Topic: Prophecies About

6:21.

2:175; 5:16; 6:92.

Important Words:

یعرفون (recognise) is derived from عرف which means, he knew or recognized or perceived a thing. Though the word is also used of such knowledge as is derived through the senses, it is particularly used of such knowledge as is obtained by thinking and meditating (Mufradat & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The pronoun hu (him or it) occurring in the clause "recognise him or it" may be taken as referring either to the change of Qiblah or to the Holy Prophet. The clause means that the People of the Book know, on the basis of the prophecies found in their Scriptures, that a Prophet would appear among the Arabs and that he would be connected with the Ka‘bah.

The sentence, some of them conceal the truth knowingly, refers to the learned men of the Jews who were well versed in their scriptures and knew the prophecies relating to the advent of the Holy Prophet of Islam but deliberately suppressed those prophecies in order to conceal them from the people.

Commentary:

The Prophet referred to in this verse is the Holy Prophet of Islam and not Moses; for wherever the Quran used the word النبی (the Prophet), it invariably refers to the Holy Prophet. Even the Jews referred to him as "that Prophet" (see John 1:21, 25), i.e. the Prophet whose advent had been foretold in Deut. 18:18.

The verse means to say that if Jews had accepted the Holy Prophet and acted upon the Quranic principle that when making friends with others those who are nearer in faith should be given preference over those who are not, they would never have preferred idolaters to Muslims as friends; for, while the latter have most things in common with them and believe in all their Prophets, the former do not. In contravention of this great principle, however, Jews, to their own detriment, not only chose to make friends with idolaters in preference to Muslims, but even declared the former to be better guided than the latter (4:52).

2:147.

Commentary:

This verse describes the second way by which God bears testimony to the truth of the Holy Prophet, i.e. through the previous Scriptures. The previous Books contain prophecies which clearly apply to the Holy Prophet and definitely point him out as the Promised One, and it is by means of these prophecies that God bears witness to the truth of the Holy Prophet. It may be asked, if the People of the Book recognize the Holy Prophet as having come in fulfilment of the prophecies contained in their scriptures, why do they not accept him? This question the Quran answers in the words, But those who ruin their souls will not believe, meaning that the People of the Book will not believe because their souls are lost and they have no sense of honesty and faith left in them.

The words, Those to whom We gave the Book recognize him as they recognize their sons, are based on a very deep spiritual truth. A Prophet, or for that matter any object of faith, is not recognized in the beginning, as one recognizes the sun or the moon. He is recognized only as a father recognizes his son with great probability but not with dead certainty. Faith must always begin in the region of the unseen.

2:254; 4:165.

Important Words:

تجلی (manifested Himself) is derived from جلا . They say جلاالامر i.e. the affair was or became clear, manifest, displayed, uncovered or laid open. تجلی الشیء i.e. the thing became manifest or apparent. تجلی الشیء used transitively means, he looked at the thing standing upon a higher position. The Quranic expression فلماتجلی ربه للجبل means, when his Lord became manifest to the mountain, i.e. when He manifested Himself on the mountain (Lane & Aqrab).

دکا (pieces) is the noun-infinitive from دك i.e. he broke or crushed or pounded a thing. They say دك الارض i.e. he made even the elevations and depressions of the earth. دکته الحمی means, fever weakened him. دك , therefore, means, an even or level place; a land broken and made even; a crumbled mountain; a mound or hill or dust or earth such as is a sandhill. The Quranic words جعله دکا means, He made it even or level; or He made it crumbled (Lane).

Commentary:

This verse sheds light on one of the most important religious subjects—whether it is possible for one to see God with the physical eyes. The verse lends no support to the view that God is visible to the physical eyes. Let alone seeing Him, the human eye cannot even see angels. Says the Quran: If God had appointed as Messenger an angel, He would have made him appear as a man (6:10). As we cannot see angels but only a manifestation of them, similarly we can see only a manifestation of God, and not God Himself. It is, therefore, inconceivable that a great Prophet of God like Moses with all his knowledge of the attributes of God, should have desired an impossibility. Moses knew that he could see only a manifestation of God and not God Himself. But he had already seen a manifestation of God in "the fire" when travelling from Midian to Egypt (28:30). What then did Moses mean by his request to see God, contained in the words, My Lord, show Thyself to me that I may look at Thee? The request seems to refer to the Perfect manifestation of God that was not granted to Moses but was to take place at the time of the Holy Prophet of Islam who was to be a مثیل or like of Moses. Indeed, Moses had already been given the promise that there was to appear, from among the brethren of the Israelites, a Prophet in whose mouth God was to put His word (Deut. 18:18-22). The words in which the promise was given implied a greater manifestation of God than had been vouchsafed to Moses. So Moses was naturally anxious to see what sort of God’s Glory and Majesty the promised Manifestation would be. He, therefore, wished that something of that Glory and Majesty might be shown to him. But a manifestation of that Glory was beyond the capacity of Moses to bear; it could not take place in or upon his heart. He was, therefore, asked to see a manifestation of it taking place at the Mount. But this should not be understood to mean that the Mount was to serve as a receptacle for the Great Glory: for, according to the Quran (33:73), the heart of Moses was certainly more capable of enduring it than the Mount. The Mount thus served only as the site or locality where that great manifestation was to take place. But even this proved too much for the Mount which shook violently.

The effect on the Mount was similar in nature to that produced on a Companion of the Holy Prophet when the latter’s head happened to be resting on his thigh at a time when a revelation descended on the Prophet. He felt such a heavy weight on his thigh that he feared that it would be crushed under it. Moses, too, could not bear to see the manifestation of Divine Power and Majesty and fell down unconscious, in spite of the fact that he had been warned beforehand of the terrible quaking that was to overtake the Mount. Thus it was that Moses realised that he did not possess the capacity for that powerful manifestation of Divine glory which was to take place later through the Holy Prophet of Islam. This is why when he recovered his senses, Moses cried, Holy art Thou, I turn towards Thee, and I am the first to believe. These words meant that he had realized that he did not possess the capacity for that perfect manifestation of Divine glory which was to take place through the Promised Prophet and that he was the first believer in the great spiritual eminence which that Prophet was destined to attain. This belief of Moses in the Holy Prophet has also been referred to in 46:11.

The words, He broke it into pieces, should not be taken literally, for the Mount was not actually broken into pieces. The words are used figuratively to express the great severity of the earthquake.

It may be also noted here that Moses was told to look at the mountain, and he was also told that he would see God if it remained in its place. The laying down of this condition shows that Moses had not asked for an impossible thing; for the laying down of a condition for an impossible thing is evidently meaningless.

The words, look at the mountain, implied that he should look outside himself because the manifestations could not take place within him. The fact that Moses fell down in a swoon shows that he did witness some manifestation, though only partly and imperfectly. The manifestation that takes place in the heart is permanent and lasting, while that which takes place outside is only temporary and passing.

A reference to this request of Moses to see God is to be found in Exod. 33:18.

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.

Commentary:

The words, This is of the tidings of the unseen, are intended to hint that the Quranic accounts of the various Prophets are not meant as mere stories of the ancient peoples. They are given in the Quran because they contain a prophetic allusion to the analogous events that were to occur in the life of the Holy Prophet himself. This is what is implied in the words "the tidings of the unseen". The concluding words of the verse, i.e. "the end is for the God-fearing," lend further support to this inference. These accounts also serve to warn Muslims that they too will have to pass through the experiences of the followers of former Prophets and they warn disbelievers that they too shall meet a fate similar to that of the rejecters of past Prophets.

The words, So be thou patient, mean that just as the people of Noah were destroyed, so will a section of the Holy Prophet’s people be destroyed; and then of their seed and of the seed of their companions God will raise a people who will bear the standard of piety and righteousness in every age.

The story of the Deluge with some variations is to be found in the traditions and literature of various countries (see Enc. Rel. & Eth. Enc. Bib. & Enc. Brit. under Deluge). The importance which is attached to it and the widespread credence it commands points to its being an historical event of very great importance. It cannot be denied that a great flood did take place sometime in the remote past, that it was of an extraordinary nature and that it affected many nations of the earth. Its description as given in the Quran, however, shows that there was nothing unnatural about it.

The catastrophe seems to have taken place somewhere at the dawn of human civilization. The Holy Prophet of Islam spoke of Noah as the first Messenger of God, i.e. the first organizer of a religious community (Bukhari, ch. on Anbiya’).The Bible also represents him as such (Gen. 6:8). Hindu traditions, too, corroborate this fact, for they speak of Manu (who is the same as Noah), the Hindu hero of the Deluge, as the first man (Enc. Brit. under Manu). But they add that seven others were saved with him, which points to the fact that he was not the first man absolutely but only the first man of the first cycle of human civilization. These statements made in the Scriptures of three great religions of the world leave no doubt about the fact that Noah laid the foundations of human civilization and culture. In fact, with the progress and advance of a people in civilization, their numbers also begin to grow with a corresponding decrease taking place in the numbers of less civilized communities living with them in the same land. It is a well-known historical fact that whenever a people, comparatively more advanced in culture and civilization, have come to settle in a country, they have either blotted out of existence the less civilized inhabitants of the land or have greatly weakened them. Thus it appears that when the descendants of Noah and those of his companions, who were the founders of human civilization, spread to other lands, because they were more powerful than the people already living there, they either exterminated them or absorbed them by breaking their power. In this way they must have introduced into all the countries they subjugated their own traditions and customs; and consequently the tradition about the Deluge which naturally impressed the subjugated people must also have come to be introduced into other lands. With the lapse of time, however, the immigrants ceased to have any connection with their original home and the catastrophe consequently came to be regarded as a local occurrence, with the result that local names of persons and places came to be substituted for the original names.

In short, the Deluge was not a universal visitation, nor should the traditions of different lands be taken to point to separate floods. It was confined to one land, but owing to the immigration of the descendants of Noah and his companions to other lands, the story spread far and wide and finally the Flood came to be regarded as a local occurrence in every country.

As for the place where the Deluge occurred see note on al-Judi in v. 45.

3:45; 11:50.

Commentary:

Having finished the life story of Joseph, the Surah beautifully turns to the people of Mecca, who were like brethren unto the Holy Prophet.

This verse thus makes it clear that this account of Joseph was not a mere story. It embodied mighty prophecies relating to the future of the Holy Prophet and of Islam, for, as pointed out in the course of comments on this chapter, many important events in the life of Joseph had their counterparts in the life of the Holy Prophet.

The word "they" in the clause, while they were plotting, refers not to the brothers of Joseph, but to the people of the Holy Prophet, who is told that what he had been listening to was "of the tidings of the unseen" embodying mighty prophecies over which no human being could have any control. These prophecies must, therefore, be regarded as emanating from God Who is the Knower of all secrets.

Commentary:

The advent of the Holy Prophet and the revelation of the Quran both have been foretold in the previous Divine Scriptures. Prophecies to this effect are to be found in the religious scriptures of almost every faith but the Bible, being the best known and most widely read of all revealed Books before the Quran and also being its forerunner and in its pristine purity being its counterpart as a Book of Divine laws, contains the largest number of such prophecies. Here are some of those prophecies:

(1) I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren; like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him (Deut. 18:18-19).

(2) And he said, the Lord came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran and he came with ten thousands of saints; from his right hand went a fiery law for them (Deut. 33:2).

The reference in the above prophecy is to the conquest of Mecca when the Holy Prophet marched into that town at the head of an army of exactly ten thousand Companions, holding the Quran in his right hand.

(3) And many among them shall stumble, and fall, and be broken, and be snared, and be taken. Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples. And I will wait upon the Lord, that hideth his face from the house of Jacob, and I will look for him (Isaiah 8: 15-17).

(4) The burden upon Arabia. In the forest in Arabia shall ye lodge; O ye travelling companies of Dedanim. The inhabitants of the land of Tema brought water to him that was thirsty, they did meet with their bread him that fled. For they fled from the swords, from the drawn swords, and from the bent bow, and from the grievousness of war. For thus hath the Lord said unto me. Within a year. According to the years of an hireling, and all the glory of Kedar shall fail: And the residue of the number of archers, the mighty men of the children of Kedar, shall be diminished: for the Lord God of Israel hath spoken it (Isaiah 21: 13-17).

The reference in the above prophecy is evidently to Arabia and to the Battle of Badr when the sons of Kedar, the Quraish, suffered an ignominious defeat at the hands of Muslims and many of their great fighters and archers were killed.

(5) And thou shalt be called by a new name which the mouth of the Lord shall name (Isaiah 62: 2).

The prophecy foretells of a new people bearing a new name which will be given to them by God Himself. There is only one people in the world who have a name given to them by God and they are the Muslims. It is to the fulfilment of this prophecy that the Quranic verse clearly refers, viz. "He named you Muslims before and in this Book" (22:79).

(6) I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon. Look not upon me, because I am swarthy, because the sun hath scorched me. (Song of Solomon 1: 5-6.)

How aptly this description applies to the Holy Prophet and the Arabs!

(7) God came from Teman, and the Holy One from mount Paran, Selah. His glory covered the heavens and the earth was full of his praise…He stood, and measured the earth: He beheld and drove asunder the nations; and the everlasting mountains were scattered, the perpetual hills did bow: his ways are everlasting. I saw the tents of Cushan in affliction; and the curtains of the land of Midian did tremble (Habakkuk 3: 3-7).

In this prophecy mention has been made not only of the Holy Prophet but also of the country in which he was to make his appearance and of the great success that was to attend his mission and the military exploits of his Successors. The holy one whose praise filled the earth and who appeared from Paran was none else than Muhammad, the praised one. From his right hand went the fiery Law—the Quran. He measured the earth and drove asunder the nations and before his irresistible armies the mighty and long established empires were scattered like chaff before the wind and his Shari‘ah is to last forever.

(8) Jesus saith unto them, did ye never read in the scriptures? The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s dong, and it is marvellous in our eyes? Therefore say I unto you, The Kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder (Matt. 21:42-45).

After Jesus, the spiritual kingdom was forever taken away from the House of Israel and given to another nation—the Ishmaelites who have brought forth the right fruits thereof. The Holy Prophet was the stone which the builders rejected and which became the head of the corner. The application to him of this prophecy cannot be disputed or doubted.

(9) I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot hear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you (John 16: 12-14).

This prophecy too applies to the Holy Prophet of Islam. He was the Comforter and the Spirit of truth. He guided mankind to all truth because he brought the most complete and perfect Law. He glorified Jesus and all other Prophets of God (4:158-160). He did not speak of himself, but whatsoever he heard that did he speak. About him the Quran says: "Nor does he speak out of desire, it is naught but revelation that is revealed" (53:4-5).

Commentary:

In the immediately preceding verse a brief reference was made to some of the prophecies that are to be found in the Bible about the Holy Prophet. After this brief reference the present verse brings home to the Israelites the fact that when their learned men know that there are prophecies about the Holy Prophet in their religious scriptures, they have no justification for rejecting him. The words "the learned among the Children of Israel" may also refer to the Israelite Prophets who had made these prophecies.

In the present and the preceding five verses the following facts about the Quran have been stated:

(a) The Quran, being a revelation from the Lord of the worlds, is the last Divine Message for all mankind. (b) Having been brought down by الروح الامین (Spirit faithful to the trust), it will continue to enjoy full and complete protection from all interference and interpolation till the end of time. (c) It is from beginning to end God’s own spoken Word. (d) It has been revealed in a most expressive, eloquent and comprehensive language which is eminently fitted to express all sorts of ideas and shades of meaning. (e) Prophecies about the advent of the Holy Prophet and the revelation of the Quran are to be found in ancient religious scriptures, especially in the Bible. (f) The learned men of Israel are fully conversant with these prophecies.

In view of these facts what better proofs are needed to establish the truth of the Quran and the universality and finality of its message.

Commentary:

The verse purports to say that the prophecy of Moses about the advent of the Holy Prophet (Deut. 18:18) has been fulfilled so clearly and in such detail as if he was present in person with Moses and the latter was actually seeing him when he was making the prophecy. The verse possesses a double significance. It proves the truth of Moses himself, inasmuch as he made a prophecy about the advent of the Holy Prophet which was literally fulfilled, and it proves also the truth of the Holy Prophet, as the prophecy made by Moses about the advent of "a Prophet like unto him from among the brethren of the Israelites" was fulfilled in his person in letter and in spirit.

Commentary:

This verse alludes to two more significant facts: (1) Ages passed and a long line of Prophets appeared after Moses and they preached their messages, yet none of these Prophets ever claimed to be "that Prophet" about whom Moses had made the prophecy mentioned in Deut. 18:18, till the Quran was revealed and it claimed that the grand prophecy of Moses had been fulfilled in the person of the Holy Prophet of Islam (73:16). (2) The words "And thou wast not a dweller among the people of Midian, rehearsing Our signs unto them" refer to a striking resemblance of the Holy Prophet with Moses. According to the prophecy (Deut. 18:18) the Promised Prophet was to be like unto Moses, and what greater similarity there could be between these two noble Prophets than that Moses had to flee for life from Egypt, where he was born and brought up, to Midian where for ten long years he lived among a strange people, and then went back to Egypt, armed with Divine authority to free and reclaim his depressed people, from the bondage of Pharaoh. Likewise the Prophet of Islam had to leave Mecca where he was born and brought up and then for ten years he lived in Medina among a people who were not of his kith and kin, and again in pursuance of Divine command marched forth to conquer Mecca at the head of an army of ten thousand saints to fulfil another prophecy of the Bible (Deut. 33:2).

20:12-13; 79:17.

32:4; 36:7.

Commentary:

The present verse continues the theme of the preceding two verses and purports to say that God spoke to Moses at the side of Mount Sinai, giving him the glad tidings that a Prophet like unto him would appear among the brethren of the Israelites (Deut. 18:18). It further implies that it was not possible for the Holy Prophet first to have caused Moses to make a prophecy concerning him and then to have claimed to have come in fulfilment of that prophecy. The verse emphasizes the fact that one Prophet (Moses) made a prophecy concerning another Prophet (the Holy Prophet) about two thousand years ago in a place far away from the scene of the activities of the latter, and that that prophecy was literally fulfilled in him. It proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that the maker of the prophecy, and he about whom the prophecy was made were both true Prophets of God.

Commentary:

In deference to his very exalted spiritual rank the Holy Prophet has been addressed as النبی (the Prophet) in the present verse and at several other places in the Quran. No other Prophet in any revealed Scripture or in the Quran has been addressed as such. All the Prophets have been addressed by their proper names. This peculiarity of address for the Holy Prophet has been adopted to show that he alone is النبی i.e. the Prophet par excellence. Or the reference in this form of address may be to a Biblical prophecy in which the advent of "that Prophet" has been foretold. The prophecy clearly and definitely applies only to the Holy Prophet.

Incidentally, according to Quranic idiom the word النبی (the Prophet) implies also the followers of the Holy Prophet.

11:18; 61:7.

Commentary:

The witness from among the Children of Israel is Moses. It is to his prophecy concerning the advent of the Holy Prophet that reference has been made in this verse. The prophecy is to this effect:

I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren like unto thee, and will put My words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass that whosoever will not hearken unto My words which he shall speak in My name, I will require it of him (Deut. 18:l8-19).

See also 11:18.

The reference in the words 'a witness from among the Children of Israel' could not be, as generally misunderstood, to ‘Abdullah bin Salam, a learned Jew, because ‘Abdullah had accepted Islam in Medina while this Surah was revealed at Mecca.

11:28.

Commentary:

One of the great impediments that stand in the way of truth being accepted by disbelievers is conceit and arrogance. Since it is the poor people and those not high placed in life and generally not conversant with current material sciences, who first accept the Divine Message, the so-called learned and wealthy people regard it beneath their dignity to associate themselves with the humble and lowly believers. It is to this proud attitude of disbelievers that the verse refers. It depicts conceited and arrogant disbelievers as saying to believers, that if there had been any good in the new Teaching, they (disbelievers), who were better placed in life and possessed better knowledge, could not have been outstripped by the former in accepting it, and that, as it was an old, old lie, they could not accept it.

28:44.

20:114; 42:8; 43:4.

Commentary:

Verse 11 above referred to the appearance of a Prophet among the Ishmaelites. The present verse refers to Arabia as the scene of the advent of the Prophet who was to be the like of Moses and to the Book (the Quran) which was to fulfil the prophecies contained in the Book of Moses and which also was to supersede it. The relevant prophecy is as follows:

The burden upon Arabia. In the forest in Arabia shall ye lodge, O ye travelling companies of Dedanim. The inhabitants of the land of Tema brought water to him that was thirsty, they presented with their bread him that fled (Isaiah 21: 13-15).

See also 26:198.

3:13; 8:37; 38:12.

Commentary:

The emphatic prophecy embodied in the verse is definitely about the crushing defeat which the Meccan army suffered at the hands of Muslims in the Battle of Badr. The odds were so heavy against the Muslims that when fighting began the Holy Prophet prayed to God in utmost humility and extreme agony, in a tent set up for him for this purpose, in the words: "O Lord, I humbly beseech Thee to fulfil Thy covenant and Thy promise. If this small band of Muslims were destroyed, Thou wilt never be worshipped again on this earth" (Bukhari & Muslim). After having finished the prayer, the Holy Prophet came out of the tent and facing the field of battle recited the verse سیھزم الجمع و یولون الدبر i.e. the hosts shall soon be routed and shall turn their backs in flight.

27:14; 43:31.

Important Words:

أحمد (Ahmad) is derived from حمد and حمدہ means, he praised, eulogised or commended him; spoke well of him; he requited him; he gave him his due. أحمد (Ahmada) means, he did or said that for which he should be praised or which was praiseworthy. أحمد الشیء means, the thing was or became praiseworthy. أحمد means, one who praises much or who is praised much or most (Lane & Taj).

Commentary:

The prophecy of Jesus about the coming of Paraclete or the Comforter or the Spirit of Truth as given in the Gospels is as follows:

I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever. Even the Spirit of Truth whom the world cannot receive because it sees him not, neither knoweth him… but when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of Truth which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me… for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you, but if I depart, I will send him unto you… I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when the Spirit of Truth is come, he will guide you unto all truth, for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak, and he will show you things to come… He shall glorify me (John 14: 16-17. 15: 26; 16: 7, 12-14).

From these verses of the Gospel of John the following inferences are clearly deducible:

(1) That Paraclete or the Comforter or the Spirit of Truth could not come unless Jesus should have departed from the world.

(2) That the Comforter was to abide in the world for ever.

(3) That he was to say many things which Jesus himself could not tell because the world could not then bear them.

(4) That he would guide men unto all truth.

(5) That he would not speak of himself, but whatever he would hear that would he speak.

(6) That the Comforter would glorify Jesus and testify of him.

This description of Paraclete or the Comforter or the Spirit of Truth is in complete harmony with the status and mission of the Holy Prophet as given in the Quran:

(1) The Holy Prophet appeared after Jesus had departed from this world.

(2) He is the last Law-giving Prophet and the Quran the last revealed Divine Law for the whole of mankind till the end of time (5:4).

(3) Jesus could not guide mankind to all truth because his Message was meant only for a particular people and for a particular period. And the Law as amended and given to the Jews by him was not and could not be a complete and perfect Law because they had not yet mentally and morally so developed as to be the bearers of a complete Shari‘ah and the world had to wait till it was given a perfect Law in the form of the Quran (5:4) and a Prophet par excellence i.e. the Holy Prophet who could guide all mankind.

(4) The Holy Prophet gave to the world a Law complete in all its details which alone could guide mankind unto all truth (5:4).

(5) The Holy Prophet did not speak of himself but whatever he heard from God that did he speak (53:4).

(6) The Holy Prophet glorified Jesus (2:254; 3:56).

The prophecy in the Gospel of John resembles the prophecy mentioned in the verse under comment except that instead of Ahmad the name stated therein is Paraclete. Christian writers challenge the correctness of the Quranic version of the prophecy, basing their contention on this difference of names, irrespective of the otherwise similar features of Biblical & Quranic versions.

In fact, Jesus spoke Aramaic and Hebrew. Aramaic was his mother tongue and Hebrew his religious language. The present Biblical version is the translation of Aramaic and Hebrew into Greek.

A translation naturally cannot fully convey the beauty of the text. Languages have their limitations. The same is true of the people who speak them. Their limitations are reflected in their works. The Greek language has another word, i.e.Periklutos, with a similar meaning as Ahmad in Arabic. Jack Finegan, the renowned theologian, in his book, "The Archaeology of World Religions," says:

"Where in Greek the word Comforter (Parakletos) is very similar to the word for 'renowned' (Periklutos), the latter being the meaning of the names Ahmad & Muhammad."

Moreover, "The Damascus Document" a scripture discovered towards the end of the nineteenth century in Ezra synagogue, Old Cairo (p. 2. lines 12, 13) describes Jesus as having foretold the advent of a "Holy Spirit," named Emeth.

ویود یعیم بید مشیحو روح قد شو و ھوا ایمة و بفروش

شمو شمو تیھم

i.e. And by His Messiah, He has made them know His Holy Spirit. For it is He who is Emeth i.e. “The Truthful One”, and in accordance with His name are also theirs.

"Emeth" in Hebrew means "the Truth," or "the Truthful one and a person of constant goodness" (Strachan’s Fourth Gospel, page 141). The word was interpreted by the Jews as "God’s Seal." Naturally, though Jesus must have used the name Ahmad, the phonetic resemblance of the two words (Ahmad & Emeth) caused later writers to substitute "Emeth"for Ahmad, its Hebrew synonym.

Thus the prophecy mentioned in the verse under comment applies to the Holy Prophet, but as a corollary it may also apply to the Promised Messiah, Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement, since in his person the Second Manifestation of the Holy Prophet took place. To this Second Manifestation or Second Coming of the Holy Prophet, the third verse of the next Surah—Al-Jumu‘ah pointedly refers.

It may be mentioned here that a prophecy about the Holy Prophet is also clearly stated in Gospel of Barnabas which is treated by the Church as apocryphal but which has as much claim to be accepted as authentic as any of the four Gospels.