A debate with Sam Shamoun regarding the Angel Gabriel peace be upon him:

Brother Yishan Jufu's answers below are in red.

From http://www.f24.parsimony.net/forum54389/messages/8180.htm

Written by yishan jufu at 06 Sep 2001 23:58:07:

"sam- Another passage in which Gabriel is actually given divine status includes:

By the Star when it goes down,- Your Companion is neither astray nor being misled. Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) Desire. It is no less than inspiration sent down to him: He was taught by one Mighty in Power, Endued with Wisdom: FOR HE APPEARED (in stately form); While he was in the highest part of the horizon: THEN HE APPROACHED HIM AND CAME CLOSER, And was at a distance of but two bow-lengths or (even) nearer; SO DID HE CONVEY THE INSPIRATION TO HIS SERVANT- (conveyed) what He (meant) to convey. S. 53:1-10

This passage clearly states that Muhammad saw someone whom Muslims claim was the Angel Gabriel. Abdullah Yusuf Ali on S. 53:5 notes:

“… This is referred by the Commentators to the angel Gabriel, though whom the inspiration came…” (Ali, The Holy Qur’an, Translation and Commentary, p. 1443, f. 5087 bold emphasis ours)

Ibn Kathir states:

The Trustworthy Angel brought Allah’s Revelation to the Trustworthy Messenger

Allah the Exalted states that the Message His servant and Messenger Muhammad brought to his people was taught to him by,

, he is Jibril, peace be upon, (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Abridged, Volume 9, Surat Al-Jathiyah to the end of Surat Al-Munafiqun, September 2000, p. 308)

Yet this interpretation will not work without this making Gabriel the god of Muhammad. The passage clearly states that the person that appeared to Muhammad was Muhammad’s sovereign as indicated by the last part of the sentence, “SO DID HE CONVEY THE INSPIRATION TO HIS SERVANT.” Seeing that Muslims insist that the being that appeared to Muhammad was Gabriel implies that Muhammad is a slave of Gabriel. There is simply no way of avoiding this inescapable conclusion. Therefore, Muslims must now accept the fact that it was actually Allah who appeared to Muhammad, which would then force them to accept the idea of Allah appearing visibly. If Muslims still insist that it was Gabriel who appeared then they must also accept that Gabriel and/or Muhammad committed the sin of associating partners with Allah.

The problem that this passage presents becomes evident from Ibn Kathir’s comments:

Zirr said, ‘Abdullah narrated to us that Muhammad saw Jibril having six hundred wings.’

means, Jibril conveyed to Allah’s servant Muhammad whatever he conveyed. OR, the meaning here could be: Allah revealed to His servant Muhammad whatever He revealed through Jibril. Both meanings are correct…” (Ibid., pp. 311-312 bold and capital emphasis ours)

The problem that this passage presents becomes evident from Ibn Kathir’s comments:

Zirr said, ‘Abdullah narrated to us that Muhammad saw Jibril having six hundred wings.’

means, Jibril conveyed to Allah’s servant Muhammad whatever he conveyed. OR, the meaning here could be: Allah revealed to His servant Muhammad whatever He revealed through Jibril. Both meanings are correct…” (Ibid., pp. 311-312 bold and capital emphasis ours)

The reader will notice that the word Allah is inserted in parentheses to presumably avoid the ambiguity of the text. This is despite the fact that the word does not appear in the Arabic original, as indicated by its second occurrence within Kathir’s citation! It becomes obvious why this would be done, namely to avoid the implication that Muhammad is Gabriel’s servant or that Allah appeared in visible form. The Muslims must safeguard from either interpretation if they are to maintain their belief in the absolute transcendence of Allah and/or the pure devotion that is to be given to him alone. Islamicist F.E. Peters notes:

“None of the pronouns is identified in these verses, though there is little doubt that the recipient of the vision was Muhammad. Who was seen is less clear, and if Muhammad’s being referred to as his ‘servant’ in verse 10 suggests that is God Himself, the Muslim tradition preferred to understand that it was Gabriel in all the other instances, chiefly because later in his own career Muhammad, as we shall see, had unmistakably come to the same conclusion. But there is no other mention of Gabriel in the Meccan suras, and it appears far more likely that God Himself first appeared to Muhammad ‘on the high horizon’ and then on a second occasion by the lotus tree near the ‘garden of the dwelling’ to show him ‘the signs of his Lord.’ Muhammad was clearly earthbound when he had his first experience, but where the latter vision took place, whether in a known locality in Mecca or, as is often thought, in some heavenly venue, is not further indicated. Neither is there anything to suggest that it was on either of these occasions that Muhammad received the words of the Quran.

“If Sura 53:1-18 seems to say that Muhammad believed that on two distinct occasions he had a vision of God, who thereby prompted him and showed to him His signs, the second vision is referred to only in briefing in passing. (Quran 81:19-27)

“Although verse 10 appears to refer back to the same vision ‘on the high horizon’ mentioned in 53:7-9, the Muslim commentators saw in the first three verses of this passage from Sura 81 an unmistakable reference to Gabriel. But there is abundant evidence that Muhammad not only did not identify Gabriel as the agent of revelation until his Medina days, but that while at Mecca he was criticized for the fact that God had not sent an angelic messenger: ‘They said: “If your Lord had so pleased, He would certainly have sent down angels; as it is, we disbelieve your mission”.’ (Quran 41:14)

“Muhammad’s earliest response did not encourage them to think that there was in fact an angel in God’s revelation to him:

They say: ‘You to whom the Reminder is being sent down, truly you are jinn-possessed! Why do you not bring angels to us if you are one of those who posses truth? We do not send down the angels except when required, and if they came, there would be not respite.’ (Ibid., 15:6-8)"

yi shan- What sam failed to understand from the above verses is that the pagan arabs doubted the prophet's message and accused him of claiming things that are not fit for a HUMAN, hence they asked "why not an angel be sent down as proof of what you claim?". Then God answered them in revelation to his prophet and clarified it that angels are messengers sent on specific missions, and if they are sent down to them; it will be their end for their disbelief.

"sam- ‘And before you as well the Messengers we sent down were but men, to whom We granted inspiration. And if you do not understand that, ask the people who possess the Reminder.’ (Ibid., 16:43)” (Peters, Muhammad and the Origins of Islam [State of University Press New York, Albany 1994], pp. 142-143 bold emphasis ours) "

yi shan- Of all the above jargon written/quoted by the grand hakham Sam Shamoun, i will concentrate on the underlined texts (my emphasis) above; i had to quote the whole thing to avoid the lame excuses of people like Sam!!

Notice how Sam is desparate for sources that can help him discredit islam so he used a source that seems to be ignorant of the quran to say the least; but to call the source an "Islamicist" is criminal due to the following reason(s):

Sam- Islamicist F.E. Peters notes:

“None of the pronouns is identified in these verses, though there is little doubt that the recipient of the vision was Muhammad. Who was seen is less clear, and if Muhammad’s being referred to as his ‘servant’ in verse 10 suggests that is God Himself, the Muslim tradition preferred to understand that it was Gabriel in all the other instances, chiefly because later in his own career Muhammad, as we shall see, had unmistakably come to the same conclusion. But there is no other mention of Gabriel in the Meccan suras, and it appears far more likely that God Himself first appeared to Muhammad ‘on the high horizon’ and then on a second occasion by the lotus tree near the ‘garden of the dwelling’ to show him ‘the signs of his Lord.’ Muhammad was clearly earthbound when he had his first experience, but where the latter vision took place, whether in a known locality in Mecca or, as is often thought, in some heavenly venue, is not further indicated. Neither is there anything to suggest that it was on either of these occasions that Muhammad received the words of the Quran.

yi shan- Notice the underlined parts! The topic sam was dealing with are the verses 53:1-10 (surat al-najm) a Meccan Surah. So, if we were to read Peters' notes to mean exactly what they said, i.e. "But there is no other mention of Gabriel in the Meccan suras..", we must understand it to "NOT MEAN MENTION OF GABRIEL BY NAME" simply because verses 53:1-10 do not name him; therefore, we must see if the false claim of Peters and sam shamoun's acceptance of such claims are justified?! We shall consult the Meccan surahs of the quran for references to "Gabriel"; but we must remember that not all quranic verses referring to Gabriel do so by citing his name!!

Therefore, the verses do not constitute any difficulty whatsoever, and the muslim interpreters/translators cannot be accused of being wrong, but just venturing into deeper-than-needed methodologies to explain what they thought would explain things to people like you in simpler terms. However, the verses themselves offer all the explanations needed to ANSWER your accusations.

Back to The Muslim-Christian Debates section.

Send your comments.

Back to Main Page.