The Message of The Quran

Translated and Explained by Muhammad Asad
APPENDIX I
SYMBOLISM AND ALLEGORY IN THE QUR'AN
When studying the Quran, one frequently encounters what may be described as
"key-- phrases" - that is to say, statements which provide a clear, concise indication of the
idea underlying a particular passage or passages: for instance, the many references to the
creation of man "out of dust" and "out of a drop of sperm", pointing to the lowly
biological origin of the human species; or the statement in the ninety-ninth surah (Az-
Zalzalah) that on Resurrection Day "he who shall have done an atom's weight of good,
shall behold it; and he who shall have done an atom's weight of evil, shall behold it" -
indicating the inelucctible afterlife consequences of, and the responsibility for, all that
man consciously does in this world; or the divine declaration (in 38:27), "We have not
created heaven and earth and all that is between them without meaning and purpose
(baatilan), as is the surmise of those who are bent on denying the truth."
Instances of such Quranic key-phrases can be quoted almost ad infinitum, and in many
varying formulations. But there is one fundamental statement in the Quran which occurs
only once, and which may be qualified as "the key-phrase of all its key-phrases": the
statement in verse 3:7 to the effect that the Quran "contains messages that are clear in and
by themselves (ayat-e-muhkamaat) as well as others that are allegorical (mutashabihaat)".
It is this verse which represents, in an absolute sense, a key to the understanding of the
Qur'anic message and makes the whole of it accessible to "people who think" (li-qawmin
yatafakkarUn).
In my notes on the above-mentioned verse I have tried to elucidate the meaning of the
expression ayaat muhkimaat as well as the general purport of what is termed mutashabih
("allegorical" or "symbolic"). Without a proper grasp of what is implied by this latter
term, much of the Qur~an is liable to be - and, in fact, has often been - grossly
misunderstood both by believers and by such as refuse to believe in its divinely-inspired
origin. However, an appreciation of what is meant by "allegory" or "symbolism" in the
context of the Quran is, by itself, not enough to make one fully understand its worldview:
in order to achieve this we must relate the Quranic use of these terms to a concept
touched upon almost at the very beginning of the divine writ - namely, the existence of "a
realm which is beyond the reach of human perception" (aI-ghayb). It is this concept that
constitutes the basic premise for an understanding of the call of the Quran, and, indeed, of
the principle of religion - every religion - as such: for all truly religious cognition arises
from and is based on the fact that only a small segment of reality is open to man's
perception and imagination, and that by far the larger part of it escapes his
comprehension altogether.
However, side by side with this clear-cut metaphysical concept we have a not less clearcut
finding of a psychological nature: namely, the finding that the human mind (in which
term we comprise conscious thinking, imagination, dream-life, intuition, memory, etc.)
can operate only on the basis of perceptions previously experienced by that very mind
either in their entirety or in some of their constituent elements: that is to say, it cannot
visualize, or form an idea of, something that lies entirely outside the realm of previously
realized experiences. Hence, whenever we arrive at a seemingly "new" mental image or
idea, we find, on closer examination, that even if it is new as a composite entity, it is not
really new as regards its component elements, for these are invariably derived from
previous - and sometimes quite disparate - mental experiences which are now but brought
together in a new combination or series of new combinations.
Now as soon as we realize that the human mind cannot operate otherwise than on the
basis of previous experiences - that is to say, on the basis of apperceptions and cognitions
already recorded in that mind - we are faced by a weighty question: Since the
metaphysical ideas of religion relate, by virtue of their nature, to a realm beyond the
reach of human perception or experience - how can they be successfully conveyed too
us? How can we he expected to grasp ideas which have no counterpart, not even a
fractional one, in any of the apperceptions which we have arrived at empirically?
The answer is self-evident: By means of loan-images derived from our actual - physical
or mental - experiences; or, as Zamakhshari phrases it in his commentary on 13:35,
"through a parabolic illustration, by means of something which we know from our
experience, of something that is beyond the reach of our perception" (tamtheelan li-ma
ghaaba anna bi-ma nushaahid). And this is the innermost purport of the term and concept
of al-mutashaabihaat as used in the Quran.
Thus, the Qur~an tells us clearly that many of its passages and expressions must be
understood in an allegorical sense for the simple reason that, being intended for human
understanding, they could not have been conveyed to us in any other way.. It follows,
therefore, that if we were to take every Quranic passage, statement or expression in its
outward, literal sense and disregard the possibility of its being an allegory, a metaphor or
a parable, we would be offending against the very spirit of the divine writ.
Consider, for instance, some of the Quranic references to God's Being - Being
indefinable, infinite in time and space, and utterly beyond any creature's comprehension.
Far from being able to imagine Him, we can only realize what He is not: namely, not
limited in either time or space, not definable in terms of comparison, and not to be
comprised within any category of human thought. Hence, only very generalized
metaphors can convey to us, though most inadequately, the idea of His existence and
activity.
And so, when the Quran speaks of Him as being "in the heavens" or "established on His
throne (al-arsh)", we cannot possibly take these phrases in their literal senses, since then
they would imply, however vaguely, that God is limited in space: and since such a
limitation would contradict the concept of an Infinite Being, we know immediately,
without the least doubt that the "heavens" and the "throne" and God's being "established"
on it are but linguistic vehicles meant to convey an idea which is outside all human
experience, namely, the idea of God's almightiness and absolute sway over all that exists.
Similarly, whenever He is described as "all-seeing", "all-hearing" or "all-aware", we
know that these descriptions have nothing to do with the phenomena of physical seeing or
hearing hut simply circumscribe, in terms understandable to man, the fact of God's
eternal Presence in all that is or happens. And since "no human vision can encompass
Him" (Quran 6:103), man is not expected to realize His existence otherwise than through
observing the effects of His unceasing activity within and upon the universe created by
Him.
But whereas our belief in God's existence does not - and, indeed, could not - depend on
our grasping the unfathomable "how" of His Being, the same is not the case with
problems connected with man's own existence, and, in particular, with the idea of a life in
the hereafter: for, man's psyche is so constituted that it cannot accept any proposition
relating to himself without being given a clear exposition of its purport.
The Quran tells us that man's life in this world is but the first stage - a very short stage -
of a life that continues beyond the hiatus called "death" ; and the same Quran stresses
again and again the principle of man's moral responsibility for all his conscious actions
and his behaviour, and of the continuation of this responsibility, in the shape of
inescapable consequences, good or bad, in a person's life in the hereafter. But how could
man be made to understand the nature of these consequences and, thus, of the quality of
the life that awaits him'? - for, obviously, inasmuch as man's resurrection will be the
result of what the Quran describes as "a new act of creation", the life that will follow
upon it must be entirely different from anything that man can and does experience in this
world.
This being so, it is not enough for man to be told, "If you behave righteously in this
world, you will attain to happiness in the life to come" , or, alternatively, "If you do
wrong in this world, you will suffer for it in the hereafter". Such statements would be far
too general and abstract to appeal to man's imagination and, thus, to influence his
behaviour. What is needed is a more direct appeal to the intellect, resulting in a kind of
"visualization" of the consequences of one's conscious acts and omissions: and such an
appeal can be effectively produced by means of metaphors, allegories and parables, each
of them stressing, on the one hand, the absolute dissimilarity of all that man will
experience after resurrection from whatever he did or could experience in this world; and,
on the other hand, establishing means of comparison between these two categories of
experience.
Thus, explaining the reference to the bliss of paradise in 32:17, the Prophet indicated the
essential difference between man's life in this world and in the hereafter in these words:
"God says, 'I have readied for My righteous servants what no eye has ever seen, and no
ear has ever heard, and no heart of man has ever conceived"' (Bukhãri, Muslim,
Tirmidhi). On the other hand, in 2:25 the Quran speaks thus of the blessed in paradise:
"Whenever they are granted fruits therefrom as their appointed sustenance, they will say,
'It is this that in days of yore was granted to us as our sustenance' - for they shall be given
something which will recall that
[past]": and so we have the image of gardens through which running waters flow, blissful
shade, spouses of indescribable beauty, and many other delights infinitely varied and
unending, and yet somehow comparable to what may be conceived of as most delightful
in this world.
However, this possibility of an intellectual comparison between the two stages of human
existence is to a large extent limited by the fact that all our thinking and imagining is
indissolubly connected with the concepts of finite time and finite space: in other words,
we cannot imagine infinity in either time or space - and therefore cannot imagine a state
of existence independent of time and space - or, as the Qur'~n phrases it with reference to
a state of happiness in afterlife, "a paradise as vast as the heavens and the earth" (3:133):
which expression is the Qur'anic synonym for the entire created universe. On the other
hand, we know that every Qur'anic statement is directed to man's reason and must,
therefore, be comprehensible either in its literal sense (as in the case of the dyãt
muhkamdt) or allegorically (as in the ayat-e-mutashaabihaat); and since, owing to the
constitution of the human mind, neither infinity nor eternity are comprehensible to us, it
follows that the reference to the infinite "vastness" of paradise cannot relate to anything
but the intensity of sensation which it will offer to the blest.
By obvious analogy, the principle of a "comparison through allegory" applied in the
Qur~ãn to all references to paradise - i.e., a state of unimaginable happiness in afterlife -
must be extended to all descriptions of otherworldly suffering - i.e., hell - in respect of its
utter dissimilarity from all earthly experiences as well as its unmeasurable intensity. In
both cases the descriptive method of the Qur'ãn is the same. We are told, as it
were: "Imagine the most joyous sensations, bodily as well as emotional, accessible to
man: indescribable beauty, love physical and spiritual, conscious-ness of fulfilment,
perfect peace and harmony; and imagine these sensations intensified beyond anything
imaginable in this world - and at the same time entirely different from anything
imaginable: and you have an inkling, however vague, of what is meant by 'paradise'."
And, on the other
hand: "Imagine the greatest suffering, bodily as well as spiritual, which man may
experience: burning by fire, utter loneliness and bitter desolation, the torment of
unceasing frustration, a condition of neither living nor dying; and imagine this pain, this
darkness and this despair intensified beyond anything imaginable in this world - and at
the same time entirely different from anything imaginable: and you will know, however
vaguely, what is meant by 'hell'."
Side by side with these allegories relating to man's life after death we find in the Qur'ãn
many symbolical expressions referring to the evidence of God's activity. Owing to the
limitations of human language - which, in their turn, arise from the inborn limitations of
the human mind - this activity can only be circumscribed and never really described. Just
as it is impossible for us to imagine or define God's Being, so the true nature of His
creativeness - and, therefore, of His plan of creation - must remain beyond our grasp. But
since the Quran aims at conveying to us an ethical teaching based, precisely, on the
concept of God's purposeful creativeness, the latter must be, as it were, "translated" into
categories of thought accessible to man. Hence the use of expressions which at first sight
have an almost anthropomorphic hue, for instance, God's "wrath" (ghadab) or
"condemnation"; His "pleasure" at good deeds or "love" for His creatures; or His being
"oblivious" of a sinner who was oblivious of Him; or "asking" a wrongdoer on
Resurrection Day about his wrongdoing; and so forth. All such verbal "translations" of
God's activity into human terminology are unavoidable as long as we are expected to
conform to ethical principles revealed to us by means of a human language; but there can
be no greater mistake than to think that these "translations" could ever enable us to define
the Undefinable.
And, as the Quran makes it clear in the seventh verse 3:7, only "those whose hearts are
given to swerving from the truth go after that part of the divine writ which has been
expressed in allegory, seeking out [what is bound to create] confusion, and seeking [to
arrive at] its final meaning [in an arbitrary manner]: but none save God knows its final
meaning."
APPENDIX II
AL-MUQATTA’AT
ABOUT one-quarter of the Qur'anic surahs are preceded by mysterious letter-symbols
called muqatta’at ("disjointed letters") or, occasionally, fawatih ("openings") because
they appear at the beginning of the relevant surahs. Out of the twenty-eight letters of the
Arabic alphabet, exactly one-half - that is, fourteen - occur in this position, either singly
or in varying combinations of two, three, four or five letters. They are always pronounced
singly, by their designations and not as mere sounds - thus: alif lam mim, or ha mim, etc.
The significance of these letter-symbols has perplexed the commentators from the earliest
times. There is no evidence of the Prophet's having ever referred to them in any of his
recorded utterances, nor of any of his Companions having ever asked him for an
explanation. None the less, it is established beyond any possibility of doubt that all the
Companions - obviously following the example of the Prophet - regarded the muqatta’at
as integral parts of the surahs to which they are prefixed, and used to recite them
accordingly: a fact which disposes effectively of the suggestion advanced by some
Western orientalists that these letters may be no more than the initials of the scribes who
wrote down the individual revelations at the Prophet's dictation, or of the Companions
who recorded them at the time of the final codification of the Qur'an during the reign of
the first three Caliphs.
Some of the Companions as well as some of their immediate successors and later Qur'ancommentators
were convinced that these letters are abbreviations of certain words or
even phrases relating to God and His attributes, and tried to "reconstruct" them with
much ingenuity: but since the possible combinations are practically unlimited, all such
interpretations are highly arbitrary and, therefore, devoid of any real usefulness. Others
have tried to link the muqatta’ at to the numerological values of the letters of the Arabic
alphabet, and have "derived" by this means all manner of esoteric indications and
prophecies.
Yet another, perhaps more plausible interpretation, based on two sets of facts, has been
advanced by some of the most outstanding Islamic scholars throughout the centuries:
Firstly, all words of the Arabic language, without any exception, are composed of either
one letter or a combination of two, three, four or five letters, and never more than five:
and, as already mentioned, these are the forms in which the muqatta’at appear.
Secondly, all surahs prefixed by these letter-symbols open, directly or obliquely, with a
reference to revelation, either in its generic sense or its specific manifestation, the Qur'an.
At first glance it might appear that three surahs (29, 30 and 68) are exceptions to this rule;
but this assumption is misleading. In the opening verse of surah 29 (Al-Ankabat), a
reference to revelation is obviously implied in the saying, "We have attained to faith"
(amanna), i.e., in God and His messages. In surah 30 (Ar-Rum), divine revelation is
unmistakably stressed in the prediction of Byzantine victory in verses 2-4. In verse l of
surah 68 (Al-Qalam) the phenomenon of revelation is clearly referred to in the evocative
mention of "the pen" (see note 2 on the first verse of that surah). Thus, there are no
"exceptions" in the surahs prefixed by one or more of the muqatta’at: each of them opens
with a reference to divine revelation.
This, taken together with the fact that the muqatta’at mirror, as it were, all word-forms of
the Arabic language, has led scholars and thinkers like Al-Mubarrad, Ibn Hazm,
Zamakhshari, Razi, Baydawi, Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Kathir - to mention only a few of them
- to the conclusion that the muqatta’at are meant to illustrate the inimitable, wondrous
nature of Qur'anic revelation, which, though originating in a realm beyond the reach of
human perception (al-ghayb), can be and is conveyed to man by means of the very
sounds (represented by letters) of ordinary human speech.
However, even this very attractive interpretation is not entirely satisfactory inasmuch as
there are many surahs which open with an explicit reference to divine revelation and are
nevertheless not preceded by any letter-symbol. Secondly – and this is the most weighty
objection – the above explanation too is based on no more than conjecture: andso, in the
last resort, we must content ourselves with the finding that a solution of this problem still
remains beyond our grasp. This was apparently the view of the four Right-Guided
Caliphs summarized in these words of Abu Bakr: "In every divine writ (kitab) there is [an
element of] mystery – and the mystery of the Qur'an is [indicated] in the openings of
[some of] the surahs."
APPENDIX III
ON THE TERM AND CONCEPT OF JINN
IN ORDER to grasp the purport of the term JINN as used in the Quran, we must
dissociate our minds from the meaning given to it in Arabian folklore, where it early
came to denote all manner of "demons" in the most popular sense of this word. This
folkloristic image has somewhat obscured the original connotation of the term and its
highly significant - almost self-explanatory -verbal derivation. The root-verb is JANNA,
"he [or "it"] concealed" or "covered with darkness": cf. 6:76, which speaks of Abraham
"when the night overshadowed him with its darkness (janna alayhi)". Since this verb is
also used in the intransitive sense ("he [or "it"] was [or "became"] concealed", resp.
"covered with darkness"), all classical philologists point out that al-jinn signifies "intense
[or "confusing"] darkness" and, in a more general sense, "that which is concealed from
[man' s] senses", i.e., things, beings or forces which cannot normally be perceived by man
but have, nevertheless, an objective reality, whether concrete or abstract, of their own.
In the usage of the Quran, which is certainly different from the usage of primitive
folklore, the term jinn has several distinct meanings. The most commonly encountered is
that of spiritual forces or beings which, precisely because they have no corporeal
existence, are beyond the perception of our corporeal senses: a connotation 'which
includes "satans" and "satanic forces" (shayateen - see note 16 on 15:17) as well as
"angels" and "angelic forces", since all of them are "concealed from our senses" (Jawhari,
Raghib). In order to make it quite evident that these invisible manifestations are not of a
corporeal nature, the Qur'an states parabolically that the jinn were created out of "the fire
of scorching winds" (naar as-samoom, in 15:27), or out of "a confusing flame of fire"
(maarij min naar, in 55:15), or simply "out of fire" (7:12 and 38:76, in these last two
instances referring to the Fallen Angel, Iblis). Parallel with this, we have authentic
ahadith to the effect that the Prophet spoke of the angels as having been "created out of
light" (khuliqat min noor: Muslim, on the authority of Aishah) - light and fire being akin,
and likely to manifest themselves within and through one another (cf. note 7 on verse 8 of
surah 27).
The term jinn is also applied to a wide range of phenomena which, according to most of
the classical commentators, indicate certain sentient organisms of so fine a nature and of
a physio-logical composition so different from our own that they are not normally
accessible to our sense-perception. We know, of course, very little as to what can and
what cannot play the role of a living organism; moreover, our inability to discern and
observe such phenomena is by no means a sufficient justification for a denial of their
existence. The Quran refers often to "the realm which is beyond the reach of human
perception" (aI-ghayb), while God is frequently spoken of as "the Sustainer of all the
worlds" (rabb al-alameen): and the use of the plural clearly indicates that side by side
with the "world" open to our observation there are other "worlds" as well - and, therefore,
other forms of life, different from ours and presumably from one another, and yet subtly
interacting and perhaps even permeating one another in a manner beyond our ken. And if
we assume, as we must, that there are living organisms whose biological premises are
entirely different from our own, it is only logical to assume that our physical senses can
establish contact with them only under very exceptional circumstances: hence the
description of them as "invisible beings". Now that occasional, very rare crossing of
paths between their life-mode and ours may well give rise to strange - because
unexplainable - manifestations, which man's primitive fantasy has subsequently
interpreted as ghosts, demons and other such "supernatural" apparitions.
Occasionally, the term jinn is used in the Quran to denote those elemental forces of
nature -including human nature - which are "concealed from our senses inasmuch as they
manifest themselves to us only in their effects but not in their intrinsic reality. Instances
of this connotation are found, e.g., in 37:158 ff. (and possibly also in 6:100), as well as in
the earliest occurrence of this concept, namely, in 114:6.
Apart from this, it is quite probable that in many instances where the Qur~an refers to
jinn in terms usually applied to organisms endowed with reason, this expression either
implies a symbolic "personification' of man's relationship with 'satanic forces' (shaytan) -
an implication evident. e.g.. in 6:112, 7:38, 11:119, 32:13 - or, alternatively, is a
metonym for a person 's preoccupation with what is loosely described as "occult powers".
whether real or illusory, as well as for the resulting practices as such. like sorcery,
necromancy. astrology, soothsaying. etc.: endeavours to which the Quran invariably
refers in condemnatory terms (cf. 2:102 ; also 6:128 and 130, or 72:5-6).
In a few instances (e.g., in 46:29-32 and 72:1-15) the term jinn may conceivably denote
beings not invisible in and by themselves but, rather. "hitherto unseen beings" ( 72:1).
Finally, references to jinn are sometimes meant to recall certain legends deeply
embedded in the consciousness of the people to whom the Quran was addressed in the
first instance (e.g., in 34:12-14) - the purpose being, in every instance, noot the legend as
such but the illustration of a moral or spiritual truth.
APPENDIX IV
THE NIGHT JOURNEY
THE PROPHET'S "Night Journey" (isra') from Mecca to Jerusalem and his subsequent
"Ascension" (mi’raj) to heaven are, in reality, two stages of one mystic experience, dating
almost exactly one year before the exodus to Medina (cf. Ibn Sa’d I/1, 143). According to
various well-documented Traditions - extensively quoted and discussed by Ibn Kathir in
his commentary on 17:1, as well as by Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari VII, 155 ff. - the Apostle
of God, accompanied by the Angel Gabriel, found himself transported by night to the site
of Solomon's Temple at Jerusalem, where he led a congregation of many of the earlier,
long since deceased prophets in prayer; some of them he afterwards encountered again in
heaven. The Ascension, in particular, is important from the viewpoint of Muslim
theology inasmuch as it was in the course of this experience that the five daily prayers
were explicitly instituted, by God's ordinance, as an integral part of the Islamic Faith.
Since the Prophet himself did not leave any clear-cut explanation of this experience,
Muslim thinkers - including the Prophet's Companions - have always widely differed as
to its true nature. The great majority of the Companions believed that both the Night
Journey and the Ascension were physical occurrences - in other words, that the Prophet
was borne bodily to Jerusalem and then to heaven - while a minority were convinced that
the experience was purely spiritual. Among the latter we find, in particular, the name of
A'ishah, the Prophet's widow and most intimate companion of his later years, who
declared emphatically that "he was transported in his spirit (bi-ruhihi), while his body did
not leave its place" (cf. Tabari, Zamakhshari and Ibn Kathir in their commentaries on
17:1); the great Al-Hasan al-Basri, who belonged to the next generation, held
uncompromisingly to the same view (ibid.). As against this, the theologians who maintain
that the Night Journey and the Ascension were physical experiences refer to the
corresponding belief of most of the Companions - without, however, being able to point
to a single Tradition to the effect that the Prophet himself described it as such. Some
Muslim scholars lay stress on the words asra bi-‘abdihi ("He transported His servant by
night") occurring in 17:1, and contend that the term ‘abd ("servant") denotes a living
being in its entirety, i.e., a combination of body and soul. This interpretation, however,
does not take into account the probability that the expression asra bi-‘abdihi simply refers
to the human quality of the Prophet, in consonance with the many Qur'anic statements to
the effect that he, like all other apostles, was but a mortal servant of God, and was not
endowed with any supernatural qualities. This, to my mind, is fully brought out in the
concluding words of the above verse - "verily, He alone is all-hearing, all-seeing" -
following upon the statement that the Prophet was shown some of God's symbols (min
ayatina), i.e., given insight into some, but by no means all, of the ultimate truths
underlying God's creation.
The most convincing argument in favour of a spiritual interpretation of both the Night
Journey and the Ascension is forthcoming from the highly allegorical descriptions found
in the authentic Traditions relating to this double experience: descriptions, that is, which
are so obviously symbolic that they preclude any possibility of interpreting them literally,
in "physical" terms. Thus, for instance, the Apostle of God speaks of his encountering at
Jerusalem, and subsequently in heaven, a number of the earlier prophets, all of whom had
undoubtedly passed away a long time before. According to one Tradition (quoted by Ibn
Kathir on the authority of Anas), he visited Moses in his grave, and found him praying. In
another Tradition, also on the authority of Anas (cf. Fath alBari VII, 158), the Prophet
describes how, on his Night Journey, he encountered an old woman, and was thereupon
told by Gabriel, "This old woman is the mortal world (ad-dunya)". In the words of yet
another Tradition, on the authority of Abu Hurayrah (ibid.), the Prophet "passed by
people who were sowing and harvesting; and every time they completed their harvest,
[the grain] grew up again. Gabriel said, 'These are the fighters in God's cause (almujahidun
).' Then they passed by people whose heads were being shattered by rocks;
and every time they were shattered, they became whole again. [Gabriel] said, 'These are
they whose heads were oblivious of prayer.’... Then they passed by people who were
eating raw, rotten meat and throwing away cooked, wholesome meat. [Gabriel] said,
'These are the adulterers.'"
In the best-known Tradition on the Ascension (quoted by Bukhari), the Prophet
introduces his narrative with the words: "While I lay on the ground next to the Kabah
[lit., "in the hijr"], lo! there came unto me an angel, and cut open my breast and took out
my heart. And then a golden basin full of faith was brought unto me, and my heart was
washed [therein] and was filled [with it]; then it, was restored to its place…" Since "faith"
is an abstract concept, it is obvious that the Prophet himself regarded this prelude to the
Ascension - and therefore the Ascension itself and, ipso facto, the Night Journey to
Jerusalem - as purely spiritual experiences.
But whereas there is cogent reason to believe in a "bodily" Night Journey arid Ascension,
there is, on the other hand, no reason to doubt the objective reality of this event. The early
Muslim theologians, who could not be expected to possess adequate psychological
knowledge, could
visualize only two alternatives: either a physical happening or a dream. Since it appeared
to them - and rightly so - that these wonderful occurrences would greatly lose in
significance if they were relegated to the domain of mere dream, they instinctively
adopted an interpretation in physical terms and passionately defended it against all
contrary views, like those of A'ishah, Muawiyah or Al-Hasan al-Basri. In the meantime,
however, we have come to know that a dream-experience is not the only alternative to a
physical occurrence. Modern psychical research, though still in its infancy, has
demonstrably proved that not every spiritual experience (that is, an experience in which
none of the known organs of man's body has a part) must necessarily be a mere
subjective manifestation of the "mind" - whatever this term may connote - but that it may,
in special circumstances, be no less real or "factual" in the objective sense of this word
than anything that man can experience by means of his physiological organism. We know
as yet very little about the quality of such exceptional psychic activities, and so it is wellnigh
impossible to reach definite conclusions as to their nature. Nevertheless, certain
observations of modern psychologists have confirmed the possibility - claimed from time
immemorial by mystics of all persuasions - of a temporary "independence" of man's spirit
from his living body. In the event of such a temporary independence, the spirit or soul
appears to be able freely to traverse time and space, to embrace within its insight
occurrences and phenomena belonging to otherwise widely separated categories of
reality, and to condense them within symbolical perceptions of great intensity, clarity and
comprehensiveness. But when it comes to communicating such "visionary" experiences
(as we are constrained to call them for lack of a better term) to people who have never
experienced anything of the kind, the person concerned - in this case, the Prophet - is
obliged to resort to figurative expressions: and this would account for the allegorical style
of all the Traditions relating to the mystic vision of the Night Journey and the Ascension.
At this point I should like to draw the reader's attention to the discussion of "spiritual
Ascension" by one of the truly great Islamic thinkers, Ibn al-Qayyim (Zad al-Ma’ad II, 48
f.): “A'ishah and Muawiyah maintained that the [Prophet's] Night Journey was performed
by his soul (bi-ruhihi), while his body did not leave its place. The same is reported to
have been the view of Al-Hasan al-Basri. But it is necessary to know the difference
between the saying, 'the Night Journey took place in dream (manaman)', and the saying,
'it was [performed] by his soul without his body'. The difference between these two
[views] is tremendous. . . , What the dreamer sees are mere reproductions (amthal) of
forms already existing in his mind; and so he dreams [for example] that he ascends to
heaven or is transported to Mecca or to [other] regions of the world, while [in reality] his
spirit neither ascends nor is transported. . . .
"Those who have reported to us the Ascension of the Apostle of God can be divided into
two groups - one group maintaining that the Ascension was in spirit and in body, and the
other group maintaining that it was performed by his spirit, while his body did not leave
its place. But these latter [also] do not mean to say that the Ascension took place in a
dream: they merely mean that it was his soul itself which actually went on the Night
Journey and ascended to heaven, and that the soul witnessed things which it [otherwise]
witnessses after death [lit., mufaraqah, "separation"].
Its condition on that occasion was similar to the condition [of the soul] after death... But
that which the Apostle of God experienced on his Night Journey was superior to the
[ordinary] experiences of the soul after death, and, of course, was far above the dreams
which one sees in sleep… As to the prophets [whom the Apostle of God met in heaven],
it was but their souls which had come to dwell there after the separation from their
bodies, while the soul of the Apostle of God ascended there in his lifetime."
It is obvious that this kind of spiritual experience is not only not inferior, but on the
contrary, vastly superior to anything that bodily organs could ever perform or record; and
it goes without saying, as already mentioned by Ibn al-Qayyim, that it is equally superior
to what we term "dream-experiences", inasmuch as the latter have no objective existence
outside the subject's mind, whereas spiritual experiences of the kind referred to above are
not less "real" (that is, objective) than. anything which could be experienced "in body",
By assuming that the Night Journey and the Ascension were spiritual and not bodily, we
do not diminish the extraordinary value attaching to this experience of the Prophet, On
the contrary, it appears that the fact of his having had such an experience by far
transcends any miracle of bodily ascension, for it
presupposes a personality of tremendous spiritual perfection - the very thing which we
expect from a true Prophet of God. However, it is improbable that we ordinary human
beings will ever be in a position fully to comprehend spiritual experiences of this kind,
Our minds can only operate with elements provided by our consciousness of time and
space; and everything that extends beyond this particular set of conceptions will always
defy our attempts at a clear-cut definition.\
In conclusion, it should be noted that the Prophet's Night Journey from Mecca to
Jerusalem, immediately preceding his Ascension was apparently meant to show that
Islam is not a new doctrine but a continuation of the same divine message which was
preached by the prophets of old, who had Jerusalem as their spiritual home, This view is
supported by Traditions (quoted in Fath al-Bari VII, 158), according to which the
Prophet, during his Night Journey, also offered prayers at Yathrib, Sinai, Bethlehem, etc.
His encounters with other prophets, mentioned in this connection, symbolize the same
idea. The well-known Traditions to the effect that on the occasion of his Night Journey
the Prophet led a prayer in the Temple of Jerusalem, in which all other prophets ranged
themselves behind him, expresses in a figurative manner the doctrine that Islam, as
preached by the Prophet Muhammad, is the fulfilment and perfection of mankind's
religious development, and that Muhammad was the last and the greatest of God's
message-bearers.

The Amazing Qur'an [by Gary Miller]

Calling the Qur'an amazing is not something done only by Muslims, who have an
appreciation for the book and who are pleased with it; it has been labeled amazing by
non-Muslims as well. In fact, even people who hate Islam very much have still called it
amazing.
Assumption of the people about the Qur'an
One thing which surprises non Muslims who are examining the book very closely is that
the Qur'an does not appear to them to be what they expected. What they assume is that
they have an old book which came fourteen centuries ago from the Arabian Desert; and
they expect that the book should look something like that - an old book from the desert.
And then they find out that it does not resemble what they expected at all.
Additionally, one of the first things that some people assume is that because it is an old
book which comes from the desert, it should talk about the desert. Well the Qur'an does
talk about the desert - some of its imagery describes the desert; but it also talks about the
sea - what it's like to be in a storm on the sea.
Some years ago, the story came to us in Toronto about a man who was in the merchant
marine and made his living on the sea. A Muslim gave him a translation of the Qur'an to
read. The merchant marine knew nothing about the history of Islam but was interested in
reading the Qur'an. When he finished reading it, he brought it back to the Muslim and
asked, "This Muhammad was he a sailor?" He was impressed at how accurately the
Qur'an describes a storm on a sea. When he was told, "No as a matter of fact, Muhammad
lived in the desert," that was enough for him. He embraced Islam on the spot. He was so
impressed with the Qur'an's description because he had been in a storm on the sea, and he
knew that whoever had written that description had also been in a storm on the sea. The
description of "a wave, over it a wave, over it clouds" was not what someone imagining a
storm on a sea to be like would have written; rather, it was written by someone who knew
what a storm on the sea was like. This is one example of how the Qur'an is not tied to a
certain place and time. Certainly, the scientific ideas expressed in it also do not seem to
originate from the desert fourteen centuries ago.
The theory of an atom
Many centuries before the onset of Muhammad's Prophethood, there was a well-known
theory of atomism advanced by the Greek philosopher, Democritus. He and the people
who came after him assumed that matter consists of tiny, indestructible, indivisible
particles called atoms. The Arabs too, used to deal in the same concept; in fact, the
Arabic word "dharrah" commonly referred to the smallest particle known to man.
Now, modern science has discovered that this smallest unit of matter (i.e., the atom,
which has all of the same properties as its element) can be split into its component parts.
This is a new idea, a development of the last century; yet, interestingly enough, this
information had already been documented in the Qur'an which states:
"He [i.e., Allah] is aware of an atom's weight in the heavens and on the earth and even
anything smaller than that..."
Undoubtedly, fourteen centuries ago that statement would have looked unusual, even to
an Arab. For him, the dharrah was the smallest thing there was. Indeed, this is proof, that
the Qur'an is not outdated.
Health and medicine
Another example of what one might expect to find in an "old book" that touches upon the
subject of health or medicine is outdated remedies or cures. Various historical sources
state that the Prophet gave some advice about health and hygiene, yet most of these
pieces of advice are not contained in the Qur'an. At first glance, to the non-Muslims this
appears to be a negligent omission. They cannot understand why Allah would not
"include" such helpful information in the Qur'an. Some Muslims attempt to explain this
absence with the following argument: "Although the Prophet's advice was sound and
applicable to the time in which he lived, Allah, in His infinite wisdom, knew that there
would come later medical and scientific advances which would make the Prophet's
advice appear outdated. When later discoveries occurred, people might say that such
information contradicted that which the Prophet had given. Thus, since Allah would
never allow any opportunity for the non-Muslims to claim that the Qur'an contradicts
itself or the teachings of the Prophet, He only included in the Qur'an information and
examples which could stand the test of time."
However, when one examines the true realities of the Qur'an in terms of its existence as a
divine revelation, the entire matter is quickly brought into its proper perspective, and the
error in such argumentation becomes clear and understandable. It must be understood that
the Qur'an is a divine revela tion, and as such, all information in it is of divine origin.
Allah revealed the Qur'an from Himself. It is the words of Allah, which existed before
creation, and thus nothing can be added, subtracted or altered. In essence, the Qur'an
existed and was complete before the creation of Prophet Muhammad, so it could not
possibly contain any of the Prophet's own words or advice. An inclusion of such
information would clearly contradict the purpose for which the Qur'an exists,
compromise its authority and render it inauthentic as a divine revelation. Consequently,
there was no "home remedies" in the Qur'an which one could claim to be outdated; nor
does it contain any man's view about what is beneficial to health, what food is best to eat,
or what will cure this or that disease. In fact, the Qur'an only mentions one item dealing
with medical treatment, and it is not in dispute by anyone. It states that in honey there is
healing. And certainly, I do not think that there is anyone who will argue with that!
If one assumes that the Qur'an is the product of a man's mind, then one would expect it to
reflect some of what was going on in the mind of the man who "composed" it. In fact,
certain encyclopedias and various books clam that the Qur'an was the produc t of
hallucinations that Muhammad underwent. If these claims are true - if it indeed originated
from some psychological problems in Muhammad's mind - then evidence of this would
be apparent in the Qur'an. Is there such evidence? In order to determine whether or not
there is, one must first identify what things would have been going on in his mind at that
time and then search for these thoughts and reflections in the Qur'an.
The Revelation
It is common knowledge that Muhammad had a very difficult life. All of his daughters
died before him except one, and he had a wife of several years who was dear and
important to him, who not only preceded him in death at a very critical period of his life.
As a matter of fact, she must have been quite a woman because when the first revelation
came to him, he ran home to her afraid. Certainly, even today one would have a hard time
trying to find an Arab who would tell you, "I was so afraid that I ran home to my wife."
They just aren't that way. Yet Muhammad felt comfortable enough with his wife to be
able to do that. That's how influential and strong woman she was. Although these
examples are only a few of the subjects that would have been on Muhammad's mind, they
are sufficient in intensity to prove my point. The Qur'an does not mention any of these
things - not the death of his children, not the death of his beloved companion and wife,
not his fear of the initial revelations, which he so beautifully shared with his wife -
nothing; yet, these topics must have hurt him, bothered him, and caused him pain and
grief during periods of his psychological reflections, then these subjects, as well as
others, would be prevalent or at least mentioned throughout. A truly scientific approach
to the Qur'an is possible because the Qur'an offers something that is not offered by other
religious scriptures, in particular, and other religions, in general. It is what scientists
demand. Today there are many people who have ideas and theories about how the
universe works. These people are all over the place, but the scientific community does
not even bother to listen to them. This is because within the last century the scientific
community has demanded a test of falsification. They say, "If you have theory, do not
bother us with it unless you bring with that theory a way for us to prove whether you are
wrong or not."
Such a test was exactly why the scientific community listened to Einstein towards the
beginning of the century. He came with a new theory and said, "I believe the universe
works like this; and here are three ways to prove whether I am wrong!" So the scientific
community subjected his theory to the tests, and within six years it passed all three. Of
course, this does not prove that he was great, but it proves that he deserved to be listened
to because he said, "This is my idea; and if you want to try to prove me wrong, do this or
try that." This is exactly what the Qur'an has - falsification tests. Some are old (in that
they have already been proven true), and some still exist today. Basically it states, "If this
book is not what it claims to be, then all you have to do is this or this or this to prove that
it is false." Of course, in 1400 years no one has been able to do "This or this or this," and
thus it is still considered true and authentic. I suggest to you that the next time you get
into dispute with someone about Islam and he claims that he has the truth and that you
are in darkness, you leave all other arguments at first and make this suggestion. Ask him,
"Is there any falsification test in your religion? Is there anything in your religion that
would prove you are wrong if I could prove to you that it exists - anything?" Well, I can
promise right now that people will not have anything - no test, no proof, nothing! This is
because they do not carry around the idea that they should not only present what they
believe but should also offer others a chance to prove they're wrong. However, Islam
does that. A perfect example of how Islam provides man with a chance to verify its
authenticity and "prove it wrong" occurs in the 4th chapter. And quiet honestly, I was
surprised when I first discovered this challenge. It states:
"Do they not consider the Qur'an? Had it been from any other than Allah, they would
surely have found therein much discrepancy."
The challenge to non-Muslims
This is a clear challenge to the non-Muslim. Basically, it invites him to find a mistake. As
a matter of fact, the seriousness and difficulty of the challenge aside, the actual
presentation of such a challenge in the first place is not even in human nature and is
inconsistent with man's personality. One doesn't take an exam in school after finishing
the exam; write a note to the instructor at the end saying, "This exam is perfect. There are
no mistakes in it. Find one if you can!" One just doesn't do that. The teacher would not
sleep until he found a mistake! And yet this is the way the Qur'an approaches people.
Another interesting attitude that exists in the Qur'an repeatedly deals with its advice to
the reader. The Qur'an informs that reader about different facts and then gives the advice:
"If you want to know more about this or that, or if you doubt what is said, then you
should ask those who have knowledge." This too is a surprising attitude. It is not usual to
have a book that comes from someone without training in geography, botany, biology,
etc., who discusses these subjects and then advises the reader to ask men of knowledge if
he doubts anything.
Yet in every age there have been Muslims who have followed the advice of the Qur'an
and made surprising discoveries. If one looks to the works of Muslim scientists in many
centuries ago, one will find them full of quotations from the Qur'an. These works state
that they did research in such a place, looking for something. And the y affirm that the
reason they looked in such and such a place was that the Qur'an pointed them in that
direction. For example, the Qur'an mentions man's origin and then tells the reader,
"Research it!" It gives the reader a hint where to look and then states that one should find
out more about it. This is the kind of thing that Muslims today largely seem to overlook -
but not always, as illustrated in the following example. A few years ago, a group of men
in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia collected all if the verses in the Qur'an which discuss
embryology - the growth of the human being in the womb. They said, "Here is what the
Qur'an says. Is it the truth?" In essence, they took the advice of the Qur'an: "Ask the men
who know." They chose, as it happened, a non-Muslim who is a professor of embryology
at the University of Toronto. His name is Keith Moore, and he is the author of textbooks
on embryology - a world expert on the subject. They invited him to Riyadh and said,
"This is what the Qur'an says about your subject. Is it true? What can you tell us?" While
he was in Riyadh, they gave him all of the help that he needed in translation and all of the
cooperation for which he asked. And he was so surprised at what he found that he
changed his textbooks. In fact, in the second edition of one of his books, called before we
are born... in the second edition about the history of embryology, he included some
material that was not in the first edition because of what he found in the Qur'an. Truly
this illustrates that the Qur'an was ahead of its time and that those who believe in the
Qur'an know what other people do not know.
Interview with Dr. Keith Moore
I had the pleasure of interviewing Dr. Keith Moore for a television presentation, and we
talked a great deal about this - it was illustrated by slides and so on. He mentioned that
some of the things that the Qur'an states about the growth of the human being were not
known until thirty years ago. In fact, he said that one item in particular - the Qur'an's
description of the human being as a "leech- like clot" ('alaqah) at one stage - was new to
him; but when he checked on it, he found that it was true, and so he added it to his book.
He said, "I never thought of that before," and he went to the zoology department and
asked for a picture of a leech. When he found that it looked just like the human embryo,
he decided to include both pictures in one of his textbooks. Dr. Moore also wrote a book
on clinical embryology, and when he presented this information in Toronto, it caused
quite a stir throughout Canada. It was on the front pages of some of the news papers
across Canada, and some of the headlines were quite funny. For instance, one headline
read:
"SURPRISING THING FOUND IN ANCIENT BOOK!" It seems obvious from this
example that people do not clearly understand what it is all about. As a matter of fact, one
newspaper reporter asked Professor Moore, "Don't you think that maybe the Arabs might
have known about these things - the description of the embryo, its appearance and how it
changes and grows? Maybe there were not scientists, but maybe they did something
crude dissections on their own - carved up people and examined these things."
The professor immediately pointed out to him that he [i.e., the reporter] had missed a
very important point all of the slides of the embryo that had been shown and had been
projected in the film had come from pictures taken through a microscope. He said, "It
does not matter if someone had tried to discover embryology fourteen centuries ago, they
could not have seen it!" All of the descriptions in the Qur'an of the appearance of the
embryo are of the item when it is still too small to see with the eye; therefore, one needs a
microscope to see it. Since such a device had only been around for little more than two
hundred years, Dr. Moore taunted, "Maybe fourteen centuries ago someone secretly had a
microscope and did this research, making no mistakes anywhere. Then he somehow
taught Muhammad and convinced him to put this information in his book. Then he
destroyed his equipment and kept it a secret forever. Do you believe that? You really
should not unless you bring some proof because it is such a ridiculous theory. " In fact,
when he was asked, "How do you explain this information in the Qur'an?" Dr. Moore's
reply was, "It could only have been divinely revealed."!
Although the aforementioned example of man researching information contained in the
Qur'an deals with a non-Muslim, it is still valid because he is one of those who is
knowledgeable in the subject being researched. Had some layman claimed that what the
Qur'an says about embryology is true, then one would not necessarily have to accept his
word. However, because of the high position, respect, and esteem man gives scholars,
one naturally assumes that if they research a subject and arrive at a conclusion based on
that research, then the conclusion is valid. One of Professor Moore's colleagues, Marshall
Johnson, deals extensively with geology at the University of Toronto.
The authenticity of the Qur'an
He became very interested in the fact that the Qur'an's statements about embryology are
accurate, and so he asked Muslims to collect everything contained in the Qur'an which
deals with his specialty. Again people were very surprised at the findings. Since there are
a vast number subjects discussed in the Qur'an, it would certainly require a large amount
of time to exhaust each subject. It suffices for the purpose of this discussion to state that
the Qur'an makes very clear and concise statements about various subjects while
simultaneously advising the reader to verify the authenticity of these statements with
research by scholars in those subjects. And as illustrated by the Qur'an has clearly
emerged authentic. Undoubtedly, there is an attitude in the Qur'an which is not found
anywhere else. It is interesting how when the Qur'an provides information, it often tells
the reader, "You did not know this before." Indeed, there is no scripture that exists which
makes that claim. All of the other ancient writings and scriptures that people have, do
give a lot of information, but they always state where the information came from.
For example, when the Bible discusses ancient history, it states that this king lived here,
this one fought in a certain battle, another one had so may sons, etc. Yet it always
stipulates that if you want more information, then you should read the book of so and so
because that is where the information came from. In contrast to this concept, the Qur'an
provides the reader with information and states that this information is something new.
Of course, there always exists the advice to research the information provided and verify
its authenticity. It is interesting that such a concept was never challenged by non-Muslims
fourteen centuries ago. Indeed, the Makkans who hated the Muslims, and time and time
again they heard such revelations claiming to bring new information; yet, they never
spoke up and said, "This is not new. We know where Muhammad got this information.
We learned this at school."
They could never challenge its authenticity because it really was new! In concurrence
with the advice given in the Qur'an to research information (even if it is new) when
'Umar was caliph, he chose a group of men and sent them to find the wall of Dhul-
Qarnayn. Before the Qur'anic revelation, the Arabs had never heard of such a wall, but
because the Qur'an described it, they were able to discover it. As a matter of fact, it is
now located in what is called Durbend in the Soviet Union. It must be stressed here that
the Qur'an is accurate about many, many things, but accuracy does not necessarily mean
that a book is a divine revelation. In fact, accuracy is only one of the criteria for divine
revelations.
For instance, the telephone book is accurate, but that does not mean that it is divinely
revealed. The real problem lies in that one must establish some proof of the source the
Qur'an's information. The emphasis is on the reader. One cannot simply deny the Qur'an's
authenticity without sufficient proof. If, indeed, one finds a mistake, then he has the right
to disqualify it. This is exactly what the Qur'an encourages. Once a man came up to me
after a lecture I delivered in South Africa. He was very angry about what I had said, and
so he claimed, "I am going to go home tonight and find a mistake in the Qur'an." Of
course, I said, "Congratulations. That is the most intelligent thing that you have said."
Certainly, this is the approach Muslims need to take with those who doubt the Qur'an's
authenticity, because the Qur'an itself offers the same challenge. An inevitably, after
accepting it's challenge and discovering that it is true, these people will come to believe it
because they could not disqualify it. In essence, the Qur'an earns their respect because
they themselves have had to verify its authenticity. An essential fact that cannot be
reiterated enough concerning the authenticity of the Qur'an is that one's inability to
explain a phenomenon himself does not require his acceptance of the phenomenon's
existence or another person's explanation of it.
Specifically, just because one cannot explain something does not mean that one has to
accept someone else's explanation. However, the person's refusal of other explanations
reverts the burden of proof back on himself to find a feasible answer. This general theory
applies to numerous concepts in life, but fits most wonderfully with the Qur'anic
challenge, for it creates a difficulty for one who says, "I do not believe it." At the onset of
refusal one immediately has an obligation to find an explanation himself if he feels
others' answers are inadequate. In fact, in one particular Qur'anic verse which I have
always seen mistranslated into English, Allah mentions a man who heard the truth
explained to him. It states that he was derelict in his duty because after he heard the
information, he left without checking the verity of what he had heard. In other words, one
is guilty if he hears something and does not research it and check to see whether it is true.
One is supposed to process all information and decide what is garbage to be thrown out
and what is worthwhile information to be kept and benefited from at a later date. One
cannot just let it rattle around in his head. It must be put in the proper categories and
approached from that point of view. For example, if the information is still doubtful, then
one must discern whether it's closer to being true or false. But if all of the facts have been
presented, then one must decide absolutely between these two options. And even if one is
not positive about the authenticity of the information, he is still required to process all of
the information and make the admission that he just does not know for sure. Although
this last point appears to be futile, in actuality, it is beneficial to the arrival at a positive
conclusion at a later time in that it forces the person to at least recognize, research and
review the facts. This familiarity with the information will give the person "the edge"
when future discoveries are made and additional information is presented. The important
thing is that one deals with the facts and does not simply discard them out of empathy
and disinterest.
Truthfulness of the Qur'an
The real certainty about the truthfulness of the Qur'an is evident in the confidence which
is prevalent throughout it; and this confidence comes from a different approach -
"Exhausting the Alternatives." In essence, the Qur'an states, "This book is a divine
revelation; if you do not believe that, then what is it?" In other words, the reader is
challenged to come up with some other explanation. Here is a book made of paper and
ink. Where did it come from? It says it is a divine revelation; if it is not, then what is its
source? The interesting fact is that no one has with an explanation that works. In fact, all
alternatives have bee exhausted. As has been well established by non-Muslims, these
alternatives basically are reduces to two mutually exclusive schools of thought, insisting
on one or the other. On one hand, there exists a large group of people who have
researched the Qur'an for hundreds of years and who claim, "One thing we know for sure
- that man, Muhammad, thought he was a prophet. He was crazy!" They are convinced
that Muhammad (peace be upon him) was fooled somehow. Then on the other hand, there
is another group which alleges, "Because of this evidence, one thing we know for sure is
that that man, Muhammad, was a liar!" Ironically, these two groups never seem to get
together without contradicting. In fact, many references on Islam usually claim both
theories. They start out by saying that Muhammad (peace be upon him) was crazy and
then end by saying that he was a liar. They never seem to realize that he could not have
been both!
For example, if one is deluded and really thinks that he is a prophet, and then he does not
sit up late at night planning, "How will I fool the people tomorrow so that they think I am
a prophet?" He truly believes that he is a prophet, and he trusts that the answer will be
given to him by revelation. As a matter of fact, a great deal of the Qur'an came in answer
to questions. Someone would ask Muhammad (peace be upon him) a question, and the
revelation would come with the answer to it. Certainly, if one is crazy and believes that
an angel put words in his ear, then when someone asks him a question, he thinks that the
angel will give him the answer. Because he is crazy, he really thinks that. He does not tell
someone to wait a short while and then run to his friends and ask them, "Does anyo ne
know the answer?" This type of behavior is characteristic of one who does not believe
that he is a prophet. What the non-Muslims refuse to accept is that you cannot have it
both ways. One can be deluded, or he can be a liar. He can be either one or neither, but he
certainly cannot be both! The emphasis is on the fact that they are unquestionably
mutually exclusive personal traits. The following scenario is a good example of the kind
of circle that non-Muslims go around in constantly. If you ask one of them, "What is the
origin of the Qur'an?" He tells you that it originated from the mind of a man who was
crazy. Then you ask him, "If it came from his head, then where did he get the information
contained in it? Certainly the Qur'an mentions many things with which the Arabs were
not familiar." So in order to explain the fact which you bring him, he changes his position
and says, "Well, maybe he was not crazy. Maybe some foreigner brought him the
information. So he lied and told people that he was a prophet." At this point then you
have to ask him, "If Muhammad was a liar, then where did he get his confidence? Why
did he behave as though he really thought he was a prophet?" Finally backed into a
corner, like a cat he quickly lashes out with the first response that comes to his mind.
Forgetting that he has already exhausted that possibility, he claims, "Well, maybe he
wasn't a liar. He was probably crazy and really thought that he was a prophet." And thus
he begins the futile circle again.
As has already been mentioned, there is much information contained in the Qur'an whose
source cannot be attributed to anyone other than Allah. For example, who told
Muhammad about the wall of Dhul-Qarnayn - a place hundreds of miles to the north?
Who told him about embryology? When people assemble facts such as these, if they are
not willing to attribute their existence to a divine source, they automatically resort to the
assumption someone brought Muhammad the information and that he used it to fool the
people. However, this theory can easily be disproved with one simple question: "If
Muhammad was a liar, where did he get his confidence? Why did he tell some people out
right to their face what others could never say?" Such confidence depends completely
upon being convinced that one has a true divine revelation. For example, the Prophet
(peace be upon him) had an uncle by the name of Abu Lahab. This man hated Islam to
such an extent that he used to follow the Prophet around in order to discredit him. If Abu
Lahab saw the Prophet (peace be upon him) speaking to a stranger, he would wait until
they parted and then would go to the stranger and ask him, "What did he tell you? Did he
say, 'Black.'? Well, it's white. Did he say, 'Morning.'? Well, it's night." He faithfully said
the exact opposite of whatever he heard Muhammad (peace be upon him) and the
Muslims say. However, about ten years before Abu Lahab died, a little chapter in the
Qur'an was revealed to him. It distinctly stated that he would go to the Fire (i.e., Hell). In
other words, it affirmed that he would never become a Muslim and would therefore be
condemned forever. For ten years all Abu Lahab had to do was say, "I heard that it has
been revealed to Muhammad that I will never change - that I will never become a Muslim
and will enter the Hellfire. Well I want to become a Muslim now. How do you like that?
What do you think of your divine revelation now?" But he never did that. And yet, that is
exactly the kind of behavior one would have expected from him since he always sought
to contradict Islam. In essence, Muhammad (peace be upon him) said, "You hate me and
you want to finish me? Here, say these words, and I am finished. Come on, say them!"
But Abu Lahab never said them. Ten years! And in all that time he never accepted Islam
or even became sympathetic to the Islamic cause. How could Muhammad possibly have
known for sure that Abu Lahab would fulfill the Qur'anic revelation if he (i.e.,
Muhammad) was not truly the messenger of Allah? How could he possibly have been so
confident as to give someone 10 years to discredit his claim of Prophethood? The only
answer is that he was Allah's messenger; for in order to put forth suck a risky challenge,
one has to be entirely convinced that he has a divine revelation.
The Devine protection
Another example of the confidence which Muhammad (peace be upon him) had in his
own Prophethood and consequently in the divine protection of himself and his message is
when he left Makkah and hid in a cave with Abu Bakr during their emigration to
Madeenah. The two clearly saw people coming to kill them, and Abu Bakr was afraid.
Certainly, if Muhammad (peace be upon him) was a liar, a forger and one who was trying
to fool the people into believing that he was a prophet, one would have expected him to
say in such a circumstance to his friend, "Hey, Abu Bakr, see if you can find a back way
out of this cave." Or "Squat down in that corner over there and keep quiet." Yet, in fact,
what he said to Abu Bakr clearly illustrated his confidence. He told him, "Relax! Allah is
with us, and Allah will save us!"
Now, if one knows that he is fooling the people, where does one get this kind of attitude?
In fact, such a frame of mind is not characteristic of a liar or a forger at all. So, as has
been previously mentioned, the non-Muslims go around and around in a circle, searching
for a way out - some way to explain the findings in the Qur'an without attributing them to
their proper source. On one hand, they tell you on Monday, Wednesday and Friday, "The
man was a liar," and on the other hand, on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday they tell you,
"He was crazy." What they refuse to accept is that one cannot have it both ways; yet they
refuse to accept is that one cannot have it both ways; yet they need both excuses to
explain the information in the Qur'an.
The minister who came to visit
About seven years ago, I had a minister over to my home. In the particular room which
we were sitting there was a Qur'an on the table, face down, and so the minister was not
aware of which book it was. In the midst of a discussion, I pointed to the Qur'an and said,
"I have confidence in that book." Looking at the Qur'an but not knowing which book it
was, he replied, "Well, I tell you, if that book is not the Bible, it was written by a man!"
In response to his statement, I said, "Let me tell you something about what is in that
book." And in just three to four minutes I related to him a few things contained in the
Qur'an. After just those three or four minutes, he completely changed his position and
declared, "You are right. A man did not write that book. The Devil wrote it!" Indeed,
possessing such an attitude is very unfortunate - for many reasons. For one thing, it is a
very quick and cheap excuse. It is an instant exit out of an uncomfortable situation. As a
matter of fact, there is a famous story in the Bible that mentions how one day some of the
Jews were witnessed when Jesus raised a man from the dead. The man had been dead for
four days, and when Jesus arrived, he simply said, "Get up!" and the man arose and
walked away. At such a sight, some of the Jews who were watching said disbelievingly,
"This is the Devil. The Devil helped him!" Now this story is rehearsed often in churches
all over the world, and people cry big tears over it, saying, "Oh, if I had been there, I
would not have been as stupid as the Jews!" Yet ironically, these people do exactly what
the Jews did when in just three minutes you show them only a small part of the Qur'an
and all they can say is, "Oh, the Devil did it. The devil wrote that book!" Because they
are truly backed into a corner and have no other viable answer, they resort to the quickest
and cheapest excuse available. Another Example of people's use of this weak stance can
be found in the Makkans' explanation of the source of Muhammad's message. They used
to say, "The devils bring Muhammad that Qur'an!" But just as with every other
suggestion made, the Qur'an gives the answer. One verse in particular states:
"And they say, 'Surely he is possessed [by jinn], 'but it [i.e., the Qur'an] is not except a
reminder to the worlds."
Thus it gives an argument in reply to such a theory. In fact, there are many arguments in
the Qur'an in reply to the suggestion that devils brought Muhammad (peace be upon him)
his message. For example, in the 26th chapter Allah clearly affirms:
"No evil ones have brought it [i.e., this revelation] down. It would neither be fitting for
them, nor would they be able. Indeed they have been removed far from hearing."
And in another place in the Qur'an, Allah instructs us:
"So when you recite the Qur'an seek refuge in Allah from Shaytaan, the rejected."
Now is this how Satan writes a book? He tells one, "Before you read my book, ask God
to save you from me."? This is very, very tricky. Indeed, a man could write something
like this, but would Satan do this? Many people clearly illustrate that they cannot come to
one conclusion on this subject. On one hand, they claim that Satan would not do such a
thing and that even if he could, God would not allow him to; yet, on the other hand, they
also believe that Satan is only that much less than God. In essence they allege that the
Devil can probably do whatever God can do. And as a result, when they look at the
Qur'an, even as surprised as they are as to how amazing it is, they still insist, "The Devil
did this!" Thanks be to Allah, Muslims do not have that attitude. Although Satan may
have some abilities, they are a long way separated from the abilities of Allah. And no
Muslim is a Muslim unless he believes that. It is common knowledge even among non-
Muslims that the Devil can easily make mistakes, and it would be expected that he would
contradict himself if and when he wrote a book. For indeed, the Qur'an states:
"Do they not consider the Qur'an? Had it been from any other than Allah, they would
surely have found therein much discrepancy."
In conjunction with the excuses that non-Muslims advance in futile attempts to justify
unexplainable verses in the Qur'an, there is another attack often rendered which seems to
be a combination of the theorie s that Muhammad (peace be upon him) was crazy and a
liar. Basically, these people propose that Muhammad was insane, and as a result of his
delusion, he lied to and misled people. There is a name for this in psychology. It is
referred to as mythomania. It means simply that one tells lies and then believes them.
This is what the non-Muslims say Muhammad (peace be upon him) suffered from. But
the only problem with this proposal is that one suffering from mythomania absolutely
cannot deal with facts, and yet the whole Qur'an is based entirely upon facts. Everything
contained in it can be researched and established as true. Since facts are such a problem
for a mythomaniac, when a psychologist tries to treat one suffering from that condition,
he continually confronts him with facts. For example, if one is mentally ill and claims, "I
am the king of England," a psychologist does not say to him "No you aren't. You are
crazy!" He just does not do that. Rather, he confronts him with facts and says, "O.K., you
say you are the king of England. So tell me where the queen is today. And where is your
prime minister? And where are your guards?" Now, when the man has trouble trying to
deal with these questions, he tries to make excuses, saying Uh... the queen... she has gone
to her mother's. Uh... the prime minister... well he died." And eventually he is cured
because he cannot deal with the facts. If the psychologist continues confronting him with
enough facts, finally he faces the reality and says, "I guess I am not the king of England."
The Qur'an approaches everyone who reads it in very much the same way a psychologist
treats his mythomania patient. There is a verse in the Qur'an which states:
"Oh mankind, there has come to you an admonition [i.e., the Qur'an] from your Lord and
a healing for what is in the hearts - and guidance and mercy for the believers."
At first glance, this statement appears vague, but the meaning of this verse is clear when
one views it in light of the aforementioned example. Basically, one is healed of his
delusions by reading the Qur'an. In essence, it is therapy. It literally cures deluded people
by confronting them with facts. A prevalent attitude throughout the Qur'an is one which
says, "Oh mankind, you say such and such about this; but what about such and such?
How can you say this when you know that?" And so forth. It forces one to consider what
is relevant and what matters while simultaneously healing one of the delusions that the
facts presented to mankind by Allah can easily be explained away with flimsy theories
and excuses. It is this very sort of thing - confronting people with facts - that had captured
the attention of many non-Muslims. In fact, there exists a very interesting reference
concerning this subject in the New Catholic Encyclopedia. In an article under the subject
of the Qur'an, the Catholic Church states, "Over the centuries, many theories have been
offered as to the origin of the Qur'an... Today no sensible man accepts any of these
theories."!! Now here is the age-old Catholic Church, which has been around for so many
centuries, denying these futile attempts to explain away the Qur'an. Indeed, the Qur'an is
a problem for the Catholic Church. It states that it is revelation, so they study it.
Certainly, they would love to find proof that it is not, but they cannot. They cannot find a
viable explanation. But at least they are honest in their research and do not accept the first
unsubstantiated interpretation which comes along. The Chur ch states that in fourteen
centuries it has not yet been presented a sensible explanation. At least it admits that the
Qur'an is not an easy subject to dismiss. Certainly, other people are much less honest.
They quickly say, "Oh, the Qur'an came from here. The Qur'an came from there." And
they do not even examine the credibility of what they are stating most of the time. Of
course, such a statement by the Catholic Church leaves the everyday Christian in some
difficulty. It just may be that he has his own ideas as to the origin of the Qur'an, but as a
single member of the Church, he cannot really act upon his own theory. Such an action
would be contrary to the obedience, allegiance and loyalty which the Church demands.
By virtue of his membership, he must accept what the Catholic Church declares without
question and establish its teachings as part of his everyday routine. So, in essence, if the
Catholic Church as a whole is saying, "Do not listen to these unconfirmed reports about
the Qur'an," then what can be said about the Islamic point of view? Even non-Muslims
are admitting that there is something to the Qur'an -something that has to be
acknowledged - then why are people so stubborn and defensive and hostile when
Muslims advance the very same theory? This is certainly something for those with mind a
to contemplate - something to ponder for those of understanding!
Almighty God is the source of the Qur'an
Recently, the leading intellectual in the Catholic Church - a man by the name of Hans -
studied the Qur'an and gave his opinion of what he had read. This man has been around
for some time, and he is highly respected in the Catholic Church, and after careful
scrutiny, he reported his findings, concluding, "God has spoken to man through the man,
Muhammad." Again this is a conclusion arrived at by a non-Muslim source - the very
leading intellectual of the Catholic Church himself! I do not think that the Pope agrees
with him, but nonetheless, the opinion of such a noted, repute public figure must carry
some weight in defense of the Muslim position. He must be applauded for facing the
reality that the Qur'an is not something which can be easily pushed aside and that, in fact
God is the source of these words. As is evident from the aforementioned information, all
of the possibilities have been exhausted, so the chance of finding another possibility of
dismissing the Qur'an is nonexistent. For if the book is not a revelation, then it is a
deception; and if it is a deception, one must ask, "What is its origin" And whe re does it
deceive us?" Indeed, the true answers to these questions shed light on the Qur'an's
authenticity and silence the bitter unsubstantiated claims of the unbelievers. Certainly, if
people are going to insist that the Qur'an is a deception, then they must bring forth
evidence to support such a claim. The burden of proof is on them, not us! One is never
supposed to advance a theory without sufficient corroborating facts; so I say to them,
"Show me one deception! Show me where the Qur'an deceives me! Show me, otherwise,
don't say that it is a deception!" An interesting characteristic of the Qur'an is how it deals
with surprising phenomena which relate not only to the past but to modern times as well.
In essence, the Qur'an is not and old problem. It is still a problem even today - a problem
to the non-Muslims that is. For everyday, every week, every year brings more and more
evidence that the Qur'an is a force to be contended with - that its authenticity is no longer
to be challenged! For example, one verse in the Qur'an reads;
"Do not the unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together, then We
clove them asunder, and made from water every living thing? Will they not then
believe?"
Ironically, this very information is exactly what they awarded the 1973 Noble Prize for -
to a couple of unbelievers. The Qur'an reveals the origin of the universe - how it began
from one piece - and mankind continues to verify this revelation, even up to now.
Additionally, the fact that all life originated from water would not have been an easy
thing to convince people of fourteen centuries ago. Indeed, if 1400 years ago you had
stood in the desert and told someone, "All of this, you see (pointing to yourself), is made
up of mostly water," no one would ha ve believed you. Proof of that was not available
until the invention of the microscope. They had to wait to find out that cytoplasm, the
basic substance of the cell, is made-up of 80% water. Nonetheless, the evidence did
come, and once again the Qur'an stood the test of time. In reference to the falsification
tests mentioned earlier, it is interesting to note that they, too, relate to both the past and
the present. Some of them were used as illustrations of Allah's omnipotence and
knowledge, while others continue to stand as challenges to the present day. An example
of the former is the statement made in the Qur'an about Abu Lahab. It clearly illustrates
that Allah, the Knower of the Unseen, knew that Abu Lahab would never change his
ways and accept Islam. Thus Allah dictated that he would be condemned to the Hellfire
forever. Such a chapter was both an illustration of Allah's divine wisdom and a warning
to those who were like Abu Lahab.
The relationship between the Muslims and the Jews
An interesting example of the latter type of falsification tests contained in the Qur'an is
the verse which mentions the relationship between the Muslims and the Jews. The verse
is careful not to narrow its scope to the relationship between individual members of each
religion, but rather, it summarizes the relationship between the two groups of people as a
whole. In essence, the Qur'an states that the Christians will always treat the Muslims
better than the Jews will treat the Muslims. Indeed, the full impact of such a statement
can only be felt after careful consideration of the real meaning of such a verse. It is true
that many Christians and many Jews have become Muslims, but as a whole, the Jewish
community is to be viewed as an avid enemy of Islam. Additionally, very few people
realize what such an open declaration in the Qur'an invites. In essence, it is an easy
chance for the Jews to prove that the Qur'an is false - that it is not a divine revelation. All
they have to do is organize themselves, treat the Muslims nicely for a few years and then
say, "Now what does your holy book say about who are your best friends in the world -
the Jews or the Christians? Look what we Jews have done for you!" That is all they have
to do to disprove the Qur'an's authenticity, yet they have not done it in 1400 years. But, as
always, the offer still stands open! All of the examples so far given concerning the
various angles from which one can approach the | Qur'an have undoubtedly been
subjective in nature; I however there does exist another angle, among others, which is
objective and whose basis is mathematical. It is surprising how authentic the Qur'an
becomes when one assembles what might be referred to as a list of good guesses.
Mathematically, it can be explained using guessing and predic tion examples. For
instance, if a person has two choices (i.e., one is right, and one is wrong), and he closes
his eyes and makes a choice, then half of the time (i.e., one time out of two) he will be
right. Basically, he has a one in two chance, for he could pick the wrong choice, or he
could pick the right choice. Now if the same person has two situations like that (i.e., he
could be right or wrong about situation number one, and he could be right or wrong about
situation number two), and he closes his eyes and guesses, then he will only be right one
fourth of the time (i.e., one time out of four). He now has a one in four chance because
now there are three ways for him to be wrong and only one way for him to be right. In
simple terms, he could make the wrong choice in situation number one and then make the
wrong choice in situation number two; OR he could make the wrong choice in situation
number one and then make the right choice in situation number two; OR he could make
the right choice in situation number one and then make the wrong choice in situation
number two; OR he could make the right choice in situation number one and then make
the right choice in situation number two. Of course, the only instance in which he could
be totally right is the last scenario where he could guess correctly in both situations. The
odds of his guessing completely correctly have become greater because the number of
situations for him to guess in have increased; and the mathematical equation representing
such a scenario is 1/2 x 1/2 (i.e., one time out of two for the first situation multiplied by
one time out of two for the second situation). Continuing on with the example, if the
same person now has three situations in which to make blind guesses, then he will only
be right one eighth of the time (i.e., one time out of eight or 1/2 X 1/2 X 1/2). Again, the
odds of choosing the correct choice in all three situations have decreased his chances of
being completely correct to only one time in eight. It must be understood that as the
number of situations increase, the chances of being right decrease, for the two
phenomena are inversely proportional. Now applying this example to the situations in the
Qur'an, if one draws up a list of all of the subjects about which the Qur'an has made
correct statements, it becomes very clear that it is highly unlikely that they ere all just
correct blind guesses. Indeed, the subjects discussed in the Qur'an are numerous, and thus
the odds of someone just making lucky guesses about all of them become practically
none. If there are a million ways or the Qur'an to be wrong, yet each time it is right, then
it is unlikely that someone was guessing. The following three examples of subjects about
which the Qur'an has made correct statements collectively illustrate how the Qur'an
continues to beat the odds. In the 16th chapter the Qur'an mentions that the female bee
leaves its home to gather food. Now, a person might guess on that, saying, "The bee that
you see flying around - it could be male, or it could be female. I think I will guess
female." Certainly, he has a one in two chance of being right. So it happens that the
Qur'an is right. But it also happens that was not what most people believed at the time
when the Qur'an was revealed. Can you tell the difference between a male and a female
bee? Well, it takes a specialist to do that, but it has been discovered that the male bee
never leaves his home to gather food. However, in Shakespeare's play, Henry the Fourth,
some of the characters discuss bees and mention that the bees are soldiers and have a
king. That is what people thought in Shakespeare's time - that the bees that one sees
flying around are male bees and that they go home and answer to a king. However, that is
not true at all. The fact is that they are females, and they answer to a queen. Yet it took
modern scientific investigations in the last 300 years to discover that this is the case.
More scientific evidence
So, back to the list of good guesses, concerning the topic of bees, the Qur'an had a 50/50
chance of being right, and the odds were one in two. In addition to the subject of bees, the
Qur'an also discusses the sun and the manner in which it travels through space. Again, a
person can guess on that subject. When the sun moves through space, there are two
options: it can travel just as a stone would travel if one threw it, or it can move of its own
accord. The Qur'an states the latter - that it moves as a result of its own motion. To do
such, the Qur'an uses a form of the word sabaha to describe the sun's movement through
space. In order to properly provide the reader with a comprehensive understanding of the
implications of this Arabic verb, the following example is given. If a man is in water and
the verb sabaha is applied in reference to his movement, it can be understood that he is
swimming, moving of his own accord and not as a result of a direct force applied to him.
Thus when this verb is used in reference to the sun's movement through space, it in no
way implies that the sun is flying uncontrollably through space as a result of being hurled
or the like. It simply means that the sun is turning and rotating as it travels. Now, this is
what the Qur'an affirms, but was it an easy thing to discover? Can any common man tell
that the sun is turning? Only in modern times was the equipment made available to
project the image of the sun onto a tabletop so that one could look at it without being
blinded. And through this process it was discovered that not only are there three spots on
the sun but that these spots move once every 25 days. This movement is referred to as the
rotation of the sun around its axis and conclusively proves that, as the Qur'an stated 1400
years ago, the sun does, indeed turn as it travels through space. And returning once again
to the subject of good guess, the odds of guessing correctly about both subjects - the sex
of bees and the movement of the sun - are one in four!
The time zones
Seeing as back fourteen centuries ago people probably did not understand much about
time zones, the Quran's statements about this subject are considerably surprising. The
concept that one family is having breakfast as the sun comes up while another family is
enjoying the brisk night air is truly something to be marveled at, even in modern time.
Indeed, fourteen centuries ago, a man could not travel more than thirty miles in one day,
and thus it took him literally months to travel from India to Morocco, for example. And
probably, when he was having supper in Morocco, he thought to himself, "Back home in
India they are having supper right now." This is because he did not realize that, in the
process of traveling, he moved across a time zone. Yet, because it is the words of Allah,
the All-Knowing, the Qur'an recognizes and acknowledges such a phenomenon. In an
interesting verse it states that when history comes to an end and the Day of Judgment
arrives, it will all occurring an instant; and this very instant will catch some people in the
daytime and some people at night. This clearly illustrates Allah's divine wisdom and His
previous knowledge of the existence of time zones, even though such a discovery was
non-existent back fourteen centuries ago. Certainly, this phenomenon is not something
which is obvious to one's eyes or a result of one's experience, and this fact, in itself,
suffices as proof of the Qur'ans authenticity.
Returning one final time to the subject of good guesses for the purpose of the present
example, the odds that someone guessed correctly about all three of the aforementioned
subjects - the sex of bees, the movement of the sun and the existence of time zones - are
one in eight! Certainly, one could continue on and on with this example, drawing up
longer and longer list of good guesses; and of course, the odds would become higher and
higher with each increase of subjects about which one could guess. But what no one can
deny is the following; the odds that Mohammed an illiterate, guessed correctly about
thousands and thousands of subjects, never once making a mistake, are so high that any
theory of his authorship of the Qur'an must be completely dismissed - even by the most
hostile enemies of Islam!
Indeed, the Qur'an expects this kind of challenge. Undoubtedly, if one said to someone
upon entering a foreign land, "I know your father. I have met him," probably the man
from that land would doubt the newcomer's word, saying, "You have just come here.
How could you know my father?" As a result, he would question him, "Tell me, is my
father tall, short, dark, fair? What is he like?" Of course, if the visitor continued
answering all of the questions correctly, the skeptic would have no choice but to say, "I
guess you do know my father. I don't know how you know him, but I guess you do!" The
situation is the same with the Qur'an. It states that it originates from the One who created
everything. So everyone has the right to say, "Convince me! If the author of this book
really originated life and everything in the heavens and on the earth, then He should
know about this, about that, and so on." And inevitably, after researching the Qur'an,
everyone will discover the same truths. Additionally, we all know something for sure: we
do not all have to be experts to verify what the Qur'an affirms. One's iman (faith) grows
as one continues to check and confirm the truths contained in the Qur'an. And one is
supposed to do so all of his life.
May God (Allah) guide everyone close to the truth.
SUPPLEMENT
An engineer at the University of Toronto who was interested in psychology and who had
read something on it, conducted researched wrote a thesis on Efficiency of Group
Discussions. The purpose of his research was to find out how much people accomplish
when they get together to talk in groups of two, three, ten, etc. The graph of his findings:
people accomplish most when they talk in groups of two. Of course, this discovery was
entirely beyond his expectations, but it is very old advice given in the Qur'an:
Additionally, the 89th chapter of the Qur'an mentions a certain city by the name of 'Iram
(a city of pillars), which was not known in ancient history and which was non-existent as
far as historians were concerned. However, the December 1978 edition of National
Geographic introduced interesting information which mentioned that in 1973, the city of
Elba was excavated in Syria. The city was discovered to be 43 centuries old, but that is
not the most amazing part. Researchers found in the library of Elba a record of all of the
cities with which Elba had done business. Believe or not, there on the list was the name
of the city of 'Iram. The people of Elba had done business with the people of 'Iram!
"Say, 'I exhort you to one thing - that you stand for Allah, [assessing the truth] by twos
and singly, and then reflect.....' In conclusion I ask you to consider with care the
following:
"And they say, 'Why are not signs sent down to him from his Lord?' Say, 'Indeed, the
signs are with Allah, and I am but a clear warner.' But is sufficient for them that We have
sent down to you the Book [i.e. Qur'an] which is rehearsed to them? Verily, in that is
mercy and a reminder to people who believe."
Reference: www.beconvinced.com