Did the Quran Borrow from Umayyah ibn Abi al-Salt? A Complete Refutation

Groups of missionaries have claimed that the Quran was stolen from the poetry of Umayyah ibn Abi al-Salt because of similarities between certain poems attributed to him and the content of the Holy Quran. In fact, a number of the most prominent scholars of pre-Islamic literature — including orientalists before the Arabs and Muslims — saw the exact opposite of what the missionaries claimed: those similar poems are fabricated against Umayyah, not sources of the Quran.

---

Who Was Umayyah ibn Abi al-Salt?

Umayyah ibn Abi al-Salt was a veteran poet from the Thaqeef tribe of Taif. His father was also a poet. He had a sister named al-Fari’ah, two daughters, several sons (some of whom were poets), and a brother named Hudhayl who was captured and killed as a polytheist during the siege of Taif.

He was one of the Hanafi school of thought — those who rebelled against idol worship and believed in the One God and the Last Day. They were disturbed by the moral decline prevalent in the Arabian Peninsula and looked forward to a prophet to be sent from among the Arabs. In fact, Umayyah himself hoped to be that prophet. He mingled with religious men, read their books, and quoted from them in his poetry.

He was a man of travel and trade who praised the notables of his people — such as Abdullah ibn Jud’an — and received their gifts and drank wine with them, though it was said he later forbade it for himself. Sources unanimously agree that he died an unbeliever out of envy and malice. As soon as he heard of the mission of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, he fled to Yemen with his two daughters. He then wandered throughout the Arabian Peninsula — Yemen, Bahrain, Mecca, Syria, Medina, and Taif.

Accounts tell us that he visited the Prophet ﷺ while he was still in Umm al-Qura and listened to Surah Yasin from him. He expressed his belief, confirming to the polytheists who asked him that the Prophet was on the right path. However, his deep-seated hatred prevented him from officially and permanently announcing his conversion to Islam. One account states he had intended to go to Medina to declare his conversion — but the infidels stirred up his hatred by reminding him that Muhammad ﷺ had killed his relatives at Badr and thrown them into the well. He had no choice but to return, tearing his clothes, crying, and hamstringing his camel, as the pre-Islamic people did.

He was not satisfied with this but mourned the dead polytheists and began inciting vengeance, joining the front of polytheism and paganism against Islam. He remained like this until his death — the year of which is disputed between the second and ninth year of the Hijra, though the period shortly before the conquest of Taif is most likely.

Sources: Poets of Christianity before Islam, 2nd ed., Dar al-Mashreq, Beirut, p.219+; Dr. Jawad Ali, Al-Mufassal fi Tarikh al-Arab qabl al-Islam, 2nd ed., Dar al-Ilm lil-Malayin, 1978, 6/478-500; Bahjat Abd al-Ghafur al-Hadithi, Umayyah ibn Abi al-Salt — His Life and Poetry, Publications of the Ministry of Information, Baghdad, 1975, p.46+.

His Poetry Collection

Umayyah has a collection of poetry that mixes authentic poetry attributed to him, poetry attributed to him and to others simultaneously, and poetry that does not inspire confidence that it was his composition — this last category being the most prevalent. Most of the collection deals with religious matters: contemplation of the universe and its significance for the Lordship of God, descriptions of the angels and their dedication to glorifying their Lord, accounts of the Last Day and its judgment, rewards, and punishments, and recounting the stories of the prophets and their peoples — in addition to his poems praising Abdullah ibn Jud’an, boasting about himself and his tribe, and so on.

Among the religious poetry attributed to him is that which closely resembles the Holy Quran in meaning and wording, as if we are faced with a poet who had the Quran before him and strove to compose its verses into poetry. The following is an example of such poetry:

---

The Scholarly Consensus: These Poems Are Fabricated

Carl Brockelmann

Carl Brockelmann confirms that most of what is narrated of Umayyah’s poetry is in fact fabricated — with the exception of his elegy for the polytheists slain at Badr. He notes that al-Asma’i called Umayyah “the Poet of the Hereafter,” and Muhammad ibn Dawud al-Antaki wanted to open the religious section of his book Al-Zahra with Umayyah’s poems — which shows that religious poems attributed to him existed from an early period, yet this does not confirm their authenticity.

The Orientalist Brau

Brau, author of the entry on “Umayyah ibn Abi al-Salt” in the first edition of the Encyclopedia of Islam, says the authenticity of the poems attributed to this poet is questionable — as is the case with pre-Islamic poetry in general. The claim that Muhammad borrowed something from Umayyah’s poems is a far-fetched assertion for a simple reason: Umayyah had a broader knowledge of the myths in question, and his myths differed in detail from those mentioned in the Quran. Although Brau does not rule out the possibility that Umayyah borrowed from the Quran, he explains the similarity between Umayyah’s poetry and the Quran by saying that intellectual tendencies similar to the views of the Hanafis spread widely in cities such as Mecca and Taif — nourished by both Jewish interpretations of the Torah and Muslim myths. He concludes what Thor André concluded: that there is nothing in Umayyah’s religious poems that can be authentically attributed to him, and that this type of poetry is the product of the interpreters’ fabrications.

Source: Encyclopedia of Islam, Arabic translation, 4/463-464.

Thor André

Thor André concluded that the poems that Clement Huart used in his accusation are only verses in which storytellers collected what the Quranic commentators extracted from the materials of the Quranic stories, and that these poems must have been attributed to Umayyah at an early stage — and there is nothing in his religious poems that can be authentically attributed to him. This type of poetry is the product of the interpreters’ fabrications.

Taha Hussein

Sheikh Muhammad Arafa

Sheikh Muhammad Arafa argues that if there were any real similarity between Umayyah’s poetry and the Holy Quran, the polytheists — whom the Prophet ﷺ challenged to produce a verse like it — would have said that Umayyah had previously composed in his poetry what the Prophet ﷺ included in the Quran, claiming it was from God. But they did not say this; rather, they accused him of being taught by a foreign slave in Mecca. He also asserts that Umayyah’s religious poetry does not resemble the strong, well-crafted poetry of the pre-Islamic period in its texture — it resembles the style of modern poets, with clearly apparent weakness of craftsmanship. Hence, this poetry attributed to that sectarian fanatic is fabricated and falsely attributed to him.

Source: His commentary in Encyclopedia of Islam, 4/465.

Dr. Omar Farroukh

Dr. Shawqi Dayf

Dr. Shawqi Dayf argues that the meanings of Umayyah’s poetry are clearly derived from the Quran — but this does not mean Umayyah was influenced by the Quran. Rather, the poetry bearing his name is crude, fabricated poetry composed by storytellers and preachers in pre-Islamic eras. He adds that Clement Huart had no knowledge of Arabic and the styles of the pre-Islamic era; otherwise, he would have realized they were clearly fabricated poems and would not have made his erroneous judgment.

Source: The Pre-Islamic Era, 10th ed., Dar al-Maarif, pp.395-396.

Dr. Jawad Ali

Dr. Jawad Ali asserts that some of Umayyah’s religious poetry was forged — and therefore Umayyah could not have borrowed anything from the Quran; otherwise the Prophet ﷺ and the Muslims would have exposed him. He also believes that the poetry agreeing with the Quran was composed after Islam — because it is not found in the Torah, the Bible, or any other religious books, except the Quran. Most of it was composed during the era of Hajjaj to draw closer to him. He notes that Umayyah’s religious poetry differs markedly from his panegyric, elegiac, and other poetry — it resembles the style of jurists, Sufis, and Christian ascetics. Narrators also repeatedly indicate that this or that poetry attributed to him had been simultaneously attributed to other poets. Furthermore, he praised the Prophet ﷺ and showed signs of belief in him — how does this reconcile with his lamentation of the polytheists killed at Badr?

Source: Al-Mufassal fi Tarikh al-Arab qabl al-Islam, 6/491-496.

Bahjat Abd al-Ghafur al-Hadithi

Bahjat al-Hadithi divides Umayyah’s religious poetry into two categories: one bearing the influence of the Hanafi school and the books of the Jews and Christians — which he tends to attribute to Umayyah, as its style and meanings are consistent with his character — and another bearing the influence of the Quran, which he regards as fabricated, evidenced by the apparent weakness of its language and formulation and its style clearly derived from the Quran.

Source: Umayyah ibn Abi al-Salt — His Life and Poetry, p.127.

---

The Hadith Record: What the Prophet ﷺ Actually Confirmed of Umayyah’s Poetry

A search through the books of the noble prophetic hadiths yields only three verses of Umayyah’s poetry in Musnad Ahmad — verses about the sun and the throne of God in a way that is not mentioned in the Quran — which the Messenger ﷺ confirmed:

It is also mentioned in the Musnads of Ibn Majah and Ahmad that al-Shuraid ibn al-Samit once recited to the Prophet ﷺ one hundred verses of Umayyah’s poetry. Whenever he finished a verse, the Prophet ﷺ said “Hey” — urging him to continue. At the end, he commented: “He almost converted to Islam.” Another narration in Musnad Ahmad states that the Prophet ﷺ paused at the end without commenting, and al-Shuraid paused in turn.

We do not know from the hadith which verses the noble Companion recited, nor the extent to which they resembled the Quran. And the figure of “one hundred” most likely indicates a considerable number, not a literal count — it is not reasonable that a man reciting poetry aloud would be counting his verses one by one.

What is notable is what the Prophet ﷺ did NOT say: he never remarked on any similarity between Umayyah’s poetry and the Quran, despite having just listened to a large selection of it.

---

The Similar Poems Are Absent from the Major Classical Anthologies

The poems in which the alleged similarity to the Quran exists did not appear in any of the respected books of literature, language, history, and exegesis — such as:

Jamharat Ash’ar al-Arab by Abu Zayd al-Qurashi; Tabaqat al-Shu’ara by Ibn Salam; Al-Shi’r wa al-Shu’ara by Ibn Qutaybah; Al-Aghani by al-Isfahani; Tarikh al-Rusul wa al-Muluk and Jami’ al-Bayan fi Tafsir al-Quran by al-Tabari.

In fact, many of these poems did not appear in the first edition of the collection. Some were simultaneously attributed to other poets. This is a significant finding — the authors of these works are among the ancient literary critics and historians known for meticulous scrutiny and refusal to accept anything at face value: Ibn Salam, Ibn Qutaybah, and Abu al-Faraj al-Isfahani in particular. Meanwhile, Ibn Dawud al-Antaki’s work in Al-Zahra goes no further than collecting and arranging poems, only occasionally adding a word to explain a difficult term.

If the poems were authentic pre-Islamic compositions, it is inconceivable that the major critical anthologists would have universally ignored them.

---

Why Did the Early Scholars Not Raise the Similarity Issue?

Only Muhammad ibn Dawud al-Antaki (3rd century AH) addressed the matter — and he argued against the accusation, not in its support: the Prophet ﷺ could not have used in his Book the poetry of a man who acknowledged his prophethood and believed in his call. And if he had, Umayyah would have rushed to accuse the Messenger ﷺ of stealing from his poetry, thus invalidating his call with the least and easiest effort.

Source: Al-Zahra, ed. Ibrahim al-Samarrai and Nour Hamoud al-Qaisi, 2nd ed., Al-Manar Library, Zarqa, 1406 AH/1985, 2/503.

The chronological paradox is revealing: al-Antaki lived in the 3rd century AH; al-Isfahani came a century later — yet it was the later scholar who refused to include these poems, while the earlier one discussed them without skepticism. Logic would suggest the earlier scholar, being closer in time to the original composition, should have been more certain of its attribution. The explanation lies in the different personalities of researchers: between the confident who accepts what is narrated and the meticulous who only accepts after scrutiny. This is the same dynamic that explains the difference between Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Hisham — the later commentator examined and refined what his predecessor wrote, denouncing for example Ibn Ishaq’s citation of poems attributed to Adam, Thamud, and individuals from Quraysh whose poetry scholars did not know or denied.

---

The Author’s Personal Assessment

Upon reviewing Umayyah’s diwan, the author could not recall reading any of the controversial poems in the major books he had studied on the man — including Al-Aghani, Tabaqat al-Shu’ara, and Al-Shi’r wa al-Shu’ara — despite having read extensively about him. Contemporary researchers addressing this issue also contented themselves with theoretical discussion, including none of the controversial poems themselves.

The impression upon reading these poems is that they are closer to the style of a poet who had Quranic verses before him and strove to include them in his verse. The speech is weak and uneven — there are gaps that the poet fills in to complete the verse in any way possible. This is in sharp contrast to Umayyah’s authentic poetry: his elegy for the Badr polytheists and his eulogies of Abdullah ibn Jud’an.

And there is no point in comparing this weak, uneven poetry to the style of the Quran — its virility, majesty, intense captivation, and overwhelming charm that penetrates hearts with overwhelming power. This makes the claim that Umayyah’s poetry influenced the Quran, rather than the reverse, not only logically sound but compelling to minds and consciences — even if we were to grant these poems their disputed attribution.

---

Assuming the Poems Are Authentic: The Logical Consequences

The author grants, for argument’s sake, that the disputed poems are authentic — and examines what this would logically entail.

Umayyah Was Preoccupied with Muhammad ﷺ, Not the Reverse

Umayyah expected prophethood. When it passed him by, he could not endure remaining in Taif near the man Heaven had favoured. He took his daughters and fled — which means he was the one preoccupied with Muhammad ﷺ, not the other way around. This is more likely to have made him attentive to everything related to the Prophet, especially the Quran, which he wished — with all the envy and eagerness for fame in his heart — could have been his. It is entirely logical that he hunted down the verses and surahs being revealed and kept them in mind while composing his poetry — following the popular proverb: “If you miss the mission, roll in its dust.”

He was not forging a new path when quoting from the Quran — he was continuing his established pre-Islamic habit of quoting from the books of previous nations in his poetry. Nature is mighty, as they say.

Why Did Umayyah Not Confront the Prophet ﷺ Directly?

If Umayyah had compelling evidence that the Quran borrowed from his poetry, logic would require him to confront Muhammad ﷺ face-to-face and state it. Instead, he fled. This evasion — combined with his ultimate inability to commit to apostasy or to Islam — reveals the man: one whose envy ate away at him but whose heart knew the truth.

The Trip to Taif

The Prophet ﷺ’s trip to Taif — when he felt Mecca was stubbornly resistant — shows him seeking a new audience for his message. If he had taken some of his Quranic verses from the poetry of Taif’s own poet, would he have gone to that poet’s city, exposing himself to ridicule and accusation? He would have been “like someone who seeks refuge from the frying pan in the fire.” The Messenger ﷺ was never a person who would commit such a strange and foolish act — and not one of his worst enemies ever accused him of anything like that.

Why Did the People of Taif Not Expose the Theft?

When the people of Taif drove out the Prophet ﷺ with stones in the streets — violating even the established Arab traditions requiring the honouring of a visiting guest — they missed what would have been the most decisive weapon at their disposal: accusing him of plagiarising their own poet’s compositions. If such evidence existed, would a tribal people defending their city let it pass unused?

---

Umayyah’s Poem Praising the Prophet ﷺ

Among the narrations concerning Umayyah is a poem attributed to him praising the Prophet ﷺ and acknowledging his mission:

Dr. Jawad Ali rejected this poem on the basis that the strong faith it contains contradicts what we know of Umayyah’s hesitation regarding Islam, and that it refers to the death of the Prophet ﷺ which did not occur until after Umayyah’s own death first (Al-Mufassal, 6/497-498). Bahjat al-Hadithi does not doubt it — he sees it as representing one of the recurring crises that plagued Umayyah, a man who did not disbelieve out of denial but out of envy, as he believed in his heart in what the Prophet ﷺ brought. Al-Antaki confirmed the poem’s presence in his poetry and its recognisability to those with experience in it (Umayyah ibn Abi al-Salt, pp.78-79).

The author’s own analysis of the poem:

First — it refers to the sealing of prophethood with Muhammad ﷺ. This concept was addressed in Surat al-Ahzab — revealed a considerable time after the poem would have been composed (at the latest before the Battle of Badr, after which Umayyah made his final decision).

Second — the Prophet’s death is mentioned in the present tense, not the past — suggesting it means he will die like all other human beings, as in the verse: “Indeed, you will die, and indeed, they will die” (Az-Zumar: 30). The mention of death itself in a context of praise is very strange regardless.

Third — describing the Prophet as “Merciful, compassionate” echoes his description in Quran 9:128 with the same two attributes (though in reversed order in the poem). That verse dates to a later period than when the poem would have been composed.

Fourth — the poem echoes the hadith of Abu Hurairah about a Muslim’s children dying and paradise. Abu Hurairah converted to Islam in Medina in the seventh year of the Hijra — years after Umayyah composed his poem. How could Umayyah have been influenced by a hadith that had not yet been transmitted?

Fifth — there are prosodic flaws: both “arsalahu” and “al-anbiya” in the poem contain a hamza that creates disturbance in the metre of the couplets in which they appear. Removing the hamzas produces a feeling of Sufi Islamic poetry — making it very difficult to place this poem in the Umayyad era or even the early Abbasid era.

Sixth — the major literary historians and critics of the period — Ibn Salam, Ibn Qutaybah, al-Jahiz, Abu al-Faraj, and Ibn Hisham — preoccupied with the issue of plagiarism in pre-Islamic and contemporary poetry — did not attribute any of this poetry to Umayyah. This overrides Ibn Dawud al-Antaki’s inclusion.

The Prophet’s Statement About Umayyah

The Prophet ﷺ himself characterised Umayyah with a decisive statement:

The meaning: he would take what was stated in the Quran and repeat it in his poetry as if he were a believer in it — but his envy of the Prophet ﷺ prevented him from announcing that belief officially and finally. This is the disbelief of the heart.

Source: Dr. Jawad Ali, Al-Mufassal, 6/485.

---

The Meeting with al-Fari’ah and What It Proves

When the Prophet ﷺ entered Taif in the ninth year of the Hijra, he met al-Fari’ah, Umayyah’s sister. She told him the story of her brother and recited some of his poetry at his request. He ﷺ responded:

Is it conceivable that the Prophet ﷺ would open the case of Umayyah and utter such a scathing word — within earshot of his sister, at the most emotionally vulnerable moment for the people of Taif — if he had derived any of his Quranic verses from the man’s poetry? This would expose him to revelational destruction for no reason. The intelligence of Muhammad ﷺ would not miss such a danger and proceed with such recklessness.

The same logic applies to his encouraging al-Shuraid to continue reciting Umayyah’s poetry: why would he invite the recitation of poetry that would expose his alleged theft — and then not react with any sign of recognition to the similarity?

---

The Historical Witnesses Who Never Raised This Accusation

Kinanah ibn Abd Yalil — Chief of Thaqeef

Kinanah ibn Abd Yalil was the chief of Thaqeef. He conspired with Abu Amir the monk against Islam — going as far as Caesar to seek his help. He left no stone unturned in fighting the new religion. Yet he never once raised the accusation that the Quran borrowed from the poetry of his own tribe’s poet. If he had such a decisive weapon, would a tribal leader fighting Islam with every means at his disposal have let it slip unused?

Sources: Ibn Hajar, Al-Isabah, 2/496 and 3/305.

Urwah ibn Mas’ud al-Thaqafi

Urwah ibn Mas’ud embraced Islam and, out of love for his people, went to invite them to the religion of monotheism — knowing the Prophet ﷺ had warned him they would kill him. They shot him with arrows and killed him. Would Urwah have gone to his people to invite them to a religion whose Book was built on plagiarising their own poet — and would his people have let that golden opportunity pass without mocking his enthusiasm for a plagiarised revelation?

Source: Abu Na’im al-Isfahani, Dala’il al-Nubuwwah, 2nd ed., Hyderabad Deccan, 1950, p.467.

Abu Mahjan al-Thaqafi — The Poet of Thaqeef

Abu Mahjan al-Thaqafi was a poet of Thaqeef who oscillated between his obsessive love for wine and his religious scruples — repeatedly punished, exiled by Umar, yet redeemed at the Battle of al-Qadisiyyah where he fought in chains and was released by the wife of Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas after pledging to return voluntarily. His collection of poems is filled with verses praising wine and rebelling against Islam’s prohibition of it. He defended Taif during the Muslim siege following the conquest of Mecca and his arrow struck a son of Abu Bakr. Yet in all his poetry — composed partly before and partly after his conversion, partly in rebellion against Islam — he never once mentioned the Prophet ﷺ using the poetry of a member of his own tribe.

Sources: Al-Zarkali, Al-A’lam, 3rd ed., 5/243; Encyclopedia of Islam, Arabic translation, 2/597-598.

Al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf al-Thaqafi

Al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf al-Thaqafi was a teacher of the Quran at the beginning of his life — like his father — seeking reward from God, not money. He later became one of the great workers of the Umayyads. He was the one who commissioned the perfection of Arabic diacritical marks, entrusting Nasr ibn Asim with the task of placing dots to distinguish between similar letters — to achieve greater precision and ease in reading the Quran. He was a regular reader of the Quran and encouraged its memorisation by every means. And he was a relative of Umayyah: the cousin of his fourth maternal grandfather, Mu’tab ibn Malik.

He himself said: “People who knew Umayyah’s poetry have gone, and so has the language been lost” — meaning that Umayyah’s poetic texts were already being lost in his time.

Now: if large portions of Umayyah’s poetry had been lost before Hajjaj — one of the closest people to him by blood — how did all this poetry that allegedly resembles the Quran reach us? And what made Hajjaj so enthusiastic about protecting and promoting the Quran if there were even a shred of doubt about the source of this book — a doubt that could have come from nowhere other than the poetry of the son of his own tribe, indeed his own relative?

Sources: Ahmad Sidqi al-Amad, Al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf al-Thaqafi, Dar al-Thaqafa, Beirut, 1975, pp.86-87, 96, 474, 477-478; Hazza ibn Eid al-Shammari, Al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf al-Thaqafi — A Civilized Face, Dar Umayya, Riyadh, p.44; Dr. Jawad Ali, Al-Mufassal, 6/483.

John of Damascus

John of Damascus was among the first Christians to write attacking Islam — and he was a contemporary of the Umayyad dynasty. If this suspicion had any shadow of truth, however slight, would this fanatical monk against Islam — who wanted to destroy it over the heads of his companions and prove by all means that Muhammad ﷺ was not a true prophet — have let this precious opportunity slip and remained silent, not using this ready-made and certainly winning card?

Umayyah’s Own Children

Al-Fari’ah (his sister) and his sons — al-Qasim, Umayyah, Rabi’ah, and Wahb — all entered Islam together with all of Thaqeef. The sons were poets. Not one word has been transmitted from any of them — or from anyone else related by blood to Umayyah — that even hints the Messenger ﷺ could have benefited from their father’s poetry in any way. Their mere conversion to Islam is in itself proof of their denial of their father and their allegiance to Muhammad ﷺ.

The Apostate Arabs

Many Arabs apostatised after the Prophet’s death ﷺ, each tribe inventing its own ridiculous excuse. But we have never heard of any of those who apostatised bringing up this subject — not even the Thaqeef, who considered apostasy themselves before Uthman ibn al-As opposed them. Even during their consideration of abandoning Islam, they never raised it.

---

The Three Possibilities and Their Evaluation

After all of this, the matter resolves into two — and only two — valid options:

Option One — The attribution of these poems to Umayyah is false. They are fabrications composed by storytellers and preachers in the Islamic era, attributed to him to lend religious authority to what was essentially Islamic content. This is the position of Brockelmann, Thor André, Brau, Taha Hussein, Dr. Shawqi Dayf, Dr. Omar Farroukh, and Dr. Jawad Ali.

Option Two — Umayyah composed them in imitation of the Quran — drawing on the verses he heard from the Prophet ﷺ and incorporating them into his poetry, continuing his pre-existing habit of quoting from religious texts. This fits the Prophet’s own description of him: “His tongue believed, but his heart disbelieved.”

A third possibility — proposed by the German Orientalist Scholz, publisher of Umayyah’s diwan — that both the Prophet ﷺ and Umayyah drew from a common third source — has no legs to walk on. Where is that common source? Why did it not appear throughout all those centuries? How did each of them fall into it, given the great spatial and psychological distance between them? And why are they alone, without all the Arabs, indeed without the entire world?