aforetime OUR MESSENGERS with Clear Signs and sent down WITH THEM THE BOOK and the Balance (of Right and Wrong), that men may stand forth in justice; and We sent down Iron, in which is great might, as well as many benefits for mankind, that Allah may test who it is that will help, Unseen, Him and His messengers: For Allah is Full of Strength, Exalted in Might. And We sent Noah and Abraham, and established in their line Prophethood and Revelation: and some of them were on right guidance, but many of them became rebellious transgressors. Then, in their wake, We followed them up with (others of) Our messengers: We sent after them Jesus the son of Mary, and bestowed on him the Gospel; and We ordained in the hearts of those who followed him Compassion and Mercy. But the Monasticism which they invented for themselves, We did not prescribe for them: (We commanded) only the seeking for the Good Pleasure of Allah; but that they did not foster as they should have done. Yet We bestowed, on those among them who believed, their (due) reward, but many of them are rebellious transgressors. S. 57:25-27
And Mary the daughter of Imran, who guarded her chastity; and We breathed into (her body) of Our spirit; and she testified to the truth of the words of her Lord and of His BOOKS (Kutubihii), and was one of the devout (servants). S. 66:12
These passages state that God taught Jesus the Taurat AND THE BOOK, that John was to take hold of the BOOK, that Mary believed in the BOOKS of God, and that messengers were sent with THE BOOK/BOOKS. These references clearly prove that the Book which John, Jesus, Mary and the Messengers knew and handed down included more than just the Taurat. Seeing that the Book which John, Jesus and Mary were familiar with and believed in was none other than the Old Testament as we now know it reinforces the claim that the Quran confirms the Holy Bible as God's Word.
This is supported by the following statement taken from a tenth century Islamic work:
A Statement about the Torah, WHICH IS IN THE HANDS OF THE JEWS, with the Names of Their Books and Information about Their Scholars and Authors. When I asked one of their notable men about these matters, he said, "God, honor to His name, revealed to Moses the Torah IN FIVE FIFTHS, each fifth divided into two parts and each part into a number of farasat, which means surahs, with every farasah divided inot a number of absuqat, meaning verses."
He said that there is a book of Moses called the Mishnah, from which the Jews derive the science of the law, with the religious ordinances and judgments. It is a large book, its language being Kasdani [Sam- an old Babylonian form for the people of Chaldea] and Hebrew. In addition to that there were among THE BOOKS OF THE PROPHETS:
Joshua; Judges; the book of Samuel; the scripture of Isaiah; the scripture of Jeremiah; the scripture of Ezekiel; Kings, which is the scripture of David and his associates, known as "Malkha al-Muluk"; the Prophets, comprising twelve minor scriptures. There are also books called the Haftaroth derived from the twelve prophets.
Among their books there are also:
Ezra; Daniel; Job; Song of Songs; Lamentations; Ruth; Ecclesiastes; Psalms of David; Proverbs of Solomon; Record of the Days [Chronicles], containing the history of the kings and accounts about them; Ahasuerus, called Megillah [Esther]. (Abu 'l-Faraj Muhammad ibn Ishaq al-Nadim, The Fihrist - A 10th Century AD Survey of Islamic Culture, edited and translated by Bayard Dodge [Great Books of the Islamic World, Inc., Columbia University Press, 1970], pp. 43-44; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Remarks about the Gospel of the Christians, the Names of Their Books, Their Scholars, and Their Authors
I asked Yunus the priest, who was an excellent man, about the books translated into the Arabic language which they expound and according to which they act. He replied, "Among them is the book Al-Surah (The Form) which is divided into two parts, the Old Form and the New Form." He also said that the "Old [Form]" was the ancient basis for the Jewish sect and the "New [Form]" for the sect of the Christians. He also said that the "Old [Form]" depends upon a number of books, the first of which is the Torah, WHICH IS FIVE SACRED WRITINGS. [Then follows] a compilation comprising a number of books, among which are:
Joshua, the Son of Nun; The Tribes, which is the book of Judges; Samuel and the Judgment of David; Traditions of the Children of Israel; Ecclesiastes [Qoheleth]; The Song of Songs; The Wisdom of Jesus, the Son of Sirach [Ecclesiasticus]. The Prophets, composed offour books; Isaiah the prophet, for whom be peace; Jeremiah the prophet, for whom be peace; The Twelve Prophets, for whom be peace; Ezekiel. The New Form which is comprised of four Gospels: The Gospel of Matthew; The Gospel of Mark; The Gospel of Luke; The Gospel of John, The Disciples, known as Fraksis [Acts]; PAUL THE APOSTLE, twenty four epistles. (Ibid., p. 45; bold and capital emphasis ours)
In fact, we are told by Al-Tabari that:
"According to Hisham (b. Yusuf) - Khalid b. Sa'id - his father, Sa'id b. Amr b. Sa'id: When Amr b. Sa'id saw that the people looked up to Ibn al-Zubayr and were anxious to support him, he thought that these matters would end in his favor. He sent to Abdallah b. Amr b. Al-As, who was a companion of his, he had been with his father in Egypt. There he had read THE BOOKS OF DANIEL. At that time, Quraysh regarded him as a scholar." (History of Al-Tabari, The Caliphate of Yazid B. Mu-Awiyah , trans. I.K.A Howard [State University of New York Press], Volume 19, p. 193; bold emphasis ours)
[Note] 647. [on this page states,] This is probably a reference to the Old Testament.
These factors reinforce my accusation that Meherally willfully deceives his readers by withholding relevant information and deliberately promoting falsehood, or is very incompetent and should not attempt to address or rebut things that our well out of his comprehension.
CHALLENGE TO MEHERALLY: I put this back on Meherally. It is incumbent upon him to provide hard evidence that the "Book", "Scripture", or "Bible" that the Christians in the Hijaz had with them and read was other than today's Bible. The only Scriptures known to be available to the Christians in the Hijaz is essentially today's Bible. There are different canons of Scripture, but, their message is essentially the same (crucifixion of Christ, Jesus as the Son of God). Over and over again Muhammad referred to a "Book", "Scripture", or "Bible" that the Christians had with them and read. Meherally, what actual "Book", "Scripture", or "Bible" did the Christians of Muhammad’s time possess? We need evidence, not conjecture; we need facts, not ad-hominem personal attacks.
WHAT IS MENTIONED IN THE QUR'AN?
The Book of Abraham
In the Qur'an (87 : 19), there appears the mention of "The Book of Abraham".
This "Book of Abraham" does not appear at all within the 66 Books of the Protestant Bible nor within the 73 Books of the Catholic Bible, in circulation today.
Meherally somehow thinks that this verse refutes Silas' claim that the Quran confirms the Holy Bible. The only thing this passage proves is that the Quran is wrong and cannot be the word of God. The reason is that the Holy Bible is earlier than the Quran and is a more accurate and reliable record on the life of Abraham and the prophets. Furthermore, the author(s) of the Quran assumed that by confirming the Holy Bible he/they would essentially be confirming the message of the Quran. Little did he/they realize that his/their appeal to the Holy Bible as God's Word only ends up exposing the Quran as a fraud since the Bible makes no reference to a book given to Abraham!
Therefore, since the Quran confirms the reliability and inspiration of the Holy Bible in existence at the time of Muhammad, and since this earlier reliable biblical record makes no reference to a book given to Abraham, the burden of proof is upon Meherally to show that such a book actually existed.
Interestingly, some see in the Quranic reference to the books of Abraham an allusion to an apocryphal work titled "The Testament of Abraham." St. Clair Tisdall wrote:
We must look elsewhere for the origin of the Muhammadan conception, and we find it once more in an apocryphal book, the "Testament of Abraham." This work seems to have been originally written in Egypt. It was known to Origen, and was probably composed either in the second century of our era, or not later than the third, by a Jewish convert to Christianity. It exists in two Greek recensions and also in an Arabic version. The resemblance between certain passages in this book and certain verses of the Qur'an and also later Muhammadan Tradition is too great to be merely fortuitous. This is especially observable in what is told us in the "Testament of Abraham" in reference to the "Balance." (Source)
Sprenger (quoted in Rodwell's Preface, p. xvii) thinks that Muhammad learnt the tales of 'Ad and Thamud from the Hanifs (see chapter vi of the present volume), and that the latter were Sabians and held sacred the "Volumes of Abraham" mentioned in Surah LXXXVII.,19 in which Apocryphal books these tales may have found place. But this can hardly be considered as proved. May not the "Testament of Abraham" (rediscovered a few years ago), of which we shall have to speak in chapter iv, be included among the Suhuf Ibrahim? (Source)
If this is the case, then it only serves to prove that the Quran is not God's Word.
The Book of Moses
It is absolutely incorrect or rather a folly to claim that"The Taurat" refers to the collection of the 39 Books of "The Old Testament". It is an indisputable fact that this entire collection of 39 Books was not Revealed to Prophet Moses. Similarly, it is ALSO incorrect to assert that the First Five Books of the Old Testaments called "The Pentateuch" (lit. "The Five Books"), which are often erroneously declared as the "Five Books of Moses", were Revealed to Prophet Moses. The Bible Scholars (mostly Christians and Jews), who have examined The Pentateuch (Five Books attributed to Moses), have discovered four or more main sources underlying them.
1. J = Yahwistic Text. Written by the authors in the time of
Note:In the First Four Books of Moses, the Priestly Writers used both
Below is the irrefutable proof that Prophet Moses did not write or dictate "The Pentateuch". The following historical account that appears in the end part of "The Pentateuch" and records what did transpire after the death of Moses could neither be qualified asRevealed by Allah Himself to Prophet Moses nor as The Book written or dictated by Moses nor as The text written during the lifetime of Moses.
As seen earlier, the Qur'anic Term"The Taurat" refers specifically to the Revealed Transcript by Allah Himself to His Prophet Moses and within this Revealed Transcript was "The Guidance and the Light." A Muslim is asked in the Qur'an to believe in this "Taurat" and not in everything that is identified or published as "The Books of Moses" in the Bible. Here are two eye-opening passages from "The Fifth Book of Moses" which is known as "Deuteronomy":
"Moses was one hundred twenty years old when he died; his sight was unimpaired and his vigor had not abated. The Israelites wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days; then the period of mourning for Moses was ended"Deuteronomy 34: 7-8
"Never since has there arisen a prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face."Deuteronomy 34: 10
The above text upholds the theory of Priestly and other Sources in The Pentateuch.
The above text can be qualified as the history of Moses written by the historians.
But certainly cannot be declared or qualified as;
First, Meherally appeals to the outdated Documentary Hypothesis, a hypothesis originally developed by anti-supernaturalists. It never ceases to amaze us how Muslims will appeal to individuals who deny the existence of God and/or revelation as a basis to reject the Holy Bible.
Meherally needs to brush up on his studies since biblical scholars have soundly refuted the Documentary Hypothesis based on extensive historical, archaeological and linguistic studies. Some books which provide the historical, archaeological and linguistic refutation of the Documentary Hypothesis include:
Gleason L. Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, Moody Press; ISBN: 0802482015; Revised & Updated edition (August 1996)
Gleason L. Archer, New International Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, Zondervan Publishing House; ISBN: 0310241464; Reprint edition (August 1, 2001)
Walter C. Kaiser Jr., The Old Testament Documents: Are They Reliable & Relevant?, Intervarsity Press; ISBN: 0830819754; (September 2001)
The following links also provide responses to the Documentary Hypothesis: , , , .
And this article refutes the notion that Genesis 1 and 2 are two contradictory creation stories that have been molded together.
Now let us see what would happen if we applied the Documentary Hypothesis to the Quran. The following is taken from Dr. William F. Campbell:
In Arabic the name for God “Allah” parallels the Hebrew Elohim and the name “Rabb” corresponds to the Hebrew Adonai (Lord) which the Jews used later to refer to Jehovah. When we examine the Qur'an we find that the name Rabb is never used in 11 Suras: 24, 48, 49, 58, 61, 62, 77, 88, 95, 104, and 112; and the name Allah is absent in 18 Suras: 54-56, 68, 75, 78, 83, 89, 92-94, 99, 100, 105, 106, 108, 113, and 114. In addition there are 10 very short Early Meccan Suras in which, like the Book of Esther in the Torah-Old Testament, the name of God is not mentioned at all.
Below is an analysis of the use of Allah and Rabb in Suras 48 to 64. I have
chosen these 17 Suras because 8 of them are in the above lists.
|Sura Number||Date of Sura||Times Allah used||Number of Verses||Times per Verse||Times Rabb Used||Times per Verse|
When we look at this information we see that in Sura 55 the word Rabb was used 36 times - 31 of them along with the word “favors” (al-ala'). This word ala' is a rare word in the Qur'an being found only three other times - once in the Early Meccan Sura 53 and twice in the Late Meccan Sura 7. Furthermore, when we examine Sura 53:19-20, we find that it is the only Sura which mentions the three Goddesses Al-Llat, and Al-`Uzza, and Manat.
A higher critic who believes in the “documentary hypothesis” would now say,
We see here that Allah is used much less often during the Meccan period, never more than once in every 10 verses. While in the Medina period this name is used at least once a verse except for Sura 48.
In addition, the word ala' and the three idol goddesses are found only in these Meccan Suras. Therefore there must have been an early Meccan writer called “R” because he used “Rabb” as the name for God, but who was still interested in idols. Later there was a second writer called “A” who used “Allah” and wrote when pure monotheism had developed. It is true, of course, that in Sura 53, Manat, Al-Llat and Al-`Uzza are mentioned with disapproval, so these disapproving words must have been added at a later date by “Q” which stands for editing done by the “Qurra”.
Next we find that there are four accounts in the Qur'an telling how the honored guests came to inform Abraham that he would have a son in his old age. The Early Meccan Sura 51:24-30 mentions how Abraham's wife didn't believe and said “a barren old woman”. This was obviously done by “R”. The Late Meccan Sura 15:51-56 tells how Abraham didn't believe the news and said, “Do you give me glad tidings that old age has seized me?” Since this is Late Meccan the “A” writer was starting to have an influence.
In the Late Meccan Sura 11:69-74 the two stories have been worked together by one of the “Q” editors and the fact is added that Abraham's wife laughed.
Finally there is the early Mid-Meccan account in Sura 37:99-103 which is really concerned with Abraham's sacrifice of his son. Since sacrifices are mentioned this represents another document which we will call the “D” document for (al-dabiha) sacrifice.
As the reader can see we easily made up a new four document theory for the origin of the Qur'an. We could call it the R,A,Q,D theory. Though this R,A,Q,D theory is completely fictitious it demonstrates the type of arbitrary reasoning used by the authors of the “documentary hypothesis”, and shows what would have happened if they had applied the same type of analysis to the Qur'an. (Campbell, The Qur'an and the Bible in light of History and Science, pp. 84-86)
"Relevant to this matter is a significant point which does not seem to have been noticed by Western scholars, namely that the word Allah does not occur in the earliest passages of the Qur'an, or does so only rarely. The relative dating of the Qur'an is, of course, a notoriously difficult matter about which Western scholars are not agreed, while few Muslims accept the Western approach to chronology. The absence of the word Allah in early surahs can be illustrated from the latest attempt to place the suras in chronological order, that of Regis Blachère in his French translation. In what he reckons to be the first seventeen surahs, the word Allah occurs only three times, namely in his seventh (91:13), his tenth (95:8) and his sixteenth (87:7); and of these, he considers the verses 91:13 and 87:7 to be later than the rest of the surah. Instead of Allah, on finds your Lord (rabbuka) as in 96:1,3 or we as in 94:14. The word Allah occurs, of course, in the invocation at the beginning of each surah, but these would be added later.
The story of the satanic verses ... shows the persistence of some confusion between Allah conceived monotheistically and Allah as a high god. The truth of the story cannot be doubted, since it is inconceivable that any Muslim would invent such a story, and it is inconceivable that any Muslim would accept such a story from a non-Muslim. It also appears to be vouched for by a verse from the Qur'an (22:52). Many Muslims reject the story as unworthy of Muhammad, but there is nothing unworthy of him in holding that his knowledge and understanding of his Lord developed during the early years of his prophethood as the revelation multiplied." (The History of al-Tabari, Volume VI - Muhammad at Mecca, translated and annotated by W. Montgomery Watt & M. V. McDonald [State University of New York Press, Albany 1988], pp. xxxiii-xxxiv; bold emphasis ours)
The editors continue to relate the story of the "satanic verses" and then make the following comment:
"The point to be emphasized is that Muhammad did not immediately appreciate that there was a contradiction between this permission for intercession and a genuine monotheism. This does not necessarily mean that he accepted the idea of the believers in Allah as high god that there were other deities which could intercede with him. Some of those who heard the verses might certainly have understood them in this way, but Muhammad himself probably thought of the three goddesses as angels. It is to be noted that verse 26 of the same surah speaks of the possibility of intercession by angels: How many angels there are in the heavens whose intercession is of no avail save after God gives leave to those whom he chooses and accepts! The full story of the rejection of the satanic verses will never be known. What is certain is that a fresh revelation canceled them and replaced them by others. It is from this time, too, that the revelations emphasize that there is no deity but God and he must be the sole object of worship. Even the possibility that the goddesses might be angels is rejected: they are but names which you have named, you and your fathers (53:23). Thus, in the end, the Qur'an decisively rejected belief in Allah as high god, but it is part of the background against which the accounts of Muhammad's call must be considered." (Ibid., pp. xxxiv-xxxv; bold emphasis ours)
This provides irrefutable proof that the Quran is a patchwork of multiple documents that were badly pieced together. For further proof that the Quran is not the work of one author, but of multiple authors, please read the following articles: , , .
So much for Meherally's appeal to the Documentary Hypothesis.
Second, Meherally erroneously assumes that the term Taurat only refers to the revelation given to Moses. He has obviously not studied his own sources carefully, since Muslim scholars admit that it is also used in a broader sense to refer to the Holy Bible as a whole or to its specific parts. The Mishkat al-Masabih cites traditions (Book XXVI, Ch. XVIII, pp. 1232, 1233 and ch. XIX, p. 1244) where the Taurat allegedly prophesied the coming of Muhammad:
Ata b. Yasar told that he met `Abdallah b. `Amr b. al-As and asked him to inform him of the description of God's messenger given in the Torah. He agreed, swearing by God that he was certainly described in the Torah by part of the description of him given in the Qur'an when it says,
"O prophet, We have sent you as a witness, a bearer of good tidings, and a warner, and a guard for the common people." (From Al-Ahzab 33:45 up to here. The following is from the Torah-Old Testament, Isaiah 42:1-3,6-7.) "You are my servant and my messenger; I have called you the one who trusts, not harsh or rough, nor loud-voiced in the streets. He will not repulse evil with evil, but will pardon and forgive, and God will not take him till He uses him to straighten the crooked creed so that people may say there is no god but God, and he opens thereby blind eyes, deaf ears and hardened hearts. Bukhari transmitted it, and Darimi also gives something to the same effect on the authority of `Ata who gave as his authority Ibn Salam.
This citation actually comes from Isaiah 42:1-3, 6-7. You will not find a single reference in the entire Pentateuch matching the above citation. This proves that at least in this Hadith the word Taurat refers to something other than the books of Moses.
Commenting on the preceding hadith, Ibn Kathir writes:
" Al-Bukhari recorded it from 'Abdullah bin 'Amr. It was also recorded by Al-Bukhari [up to the word] forgoes. And he mentioned the narration of 'Abdullah bin 'Amr then he said: It was COMMON in the speech of our Salaf that they describe THE BOOKS OF THE PEOPLE OF THE TWO SCRIPTURES AS THE TAWRAH, as some Hadiths concur. Allah knows best." (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged), Volume 4, (Surat Al-Ar'af to the end of Surah Yunus), abridged by a group of scholars under the supervision of Shaykh Safiur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Houston, New York, Lahore; First Edition: May 2000], p. 179; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Third, Meherally has obviously not read the Quran or the Hadiths carefully. The Muslim traditions quite emphatically state that the Taurat of Moses existed in an uncorrupt form during the time of both Jesus and Muhammad:
We did indeed aforetime give the Book to Moses: be not then in doubt OF ITS REACHING (THEE): and We made it a guide to the Children of Israel. And We appointed, from among them, leaders, giving guidance under Our command, so long as they persevered with patience and continued to have faith in Our Signs (Ayat- Verses). Verily thy Lord will judge between them on the Day of Judgment, in the matters wherein they differ (among themselves) S. 32:23-25
This passage demonstrates that God entrusted the Torah to the Israelite leaders that believed and judged by it, and that this very Torah was available to Muhammad.
"And Allah will teach him the Book and Wisdom, THE TORAH and the Gospel, And (appoint him) as a messenger to the Children of Israel, (with this message): 'I have come to you, with a Sign from your Lord, in that I make for you out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, and breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by Allah's leave: And I heal those born blind, and the lepers, and I bring the dead into life, by Allah's leave; and I declare to you what ye eat, and what ye store in your houses. Surely therein is a Sign for you if ye did believe; (I have come to you), TO ATTEST THE TORAH WHICH WAS BEFORE ME. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me. S. 3:48-50
"Then will Allah say: O Jesus the son of Mary! Recount My favor to thee and to thy mother. Behold! I strengthened thee with the Holy Spirit, so that thou didst speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. Behold! I taught thee the Book and Wisdom, THE TORAH and the Gospel. And behold! thou makest out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, by My leave, and thou breathest into it and it becometh a bird by My leave, and thou healest those born blind, and the lepers, by My leave. And behold! thou bringest forth the dead by My leave. And behold! I did restrain the Children of Israel from (violence to) thee when thou didst show them the Clear Signs, and the unbelievers among them said: "This is nothing but evident magic"." S. 5:110
"And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: O Children of Israel! I am the messenger of Allah (sent) to you, CONFIRMING THE TAURAT (Law) (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad. But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, This is evident sorcery!" S. 61:6
These passages state that Jesus confirmed the Taurat of his day as the very one which God gave to Moses, as even Ibn Kathir admits. Ibn Kathir comments on S. 3:48-50:
<the Tawrah and the Injil>. The Tawrah is the Book THAT ALLAH SENT DOWN TO MUSA, son of Imran, while the Injil is what Allah sent down to Isa, son of Maryam, peace be upon them, AND ISA MEMORIZED BOTH BOOKS
<If you believe. And I have come confirming that which was before me of the Tawrah,> affirming the Tawrah AND UPHOLDING IT," (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Abridged, Volume 2, parts 3,4 & 5, Surat Al-Baqarah, Verse 253, to Surat An-Nisa, Verse 147 [March 2000], pp. 163, 165; bold and capital emphasis ours)
As well as his commentary on S. 61:6:
"'Isa said, The Tawrah conveyed the glad tidings of my coming, and my coming CONFIRMS THE TRUTH OF THE TAWRAH ..." (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Abridged, Volume 9, Surat Al-Jathiyah to the end of Surat Al-Munafiqun [September 2000, first edition], p. 617; bold and capital emphasis ours)
"And I will write down (my mercy) for those who are righteous and give alms and who believe in our signs; who follow the apostle, the unlettered prophet, whom they find written in THE TORAH AND THE GOSPEL THAT IS WITH THEM. S. 7:156-157
This passage explicitly states that both the original Taurat and Gospel existed during Muhammad's time.
"Salih b. Kaisan from Nafi, freedman of Abdullah b. Umar from Abdullah b. Umar, told me: When the apostle gave judgement about them HE ASKED FOR A TORAH. A rabbi sat there reading it having put his hand over the verse of stoning. Abdullah b. Salam struck the rabbi's hand, saying, This, O prophet of God, is the verse of stoning which he refused to read to you. The apostle said, Woe to you Jews! What has induced you to abandon the judgement of God WHICH YOU HOLD IN YOUR HANDS? They answered: The sentence used to be carried out until a man of royal birth and noble origin committed adultery and the king refused to allow him to be stoned. Later another committed adultery and the king wanted him to be stoned but they said No, until you stone so-and-so. And they did away with all mention of stoning. The apostle said, I am the first to revive the order from God AND HIS BOOK and to practice it. They were duly stoned and Abdullah b. Umar said, I was among those that stoned them. (Alfred Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad, p. 267; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Notice that Muhammad asked FOR A TAURAT, not a corrupted Taurat. Muhammad claims that he is the first to revive what is in GOD'S BOOK, AND PRACTICES WHAT IT ENTAILED.
"Rafi b. Haritha and Sallam b. Mishkam and Malik b. al-Sayf and Rafi b. Huraymila came to him [Muhammad] and said: Do you not allege that you follow the religion of Abraham and believe in the Torah WHICH WE HAVE and testify that it is the truth from God? He replied, CERTAINLY, but you have sinned and broken the covenant CONTAINED THEREIN and concealed what you were ordered to make plain to men, and I dissociate myself from your sin. They said, We hold by WHAT WE HAVE. We live according to the guidance and the truth and we do not believe in you and we will not follow you. So God sent down concerning them: Say, O Scripture folk, you have no standing until you observe the Torah and the Gospel and what has been sent down from your Lord. What has been sent down to thee from they Lord will assuredly increase many of them in error and unbelief. But be not sad because of the unbelieving people." (Guillaume, p. 268; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Here was a great opportunity for Muhammad to claim that the Taurat had been changed. Instead, he claims to believe in the Taurat available at his time. He calls it "Allah's Book". Would he have called it Allah's book if it contained much corruption by the hand of men?
Narrated Abdullah Ibn Umar:
A group of Jews came and invited the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) to Quff. So he visited them in their school.
They said: AbulQasim, one of our men has committed fornication with a woman; so pronounce judgment upon them. They placed a cushion for the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) who sat on it and said: Bring the Torah. It was then brought. He then withdrew the cushion from beneath him AND PLACED THE TORAH ON IT saying: I BELIEVED IN THEE and in Him Who REVEALED THEE.
He then said: Bring me one who is learned among you. Then a young man was brought. The transmitter then mentioned the rest of the tradition of stoning similar to the one transmitted by Malik from Nafi' (No. 4431). (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 38, Number 4434)
The respect and love shown to the Taurat only serves to expose Meherally's desperate attempt to avoid the inevitable. Muhammad didn't say to bring him a corrupted Taurat, nor did he say that he believed in the Taurat before it had been corrupted. Rather, he affirms that the Taurat in his possession was that which God had revealed. It is little wonder that he placed it on a cushion, showing it the very same respect that he would to the Quran.
The preceding statements conclusively demonstrate that the Taurat given to Moses was available both during the time of Jesus and Muhammad. Yet the Taurat which existed during their time is that which we find in our Bibles today. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947 reinforces the fact that the only Taurat which the Jews and Christians have ever known is the Pentateuch as we know it! This means that Meherally's claim that Taurat originally refers to the revelation given to Moses and not the Pentateuch is simply wrong.
Fourth, Meherally thinks that Deuteronomy 34 somehow refutes Mosaic authorship. Yet this only exposes Meherally's hypocrisy. Meherally claims and believes that Deuteronomy contains two prophecies about Muhammad, Deuteronomy 18:15-18, 33:2:
8. Finally, several millenniums before Christ Jesus spoke for the coming of
"another paraclete", the making of ISLAM as a Great Nation was already in GOD'S
MASTER PLAN and foretold in the Holy Bible. God the Almighty had declared His Master Plan
to His prophets Abraham, MOSES, Solomon, Isaiah and Habakkuk. Here are few verses
from the Old and New Testaments. Genesis 17: 20; 21: 13-17-18; DEUTERONOMY 18: 15-18
AND IN PARTICULAR 33:2; Songs of Solomon 5: 10 to 16; Isaiah 42: 9 to 17 and
Habakkuk 3: 3.
John 14: 16/26; 15: 26; 16: 7 to 15; 1 John 2: 1 and 1 John 4: 6. (Source)
Nearly TWENTY CENTURIES before the birth of prophet Muhammad AND A SHORT WHILE BEFORE HIS OWN DEATH, PROPHET MOSES speaking on the subject of the Holy One from mount Paran, said to his people: (Source)
If Meherally believes that Moses predicted the coming of his prophet twenty centuries before Muhammad's birth, then on what basis does Meherally use Deuteronomy 34 to reject Mosaic authorship? It seems to have never occurred to Meherally that just as it was possible for God to reveal to Moses the advent of a prophet that came thousands of years later, God was also able to reveal to Moses the manner of his death and have him record it for future generations!
Fifth, since Meherally accepts the Documentary Hypothesis and since this hypothesis rejects Mosaic authorship for the great bulk of the Pentateuch, how then does Meherally know that Deuteronomy 18 and 33 are genuine prophecies by Moses? On what basis does he accept Deuteronomy 18 and 33 as genuine while rejecting chapter 34?
Interestingly, Meherally contradicts himself since elsewhere he calls Deuteronomy "the fifth book of Moses":
The Message that Jesus had brought was the same as declared IN THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES, called Deuteronomy, which is: "Thou shalt have no other gods before Me." "Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them; for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God..." (Source)
So which is it? Is Deuteronomy the fifth book of Moses or not? Meherally seemingly wants to have his cake and eat it too and yet he can't have it both ways. Sadly, such shoddy scholarship and deceptive methodology is a common feature of Meherally's articles.
Finally and even more amazingly, it might come as a complete shock to our readers to find that the Quran never actually says that the Taurat was given to Moses. Instead, the Quran says that Allah gave Moses the Book. This means that the only way for Meherally to know whether the Taurat was given to Moses IS BY TURNING TO THE HOLY BIBLE! Otherwise, Meherally can never prove from the Quran itself that the Taurat was given to Moses. This is another indication that the Quran is an incomplete and incoherent record.
This ends this section. Continue with Part 2.
Responses to Akbarally Meherally
Answering Islam Home Page