| JuryFury.com
Now Every 15th of the Month ! Online School of Politics |
|||
| Areas of Interest THE USA American Foreign Policy US House and Senate US Presidents State & Local Politics Regional Politics Politics of China The British Commonwealth Indian Subcontinent Middle East The European Union Africa Latin America ASEAN NATO United Nations The Non-aligned Movement Eastern Europe New Nations of the 20th Century General Topics Constitutional Law Human Rights Nuclear Disarmament & Treaties International Warfare Environmental Law Peace Treaties Economic & Social Alliances International Organizations Journalism & Media Racism and Democracy Women in the Workplace Family Law Courts and Practices The Judicial System Higher Education Education and Government Health Care & Insurance Rights of the Disabled Copyright & Working Online Legal Representation Legal Insurance Pornography Domestic Violence Religion & Law Workers Rights Employers Rights Prison & Life after Social Organizations Welfare & Poverty Taxation and Democracy Third World Aid Programs Space Exploration Alternative Energy Petroleum Industry & Cars Nuclear Power Programs for the Arts Sports Education Policing the Internet Privacy and freedom Immigration Food and Regulation War on Drugs War on Pharmaceuticals Public Housing Pollution and Control Sexual Harrassment Discrimination Electoral Process Consumers Rights Investors Rights Abortion Death Penalty Social Security Gender & Sexuality Grassroots Organization ACLU World Watch Oxfam UNICEF United Negro Fund Ford Foundation (suggestions welcome at our chatsite) Law of the Economy Join I-Traderschool, our sister magazine, for debates and news. |
The Pulpit
The Search for the True Qu’ran by Sophia Barkat Christian and Judaic scholars freely question the authenticity of the Bible and the Torah, but questioning the authenticity of the Qu’ran is considered blasphemy in Islamic culture. A close study of the Qu’ran, however, raises such questions. Indeed, the Qu’ran is full of references to society and geography, norms and values akin to Persia and not just 7th Century Arabia, suggesting that its audience, at one time or another, may have been the people of Persia, not Arabia. Notice, that I didn’t say that it was revealed or written in Farsi, the language of the Persians or in any other Persian language, or that it was revealed inside Persia. But only that the Qu’ran, as we know it today, may not be the original version revealed to the Prophet Mohammad. To investigate this, let’s have a look at the history of Islam, dynastic rule in Muslim nations, as well as at the Qu’ran. 7th Century Arabia Mecca was the home of the Kabah – Arabic for "cube" – built by Adam as the house of God, rebuilt by Abraham and Ishmael, and later to become the home of 360 idols of which the God of Abraham and Adam or Allah just happened to be one (Emerick, "Muhammad", pg. 3-14). Mecca, a city in the barren land of Saudi Arabia, boasted huge tourism revenues from idolaters who came to Mecca to do the pilgrimage of the Kabah. It also offered a place of rest to the thousands of merchant caravans travelling between Yemen and Jerusalem via the Hijaz. The Hijaz, the area described by Ta’if, Yathrib (Medina) and Mecca, is a long patch of desert on the west of Arabia and parallel to the dangerous route of the Red Sea coast. It got just enough annual rainfall to allow for human survival compared to the rest of Arabia. As a result, cities existed in this area, even with buildings. So do elaborate bazaars, where traders from all over the world could exchange goods, rest for the night, and also enjoy food and entertainment. Hijaz is, therefore, a mercantile and nomadic culture. Men earn their living by carrying cargo back and forth Yemen and Syria, the more greener regions where monarchies are set up and control seminal ports of trade between Asia and Europe. Traders who embark at Yemen’s Byzantine Empire have to pay huge taxes there and the same in Syria. In comparison, traders pay next to no taxes in the Hijaz, where it is expected they will rest, eat and spend money, anyway. Trade is, thus, the cash-crop of the Hijaz, and most men do not have stationary lives. As a result, in 7th Century Arabia, with the exception of families whose men work inside cities year-round, the women generally raise the children and the children take the name of the woman’s family. Husbands merely visit the women and pay an upkeep. The husband may have more than one wife – and women can have more than one husband. Mohammad’s Birth Mohammad’s family was the prominent Abu Hashim clan of the Qurayesh, and his grandfather, Abdel Mutallib, the city’s caretaker, almost like a mayor. His duties included seeing that Mecca remained the number one sacred spot for idolters. So much so, he was faced with war during the Year of the Elephant, when the Abbysinian King, hoping to destroy the Kabah, attacked Mecca with Elephants (Emerick, "Muhammad", pg. 27). Mohammad was born to what was considered privilege -- the ruling family. But Mohammad spent his life questioning the very tradition that kept his city alive. How did this happen? Mohammad’s Youth Mohammad's father, Abdullah, died two months into his marriage to Aminah. For the first six years of his life, the child was sent away by the grieving mother to be raised by the Banu Sa’d, a nomadic tribe that travel the Hijaz. The Banu Sa’d were an agnostic tribe who shunned and ridiculed the idolatry of the Meccans. To them, God was not the Moon nor the Sun nor trees nor stars and nor was he trying to communicate with humans. This god was distant, uncaring. (Emerick, "Muhammad", pg. 30-31). Mohammad, consequently, believed in this religion and when he is brought back to Mecca by his grandfather and saw the idolatry of his own Abu Hashim, he denounced it. He spent long hours talking to his closest friend, Abu Bakr about the Hanafi way, and together, the two develop a tradition of going away to the caves to meditate, just like the Banu Sa’d. Mohammad is, thus, a Hanif, one who meditates. He also spends hours listening to his uncle, Zubayr who starts a charity organization in Mecca with the aim of helping the poor and needy (Emerick, "Muhammad", pg. 36) Here he listens to elders talk about social change and welfare. It is also the time that Mohammad faces a life of poverty. After the death of his grandfather, Abu Taleb, his uncle, adopts Mohammad and raises him. Aminah has long died from illness, and there is no other guardian. Mohammad works in his uncle’s business, and when that goes sour he works as a shepherd tending to goats and camels for his uncle. He would have remained there had it not been for the fact that Abu Taleb had found him job in the business of Khadija, the wealthiest businesswoman in Arabia. As a widow, Khadija had inherited immense wealth from her husbands. She had married a wealthy man and upon his death his brother, who also had died leaving her a widow. Seeing no interest in losing her wealth to a new husband – as was the fate of women upon marriage -- she decided not to marry again, refusing the hand of every eligible man. It was stories of Mohammad’s honesty in running her business, supposedly, that got her attention, and it was then that she had proposed to him. Thus, at the age of 25 yrs. Mohammad married into the wealthiest family of Mecca. Together they had four daughters and two sons, though the boys did not survive. Mohammad was known to be in love with his wife and did not marry again during her lifetime, but several, after. Prophethood & Revelation of the Qu'ran It is only when the Prophet was 40 years old that he was visited by the Angel Gabriel and is told that he was a Prophet and that he had to spread the religion that was revealed to Abraham – namely to renounce idolatry (See Bruce Fieler, "Abraham"). Mohammad kept this revelation a secret, and only his closest friends and family converted to Islam in the first three years. What was the religion he was spreading? The first verses of the Qu’ran to be revealed to the Prophet -- i.e. in chronological order -- were all against idolatry. They incitted the resentment of the Qurayesh, Abu Hashim's parent tribe, and mostly laughs, but don’t get him thrown out of Mecca yet. The next few are on the rights of women and on freeing slaves. These do get Muslims thrown out (Emerick, "Muhammad"). Muhammad and his followers fled to Medina, where he found Jews and others willing to believe his story and give him sanctuary and also pledged in the Pact of al-Aqabah to fight the idolaters. In Medina, Muslims grow in number following mass conversions. The next verses to be revelaed of the Qu’ran were about other Prophets and their religions, about war and property rights of the vanquished, and about equity and social justice and the running of an Islamic society – as the need arose, for the Muslims are then engaged in many wars with the Meccans who don’t like Islam (Pickthall, "Meaning of the Glorius Quran", Introduction). These revealed verses are told by the Prophet to those near him at the time, and after his death, by the Caliphat of Abu Bakr and Uthman, compiled into a bound version. This Qu’ran or "The Reading" is for the people of faith who live in Arabia and for those who might convert. Its audience, is therefore, a mercantile economy with very low taxes and a system of taking care of the poor and needy. Its audience is also a matrilineal society fleeting with patrimony, where all except affluent women still raise the children, as the nomadic mercantile lifestyles of men don’t allow men to settle down much. The audience is, therefore, a polygamous society where men are gone a lot of the time, and women may marry more than one husband, in the pre-Islam era, at least. Slavery exists in this society, and slaves are treated at the mercy of the owners. Islam introduces some changes that disturb the oppressive aspects of society and the spiritual but not the mercantile culture. Contracts and vows are important in this culture and remain so. Only now women and orphans have rights -- regarding marriage, divorce, property, education. Laws forbidding inhumane use, rape, prostitution and excesses upon slaves are put into place. In the first three years of Islam, the Prophet preaches peacefully, urging Meccans to stop idolatery. During the Hijrah, or mass movement from Mecca to Medina, the Prophet made a pact with several idolater tribes in the Truce of Hudaibiyah, when for ten years the Qurayesh and the Muslims promised to keep peace, so that either could make alliances with third-parties not involved. The Muslims, though fewer in number than the Qurayesh in the Battles of Badr and the Uhud, had defeated the Qurayesh by sheer strategy and new techniques in warfare hitherto unknown to the Arabs (Pickthall, "The Meaning of the Glorious Qu’ran", Introduction). The Prophet, for one, had understood that a larger army was ultimately required if they were ever to re-enter Mecca. The Qurayesh, tired of being defeated, had also wanted to come up with enough people to destroy the Muslims. The Truce was, thus, eagerly negotiated between the Muslims and the Qurayesh so that both parties could make political alliances in the meantime to destroy the other. Though the Truce was broken by an ally of the Qurayesh, and they declared war, the Prophet kept his vow with the idolaters and tribes who signed pacts with him and the Muslims. Muhammad & Persia The Prophet Muhammad was an Arab, traveled often to Syria and Jerusalem as a merchant but never too far. He never did travel to Persia. The Muslims took over Persia, known then as the Sassanid Kingdom, in 650 AD, to overthrow the powerful kingdom that had made an alliance with the Qurayesh during the Truce of Hudaybiyah. The Sassanid Shahs of Persia, though Zoroastrian and believers in the one-God, had heard about this new prophet who wanted the rich to free their slaves (al-Qu’ran: Surahs Al-Bakara and An-Nisa), and found it necessary to oppose him and the new religion, al-Islam, as did many other nearby monarchies and tribes. In 650 AD, fearing retribution from the allies of the Qurayesh, the Muslim army under Uthman marched into the Sassanid empire and to other places where the Muslims arose victorious. Most surprising to the Muslims was how fast the wars were won, considering how little the blood of the enemy was spilled. It is said that on hearing that the Muslims were close, the enslaved, hardworking peasants and laborers in Persia, declared themselves Muslimss and took to the streets, staging a civil war against the monarchs who had ruled them for over six thousand years. Muhammad, thus, had not seen the Sassanid Empire, though Zoroastrianism and many religions co-exist in Mecca. When he died in 632 AD, Arabs were still tribes doing trade and enjoying the lowest tax-rates in the region -- 2.5% on income and wealth. Believers were expected to educate and free their slaves and to treat them with dignity, and to give up worshiping idols as well as live a life of moderation and do their duty to God. He had also not legislated that the Muslim successor after him would be a King or rule over people as did the contemporary Sassanid, Byzantine or Abbyssinian kings, implying perhaps that he never considered monarchy as an option. Indeed, his own ancestor in the Qurayesh, Qussay, had found it hard to run Arabia as a king due to the fact that Mecca had few permanent citizens and that it’s population was that of travelling caravans, mostly foreigners (Emerick, "Muhammad", pg. 15-16) Hence, there is not only no concept of kingdom in Islam, it is also frowned upon in the religion that calls all Muslims equal. The only ruler allowed is a Caliph or governor, and the head of religious jurisprudence is the Imam. Ummayads and Abbasids: Islam as Empire When the Prophet died Muslims could not decide how to select a successor. It is said that while the Prophet had hinted on electing a just person to be Caliph, Muslims quarreled over who was just. Abu Bakr, the childhood friend and life-long confidante of the Prophet and father to Aiysha, the Prophet’s favorite wife, was chosen as the first Caliph by a handful of his followers. Umar, the second Caliph, was also father of another of the Prophet’s wife and a close confidante. Uthman, a millionaire and brave soldier and son-in-law of the Prophet, was the third. The last was Ali, his cousin and son-in-law, the only to leave him grandchildren. Disputes occured over why Ali was not the first Caliph. And after the death of Ali, Muslims fell into a greater quandary. War broke out in various parts of Arabia and in the annexed areas of Syria and Persia. It is then that a distant relation of Uthman and of the sons of Abu Sufyan, a one time enemy of Muhammad but now Muslims and in charge of Syria, declared themselves Caliphs. They remained Muslim in name and practiced Islam, and enforced Islamic Law, but also opposed Ali’s family’s claim to the Caliphat. For the first time in Islamic history the leaders with military power also found a culture where the people were not nomadic, as they were in Arabia. This allowed empire. Consequently, the Ummayad dynasty, the first monarchy run by Muslims began in 661 AD (Antony Black, "History of Islamic Political Thought", pg.18-19 ). The Ummayad rise to power involved bloodshed. They were murderers, killing off the Ali’s son and grandson and forcing the Shia to go into hiding. In 750 AD, after ninety years, when the Ummayads were finally overthrown by yet another set of warriors, the animosity towards Ali’s descendents had not changed, however, even though another distant relation of the Prophet’s now claimed the Caliphat. The Abbasids formed their capital in Baghdad, moving the center of Islam to the heartland of the previous Sassanid empire, which ruled the greater part of what is today Iraq and Iran. The Abbassids are pivotal in Islam as the Quran is mass published in their time. Harun al-Rashid: the Sexy Caliph? Harun al-Rashid may go down in history as the man who inspired the 1001 Arabian Nights, but he was no sexy Caliph, as Fatima Mernissi portrays him in "Sheherezade Goes West". Quite the contrary, Harun al-Rashid is a ruthless king, known to have killed dissidents, even those who helped him rule, and one of the first to inculcate monarchy into Islam and to borrow every tool in history to legalize this. Son of a monarch, this Abbasid king would rule that no Caliph could ever be removed from power, unlike Yazid III of the Ummayad’s who had conceded to the opposite under pressure (Antony Black, "History of Islamic Political Thought", pg. 18-19 ). It’s in al-Rashid’s time that Muslims rule not from Arabia, where the Prophet’s religion is born, but from Persia and Baghdad, with dominions all over the Middle East, North Africa, Europe and Asia. Yet, al-Rashid was never satisfied and wanted more. He wanted to be a legendary conquerer. So much so, he ordered that Alexander the Great’s story be translated into Arabic, the native language of the Arab rulers who had moved to the Persian lands. Al-Mamun, Rashid’s successor, also dreamt of this fame and mass-published a letter from Alexander the Great to himself to make his followers believe in his divine right to rule. Strangely enough, there is a reference to Alexander the Great in the Qu’ran, where he is called 'Dhul Qarnayan'. (Qu’ran: Surah an-Nur, XVIII). Question arises if his name was not put into the Qu’ran by a over-zealous al-Rashid, considering that he was the first to issue a mass-publication of the Qu’ran. Mass-publication of the Qu’ran and other books had become possible due to the invention of cheaper paper, and the Caliph often requested it to happen. But where did he get this idea from? Harun al-Rashid was a man surrounded by descendents of high ranking nobility and courtiers of the Sassanid era who wished for the glory of the olden days, and convinced him to adopt the Sassanid system of government. Al-Rashid was still an Arab and never considered giving up his native tongue. In the rule of al-Rashid, Arabic and not Persian was still the language of choice for royal matters and matters of the State, but hardly because it is the birth language of Islam. It is the language that the Abbasid’s know, and only through interpreters can they understand the systems of Sassanid government. The Risala fil-Sahaba, written as a letter in Arabic to al-Rashid, is Persian scholar Ibn Muqaffah’s translation and summarization of the Sassanid style of government depicted in the "Testament of Ardashir" (Antony Black, "History of Islamic Political Thought", pg. 21). The Risala introduced to al-Rashid all that made monarchies stable and all the evils denounced by Islam -- social classes, meritocracy, taxes to sustain a soldier class and Sassanid courtly manners that removed the Caliph from the people and made him a king. It also urged the king to define what citizens should do for their nation so that they could be efficient and loyal. Abu Yusuf, an Islamic Jurist and Arab, upon al-Rashid’s request wrote the Kitab al-Kharaj, or "Book of Taxes" to complement the Risala. The Kitab al Kharaj compounded all kinds of taxes upon the subjects previously considered unjust in Islam. The Risala also spoke about the history of the Sassanid’s patronage of the Arts and Sciences. In the 6th Century B.C., Greeks and others fleeing persecution by the Byzantine Empire were given refuge by the Sassanids. Consequently, they were educated in Greek thinking -- Aristotle, Plato and others. Harun al-Rashid’s court, following this advice, mass translated these works into Arabic for Muslims in Arabia and outside. Writing, literature, philosophy or falsafa, logic, history, religion, mathematics, sciences – all disciplines cultured outside Arabia became important as knowledge that set people apart in status in al-Rashid’s Caliphat, thus, creating a meritocracy hitherto unknown in mercantile Islam. The Caliphat paid a poet an annual salary of 500 dinars – a construction worker made only one dirham a day (Fatima Mernissi, "Scheherazade Goes West", pg. 124). Christian and Jewish scholars fleeing Byzantine persecution also found refuge and patronage in al-Rashid’s court and educated the Arab’s about their own traditions, much like they did in the Sassanid Empire. Muslims minorities, however, were unwelcome. Al-Rashid’s successor, al-Mamun, and also Mahmud of the Buyid dynasty that followed, would follow this tradition, further stratifying society. Smart Persian courtiers like Ibn Qutaiyba and Firdausi would stand by the side of their Kings to create doctrines for more social strata and help enforce more laws and taxes upon the working class. (Antony Black, "History of Islamic Political Thought", pg. 21) Later dynasties of the Safavids (1501-1722 AD) -- founders of Shia Iran -- would also continue the system of monarchy and all the vices and values that went with it, as would the Ottomans in Turkestan (1280-1922 AD), the Moghuls in India (1526-1857 AD) and the Saudis (1920- ). Thus, Islam would become known to the world as a religion of monarchy and inequality, thanks in large part to the very Sassanids, they had once conquered. The History of the Qu’ran The Revelation It is said that the Qu’ran, Holy Book of Islam, was revealed in verses to Prophet Muhammad between 610-632 AD. The Prophet was 40 yrs of age when he received the "Reading" – translation of Qu’ran – from the Angel Gabriel (Emerick; Pickthall). In fact, all verses were received by Muhammad in his trance state, he then telling it to the others near him. Thus, the Qu’ran, revealed between 610-632 AD, was told by the Prophet to his closest followers, especially those who could write or memorize it. Abu Bakr was one of them. The First Written Compilation After the death of the Prophet in 632AD, the first Muslims started the tradition of oral repetition and memorization of the Qu’ran, so as not to lose it’s meaning over time. The Hafizi tradition was new to Islam, but not new to Arabia, which has a strong history of the oral tradition, and where writing is not that common a skill, probably due to lack of paper, and where oral vows mean as much as the written word. Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman – the three first Caliphs to succeed as ruler of Arabia after the Prophet – were known to compile the first version of the written Qu’ran. Most of the collection came from close personal friends of the Prophet who wrote down the verses, Abu Bakr included. The limited scrolls, thus, stayed out of sight of regular Arabs. It was, therefore, not a requirement to have read the Qu'ran oneself, as most Muslims think today, now that paper is more available and books easier to print. In those days the substance of the Qu’ran was discussed at the Jumma Prayers and during court proceedings where jurists delivered justice based on the Qu’ran. The Right Way was, thus, derived from the Qu’ran, mostly word-for-word. It consisted of the Fiqh or Islamic Jurisprudence and the Sunnah or Tradition of belief in God and the Prophets and the religions before, and in the acts of praying, fasting, of giving the social tax and of performing the pilgrimage to Mecca. Mass Publication Paper became cheap in the time of Harun al-Rashid (750-814 AD) and he ordered the mass publication of the Qu'ran. This was the first time Muslims, in general, could read it. Islamic Law From the Qu'ran and the Hadiths (reports of the Prophet's life examples) came Islamic Law or Sharia. In the days of the Prophets, jurists cited the Qu’ran and discussed it at length in the congregational or Jumma Prayers and in other Mosque proceedings to explain to them how to be good Muslims. The Mosque was a central place in early Islam, and acted as the court of justice, place of prayer, a school, as well as a community center. Everything from operation of the markets central to the mercantile economy to fairness of court rulings was discussed at the mosque. Women are a vital part in the legal process. Aiysha, the youngest of the Prophet’s wives and daughter of Abu Bakr, was one of the main jurists of early Islam, and a key figure in Islamic Jurisprudence from whom much law was later written. She and other jurists deliberated on cases involving marriages, divorces, property rights, business contracts and criminal offences. (Barkat, Juryfury.com: "Islamic Feminism: A Dichotomy?") The daily consultation of the Qu’ran which occurs in days of the Prophet and after his death in the days of Caliphs – Abu Bakr, Umar (Omar), Uthman (Osman) and Ali – ends with the rise of Arab dynasties. The mosque had allowed Caliphs and the Prophet to meet with people directly. This direct contact is lost in dynastic rule of the Umayyads and the Abbasids, who wished to be not bayahs or elected officials but kings who begot kings. Dynasty and Islamic Law Dynastic rule is the turning point in Islam. Before this time, Islamic Jurisprudence was only formed from direct teachings in the Qu’ran and the Hadith. During dynastic rule Islamic Law had been written by the whims of the Caliphs and Kings also, and also by consultation with the courtiers. This raised objection from Islamic Jurists who wished to stick to the Sunnah, or the Traditional Path. Al Shafi’i, a notable scholar and Jurist disagreed with the status quo in the al-Rashid dynasty. There are four law schools in Islamic tradition – the Hanafi, the Maliki, the Shafi’i, and the Hanbali – all named after their founders. Shafi’i is the head of one tradition that marries the literal approach of the Hanbali School with the rationalist approach of the Hanafi School, and says that Islamic Law must draw from only two sources – the Qu’ran (God’s message) and the Hadiths (Reports). He leaves out Consensus (ijma) and Analogy (qiyas) – saying that the Qu’ran and Hadith were the final message of the Prophet (Antony Black, "History of Islamic Political Thought", pg. 37-38). He was the Caliph’s agent in Yemen at the time, and was dismissed, imprisoned, released by a worried al-Rashid who saw al Shafi’i as a hindrance to the monarchy. Shafi’i consequently declined all of al-Rashid’s posts, and even a Judgeship by al-Mamun, al-Rashid’s son. He instead moved to Egypt, where he was murdered by a Maliki, furthering opening the can of worms on the Abbasid dynasty’s intentions regarding Islamic law, which they saw as their own. The death of Muqaffah by al-Rashid also brings to light his intolerance to political opposition of any kind, whether by confidants or people who were critics. It shows al-Rashid’s resolve to dictatorship and raises questions about his handling of the publication of the Qu’ran and the Hadiths. Did he, for e.g., change the contents of the Qu’ran and the Hadiths to help further his notion of dynasty? Inspecting present day Qu’ran The Hafiz, those who memorize the Qu'ran, keep it unadulterated – at least that is the claim and belief of today’s Ulemas, Mullahs, Imams and the general Muslim population. But the Qu’ran as we know it, or as the Hafiz of today do, is largely the Arabic version put into mass-print by Harun al-Rashid. Did al-Rashid change anything? Why would he want to? Let's have a look: Revelation The first verse of the Qu’ran to be revelaed to the Prophet, (but not organized as first verse in the Qu'ran) is known to have been "Ikra Bi Isme Rabbi Khalaq" or "Read in the name of your Lord," – where Gabriel orders Muhammad to read (Emerick, "Muhammad"). Question arises why the word "read" is used considering that Muhammad received nothing in print, and if God really knew everything must have known that Muhammad couldn't read either. Most of Arabia couldn't read. They spoke many languages but couldn't read or write. And even if he could, where was the writing? Was Gabriel writing on sand? Did he leave tablets of clay? No. None of this was ever handed over by Muhammad to his friends, at least. So, why the word "Ikra?" The very first words in the Qu’ran should set off alarms in the minds of Muslims. Questions that should arise in their minds are: Is the Qu’ran we know today the real revelation to the Prophet? It seems a legitimate question indeed, considering paper was scarce in those days, not that Gabriel could not have brought some in from the higher powers if God so chose. But, no physical scroll or tablet was ever revealed by the Prophet to the followers, and nor would it have made any sense to, as the man didn’t know how to read and nor did most of Arabia. So why use the word "Read"? At al-Rashid’s time, paper first becomes mass-produced and available to Muslims. It is a time of translation of Greek, Christian and Judaic writers. It is a time of patronage to Literature and Science. Paper and reading, therefore, are akin not to Muhammad’s people, but to al-Rashid’s. The Opening Surah Fatiha, or The Opening, the first verse to appear in the Qu’ran of al-Rashid, is a carbon-copy of a Zoroastrian verse – Zoroastrian being a religion practiced in Persia before Islam and the Abbasid dynasty. About Zoroastrianism, Mary Boyce said, in her book "Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices" (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1979, p. 29): "It is thought to be the first major religion to introduce the doctrines of an individual judgment, Heaven and Hell, the future resurrection of the body, the general Last Judgment, and life everlasting for the reunited soul and body. These doctrines were to become familiar articles of faith to much of mankind, through borrowings by Judaism, Christianity and Islam; yet it is in Zoroastrians itself that they have their fullest logical coherence...." Perhaps all such religions learnt about Zoroastrianism first? But, one who thinks the Qu’ran that is in print-form today is the same as that which came from God might be able to rationalize it as such: that all religions and Zoroastrianism also came from God, and hence the sameness. On the other hand, one who thinks that the Persians influenced al-Rashid’s print-version of the Qu’ran might say that this is proof. It is possible the later group is right. Though the Fatiha is used as an invocation, it is considered a very late Meccan Surah, the year of revelation uncertain, according to Pickthall. The Order of Verses The Qu’ran as we know it is not assembled in chronological order. No one knows why this method was avoided, though some suggestions follow. If it had been in chronological order, for example, it would be very easy to see that the Qu’ran starts with the theme of abolishing idolatry, proceeds to chapters on the rights of women, and then talks about freeing slaves. Three very militant ideas in the eyes of a monarchy! Why else would the chapters be thrown about? This ordering system might be better for al-Rashid and hence be proof of tampering. Follow the Cow There are two kinds of inferences to cows in the Qur'an. Surah Bakarah, Verses II in the Qu’ran is titled 'The Cow' after the yellow heifer, as an introduction to the story of Moses. And then there are other inferences as though cows were indigenous to Arabia in Mohammad's time, such as the following verses: "And the cattle hath He created, whence ye have warm clothing and uses, and whereof ye eat;" (Qur'an 16:5). Did cows exist in Mecca or Medina, places where the Prophet lived and where all the verses were revealed? More so, had the Meccans any idea what a cow was? The Herodotus says about the land of Arabia and Arabs: "They cover all their body and their face with the hides of oxen and other skins, leaving only holes for the eyes," (The Herodotus: The Histories, Book III, c. 430 BCE). From this account it seems oxen and hence cows were known to Arabs. Then again, the Herodotus is a ridiculous book, telling tales that are mostly fictional. Let’s have a look: "Still more wonderful is the mode in which they collect the cinnamon. Where the wood grows, and what country produces it, they cannot tell---only some, following probability, relate that it comes from the country in which Bacchus was brought up. Great birds, they say, bring the sticks which we Greeks, taking the word from the Phoenicians, call cinnamon, and carry them up into the air to make their nests. These are fastened with a sort of mud to a sheer face of rock, where no foot of man is able to climb. So the Arabians, to get the cinnamon, use the following artifice. They cut all the oxen and asses and beasts of burthen that die in their land into large pieces, which they carry with them into those regions, and Place near the nests: then they withdraw to a distance, and the old birds, swooping down, seize the pieces of meat and fly with them up to their nests; which, not being able to support the weight, break off and fall to the ground. Hereupon the Arabians return and collect the cinnamon, which is afterwards carried from Arabia into other countries." (The Herodotus: The Histories, Book III, c. 430 BCE) Forget the Herodotus. Let's consider something more reliable. Bruce Feiler, in his New York Times Best Seller book, "Abraham" talks about Abraham growing up in southern Turkey, where it is nice and green and there are cows too. And when God asks for a sacrifice, and Abraham offers Isaac as the sacrifice, God replaces Isaac with a cow (Bruce Feiler, "Abraham", pg. 71). We know that Abraham was living in a lush green region quite different from Mecca or Medina, because God ordains Hagar, Abraham’s wife to live in a dessert with her son, Ishmael, far away from the comfort Abraham, Sarah and Isaac were to enjoy. Hagar raises Ishmael near the area of the Zam Zam, a well near Makkah, which all pilgrims pass and gather water from during the Hajj. Livestock didn’t survive in such harsh climates as that of the Hijaz, where grass didn’t grow. Hence, cows cannot be indigenous to Mecca or Medina, and it’s use in the Qu’ran is strange. In contrast, the Abbasid Kingdom, present day Iran and Iraq, was a lot greener than Mecca and Medina, and has a class of farmers and agriculturists. Al-Rashid is known to have built the first irrigation system there to make it even greener. Here cows may graze, and sheep do. Would it not be more logical to assume al-Rashid’s mass published version of the Qu’ran is tailored to speak to an Iranian or Iraqi audience? And if so, is it not possible that more was changed? Holy War The persecution of the Muslims by the Meccans, namely the Qurayesh, led to all the wars between the two. After the Prophet died, fears and rumors of Byzantine aggression led to wars under Uthman, the third Caliph. There were wars with people who had declared themselves enemies of the Muslims during the Truce of Hudaibiyah also. These wars are documented in history. But was participation in such wars compulsory? The Qu’ran makes it compulsory for Muslims to go to Holy War -- one of many social duties one must fulfill as a citizen (Qu’ran: Chapters II, IV, IX, XLVII). Except for XLVII, all are early Surahs, revealed in Medina. But were these put into text by al-Rashid, the great undertaker of the Abbasid dynasty, to enable him and his successors to declare wars to plunder idolaters and pillage their empires? Ibn Muqaffah’s constant reminder to al-Rashid in the Risala to define duties of the citizen, especially pertaining to responsibility of soldiers, may be a big clue that indeed in the times of al-Rashid no sense of civic duty or compulsory duty to one’s society existed beyond charity-giving or az-Zakah. There is no Sixth Pillar of Islam -- defending Islam with one’s very last drop of blood – that the Qu’ran suggests. Moreover, Pickthall’s translation of the Qu’ran declares that Arabs were not really interested in War – at least not the Muslims who had newly converted to Islam – implying that they always have a choice to not participate (Pickthall, "Meaning of the Glorious Qu'ran", "Introduction"). Indeed, in the Battles of Bard and Uhud, they became warriors out of a need to fend off the Qurayesh, and some chose not to fight. Does this not negate the idea that there was a compulsory law to fight in war? If so, this might imply that monarchy did shape such Surahs but could also mean that they existed earlier but that the Prophet never enforced them. Killing Believers The Qu'ran forbids killing believers. This makes sense. It increases civil unrest and destroys the economy and the peace. Anyone seeking internal harmony would be happy with this law. But the fighting that broke out amongst believers suggests that even the earliest Muslims were half-believers, greedy and power-hungry. Is it not possible that the idea of kingdom was eventual, therefore? Is it not possible that wrong is made right -- verses played with for the sake of power? The in-fighting is proof indeed that we must allow ourselves that much doubt. After the death of the Prophet much war was waged between the four main lines of the Prophet’s family, and finally in the various dynasties and Imamas that followed. Aiysha, the daughter of Abu Bakr is known to have led the plot to assassinate Uthman, the third Caliph. It is known that Umar, also disliked Uthman, who was not only a millionaire and great benefactor to Islam but also much loved by the Prophet. Even Ali, who stayed quiet on the appointment of Abu Bakr and even Umar, found it hard to do so when Uthman was appointed Caliph before him. Fatima and Ali would be considered the rightful successors of the Prophet by the Shia, Ali’s descendents. The Shias would become the arch enemies of all dynasties to rule the Muslims – starting with the descendents of Uthman’s relatives in the Umayyad’s Husayn, Ali’s grandson, would be murdered by Yazid III, the last Umayyad King. The Umayyad’s tried to suppress civil war using indoctrination too: "Deputy fills Earth with Light, Mercy Justice and Rain. He is owed unconditional obedience." (Crone and Hinds, 1986, pg. 37) The Abbasids, claiming to be descendents of an uncle of Muhammad would also persecute the Shia, leading the later to go in hiding, though in general they were a lot more private in their persecution of Muslims, aiming instead to introduce laws into society to curb civil disobedience. Those who opposed or displeased the King might be imprisoned. Or those who failed to pay taxes. If they wanted to suppress civil disobedience at any cost, they could have altered the speech in the Qu’ran to make it okay to kill believers but they did not – fearing perhaps that this would perpetuate civil wars and crimes in society and be counter-productive to the dynasty and the rule of law. Social Emancipation The Prophet was expelled from Mecca only after he asks the Meccans to free their slaves. Before this he had belittled their idolatry, even talked about protecting the property rights of women and orphans, but the Qurayesh were not so angered that they wished to dislocate him. Yet, on this point the Prophet got thrown into the desert. (Emerick, "Muhammad") Women’s Role in Early Islam The independence of women in Arabia is documented in the Holy Books of Christianity, Judaism and Islam. The Arabs are descendents of Ishmael, son of Abraham and Sarah’s servant, Hagar. Hagar’s independence in raising Ishmael, even if God pretty much told her she had no choice, is testament to Arab women before Islam being independent. It is said that Hagar helped found the city of Mecca – travelers came to settle there when they learnt about the well of the Zam Zam. That's not all. Pre-Islamic Arab women were warriors, cheered on men in battle (Leila Ahmed, 1992, pg. 41-64). Women, thus, played an equal role in the first Islamic society. The daughters and the wives of the Prophets hold promiment places in society as professionals. (Barkat, Juryfury.com, Islamic Feminism: A Dichotomy?). The Qu'ran expects equal participation of women (Quran: Chapter 4). Yet, women of class and nobility were removed from public participation in al-Rashid’s court, much like in the Persian culture. The system of Adab requires women of aristocracy to not be in sight of commoners, just as of their male equivalents. The Buyids who succeed the Abbasids in 850 AD, despite being Shia, would carry on this tradition, after which time the Abbasids would be looked upon as the religious guardians of the Sunni sect. Consequently, the veil becomes part of Islamic culture, from the Abbassids. It is said, that al-Rashid's wife, Zubeidah, was so beautiful he didn't allow anyone to see her. Indeed, that could be the reason why women of nobility in early dynasties wore the veil, and how it became a symbol of aristocracy to all Muslims to have their women wear the Niqab, Burqhah or Hijab. Only peasants and working women could avoid this. Surprisingly, a verse in the Qu'ran suggests that wives of the Prophet be veiled (Quran: Chapter 4). This seems highly unlikely in fact as all of the Prophet's wives, especially Aiysha, led a public life. Slaves & Eunuchs The Qu’ran asks Muslims to free slaves, to educate them and to marry the women slaves and never to force them to have sex. The Prophet also ordered Muslims to free slaves as a punishment for not keeping vows etc., when the incentive to be a good Muslim was not enough. (Qu’ran Surah 2:177; 4:25, 4:36, 4:92; 24:32; 58:3; 150:13). In Al-Baqarah (Qu’ran, 2:177) is stated that no man can be righteous if he keeps slaves. This is an old Surah – revealed during the 1st and 2nd years of the Hijrah. But slavery was usually present in monarchies and Harun al-Rashid has many slaves. He has male slaves for his favorite cousin and wife, Zubeidah, as Fatema Mernissi points out, in "Sheherazde Goes West" (pg. 122). Mernissi says of Zubeidah, whom al-Rashid adored and spoiled," She was the first to organize a bodyguard of eunuchs and slave girls, who rode at her side." Hitherto, there are no references to eunuchs in Islamic history – i.e. after Islam is founded in 610 AD. And yet, in Surah An-Nur, (Qu’ran (24:30) despite the Qu’ran being against slavery there is one reference to impotent males: "Enjoin women to turn their eyes away from temptation and to preserve their chastity....to draw their veil over their bosoms and not reveal their finery except to their husbands, fathers......male attendants lacking in natural vigor." Was this al-Rashid’s addition to the list of men a woman could show her face to? We know that he adopted the strict courtly system of refraining women from participating in social life. Perhaps he was jealous and thought his beautiful wife and cousin would fall in love with another man? Idolatry, Looting & Dynasty In the Qu’ran, there are several verses on War, revealed to the Prophet during wars, and most are of a prophetic nature: reassuring Muhammad’s victory or return to Mecca, though some are of a more administrative nature. Surah al-Anfal or 'The Spoils of War' (verses VIII of the Qu’ran), is an early Surah revealed to Muhammad to not loot the Qurayesh, namely Abu Sufyan’s clan, at the Battle of Badr. The battle was the very first against the Qurayesh, which the Ansar – brigade of Muslims and Jews from Median -- won (Emerick, "Muhammad"). It is an early verse, the time being the 2nd year of the Hijrah (start of the Muslim year commemorating the flight from Mecca to Medina of Muslims following persecution in Mecca by the Qurayesh). The loot was considered to be for Islam only – for the theocratic government. There were only a handful of Ansar in this war. The later wars were waged by many thousands of Muslims and the Ansar were harder to stop from looting. The looting, nonetheless, lead to revelations in the Qu’ran about what should happen to the life and property of the widows and orphans of war, and also to the loot. Perhaps, this came in handy during wars waged after the Prophet’s time, as in the Abbasid era, when the king owned everything – land, labor, capital, and also the spoils of war. There was no land ownership in Abbasid era for sure, the land being worked on by farmers and irrigated by the Caliphat. Some land was given to the elite to live on but never to pass on to their families as inheritance, and some land given to the public to farm -- from which land-taxes were remitted. (Antony Black, 2001, pg. 18-31) As it is an early Surah, al-Anfal is more likely to be known widely by non-Abbasids, and thus, could well be authentic even if it sits very well with the idea of empire. Perhaps, the subject of scrutiny is not al-Anfal but idolatry as an excuse for war. Idolaters were considered friends of Islam only if they sided with the Muslims during the Truce of Hudaibiyah (6-8 Hijrah). Once Mecca fell to the 12,000 Ansar in 9th year of Hijrah, the Prophet declared immunity to friendly idolaters up until 16th year of Hijrah – the Truce was supposed to be for ten years but was cut short between Qurayesh and the Muslims by war. The 9th year is known as the Year of Immunity. The Truce had not been signed by all idolaters. Muhammad led 27 battles, and planned 38 more in ten years, and many of these were fought in the last days of his life. Did he use idolatry as an excuse to go to war? He lived only until 632 AD, the 10th year. Though, he didn’t attack friendly idolaters during that time, though one wonders what he would have done if he had lived longer. It is known that in the wars waged by the Prophet, he was not merciless, and often forgave people for crimes against himself also (Pickthall, "The Meaning of the Glorious Qu'ran", 'Introduction'). Caliphs and dynasties who followed were, however, less just and looted idolaters for all they had. And yet, Surah Anfal is part of the Qu’ran, showing that the dynasties did not preach disorder even if some of their kings brought back slaves and appropriated loot to their own coiffeurs. The Prophet freed all his slaves and educated and empowered them, and also urged his followers to free and educate the women slaves and marry them if they consented; and never to prostitute them or have sex with them or any woman by force – (Qu’ran: Surah an-Nur, verse 14, The Light.) He adopted Zeyd, a slave, as his own son, and made him a general. Zeyd led the attack on the Syrians but was killed. In any case, idolatry is discussed at length in the printed Qu’ran in Chapters 4 and 6, An-Nisa and Al-Anam, where it is stated to Muslims that idolaters are "your inveterate enemies" in the Pickthall translation. An-Nisa is a 3-4th year of Hijrah Surah, and so it is before the Treaty of Hudaibeyah which is drawn up in 6th year of Hijrah, and so could be true and not al-Rashid's tampering. Pickthall's version of the line is harsher than the other versions of the Qu'ran's translations, and the line may not imply that all idolaters are enemies. In 8th year of Hijrah, Muhammad offered immunity to the idolaters and other tribes who had joined the Muslims in the Treaty of Hudaibeyah, offering them the whole 10 years of immunity, just as promised. Muhammad did not live beyond this time for us to know how he would have treated the same idolaters. We do know, however, that the dynasties hungry for power who came after him waged war from Spain to India to Each Asia to Africa. In early Islam, the attack on Sassanids we know, was hardly fought. In 651 AD, the ill-treated peasants and poor Persians converted willfully to Islam on hearing of the Prophet’s arrival and revolted on their own causing the Sassanids to fall in less than a week. In the case of the al-Rashid’s army this was not the case. There was much opposition to the Abbassid army. For he was much unlike the Prophet. Could he have put harsh words into the Qu’ran such as "inveterate enemy" to inspire his army to kill and loot? Clearly, Muhammad did not consider idolaters as inveterate enemy but as future converts. Tampering with Sharia There were four competing schools of thought on Islamic Jurisprudence. (See Antony Black, 2001, pg. 33-35) Of these schools the Shafi’i school was formed by al-Shafi’i, a noted Jurist and agent of Harun al-Rashid. Each school of thought was trying to formulate Islamic Law as it saw fit. As-Shafi’i was involved in collecting the Hadith (advices of the Prophet) and in the determination of which Hadith was truly from the Prophet. Shafi’i was a literalist and did not believe that the Qu’ran nor the Hadith could be left to self-interpretation or Ijtema. Al-Rashid on the other hand was a proponent of Ijtema as it gave him, the Caliph, more power to dictate law. He wanted to have a hand in writing the Sharia or Islamic Code of Law. As we saw earlier he introduced new taxes upon the 2.5% tax of az-Zakah that Islam allowed. He created a kingdom also, even if never declaring himself a king, as it was considered a blasphemy is Islam (See Antony Black, 2001, pg. 12-14). Al-Rashid was so angered by As-Shafi’i’s attempt to curb the Caliph’s power he had the man dismissed from his post as agent to the Deputy in Yemen, then imprisoned, and then released. Al-Mamun, the successor to the Abbassid dynasty, offered the man a Judgeship, which Al-Shafi’i refused. Al-Shafi’i was found murdered in Egypt in 814. The Abbassid doing? Perhaps. Even though the murder was by a Maliki (another school of law) Egypt was a part of Abbassid reign. One can only guess. Refutations by Clerics Changing the language of the Qu’ran would not go unnoticed in the Shia, Mutazalite or Fatimid community not to mention Al-Rashid’s own Sunni community, though assassinations and persecution stories of those who opposed him are well known (Antony Black, 2001, pg. 22). Indeed, minorities and opposers were hunted down by the Abbassids. Could it be they tried to but failed? After all, those who had access to the Qu’ran, in the absence of mass published versions, were the elite. We know what happened to Al’Shafi’i who opposed the system of Ijtema that al-Rashid t | ||