[Updated/Revised 5/12/18 Yet To Be Completed]
A popular criticism against the Christian dogma of the Trinity states that Trinitarianism is logically incoherent, that is: it either collapses into modalism or tritheism. In this post, I will take the latter (tritheism) criticism for granted. Typically and straightforwardly, it's mainly stated as: "Basic math: 1+1+1=3 gods". I will then ask myself, on whether a similar (but not identical) criticism could be applied to any doctrine within Islam. One good place to start searching could be, Islam's self-purported primary basis: the Qur'an. Therefore we are looking for any possible existing Qur'anic pluralism.
A popular criticism against the Christian dogma of the Trinity states that Trinitarianism is logically incoherent, that is: it either collapses into modalism or tritheism. In this post, I will take the latter (tritheism) criticism for granted. Typically and straightforwardly, it's mainly stated as: "Basic math: 1+1+1=3 gods". I will then ask myself, on whether a similar (but not identical) criticism could be applied to any doctrine within Islam. One good place to start searching could be, Islam's self-purported primary basis: the Qur'an. Therefore we are looking for any possible existing Qur'anic pluralism.
But before, I continue, I must observe that notably Trinitarians do not reject embracing Sunni Orthodox Islam based on the following grounds (the rejection of a 'complex pluralist unity' is not justified on Christian grounding, there has to be other good reasons to reject orthodox Islam), rather I simply wish to apply some polemically charged and apologetically contrived rhetoric (that has previously been applied to Christianity, especially the Christian doctrine of the Trinity) to various aspects of Islamic thought and hope that these individual Muslims be consistent and either cease to argue against the Trinity on similar grounds, or concur that this same argument must be applied to Islam with equal merit and force and therefore undermine both religious traditions but in different ways.
The nature of the Qur'an is a hotly-disputed topic, even among Muslims. However what is not disputed by Ahlus Sunnah Wa Jammah is the way in which the Qur'an was expressed to the Prophet Mohammed (SWS). Ibn Abbas narrated that the Prophet said: “Jibreel taught me one style and I reviewed it until he taught me more, and I kept asking him for more and he gave me more until finally there were seven styles". That is "styles" of the "Qur'an".
One Muslim expert said, there are over 40 differing scholarly opinions on what the styles revealed to the Prophet were (Arabic plural: ahruf/Arabic sing. harf). Nonetheless in his view, one of the best opinions was that the 7 styles (ahruf), consist of variation in these manners:
- The wording may differ but the meaning is the same
- If there is a different meaning then it is by way of variations on a theme, not opposing and contradictory
Later Muslims thought that "al-ahruf al-saba’ (the seven styles) were al-qiraa’aat al-saba’ (the seven recitations) because they happened to be the same number. Some people thought that the styles (ahruf) were the recitations, but this is a mistake.The seven recitations are one of the seven styles, and this is the style that ‘Uthmaan chose for all the Muslims. When ‘Uthmaan made copies of the Qur’aan, he did so according to one style (harf), but he omitted the dots and vowel points so that some other styles could also be accommodated. So the Mus-haf that was copied in his time could be read according to other styles, and whatever styles were accommodated by the Mus-haf of ‘Uthmaan remained in use, and the styles that could not be accommodated fell into disuse. The people had started to criticize one another for reciting differently, so ‘Uthmaan united them by giving them one style (harf) of the Qur’aan."
The focus of this post, will not be the Uthmanic Qur'an, but the Qur'an given to Mohammed (SWS) as approved of by Allah visa vie the angel Jibreel. The Qur'an that was revealed to Mohammed was seven styles (arabic: ahruf), that is 'seven' styles of the Qur'an existed. Q is H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, H6, H7, all of which are sent to the Prophet, all of which are the Qur'an. Each of these unique seven styles is also identical to the Quran: "H1 is Q, H2 is Q, H3 is Q, H4 is Q, H5 is Q, H6 is Q, H7 is Q". However no style (harf) is identical to the others (ahruf). None of the styles are identical to one another, but all are distinct from each other: "H7 is Q but is not H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, H6, yet H6 is Q but is not H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, H7, yet H5 is Q but is not H1, H2, H3, H4, H6, H7, yet H4 is Q but is not H1, H2, H3, H5, H6, H7, yet H3 is Q but is not H1, H2, H4, H5, H6, H7, yet H2 is Q but is not H1, H3, H4, H5, H6, H7, yet H1 is Q but is not H2, H3, H4, H5, H6, H7"
Here is an illustration and an analogy showing how the same problem can be applied to the Qiraaat (thanks to the brother Denis Giron):
Each individual harf (style) exists as the complete Quran, independently from any other style, as the styles are distinct and not identical. The logic is vividly incoherent: Each style which is the complete Quran is not another style which is also the fully complete Quran. Yet both styles are identical to the Qur'an, yet the Qur'an is identical all of these various unique styles.
A further problem is that if the Qur'an just is identical with every style, but what happens when each unique style is identical with the complete Qur'an
- H1 (a distinct style of the Quran) = the fully complete Quran ( and Quran just is identical with every style)
- H2 = CQ (which is seven styles)...
- H3 = CQ (seven styles)
- H4 = CQ (seven styles)
- H5 = CQ (seven styles)
- H6 = CQ (seven styles)
- H7 = CQ (seven styles)
If H1 = CQ, and CQ = just is identical, that is the same as all the styles, then H1 is just synonymous with the Qur'an which is synonymous with all the styles and therefore H1 is every style. and there are no real distinctions, and so you have the eqivolent of Qur'anic modalism rather than Qur'anic pluralism. However if the differences aren't real, then all written and oral variation that exists among the Qur'an today are in fact not legitimate differences but man-made.
On the the other hand if each of the seven style is the fully complete Quran and the Quran is seven styles, then we have 49 completely complete Qurans. If those individual Muslims don't acknowledge this, then you are changing the definition of Qur'an as you please (just as Trinitarians does with "God"). Ultimately orthodox Muslims claim the Quran was revealed as seven styles. But notice even this sentence, the "Qur'an" here is being spoken of as an abstract Qur'an that is the source of all the seven styles, for example, it's not saying that H2 or H3 revealed the other styles, it's referring to the source of all the styles, independently from the styles themselves, so the Qur'an here again is redesignated a different meaning. This while also claiming each style is a complete Quran which they have already predefined as revealed in seven styles. According to Mohammed the Quran was revealed in seven different styles/ways/modes literally 'words/letters' (translated from the Arabic plural of harf: ahruf) yet each style fully constitutes a complete Quran, yet none of the styles is precisely identical with the other.
Yet Muslim refer to the Quran in the singular and believe there is only one single Quran. But which single Quran is it that they believe in? Each single style consists of the complete Quran that is distinct from the other styles which are also considered the complete Quran. How could each style be the totally complete Qur'an in and of themselves without the other styles? That would mean either each style is not the complete Qur'an and is just part of the Qur'an or that each style is a complete Qur'an in and of itself, but that means each styles is an independently totally complete Qur'an, making up seven Qurans.
Perhaps the best option for the Muslims is to admit each style is an expression or form of the essence of the Quran and represents the Quran perfectly, but can never actually be the complete Quran.
“You cannot say “each harf (mode) is fully the Quran” without implying seven Qurans. In fact let me illustrate this reasoning for you. According to Muslim criticisms of the Trinity, if the Father is fully God, and the Son is fully God and the Holy Spirit is fully God, then there are THREE DISTINCT GODS. Likewise if each harf is fully the Quran, then there are SEVEN DISTINCT QURANS.” (source)
Zawadi said:
“This Qur’an has been revealed to be recited in seven different ways, so recite of it whichever (way) is easier for you (or read as much of it as may be easy for you).””
What does it say? - It says that there is ONE QUR’AN. Not seven Qur’ans. - This one Qur’an has seven different ways in which it could be recited. So……. one Qur’an, but seven ways. Each way is considered the complete Qur’an.
The Prophet said that we could choose whichever WAY (singular) we like to recite. So here the Prophet said that we don’t need to know all seven ways, rather one way is enough.
“Now…….. did the Prophet consider each way to be offering us the complete Qur’an? The answer is yes.” How do we know? Because he wouldn’t say that it’s okay for us to restrict ourselves to an incomplete Qur’an. He wouldn’t say that an incomplete Qur’an is sufficient.” (source)
Muslims are allowed to recite one style (instead of all seven), and this one style/way is the complete Quran. Yet the other styles are also the complete Quran. Now this implies that each style is identical to the other mode since they consist of the complete Quran, they are the exact same complete Quran, yet Zawadi clearly distinguishes between these styles and believes differences actually exist between the styles. So how does each styles consist of the complete Quran while being distinct from the other styles which are also the fully complete Quran? This of course is irrational, ABSURD!
"Is this ahruf (let's say for example the 3rd one) being the complete Qur'an - is it the ONLY TRUE QUR'AN?
"Are the all of the styles together the only true Quran?
or are they individually the only true Quran? If they are individually the only true Quran, then you have seven Qurans all claiming to be the only true complete version of the Quran!
If the third style is the only true Quran, what about the others?
If the styles together are the only true Quran, the how is a style mode by itself the only true Quran without the others? If the styles seperate or independently from one another are the only true Qur'an then how can they be viewed as the complete Qur'an when collectively all put together? Something complete cannot become more complete.
When Allah sent down this style - was it the only true Qur'an along with the other styles whom he sent?
Does the six others being distinct from the first style, called the only true Qur'an take away from the other six being the only true Qur'an?
In the beginning was the harf, and the harf was with Qur'an and harf was Qur'an
An acceptance of pluralism, whether Trinitarian or Quranic, as Royalson points out the H1 is not identical with the Quran in the sense that it is not all of the other styles, yet it is fully the Quran in the sense that it fully consists of what the Quran is, the complete and perfect Quran.
Further more if one style is the only fully and complete and entire Quran, does this mean the other styles are not the Quran, as this is the reasoning Muslims apply to Jesus Christ!
Problem II - The meaning and referent of "Qur'an"
But it gets worse because now when we read the Quran, we must discover which form of the Quran is being referred to in any given sentence in which the Quran refers to itself.
For example is the Quran referring to itself collectively (all seven modes), or individually (one of the seven modes), or in a plurality (several of the seven modes) and is the Quran referring to itself in the way it exists in heaven, in Allah's attribute of Speech, or inside creation in the various states it exists in?
This of course means we have to split the Quran up by definition making more Qurans than even seven Qurans, as I said to Zawadi:
"15:9 when it speaks of the Quran according to Zawadi must mean that when the Quran refers to itself it can refer to ANY HARF or any variant or AMOUNT of ahruf, since each HARF is the full Quran! This means Zawadi doesn’t know which HARF was preserved in this case, nor what combination of ahruf he has. But since he believes parts of ahruf were preserved he doesn't know what parts of the Quran he really has." (source)
But not only do you have to split the Quran up into these categories you have to decide which is the actual Quran, Allah then preserved, you then have to split the Quran up from the previous Quran sent down to David and other prophets, to the Quran sent to Mohammed:
“They say: "O thou to whom the Message is being revealed! truly thou art mad (or possessed)!
"Why bringest thou not angels to us if it be that thou hast the Truth?" We send not the angels down except for just cause: if they came (to the ungodly), behold! no respite would they have! We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).
We did send apostles before thee amongst the religious sects of old: But never came an apostle to them but they mocked him. Even so do we let it creep into the hearts of the sinners -That they should not believe in the (Message); but the ways of the ancients have passed away. The Prophet said… “so recite of it whichever (way) is easier for you”. 15:6-13
Now Zawadi knows “the message(thikri)” here is referring to the Quran. The same Arabic word “thikri” is used elsewhere in the Quran to refer to the Quran being revealed to Mohammed but in the very same verse it refers to the previous followers of the Quran (from before Mohammed’s time):
"And We sent not (as Our messengers) before thee other than men, whom We inspired. Ask the followers of the Reminder (thikri) if ye know not?" S. 21:7 Pickthall
"And indeed it is a revelation of the Lord of the worlds - brought down by the trustworthy spirit – upon your heart, so that you be one of the warners – [revealed] in a clear Arabic dialect - and indeed it is [also] in the scriptures (Arabic- Zubur) of old. Is it no evidence for them that the scholars of the Israelites know him [to be a true prophet]?" 26:192-197
If it is still not made clear that the Quran was sent down earlier this will settle it:
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, 'The recitation of the Quran was made light and easy for David that he used to have his riding animal be saddled while he would finish the recitation of the Quran before the servant had saddled it.' (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 237)
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, 'The reciting of the Zabur (i.e. Psalms) was made easy for David. He used to order that his riding animals be saddled, and would finish reciting the Zabur before they were saddled. And he would never eat except from the earnings of his manual work." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 628)
But the same Quran that Zawadi thinks is seven styles, and each of these styles is the complete Quran unfortunately never existed according to the top reciter and teacher of the Quran, Ibn Masud: al-Masahif, 1/69, narrates with his chain from Fulfula al-Ja’fi who said,
“I was one of those who went to Abdullah regarding the Masahif, so when we entered upon him one of us said, ‘We did not come here to visit you, but we came when this news reached us’, he responded, ‘Indeed the Qur’an was sent down to you Prophet from seven doors with seven different Ahruf (or Qira’ah, recitation style), the books that were before you were sent down FROM ONE DOOR, with ONE READING STYLE, and its meaning is one.”
Zawadi’s bizarre interpretation that each style is the fully complete perfect Quran combined with the statements in the Quran and Authentic Reports contradict his favorite Ibn Masud narration.
As it turns out the Quran never existed as seven Qurans until the Quran was sent down to Mohammed, yet the Quran and the Authentic Reports all teach the very same Quran sent to Muhammad was sent before hand! This my friends is the ultimate confusion of the Quran." (source)
In conclusion we have seen a parallel shown between the seven modes of the Quran (in Islam) and the three persons of God (in Christianity) and drawn upon an inconsistency that the Muslims utilizes in critiquing his theological opponents, while proclaiming they only believe in one Qur'an and not seven.
