Answering Christianity Research Center

The Hadith under discussion is as follows:

قَالَ أَبُو هُرَيْرَةَ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقُولُ ‏"‏ مَا مِنْ بَنِي آدَمَ مَوْلُودٌ إِلاَّ يَمَسُّهُ الشَّيْطَانُ حِينَ يُولَدُ، فَيَسْتَهِلُّ صَارِخًا مِنْ مَسِّ الشَّيْطَانِ، غَيْرَ مَرْيَمَ وَابْنِهَا ‏"‏‏.‏ ثُمَّ يَقُولُ أَبُو هُرَيْرَةَ ‏{‏وَإِنِّي أُعِيذُهَا بِكَ وَذُرِّيَّتَهَا مِنَ الشَّيْطَانِ الرَّجِيمِ ‏}

Narrated Said bin Al-Musaiyab: Abu Huraira said, "I heard Allah's Apostle saying, 'There is none born among the off-spring of Adam, but Satan touches it. A child therefore, cries loudly at the time of birth because of the touch of Satan, except Mary and her child." Then Abu Huraira recited: "And I seek refuge with You for her and for her offspring from the outcast Satan" (Qur’an 3.36)

This Hadith has been posted and a number of questions have been asked pertaining to it.

1. Do you think there is no medical reason for why the newborns cry? According to medical science a new born baby has to cry otherwise brain will not get oxygen immediately and this can bring serious complications later. When the baby is in the womb it doesn’t breath through the nose but by umbilical cord, so when it comes out there is no oxygen going in through the nose since the baby doesn’t know how to breath so the nurse will hit their tiny buttocks and they will respond to the pain will a yell which automatically opens the nose and the lungs start pumping oxygen.  In some cases, babies born at home, into a quiet, warm environment (especially during water birth) sometimes do not cry and no complications may happen in those circumstances. Babies need to be monitored only under such circumstances.   Therefore, there is pure science involved for babies crying. It is not Satan’s touch that makes them cry.

There is no reason why the medical reason and the touch of Satan cannot go hand in hand. Let’s say, if someone says that Allah causes rain and another person says that evaporation and the whole procedure related to it causes rain, we cannot say that only one of them is correct; both would be correct in saying so. Allah causes rain and evaporation is the procedure by which it happens.

إِنَّ الشَّيْطَانَ يَجْرِي مِنِ ابْنِ آدَمَ مَبْلَغَ الدَّمِ

Satan runs in the body of Adam's son (i.e. man) as his blood circulates in it.

Satan's touching is an unseen event. We know that he resides in son of Adam like blood yet we cannot see it or feel it. However, we don't know when Satan enters the human body. It could either be at time of birth or while the child is still in the womb or later on. Since it is from the unseen, speculating won't be helpful. There is another Hadith that provides us with further understanding of Satan.

إِذَا اسْتَيْقَظَ ـ أُرَاهُ ـ أَحَدُكُمْ مِنْ مَنَامِهِ فَتَوَضَّأَ فَلْيَسْتَنْثِرْ ثَلاَثًا، فَإِنَّ الشَّيْطَانَ يَبِيتُ عَلَى خَيْشُومِهِ

"If anyone of you rouses from sleep and performs the ablution, he should wash his nose by putting water in it and then blowing it out thrice, because Satan has stayed in the upper part of his nose all the night."

Some people attempt to ridicule this Hadith. However, that is not our concern in this paper. If they find problems in accepting that Satan is an ugly creature and that his deeds are ugly as well, then they would not attempt to defend Satan by mocking such narrations.

Satan's touch (or his initial entry into the human possibly through the nose) while the child enters the world, could cause the medical conditions mentioned. For someone to find the Hadith to be against science, they would have to have seen Satan in person and convince others that Satan is not how he has been defined by Allah and His Messenger –peace be upon him.

The second question asked relating to the Hadith is as follows:

2. There are some babies that do not cry at the time of birth. Will they come under the category of Mary and Jesus? i.e, They do not cry, is it because of Satan not touching them?

The Hadith states that a baby that cries is due to the touch of Satan. It does not say that Satan's touch always causes a cry. There is a big difference in both! A child cries when it falls down while playing. However, this does not mean that all children will cry when they fall down; some don't.

Another question pertaining to the Hadith is as follows:

3. Why Mary and Jesus alone were exempted from Satan’s touching and (most probably did not cry)? This question is important, because, as per the hadith, even prophet Ibrahim was not excluded from Satan's touching. And why Mary and Jesus alone?  Don't you think this hadith makes discrimination among different prophets?

The reason why Maryam –peace be upon her- was not touched by Satan is because she was dedicated by her mother to the service of Allah. Her purpose in life was to stay away from worldly activities and only dedicate herself to the worship of Allah and hence Allah kept her away from Satan. Here is what her mother had said when she conceived her:

اذ قالت امراة عمران رب اني نذرت لك مافي بطني محررا فتقبل مني انك انت السميع العليم

When the wife of ‘Imran said, "My Lord, indeed I have pledged to You what is in my womb, consecrated [for Your service], so accept this from me. Indeed, You are the Hearing, the Knowing."

Prophet Eisa –peace be upon him- was not touched by Satan because the Qur'an explicitly says so.

فلما وضعتها قالت رب اني وضعتها انثى والله اعلم بما وضعت وليس الذكر كالانثى واني سميتها مريم واني اعيذها بك وذريتها من الشيطان الرجيم

But when she delivered her, she said, "My Lord, I have delivered a female." And Allah was most knowing of what she delivered, "And the male is not like the female. And I have named her Maryam, and I seek refuge for her in You and [for] her descendants from Satan, the expelled [from the mercy of Allah]."

The prayer was answered. The Hadith of Satan not touching them is quoted in the commentary of this verse by Ibn Kathir as well.

As to the discrimination argument, there is none because all messengers of Allah were out of the reach of Satan’s influence in their life. Since all messengers of Allah were not able to be influenced by Satan in their lives, Prophet Eisa and Maryam –peace be upon them- would have been protected by Allah from Satan even if the prayer was not made. However, since the prayer was made, the additional protection was provided to them and that was the touch of Satan at the time of birth.

On a side note, one must not question such issues and points related to discrimination between prophets because they were all messengers of Allah. Prophets were given features, qualities and miracles by Allah and hence to say that one messenger received such and such a miracle while the other received such and such and hence this messenger has been discriminated against.

Moreover, Prophet Muhammad –peace be upon him- mentioned that his companion Satan became a believer. We are not told whether the same happened with any other messenger as well. Asking unnecessary questions at unnecessary places and occasions leads to confusions and doubts. Since the Messenger of Allah –peace be upon him- is not with us any more to answer the questions directly, we must remain content with what has been told to us and such areas not told to us should not be speculated upon.

Another question asked is as follows:

4. Don’t you think this hadith contradicts another ahaadith reported by both Bukhari and Muslim wherein the prophet said that each and every child is born in a state of Fitrah?

The child is still born on Fitrah. This question indicates a lack of understanding of the term ‘Fitrah’. Satan's touch does not convert the child towards a false or a corrupted religion, neither does it force the child towards the worship of a false deity or any other deviated belief. The Hadith that has been spoken of in this question itself clarifies this, if read in full.

مَا مِنْ مَوْلُودٍ إِلاَّ يُولَدُ عَلَى الْفِطْرَةِ، فَأَبَوَاهُ يُهَوِّدَانِهِ أَوْ يُنَصِّرَانِهِ أَوْ يُمَجِّسَانِهِ، كَمَا تُنْتَجُ الْبَهِيمَةُ بَهِيمَةً جَمْعَاءَ، هَلْ تُحِسُّونَ فِيهَا مِنْ جَدْعَاءَ

"No child is born except on Al-Fitrah (Islam) and then his parents make him Jewish, Christian or Magian, as an animal produces a perfect young animal: do you see any part of its body amputated?"

Lastly, it has been asked whether making du’a (prayer), as mentioned in another Hadith, can prevent from the touch of Satan.

5. You quoted a hadith from Volume 1, Book 4, Number 143: Narrated Ibn 'Abbas, in which prophet said “If anyone of you on having sexual relations with his wife said 'In the name of Allah. O Allah! Protect us from Satan and also protect what you bestow upon us (i.e. the coming offspring) from Satan, and if it is destined that they should have a child then, Satan will never be able to harm that offspring. "My question is this:  Are you saying that babies born in the above circumstances won’t cry?

The question would not have been asked if the Hadith had been read properly. The du’a made by the parent is for the parents as well. Since the parent makes du’a for protection from Satan, who has already been touched by Satan at his own birth, how can one assume that the protection of the child from Satan means protection from his touch at the time of birth? Harm caused by Satan is not only limited to touching at the time of birth. Satan not being able to harm him speaks of a bigger context i.e. Satan would not be able to cause him problems in life that may turn him away from the true faith.

http://quranmisconceptions.wordpress.com/2014/04/12/why-do-babies-cry-at-birth/

Indeed, Allah knows the best.

Footnotes:
[1] Saheeh Bukhari, Book 60, Hadith 102
[2] Saheeh Bukhari ,Book 78, Hadith 243
[3] Saheeh Bukhari, Book 59, Hadith 104
[4] Qur’an 3:35
[5] Qur’an 3:36

There is a saying of Prophet Muhammad –may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- that is alleged to contradict science and logic.

في الحبة السوداء شفاء من كل داء، إلا السام

Narrated Abu Huraira: I heard Allah’s Apostle saying, “There is healing in black cumin for all diseases except death.[1]“

There are two aspects to the narration. The first aspect is linguistic and the other being scientific. It must be understood what the Hadith actually means linguistically. When it is said that black cumin has cure for all diseases except death, one would naturally ask the question whether death is a disease or not. Death is not a disease and hence the statement itself is clear that it is not to be read and understood literally but rather as a figure of speech. This figure of speech lays down the immense importance of the black cumin.

Another important point here is the understanding of all when the diseases are mentioned. The Arabic language has a rule known as taqleeb (تقليب) which states that whenever a majority is addressed, relevant words related to them are used which automatically include the minority not directly addressed. Hence, if the Hadith states that black cumin has cure for all diseases, it applies the rule of taqleeb.

Moreover, something carrying healing does not necessarily mean that it would ‘itself’ provide healing. If, for example, acetaminophen is an ingredient in many of the medicines, it does not mean that consuming it would provide one with healing. Dr. Zaghlool el-Naggar states regarding the Hadith:

This Prophetic hadith has urged many Muslim scholars and physicians throughout the ages to carry out research about the possibility of making use of this blessed seed in the treatment of some diseases, as the word ‘heal’, is mentioned in these Ahadith (sayings of the Prophet) in an indefinite form . Some scholars assert that it is not meant to heal any disease (on its own) and that the expected percentage of cure varies according to the type of disease and its intensity.

It is interesting to note that black cumin contains ‘nigellone’ which is used in the treatment of several diseases, most common of them being respiratory diseases.

Prophet Muhammad –may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- had stated this fact about the cumin seed a long time back and the guidance provided is for mankind for all times.

The scholars have explained the Hadith as follows:

قال النووي في شرح صحيح مسلم: “وقد ذكر الخطابي في الكلام على السنن أن هذا من العام المراد به الخصوص؛ إذ لا يجتمع في طبيعة نبات واحد يجمع القوى التي تتقاوم الطبائع فيها من معالجة الأدواء على اختلافها وتقابل طبائعها، وإنما أراد أنه شفاء من كل داء يحدث من كل البرودة والرطوبة والبلغم

Imam an-Nawawi in his commentary on Saheeh Muslim said: Al-Khattabi in his Sunan mentioned that the rhetorical device of speaking in general terms, yet intending by it a specific thing, is being utilized here. There is not a single type of plant, which contains the cure for a disease and a cure for another disease which requires the opposite of that which is present in the same plant. Rather, what he intended is that it’s a healing from every disease which occurs from every cold, humidity and expectoration.[2]

قال أبو بكر بن العربي: العسل عند الأطباء أقرب إلى أن يكون دواء من كل داء من الحبة السوداء، ومع ذلك فإن من الأمراض ما لو شرب صاحبه العسل لتأذى به، فإن كان المراد بقوله في العسل” فيه شفاء للناس” الأكثر الأغلب فحمل الحبة السوداء على ذلك أولى. وقال غيره: كان النبي -صلى الله عليه وسلم- يصف الدواء بحسب ما يشاهده من حال المريض، فلعل قوله في الحبة السوداء وافق مرض من مزاجه بارد، فيكون معنى قوله «شفاء من كل داء»؛ أي: من هذا الجنس الذي وقع القول فيه، والتخصيص بالحيثية كثير وشائع”

Abu Bakr Ibn al-’ Arabi said: Honey according to the doctors is more worthy of being considered a healing for every disease than the black cumin, nevertheless there are still certain diseases which would worsen if the patient were to drink the honey. If in His saying “in it there is healing for people” [16:69] we understand that this refers to the majority of the cases, then restricting the Hadith of the black cumin to this as well would be even more suitable. Others have said: The Prophet – peace be upon him – used to prescribe medicine in accordance with what he observed from the state of the patient. It’s possible that his statement regarding the black cumin corresponded to diseases resulting from a cold, hence the meaning of his statement “healing for all diseases” entails it being in reference to this specific nature and type of disease (i.e. related to cold). Specification of general statements in accordance with the viewpoint and perspective of the speaker is very common.[3]

Indeed, Allah knows the best.


Footnotes:

[1] Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 7, book 71, no. 592

[2] Commentary on Sahih Muslim by Imam Nawwawi

[3] Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani’s commentary of Sahih Bukhari, Fath al-Bari

It is argued that the following Hadith ignores reality and asks to blindly believe in God even when it apparently contradicts reality.

Narrated Abu Said: A man came to the prophet and said, 'My brother has got loose motions. The Prophet said, Let him drink honey." The man again (came) and said, 'I made him drink (honey) but that made him worse.' The Prophet said, 'Allah has said the Truth, and the abdomen of your brother has told a lie."[1]

Other version has the following addition towards the end.

"Let him drink honey." So he made him drink honey and he was cured.[2]

Mufti Taqi Usmani explaining the phrase in question writes:

"The people of Hijaz use the word "kizb" to mean mistake/error. This is as al-Khattabi has pointed out that they say, "Your hearing has lied" i.e. he has erred and has not understood what was said to him. And in the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him):

"The stomach of your brother has lied" is an indication that this medicine (in the form of honey) is beneficial for him.

The persistence of disease is not for the ineffectiveness of the medicine rather for the problem with the stomach of your brother that it has a lot of infectious matter and the quantity of the medicine benefits when it according to severity of the disease.

If the disease is severe the use of the medicine for a short duration does not benefit and it requires repetitive and consistent intake.

For this reason the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) ordered him to drink honey again."[3]

Indeed, Allah knows the best.

Footnotes:

[1] Sahih Bukhari, book 71, Hadith no. 614
[2] Sahih Bukhari, book 71, Hadith no. 588
[3] Takmila Fath al-Mulhim, vol. 4, p. 313

This paper critically examines a claim made by the critics of Islam that Aishah, the wife of Prophet Muhammad, had doubts towards the reality of his prophethood because of her statement to the Prophet, “Your Lord hastens to fulfill your desires.” The context of saying is highlighted as a tool to see its actual implications. And the whole claim is deconstructed through understanding of the key words and Prophet’s conduct on the issue. And in doing all this positive argument is made for the prophethood of the Prophet.

1. Introduction

One of the basic units of thought for as long as humanity has existed is the concept of reason. Reason screams loud and clear at thinkers as soon as the opposite of it is being propelled by ignorant masses as an ultimate discovery. Reason is not a byproduct of being educated; rather it is a litmus paper, separating those who have degrees only, from those who have knowledge. As such, many people who possess degrees have evaded reason, especially in the field of religion. In this paper we will examine a claim that has been made by certain critics against Prophet Muhammad, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, stating that some of his closest followers had doubts towards the reality of his prophethood. One of such people as claimed was Aishah, the wife of the Prophet.

The statement in question goes as follows:

“I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires.”

Referring to this statement, people make various assertions like:

Aishah meant to question the idea of revelation and therefore that of her husband’s prophethood.

That she said “Your Lord” and did not say “My Lord” or simply “Lord.” This shows she did not sincerely believe in what her husband preached about God.

She meant to be satirical and suggested that these were “convenient” revelations meant to allow him whatever he wanted.

In the following lines, all these assertions are critically analyzed.

2. The narration, full and explained

The complete text of the narration is:

عن عائشة رضي الله عنها، قالت: «كنت أغار على اللاتي وهبن أنفسهن لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، وأقول أتهب المرأة نفسها؟» فلما أنزل الله تعالى: (ترجئ من تشاء منهن وتؤوي إليك من تشاء ومن ابتغيت ممن عزلت فلا جناح عليك) قلت: ما أرى ربك إلا يسارع في هواك

Narrated Aishah: I used to look down upon those ladies who had given themselves to Allah’s Messenger and I used to say, “Can a lady give herself (to a man)?” But when Allah revealed: “You (O Muhammad) can postpone (the turn of) whom you will of them (your wives), and you may receive whom you will. And whomsoever you desire of those whom you have set aside (her turn temporarily) it is no sin on you (to receive her again).” (V.33:51) I said (to the Prophet), “I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires (hawa).”[1]

The Prophet and his family lived a very austere life and some hypocrite women tried to stir wrong feelings with the wives of the Prophet, trying to exploit this adversity of situation. At the same time, some believing women, while knowing the conditions in which the Prophet’s family was, wished to be bond in the marital relation with the Prophet and they did so, making a pronouncement that they would even forego their rights if it could turn out to be too much for the Prophet to divide his time. In order to regard such feelings and to upset the hypocrites who attempted to stir troubles in the Prophet’s household, it was made lawful for the Prophet to accept such proposals.

Aishah knew that it was permissible for the Prophet but there was spousal jealousy that made her comment that way.

2.1 Aishah saying “Your Lord” shows she was not even angry with the Prophet

While the uneducated critics suggest that Aishah doubted the idea divine revelation because she said “Your Lord” and not “My Lord” the truth is quite the contrary. In the following report we find her own testimony on the meanings of implications of her referring to the Allah through mention of the Prophet.

عن عائشة رضي الله عنها، قالت: قال لي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: «إني لأعلم إذا كنت عني راضية، وإذا كنت علي غضبى» قالت: فقلت: من أين تعرف ذلك؟ فقال: ” أما إذا كنت عني راضية، فإنك تقولين: لا ورب محمد، وإذا كنت علي غضبى، قلت: لا ورب إبراهيم ” قالت: قلت: أجل والله يا رسول الله، ما أهجر إلا اسمك

Narrated ‘Aishah that Allah’s Messenger said to her, “I know when you are pleased with me or angry with me.” I said, “Whence do you know that?” He said, “When you are pleased with me, you say, ‘No, by the Lord of Muhammad,’ but when you are angry with me, then you say, ‘No, by the Lord of Abraham.’” Thereupon I said, “Yes (you are right), but by Allah, O Allah’s Messenger, I leave nothing but your name.”[2]

It proves far from doubting the revelation Aishah wasn’t even angry. It was nothing more than a characteristic frank comment between spouses imbued with spousal jealousy.

When the Prophet gave Aishah the good news of revelation vindicating her of the calumny, her mother asked her to go to the Prophet and thank him, to which she replied:

لا والله، لا أقوم إليه، ولا أحمد إلا الله

“By Allah, I will not go to him and will not thank (anyone) but Allah.”[3]

On the same note the statement under consideration came from his wife and needs to be viewed in that backdrop only. The blessed Prophet used to be frank and informal with his wives and likewise, they were with him. The simple and only conclusion is that there was certainly no skepticism or disrespect but only blunt frankness and natural spousal jealousy.

2.2 Aishah did not doubt prophethood

The fact that the Prophet did not object or reprimand her for saying what she said is a definite proof that even he understood Aishah did not mean to be skeptical or disrespectful; instead she was just being jealous for him. It is manifestly clear on comparison with the above mentioned hadith about Aishah leaving out the Prophet’s name, for we know when the Prophet genuinely felt that Aishah had some unnatural feelings, he used not to stay silent. At another point, Aishah herself reported that one night while the Prophet was staying with her, he left his bed and went to the Baqi’ graveyard to pray for the deceased and Aishah followed her and when he turned back Aishah ran to her room before him. Upon returning, the Prophet found her breathing heavily as she had followed him with the presumption that he might have gone to another wife. As this act had the suggestion of doubting Prophet’s justice between the wives, he reprimanded her. She herself stated: “He gave me a painful shove on the chest, then he said: ‘Did you think that Allah and His Messenger would be unjust to you?’”[4]

It is therefore unfathomable that the Prophet did not say a word when Aishah had actually meant to be skeptical on so fundamental an issue while he took exception to something far less serious.

2.3 The meaning هوى (hawa)

As stated above, the context of the saying is such that it gives no suggestion the lines the critics tend to read into it; however, to add more on what the actual meaning of the word ‘desire’ is, we will explain below.

The word used is هوى (hawa) which means desire at heart and inclination. It does not always mean whims or mala fide inclinations.

It means carefully considered opinion as well. After the battle of Badr, the blessed Prophet consulted Abu Bakr and ‘Umar about the prisoners. They both gave their suggestions and the Prophet inclined towards Abu Bakr’s opinion. ‘Umar stated this fact in the following words:

فهوي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ما قال أبو بكر، ولم يهو ما قلت

“But the Messenger of Allah inclined (hawiya) towards the view of Abu Bakr, and he did not incline (yahwa) towards what I said.”[5]

Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali (d. 795 AH) states:

وقد وقع مثل ذلك في الآثار الإسرائيلية كثيرا ، وكلام مشايخ القوم وإشاراتهم نظما ونثرا يكثر في هذا الاستعمال

“With such a connotation of good/innocent inclination, the word has been used in the reports of the People of the Book and also frequently in the poetry and prose of the Pious Predecessors.”[6]

It can even refer to a desire shaped under divine guidance. In the Noble Qur’an, we read:

وَمَنْ أَضَلُّ مِمَّنِ اتَّبَعَ هَوَاهُ بِغَيْرِ هُدًى مِنَ اللَّهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ

“And who is more astray than one who follows his desire without guidance from Allah? Indeed, Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people.” (Noble Qur’an, 28:50)

This tells us that following one’s desires (hawa) is condemnable when it is not guided by Allah whereas following the desires guided by Allah is naturally above any kind of reproof.[7]

3. Did the Prophet benefit from the relaxation in rules?

Finally, the most important thing is to see if the Prophet used the excuse from the regular rules given to him. The verses relate to two specific relaxations for the Prophet:

a) Accepting a woman’s proposal to accept her in marriage without any dower.

b) No obligation to divide his time evenly between his wives.

All the propaganda around the above hadith is answered when we see that the Prophet opted not to benefit from these relaxations.

عن ابن عباس قال لم يكن عند رسول الله صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّم امرأة وهبت نفسها

Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: “The Messenger of Allah did not have any wife who offered herself to him.”[8]

Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (d. 852 AH) classified it as hasan and stated that it means the Prophet did not consummate his marriage with any such woman.[9] The narration that says Maymoonah had offered herself to the Prophet is weak.[10]

Aishah herself testified that the Prophet never discriminated among his wives regarding the distribution of time:

عن عروة ،قال: قالت عائشة: يا ابن أختي كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم لا يفضل بعضنا على بعض في القسم، من مكثه عندنا، وكان قل يوم إلا وهو يطوف علينا جميعا

Narrated ‘Urwah, Aishah said: “O nephew! The Messenger of Allah would not prefer any one of us to another with regards to spending time with us. And hardly a day would go by except that he would visit all of us…”[11]

It is thus abundantly clear that the allegation of “convenient revelations” is out rightly false. In Surah Ahzab, around the verse quoted in the hadith, there are seven rules about marriage peculiar to the Prophet. Four of these granted him relaxations and three put restrictions; and while the Prophet certainly abided by the restrictions, he did not opt to benefit from two of the relaxations.[12]

These facts frustrate all efforts to twist the hadith under consideration to cast doubts upon Islam. Had the idea of ‘convenient revelations’ any basis, there wouldn’t have been any restrictions on the Prophet to the exclusion of the rest of the believers and he wouldn’t have failed to take benefit of every relaxation.

In fact, there is overwhelming evidence for ‘inconvenient revelations’ as well. The prime example is that of change in qibla. According to the soundest opinion, the change in the qibla happened twice.[13] First it was the Ka’bah, then while the Prophet was in Makkah living among the pagans who revered the Ka’bah, he was instructed to make Jerusalem his qibla, which naturally invited more friction from the pagans and later when he wished it to be changed back to Ka’bah he did not turn to it merely on the basis of his own desire, unless he was ordered by Allah to do so.[14] Moreover, more than once he was reprimanded in the verses of Qur’an as in the verse about the blind man[15] and about the marriage with the divorcee of Zayd.[16]

That he was not making up things to make his life easier is established in the facts that he used to fast longer and pray for long hours at night to the point that his feet became swollen. Likewise, he never had anything from charity while he permitted it for his Companions, nor did he leave anything in inheritance for his widows and children. All such ‘inconvenient’ teachings refute any notion of ‘convenient’ revelations.

4. Aishah’s love and fidelity to the Prophet

As a final refutation, we will show categorical proofs of Aishah’s contribution and support of Prophet Muhammad. First and foremost, she was one of the most influential female scholars and one of the greatest first narrators of hadith reports and jurists. Their marriage was an example of love and affection. They used to race for fun, eat from the same plate, joke and nickname. She was his support in times of hardship and his loving companion along the struggles that he faced. When the blessed Prophet was on his deathbed, he chose to spend his last moments in Aishah’s house. He breathed his last breath and was buried in her house. Was this a woman who doubted his prophethood? No sensible person can believe that notion, in the light of evidence as opposed to the darkness of ignorance and ill intentions.

5. Summary and Conclusion

a) It was part of the frank discussion between spouses and included the element of spousal jealousy as well.

b) Aishah’s own testimony about her way of mentioning Allah tells us that she was not even angry with the Prophet when she said “Your Lord,” let alone doubting his prophethood. Moreover, her unwavering love and fidelity to the Prophet afterward also belies any such reading of the hadith.

c) The word used to mean “desires” does not necessarily mean base desires, it is also used for carefully deliberated upon opinion and a wish developing under divine guidance.

d) The Prophet never practiced either of the two exemptions mentioned in the hadith.

e) There are multiple examples of specific rulings and practices that made life difficult for him and his family, which show he had no personal motives or drives in any of these rulings.

It is therefore clear that far from raising any doubts about the Prophet, the hadith actually shows how the Prophet managed a very friendly and frank relation with his wives, despite all the burden of prophethood and that he did not even exercise the special relaxations given to him which dissolves the idea of ‘convenient revelations.’ In fact it even goes on to serve as a proof of his Prophethood.


Indeed, Allah knows the best.


References

[1]al-Bukhari, as-Sahih, Translated by Muhammad Muhsin Khan (Riyadh: Maktabat Dar-us-Salam, 1997) Hadith 4788

[2]Ibid., Hadith 5228

[3]Ibid., Hadith 2661

[4] Muslim bin Hajjaj, as-Sahih, Translated by Nasiruddin al-Khattab (Riyadh: Maktabat Dar-us-Salam, 2007) Hadith 2256 (103-974)

[5] Ibid., Hadith 4588 (1-1763)

[6]al-Hanbali, Ibn Rajab, Jami’ al-’Uloom wal-Hikam, (Beirut: ar-Risalah Publication, 2001) Vol.2, 399

[7]as-Sindi, ‘Abdul-Hadi, Hashiah ‘ala Sunan an-Nasa’i, (Halab: Matbu’at al-Islamiyya, 1986) Vol.6, 54

[8]at-Tabari, Ibn Jareer, Jami’ al-Bayan fee Ta’weel al-Qur’an, (Beirut: ar-Risalah Publication, 2000) Vol.20, 288

[9]al-Asqalani, Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari, (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifah, 1367 AH) Vol.8, 526

[10]Ibid., 525. Also, al-Jazri, Ibn Atheer, Usd al-Ghabah fee Ma’rifah as-Sahabah, (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyah, 1994) Vol.7, 262

[11]as-Sajistani, Abu Dawood, as-Sunan, Translated by Yasir Qadhi (Riyadh: Maktabah Dar-us-Salam, 2008) Hadith 2135. Classified as hasan sahih by al-Albani

[12]Shafi’, Muhammad, Ma’arif al-Qur’an, Translated by Muhammad Shamim (Karachi: Maktaba-e-Darul Uloom, n.d.) Vol.7, 191-200

[13]Usmani, Muhammad Taqi, In’am al-Bari, (Karachi: Maktabatul Hira, 2006)  Vol.1, 505-508

[14]Qur’an 2:144

[15]Qur’an 80:1-10

[16] Qur’an 33:37

A narration in Sunan Abu Da'ood  states that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: Do not beat your wife as you beat your slave girl.

The full narration is lengthy so let us take a look at the relevant paragraph from it.

قَالَ قُلْتُ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِنَّ لِي امْرَأَةً وَإِنَّ فِي لِسَانِهَا شَيْئًا يَعْنِي الْبَذَاءَ ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏"‏ فَطَلِّقْهَا إِذًا ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ قُلْتُ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِنَّ لَهَا صُحْبَةً وَلِي مِنْهَا وَلَدٌ ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏"‏ فَمُرْهَا - يَقُولُ عِظْهَا - فَإِنْ يَكُ فِيهَا خَيْرٌ فَسَتَفْعَلُ وَلاَ تَضْرِبْ ظَعِينَتَكَ كَضَرْبِكَ أُمَيَّتَكَ

I (the narrator Laqit) then said: Messenger of Allah, I have a wife who has something (wrong) in her tongue, i.e. she is insolent. He said: Then divorce her. I said: Messenger of Allah, she had company with me and I have children from her. He said: Then ask her (to obey you). If there is something good in her, she will do so (obey); and do not beat your wife as you beat your slave-girl[1].

The full context indicates that this was a way of explaining or conveying the message of not beating the wife. It also does not encourage beating of slave girls.

Al-Khattabi states:

وإنما فيه النهي عن تبريح الضرب كما يضرب المماليك في عادات من يستجيز ضربهم، ويستعمل سوء الملكة فيهم. وتمثله بضرب المماليك لا يوجب إباحة ضربهم، وإنما جرى ذكره في هذا على طريق الذم لأفعالهم ونهاه عن الاقتداء بها وقد نهى صلى الله عليه وسلم عن ضرب المماليك إلاّ في الحدود وأمرنا بالإحسان إليهم.

It forbids severe beating like the beating of the slaves by the one who beats them and makes wrong use of his authority with regards to them. And the similitude of beating the slaves does not mean permissibility of beating them. The mention of it is made by the way of condemnation of their deeds and it prohibit imitating the same. Verily the Prophet has prohibited the beating of the slaves except by the way of prescribed punishments (hudood) and he has ordered to be kind towards them.[2]

Likewise as-Sindi states:

، والتشبيه ليس لإباحة ضرب المماليك، بل لأنه مما جرى به عادتهم

And the similitude is not provided in order to denote the permissibility of beating the slaves rather it was utilized because it was general practice (i.e. in seventh century Arabia) for slaved to be beaten.[3]

The statement was spoken as a similitude and the beating of slave was mentioned as an example. If one were to say that so-and-so treats his friends like animals, this would mean that he treats them poorly and would not indicate as to how he treats animals. Perhaps this person is very nice towards animals; the statement is a figure of speech. Similarly, not treating ones wife as a slave-girl is to be understood in like manner.

Moreover, this can be confirmed by the fact that the narrator Laqit Ibn Sabirah had come to the Prophet (peace be upon him) as a part of a delegation from Iraq from the tribe of Banu al-Muntafiq. For 'as you beat your slave-girl' to be literal, the Prophet (peace be upon him) would have to know Laqit Ibn Sabirah quite well from well before and would have to know how he treats his slave-girls and would even have to know if he had any slave girls or not.

Moreover, the Prophet (peace be upon him) has explicitly stated as to how to treat the slaves.

Abu Mas'ud al-Ansari reported: "When I was beating my servant, I heard a voice behind me (saying): Abu Mas'ud, bear in mind Allah has more dominance over you than you have upon him. I turned and (found him) to be Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him). I said: Allah's Messenger, I set him free for the sake of Allah. Thereupon he said: Had you not done that, (the gates of) Hell would have opened for you, or the fire would have burnt you."[4]

"Zadhan reported that Ibn Umar called his slave and he found the marks (of beating) upon his back. He said to him: I have caused you pain. He said: No. But he (Ibn Umar) said: You are free. He then took hold of something from the earth and said: There is no reward for me even to the weight equal to it. I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: He who beats a slave without cognizable offence of his or slaps him, then expiation for it is that he should set him free."[5]

Narrated Al-Ma'rur: At Ar-Rabadha I met Abu Dhar who was wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a similar one. I asked about the reason for it. He replied, "I abused a person by calling his mother with bad names."  The Prophet said to me, 'O Abu Dhar! Did you abuse him by calling his mother with bad names You still have some characteristics of ignorance. Your slaves are your brothers and Allah has put them under your command. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats and dress him of what he wears. Do not ask them (slaves) to do things beyond their capacity (power) and if you do so, then help them.'[6]

Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: "When the slave of anyone amongst you prepares food for him and he serves him after having sat close to (and undergoing the hardship of) heat and smoke, he should make him (the slave) sit along with him and make him eat (along with him), and if the food seems to run short, then he should spare some portion for him (from his own share) - (another narrator) Dawud said:" i. e. a morsel or two".

Narrated AbuDharr:  "The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Feed those of your slaves who please you from what you eat and clothe them with what you clothe yourselves, but sell those who do not please you and do not punish Allah's creatures."[7]

Indeed, Allah knows the best.

Footnotes

[1] Book 1, Hadith 56
[2] Ma’alim al-Sunan
[3] Hashia ‘ala Musnad
[4] Sahih Muslim, book 15, no. 4088
[5] Sahih Muslim, book 15, no. 4079
[6] Sahih Bukhari, vol 1, book 2, no. 29
[7] Sahih Muslim, book 15, no. 4096/4097

Find part one here.

It has been alleged that there are a number of passages in the Qur'an which indicate that Islam is not a monotheistic religion and that there are a number of verses which indicate so.[1] It is claimed that if one is to forcefully insert monotheism to such passages, then the Qur'an would lose points to the eloquence argument and hence it would be concluded that either the contradicts monotheism or that the Qur'an's claim to eloquence is unfounded.

Let us examine the verses claimed to contradict monotheism.


Allegation 1

And [We sent] Abraham, when he said to his people, 'Worship Allah and fear Him. That is best for you, if you should know. You only worship, besides Allah, idols, and you produce a falsehood. Indeed, those you worship besides Allah do not possess for you [the power of] provision. So seek from Allah provision and worship Him and be grateful to Him. To Him you will be returned.' And if you [people] deny [the message] - already nations before you have denied. And there is not upon the Messenger except [the duty of] clear notification. Have they not considered how Allah begins creation and then repeats it? Indeed that, for Allah, is easy. Say, [O Muhammad], 'Travel through the land and observe how He began creation. Then Allah will produce the final creation. Indeed Allah, over all things, is competent.' He punishes whom He wills and has mercy upon whom He wills, and to Him you will be returned. And you will not cause failure [to Allah] upon the earth or in the heaven. And you have not other than Allah any protector or any helper. And the ones who disbelieve in the signs of Allah and the meeting with Him - those have despaired of My mercy, and they will have a painful punishment. And the answer of Abraham's people was not but that they said, 'Kill him or burn him,' but Allah saved him from the fire. Indeed in that are signs for a people who believe. And [Abraham] said, 'You have only taken, other than Allah, idols as [a bond of] affection among you in worldly life. Then on the Day of Resurrection you will deny one another and curse one another, and your refuge will be the Fire, and you will not have any helpers.' And Lot believed him. [Abraham] said, 'Indeed, I will emigrate to [the service of] my Lord. Indeed, He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise.' And We gave to Him Isaac and Jacob and placed in his descendants prophethood and scripture. And We gave him his reward in this world, and indeed, he is in the Hereafter among the righteous.[2]

Allegations against these verses are mainly twofold:

1. Either the Qur'an contradicts monotheism because the passage appears to be stating that the words those have despaired of My mercy, and they will have a painful punishment belong to Prophet Muhammad (may blessings of Allah and peace be upon him).

Or

2.There is no eloquence in the Qur'an and the entire passage is riddled with confusions carrying no sequence.

There is neither contradiction with monotheism nor any confusion and incoherence. The article containing the allegation has itself provided clarification to the first criticism:

Then often as the Quran does an interjection is made, Allah commands Mohammed to 'say' or recite something specifically to his people, his tribesmen.

However, a question has been asked:

When do Mohammed's comments addressing his people stop and when does the story switch back to Abraham?

The question is very much fair and valid. How does one know where the instruction to the Prophet to proclaim end and the statement of Allah starts and likewise where the statements spoken by Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him) start and end.

The Arabic text and the overall context of the Qur'an provides us with the understanding that the Most Merciful is none other than Allah. Keeping the teachings of the Qur'an in mind, one would automatically understand the quoted passages in accordance with the theme of the Qur'an. Even though this provides us answers as to whom each statement is attributed to, it is argued that it requires self-assessment thereby indicating problems in the Qur'an's eloquence.

Let us examine each of these verses in a little detail.

29:16: And [We sent] Abraham, when he said to his people, 'Worship Allah and fear Him. That is best for you, if you should know.

29:17: You only worship, besides Allah, idols, and you produce a falsehood. Indeed, those you worship besides Allah do not possess for you [the power of] provision. So seek from Allah provision and worship Him and be grateful to Him. To Him you will be returned.'

Here it is very clear that it is Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him) who is speaking. If we ponder over the words of the verses, we observe that the words of Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him) are in second person.

29:18: And if you [people] deny [the message] - already nations before you have denied. And there is not upon the Messenger except [the duty of] clear notification.

This is the statement of Allah towards the nation of Prophet Muhammad (may blessings of Allah and peace be upon him).[3] When one reads the passage in Arabic, this makes complete sense and is harmonious as well.

The Arabic text of verse 15 (which is the statement of Allah) ends with 'Aalameen' Verse 16 and 17 end with 'Ta'lamoon' and 'Turja'oon' respectively which are the words of Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him) and they rhyme with each other. Then verse 18 ends with 'Mubeen'. This is the statement of Allah and notice how beautifully it rhymes with the ending of verse 15 (Aalameen). The change in person is done in a very beautiful and poetic manner.

The proceeding verses follow different rules of rhyme and rhythm however, they are not addressed as they are not relevant to the topic at hand because where the rhythm does not clarify the situation, the direct and actual words do. When one reads the Qur'an in its original language, no such doubts and queries arise. No wonder the pagan Arabs never raised questions against the Qur'an eloquence.

Then in the very next verse, the tense changes from second person to third person:

29:19: Have they not considered how Allah begins creation and then repeats it? Indeed that, for Allah, is easy.

This is the statement of Allah and coming to this conclusion does not require a far-fetched interpretation and can be evidenced from the verse itself where Allah says Have they not considered (third person tense) whereas in the previous verse, it is Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him) speaking to people in second person.

29:20: Say, [O Muhammad], 'Travel through the land and observe how He began creation. Then Allah will produce the final creation. Indeed Allah, over all things, is competent.'

These are the words instructed by Allah to the Prophet to speak. The word Qul (Say/Proclaim) at the start of the sentence makes this very clear. The Prophet is instructed to speak these words and they have been quoted in second person.

29:21: He punishes whom He wills and has mercy upon whom He wills, and to Him you will be returned.

29:22: And you will not cause failure [to Allah] upon the earth or in the heaven. And you have not other than Allah any protector or any helper.

These two verses also carry the words instructed by Allah to the Prophet to speak to the people.

29:23: And the ones who disbelieve in the signs of Allah and the meeting with Him - those have despaired of My mercy, and they will have a painful punishment.

In the 23rd verse, we see that the tense used is in third person which is the same as verse 19. i.e. both are the words of Allah and not of Prophet Muhammad (may blessings of Allah and peace be upon him) nor of Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him).


Allegation 2

And [Abraham] said, 'You have only taken, other than Allah, idols as [a bond of] affection among you in worldly life. Then on the Day of Resurrection you will deny one another and curse one another, and your refuge will be the Fire, and you will not have any helpers.'

And Lot believed him. [Abraham] said, 'Indeed, I will emigrate to [the service of] my Lord. Indeed, He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise.'[4]

Arguments from these verses are the following:

1. The second statement is confusing as to the identity of the speaker. Whether the statement 'Indeed, I will emigrate' are the words of Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him) or of Prophet Lut (peace be upon him) is not clear from the text of the Qur'an.

2. Using the Qur'an only and not seeking aid of tafaseer (commentaries) would guide one to the conclusion that the speaker is Prophet Lut (peace be upon him) and his migrating to his Lord (Ibrahim) would mean that he committed shirk (polytheism).

Using different translations and utilizing the help of the weakest one to arrive at conclusions is intellectual dishonesty.

As to the first question, a little clarification on Arabic is necessary. Two words/letters are being used for 'and' in this passage. Wa (و) and Fa (ف). Wa (و) simply means 'and' whereas Fa (ف) refers to that 'and' where the follow-up word comes after i.e. there is a sequence. If a person did this and (و) that, it would mean that he did both of these while the sequence is not of importance. However, if a person is said to have done this and (ف) that, it would mean that he did the latter event after the former. Hence, another way to translate (ف) would be 'and then'.

Verse 24 quotes the response of the nation of Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him) to him. The verse starts with Fa (ف) and so does verse 26 indicating that Lut (peace be upon him) believed in him (i.e. he accepted his call) after he had delivered the message. Keeping this basic information in mind, let us take a look at the verse again:

Then (Fa) Lot believed him. And (Wa) [Abraham] said, 'Indeed, I will emigrate to [the service of] my Lord. Indeed, He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise.

The previous verse quotes the words of Ibrahim (peace be upon him) stating that the disbelievers had rejected his call, then a little pause is taken stating as to who accepted his message using the word Fa (ف) and then the pause is ended and the words of Ibrahim (peace be upon him) continue again using the word Wa (و) this time.

When translators add words in brackets, it is not that they are using deceit or covering shortcomings but it is due to the fact that a literal translation does not always do justice to the text and the message especially where the language is Arabic and words and letters carry minute and deep meanings. If one were to read the entire passage in Arabic, one would find no issue worth seeking clarification.

As to the second point, even if it is assumed that the speaker is Prophet Lut (peace be upon him), the conclusion of polytheism appears very unwise. Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him), in the previous verse, is quoted as speaking to his nation who had rejected his message and then the next verse informs us that Prophet Lut (peace be upon him) believed in him. Now supposing that it was him who wished to emigrate to his Lord, how would he emigrate to Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him) when he was right with him? If he had considered Ibrahim (peace be upon him) as his Lord, then the statement of emigrating to him would not make sense as they were both together. This clearly shows that the Lord of the one planning to emigrate was none other Allah which is indicated by the verse itself.


Conclusion

If one reads the Qur'an with the intent to find faults, then the silly arguments would keep on generating and the list of 'contradictions' would never end. However, if one reads the Qur'an with genuine intent to understand it, then most of the questions would be answered by the readers themselves and where problems still persist, a closer look at the Arabic words, letters and sentences would surely end the confusion. The Qur'an is the book of Allah and it neither contains polytheism nor incoherence or departure from eloquence.

Indeed, Allah knows the best.


Footnotes

[1] Anti-Islamic claim
[2] Qur'an 29:16-27
[3] Refer Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Tafsir Jalalayn, Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas
[4] Qur'an 29:25, 26

Assalaamualaykum dear brothers and sisters,

I am new here and so still getting to know the things around. So for my first piece, I would present a link instead of pasting it here.

There are a number of passages of the Qur’an where the quoted words appear to be different when they are repeated in another passage. How does a Muslim respond to this?

Answer: http://quranmisconceptions.wordpress.com/2012/11/17/parallel-passages-of-the-quranic-text-no-conflict/