TWO
THEORIES
For ages Muslims propounded two theories: one, that Jesus was
never ever nailed on the cross; two, Jesus was nailed on the
cross but he did not die on the cross. The purpose here is to investigate
both the theories and ascertain if the second possibility have any
validity in itself.
VERSE
ON CRUCIFIXION
Only one verse in the Quran references crucifixion of Prophet Jesus.
The verse is from Surah An-Nisa' number 157. Discussion in this site
will largely be based on this verse. Needless to say, the wordings
in this verse are as crucial as in any other verse. For non-Arabic
speaking readers, a correct understanding can result only from a correct
translation. Obviously, some deviation from the original Arabic words
and syntax could interject alternate possibilities. The deviations
could be inaccurate translations of the verse, omission of a
word (or words) in translation or addition of new word (or words)
suggesting that these are equivalent of "reveled text".
The correct
translation of the verse, adapted word for word is:
And
(because of) their saying: "Surely we have killed the Massih,
- son of Maryam" the messenger of Allah, and they could not kill
him nor could they crucify him, .
WAS
JESUS CRUCIFIED OR NOT?
Based on the first part of the verse 4:157, Muslims in general believe
that Jesus was not crucified. The key words "maa salabuhu"
was translated by many as "he was not crucified"; some others
translated it as "not put on the cross". General observation
is that only Qadiani Ahmadiyyaa sects hold that Jesus was put on the
cross. Other Muslims flatly refuse the contention based on the statement
in the verse "maa salabuhu". This necessitates a critical
analysis from the viewpoint of a bystander.
Had Allah closed
the sentence here and told nothing more, then it would have meant
that Jesus was not crucified. However, the sentence does not end here,
it continues to the most critical part where Allah says something
about "resemblance" or "similitude".
4:157
And (because of) their saying: "Surely we have killed the Massih,
- son of Maryam" the messenger of Allah, and they could not kill
him nor could they crucify him, even though a likeness of that was
made for them. .
ANALYSIS
OF KEYWORDS
Without going any further, first let us try to dissect the key words
wa
lakin subbiha lahum
and understand the usage and syntax. The meaning of the root word
"shibbahum"
is given in Arabic dictionary as "a likeness". The word
"subbiha"
is the passive form of the root word and means "to be made like".
Below I am giving all possible meanings of the key words, some of
them may be very remote synonym.
Arabic word
Best meaning
Remote synonym /
meaning
Wa
and,
but, also, whilst, too
- none -
Lakin
but
, still, nevertheless, yet, however, even though
even
though, although, nonetheless, after all
subbiha
<ha
refers to that, it, which etc.>
to be made like
A likeness of that / it / which
A similitude of that / it / which
A resemblance of that / it / which A similarity of that / it /
which
Analogy
of that / it / which
Image of that / it / which Representation of that / it
Posture of that / it / which
Stance of that / it / which Appearance of that / it / which
lahum
to
them
was made for them
was
shaped for them
was produced for them
was actualized for them
was formed for them
was fashioned for them
was contrived for them
SAMPLES
OF TRANSLATION
While translating the complete verse, many translators remained, as
far as possible, loyal to actual Arabic words and refrained from advocating
specific theories. Here most translators did not omit any key word
from translating, however, quite a few ventured beyond what Allah
said. These few translators very surreptitiously interjected additional
words inside the actual translation suggesting these wererevealed
text.
Here are a few representative works:
Yusuf
Ali
....Only
a likenss of that was shown to them.
Pickthall
.
But it appeared so unto them; .
M.
H. Shakir
.
But it appeared to them so (like Isa) ..
Hilali
and Khan
.
but the resemblance of 'Isa (Jesus) was put over anotherman
(and they killed that man) .
Rodwell
.
but they had only his likeness ..
T.
J. Irving
.
even though it seemed so to them .
Sher
Ali
...
but he was made to appear to them like one crucified; ....
Rashad
Khalifa
.
they were made to think that they did .
Arthur
J. Arberry
.
Only a likeness of that was shown to them.
Mohammad
Ali
. but he was made to appear to them as such.
Al-bukhari
.
But this matter was made dubious to them. .
Mohammad
Asad
...
but it only seemed to them (as if it had been so) ....
Zohurul
Hoque
...
but he was made to resemble to them. ...
In the above
sample, only Shakir, Hilali & Khan and Rodwell suggested that
a different person be substituted. Shakir placed 'like Isa' within
parenthesis to suggest what may have happened. Rodwell simply structured
the sentence to suggest the substitution theory. Hilali & Khan
overstepped all boundaries and clearly falsified by putting interpolated
words inside the translation. Shakir suggested a theory by placing
his opinion inside paranthesis and not in the actual text. Shakir
and Rodwell may be excused for inaccurate translations, but Hilali
& Khan remain notoriously corrupt and unpardonable for absolutely
wrong translation. No sane person can find the words 'Isa' and 'another
man' in actual Arabic text. Hilali & Khan tried to justify the
substitution theory by resorting to cheating, falsifying the Quran,
interpolating totally imaginary words and staying miles away from
revealed text.
WHAT
WAS SHOWN AS SIMILITUDE?
All Muslims agree that on the fateful day someone was raised on the
cross. That someone was also killed (per the corrupt Hilali &
Khan et. al.) on the cross. Question is was that 'someone': Jesus
or another person? Irrespective of whether it was Jesus or not,
the word similitude here refers to showing the likeness of death.
Since the question here is of the death of Jesus, by all means, the
likeness of death of Jesus was shown.
If a different
person's appearance was changed to become like Jesus, then the APPEARANCE
was mimicked or simulated and not death. This is precisely what
Hilali & Khan et. al. suggest. According to them the substituted
person was really killed. If the substituted person was really killed,
then the death could not have been mimicked - rather it did happen.
The verse 4:157
does not refer to simulation of appearance of a different person.
If any of the fairly correct translation is considered, than the word
similitude refers to the key words DEATH or CRUCIFIXION: . they could
not kill him nor could they crucify him, event though a likeness of
THAT was made to them ..
When Hilali
& Khan et. al. could not conclusively prove that a different person
was substituted, they elected to mutilate the verse in
the most wicked way by putting superfluous words 'Isa' and 'anotehr
man'.
WHAT
IS CRUCIFIXION?
The substitution theory was propounded to justify that Jesus was not
crucified. Those Muslims who say that Allah clearly mentioned that
Jesus was not crucified have a point there. The verse is sufficiently
clear and bear precise meaning that they neither could kill him nor
crucify him. However, little more digging is needed to go beyond the
meaning of of the word crucify. The purpose of crucifixion is to put
someone to death by nailing. The Jews would not put a person
on the cross and later let him walk away. For centuries, the Jews
killed thousands of people on the cross and never they let anyone
walk away. It was a form of capital punishment. It is a long event
starting from raising on the cross, nailing or binding the hands and
feet and letting the person to die through a slow painful process
of death, often taking hours and sometimes days. If the person is
nailed, then due to bleeding, death occurs far quickly - may be in
hours. On the contrary, if a person is tied on the cross; then death
is prolonged. Either way, if a person cannot be put to death by
the process of crucifixion, then it is true that the person was not
crucified - because, the purpose of crucifixion was defeated!
The Jews wanted
to kill Jesus by crucifixion. When Allah refuted their contention
of crucifixion, it is still possible that the Jews nailed him on the
cross, but failed to ensure the completion of the entire process of
killing by crucifixion. If that is so, the statement in the verse
4:157 is still valid and there is no need to invent a story of substitution.
If the Jews failed to ascertain Jesus' death, then by all reasoning,
they failed to crucify him. This is because the very purpose of nailing
Jesus on the cross was defeated.
SIMILITUDE
MADE SIMPLE
The meaning of 'showing a similitude' becomes easy to follow once
the readers are ready to go beyond the flat meaning of crucifixion.
The Jews thought they killed Jesus and Allah truly made them to think
that they did, but in reality they failed to kill him because they
failed to verify and ascertain whether he was acutally dead or not.
Question is did Allah plan to put another man to Capital Punishment
for the crime (?) committed by Jesus? Is Allah's mode of judgement
so ridiculous?
Several possibilities
can be investigated based on authentic history, descriptions available
in Bible and to some extent Hadith. In this reagrd descriptions given
in the Bible should be carefully investigated because it is contemporary
to that period. Hadith was compiled 800 years after the event of crucifixion.
One possibility is that Jesus fainted on the cross, other possibility
is that Jesus was sent to a comatose state, yet another possibility
is that the Jews brought him down from the cross far too early thinking
that he died. Any or all of these possibilities go hand in hand with
Allah's statement that a similitude or likeness of it/that/which (subbiha)
was shown to the Jews. Once again, it/that/which here refers to death
of Jesus.
Any of these
possibilities as described above clearly goes with the acceptable
translations of the verse provided by Yusuf Ali, M. Pickthall, T.
J. Irving, Sher Ali, Rashad Khalifa, A. J. Arberry, Mohammad Ali,
Al-bukhari, Muhammad Asad and Zohurul Hoque.
SUBSTITUTION
WITHOUT SUBSTANCE
The staunch supporters of substitution theory (Hilali & Khan)
in a way do feel the necessity to kill someone by crucifixion. They
know someone was crucified on that fateful day, but they think it
was not Jesus. The substitution theory propounds stories that are
too far fetched and cannot be explained by logical inferences. Several
questions arise without a satisfactory answer. For example:
Appearance of a different person became like Jesus. How did it happen?
If Jesus designed and planned the disguise, then he is coward and
cheat. He caused an apparent innocent person to die for him. If Allah
caused the feature of a different person to get changed and made him
to die, then it is injustice on part of Allah. With the vast power
and possibilities of Allah, He could have accomplished this matter
in more graceful manner. If
saving Jesus was the main intention of Allah, then quietly Jesus should
have been raised. There was no need to kill a different person in
his place. The Jews would have got a message that Jesus was indeed
a prophet.
If appearance of a different person can become like Jesus, then what
stopped Jesus' appearance to become like a different person? If Jesus'
appearance was made to change, then the Jews could not have identified
him and he could have been saved. Besides, no killing would have taken
place. If
the likeness of Jesus was shown to the Jews, then what was shown to
the actual followers? Were the actual followers led to believe that
the substituted person was actual Jesus?
If the actual followers knew that the substituted person was not actual
Jesus, why did some of them follow the substituted person to the place
of crucifixion? Were they making a fun of the situation?
If the actual Jesus was raised alive before the incidence of crucifixion,
why did the followers not mention it to the Jews? Were they scared?
Scared of what? Jesus was already saved by then. By remaining silent,
the actual followers made a different person to die for no fault of
his. Actual
Jesus was raised alive by Allah. If so, while he was raised alive,
how come nobody saw the event? Was he made invisible at that time?
Or does it mean a similitude of raising alive was shown to them? There
is no convincing answer available to explain the process of raising.
The
substitution theory says that Jesus was raised alive in the Heaven
on the eve of crucifixion. However, verse 3:54 categorically
says Allah will cause Jesus to die first than raise him. How
can he be raised contrary to the verse 3:54? Where is the scope to
accomodate the substitution theory? Verse
23:50 says Allah sheltered Jesus and his mother in a plateau of meadows
and spring. Did it happen before substitution? If so what is
that place? Further,
verse 3:45 and 5:40 refers to Jesus talking to people in mature age
or gray hair age. If Jesus was substituted and raised on the day of
crucifixion, he did not reach gray hair age. If he reaches the mature
age after his Second Coming, then at the age of 2000 years, he is
beyond being mature, rather old and debilitated. That age cannot be
referred to as mature age.
The substitution
theory does not explain any of the points mentioned above. Even if
an explanantion can be found, it is not surprising, a story can be
adapted in any manner to serve the purpose. The substitution theory
was propounded just to substantiate the fact that Jesus was not 'crucified'.
The substitution theory uses one lie to cover another and in the end
snowballs everything into a total clutter. The Quran does not support
this theory.
Botttom Line: For a long time, it was maliciously propagated that
crucifixion of Jesus was a Qadiani-Ahmadiyyaa conspiracy. As
a result, many traditional Muslims remained in a cloud of confusion
for ages. If at all there was a conspiracy, it was done by the right-wing
pseudo-scholars like Hilali and Khan. Their blatant lies and
forgery has been accepted by most Muslims and notoriously supported
by the Saudi Government.
Main Entry: cru·ci·fy
Pronunciation: 'krü-s&-"fI
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -fied; -fy·ing
Etymology: Middle English crucifien, from Old French crucifier,
from Late Latin crucifigere
Date: 14th century
1 : to put to death
by nailing or binding the wrists or hands and feet to a cross
Any
comments, suggestions: please send email to: Abu
Samad Nayeem
Akhtar
You are visitor number
Appearance of a different person became like Jesus. How did it happen?
If Jesus designed and planned the disguise, then he is coward and
cheat. He caused an apparent innocent person to die for him. If Allah
caused the feature of a different person to get changed and made him
to die, then it is injustice on part of Allah. With the vast power
and possibilities of Allah, He could have accomplished this matter
in more graceful manner.