This inquiry examines whether the Hāmān of Sūrat al-Qaṣaṣ corresponds to the Hāmān of the Book of Esther and assesses the relationship between Hāmān’s edifice and Nimrod’s Tower of Babel. The paper first outlines the nature of divine revelation, distinguishing takwīnī (cosmological) from tashrīʿī (revelatory) knowledge, and traces the progressive relationship between successive scriptures — culminating in the Qur’ān as their Muhaymin (authoritative guardian). It then examines the preservation of earlier scriptures, contrasting their human custodianship with Allāh’s direct preservation of the Qur’ān, demonstrating how verbal corruption and interpretive distortion account for discrepancies with extant Biblical texts.
The paper lays out an epistemic framework grounded in thubūt (establishment of transmission) and dalālah (indicative meaning), applying it to evaluate reports concerning Hāmān, Nimrod, and the Tower of Babel. Drawing on al-Ṭabarī, Shāh Walī Allāh, and al-Ālūsī, among others, it argues that the Qur’ānic Hāmān is known with certainty, while the Persian Hāmān of Esther remains historically possible given the ambiguity surrounding that text’s authorship, canonicity, and transmission. Nimrod’s Tower, though not named explicitly in the Qur’ān, is strongly indicated in several āyāt and corroborated by Companion narrations. The paper concludes by distinguishing the Qur’ānic terms ṣarḥ (grand edifice) and bunyān (tower) as internal evidence that these are separate events, recommending the Qur’ānic account be privileged wherever sources conflict.
