Blogging the Qur’an: Sura 14, “Abraham”
posted at 8:00 am on February 3, 2008 by Robert Spencer
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
This is yet another late Meccan sura. Its name comes from v. 35, where Abraham appears and prays, but following the convention of the naming of Qur’an chapters, this name has little to do with the content of this sura; more is said about Abraham elsewhere in the Qur’an.
Verses 1-4 celebrate the “Book which We have revealed unto thee” (v. 1) — which is, of course, the Qur’an that was delivered to Muhammad. In the words of Ibn Kathir, it is “the most honored Book, that Allah sent down from heaven to the most honored Messenger of Allah sent to all the people of the earth, Arabs and non-Arabs alike.”
With this Book, Muhammad can “lead mankind out of the depths of darkness into light” (v. 1) – the light of Allah – but of course for the unbelievers there is a terrible penalty in store (v. 2): “woe to them on the Day of Judgment because they defied you, O Muhammad, and rejected you,” says Ibn Kathir. For they dared to prefer this world to the next and to keep people from the path of Allah, and they “seek therein something crooked” (v. 3) – that is, they are, in the words of Maulana Bulandshahri, “ever vigilant to expose any defect that they hope to find in the religion (D’in) of Islam.” Yet Allah has sent messengers to people speaking in their own language so they can understand the message clearly (v. 4), but after that, says the Tafsir al-Jalalayn, “God then sends astray whomever He will and He guides whomever He will.”
Then verses 5-15 return to the stories of Moses (vv. 5-8) and some of the other prophets (v. 9). The unbelievers “thrust their hands into their mouths” (v. 9) on hearing the messengers’ clear proofs. “It is said,” explains Ibn Kathir, “that they pointed to the Messengers’ mouths asking them to stop calling them to Allah, the Exalted and Most Honored. It is also said that it means, they placed their hands on their mouths in denial of the Messengers. It was also said that it means that they did not answer the call of the Messengers, or they were biting their hands in rage.” Then comes a dialogue between the unbelievers and the messengers (vv. 10-15) that appears to be meant to apply to all the experiences of all the prophets Allah has sent to the world, but which once again, as we have seen in other late Meccan suras, closely traces and universalizes Muhammad’s dealings with his own people, the pagan Quraysh of Mecca. Maulana Maududi makes this clear when he explains that v. 13, “The disbelievers warned their Messengers, ‘You shall have to return to our community or we will assuredly expel you from our land,’” is a reference to a threat the Quraysh had issued to Muhammad: the verse “clearly indicates,” he says, “that the persecution of the Muslims was at its worst at the time of the revelation of this Surah, and the people of Makkah were bent on expelling the Believers from there like the disbelievers of the former Prophets.”
But Allah will turn the tables on the unbelievers: “Verily we shall destroy the wrong-doers, and verily We shall make you” – that is, Muhammad and the Muslims – “to dwell in the land after them” (vv. 13-14).
This leads to more warnings for the unbeliever in verses 16-23: “In front of such a one is Hell, and he is given, for drink, boiling fetid water” (v. 16). They will suffer “chastisement unrelenting” (v. 17) and their work in this world will come to nothing (v. 18). Allah can even replace the entire creation if he wishes (v. 20). On Judgment Day, the weak will blame the arrogant (v. 21), and Satan will acknowledge that while both he and Allah made promises to people, he – Satan – proved to be a betrayer (v. 22). According to Ibn Jarir, Satan will tell the unbelievers at that point, when it’s too late: “I deny being a partner with Allah, the Exalted and Most Honored.” And “Iblis [Satan],” says Ibn Kathir, “may Allah curse him, will stand and address” those whom he led astray, “in order to add depression to their depression, sorrow to their sorrow and grief to their grief.” No mention is made, however, of the conundrum created by Allah’s leading people astray. The righteous, in any case, will enter “gardens beneath which rivers flow” (v. 23).
Verses 24-27 compare the word of Allah to a strong tree and the “evil Word” to a tree without roots, reminiscent of Jesus’ parable in Matthew 7:17-19 (see also 7:24-27). Muhammad once told his companions, “There is a tree among the trees which is as blessed as a Muslim,” and explained, “It is the datepalm tree.” This may have been because of the spiritual powers of dates. Muhammad also said: “He who eats seven ‘Ajwa dates every morning, will not be affected by poison or magic on the day he eats them.” Allah will strengthen the believers in this world and the next (v. 27); Muhammad explained: “When a Muslim is questioned in his grave, he will testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle, and that is what is meant by Allah’s statement” in v. 27.
Verses 28-34 again warn the unbelievers of hellfire and remind them of Allah’s blessings. In a hadith, Muhammad identifies “those who have changed the favor of Allah into blasphemy” (v. 28) as “the disbelieving pagans of Mecca,” thus reinforcing Maududi’s impression of this sura as a warning to the Quraysh when tensions between them and the Muslims were high.
In verses 35-41 Abraham prays that Allah will make Mecca a city of “peace and security” (v. 35) and for his children, some of whom he has made to “dwell in a valley without cultivation, by Thy Sacred House” – that is, the Ka’aba, which Abraham built, according to Islamic tradition. That the land is barren makes them dependent upon the good will of those in the area: Abraham asks Allah to “fill the hearts of some among men with love towards them, and feed them with fruits” (v. 37). However, according to Ibn ‘Abbas, Mujahid and Sa‘id bin Jubayr, this is restricted to Muslims only: “Had Ibrahim said, ‘The hearts of mankind’, Persians, Romans, the Jews, the Christians and all other people would have gathered around” the Ka’aba. But Abraham, they explain, said “some among men,” thus “making it exclusive to Muslims only.”
According to one of Muhammad’s companions, Abdullah bin Amr, Muhammad recited part of Abraham’s prayer here – “They have indeed led astray many among mankind” (v. 36) – and wept, crying out three times: “O Allah, Save my Ummah [community]!” In another indication of the importance of Muhammad to Allah, he sent Gabriel to the prophet with these instructions: “Go to Muhammad and tell him this; ‘We will make you pleased with your Ummah, O Muhammad, and will not treat them in a way you dislike.’”
Verses 42-52 repeat that the sinners who remain heedless of Allah’s truth will nonetheless face his dreadful judgment.
Next week: Sura 15, “Rock City” – no, not this one.
(Here you can find links to all the earlier “Blogging the Qur’an” segments. Here is a good Arabic/English Qur’an, here are two popular Muslim translations, those of Abdullah Yusuf Ali and Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall, along with a third by M. H. Shakir. Here is another popular translation, that of Muhammad Asad. And here is an omnibus of ten Qur’an translations.)
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
So, just how do present day Islamic scholars reconcile the contradictions in the Quran that variously say that Satan leads people astray, or that it’s Allah’s will that such people go astray and that people have free will?
Do they just ignore those contradictions?
flipflop on February 3, 2008 at 9:26 AM
Thanks Mr. Spencer. I have a question in reference to the events of the past week:
Do the rules of martyrdom apply to the mentally challenged? As it would seem difficult for them to practice the required piety, what I’m curious of is whether there exists some twisted rational that by forced martyrdom they are being done a “favor”, or are they just considered a tool without regard to the spiritual aspect? Thanks.
Spirit of 1776 on February 3, 2008 at 9:48 AM
In light of the statement that “Allah sent to all the people of the earth, Arabs and non-Arabs alike,” how do Muslims reconcile the idea that they consider all translations as inauthentic? The fact is that the old Arabic of the Qur’an is not the modern version of that language so that even Arabs are disadvantaged unless they get a special annotated version. This seems much like what English readers would need to understand old English, or worse pre-Chaucer or Norse.
If the Persian Mahdi ever shows up (sorry to my Baha’i friends who think he already has) perhaps we’ll get a new book written in Farsi and maybe then authentic translations will be permitted.
Annar on February 3, 2008 at 9:55 AM
I just wanted to say thank you for these bits of information. I try to gather all the info I can on the “religion of peace”. Know your enemy right? Keep them coming, this war is far from over.
HotAirExpert on February 3, 2008 at 11:00 AM
They explain them away by saying “How dare you place limitations on Allah, by saying that he must be consistent?”
Bigfoot on February 3, 2008 at 11:21 AM
flipflop:
No, they say that nothing can be done except by the will of Allah. Allah can even use Satan to affect whatever he wants to do.
Robert Spencer on February 3, 2008 at 11:33 AM
Spirit of 1776:
Oh sure, those two women would be considered martyrs, and that they’ve been done a favor.
Robert Spencer on February 3, 2008 at 11:34 AM
Annar:
Allah sent, according to Islamic theology, messengers to other peoples who spoke in their own language. Muhammad and the Qur’an were sent to the Arabs, but this message is the final and perfect one and is for all mankind also. But this does create Arab supremacism. There has always been tension between Arab and non-Arab Muslims, and a sense of superiority among the former.
Robert Spencer on February 3, 2008 at 11:36 AM
Robert, prior to Mohamed’s vivid imagination, were there any Arab/Beduin legends associating Abraham with Mecca? Or was this a completely new claim by Moe?
Shy Guy on February 3, 2008 at 11:42 AM
Detroit Rock City?
Nosferightu on February 3, 2008 at 11:50 AM
Mr. Spencer, I cannot thank you enough for the task you’ve undertaken.
Thank you,
Thank you,
Thank you!
oldleprechaun on February 3, 2008 at 11:58 AM
why should a book that was collected, rather than composed be expected to be completely internally consistent?
crr6 on February 3, 2008 at 12:37 PM
You know that.
We know that.
But they don’t know that.
Shy Guy on February 3, 2008 at 1:24 PM
right, just as with the Bible total scriptural consistency is only a problem for a minority of literalists.
crr6 on February 3, 2008 at 1:57 PM
Mr. Spencer, thank you once again. In previous weeks I had asked questions about the lack of curiosity about the natural world among the followers of Islam. I see much in this Sura that shows where a Muslim would believe that everything is predestined or “God’s Will.” Such as Ayat 4, 19, or 20.
I am beginning to see a pattern here.
dentalque on February 3, 2008 at 2:10 PM
Shy Guy:
It seems to have been an invention by Muhammad, to justify his changing the qibla — the direction to face during prayer — from Jerusalem to Mecca.
Robert Spencer on February 3, 2008 at 10:55 PM
Does this ayah suggest “martyrdom”? Or perhaps more importantly, is it be used to…
It seems to track the language of some others which do.
One of Osama’s favorites it the ayah in Nine which mentions clinging too heavily to this life.
Beagle on February 3, 2008 at 11:16 PM
This one:
Beagle on February 3, 2008 at 11:20 PM
Beagle:
Yes.
Robert Spencer on February 4, 2008 at 7:36 AM
where is this lack of consistency in the bible?
nineveh on February 4, 2008 at 7:59 AM
you’re kidding right?
crr6 on February 4, 2008 at 10:05 AM
Here’s a question that has probably been asked more times than anyone can count. Are you going to put this series in book form, Mr. Spencer? I’ve read most of you’re books (will start Onward Muslim Soldiers as soon as I finish Hatred’s Kingdom haven’t bought Religion of Peace? yet) and think putting this in book form would be very useful.
srhoades on February 4, 2008 at 10:09 AM
srhoades,
I have a contract to write The Infidel’s Guide to the Koran in 2009 for Regnery (after Stealth Jihad in 2008). It will be based on this series, but will be arranged thematically and will not reproduce these posts. I hope sometime after that to publish this series as it appears here, if I can interest a publisher in doing so.
Robert Spencer on February 4, 2008 at 10:22 AM
how about a peer-reviewed academic journal?
(crickets).
crr6 on February 4, 2008 at 11:44 AM
crr6
Peer-reviewed by Saudi-funded MESA Nostra crypto jihadis like Esposito?
That’s as bankrupt as the modern Pulitzer.
Beagle on February 4, 2008 at 12:23 PM
Beagle:
Precisely.
My work stands or falls on its merits. And no one — particularly those hacks and propagandists like Carl Ernst, Omid Safi, and others who write for peer-reviewed academic journals — have ever been able to demonstrate that anything I have said about Islam or jihad or the Qur’an is false.
Robert Spencer on February 4, 2008 at 12:41 PM
ok, if you’re so confident in your works merits,why not submit it to a peer reviewed journal? It’s pretty easy to deflect attacks on a blog consisting of people who have never heavily studied the Qur’an, although admittedly you and I have the same amount of academic training in Islamic studies…none. If your personal studies stand on their own merits, then they should be able to do so under peer review.
crr6 on February 4, 2008 at 1:47 PM
I’m interested in what you think and why
nineveh on February 4, 2008 at 2:48 PM
crr6:
Actually, I have academic training in Islamic studies. I just don’t have a doctorate in it. If you think peer reviewed journals are academically sound and unbiased these days, I suggest you read Ivory Towers on Sand by Martin Kramer, and Ibn Warraq’s elegant evisceration of Edward Said — whose perspective rules academic study of Islam and related issues these days — which I reprinted in my book The Myth of Islamic Tolerance.
Academic approval in America in 2008 signifies that your work meets the standards of hard-Left propagandists who have demonstrated again and again that they have no interest whatsoever in genuine academic inquiry.
That said, would I hesitate to go head-to-head with any of these vaunted academicians, or to stack up my work against theirs? Not for a nanosecond. In fact, I have challenged numerous Middle East Studies establishment professors to debate — including Carl Ernst, Omid Safi, Akbar Ahmed, Ahmed Afzaal, and others. All have declined. One would think that if I am really as ignorant and malicious as my detractors claim, one of these superior scholars could accept my debate challenge, mop the floor with me, and end my baneful influence forever. Yet none of them will even try. Now, why is that?
The only answer I’ve ever gotten to that question is just more ad hominems — “You’re so witless and evil it isn’t even worth refuting you.” Fine. But I continue to document everything I say very carefully from Islamic sources. People can check up on me for themselves, to see if I’m misusing or misrepresenting those sources — and they have. Professors have written to me saying they started out trying to debunk what I’ve written and ended up discovering it was true. In any case, my invitation to debate any scholar or academic remains open.
Robert Spencer on February 4, 2008 at 4:48 PM
crr6
You’ve never heavily studied the Quran. Don’t generalize any further.
Beagle on February 4, 2008 at 7:16 PM
Robert, have you read Jasser’s latest piece? Beside the fact that I just wish he would convert to anything else, I have a problem with his idea that a sitting U.S. President should be responsible for promoting spiritual Islam (which I would consider the new agey type sufism that seems to run rampant through out the U.N. and its NGOs). It seems to me that we would all be better served if Jasser would simply declare a formal break between Western Sufism and its Islamic roots. As it is now, it seems he simply wants to have his cake and eat it too.
In War against Islamism, We Must Listen to the Words of Our Enemies
Connie on February 5, 2008 at 1:02 AM
Thank you Mr. Spencer for all of your hard and great work you do on this!!
Grafted on February 5, 2008 at 2:00 PM
Thank you Mr. Spencer!
4shoes on February 5, 2008 at 2:38 PM