Refuting the Satanic Verses. Part 1!

 

Refuting the Satanic Verses. Part 1!

There are many Ahadith of the Satanic verses, and they can be found in numerous books. The Satanic Verse is about how Satan cast words into the Prophet’s (SAW) mouth making him recite what Satan wanted and making everyone bow down to the pagen’s idols. 

Now the origin of this event can be found in Sahih Al Bukhari 4863. It doesn't include anything About Satan or bowing down to idols. Rather it says they bowed down to Allah as said in the hadith and in the Chapter heading where the hadith falls under. Now the part where Satan cast words into the Prophet’s (SAW) mouth is an addition to the original story. And it's a WEAK/FABRICATED ADDITION when the event took place when the Prophet( SAW) was reciting Surah al Najem. 

I'm gonna be going through each narration and prove to you how they are weak and not authentic with sources! And also refute claims that some scholars have authenticated it as well during the end. Let's start shall we. 

First narration (1):

History of al tabari chain:

In Humayd-Salamah-Muhammad b. Ishaq-Yazid b. Ziyad al-Madani-Muhammad b. Kalb al-Qurazi. 

Response (1):  the chain is weak because its mursal (disconnected), Al Qurazi was born way after the satanic verses “event” took place, the event took place where “satan cast words into the prophet’s mouth” ( the weak addition) in the year 626. Now Al Qurazi was born in the year 708. How can he witness the event if he wasn’t born to begin with? Therefore the chain is disconnected. Proof for his birth date:

• Al Tabari: conception of history page 186

Now the same chain can be found in Ibn Ishaq’s biography, which we know is a weak report.  

Before we go to the next chain of narration, Lets establish that mursal hadith is weak and should not be used as evidence:  

Translation: And know that the ruling of the mursal hadith is the same ruling as the weak hadith unless there is another hadith that is authentic and can strengthen it. 

• Uloom al hadith by Ibn Salah page 53

You see in this source, ibn salah says that mursal hadith is weak. Now let's give more proof from scholars saying mursal=weak.

Translation: Abu Issa Al Trimidhi said: If the hadith is Mursal , it is not authentic according to most of the hadith scholars and more than one of them has deemed it weak. 

• sharh illal al trimidhi by ibn rajab page 273

Now we can conclude that the majority of hadith scholars from before and after the 10th century have said that Mursal hadith is weak! Now let's go to the next chain of narration. 

Second narration (2):

Tafsir by Ibn Kaithir’s chain:

Umaya Bin Khalid-Al-kalbi-Abi salah-Ibn Abbas.

Response (2):

Even in the beginnings of the tafsir under chapter 22 verse 52. Ibn kathir clearly says there isn't any authentic report of the satanic verses, they are all mursal reports. The defect in the chain is because of Al Kalbi. He himself admitted he was a liar, and he said he made up the chain with abi salah from ibn Abbas that was mentioned above:

Translation: Sufian Al-Thawrisaid: Al-Kalbi have said to me: all what you heard about me (Al kalbi)  from "Abi Saleh from Ibn Abbas" is a lie. So don't narrate it from me”

• Al-Majroohin min Al-Muhaditheen by Ibn Habban volume 2 page 263 

If you still don't believe me, Imam Ahmed himself said he isn't trustworthy near the bottom of the same page. So we have here that Al kalbi himself admitted he lied about the abi salah and ibn abbas narrating it. Therefore this chain is weak.  So 2 chains so far. Let go the third chain of narration.

Third narration (3):

Al Ahadith Al Mukhtarah chain:

Yuswf ibn hammad al mani-Ummayah ibn khalid-shubah-abi bishr-saeed ibn jbair-Ibn Abbas.

Response(3):

Now the problem in this chain is that if saeed ibn jabir heard from Ibn Abbas. When Imam Al bazzer was narrating this narration, he wasn't sure if he saeed ibn jabir heard from Ibn Abbas. Sheikh Al-Albani confirmed Imam Al Bazzar’s doubt about Saeed ibn jabir. Also Ibn kathir in his tafsir has said that he wasn't sure if saeed ibn jabir heard it from Ibn Abbas. The sources for this:

 

1st scan. Translation: Al Bazzer uses the narration (same chain from above) He says through Ibn Abbas which i think it is ( Al Albani says he is in doubt if this chain is correct).

Second scan. translation: because the narrator was in doubt if this hadith is narrated while connected(since Al Bazar was in doubt if it was Saeed Bin Jubair actually heard directly from Ibn Abbas)".

• Nasb Al Majaaneeq by Albani page 11-12

Now for the source where Ibn Kathir confirms this: 

Translation: from Saeed ibn jabir from who I think. He was in doubt of the hadith.

• Tafsir Ibn Kathir for chapter 22 verse 52.

As you can see from saeed ibn jabir to Ibn Abbas, the chain is cut. Therefore the chain is weak. That’s the defection in this chain. Now let's go to another narration. 

Fourth chain (4) part 1:

Al Dur Al munthor chain (1):

Now in this book, there is 2 chains. So we will go one by one. Let's start with the first chain:

Saeed ibn jabir-Ibn Abbas.

Response (4) part 1:

Well its the same chain as the last response (response 3) so a quick recap: the scholars aren't sure if saeed ibn jabir heard from ibn Abbas. I will also give more proof from the same book in the footnotes that more scholars agree with al Bazzar and Ibn Kathir:

Translation: Imam Al Tabarani says when narrating the hadith “I don't know it except from ibn Abbas from the prophet”

• Al Dur Al manthur volume 10 page 525

Translation: Abu Bakr Al Bazar said, We don't know of any connected authentic chain of this hadith except that Al Tabarani mentioned Interrupted with uncertainty. (Also read the footnotes . Very beneficial)

• Tafsir Al Qourtobi volume 17 page 427

As you can see even more scholars are agreeing with what originally  imam al Bazzar has said (in response 3). Therefore the chain is weak and cut off from Saeed ibn jabir from Ibn Abbas. Lets go to the second narration in book.

Forth chain (4) part 2:

Al Dur Al munthor chain (2):

Saeed ibn jabir.

Response (4) part 2:

Yes, there is only 1 narrator. And its the same guy. Now because its the only narrator, we know saeed ibn jabir wasnt alive during the event, so this is already mursal. Imam al Qourtobi has said this chain is munkar, which means rejected. Its weaker than weak. The source im gonna be using is the same volume of tafsir al qourotbi as referenced ( in response 4 part 4):

Translation: And this hadith is munkar (rejected).

• Ibid page 425

So we can see here both narrations in this book are weak and shouldn't be trusted. And every hadith here so far I have proved it to be weak and fabricated.  Now let's go to the next chain.

Fith chain (5):

Majam Al Zawa’id chain:

Ibn Abbas-(through who i think)-Saeed ibn Jabir.

Response (5):

Yes it says in the book what I wrote in brackets, so basically it's the same chain as mentioned in the third chain and fourth chain part 1 and 2. Same chain therefore the proof from above applies to this chain and we know that its a weak narration because saeed ibn jabir didnt hear from Ibn Abbas. 

——— 

 Now thats all the narration of the  satanic verses that i know of, when i find out about new ones..i will make a part 2 hence why this article has “part 1” in the title. 

Now lets refute the arguments that scholars like ibn Taymiah have authenticated it.

First shaykh ibn Taymiah. The source for this is a secondary source, there is no source leading to its primary source, the secondary source I'm referring to is a paper written in the 1900’s by the same guy who wrote the Satanic Verses book. He doesnt properly cite a source that ibn Taymiah authenticated it. Yet I will bring a source from his own book saying otherwise:

Translation: As for [hadiths]) the reason for the revelation, most of them are mursal without a chain of transmission. That is why Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: There are three sciences that have no chain of transmission - and in a word: they have no basis -: interpretation, meaning that their hadiths are transmitted

• Minhaj as sunnah an Nabawiyah volume 7 page 435 by ibn Taymiah

So we can see that ibn Taymiah cleary said they are mursal (disconneted reports) (as i established before that mursal hadith are weak) also Imam Ahmed agrees. So Ibn Taymiah did not authenticate the satanic verses.

Lets quote more scholars saying the satanic verses are weak and fabrication.

We have Al-Albani saying he put all Ahadith about the satanic verses in his book of weak and fabricated reports:

1st scan. Translation: "The Sunnah that has this importance for legislation is the Sunnah that is authentic by the prophet muhammad whether it isthrough ways of knowledge or Isnads(transmissions) that are authentic and are known by the people of knowledge who know the Hadith well and the transmitters.… and alot of these Hadiths that are weak andunknown and fabricated and some in which Islam is free from like the hadith of the cranes(satanic verses Al Gharaaneeq)..

2nd scan. Translation: weak and only 500 copies were published". and I have brought forth a huge amount of narrations (of Satanic Verses hadiths) and placed them in my big book called "Silsilat Al Alhadith Al Daeefah Wa Al Mawdua Wa Atharuha Al Sayi Fi Al Ummah, translation: Collection of the WEAK HADITHS ANDFABRICATIONS AND THEIR EVIL AFFECT ON THE UMMAH). And these weak and fabricated hadiths in my book have reached approximately 4000 hadiths, and all of them are either fabricated or weak and only 500 copies were published. 

• Manzilar al sunnah fi al islam wa bayan anahu la yugstaghna anha fi al quran Al-Albani page 18-19. 

We can see here that Albani has weakened every narration of the satanic verses. And placed them all in his book of weak and fabricated hadith. Therefore elarty and modern scholars has said the satanic verses are weak and a faberacted edition to the original hadith about surah al Najem which I quoted at the beginning of this article. 

Another reference that Albani refutes the satanic verses, is a book he wrote dedicated to disroving each claim it's called ( Nasb Al Majaaneeq) you would see that I used this book as a reference for one of the responses. 

Now to conclude all of this, Imam Al Razi has refuted anyone who authenticated the satanic verses, we see here:

Translation: Al Raazi Says: "There have been many authentic hadiths narrated and none of them mention the story of Al Gharaaneeq (Satanic Verses), and here is the proof: 1) Whoever uses this story claims that the Prophet Muhammad has praised the idols of the pagans has disbelieved because it is well known that the importance of the prophet Muhammad being sent is to dishonor the idols and reject them. 2) This story of Al Gharaaneeq (Satanic verses) is not true because it took place at the beginning of his message in which he(Prophet Muhammad) was unable to pray close to the Kaaba while reciting Quran out loud since he was not safe from the harms of the Pagans since they would of took hold of him with there hands rather the prophet was only safe to pray close to the Kaaba at night time when it was empty and the pagans were sleeping in which they would not be able to harm him, and this is what nullifies the claim of those who authenticate the story of Al Gharaaneeq (Satanic verses)".

• Tafsir Al Razi on chapter 22 verse 52

So here Al razi has clearly used logic and proved logically how the narrations of the satanic verses cannot be authentic. 

Thank you for reading till the end. 

Stay tuned for part 2 inshallah. As salam alikum ramatallah…Wabaraktu..

Have any questions? Send me a dm on Tiktok!

Aboutislam62

Aboutislam62_