THE QUR’ĀN DOES NOT talk about a story of revelation to Muḥammad as it did with the Jewish prophets, and there is no tale or explanation of the emergence of Islam in what is now Makka. Indeed, all studies, manuscripts and inscriptions confirm its appearance in the north of the Arabian Peninsula, in the Levant and Iraq.

The jurists say that Muḥammad received the revelation in the cave of al-Ḥirā’, where he met with Jibrā’īl who said to him, ‘Read in the name of your Lord’. Yet this story is completely absent from the Qur’ān, and this absence of the story of revelation from the Qur’ān is a passing strange thing in the history of Islam.

There are expressions in the Qur’ān indicating that Muḥammad did not initially present himself as a prophet

There are expressions in the Qur’ān indicating that Muḥammad did not initially present himself as a prophet. His admission Glory be to my Lord; am I aught but a mortal messenger? in Sūrat al-Isrā’ verse 93 confirmed that he was nothing other than a human being, and in Sūrat Yūnus verse 20 the Messenger to the Muslims has no knowledge of the Unseen: 

The unseen is only for Allah; therefore wait – surely I too, with you am of those who wait.

Muḥammad crowned this with his confession that he was not bringing anything new, but had come merely to expound, clarify and remind others of the earlier scriptures (the Torah and the Gospel). The Qur’ān was thus a text and an expression of the Book of Moses – the law of Moses as Waraqa ibn Nawfal had said when Khadīja had questioned him:

And they say: If only he would bring us a miracle from his Lord! Hath there not come unto them the proof of what is in the former scriptures?^[3]

As for the word ‘Muḥammad’ in the Qur’ān what was earlier named Sūrat al-Qitāl (the ‘Sūra of Fighting’) was renamed Sūrat Muḥammad.  At the beginning of this sūra the jurists inserted the phrase and believe in what has been revealed to Muhammad, and it is the very truth from their Lord, and then changed Sūrat al-Qitāl to Sūrat Muḥammad:

(As for) those who disbelieve and turn away from Allah’s way, He shall render ineffective their works;

And (as for) those who believe and do good, and believe in what has been revealed to Muhammad, and it is the very truth from their Lord, He will remove their evil from them and improve their condition;

That is because those who disbelieve follow falsehood, and those who believe follow the truth from their Lord; thus does Allah set forth to men their examples.^[4]

If we examine this phrase and believe in what has been revealed to Muhammad, and it is the very truth from their Lord) we can see how it as an extraneous sentence because it breaks the context of the verses and lengthens the verse. If we delete the interpolated phrase we find that the text remains consistent with the rhythm (and rhyme) of the passage, so it becomes:

(As for) those who disbelieve and turn away from Allah’s way, He shall render ineffective their works (a‘mālahum);

And (as for) those who believe and do good, He will remove their evil from them and improve their condition (bālahum);

That is because those who disbelieve follow falsehood, and those who believe follow the truth from their Lord; thus does Allah set forth to men their examples (amthālahum).

This was confirmed by the researcher and orientalist Christoph Luxenberg in his book The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran.^[5] The word ‘Muḥammad’ was also inserted by the jurists into Sūrat Al-Fatḥ:

Truly did Allah fulfil the vision for His Messenger: you shall enter the Sacred Mosque, if Allah wills, with minds secure, heads shaved, hair cut short, and without fear. For He knew what you knew not, and He granted, besides this, a speedy victory.

It is He Who has sent His Messenger with Guidance and the Religion of Truth, to proclaim it over all religion: and enough is Allah for a Witness.

Muḥammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. On their faces are their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration. This is their description in the Torah; and their description in the Gospel is: like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them. Allah has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds forgiveness, and a great Reward.^[6]

The first of the above three verses is Christian and speaks of the Messiah, the Messenger of God, who demolishes the Sacred House of God (the Jewish temple in Jerusalem) and then rebuilds it at the hands of the believers (Christians and muhājir Arabs).^[7] The jurists, however, added to the third verse the name of Muḥammad, which became a very long verse inserted into the sūra with the name of Muḥammad interpolated. It thus breaks the context preceding it and unbalances the length of the verses. The basis of the Qur’ān is thus a reading of the earlier scriptures, because the Qur’ān had not been collected when Muḥammad was alive. How, then, can we talk about a ready-made Qur’ān? The Prophet died and did not collect the Qur’ān. This fact is recognized by the Muslim scholars.

There is not a single historical evidence testifying to the existence of Muḥammad

Nor did Prophet provide any interpretation of the Qur’ān, and there is no evidence that the Prophet ‘Muḥammad’ was in dispute with the Quraysh or addressing them. The absence of the Prophet from his collection and explanation of the Qur’ān, and the absence of a single historical proof – be it an inscription, a coin or a non-Islamic testimony – indicating the presence of Muḥammad in Mecca in the year (570-632 AD) as claimed in the Islamic heritage, confirms this fact.

Despite the existence of thousands of inscriptions uncovered in the Hijaz and the Levant, there is not a single historical evidence testifying to the existence of Muḥammad the Messenger of God. Not a single Muslim spoke or wrote of Muḥammad the Messenger of God, of his sīra (biography) or of the Qur’ān, or its collection, or of a new religion for a full 150 years after the advent of the Qur’ān. Then, suddenly, 180 years after the hijra, a wondrous and extraordinary person named Ibn Hishām was born in Iraq who claimed to know what happened a century and a half earlier. 

Suggested Reading

The Qur’ān according to critical research – 11

Conclusion

While millions of people believed that the Qur’ān is the word of God revealed to His Messenger ‘in a clear Arabic tongue’,^[8] all the commentators manipulated its texts and interpreted it according to their political whims and personal circumstances, all without the slightest acquaintance with linguistics or history.

There are dozens of examples and teachings in the Arabic Qur’ān, in the Sharī‘a and the Sunna that are derived from Jewish and Judaeo-Christian works. These still evidence that the Qur’ān in its beginnings was a Christian work, and that early Islam was a Judaeo-Christian doctrine. We have noted this in our series of articles entitled Early Islam was a Christian sect and we pointed out there the evidence that the first (Judaeo-Christian) Qur’ān was extolling the Christians and considering them ‘the believers’.

Early Islam was a Judaeo-Christian doctrine

But something happened during the course of Islamic history that turned ‘Muslims’ against Christians. The Qur’ānic verses changed and now stood hostile to the Jews and Christians, and this is the best evidence that the current Qur’ān was altered in line with the wishes of the caliphs. These had their scribes and interpreters who duly added and erased Qur’ānic texts as the Muslim caliphs manipulated the Qur’ān, particularly during the era of ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Marwān and his governor in Iraq, al-Ḥajjāj ibn Yūsuf Al-Thaqafī. The doctrine then crystallized to become an entirely independent doctrine in the era of the ‘Abbāsid caliphs, when Islam, as we know it today, emerged, and when elements of Zoroastrianism, Manichaeism and Buddhism were incorporated into it, alongise the Judaeo-Christian doctrines. 

Thus it was that they coined the term ‘Muslims’ about 70 years after the death of Muḥammad, collected together a book called the ‘Qur’ān’, and invented a prophet named ‘Muḥammad’. The term muḥammad, however, is not a name but a title given to the Messiah, the ‘glorified’ one, the  chosen or favourite one. This is proven by the verses inscribed on the Dome of the Rock built by ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Marwān, as well as by discoveries of Qur’ānic manuscripts, coins and antiquities. 

^[1] Qur’ān XCVI (al-‘Alaq), 1. In the Torah the phrase is used in several forms, notably at Joel 3:5: כֹּל אֲשֶׁר-יִקְרָא בְּשֵׁם יְהוָה—יִמָּלֵט ‘Whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered’ and both at I Chronicles 16:8 and Psalms 105:1: קִרְאוּ בִשְׁמוֹ ‘Call upon His name’. The hymn that follows both exhorts the people to worship the true God instead of false idols. In the Christian period the formula ‘call on the name of the Lord’ (ἐπικαλεῖν τὸ ὄνομα κυρίου) involved more than simply invoking the Lord, but expressed a prayer for deliverance with cultic connotations, that is, ’to worship Jesus as Lord.’  (Ed.)

^[2] Qur’ān IV (al-Nisā’), 163: Surely We have revealed to you as We revealed to Nuh, and the prophets after him, and We revealed to Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and Isa and Ayub and Yunus and Haroun and Sulaiman and We gave to Dawood Psalms.

^[3] Qur’ān XX (ṬāḤā), 133.

^[4] Qur’ān XLVII (Muḥammad), 1-3.

^[5] On this work, see Almuslih article: An Aramaic and Syriac reading of the Qur’ān, Parts 1 and 2.

^[6] Qur’ān XLVIII (al-Fatḥ), 27-29.

^[7] The term muhājir is disputed. Muslims claim that the word refers to Muslims who ‘migrated’ hājarū from Makka to Madina, while many contemporary scholars understand the term to denote adherents of a Jewish messianic movement seeking to re-establish Judaism in the Holy Land, and that their ‘hijra’ was to Jerusalem rather than to Makka. Its members were initially both Jewish and Arab but the Arabs’ increasing success impelled them to break from the Jews around the time of ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Marwān in the late seventh century and assert an independent faith. The word also appears in several forms in ancient authors, as μαγαρίται (‘magaritai’), μωαγαρίται (‘moagaritai’) and ܡܗܓܪܝܐ (‘mahgraye’)  to denote them. On this, see in particular the work Hagarism by Patricia Crone and Michael Cook. The work is available in the Almuslih Library here. For Robert Kerr the Syriac term mahgraye simply means ‘Arabs’, and the ‘hijrī’ year is to be understood better as denoting the ‘Year of the Arabs’ or the ‘Year of the Hājariyyūn’, not a reference to a historical hijra or ‘migration’. On this see Almuslih article Theories on the origins of the Hijri calendar and al-Nasi’ – 2 (Ed.)

^[8] Qur’ān XXVI (al-Shu‘arā’), 195.

Main image: Fragment of a Qur’ānic palimpsest (a manuscript that has had its original writing scrubbed off in order to reuse the page) showing underneath its original Coptic text of the Torah’s Book of Deuteronomy.

On this essay read the earlier sections: Part One; Part Two; Part Three; Part Four; Part Five, Part Six; Part Seven; Part Eight; Part Nine