Can We Describe the Common Word Initiative as a Turning Point in Christian-Muslim Relations?

01

of 04

Events That Led to the Common Word Initiative

The Common Word initiative emerged as an open letter a year after Pope Benedict XVI’s Regensburg lecture, titled Faith, Reason and University – Memories and Reflections of His Holiness Benedict XVI, which he delivered on September 12^th, 2006, at the University of Regensburg in Germany. Addressing an audience of historians, philosophers, philologists, academics and students, the lecture’s central argument asserted that faith and reason are compatible, and discussions related to science and reason need not exclude the question of God. The lecture delved into a conversation on Christian-Muslim relations between the fourteenth-century Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Palaeologus and an “erudite Persian.”^[5] However, rather than examining this discussion for its inter-religious merits, the Pope chose to focus on peripheral aspects of the discussion to provide context for his main thesis.

In an English translation of the Regensburg lecture, the Pope quoted Manuel II to have said:

Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.[6]

Rather than providing a defence or rebuttal against what the Pope had described as a “brusque slight” against Islam, the Pope instead chose to emphasise the emperor’s rebuke as a means of illustrating the irrationality of spreading faith through violence and the incompatibility of violence with the nature of God. The Pope argued how both Manuel II and contemporary Western societies are influenced by Greek philosophy, while Muslims are taught to believe in the absolute transcendence of God, and that God’s will transcends “any of our categories, even that of rationality.”^[7]

The arguments posited by the Pope in his Regensburg lecture alarmed Muslim clerics and Islamic scholars around the world.  Following the lecture, political leaders, religious figures, and social commentators offered their opinions on the Pope’s statements. While some endorsed the lecture’s intent, others expressed reservations. Among those who expressed support for the Pope was the German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who stated:

Whoever criticises the Pope misunderstood the aim of his speech… It was an invitation to dialogue between religions and the Pope expressly spoke in favour of this dialogue, which is something I also support and consider urgent and necessary.[8]

The Muslim academic and philosopher Tariq Ramadan commented:

Most did not read the pope’s speech; others had relied on a sketchy summary according to which the pope had linked Islam and violence … certain groups or governments manipulate crises of this kind as a safety valve for both their restive populations and their own political agenda … the mass protests … end up providing a living proof that Muslims cannot engage in reasonable debate and that verbal aggression and violence are more the rule than the exception.[9]

Others admonished the Pope‘s choice of references. The author and social commentator Christopher Hitchens reproached the Pope for having …

…managed to do a moderate amount of harm – and absolutely no good – to the very tense and distraught discussion not in progress between Europe and Islam.[10]

While Egypt’s foreign minister Ahmad Abol Gheit lamented:

This was a very unfortunate statement and it is a statement that shows that there is a lack of understanding of real Islam. And because of this we are hopeful that such statements and such positions would not be stated in order to not allow tension and distrust and recriminations to brew between the Muslim as well as the west.[11]

The Pope’s reference to Manuel II’s portrayal of Islam in his lecture caused considerable indignation across much of the Muslim world. In an attempt to address the concerns of Muslim authorities worldwide, the Pope delivered a statement during a Sunday sermon clarifying his position:

…I am deeply sorry for the reactions in some countries to a few passages of my address at the University of Regensburg, which were considered offensive to the sensibility of Muslims. These in fact were a quotation from a medieval text, which do not in any way express my personal thought … I hope that this serves to appease hearts and to clarify the true meaning of my address, which in its totality was and is an invitation to frank and sincere dialogue, with great mutual respect.[12]

On October 13^th,  2006, 38 Muslim clerics from various countries issued a co-signed Open Letter to His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI. This letter provided a detailed analysis of the Pope’s lecture and offered responses to some of its contentious elements. The signatories ultimately acknowledged the Pope’s “unprecedented personal expression of sorrow,” which he pronounced during his sermon and that they shared his “desire for frank and sincere dialogue, and recognize its importance in an increasingly interconnected world.”^[13]

One year later, on October 13^th, 2007, Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad bin Talal of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, who was among the signatories of the Open Letter to His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, took his commitment to dialogue a step further by authoring A Common Word Between Us and You. Sponsored by the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought, where Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad bin Talal serves as Chair of the Board of Trustees, this document was initially co-signed by 138 Muslim clerics and Islamic scholars from various nations. The number of co-signatories today stands at over 300.

The Common Word was issued as an open letter to Pope Benedict XVI and leaders of other Christian denominations worldwide. Supporters of the Common Word consider the paper a “landmark initiative” that marked a new dawn in Christian-Muslim relations.  The prominent Muslim authorities who co-signed the Common Word were acclaimed as being “more positive and open, yet mainstream and orthodox.”^[14]  David F. Ford, Emeritus Regius Professor of Divinity at the University of Cambridge, described the Common Word as a…

…historic agreement [that] gives the right keynote for relations between Muslims and Christians in the 21^st century…. The message is rich and deep, and it goes to the heart of [the] Muslim faith as expressed in the Quran. It also goes to the heart of the teaching of Jesus in the New Testament.[15]

The Common Word begins by highlighting the global demographic landscape of the twenty-first century, where Muslims and Christians together constitute more than half of the world’s population. The document emphasises the need for these two communities to adhere to the teachings of their respective faiths and to reconcile their differences in order to foster world peace.^[16] The Common Word warns that failure to heed its call to action could have a dire consequence:

The very survival of the world itself is perhaps at stake…our very eternal souls are also at stake if we fail to sincerely make every effort to make peace and come together in harmony.[17]

The Common Word letter centres around the concept of love as expressed in the Qur’an and the Bible, and this overarching theme is divided into three parts:

1. 1. Love of God.
   2. Love thy neighbour.
   3. Coming to a Common Word between Us and You.

To assess the Common Word’s impact on Christian-Muslim relations, it is necessary to analyse Christians’ responses to the three parts of the open letter.

02

of 04

Endorsements and Criticisms the Common Word Initiative Has Received

The Common Word appeals to its Christian audience through its evocative use of the word ‘love’ – a term often used in Christian literature. The Common Word draws from both Christian and Islamic scriptures to provide examples of how individuals should love their Lord and their neighbour:

The Unity of God, the necessity of love for Him, and the necessity of love for the neighbour is thus the common ground between Islam and Christianity.[18]

Much of the Common Word is devoted to showing how the theme of love permeates the verses of the Qur’an, the hadith traditions,^[19]  and passages from the Bible. The paper connects these shared themes with Qur’an (3:64),^[20] from which the term “Common Word” is derived. The paper calls on Muslims and Christians to accept God’s sovereignty over creation^[21] and to observe the Islamic precept, “None of you have faith until you love for your brother what you love for yourself.”^[22] The paper augments this Islamic precept with the biblical passages of Leviticus (19:17-18) and Matthew (22:38-40).^[23]

Some Christians perceive the central theme of love within the Common Word as a contrived attempt to persuade readers to temporarily set aside their personal beliefs and embrace the principles outlined in the open letter. Professor Johnny Awwad, who serves as the Executive Secretary for Education at the National Evangelical Synod of Syria and Lebanon and Associate Professor of New Testament at the Near East School of Theology in Beirut, Lebanon, expressed his discontent with how the Common Word and its Muslim signatories seem to make presumptions about Christians and their theological tenets.^[24] Awwad argued that, from a Christian perspective, the love of God and love for their neighbours find their roots in the Christological events of the crucifixion and resurrection. He further asserted that the Christian belief in a triune God does not undermine the concept of the unity of God, emphasising that this central tenet of Christianity should be made clear in all interfaith discussions.^[25] In his summary, Awwad extends an invitation to Muslims to engage in dialogue with the intent of understanding Christianity in the same way as Christians do.

If we are committed to dialogue and its development we must set aside all the preconceptions we have about the other, even if this involves a radically new interpretation of some sacred passages.[26]

While some Christian respondents, such as Awwad, provide constructive criticisms of certain aspects of the Common Word’s proposals and establish conditions for Christian-Muslim dialogue, others, like Dr. William Kilpatrick of Boston College, strongly object to what they see as the Common Word’s call for Christians to adopt the Islamic principles detailed in the open letter in-lieu of their personal beliefs. Kilpatrick offers a scathing critical summary of the Common Word for his audience:

A translation [of the Common Word] into contemporary English would read something like this: “Listen, Christians! Agree with us that Jesus is not the Son of God, and that God is not a Trinity, and then we can talk.” That is the price of entry into the Common Word club.^[27]      

With regards to how some Christians interpret the Common Word, Awwad delves into its religious context. He acknowledges the Common Word’s references to Biblical passages but raises objections to its categorisation of Christians as “the People of the Scripture.”^[28]  Presenting an alternative Christian perspective, Awwad asserts that Christians identify themselves as people of the person of Christ, who also possess a sacred text. In contrast to Muslims, who hold the Qur’an as the locus of God’s revelation, Awwad contends that Christians do not accord the same level of reverence to their Bible. From the Christian standpoint, the person of Christ serves as the locus of God’s revelation – the Word made flesh.^[29]

Both Awwad and Professor George Sabra, Dean and Professor of Systematic Theology at the Near East School of Theology in Beirut, Lebanon, also highlight how the Common Word seemingly pays a cursory tribute to how Christians love thy neighbour. Sabra argues that building trust is essential for peaceful coexistence among neighbours.^[30]  Both Awwad^[31] and Sabra^[32] contend that the parable of the Good Samaritan underscores that the neighbour to whom their Lord commands Christians to love may, at times, be their enemy.

The language of love that permeates the Common Word has also given rise to ambiguities in how some Muslims understand the concept of love. Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad bin Talal, the author of the Common Word, offered his interpretation of love during his inaugural address at the Yale Conference in July 2008:

…it has been a particular joy to be able to focus in our initiative on this frequently underestimated aspect of our religion, the principle of love.  Indeed, we have over 50 near synonyms for love in the Holy Qur’an.  English does not have the same linguistic riches and connotation … If Muslims do not usually use the same language of love as Christians in English, it is perhaps because the word ‘love’ frequently implies different things for Muslims than it does for Christians.[33]

Shortly after presenting his explanation of how Muslims understand love, Prince Ghazi retracted his statement and instead offered a more ubiquitous definition of love as “a universal human phenomenon that best finds its ultimate fulfilment in God.”^[34] In retrospect, Sabra suggests that the message conveyed by the Common Word…

…needs to be received in the Islamic World before it can truly serve as a basis for dialogue and peace between Islam and Christianity.  My distinct impression is that not enough effort is being exerted to make the Common Word known and understood among Muslims.[35]

One of the more prolific official Christian responses to the Common Word emerged from Yale Divinity School, presented in a press release entitled Loving God and Neighbour Together: A Christian Response to A Common Word Between Us and You. This press release garnered the endorsement of more than 300 influential Christian leaders from around the world.^[36] In its preamble, the Yale press release cordially accepted the invitation for dialogue and asked for forgiveness from the Muslim community.^[37] The article considered the counsel offered within the Common Word and complemented them with further references from the canonical Gospels. With regard to loving thy neighbour, the Yale press release stated:

Our faith teaches that we must be with our neighbors – indeed, that we must act in their favor – even when our neighbors turn out to be our enemies.[38]

The press release paid homage to the principle of loving thy neighbour by referencing the “Prophet Muhammad’s virtuous behavior.”  It recounted the incident when Muhammad was violently exiled from the city of Ta’if. Instead of invoking divine retribution upon the city, Muhammad implored that his Lord to forgive his persecutors. The press release also relayed how Muhammad found solace in an unexpected encounter with a Christian slave named ‘Addas.^[39] Yale University’s inclusion of this historical interfaith exchange between the Prophet Muhammad and a Coptic Christian slave can be interpreted as an effort to assuage Muslim sentiments, particularly in light of their response to the Regensburg lecture. The Yale press release concluded on an optimistic note:

Indeed, together with you [Muslims] we believe that we need to move beyond “a polite ecumenical dialogue between selected religious leaders” and work diligently together to reshape relations between our communities and our nations so that they genuinely reflect our common love for God and for one another.[40]

In a more objective article, Gé M. Speelman raises pertinent questions about the Common Word from an interreligious perspective. Speelman highlights that the common ground between Christians and Muslims is rooted in Judaism.^[41]  She dedicates a section of her article entitled The Missing Link: Judaism, in which she argues that, in any interfaith discussion centred on the unity of God, participants must consider the religious precedents from the three Abrahamic traditions—Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.^[42]

Speelman also observes that “the things left unsaid [in the Common Word] are almost as important as the things said.”^[43]  She notes that the Common Word not only entirely bypasses Judaism and several central Christian tenets, but also forsakes certain fundamental tenets of Islam. Early in the Common Word letter, Speelman observes that it dissects the Muslim testimony of faith (ash-shahādah) to simply “there is no god but God,” setting aside the second half of the testimony “Muhammad is the messenger of God” for later in the open letter. ^[44]

So, in the end, both traditions [Islam and Christianity] end up with a mutilated version of their basic tenets of faith.[45]

With regards to the tropology of love in Islam and Christianity, Speelman contends that the pursuit of a shared understanding of the concept of love that appeases both Christians and Muslims is a futile endeavour. In Speelman’s view, the essence of dialogue lies in the pursuit itself:

Love of God and love of the neighbour are of course for Christians indispensable notions, as they are for Muslims.  What we Christians really mean when we employ these words may be in many ways different to the meanings given to them by Jews and Muslims, and in the course of our dialogue we must finds ways to explore these differences.[46]

03

of 04

Concluding Thoughts

At its core, the Common Word is an invitation to engage in dialogue, composed and endorsed by prominent Islamic authorities who represent the orthodox Muslim position. The initiative also reveals how these Islamic authorities perceive Christianity. It asserts that the unity of God, love for God, and love for one’s neighbour are shared principles found in both Islam and Christianity and can serve as a basis for all future dialogue. This open letter extends its message to Christians and Muslims, two of the world’s largest faith communities, urging them to turn to their respective scriptures and follow the examples set by their prophets. By doing so, Christians and Muslims may discover that they have more in common than was previously assumed. The paper calls on Christians and Muslims to be more faithful to their traditions by engaging in conversations with their neighbours and seeking to understand one another, recognising that global peace depends upon the harmonious coexistence of these two communities.

Several theologians and scholars in the field of religion consider the Common Word as a turning point for Muslims, as it has successfully garnered the opinions of the world’s Muslim authorities around its central message. Through the Common Word, the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute has established a consensus-building mechanism that compiles the opinions of the world’s Muslim authorities and presents a shared understanding of their faith. While serving as a proposal representing the orthodox Muslim position, the Common Word calls upon Christians to gain a deeper understanding of Islam but is remiss in reciprocating its call for Muslims to better understand Christianity – an oversight that some Christian respondents found objectionable.

The reception of the Common Word amongst Christians has been mixed. While the open letter has succeeded in unifying many Muslim authorities worldwide, its message has seemingly divided its Christian audience. The paper appeals to Christians, invoking “with all their sentiments and emotion,”^[47] by placing love at the core of its message. The Common Word augments its Islamic message with references to Christian scriptures, highlighting the shared values between two of the world’s largest faith communities. Nevertheless, some Christian readers have noted omissions within the Common Word, particularly in terms of the subjects it avoids addressing, as well as the distinctions between Islam and Christianity which some Christian critics argue warrant a thorough examination; “the things left unsaid are almost as important as the things said.”^[48]

While some Christian leaders perceive the Common Word as “an astonishing achievement of solidarity, [and] one that can be built on in the future,”^[49] others express concerns about the dialogue’s terms being set by the world’s Muslim authorities, leaving no room for negotiation. The Common Word may appear as a one-sided discussion, inviting Christians to learn about Islam, but does not reciprocate the invitation for Muslims to learn about Christianity. Nevertheless, what the Common Word offers to Christians is a mechanism for consensus-building.   This mechanism enables religious leaders to temporarily set aside their theological differences and identify common ground not only with Jews and Muslims, but also with practitioners of the Dharmic religious traditions.

Another notable aspect of the Common Word initiative is the limited response it has received from both Christian and Muslim laity.  While the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute’s aims to promote civil and ecumenical dialogue in the public space, it has primarily engaged with prominent establishment figures; with more than half having served as government officials. The success of the Common Word initiative as a turning point in Christian-Muslim relations can be gauged by its public reception, of which it appears to have garnered scant attention. This represents another missed opportunity for the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute.

In the twenty-first century, particularly for those living in the United States and Europe, Christians and Muslims share commonalities that extend beyond the teachings of their respective scriptures. They have shared experiences related to raising and educating their children, confronting the challenges posed by populist and radical extremism, addressing the economic demands of daily life, and navigating the competitive job market. These shared life experiences are aspects to which people today can relate and empathise. It is therefore vital to recognise that common ground can be found not only within the holy scriptures but also through the shared experiences of human existence, which hold relevance for Jews,^[50] Christians^[51] and Muslims^[52] alike.

04

of 04

References

[1] Henceforth referred to as the Common Word.

[2] E al-Maqdisi and Sam Soloman, The Truth about A Common Word: The Undermining of the Church (Charlottesville, USA: ANM Publishers, 2009), p. 10.

[3] Archbishop Meets with Grand Mufti of Egypt, Dr Ali Gomaa (Magdalene College, Cambridge.: Dr Rowan Williams: 104th Archbishop of Canterbury website, 2011) <http://rowanwilliams.archbishopofcanterbury.org/articles.php/2140/archbishop-meets-with-grand-mufti-of-egypt-dr-ali-gomaa.html>.

[4] Jon Hoover, ‘A Common Word “More Positive and Open yet Mainstream and Orthodox”’, Theological Review, XXX (2009), 50–77 (pp. 51–52).

[5] Pope Benedict XVI, Lecture of the Holy Father, Aula Magna of the University of Regensburg, Meeting with the Representative of Science. (University of Regensburg: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2006) <https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2006/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060912_university-regensburg.html>.

[6] Pope Benedict XVI, Lecture of the Holy Father, Aula Magna of the University of Regensburg, Meeting with the Representative of Science.

[7] Pope Benedict XVI, Lecture of the Holy Father, Aula Magna of the University of Regensburg, Meeting with the Representative of Science.

[8] Tom Armitage, Germany’s Merkel Defends Pope amid Muslim Fury (Berlin: Reuters, 16 September 2006) <https://www.thestar.com.my/news/world/2006/09/16/germanys-merkel-defends-pope-amid-muslim-fury>.

[9] Tariq Ramadan, A Struggle over Europe’s Religious Identity (Paris France: International Herald Tribune, 20 September 2006).

[10] Christopher Hitchens, Papal Bull:  Joseph Ratzinger’s Latest Offense (United States of America: Slate, 18 September 2006) <https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2006/09/the-pope-s-latest-offense.html>.

[11] BBC News, In Quotes: Muslim Reaction to Pope (London: BBC News, 16 September 2006) <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/5348436.stm>.

[12] Pope Benedict XVI, Sunday Angelus (Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 17 September 2006).

[13] ‘Open Letter to His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI’, The Ecumenist: A Journal of Theology, Culture, and Society., 43.4 (2006), 1–6.

[14] Sohail Nakhooda, ‘The Significance of the Amman Message and the Common Word’ (presented at the 4th Annual Ambassadors’ Forum, Amman: Jordanian Foreign Ministry, 2008), p. 52 <http://www.acommonword.com/The-Significance-of-the-Amman-Message-and-the-Common-Word.pdf>.

[15] Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad bin Talal, ‘A Common Word between Us and You’ (Jordan, The Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought, 2009), p. 77.

[16] Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad bin Talal, ‘A Common Word between Us and You’ (Jordan, The Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought, 2007), p. 2 <http://www.acommonword.com/lib/downloads/CW-Total-Final-v-12g-Eng-9-10-07.pdf>.

[17] Talal, ‘A Common Word between Us and You’, p. 16.

[18] Talal, ‘A Common Word between Us and You’, p. 2.

[19] The gospels of the Prophet Muhammad and his companions.

[20] “Say: O People of the Scripture! Come to a common word between us and you: that we shall worship none but God, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside God. And if they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we are they who have surrendered (unto Him).” Qur’an (3:64)

[21] Talal, ‘A Common Word between Us and You’, pp. 4–8.

[22] Talal, ‘A Common Word between Us and You’, p. 11.

[23] Talal, ‘A Common Word between Us and You’, pp. 11–12.

[24] Johnny B Awwad, ‘Who Is My God and Who Is My Neighbour? A Response to “A Common Word Between Us and You”’, Theological Review, XXX (2009), 78–88 (p. 79).

[25] Awwad, p. 82.

[26] Awwad, p. 83.

[27] William Kilpatrick, ‘A “Common Word” Versus Common Sense’, Crisis Magazine: A Voice for the Faithful Catholic Laity, 29 January 2018 <https://www.crisismagazine.com/2018/common-word-versus-common-sense>.

[28] Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad bin Talal, ‘A Common Word between Us and You’ (Jordan, The Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought, 2009), p. 7.

[29] Awwad, p. 80.

[30] G Sabra, ‘The “Common Word” Letter in the Context of Christian-Muslim Dialogue’, Theological Review, XXX (2009), 89–98 (p. 96).

[31] Awwad, p. 84.

[32] Sabra, p. 96.

[33] Hoover, pp. 64–65.

[34] Hoover, p. 64.

[35] Sabra, p. 98.

[36] Legacy Project:  A Common Word:  Loving Our Muslim Neighbors by Affirming Our Common Call to Love God and Neighbour. (New Haven , Connecticut , United States: Yale Center for Faith & Culture,Yale Divinity School., 2007) <https://faith.yale.edu/legacy-projects/a-common-word>.

[37] Harold W Attridge and others, ‘An Unprecedented Breakthrough? Loving God and Neighbour Together: A Christian Response to A Common Word Between Us and You.’, International Journal of Frontier Missiology, Winter.24:4 (2007), 215–17 (p. 215).

[38] Attridge and others, p. 216.

[39] Attridge and others, pp. 216–17.

[40] Attridge and others, p. 217.

[41] Gé M. Speelman, ‘The Background of “A Common Word”’, Brill, Exchange 39, 2010, 109–20 (p. 109).

[42] Speelman, p. 114.

[43] Speelman, p. 113.

[44] Talal, ‘A Common Word between Us and You’, p. 4.

[45] Speelman, pp. 118–19.

[46] Speelman, p. 120.

[47] Talal, ‘A Common Word between Us and You’, pp. 11, 97, 142, 185.

[48] Speelman, p. 113.

[49] Talal, ‘A Common Word between Us and You’, p. 77.

[50] ¹In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth … ¹⁰God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters He called Seas. And God saw that it was good. ¹¹Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herbs that yield seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on th earth”; and it was so. ¹² And the earth brought forth grass, herb that yields seed according to its kind, and the tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself according to its kind. And God saw that it was good … ²⁴Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind”; and it was so. ²⁵ God made the beast [wild animals] of the earth according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind.  And God saw that it was good. ²⁶Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”  Genesis [1:1-26] See: MacArthur Study Bible, New King James Version., ed. by John F. MacArthur (Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1997), pp. 16–17.

[51] For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers.  All things were created through Him and for Him. Colossians [1:16] See: MacArthur, p. 1833.

[52] ¹These are the signs of the Scripture. What your Lord has sent down to you [Prophet] is the truth, yet most people do not believe. ²It is God who raised up the heavens with no visible supports and then established Himself on the throne; He has subjected the sun and the moon each to pursue its course for an appointed time; He regulates all things, and makes the revelations clear so that you may be certain of meeting your Lord; ³it is He who spread out the earth, placed firm mountains and rivers on it, and made two of every kind of fruit; He draws the veil of night over the day. There truly are signs in this for people who reflect. ⁴There are, in the land, neighbouring plots, gardens of vineyards, cornfields, palm trees in clusters or otherwise, all watered with the same water, yet We make some of them taste better than others: there truly are signs in this for people who reason.  Qur’ān [13:1-4] See: The Qur’an, trans. by M. A. S. Abdel Haleem, Reissue edition (Oxford: OUP Oxford, 2008), p. 153.