Rushdies novel The Satanic Verses is actually based on some of the most oldest, original verses from the Koran. The Satanic Verses incident, known as qissat al-gharaniq (Story of the Cranes), is the name given to the alleged occasion on which the Islamic Prophet Muhammad is said to have mistaken the words of “satanic suggestion” for divine revelation.
Narratives involving these alleged verses can be read in, among other places, the biographies of Muhammad by al-Wāqidī, Ibn Sa’d (who was a scribe of Waqidi) and Ibn Ishaq (as reconstructed by Alfred Guillaume), as well as the tafsir of al-Tabarī. The majority of Muslim scholars however have rejected the historicity of the incident on the bases of their weak isnads (chains of transmission) and the incompatibility of the incident with the theological doctrine of ‘isma (Prophetic infallibility, divine protection of Muhammad from mistakes).
The first use of the expression ‘Satanic Verses’ is attributed to Sir William Muir (1858).
The Satanic Verses incident is reported in the tafsir and the sira-maghazi literature dating from the first two centuries of Islam, and is reported in the respective tafsīr corpuses transmitted from almost every Qur’anic commentator of note in the first two centuries of the hijra. Muslim scholars who refuses to acknowledge the reality of Mhammed’s true nature and it has become a trend to considered these old testimonies as fabricated incident and the chains of narration “are weak”. The earliest biography of Muhammad, Ibn Ishaq (761-767) is lost but his collection of traditions survives mainly in two sources: Ibn Hisham (833) and al-Tabari (915). The story appears in al-Tabari, who includes Ibn Ishaq in the chain of transmission, but not in Ibn Hisham. Ibn Sa’d and Al-Waqidi, two other early biographers of Muhammad relate the story. Scholars such as Uri Rubin and Shahab Ahmed and Guillaume hold that the report was in Ibn Ishaq, while Alford T. Welch holds the report has not been presumably present in the Ibn Ishaq.
Muslim scholars removed the tradition of the Satanic Verses and it never made it into any of the newer canonical hadith compilations (though possible truncated versions of the incident that did). The reference and exegesis about the Verses appear in early histories. In addition to appearing in Tabarī’s Tafsīr, it is used in the tafsīrs of Muqātil, ‘Abdu r-Razzāq and Ibn Kathir as well as the naskh of Abu Ja‘far an-Nahhās, the asbāb collection of Wāhidī and even the late-medieval as-Suyūtī’s compilation al-Durr al-Manthūr fil-Tafsīr bil-Mathūr.
The Koran is under endless modifications, a process Muslims tend to always accuse the religious infidels of.
Iran’s Hard-Line Press Adds to Bounty on Salman Rushdie
By THOMAS ERDBRINKFEB
NYTimes, February 22, 2016
Salman Rushdie in New York in August. The fatwa calling for Mr. Rushdie to be killed because of his book “The Satanic Verses” was issued in 1989. Credit Sara Krulwich/The New York Times
TEHRAN — A group of hard-line Iranian news media organizations says it has raised $600,000 to add to a bounty for the killing of the British novelist Salman Rushdie.
Iran’s former supreme leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, issued a fatwa, or religious edict, in 1989 calling for Mr. Rushdie to be killed because of his book “The Satanic Verses,” which the ayatollah found to be blasphemous and insulting toward Muslims. Mr. Rushdie has since then been living largely out of sight and under the protection of bodyguards.
The semiofficial Fars news agency, one of the organizations involved, reported that the new reward money was gathered during a trade fair called the Islamic Republic’s Digital Media Exhibition. It quoted the secretary of the exhibition saying that the $600,000 had been announced last week to mark the anniversary of the 1989 fatwa.
Rushdie Backs Out of India Literary Event, Citing SecurityJAN. 20, 2012
The Iranian government distanced itself from calls for Mr. Rushdie’s death under former President Mohammad Khatami, a reformist who declared in 1998 that the fatwa had ended. But the religious authorities said it could not be withdrawn by anyone other than Ayatollah Khomeini, who died four months after issuing it. His successor, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said in 2005 that the fatwa remained valid.
The decree had already put a considerable price on Mr. Rushdie’s head: A religious organization called the 15 Khordad Foundation initially offered a $2.7 million reward to anyone carrying out the fatwa, then increased it to $3.3 million in 2012. The new money, bringing the total bounty to nearly $4 million, came from 40 news outlets listed by Fars, which said that it had contributed $30,000.
Iranian hard-line organizations tend to make symbolic gestures involving the Rushdie fatwa every year around its anniversary, Feb. 14. Whether the bounty really would be paid is unclear. Many news organizations in Iran do not turn a profit, and some are subsidized by state organizations.
The announcement highlights the continuing political infighting in Iran as elections approach for Parliament and the Assembly of Experts, a council that would choose the next supreme leader. The government of President Hassan Rouhani has promised to improve relations with the West, while his hard-line opponents have campaigned against any opening. Analysts said the hard-liners may have been seeking an electoral edge by raising the Rushdie matter now.
“This is just to overshadow the elections, because the hard-liners and their media want to dissuade people from voting in large numbers,” said Mojgan Faraji, a reformist journalist. She said the hard-liners drag up issues from the past to confuse people and to “make other issues more important than voting.”