Islam and Mary

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mr.Ruggerio
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Also, you have yet to provide a source for the claim of pre-Islamic apocryphal literature in language other than Greek to which M or his alleged teacher had access

Again, M was a caravan merchant, not a particularly intellectual calling.
 
Mr.Ruggerio said:
Also, you have yet to provide a source for the claim of pre-Islamic apocryphal literature in language other than Greek to which M or his alleged teacher had access

Again, M was a caravan merchant, not a particularly intellectual calling.
Click to expand...
do you find apocrypha in the Quran? yes. The language is details…whatever the language he took from is irrelevant. What is relevant is that we find many apocryphal passages in his book.
 
I must say that it is a red herring to suggest that there has to be Arabic translations of the scriptures and apocrypha from which Muhammad copied.

This is false as the charge from the Quran, hadiths and sira, is that Muhammad learnt orally from various people. He did not just learn from one single person but over the ~30 years from his first ‘visions’ to the end of his so-called prophethood he learnt from various peoples - mostly Hanifs (people who followed a sort of Abrahamic faith), heretical Christians, and Jews.

These people are named in the Islamic sources.

[25.4-6] The unbelievers say: 'This is but a falsehood he has forged – another nation has helped him. ’ So they have come with wrong and falsehood. They say: ‘He has written tales of the ancients, they are recited to him at dawn and at the evening.’ Say: 'It was sent down by Him who knows the secrets of heavens and earth. He is Forgiving, the Most Merciful.

BTW: Waraqa was not the only one.
 
Rodrigo wrote:
I must say that it is a red herring to suggest that there has to be Arabic translations of the scriptures and apocrypha from which Muhammad copied.

Angelos wrote:
I agree with you my friend 👍 Unfortunately, most people do not know that we are not discussing here the causes or effects of Mohammed’s illiteracy. Neither are we here to make associations between the apocryphal writings in the Quran and Mohammed’s illiteracy. We are here to discuss Islam’s approach to Mary in Mohammed’s Scripture.

Rodrigo wrote:
This is false as the charge from the Quran, hadiths and sira, is that Muhammad learnt orally from various people. He did not just learn from one single person but over the ~30 years from his first ‘visions’ to the end of his so-called prophethood he learnt from various peoples - mostly Hanifs (people who followed a sort of Abrahamic faith), heretical Christians, and Jews.

Angelos wrote:
The Quran absolutely denies that someone taught Mohammed because it considers the idea of direct revelation from Allah the only foundation of Islam’s authenticity and reliability. If Mohammed did not have access to apocryphal Christian literature, how can we find those stories in Mohammed’s book? If Mohammed did not know anything about those fake Gospels, who put them in his book? :confused:

Rodrigo wrote:
[25.4-6] The unbelievers say: 'This is but a falsehood he has forged – another nation has helped him. ’ So they have come with wrong and falsehood. They say: ‘He has written tales of the ancients, they are recited to him at dawn and at the evening.’ Say: 'It was sent down by Him who knows the secrets of heavens and earth. He is Forgiving, the Most Merciful.

Angelos wrote:
Read what the same Quran also says:

016: 103 We know indeed that they say, “It is **a man **that teaches him.” The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.

Apparently, the Quran confirms that people blamed Mohammed for learning from one certain man whose language was not Arabic! Further, the Quran disregards the possibility of translation even though it is easy to infer from the statement above that the man in question could speak Arabic! Had that certain foreigner been unable to communicate with Mohammed, no one had held such a claim refuted in the Quran 😛 Finally, it is not true that the Quran is pure Arabic since it has many words borrowed from various languages!

Peace to all seeking the truth to embrace it 🙂

P.S. I’ll post the last episode of my analysis on Islam and Mary tomorrow (hopefully!)
 
Angelos said:
Rodrigo wrote:
I must say that it is a red herring to suggest that there has to be Arabic translations of the scriptures and apocrypha from which Muhammad copied.

Angelos wrote:
I agree with you my friend 👍 Unfortunately, most people do not know that we are not discussing here the causes or effects of Mohammed’s illiteracy. Neither are we here to make associations between the apocryphal writings in the Quran and Mohammed’s illiteracy. We are here to discuss Islam’s approach to Mary in Mohammed’s Scripture.
Click to expand...
Fair enough.

Angelos said:
Rodrigo wrote:
This is false as the charge from the Quran, hadiths and sira, is that Muhammad learnt orally from various people. He did not just learn from one single person but over the ~30 years from his first ‘visions’ to the end of his so-called prophethood he learnt from various peoples - mostly Hanifs (people who followed a sort of Abrahamic faith), heretical Christians, and Jews.

Angelos wrote:
The Quran absolutely denies that someone taught Mohammed because it considers the idea of direct revelation from Allah the only foundation of Islam’s authenticity and reliability. If Mohammed did not have access to apocryphal Christian literature, how can we find those stories in Mohammed’s book? If Mohammed did not know anything about those fake Gospels, who put them in his book? :confused:
Click to expand...

Of course Muhammad would say that he received his revelations from Allah via Jibril.

But what we know is that Muhammad had to deflect the criticisms of his contemporaries who noted that Muhammad learnt his Abrahamic religion from certain people.

16:103
“And certainly We know that they say: Only a mortal teaches him. The tongue of him whom they reproach is barbarous, and this is clear Arabic tongue.”

This is the Quran saying to Muhammad’s followers - don’t believe what is being said about Muhammad - that a mortal teaches him. The Quran gives the nonsensical explanation that the person who was charged with teaching Muhammad was foreign where the Quran is in Classical Arabic.

This is pure nonsense since it is known that Jabr the Christian taught Muhammad in his own language which Muhammad paraphrased into the Quran.

Ibn Ishaq page 180: "According to my information the apostle used often to sit at al-Marwa at the booth of a young Christian called Jabr, a slave of B. al-Hadrami and they used to say “The one who teaches Muhammad most of what he brings is Jabr the Christian, slave of the B. al-Hadrami.” Then God revealed in reference to their words “We well know that they say, “Only a mortal teaches him”.” The tongue of him at whom they hint is foreign, and this is a clear Arabic tongue.
injil.de/Main/Silas/saifdebate2.htm

This is from sahih Bukhari:
Bukhari 4:56:814:
Narrated Anas: There was a Christian who embraced Islam and read Surat-al-Baqara and Al-Imran, and he used to write (the revelations) for the Prophet. Later on he returned to Christianity again and he used to say: “Muhammad knows nothing but what I have written for him.” …

Waqidi reports the name of another Christian who taught Muhammad the Christian scriptures:
Waqidi [d. 207 AH D/823 CE] who says that a Christian slave named Ibn Qumta was the amanuensis of the prophet, along with a certain ‘Abdallah b. Sa‘ad b. Abi Sarh, who reported that “It was only a Christian slave who was teaching him [Mohammed]; I used to write to him and change whatever I wanted.” 6
debate.org.uk/topics/books/origins-koran.html

Thus the Quran gives us the clue that Muhammad’s contemporaries already accused him of learning from a foreigner.

cont.
 
Angelos said:
Rodrigo wrote:
[25.4-6] The unbelievers say: 'This is but a falsehood he has forged – another nation has helped him. ’ So they have come with wrong and falsehood. They say: ‘He has written tales of the ancients, they are recited to him at dawn and at the evening.’ Say: 'It was sent down by Him who knows the secrets of heavens and earth. He is Forgiving, the Most Merciful.

Angelos wrote:
Read what the same Quran also says:

016: 103 We know indeed that they say, “It is **a man **that teaches him.” The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.

Apparently, the Quran confirms that people blamed Mohammed for learning from one certain man whose language was not Arabic! Further, the Quran disregards the possibility of translation even though it is easy to infer from the statement above that the man in question could speak Arabic! Had that certain foreigner been unable to communicate with Mohammed, no one had held such a claim refuted in the Quran 😛 Finally, it is not true that the Quran is pure Arabic since it has many words borrowed from various languages!
Click to expand...

Yes, I see we’re on the same page on this. However, Muhammad is known to have learnt from many Christians, not just one.

The sira names other Christians who talked to Muhammad about certain doctrines/apocrypha and immediately and rather conveniently Allah revealed the same issues to Muhammad.

islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Najran.gif

[Those who talked to Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, were Abu Haritha Ibn Alqama, Al-Aqib Abdul-Masih and Al-Ayham al-Said.] They were Christians according to the faith of the king with differences between them; they say: He is Allah, and say: He is Son of Allah, and say: He is the third of three * and these are the claims of Christianity. [They use as evidence for their claim that He is Allah the argument that] he used to raise the dead, cure the sick, create from clay bird-like structure then breathe into it to make it a [living] bird. All this was by the leave of Allah, the Praiseworthy the Exalted {to appoint him as a sign for men} (Maryam:21).

They also argue for saying that he is Son of Allah by saying he had no known father and spoke in infancy which is something never done by any human being. They use as evidence for their claim that He is the third of three * the argument that Allah says: We did, We commanded, We created and We judged , and whereas if He was one, He would say: I did, I judged, I commanded and I created; but it is He, Jesus and Maryam. The Qur’an was revealed addressing all these arguments.[27] Ref: Abu Muhammad Abd al-Malik Ibn Hisham al-Maafiri, Al-Sirah Al-Nabawiyyah, 1998, Volume II, Dar al-Hadith: Cairo (Egypt), pp. 181-182; also A. Guillaume, The Life Of Muhammad: A Translation Of Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, 1998 (13th impression), Oxford University Press: Karachi (Pakistan), pp. 271-272.
islamic-awareness.org/Quran/MuhBible.html**
 
Wonderful posts 👍

I must add, Allahs response that Muhammmads Quran is in Arabic whereas the one who is teaching him has a different language is absurd to say the least because why would people accuse Muhammad of being taught by another if the other other party did not know Arabic as well?😛

Rodrigo , that Bukhari hadith is 👍
 
Dear inJesus,
I agree. I think 16:103 is referring to Jabr the Christian not being able to speak Classical Arabic in the same poetry as the Quran. I have not heard that Muhammad could speak any other language than Arabic so for conversation between Jabr and Muhammad to have occurred to the level that permitted the former to teach the latter about Christianity, then it stands to reason that Jabr could speak Arabic - after all, he did live in Mecca among the Arabs - but since he was a foreigner he couldn’t speak the high-flown Arabic of the Quran.

Rodrigo
 
Here I am posting the 3rd & final episode of my analysis. I hope you enjoy it 😉

**MARY IN ISLAM WITHOUT JESUS **

Interestingly, there is one single verse in Mohammed’s book that refers to Mary with no mention of Issa. That verse takes place in the comparatively short chapter (only 12 verses!) of Medina period:

(Tahrim) 066: 12. And Mary, daughter of 'Imran, whose body was chaste, therefore We breathed therein something of Our Spirit. And she put faith in the words of her Lord and His scriptures, and was of the obedient.

The first important point about this last verse of the 66th chapter is that it accentuates Mary’s chastity through an inferential endorsement of Her miraculous pregnancy. Actually, the first part of this verse emphasizing Mary’s virginity is the partly repetition of another verse occurring in a chapter of the earlier period (Mecca) of the supposed revelations. To compare & contrast:

021: 91. And she who was chaste, therefore We breathed into her (something) of Our Spirit and made her and her son a token for (all) peoples.

As far as we can conclude from this comparative analysis, the authors of this chapter deliberately modify the second part of the verse of the 21st chapter by excluding Mary’s son Issa while copying that verse in order to single out Mary as the only subject of the sentence in question. Once the authors of the 66th chapter get rid of Issa, they add a special sentence praising Mary for Her faith and obedience.The second modification of secondary significance is carried out by Mary’s identification through Her father Imran, which indicates the continuation of a case of mistaken identity going back to the 19th chapter.

In order to decipher the reason underlying the first major textual alteration, we should comprehend the context of the 66th chapter and find out on what occasion the Quran mentions Mary without any reference to Issa. The opening verses of this short chapter read:

066:001-2. O Prophet! Why bannest thou that which Allah hath made lawful for thee, seeking to please thy wives ? And Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. Allah hath made lawful for you (Muslims) absolution from your oaths (of such a kind), and Allah is your Protector. He is the Knower, the Wise.

It is clear that the prevalent theme of this chapter is Mohammed’s fault to forbid himself from lawful things for the sake of his wives’ happiness. The ensuing verse relates what leads Mohammed to that fault and stresses that Allah reveals to Mohammed whatever his wives try to conceal from him:

066: 003. When the Prophet confided a fact unto one of his wives and when she afterward divulged it and Allah apprised him thereof, he made known (to her) part thereof and passed over part. And when he told it her she said: Who hath told thee ? He said: The Knower, the Aware hath told me.

The next verse contains Allah’s wrathful complaint about Mohammed’s wives after putting the whole blame on two of his wives for misleading Mohammed to erroneous decisions not confirmed by Allah:

066: 004. If ye twain turn unto Allah repentant, (ye have cause to do so) for your hearts desired (the ban); and if ye aid one another against him (Muhammad) then lo! Allah, even He, is his Protecting Friend, and Gabriel and the righteous among the believers; and furthermore the angels are his helpers.

Not surprisingly, the next verse expresses Mohammed’s anger along with his relevant threat of divorcing two of his wives and the assertion that Allah, the angelic hosts, and the true believers will always side with Mohammed. In short, this verse commands two of Mohammed’s wives to repent for complying against Allah’s supposed messenger, predicting what they would lose if Mohammed divorced them:

066: 005. It may happen that his Lord, if he divorce you, will give him in your stead wives better than you, submissive (to Allah), believing, pious, penitent, devout, inclined to fasting, widows and maids.

to be continued… 😃
 
continuing 😉

The interesting point embedded in the verse above is definitely Allah’s promise to give His supposed messenger new wives in case of a divorce. The characteristics of the new wives to replace Mohammed’s two wives are explained in details so as to display Mohammed’s primary criteria for eligibility as well as to help his two wives endeavor to reform themselves and acquire the qualities they presumably lack. After these warnings, the authors of this chapter make a quick leap from Mohammed’s wives to all people even though they continue to employ the same theme of belief and obedience. Finally, Mohammed is asked not to restrain his anger while dealing with unbelievers and hypocrites, by the help of which the notion of hypocrisy is weirdly linked to what two of Mohammed’s wives did to infuriate him:

066: 006-009. O ye who believe! Ward off from yourselves and your families a Fire whereof the fuel is men and stones, over which are set angels strong, severe, who resist not Allah in that which He commandeth them, but do that which they are commanded. (Then it will be said): O ye who disbelieve! Make no excuses for yourselves this day. Ye are only being paid for what ye used to do. O ye who believe! Turn unto Allah in sincere repentance! It may be that your Lord will remit from you your evil deeds and bring you into Gardens underneath which rivers flow, on the day when Allah will not abase the Prophet and those who believe with him. Their light will run before them and on their right hands; they will say: Our Lord! Perfect our light for us, and forgive us! Lo! Thou art Able to do all things. O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey’s end.

In the last three verses of this chapter, the scribes of Mohammed’s book bring the issue back to the rebuke of his wives through the striking analogies of four female figures in Mohammed’s religious history. First they make a comparison between Mohammed’s two wives and the wives of two other messengers. The first two ladies presented as the example of disbelievers are Noah and Lot’s wife:

066: 10. Allah citeth an example for those who disbelieve: the wife of Noah and the wife of Lot, who were under two of Our righteous slaves yet betrayed them so that they (the husbands) availed them naught against Allah and it was said (unto them): Enter the Fire along with those who enter.

to be continued…
 
It is by no means a coincidence that the scribes of the Islamic scripture mentioned the wives of the two prophets – not one – while providing example for disobedient women from history. They definitely made associations between Mohammed’s two wives and the wives of two messengers in order to support the paramount Islamic tenet that Mohammed is Allah’s messenger. Thus, they made efforts to highlight the presumable (and amazing!) similarity between Noah and Lot and Mohammed in terms of having disobedient wives and becoming Allah’s messengers facing betrayals! As a consequence of those efforts, Mohammed’s wife Aisha and Hafsa were skillfully designated as the modern Islamic versions of Noah and Lot’s wife whilst Mohammed himself of those two prophets.

Still, those skillful designations naturally resulted in an innovation that was not known to the inspired writers of the Bible. Since Mohammed’s scribes derived most elements of the Islamic theology from Mohammed’s daily problems and politics, they had to reshape history and distort some biblical accounts in order to conform them to Mohammed’s situation. Therefore, they chose Noah’s poor wife as the second example of betraying women although the biblical account never charged that woman with disbelief or betrayal. If we ask the writers of the Quran why they chose Noah’s wife from among the wives of various prophets, they will surely answer that they did so because they considered Lot’s story similar to Noah’s in terms of a prophet’s salvation from evil folks and Allah’s wrath along with his family. The authors of the Quran definitely knew that the notion of family was momentous in both those messengers’ stories. Accordingly, in the Quran Noah is mentioned with His family:

Anbiya 021: 76 (Remember) Nuh, when he cried (to Us) aforetime: We listened to his (prayer) and delivered him and **his family **from great distress.

to be continued …:rolleyes:
 
After these examples of disobedient and betraying women, the writers of Mohammed’s book give two examples of believing women, the first of which is Pharaoh’s wife:

Tahrim 066: 11 And Allah citeth an example for those who believe: the wife of Pharaoh when she said: My Lord! Build for me a home with thee in the Garden, and deliver me from Pharaoh and his work, and deliver me from evil-doing folk.

The second example is astonishingly Mary, the virgin mother of Issa. However, this verse does not identify Mary as Issa’s mother, but as Imran’s daughter:

066: 12. And Mary, daughter of 'Imran, whose body was chaste, therefore We breathed therein something of Our Spirit. And she put faith in the words of her Lord and His scriptures, and was of the obedient.

Of the four women in total given as examples, Mary is the only one to be no one’s wife! In order to stress Mary’s virginity, the authors of this chapter prefer referring to Mary in terms of parental affiliation and replacing the word “wife” in the other three examples with “daughter” in this. It’s good and natural for Mohammed’s book to reiterate Mary’s virginity since it endorses Issa’s miraculous birth. Still, there’s another reason for those writers to insert Mary’s virginity in the same context as Mohammed’s complaints about his two wives. We so far know that Noah and Lot’s wife were presented as the old equivalents of Aisha and Hafsa, but what about Pharaoh’s wife and Imran’s daughter? What are they doing in this chapter? More to the point, why does the Quran give two women as examples of believing and obedient women? Why is one of these women someone’s wife whereas the other is a virgin? In order to solve the mystery and reveal the hidden association between the last two verses and the opening verses of this chapter, the only thing we can do is to read the fifth verse once more:

066: 05. It may happen that his Lord, if he divorce you, will give him in your stead wives better than you, submissive (to Allah), believing, pious, penitent, devout, inclined to fasting, widows and **maids **

The key words in this verse are “widow” and “maid”. Once we focus on these words, it becomes easy for us to see that Islamic scribes considered Pharaoh’s daughter as the example of believing women (widows!) Mohammed dreamed of marrying if he divorced his two naughty wives. Likewise, they regarded Mary as the example of believing women (maids!) Mohammed desired to have instead of Aisha and Hafsa. In short, the 66th chapter of the Quran profanes the holy name of Mary by making use of Her virginity to threaten Mohammed’s wives and make them jealous. Such an approach to Mary’s virginity also explains why the Quran avoided mentioning St Joseph as Virgin Mary’s husband!

Peace & blessings to the followers of the truth 🙂
 
As usual Angelos, you always give new insights!! thank you for your efforts and God bless you:)
 
inJESUS said:
As usual Angelos, you always give new insights!! thank you for your efforts and God bless you:)
Click to expand...
Thanks amigo 👍 Praise the Lord since I only boast in the Lord and His wisdom. Peace and grace to you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top