“On what basis do you argue over Abraham when the Torah and Bible were sent down after him?”

Last night, I listened to the Qur’an at Muir Street mosque in Cape Town during the night prayer (tarawih). The reciter (qari) went through a number of verses from the Chapter Ale Imran. it was a beautiful recitation, read in slow and measured rhythm. There was no urgency or rush in the voice of the reciter, and I listened without distraction, without my mind wandering in all directions.

This verse (65) drew my attention to a profound message in this section of the chapter. It was an argument made for the Prophet against the People of the Book. Abraham was presented as the original believer, he was neither Jew nor Christian ... And please, the voice of the reciter said, do not use the scriptures to make an argument for Abraham’s position. In a sectarian milieu, scriptures would not do. Scriptures were historical and Abraham, the common ancestor, was located outside that history.

But of course, Abraham was a “hanifan musliman.” He was pure and committed in submission.

Was he also a Muslim with a capital M?

The triumphalist message of the Qur’an is that they were all Muslims. And that is the true religion. Islam came to replace the Jews and Christians!

But what is the insight of this verse .... what is the point of appealing to an ancestor, a foundation that goes beyond scriptures. When the Qur’an became scripture, does this verse not also apply to it? Does the Quran not come after the Torah and the Bible?

I was struck by the idea of appealing to a common foundation. And I was struck by the declaration that exposed the temporality of scriptures.

A beautiful recitation, sounds reverberating over bowed heads, recalled this insight.