The Allegation Regarding the Source of the Qur’an: Human Instruction

There is a persistent allegation that Prophet Muhammad received the knowledge contained in the Qur’an from a human teacher. However, logic dictates that if this doubt were genuinely felt by those who made it, they would have held onto it firmly without shifting to contradictory explanations.

If the human mind attempts to explain the total break between Muhammad’s life before his message and his life after it, it might conclude that this new knowledge must have been imparted by fresh instruction. Since people are unaware of non-human teachers on earth, the immediate assumption is that a human must have undertaken this instruction. Yet, if an accuser could find even plausible factors to support this conviction, they would abstain from seeking different explanations.

Consequently, the claim that the Qur’an was taught to Muhammad by a human being is actually the least frequent argument employed by those who deny that the Qur’an was revealed by Allah.

Contradictory Accusations: Madness, Poetry, or Instruction?

Those who deny the divine origin of the Qur’an remain uncertain regarding what to say about it. They face a dilemma:

  • Should they claim it was taught to Muhammad by another human?
  • Should they say it is the product of his own intellect?
  • Or should they combine the two, describing Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) as being both “taught” and a “madman”?

This confusion is captured in the Qur’an itself in Surat Ad-Dukhan:

{Yet they turned away from him and said, “One taught (by others), a madman.”} (Ad-Dukhan 44:14)

The Theory of Self-Inspiration

Because the “human teacher” argument is weak, the most frequent argument is that the Qur’an was “self-inspired”. However, those who make this allegation cannot agree on the psychological condition that led to the production of the Qur’an—whether it was poetic inspiration, madness, or mere dreaming.

These deniers tried every angle to support their rejection of the message. They did not stop at critiquing the logic of the speech; they considered extreme psychological conditions, regardless of whether the speaker was rational or irrational.

This scattershot approach is clear evidence that they did not truly believe their own allegations. They simply raised all possibilities—overlooking defects and improbabilities—to raise doubts in the minds of those seeking the truth.

A State of Confusion

Whenever critics advanced an opinion, they found it unsuitable and devoid of plausible proof. They would quickly move to a second or third opinion, realizing each time that their attempts were futile. They remained torn in the midst of views they knew to be false.

The Qur’an vividly describes this persistent confusion:

{Nay! They say, “Medleys of dreams. Nay! He has forged it. Nay! He is a poet.} (Al-Anbiyaa’ 21:5)

This verse depicts how the deniers switch from one extreme to another when they feel their lies are about to be exposed. Haphazardly, they seek anything to support their untenable position.

{See what kinds of comparisons they make for you [O Prophet], so they have gone astray; therefore they shall not be able to find a way [to the truth].} (Al-Furqan 25:9)

Modern Atheism: Recycling Ancient Arguments

The position adopted by modern atheists, who attribute the Qur’an to self-inspiration, is identical to the arguments of the past. They allege their view relies on modern psychology or science, but it is no new opinion; it is the same view advanced by the society of Jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic ignorance).

The ancient detractors described the Prophet as a man of active imagination and profound sensitivity—a poet whose emotions overpowered his senses until he imagined he heard someone speaking to him.

Modern atheism is simply an updated or distorted version of these former types. As Almighty Allah says:

{Even thus said those before them the like of what they say; their hearts are all alike.} (Al-Baqarah 2:118)

The Prophet’s Integrity and the Divine Source

Interestingly, despite what neo-atheists say about the Prophet, they acknowledge that he was exemplary in his honesty. They argue he can be “excused” for attributing his vision to divine inspiration because his dreams were so vivid he thought they were real—meaning he only said what he believed.

However, this theory collapses when one realizes the Qur’an includes accounts of past and future communities. To explain this, critics are forced to abandon “self-inspiration” and return to the idea that he heard these stories from scholars during his travels—bringing them back to the “human teacher” argument they previously discarded.

If Muhammad is justified in describing what he saw as revelation, what justification did he have in saying that neither he nor his people had ever heard such news before?

To be consistent, deniers would have to claim it is all a fabrication. However, they avoid making this direct claim to maintain a guise of fairness and objectivity. Yet, by adopting such an attitude, they practically make that accusation.

{They desire to put out the light of Allah with their mouths but Allah will perfect His light, even though the unbelievers may be averse.} (As-Saff 61:8)

By Muhammad Abdullah Diraz