Islam Watch

Is the Qur’an Muhammad’s Own Thinking?

Muslims believe the Qur’an is the divine word of Allah, revealed verbatim to Muhammad through the Angel Jibril (Gabriel). It is widely regarded as the literal speech of God—perfect, eternal, and untouched by human influence. But what if that claim doesn’t hold up under scrutiny?

In this post, we explore evidence from within the Qur’an itself, Islamic tradition, and modern scholarly research that challenges the idea of the Qur’an as a purely divine, non-human product. We ask the hard question: Could the Qur’an actually be Muhammad’s own thoughts, ideas, and edits—cloaked in divine authority?

1. The Qur’an About Muhammad’s Own Sayings

The Qur’an emphatically denies that Muhammad made any mistakes. Qur’an 53:2 says:

“Your companion [Muhammad] has not strayed, nor has he erred.” (Qur’an 53:2)

But several verses contradict this notion by clearly presenting Muhammad as the speaker, expressing personal sentiments and using first-person language. Here are a few telling examples:

Qur’an 17:1:
“Exalted is He who took His servant by night...”
This verse contains praise for Allah. But since no angel is narrating this—and it’s Muhammad speaking—the praise originates from him. This is personal expression, not direct divine speech.
Qur’an 27:91:
“I have only been commanded to worship the Lord of this city…”
The “I” here is Muhammad. He is reporting what he believes he’s been told, not conveying Allah’s direct words.
Qur’an 72:11:
“And among us are the righteous, and among us are others not so; we were of divided ways.”
The speaker says “among us,” referring to a human community. This isn’t a divine statement from above—it's clearly earthly and anthropocentric in tone.

These internal inconsistencies point to a fundamental contradiction: If the Qur’an is entirely divine speech, why is Muhammad narrating in the first person?

2. The Controversy of the Qur’an’s Createdness

One of the most volatile theological debates in Islamic history was about the createdness of the Qur’an—whether it is eternal and uncreated (like Allah), or a created phenomenon within time.

The Mu’tazilah, an influential rationalist school of Islamic theology, believed the Qur’an was created, not eternal. Their rationale was simple: Only God is uncreated. Everything else must have a beginning—including His speech.

Abu l-Hudhayl, a prominent Mu’tazilite, argued that the Qur’an, like everything else aside from God, had to be created in time.
Their belief was supported by Qur’an 2:106, which explicitly refers to abrogation—God replacing one verse with another—something hard to explain if the Qur’an is eternal and unchanging.

“We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it.” (Qur’an 2:106)

This view was so controversial that it led to theological suppression. In the 9th century, under Caliph al-Mutawakkil, publicly claiming that the Qur’an was created was forbidden. The idea of the Qur’an as an eternal, divine product became not just a theological view—but an authoritarian decree.

3. Academic Qur’an Research: Who Really Authored the Text?

Modern scholarship has seriously undermined the traditional view that the Qur’an is a direct transmission from God. Evidence from textual studies, linguistics, and historical comparison suggests a composite origin, with heavy editing, human input, and syncretism over time.

a) Liturgical Texts from Mecca Are Human-Derived

Scholar Angelika Neuwirth has shown that many Meccan surahs—especially liturgical and poetic verses—bear the hallmarks of personal reflection and community practice, not revelation. They resemble early communal hymns and meditative expressions, not divine commandments.

b) The Qur’an Evolved Over Centuries

In her research on Qur’anic composition, Neuwirth also argues that the Qur’an evolved over 200+ years, undergoing editing, revision, and expansion as part of an oral-literate transition in early Islam.

The Qur’an we have today is not a fixed download from heaven, but a “community text” shaped over generations.

c) John Burton: The Qur’an Is Muhammad’s Own Output

Scholar John Burton concluded in his landmark book The Collection of the Qur’an that:

“The Qur'an is the product of Muhammad’s own mind, responding to situations as they arose, and the record we have is what he remembered or had written down.”

His view is that the Qur’an is best understood as a record of Muhammad’s own speeches, thoughts, and leadership messages, not as a timeless divine revelation.

4. Muhammad’s Religious Literacy and Contextual Knowledge

If the Qur’an is a patchwork of earlier religious stories, then Muhammad must have known them. And indeed, all evidence points to that conclusion:

He had frequent contact with Jews and Christians in Arabia.
He had access to oral and possibly written sources from Gnostic, apocryphal, and biblical traditions.
He recycled religious motifs, such as:
- Jesus speaking from the cradle (found in the Arabic Infancy Gospel)
- Stories of Mary at the palm tree (from the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew)
- Cain and Abel’s tale (mirroring Syriac Christian writings)

These parallels are not coincidental. They point toward selective borrowing and reworking by Muhammad for his own context.

5. What Do the Internal Contradictions Reveal?

If the Qur’an was authored by an all-knowing God, we’d expect internal consistency. But instead, we find:

Verses that correct or abrogate earlier ones (Qur’an 2:106, 16:101)
Conflicting accounts of creation
Multiple contradictory versions of key stories
First-person interruptions that sound distinctly like Muhammad’s interjections

Rather than a divine monologue, the Qur’an reads like a dynamic dialogue—between Muhammad, his followers, critics, and his own evolving thoughts.

6. Conclusion: A Book of Man, Not a Book of God

All the evidence—internal, historical, linguistic, and theological—points to the same conclusion:

The Qur’an is not a divine product. It is a record of Muhammad’s evolving religious vision, his personal expressions, his social negotiations, and his moral leadership.

It is deeply human—shaped by context, culture, influence, and purpose.

The claim that it is entirely divine, timeless, and unchanged simply doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. Once you remove the assumption of its heavenly origin, the Qur’an reads as what it most likely is:

The legacy of a charismatic preacher stitching together myth, morality, and monotheism to forge a new identity and power structure for Arabia.

Citations & References

Sabine Schmidtke, Mu’tazila, in: Jane Dammen McAuliffe (ed.), Encyclopaedia of the Qur’an, Volume Three J-O, Brill, Leiden, 2002, p. 467.
Richard C. Martin, Createdness of the Qur’an, in: Jane Dammen McAuliffe (ed.), Encyclopaedia of the Qur’an, Volume One, A-D, Brill, Leiden, 2002, pp. 468–470.
Angelika Neuwirth, Studien zur Komposition der mekkanischen Suren, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, 1981.
Ibid.
John Burton, The Collection of the Qur’an, Cambridge University Press, 1977.