This project examines textual representations of disability within the Qur’an in order to develop a critical understanding of the Qur’an’s historical conceptualization of disability, and to interrogate the ethical implications posed by some of the text’s rhetorical content on contemporary Muslim communities. Scholars working on disability and Islam generally agree that the Qur’an presents an ethos of social and religious inclusion with regard to individuals with physical impairments, which arguably influenced later Muslim jurists concerned with disability. Indeed, the Qur’an insists that there is no moral blame on individuals who are blind, sick or lame, and the text advises against the exclusion of this group from community meals (Q 24:61). However, these conclusions are based solely on the Qur’an’s legal content, thereby ignoring a significant portion of the text--the Qur’an’s narratives--which also contains valuable information regarding the text’s historical understanding of disability and how it theoretically influences contemporary cultural perspectives on disability. Furthermore, most of the research on Islam and disability does not engage foundational scholarship from disability critical theorists, which has proven beneficial to scholars investigating disability in premodern (and “non-Western”) texts such as the Hebrew Bible. Using a literary-critical approach that draws on the methodological recommendations of Angelika Neuwirth, who argues that a comprehensive reading of the mu??af as we have it hints at the development of an emerging Muslim community and its ideology, I bring the Qur’an into conversation with disability studies. As a case study, I analyze the story of Moses and the “knot” in his tongue from Qur’an 20:25-31. I argue that while the Qur’an’s rhetorical discourse consistently associates disability imagery with inferior categories such as the non-believers who are described as “blind, deaf and dumb” (Q 2:18)—an association that would be criticized as ableist by contemporary disability scholars and activists—the story of Moses presents an account that destabilizes this system of classification. I suggest that from the story of Moses, we can derive a Qur’anic ethic for the full acceptance of individuals with disabilities that also emphasizes the ethical obligation to accommodate people of all (dis)abilities in religious practice. Moses’ “knotted tongue”, regardless of how we read it, is an integral part of his prophecy and identity in the Qur’an. God does not “fix” it, but instead accommodates him with his brother Aaron who functions as a fellow Prophet and interpreter, through whom Moses’ strengths are increased (Q 20:31).