Allah's FAILURE to even UNDERSTAND the 3 Questions by the Jews

Summary:

• First, Muhammad struggled to give an answer for many days (in some traditions 15 days). Critics point out that the Quran itself points out that Muhammad spent this time gathering information from local people instead of receiving any divine revelation.
• Second, when Muhammad finally gave his answers after fifteen days, not a single historical record shows that anyone believed them to be correct or miraculous. Neither a single pagan Arab nor a single Jew converted to Islam because of these answers. This is very different from the story of Pharaoh’s magicians, who immediately believed in Moses after seeing his staff turn into a snake.
• Third, the Quran itself proves that the pagans and the Jews continued to ask Muhammad for miracles. Even though they kept asking, Muhammad once told them that he had already shown them a miracle by answering these three questions.
• Fourth, critics of Islam argue that the Jews did not accept Muhammad's answers because the answers were completely wrong. The problem was actually much bigger: Muhammad and his Allah did not even understand the original questions.

1. Not knowing the answers is the first failure.
2. Giving incorrect answers is an even worse failure.
3. Failing to understand the questions at all is the worst possible outcome, because an all-knowing God should easily comprehend them.

According to the the Jews,  Muhammad was asked the following 3 Questions (all from The Book of Denial (The Bible)). 

Table of Contents:

The Preliminary Standards on Which This Case Will Be Judged

Before analyzing the specific Jewish questions and the Quranic answers in detail, we must clarify the two legal standards on which this entire case will be judged.

Standard 1: The Standard of Reason and Common Sense

Today, Allah does not appear to us directly, and His angels do not show themselves. Furthermore, Allah no longer performs visible, physical miracles like the ones mentioned in ancient scriptures. Despite this total absence of direct evidence, Islamic apologists still demand that we recognize Allah by evaluating His laws and teachings.

Since we must use our own minds to make this choice, it is only fair that we use human reason and common sense as our primary standard for evaluation.

Furthermore, if a text truly comes from God, its laws and teachings must contain a level of supreme wisdom that human reason can immediately recognize as divine. If the text lacks this supreme wisdom, there is no reason to believe it has a divine origin.

Standard 2: Evaluating Unverifiable Stories using Circumstantial Evidence

Muhammad's answers to the Jewish questions consist entirely of historical stories about the ancient past. Because these supernatural events happened long ago, they cannot be physically tested or proven today. A clever false prophet could also invent such unverifiable historical stories just as easily as a true prophet could receive them from God.

Therefore, while it is impossible to be 100% certain about what happened in the past, a truth-seeker can still find the most likely answer by weighing circumstantial evidence. This includes looking for contradictions in the teachings, checking for a lack of wisdom, and analyzing whether the people of that era accepted or rejected the stories.

In a court of law, there are two types of evidence:

• Direct Evidence: This is an eyewitness account that allows a judge or jury to come to an immediate, clear conclusion.

• Circumstantial Evidence: This is indirect evidence. Here, a final conclusion is reached by connecting different clues and judging the probabilities of whether a story is likely to be true or false.

Our investigation into the three Jewish questions is a case of circumstantial evidence. Since no one today can travel back in time to be an eyewitness, we must rely entirely on indirect clues to find the truth.

It is vital to establish this standard early. Islamic apologists always demand absolute, direct eyewitness proof from critics. When critics cannot provide it (as these stories of distant past are not verifiable), then apologists completely dismiss all the powerful circumstantial clues too and claim to win the argument. By setting this standard now, we prevent them from using this deceptive tactic.

Let us now begin the detailed examination.

The Original Incident: Tafsir al-Tabari

To understand exactly how this event unfolded, we must look at the earliest and most authoritative Islamic historical records. The following narration from Tafsir al-Tabari (Introduction to Surah al-Kahf, vol. 15, p. 143) explicitly records the Jewish test, Muhammad's 15-day delay, and the Meccan response:

 Tafsir al-Tabari, under the Introduction to the Surah al-Kahaaf, vol 15, page 143 (link 1 and link 2):

Question 1: What is the "Spirit"?

According to critics, the Jews asked Muhammad about the "Spirit of God" (الروح القدس) based on the context of the Book of Daniel (Bible). To understand why they chose this specific question, we must look at a major theological dispute that existed between Jews and Christians during Muhammad's time:

• The Christian View: Christians regarded Daniel as a great prophet because the Spirit of God gave him powerful "visions" of the future.
• The Jewish View: Jews did not consider Daniel to be a prophet in the traditional sense, and his book was not grouped with the Books of the Prophets in the Hebrew Bible.

The Jews of Medina saw this disagreement as the perfect test. They believed that if Muhammad were truly a prophet receiving direct messages from the Creator, he would easily be able to resolve this deep theological dispute between them and the Christians.

The Quranic Response and the Failure of Comprehension:

However, the response found in the Quran shows that Muhammad and his Allah completely missed the point of the question. Instead of addressing the "Spirit of God" or resolving the debate regarding the Book of Daniel, Muhammad mistook the inquiry as a question about the "human soul" (the life force that enters and leaves the human body).

Because he lacked any knowledge of the biblical context, he provided a very brief and vague answer:

And they ask you, [O Muhammad], concerning the Spirit. Say, 'The Spirit is of the affair of my Lord; and mankind have not been given of knowledge except a little.' (Quran 17:85)

How does this vague answer help to prove that Muhammad and his Allah passed the TEST of showing miracle here?

Judging Question 1 Using Our Preliminary Standards:

Let us weigh the facts of this first question using the two legal standards we established earlier. Since we cannot go back in time, we must look at the powerful circumstantial evidence to judge which model is more probable.

Applying Standard 1: The Standard of Reason and Common Sense:

If we look at this situation through the lens of common sense, we must compare two competing explanations:

• The Divine Model: If an all-knowing God authored this verse, it contradicts the concept of any "supreme wisdom" in this case. It makes little sense for a perfect Creator to completely ignore a specific theological test about His own previous scriptures, only to give a "vague" reply about "human ignorance".

• The Human Model: If a human author did not understand a highly technical religious question about the Book of Daniel, he would desperately need to hide his lack of knowledge. Giving a vague answer like "only God knows, and mankind knows very little" is exactly what a clever human storyteller (i.e. a false Prophet) would do to escape a trap.

Common sense tells us that the human model requires no excuses, while the divine model requires endless layers of explanation.

Applying Standard 2: Evaluating the Circumstantial Evidence:

We must also look at the historical outcome as an indirect clue. Did the Jewish scholars accept this answer as a miracle? They did not. Islamic History didn't record a name of single Meccan pagan or a Jew who converted to Islam due to this information that the Quran provided as miracle (to proof that Muhammad was indeed a true prophet). 

The circumstantial evidence shows that the answer provided no new information, resolved no religious dispute, and failed to prove any supernatural insight. The Jews walked away completely unconvinced because the answer bypassed the actual test they had set. Just like a failed test in a modern court of law, this total lack of conversion provides powerful indirect evidence that no miracle occurred.

The 2nd Question from the Book of Daniel:

At that time, two famous but somewhat similar stories existed.

The first story was found in the Book of Daniel in the Bible, which mentioned three young, righteous, and pious Jews (Daniel 3:8-30). In this story, three pious Jewish youths (Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego) were cast into a blazing furnace for refusing to worship a golden idol made by King Nebuchadnezzar. But they survived by God's miracle, despite being thrown into the fire.

The second story was known as "The Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus" (referred to in Arabic as Ashab al-Kahf). This story spoke of seven righteous and pious Christian men, though some traditions mention eight. This legend was not part of the Bible. Jews did not believe in it and actually opposed it because it featured faithful Christians, whom Jews considered their adversaries.

The Jews questioned Muhammad about the first story, which was the account of the three devout Jewish youths in the Book of Daniel. However, Muhammad (and his Allah) became confused. They thought the question referred to the second story, the Christian legend of the "People of the Cave."

Confusion upon Confusion about numbers of people:

Quranic verses themselves become witness of following 2 issues:

1.  Firstly, Muhammad was not relying on any revelation for the answers. Instead, he was asking other people about this story during that period (which was 15 days according to some traditions). 
2. But some people told him correctly that the question was about the story of three Jewish devout followers. While other people told him the opposite, i.e., the story is about 7 n

Since Muhammad himself didn't know both incidents himself personally, therefore, he was asking other people about the number of people involved in that story. 

Because Muhammad was asking others for the answers to these questions, he became deeply confused after hearing both types of stories from his informants. As a result, he mixed the two stories together and stated the number of people in the Quran as being anywhere from three to eight.

"Some will say they were three, the fourth of them being their dog; and some will say they were five, the sixth of them being their dog, guessing at the unseen. And some will say they were seven, and the eighth of them was their dog. Say, 'My Lord is most knowing of their number. None knows them except a few.' So do not argue about them except with a superficial argument and do not inquire about them from any of them." (Quran 18:22)

This raises several important questions:

1. Why only a "superficial" discussion?
Why is Allah telling his prophet not to engage in any debate or discussion except a superficial one?

2. Why was Muhammad questioning others?
This is the most fundamental question. If an angel was truly bringing answers from Allah, why did Muhammad need to spend 15 days questioning people? People began to mock the situation, noticing that Muhammad was asking various people for information while claiming the eventual answer was from Allah. When people started ridiculing Muhammad’s Allah, Muhammad took the blame upon himself to protect Allah from criticism, suggesting he was the one inquiring, while Allah later forbade him from doing so.

3. If Allah knew the exact number, why did he not state it clearly?

On one hand, Muhammad says that Allah knows the correct number, but on the other hand, Allah avoided stating that number. The question is: if Allah knew the truth, why not clarify it? What catastrophe would have occurred if Allah had simply stated the correct number?

4. Where did the count of three to eight come from?

• The Book of Daniel mentioned three youths.
• The legend of the People of the Cave mentioned seven (or in some versions, eight) individuals.

Thus, due to uncertainity, Muhammad combined both stories and gave a range of three to eight.

5. If this legend was not part of the Jewish Bible and it was even against the Jewish beliefs, how could they have asked about it?

This is another major flaw. The story of the People of the Cave was an unauthenticated Christian tradition. It was not even in the Christian Bible, but only a Christian folk story. Despite this, Muhammad presented it as an answer to a Jewish question, even though Jews did not believe in it. To Jews, this story was unauthentic and unacceptable because it glorified faithful Christians. Jews regarded Jesus as a false prophet and his followers as misguided. To expect Jews to use a Christian legend to verify a prophethood of Muhammad would be like Muslims in the future asking a prophet about a miracle story involving Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to verify his prophethood. Is that even plausible?

The 3rd Question from the Book of Daniel:

Then the Jews questioned Muhammad and his Allah about the vision of the two-horned ram found in the Book of Daniel (Bible). However, Muhammad and his Allah once again fell into confusion, assuming the question was about Alexander the Great, who was known in history as the "two-horned one."

The Jews asked Muhammad about a vision mentioned in the Book of Daniel that featured a ram with two horns.

1. The Ram Seen in the Vision:

The Book of Daniel, in verses 3 and 4, describes the ram seen in this vision:

(Denial said) "I looked up, and there before me was a ram with two horns, standing beside the canal, and the horns were long. One of the horns was longer than the other but grew up later. I watched the ram as it charged toward the west and the north and the south. No animal could stand against it, and none could rescue from its power. It did as it pleased and became great."

2. The Interpretation of the Vision:

The interpretation of this vision is clearly stated later in the same Book of Daniel, in verse 20:

"The two-horned ram that you saw represents the kings of Media and Persia... (further explanation followed, stating that) In the latter part of their reign, when rebels have become completely wicked, a fierce-looking king, a master of intrigue, will arise. He will become very strong, but not by his own power. He will cause astounding devastation and will succeed in whatever he does. He will destroy those who are mighty and the holy people. He will cause deceit to prosper, and he will consider himself superior. When they feel secure, he will destroy many and take his stand against the Prince of princes. Yet he will be destroyed, but not by human power."

And because Muhammad was unlettered (and there was no such thing as an All-Knowing Allah), he mistook this for the story of Alexander the Great because, historically, Alexander was called "the two-horned one."

In Greek culture, Alexander the Great was depicted with horns, which were considered symbols of divinity and power. For instance, coins from Alexander's era show him with the horns of a ram, which were associated with the Egyptian god Ammon. When Alexander reached the Siwa Oasis, he was declared the son of Ammon, and this "horned" symbol was used to represent the divinity of his rule.

The Quranic Arabic term "Dhul-Qarnayn" itself literally means "The Two-Horned One."

Muhammad then recounted the entire story of Dhul-Qarnayn, in which "The Two-Horned One" first travels toward the west, and no one can stand before him. Then he travels toward the east, and still, no one can oppose him. After that, he travels toward the north, and there too, no one has the strength to stand against him.

The story of Dhul-Qarnayn is detailed in Surah Al-Kahf (Chapter 18), verses 83 to 101.

In the Quran, Dhul-Qarnayn is presented as a righteous and powerful king who acts with divine wisdom and justice during his expeditions.

During his final and most famous expedition to the north, Dhul-Qarnayn arrives at a valley situated between two mountains. There, he meets a people who ask for his help against Gog and Magog (Ya’juj wa Ma’juj) because these tribes were spreading corruption and destruction across the land. Dhul-Qarnayn agrees to help them and builds a massive wall made of iron and molten copper, which imprisons Gog and Magog between the mountains. Dhul-Qarnayn then declares that this wall will stand until the Day of Judgment, and when the command of Allah comes, the wall will collapse (implying that, according to the Quran, Dhul-Qarnayn was a firm believer).

However, Muhammad (and his Allah) failed to provide a clear answer regarding the true identity of Dhul-Qarnayn, leading to a state of perpetual confusion among Muslims.

The vague answer provided by the Quran and Muhammad sparked a never-ending debate of uncertainty. A prominent manifestation of this confusion is the various contradictory statements that emerged from time to time.

The First Contradiction: 
Muslim commentators initially claimed that Dhul-Qarnayn was actually Alexander the Great. But later, a problem arose: historical and archaeological evidence proved that Alexander the Great was not a pious believer like the Dhul-Qarnayn of the Quranic story. Instead, contrary to the Quran, he was a polytheist who considered himself the son of Greek and Egyptian gods.

The Second Contradiction: 
When the polytheism of Alexander the Great became indefensible for Muslim commentators, they attempted to shift the identity of Dhul-Qarnayn from Alexander to Cyrus the Great of Persia.

But this claim was also devoid of solid evidence and contained several fundamental flaws. On the contrary, clear evidence suggests that this story was actually taken from a Syriac legendary tradition of Alexander the Great known as the Legend of Alexander. Indeed, in this Christian mythological tale, Alexander was first portrayed as a pious believer who was not a polytheist but had complete faith in Allah. By Muhammad’s time, this Christian myth had spread widely, so Muhammad simply recounted what he had heard from people.

Furthermore, Cyrus the Great of Persia cannot be the Quranic Dhul-Qarnayn because, like Alexander, he was a believer in various gods and goddesses. He not only tolerated non-Islamic religions but actually patronized them.

Consequently, for centuries, Muslims have been victims of these contradictions and uncertainties (and even today, they still do not know who Dhul-Qarnayn really was).

Islamist Objection: "How Can You Be Sure That the Jews Asked Questions from the Book of Daniel?"

The Islamist apologists raise the following objection here:

"But how do you know that they were asking about the Book of Daniel? It seems as though you yourself have simply claimed that these questions were asked by the Jews from the Book of Daniel."

Our Response:

Using basic human common sense is sufficient for anyone to understand the truth.

Muslims did not preserve any Jewish or pagan oral traditions for future generations, which could have clarified their perspective. Therefore, we are left with only the Quran and Islamic traditions. However, as human beings we possess reason, and we can draw conclusions from circumstantial evidence using common sense.

Please consider the following questions:

1. Why would the Jews ask about an unauthentic Christian Legend when they had their own original scripture (the Torah) available to them?
2. Christian stories were unacceptable to the Jews, because they considered Christians to be neither righteous nor people of true faith.
3. Why did Muhammad and his Allah become confused about the number of people?
4. Why does the Quran mention exactly those same numbers (3 to 8) that appear differently across the stories of Daniel and the "People of the Cave"?
5. What harm would have come if Allah had simply stated the correct number?
6. Why would the Jews take any interest in an "infidel" Alexander the Great and his conquests, and why would they ask about him? Alexander the Great was not a sacred figure for the Jews but rather a polytheist ruler who worshipped Greek gods and goddesses and considered himself their son.
7. No figure exists anywhere in all of human history who resembles the Quranic Dhulqarnain, being both a true believer and a conqueror of the entire world.
8. And what interest could the Jews possibly have had in asking about the "Human Spirit"? In reality, the question of far greater importance to them was whether the "Spirit of God" (i.e. the visions/revelations sent by God) constitutes proof of a person's prophethood or not.

When we look at all these contradictions in light of the Book of Daniel, every single one of them instantly disappears, and all the questions begin to make perfect logical sense.

How Many Polytheists or Jews Accepted Islam upon Considering Muhammad's 3 Answers as a Miracle?

The answer is: None whatsoever.

Whether it was the polytheists of Mecca or the Jews of Medina, there is not a single name recorded in history who accepted Islam due to the supposedly miracle nature of these answers. 

Islamic apologists deny this argument by calling it an argument from silence. 

However, we don't agree with apologists. For us, it is indeed an indirect circumstantial evidence which has its own weight. 

Consider this, in the Quranic story of Pharaoh, his magicians immediately went into prostration after seeing the miracle of Moses' staff. And Muslims claim it to be an evidence. Therefore, it will become only double standards when they deny it if no one accepts the miracle of 3 Quranic answers. 

Has Muhammad himself ever presented these 3 answers as Miracle and proof of his prophethood?

The Quran bears witness (e.g. Quran 17:90-93) that pagan Arabs were constantly asking Muhammad to show any miracle to him as proof of his prophethood, like he claimed that previous prophets brought (Quran 21:5).

However, despite constant demand, Muhammad and his Allah didn't show them any miracle. Instead, Muhammad and his Allah always came up with multiple excuses for not showing any miracle. All these excuses are recorded in the Quran itself. For example:

• Muhammad will not show any miracle to them while Muhammad is only a human (Quran 17:90-93).
• Muhammad will not show any miracle while Allah has decided to keep pagan Arabs misguided (Quran 6:35).
• Muhammad will not show the miracle of the sky falling on the Meccans due to Muhammad's presence among them (Quran 8:32).
• (and many more such excuses ...)

You can read details in our article:

• Allah's FAILURE to pass his own TEST of showing a Miracle

So, the questions is: If these 3 Quranic answers were indeed miracle, why didn't Muhammad present it to pagans as proof of his prophethood? 

Evidence That Muhammad Was Inquiring from People and Engaging in Discussion:

Rather than relying on divine revelation, Muhammad spent those 15 days going from person to person, asking questions and "gathering information." This evidence is found in the latter part of verse 18:22 of Surah Al-Kahf.

Some will say they were three, the fourth being their dog; and some will say they were five, the sixth being their dog, guessing at the unseen; and some will say they were seven, and the eighth was their dog. Say: My Lord knows best their number. None knows them except a few. So do not argue about them except with a clear argument, and do not inquire about them from anyone among them. (Quran 18:22)

This verse is itself a witness that during those 15 days Muhammad was going around asking people questions and collecting information. But when he was unable to gather "reliable" information even from people, and became "confused" about the number of individuals due to the conflicting stories he was hearing, Muhammad then fabricated an excuse within the Quranic verse to escape this confusion. He instructed that one should not "ask" anyone about the "number" of the People of the Cave, and should only engage in "passing" conversation about their number, and move on by saying that only Allah knows their number, and that Allah does not wish to reveal that number to people.

After all of this, can any doubt remain that there is no "All-Knowing and All-Aware" Allah up in the heavens, and that it was Muhammad himself who was fabricating the "revelation"?

Proof: The Quran itself witnesses that DELAY indeed happened

Islamic apologists have claimed that no delay occurred during any incident. However, the verses 18:23-24 provide clear evidence that a delay did indeed happen (which was up to 15 days according to the traditions).

These verses are positioned between the verses about the People of the Cave, as seen below:

• Verse 18:22: They will say there were three, the fourth of them being their dog; and they will say there were five, the sixth of them being their dog - guessing at the unseen; and they will say there were seven, and the eighth of them was their dog. Say, [O Muhammad], "My Lord is most knowing of their number. None knows them except a few. So do not argue about them except with an obvious argument and do not inquire (arabic:  تَسۡتَفۡتِ) about them from anyone among them."
• Verse 18:23: And never say about anything that, “I will do this tomorrow.” (Arabic: وَلَا تَقُولَنَّ لِشَا۟ىْءٍ إِنِّى فَاعِلٌ ذَٰلِكَ غَدًا)
• Verse 18:24: Except [when adding], "If Allah wills." [Arabic: إِلَّآ أَن يَشَآءَ ٱللَّهُ] ...
• Verse 18:25: And they remained in their cave for three hundred years and exceeded by nine.

These verses demonstrate that a delay did occur in this incident. Specifically, Muhammad forgot to say "If Allah wills" when claiming he would provide the answer the next day, which is the very reason the verses were revealed. Thus, this is a direct acknowledgment of delay.

Credit:

All credit goes to Adam ElMasri for his video on this subject. This whole article is based on his video (with some additions from us for clarity and better understanding). Please watch his video here (link):

Islamic Apologist: The Meccan Polytheist didn't ask any 3 Questions, and no DELAY of 15 day occurred in any incident

An Islamic apologist argued:

The narration you referenced (from Al-Suyuti regarding the three questions by the Meccans) is classified as weak, as noted by the Islam Q&A website.

Additionally, only one question—regarding Ruh—was asked of the Prophet, and it was not by the Quraysh in Mecca but later by the Jews in Medina.

Sahih al-Bukhari 4721: Narrated `Abdullah: While I was in the company of the Prophet (ﷺ) on a farm and he was reclining on a palm leave stalk, some Jews passed by. Some of them said to the others. "Ask him (the Prophet (ﷺ) about the spirit." Some of them said, "What urges you to ask him about it" Others said, "(Don't) lest he should give you a reply which you dislike." But they said, "Ask him." So they asked him about the Spirit. The Prophet (ﷺ) kept quiet and did not give them any answer. I knew that he was being divinely inspired so I stayed at my place. When the divine inspiration had been revealed, the Prophet (ﷺ) said. "They ask you (O, Muhammad) concerning the Spirit, Say: "The spirit," its knowledge is with my Lord; and of knowledge you (mankind) have been given only a Little. (Verse 17.85)"

Furthermore, there was no 15-day delay in revelation in any incident. The Prophet immediately responded with the answer regarding the Ruh.

Here is our response:

1. Muslims narrators used to FABRICATE Ahadith:

It's important to recognize that Hadiths were exclusively compiled by Muslims, who had complete freedom to fabricate them in order to defend their religion from criticism.

There was no external verification process to independently authenticate any Hadith.

However, in some cases, fabricated Hadiths were exposed due to severe internal contradictions or contradictions with the Quran. On our website, we have documented examples of such cases:

• Contradictory Ahadith on the Sacrificed Son:
  Our article highlights how 131 Hadiths claimed that Isaac was the son who was to be sacrificed, but later 133 Hadiths were fabricated to assert that Ishmael was the one. This resulted in a total of 133 contradictory Hadiths, revealing their fabrication through internal inconsistency.

• The Myth of the Moon Splitting:
  Another article on our site presents overwhelming evidence that Hadiths cannot be trusted. Numerous so-called "Sahih" Hadiths—including those in Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim—claim that Muhammad performed the miracle of splitting the moon for the Meccan pagans. However, these claims are debunked by their direct contradiction with the Quran.

These examples demonstrate that Hadiths, even those labeled as "authentic," are prone to fabrication and inconsistencies.

2. Surah 17 revealed in Mecca and not in Medina

Here is the verse:

Quran 17:85:

وَيَسْـَٔلُونَكَ عَنِ ٱلرُّوحِ ۖ قُلِ ٱلرُّوحُ مِنْ أَمْرِ رَبِّى وَمَآ أُوتِيتُم مِّنَ ٱلْعِلْمِ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا

And they ask you, [O Muhammad], about the soul. Say, "The soul is of the affair of my Lord. And mankind have not been given of knowledge except a little."

However, according to Muslim Scholars, Surah 17 (Bani Israel) was revealed in Mecca and not in Medina (link).

3. Another Sahih Hadith claims verse 17:85 was revealed in Mecca

The following Sahih Hadith from Jami' Tirmidhi claims that it were not the Jews in Medina, but the Quraish in Mecca who asked Muhammad about Ruh. 

Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3140:

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: "The Quraish said to the Jews: 'Give us something that we can ask this man about.' So he said: 'Ask him about the Ruh.' So they (i.e. Quraish of Mecca) asked him about the Ruh. So Allah Most High, revealed: They ask you concerning the Ruh. Say: The Ruh is one of the things, the knowledge of which is only with my Lord. And of knowledge, you have been given only a little (17:85).

Grade: Sahih (Darussalam)

4. There are 3 Traditions about this Incident:

It is not a singular tradition, but Imam Syuti recorded 3 traditions about this incident. 

• The 1s Tradition is from Ibn Abbas. Imam Syuti recorded in his Tafsir Dure al-Manthur, vol. 5, page 357
• The 2nd tradition is again from Ibn Abbas. Imam Syuti records in his Tafsir Dure al-Manthur, vol 5, page 358
• And the 3rd tradition is from Mujahid. Imam Syuti recorded in his Tafsir Dure al-Manthur, vol. 5, page 377

5. Internal Quranic Evidence Confirming the Event

The structure, tone, and specific phrasing of Surah Al-Kahf (The Cave) provide compelling internal proof that these verses were revealed in direct response to an external interrogation:

• The Phrasing "They Ask You": The Quran explicitly uses interrogative transitions when addressing these topics. For instance, in verse 83, it states: "And they ask you, [O Muhammad], about Dhul-Qarnayn..." (Quran 18:83). This directly mirrors an ongoing interrogation.

• The Intermission and Divine Correction: Traditional accounts note that the Prophet told the Quraysh he would answer them the next day, but forgot to say "Insha'Allah" (If Allah wills). Consequently, divine revelation was delayed for several days, causing anxiety to the Prophet and temporary mockery from the Quraysh. The Quran explicitly documents and corrects this specific incident within the narrative of the answers: "And never say of anything, 'Indeed, I will do that tomorrow,' except [when adding], 'If Allah wills.'" (Quran 18:23-24). This structural interjection makes no sense unless it was addressing a real-time, historical occurrence.

6. Rational Thinking Indicates that the Pagan Meccans Could Not Have Inquired About Ruh, Dhulqarnain, or the People of the Cave on Their Own

It is commonly accepted by Islamic scholars that Surah 17 (Bani Israel) and Surah 18 (Al-Kahf) were revealed in Mecca. When considering the nature of the Meccan society and their beliefs, it becomes clear that the pagan Meccans would not have independently come up with the three specific questions mentioned in these surahs. The only logical explanation for these inquiries is that the Meccans received these questions from the Jews of Medina. This further suggests that the historical accounts surrounding this incident are indeed accurate.

1. Ruh (Spirit):

The polytheists of Mecca had no interest in the concept of Ruh (the spirit) because it was not part of their belief system. Their focus was primarily on their idols and their polytheistic practices. They had little to no engagement with abstract spiritual matters or theological discussions like those found in other traditions. On the other hand, the Jews of Medina, who had a deep knowledge of religious texts and spiritual concepts, were quite familiar with the idea of the Ruh, as it was an essential part of Jewish theology.

The Meccans' sudden interest in asking about Ruh can only be explained by external influence. They did not naturally inquire about it on their own; instead, it is highly likely that they were prompted by the Jews of Medina, who had an established interest in such matters. This suggests that the two groups—Meccans and Jews—were in some form of communication, and the Meccans were guided by the Jews’ knowledge in raising these specific questions.

2. Dhulqarnain (The Two-Horned One):

The question about Dhulqarnain also doesn't fit with the worldview of the Meccan polytheists. Dhulqarnain is depicted as a righteous and God-fearing individual (a Momin), known for his acts of justice and his defense of faith. If the Meccans had truly believed in such a person, who undertook significant missions for the sake of God, they would have also believed in God Himself. 

In contrast, the Jews had a vested interest in asking about the Vision of the Two-Horned Ram, as was present in their Jewish Bible. Thus, the Jewish community was more likely to have posed this question as a test of Muhammad’s knowledge or as a way to challenge his claims.

3. The People of Cave/ The 3 believing Young Jewish men:

The Meccan polytheists, who were steeped in idol worship, would not have had any reason to ask about a group of believing young men who had supposedly hidden away in a cave. The idea of pious individuals, especially Christians, being involved in such a miraculous event would have been foreign to their beliefs. How could they have asked about the People of the Cave on their own, given their lack of interest in such matters?

Moreover, please ponder upon it:

• The original story in the Book of Daniel involved 3 young men.
• The Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus involved 7 people (with some versions mentioning 8), who were sleeping in the cave.
• Thus, Muhammad mixed both of these stories and came to the figures of 3 to 8 in the Quran. 
• Please also ask this question, what potential harm would have arisen if Allah had revealed the precise numbers of the people in the cave? 

Once again, it is evident that the Meccans' inquiry originated from the Jews of Medina, who were actually referring to the story of three devout Jewish men who were miraculously saved from the fire.