Perpetuity of Hellfire?

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

وصلى الله على نبيه الامين

وعلى آله واصحابه اجمعين

Rationally it is quite a challenge to justify the idea that everlasting, eternal damnation and punishment awaits people in Hell for sins and rebellion against Allah that are finite. Such a belief also appears to be contrary to the idea of Allah ارحم الراحمين being gracious, merciful and compassionate.

Once the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم came across a woman nursing her child and asked his companions whether they thought she could ever throw her child into the fire, to which they replied “by no means, if she could help it”, to which the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

اللَّهُ أَرْحَمُ بِعِبَادِهِ مِنْ هَذِهِ بِوَلَدِهَا

“Allah is more merciful to His servant than this woman is to her child”

Allah says:

وَ رَحۡمَتِیۡ وَسِعَتۡ کُلَّ شَیۡءٍ

My mercy encompasses all things

(Surah 7:156)

There are some more specific indications in the Quran that the punishment of Hellfire is not eternal:

فَاَمَّا الَّذِیۡنَ شَقُوۡا فَفِی النَّارِ لَہُمۡ فِیۡہَا زَفِیۡرٌ وَّ شَہِیۡقٌ

As for those who will prove unfortunate, they shall be in the Fire, wherein there shall be for them sighing and sobbing,

خٰلِدِیۡنَ فِیۡہَا مَا دَامَتِ السَّمٰوٰتُ وَ الۡاَرۡضُ اِلَّا مَا شَآءَ رَبُّکَ ؕ اِنَّ رَبَّکَ فَعَّالٌ لِّمَا یُرِیۡدُ

Abiding therein so long as the heavens and the earth endure, excepting what thy Lord may will. Surely, thy Lord does bring about what He pleases

(Surah 11:106-107)

In this Ayah there is a strong hint that the punishment of the Hellfire is not eternal, but shall perhaps come to an end at some point as per Allah’s will. Interestingly, the same description of duration is mentioned concerning Paradise with one critical caveat:

وَ اَمَّا الَّذِیۡنَ سُعِدُوۡا فَفِی الۡجَنَّۃِ خٰلِدِیۡنَ فِیۡہَا مَا دَامَتِ السَّمٰوٰتُ وَ الۡاَرۡضُ اِلَّا مَا شَآءَ رَبُّکَ ؕ عَطَآءً غَیۡرَ مَجۡذُوۡذٍ

But as for those who will prove fortunate, they shall be in Heaven; abiding therein so long as the heavens and the earth endure, excepting what thy Lord may will — a gift that shall not be cut off

(Surah 11:108)

Note that the description of Paradise as “a gift that shall not be cut off” is unique to Paradise and not mentioned at all regarding the Hellfire. This too is an indication that unlike Paradise, the punishment of Hellfire is not permanent or everlasting. Whether the Quran describes the punishment of Hell as eternal or not, it certainly cannot be denied that Hellfire is described as a lengthy sentence:

لّٰبِثِیۡنَ فِیۡہَاۤ اَحۡقَابًا

Who will tarry therein for ages

(Surah 78:23)

Ahqāb is the plural of huqb which is a finite period of time, usually translated to mean: “long period of time, years, eighty years” (Arabic-English Dictionary of Quranic Usage p.223)

It seems counter-intuitive to describe perpetuity as “ages” or a multiple of measurements of a fixed period of time. Granted, infinite fixed periods is still infinite, but that is a strange way to describe infinity.

The Prophet صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم said:

يَخْرُجُ مِنَ النَّارِ مَنْ قَالَ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ، وَفِي قَلْبِهِ وَزْنُ شَعِيرَةٍ مِنْ خَيْرٍ، وَيَخْرُجُ مِنَ النَّارِ مَنْ قَالَ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ، وَفِي قَلْبِهِ وَزْنُ بُرَّةٍ مِنْ خَيْرٍ، وَيَخْرُجُ مِنَ النَّارِ مَنْ قَالَ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ، وَفِي قَلْبِهِ وَزْنُ ذَرَّةٍ مِنْ خَيْرٍ

“Whoever said ‘none has the right to be worshipped but Allah’ and has in his heart good equal to the weight of a barley grain will be taken out of Hell. And whoever said ‘none has the right to be worshipped but Allah’ and has in his heart good (faith) equal to the weight of a wheat grain will be taken out of Hell. And whoever said, ‘none has the right to be worshipped but Allah’ and has in his heart good equal to the weight of an atom will be taken out of Hell.”

Interestingly, confessing to the Prophesy of sayyidina Muhammad صلوات الله وسلام عليه is not mentioned as the criterion for Allah taking out souls from the Hellfire, but only belief in the oneness of Allah, that He alone is worthy of worship and the only God.

According to a Hadith whose authenticity is not established:

يأتي على جهنم يوم ما فيها من بني آدم واحد تخفق أبوابها كأنها أبواب الموحدين

That is, a day or time shall dawn upon Gehinnom in which none from the children of Adam will be found in it, and it’s doors shall rattle to the blowing wind.

In conclusion, I say that the traditional belief in the eternality of Hellfire held by most Muslims is not strongly established in Islam. It is indeed rationally difficult to justify, but Allah knows best.

Ibn Taymiyah Declared Act of Ibn Umar رضى الله عنهما an Innovation

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

وصلى الله على نبيه الامين

وعلى آله واصحابه اجمعين

Regarding the eminent sahabi sayyidina Abd Allah b. Umar رضى الله عنهما the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم said:

إِنَّ عَبْدَ اللَّهِ رَجُلٌ صَالِحٌ

“Verily, Abdallah is a righteous man”

We are pleased and honored to take our Religion from a man whom the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم certified and praised. It is narrated that sayyidina Ibn Umar رضى الله عنهما used to go out of his way to search for the places where the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم had prayed on the path, during travel, between Medina and Mecca, and would pray at those places himself. Imam al-Bukhari رحمة الله عليه has narrated several narrations to this effect under the chapter heading:

بَابُ الْمَسَاجِدِ الَّتِي عَلَى طُرُقِ الْمَدِينَةِ وَالْمَوَاضِعِ الَّتِي صَلَّى فِيهَا النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ

“The Mosques which are on the way to al-Madinah and the places where the Prophet peace be upon him prayed”

Strangely enough, Ibn Taymiyah رحمة الله عليه declared the act of seeking out the places where the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم prayed to be a reprehensible innovation and misguidance while acknowledging this as having been done by sayyidina Ibn Umar رضى الله عنهما. Ibn Taymiyah argued that while Ibn Umar would do so, this practice was not done by any of the other Sahabah, particularly the Prophet’s four rightly-guided successors رضى الله عنهم

Source: Iqtida al-Sirat al-Mustaqim v.2 p.278:

The contemporary Salafi movement, which is strongly influenced by Ibn Taymiyah and al-Albani, is known to go to extremes in denouncing common religious practices of Muslims as being bid’āt (innovations). For example, they generally condemn the practice of wiping the face with the hands after raising them in du’a, the practice of swaying back and forth while reading the Qurān, making dhikr on a rosary, and so on and so forth. This despite the fact there is indeed a basis for many of these practices which the zealous Salafis condemn as innovative in the Quran, Sunnah, Hadith and way of the Sahabah رضى الله عنهم

The Liar of Thaqif (Mukhtar al-Thaqafi) Part 2

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

وصلى الله على نبيه الامين

وعلى آله واصحابه اجمعين

I previously discussed the reality of the pretender al-Mukhtar b. Abi Ubaid al-Thaqafi, who is hailed as a hero by the Twelver Shi’ah sect. Mukhtar’s associate, Abu Amrah Kaysan, after whom the deviated Kaysaniyyah sect is named, was believed by the latter to receive divine revelation via the Angel Gabriel عليه السلام as Muhammad al-Hasan b. Musa al-Nawbakhti, a Twelver Shi’i theologian, has mentioned:

وكان يزعم أن جبرائيل عليه السلام يأتى المختار بالوحى من عند الله عز وجل

“He (Kaysan) claimed that Gabriel peace be upon him came to al-Mukhtar with wahi (revelation) from Allah” (Firaq al-Shi’ah p.59):

This is a Twelver Shi’ah corroboration of what is in our Sunni sources, for example, Rifa’ah b. Shaddad رحمه الله narrates:

دَخَلْتُ عَلَى الْمُخْتَارِ فِي قَصْرِهِ فَقَالَ قَامَ جِبْرَائِيلُ مِنْ عِنْدِي السَّاعَةَ

I entered upon al-Mukhtar in his palace and he said: “Gabriel just came to me this hour” (Sunan Ibn Majah)

Like sayyidina Ibrahim b. Malik al-Ashtar رضى الله عنهما, Rifa’ah b. Shaddad al-Bajali initially joined and assisted al-Mukhtar in his mission of avenging the martyrdom of Imam al-Husain رضى الله عنه وعليه السلام but subsequently left him when the reality of the pretender was made plain to him.

The Isma’ili Shi’i heresiographer, Abu Tammam, in his text Kitab al-Shajarah, lists the Mukhtariyyah as one of the subsects of the Kaysaniyyah. He writes that al-Mukhtar would say that the Imam after the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم was was Ali b. Abi Talib عليه السلام, and that the Ummah became misguided and committed disbelief by giving bay’ah to Abu Bakr رضى الله عنه, then the Imam after Ali b. Abi Talib عليه السلام was his son al-Hasan then al-Husain then Muhammad b. Ali, the well known son of the Hanafiyah عليهم السلام (Bab al-Shaytan p.98):

The infamous Twelver Shi’i scholar, Baqir Majlisi, has mentioned that the fourth Imam, Ali b. Husain al-Sajjad, also known as Zain al-Abidin رضى الله عنه cursed al-Mukhtar because the latter pretended to receive wahi (revelation) from Allah (Jilaa al-Uyun, Urdu, v.2 p.341):

Deobandi Blasphemy in Sirate Mustaqim

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

وصلى الله على نبيه الامين

وعلى آله واصحابه اجمعين

In the text Sirate Mustaqim written in Persian by the martyr Shah Ismail of Delhi رحمة الله عليه there is an extremely controversial, indeed blasphemous, statement that cannot be understood as being anything other than disrespectful to the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم

It is written:

شیخ یا انہی جیسے اور بزرگوں کی طرف خواہ جناب رسالت مآب ہی ہوں اپنی ہمت کو لگا دینا اپنے بیل اور گدھے کی صورت میں مستغرق، ہونے سے زیادہ برا ہے

“To concentrate (in prayer) on one’s Shaikh or other religious figure, even if it is the Prophet, is worse than thinking of one’s ox or donkey” (Sirate Mustaqim p.169):

معاذ الله

نقل کفر کفر نہ باشد

Now in justification of this apparent statement of disbelief and blasphemy, the author of these vile words writes subsequently that because one will think of one’s Shaikh or other religious figure with veneration, it will transform a prayer intended for God alone into an act that is bordering on polytheism, whereas naturally one’s being distracted about thoughts of one’s ox or donkey is not with that type of veneration.

The Barelawis, who are rightly outraged by the blasphemous statement which says thinking of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم in prayer is worse than thinking of one’s ox or donkey, allege that these are the words of Shah Isma’il of Delhi رحمة الله عليه. However, I am not convinced this is true. It appears that this text, Sirate Mustaqim, has multiple authors. Therefore, it cannot be said with any degree of certainty whether these are actually the words of Shah Isma’il of Delhi, or perhaps Sayyid Ahmad of Rai Baraili or even Abd ul-Hayy of Lucknow. At any rate, while the statement in question is surely blasphemous and are words of disbelief, since the author obviously did not intend to insult or blaspheme the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم it cannot be said that he personally is guilty of blasphemy. While the justification for the statement is unacceptable, as I shall explain, it makes clear that the author of these controversial words was under a misconception and may be excused, and Allah knows best. The only group of Muslims who justify this blasphemous statement till this day are the astray Deobandis.

Thinking of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم in the Salah is by no means reprehensible or bordering on Shirk. On the contrary, we necessarily think of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم in the Salah from a number of angles. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

صَلُّوا كَمَا رَأَيْتُمُونِي أُصَلِّي

“Pray as you see me praying”

While praying behind the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم the Sahabah رضى الله عنهم would keep their gaze fixed on the Prophet and observe him carefully. Sayyidina Khabbab رضى الله عنه narrates that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم would recite from the Quran during the Zuhr and Asr prayers (although inaudibly). When asked how they knew the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was reciting in those prayers when that recitation wasn’t audible, sayyidina Khabbab answered:

بِاضْطِرَابِ لِحْيَتِهِ

“by the movement of his beard”

Likewise, while seated in the Salah we recite Salat and Salam upon the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. Therefore, we necessarily think of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم during the prayers. Shirk would be to pray the Salah with the intention of praying to the Prophet or making him a partner with Allah in dedicating the Salah to him صلى الله عليه وسلم.

Cow Sacrifice the Antidote to Idolatry

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

وصلى الله على نبيه الامين

وعلى آله واصحابه اجمعين

اِنَّ اللّٰہَ یَاۡمُرُکُمۡ اَنۡ تَذۡبَحُوۡا بَقَرَۃً

Allah commands you to slaughter a cow

(Surah 2:67)

The narrative in Surat al-Baqarah, the second Surah of the Quran and its longest, is extremely vital for understanding a disease that has spread in the minds of many Muslims.

Baqarah means cow and this Surah is named after the incident of the Prophet Moses على نبينا وعليه الصلاة والسلام under divine authority ordering his people to sacrifice a cow. In the proceeding Ayāt, Allah describes how the people of Moses, who are repeatedly named “stiff necked” in the Torah, attempted to play games with their own Prophet and escape having to carry out his orders by asking him questions regarding the specific description of the cow they were ordered to sacrifice. So Allah says:

فَذَبَحُوۡہَا وَ مَا کَادُوۡا یَفۡعَلُوۡنَ

Then they slaughtered her, though they would rather not do so

(Surah 2:71)

Perhaps the reluctance of the people of Moses in sacrificing a cow was a degree of hypocrisy and unfaithfulness that remained in them after their worship of the Golden Calf. In other words, they were ordered to sacrifice a cow to remove from their hearts once and for all any attachment or veneration for the cow, a mere animal, which had led them to their original idolization of it.

Interestingly, the red heifer sacrifice tradition in Judaism, from the Book of Numbers 19:2, has a connection to the Quranic account of the people of Moses being ordered to sacrifice a cow of a “dun color” (Surah 2:69): “The heifer's color is described in the Torah as adumah אדומה‎, normally translated as "red". However, Saadiah Gaon translates this word to Judeo-Arabic as صفرا, a word translated to English as "yellow". In addition, the Quran describes Moses being commanded about a "yellow" cow (Surat al-Baqara 9.69). To explain this discrepancy, Yosef Qafih (in his Hebrew translation and commentary on Saadiah's work) argues that the Bible requires the cow to have a ruddy light-brown color, which he says is the normal color of a cow. He says this color is in general described as אדום‎ in Hebrew and "yellow" in Arabic, resolving the discrepancy in the color words. He explains the Biblical requirement to mean that the cow be entirely of this color, and not have blotches or blemishes of a different color.” Source: Yosef Qafih, Perushei Rabbeinu Saadiah Gaon al haTorah, footnote to Numbers 19:2

Cow veneration is of course most prominently associated with the Hindus. This story in Surat al-Baqarah describing the apostasy of the Israelites in worshipping the Golden Calf and then being reluctant in sacrificing a cow ought to be read and understood as foreshadowing or using coded language for the Hindus and those Muslims of India who have developed some attachment to the cow due to Hindu influence and religious syncretism. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم said:

لَتَتَّبِعُنَّ سَنَنَ مَنْ قَبْلَكُمْ شِبْرًا بِشِبْرٍ، وَذِرَاعًا بِذِرَاعٍ، حَتَّى لَوْ سَلَكُوا جُحْرَ ضَبٍّ لَسَلَكْتُمُوهُ

“You will follow the wrong ways, of your predecessors so completely and literally that if they should go into the hole of a lizard, you too will go there”

Cow veneration is Satanic, the beaten path to idolatry which duped some of the people of Moses long ago, and has duped an entire nation, the Hindu Indians, till this day. This Ummah is warned severely to beware of cow veneration in the narrative of the second Surah of the Quran.

The apostate Mughal ruler, Akbar, criminalized cow sacrifice in his domain to curry favor with the idolatrous Hindus. Here was the first example, to my knowledge, of someone initially from the Ummah who set the precedent and instituted the demonic concept of cow veneration. Sikhs, despite their pretentious claim to monotheism, avoid consumption of beef and have inherited from their Dharmic tradition a veneration for the cow. During the rule of the tyrant and taghut Ranjit Singh, cow slaughter was a capital offense. Many Muslims were beheaded during his tyrannical government for the “crime” of cow sacrifice. It was only when the British liberated the Punjab from the Sikh bandits during the Anglo-Sikh wars was the religious liberty of Muslims restored and the ludicrous criminalization of cow slaughter reversed.

Some idiotic Muslims in India, such as Abdul Bari of Firangi Mahal, in alliance with the despicable Hindu Gandhi, a pervert who after his wife’s death used to sleep in the nude alongside two young women, began instructing the Muslims to avoid cow sacrifice so as not to hurt the sentiments of their Hindu “brothers” معاذ الله

It is these kind of treacherous and Hinduphilic Muslims that are a carbon copy of the people of Moses who worshipped the Golden Calf and were reluctant to sacrifice a cow. They were blinded by their Indian nationalism and irrational hatred of the British that they corrupted their own Faith and rebelled against the fundamental precepts of Tawhid.

Muslims should therefore go out of their way to sacrifice cows during our religious festivals and other occasions in those lands and among those populations where there is a large number of people who religiously venerate the cow and worship idols.

Shah Ismail of Delhi: Allah Can Create Millions of Prophet Muhammads

 باسمك اللهم

اللهم صلى على محمد وآل محمد

Some Muslims, especially the Barelawis, object to the following line written by the honorable martyr and champion of Tawhid, namely, Shah Ismail of Delhi رحمة الله عليه

اس شہنشاہ کی تو شان یہ ہے کہ ایک آن میں ایک حکم کن سےچاہے تو کروڑوں نبی اور ولی اور جن اور فرشتے، جبرئیل اور محمد صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کے برابر پیدا کر ڈالے

Allah’s status is so Great and Exalted that if He so wishes, He may bring into existence millions of Prophets, saints, jinns, angels, and entities equal to Gabriel and Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in terms of status, merely by uttering a word ‘Be’

(Taqwiyat ul-Iman p.54):

According to the Barelawis and others who object to this statement, it is rationally impossible for there to come into existence any being that is the equal of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم, the supreme creation of Allah Most High. While we acknowledge that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم is the greatest creation of Allah, to object to the belief that if, hypothetically, Allah wished to He could create tens of millions of Prophet Muhammads, is to object to the teaching of the Quran itself, wherein it states repeatedly:

اِنَّ اللّٰہَ عَلٰی کُلِّ شَیۡءٍ قَدِیۡرٌ

Surely, Allah has the power to do all that He wills

اِنَّمَا قَوۡلُنَا لِشَیۡءٍ اِذَاۤ اَرَدۡنٰہُ اَنۡ نَّقُوۡلَ لَہٗ کُنۡ فَیَکُوۡنُ

Our word to a thing, when We will it, is only that We say to it, ‘Be!’, and it is

(Surah 16:40)

And what is the alternative to this statement of Shah Ismail shahid رحمة الله عليه? It can only be that Allah is incapable of creating a being that is equal in rank and status to the beloved Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم, and we seek refuge in Allah from such a heresy.

Ibn Ashur and Death of Jesus from Quran (3:55; 5:117)

 باسمك اللهم

اللهم صلى على محمد وآل محمد

I find it astonishing that so many Muslims believe Jesus of Nazareth على نبينا وعليه الصلوات والتسليمات was raised alive into Heaven in his corporal body while our beloved Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم passed away as ordinary mortals and is buried in a grave. The orthodox Ulama have made this particular doctrine of Jesus’s bodily ascension into Heaven without having tasted death a matter of belief and disbelief. They expel those who believe Jesus is deceased from either the fold of Islam, or if they are moderate in their approach, from the fold of Ahl us-Sunnah. However, I have on this very website put forward dozens of references from the Ulama and classical Imams of Ahl us-Sunnah teaching the death of Jesus on the basis of the holy Quran. Now I shall put forward a reference from the scholar and exegete of the Maliki school, Ibn Ashur (1879-1973). Commenting on the Ayah (3:55), he writes:

وقوله { إني متوفيك } ظاهر معناه إنّي مميتك، هذا هو معنى هذا الفعل في مواقع استعماله لأنّ أصل فعل توفَّى الشيءَ أنه قَبَضه تاماً واستوفاه. فيقال توفاه اللَّهِ أي قدّر موته، ويقال توفاه ملك الموت أي أنفذ إرادة الله بموته

ولذلك قال ابن عباس، ووهب بن منبه إنها وفاة موت وهو ظاهر قول مالك في جامع العتبية قال مالك مات عيسى وهو ابن إحدى وثلاثين سنة قال ابن رشد في البيان والتحصيل «يحتمل أنّ قوله مات وهو ابن ثلاث وثلاثين على الحقيقة لا على المجاز

(Tafsir at-Tahrir wat-Tanwir v.3 p.258):

Ibn Ashur has not only explained his own position, but quoted classical authorities before him, such as Ibn Abbas, Wahb b. Munabbih, and Imam Malik. Likewise, in explanation of the Ayah (5:117) Ibn Ashur writes:

قوله { فلمّا توفّيتني كنتَ أنتَ الرقيبَ عليهم } ، أي فلمّا قضيت بوفاتي، لأنّ مباشر الوفاة هو ملك الموت. والوفاة الموت، وتوفّاه الله أماته، أي قضى به وتوفّاه ملك الموت قبض روحه وأماته. وقد تقدّم ذلك عند قوله تعالى{ إنّي متوفّيك } في سورة آل عمران 55

(ibid v.7 p.117):

Rejection of Samaritan Religion

 

باسمك اللهم

اللهم صلى على محمد وآل محمد

In the now academically discredited book Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World by Patricia Crone and Michael Cook: “the tendency on the Hagarene side is clearly towards the Samaritan scriptural position. The way in which the great Judaic prophets scarcely figure in the Koran is perhaps the Islamic residue of this doctrine. The Samaritan scriptural position had something to offer the Hagarenes on two levels. Specifically, it deleted the scriptural basis of the Davidic component of Judaic messianism – neither the legitimacy of the Davidic monarchy nor the sanctity of Jerusalem are attested to in the Pentateuch” (p.15)

But this theory would only truly hold water if the “great Judaic prophets” did not figure in Islam or the Koran at all. That they do figure in the Quran, however “scarcely” in the perspective of the authors of this book first published in 1977, is manifest proof that Islam is closer to the position of orthodox Judaism than to Samaritanism.

The Samaritans are a misguided sect which rejects the Jewish prophets and scriptures after Joshua son of Nun على نبينا وعليه الصلوات والتسليمات. Almost equally alarming, they reject the Davidic Covenant, the sanctity of Jerusalem, Mount Zion and the Temple Mount, and disbelieve in those great Prophets and Apostles that appear in the Jewish Scriptures and are affirmed in the Quran, namely, Samuel, Kings David and Solomon, Elijah, Elisha, Jonah, Job and Ezra عليهم السلام

And in my humble opinion, the Quran also speaks of the post-exilic Jewish prophet Ezekiel عليه السلام by describing his Vision of the Valley of Dry Bones (2:259).

Contrary to the claim of these two authors, King David and his son King Solomon feature quite prominently in the Quran, which strongly disproves any Samaritan influence on Islam. Likewise, the Quran and Islam strongly recognizes the sanctity and holiness of Jerusalem and the Temple of Solomon. On the other hand, Mount Gerizim, the holiest site for the Samaritans and their false alternative to Jerusalem, has no significance in Islam. In the beginning of Surat Bani Israel, Allah Most High refers to the holy site of the Temple in Jerusalem as Masjid al-Aqsa, and again simply as “the Masjid” (17:7) which was tragically destroyed twice, first by the Babylonians and then by the Romans. In Islam, Jerusalem or more specifically, the Temple Mount, is the third holiest place after Masjid al-Haram or the Ka’bah in Mecca and Masjid al-Nabawi in Medina. Muslims are encouraged to offer a pilgrimage to Jerusalem and pray at the Temple Mount.

According to the New Testament, in the account of Jesus’s encounter with a Samaritan woman, the latter said: “Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.” “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews.” (John 4:20-22)

Apparently from this passage, Jesus Christ عليه السلام refuted the Samaritan belief regarding the controversy on whether to worship at Mount Gerizim or Jerusalem and said “salvation is from the Jews”. And the Quran has tacitly acknowledged this truth when it extols Jesus as a true prophet and the Messiah.

Interpret the Quran in Light of Prior Scriptures

سُبْحَانَكَ اللَّهُمَّ وَبِحَمْدِكَ ، أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لا إِلَهَ إِلا أَنْتَ ، أَسْتَغْفِرُكَ وَأَتُوبُ إِلَيْكَ

سُبْحَانَكَ رَبَّنَا وَبِحَمْدِكَ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ أنت أَسْتَغْفِرُكَ ثُمَّ أَتُوبُ إِلَيْكَ

I hold it to be essential for Muslims to truly understand the holy Quran and the Prophet’s صلوات الله وسلامه عليه blessed utterances to be familiar with the Biblical narrative. There is strong indication of this in the Quran itself, for example, when Allah says:

اَوَ لَمۡ تَاۡتِہِمۡ بَیِّنَۃُ مَا فِی الصُّحُفِ الۡاُوۡلٰی

Has there not come to them the clear evidence in what is contained in the former Books?

(Surah 20:133)

In answer to the challenge for a divine sign from the unbelievers, Allah says that clear evidence has already come in the prior Scriptures, meaning the heavenly texts which more or less compose the Bible.

Regarding the Torah specifically, which was revealed to Prophet Moses على نبينا وعليه الصلاة والسلام at Mount Sinai, Allah says:

قُلۡ فَاۡتُوۡا بِالتَّوۡرٰٮۃِ فَاتۡلُوۡہَاۤ اِنۡ کُنۡتُمۡ صٰدِقِیۡنَ

Say, ‘Bring, then, the Torah and read it, if you are truthful.’

(Surah 3:93)

In this blessed Ayah, the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم is instructed to invite the people to recite the Torah. Some Muslims, especially from among the Ulama, wrongly say it is forbidden to read, let alone recite the Torah or other heavenly Scriptures. They cite a narration in which it is said the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم became angry when he saw sayyidina Umar al-Faruq رضى الله عنه reciting from the Torah and forbade him to do so, allegedly saying:

وَالَّذِي نَفْسُ مُحَمَّدٍ بِيَدِهِ لَوْ بَدَا لَكُمْ مُوسَى فَاتَّبَعْتُمُوهُ وَتَرَكْتُمُونِي لَضَلَلْتُمْ عَنْ سَوَاءِ السَّبِيلِ وَلَوْ كَانَ حَيًّا وَأَدْرَكَ نُبُوَّتِي لَاتَّبَعَنِى

“By the One in Whose Hand is the soul of Muhammad! If Moses were to come and you followed him and left me you would be misguided from the Path, and if was alive during my Prophesy he would have to follow me.” (Sunan al-Darimi)

But this Hadith is weak, as mentioned by the muhaddith Zubair Ali Zai in his checking of Mishkat al-Masabih, due to the weakness of the narrator Mujalid b. Sa’id:

On the contrary, we have an authentic Hadith that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم revered and respected a copy of the Torah scrolls that were brought before him by the Jews of Quff in their Bait al-Midras or Yeshiva. It is narrated that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was seated on a cushion, and when the Torah scrolls were brought to him, he withdrew the cushion from below him and placed the Torah upon it, saying:

آمَنْتُ بِكِ وَبِمَنْ أَنْزَلَكِ

“I believe in you and the One Who revealed you” (Sunan Abi Dawud)

Allah Most High says:

وَ کَیۡفَ یُحَکِّمُوۡنَکَ وَ عِنۡدَہُمُ التَّوۡرٰٮۃُ فِیۡہَا حُکۡمُ اللّٰہِ

And how will they make thee their judge when they have with them the Torah, wherein is Allah’s judgment?

(Surah 5:43)

Here it is affirmed that the Torah contains Allah’s judgment. Going back to the narration of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم going to the Jews in Quff, it was to judge a matter of adultery that had been committed among them. He judged them according to the Torah, which commands the punishment of stoning for adultery:

כִּי-יִמָּצֵא אִישׁ שֹׁכֵב עִם-אִשָּׁה בְעֻלַת-בַּעַל, וּמֵתוּ גַּם-שְׁנֵיהֶם--הָאִישׁ הַשֹּׁכֵב עִם-הָאִשָּׁה, וְהָאִשָּׁה; וּבִעַרְתָּ הָרָע, מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל

If a man be found lying with a woman married to a husband, then they shall both of them die, the man that lay with the woman, and the woman; so shalt thou put away the evil from Israel.

Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die (Deuteronomy 22)

Interestingly, many Muslims, especially our polemicists and apologists, claim that the Bible has been completely corrupted and it is futile to read or take any information from it. But they fail to answer that why then did the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم command the Jews to read from a scroll of the Torah they themselves wrote and brought to him in order to draw their attention to the punishment of lapidation divinely legislated within its text.

In the next Ayah, Allah goes on to say:

اِنَّاۤ اَنۡزَلۡنَا التَّوۡرٰٮۃَ فِیۡہَا ہُدًی وَّ نُوۡرٌ ۚ یَحۡکُمُ بِہَا النَّبِیُّوۡنَ الَّذِیۡنَ اَسۡلَمُوۡا لِلَّذِیۡنَ ہَادُوۡا وَ الرَّبّٰنِیُّوۡنَ وَ الۡاَحۡبَارُ بِمَا اسۡتُحۡفِظُوۡا مِنۡ کِتٰبِ اللّٰہِ وَ کَانُوۡا عَلَیۡہِ شُہَدَآءَ

Surely, We sent down the Torah wherein was guidance and light. By it did the Prophets, who were obedient to Us, judge for the Jews, as did the godly people and those learned in the Law; for they were required to preserve the Book of Allah, and because they were witnesses over it

(Surah 5:44)

Concerning the relationship between the Torah and the Quran, Allah عز وجل says:

وَ مِنۡ قَبۡلِہٖ کِتٰبُ مُوۡسٰۤی اِمَامًا وَّ رَحۡمَۃً ؕ وَ ہٰذَا کِتٰبٌ مُّصَدِّقٌ لِّسَانًا عَرَبِیًّا لِّیُنۡذِرَ الَّذِیۡنَ ظَلَمُوۡا ٭ۖ وَ بُشۡرٰی لِلۡمُحۡسِنِیۡنَ

And before it was the Scripture of Moses to lead and as a mercy. And this is a confirming Book in an Arabic tongue to warn those who have wronged and as good tidings to the doers of good

(Surah 46:12)

The Quran is a Book which confirms the Torah in the Arabic language. It merely restates and reiterates the essence of the Torah through the last and final Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. And the Quran affirms that the Torah is an Imam, a mercy, containing guidance, light and the command of the Lord God. So on what basis can it be said that Muslims ought to ignore it and the other heavenly Scriptures contained in the Bible? That is a false methodology. The true methodology for understanding the Quran and Sunnah better is to be familiar with the Bible. It is true that parts of the Bible have been corrupted, lost and interpolated by evil scribes, as Allah says:

فَوَیۡلٌ لِّلَّذِیۡنَ یَکۡتُبُوۡنَ الۡکِتٰبَ بِاَیۡدِیۡہِمۡ ٭ ثُمَّ یَقُوۡلُوۡنَ ہٰذَا مِنۡ عِنۡدِ اللّٰہِ لِیَشۡتَرُوۡا بِہٖ ثَمَنًا قَلِیۡلًا ؕ فَوَیۡلٌ لَّہُمۡ مِّمَّا کَتَبَتۡ اَیۡدِیۡہِمۡ وَ وَیۡلٌ لَّہُمۡ مِّمَّا یَکۡسِبُوۡنَ

Woe, therefore, to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say: ‘This is from Allah,’ that they may take for it a paltry price. Woe, then, to them for what their hands have written, and woe to them for what they earn

(Surah 2:79)

Indeed, secular scholars and historians have developed a strong consensus that much of the Bible is unreliable and that there has occurred a great degree of interpolation in the text by scribes and copyists. This is especially true of the Christian New Testament. From the Islamic perspective, the solution to this dilemma is simple. Those parts of the Bible which concur with the Quran, Sunnah and Hadith, or at the very least do not explicitly contradict the holy Quran and authentic Hadith, should be accepted. Now I would like to go a step further and say that we should accept the Biblical narrative in explaining the details of things mentioned in the Quran. To illustrate, let me give the example of the account of Jonah the Prophet على نبينا وعليه الصلاة والسلام

Now according to the Book of Jonah in the Hebrew Bible: “The word of the Lord came to Jonah son of Amittai: ‘Go to the great city of Nineveh and preach against it, because its wickedness has come up before me.’ But Jonah ran away from the Lord and headed for Tarshish. He went down to Joppa, where he found a ship bound for that port. After paying the fare, he went aboard and sailed for Tarshish to flee from the Lord.” The Bible explains that Prophet Jonah fled to the laden ship (Surah 37:140) after he was called by the Lord God to go to Nineveh. However, many if not most Muslims believe the Prophet Jonah first went to Nineveh, delivered the divine warning unto her people, and then fled to the laden ship without God’s permission, expecting the great city to be destroyed and seized by a terrible wrath. This is mentioned in Ibn Kathir’s Qasas al-Anbiya for example, based on a questionable interpretation of 21:87. But if we return to an examination of the story of Prophet Jonah in the Quran in Surah 37, it clearly mentions subsequent to the narrative of Prophet Jonah running to the laden ship, drawing lots with the crew of the ship, being thrown overboard and then swallowed by the whale, then vomited out and cast ashore:

وَ اَرۡسَلۡنٰہُ اِلٰی مِائَۃِ اَلۡفٍ اَوۡ یَزِیۡدُوۡنَ

And We sent him to a hundred thousand or more

(Surah 37:147)

So in addition to the explicit narrative of the Book of Jonah on this matter, we have a strong inference from the Quran itself that the Prophet Jonah fled to the ship and was swallowed by the whale before he ever stepped foot in Nineveh. It is clear the Quran is speaking of Nineveh, though it isn’t explicitly named, by the fact that it is described as having a hundred thousand people or more, and the last verse of the Book of Jonah says about Nineveh: “And should I not have concern for the great city of Nineveh, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand people”.

An apparent difference between the Quran and the Book of Jonah is regarding the circumstances in which the Lord God caused a plant to grow over him. According to the Book of Jonah, it was after he delivered his oracle of doom to Nineveh: “Jonah had gone out and sat down at a place east of the city. There he made himself a shelter, sat in its shade and waited to see what would happen to the city. Then the Lord God provided a leafy plant and made it grow up over Jonah to give shade for his head to ease his discomfort”. However, the Quran seems to suggest this episode occurred after Prophet Jonah was vomited out of the whale and cast upon the shore in a state of sickness, based on the sequence described in Surah 37. Now the hasty reaction of most Muslim apologists and polemicists is to simply dismiss the Biblical narrative and say without hesitation that it has been corrupted. But I am more cautious. My methodology is that the Quranic narrative should be interpreted to accord with the Biblical one since the Quran does not explicitly say that the plant was caused to grow over Prophet Jonah after he was cast ashore. The placement of the Ayah in that sequence may suggest that interpretation, but it is not necessary. There are many other instances in the Quran where the sequence of things narrated is not meant to be understood strictly in chronological order.