Qur'an: A Work of Multiple Hands? My Answer

- Content:

Introduction

The now infamous essay by Denis Giron, “Qur’an: A Work of Multiple Hands?” can be found at http://www.infidels.org/. This article is a rebuttal to it. I would like to apologize now, ahead of time, for the deeply personal tone this article is going to have, but the article I'm rebutting contains strong elements of overconfidence and closed-mindedness, as you can probably see for yourself if you follow that link.

First, Whose Hands Are We Talking About?

The Koran (I always use this more familiar spelling) makes numerous references that are obviously to the life of Muhammad (peace be upon him). It mentions him by name, both as “Ahmad” and “Muhammad,” and even contains a chapter titled “Muhammad.” And yet Giron’s article seems to imply that he wasn’t the author. If he wasn’t the author, or if he didn’t exist at all (which I think is supposed to be the implication), then what’s the deal with all this? Did these anonymous multiple authors all go under a single pseudonym with a made-up backstory, a la Ellery Queen? For what reason on earth would they have done that? I think that, considering how popular the Koran became, it would have been fairly easy early on for the people of the blessed Muhammad's generation, or even of the first few generations to come after him, to find out if the book was falsely attributed to him. And if he didn't exist at all, then you'd think that the local people would be curious to meet the founder of this new religion, and consequently would find out that he didn't exist.

Why Does Allah swear oaths?

Giron brought up the point that the use of oaths by the author of the Koran can be seen as evidence that the voice speaking was not that of Allah. I don’t see why this would be; some people seem to regard the use of oaths as an indication that there is something higher than yourself to swear by, but oaths can also be used (in a more semantic, less official way) as mere statements of emphasis or affirmation. For instance, when people say, “I swear to God!” they often don’t mean this as a real, binding oath, but only to emphasize, and affirm the importance of, what they’re saying. So why can God Himself not do the same thing?

The Bismillah and al-Fatihah

Giron also points out the opening chapter of the Koran (al-Fatihah), which is a prayer expressed to Allah, and the Bismillah which opens each chapter (“In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful”), as examples of the text referring to God as a being distinct from the author. Had al-Fatihah occurred anywhere but at the very beginning, grossly breaking the general longest-chapter-to-shortest-chapter pattern, Giron's point just might be a little bit stronger, but as it is, this prayer is there right at the opening, indicating that it is the attitude behind the rest of the Book and the central prayer of Islam. Often the beginning of a document will be used that way, to set the tone. In fact, Giron’s own paper begins with a quotation from someone else for this very purpose. In much the same way, the Bismillah sets the tone and establishes the attitude for each chapter to come, also serving to echo the al-Fatihah which is behind it all.

You must also remember that when God gives a revelation through an angel, all three entities--the prophet involved, the angel being used as a medium, and God Almighty Himself--are involved in the writing process. If Gabriel or Muhammad (peace be upon him) made occasional comments of their own in the text (which it seems at times that they did--see 2:286 for an example), this does not mean that they do not remain inspired while doing it. All three parties were the authors of this Book--God Almighty, Gabriel His envoy, and the blessed Muhammad--and all three were united by the bond of inspiration.

Allah's referring to Himself in the third person in 17:1

Giron uses 17:1 as further evidence that the voice speaking in the text is not always that of Allah Himself but sometimes that of “Muhammad, Jibreel, or whomever the reciter(s) of the Qur’an may have been.” As I've pointed out, there's no problem if that is the case, but I don't see what the problem is anyway. When people refer to themselves occasionally in the third person, we don’t accuse them of being other people in disguise. And just as with people, Allah will do this only occasionally, mostly referring to Himself in the first person, albeit usually in the plural, this being the magisterial "we". (I will not respond to the point about which mosque is “the farthest mosque,” since Giron himself admits to there being a possible rational explanation for it.)

Does the Koran Condemn the Use of Ahadith?

Giron points out two references from the Koran which are supposed to be condemning the use of ahadith, 31:6 and 45:6. But the first reference reads:

Some men there are who buy diverting [ahadith] to lead astray from the way of God without knowledge, and to take it in mockery; those—there awaits them a humbling chastisement.

(- 31:06 -)
Noble Quran

So as you can see, this verse refers to people who forge sayings (or ahadith) for the specific purpose of misleading and ridiculing God’s religion. I would hardly think that all ahadith by all compilers at all times were for this single purpose. Rather, the compilers just collected ahadith from various sources which they thought were (or might be) authentic. I don’t see anything sneaky going on there. Now let’s examine 45:6 in context:

Surely in the heavens and the earth there are signs for the believers;

(- 45:03 -)
Noble Quran

and in your creation, and the crawling things He scatters abroad, there are signs for a people having sure faith,

(- 45:04 -)
Noble Quran

and in the alternation of night and day, and the provision God sends down from heaven, and therewith revives the earth after it is dead, and the turning about of the winds, there are signs for a people who understand.

(- 45:05 -)
Noble Quran

Those are the signs of God that We recite to thee in truth; in what manner of [hadith] then, after God and His signs, will they believe?

(- 45:06 -)
Noble Quran

So as you can see, this list of signs is the ahadith, or communications, being referred to.

Did God Command the Angels to Commit Shirk (idol worship)?

Although it is a minor point in his paper, a sort of offhand comment, I feel that Giron’s allegation that God was apparently commanding the angels to worship the blessed Adam in 15:29 and 38:72, should be discussed. The translation he cites says “fall ye down in obeisance unto him.” Now let me ask you: is the only purpose of bowing down to worship someone? Do you not also bow down before, say for instance, royalty?

The Use of Variant Repetitions

Giron then brings up the point of slightly varying conversations in repetitive tellings of a single story. He also said that when you ask Muslims what the exact words are, they never have an answer (which I think should only be expected, given that they’re very unlikely to have combined the passages and memorized the results so that they can just tell you all the exact words right off the top of their heads). Did it not occur to him that maybe the exact words of the conversation are not being recorded? The whole Book is in a psalmic style, as I’m sure he’s noticed—it’s like a song, with choruses and refrains that recur from time to time. And just as in a song, the chorus’s exact wording may change slightly from time to time, with flourishes, brief comments or “yeah!”’s, etc., or subtly altered phrases. Sometimes they’ll even be rounded off at the end with a new line. An example of many of these principles can be found in the concluding chorus of “The Unforgiven II,” by Metallica, which transforms the usual chorus of:

What I’ve felt, what I’ve known
Turn the pages, turn the stone
Behind the door, should I open it for you?
Oohhhhhh, what I’ve felt, what I’ve known
So sick and tired, I stand alone
Could you be there, ‘cause I’m the one who waits for you
Or are you unforgiven too?

into this:

What I’ve felt, what I’ve known Turn the pages, turn the stone Behind the door, should I open it for you? (so I dub thee unforgiven)
Oohhhhh, what I’ve felt, what I’ve known...
I take this key and I bury it in you, because you’re unforgiven too (never free, never me)
Because you're unforgiven too....

Passages which do not chronicle events or conversations also get this treatment in the Koran, so why should events and conversations be any different? When I see the blessed Jesus’s teachings briefly recorded toward the end of surah/chapter five, they look to me not like his exact words but like a summary of his teachings. Koran 21:105 paraphrases, but does not quote exactly, a verse from Psalm 37. Why should conversations be any different? You might notice that everyone who speaks throughout the Book sounds like the same person, and also like the author—obviously this is because their words are being transferred to the consistent, psalmic style of the whole thing. It’s a poetic, song-like paraphrasing of what they said, and as such might contain subtle variations through its repetitions (as well as separate sentences altogether tacked onto the end or beginning, which I suppose should be combined with the shorter versions elsewhere), as a song might.

My Wild Confabulations—Or Could It Just Be That I Disagree?

In an infuriating display of arrogance, Giron says:

Zulfikar Khan exposed numerous contradictions in the Qur’an, and there is no doubt that Muslim apologists will offer all kinds of wild confabulations in an attempt to reconcile each one. It is quite obvious that in the world of apologetics, such characters are more than willing to sacrifice their intellectual integrity in order to salvage their cherished beliefs.

He points out three contradictions himself, and so I guess there’s no way anyone could rebut them with anything but “wild confabulations.” I hate to break it to you, Giron, but just because you accuse a text of having contradictions does not automatically mean that it does and that anyone who expresses disagreement is automatically giving you rationalizing mish-mesh—unless, that is, you happen to be right about everything all the time, which it seems that you think you are. With that said, let’s get down to what my silly little “wild confabulations” are about these proposed contradictions (although I’m not really an apologist—but don’t tell me that makes a difference).

First, Giron alleges that 3:45 and 19:17 contradict each other, since one of them refers to "an angel" delivering the anunciation to Mary whereas the other refers to "angels" doing it. Angels work in collusion with each other; they are completely and utterly united in purpose at all times, bound by the will of their Lord. They are an organization of sorts. Therefore I see nothing wrong with saying at one that an angel delivered a message to you and then saying later that the angels did, since they're all in an association with each other. It's like if an agent of the FBI started stalking you and you said, "The FBI is stalking me," and then the next day said, "An agent of the FBI is stalking me." Would you be contradicting yourself?

Second, Giron compares 41:9-12, which speaks of the earth being made before the heavens, to 79:27-30, which speaks of the heavens being made before the earth. So what “wild confabulation” do I have to offer? How am I going to "sacrifice my intellectual integrity" here? Well, the fact is, there are two different heavens: first, there's the heaven we know as “the sky,” ending where the earth’s ozone layer ends, and then there's the heaven around and above it, which we know as “outer space.” First outer space was formed, and then the earth was formed (as well as other planets), and then the atmosphere of the earth settled into what it is now, giving the earth a sky. It's all very scientifically accurate. The heaven being referred to in surah/chapter 79 is obviously the sky, since this heaven darkens at night and has a forenoon:

What, are you stronger in constitution or the heaven He built?

(- 79:27 -)
Noble Quran

He lifted up its vault, and levelled it,

(- 79:28 -)
Noble Quran

and darkened its night, and brought forth its forenoon.

(- 79:29 -)
Noble Quran

And the heaven being spoken of in Surah/Chapter 41 is obviously outer space, since it is this heaven which contains the stars:

Then He lifted Himself to heaven when it was smoke, and said to it and to the earth, “Come willingly, or unwillingly!” They said, “We come willingly.”

(- 41:11 -)
Noble Quran

So he determined them as seven heavens in two days, and revealed its commandment in every heaven. And We adorned the lower heaven with lamps, and to preserve; that is the ordaining of the All-mighty, the All-knowing.

(- 41:12 -)
Noble Quran

The final contradiction he proposes is in regards to the requirement for salvation: according to him, verses like 2:62, 5:69, and 103:2-3 say that non-Muslims can enter Paradise, whereas 3:85 and 4:150-151 say that only Muslims can enter Paradise. Giron mentions the possibility that the word “Islam” in 3:85 can mean “submission to God,” but to him 4:150-151 is the final word on the subject. He says, “These differing views cannot be reconciled, and amount to a contradiction.” Well, I had no idea Giron had the authority to make such a declaration; once again, he seems to think that anyone who disagrees with him is automatically wrong. Now let’s take a look at 4:150-151 in light of the verse which follows:

Those who disbelieve in God and His Messengers and desire to make division between God and His Messengers, and say, “We believe in part, and disbelieve in part,” desiring to take between this and that a way—

(- 4:150 -)
Noble Quran

those in truth are the unbelievers; and We have prepared for the unbelievers a humbling chastisement.

(- 4:151 -)
Noble Quran

And those who believe in God and His Messengers and make no division between any of them, those—We shall surely give them their wages; God is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.

(- 4:152 -)
Noble Quran

I don’t know about you, but it seems pretty obvious to me that this passage is referring to wishy-washy Muslims who deliberately pick and choose between prophets—people who are only half committed to being Muslims—and not to people who simply believe in following one or two prophets because they belong to another religion. You be the judge.

My my my! What wild confabulations I have been making, n’est-ce pas?

Giron’s conclusion

The concluding segment of Giron’s article sums up the arrogant and closed-minded attitude of the whole document, as you can see:

Through all this, it has been shown that the Qur’an is indeed given to repetition of whole passages of variant versions. Blatant contradictions have been shown. With this now before us, how can we conclude that this text is the word of an Almighty God, or even a single Arab nomad? It is quite clear that the Qur’an is, as Cook and Crone said at the outset, “the product of belated and imperfect editing of materials from a plurality of traditions.” There is simply no other possibility.

Well, I hate to break it to you, Mr. Giron, but there are always other possibilities. You are not infallible and neither is anyone else alive. And as I have shown, you are apparently wrong about everything you've said in your paper. I have nothing more to say.



APPENDIX:

It has come to my attention that at Answering Islam, after mangling my name, calling me “Yusuf Sulaimin”, when my name is Yahya Sulaiman, Sam Shamoun has argued against my explanation of the heavens-before-earth-or-earth-before-heavens matter, being quite illogical. He quotes:

Say: 'What, do you disbelieve in Him who created the earth in two days, and do you set up compeers to Him? That is the Lord of all Being. And He set therein firm mountains over it, and He blessed it, and He ordained therein its diverse sustenance in four days, equal to those who ask. THEN (thumma) He lifted Himself to heaven when it was smoke, and said to it and to the earth, "Come willingly, or unwillingly!" They said, "We come willingly." So He determined them as seven heavens in two days, and revealed its commandment in every heaven.’ And We adorned the lower heaven with lamps, and to reserve; that is the ordaining of the All-mighty, the All-knowing.” (S. 41:9-12 A.J. Arberry)

So God categorized the firmaments after He created the earth. Next, Shamon quotes:

What, are you stronger in constitution or the heaven He built? He lifted up its vault, and levelled it, and darkened its night, and brought forth its forenoon; and the earth - AFTER THAT (bada) He spread it out, therefrom brought forth its waters and its pastures, and the mountains He set firm, an enjoyment for you and your flocks. (S. 79:27-33 A.J. Arberry)

The earth was spread out after the sky was made. So the order of events goes:

1. Goes creates outer space.
2. God creates the earth.
3. God levels outer space into seven firmaments
4. God creates the sky.
5. God spreads out the earth.

This is exactly what modern science tells us. The earth had a sky before the single continent Pangea spread itself out across the earth, separating into the different continents we have today.