The Abbasid caliph Al-Mansur commissioned Ibn Ishaq (ابن اسحٰق) to write a sweeping history of Islam starting from the creation of Adam to the present date together with the biography of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

Ibn Ishaq was the grandson of practicing Christian Yasar, who was arrested by Khalid Bin Waleed from Christian foundation in Abbey of Ayn -al-Tamar. The Christian grandfather of Ibn Ishaq was taken to Medina and made the slave of Qays ibn Makhrama ibn al-Muṭṭalib, where he acquired his family name/surname (نسبة‎‎) “al-Muṭṭalib” from the name of his master Qays ibn Makhrama ibn al-Muṭṭalib.

Ibn Ishaq was the son of Yasar’s third son Ishaq, who was a transmitter of akhbar (news) and also used to collect and recount tales of the past.

Ibn Ishaq started collection of tales like his transmitter father and came into collection of Hadith.

However, Ibn Ishaq was ordered to get out of Medina for relating a false Hadith from a woman, Faṭima bint al-Mundhir, wife of Hisham ibn Urwa.

Hence, the false Hadith transmitter Ibn Ishaq left Medina and settled in Baghdad, where he found employment with Abbasids, who were establishing their new Capital in Baghdad having overthrown the Umayyad Caliphate. (“Ibn Isḥaḳ – Encyclopedia of Islam” and “The Making of the Last Prophet”– University of South Carolina).


Under Abbasid’s hands Ibn Ishaq wrote the earliest biography of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) namely “Sirat ar Rasul Allah” in which he brought doubts in the verses of the Quran, pressed lies on Allah, and accused Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) of fabricating Allah’s words.

The false Hadith transmitter Ibn Ishaq transmitted “Qissa Gharaniq” (the story of intermediary cranes) with reference to the verses of Surah Al Najam Chapter 53 of the Quran, in which he accused Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) of not distinguishing the verses of Allah and the verses of Satan and that the Prophet (pbuh) purposely fabricated Allah’s words to compromise with Arab pagans on the matter of intercession (Persian Shafaat “شفاعت”) through their deities Lat, Manat and Uzzah.


Following the revelation of verses 53:19 and 53:20 of Surah Al Najam, Have you thought upon al-Lat and al-Uzza (53:19) And Manat, the third, the other?” (53:20), Ibn Ishaq transmitted the false tail that after these verses 53:19 and 53:20 of Surah Al Najam the next two verses, “These are the exalted intermediaries cranes” and  Whose intercession is to be hoped for” were originally revealed by Satan, and as soon as these verses were revealed the whole council of Arab pagans and Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) prostrated to the deities al-Laat , Manat  and Uzzah and their conflicts on religion were peacefully dissolved but the Angel of revelation Gabriel’s timely Interventions made the Prophet of Islam aware that these verses were not from Allah as Satan had revealed them. Then Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) instantly changed his point of view.

In other words Ibn Ishaq gave an impression that Satan is more powerful than Allah (Nauzubillah), who made and revealed his verses more efficiently before Allah Who was still managing to reveal His verses through His Angel Gabriel and left behind the Satan.

Have you thought of al-Lat and al-Uzza and Manat, the third … these are the exalted Gharaniq (high flying intermediary birds) whose intercession is approved. (“Sirat ar Rasul Allah” by Ibn Ishaq, pages. 165-166)

How has Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), who always rejected deities, now suddenly prostrated to the same pagans’ deities Lat, Manat and Uzzah?

How was it possible for Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), who was preaching against deities including Lat, Manat and Uzzah to now recite that their “intercession is approved”?

Muhammad’s desire had been realised; the Quraysh accepted him. The Muslims who had fled to Abyssinia heard about this and many of them began to return to Mecca. The Quraysh accepted Muhammad because he had, “spoken of their gods in splendid fashion. “Muhammad has spoken of our gods in splendid fashion(“Sirat ar Rasul Allah” by Ibn Ishaq, page.166) when Quraysh heard that, they were delighted and greatly pleased at the way in which Muhammad (pbuh) spoke of their deities and they listened to him delightedly at what had been said about their gods.

This is the Islamic scholarly explanation as to why Muhammad (pbuh) accepted the idols is that he desired a way to attract the Quraysh and Satan used this opportunity to put these words on Prophet Muhammad’s lips.

According to the so called Islamic literature; now, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was anxious for the welfare of his people, wishing to attract them as far as he could. It has been mentioned that he longed for a way to attract them … and Satan, when Muhammad (pbuh) was meditating upon it, and desiring to bring his people back, putting upon his tongue for reconciliation “these are the exalted Gharaniq whose intercession is approved”. (Ibn Ishaq, pages. 165-166)

Therefore, according to the Satan scholars of Islam they were the words which Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) spoke from Satan and his own desire. The Islamic accounts then say that the angel Jibrael rebuked Muhammad (pbuh) for what he had said:

Then Jibrael came to the Prophet and said, “What have you done, Muhammad? You have read to these people something I did not bring you from God and you have said what He did not say to you.” (“Sirat ar Rasul Allah” by Ibn Ishaq, page. 166)

The Quraysh saw that Muhammad had now changed his message: When the annulment of what Satan had put upon the prophet’s tongue came from God, Quraysh said: “Muhammad has repented of what he said about the position of your gods with Allah, altered it and brought something else.” (“Sirat ar Rasul Allah” by Ibn Ishaq, pages. 166-167)

The so called legend Muslim scholars Tabari and Ibn Sa’d also mentioned in their early biographical and historical accounts of Muhammad (pbuh), while Muhammad (pbuh) was in Mecca, his followers were very few, his movement grew painfully slow and he felt the pain of estrangement from his tribe. Mecca was a very polytheistic pagan society, and as Muhammad (pbuh) began preaching a new religion, the majority of Meccans became his enemy and began persecuting Muhammad (pbuh) and his followers. Muhammad (pbuh) longed for better relations and reconciliation with his community. Thereafter, the accounts continue and “قصہ غرانیق” occurred, when Allah revealed Surah Al Najam 53 to Muhammad (pbuh) up to the verses 53:19 and 53:20:

أَفَرَأَيْتُمُ اللَّاتَ وَالْعُزَّى” (53:19) Have you thought about al-Lat and al-Uzza

وَمَنَاةَ الثَّالِثَةَ الْأُخْرَى” (53:20) And Manat, the third, the other?

“تلك الغرانيق العلى” These are the exalted intermediary cranes (53:21 originally revealed by Satan as mentioned in the Islamic literature of the above authors)

“وإن شفاعتهنّ لتُرتجى” Whose intercession is to be hoped for (53:22 originally revealed by Satan as mentioned in the Islamic literature of the above authors)


The intermediary cranes “الغرانیق” whose intercession (شفاعتهنّ) was recognized were all three female deities, al-Laat, Mamat and Uzzah. The same accounts describe that after this revelation was completed, Muhammad (pbuh), his followers and the pagan Arabs all prostrated on Earth in front of these deities. Tensions eased, reconciliation was at hand, and all were delighted but Muhammad (pbuh) soon retracted the reconciliation—how soon is not clear in the literature of these scholars and the account continues that Gabriel, the angel of revelation, informed Muhammad (pbuh) that Satan had used your desire for reconciliation with the pagan leaders to insert into the revelation of Allah the verses about the interceding cranes (الغرانیق). Then angel Jibrael had replaced the satanic verses with the following verses as the true sequence to 53:19 and 53:20 to onwards:

أَلَكُمُ الذَّكَرُ وَلَهُ الْأُنثَى” (53:21) Are yours the males and His the females?

تِلْكَ إِذًا قِسْمَةٌ ضِيزَى” (53:22) That indeed is an unfair division!

In the new verses 53:21-22 Allah said to the Arab pagans how unfair they were, if it comes to them they prefer sons for themselves but they like daughters for Allah!

However, in the satanic literature of early scholars of Islam, our innocent Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is shown confessing and admitting that he was being deceived in inserting these verses into the Quran and he was unable to discern revelation from Allah with revelation from Satan. Hence, the so called great Islamic historian and Satan scholar al-Tabari (الطبری) recorded Prophet Muhammad’s confession in the following words:

I have fabricated things against God and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken”. (The History of al-Tabari, Vol. 6, page.111)

Just tell me, hands on heart, was it possible for one who was truly God’s chosen Prophet (pbuh)?


Furthermore, if Satan was able to deceive Muhammad (pbuh) into inserting his verses in Surah Al Najam, how many other verses have also been inserted in the whole Quran due to satanic influence?


Hence, the above mentioned evil scholars did not stop their evilness until they invented a severe lie on Allah in the fake interpretation of the verse 22:52 of Surah Al Hajj and falsely related this verse with the lie of “قصۃ الغرانیق” (the story of high flying intermediary cranes) to falsely assure people that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) fabricated things against God and have imputed to Him the words which has been given by Satan, and to rectify this blunder Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) received another just-in-time revelation absolving him of his indiscretion!

And We did not send before you any messenger or prophet, but when he desired, the Satan made a suggestion respecting his desire; but Allah annuls that which the Satan casts, then does Allah establish His communications, and Allah is Knowing, Wise” (False translation 22:52)

In the above copy of the false translation of the verse 22:52 our so called scholars of Islam and thinkers of the Quran have made the Quran doubtful together with all previous revelations of God. In other words the false translation of the verse 22:52 is telling, don’t worry Muhammad (pbuh), all other prophets before you said things attributed to Satan from time to time, but Allah always corrects them.

However, the fake translation of the verse 22:52 of the Quran was invented to confirm the intervention of Satan in the revelation of the Quran with the false justification that other prophets had had their wishes tampered with by Satan just as he had done to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), but God had rectified the whole situation.


We really need to abandon the fake translation of the whole Quran including the Satanic literature of Islam invented by the Satan authorities, in which hearsay or so called legend scholars of Islam Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Sa’d, al-Tabari and al Bukhari of ‘Sahih Hadith Bukhari’, and the lifeline of all exegesis (tasfeer) and translations, ‘Ibn Kathir’ have well documented the fake incident of “قصۃ الغرانیق” (the story of high flying intermediary cranes).


Transmitting the same fake story of “قصۃ الغرانیق” (the story of high flying intermediary cranes) Ibn Sa’d  said, “The Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him, repeated them (the verses), and he went on reciting the whole of Surah (53) and then fell in prostration, and the people (the Quraysh) fell in prostration with him”. (Ibn Sa’d, vol. 1, page. 237)

Ibn Sa’d also noted Prophet Muhammad’s confession:

Then Muhammad confessed: I ascribed to Allah, what He had not said. (Ibn Sa’d, vol. 1, page. 237)

Tabari noted Prophet Muhammad’s confession:

I have fabricated things against God and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken. (Al-Tabari, vol. 6, page. 111)


Bukhari also portrays the same lie in his ‘Sahih Hadith’ that after Prophet Muhammad (pbuj) recited Surah 53 the Quraysh accepted Muhammad (pbum) and prayed with him:

Muhammad recited Suraht-an-Najm (53) and prostrated while reciting it and all the people prostrated and a man amongst the people took a handful of stones or earth and raised it to his face and said, “This is sufficient for me.” Later on I saw him killed as a non-believer. Bukhari 2.019. Number 176 and also Narration 173)


Narrated Ibn Abbas: The Prophet (pbuh) prostrated while reciting An-Najm (Surah 53) and with him prostrated the Muslims, the pagans (Quraysh), the jinns, and all human beings. (Bukhari, 2.019, Number 177).

Bukhari also narrated from Ibn Abbas in his ‘Sahih Bukhari’ volume 6, book 60, Hadith number 385 that as soon as Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) recited surah al Najam all Muslims, all Pagans, all Jinns and all mankind prostrated with the Prophet (pbuh).

According to Bukhari, “The Prophet performed a prostration when he finished reciting Suraht an-Najm [Surah 53], and all the Muslims and Al-Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, and disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah and in His Messenger Muhammad) and jinn and human beings prostrated along with him”. (4862)

Bukhari well confirms the account given by Ibn Ishaq, Tabari, Ibn Sa’d, Inb Kathir and others, who reported that the pagans bowed down and prostrated because Muhammad (pbuh) spoke favourably of their gods.


Muhammad (pbuh) then announced that Gabriel had now told him to speak against the idols and so what he recited previously had been changed. Have you thought of al-Lat and al-Uzza and Manat, the third … these are the exalted Gharaniq whose intercession is approved. Now the verse became “Have you considered Al-Lat and Al-‘Uzza and Manat the third, the other? What, have you males, and He females? That were indeed an unjust division. They are naught but names yourselves have named, and your fathers; God has sent down no authority touching them. (Qur’an 53:19-23).Please see Tafsir al-Jalalayn.



This false event of “الغرانیق” is not only documented by so called legend scholars of Islam, Islamic historians and the biographical writers of Prophet Muhammad’s life: Ibn Ishaq, Wakidi, Ibn Sa’d, Tabari, Ibn Kathir but to support the occurrence of this event false Hadith and fake exegesis of the Quran were also invented, which can be seen in the following so called Islamic sources.

  • Tabari’s “History”
  • “Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir”, translated by S. Moinul Haq,
  • “Siraht Rasulallah” by Ibn Ishaq
  • “The life of Muhammad” a biography of the Prophet by Wakidi
  • Yunus ibn Bukayr’s notes at Kufa
  • Sahih Hadith of Bukhari – 6.4862 (Vol Six) and narration 6.385 narrated by Ibn Abbas (Riyadh & Darussalam 1997)
  • Tafsir of Quran by so called great Islamic scholar Zamakhshari. He commented on this event as well. (from “The Qur’an and its Exegesis, pages 53 – 55, published by Oneworld, Oxford, England): “Zamakhshari on Surah 22:52/51: We have never sent any messenger or prophet before thee, but that Satan cast into his fancy, when he was fancying; but God annuls what Satan casts, then God confirms His signs – surely God is All-knowing, All-wise.
  • Ibn Sa’d, Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibn al-Mundhir, Ibn Mardauyah, Musa ibn ‘Uqba and Abu Ma’shar also supported the false event of “الغرانیق” through their false tafseer (exegesis) and fake Islamic literature in which Ibn Sa’d used Wakidi’s material, Tabari used Ibn Ishaq’s material as well as Wakidi’s, and others. Tabari wrote 39 volumes of fake history of Islam and false “tafseer” (exegesis/commentary on the whole Qur’an).
  • Ibn Ishaq, Wakidi, Ibn Sa’d, Tabari and Bukhari falsely recorded and accepted the details of this fake story of al Ghraniq (الغرانیق) as a way of discrediting Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) which has been falsely conceived by Ibn Ishaq, Wakidi, Ibn Sa’d, Tabari and Bukhari that Muhammad (pbuh) accepted idols and their intercession when Satan intervened.


All above mentioned so called legend scholars of Islam are also agreed on the following lies:

  • Muhammad (pbuh) did not want to further offend the Meccans and he did not want God to reveal something to him that would cause further offence.
  • Muhammad (pbuh) desired a revelation that would bring peace between him and the Meccans.
  • When Muhammad (pbuh) began to recite “Surah al Najam”, Satan interjected some words and thoughts into Muhammad’s heart and mind. This was coupled with Muhammad’s own desires; thus Muhammad (pbuh) spoke Satan’s words.
  • Later, Gabriel rebuked Muhammad (pbuh) for having spoken Satan’s words. Muhammad (pbuh) admitted his sinful error and was then comforted by Allah. The accounts are very similar to each other. Each contains minor different details, but all agree totally on the relevant essentials points; Muhammad (pbuh) spoke the verses of Satan. All of the earliest Islamic sources agree on the event al Ghraniq (الغرانیق).  (History of al-Tabari, Volume VI: Muhammad at Mecca, State University of New York Press, 1988).
  • According to al-Tabari, When the Messenger of God saw how his tribe turned their backs on him and was grieved to see them shunning the message he had brought to them from God, he longed in his soul that something would come to him from God which would reconcile him with his tribe. With his love for his tribe and his eagerness for their welfare it would have delighted him if some of the difficulties which they made for him could have been smoothed out, and he debated within himself and fervently desired such an outcome. Then God revealed Surah Al Najam: By the Star when it sets, your comrade does not err, nor is he deceived; nor does he speak out of (his own) desire…and when he came to the words: Have you thought upon al-Lat and al-‘Uzza and Manaat, the third, the other? Satan cast on his tongue, because of his inner debates and what he desired to bring to his people, the words: These are the high-flying cranes; verily their intercession is accepted with approval. (History of Al-Tabari, page. 108).
  • The polytheists were delighted that Muhammad (pbuh) had at last approved of their gods. To return the kindness, they “prostrated themselves because of the reference to their gods which they had heard, so that there was no one in the mosque, believer or unbeliever, who did not prostrate himself” (History of Al-Tabari, page. 109).
  • Muhammad’s friendly relations with the polytheists were short-lived, however, for he soon learned that his verses praising pagan idols came not from God, but from Satan. Saddened to recognize his treachery against Allah, Muhammad lamented: “I have fabricated things against God and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken” (History of Al-Tabari, page. 111).
  • Yet “Gabriel” comforted Muhammad (pbuh), informing him that all prophets fall for Satan’s tricks from time to time. This staggering and unbelievable claim even found its way into the interpretation of the Quran. One day, Tabari continues, Muhammad (pbuh) was sitting beside the Kaaba with some of the elders, reciting a new surah, in which Allah tried to reassure his critics: Muhammad (pbuh) had not intended to cause all this trouble, the divine voice insisted; he was not deluded nor inspired by a jinni; he had experienced a true vision of the divine and was simply telling his people what he had seen and heard. But then, to his surprise, Muhammad found himself chanting some verses about the three “daughters of God”: “Have you, then, ever considered what you are worshipping in Al-Lat and Al-Uzza, as well as Manat, the third, the other?” Immediately the Quraysh sat up and listened intently. “These are the exalted Gharaniq,” Muhammad (pbuh) continued, “whose intercession is approved.”
  • When the annulment of what Satan had put upon the prophet’s tongue came from God, Quraysh said: “Muhammad has repented of what he said about the position of your gods with Allah, altered it and brought something else.” (Siraht Rasulallah by Ibn Ishaq, page. 165-167)


Islamic historians and scholars emphasized the desire of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) for reconciliation as Ibn Sa’d starts his account by saying that in his desire to avoid an irrevocable breach with the Quraysh, Muhammad “sat down by himself, wishing that nothing be revealed to him that would drive them away”.

Likewise, the western historian of Islam accepted and praised by Muslim world have said the same thing as mentioned by early Islam historians and so called legendary Islamic scholars.

Western author Benjamin Walker wrote: In 616 Muhammad, in an attempt to placate his Meccan opponents, spoke favourably of these three goddesses, but he withdrew his approval not long after ….(Foundations of Islam: the Making of a World Faith, page 44 – Peter Owen Publishers, London and Chester Springs).

Even Karen Armstrong, a modern author whose biography on Muhammad (pbuh) and book on Islam are praised by Muslims, accepts the historicity of this event:

The pressure on Muhammad to make concessions to pagans of Mecca continued to increase, and, according to al-Tabari, he himself was keen to make it easier for the Meccans to accept his message. With this in mind, in 616 he tried to come to some reconciliation with the polytheists in respect of the deities Allat, Ozza and Manat, the three most popular goddesses of Mecca and the neighboring towns, and decided to admit them as worthy of honour. He went to the Kaaba and, in the presence of the elders of Mecca, recited the verses still found in the Koran (53:19-20) calling attention to three goddesses. He then added the words ‘These are the exalted damsels (Gharanik – variously translated as ‘females,’ ‘birds,’ ‘swans,’ ‘herons,’ ‘cranes’] mounting upward to heaven, whose intercession may be sought.’

For more details on this topic please read the following books:

Muhammad ibn Ismail al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari (translated by Dr. Muhammad Mohsin Khan); Ibn Ishaq, Siraht Rasul Allah, translated as, The Life of Muhammad, Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1998. Ibn Sa’d, Kitab Al-Tabaqat Al-Kabir, (translator: S. Moinul Haq) New Delhi: Kitab Bhavan, 2 volumes, Al-Tabari, The History of al-Tabari, vol. 6, “Muhammad at Mecca” State University of New York Press, 1988. Al-Tabari, The History of al-Tabari, vol. 8, “The Victory of Islam” State University of New York Press, 1997). Prophet and Statesman [Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K., 1975 (1961)], page 61), Al-Badawi, Anwar al-Tanzil, ed. H.O. Fleischer, vol. I (Leipzig, 1846), pages. 636-637; Tabari, vol. xxvii, page. 34, seq., vol. xvii, page. 131. (Ibid. page. 99, fn. 1)

Furthermore, commentators and translators of the Quran also did their best to get false confirmation from the Quran of this fake incident in their fake translations and commentary of verse 22:51 of Sura Al-Hajj, which they interpret as a sort of divine consolation sent down to relieve Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) of the bitter remorse which he felt after his utterance of the verses given by Satan.

The motive for the invention of the fake story of interceding cranes (الغرانیق) was to discredit Muhammad (pbuh), to make the Quran doubtful, and to defame Islam itself, and also to bring into Islam the pagan dogma of intercession. To prove from the Quran this false story of interceding cranes and pagan dogma of intercession our scholars invented a fake principle of nasikh (نسخ) and mansukh (منسوخ), abrogating and abrogated verses, and pressed lies on Allah that by means of which Allah revokes and alters the announcements of His will; this results in the cancellation of a verse and the substitution of another for it.


The so called Islamic sources record that tempter Satan produced the following verses and put them on the lips of our holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh): “تلك الغرانيق العلى” (These are the exalted intermediary cranes) and “وإن شفاعتهنّ لتُرتجى” (Whose intercession is to be hoped for).


Furthermore, these satanic verses were invented exactly like those of the Quran. If they were not like the Quran then our scholars and historians could not have said that Muhammad (pbuh), his followers and the Quraysh had accepted them. On the other hand the verse 2:22 of the Quran “وَإِنْ كُنتُمْ فِي رَيْبٍ مِّمَّا نَزَّلْنَا عَلَى عَبْدِنَا فَأْتُواْ بِسُورَةٍ مِّن مِّثْلِهِ” is translated to mean: “And if you are in doubt concerning that We have sent down on Our servant, then bring a Surah like it” and the verse 17:88 of the Quran “قُل لَّئِنِ اجْتَمَعَتِ الْإِنسُ وَالْجِنُّ عَلَى أَن يَأْتُواْ بِمِثْلِ هَـذَا الْقُرْآنِ لاَ يَأْتُونَ بِمِثْلِهِ وَلَوْ كَانَ بَعْضُهُمْ لِبَعْضٍ ظَهِيرًا” is translated to mean: Say: ‘If men and jinn banded together to produce the like of this Quran, they would never produce its like, not though they backed one another.’

Therefore, Allah’s challenge given in the above verses that no one is able to produce something like the Quran, itself proves those liar scholars wrong who have invented that Satan had produced verses like the Quran and Allah rectified this error.


Furthermore, in the light of the above verses of the Quran, if no one is able to produce something like the Quran how was Satan able to make the said satanic verses like the Quran?

Also, if no one is able to produce something like the Quran then there was no need to correct, abrogate or annul the so called verses of Satan because Satan was also not able to make any verse like the Quran. Thus, the story of interceding cranes (قصہ الغرانیق) is a complete pack of lies and translation of the verse 22:52 is totally wrong and misleading in which the liar scholars pressed lies on Allah to cover their own lies.

Therefore, before moving further to the topic of intercession we need to understand the verse 22:52 from its own Arabic words.

وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ مِن رَّسُولٍ وَلَا نَبِيٍّ إِلَّا إِذَا تَمَنَّى أَلْقَى الشَّيْطَانُ فِي أُمْنِيَّتِهِ فَيَنسَخُ اللَّهُ مَا يُلْقِي الشَّيْطَانُ ثُمَّ يُحْكِمُ اللَّهُ آيَاتِهِ وَاللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ”  (22:52)

وَمَا” and no/non/not/nothing. “أَرْسَلْنَا” is a combination of نَا + أَرْسَلْ in which “نَا” is the first person plural objective pronoun to mean “our/us” and “أَرْسَلْ” has been used to mean “cause to send/cause to dispatch”. “مِن” is a preposition to mean “from/of”. “قَبْلِكَ” is a combination of كَ +قَبْلِ in which “قَبْلِ” means “before/earlier” and “كَ” is the second person singular objective pronoun to mean “your/yours” that refers the revelation sent to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as yours denotes something in your possession. Therefore, this pronoun “كَ” cannot be taken to mean “you” same as we cannot translate “رَبّْكَ” to mean “you Rab” or “دِینْكَ” to mean “you Deen”. Hence, “كَ” does not refer you but something to which you belong to mean “your”. This is the reason why the phrases like “رَبّْكَ” and “دِینْكَ” are translated to mean “your Rab” and “your Deen” but when the same preposition “كَ” comes in such phrases of the Quran which do not go with our false beliefs we change it to “you” to derive the meaning of our choice and according to our non-Quranic pagan dogma.

Preposition “مِن” is coming once again to mean “from/of” but if you look at the translations of this verse 22:52 all translators have purposely omitted this preposition in their false translations.

رَّسُولٍ” means Allah’s message, Allah’s address, Allah’s circular, Allah’s informant, Allah’s inscription, Allah’s hand out, Allah’s gazette, Allah’s correspondent, Allah’s communication, Allah’s address, Allah’s missive, Allah’s memorandum, Allah’s bulletin, Allah’s communiqué, Allah’s word, Allah’s notation, Allah’s intimation, Allah’s tiding, Allah’s agenda, Allah’s reminder, Allah’s datum, Allah’s annotation, Allah’s directive and Allah’s epistle.  Please see more details of “رَّسُولٍ” in my article “RASOOL (رسول) IS NOT A PROPHET (نبی) IN THE QURAN”

Therefore, the clause “وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ مِن رَّسُولٍ” correctly means “And it did not cause us to send of before yours from Message

وَلَا”: and no/and not. “نَبِيٍّ” Prophet. “إِلَّا” unless/except/but/only. “إِذَا” when/if. “تَمَنَّى”: appetence, needed, required, desired for, wished for and longed for.

أَلْقَى”: discard, throw away, shed off, cast a shadow over, oppress, harass, subjugate, crush, overcome, and suppress. “الشَّيْطَانُ”: the evil.

Our deviated scholars falsely translated the word “تَمَنَّى” in this verse 22:52 to mean “he recited”, without any explanation where they got “he” from and where “تَمَنَّى” or any of its derivatives used to mean “recite something”. Whereas, the same word “تَمَنَّى” is translated to mean “wish” and “desire” in the verse 53:23 “أَمْ لِلْإِنسَانِ مَا تَمَنَّى” and in so many other verses of the Quran in the same meaning of ‘desire’ or ‘wish’ but to falsely link this verse 22:52 with the fake story of interceding cranes (الغرانیق) our pagan scholars have changed Allah’s words by taking false meaning of this word “تَمَنَّى” in their misleading translations of this verse 22:52.

If you go to the following link of (22:52:11)

you will see for yourself the real evil face of our liar scholars who put the same word “تَمَنَّى” in the category of “Verb (form I) – to wish” with all other verses to mean ‘wish’ but when it comes to the verse 22:52 they took it to mean “he recited”!

Recited and Wish have no similarity between each other but to make us fool and to sabotage the actual statement of this verse 22:52 they have played this evil game to bring the pagan thoughts in the Quran, to press severe lies on Allah and to discredit the Prophet (pbuh) that he has recited the verses given by Satan.

In fact they are those who should be charged with blasphemy because they are the actual root cause of defamation of Islam and false accusation on our exalted Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) of what he (pbuh) never did.

However, the Arabic “تَمَنَّى” is correctly used to mean: appetence, needed, required, desired for, wished for and longed for.

The word “أَلْقَى” is derived out of proto root “LQ (ل ق)” and root word “لقی”.

Ibn‐Hisham (708-762) quoted in his ancient Arabic lexicon and grammar “Mughnee” that “لقی” means ‘find’.

Seyyid Murtada az‐Zebcedee quoted in his famous Arabic lexicon “Taj ul Uroos” that “لقی” means ‘fall a thing such as curtain etc. and also means ‘muscles of flesh’. Taj ul Uroos and Kamoos both quoted the same phrase: “القی علیہ” to mean ‘to fall or light upon. Ar-Raghib and Taj ul Uroos quoted “القی” to mean ‘facing’, ‘encountering’, and ‘finding’. Al‐Mutarrizi wrote in “Mughrib” that predominant application of “القی” is ‘Encounter’ to mean ‘fight’, ‘battle’ or ‘war. Al‐Mutarrizi also quoted an Arabic saying: “یوم اللِّقَاء” to mean: The day of encounter in fight.

Ar Raghib explained “القاہْ” to mean ‘He threw it where he would find it and Al‐Mutarrizi quoted the same phrase to mean: Throw it on the ground.

So, the Arabic word “أَلْقَى” is correctly used to mean: encounter with, confrontation, discard, throw away, shed off, cast a shadow over, oppress, harass, subjugate, crush, overcome, and suppress.

Therefore, the words of the verse 22:52 “وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ مِن رَّسُولٍ وَلَا نَبِيٍّ” are simply describing that before yours message it did not cause Us to send Message neither Prophetإِلَّا إِذَا تَمَنَّى أَلْقَى الشَّيْطَانُunless/but/except/only when it was desired/required to throwaway/encounter/crush/suppress the evil.

فِي” is a preposition to mean “in/within” and the compound phrase “أُمْنِيَّتِهِ” is very important to understand as it has been misused in all translations of the this verse 22:52 to invent lies on Allah.

This Quranic phrase “أُمْنِيَّتِهِ” is the combination of هِ + أُمْنِيَّتِ in which “هِ” is the third person singular objective pronoun to mean “its/his”, which goes back to its referring noun “الشَّيْطَانُ”. Hence, this “هِ” is an objective pronoun of Satan to mean “his”.

The word “أُمْنِيَّت” needs a careful attention to drill its correct meaning because the true meaning of  “أُمْنِيَّت” have been sneakily concealed by our scholars to derive the misleading translation of this verse 22:52.

You can see on the screen print of the following link of, that firstly, the word “أُمْنِيَّت” of this verse 22:52 has been derived from the wrong root word “منی”. Secondly, some other words, i.e. “أَمَانِيَّ” of the verse 2:78, “أَمَانِيُّهُمْ” of 2:111, “بِأَمَانِيِّكُمْ” of 4:123, “أَمَانِيِّ” of 4:123 and “الْأَمَانِيُّ” of the verse 57:14 are also wrongly added in this category of root word “منی” to hide the correct root word of “أُمْنِيَّت” of the verse 22:52 so that people could not catch their evil work of giving totally false translation of the verse 22:52 and people will  automatically understand that if similar derivatives “أَمَانِيَّ”, “أَمَانِيُّهُمْ”, “بِأَمَانِيِّكُمْ”, “أَمَانِيِّ” and “الْأَمَانِيُّ” are derived from “منی” then “أُمْنِيَّت” is rightly derived from the same root word. However, if you pay your attention and carefully look at the meaning of all above words fall in this category they are all translated to mean “wish” or “desire” except only one word “أُمْنِيَّت” of the verse 22:52 which is translated to mean “his recitation”. This is because our pagan scholars are adamant to bring in the translation of 22:52, by unfair means, that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) definitely recited the so called ‘satanic verses’ of interceding crane (الغرانیق). Their aim was to bring in the Quran their pagan dogma of intercession without caring about the distortion in the translation of so many other verses such as 2:78, 2:111, 4:123, 4:123 and 57:14 the words “أَمَانِيَّ”, “أَمَانِيُّهُمْ”, “بِأَمَانِيِّكُمْ”, “أَمَانِيِّ” and “الْأَمَانِيُّ” of which are purposely derived from the wrong root word “منی” just to hide deriving the word “أُمْنِيَّت” of the verse 22:52 from “منی”.

In reality the words “أَمَانِيَّ”, “أَمَانِيُّهُمْ”, “بِأَمَانِيِّكُمْ”, “أَمَانِيِّ”, “الْأَمَانِيُّ” and “أُمْنِيَّت” of the verse 22:52 are true derivatives of Arabic root word “امن” (ء م ن), which has been frequently used in all previous revelations and came into Arabic from its mother tongue Hebrew.

According to etymology of “امن” its root ء م ن cognates to Hebrew הֶאֱמִין (Aleph-Mem-Nun) and Aramaic הֵימֵן (ēmēn).

So, “امني” means: safety, security, trustfully, faithfully and precautionary.

A military term “تدريب امني” is used for “Security Training” throughout the Arab world and again a term “مسح امني” is used in Arab military for “Security Survey” but if the same words “مسح” and “امني” come in the Quran the pagan scholars and their nonsense followers translate “مسح” to mean pagan ritual of ablution (وضوء) of wiping heads and “امني” to mean recitation. They don’t ever ponder if military or UN wipe their heads or perform the pagan ritual of “وضوء” and recite in their camps when they use these words “مسح امني” or they take these words “مسح امني”  in real life for their practical activities of taking security and safety measures?

When I tell these realities to ignorant scholars and their blind followers, instead of proving me wrong with internationally established academic evidence they impertinently say that I don’t know Arabic at all. They also add that the Quranic Arabic is different to standard Arabic. When I ask them where it is written in the Quran that it was revealed in different Arabic they refer to the pagans’ Tafseer (exegesis). Whereas, Allah Himself made it clear in the Quran that it was made and revealed in plain, simple and straightforward Arabic language which people speak so that no one could make any excuse of not understanding the Quran if it was revealed in other than Arabic tongue.

So, the phrase “امنية” generally describes: desideratum, requirement, prerequisite, need, indispensable thing, essential, requisite, necessity; dream, ideal, hope, ambition, purpose, intention, plan, target, scheme, objective, aim, end, heading, compulsion, demand, claim, cause, fundamental, obligation, vital part, charge, commitment, committal, duty, extremity, fulfilment, element, obsession, specification, term, stipulation, concern, condition, engrossment, pinch, eagerness, urgent need or demand, the object of someone’s ambition or effort, aim, the exercise of the will, purpose, intention, safety, security, faithful, assurance.

The military term “اجراءات امنية” is used throughout the Arabic world to mean “Security Procedures”. The term “حوادث امنية” is used to mean “security incidents” and “تدابير أمنية” is a legal term which is used throughout the Arab world including UNO to mean “Safety Measures/Security Measures”. A term “احتياطات أمنية” means “Safety Precautions” and a term “موافقة أمنية” is used to mean “Security Clearance”. United Nation (UN) Arabic terms “تأكيدات أمنية” recognised throughout the world to mean “Security Assurances” and “خطة أمنية” to mean “Security Plan”, and “لجنة أمنية” is used to mean “Security Committee”.

Arabs don’t “recite” in United Nation (UN) offices nor do they take this word “امنية” to mean “recitation” or “he recited” but in the translation of the verse 22:52 of the Quran the same word “امنية” is distorted to mean “he recited”.

If you break this phrase “أُمْنِيَّت” you will see ت + يَّ + أُمْنِ in its further breakdown in which we get the root word “امن” to mean: calm, self-possessed, showing confidence, free from worry or fear, protected from danger and harm,  having trust, trustful, assured, safe, secure, have trust in.

In Arabic two types of personal adjectives are used to describe someone’s nationality, family linage, folk, relations, acquaintances, clan, community, confederation, culture group, ethnic group, family, general public, group, house, household, inhabitants, kin, kindred, lineage, masses, menage, nation, people, population, proletariat, public, race, tribe, settlement, society, state and stock etc. In the grammar they are called personal ‘possessive’ and personal ‘subject’ adjectives. They are commonly made by adding suffix “ي” (possessive adjective) and suffix “ية” (subject adjective) such as: ‘سعودی’, ‘افریقی’, ‘صومالی’, ‘مصری’, ‘لبنانی’,  ‘عربی’ , ‘ھاشمی’ and  ‘قریشی’ etc. are personal possessive adjectives and ‘سعودية’, ‘افریقية’, ‘صومالیة’, ‘مصرية’, ‘لبنانیة’, ‘عربیة’, ‘ھاشمية’, ‘قریشية’ etc. are personal subject adjective as seen in the above examples their grammatical formed like: يّ + مِصْر = مِصْريّ or ية + مِصْر = مِصْريّة likewise, يّ + لُبْنان = لُبْنانيّ or ية + لُبْنان = لُبْنانِيَّة and ی + عرب = عربی or یة + عرب + عربیة etc.

Now, look at the grammatical formation of the word “أُمْنِيَّتِهِ” of the verse 22:52 that we are studying, which is a compound of objective pronoun (his) هِ + أُمْنِيَّتِ  that is actually تِ + أُمْنِيَّ  in which تِ is the plural particle to make أُمْنِيَّ a plural personal possessive adjective يَّ  + أُمْن  = أُمْنِي  as seen in the above examples of personal possessive adjectives يّ + مِصْر = مِصْريّ or يّ + لُبْنان = لُبْنانيّ or ی + عرب = عربی etc.

Therefore, in the compound “أُمْنِيَّتِهِ” the word “أُمْنِي” is actually the personal possessive adjective of objective pronoun “هِ” of “الشَّيْطَانُ” coming in the end of “أُمْنِيَّتِهِ” and letter “تِ” in the remaining phrase “أُمْنِيَّتِ” (تِ + أُمْنِيَّ) is making it plural to mean ‘secure environments’, ‘protected communities’, ‘self-possessed tribes’, relaxed populations’, ‘unconstrained societies’, ‘confidential families’, ‘impudent lineages’ ,’cozy cultures’, ‘free-flowing states’, ‘overflowing conditions, comfy nations, snug groups, enthusiastic masses, ungoverned settlements, obtrusive confederations, abandoned kindred, intemperate inhabitants, profligate races, licentious households, evil kins, wicked folks, outpouring acquaintances, gushing relations, all jaw nations, officious ethnicities, lavish dwellings, vicious housings, gabby publics, outgoing men ages, dissolute peoples, smart schemes, open engrossments, free intentions, high living houses, secure dwelling, safe environment, trustworthy hideout, faithful dug, protective living and trouble free surrounding and secure hide out etc. of “الشَّيْطَانُ”.

Hence, objective pronoun “ۃ” at the end of “أُمْنِيَّتِهِ” will be correctly translated to mean “his”, which refers to “الشَّيْطَانُ”.

Since, our Satan scholars are habitual of replacing Arabic words of the Quran with similar Persian words to invent lies in their translations, it is so strange that meaning wise “أُمْنِيَّتِ” is exactly like Persian word “امنیت” (amniat) which they did not translate into its Persian meaning. This is because had they taken this Arabic word “أُمْنِيَّتِ” as a Persian “امنیت” (amniat) they would have no choice left but to write its nearly correct meaning as Persian “امنیت” (amniat) gives similar meaning to Arabic “أُمْنِيَّتِ” that’s why this time they have avoided even giving its Persian meaning in their translations of this verse and invented its new meaning “recited” to blame Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) that he did recite the verses given by Satan.

Those who know Urdu they also know the correct meaning of “امنیت” (amniat) very well because this is the same word “امنیت” which is used in Urdu as well in the same meaning of ‘peace’, ‘safe’, ‘secure’ and trouble free environments or conditions but those who are totally blind they will still take this word “امنیت” (amniat) to mean “HE RECITED” to press lies on our exalted Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) that he did recite Satanic verses. They are those ill-fated people who are filling their bellies with the hell fire following their infidel scholars, who will go with them in their dug of hell.

Therefore, according to the above stated correct grammatical rules the letter “ي” of the phrase “أُمْنِيَّتِهِ” of this verse 22:52 makes it a possessive adjective “أُمْنِيَّ” the correct uses of which can also be seen in the following popular Arabic terms of safety, security, precaution and protection from danger, harm, trouble, fear, trust, faith and dependability. Also, “أُمْنِيَّ” is a synonym of “مَأمُون” to mean: safe, secure, protected from danger and harm, reliable or untroubled by danger or fear, dependable, faithful, trustworthy and trusty.

A popular Arabic term “بدل أمني” is used in United Nations (UN) to mean “security allowance”. UN term “نظام أمني” is used to mean “security regime”, the term “جيب أمني” is used to mean “Security Enclave” and “فحص أمني” is the term to mean “Security Check”. Arabic term “مركز تنسيق أمني” used in United Nations (UN) to mean “Security Focal Point” and “جهاز مسح أمني بالأشعة السينية” is again a UN term which is used to mean “Security X -ray scanner”.

Furthermore, the word “أمن” of the Quranic phrase “أُمْنِيَّتِهِ” is actually a Hebrew word “א־מ־ן” (AMN) of the “Torah”, which was transferred in Arabic and Greek through the Bible and the Quran and from Greek to English language in the same meaning and with the same pronunciation (amen). Therefore, the world popular word “amnesty” is also derived in English language on the bases of the same word أمن / א־מ־ן /Amen. Therefore, “أُمْنِيَّت” of the Quranic Phrase “أُمْنِيَّتِهِ” is also quite similar to the English word “amnesty”.

Hence, all above stated in depth research on the etymology and uses of this Quranic phrase “أُمْنِيَّتِهِ” proves those scholars false who translate “أُمْنِيَّتِهِ” in the verse 22:52 to mean “HE RECITED”.

The next word is “فَيَنسَخُ” of the verse 22:51 that we are studying. This is actually a combination of prefix فَ   + يَنسَخُ in which prefix “فَ” correctly means: must, necessary, important, indeed, actually and in fact etc. This prefix “فَ” is used to make the statement highly important, absolutely necessary, universal truth, and highly necessary.

يَنسَخُ” is the present verb derived out of root word “نسخ” to mean: record, produce, engross, transcript, print, mimeograph, transcribe, layout, issue, copy, sketch, design, model, project, template, cast, figure out, construct, compile, transmit.

Arabic legal term “نسخ معتمدة” to mean “credentials” is used throughout the Arab world in their legal system. The Arabic term “نسخ محتويات الذاكرة” is used to mean “memory print”. The Arabic term “آلة نسخ” is used to mean “copier” and copying machine is also called “مكنة نسخ” and “ماكينة نسخ”. Arabic term “نسخ ورقية” is used to mean “Hard Copies” and a computer term “نَسخ ولصق” to mean “Copy and Paste” is regularly used throughout the Arab countries. CD-Writer is called “محرك نسخ للقرص” and Arabic term “فصل نسخ” means “printed collection”. Arabic term “وحدة نسخ” is a financial term to mean “Transcriber” and a technical term “نسخ أزرق” is used to mean “Blueprint”.

You might have heard or seen Arabic word “نسخہ” (Nuskha) so and so visibly written on the front page of published books such as “نسخہ اَوّل” means “issue 1” etc. Does it mean cancellation, abrogation or annulment of that book???

When a copy of the Quran is also called “نسخہ” (Nuskha) does it mean it is an annulled copy of the Quran???

However, to falsely bring the concept of cancellation of satanic verses our Satan scholars replaced this Arabic word of the Quran “فَيَنسَخُ” with Persian word “منسوخ” and invented their satanic translation of the verse 22:52.

Blind followers of these Satan scholars should carry out a simple test before supporting the Satans by writing or pasting this Persian word “منسوخ” on ‘google translator’; selecting  Persian from drop down menu and translate in English on the other side. They will find Persian word “منسوخ” to mean: outdated, abolished and annulled. When they select Arabic from drop down menu and translate the same word “منسوخ” taking it as an Arabic word they will find its English translation to mean: copied, replicated, transcribe, carry, transmit and convey etc. They can also use Arabic to English and Persian to English reputable dictionaries to spit on the ugly faces of evils who sabotage Quran.

The next word “اللَّهُ” (God) is the subject of the verb “فَيَنسَخُ” to mean: God transcribes/issues, “مَا” what, “يُلْقِي” means: crush, throw out, encounter, confrontation, discard, throw away, shed off, cast a shadow over, oppress, subjugate, overcome, and suppress (we have already found its correct meaning in the above paragraphs, from the Quran and the worldwide academic sources), “الشَّيْطَانُ” the evil, “ثُمَّ”then, “يُحْكِمُ” orders/judges/rules/ decides, “اللَّهُ” God, “آيَاتِهِ” His verses/His signs, “وَاللَّهُ” and God. The Quranic phrase “عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ” always wrongly translated to mean ‘Knowledgeable and Wise’ or ‘knowing wise’ because our scholars replace Arabic word “عَلِيم” with Persian word “عالم” which is used for scholars or knowledgeable people. Likewise, they replace the Quranic word “حَكِيمٌ” with Persian word “حکیم” from its Persian noun “حکمت” to mean Doctor, Philosopher or Wiseman in ancient Zoroastrian culture. Whereas, the Quran uses Arabic word “عَلِيمٌ” to mean self-talented, self-intellectual or self-intellect and Arabic word “حَكِيمٌ” derived out of Arabic root word “حکم” to mean the One Who Possesses Authority. Hence, Arabic “حَكِيمٌ” is an ‘Authority’ whose word is the last word.

Now, in the following lines you can see the correct translation of this verse 22:52 from the above in depth research and word to word true analysis:

وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ مِن رَّسُولٍ وَلَا نَبِيٍّ إِلَّا إِذَا تَمَنَّى أَلْقَى الشَّيْطَانُ فِي أُمْنِيَّتِهِ فَيَنسَخُ اللَّهُ مَا يُلْقِي الشَّيْطَانُ ثُمَّ يُحْكِمُ اللَّهُ آيَاتِهِ وَاللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ”  (22:52)

And it did not cause us to send of before yours from Message and not Prophet unless when required to encounter the evil in his secured hide out indeed God issues what encounters/crushes the evil then God orders His verses/signs and God is intellectual Authority” (Word to word correct translation of the verse 22:52)


Have you seen the word to word correct translation of the above verse 22:52, which has proven those liars wrong who have invented the so called satanic verses and the story of interceding high rising cranes (قصۃ الغرانیق) in Islamic literature and subsequently tried to prove their invented incident and Satan’s interference in the revelation of God by fake translation of this verse 22:52?

Now, we will find the actual Satans who have invented satanic verses and their fake story in the Islamic literature.

The word “شفاعتهنّ” of so called satanic verses “تلك الغرانيق العلى” (53:21 originally revealed by Satan as mentioned in the Islamic literature) and

وإن شفاعتهنّ لتُرتجى” (53:22 originally revealed by Satan as mentioned in the Islamic literature) is the combination of هنّ + شفاعت = شفاعتهنّ in which هنّ is the third person female plural objective pronoun to mean “their” which refers to “الغرانيق العلى” (high rising cranes), i.e. Lat, Manat and Uzza, according to Islamic scholars. Whereas, the word “شفاعت” is first of all not an Arabic noun because Arabic nouns normally end with “ۃ” such as “شفاعة” in our case. The suffix “ت”coming at the end of Arabic words does not make it a noun but shows its gender, plurality, and epithetic of God. However, Persian nouns normally end at suffix “ت”. Furthermore, if “شفاعت” is an Arabic word and derived from Arabic root word “شفع” then it cannot be translated to mean “intercession”. This is because only Persian word “شفاعت” means intercession whereas, Arabic root word “شفع” its verbs “شَفَعَ” (past participle), “یَشفع” (present) and “اشفع” (imperative/command verb), and noun “شفاعة” are not taken to mean intercession in Arabic language.

Therefore, to reach the correct meaning of Arabic root word “شفع” first of all I will present an overview of classical legend lexicons of Arabic language compiled by old time famous Islamic scholars:

Hence, according to Abu Nasr Ismail ibn Hammad al-Jauhari’s notable Arabic dictionary the Crown of Language “Taj al-Lughah wa Sihah al-Arabiya”, Al Hasan bin Muhammad al-Saghani’s Arabic dictionary “al Obab az Zakhir wa lil Bab al Fakhir” (العباب الزاخر واللباب الفاخر) and Abul-Fath Naisir Ibn Abi al-Makarim Abd As-Saiyid Ibn Ali al-Mutarrizi’s Arabic dictionary “Al Maghrib” the Arabic word شفع” is a synonym of “زوج”, which signifies one of a pair or couple but sometimes rarely taken to mean a pair or couple together, and sometimes an even number, a number that may be divided into two equal numbers one with which another is made to be a pair or couple, one with which an odd number is made to be an even number “شفاع” of “شفع”, which is an antonym of “وتر”.

This the reason why on the authority of the above scholars the Quranic verse 89:3 “وَالشَّفْعِ وَالْوَتْرِ” has been translated by all traditional and Quranist scholars to mean: “And the even and the odd” in which they take the same word “الشَّفْعِ” to mean the “even”.

However, in the exegesis (tafseer) some scholars take these ‘even and odd numbers’ to mean the units (Rakaat) of contact prayer (Namaz) from the words of the same verse “وَالشَّفْعِ وَالْوَتْرِ” (89:3). Whereas, no word of prayer has been revealed in this verse nor has prayer been mentioned in the context of this verse 89:3.

Abu Nasr Ismail ibn Hammad al-Jauhari mentioned in his Arabic dictionary the Crown of Language “Taj al-Lugha wa Sihah al-Arabiya” and Seyyid Murtadha az‐Zabidi in his lexicon “Taj al‐Aroos” that “شفعة” is used in relation to house and land, which signifies “مِلْك” meaning to property, house or piece of land that is coupled (مَشْفُوع) or pledged by purchase with one’s house, or piece of land, previously possessed (مِلْك), and adjoining thereto. Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ali al-Muqri al-Faiyumi and Abul-Fath Naisir Ibn Abi al-Makarim Abd As-Saiyid Ibn Ali al-Mutarrizi quoted an Arabic phrase: “كَانَ وِتْرًا فَشَفَعْتُهُ” in “Al-Misbah” and “Al Maghrib” in the same meaning as mentioned above from “Taj al Aroos” and “al Sihah al Arabia”

Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ali al-Muqri al-Faiyumi further added in “Al-Misbah” that this is the primary signification: then it was applied to denote a particular kind of obtaining possession and Abul-Fath Naisir Ibn Abi al-Makarim Abd As-Saiyid Ibn Ali al-Mutarrizi added in “Al Maghrib” that it is also used to mean obtaining possession of that “مِلْك” (property) and coupling it with that was previously possessed, and adjoining thereto. Al Hasan bin Muhammad al-Saghani and Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ali al-Muqri al-Faiyumi further added in “al Obab az Zakhir wa lil Bab al Fakhir” and in “Al-Misbah” that one’s making a demand respecting that which he seeks to possess, for the right of the pre-emption thereof, and adjoining it to that which he already has it signifies the right of obtaining possession of a piece of land that is the right of pre-emption thereof. Seyyid Murtadha az‐Zabidi added in “Taj al‐Aroos” that of a house against one’s co-sharer whose possession is by compulsion, for a compensation or the right of obtaining possession of a piece of land, by compulsion, by reason of partnership or of immediate neighbourship or the right of immediate neighbourship with respect to pre-emption of a house or land.

Ibn Kuteybeh says, in explaining “شفعة”, in the time of ignorance, when a man desired to sell a house, his neighbour used to come to him and to make a demand to him called “شَفَعَ إِلَيْهِ”, i.e. “طَلَبَ” or demand respecting that which he sold (for the right of pre-emption), and he pronounced him to have a better right, or title, or claim, (as a purchaser) to that which was sold, than he whose connexion was more remote: as though he took it from “الشَّفَاعَةُ”  Ash-Shaabee uses it in his narrated saying, “مَنْ بِيعَتْ شُفْعَتُهُ وَهُوَ حَاضِرٌ فَلَمْ يَطْلُبْ ذٰلِكَ فَلَا شُفْعَةَ لَهُ” to mean: “He whose claimed possession to be coupled by purchase with one already belonging to him is sold when he is present without his demanding that possession, there shall be no obtaining possession for him by his purchasing it for that purpose”. Ash-Shaabee also quoted another saying in the same account: “الشُّفْعَةُ عَلَى رُؤُوسِ الرِجَالِ” means: “The possession that is coupled by purchase with another possession is apportioned according to the heads of the men entitled thereto”. Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ali al-Muqri al-Faiyumi and Abul-Fath Naisir Ibn Abi al-Makarim Abd As-Saiyid Ibn Ali al-Mutarrizi quoted similar saying of classical times in “Al-Misbah” and “Al Maghrib”. Aboo‐ Amr Ibn‐Al‐Aala, Al-Faiyumi and Ibn Al-Arabi also took “شفعة” to mean possession, madness or insanity and so “شَفْعَةٌ” later explained by Ibn Al-Arabi in this sense and synonym of “سَفْعَةٌ”, “شُنْعَةٌ”, “رَدَّةٌ”and “نَظْرَةٌ” to mean perceived in the face, which generally means an unseemliness or ugliness and so, on the authority of Ibn Al-Arabi is شُفَعٌ.

Ibn‐Faris, the author of the “Mujmal” states that “شُفَعٌ” been said to signify the evil eye, by which one is smitten but he doubts its correctness.

Ibn-Abbad and al-Faiyumi of al Obab further said “شَافِعٌ” is sorts of pasture, or herbage, that grow two and two or twins of plants.

Hence, Abu Obeyd, Al Mutarrizi, Al Ferozabadi of “Kamoos”, Abu Nasr Ismail ibn Hammad al-Jauhari of “Sihah al-Arabiya” mentioned that “شفع” means “one of a pair” and “شَفُوعٌ” signifies the same as “شَافِعٌ” to mean with twins. They have quoted an Arabic saying: “عَيْنٌ شَافِعَةٌ” to mean ‘an eye that makes a thing to appear a pair or that sees doubly.

Ibn‐Mukarram mentioned in “Lisan uI‐Arab” and Seyyid Murtada Az‐Zebcedi mentioned in “Taj ul‐Aroos” that “أَشْفَعُ” means ‘tall or high’. Ibn Al-Arabi and Seyyid Murtada further added that “مُشْفِعٌ” is a sheep, ram or lamb or she-goat that suckles any animal.

Ibn‐Faris, al-Faiyumi and Ibn‐Mukarram further mentioned that “مَشْفُوعَةٌ” signifies a woman smitten by the evil eye.

Al-Faiyumi further mentioned in ‘al Obab’ and Ibn Hammad al Jauhari mentioned in ‘Sihah’ that “شَفَعَتْ” and its infinitive or noun “شَفْعٌ” means “she became such as is termed “شَافِعٌ” a quasi-pass and she is thus termed “لِأَنَّ وَلَدَهَا شَفَعَهَا أَوْ شَفَعَتْهُ” because her young one has made her to be one of a pair, or couple, with itself, or because she has made it to be one of a pair or couple, with another that is in her belly.

Al-Faiyumi, Al Ferozabadi and Seyyid Murtada Az‐Zebcedi mentioned in ‘al Obab’, ‘Kamoos’ and ‘Taj ul‐Aroos’ that a ‘kid’ conjointly with another is called “شافع”. Therefore, “شفع” correctly means conjoined with another and “شَفَاعَةٌ” is ‘conjoint’, ‘combine, and coupling, and “الشفعة” is ‘preemptive right’.

It is only Ibn-Masood who invented the term of “intercession” and in their sheep practice many Arabic lexicons copied his falsely given meaning of “intercession”. It is mentioned by Al-Faiyumi in ‘al Obab’ and by Seyyid Murtada Az‐Zebcedi in “Taj ul‐Aroos” that Ibn-Masood said, “One whose intercession is accepted mentioned in the Quran by a term “شَافِعٌ” and “مُشَفَّعٌ” to mean an intercessor of which the intercession will be accepted, for him who follows it and does according to what is in it, that his unpremeditated transgressions may be forgiven.

However, Seyyid Murtada Az‐Zebcedi clarified in the same lexicon the “Taj ul‐Aroos” that تَشَفَّعَهُ also is quasi-pass of اِسْتَشْفَعَ بِهِ: but تَشَفَّعَهُ is evidently, here, a mis-transcripted application for تَشَفَّعَ, meaning He was granted intercession. Whereas, “تَشَفَّعَ” is a derivative of “شفع” which is not an intercession.


In the above summery noted from all classical lexicons of old time legend scholars we have found that “شفع” means ‘adjoining’, ‘couple with something’, ‘preemption’, ‘conjoined’;  ‘conjoint’’ and ‘combined with another’. However, among all above stated classical scholars only Ibn-Masood invented “شفع” to mean “intercession” but Seyyid Murtada Az‐Zebcedi clarified in the same lexicon “Taj ul‐Aroos” that “شفع” is not an “intercession” and it was mis-transcripted by Ibn-Masood.


Now, we are looking at its practical usage in Arabic as well as international legal system in which “الشفعة” derived out of the same root word “شفع” has been used in the LAW OF PRE-EMPTION (قانون الشفعة), governs over a valid claim of the right of enjoining the property which was previously possessed. This is the original meaning of “الشفعة” or preemption, which is also known as “a right to take” in the language of the law (Baillie 1.475).

In Practical Law a ‘pre-emption agreement’ is used where a buyer wants the opportunity to buy a property in the event of the seller deciding to dispose of it during an agreed or appointed term.

Therefore, the Arabic word “الشفعة” from the root of “شفع” is used to mean ‘constitutional right of preemption’ and in the same context, the pre-emptive right is also called ‘subscription right’ or ‘subscription privilege

Other situations in which pre-emption rights (الشفعة) are seen to arise are in property developments; parties close to the developer are often given a right of pre-emption in relation to new accommodation or condominiums within a development.

You might have seen builders or developers who build towers, blocks of flats or develop plots of land they offer developed accommodations or developed plots to the predevelopment occupiers in favourable terms. This is the practical application of “الشفعة” in which the developing or building ‘AUTHORITY’ grants “الشفعة” ‘adjoining’ with the preoccupation of undeveloped land. A ‘housing authority’ also practices “الشفعة” in giving a ‘right to buy’ to the occupants of its properties. Tenants of Council or Local Authorities enjoy their right of “الشفعة” (pre-emption right) and buy Council or Local Authority’s accommodations in which they have been living.

Overall, pre-emption right (الشفعة) is similar to the concept of a call option.

The Companies Act 2006 is the source of shareholder pre-emption rights in English companies. Under section 561(1) of the Companies Act 2006 a company must not issue shares to any person unless:

It has made an offer (on the same or more favourable terms) to each person who already holds shares in the company in the proportion held by them.

The same rule of “الشفعة” has been in practice throughout the world since before Islam or since before the revelation of the Quran, as seen in the above research in classical Arabic literature in which Ibn Kuteybeh says, in explaining “شفعة”, in the time of ignorance, when a man desired to sell a house, his neighbour used to come to him and to make a demand to him called “شَفَعَ إِلَيْهِ”, i.e. “طَلَبَ” or demand respecting that which he sold (for the right of pre-emption), and he pronounced him to have a better right, or title, or claim, (as a purchaser) to that which was sold, than he whose connection was more remote: as though he took it from “الشَّفَاعَةُ”. We have also seen Ash-Shaabi’s narrated Arabic saying, “مَنْ بِيعَتْ شُفْعَتُهُ وَهُوَ حَاضِرٌ فَلَمْ يَطْلُبْ ذٰلِكَ فَلَا شُفْعَةَ لَهُ” to mean: “He whose claimed possession to be coupled by purchase with one already belonging to him is sold when he is present without his demanding that possession, there shall be no obtaining possession for him by his purchasing it for that purpose”. Ash-Shaabi also quoted another saying in the same account: “الشُّفْعَةُ عَلَى رُؤُوسِ الرِجَالِ” means: “The possession that is coupled by purchase with another possession is apportioned according to the heads of the men entitled thereto”. Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ali al-Muqri al-Faiyumi and Abul-Fath Naisir Ibn Abi al-Makarim Abd As-Saiyid Ibn Ali al-Mutarrizi also quoted similar saying of classical times in “Al-Misbah” and “Al Maghrib”. Aboo‐ Amr Ibn‐Al‐Aala, Al-Faiyumi and Ibn Al-Arabi also took “شفعة” to mean possession and we have also seen on the authority of Ibn Al-Arabi that “شَفْعَةٌ” is actually “شُفَعٌ”.

Therefore, Allah has used “شفع” and its derivatives in the Quran in the same meaning as they were used by Arabs to make them understand Allah’s message in their own language.

Hence, the above research has proven that Arabs never took “شفع” and its derivatives to mean “INTERCESSION”.

On the other hand if you read the beliefs of Zoroastrianism you will find “INTERCESSION” is an integral part of their belief in which they struggle to find “INTERCESSION” for their salvation.

In “On Mithra’s part in Zoroastrianism” a publication of Cambridge University Press on the Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies University of London, you will find “pray for the yazata’s intercession” in Zoroastrianism. The academic publications of the world class Universities also pointed out the apparent difference in many points of doctrine of the religion of the Zoroastrian mosque which is not in fact what was preached by their prophet Zoroaster 3500 years ago who was imbued from his infancy with deep philosophical and religious thoughts for the welfare and well-being of mankind, this ancient prophet of Bactria derived his holy inspiration after thirty years of divine meditation on a secluded and inaccessible mountain-top of “Ushidarena.” Thus fortified in communion with Ahura-Mazda, “Spitama Zarathustra” proceeded to the city of Balkh, at the time the capital of the King of Iran, Kava Vishtaçpa. However, the above mentioned publication of Cambridge University Press mentioned “that the followers of Zoroaster fairly rapidly betrayed his teachings and evolved a syncretic religion in which they reverted to many ancient beliefs and observances which he himself had denounced”.

Therefore, from their “Gathas” (the sacred Songs) of central Zoroastrian belief they were the Zoroastrians (ancient Parsi Iranians) who brought, the concept of “INTERCESSION”, “Purification” (وضوء Baptisms & Ashnan etc.), “rituals of prayers with and without the image of deity”, “typical linear hereafter”, “resurrection on the day of judgment” and “angels having wings or feathers”, in all major religions including Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Furthermore, Zoroastrianism is also called “monotheism” in which only one deity is worshiped due to which all rituals of Zoroastrianism have been as it is seamlessly adopted in the modified Islam, after Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and his first 4 Caliphs (RA). When Allah was made an unseen deity and His worship has been started exactly in the same way as it is still seen in the contact prayer of Zoroastrianism, which is called Namaz by Parsis, the followers of Zoroastrianism. To incorporate Zoroastrian “monotheism” in the modified Islam those verses of the Quran were wrongly translated in which Allah has clearly said that He is not a deity. So, following the Zoroastrian monotheist belief all verses of the Quran starting from the words “لا اله الا الله” were wrongly translated to mean “There is no deity but God or Allah” or “There is no deity except God or Allah”. Whereas, Allah says, “اللّهُ لاَ إِلَـهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ الْحَيُّ الْقَيُّومُ” that “Allah is not deity He is only living entity” as no deity comes under living things. So, when you correctly word to word translate the Quranic phrases “لا اله الا الله” you will find its true meaning “no (لا) deity (اله) only (الا) Allah (الله)”. Therefore, the Quran does not accept any so called “monotheism” in which one deity is selected for worship and to perform all rituals on its name. This is the reason why the Quranic Islam is totally different to the present Islam in which Allah has been falsely made a deity in order to carry on performing forbidden rituals which were used to worship deities before revealing the Quran. Hence, true Islam, which was brought by the Quran was not “monotheism” but following Allah on His attributes and His commandments instead of getting involved in any ritual worship considering Him a deity. If “monotheism” was already in place and practiced by a “monotheists” group at the time of the revelation of the Quran why did Allah send His Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) with His guidance and instructions (the Quran)? Due to this misconception of “monotheism” we have been degrading our exalted Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and putting words in the ugly mouth of anti-Islam forces that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did not bring anything new or different to the preexisted “monotheism”. This is the reason why they blame on our Prophet (pbuh) that he invented the Quran himself taking motivation from the “monotheism”. In reality there is no much difference between “monotheism” and “polytheism” because in “monotheism” only one deity is worshiped whereas in “polytheism” more than one deities are worshiped but deity is deity no matter whether you worship only one deity or more than one deities. You might have noticed that worship of only one deity is quite common among polytheist religions such as Hinduism in which despite having so many deities people worship their personally selected deity. This is the reason why the worshipers of “Maa” (the mother deity) always have her image or statue with them, in their houses, at their work places and even in their cars, and they proclaim “jay Mata di” (highness of Mata). Those “monotheists” of “polytheism” who worship “Krishna” they have images of “Krishna” around them and proclaim “Jay shri Krishna” (highness of Krishna), those who worship “Hanuman” (a monkey shaped deity) they keep images of “Hanuman” around them. Likewise, those “monotheists” who worship deity Allah they install its images the “moon crescent” on high minarets and on the peak of domes of their mosques and proclaim “اللہ اکبر” (highness of deity Allah). This is not my word but the words of those “monotheists” of “polytheism” who have made Allah a deity in their religion and wrongly translate the Quranic words “لا اله الا الله”, “اللّهُ لاَ إِلَـهَ” and “اللّهُ لاَ إِلَـهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ الْحَيُّ الْقَيُّومُ” to make Allah a deity of Islam.

However, we are coming back to the subject of “intercession” and “satanic verses”. The above research in classic Arabic literature, Classical Arabic lexicons and grammars, research publications of the world class universities, research on the words of the Quran, word to word analysis and correct translation of the verse 22:52 have proved that “شفاعت” is not an Arabic noun in its formation because only Persian nouns ends with “ت” whereas Arabic nouns ends with “ۃ”. The Arabic letter “ت” is used at the end of Arabic words only to specify their genders, making them plural and to use epithetical pronouns in complex combinations. However, in the set parameters of using “ت” at the end of Arabic words this letter “ت” does not fit in the phrase “شفاعتهنّ” of the said satanic verse “وإن شفاعتهنّ لتُرتجى” because Arabic language does not recognize the word “شفاعت” as a noun but “شَفٰعَةٌ” or “شَفاعَةٌ” not meaning to “intercession” but “adjoin”, “couple with”, “subscription”, “preemption” and ‘attachment’ etc. as seen in the classical Arabic literature as well as modern usage of “شَفْعَةٌ” to mean “preemption” or “right to buy”. However, if we take “شفاعتهنّ” an Arabic phrase then using “ت” at the end of Arabic word “ت + شفاع” to denote a gender is out of question because in the presence of female pronoun “هنّ” with “شفاعت” of “شفاعتهنّ” no further gender marker is required. Furthermore, in the presence of pronoun “هنّ” no other epithetical pronoun can come in the same phrase “شفاعتهنّ”. Although letter “ت” is used to make Arabic nouns plural but as a rule letter “alif” is also required before “ت”, such as “معلمات”, a plural of “معلمةٌ” and so on.

Despite all above explained technical disorders if we still believe that the said satanic verse “وإن شفاعتهنّ لتُرتجى” was made and revealed by Satan on an Arab Prophet (pbuh) for his alleged reconciliation with Arab pagans then again this satanic verse “وإن شفاعتهنّ لتُرتجى” would have been taken in its true meaning “Whose subscription or adjoining is to be hoped for” instead of “Whose intercession is to be hoped for” invented by replacing Arabic “شفاعتهنّ” with Persian “شفاعت” + Arabic pronoun “هنّ”. Also, adjoining or coupling their deities with God was central belief of Arab pagans instead of keeping their deities just for the purpose of intercession only. Hence, Arab pagans used to accept Lat, Manat and Uzzah as their gods and used to adjoin them with Allah being His daughters and they used to worship them. So, if Lat, Manat and Uzza were themselves their gods why did Arabs degrade them from gods to intermediaries? This is because according to the definition and general belief the intermediaries are not actually gods but those whose intercession is accepted by God with His will. Therefore, these so called satanic verses “تلك الغرانيق العلى” (These are the exalted or high rising intermediary cranes) and “وإن شفاعتهنّ لتُرتجى” (Whose intercession is to be hoped for) were actually going against the belief of Arab pagans but were in fact according to the Zoroastrian’s belief in intercession for which they struggle in finding, believing and following high rising religious personalities, Saints, innocent children, and their Prophet to hold their intercession in the Hereafter.

So, they were only Zoroastrian originated Persian agents and Persian Zoroastrian Imams in disguise of so called authoritative scholars, historians and biographers of Islam, who invented these so called satanic verses in Islamic literature to bring in Islam their false belief in intercession and to make the Quran doubtful, and also to accuse the innocent Prophet of Islam Muhammad (pbuh) that he has recited the verses given by Satan.

Since now we have eventually found that satanic verses are fake so Allah’s statement has been proven true that no one can make something as the Quran. This is because we have found the reality of satanic verses and differentiate them from the formation of their words and Allah’s words in His verses and Allah has clearly shown us that these so called satanic verses have technical flaws in their making that’s why they are not same as the Quranic verses.

Therefore, until the false literature of Islam given by Persian Imams is not fully thrown out this stigma will always blacken the face of Islam.

Now, we can produce the correct translation of those verses of the Quran in which Arabic word “شفع” and its derivatives have been used.


The correct meaning of Arabic “شفع” and its derivatives are as follows:

Preempt, couple with, smite with, adjoin with, correspond with, attach with, accompany with, coincide with, harmonize with, synchronize with, escort with, team up, line up, run with, tie up with, attend, hang out, hang around, combined with another, conjoin, conjoint, subscribe, fall upon, grab, hook, support, brace, to pop, to plunge, to finger, to fondle, to clutch, to scratch, to sign up, to buy, to consent, to pledge, to register, to support, to come through, to accept, to acquiesce, to admit, to assent, to cave in, to comply, to enter into, to permit, to roll over, to accommodate, to adapt, to adjust, to come around, to go along, to pass, to acknowledge, to be side with, to engage, to set, to take one up on, to embrace, to pass on, to sanction, inscribe, come through, break in, ditto, preemption, subscription, adjoining appropriation, assumption, infringement, taking first option, prior right of purchase, right of preemption, determent, preclusion, one of the pair and accompanied with someone.

Now, I will translate some verses containing the word “شفع” or its derivatives so that you can correctly translate and understand all other verses containing “شفع” and its derivatives.

The verse 2:254:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ أَنفِقُواْ مِمَّا رَزَقْنَاكُم مِّن قَبْلِ أَن يَأْتِيَ يَوْمٌ لاَّ بَيْعٌ فِيهِ وَلاَ خُلَّةٌ وَلاَ شَفَاعَةٌ وَالْكَافِرُونَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ

O those who have faith, disburse from your provision what is Our provided, before coming of day in it no bargain and no refute and no attachment/no escort/no right of preemption and the concealers they are the cruel” (word to word correct translation of the verse 2:254)

In fact this verse 2:254 is preparing us for the day when we will die by urging us to contribute from our resources before the day comes when we can’t do anything and nothing will go with us and we will be all alone without any companion and the right of admission in further development (preemption) will not automatically granted for further life, especially to those who hide Allah’s message.

However, who hide Allah’s message they made it easy for their followers to escape from Allah’s system of justice by introducing ‘intercession’. Whereas, intercession is nowhere mentioned in this verse.

So, now you can compare the fake translations of these verses with the Arabic words of their Quranic texts. A sample of wrong translations is copied underneath for your quick comparison on the basis of which some scholars argue that intercession is not permissible but they hide the actual word of the Quran that no escort, or companion will be with us and we will not get any preemption.


O you who have believed, spend from that which We have provided for you before there comes a Day in which there is no exchange and no friendship and no intercession. And the disbelievers they are the wrongdoers” (Translation of 2:254 by Saheeh)


The next verse 2:255:

اللّهُ لاَ إِلَـهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ الْحَيُّ الْقَيُّومُ لاَ تَأْخُذُهُ سِنَةٌ وَلاَ نَوْمٌ لَّهُ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الأَرْضِ مَن ذَا الَّذِي يَشْفَعُ عِنْدَهُ إِلاَّ بِإِذْنِهِ

God is not deity but He is the ultimate living unification nor is taken His age (length of time of His life) and neither is unconsciousness for Him, what in the skies and what in the earth, who is that one who adjoins/ corresponds/attaches with Him except by His authorization”. (Word to word correct translation)


A sample of existing wrong translation: “Allah there is no deity except Him, the Ever-Living, the Sustainer of [all] existence. Neither drowsiness overtakes Him nor sleep. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. Who is it that can intercede with Him except by His permission?” (Translation by Saheeh)

If you notice the translation of the verse 2:255 you will find for yourself that the translation of the phrase “لاَ تَأْخُذُهُ سِنَةٌ” is missing in all translations given by all Quranists and the traditional scholars.

سِنَةٌ” refers to His age or time of life, which is normally translated to mean “year” but it if you search this word in a reputable lexicon you will see that the same word refers to someone’s time of life. “تَأْخُذُهُ” again a combination of third person singular pronoun هُ + أْخُذُ+ تَ in which “أْخُذُ” refers to ‘take’ something that is “سِنَةٌ” and “لاَ” to mean ‘no/never’ is negating this action.

Also, in the translation of opening phrase “اللّهُ لاَ إِلَـهَ” why do they write Allah or God separately or abruptly such as: “Allah, there is no deity” or “God, there is no deity” and where do they get “there is” from?

This is because to make Allah a deity they don’t want to translate this opening phrase “اللّهُ لاَ إِلَـهَ” correctly! Otherwise, I can’t see any other problem in translating this phrase “اللّهُ لاَ إِلَـهَ” correctly as: Allah or God (اللّهُ) is not (لاَ) deity (إِلَـهَ). So, word to word correct translation of this phrase “اللّهُ لاَ إِلَـهَAllah is not deity does not digest to our pagan scholars and their agents who preach the Quran as I have often heard them saying that the Quran cannot be translated from Arabic to any other language. This is because they don’t want to leave their pagan beliefs in the light of the correct translation of the Quran.

Furthermore, in the translation of this verse 2:255 they wrongly attach “لَّهُ” with “مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الأَرْض” to falsely translate “belong to Him”. Whereas, in reality “لَّهُ” is linguistically attached with the phrase “وَلاَ نَوْمٌ لَّهُ” to correctly understand “and no nape, sleep or unconsciousness for Him

Anyway, like self-invented “there is” with “no deity” there is no word in this verse to mean “belong to” and you have seen throughout the research conducted in this article that Arabic word “يَشْفَعُ” is not “intercede” So, these words are all self-insertions in Allah’s words to drive Allah’s statement according to their pagan beliefs.

However, a contradiction coming in the statements of the above verses 2:254 and 2:255 on the matter of ‘intercession’ is self-explanatory proof and a clear evidence that the translations of both verses are wrong otherwise there is no contradiction in Allah’s message.

This self-created contradiction in the translation has not only divided Muslim nation on the matter of ‘intercession’ but in fact it is becoming a severe cause of defamation of Quran in the eyes of non-Muslims.


The verse 4:85

مَّن يَشْفَعْ شَفَاعَةً حَسَنَةً يَكُن لَّهُ نَصِيبٌ مِّنْهَا وَمَن يَشْفَعْ شَفَاعَةً سَيِّئَةً يَكُن لَّهُ كِفْلٌ مِّنْهَا وَكَانَ اللّهُ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ مُّقِيتًا

Who joins good companionship for him he draws his destiny/participation from it and who joins bad companionship for him he is liable/responsible of it and God instituted over everything an espionage” (word to word correct translation)


A sample of wrong Translation: “Whoever intercedes a good intercession, he will have a reward of it; and whoever intercedes an evil intercession, he will receive a share of it. And God has control over all things” (Translation by Free Minds)

يَشْفَعْ” is the present verb of “شْفَعْ” and now you know the correct meaning of “شْفَعْ” and “شَفَاعَةً”, which have been drilled in the above paragraphs.

نَصِيبٌ” means draw, luck, destiny and participation. A lottery or lucky draw is called “یا نَصِيبٌ” (Ya Naseeb) in Arabic.

The phrase “مُّقِيتًا” is actually derived from the proto root “ق ت” (Q T) to mean “spying on” or shadowing, prefixed “م” makes it a noun of handler of spying or shadowing i.e. “espionage” and suffix “alif” refers to one, i.e. ‘a’ or ‘an’.


The verse 21:28

يَعْلَمُ مَا بَيْنَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَمَا خَلْفَهُمْ وَلَا يَشْفَعُونَ إِلَّا لِمَنِ ارْتَضَى وَهُم مِّنْ خَشْيَتِهِ مُشْفِقُونَ

He knows what is between themselves and what is behind them and they are not subscribed/accommodated unless for whom He is pleased and they are of entering His grand compassionated pity” (Word to word correct translation)

This verse is purely talking about the Angels who become Allah’s “مقربین” (The closest) but the non-God fearing evil minds have misleading translated this verse to bring Angels’ intercession in the Quran!

Here is a sample of the wrong translation: “He knows what is before them, and what is behind them, and they offer no intercession except for those who are acceptable, and they stand in awe and reverence of His (Glory)” (Translation by Yousuf Ali)

يَشْفَعُونَ” is a passive voice present tense of “شَفَعَ” which is falsely taken to mean intercession or recommendation in all translations. However, by now you know the correct meaning of Arabic word “شفع” and its derivatives.

The phrase “خَشْيَتِهِ” is a combination of “هِ +تِ +يَ +خَشْ” in which “هِ” is the third person objective pronoun, “تِ” is an epithetic of God, “يَ” makes verb “خَشْ” a gerund, i.e. ‘a kind of verbal noun’ same as made in English by adding “ing” with the verbs, and “خَشْ” is the verb to mean “enter” in some state.

مُشْفِقُونَ” is derived out of “شفق” and “مشفق” is a noun to mean grand ‘petier’ and highly compassionate.

Now, you can correctly translate the rest of the verses of the Quran in which “شفع” and its derivatives have been used in the same meaning which we have correctly found through our in depth research. These verses do not talk about any so called ‘intercession’, which is falsely brought in their translations by both groups of ‘traditional’ and the ‘Quran-only’ scholars.

However, traditional scholars whole heartedly brought the Zoroastrian belief in their fake translations and false exegesis and wrote in the brackets that children, prophets, saints, and angels will intercede. Whereas, the Quranists or ‘Quran-only’ scholars and their followers pinch the nose from other hand by translating “شفع” and its derivatives to mean “recommendation” and also “intercession” but apparently they preach against the traditional views of ‘intercession’ and claim that intercession is not admissible. If you attend their lectures (Dars-e-Quran) and subsequently read their scholars’ translations you will find for yourself clear contradictions in their translations and what they preach. This is because somehow they know that intercession is not allowed but they don’t bother to rectify the last words of their founders, which they have left for them in the shape of a huge pack of lies together with Persianised Quranic dictionaries in which “شفاعت” is the intercession.

You can see the same arguments on the internet and on so many Quranic or Islamic forums in which traditionals and Quranists quote the same verses which contain “شفع” and its derivatives and argue that intercession is allowed or not allowed but no one ever bothers to at least look at the Arabic word “شفع” for its correct meaning before entering the useless arguments on intercession.

If “شفع” means ‘intercession’ why don’t they translate the same word “الشَّفْعِ” to mean ‘THE INTERCESSION’ in the translation of the verse 89:3 “وَالشَّفْعِ وَالْوَتْرِ?

Where is their so called method of “تصریفِ آیات” (cross reference of verses) which they use to destroy the actual statements of the Quran by pulling words from one context to another for producing the set minds translation?

Hence, our research concludes that the Quranic word “شفع” and its derivatives do not refer to any kind of ‘intercession’ or ‘recommendation’ and the translations of all verses, containing the word “شفع” and its derivatives, are completely wrong.