So what is this evidence that Islam claims to present that is so convincing?
The first issue is authenticity. Purity of text is quite vital to
the whole spirit of "fund". This is because once a text has shown to have
been corrupted and altered in order to make it comply with doctrinal or
political expediencies, and if there is no reliable means to distinguish
the corrupt from the pure, then there is not one passage of that text that
cannot be called into question. This is not so easy with a pure and preserved
text. This is well understood by the Christian fundamentalists. If it is
not the "Word of God", then what real value does it posses as guidance,
except as a collection of wisdom? Few serious scholars, even from Islam's
opponents, have tried to dispute the Qur'an's historical authenticity .
Indeed it would be a pointless exercise, since anyone who cares to take
a trip to Tashkent (in the former Soviet Union) will find there a complete
copy of the Qur'an written by one of the Prophet's scribes, Zayed ibn Thabit,
upon the order of the first Caliph Abu Bakr within two years of the Prophet's
death. The manuscript in Tashkent is a copy of that first manuscript, also
written by the hand of the same Zayed, but some twelve years later under
the order of 'Uthman bin Affan, the third Caliph, with the consensus of
over fifty companions of the Prophet who also had written portions of the
Qur'an, and also others who had memorised it in toto. This "Uthmanic"
Qur'an, as it later came to known, was accepted without exception by the
surviving companions of the Prophet, peace be upon him, as being one and
the same that was revealed by Allah to his Final Messenger Muhammad, peace
be upon him,. One can take any copy of any Qur'an, from any mosque anywhere
in the word and compare it with the mushaf of Zayed, and find it
exactly the same - word for word. It is even recited in the same accent
in which the Prophet, peace be upon him, recited it. Furthermore Arabic,
the language of the Qur'an, is a living language, and the Book has always
been in the hands of the people - not merely the domain of a few priests.
Thus anyone reading the Qur'an can be certain beyond reasonable doubt that
they are reading the same words revealed to Muhammad, peace be upon him,
over one thousand four hundred years ago. "Verily! It is We Who have
sent down the Qur'an and surely, We will guard it" (Surah al-Hijr
15:9). The reality of the fruition of this statement is a clear sign to
mankind, and one of the manifest miracles of the Qur'an. Moreover this
preservation is not limited to only the Qur'an, but also its explanation,
the Sunnah, i.e. the actions, sayings and tacit approvals of the
Prophet, peace be upon him,. These were meticulously memorised and written
down by his wives and companions, and passed down until they were collected
in the more famous books of hadeeth some two to three hundred years
after the Hijra.. The body of hadeeth literature has not enjoyed,
quite unjustly, the same general acceptance of authenticity as the Qur'an.
This is simply because the means by which the hadeeth became preserved
was a longer and more complicated affair than that of the Qur'an, and therefore
became a relatively easier target of attack by Islam's enemies. Some Orientalists
have even claimed that Hadith authenticity rates the same as the Biblical
texts . This is, however a very superficial comparison, even if there are
some apparent similarities. For example the major books of hadeeth
such Saheeh al-Bukhari,
Saheeh Muslim and the Sunan
of Abu Dawood, did not appear until just over two hundred years the Hijra.
Those who compiled the books were not themselves eye witnesses. Many
hadeeth
within the entire body of hadeeth literature are clearly fabricated
and of dubious authenticity, and ,as a whole, contain contradictions.
These statements are true in general, but a more detailed study of the
history of the preservation of the hadeeth makes it immediately
clear that the reality is quite different. Firstly, as we mentioned concerning
the Qur'an, the language of the Prophet, peace be upon him, is preserved.
Secondly the major hadeeth books we mentioned were not so much new
works as compilations of earlier, smaller ones. There was also a good deal
of oral transmission, but the collectors of Prophetic sayings were extremely
weary of ensuring that any given narration attributed to the Prophet, peace
be upon him, could be effectively proven as such. The method by which this
was accomplished was through the 'isnad', or chain of narrators.
From the earliest days of Islam after the death of the Prophet, peace be
upon him,, various groups arose deviating from the teachings of Islam that
had been given to the Prophet's Companions. These sects began to invent
sayings which they attributed to the Prophet, peace be upon him,. So in
response the Companions of the Prophet began to demand that anyone transmitting
a narration must name which companion they had received it from, and thus
the truth of narrator ascertained. The students of the Companions continued
this policy, and further safe guards were added as not only the Companions
name was needed, but also the next narrator in the chain of transmission
. Conditions were laid down for these narrators to be accepted. The scholars
differed over some of the conditions, some being stricter than others,
but three basic requirements were agreed by all. First the transmitter
must be a pious Muslim, secondly they must be known not to forget, thirdly
they must not be liars. The next generation of hadeeth transmitters
began to write the names of all those who attended their lectures. No one
was allowed to narrate a hadeeth on that lecturers authority unless
he attended the lecture in which that hadeeth was narrated and its
meaning explained. From this developed the books of "Rijal" in which
was listed the character, quality of memory, place of habitation, travels,
teachers and students, and opinion of other scholars, concerning all the
narrators of the hadeeth. Thus every available method was used to
ensure that when the scholars of the sciences of hadeeth declared
a narration of the Prophet, peace be upon him, as being authentic it was,
beyond any reasonable doubt said by him. This methodology is not only used
for the Prophetic traditions, but also the sayings of the Companions and
the early scholars. Indeed any true scholar must be able to produce the
isnad
of his teachers back to the Prophet himself!
Along with this textual and contextual authenticity, the Qur'an itself
lays down claims to prove its veracity as God's revealed Words. Of course,
"proof" is a big word, especially when it comes to God or religion,
especially for the "Western mind", programmed by two thousand years
of Christianity, which seems to think that religion is supposed to be "mysterious"
and "incomprehensible". The idea that God and revelation are not
only compatible with reason, but also can be proven, is often met with
incredulity. After all, what's the point? If you can prove it where does
faith come in? This is because the Christian world has been taught that
"faith" means believing the unbelievable without any proof. This
is manifest in the that nonsense called the Trinity, and all the theological
contortions surrounding it. Christians are expected to believe that black
is white and yet still black, or in their terms, that the Invisible, Self-Sufficient,
Un-Changing, Omnipotent and Omniscient Creator became a visible, needy,
mortal, fallible creature who was killed on a cross, and this man was still
the Invisible, Self-Sufficient, Un-Changing, Omnipotent and Omniscient
Creator - completely God and completely man. Of course anyone with a mind
will understand that one by necessity precludes the other. Something completely
God cannot possibly be, or contain the qualities of, a man, for this would
immediately exclude such a being from being truly God. Furthermore, any
man that had the qualities of God would no longer be a man. In an attempt
to "explain the unexplainable" the Doctrine of the Trinity was invented:
One God made of three entities, each one completely God, (and therefor
completely the same, yet somehow different) not making three Gods but only
One! Moreover the Christian has been asked to believe that mankind's salvation
lies in believing God killed Himself (or His son, or an innocent man, or
all three at the same time) as a ransom for a burden of sin - that He placed
on all human beings for the sin of Adam and Eve eating from the forbidden
tree! The inevitable refuge of the Christian when assaulted with a barrage
questions over this muddle is that its all "a mystery", and if you
want to be saved from Hell you should stop asking so many questions and
accept it as an act of faith. Yet it seems rather absurd that the Just
Creator would punish anyone for refusing to believe things which are unacceptable
and incomprehensible to the very faculties of reason and common sense that
He has provided for the human to make their decisions, without providing
some strong proof that they should do so!
The Qur'an, however, chastises mankind for not using their common sense
and reasoning powers, and states that their failure to do so is itself
a cause of their destruction: "And for those who disbelieve in their
Lord is the torment of Hell, and worst indeed is that destination. When
they are cast therein, they will hear the terrible drawing in of its breath
as it blazes forth. It almost bursts with fury. Every time a group is cast
therein, its keeper will ask: 'Did no warner come to you?' They will say:
'Yes indeed; a warner did come to us, but we belied him and said: 'Allah
never sent down anything, you are only in great error.' And they will say:
'Had we but listened or used our intelligence, we would not have been among
the dwellers of the Fire!'" (Surah al-Mulk 67:6-9) Indeed there
is nothing in the theology of Islam that cannot be understood by sound
reasoning. In fact it is possible for anyone, anywhere to reach an understanding
of the essence of Islam without ever having heard of Muhammad or the Qur'an.
This is because the Creator's existence can be readily understood by anyone
observing the patterns and intricate mechanisms of the world and universe
around us, and that ultimate power and control rests with this Being, and
thus is alone truly worthy of worship, and that to worship this Creator
one can only rely on Divine guidance. To attempt to do this is "Islam",
which means "sincerity and submission to Allah". This very universality
and simplicity is one of the strong arguments in favour of Islam's Divine
origin. For the Muslim, faith is not a blind leap in the dark against proof
and reason, but rather a step taken as a consequence of contemplation,
experience, instinct and evidence. Ultimately it does mean a complete acceptance
of a single truth, but this is no more blind than the faith of a scientist
in a particular theory, or a doctor in form of treatment that has proven
itself valid clinically and operationally. It might be compared to the
situation in a court, with a jury. Ideally what is supposed to happen is
that the jury is presented with a series of evidences concerning a case.
When the weight of evidence is so conclusive the jury makes its decision.
It is not sufficient for it to say: "Well, we found the evidence really
convincing!" In the end it must make a decision, "Guilty!" or
"Not guilty!", based on the facts. Similarly in Islam, the Creator
presents the human being with a series of conclusive evidences, upon the
basis of which the human should declare their faith, and act accordingly.