Part 2 Rashad's chronology of events- Appendix 24

 

Tampering with the word of God

Part 2 Rashad's chronology of events

Dr. Khalifa's chronological understanding of events is unsurprising problematic. Dr. Khalifa’s claim that the two verses (9:128.129) were added to the Qur’an nineteen years after Muhammad's death has no basis. This is when Dr. Khalifa believes that Uthmanic canonization process began. Muhammad died in 632 C.E. and Uthman became the Caliph in 644.AD. Some classical scholars such as ibn Khaldun place the date for canonization at 30 AH which is 23 years after Prophet Muhammad’s death. Ibn Hajar argues for an earlier date and places the canonization 13 after Muhammad’s death There is no source we are aware of that shows anything significant happening in the canonization process 19 years after the demise of the Prophet. (The Uthmanic Codex: Understanding how the Qur’an wasPreserved: Published: June 22, 2022 • Edited: July 28, 2022 Authors: Ammar Khatib and Dr. Nazir Khan )

Dr. Khalifa's claim that a 50 year unfolded after Ali became Caliph is also problematic. Where did he get the number fifty from? There were two major wars that occurred from the time of Ali's succession. These wars are called “fitnah” by historians. The first major fitnah occurred from the beginning of Ali's reign in 656 and lasted to 661. That is a total of 6 years. The second fitnah occurred 19 years later (680AD- 692) and lasted 12 years. If we combine the two fitnahs as one and generously include the 19 years between we get a total of 36 years, 14 years short of 50.

The timeline problems continue. The “50” year war started with Ali's Calilphate, which was in 656 AD. If the war started in 656 AD then it had to end in 706 AD. But when does Dr. Khalifa say the war ended? “The first peace time ruler after this lengthy and disastrous war was Marwan Ibn Al Hakam.” Marwan came to office in 684 AD as Dr. Khalifa rightly pointed out. This is approximately 28 years after Ali was elected as the caliph. So we see that Dr. Calipha is off the mark by 22 years for his “50” years war. Our own attempts to construct a timeline (of 36 years)according to Dr. Kalipha's claim was more accurate.

The assertion of Marwan ibn Hakam being the “first peace time ruler” after the culmination of the “50 year war” is wrong on multiple levels. In historical chronology, Marwan reigned from June 684 to May of 685, the time of his death. The Second Fitnah however did not end until 692 AD, 7 years later. Marwan reigned during the time of the second Fitnah.

Describing Marwan ibn Hakam as a “peace time ruler” has no basis. It is true that Marwan ibn Hakam was selected as a way to unify the Ummaydic dynasty which was plagued by selection but the “peace” does not go beyond that. Marwan ibn Hakam faced his first major battle (Marj Rahit) less than three months into his rule and he died less than a year into his rule. Marwan's short reign was marked by campaigns to re-assert Ummayd autohrity and to describe him as a “peace time ruler” is wrong.

706AD marked the time period of 50 years following Ali's Ascension to Islamic governance. The only thing significant about the 706 AD was that it was the year the the Ummmayd Mosque of Damascus was built by Abdul Malik, the son of Marwan of Hakam. The reign of Abdul Malik did mark the end of the Second Fitnah, but not war. Abdul Malik ibn Marwan could not be described as a peace time ruler.

Dr. Khalifa asserts that the "disaster culminated in the infamous Battle of Karbala, where `Ali's son, Hussein, and his family were massacred." Rashad mentions the ending of the "50" year war as culminating in Imam Hussain's martydom in his Appnedix 24 and the Proclamation at the beginning of his "authorized" translation."  Dr. Khalifa makes it clear that he sees the 40 year war ended with Imam Hussain's martyrdom. But inserting Karbala into the timeline makes the chronology make even less sense.  The battle of Karbala, where Hussain was killed, occurred in  680 AD (61 A.H.) Historians classify the battle of Karbala as marking the beginning of the second fitnah (680-693.) There was another 13 years left before the war ended. 

The basic problem with Dr. Khalifa's own timeline remains when Karbala is added to the picture. The math does not add up in the chronology. Dr. Khalifa stated in both the Appendix 24 and Proclamation that the 50 year war (which was not a single war or fifty years) started with Hazrat Ali becoming Caliph. Ali took up his government post in 656 AD. If we add 50 years to 656 AD we arrive at the year 706 A.D.  But the battle of Karbala took place in 680 A.D, 26 years earlier.  Thus Hussain's martyrdom was only 24 years after his father Hazrat Ali became Caliph. That leaves us with 26 years left in Dr. Khalifa's timeline. 

It is clear from our review of Appendix 24 that Dr. Khalifa's chronological understanding of events does not match actual recorded history. The blatancy of errors gives credence to the fact that Rashad was careless in his assertions. A question is necessary for any follower of Rashad: If Rashad could make such gross errors in in numbers when discussing history can we really trust the doctor with the complex math analysis he makes in the Qur'an? Indeed, Dr. Khalifa's timeline is almost to incoherent to even refute. 

Before reviewing Dr. Khalifa’s evidence for the alleged manipulation of the Qur’an we need to discuss what his Appendix fails to mention. When it comes to the transmission of the Qur’an the first thing that is noticeable is that Dr. Khalifa talks about the historical documentation process of the Qur’an as if it was limited to writing. The Appendix does not discuss the oral recitation of the Qur’an anywhere. The oral transmission of the Qur’an is understood to be the primary tool by which the Qur’an is taught. (How the Qur’an Was Preserved During the Prophet’s ? Time: Mechanisms of Oral and Written Transmission https://yaqeeninstitute.org/read/paper/how-the-quran-was-preserved-during-the-prophets-time-mechanisms-of-oral-and-written-transmission) The ability of vast numbers of people to recite the Qur’an orally is considered a miracle by believers. The notion that the Qur’an is primary an oral recitation is not a piece of traditional polemics but is a fact recognized by secular scholars (Qur’an Recitation: ATradition of Oral Performance and Transmission Frederick Mathewson Denny; Oral Tradition, 4/1-2 (1989): 5-26 )

Why does Dr. Khalifa fail to mention the oral recitation of the Qur’an as a factor in it’s transmission? The oral learning method the Qur’an hinders the doctor’s claims about the so-called 19 “miracle” and the notion that two “false” were added. If the Qur’an is primarily a verbal communication from the Creator than the writing on paper is a tool to help transmit that oral form. The idea that a divine origin of a text can be proven from a mathematical analysis of the text assumes that the text was written by God. But the Quran is given by God in a revelatory process that involves listening and reciting, not writing. The writing scripts with the alphabets used to record the Qur’an were developed by human beings. The devisers of the Arabic scripts used their own ideas to decide how to display phonetical sounds with letters.

The other problem for Dr. Khalifa is that the oral transmission of the Qur’an was one of the methods used in the historical documentation process of the Holy writ. The memory of the Qur’an by the companions along with the various scattered texts were both used to produce what became the official manuscripts for the Qur’an we have today. We will see momentarily why this put’s a big question mark on Dr. Khalifa’s ability to do research.