The following is a video lecture made by Hamza Yusof on July 14th, 1997 and in cooperation with Alhambra Productions. The topic of the history of the Qur’an and its compilation, and forms as part of a “Foundations of Islam” series of lectures. Hamza Yusof gave a good historical background of the Qur’an, its history and how it was Revealed in stages to the Prophet Muhammad(P), its compilation after the passing of the Prophet(P) as well as demonstrating the textual integrity of the Qur’an — as opposed to the textual frailty of the Judeo-Christian text which stands on shaky ground.
Also of interest is the Question & Answer session towards the end of this lecture which we hope our readers will find beneficial.
We have noted in our earlier rebuttal to a Christian missionary fantasy that A. Yusuf Ali had alluded to the commentaries of the major commentators for his explanation of Qur’?n, 41:10. Unfortunately, Yusuf Ali did not cite the precise quotations of the Commentators that he was referring to. Here, we would like to fill in that gap by citing the relevant commentaries of the Qur’?nic verse in question.
In his commentary, Imam Ibn Kathir explains that Qur’?n, 41:10 talks about events taking place in two days and adds that
They (both) with the previous two days complete four that’s why He says “in four Days”
Al-Qurtubi says in his commentary that
“in four Days” – In completion of four days as one says: I walked from Basra to Baghdad in ten days and to Kufa in fifteen days meaning in completion of fifteen days. This has been said by Ibn-ul-Anbari and others.
Al-Zamakhshari says that
“in four Days” – This is conclusion of the period of creating earth and things which are in it, as if He says all this took place in exactly four days no more and no less.
In Tafsir-un-Nasafi, we read that
“in four Days” – In completion of four days, He means by completion the two days as you say: I walked from Basra to Baghdad in ten days and to Kufa in fifteen days meaning in completion of fifteen days.
Al-Baidhawi notes that
“in four Days” – In completion of four days as you say: I walked from Basra to Baghdad in ten days and to Kufa in fifteen days. Probably, He said this and did not say in two days in order to to connect them with the previous two days. This expression is for (the purpose of) conclusion.
Finally, we quote Imam Ash-Shawkani in his famous Tafsir, “in four Days”:
In completion of four days including the previous two days. This has been stated by Az-Zajjaj and others. Ibn-ul-Anbari says that this is as one says: I walked from Basra to Baghdad in ten days and to Kufa in fifteen days meaning in completion of fifteen days. So, the meaning is that occurrence of creation of earth and what followed it took four days.
Now, we come to a relevant question: what is the reason for saying “in four Days”? Imam Az-Zamakhshari answers as follows:
If you say: Wouldn’t it be better said: ‘in two days’? And what is the benefit of this conclusion? I say: If He says in four days after He have said that earth was created in two days, it is acknowledged that things in it were created in two days. So, the choice between saying in two days and saying in four days becomes equal. But (saying) in four days has a benefit over (saying) in two days; it is the indication that they were exactly four complete days no more and no less. If He said: in two days, while (the term) two days can be given to most of the two days, it would be possible that He meant by the first and the last two days the most of them.
And only God knows best.
All praise is for God, the Lord of the Worlds and Master of the Day of Judgement. God’s wrath is invoked upon those who say “God has a Son!”, for He is free from all the attributes they have ascribed to Him. And since there was never such thing as a “Triune” god, we also reject the petty threats of its worshippers and denounce that the non-existent sterile “Triune” pagan god is a fantasy. And it is to our Rabb alone that we submit in total obedience, even though the disbelievers may dislike it. Am?n! Am?n! Thumma Am?n!
 Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Vo. 7, p. 108
 Tafsir-ul-Qurtubi, Vol. 15, p. 290
 Az-Zamakhshari, Tafsir-ul-Kashaf, Vol. 4, p. 104
The missionaries in their latest alleged claim of contradictions in the Qur’an have certainly outdid themselves in their travesty of logic and idiocy.
To cite the missionary claim, word-for-word:
In the realm of the natural this is not possible, but for God it is possible; actually, it is not only possible, it is easy for God. It is rather ironic that, when discussing the identity of Jesus, the Quran says that Allah cannot have a son without a consort, but Mary can have a son without a consort, because all things are easy for Allah.
They have quoted Qur’an 6:100-101 as follows:
“And they make the jinn associates with Allah, while He created them, and they falsely attribute to Him sons and daughters without knowledge; glory be to Him, and highly exalted is He above what they ascribe (to Him). Wonderful Originator of the heavens and the earth! How could He have a son when He has no consort, and He (Himself) created everything, and He is the Knower of all things.”
This, they claim, contradicts the general nature of the following verse:
He said: I am only a messenger of thy Lord, that I may bestow on thee a faultless son. She said: How can I have a son when no mortal hath touched me, neither have I been unchaste? He said: So (it will be). Thy Lord saith: It is easy for Me. And (it will be) that We may make of him a revelation for mankind and a mercy from Us, and it is a thing ordained. Sura 19:19-21 Pickthall
Unfortunately for the missionary, an understanding can be reached if a little more thought can be put into their argument. The missionary has taken the understanding of these verses out of its intended context and is confusing Mary’s nature (since she is only human, and hence procreates) as a creation of the Almighty, with God Himself, who is the Uncreated. Certainly, God Almighty could have taken a “wife” and have “children” or have “children” without any consort whatsoever (nau’zubillahi min zaalik).
However, if this were to happen, it would mean that the Uncreated nature of God would be affected, as anything that is “procreated” by God (as the Qur’an argues in 6:100) is created. In other words, to expect the Uncreated to “procreate” children, whether with or without a “consort” (which would also be part of the Creation) is not only an affront against what God Almighty has told us about Himself, it is also a preposterous position only held by pantheists and the idolaters. It is most certainly not in conformity with pure monotheism or on how Islam understands divine transcedence.
“This is the first assertion of the Islamic creed that “There is no god but God” which the Muslim understands as denial of any associates with God in His rulership and judgeship of the universe, as well as a denial of the possibility for any creature to represent, personify or in any way. express the divine Being. The Qur’an says of God that “He is the Creator of heaven and earth Who creates by commanding the creature to be and it is…He is the One God, the ultimate… (2:117, 163). There is no God but He, ever-living, ever-active (3:2) May he be glorified beyond any description! (6:100)…No sense may perceive Him (6:103)…Praised be He, the Transcedent Who greatly transcends all claims and reports about Him (17:43).” In fulfilment of this view, the Muslims have been all too careful never to associate in any manner possible, any image or thing with the presence of the divine, or with their consciousness of the divine; and in their speech and writing about the divine to use only Quranic language, terms and expressions which, according to them, God has used about Himself in the Quranic revelation.”1
Hence, we say that the claim that:
S. 6:101 stands not only in tension to S. 19:21, but conflicts with several other passages as well.
is not only a premature conclusion from the missionary, but an obvious ignorance of the doctrine of tawheed and what Islam actually stands for.
It is known that the Christian missionaries are desperate to resort to the tactics of Paul by using guile and trickery in order to dupe Muslims uneducated in their religion to their worthless cause. Such tactics have been exposed when they attempt to imitate the Islamic calligraphy of Qur’anic verses by applying that calligraphy to the Arabic verses of the New Testament.
The missionaries have now resurfaced with their latest underhand tactics. They have published a small booklet, entitled “Al Siratul Mustaqiim” (The Straight Path) with Qur’anic verses and Islamic imagery on its cover to dupe Muslims into buying it. The title of this booklet itself is taken from Sura’ al-Fatihah, the first chapter of the Qur’an.
However, when one reads the contents of this booklet, it is clear that the discussed issue is far from anything about Islam or its religious practices. It contained selective verses from the Qur’an about the Prophet Jesus(P) and the warped interpretation of Christological implications is applied to these same verses.
Cover of missionary book: note the Basmalah printed on the top of cover
Pages 8 – 9. Missionary manipulation of Qur’anic verse on the status of ‘Isa (P)
Pages 10 and 11 of missionary booklet
Last page of the book with the address of publisher
The latest missionary deception is disgusting and shameful, to say the least. Insha’allah, we at bismikaallahuma.org plan to dissect and refute the allegations contained within the booklet. For now, please be made aware of this latest missionary trickery and deception.