Dear brother,
I think the main question to ask is
what was the basis of that understanding of the Jews at the time of the Prophet?
An invented tradition, an interpretation based on scripture itself, or guidance provided by subsequent prophets and / or inspired messengers?
Something being
'kataba' (prescribed, decree, ordained) doesn't mean it has to be written down in a Book or Law. When this is the case, the Quran makes this clear. Please see verse 5:45
"therein We prescribed for them: A life for a life, the eye for an eye..." It is worthy to note that the continuation of inspired words through appointed agents of God is clearly confirmed in the same verse (5:32) that deals with the ordainment you mention "…and surely Our messengers came to them with clear signs"
From my humble perspective, It is also useful to remember that the Torah
was not the only revelation given to the Children of Israel, but many other prophets and messengers came with inspired words and shared musings which became part and parcel of the holistic understanding of the religious communities of yore. The Quran even mentions some of these writings such as the 'Zabur' (Psalms)
Verse 5:32 does not say that such an understanding was prescribed in a particular 'book'. It speaks of a Divine prescription that was generally understood by the Children of Israel (irrespective of what particular source) as
‘religious’, hence the term ‘kataba’. This is also corroborated by the The Mishna, Sanhedrin 4:5 which does not 'invent' this prescription. It seems to clearly understand it as being derived from
scripture itself.
"Therefore, humans were created singly, to teach you that whoever destroys a single soul [of Israel], Scripture accounts it as if he had destroyed a full world; and whoever saves one soul of Israel, Scripture accounts it as if she had saved a full world." [1] This scriptural interpretation may have been derived from Genesis 4:10 as noted by commentaries such as below:
"It doesn’t say, “The blood of your brother”, but rather “The bloods of your brother”—meaning his blood and the blood of his descendants." This was the understanding of some of those from the Children of Israel contemporaneous to the Prophet. All the Quran did was to
confirm this understanding and ratify it (as true). The Quran even confirms aspects of the Apocryphal Christian texts (clay birds etc).
As I mentioned in the post below, with some critics an inconsistent approach seems fair play.
INSATIABLE DESIRE TO CRITICISE THE QURANhttps://www.facebook.com/joseph.a.islam/posts/153440904793045 With regards (b) i.e. those that use this as an argument to authenticate the 'Sunnah', there are three key differences why this comparison is untenable.
- The Quran clearly confirms itself to be a 'furqan' and a ‘Muhayminan' (5:48) over the previous scriptures. It also deals with the beliefs and practices of the preceding religious communities. It does not a ‘furqan’ over the hadith which wasn’t compiled at times until centuries after the death of the Prophet.
- The Quran acts as the final verification point and the last religiously 'ordained' source for guidance for believers. This is an explicit ordainment. Appealing to the Talmud is at best, implied.
- There are no subsequent verification points after the Quran.
Therefore, any such comparison is only superficial and without any religious warrant.
I hope this addresses the matter, God willing.
Peace and regards,
Joseph.
REFERENCE [1] [online]
http://www.on1foot.org/text/mishna-sanhedrin-45 [accessed] 27th July 2013