Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

Dissertation Cover Sheet

● Please complete and insert this form as the first page of your dissertation
● Submit your work with this completed coversheet
● Make sure you keep a soft copy of your assignment

Student and Course Details

Full Name Asim Zahoor

Course Title BA Islamic Studies

Dissertation Details

Module Code BISA 600

Name of Tutor Dr Fella Lahmar
Due date 1st June 2020
Dissertation title Between Deism and Islam: Exploring the Qur’anic defence of the concept of
revelation, with specific reference to Qur’an 6:91-4
Word count 9800

Student’s signature: A.Zahoor

All forms of plagiarism, cheating and unauthorized collusion are regarded seriously by the Markfield
Institute of Higher Education and could result in penalties including failure in the unit and possible exclusion
from the Institute. If you are in doubt, please read the following web page.

Student’s Declaration:

By submitting this assignment I SIGNAL & DECLARE my knowledge and agreement to the following: -Except
where I have indicated, the work I am submitting in this dissertation is my own work and has not been
submitted for assessment in another unit or for any other purpose. This work conforms to the instructions and
submission guidelines as contained in the assessment briefing and the module guide respectively. This
submission complies with MIHE’s policies regarding plagiarism, cheating and collusion. I acknowledge and
agree that the assessor of this assignment may, for the purpose of assessing this assignment:

● Reproduce this assignment and provide a copy to another academic staff member; and/or
● Communicate a copy of this assignment to a plagiarism-checking service. This web-based service will
retain a copy of this work for subsequent plagiarism checking, but has a legal agreement with the Institute
that it will not share or reproduce it in any form.

I have retained a soft copy of this assignment for my own records Y / N

Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

Markfield Institute of Higher Education

Between Deism and Islam: Exploring the Qur’anic

defence of the concept of revelation, with specific
reference to Qur’an 6:91-4

Student: Asim Zahoor

Supervisor: Dr Fella Lahmar

1st June 2020

Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

Abstract

This dissertation explores the arguments made in the Qur’an in defense of revelation, more
specifically it shall focus upon one particular passage, which is Qur’an 6:91-94. The passage opens up
with a denunciation of those who would deny revelation, in what represents one of the most explicit
criticism of Deism found in the Qur’an, this is followed by a series of response in defense of
revelation, the aim of this paper is to explore the arguments being made and how they attempt to
defend the concept of revelation.

As well as textual analysis of the verse to identify the potential arguments that are being made in a
given passage, recourse to works of exegesis are also made to further examine what arguments in
defense of revelation are being made, of the various opinions, the paper seeks to select the
strongest interpretation following analysis. In addition other passages of the Qur’an with similar
connotations to Qur’an 6:91-4 are explored to further enhance the understanding of the Qur’anic
arguments being made.

The key findings of the paper identify a number of arguments made including the idea that divine
providence would dictate the presence of revelation, the precedent of ancient revelations of the
past vindicating such notion of divine providence, the corruption of the previous scriptures
necessitating a new revelation, that is the Qur’an. Qur’an 6:92 declares the authenticity of the
Qur’anic claim to divine origin by appealing to the content of the Qur’an, which is described in an
attempt to show the Qur’an as bearing the hallmarks of revelation. Finally Qur’an 6:93 declares
condemnation of those who would fabricate revelation, it is argued in this paper that it would not
seem far-fetched that the Qur’an does this in order to bolster Muhammad’s claim to Prophethood,
by having him declare condemnation upon one who would claim falsely Prophethood, this is shown
as having corollaries with other passages of the Qur’an.
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

Introduction
Islam bears an interesting relationship to Deism in light of its similarities, Lord Herbert of Cherbury
deemed the father of Deism highlighted five common notions to Deism (Byrne 2013; Wigelsworth
2009; Piland 2011),

1) Belief in God

2) God is to be worshipped

3) Virtue serves as the primary means to worship God

4) Vice and Sins must be expiated through repentance

5) There is reward and punishment in the afterlife

These doctrines do not conflict but can be seen as corresponding to the fundamental ideas of Islam,
no surprise then that Napoleon Bonaparte in a bid to placate the newly conquered territory of Egypt,
declared himself and France as having turned Deist, and hence bearing the fundamental beliefs in
Islam, bore legitimacy to rule (Cole 2007). The Prophet himself declared the entry of paradise of he
who rejected all religions bearing only the truth of one God, unlike his counterparts, Zayd b ‘Amr b
Nawfal described as one of the ḥunafā’ (monotheists) seeking true religion in rejection of paganism,
Zayd did not subscribe to any particular religion (Ibn Hishām 2009), yet when the Prophet was asked
about him, he declared him as being ‘gathered as a nation of his own, between me and Jesus the son
of Mary’ (Ashqar 2005 p.454).

Yet Deism bears one fundamental difference to Islam in its rejection of revelation, rather reason is
the prime means by which one is to be guided to truth, (Hussaini 2016), In 2018 a number of articles
were published discussing the rise of Deism in the Muslim World (BBC NEWS 2018; Akyol 2018), this
development has even merited the attention of the highest level of government, in Turkey,
President Erdogan responded to studies highlighting the rise of Deism amongst Muslim youth as
‘unacceptable’ (Kulsoy 2018) and the Grand Mufti, Ali Erbas, warned students on the ‘dangers’ of
Deism as a conduit to Atheism (Hurriyet 2018). Professor Murat Belgi declared sensationally that half
the Turkish population were in fact Deists on account of their ignorance of religion and the
secularism of its people (Kulsoy 2018), although such figures admittedly represent gross
exaggeration, it does go to emphasize the presence of this new trend.

Although reports seemingly are restricted to Turkey which has a history of militant secularism, the
issue of modernity and Deism does not linger behind other Muslim countries, in fact Akyol (2018) in
his article A New Secularism is Appearing in Islam highlights this as a trend not restricted to Turkey,
this has been affirmed by journalist Ismail Azzam (2019). Hussaini (2016) writes that Deism exist
wherever there exists a belief that God can be proven rationally accompanied by a lack of
confidence in revelation.

Amid the debates in the Muslim World, the following work shall seek to explore passage in the
Qur’an (Qur’an 6:91-4) which opens with a curious reference to Deism,

‘They have no grasp of God’s true measure when they say, ‘God has sent nothing down to a mere
mortal….’ (Qur’an 6:91)

What follows are a number of points and arguments,

Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

‘Say, ‘Who was it who sent down the Scripture, which Moses brought as a light and a guide to
people, which you made into separate sheets, showing some but hiding many? You were taught
things that neither you nor your forefathers had known.’ Say, ‘God [sent it down],’ then leave them
engrossed in their vain talk’ (Qur’an 6:91)

‘This is a blessed Scripture that We have sent down to confirm what came before it and for you to
warn the Mother of Cities and all around it. Those who believe in the Hereafter believe in this
Scripture, and do not neglect their prayers.’ (Qur’an 6:92)

‘Who could be more wicked than someone who invents a lie against God, or claims, ‘A revelation has
come to me,’ when no revelation has been sent to him, or says, ‘I too can reveal something equal to
God’s revelation’? If you could only see the wicked in their death agonies, as the angels stretch out
their hands [to them], saying, ‘Give up your souls. Today you will be repaid with a humiliating
punishment for saying false things about God and for arrogantly rejecting His revelations.’ (Qur’an
6:93).

The work aims to explore the various arguments that continue throughout the passages in defense
of revelation, as a result not only the presentation of Qur’an’s own defense of revelation shall be
featured, but also Islam’s relation and attitude to the rejection of revelation and understanding of
the relationship between reason and revelation in light of this passage.
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

Literature Review
Revelation has been advocated by its supporters as being necessary in order to discern between
what is correct from that which is false, it is argued that only God who created this universe can
arbitrate in the differences that exist (Green 2011), the following two areas are said to be the
domain of revelation (Ibid),

A) Metaphysical questions such as what will occur after death? And if God exists what is the purpose
of life? These types of question it is argued, cannot be answered by humans except that it will
represent mere speculation, different opinions can adduced but none can guarantee its certainty,
only the creator can know why humans have been created and what is to transpire after death with
certainty hence there exists a need for God to announce the answers.

B) Morality is subjective when articulated by humans but God is free of subjectivity and hence he can
guarantee the only certainty, as to what is truly ethical and what is not.

A chief argument in advocacy of the necessity of revelation is the notion that generations of
philosophers reliant upon reason alone had failed to bring about a consensus on truth (Mills 2015:
Nadwī 1979)

However not all Muslim scholars believed in a total dependency in revelation, Interestingly Richard C
Martin’s (et al) Defenders of Reason in Islam (1997) highlights the similarities between Deists and
Muslim rationalists such as the Mu’tazilites who too believed that general religious beliefs such as
the common notions of Deism (to be discussed later) and general ethics could be discerned through
reason, this was also expressed by more orthodox theologian al Māturīdī (el Gallī 1976). In true Deist
fashion the last great Mu’tazilite thinker Qāḍī ‘Abd al Jabbār believed that nature’s law remained
immutable so people may derive guidance from the universe around them and the nature of God
(although prophetic miracles were said to be excluded from this general rule; Martin 1997), however
Martin (1997) mentions that this gave the troubling impression that revelation is unnecessary, a
position former Mu’tazilites such as Ibn Rāwandī adopted stating reason to be the sole arbiter of
truth. In response to this the Mu’tazilites argued that although general metaphysical and ethical
truths could be discerned simply by reason, particular details such as the instruction of the five daily
prayers or the description of the hereafter could only be accessed through revelation (Ibid).
Revelation also served to affirm (taqrīr) the rational inferences drawn to understand the general
precepts of truth. al Māturīdī argued that reason could also lead a person to disbelieve in God on the
conviction that a person may have believe no evidence exists, similarly a person can become
indifferent to religious truths on the basis of reason, he thus also provides a place for revelation to
work through the quagmire (el Gallī 1976), on ethics al Māturīdī argued that it could be derived via
reason, ethics are divided into two types, one which is absolute such as injustice and another which
can be permissible under certain circumstances such as killing (in a just war scenario), on this he says
revelation serves to determine the grey areas where a person’s influences and nature could lead him
to an alternative conclusion, as in the case of the vegan whose nature doesn’t allow him to eat
animals, al Māturīdī argued that a person’s nature is unreliable and can change as a wild animal can
become domesticated, but he also believed that should people be left alone without external
influences, they would come to believe in the primordial beliefs such as God’s existence and life
after death, what is fascinating is that al Māturīdī shows a similarity to Mu’tazilite rationalism freely
interpreting the Qur’an according to its most rational implication and using aḥādīth with great
paucity, al Māturīdī is on record for rejecting solitary prophetic traditions which do not accord with
reason and in his Kitāb al Tawḥīd he only uses 6 aḥādīth as evidence, mostly using Qur’an and reason
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

as a basis for his creed, this is similar to the same skepticism hosted by Mu’tazilite who only allow
solitary reports to be used for furū’ issues (non-creedal matters; Martin 1997).

On the other hand were the traditionalist and less rationalist Ash’arites, Ibn Taymiyyah (a
traditionalist figure) however did cite sources of truth beyond revelation such as the the fiṭrah
(innate disposition), an example of intuition being the feeling that God must be above the skies (Kazi
2013), however for him and the traditionalists revelation was supreme, as truth was independent of
whether a person’s reason enabled him to find it or not, reason could not clash with the literal text
of revelation (Ibid). On the contrary although the Ash’arites believed that anthropomorphic
expressions of God in the Qur’an were to be interpreted figuratively due to rational evidence, they
were less confident in the role of reason in deriving ethics, for them ethics remained synonymous to
obedience to God and thus beyond the purview of reason and dependent upon revelation (el Gallī
1976).

Arguing the contrary of the necessity of revelation are the Deists, which host figures such as Ibn
Rāwandī (Martin 1997) and al Ma’arrī (Lindstedt 2011) in the medieval Middle East to figures such as
Thomas Paine in the US (Piland 2011) and Thomas Morgan in Britain (Wiggelsworth 2009). Criticism
of revelation featured the idea that they served a redundant function, whatever revelation contains
of reason it was argued, can be understood independently by means of reason, and whatever cannot
be understood by means of reason cannot oblige men to believe. Tindal (Ibid) asserted that God in
his goodness (which is proved in him not being a jealous God in view of his omnipotence) will not
require us to believe more than we can conceive of, hence if revelation did occur it could only offer
us matters which could be understood independently of reason anyhow, revelation he says is
redundant as it too was subject to reason and hence reason alone was the sole guide of man. Other
arguments included Thomas Paine’s assertion that revelation could only be known by the recipient
(the prophet himself), whereas it represented mere hearsay for the rest of mankind (the same was
argued by Elihu Palmer; Piland 2011), In response to Christian theologians who argued that reason is
insufficient, Deists such as Ethan Allen argued the folly of using reason to argue against reason.
Herbert of Churbury argued that God’s universal providence would not rely upon local revelations to
guide some people to the exclusion of others, there is to exist a universal means to access truth, this
can only be viewed as the role of reason, the surest way to understand truths (Byrne 2013). These
contentions primarily serve to argue the very institution of revelation as being incoherent and thus
do not restrict the criticisms to any one particular religion but all who hold revelation as an integral
part of their creed.

Deists argued that religious truths could be discerned through reason instead, and hence made men
independent of revelation (Hussaini 2016), In this respect Lord Herbert of Cherbury described as the
‘father of Deism’ (Byrne 2013; Wigelsworth 2009; Piland 2011), advocated five common notions
which he thought to be rational truths,

1) Belief in God

2) God is to be worshipped

3) Virtue serves as the primary means to worship God

4) Vice and Sins must be expiated through repentance

5) There is reward and punishment in the afterlife

On the existence of God, Deists like Ethan Allen and Benjamin Franklin advanced rational evidence
for the existence of God, they argued that nothing can come from nothing and thus the universe
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

must have had a cause to bring it from its non-existence (Piland 2011). It was also believed that the
attributes and purpose of God could be discerned in reason and nature, for instance God’s good will
for humanity could be discerned by understanding his omnipotence, being need free of his creation
God does not envy humanity but instead seeks their happiness argued Tindal, looking at nature said
Collins served as a surer means than revelation to identify the attributes of God such as his
omnipotence over us (Wigelsworth 2009). Likewise our desire for everlasting life as opposed to an
eternal nothingness has been molded in to us by God to remind us of a life beyond this, the
existence of morality and free will to exercise it is also indicative of a God who seeks for us to live a
moral life (Byrne 2013). Natural theology was to take the place of revealed religion (Ibid).

In the same vein Deists see reason and nature as the means by which ethical truths too are drawn
(Lucci 2016 p.2; Betts 1984 p.17), Chubbs for example asserted that morality is found ‘in the nature
of things’ which betrays the idea that humanity is imbued with inherent goodness, Rousseau argued
that primitive humans who were more in touch with their natures displayed greater benevolence
and morality (his theory of noble savages; Grove 1998) and Voltaire equally expressed that morality
was to be found in nature not scripture (Betts 1984). In essence Deists argue that morality which is
absolute and universal could be discovered.

The resurgence of Deism once again but in the Muslim World means the topic of revelation, its
necessity or redundancy, modernity, the role of religion, and the sufficiency of reason etc. gives new
stock to these discussions to surface, particularly the idea that revelation is not required or has
never occurred, whilst the debate rages on, the aim of this research is to explore the arguments in
defense of revelation found in Qur’an 6:91-4, the reason for this is that the passage itself seems to
represent the only explicit rejection of Deism, and features a series of responses in defense of the
idea of revelation, this provides rich material for anyone wanting to understand the Qur’anic
paradigm to discussions that as has been mentioned already, bear great relevance today. The paper
would seek to understand what type of arguments are being employed in defense of revelation, and
as to how they serve to defense the concept of revelation. The presence of such a theologically
charged passage that touches upon the discussions being held in the modern world, would make it
difficult for any academic or student of the Qur’an to overlook, and would provide insight in
understanding the Qur’an’s and by extension the Islamic attitude to revelation and reason, as well as
inform the arguments found in Islamic quarters in defense of revelation, this can also serve an
interest for Deists interested in Muslim polemics, as well as contribute to academia by providing
insight as to how the Qur’an’s attitude to Deism (given the presence of such a passage), the Qur’an’s
approach to the concept of revelation, and its relation to reason.
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

Methodology
The method employed in this study shall begin with a textual analysis of Verses 91-94 in Chapter 6,
of the Qur’an, specifically with respect to the points and arguments advanced in defending the
concept of revelation. The choice to sample these verses specifically has been highlighted above,
that is in light of its explicit denunciation of those who reject revelation followed by a series of
arguments made in favour of revelation, this is hoped to provide rich material to understand how
the Qur’an defends the concept of revelation as well as its own claim to divine origin.

Analysis shall first begin with a presentation of the apparent argument being made, this will however
suffer the issue of subjectivity (in light of the qualitative nature of the work), in order to remove this
issue, an effort to provide multiple interpretations will be presented, this shall be done with the aim
to encompass the different arguments that can be understood from the verse, by which a thorough
analysis of the Qur’anic defence of revelation in the relevant passages are achieved.

Recourse shall also be made to works of exegesis to explore the understanding of scholars with
respect to the relevant verses, this will be done in order to aid the attempt made in this research to
capture the potentially different perspectives in understanding the Qur’anic defence in the verses,
however works of exegesis shall only be employed where relevant such as supporting conclusions
made in the course of this research when needed, or adding perspective, such as a report from early
authorities describing the context of a verse or an alternative interpretation .

The works of exegesis used to aid the research shall include, al Tabarī’s Jāmi’ al Bayān ‘an Ta’wīl al
Qur’ān, al Tabarī represents one of the oldest comprehensive work of exegesis, although admittedly
it was penned close to 300 years after the revelation of the Qur’an, it enjoys the primacy of being
one of the earliest works on tafsīr (Berg 2000), part of its utility is its chains of reports going back to
early authorities on the verses of the Qur’an, although these reports are often conflicting it often
features Tabarī’s own analysis of the range of opinions present as well as his reasoning,
complementary to this work of exegesis is the work of Ibn Kathīr in his Tafsīr al Qur’ān al ‘Aẓīm, this
work is based on al Tabarī but is further refined in removing reports deemed to be of weak authority
and proving greater critical analysis of al Tabarī’s work, at times agreeing with supporting evidence
the conclusion of al Tabarī and likewise disagreeing with him at times with evidence (Ibid), Ibn
Kathīr’s work also has the added benefit of enabling a thematic analysis of the verses in discussion,
Ibn Kathīr will often bring verses related to the passage which enable greater understanding of the
Qur’anic paradigm, this is as per his methodology which is described in the introduction of his
exegesis (Ibn Kathīr 2010). Fakhr al Dīn al Rāzī’s work entitled al Tafsīr al ‘Aẓīm (also alternatively
known as Mafātīḥ’ al Ghayb) represent something of a must in understanding the intellectual
discourse of the Qur’ān, this is in view of al Rāzī’s own intellectual background as an Ash’arite
theologian and affiliation to philosophy, typically al Rāzī would cite a passage in the Qur’an and
explicate the intellectual arguments present as well as objections, thereafter he would provide
responses (Ceylan 1980), given the intellectual nature of the exegesis corresponds with the aims of
this research, that is to explicate the Qur’anic arguments found in Qur’an 6:91-4, al Rāzī’s work is
hoped to provide useful. Other works of exegesis that shall be used include al Māturīdī’s Ta’wīlāt Ahl
al Sunnah, Ibn ‘Ashūr’s al Taḥ’rīr wal Tanwīr as well as Rashīd Riḍā’s Tafsīr al Manār. Al Māturīdī’s
work has the benefit of representing the Māturīdite School whose rationalism is far greater than that
of the Ash’arites, this in view of al Māturīdī’s own belief that reason is able to discern right from
wrong even in ethics, as such they represent a view on reason close to Deism (el Gallī 1976), similarly
the Mu’tazilite view would be assessed via the medium of Zamaksharī’s work al Kash’shāf due to
their interesting position of holding the primacy of reason but also revelation (Martin 1997). Modern
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

works such as Ibn ‘Ashūr’s al Taḥ’rīr wal Tanwīr and Rashīd Riḍā’s Tafsīr al Manār shall also be
consulted, both represent prominent figures in exegesis literature who had to come to terms with
the issue of modernity and exposure to influential Western ideals, Ibn ‘Ashūr’s work emphasizes the
use of reason (ra’y) in understanding the Qur’an, this is embodied in his maqāṣid approach (where
he looks at the objectives/rationale of the laws as opposed to its letter), in this pursuit even the
sanction of divorce in the Qur’an is rationalized, he also rejected the majority of traditions seeking to
explain the causes of revelation as fabricated, however his work is also characterized by a heavy
emphasis on the Arabic language, this is to ensure arbitrary reasoning is not allowed to creep into
the hermeneutics of the Qur’an (Nafi 2005). By contrast Rashīd Ridā’s aim was more single minded in
its attempt to produce an understanding of the Qur’an, the fundamental source of Muslims, as being
in accord with the more modernistic trend found in the Muslim world (Ibid), given the exposure of
Ibn ‘Ashur and Rashid Rida to the influence of modernity which continues into this day in the Muslim
World, their works shall provide useful given their views at times reflect a departure from traditional
understanding of certain verse (Nafi’ 2005; Jomier & Ende 2012).

The exegesis have been selected are either mainly rationalistic in character or primarily use reports
from earlier authorities, the rationalist works of exegesis range from Sunni and non-Sunni Mu’tazlite
literature, the reason for the general openness to rationalist works is due to the interest of such
works to intellectual discussions, it is hoped that they shall provide stock for intellectual nuances and
discussions to understand how the Qur’an defends revelation, as for works focusing on āthār
(reports), then they have adopted to add insight into the understanding of the earliest authorities
with respect to the relevant verses, however such exegesis have been restricted to Sunni works for
the sake of brevity, this is because Sunni sources often themselves present conflicting reports from
early authorities (Berg 2000) which provides vast scope for discussion (Sunni works being preferred
for selection due to the greater influence of such traditions on Muslims, this is in contrast to other
denominations who enjoy less demographic representation).

The principle medium by which these works of exegesis shall be accessed is through the Prince Ghazi
trust for Qur’anic thought online database (greattafsirs.com), the site boasts an impressive collection
of 91 prominent works of exegesis belonging to various denominations and backgrounds (including
the ones selected for review). The user is only required to specify a particular verse of the Qur’an
and thereafter to choose the work of exegesis relevant to one’s research, thereafter other works of
exegesis can be accessed on the same verse. Given the relative ease of accessing all the works of
exegesis in one platform this software has been preferred. Wherever an opinion is mentioned on the
authority of an exegete pertaining to a particular verse, it is to be assumed that the information has
been located in the Prince Ghazi database unless otherwise mentioned, for example if it is said
regarding a particular passage in Qur’an 6:92, ‘Tabari says’, readers are to assume the information
on Tabari’s view is to be located in the database.

Certain corollaries found elsewhere in the Qur’an (other than Qur’an 6:91-4) which correspond to
the basic themes of the arguments or message being articulated in Qur’an 6:91-4 will also be
explored, this will be done in an effort to aid understanding of a Qur’anic argument by finding
parallels of the same or similar points being made in other verses. By observing parallels, greater
understanding and context of the points being made in a verse shall come to light. As has been
mentioned previously the adoption of Ibn Kathīr’s exegesis has the benefit of serving this purpose in
his constant habit of presenting corollaries of a verse found elsewhere, this has a utility above using
software to enter keywords similar to the ones found in the passage of interest, as a similar point
may be present elsewhere in the Qur’an but may not bear the same exact wording. However usage
of software to type in keywords shall also be employed, this is to ensure the best possible attempt in
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

finding corollaries to Qur’anic arguments and points present in a particular passage, also search
engines allow users with no extensive experience of the Qur’an to access similar words or phrases
found elsewhere in the Qur’an with ease. Only Arabic software shall be used, as an example in order
to understand what the Qur’an means by wamā qadarullāha (‘they have no grasp of God’s true
measure…’; Qur’an 6:91) as a point against the rejection of revelation, other verses with the same
wording in Arabic shall be explored, similarly where the Qur’an mentions that it ‘confirms what is
before it’ (‘muṣaddiq limā bayna yadayh’: Qur’an 6:92) other passages with the same Arabic wording
will be utilized, this is because English translators often vary in their translations, and the same
translator may translate the same Arabic wording differently in another context, as such the task of
finding similar Qur’anic arguments or phrases elsewhere in the Qur’an through English software such
as Qur’an Explorer may prove difficult, and result in some verses being missed out, by contrast
Arabic software do not suffer the discrepancies of languages foreign to the Qur’an, rather one may
enter the precise Arabic wording or phrase found in the Qur’an and receive a number of entries
which bear the same wording, without having to worry about variations in translation. The software
to be employed is eQuran.me, it is a simple platform where users are to type in the relevant phrases
or words into the entry field, thereafter results are produced in order of relevance. However
recourse to search engines to find corollary passages elsewhere in the Qur’an shall only be done
where relevant, for example if the meaning or implication is conflicting, or multiple interpretations
exist whereby exploring similar passages elsewhere in the Qur’an may explicate the passage of
interest.

Not too much emphasis is required on the translation of the Qur’an used given that this research
goes beyond translation, but rather would seek to analyse the Qur’an partly through direct access to
the Arabic medium via exegesis. However all translations of the Qur’an in the English medium shall
be through Professor Abdel Haleem’s translation of the Qur’an published by Oxford University Press,
the motivation for this decision lies in Professor Abdel Haleem’s own erudite background which has
seen him graduate from the most prominent theological seminaries in the Muslim World, as well as
that of the most prominent Western institutes, this includes his graduation from al Az’har in Egypt as
well as Cambridge University, teaching in respected institutes since 1966 (Abdel Haleem 2005), this
academic bearing accompanied with classical expertise is expected to give Abdel Haleem distinction
over other translators. By far the most common English translation is Sahih International which was
authored by three American women who converted to Islam in the 1980s (Zavadski 2017), although
it is much simpler to read than the archaic language utilized by the likes of Yusuf Ali, the authors
have themselves expressed limitations due to their non-scholarly credentials (Ibid).
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

Analysis and Discussion

‘Athens and Jerusalem’ so the director of the World Union of Deists, Bob Johnson asserts, represent
two opposing forces, one representing the camp of reason to understand the truths of this life and
the other representing the camp of revelation which has nothing more to teach us beyond ‘nature’s
God’ (Johnson B n.d.), this sentiment has been echoed in the past by multiple Deist figures
(Wigelsworth 2009; Byrne 2013; Piland 2011) further to his Thomas Morgan argued that revelation
represented a redundant function as whatever of its content contained rational truths rendered us
independent of it whilst whatever of its content that was not accessible to reason rendered us un-
obliging to accept it (Ibid).

The opening passages of Qur’an 6:91 instead implies the idea that the very same ‘nature’s God’
would instead imply the existence of revelation,

‘They have no grasp of God’s true measure when they say, ‘God has sent nothing down to a mere
mortal….’ (Qur’an 6:91)

This passage has seems to indicate the notion that disbelief in the idea that God would send
revelation to guide humankind, reflects a deficiency in one’s judgement of God. However this
deficiency is understood in different ways, a report attributed to Ibn ‘Abbas in al-Tabarī’s exegesis
held the idea that those who expressed disbelief in revelation fell short of understanding God’s
power in sending revelation, thus according to this view those who denied revelation did so on the
basis that they did not believe God had the capacity to do so, the same report attributed to Ibn
‘Abbas is also said of another passage in the Qur’an (al Tabarī n.d.) which reads,

‘These people have no grasp of God’s true measure. On the Day of Resurrection, the whole earth
will be in His grip. The heavens will be rolled up in His right hand- Glory be to Him! He is far above
the partners they ascribe to Him!’ (Qur’an 39:67)

However the view that Qur’an 6:91 refers to an undermining of God’s omnipotence seems far-
fetched as the verse according to traditions (al-Tabarī n.d.) was either addressed to members of the
Jewish community who nominally uttered denial in revelation (this view seems to be weaker as will
be explained later), or it was addressed to the pagans of Makkah who did not believe in notions of
revelation from the onset, both of these communities in general held notions of God bearing great
powers, this being most obvious in Jewish tradition but also extended to the pagans of Makkah as
evidenced in the Qur’an (Qur’an 10:31, 23:86-9, 29:61), it would seem strange thus that these two
groups who viewed God as bearing the power to create the universe and its contents would deny his
ability to merely communicate with humans, furthermore the idea of God’s power is a major
premise utilized in the Qur’an to convince the pagans of the hereafter.

Significantly however Qur’an 6:91 itself seems only to indicate that the opponents of revelation
denied the occurrence of revelation, not the ability of it occurring, both Fakhr al Dīn al Rāzī and al
Tabarī bring reports to indicate that denial of revelation itself (without the question of God’s ability)
is being deemed as belittlement of God (similarly al Tabarī brings different interpretations for Qur’an
39:67). The most obvious explanation for this line of reasoning employed by the Qur’an seems to be
that by denying the occurrence of God aiding humans in discerning truths significant to their lives,
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

one is undermining God’s providence which would seek to provide for mankind, this would seem to
correspond with other verses of the Qur’an which draws a comparison between God ‘sending down’
(anzalnā) rain and God ‘sending down’ revelation (Qurtubi n.d: Qurtubi in his commentary of Qur’an
16:65 highlights this comparison), similarly it maybe that with the denial of revelation the wisdom of
God is given its full due, in that it assumes God created humankind only to abandon them as sentient
beings with questions but no clear answers.

This line of reasoning may give the impression that the Qur’an is a-rational in character as it
seemingly depends on undermining the capacity of reason to guide humans in order to advocate the
necessity of revelation. This view on the redundancy of reason does have its advocates among
Muslims whose argument consists of highlighting the inability of philosophy to come to a conclusion
on metaphysical and ethical truths (Nadwī 1976) and the consequent need for God to reveal these
truths to mankind (Green 2011). However this argument suffers from a self-defeating weakness, for
revelation is not vindicated by arguing against the efficacy of reason but rather a post-modern form
of skepticism that no truths or very few truths can be discerned, this in itself undermines the very
absolute claims made by religions including any rational premises used to justify the Qur’an as
revelation, it is for this reason Fakhr al Dīn al Rāzī awarded reason in his al Qā’idiah al Kulliyyah
(Universal Principle) a higher place to revelation given that revelation itself was built upon and
vindicated by reason (Kazi 2011).

Significantly the Qur’an itself makes copious use of rational arguments in its opposition to idol-
worship, frequently imploring the pagans to uphold reason in place of the traditions of their
ancestors, as well as utilizing logical and empirical arguments in advocacy of the existence of God,
monotheism and the hereafter, from this perspective it would seem that the Qur’an is closer to the
natural theology of Deists who argue creed on the basis of nature and reason than its own adherents
who argue the redundancy of reason.

Examples of the Qur’an employing rational arguments or āyāt (signs) as it is termed in the Qur’an is
listed below,

1) Existence of God: The Qur’an highlights the former non-existence of creation to argue the
presence of God in being the agent who brought creation from its non-existence to existence
(Qur’an 2:28), in another passage this point is driven further by showcasing the alternatives such as
self-creation of the universe, existence coming from nothing or the idea that the inhabitants of the
cosmos itself as its creator, implying rejection of all these postulates (Qur’an 52:35-36)

2) Monotheism: A frequent occurrence in the Qur’an includes the observation of creation to

highlight its creator’s omnipotence and superiority in contrast to the idols and men that are
worshipped (Qur’an 2:21-2, 27:60-4), furthermore the routinal workings of the universe and its
continuity (such as the constant alternation of the night and day and the reoccurrence of seasons)
reflect a harmony indicative of one will or one being behind the occurrences of the cosmos (Qur’an
21:22), the worship of idols is constantly criticized as irrational and by extension that of human
figures as created beings not equal to God.

3) Life after death: Numerous passages draw analogy from life giving rain which revives the barren
land as indicative of life after death not being some distant anticipation but a reality in our world
(Qur’an 22:5), the Qur’an describes the various human stages and different forms assumed from the
womb to the tomb as indicative of God’s ability to transform humans from death to life (Qur’an
22:5), analogy is also drawn that the God who brought existence from non-existence is more than
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

capable to bring the dead back to life (19:67, 30:27, 36:79) and also the justice of God in
discriminating between the righteous and the unrighteous in the next life (68:35).

Thus the Qur’an does not argue the redundancy of reason but in fact makes use of rational
arguments to substantiate the fundamentals of creed.

Qur’an 6:91 can thus be seen (in light of other passages in the Qur’an) as advocating a more
moderate position towards reason, instead of conflicting with reason, revelation is seen as an
extension of God’s providence by making manifest truths via the use of signs (āyāt), however a
question remains, in that if reason is sufficient why would the Qur’an argue that those who deny
revelation fall short of a good assessment of God? Especially if human reason is sufficient to account
for God’s providence and wisdom. It would seem in order to maintain the argument for revelation
on the basis of providence, one has to undermine the capacity of reason to justify that providence
dictates both reason and revelation to be granted to men in understanding truth, in this the writings
of al-Māturīdī prove useful who although asserted the power of human reason (In contrast to the
Ash’arite theological school who saw reason as more relative), yet justified the need for revelation
based on his view that although true creed was discernible through rational investigation, this is not
so obvious to people at first, in fact based on rational investigation people may conclude there exist
no evidence for God, or assume a general apathy to reason and conclude no truth is discernible and
one is to merely enjoy this life if one can afford to do so, similarly some may not feel any sense in
employing rational investigation to understand their lives, rather they choose to remain content with
prevailing traditions and norms (el Gallī 1976), in the face of such ignorance surrounding truth there
exists a need for revelation to guide mankind throughout the ages to bring them back to truths they
may have strayed from. This argument thus does not argue the redundancy of reason to advocate
the necessity of revelation, but the idea that rational truths may not be so obvious to people at first
despite the presence of reason, corroborating this view the Qur’an itself frequently criticizes the
idolaters as not employing reason (Qur’an 5:103, 29:63), sometimes the pagans of Arabia are
compared to cattle in their pursuit of tradition without rational scrutiny (Qur’an 25:44), more often
the Qur’an describes the pagans as an ignorant people (6:37, 6:111. 7:131, 7:187, 8:34, 10:55, 12:38,
12:40 etc.). The fact that the same Qur’an 6:91 describes the utility of revelation in the following
light, ‘You were taught things that neither you nor your forefathers had known’, corroborates the
idea that the Qur’an argues the prevalence of ignorance, confusion and falsehood as highlighting the
need for revelation not the redundancy of reason.

Interestingly this is an idea not altogether rejected by Deists, John Toland one of the more influential
British Deists argued that the role of Moses, Jesus and Muhammad in explicating certain ideas
brought humanity closer to ‘natural truths’ (Lucci 2016), similarly the World Union of Deists despite
their rejection of revelation or prophets, do advocate a principle akin to the Qur’an in their call for
members to proselytize the truth of Deism, the rationale being that although truth can be discerned
through reason, ignorance still prevails (https://www.deism.com/thinkact.htm).

The next part of the verse in Qur’an 6:91 responds to the claim that ‘God had not sent anything
down to any man’ with,

‘Say, ‘Who was it who sent down the Scripture, which Moses brought as a light and a guide to
people, which you made into separate sheets, showing some but hiding many? You (or ‘they’
according to one variant recital) were taught things that neither you nor your forefathers had
known.’ Say, ‘God [sent it down],’ then leave them engrossed in their vain talk (Qur’an 6:91).
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

On first glance it is not clear how the above passage serves to address those who deny revelation on
account of the fact that such people would not accept the Torah to be of divine origin, it is for this
reason a number of exegetes held the view that the people who are depicted as denying revelation
do not refer to the pagan Arabs but the Jews of Madinah, to this end a number of traditions are
brought, one holds the view that the Prophet addressed a Jewish scholar known as Mālik b al Sayf by
asking him whether the Torah contains condemnation of the fat scholar, given that Mālik himself
was an overweight religious scholar this question so enraged him that he denied another report has
it that it refers to the Jewish rabbi Fin’ḥāṣ who denied any revelation to have occurred to
Muhammad, another report has it that a group of Jews uttered denial in revelation when they
sought a sign from the Prophet who responded by giving precedents in Jewish history where signs
were denied revelation (Tabarī n.d.). Accordingly in response to this, Jewish denial of revelation is
met with the precedent of Moses and the Torah. However this narrative is contradicted by another
group of reports that indicate that it was the Arabs who were being addressed, this view was
supported by the likes of al Tabarī and Ibn Kathīr who acknowledging the reports that indicate it was
in response to the Jewish community, bring traditions to show that in fact the pagan Arabs were the
ones being addressed in this verse and show preference to these reports, this view does seem to
make the most sense for a number of reasons, firstly the reports that indicate it is in response to the
Jewish community are themselves contradictory, also denial in revelation itself was not a true
feature of the Jewish community (the report indicating that the verse was in response to Mālik b al
Sayf have the Jews scolding him), whereas the Qur’an constantly references the Arabs’ rejection of
prophet-hood, furthermore as al Tabarī and Ibn Kathīr indicate, the chapter of the Qur’an which
contains Qur’an 6:91 itself is described as Meccan and reflects its style, hence making the primary
audience the pagans, furthermore the verses previous to Qur’an 6:91 are themselves addressed to a
Pagan audience (Tabarī n.d, Ibn Kathr n.d.) . Fakhr al Dīn al Rāzī in his commentary does himself
question the suspect wisdom of the Qur’an, in recording for perpetuity the comments of an enraged
Jewish scholar (who did not even mean what he said).

However even if it is understood that the verse is in address to the pagan Arabs who denied
revelation, the question remains as to how the revelation of the Torah stands as proof against denial
in revelation, in this respect al-Tabarī and Ibn Kathīr seem to be in agreement that the response is a
general rejection of their narrative that no scripture had been sent in the past, Ibn Kathīr further
adds that the Pagans ‘and everyone else’ knew of the Torah being given to Moses from God (most
likely he means by this its attribution to God as Ibn Kathīr believes the verse to be addressed to the
Arabs on account of their rejection of revelation, as opposed to the Jews who believe in Mosaic
revelation), this view is shared by Ibn ‘Ashur and Rasḥīḍ Riḍā’. Thus the idea of citing Moses
according to these exegetes is to reject the confident assertion of the pagans in denying revelation
having ever occurred, furthermore the description of the Torah as ‘light and guidance’ so Rashīd Riḍā
argues, is due to its rejection of paganism in an era where polytheism and idol-worship was so
pervasive, thus bearing the hallmark of revelation in guiding humanity. However a more coherent
way of looking at the argument made in Qur’an 6:91 is to view it as building up expectation in God to
guide humanity from ignorance and finishes with the precedent of Moses to argue that the notion of
God guiding human beings far from reflecting a distant hope, is an expectation that has precedent
throughout history, this is corroborated by the Qur’an’s own affirmation elsewhere of numerous
scriptures such as the Psalms (Zabūr: Qur’an 21:105), Evangel (Injīl: Qur’an 5: 46-7), the scrolls of
Abraham (ṣuḥuf Ibrāhīm: Qur’an 87:19) and the notion that to every nation a prophet has been sent
(Qur’an 16:36), in fact the passages prior to Qur’an 6:91 list a series of prophets by name ought to
have been deputed by God (Qur’an 6:85-91). Perhaps Moses is cited more prominently in this verse
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

as Ibn ‘Ashūr mentions due to the greater exposure and familiarity of the Arabs to the Jews in
Arabia, as a community distinguished for their absolute monotheism.

Peculiarly after citing the revelation of Moses the Qur’an makes a discretionary remark in
condemning the Torah community of diving the scripture into smaller books, with the view of
enabling concealment of some tracts and disclosure of others, the idea being that revelation as
guidance which ought to be fully transparent Is being unfaithfully handled by its current recipients,
what exactly is being concealed is not made clear in the Qur’an, exegetes only speculate that it can
include the description of Muhammad or the punishment of stoning (Tabari n.d, Ibn Kathir n.d, al
Rāzī n.d, Zamaksharī n.d, al Māturīdī n.d, Rashīd Riḍā’ n.d, Ibn ‘Ashūr n.d.), however passages
elsewhere in the Qur’an make the more bold assertion that the Torah has been distorted in its
writing (2:79), the idea is thus given that not just revelation, but the revelation of the Qur’an too
serves a necessary function in purifying previous scriptures from distortions and later accretions, this
is made clear in other verses where the Qur’an is described as a guardian (muhaymin) over previous
scriptures (Qur’an 5:48).

The next verse is as follows,

‘This is a blessed Scripture that We have sent down to confirm what came before it and for you to
warn the Mother of Cities and all around it. Those who believe in the Hereafter believe in this
Scripture, and do not neglect their prayers.’ (Qur’an 6:92)

A number of characteristics are made mention of which the Qur’an assumes for itself, firstly its
description of being blessed (mubārak), thereafter its quality of confirming the scriptures before it
and finally its function as warning the ‘mother of cities’ and beyond. These attributes put together
are to express the revelatory nature of the Qur’an in serving the function of revelation. On the first
ascription of being blessed (mubārak) which is explained by commentaries (Tabarī n.d, Ibn Kathīr
n.d, Ibn ‘Ashur) as being defined as ‘full of goodness’, one of the salient features of the Qur’an
comes to light, contrary to perhaps popular thought the Qur’an does not rely upon miracles to
vindicate it’s claims to divine origin (often it denies miracles to the Prophet: Bril Encyclopaedia of
Islam 1993 Vol 6 p.295), but its own content made up of āyāt (signs) to impress upon its audience
that it bears the feature of revelation which is to guide, one of the more explicit passages in this
regard is the response of Qur’an 29:51 to the pagan’s insistence upon miracles,

‘And is it not sufficient for them that we revealed to you the Book which is recited to them? Indeed
in that is a mercy and reminder for a people who believe.’ (Qur’an 29:51).

Other passages include a series of oath sworn on the authority of the Qur’an, whose content ought
to reflects the hallmarks of revelation in its role of guiding men to wisdom, examples include,

1) Ha-Mim, by the scripture that makes things clear, truly We sent it down on a blessed night––We
have always sent warnings (Qur’an 44:1-3)

2) Sād, by the Qur’an with its reminding, yet the disbelievers are steeped in arrogance and hostility
(Qur’an 38:1-2)

3) Ya-Sin, by the wise Qur’an, you are truly one of the messengers sent (Qur’an 36: 1-3)

In all of these examples the oaths are made on a description of the Qur’an and thereafter an oath is
sworn that the Qur’an is revelation, or by its rejection the unbelievers are engaging in arrogance and
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

hostility, this seems to emphasize the idea that the Qur’an at least primarily vindicates its claim to
divine origin.

Even the miracle ascribed to the Prophet in which he was said to have split the moon and is thought
to be referenced in Qur’an 54:1, ‘The hour has drawn close and the moon has split’, is thought by
some such as Hasan al Baṣrī to refer to the moon’s splitting towards the end of time (al-Māturīd n.d),
to this end al Māturīdī explains the next verse ‘and if they were to see a sign they would turn away…’
(Qur’an 29:52) to suggest that had they seen an empirical sign like the splitting of the moon they
would turn away, interestingly he adds to this that the signs typically given to the prophet were the
rational arguments found in the Qur’an (Ibid).

Another quality the Qur’an seeks to focus attention on is the fact that it is a confirmation of the
previous scriptures, this is a frequent affirmation found in the Qur’an (Ibn Kathīr n.d), the idea being
that revelation is at odds with novelty, in this Qur’an 46:9 declares,

Say, ‘I am nothing new among God’s messengers…’

In other places the Qur’an affirms the same idea,

‘Believe in the message I have sent down confirming what you already possess…’ (Qur’an 2:41)

‘Step by step, He has sent the Scripture down to you [Prophet] with the Truth, confirming what went
before: He sent down the Torah and the Gospel…’ (Qur’an 3:3)

‘People of the Book, believe in what We have sent down to confirm what you already have…
‘(Qur’an 4:47)

‘We sent to you [Muhammad] the Scripture with the truth, confirming the Scriptures that came
before it…’ (Qur’an 5:48)

Perhaps the emphasis can be understood given the very concept of revelation, is based on the idea
that it exist to guide men throughout the ages, it does not make sense thus that revelation be a
novel phenomenon beginning only in 6 th century Arabia, rather as the Qur’an argues ‘to every nation
we sent a prophet to worship God (alone) and avoid false gods’ (Qur’an 16:36) and that a number of
prophets had been sent prior to Muhammad, furthermore the Prophet’s Abrahamic lineage is
implied in other verse to show that Muhammad (who along with Ishmaelite Arabs are considered in
Abrahamic religion as belonging to Abraham’s son Ishmael) too belonged to the great tradition of
Abrahamic prophets (Qur’an 4:54; Ibn Kathīr n.d), this goes back to the idea that ever since the
creation of man, God has taught humanity what it is required to know (Qur’an 3:33), thus the Qur’an
once again here can be seen as reflecting the hallmark of revelation in it being a continuation (not a
novelty) of the religious knowledge of the first humans. Alterative interpretations can include the
idea that the Qur’an perhaps is implying the idea that Muhammad is prophesized as it is elsewhere
mentioned in the Qur’an (i.e. Qur’an 61:6), this potential interpretation has been highlighted by al
Rāzī and Ibn ‘Ashūr. However whilst this is possible, the Qur’an simply makes the generic assertion
that it recognizes the ancient revelation and does not oppose them (the significance being that it is
consistent with the concept of revelation which is to guide humanity throughout), this is expressed
by al Tabarī and al Māturidī (who argues that the Qur’an teaches the same fundamental idea of
monotheism and virtuous deeds), al Rāzī and Ibn ‘Ashūr both cite this general interpretation as
another possibility, Zamakhsharī, Ibn Kathīr and Rashīd Riḍā’ do not comment on this passage of the
verse.
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

The final attribute highlighted in Qur’an 6:92 is its function of warning the mother of cities (agreed
by the exegetes to refer to Makkah; Tabari n.d, Ibn Kathīr n.d, Māturīdī n.d, al Rāzī n.d, Zamakhsharī
n.d, Rida n.d, Ibn ‘Ashur n.d) and beyond, in this sense the Qur’an seeks to highlight another
function corresponding to the primary characteristic of revelation, that is to warn people of
falsehood and vices, thereby guiding them. This is linked to the very first idea in Qur’an 6:91 in which
it is expected that God reveal guidance to mankind, to this end the prophet is expected to articulate
this guidance (Balligh) without worrying about the reception of his people to revelation (Qur’an
13:40).

The last verse to be discussed are as follows,

‘Who could be more wicked than someone who invents a lie against God, or claims, ‘A revelation has
come to me,’ when no revelation has been sent to him, or says, ‘I too can reveal something equal to
God’s revelation’? If you could only see the wicked in their death agonies, as the angels stretch out
their hands [to them], saying, ‘Give up your souls. Today you will be repaid with a humiliating
punishment for saying false things about God and for arrogantly rejecting His revelations.’ (Qur’an
6:93).

This verse can be read as merely a rejection of paganism rather than an argument for revelation, to
this end some early exegetes believed those who ascribe lies against God were the pagans, similarly
the pagans were said to constantly undermine the Qur’an by arguing they too could replicate what
was merely ‘poetry’ (Tabari n.d), another interpretation argues that it referred to false claimants to
prophecy contemporary to the Prophet, the likes of Musaylamah and to a lesser extent ‘Abdullah b
Sa’d who turned apostate after serving as a scribe of the prophet (the traditions about him conflict in
the details but generally argue that he fell in to doubt when he changed certain words dictated to
him by the Prophet of the Qur’an, only for his words to later be accepted by the Prophet; Ibid),
however al Tabarī argues that despite the traditions this refers to any false ascriptions to God
whether in law or receiving inspiration for him, and the generality of the verse accords with this
view. Although this verse could be seen as a condemnation only, it could be even argued that given
the context of the passage which began with the rejection of the idea that God had not sent any
revelation, to then the notion of the Qur’an as bearing the hallmarks of revelation, that this verse
too is a continuation of the same attempt to defend the Qur’an as revelation, and that this
condemnation of false claimants to divine truths in the mouth of the prophet, seeks to assert the
authority of the Qur’an’s own claim to divine origin, this certainly has corollaries elsewhere in the
Qur’an (69:44) where Muhammad is instructed to say that should he attribute any words to God
falsely he would be seized by divine punishment. The assertion made then is that Muhammad who
began by advocating the falsehood of idolatry, does not justify the usage of false claims to prophecy
to this end, rather his claims are to be thought of as genuine claims, significant for any who may
assume that Muhammad loosely claimed inspiration from God.

In conclusion the passage of the Qur’an subject to review serves as a rich source by which curious
students of the Qur’an can gain considerable insight, in to how the Qur’an seeks to vindicate not
only its own claim to revelation but the concept of revelation itself. Several matters of importance
have revealed themselves in the course of this research, namely the Qur’an’s own approach to the
ever-continuing discussion on reason and revelation, one that values reason and makes frequent use
of it in a bid to inform creed and criticize idolatry, but also an approach that posits the necessity of
revelation to make it an expectation due of God. Also the approach of the passage in vindicating its
own origin bears no appeal to miracles, rather the study has shown the Qur’an’s frequent reliance
on its own content, as reflective of revelation, to vindicate the idea of it being of divine origin
(although this does not necessarily mean no appeal to supernatural phenomenon are made in the
Qur’an).
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

The study was however established with the aim to explore the manner in which the Qur’an defends
the concept of revelation, what follows shall be a brief summary of the finding.

Qur’an in 6:91 seems to argue the notion that divine providence would dictate the idea that God
would send revelation to guide humanity, however this is not to say that reason is redundant as the
Qur’an utilizes rational arguments to justify the fundamental Abrahamic creeds of belief in God,
monotheism and life after death. Rather despite the presence of reason, ignorance and confusion
still prevails, the role of revelation is to guide humanity away from ignorance, hence the same verse
addresses the idolaters in its role as teaching that which you nor your fathers knew’. Further to this
the precedent of Moses is brought to show that the concept of revelation is not an abstract idea but
a reality present in human history, Moses’s revelation is described as ‘light and guidance’ perhaps
due to its success in steering Israel from the idolatry in a world in which idolatry pervaded (Rida
n.d.). However the necessity of Qur’anic revelation can be seen as being hinted at in Qur’an 6:91,
with the corruption of the Torah community as well as the Torah itself (as mentioned elsewhere in
the Qur’an) necessitating a new revelation.

Qur’an 6:92 defends specifically Qur’anic revelation, it does this by celebrating the Qur’an as bearing
the attributes reflective of revelation, this includes its contents ‘being full of goodness’ and in
conformity to the idea of revelation, which is to guide humanity throughout the ages, in this the
Qur’an denies being a novelty or an innovation, but a continuation of previous scriptures, finally it
highlights its function as warning the idolatrous city of Makkah and beyond as serving the function of
revelation.

Qur’an 6:93 in the context of the above two revelations, can be seen as an argument in defence of
specifically Qur’anic revelation, rather than just a condemnation of those who would fabricate
revelation, this method of arguing in defence of revelation also has corollaries with other verses in
the Qur’an, which assert the idea that would Muhammad attribute statements to God falsely he
would be seized by punishment, thus seeking to dispel the notion that Muhammad justified
revelatory experience as a justifiable fabrication in his battle against paganism.
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

References
Abdel Haleem M.A.S (2005) The Qur’an Oxford University Press

Akyol M (2018) Why So Many Turks are Losing Faith in Islam (Al-Monitor; Accessed Online:
https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2018/04/turkey-why-so-many-turks-are-losing-faith-in-
islam.html)

Akyol M (2019) A New Secularism is appearing in Islam (NY Times; Accessed Online:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/23/opinion/islam-religion.html)

Al Māturīdī (N.D.) Ta’wīlāt Ahl al Sunnah {Accessed Online:

https://www.greattafsirs.com/Tafsir_Library.aspx?SoraNo=6&AyahNo=91&MadhabNo=-
1&TafsirNo=103}

Al-Rāzī F (N.D.) al Tafsīr al ‘Aẓīm {Accessed Online:

https://www.greattafsirs.com/Tafsir_Library.aspx?SoraNo=6&AyahNo=91&MadhabNo=-
1&TafsirNo=4}

Al-Tabarī (N.D.) Jāmi’ al Bayān ‘an Ta’wīl al Qur’ān {Accessed Online:

https://www.greattafsirs.com/Tafsir_Library.aspx?SoraNo=6&AyahNo=91&MadhabNo=-
1&TafsirNo=1}

Al Zamakhsharī (N.D.) Al-Kash’shāf {Accessed Online:

https://www.greattafsirs.com/Tafsir_Library.aspx?SoraNo=6&AyahNo=91&MadhabNo=-
1&TafsirNo=2}

Ashqar U (2005) Belief in Allah International Islamic Publishing House

Azzam I (2019) Morocco’s Atheists Find a Home in the Internet (Qantara; Accessed Online:
https://en.qantara.de/content/atheism-in-the-arab-world-moroccos-atheists-find-a-home-on-the-
internet)

Barnett S (2003) The Enlightenment and religion: The myths of modernity Manchester University
Press.

BBC NEWS (2018) The Young Turks Rejecting Islam (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-

43981745).

Berg H (2000) The Development of Exegesis in Early Islam: The Authenticity of Muslim Literature
from the Formative Period Routledge

Betts C.J. (1984) Early Deism in France. MARTINUS NIJHOFF PUBLISHERS.

Brill (1993) The Encyclopedia of Islam Vol 7 (Leiden New York)

Byrne P (2013) Natural Religion and the Nature of Religion, The Legacy of Deism Routledge Library
Edition: Philosophy of Religions

Ceylan Y (1980) Theology and Tafsīr in the Major Works of Fakhr al Dīn al Rāzī (University of
Edinburgh; Accessed Online: era.lib.ed.ac.uk)
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

Clark H (1935) Deism in America. American Literature Vol 6 No.4 pp.467-469. DUKE UNIVERSITY
PRESS.

Cole J (2007) Napoleon’s Egypt: Invading the Middle East Palgrave Macmillan (New York)

El Gallī A.M (1976) The Place of Reason in the Theology of al Māturīdī and al Ash’arī (University of
Edinburgh) {Accessed Online: https://era.ed.ac.uk/handle/1842/17177}

Green A 2011 The Man in the Red Underpants One Reason (IERA)

Hussaini, Sayed (2016) Islamic Philosophy between Theism and Deism Philosophical Contributions
from the East to the West Journal, pp. 65-83.

Ibn ‘Ashūr (N.D.) al Taḥ’rīr wal Tanwīr {Accessed Online:

https://www.greattafsirs.com/Tafsir_Library.aspx?SoraNo=6&AyahNo=91&MadhabNo=-
1&TafsirNo=54}

Ibn Hishām (2009) al Sīrah al Nabawiyyah. Dār al Kutub al ‘Ilmiyyah.

Ibn Kathīr (N.D.) Tafsīr al Qur’ān al ‘Aẓīm {Accessed Online:

https://www.greattafsirs.com/Tafsir_Library.aspx?SoraNo=6&AyahNo=91&MadhabNo=-
1&TafsirNo=7}

Johnson B (N.D.) Deism in the Battle between Jerusalem and Athens {Accessed Online:
https://www.deism.com/deismathensvjerusalem.htm}

Jomier, J. (2012). Al-Manār: Encyclopedia of Islam,.Washington, D.C.: Brill

Kazi Y (2013) Reconciling Reason and Revelation in the Writings of Ibn Taymiyyah (Yale University)
{Accessed Online: https://search.proquest.com/openview/0568e2368f366ce8d64298f1e72959e4/1?
pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y}

Kulsoy A (2018) What is Pushing Half of Turkey towards Deism (Ahval; Accessed Online:
https://ahvalnews.com/islam/what-pushing-half-turkey-towards-deism)

Larkin M (1988) The Inimitability of the Qur’ān: Two Perspectives Vol. 20, No. 1, The Literature of
Islam, pp. 31-47

Lindstedt I (2011) Anti-Religious Views in the Works of Ibn al Rāwandī and Abūl al-Ma’arrī Studia
Orientalia Vol 111 {Accessed Online: https://www.academia.edu/2405271/Anti-
Religious_Views_in_the_Works_of_Ibn_al-R%C4%81wand%C4%AB_and_Ab%C5%AB_l-%CA%BFAl
%C4%81%CA%BE_al-Ma%CA%BFarr%C4%AB}

Lucci D (2016) Deism, Freethinking and Toleration in Enlightenment England History of European
Ideas {Accessed Online: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01916599.2016.1203594?
src=recsys&journalCode=rhei20}
Asim Zahoor BA Islamic Studies

Martin R (1997) Defenders of Reason in Islam: Mu’tazilism from Medieval School to Modern Symbol
(OneWorld Oxford)

Mills R.J.W (2015) Archibald Campbell’s Necessity of Revelation (1739)-The Science of Human
Nature’s First Study of Religion History of European Ideas, 41:6, 728-746, (Accessed Online:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01916599.2015.1022414)

Nadwī A.H (1979) Islamic Concept of Prophethood Islamic Research & Publicatons (Lucknow, India)

Nafi, Basheer M (2005) Ṭāhir Ibn ʿĀshūr: The Career and Thought of a Modern Reformist ʿālim,
with Special Reference to His Work of Tafsīr Journal of Qur'anic Studies Vol. 7, No. 1 (2005), pp. 1-32
{Accessed Online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25728162?read-now=1&seq=1}

Piland T (2011) The Influence and Legacy of Deism in Eighteenth Century America Hamilton Holt
School: Rollins College {Accessed Online: https://scholarship.rollins.edu/mls/8/}

Pink J (2016) Striving for a new exegesis of the Qur’ān. The Oxford Handbook of Theology.

Qur’an Search Engine [Accessed Online: https://equran.me/)

Riḍā R (N.D.) Tafsīr al Manār {Accessed Online: https://www.greattafsirs.com/Tafsir_Library.aspx?

SoraNo=6&AyahNo=91&MadhabNo=-1&TafsirNo=103}

Singer, M. (1954). The Categorical Imperative. The Philosophical Review, 63(4), 577-591.
doi:10.2307/2182292

Tate R.S. (1969) Rousseau and Voltaire as Deists compared: A Comparison Vol. 9, No. 3, Jean-Jacques
Rousseau, pp. 175-186

Wigelsworth J. (2009) Deism in Enlightenment England. Manchester University Press.

Zavadski K (2017) How Three American Women Translated One of the World’s Most Popular Qurans
(Accessed Online: https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-three-american-women-translated-one-of-
the-worlds-most-popular-qurans)