Hadith of the prediction in Sura al-Rum

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

A Hadith, a recorded oral tradition, is attached to a prediction in the Qur'anic Sura ar-Rum. More traditions can be found in the books dealing with the Life of the Prophet, as well as the Quranic Tafaseer (exegeses).

Contents

[edit] Introduction

The early Muslim community perceived the Christian Byzantine Empire (or Eastern Romans, therefore ar-Rum) as nearer to their religion, whilst the Meccans felt more inclined to the Persian relgion.

According to Muslim tradition, the Meccan polytheists taunted the Muslims by pointing to the recent military defeats of the Byzantines by the Persian Sassanid Empire, that adhered to Zoroastrianism, and predicted that the Christian Byzantines were about to be defeated, and that the Muslims were next in line[citation needed].

In this situation, in {CE-BH|615|7}, the Islamic prophet Muhammad announced that he had received a revelation, the Sura al-Rum, that the Romans would triumph over the Persians and the Muslims over the Meccan polytheists[citation needed].

[edit] The Qur'anic quote

The Sura al-Rum starts with the relevant verses:

The Qur'an, chapter 30 (Ar-Rum), verse 2 to 6:
“
  1. Alif Lam Mim.
  2. The Romans are vanquished,
  3. In a near land, and they, after being vanquished, shall overcome,
  4. Within a few years. Allah's is the command before and after; and on that day the believers shall rejoice,
  5. With the help of Allah; He helps whom He pleases; and He is the Mighty, the Merciful;
  6. (This is) Allah's promise! Allah will not fail His promise, but most people do not know.— translated by M. H. Shakir

Transliteration: #Alif-lam-meem

  1. Ghulibati [a]rroom[u]
  2. Fee adna al-'arDi wahum min baAAdi ghalabihim sayaghliboon[a]
  3. Fee bidAAi sineena lillahi al-'amru min qablu wamin baAAdu wayawma-ithin yafraHu [a]lmu'minoona
  4. BinaSri [A]llahi yanSuru man yasha'o wahuwa alAAazeezu arraheem[u]
  5. WaAAda [A]llahi la yukhlifu [A]llahu waAAdahu walakinna 'akthara [a]nnasi la yaAAlamoon[a]
 ”
  • In verse 3, the Arabic word "adna al-ard" that is translated as "a near land" can also be translated just as accurately to "in the lowest land".[citation needed] Muslims now view this to be relevant,[citation needed] arguing that the Jordanian Valley, the land were the Romans became victorious, is the lowest land on the earth.
  • In verse 4, the Arabic word "biḍa‘" (Arabic بضع) that is translated as "a few" means a number between 3 to 9 or 10.
  • You can click here to listen to this Sura in Arabic.

[edit] Hadith

Abu Bakr, a companion (Arabic: Sahaba) of Muhammad and later the first Caliph, defended the prophetic validity of this prediction and ended up making a bet with Ubay ibn Khalaf, a Meccan polytheist.

Muslim scholar Al-Baizawi writes: "This passage refers to the defeat of the Byzantines in Syria by the Persians under Khusran Parvis. (C.E. 615 - 6 years before the Hegira). However, the defeat of the Persians should take place soon 'in a small number of years'. In the light of this prediction, Abu-Bakr undertook a bet with Ubai-ibn-Khalaf that this prediction would be fulfilled within three years, but he was corrected by Mohammed who stated that the 'small number' is between three and nine years [1].

Note: The Arabic language has a word for single year, two years and a third grammatic form for three or more years. It is the third form that is used in the Qur'anic verse.

[edit] Interpretation

[edit] Muslim view

It has been depicted as a miraculous prediction by Muslims.[2]

Al-Baidawi's commentary states that the prophecy was fulfilled exactly as the Qur’an predicted (page 534) and added "This is one of sign of prophethood because it is a prophecy" [1]

Abdullah Yusuf Ali, a 20th century Sunni Islamic scholar writes:

“ Bidh'un in the text means a short period -a period of from three to nine years. The period between the loss of Jerusalem (614-15) by the Romans and their victory at Issus (622) was seven years, and that to the penetration of Persia by Heraclius was nine years. [3][1] ”

A Muslim site writes:

“ This passage was revealed after the defeat of Romans before the Persians, this took place in 614-15 A.D. For the next seven years, Romans were losing their cities to the Persians and there were no way to predict the Romans would stand up again. In 622, Emperor Heraclius transported his army through the Aegean Sea and unexpectedly defeated the Persian army in the decisive battle of Issus. So, the prophecy indeed came true and Romans became victorious after 7 years. This victory was not transient, Romans moved forward and restored all what they had lost and launched their campaign toward the heart of Persia.
• • •

the prophecy talked about Romans being permanently victorious after their defeat within 3-9 years and this did take place as the Qur'an said. The extension of this victory is irrelevant to the prophecy, yet it proved that the victory was permanent as the Qur'an said.

• • •

It is noteworthy that the progressive Roman victory in 624 was synchronous with Muslims' victory over Pagans in Badr battle and this is the fulfillment of the second part of the prophecy that reads "On that day shall the Believers rejoice with the victory of God. He helps whom He wills.[1]

 ”

[edit] Non-Muslim criticism

Karl Gottlieb Pfander, a 19th century non-Muslim Islamic scholar writes:

“ But Al-Baizawi shatters the whole argument of the Muslims by informing us of certain varied readings in these verses of Suratu'r Rum. He tells us that some read (Arabic text appears here) instead of the usual (Arabic text appears here) and (Arabic text appears here) instead of (Arabic text appears here). The rendering will then be: 'The Byzantines have conquered in the nearest part of the land, and they shall be defeated in a small number of years'. If this be the correct reading, the whole story about Abu Bakr's bet with Ubai must be a fable, since Ubai was dead long before the Muslims began to defeat the Byzantines, and even long before the victories which Heraclius won over the Persians. This shows how unreliable such Traditions are. The explanation which Al Baizawi gives is, that the Byzantines became conquerors of 'the well-watered land of Syria' (Arabic text appears here) and that the passage predicted that the Muslims would soon overcome them. If this is the meaning, the Tradition which records the 'descent' of the verses about six years before the Hijrah must be wrong, and the passage must belong to A.H. 6 at earliest. It is clear that, as the vowel points were not used when the Qur-an was first written down in Cufic letters, no one can be certain which of the two readings is right. We have seen that there is so much uncertainty about (1) the date at which the verses were 'sent down', (2) the correct reading, and (3) the meaning, that it is quite impossible to show that the passage contains a prophecy which was fulfilled. Hence, it cannot be considered to be a proof of Muhammad's prophetic office."[4] ”

<[5]

Some non-Muslims argue that the hadith makes the prophesy false as it did not come to pass within 9 years.[6][7]<[5][8]

[edit] Muslim response

This resulted in rebuttals from Muslims. [9][1]

The historical context does not fit well with the unattested reading which reverses the prediction, or even gives equal weight to either readings. Such a change - to make the verse read "And after their defeat they will be defeated" is difficult to consider a prediction/prophecy. Nor the promise that the believers would be happy then can be reconciled with that reading.

A Muslim site writes:

“

So, when they cannot refute the prophecy, they claim that Muslims fabricated it. Very convenient!

The Qur’an was first orally transmitted by hundreds of reciters, this means that no one could change the meaning while others are asleep because other reciters of the Qur’an would quickly recognize the flaw. This is not the case with written transmission that is more liable to corruption in absence of memorization. This oral transmission is still present until now and there are millions of Muslims who memorize the Qur’an as first recited by the Prophet (peace be upon him).

• • •

Another noteworthy point is that Al-Baidawi affirmed the prophecy of Roman victory over Persians in his commentary, page 534, and said it is among signs of his truthfulness. So, how come he is quoted to say the opposite?! Is it a widespread practice among Christian missionaries?

Concerning the last comment about Muslims unable to be confident about the accurate recitation, conditions were formulated by the scholars of the Qur'anic recitation to facilitate critical analysis of the recitations. For any given recitation to be accepted as authentic (Sahih), it had to fulfill three conditions and if any of the conditions were missing such a recitation was classified as Shâdhdh (unusual).

  • The first condition was that the recitation has an authentic chain of narration in which the chain of narrators was continuous, the narrators were all known to be righteous and they were all known to possess good memories. It was also required that the recitation be conveyed by a large number of narrators on each level of the chain of narration below the level of Sahaabah (the condition of Tawaatur). Narrations which had authentic chains but lacked the condition of Tawaatur were accepted as explanations (Tafseer) of the Sahaabah but were not considered as methods of reciting the Qur'an. As for the narrations which did not even have an authentic chain of narration, they were classified as Baatil (false) and rejected totally.
  • The second condition was that the variations in recitations match known Arabic grammatical constructions. Unusual constructions could be verified by their existence in passages of pre-Islamic prose or poetry.
  • The third condition required the recitation to coincide with the script of one of the copies of the Qur'an distributed during the era of Caliph ‘Uthmân. Hence differences which result from dot placement (i.e., ta'lamoon and ya'lamoon) are considered acceptable provided the other conditions are met. A recitation of a construction for which no evidence could be found would be classified Shaadhdh. This classification did not mean that all aspects of the recitation was considered Shaadhdh. it only meant that the unverified constructions were considered Shaadhdh.(1)

This being the case, we can confidently say that the authentic recitation is the one universally accepted by all Muslim scholars and in perfect harmony with authentic Islamic traditions.

Before moving on I’d like to make a little comment on Pfander, a 19th century leader of the Christian missionaries to India while it was under the occupation of the British, who is quoted by Mr. Shamoun not realizing that during his lifetime his book was refuted in detail by a number of Muslim scholars such as Al-Kairanvi Al-Hindi in his book[10]"Izhar ul Haqq" which has been translated into English and is widely available today.

Pfander was invited to a five day public debate in Agra India with Al-Kairanvi which has been preserved for posterity in the Indian archives. The debate was originally scheduled to continue for five days and to discuss five different topics (tampering, abrogation, the Trinity, the origins of the Qur'an, and the prophethood of Muhammad, peace be upon him). However, after only two days, the day the issue of the Trinity was to be discussed, Pfander withdrew from this public debate refusing to continue. Al-Kairanvi was subsequently so severely persecuted by the occupying British forces that he was forced to flee the country. This is how such men managed to 'prove' their case and these are the sorts of men whom people regard as champions of Islam bashing and quoted by many authors.

• • •

Concerning the Qur’anic passage under discussion, all Muslim scholars accept the famous reading as the most authentic one. Imam At-Tabari and Imam Al-Qurtubi have mentioned both readings in their commentaries and proved the famous reading to be the most authentic and reliable according to the criteria mentioned before. Even Imam Al-Baidawi did not approve the eccentric reading; he just mentioned it after his detailed commentary on the authentic one.

• • •

...did not provide the evidence that the prophecy is fabricated in the first place. Presence of two variant reading does not disprove the prophecy unless you show that the famous reading is the unreliable one. He stopped at the stage of acknowledging the presence of two readings and ignored the efforts of Muslim scholars who studied the isnad and the manuscripts to recognize the reliable authentic reading from the eccentric one. So, in order to be brief I demand Mr. Shamoun to bring the proof -other than his conjecture and anti-Islamic zeal- that the famous reading is unreliable. [1]

 ”

[edit] Timeline of relevant events

Year Roman-Persian events[11] Arabian events
602 AD (20 BH) Byzantine Emperor Mauricius is murdered by Phocas. Sassanid King Khosrau II reopens war against the Roman (Byzantine) Empire.
608 AD (14 BH) Persian armies, after plundering Syria and Asia Minor, advance on Chalcedon.
610 AD (12 BH) Heraclius overthrows Phocas and becomes Emperor.
613 AD (9 BH) Persian armies take Damascus.
614 AD (8 BH) Persian armies take Jerusalem and capture the True Cross. Migration to Abyssinia [12]
615 AD (7 BH) Traditional Muslim date of the Sura al-Rum.
619 AD (4 BH) Persians capture Egypt. Muhammad's Year of Sorrow
622 AD (1 AH) Emperor Heraclius takes the field and defeats Persians in the Battle of Issus. Muhammad's emigrates to Medina, beginning of Muslim calendar
624 AD (2 AH) Heraclius advances into northern Media.[3] Battle of Badr, Muslims victory over Meccan army[1]
625 AD (3 AH) Battle of Uhud, Meccan victory over Muslim army[1]
626 AD (4 AH) Heraclius fights in Lazistan (Colchis), while Persians and Awars unsuccessfully besiege Constantinople.
627 AD (5 AH) Heraclius defeats the Persian army in the Battle of Nineveh and advances towards Ctesiphon. Battle of the Trench: Meccans unsuccessfully besiege Medina.
628 AD (6 AH) Khosrau II flees from internal rebellion and is murdered in February, while the Romans retake Syria. Khosrau's successor Kavadh II proposes peace with the Romans. Treaty of Hudaybiyyah between Muslims and Meccans[13].
629 AD (7 AH) Peace negotiations are concluded in June, Persians yielding Syria and Egypt and returning the True Cross.[14]. The first pilgrimage of Muslims to the Ka'ba.
632 AD (8 AH) Heraclius visits Jerusalem as a pilgrim and restores the True Cross, marking the conclusive nature of the Roman victory.[14]. Conquest of Mecca: Muslim force under Muhammad enters Mecca unopposed, decisive Muslim victory.
632 AD (10 AH) Death of Muhammad
636 AD (14 AH)
Arabs capture Syria and Palestine

[edit] References

  1. ^ a b c d e f g h Hesham Azmy, Exposing Fallacies of "Muhammad’s False Prophecies"
  2. ^ Syed Maududi's Commentary for Surah #30
  3. ^ a b Abdullah Yusuf Ali used Edward Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, A. J. Butler's Arab conquest of Egypt (Oxford, 1902) and others as references.
  4. ^ Mizan al-Haqq, revised and enlarged by W. St. Clair Tisdall (Light of Life P.O. Box 18, A-9503, Villach Austria), 279-280
  5. ^ a b Sam Shamoun: Muhammad's False Prophecies
  6. ^ Dr. William Campbell: Muhammad's Prophethood
  7. ^ Sam Shamoun: Surat Ar-Rum Revisited
  8. ^ Gerhard Nehls: Proofs of the prophethood of Mohammed
  9. ^ Sami Zaatari: Rebuttal to Sam Shamoun
  10. ^ Izhar ul Haqq by al-Kaiwanvi: Refuting Christianity إظهار الحق للهندي
  11. ^ in parts based on http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/romans.html
  12. ^ http://www.anwary-islam.com/prophet-life/holly-p-7.htm
  13. ^ Tafsir ibn Kathir [1]
  14. ^ a b William Montgomery Watt, Muhammad at Medina

[edit] See also

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../h/a/d/Hadith_of_the_prediction_in_Sura_al-Rum_1fc1.html"