رَسُوۡل

See 2:54.

5:47; 57:28.

2:254; 3:185; 5:111; 43:64.

16:103.

Important Words:

قفینا (We caused to follow) is derived from قفا which means, the back of the neck. Hence قفا أثره means, he followed him. قفی(qaffa) means, he made a person or thing follow or come after another (Aqrab).

بینات (manifest Signs) is derived from بین meaning, he explained a thing so as to make it clear or manifest. So بینات means, such signs and arguments as make a thing manifest and clearly establish the truth of a claimant (Mufradat & Aqrab).

روح القدس (Spirit of Holiness) is a compound word made up of روح and القدس. The first-mentioned word, i.e. روح means, a spirit, an angel, a word of God; and قدس means, sanctity, holiness. روح القدس would thus mean, the holy or blessed word of God; the spirit or angel of holiness (Aqrab & Lane). It is generally taken to signify the angel Gabriel.

Commentary:

In this verse, the Israelites are told that they had opposed all the Prophets of God, beginning from Moses and ending with Jesus, for no other reason than that some of the teachings of these Prophets were at variance with their cherished desires.

The verse, while speaking generally of the Prophets who came after Moses, makes a special mention of Jesus. The reason for this lies in the fact that somehow or other, the Jews accepted all those Prophets who appeared prior to Jesus, but they stubbornly refused to accept him. It was, therefore, in the fitness of things that particular mention should have been made of Jesus, and it should have been declared that he was as good and as holy a Prophet as so many others who had gone before him and in whom the Jews had believed, inasmuch as he possessed, in common with them, that characteristic Spirit of Holiness which distinguished God’s Prophets from other men of the world. The most powerful proof of the truth of the claims of Jesus as a Prophet was his being favoured with Signs and the assistance of the Holy Spirit, and this is the very proof on the basis of which the Jews had believed in the previous Prophets. The بینات(manifest Signs) and روح القدس (the Spirit of Holiness) have been mentioned here not because they were the unique characteristics of Jesus, but because both these evidences, which must accompany every true Prophet, were denied him by the Jews. From Matt. 12:38-40, it is apparent that the Jews denied that Jesus showed any Sign, while from Luke 11:15 and Matt. 10:25 we learn that, according to the Jews, Jesus, far from being favoured with the Holy Spirit, was influenced by the Evil Spirit and was (God forbid!) himself a devil.

That بینات (manifest Signs) and روح القدس (the Spirit of Holiness) are the common characteristics of all the Prophets of God and not an exclusive distinction of Jesus is apparent from other verses of the Quran as well. Says the Quran: That was because their Messengers came to them with بینات (manifest Signs) but they disbelieved; so Allah seized them. Surely, He is strong and severe in chastising (40:23). Also see 2:100. And elsewhere the Quran says about the Holy Prophet, Say, theروح القدس (Spirit of Holiness) has brought it (the Quran) down from thy Lord with truth that He may strengthen those who believe and as a guidance and glad tidings for Muslims (16:103). The Quran goes still further and declares that the Spirit of Holiness descends not only on Prophets but also on true believers (58:23).

In this connection we have also the testimony of the Holy Prophet who is reported to have said to the poet Hassan, "Reply, O Hassan (to the disbelievers), on behalf of the Prophet of God, and O God, help Thou Hassan with روح القدس i.e. the Spirit of Holiness" (Bukhari & Muslim).

Hassan also declares in a couplet of his that روح القدس i.e. the Holy Spirit was always with the Muslims. Says he:

و جبریل رسول الله فینا

و روح القدس لیس له كفاء

"And Gabriel, the Messenger of God, is among us and the Spirit of Holiness has no match" (Muslim).

From the above it is clear that البینات (manifest Signs) and روح القدس (the Spirit of Holiness) are not the exclusive privileges of Jesus but were vouchsafed to all the Prophets of God. Even holy men other than Prophets have received the Spirit of Holiness from God. The specific mention of "manifest Signs" and "the Spirit of Holiness" in this verse is thus meant only to bring home to the Jews that the rejection of Jesus was entirely unjustified.

It is commonly believed that روح القدس is another name of the angel Gabriel (Jarir & Kathir). As explained under 2:31, out of His infinite wisdom, God has appointed different angels to execute His will and manifest His attributes in the universe; and the angel to whom the work of bringing about purification in the world and of reflecting God’s attribute of holiness has been assigned is called, روح القدس. The expression "Holy Spirit" is also met with in the Old Testament (Ps. 51:11). Some commentators have also interpreted روح القدس as a special manifestation of God’s اسم اعظم i.e. His chief attribute of Holiness (Kathir).

See 2:90.

3:188.

Commentary:

As pointed out in the preceding verse, the Jews had pledged themselves to their own Prophets that they would accept the Prophet who was to appear from among their brethren, the Ishmaelites, in fulfilment of the prophecies mentioned in the Bible. But although all the signs mentioned in the prophecies concerning the promised Prophet had been fulfilled in the person of the Holy Prophet, yet they persisted in their denial and thus broke their promise and belied their own Scriptures.

The word مصدق has been construed to mean: (1) that the Quran declares the Bible to be true, and (2) that the Quran fulfils the prophecies contained in the Bible. The latter meaning only is applicable here. For here the People of the Book are spoken of as casting the Book of God (the Torah) behind their backs as a result of the fulfilment of its prophecies in the Quran. This cannot be the case, if we follow the first meaning ascribed to the word; for if the Quran declared the Bible to be true, this could not be the cause of the Jews casting their own Book behind their backs. Evidently, the correct meaning is that in spite of the fact that the Quran fulfils the prophecies contained in the Bible, the Jews reject it, and thereby cast their own Book behind their backs.

4:154.

Important Words:

سواء (right) is derived from سوی. They say سوی الرجل i.e. his affairs became straight and well. سواء means: (1) the central portion of a thing; (2) equal. سواء السبیل means, the straight or right portion of a way; or a straight or right way (Lisan & Aqrab).

Commentary:

This verse mentions another artifice which the Jews employed to overthrow the mission of the Holy Prophet. They asked him absurd and silly questions as had no bearing on religion. This they did to inoculate Muslims with the same spirit of stupid questioning, so that their hearts might gradually become estranged from the dignity of faith and give way to doubt. In warning Muslims against such a course, the Quran points out that the Jews had ruined themselves by putting similar questions to Moses, and that the Muslims should, therefore, beware of following their evil example. In fact, unnecessary and irrelevant questions in religious matters eventually lead one to loss of faith, for they tend to degrade religion to a plaything or a piece of idle philosophy.

As to the nature of questions put to Moses by the Israelites, the Quran refers to one in 4:154. Says God: The People of the Book ask thee to cause a Book to descend on them from heaven. They asked Moses a greater thing than this; they said, 'Show us Allah openly.' then a destructive punishment overtook them because of their transgression. Then they took the calf for worship after clear Signs had come to them, but We pardoned even that. And We gave Moses manifest authority. This verse gives us an indication as to the nature of the questions that were put to Moses, and Muslims are forbidden to put such questions to their Prophet.

2:152; 3:165; 62:3.

Important Words:

آیات (Signs) is the plural of آیة which means, a sign, token, or mark by which a person or thing is known or recognized; it properly signifies any apparent thing inseparable from a thing not equally apparent, so that when one perceives the former, one knows that one also perceives the latter which one cannot perceive by itself; it also means a miracle, a wonder. The word is also used in the sense of a sentence; a part of speech; a verse (Lane & Aqrab).

کتاب (Book) means, anything written; a book; a prescribed law (Aqrab). See also 2:54.

حکمة (Wisdom) is derived from حکم (hakama). They say, حکمه i.e. he prevented or restrained him (from acting in an evil manner). حکم بالامر means, he judged and decreed in the matter. حکم (hakuma) means, he became wise (Aqrab). حکمةmeans, what prevents or restrains one from ignorant behaviour; knowledge or science; knowledge of the true nature of things; wisdom or wisdom under­lying a commandment; an action according to the requirements thereof (Mufradat & Lane).

یزکیھم (purify them) is derived from زکی (zakka) which again is derived from زکا meaning, he or it grew and increased and developed; he or it be­came purified. زکی means, he purified; he caused to grow and increase. تزکیة means, the act of purifying and increasing (Aqrab).

العزیز (the Mighty) is derived from عز i.e. he was or became mighty, potent or powerful; or high, elevated or illustrious; or hard and resisting. عزیز means, mighty and powerful or high and elevated; or hard and resisting. It also sometimes means, distressing or grievous. العزیز used as the attributive name of God means, the Mighty Who overcomes everything; the Incomparable or Unparalleled (Lane). See also 2:207 and 5:55.

الحکیم (the Wise) is derived from the same root from which حکمة (for which see above) is derived. حکیم means, possessing knowledge or science or wisdom; wise; a sage; a philosopher; a physician; one who performs or executes affairs firmly, soundly, thoroughly, skilfully and well. الحکیم is one of the names of God meaning the All-Wise (Lane). Applied to the Quran the word would signify the book that is full of wisdom and is free from all defect and imperfection, having no incongruity or unsoundness; or the book which judiciously decides religious differences.

Commentary:

In this verse which is one of the most important, attention is drawn to the prayer of Abraham when he was leaving his wife Hagar and his son Ishmael to live in the arid valley of Mecca. The great prayer was to the effect that God might raise from among the Meccans a Prophet, who should (1) lay before the people Signs of God that may carry conviction to their minds; (2) teach them the Law of God; (3) initiate them into the philosophy of divine commandments, because until the wisdom underlying a commandment is brought home, one does not feel disposed to attend to it, but rather looks upon it as a burden, as was the case with the Christians who, unable to understand the underlying wisdom of the Mosaic Law, began to look upon it as a curse (Rom. 4:15; Gal. 3:13); and finally (4) purify the lives of men and open out to them the avenues of progress. See also 2:152.

This prayer of Abraham, offered from the very depth of his heart, was fulfilled in the person of the Holy Prophet. The wonderful way in which the Holy Prophet combined in his person the four characteristics mentioned in this prayer is a fact of history to which even his most hostile critics have testified. By universal consent the Prophet of Islam has been acclaimed as "the most successful Prophet".

The fact that Abraham did not here pray for many Prophets, but for one Prophet only shows that while offering this prayer, he had in view a very great Prophet, a Master-Prophet who was to transcend all. This prayer of Abraham has been applied by the Holy Prophet to himself. He is reported to have said انا دعوة ابراھیم i.e. "I am the prayer (personified) of Abraham" (Jarir & ‘Asakir).

As mentioned in the introductory remarks in the beginning of this chapter, the verse under comment serves as a summary of the entire chapter which is not only an enlargement of the subject matter of this verse but treats its various subjects in exactly the same order in which they have been mentioned in this verse, i.e. first come the Signs, then the Book, then the Wisdom of the Law, and last of all the means of national progress.

It may be of interest to note here that the Quran speaks of two separate prayers of Abraham—one about the progeny of Isaac and the other about that of Ishmael. The former prayer has been mentioned in 2:125 and the latter in the verse under comment. In his prayer about the progeny of Isaac, Abraham asks that Imams or Reformers may be raised from among them, but he makes no mention of their special work or status—they are ordinary Reformers who will follow one another for the reformation of the Israelites. On the other hand, when Abraham prays about the progeny of Ishmael, he begs his Lord to raise among them a special Prophet with a specific and lofty mission. Again, when God answers the first-mentioned prayer of Abraham, He does not make any mention of the Reformers to be raised but leaves their appearance to be inferred only by implication; but He does make a pointed reference to the fact that in spite of these Reformers, the Israelites will end as transgressors. On the contrary, God makes no such mention about the progeny of Ishmael, thereby hinting that after the Promised Prophet has been raised, their glorious days will continue till the end of the world. This is indeed a marvellously true portrait of the two branches of the House of Abraham.

In making mention of the prayers of Abraham in verses 127 to 130 the Quran makes an allusion to the fact that Abraham did not only pray for the prosperity of the children of Isaac but also for the posterity of Ishmael, his firstborn. When the offspring of Isaac lost the gift of prophethood on account of their evil deeds, the next descendants of Abraham were the children of Ishmael and thus the Promised Prophet must belong to the House of the latter. In order to point out that the expected Prophet was to be an Ishmaelite, the Quran makes mention of the construction of the Ka‘bah by Abraham and Ishmael and of the prayers offered by Abraham for the posterity of his eldest son.

To this natural conclusion Christian critics generally bring forward two objections (1) that the Bible makes no mention of any promise having been made by God to Abraham concerning Ishmael, and (2) that, admitting that God did make such a promise, there is no proof of the fact that the Prophet of Islam was descended from Ishmael.

As regards the first objection, it should be borne in mind that even if the Bible be shown to contain no prophecy about Ishmael, the absence of such a mention in it cannot be considered as conclusive testimony that such a prophecy was not actually made. It is no secret that Sarah, the mother of Isaac, hated Ishmael and his mother, Hagar. This hatred of their mother for the House of Ishmael was inherited by her sons, the Israelites (Gen. 16:12). In these circumstances it would be idle to search for any express prophecy in favour of Ishmael and his progeny in the Bible; particularly when it was for a long time subjected to all sorts of interference on the part of the Israelites. Moreover, if the Biblical evidence can be taken to establish the existence of a promise about Isaac and his sons, why should not the evidence of the Quran and, for that matter, of the children of Ishmael, be accepted to establish the fact that promises were held out by God to Ishmael and his sons also. But the undeniable fact is that the Bible does contain references to the future prosperity of the sons of Ishmael similar to those it contains about the sons of Isaac. The following are some of these references:

(1) "And God said unto Abraham, thou shalt keep my covenant, therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations. This is my covenant, which ye shall keep between me and you and thy seed after thee; every man child among you shall be circumcised" (Gen. 17:9, 10). This covenant was made with Abraham before the birth of Isaac and after Ishmael had been born, which shows that it applied to Ishmael and his children.

(2) "And the angel of the Lord said unto her (Ishmael’s mother), I will multiply thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude. And the angel of the Lord said unto her, Behold, thou art with child and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; because the Lord hath heard thy affliction. And he will be a wild man (it appears that here some expression like "Arab" or the dweller of a desert country, has been translated as "wild"); his hand will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren"; i.e., although all will constantly oppose him and be jealous of him, yet he will succeed (Gen. 16:10-12).

(3) Further evidence of Ishmael and his posterity being included in the covenant which God established between Himself and Abraham and his seed after him is furnished by Gen. 17:6-8 which says, "And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee. And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee and to thy seed after thee the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God." Now, has not the land of Canaan remained in the possession of the Ishmaelites for over 1,300 years? If the Arab Muslims are not the seed of Abraham, why has Canaan continued in their possession for so long?

(4) Again in Gen. 17:18-20, we read:

"And Abraham said unto God, O that Ishmael might live before thee! and God said,…And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee. Behold I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation." It will thus be seen that the promises made for Ishmael are similar to those made for Isaac; nay, they are even greater in number, for, with regard to Ishmael, God says, (a) "I have blessed him"; (b) "I will make him fruitful"; (c) "I will multiply him exceedingly"; (d) "twelve princes shall he beget"; and (e) "I will make him a great nation".

(5) Further evidence of the fact that Ishmael was included in God’s covenant is furnished by the fact that circumcision which was instituted by God as a token of His covenant with Abraham and his seed after him, has continued among the descendants of Ishmael. Though Islam also enjoined it, yet it was already in vogue among the Arabs, which shows that they were the seed of Abraham and were consequently included in the covenant of which circumcision was instituted as a symbol.

In order to exclude Ishmael from God’s covenant, Christian writers sometimes bring forward the plea that the offspring of a handmaid cannot be included in Abraham’s seed. But this is entirely baseless; for, even conceding, for the sake of argument, that Ishmael’s mother was a handmaid, it has been clearly said with reference to Ishmael: "And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation because he is thy seed" (Gen. 41:13).

The above-quoted verses of the Bible show (1) that Ishmael was born according to the promise of God given to Abraham before Ishmael’s birth; (2) that God blessed Ishmael and his mother, Hagar; (3) that He promised to make Ishmael and his mother fruitful and to multiply them exceedingly; (4) that God was with Ishmael; and (5) that the covenant of God with Abraham about the circumcision of every male child among his progeny applied to Ishmael and his children.

As a matter of fact, the promise made to Ishmael does not differ very much from that made to Isaac; they are both to be blessed, both to be made fruitful, the descendants of both to multiply exceedingly and both are to be made great nations, and kingdom and dominion is promised to the progeny of both. So when the nature of the promise made to both the brothers does not substantially differ, the kind of reward granted to the children of Isaac will have also to be admitted for the children of Ishmael. It would be wrong to think that as in Gen. 17:21 it is written that God will establish His covenant with Isaac, so Prophets were meant to be raised from among his children only, for a similar covenant was made with Abraham even before the birth of Isaac, and this clearly applied to Ishmael. This covenant is contained in Gen. 17:10, 11 according to which Ishmael was circumcised at the age of 13 and thenceforward circumcision became a religious rite with the posterity of Ishmael. It is therefore beyond any shadow of doubt that the covenant referred to above was intended for the children of Ishmael quite as much as for the children of Isaac. This fact has even been admitted by some eminent Christian writers of established authority (The Scofield Reference Bible, p. 25).

So far about verbal promises. Now let us see how God practically treated Ishmael. We read in Gen. 21:14-20, "And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a bottle of water, and gave it unto Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her away: and she departed, and wandered in the wilderness of Beer-Sheba. And the water was spent in the bottle, and she cast the child under one of the shrubs. And she went, and sat her down over against him a good way off, as it were a bowshot: for she said, Let me not see the death of the child. And she sat over against him, and lifted up her voice, and wept. And God heard the voice of the lad; and the angel of God called to Hagar out of heaven, and said unto her, What aileth thee, Hagar? Fear not; for God has heard the voice of the lad where he is. Arise, lift up the lad, and hold him in thine hand; for I will make him a great nation. And God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water; and she went, and filled the bottle with water, and gave the lad drink. And God was with the lad; and he grew, and dwelt in the wilderness, and became an archer."

This shows that God rendered miraculous help to Ishmael and brought into existence a well of water for his sake. It is now for the Christians to show what extraordinary thing God wrought for Isaac that may be compared with this. In the above passage it is also said that "God was with the lad", which means that Ishmael grew up under the special protection of the Lord.

Further evidence of the fact that Ishmael was looked upon as the seed of Abraham, on a par with Isaac, is furnished by the following circumstances:

In Gen. 25:6, we read that when Abraham grew old and was nearing his end, he sent away the sons of the concubines. And then the Bible goes on to say: "And these are the days of the years of Abraham’s life which he lived, an hundred three score and fifteen years, and Abraham gave up the ghost, and died in a good old age, an old man full of years; and was gathered to his people. And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah." (Gen. 25:7-9). Now, if Ishmael was also treated as the offspring of a concubine, he ought to have been treated as the other children, who were the issue of concubines, were treated. But such was not the case; for when Abraham died, the children of the concubines were away and only Ishmael and Isaac were present, and both of them participated in the burial ceremony of their father. This shows that Ishmael was not treated as the offspring of a concubine, but was looked upon as the equal of Isaac and was treated accordingly.

In reply to the second objection that even if the covenant be understood to include the sons of Ishmael, it is yet to be proved that the Holy Prophet belonged to the House of Ishmael, the following points may briefly be noted:

(1) The best way to know the origin of a race is to refer to the traditions and the testimony of the race itself; and, as we all know, the Quraish, the tribe to which the Holy Prophet belonged, always believed and declared themselves to be the descendants of Ishmael and this claim was recognized by all the people of Arabia.

(2) If the claim of the Quraish and, for that matter, that of other Ishmaelite tribes of Arabia, to Ishmaelite descent had been false, the real descendants of Ishmael would have protested against such a false claim; but no such objection is known to have been ever raised.

(3) In Gen. 17:20 God had promised to bless Ishmael, to multiply his progeny, to make him a great nation and the father of twelve princes. If the people of Arabia are not his descendants, where is the promised nation? The Ishmaelite tribes of Arabia are indeed the only claimants in the field,

(4) According to Gen. 21:8-14 Hagar had to leave her home in order to satisfy the vanity of Sarah. If she was not taken to Hedjaz, where are her descendants found, and which is the place of her banishment?

(5) After her banishment Hagar dwelt in the wilderness of Paran (Gen. 21:21). Christian writers have tried to prove that Paran is Feiran near Jebel Serbal in the Sinai Peninsula. But the great English commentator of the Old Testament, who devoted his whole life to the study of the Bible, Dr. S. R. Driver, has had to confess after all that "the site of Paran, from which the wilderness derives its name, is, however, unknown" (Deut. p.4). On the contrary, the Arab geographers are all agreed that Paran is the name given to the hills of Hedjaz (Mu‘jamul-Buldan).

(6) We are told that the generations of Ishmael "dwelt from Havilah unto Shur" (Gen. 25:18) and the phrase "from Havilah unto Shur" designates the opposite extremes of Arabia (Bib. Cyc. by J. Eadie, London, 1862).

(7) The Bible calls Ishmael "a wild man" (Gen. 16:12) and the word اعرابی (A‘rabi) "a dweller of the desert" conveys almost the same sense.

(8) Even Paul has admitted Hagar’s connection with Arabia (Gal. 4:25).

(9) Kedar was a son of Ishmael and it is admitted that his descendants settled in the southern part of Arabia (Bib. Cyc. London, 1862).

(10) Prof. C. C. Torrey says: "The Arabs were Ishmaelites according to the Hebrew tradition…The 'twelve princes' (Gen. 17:20) subsequently named in Gen. 25:13ff, represent Arabian tribes or districts; notice especially Kedar, Duma (Dumatul-Jandal), Teima. The great nation is the people of Arabia." (Jewish Foundation of Islam, p.83).

(11) Similarly, the learned authors of the Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature, New York, (1877, p. 685) admit that "the Arabs, from physical characteristics, language, the occurrence of native traditions…and the testimony of the Bible are mainly and essentially Ishmaelites."

(12) Lastly there is the opinion of Narsai, a Syrian writer who lived about a hundred years before the birth of the Holy Prophet. Mingana quotes Narsai as saying: "The raid of the sons of Hagar was more cruel even than famine, and the blow that they gave was more sore than disease; the wound of the sons of Abraham is like the venom of a serpent and perhaps there is a remedy for the poison of reptiles but not for theirs—let us always blame the foul inclination of the sons of Hagar, and specially the people (the tribe) of Kuraish who are like animals." (Leaves from Three Ancient Qurans, edited by the Rev. A. Mingana, D.D. Intro. xiii).

In the face of these conclusive proofs both the objections, that (1) Ishmael was not included in the covenant which God made with Abraham, and that (2) Ishmael did not settle in Arabia or that the Holy Prophet of Islam was not a descen-dant of Ishmael, fall to the ground.

Before passing on to the next verse a brief reference to Hagar, mother of Ishmael, will not be out of place here. C. J. Ellicott, Lord Bishop of Gloucester, says in his Commentary: "Hagar…was to be, not Abraham’s concubine, but his wife" (Vol. 1, p. 69). The Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan ben Uzziel tell us that "Sarah…took Hagar…and set her free, and gave her to Abraham, her husband, to wife" (Translation by J. W. Etheridge, London, 1862, p. 205). This setting free of the "handmaid" or "bondwoman" does not imply that Hagar was a barbarian slave or that she was a slave from her very childhood. Sir Leonard Wooley says that she was a "civilised creature sprung from the second great centre of culture in the ancient world" (Abraham, London, 1936, p. 144).

"According to Midrash", says another authority, "Hagar had been given as a slave to Abraham by her father, the Pharaoh of Egypt, who said, "My daughter had better be a slave in the house of Abraham, than mistress in any other" (Translation of the Targums by J. W. Etheridge, note 8, on page 204).

2:204; 8:46; 62:11.

Commentary:

The word کما meaning "even as" has been used to connect this verse with the preceding one by pointing out that God will bestow upon the believers the favours mentioned in the preceding verse even as, or just as, He has favoured them with a Prophet.

With a slight change in the arrangement of the words this verse refers to the work of the Holy Prophet in exactly the same words in which Abraham prayed to God about the appearance of a Prophet among the Meccans (2:130), which clearly shows that Abraham’s prayer had found fulfilment in the person of the Holy Prophet. The change in arrangement is that, while recounting the favours of God, this verse, unlike verse 2:130, mentions the work of purification before that of the teaching of the Book and Wisdom, because though in theory the teaching of the Book may come first, in actual practice purification is more important than the teaching of the Book and Wisdom; for whereas the former is the end, the latter is simply the means to that end.

Another difference between this verse and 2:130 is that whereas the latter ends with the words, Thou art the Mighty, the Wise, the former concludes with the words, And (he) teaches you that which you did not know. The reason for this change is not far to seek. Abraham had used the words, Surely, Thou art the Mighty, the Wise, in his prayer, meaning that God being Mighty, it was not difficult for Him to accept his prayer; and as He was also Wise, He knew best what the requirements of his posterity would be. But when God spoke of the actual fulfilment of this prayer, it was quite unnecessary to repeat these words. So in place of the above-quoted words, the words, (he) teaches you that which you did not know, have been added to signify: firstly, that, while accepting the prayer God had granted even more than Abraham had prayed for; and secondly, that the teachings of the Holy Prophet were far in advance of the teachings of the former Prophets and were such as the world really needed but had not so far known.

Important Words:

فاذنوا (then beware of) is derived from اذن. They say اذن له i.e. he gave ear or listened to it or him; he permitted, or allowed him. أذن بالشیء means, he knew the thing; or he became informed or apprised of it. آذنه بالامر means, he made him to know the thing; or he notified or announced it to him. أذن (adhdhana) or تأذن (ta’adhdhana) means, he made known or notified or announced (Lane).

حرب (war) is from حرب. They say حربه i.e. he despoiled him of his wealth and property, leaving him without anything. حرب (hariba) means, he became greatly angry, or wrathful. الحرب means, war; hostilities (Aqrab).

رؤس اموالکم (your original sums). رؤس is the plural of رأس meaning: (1) head; (2) the upper or higher part or end of a thing; (3) chief or leader of a society. رأس الشھر means, the first day of the month. The word رأس also signifies the thing itself; as they say ھوقسم برأسه i.e. this is an independent species in itself. رأس المال means, the original sum without interest; principal; capital. The Arabs say اقرضنی عشرة برؤسھا i.e. he lent me a loan of ten pieces of money without interest (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

The verse declares that the taking of interest is tantamount to waging war against God. It may be inferred from this that those among Muslims who lend money at interest, should be boycotted by the rest of the community. History bears testimony to the fact that such Muslim States as borrowed or lent money at interest were ruined.

It is often objected that no trade or commerce is possible without interest. This is not correct. There is no natural relation between trade and interest. The latter has become unconsciously associated with the former, as Western countries have based their commercial system on credit. If this had not been so, commerce would not have been dependent upon interest. Only a few hundred years ago, Muslims were responsible for a large part of the world’s commerce, and yet they carried it on without interest. They used to borrow money even from the poorer classes by way of partnership loans, and the commerce carried on by them thus contributed directly to the welfare of those classes. Interest is not at all essential for commerce, but as commerce is now being carried on, on the basis of interest, it appears as if without interest it would come to a standstill. No doubt, a change in the system would at first be inconvenient but the system of commerce depending upon interest can certainly be discarded.

Interest is, in fact, a leech which is fast sucking away the blood of humanity, especially of the lower and middle classes. Even the upper classes are not entirely secure against its poison, but they are deriving a false enjoyment from it like the proverbial leopard who ate away his own tongue by rubbing it against a rough stone, foolishly thinking it to be the blood and flesh of another animal. Unfortunately those who are willing to forego it are too weak to withstand the force of the current system.

The system of credit prevailing in Western countries is destructive to the peace of the world in two ways. On the one hand, it helps the accumulation of wealth in a few hands and, on the other, it facilitates war. No government can be imagined as entering upon a great war unless it relies upon its ability to raise money by means of loans carrying interest. Long and devastating wars are made possible only by the institution of interest. If huge loans on interest were not possible, many countries would refuse to enter what appeared to be a long war; and if they entered such wars at all, they would certainly hasten to withdraw from them long before they actually terminated, for their treasuries would become empty and their people would revolt in protest against the criminal waste of men and money. But the system of what appear to be easy loans makes it possible for governments to carry on ruinous struggles as they are able to obtain the sinews of war without having to resort to a system of direct taxation. The people of belligerent countries do not, at the moment, feel the burden which is laid on their backs, but after the war is over their backs are bent double under the staggering weight of national debts and future generations are kept busy reducing the weight. Take, for instance, the case of the last Great War. If huge loans had not been possible, the result of the war would still have been the same, but the devastation and the heavy indebtedness of the different countries would have been avoided. Nay, the War itself might have been avoided; and even if it had taken place, the belligerents would soon have been exhausted, peace would have been signed within a year, and the world would have proceeded on its forward march of progress. A worse fate is perhaps awaiting the Western countries at the termination of the present World War.

43:60; 61:7.

5:111.

Important Words:

اخلق (I fashion out) is derived from خلق. They say خلقه meaning: (1) he measured it, or he determined its measure or proportion (e.g. they say خلق الادیم meaning, he determined the leather with a view to cutting it); (2) he designed or fashioned or planned it; (3) he made it according to a certain measure or design; (4) He (God) produced or created or brought into existence a thing or being without there being any previously existing pattern or model or similitude, i.e.He originated it; (5) he forged or fabricated a story or a lie; (6) he made a thing smooth, even and equable (Lane & Lisan).

الطین (clay) is derived from طان i.e. he made his work or deed good; he performed or executed his work or deed well. طانه الله علی الخیر means, God created him with a disposition or adaptation to that which is good, i.e. created him with a good natural disposition. طانه means, he coated or plastered it with clay or mud. طین means, clay, earth, mould, soil or mud. طینةmeans, any material sub-stance of which anything having form consists; the natural constitution or disposition of a thing. The term ابن الطین is sometimes used to signify Adam (Lane). Figuratively الطین may signify such persons as possess docile natures suitable for being moulded into any good shape like pliable clay.

الطیر (bird) which is the plural of طائر (a bird) and is also sometimes used as singular is derived from طار i.e. (1) he or it flew or moved in the air by means of wings; (2) he or it ran or moved quickly or fled. طار عقله means, his reason fled. طارت الابل means, the she-camel conceived. طار لکل منھم سھمه means, the share of each came to him. الطیر or طیر is both the plural of طائر (bird) and the noun infinitive from the verb طار. So طیر means: (1) flying birds, insects, etc.; (2) a flying bird, insect, etc., for طیر is sometimes also used as singular; (3) as an infinitive noun طیر would also give the different meanings conveyed by its verbal forms (Lane).

ھیئة (manner) is the noun infinitive from ھاء. They say ھاء الرجل meaning, the man was or became of good form and appearance or other properties denoted by ھیئة, the noun infinitive. ھاء الیه means, he desired or longed to see or find him or it. ھیأه means, he gave him or he made him have a garb or guise, etc.; he prepared or arranged it and put it in a good state. تھیأ لامر means, he became prepared for the thing, or the matter. ھیئة means, form, fashion, appearance or figure; guise or garb; state, condition or case; manner, mode or quality (Aqrab & Lane).

ابری (I heal) is derived from بری i.e. he was or became clear or free from a thing. بری من المرض means, he became free from disease, i.e. he recovered from it. بری من الدین means, he became clear of debt. ابرأه means, he cured or healed him of the disease; he declared him innocent or free from the defect attributed to him; he acquitted him (Aqrab & Lane).

الاکمه (blind) is derived from کمه i.e. he became blind; or his eyes did not see at night. کمه فلان also means, he was or became deprived of reason or understanding. کمه النھار means, the day became dark, i.e. the sun became overcast with clouds. اکمه means, one who cannot see at night; one who is born blind; one who becomes blind afterwards; one who is deprived of reason and understanding (Aqrab & Mufradat).

ابرص (leprous) is derived from برص i.e. he was or became affected with برص (leprosy) viz. a sort of whiteness that appears upon parts of the body by reason of a corrupt state of health or constitution. The moon is sometimes called الابرص because of its white hue. ارض برصاء means, a land of which the herbage has become depastured at several places so that it has become bare thereof (Aqrab & Lane). A variety of leprosy of the Hebrews (probably identical with modern leprosy) was characterized by the presence of smooth, shining, depressed white patches or scales, the hair on which participated in the whiteness, while the skin and adjacent flesh became insensible (Webster).

تاکلون (you will eat) is derived from اکل i.e. he ate; he ate up; he devoured; he consumed; he wore away, etc. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said, امرت بقریة تاکل القری i.e. I have been commanded to migrate to a town (Medina) which shall devour, (i.e. subdue and conquer) other towns (Lane).

Commentary:

With this verse begins an account of Jesus’ ministry as a Prophet of God. By using the words, a Messenger to the Children of Israel, the verse makes it clear that Jesus’ mission was confined to the House of Israel. He was not a universal Messenger. In fact, as the Gospel itself states, he expressly ordered his disciples not to preach his message to any but the Israelites: "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel' " (Matt. 10:5, 6). It cannot be argued that this prohibition was confined to the lifetime of Jesus and that after his death his disciples were at liberty to preach to all the nations of the world, for this supposition is belied by the Gospel itself: "But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the son of man be come" (Matt. 10:23). According to this verse, the followers of Jesus were enjoined to confine their preaching to the Children of Israel till the time of his second coming. The same injunction is contained in Matt. 15: 24; 18: 11, 12; 19: 28; Acts 3: 25, 26; 13: 46; Luke 19: 10; 15: 4; 22: 28-30.

Only in Matt. 28:19 there appears some ambiguity about the mission of Jesus but on deeper reflection it becomes clear that here too it is the tribes of Israel that are meant, and not all peoples and all nations. The early disciples understood these words of Jesus in this very sense: "Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only" (Acts 11: 19).

For a clear understanding of the other parts of the present verse, i.e. making birds of clay, etc. it is necessary to remember that it was Jesus’ habit to talk in parables—a way of talking which was predicted in the previous Scriptures to be a characteristic of his speech. Says the Gospel: "All these things spake Jesus unto the multitudes in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables" (Matt. 13:34, 35). Later historians also have referred to this peculiar characteristic of Jesus: "In his popular addresses Jesus would make free use of parables. He spoke in parables to all classes but especially to the people. Without parables he was not wont to speak to them" (Enc. Bib. under Jesus). With this torchlight of history in our hands, it does not remain difficult for us to understand or explain the "signs" of Jesus as mentioned in the present verse.

There is no mention in the Bible of the miracle of creating birds popularly believed to have been performed by Jesus. If Jesus had really created birds, there is no reason why the Bible should have omitted to mention it, particularly when the creation of birds was a miracle the like of which had never been shown before by any Messenger of God. The mention of such a miracle would certainly have established his superiority over other Prophets and would have lent some support to the claim to divinity which has been foisted upon him by his later followers. Of the different meanings of خلق i.e. measuring, determining, designing or fashioning; making and creating, etc. given under Important Words above, it is in the former sense that this word has been used in this verse. In the sense of "creating'', the act of khalq has not been attributed in the Quran to any other being or thing except God. In fact, the Quran has laid the greatest emphasis on this exclusive attribute of God Who has been again and again declared to be the sole "Creator" of all things. All others to whom creation has been attributed are declared by the Quran to have been themselves created by God and to be devoid of all power to create anything (e.g. see 13:17; 16:21; 22:74; 25:4; 31:11, 12; 35:41 and 46:5). Even the silly notion that the power of creating though the unshared prerogative of God, might have been temporarily delegated by Him to another is rejected by the Quran (39:30 & 16:72).

In the light of the above explanation, and keeping in view the figurative sense of "clay", for which see Important Words above, the clause, I will fashion out for you a creation out of clay after the manner of a bird, then I will breathe into it (a new spirit) and it will become a soaring being, would mean that if ordinary men of humble origin but possessing the inherent power of growth and development came into contact with Jesus and accepted his message they would undergo a complete transformation in their lives. From men grovelling in the dust and not seeing beyond their material cares and mundane concerns, they would become converted into birds soaring high into the lofty regions of the spiritual firmament. And this is exactly what happened. The humble and despised fishermen of Galilee, under the impact of the ennobling teaching of their Master, began soaring like birds, preaching to the world of Israel the word of God and bravely facing all sorts of hardships and privations and making sacrifices that should adorn the history of any nation. Says Jesus: "I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, and what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?" (Matt. 6:25, 26).

The miracle relating to the making of birds from clay may be interpreted in another way as well. In the time of Jesus people had a special liking for the practice of occult sciences —hypnotism, mesmerism, etc. So it is possible that God granted him special power of this kind in order to impress the people and make them believe in him. In this case the sign of making birds would mean that Jesus made small clay models of birds and then through a sort of mesmerism made them appear to fly in the air. But this did not convert them into real living birds; for as soon as the influence was removed, they fell down to the ground like so many lumps of earth. This miracle of Jesus was more or less like the miracle of the rod of Moses which was temporarily made to look like a real serpent but was actually not so. But whatever the significance of the sign, it was performed, as the verse clearly puts it, by the command of Allah, and Jesus possessed no power of creation. (For fuller description see Izalah’-e-Auham by Ahmad, the Promised Messiah).

As for healing the blind and the leprous, it appears from the Bible that persons suffering from certain diseases (leprosy, etc.) were considered unclean and were, therefore, not allowed to come in contact with other men. If, therefore, the word ابری be taken to mean, "I declare to be free", the clause would signify that the legal or social disabilities and disadvantages under which persons suffering from such maladies laboured were removed by Jesus. If, however, the word be interpreted as "I heal," then the clause would mean that Jesus used to heal persons suffering from these diseases. But as indicated above, Jesus used to speak in metaphors. So just as the "creation" spoken of is spiritual creation, the diseases mentioned are spiritual diseases. The Prophets of God are spiritual physicians; they give eyes to those that have lost spiritual sight, and they give hearing to those who are spiritually deaf, and they restore life to those who are spiritually dead (see also Matt. 13:15). In this case the word اکمه (blind or one who is blind at night) would stand for such person as possesses the light of faith but being weak, cannot stand trials. He sees in the daytime, i.e. so long as there are no trials and the sun of faith shines forth unclouded; but when the night comes on, i.e. when there are trials, and sacrifices have to be made, he loses his spiritual vision and stands still (cf. 2:21). Similarly, the word ابرص(leprous) would, in the spiritual sense, stand for one who is imperfect in faith, having patches of diseased skin among healthy ones. But even if these words be taken in their physical sense, Jesus is proved to possess no peculiar power. All Prophets heal diseases and ailments by the power of prayer. In this case, however, the word اکمه (blind) would be taken in the sense of one who cannot see at night or one whose sight is weak.

The clause, I will quicken the dead, does not mean that Jesus actually brought the dead to life. Those actually dead are never restored to life in this world. Such a belief is diametrically opposed to the whole Quranic teaching (23:100, 101; 21:96; 39:59, 60; 2:29; 40:12; 45:27). The sayings of the Holy Prophet are also clear on this point. For instance, it is related that when Jabir’s father, who was a Companion of the Holy Prophet, was killed in the Battle of Uhud and the lad was much grieved, the Holy Prophet consolingly told him that God had lovingly spoken to his father in the other world and had asked him to beg of Him anything he liked, for that would be given to him. Thereupon Jabir’s father said, "Grant me, my Lord, another lease of life on earth that I may again be killed in Thy way". God replied, "I would certainly have done so, but the word has gone forth from Me that the dead shall not be sent back to the earth" (Tirmidhi & Majah).

That the so-called dead who are reported to have been raised by Jesus were not actually dead is clear from the Gospels as well. The incident described in Matt. 9:23-25 sheds some light on it. As a matter of fact, Prophets are only sent to give life to those who are spiritually dead. Jesus, Moses, Abraham and, above all, the Holy Prophet of Islam brought about a complete change in the lives of their followers. This, in religious language, is termed raising the dead to life. Literally, too, the word موتی (the dead) does not necessarily mean those physically dead. It is also used about those who are dead spiritually, morally or intellectually. The Quran freely speaks of the quickening of the dead in the sense of granting life to the spiritually dead (e.g. 3:28; 6:123; 8:43; 25:50; 36:71). In 8:25 the Holy Prophet himself has been spoken of as giving life to the dead. Says the Quran: O ye who believe, respond to Allah and the Messenger when he calls you that he may give you life. Here it is spiritual and intellectual life that is meant, for Muslims do not believe that the Holy Prophet ever brought an actually dead person to life.

The miracles of Jesus, as mentioned in this verse, have been stated in a natural order. First of all is mentioned the change in the outlook and way of life of those that came in contact with him. From men of the world, they became men of God. They rose from the dust and began soaring in the air. Then are mentioned some of the more common spiritual diseases of which Jesus cured the people; the blind were given spiritual sight and those having diseased skins were healed. Finally, the spiritually dead are declared to have received through Jesus a new life. Thus not only a natural order but a sort of progressive order is found in the verse, the climax, so far as individual reformation is concerned, being reached with the miracle relating to the quickening of the dead. But if the verse be interpreted literally, no arrangement seems to exist in the order in which the miracles are described here, i.e. (1) the creation of birds out of clay; (2) the healing of the blind; (3) the healing of those suffering from leprosy, i.e. those who had patches of disease on their skin; and (4) the raising of the dead to life.

The true climax, however, reaches in the miracle or sign mentioned in the clause, I will announce to you what you will eat and what you will store up in your houses. According to Abul-Baqa’, the words نبأ (news) and انبأ (he gave the news) are used in the Quran for announcing matters of great importance (Kulliyyat). This shows that, what Jesus is here represented as announcing to the people, are matters of supreme im-portance to his followers. The language of the verse being parabolic, the word تاکلون (you will eat) will be taken figuratively, mean, "you will subdue or conquer" (see under Important Words above). Thus the clause, I will announce to you what you will eat, would mean, "I will let you know what you will subdue or conquer", i.e. "I will announce to you the conquests you are destined to make in future". The other expression, i.e. I will also let you know what you will store up in your houses, would mean, "I will let you know the deeds which you should or would leave behind for posterity".

The entire clause may have yet another meaning. It may mean that Jesus told his disciples: (1) what they should eat, i.e. what they should spend to meet their physical needs, and (2) what they should store up, i.e. what they should lay up as a spiritual treasure in Heaven. In other words, Jesus told them that their earnings should be honestly and lawfully acquired and that they should spend their savings in the way of God, having no thought for the morrow which should be left to God (see Matt. 6:25, 26 as quoted above).

5:13.

Important Words:

میثاق النبیین (covenant from the people through the Prophets) literally means, Covenant of the Prophets. According to Arabic usage, the expression اخذ الله میثاق النبیین (lit. Allah took the covenant of the Prophets) may refer either to a covenant which the Prophets of God entered into with Him, or to a covenant which God took from the people through their Prophets. In this verse, the words are used in the latter sense, which is supported by another reading of میثاق النبیین as reported by Ubayy bin Ka‘b and ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud, i.e. میثاق الذین اوتوا الکتاب meaning, the covenant of those who were given the Book (Muhit). This rendering is supported by the words that follow, i.e. and then there comes to you a Messenger fulfilling what is with you, because it was to the people and not to their Prophets that the Messenger of God came. The meaning given above gains further support from the fact that as other Prophets were dead at the time of the Holy Prophet, they could naturally render him no help and there was thus no sense in taking any covenant from them to this effect.

Commentary:

This verse is considered to apply to other Prophets in general and to the Holy Prophet in particular. Both applications are correct. The verse lays down a general rule. The advent of every Prophet takes place in fulfilment of certain prophecies made by a previous Prophet in which he enjoins his followers to accept the next Prophet when he makes his appearance. If the Prophet comes in fulfilment of the prophecies con-tained in the scriptures of one people only, as was the case with Jesus and other Israelite Prophets, then only that people are bound to accept and help him; but if the scriptures of all religions predict the coming of a Prophet, as in the case of the Holy Prophet, then all nations are bound to accept him.

The Holy Prophet appeared in fulfilment of the prophecies not only of the Israelite Prophets (Isa. 21:13-15. Deut. 18:18; 33:2. John 14:25, 26; 16:7-13) but also of the Aryan seers and Buddhist and Zoroastrian sages. We have the following prophecy in Dasatir, the sacred Scripture of the Parsis: "When the people of Iran will begin to do such, (i.e.evil) deeds, there shall appear from among the Arabs a man whose followers shall abolish the crown, the throne, the kingdom, and the religion of Iran. The headstrong shall become humble and a house without idols shall take the place of idol-houses and fire-temples, and to it shall they turn their faces in worship" (Safrang Dasatir, p. 188, Siraji Press, Delhi). The words are too clear to need comment. A similar prophecy is found in Jamaspi, a work of Jamaspi, the first successor of Zoroaster (Jamaspi, published by Nizamul-Masha’ikh, Delhi, 1330 A.H.).

The word مصدقا (fulfilling; for the meaning of which see 3:42) has been used here to denote the criterion by which a true claimant to prophethood is distinguished from a false one. But if the word is taken in the sense of "verifying or confirming or declaring to be true" as is sometimes done, this verification or confirmation can be no test of knowing a true Prophet from an impostor, for even an impostor can declare the previous scriptures to be true. The word has, therefore, been rightly translated here as "fulfilling" for it is only by "fulfilling" in his person the prophecies contained in the previous scriptures that a claimant can prove his truth, it being beyond the power of an impostor to fulfil the previous prophecies in his person.

4:147, 176.

Commentary:

The words, who holds fast to Allah, have two meanings: (1) whoever preserves himself from sin by acting on God’s commandments; (2) whoever connects himself with Allah and cleaves firmly to Him, thereby securing for himself an everlasting source of rise and progress.

5:76.

2:144, 218; 5:55; 47:39.

Commentary:

As already mentioned (3:122), the false report was spread at Uhud that the Holy Prophet was killed. The verse refers to this incident and purports to say that although the report about the death of the Prophet was untrue, yet even if it had been true, that should not have made the Faithful waver in their faith. Muhammad was only a Prophet; and as other Prophets before him had died, so would he. But the God of Islam ever lives.

It is also on record that when, seven years later, the Holy Prophet died, ‘Umar stood up in the Mosque at Medina with a drawn sword in his hand, and said, "Whoever will say that the Prophet of God is dead, I will cut off his head. He is not dead, but has gone to his Lord, (i.e. he has ascended to heaven) even as Moses had gone to his Lord, and he would come back and punish the hypocrites." At this stage, Abu Bakr, who happened to be away at the time of the Prophet’s death, hurriedly came back, went straight into the Prophet’s chamber and, seeing that he was really dead, kissed his forehead, saying, "Sweet art thou in death as thou wert in life, and surely God will not bring on thee two deaths." Then he came out, strong and firm, asked ‘Umar to sit down and, addressing the Companions, who were gathered in the Mosque, recited to them this very verse, i.e. Muhammad is only a Messenger; verily all Messengers have passed away before him; if then he die or be slain, will you turn back on your heels? meaning, that in the circumstances it was no wonder that the Holy Prophet also had passed away. Hearing this timely recital, ‘Umar, and all others, were convinced of the death of the Holy Prophet and were overpowered with grief. Thus, the verse incidentally proves that the Prophets that lived before the Holy Prophet had all died; for if any of them had been alive, the verse could not have been quoted as proof of the Holy Prophet’s death.

The verse also negates the idea that any Prophet has risen to heaven; for it was used to falsify ‘Umar’s contention to the effect that the Holy Prophet was not dead but had risen to heaven. The verse thus proves, without a shadow of doubt, that Jesus too, who was one of the Prophets that had appeared before the Holy Prophet, is not physically alive in the heavens, as some present-day Muslims, following the Christian belief, erroneously think. He is certainly dead, as proved by this verse and the consensus of the Companions’ opinion on the occasion of the death of the Holy Prophet.

In fact, religion does not depend on any personality. It belongs to God alone. That is why the Quran says that if the Holy Prophet dies or is killed, it will be no ground for Muslims to turn away from Islam; for the Prophet is only a Messenger and the religion is God’s. Elsewhere, however, the Quran clearly says: And Allah will protect thee from men(5:68). These two verses are not at variance with each other. What the Quran intends to emphasize in the verse is the fundamental truth of Islamic teachings. Muslims had seen how pure and true these teachings were. Their truth was evident and they could not have become false even if the Holy Prophet had been slain. For instance, the fundamental teaching of Islam is the Unity of God. Now, this truth could not become an untruth if the Prophet were killed. But apart from this announcement in principle, the Prophet could not be killed, for God had definitely promised to protect him.

It should also be remembered that immunity from being murdered is not given in the Quran as a criterion of a Prophet’s truth. People are required to accept a Prophet in his lifetime, and, therefore, they must have proofs of his truth in his lifetime, so that, by witnessing them, they may believe in him. They cannot wait till the time of his death in order to know whether he is a true or a false claimant.

Once a Prophet has furnished clear proofs of his truth in his lifetime, his claim is established and nothing can undo those proofs. Only if a Prophet were murdered before he had been able to give any proof of his truth could we conclude that he had proved a failure and was not a true claimant. But such a thing has never happened.

The enemy rejoiced when the report went round that the Prophet had been slain, but that supposed death of the Prophet turned out to be the veritable "life" of Islam. It fulfilled a great purpose. It prepared Muslims for the actual passing of the Holy Prophet. If this event had not occurred, the death of the Holy Prophet would have proved an unbearable trial for Muslims. In fact, this painful experience brought in disguise many blessings for Islam. At the Battle of Uhud, it brought to light the unshakable faith of the believers; at the time of his death it served to save Islam from going to pieces; and now that Islam is to all appearances dead, it is serving as a means of breathing new life into it, by proving that Jesus, whom Christians have deified, is dead, like all other Prophets that lived before Islam.