Why isn't the Name YHWH in Quran?

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

At the burning bush, Allah spoke to Moses and revealed to him:

اِنَّنِیۡۤ اَنَا اللّٰہُ لَاۤ اِلٰہَ اِلَّاۤ اَنَا فَاعۡبُدۡنِیۡ

I am I, Allah, there is no god except Me, so worship Me

(Surah 20, Ayah 14)

The words Innani Ana, which literally mean “I am Me” especially in conjunction with the narrative of what Allah said to Moses at the burning bush is certainly a confirmation and indication of what is mentioned about the Name of God in the Book of Exodus:

וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֔ה אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה וַיֹּ֗אמֶר כֹּ֤ה תֹאמַר֙ לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה שְׁלָחַ֥נִי אֲלֵיכֶֽם

And God said unto Moses, I Am That I Am: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I Am hath sent me unto you

(Exodus 3:14)

The words Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh meaning “I am that I am” are referred to in the Quran as Innani Ana “I am Me”. In this Biblical verse, God says His name is Ehyeh “you shall say to the sons of Israel, Ehyeh has sent me”. This is the meaning of God’s greatest Name, the Ism al-A’zam in Islamic tradition, regarding which the Prophet Muhammad said that It can be found, among other places, in Surat Ta Ha:

اسْمُ اللَّهِ الأَعْظَمُ الَّذِي إِذَا دُعِيَ بِهِ أَجَابَ فِي سُوَرٍ ثَلاَثٍ الْبَقَرَةِ وَآلِ عِمْرَانَ وَطَهَ

“The Greatest Name of Allah, which if called by He responds is in three Surahs: al-Baqarah, Ale Imran and Ta Ha.” (Sunan Ibn Majah)

The Ayah I have quoted in which Allah says انني انا “I am Me” to the Prophet Moses is the fourteenth verse of Surat Ta Ha.

Now the divine Name YHWH occurs in the Hebrew Bible a little under seven thousand times. It is the most frequent and repeated Name of God in the Old Testament, outnumbering the Name Elohim which occurs a under three thousand times.

Exodus 3:14 is essentially giving the etymological significance and meaning of the divine Name YHWH, and therefore so is the fourteenth Ayah of Surat Ta Ha in the Quran.

So it is a valid question as to why doesn’t the divine Name YHWH occur directly and plainly in the Holy Quran? Why instead is there an Islamic tradition from the Sunnah about the Ism al-A’zam (Greatest Name) though it is never spelled out plainly what that Name is?

I believe the reason for this is that the divine Name YHWH (even I am not spelling it out plainly for a reason) is because the Name is so holy, being the Greatest Name of all the many Names of God, that Islam does not want the people, especially Muslims, speaking or pronouncing it casually. This in fact indicated in the Third Commandment: “Thou shalt not take the name of YHWH thy God in vain; for YHWH will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain” (Exodus 20:7).

By at least a little before the time of Jesus, the Septuagint, or Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible in circulation, had Kyrios, Greek for Lord, written in place of the divine Name YHWH. This was a Jewish tradition, at least by that time, that the divine Name YHWH should not be uttered out of reverence and fear, a tradition that the Jews have preserved till the present.

Likewise, the divine Name YHWH never appears even once in the New Testament. In those places where the New Testament quotes a passage from the Old Testament in which the divine Name YHWH is mentioned, it has substituted it with Kyrios.

For instance, John the Baptist quotes Isaiah 40:3, “Prepare ye the way of the Lord [Kyriou]” (Matthew 3:3; Mark 1:3; Luke 3:4). Isaiah 40:3, in the original Hebrew, has the divine Name YHWH, but the Gospels have rendered it Kyrios in Greek, meaning Lord, in keeping with the tradition of not uttering or writing the divine Name YHWH. 

Jesus quotes the Shema, “Hear O Israel; the Lord [Kyrios] our God is one Lord [Kyrios]” (Mark 12:29)

From this we can conclude that Jesus likely did not utter the divine Name YHWH, at least not casually or frequently, but instead, like the Pharisees, would have said Adonai. He would have said the Shema the way Jews say it today, not saying the divine Name YHWH, but substituting it with Adonai “my Lord”.

It is, therefore, strange that some Christians today insist on uttering and fully pronouncing the divine Name YHWH. The Jehovah’s Witnesses have made this point one of their salient features in dissenting from normative Christianity. They often argue that “Apostate Christendom” is guilty of having removed the name Jehovah from the translation of the Bible (and they have restored the name Jehovah in their New World Translation), but fail to explain why that name never once occurs in the Greek New Testament, even in a Hellenized form, which would be Iao. Jehovah itself is an Anglicization of a possible pronunciation of YHWH, though not the one most scholars contend is the actual one.

The Holy Quran, like the Gospels and the New Testament, has not plainly referred to the divine Name YHWH, not because it is unfamiliar with or denies the Name, but because it wants to discourage Muslims from saying or writing it down casually due its extreme holiness since it is the Ism al-A’zam (Greatest Name), thereby preventing unintentional sacrilege.

And Allah and His Apostle know best!

Molinism and the Problem of Evil

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Molinism is a theological attempt to answer the problem of evil, and an attempt to reconcile God’s sovereignty and omniscience with human free will. Its author was Luis de Molina (1535-1600), a Spanish Jesuit priest. 

The key teaching of Molinism is that God selects and creates a world, one out of infinite possible worlds, on the basis of His foreknowledge of what every person will freely do in their given circumstances.

A good analogy is a game of chess; God moves His pieces on the basis of His foreknowledge of which exact moves His opponent will freely make in reaction so as to result in a victory for Himself in the game. This knowledge of what a person will freely choose to do in a set of given circumstances is termed middle knowledge.

When first introduced, the doctrine of Molinism was fiercely opposed by a rival Catholic monastic order, the Dominicans. In my view, the Dominicans rightly objected to Molinism for essentially making God’s will and plan dependent on the human will. It is a mild form of dualism, that does not give due regard to God’s total sovereignty and independence. However, after a series of debates and discussions, the Catholic Pope decreed that both the Dominican and Jesuit/Molinist views were legitimate and forbade them from declaring each other heretical.

The Dominicans had characterized Molinism as a recycling of the earlier heresy of Semi-Pelagianism; man takes the first step freely after which God responds with His grace leading to his salvation. In thinking about Semi-Pelagianism I was reminded of the Hadith Qudsi in which Allah, holy and exalted is He, says about man:

وَإِنْ أَتَانِي يَمْشِي أَتَيْتُهُ هَرْوَلَةً

If he walks toward Me I run toward Him

Someone might mistakenly think that, based on this Hadith Qudsi, man must take the initiative in seeking God, and only then does God respond eagerly and make the way easy for him to reach Him. But we orthodox Sunni Muslims believe that even man’s initiative in seeking Allah has been created and determined by Allah, Who creates and determines everything.

The doctrine of synergism, that salvation is the result of cooperation between God and man, does not appear to be compatible with Sunni Islam. The Holy Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم said:

 وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّهُ لَنْ يَنْجُوَ أَحَدٌ مِنْكُمْ بِعَمَلِهِ

Know that none from among you can be saved by his work (Sahih Muslim)

Rather, it is purely by the mercy and grace of Allah through which a person is saved:

وَلاَ أَنَا إِلاَّ أَنْ يَتَغَمَّدَنِيَ اللَّهُ بِرَحْمَةٍ مِنْهُ وَفَضْلٍ

“Even I cannot be saved except if Allah envelops me in a mercy from Him and grace.” (ibid)

Concerning the problem of evil; the objection raised predominantly by atheists, that if God is able but unwilling to prevent evil in this world then He is malevolent. This is the objection that applies to us Sunni Muslims, because we reject the alternative notion that God is willing but unable to prevent evil in this world. We obviously disagree with the conclusion that introducing evil into this world, allowing it to be and not always preventing it despite the capability to do so is necessarily malevolence itself. It is in fact a childish argument that allowing evil to exist in this world makes God evil.

Yes, there is evil in this world and God has decreed that it happen but for the purpose of elevating man and giving him the opportunity to prove himself righteous. And as a reward for that righteousness God will admit man into another world in the afterlife in which there is no evil whatsoever.

Commentary on Select Verses of Surah 43 (Part 1)

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

Salutations and peace upon you, my master, Apostle of Allah

Allah جل جلاله says:

اِنَّا جَعَلۡنٰہُ قُرۡءٰنًا عَرَبِیًّا لَّعَلَّکُمۡ تَعۡقِلُوۡنَ

Indeed, We have made it an Arabic Quran that you may comprehend

(Surah 43:3)

Allah never says that He created the Quran. But here He says He made the Quran Arabic. There is the subtle difference between make and create. Hence, Allah says:

وَلَا تَجۡعَلُوا اللّٰہَ عُرۡضَۃً لِّاَیۡمَانِکُمۡ

And make not Allah a target for your oaths

(Surah 2:224)

It is obvious that here the act of making Allah a target of one's oath does not mean creating Allah. So it is correct to say the Quran is مجعول "made" but not مخلوق "created". The Holy Quran is the speech of God, and God's speech is one of his divine attributes that is eternal, uncreated.

Allah says:

وَکَمۡ اَرۡسَلۡنَا مِنۡ نَّبِیٍّ فِی الۡاَوَّلِیۡنَ

وَمَا یَاۡتِیۡہِمۡ مِّنۡ نَّبِیٍّ اِلَّا کَانُوۡا بِہٖ یَسۡتَہۡزِءُوۡنَ

And how many a Prophet We sent among the earlier ones?

And there came not a Prophet to them except that they were to him ridiculing

(Surah 43:6-7)

Allah reveals, in the form of a rhetorical question, that the number of Prophets who preceded our master the Holy Prophet Muhammad صلي الله عليه وسلم is rather large. Some narrations mention that there were around 124 thousand Prophets. Allah and His Apostle know best! The vast majority of Prophets sent by God were to the Children of Israel, and therefore, most of the Prophets mentioned in the Holy Quran were Israelite Prophets (Moses, Aaron, David, Solomon, Samuel, Elias, Elisha, Job, Jonas, Ezekiel, Zechariah, Jehiah/John the Baptist and Jesus). Only a few non-Israelite Prophets are mentioned, namely, Shu'aib, Salih, Hud and of course the Prophet Muhammad عليهم السلام

But without exception each and every Prophet was mocked and ridiculed. And those who ridicule a Prophet—one who is the most beloved to God Himself—are indeed among the most debased and wretched of creation. Such blasphemy without sincere repentance sends a soul straight to eternal damnation in the lowest and most terrifying depths of the fire of Hell. Till this day, the blasphemers use their blasphemy and mockery of the Prophets as a means to demoralize the Believers and make them doubtful or ashamed of their Faith.

فَاَہۡلَکۡنَاۤ اَشَدَّ مِنۡہُمۡ بَطۡشًا وَّمَضٰی مَثَلُ الۡاَوَّلِیۡنَ

And We destroyed those stronger than them in power, and the example of the earlier ones has already past

(Surah 43:8)

The idol worshiping Quraysh of Mecca, the primary opponents of the Prophet Muhammad صلي الله عليه وسلم were not a great kingdom or regional power unlike the Pharaoh of the Exodus who opposed Moses, or even the warlike people who were wiped out during the Great Flood after having rejected Noah. Consider also the scattering and erasure of the Northern Kingdom of Israel in the 8th century BCE, an obstinate nation that repeatedly and arrogantly belied the warnings delivered to them by ancient Israelite Prophets to repent from idolatry. They too were relatively stronger than the clans of Quraysh and the other Arab tribes in their vicinity—who did not even possess a proper polity—on the eve of the Prophet Muhammad's mission. The purpose of the Ayah is to impress upon them that they should not feel secure in opposing the Prophet Muhammad صلي الله عليه وسلم despite the odds against the latter in terms of raw numbers and influence in the region at the time of the revelation of this Ayah. Allah says:

وَلَئِنۡ سَاَلۡتَہُمۡ مَّنۡ خَلَقَ السَّمٰوٰتِ وَالۡاَرۡضَ لَیَقُوۡلُنَّ خَلَقَہُنَّ الۡعَزِیۡزُ الۡعَلِیۡمُ

If you were to ask them who created the Heavens and the Earth they would say, "the Mighty, the Knowing created them both"

(Surah 43:9)

The pagan Arabs affirmed not only the existence of Allah—the invisible God Who had no image or idol to represent Him—but that He alone is the Creator. But confessing belief in a Supreme Deity, Who alone is the Creator, and alone has possession over all things, is not sufficient to save one from Shirk of polytheism if one believes in other deities alongside the One God and worships anything or anyone besides Allah, even if he acknowledges that what he worships is not independent of Allah. This is because it is not only Tawhid to believe in a single Creator, a single Supreme Being, but the Tawhid of Islam requires that we worship nothing but Allah. Allah سبحانه وتعالي says:

وَالَّذِیۡ خَلَقَ الۡاَزۡوَاجَ کُلَّہَا وَجَعَلَ لَکُمۡ مِّنَ الۡفُلۡکِ وَالۡاَنۡعَامِ مَا تَرۡکَبُوۡنَ

لِتَسۡتَوٗا عَلٰی ظُہُوۡرِہٖ ثُمَّ تَذۡکُرُوۡا نِعۡمَۃَ رَبِّکُمۡ اِذَا اسۡتَوَیۡتُمۡ عَلَیۡہِ وَتَقُوۡلُوۡا سُبۡحٰنَ الَّذِیۡ سَخَّرَ لَنَا ہٰذَا وَمَا کُنَّا لَہٗ مُقۡرِنِیۡنَ

وَاِنَّاۤ اِلٰی رَبِّنَا لَمُنۡقَلِبُوۡنَ

And Who has created everything in pairs, and has made vessels and beasts whereon you ride.

That you may settle yourselves firmly on their backs and when you are securely seated thereon you may remember the favor of your Lord and say: Holy is He Who has subjected this to us, while we had not the strength to subdue it by ourselves.

And to our Lord surely shall we return.

(Surah 43:12-14)

Muslims universally recite this Quranic prayer upon seating themselves in any vehicle, including modern cars, trains and planes. Modern vehicles and forms of passenger transportation may all linguistically be named fulk, which literally means a moving vessel. While in premodern times it was primarily used in reference to sea faring vessels, the same word may certainly apply to modern-day vehicles like automobiles, trains and airplanes.

Allah, holy and exalted is He, says:

اَمِ اتَّخَذَ مِمَّا یَخۡلُقُ بَنٰتٍ وَّاَصۡفٰکُمۡ بِالۡبَنِیۡنَ 

Has He taken [for Himself] from that which He created daughters and privileged you with sons?

(Surah 43, Ayah 16)

This rhetorical question highlights that the polytheist Arabs believe their “goddesses”, meaning their idols, namely, Lat, Manat, and Uzza, are the daughters of Allah, and likewise that the Angels are His female children, yet prefer for themselves sons. But if one of them were to have a daughter, the next verse describes his condition:

ظَلَّ وَجۡہُہٗ مُسۡوَدًّا وَّہُوَ کَظِیۡمٌ

His face becomes blackened and he becomes filled with suppressed rage and sorrow

(Surah 43, Ayah 17)

Some understand this passage to mean there is inherently no difference between sons and daughters in terms of worth, but that it is hypocritical for the polytheists to ascribe daughters to Allah while they prefer sons for themselves. And Allah is free of having any children, male or female. But elsewhere in the Quran, Allah says about the polytheist belief that He has daughters while they prefer sons for themselves:

اَلَکُمُ الذَّکَرُ وَلَہُ الۡاُنۡثٰی

تِلۡکَ اِذًا قِسۡمَۃٌ ضِیۡزٰی

For you males and for Him females?!

That is surely an unfair division

(Surah 53, Ayah 21 & 22)

I consider this an objective statement and not merely a rhetorical response. In other words, it truly is unfair if one person has sons and another daughters. The one who is given sons is favored, in the apparent, because the male is inherently of greater worth and value than the female, as Allah says:

اَلرِّجَالُ قَوّٰمُوۡنَ عَلَی النِّسَآءِ بِمَا فَضَّلَ اللّٰہُ بَعۡضَہُمۡ عَلٰی بَعۡضٍ

The men are in charge of the women because Allah has given excellence of some of them [men] over some [women]

(Surah 4, Ayah 34)

When we consider that the greatest creation of Allah, and the one who is most beloved to Him, namely, the Prophet Muhammad, صلى الله عليه وسلم is male, and likewise that the Prophets and Apostles of God were men; Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, Elias and Jesus عليهم الصلاة والسلام were all men, then it becomes apparent that in the sight of Allah the male is inherently superior to the female. The point is not to denigrate the female but to elevate the male. Though all humans are accountable to God and He shall deliver justice to everyone, male and female, the male has been granted faculties, intelligence, strength, a drive and understanding above and beyond what the female naturally possesses. For this reason the man has greater responsibility and is burdened with more challenging duties than the female. His threshold for enduring pain and suffering is higher and so God tests him to a greater degree than the woman.

To be continued…

Christian Nudism

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Before the establishment of Islam in Arabia and the total elimination of idolatry in that land, the idol-worshipers had control of the Ka’bah and would perform Tawaf (circling) of it totally in the nude. Islam abolished this satanic practice:

وَأَنْ لاَ يَحُجَّ بَعْدَ الْعَامِ مُشْرِكٌ وَلاَ يَطُوفَ بِالْبَيْتِ عُرْيَانٌ

“No polytheist shall perform the Hajj after this year, nor shall anyone perform Tawaf of the House naked” (Sahih al-Bukhari)

Public nudity is strictly forbidden, for both males and females, in the Shari’ah.

But according to the Bible, the Prophet Isaiah prophesied while naked: “At the same time spake the Lord by Isaiah the son of Amoz, saying, Go and loose the sackcloth from off thy loins, and put off thy shoe from thy foot. And he did so, walking naked and barefoot.” (Isaiah 20:2), and likewise did Prophet Micah prophesy while naked, “Therefore I will wail and howl, I will go stripped and naked” (Micah 1:8).

It seems to me that what is intended in these passages by the word naked is the wearing of minimal clothing, meaning only an inner garment or underwear, as a person would be considered “naked” if he was not wearing the outer garment in public.

The Bible mentions the story of King Saul, having the Spirit of God upon him, prophesying naked in the presence of the Prophet Samuel: “and the Spirit of God was upon him also, and he went on, and prophesied, until he came to Naioth in Ramah. And he stripped off his clothes also, and prophesied before Samuel in like manner, and lay down naked all that day and all that night. Wherefore they say, Is Saul also among the prophets?” (1 Samuel 19:23-24) The implication here is that, at least in the public perception, a man stripping naked and lying down exposed in public was an action associated with prophets and prophesying.

It is stated in the Bible that the nakedness of King David became exposed to the people while performing a celebratory dance for which his wife Michal sarcastically rebuked him, “And Michal the daughter of Saul came out to meet David, and said, How glorious was the king of Israel to day, who uncovered himself to day in the eyes of the handmaids of his servants, as one of the vain fellows shamelessly uncovereth himself!” (2 Samuel 6:20)

One of the main sacraments of Christianity is baptism. Apparently, early Christians used to practice baptism, a public ritual, totally naked. Writing in the early 3rd century CE, Hippolytus gives instructions on how baptism is to be performed according to the Apostolic tradition of Christianity, “Then they shall take off all their clothes. The children shall be baptized first. After this the men will be baptized. Finally, the women, after they have unbound their hair and removed their jewelry. No one shall take any foreign object with themselves down into the water.” (The Apostolic Tradition, 21:3-5)

Incidentally, Islam has its own version of baptism that a newly converted Muslim is expected to observe. But this is not a public ritual, rather a private full body washing. It is termed Ghusl, and Muslims perform it also to remove ritual impurity, for instance the Ghusl al-Janabah. Then there is Ghusl al-Mayyit, the ritual full body washing of the deceased corpse before its shrouding and burial. Because these are ritual washings done for religious reasons, and not merely ordinary bathing, they ought to be understood as a form of baptism.

Between the 2nd and 4th centuries CE, a Christian sect known as the Adamites appeared in parts of North Africa and the Near East. They practiced nudity as part of the heresy that they had been restored to the primeval innocence of Adam and Eve before the Fall. They rejected the institution of marriage. There may have been similar groups in medieval Europe, which were likewise dubbed “Adamites”. These were generally radical antinomian cults that lived communally and were accused of all manner of debauchery. At present there are some Christian nudist or naturist communities that practice nudism for various reasons, and have revived the early Christian practice of nude baptism.

Noah, he is not from your family (11:46)

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Allah, holy and exalted, said to Noah about one of his sons who rejected him:

قَالَ يَا نُوحُ إِنَّهُ لَيْسَ مِنْ أَهْلِكَ

He [Allah] said, “O Noah! Indeed, he is not from your family.”

(Surah 11, Ayah 46)

Some exegetes explained that Allah revealed to Noah that this person was not actually his son because he was the product of adultery between Noah's wife and another man! The Holy Quran condemns Noah’s wife as an unbeliever:

ضَرَبَ اللّٰہُ مَثَلًا لِّلَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوا امۡرَاَتَ نُوۡحٍ وَّامۡرَاَتَ لُوۡطٍ

Allah casts as an example those who disbelieved; the wife of Noah and the wife of Lot

(Surah 66, Ayah 10)

However, I do not accept the view that Noah’s wife committed adultery with another man and bore a son whom Noah initially considered his own. The standard view is that while this person was biologically Noah’s son, he was expelled from Noah’s family on account of his unbelief.

Yet, it is within the power of Allah to blot out even the kinship by blood, and likewise to establish blood kinship between individuals that are apparently unrelated.

The Prophet Yahya—John the Baptist—said to the boastful Jews: “And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham” (Matthew 3:9; Luke 3:8)

Likewise did Jesus rebuke the Jews when they boasted of being the seed of Abraham, and said to them, “If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham”, “Ye are of your father the devil” (John 8:39, 44)

Is it not within the power of God to nullify biological descent, so that a man who is considered the father of another is in an instant no longer his father?

And some of our preachers have described those who commit blasphemy against Allah and His Apostle, peace be upon him, as bastards born of harlotry. It may not be merely figurative but a literal, biological fact.

Abraham the Close, Intimate Friend of God (4:125)

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Allah, holy and exalted, says

وَاتَّخَذَ اللّٰہُ اِبۡرٰہِیۡمَ خَلِیۡلًا

And Allah took Abraham as a very close intimate friend

(Surah 4, Ayah 125)

The Arabic word khalil means “a very close intimate friend” (Arabic-English Dictionary of Qur’anic Usage, p.284).

We Muslims often refer to the great Patriarch Abraham, peace be upon him, as Khalilullah and Khalil-ur-Rahman, the very close and intimate friend of Allah, the very close and intimate friend of the Rahman.

The Prophet Muhammad, sall Allahu alaihi wasallam, said:

إِنَّ الْكَرِيمَ ابْنَ الْكَرِيمِ ابْنِ الْكَرِيمِ ابْنِ الْكَرِيمِ يُوسُفُ بْنُ يَعْقُوبَ بْنِ إِسْحَاقَ بْنِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ خَلِيلِ الرَّحْمَنِ

“Indeed, the honorable, son of the honorable, son of the honorable, son of the honorable is Joseph, son of Jacob, son of Isaac, son of Abraham, Khalil-ir-Rahman.”

The Holy Prophet Muhammad, sall Allahu alaihi wasallam, said about himself:

إِنَّ صَاحِبَكُمْ خَلِيلُ اللَّهِ

“Verily, your Companion is the very close intimate friend of Allah.” (Sahih Muslim)

So this title “Khalilullah” belongs especially to the Patriarch Abraham, but also to the one who resembles him fully, his descendant the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon them both.

In the prophetic Scripture of Isaiah, the Patriarch Abraham is likewise singled out as the beloved friend of God:

הַחֲרִ֤ישׁוּ אֵלַי֙ אִיִּ֔ים וּלְאֻמִּ֖ים יַחֲלִ֣יפוּ כֹ֑חַ יִגְּשׁוּ֙ אָ֣ז יְדַבֵּ֔רוּ יַחְדָּ֖ו לַמִּשְׁפָּ֥ט נִקְרָֽבָה

“But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend.” (Isaiah 41:8, KJV)

It is apparent to me that Surah 4, Ayah 125 of the Holy Quran is a confirmation of Isaiah 41:8, indicating further that the Scripture of Isaiah is truly a divinely inspired text to the ancient Prophet Isaiah. Although this Prophet is not mentioned by name in the Holy Quran or the Sunnah, he is surely in the category of من لم نقصص عليك  “the one We did not relate about to you, O Muhammad”.

According to the Talmud, the Prophet Isaiah suffered martyrdom by the hand of the wicked King Manasseh of Judah:

The Gemara expands on the events surrounding Isaiah’s death: Rava said: Manasseh judged him as a false witness for issuing statements contradicting the Torah and only then killed him. Manasseh said to Isaiah: Moses your master said in the Torah: “And He said: You cannot see My face, for man cannot see Me and live” (Exodus 33:20), and yet you said: “I saw the Lord sitting upon a high and lofty throne” (Isaiah 6:1). Moses your master said: “For which great nation is there, that has God so near to it, as the Lord our God is, whenever we call upon Him?” (Deuteronomy 4:7), and yet you said: “Seek the Lord while He may be found, call upon Him while He is near” (Isaiah 55:6), which implies that God is not always near. Moses your master said: “I will fulfill the number of your days” (Exodus 23:26), which implies that each individual has a preordained allotted lifespan that he cannot outlive, and yet you said in a prophecy to King Hezekiah: “And I will add to your days, fifteen years” (II Kings 20:6). Isaiah said to himself: I know him, i.e., Manasseh, that he will not accept whatever explanation that I will say to him to resolve my prophecies with the words of the Torah. And even if I say it to him, I will make him into an intentional transgressor since he will kill me anyway. Therefore, in order to escape, he uttered a divine name and was swallowed within a cedar tree. Manasseh’s servants brought the cedar tree and sawed through it in order to kill him. When the saw reached to where his mouth was, Isaiah died. He died specifically as this point due to that which he said: “In the midst of a people of unclean lips, I dwell” (Isaiah 6:5). He was punished for referring to the Jewish people in a derogatory manner. (Yevamot 49b)

This story of the Prophet Isaiah being sawed to death while hiding inside a tree is also mentioned in the pseudepigraphical text called the Ascension of Isaiah.

The Holy Prophet Muhammad, sall Allahu alaihi wasallam, mentioned a man from history who was martyred by being sawed in half from the top of the head down:

وَيُوضَعُ الْمِنْشَارُ عَلَى مَفْرِقِ رَأْسِهِ فَيُشَقُّ بِاثْنَيْنِ مَا يَصْرِفُهُ ذَلِكَ عَنْ دِينِهِ

“A saw might be put over the parting of his head which would be split into two parts, yet all that would never make him abandon his Religion.” (Sahih al-Bukhari)

It is quite possible that the Holy Prophet, sall Allahu alaihi wasallam, was referring to the martyrdom of Isaiah, as he referred to the martyrdom of Rabbi Akiva, whom the Romans killed by scraping him with iron combs in 135 CE.

But Allah and His Apostle know best!