A Muslim professor and cleric elucidates Muslim support for Jerusalem as Judaism's holiest city.

Any discussion of the problem of sovereignty over Jerusalem necessarily means involvement in a kind of investigation that has political, cultural, psychological and religious implications.

For a Jew or a Muslim, religious or secular, thinking of Jerusalem means to feel reason and sentiment mingled together.

In this paper I do not want to enter into specific features directly connected with politics but, as a Muslim scholar and a man of religion, only to try and determine whether, from an Islamic point of view, there is some well-grounded theological reason that makes it impossible for Muslims to accept the idea of recognizing Jerusalem both as an Islamic holy place and as the capital of the State of Israel.

First, I would like to underline that the idea of considering Jewish immigration to Israel as a western "invasion" and Zionists as new "colonizers" is very recent and has no relation to the basic features of Islamic faith.

According to the Koran, no person, people or religious community can claim a permanent right of possession over a certain territory, since the earth belongs exclusively to God, Who is free to entrust sovereign right to everyone He likes and for as long as He likes:

Say: O God, King of the kingdom, Thou givest the kingdom to whom Thou pleasest, and Thou strippest off the kingdom from whom Thou pleasest. Thou endurest with honor whom Thou pleasest, and Thou bringest low whom Thou pleasest. All the best is in Thy hand. Verily, Thou hast power over all things. (Koran, Sura 3:26, "The Imrans")

From this verse one can deduce a basic principle of the monotheistic philosophy of history: God can choose as He likes as to relationships between peoples and countries. Sometimes He gives a land to a people, and sometime He takes His possession back and gives it to another people.

In general terms, one might say that He gives as a reward for obedience and takes back as a punishment for wickedness, but this rule does not permit us to say that God's ways are always plain and clear to our understanding.

The idea of Islam as a factor that prevents Arabs from recognizing any sovereign right of Jews over Palestine is quite recent and can by no means be found in Islamic classical sources. To see anti-Zionism as a direct consequence of Islam is a form of explicit misunderstanding which implies the transformation of Islam from a religion into a secularized ideology.

This was originally done by the late Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin al-Husseini, who was responsible for most of the Arab defeats, and during World War Two collaborated with Adolf Hitler.

Later, [Egyptian President] Jamal el-Din Abd el-Nasser based his policy on Pan-Arabism, hate for the Jews, and alliance with the Soviet Union. All these doctrines were the real cause of Arab backwardness, and most of Nasser's mistakes were afterwards corrected by the martyr Anwar Sadat.

After the defeat of Nasserism, the fundamentalist movements made anti-Zionism an outstanding part of their propaganda, trying to describe the so-called "fight for liberation of Palestine" as rooted in Islamic tradition and derived from religious principles.

This plan for the ideologization of Islam as an instrument of political struggle nevertheless encounters a significant obstacle, since both Koran and Torah indicate quite clearly that the link between the Children of Israel and the Land of Canaan does not depend on any kind of colonization project -- but directly on the will of God Almighty.

As we learn from Jewish and Islamic Scriptures, God, through His chosen servant Moses, decided to free the offspring of Jacob from slavery in Egypt and to make them the inheritors of the Promised Land. Whoever claims that Jewish sovereignty over Palestine is something recent and dependent on political machinations is in fact denying the history of revelation and prophecy, as well as the clear teaching of the Holy Books.

The Koran cites the exact words in which Moses ordered the Israelites to conquer the Land:

And [remember] when Moses said to his people: O my people, call in remembrance the favor of God unto you, when he produced prophets among you, made you kings, and gave to you what He had not given to any other among the people. O my people, enter the Holy Land which God has assigned unto you, and turn not back ignominiously, for then will ye be overthrown, to your own ruin. (Koran, Sura 5:22-23, "The Table")

Moreover -- and fundamentalists always forget this point -- the Holy Koran quite openly refers to the reinstatement of the Jews in the land before the Last Judgment, where it says:

And thereafter We said to the Children of Israel: Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, We will gather you together in a mingled crowd. (Koran, Sura 17:104, "The Night Journey")

The most common argument against Islamic acknowledgement of Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem is that, since al-Quds is a holy place for Muslims, they cannot accept its being ruled by non-Muslims, because such acceptance would be a betrayal of Islam.

Before expressing our point of view about this question, we must reflect upon the reason that Jerusalem and the al-Aqsa Mosque hold such a sacred position in Islam. As everyone knows, the definition of Jerusalem as an Islamic holy place depends on al-Mi'raj, the ascension of the prophet Muhammad to heaven, which began from the Holy Rock.

While remembering this, we must admit that there is no real link between al-Mi'raj and sovereign rights over Jerusalem, since when al-Mi'raj took place the city was not under Islamic, but under Byzantine administration. Moreover, the Koran expressly recognizes that Jerusalem plays the same role for Jews that Mecca has for Muslims.

We read:

...They would not follow thy direction of prayer (qibla), nor art thou to follow their direction of prayer; nor indeed will they follow each other's direction of prayer... (Koran, Sura 2:145, "The Cow")

All Koranic commentators explain that "thy qibla" is obviously the Kaba of Mecca, while "their qibla" refers to the Temple Area in Jerusalem...

As opposed to what "Islamic" fundamentalists continuously claim, the Book of Islam -- as we have just now seen -- recognizes Jerusalem as the Jewish direction of prayer. Some Muslim exegetes also quote the Book of Daniel as proof of this (Daniel 6:10).

After exhibiting the most relevant Koranic passages in this connection, one easily concludes that, as no one wishes to deny Muslims complete sovereignty over Mecca, from an Islamic point of view there is no sound theological reason to deny the Jews the same right over Jerusalem.

If we consider ourselves as religious men, we must necessarily include justice among our qualities. As regards the argument, we have to admit that the same idea of justice requires that we treat Jews, Christians and Muslims equally. No community can demand for itself privileges that it is not ready to recognize to others.

We know that Roman Catholics consider Rome their own capital, and the fact that city has the largest mosque in Europe and an ancient Jewish community does not alter its role as the center of Catholicism.

Even more can be said of Mecca: It is the main religious center for Muslims the world over and is completely under Islamic administration.

Respecting this principle of fair-mindedness, we necessarily conclude that the Israelis as a nation and the Jews as a religion must have their own political and ethnic capital, under their sole administration, even though it contains certain places regarded as sacred by the other two Abrahamic faiths.

To my mind, this is the only realistic ground for any discussion of the future of the Holy City. The other parties must understand that Jews will never agree to have less rights than the other religions, and that Israelis will never agree to see David's City divided into two parts.

If everyone was happy to see the Berlin Wall destroyed, it was because the very idea of forced separation within a single city is something offensive to human sensitivity. We cannot even think of creating another Berlin in the heart of the Middle East.

Of course, the idea of "two Jerusalems," if ever realized, will by no means be a solution, but a source of new troubles and conflicts...

We would nevertheless like to mention something that appears unbearable for any person of religious consciousness: the fact that at present the Islamic administration of bayt al-maqdis permits Jews to visit the Temple Mount, but not to pray there.

There are special officials in the area whose task is to ensure that Jewish visitors on the Temple Mount are not moving their lips in prayer. To my mind, this is clearly opposed to Islamic prescriptions and rules.

We have seen that the Holy Koran declares the Rock a qibla for Jews; how, then, is it possible that -- in the name of Islam -- someone dares to forbid Jews to pray in the place that God has appointed as their qibla?

This is a clear example of a case in which pseudo-religious principles may work against the real spirit of religion.

Moreover, we must ask: Is it possible for someone who believes in God to forbid another human to pray? What kind of religion can let us interfere in the relationship between the Creator and His creature?

On this point the Koran says:

"When My servants ask thee concerning Me, I am indeed close to them: I answer the prayer of every suppliant who calleth on Me..." (Koran, Sura 22:186, "Pilgrimage")

This verse explains that God is always close to His servants when they are praying. Wherever we are and whoever we are, according to the Koran we can be sure that God is listening to our prayers and will answer them, although, of course, we are not always able to understand His response.

This being the case, no one who believes in God can possibly prevent others praying, notwithstanding the fact that they belong to another religious tradition. The very idea of opposing someone's prayers reveals a really deep lack of faith.

As to Jewish-Muslim relationships, we heartily agree with the decision of Samuel Sirat, President of the Council of European Rabbis: Until now inter-religious dialogue has been hampered by political reasons; but from a theological point of view, dialogue between Jews and Muslims is easier than, say, dialogue between Jews and Christians.

In the past, Ibn Gabirol [Avucebri], Maimonides, Ibn Sina [Avicenna] and Ibn Rushd [Averroes] were not isolated intellectuals, but part of an intercommunication game that went beyond confessional links. If we reflect on the level of inter-religious dialogue in past centuries, we must frankly admit that in this respect we have been moving backwards...

Israeli intellectuals, for their part, must be ready to understand that a new attitude is emerging among some Islamic thinkers. Many of us are now ready to admit that hostility for Israel has been a great mistake, perhaps the worst mistake Muslims have made in the second half of this century.

For those Muslim leaders who live in Europe, in democratic countries and not under dictatorship, this declaration is not so dangerous as for those of our brothers who live in the Arab countries.

We know that, in those countries too, there is a certain part of the educated population that does not blindly accept anti-Israel propaganda. But freedom of expression is considerably limited in those countries.

...Our general guideline must be the principle that, the more we discover our common roots, the more we can hope for a common future of peace and prosperity.

Shaykh Prof. Abdul Hadi Palazzi holds a Ph.D in Islamic Sciences by decree of the Grand Mufti of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. He served as an Imam for the Italian Islamic community, and as a lecturer in the Department of the History of Religion at the University of Velletri in Rome, Italy. This essay is excerpted from Palazzi's address to the Third International Seminar on The Sources of Contemporary Law, July, 1996, Jerusalem.

http://shell.spqr.net/islam/

Islam/Commentary:

WHAT THE QUR'AN REALLY SAYS

by Shaykh Prof. Abdul Hadi Palazzi

THE QUR'AN SAYS THAT ALLAH GAVE THE LAND OF ISRAEL TO THE JEWS
AND WILL RESTORE THEM TO IT AT THE END OF DAYS

THE QUR'AN SAYS:

"To Moses We [Allah] gave nine clear signs. Ask the Israelites how he [Moses] first appeared amongst them. Pharoah said to him: 'Moses, I can see that you are bewitched.' 'You know full well,' he [Moses] replied, 'that none but the Lord of the heavens and the earth has revealed these visible signs. Pharoah, you are doomed.'"

"Pharoah sought to scare them [the Israelites] out of the land [of Israel]: but We [Allah] drowned him [Pharoah] together with all who were with him. Then We [Allah] said to the Israelites: 'Dwell in this land [the Land of Israel]. When the promise of the hereafter [End of Days] comes to be fulfilled, We [Allah] shall assemble you [the Israelites] all together [in the Land of Israel]."

"We [Allah] have revealed the Qur'an with the truth, and with the truth it has come down. We have sent you [Muhammed] forth only to proclaim good news and to give warning."

[Qur'an, "Night Journey," chapter 17:100-104]

SHAYKH PROF. PALAZZI COMMENTS:

God wanted to give Avraham a double blessing, through Ishmael and through Isaac, and ordered that Ishmael's descendents should live in the desert of Arabia and Isaac's in Canaan.

The Qur'an recognizes the Land of Israel as the heritage of the Jews and it explains that, before the Last Judgment, Jews will return to dwell there. This prophecy has already been fulfilled.

****************************************

MUSLIMS MUST RECOGNIZE THE STATE OF ISRAEL AS A JEWISH STATE

Is there any fundamental reason which prohibits Muslims from recognizing Israel as a friendly State?

I realize that a negative answer to the above question is taken for granted by popular opinion. My approach, however, is not based on popular opinion or the current political situation, but on a theological analysis of authentic Islamic sources.

Viewing the Jewish return to Israel as a Western invasion and Zionists as recent colonizers is new. It has no basis in authentic Islamic faith. According to the Qur'an, no person, people or religious community can claim a permanent right of possession over any territory. The Earth belongs exclusively to God, and He is free to entrust sovereignty over land to whomever He likes for whatever time period that He chooses.

"Say: 'O God, King of the kingdom (1), Thou givest the kingdom to whom Thou pleasest, and Thou strippest off the kingdom from whom Thou pleasest; Thou endowest with honour whom Thou pleasest, and Thou bringest low whom Thou pleasest: all the best is in Thy hand. Verily, Thou hast power over all things.'"(2) [Qur'an 3:26]

From the above Qur'anic verse we deduce a basic principle of the Monotheistic philosophy of history: God chooses as He likes in the relationship between peoples and countries. Sometimes He gives a land to a people, and sometimes He takes His possession back and gives it to another people.

In general, we can say that He gives as a reward for faithfulness and takes back as a punishment for wickedness, but this rule does not permit us to say that God's ways are always plain and clear to our eyes, since His secrets are inaccessible to the human intellect.

Using Islam as a basis for preventing Arabs from recognizing any sovereign right of Jews over the Land of Israel is new. Such beliefs are not found in classical Islamic sources.

Concluding that anti-Zionism is the logical outgrowth of Islamic faith is wrong. This conclusion represents the false transformation of Islam from a religion into a secularized ideology.

Such a false transformation of Islam was in fact made by the late Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el-Husseini. He is the one person most responsible, both morally and materially, for the repeated Arab defeats in their conflict with the Jews in Israel.

Husseni not only incited Arabs against Jews. He also encouraged the torture and murder of all Arabs who correctly understood that Arab cooperation with Jews was a precious opportunity for the development of the Land of Israel. Husseini ended his woeful life by putting his perverted religious teachings at the service of the evil and pagan Nazis.

After Husseini came Jamal al-Din 'Abd al-Nasser. Nasser based his policy on Pan-Arabism, hatred and contempt for Jews, and an alliance with the atheistic Soviet Union. Nasser's terrible choices were critical factors in maintaining Arab backwardness. Fortunately, most of Nasser's mistakes were afterward corrected by the martyr Anwar Sadat. (3)

After the defeat of Nasserianism, Islamic fundamentalist movements made anti-Zionism the primary feature of their propaganda. They presented the negation of any Jewish rights to the Land of Israel as rooted in authentic Islam and derived from authentic Islamic religious principles.

***********************************

THE LAND OF ISRAEL IN QUR'ANIC EXEGESIS

The fundamentalist Muslim program to use Islam as an instrument for political warfare against Jews finds a major obstacle in the Qur'an itself. Both the Bible and the Qur'an state quite clearly that the right of the Israelites to the Land of Israel does not depend on conquest and colonization. This right flows from the will of almighty God Himself.

Both the Jewish and Islamic Scriptures teach that God, through His chosen servant Moses, decided to free the offspring of Jacob from slavery in Egypt and to constitute them as heirs of the Promised Land. Whoever claims that Jewish sovereignty over the Land of Israel is something new and rooted in human politics denies divine revelation and divine prophecy as explicitly expressed in our Holy Books (the Bible and Koran).

The Qur'an relates the words by which Moses ordered the Israelites to conquer the Land:

"And [remember] when Moses said to his people: 'O my people, call in remembrance the favour of God unto you, when he produced prophets among you, made you kings, and gave to you what He had not given to any other among the peoples. O my people, enter the Holy Land which God has assigned unto you, and turn not back ignominiously, for then will ye be overthrown, to your own ruin.'" [Qur'an 5:20-21]

Moreover - and those who try to use Islam as a weapon against Israel always conveniently ignore this point - the Holy Qur'an explicitly refers to the return of the Jews to the Land of Israel before the Last Judgment - where it says: "And thereafter We [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd.'" [Qur'an 17:104]

Therefore, from an Islamic point of view, there is NO fundamental reason which prohibits Muslims from recognizing Israel as a friendly State.

*********************************************

ISLAM AND NORMALIZATION OF RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ISLAMIC STATES AND THE JEWISH STATE

PLO documents can in no way be regarded as Islamic. The PLO leaders are a gang of criminals and thieves, and Arabs will be the main victims of any supposed "Palestinian State" under their leadership.

I do not believe that Islam is the factor preventing normalization between Arabs and the State of Israel. The real problem is that members of the ruling classes in Arab countries believe their authority and power would be threatned by democracy, modernization, and education in the Arab world. They use a distorted interpretation of Islam as a political tool, and unfortunately the majority of uneducated Arabs believe their poisonous propaganda.

I believe that we must return to the time when Islam was in the vanguard of scientific progress and interfaith dialogue. Instead of false "leaders" such as Qadhafi, Saddam Hussein, Arafat [el-Husseini] or Yasin, we Muslims again need true leaders such as al-Ghazali, Ibn Rushd and Ibn Khaldum.

King Faysal of Iraq said: "The Arabs, and particularly the educated ones among them, must look at the Zionist movement with the deepest sympathy."

Tragically, true leaders such as Faysal were silenced, and fanatics such as Haj Amin al-Husseini prevailed.

The evil consequences of the victory of fanaticism are clear for all to see: Jews expelled from Arab countries where the lived in peace for over one thousand years, "Palestinian" refugees, terrorism, etc. To avoid future mistakes, we must learn from our past ones.

Unfortunately, there are Arabs who believe that they must fight against Israel until they completely destroy it (a tragedy which I do not believe the God of Israel will ever permit to happen - Never again!).

Unfortunately, there are also naive and foolish Israelis who believe, incredibly to me, that they will achieve "peace" with their Arab neighbours by giving the murderer "Arafat" [el-Husseini] a State, an army, etc. This is insane. You Jews are supposedly famous for your intelligence. How can some of your "leaders" be so stupid?

From the perspective of the natural world, I am not optimistic about what the future holds. However, from the supernatural perspective of faith, we who believe in God must face the future with a positive attitude.

We must have faith that we will see the day when real peace and prosperity - which can only be based on true faith in God and His Word (the Bible and Rabbinic Tradition for you; the Bible, Qur'an and Authentic Islamic Tradition for us) - will spread throughout the world. Meanwhile, we must work together to prepare for a better future.

********************************************

MUSLIMS MUST RECOGNIZE JEWISH SOVEREIGNTY OVER JERUSALEM

From an Islamic point of view, is there any fundamental reason which prohibits Muslims from recognizing Jerusalem both as an Islamic Holy Place and as the capital of the State of Israel?

JERUSALEM IN THE QUR'AN

The most common argument against Muslim acknowledgment of Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem is that, since al-Quds [Jerusalem] (4) is a Holy Place for Muslims, Muslims cannot accept that it is ruled by non-Muslims, because such acceptance amounts to a betrayal of Islam.

Before expressing our point of view on this question, we must reflect upon the reason for which Jerusalem and Masjid al-Aqsa [the Al Aksa mosque] hold such a sacred position in Islamic faith.

As is well known, the inclusion of Jerusalem among Islamic holy places derives from al-Mi'raj, the Ascension of the Prophet Muhammed to heaven. The Ascension began at the Rock, usually identified by Muslim scholars as the Foundation Stone of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem referred to in Jewish sources.

Recalling this link requires us to admit that there is no connection between al-Miraj [the Ascension] and Muslim sovereign rights over Jerusalem since, in the time that al-Miraj took place, the City was not under Islamic, but under Byzantine administration. Moreover, the Qur'an expressly recognizes that Jerusalem plays for Jews the same role that Mecca does for Muslims.

We read:

"...They would not follow thy direction of prayer (qiblah), nor art thou to follow their direction of prayer; nor indeed will they follow each other's direction of prayer..." (5)

All Qur'anic commentators explain that "thy qiblah" [direction of prayer for Muslims] is clearly the Ka'bah of Mecca, while "their qiblah" [direction of prayer for Jews] refers to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.

To quote only one of the most important Muslim commentators, we read in Qadn Baydawn's Commentary:

"Verily, in their prayers Jews orientate themselves toward the Rock (sakhrah), while Christians orientate themselves eastwards..." (6)

In complete opposition to what "Islamic" fundamentalists continuously claim, the Book of Islam [the Qur'an] - as we have just now seen - recognizes Jerusalem as the Jewish direction of prayer.

Some Muslim commentators also quote the Book of Daniel (7) as a proof for this.

After reviewing the relevant Qur'anic passages concerning this matter, I conclude that, as no one denies Muslims complete sovereignty over Mecca, from an Islamic point of view - despite opposing, groundless claims - there is no reason for Muslims to deny the State of Israel - which is a JEWISH state - complete sovereignty over Jerusalem.

************************************

ISLAMIC HOLY PLACES

Anti-Jewish sentiments expressed by Islamic leaders throughout the Middle East are, in fact, not religious in nature, but, rather, political. The best proof of this is in the fact that Islamic anti-Judaism is quite recent.

Omar ended the Roman ban that prevented Jews to enter Jerusalem, the Ummayad caliphs in Cordoba built a synagogue for Maimonides, and Salahu-d-Din, after defeating the Crusaders, wrote to the Jewish leaders, "Your exile is over. Whoever wants to come back is welcome."

The late King Faysal of Iraq openly expressed his sympathy for the Zionist movement, while King Abdullah of Jordan was compelled to wage war against Israel by the other Arab leaders.

Recently, the Resident Arab ["Palestinian"] Wakf has made pronouncements, such as that the Western Wall (Kotel) is not a Jewish shrine, but, rather, the wall to which the Prophet's [steed] was tethered, or, at best, the wall surrounding the Muslim Mosque. The Wakf has also stated that all of Hebron should be turned over to the Resident Arab ["Palestinian"] Authority, and that Jews would be forbidden to pray in the Cave of the Patriarchs.

These kinds of declarations by the PLO gangsters are ridiculous and absurd.

The Kotel was effectively, according to the Islamic tradition, the place where al-Buraq [the Prophet's steed] was tethered, but it was already an existing part of the Herodian structure. Muslims have never prayed close to it, and it has never had a special relevance in Islam. On the contrary, everyone knows how important it is for Jewish worshippers.

Apart from Mecca, no Islamic holy place is off-limits for non-Muslims. Historical sources say that the Prophet Muhammad entertained a delegation of Christians from Najran in the Mosque of Medina, and permitted them to celebrate a mass inside the Mosque, notwithstanding the fact that Christian rites can include words that are against Islam [such as stating that Jesus is God].

There is nothing in Jewish worship that can be offensive for Muslims, and nothing in Islamic Law prevents Jews to pray on Haram al-Sharif/Har Habayyit (the Temple Mount), in the Cave of Machpela or in any other place that is regarded as holy by Muslims.

Every time I meet those who say otherwise, I ask them to identify a single authoritative Islamic source as legal proof of their claim. None of them has ever answered such a request of mine.

********************************************

NOTES:

1. The original Arabic word we translated as "kingdom" is mulk, from a Semitic root m-l-k, that is common to both Arabic and Hebrew. According to Islamic theological terminology, the three synonyms for "kingdom" are mulk, malakut and jabarut. They refer respectively to the physical, psychic and spiritual levels of existence. Of course, G-d can be called King of all of them; if here only mulk is quoted, it depends on the fact that this verse directly concerns the earthly domain. To denote a kingdom in the secular and political sense, Arabic commonly uses another derived form, that is mamlakah.

2. Koran 3:26. For typographical reasons, it is not possible to reproduce here the original Arabic text of the Koran, which must nevertheless be understood as quoted. As well here as in other Koranic quotations, the English translation of the meaning of Koranic words from Arabic is my own, but based on the most authoritative English commentaries, such as M. Marmaduke Pickthall's "The Meaning of The Glorious Koran" (Beirut 1973), 'A. Yusuf 'Ali, "The Holy Koran - Text, Translation and Commentary" (Maryland 1983) and A. 'A. Maududi "The Holy Koran - Text, Translation and Brief Notes" (Lahore 1986).

3. In using the term "martyr" I do not simply refer to one who lost his life for a good cause. I give a precise translation of the Arabic word "shahid," which identifies a "martyr" in the strictly religious sense; that is to say, someone who spent his life serving the cause of G-d. Since making peace with former enemies is an explicit Koranic order (see Koran 8:61), and since, according to Islam, Peace is G-d Himself, any believer who is killed because of his search for Peace must be understood as a religious martyr. The same considerations clearly apply to Yitzhak Rabin. 4. Arabic name of Jerusalem, from the root q-d-s, meaning "holiness". It is an abridged form of Bayt al-maqdis, "the sanctified House" or "the House of the Sanctuary", an exact equivalent of the Hebrew Beth ha-mikdash. The name originally referred only to the Temple Mount, and was afterward extended to the City as a whole. This extension of meaning became common among Arabs from the tenth century C.E. onwards. Earlier Islamic sources use the name Iliyia, an adaptation to Arabic pronounciation of the Roman name Aelia.

5. Koran 2:145.

6. M. Shaykh Zadeh Hashiyaah 'ali Tafsir al-Qadn al-Baydawn (Istanbul 1979), Vol. 1, p. 456.

7. Daniel 6:10

***********************************

Prof. Abdul Hadi Palazzi has been a lecturer in the Department of the History of Religion at the University of Velletri (Rome, Italy).

Ref - WHAT THE QUR'AN REALLY SAYS by Shaykh Prof. Abdul Hadi Palazzi

Christianity, Judaism and Islam � By Samuel green (http://www.answering-islam.org/Green/onbible.htm)

The Qur'an teaches that Islam is the continued faithful religion in the same line as the Prophets who were before Muhammad: The same religion has He established for you as that which He enjoined on Noah ... and that which We enjoined on Abraham, Moses, and Jesus (42:13 AYA). The result of this view is that the scriptures given by these Prophets are considered to be genuine scriptures from God: But say, "We (Muslims) believe in the Revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you (Jews & Christians); our Allah and your Allah is One" (29:46 AYA).

In the Qur'an there are many references to the Jewish and Christian Holy Books. In fact the Qur'an addresses Christians and Jews in terms of the Book: O People of the Book! (5:68 AYA

God's Mission For The People of the Book

Christians and Jews are mentioned in the Qur'an as the custodians of scripture: For to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's Book (5:47 AYA/44 MP). God gave the scripture to the Christians and Jews so that they could make known to the whole world and every nation the true knowledge of God: And remember Allah took a Covenant from the People of the Book, to make it known and clear to mankind, and not to hide it (3:187 AYA). Some of the Jews and Christians fulfilled this mission, others did not. Just as there are faithful and unfaithful Muslims so too the Qur'an distinguishes between the faithful and the unfaithful Christians and Jews

The Qur'an maintains that the Bible is the word of God and no distinction is to be made between any of the holy books. Therefore if you are a Muslim you should not attack the Bible - the Qur'an upholds it!

The Bible is taught to be a source of guidance for Jews and Christians who wish to know the will of God, and so the Qur'an encourages Jews and Christians to obey their scripture and never asks them to deny it. The Qur'an says the Bible foretells the coming of Muhammad and it never says that faithful Jews or Christians have corrupted their scripture.

The Qur'an never asks a Christian or Jew to accept it because their own scripture has become corrupt, rather they are asked to accept the Qur'an because the Qur'an claims, 1/ to confirm the teaching of the Bible, 2/ that Muhammad is foretold in the Torah and Gospel, 3/ the Qur'anic teaching makes clear what the Jews and Christians could not understand properly from their own scriptures. If the Qur'an is to be taken seriously then the claims it makes must be examined. If its claims are true then that is good evidence for accepting it as the Word of God. If its claims are false then it fails its own test and should be rejected.