Topic: Holy Prophet(sa) As A

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.

See 2:137.

3:148, 194; 60:6.

Important Words:

غفرانك (Thy forgiveness). غفران is the noun-infinitive from غفر for which see 2:59 and 2:200. غفران on the part of God signifies, covering man with mercy and forgiveness and saving him from the punishment of sins. It is used in the infinitive form for the sake of emphasis, words like "I or we implore" being understood before it.

Commentary:

The mention of the believers along with the Prophet has a special significance in the verse; the purifying influence of the Holy Prophet has brought into existence a class of men who have become purified both in belief and in deeds, thus fulfilling the object for which the Prophet for whom Abraham had prayed was to make his appearance.

Good deeds are indeed the principal means for the attainment of purification, but they have their origin in the purity of the heart, which can be attained only by holding true beliefs. Hence, the verse details the fundamental points of belief which the Holy Prophet taught his followers, i.e. belief in God and His angels and His Books and His Messengers, mentioned in their natural order.

Among the points of belief detailed here, one is that true believers say, We make no distinction between any of His Messengers. This means that true believers should accept all the Messengers of God, without exception, and should make no distinction between them by accepting some and rejecting others. There is in this, food for thought for those Muslims who reject the Promised Messiah, Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement, whom God raised in fulfilment of the prophecies of the Holy Prophet and who came to demonstrate the truth of Islam, by cogent reasons and powerful signs.

Another very important means of attaining purification is prayer. The verse represents true believers as offering prayer to God in the ennobling words, We hear and we obey. We implore Thy forgiveness, O our Lord, and to Thee is the returning. This prayer contains four basic elements of purification: (1) man should ever be prepared to listen to God’s commandments; (2) he should be ever ready to obey His commandments, whatever the circumstances; (3) he should always be asking for God’s forgiveness for his sins and shortcomings; and (4) he should never forget that he will one day return to, and stand before, his Maker and will render an account of his works.

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.

4:60.

Important Words:

حرجا (demur) is the noun-infinitive from حرج meaning, it was or became narrow; or he became disquieted and contracted in his bosom; he doubted, because doubt disquiets the mind; he became straitened or in difficulty, particularly owing to the commission of a sin or crime for which he deserved punishment; حرجا therefore means, straitness; difficulty; a sin or crime or an act of disobedience for which one deserves punishment (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

It should be noted that the injunction contained in this verse does not refer to the Holy Prophet alone. The verse speaks of the settlement of disputes, and so the injunction contained in it should be taken to pertain not to the person of the Holy Prophet but to him as Head of the Muslim State and is, therefore, applicable to his Successors as well. Muslims should not only have their disputes settled in accordance with the Law of Islam but should submit to the awards of those in authority with cheerfulness. The injunction is most essential for the maintenance of solidarity among the Muslim community. In fact, the chief cause of discord in a community is that people should regard their own judgement as right and should refuse to give to those in authority their due. The verse requires the Faithful not only to refer their differences to the Holy Prophet, and for that matter to his Successors, deputies and representatives, but to submit to their decisions cheerfully and without demur.

4:14; 8:25.

1:7; 5:21; 19:59; 57:20.

Important Words:

مع (among) is a common word of the Arabic language denoting concomitance. It means "with" or "among", etc. signifying the being together of two or more persons both literally and figuratively. The word مع thus denotes (1) concomitance of two or more persons in one place; or (2) concomitance of two or more persons at one time; or (3) concomitance of two or more persons in position, rank or status.

The word also implies the sense of assistance, as in the verse إن الله معنا i.e. Allah is with us, which means, God is our Helper (Mufradat).

Commentary:

The verse is important inasmuch as it describes the avenues of spiritual progress open to Muslims. The four spiritual ranks: (1) the Prophets (2) the Truthful (3) the Martyrs and (4) the Righteous can be attained only by following the Holy Prophet. This is an honour reserved for the Holy Prophet alone. No other Prophet shares it with him. The inference is further supported by the verse which speaks of Prophets generally and says, And those who believe in Allah and His Messengers, they are the Truthful and the Martyrs in the presence of their Lord (57:20). When read together these two verses purport to mean that whereas the followers of other Prophets could only rise to the rank of the Truthful and the Martyrs, and no higher, the followers of the Holy Prophet can achieve even higher ranks; viz. they can rise to the rank of a Prophet also.

Some critics take exception to the particle مع rendered as "among" but generally taken to mean "with" and allege that a follower of the Holy Prophet will only be placed "with" the Prophets and not "among" them. Apart from what has been said under Important Words, if the particle مع be taken to denote that a follower of the Holy Prophet is merely joined to and placed with these four classes of men, without actually becoming one of them and without attaining their rank, it will follow from the construction of the verse that not only no person, by following in the footsteps of the Holy Prophet, can attain to the rank of a Prophet but also that he cannot even attain the rank of a Siddiq (Truthful) or a Shahid (Martyr) or a Salih (Righteous) but that he can only be joined to and placed with the people holding these ranks without himself attaining to their spiritual status, which is simply absurd. It is evident that the preposition مع rendered as "among" governs all the four nouns equally viz. the Salihin, the Shuhada’, the Siddiqin and the Nabiyyin, the four having been linked together in one chain. So what holds good in one case should hold good in the other cases as well. Hence, if according to this verse a person can attain the rank of a Salih (Righteous) by following the Holy Prophet of Islam, he can also attain the rank of a Prophet. If we deny the rank of a Prophet to the followers of the Holy Prophet, we will have to deny to them the rank of the Righteous also.

Besides, as shown under Important Words, it is wrong to say that the preposition مع always denotes merely being physically joined to or placed with a class of people physically without attaining to their position or rank. The word has been used at several places in the Quran in the sense of فی i.e. "among" or "from among" (see 3:194 and 4:147). In the latter verse, i.e. 4:147, God says that those of the hypocrites, who repent and amend, will be مع المؤمنین i.e. "among the believers". Now by no stretch of imagination can it be presumed that these people will only "be placed with the believers" and will not form part of them. The verse thus definitely proves that the word مع has been used here in the sense of فی or "among" and in no other sense. So is the case with 3:194. It is exactly in this sense that it has been used in the present verse. If, in the above-mentioned verses in which the word مع occurs, it is taken to give the sense of mere companionship, these verses would become meaningless. Certainly, it can give no comfort to a believer to be told that as a reward of his submission to God and the Holy Prophet, he would be merely made to sit in the company of the Prophets, the Truthful, the Martyrs and the Righteous, without attaining the spiritual rank they attained. That the preposition مع is not always used in the sense of companionship finds a further illustration in the words which the Holy Prophet is reported to have uttered just before his death viz. ألحقنی بالرفیق الاعلی i.e. "O God, join me with the exalted companions" (meaning the class of the Prophets in Heaven). Now does this prayer of the Holy Prophet offered at the time of his death mean that he only wished to live in the company of these exalted personages and that he himself was not a Prophet of God?

Support for the above-mentioned wrong inference is sometimes sought from the words, this grace is from Allah, occurring in the succeeding verse. The word "grace", it is alleged, indicates that what these people will get will be purely through God’s grace and not as any reward or result of their own works and deeds. But the question: Did the Prophets, the Truthful, the Martyrs and the Righteous attain their high spiritual stations independently of the "grace" of God? Did not the Holy Prophet himself, when asked whether he would get salvation by his deeds, say that he, too, would receive it through the "grace" of God? (Bukhari, ch. on Marda). Does this reply of the Prophet mean that he did not "deserve" salvation? In fact, the truth is that every blessing that one receives is a "grace" of God, in spite of the fact that it is the actions of man that draw this grace.

It may here be pointed out that the interpretation we have put on the verse under comment is not a new one. AbuHayyan, the well-known author of Bahrul-Muhit and Ar-Raghib, the great lexicographer, agree with this view. The Bahrul-Muhit (vol. iii, p. 287) quotes Ar-Raghib as saying: "God has divided the believers into four classes in this verse, and has appointed for them four stages, some of which are lower than the others, and He has exhorted true believers not to remain behind any of these stages." This explanation shows that both these commentators of the Quranheld that, as hinted in this verse, the rank of prophethood was attainable by following the Holy Prophet. Similarly, the author of the well-known commentary Ruhul-Ma‘ani in explanation of this verse, writes as follows: "Prophethood is of two kinds, general and special. The special prophethood, viz. the Law-bearing prophethood is now unattainable; but the general prophethood still continues." In fact, it is only the prophethood with a new Law that has now ceased, the Quran being the final Law of God, but prophethood without a new Law continues and is certainly attainable by the followers of the Holy Prophet who has himself said: "If my son Ibrahim had lived, he would have become a Prophet" (Majah, ch. on Jana’iz).

It may also be noted that even if the word مع is rendered as "with" and not as "among", it will not make much difference, for the word "with" very often gives the sense of being one of the party. When you are with a people, you are one of them. Even in English the word "with" is used in that sense. For fuller discussion of the subject of prophethood, see 33:41.

Finally, the word "companions" occurring at the end of the verse should not be construed to mean that mere companionship is meant here; for the expression has been used to hint at an additional significance, viz. that those who sincerely and truly follow God and His Messenger will not only rank among the Prophets, etc., but will also form a sort of company or brotherhood with them.

2:5, 137; 4:163; 5:60.

4:151.

4:117.

Commentary:

In the clause: O ye who believe, believe in Allah and His Messenger… the first-mentioned belief refers to lip-profession and the second to true and genuine belief which really matters. The words thus show that sometimes expressions like "O ye who believe" or "believers" may be used for those who profess to be believers in Islam but do not live up to its teachings by carrying out faithfully its precepts into practice. Their assertion is a mere lip-profession that carries no weight.

2:137; 3:85; 6:85-88.

17:56.

Commentary:

زبورا (a Book) signifies any writing or book; or a book that is confined to intellectual science exclusive of legal statutes or ordinances. الزبور signifies particularly the Book of the Psalms of David (Lane & Aqrab). See also 3:185.

Commentary:

Typical Prophets have been mentioned here and in the succeeding verse to point out that the mission of the Prophet of Islam was not a new thing, the specific mention of زبور, the Book of wisdom given to David, in the present verse and of the Law-bearing revelation vouchsafed to Moses in the succeeding one, being both "Law" and "Wisdom".

29:49; 42:53; 62:3.

48:30.

See 3:105.

Important Words:

امی (Immaculate One) is derived from ام. They say امه i.e. he repaired to it; or he aimed at or sought after it; or he endeavoured to get it. ماکنت اما ولقد اممت means, thou wast not a mother, but thou hast come to be sought like a mother. امیmeans, belonging to or pertaining to the mother, i.e. as innocent as a child at the breast of its mother. The word also means, one not having a revealed Scripture, parti-cularly an Arab; one who does not know the art of reading or writing; one belonging to Mecca which was known as ام القری i.e. the mother of towns. See also 3:21.

اغلال (shackles) is the plural of غل (ghullun) which is derived from غل (ghalla). They say غل فلانا i.e. he put upon the neck or the hand of such a one a collar or a manacle, etc. غل, therefore, means, a ring or collar of iron put upon the neck; a shackle for the neck or the hand; a pinion or manacle for the hand; a shackle of iron collecting together the two hands to the neck; a difficult and fatiguing work. The Arabs say ھذاغل فی عنقك i.e. this is tied to your neck, meaning, it is inseparable from you and the punishment of it will stick to you (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

This verse qualifies and explains the last sentence of the previous verse, viz. those who believe in Our Signs.

The verse puts the words "Messenger" and "Prophet" side by side which may lead some to think that one may be a Messenger without being a Prophet or vice versa. But this is not so. A رسول (Messenger) of God is also a نبی (Prophet) of God. The former epithet is applied to him in his relation to God from Whom he brings a message, while the latter is applied to him in his relation to men to whom he conveys that message, the word نبی (Prophet) meaning, one who prophesies, or makes known hidden secrets.

The word امی (Ummi) literally means "belonging to the mother", i.e. as innocent as a newborn child. The Promised Prophet, who is none other than the Holy Prophet of Islam, has been called امی because he was to be innocent like a child at the breast of its mother. The word has also been translated as "illiterate" or "one belonging to Mecca" or "an Arab", but "innocent" or "immaculate" is a preferable rendering, inasmuch as it is in keeping with the sense of the prophecy contained in Deut. 18:18-22 to which this verse particularly refers and wherein truthfulness has been mentioned as a distinctive feature of the Promised Prophet. For some of the prophecies of the Bible about the Holy Prophet see under 2:42 and also Matt. 23:39; John 14:16, 26; 16:7-14; Acts 3:21-24.

If the word امی be taken in the sense of "unlettered", the verse would signify that although the Prophet had received no education whatever and was quite unread and illiterate, yet God vouchsafed to him such knowledge as can impart light and guidance even to those who are considered to be most advanced in learning and enlightenment.

The illiteracy (امیة) of the Holy Prophet, mentioned in this verse and believed to have also been hinted at in 10:17, has been subjected to much hostile criticism. George Sale, a well-known Christian commentator of the Quran, writes as follows: "For so old was Muhammad before he took upon him to be a Prophet, during which time his fellow-citizens well knew that he had not applied himself to learning of any sort, nor frequented learned men, nor had ever exercised himself in composing verses or orations, whereby he might acquire the art of rhetoric or elegance of speech" (Prelim. Disc, Section II).

Referring to this view of Sale, another Christian commentator of the Quran, the Rev. E. M. Wherry, says:

"This view, however, does not agree with what is recorded of his previous career. Is it likely that he should have been trained in the same household with ‘Ali, who knew both how to read and write, and not have received similar instruction? Could he have conducted an important mercantile business for years without some knowledge of letters? That he could read and write in later years is certain. Tradition tells us, he said to Mu‘awiyah, one of his secretaries: 'Draw the ب straight, divide the س properly', etc., and that in his last moments he called for writing materials. The question arises, when did he acquire this art? The commentators say that God gave him the power, as he did his inspiration, and they quote chap. xcvi. 4, one of the earliest verses of the Quran, in proof. Certainly that verse seems to teach clearly that he could write as well as read, though it by no means teaches that he had not received the knowledge of both beforehand, or that he did not receive it in the ordinary way. His use of amanuenses does not militate against his knowledge of the art of writing, for such use of amanuenses was common in that age, even among the most learned. But still there remains the testimony of many traditions and the almost universal belief of Muhammadans. How account for this? I am inclined to think it originated with a misunderstanding of Muhammad’s repeated claim that he was the "Illiterate Prophet", or rather the "Prophet of the Illiterate", the term "illiterate" being generally applied by the Jews to the Arabs. See notes on chap. v. 85, 86. This misunderstanding turned out to the furtherance of Muhammad’s claims, inasmuch as the miracle of the matchless style of the Quran was enhanced by the consideration that the Prophet was illiterate. On the whole, we think there is very good reason for believing Muhammad to have been acquainted with the art of both reading and writing from an early period in his life" (Commentary of the Quran, ii. 326).

The above constitutes the gist of Wherry’s criticism of the generally accepted view that the Holy Prophet was امی or illiterate. But this contention seems to possess no substance. It is indeed a poor argument to say that because the Prophet "had been trained in the same house with ‘Ali, who knew both how to read and write", therefore he should also have learnt reading and writing. It only betrays ignorance of elementary facts of the Holy Prophet’s life on the part of the reverend gentleman. Even a desultory acquaintance with the life history of the Holy Prophet should make one know that ‘Ali and the Holy Prophet could not be brought up together. There was a great difference between the ages of the two. The Prophet was no less than 29 years older than ‘Ali; therefore, it was impossible for the two to be trained and brought up together.

Those whom prejudice against the Holy Prophet has not blinded to the patent facts of history know that, let alone the Prophet being educated and trained together with ‘Ali, which the great disparity in their ages evidently obviated, it was ‘Ali who got his training in the house and under the fostering care of the Holy Prophet (Hisham). Abu Talib in whose house the Holy Prophet was brought up was a man of very meagre means. He did not know the value of learning and knowledge nor was their possession regarded as an asset and acquisition in his time. The Holy Prophet, therefore, remained illiterate in his house. But ‘Ali was brought up in the house of the Holy Prophet himself, whose marriage with Khadijah, a wealthy lady of great repute, had placed ample means at his disposal. The Prophet also fully realized how priceless a thing good education was. So under his benign care and ennobling influence, ‘Ali, judged by the standards of that time, naturally grew up to be a young man of good education.

Wherry’s second objection is that if the Holy Prophet had been illiterate and did not know how to read and write, he could not have proved such a successful business man as he actually was. This objection is born of the mistaken concept of a good and successful Arab business man of the Prophet’s time. Judging by the present European standards of a successful business man, Wherry thought that lack of education and success in business could not go together. He would not have made this objection if he had known that in Asia even in the present twentieth century, highly successful business men are to be found who have not received even elementary education. In Mecca, in the Holy Prophet’s time, education was not much in favour. There were very few persons there who could read and write, though hundreds carried on most successful and flourishing business. Education was not at that time regarded in Arabia as the sine qua non of a good business man. Moreover, the fact that Khadijah had given the Prophet, a slave named Maisara who knew reading and writing and who always accompanied him on his trade journeys, knocks the bottom out of Wherry’s objection.

The tradition which says that the Holy Prophet had once asked Mu‘awiyah to write correctly the letters ب and س does not seem to be quite reliable. In the ‘Abbasid period many traditions derogatory to the Umayyads were forged. This tradition seeks to show off Mu‘awiyah, a prominent member of the distinguished House of Umayyah, as a man of very poor education who could not even write properly such simple letters as ب and س. Even, however, if this tradition be proved to be reliable, it does not show that the Holy Prophet was literate, because he had become so used to dictating the Quran that it was not impossible for him to have become familiar with the general form of letters and to give instruction regarding an improperly written word. It is also possible that someone, while rehearsing some portion of the Quran to the Prophet, might have stopped at a certain place, not being able to decipher the writing, and the Holy Prophet having asked the cause of stopping, the reader might have replied that the delay was due to the letters ب and سnot having been written properly or legibly. This might have led the Holy Prophet to instruct Mu‘awiyah to see that the letters were written correctly.

The fact that the Holy Prophet sent for pen and paper in the last moments of his life also lends no support to Wherry’s assumption. It is an established fact of history that whenever any verse was revealed, the Holy Prophet used to send for pen and paper and dictate to one of his scribes what had been revealed to him. The mere sending for pen and paper cannot, therefore, prove that the Holy Prophet himself knew how to read and write.

Nor do the words, referred to by Wherry in support of his contention viz. "read in the name of thy Lord", prove anything. The Arabic word اقرء (read) used in the verse referred to above not only means the reading of a written thing, but also repeating and rehearsing what one hears from another person. Again, the words ھویحسن القراءة (i.e. he recites well) occurring in a tradition can be spoken of even of a blind man who can recite the Quran properly and well. Moreover, the Hadith establishes the fact that when, at the time of the first revelation, the angel Gabriel said to the Prophet اقرء(read), no writing was actually placed before him to read. He was simply asked to repeat orally what the angel was reciting to him. The word قراءة not only means to read a writing but to repeat orally or recite or rehearse what another man has uttered.

Wherry’s inference that the idea that the Holy Prophet could not read or write originated with a misunderstanding of his repeated claim that he was the "Illiterate Prophet", is as strange as it is ill-based. It is really very surprising to say that those with whom he had lived day and night for years could not find out that he was illiterate but were misled into this belief only by his own repeated claim that he was امی (illiterate). Only a man of Wherry’s hostile attitude could come to such a conclusion. The question is whether it was the Prophet’s own contempor-aries who suffered from this misunderstanding or those who came afterwards. If it were the former, then the question would naturally arise how those, who saw him daily with their own eyes reading and writing, could possibly fall victims to the glaring misunderstanding that he was illiterate. If it were the latter class, even then the whole theory of misunderstanding advanced by Wherry looks frivolous, because the argument put forward by him is that because the Holy Prophet was considered to be illiterate, therefore, the matchless style of the Quran was regarded as a miracle. This inference is both foolish and flimsy, inasmuch as Muslims and other contemporaries of the Prophet, who were fully aware that he knew quite well how to read and write, could never believe in such a miracle.

Wherry’s last argument in support of his contention, that "his (the Holy Prophet’s) use of amanuenses does not militate against his knowledge of the art of writing, for such use of amanuenses was common in that age, even among the most learned," betrays his ignorance of Arab and Islamic history. The fact is that there were no ulema or learned men among the Arabs in the time of the Holy Prophet in the sense in which this word is understood now, nor were they used to keeping amanuenses and scribes. There is no instance on record of an amanuensis having been kept by an Arab. We know of only one learned man among the Meccans in the Prophet’s time, viz. Waraqah bin Naufal, and he was his own secretary. It is a pity that in their zeal for misrepresenting Islam, some Christian writers do not even hesitate to invent historical facts.

The words, and remove from them their burden and shackles, occurring in the latter part of the verse, contain a hint that by accepting the Promised Prophet Christians will get rid of the curse of the original sin of Adam and Eve and of the punishment thereof which, according to them, has dogged their footsteps through no fault of theirs.

21:108; 25:2; 34:29.

2:259; 23:81; 44:9; 57:3.

Commentary:

This verse beautifully declares that the prophecies of the Old and New Testaments concerning the Promised Prophet have been fulfilled in the Holy Prophet.

The reference in the words, to Whom belongs the kingdom of the heavens and the earth, is to the fact that just as there is one kingdom in the heavens, so, as a result of the advent of the Holy Prophet, there will in future be only one spiritual kingdom on earth. It is to this kingdom that the prayer of Jesus (Matt. 6:10) refers. This prayer embodied a prophecy about the advent of the Holy Prophet.

The establishment of one spiritual kingdom on earth points to the fact that the Promised Prophet will be a Messenger of God to all mankind, and that by his advent all distinctions of race, nationality and colour will cease.

3:32.

Commentary:

The Battle of the Ditch perhaps constituted the hardest ordeal in the Holy Prophet’s whole career and from that supreme test he emerged with enhanced moral stature and prestige. In fact, it is in time of danger, when all around is dark, or in the hour of success and victory when a person’s enemy lies prostrate at his feet, that his real mettle is tested, and history bears an eloquent testimony to the fact that the Holy Prophet was as great and noble in time of distress, as he was in the hour of success. The Battles of the Ditch, Uhud and Hunain shed a flood of light on one beautiful facet of his character, and the Fall of Mecca on the other. Peril and danger did not discourage or dismay him nor could victory and success spoil him. When left almost alone on the day of Hunain, with the fate of Islam hanging in the balance, he fearlessly and single-handed advanced into the enemy’s ranks with the memorable words on his lips, viz. انا النبی لاکذب انا ابن عبدالمطلب i.e. "I am the Prophet of God and I am telling no lie. I am the son of ‘Abdul-Muttalib." And when Mecca fell and the whole of Arabia lay prostrate at his feet, absolute and undisputed power failed to corrupt him. Says Rev. Bosworth Smith:

"Now would have been the moment to gratify his ambition, to satiate his lust, to glut his revenge. Read the account of the entry of Mohammed into Mecca side by side with that of Marius or Sulla into Rome. Compare all the attendant circumstances, the outrages that preceded, and the use made by each of his recovered power and we shall then be in a position better to appreciate the magnanimity and moderation of the Prophet of Arabia. There were no proscription lists, no plunder, no wanton revenge. From a helpless orphan to the ruler of a big country was a great transition; yet the Holy Prophet retained the nobility of his character under all circumstances" - ("Mohammed and Mohammedanism").

What greater testimony could there possibly be to the Holy Prophet’s nobility of character than the fact that those who were nearest to him and knew him most, loved him most and were the first to believe in his mission—his dear wife Khadijah, his life-long friend Abu Bakr, his cousin and son-in-law ‘Ali, his freed slave Zaid. The Prophet was humanity’s noblest specimen and a perfect model in beauty and beneficence. In all the various facets of his variegated life and character he stands unrivalled and an excellent exemplar for men to copy and follow. His whole life lies before the floodlight of history. He started life as an orphaned child and ended with being the arbiter of the destinies of a whole nation. As a boy he was sedate and dignified and at the threshold of youth he was a perfect example of moral virtue, righteousness and sobriety. In middle age he won the title of Al-Amin, i.e. the trusty and truthful, and as a businessman he proved himself to be most honest and scrupulous. He married ladies both much older and much younger than himself and all of them swore by his faithfulness, love, and godliness. As a father he was most affectionate, and as a friend most loyal and considerate. When entrusted with the great and difficult task of reforming a corrupt society and subjected to persecution and exile, he bore it all with dignity and decorum. He fought as a soldier, and commanded armies. He faced defeat and won victories. He legislated and decided cases. He was a politician, a statesman, a teacher and a leader of men. Head of the state as well as of the Church he was, as a great writer has described him, Caesar and Pope in one; but he was Pope without the Pope’s pretentions, and Caesar without the legions of Caesar. Without a standing army, without a bodyguard, without a palace, without a fixed revenue, if ever any man had the right to say that he ruled by a right Divine, it was Muhammad, for he had all the power without its instruments and without its supports. He would do his household work with his own hands, would sleep upon a leathern mat and his menu consisted of dates and water or barley-bread, and after having done a full day of multifarious duties, he would spend the hours of night in prayer and supplication till his feet got swollen. No man under so vastly changed circumstances and conditions had changed so little. To quote Rev. Bosworth Smith again:

"On the whole, the wonder is not how much but how little, under different circumstances, Mohammed differed from himself. In the shepherd of the desert, in the Syrian trader, in the solitary of Mount Hira, in the reformer in the minority of one, in the exile of Medina, in the acknowledged conqueror, in the equal of the Persian Chosroes and the Greek Heraclius, we can still trace substantial unity. I doubt whether any other man whose external conditions changed so much, ever himself changed less to meet them."

Such was Muhammad, the Holy Prophet of Islam whom the verse under comment describes as an excellent exemplar and a perfect model and as humanity’s unerring guide for all time. The Holy Prophet’s goodness and greatness indeed stand unrivalled and unmatched, incomparable and unapproachable.

Important Words:

خاتم النبیین (Seal of the Prophets). خاتم (Khatam) is derived from ختم. They say ختم الشیء او ختم علیه i.e. he sealed, stamped, impressed or imprinted the thing or he put the seal on it. This is the primary signification of this word. Or the primary signification of ختم (khatmun) is the act of covering over the thing. It also signifies the protecting of what is in a writing by marking or stamping a piece of clay upon it, or by means of a seal of any kind. ختم الشیء also means, he reached the end of the thing. ختم القرآن means, he recited the whole of the Quran. This is the secondary meaning of the word. Thus خاتم(khatam) means, a signet-ring; a seal or stamp and a mark; the end or last part or portion and result or issue of a thing; the hollow of the back of the neck. The words ختم (khatmun) and خاتم (khatim and khatam) are almost synonymous and mean a signet. خاتم (khatam) also signifies, embellishment or ornament, the best and most perfect (Lane, Aqrab, Mufradat, Fath & Zurqani). So the expression خاتم النبیین would mean, the Seal of the Prophets; the best and most perfect of the Prophets; the embellishment and ornament of the Prophets. Secondarily, the expression may also mean, the last of the Prophets.

Commentary:

Much confusion and misunderstanding seems to prevail as to what is the real spiritual status and position of the Holy Prophet as indicated by the expression خاتم النبیین i.e. the Seal of the Prophets. A careful study of the context, however, removes the prevalent misconception. At Mecca when all the Holy Prophet’s male children died in their childhood, his enemies taunted him with being أبتر (one who has no male issue), meaning that in the absence of male heirs to succeed him his movement would sooner or later come to an end (Muhit). In answer to this taunt of disbelievers it was emphatically declared in Surah Al-Kausar (الکوثر) that not the Holy Prophet but his enemies would remain issueless. After the revelation of Surah Al-Kausar the idea naturally found favour with the early Muslims that the Holy Prophet would be blessed with sons who would live to an adult age. The verse under comment removed that misconception inasmuch as it declared that the Prophet is not, never was, nor will ever be the father of any grownup young men (رجالmeaning grown-up young men). The verse under comment while appearing to be in conflict with Surah Al-Kausar in which not the Holy Prophet but his enemies have been threatened with being issueless, in reality seeks to set at rest doubts and misgivings to which this seeming contradiction gives rise. It says that the Holy Prophet is رسول الله i.e. the spiritual father of a whole Ummat and he is also خاتم النبیین signifying that he is the spiritual father of all the past and future Prophets. So when he is the spiritual father of all the believers and all Prophets, how can he be said to be أبتر i.e. issueless. But if the expression be taken to mean that the Holy Prophet is the last of the Prophets and that no Prophet will come after him, then the verse appears to be out of tune with the context and instead of refuting the objection of disbelievers that the Holy Prophet was issueless, supports and reinforces it.

Briefly, according to the meaning of the word خاتم the expression خاتم النبیین can have four possible meanings:

(1) That the Holy Prophet was the Seal of the Prophets, i.e. no Prophet, past or future, can be regarded as true unless his prophethood bears the seal of the Holy Prophet. The prophethood of every past Prophet must be confirmed and testified to by the Holy Prophet and nobody can attain to prophethood after him except by being his أمتی (follower). All claims to prophethood must be judged and tested by reference to the revelation received by the Holy Prophet and to his teachings.

(2) That the Holy Prophet was the best, the noblest and the most perfect of all the Prophets and that he was also a source of embellishment for them (Zurqani, Sharah Mawahibul-Ladunniyya).

(3) That the Holy Prophet was the last of the Law-bearing Prophets. This interpretation has been accepted by many eminent Muslim theologians, saints and savants such as Ibn ‘Arabi, Shah Wali-Allah, Imam ‘AliQari, Mujaddid Alif Thani, etc. According to these great scholars and saints، no Prophet can come after the Holy Prophet who should abrogate his Millah or should not be in his Ummah (Futuhat, Tafhimat, Mukatabat & Yawaqit wal Jawahir). ‘A’ishah, the talented spouse of the Holy Prophet, has removed all ambiguity about the meaning of the expression خاتم النبیین. She is reported to have said: قولوا انه خاتم النبیین ولا تقولوا لا نبی بعدہ i.e. Say that he (the Holy Prophet) is خاتم النبیین but do not say that there will be no Prophet after him (Manthur). This saying of ‘A’ishah makes it quite clear that the expression خاتم النبیین and لانبی بعدہ were considered by her to be contradictory to each other in meaning and significance.

(4) That the Holy Prophet was the last of the Prophets, but only in this sense that all the qualities and attributes of prophethood found their most perfect and complete consummation and expression in him; خاتم in the sense of being the last word in excellence and perfection is of common use.

Moreover, the Quran clearly speaks of the advent of Prophets after the Holy Prophet. The following two verses leave no ambiguity on this point:

And whoso obeys Allah and this Messenger of His shall be among those on whom Allah has bestowed His blessings, namely, the Prophets, the Truthful, the Martyrs and the Righteous. And excellent companions are these (4:70).

O children of Adam! if Messengers come to you from among yourselves, rehearsing My Signs come unto you, then whoso shall fear God and do good deeds, on them shall come no fear nor shall they grieve (7:36).

The Holy Prophet himself was clear in his mind as to the continuity of prophethood after him. He is reported to have said: "If Abraham (his son) had lived long, he would have been a Prophet" (Majah, Kitabul-Janai’z), and, "Abu Bakr is best of men after me, except that a Prophet should appear" (Kanzul-‘Ummal).

Commentary:

The verse by way of introduction to the main subject makes a brief reference to two great Israelite Prophets, Moses and Jesus, one the Founder, and the other the great exponent of the Jewish Dispensation.

If the word القریة in the preceding verse may be taken as referring to Mecca, the two Messengers mentioned in the verse under comment will be Abraham and Ishmael.

The reference in the words "a third," in the expression "We strengthened them by third," seems to be to the Holy Prophet who testified to the truth of both Moses and Jesus and also to that of Abraham and Ishmael. The word ثالث (a third) has been used as a نکرة in order to signify the greatness of the third Prophet, the Holy Prophet.

The Holy Prophet "strengthened" Moses and Jesus, also Abraham and Ishmael by testifying to the truth of their missions and by fulfilling in his person the prophecies they had made about his advent (Deut. 18:18 & Matt. 21:33-46).