Assumed Contradictions in the Qurʾān: An Analysis on Al-Alūsī’s Disputation of Al-Kindī in “The Apology of Al-Kindī”

1. Introduction

The profound dissemination of Islam across the Arabian Peninsula has bestowed upon the masses an enlightening encounter with the theological principles of Islamic doctrine. Consequently, the study of the Qurʾān has engendered a diverse array of outcomes as it has been contemplated by an assortment of individuals and collectives. The imposition of authority by the Qurʾān upon other religious scriptures has evoked a sense of discontent among devotees of those religions who question the dominant position asserted by the Qurʾān. The concept of the Qurʾān as being the exclusive and untainted revelation bestowed by Allāh has undoubtedly evoked diverse receptions, thereby giving rise to critiques directed towards the Qurʾān itself. The contemplation and discourse surrounding faith and spirituality have been meticulously chronicled within numerous bodies of written work.¹ Throughout history, it is evident that even the Prophet Muḥammad found himself engaged in immersed encounters with the Meccan Quraysh and the people of the book. The Qurʾān, in its persistent manner, refutes these allegations or critiques of untainted revelation and provides fitting responses to this objection without fail.² Christian-Muslim Relations, a renowned Bibliographical History Online published by Brill, focuses on the period between 600 to 1500, during which time interactions occurred across the vast Mediterranean region and the details of which were documented in various languages such as Syriac, Arabic, Greek, Latin, and others.³

In the pursuit of unravelling the enigmatic origins of the Qurʾān, modern scholars find themselves traversing a vast landscape of knowledge where myriad elements, characteristics, and domains converge, forming intricate constellations of interconnected themes. Mohar Ali in the year 2004 authored a work, titled "The Qurʾān and the Orientalist: An Examination of their Theories and Assumptions "aiming to understand and discern the Qurʾān as the sole uncorrupted revelation by Allāh. In general, the Qurʾān's response to this allegation takes at least seven principal forms: (i) declarations that the Qurʾān is not composed by humans, nor did the Prophet turn a poet;⁴ (ii) proclamations that the Qurʾān is a true revelation by Allāh in Arabic language;⁵ (iii) Allāh ensures that the Qurʾān will be completely revealed as intended without any shortcoming;⁶ (iv) the stories of previous prophets; their challenges and objections attest to Muḥammad's veracity as the true prophet of Allāh;⁷ (v) Allāh commands the Prophet to declare that if he fabricates anything and then distributes it in Allāh's name, he would be severely chastised;⁸ (vi) Allāh declares Himself to be the Witness between the prophet and his people which is crucial because Allāh's conversation with His Messengers is essentially an intimate affair that no outsider can witness or vouchsafe for;⁹ and (vii) Allāh dares all Qurʾān listeners to compose a text that is similar to a single surah of the Qurʾān and that has not been fulfilled in any time period.¹⁰

Apart from the accusations recounted in the Qurʾān, the prophetic traditions also show attempts by others to undermine Islamic foundation through criticism. The Christians of Najrān attempted to raise a supposed fault in the Qurʾān, according to a narration by the Muslim.¹¹ They drew attention to a verse in Surah Maryam in which the Qurʾān says, "O sister of Hārūn," in reference to the occurrence of the birth of Prophet ꜥĪsā. They maintained that the scripture was historically incorrect because Prophet Mūsā was born considerably before the time of Prophet ꜥĪsā. The Prophet Muḥammad answered the criticism by explaining that the people of the book used to name their children after apostles and pious persons who had gone before them.

Criticisms on the Qurʾān continued to emerge in different eras and places under various types and subjects. In response to those criticisms, scholars have produced a number of literatures consisting of explanations and rebuttals to those allegations. Among those who have contributed to this field is Abū Muḥammad ꜥAbd Allāh ibn Muslim ibn Qutaybah al-Dīnawarī (d. 276H), the author of Taʾwīl Mushkil al-Qurʾān, who responded to faulty interpretations of the Qurʾān by the people who displayed hostility towards the sacred text during his time. Ibn Qutaybah's noble endeavours was later carried on by other scholars in the likes of al-Qāḍī ꜥAbd al-Jabbār al-Muꜥtazilī (d. 415H), Abū Jaꜥfar, Aḥmad ibn Ibrāhīm ibn al-Zubayr al-Gharnāṭi (d. 708H), and Shaykh al-Islām ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728H).

Among the late scholars who have also contributed to this field is Abū al-Barakāt, Nuꜥmān ibn Maḥmūd al-Alūsi (d. 1317) who is the focus of this study.¹² Al-Alūsī wrote al-Jawāb al-Fāṣil li-mā laffaqahu ꜥAbd al-Masīh as a response towards ꜥAbd al-Masīh al-Kindī's letter to al-Hāshimī. This research aims to examine al-Alūsī's rebuttal to al-Kindī's claims on allegedly contradictory verses in the Qurʾān. The outcome of the investigation will outline Alūsī's approach to the problem which can be applied to other allegedly contradictory passages in the Qurʾān.

2. Background of Al-Kindī

Scholarly discussions on the Nestorian ꜥAbd al-Masīḥ al-Kindī's background are unusual in that they cannot confirm the existence of al-Kindī in any significant way. Current researchers believe that al-Kindī was a real person who lived in the 9th century and this information was cited from Al-Bīrūnī's reference of him in his work, "Vestiges of Ancient Nations" from the 10th century. While describing the customs of the Sabaeans, al-Bīrūnī cited the authority of Ibn Isḥāq al- Kindī, a Christian as, "Likewise ꜥAbd al-Masīḥ ibn Isḥāq al- Kindī the Christian, in his reply to the Epistle of ꜥAbd Allāh ibn Ismāꜥīl the Hashimite, relates of them (the Sabaeans) that they are notorious for Human sacrifice, but that at present they are not able to practise openly the same.”¹³ Despite the mention by al-Bīrūnī, however, the fact that there was no biographical data available on the two men to which the dispute in the apology is ascribed, viz. ꜥAbd Allāh ibn Ismāꜥīl al-Hāshimī and ꜥAbd al-Masīh al-Kindī, both are a major concern as suggested by al-Alūsī in his response to al-Kindī.

3. Al-Alūsī's View on the Originality of the Apology

Al-Alūsī clearly did not view the apology to be written during the time of al-Maʾmūn, instead he claimed that it was written by a group of protestants much later than the date presumed. Al-Alūsī alleged them to fabricate the letter to two unknown individuals during al-Mamun's time. He then further stressed that none of the Islamic libraries during his time possessed a copy of the literature until it was found in a library in London.¹⁴ Al-Alūsī's proposition is supported by the fact that each time a biblical verse is quoted, it is accompanied with reference numbers which are comparable to the protestant version of the bible.¹⁵

In addition, it is also peculiar to note that despite the heavy writings on Christianity by scholars such as al-Mawardī (d. 450H), al-Qarafī (d. 684h), Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728H), Ibn Kathīr (d. 774H), and Ibn al-Qayyim (d. 751H), none of them ever mentioned the apology even though they had issued scathing criticism towards the foundation of Islam. Aḥmad Hijazi Saqa, the editor of al-Alūsī's work, claimed that the corresponding letters aim to achieve two objectives, namely to influence people into believing that Muslims, Jews, Christians, and Pagans are all the same and to demonstrate the superiority of Christianity over Islam. The former is seen through the manner in which the initial letter allegedly by al-Hashmi greeted al-Kindī with peace offering and blessings which he claimed to be in accordance with the prophetic traditions.

On this matter, al-Alūsī explained that based on the authentic narrations, the Prophet ﷺ used the phrase wa al-salām ꜥalā man ittabaꜥa al-hudā (peace upon whoever follows the truth) in his letters to the rulers of Rome and Egypt rather than wa al-salām ꜥalayka wa al-raḥmah (peace and blessing upon you) as used in al-Hashimi's letter. Furthermore, the Prophet did not treat Muslims and non-Muslims equally. The Prophet imposed jizyah (levy) on the the dhimmis,¹⁶ demonstrating his distinction between Muslims and dhimmis. In the apology, it is also mentioned that al-Maʾmūn endorsed Christianity as the religion of the hereafter and this assertion clearly opposes the Islamic fundamentals as explained by Saqa.

4. Contradictory Verses in the Qurʾān According to al-Kindī

The notion of Qurʾān to be self-contradictory was borne from the idea that the Qurʾān was composed by the Prophet.¹⁷ The claim that it is composed by a human render it to be vulnerable to mistakes and inconsistency hence, the allegation. Al-Kindī toyed with the idea in his apology where he presented a number of contradictions in the Qurʾān which are based on his self-interpretation of the verses. It is claimed in the apology that ꜥAbd Allāh al-Hāshimī, a character presumed to live in the era of al-Maʾmūn, sent a letter to al-Kindī and invited him to embrace Islam which prompted al-Kindī to respond with an apology. In his response to al-Hashimi, al-Kindī presented scathing arguments to undermine Islam and its teachings. Among the propositions forwarded by al-Kindī, the most prominent is that the Qurʾān is self-contradictory. He stated that, "And in proof thereof, we have the Coran itself, which is a confused heap, with neither system nor order. The sense moreover consistent not with itself; but throughout one passage is contradicted by another.¹⁸

In general, al-Kindī's allegation on the contradictions in the Qurʾān revolve around three main subjects, namely foreign words in the Qurʾān, responsibility to invite others to Islam, and to engage in jihad against the unbelievers and the corruption of the Torah and Bible. Under each of the subjects, al-Kindī listed the assumed contradictory verses. In the following discussions, the allegations forwarded by al-Kindī and followed by al-Alūsī's refutations are mentioned.

4.1. Foreign Words in the Qurʾān

The fact that the Qurʾān was revealed in Arabic language is emphasised in a number of Qurʾānic verses. The eloquence of the Qurʾān is adored by Muslims and non-Muslims during the Prophet's time. On this matter, al-Kindī alleged that the Qurʾān consisted of foreign words that stand in contrast with the former assertion hence, the contradiction. Al-Kindī wrote,

"If the claim be that (apart from all other tongues) the Coran is an unparalleled and miraculous model of Arabic (according to the text, Verily, we have sent down the Coran in the Arabic tongue, if perchance ye may comprehend); then, why do we find in it foreign words, as namâric from the Persian, and mishkât from the Abyssinian, vocabulary? "¹⁹

In response to al-Kindī's accusation, Al-Alūsī brought together the views of several scholars in analysing the issue highlighted by al-Kindī. In general, scholars were divided into two camps such as, those who completely reject the existence of language in the Qurʾān other than Arabic and those who recognise the existence of such words. Those who persisted on ignoring the existence of terms other than Arabic in the Qurʾān were al-Shāfiꜥī and Abū Ubaydah. They claimed through the verses such as, Yūsuf 12:2 and Ṭahā 20:113 as proof that the Qurʾān was revealed in Arabic. Words that were commonly mistaken for non-Arabic words had actually been derived from Arabic but are unfamiliar to some people. This group claimed that Arabic is a widely spoken language and that no one can completely master it. However, Ibn ꜥAbbās's interpretation mentioned certain words as being in Persian, Abyssinian, or other languages. Some academics say that it alludes to the employment of the same pronunciation in Arabic and other languages in this circumstance.²⁰

Another opinion that also falls under this category is that those who assert that terms considered non-Arabic are actually imported words from another. Nonetheless, these terms have been commonly employed by Arabs in everyday dialogue as well as in their poetry. However, these terms have likewise gone through a transformation which rendered them to become Arabic. The Arabic language had integrated these words by the time the Qurʾān was revealed, therefore, it was regarded as an Arabic word. Whereas, the second group of scholars acknowledged that the Qurʾān includes phrases that are not in Arabic.²¹

Such non-Arabic phrases, according to this perspective, do not negate the fact that the Qurʾān was revealed in Arabic. Similarly, the existence of Persian phrases in Arabic poetry, for example, does not negate the fact that the poetry was written in Arabic. Some scholars argued that the existence of such imported terms is justified. They emphasised that the Qurʾān was revealed in several different languages and the Qurʾān choose the best imported terms which is also the most popular among Arabs. In addition, the Prophet was sent to the entire human race. As a result, the fact that the Qurʾān contains words from other languages, despite being initially written in Arabic, is not surprising.²²

4.2. Responsibility to Invite Others to Islam and to Engage in Jihad Against the Unbelievers

Al-Kindī questioned the necessity of waging jihād against the unbelievers. He stated that there is a contradiction between some passages that tell Muslims and dhimmis to share their faith in peace and to wage war against unbelievers until they succumb to their defeat, accept Islam, or pay taxes to Muslims. Furthermore, it appears that al-Kindī even questioned the obligation to invite others to accept Islam as he firstly quoted āl-ꜥImrān 3:104, which states: "And let there be arising] from you a nation inviting to all that is] good, enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong, and those will be the successful. "²³

Al-Kindī subsequently quoted several verses²⁴ which he believed to be in contrast with the above quoted verse. In response, Al-Alūsī clarified that the verse from al-ꜥImrān 3:104, waltakun minkum (and let there be arising] from you a nation) requires a group of people to be responsible for calling others to everything that is beneficial. The passage next instructs them to encourage others to do what is maꜥrūf (right) and to forbid them from doing what is munkar (wrong). Linguistically khayr means something that is desired by all. By context of the verse, it implies that following the Qurʾān and the prophetic tradition along with believing in Allāh (īmān) and staying maꜥrūf are various forms of ṭāꜥat (devotion).²⁵ Some scholars believe that khayr means Islam and maꜥrūf means to follow Allāh's instructions or commands.²⁶ This obligation does not in any way contradict with what has been stated in al-Baqarah: 272. On al-Baqarah 2:272, laysa ꜥalayka hudāhum (not upon you, O Muhammad], is responsibility for their guidance).²⁷ Al-Alūsī simply emphasised that Prophet Muḥammad is not obligated to force the unbelievers to accept what is decreed for them as Allāh is capable of guiding anyone He desires. The verse proceeds to note that whatever donations given by the believers will be rewarded by Allāh in full. Al-Alūsī then cited the sabab nuzul (occasion of revelation) of the verse which explains that the verse was revealed in response to a group of Muslims' refusal to offer alms to the destitute among the unbelievers only because they were not Muslims, even though they had family tied with them.²⁸ Al-Ṭanṭawī also mentioned that al-Baqarah 2:272 implies that the Prophet Muḥammad is not obliged to make the unbelievers accept what has been ordained upon them. However, despite their rejection, the Muslims are still required to practise the highest standard of behaviour towards them which includes providing assistance to those in need among them.²⁹

Al-Alūsī quoted al-Rāzī's interpretation where he explained that the verse in surah Yūnus, walaw shāʾa rabbuka la-āmana man fī al-arḍ (and had your Lord willed, those on earth would have believed),concerns the suspicions raised by the unbelievers in regards of prophethood of Muḥammad as well as to provide counter arguments.³⁰ Among the raised suspicions, is the delay of punishments promised by the Prophet to the unbelievers which led to mockery and denial. Allāh then asserts that the delay does not suggest fallacy as implied in the story of Prophet Nūḥ and Prophet Mūsā which were mentioned earlier in the surah. Allāh then mentions in Yūnus 10:99 that the Prophet's excessive eagerness to establish evidence to the veracity of his calling and his response to the unbelievers' suspicion will not alter their stance unless Allāh wishes so.³¹ The understanding here shows that Yūnus 10:99 does not pose any contradiction with the obligation to invite others to Islam or to participate in jihad against the unbelievers.

On Yūnus 10:108-109, (say, "O mankind, the truth has come to you…”), al-Alūsī explained that Prophet Muḥammad in the initial stages of da'wah was not instructed to engage in battle with the unbelievers rather he was ordered to offer warnings and kind advice. It was in the later stages where the Prophet was required to fight in battle with the unbelievers. Al-Alūsī went on to claim that the verse's instructions are nullified by passages pertaining to warfare and that Allāh's wisdom is the sole basis for the revision of the verse's directives. Al-Alūsī emphasised that it is common for prophets to have different teachings from one another. Prophet Mūsā and Prophet Yūshaꜥ were ordered to engage in battle whereby Prophet ꜥĪsā was not. It has been observed that several commandments that were followed during the time of Prophet Mūsā AS were also abrogated by Prophet ꜥĪsā. All of the commandment changes are based on Allāh's unsurpassed wisdom. Additionally, the prophets adapted to the changing conditions and also serve as a test for humanity. Al-Alūsī even emphasised that the Torah and the Injīl also include similar command variations.³²

Regarding Hud 118-119, (and if your Lord had willed, He could have made mankind one community), Al-Alūsī pointed out that the verse reveals that, had Allāh so desired, He would have made everyone on Earth adhere to the correct path or faith. However, mankind was allowed to have its own differences which would ultimately have a varied impact on each individual. Al-Alūsī went on to say that according to al-Dhāriyāt 51:56, Allāh created people in order for them to worship Him, not because of the disagreements that have arisen between them. The vowel lam in lidhālika is lām al-ꜥāqibah (consequence) and al-ṣayrūrah (becoming).³³

On al-Baqarah 2:256, lā ikrāh fī al-dīn (there shall be no compulsion in acceptance of] the religion), Al-Alūsī asserted that this verse and all other comparable verses that do not command the Prophet to engage in combat with the kuffar were abrogated by other passages that do. In this regard, Al-Alūsī cited al-Tawbah 9:123, al-Fatḥ 48:16, and al-Baqarah 2: 190 in order to substantiate his argument. Likewise, al-Alūsī also cited a prophetic tradition indicating that jihad is still relevant today and will be till the Day of Judgement. Al-Alūsī believed that it is incomprehensible to suggest that the Prophet disobeyed the Qurʾān and gave companions the order to keep fighting the kuffār notwithstanding the revelation of the pacifist verses.

Al-Alūsī went on to say that Sūrah al-Kāfirūn, whether it is abrogated or not, does not conflict in any way with the passages about jihad. Al-Alūsī referred to the sūrah's cause of revelation in this regard which states that the sūrah was revealed in response to the Meccan Quraysh's demand that the Prophet should demonstrate religious compromise. The Meccan Quraysh initially offered the Prophet money and women in exchange for him to stop demeaning their gods but the Prophet rejected them. They then went on to propose a different arrangement that calls for the Prophet to worship the idols for a year before they may worship Allāh for the same length of time.

Then, Sūrah al-Kāfirūn was revealed to emphasise the Islamic tenet that there can be no compromise when it comes to one's beliefs. Al-Kāfirūn has drawn a distinct line between Islam and Kufr and a Muslim is expected to abstain from all Kufr related practices and beliefs and to worship Allāh only ever. Such a declaration is not at odds with the instruction of jihād in any way.³⁴ In contrast to the verses on jihād against the unbelievers, it appears that Sūrah al-Kāfirūn is more focused on inner issues and acts of devotion whereas the verses on jihad against the unbelievers are more focused on physical conflicts with the rival unbelievers.

Concerning al-ꜥAnkabūt, 29:46, (and do not argue with the People of the Scripture unless it be with that, bettering the most virtuous way, except in the case of] those of them who have done wrong), the scripture commanded the Prophet and the Muslims to debate with people of the book in the most effective manner possible. According to Qurʾānic exegetes, the phrase "the best method"refers to any action that yields the greatest rewards.³⁵ It pertains to both the substance of the argument and the method in which it is conducted. Ibn ꜥAbbās defined "the best path"as the phrase lā ilāha illā Allāh (there is no god other than Allāh) and this might be regarded as the debate's topic. The "best way"also entails intricate word selection, proper arguments, and avoiding harsh or disrespectful comments.³⁶ However, al-ꜥAnkabūt, 29:46 notes that those who do injustice among the people of the book necessitate a different reaction which includes a harsher approach that may include battle. Based on this interpretation, it is clear that al-ꜥAnkabūt, 29:46 does not contradict the verses of jihad.

4.3. The Corruption of the Torah and Injīl

Al-Kindī contested the Muslim view that the Torah and the Injīl had been corrupted. He asserted that this belief was against the teachings of the Qurʾān itself and to support his assertion he quoted Yūnus 10:94 and al-Baqarah 2:123.³⁷ Prior to addressing the Qurʾānic verses cited by al-Kindī on the subject, al-Alūsī went on to elaborate in length the subject of the corruption in the Bible. He then presented abundant evidences from the scripture attesting to the fact that there have been alterations and changes to the text of Bible.³⁸ Al-Alūsī then explained that the Qurʾān asserts repeatedly that both the Torah and the Injil have been corrupted. The subject is referenced in al-Baqarah: 75 as: "Do you covet the hope, O believers], that they would believe for you while a party of them used to hear the words of Allah and then distort the Torah after they had understood it while they were knowing?”³⁹ And in al-Maidah 5:13 it is stated as: "So, for their breaking of the covenant, We cursed them and made their hearts hard. They distort words from their proper usages and have forgotten a portion of that of which they were reminded. And you will still observe deceit among them, except a few of them. But pardon them and overlook their misdeeds]. Indeed, Allah loves the doers of good."⁴⁰

In addition to the numerous passages that allude to it. In regards of Yūnus: 94, faʾin kunta fī shakk (so if you are in doubt), Al-Alūsī quoted Al-Baghāwī's interpretation, in which he expounded the phrase, "Ask those who have read the Scripture before you,"to refer to those people of the book who have embraced Islam. They will be able to testify the veracity of Muḥammad's Prophethood as attested to in the earlier scriptures.⁴¹ The same approach was applied to al-Baqarah: 121, alladhīna ʾātaynāhum al-kitāb (Those to whom We have given the Book), where it also refers to those people of the book who have believed in the Prophethood of Muḥammad.⁴² Ibn ꜥAbbās interpreted the verse to refer to the forty people who have come from Habshah (Abyssinia) with Jaꜥfar ibn Abī Ṭālib, however it may really be much more inclusive of other groups who have similar characteristics. Al-Kalbī interpreted the verse "recite it with its true recital"as referring to the attributes of Prophet Muḥammad (PBUH) as mentioned in the scriptures. It may also relate to the text itself, in which case, in accordance with Ibn Masꜥūd, they recite it in its original, unaltered form.⁴³

5. Analysis on Al-Alūsī's Method in Reconciling between Verses

Before responding to al-Kindī's criticism of the Qurʾān, Al-Alūsī contested the Bible and addressed the contradictions and absurdities in the scripture. Among the absurdities raised by al-Alūsī is Matthew 24: 34-35, "I tell you the truth, this generation will not pass from the scene until all these things take place."The word ‘things' refers to the darkened sun, the lightless moon, the falling stars, and the shaken power mentioned earlier in the Bible. The phrase appears to imply that those who lived during Jesus' lifetime will not die until they see the signs of Judgement Day. This is also implied in Matthew 16: 27-28, "27. For the Son of Man will come with his angels in the glory of his Father and will judge all people according to their deeds. 28. And I tell you the truth, some standing here right now will not die before they see the Son of Man coming in his Kingdom.”

Al-Alūsī rejected the notion by stating that despite the passage of those centuries, none of the signs stated above had yet manifested. Furthermore, Al-Alūsī reasoned from the Bible about whether one should pray for life necessities. It appears that Matthew 6: 7-12 prohibits a person from praying for necessities,⁴⁴ and Mathew 6:25 even imply that that one should not even worry about them,⁴⁵ yet Matthew 7: 7-12 seems to imply the opposite.⁴⁶

Al-Alūsī then suggested that the universal concept of Jesus' calling is erroneous. He substantiated his claim by citing a verse from the Bible itself, "Then Jesus said to the woman, "I was only sent to help God's lost sheep—the people of Israel."Then, based on Matthew 19:17, "Why ask me about what is good?"Jesus replied. "There is only One who is good. But to answer your question—if you want to receive eternal life, keep the commandments"Al-Alūsī discredited the core of Christianity which is centred on the divinity of Jesus. On al-Alūsī's method of reconciling supposedly contradictory Qurʾānic texts which has been elaborated upon previously, it is possible to say that it takes five forms.⁴⁷

5.1 Reference to Asbāb al-Nuzūl (Occasions of Revelation)

The verses of the Qurʾān came in two categories, namely verses that were revealed without any specific cause and verses that were revealed succeeding an occasion or a question.⁴⁸ Al-Hilālī and al-Naṣr (1425H) defined asbab nuzūl as an event or an inquiry that led to a revelation of a verse.⁴⁹ The most important aspect of asbāb al-nuzūl is that they facilitate comprehension of the direct and immediate meaning and implication of a verse as it can be seen within its original context. They also help in identifying the original intent of a verse.⁵⁰ Furthermore, the knowledge of asbāb al-nuzūl clarifies any ambiguous or problematic understanding of a verse.

When al-Alūsī addressed the supposed discrepancy between the jihad verses and sūrah al-Kāfirūn, he resorted to asbāb al-nuzūl. The ambiguity arises when al-Kindī claimed that al-Kāfirūn contradicts the instruction on jihad. However, the context in which the verse was revealed, as provided by the asbab nuzūl, clarified the presumption. Al-Alūsī also resorted to asbab nuzūl in clarifying the assumed contradiction between the obligation to call people to Islam as stated in Al-ꜥImrān: 104, waltakun minkum, with al-Baqarah: 272, laysa ꜥalayka hudāhum. According to the quoted asbab nuzūl, the phrase obviously refers to a group of Muslims who despite their familial ties, refused to provide aid to the needy nonbelievers.

5.2. The Capacity of Siyāq (Context)

Scholars have emphasised upon the importance of theme or context (siyāq) in Qurʾānic interpretation. Al-Shāṭibī asserts that the theme or context of a verse must be considered thoroughly when interpreting the Qurʾān. The process of isolating parts of the verse from the rest will not generate an accurate understanding of the verse.⁵¹ ꜥAbd Allāh stated that the context of a verse may determine the actual interpretation of a it and may also clear up any assumed contradiction.⁵² The impact of siyāq extends beyond the determination of word meanings and also encompasses factors such as the presence or absence of statements, the arrangement of content, and the quantity of information provided. Similarly, the order and extent of material employed in in the Qurʾān can be determined by its context.

Al-Alūsī resorted to al-Razi's interpretation which mainly focused on the verse's context when addressing the supposed discrepancy between Yūnus 10:99 and the jihad passages. According to the context provided by al-Razi, Yūnus 10:99 does not condemn jihad rather, it only cautions the Prophet not to be overzealous in his efforts to convince unbelievers of the truth of Islam. It is only by Allāh's will that unbelievers will accept the Prophet's summons.

5.3. Coherence Interpretation

Among the verses that al-Kindī claimed to be in contrast with the jihad verses is al-ꜥAnkabūt 29:46. However, al-Kindī only partially quoted it. He left out an important part of the verse which determines the actual understanding of the verse. Al-Kindī's quotation of the verse ends at the phrase "except in a way that is best"thus resulting in an incomplete understanding of the verse. When addressing the presupposed conflict, al-Alūsī provided the verse in full where he explained that the later part of the verse "except for those who commit injustice among them"indicates that a harsher method is required when dealing with the people of the book who commit injustice and that includes jihad.

Concerning corruption in the Torah and Injil, al-Alūsī said that the two verses cited by al-Kindī do not support his argument on the Torah's authenticity. According to Ibn ꜥAbbās' interpretation, both Yūnus 10:94, faʾin kunta fī shakk (so if you are in doubt) and al-Baqarah 2:121, alladhīna ʾātaynāhum al-kitāb (those to whom We have given the Book), refer to the people of the book who acknowledged Muḥammad's Prophethood. They provided no evidence whatsoever that the Torah and Bible were spared from the corruption. For al-Ṭabarī, obedience to the teachings of the Torah eventually entails following the guidance of Prophet Muḥammad as the Torah itself is believed to require such adherence. Therefore, to refuse acceptance of the Prophet (PBUH) would mean refusing acceptance of the Torah.⁵³

5.4. The Utilisation of Abrogation

Linguistically al-naskh (abrogation) can be defined as izālah (cancellation, removal, or abolishment), tabdīl (replacement), or taḥwīl (to move from one place to another). While in Sharia's term, al-naskh is to declare an expiration of a Sharia ruling with another of the Sharia ruling. Al-naskh does not in any way implies ignorance rather it demonstrates an absolute and comprehensive knowledge of Allāh SWT. Al-naskh was implemented to accommodate the ever-changing circumstances of human existence as a particular ruling may be appropriate at one moment but destructive at another. Furthermore, naskh is also a crucial concept in the advanced versions of Islamic jurisprudence, theology, and Qurʾānic exegesis. It serves as a significant tool for comprehending the connection between various mandates and prohibitions in the Qurʾān and the Sunnah.⁵⁴ Such type of verse receives significant attention from the classical exegetes since it plays a critical role in understanding how the Qurʾān is utilised as a source of Islamic law and practice. Due to the enormous impact of abrogation on Islamic law, scholars have outlined several important requirements before an abrogation can be carried out. These include: 1) there must be an explicit narration from the Prophet, or the companions must attest to the abrogation claim; 2) both the abrogating and abrogated verses must be contradictory; and 3) the abrogating verse must have been revealed after the abrogated verses; 4) abrogation applies just to practical Sharia rulings and not to tales, reminders, or future events.

Al-Alūsī resorted to abrogation when addressing the contradiction between al-Baqarah 2:256, la ikrāh fī al-dīn, and all other comparable verses that do not command the Prophet ﷺ to engage in combat with the kuffar. He viewed these verses as abrogated with other verses on the topic of jihad. Regarding al-Alūsī's interpretation of al-Baqarah 2:256, it must be noted that various interpretations do exist. According to scholars, any passage that commands Muslims to wage war against non-Muslims must be interpreted within its proper context. For instance, the verse al-Tawbah 9:5 reads:

"And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them go on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.”⁵⁵

The above verse commands Muslims to slaughter polytheists on every occasion and particularly refers to a specific group of Quraysh non-believers who have violated the peace treaty with the Muslims. Therefore, there is no contradiction with passages that advocate peace and liberty. Zayd emphasised that this interpretation is evident when the context of the passage in the Qurʾān is considered.⁵⁶ It is followed by verses that identify those who breached the agreement between Muslims and non-Muslims. In addition, following the al-Tawbah 9:5, Allāh commanded Muslims to provide protection to those who seek it among non-believers and deliver them to safety notwithstanding their refusal to adopt Islam. Another verse al-Tawbah 9:29 states: "Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - fight until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.⁵⁷

There is no element of coercion in the passage rather, it discusses jizyah⁵⁸ which is a tax or compensation placed on non-Muslims in exchange for the security and help they get. Non-Muslims may live in a country ruled by Muslims under specific conditions, but they are not compelled to convert to Islam. According to his jihad account, ꜥUlwān claimed that Islam permits conflict with non-Muslims to achieve the following goals: 1) to erase injustice and transgression from Muslim territory; 2) to uphold treaties established with any party; and 3) to eliminate any hurdles in the spreading the Islamic message. Similarly, ꜥUlwān emphasised further that Islam prohibits any form of coercion in converting people to Islam.⁵⁹ In accordance with al-Baqarah 2:256, "There must be no compulsion in adoption of the religion,"which means the freedom of religion is extensively emphasised in Islamic teachings, Muslim scholars also pointed out that there are Islamic nations that have never participated in any kind of conflict with Arab Muslims.⁶⁰

6. Conclusion

Regardless of the various possibilities about rejection, criticism, and so on, al-Alūsī did not believe that the apology was composed during the reign of al-Maʾmūn. Instead, he asserted that it was written by a group of protestants considerably later than the assumed historical period. Al-Alūsī has offered sufficient clarity on the concerns highlighted by al-Kindī about the supposedly contradicting verses. Al-Alūsī quoted asbāb al-nuzūl (occasions of revelation) to offer the correct interpretation of the verses cited by al-Kindī. Al-Alūsī even resorted to naskh when addressing the assumed contradictory verses. However, his view on the subject is contested by other scholars who believed that al-Baqarah 2:256 and other pacifist verses are not abrogated. However, they offered a different understanding yet compatible with the verses on jihad.

As mentioned earlier, al-Kindī also erroneously interpreted al-ꜥAnkabūt 29:46 when he omitted the verse's conclusion, necessitating that al-Alūsī quoted the entire verse to convey the proper meaning. In short, al-Alūsī's method for reconciling the presumed contradictory passages in these verses can also be applied to other allegedly conflicting verses. In response to al-Kindī's accusations of contradictions in the Qurʾān, al-Alūsī enumerated biblical passages that he deemed contradictory or nonsensical. This indicates that al-Alūsī had a thorough understanding of the Bible. Al-Alūsī also presented plenty of proofs to uncover corruption in the Bible when addressing the subject. In a broader context, al-Kindī has addressed numerous aspects of the Qurʾān in his apology which Alūsī has disputed in detail. However, from the outset, this study could only focus on one aspect among numerous others. Therefore, additional research could be conducted on al-Alūsī's texts, his technique in general, and his biblical critique.