and Salmān al-Fārisī, Ka‘b al-Ahbār, and others, who would relate the knowledge they possessed. Their knowledge could then be cited as corroborating what the Messenger brought, serving as evidence against them in one respect and against others in another, as we have explained elsewhere.

Hebrew words bear some resemblance to Arabic words, just as words resemble one another through derivation based on phonetically related consonants. I have heard the Torah’s wording in Hebrew from people of the Book who embraced Islam, and found the two languages so remarkably close that I came to understand much of their Hebrew speech merely through my knowledge of Arabic. Its sound meanings are either close to those of the Quran, like them, or identical with them, although the Quran possesses exceptional qualities of expression and meaning.

If someone among them engaged in argument wishes to challenge the Quran on the basis of transmitted evidence or reason—for example, by citing something attributed to the prophets in their scriptures that contradicts what Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, brought, or something contrary to what Allah has stated in their scriptures, as when they claimed before the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, that Allah had commanded them to blacken the adulterer’s face with charcoal rather than stone him—then the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and the believers could request the Torah and trustworthy interpreters to read it in Arabic and translate it, such as ‘Abd Allāh ibn Salām and others like him. This was the case when he said to their rabbi:

“Lift your hand from the verse concerning stoning.”

There it was, clearly visible. The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, stoned the two adulterers from among them after establishing the proof against them from their own scripture. This was because it accorded with what Allah had revealed to him concerning stoning. He said:

“O Allah, I