Surah 5:32, Sanhedrin, Talmud Plagiarism?

Donate To Discover The Truth

Kaleef K. Karim

Islam is often perceived as a religion antithetical to Western, secular values. There are some who are out there, whose job it is to spread propaganda against Islam’s core teachings

One verse has been under attack by opponents is chapter 5, verse 32 of the Quran. They assert that the verse does not say murder is wrong and prohibited in Islam, this we have responded to here: “Sanctity Of Life: ‘If Anyone Kills A Person It Would Be As If He Killed All Mankind’ – Surah 5:32“. They make these claims in order to spread misinformation to innocent readers – to paint Islam negatively for their own mischievous ends.

Another claim, which we shall respond to in this article is that the verse (Q. 5:32) was plagiarized word for word from the Talmud. Let us read a translation of Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Sanhedrin, translated by Michael L. Rodkinson:

“Therefore the man was created singly, to teach that he who destroys one soul of a human being, the Scripture considers him as if he should destroy a whole world, and him who saves one soul of Israel, the Scripture considers him as if he should save a whole World.” (Babylonian Talmud) [1]

We may add also the Mishnah, translated from the Hebrew with introduction and brief explanatory notes – by Herbert Danby:

“Therefore but a single man was created in the World, to teach that if any man has caused a single soul to perish from Israel Scripture imputes it to him as though he had caused a whole world to perish; and if any man saves alive a single soul from Israel scripture imputes it to him as though he had saved alive a whole world. …” [2]

Now, let’s read Surah 5:32,

“Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one – it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.” – Quran 5:32

To make things easier for our readers, we have made parallel side by side for Sanhedrin 4:5 and Surah 5:32.

mishnah 4 5 surah 532

One thing stands out clear when one reads carefully is that the Sanhedrin 4:5 is aimed only at the children of Israel, whereas the Quran speaks of whole of mankind. Sanhedrin 4:5 reveals that shedding an Israelite blood is as if killing whole of humanity, in contrast the Quran says slaying any soul, Muslim or non-Muslim, is as if killing whole of humanity. The message in both are completely different.

Commenting on Sanhedrin 4:5, respected Jewish scholar Jacob Neusner states when ‘Israel[ite]’ is mentioned, it means a Jewish soul only:

“‘We Israel’ encompasses many “I’s” – that is, invidual Israelites (or Jews, a much less common usage). When the authorship of the Mishnah wishes to refer to an invidual Jew, not surprisingly it speaks of ‘Israel,’ meaning an Israelite; occasionally, in context, this means ‘not a Gentile,’ one of ‘us’ in general. As soon as we encounter ‘Israel’ as the name of the group, we become aware of this further important sense of the name.
The occurrences are typified by these statements: ‘An Israelite who married a mamzer-woman…’ (M. Qid. 9:2); ‘He who undertakes to sharecrop a field belonging to an Israelite, a Gentile, a Samaritan…’ (M. Dem. 6:1), meaning an individual person in the category of Israel, a Jew; ‘And let not a single soul of Israel be handed over to them’ (M. Ter. 8:12), which has a similar sense; ‘People do not accept for share-cropping a field handed over on terms of ‘iron flock’ from an Israel[ite] [since it smacks of usury]’ (M. B.M. 5:6); ‘Whoever saves…, whoever destroys a single life of Israel…’ (M. San. 4:5), meaning, a Jew.” [3]

So when those who claim that the quote in San 4:5 is similar in content and in meaning with Surah 5:32, this is not true. Surah 5:32 speaks of prohibiting any human being killed. The Talmud quote emphasizes only on an Israelite (Jewish) soul.

Another quote which is commonly cited by critics is Sanhedrin 37a. They claim that Surah 5:32 was taken from San 37a. Let’s read:

Talmudic Mishnah:
“For thus we find in the case of Cain, who killed his brother, that it is written: the bloods of thy brother cry unto me: not the blood of thy brother, but the bloods of thy brother, is said — i.e., his blood and the blood of his [potential] descendants. (alternatively, the bloods of thy brother, teaches that his blood was splashed over trees and stones.) For this reason was man created alone, to teach thee that whosoever destroys a single soul of Israel, scripture imputes [guilt] to him as though he had destroyed a complete world; and whosoever preserves a single soul of Israel, scripture ascribes [merit] to him as though he had preserved a complete world. Furthermore, [he was created alone] for the sake of peace among men, that one might not say to his fellow, ‘my father was greater than thine, and that the minim might not say, there are many ruling powers in heaven…” (Talmud: Sanhedrin 37a) [4]

 

When we zone in to the above quote, we read that the killing of an ‘Israelite’ soul is if killing whole mankind. We read yet again that only an ‘Israelite’ soul is sacred. There is no mention of gentile souls. Renowned Rabbi Samuel Edels (1555 – 1631 AD), famously known for his commentary on the Talmud, had this to say on Sanhedrin 37a:

“‘One soul of Israel’ means EXCLUSIVELY AN ISRAELITE, who alone had, through Jacob, retained the Divine image, in which Adam was created. But other nations have not that image, but are like other creatures. Whoever, therefore, destroys a soul of them, does not destroy the whole replenished world, etc.” [5]

Likewise, Rabbi Noson Gurary, comments on San 37a:

“In a similar sense, we find that the soul of a Jewish person is regarded as a whole world, to the extent that we sometimes find that the soul of one person is just as important as an entire group of people.” [6]

Coming back to Rabbi Samuel Edels. Other Rabbis such as, Shne’ur Zalman, and Rabbi Israel Meir Cohen also followed suit, accepted that Sanhedrin 37a speaks of Jewish soul alone. Not the whole of humanity as it is the case for Surah 5:32. Rabbi Efraim Shmueli states:

“…most editions of the Mishnah contained the version, ‘if any man saves alive a single soul in Israel.’ Needless to say, the adoption of one or another version has important legal ramifications: does the saving of a Gentile’s life warrant desecration of the Sabbath? This question was debated in the Rabbinic culture, resulting in opinions that were generally unfavourable, sometimes downright harsh, to Gentiles, as for example, the words of Rabbi Samuel Eliezer Edels (1555 – 1631), whose famous commentary, Hidushei Halachot, accompanies most editions of the Talmud, in the commentary to San 37a: ‘This is intended to teach you that any man who saves one soul in Israel, and it is intentionally specified ‘one soul in Israel,’ in singular form, as this is the image of God, the Singular One of the world, and Jacob’s form [i.e. Israel] is His Likeness… but Kuttim [i.e. Gentiles] do not have the form of man, only the form of other creatures, and whoever brings about the loss of a soul among them does not lose the world, and whoever saves a soul among them neither adds nor diminishes anything in this world.
Rabbi Shne’ur Zalman of Ladi, author of the Tania, and Rabbi Israel Meir Cohen of Radun, the Hafetz Haim (Mishnah berurah, Orah Haim, 30. 8. Tel Aviv. Pardes. 1955) also accepted this Mishnah in its later, anti-Gentile, version.” [7]

However, Efraim Shmueli disagrees with earliest and contemporary Rabbis on Sanhedrin 37a. Here, we need to introduce a point not discussed before, ‘some’ editions for 4:5 and Sanhedrin 37a omit ‘Israel. However, the words ‘Israel’ appear in the earliest and most authoritative Manuscripts. It is only in latter editions which omit ‘Israel’.

Conclusion

The ‘Judaic principle’ from Sanhedrin 4:5 and Sanhedrin 37a, when held up in critical scrutiny we see that the quotes referenced only refer to the saving of Jewish lives, not all human beings (no gentiles). Hence, we see that Surah 5:32 and the quotes discussed – they have vast differences in their content and meaning. Furthermore, how could the Quran plagiarize from the Talmud, given the fact that there is not a shred of evidence that an extant copy of it existed during the life-time of Prophet Muhammed (p)?

Don’t forget to follow Discover The Truth on Facebook and Twitter. PLEASE help spread the word by sharing our articles on your favourite social networks. Thank You!

Related article:

– ‘On The Sources Of The Story Of Cain & Abel In The Qur’an

References:

[1] The Babylonian Talmud, Translated By Michael L. Rodkinson – Book 8: Section Jurisprudence (Damages), [Bostin, The Talmud Society, 1918] – Tract Sanhedrin, page 1747 https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/FullTalmud.pdf
[2] The Mishnah, Translated From The Hebrew With Introduction and brief Explanatory Notes, [Oxford University Press, 1933], By Herbert Danby, D.D., page 388
[3] The Body of Faith: Israel and the Church, [Trinity Press International; Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, 1996] By Jacob Neusner, page 37
[4] Talmud: Sanhedrin 37a http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_37.html
[5] The Pentateuch According to the Talmud: Genesis: with a Talmudical Commentary, [London: Samuel Bagster And Sons, 15, Paternoster Row. 1883] Part 1, Paul Isaac Hershon, page 173
[6] Chasidism: Its Development, Theology, and Practice, by Rabbi Noson Gurary, page 146
[7] Seven Jewish Cultures: A Reinterpretation of Jewish History and Thought By Efraim Shmueli, page 261

Advertisements

Tagged as: , , , , ,

5 Responses »

  1. Aaaahhh!! This is the article we needed badly. JAZAK’ALLAHU KHAIR for taking out time and writing for lay Muslims like Us.
    Anyways I want to add few things here if we find Anti-islamic polemics to be adamant:

    First a bit of background: Around the year 200 CE, following the loss of many Jewish teachers in the failed Great Revolt and Bar-Kokhba rebellion, Rabbi Yehudah Ha-Nasi decided to secure Judaism’s Oral Law by codifying it into 63 tractates called the Mishnah. The above quote provided is from a Mishnah, which as i understand is the first written recording of the Oral Torah of the Jewish people. Rabbinic commentaries on the Mishnah between 200-500 CE were compiled as the Gemara. While the term Gemara refers to the rabbinic discussions about the Mishah, the Talmud contains both the Mishnah law and its associated Gemara commentary. Today, however, the terms Gemara and Talmud are generally used interchangeably.

    Judaism says that two things were revealed by God to Moses at Mount Sinai: the Torah and the Oral Law. The oral law clarified the written Torah, in a similar way i think to how hadith claifies the Quran. For example, the Quran mentions when to pray, however the hadith describes how the prayer is performed, and is hence part of revelation. In a similar way, the Torah/Bible mentions that the Isrealites should only eat meat from animals that were slaughtered as God commanded them. But the Mishnah describes the process of kosher slaughter. So both are sufficient to understand Judaism, just like both Quran and hadith are required to understand Islam.

    For e.g.,Torah says: “You shall not murder!” (Exodus 20:13 and Deut. 5:17). Then, the mishnah further explains the warning given to the witnesses in capital cases to be very careful in their testimony judged by a Jewish High Court because “Why did God create all of mankind out of one single person? To teach you that whoever destroys one life is considered as if he had destroyed the entire world, and whoever saves one life is considered as if he had saved the entire world.” If the mishnah codifies what was revealed to Moses at Mount Sinai by God, according to Judaism then it is revelation from God, and above all the Quran (the criterion of what’s truthful and falsehood) explicitly mentions that God decreed this for the children of Israel. Thus us muslims believe this was truly revealed. I don’t see a problem.I don’t see what all the fuss is about. The quote that Christian missionaries shows from the Talmud is from the part called the Mishnah, and here’s what Jews say about the Mishnah:

    In addition to the written scriptures we have an “Oral Torah,” a tradition explaining what the above scriptures mean and how to interpret them and apply the Laws. Orthodox Jews believe G-d (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/g-d.htm ) taught the Oral Torah to Moses (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/moses.htm ), and he taught it to others, down to the present day. This tradition was maintained only in oral form until about the 2nd century C.E. (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/ce.htm ), when the oral law was compiled and written down in a document called the Mishnah. Over the next few centuries, additional commentaries elaborating on the Mishnah were written down in Jerusalem and Babylon. These additional commentaries are known as the Gemara. The Gemara and the Mishnah together are known as the Talmud. This was completed in the 5th century C.E. (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/ce.htm )

    taken from: JewFAQ.org- Oral Torah: The Talmud
    (http://www.jewfaq.org/torah.htm#Talmud )

    So the Mishnah is the oral law said to be from Moses, Gemera is the Rabbis commentary and together they are known as the Talmud.

    Allah says that “We decreed upon the Children of Israel….”

    ibn Katheer explains that this means “We legislated for them and informed
    them”

    So it just proves that this aspect of Jewish Law was indeed from Allah (taught to Moses) and that it had been preserved accurately in their oral tradition and that it was not something the Rabbis had made up over time.

  2. what you are saying is not true the jewish law came before the quaran so if any one did plagiarism it couldn’t have been the mishnah because it came before. So before you make huge statements like think before and get all your information because when i read this it shows how ignorant you are and how you know absolutely nothing on the history of the mishanah and other religious books

    • I dont think you took your time out to read all the article.

      1. Mishnah – the earliest extant comes from the 9th century or later.

      2. The Quran could NOT copy something that did NOT exist. We have extant quran’s from the time of companions of Prophet Muhammed (p).

      Conclusion,

      The Quran did NOT copy something that did not exist. Furthermore the two text do are NOT even similar.

  3. I am preparing a commentary on Qur’anic Deviations from the Torah and New Testament. Let me know if you are interested in seeing it:
    mevashir@aol.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Facebook

Twitter

%d bloggers like this: