Ever since I started researching Islam in 2009, I have perpetually grappled with differences of opinions amongst scholars on almost every other issue of Islamic practice, which was so disturbing that I had sleepless nights on many occasions! I kept thinking, rather wondering, how come there exists no agreement amongst the Muslims on any Islamic issue! Even the most fundamental matters like Qadr (Destiny), nature of God, Jihad, Salaah (prayer), women’s issues, etc., are much debated and widely disagreed upon by the Muslims in general and the scholars in particular. Any well read Muslim knows the fact that in almost every matter in which an Islamic verdict is sought either from a scholar or from a book, there are a multiplicity of opinions available, sometimes abhorrently contradictory to one another. I discussed one such case, a very simple one, in my previous article.
One of the best examples of a book that meticulously lists all the differing opinions on all matters related to the pillars of Islam is Fiqh-us-Sunnah by Sayyid-as-Sabiq. Fiqh-ul-Hadith by Qadhi-ash-Shawkani is another superb example, as is I’laamul Mua’qqieen by Ibnul Qayyim.
So what are the reasons behind these differences?
(1) My understanding is, they arise due to two main causes:
(i.) Human shortcomings and errors in comprehension of the texts of Islam.
(ii.) Ambiguity of the texts of Islam.
The first one is obvious and needs no elaboration.
The second one is disputable, thus demands a detailed discussion.
(2.a.) There are a lot many issues that have remained points of disagreement from the very beginning, that is, from the first generation of Muslims itself. And many more from the first and the second centuries of the Islamic era, as crystallised in the jurisprudences or fiqh of the schools of several imams like Ja’far, Maalik, Aboo Haneefa, Sufyan at-Thawri, Al Layth, Ash-Shafi’i, etc.
(b.) If the differences that are more than a millennium old were only due to human error then they would have not stuck around for so long, they would have been resolved by now, through the 12-13 centuries of incessant peer reviewed scholarship that has occurred since.
(c.) The fact that the differences have persisted for so long implies that the differences are legitimate and not merely a result of scholars erring; there’s more to it than meets the eye!
(d.) The differences cannot be the result of ulterior agendas of the scholars either, otherwise they would have not agreed upon the thousands of issues that they have agreed upon!
The classical scholars of the early generations of Islam didn’t create differences purposefully, just for the sake of it! Otherwise why would they agree on the matters on which they agreed, that the Kaabah in Makkah is the qiblah (direction of prayer), that there are five obligatory prayers in a day, that the morning salaah/prayer (fajr) has two obligatory units, that the two day prayers (dhuhr, a’sr) have four obligatory units each, that the evening prayer (maghrib) has three obligatory units, that the night prayer (isha’a) has four obligatory units, that one cannot pray when in major ceremonial impurity (janaabah), that wudu (ablution) is mandatory before salaah under normal circumstances, that wudu is nullified by the letting out of urine, stool, fart, semen, pre-seminal fluid, unconsciousness, deep sleep; that sexual intercourse makes one ceremonially impure in a major way, that in case of non-availability of water one can make tayammum (purification achieved through clean earth/dust), that zakaat (poor due) is obligatory, that fasting in Ramadan is obligatory, that there are 114 chapters in the Quran, that Allah is One, that Muhammad is His messenger, born in Makkah, married to Khadijah, etc.; that adultery is forbidden, that pork is forbidden, that getting intoxicated is forbidden, that gambling is forbidden, that usury is forbidden, that theft is forbidden, that sex with one’s own mother, sister, daughter is forbidden, and thousands of other issues over which they agreed, why didn’t they disagree on these issues?
(e.) If the differences were created by them intentionally, or because of errors on their part, then why didn’t they create differences on these matters as well, or why didn’t they err regarding these matters as well? It would be unfair and pretentious to doubt their piety, sincerity, and scholarship!
(3.) The simple answer is that the texts of Islam, namely the Quran and the Hadeeth or the ‘akhbaar-e-ahaad’ (isolated reports on the sayings, deeds, and tacit approvals of the Prophet Muhammad), have portions that are ambiguous and hence interpretable in multiple ways leading to differences in opinions on matters of both law and theology. Whereas the areas of the texts that are precise and clear in meaning, do not give rise to differences, hence the scholars agree on such points. This is well acknowledged by the Quran itself in the seventh verse of its third chapter (3:07)! (See Note 1). Thus, it is the very nature of the text(s) that gives rise to differences.
(4.a.) So the troublesome question that arises out of the above analysis is this:
Why would God give a book that has ambiguities that lead to differences? If the Quran is from God to guide humanity, then why is it so confusingly difficult, so much so that even its scholars don’t agree over so many critical issues, leading to multiple, conflicting sects and sub sects? Why would the most Merciful God send such a book which is so prone to differing interpretations that it divides its followers?
(b.) Moreover, the Qur’an claims to be a clear book (see Note 2), then why the ambiguities?!!?
(5.) Let’s look at the answers that I uncovered; answers that finally satisfied my sceptic mind and cemented my return to Islam!
(a.) First and foremost, the Quran is a constitutional text and constitutional texts inevitably harbour a scope of interpretation that leads to differing opinions.
(b.) Differences are inevitable as there can be no limit to hairsplitting to derive laws for very specific situations, or similar situations in very different times and places.
(c.) One can keep asking ‘what if’ questions and keep deriving more and more specific rulings, and the more specific one gets, the more one employs his/her individual reasoning abilities, thus creating more scope for differences in the finally derived opinions!
(d.) Thus the ambiguities and the resultant differences exist only on matters that are left to the hair splitting of the interpreters, and such matters are of secondary nature.
(e.) Ambiguities and resultant differences don’t exist over primary matters as they are clearly and precisely addressed by the sources of Islam, as also mentioned in the Quran itself in 3:07 (quoted and explained in Note 1). Common sense too suggests that the issues of fundamental/primary importance must be communicated to the community in absolutely explicit terms, leaving no room for interpretive differences of opinions. This reasoning is further supported by the following statement of Muhammad:
(f.) Narrated An−Nouman bin Bashir: I heard Allah’s Apostle saying, “Both legal and illegal things are evident but in between them there are doubtful (suspicious) things and most of the people have no knowledge about them. So whoever saves himself from these suspicious things saves his religion and his honour. And whoever indulges in these suspicious things is like a shepherd who grazes (his animals) near the Hima (private pasture) of someone else and at any moment he is liable to get into it. (O people!) Beware! Every king has a Hima and the Hima of Allah on the earth is His illegal (forbidden) things. Beware! There is a piece of flesh in the body, if it becomes good (reformed) the whole body becomes good, but if it gets spoiled the whole body gets spoiled, and that is the heart.” (Sahih Al Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2 (Kitaab-ul-Imaan/Book of Faith), hadith no.49)
(g.) The above report clearly says that the legal and the illegal things are only those that have been explicitly ordained; the things that are not explicitly clear cannot be absolutely legal or illegal, i.e.; such matters fall in the grey zone, hence they are not of fundamental importance. And the Quran too states in 3:07 that the verses which are precise and clear are the foundations of the religion, i.e.; these verses deal with primary/fundamental matters, that is the faraaidh/obligations and the hurmaat/prohibitions, i.e.; the legal and the illegal things. This implies that the allegorical/interpretable verses deal only with the secondary/non-fundamental matters. So, the differences that arise out of these interpretable verses are only in matters of secondary importance, not of fundamental importance.
(h.) So, it can be safely deduced that only those matters that are laid down by the muhkam/clear verses over which the community has agreed upon are the major/primary/fundamental issues; whereas the matters arising out of the ambiguous/unclear verses over which the community has differed are the secondary issues; hence not to be bickered and fought over.
(i.) The following ahadith/reports would make the matter more clear:
It has been narrated on the authority of Abdullah who said: On the day he returned from the Battle of Ahzab, the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) made for us an announcement that nobody would say his Zuhr prayer but in the quarters of Banu Quraizah. (Some) people, being afraid that the time for prayer would expire, said their prayers before reaching the street of Banu Quraizah. The others said: We will not say our prayer except where the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) has ordered us to say it even if the time expires. When he learned of the difference in the view of the two groups of the people, the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) did not blame anyone from the two groups. (Sahih Muslim, Book 019, Number 4374)
Narrated Abd-Allah ibn Umar: On the day of Al-Ahzab (i.e., the battle of the Clans) the Prophet said, “None of you (Muslims) should offer the Asr prayer, but only at (after reaching) Banu Quraiza’s place.” The Asr prayer became due for some of them on the way. Some of those said, “We will not offer it till we reach it, the place of Banu Quraizah”, while some others said, “No, we will pray at this spot, for the Prophet did not mean that for us.” Later on, it was mentioned to the Prophet and he did not criticise any of the two groups. (Al Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Hadith 445)
(j.) Hence we see that the difference regarding the time (and place) of offering a prayer emanated from the words of Muhammad itself. No difference would have arisen if Muhammad had clearly explained beforehand what was to be done in case the time for the prayer was about to expire before they reach Banu Quraizah. Muhammad didn’t explicitly specify this, why?
(k.) Because the issue of offering the prayer was secondary in this context. What was of primary importance was reaching Banu Quraizah as early as possible, which the companions indeed achieved. As the matter of the prayer was of secondary importance, the words of Muhammad were not explicit in this regard and could be interpreted in both ways, and Muhammad knew this, hence he didn’t criticise any of the two groups. This clearly shows that legitimate differences that arose amongst the pious classical scholars were not a result of their errors or malevolence, but because of the very nature of the sources of Islam. Hence, we should not have bad blood amongst ourselves over the differences (in secondary matters) that arise out of the ambiguous portions of the sources of Islam.
(l.) Thus, we have so far established that there is a bifurcation of issues into two categories:
(m.) The primary matters; these are simple, and constitute the basic Deen-al-Islam (the Religion of Islam). They are drawn from the clear primary sources:
(i) The explicit verses of the primary text of Islam, that is the Quran (or Al Kitaab).
(ii) The unanimously agreed upon – concurrently established practices of the Prophet(s), that is the Sunnah (or Al Hikmah).
(n.) And the complicated secondary matters, covered under the huge corpuses of Fiqh (secondary legal opinions) and detailed Aqeedah (theology).
Fiqh and Aqeedah contain complex secondary details, derived from the ambiguous verses/text of the Quran and from the secondary sources of Islam like the historical reports (‘akhbaar-e-ahaad’/‘ahadith’), analogical reasoning (‘qiyas’), customs (‘urf’) of a community/nation, etc.
(o.) This bifurcation yields a solid two layered structure comprising of:
Primary simplicity, topped with secondary sophistication.
(p.) This bi-layered structure spawns a sea of opinions that enhances the robustness of Islam by enabling its application to very different and very specific scenarios in very different times and places.
(q.) Thus I found that the apparent problem of differing opinions is actually a strength of Islam, not a weakness! And I’ve discussed this with an easy example in my previous article.
(6.) Several other utilities of this framework include:
(a.) Leeway to believers:
Since there are no disagreements over primary matters, the believers are mainly accountable for these. And the secondary matters that are ambiguous and fall in the grey zone are left to the discretion of the followers. The lack of clear guidance regarding these matters allows the Muslims to follow any of the opinions of their choice according to their needs; if each and every matter was concretely elaborated then there would be no choice left in any matter, as the Quran states in chapter 5, verses 101-102:
(b.) O Believers! Do not ask questions concerning such things, which, if made known to you, would only vex you. But if you ask such questions at the time when the Qur’an is being sent down, they will be made known to you. Allah has forgiven what you have done so far: for He is Forgiving and Forbearing. Some people before you asked such questions, then they were involved in disbelief because of those very things. (Abul A’laa Maududi)
(c.) Abul A’laa Maududi comments:
“This verse forbids people from asking useless and unnecessary questions because some people used to put such questions to the Holy Prophet as were of no practical good for mundane affairs or for spiritual uplift. For example, once a certain person while sitting in a gathering asked him, “Who is my real father?” Likewise, sometimes, some people put unnecessary questions concerning legal matters so as to get these defined, whereas they had been purposely kept undefined for the good of the people. For example, when Hajj was made obligatory by a commandment in the Qur’an a certain person heard it, and instantly asked, “Has it been made obligatory to perform Hajj every year?” The Holy Prophet did not reply. The man repeated the question, but he again kept quiet. When the man put the question for the third time, he replied, “Woe to you! If I had said ‘Yes’, the performance of Hajj every year would have become obligatory and people like you would have been unable to perform it and been guilty of disobedience.”
The Holy Prophet himself forbade people to ask questions just for the sake of it and to probe into things aimlessly. In a Tradition he warned, “The worst offender against the Muslims is the person who asked a question about something that had not been made unlawful but was made so because of his question.” In another Tradition he said, “Allah has prescribed some obligatory duties for you, let not these go unfulfilled, and He has made certain things unlawful, so do not go near them. He has prescribed certain limits, do not transgress them. He has been silent concerning certain things, but not because He has forgotten them, so do not try to probe into such things.”
In these two Traditions a warning has been served against a very serious matter. There are certain things and commandments which have been left vague and without details. This is not because the Law-giver had forgotten to give details or to make them explicit, but because He did not intend to limit these in order to leave a wide scope for the people. Therefore if a person goes on creating one issue after the other, by putting unnecessary and useless questions and thus creates limitations and specifications, he puts the people in unnecessary trouble. Likewise if he tries to deduce the details by the force of his reasoning and does not rest content till he has made the vague things specific and the indefinite definite, he in reality puts the Muslims in a very awkward position. This is because the more details we offer for the Unseen and the Next World, the more will be the chances for creating doubts about them and, likewise, the more limitations are imposed concerning the Commandments, the greater will be the chance for their violation.
The people, who were involved in disbelief because they asked useless and unnecessary questions, were the Jews. At first they were involved in hairsplitting, which led them to put unnecessary questions about the details of the Faith and the Commandments. Consequently, they helped to impose upon themselves such restrictions as they could not observe and so became guilty of disobedience and disbelief. What a pity that the Muslims are following the Jews, step by step, in spite of these warnings by the Qur’an and the Holy Prophet!” (End quote) (Emphasis mine)
(d.) Following are the reports referred to by maulana Maududi in the commentary quoted above:
(i.) The Prophet said, “Indeed the greatest crime for a Muslim is to ask about an issue that had not been forbidden and then it is forbidden because he asked about it” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-I’tisam, baab maa yukrau min kathrat al-sual).
(ii.) The Prophet said, “What God has prohibited in His Book, it is forbidden, and what He has allowed in His Book is allowed. And what He has not mentioned is clemency (mercy), so accept the clemency of your Lord” (Al-Hakim, 1917–25, 2:375).
(iii.) The Prophet said, “Leave me be as long as I’ve left you [with no orders], for indeed the people before you perished due to their questions and disagreements over their prophets. So if I’ve forbidden you from something then avoid it, and if I’ve ordained something for you then do of it what you are able.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-I’tisam, baab al-iqtida bi-sunan Rasul Allah).
(e.) The ahadith above, the Quranic verses 5:101-102, and the commentary of Abul a’laa Maududi lay out the proposition that whenever there is lack of explicit clarity regarding an issue, it is a mercy from God in that the Muslims have an option to do as they feel correct, with no strict imposition from God. As can be seen in case of the Zuhr/Asr prayer in the Bani Quraizah episode, since Muhammad had not explicitly told the companions what to do in case the time for the prayer was about to expire before reaching the destination, the Muslims had the option to do as they felt correct, and Muhammad endorsed this by approving the actions of both the groups.
(7.) Test of intelligence could be another reason why some parts of Islam are ambiguous:
God made the Quran and Islam ambiguous to test whether the Muslims use their brains to arrive at the broad and inclusive understanding arrived at so far, that is, that all matters of disagreement should be classified as secondary matters.
(8.) This is also a test of humanity and goodness of individuals and groups, as once they realise this primary matter-secondary matter concept, they must not cling on to partisan spirit for vested interests. They must stop insulting and fighting those who hold differing views. All diatribes and clashes be stopped for the good of the community in particular and the world at large.
(9.) Test of piety is another reason why some portions of Islam are ambiguous:
To test whether the Muslim avoids those things which fall in the grey zone, thus earn brownie points in the process. One who avoids doing the things whose legality is disagreed upon by the scholars; he demonstrates extra caution, piety, and God consciousness, which would fetch him extra rewards from God. This is well elaborated by the following hadith:
Narrated An−Nouman bin Bashir: I heard Allah’s Apostle saying, “Both legal and illegal things are evident but in between them there are doubtful (suspicious) things and most of the people have no knowledge about them. So whoever saves himself from these suspicious things saves his religion and his honor. And whoever indulges in these suspicious things is like a shepherd who grazes (his animals) near the Hima (private pasture) of someone else and at any moment he is liable to get into it. (O people!) Beware! Every king has a Hima and the Hima of Allah on the earth is His illegal (forbidden) things. Beware! There is a piece of flesh in the body if it becomes good (reformed) the whole body becomes good but if it gets spoilt the whole body gets spoilt and that is the heart.” (Sahih Al Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2 (Kitaab-ul-Imaan/Book of Faith), hadith no.49).
(10.) To summarise the issue so far:
(a.) Differences exist amongst scholars on Islamic legal and theological issues.
(b.) Reasons behind the differences are:
(i.) Human weaknesses.
(ii.) Ambiguities in scriptures:
(c.) The differences are not simply an issue of scholars erring as otherwise centuries of scholarship would have eliminated the errors eventually. The persistence of differences from the first generation itself is evidence that the differences are not just an issue of errors.
(d.) Similarly, the differences are not motivated by any ulterior agendas of the scholars otherwise they would have not agreed upon the thousands of issues that they have agreed upon!
(e.) But why would God give a book that has ambiguities that lead to differences?
(f.) Moreover, the Qur’an claims to be a clear book then why the ambiguities?
(g.) The answer is:
(i.) Constitutional texts inevitably have the scope of interpretation leading to differing opinions.
(ii.) Differences are inevitable as there can be no limit to hairsplitting.
(iii.) Thus the ambiguities and the resultant differences exist only on very specific secondary matters that are left to the hair splitting of the interpreters.
(iv.) Ambiguities and resultant differences don’t exist over primary matters as they are general and clear.
(v.) Thus there is this bifurcation of issues into simple primary matters and the complex secondary matters. The primary ones drawn from the clear primary sources of Islam, that is the explicit text of the Quran and the concurrently established Sunnah of the Prophets(s). And the secondary matters constituting the detailed law or ‘fiqh’ and the detailed theology or ‘aqeedah’, drawn from the ambiguous verses/text of the Quran and from the secondary sources of Islam like the historical reports (‘ahadith’), etc.
(vi.) Primary simplicity, topped by secondary sophistication, spawns a pool of opinions that enhances the robustness of Islam as this enables the application of Islam to different scenarios in different times and places.
(vii.) Also allows leeway to believers as there are no disagreements over primary matters for which they will be accountable, and the secondary matters that are ambiguous and fall in the grey zone are left to the discretion of the followers.
(viii.) Test of intelligence, test of piety, test of humanity are other reasons behind the ambiguities in the texts of Islam.
(11.) So we are at the end of this (long) article now! I deviated from my target of keeping the articles on this blog short, to cover the entire issue on one page, as I think this would do justice to this topic.
(12.) Going forward, I’ll cover an associated issue in the next article. Let’s set the stage for it here: Although we have reasoned out the causes and benefits behind the differences of opinions in Islam, one question that can potentially crop up is:
Could the differences be a consequence of contradictions within the source texts of Islam? Since contradictions can lead to ambiguities which in turn can lead to differences.
Stay tuned!
Note 1
Surah Aale Imran (chapter 3), verse 7 of the Quran states:
Translation of Abul A’laa Maududi:
It is He Who has sent down this Book to you. There are two kinds of verses in this Book: muhkamaat (which are precise in meaning) they are the essence of the Book and the other kind is mutashaabihaat (which are ambiguous). Those whose hearts are perverted, always go after the mutashaabihaat in pursuit of mischief and try to interpret them, whereas in fact, none except Allah knows their real meanings! And those who possess sound knowledge say, ‘We believe in them because all of them are from our Lord.’ And the fact is that only the people of insight can learn lessons from such things.
Translation of Abdullah Yusuf Ali:
He it is who has sent down to you the Book: In it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book: others are allegorical. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord.” And none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.
Translation of Muhsin Khan:
It is He Who has sent down to you (Muhammad) the Book (this Qur’an). In it are Verses that are entirely clear, they are the foundations of the Book (muhkamaat); and others not entirely clear (mutashaabihaat). So as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation (from the truth) they follow that which is not entirely clear thereof, seeking Al-Fitnah (polytheism and trials, etc.), and seeking for its hidden meanings, but none knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses) are from our Lord.” And none receive admonition except men of understanding.
Translation of MM Pickthall:
He it is Who hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture wherein are clear revelations. They are the substance of the Book. And others (which are) allegorical. But those in whose hearts is doubt pursue that which is allegorical, seeking (to cause) dissension by seeking to explain it. None knows its explanation except Allah. And those who are of sound instruction say: We believe therein, the whole is from our Lord; but only men of understanding really heed.
I have quoted the verse from four of the most popular English translations of the text. No matter how the verse is translated, the crux of the matter remains the same: there are two types of verses in the Quran, the absolutely clear verses (clear in meaning, which don’t have scope of interpretation); and the verses which are ambiguous and interpretable, thus leading to differences amongst the scholars. The clear verses are termed as ‘muhkamaat’, and the unclear/ambiguous verses are termed ‘mutashaabihaat’.
“The word mutashaabih comes from (the root word) ‘sh-b-h’, which means ‘to resemble’/‘to be similar to’. ‘Mutashaabih’ has two meanings, the first one is ‘resembling’, and the second ‘unclear’. The second meaning is related to the first, since those objects which resemble one another are difficult to distinguish, hence ‘unclear’”. (Yasir Qadhi, ‘An Introduction to the Sciences of the Quran’, pg.208)
“The scholars of uloom al-Qur’aan (sciences of the Quran) have differed over the exact meaning of muhkam and mutashaabih. As-Suyootee lists almost twenty opinions concerning this issue alone (Al Itqan, V:2, pg.3-7). However, in reality, almost all of the definitions that As-Suyootee quotes have a similar meaning. Az-Zarqaanee states, “If we look at these various opinions, we do not really find contradictions or discrepancies between them, but rather we see that they are all similar and close in meaning.”
Some of the meanings that As-Suyootee quotes are:
1) The muhkam is that which is clear in and of itself in contrast to the mutashaabih.
2) The muhkam are the verses whose meaning is understood, whereas the mutashaabih are those verses whose meaning is not understood.
3) The muhkam is that which can hold only one valid meaning, whereas the mutashaabih has many (valid meanings).
4) The muhkam can be understood by itself whereas the mutashaabih must be understood in light of other verses.
5) The muhkam does not need any interpretation in order for it to be understood, whereas the mutashaabih needs interpretation.
As can be seen, the various definitions have the same theme: the muhkam verses are those verses that are clear in meaning, and cannot be distorted or misunderstood, whereas the mutashaabih verses are those verses that are not clear in meaning by themselves, and in order to properly understand the mutashaabih verses, it is necessary to look at them in light of the muhkam verses.” (Yasir Qadhi, ‘An Introduction to the Sciences of the Quran’, pg.211) (Emphasis mine)
The above quotes make it very clear that the mutashaabih verses of the Quran are those which are not clear in meaning and have multiple possible interpretations. Now the same verse also says that none knows the ‘Taweel’ (true/real and total meaning) of the mutashaabih verses except Allah! And those who seek to do ‘taweel’ of these verses, cause dissension and discord amongst the people, thus clearly accepting the fact that the very nature of the mutashaabih verses is such that their ‘taweel’/interpretation/explanation leads to differences amongst the people!
Note 2
The Quran claims that it is a clear book:
5:15 – O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians)! Now has come to you Our Messenger (Muhammad) explaining to you much of that you used to hide from the Scripture and passing over (i.e., leaving out without explaining) much. Indeed, there has come to you from Allah a light (Prophet Muhammad) and a plain/clear Book (this Qur’an).
15:1 – Alif Laam Raa. These are the Verses of the Book, and a plain/clear Qur’an.
And it claims that it is explained in detail, a detailed explanation for everything:
11:1 – Alif Laam Raa. (This is) a Book, the Verses whereof are perfected and then explained in detail from One (Allah), Who is All-Wise and Well-Acquainted (with all things).
6:114 – [Say (O Muhammad)] ‘Shall I seek a judge other than Allah while it is He Who has sent down unto you the Book (The Qur’an), explained in detail.’ Those unto whom We gave the Scripture [the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)] know that it is revealed from your Lord in truth. So be not of those who doubt.
16:89 – ……….And We have sent down on you the Book making clear everything, and as a guidance and a mercy, and as good tidings to those who surrender.
41:3 – A Book whereof the Verses are explained in detail; A Quran in Arabic for people who know.
6:38 – There is not an animal on the earth, nor a flying creature flying on two wings, but they are communities like you. We have neglected nothing in the Book. Then unto their Lord they will be gathered.
6:126 – This is the path of your Lord, a straight path. We have detailed Our revelations for people who take heed.
10:37 – This Quran could not possibly be authored by someone other than GOD. It confirms all previous messages, and provides a fully detailed scripture. It is infallible, for it comes from the Lord of the universe.
12:111 – In their history verily there is a lesson for men of understanding. It is no invented story but a confirmation of the existing (Scriptures) and a detailed explanation of everything, and a guidance and a mercy for folk who believe.
It also claims that it is easy to understand and draw lessons from:
54:17 – And We have indeed made the Quran easy to understand and remember, then is there any that will remember (or receive admonition)?
54:22 – And We have indeed made the Quran easy to understand and remember, then is there any that will remember (or receive admonition)?
54:32 – And indeed, We have made the Quran easy to understand and remember, then is there any that will remember (or receive admonition)?
54:40 – And indeed, We have made the Quran easy to understand and remember, then is there any that will remember (or receive admonition)?
It claims that it has correct laws:
98:3 – …………..Containing correct and straight laws from Allah.
It claims that it has no contradictions in it:
4:82 – Do they not then consider the Quran carefully? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much contradictions.