Surah 39:65
"And it was already revealed to you and to those before you that if you should associate [anything with Allah], your work would surely become worthless, and you would surely be among the losers."
Surah 39:65 collides violently with early Islamic history. Critics use this verse to argue that Muhammad did, in fact, briefly succumb to compromising monotheism, and that the verse exposes a deep flaw in the later theological doctrine of prophetic infallibility.
The core of the argument that "Muhammad ascribed partners to God" rests on a famous historical event recorded by early, authoritative Islamic historians and commentators (including Al-Tabari, Ibn Sa'd, and Ibn Ishaq) known as the Incident of the Gharaniq (The Satanic Verses).
The Event: While under immense pressure from the pagan Quraysh elite in Mecca, Muhammad was reciting Surah 53 (An-Najm). According to early biographers, Satan cast words onto his tongue, causing him to praise the three chief pagan goddesses of Mecca (Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, and Manat) by reciting: "These are the exalted cranes (gharāniq), and their intercession is to be hoped for."
The Act of Shirk: By validating these idols as legitimate intercessors with Allah, Muhammad performed a textbook act of Shirk (ascribing partners to God). The Meccan pagans were so thrilled by this theological concession that they prostrated alongside the Muslims.
The Connection to 39:65: Critics argue that Surah 39:65—which specifically warns Muhammad in the singular (la-in ashrakta / "if you associate partners") that his entire life's work will be nullified if he lapses into polytheism—serves as a direct, sobering historical rebuke or a lingering scar from this temporary compromise.
In later orthodox Islamic theology, the doctrine of Ismah was developed, asserting that all prophets are divinely protected from committing major sins, especially Shirk.
The Textual Conflict: Critics point out that Surah 39:65 is not addressed to the generic masses; the grammar uses the second-person singular masculine pronoun, targeting Muhammad directly.
The Critical Verdict: If Muhammad were ontologically incapable of committing Shirk due to divine protection, issuing an absolute, catastrophic warning to him ("your deeds will become worthless") would be entirely meaningless. The text treats the possibility of the Prophet committing Shirk as a real, tangible danger. To the historian, this indicates that the absolute concept of Ismah was an artificial, post-prophetic theological construct invented centuries later to overwrite the highly vulnerable, human reality of Muhammad’s early career.
Islamic apologists frequently defend this verse by utilizing a rhetorical escape route known as Iyyaki a'ni wa-smati ya jara ("I mean you, but listen, O neighbor"). They argue that God is addressing Muhammad publicly only as a rhetorical proxy to warn the followers and the pagans that polytheism is so dangerous that not even the Prophet would be spared if he tried it.
The Critique: Critics reject this defense as a convenient semantic loophole. The phrasing specifically links Muhammad to previous biblical prophets ("and to those before you"), implying a universal baseline standard for the prophets themselves. In the historical context of Mecca, Muhammad was facing intense political isolation, economic boycotts, and tribal assassination threats. The temptation to find a syncretic middle ground with the Quraysh's ancestral pantheon was a genuine geopolitical reality, making the verse a literal warning against political-religious capitulation.