The Charge of Corruption of the Scriptures - Part Two
Corruption as understood by Muslim writers before the 11th century A.D.
When we look at Islamic and other scientific texts which are not expository,
some of them being dialogical, we notice that in addressing the Bible
Muslim scholars are not solely concerned with the issue of corruption, but
also some of them display a remarkable openness concerning the
trustworthiness of the Bible texts. What follows are three examples from the
9th century A.D. The historian Al Yacoubi often cites the Bible and uses
texts from the Injil as reliable historical sources. The jurisprudent Ibn
Qutaybah uses the texts of the Bible to determine which of the hadiths are
authentic and which are not in his famous book The Interpretation of
Conflicting Narrations. He considers those texts of great authority in the
study of hadith. Imam Al Qasim bin Ibrahim al Rassi (the founder of Al
Zaidiyah in Yemen) extensively cites the first seven chapters of the Gospel
of Matthew, using a Quranic style. While we cannot present here the
numerous examples of those beneficial meaning-based translations, one
example from Al Qasim al Rassi’s book Answering the Christians is his
mention of the Lord's prayer which Christ taught to his followers (from
Matthew 6:9-13):
But if you pray, only pray to God praying
And if you judge anything on earth, do so justly and say:
Our Sustainer is heaven, may your name and wisdom be sanctified May your sovereignty and power be exalted
Show your rule on your earth,
AS you have shown it in your heaven
And provide for us the food we are lacking in our day,
And forgive us our previous wrongdoing,
Just as we forgive whoever wrongs us.
And forgive us in your mercy if we sin.
And do not afflict us, our Cherisher and Sustainer, with trials,
And rid us of abhorrent sins
For to you is the sovereignty and power
And from you is rule and forgiveness,
Forever and ever,
Age to age.1
Concerning the issue of corruption, if we compare the period before the 11th century and after we discover a clear evolution among Muslim scholars. The 9th century was distinguished, as we have shown, by open-minded attitudes such as those of Al Yacoubi, Ibn Qutaybah and Al Qasim al Rassi. Even in a polemical text such as Answering the Christians by Ibn Rabban Al Tabari (a Christian convert to Islam – not the same person as Muhammad ibn Jazir al Tabari), we do not find that Christianity is accused of textual corruption. Instead what we find are references to "the contradictions and the grave offenses…in the laws of their faith", i.e. the creed of the Christian faith which Al Tabari fully mentions. He goes on to explain "the words which they interpret opposite of their meanings," and mentions "the corruption and wickedness found" in the Christians’ interpretation of their book. In another book entitled Religion and State, Al Tabari argues with those who say that the Quran contains falsehoods. He says, "If that was not possible in the Torah and the Injil, and among those who recalled them, it is also not possible in the Quran or among those who know it by heart."2 In the 10th century two important books appear, The Virtues of Islam by Abu al Hasan al Ameri and Introduction to the Forefathers And A Summary of Proofs by Abu Bakr bin al Tayyib al Baqillani. In neither of these books is there any mention of textual corruption. Instead Al Ameri accuses the Jewish and Christian religious leaders of changing the meanings of the symbols in their books because of fear of losing their positions if they recognize the prophethood of Muhammad.3 Furthermore, Al Baqillani only mentions corruption as it concerns the inaccurate translation by the Jews of their Torah from Hebrew to Arabic. 4
But if you pray, only pray to God praying
And if you judge anything on earth, do so justly and say:
Our Sustainer is heaven, may your name and wisdom be sanctified May your sovereignty and power be exalted
Show your rule on your earth,
AS you have shown it in your heaven
And provide for us the food we are lacking in our day,
And forgive us our previous wrongdoing,
Just as we forgive whoever wrongs us.
And forgive us in your mercy if we sin.
And do not afflict us, our Cherisher and Sustainer, with trials,
And rid us of abhorrent sins
For to you is the sovereignty and power
And from you is rule and forgiveness,
Forever and ever,
Age to age.1
Concerning the issue of corruption, if we compare the period before the 11th century and after we discover a clear evolution among Muslim scholars. The 9th century was distinguished, as we have shown, by open-minded attitudes such as those of Al Yacoubi, Ibn Qutaybah and Al Qasim al Rassi. Even in a polemical text such as Answering the Christians by Ibn Rabban Al Tabari (a Christian convert to Islam – not the same person as Muhammad ibn Jazir al Tabari), we do not find that Christianity is accused of textual corruption. Instead what we find are references to "the contradictions and the grave offenses…in the laws of their faith", i.e. the creed of the Christian faith which Al Tabari fully mentions. He goes on to explain "the words which they interpret opposite of their meanings," and mentions "the corruption and wickedness found" in the Christians’ interpretation of their book. In another book entitled Religion and State, Al Tabari argues with those who say that the Quran contains falsehoods. He says, "If that was not possible in the Torah and the Injil, and among those who recalled them, it is also not possible in the Quran or among those who know it by heart."2 In the 10th century two important books appear, The Virtues of Islam by Abu al Hasan al Ameri and Introduction to the Forefathers And A Summary of Proofs by Abu Bakr bin al Tayyib al Baqillani. In neither of these books is there any mention of textual corruption. Instead Al Ameri accuses the Jewish and Christian religious leaders of changing the meanings of the symbols in their books because of fear of losing their positions if they recognize the prophethood of Muhammad.3 Furthermore, Al Baqillani only mentions corruption as it concerns the inaccurate translation by the Jews of their Torah from Hebrew to Arabic. 4
[1] This text was edited and introduced by: Ignazio di Matteo, Ignazio, in “Confutazione contro I cristiani
dello zaydita Al-Qasim b. Ibrahim”. Revista degli Studi Orientali (Rome) 9 (1922): 301-364.
[2] Al-Tabari, ‘Ali, Kitab Ad-Din wa Ad-Dawla (The Book of Religion and State), (Edited and translated by
Alphonse Mingana), Manchester, 1923, p.35.
[3] Al Ameri, Abu Al-Hasan Muhammad, Kitab al-‘I’lam bi-Manaqib al-Islam (edited by Abd al-Hameed
Ghurab), Cairo, 1967, p. 202.
[4] Al Baqillani, Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn At-Tayyib, Kitab Tamheed al-Awa’il wa Takhlees ad-Dala’il
(Edited by Fr. Richard MacCarthy), Beirut, 1957, p. 181.
Corruption as understood by Muslim writers after the 14th century
The great change in the Muslim attitude towards the issue of corruption
occurs in the 11th century, specifically beginning with the writings of Ibn
Hazm al Andalusi and especially his book The Separator Concerning
Religions, Heresies, and Sects. In this comprehensive book Ibn Hazm deals
with in detail all parts of the Bible, and highlights "the contradictions",
"disparities", and matters which, as he understands it, "are incompatible with
the logic of reason." It is noteworthy that this book not only criticizes the
Bible, Judaism and Christianity, but actually seeks to tear down all religious
opinions, as well as Islamic and other sects, that do not adhere to the
positions of his sect, "Al Zahiriyah," which rejected all Islamic
jurisprudence, only accepting the interpretation of the Qur’an on its surface
meaning. We find in Ibn Hazm al Andalusi's attitude a fundamental change
from accusing the Jews and Christians of "corrupting the meaning", to
actually claiming that they have textually corrupted their books. Most of the Muslim writers after Ibn Hazm adopted the same attitude
towards the Bible, taking Islamic-Christian interaction from the realm of
discussing interpretation to that of arguing about the trustworthiness of the
written texts. We find this for example in Gratifying Ill Will through
Alteration by Abu al Ma'ali al Juwayni at the end of the 11th century, and
Superior Answers to Godless Questions by Shihab ad-Din al Qarafi in the
13th century, and Guidance to the Confused of the Christians and the Jews
by Ibn Qayyim al Jawziyah in the 14th century.
What do Muslims and Christians today think about this subject?
What is the Muslim position today vis-à-vis the accusation of corruption
against the Jews and Christians?
Most Muslims today have adopted the idea of "textual corruption." It is an
accusation which Muslims have passed on from generation to generation
since the time of Ibn Hazm. It is obvious that this position does not leave an
opportunity for constructive dialogue, because it eliminates the written basis
for theological and doctrinal Islamic – Christian interchange. The purpose of
this article is to highlight alternate, constructive positions which the most
important Muslim scholars adopted previous to the 11th century. In so doing
we desire to present to the Muslim reader examples of dialogue about this
topic other then the extreme model so prevalent today.
In conclusion, we refer to the opinion of him who is known as "The Sheik of
Islam, that great man and master, the pious, the worshipper, the ascetic"
Taqieddine Ahmad bin Taymiyyah. He was able to transcend the extremist
"textual corruption" position, in spite of the fact that he lived in the 14th
century. In his book The True Answer to Those who Changed the Religion of
Christ, he (as he states in the title) accuses the Christians of changing the
religion of Christ by wrongly interpreting its words. Undoubtedly he knew
the writings of Ibn Hazm, Al Juwayni and Al Qarafi, and he was the sheik of
Ibn Qayyim al Jawziyah in Damascus. However, in spite of his being aware
of the two possible Islamic positions--that of textual corruption or that of
corruption of the meaning--he clearly refused to adhere to the textual corruption position. Ibn Taymiyyah was a man of dialogue and knew that the
extremist position kills dialogue. He demonstrated his position when he said:
"It was known that the Torah, which was available after the destruction of
Jerusalem, after Nebuchadnezzar, after Christ was sent, and after
Muhammad was sent, contains the wisdom of God. During the era of the
Prophet of God, the Jews of Medina had the Torah. It was said that after it
was sent some of its words had been changed. We can't confirm that this
happened to every copy in the world, as we don't know and anyway this is
not feasible. However, it is possible that many copies were changed and
circulated by [the Torah’s] followers to the extent that many people only
have what was later changed. Even so many of the copies of the Torah and
the Injil are primarily in agreement, with only insignificant differences."5
He however concentrated his criticism on the accusation of corrupting the
meaning, and here his position was definitive: "If it was known that all of
the Muslim, Jewish, and Christian sects had confirmed that these books had
had their meanings, interpretations and laws corrupted and changed, then
that would be sufficient."6
We conclude by noting that there is a basic fundamental difference between
the Christian and Muslim understanding of their respective books. Christians
focus on how the Bible points to Christ, and on how he himself is the eternal
Word of God. Most of them do not hold to the understanding of written
revelation being "sent down", as do Muslims believe regarding their book.
Rather the Bible is a trustworthy testimony, which God revealed to his
messengers in order to lead people to a knowledge of Him. People of faith
should always strive to dialogue and have beneficial interaction as they seek
to discover the deep and rich meanings in this written word.
[5] Ibn Taymiyyah, Al Jawab as-Sahih li-man Baddal Din al-Masih (The True Answer to Those who Changed
the Religion of Christ), edited by Dr. ‘Ali Hasan Nasir and Dr. Abd al-‘Aziz Ibrahim al-‘Askar and Dr.
Hamdan Muhammad, Al-‘Asimah Publishing House, 1st Printing, Riyadh, 1414 AH, Volume 2, p.419.
[6] Idem, Volume 2, p. 413.
