The Christian missionaries are traditionally known for their blatant abuse and misinterpretations of the text of the noble Qur’an with the most disgusting and lurid interpretations imaginable. One particular missionary, Sam Shamoun, has continued this “fine” tradition of his predecessors by imposing his perverted and repulsive understanding of the conception of Jesus (P) on the Qur’anic text which describes the incident. Our attempt here is to refute this missionary from the exegesical and lexical sources made available to us, insha’allah.
General Introduction to Qur’an 66:12
Before we discuss the missionary’s ugly interpretation of Sura’ al-Tahrim, we would like to note the comment made by Sheikh Rahmatullah al-Kiranwi al-Hindi concerning his opponent, the Christian missionary Pfander:
The third habit: he (Pfander) translates Qur’?nic verses and interprets them according to his own opinion in order to object against them as he alleges. He claims that the correct interpretation and the correct translation is what he translates and interprets, not what scholars of Islam and exegetes of the Qur’an state.[1]
Indeed, the same observation applies here! The Christian missionaries have brought the most disgusting interpretation to the following Qur’anic verse:
“And Mary the daughter of ‘Imran, who guarded her farj; and We breathed into it of Our Spirit.” (Qur’?n, 66:12)
The Christian missionary Sam Shamoun claims that the Archangel Gabriel had breathed into the vagina of Mary in order the conception of Jesus (P) takes place. He alleges that the above Qur’anic verse ideally gives this understanding. Although he quotes Imam Ibn Kathir, he simply (or intentionally) fails to understand what the Imam is saying. All Muslim commentators and scholars had indisputably agreed that Angel Gabriel breathed into the opening of Mary’s garment, not into her vagina as the missionary’s mind fantasizes.
It is reported on authority of Ibn Abbas and Qatad? that the Archangel Gabriel appeared to Mary, the daughter of ‘Imran, in a human form. He approached her in order to breathe the spirit of Jesus (P) into her, but she prevented him from even approaching the opening of her garment; this is the meaning of Mary guarding her farj because the Arabic word farj applies to any opening, gap or slit. When Gabriel introduced himself to Mary and informed her about his mission, she let him breathe the spirit of Jesus (P) into the opening of her garment; this is the meaning of breathing into her farj. However, Mr. Shamoun — without a glance of hesitation — assumed that the Arabic word farj must refer to the vagina of Mary and that Gabriel had directly breathed into her vagina. Astaghfirullah!
The eminent Imam Ibn Jarir At-Tabari states, in his commentary known as Jami?-ul-Bayan, the following:
All?h Whose remembrance is exalted says “And Mary the daughter of Imran, who guarded her farj” He means: who protected the opening of her garment from Gabriel (peace be upon him); any opening or tear in the garment is called farj, as well any crack in a wall, or a window in a roof is a farj. His saying “and We breathed into it of Our spirit” He means: We breathed into it i.e., into the opening of her garment; this is her farj. From Our Spirit i.e., from Gabriel; he is the Spirit. Exegetes have given similar statements; Ibn Abdul-A’la said: Ibn Thawr said on authority of Mu’ammer on authority of Qatada that “and We breathed into it of Our spirit” means We breathed into the opening (of her garment) from our spirit.[2]
Imam Al-Qurtubi in Al-Gami’ le Ahkam-el-Qur’an states that
“who guarded her farj” — from lewdness. Commentators say the farj is intended to mean the opening (of the garment) because He says “We breathed into it of Our spirit”; Gabriel (peace be upon him) breathed but into the opening of her (garment) and did not breathe into her private part. In the recitation of Ubai “We breathed into the opening of her (garment) of Our Spirit”. Every opening in the dress is called farj like His saying “and there are no flaws (furooj, sing. farj) in it?” (Holy Qur’an 50:6). It is probable that she guarded her private part and he breathed into the opening of her (garment).[3]
Imam Ibn Kath?r in Tafsir-ul-Qur’an Al-`Azim states that
“And Mary the daughter of Imran, who guarded her farj” i.e., protected and purified it; guarding (ihsan) is chastity and absence of immorality. “We breathed into it from Our spirit” — by the Archangel Gabriel for God the Most High sent him to her, so he shaped in the form of a man. God the Most High commanded him to breathe with his mouth into the opening of her garment, the breath then descended and entered through her private part, and she conceived Jesus (peace be upon him).[4]
Al-Galalan Al-Mahall? and As-Suyuti also states
“And Mary the daughter of Imran, who guarded her farj” – protected it. “We breathed into it from Our spirit” ? it is Gabriel when he breathed into the opening of her garment what God the Exalted had created, so it reached her private part and she conceived Jesus.[5]
Ash-Shawkani in Fath-ul-Qadir states,
“who guarded her farj” from lewdness, its exegesis has been mentioned in Surat-un-Nisaa. Commentators state that the farj is intended to mean the opening (of the garment) for His saying “We breathed into it from Our spirit”; Gabriel breathed but into the opening of her garment and she conceived Jesus.[6]
As-Samarqand? in Bahr-ul-‘Ulum states,
“who guarded her farj” means who purified herself from lewdness. “We breathed into it from Our spirit” means We sent (Angel) Gabriel (peace be upon him) so he breathed into the opening of her garment.
Al-Mawardi in An-Nukat wa Al-‘Uyun states,
“And Mary the daughter of Imran, who guarded her farj“ commentators state that the farj is intended to mean the opening (of the garment) for He says “We breathed into it from Our spirit”; and Gabriel breathed but into the opening of her (garment).
Al-Baghwi in Ma’alem-ut-Tanzil states,
“And Mary the daughter of Imran, who guarded her farj; and We breathed into it of Our spirit” — into the opening of her garment.
Fakhr-ud-Din Ar-Razi in Mafateh-ul-Ghaib states,
“guarded” from lewdness because she was accused of adultery. The farj is understood literally; Ibn ‘Abbas said Gabriel breathed into the opening of the garment; he extended it with his fingers and breathed into it. every opening, tear, et. cetera in the garment is named farj.
The Shi’ite Imam At-Tabarasi in Majmu-ul-Bayan states,
“And Mary the daughter of Imran, who guarded her farj” i.e., protected her private part from (indulging in) sin and purified herself from prohibited things. It is said, it means she prevented herself from having a husband. “We breathed into it from Our spirit” i.e., Gabriel breathed with Our command into the opening of her (garment) from Our spirit, related on authority of Qatada. Al-Farra? said, every slit is a farj; (the phrase) “she guarded her farj” means she protected the opening of her garment from Gabriel.
The above is adequate to refute the filthy missionary argument. As-Suhaili in his discussion of this verse also notes that
Do not allow your imagination to go elsewhere; this is one of delicate gestures because the Qur’?n is more exalted in meanings, more balanced in words, more delicate in gestures and better in expression than aiming at what the ignorant’s delusion presumes especially the breath came from the Holy Spirit (Ruh-ul-Quds) at the command of the Holiest (Al-Quddos). So, add the Holy to the Holiest and exalt the holy pure woman above false delusion and guesswork.[7]
Literal and metaphoric meanings of the Arabic word “farj”
Literally the word farj means any opening, fissure, rent, slit, tear or gap between two objects; the sky is described in the Qur’?n as having no furooj (sing. farj) in it i.e., no gaps or tears (Qur’?n 60:5). In the Arabic-Arabic Dictionary published by Majma? Al-Lughat Al-?Arabiyyah (The Council of Arabic Language) in Egypt we read that
Al-Farj: the fissure between two things pl. Furooj. In the Holy Qur’?n “and there are no furooj in it?” i.e., cracks and tears.[8]
Metaphorically the word can be used as a reference to male genital organs[9] and less commonly to female genital organs[10]. This use of the word serves as a polite expression instead of uttering the explicit names of private organs, this is the reason why it is present in Islamic texts relating to marital life and other sexual issues. We are aware that the Christian missionary Sam Shamoun and others whom he quotes managed to display the word as a filthy one and to show Muslims as people who are accustomed to utter dirt and filth even in their religious discussions! Nothing is further from the truth; the believer is supposed neither to use gutter expressions nor to curse frequently as God?s Messenger(P) has commanded in the sound tradition related by At-Tirmith?, Ahm?d ibn Hanbal and Al-Baih?qi on authority of Abdull?h Ibn Mas’?d[11]. And to God belongs the judgement in all affairs.
Now, we move on to a relevant issue: when to understand the word literally and when to metaphorically interpret it in a given text. Under the title of “Misinterpretation”, Dr. Yus?f Al-Qar?d?w? notes that
It is established before people of knowledge that it is prior to maintain the explicit meanings of texts which refer to their original meanings determined by the language. But interpretation of texts by shifting them from their original meanings to metaphoric ones is an indisputable issue among scholars well versed in the Qur’?n and Sunnah. Some may not call it metaphor (majaz) and give it another name as Sheikh-ul-Islam Ibn Taimiyyah, grammarians who preceded him and his disciples who followed him have done. We are not interested in names and titles as long as the identities and contents are clear; they all agree upon shifting the word from its literal meaning into another hidden meaning. What is actually important is that this should not take place without the evidence that necessitates diversion from the literal meaning to a metaphoric one, otherwise trust in the language and its function would be nullified. If we find the proof or the evidence, we can divert the word from the explicit meaning to an implicit one and from truth to metaphor.[12]
After giving several examples, he then added that
Interpretation (ta?w?l) is then acceptable if it is indicated by an authentic proof from the language, the law or the intellect, otherwise it is rejected no matter who interprets. That is why the most serious danger to whom texts are exposed is misinterpretation i.e., explaining the texts in a way that diverts them from the purpose of All?h and His Apostle to another purpose sought by the interpreter. These meanings themselves could be correct but the texts do not prove them. The meanings themselves could be corrupted and the texts do not prove them, then corruption lies in the proof and the proved.[13]
Technically, interpretation (ta?w?l) means a diversion of the word from its explicit meaning to a possible overridden meaning due to presence of an evidence that makes it overriding.[14] This is the acceptable form of interpretation. First, diversion should be to a possible meaning. Secondly, evidence is required to support this possible meaning. Thirdly, this evidence should be overpowering for an overpowered or an equivocal evidence is inadequate to divert the word from its literal meaning, thus it is to be rejected.
If we apply this rule to the word “farj” in the verse, maintaining its explicit meaning is prior to interpreting it. Moreover, evidence adds more weight to the explicit meaning than to the interpretation. This is discussed in the following section.
Exegesis of “guarded her farj…”
Here we are confronted with two explanations: one claiming that the farj refers to the Jayb (i.e., the opening of her garment) and that Mary prevented Gabriel from approaching her Jayb according to the previously quoted tradition, and the other claiming that it refers to her private part and that the expression “guarded her farj” is intended to mean guarded her chastity from lewdness. Before we discuss the two explanations, the degree of veracity of each of them and which of them is the correct one (since we know that they cannot be both right), we will display the opinions of various scholars and exegetes concerning the phrase.
Imam At-Tab?r? states,
All?h Whose remembrance is exalted says “And Mary the daughter of ?Imran, who guarded her farj” He means: who protected the opening of her garment from Gabriel (peace be upon him); any opening or tear in the garment is called farj, as well any crack in a wall, or a window in a roof is a farj.[15]
Imam Al-Qurt?b? says
“who guarded her farj” – from lewdness. Commentators say the faarj is intended to mean the opening (of the garment) because He says “We breathed into it of Our spirit”; Gabriel (peace be upon him) breathed but into the opening of her (garment) and did not breathe into her private part. In the recitation of Ubai “We breathed into the opening of her (garment) of Our Spirit”. Every opening in the dress is called farj like His saying “and there are no flaws (furooj, sing. farj) in it?” (Holy Qur’?n 50:6). It is probable that she guarded her private part and he breathed into the opening of her (garment).[16]
Imam Ibn Kath?r says
“And Mary the daughter of ?Imran, who guarded her farj” i.e., protected and purified it; guarding (ihsan) is chastity and absence of immorality.[17]
As-Samarq?nd? says
“who guarded her farj” means who purified herself from lewdness.
Al-Mawardi states
“And Mary the daughter of Imran, who guarded her farj” commentators state that the farj is intended to mean the opening (of the garment) for He says “We breathed into it from Our spirit”; and Gabriel breathed but into the opening of her (garment).
Ar-R?z? states
“guarded” from lewdness because she was accused of adultery. The farj is understood literally; Ibn ?Abbas said Gabriel breathed into the opening of the garment; he extended it with his fingers and breathed into it. Every opening, tear et cetera in the garment is named farj.
Ibn-ul-Ja?z? states that
His saying “guarded her farj” we have mentioned two opinions in Surat-ul-Anbiyya?; those who say that it is the opening of her garment state that the pronoun in “breathed into it” refers to it (i.e., the Jayb) because Gabriel extended the opening of the garment and introduced it. And those who say that it is the birth outlet state that the pronoun refers to a non-mentioned object for he breathed into her garment not her private part.
Ath-Tha’?lib? states that
His saying “guarded her farj”, the majority say it is the opening of the garment, and some say it is the private organ and “guarding it” means protecting it.
Al-Al?s? states that
Al-Farr? says: “Exegetes mentioned that the farj is the opening of her garment and this is possible because Al-Farj linguistically means every fissure between two objects and the place of opening of woman?s garment is fissure-like, so it is a farj. This is more eloquent in praising her for if she guards the opening of her garment, she is more solid in guarding herself”.
This quotation of the famous Arab grammarian Al-Farr?’ by Al-Al?si is extremely valuable because it shows that the tradition of Mary preventing Gabriel from approaching her Jayb (i.e., the opening of her garment) is not merely linguistically applicable, but it is even more eloquent for if she is praised for being solid in guarding her Jayb, then she must be much more solid in guarding herself against lewdness. Consequently, this explanation encompasses – and is superior to – the other one claiming that “guarded her farj” means “kept herself pure”, but not vice-versa.
Ash-Sha?kan? states,
“who guarded her farj” from lewdness, its exegesis has been mentioned in Surat-un-Nisaa. Commentators state that the farj is intended to mean the opening (of the garment) for His saying “We breathed into it from Our spirit”; Gabriel breathed but into the opening of her garment and she conceived Jesus.[18]
The Shi’ite scholar At-Tabar?s? states that
“And Mary the daughter of Imran, who guarded her farj” i.e., protected her private part from (indulging in) sin and purified herself from prohibited things. It is said, it means she prevented herself from having a husband.
After we have displayed quotations of various scholars on the passage, we are left with two explanations – either that the farj refers to the private part and the meaning is that Mary guarded herself from lewdness, or that it refers to the opening of her garment and the passage is a reference to the event of Mary preventing Gabriel from approaching her Jayb. The two meanings are possible, but – according to principles of Qur’?nic interpretation – only one of them is the correct one.
We say – and All?h knows best – that the second explanation is the correct one for the following causes: first, it is the literal meaning and we have shown in the above section that the direct explicit meaning is prior to the metaphoric one. Secondly, it is supported by Muslim tradition and this is the strongest evidence. Thirdly, it is more eloquent and encompasses the other interpretation but not vice-versa. Fourthly, the pronoun in the verse undoubtedly refers to Mary?s Jayb (i.e., the opening of her garment) and it is prior of the pronoun to refer to the object in the verse (i.e., the farj) rather than referring to a non-mentioned object.
So, we notice that all traditional, linguistic, rhetoric and logical aspects endorse the exegesis of the word farj as a reference to the opening of Mary?s garment. And All?h knows best.
Exegesis of “breathed into it…”
All Muslim exegetes and commentators agree that Gabriel breathed but into the opening of Mary’s garment, not into her vagina as Christian missionaries and polemicists fantasize. This is the agreed-upon exegesis even if the unbelievers dislike it. The English translation of the Noble Qur’?n done by Dr. Taq?-ud-D?n Al-Hil?l?, Ph. D. & Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Kh?n renders the verse to
“…and We breathed into (the sleeve of her shirt or her garment) through Our R?h [i.e. Jibrael (Gabriel)” (Qur’?n 66:12)
Imam Ibn Quta?bah (died 276 A.H.) states
The Messiah is Spirit of God (Ruhullah) because he is the breath of Gabriel into the garment of Mary.[19]
Ibn Jar?r At-Tab?r? states,
“We breathed into it” ? into the opening of her garment.[20]
Al-Qurt?b? states,
“We breathed into it of Our spirit” ? Gabriel (peace be upon him) breathed but into the opening of her (garment) and did not breathe into her private part. In the recitation of Ubai “We breathed into the opening of her (garment) of Our Spirit”.[21]
Ibn Kath?r states
“We breathed into it from Our spirit” ? by the Archangel Gabriel for God the Most High sent him to her, so he shaped in the form of a man. God the Most High commanded him to breathe with his mouth into the opening of her garment, the breath then descended and entered through her private part, and she conceived Jesus (peace be upon him).[22]
As-Samarqandi states
“We breathed into it from Our spirit” ? means We sent (Angel) Gabriel (peace be upon him) so he breathed into the opening of her garment.
Al-Mawardi states
…He says “We breathed into it from Our spirit” and Gabriel breathed but into the opening of her (garment).
Al-Baghwi states
“We breathed into it from Our spirit” ? into the opening of her garment.
Az-Zamakhshar? in Al-Kashaf states (commentary on 21:91),
? because he breathed into the opening of her garment and the breath reached inside of her.[23]
An-Nasaf? in Madarek-ut-Tanz?l states (commentary on 21:91),
“We breathed into her from Our spirit” ? We put spirit of the Messiah inside her or We sent Gabriel and he breathed in the opening of her garment, so We produced Jesus inside her with this breath.[24]
Ab? Hayyan in Al-Bahr Al-Muh?t states (commentary on 21:91),
Apparently, His saying “We breathed into her from Our spirit” is a metaphor to indicate creation of Jesus alive inside her womb; there is no actual breathing. He the Exalted attributed the spirit to Himself out of honour. It is said: there is actual breathing; Gabriel did breathe into the opening of her garment and the breath is attributed to Him (glory be to Him) out of honour for Gabriel did it according to His command. It is said: the spirit here is Gabriel as He says “We sent to her Our spirit” (Holy Qur’?n 19:17) and the meaning of “We breathed into her” is through Gabriel. Gabriel had breathed into the opening of her garment and the breath reached inside her.
This is the only exception to the agreement of Muslim commentators. Ab? Hayyan brings a valuable consideration (that the entire phrase is but a metaphor), however, he honestly gives mention of the orthodox interpretation.
Ar-R?z? states that
Ibn ?Abbas said Gabriel breathed into the opening of the garment; he extended it with his fingers and breathed into it.
Ibn-ul-Ja?z? says that
His saying “guarded her farj” we have mentioned two opinions in Surat-ul-Anbiyya?; those who say that it is the opening of her garment state that the pronoun in “breathed into it” refers to it (i.e., the Jayb) because Gabriel extended the opening of the garment and introduced it. And those who say that it is the birth outlet state that the pronoun refers to a non-mentioned object for he breathed into her garment not her private part.
Here Imam Ibn-ul-Ja?z? state that the pronoun refers to the Jayb (i.e., the opening of the garment) no matter what the meaning of farj is. If the farj refers to the Jayb, then the pronoun refers to it, and if the farj refers to the private organ, then the pronoun refers to a non-mentioned object – which is a legitimate approach in Arabic language – that is the Jayb because the tradition leaves no doubt that Gabriel had breathed into Mary’s Jayb.
Al-Galalan states that
“We breathed into it from Our spirit” ? it is Gabriel when he breathed into the opening of her garment what God the Exalted had created, so it reached her private part and she conceived Jesus.[25]
Ash-Sha?kan? also comments by saying
Commentators state that what is intended by Al-Farj here is the opening (of the garment) due to His saying “We breathed into it from Our spirit”; Gabriel did breathe into the opening of her garment, so she conceived Jesus.[26]
The Shi’ite Imam At-Tabar?s? states
“We breathed into it from Our spirit” ? Gabriel, with our command, breathed into the opening of her garment from Our spirit. It is related on authority of Qatada.
So if the missionary?s objection is all about the mention of breathing into Mary?s vagina in the Qur’?n, then his objection is baseless for no single Muslim commentator ever claimed that the pronoun in Qur’?n 66:12 refers to the vagina of Virgin Mary. But the controversy here would be about how the breath had reached the womb of Mary; Ab? Hayyan, Az-Zamakhsh?r? and An-Nasaf? noted that it infiltrated her body based upon their understanding of the verse in Sura al-Anbiyaa’, “We breathed into her”, while later scholars like Ibn Kath?r and Al-Galalan stated that the breath descended and entered her womb through her private organ based upon their supposition that since the birth of Jesus(P) was vaginal, then his conception must have been vaginal too. A simple comparison will show that the opinion of Ab? Hayyan, Az-Zamakhsh?r? and An-Nasaf? is more acceptable and acquires legitimacy from the Qur’?n, while that of Ibn Kath?r and Al-Galalan is no more than a supposition without evidence in the Qur’?n or tradition. And All?h knows best.
Language of the Bible as a Whole
Now let us move on the the language of the Bible and demonstrate how certain passages from it can only be deemed as anything but “decent”. It has been recognised in the past that the Bible contained language that are obscene and are graphically sexual in its material, or as what a noted contemporary theologian said,
…the Bible contains much racy material, fully as sexy as the works of Jacqueline Susann, only better written.[27]
Now let us cite a few passages from the Bible to demonstrate the “racy material” that is contained within it. It should be noted that this is a incomplete collection of excerpts from objectionable Biblical language, and is therefore not exhausive. This is done in order to keep this article within the limits of PG-13 rating. Further objections to the Biblical material can be noted in our Appendix.
Genesis 34:2
And when Shechem, the son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of the country, saw her, he took her, and lay with her, and defiled her.
Numbers 25:1
And Israel abode in Shittim, and the people began to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab.
Micah 1:8>
Therefore I will wail and howl, I will go stripped and naked: I will make a wailing like the dragons, and mourning as the owls.
Ezekiel 16:7-8
I have caused thee to multiply as the bud of the field, and thou hast increased and waxen great, and thou art come to excellent ornaments: thy breasts are fashioned, and thine hair is grown, whereas thou wast naked and bare. Now when I passed by thee, and looked upon thee, behold, thy time was the time of love; and I spread my skirt over thee, and covered thy nakedness: yea, I sware unto thee, and entered into a covenant with thee, saith the Lord God, and thou becamest mine.
Ezekiel 23:16-20
And as soon as she saw them with her eyes, she doted upon them, and sent messengers unto them into Chaldea. And the Babylonians came to her into the bed of love, and they defiled her with their whoredom, and she was polluted with them, and her mind was alienated from them So she discovered her whoredoms, and discovered her nakedness: then my mind was alienated from her, like as my mind was alienated from her sister. Yet she multiplied her whoredoms, in calling to remembrance the days of her youth, wherein she had played the harlot in the land of Egypt.For she doted upon their Paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses.
Proverbs 5:18-19
Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth. Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love.
Proverbs 7:18
Come, let’s drink deep of love till morning; let’s enjoy ourselves with love!
More examples can be noted here.
It is perhaps not too far-fetched to say that we are now able to pinpoint the source of the missionary’s rauchy interpretations of the Qur’?n, having seen the indecent exposures from excerpts of the Biblical text. One can only conclude that the Bible language in general is shameful and disgusting, to say the least.
Conclusions
We have shown that the interpretation of Qur’?n 66:12 clearly affirms that Mary, the mother of Christ Jesus(P), was a chaste woman who had never been touched by any man. The word farj, which the missionary claims to be alluding to Mary’s genitals, is actually referring to the opening/fissure of Mary’s garment, and the commentators of the Qur’?n had understood this to mean that the Angel Gabriel had breathed into an opening of Mary?s garment to usher in the conception of Jesus (P).
It is also clear that the Qur’?nic text is nothing like the vivid, obscene imagery that is contained within the Bible. Having shown examples of the “racy material” that is contained within the missionary’s “Word of God”, it is clear that the language of parts of the Bible is little left to be desired. It might be prudent for the missionary to bear in mind that throwing stones at glass houses would only get oneself hurt in the process.
And only God knows best!
References
[1] Rahmatull?h al-Kiranw?, Izhar-ul-H?q, Vol. 1, p. 85
[2] At-Tab?r?, Jami’-ul-Bayan, Vol. 28, p. 192
[3] Al-Qurt?b?, Al-Gami’ le Ahk?m-el-Qur’?n, Vol. 28, pp. 203-204
[4] Ibn Kath?r, Tafs?r-ul-Qur’?n Al-‘Az?m, Vol. 8, p. 92
[5] Al-Mahalli and As-Suy?t?, Tafs?r-ul-Galal?n, p. 543
[6] Ash-Sha?kan?, Fath-ul-Qad?r, Vol. 5, p. 340
[7] As quoted by Al-Qurt?b?, Al-Gami’ le Ahk?m-el-Qur’?n, Vol. 17, p. 304
[8] Al-Mu’j?m-ul-Waj?z, p. 465
[9] cf. Qur’?n 5:23, 29:70, 30:24, 31:24 and 35:33
[10] cf. Qur’?n 31:24
[11] Sunan-ut-Tirmith?, n. 2105, Musn?d Ahm?d, n. 3916 and 4027 and Sunan-ul-Ba?haqi, n. 21314 and 21670
[12] Yus?f Al-Qar?d?w?, Kaif Nata?amal Ma?a Al-Qur’?n Al-‘Az?m? (How to Deal with the Glorious Qur’?n?), p. 284
[13] Ibid., p. 185
[14] Ash-Sha?kan?, Irshad-ul-Fuh?l, p. 176
[15] At-Tab?r?, Jami?-ul-Bayan, Vol. 28, p. 192
[16] Al-Qurt?b?, Al-Gami? le Ahk?m-el-Qur’?n, Vol. 28, pp. 203-204
[17] Ibn Kath?r, Tafs?r-ul-Qur’?n Al-‘Az?m, Vol. 8, p. 92
[18] Ash-Sha?kan?, Fath-ul-Qad?r, Vol. 5, p. 340
[19] Ibn Quta?bah, Ta’wil Mushkil Al-Qur’?n, p. 487
[20] At-Tab?r?, op. cit.
[21] Al-Qurt?b?, op. cit.
[22] Ibn Kath?r, op. cit.
[23] Az-Zamakhshari, Tafs?r-ul-Kashaf, Vol. 3, p. 204
[24] An-Nasaf?, Madarek-ut-Tanz?l, Vol. 2, p. 99
[25] Al-Mahall? and As-Suy?t?, Op. Cit.
[26] Ash-Sha?kan?, Op. Cit.
[27] As quoted from Rev. Charles Merrill Smith in Ben Edward Akerley, The X-Rated Bible (Omar Brothers Publication, 1994), p. xv
Leave a Reply