The Quran, vol. 1

Mohammed

amagi symbol
Published by Liberty Fund, Inc.

Mohammed, The Quran, vol. 1 [1896]

Edition used:

A Comprehensive Commentary on the Quran: Comprising Sale’s Translation and preliminary Discourse, with Additional Notes and Emendations (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner, and Co., 1896). 4 vols.

Editor: Rev. Elwood Morris Wherry

Translator: George Sale

Author: Mohammed

Vol. 1 of a 4 volume edition of the Quran based upon Sale’s translation of 1734 with later commentary and notes by Wherry. Vol. 1 contains Sale’s lengthy introduction.

Copyright:

The text is in the public domain.

Table of Contents

PREFACE.

CONTENTS.

LIST OF AUTHORS AND BOOKS QUOTED AND MADE USE OF IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS VOLUME.

NOTE.

SALE’S PREFACE TO THE PRELIMINARY DISCOURSE AND TRANSLATION.

SALE’S PRELIMINARY DISCOURSE.

SECTION 1.: OF THE ARABS BEFORE MUHAMMAD; OR, AS THEY EXPRESS IT, IN THE TIME OF IGNORANCE; THEIR HISTORY,* RELIGION, LEARNING, AND CUSTOMS.

SECTION II.: OF THE STATE OF CHRISTIANITY, PARTICULARLY OF THE EASTERN CHURCHES, AND OF JUDAISM, AT THE TIME OF MUHAMMAD’S APPEARANCE; AND OF THE METHODS TAKEN BY HIM FOR THE ESTABLISHING HIS RELIGION, AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH CONCURRED THERETO.

SECTION III.: OF THE QURÁN ITSELF, THE PECULIARITIES OF THAT BOOK; THE MANNER OF ITS BEING WRITTEN AND PUBLISHED, AND THE GENERAL DESIGN OF IT.

SECTION IV.: OF THE DOCTRINES AND POSITIVE PRECEPTS OF THE QURÁN, WHICH RELATE TO FAITH AND RELIGIOUS DUTIES.

SECTION V.: OF NERTAIN NEGATIVE PRECEPTS IN THE QURÁN.

SECTION VI.: OF THE INSTITUTIONS OF THE QURÁN IN CIVIL AFFAIRS

SECTION VII.: OF THE MONTHS COMMANDED BY THE QURÁN TO BE KEPT SACRED, AND OF THE SETTING APART OF FRIDAY FOR THE ESPECIAL SERVICE OF GOD.

SECTION VIII.: OF THE PRINZIPAD SECTS AMONG THE MUHAMMADANS, AND OF THOSE WHO HAVE PRETENDED TO PROPHECY AMONG THE ARABS IN OR SINCE THE TIME OF MUHAMMAD

THE QURÁN.

CHAPTER I.: ENTITLED SURAT UL FÁTIHAT (THE PREFACE). Revealed at Makkah.

INTRODUCTION.

IN THE NAME OF THE MOST MERCIFUL GOD.

CHAPTER II.: ENTITLED SURAT UL BAQR (THE COW). Revealed partly at Makkah and partly at Madína.

INTRODUCTION.

Makkan Revelations.

Madina Revelations.

IN THE NAME OF THE MOST MERCIFUL GOD.

Edition: current; Page: [i]

A COMPREHENSIVE COMMENTARY ON THE QURÁN: COMPRISING SALE’S TRANSLATION AND PRELIMINARY DISCOURSE,

WITH ADDITIONAL NOTES AND EMENDATIONS together with A Complete Index to the Text, Preliminary Discourse, and Notes,

By the Rev. E. M. WHERRY, M.A.

VOL. I.

LONDON.

Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co., Limited Paternoster House, Charing Cross Road,

1896.

[All rights reserved.]

Edition: current; Page: [ii] Edition: current; Page: [iii] Edition: current; Page: [iv] Edition: current; Page: [v]

PREFACE.

In presenting to the public the first volume of A Comprehensive Commentary on the Qurán, I think it necessary to make a brief statement as to the reasons which have led to the publication of this work, and the object sought to be attained thereby.

The idea of preparing such a work grew out of the wants which I felt in the pursuit of my own study of the Qurán, and in the work of a missionary among Muslims. The time required to gather up the results of the labours of various writers on Islám; the difficulty of preserving these results in a form suitable for convenient reference; and the still greater difficulty of bringing the truth thus acquired to bear on the minds of Muslims, owing to the absence of any medium whereby the proof-texts, referred to in the English works by chapter and verse, may be found in the original copies current among Muhammadans, where no such mode of reference is used;—all these suggested the great need of a work which would remove in some degree at least these obstacles to the study of the Qurán, and thus promote a better knowledge of Islám among missionaries.

It will thus be seen that I have not laboured simply to make a book. I have endeavoured to provide for a felt Edition: current; Page: [vi] want. My object has been to gather up in a few volumes the results of the labours of those who have endeavoured to elucidate the text of the Qurán, adding the results of my own study. It is in this sense that this work is entitled a Comprehensive Commentary. Though primarily intended for the use of those who, like myself, are engaged in missionary work among Muhammadans, it is hoped that it will render valuable service to others.

The plan adopted in the preparation of this work is as follows:—

I. To present Sale’s translation of the Qurán in the form of the Arabic original, indicating the Sipára, Súrat, Ruqú of the Sipára, Ruqú of the Súrat, &c., as they are in the best Oriental editions.

II. To number the verses as they are in the Roman Urdú edition of Maulvi Abdul Qádir’s translation. This arrangement will be of special benefit to missionaries in India.

III. To exhibit in the notes and comments the views of the best Muslim commentators. For these I am indebted for the most part to Sale, the Tafsír-i-Raufi, the Tafsír-i-Hussaini, the Tafsír-i Fatah-ar-Rahmán, and the notes on Abdul Qádir’s Urdú translation of the Qurán. Sale’s notes have been almost entirely drawn (with the aid of Maracers work in Latin) from the standard writings of Baidháwi, the Jalálaín, and Al Zamakhshari. I have also culled much from some of the best European writers on Islám, a list of whose works may be found below.

IV. To the above is prefixed Sale’s Preliminary Discourse, with additional notes and emendations. And the last volume will contain a complete Index, both to the text of, and the notes on, the Qurán, which will enable the reader to acquaint himself with the teaching of the Edition: current; Page: [vii] Quran on any particular subject, with a very small amount of labour.

In regard to the spelling of proper names, I have invariably Romanised the original form of the words, except when quoting from living authors, in which case I have felt obliged to retain the spelling peculiar to each writer.

In order to facilitate the study of individual chapters, and to help a better understanding of the various “revelations,” I have prefixed to each chapter a brief introduction, showing the circumstances under which the revelations were made, the date of their publication by Muhammad, and also giving a brief analysis of each chapter as to its teaching.

As to the matter of the notes, the reader will perceive occasional repetition. This is due in part to the repetitions of the text, and partly in order to call special attention to certain doctrines of the Qurán, e.g., its testimony to the genuineness and credibility of the Christian Scriptures current in the days of Muhammad; the evidence it affords to its own character as a fabrication; its testimony to the imposture of the Arabian prophet, in his professing to attest the Former Scriptures, while denying almost every cardinal doctrine of the same,—in his putting into the mouth of God garbled statements as to Scripture history, prophecy, and doctrine, to suit the purposes of his prophetic pretensions,—and in his appealing to Divinity to sanction his crimes against morality and decency.

The need of emphasising facts of this kind has grown out of the attempt of certain apologists for Islám to ignore these unpleasant truths, and to exhibit to the present generation an ideal Muhammad, no less unlike the prophet of Arabia than the Muhammad of Christian bigotry and Edition: current; Page: [viii] misrepresentation. My endeavour has been to show what the Qurán actually teaches on these subjects.

On the other hand, I have endeavoured to remove, as far as known to me, the misapprehensions, and consequent misrepresentations, of the doctrines of the Qurán, popular among Christians, believing that every such error strengthens the prejudices of Muhammadans, and thereby aids the cause it seeks to overthrow, whilst justifying similar misrepresentation from the Muslim side. Everywhere I have endeavoured to advance the cause of truth, to show just what the Qurán teaches, and so by stating fairly the issues of the controversy with Islám, to advance the great cause of bringing its votaries to a knowledge of Him to whom all the prophets of God pointed as the Son of God and the Saviour of sinners.

Finally, whilst I desire to express my obligations to all those, now living, whose writings I have consulted or used in the preparation of this volume, I wish specially to make thankful acknowledgment of the help afforded me by Sir William Muir, in permitting me to make use of his most valuable works on Muhammad and the Qurán in the preparation of this work. My thanks are also due to the Rev. P. M. Zenker, C.M.S. missionary, Agra, for much valuable assistance in gathering material from sources inaccessible to me.

Without further preface, and earnestly desiring the blessing of Him who is The only Sinless Prophet of Islám, and the only Saviour of fallen men, I commend this volume to the reader.

E. M. W.

Lodiana, December 31, 1881.

Edition: current; Page: [ix]

CONTENTS.

Preface . . . . . . . . . . page v

Sale’s Preface . . . . . . . . . 3

SALE’S PRELIMINARY DISCOURSE.

Sect. I.—Of the Arabs before Muhammad; or, as they express it in the Time of Ignorance; their History, Religion, Learning, and Customs . . . . . . 13

II.—Of the State of Christianity, particularly of the Eastern Churches, and of Judaism, at the time of Muhammad’s Appearance; and of the Methods taken by him for the Establishing his Religion, and the Circumstances which concurred thereto . . 61

III.—Of the Qurán itself, the Peculiarities of that Book; the Manner of its being Written and Published, and the General Design of it . . . . . 96

IV.—Of the Doctrines and Positive Precepts of the Qurán which relate to Faith and Religious Duties . . 116

V.—Of Certain Negative Precepts in the Qurán . . . 191

VI.—Of the Institutions of the Qurán in Civil Affairs . 205

VII.—Of the Months commanded by the Qurán to be kept Sacred; and of the setting apart of Friday for the especial Service of God . . . . . . 227

VIII. Of the Principal Sects among the Muhammadans; and of those who have pretended to Prophecy among the Arabs in or since the time of Muhammad . 233

THE QURÁN.

Chap. I.—Entitled Súrat ul Fátihat (The Preface) . . . . 287

II.—Entitled Súrat ul Baqr (The Cow) . . . . . 291

Edition: current; Page: [x] Edition: current; Page: [1]

LIST OF AUTHORS AND BOOKS QUOTED AND MADE USE OF IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS VOLUME.

Abdul Qádir Ibn Wali Ullah. Translation of the Qurán, with Notes, in Urdú.

Arnold, John Muehleisen, D.D. Islám: Its History, Character, and Relation to Christianity. Third edition.

Burckhardt, J. L. Notes on the Bedouins and Wahábys. 2 vols, 1831.

Burton, Captain. Pilgrimage to Mecca.

Brinckman, Rev. Arthur. Notes on Islám.

Higgins, Godfrey, Esq. An Apology for the Life and Character of the Celebrated Prophet of Arabia.

Hughes, Rev. T. P. Notes on Muhammadanism. Second edition. Also, Preface and Introduction to the Roman Urdú Qurán. Lodiana edition.

Lane, Edward William. Selections from the Qurán.

Muir, Sir William, LL.D. Life of Mahomet. The Testimony borne by the Coran to the Jewish and Christian Scriptures.

Noeldeke, Th. Origine et Compositione Surarum Quranicarum ipsiusque Quráni. Geschiehte des Qorâns.

Palgrave, W. Gifford. Central and Eastern Arabia.

Prideaux, Humphrey, D.D. Life of Mahomet.

Rodwell, J. M. The Koran. Second edition, 1876.

Sale, George. The Koran, with Preliminary Discourse and Notes on the Authority of Baidháwi, Jaláluddín, Al Zamakhshari, &c.

Smith, R. Bosworth, M.A. Mohammed and Mohammedanism. Second edition.

Syed Ahmad Khan Bahadur. Essays on the Life of Mohammed.

The Tafsír-i-Raufi, an Urdú Commentary on the Qurán.

The Tafsír-i-Fatah-ar-Rahmán.

The Tafsír-i-Hussaini, a Persian Commentary on the Quran.

The Notes on the Roman Urdú Qurán. Allahabad edition, 1844.

Wheeler, Talboys. History of India, vol. iv., part i

Edition: current; Page: [2]

NOTE.

In reading the Romanised form of Arabic proper names, the reader should pronounce—

a | as | u | in | but.
á | as | a | in | far.
ι | as | i | in | sin.
ί | as | ee | in | heed.
o | as | o | in | home.
u | as | o | in | do.
ú | as | oo | in | pool.
ai | as | i | in | side.

In reading the fractional sign R 1/1, R 17/1, &c., in the margin to the text of the Qurán, understand by the figures above the line the Ruqá of the Súrat or chapter, and by the figures below the line the Ruqú of the Sipára. The terms Ruba, Nisf, and Suls mark the fourth, half, and three-fourths of a Sipára.

Edition: current; Page: [3]

SALE’S PREFACE TO THE PRELIMINARY DISCOURSE AND TRANSLATION.

I imagine it almost needless either to make an apology for publishing the following translation, or to go about to prove it a work of use as well as curiosity. They must have a mean opinion of the Christian religion, or be but ill grounded therein, who can apprehend any danger from so manifest a forgery: and if the religious and civil institutions of foreign nations are worth our knowledge, those of Muhammad, the lawgiver of the Arabians, and founder of an empire which in less than a century spread itself over a greater part of the world than the Romans were ever masters of, must needs be so; whether we consider their extensive obtaining, or our frequent intercourse with those who are governed thereby. I shall not here inquire into the reasons why the law of Muhammad has met with so unexampled a reception in the world (for they are greatly deceived who imagine it to have been propagated by the sword alone), or by what means it came to be embraced by nations which never felt the force of the Muhammadan arms, and even by those which stripped the Arabians of their conquests, and put an end to the sovereignty and very being of their Khalífahs; yet it seems as if there was something more than what is vulgarly imagined in a religion which has made so surprising a progress. But whatever use an impartial version of the Qurán may be of in other respects, it is absolutely necessary to undeceive those who, from the ignorant or unfair Edition: current; Page: [4] translations which have appeared, have entertained too favourable an opinion of the original, and also to enable us effectually to expose the imposture; none of those who have hitherto undertaken that province, not excepting Dr. Prideaux himself, having succeeded to the satisfaction of the judicious, for want of being complete masters of the controversy. The writers of the Romish communion, in particular, are so far from having done any service in their refutations of Muhammadism, that by endeavouring to defend their idolatry and other superstitions, they have rather contributed to the increase of that aversion which the Muhammadans in general have to the Christian religion, and given them great advantages in the dispute. The Protestants alone are able to attack the Qurán with success; and for them, I trust, Providence has reserved the glory of its overthrow. In the meantime, if I might presume to lay down rules to be observed by those who attempt the conversion of the Muhammadans, they should be the same which the learned and worthy Bishop Kidder1 has prescribed for the conversion of the Jews, and which may, mutatis mutandis, be equally applied to the former, notwithstanding the despicable opinion that writer, for want of being better acquainted with them, entertained of those people, judging them scarce fit to be argued with. The first of these rules is, To avoid compulsion, which, though it be not in our power to employ at present, I hope will not be made use of when it is. The second is, To avoid teaching doctrines against common sense; the Muhammadans not being such fools (whatever we may think of them) as to be gained over in this case. The worshipping of images and the doctrine of transubstantiation are great stumbling-blocks to the Muhammadans, and the Church which teacheth them is very unfit to bring those people over. The third is, To avoid weak arguments; for the Muhammadans are not to be converted Edition: current; Page: [5] with these, or hard words. We must use them with humanity, and dispute against them with arguments that are proper and cogent. It is certain that many Christians who have written against them have been very defective this way: many have used arguments that have no force, and advanced propositions that are void of truth. This method is so far from convincing, that it rather serves to harden them. The Muhammadans will be apt to conclude we have little to say when we urge them with arguments that are trifling or untrue. We do but lose ground when we do this; and instead of gaining them, we expose ourselves and our cause also. We must not give them ill words neither: but must avoid all reproachful language, all that is sarcastical and biting: this never did good from pulpit or press. The softest words will make the deepest impression: and if we think it a fault in them to give ill language, we cannot be excused when we imitate them. The fourth rule is, Not to quit any article of the Christian faith to gain the Muhammadans. It is a fond conceit of the Socinians that we shall upon their principles be most like to prevail upon the Muhammadans: it is not true in matter of fact. We must not give up any article to gain them: but then the Church of Rome ought to part with many practices and some doctrines. We are not to design to gain the Muhammadans over to a system of dogma, but to the ancient and primitive faith. I believe nobody will deny but that the rules here laid down are just: the latter part of the third, which alone my design has given me occasion to practise, I think so reasonable, that I have not, in speaking of Muhammad or his Qurán, allowed myself to use those opprobrious appellations, and unmannerly expressions, which seem to be the strongest arguments of several who have written against them. On the contrary, I have thought myself obliged to treat both with common decency and even to approve such particulars as seemed to me to deserve approbation; for how criminal soever Muhammad may have been in imposing a false religion Edition: current; Page: [6] on mankind, the praises due to his real virtues ought not to be denied him; nor can I do otherwise than applaud the candour of the pious and learned Spanhemius, who, though he owned him to have been a wicked impostor, yet acknowledged him to have been richly furnished with natural endowments, beautiful in his person, of a subtle wit, agreeable behaviour, showing liberality to the poor, courtesy to every one, fortitude against his enemies, and above all a high reverence for the name of God; severe against the perjured, adulterers, murderers, slanderers, prodigals, covetous, false witnesses, &c., a great preacher of patience, charity, mercy, beneficence, gratitude, honouring of parents and superiors, and a frequent celebrator of the divine praises.1

Of the several translations of the Qurán now e tant, there is but one which tolerably represents the sense of the original; and that being in Latin, a new version became necessary, at least to an English reader. What Bibliander published for a Latin translation of that book deserves not the name of a translation; the unaccountable liberties therein taken, and the numberless fault, both of omission and commission, leaving scarce any resemblance of the original. It was made near six hundred years ago, being finished in 1143, by Robertus Retenensis, an Englishman, with the assistance of Hermannus Dalmata, at the request of Peter, Abbot of Clugny, who paid them well for their pains.

From this Latin version was taken the Italian of Andrea Arrivabene, notwithstanding the pretences in his dedication of its being done immediately from the Arabic;2 Edition: current; Page: [7] wherefore it is no wonder if the transcript be yet more faulty and absurd than the copy.1

About the end of the fifteenth century, Johannes Andreas, a native of Xativa in the kingdom of Valencia, who from a Muhammadan doctor became a Christian priest, translated not only the Qurán, but also its glosses, and the seven books of the Sonna, out of Arabic into the Arragonian tongue, at the command of Martin Garcia,2 Bishop of Barcelona and Inquisitor of Arragon. Whether this translation were ever published or not I am wholly ignorant; but it may be presumed to have been the better done for being the work of one bred up in the Muhammadan religion and learning; though his refutation of that religion, which has had several editions, gives no great idea of his abilities.

Some years within the last century, Andrew du Ryer, who had been consul of the French nation in Egypt, and was tolerably skilled in the Turkish and Arabic languages, took the pains to translate the Qurán into his own tongue; but his performance, though it be beyond comparison preferable to that of Retenensis, is far from being a just translation, there being mistakes in every page, besides frequent transpositions, omissions, and additions,3 faults unpardonable in a work of this nature. And what renders it still more incomplete is the want of Notes to explain a vast number of passages, some of which are difficult, and others impossible to be understood, without proper explications, were they translated ever so exactly, which the author is so sensible of that he often refers his reader to the Arabic commentators.

The English version is no other than a translation of Edition: current; Page: [8] Du Ryer’s, and that a very bad one; for Alexander Ross, who did it, being utterly unacquainted with the Arabic, and no great master of the French, has added a number of fresh mistakes of his own to these of Du Ryer, not to mention the meanness of his language, which would make a better book ridiculous.

In 1698 a Latin translation of the Quran, made by Father Lewis Marracci, who had been confessor to Pope Innocent XI., was published at Padua, together with the original text, accompanied by explanatory notes and a refutation. This translation of Marracci’s, generally speaking, is very exact; but adheres to the Arabic idiom too literally to be easily understood, unless I am much deceived, by those who are not versed in the Muhammadan learning.* The notes he has added are indeed of great use, but his refutations, which swell the work to a large volume, are of little or none at all, being often unsatisfactory, and sometimes impertinent. The work, however, with all its faults, is very valuable, and I should be guilty of ingratitude did I not acknowledge myself much obliged thereto; but still, being in Latin, it can be of no use to those who understand not that tongue.

Having therefore undertaken a new translation, I have endeavoured to do the original impartial justice, not having, to the best of my knowledge, represented it, in any one instance, either better or worse than it really is. I have thought myself obliged, indeed, in a piece which Edition: current; Page: [9] pretends to be the Word of God, to keep somewhat scrupulously close to the text, by which means the language may, in some places, seem to express the Arabic a little too literally to be elegant English: but this, I hope, has not happened often; and I flatter myself that the style I have made use of will not only give a more genuine idea of the original than if I had taken more liberty (which would have been much more for my ease), but will soon become familiar; for we must not expect to read a version of so extraordinary a book with the same ease and pleasure as a modern composition.

In the Notes my view has been briefly to explain the text, and especially the difficult and obscure passages, from the most approved commentators, and that generally in their own words, for whose opinions or expressions, where liable to censure, I am not answerable; my province being only fairly to represent their expositions, and the little I have added of my own, or from European writers, being easily discernible. Where I met with any circumstance which I imagined might be curious or entertaining, I have not failed to produce it.

The Preliminary Discourse will acquaint the reader with the most material particulars proper to be known previously to the entering on the Qurán itself, and which could not so conveniently have been thrown into the Notes. And I have taken care, both in the Preliminary Discourse and the Notes, constantly to quote my authorities and the writers to whom I have been beholden; but to none have I been more so than to the learned Dr. Pocock, whose Specimen Historiæ Arabum is the most useful and accurate work that has been hitherto published concerning the antiquities of that nation, and ought to be read by every curious inquirer into them.

As I have had no opportunity of consulting public libraries, the manuscripts of which I have made use throughout the whole work have been such as I had in my own study, except only the Commentary of Al Baidháwi Edition: current; Page: [10] and the Gospel of St. Barnabas. The first belongs to the library of the Dutch Church in Austin Friars, and for the use of it I have been chiefly indebted to the Rev. D Bolten, one of the ministers of that church: the other was very obligingly lent me by the Rev. Dr. Holme, Rector of Hedley in Hampshire; and I take this opportunity of returning both those gentlemen my thanks for their favours. The merit of Al Baidháwi’s commentary will appear from the frequent quotations I have made thence; but of the Gospel of St. Barnabas (which I had not seen when the little I have said of it in the Preliminary Discourse,1 and the extract I had borrowed from M. de la Monnoye and M. Toland,2 were printed off), I must beg leave to give some further account.

The book is a moderate quarto, in Spanish, written in a very legible band, but a little damaged towards the latter end. It contains two hundred and twenty-two chapters of unequal length, and four hundred and twenty pages; and is said, in the front, to be translated from the Italian by an Arragonian Muslim named Mustafa de Aranda. There is a preface prefixed to it, wherein the discoverer of the original MS., who was a Christian monk, called Fra Marino, tells us that having accidentally met with a writing of Irenæus (among others), wherein he speaks against St. Paul, alleging, for his authority, the Gospel of St. Barnabas, he became exceeding desirous to find this Gospel; and that God, of his mercy, having made him very intimate with Pope Sixtus V., one day, as they were together in that Pope’s library, his Holiness fell asleep, and he, to employ himself, reaching down a book to read, the first he laid his hand on proved to be the very Gospel he wanted: overjoyed at the discovery, he scrupled not to hide his prize in his sleeve, and on the Pope’s awaking, took leave of him, carrying with him that celestial treasure, by reading of which he became a convert to Muhammadism.

Edition: current; Page: [11]

This Gospel of Barnabas contains a complete history of Jesus Christ from his birth to his ascension; and most of the circumstances in the four real Gospels are to be found therein, but many of them turned, and some artfully enough, to favour the Muhammadan system. From the design of the whole, and the frequent interpolations of stories and passages wherein Muhammad is spoken of and foretold by name, as the messenger of God, and the great prophet who was to perfect the dispensation of Jesus, it appears to be a most barefaced forgery. One particular I observe therein induces me to believe it to have been dressed up by a renegade Christian, slightly instructed in his new religion, and not educated a Muhammadan (unless the fault be imputed to the Spanish, or perhaps the Italian translator, and not to the original compiler); I mean the giving to Muhammad the title of Messiah, and that not once or twice only, but in several places: whereas the title of the Messiah, or, as the Arabs write it, al Masíh, i.e., Christ, is appropriated to Jesus in the Qurán, and is constantly applied by the Muhammadans to him, and never to their own prophet. The passages produced from the Italian MS. by M de la Monnoye are to be seen in this Spanish version almost word for word.

But to return to the following work. Though I have freely censured the former translations of the Qurán, I would not therefore be suspected of a design to make my own pass as free from faults: I am very sensible it is not; and I make no doubt that the few who are able to discern them, and know the diffienlty of the undertaking, will give me fair quarter. I likewise flatter myself that they, and all considerate persons, will excuse the delay which has happened in the publication of this work, when they are informed that it was carried on at leisure times only, and amidst the necessary avocations of a troublesome profession.

Edition: current; Page: [12] Edition: current; Page: [13]

SALE’S PRELIMINARY DISCOURSE.

SECTION 1.: OF THE ARABS BEFORE MUHAMMAD; OR, AS THEY EXPRESS IT, IN THE TIME OF IGNORANCE; THEIR HISTORY,* RELIGION, LEARNING, AND CUSTOMS.

The name Arabia.

The Arabs, and the country they inhabit, which themselves call Jazírat al Arab, or the Peninsula of the Arabians, but we Arabia, were so named from Araba, a small territory in the province of Tahama;1 to which Yarab the son of Qahtán, the father of the ancient Arabs, gave his name, and where, some ages after, dwelt Ismaíl the son of Abraham by Hagar. The Christian writers for several centuries speak of them under the appellation of Saracens, the most certain derivation of which word is from shark, the east, where the descendants of Joctan, the Edition: current; Page: [14] Qahtán of the Arabs, are placed by Moses,1 and in which quarter they dwelt in respect to the Jews.2

Limits of Arabia.

The name of Arabia (used in a more extensive sense) sometimes comprehends all that large tract of land bounded by the river Euphrates, the Persian Gulf, the Sindian, Indian, and Red Seas, and part of the Mediterranean: above two-thirds of which country, that is, Arabia properly so called, the Arabs have possessed almost from the Flood; and have made themselves masters of the rest, either by settlements or continual incursions; for which reason the Turks and Persians at this day call the whole Arabistán, or the country of the Arabs.

But the limits of Arabia, in its more usual and proper sense, are much narrower, as reaching no farther northward than the Isthmus, which runs from Aila to the head of the Persian Gulf, and the borders of the territory of Kúfa; which tract of land the Greeks nearly comprenended under the name of Arabia the Happy. The Eastern geographers make Arabia Petræa to belong partly to Egypt, and partly to Shám or Syria, and the Desert Arabia they call the Deserts of Syria.3

Proper Arabia is by the Oriental writers generally divided into five provinces,4 viz., Yaman, Hijaz, Taháma, Najd, and Yamáma; to which some add Bahrain, as a sixth, but this province the more exact make part of Irák;5 others reduce them all to two, Yaman and Hijáz, the last including the three other provinces of Taháma, Najd, and Yamáma.

The province of Yaman.

The province of Yaman, so called either from its situation to the right hand, or south of the temple of Makkah, or else from the happiness and verdure of its soil, extends itself along the Indian Ocean from Aden to Cape Rasalgat; part of the Red Sea bounds it on the west and south sides, Edition: current; Page: [15] and the province of Hijáz on the north.1 It is subdivided into several lesser provinces, as Hadramaut, Shihr, Omán, Najrán, &c., of which Shihr alone produces the frankincense.2 The metropolis of Yaman is Sanaa, a very ancient city, in former times called Ozal,* and much celebrated for its delightful situation; but the prince at present resides about five leagues northward from thence, at a place no less pleasant, called Hisn al Mawáhib, or the Castle of Delights.3

So-called Arabian produce brought from India. Produce of Yaman.

This country has been famous from all antiquity for the happiness of its climate, its fertility and riches,4 which induced Alexander the Great, after his return from his Indian expedition, to form a design of conquering it, and fixing there his royal seat; but his death, which happened soon after, prevented the execution of this project.5 Yet, in reality, great part of the riches which the ancients imagined were the produce of Arabia, came really from the Indies and the coasts of Africa; for the Egyptians, who had engrossed that trade, which was then carried on by way of the Red Sea, to themselves, industriously concealed the truth of the matter, and kept their ports shut to prevent foreigners penetrating into those countries, or receiving any information thence; and this precaution of theirs on the one side, and the deserts, unpassable to strangers, on the other, were the reason why Arabia was so little known to the Greeks and Romans. The delightfulness and plenty of Yaman are owing to its mountains; for all that part which lies along the Red Sea is a dry, barren desert, in some places ten or twelve leagues over, but in return bounded by those mountains, which being Edition: current; Page: [16] well watered, enjoy an almost continual spring, and, besides coffee, the peculiar produce of this country, yield great plenty and variety of fruits, and in particular excellent corn, grapes, and spices. There are no rivers of note in this country, for the streams which at certain times of the year descend from the mountains, seldom reach the sea, being for the most part drunk up and lost in the burning sands of that coast.1

The soil of the other provinces is much more barren than that of Yaman; the greater part of their territories being covered with dry sands, or rising into rocks, interspersed here and there with some fruitful spots, which receive their greatest advantages from their water and palm-trees.

The Hijáz its boundaries.

The province of Hijáz, so named because it divides Najd from Taháma, is bounded on the south by Yaman and Taháma, on the west by the Red Sea, on the north by the deserts of Syria, and on the east by the province of Najd.2 This province is famous for its two chief cities, Makkah and Madína, one of which is celebrated for its temple, and for having given birth to Muhammad; and the other for being the place of his residence for the last ten years of his life, and of his interment.

Makkah described.

Makkah, sometimes also called Bakkah, which words are synonymous, and signify a place of great concourse, is certainly one of the most ancient cities of the world: it is by some3 thought to be the Mesa of the Scripture,4 a name not unknown to the Arabians, and supposed to be taken from one of Ismaíl’s sons.5 It is seated in a stony and barren valley, surrounded on all sides with mountains.6 The length of Makkah from south to north is about two miles, and its breadth from the foot of the mountain Edition: current; Page: [17] Ajyad, to the top of another called Koaikaán, about a mile.1 In the midst of this space stands the city, built of stone cut from the neighbouring mountains.2 There being no springs at Makkah,3 at least none but what are bitter and unfit to drink,4 except only the well Zamzam, the water of which, though far the best, yet cannot be drank of any continuance, being brackish,* and causing eruptions in those who drink plentifully of it,5 the inhabitants are obliged to use rain-water, which they catch in cisterns.6 But this not being sufficient, several attempts were made to bring water thither from other places by aqueducts; and particularly about Muhammad’s time, Zubair, one of the principal men of the tribe of Quraish, endeavoured, at a great expense, to supply the city with water from Mount Arafat, but without success; yet this was effected not many years ago, being begun at the charge of a wife of Sulaimán the Turkish emperor.7 But long before this another aqueduct had been made from a spring at a considerable distance, which was, after several years’ labour, finished by the Khalífah al Muktadir.8

How the people of Makkah subsist.

The soil about Makkah is so very barren as to produce no fruits but what are common in the deserts, though the prince or Sharíf has a garden well planted at his castle Edition: current; Page: [18] of Marbaa, about three miles westward from the city, where he usually resides. Having therefore no corn or grain of their own growth, they are obliged to fetch it from other places;1 and Hásham, Muhammad’s great-grandfather, then prince of his tribe, the more effectually to supply them with provisions, appointed two caravans to set out yearly for that purpose, the one in summer, and the other in winter:2 these caravans of purveyors are mentioned in the Qurán. The provisions brought by them were distributed also twice a year, viz., in the month of Rajab, and at the arrival of the pilgrims. They are supplied with dates in great plenty from the adjacent country, and with grapes from Táyif, about sixty miles* distant, very few growing at Makkah. The inhabitants of this city are generally very rich, being considerable gainers by the prodigious concourse of people of almost all nations at the yearly pilgrimage, at which time there is a great fair or mart for all kinds of merchandise. They have also great numbers of cattle, and particularly of camels: however, the poorer sort cannot but live very indifferently in a place where almost every necessary of life must be purchased with money. Notwithstanding this great sterility near Makkah, yet you are no sooner out of its territory than you meet on all sides with plenty of good springs and streams of running water, with a great many gardens and cultivated lands.3

The temple of Makkah and the reputed holiness of this territory, will be treated of in a more proper place.

Madína or Yathrab.

Madína, which till Muhammad’s retreat thither was called Yathráb, is a walled city about half as big as Makkah,4 built in a plain, salt in many places, yet tolerably fruitful, particularly in dates, but more especially near Edition: current; Page: [19] the mountains, two of which, Ohod on the north, and Air on the south, are about two leagues distant. Here lies Muhammad interred1 in a magnificent building, covered with a cupola, and adjoining to the east side of the great temple, which is built in the midst of the city.2

The provinces of Tahama. Najd, and Yamáma founded.

The province of Taháma was so named from the vehement heat of its sandy soil, and is also called Gaur from its low situation; it is bounded on the west by the Red Sea, and on the other sides by Hijáz and Yaman, extending almost from Makkah to Aden.3

The province of Najd, which word signifies a rising country, lies between those of Yamáma, Yaman, and Hijáz, and is bounded on the east by Irák.4

The province of Yamáma, also called Arúd from its oblique situation, in respect of Yaman, is surrounded by the provinces of Najd, Tahama, Bahrain, Omán, Shihr, Hadramaut, and Saba. The chief city is Yamáma, which gives name to the province: it was anciently called Jaw, and is particularly famous for being the residence of Muhammad’s competitor, the false prophet Musailama.5

Two classes of Arabians.

The Arabians, the inhabitants of this spacious country, Edition: current; Page: [20] which they have possessed from the most remote antiquity, are distinguished by their own writers into two classes, viz., the old lost Arabians, and the present.

The former were very numerous, and divided into several tribes, which are now all destroyed, or else lost and swallowed up among the other tribes, nor are any certain memoirs or records extant concerning them:1 though the memory of some very remarkable events and the catastrophe of some tribes have been preserved by tradition, and since confirmed by the authority of the Qurán.

The ancient Arabians.

The most famous tribes amongst these ancient Arabians were Ád, Thamúd, Tasm, Jadís, the former Jorham, and Amalek.

The Áditen. The garden of Iram.

The tribe of Ád were descended from Ád, the son of Aws,2 the son of Aram,3 the son of Sem, the son of Noah,* who, after the confusion of tongues, settled in al Ahqáf, or the winding sands in the province of Hadramaut, where his posterity greatly multiplied. Their first king was Shadád the son of Ád, of whom the Eastern writers deliver many fabulous things, particularly that he finished the magnificent city his father had begun, wherein he built a fine palace, adorned with delicious gardens, to embellish which he spared neither cost nor labour, proposing thereby to create in his subjects a superstitious veneration of himself as a god.4 This garden or paradise was called the garden of Iram, and is mentioned in the Qurán,5 and often alluded to by the Oriental writers. The city, they tell us, is still standing in the deserts of Aden, being preserved Edition: current; Page: [21] by Providence as a monument of divine justice, though it be invisible, unless very rarely, when God permits it to be seen, a favour one Colabah pretended to have received in the reign of the Khalífah Muáwiyah, who sending for him to know the truth of the matter, Colabah related his whole adventure: that as he was seeking a camel he had lost, he found himself on a sudden at the gates of this city, and entering it, saw not one inhabitant, at which, being terrified, he stayed no longer than to take with him some fine stones which he showed the Khalífah.1*

Destruction of the Ádites. The latter Adites.

The descendants of Ád in process of time falling from the worship of the true God into idolatry, God sent the prophet Húd (who is generally agreed to be Heber2†) to preach to and reclaim them. But they refusing to acknowledge his mission, or to obey him, God sent a hot and suffocating wind, which blew seven nights and eight days together, and entering at their nostrils passed through their bodies,3 and destroyed them all, a very few only excepted, who had believed in Húd and retired with him to another place.4 That prophet afterwards returned into Hadramaut, and was buried near Hasiq, where there is a small town now standing called Qabr Húd, or the sepulchre of Húd. Before the Ádites were thus severely punished, God, to humble them and incline them to hearken to the preaching of his prophet, afflicted them with a drought for four years, so that all their cattle Edition: current; Page: [22] perished, and themselves were very near it; upon which they sent Luqmán (different from one of the same name who lived in David’s time) with sixty others to Makkah to beg rain, which they not obtaining, Luqmán with some of his company stayed at Makkah, and thereby escaped destruction, giving rise to a tribe called the latter Ád, who were afterward changed into monkeys.1

Some commentators on the Qurán2 tell us these old Ádites were of prodigious stature, the largest being 100 cubits high, and the least 60; which extraordinary size they pretend to prove by the testimony of the Qurán.3

The tribe of Thamúd. Destruction of the Thamudites.

The tribe of Thamúd were the posterity of Thamúd the son of Jathar4 the son of Aram, who falling into idolatry, the prophet Sálih was sent to bring them back to the worship of the true God. This prophet lived between the time of Húd and of Abraham, and therefore cannot be the same with the patriarch Sálih, as M. d’Herbelot imagines.5 The learned Bochart with more probability takes him to be Phaleg.6 A small number of the people of Thamúd hearkened to the remonstrances of Sálih, but the rest requiring, as a proof of his mission, that he should cause a she-camel big with young to come out of a rock in their presence, he accordingly obtained it of God, and the camel was immediately delivered of a young one ready weaned; but they, instead of believing, cut the hamstrings of the camel and killed her; at which act of impiety God, being highly displeased, three days after struck them dead in their houses by an earthquake and a terrible noise from heaven, which, some7 say, was the voice of Gabriel the archangel crying aloud, “Die, all of you.” Sálih, with those who were reformed by him, were saved from this destruction; the prophet going into Palestine, and from thence to Makkah,8 where he ended his days.

Edition: current; Page: [23]

Rock-cut houses of the Thamúdites.

This tribe first dwelt in Yaman,1 but being expelled thence by Himyár the son of Sába, they settled in the territory of Hajr in the province of Hijáz, where their habitations cut out of the rocks, mentioned in the Qurán,2 are still to be seen, and also the crack of the rock whence the camel issued, which, as an eyewitness3 hath declared, is sixty cubits wide. These houses of the Thamúdites being of the ordinary proportion, are used as an argument to convince those of a mistake who make this people to have been of a gigantic stature.

4The tragical destructions of these two potent tribes are often insisted on in the Qurán as instances of God’s judgment on obstinate unbelievers.

The tribe of Tasm.

The tribe of Tasm were the posterity of Lúd the son of Sem, and Jadís of the descendants of Jathar.5 These two tribes dwelt promiscuously together under the government of Tasm, till a certain tyrant made a law that no maid of the tribe of Jadís should marry unless first deflowered by him;6 which the Jadísians not enduring, formed a conspiracy, and inviting the king and chiefs of Tasm to an ehtertainment, privately hid their swords in the sand, and in the midst of their mirth fell on them and slew them all, and extirpated the greatest part of that tribe; however, the few who escaped obtaining aid of the king of Yaman, then (as is said) Dhu Habshán Ibn Aqrán,7 assaulted the Jadís and utterly destroyed them, there being scarce any mention made from that time of either of these tribes.8

The Jorhamites. The Amalekites conquer Lower Egypt.

The former tribe of Jorham (whose ancestor some pretend was one of the eight persons saved in the ark with Noah, according to a Muhammadan tradition9) was contemporary Edition: current; Page: [24] with Ád, and utterly perished.1 The tribe of Amalek were descended from Amalek the son of Eliphaz the son of Esau,2 though some of the Oriental authors say Amalek was the son of Ham the son of Noah,3 and others the son of Azd the son of Sem.4 The posterity of this person rendered themselves very powerful,5 and before the time of Joseph conquered the Lower Egypt under their king Walíd, the first who took the name of Pharaoh, as the Eastern writers tell us;6 seeming by these Amalekites to mean the same people which the Egyptian histories call Phœnician shepherds.7 But after they had possessed the throne of Egypt for some descents, they were expelled by the natives, and at length totally destroyed by the Israelites.8

Origin of the present Arabe.

The present Arabians, according to their own historians, are sprung from two stocks, Qahtán,* the same with Joctan the son of Eber,9 and Adnán, descended in a direct line from Ismail the son of Abraham and Hagar; the posterity of the former they call al Arab al Áriba,10 i.e., the genuine or pure Arabs, and those of the latter al Arab al Mustáriba, i.e., naturalised or insititious Arabs, though Edition: current; Page: [25] some reckon the ancient lost tribes to have been the only pure Arabians, and therefore call the posterity of Qahtán also Mutáriba, which word likewise signifies insititious Arabs, though in a nearer degree than Mustáriba, the descendants of Ismaíl being the more distant graff.

Their posterity have no claim to be pure Arabs.

The posterity of Ismaíl have no claim to be admitted as pure Arabs, their ancestor being by origin and language an Hebrew; but having made an alliance with the Jorhamites, by marrying a daughter of Mudád, and accustomed himself to their manner of living and language, his descendants became blended with them into one nation. The uncertainty of the descents between Ismaíl and Adnán is the reason why they seldom trace their genealogies higher than the latter, whom they acknowledge as father of their tribes, the descents from him downwards being pretty certain and uncontroverted.1*

The genealogy of these tribes being of great use to illustrate the Arabian history, I have taken the pains to Edition: current; Page: [26] form a genealogical table from their most approved authors, to which I refer the curious.

The Cushites.

Besides these tribes of Arabs mentioned by their own authors, who were all descended from the race of Sem, others of them were the posterity of Ham by his son Cush, which name is in Scripture constantly given to the Arabs and their country, though our version renders it Ethiopia; but, strictly speaking, the Cushites did not inhabit Arabia properly so called, but the banks of the Euphrates and the Persian Gulf, whither they came from Chuzestán or Susiana, the original settlement of their father.1 They might probably mix themselves in process of time with the Arabs of the other race, but the Eastern writers take little or no notice of them.

The Arabians were for some centuries under the government of the descendants of Qahtán; Yárab, one of his sons, founding the kingdom of Yaman, and Jorham, another of them, that of Hijáz.

The Himyár princes of Yaman.

The province of Yaman, or the better part of it, particularly the provinces of Saba and Hadramaut, was governed by princes of the tribe of Himyár, though at length the kingdom was translated to the descendants of Qahlán, his brother, who yet retained the title of King of Himyár, and had all of them the general title of Tubba, which signifies successor, and was affected to this race of princes as that of Cæsar was to the Roman emperors, and Khalífah to the successors of Muhammad. There were several lesser princes who reigned in other parts of Yaman, and were mostly, if not altogether, subject to the king of Himyár, whom they called the great king, but of these history has recorded nothing remarkable or that may be depended upon.2

The inundation of Aram.

The first great calamity that befell the tribes settled in Yaman was the inundation of Aram, which happened soon after the time of Alexander the Great, and is famous in Edition: current; Page: [27] the Arabian history.* No less than eight tribes were forced to abandon their dwellings upon this occasion, some of which gave rise to the two kingdoms of Ghassán and Hira. And this was probably the time of the migration of those tribes or colonies which were led into Mesopotamia by three chiefs, Baqr, Mudar, and Rabía, from whom the three provinces of that country are still named Diyár Baqr, Diyár Mudar, and Diyar Rabía.1 Abd-as-Shams, surnamed Saba, having built the city from him called Saba, and afterwards Márib, made a vast mound, or dam,2 to serve as a basin or reservoir to receive the water which came down from the mountains, not only for the use of the inhabitants, and watering their lands, but also to keep the country they had subjected in greater awe by being masters of the water. This building stood like a mountain above their city, and was by them esteemed so strong that they were in no apprehension of its ever failing The water rose to the height of almost twenty fathoms, and was kept in on every side by a work so solid, that many of the inhabitants had their houses built upon it. Every family had a certain portion of this water, distributed by aqueducts. But at length God, being highly displeased at their great pride and insolence, and resolving to humble and disperse them,† sent a mighty flood, which broke down the mound by night while the inhabitants were asleep, and carried away the whole city, with the neighbouring towns and people.3

Edition: current; Page: [28]

Ethiopian conquest of Yaman. Persian supremacy established.

The tribes which remained in Yaman after this terrible devastation still continued under the obedience of the former princes, till about seventy years before Muhammad, when the king of Ethiopia sent over forces to assist the Christians of Yaman against the cruel persecution of their king, Dhu Nuwás, a bigoted Jew, whom they drove to that extremity that he forcéd his horse into the sea, and so lost his life and crown,1 after which the country was governed by four Ethiopian princes successively, till Salif, the son of Dhu Yazan, of the tribe of Himyár, obtaining succours from Khusrú Anushirwán, king of Persia, which had been denied him by the emperor Heraclius, recovered the throne and drove out the Ethiopians, but was himself slain by some of them who were left behind. The Persians appointed the succeeding princes till Yaman fell into the hands of Muhammad, to whom Bázán, or rather Bádhán, the last of them, submitted, and embraced this new religion.2

This kingdom of the Himyárites is said to have lasted 2020 years,3 or, as others say, above 3000,4 the length of the reign of each prince being very uncertain.

The kingdom of Ghassán founded.

It has been already observed that two kingdoms were founded by those who left their country on occasion of the inundation of Aram: they were both out of the proper limits of Arabia. One of them was the kingdom of Ghassán. The founders of this kingdom were of the tribe of Azd, who, settling in Syria Damascena near a water called Ghassán, thence took their name, and drove out the Dajaamian Arabs of the tribe of Sálih, who before possessed the country;5 where they maintained their kingdom 400 years, as others say 600, or, as Abulfeda more exactly computes, 616. Five of these princes were named Hárith, which the Greeks write Aretas: and one Edition: current; Page: [29] of them it was whose governor ordered the gates of Damascus to be watched to take St. Paul.1 This tribe were Christians,* their last king being Jabalah the son of al Ayham, who, on the Arabs’ successes in Syria professed Muhammadism under the Khalífah Omar; but receiving a disgust from him, returned to his former faith, and retired to Constantinople.2

The kingdom of Hira.

The other kingdom was that of Hira, which was founded by Malik, of the descendants of Qablán3 in Chaldea or Irák; but after three descents the throne came by marriage to the Lakhmians, called also the Mundárs (the general name of those princes), who preserved their dominion, notwithstanding some small interruption by the Persians, till the Khalífat of Abu Baqr, when al Mundár al Maghrúr, the last of them, lost his life and crown by the arms of Khálid Ibn al Walíd. This kingdom lasted 622 years eight months.4 Its princes were under the protection of the kings of Persia, whose lieutenants they were over the Arabs of Irák, as the kings of Ghassán were for the Roman emperors over those of Syria.5

Jorhamites of the Hijáz. They are expelled and finally destroyed.

Jorham the son of Qahtán reigned in Hijáz, where his posterity kept the throne till the time of Ismaíl; but on his marrying the daughter of Mudád, by whom he had twelve sons, Qidár, one of them, had the crown resigned to him by his uncles the Jorhamites,6 though others say the descendants of Ismaíl expelled that tribe, who retiring to Johainah, were, after various fortune, at last all destroyed by an inundation.7

Edition: current; Page: [30]

Of the kings of Himyár, Hira, Ghassán, and Jorham, Dr. Pocock has given us catalogues tolerably exact, to which I refer the curious.1

The Phylarchic government of the Hijáz.

After the expulsion of the Jorhamites, the government of Hijáz seems not to have continued for many centuries in the hands of one prince, but to have been divided among the heads of tribes, almost in the same manner as the Arabs of the desert are governed at this day. At Makkah an aristocracy prevailed, where the chief management of affairs till the time of Muhammad was in the tribe of Quraish, especially after they had gotten the custody of the Kaabah from the tribe of Khuzáah.2

Besides the kingdoms which have been taken notice of, there were some other tribes which in latter times had princes of their own, and formed states of lesser note, particularly the tribe of Kinda;3 but as I am not writing a just history of the Arabs, and an account of them would be of no great use to my present purpose, I shall waive any further mention of them.

The government of Arabia after the time of Muhammad.

After the time of Muhammad, Arabia was for about three centuries under the Khalífahs his successors. But in the year 325 of the Hijra, great part of that country was in the hands of the Karmatians,4 a new sect who had committed great outrages and disorders even in Makkah, and to whom the Khalífahs were obliged to pay tribute, that the pilgrimage thither might be performed: of this sect I may have occasion to speak in another place. Afterwards Yaman was governed by the house of Thabátiba, descended from Ali, the son-in-law of Muhammad, whose sovereignty in Arabia some place so high as the time of Charlemagne. However, it was the posterity of Ali, or pretenders to be such, who reigned in Yaman and Egypt so early as the tenth century. The present reigning family in Yaman is probably that of Ayúb, a branch of which reigned there in Edition: current; Page: [31] the thirteenth century, and took the title of Khalífah and Imám, which they still retain.1* They are not possessed of the whole province of Yaman,2 there being several other independent kingdoms there, particularly that of Fartakh. The crown of Yaman descends not regularly from father to son, but the prince of the blood royal who is most in favour with the great ones, or has the strongest interest, generally succeeds.3

The governors of Makkah and Madína independent.

The governors of Makkah and Madína, who have always been of the race of Muhammad, also threw off their subjection to the Khalífahs, since which time four principal families, all descended from Hassan the son of Ali, have reigned there under the title of Sharíf, which signifies noble, as they reckon themselves to be on account of their descent. These are Banu Qádir, Banu Músa Thani, Banu Hásham, and Banu Kitáda;4 which last family now is, or lately was in the throne of Makkah, where they have reigned above 500 years.† The reigning family at Madína Edition: current; Page: [32] are the Banu Hásham, who also reigned at Makkah before those of Kitáda.1

The rulers of Yaman independent.

The kings of Yaman, as well as the princes of Makkah and Madína, are absolutely independent2 and not at all subject to the Turk, as some late authors have imagined3* These princes often making cruel wars among themselves, gave an opportunity to Selim I, and his son Sulaimán, to make themselves masters of the coasts of Arabia on the Red Sea, and of part of Yaman, by means of a fleet built at Sues: but their successors have not been able to maintain their conquests; for, except the port of Jidda, where Edition: current; Page: [33] they have a Pasha whose authority is very small, they possess nothing considerable in Arabia.1*

Arabian liberty preserved in all ages.

Thus have the Arabs preserved their liberty, of which few nations can produce so ancient monuments, with very little interruption, from the very Deluge; for though very great armies have been sent against them, all attempts to subdue them were unsuccessful. The Assyrian or Median empires never got footing among them.2 The Persian monarchs, though they were their friends, and so far respected by them as to have an annual present of frankincense,3 yet could never make them tributary;4 and were so far from being their masters, that Cambyses, on his expedition against Egypt, was obliged to ask their leave to pass through their territories;5 and when Alexander had subdued that mighty empire, yet the Arabians had so little apprehension of him, that they alone, of all the neighbouring nations, sent no ambassadors to him, either first or last; which, with a desire of possessing so rich a country, made him form a design against it, and had he not died before he could put it in execution,6 this people might possibly have convinced him that he was not invincible: and I do not find that any of his successors, either in Asia or Egypt, ever made any attempt against them.7 The Romans never conquered any part of Arabia properly so called; the most they did was to make some tribes in Syria tributary to them, as Pompey did one commanded by Sampsiceramus or Shams’alkerám, who reigned at Hems or Emesa;8 but none of the Romans, or any other nations that we know of, ever penetrated so far into Arabia as Ælius Gallus under Augustus Cæsar;9 yet he was so far from subduing it, as some authors pretend,10 that he Edition: current; Page: [34] was soon obliged to return without effecting anything considerable, having lost the best part of his army by sickness and other accidents.1 This ill success probably discouraged the Romans from attacking them any more; for Trajan, notwithstanding the flatteries of the historians and orators of his time, and the medals struck by him, did not subdue the Arabs; the province of Arabia, which it is said he added to the Roman empire, scarce reaching farther than Arabia Petræa, or the very skirts of the country. And we are told by one author,2 that this prince, marching against the Agarens who had revolted, met with such a reception that he was obliged to return without doing anything.

The religion of the Arabs before Muhammad.

The religion of the Arabs before Muhammad, which they call the state of ignorance, in opposition to the knowledge of God’s true worship revealed to them by their prophet, was chiefly gross idolatry; the Sabian religion having almost overrun the whole nation, though there were also great numbers of Christians, Jews, and Magians among them.

The Sabian religion described.

I shall not here transcribe what Dr. Prideaux3 has written of the original of the Sabian religion; but instead thereof insert a brief account of the tenets and worship of that sect. They do not only believe one God, but produce many strong arguments for his unity, though they also pay an adoration to the stars, or the angels and intelligences which they suppose reside in them, and govern the world under the Supreme Deity. They endeavour to perfect themselves in the four intellectual virtues, and believe the souls of wicked men will be punished for nine thousand ages, but will afterwards be received to mercy. They are obliged to pray three times4 a day; the first, half an hour or less before sunrise, ordering it so that they may, just as the sun rises, finish eight adorations, each containing three prostrations:5 the second prayer they Edition: current; Page: [35] end at noon, when the sun begins to decline, in saying which they perform five such adorations as the former: and the same they do the third time, ending just as the sun sets. They fast three times a year, the first time thirty days, the next nine days, and the last seven. They offer many sacrifices, but eat no part of them, burning them all. They abstain from beans, garlic, and some other pulse and vegetables.1 As to the Sabian Qibla, or part to which they turn their faces in praying, authors greatly differ; one will have it to be the north,2 another the south, a third Makkah, and a fourth the star to which they pay their devotions:3 and perhaps there may be some variety in their practice in this respect. They go on pilgrimage to a place near the city of Harran in Mesopotamia, where great numbers of them dwell, and they have also a great respect for the temple of Makkah, and the pyramids of Egypt;4 fancying these last to be the sepulchres of Seth, and of Enoch and Sabi his two sons, whom they look on as the first propagators of their religion; at these structures they sacrifice a cock and a black calf, and offer up incense.5 Besides the Book of Psalms, the only true Scripture they read, they have other books which they esteem equally sacred, particularly one in the Chaldean tongue which they call the Book of Seth, and which is full of moral discourses. This sect say they took the name of Sabian from the above mentioned Sabi, though it seems rather to be derived from צבא, Saba,6 or the host of heaven, which they worship.7 Travellers commonly call them Christians of St. John the Baptist, whose disciples also they pretend to be, using a kind of baptism, which is the greatest mark they bear of Christianity. This is one of the religions, the practice of which Muhammad tolerated (on Edition: current; Page: [36] paying tribute), and the professors of it are often included in that expression of the Qurán, “those to whom the Scriptures have been given,” or literally, the people of the book.*

Arab idolatry and starworship.

The idolatry of the Arabs then, as Sabians, chiefly consisted in worshipping the fixed stars and planets, and the angels and their images, which they honoured as inferior deities, and whose intercession they begged, as their mediators with God. For the Arabs acknowledged one supreme God, the Creator and Lord of the universe, whom they called Allah Taála, the most high God; and their other deities, who were subordinate to him, they called simply, al Ilahát, i.e., the goddesses; which words the Grecians not understanding, and it being their constant custom to resolve the religion of every other nation into their own, and find out gods of theirs to match the others’, they pretend that the Arabs worshipped only two deities, Orotalt and Alilat, as those names are corruptly written, whom they will have to be the same with Bacchus and Urania; pitching on the former as one of the greatest of their own gods, and educated in Arabia, and on the other because of the veneration shown by the Arabs to the stars.1

They acknowledged one supreme God.

That they acknowledged one supreme God, appears, to omit other proof, from their usual form of addressing themselves to him, which was this, “I dedicate myself to thy service, O God! Thou hast no companion, except thy companion of whom thou art absolute master, and of whatever is his.”2 So that they supposed the idols not to be sui juris, though they offered sacrifices and other offerings to them, as well as to God, who was also often put off with the least portion, as Muhammad upbraids them. Thus when they planted fruit-trees or sowed a field, they divided it by a line into two parts, setting one apart for Edition: current; Page: [37] their idols, and the other for God; if any of the fruits happened to fall from the idol’s part into God’s, they made restitution; but if from God’s part into the idol’s, they made no restitution. So when they watered the idol’s grounds, if the water broke over the channels made for that purpose, and ran on God’s part, they dammed it up again; but if the contrary, they let it run on, saying, they wanted what was God’s, but he wanted nothing.1 In the same manner, if the offering designed for God happened to be better than that designed for the idol, they made an exchange, but not otherwise.2

Muhammad restored primitive monotheism.

It was from this gross idolatry, or the worship of inferior deities, or companions of God, as the Arabs continue to call them, that Muhammad reclaimed his countrymen, establishing the sole worship of the true God among them; so that how much soever the Muhammadans are to blame in other points, they are far from being idolaters,* as some ignorant writers have pretended.

Origin of star-worship.

The worship of the stars the Arabs might easily be led into, from their observing the changes of weather to happen at the rising and setting of certain of them,3 which after a long course of experience induced them to ascribe a divine power to those stars, and to think themselves indebted to them for their rains, a very great benefit and refreshment to their parched country: this superstition the Qurán particularly takes notice of.4

Edition: current; Page: [38]

The temple of Bait Ghumdán at Sanaa.

The ancient Arabians and Indians, between which two nations was a great conformity of religions, had seven celebrated temples, dedicated to the seven planets; one of which in particular, called Bait Ghumdán, was built in Sanaa, the metropolis of Yaman, by Dahaq, to the honour of al Zubarah or the planet Venus, and was demolished by the Khalífah Othman;1 by whose murder was fulfilled the prophetical inscription set, as is reported, over this temple, viz., “Ghumdán, he who destroyeth thee shall be slain.”2 The temple of Makkah is also said to have been consecrated to Zuhal, or Saturu.3

Different stars worshipped by different tribes.

Though these deities were generally reverenced by the whole nation, yet each tribe chose some one as the more peculiar object of their worship.

Thus as to the stars and planets, the tribe of Himyár chiefly worshipped the sun; Misam,4 al Dabaráh, or the Bull’s-eye; Lakhm and Jedám, al Múshtari, or Jupiter; Tay, Suhail, or Canopus; Qais, Sirius, or the Dog-star; and Asad, Atárid, or Mercury,5 Among the worshippers of Sirius, one Abu Qabsha was very famous; some will have him to be the same with Waháb, Muhammad’s grandfather by the mother, but others say he was of the tribe of Khuzáah. This man used his utmost endeavours to persuade the Quraish to leave their images and worship this star; for which reason Muhammad, who endeavoured also to make them leave their images, was by them nicknamed the son of Abu Qabsha.6 The worship of this star is particularly hinted at in the Qurán.7

Angels or gods worshipped as intercessors.

Of the angels or intelligences which they worshipped, the Qurán8 makes mention only of three, which were worshipped under female names;9 at Lat, al Uzza, and Mínáh. These were by them called goddesses, and the daughters Edition: current; Page: [39] of God; an appellation they gave not only to the angels, but also to their images, which they either believed to be inspired with life by God, or else to become the tabernacles of the angels, and to be animated by them; and they gave them divine worship, because they imagined they interceded for them with God.

The idol al Lát.

Al Lát was the idol of the tribe of Thakíf who dwelt at Tayif, and had a temple consecrated to her in a place called Nakhla. This idol al Mughairah destroyed by Muhammad’s order, who sent him and Abu Sofián on that commission in the ninth year of the Hijra.1 The inhabitants of Tayif, especially the women, bitterly lamented the loss of this their deity, which they were so fond of, that they begged of Muhammad, as a condition of peace, that it might not be destroyed for three years, and not obtaining that, asked only a month’s respite; but he absolutely denied it.2 There are several derivations of this word, which the curious may learn from Dr. Pocock;3 it seems most probably to be derived from the same root with Allah, to which it may be a feminine, and will then signify the goddess.

The idol al Uzza.

Al Uzza, as some affirm, was the idol of the tribes of Quraish and Kinánah,4 and part of the tribe of Salim;5 others6 tell us it was a tree called the Egyptian thorn, or acacia, worshipped by the tribe of Ghatfán, first consecrated by one Dhálim, who built a chapel over it, called Boss, so contrived as to give a sound when any person entered. Khálid Ibn Walíd being sent by Muhammad in the eighth year of the Hijra to destroy this idol, demolished the chapel, and cutting down this tree or image, burnt it: he also slew the priestess, who ran out with her hair dishevelled, and her hands on her head as a suppliant. Yet Edition: current; Page: [40] the author who relates this, in another place says, the chapel was pulled down, and Dhálim himself killed by one Zuhair, because he consecrated this chapel with design to draw the pilgrims thither from Makkah, and lessen the reputation of the Kaabah. The name of this deity is derived from the root azza, and signifies the most mighty.

The idol Mínáh.

Mínáh was the object of worship of the tribes of Hudhail and Khuzáah,1 who dwelt between Makkah and Madína, and, as some say,2 of the tribes of Aws, Khazraj, and Thakíf also. This idol was a large stone,3 demolished by one Saad, in the eighth year of the Hijra, a year so fatal to the idols of Arabia. The name seems derived from mana, to flow, from the flowing of the blood of the victims sacrificed to the deity; whence the valley of Mína,4 near Makkah, had also its name, where the pilgrims at this day slay their sacrifices.5

Idols Wadd, Sawá, Yaghúth, Yäúq, and Nasr.

Before we proceed to the other idols, let us take notice of five more, which with the former three are all the Qurán mentions by name, and they are Wadd, Sawá, Yaghúth, Yäúq, and Nasr. These are said to have been antediluvian idols, which Noah preached against, and were afterwards taken by the Arabs for gods, having been men of great merit and piety in their time, whose statues they reverenced at first with a civil honour only, which in process of time became heightened to a divine worship.6

Wadd was supposed to be the heaven, and was worshipped under the form of a man by the tribe of Qalb in Daumat al Jandal.7

Sawá was adored under the shape of a woman by the tribe of Hamadan, or, as others8 write, of Hudhail in Rohat. This idol lying under water for some time after the Deluge, was at length, it is said, discovered by the devil, and was worshipped by those of Hudhail, who instituted pilgrimages to it.9

Edition: current; Page: [41]

Yaghúth was an idol in the shape of a lion, and was the deity of the tribe of Madhaj and others who dwelt in Yaman.1 Its name seems to be derived from ghatha, which signifies to help.

Yäúq was worshipped by the tribe of Murád, or, according to others, by that of Hamadan,2 under the figure of a horse. It is said he was a man of great piety, and his death much regretted; whereupon the devil appeared to his friends in a human form, and undertaking to represent him to the life, persuaded them, by way of comfort, to place his effigies in their temples, that they might have it in view when at their devotions. This was done, and seven others of extraordinary merit had the same honours shown them, till at length their posterity made idols of them in earnest.3 The name Yäúq probably comes from the verb áqa, to prevent or avert.4

Nasr was a deity adored by the tribe of Himyár, or at Dhu’l Khalaah in their territories, under the image of an eagle, which the name signifies.

There are, or were, two statues at Bamiyan, a city of Cabul in the Indies, fifty cubits high, which some writers suppose to be the same with Yaghúth and Yäúq, or else with Mínáh and al Lát; and they also speak of a third standing near the others, but something less, in the shape of an old woman, called Nasram or Nasr. These statues were hollow within, for the secret giving of oracles;5 but they seem to have been different from the Arabian idols. There was also an idol at Súmenat in the Indies, called Lát or al Lát,* whose statue was fifty fathoms high, of a Edition: current; Page: [42] single stone, and placed in the midst of a temple supported by fifty-six pillars of massy gold: this idol Mahmúd Ibn Sabaqtaghín, who conquered that part of India, broke to pieces with his own hands.1

The worship of Hobai and other idols of the Kaabah.

Besides the idols we have mentioned, the Arabs also worshipped great numbers of others, which would take up too much time to have distinct accounts given of them; and not being named in the Qurán, are not so much to our present purpose: for besides that every housekeeper had his household god or gods, which he last took leave of and first saluted at his going abroad and returning home,2 there were no less than 360 idols,3 equalling in number the days of their year, in and about the Kaabah of Makkah: the chief of whom was Hobal,4 brought from Belka in Syria into Arabia by Amru Ibn Luhai, pretending it would procure them rain when they wanted it.5 It was the statue of a man, made of agate, which having by some accident lost a hand, the Quraish repaired it with one of gold: he held in his hand seven arrows without heads or feathers, such as the Arabs use in divination.6 This idol is supposed to have been the same with the image of Abraham,7 found and destroyed by Muhammad in the Kaabah, on his entering it, in the eighth year of the Hijra, when he took Makkah,8 and surrounded with a great number of angels and prophets, as inferior deities; among whom, as some say, was Ismaíl, with divining arrows in his hand also.9

The idols Asáf and Naílah of Safá and Marwa.

Asaf and Naílah, the former the image of a man, the latter of a woman, were also two idols brought with Hobal from Syria, and placed the one on Mount Safá, and the other on Mount Marwa.* They tell us Asáf was the son Edition: current; Page: [43] of Amru, and Nailah the daughter of Sahal, both of the tribe of Jorham, who committing whoredom together in the Kaabah, were by God converted into stone,1 and afterwards worshipped by the Quaraish, and so much reverenced by them, that though this superstition was condemned by Muhammad, yet he was forced to allow them to visit those mountains as monuments of divine justice.2

The dough-worship of the tribe of Hanífa.

I shall mention but one idol more of this nation, and that was a lump of dough worshipped by the tribe of Hanífa, who used it with more respect than the Papists do theirs, presuming not to eat it till they were compelled to it by famine.5

Origin of stone-worship.

Several of their idols, as Mínáh in particular, were no more than large rude stones, the worship of which the posterity of Ismaíl first introduced; for as they multiplied, and the territory of Makkah grew too strail for them, great numbers were obliged to seek new abodes; and on such migrations it was usual for them to take with them some of the stones of that reputed holy land, and set them up in the places where they fixed; and these stones they at first only compassed out of devotion, as they had accustomed to do the Kaabah. But this at last ended in rank idolatry, the Ismaílites forgetting the religion left them by their father so far as to pay divine worship to any fine stone they met with.4

Arab belief in a future life.

Some of the pagan Arabs believed neither a creation past, nor a resurrection to come, attributing the origin of things to nature, and their dissolution to age. Others believed both, among whom were those who, when they died, had their camel tied by their sepulchre, and so left, without meat or drink, to perish, and accompany them to the other world, lest they should be obliged, at the resurrection, to go on foot, which was reckoned very scandalous.5 Edition: current; Page: [44] Some believed a metempsychosis, and that of the blood near the dead person’s brain was formed a bird named Hámah, which once in a hundred years visited the sepulchre; though others say this bird was animated by the soul of him that is unjustly slain, and continually cries, Isqúni, Isqúni, i.e., “give me to drink”—meaning of the murderer’s blood—till his death be revenged, and then it flies away. This was forbidden by the Qurán to be believed.1

I might here mention several superstitious rites and customs of the ancient Arabs, some of which were abolished and others retained by Muhammad; but I apprehend it will be more convenient to take notice of them hereafter occasionally, as the negative or positive precepts of the Qurán, forbidding or allowing such practices, shall be considered.

Let us now turn our view from the idolatrous Arabs, to those among them who had embraced more rational religions.

The Magian religion adopted by some tribes.

The Persians had, by their vicinity and frequent intercourse with the Arabians, introduced the Magian religion among some of their tribes, particularly that of Tamím,2 a long time before Muhammad, who was so far from being unacquainted with that religion, that he borrowed many of his own institutions from it, as will be observed in the progress of this work. I refer those who are desirous to have some notion of Magism to Dr. Hyde’s curious account of it,3 a succinct abridgment of which may be read with much pleasure in another learned performance.4

Judaism introduced as a result of Roman persecution.

The Jews, who fled in great numbers into Arabia from the fearful destruction of their country by the Romans, made proselytes of several tribes, those of Kinánah, al Hárith Ibn Kaabah, and Kindah5 in particular, and in Edition: current; Page: [45] time became very powerful, and possessed of several towns and fortresses there. But the Jewish religion was not unknown to the Arabs, at least above a century before. Abu Qaríb Asad, taken notice of in the Qurán,1 who was king of Yaman, about 700 years before Muhammad,* is said to have introduced Judaism among the idolatrous Himyárites. Some of his successors also embraced the same religion, one of whom, Yusaf, surnamed Dhu Nuwás,2 was remarkable for his zeal and terrible persecution of all who would not turn Jews, putting them to death by various tortures, the most common of which was throwing them into a glowing pit of fire, whence he had the opprobrious appellation of the Lord of the Pit. This persecution is also mentioned in the Qurán.3

Christianity in Arabia.

Christianity had likewise made a very great progress among this nation before Muhammad. Whether St. Paul preached in any part of Arabia, properly so called,4 is uncertain; but the persecutions and disorders which happened in the Eastern Church soon after the beginning of the third century, obliged great numbers of Christians to seek for shelter in that country of liberty, who, being for the most part of the Jacobite communion, that sect generally prevailed among the Arabs.5 The principal tribes that embraced Christianity were Himyár, Ghassán, Rabía, Taghlab, Bahrá, Tunúkh,6 part of the tribes of Tay and Kudáa, the inhabitants of Najrán, and the Arabs of Hira.7 As to the two last, it may be observed that those of Najrán became Christians in the time of Dhu Nuwás,8 and very probably, Edition: current; Page: [46] if the story be true, were some of those who were converted on the following occasion, which happened about that time, or not long before. The Jews of Himyar challenged some neighbouring Christians to a public disputation, which was held sub dio for three days before the king and his nobility and all the people, the disputants being Cregentius, bishop of Tephra (which I take to be Dhafar) for the Christians, and Herbanus for the Jews. On the third day, Herbanus, to end the dispute, demanded that Jesus of Nazareth, if he were really diving, and in heaven, and could hear the prayers of his worshippers, should appear from heaven in their sight, and they would then believe in him: the Jews crying out with one voice, “Show us your Christ, alas! and we will become Christians.” Whereupon, after a terrible storm of thunder and lightning, Jesus Christ appeared in the air, surrounded with rays of glory, walking on a purple cloud having a sword in his hand, and an inestimable diadem on his head, and spake these words over the heads of the assembly “Behold I appear to you in your sight, I, who was crucified by your fathers.” After which the cloud received him from their sight. The Christians eried out, “Kyrie eleeson,” i.c., “Lord, have mercy upon us;” but the Jews were stricken blind, and recovered not till they were all baptized.1*

Numán, king of Hira, converted to Christianiry.

The Christians at Hira received a great accession by several tribes, who fled thither for refuge from the persecution of Dhu Nuwás. Al Numán, surnamed Abu Kabús, king of Hira, who was slain a few months before Muhammad’s birth, professed himself a Christia on the following occasion. This prince, in a drunken fit, ordered Edition: current; Page: [47] two of his intimate companions, who overcome with liquor had fallen asleop, to be buried alive. When he came to himself, he was extremely concerned at what he had done, and to expiate his crime, not only raised a monument to the memory of his friends, but set apart two days, one of which he called the unfortunate, and the other the fortunate day; making it a perpetual rule to himself, that whoever met him on the former day should be slain, and his blood sprinkled on the monument, but he that met him on the other day should be dismissed in safety, with magnificent gifts. On one of those unfortunate days there came before him accidentally an Arab of the tribe of Tay, who had once entertained this king when fatigued with hunting and separated from his attendants. The king, who could neither discharge him contrary to the order of the day, nor put him to death, against the laws of hospitality, which the Arabians religiously observe, proposed, as an expedient, to give the unhappy man a year’s respite, and to send him home with rich gifts for the support of his family, on condition that he found a surety for his returning at the year’s end to suffer death. One of the prince’s court, out of compassion, offered himself as his surety, and the Arab was discharged. When the last day of the term came, and no news of the Arab, the king, not at all displeased to save his host’s life, ordered the surety to prepare himself to die. Those who were by represented to the king that the day was not yet expired, and therefore he ought to have patience till the evening; but in the middle of their discourse the Arab appeared. The king, admiring the man’s generosity, in offering himself to certain death, which he might have avoided by letting his surety suffer, asked him what his motive was for so doing? to which he answered, that he had been taught to act in that manner by the religion he professed; and al Numán demanding what religion that was, he replied, the Christian. Whereupon the king desiring to have the doctrines of Christianity explained to him, was baptized, Edition: current; Page: [48] he and his subjects; and not only pardoned the man and his surety, but abolished his barbarous custom.1 This prince, however, was not the first king of Hira who embraced Christianity; al Mundár, his grandfather, having also professed the same faith, and built large churches in his capital.2

The extent of the Christian Church in Arabia.

Since Christianity had made so great a progress in Arabia, we may consequently suppose they had bishops in several parts, for the more orderly governing of the ehurches. A bishop of Dhafár has been already named, and we are told that Najrán was also a bishop’s see.3 The Jacobites (of which sect we have observed the Arabs generally were) had two bishops of the Arabs subject to their Mafrián,* or metropolitan of the East; one was called the bishop of the Arabs absolutely, whose seat was for the most part at Akula, which some others make the same with Kúfa,4 others a different town near Baghdád.5 The other had the title of bishop of the Scenite Arabs, of the tribe of Thaalab in Hira, or Hirta, as the Syrians call it, whose seat was in that city. The Nestorians had but one bishop, who presided over both these dioceses of Hira and Akula, and was immediately subject to their patriarch.6

Free thought and Zendiciam among the Quraiah.

These were the principal religions which obtained among the ancient Arabs; but as freedom of thought was the natural consequence of their political liberty and independence, some of them fell into other different opinions. The Quraish, in particular, were infected with Zendicism,7 an error supposed to have very near affinity with that of the Sadducees among the Jews, and, perhaps, not greatly Edition: current; Page: [49] different from Deism; for there were several of that tribe, even before the time of Muhammad, who worshipped one God and were free from idolatry,1 and yet embraced none of the other religions of the country.

Two classes of Arabs previous to Muhammad.

The Arabians before Muhammad were, as they yet are, divided into two sorts—those who dwell in cities and towns, and those who dwell in tents. The former lived by tillage, the cultivation of palm-trees, breeding and feeding of cattle, and the exercise of all sorts of trades,2 particularly merchandising,3 wherein they were very eminent, even in the time of Jacob. The tribe of Quraish were much addicted to commerce, and Muhammad, in his younger years, was brought up to the same business; it being customary for the Arabians to exercise the same trade that their parents did.4 The Arabs who dwelt in tents employed themselves in pasturage, and sometimes in pillaging of passengers; they lived chiefly on the milk and flesh of camels; they often changed their habitations, as the convenience of water and of pasture for their cattle invited them, staying in a place no longer than that lasted, and then removing in search of other.5 They generally wintered in Irak and the confines of Syria. This way of life is what the greater part of Ismaíl’s posterity have used, as more agreeable to the temper and way of life of their father; and is so well described by a late author,6 that I cannot do better than refer the reader to his account of them.

The dialects of the Arabic language. The art of writing in Arabia.

The Arabic language is undoubtedly one of the most ancient in the world, and arose soon after, if not at, the confusion of Babel. There were several dialects of it, very different from each other: the most remarkable were that spoken by the tribes of Himyár and the other genuine Arabs, Edition: current; Page: [50] and that of the Quraish. The Himyáritic seems to have approached nearer to the purity of the Syriac than the dialect of any other tribe; for the Arabs acknowledge their father Yarab to have been the first whose tongue deviated from the Syriac (which was his mother tongue, and is almost generally acknowledged by the Asiatics to be the most ancient) to the Arabic. The dialect of the Quraish is usually termed the pure Arabic, or, as the Qurán, which is written in this dialect, calls it, the perspicuous and clear Arabic; perhaps, says Dr. Pocock, because Ismaíl, their father, brought the Arabic he had learned of the Jorhamites nearer to the original Hebrew. But the politeness and elegance of the dialect of the Quraish is rather to be attributed to their having the custody of the Kaabah, and dwelling in Makkah, the centre of Arabia, as well more remote from intercourse with foreigners, who might corrupt their language, as frequented by the Arabs from the country all around, not only on a religious account, but also for the composing of their differences, from whose discourse and verses they took whatever words or phrases they judged more pure and elegant; by which means the beauties of the whole tongue became transfused into this dialect. The Arabians are full of the commendations of their language, and not altogether without reason; for it claims the preference of most others in many respects, as being very harmonious and expressive, and withal so copious, that they say no man without inspiration can be perfect master of it in its utmost extent; and yet they tell us, at the same time, that the greatest part of it has been lost; which will not be thought strange if we consider how late the art of writing was practised among them. For though it was known to Job,1 their countryman, and also to the Himyárites (who used a perplexed character called al Musnad, wherein the letters were not distinctly separate, and which was neither publicly taught, nor suffered to be used Edition: current; Page: [51] without permission first obtained), many centuries before Muhammad, as appears from some ancient monuments, said to be remaining in their character; yet the other Arabs, and those of Makkah in particular, were, for many ages, perfectly ignorant of it, unless such of them as were Jews or Christians.1 Murámir Ibn Murra of Anbár, a city of Irák, who lived not many years before Muhammad, was the inventor of the Arabic character, which Bashar the Kindian is said to have learned from those of Anbár, and to have introduced at Makkah but a little while before the institution of Muhammadism. These letters of Murámir were different from the Himyáritic; and though they were very rude, being either the same with or very much like the Cufic,2 which character is still found in inscriptions and some ancient books, yet they were those which the Arabs used for many years, the Qurán itself being at first written therein; for the beautiful character they now use was first formed from the Cufic by Ibn Muklah, Wazír (or Visir) to the Khalífahs al Muktadir, al Qáhir, and al Rádi, who lived about three hundred years after Muhammad, and was brought to great perfection by Ali Ibn Bawáb,3 who flourished in the following century, and whose name is yet famous among them on that account; yet it is said, the person who completed it, and reduced it to its present form, was Yaqút al Mustásami, secretary to al Mustásam, the last of the Khalífahs of the family of Abbás, for which reason he was surnamed al Khattái, or the Scribe.

Arab accomplishments and learning. Style of prose and poetry. Honour bestowed on poets. Poetic contests at the fair of Okátz

The accomplishments the Arabs valued themselves chiefly on were: 1. Eloquence, and a perfect skill in their own tongue; 2. Expertness in the use of arms and horsemanship; Edition: current; Page: [52] and 3. Hospitality.1 The first they exercised themselves in by composing of orations and poems. Their orations were of two sorts, metrical or prosaic, the one being compared to pearls strung, and the other to loose ones. They endeavoured to excel in both, and whoever was able, in an assembly, to persuade the people to a great enterprise or dissuade them from a dangerous one, or gave them other wholesome advice, was honoured with the title of Khatíb, or orator, which is now given to the Muhammadan preachers. They pursued a method very different from that of the Greek and Roman orators; their sentences being like loose gems, without connection, so that this sort of composition struck the audience chiefly by the fulness of the periods, the elegance of the expression, and the acuteness of the proverbial sayings; and so persuaded were they of their excelling in this way, that they would not allow any nation to understand the art of speaking in public except themselves and the Persians, which last were reckoned much inferior in that respect to the Arabians.2 Poetry was in so great esteem among them, that it was a great accomplishment, and a proof of ingenious extraction, to be able to express one’s self in verse with ease and elegance on any extraordinary occurrence; and even in their common discourse they made frequent applications to celebrated passages of their famous poets. In their poems were preserved the distinction of descents, the rights of tribes, the memory of great actions, and the propriety of their language; for which reasons an excellent poet reflected an honour on his tribe, so that as soon as any one began to be admired for his performances of this kind in a tribe, the other tribes sent publicly to congratulate them on the occasion and themselves made entertainments, at which the women assisted, dressed in their nuptial ornaments, singing to the sound of timbrels the happiness of their tribe, who had Edition: current; Page: [53] now one to protect their honour, to preserve their genealogies and the purity of their language, and to transmit their actions to posterity;1 for this was all performed by their poems, to which they were solely obliged for their knowledge and instructions, moral and economical, and to which they had recourse, as to an oracle, in all doubts and differences.2 No wonder, then, that a public congratulation was made on this account, which honour they yet were so far from making cheap, that they never did it but on one of these three occasions, which were reckoned great points of felicity, viz., on the birth of a boy, the rise of a poet, and the fall of a foal of generous breed. To keep up an emulation among their poets, the tribes had, once a year, a general assembly at Okátz,3 a place famous on this account, and where they kept a weekly mart or fair, which was held on our Sunday.4 This annual meeting lasted a whole month, during which time they employed themselves, not only in trading, but in repeating their poetical compositions, contending and vieing with each other for the prize; whence the place, it is said, took its name.5 The poems that were judged to excel were laid up in their kings’ treasuries, as were the seven celebrated poems, thence called al Muallaqát, rather than from their being hung up on the Kaabah, which honour they also had by public order, being written on Egyptian silk and in letters of gold; for which reason they had also the name of al Mudháhabát, or the golden verses.6

This fair suppressed by Muhammad.

The fair and assembly at Okátz were suppressed by Muhammad, in whose time, and for some years after, poetry seems to have been in some degree neglected by the Arabs, who were then employed in their conquests; which being completed, and themselves at peace, not only Edition: current; Page: [54] this study was revived,1 but almost all sorts of learning were encouraged and greatly improved by them. This interruption, however, occasioned the loss of most of their ancient pieces of poetry, which were then chiefly preserved by memory; the use of writing being rare among them in their time of ignorance.2 Though the Arabs were so early acquainted with poetry, they did not at first use to write poems of a just length, but only expressed themselves in verse occasionally; nor was their prosody digested into rules, till some time after Muhammad;3 for this was done, as it is said, by al Khalíl Ahmad al Faráhídi, who lived in the reign of the Khalífah Harún al Rashíd.4

Arab equestrian and military training.

The exercise of arms and horsemanship they were in a manner obliged to practise and encourage, by reason of the independence of their tribes, whose frequent jarrings made wars almost continual; and they chiefly ended their disputes in field battles, it being a usual saying among them that God had bestowed four peculiar things on the Arabs—that their turbans should be to them instead of diadems, their tents instead of walls and houses, their swords instead of entrenchments, and their poems instead of written laws.5

Their hospitality and liberality.

Hospitality was so habitual to them, and so much esteemed, that the examples of this kind among them exceed whatever can be produced from other nations. Hátim, of the tribe of Tay,6 and Hasan, of that of Fizárah,7 were particularly famous on this account; and the contrary Edition: current; Page: [55] vice was so much in contempt, that a certain poet upbraids the inhabitants of Wasat, as with the greatest reproach, that none of their men had the heart to give nor their women to deny.1

Nor were the Arabs less propense to liberality after the coming of Muhammad than their ancestors had been. I could produce many remarkable instances of this commendable quality among them,2 but shall content myself with the following. Three men were disputing in the court of the Kaabah which was the most liberal person among the Arabs. One gave the preference to Abdallah, the son of Jaafar, the uncle of Muhammad; another to Qais Ibn Saad Ibn Obádah; and the third gave it to Arábah, of the tribé of Aws. After much debate one that was present, to end the dispute, proposed that each of them should go to his friend and ask his assistance, that they might see what every one gave, and form a judgment accordingly. This was agreed to; and Abdallah’s friend, going to him, found him with his foot in the stirrup, just mounting his camel for a journey, and thus accosted him: “Son of the apostle of God, I am travelling and in necessity.” Upon which Abdallah alighted, and bade him take the camel with all that was upon her, but desired him not to part with a sword which happened to be fixed to the saddle, because it had belonged to Ali, the son of Abutálib. So he took the camel, and found on her some vests of silk and 4000 pieces of gold; but the thing of greatest value was the sword. The second went to Qais Ibn Saad, whose servant told him that his master was asleep, and desired to know his business. The friend answered that he came to ask Qais’s assistance, being in want on the road. Whereupon the servant said that he had rather supply his necessity than wake his master, and gave him a purse of 7000 pieces of gold, assuring him that it was all the money then in Edition: current; Page: [56] the house. He also directed him to go to those who had the charge of the camels, with a certain token, and take a camel and a slave and return home with them. When Qais awoke, and his servant informed him of what he had done, he gave him his freedom, and asked him why he did not call him, “For,” says he, “I would have given him more.” The third man went to Arábah, and met him coming out of his house in order to go to prayers, and leaning on two slaves, because his eyesight failed him. The friend no sooner made known his case, but Arábah let go the slaves, and clapping his hands together, loudly lamented his misfortune in having no money, but desired him to take the two slaves, which the man refused to do, till Arábah protested that if he would not accept of them he gave them their liberty, and leaving the slaves, groped his way along by the wall. On the return of the adventurers, judgment was unanimous, and with great justice, given by all who were present, that Arábah was the most generous of the three.

Nor were these the only good qualities of the Arabs; they are commended by the ancients for being most exact to their words1 and respectful to their kindred.2 And they have always been celebrated for their quickness of apprehension and penetration, and the vivacity of their wit, especially those of the desert.3

Their national defects and vices.

As the Arabs have their excellences, so have they, like other nations, their defects and vices. Their own writers acknowledge that they have a natural disposition to war, bloodshed, cruelty,* and rapine, being so much addicted Edition: current; Page: [57] to bear malice that they scarce ever forget an old grudge; which vindictive temper some physicians say is occasioned by their frequently feeding on camels’ flesh* (the ordinary diet of the Arabs of the desert, who are therefore observed to be most inclined to these vices), that creature being most malicious and tenacious of anger,1 which account suggests a good reason for a distinction of meats.

Strange apology for plundering propensity.

The frequent robberies committed by these people on merchants and travellers have rendered the name of an Arab almost infamous in Europe; this they are sensible of, and endeavour to excuse themselves by alleging the hard usage of their father Ismaíl, who, being turned out of doors by Abraham, had the open plains and deserts given him by God for his patrimony, with permission to take whatever he could find there; and on this account they think they may, with a safe conscience, indemnify themselves as well as they can, not only on the posterity of Isaac, but also on everybody else, always supposing a sort of kindred between themselves and those they plunder. And in relating their adventures of this kind, they think it sufficient to change the expression, and instead of “I robbed a man of such or such a thing,” to say “I gained it.”2 We must not, however, imagine that they are the less honest for this among themselves, or towards those Edition: current; Page: [58] whom they receive as friends; on the contrary, the strictest probity is observed in their camp, where everything is open and nothing ever known to be stolen.*1

The sciences in Arabia previous to Muhammad.

The sciences the Arabians chiefly cultivated before Muhammadism were three—that of their genealogies and history, such a knowledge of the stars as to foretell the changes of weather, and the interpretation of dreams.2 They used to value themselves excessively on account of the nobility of their families, and so many disputes happened on that occasion, that it is no wonder if they took great pains in settling their descents. What knowledge they had of the stars was gathered from long experience, and not from any regular study or astronomical rules.3 The Arabians, as the Indians also did, chiefly applied themselves to observe the fixed stars, contrary to other nations, whose observations were almost confined to the Edition: current; Page: [59] planets, and they foretold their effects from their influences, not their nature; and hence, as has been said, arose the difference of the idolatry of the Greeks and Chaldeans, who chiefly worshipped the planets, and that of the Indians, who worshipped the fixed stars. The stars or asterisms they most usually foretold the weather by were those they called Anwa, or the houses of the moon. These are twenty-eight in number, and divide the zodiac into as many parts, through one of which the moon passes every night;1 as some of them set in the morning, others rise opposite to them, which happens every thirteenth night; and from their rising and setting, the Arabs, by long experience, observed what changes happened in the air, and at length, as has been said, came to ascribe divine power to them; saying that their rain was from such or such a star; which expression Muhammad condemned, and absolutely forbade them to use it in the old sense, unless they meant no more by it than that God had so ordered the seasons, that when the moon was in such or such a mansion or house, or at the rising or setting of such and such a star, it should rain or be windy, hot or cold.2

The old Arabians, therefore, seem to have made, no further progress in astronomy, which science they afterwards cultivated with so much success and applause,* Edition: current; Page: [60] than to observe the influence of the stars on the weather and to give them names; and this it was obvious for them to do, by reason of their pastoral way of life, lying night and day in the open plains. The names they imposed on the stars generally alluded to cattle and flocks, and they were so nice in distinguishing them, that no language has so many names of stars and asterisms as the Arabic; for though they have since borrowed the names of several constellations from the Greeks, yet the far greater part are of their own growth, and much more ancient, particularly those of the more conspicuous stars, dispersed in several constellations, and those of the lesser constellations which are contained within the greater, and were not observed or named by the Greeks.1

Thus have I given the most succinct account I have been able of the state of the ancient Arabians before Muhammad, or, to use their expression, in the time of ignorance. I shall now proceed briefly to consider the state of religion in the East, and of the two great empires which divided that part of the world between them at the time of Muhammad’s setting up for a prophet, and what were the conducive circumstances and accidents that favoured his success.

Edition: current; Page: [(61)]

SECTION II.: OF THE STATE OF CHRISTIANITY, PARTICULARLY OF THE EASTERN CHURCHES, AND OF JUDAISM, AT THE TIME OF MUHAMMAD’S APPEARANCE; AND OF THE METHODS TAKEN BY HIM FOR THE ESTABLISHING HIS RELIGION, AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH CONCURRED THERETO.

The decline of true religion in the Church

If we look into the ecclesiastical historians even from the third century, we shall find the Christian world to have then had a very different aspect from what some authors have represented; and so far from being endued with active graces, zeal, and devotion, and established within itself with purity of doctrine, union, and firm profession of the faith,1 that on the contrary, what by the ambition of the clergy, and what by drawing the abtrusest niceties into controversy, and dividing and subdividing about them into endless schisms and contentious, they had so destroyed that peace, love, and charity from among them which the Gospel was given to promote, and instead thereof continually provoked each other to that malice, rancour, and every evil work, that they had lost the whole substance of their religion, while they thus eagerly contended for their own imaginations concerning it, and in a manner quite drove Christianity out of the world by those very controversies in which they disputed with each other about it.2 In these dark ages it was that most of those superstitions and corruptions we now justly abhor Edition: current; Page: [62] in the Church of Rome were not only broached but established, which gave great advantages to the propagation of Muhammadism. The worship of saints and images, in particular, was then arrived at such a scandalous pitch that it even surpassed whatever is now practised among the Romanists.1

Controversies in the Eastern Churches, and corruption of the clergy.

After the Nicene Council, the Eastern Church was engaged in perpetual controversies, and torn to pieces by the disputes of the Arians, Sabellians, Nestorians, and Eutychians, the heresies of the two last of which have been shown to have consisted more in the words and form of expression than in the doctrines themselves,2 and were rather the pretences than real motives of those frequent councils to and from which the contentious prelates were continually riding post, that they might bring everything to their own will and pleasure.3 And to support themselves by dependants and bribery, the clergy in any credit at court undertook the protection of some officer in the army, under the colour of which justice was publicly sold and all corruption encouraged.

In the Western Church Damasus and Ursicinus carried their contests at Rome for the episcopal seat so high, that they came to open violence and murder, which Viventius, the governor, not being able to suppress, he retired into the country, and left them to themselves, till Damasus prevailed. It is said that on this occasion, in the church of Sicininus, there were no less than one hundred and thirty-seven found killed in one day. And no wonder they were so fond of these seats, when they became by that means enriched by the presents of matrons, and went abroad in their chariots and sedans in great state, feasting sumptuously even beyond the luxury of princes, quite Edition: current; Page: [63] contrary to the way of living of the country prelates, who alone seemed to have some temperance and modesty left.1

Evil influence of Roman emperors in the Church.

These dissensions were greatly owing to the emperors, and particularly to Constantius, who, confounding the pure and simple Christian religion with anile superstitions, and perplexing it with intricate questions, instead of reconciling different opinions, excited many disputes, which he fomented as they proceeded with infinite altercations.2 This grew worse in the time of Justinian, who, not to be behind the bishops of the fifth and sixth centuries in zeal, thought it no crime to condemn to death a man of a different persuasion from his own.3

This corruption of doctrine and morals in the princes and clergy was necessarily followed by a general depravity of the people;4 those of all conditions making it their sole business to get money by any means, and then to squander it away when they had got it in luxury and debauchery.5

Arabia famous for heresy.

But, to be more particular as to the nation we are now writing of, Arabia was of old famous for heresies,6 which might be in some measure attributed to the liberty and independency of the tribes. Some of the Christians of that nation believed the soul died with the body, and was to be raised again with it at the last day:7 these Origen is said to have convinced.8 Among the Arabs it was that the heresies of Ebion, Beryllus, and the Nazaræans,9 and also that of the Collyridians, were broached, or at least propagated; the latter introduced the Virgin Mary for God, or worshipped her as such, offering her a sort of twisted cake called collyris, whence the sect had its name.10

Edition: current; Page: [64]

Mariolatry and the doctrine of the Trinity

This notion of the divinity of the Virgin Mary was also believed by some at the Council of Nice, who said there were two gods besides the Father, viz., Christ and the Virgin Mary, and were thence named Mariamites.1 Others imagined her to be exempt from humanity and deified; which goes but little beyond the Popish superstition in calling her the complement of the Trinity, as if it were imperfect without her. This foolish imagination is justly condemned in the Qurán2 as idolatrous, and gave a handle to Muhammad to attack the Trinity itself.*

Arabia refuge for heretics.

Other sects there were of many denominations within the borders of Arabia, which took refuge there from the proscriptions of the imperial edicts, several of whose notions Muhammad incorporated with his religion, as may be observed hereafter.

The power of the Jews in Arabia, and Muhammad’s treatment of them.

Though the Jews were an inconsiderable and despised people in other parts of the world, yet in Arabia, whither many of them fled from the destruction of Jerusalem, they grew very powerful, several tribes and princes embracing their religion; which made Muhammad at first show great regard to them, adopting many of their opinions, doctrines, and customs, thereby to draw them, if possible, into his interest. But that people, agreeably to their wonted obstinacy, were so far from being his proselytes, that they were some of the bitterest enemies he had, waging continual war with him, so that their reduction cost him infinite trouble and danger, and at last his life. This aversion of theirs created at length as great a one in him to them, so that he used them, for the latter part of his life, much worse than he did the Christians, and frequently exclaims against them in his Qurán. His followers to this day observe the same difference between them and Edition: current; Page: [65] the Christians, treating the former as the most abject and contemptible people on earth.

Islám succeeds as a religion through political weakness of Rome and Persia.

It has been observed by a great politician,1 that it is impossible a person should make himself a prince and found a state without opportunities. If the distracted state of religion favoured the designs of Muhammad on that side, the weakness of the Roman and Persian monarchies might flatter him with no less hopes in any attempt on those once formidable empires, either of which, had they been in their full vigour, must have crushed Muhammadism in its birth; whereas nothing nourished it more than the success the Arabians met with in their enterprises against those powers, which success they failed not to attribute to their new religion and the divine assistance thereof.

Decline of the Roman empire.

The Roman empire declined apace after Constantine, whose successors were for the generality remarkable for their ill qualities, especially cowardice and cruelty. By Muhammad’s time, the western half of the empire was overrun by the Goths, and the eastern so reduced by the Huns on the one side and the Persians on the other, that it was not in a capacity of stemming the violence of a powerful invasion. The Emperor Maurice paid tribute to the Khagán or king of the Huns; and after Phocas had murdered his master, such lamentable havoc there was among the soldiers, that when Heraclius came, not above seven years after, to muster the army, there were only two soldiers left alive of all those who had borne arms when Phocas first usurped the empire. And though Heraclius was a prince of admirable courage and conduct, and had done what possibly could be done to restore the discipline of the army, and had had great success against the Persians, so as to drive them not only out of his own dominions, but even out of part of their own; yet still the very vitals of the empire seemed to be mortally wounded, Edition: current; Page: [66] that there could no time have happened more fatal to the empire or more favourable to the enterprises of the Arabs, who seem to have been raised up on purpose by God to be a scourge to the Christian Church for not living answerably to that most holy religion which they had received.1

The general luxury and degeneracy of manners into which the Grecians were sunk also contributed not a little to the enervating their forces, which were still further drained by those two great destroyers, monachism and persecution.

The communism of Mazdak.

The Persians had also been in a declining condition for some time before Muhammad, occasioned chiefly by their intestine broils and dissensions, great part of which arose from the devilish doctrines of Manes and Mazdak. The opinions of the former are tolerably well known: the latter lived in the reign of Khusrú Kobád, and pretended himself a prophet sent from God to preach a community of women and possessions, since all men were brothers and descended from the same common parents. This he imagined would put an end to all feuds and quarrels among men, which generally arose on account of one of the two. Kobád himself embraced the opinions of this impostor, to whom he gave leave, according to his new doctrine, to lie with the queen his wife; which permission Anushirwán, his son, with much difficulty prevailed on Mazdak not to make use of. These sects had certainly been the immediate ruin of the Persian empire, had not Anushirwán, as soon as he succeeded his father, put Mazdak to death with all his followers, and the Manicheans also, restoring the ancient Magian religion.2

Decline of the Persian empire.

In the reign of this prince, deservedly surnamed the Just, Muhammad was born. He was the last king of Persia who deserved the throne, which after him was Edition: current; Page: [67] almost perpetually contended for, till subverted by the Arabs. His son Hormuz lost the love of his subjects by his excessive cruelty: having had his eyes put out by his wife’s brothers, he was obliged to resign the crown to his son Khusrú Parvíz, who at the instigation of Bahrám Chubín had rebelled against him, and was afterwards strangled. Parvíz was soon obliged to quit the throne to Bahrám, but obtaining succours of the Greek emperor Maurice, he recovered the crown; yet towards the latter end of a long reign he grew so tyrannical and hateful to his subjects, that they held private correspondence with the Arabs, and he was at length deposed, imprisoned, and slain by his son Shirúyah.1 After Parvíz no less than six princes possessed the throne in less than six years. These domestic broils effectually brought ruin upon the Persians; for though they did rather by the weakness of the Greeks than their own force ravage Syria and sack Jerusalem and Damascus under Khusrú Parvíz, and, while the Arabs were divided and independent, had some power in the province of Yaman, where they set up the four last kings before Muhammad; yet, when attacked by the Greeks under Heraclius, they not only lost their new conquests, but part of their own dominions; and no sooner were the Arabs united by Muhammadism, than they beat them in every battle, and in a few years totally subdued them.

The political power of Arabia consolidated under Muhammad.

As these empires were weak and declining, so Arabia, at Muhammad’s setting up, was strong and flourishing; having been peopled at the expense of the Grecian empire, whence the violent proceedings of the domineering sects forced many to seek refuge in a free country, as Arabia then was, where they who could not enjoy tranquillity and their conscience at home found a secure retreat. The Arabians were not only a populous nation, but unacquainted with the luxury and delicacies of the Greeks and Persians, and inured to hardships of all sorts, living Edition: current; Page: [68] in a most parsimonious manner, seldom eating any flesh, drinking no wine, and sitting on the ground. Their political government was also such as favoured the designs of Muhammad; for the division and independency of their tribes were so necessary to the first propagation of his religion and the foundation of his power, that it would have been scarce possible for him to have effected either had the Arabs been united in one society. But when they had embraced his religion, the consequent union of their tribes was no less necessary and conducive to their future conquests and grandeur.

This posture of public affairs in the Eastern world, both as to its religious and political state, it is more than probable Muhammad was well acquainted with, he having had sufficient opportunities of informing himself in those particulars in his travels as a merchant in his younger years; and though it is not to be supposed his views at first were so extensive as afterwards, when they were enlarged by his good fortune, yet he might reasonably promise himself success in his first attempts from thence. As he was a man of extraordinary parts and address, he knew how to make the best of every incident, and turn what might seem dangerous to another to his own advantage.

Muhammad’s birth, nurture, marriage, and fortune.

Muhammad came into the world under some disadvantages, which he soon surmounted. His father, Abdallah, was a younger son1 of Abd al Mutallib, and dying very young and in his father’s lifetime, left his widow and infant son in very mean circumstances, his whole substance consisting but of five camels and one Ethiopian she-slave.2 Abd al Mutallib was therefore obliged to take care of his grandchild Muhammad, which he not only did during his Edition: current; Page: [69] life, but at his death enjoined his eldest son, Abu Tálib, who was brother to Abdallah by the same mother, to provide for him for the future; which he very affectionately did, and instructed him in the business of a merchant, which he ollowed; and to that end he took him with him into Syria when he was but thirteen, and afterward recommended him to Khadíjah, a noble and rich widow, for her factor, in whose service he behaved himself so well, that by making him her husband she soon raised him to an equality with the richest in Makkah.

He forms the design of reforming the religion of his countrymen.

After he began by this advantageous match to live at his ease it was that he formed a scheme of establishing a new religion, or, as he expressed it, of replanting the only true and ancient one, professed by Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and all the prophets,1 by destroying the gross idolatry into which the generality of his countrymen had fallen, and weeding out the corruptions and superstitions which the latter Jews and Christians had, as he thought, introduced into their religion, and reducing it to its original purity, which consisted chiefly in the worship of one only God.

Opinions as to probable motives of Muhammad His hold on the doctrine of the unity of God. Probably a monomaniac on the subject of religion.

Whether this was the effect of enthusiasm, or only a design to raise himself to the supreme government of his country, I will not pretend to determine. The latter is the general opinion of Christian writers, who agree that ambition and the desire of satisfying his sensuality were the motives of his undertaking. It may be so, yet his first views, perhaps, were not so interested. His original design of bringing the pagan Arabs to the knowledge of the true God was certainly noble, and highly to be commended; for I cannot possibly subscribe to the assertion of a late learned writer,2 that he made that nation exchange their idolatry for another religion altogether as bad. Muhammad was no doubt fully satisfied in his conscience of the truth of his grand point, the unity of God, which was what Edition: current; Page: [70] he chiefly attended to; all his other doctrines and institutions being rather accidental and unavoidable than premeditated and designed. Since, then, Muhammad was certainly himself persuaded of his grand article of faith, which, in his opinion, was violated by all the rest of the world, not only by the idolaters, but by the Christians, as well those who rightly worshipped Jesus as God, as those who superstitiously adored the Virgin Mary saints, and images; and also by the Jews, who are accused in the Qurán of taking Ezra for the son of God;1 it is easy to conceive that he might think it a meritorious work to rescue the world from such ignorance and superstition; and by degrees, with the help of a warm imagination, which an Arab seldom wants,2 to suppose himself destined by Providence for the effecting that great reformation. And this fancy of his might take still deeper root in his mind during the solitude he thereupon affected, usually retiring for a month in the year to a cave in Mount Hira, near Makkah. One thing which may be probably urged against the enthusiasm of this prophet of the Arabs is the wise conduct and great prudence he all along showed in pursuing his design, which seem inconsistent with the wild notions of a hot-brained religionist. But though all enthusiasts or madmen do not behave with the same gravity and circumspection that he did, yet he will not be the first instance, by several, of a person who has been out of the way only quoad hoc, and in all other respects acted with the greatest decency and precaution.*

He was ignorant of the pure doctrines of the Christian religion

The terrible destruction of the Eastern Churches, once so glorious and flourishing, by the sudden spreading of Muhammadism, and the great successes of its professors against the Christians, necessarily inspire a horror of that Edition: current; Page: [71] religion in those to whom it has been so fatal; and no wonder if they endeavour to set the character of its founder and its doctrines in the most infamous light. But the damage done by Muhammad to Christianity seems to have been rather owing to his ignorance than malice; for his great misfortune was his not having a competent knowledge of the real and pure doctrines of the Christian religion, which was in his time so abominably corrupted, that it is not surprising if he went too far, and resolved to abolish what he might think incapable of reformation.

His natural! ambition is inflamed by success.

It is scarce to be doubted but that Muhammad had a violent desire of being reckoned an extraordinary person, which he could attain to by no means more effectually than by pretending to be a messenger sent from God to inform mankind of his will. This might be at first his utmost ambition; and had his fellow-citizens treated him less injuriously, and not obliged him by their persecutions to seek refuge elsewhere, and to take up arms against them in his own defence, he had perhaps continued a private person, and contented himself with the veneration and respect due to his prophetical office; but being once got at the head of a little army, and encouraged by success, it is no wonder if he raised his thoughts to attempt what had never before entered into his imagination.

His sensuality and doctrine of polygamy in accordance with the morality of his time

That Muhammad was, as the Arabs are by complexion,1 a great lover of women, we are assured by his own confession; and he is constantly upbraided with it by the controversial writers, who fail not to urge the number of women with whom he had to do, as a demonstrative argument of his sensuality, which they think sufficiently proves him to have been a wicked man, and consequently an impostor. But it must be considered that polygamy, though it be forbidden by the Christian religion, was in Muhammad’s time frequently practised in Edition: current; Page: [72] Arabia and other parts of the East, and was not counted an immorality, nor was a man worse esteemed on that account; for which reason Muhammad permitted the plurality of wives, with certain limitations, among his own followers, who argue for the lawfulness of it from several reasons, and particularly from the examples of persons allowed on all hands to have been good men, some of whom have been honoured with the divine correspondence. The several laws relating to marriages and divorces, and the peculiar privileges granted to Muhammad in his Qurán, were almost all taken by him from the Jewish decisions, as will appear hereafter; and therefore he might think those institutions the more just and reasonable, as he found them practised or approved by the professors of a religion which was confessedly of divine original.

A tolerable morality was necessary to the success of his enterprise.

But whatever were his motives, Muhammad had certainly the personal qualifications which were necessary to accomplish his undertaking. The Muhammadan authors are excessive in their commendations of him, and speak much of his religious and moral virtues; as his piety, veracity, justice, liberality, clemency, humility and abstinence. His charity in particular, they say, was so conspicuous, that he had seldom any money in his house, keeping no more for his own use than was just sufficient to maintain his family; and he frequently spared even some part of his own provisions to supply the necessities of the poor; so that before the year’s end he had generally little or nothing left.1 “God,” says al Bokhári, “offered him the keys of the treasures of the earth, but he would not accept them.” Though the eulogies of these writers are justly to be suspected of partiality, yet thus much, I think, may be inferred from thence, that for an Arab who had been educated in Paganism, and had but a very imperfect knowledge of his duty, he was a man of at least Edition: current; Page: [73] tolerable morals, and not such a monster of wickedness as he is usually represented. And indeed it is scarce possible to conceive that a wretch of so profligate a character should ever have succeeded in an enterprise of this nature; a little hypocrisy and saving of appearances, at least, must have been absolutely necessary; and the sincerity of his intentions is what I pretend not to inquire into.

His intellectual gifts and suavity of manner.

He had indisputably a very piercing and sagacious wit, and was thoroughly versed in all the arts of insinuation.1 The Eastern historians describe him to have been a man of an excellent judgment and a happy memory; and these natural parts were improved by a great experience and knowledge of men, and the observations he had made in his travels. They say he was a person of few words, of an equal, cheerful temper, pleasant and familiar in conversation, of inoffensive behaviour towards his friends, and of great condescension towards his inferiors.2 To all which were joined a comely agreeable person and a polite address; accomplishments of no small service in preventing those in his favour whom he attempted to persuade.

His ignorance of letters and the use he made of it

As to acquired learning, it is confessed he had none at all; having had no other education than what was customary in his tribe, who neglected, and perhaps despised, what we call literature, esteeming no language in comparison with their own, their skill in which they gained by use and not by books, and contenting themselves with improving their private experience by committing to memory such passages of their poets as they judged might be of use to them in life. This defect was so far from being prejudicial or putting a stop to his design, that he made the greatest use of it; insisting that the writings which he produced as revelations from God could not possibly be a forgery of his own, because it was not Edition: current; Page: [74] conceivable that a person who could neither write nor read should be able to compose a book of such excellent doctrine and in so elegant a style, and thereby obviating an objection that might have carried a great deal of weight.1 And for this reason his followers, instead of being ashamed of their master’s ignorance, glory in it. as an evident proof of his divine mission, and scruple not to call him (as he is indeed called in the Qurán itself2) the “illiterate prophet.”

His scheme for the inauguration of his religion

The scheme of religion which Muhammad framed, and the design and artful contrivance of those written revelations (as he pretended them to be) which compose his Qurán, shall be the subject of the following sections: I shall therefore in the remainder of this relate, as briefly as possible. the steps he took towards the effecting of his enterprise, and the accidents which concurred to his success therein.

He begins with the conversion of his own household

Before he made any attempt abroad, he rightly judged that it was necessary for him to begin by the conversion of his own household. Having therefore retired with his family, as he had done several times before, to the above-mentioned cave in Mount Hira, he there opened the secret of his mission to his wife Khadíjah, and acquainted her that the Angel Gabriel had just before appeared to him, and told him that he was appointed the apostle of God: he also repeated to her a passage3 which he pretended had been revealed to him by the ministry of the angel, with those other circumstances of his first appearance which are related by the Muhammadan writers. Khadíjah received the news with great joy,4 swearing by him in whose hands her soul was that she trusted he would be the prophet of his nation, and immediately communicated what she had heard to her cousin, Waraqa Ibn Edition: current; Page: [75] Naufal, who, being a Christian, could write in the Hebrew character, and was tolerably well versed in the Scriptures:1 and he as readily came into her opinion, assuring her that the same angel who had formerly appeared unto Moses was now sent to Muhammad.2 This first overture the prophet made in the month of Pamadhán, in the fortieth year of his age, which is therefore usually called the year of his mission.

Secret manœuvring. Gains other couverts, from his own tribe. At the end of three years he openly proclaims his doctrine. His relatives reject his prophetic clairus,

Encouraged by so good a beginning, he resolved to proceed, and try for some time what he could do by private persuasion, not daring to hazard the whole affair by exposing it too suddenly to the public. He soon made proselytes of those under his own roof, viz.) his wife Khadíjah his servant Zaid Ibn Hárith (to whom he gave his freedom3 on that occasion, which afterwards became a rule to his followers*). and his cousin and pupil Ali, the son of Abu Tálib, though then very young; but this last, making no account of the other two, used to style himself the “first of believers.” The next person Muhammad applied to was Abdallah Ibn Abi Kuháfa, surnamed Abu Baqr, a man of great authority among the Quraish, and one whose interest he well knew would be of great service to him, as it soon appeared; for Abu Baqr being gained over, prevailed also on Othmán Ibn Affán, Abd al Rahmán Ibn Awf, Saad Ibn Abi Wakkás, Al Zubair Edition: current; Page: [76] Ibn al Awám, and Talha Ibn Obaidullah, all principal men in Makkah, to follow his example. These men were the six chief companions, who, with a few more, were converted in the space of three years, at the end of which Muhammad, having, as he hoped, a sufficient interest to support him, made his mission no longer a secret, but gave out that God had commanded him to admonish his near relations;1 and in order to do it with more convenience and prospect of success, he directed Ali to prepare an entertainment, and invite the sons and descendants of Abd al Mutallib, intending then to open his mind to them. This was done, and about forty of them came; but Abu Lahab, one of his uncles, making the company break up before Muhammad had an opportunity of speaking, obliged him to give them a second invitation the next day; and when they were come, he made them the following speech: “I know no man in all Arabia who can offer his kindred a more excellent thing than I now do you. I offer you happiness both in this life and in that which is to come. God Almighty hath commanded me to call you unto him; who therefore among you will be assisting to me herein, and become my brother and my vicegerent?” All of them hesitating and declining the matter, Ali at length rose up and declared that he would be his assistant, and vehemently threatened* those who should oppose him. Muhammad upon this embraced Ali with great demonstrations of affection, and desired ali who were present to hearken to and obey him as his deputy, at which the Edition: current; Page: [77] company broke out into great laughter, telling Abu Tálib that he must now pay obedience to his son.

Opposition aroused by his preaching. He is protected by Abu Tálib.

This repulse, however, was so far from discouraging Muhammad, that he began to preach in public to the people, who heard him with some patience, till he came to upbraid them with the idolatry, obstinacy, and perverseness of themselves and their fathers, which so highly provoked them that they declared themselves his enemies, and would soon have procured his ruin had he not been protected by Abu Tálib. The chief of the Quraish warmly solicited this person to desert his nephew, making frequent remonstrances against the innovations he was attempting, which proving ineffectual, they at length threatened him with an open rupture if he did not prevail on Muhammad to desist. At this Abu Tálib was so far moved that he earnestly dissuaded his nephew from pursuing the affair any further, representing the great danger he and his friends must otherwise run. But Muhammad was not to be intimidated, telling his uncle plainly “that if they set the sun against him on his right hand and the moon on his left, he would not leave his enterprise;” and Abu Tálib, seeing him so firmly resolved to proceed, used no further arguments, but promised to stand by him against all his enemies.1

First emigration to Abyssinia.

The Quraish, finding they could prevail neither by fair words nor menaces, tried what they could do by force and ill-treatment, using Muhammad’s followers so very injuriously that it was not safe for them to continue at Makkah any longer: whereupon Muhammad gave leave to such of them as had not friends to protect them to seek for refuge elsewhere. And accordingly, in the fifth year of the prophet’s mission, sixteen of them, four of whom were women, fled into Ethiopia; and among them Othman Ibn Affán and his wife Rakiah, Muhammad’s daughter. This was the first flight; but afterwards several others followed Edition: current; Page: [78] them, retiring one after another, to the number of eighty-three men and eighteen women, besides children.1 These refugees were kindly received by the Najáshi,2 or king of Ethiopia, who refused to deliver them up to those whom the Quraish sent to demand them, and, as the Arab writers unanimously attest, even professed the Muhammadan religion.

Conversion of Hamza and Omar Social ostracism of the Háshimites.

In the sixth year of his mission3 Muhammad had the pleasure of seeing his party strengthened by the conversion of his uncle Hamza, a man of great valour and merit, and of Omar Ibn al Khattáb, a person highly esteemed, and once a violent opposer of the prophet. As persecution generally advances rather than obstructs the spreading of a religion, Islám made so great a progress among the Arab tribes, that the Quraish, to suppress it effectually, if possible, in the seventh year of Muhammad’s mission,4 made a solemn league or covenant against the Háshimites and the family of al Mutallib, engaging themselves to contract no marriages with any of them, and to have no communication with them; and to give it the greater sanction, reduced it into writing, and laid it up in the Kaabah. Upon this the tribe became divided into two factions, and the family of Háshim all repaired to Abu Tálib, as their head, except only Abd al Uzza, surnamed Abu Lahab, who, out of his inveterate hatred to his nephew and his doctrine, went over to the opposite party, whose chief was Abu Sofián Ibn Harb of the family of Ommeya.

The league against the Háshimites broken.

The families continued thus at variance for three years; but in the tenth year of his mission, Muhammad told his uncle Abu Tálib that God had manifestly showed his disapprobation of the league which the Quraish had made against them, by sending a worm to eat out every word of the Edition: current; Page: [79] instrument except the name of God. Of this accident Muhammad had probably some private notice; for Abu Tálib went immediately to the Quraish and acquainted them with it; offering, if it proved false, to deliver his nephew up to them; but in case it were true, he insisted that they ought to lay aside their animosity, and annul the league they had made against the Háshimites. To this they acquiesced, and going to inspect the writing, to their great astonishment found it to be as Abu Tálib had said, and the league was thereupon declared void.

Death of Abu Talib and Khadíjah.

In the same year Abu Tálib died, at the age of above fourscore; and it is the general opinion that he died an infidel, though others say that when he was at the point of death he embraced Muhammadism, and produce some passages out of his poetical compositions to confirm their assertion. About a month, or, as some write, three days after the death of this great benefactor and patron, Muhammad had the additional mortification to lose his wife Khadíjah, who had so generously made his fortune. For which reason this year is called the year of mourning.1

Renewed persecution. Seeks refuge in Tayif and is rejected.

On the death of these two persons the Quraish began to be more troublesome than ever to their prophet, and especially some who had formerly been his intimate friends; insomuch that he found himself obliged to seek for shelter elsewhere, and first pitched upon Tayif, about sixty miles east from Makkah, for the place of his retreat. Thither therefore he went, accompanied by his servant Zaid, and applied himself to two of the chief of the tribe of Thakif, who were the inhabitants of that place; but they received them very coldly. However, he stayed there a month; and some of the more considerate and better sort of men treated him with a little respect; but the slaves and inferior people at length rose against him, and bringing him to the wall of the city, obliged him to depart Edition: current; Page: [80] and return to Makkah, where he put himself under the protection of al Mutám Ibn Adi.1

Makes converts of six men of Madina

This repulse greatly discouraged his followers: however, Muhammad was not wanting to himself, but boldly continued to preach to the public assemblies at the pilgrimage, and gained several proselytes, and among them six of the inhabitants of Yathrab of the Jewish tribe of Khazraj, who on their return home failed not to speak much in commendation of their new religion, and exhorted their fellow-citizens to embrace the same.

Night journey from Makkah to Jerusalem and heaven.

In the twelfth year of his mission it was that Muhammad gave out that he had made his night journey from Makkah to Jerusalem and thence to heaven,2 so much spoken of by all that write of him. Dr. Prideaux3 thinks he invented it either to answer the expectations of those who demanded some miracle as a proof of his mission, or else, by pretending to have conversed with God, to establish the authority of whatever he should think fit to leave behind by way of oral tradition, and make his sayings to serve the same purpose as the oral law of the Jews. But I do not find that Muhammad himself ever expected so great a regard should be paid to his sayings as his followers have since done; and seeing he all along disclaimed any power of performing miracles, it seems rather to have been a fetch of policy to raise his reputation, by pretending to have actually conversed with God in heaven, as Moses had heretofore done in the mount, and to have received several institutions immediately from him, whereas before he contented himself with persuading that he had all by the ministry of Gabriel.

This device raises his credit

However, this story seemed so absurd and incredible, that several of his followers left him upon it, and it had probably ruined the whole design, had not Abu Baqr vouched for his veracity, and declared that if Muhammad Edition: current; Page: [81] affirmed it to be true, he verily believed the whole. This happy incident not only retrieved the prophet’s credit, but increased it to such a degree, that he was secure of being able to make his disciples swallow whatever he pleased to impose on them for the future. And I am apt to think this fiction, notwithstanding its extravagance, was one of the most artful contrivances Muhammad ever put in practice, and what chiefly contributed to the raising of his reputation to that great height to which it afterwards arrived.

The first pledge of Aqabah

In this year, called by the Muhammadans the accepted year, twelve men of Yathrab or Madína, of whom ten were of the tribe of Khazraj, and the other two of that of Aws, came to Makkah, and took an oath of fidelity to Muhammad at al Aqabah, a hill on the north of that city. This oath was called the women’s oath, not that any women were present at this time, but because a man was not thereby obliged to take up arms in defence of Muhammad or his religion; it being the same oath that was afterwards exacted of the women, the form of which we have in the Qurán,1 and is to this effect, viz.: “That they should renounce all idolatry; that they should not steal, nor commit fornication, nor kill their children (as the pagan Arabs used to do when they apprehended they should not be able to maintain them2), nor forge calumnies; and that they should obey the prophet in all things that were reasonable.” When they had solemnly engaged to do all this, Muhammad sent one of his disciples, named Musáb Ibn Omair, home with them, to instruct them more fully in the grounds and ceremonies of his new religion.

Missionary success at Madína.

Musáb, being arrived at Madína, by the assistance of those who had been formerly converted, gained several prosolytes, particularly Osaid Ibn Hudaira, a chief man of the city, and Saad Ibn Muádh, prince of the tribe of Aws; Muhammadism spreading so fast, that there was Edition: current; Page: [82] scarce a house wherein there were not some who had embraced it.

The second pledge of Aqabah.

The next year, being the thirteenth of Muhammad’s mission, Musáb returned to Makkah, accompanied by seventy-three men and two women of Madína, who had professed Islám, besides some others who were as yet unbelievers. On their arrival, they immediately sent to Muhammad, and offered him their assistance, of which he was now in great need, for his adversaries were by this time grown so powerful in Makkah, that he could not stay there much longer without imminent danger. Wherefore he accepted their proposal, and met them one night by appointment, at al Aqabah above mentioned, attended by his uncle al Abbas, who, though he was not then a believer wished his nephew well, and made a speech to those of Madína, wherein he told them, that as Muhammad was obliged to quit his native city and seek an asylum elsewhere, and they had offered him their protection, they would do well not to deceive him; and that if they were not firmly resolved to defend and not betray him, they had better declare their minds, and let him provide for his safety in some other manner. Upon their protesting their sincerity, Muhammad swore to be faithful to them, on condition that they should protect him against all insults as heartily as they would their own wives and families. They then asked him what recompense they were to expect if they should happen to be killed in his quarrel; he answered, Paradise. Whereupon they pledged their faith to him, and so returned home,1 after Muhammad had chosen twelve out of their number, who were to have the same authority among them as the twelve apostles of Christ had among his disciples.2

Islám thus far propagated by persuasion. Muhammad’s moderation owing to his helplessness.

Hitherto Muhammad had propagated his religion by fair means, so that the whole success of his enterprise, before his flight to Madína, must be attributed to persuasion Edition: current; Page: [83] only, and not to compulsion. For before this second oath of fealty or inauguration at al Aqabah he had no permission to use any force at all; and in several places of the Qurán, which he pretended were revealed during his stay at Makkah, he declares his business was only to preach and admonish; that he had no authority to compel any person to embrace his religion; and that whether people believed or not was none of his concern, but belonged solely unto God. And he was so far from allowing his followers to use force, that he exhorted them to bear patiently those injuries which were offered them on account of their faith; and when persecuted himself, chose rather to quit the place of his birth and retire to Madína, than to make any resistance. But this great passiveness and moderation seems entirely owing to his want of power, and the great superiority of his opposers for the first twelve years of his mission; for no sooner was he enabled, by the assistance of those of Madína, to make head against his enemies, than he gave out that God had allowed him and his followers to defend themselves against the infidels; and at length, as his forces increased, he pretended to have the divine leave even to attack them, and to destroy idolatry, and set up the true faith by the sword; finding by experience that his designs would otherwise proceed very slowly, if they were not utterly overthrown, and knowing, on the other hand, that innovators, when they depend solely on their own strength, and can compel, seldom run any risk; from whence the politician observes it follows, that all the armed prophets have succeeded, and the unarmed ones have failed.* Moses, Cyrus, Theseus, Edition: current; Page: [84] and Romulus would not have been able to establish the observance of their institutions for any length of time had they not been armed.1 The first passage of the Qurán which gave Muhammad the permission of defending himself by arms is said to have been that in the twenty-second chapter; after which a great number to the same purpose were revealed.

He authorises the enforcement of his doctrines by the sword. The sword declares Islám to be of human origin. Christianity compared with it

That Muhammad had a right to take up arms for his own defence against his unjust persecutors may perhaps be allowed; but whether he ought afterwards to have made use of that means for the establishing of his religion is a question I will not here determine. How far the secular power may or ought to interpose in affairs of this nature, mankind are not agreed. The method of converting by the sword gives no very favourable idea of the faith which is so propagated, and is disallowed by everybody in those of another religion, though the same persons are willing to admit of it for the advancement of their own, supposing that though a false religion ought not to be established by authority, yet a true one may; and accordingly force is almost as constantly employed in these cases by those who have the power in their hands, as it is constantly complained of by those who suffer the violence. It is certainly one of the most convincing proofs that Muhammadism was no other than a human invention that it owed its progress and establishment almost entirely to the sword; and it is one of the strongest demonstrations of the divine original of Christianity that it prevailed against all the force and powers of the world by the mere dint of its own truth, after having stood the assaults of all manner of persecutions, as well as other oppositions, for 300 years together, and at length made the Roman emperors themselves submit thereto;2 after which time, indeed, this proof seems to fail, Christianity Edition: current; Page: [85] being then established and Paganism abolished by public authority, which has had great influence in the propagation of the one and destruction of the other ever since.1 But to return.

Emigration of Muslims to Madina. Consequent excitement among the Quraish. They conspire against Muhammad,

Muhammad having provided for the security of his companions as well as his own by the league offensive and defensive which he had now concluded with those of Madína, directed them to repair thither, which they accordingly did; but himself with Abu Baqr and Ali stayed behind, having not yet received the divine permission, as he pretended, to leave Makkah. The Quraish, fearing the consequence of this new alliance, began to think it absolutely necessary to prevent Muhammad’s escape to Madína, and having held a council thereon, after several milder expedients had been rejected, they came to a resolution that he should be killed; and agreed that a man should be chosen out of every tribe for the execution of this design, and that each man should have a blow at him with his sword, that the guilt of his blood might fall equally on all the tribes, to whose united power the Háshimites were much inferior, and therefore durst not attempt to revenge their kinsman’s death.*

Edition: current; Page: [86]

This conspiracy was scarce formed when by some means or other it came to Muhammad’s knowledge, and he gave out that it was revealed to him by the Angel Gabriel, who had now ordered him to retire to Madína. Whereupon, to amuse his enemies, he directed Ali to lie down in his place and wrap himself up in his green cloak, which he did, and Muhammad escaped miraculously, as they pretend,1 to Abu Baqr’s house, unperceived by the conspirators, who had already assembled at the prophet’s door. They in the meantime, looking through the crevice and seeing Ali, whom they took to be Muhammad himself, asleep, continued watching there till morning, when Ali arose, and they found themselves deceived.

Muhammad escapes to Madína.

From Abu Baqr’s house Muhammad and he went to a cave in Mount Thúr, to the south-east* of Makkah, accompanied only by Amar Ibn Fuháirah, Abu Baqr’s servant, and Abdallah Ibn Oraikat, an idolater, whom they had hired for a guide. In this cave they lay hid three days to avoid the search of their enemies, which they very narrowly escaped, and not without the assistance of more miracles than one; for some say that the Quraish were struck with blindness, so that they could not find the cave; others, that after Muhammad and his companions were got in, two pigeons laid their eggs at the entrance, and a spider covered the mouth of the cave with Edition: current; Page: [87] her web,1 which made them look no further.2* Abu Baqr, seeing the prophet in such imminent danger, became very sorrowful, whereupon Muhammad comforted him with these words, recorded in the Qurán:3 “Be not grieved, for God is with us.” Their enemies being retired, they left the cave and set out for Madína by a by-road, and having fortunately, or, as the Muhammadans tell us, miraculously, escaped some who were sent to pursue them, arrived safely at that city, whither Ali followed them in three days, after he had settled some affairs at Makkah.4†

He builds a mosque at Madína.

The first thing Muhammad did after his arrival at Madina was to build a temple for his religious worship, and a house for himself, which he did on a parcel of ground which had before served to put camels in, or, as others tell us, for a burying-ground, and belonged to Sahal and Sohail the sons of Amru, who were orphaus.5 This action Dr. Prideaux exclaims against, representing it as a flagrant instance of injustice, for that, says he, he violently Edition: current; Page: [88] dispossessed these poor orphans, the sons of an inferior artificer (whom the author he quotes1 calls a carpenter) of this ground, and so founded the first fabric of his worship with the like wickedness as he did his religion.2 But to say nothing of the improbability that Muhammad should act in so impolitic a manner at his first-coming, the Muhammadan writers set this affair in a quite different light; one tells us that he treated with the lads about the price of the ground, but they desired he would accept it as a present;3 however, as historians of good credit assure us, he actually bought it,4 and the money was paid by Abu Baqr.5 Besides, had Muhammad accepted it as a present, the orphans were in circumstances sufficient to have afforded it; for they were of a very good family, of the tribe of Najjár, one of the most illustrious among the Arabs, and not the sons of a carpenter, as Dr. Prideaux’s author writes, who took the word Najjár, which signifies a carpenter, for an appellative, whereas it is a proper name.6

Makes predatory raids on the caravans of the Quraish

Muhammad being securely settled at Madína, and able not only to defend himself against the insults of his enemies, but to attack them, began to send out small parties to make reprisals on the Quraish; the first party consisting of no more than nine men, who intercepted and plundered a caravan belonging to that tribe, and in the action took two prisoners. But what established his affairs very much, and was the foundation on which he built all his succeeding greatness, was the gaining of the battle of Badr, which was fought in the second year of the Hijra, and is so famous in the Muhammadan history.7 As my design is not to write the life of Muhammad, but only to describe the manner in which he carried on his enterprise, I shall not enter into any detail of his subsequent Edition: current; Page: [89] battles and expeditions, which amounted to a considerable number. Some reckon no less than twenty-seven expeditions wherein Muhammad was personally present, in nine of which he gave battle, besides several other expeditions in which he was not present;1 some of them, however, will be necessarily taken notice of in explaining several passages of the Qurán. His forces he maintained partly by the contributions of his followers for this purpose, which he called by the name of Zakát or alms, and the paying of which he very artfully made one main article of his religion; and partly by ordering a fifth part of the plunder to be brought into the public treasury for that purpose, in which matter he likewise pretended to act by the divine direction.

He goes to Makkah, but is not allowed to enter. The ten years’ truce

In a few years, by the success of his arms (notwithstanding he sometimes came off by the worst), he considerably raised his credit and power. In the sixth year of the Hijra he set out with 1400 men to visit the temple of Makkah, not with any intent of committing hostilities, but in a peaceable manner. However, when he came to al Hudaibiya, which is situate partly within and partly without the sacred territory, the Quraish sent to let him know that they would not permit him to enter Makkah, unless he forced his way; whereupon he called his troops about him, and they all took a solemn oath of fealty or homage to him, and he resolved to attack the city; but those of Makkah sending Arau Ibn Masud, prince of the tribe of Thakíf, as their ambassador to desire peace, a truce was concluded between them for ten years, by which any person was allowed to enter into league either with Muhammad or with the Quraish, as he thought fit.

Muslim veneration of their prophet.

It may not be improper, to show the inconceivable veneration and respect the Muhammadans by this time had for their prophet, to mention the account which the above-mentioned ambassador gave the Quraish, at his Edition: current; Page: [90] return, of their behaviour. He said he had been at the courts both of the Roman emperor and of the king of Persia, and never saw any prince so highly respected by his subjects as Muhammad was by his companions; for whenever he made the ablution, in order to say his prayers, they ran and catched the water that he had used; and whenever he spit, they immediately licked it up, and gathered up every hair that fell from him with great superstition.1*

He sends letters inviting foreign princes to embrace Islam

In the seventh year of the Hijra, Muhammad began to think of propagating his religion beyond the bounds of Arabia, and sent messengers to the neighbouring princes with letters to invite them to Muhammadism. Nor was this project without some success. Khusrú Parvíz, then king of Persia, received his letter with great disdain, and tore it in a passion, sending away the messenger very abruptly, which when Muhammad heard, he said, “God shall tear his kingdom.” And soon after a messenger came to Muhammad from Badhán, king of Yaman, who was a dependent on the Persians,2 to acquaint him that he had received orders to send him to Khusrú. Muhammad put off his answer till the next morning, and then told the messenger it had been revealed to him that night that Khusrú was slain by his son Shirúyih adding that he was well assured his new religion and empire should rise to as great a height as that of Khusrú, and therefore bid him advise his master to embrace Muhammadism. The messenger being returned, Badhán in a few days received a letter from Shirúyih informing him of his father’s death, and ordering him to give the prophet no further disturbance; Edition: current; Page: [91] whereupon Badhán and the Persians with him turned Muhammadans.1*

The emperor Heraclius, as the Arabian historians assure us, received Muhammad’s letter with great respect, laying it on his pillow, and dismissed the bearer honourably. And some pretend that he would have professed this new faith had he not been afraid of losing his crown.2†

Mukauicas’ presents to Muhammad

Muhammad wrote to the same effect to the king of Ethiopia, though he had been converted before, according to the Arab writers; and to Mukaukas, governor of Egypt, who gave the messenger a very favourable reception, and sent several valuable presents to Muhammad, and among the rest two girls, one of which, named Mary,3 became a great favourite with him. He also sent letters of the like purport to several Arab princes, particularly one to al Harith Ibn Abi Shamir,4 king of Ghassán, who returning for answer that he would go to Muhammad himself, the prophet said, “May his kingdom perish;” another to Haudha Ibn Ali, king of Yamáma, who was a Christian, and having some time before professed Islám, had lately returned to his former faith; this prince sent back a very rough answer, upon which Muhammad cursing him, he died soon after; and a third to al Mundár Ibn Edition: current; Page: [92] Sáwa, king of Bahrain, who embraced Muhammadism, and all the Arabs of that country followed his example.1*

Khálid and Amru converted The expedition to Syria.

The eighth year of the Hijra was a very fortunate year to Muhammad. In the beginning of it Khálid Ibn al Walid and Amru Ibn al As, both excellent soldiers, the first of whom afterwards conquered Syria and other countries, and the latter Egypt, became proselytes of Muhammadism. And soon after the prophet sent 3000 men against the Grecian forces to revenge the death of one of his ambassadors, who being sent to the governor of Bosra on the same errand as those who went to the above-mentioned princes, was slain by an Arab of the tribe of Ghassan at Múta, a town in the territory of Balká in Syria, about three days’ journey eastward from Jerusalem, near which town they encountered. The Grecians being vastly, superior in number (for, including the auxiliary Arabs, they had an army of 100,000 men), the Muhammadans were repulsed in the first attack, and lost successively three of their generals, viz., Zaid Ibn Hárith, Muhammad’s freedman, Jaafar, the son of Abu Tálib, and Abdallah Ibn Rawáha; but Khálid Ibn al Walid, succeeding to the command, overthrew the Greeks with a great slaughter, and brought away abundance of rich spoil;2† on occasion of which action Muhammad gave him the Edition: current; Page: [93] honourable title of Saif min suyúf Allah, One of the Swords of God.1

The truce with the people of Makkah broken.

In this year also Muhammad took the city of Makkah, the inhabitants whereof had broken the truce concluded on two years before. For the tribe of Baqr, who were confederates of the Quraish, attacking those of Khuzáah, who were allies of Muhammad, killed several of them, being supported in the action by a party of the Quraish themselves. The consequence of this violation was soon apprehended, and Abu Sufián himself made a journey to Madína on purpose to heal the breach and renew the truce,2 but in vain, for Muhammad, glad of this opportunity, refused to see him; whereupon he applied to Abu Baqr and Ali, but they giving him no answer, he was obliged to return to Makkah as he came.

Muhammad captures Makkah.

Muhammad immediately gave orders for preparations to be made, that he might surprise the people of Makkah while they were unprovided to receive him. In a little time he began his march thither, and by the time he came near the city his forces were increased to 10,000 men. Those of Makkah being not in a condition to defend themselves against so formidable an army, surrendered at discretion, and Abu Sufián saved his life by turning Muhammadan. About twenty-eight of the idolaters were killed by a party under the command of Khálid; but this happened contrary to Muhammad’s orders, who, when he entered the town, pardoned all the Quraish on their submission, except only six men and four women, who were more obnoxious than ordinary (some of them having apostatised), and were solemnly proscribed by the prophet himself; but of these no more than three men and one woman were put to death, the rest obtaining pardon on Edition: current; Page: [94] their embracing Muhammadism, and one of the women making her escape.1

The remainder of this year Muhammad employed in destroying the idols in and round about Makkah, sending several of his generals on expeditions for that purpose, and to invite the Arabs to Islám: wherein it is no wender if they now met with success.

Many tribes converted.

The next year, being the ninth of the Hijra, the Muhammadans call “the year of embassies,” for the Arabs had been hitherto expecting the issue of the war between Muhammad and the Quraish; but so soon as that tribe—the principal of the whole nation, and the genuine descendants of Ismaíl, whose prerogatives none offered to dispute—had submitted, they were satisfied that it was not in their power to oppose Muhammad, and therefore began to come in to him in great numbers, and to send embassies to make their submissions to him, both to Makkah, while he stayed there, and also to Madína, whither he returned this year.2 Among the rest, five kings of the tribe of Himyár professed Muhammadism, and sent ambassadors to notify the same.3

Ali’s expedition to Yaman.

In the tenth year Ali was sent into Yaman to propagate the Muhammadan faith there, and as it is said, converted the whole tribe of Hamdán in one day.* Their example was quickly followed by all the inhabitants of that province, except only those of Najrán, who, being Christians, chose rather to pay tribute.4

Arabia accepts Islám.

Thus was Muhammadism established and idolatry rooted out, even in Muhammad’s lifetime (for he died the next year), throughout all Arabia, except only Yamáma, where Musailama, who set up also for a prophet Edition: current; Page: [95] as Muhammad’s competitór, had a great party, and was not reduced till the Khalífat of Abu Baqr. And the Arabs being then united in one faith and under one prince, found themselves in a condition of making those conquests which extended the Muhammadan faith over so great a part of the world.

Edition: current; Page: [(96)]

SECTION III.: OF THE QURÁN ITSELF, THE PECULIARITIES OF THAT BOOK; THE MANNER OF ITS BEING WRITTEN AND PUBLISHED, AND THE GENERAL DESIGN OF IT.

Import of the word qaraa.

The word Qurán, derived from the verb qaraa, to read, signifies properly in Arabic “the reading,” or rather “that which ought to be read;” by which name the Muhammadans denote not only the entire book or volume of the Qurán, but also any particular chapter or section of it; just as the Jews call either the whole Scripture or any part of it by the name of Karâh or Mikra,1 words of the same origin and import; which observation seems to overthrow the opinion of some learned Arabians, who would have the Qurán so named because it is a collection of the loose chapters or sheets which compose it—the verb karaa signifying also to gather or collect;2 and may also, by the way, serve as an answer to those who object3 that the Qurán must be a book forged at once, and could not possibly be revealed by parcels at different times during the course of several years, as the Muhammadans affirm, because the Qurán is often mentioned and called by that name in the very book itself. It may not be amiss to observe, that the syllable Al in the word Alqurán is only the Arabic article, signifying the, and therefore ought to be omitted when the English article is prefixed.

Edition: current; Page: [97]

Other names applied to the Qurán.

Besides this peculiar name, the Qurán is also honoured with several appellations common to other books of Scripture: as, al Furqán, from the verb faraqa, to divide or distinguish; not, as the Muhammadan doctors say, because those books are divided into chapters or sections, or distinguish between good and evil, but in the same notion that the Jews use the word Perek or Pirka, from the same root, to denote a section or portion of Scripture.1 It is also called al Musháf, the volume, and al Kitáb, the Book, by way of eminence, which answers to the Biblia of the Greeks; and al Dhikr, the admonition, which name is also given to the Pentateuch and Gospels.

Divisions of the Qurán.

The Qurán is divided into 114 larger portions of very unequal length, which we call chapters, but the Arabians Súwar, in the singular Súra, a word rarely used on any other occasion, and properly signifying a row, order, or regular series, as a course of bricks in building or a rank of soldiers in an army; and is the same in use and import with the Súra or Tora of the Jews, who also call the fifty-three sections of the Pentateuch Sedárim, a word of the same signification.2

Titles of the chapters.

These chapters are not in the manuscript copies distinguished by their numerical order, though for the reader’s ease they are numbered in this edition, but by particular titles, which (except that of the first, which is the initial chapter, or introduction to the rest, and by the old Latin translator not numbered among the chapters) are taken sometimes from a particular matter treated of or person mentioned therein, but usually from the first word of note, exactly in the same manner as the Jews have named their Sedárim; though the words from which some chapters are denominated be very far distant, towards the middle, or perhaps the end of the chapter, which seems Edition: current; Page: [98] ridiculous. But the occasion of this seems to have been, that the verse or passage wherein such word occurs was, in point of time, revealed and committed to writing before the other verses of the same chapter which precede it in order: and the title being given to the chapter before it was completed or the passages reduced to their present order, the verse from whence such title was taken did not always happen to begin the chapter. Some chapters have two or more titles, occasioned by the difference of the copies.

Some of the chapters having been revealed at Makkah and others at Madína, the noting this difference makes a part of the title; but the reader will observe that several of the chapters are said to have been revealed partly at Makkah and partly at Madína; and as to others, it is yet a dispute among the commentators to which place of the two they belong.

The verses of the chapters.

Every chapter is subdivided into smaller portions, of very unequal length also, which we customarily call verses; but the Arabic word is Ayát, the same with the Hebrew Ototh, and signifies signs or wonders; such as are the secrets of God, his attributes, works, judgments, and ordinances, delivered in those verses; many of which have their particular titles also, imposed in the same manner as those of the chapters.

*Notwithstanding this subdivision is common and well known, yet I have never yet seen any manuscript wherein the verses are actually numbered; though in some copies the number of verses in each chapter is set down after the title, which we have therefore added in the table of the chapters And the Muhammadans seem to have some scruple in making an actual distinction in their copies, because the chief disagreement between their several editions of the Qurán consists in the division and number of the verses and for this reason I have not taken upon me to make any such division.

Edition: current; Page: [99]

The seven principal editions of the Quran. Number of verses, words, &c.

Having mentioned the different editions of the Qurán, if may not be amiss here to acquaint the reader that there are seven principal editions, if I may so call them, or ancient copies of that book, two of which were published and used at Madína, a third at Makkah, a fourth at Kúfa, a fifth at Basra, a sixth in Syria, and a seventh called the common or vulgar edition. Of these editions, the first, of Madína, makes the whole number of the verses 6000; the second and fifth, 6214, the third, 6219; the fourth, 6236; the sixth, 6226; and the last, 6225. But they are all said to contain the same number of words, namely, 77,639,1 and the same number of letters, viz., 323,015;2* for the Muhammadans have in this also imitated the Jews, that they have superstitiously numbered the very words and letters of their law; nay, they have taken the pains to compute (how exactly I know not) the number of times each particular letter of the alphabet is contained in the Qurán.3

Other divisions of the Qurán.

Besides these unequal divisions of chapter and verse, the Muhammadans have also divided their Qurán into sixty equal portions, which they call Ahzáb in the singular Hizb, each subdivided into four equal parts; which is also an imitation of the Jews, who have an ancient division of their Mishna into sixty portions called Massictoth;4 but the Qurán is more usually divided into thirty sections only, named Ajzá, from the singular Juz, each of twice the length of the former, and in the like manner subdivided into four parts. These divisions are for the use of the readers of the Qurán in the royal temples, or in the Edition: current; Page: [100] adjoining chapels where the emperors and great men are interred. There are thirty of these readers belonging to every chapel, and each reads his section every day, so that the whole Qurán is read over once a day.1 I have seen several copies divided in this manner, and bound up in as many volumes; and have thought it proper to mark these divisions in the margin of this translation by numeral letters.*

The Bismillah.

Next after the title, at the head of every chapter, except only the ninth, is prefixed the following solemn form, by the Muhammadans called the Bismillah, “In the name of the most merciful God;” which form they constantly place at the beginning of all their books and writings in general, as a peculiar mark or distinguishing characteristic of their religion, it being counted a sort of impiety to omit it. The Jews for the same purpose make use of the form, “In the name of the Lord,” or, “In the name of the great God;” and the Eastern Christians that of, “In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” But I am apt to believe Muhammad really took this form, as he did many other things, from the Persian Magi, who used to begin their books in these words, Banám Yazdán bakhshaïshghar dádár; that is, “In the name of the most merciful, just God.”2

This auspicatory form, and also the titles of the chapters, are by the generality of the doctors and commentators believed to be of divine original, no less than the text itself; but the more moderate are of opinion they are only human additions, and not the very word of God.

The letters A.L.M., &c.

There are twenty-nine chapters of the Qurán, which have this peculiarity, that they begin with certain letters Edition: current; Page: [101] of the alphabet, some with a single one, others with more. These letters the Muhammadans believe to be the peculiar marks of the Qurán, and to conceal several profound mysteries, the certain understanding of which, the more intelligent confess, has not been communicated to any mortal, their prophet only excepted. Notwithstanding which, some will take the liberty of guessing at their meaning by that species of Cabbala called by the Jews Notarikon,1 and suppose the letters to stand for as many words expressing the names and attributes of God, his works, ordinances, and decrees; and therefore these mysterious letters, as well as the verses themselves, seem in the Qurán to be called signs. Others explain the intent of these letters from their nature or organ, or else from their value in numbers, according to another species of the Jewish Cabbala called Gematria;2 the uncertainty of which conjectures sufficiently appears from their disagreement. Thus, for example, five chapters, one of which is the second, begin with these letters, A.L.M., which some imagine to stand for Allah latíf majíd, “God is gracious and to be glorified;” or, Ana li minni, “To me and from me,” viz., belongs all perfection and proceeds all good; or else for Ana Allah álam, “I am the most wise God,” taking the first letter to mark the beginning of the first word, the second the middle of the second word, and the third the last of the third word; or for “Allah, Gabriel, Muhammad,” the author, revealer, and preacher of the Qurán. Others say that as the letter A belongs to the lower part of the throat, the first of the organs of speech; L to the palate, the middle organ; and M to the lips, which are the last organs; so these letters signify that God is the beginning, middle, and end, or ought to be praised in the beginning, middle, and end of all our words and actions: or, as the total value of those three letters in numbers is Edition: current; Page: [102] seventy-one, they signify that in the space of so many years, the religion preached in the Qurán should be fully established. The conjecture of a learned Christian1 is, at least, as certain as any of the former, who supposes those letters were set there by the amanuensis, for Amar li Muhammad, i.e., “at the command of Muhammad,” as the five letters prefixed to the nineteenth chapter seem to be there written by a Jewish scribe for koh yaas, i.e., “Thus he commanded.”*

The language of the Qurán.

The Qurán is universally allowed to be written with the utmost elegance and purity of language, in the dialect of the tribe of Quraish, the most noble and polite of all the Arabians, but with some mixture, though very rarely, of other dialects. It is confessedly the standard or the Arabic tongue and as the more orthodox believe, and are taught by the book itself, inimitable by any human pen (though some sectaries have been of another opinion),2 and therefore insisted on as a permanent miracle, greater than that of raising the dead,3 and alone sufficient to convince the world of its divine original.

its elegance of style elaimed to be miraculous.

And to this miracle did Muhammad himself chiefly appeal for the confirmation of his mission, publicly challenging the most eloquent men in Arabia, which was at that time stocked with thousands whose sole study and ambition it was to excel in elegance of style and composition,4 to produce even a single chapter that might be compared Edition: current; Page: [103] with it1* I will mention but one instance out of several, to show that this book was really admired for the beauty of its composure by those who must be allowed to have been conrpetent judges. A poem of Lábíd Ibn Rabia, one of the greatest wits in Arabia in Muhammad’s time, being fixed up on the gate of the temple of Makkah, an honour allowed to none but the most esteemed performances none of the other poets durst offer anything of their own in competition with it. But the second chapter of the Qurán being fixed up by it soon after. Lábid himself (then an idolater), on reading the first verses only, was struck with admiration, and immediately professed the religion taught thereby, declaring that such words could proceed from an inspired person only. This Lábíd was afterwards of great service to Muhammad in writing answers to the satires and invectives that were made on him and his religion by the infidels, and particularly by Amri al Qais,2 prince of the tribe of Asad,3 and author of one of those seven famous poems called al Muallaqat.4†

The style the composition.

The style of the Qurán is generally beautiful and fluent, especially where it imitates the prophetic manner and Edition: current; Page: [104] Scripture phrases. It is concise and often obscure, adorned with bold figures after the Eastern taste, enlivened with florid and sententious expressions, and in many places, especially where the majesty and attributes of God are described, sublime and magnificent; of which the reader cannot but observe several instances, though he must not imagine the translation comes up to the original, notwithstanding my endeavours to do it justice.

Though it be written in prose, yet the sentences generally conclude in a long continued rhyme, for the sake of which the sense is often interrupted, and unnecessary repetitions too frequently made, which appear still more ridiculous in a translation, where the ornament, such as it is, for whose sake they were made, cannot be perceived. However, the Arabians are so mightily delighted with this jingling, that they employ it in their most elaborate compositions, which they also embellish with frequent passages of, and allusions to, the Qurán, so that it is next to impossible to understand them without being well versed in this book.

The influence of this style on Muhammad’s hearers.

It is probable the harmony of expression which the Arabians find in the Qurán might contribute not a little to make them relish the doctrine therein taught, and give an efficacy to arguments which, had they been nakedly proposed without this rhetorical dress, might not have so easily prevailed. Very extraordinary effects are related of the power of words well chosen and artfully placed, which are no less powerful either to ravish or amaze than music itself; wherefore as much has been ascribed by the best orators to this part of rhetoric as to any other.1 He must have a very bad ear who is not uncommonly moved with the very cadence of a well-turned sentence; and Muhammad seems not to have been ignorant of the enthusiastic operation of rhetoric on the minds of men; for which reason he has not only employed his utmost skill in these Edition: current; Page: [105] his pretended revelations, to preserve that dignity and sublimity of style which might seem not unworthy of the majesty of that Being whom he gave out to be the Author of them, and to imitate the prophetic manner of the Old Testament; but he has not neglected even the other arts of oratory, wherein he succeeded so well, and so strangely captivated the minds of his audience, that several of his opponents thought it the effect of witchcraft and enchantment, as he sometimes complains.1

Design of the Qurán

“The general design of the Qurán” (to use the words of a very learned person) “seems to be this: to unite the professors of the three different religions then followed in the populous country of Arabia, who for the most part lived promiscuously, and wandered without guides, the far greater number being idolaters, and the rest Jews and Christians, mostly of erroneous and heterodox belief, in the knowledge and worship of one eternal, invisible God, by whose power all things were made, and those which are not, may be, the supreme Governor, Judge, and absolute Lord of the creation; established under the sanction of certain laws, and the outward signs of certain ceremonies, partly of ancient and partly of novel institution, and enforced by setting before them rewards and punishments, both temporal and eternal; and to bring them all to the obedience of Muhammad, as the prophet and ambassador of God, who after the repeated admonitions, promises, and threats of former ages, was at last to establish and propagate God’s religion on earth by force of arms, and to be acknowledged chief pontiff in spiritual matters, as well as supreme prince in temporal.”2

The doctrine of the Qurán regarding religion and revelation The use made of Old Testament history in the Qurán.

The great doctrine, then, of the Qurán is the unity of God, to restore which point Muhammad pretended was the chief end of his mission; it being laid down by him as a fundamental truth that there never was nor ever can Edition: current; Page: [106] be more than one true orthodox religion. For though the particular laws or ceremonies are only temporary, and subject to alteration according to the divine direction, yet the substance of it being eternal truth, is not liable to change, but continues immutably the same. And he taught that whenever this religion became neglecte or corrupted in essentials, God had the goodness to re-inform and re-admonish mankind thereof by several prophets, of whom Moses and Jesus were the most distinguished, till the appearance of Muhammad, who is their seal, no other being to be expected after him. And the more effectually to engage people to hearken to him great part of the Qurán is employed in relating examples of dreadful punishments formerly inflicted by God on those who rejected and abused his messengers; several of which stories, or some circumstances of them, are taken from the Old and New Testament, but many more from the apocryphal books and traditions of the Jews and Christians of those ages, set up in the Qurán as truths in opposition to the Scriptures, which the Jews and Christians are charged with having altered; and I am apt to believe that few or none of the relations or circumstances in the Qurán were invented by Muhammad, as is generally supposed, it being easy to trace the greatest part of them much higher, as the rest might be, were more of those books extant, and it was worth while to make the inquiry.

The other part of the Qurán is taken up in giving necessary laws and directions, in frequent admonitions to moral and divine virtues, and above all to the worshipping and reverencing of the only true God, and resignation to his will; among which are many excellent things intermixed not unworthy even a Christian’s perusal.

The use made of the Qurán by Muhammad in emergency.

But besides these, there are a great number of passages which are occasional, and relate to particular emergencies. For whenever anything happened which perplexed and gravelled Muhammad, and which he could not otherwise Edition: current; Page: [107] get over, he had constant recourse to a new revelation, as an infallible expedient in all nice cases; and he found the success of this method answer his expectation. It was certainly an admirable and politic contrivance of his to bring down the whole Qurán at once to the lowest heaven only, and not to the earth, as a bungling prophet would probably have done; for if the whole had been published at once, innumerable objections might have been made, which it would have been very hard, if not impossible, for him to solve; but as he pretended to have received it by parcels, as God saw proper that they should be published for the conversion and instruction of the people, he had a sure way to answer all emergencies, and to extricate himself with honour from any difficulty which might occur. If any objection be hence made to that eternity of the Qurán which the Muhammadans are taught to believe, they easily answer it by their doctrine of absolute predestination, according to which all the accidents for the sake of which these occasional passages were revealed were predetermined by God from all eternity.

Muhammad the author of the Qurán

That Muhammad was really the author and chief contriver of the Qurán is beyond dispute, though it be highly probable that he had no small assistance in his design from others, as his countrymen failed not to object to him.1 However, they differed so much in their conjectures as to the particular persons who gave him such assistance,2 that they were not able, it seems, to prove the charge; Muhammad, it is to be presumed, having taken his measures too well to be discovered. Dr. Prideaux3 has given the most probable account of this matter, though chiefly from Christian writers, who generally mix such ridiculous fables with what they deliver, that they deserve not much credit.

Edition: current; Page: [108]

The divine original of the Qurán.

However it be, the Muhammadans absolutely deny the Qurán was composed by their prophet himself, or any other for him, it being their general and orthodox belief that it is of divine original; nay, that it is eternal and uncreated, remaining, as some express it, in the very essence of God; that the first transcript has been from everlasting by God’s throne, written on a table of vast bigness, called the Preserved Table, in which are also recorded the divine decrees past and future; that a copy from this table, in one volume on paper, was by the ministry of the Angel Gabriel sent down to the lowest heaven, in the month of Ramadhán, on the night of power;1 from whence Gabriel revealed it to Muhammad by parcels, some at Makkah, and some at Madína, at different times, during the space of twenty-three years, as the exigency of affairs required; giving him, however, the consolation to chow him the whole (which they tell us was bound in silk, and adorned with gold and precious stones of paradise) once a year; but in the last year of his life he had the favour to see it twice. They say that few chapters were delivered entire, the most part being revealed piecemeal, and written down from time to time by the prophet’s amanuenses in such or such a part of such or such a chapter till they were completed, according to the directions of the angel.2 The first parcel that was revealed is generally agreed to have been the first five verses of the ninety-sixth chapter.3

Original MSS. of the Qurán.

After the new revealed passages had been from the prophet’s mouth taken down in writing by his scribe, they were published to his followers, several of whom took copies for their private use, but the far greater number got them by heart. The originals when returned were put Edition: current; Page: [109] promiscuously into a chest,* observing no order of time, for which reason it is uncertain when many passages were revealed.

Collected into one volume by Abu Baqr.

When Muhammad died, he left his revelations in the same disorder I have mentioned, and not digested into the method, such as it is, which we now find them in. This was the work of his successor, Abu Baqr, who considering that a great number of passages were committed to the memory of Muhammad’s followers, many of whom were slain in their wars, ordered the whole to be collected, not only from the palm-leaves and skins on which they had been written, and which were kept between two boards or covers, but also from the mouths of such as had gotten them by heart. And this transcript when completed he committed to the custody of Hafsa the daughter of Omar, one of the prophet’s widows.1

From this relation it is generally imagined that Abu Baqr was really the compiler of the Qurán; though for aught appears to the contrary, Muhammad left the chapters complete as we now have them, excepting such passages as his successor might add or correct from those who had gotten them by heart; what Abu Baqr did else being perhaps no more than to range the chapters in their present order, which he seems to have done without any regard to time, having generally placed the longest first.

Othmán’s recension.

However, in the thirtieth year of the Hijra, Othmán being then Khalífah, and observing the great disagreement in the copies of the Qurán in the several provinces of the empire—those of Irak, for example, following the reading of Abu Musa al Ashari, and the Syrians that of Maqdád Ibn Aswad—he, by advice of the companions, ordered a great number of copies to be transcribed from that of Abu Edition: current; Page: [110] Baqr, in Hafsa’s care, under the inspection of Zaid Ibn Thábit, Abdallah Ibn Zobair, Saïd Ibn al As, and Abdalrahmán Ibn al Hárith, the Makhzumite; whom he directed, that wherever they disagreed about any word, they should write it in the dialect of the Quraish, in which it was at first delivered.1 These copies when made were dispersed in the several provinces of the empire, and the old ones burnt and suppressed. Though many things in Hafsa’s copy were corrected by the above-mentioned supervisors, yet some few various readings still occur, the most material of which will be taken notice of in their proper places.

Various readings: how they originated.

The want of vowels2 in the Arabic character made Muqrís, or readers whose peculiar study and profession it was to read the Qurán with its proper vowels, absolutely necessary. But these, differing in their manner of reading, occasioned still further variations in the copies of the Qurán, as they are now written with the vowels: and herein consist much the greater part of the various readings throughout the book. The readers whose authority the commentators chiefly allege, in admitting these various readings, are seven in number.

The doctrine of abrogation

There being some passages in the Qurán which are contradictory, the Mùhammadan doctors obviate any objection from thence by the doctrine of abrogation; for they say that God in the Qurán commanded several things which were for good reasons afterwards revoked and abrogated.

Abrogated passages

Passages abrogated are distinguished into three kinds: the first where the letter and the sense are both abrogated; the second, where the letter only is abrogated, but the sense remains; and the third, where the sense is abrogated, though the letter remains.

Edition: current; Page: [111]

Of the first kind were several verses which, by the tradition of Malik Ibn Ans, were in the prophet’s lifetime read in the chapter of Repentance, but are not now extant, one of which, being all he remembered of them, was the following: “If a son of Adam had two rivers of gold, he would covet yet a third; and if he had three he would covet yet a fourth (to be added) unto them neither shall the belly of a son of Adam be fihed but with dust. God will turn unto him who shall repent” Another instance of this kind we have from the tradition of Abdallah Ibn Masúd, who reported that the prophet gave him a verse to read which he wrote down; but the next morning, looking in his book, he found it was vanished, and the leaf blank: this he acquainted Muhammad with, who assured him the veise was revoked the same night.

Of the second kind is a verse called the verse of Stoning, which, according to the tradition of Omar, afterwards Khalífah, was extant while Muhammad was living, though it be not now to be found. The words are these: “Abhor not your parents, for this would be ingratitude in you. If a man and woman of reputation commit adultery, ye shall stone them both; it is a punishment ordained by God; for God is mighty and wise.”

Of the last kind are observed several verses in sixty-three different chapters, to the number of 225; such as the precepts of turning in prayer to Jerusalem, fasting after the old custom, forbearance towards idolaters, avoiding the ignorant, and the like.1 The passages of this sort have been carefully collected by several writers and are most of them remarked in their proper places.

The Qurán believed to be eternal.

Though it is the belief of the Sonnites or orthodox that the Qurán is uncreated and eternal, subsisting in the very essence of God, and Muhammad himself is said to have pronounced him an infidel who asserted the contrary, yet Edition: current; Page: [112] several have been of a different opinion; particularly the sect of the Mutazalites,1 and the followers of Isa Ibn Subaih Abu Músa, surnamed al Muzdár, who stuck not to accuse those who held the Qurán to be uncreated of infidelity, as asserters of two eternal beings.2

This point was controverted with so much heat that it occasioned many calamities under some of the Khalífahs of the family of Abbás, al Mámún3 making a public edict declaring the Qurán to be created, which was confirmed by his successors al Mutasim4 and al Wáthik,5 who whipped, imprisoned, and put to death those of the contrary opinion. But at length al Mutawakkil,6 who succeeded al Wáthik, put an end to these persecutions by revoking the former edicts, releasing those that were imprisoned on that account, and leaving every man at liberty as to his belief in this point.7

Al Ghazáli’s opinion as to the Quran

Al Ghazáli seems to have tolerably reconciled both opinions, saying that the Qurán is read and pronounced with the tongue, written in books, and kept in memory; and is yet eternal, subsisting in God’s essence, and not possible to be separated thence by any transmission into men’s memories or the leaves of books;8 by which he seems to mean no more than that the original idea of the Qurán only is really in God, and consequently co-essential and co-eternal with him, but that the copies are created and the work of man.

Opinion of al Jahidh.

The opinion of al Jahidh, chief of a sect bearing his name, touching the Qurán, is too remarkable to be Edition: current; Page: [113] omitted: he used to say it was a body, which might sometimes be turned into a man,1 and sometimes into a beast;2 which seems to agree with the notion of those who assert the Qurán to have two faces, one of a man, the other of a beast;3 thereby, as I conceive, intimating the double interpretation it will admit of, according to the letter or the spirit.

Heretical opinions.

As some have held the Qurán to be created, so there have not been wanting those who have asserted that there is nothing miraculous in that book in respect to style or composition, excepting only the prophetical relations of things past, and predictions of things to come; and that had God left men to their natural liberty, and not restrained them in that particular, the Arabians could have composed something not only equal but superior to the Qurán in eloquence, method, and purity of language. This was another opinion of the Mutazilites, and in particular of al Muzdár, above mentioned, and al Nudhám.4

Muslim exegetical rules.

The Qurán being the Muhammadans’ rule of faith and practice, it is no wonder its expositors and commentators are so very numerous. And it may not be amiss to take notice of the rules they observe in expounding it.

One of the most learned commentators5 distinguishes the contents of the Qurán into allegorical and literal. The former comprehends the more obscure, parabolical, and enigmatical passages, and such as are repealed or abrogated; Edition: current; Page: [114] the latter those which are plain, perspicuous, liable to no doubt, and in full force.

To explain these severally in a right manner, it is necessary from tradition and study to know the time when each passage was revealed, its circumstances, state, and history, and the reasons or particular emergencies for the sake of which it was revealed;1 or, more explicitly, whether the passage was revealed at Makkah or at Madína; whether it be abrogated, or does itself abrogate any other passage; whether it be anticipated in order of time or postponed; whether it be distinct from the context or depends thereon; whether it be particular or general; and, lastly, whether it be implicit by intention or explicit in words.2

Muslim reverence for the Qurán

By what has been said the reader may easily believe this book is in the greatest reverence and esteem among the Muhammadans. They dare not so much as touch it without being first washed or legally purified;3 which, lest they should do by inadvertence, they write these words on the cover or label, “Let none touch it but they who are clean.” They read it with great care and respect, never holding it below their girdles. They swear by it, consult it in their weighty occasions,4 carry it with them to war, write sentences of it on their banners, adorn it with gold and precious stones, and knowingly suffer it not to be in the possession of any of a different persuasion.

Translations

The Muhammadans, far from thinking the Qurán to be profaned by a translation, as some authors have written,5 Edition: current; Page: [115] have taken care to have their Scriptures translated not only into the Persian tongue, but into several others, particularly the Javan and Malayan,1 though out of respect to the original Arabic these versions are generally (if not always) interlineary.*

Edition: current; Page: [(116)]

SECTION IV.: OF THE DOCTRINES AND POSITIVE PRECEPTS OF THE QURÁN, WHICH RELATE TO FAITH AND RELIGIOUS DUTIES.

Islám the one true orthodox belief.

It has been already observed more than once, that the fundamental position on which Muhammad erected the superstructure of his religion was, that from the beginning to the end of the world there has been, and for ever will be, but one true orthodox belief, consisting, as to matter of faith, in the acknowledging of the only true God, and the believing in and obeying such messengers or prophets as he should from time to time send, with proper credentials, to reveal his will to mankind; and as to matter of practice, in the observance of the immutable and eternal laws of right and wrong, together with such other precepts and ceremonies as God should think fit to order for the time being, according to the different dispensations in different ages of the world; for these last he allowed were things indifferent in their own nature, and became obligatory by God’s positive precept only, and were therefore temporary, and subject to alteration according to his will and pleasure. And to this religion he gives the name of Islám, which word signifies resignation, or submission to the service and commands of God,1 and is used as the proper name of the Muhammadan religion, which they will also have Edition: current; Page: [117] to be the same at bottom with that of all the prophets from Adam.

Under pretext that this eternal religion was in his time corrupted, and professed in its purity by no one sect of men, Muhammad pretended to be a prophet sent by God to reform those abuses which had crept into it, and to reduce it to its primitive simplicity; with the addition, however, of peculiar laws and ceremonies, some of which had been used in former times, and others were now first instituted. And he comprehended the whole substance of his doctrine under these two propositions or articles of faith, viz., that there is but one God, and that himself was the apostle of God; in consequence of which latter article, all such ordinances and institutions as he thought fit to establish must be received as obligatory and of divine authority.

Five points of Imán and Dín.

The Muhammadans divide their religion, which, as I just now said, they call Islám, into two distinct parts: Imán, i.e., faith or theory, and Dín, i.e., religion or practice; and teach that it is built on five fundamental points, one belonging to faith, and the other four to practice.

First fundamental point of Islám.

The first is that confession of faith which I have already mentioned, that “there is no god but the true God, and that Muhammad is his apostle,” under which they comprehend six distinct branches, viz., 1. Belief in God; 2. In his angels; 3. In his Scriptures; 4. In his prophets; 5. In the resurrection and day of judgment; and, 6. In God’s absolute decree and predetermination both of good and evil.

Four points of religion.

The four points* relating to practice are: 1. Prayer, under which are comprehended those washings or purifications Edition: current; Page: [118] which are necessary preparations required before prayer; 2. Alms; 3. Fasting; and, 4. The pilgrimage to Makkah. Of each of these I shall speak in their order.

The God of Islam the true God

That both Muhammad and those among his followers who are reckoned orthodox had and continue to have just and true notions of God and his attributes (always excepting their obstinate and impious rejecting of the Trinity), appears so plain from the Qurán itself and all the Muhammadan divines, that it would be loss of time to refute those who suppose the God of Muhammad to be different from the true God, and only a fictitious deity or idol of his own creation.1* Nor shall I here enter into any of the Muhammadan controversies concerning the divine nature and attributes, because I shall have a more proper opportunity of doing it elsewhere.2

Belief in the doctrine of angels required.

The existence of angels and their purity are absolutely required to be believed in the Qurán, and he is reckoned an infidel who denies there are such beings, or hates any Edition: current; Page: [119] of them,1 or asserts any distinction of sexes among them. They believe them to have pure and subtle bodies, created of tire;2 that they neither eat nor drink, nor propagate their species; that they have various forms and offices: some adoring God in different postures others singing praises to him, or interceding for mankind They hold that some of them are employed in writing down the actions of men, others in carrying the throne of God and other services.

Gabriel, Michael, Azrael, Isráfíl, and guardian angels

The four angels whom they look on as more eminently in God’s favour, and often mention on account of the offices assigned them, are Gabriel, to whom they give several titles, particularly those of the holy spirit,3 and the angel of revelations,4 supposing him to be honoured by God with a greater confidence than any other, and to be employed in writing down the divine decrees;5 Michael, the friend and protector of the Jews;6 Azrael,* the angel of death, who separates men’s souls from their bodies;7 Edition: current; Page: [120] and Isráfíl, whose office it will be to sound the trumpet at the resurrection.1 The Muhammadans also believe that two guardian angels attend on every man to observe and write down his actions,2 being changed every day, and therefore called al Muaqqibát, or the angels who continually succeed one another.

This doctrine borrowed from the Jews.

This whole doctrine concerning angels Muhammad and his disciples have borrowed from the Jews, who learned the names and offices of those beings from the Persians, as themselves confess.3 The ancient Persians firmly believed the ministry of angels, and their superintendence over the affairs of this world (as the Magians still do), and therefore assigned them distinct charges and provinces, giving their names to their months and the days of their months. Gabriel they called Sarosh and Raván Bakhsh, or the giver of souls, in opposition to the contrary office of the angel of death, to whom among other names they gave that of Murdád, or the giver of death; Michael they called Beshter, who according to them provides sustenance for mankind.4 The Jews teach that the angels were created of fire;5 that they have several offices;6 that they intercede for men,7 and attend them.8 The angel of death they name Dúma, and say he calls dying persons by their respective names at their last hour.9

Belief concerning Satan.

The devil, whom Muhammad names Iblís, from his despair, was once one of those angels who are nearest to God’s presence, called Azazíl,10 and fell, according to the Edition: current; Page: [121] doctrine of the Qurán, for refusing to pay homage to Adam at the command of God.1

Concerning the Genii.

Besides angels and devils, the Muhammadans are taught by the Qurán to believe in an intermediate order of creatures, which they call Jin or Genii, created also of fire,2 but of a grosser fabric than angels, since they eat and drink, and propagate their species, and are subject to death.3 Some of these are supposed to be good and others bad, and capable of future salvation or damnation, as men are; whence Muhammad pretended to be sent for the conversion of genii as well as men.4 The Orientals pretend that these genii inhabited the world for many ages before Adam was created, under the government of several successive princes, who all bore the common name of Solomon; but falling at length into an almost general corruption, Iblís was sent to drive them into a remote part of the earth, there to be confined; that some of that generation still remaining, were by Tahmúrath, one of the ancient kings of Persia, who waged war against them, forced to retreat into the famous mountains of Qáf. Of which successions and wars they have many fabulous and romantic stories. They also make different ranks and degrees among these beings (if they be not rather supposed to be of a different species), some being called absolutely Jin, some Pari or fairies. some Dev or giants, others Taqwíms or fates.5

Agrees with Jewish belief in Shedím.

The Muhammadan notions concerning these genii agree almost exactly with what the Jews write of a sort of demons called Shedím, whom some fancy to have been begotten by two angels, named Aza and Azaël, on Naamah the daughter of Lamech, before the Flood.6 However, the Shedím, they tell us, agree in three things with the Edition: current; Page: [122] ministering angels, for that, like them, they have wings, and fly from one end of the world to the other, and have some knowledge of futurity; and in three things they agree with men, like whom they eat and drink, are propagated, and die.1 They also say that some of them believe in the law of Moses, and are consequently good, and that others of them are infidels and reprobates.2

The former Scriptures. Alleged corruption of Jewish and Christian Scriptures Muslim Psalter and Gospel of Barnabas Muslim use of spurious Gospels.

As to the Scriptures, the Muhammadans are taught by the Qurán that God, in divers ages of the world, gave revelations of his will in writing to several prophets, the whole and every word of which it is absolutely necessary for a good Muslim to believe. The number of these sacred books were, according to them, one hundred and four. Of which ten were given to Adam, fifty to Seth, thirty to Idrís or Enoch, ten to Abraham; and the other four, being the Pentateuch, the Psalms, the Gospel, and the Qurán, were successively delivered to Moses, David, Jesus, and Muhammad; which last being the seal of the prophets, those revelations are now closed, and no more are to be expected. All these divine books, except the four last, they agree to be now entirely lost, and their contents unknown, though the Sabians have several books which they attribute to some of the antediluvian prophets. And of those four, the Pentateuch, Psalms, and Gospel, they say, have undergone so many alterations and corruptions, that though there may possibly be some part of the true Word of God therein, yet no credit is to be given to the present copies in the hands of the Jews and Christians. The Jews in particular are frequently reflected on in the Qurán for falsifying and corrupting their copies of their law;* and some instances of such Edition: current; Page: [123] pretended corruptions, both in that book and the two others, are produced by Muhammadan writers, wherein they merely follow their own prejudices, and the fabulous accounts of spurious légends. Whether they have any copy of the Pentateuch among them different from that of the Jews or not, I am not entirely satisfied, since a person who travelled into the East was told that they had the books of Moses, though very much corrupted;1 but I know nobody that has ever seen them. However, they certainly have and privately read a book which they call the Psalms of David in Arabic and Persian, to which are added some prayers of Moses, Jonas, and others.2 This Mr. Reland supposes to be a translation from our copies (though no doubt falsified in more places than one); but M D’Herbelot says it contains not the same Psalms which are in our Psalter, being no more than an extract from thence mixed with other very different pieces.3 The easiest way to reconcile these two learned gentlemen is to presume that they speak of different copies. The Muhammadans have also a Gospel in Arabic, attributed to St. Barnabas, wherein the history of Jesus Christ is related in a manner very different from what we find in the true Gospels, and correspondent to those traditions which Muhammad has followed in his Qurán.* Of this Gospel the Moriseoes in Africa have a translation in Edition: current; Page: [124] Spanish;1 and there is in the library of Prince Eugene of Savoy a manuscript of some antiquity containing an Italian translation of the same Gospel,2 made, it is to be supposed, for the use of renegades. This book appears to be no original forgery of the Muhammadans, though they have no doubt interpolated and altered it since, the better to serve their purpose; and in particular, instead of the Paraclete or Comforter,3 they have in this apocryphal Gospel inserted the word Periclyte, that is, the famous or illustrious, by which they pretend their prophet was foretold by name that being the signification of Muhammad in Arabic;4 and this they say to, justify that passage of the Qurán5 where Jesus Christ is formally asserted to have foretold his coming, under his other name of Ahmad, which is derived from the same root as Muhammad, and of the same import. From these or some other forgeries of the same stamp it is that the Muhammadans quote several passages of which there are not the least footsteps in the New Testament. But after all, we must not hence infer that the Muhammadans, much less all of them, hold these copies of theirs to be the ancient and genuine Scriptures themselves. If any argue, from the corruption which they insist has happened to the Pentateuch and Gospel, that the Qurán may possibly be corrupted also, they answer that God has promised that he will take care of the latter, and preserve it from any addition or diminution;6 but that he left the two other to the care of men. However, they confess there are some various readings in the Qurán,7 as has been observed.

Besides the books above mentioned, the Muhammadans also take notice of the writings of Daniel and several other Edition: current; Page: [125] prophets, and even make quotations thence; but these they do not believe to be divine scripture, or of any authority in matters of religion.1

The prophets recognised by Islám.

The number of the prophets which have been from time to time sent by God into the world amounts to no less than 224,000, according to one Muhammadan tradition, or to 124,000 according to another; among whom 313 were apostles, sent with special commissions to reclaim mankind from infidelity and superstition, and six of them brought new laws or dispensations, which successively abrogated the preceding: these were Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad. All the prophets in general the Muhammadans believe to have been free from great sins and errors of consequence, and professors of one and the same religion, that is, Islám, notwithstanding the different laws and institutions which they observed. They allow of degrees among them, and hold some of them to be more excellent and honourable than others.2 The first place they give to the revealers and establishers of new dispensations, and the next to the apostles.

In this great number of prophets they not only reckon divers patriarchs and persons named in Scripture, but not recorded to have been prophets (wherein the Jewish and Christian writers have sometimes led the way3), as Adam, Seth, Lot, Ismaíl, Nun, Joshua, &c., and introduce some of them under different names, as Enoch, Heber, and Jethro, who are called in the Qurán Idrís, Húd, and Shuaib, but several others whose very names do not appear in Scripture (though they endeavour to find some persons there to fix them on), as Sálih, Khidhar, Dhu’l Kifl, &c. Several of their fabulous traditions concerning these prophets we shall occasionally mention in the notes on the Qurán.

Edition: current; Page: [126]

Muhammad appeals to the Bible in proof of his mission.

As Muhammad acknowledged the divine authority of the Pentateuch, Psalms, and Gospel, he often appeals to the consonancy of the Qurán with those writings, and to the prophecies which he pretended were therein concerning himself, as proofs of his mission; and he frequently charges the Jews and Christians with stifling the passages which bear witness to him.1 His followers also fail not to produce several texts even from our present copies of the Old and New Testament to support their master’s cause.2*

Doctrine of the resurrection

The next article of faith required by the Qurán is the belief of a general resurrection and a future judgment. But before we consider the Muhammadan tenets in those points, it will be proper to mention what they are taught to believe concerning the intermediate state, both of the body and of the soul, after death.

Edition: current; Page: [127]

Concerning the soul after death.

When a corpse is laid in the grave, they say he is received by an angel, who gives him notice of the coming of the two examiners, who are two black, livid angels, of a terrible appearance, named Munkir and Nakír. These order the dead person to sit upright, and examine him concerning his faith, as to the unity of God and the mission of Muhammad; if he answer rightly, they suffer the body to rest in peace, and it is refreshed by the air of paradise; but if not, they beat him on the temples with iron maces, till he roars out for anguish so loud, that he is heard by all from east to west, except men and genii. Then they press the earth on the corpse, which is gnawed and stung till the resurrection by ninety-nine dragons, with seven heads each; or, as others say, their sins will become venomous beasts, the grievous ones stinging like dragons, the smaller like scorpions, and the others like serpents: circumstances which some understand in a figurative sense.1

The examination of the sepulchre is not only founded on an express tradition of Muhammad, but is also plainly hinted at, though not directly taught, in the Qurán,2 as the commentators agree. It is therefore believed by the orthodox Muhammadans in general, who take care to have their graves made hollow, that they may sit up with more ease while they are examined by the angels;3 but is utterly rejected by the sect of the Mutazilites, and perhaps by some others.

This belief borrowed from the Jews.

These notions Muhammad certainly borrowed from the Jews, among whom they were very anciently received.4 They say that the angel of death coming and sitting on the grave, the soul immediately enters the body and raises it on his feet; that he then examines the departed person, and strikes him with a chain half of iron and half of fire; Edition: current; Page: [128] at the first blow all his limbs are loosened, at the second his bones are scattered, which are gathered together again by angels, and the third stroke reduces the body to dust and ashes, and it returns into the grave. This rack or torture they call Hibbút haqqeber, or the beating of the sepulchre, and pretend that all men in general must undergo it, except only those who die on the evening of the Sabbath, or have dwelt in the land of Israel.1

If it be objected to the Muhammadans that the cry of the persons under such examination has never been heard, or if they be asked how those can undergo it whose bodies are burnt or devoured by beasts or birds, or otherwise consumed without burial; they answer, that it is very possible notwithstanding, since men are not able to perceive what is transacted on the other side the grave, and that it is sufficient to restore to life any part of the body which is capable of understanding the questions put by the angels.2

The state of Al Barzakh: various opinions.

As to the soul, they hold that when it is separated from the body by the angel of death, who performs his office with ease and gentleness towards the good and with violence towards the wicked,3 it enters into that state which they call Al Barzakh,4 or the interval between death and the resurrection. If the departed person was a believer, they say two angels meet it, who convey it to heaven, that its place there may be assigned, according to its merit and degree. For they distinguish the souls of the faithful into three classes: the first of prophets, whose souls are admitted into paradise immediately; the second of martyrs, whose spirits, according to a tradition of Muhammad, rest in the crops of green birds which eat of the fruits and drink of the rivers of paradise; and the third of other Edition: current; Page: [129] believers, concerning the state of whose souls before the resurrection there are various opinions. For, 1. Some say they stay near the sepulchres, with liberty, however, of going wherever they please; which they confirm from Muhammad’s manner of saluting them at their graves, and his affirming that the dead heard those salutations as well as the living, though they could not answer. Whence perhaps proceeded the custom of visiting the tombs of relations, so common among the Muhammadans.1 2. Others imagine they are with Adam in the lowest heaven, and also support their opinion by the authority of their prophet, who gave out that in his return from the upper heavens in his pretended night journey, he saw there the souls of those who were destined to paradise on the right hand of Adam, and of those who were condemned to hell on his left.2 3. Others fancy the souls of believers remain in the well Zamzam, and those of infidels in a certain well in the province of Hadramant, called Burhút; but this opinion is branded as heretical. 4. Others say they stay near the graves for seven days; but that whither they go afterwards is uncertain. 5. Others that they are all in the trumpet whose sound is to raise the dead. 6. And others that the souls of the good dwell in the forms of white birds under the throne of God.3 As to the condition of the souls of the wicked, besides the opinions that have been already mentioned, the more orthodox hold that they are offered by the angels to heaven, from whence being repulsed as stinking and filthy, they are offered to the earth, and being also refused a place there, are carried down to the seventh earth, and thrown into a dungeon, which they call Sajín, under a green rock, or, according to a tradition of Muhammad, under the devil’s jaw,4 to be Edition: current; Page: [130] there tormented till they are called up to be joined again to their bodies.

The resurrection of the body: opinions of Muslims.

Though some among the Muhammadans have thought that the resurrection will be merely spiritual, and no more than the returning of the soul to the place whence it first came (an opinion defended by Ibn Sina,1 and called by some the opinion of the philosophers);2 and others, who allow man to consist of body only, that it will be merely corporeal; the received opinion is, that both body and soul will be raised, and their doctors argue strenuously for the possibility of the resurrection of the body, and dispute with great subtlety concerning the manner of it.3 But Muhammad has taken care to preserve one part of the body, whatever becomes of the rest, to serve for a basis of the future edifice, or rather a leaven for the mass which is to be joined to it. For he taught that a man’s body was entirely consumed by the earth, except only the bone called al Ajb, which we name the os coceygis, or rumpbone; and that as it was the first formed in the human body, it will also remain uncorrupted till the last day, as a seed from whence the whole is to be renewed: and this he said would be effected by a forty days’ rain which God should send, and which would cover the earth to the height of twelve cubits, and cause the bodies to sprout forth like plants.4 Herein also is Muhammad beholden to the Jews, who say the same things of the bone Luz,6 excepting that what he attributes to a great rain will be effected, according to them, by a dew impregnating the dust of the earth.

Signs of the resurrection day.

The time of the resurrection the Muhammadans allow to be a perfect secret to all but God alone: the angel Gabriel himself acknowledging his ignorance on this point Edition: current; Page: [131] when Muhammad asked him about it. However, they say the approach of that day may be known from certain signs which are to precede it. These signs they distinguish into two sorts—the lesser and the greater—which I shall briefly enumerate after Dr. Pocock.1

Lesser signs of its approach.

The lesser signs are: 1. The decay of faith among men.2 2. The advancing of the meanest persons to eminent dignity. 3. That a maid-servant shall become the mother of her mistress (or master), by which is meant either that towards the end of the world men shall be much given to sensuality, or that the Muhammadans shall then take many captives. 4. Tumults and seditions. 5. A war with the Turks. 6. Great distress in the world, so that a man when he passes by another’s grave shall say, “Would to God I were in his place.” 7. That the provinces of Irák and Syria shall refuse to pay their tribute. And, 8. That the buildings of Madína shall reach to Aháb or Yaháb.

The greater signs are:

Greater signs.

1. The sun’s rising in the west, which some have imagined it originally did.3

2. The appearance of the beast, which shall rise out of the earth, in the temple of Makkah, or on Mount Safá, or in the territory of Táyif, or some other place. This beast they say is to be sixty cubits high: though others, not satisfied with so small a size, will have her reach to the clouds and to heaven when her head only is out; and that she will appear for three days, but show only a third part of her body. They describe this monster, as to her form, to be a compound of various species, having the head of a bull, the eyes of a hog, the ears of an elephant, the horns of a stag, the neck of an ostrich, the breast of a lion, the colour of a tiger, the back of a cat, the tail of a ram, the legs of a camel, and the voice of an ass. Some say this beast is Edition: current; Page: [132] to appear three times in several places, and that she will bring with her the rod of Moses and the seal of Solomon; and being so swift that none can overtake or escape her, will with the first strike all the believers on the face and mark them with the word Múmin, i.e., believer; and with the latter will mark the unbelievers, on the face likewise, with the word Káfir, i.e., infidel, that every person may be known for what he really is. They add that the same beast is to demonstrate the vanity of all religions except Islám, and to speak Arabic. All this stuff seems to be the result of a confused idea of the beast in the Revelation.1

3. War with the Greeks, and the taking of Constantinople by 70,000 of the posterity of Isaac, who shall not win that city by force of arms, but the walls shall fall down while they cry out, “There is no god but God: God is most great!” As they are dividing the spoil, news will come to them of the appearance of Antichrist, whereupon they shall leave all, and return back.

4 The coming of Antichrist, whom the Muhammadans call al Masíh al Dajjál, i.e., the false or lying Christ, and simply al Dajjál. He is to be one-eyed, and marked on the forehead with the letters K.F.R., signifying Káfir, or infidel. They say that the Jews give him the name of Messiah Ben David, and pretend he is to come in the last days and to be lord both of land and sea, and that he will restore the kingdom to them. According to the traditions of Muhammad, he is to appear first between Irák and Syria, or according to others, in the province of Khurasán; they add that he is to ride on an ass, that he will be followed by 70,000 Jews of Ispahán, and continue on earth forty days, of which one will be equal in length to a year, another to a month, another to a week, and the rest will be common days; that he is to lay waste all places, but will not enter Makkah or Madína, which are to be guarded by angels; Edition: current; Page: [133] and that at length he will be slain by Jesus, who is to encounter him at the gate of Lud. It is said that Muhammad foretold several Antichrists, to the number of about thirty, but one of greater note than the rest.

5. The descent of Jesus on earth. They pretend that he is to descend near the white tower to the east of Damascus when the people are returned from the taking of Constantinople; that he is to embrace the Muhammadan religion marry a wife; get children, kill Antichrist, and at length die after forty years’ or, according to others, twenty-four years’,1 continuance on earth. Under him thay say there will be great security and plenty in the world, all hatred and malice being laid aside; when lions and camels, bears and sheep, shall live in peace, and a child shall play with serpents unhurt.2

6. War with the Jews, of whom the Muhammadans are to make a religious slaughter, the very trees and stones discovering such of them as hide themselves, except only the tree called Gharkad, which is the tree of the Jews.

The cruption of Gog and Magog, or, as they are called in the East, Yájúj and Májúj, of whom many things are related in the Quran3 and the traditions of Muhammad. These barbarians, they tell us, having passed the lake of Tiberias, which the vanguard of their vast army will drink dry, will come to Jerusalem, and there greatly distress Jesus and his companions; till at his request God will destroy them, and fill the earth with their carcases, which after some time God will send birds to carry away, at the prayers of Jesus and his followers. Their bows, arrows, and quivers the Muslims will burn for seven years together;4 and at last God will send a rain to cleanse the earth, and to make it fertile.

8. A smoke which shall fill the whole earth.5

Edition: current; Page: [134]

9. An eclipse of the moon. Muhammad is reported to have said that there would be three eclipses before the last hour; one to be seen in the East, another in the West, and the third in Arabia.

10. The returning of the Arabs to the worship of al Lát and al Uzza and the rest of their ancient idols, after the decease of every one in whose heart there was faith equal to a grain of mustard-seed, none but the very worst of men being left alive. For God, they say, will send a cold odoriferous wind, blowing from Syria Damascena, which shall sweep away the souls of all the faithful, and the Qurán itself, so that men will remain in the grossest ignorance for a hundred years.

11. The discovery of a vast heap of gold and silver by the retreating of the Euphrates, which will be the destruction of many.

12. The demolition of the Kaabah or temple of Makkah by the Ethiopians.1

13. The speaking of beasts and inanimate things.

14. The breaking out of fire in the province of Hijáz; or, according to others, in Yaman.

15. The appearance of a man of the descendants of Qahtán, who shall drive men before him with his staff.

16. The coming of the Mahdí or director, concerning whom Muhammad prophesied that the world should not have an end till one of his own family should govern the Arabians, whose name should be the same with his own name, and whose father’s name should also be the same with his father’s name, who should fill the earth with righteousness.* This person the Shiites believe to be now Edition: current; Page: [135] alive, and concealed in some secret place till the time of his manifestation; for they suppose him to be no other than the last of the twelve Imáms, named Muhammad Abu’l Qásim, as their prophet was, and the son of Hasan al Askarí, the eleventh of that succession. He was born at Sarmaurái in the 255th year of the Hijra.1 From this tradition, it is to be presumed, an opinion pretty current among the Christians took its rise, that the Muhammadans are in expectation of their prophet’s return.

17. A wind which shall sweep away the souls of all who have but a grain of faith in their hearts, as has been mentioned under the tenth sign.

The blast of the resurrection trump. Effects of the first blast.

These are the greater signs, which, according to their doctrine, are to precede the resurrection, but still leave the hour of it uncertain: for the immediate sign of its being come will be the first blast of the trumpet, which they believe will be sounded three times. The first they call the blast of consternation, at the hearing of which all creatures in heaven and earth shall be struck with terror, except those whom God shall please to exempt from it. The effects attributed to this first sound of the trumpet are very wonderful; for they say the earth will be shaken, and not only all buildings, but the very mountains levelled; that the heavens shall melt, the sun be darkened, the stars fall, on the death of the angels, who, as some imagine, hold them suspended between heaven and earth, and the sea shall be troubled and dried up, or, according to others, turned into flames, the sun, moon, and stars being thrown into it: the Qurán, to express the greatness of the terror of that day, adds that women who give suck shall abandon the care of their infants, and even the shecamels which have gone ten months with young (a most valuable part of the substance of that nation) shall be utterly neglected. A further effect of this blast will be that concourse of beasts mentioned in the Qurán,2 though Edition: current; Page: [136] some doubt whether it be to precede the resurrection or not. They who suppose it will precede, think that all kinds of animals, forgetting their respective natural fierceness and timidity, will run together into one place, being terrified by the sound of the trumpet and the sudden shock of nature.

Effects of the second blast

The Muhammadans believe that this first blast will be followed by a second, which they call the blast of examination,1 when all creatures, both in heaven and earth, shall die or be annihilated, except those which God shall please to exempt from the common fate;2 and this, they say, shall happen in the twinkling of an eye, nay, in an instant, nothing surviving except God alone, with paradise and hell, and the inhabitants of those two places, and the throne of glory.3 The last who shall die will be the angel of death.

Effects of the third blast

Forty years after this will be heard the blast of resurrection, when the trumpet shall be sounded the third time by Israfíl, who, together with Gabriel and Michael, will be previously restored to life, and standing on the rock of the temple of Jerusalem,4 shall, at God’s command, call together all the dry and rotten bones, and other dispersed parts of the bodies, and the very hairs, to judgment. This angel having, by the divine order, set the trumpet to his mouth, and called together all the souls from all parts, will throw them into his trumpet, from whence, on his giving the last sound, at the command of God, they will fly forth like bees, and fill the whole space between heaven and earth, and then repair to their respective bodies, which Edition: current; Page: [137] the opening earth will suffer to arise; and the first who shall so arise, according to a tradition of Muhammad, will be himself. For this birth the earth will be prepared by the rain above mentioned, which is to fall continually for forty years,1 and will resemble the seed of a man, and be supplied from the water under the throne of God, which is called living water; by the efficacy and virtue of which the dead bodies shall spring forth from their graves, as they did in their mother’s womb, or as corn sprouts forth by common rain, till they become perfect; after which breath will be breathed into them, and they will sleep in their sepulchres till they are raised to life at the last trump.

Length of the judgment-day.

As to the length of the day of judgment, the Qurán in one place tells us that it will last 1000 years,2 and in another 50,000.3 To reconcile this apparent contradiction, the commentators use several shifts: some saying they know not what measure of time God intends in those passages; others, that these forms of speaking are figurative and not to be strictly taken, and were designed only to express the terribleness of that day, it being usual for the Arabs to describe what they dislike as of long continuance, and what they like as the contrary; and others suppose them spoken only in reference to the difficulty of the business of the day, which, if God should commit to any of his creatures, they would not be able to go through it in so many thousand years; to omit some other opinions which we may take notice of elsewhere.

Having said so much in relation to the time of the resurrection, let us now see who are to be raised from the dead, in what manner and form they shall be raised, in what place they shall be assembled, and to what end, according to the doctrine of the Muhammadans.

Edition: current; Page: [138]

Resurrection to be general

That the resurrection will be general, and extend to all creatures, both angels, genii, men, and animals, is the received opinion, which they support by the authority of the Qurán, though that passage which is produced to prove the resurrection of brutes be otherwise interpreted by some.1

Manner of the rising of the dead.

The manner of their resurrection will be very different. Those who are destined to be partakers of eternal happiness will arise in honour and security; and those who are doomed to misery, in disgrace and under dismal apprehensions. As to mankind, they say that they will be raised perfect in all their parts and members, and in the same state as they came out of their mother’s wombs, that is, barefooted, naked, and uncircumcised; which circumstances when Muhammad was telling his wife Ayesha, she, fearing the rules of modesty might be thereby violated, objected that it would be very indecent for men and women to look upon one another in that condition; but he answered her, that the business of the day would be too weighty and serious to allow them the making use of that liberty. Others, however, allege the authority of their prophet for a contrary opinion as to their nakedness, and pretend he asserted that the dead should arise dressed in the same clothes in which they died;2 unless we interpret these words, as some do, not so much of the outward dress of the body, as the inward clothing of the mind, and understand thereby that every person will rise again in the same state as to his faith or infidelity, his knowledge or ignorance, his good or bad works. Muhammad is also said to have further taught, by another tradition, that mankind shall be assembled at the last day distinguished into three classes. The first, of those who go on Edition: current; Page: [139] foot; the second, of those who ride; and the third, of those who creep grovelling with their faces on the ground. The first class is to consist of those believers whose good works have been few; the second of those who are in greater honour with God, and more acceptable to him; whence Ali affirmed that the pious when they come forth from their sepulchres shall find ready prepared for them white-winged camels with saddles of gold, wherein are to be observed some footsteps of the doctrine of the ancient Arabians;1 and the third class, they say, will be composed of the infidels, whom God shall cause to make their appearance with their faces on the earth, blind, dumb, and deaf. But the ungodly will not be thus only distinguished; for, according to a tradition of the prophet, there will be ten sorts of wicked men on whom God shall on that day fix certain discretory remarks. The first will appear in the form of apes; these are the professors of Zendicism: the second in that of swine; these are they who have been greedy of filthy lucre and enriched themselves by public oppression: the third will be brought with their heads reversed and their feet distorted; these are the usurers: the fourth will wander about blind; these are unjust judges: the fifth will be deaf, dumb, and blind, understanding nothing; these are they who glory in their own works: the sixth will gnaw their tongues, which will hang down upon their breasts, corrupted blood flowing from their mouths like spittle, so that everybody shall detest them; these are the learned men and doctors, whose actions contradict their sayings: the seventh will have their hands and feet cut off; these are they who have injured their neighbours: the eighth will be fixed to the trunks of palm trees or, stakes of wood; these are the false accusers and informers: the ninth will stink worse than a corrupted corpse; these are they who have indulged their passions and voluptuous appetites, but refused God Edition: current; Page: [140] such part of their wealth as was due to him: the tenth will be clothed with garments daubed with pitch; and these are the proud, the vainglorious, and the arrogant.

The place of final judgment.

As to the place where they are to be assembled to judgment, the Qurán and the traditions of Muhammad agree that it will be on the earth, but in what part of the earth it is not agreed. Some say their prophet mentioned Syria for the place: others a white and even tract of land, without inhabitants or any signs of buildings. Al Ghazáli imagines it will be a second earth, which he supposes to be of silver; and others, an earth which has nothing in common with ours but the name; having, it is possible, heard something of the new heavens and new earth mentioned in Scripture: whence the Quran has this expression, “On the day wherein the earth shall be changed into another earth.”1

End of the resurrection.

The end of the resurrection the Muhammadans declare to be, that they who are so raised may give an account of their actions and receive the reward thereof. And they believe that not only mankind, but the genii and irrational animals also,2 shall be judged on this great day, when the unarmed cattle shall take vengeance on the horned, till entire satisfaction shall be given to the injured.3

State of the resurrected pending judgment.

As to mankind, they hold that when they are all assembled together, they will not be immediately brought to judgment, but the angels will keep them in their ranks and order while they attend for that purpose; and this attendance some say is to last forty years, others seventy Edition: current; Page: [141] others 300, nay, some say no less than 50,000 years, each of them vouching their prophet’s authority. During this space they will stand looking up to heaven, but without receiving any information or orders thence, and are to suffer grievous torments, both the just and the unjust, though with manifest difference. For the limbs of the former, particularly those parts which they used to wash in making the ceremonial ablution before prayer, shall shine gloriously, and their sufferings shall be light in comparison, and shall last no longer than the time necessary to say the appointed prayers; but the latter will have their faces obscured with blackness, and disfigured with all the marks of sorrow and deformity. What will then occasion not the least of their pain is a wonderful and incredible sweat, which will even stop their mouths, and in which they will be immersed in various degrees according to their demerits, some to the ankles only, some to the knees, some to the middle, some so high as their mouth, and others as their ears. And this sweat, they say, will be provoked not only by that vast concourse of all sorts of creatures mutually pressing and treading on one another’s feet, but by the near and unusual approach of the sun, which will be then no farther from them than the distance of a mile, or, as some translate the word, the signification of which is ambiguous, than the length of a bodkin. So that their skulls will boil like a pot,1 and they will be all bathed in sweat. From this inconvenience, however, the good will be protected by the shade of God’s throne; but the wicked will be so miserably tormented with it, and also with hunger, and thirst, and a stifling air, that they will cry out, “Lord, deliver us from this anguish, though thou send us into hell-fire.”2 What they fable of the extraordinary heat of the sun on this occasion, the Muhammadans certainly borrowed from the Jews, who say, that for the punishment of the wicked on the last day that planet shall be drawn from its sheath, Edition: current; Page: [142] in which it is now put up, lest it should destroy all things by its excessive heat.1

Muhammad’s intercession in the judgment. The great day of assizes.

When those who have risen shall have waited the limited time, the Muhammadans believe God will at length appear to judge them; Muhammad undertaking the office of intercessor, after it shall have been declined by Adam, Noah, Abraham, and Jesus, who shall beg deliverance only for their own souls. They say that on this solemn occasion God will come in the clouds, surrounded by angels, and will produce the books wherein the actions of every person are recorded by their guardian angels,2 and will command the prophets to bear witness against those to whom they have been respectively sent. Then every one will be examined concerning all his words and actions, uttered and done by him in this life; not as if God needed any information in those respects, but to oblige the person to make public confession and acknowledgment of God’s justice. The particulars of which they shall give an account, as Muhammad himself enumerated them, are—of their time, how they spent it; of their wealth, by what means they acquired it and how they employed it; of their bodies, wherein they exercised them; of their knowledge and learning, what use they made of them. It is said, however, that Muhammad has affirmed that no less than 70,000 of his followers should be permitted to enter paradise without any previous examination, which seems to be contradictory to what is said above. To the questions we have mentioned each person shall answer, and make his defence in the best manner he can, endeavouring to excuse himself by casting the blame of his evil deeds on others, so that a dispute shall arise even between the soul and the body, to which of them their guilt ought to be imputed, the soul saying, “O Lord, my body I received from thee; for thou createdst me without a hand to lay hold with, Edition: current; Page: [143] a foot to walk with, an eye to see with, or an understanding to apprehend with, till I came and entered into this body; therefore, punish it eternally, but deliver me.” The body, on the other side, will make this apology:—“O Lord, thou createdst me like a stock of wood, having neither hand that I could lay hold with, nor foot that I could walk with, till this soul, like a ray of light, entered into me, and my tongue began to speak, my eye to see, and my foot to walk; therefore, punish it eternally, but deliver me.” But God will propound to them the following parable of the blind man and the lame man, which, as well as the preceding dispute, was borrowed by the Muhammadans from the Jews:1—A certain king, having a pleasant garden, in which were ripe fruits, set two persons to keep it, one of whom was blind and the other lame, the former not being able to see the fruit nor the latter to gather it; the lame man, however, seeing the fruit, persuaded the blind man to take him upon his shoulders; and by that means he easily gathered the fruit, which they divided between them. The lord of the garden, coming some time after, and inquiring after his fruit, each began to excuse himself; the blind man said he had no eyes to see with, and the lame man that he had no feet to approach the trees. But the king, ordering the lame man to be set on the blind, passed sentence on and punished them both. And in the same manner will God deal with the body and the soul. As these apologies will not avail on that day, so will it also be in vain for any one to deny his evil actions, since men and angels and his own members, nay, the very earth itself, will be ready to bear witness against him.

Time allotted to the trial.

Though the Muhammadans assign so long a space for the attendance of the resuscitated before their trial, yet they tell us the trial itself will be over in much less time, Edition: current; Page: [144] and, according to an expression of Muhammad familiar enough to the Arabs, will last no longer than while one may milk an ewe, or than the space between the two milkings of a she-camel.1 Some, explaining those words so frequently used in the Qurán, “God will be swift in taking an account,” say that he will judge all creatures in the space of half a day, and others that it will be done in less time than the twinkling of an eye.2

The account books delivered.

At this examination they also believe that each person will have the book wherein all the actions of his life are written delivered to him; which books the righteous will receive in their right hand, and read with great pleasure and satisfaction, but the ungodly will be obliged to take them against their wills in their left,3 which will be bound behind their backs, their right hand being tied up to their necks.4

The great balance described.

To show the exact justice which will be observed on this great day of trial, the next thing they describe is the balance wherein all things shall be weighed. They say it will be held by Gabriel, and that it is of so vast a size, that its two scales, one of which hangs over paradise, and the other over hell, are capacious enough to contain both heaven and earth. Though some are willing to understand what is said in the Qurán concerning this balance allegorically, and only as a figurative representation of God’s equity, yet the more ancient and orthodox opinion is that it is to be taken literally; and since words and actions, being mere accidents, are not capable of being themselves weighed, they say that the books wherein they are written will be thrown into the scales, and according as those wherein the good or the evil actions Edition: current; Page: [145] are recorded shall preponderate, sentence will be given; those whose balances laden with their good works shall be heavy will be saved, but those whose balances are light will be condemned.1 Nor will any one have cause to complain that God suffers any good action to pass unrewarded, because the wicked for the good they do have their reward in this life, and therefore can expect no favour in the next.

Notions of books and balance borrowed from Jews and Magians.

The old Jewish writers make mention as well of the books to be produced at the last day, wherein men’s actions are registered,2 as of the balance wherein they shall be weighed;3 and the Scripture itself seems to have given the first notion of both.4 But what the Persian Magi believe of the balance comes nearest to the Muhammadan opinion. They hold that on the day of judgment two angels, named Mihr and Sarosh, will stand on the bridge we shall describe by and by, to examine every person as he passes; that the former, who represents the divine mercy, will hold a balance in his hand to weigh the actions of men; that according to the report he shall make thereof to God, sentence will be pronounced, and those whose good works are found more ponderous, if they turn the scale but by the weight of a hair, will be permitted to pass forward to paradise; but those whose good works shall be found light will be by the other angel, who represents God’s justice, precipitated from the bridge into hell.5

Mutual retaliation of the creatures and of men. Fate of the brutes and genii.

This examination being passed, and every one’s works weighed in a just balance, that mutual retaliation will follow, according to which every creature will take vengeance one of another, or have satisfaction made them for the injuries which they have suffered. And since Edition: current; Page: [146] there will then be no other way of returning like for like, the manner of giving this satisfaction will be by taking away a proportionable part of the good works of him who offered the injury, and adding it to those of him who suffered it. Which being done, if the angels (by whose ministry this is to be performed) say, “Lord, we have given to every one his due, and there remaineth of this person’s good works so much as equalleth the weight of an ant,” God will of his mercy cause it to be doubled unto him, that he may be admitted into paradise; but if, on the contrary, his good works be exhausted, and there remain evil works only, and there be any who have not yet received satisfaction from him, God will order that an equal weight of their sins be added unto his, that he may be punished for them in their stead, and he will be sent to hell laden with both. This will be the method of God’s dealing with mankind. As to brutes, after they shall have likewise taken vengeance of one another, as we have mentioned above, he will command them to be changed into dust;1 wicked men being reserved to more grievous punishment, so that they shall cry out, on hearing this sentence passed on the brutes, “Would to God that we were dust also!” As to the genii, many Muhammadans are of opinion that such of them as are true believers will undergo the same fate as the irrational animals, and have no other reward than the favour of being converted into dust; and for this they quote the authority of their prophet. But this, however, is judged not so very reasonable, since the genii, being capable of putting themselves in the state of believers as well as men, must consequently deserve, as it seems, to be rewarded for their faith, as well as to be punished for infidelity. Wherefore some entertain a more favourable opinion, and assign the believing genii a place near the confines of paradise, where they will Edition: current; Page: [147] enjoy sufficient felicity, though they be not admitted into that delightful mansion. But the unbelieving genii, it is universally agreed, will be punished eternally, and be thrown into hell with the infidels of mortal race. It may not be improper to observe, that under the denomination of unbelieving genii, the Muhammadans comprehend also the devil and his companions.1

Passing the bridge over hell.

The trials being over and the assembly dissolved, the Muhammadans hold that those who are to be admitted into paradise will take the right-hand way, and those who are destined to hell-fire will take the left; but both of them must first pass the bridge, called in Arabic al Sirát, which they say is laid over the midst of hell, and described to be finer than a hair and sharper than the edge of a sword, so that it seems very difficult to conceive how any one shall be able to stand upon it; for which reason most of the sect of the Mutazilites reject it as a fable, though the orthodox think it a sufficien proof of the truth of this article that it was seriously affirmed by him who never asserted a falsehood, meaning their prophet, who, to add to the difficulty of the passage has likewise declared that this bridge is beset on each side with briars and hooked thorns, which will, however, be no impediment to the good, for they shall pass with wonderful ease and swiftness, like lightning or the wind, Muhammad and his Muslims leading the way; whereas the wicked, what with the slipperiness and extreme narrowness of the path, the entangling of the thorns, and the extinction of the light which directed the former to paradise, will soon miss their footing, and fall down headlong into hell, which is gaping beneath them.2

This notion also borrowed from the Magians.

This circumstance Muhammad seems also to have borrowed from the Magians, who teach that on the last day all mankind will be obliged to pass a bridge which they call Púl Chínavad or Chínavar, that is, the straight Edition: current; Page: [148] bridge, leading directly into the other world; on the midst of which they suppose the angels, appointed by God to perform that office, will stand, who will require of every one a strict account of his actions, and weigh them in the manner we have already mentioned.1 It is true the Jews speak likewise of the bridge of hell, which they say is no broader than a thread; but then they do not tell us that any shall be obliged to pass it except the idolaters, who will fall thence into perdition.2

The seven apartments of hell and their inmates.

As to the punishment of the wicked, the Muhammadans are taught that hell is divided into seven storeys, or apartments, one below another, designed for the reception of as many distinct classes of the damned.3 The first, which they call Jahannam, they say will be the receptacle of those who acknowledged one God, that is, the wicked Muhammadans, who, after having there been punished according to their demerits, will at length be released. The second, named Ladhwá, they assign to the Jews; the third, named Hutama, to the Christians; the fourth, named al Saír, to the Sabians; the fifth, named Saqar, to the Magians; the sixth, named al Jahím, to the idolaters; and the seventh, which is the lowest and worst of all, and is called al Háwíya, to the hypocrites, or those who outwardly professed some religion, but in their hearts were of none.4 Over each of these apartments they believe there will be set a guard of angels,5 nineteen in Edition: current; Page: [149] number,1 to whom the damned will confess the just judgment of God, and beg them to intercede with him for some alleviation of their pain, or that they may be delivered by being annihilated.2

Proportion of suffering in hell. Final restoration of Muslim culprits Cleansing the infernals.

Muhammad has, in his Qurán and traditions, been very exact in describing the various torments of hell, which, according to him, the wicked will suffer both from intense heat and excessive cold. We shall, however, enter into no detail of them here, but only observe that the degrees of these pains will also vary, in proportion to the crimes of the sufferer and the apartment he is condemned to; and that he who is punished the most lightly of all will be shod with shoes of fire, the fervour of which will cause his skull to boil like a caldron. The condition of these unhappy wretches, as the same prophet teaches, cannot be properly called either life or death; and their misery will be greatly increased by their despair of being ever delivered from that place, since, according to that frequent expression in the Qurán, “they must remain therein for ever.” It must be remarked, however, that the infidels alone will be liable to eternity of damnation, for the Muslims, or those who have embraced the true religion, and have been guilty of heinous sins, will be delivered thence after they shall have expiated their crimes by their sufferings. The contrary of either of these opinions is reckoned heretical; for it is the constant orthodox doctrine of the Muhammadans that no unbeliever or idolater will ever be released, nor any person who in his lifetime professed and believed the unity of God be condemned to eternal punishment. As to the time and manner of the deliverance of those believers whose evil actions shall outweigh their good, there is a tradition of Muhammad that they shall be released after they shall have been scorched and their skins burnt black, and shall afterwards be admitted into paradise; and when the inhabitants of Edition: current; Page: [150] that place shall, in contempt, call them infernals, God will, on their prayers, take from them that opprobrious appellation. Others say he taught that while they continue in hell they shall be deprived of life, or (as his words are otherwise interpreted) be cast into a most profound sleep, that they may be the less sensible of their torments; and that they shall afterwards be received into paradise, and there revive on their being washed with the water of life; though some suppose they will be restored to life before they come forth from their place of punishment, that at their bidding farewell to their pains they may have some little taste of them. The time which these believers shall be detained there, according to a tradition handed down from their prophet, will not be less than 900 years, nor more than 7000. And as to the manner of their delivery, they say that they shall be distinguished by the marks of prostration on those parts of their bodies with which they used to touch the ground in prayer, and over which the fire will, therefore, have no power; and that being known by this characteristic, they will be relieved by the mercy of God, at the intercession of Muhammad and the blessed; whereupon those who shall have been dead will be restored to life, as has been said, and those whose bodies shall have contracted any sootiness or filth from the flames and smoke of hell will be immersed in one of the rivers of paradise, called the river of life, which will wash them whiter than pearls.1

Muhammad indebted to Jews and Magians for his notions of hell and the state of the lost.

For most of these circumstances relating to hell and the state of the damned, Muhammad was likewise, in all probability, indebted to the Jews, and in part to the Magians, both of whom agree in making seven distinct apartments in hell,2 though they vary in other particulars. The former place an angel as a guard over each of these infernal apartments, and suppose he will intercede for the Edition: current; Page: [151] miserable wretches there imprisoned, who will openly acknowledge the justice of God in their condemnation.1 They also teach that the wicked will suffer a diversity of punishments, and that by intolerable cold2 as well as heat, and that their faces shall become black;3 and believe those of their own religion shall also be punished in hell hereafter, according to their crimes (for they hold that few or none will be found so exactly righteous as to deserve no punishment at all), but will soon be delivered thence, when they shall be sufficiently purged from their sins by their father Abraham, or at the intercession of him or some other of the prophets.4 The Magians allow but one angel to preside over all the seven hells, who is named by them Vanánd Yazád, and, as they teach, assigns punishments proportionate to each person’s crimes, restraining also the tyranny and excessive cruelty of the devil, who would, if left to himself, torment the damned beyond their sentence.5 Those of this religion do also mention and describe various kinds of torments, wherewith the wicked will be punished in the next life, among which, though they reckon extreme cold to be one, yet they do not admit fire, out of respect, as it seems, to that element, which they take to be the representation of the divine nature; and, therefore, they rather choose to describe the damned souls as suffering by other kinds of punishments, such as an intolerable stink, the stinging and biting of serpents and wild beasts, the cutting and tearing of the flesh by the devils, excessive hunger and thirst, and the like.6

The partition al Araf.

Before we proceed to a description of the Muhammadan paradise, we must not forget to say something of the wall or partition which they imagine to be between that place and hell, and seems to be copied from the great gulf of Edition: current; Page: [152] separation mentioned in Scripture.1 They call it al Urf, and more frequently in the plural al Aráf, a word derived from the verb arafa, which signifies to distinguish between things, or to part them; though some commentators give another reason for the imposition of this name, because, they say, those who stand on this partition will know and distinguish the blessed from the damned by their respective marks or characteristics;2 and others say the word properly intends anything that is high raised or elevated, as such a wall of separation must be supposed to be.3 The Muhammadan writers greatly differ as to the persons who are to be found on al Aráf. Some imagine it to be a sort of limbo for the patriarchs and prophets, or for the martyrs and those who have been most eminent for sanctity, among whom, they say, there will be also angels in the form of men. Others place here such whose good and evil works are so equal that they exactly counterpoise each other, and therefore deserve neither reward nor punishment; and these, they say, will, on the last day, be admitted into paradise, after they shall have performed an act of adoration, which will be imputed to them as a merit, and will make the scale of their good works to overbalance. Others suppose this intermediate space will be a receptacle for those who have gone to war without their parents’ leave, and therein suffered martyrdom, being excluded paradise for their disobedience, and escaping hell because they are martyrs. The breadth of this partition wall cannot be supposed to be exceeding great, since not only those who shall stand thereon will hold conference with the inhabitants both of paradise and of hell, but the blessed and the damned themselves will also be able to talk to one another.4

If Muhammad did not take his notions of the partition we have been describing from Scripture, he must at least Edition: current; Page: [153] have borrowed it at second-hand from the Jews, who mention a thin wall dividing paradise from hell.1

The refreshing water of al Kauthar.

The righteous, as the Muhammadans are taught to believe, having surmounted the difficulties and passed the sharp bridge above mentioned, before they enter paradise will be refreshed by drinking at the pond of their prophet, who describes it to be an exact square, of a month’s journey in compass: its water, which is supplied by two pipes from al Kauthar, one of the rivers of paradise, being whiter than milk or silver and more odoriferous than musk, with as many cups set around it as there are stars in the firmament, of which water whoever drinks will thirst no more for ever.2 This is the first taste which the blessed will have of their future and now near-approaching felicity.

Though paradise be so very frequently mentioned in the Qurán, yet it is a dispute among the Muhammadans whether it be already created, or be to be created hereafter: the Mutazilites and some other sectaries asserting that there is not at present any such place in nature, and that the paradise which the righteous will inhabit in the next life will be different from that from which Adam was expelled. However, the orthodox profess the contrary, maintaining that it was created even before the world, and describe it, from their prophet’s traditions, in the following manner.

Paradise described.

They say it is situate above the seven heavens (or in the seventh heaven) and next under the throne of God; and to express the amenity of the place, tell us that the earth of it is of the finest wheat flour, or of the purest musk, or, as others will have it, of saffron; that its stones are pearls and jacinths, the walls of its buildings enriched with gold and silver, and that the trunks of all its trees are of gold, among which the most remarkable is the tree called Túba, or the tree of happiness. Concerning this Edition: current; Page: [154] tree they fable that it stands in the palace of Muhammad, though a branch of it will reach to the house of every true believer;1 that it will be laden with pomegranates, grapes, dates, and other fruits of surprising bigness, and of tastes unknown to mortals. So that if a man desire to eat of any particular kind of fruit, it will immediately be presented to him, or if he choose flesh, birds ready dressed will be set before him according to his wish. They add that the boughs of this tree will spontaneously bend down to the hand of the person who would gather of its fruits, and that it will supply the blessed not only with food, but also with silken garments, and beasts to ride on ready saddled and bridled, and adorned with rich trappings, which will burst forth from its fruits; and that this tree is so large, that a person mounted on the fleetest horse would not be able to gallop from one end of its shade to the other in a hundred years.2

The rivers of paradise.

As plenty of water is one of the greatest additions to the pleasantness of any place, the Qurán often speaks of the rivers of paradise as a principal ornament thereof. Some of these rivers, they say, flow with water, some with milk, some with wine, and others with honey, all taking their rise from the root of the tree Túba: two of which rivers, named al Kauthar and the river of life, we have already mentioned. And lest these should not be sufficient, we are told this garden is also watered by a great number of lesser springs and fountains, whose pebbles are rubies and emeralds, their earth of camphire, their beds of musk, and their sides of saffron, the most remarkable among them being Salsabíl and Tasním.

Glories of the Húr al oyún.

But all these glories will be eclipsed by the resplendent and ravishing girls of paradise, called, from their large black eyes, Húr al oyún, the enjoyment of whose company will be a principal felicity of the faithful. These, they say, are created not of clay, as mortal women are, Edition: current; Page: [155] but of pure musk, being, as their prophet often affirms in his Qurán, free from all natural impurities, defects, and inconveniences incident to the sex, of the strictest modesty, and secluded from public view in pavilions of hollow pearls, so large, that, as some traditions have it, one of them will be no less than four parasangs (or, as others say, sixty miles) long, and as many broad.

Names of the abode of bliss.

The name which the Muhammadans usually give to this happy mansion is al Jannat, or the garden; and sometimes they call it, with an addition, Jannat-ul-Firdaus, the garden of paradise, Jannat-ul-Adan, the garden of Eden (though they generally interpret the word Eden, not according to its acceptation in Hebrew, but according to its meaning in their own tongue, wherein it signifies a settled or perpetual habitation), Jannat-ul-Mawá, the garden of abode, Jannat-ul-Naím, the garden of pleasure, and the like; by which several appellations some understand so many different gardens, or at least places of different degrees of felicity (for they reckon no less than a hundred such in all), the very meanest whereof will afford its inhabitants so many pleasures and delights, that one would conclude they must even sink under them, had not Muhammad declared, that in order to qualify the blessed for a full enjoyment of them, God will give to every one the abilities of a hundred men.

The two fountains at the gate of paradise, celestial attendance, &c. The mercy of God, the ground; works, the measure of the rewards of the righteous

We have already described Muhammad’s pond, whereof the righteous are to drink before their admission into this delicious seat; besides which some authors1 mention two fountains springing from under a certain tree near the gate of paradise, and say that the blessed will also drink of one of them to purge their bodies and carry off all excrementitious dregs, and will wash themselves in the other. When they are arrived at the gate itself, each person will there be met and saluted by the beautiful youths appointed to serve and wait upon him, one of them Edition: current; Page: [156] running before, to carry the news of his arrival to the wives destined for him; and also by two angels, bearing the presents sent him by God, one of whom will invest him with a garment of paradise, and the other will put a ring on each of his fingers, with inscriptions on them alluding to the happiness of his condition. By which of the eight gates (for so many they suppose paradise to have) they are respectively to enter, is not worth inquiry; but it must be observed that Muhammad has declared that no person’s good works will gain him admittance, and that even himself shall be saved, not by his merits, but merely by the mercy of God. It is, however, the constant doctrine of the Qurán that the felicity of each person will be proportioned to his deserts, and that there will be abodes of different degrees of happiness; the most eminent degree being reserved for the prophets, the second for the doctors and teachers of God’s worship, the next for the martyrs, and the lower for the rest of the righteous, according to their several merits. There will also some distinction be made in respect to the time of their admission, Muhammad (to whom, if you will believe him, the gates will first be opened) having affirmed that the poor will enter paradise five hundred years before the rich: nor is this the only privilege which they will enjoy in the next life, since the same prophet has also declared, that when he took a view of paradise, he saw the majority of its inhabitants to be the poor, and when he looked down into hell, he saw the greater part of the wretches confined there to be women.

The great feast of God.

For the first entertainment of the blessed on their admission, they fable that the whole earth will then be as one loaf of bread, which God will reach to them with his hand, holding it like a cake; and that for meat they will have the ox Balám and the fish Nún, the lobes of whose livers will suffice 70,000 men, being, as some imagine, to be set before the principal guests, viz., those who, to that number, will be admitted into paradise without Edition: current; Page: [157] examination;1 though others suppose that a definite number is here put for an indefinite, and that nothing more is meant thereby than to express a great multitude of people.

Rewards of the faithful described.

From this feast every one will be dismissed to the mansion designed for him, where (as has been said) he will enjoy such a share of felicity as will be proportioned to his merits, but vastly exceed comprehension or expectation, since the very meanest in paradise (as he who, it is pretended, must know best has declared) will have eighty thousand servants, seventy-two wives of the girls of paradise, besides the wives he had in this world, and a tent erected for him of pearls, jacinths, and emeralds, of a very large extent; and, according to another tradition, will be waited on by three hundred attendants while he eats, will be served in dishes of gold, whereof three hundred shall be set before him at once, containing each a different kind of food, the last morsel of which will be as grateful as the first; and will also be supplied with as many sorts of liquors in vessels of the same metal; and, to complete the entertainment, there will be no want of wine, which, though forbidden in this life, will yet be freely allowed to be drunk in the next, and without danger, since the wine of paradise will not inebriate, as that we drink here. The flavour of this wine we may conceive to be delicious without a description, since the water of Tasním and the other fountains which will be used to dilute it is said to be wonderfully sweet and fragrant. If any object to these pleasures, as an impudent Jew did to Muhammad, that so much eating and drinking must necessarily require proper evacuations, we answer, as the prophet did, that the inhabitants of paradise will not need to ease themselves, nor even to blow their nose, for that all superfluities will be discharged and carried off by perspiration, or a sweat as odoriferous as musk, after which their appetite shall return afresh.

Edition: current; Page: [158]

The magnificence of the garments and furniture promised by the Qurán to the godly in the next life is answerable to the delicacy of their diet; for they are to be clothed in the richest silks and brocades chiefly of green, which will burst forth from the fruits of paradise, and will be also supplied by the leaves of the tree Túba; they will be adorned with bracelets of gold and silver, and crowns set with pearls of incomparable lustre; and will make use of silken carpets, litters of a prodigious size, couches, pillows, and other rich furniture embroidered with gold and precious stones.

Ability of the faithful to enjoy.

That we may the more readily believe what has been mentioned of the extraordinary abilities of the inhabitants of paradise to taste these pleasures in their height, it is said they will enjoy a perpetual youth; that in whatever age they happen to die, they will be raised in their prime and vigour, that is, of about thirty years of age, which age they will never exceed (and the same they say of the damned); and that when they enter paradise they will be of the same stature with Adam, who, as they fable, was no less than sixty cubits high. And to this age and stature their children, if they shall desire any (for otherwise their wives will not conceive), shall immediately attain, according to that saying of their prophet, “If any of the faithful in paradise be desirous of issue, it shall be conceived, born, and grown up within the space of an hour.” And in the same manner, if any one shall have a fancy to employ himself in agriculture (which rustic pleasure may suit the wanton fancy of some), what he shall sow will spring up and come to maturity in a moment.

Lest any of the senses should want their proper delight, we are told the ear will there be entertained, not only with the ravishing songs of the angel Isráfíl, who has the most melodious voice of all God’s creatures, and of the daughters of paradise; but even the trees themselves will celebrate the divine praises with a harmony exceeding what ever mortals have heard; to which will be joined the Edition: current; Page: [159] sound of the bells hanging on the trees, which will be put in motion by the wind proceeding from the throne of God, so often as the blessed wish for music; nay, the very clashing of the golden-bodied trees, whose fruits are pearls and emeralds, will surpass human imagination; so that the pleasures of this sense will not be the least of the enjoyments of paradise.

The spiritual enjoyments of heaven.

The delights we have hitherto taken a view of, it is said, will be common to all the inhabitants of paradise, even those of the lowest order. What then, think we, must they enjoy who shall obtain a superior degree of honour and felicity? To these, they say, there are prepared, besides all this, “such things as eye hath not seen, nor hath ear heard, nor hath it entered into the heart of man to conceive;” an expression most certainly borrowed from Scripture.1 That we may know wherein the felicity of those who shall attain the highest degree will consist, Muhammad is reported to have said that the meanest of the inhabitants of paradise will see his gardens, wives, servants, furniture, and other possessions take up the space of a thousand years’ journey (for so far and farther will the blessed see in the next life) but that he will be in the highest honour with God who shall behold his face morning and evening; and this favour al Ghazáli supposes to be that additional or superabundant recompense promised in the Qurán,2 which will give such exquisite delight, that in respect thereof all the other pleasures of paradise will be forgotten and lightly esteemed; and not without reason, since, as the same author says, every other enjoyment is equally tasted by the very brute beast who is turned loose into luxuriant pasture.3 The reader will observe, by the way, that this is a full confutation of those who pretend that the Muhammadans admit of no spiritual Edition: current; Page: [160] pleasure in the next life, but make the happiness of the blessed to consist wholly in corporeal enjoyments.1*

Muhammad indebted to Jews and Magians for his notions of paradise.

Whence Muhammad took the greatest part of his paradise it is easy to show. The Jews constantly describe the future mansion of the just as a delicious garden, and make it also reach to the seventh heaven.2 They also say it has three gates,3 or, as others will have it, two,4 and four rivers (which last circumstance they copied, to be sure, from those of the Garden of Eden),5 flowing with milk, wine, balsam, and honey.6 Their Behemoth and Leviathan, which they pretend will be slain for the entertainment of the blessed,7 are so apparently the Balám and Nún of Muhammad, that his followers themselves confess he is obliged to them for both.8 The Rabbins likewise mention seven different degrees of felicity,9 and say that the highest will be of those who perpetually contemplate the face of God.10 The Persian Magi had also an idea of the future happy estate of the good, very little different from that of Muhammad. Paradise they called Bahisht, and Mínu, which signifies crystal, where they believe the righteous shall enjoy all manner of delights, and particularly the company of the Hurán-i-bahisht, or black-eyed nymphs of paradise,11 the care of whom, they say, is committed to the angel Zamiyád;12 and hence Muhammad seems to have taken the first hint of his paradisiacal ladies.

Christian and Muslim notions of the future state compared.

It is not improbable, however, but that he might have been obliged, in some respect, to the Christian accounts of Edition: current; Page: [161] the felicity of the good in the next life.* As it is scarce possible to convey, especially to the apprehensions of the generality of mankind, an idea of spiritual pleasures without introducing sensible objects, the Scriptures have been obliged to represent the celestial enjoyments by corporeal images, and to describe the mansion of the blessed as a glorious and magnificent city, built of gold and precious stones, with twelve gates, through the streets of which there runs a river of water of life, and having on either side the tree of life, which bears twelve sorts of fruits and leaves of a healing virtue.1 Our Saviour likewise speaks of the future state of the blessed as of a kingdom where they shall eat and drink at his table.2 But then these descriptions have none of those puerile imaginations3 which reign throughout that of Muhammad, much less any the most distant intimation of sensual delights, which he was so fond of; on the contrary, we are expressly assured that “in the resurrection they will neither marry nor be given in marriage, but will be as the angels of God Edition: current; Page: [162] in heaven.”1 Muhammad, however, to enhance the value of paradise with his Arabians, chose rather to imitate the indecency of the Magians than the modesty of the Christians in this particular, and lest his beatified Muslims should complain that anything was wanting, bestows on them wives, as well as the other comforts of life; judging, it is to be presumed, from his own inclinations, that, like Panurgus’s ass,2 they would think all other enjoyments not worth their acceptance if they were to be debarred from this.

The description of paradise in the Qurán to be understood in a literal sense.

Had Muhammad, after all, intimated to his followers, that what he had told them of paradise was to be taken, not literally, but in a metaphorical sense (as it is said the Magians do the description of Zoroaster’s3), this might, perhaps, make some atonement; but the contrary is so evident from the whole tenor of the Qurán, that although some Muhammadans, whose understandings are too refined to admit such gross conceptions, look on their prophet’s descriptions as parabolical, and are willing to receive them in an allegorical or spiritual acceptation,4 yet the general and orthodox doctrine is, that the whole is to be strictly believed in the obvious and literal acceptation; to prove which I need only urge the oath they exact from Christians (who they know abhor such fancies) when they would bind them in the most strong and sacred manner; for in such a case they make them swear that if they falsify their engagement, they will affirm that there will be black-eyed girls in the next world and corporeal pleasures.5

The rewards of Muslim women.

Before we quit this subject it may not be improper Edition: current; Page: [163] to observe the falsehood of a vulgar imputation on the Muhammadans, who are by several writers1 reported to hold that women have no souls, or, if they have, that they will perish, like those of brute beasts, and will not be rewarded in the next life. But whatever may be the opinion of some ignorant people among them, it is certain that Muhammad had too great a respect for the fair sex to teach such a doctrine; and there are several passages in the Qurán which affirm that women, in the next life, will not only be punished for their evil actions, but will also receive the rewards of their good deeds, as well as the men, and that in this case God will make no distinction of sexes.2 It is true the general notion is that they will not be admitted into the same abode as the men are, because their places will be supplied by the paradisiacal females (though some allow that a man will there also have the company of those who were his wives in this world, or at least such of them as he shall desire3), but that good women will go into a separate place of happiness, where they will enjoy all sorts of delights;4 but whether one of those delights will be the enjoyment of agreeable paramours created for them, to complete the economy of the Muhammadan system, is what I have nowhere found decided. One circumstance relating to these beatified females, conformable to what he had asserted of the men, he acquainted his followers with in the answer he returned to an old woman, who, desiring him to intercede with God that she might be admitted into paradise, he told her that no old woman would enter that place; which setting the poor woman a crying, he explained himself by saying that God would then make her young again.5

Edition: current; Page: [164]

The decrees of God.

The sixth great point of faith which the Muhammadans are taught by the Qurán to believe is God’s absolute decree and predestination both of good and evil; for the orthodox doctrine is, that whatever hath or shall come to pass in this world, whether it be good or whether it be bad, proceedeth entirely from the divine will, and is irrevocably fixed and recorded from all eternity in the preserved table,1 God having secretly predetermined not only the adverse and prosperous fortune of every person in this world, in the most minute particulars, but also his faith or infidelity, his obedience or disobedience, and consequently his everlasting happiness or misery after death, which fate or predestination it is not possible by any foresight or wisdom to avoid.

Use made of this doctrine by Muhammad.

Of this doctrine Muhammad makes great use in his Qurán for the advancement of his designs, encouraging his followers to fight without fear, and even desperately, for the propagation of their faith, by representing to them that all their caution could not avert their inevitable destiny or prolong their lives for a moment,2 and deterring them from disobeying or rejecting him as an impostor by setting before them the danger they might thereby incur of being, by the just judgment of God, abandoned to seduction, hardness of heart, and a reprobate mind, as a punishment for their obstinacy.3

As this doctrine of absolute election and reprobation has been thought by many of the Muhammadan divines to be derogatory to the goodness and justice of God, and to make God the author of evil, several subtle distinctions have been invented and disputes raised to explicate or soften it, and different sects have been formed, according to their several opinions or methods of explaining this point, some of them going so far as even to hold the Edition: current; Page: [165] direct contrary position of absolute free will in man, as we shall see hereafter.1

Prayer or sulat.

Of the four fundamental points of religious practice required by the Qurán the first is prayer, under which, as has been said, are also comprehended those legal washings or purifications which are necessary preparations thereto.

Ceremonial purifications required.

Of these purifications there are two degrees, one called Ghusl, being a total immersion or bathing of the body in water, and the other called Wadhú (by the Persians Ábdast), which is the washing of their faces, hands, and feet after a certain manner, The first is required in some extraordinary cases only, as after having lain with a woman, or being polluted by emission of seed, or by approaching a dead body; women also being obliged to it after their courses or childbirth. The latter is the ordinary ablution in common cases and before prayer, and must necessarily be used by every person before he can enter upon that duty.2 It is performed with certain formal ceremonies, which have been described by some writers, but are much easier apprehended by seeing them done than by the best description.

These were borrowed from the Jews.

These purifications were perhaps borrowed by Muhammad from the Jews; at least they agree in a great measure with those used by that nation,3 who in process of time burdened the precepts of Moses in this point with so many traditionary ceremonies, that whole books have been written about them, and who were so exact and superstitious therein, even in our Saviour’s time, that they are often reproved by him for it.4 But as it is certain that the pagan Arabs used lustrations of this kind5 long before the time of Muhammad, as most nations did, and still do in the East, where the warmth of the climate Edition: current; Page: [166] requires a greater nicety and degree of cleanliness than these colder parts, perhaps Muhammad only recalled his countrymen to a more strict observance of those purifying rites, which had been probably neglected by them, or at least performed in a careless and perfunctory manner. The Muhammadans, however, will have it that they are as ancient as Abraham,1 who, they say, was enjoined by God to observe them, and was shown the manner of making the ablution by the Angel Gabriel in the form of a beautiful youth.2 Nay, some deduce the matter higher, and imagine that these ceremonies were taught our first parents by the angels.3

The practice of religion based on cleanliness.

That his followers might be the more punctual in this duty, Muhammad is said to have declared, that “the practice of religion is founded on cleanliness,” which is the one-half of the faith and the key of prayer, without which it will not be heard by God.4 That these expressions may be the better understood, al Ghazáli reckons four degrees of purification, of which the first is, the cleansing of the body from all pollution, filth, and excrements; the second, the cleansing of the members of the body from all wickedness and unjust actions; the third, the cleansing of the heart from all blamable inclinations and odious vices; and the fourth, the purging a man’s secret thoughts from all affections which may divert their attendance on God: adding, that the body is but as the outward shell in respect to the heart, which is as the kernel. And for this reason he highly complains of those who are superstitiously solicitous in exterior purifications, avoiding those persons as unclean who are not so scrupulously Edition: current; Page: [167] nice as themselves, and at the same time have their minds lying waste, and overrun with pride, ignorance, and hypocrisy.1 Whence it plainly appears with how little foundation the Muhammadans have been charged by some writers2 with teaching or imagining that these formal washings alone cleanse them from their sins.3

Lustration with sand instead of water allowed.

Lest so necessary a preparation to their devotions should be omitted, either where water cannot be had, or when it may be of prejudice to a person’s health, they are allowed in such cases to make use of fine sand or dust in lieu of it;4 and then they perform this duty by clapping their open hands on the sand, and passing them over the parts, in the same manner as if they were dipped in water. But for this expedient Muhammad was not so much indebted to his own cunning5 as to the example of the Jews, or perhaps that of the Persian Magi, almost as scrupulous as the Jews themselves in their lustrations, who both of them prescribe the same method in cases of necessity;6 and there is a famous instance in ecclesiastical history of sand being used, for the same reason, instead of water, in the administration of the Christian sacrament of baptism, many years before Muhammad’s time.7

Minor points of purification.

Neither are the Muhammadans contented with bare washing, but think themselves obliged to several other necessary points of cleanliness, which they make also parts of this duty; such as combing the hair, cutting the beard, paring the nails, pulling out the hairs of their armpits, shaving their private parts, and circumcision;8 of Edition: current; Page: [168] which last I will add a word or two, lest I should not find a more proper place.

The Muslim doctrine of circumcision.

Circumcision, though it be not so much as once mentioned in the Qurán, is yet held by the Muhammadans to be an ancient divine institution, confirmed by the religion of Islám, and though not so absolutely necessary but that it may be dispensed with in some cases,1 yet highly proper and expedient. The Arabs used this rite for many ages before Muhammad, having probably learned it from Ismaíl, though not only his descendants, but the Himyárites,2 and other tribes, practised the same. The Ismaílites, we are told,3 used to circumcise their children, not on the eighth day, as is the custom of the Jews, but when about twelve or thirteen years old, at which age their father underwent that operation;4 and the Muhammadans imitate them so far as not to circumcise children before they be able, at least, distinctly to pronounce that profession of their faith, “There is no god but God; Muhammad is the apostle of God;”5 but pitch on what age they please for the purpose, between six and sixteen or thereabouts.6 Though the Muslim doctors are generally of opinion, conformably to the Scripture, that this precept was originally given to Abraham, yet some have imagined that Adam was taught it by the Angel Gabriel, to satisfy an oath he had made to cut off that flesh which, after his fall, had rebelled against his spirit; whence an odd argument has been drawn for the universal obligation of circumcision.7 Though I cannot say the Jews led the Muhammadans the way here, yet they seem so unwilling to believe any of the principal Edition: current; Page: [169] patriarchs or prophets before Abraham were really uncircumcised, that they pretend several of them, as well as some holy men who lived after his time, were born ready circumcised, or without a foreskin, and that Adam, in particular, was so ereated;1 whence the Muhammadans affirm the same thing of their prophet.2

Prayer the key of paradise.

Prayer was by Muhammad thought so necessary a duty, that he used to call it the pillar of religion and the key of paradise; and when the Thakifites, who dwelt at Tayif, sending in the ninth year of the Hijra to make their submissicn to the prophet, after the keeping of their favourite idol had been denied them,3 begged, at least, that they might be dispensed with as to their saying of the appointed prayers, he answered, “That there could be no good in that religion wherein was no prayer.”4

The hours of prayer. Manner of performing the service of prayer.

That so important a duty, therefore, might not be neglected, Muhammad obliged his followers to pray five times every twenty-four hours, at certain stated times; viz., 1 In the morning, before sunrise; 2. When noon is past, and the sun begins to decline from the meridian; 3. In the afternoon, before sunset; 4. In the evening, after sunset, and before day be shut in; and 5. After the day is shut in, and before the first watch of the night.5 For this institution he pretended to have received the divine command from the throne of God himself, when he took his night journey to heaven; and the observing of the stated times of prayer is frequently insisted on in the Qurán, though they be not particularly prescribed therein. Accordingly, at the aforesaid times, of which public notice is given by the Muadhdhíns, or Criers, from the steeples Edition: current; Page: [170] of their mosques (for they use no bell), every conscientious Muslim prepares himself for prayer, which he performs either in the mosque or any other place, provided it be clean, after a prescribed form, and with a certain number of phrases or ejaculations (which the more acrupulous count by a string of beads) and using certain postures of worship; all which have been particularly set down and described though with some few mistakes, by other writers,1 and ought not to be abridged, unless in some special cases, as on a journey, on preparing for battle, &c.

For the regular performance of the duty of prayer among the Muhammadans, besides the particulars above mentioned, it is also requisite that they turn their faces, while they pray, towards the temple of Makkah,2 the quarter where the same is situate being, for that reason, pointed out within their mosques by a niche, which they call al Mihráb, and without by the situation of the doors opening into the galleries of the steeples: there are also tables calculated for the ready finding out their Qibla, or part towards which they ought to pray, in places where they have no other direction.3

But what is principally to be regarded in the discharge of this duty, say the Muslim doctors, is the inward disposition of the heart, which is the life and spirit of prayer;4 the most punctual observance of the external rites and ceremonies before mentioned being of little or no avail, if performed without due attention, reverence, devotion, and hope;5 so that we must not think the Muhammadans, or the considerate part of them at least, content themselves with the mere opus operatum, or imagine their whole religion to be placed therein.6

Edition: current; Page: [171]

Regulations as to apparel and women in time of prayer.

I had like to have omitted two things which in my mind deserve mention on this head, and may, perhaps, be better defended than our contrary practice. One is, that the Muhammadans never address themselves to God in sumptuous apparel, though they are obliged to be decently clothed, but lay aside their costly habits and pompons ornaments, if they wear any, when they approach the divine presence, lest they should seem proud and arrogant.1 The other is, that they admit not their women to pray with them in public, that sex being obliged to perform their devotions at home, or if they visit the mosques, it must be at a time when the men are not there; for the Muslims are of opinion that their presence inspires a different kind of devotion from that which is requisite in a place dedicated to the worship of God.2

The institution of prayer borrowed from the Jews.

The greater part of the particulars comprised in the Muhammadan institution of prayer their prophet seems to have copied, from others, and especially the Jews, exceeding their institutions only in the number of daily prayers.3 The Jews are directed to pray three times a day,4 in the morning, in the evening, and within night, in imitation of Abraham,5 Isaac,6 and Jacob;7 and the practice was as early, at least, as the time of Daniel.8 The several postures used by the Muhammadans in their prayers Edition: current; Page: [172] are also the same with those prescribed by the Jewish Rabbins, and particularly the most solemn act of adoration, by prostrating themselves so as to touch the ground with their forebead;1 notwithstanding, the latter pretend the practice of the former, in this respect, to be a relic of their ancient manner of paying their devotions to Baalpeor.2 The Jews likewise constantly pray with their faces turned towards the temple of Jerusalem,3 which has been their Qibla from the time it was first dedicated by Solomon;4 for which reason Daniel, praying in Chaldea, had the windows of his chamber open towards that city;5 and the same was the Qibla of Muhammad and his followers for six or seven months,6 and till he found himself obliged to change it for the Kaabah. The Jews, moreover, are obliged by the precepts of their religion to be careful that the place they pray in, and the garments they have on when they perform their duty, be clean:7 the men and women also among them pray apart (in which particular they were imitated by the Eastern Christians); and several other conformities might be remarked between the Jewish public worship and that of the Muhammadans.8

Almsgiving the second fundamental act of religious practice.

The next point of the Muhammadan religion is the giving of alms, which are of two sorts, legal and voluntary. The legal alms are of indispensable obligation, being commanded by the law, which directs and determines both the portion which is to be given and of what things it ought to be given; but the voluntary alms are left to every one’s liberty, to give more or less as he shall see fit The former kind of alms some think to be properly called Zakát and the latter Sadaqa, though this name be also Edition: current; Page: [173] frequently given to the legal alms. They are called Zakát, either because they increase a man’s store, by drawing down a blessing thereon, and produce in his soul the virtue of liberality,1 or because they purify the remaining part of one’s substance from pollution and the soul from the filth of avarice;2 and Sadaqa, because they are a proof of a man’s sincerity in the worship of God. Some writers have called the legal alms tithes, but improperly, since in some eases they fall short, and in others exceed that proportion.

The giving of alms is frequently commanded in the Quran, and often recommended therein jointly with prayer; the former being held of great efficacy in causing the latter to be heard of God: for which reason the Khalífah Omar Ibn Abd al Azíz used to say “that prayer carries us half-way to God, fasting brings us to the door of his palace, and alms procures us admission.”3 The Muhammadans, therefore esteem almsdeeds to be highly meritorious, and many of them have been illustrious for the exercise thereof. Hasan, the son of Ali and grandson of Muhammad, in particular, is related to have thrice in his life divided his substance equally between himself and the poor, and twice to have given away all he had;4 and the generality are so addicted to the doing of good, that they extend their charity even to brutes.5*

Laws relating to legal alms.

Alms, according to the prescriptions of the Muhammadan law, are to be given of five things: 1. Of cattle, that is to say, of camels, kine, and sheep; 2. Of money; Edition: current; Page: [174] 3. Of corn; 4. Of fruits, viz., dates and raisins; and 5. Of wares sold. Of each of these a certain portion is to be given in alms, being usually one part in forty, or two and a half per cent of the value. But no alms are due for them, unless they amount to a certain quantity or number; nor until a man has been in possession of them eleven months, he not being obliged to give alms thereout before the twelfth month is begun; nor are alms due for cattle employed in tilling the ground or in carrying of burdens. In some cases a much larger portion than the before-mentioned is reckoned due for alms: thus of what is gotten out of mines, or the sea, or by any art or profession over and above what is sufficient for the reasonable support of a man’s family, and especially where there is a mixture or suspicion of unjust gain, a fifth part ought to be given in alms. Moreover, at the end of the fast of Ramadhán, every Muslim is obliged to give in alms for himself and for every one of his family, if he has any, a measure1 of wheat, barley, dates, raisins, rice, or other provisions commonly eaten.2

Appropriation of legal alms.

The legal alms were at first collected by Muhammad himself, who employed them as he thought fit, in the relief of his poor relations and followers, but chiefly applied them to the maintenance of those who served in his wars, and fought, as he termed it, in the way of God. His successors continued to do the same, till, in process of time, other taxes and tributes being imposed for the support of the government, they seem to have been weary of acting as almoners to their subjects, and to have left the paying them to their consciences.

Jewish and Muslim almsgiving compared.

In the foregoing rules concerning alms we may observe also footsteps of what the Jews taught and practised in respect thereto. Alms, which they also call Sedaka, i.e., Edition: current; Page: [175] justice or righteousness,1 are greatly recommended by their Rabbins, and preferred even to sacrifices,2 as a duty the frequent exercise whereof will effectually free a man from hell-fire,3 and merit everlasting life;4 wherefore, besides the corners of the field and the gleanings of their harvest and vineyard, commanded to be left for the poor and the stranger by the law of Moses,5 a certain portion of their corn and fruits is directed to be set apart for their relief, which portion is called the tithes of the poor.6 The Jews likewise were formerly very conspicuous for their charity. Zaccheus gave the half of his goods to the poor;7 and we are told that some gave their whole substance: so that their doctors at length decreed that no man should give above a fifth part of his goods in alms.8 There were also persons publicly appointed in every synagogue to collect and distribute the people’s contributions.9

The duty of fasting.

The third point of religious practice is fasting, a duty of so great moment, that Muhammad used to say it was “the gate of religion,” and that “the odour of the mouth of him who fasteth is more grateful to God than that of musk;” and al Ghazáli reckons fasting one-fourth part of the faith. According to the Muhammadan divines, there are three degrees of fasting: 1. The restraining the belly and other parts of the body from satisfying their lusts; 2. The restraining the ears, eyes, tongue, hands, feet, and other members from sin; and 3. The fasting of the heart from worldly cares, and refraining the thoughts from everything besides God.10

Edition: current; Page: [176]

The fast of Ramadhán.

The Muhammadans are obliged, by the express command of the Qurán, to fast the whole month of Ramadhán, from the time the new moon first appears till the appearance of the next new moon; during which time they must abstain from eating, drinking, and women, from daybreak till night,1 or sunset. And this injunction they observe so strictly, that while they fast they suffer nothing to enter their mouths, or other parts of their body, esteeming the fast broken and null if they smell perfumes, take a clyster or injection, bathe, or even purposely swallow their spittle; some being so cautious that they will not open their mouths to speak, lest they should breathe the air too freely:2 the fast is also deemed void if a man kiss or touch a woman, or if he vomit designedly. But after sunset they are allowed to refresh themselves, and to eat and drink, and enjoy the company of their wives till daybreak;3 though the more rigid begin the fast again at midnight.4 This fast is extremely rigorous and mortifying when the month of Ramadhán happens to fall in summer, for the Arabian year being lunar,5 each month runs through all the different seasons in the course of Edition: current; Page: [177] thirty three years, the length and heat of the days making the observance of it much more difficult and uneasy then than in winter.

The reason given why the month of Ramadhán was pitched on for this purpose is, that on that month the Qurán was sent down from heaven.1 Some pretend that Abraham, Moses, and Jesus received their respective revelations in the same month.2

The rule of fasting for the sick, &c

From the fast of Ramadhán none are exensed, except only travellers and sick persons (under which last denomination the doctors comprehend all whose health would manifestly be injured by their keeping the fast; as women with child and giving suck, ancient people, and young children); but then they are obliged, as soon as the impediment is removed, to fast an equal number of other days: and the breaking the fast is ordered to be expiated by giving alms to the poor.3

This also borrowed from the Jews.

Muhammad seems to have followed the guidance of the Jews in his ordinances concerning fasting, no less than in the former particulars. That nation, when they fast, abstain not only from eating and drinking, but from women, and from anointing themselves,4 from daybreak until sunset, and the stars begin to appear,5 spending the night in taking what refreshments they please.6 And they allow women with child and giving suck, old persons, and young children to be exempted from keeping most of the public fasts.7

Voluntary fasts of Muslims Ashúra borrowed from the Jewish day of atonement.

Though my design here be briefly to treat of those points only which are of indispensable obligation on a Muslim, and expressly required by the Qurán, without entering into their practice as to voluntary and supererogatory Edition: current; Page: [178] works; yet, to show how closely Muhammad’s institutions follow the Jewish I shall add a word or two of the voluntary fasts of the Muhammadans. These are such as have been recommended either by the example or approbation of their prophet; and especially certain days of those months which they esteem sacred there being a tradition that he used to say That a fast of one day in a sacred month was better than a fast of thirty days in another month, and that the fast of one day in Ramadhán was more meritorious than a fast of thirty days in a sacred month.1 Among the more commendable days is that of Ashúra, the tenth of Muharram, which, though some writers tell us it was observed by the Arabs, and particularly the tribe of Quraish, before Muhammad’s time,2 yet, as others assure us, that prophet borrowed both the name and the fast from the Jews, it being with them the tenth of the seventh month, or Tisri, and the great day of expiation commanded to be kept by the law of Moses.3 Al Kazwíni relates that when Muhammad came to Madína, and found the Jews there fasted on the day of Ashúra, he asked them the reason of it; and they told him it was because on that day Pharaoh and his people were drowned, Moses and those who were with him escaping: whereupon he said that he bore a nearer relation to Moses than they, and ordered his followers to fast on that day. However it seems afterwards he was not so well pleased in having imitated the Jews herein; and therefore declared that, if he lived another year, he would alter the day, and fast on the ninth, abhorring so near an agreement with them.4

Pilgrimage to Makkah.

The pilgrimage to Makkah is so necessary a point of practice that, according to a tradition of Muhammad, he who dies without performing it may as well die a Jew or Edition: current; Page: [179] a Christian;1 and the same is expressly commanded in the Qurán.2 Before I speak of the time and manner of performing this pilgrimage, it may be proper to give a short account of the temple of Makkah, the chief scene of the Muhammadan worship; in doing which I need be the less prolix, because that edifice has been already described by several writers,3 though they, following different relations, have been led into some mistakes, and agree not with one another in several particulars: nor, indeed, do the Arab authors agree in all things, one great reason whereof is their speaking of different times.

The temple of Makkah described.

The temple of Makkah stands in the midst of the city, and is honoured with the title of Masjid al Harám, i.e., the sacred or inviolable temple. What is principally reverenced in this place, and gives sanctity to the whole, is a square stone building called the Kaabah, as some fancy, from its height, which surpasses that of the other buildings in Makkah,4 but more probably from its quadrangular form, and Bait Allah, i.e., the house of God, being peculiarly hallowed and set apart for his worship. The length of this edifice, from north to south, is twenty-four cubits, its breadth from east to west twenty three cubits, and its height twenty-seven cubits: the door, which is on the east side, stands about four cubits from the ground; the floor being level with the bottom of the door.5 In the corner next this door is the black stone, of which I shall take notice by and by. On the north side of the Kaabah, within a semicircular enclosure fifty cubits long, lies the white stone, said to be the sepulchre of Ismail, which receives the rain-water that falls off the Kaabah by a spout, formerly of wood,6 but now of gold. Edition: current; Page: [180] The Kaabah has a double roof, supported within by three octangular pillars of aloes wood, between which, on a bar of iron; hang some silver lamps. The outside is covered with rich black damask, adorned with an embroidered band of gold, which is changed every year, and was formerly sent by the Khalífahs, afterwards by the Sultáns of Egypt, and is now provided by the Turkish emperors.* At a small distance from the Kaabah, on the east side, is the Station or Place of Abraham, where is another stone much respected by the Muhammadans, of which something will be said hereafter.

The Kaabah, at some distance, is surrounded, but not entirely, by a circular enclosure of pillars, joined towards the bottom by a low balustrade, and towards the top by bars of silver. Just without this inner enclosure, on the south, north, and west sides of the Kaabah, are three buildings which are the oratories, or places where three of the orthodox sects assemble to perform their devotions (the fourth sect, viz., that of al Sháfaí, making use of the Station of Abraham for that purpose), and towards the Edition: current; Page: [181] south-east stands the edifice which covers the well Zamzam, the treasury, and the cupola of al Abbás.1

All these buildings are enclosed, a considerable distance, by a magnificent piazza, or square colonnade, like that of the Royal Exchange in London, but much larger, covered with small domes or cupolas, from the four corners whereof rise as many minarets or steeples, with double galleries and adorned with gilded spires and crescents, as are the cupolas which cover the piazza and the other buildings Between the pillars of both enclosures hang a great number of lamps, which are constantly lighted at night. The first foundations of this outward enclosure were laid by Omar, the second Khalifah, who built no more than a low wall, to prevent the court of the Kaabah, which before lay open, from being encroached on by private buildings; but the structure has been since raised, by the liberality of many succeeding princes and great man, to its present lustre.2

Sacred territory.

This is properly all that is called the temple but the whole territory of Makkah being also Haram or sacred, there is a third enclosure, distinguished at certain distances by small turrets, some five, some seven, and others ten miles distant from the city.3 Within this compass of ground it is not lawful to attack an enemy or even to hunt or fowl, or cut a branch from a tree: which is the true reason why the pigeons at Makkah are reckoned sacred, and not that they are supposed to be of the race of that imaginary pigeon which some authors, who should have known better, would persuade us Muhammad made pass for the Holy Ghost.4

Edition: current; Page: [182]

The antiquity of the Kasbah.

The temple of Makkah was a place of worship, and in singular veneration with the Arabs from great antiquity, and many centuries before Muhammad. Though it was most probably dedicated at first to an idolatrous use,1 yet the Muhammadans are generally persuaded that the Kasbah is almost coeval with the world: for they say that Adam, after his expulsion from paradise, begged of God that he might erect a building like that he had seen there, called Bait al Mámúr, or the frequented house, and al Duráh, towards which he might direct his prayers, and which he might compass, as the angels do the celestial one. Whereupon God let down a representation of that house in curtains of light,2 and set it in Makkah, perpendicularly under its original,3 ordering the patriarch to turn towards it when he prayed, and to compass it by way of devotion.4 After Adam’s death, his son Seth built a house in the same form of stones and clay, which being destroyed by the Deluge, was rebuilt by Abraham and Ismail,5 at God’s command, in the place where the former had stood, and after the same model, they being directed therein by revelation.

The present building.

6After this edifice had undergone several reparations, it was, a few years after the birth of Muhammad, rebuilt by the Quraish on the old foundation,7 and afterwards repaired Edition: current; Page: [183] by Abdullah Ibn Zubair, the Khalífah of Makkah, und at length again rebuilt by al Haláj Ibn Yusaf in the seventy-fourth year of the Hijra with some alterations, in the form wherein it now remains.1 Some years after, however, the Khalífah Harún al Rashíd (or as others write, his father, al Mahdi, or his grandfather, al Mansúr) intended again to change what had been altered by al Hajáj, and to reduce the Kaabah to the old form in which it was lett by Abdullah, but was dissuaded from meddling with it, lest so holy a place should become the sport of princes, and being new modelled after every one’s fancy, should lose that reverence which was justly paid it.2 But notwithstanding the antiquity and holiness of this building, they have a prophecy, by tradition from Muhammad, that in the last times the Ethiopians shall come and utterly demolish it, after which it will not be rebuilt again for ever.3

The Black stone described.

Before we leave the temple of Makkah, two or three particulars deserve further notice. One is the celebrated black stone, which is set in silver, and fixed in the southeast corner of the Kaabah,* being that which looks towards Edition: current; Page: [184] Basra, about two cubits and one-third, or, which is the same thing, seven spans from the ground. This stone is exceedingly respected by the Muhammadans, and is kissed by the pilgrims with great devotion, being called by some the right hand of God on earth. They fable that it is one of the precious stones of paradise, and fell down to the earth with Adam, and being taken up again, or otherwise preserved at the Deluge, the Angel Gabriel afterwards brought it back to Abraham when he was building the Kaabah. It was at first whiter than milk, but grew black long since by the touch of a menstruous woman, or, as others toll us, by the sins of mankind,1 or rather by the touches and kisses of so many people the superficies only being black and the inside still remaining white.2 When the Karmatians,3 among other profanations by them offered to the temple of Makkah, took away this stone, they could not be prevailed on, for love or money, to restore it, though those of Makkah offered no less than five thousand pieces of gold for it.4 However, after they had kept it twenty-two years, seeing they could not thereby draw the pilgrims from Makkah, they sent it back of their own accord, at the same time bantering its devotees by telling them it was not the true stone; but, as it is said, it was proved to be no counterfeit by its peculiar quality of swimming on water.5

Edition: current; Page: [185]

The stone in Abraham’s Place

Another thing observable in this temple is the stone in Abraham’s Place wherein they pretend to show his footsteps, telling us he stood on it when he built the Kaabah,1 and that it served him for a scaffold, rising and falling of itself as he had occasion,2 though another tradition says he stood upon it while the wife of his son Ismaíl, whom he paid a visit to, washed his head.3 It is now enclosed in an iron chest, out of which the pilgrims drink the water of Zamzam,4 and are ordered to pray at it by the Qurán.5 The officers of the temple took care to hide this stone when the Karmatians took the other.6

The well Zamzam.

The last thing I shall take notice of in the temple is the well Zamzam, on the east side of the Kaabah, and which is covered with a small building and cupola. The Muhammadans are persuaded it is the very spring which gushed out for the relief of Ismaíl, when Hagar his mother wandered with him in the desert;7 and some pretend it was so named from her calling to him, when she spied it, in the Egyptian tongue, Zam, zam, that is, “Stay, stay,”8 though it seems rather to have had the name from the murmuring of its waters. The water of this well is reckoned holy, and is highly reverenced, being not only drunk with particular devotion by the pilgrims, but also sent in bottles, as a great rarity, to most parts of the Muhammadan dominions. Abdullah, surnamed al Háfidh, from his great memory, particularly as to the traditions of Muhammad, gave out that he acquired that faculty by drinking large draughts of Zamzam water,9 to which I really believe it as efficacious as that of Helicon to the inspiring of a poet.

Fame of the pilgrimage to Makkah

To this temple every Muhammadan, who has health and means sufficient,10 ought once, at least, in his life to go on Edition: current; Page: [186] pilgrimage; nor are women excused from the performance of this duty. The pilgrims meet at different places near Makkah, according to the different parts from whence they come,1 during the months of Shawwál and Dhu’l Qaada, being obliged to be there by the beginning of Dhu’l Hajja, which month, as its name imports, is peculiarly set apart for the celebration of this solemnity

The sacred habit put on.

At the places above mentioned the pilgrims properly commence the sacred rites. The men put on the Ihrám, or sacred habit, which consists only of two woollen wrappers, one wrapped about the middie to cover their shame, and the other thrown over their shoulders, having their heads bare, and a kind of slippers which cover neither the heel nor the instep, and so enter the sacred territory on their way to Makkah. While they have this habit on they must neither hunt nor fowl2 (though they are allowed to fish3), which precept is so punctually observed, that they will not kill even a louse or a flea, if they find them on their bodies: there are some noxious animals, however, which they have permission to kill during the pilgrimage, as kites, ravens, scorpions, mice, and dogs given to bite.4 During the pilgrimage it benoves a man to have a constant guard over his words and actions, and to avoid all quarrelling or ill language, and all converse with women and obscene discourse, and to apply his whole intention to the good work he is engaged in.

Visiting the temple, &c

The pilgrims, being arrived at Makkah, immediately visit the temple, and then enter on the performance of the prescribed ceremonies, which consist chiefly in going in procession round the Kaabah, in running between the Mounts Safá and Marwa, in making the station on Mount Arafát, and slaying the victims, and shaving their heads in the valley of Miná. These ceremonies have been so particularly described by others,5 that I may be excused Edition: current; Page: [187] if I but just mention the most material circumstances thereof.

In compassing the Kaabah, which they do seven times, beginning at the corner where the black stone is fixed, they use a short, quick pace the three first times they go round it, and a grave, ordinary pace the four last; which, it is said, was ordered by Muhammad, that his followers might show themselves strong and active, to cut off the hopes of the infidels, who gave out that the immoderate heats of Madina had rendered them weak1 But the aforesaid quick pace they are not obliged to use every time they perform this piece of devotion but only at some particular times.2 So often as they pass by the black stone, they either kiss it, or touch it with their hand, and kiss that.

The running between Safá and Marwa3 is also performed seven times, partly with a slow pace, and partly running;4 for they walk gravely till they come to a place between two pillars; and there they run, and afterwards walk again; sometimes looking back, and sometimes stopping, like one who has lost something, to represent Hagar seeking water for her son;5 for the ceremony is said to be as ancient as her time.6

On the ninth of Dhu’l Hajja, after morning prayer, the pilgrims leave the valley of Miná, whither they come the day before, and proceed in a tumultuous and rushing manner to Mount Arafát,7 where they stay to perform their devotions till sunset: then they go to Muzadalífah, an oratory between Arafát and Miná, and there spend the night in prayer and reading the Quran. The next morning, by daybreak they visit al Mashar al Harám, or the Edition: current; Page: [188] sacred monument,1 and departing thence before sunrise, haste by Batn Muhassir to the valley of Miná, where they throw seven stones2 at three marks or pillars, in imitation of Abraham, who, meeting the devil in that place, and being by him disturbed in his devotions, or tempted to disobedience, when he was going to sacrifice his son, was commanded by God to drive him away by throwing stones at him,3 though others pretend this rite to be as old as Adam, who also put the devil to flight in the same place and by the same means.4

Sacrifices and sacred offerings.

This ceremony being over, on the same day, the tenth of Dhu’l Hajja, the pilgrims slay their victims in the said valley of Miná, of which they and their friends eat part, and the rest is given to the poor. These victims must be either sheep, goats, kine, or camels; males if of either of the two former kinds, and females if of either of the latter, and of a fit age.5 The sacrifices being over, they shave their heads and cut their nails, burying them in the same place: after which the pilgrimage is looked on as completed,6 though they again visit the Kaabah, to take their leave of that sacred building.

The ceremonies of pilgrimage borrowed arom Arabneathenism.

The above-mentioned ceremonies, by the confession of the Muhammadans themselves, were almost all of them observed by the pagan Arabs many ages before their prophet’s appearance; and particularly the compassing of the Kaabah the running between Safá and Marwa and the throwing of the stones in Miná; and were confirmed by Muhammad with some alterations in such points as seemed most exceptionable: thus, for example, he ordered that when they compassed the Kaabah they should be clothed;7 whereas, before his time, they performed that Edition: current; Page: [189] piece of devotion naked, throwing off their clothes as a mark that they had cast off their sins,1 or as signs of their disobedience towards God.2

Object of the pilgrimage.

It is also acknowledged that the greater part of these rites are of no intrinsic worth, neither affecting the soul nor agreeing with natural reason, but altogether arbitrary, and commanded merely to try the obedience of mankind, without any further view, and are therefore to be complied with; not that they are good in themselves, but because God has so appointed.3 Some, however, have endeavoured to find out some reasons for the abitrary injunctions of this kind, and one writer,4 supposing men ought to imitate the heavenly bodies, not only in their purity but in their circular motion, seems to argue the procession round the Kaabah to be therefore a rational practice. Reland5 has observed that the Romans had something like this in their worship, being ordered by Numa to use a circular motion in the adoration of the gods, either to represent the orbicular motion of the world, or the perfecting the whole office of prayer to that God who is maker of the universe, or else in allusion to the Egyptian wheels, which were hieroglyphics of the instability of human fortune.6

Muhammad’s concession to Arab custom and superstition.

The pilgrimage to Makkah, and the ceremonies prescribed to those who perform it, are, perhaps, hable to greater exception than other of Muhammad’s institutions, not only as silly and ridiculous in themselves, but as relics of idolatrous superstition.7 Yet whoever seriously considers how difficult it is to make people submit to the Edition: current; Page: [190] abolishing of ancient customs, how unreasonable soever, which they are fond of, especially where the interest of a considerable party is also concerned, and that a man may with less danger change many things than one great one,1 must excuse Muhammad’s yielding some points of less moment to gain the principal. The temple of Makkah was held in excessive veneration by all the Arabs in general (if we except only the tribes of Tay and Khuzáah and some of the posterity of al Hárith Ibn Qaab,2 who used not to go in pilgrimage thereto), and especially by those of Makkah, who had a particular interest to support that veneration; and as the most silly and insignificant things are generally the objects of the greatest superstition, Muhammad found it much easier to abolish idolatry itself than to eradicate the superstitious bigotry with which they were addicted to that temple and the rites performed there; wherefore, after several fruitless trials to wean them therefrom,3 he thought it best to compromise the matter, and rather than to frustrate his whole design, to allow them to go on pilgrimage thither, and to direct their prayers thereto, contenting himself with transferring the devotions there paid from their idols to the true God, and changing such circumstances therein as he judged might give scandal. And herein he followed the example of the most famous legislators, who instituted not such laws as were absolutely the best in themselves, but the best their people were capable of receiving; and we find God himself had the same condescendence for the Jews, whose nardness of heart he humoured in many things, giving them therefore statutes that were not good, and judgmonts whereby they should not live.4*

Edition: current; Page: [(191)]

SECTION V.: OF NERTAIN NEGATIVE PRECEPTS IN THE QURÁN.

Having in the preceding section spoken of the fundamental points of the Muhammadan religion, relating both to faith and to practice, I shall in this and the two following discourses speak in the same brief method of some other precepts and institutions of the Qurán which deserve peculiar notice, and first of certain things which are thereby prohibited.

The drinking of wine and spirituous liquors forbidden.

The drinking of wine, under which name all sorts of strong and inebriating liquors are comprehended, is forhidden in the Qurán in more places than one.1 Some indeed, have imagined that excess therein is only forbidden, and that the moderate use of wine is allowed by two passages in the same book;2 but the more received opinion is, that to drink any strong liquors, either in a lesser quantity or in a greater, is absolutely unlawful; and though libertines3 indulge themselves in a contrary practice, yet the more conscientious are so strict, especially if they have performed the pilgrimage to Makkah,4 that they hold it unlawful not only to taste wine, but to press grapes for the making of it, to buy or to sell it, or even to maintain themselves with the money arising by the sale of that liquor. The Persians, however, as well as the Turks are very fond of wine; and if one asks them how it comes to pass that they venture to drink it, when it is Edition: current; Page: [192] so directly forbidden by their religion, they answer, that it is with them as with the Christians, whose religion prohibits drunkenness and whoredom as great sins, and who glory, notwithstanding, some in debauching girls and married women, and others in drinking to excess.1

Question as to coffee and tobacco.

It has been a question whether coffee comes not under the above-mentioned prohibition,2 because the fumes of it have some effect on the imagination. This drink, which was first publicly used at Aden in Arabia Felix, about the middle of the ninth century of the Hijra, and thence gradually introduced into Makkah, Madína, Egypt Syria, and other parts of the Levant, has been the occasion of great disputes and disorders, having been sometimes publicly condemned and forbidden, and again declared lawful and allowed.3 At present the use of coffee is generally tolerated, if not granted, as is that of tobacco, though the more religious make a scruple of taking the latter, not only because it inebriates, but also out of respect to a traditional saying of their prophet (which, if it could be made out to be his, would prove him a prophet indeed), “That in the latter days there should be men who should bear the name of Muslims, but should not be really such; and that they should smoke a certain weed, which should be called tobacco.” However, the Eastern nations are generally so addicted to both, that they say, “A dish of coffee and a pipe of tobacco are a complete entertainment;” and the Persians have a proverb that coffee without tobacco is meat without salt.4

Opium and bang (which latter is the leaves of hemp in pills or conserve) are also by the rigid Muhammadans esteemed unlawful, though not mentioned in the Qurán, Edition: current; Page: [193] because they intoxicate and disturb the understanding as wine does, and in a more extraordinary manner: yet these drugs are now commonly taken in the East;* but they who are addicted to them are generally looked upon as debauchees.1

The reason why wine-drinking was prohibited.

Several stories have been told as the occasion of Muhammad’s prohibiting the drinking of wine;2 but the true reasons are given in the Qurán, viz., because the ill qualities of that liquor surpass its good ones, the common effects thereof being quarrels and disturbances in company, and neglect, or at least indecencies, in the performance of religious duties.3 For these reasons it was that the priests were, by the Levitical law, forbidden to drink wine or strong drink when they entered the tabernacle,4 and that the Nazarites,5 and Rechabites,6 and many pious persons among the Jews and primitive Christians, wholly abstained therefrom; nay, some of the latter went so far as to condemn the use of wine as sinful.7 But Muhammad is said to have had a nearer example than any of these, in the more devout persons of his own tribe.8

Lots and games of chance for bidden

Gaming is prohibited by the Quran9 in the same passages, and for the same reasons, as wine. The word al maisar, which is there used, signifies a particular manner of casting lots by arrows, much practised by the pagan Arabs, and performed in the following manner. A young camel being bought and killed, and divided into ten or twenty-eight parts, the persons who cast lots for them, to the number of seven, met for that purpose; and eleven arrows were provided, without heads or feathers, seven of Edition: current; Page: [194] which were marked, the first with one notch, the second with two, and so on, and the other four had no mark at all.1 These arrows were put promiscuously into a bag, and then drawn by an indifferent person, who had another near him to receive them, and to see he acted fairly; those to whom the marked arrows fell won shares in proportion to their lot, and those to whom the blanks fell were entitled to no part of the camel at all, but were obliged to pay the full price of it. The winners, however, tasted not of the flesh, any more than the losers, but the whole was distributed among the poor; and this they did out of pride and ostentation, it being reckoned a shame for a man to stand out, and not venture his money on such an occasion.2 This custom, therefore, though it was of some use to the poor and diversion to the rich, was forbidden by Muhammad,3 as the source of great inconveniences, by occasioning quarrels and heart-burnings, which arose from the winners insulting of those who lost.

Chess allowable under restrictions

Under the name of lots the commentators agree that all other games whatsoever, which are subject to hazard or chance, are comprehended and forbidden, as dice, cards, tables, &c. And they are reckoned so ill in themselves, that the testimony of him who plays at them is by the more rigid judged to be of no validity in a court of justice. Chess is almost the only game which the Muhammadan doctors allow to be lawful (though it has been a doubt with some),4 because it depends wholly on skill and management, and not at all on chance: but then it is allowed under certain restrictions, viz., that it be no hindrance to the regular performance of their devotions, and that no money or other thing be played for or betted; which last the Turks, being Sunnis, religiously observe, Edition: current; Page: [195] but the Persians and Moguls do not.1 But what Muhammad is supposed chiefly to have disliked in the game of chess was the carved pieces, or men, with which the pagan Arabs played, being little figures of men, elephants, horses, and dromedaries;2 and these are thought, by some commentators, to be truly meant by the images prohibited in one of the passages of the Qurán3 quoted above. That the Arabs in Muhammad’s time actually used such images for chessmen appears from what is related in the Sunnat of Ali, who, passing accidentally by some who were playing at chess, asked, “What images they were which they were so intent upon?”4 for they were perfectly new to him, that game having been but very lately introduced into Arabia, and not long before into Persia, whither it was first brought from India in the reign of Khusrú Anushirwán.5 Hence the Muhammadan doctors infer that the game was disapproved only for the sake of the images: wherefore the Sunnis always play with plain pieces of wood or ivory; but the Persians and Indians, who are not so scrupulous, continue to make use of the carved ones.6*

The Muhammadans comply with the prohibition of gaming much better than they do with that of wine; for though the common people, among the Turks more frequently, and the Persians more rarely, are addicted to play, yet the better sort are seldom guilty of it.7

Gaming, at least to excess, has been forbidden in all well-ordered states. Gaming-houses were reckoned scandalous places among the Greeks, and a gamester is declared by Aristotle8 to be no better than a thief: the Roman senate made very severe laws against playing at games of hazard,9 except only during the Saturnalia; though the Edition: current; Page: [196] people played often at other times, notwithstanding the prohibition: the civil law forbade all pernicious games,1 and though the laity were, in some cases, permitted to play for money, provided they kept within reasonable bounds, yet the clergy were forbidden to play at tables (which is a game of hazard), or even to look on while others played.2 Accursius, indeed is of opinion they may play at chess, notwithstanding that law, because it is a game not subject to chance,3 and being but newly invented in the time of Justinian, was not then known in the Western parts. However, the monks for some time were not allowed even chess.4

As to the Jews, Muhammad’s chief guides, they also highly disapprove gaming: gamesters being severely censured in the Talmud, and their testimony declared invalid.5

Divining by arrows forbidden.

Another practice of the idolatrous Arabs forbidden also in one of the above-mentioned passages,6 was that of divining by arrows. The arrows used by them for this purpose were like those with which they cast lots, being without heads or feathers, and were kept in the temple of some idol, in whose presence they were consulted. Seven such arrows were kept at the temple of Makkah;7 but generally in divination they made use of three only, on one of which was written, “My Lord hath commanded me,” on another, “My Lord hath forbidden me,” and the third was blank. If the first was drawn, they looked on it as an approbation of the enterprise in question; if the second, they made a contrary conclusion; but if the third happened to be drawn, they mixed them and drew Edition: current; Page: [197] over again, till a decisive answer was given by one of the others. These divining arrows were generally consulted before anything of moment was undertaken; as when a man was about to marry or about to go a journey, or the like.1 This superstitious practice of divining by arrows was used by the ancient Greeks,2 and other nations; and is particularly mentioned in Scripture,3 where it is said that “the king of Babylon stood at the parring of the way, at the head of the two ways, to use divination; he made his arrows bright” (or, according to the version of the Vulgate, which seems preferable in this place, “he mixed together or shook the arrows”), “he consulted with images,” &c.; the commentary of St. Jerome on which passage wonderfully agrees with what we are told of the aforesaid custom of the old Arabs: “He shall stand” says he, “in the highway, and consult the oracle after the manner of his nation, that he may cast arrows into a quiver, and mix them together, being written upon or marked with the names of each people, that he may see whose arrow will come forth, and which city he ought first to attack.”4

Laws concerning meats.

A distinction of meats was so generally used by the Eastern nations, that it is no wonder that Muhammad made some regulations in that matter. The Qurán, therefore prohibits the eating of blood, and swine’s flesh and whatever dies of itself, or is slain in the name or in honour of any idol, or is strangled or killed by a blow, or a fall, or by any other beast.5 In which particulars Muhammad seems chiefly to have imitated the Jews, by whose law, as is well known, all those things are forbidden; but he allowed some things to be eaten which Moses did not,6 as camels’ flesh7 in particular. In cases of necessity, however, Edition: current; Page: [198] where a man may be in danger of starving, he is allowed by the Muhammadan law to eat any of the said prohibited kinds of food;1 and the Jowish doctors grant the same liberty in the same case.2 Though the aversion to blood and what dies of itself may seem natural, yet some of the pagan Arabs used to eat both: of their eating of the latter some instances will be given hereafter; and as to the former, it is said they used to pour blood, which they sometimes drew from a live camel, into a gut, and then broiled it in the fire, or boiled it, and ate it:3 this food they called Muswadd, from Aswad, which signifies black; the same nearly resembling our black puddings in name as well as composition.4 The eating of meat offered to idols I take to be commonly practised by all idolaters, being looked on as a sort of communion in their worship, and for that reason esteemed by Christians, if not absolutely unlawful, yet as what may be the occasion of great scandal;5 but the Arabs were particularly superstitious in this matter, killing what they ate on stones erected on purpose around the Kaabah, or near their own houses, and calling, at the same time, on the name of some idol.6 Swine’s flesh, indeed, the old Arabs seem not to have eaten; and their prophet, in prohibiting the same, appears to have only confirmed the common aversion of the nation. Foreign writers tell us that the Arabs wholly abstained from swine’s flesh,7 thinking it unlawful to feed thereon,8 and that very few, if any, of those animals are found in their country, because it produces not proper food for them;9 which has made one writer imagine that if a hog were carried thither, it would immediately die.10

Edition: current; Page: [199]

Of usury and certain superstitions customs

In the prohibition of usury1 I presume Muhammad also followed the Jews, who are strictly forbidden by their law to exercise it among one another, though they are so infamously guilty of it in their dealing with those of a different religion; but I do not find the prophet of the Arabs has made any distinction in this matter.

Several superstitious customs relating to cattle, which seem to have been peculiar to the pagan Arabs, were also abolished by Muhammad. The Qurán2 mentions four names by them given to certain camels or sheep, which for some particular reasons were left at free liberty, and were not made use of as other cattle of the same kind. These names are Bahira, Sáiba, Wasíla, and Hámi: of each whereof in their order.

The customs relating to the Bahira, Sáiba, Wasíla and Hámí explained.

As to the first, it is said that when a she-camel or a sheep had borne young ten times, they used to slit her ear, and turn her loose to feed at full liberty; and when she died, her flesh was eaten by the men only, the women being forbidden to eat thereof: and such a camel or sheep, from the slitting of her ear, they called Bahíra. Or the Bahíra was a she-camel, which was turned loose to feed, and whose fifth young one, if it proved a male, was killed and eaten by men and women promiscuously; but if it proved a female, had its ear slit, and was dismissed to free pasture, none being permitted to make use of its flesh or milk, or to ride on it; though the women were allowed to eat the flesh of it when it died: or it was the female young of the Sáiba, which was used in the same manner as its dam; or else an ewe, which had yeaned five times.3 These, however, are not all the opinions concerning the Bahíra; for some suppose that name was given to a she-camel, which, after having brought forth young five times, if the last was a male, had her ear slit, as a mark thereof, and was let go loose to feed, none driving her from pasture or water, nor using her for Edition: current; Page: [200] carriage;1 and other tell us that when a camel had newly brought forth, they used to slit the ear of her young one, saying, “O God, if it live, it shall be for cur use, but if it die, it shall be deemed rightly slain;” and when it died they ate it.2

Sáiba signifies á she-camel turned loose to go where she will. And this was done on various accounts: as when she had brought forth females ten times together; or in satisfaction of a vow, or when a man had recovered from sickness, or returned safe from a journey, or his camel had escaped some signal danger either in battle or otherwise. A camel so turned loose was declared to be Sáiba, and, as a mark of it, one of the vertebræ or bones was taken out of her back, after which none might drive her from pasture or water, or ride on her.3 Some say that the Sáiba, when she had ten times together brought forth females, was sunered to go at liberty, none being allowed to ride on her, and that her milk was not to be drank by any but her young one, or a guest, till she died; and then her flesh was eaten by men as well as women, and her last female young one had her ear slit, and was called Bahíra, and turned loose as her dam had been.4

This appellation, however, was not so strictly proper to female camels, but that it was given to the male when his young one had begotten another young one:5 nay, a servant set at liberty and dismissed by his master was also called Sáiba;6 and some are of opinion that the word denotes an animal which the Arabs used to turn loose in honour of their idols, allowing none to make use of them thereafter, except women only.7

Wasíla is, by one author,8 explained to signify a she-camel which had brought forth ten times, or an ewe which Edition: current; Page: [201] had yeaned seven times, and every time twins; and if the seventh time she brought forth a male and a female, they said, “Wusilat akháha,” i.e., “She is joined,” or, “was brought forth with her brother,” after which none might drink the dam’s milk, except men only; and she was used as the Sáiha Or Wasíla was particularly meant of sheep; as when an ewe brought forth a female, they took it to themselves, but when she brought forth a male, they consecrated it to their gods, but if both a male and a female, they said, “She is joined to her brother” and did not sacrifice that male to their gods: or Wasíla was an ewe which brought forth first a male and then a female, on which account, or because she followed her brother, the male was not killed; but if she brought forth a male only, they said, “Let this be an offering to our gods.”1 Another2 writes, that if an ewe brought forth twins seven times together, and the eighth time a male, they sacrificed that male to their gods; but if the eighth time she brought both a male and a female, they used to say, “She is joined to her brother,” and for the female’s sake they spared the male, and permitted not the dam’s milk to be drunk by women. A third writer tells us, that Wasíla was an ewe, which having yeaned seven times, if that which she brought forth the seventh time was a male they sacrificed it, but if a female, it was suffered to go loose, and was made use of by women only; and if the seventh time she brought forth both a male and a female, they held them both to be sacred, so that men only were allowed to make any use of them, or to drink the milk of the female: and a fourth3 describes it to be an ewe which brought forth ten females at five births one after another, i.e., every time twins, and whatever she brought forth afterwards was allowed to men, and not to women &c.

Hámi was a male camel used for a stallion, which, if the females had conceived ten times by him, was afterwards Edition: current; Page: [202] freed from labour, and let go loose, none driving him from pasture or from water; nor was any allowed to receive he least benefit from him, not even to shear his hair.1

These things were observed by the old Arabs in honour of their false gods,2 and as part of the worship which they paid them, and were ascribed to the divine institution; but are all condemned in the Qurán, and declared to be impious superstitions.3

Muhammad prohibits infanticide.

The law of Muhammad also put a stop to the inhuman custom, which had been long practised by the pagan Arabs, of burying their daughters alive, lest they should be reduced to poverty by providing for them, or else to avoid the displeasure and disgrace which would follow, if they should happen to be made captives, or to become scandalous by their behaviour;4 the birth of a daughter being, for these reasons, reckoned a great misfortune,5 and the death of one as a great happiness.6 The manner of their doing this is differently related: some say that when an Arab had a daughter born, if he intended to bring her up, he sent her, clothed in a garment of wool or hair, to keep camels or sheep in the desert; but if he designed to put her to death, he let her live till she became six years old, and then said to her mother, “Perfume her, and adorn her, that I may carry her to her mothers;” which being done the father led her to a well or pit dug for that purpose, and having bid her to look down into it, pushed her in headlong, as he stood behind her, and then filling up the pit, levelled it with the rest of the ground; but others say, that when a woman was ready to fall in labour, they dug a pit, on the brink whereof she was to be delivered, and if the child happened to be a daughter, they threw it into the pit, but if a son, they saved it alive.7 Edition: current; Page: [203] This custom, though not observed by all the Arabs in general, was yet very common among several of their tribes, and particularly those of Quraish and Kinda; the former using to bury their daughters alive in Mount Abu Dalama, near Makkah.1 In the time of ignorance while they used this method to get rid of their daughters, Sásaá, grandfather to the celebrated poet al Farazdak, frequently redeemed female children from death, giving for every one two she-camels big with young, and a he-camel; and hereto al Farazdak alluded when, vaunting himself before one of the Khalífahs of the family of Omayyah, he said, “I am the son of the giver of life to the dead;” for which expression being censured, he excused himself by aileging the following words of the Qurán,2 “He who saveth a soul alive, shall be as if he had saved the lives of all mankind.”3 The Arabs, in thus murdering of their children, were far from being singular; the practice of exposing infants and putting them to death being so common among the ancients, that it is remarked as a thing very extraordinary in the Egyptians, that they brought up all their children;4 and by the laws of Lycurgus5 no child was allowed to be brought up without the approbation of public officers. At this day, it is said, in China, the poorer sort of people frequently put their children, the females especially, to death with impunity.6*

Edition: current; Page: [204]

This wicked practice is condemned by the Qurán in several passages;1 one of which, as some commentators2 judge, may also condemn another custom of the Arabians, altogether as wicked, and as common among other nations of old, viz., the sacrificing of their children to their idols; as was frequently done, in particular, in satisfaction of a vow they used to make, that if they had a certain number of sons born, they would offer one of them in sacrifice.

Several other superstitious customs were likewise abrogated by Muhammad, but the same being of less moment, and not particularly mentioned in the Quran, or having been occasionally taken notice of elsewhere I shall say nothing of them in this place

Edition: current; Page: [(205)]

SECTION VI.: OF THE INSTITUTIONS OF THE QURÁN IN CIVIL AFFAIRS

The Muhammadan civil law is founded on the precepts and determinations of the Qurán, as the civil laws of the Jews were on those of the Pentateuch; yet being variously interpreted, according to the different decisions of their civilians, and especially of their four great doctors, Abu Hanífa, Málik, al Shafai, and Ibn Hanbal,1 to treat thereof fully and distinctly in the manner the curiosity and usefulness of the subject deserves, would require a large volume; wherefore the most that can be expected here is a summary view of the principal institutions, without minutely entering into a detail of particulars. We shall begin with those relating to marriage and divorce.

Laws regulating polygamy.

That polygamy, for the moral lawfulness of which the Muhammadan doctors advance several arguments,2 is allowed by the Qurán, every one knows, though few are acquainted with the limitations with which it is allowed. Several learned men have fallen into the vulgar mistake that Muhammad granted to his followers an unbounded plurality; some pretending that a man may have as many wives,3 and others as many concubines,4 as he can maintain; Edition: current; Page: [206] whereas, according to the express words of the Qurán,1 no man can have more than four, whether wives or concubines;2* and if a man apprehend any inconvenience from even that number of ingenuous wives, it is added, as an advice (which is generally followed by the middling and inferior people),3 that he marry one only, or, if he cannot be contented with one, that he take up with his she-slaves, not exceeding, however, the limited number;4 and this is certainly the utmost Muhammad allowed his followers: nor can we urge, as an argument against so plain a precept, the corrupt manners of his followers, many of whom, especially men of quality and fortune, indulge themselves in criminal excesses;5 nor yet the example of the prophet himself,† who had peculiar privileges in this and other points, as will be observed hereafter. In making the above-mentioned limitation, Muhammad was directed by the decision of the Jewish Edition: current; Page: [207] doctors, who, by way of counsel, limit the number of wives to four,1 though their law confines them not to any certain number.2

Law concerning divorce.

Divorce is also well known to be allowed by the Muhammadan law, as it was by the Mosaic, with this difference only, that, according to the latter, a man could not take again a woman whom he had divorced, and who had been married or betrothed to another;3 whereas Muhammad, to prevent his followers from divorcing their wives on every light occasion, or out of an inconstant humour, ordained that if a man divorced his wife the third time (for he might divorce her twice without being obliged to part with her, if he repented of what he had done), it should not be lawful for him to take her again until she had been first married and bedded by another, and divorced by such second husband.4 And this precaution has had so good an effect that the Muhammadans are seldom known to proceed to the extremity of divorce, notwithstanding the liberty given them, it being reckoned a great disgrace so to do; and there are but few, besides those who have little or no sense of honour, that will take a wife again on the condition enjoined.5* It must be observed that, though Edition: current; Page: [208] a man is allowed by the Muhammadan, as by the Jewish law,1 to repudiate his wife even on the slightest disgust, yet the women are not allowed to separate themselves from their husbands, unless it be for ill-usage, want of proper maintenance, neglect of conjugal duty, impotency, or some cause of equal import; but then she generally loses her dowry,2 which she does not if divorced by her husband, unless she has been guilty of impudicity or notorious disobedience.3

When a woman is divorced, she is obliged, by the direction of the Qurán, to wait till she hath had her courses thrice, or, if there be a doubt whether she be subject to them or not, by reason of her age, three months, before she marry another; after which time expired, in case she be found not with child, she is at full liberty to dispose of herself as she pleases; but if she prove with child, she must wait till she be delivered; and during her whole term of waiting she may continue in the husband’s house, and is to be maintained at his expense, it being forbidden to turn the woman out before the expiration of the term, unless she be guilty of dishonesty.4 Where a man divorces a woman before consummation, she is not obliged to wait any particular time,5 nor is he obliged to give her more than one-half of her dower.6 If the divorced woman have a young child, she is to suckle it till it be two years old; the father, in the meantime, maintaining her in all respects: a widow is also obliged to do the same, and to wait four months and ten days before she marry again.7

These rules are also copied from those of the Jews, according to whom a divorced woman or a widow cannot marry another man till ninety days be past, after the Edition: current; Page: [209] divorce or death of the husband;1 and she who gives suck is to be maintained for two years, to be computed from the birth of the child, within which time she must not marry, unless the child die, or her milk be dried up.2

Laws concerning adultery and fornication.

Whoredom, in single women as well as married, was, in the beginning of Muhammadism, very severely punished, such being ordered to be shut up in prison till they died; but afterwards it was ordained by the Sunnat that an adulteress should be stoned3 and an unmarried woman guilty of fornication scourged with a hundred stripes and banished for a year.4 A she-slave, if convicted of adultery, is to suffer but half the punishment of a free woman,5 viz., fifty stripes and banishment for six months, but is not to be put to death. To convict a woman of adultery, so as to make it capital, four witnesses are expressly required,6 and those, as the commentators say, ought to be men; and if a man falsely acense a woman of reputation of whoredom of any kind, and is not able to support the charge by that number of witnesses, he is to receive fourscore stripes, and his testimony is to be held invalid for the future.7 Fornication, in either sex, is by the sentence of the Qurán to be punished with a hundred stripes.8

If a man accuse his wife of infidelity, and is not able to prove it by sufficient evidence, and will swear four times that it is true, and the fifth time imprecate God’s vengeance on him if it be false, she is to be looked on as convicted, unless she will take the like oaths and make the like imprecation Edition: current; Page: [210] in testimony of her innocency; which if she do, she is free from punishment, though the marriage ought to be dissolved.1

What the law of the Quran owes to Judaism

In most of the last-mentioned particulars the decisions of the Qurán also agree with those of the Jews. By the law of Moses, adultery, whether in a married woman or a virgin betrothed, was punished with death; and the man who debauched them was to suffer the same punishment.2 The penalty of simple fornication was scourging, the general punishment in cases where none is particularly appointed; and a betrothed bondmaid, if convicted of adultery, underwent the same punishment, being exempted from death because she was not free.3 By the same law no person was to be put to death on the oath of one witness;4 and a man who slandered his wife was also to be chastised, that is, scourged, and fined one hundred shekels of silver.5 The method of trying a woman suspected of adultery where evidence was wanting, by forcing her to drink the bitter water of jealousy,6 though disused by the Jews long before the time of Muhammad,7 yet, by reason of the oath of cursing with which the woman was charged, and to which she was obliged to say “Amen,” bears great resemblance to the expedient devised by the prophet on the like occasion.

The institutions of Muhammad relating to the pollution Edition: current; Page: [211] of women during their courses,1 the taking of slaves to wife,2 and the prohibiting of marriage within certain degrees,3 have likewise no small affinity with the institutions of Moses;4 and the parallel might be carried farther in several other particulars.

Prohibited degrees

As to the prohibited degrees, it may be observed that the pagan Arabs abstained from marrying their mothers,* daughters, and aunts, both on the father’s side and on the mother’s, and held it a most scandalous thing to marry two sisters, or for a man to take his father’s wife;5 which last was, notwithstanding, too frequently practised,6 and is expressly forbidden in the Qurán.7

Peculiar privileges of Muhammad as to marriage.

Before I leave the subject of marriages, it may be proper to take notice of some peculiar privileges in relation thereto which were granted by God to Muhammad, as he gave out, exclusive of all other Muslims. One of them was that he might lawfully marry as many wives and have as many concubines as he pleased, without being confined to any particular number;8 and this he pretended to have been the privilege of the prophets before him. Another was that he might alter the turns of his wives, and take such of them to his bed as he thought fit, without being tied to that order and equality which others are obliged to observe.9 A third privilege was that no man might marry any of his wives,10 either such as he should divorce during his lifetime, or such as he should leave widows at his death; which last particular exactly agrees Edition: current; Page: [212] with what the Jewish doctors have determined concerning the wives of their princes; it being judged by them to be a thing very indecent, and for that reason unlawful, for another to marry either the divorced wife or the widow of a king:1 and Muhammad, it seems, thought an equal respect, at least, due to the prophetic as to the regal dignity, and therefore ordered that his relicts should pass the remainder of their lives in perpetual widowhood.

Laws concerning inheritance.

The laws of the Qurán concerning inheritances are also in several respects conformable to those of the Jews, though principally designed to abolish certain practices of the pagan Arabs, who used to treat widows and orphan children with great injustice, frequently denying them any share in the inheritance of their fathers or their husbands, on pretence that the same ought to be distributed among those only who were able to bear arms, and disposing of the widows, even against then consent, as part of their husband’s possessions.2 To prevent such injuries for the future, Muhammad ordered that women should be respected, and orphans have no wrong done them; and in particular that women should not be taken against their wills, as by right of inheritance, but should themselves be entitled to a distributive part of what their parents, husbands, and near relations should leave behind them, in a certain proportion.3

The general rule to be observed in the distribution of the deceased’s estate is, that a male shall have twice as much as the female;4 but to this rule there are some few exceptions; a man’s parents, for example, and also his brothers and sisters, where they are entitled not to the whole but a small part of the inheritance, being to have equal shares with one another in the distribution thereof, Edition: current; Page: [213] without making any difference on account of sex.1 The particular proportions, in several cases, distinctly and sufficiently declare the intention of Muhammad, whose decisions, expressed in the Qurán,2 seem to be pretty equitable preferring a man’s children first, and then his nearest relations.

Law concerning wills.

If a man dispose of any part of his estate by will, two witnesses, at the least, are required to render the same valid; and such witnesses ought to be of his own tribe, and of the Muhammadan religion, if such can be had.3 Though there be no express law to the contrary, yet the Muhammadan doctors reckon it very wrong for a man to give away any part of his substance from his family, unless it be in legacies for pious uses; and even in that case a man ought not to give all he has in charity, but only a reasonable part in proportion to his substance. On the other hand, though a man make no will, and bequeath nothing for charitable uses, yet the heirs are directed, on the distribution of the estate, if the value will permit, to bestow something on the poor, especially such as are of kin to the deceased and to the orphans.4

The first law, however, laid down by Muhammad touching inheritances was not very equitable; for he declared that those who had fled with him from Makkah, and those who had received and assisted him at Madína, should be deemed the nearest of kin, and consequently heirs to one another, preferably to and in exclusion of their relations by blood; nay, though a man were a true believer, yet if he had not fled his country for the sake of religion and joined the prophet, he was to be looked on as a stranger,5 but this law continued not long in force, being quickly abrogated.6

Children of concubines legitimate.

It must be observed that among the Muhammadans the children of their concubines or slaves are esteemed as Edition: current; Page: [214] equally legitimate with those of their legal and ingenuous wives, none being accounted bastards except such only as are born of common women and whose fathers are unknown.

Law concerning private contracts.

As to private contracts between man and man, the conscientious performance of them is frequently recommended in the Qurán.1 For the preventing of disputes, all contracts are directed to be made before witnesses,2 and in case such contracts are not immediately executed, the same ought to be reduced into writing in the presence of two witnesses3 at least, who ought to be Muslims and of the male sex; but if two men cannot be conveniently had, then one man and two women may suffice. The same method is also directed to be taken for the security of debts to be paid at a future day; and where a writer is not to be found, pledges are to be taken.4 Hence, if people trust one another without writing witnesses, or pledge, the party on whom the demand is made is always acquitted if he denies the charge on oath, and swears that he owes the plaintiff nothing, unless the contrary be proved by very convincing circumstances.5

Murder and its penalty

Wilful murder, though forbidden by the Qurán under the severest penalties to be inflicted in the next life,6 is yet, by the same book, allowed to be compounded for, on payment of a fine to the family of the deceased, and freeing a Muslim from captivity; but it is in the election of the next of kin, or the revenger of blood, as he is called in the Pentateuch, either to accept of such satisfaction or to refuse it; for he may, if he pleases, insist on having the murderer delivered into his hands, or be put to death in such manner as he shall think fit.7 In this particular Edition: current; Page: [215] Muhammad has gone against the express letter of the Mosaic law, which declares that no satisfaction shall be taken for the life of a murderer;1 and he seems, in so doing, to have had respect to the customs of the Arabs in his time, who, being of a vindictive temper, used to revenge murder in too unmerciful a manner,2 whole tribes frequently engaging in bloody wars on such occasions, the natural consequence of their independency, and having no common judge or superior.

Manslaughter and its penalty.

If the Muhammadan laws seem light in case of murder, they may perhaps be deemed too rigorous in case of manslaughter, or the killing of a man undesignedly, which must be redeemed by fine (unless the next of kin shall think fit to remit it out of charity), and the freeing of a captive; but if a man be not able to do this, he is to fast two months together by way of penance.3 The fine for a man’s blood is set in the Sunnat at a hundred camels,4 and is to be distributed among the relations of the deceased according to the laws of inheritance; but it must be observed that though the person slain be a Muslim, yet if he be of a nation or party at enmity, or not in confederacy with those to whom the slayer belongs, he is not then bound to pay any fine at all, the redeeming a captive being, in such case, declared a sufficient penalty.5 I imagine that Muhammad, by these regulations, laid so heavy a punishment on involuntary manslaughter, not only to make people beware incurring the same, but also to humour, in some degree, the revengeful temper of his countrymen, which might be with difficulty, if at all, prevailed on to accept a lighter satisfaction. Among the Jews, who seem to have been no less addicted to revenge than their neighbours, the manslayer who had escaped to a city of refuge was obliged to keep himself within that city and to abide there till the death of the person who Edition: current; Page: [216] was high priest at the time the fact was committed, that his absence and time might cool the passion and mitigate the resentment of the friends of the deceased; but if he quitted his asylum before that time, the revenger of blood, if he found him, might kill him without guilt;1 nor could any satisfaction be made for the slayer to return home before the prescribed time2

Penalty for theft.

Theft is ordered to be punished by cutting off the offending part, the hand,3 which, at first sight, seems just enough; but the law of Justinian, forbidding a thief to be maimed,4 is more reasonable; because stealing being generally the effect of indigence, to cut off that limb would be to deprive him of the means of getting his livelihood in an honest manner.5 The Sunnat forbids the inflicting of this punishment, unless the thing stolen be of a certain value. I have mentioned in another place the further penalties which those incur who continue to steal, and of those who rob or assault people on the road.6

Law of retaliation.

As to injuries done to men in their persons, the law of retaliation, which was ordained by the law of Moses,7 is also approved by the Qurán;8 but this law, which seems to have been allowed by Muhammad to his Arabians for the same reasons as it was to the Jews, viz., to prevent particular revenges, to which both nations were extremely addicted,9 being neither strictly just nor practicable in many cases, is seldom put in execution, the punishment being generally turned into a mulct or fine, which is paid to the party injured.10 Or rather, Muhammad designed the words of the Qurán relating thereto should be understood Edition: current; Page: [217] in the same manner as those of the Pentateuch most probably ought to be—that is, not of an actual retaliation, according to the strict literal meaning, but of a retribution proportionable to the injury; for a criminal had not his eyes put out nor was a man mutilated according to the law of Moses, which, besides, condemned those who had wounded any person, where death did not ensue, to pay a fine only,1 the expression “eye for eye and tooth for tooth” being only a proverbial manner of speaking, the sense whereof amounts to this, that every one shall be punished by the judges according to the heinousness of the fact.2

Penalty for petty crimes.

In injuries and crimes of an inferior nature, where no particular punishment, is provided by the Qurán, and where a pecuniary compensation will not do, the Muhammadans, according to the practice of the Jews in the like case3 have recourse to stripes or drubbing, the most common chastisement used in the East at this day, as well as fermerly; the cudgel, which, for its virtue and efficacy in keeping, their people in good order and within the bounds of duty, they say came down from heaven, being the instrument wherewith the judge’s sentence is generally executed.4

Distinction between civil and ecclesiastical law.

Notwithstanding the Qurán is by the Muhammadans in general regarded as the fundamental part of their civil law, and the decisions of the Sunnat among the Turks and of the Imáms among those of the Persian sect. with the explications of their several doctors, are usually followed in judicial determinations, yet the secular tribunals do not think themselves bound to observe the same in all cases, but frequently give judgment against those decisions, which are not always consonant to equity and reason; and therefore distinction is to be made between the written civil law, as administered in the ecclesiastical courts, and Edition: current; Page: [218] the law of nature or common law (if I may so call it) which takes place in the secular courts, and has the executive power on its side.1

The command to war against infidels. Jewish doctrine concerning war in defence of religion. Opinions of Christian Crusaders on the same subject.

Under the head of civil laws may be comprehended the injunction of warring against infidels, which is repeated in several passages of the Qurán,2 and declared to be of high merit in the sight of God, those who are slain fighting in defence of the faith being reckoned martyrs, and promised immediate admission into paradise.3 Hence this duty is greatly magnified by the Muhammadan divines, who call the sword the key of heaven and hell, and persuade their people that the least drop of blood spilt in the way of God, as it is called, is most acceptable unto him, and that the defending the territories of the Muslims for one night is more meritorious than a fast of two months;4 on the other hand, desertion, or refusing to serve in these holy wars, or to contribute towards the carrying them on, if a man has ability, is accounted a most heinous crime, being frequently declaimed against in the Qurán.5 Such a doctrine, which Muhammad ventured not to teach till his circumstances enabled him to put it in practice,6 it must be allowed, was well calculated for his purpose, and stood him and his successors in great stead: for what dangers and difficulties may not be despised and overcome by the courage and constancy which these sentiments necessarily inspire? Nor have the Jews and Christians, how much soever they detest such principles in others, been ignorant of the force of enthusiastic heroism, or omitted to spirit up their respective partisans by the like arguments and promises. “Let him who has listed himself in defence of the law,” says Maimonides,7 “rely Edition: current; Page: [219] on him who is the hope of Israel, and the saviour thereof in the time of trouble;1 and let him know that he fights for the profession of the divine unity: wherefore let him put his life in his hand,2 and think neither of wife nor children, but banish the memory of them from his heart, having his mind wholly fixed on the war. For if he should begin to waver in his thoughts, he would not only confound himself, but sin against the law; nay, the blood of the whole people hangeth on his neck; for if they are discomfited, and he has not fought stoutly with all his might, it is equally the same as if he had shed the blood of them all; according to that saying, Let him return, lest his brethren’s heart fail as his own.”3 To the same purpose doth the Kabala accommodate that other passage, “Cursed be he who doth the work of the Lord negligently, and cursed be he who keepeth back his sword from blood.4 On the contrary, he who behaveth bravely in battle, to the utmost of his endeavour, without trembling, with intent to glorify God’s name, he ought to expect the victory with confidence, and to apprehend no danger or misfortune, but may be assured that he will have a house built him in Israel, appropriated to him and his children for ever; as it is said, God shall certainly make my lord a sure house, because he hath fought the battles of the Lord, and his life shall be bound up in the bundle of life with the Lord his God.”5 More passages of this kind might be produced from the Jewish writers, and the Christians come not far behind them. “We are desirous of knowing, says one,6 writing to the Franks engaged in the holy war, “the charity of you all; for that every one (which we speak not because we wish it) who shall faithfully lose his life in this warfare shall be by no means denied the kingdom of heaven.” And Edition: current; Page: [220] another gives the following exhortation: “Laying aside all fear and dread, endeavour to act effectually against the enemies of the holy faith and the adversaries of all religions; for the Almighty knoweth if any of you die, that he dieth for the truth of the faith, and the salvation of his country, and the defence of Christians; and therefore he shall obtain of him a celestial reward.”1 The Jews, indeed, had a divine commission, extensive and explicit enough, to attack, subdue, and destroy the enemies of their religion; and Muhammad pretended to have received one in favour of himself and his Muslims in terms equally plain and full;* and therefore it is no wonder that they should act consistently with their avowed principles; but that Christians should teach and practice a doctrine so opposite to the temper and whole tenor of the Gospel seems very strange; and yet the latter have carried matters further, and shown a more violent spirit of intolerance than either of the former.

Laws of war among Muslims.

The laws of war, according to the Muhammadans, have been already so exactly set down by the learned Reland,2 that I need say very little of them. I shall, therefore, only observe some conformity between their military laws and those of the Jews.

While Muhammadism was in its infancy the opposers Edition: current; Page: [221] thereof taken in battle were doomed to death without mercy; but this was judged too severe to be put in practice when that religion came to be sufficiently established, and past the danger of being subverted by its enemies.1 The same sentence was pronounced not only against the seven Canaanitish nations,2 whose possessions were given to the Israelites, and without whose destruction, in a manner, they could not have settled themselves in the country designed them, but against the Amalekites3 and Midianites,4 who had done their utmost to cut them off in their passage thither. When the Muhammadans declare war against a people of a different faith, they give them their choice of three offers, viz., either to embrace Muhammadism, in which case they become not only secure in their persons, families, and fortunes, but entitled to all the privileges of other Muslims; or to submit and pay tribute,5 by doing which they are allowed to profess their own religion, provided it be not gross idolatry or against the moral law; or else to decide the quarrel by the sword, in which last case, if the Muslims prevail, the women and children which are made captives become absolute slaves, and the men taken in battle may either be slain, unless they turn Muhammadans, or otherwise disposed of at the pleasure of the prince.6 Herewith agree the laws of war given to the Jews which relate to the nations not devoted to destruction;7* and Joshua is Edition: current; Page: [222] said to have sent even to the inhabitants of Canaan, before he entered the land, three schedules, in one of which was written, “Let him fly who will;” in the second, “Let him surrender who will;” and in the third, “Let him fight who will;”1 though none of those nations made peace with the Israelites (except only the Gibeonites, who obtained terms of security by stratagem, after they had refused those offered by Joshua), “it being of the Lord to harden their hearts, that he might destroy them utterly.”2

Law regulating the division of spoils.

On the first considerable success of Muhammad in war, the dispute which happened among his followers in relation to the dividing of the spoil rendered it necessary for him to make some regulation therein; he therefore pretended to have received the divine commission to distribute the spoil among his soldiers at his own discretion,3 reserving thereout, in the first place, one-fifth part4 for the uses after mentioned; and, in consequence hereof, he took himself to be authorised, on extraordinary occasions, to distribute it as he thought fit, without observing an equality. Thus he did, for example, with the spoil of the tribe Hawázín taken at the battle of Hunain, which he bestowed by way of presents on those of Makkah only, passing by those of Madína, and highly distinguishing the principal Quraish, that he might ingratiate himself Edition: current; Page: [223] with them after he had become master of their city1 He was also allowed in the expedition against those of al Nadhir to take the whole booty to himself, and to dispose thereof as he pleased, because no horses or camels were made use of in that expedition,2 but the whole army went on foot; and this became thence-forward a law;3 the reason of which seems to be, that the spoil taken by a party consisting of infantry only should be considered as the more immediate gift of God,4 and therefore properly left to the disposition of his apostle According to the Jews, the spoil ought to be divided into two equal parts, one to be shared among the captors, and the other to be taken by the prince,5 and by him employed for his own support and the use of the public. Moses, it is true, divided one-half of the plunder of the Midianites among those who went to battle, and the other half among all the congregation;6 but this, they say, being a peculiar case, and done by the express order of God himself, must not be looked on as a precedent.7 It should seem, however, from the word of Joshua to the two tribes and a half, when he sent them home into Gilead after the conquest and division of the land of Canaan, that they were to divide the spoil of their enemies with their brethren after their return;8 and the half which was in succeeding times taken by the king was in all probability taken by him as head of the community, and representing the whole body. It is remarkable that the dispute among Muhammad’’s men about sharing the booty at Badr9 arose on the same occasion as did that among David’s soldiers in relation to the spoils recovered Edition: current; Page: [224] from the Amalekites,1 those who had been in the action insisting that they who tarried by the stuff should have no part of the spoil; and that the same decision was given in both cases, which became a law for the future, to wit, that they should part alike.

God’s fifth of the spoils—how to be used.

The fifth part directed by the Quran to be taken out of the spoil before it be divided among the captors is declared to belong to God, and to the apostle and his kindred, and the orphans, and the poor, and the traveller:2 which words are variously understood. Al Sháfíi was of opinion that the whole ought to be divided into five parts; the first, which be called God’s part, to go to the treasury, and be employed in building and repairing fortresses, bridges, and other public works, and in paying salaries to magistrates, civil officers, professors of learning, ministers of public worship, &c.; the second part to be distributed among the kindred of Muhammad, that is, the descendants of his grandfather Hásham, and of his great-uncle al Mutallib,3 as well the rich as the poor, the children as the adult, the women as the men, observing only to give a female but half the share of a male; the third part to go to the orphans; the fourth part to the poor, who have not wherewithal to maintain themselves the year round, and are not able to get their livelihood; and the fifth part to travellers who are in want on the road, notwithstanding they may be rich men in their own country.4 According to Málik Ibn Ans, the whole is at the disposition of the Imám or prince, who may distribute the same at his own discretion, where he sees most need.5 Abu’l Aliya went according to the letter of the Quran, and declared his opinion to be that the whole should be divided into six parts, and that God’s part should be applied to the service of the Kaabah; while others supposed God’s part and the Edition: current; Page: [225] apostle’s to be one and the same.1 Abu Hanífa thought that the share of Muhammad and his kindred sank at that prophet’s death, since which the whole ought to be divided among the orphans, the poor, and the traveller.2 Some insist that the kindred of Muhammad entitled to a share of the spoils are the posterity of Hásham only; but those who think the descendants of his brother al Mutallib have also a right to a distributive part, allege a tradition in their favour purporting that Muhammad himself divided the share belonging to his relations among both families; and when Othmán Ibn Assán and Jubair Ibn Matam (who were descended from Abd-as-shams and Naufal, the other brothers of Hásham) told him that though they disputed not the preference of the Háshamites, they could not help taking it ill to see such difference made between the family of al Mutallib and themselves, who were related to him in an equal degree, and yet had no part in the distribution, the prophet replied that the descendants of al Mutallib had forsaken him neither in the time of ignorance nor since the revelation of Islám, and joined his fingers together in token of the strict union between them and the Hashamites.3 Some exclude none of the tribe of Quraish from receiving a part in the division of the spoil, and make no distinction between the poor and the rich; though, according to the more reasonable opinion, such of them as are poor only are intended by the text of the Quran, as is agreed in the case of the stranger; and others go so far as to assert that the whole fifth commanded to be reserved belongs to them only, and that the orphans and the poor, and the traveller, are to be understood of such as are of that tribe.4 It must be observed that immovable possessions, as lands, &c., taken in war, are suoject to the same laws as the movable, excepting only that the fifth part of the former is not Edition: current; Page: [226] actually divided, but the income and profits thereof, or of the price thereof, if sold, are applied to public and pious uses, and distributed once a year, and that the prince may either take the fifth part of the land itself, or the fifth part of the income and produce of the whole, as he shall make his election.

Edition: current; Page: [(227)]

SECTION VII.: OF THE MONTHS COMMANDED BY THE QURÁN TO BE KEPT SACRED, AND OF THE SETTING APART OF FRIDAY FOR THE ESPECIAL SERVICE OF GOD.

The four sacred months.

It was a custom among the ancient Arabs to observe four months in the year as sacred, during which they held it unlawful to wage war, and took off the heads from their spears, ceasing from incursions and other hostilities. During these months whoever was in fear of his enemy lived in full security, so that if a man met the murderer of his father or his brother, he durst not offer him any violence.1 “A great argument,” says a learned writer, “of a humane disposition in that nation, who being, by reason of the independent governments of their several tribes, and for the preservation of their just rights, exposed to frequent quarrels with one another, had yet learned to cool their inflamed breasts with moderation, and restrain the rage of war by stated times of truce.”2

This institution obtained among all the Arabian tribes, except only those of Tay and Khuzáah, and some of the descendants of al Hárith Ibn Kaab (who distinguished no time or place as sacred),3 and was so religiously observed, that there are but few instances in history (four, say some, six, say others4) of its having been transgressed; the war which were carried on without regard thereto being therefore Edition: current; Page: [228] termed impious One of those instances was in the war between the tribes of Quraisl and Qais Ailán, wherein Muhammad himself served under his uncles, being then fourteen1 or, as others say, twenty2 years old.

The months which the Arabs held sacred were al Muharram, Rajab Dhu’l Qáada, and Dhu’l Hajja; the first, the seventh the eleventh, and the twelfth in the year.3 Dhu’l Hajja being the month wherein they performed the pilgrimage to Makkah, not only that month, but also the preceding and the following, were for that reason kept inviolable, that every one might safely and without interruption pass and repass to and from the festival.4 Rajab is said to have been more strictly observed than any of the other three,5 probably because in that month the pagan Arabs used to fast;6 Ramadhan, which was afterwards set apart by Muhammad for that purpose, being in the time of ignorance dedicated to drinking in excess.7 By reason of the profound peace and security enjoyed in this month, one part of the provisions brought by the caravans of purveyors annually set out by the Quraish for the supply of Makkah,8 was distributed among the people; the other part being, for the like reason, distributed at the pilgrimage.9

Their observance among Muslims

The observance of the aforesaid months seemed so reasonable to Muhammad, that it met with his approbation, Edition: current; Page: [229] and the same is accordingly confirmed and enforced by several passages of the Qurán.1 which forbid war to be waged during those months against such as acknowledge them to be sacred, but grant, at the same time, full permission to attack those who make no such distinction, in the sacred months as well as in the profane.2

Regulations concerning Muharram.

One practice, however, of the pagan Arabs, in relation to these sacred months, Muhammad thought proper to reform; for some of them, weary of sitting quiet for three months together, and eager to make their accustomed incursions for plunder, used, by way of expedient, whenever it suited their inclinations or conveniency, to put off the observing of al Muharram to the following month, Safar,3 thereby avoiding to keep the former, which they supposed it lawful for them to profane, provided they sanctified another month in lieu of it, and gave public not e thereof at the preceding pilgrimage. This transferring the observation of a sacred month to a prolane month is what is truly meant by the Arabic word al Nasi, and is absolutely condemned and declared to be an impious innovation in a passage of the Quran4 which Dr Prideaux,5 misled by Golius,6 imagines to relate to the prolonging of the year by adding an intercalary month thereto. It is true the Arabs, who imitated the Jews in their manner of computing by lunar years, had also learned their method of reducing them to solar years by intercalaring a month sometimes in the third and sometimes in the second year,7 by which ineans they fixed the pilgrimage of Makkah (contrary to the original institution) to a certain sesson of the year, viz., to antumn, as most convenient for the pilgrims, by reason of the temperateness of the weather and the plenty of provisions;8 and it is also true that Muhammad Edition: current; Page: [230] forbade such intercalation by a passage in the same chapter of the Qurán; but then it is not the passage above mentioned, which prohibits a different thing, but one a little before it, wherein the number of months in the year, according to the ordinance of God is declared to be twelve;1 whereas, if the intercalation of á month were allowed, every third or second year would consist of thirteen, contrary to God’s appointment.

Friday instituted as a sacred day

The setting apart of one day in the week for the more peculiar attendance on God’s worship, so strictly required by the Jewish and Christian religions, appeared to Muhammad to be so proper an institution, that he could not but imitate the professors thereof in that particular; though, for the sake of distinction, he might think himself obliged to order his followers to observe a different day from either. Several reasons are given why the sixth day of the week was pitched on for this purpose;2 but Muhammad seems to have preferred that day chiefly because it was the day on which the people used to be assembled long before his time,3 though such assemblies were had, perhaps, rather on a civil than a religious account. However it be, the Muhammadan writers bestow very extraordinary encomiums on this day, calling it the prince of days, and the most excellent day on which the sun rises;4 pretending also that it will be the day whereon the last judgment will be solemnised;5 and they esteem it a peculiar honour to Islám that God has been pleased to appoint this day to be the feast-day of the Muslims; and granted them the advantage of having first observed it.6

Though the Muhammadans do not think themselves bound to keep their day of public worship so holy as the Edition: current; Page: [231] Jews and Christians are certainly obliged to keep theirs, there being a permission, as is generally supposed, in the Quran,1 allowing them to return to their employments or diversion after divine service is over; yet the more devout disapprove the applying of any part of that day to worldly affairs, and require it to be wholly dedicated to the business of the life to come.2

The two principal annual feasts.

Since I have mentioned the Muhammadan weekly feast, I beg leave just to take notice of their two Bairáms,3 or principal annual feasts. The first of them is called in Arabic, Íd ul Fitr, i.e., The feast of breaking the fast, and begins the first of Shawwál, immediately succeeding the fast of Ramadhán; and the other is called Íd ul Qurbán, or Íd ul Adhá, i.e., The feast of the sacrifice, and begins on the tenth of Dhu’l Hajja, when the victims are slain at the pilgrimage of Makkah.4 The former of these feasts is properly the lesser Bairám, and the latter the greater Bairám;5 but the vulgar, and most authors who have written of the Muhammadan affairs,6 exchange the epithets, and call that which follows Ramadhán the greater Bairám, because it is observed in an extraordinary manner, and kept for three days together at Constantinople and in other parts of Turkey, and in Persi, for five or six days, by the common people, at least, with great demonstrations of public joy, to make themselves amends, as it were, for the mortification of the preceding month;7 whereas, the feast of sacrifices, though it be also kept for three days, and the first of them be the most solemn day of the pilgrimage, the principal act of devotion among the Muhammadans is taken much less notice of by the generality Edition: current; Page: [232] of people, who are not struck therewith, because the ceremonies with which the same is observed are performed at Makkah, the only scene of that solemnity.*

Edition: current; Page: [(233)]

SECTION VIII.: OF THE PRINZIPAD SECTS AMONG THE MUHAMMADANS, AND OF THOSE WHO HAVE PRETENDED TO PROPHECY AMONG THE ARABS IN OR SINCE THE TIME OF MUHAMMAD

Before we take a view of the sects of the Muhammadans, it will be necessary to say something of the two sciences by which all disputed questions among them are determined viz., their Scholastic and Practical Divinity

Muhammadan scholasticism

Their scholastic divinity is a mongrel science, consisting of logical metaphysical, theological, and philosophical disquisitions, and built on principles and methods of reasoning very different from what are used by those who pass among the Muhammadans themselves for the sounder divines or more able philosophers,1 and, therefore, in the partition of the sciences this is generally left out, as unworthy a place among them.2 The learned Maimonides3 has laboured to expose the principles and systems of the scholastic divines, as frequently repugnant to the nature of the world and the order of the creation, and intolerably absurd.

Its origin and use

This art of handling religious disputes was not known in the infancy of Muhammadanism, but was brought in when sects sprang up and articles of religion began to be called in question, and was at first made use of to defend the truth of those articles against innovators;4 and while Edition: current; Page: [234] it keeps within those bounds is allowed to be a commendable study, being necessary for the defence of the faith; but when it proceeds farther, out of an itch of disputation, it is judged worthy of censure.

This is the opinion of al Gházali,1 who observes a medium between those who have too high a value for this science, and those who absolutely reject it. Among the latter was al Sháfíi, who declared that, in his judgment, if any man employed his time that way, he deserved to be fixed to a stake and carried about through all the Arab tribes, with the following proclamation to be made before him: “This is the reward of him who, leaving the Qurán and the Sunnat, applied himself to the study of scholastic divinity.”2 Al Ghazáli, on the other hand, thinks that as it was introduced by the invasion of heresies, it is necessary to be retained in order to quell them; but then in the person who studies this science he requires three things—diligence, acuteness of judgment, and probity of manners; and is by no means for suffering the same to be publicly explained.3 This science, therefore, among the Muhammadans, is the art of controversy, by which they discuss points of faith concerning the essence and attributes of God, and the conditions of all possible things, either in respect to their creation or final restoration, according to the rules of the religion of Islám.4

The other science is practical divinity or jurisprudence, and is the knowledge of the decisions of the law which regard practice, gathered from distinct proofs.

Muslim jurisprudence

Al Ghazáli declares that he had much the same opinion of this science as of the former, its original being owing to the corruption of religion and morality; and therefore judged both sciences to be necessary, not in themselves, but by accident only, to curb the irregular imaginations and passions of mankind (as guards become necessary in Edition: current; Page: [235] the highways by reason of robbers), the end of the first being the suppression of heresies, and of the other the decision of legal controversies, for the quiet and peaceable living of mankind in this world, and for the preserving the rule by which the magistrate may prevent one man from injuring another, by declaring what is lawful and what is unlawful, by determining the satisfaction to be given or punishment to be inflicted, and by regulating other outward actions; and not only so, but to decide of religion itself, and its conditions, so far as relates to the profession made by the mouth, it not being the business of the civilian to inquire into the heart:1 the depravity of men’s manners, however, has made this knowledge of the laws so very requisite, that it is usually called-the Science, by way of excellence, nor is any man reekoned learned who has not applied himself thereto.2

Points of faith subjec to scholastic discussion.

The points of faith subject to the examination and discussion of the scholastic divines are reduced to four general heads, which they call the four bases, or great fundamental articles.3

The first basis relates to the attributes of God and his unity consistent therewith. Under this bead are comprehended the questions concerning the eternal attributes which are asserted by some and denied by others; and also the explication of the essential attributes and attributes of action, what is proper for God to do, and what may be affirmed of him and whal it is impossible for him to do. These things are controverted between the Asharians, the Karámians, the Mujassamians or Corporalists, and the Mutazilites.4

The second basis regards predestination and the justice thereof, which comprises the questions concerning Gon’s purpose and decree man’s compulsion or necessity to act Edition: current; Page: [236] and his co-operation in producing actions by which he may gain to himself good or evil, and also those which concern Gon’s willing good and evil, and what things are subject to his power, and what to his knowledge; some maintaining the affirmative, and others the negative. These points are disputed among the Qadríans the Najríans, the Jabrians the Asharíans, and the Karámians.1

The third basis concerns the promises and threats, the precise acceptation of names used in divinity, and the divine decisions, and comprehends questions relating to faith, repentance, promises, threats, forbearance, infidelity and error. The controversies under this head are on foot between the Murjians, the Waidians, the Mutazilites the Asharians, and the Karámians.2

The fourth basis regards history and reason, that is, the just weight they ought to have in matters belonging to faith and religion and also the mission of the prophets and the office of the Imám or chief pontiff. Under this head are comprised all casuistical questiens relating to the moral beauty or turpitude of actions; inquiring whether things are allowed or forbidden by reason of their own nature or by the positive law; and also questions concerning the preference of actions, the favour or grace of God, the innocence which ought to attend the prophetical office, and the conditions requisite in the office of Imám; some asserting it depends on right of succession, others on the consent of the faithful; and also the method of transferring it with the former, and of confirming it with the latter. These matters are the subjects of dispute between the Shíahs, the Mutazilites, the Karamians and the Asharíans.3

The sects of Islam.

The different sects of Muhammadans may be distinguished into two sorts—those generally esteemed orthodox, and those which are esteemed heretical.

Edition: current; Page: [237]

The former, by a general name are called Sunnis or Traditionists, because they acknowledge the authority of the Sunnat, or collection of moral traditions of the sayings and actions of their prophet, which is a sort of supplement to the Qurán, directing the observance of several things omitted in that book and in name as well as design answering to the Mishna of the Jews.1

Divisions of the Sunnís: the four orthodox sects.

The Sunnís are subdivided into four chief sects, which, notwithstanding some differences as to legal conclusions in their interpretation of the Qurán and matters of practice, are generally acknowledged to be orthodox in radicals or matters of faith and capable of salvation, and have each of them their several stations or oratories in the temple of Makkah.2 The founders of these sects are looked upon as the great masters of jurisprudence, and are said to have been men of great devotion and self-denial, well versed in the knowledge of those things which belong to the next life and to man’s right conduct here, and directing all their knowledge to the glory of God. This is al Ghazáli’s encomium of them, who thinks it derogatory to their honour that their names should be used by those who, neglecting to imitate the other virtues which make up their character, apply themselves only to attain their skill and follow their opinions in matters of legal practice.3

The Hanífites.

The first of the four orthodox sects is that of the Hanífites, so named from their founder, Abu Hanífa al Númán Ibn Thábit, who was born at Kufa in the 80th year of the Hijra, and died in the 150th, according to the more preferable opinion as to the time.4 He ended his life in prison at Baghdád where he had been confined because he refused to be made qádi or judge,5 on which Edition: current; Page: [238] account he was very hardly dealt with by his superiors, yet could not be prevailed on, either by threats or illtreatment, to undertake the charge, “choosing rather to be punished by them than by God,” says al Ghazáli, who adds, that when he excused himself from accepting the office by alleging that he was unfit for it, being asked the reason, he replied, “If I speak the truth, I am unfit; but if I tell a lie, a liar is not fit to be a judge.” It is said that he read the Qurán in the prison where he died no less than 7000 times.1

The Hanífites are called by an Arabian writer2 the followers of reason, and those of the three other sects, followers of tradition, the former being principally guided by their own judgment in their decisions, and the latter adhering more tenaciously to the traditions of Muhammad.

The sect of Abu Hanífa heretofore obtained chiefly in Irák,3 but now generally prevails among the Turks and Tartars: his doctrine was brought into great credit by Abu Yúsuf, chief-justice under the Khalífahs al Hádi and Harún al Rashíd.4

Málik Ibn Ans and his sect.

The second orthodox sect is that of Málik Ibn Ans, who was born at Madína in the year of the Hijra 90, 93, 94,5 or 95,6 and died there in 177,7 178,8 or 1799 (for so much do authors differ). This doctor is said to have paid great regard to the traditions of Muhammad.10 In his last illness, a friend going to visit him, found him in tears, and asking him the reason of it, he answered, “How should I not weep? and who has more reason to weep Edition: current; Page: [239] than I? Would to God that for every question decided by me according to my own opinion I had received so many stripes! then would my accounts be easier. Would to God I had never given any decision of my own!”1 Al Ghazáli thinks it a sufficient proof of Málik’s directing his knowledge to the glory of God, that being once asked his opinion as to forty-eight questions, his answer to thirty-two of them was, that he did not know; it being no easy matter for one who has any other view than God’s glory to make so frank a confession of his ignorance.2

The doctrine of Málik is chiefly followed in Barbary and other parts of Africa.

Muhammad Ibn Idris al Shafíi.

The author of the third orthodox sect was Muhammad Ibn Idris al Sháfíi, born either at Gaza or Ascalon, in Palestine, in the year of the Hijra 150, the same day (as some will have it) that Abu Hanífa died, and was carried to Makkah at two years of age, and there educated.3 He died in 204,4 in Egypt, whither he went about five years before.5 This doctor is celebrated for his excellency in all parts of learning, and was much esteemed by Ibn Hanbal, his contemporary, who used to say that “he was as the sun to the world, and as health to the body.” Ibn Hanbal, however, had so ill an opinion of al Sháfíi at first, that he forbade his scholars to go near him; but some time after one of them, meeting his master trudging on foot after al Sháfíi, who rode on a mule, asked him how it came about that he forbade them to follow him, and did it himself; to which Ibn Hanbal replied, “Hold thy peace; if thou but attend his mule thou wilt profit thereby.”6

Al Sháfíi is said to have been the first who discoursed of jurisprudence, and reduced that science into a method;7 one wittily saying, that the relators of the traditions of Edition: current; Page: [240] Muhammad were asleep till al Sháfíi came and waked them.1 He was a great enemy to the scholastic divines, as has been already observed.2 Al Ghazáli tells us that al Sháfíi used to divide the night into three parts, one for study, another for prayer, and the third for sleep. It is also related of him that he never so much as once swore by God, either to confirm a truth or to affirm a falsehood; and that being once asked his opinion, he remained silent for some time, and when the reason of his silence was demanded, he answered, “I am considering first whether it be better to speak or to hold my tongue.” The following saying is also recorded of him, viz., “Whoever pretends to love the world and its Creator at the same time is a liar.”3 The followers of this doctor are from him called Sháfíites, and were formerly spread into Mawara’lnahr and other parts eastward but are now chiefly of Arabia and Persia.

Ahmad Ibn Hanbal.

Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, the founder of the fourth sect, was born in the year of the Hijra 164; but as to the place of his birth there are two traditions: some say he was born at Mirú in Khurasán, of which city his parents were, and that his mother brought him from thence to Baghdád at her breast; while others assure us that she was with child of him when she came to Baghdád, and that he was born there.4 Ibn Hanbal in process of time attained a great reputation on account of his virtue and knowledge; being so well versed in the traditions of Muhammad in particular, that it is said he could repeat no less than a million of them.5 He was very intimate with al Sháfíi, from whom he received most of his traditionary knowledge, being his constant attendant till his departure for Egypt.6 Refusing to acknowledge the Qurán to be created,7 he was, by order of the Khalífah al Mutasim, severely scourged and imprisoned.8 Ibn Hanbal died at Baghdád, in the Edition: current; Page: [241] year 241, and was followed to his grave by eight hundred thousand men and sixty thousand women. It is related, as something very extraordinary, if not miraculous, that on the day of his death no less than twenty thousand Christians, Jews, and Magians embraced the Muhammadan faith.1 This sect increased so fast and became so powerful and bold, that in the year 323, in the Khalífat of al Rádi, they raised a great commotion in Baghdád, entering people’s houses, and spilling their wine, if they found any, and beating the singing-women they met with, and breaking their instruments; and a severe edict was published against them before they could be reduced to their duty;2 but the Hanbalites at present are not very numerous, few of them being to be met with out of the limits of Arabia.

Heretical sects of Muhammadans.

The heretical sects among the Muhammadans are those which hold heterodox opinions in fundamentals or matters of faith.

The first controversies relating to fundamentals began when most of the companions of Muhammad were dead;3 for in their days was no dispute, unless about things of small moment, if we except only the dissensions concerning the Imams, or rightful successors of their prophet, which were stirred up and fomented by interest and ambition; the Arabs’ continual employment in the wars during that time allowing them little or no leisure to enter into nice inquiries and subtle distinctions. But no sooner was the ardour of conquest a little abated than they began to examine the Qurán more nearly; whereupon differences in opinion became unavoidable, and at length so greatly multiplied, that the number of their sects, according to the common opinion, are seventy-three. For the Muhammadans seem ambitious that their religion should exceed others even in this respect, saying, that the Magians are Edition: current; Page: [242] divided inte seventy sects, the Jews into seventy-one, the Christians into seventy-two, and the Muslims into seventy-three as Muhammad had foretold:1 of which sects they reckon one to be always orthodox and entitled to salvation.2

The Khárijites.

The first heresy was that of the Khárijites, who revolted from Ali in the thirty-seventh year of the Hijra; and not long after, Mábad al Johni, Ghailán of Damascus, and Jonas al Aswári broached heterodox opinions concerning predestination and the ascribing of good and evil unto God, whose opinions were followed by Wasil Ibn Atá.3 This latter was the scholar of Hasan of Basra, in whose school a question being proposed, whether he who had committed a grievous sin was to be deemed an infidel or not, the Khárijites (who used to come and dispute there) maintaining the affirmative, and the orthodox the negative, Wásil, without waiting his master’s decision, withdrew abruptly, and began to publish among his fellow-scholars a new opinion of his own, to wit, that such a sinner was in a middle state; and he was thereupon expelled the school; he and his followers being thenceforth called Mutazilites, or Separatists.4

The several sects which have arisen since this time are variously compounded and decompounded of the opinions of four chief sects, the Mutazilites, the Sifátians, the Khárijites, and the Shiites.5

The Mutazilites.

I. The Mutazilites were the followers of the beforementioned Wásil Ibn Atá. As to their chief and general tenets: 1. They entirely rejected all eternal attributes of Edition: current; Page: [243] God, to avoid the distinction of persons made by the Christians, saying that eternity is the proper or tormal attribute of his essence, that God knows by his essence, and not by his knowledge:1 and the same they affirined of his other attributes2 (though all the Mutazilites do not understand these words in one sense); and hence this sect were also named Muattalites, from their divesting God of his attributes;3 and they went so far as to say that to affirm these attributes is the same thing as to make more eternals than one, and that the unity of God is inconsistent with such an opinion;4 and this was the true doctrine of Wásil their master, who declared that whoever asserted an eternal attribute asserted there were two Gods.5 This point of speculation concerning the divine attributes was not ripe at first, but was at length brought to maturity by Wásil’s followers after they had read the books of the philosophers.6 2. They believed the Word of God to have been created in subjecto (as the schoolmen term it), and to consist of letters and sound, copies thereof being written in books to express or imitate the original. They also went farther, and affirmed that whatever is created in subjecto is also an accident and liable to perish.7 3. They denied absolute predestination, holding that God was not the author of evil, but of good only, and that man was a free agent.8 which being properly the opinion of the Qadarians, we defer what may be further said thereof till we come to speak of that sect. On account of this tenet and the first, the Mutazilites look on themselves as the defenders of Edition: current; Page: [244] the unity and justice of God.1 4. They held that if a professor of the true religion be guilty of a grievous sin and die without repentance, he will be eternally damned, though his punishment will be lighter than that of the infidels.2 5. They denied all vision of God in paradise by the corporeal eye and rejected all comparisons or similitudes applied to God.3

Various divisions of this sect.

This sect are said to have been the first inventors of scholastic divinity,4 and are subdivided into several inferior sects, amounting, as some reckon, to twenty, which mutually brand one another with infidelity.5 The most remarkable of them are:—

The Hudailians

1 The Hudailians, or followers of Hamadán Abu Hudail, a Mutazilite doctor, who differed something from the common form of expression used by this sect, saying that God knew by his knowledge, but that his knowledge was his essence; and so of the other attributes: which opinion he took from the philosophers, who affirm the essence of God to be simple and without multiplicity, and that his attributes are not posterior or accessory to his essence, or subsisting therein, but are his essence itself; and this the more orthodox take to be next kin to making, distinctions in the deity which is the thing they so much abhor in the Christians.6 As to the Qurán’s being created he made some distinction, holding the Word of God to be partly not in subjecto (and therefore uncreated) as when he spake the word Kum i.e., fiat at the creation, and partly in subjecto, as the precepts prohibitions, &c.7 Marracci8 mentions an opinion of Abu Hudail’s concerning predestination, from an Arab writer,9 which being by him expressed in a manner not very intelligible. I choose to omit.

Edition: current; Page: [245]

The Jubbáians.

2. The Jubbáians, or followers of Abu Ali Muhammad Ibn Abd al Wahab surnamed al Jubbái, whose meaning when he made use of the common expression of the Mutazilites, that “God knows by his essence,” &c., was that God’s being knowing is not an attribute the same with knowledge, nor such a state as rendered his being knowing necessary.1 He held God’s Word to be created in subjecto. as in the preserved table, for example, the memory of Gabriel Muhammad, &c.2 This sect, if Marracci has given the true sense of his author, denied that God could be seen in paradise without the assistance of corporeal eyes, and held that man produced his acts by a power superadded to health of body and soundness of limbs, that he whe was guilty of a mortal sin was neither a believer nor an infidel, but a transgressor (which was the original opinion of Wásil), and if he died in his sins, would be doomed to hell for eternity: and that God conceals nothing of whatever he knows from his servants3

The Háshamians.

3. The Háshamians, who were so named from their master, Abu Hásham Abd al Salám, the son of Abu Ali al Jubbái and whose tenets nearly agreed with those of the preceding sect.4 Abu Hásham took the Mutazilite form of expression that “God knows by his essence” in a different sense from others, supposing it to mean that God hath or is endued with a disposition which is a known property or quality posterior or accessory to his existence.5 His followers were so much afraid of making God the author of evil that they would not allow him to be said to create an infidel, because, according to their way of arguing, an infidel is a compound of infidelity and man, and God is not the creator of infidelity.6 Abu Hásham Edition: current; Page: [246] and his father, Abu Ali al Jubbái, were both celebrated for their skill in scholastic divinity.1

The Nudhámians.

4. The Nudhámians, or followers of Ibrahim al Nudhám, who having read books of philosophy, set up a new sect and imagining he could not sufficiently remove God from being the author of evil without divesting him of his power in respect thereto taught that no power ought to be ascribed to God concerning evil and rebellious actions; but this he affirmed against the opinion of his own disciples, who allowed that God could do evil, but did not, because of its turpitude.2 Of his opinion as to the Qurán’s being created we have spoken elsewhere.3

The Háyatians.

5. The Háyatians, so named from Ahmad Ibn Hayat, who had been of the sect of the Nudhamians, but broached some new notions on reading the philosophers. His peculiar opinions were: 1. That Christ was the eternal Word incarnate, and took a true and real body, and will judge all creatures in the life to come:4 he also farther asserted that there are two Gods or Creators—the one eternal, viz., the most high God, and the other not eternal, viz., Christ5—which opinion, though Dr. Pocock urges the same as an argument that he did not rightly understand the Christian mysteries,6 is not much different from that of the Arians and Soeinians. 2. That there is a successive transmigration of the soul from one body into another, and that the last body will enjoy the reward or suffer the punishment due to each soul;7 and 3. That God will be seen at the resurrection, not with the bodily eyes, but those of the understanding.8

The Jahidhians.

6. The Jahidhians, or followers of Amru Ibn Bahr, surnamed al Jahidh a great doctor of the Mutazilites, Edition: current; Page: [247] and very much admired for the elegance of his composures1 who differed from his brethren in that he imagined that the damned would not be eternally tormented in hell, but would be changed into the nature of fire, and that the fire would of itself attract them, without any necessity of their going into it.2 He also taught that if a man believed God to be his Lord and Muhammad the apostle of God, he became one of the faithful, and was obliged to nothing farther.3 His peculiar opinion as to the Qurán has been taken notice of before4

The Muzdárians.

7. The Muzdárians, who embraced the opinions of Isa Ibn Subaih al Muzdár, and those very absurd ones; for, besides his notions relating to the Qurán,5 he went so directly counter to the opinion of those who abridged God of the power to do evil, that he affirmed it possible for God to be a liar and unjust.6 He also pronounced him to be an infidel who thrust himself into the supreme government;7 nay, he went so far as to assert men to be infidels while they said “There is no God but God,” and even condemned all the rest of mankind as guilty of infidelity; upon which Ibrahim Ibn al Sandi asked him whether paradise, whose breadth equals that of heaven and earth, was created only for him and two or three more who thought as he did? to which it is said he could return no answer.8

The Basharians

8. The Basharians, who maintained the tenets of Bashar Ibn Mutamir, the master of al Muzdar,9 and a principal man among the Mutazilites. He differed in some things from the general opinion of that sect, carrying man’s free agency to a great excess, making it even independent; and yet he thought God might doom an infant to eternal punishment, but granted he would be unjust in so doing. Edition: current; Page: [248] He taught that God is not always obliged to do that which is best for if he pleased he could make all men true believers. These sectaries also held that if a man repent of a mortal sin and afterwards return to it, he will be liable to suffer the punishment due to the former tranagression.1

The Thamámians

9 The Thamámians, who follow Thamáma Ibn Bashar, a chief Mutazilite. Their peculiar opinions were: 1. That sinners should remain in hell for ever. 2. That free actions have no producing author. 3. That at the resurrection all infidels, idolaters, atheists, Jews, Christians, Magians, and heretics shall be reduced to dust2

The Qadarians

10 The Qadarians, which is really a more ancient name than that of Mutazilites, Mábad al Johni and his adherents being so called, who disputed the doctrine of predestination before Wásil quitted his master:3 for which reason some use the denomination of Qadarians as more extensive than the other, and comprehend all the Mutazilites under it4 This sect deny absolute predestination, saying that evil and injustice ought not to be attributed to God, but to man, who is a free agent, and may therefore be rewarded or punished for his actions, which God has granted him power either to do or to let alone.5 And hence it is said they are called Qadarians because they deny al Qadr, or God’s absolute decree; though others, thinking it not so proper to affix a name to a sect from a doctrine which they combat, will have it come from Qadr or Qudrat, i.e., power, because they assert man’s power to act freely.6 Those, however, who give the name of Qadarians to the Mutazilites are their enemies, for they disclaim it, and give it to their antagonists, the Jabarians who likewise refuse it as an infamous appellation,7 because Muhammad is said to have declared Edition: current; Page: [249] the Qadarians to be the Magians of his followers1 But what the opinion of these Qadarians in Muhammad’s time was is very uncertain. The Mutazilites say the name belongs to those who assert predestination and make God the author of good and evil,2 viz. the Jabarians; but all the other Muhammadan seets agree to fix it on the Mutazilites, who, they say, are like the Magians in establishing two principles, Light, or God the author of good: and Darkness or the devil, the author of evil; but this cannot absolutely be said of the Mutazilites, for they (at least the generality of them) ascribe men’s good deeds to God, but their evil deeds to themselves; meaning thereby that man has a free liberty and power to do either good or evil, and is master of his actions; and for this reason it is that the other Muhammadans call them Magians because they assert another author of actions besides God.2 And indeed it is a difficult matter to say what Muhammad’s own opinion was in this matter; for on the one side the Qurán itself is pretty plain for absolute predestination, and many sayings of Muhammad are recorded to that purpose,4 and one in particular wherein he introduces Adam and Moses disputing before God in this manner: “Thou,” says Moses, “art Adam whom God created, and animated with the breath of life and caused to be worshipped by the angels, and placed in paradise, from whence mankind have been expelled for thy fault,” whereto Adam answered, “Thou art Moses, whom God chose for his apostle, and intrusted with his Word by giving thee the tables of the law, and whom he vouchsafed to admit to discourse with himself: how many years dost thou find the law was written before I was created?” Says Moses, “Forty” “And dost thou not find,” replied Adam, “these words therein, ‘And Adam rebelled against his Lord and transgressed’?” which Edition: current; Page: [250] Moses confessing, “Dost thou therefore blame me,” continued he, “for doing that which God wrote of me that I should do forty years before I was created? nay, for what was decreed concerning me fifty thousand years before the creation of heaven and earth?” In the conclusion of which dispute Muhammad declared that Adam had the better of Moses.1 On the other side it is urged in the behalf of the Mutazilites, that Muhammad declaring that the Qadarians and Murjians had been cursed by the tongues of seventy prophets, and being asked who the Qadarians were, answered, “Those who assert that God predestinated them to be guilty of rebellion, and yet punishes them for it.” Al Hasan is also said to have declared that God sent Muhammad to the Arabs while they were Qadarians or Jabarians, and laid their sins upon God: and to confirm the matter, this sentence of the Qurán is quoted:2 “When they commit a filthy action, they say, We found our fathers practising the same, and God hath commanded us so to do: Say, Verily God commandeth not filthy actions.”3

The Sifátians.

II. The Sifátians held the opposite opinion to the Mutazilites in respect to the eternal attributes of God, which they affirmed, making no distinction between the essential attributes and those of operation; and hence they were named Sifátians, or Attributists. Their doctrine was that of the first Muhammadans, who were not yet acquainted with these nice distinctions: but this sect afterwards introduced another species of declarative attributes, or such as were necessarily used in historical narration, as hands, face, eyes, &c., which they did not offer to explain, but contented themselves with saying they were in the law, and that they called them declarative attributes.4 However, at length, by giving various explications and interpretations of these attributes, they divided Edition: current; Page: [251] into many different opinions: some, by taking the words in the literal sense, fell into the notion of a likeness or similitude between God and created beings; to which it is said the Karaites among the Jews, who are for the literal interpretation of Moses’s law had shown them the way:1 others explained them in another manner, saying that no creature was like God, but that they neither understood nor thought it necessary to explain the precise signification of the words, which seem to affirm the same of both, it being sufficient to believe that God hath no companion or similitude. Of this opinion was Málik Ibn Ans, who declared as to the expression of God’s sitting on his throne, in particular, that though the meaning is known, yet the manner is unknown; and, that it is necessary to believe it, but heresy to make any questions about it.2

The sects of the Sifátians are:—

The Asharíans.

1. The Asharíans, the followers of Abu’l Hasan al Asharí, who was first a Mutazilite, and the scholar of Abu Ali al Jobbái, but disagreeing from his master in opinion as to God’s being bound (as the Mutazilites assert) to do always that which is best or most expedient, left him and set up a new sect of himself. The occasion of this difference was the putting a case concerning three brothers, the first of whom lived in obedience to God, the second in rebellion against him, and the third died an infant. Al Jobbái being asked what he thought would become of them, answered, that the first would be rewarded in paradise the second punished in hell, and the third neither rewarded nor punished. “But what,” objected al Ashari, “if the third say, O Lord, if thou hadst given me longer life, that I might have entered paradise with my believing brother it would have been better for me?” To which al Jobbai replied, “That God would answer, I knew that if thou hadst lived longer thou wouldst Edition: current; Page: [252] have been a wicked person, and therefore cast into hell.” “Then,” retorted al Asharí, “the second will say, O Lord, why didst thou not take me away while I was an infant, as thou didst my brother, that I might not have deserved to be punished for my sins nor to be cast into hell?” To which al Jobbai could return no other answer than that God prolonged his life to give him an opportunity of obtaining the highest degree of perfection, which was best for him; but al Asharí demanding further why he did not for the same reason grant the other a longer life, to whom it would have been equally advantageous, al Jobbái was so put to it, that he asked whether the devil possessed him. “No,” says al Asharí, “but the master’s ass will not pass the bridge;”1 i.e., he is posed.

Opinions regarding the attributes of God. Their views of sin.

The opinions of the Asharíans were: 1. That they allowed the attributes of God to be distinct from his essence, yet so as to forbid any comparisom to be made between God and his creatures2 This was also the opinion of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, and David al Ispaháni, and others, who herein followed Málik Ibn Ans, and were so cautious of any assimilation of God to created beings, that they declared whoever moved his hand while he read these words, “I have created with my hand,” or stretched forth his finger in repeating this saying of Muhammad, “The heart of the believer is between two fingers of the Merciful,” ought to have his hand and finger cut off;3 and the reasons they gave for not explaining any such words were, that it is forbidden in the Qurán, and that such explications were necessarily founded on conjecture and opinion, from which no man ought to speak of the attributes of God, because the words of the Quran might by that means come to be understood differently from the author’s meaning: nay, some have been so superstitiously scrupulous in this matter as not to allow the words hand, Edition: current; Page: [253] face, and the like, when they occur in the Quran to be rendered into Persian or any other language, but require them to be read in the very original words and this they call the safe way1 2. As to predestination, they held that God hath one eternal will, which is applied to whatsoever he willeth, both of his own actions and those of men, so far as they are created by bini, but not as they are acquired or gained by them; that he willeth both their good and their evil, their profit and their hurt, and as he willeth and knoweth, he willeth concerning men that which he knoweth, and hath commanded the pen to write the same in the Preserved Table and this is his decree and eternal immutable counsel and purpose.2 They also went so far as to say that it may be agreeable to the way of God that man should be commanded what he is not able to perform.3 But while they allow man some power, they seem to restrain it to such a power as cannot produce anything new; only God, say they, so orders his providence that he creates, after or under and together with every created or new power, an action which is ready whenever a man wills it and sets about it; and this action is called Casb, i.e., Acquisition, being in respect to its creation, from God, but in respect to its being produced, employed, and acquired, from man.4 And this being generally esteemed the orthodox opinion, it may not be improper farther to explain the same in the words of some other writers. The elective actions of men, says one, fall under the power of God alone; nor is their own power effectual thereto, but God causeth to exist in man power and choice; and if there be no impediment, he causeth his action to exist also, subject to his power, and joined with that and his choice; which action, as created, is to be ascribed to God, but as produced, employed, or acquired to man.4 So that by the acquisition of an action is properly meant a man’s Edition: current; Page: [254] joining or connecting the same with his power and will, yet allowing herein no impression or influence on the existence thereof, save only that it is subject to his power.1 Others, however, who are also on the side of al Ashari, and reputed orthodox, explain the matter in a different manner and grant the impression or influence of the created power of man on his action, and that this power is what is called Acquisition.2 But the point will be still clearer if we hear a third author, who rehearses the various opinions or explications of the opinion of this sect in the following words, viz.:Abu’l Hasan al Ashari asserts all the actions of men to be subject to the power of God, being created by him, and that the power of man hath no influence at all on that which he is empowered to do, but that both the power and what is subject thereto fall under the power of God. Al Qádhi Abu Baqr says that the essence or substance of the action is the effect of the power of God, but its being either an action of obedience, as prayer, or an action of disobedience, as fornication, are qualities of the action, which proceed from the power of man. Abdal Málik, known by the title of Imám al Haramain, Abu’l Husain of Basra, and other learned men, held that the actions of men are effected by the power which God hath created in man, and that God causeth to exist in man both power and will, and that this power and will do necessarily produce that which man is empowered to do; and Abu Isháq al Isfarayain taught that that which maketh impression or hath influence on an action is a compound of the power of God and the power of man.3 The same author observes that their ancestors, perceiving a manifest difference between those things which are the effects of the election of man and those things which are the necessary effects of inanimate agents, destitute both of knowledge and choice, and being at the same time Edition: current; Page: [255] pressed by the arguments which prove that God is the Creator of all things, and consequently of those things which are done by men, to conciliate the matter, chose the middle way, asserting actions to proceed from the power of God and the acquisition of man, God’s way of dealing with his servants being, that when man intendeth obedience, God createth in him an action of obedience; and when he intendeth disobedience, he createth in him an action of disobedience; so that man seemeth to be the effective producer of his action, though he really be not.1 But this, proceeds the same writer, is again pressed with its difficulties, because the very intention of the mind is the work of God, so that no man hath any share in the production of his own actions: for which reason the ancients disapproved of too nice an inquiry into this point, the end of the dispute concerning the same being, for the most part, either the taking away of all precepts, positive as well as negative, or else the associating of a companion with God, by introducing some other independent agent besides him. Those, therefore, who would speak more accurately, use this form: There is neither compulsion nor free liberty but the way lies between the two: the power and will in man being both created by God, though the merit or guilt be imputed unto man. Yet, after all, it is judged the safest way to follow the steps of the primitive Muslims, and, avoiding subtle disputations and too curious inquiries, to leave the knowledge of this matter wholly unto God.2 3 As to mortal sin, the Edition: current; Page: [256] Asharíans taught, that if a believer guilty of such sin die without repentance his sentence is to be left with God, whether he pardon him out of mercy, or whether the prophet intercede for him (according to that saying recorded of him. “My intercession shall be employed for those among my people who shall have been guilty of grievous crimes”) or whether be punish him in proportion to his demerit and afterwards, through his mercy, admit him into paradise but that it is not to be supposed he Edition: current; Page: [257] witl remain for ever in hell with the infidels, seeing it is declared that whoevertshall have faith in his heart but of the weight of an ant, shall be delivered from hell-fire.1 And this is generally received for the orthodox doctrine in this point, and is diametrically opposite to that of the Mutazilites.

These were the more rational Sifátians, but the ignorant part of them, not knowing how otherwise to explain the expressions of the Qurán relating to the declarative attributes, fell into most gross and absurd opinions, making God corporeal and like created beings.2 Such were—

The Mushábbihites

2. The Mushábbihites, or Assimilators, who allowed a resemblance between God and his creatures,3 supposing Edition: current; Page: [258] him to be a figure composed of members or parts, either spiritual or corporeal, and capable of local motion, of ascent and descent, &c.1 Some of this sect inclined to the opinion of the Hulúlians, who believed that the divine nature might be united with the human in the same person; for they granted it possible that God might appear in a human form, as Gabriel did; and to confirm their opinion they allege Muhammad’s words, that he saw his Lord in a most beautiful form, and Moses talking with God face to face.2 And

The Karamians or Mujassamians.

3. The Karamians, or followers of Muhammad Ibn Karam, called also Mujassamians, or Corporalists, who not only admitted a resemblance between God and created beings, but declared God to be corporeal.3 The more sober among them, indeed, when they applied the word “body” to God, would be understood to mean that he is a self-subsisting being, which with them is the definition of body; but yet some of them affirmed him to be finite, and circumscribed, either on all sides, or on some only (as beneath, for example), according to different opinions;4 and others allowed that he might be felt by the hand and seen by the eye. Nay, one David al Jawári went so far as to say that his deity was a body composed of flesh and blood, and that he had members, as hands, feet, a head, a tongue, eyes, and ears; but that he was a body, however, not like other bodies, neither was he like to any created being: he is also said further to have affirmed that from the crown of the head to the breast he was hollow, and from the breast downward solid, and that he had black curled hair.5 These most blasphemous and monstrous notions were the consequence of the literal acceptation of those passages in the Qurán which figuratively attribute corporeal actions to God, and of the words of Muhammad when he said Edition: current; Page: [259] that God created man in his own image, and that himself had felt the fingers of God, which he laid on his back, to be cold. Besides which, this sect are charged with fathering on their prophet a great number of spurious and forged traditions to support their opinion, the greater part whereof they borrowed from the Jews, who are accused as naturally prone to assimilate God to men, so that they describe him as weeping for Noah’s flood till his eyes were sore.1 And, indeed, though we grant the Jews may have imposed on Muhammad and his followers in many instances, and told them as solemn truths things which themselves believed not or had invented, yet many expressions of this kind are to be found in their writings; as when they introduce God roaring like a lion at every watch of the night, and crying, “Alas! that I have laid waste my house, and suffered my temple to be burnt, and sent my children into banishment among the heathen,” &c.2

The Jabarians and their various denominations.

The Jabarians, who are the direct opponents of the Qadarians, denying free agency in men, and ascribing his actions wholly unto God.3 They take their denomination from al jabr, which signifies necessity or compulsion; because they hold man to be necessarily and inevitably constrained to act as he does by force of God’s eternal and immutable decree.4 This sect is distinguished into several species, some being more rigid and extreme in their opinion, who are thence called pure Jabarians, and others more moderate, who are therefore called middle Jabarians. The former will not allow men to be said either to act or to have any power at all, either operative or acquiring, asserting that man can do nothing, but produces all his actions by necessity, having neither power, nor will, nor choice, any more than an inanimate agent; they also declare that rewarding and punishing are also the effects of necessity; and the same they say of the imposing of Edition: current; Page: [260] commands. This was the doctrine of the Jahmians, the followers of Jahm Ibn Safwán, who likewise held that paradise and hell will vanish or be annihilated after those who are destined thereto respectively shall have entered them, so that at last there will remain no existing being besides God;1 supposing those words of the Qurán which declare that the inhabitants of paradise and of hell shall remain therein for ever to be hyperbolical only, and intended for corroboration, and not to denote an eternal duration in reality.2 The moderate Jabarians are those who ascribe some power to man, but such a power as hath no influence on the action; for as to those who grant the power of man to have a certain influence on the action, which influence is called Acquisition, some3 will not admit them to be called Jabarians, though others reckon those also to be called middle Jabarians, and to contend for the middle opinion between absolute necessity and absolute liberty, who attribute to man Acquisition or concurrence in producing the action, whereby he gaineth commendation or blame (yet without admitting it to have any influence on the action), and therefore make the Asharians a branch of this sect.4 Having again mentioned the term Acquisition, we may perhaps have a clearer idea of what the Muhammadans mean thereby when told that it is defined to be an action directed to the obtaining of profit or the removing of hurt, and for that reason never applied to any action of God, who acquireth to himself neither profit nor hurt.5 Of the middle or moderate Jabarians were the Najarians and the Dirárians The Najarians were the adherents of al Hasan Ibn Muhammad al Najár, who taught that God was he who created the actions of men, both good and bad, and that man acquired them, and also that man’s power had an influence on the action, or a Edition: current; Page: [261] certain co-operation, which he called Acquisition; and herein he agreed with al Asharí.1 The Dirárians were the disciples of Dirár Ibn Amru, who held also that men’s actions are really created by God, and that man really acquired them.2 The Jabarians also say that God is absolute hard of his creatures, and may deal with them according to his own pleasure, without rendering account to any, and that if he should admit all men without distinction into paradise, it would be no impartiality, or if he should cast them all into hell, it would be no injustice.3 And in this particular likewise they agree with the Ashariáns, who assert the same,4 and say that reward is a favour from God, and punishment a piece of justice; obedience being by them considered as a sign only of future reward, and transgression as a sign of future punishment.5

The Murjians.

5. The Murjians, who are said to be derived from the Jabarians.6 These teach that the judgment of every true believer, who hath been guilty of a grievous sin, will be deferred till the resurrection; for which reason they pass no sentence on him in this world, either of absolution or condemnation. They also hold that disobedience with Edition: current; Page: [262] faith hurteth not, and that, on the other hand, obedience with infidelity profiteth not.1 As to the reason of their name the learned differ, because of the different significations of its root, each of which they accommodate to some opinion of the sect. Some think them so called because they postpone works to intention, that is, esteem works to be inferior in degree to intention and profession of the faith;2 others because they allow hope, by asserting that disobedience with faith hurteth not, &c.; others take the reason of the name to be their deferring the sentence of the heinous sinner till the resurrection;3 and others their degrading of Ali, or removing him from the first degree to the fourth;4 for the Murjians, in some points relating to the office of Imám, agree with the Khárijites. This sect is divided into four species, three of which, according as they happen to agree in particular dogmas with the Khárijites, the Qadarians, or the Jabarians, are distinguished as Murjians of those sects, and the fourth is that of the pure Murjians, which last species is again subdivided into five others.5 The opinions of Muqátil and Báshar, both of a sect of the Murjians called Thaubánians, should not be omitted. The former asserted that disobedience hurts not him who professes the unity of God and is endued with faith, and that no true believer shall be cast into hell. He also taught that God will surely forgive all crimes besides infidelity, and that a disobedient believer will be punished at the day of resurrection on the bridge6 laid over the midst of hell, where the flames of hell-fire shall catch hold on him, and torment him in proportion to his disobedience, and that he shall then be admitted into paradise.7 The latter held that if God do cast the believers guilty of grievous sins into hell, yet they will be delivered thence after they shall have been sufficiently punished; but that Edition: current; Page: [263] it is neither possible nor consistent with justice that they should remain therein for ever; which, as has been observed, was the opinion of al Asharí.

The Khárijites.

III. The Khárijites are they who depart or revolt from the lawful prince established by public consent; and thence comes their name, which signifies revolters or rebels1 The first who were so called were twelve thousand men who revolted from Ali, after they had fought under him at the battle of Saffain, taking offence at his submitting the decision of his right to the Khalifat, which Muáwiyah disputed with him, to arbitration, though they themselves had first obliged him to it.2 These were also called Muhaqqimites, or Judiciarians, because the reason which they gave for their revolt was that Ali had referred a matter concerning the religion of God to the judgment of men, whereas the judgment, in such case, belonged only unto God.3 The heresy of the Khárijites consisted chiefly in two things:—1. In that they affirmed a man might be promoted to the dignity of Imám or prince though he was not of the tribe of Quraish, or even a freeman, provided he was a just and pious person, and endued with the other requisite qualifications; and also held that if the Imám turned aside from the truth, he might be put to death or deposed; and that there was no absolute necessity for any Imám at all in the world. 2. In that they charged Ali with sin, for having left an affair to the judgment of men which ought to have been determined by God alone; and went so far as to declare him guilty of infidelity and to curse him on that account.4 In the 38th year of the Hijra, which was the year following the revolt, all these Khárijites who persisted in their rebellion, to the number of four thousand, were cut to pieces by Ali, and, as several historians5 write, even to a Edition: current; Page: [264] man; but others say nine of them escaped, and that two fled into Omán, two into Karman, two into Sajistán, two into Mesopotamia, and one to Tel Mawrun, and that these propagated their heresy in those places, the same remaining there to this day.1 The principal sects of the Khárijites, besides the Muhaqqimites above mentioned, are six, which, though they greatly differ among themselves in other matters, yet agree in these, viz., that they absolutely reject Othmán and Ali, preferring the doing of this to the greatest obedience, and allowing marriages to be contracted on no other terms; that they account those who are guilty of grievous sins to be infidels: and that they hold it necessary to resist the Imám when he transgresses the law. One sect of them deserves more particular notice, viz.—

Peculiar views of the Wáidians.

The Wáidians so called from al Wáid, which signifies the threats denounced by God against the wicked These are the antagonists of the Murjians, and assert that he who is guilty of a grievous sin ought to be declared an infidel or apostate and will be eternally punished in hell, though he were a true believer;2 which opinion of theirs, as has been observed, occasioned the first rise of the Mutazilites. One Jaafar Ibn Mubashshar, of the sect of the Nudhámians, was yet more severe than the Wáidians, pronouncing him to be a reprobate and an apostate who steals but a grain of corn.3

The Shíahs and their distinguishing doctrines.

IV The Shíahs are the opponents of the Khárijites: their name properly signifies sectaries or adherents in general, but is peculiarly used to denote those of Ali Ibn Tálib, who maintain him to be lawful Khálífah and Imám, and that the supreme authority, both in spirituals and temporals, of right belongs to his descendants, notwithstanding they may be deprived of it by the injustice of others or their own fear. They also teach that the office Edition: current; Page: [265] of Imám is not a common thing, depending on the will of the vulgar, so that they may set up whom they please, but a fundamental affair of religion, and an article which the prophet could not have neglected or left to the fancy of the common people:1 nay some, thence called Imámians, go so far as to assert that religion consists solely in the knowledge of the true Imám.2 The principal sects of the Shíahs are five, which are subdivided into an almost innumerable number, so that some understand Muhammad’s prophecy of the seventy odd sects of the Shíahs only Their general opinions are—1. That the peculiar designation of the Imám, and the testimonies of the Qurán and Muhammad concerning him, are necessary points 2. That the Imáms ought necessarily to keep themselves free from light sins as well as more grievous. 3. That every one ought publicly to declare who it is that he adheres to, and from whom he separates himself, by word, deed, and engagement, and that herein there should be no dissimulation. But in this last point some of the Zaidians, a sect so named from Zaid, the son of Ali surnamed Zain al Ábidin, and great-grandson of Ali, dissented from the rest of the Shíahs3 As to other articles wherein they agreed not, some of them came pretty near to the notions of the Mutazilites, others to those of the Mushábbihites, and others to those of the Sunnís4 Among the latter of these Muhammad al Bákir, another son of Zain al Ábidín’s, seems to claim a place, for his opinion as to the will of God was that God willeth something in us and something from us, and that what he willeth from us he hath revealed to us; for which reason he thought it preposterous that we should employ our thoughts about these things which God willeth in us, and neglect those which he willeth from us: and as to God’s decree, he held that the way lay in the middle, Edition: current; Page: [266] and that there was neither compulsion nor free liberty.1 A tenet of the Khattábians, or disciples of one Abu’l Khattáb, is too peculiar to be omitted. These maintained paradise to be no other than the pleasures of this world, and hell-fire to be the pains thereof, and that the world will never decay: which proposition being first laid down, it is no wonder they went further, and declared it lawful to indulge themselves in drinking wine and whoring, and to do other things forbidden by the law, and also to omit doing the things commanded by the law.2

Their veneration of Ali and his descendants.

Many of the Shíahs carried their veneration for Ali and his descendants so far that they transgressed all bounds of reason and decency, though some of them were less extravagant than others. The Ghuláites, who had their name from their excessive zeal for their Imáms, were so highly transported therewith that they raised them above the degree of created beings, and attributed divine properties to them; transgressing on either hand, by deifying of mortal men, and by making God corporeal; for one while they liken one of their Imáms to God, and another while they liken God to a creature.3 The sects of these are various, and have various appellations in different countries.4 Abdallah Ibn Saba (who had been a Jew, and had asserted the same thing of Joshua the son of Nun) was the ringleader of one of them. This man gave the following salutation to Ali, viz., “Thou art Thou,” i.e., thou art God: and hereupon the Ghuláites became divided into several species, some maintaining the same thing, or something like it, of Ali, and others of some of one of his descendants, affirming that he was not dead, but would return again in the clouds and fill the earth with justice. But how much soever they disagreed in other things, they unanimously held a metempsychosis, and what they call al Hulúl, or the descent of God on his creatures, meaning Edition: current; Page: [267] thereby that God is present in every place, and speaks with every tongue, and appears in some individual person;1 and hence some of them asserted their Imáms to be prophets, and at length gods.2 The Nusairians and the Isháqians taught that spiritual substances appear in grosser bodies, and that the angels and the devil have appeared in this manner. They also assert that God hath appeared in the form of certain men; and since, after Muhammad, there hath been no man more excellent than Ali, and, after him, his sons have excelled all other men, that God hath appeared in their form, spoken with their tongue, and made use of their hands; for which reason, say they, we attribute divinity to them.3* And to support these blasphemies they tell several miraculous things of Ali, as his moving the gates of Khaibar,4 which they urge as a plain proof that he was endued with a particle of divinity and with sovereign power, and that he was the person in whose form God appeared, with whose hands he created all things, and with whose tongue he published his commands; and therefore they say he was in being before the creation of heaven and earth.5 In so impious a manner do they seem to wrest those things which are said in Scripture of Christ by applying them to Ali. These extravagant fancies of the Shíahs, however, in making their Imáms partakers of the divine nature, and the impiety of some of those Imáms in laying claim thereto, are so far from being peculiar to this sect, that Edition: current; Page: [268] most of the other Muhammadan sects are tainted with the same madness, there being many found among them, and among the Súfis especially, who pretend to be nearly related to heaven, and who boast or strange revelations before the credulous people.1 It may not be amiss to hear what al Ghazáli has written on this occasion. “Matters are come to that pass,” says he, “that some boast of an union with God, and of discoursing familiarly with him, without the interposition of a veil, saying, ‘It hath been thus said to us,’ and ‘We have thus spoken,’ affecting to imitate Husain al Halláj, who was put te death for some words of this kind uttered by him, he having said (as was proved by credible witnesses), ‘I am the Truth,’2 or A’bu Yazíd al Bastámi, of whom it is related that be often used the expression, Subháni,’ i.e., ‘Praise be unto me!’ But this way of talking is the cause of great mischief among the common people, insomuch that husbandmen; neglecting the tillage of their land, have pretended to the like privileges, nature being tickled with discourses of this kind, which furnish men with an excuse for leaving their occupations, under pretence of purifying their souls, and attaining I know not what degrees and conditions. Nor is there anything to hinder the most stupid fellows from forming the like pretensions and catching at such vain expressions; for whenever what they say is denied to be true, they fail not to reply that our unbelief proceeds from learning and logic; affirming learning to be a veil, and logic the work of the mind; whereas what they tell us appears only within, being discovered by the light of truth. But this is that truth the sparks whereof have flown into several countries and occasioned great mischiefs; so that it is more for the advantage of God’s true religion to put to death one of those who utter such things than to bestow life on ten others.”3 4

Edition: current; Page: [269]

Main points of difference between the Shiahs and the Sunnis

Thus far have we treated of the chief sects among the Muhammadans of the first ages, omitting to say anything of the more modern sects, because the same are taken little or no notice of by their own writers, and would be of no use to our present design.1 It may be proper, however, to mention a word or two of the great schism at this day subsisting between the Sunnis and the Shiahs, or partisans of Ali, and maintained on either side with implacable hatred and furious zeal. Though the difference arose at first on a political occasion, it has, notwithstanding, been so well improved by additional circumstances and the spirit of contradiction, that each party detest and anathematise the other as abominable heretics, and farther from the truth than either the Christians or the Jews.2 The chief points wherein they differ are—1. That the Shíahs reject Abu Baqr, Omar, and Othman, the three first Khalífahs, as usurpers and intruders; whereas the Sunnís acknowledge and respect them as rightful Imams. 2. The Shíahs prefer Ali to Muhammad, or at least esteem them both equal. but the Sunnís admit neither Alí nor any of the prophets to be equal to Muhammad. 3. The Sunnís charge the Shíahs with corrupting the Quran and neglecting its precepts, and the Shíahs retort the same charge on the Sunnís. 4. The Sunnís receive the Sunnat, or book of traditions of their prophet, as of canonical authority, whereas the Shíahs reject it as apocryphal and unworthy of credit. And to these disputes, and some others of less moment, is principally owing the antipathy which has long reigned between the Turks, who are Sunnis and the Persians who are of the sect of Ali. It seems strange that Spinoza, had he known of no other schism among the Muhammadans, should yet never have heard of one so publicly notorious as this between the Turks and Persians; but it is plain he did not, or he would Edition: current; Page: [270] never have assigned it as the reason of his preferring the order of the Muhammadan Church to that of the Roman, that there have arisen no schisms in the former since its birth.1

Muslim false prophets.

As success in any project seldom fails to draw in imitators, Muhammad’s having raised himself to such a degree of power and reputation by acting the prophet induced others to imagine they might arrive at the same height by the same means. His most considerable competitors in the prophetic office were Musailama and al Aswad, whom the Muhammadans usually call “the two liars”

Claim of Musailama to the prophetic office.

The former was of the tribe of Hunaifa, who inhabited the province of Yamáma, and a principal man among them. He headed an embassy sent by his tribe to Muhammad in the ninth year of the Hijra, and professed himself a Muslim;2 but on his return home, considering that he might possibly share with Muhammad in his power, the next year he set up for a prophet also, pretending to be joined with him in the commission to recall mankind from idolatry to the worship of the true God;3 and he published written revelations in imitation of the Qurán, of which Abulfaragius4 has preserved the following passage, viz.: “Now hath God been gracious unto her that was with child, and hath brought forth from her the soul which runneth between the peritonæum and the bowels.” Musailama, having formed a considerable party among those of Hunaifa, began to think himself upon equal terms with Muhammad, and sent him a letter, offering to go halves with him,5 in these words: “From Edition: current; Page: [271] Musailama the apostle of God, to Muhammad the apostle of God. Now let the earth be half mine and half thine.” But Muhammad, thinking himself too well established to need a partner. wrote him this answer: “From Muhammad the apostle of God, to Musailama the liar. The earth is God’s: he giveth the same for inheritance unto such of his servants as he pleaseth; and the happy issue shall attend those who fear him.”1 During the few months which Muhammad lived after this revolt, Musailama rather gained than lost ground, and grew very formidable, but Abu Baqr, his successor, in the eleventh year of the Hijra, sent a great army against him, under the command of that consummate general, Khálid Ibn al Walíd, who engaged Musailama in a bloody battle, wherein the false prophet, happening to be slain by Wahsha, the negro slave who had killed Hamza at Ohod, and by the same lance,2 the Muslims gained an entire victory ten thousand of the apostates being left dead on the spot, and the rest returning to Muhammadism.3

Al Aswad the second of “the two liars

Al Aswad, whose name was Aihala, was of the tribe of Ans, and governed that and the other tribes of Arabs descended from Madhhaj.4 This man was likewise an apostate from Muhammadism, and set up for himself the very year that Muhammad died.5 He was surnamed Dhu’l Hamár, or the master of the asses, because he used frequently to say, “The master of the asses is coming unto me;”6 and pretended to receive his revelations from two angels named Suhaiq and Shuraiq.7 Having a good hand at legerdemain and a smooth tongue, he gained mightily on the multitude by the strange feats which he showed them and the eloquence of his discourse;8 by these means he greatly increased his power, and having Edition: current; Page: [272] made himself master of Najrán and the territory of al Táyif,1 on the death of Badhán, the governor of Yaman for Muhammad, he seized that province also, killing Shahr, the son of Badhán, and taking to wife his widow, whose father, the uncle of Firúz the Dailamite, he had also slain.2 This news being brought to Muhammad, he sent to his friends and to those of Hamdán, a party of whom, conspiring with Qais Ibn’ Abd al Yaghúth, who bore al Aswad a grudge, and with Firuz and al Aswad’s wife, broke by night into his house, where Firúz surprised him and cut off his head. While he was despatching he roared like a bull; at which his guards came to the chamber door, but were sent away by his wife, who told them the prophet was only agitated by the divine inspiration. This was done the very night before Muhammad died. The next morning the conspirators caused the following proclamation to be made, viz., “I bear witness that Muhammad is the apostle of God, and that Aihala is a liar;” and letters were immediately sent away to Muhammad, with an account of what had been done; but a messenger from heaven outstripped them, and acquainted the prophet with the news, which he imparted to his companions but a little before his death, the letters themselves not arriving till Abu Baqr was chosen Khalífah. It is said that Muhammad, on this occasion, told those who attended him that before the day of judgment thirty more impostors, besides Musailama and al Aswad, should appear, and every one of them set up for a prophet. The whole time, from the beginning of al Aswad’s rebellion to his death, was about four months.3

In the same eleventh year of the Hijra, but after the death of Muhammad, as seems most probable, Tulaiha Ibn Khuwailid set up for a prophet, and Sajáj Bint al Mundár4 for a prophetess.

Edition: current; Page: [273]

Tulaiha and Sajáj.

Tulaiha was of the tribe of Asad, which adhered to him, together with great numbers of the tribes of Ghatfán and Tay. Against them likewise was Khálid sent, who engaged and put them to flight, obliging Tulaiha with his shattered troops to retire into Syria, where he stayed till the death of Abu Baqr; then he went to Omar and embraced Muhammadism in his presence, and having taken the oath of fidelity to him, returned to his own country and people.1

Sajáj, surnamed Omm Sádir, was of the tribe of Tamím, and the wife of Abu Qahdála, a soothsayer of Yamánia. She was followed not only by those of her own tribe, but by several others. Thinking a prophet the most proper husband for her, she went to Musailama, and married him, but after she had stayed with him three days, she left him and returned home.2 What became of her afterwards I do not find. Ibn Shohnah has given us part of the conversation which passed at the interview between those two pretenders to inspiration, but the same is a little too immodest to be translated.

In succeeding ages several impostors from time to time started up, most of whom quickly came to nothing, but some made a considerable figure, and propagated sects which continued long after their decease. I shall give a brief account of the most remarkable of them in order of time.

Hakím Ib Hásham and his practices.

In the reign of al Mahdi, the third Khalífah of the race of al Abbas, one Hakim Ibn Hásham,3 originally of Merú in Khurasán, who had been an under-secretary to Abu Muslim, the governor of that province, and afterwards turned soldier, passed thence into Mawaralnahr, where he gave himself out for a prophet. He is generally named by the Arab writers al Mukanna, and sometimes al Burkaí, that is, “the veiled,” because he used to cover his face with Edition: current; Page: [274] a veil or a gilded mask, to conceal his deformity, having lost an eye in the wars, and being otherwise of a despicable appearance; though his followers pretended he did it for the same reason as Moses did, viz., lest the splendour of his countenance should dazzle the eyes of the beholders. He made a great many proselytes at Nakhshab and Kash, deluding the people with several juggling performances, which they swallowed for miracles, and particularly by causing the appearance of a moon to rise out of a well for many nights together; whence he was also called, in the Persian tongue, Sázindah-mah, or the moonmaker. This impious impostor, not content with being reputed a prophet, arrogated divine honours to himself, pretending that the deity resided in his person; and the doctrine whereon he built this was the same with that of the Ghuláites above mentioned, who affirmed a transmigration or successive manifestation of the divinity through and in certain prophets and holy men, from Adam to these latter days (of which opinion was also Abu Muslim himself1); but the particular doctrine of al Mukanna was that the person in whom the deity had last resided was the aforesaid Abu Muslim, and that the same had, since his death, passed into himself. The faction of al Mukanna, who had made himself master of several fortified places in the neighbourhood of the cities above mentioned, growing daily more and more powerful, the Khalífah was at length obliged to send an army to reduce him at the approach whereof al Mukanna retired into one of his strongest fortresses, which he had well provided for a siege, and sent his emissaries abroad to persuade people that he raised the dead to life and knew future events. But being straitly besieged by the Khalífah’s forces, when he found there was no possibility for him to escape, he gave poison in wine to his whole family, and all that were with him in the castle; Edition: current; Page: [275] 1and when they were dead he burnt their bodies, together with their clothes, and all the provisions and cattle; and then, to prevent his own body being found, he threw himself into the flames, or, as others say, into a tub of aquafortis, or some other preparation, which consumed every part of him, except only his hair, so that when the besiegers entered the place they found no creature in it, save one of al Mukanna’s concubines, who, suspecting his design, had hid herself, and discovered the whole matter. This contrivance, however, failed not to produce the effect which the impostor designed among the remaining part of his followers; for he had promised them that his soul should transmigrate into the form of a grey-headed man riding on a greyish beast, and that after so many years he would return to them, and give them the earth for their possession: the expectation of which promise kept the sect in being for several ages after under the name of Mubayyidites, or, as the Persians call them, Safaid jámahghián, i.e., the clothed in white, because they wore their garments of that colour, in opposition, as is supposed, to the Khalífahs of the family of Abbás, whose banners and habits were black. The historians place the death of al Mukanna in the 162d or 163d year of the Hijra.2

Bábik and his cruelties

In the year of the Hijra 201, Bábik, surnamed al Khurrami and Khurramdín, either because he was of a certain district near Ardaibíl in Adhairbiján called Khurram, or because he instituted a merry religion, which is the signification of the word in Persian, began to take on him the title of a prophet. I do not find what doctrine he taught, but it is said he professed none of the religions then known in Asia. He gained a great number of devotees in Adhairbiján and the Persian Iraq, and grew powerful enough to wage war with the Khalífah al Mámún, whose troops he Edition: current; Page: [276] often beat, killing several of his generals, and one of them with his own hand; and by these victories he became so formidable that al Mútasim, the successor of al Mámún, was obliged to employ the forces of the whole empire against him, The general sent to reduce Bábik was Afshíd, who having overthrown him in battle, took his castles one after another with invincible patience, notwithstanding the rebels gave him great annoyance, and at last shut up the impostor in his principal fortress; which being taken, Bábik found means to escape thence in disguise, with some of his family and principal followers; but taking refuge in the territories of the Greeks, was betrayed in the following manner. Sahel, an Armenian officer, happening to know Bábik, enticed him, by offers of service and respect, into his power, and treated him as a mighty prince, till, when he sat down to eat, Sahel clapped himself down by him; at which Bábik being surprised, asked him how he dared to take that liberty unasked? “It is true, great king.” replied Sahel, “I have committed a fault; for who am I, that I should sit at your majesty’s table?” And immediately sending for a smith, he made use of this bitter sarcasm, “Stretch forth your legs, great king, that this man may put fetters on them.” After this Sahel sent him to Afshíd, though he had offered a large sum for his liberty, having first served him in his own kind by causing his mother, sister, and wife to be ravished before his face, for so Babik used to treat his prisoners Afshid having the arch rebel in his power, conducted him to al Mutasim, by whose order he was put to an ignominious and cruel death. This man had maintained his ground against the power of the Khalífahs for twenty years, and had cruelly put to death above two hundred and fifty thousand people, it being his custom never to spare man, woman, or child, either of the Muhammadans or their allies.1 The sectaries of Edition: current; Page: [277] Bábik which remained after his death seem to have been entirely dispersed, there being little or no mention made of them by historians.

Mahmúd Ibn Faraj.

About the year 235, one Mahmúd Ibn Faraj pretended to be Moses resuscitated, and played his part so well that several people believed on him, and attended him when he was brought before the Khalífah al Mutawaqqil. That prince, having been an ear-witness of his extravagant discourses, condemned him to receive ten buffets from every one of his followers, and then to be drubbed to deata; which was accordingly executed; and his disciples were imprisoned till they came to their right minds.1

The Karmatians and their founder Doctrines and practices.

The Karmatians, a sect which bore an inveterate malice against the Muhammadans, began first to raise disturbances in the year of the Hijra 278, and the latter end of the reign of al Mútamid. Their origin is not well known, out the common tradition is that a poor fellow, whom some call Karmata, came from Khuzistan to the villages near Kúfa, and there feigned great sanctity and strictness of life and that God had enjoined him to pray fifty times a day, pretending also to invite people to the obedience of a certain Imam of the family of Muhammad; and this way of life he continued till he had made a very great party out ot whom he chose twelve, as his apostles to govern the rest and to propagate his doctrines. But the governor of the province, finding men neglected their work, and their husbandry in particular, to say those fifty prayers a day, seized the fellow, and having put him into prison swore that he should die; which being overheard by a girl belonging to the governor, she, pitying the man at night took the key of the dungeon from under her master’s head as he slept, and having let the prisoner out, returned the key to the place whence she had it The next morning the governor found the bird flown, and the accident being publicly known, raised great admiration, Edition: current; Page: [278] his adherents giving it out that God had taken him into heaven. Afterwards he appeared in another province, and declared to a great number of people he had got about him that it was not in the power of any to do him hurt; notwithstanding which, his courage failing him, he retired into Syria, and was not heard of any more. His sect, however, continued and increased, pretending that their master had manifested himself to be a true prophet, and had left them a new law, wherein he had changed the ceremonies and form of prayer used by the Muslims, and introduced a new kind of fast, and that he had also allowed them to drink wine, and dispensed with several things commanded in the Qurán. They also turned the precepts of that book into allegory, teaching that prayer was the symbol of obedience to their Imám, and fasting that of silence, or concealing their dogmas from strangers: they also believed fornication to be the sin of infidelity, and the guilt thereof to be incurred by those who revealed the mysteries of their religion or paid not a blind obedience to their chief. They are said to have produced a book wherein was written (among other things), “In the name of the most merciful God. Al Faraj Ibn Othmán of the town of Nasrana saith that Christ appeared unto him in a human form and said, ‘Thou art the invitation: thou art the demonstration: thou art the camel: thou art the beast: thou art John the son of Zacharias: thou art the Holy Ghost.’ ”1 From the year above mentioned the Karmatians, under several leaders, gave almost continual disturbance to the Khalífahs and their Muhammadan subjects for several years, committing great disorders and outrages in Chaldea, Arabia, Syria, and Mesopotamia, and at length establishing a considerable principality, the power whereof was in its meridian in the reign of Abu Dháhir famous for his taking of Makkah, and the indignities by him offered to the temple Edition: current; Page: [279] there, but which declined soon after his time and came to nothing.1

The Ismaílians

To the Karmatians the Ismaílians of Asia were very near of kin, if they were not a branch of them. For these, who were also called al Muláhidah, or the Impious, and by the writers of the history of the holy wars, Assassins, agreed with the former in many respects; such as their inveterate malice against those of other religions, and especially the Muhammadans, their unlimited obedience to their prince, at whose command they were ready for assassinations, or any other bloody and dangerous enterprise, their pretended attachment to a certain Imám of the house of Ali, &c. These Ismaílians in the year 483 possessed themselves of al Jabál, in the Persian Iráq, under the conduct of Hasan Sabah, and that prince and his descendants enjoyed the same for a hundred and seventy-one years, till the whole race of them was destroyed by Holagu the Tartar.2

The Bátinites, which name is also given to the Ismaílians by some authors, and likewise to the Karmatians,3 were a sect which professed the same abominable principles, and were dispersed over several parts of the East.4 The word signifies Esoterics, or people of inward or hidden light or knowledge.

Abu’l Tayyab Ahmad prophetical career.

Abu’l Tayyab Ahmad, surnamed al Mutanabbi, of the tribe of Jóufa, is too famous on another account not to claim a place here. He was one of the most excellent poets among the Arabians, there being none besides Abu Tamám who can dispute the prize with him. His poetical inspiration was so warm and exalted that he either mistook it, or thought he could persuade others to believe it, to be prophetical, and therefore gave himself out to be Edition: current; Page: [280] a prophet indeed, and thence acquired his surname, by which he is generally known. His accomplishments were too great not to have some success; for several tribes of the Arabs of the deserts, particularly that of Qaláb, acknowledged him to be what he pretended. But Lúlú, governor in those parts for Akhshíd, king of Egypt and Syria, soon put a stop to the further progress of this new sect by imprisoning their prophet and obliging him to renounce his chimerical dignity; which having done, he regained his liberty, and applied himself solely to his poetry, by means whereof he got very considerable riches, being in high esteem at the courts of several princes. Al Mutanabbi lost his life, together with his son, on the bank of the Tigris, in defending the money which had been given him by Adad-ud-Daula sultan of Persia, against some Arabian robbers who demanded it of him, with which money he was returning to Kúfa, his native city. This accident happened in the year 354.1

Bába and his sect.

The last pretender to prophecy I shall now take notice of is one who appeared in the city of Amasia, in Natolia, in the year 638, and by his wonderful feats sed ced a great multitude of people there. He was by nation a Turkmán, and called himself Bába, and had a disciple called Isaac, whom he sent about to invite those of his own nation to join him. Isaac accordingly, coming to the territory of Sumaisat, published his commission, and prevailed on many to embrace his master’s sect, especially among the Turkmáns; so that at last he had six thousand horse at his heels, besides foot. With these Bába and his disciple made open war on all who would not cry out with them, “There is no God but God; Bába is the apostle of God;” and they put great numbers of Muhammadans as well as Christians to the sword in those parts, till at length both Muhammadans and Christians, joining together, gave them battle, and having entirely routed Edition: current; Page: [281] them put them all to the sword, except their two chiefs, who being taken alive, had their heads struck off by the execntioner.1

I could mention several other impostors of the same kind which have arisen among the Muhammadans since their prophet’s time, and very near enough to complete the number foretold by him; but I apprehend the reader is by this time tired as well as myself, and shall therefore, here conclude this discourse, which may be thought already too long for an introduction.*

Edition: current; Page: [283] Edition: current; Page: [284] Edition: current; Page: [285]

THE QURÁN.

Edition: current; Page: [286] Edition: current; Page: [287]

CHAPTER I.: ENTITLED SURAT UL FÁTIHAT (THE PREFACE).
Revealed at Makkah.

INTRODUCTION.

The chapters of the Qurán are entitled Suras. Muir, in his Life of Mahomet, Introduction, p. 7, says, “Weil has a learned note (Mohammed, p. 361) on the meaning of the word Sura as used by Mahomet. It was probably at first employed to designate any portion of his revelation, or a string of verses; but it soon afterwards, even during Mahomet’s lifetime, acquired its present technical meaning.”

This chapter is held in the highest esteem among all Muslims, “who,” says Sale, “give it several other honourable titles; as the chapter of prayer, of praise, of thanksgiving, of treasure, &c. They esteem it as the quintessence of the whole Qurán, and often repeat it in their devotions, both public and private, as the Christians do the Lord’s Prayer”

The author of the Tafsír-i-Raufi declares that “he who has read the Fátihat has, as it were, read the whole Qurán.” According to this author, its separate clauses contain the sum of the divine attributes, ascriptions of praise, promises to believers, and threatenings of judgment against infidels, &c., as contained in the Qurán. Muslims always say Amen after this prayer.

The following transliteration will give the English reader an idea of the rhyming prose in which the Qurán is written:—

Edition: current; Page: [(288)]

“Bismîllá-bi rahmáni rrahím

Al-hamdúlilláhi Rabbi’lálumm

Arrahmani’rrahim;

Méliki yomi-d-din.

Iyáka Nábúdú waiyáka nastám.

Ihdina’ssirat al mústakím;

Sirát alazína au niámta alaihim,

Ghairi-’l-mághdhúbi alaihim waladhálina.”

Muir regards this as the daily prayer of Muhammad during his search for light, previous to his assumption of the prophetic office. “It was afterwards recast to suit the requirements of public worship.” - Life of Mahomet, vol. i. p. 59.

Muslims are here met with a difficulty as to the divine authorship of their Scriptures, arising out of the form of address in this chapter. The orthodox belief in regard to the origin of the Qurán is that it was copied literally from the divine original, which is engraved on the Luh-í-Mohfúz, or Preserved Table close by the throne of God. The speaker throughout is God. It is God’s Word. But this chapter contains a prayer apparently suitable for sinful men groping after divine light and heavenly guidance. As the text stands, the chapter clearly claims a human origin, and would express very well the desire of the Makkan reformer. Muslim commentators, however, avoid this difficulty by explaining this chapter as an inspired model of prayer, revealed to instruct the faithful how to pray, and they understand it as introduced by the word “say.” Abdul Qádir says, “God has enunciated this chapter in the language of his servants, in order that they might thus address him.”

To us it seems that in the mind of a Muhammadan, boasting of the absolute perfection and purity of the text of the Qurán, and stickling for the very jots and tittles of the text, the omission of this word—a word without which the status of this whole chapter is changed—should arouse serious objection to such a mode of avoiding a difficulty.

As to the prayer itself, the Christian reader cannot but admire its spirit. It is throughout earnest and devout. Interpreting its language in a Christian manner, any one might respond to it “Amen”

Supposing this prayer to express the feelings and aspirations of the Makkan reformer at the time it was written, we could hardly regard him as a deliberate impostor. Had he continued his search after truth in the spirit of this prayer, how different would have been his religion from that which he proclaimed in later years!

Concerning the formula, “In the name of the most merciful God,” Savary says, “It is prefixed to all the chapters (with the exception Edition: current; Page: [(289)] of one). It is expressly recommended in the Qurán. The Muhammadans pronounce it whenever they slaughter an animal, and at the commencement of their reading, and of all important actions. Giaab, one of their celebrated authors, says that when these words were sent down from heaven, the clouds fled on the side of the east, the winds were lulled, the sea was moved, the animals erected their ears to listen, and the devils were precipitated from the celestial spheres.”

It is almost certain that Muhammad horrowed the idea of the Bismilluh from the Jews and Sabains. The latter intróduced their writings with the words, “Banám i yazdàn bakhshaishgar dádár,” i.e., In the name of God the merciful and the just.

Rodwell says, “This formula is of Jewish origin. It was in the first instance taught to the Koreisch by Omayah of Taief, the poet, who was a contemporary with, but somewhat older than, Muhammad, and who, during his mercantile journeys into Arabia Petræa and Syria, had made himself acquainted with the sacred books and doctrines of Jews and Christians. Mahammad adopted and constantly used it.”

The two terms, “Rahman,” the merciful, and “Rahím,” the blessed, have nearly the same meaning. The Tafsír-i-Raufi explains the former as only applicable to God, while the latter may be applied to the creature as well as to God. Others explain the former epithet as applicable to God as exercising mercy towards his creatures, the latter as applicable to the mercy inherent in God.

IN THE NAME OF THE MOST MERCIFUL GOD.

First Manzil

First Sipara. R 1/1.

∥ (1) Praise be to God, the Lord of all creatures; (2) the most merciful, (3) the king of the day of judgment. (4) Thee do we worship, and of thee do we beg assistance. (5) Direct us in the right way, (6) in the way of those Edition: current; Page: [(290)] to whom thou hast been gracious; (7) not of those against whom thou art incensed, nor of those who go astray.

Edition: current; Page: [(291)]

CHAPTER II.: ENTITLED SURAT UL BAQR (THE COW).
Revealed partly at Makkah and partly at Madína.

INTRODUCTION.

“The title of this chapter was occasioned by the story of the red heifer” (in vers. 66-73) —Sale.

“In this Sura are collected the passages composed in the first two or three years of Mahomet’s stay at Medina. The greater part relates to the Jews, with biblical and rabbinical stories, notice of the change of the Kibla, &c. The disaffected citizens are also denounced in it. There is likewise much matter of a legislative character, produced during the first Medina stage, with additions and interpolations from the revelations of later stages.”—Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. iii, Appendix.

The following is a brief analysis of this chapter, based for the most part on Noeldeke’s Origine et Compositions Surarum Quranicarum ipsiusque Quráni, showing Makkan and Madina revelations, probable date of composition, and principal topics treated.

Makkan Revelations.

These are found in verses 21-38, 164-172, and probably 254-257, 285, and 286. They belong to the period of Muhammad’s mission previous to the Hijra.

Madina Revelations.

These make up the bulk of the chapter, and are found in verses 1-20, 39-153, 173-253, and 258-284.

As to the date of composition, verses 1-20, 39-153, 173-185, 203-253, and 258-284, belong to the interval between the Hijra and the early part of a.h. 2. Verses 154-163 were revealed soon after the battle of Badr, a.h. 2. Verses 186, 187, belong to a.h. 3, and Edition: current; Page: [(292)] verses 188-202 must be referred to a period shortly before the pilgrimage to Makkah in a.h. 7.

Analysis of the Chapter as to its Teaching.

Unbelievers and hypocrites reproved | verses | 1-20
Exhortation to the worship of the true God | verses | 21-38
Jews and Christians urged to accept the claim of Muhammad to be a prophet of God | verses | 39-102
The opposition of Jews and Christians to Muhammad’s prophetic pretensions combated | verses | 102-112
The doctrine of abrogation enunciated | verses | 113
A Qibla declared to be unnecessary | verses | 115
The Jews denounced and the religion of Abraham declared to be the true Islám | verses | 116-141
The Jews finally abandoned and the Arabs accepted by the adoption of Makkah as the Qibla of Islám | verses | 142-153
The bereaved friends of those slain at Badr comforted | verses | 154-163
Makkans exhorted to faith in God, and directed to observe the law respecting forbidden meats | verses | 164-172
Law concerning lawful and unlawful food (delivered at Madina) | verses | 173-176
The sum of Muslim duty | verses | 177
The law of retaliation | verses | 178, 179
The law concerning bequests | verses | 180-182
The law concerning fasting | verses | 183-185
The fast of Ramadhán | verses | 186, 187
The pilgrimage to Makkah and war for the faith | verses | 188-202
Hypocrites and true believers contrasted | verses | 203-206
Exhortation to a hearty acceptance of Islám | verses | 207, 208
The doom of infidels pronounced | verses | 209
The Jews reproached | verses | 210-212
Suffering to be patiently endured | verses | 213
Sundry laws relating to almsgiving, war, wine, lots, orphans, marriage, women, oaths, and divorce | verses | 214-242
The duty of warring in defence of religion enjoined by precept, and illustrated by the history of former prophets | verses | 243-253
The Throne Verse | verses | 254-257
The doctrine of the resurrection illustrated | verses | 258-260
Exhortation and encouragement to almsgiving | verses | 261-274
Usury forbidden | verses | 275-277
The law concerning contracts and debts | verses | 278-284
The prophet’s confession and prayer | verses | 285, 286

Edition: current; Page: [(293)]

IN THE NAME OF THE MOST MERCIFUL GOD.

R 1/1.

∥ (1) A. L. M. (2) There is no doubt in this book; it is a direction to the pious, (3) who believe in the mysteries of faith, who observe the appointed times of prayer, and distribute alms out of what we have bestowed on them, (4) and who believe in that revelation, which hath been sent down unto thee and that which hath been sent down Edition: current; Page: [(294)] unto the prophets before thee, and have firm assurance of the life to come: (5) these are directed by their Lord, and they shall prosper. (6) As for the unbelievers, it will be equal to them whether thou admonish them, or do not admonish them; they will not believe. (7) God hath sealed up their hearts and their hearing; a dimness covereth their sight, and they shall suffer a grievous punishment.

R 2/2.

∥ (8) There are some who say, We believe in God, and the last day; but are not really believers: (9) they seek Edition: current; Page: [(295)] to deceive God, and those who do believe, but they deceive themselves only, and are not sensible thereof. (10) There is an infirmity in their hearts, and God hath increased that infirmity; and they shall suffer a most painful punishment, because they have disbelieved. (11) When one saith unto them, Act not corruptly in the earth; they reply, Verily we are men of integrity. (12) Are not they themselves corrupt doers? but they are not sensible thereof. (13) And when one saith unto them, Believe ye as others believe; they answer, Shall we believe as fools believe? Are not they themselves fools? but they know it not. (14) When they meet those who believe, they say, We do believe: but when they retire privately to their devils, they say, We really hold with you, and only mock at those people: (15) God shall mock at them, and continue them in their impiety; they shall wander in confusion. (16) These are the men who have purchased error at the price of true direction: but their traffic hath not been gainful, neither have they been rightly directed. (17) They are like unto one who kindleth a Edition: current; Page: [(296)] fire, and when it hath enlightened all around him, God taketh away their light and leaveth them in darkness, they sball not see; (18) they are deaf, dumb, and blind, therefore will they not repent. (19) Or like a stormy cloud from heaven, fraught with darkness, thunder, and lightning, they put their fingers in their ears because of the noise of the thunder, for fear of death; God encompasseth the infidels: (20) the lightning wanteth but little of taking away their sight; so often as it enlighteneth them, they walk therein, Edition: current; Page: [(297)] but when darkness cometh on them, they stand still: and if God so pleased he would certainly deprive them of their hearing and their sight, for God is mighty.

R 3/3.

∥ (21) O men of Makkah, serve your Lord who hath created you, and those who have been before you: peradventure ye will fear him; (22) who hath spread the earth as a bed for you, and the heaven as a covering, and hath caused water to descend from heaven, and thereby produced fruits for your sustenance. Set not up therefore any equals unto God, against your own knowledge. (23) If ye be in doubt concerning that revelation which we have sent down unto our servant, produce Edition: current; Page: [(298)] a chapter like unto it, and call upon your witnesses besides God, if ye say truth. (24) But if ye do it not, nor shall ever be able to do it; justly fear the fire whose fuel is men and stones, prepared for the unbelievers. (25) But bear good tidings unto those who believe, and do good works, that they shall have gardens watered by rivers; so often as they eat of the fruit thereof for sustenance, they shall say, This is what we have formerly eaten of; and they shall be supplied with several sorts of fruit having a mutual resemblance to one another. There shall they enjoy wives subject to no impurity, and there shall they continue for Edition: current; Page: [(299)] ever. (26) Moreover, God will not be ashamed to propound in a parable a gnat, or even a more despicable thing: for they who believe will know it to be the truth from their Lord; but the unbelievers will say, What meaneth God by this parable? he will thereby mislead many, and will direct many thereby: but he will not mislead any thereby, except the transgressors, (27) who make void the covenant of God after the establishing thereof, and cut in sunder that which God hath commanded to be joined, and act corruptly in the earth: they shall perish. (28) How is it that ye believe not in God? Since ye were dead, and he gave you life; he will hereafter cause you to die, and will again restore you to life; then shall ye return unto him. (29) It is he who hath created for you whatsoever is on earth, and then set his mind to the ereation of heaven, Edition: current; Page: [(300)] and formed it into seven heavens; he knoweth all things.

R 4/4.

∥ (30) When thy Lord said unto the angels, I am going to place a substitute on earth; they said, Wilt thou place there one who will do evil therein, and shed blood? but we celebrate thy praise, and sanctify thee. God answered, Verily I know that which ye know not: (31) and he taught Adam the names of all things, and then proposed them to the angels, and said, Declare unto me the names of these things if ye say truth. (32) They answered, Praise be unto thee; we have no knowledge but what thou teachest us, for thou art knowing and wise. (33) God Edition: current; Page: [(301)] said, O Adam, tell them their names. And when he had told them their names, God said, Did I not tell you that I know the secrets of heaven and earth, and know that which ye discover, and that which ye conceal? (34) And when we said unto the angels, Worship Adam; they all worshipped him, except Iblis, who refused, and was puffed up with pride, and became of the number of unbelievers. Edition: current; Page: [(302)] (35) And we said, O Adam, dwell thou and thy wife in the garden, and eat of the fruit thereof plentifully wherever ye will; but approach not this tree, lest ye become of the number of the transgressors. But Satan caused them to forfeit paradise, and turned them out of the state of happiness wherein they had been; whereupon we said, Get ye Edition: current; Page: [(303)] down, the one of you an enemy unto the other; and there shall be a dwelling-place for you on earth, and a provision for a season. (36) And Adam learned words of prayer from his Lord, and God turned unto him, for he is easy to be reconciled and merciful. (37) We said, Get ye all down from hence; hereafter shall there come unto you a direction from me, and whoever shall follow my direction, on them shall no fear come, neither shall they be grieved; (38) but they who shall be unbelievers, and accuse our Edition: current; Page: [(304)] signs of falsehood, they shall be the companions of hell-fire, therein shall they remain for ever.

R 5/5.

∥ (39) O children of Israel, remember my favour wherewith I have favoured you; and perform your covenant with me, and I will perform my covenant with you; and revere me: (40) and believe in the revelation which I have sent down, confirming that which is with you, and be not the first who believe not therein, neither exchange my signs for a small price; and fear me (41) Clothe not the truth with vanity, neither conceal the truth against your own knowledge; Edition: current; Page: [(305)] (42) observe the stated times of prayer, and pay your legal alms, and bow down yourselves with those who bow down. (43) Will ye command men to do justice, and forget your own souls? yet ye read the book of the law: do ye not therefore understand? (44) Ask help with perseverance Edition: current; Page: [(306)] and prayer; this indeed is grievous unless to the humble, (45) who seriously think they shall meet their Lord, and that to him they shall return.

R 6/6.

∥ (46) O children of Israel, remember my favour wherewith I have favoured you, and that I have preferred you above all nations; (47) dread the day wherein one soul shall not make satisfaction for another soul, neither shall any intercession be accepted from them, nor shall any compensation be received, neither shall they be helped. (48) Remember when we delivered you from the people of Pharaoh, who grievously oppressed you, they slew your male children, and let your females Edition: current; Page: [(307)] live: therein was a great trial from your Lord. (49) And when we divided the sea for you and delivered you, and drowned Pharaoh’s people while ye looked on. (50) And when we treated with Moses forty nights; then ye took the calf for your God, and did evil; (51) yet afterwards we forgave you, that peradventure ye might give thanks. (52) And when we gave Moses the book of the law, and Edition: current; Page: [(308)] the distinction between good and evil, that peradventure ye might be directed. (53) And when Moses said unto his people, O my people, verily ye have injured your own souls, by your taking the calf for your God; therefore be turned unto your Creator, and slay those among you who have been guilty of that crime: this will be better for you Edition: current; Page: [(309)] in the sight of your Creator: and thereupon he turned unto you, for he is easy to be reconciled, and merciful. (54) And when ye said, O Moses, we will not believe thee, until we see God manifestly; therefore a punishment came upon you, while ye looked on; (55) then we raised you to life after ye had been dead, that peradventure ye might give thanks. (56) And we caused clouds to overshadow you, and manna and quails to descend upon you, saying, Eat of the good things which we have given you for food: and they injured not us, but injured Edition: current; Page: [(310)] their own souls. (57) And when we said, Enter into this city, and eat of the provisions thereof plentifully as ye will; and enter the gate worshipping, and say, Forgiveness! we will pardon you your sins, and give increase unto the well-doers. (58) But the ungodly changed the expression into another, different from what had been spoken unto them; and we sent down upon the ungodly indignation from heaven, because they had transgressed.

R 7/7.

(59) And when Moses asked drink for his people, we said, Strike the rock with thy rod; and there gushed thereout twelve fountains according to the number of the tribes, and Edition: current; Page: [(311)] all men knew their respective drinking-place. Eat and drink of the bounty of God, and commit not evil on the earth, acting unjustly. (60) And when ye said, O Moses, we will by no means be satisfied with one kind of food; pray unto thy Lord therefore for us, that he would produce for us of that which the earth bringeth forth, herbs and cucumbers, and garlic, and lentils, and onions; Moses answered, Will ye exchange that which is better, for that which is worse? Get ye down into Egypt, for there shall ye find what ye desire: and they were smitten with vileness and misery, and drew on themselves indignation from God. This they suffered, because they believed not in the signs of God, and killed the prophets unjustly; this, because they rebelled and transgressed.

R 8/8.

∥ (61) Surely those who believe, and those who Judaize, Edition: current; Page: [(312)] and Christians, and Sabians, whoever believeth in God, and the last day, and doth that which is right, they shall have their reward with their Lord; there shall come no fear on Edition: current; Page: [(313)] them, neither shall they be grieved. (62) Call to mind also when we accepted your covenant, and lifted up the mountain of Sinai over you, saying, Receive the law which we have given you, with a resolution to keep it, and remember that which is contained therein, that ye may beware. (63) After this ye again turned back, so that if it had not been for God’s indulgence and mercy towards you, ye had certainly been destroyed. (64) Moreover ye know what befell those of your nation who transgressed on the Sabbath day; We said unto them, Be ye changed into apes, driven away from the society of men. (65) And we Edition: current; Page: [(314)] made them an example unto those who were contemporary with them, and unto those who came after them, and a warning to the pious. (66) And when Moses said unto his people, Verily God commandeth you to sacrifice a cow; they answered. Dost thou make a jest of us! Moses said, God forbid that I should be one of the foolish. Edition: current; Page: [(315)] (67) They said, Pray for us unto thy Lord, that he would show us what cow it is. Moses answered, He saith, She is neither an old cow, nor a young heifer, but of a middle age between both: do ye therefore that which ye are commanded. (68) They said, Pray for us unto thy Lord, that he would show us what colour she is of. Moses answered, He saith, She is a red cow, intensely red, her colour rejoiceth the beholders. (69) They said, Pray for us unto thy Lord, that he would further show us what cow it is, for several cows with us are like one another and we, if God please, will be directed. (70) Moses answered, He saith, She is a cow not broken to plough the earth, or water Edition: current; Page: [(316)] the field, a sound one, there is no blemish in her. They said, Now hast thou brought the truth. Then they sacrificed her; yet they wanted but little of leaving it undone.

R 9/9. Nisf.

∥ (71) And when ye slew a man, and contended among yourselves concerning him, God brought forth to light that which ye concealed. (72) For we said, Strike the dead body with part of the sacrificed cow: so God raiseth the dead to life, and showeth you his signs, that peradventure ye may understand. (73) Then were your hearts hardened after this, even as stones, and exceeding them in hardness: for from some stones have rivers bursted forth, others have been rent in sunder, and water hath issued from them, and others have fallen down for fear of God. But God is not regardless of that which ye do. (74) Do Edition: current; Page: [(317)] ye therefore desire that the Jews should believe you? yet a part of them heard the word of God, and then perverted it, after they had understood it, against their own conscience. (75) And when they meet the true believers, they say, We believe: but when they are privately assembled together, they say, Will ye acquaint them with what God hath revealed unto you, that they may dispute with you concerning it in the presence of your Lord? Do ye not therefore understand? (76) Do not they know that God knoweth that which they conceal as well as that which they publish? ∥ (77) But there are illiterate men Edition: current; Page: [(318)] among them, who know not the book of the law, but only lying stories, although they think otherwise. (78) And woe unto them, who transcribe corruptly the book of the Law with their hands, and then say, This is from God: that they may sell it for a small price. Therefore woe unto them because of that which their hands have written; and woe unto them for that which they have gained. (79) They say, The fire of hell shall not touch us but for a certain number of days. Answer, Have ye received any promise from God to that purpose? for God will not act contrary to his promise: or do ye speak concerning God that which ye know not? (80) Verily whoso doth evil, and Edition: current; Page: [(319)] is encompassed by his iniquity, they shall be the companions of hell-fire, they shall remain therein forever: (81) but they who believe and do good works, they shall be the companions of paradise, they shall continue therein forever.

R 10/10.

∥ (82) Remember also, when we accepted the covenant of the children of Israel, saying, Ye shall not worship any other except God, and ye shall show kindness to your parents and kindred, and to orphans, and to the poor, and speak that which is good unto men, and be constant at prayer, and give alms. Afterwards ye turned back, Edition: current; Page: [(320)] except a few of you, and retired afar off. (83) And when we accepted your covenant, saying, Ve shall not shed your brother’s blood, nor dispossess one another of your habitations; then ye confirmed it, and were witnesses thereto. (84) Afterwards ye were they who slew one another, and turned several of your brethren out of their houses, mutually assisting each other against them with injustice and enmity; but if they come captives unto you, ye redeem them: yet it is equally unlawful for you to dispossess them. Do ye therefore believe in part of the book of the law, and reject other part thereof? But whoso among you doth this, shall have no other reward than shame in this life, and on the day of resurrection they shall be sent to a most grievous punishment; for God is not regardless of that which ye do. (85) These are they who have purchased this present life, at the price of that which is to come; wherefore their punishment shall not be mitigated, neither shall they be helped.

R 11/11.

∥ (86) We formerly delivered the book of the law unto Edition: current; Page: [(321)] Moses, and caused apostles to succeed him, and gave evident miracles to Jesus the son of Mary, and strengthened him with the holy spirit. Do ye therefore, whenever an apostle cometh unto you with that which your souls desire not, proudly reject him, and accuse Edition: current; Page: [(322)] some of imposture, and slay others? (87) The Jews say, Our hearts are uncircumcised: but God hath cursed them with their infidelity; therefore few shall believe. (88) And when a book came unto them from God, confirming the scriptures which were with them, although they had before prayed for assistance against those who believed not, yet when that came unto them which they knew to be from God, they would not believe therein: therefore the curse of God shall be on the infidels. (89) For a vile price have they sold their souls, that they should not Edition: current; Page: [(323)] believe in that which God hath sent down; out of envy, because God sendeth down his favours to such of his servants as he pleaseth: therefore they brought on themselves indignation on indignation; and the unbelievers shall suffer an ignominious punishment. (90) When one saith unto them, Believe in that which God hath sent down; they answer, We believe in that which Edition: current; Page: [(324)] hath been sent down unto us: and they reject what hath been revealed since, although it be the truth, confirming that which is with them. Say, Why therefore have ye slain the prophets of God in times past, if ye be true believers? (91) Moses formerly came unto you with evident signs, but ye afterwards took the calf for your god and did wickedly. (92) And when we accepted your covenant, and lifted the mountain of Sinai over you, saying, Receive the law which we have given you, with a resolution to perform it, and hear; they said, We have heard, and have rebelled: and they were made to drink down the calf into their hearts for their unbelief. Say, A grievous thing hath your faith commanded you, if ye be true believers? (93) Say, If the future mansion with God be prepared peculiarly for you, exclusive of the rest of mankind, wish for death, if ye say truth; (94) but they will never wish for it, because of that which their hands have sent before them; God knoweth the wicked-doers; Edition: current; Page: [(325)] (95) and thou shalt surely find them of all men the most covetous of life, even more than the idolaters: one of them would desire his life to be prolonged a thousand years, but none shall reprieve himself from punishment, that his life may be prolonged: God seeth that which they do.

R 12/12.

∥ (96) Say, Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel (for he hath caused the Qurán to descend on thy heart, by the permission of God, confirming that which was before revealed, a direction, and good tidings to the faithful); (97) whosoever is an enemy to God, or his angels, or his apostles, or to Gabriel, or Michael, verily God is an enemy to the unbelievers. (98) And now we have sent down unto thee evident Edition: current; Page: [(326)] signs, and none will disbelieve them but the evil-doers. (99) Whenever they make a covenant, will some of them reject it? yea, the greater part of them do not believe. (100) And when there came unto them an apostle from God, confirming that scripture which was with them, some of those to whom the scriptures were given cast the book of God behind their backs, as if they knew it not: (101) and they followed the device which the devils devised against the kingdom of Solomon, and Solomon was not an unbeliever; but the devils believed not; they taught men sorcery, and that which was sent down to the two angels at Babel, Hárút and Márút; yet those two taught no man until they had said, Verily we are a temptation, therefore be not an Edition: current; Page: [(327)] unbeliever. So men learned from those two a charm by which they might cause division between a man and his wife; but they hurt none thereby, unless by God’s permission, and they learned that which would hurt them, and not profit them; and yet they knew that he who bought that art should have no part in the life to come, and woful is the price for which they have sold their souls, if they knew it. (102) But if they had believed, and feared God, verily the reward they would have had from God would have been better, if they had known it.

Suls.

R 13/13.

∥ (103) O true believers, say not to our apostle, “Raina;” but say “Undhúrna;” and hearken: the infidels shall suffer a grievous punishment. (104) It is not the desire of the unbelievers, Edition: current; Page: [(328)] either among those unto whom the scriptures have been given, or among the idolaters, that any good should be sent down unto you from your Lord: but God will appropriate his mercy unto whom he pleaseth; for God is exceeding beneficent. (105) Whatever verse we shall abrogate, or cause thee to forget, we will bring a better than Edition: current; Page: [(329)] it, or one like unto it. Dost thou not know that God is almighty? (106) Dost thou not know that unto God belongeth the kingdom of heaven and earth? neither have ye any protector or helper except God. (107) Will ye require of your apostle according to that which was formerly required of Moses? but he that hath exchanged faith Edition: current; Page: [(330)] for infidelity, hath already erred from the straight way. (108) Many of those unto whom the scriptures have been given, desire to render you again unbelievers, after ye have believed; out of envy from their souls, even after the truth is become manifest unto them; but forgive them, and avoid them, till God shall send his command; for God is omnipotent. (109) Be constant in prayer, and give alms; and what good ye have sent before for your souls, ye shall find it with God; surely God seeth that which ye do. (110) They say, Verily none shall enter paradise, except they who are Jews or Christians: this is their wish. Say, Produce your proof of this, if ye speak truth. (111) Nay, but he who resigneth himself to God, and doth that which is right, he shall have his reward Edition: current; Page: [(331)] with his Lord: there shall come no fear on them, neither shall they be grieved.

R 14/14.

∥ (112) The Jews say, The Christians are grounded on nothing; and the Christians say, The Jews are grounded on nothing; yet they both read the scriptures. So likewise say they who know not the scripture, according to their saying. But God shall judge between them on the day of the resurrection, concerning that about which they now disagree. (113) Who is more unjust than he who prohibiteth the temples of God, that his name should be remembered therein, and who hasteth to destroy them? Those men cannot enter therein, but with fear: (114) they shall Edition: current; Page: [(332)] have shame in this world, and in the next a grievous punishment. (115) To God belongeth the east and the west; therefore whithersoever ye turn yourselves to pray, there is the face of God; for God is omnipresent and omniscient. (116) They say, God hath begotten children: God forbid! To him belongeth whatever is in heaven, and on earth; (117) all is possessed by him, the Creator of Edition: current; Page: [(333)] heaven and earth; and when he dreceeth a thing, he only saith unto it, Be, and it is. (118) And they who know not the scriptures say, Unless God speak unto us, or thou show us a sign, we will not believe. So said those before them, according to their saying: their hearts resemble each other. We have already shown manifest signs unto people who firmly believe; (119) we have sent thee in truth, a bearer of good tidings and a preacher; and thou shalt not be questioned concerning the companions of hell. (120) But the Jews will not be pleased with thee, neither the Christians, until thou follow their religion; say, The direction of God is the true direction. And verily if thou follow their desires, after the knowledge which hath been given thee, thou shalt find no patron or protector against God. (121) They to whom we have Edition: current; Page: [(334)] given the book of the Qurán, and who read it with its true reading, they believe therein; and whoever believeth not therein, they shall perish.

R 15/15.

∥ (122) O children of Israel, remember my favour wherewith I have favoured you, and that I have preferred you before all nations; (123) and dread the day wherein one soul shall not make satisfaction for another soul, neither shall any compensation be accepted from them, nor shall any intercession avail, neither shall they be helped. (124) Remember when the Lord tried Abraham by certain words, which he fulfilled: God said, Verily I will constitute thee a model of religion unto mankind; he answered, And also of my posterity; God said, My covenant doth not comprehend the ungodly. Edition: current; Page: [(335)] (125) And when we appointed the holy house of Makkah to be a place of resort for mankind, and a place of security; and said, Take the station of Abraham for a place of prayer; and we covenanted with Abraham and Ismaíl, that they should cleanse my house for those who should compass it, and those who should be devoutly assiduous there, and those who should bow down and worship. (126) Edition: current; Page: [(336)] And when Abraham said, Lord, make this a territory of security, and bounteously bestow fruits on its inhabitants, such of them as believe in God and the last day; God answered, And whoever believeth not, I will bestov on him little; afterwards I will drive him to the punishment of hell-fire; an ill journey shall it be! (127) And when Abraham and Ismaíl raised the foundations of the house, saying, Lord, accept it from us, for thou art he who heareth and knoweth: (128) Lord, make us also resigned unto thee, and of our posterity a people resigned unto thee, and show us our holy ceremonies, and be turned unto us, for thou art easy to be reconciled, and merciful. (129) Lord, send them likewise an apostle from among them, who may declare thy signs unto them, and teach them the book of the Qurán and wisdom, and may purify them; for thou art mighty and wise.

Edition: current; Page: [(337)]

R 16/16.

∥ (130) Who will be averse to the religion of Abraham, but he whose mind is infatuated? Surely we have chosen him in this world, and in that which is to come he shall be one of the righteous. (131) When his Lord said unto him, Resign thyself unto me; he answered, I have resigned myself unto the Lord of all creatures. (132) And braham bequeathed this religion to his children, and Jacob did the same, saying, My children, verily God hath chosen this religion for you, therefore die not, unless ye also be resigned. (133) Were ye present when Jacob was at the point of death? when he said to his sons, Whom will ye worship after me? They answered, We will worship thy God, and the God of thy fathers Abraham, and Ismaíl, and Isaac, one God, and to him will we be resigned. (134) That people are now passed away, they have what they have gained, and ye shall have what ye gain; and ye shall not be questioned concerning that which they have done. (135) They say, Become Jews or Christians that ye may be directed. Say, Edition: current; Page: [(338)] Nay, we follow the religion of Abraham the orthodox, who was no idolater. (136) Say, We believe in God, and that which hath been sent down unto us, and that which hath been sent down unto Abraham, and Ismaíl, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the tribes, and that which was delivered unto Moses, and Jesus, and that which was delivered unto the prophets from their Lord: We make no distinction Edition: current; Page: [(339)] between any of them, and to God are we resigned. (137) Now if they believe according to what ye believe, they are surely directed, but if they turn back, they are in schism. God shall support thee against them, for he is the hearer, the wise (138) The baptism of God have we received, and who is better than God to baptize? him do Edition: current; Page: [(340)] we worship. (139) Say, Will ye dispute with us concerning God, who is our Lord, and your Lord? we have our works, and ye have your works, and unto him are we sincerely devoted. (140) Will ye say, truly Abraham, and Ismaíl and Isaac, and Jacob, and the tribes were Jews or Christians? Say, are ye wiser, or God? And who is more unjust than he who hideth the testimony which he hath received from God? But God is not regardless of that which ye do. (141) That people are passed away, they have what they have gained, and ye shall have what ye gain, nor shall ye be questioned concerning that which they have done.

Second Sipara

R 17/1.

∥ (142) The foolish men will say, What hath turned them from their Qibla, towards which they formerly prayed? Say, Unto God belongeth the east and the west: he directeth whom he pleaseth into the right Edition: current; Page: [(341)] way. (143) Thus have we placed you, O Arabians, an intermediate nation, that ye may be witness against the rest of mankind, and that the apostle may be a witness Edition: current; Page: [(342)] against you. (144) We appointed the Qibla, towards which thou didst formerly pray, only that we might know him who followeth the apostle, from him who turneth back on the heels; though this change seem a great matter, unless unto those whom God hath directed. But God will not render your faith of none effect; for God is gracious and merciful unto man. (145) We have seen thee turn about thy face towards heaven with uncertainty, but we will cause thee to turn thyself towards a Qibla that will please thee. Turn, therefore, thy face towards the holy temple of Makkah; and wherever ye be, turn your faces towards that place. They to whom the scripture hath been given, know this to be truth from their Lord. Edition: current; Page: [(343)] God is not regardless of that which ye do. (146) Verily although thou shouldest show unto those to whom the scripture hath been given all kinds of signs, yet they will not follow thy Qibla, neither shalt thou follow their Qibla; nor will one part of them follow the Qibla of the other. And if thou follow their desires, after the Edition: current; Page: [(344)] knowledge which hath been given thee, verily thou wilt become one of the ungodly. (147) They to whom we have given the scripture know our apostle, even as they know their own children; but some of them hide the truth, against their own knowledge. (148) Truth is from thy Lord, therefore thou shalt not doubt.

R 18/2.

∥ (149) Every sect hath a certain tract of heaven to which they turn themselves in prayer; but do ye strive to run after good things; wherever ye be, God will bring you all back at the resurrection, for God is almighty. (150) And from what place soever thou comest forth, turn thy face towards the holy temple; for this is truth from thy Lord; neither is God regardless of that which ye do. (151) From what place soever thou comest forth, turn thy face towards the holy temple; and wherever ye be, thitherward turn your faces, lest men have matter of dispute against you; but as for those among them who are unjust doers, fear them not, Edition: current; Page: [(345)] but fear me, that I may accomplish my grace upon you, and that ye may be directed. (152) As we have sent unto you an apostle from among you, to rehearse our signs unto you, and to purify you, and to teach you the book of the Qurán and wisdom, and to teach you that which ye knew not: (153) therefore remember me, and I will remember you, and give thanks unto me, and be not unbelievers.

Edition: current; Page: [(346)]

R 19/3.

∥ (154) O true believers, beg assistance with patience and prayer, for God is with the patient. (155) And say not of those who are slain in fight for the religion of God, that they are dead; yea, they are living: but ye do not understand. (156) We will surely prove you by afflicting you in some measure with fear, and hunger, and decrease of wealth, and loss of lives, and scarcity of fruits: but bear good tidings unto the patient, (157) who, when a misfortune befalleth them, say, We are God’s, and unto him shall we surely return. (158) Upon them shall be Edition: current; Page: [(347)] blessings from their Lord and mercy, and they are the rightly directed. (159) Moreover Safá and Marwah are two of the monuments of God: whoever therefore goeth on pilgrimage to the temple of Makkah or visiteth it, it shall be no crime in him, if he compass them both. And as for him who voluntarily performeth a good work; verily God Edition: current; Page: [(348)] is grateful and knowing. (160) They who conceal any of the evident signs, or the direction which we have sent down, after what we have manifested unto men in the scripture, God shall curse them; and they who curse shall curse them. (161) But as for those who repent and amend, and make known what they concealed, I will be turned unto them, for I am easy to be reconciled and merciful. (162) Surely they who believe not, and die in their unbelief, upon them shall be the curse of God, and of the angels, and of all men; (163) they shall remain under it forever, their punishment shall not be alleviated, neither shall they be regarded. (164) Your God is one God; there is no God but He, the most merciful.

R 20/4.

∥ (165) Now in the creation of heaven and earth, and Edition: current; Page: [(349)] the vicissitude of night and day, and in the ship which saileth in the sea, laden with what is profitable for mankind, and in the rain water which God sendeth from heaven, quickening thereby the dead earth, and replenishing the same with all sorts of cattle, and in the change of winds, and the clouds that are compelled to do service between heaven and earth, are signs to people of understanding: (166) yet some men take idols beside God, and love them as with the love due to God; but the true believers are more fervent in love towards God. Oh, that they who act unjustly did perceive, when they behold their punishment, that all power belongeth unto God, and that he is severe in punishing. (167) When those who have been followed shall separate themselves from Edition: current; Page: [(350)] their followers, and shall see the punishment, and the cords of relation between them shall be cut in sunder; (168) the followers shall say, If we could return to life, we would separate ourselves from them, as they have now separated themselves from us. So God will show them their works; they shall sigh grievously, and shall not come forth from the fire of hell.

R 21/5.

∥ (169) O men, eat of that which is lawful and good on the earth; and tread not in the steps of the devil, for he is your open enemy. (170) Verily he commandeth you evil and wickedness, and that you should say that of God which ye know not. (171) And when it is said unto them who believe not, Follow that which God hath sent down; they answer, Nay, but we will follow that which we found our fathers practise. What? though their fathers knew nothing, and were not rightly directed? (172) The unbelievers are like unto one who crieth aloud to that which heareth not so much as his calling, or the sound of his voice. They are deaf, dumb, and blind, therefore do they Edition: current; Page: [(351)] not understand (173) O true believers, eat of the good things which we have bestowed on you for food, and return thanks unto God, if ye serve him. (174) Verily he hath forbidden you to eat that which dieth of itself, and blood and swine’s flesh, and that on which any other name but God’s hath been invocated. But he who is forced by necessity, not lusting, nor returning to transgress, it shall be no crime in him if he eat of those things, for God is gracious and merciful. (175) Moreover they who conceal any part of the scripture which God hath sent down unto them, and sell it for a small price, they shall swallow into Edition: current; Page: [(352)] their bellies nothing but fire; God shall not speak unto them on the day of resurrection, neither shall he purify them, and they shall suffer a grievous punishment. (176) These are they who have sold direction for error, and pardon for punishment: but how great will their suffering be in the fire! This they shall endure, because God sent down the book of the Qurán with truth, and they who disagree concerning that book are certainly in a wide mistake.

Ruba. R 22/6.

∥ (177) It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces in prayer towards the east and the west, but righteousness is of him who believeth in God and the last day and the angels, and the scriptures, and the prophets; who giveth money for God’s sake unto his kindred, and unto orphans, and the needy, and the stranger, and those who ask, and for redemption of captives; who is constant at prayer, and giveth alms and of those who perform their covenant, Edition: current; Page: [(353)] when they have covenanted, and who behave themselves patiently in adversity, and hardships, and in time of violence; these are they who are true, and these are they who fear God. (178) O true believers, the law of retaliation is ordained you for the slain: the free shall die for the free, and the servant for the servant, and a woman for a woman; but he whom his brother shall forgive may be prosecuted, and obliged to make satisfaction according to what is just, and a fine shall be set on him with humanity. This is indulgence from your Lord, and mercy. And he who shall transgress after this, by killing the murderer, shall Edition: current; Page: [(354)] suffer a grievous punishment. (179) And in this law of retaliation ye have life, O ye of understanding, that peradventure ye may fear. (180) It is ordained you, when any of you is at the point of death, if he leave any goods, that he bequeath a legacy to his parents, and kindred, according to what shall be reasonable. This is a duty incumbent on those who fear God. (181) But he who shall change the legacy, after he hath heard it bequeathed by the dying person, surely the sin thereof shall be on those who change it, for God is he who heareth and knoweth. (182) Howbeit he who apprehendeth from the testator any mistake or injustice, and shall compose the matter between them, that shall be no crime in him, for God is gracious and merciful.

R 23/7.

∥ (183) O true believers, a fast is ordained you, as it was ordained unto those before you, that ye may fear Edition: current; Page: [(355)] God. (184) A certain number of days shall ye fast: but he among you who shall be sick, or on a journey, shall fast an equal number of other days. And those who can keep it, and do not, must redeem their neglect by maintaining of a poor man. And he who voluntarily dealeth better with the poor man than he is obliged, this shall be better for him. But if ye fast, it will be better for you, if ye knew Edition: current; Page: [(356)] it. (185) The month of Ramadhán shall ye fast, in which the Qurán was sent down from heaven, a direction unto men, and declarations of direction, and the distinction between good and evil. Therefore, let him among you who shall be present in this month, fast the same month; but he who shall be sick, or on a journey, shall fast the like number of other days. God would make this an ease unto you, and would not make it a difficulty unto you; that ye may fulfil the number of days, and glorify God, for that he hath directed you, and that ye may give thanks. (186) When my servants ask thee concerning me, Verily I am near; I will hear the prayer of him that prayeth, when he prayeth unto me: but let them hearken unto Edition: current; Page: [(357)] me, and believe in me, that they may be rightly directed. (187) It is lawful for you, on the night of the fast, to go in unto your wives; they are a garment unto you, and ye are a garment unto them. God knoweth that ye defraud yourselves therein, wherefore he turneth unto you, and forgiveth you. Now, therefore, go in unto them; and earnestly desire that which God ordaineth you, and eat and drink, until ye can plainly distinguish a white thread from a black thread by the daybreak: then keep the fast until night, and go not in unto them, but be constantly present in the places of worship. These are the prescribed bounds of God, therefore draw not near them to transgress them. Thus God declareth his signs unto men, that ye may fear him. (188) Consume not your wealth among yourselves in vain; nor present it unto judges, that ye may devour part of men’s substance unjustly, against your own consciences.

R 24/8.

∥ (189) They will ask thee concerning the phases of the moon: Answer, They are times appointed unto men, and Edition: current; Page: [(358)] to show the season of the pilgrimage to Makkah. It is not righteousness that ye enter your houses by the back parts thereof, but righteousness is of him who feareth God. Therefore enter your houses by their doors; and fear God, that ye may be happy. (190) And fight for the religion of God against those who fight against you; but transgress not by attacking them first, for God loveth not the transgressors. (191) (191) And kill them wherever ye find them, and turn them out of that whereof they have dispossessed you; for temptation to idolatry is more grievous than slaughter; yet fight not against them in the holy Edition: current; Page: [(359)] temple, until they attack you therein; but if they attack you, slay them there. This shall be the reward of infidels. (192) (192) But if they desist, God is gracious and merciful. (193) (193) Fight therefore against them, until there be no temptation to idolatry, and the religion be God’s; but if they desist, then let there be no hostility, except against the ungodly. (194) A sacred month for a sacred month, and the holy limits of Makkah, if they attack you therein, do ye also attack them therein in retaliation; and whoever transgresseth against you by so doing, do ye transgress against him in like manner as he hath transgressed against you, and fear God, and know that God is with those who fear him. (195) Contribute out of your substance toward the defence of the religion of God, and throw not yourselves with your own hands into perdition; and do good, Edition: current; Page: [(360)] for God loveth those who do good. (196) Perform the pilgrimage of Makkah, and the visitation of God; and, if ye be besieged, send that offering which shall be the easiest; and shave not your heads, until your offering reacheth the place of sacrifice. But, whoever among you is sick, or is troubled with any distemper of the head must redeem Edition: current; Page: [(361)] the shaving his head, by fasting, or alms, or some offering. When ye are secure from enemies, he who tarrieth in the visitation of the temple of Makkah until the pilgrimage, shall bring that offering which shall be the easiest. But he who findeth not anything to offer, shall fast three days in the pilgrimage, and seven when ye are returned: they shall be ten days complete. This is incumbent on him whose family shall not be present at the holy temple. And fear God, and know that God is severe in punishing.

R 25/9.

∥ (197) The pilgrimage must be performed in the known months: whosoever therefore purposeth to go on pilgrimage therein, let him not know a woman, nor transgress, nor quarrel in the pilgrimage. The good which ye do, God knoweth it. Make provision for your journey; but the best provision is piety; and fear me, O ye of understanding. (198) It shall be no crime in you, if ye seek an increase from your Lord, by trading during the pilgrimage. Edition: current; Page: [(362)] And when ye go in procession from Arafát remember God near the holy monument; and remember him for that he hath directed you, although ye were before this of the number of those who go astray. (199) Therefore go in procession from whence the people go in procession, and ask pardon of God, for God is gracious Edition: current; Page: [(363)] and merciful. (200) And when ye have finished your holy ceremonies, remember God, according as ye remember your fathers, or with a more reverent commemoration. There are some men who say, O Lord, give us our portion in this world; but such shall have no portion in the next life; (201) and there are others who say, O Lord, give us good in this world and also good in the next world, and deliver us from the torment of hell fire. They shall have a portion of that which they have gained: God is swift in taking an account.

Nisf.

∥ (202) Remember God the appointed number of days, but if any haste to depart from the valley of Mína in two days, it shall be no crime in him. And if any tarry longer, it shall be no crime in him, in him who feareth God. Therefore fear God, and know that unto him ye shall be gathered. (203) There is a man who causeth thee to marvel by his speech concerning this Edition: current; Page: [(364)] present life, and calleth God to witness that which is in his heart, yet he is most intent in opposing thee; (204) and when he turneth away from thee, he hasteth to act corruptly in the earth, and to destroy that which is sown, and springeth up: but God loveth not corrupt doing. (205) And if one say unto him, Fear God; pride seizeth him, together with wickedness; but hell shall be his reward, and an unhappy couch shall it be. (206) There is also a man who selleth his soul for the sake of those things which are pleasing unto God; and God is gracious unto his servants. (207) O true believers, enter into the true religion wholly, and follow not the steps of Satan, for he is your open enemy. (208) If ye have slipped after the declarations of our will have come unto you, know that God is mighty and wise. (209) Do the infidels expect less than that God should come down to them overshadowed Edition: current; Page: [(365)] with clouds, and the angels also? but the thing is decreed, and to God shall all things return.

R 26/10.

∥ (210) Ask the children of Israel how many evident signs we have showed them; and whoever shall change the grace of God after it shall have come unto him, verily God will be severe in punishing him. (211) The present life was ordained for those who believe not, and they laugh the faithful to scorn; but they who fear God shall be above them, on the day of the resurrection: for God is bountiful unto whom he pleaseth without measure. (212) Mankind was of one faith, and God sent prophets bearing good Edition: current; Page: [(366)] tidings, and denouncing threats, and sent down with them the scripture in truth, that it might judge between men of that concerning which they disagreed: and none disagreed concerning it, except those to whom the same scriptures were delivered, after the declarations of God’s will had come unto them, out of envy among themselves. And God directed those who believed, to that truth concerning which they disagreed, by his will: for God directeth whom he pleaseth into the right way. (213) Did ye think ye should enter paradise, when as yet no such thing had happened unto you, as hath happened unto those who have been before you? They suffered calamity, and tribulation, and were afflicted; so that the apostle, and they who believed with him, said: When will the help of God Edition: current; Page: [(367)] come? Is not the help of God nigh? (214) They will ask thee what they shall bestow in alms: Answer, The good which ye bestow, let it be given to parents, and kindred, and orphans, and the poor and the stranger. Whatsoever good ye do, God knoweth it. (215) War is enjoined you against the infidels; but this is hateful unto you: yet perchance ye hate a thing which is better for you, and perchance ye love a thing which is worse for you: but God knoweth and ye know not.

R 27/11.

∥ (216) They will ask thee concerning the sacred month, whether they may war therein: Answer, To war therein is grievous; but to obstruct the way of God, and infidelity towards him and to keep men from the holy temple, and to drive out his people from thence, is more grievous in Edition: current; Page: [(368)] the sight of God, and the temptation to idolatry is more grievous than to kill in the sacred months. They will not cease to war against you, until they turn you from your religion, if they be able: but whoever among you shall turn back from his religion, and die an infidel, their works shall be vain in this world, and the next; they shall be the companions of hell-fire, they shall remain therein forever. (217) But they who believe, and who fly for the sake of religion, and fight in God’s cause, they shall hope for the mercy of God; for God is gracious and merciful. (218) They will ask thee concerning wine and lots: Answer, In both there is great sin, and also some things of use unto men; but their sinfulness is greater than their Edition: current; Page: [(369)] use. They will ask thee also what they shall bestow in alms: (219) Answer, What ye have to spare. Thus God showeth his signs unto you, that peradventure ye might seriously think of this present world, and of the next. (220) They will also ask thee concerning orphans: Answer, To deal righteously with them is best; and if ye intermeddle with the management of what belongs to them, do them no wrong; they are your brethren: God knoweth the corrupt dealer from the righteous; and if God please, Edition: current; Page: [(370)] he will surely distress you, for God is mighty and wise. (221) Marry not women who are idolaters, until they believe: verily a maidservant who believeth is better than an idolatress, although she please you more. And give not women who believe in marriage to the idolaters, until they believe: for verily a servant who is a true believer is better than an idolater, though he please you more. They invite unto hell-fire, but God inviteth unto paradise and pardon through his will, and declareth his signs unto men, that they may remember.

R 28/12.

∥ (222) They will ask thee also concerning the courses of women: Answer, They are a pollution: therefore separate yourselves from women in their courses, and go not near them, until they be cleansed. But when they are cleansed, go in unto them as God hath commanded you, for God loveth those who repent, and loveth those who are clean. (223) Your wives are your tillage; go in therefore unto your tillage in what manner soever ye will: and do first some act that may be profitable unto your souls; and fear God, and know that ye must meet him; and bear good tidings unto the faithful. (224) Make not Edition: current; Page: [(371)] God the object of your oaths, that ye will deal justly, and be devout, and make peace among men; for God is he who heareth and knoweth. (225) God will not punish you for an inconsiderate word in your oaths; but he will punish you for that which your hearts have assented unto: God is merciful and gracious. (226) They who vow to abstain from their wives are allowed to wait four months: but if they go back from their vow, verily God is gracious and merciful; (227) and if they resolve on a divorce, God Edition: current; Page: [(372)] is he who heareth and knoweth. (228) The women who are divorced shall wait concerning themselves until they have their courses thrice, and it shall not be lawful for them to conceal that which God hath created in their wombs, if they believe in God and the last day; and their husbands will act more justly to bring them back at this time, if they desire a reconciliation. The women ought also to behave towards their husbands in like manner as their husbands should behave towards them, according to what is just: but the men ought to have a superiority over them. God is mighty and wise.

R 29/13.

∥ (229) Ye may divorce your wives twice; and then Edition: current; Page: [(373)] either retain them with humanity, or dismiss them with kindness. But it is not lawful for you to take away anything of what ye have given them, unless both fear that they cannot observe the ordinance of God. And if ye fear that they cannot observe the ordinance of God, it shall be no crime in either of them on account of that for which the wife shall redeem herself. These are the ordinances of God; therefore transgress them not; for whoever transgresseth the ordinances of God, they are unjust doers. (230) But if the husband divorce her a third time, she shall not be lawful for him again, until she Edition: current; Page: [(374)] marry another husband. But if he also divorce her, it shall be no crime in them if they return to each other, if they think they can observe the ordinances of God, and these are the ordinances of God; he declareth them to people of understanding. (231) But when ye divorce women, and they have fulfilled their prescribed time, either retain them with humanity or dismiss them with kindness; and retain them not by violence, so that ye transgress; for he who doth this surely injureth his own soul. And make not the signs of God a jest: but remember God’s favour towards you, and that he hath sent down unto you the book of the Qurán, and wisdom admonishing you thereby; and fear God, and know that God is omniscient.

Suls. R 30/14.

∥ (232) But when ye have divorced your wives, and they have fulfilled their prescribed time, hinder them not Edition: current; Page: [(375)] from marrying their husbands, when they have agreed among themselves according to what is honourable. This is given in admonition unto him among you who believeth in God, and the last day. This is most righteous for you, and most pure. God knoweth, but ye know not. (233) Mothers after they are divorced shall give suck unto their children two full years, to him who desireth the time of giving suck to be completed; and the father shall be obliged to maintain them and clothe them in the meantime, according to that which shall be reasonable. No person shall be obliged beyond his ability. A mother shall not be compelled to what is unreasonable on account of her child, nor a father on account of his child. And the heir of the father shall be obliged to do in like manner. But if they choose to wean the child before the end of two years, by common consent and on mutual consideration, it shall be no crime in them. And if ye have a mind to provide a nurse for your children, it shall be no crime in you, in case ye fully pay what ye offer her, according to that which is just. And fear God, and know that God seeth whatsoever ye do. (234) Such of you as die, and leave wives, their wives must wait concerning themselves four months and ten days, and when they shall have fulfilled their term, it shall be no crime in you, for that which they shall do with themselves, according to what is reasonable. God well knoweth that which ye do. (235) And it shall be no crime in you, whether ye make public overtures of marriage unto such women, within the said four months and ten days, or whether ye conceal such your designs in your minds: God knoweth that ye will remember Edition: current; Page: [(376)] them. But make no promises unto them privately, unless ye speak honourable words; and resolve not on the knot of marriage until the prescribed time be accomplished; and know that God knoweth that which is in your minds, therefore beware of him and know that God is gracious and merciful.

R 31/15.

∥ (236) It shall be no crime in you if ye divorce your wives, so long as ye have not touched them, nor settled any dowry on them. And provide for them (he who is at his ease must provide according to his circumstances, and he who is straitened according to his circumstances) necessaries, according to what shall be reasonable. This is a duty incumbent on the righteous. (237) But if ye divorce them before ye have touched them, and have already settled a dowry on them, ye shall give them half of what ye have settled, unless they release any part, or he release part in whose hand the knot of marriage is; and if ye release the whole, it will approach nearer unto piety. And forget not liberality among you, for God seeth that which ye do. (238) Carefully observe the appointed prayers, Edition: current; Page: [(377)] and the middle prayer, and be assiduous therein, with devotion towards God. (239) But if ye fear any danger, pray on foot or on horseback; and when ye are safe remember God, how he hath taught you what as yet ye knew not. (240) And such of you as shall die and leave wives, ought to bequeath their wives a year’s maintenance, without putting them out of their houses: but if they go out voluntarily, it shall be no crime in you, for that which they shall do with themselves, according to what shall be reasonable: God is mighty and wise. (241) And unto those who are divorced, a reasonable provision Edition: current; Page: [(378)] is also due: this is a duty incumbent on those who fear God. (242) Thus God declareth his signs unto you, that ye may understand.

R 32/16.

∥ (243) Hast thou not considered those who left their habitations (and they were thousands), for fear of death? And God said unto them, Die; then he restored them to life, for God is gracious towards mankind; but the greater part of men do not give thanks. (244) Fight for the religion of God, and know that God is he who heareth and knoweth. (245) Who is he that will lend unto God Edition: current; Page: [(379)] on good usury? verily he will double it unto him manifold; for God contracteth and extendeth his hand as he pleaseth, and to him shall ye return. (246) Hast thou not considered the assembly of the children of Israel, after the time of Moses; when they said unto their prophet Samuel, Set a king over us, that we may fight for the religion of God. The prophet answered, If ye are enjoined to go to war, will ye be near refusing to fight? They answered, And what should ail us that we should not fight for the religion of God, seeing we are dispossessed of our habitations and deprived of our children? But when they were enjoined to go to war, they turned back, except a few of them: and God knew the ungodly. (247) And their prophet said unto them, Verily God hath set Tálút, king over you: they answered How shall he reign over us, seeing we are more worthy of the kingdom than he, neither is he possessed of great riches? Samuel said, Verily God hath chosen him before you, and hath caused him to increase in knowledge and stature, for God giveth his kingdom unto whom he pleaseth; God is bounteous Edition: current; Page: [(380)] and wise. (248) And their prophet said unto them, Verily the sign of his kingdom shall be, that the ark shall come unto you: therein shall be tranquillity from your Lord, and the relics which have been left by the family of Moses and the family of Aaron; the angels shall bring it. Verily this shall be a sign unto you, if ye believe.

R 33/1.

∥ (249) And when Tálút departed with his soldiers he said, Verily God will prove you by the river; for he who Edition: current; Page: [(381)] drinketh thereof shall not be on my side (but he who shall not taste thereof he shall be on my side), except he who drinketh a draught out of his hand. And they drank thereof, except a few of them. And when they had passed the river, he and those who believed with him, they said, We have no strength to-day, against Jálút and his forces. But they who considered that they should meet God at the resurrection said, How often hath a small army discomfited a great one, by the will of God! and God is with those who patiently persevere. (250) And when they went forth to battle against Jálút and his forces, they said. O Lord, pour on us patience, and confirm our feet, and help us against the unbelieving people. (251) Therefore they discomflted them, by the will of God, and David slew Jálút. And God gave him the kingdom and wisdom, and taught him his will; and if God had not prevented men, the one by the other, verily the earth had been corrupted; but God is beneficent towards his creatures. (252) These are the signs of God: we rehearse them unto thee with truth, and thou art surely one of those who have been sent by God.

Third Sipara.

∥ (253) These are the apostles; we have preferred some of them before others; some of them hath God spoken unto, and hath exalted the degree of others of them. And we gave unto Jesus the son of Mary manifest signs, and strengthened him with the holy spirit. And if God had Edition: current; Page: [(382)] so pleased, they who came after those apostles would not have contended among themselves, after manifest signs had been shown unto them. But they fell to variance; therefore some of them believed, and some of them believed not; and if God had so pleased, they would not have contended among themselves; but God doth what he will

R 34/2.

∥ (254) O true believers, give alms of that which we have bestowed unto you, before the day cometh wherein there shall be no merchandising, nor friendship, nor intercession. The infidels are unjust doers. (255) Goo! there is no God but he; the living, the self-subsisting: neither slumber nor sleep seizeth him; to him belongeth whatsoever is in heaven, and on earth. Who is he that Edition: current; Page: [(383)] can intercede with him, but through his good pleasure? He knoweth that which is past, and that which is to come unto them, and they shall not comprehend anything of his knowledge, but so far as he pleaseth. His throne is extended over heaven and earth, and the preservation of both is no burden unto him. He is the high, the mighty. (256) Let there be no violence in religion. Now is right direction manifestly distinguished from deceit: whoever therefore shall deny Tághút, and believe in God, he shall surely take hold on a strong handle, which shall not be broken; God is he who heareth and seeth. (257) God is the patron of those who believe; he shall lead them out of darkness into light: but as to those who believe not, their Edition: current; Page: [(384)] patrons are Tághút; they shall lead them from the light into darkness; they shall be the companions of hell-fire, they shall remain therein for ever.

R 35/3.

∥ (258) Hast thou not considered him who dispured with Abraham concerning his Lord, because God had given him the kingdom? When Abraham said, My Lord is he who giveth life and killeth: he answered, I give life and I kill. Abraham said, Verily God bringeth the sun from the east, now do thou bring it from the west. Whereupon the infidel was confounded: for God directeth not the ungodly people. (259) Or hast thou not considered how he behaved who passed by a city which had been destroyed, even to her foundations? He said, How shall God quicken this city, after she hath been dead? And God caused him to die for an hundred years, and afterwards raised him to life. And God said, How long hast thou tarried here? He answered, A day, or part of a day. God said, Nay, thou hast tarried here a hundred years. Now look on thy food and thy drink, they are not yet corrupted; and look on thine ass: and this have we done that we might make thee a sign unto men. And look on the bones of thine ass, how Edition: current; Page: [(385)] we raise them, and afterwards clothe them with flesh. And when this was shown unto him, he said, I know that God is able to do all things. (260) And when Abraham said, O Lord, show me how thou wilt raise the dead: God said, Dost thou not yet believe? He answered, Yea, but I ask this that my heart may rest at ease. God said, Take therefore four birds, and divide them; then lay a part of them on every mountain; then call them, and they shall come swiftly unto thee: and know that God is mighty and wise.

R 36/4.

∥ (261) The similitude of those who lay out their substance, for advancing the religion of God, is as a grain of corn which produceth seven ears, and in every ear an hundred grains; for God giveth twofold unto whom he pleaseth: God is bounteous and wise. (262) They who lay out their substance for the religion of God, and afterwards follow not what they have so laid out by reproaches or mischief, they shall have their reward with their Lord; upon them shall no fear come, neither shall they be grieved. (263) A fair speech and to forgive is better than alms followed by mischief. God is Edition: current; Page: [(386)] rich and merciful. (264) O true believers, make not your alms of none effect by reproaching or mischief, as he who layeth out what he hath to appear unto men to give alms, and believeth not in God and the last day. The likeness of such a one is as a flint covered with earth, on which a violent rain falleth, and leaveth it hard. They cannot prosper in anything which they have gained, for God directeth not the unbelieving people. (265) And the likeness of those who lay out their substance from a desire to please God, and for an establishment for their souls, is as a garden on a hill, on which a violent rain falleth, and it bringeth forth its fruits twofold; and if a violent rain falleth not on it, yet the dew falleth thereon: and God seeth that which ye do. (266) Doth any of you desire to have a garden of palm-trees and vines, through which rivers flow, wherein ye may have all kinds of fruits, and that he may attain to old age, and have a weak offspring? then a violent fiery wind shall strike it, so that it shall be burned. Thus God declareth his signs unto you, that ye may consider.

R 37/5.

∥ (267) O true believers, bestow alms of the good things which ye have gained, and of that which we have produced for you out of the earth, and choose not the bad thereof, to give it in alms, such as ye would not accept yourselves, otherwise than by connivance: and know that God is rich and worthy to be praised. (268) The devil threateneth you with poverty, and commandeth you filthy covetousness; but God promiseth you pardon from Edition: current; Page: [(387)] himself and abundance: God is bounteous and wise. (269) He giveth wisdom unto whom he pleaseth; and he unto whom wisdom is given hath received much good: but none will consider, except the wise of heart. (270) And whatever alms ye shall give, or whatever vow ye shall vow, verily God knoweth it; but the ungodly shall have none to help them. (271) If ye make your alms to appear, it is well; but if ye conceal them, and give them unto the poor, this will be better for you, and will stone for your sins; and God is well informed of that which ye do. (272) The direction of them belongeth not unto thee; but God directeth whom he pleaseth. The good that ye shall give in alms shall redound unto yourselves; and ye shall not give unless out of desire of seeing the face of God. And what good thing ye shall give in alms, it shall be repaid you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly; (273) unto the poor who are wholly employed in fighting for the religion of God, and cannot go to and fro on the earth; whom the ignorant man thinketh rich, because of Edition: current; Page: [(388)] their modesty: thou shalt know them by this mark, they ask not men with importunity; and what good ye shall give in alms, verily God knoweth it.

Ruba. R 38/6

∥ (274) They who distribute alms of their substance night and day, in private and in public, shall have their reward with the Lord; on them shall no fear come, neither shall they be grieved. (275) They who devour usury shall not arise from the dead, but as he ariseth whom Satan hath infected by a touch: this shall happen to them because they say, Truly selling is but as usury: and yet God hath permitted selling and forbidden usury. He therefore who when there cometh unto him an admonition from his Lord abstaineth from usury for the future, shall have what is past forgiven him, and his affair belongeth unto God. But whoever returneth to usury, they shall be the companions of hell-fire, they shall continue therein forever. (276) God shall take his blessing from usury, and shall increase alms: for God loveth no infidel, or ungodly person. (277) But they who believe and do that which is right, and observe the stated times of prayer, and pay their legal alms, they shall have their reward Edition: current; Page: [(389)] with their Lord: there shall come no fear on them, neither shall they be grieved. (278) O true believers, fear God, and remit that which remaineth of usury, if ye really believe; (279) but if ye do it not, hearken unto war, which is declared against you from God and his apostle: yet if ye repent, ye shall have the capital of your money. Deal not unjustly with others, and ye shall not be dealt with unjustly. (280) If there be any debtor under a difficulty of paying his debt, let his creditor wait till it be easy for him to do it; but if ye remit it as alms, it will be better for you, if ye knew it. (281) And fear the day wherein ye shall return unto God; then shall every soul be paid what it hath gained, and they shall not be treated unjustly.

R 39/7.

∥ (282) O true believers, when ye bind yourselves one to the other in a debt for a certain time, write it down; and let a writer write between you according to justice, and let not the writer refuse writing according to what God hath taught him; but let him write, and let him who oweth the debt dictate, and let him fear God his Lord, and not diminish aught thereof. But if he who oweth the debt be foolish, or weak, or be not able to dictate himself, let his agent dictate according to equity; and call to witness two witnesses of your neighbouring Edition: current; Page: [(390)] men; but if there be not two men, let there be a man and two women of those whom ye shall choose for witnesses: if one of those women should mistake, the other of them will cause her to recollect. And the witnesses shall not refuse, whensoever they shall be called. And disdain not to write it down, be it a large debt, or be it a small one, until its time of payment: this will be more just in the sight of God, and more right for bearing witness, and more easy, that ye may not doubt. But if it be a present bargain which ye transact between yourselves, it shall be no crime in you, if ye write it not down. And take witnesses when ye sell one to the other, and let no harm be done to the writer, nor to the witness; which if ye do, it will surely be injustice in you: and fear God, and God will instruct you, for God knoweth all things. (283) And if ye be on a journey, and find no writer, let pledges be taken: but if one of you trust the other, let him who is trusted return what he is trusted with, and fear God his Lord. And conceal not the testimony, for he who concealeth it hath surely a wicked heart: God knoweth that which ye do.

R 40/8.

∥ (284) Whatever is in heaven and on earth is God’s; and whether ye manifest that which is in your minds, or conceal it, God will call you to account for it, and will forgive whom he pleaseth, and will punish whom he pleaseth; for God is almighty. (285) The apostle believeth in that which hath been sent down unto him from Edition: current; Page: [(391)] his Lord, and the faithful also. Every one of them believeth in God, and his angels, and his scriptures, and his apostles: we make no distinction at all between his apostles. And they say, We have heard, and do obey; we implore thy mercy, O Lord, for unto thee must we return. (286) God will not force any soul beyond its capacity: it shall have the good which it gaineth, and it shall suffer the evil which it gaineth. O Lord, punish us not if we forget or act sinfully: O Lord, lay not on us a burden like that which thou hast laid on those who have been before us; neither make us, O Lord, to bear what we have not strength to bear, but be favourable unto us, and spare us, and be merciful unto us. Thou art our patron, help us therefore against the unbelieving nations.

printed by ballantyne, manson and co. edinburgh and london.

1

In his Demonstr. of the Measias, part iii. chap. 2.

1

Id certum, naturalibus egregiè dotibus instructum Muhammadem, forma præstanti, ingenio calido, moribus facetis, ac præ se ferentem liboralitatem in egenos, comitatem in singulos, fortitudinem in hostes, ac præ cæteris reverentiam divini nominis.—Severus fuit in perjuros, adulteros, homicidas, obtrectatores, prodigos, avaros, falsos testes, &c. Magnus idem patientiæ, charitatis, misericordiæ beneficentiæ, gratitudinis, honoris in parentes ac superiores præco, ut et divinarum laudum. Hist. Eccles., sec. vii. c. 7, lem. 5 and 7.

2

His words are: Questo libro, che già havevo à commune utilità di molti fatto dal proprio testo Arabo tradurre nella nostia volgar lingua Italiana, &c. And afterwards: Questo è l’Alcorano di Macometto, il quale, come ho gia detto, ho fatto dal suo idioma tradurre, &c.

1

Vide Jos. Scalig., Epist. 361 et 362; Selden., De Success. ad Leges Ebræor., p. 9.

2

J Andreas, in Præf. ad Tractat. suum de Confusione Sectæ Mahometanæ.

3

Vide Windet., De Vita Functorum Statu, sec. ix.

*

Of Marracci’s translation Savary says, “Marracci, that learned monk, who spent forty years in translating and refuting the Korán, proceeded on the right system. He divided it into verses, according to the text; but, neglecting the precepts of a great master—

‘Nec verbum verbo, curabis reddere, fidus

Interpres, &c.—

he translated it literally. He has not expressed the ideas of the Korán, but travestied the words of it into barbarous Latin. Yet, though all the beauties of the original are lost in this translation, it is preferable to that by Du Ryer.”

e. m w.

1

Sec. iv. p. 123.

2

In not, ad cap. 3.

*

Whilst regarding this Preliminary Discourse as a most masterly, and on the whole reliable, presentation of the peculiar doctrines, rites, ceremonies, customs, and institutions of Islám, we recognise the fact that more modern research has brought to light many things concerning the history of the ancient Arabs which greatly modify the statements made in the early paragraphs of this chapter. We therefore refer the reader to the most valuable works of M. C. de Perceval. Hist. des Arabes, a masterly digest of which may be found in the Introduction to Muir’s Life of Mahomet, chap. iii.; also to the works of Dr. Sprenger, Biography of the Prophet, &c.

e. m. w.

1

Pocock, Specim. Hist. Arab., p. 33.

1

Gen. x. 30.

2

See Pocock, Specim., 33, 34.

3

Golius ad Alfragan, 78, 79

4

Strabo says Arabia Felix was in his time divided into five kingdoms, l 16, p. 1129.

5

Gol. ad Alfragan, 79.

1

La Roque, Vovage de l’Arab. Heur., 121.

2

Gol. ad Alfragan, 79, 87.

*

“Or this was the name of its builder; see Kamoos” (Lane).

e. m. w.

3

Voyage de l’Arab. Heur, 232.

4

Vide Dionys. Perieges., v. 927, &c.

5

Strabo, l. 10, p. 1132; Arrian, 161.

1

Voyage de l’Arab. Heur., 121, 123, 153.

2

Vide Gol. ad Alfrag., 98; Abulfeda, Descr. Arab., p. 5.

3

R. Saadias in version. Arab. Pentat. Sefer Juchasin., 135 b.

4

Gen. x. 30.

5

Gol. ad Alfrag., 82; see Gen. xxv. 15.

6

Gol., ib. 198. See Pitts’ Account of the Religion and Manners of the Muhammadans, p. 96.

1

Sharíf al Edrisi apud Poc. Spec., p. 122.

2

Ibid.

3

Gol. ad Alfragan, 99.

4

Sharíf al Edrísi, ubi supra, 124.

*

Lane adds the following note:—“Sale here adds ‘being brackish,’ but Burckhardt says the water of the Zemzem ‘is heavy to the taste, and sometimes in its colour resembles milk; but,’ he adds, ‘it is perfectly sweet, and differs very much from that of the brackish wells dispersed over the town. When first drawn up, it is slightly tepid, resembling in this respect many other fountains of the Hejáz.’—Travels in Arabia, p. 144. I have also drunk the water of Zemzem brought in a china bottle to Cairo, and found it perfectly sweet.”

e. m. w.

5

Ibid. and Pitts, ubi supra, p. 107.

6

Gol. ad Alfragan, 99.

7

Ibid.

8

Sharif al Edrísi, ubi supra.

1

Sharíf al Edrísi, ubi supra.

2

Poc. Spec., p. 51.

*

Burckhardt says seventy-two miles. Travels in Arabia, p. 69.

e. m. w.

3

Sharíf al Edrísi, ubi supra, 125.

4

Id., Vulgò Geogr. Nubiensis 5.

1

Though the notion of Muhammad’s being buried at Makkah has been so long exploded, yet several modern writers, whether through ignorance or negligence I will not determine, have fallen into it I shall here take notice only of two; one is Dr. Smith, who having lived some time in Turkey, seems to be inexcusable: that gentleman in his Epistles De Moribus ac Institutis Turcarum, no less than thrice mentions the Muhammadans visiting the tomb of their prophet at Makkah, and once his being born at Madína—the reverse of which is true (see Epist. 1, p 22, Epist. 2. pp. 63, 64). The other is the publisher of the last edition of Sir J. Mandeville’s Travels, who on his author’s saying very truly (p. 50) that the said tomb was at Methone, i.e., Madina, undertakes to correct the name of the town, which is something corrupted, by putting at the bottom of the page, Makkah. The Abbot de Vertot, in his History of the Order of Malta (vol i. p. 410, ed. 8vo), seems also to have confounded these two cities together, though he had before mentioned Muhammad’s sepulchre at Madína. However, he is certainly mistaken, when he says that one point of the religion, both of the Christians and Muhammadans, was to visit, at least once in their lives, the tomb of the author of their respective faith. Whatever may be the opinion of some Christians, I am well assured the Muhammadans think themselves under no manner of obligation in that respect.

2

Gol. ad Alfragan, 97; Abulfeda, Descr. Arab., p. 40.

3

Gol., ubi supra, 95.

4

Ibid., 94.

5

Ibid., 95.

1

Albufarag. p. 159.

2

Or Uz. Gen. x. 22, 23.

3

Vide Qurán, c. 89, v. 6. Some make Ad the son of Amalek, the son of Ham; but the other is the received opinion. See D’Herbel., 51.

*

This genealogy is given on the authority of Muslim tradition, or rather of Muslim adaptation of Jewish tradition to gratify Arab pride. As to its utter worthlessness, see note on p. 24.

e. m. w.

4

Vide Eund., 498

5

Cap. 89.

1

D’Herbei., 51.

*

For a full account of his adventure, see Lane’s translation of the Thousand and One Nights.

e. m. w.

2

The Jews acknowledge Heber to have been a great prophet. Seder Olam., p. 2.

†

I can find no authority for this “general belief,” excepting that of Muslim conjecture. The guesses of D’Herbelot and Bochart seem to be inspired by Muslim tradition, which has been shown to be for the most part, so far as genealogy is concerned, a forgery. Muir suggests that Húd may have been a Jewish emissary or Christian evangelist. Life of Mohamet, Introd., p. 139.

e. m. w.

3

Al Baidháwi.

4

Poc. Spec., p. 35, &c.

1

Poc. Spec., p. 36.

2

Jaláluddin et Zamakhshari.

3

Qurán, c. 7, v. 70.

4

Or Gether, vide Gen. x. 23.

5

D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., 740.

6

Bochart, Georg. Sac.

7

See D’Herbel., 366.

8

Ibn Shohnah.

1

Poc. Spec., p. 57.

2

Qurán, c. 15, v. 82.

3

Abu Musa al Ashari.

4

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 37.

5

Abulfeda.

6

A like custom is said to have been in some manors in England, and also in Scotland, where it was called “culliage,” or “cullage,” having been established by K. Ewen, and abolished by Malcolm III. See Bayle’s Dict. Art. Sixte IV. Rem. H.

7

Poc. Spec., p. 60.

8

Ibid., p. 37, &c.

9

Ibid., p 38.

1

Ibn Shohnah.

2

Gen. xxxvi. 12.

3

Vide D’Herbelot, p. 110.

4

Ibn Shohnah.

5

Vide Numb. xxiv. 20.

6

Mirát Caïnát.

7

Vide Joseph, cont. Apion., l. i.

8

Vide Exod. xvii. 18, &c.; 1 Sam. xv. 2, &c.; ibid., xxvii. 8, 9; 1 Chron. iv. 43.

*

Muir, in his Life of Mahomet (Introd., p. cl.), proves conclusively that this identification of the Arab Qahtán with the Joctan of Scripture is an extravagant fiction, and shows that the age of Qahtán must be fixed at a period somewhere between 800 and 500 bc He says: “The identification (alluded to above) is one of those extravagant fictions which the followers of Islám, in their zeal to accommodate Arab legend to Jewish scripture, has made in defiance of the most violent improbability, and the grossest anachronisms.”

e. m. w

9

R. Saad. in vers. Arab. Pentat. Gen. x. 25. Some writers make Qahtán a descendant of Ismaíl, but against the current of Oriental historians. See Poc. Spec., p. 39.

10

An expression something like that of St. Paul, who calls himself “an Hebrew of the Hebrews” (Phil. iii. 5).

1

Poc. Spec., p. 40.

*

On this subject we give the following extract from Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. i. p. cvii.:—

“The first peopling of Arabia is a subject on which we may in vain look for any light from the traditions of Arabia itself. Tradition, indeed, gives us the genealogies of the Himyár kings and the links of the great Coreishite line of descent. But the latter do not ascend much beyond the Christian era, and the former only five or six centuries further; the earlier names of the Himyár dynasty were probably derived from bare inscriptions; and of the Coreish we have hardly anything but a naked ancestral tree, till within two or three centuries of Mahomet.

“Beyond these periods Mahometan tradition is entirely worthless. It is not original, but taken at second hand from the Jews, Mahomet having claimed to be of the seed of Ishmael. The Jewish Rabbins who were gained over to his cause endeavoured to confirm the claim from the genealogies of the Old Testament and of Rabbinical traditions.” Muir’s Introduction to his Life of Mahomet is the standard work, in the English language, on all that pertains to early Arabian history.

e. m. w.

1

Vide Hyde, Hist. Rel. vet. Pers., p. 37, &c.

2

Poc. Spec., pp. 65, 66.

*

This event did not occur till about the beginning of the second century of the Christian era. See Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. i., Introd., p. clvii., and authorities cited there.

e. m. w.

1

Vide Gol. ad Alfrag., p. 232.

2

Poc. Spec, p. 57.

†

This immigration was probably due chiefly to “the drying up of the Yemen commerce, and stoppage of the carrying trade,” owing to the Romans having opened up commercial intercourse between India and Egypt by way of the Red Sea. Muir’s Introd., Life of Mahomet. p. cxxxvii.

e. m. w.

3

Geogr. Nubiens, p. 52.

1

See Prideaux’s Life of Mahomet, p. 61.

2

Poc. Spec., pp. 63, 64.

3

Abulfeda.

4

Al Jannábi and Ahmed Ibn Yusef.

5

Poc. Spec., p. 76.

1

2 Cor. xi. 32; Acts ix. 24.

*

This was true only of the last kings of the tribe, the conversion having probably taken place through political influence about the middle of the fourth century of our era. Muir’s Introd., Life of Mahomet, p. clxxxv.

e. m. w.

2

Vide Ockley’s History of the Saracens, vol. i. p. 174.

3

Poc. Spec., p. 66.

4

Ibid., p. 74.

5

Ibid. and Procop. in Pers. apud Photium., p. 71, &c.

6

Poc. Spec., p. 45.

7

Ibid., p. 79.

1

Poc. Spec., p. 55 sed.

2

Vide ibid., p. 41, and Prideaux’s Life of Mahomet, p. 2.

3

Vide Poe. Spec., p. 79, &c.

4

Vide Elmacin. in Vita al Rádi.

1

Voyage de l’Arab. Heur., p. 255.

*

There is no one family now ruling over the whole of Yaman. At present the Turks have at least nominal dominion in the northern part to about 17° 30′ north latitude. In Southern Yaman there is no paramount sovereign, the Záidí family having been deposed from the throne of Sanáa some years ago. The Sultán of Gáara, in Lower Jafiá, who is recognised as a sort of hierarch in those regions, exercises considerable authority under the title of Afífí. He is said to pronounce judgment by fire ordeals. His principal rival is the Sultán of Maár, in the district of Abíán, but he has thus far been able to maintain his position as the most respected judge in Southern Yaman. In addition to these there is the so-called six-finger dynasty (said to have twelve fingers and twelve toes) of the Osmám rulers in the region near Aden, who are subsidised by the English. These are also rivals of the Afífí.

e. m. w.

2

Ibid., pp. 153, 273.

3

Ibid., p. 254.

4

Ibid., p. 143.

†

The present Grand Sharíf of Makkah is Abdal Muttalib, who was deposed in 1858 by the Sultán of Turkey, and kept at Constantinople as a state prisoner for more than twenty years. His successor in office was assassinated at Jidda in 1880 by a fanatic, because, as is believed by some, he refused to recognise the Sultán of Turkey as the Khalífah (caliph or vicegerent of Muhammad). Strange to say, the Sultán reinstated the exiled Grand Sharíf. He is said to be a mortal enemy of the English. Yet he does not appear to be popular in Arabia, as an unsuccessful attempt was made on his life soon after his arrival at Makkah.

e. m. w.

1

Voyage de l’Arab. Heur., p. 145.

2

Ibid., pp. 143, 148.

3

Vide D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., p. 477.

*

The defeat of the Wahábis by Ibrahím Pásha in 1818 brought a considerable portion of Arabia, comprising about two hundred thousand square miles, under Turkish suzerainty. The rule of the Turk, however, is for the most part merely nominal, and this becomes more so each year as the power of the Ottoman empire decreases. So far, however, as recognised, it extends over almost the whole of Hijáz, with Makkah, Madína, and Jidda, under semi-independent rulers, the northern part of Yaman, and about half of Ahra (with Palgrave’s Hofhoof) on the east coast. Madína is subject to the Grand Sharíf of Makkah.

A German traveller (Von Moltzau) tells us that Arabia, especially South-Western Arabia, is honeycombed by numerous sects, notably by that of the “Hidden Imám.” The Wahábis too are stirring again, and the powerful chief of Northern Hijáz, with his hordes of Bedouíns, is quite ready to throw off the Ottoman yoke, light as it is. It therefore appears that while the Turk possesses considerably more authority in Arabia than he formerly did, according to our author, there is every reason to believe it to be for the most part nominal, and that even this tenure is likely to be of short duration. (I am indebted for most of the information in this note and the two preceding to the research of the Rev. P. M. Zenker, C.M.S., Agra.)

e. m. w.

1

Voy. de l’Arab. Heur., p. 148.

*

See note above.

2

Diodor. Sic., l. 2, p. 131.

3

Herodot., l. 3, c. 97.

4

Idem ib. c. 91. Diodor., ubi sup.

5

Herodot., l. 3, c. 8 and 98.

6

Strabo, l. 16, pp. 1076, 1132.

7

Vide Diodor. Sic., ubi supra.

8

Strabo, l. 16, p. 1092.

9

Dion Cassius, l. 53, p m. 516.

10

Huet, Hist. du Commerce et de la Navigation des Anciens, c. 50.

1

See the whole expedition described at large by Strabo, l. 16, p. 1126, &c.

2

Xiphilin., epit.

3

Connect. of the Hist. of the Old and New Test., p. 1, bk. 3.

4

Some say seven. See D’Herbelot, p. 726, and Hyde, De Rel. Vet. Pers., p. 128.

5

Others say they use no incurvations or prostrations at all; vide Hyde, ibid.

1

Abulfarag, Hist. Dynast., p. 281, &c

2

Idem ibid.

3

Hyde, ubi supra, p. 124, &c.

4

D’Herbelot, ubi supra.

5

See Greaves Pyramidog., pp. 6, 7.

6

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 138.

7

Thábit Ibn Kurrah, a famous astronomer, and himself a Sabian, wrote a treatise in Syriac concerning the doctrines, rites, and ceremonies of this sect; from which, it it could be recovered, we might expect much better information than any taken from the Arabian writers; vide Abulfarag, ubi supra.

*

For a better account of these Sabians, see note on chap. ii. v. 61.

e. m. w.

1

Vide Herodot., l. 3, c. 8; Arrian, pp. 161, 162; and Strabo, l. 16.

2

Al Shahristáni.

1

Nodhm al dorr.

2

Al Baidháwi.

*

So far as the Qurán and the religion of Muhammad are concerned, a charge of idolatry would be a sign of ignorance. But when we take into account the reverence of Muslims for the Black Stone at Makkah, their worship of Walis or saints, and notably of Hasan and Husain, the charge is just. However, when this inconsistency of Muslims is made to appear as an argument against Islám, it is as absurd as the attempt of Muslims to establish the charge of idolatry against Christians by pointing to Roman Catholic image-worship.

e. m. w.

3

Vide post.

4

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 163.

1

Shahristáni.

2

Al Jannábi.

3

Shahristáni.

4

This name seems to be corrupted, there being no such among the Arab tribes. Poc. Spec., p. 130.

5

Abulfarag, p. 160.

6

Poc. Spec., p. 132.

7

Cap. 53, v. 1.

8

Ibid., va. 19-28.

9

Ibid.

1

Dr. Prideaux mentions this expedition, but names only Abu Sofián, and mistaking the name of the idol for an appellative, supposes he went only to disarm the Tayifians of their weapons and instruments of war. See his Life of Mahomet, p. 98.

2

Abulfeda, Vit. Muham., p. 127.

3

Poc. Spec., p. 90.

4

Al Jauhari, apud eund., p. 91.

5

Al Shah., ib.

6

Al Firauz., ib.

1

Al Jauhari.

2

Al Shahristáni, Abulfeda, &c.

3

Al Baidháwi, al Zamakhshari.

4

Poc. Spec., p. 91, &c.

5

Ibid.

6

Qurán, c. 71, v. 22; Comment. Persic.; vide Hyde, De Rel. Vet. Pers., p. 133.

7

Al Jauhari, al Shahristáni.

8

Idem, al Firauzábádi, and Safiu’ddin.

9

Al Firauzáb.

1

Shahristáni.

2

Al Jauhari.

3

Al Firauzáb.

4

Poc. Spec., p. 94.

5

See Hyde, De Rel. Vet. Pers., p. 132.

*

Somnáth is the name of the idol, and is applied to the god Mahadev. This idol may have been called Lát or al Lát by the Muslim plunderer, Mahmúd, and his followers, but that it was ever so called by the Hindus is a mistake.

e. m. w.

1

D’Herbelot, Bibl. Orient., p. 512.

2

Al Mustatraf.

3

Al Jannab.

4

Abulfed., Shahrist., &c.

5

Poc. Spen., p. 95.

6

Safiu’ddin.

7

Poc. Spec., p. 97.

8

Abulfeds.

9

Ibn al Ashir., al Jannáb., &c.

*

Safá and Marwa “are two slightly elevated spots adjacent to theTemple of Mekkeh.”—Lane’s Kurán, p. 33.

e. m. w.

1

Poc. Spec., p. 98.

2

Qurán, c. 2, v. 159.

5

Al Mustatraf, al Jauhari.

4

Al Mustatraf, al Jannábi.

5

Abulfarag, p. 160.

1

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 135.

2

Al Mustatraf.

3

In his Hist. Relig. Vet. Pers.

4

Dr. Prideaux’s Connect of the Hist. of the Old and New Test., part i. book 4.

5

Al Mustatraf.

1

Chap. 50.

*

Here is another instance of the error into which the writers of last century were led by Muslim authors. This Abu Qaríb Asad flourished about the beginning of the third century of our era, and hence about four hundred years before Muhammad. See Introd. Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. i. p. clvi.

e. m. w.

2

See before, p 28, and Baronii, Annal. ad sec. vi.

3

Chap. 85, vv. 4, 5.

4

See Galat. i. 17.

5

Abulfarag, p. 149.

6

Al Mustatraf.

7

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 137.

8

Al Jannábi, apud Poc. Spec., p. 63.

1

Vule Gregentii disput, cam Herbano Judæo

*

We can but wonder at the apparent credulity which could admit a story like this as anything more than a fabrication. The whole account of the persecution of Christians by Dhu Nuwás shows that Christianity had been introduced before his time

e. m. w.

1

Al Maidáni and Ahmad Ibn Yusaf, apud Poc. Spec., p. 72

2

Abulfeda, apud eund., p. 74.

3

Safiu’ddin, apud. Poc. Spec., p. 137.

*

Lane says “the Copts call their metropolitan Matran.”—Kurán, p. 39, note.

e. m. w.

4

A Bulfarag in Chross. Syriac, MS.

5

Abulfeda in Descr. Iracæ.

6

Vide Assemani, Bibl. Orient., tom. 2, in Dissert. de Monophysitis, and p. 245.

7

Al Mustatraf, apud Poc. Spec., p. 136.

1

Vide Reland, De Relig. Moham., p. 270; and Millium de Mohammedismo ante Moham., p. 311.

2

These seem to be the same whom M. La Roque calls Moors. Voy. dans la Palestine, p. 110.

3

See Prideaux’s Life of Mahomet, p. 6.

4

Strabo, l. 16, p. 1129.

5

Idem ibid., p. 1084.

6

La Roque. Voy. dans la Palestine, p. 109, &c.

1

Job xix. 23, 24.

1

See Prideaux’s Life of Mahomet, pp. 29, 30

2

A specimen of the Cufic character may be seen in Sir J. Chardin’s Travels, vol. iii. p. 119.

3

Ibn Khaliqán. Yet others attribute the honour of the invention of this character to Ibn Muklah’s brother, Abdallah al Hassan, and the perfecting of it to Ibn Amíd al Kátib, after it had been reduced to near the present form by Abd’alhamid. Vide D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., pp. 590, 108, and 194.

1

Poc. Orat. ante Carmen Tograi, p. 10.

2

Poc. Spec., p. 161.

1

Ibn Rashik, apud Poc. Spec., p. 160.

2

Poc. Orat. præfix. Carm. Tograi, ubi supra.

3

Idem, Spec., p. 159.

4

Geogr. Nub., p. 51.

5

Poc. Spec., p. 159.

6

Ibid., and p. 381. Et in calce Notar. in Carmen Tograi, p. 233.

1

Jaláluddin al Soyú., apud Poc. Spec., p. 159, &c.

2

Ibid., p. 160.

3

Ibid., 161. Al Safadi confirms this by a story of a grammarian named Abu Jaafar, who sitting by the Mikyas or Nilometer in Egypt, in a year when the Nile did not rise to its usual height, so that a famine was apprenended, and dividing a piece of poetry into its parts or feet, to examine them by the rules of art, some who passed by not understanding him, imagined he was uttering a charm to hinder the rise of the river, and pushed him into the water, where he lost his life.

4

Vide Clericum de Prosod. Arab., p. 2.

5

Pocock, in calce Notar. ad Carmen Tograi.

6

Vide Gentii Notas in Gulistan Sheikh Sadi, p. 486, &c.

7

Poc. Spec., p. 48.

1

Ibn al Hubaírah, apud Poc. in Not. ad Carmen Tograi, p. 107.

2

Several may be found in D’Herbelot’s Bibl. Orient., particularly in the articles of Hasan the son of Ali, Maan Fadhal, and Ibn Yahya.

1

Herodot., l. 3, c. 8.

2

Strabo, l. 16, p. 1129.

3

Vide D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., p. 121.

*

On the authority of Lane I give the following from Burckhardt’s Notes on the Bedouins and Wahhabys, vol. i. p. 185:—“The Turk is cruel, the Arab of a more kind temper; he pities and supports the wretched, and never forgets the generosity shewn to him even by an enemy. Not accustomed to the sanguinary scenes that harden and corrupt an Osmanly’s heart, the Bedouin learns at an early period of life to abstain and to suffer, and to know from experience the healing power of pity and consolation.”—Kurán, p. 48, note.

e. m. w.

*

This, again, according to Burckhardt, is a mistake, for he says that the slaughter of a camel rarely happens. (See his Notes on the Bedouins and Wahhabys, vol. i. p. 63; Lane’s Kurán, p. 48.) But the testimony of tradition to the fact that the Quraish, during their expedition against Muhammad which resulted in the battle of Badr, slaughtered nine camels daily, would seem to indicate that, whatever modern custom may be, the Arabs of Muhammad’s time indulged very freely in camels’ flesh.

e. m. w.

1

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 87; Bochart, Hierozoic., l. 2, c. 1.

2

Voyage dans la Palest., p. 220, &c.

*

That this statement is incorrect is evident from the following remarks in Burckhardt’s Notes on the Bedouins and Wahhabys, vol. i. pp. 157, 158:—“The Arabs may be styled a nation of robbers, whose principal occupation is plunder, the constant subject of their thoughts. But we must not attach to this practice the same notions of criminality that we entertain respecting highwaymen, housebreakers, and thieves in Europe. The Arabian robber considers his profession as honourable, and the term haramy (robber) is one of the most flattering titles that could be conferred on a youthful hero. The Arab robs his enemies, his friends, and his neighbours, provided that they are not actually in his own tent, where their property is sacred. To rob in the camp or among friendly tribes is not reckoned creditable to a man, yet no stain remains upon him for such an action, which, in fact, is of daily occurrence. But the Arab chiefly prides himself on robbing his enemies, and on bringing away by stealth what he could not have taken by open force. The Bedouins have reduced robbery in all its branches to a complete and regular system, which offers many interesting details.”

For these details the reader is referred to the excellent work from which the above is quoted, Lane’s Kurán, note to p. 49.

e. m. w.

1

Voyage dans la Palest., p. 213, &c.

2

Al Shahristáni, apud Poc. Orat., ubi sup., p. 9, and Spec., p. 164.

3

Abulfarag, p. 161.

1

Vide Hyde in not. ad Tabulas stellar fixar, Ulugh Beigh, p. 5.

2

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 103. &c.

*

R. Bosworth Smith, in his Lectures on Muhammad and Muhammadanism, p. 216, makes the following statement on this subject:—

“During the dark period of European history, the Arabs for five hundred years held up the torch of learning to humanity. It was the Arabs who then ‘called the Muses from their ancient seats;’ who collected and translated the writings of the Greek masters; who understood the geometry of Apollonius, and wielded the weapons found in the logical armoury of Aristotle. It was the Arabs who developed the sciences of agriculture and astronomy, and created those of algebra and chemistry; who adorned their cities with colleges and libraries, as well as with mosques and palaces; who supplied Europe with a school of philosophers from Cordova, and a school of physicians from Salerno.”

This expresses the opinion of a numerous class of modern writers on Islám. But, whilst according to the Arabs all praise for what they did towards the preservation and advancement of learning during the dark ages, we cannot see that astronomy, as a science, owes much to Arab genius. As in regard to philosophical learning and medical science, so in regard to astronomy, it may be fairly said that the Muslims did not improve on their Greek masters. They never succeeded in elevating it out of the region of astrology.

On this question, see Arnold’s Islám and Christianity, pp. 233-236.

e. m. w.

1

Vide Hyde, ubi sup., p. 4.

1

Ricaut’s State of the Ottoman Empire, p. 187.

2

Prideaux’s Preface to his Life of Mahomet.

1

Vide La Vie de Mahommed, par Boulainvilliers, p. 219, &c.

2

Vide Simon, Hist. Crit de la Créance, &c., des Nations du Levant.

3

Ammian Maroellin., l. 21. Vide etiam Euseb., Hist. Eccles., l. 8, c. 1. Sozom., l. 1, c. 14, &c. Hilar. et Sulpic. Sever. in Hist. Sacr., p. 112, &c.

1

Ammian. Marcellin., lib. 27.

2

Idem, l. 21.

3

Procop. in Anecd., p. 60.

4

See an instance of the wickedness of the Christian army, even when they were under the terror of the Saracens, in Ockley’s Hist. of the Sarac., vol. i. p. 239.

5

Vide Boulainvil., Vie de Mahom., ubi sup.

6

Vide Sozomen., Hist. Eccles., l. 1, c. 16, 17. Sulpic. Sever., ubi supra.

7

Euseb., Hist. Eccles., l. 6, c. 33.

8

Idem ibid., c. 37.

9

Epiphan. de Hæres., l. 2; Hær. 40.

10

Idem ibid., l. 3; Hæres., 75, 79.

1

Elmacin. Eutych.

2

Cap. 5, v. 77.

*

A careful study of the Qurán will show that this is the only conception of a Trinity which found a place in Muhammad’s mind.

e. m. w.

1

Machiavelli, Princ., c. 6, p. 19.

1

Ockley’s Hist. of the Saracens, vol. i. p. 19, &c.

2

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 70.

1

Vide Teixeira, Relaciones de los Reyes de Persia, p. 195, &c.

1

He was not his eldest son, as Dr. Prideaux tells us, whose reflections built on that foundation must necessarily fail (see his Life of Mahomet, p. 9); nor yet his youngest son, as M. de Boulainvilliers (Vie de Mahommed, p. 182, &c.) supposes; for Hamza and al Abbás were both younger than Abdallah.

2

Abulfeda, Vit. Moham., p. 2.

1

See Qurán, c 2

2

Prideaux’s Life of Mahomet, p. 76.

1

Qurán, c. 10. v. 37

2

See Casaub. of Enthusiasm, p. 148.

*

For a most able and satisfactory exposition of the character of Muhammad, we refer the reader to Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. iv. chap. xxxvii.

e. m. w.

1

Ammian Marcell., l. 14, c. 4.

1

Vide Abulfeda Vit. Moham., p. 144, &c.

1

Vide Prid. Life of Mahomet, p. 105.

2

Vide Abulfeda, ubi supra.

1

See Qurán, c. 29, v. 47. Prid. Life of Mahomet. p 28, &c.

2

Chap. 7.

3

This passage is generally agreed to be the first five verses of the 96th chapter.

4

I do not remember to have read in any Eastern author that Khadíjah ever rejected her husband’s pretences as delusions, or suspected him of any imposture. Yet see Prideaux’s Life of Mahomet, p. 11, &c.

1

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 157.

2

Vide Abulfeda, Vit. Moham., p. 16, where the learned translator has mistaken the meaning of this passage.

3

For he was his purchased slave, as Abulfeda expressly tells us, and not his cousin-german, as M. de Boulainvilliers asserts (Vie de Mah. p. 273).

*

Lane calls attention to the fact that “the conversion of a person after he has been made a slave does not entitle him to, and seldom obtains for him, his freedom.” The “followers” of Muhammad referred to in the text probably designates only those who were his contemporaries Certainly the “rule” is not observed by the holders of slaves, black and white, in Turkey, Egypt, and other regions under Muslim government.

e. m. w.

1

Qurán, c. 74. See the notes thereon.

*

The statement that Ali “vehemently threatened those who should oppose” Muhammad is a mistake, which, says Lane (Kurán, p. 62), “originated with Gagnier, who, in his edition of Abu-l-Fida’s Life of Mohammed, has given the original words of this speech with several errors, and thus rendered them—‘Egomet ita faciam; ego ipse dentes illio excutiam, aculos eruam, ventrem dissecabo, crura mutilabo, &c.’ (p. 19).”

e. m. w.

1

Abulfeda, ubi supra.

1

Idem, Ibn Shohnah.

2

Dr. Prideaux seems to take this word for a proper name, but it is only the title the Arabs give to every king of this country. See his Life of Mahomet, p. 55.

3

Ibn Shohnah

4

Al Jannábi

1

Abulfeda, p. 28. Ibn Shohuah.

1

Ibn Shohnah.

2

See the notes on the 17th chapter of the Qurán.

3

Life of Mahomet, pp. 41, 51. &c.

1

Cap. 60, v. 12.

2

Vide Qurán, c. 6, v. 151

1

Abulfeda, Vit. Moham., p. 40, &c.

2

Ibn Ishák.

*

No sentiment could be further from the truth than this. Jesus and Buddha have more followers than any other “prophets” to-day. Even Islám has not depended on the sword for all its successes, e.g., the conversion of multitudes of Tartars, Hindus, Africans, &c. Judaism was never a religion of the sword, and Christianity has ever prospered amidst the fires of persecution, and in spite of the sword. But see next paragraph.

e. m. w.

1

Machiavelli, Princ., e. 6.

2

See Prideaux’s Letter to the Deists, p. 220, &c.

1

See Bayle’s Dict. Hist, Art. Mahomet, Rem. O.

*

A deputation was sent at this time to Muhammad, but its object was not to assassinate him. This has been satisfactorily established by Muir in his Life of Mahomet, vol. ii. chap. vi. p. 251. He says, “What was the decision as to their future course of action (i.e., of the Coreish), what the object even of the present deputation, it is impossible, amid the hostile and marvellous tales of tradition, to conclude. There is little reason to believe that it was assassination, although the traditionists assert that this was determined upon at the instigation of Abu Jahi, supported by the devil, who, in the person of an old man from Najd, shrouded in a mantle, joined the council. Mahomet himself, speaking in the Corân of the designs of his enemies, refers to them in these indecisive terms—‘And call to mind when the unbelievers plotted against thee, that they might detain thee, or slay thee, or expel thee; yea, they plotted, but God plotted likewise, and God is the best of plotters’ (Sura viii. ver. 30). Assuredly had assassination been the sentence, and its immediate execution (as pretended by tradition) ordered by the council, Mahomet would have indicated the fact in clearer language than these alternative expressions. A resolution so fatal would unquestionably have been dwelt on at length, both in the Coran and traditions, and produced as a justification (for such, indeed, it would have been) of all subsequent hostilities.”

e. m. w.

1

See the notes to chap. 8 and 36.

*

Burckhardt says “south” (Travels in Arabia, p. 176). So Lane in Kurán, p. 74.

e. m. w.

1

It is observable that the Jews have a like tradition concerning David, when he fled from Saul into the cave;and the Targum paraphrases these words of the second verse of Psalm lvii., which was composed on occasion of that deliverance: “I will pray before the Most High God that performeth all things for me, in this manner; I will pray before the Most High God, who called a spider to weave a web for my sake in the mouth of the cave.”

2

Al Baidhawi in Qurán, c. 9. Vide D’Herbelo. Bibl. Orient., p. 445.

*

“The verses in Sura viii. 30, about God plotting so as to deceive the Meceans, and in Sura ix. 40, about God assisting the two refugees in the cave, have probably given rise to these tales.” Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. ii. p. 257, note.

e. m. w.

3

Cap. 9, v. 40.

4

Abulfeda; Vit. Moh., p. 50, &c. Ebn Shohnah.

†

“It is the general opinion of our chronologers that the first day of the Muslim era of ‘the Flight’ (or, more properly, ‘the Emigration’) was Friday the 16th of July ad 622. . This era does not commence from the day on which the proph departed from Mekkeh (as is supposed by most of our authors who have mentioned this subject), but from the first day of the moon or month of Moharram preceding that event. . . . The flight itself . . . commenced on the 22d of September.”—Lanc in “Kuran,” p. 75.

e. m. w.

5

Abulfeda, ib. pp. 52, 53.

1

Disputatio Christiani contra Saracen., cap. 4.

2

Prideaux’s Life of Mahomet, p. 58.

3

Al Bokhari in Sonna.

4

Al Jannabi.

5

Ahmad Ibn Yusaf.

6

Vide Gagnier, not, in Abulfed. de Vit. Moh., pp. 52, 53.

7

See the notes on the Qurán, chap. 3, v. 13.

1

Vide Abulfeda, Vit. Moh., p. 158.

1

Abulfeda, Vit. Moh., p. 85.

*

These statements are manifest fabrications of a later period. Muir says. “There is no reason to believe that there was any such abject worship of Mahomet during his lifetime.”—Life of Mahomet, vol. iv. p. 30.

e. m. w.

2

See before, p. 28.

1

Abulfeda, Vit. Moh., p. 92, &c.

*

This whole story of the conversion of Badhán, with all its miraculous surroundings, is a clear fabrication. The only element of truth allowable is that Badhán, taking advantage of a revolution in Persia, threw off his allegiance to that power, and, finding Muhammad the leader of a powerful and growing faction in Arabia, was glad to gain his support by signifying his allegiance to him.

e. m. w.

2

Al Jannábi.

†

This absurd pretension of the traditionists is described in full in Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. iv. chap. 20.

e. m. w.

3

It is, however a different name from that of the Virgin Mary, which the Orientals always write Maryam or Miriam, whereas this is written Máriya.

4

This prince is omitted in Dr. Pocock’s list of the kings of Ghassán, Spec., p. 77.

1

Abulfeda ubi sup., p. 94. &c.

*

For a full and reliable account of the matters treated in this paragraph, see Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. iv. chap. 20, already referred to above.

e. m. w.

2

Idem ib., pp. 99, 100, &c.

†

“Some accounts pretend that Khâled rallied the army, and either turned the day against the Romans or made it a drawn battle. But besides that the brevity of all the accounts is proof enough of a reverse, the reception of the army on its return to Medina admits of only one conclusion, viz., a complete, ignominious, and unretrieved discomfiture. —Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. iv. p. 100, note.

e. m. w.

1

Al Bokhári in Sonna.

2

This circumstance is a plain proof that the Quraish had actually broken the truce, and that it was not a mere pretence of Muhammad’s, as Dr. Prideaux insinuates. Life of Mahomet, p. 94.

1

Vide Abulfeda, ubi sup., c. 51, 52.

2

Vide Gagnier, not ad Abulfeda, p. 121.

3

Abulfeda, ubi sup., p. 128.

*

The arguments used to persuade the Yamanites were the swords of his Muslim followers.

e. m. w.

4

Ibid., p. 129.

1

This name was at first given to the Pentateuch only, Nehem. viii. Vide Simon. Hist. Crit. du Vieux. Test., l. 1, c. 9.

2

Vide Erpen. not. ad Hist. Joseph., p. 3.

3

Marrac. de Alcor., p. 41.

1

Vide Gol. in append. ad Gram. Arab. Erpen., 175. A chapter or subdivision of the Massictoth of the Mishna is also called Perek. Maimon., Præf. in Seder Zeraim, p. 57.

2

Vide Gol., ubi. sup., 177. Each of the six grand divisions of the Mishna is also called Seder. Maimon., ubi sup., p. 55.

*

In this edition the verses are numbered according to the division of Shaikh Abdul Qádir of Delhi, so as to correspond with those of the Roman Urdú edition published at Lodiana, 1876.

e. m. w.

1

Or as others reckon them, 99,464 Reland., De Rel. Moh. p. 25

2

Or according to another computation, 330,113. Ibid. Vide Gol. ubi.sup., p 178 D’Herbelot. Bibl Orient. p. 87.

*

Hughes in his introduction to the Roman Urdu Qurán, makes the number of verses to be 6616; of words, 77,934; and of letters, 323,671.

e. m. w.

3

Yide Reland. De Relig. Moh., p. 25.

4

Vide Gol., ubi sup., p. 178. Maimon., Præf in Seder Zeraim, p. 57.

1

Vide Smith, De Moribus et Instit. Turcar., p. 58.

*

In this edition these parts are called sipáras, from two Persian words: si, thirty, and pára, parts; and they are indicated as first sipára, second sipára, &c.

e. m. w.

2

Hyde, His. Rel. Vet. Pers., p. 14.

1

Vide Buxtorf, Lexicon Rabbin.

2

Vide Ibid. See also Schickardi Bechinat happerushim, p. 62, &c.

1

Golius in Append. ad Gram. Erp., p. 182.

*

See Rodwell’s Koran, p. 17, note. Rodwell conjectures that they may have been the initial letters or marks of the persons to whom the manuscripts of the respective Súras belonged from which Zaid compiled the present text.

e. m. w.

2

See post.

3

Ahmed Abd’alhalim, apud Marrace, de Alc., p. 43.

4

A noble writer therefore mistakes the question when he says these Eastern religionists leave their sacred writ the sole standard of literate performance by extinguishing all true learning. For though they were destitute of what we call learning, yet they were far from being ignorant, or unable to compose elegantly in their own tongue. See Lord Shaftesbury’s Characteristics, vol. iii. p 235

1

Al Ghazáli, apud Poc. Spec., 191. See Qurán, c. 17. v. 90, and also c. 2, p. 3, v. 23, and c. II, v. 14, &c.

*

Arnold (Islam and Christianity, p. 324) has pointed out that, while the beauty of the Qurán was acknowledged by some of Muhammad’s contemporaries, yet there is proof from the Qurán itself that this was rather the exception than the rule, e.g., chap. viii. 31, also chap. xxi. 5.

e. m. w.

2

D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., p. 512, &c.

3

Poc. Spec., p. 80.

4

See supra, p. 53

†

This Amri al Qais died in ad 540, on his return from Constantinople. See Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. i. p. ccxxii. This was just thirty years before Muhammad was born!

I can find no authority for the statement that Lábíd, the satirist of the Baní Amir, rendered Muhammad any assistance of a poetic order. If a convert at all, be must have become such very shortly before Muhammad’s death. See Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. iv, p. 226.

e. m. w.

1

See Casaubon, of Enthusiasm, c. 4.

1

Qurán, c. 15, v. 6; c. 21, v. 3, &c.

2

Golius. in appen. ad Gram. Erp., p. 176.

1

Vide Qurán, c. 16, v. 105, and c. 25, v. 5.

2

See the notes on those passages.

3

Life of Mahomet, p. 31, &c.

1

Vide Quran, c. 97, and note ibid.

2

Therefore it is a mistake of Dr. Prideaux to say it was brought him chapter by chapter. Life of Mahomet, p. 6. The Jews also say the Law was given to Moses by parcels. Vide Millium, de Mohammedismo ante Moham., p. 365.

3

Not the whole chapter, as Golius says. Append. ad Gr. Erp., p. 108.

*

Muir says, “This statement does not seem to be borne out by any good authority.”—Introduction, Life of Mahomet, p. 4.

e. m. w.

1

Elmacin. in Vita Abu Becr, Abulfeda.

1

Abulfeda, in Vitis Abu Becr and Othman

2

The characters or marks of the Arabic vowels were not used till several years after Muhammad. Some ascribè the invention of them to Yahya Ibn Yámir, some to Nasr Ibn Asam, surnamed al Laithi, and others to Abu al Aswad al Díli—all, three of whom were doctors of Basra, and immediately succeeded the companions. See D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., p. 87.

1

Abu Hashem Hebatallah, apud Marracc. de Alc., p. 42.

1

See post, Sect. VIII.

2

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 219, &c.

3

Anno Hij., 218. Abulfarag, p. 245, v. etiam Elmacin. in Vita al Mamûn.

4

In the time of al Mutasim, a doctor named Abu Harún Ibn al Baqa found out a distinction to screen himself, by affirming that the Qurán was ordained, because it is said in that book, “And I have ordained thee the Qurán.” He went still further to allow that what was ordained was created, and yet he denied it thence followed that the Qurán was created. Abulfarag, p. 253.

5

Ibid., p. 257.

6

Anno Hij., p. 242.

7

Abulfarag, p. 262.

8

Al Ghazáli, in prof. fid.

1

The Khalífah al Walíd Ibn Yazíd, who was the eleventh of the race of Ommeya, and is looked on by the Muhammadans as a reprobate and one of no religion, seems to have treated this book as a rational creature; for, dipping into it one day, the first words he met with were these: “Every rebellious, perverse person shall not prosper.” Whereupon he stuck it on a lance, and shot it to pieces with arrows, repeating these verses: “Dost thou rebuke every rebellious, perverse person? Behold, I am that rebellious, perverse person. When thou appearest before thy Lord on the day of resurrection, say, O Lord, al Walíd has torn me thus.” Ibn Shohnah. v. Poc. Spec., p. 223.

2

Poc. Spec., p. 222.

3

Herbelot, p. 87.

4

Abulfeda, Shahristáni, &c., apud Poc Spec., p. 222, et Marracc., De Qur., p. 44.

5

Al Zamakhahari. Vide Quran, c. 3, v. 7, note.

1

Ahmad Ibn Muh. al Thalabi, in Princip. Expos. Alc.

2

Yahya Ibn al Salám al Basri, in Princep. Expos. Alc.

3

The Jews have the same veneration for their law, not daring to touch it with unwashed hands, nor then neither without a cover. Vide Millium, De Mohammedismo ante Moh., p. 366.

4

This they do by dipping into it, and taking an omen from the words which they first light on, which practice they also learned of the Jews, who do the same with the Scriptures. Vide Millium, ubi sup. [See also Lane’s Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians, vol. i. chap. xi., near the end. e. m. w.]

5

Sionita, De Urb. Orient., p. 41, et Marrace., De Aic., p. 33.

1

Reland, De Rel. Moh., p. 265.

*

In addition to those mentioned in the text, we would note two popular translations of the Qurán in the Urdú language current in India. They are interlined with the Arabic text in all Muslim editions.

e. m. w.

1

The root Salama, from whence Islám is formed, in the first and fourth conjugations, signifies also to be saved, or to enter into a state of salvation; according to which, Islám may be translated the religion or state of salvation; but the other sense is more approved by the Muhammadans, and alluded to in the Qurán itself. See c. 2. v. 111, and c. 3, v. 19, notes.

*

To these should be added the duty of Jihád, or war against infidels, which our author places under the head of Civil Laws, see chap. vi. All Muslims regard this as a religious duty, which they enumerate along with the four mentioned in the text.

e. m. w.

1

Marrac in Alc., p. 102.

*

The God of Islám is undoubtedly the only true God, inasmuch as he is represented as a personal God, the Creator and Preserver of all things, as a prayer-hearing God, and as possessing many other characteristics of the God of the Bible.

And yet we have other objections to the Muslim conception of God, besides that of its “impious rejecting of the Trinity.” We object to its having exalted His omnipotence over all other attributes; to its lowering of His character for holiness, nothing being said of God in the Qurán which might not be said of a holy man; to its limiting the goodness of God to Muslims, no matter what their character, relegating even infants of unbelievers to hell-fire; to its sacrifice of God’s justice by denying the necessity for any atonement for sin; and, finally, to its limitation of the truth of God by its sanctification of a lie, if it only be spoken in self-defence or for the advancement of Islám. It should never be forgotten that the God of Islám is not merely the Allah described in the Qurán, but the God who speaks in every word, syllable, and letter of the Quran. We must not therefore separate what we conceive to have special reference to God in its teaching, from what we may conceive to have been used by Muhammad for the furtherance of his private or political purposes; for, according to Islám, Muhammad was but the mouthpiece of Divinity. If, then, we would get a correct idea of the Allah of Islám, we must take into account all that was done by Muhammad under the sanction of the Qurán. Let this be done, and it will appear that what we have said above is by no means extravagant.

A true conception of Islám and its doctrines can never be formed by looking at the Qurán from the standpoint of the “unbelievers,” who regard it as the work of Muhammad; but by looking at it as the Muslim does, who believes it to be not only God’s word, but as being from eternity recorded on the “Preserved Table,” kept close by the throne of God

We would refer the reader to Palgraves criticism on Muhammadan theology. For further information on this subject, see his Travels in Arabiu.

e. m. w.

2

Sect VIII.

1

Qurán, c. 2, vv 31-34.

2

Ibid., c. 7, v. 12, and c. 38, v. 77.

3

Ibid., c. 2, v. 97.

4

See the notes, ibid., vv. 97, &c.

5

Vide Hyde, Hist. Rel. Vet. Pers, p. 262.

6

Vide ibid., p. 271, and note in Qurán, c. 2, vv 97, &c.

*

Muslims pronounce these names Jibráíl, Míkáíl, and Izráíl.

e. m. w.

7

Vide note, ibid., c. 2, v. 30.

1

Qurán, c. 6, 13, and 86. The offices of these four angels are described almost in the same manner in the apocryphal Gospel of Barnabas, where it is said that Gabriel reveals the secrets of God, Michael combats against his enemies, Raphael receives the souls of those who die, and Uriel is to call every one to judgment on the last day. See the Menagiana, tom. iv. p. 333.

2

Qurán, c. 50. v. 16.

3

Talmud Hieros. in Rosh hashan.

4

Vide Hide, ubi sup., c. 19 and 20.

5

Gemar. in Hagig. and Bereshit rabbah, &c. Vide Psalm civ. 4.

6

Yalkut hadash.

7

Gemar. in Shebet, and Bava Bathra, &c.

8

Midrash, Yalkut Shemúni.

9

Gemar. Berachoth.

10

Vide Reland, De Rel. Moh., p. 189, &c.

1

Qurán, c. 2, vv. 31-34. See also c. 7, v. 12; c. 38, v. 77, &c.

2

Qurán, c. 55, v. 14. See the notes there.

3

Jaláluddin, in Qurán, c. 2, v. 101, and c. 18, v. 48.

4

Vide Qurán, c. 55, v. 31; c. 72, vv. 1-14; and c. 74.

5

See D’Herbelot, Bibl. Orient pp. 369, 820, &c.

6

In libro Zohar.

1

Gemara, in Hagiga

2

Igrat Baale hayyim., c. 15.

*

A careful study of the passages alluded to here will show that the alterations and “corruptions charged against Jews and Christians in the Quran do not refer to the text of their Scriptures. Muir in his treatise on The Testimony Borne by the Coran to the Jewish and Christian Scriptures, clearly proves that—“The strongest and most unequivocal testimony is borne by the Coran to the Jewish and Christian Scriptures as current in the time of Mahomet that the evidence extends equally to their genuineness and authority; and that there is not a hint any where to be found of their concealment or interpolation.”—Life of Mahomet, vol. ii. p. 207.

e. m. w.

1

Terry’s Voyage to the East Indies, p 277.

2

De Rel. Moham., p. 23.

3

A copy of this kind, he tells us, is in the library of the Duke of Tuscany, Bibl. Orient.. p. 924

*

See page 10 Preface to Preliminary Discourse.

1

Reland, ubi supra.

2

Menagian, tom. iv. p. 321, &c.

3

John xiv. 16, 26, xv. 26, and xvi. 7, compared with Luke xxiv. 49.

4

See Toland’s Nazarenus, the first eight chapters.

5

Cap. 61, v. 6.

6

Qurán, c. 15, v. 9.

7

Reland ubi supra, pp. 24, 27.

1

Reland, ubi supra, p. 41.

2

Qurán, c. 2, v. 253, &c.

3

Thus Heber is said to have been a prophet by the Jews (Seder Olam., p. 2), and Adam by Epiphanius (Adv. Hæres., p. 6). See also Joseph., Ant., l. 1, c. 2.

1

Qurán, c 2, vv. 41, 78; c. 3, 11.

2

Some of these texts are produced by Dr. Prideaux at the end of his Life of Mahomet, and more by Marracci in Alcor., p. 20, &c.

*

For example, Deut. xviii. 15-18, where the Lord promises to raise up a prophet for the children of Israel from among their brethren. Muslims argue that the Israelites had no brethren excepting the Ismaílites, from whom Muhammad was descended. This argument is strengthened, they say, by the further statement that this prophet should be like unto Moses. Again, Deut. xxxiv. 10, declares that “there arose no prophet in Israel like unto Moses;” Habakkuk iii. 3 says, “The Holy One came from Mount Paran.” Mount Paran is declared by the Muslims to be Makkah!

The Hebrew word חֶמֶר, translated desire in Hag. ii. 7, is said to be the same as the name Muhammad. The same word is translated beloved in Cant. ii. 3. Wherefore we are called upon to behold the very name of the Arabian prophet in the Bible!

When we read in Isaiah, in the Septuagint version, chap. xxi. 7, that he saw “two riders, one on an ass and one on a camel,” we are to understand the rider on the ass to refer to Jesus, who so entered Jerusalem, while the rider on a camel refers to Muhammad. When John the Baptist was asked if he were the Christ, or Elijah, or “that prophet,” Muhammadans claim that the words “that prophet” refer to Muhammad, &c., &c. See Essays on the Life of Muhammad, by Syed Ahmed Khan Bahádr, C.S.I.

e. m. w.

1

Al Ghazáli. Vide Poc., not. in Port Mosis, p. 241, &c.

2

Cap. 8, v. 52, and c. 47, v. 29, &c.

3

Smith, De Morib. et Instit. Turcar. Ep. 2, p. 57.

4

Vide Hyde, in Noris ad Bobov. de Visit. Ægrot., p. 10.

1

R. Elias, in Tishbi See also Buxtorf, Synag. Judaic., and Lexic. Talmud.

2

Wide Poc., ubi sup.

3

Qurán, c. 79, v. 1. The Jews my the same, in Nishurat bayim., f 77.

4

Vide Qurán, c. 23, v. 101, and not. ib.

1

Poc., ubi sup., 247.

2

Ibid., p. 248. Consonant hereto are the Jewish notions of the souls of the just being on high, under the throne of glory. Vide ibid., p. 156.

3

Ibid., p. 250.

4

Al Baidháwi. Vide Poc., ubi sup., p 252.

1

Or, as we corruptly name him, Avicenna.

2

Kenzal aírár.

3

Vide Poc., ubi sup., p. 254.

4

Idem, ibid., p. 255, &c.

6

Bereshit. rabbah, &c. Vide Poc., ubi sup., p. 117, &c.

1

Vide Poc., ubi sup., p. 258, &c.

2

See Luke xviii. 8.

3

See Whiston’s Theory of the Earth, bk. ii. p. 98, &c.

1

Chap. xiii.

1

Al Thalábi, in Quràn, c. 4.

2

See Isaiah xi. 6, &c.

3

Cap. 18, v. 96, and 21, v. 96.

4

See Ezek. xxxix. 9; Rev. xx. 8.

5

See Qurán, c. 44, v. 10, and the notes thereon. Compare also Joel ii. 20, and Rev. ix. 2.

1

See post, in this section.

*

An account of a remarkable movement among Indian Muslims, aroused during the eleventh century (a.h.) by the expected advent of the Imám Mahdí, is given in F. Talboys Wheeler’s History of India, vol. iv. part i. pp. 151-153.

e. m. w.

1

Vide D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., p. 531.

2

Cap. 81, v. 5.

1

Several writers, however, make no distinction between this blast and the first, supposing the trumpet will sound but twice. See the notes to Qurán, c. 39, v. 68.

2

Qurán, c. 30, v. 14.

3

To these some add the spirit who bears the waters on which the throne is placed, the preserved table wherein the decrees of God are registered, and the pen wherewith they are written; all which things the Muhammadans imagine were created before the world.

4

In this circumstance the Muhammadans follow the Jews, who also agree that the trumpet will sound more than once. Vide R. Bechai in Biur hattorah, and Otioth ahel R. Akiba.

1

Elsewhere (see supra p. 130) this rain is said to continue only forty days; but it rather seems that it is to fall during the whole interval between the second and third blasts.

2

Qurán, c. 32, v. 4.

3

Ibid., c. 70. v. 4.

1

See the notes to Qurán, c. 81, v. 5, and supra, page 136.

2

In this also they follow their old guides, the Jews, who say that if the wheat which is sown naked rise clothed, it is no wonder the pious who are buried in their clothes should rise with them. Gemar. Sanhedr., fol. 90.

1

See supra, Sect. I., p. 43.

1

Cap. 14, v. 49.

2

Qurán, c. 6, v. 37. Vide Maimonid., More Nev., part iii. c. 17.

3

This opinion the learned Greaves supposed to have taken its rise from the following words of Ezekiel, wrongly understood: “And as for ye, O my flock, thus saith the Lord God Behold I, even I, will judge between the fat cattle, and between the lean cattle; because ye have thrust with side and with shoulder, and pushed all the diseased with your horns, till ye have scattered them abroad, therefore will I save my flock, and they shall no more be a prey, and I will judge between cattle and cattle,” &c. (Ezek. xxxiv. 17. 20-22). Much might be said concerning, brutes deserving future reward and punishment. See Bayle Dict. Hist. Art. Rorarius, Rem. D., &c.

1

Al Ghazáli

2

Idem

1

Vide Pocock, not. in Port. Mosis, p. 277.

2

See supra, p. 120.

1

Gemara, Sanhedr. c. 11; B Jos. Albo, Serm. iv. c. 33. See also Epiphan. in Ancorat., sect. 89.

1

The Arabs use, after they have drawn some milk from the camel, to wait a while and let her young one suck a little, that she may give down her milk more plentifully at the second milking.

2

Pocock, not. in Port. Mosis, pp. 278-282. See also Qurán, c. 2, v. 201.

3

Qurán, c 17, v. 16; c. 18, v. 47; c. 69, v. 25; and c. 84, vv. 7, 8.

4

Jaláluddin.

1

Qurán, c. 23, v. 103; c. 7, v. 8, &c.

2

Midrash, Yalkut Shemuni, f. 153, c. 3.

3

Gemar. Sanhedr., f. 91, &c.

4

Exod. xxxii. 32, 33; Dan. vii. 10; Rev. xx. 12, &c., and Dan. v. 27.

5

Hyde, De Rel. Vet. Pers., pp. 245, 401, &c.

1

Yet they say the dog of the even sleepers and Ezra’s ass, which was raised to life, will, by peculiar favour, be admitted into paradise. See Qurán, c. 18, vv. 8-24, and c. 3

1

Vide Qurán, c. 18, v. 48.

2

Pocock, ubi sup., pp. 282-289.

1

Hyde, De Rel. Vet. Pers., pp. 245, 402, &c.

2

Midrash, Yalkut Reubeni, § Gehinnom.

3

Qurán, c. 15, v. 14.

4

Others fill these apartments with different company. Some place in the second the idolaters; in the third. Gog and Magog, &c.; in the fourth,the devils; in the fifth, those who neglect alms and prayers; and crowd the Jews, Christians, and Magians together in the sixth. Some, again, will have the first to be prepared for the Dahrians, or those who deny the creation and believe the eternity of the world; the second, for the Dualists, or Manichees, and the idolatrous Arabs; the third, for the Brahmins of the Indies; the fourth, for the Jews; the fifth, for the Christians; and the sixth, for the Magians. But all agree in assigning the seventh to the hypocrites. Vide Millium, De Mohamedismo ante Moham., p. 412; D’Herbel., Bibl Orient., p. 368, &c.

5

Qurán, c. 40, v. 52; c. 43, v. 77; c. 74, v. 30, &c.

1

Qurán, c. 74, v. 30.

2

Ibid., c. 40, v. 52; c. 43, v. 77.

1

Poc., not. in Port. Mosis, pp. 289-291.

2

Nishmat hayim, f. 32; Gemar. in Arubin, f. 19; Zohar, ad Exod. xxvi. 2, &c.; and Hyde, De Rel. Vet. Pers., p. 245.

1

Midrash, Yalkut Shemuni, part 11, f. 116.

2

Zohar, ad Exod. xix.

3

Yalkut Shemuni, ubi sup., f. 86.

4

Nishmat hayim, f. 82; Gemar. Arabin, f. 19. Vide Qurán, c. 2. v. 79, and c. 3, v. 2d. and notes there.

5

Hyde, De Ref. Vet. Pers., p. 182.

6

Vide eundem, ibid., p. 399, &c.

1

Luke xvi. 26.

2

Jaláluddin. Vide Qurán, c. 7, vv. 47-50.

3

Al Baidháwi.

4

Qurán, ubi sup. Vide D’Herbel, Bibl. Orient., p. 121, &c.

1

Midrash, Yalkut Sioni, f. 11.

2

Al Ghazáli.

1

Yabya, in Qurán, c. 13.

2

Jaláluddin, ibid.

1

Al Ghazáli, Kanz al Afrár.

1

See supra, p. 142.

1

Isa lxiv. 4; I Cor. ii. 9.

2

Cap. 10, v. 9, &c.

3

Vide Poc., in not. ad Port. Moais, p. 305.

1

Vide Reland, De Rel. Moh., l. 2, § 17.

*

We find no authority for such spiritual blessing in the Qurán. But see post, p. 162.

e. m. w.

2

Vide Gemar Tánith, f. 25, Beracoth, f. 34, and Midrash sabboth, f. 37.

3

Megillah, Amkoth, p. 78.

4

Midrash, Yalkut Shemuni.

5

Gen. ii. 10, &c.

6

Midrash, Yalkut Shemuni.

7

Gemar. Bava Bathra, f. 78; Rashi, in Job i.

8

Vide Poc., not. in Port. Mosis, p. 298.

9

Nishmat hayim, f. 32.

10

Midrash, Tehillim, f. 11.

11

Sadder, porta 5.

12

Hyde, De Rel. Vet. Pers., p.225.

*

As all the doctrines of Muhammad concerning the future state were proclaimed in Makkan suras before the tenth year of his mission, and as almost no reference had yet been made to Christianity, it seems quite certain that he was ignorant of the Christian Scriptures; and inasmuch as he everywhere evinces in the Qurán his almost entire ignorance of Christian doctrine, we may safely conclude that he owed little or nothing to Christianity for his ideas of heaven and hell.

e. m. w.

1

Rev. xxi. 10, &c., and xxii. 1, 2.

2

Luke xxii. 29, 30. &c.

3

I would not, however, undertake to defend all the Christian writers in this particular; witness that one passage of Irenæus, wherein be introduces a tradition of St. John that our Lord should say, “The days shall come, in which there shall be vines, which shall have each ten thousand branches, and every one of those branches shall have ten thousand lesser branches, and every one of these branches shall have ten thousand twigs, and every one of these twigs shall have ten thousand clusters of grapes, and in every one of these clusters there shall be ten thousand grapes, and every one of these grapes being pressed shall yield two hundred and seventy-five gallons of wine; and when a man shall take hold of one of these sacred bunches, another bunch shall cry out, I am a better bunch take me, and bless the Lord by me,” &c. Iren., l. 5, c. 33.

1

Matt. xxii. 30.

2

Vide Rabelais, Pantagr., l. 5, c. 7. A better authority than this might, however, be alleged in favour of Muhammad’s judgment in this respect; I mean that of Plato, who is said to have proposed, in his ideal commonwealth, as the reward of valiant men and consummate soldiers, the kisses of boys and beauteous damsels. Vide Gell. Noct. Att., l. 18, c. 2.

3

Vide Hyde, De Rel. Vet. Pers., p. 266.

4

Vide eund., in not. ad Bobov. Lit Turcar., p. 21.

5

Poc. ad Port. Mosis, p. 305.

1

Hornbek, Sum. Contr., p. 16. Grelot, Voyage de Constant., p. 275 Ricaut’s Present State of the Ottoman Empire, l. 2, c. 21.

2

See Qurán, c. 3, v. 196; c. 4, v 126, &c.; and also c. 13. v. 23; c. 16, 40, 48, 57, &c. Vide etiam Reland, De Rel. Moh., l. 2, § 18; and Hyde, in not. ad Bobov. de. Visit. ægr., p. 21.

3

See supra, p. 157.

4

Vide Chardin, Voy., tom. 2, p. 328; and Bayle, Dict. Hist. Art. Mahomet, Rem. Q.

5

See Qurán, c. 56, v. 36, and the notes there; and Gagnier, not. in Abulfeda, Vit. Moh., p. 145.

1

See supra, p. 108.

2

Qurán, c. 3, v. 144; c. 4. v. 77, &c.

3

Ibid., c. 4, vv. 134-144; c. 2, vv. 6-20, &c., passim.

1

Sect. VIII.

2

Qurán, c. 4, v. 42, and c. 5, v. 7. Vide Reland, De Rel. Moh., l. 1,

3

Poc., not. in Port. Mosis, p. 356. &c.

4

Mark vii. 3, &c.

5

Vide Herodot., l. 3, c. 198.

1

Al Jannábi in Vita Abrah. Vide Poc. Spec., p. 303.

2

Herewith agrees the spurious Gospel of St. Barnabas, the Spanish translation of which (cap. 29) has these words: Dixo Abraham, Que haré yo para servir al Dios de los sanctos y prophetas? Respondiò el angel, Ve e aquellu fuente y lavate, porque Dios quiere hablar contigo. Dixo Abraham, Cemo tengo de lavarme? Luego et angelise le appareciò como uno bello-mancebo, y se lavò en la fuente, y le dixo, Abraham, haz como yo. Y Abraham se lavò, &c.

3

Al Kessáī. Vide Reland, De Rel. Moham., p. 81.

4

Al Ghazáli Ibn al Athír.

1

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 302, &c.

2

Barthol. Edessen. Confut. Hagaren., p. 360. G. Sionita and J. Hesronita, in Tract. de Urb. and Morib. Orient. ad Calcem Geogr. Nubiens., c. 15. Du Ryer, dans le Sommaire de la Rel. des Turcs, mis à la tôte de sa version de l’Alcor. St. Olon, Descr. du Royaume de Maroc, c. 2. Hyde, in not. ad Bobov. de Prec. Moh., p. 1. Smith, de Morib. et Instit. Turcar., Ep. 1, p. 32.

3

Vide Reland, De Rel. Moh., l. 2, c. 11.

4

Qurán, c. 4, v. 42, and c. 5, v. 7.

5

Vide Smith, ubi sup.

6

Gemar. Berachoth. c. 2. Vide Poc. not. ad Port. Mosis, p. 380. Sadder, porta 84.

7

Cedren., p. 250.

8

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 303.

1

Vide Bobov. de Circumcis., p. 22.

2

Philostorg., Hist. Eccl., l. 3.

3

Joseph., Ant., l. 1, c. 23.

4

Gen xvii. 25.

5

Vide Bobov., ubi sup., and Poc. Spec., p. 319.

6

Vide Reland, De Rel. Moh., l. 1, p. 75.

7

This is the substance of the following passage of the Gospel of Barnabas (cap. 23), viz., Entonces dixo Jesus; Adam el primer hombre aviendo comide por engano del demonio la comida prohibida por Dios en el parayso, se le rebelò su carne à su expiritu; por lo qual jurò diziendo, Por Dios que yo te quiero cortar; y rompiende una piedra tomò su carne paru cortarla con el corte de la piedra. Por loqual fue reprehendido del angel Gabriel, y el le dixo; Yo he jurado por Dios que lo he de cortar, y men tiroso no lo serè jamas. Ala hora el angel le enseno la superfluided de su carne, y a quellà cortò. De manerà que ansi como todo hombre toma carne de Adam, ansi esta obligado a cumplir aquello que Adam con juramento promotiò

1

Shalshel. hakkabala Vide Poc. Spec., p. 320; Gagnier, not. in Abulfed., Vit. Moh., p. 2.

2

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 304.

3

See supra, p. 39.

4

Abulfed. Vit. Moh., p. 127

5

Vide ibid., pp. 38, 39.

1

Vide Hotting., Hist. Eccles., tom. 8, pp. 470-529; Bobov. in Liturg. Turcic., p. 1, &c.; Grelot, Voyage de Constant., pp. 253-264; Chardin, Voy. de. Perse, tom. 2, p. 382, &c.; and Smith, de Moribus ac Instit. Turcar., Ep. 1, p. 38, &c.

2

Qurán, c. 2, v. 142. See the notes there.

3

Vide Hyde, De Rel. Vet. Pers., pp. 8, 9, and 126

4

Al Ghazáli.

5

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 305.

6

Vide Smith, ubi sup., p. 40.

1

Reland, De Rel. Moh., p. 96. See Qurán, c. 7, v. 32.

2

A Moor, named Ahmad Ibn Abdalla, in a Latin epistle by him, written to Maurice, Prince of Orange, and Emanuel, Prince of Portugal, containing a censure of the Christian religion (a copy of which, once belonging to Mr. Selden, who has thence transcribed a considerable passage in his treatise, De Synedriis vett. Ebræor., l. 1, c. 12, is now in the Bodleian Library), finds great fault with the unedifying manner in which mass is said among the Roman Catholics, for this very reason among others. His words are: Ubicunque congregantur simul viri et fœminœ, ibi mens non est intenta et devota: nam inter celebrandum missam et sacrificia, fœminœ et viri mutuis aspectibus, signis, ac nutibus accendunt pravorum appetitum. et desideriorum suorum ignes: et quando hoc non fieret, saltem humana fragilitas delectatur mutuo et reciproco aspectu; et ita non potest esse mens quieta, attenta, et devota.

3

The Sahíans, according to some, exceed the Muhammadans in this point, praying seven times a day. See supra, p. 34, note.

4

Gemar. Berachoth.

5

Gen. xix. 27.

6

Gen. xxiv. 63.

7

Gen. xxviii. 11, &c.

8

Dan. vi. 10.

1

Vide Millium, De Mohammedismo ante Moham., p. 427, &c., and Hyde, De Rel. Vet. Pers., p. 5, &c.

2

Maimonid in Epist ad Proselyt. Relig. Vide Poc Spec., p. 306.

3

Gemar. Bava Bathra, and Berachoth.

4

1 Kings viii. 29, &c.

5

Dan. vi. 10.

6

Some say eighteen months Vide Abulfed, Vit. Moh., p. 54.

7

Maimon. in Halachoth Tephilla, c. 9, § 8, 9. Menura hammeor, fol. 28, 2.

8

Vide Millium, ubi sup p. 424, et seq.

1

Al Baidháwi. See Qurán, c. 2, vv. 261-274.

2

Idem. Compare this with what our Saviour says (Luke xi. 41), “Give alms of such things as ye have; and behold, all things are clean unto you”

3

D’Herbel., Bibl Orient, p. 5

4

Ibid., p. 422.

5

Vide Busbeq, Epist. 3, p. 178 Smith, de Morib. Ture., Ep. 1, p. 66, &c. Compare Eccles. xi. 1 and Prov. xii. 10.

*

A few years’ residence among Muslims will serve to materially modify this statement.

e. m. w.

1

This measure is a Seá, and contains about six or seven pounds weight.

2

Vide Reland, De Rel. Mahommed, l. 1, p. 99, &c. Chardin, Voy. de Perse, tom. 2, p. 415, &c.

1

Hence alms are in the New Testament termed Δικαιοσυνη. Matt. vi. 1 (ed. Steph.), and 2 Cor. ix. 10.

2

Gemar. in Bava Bathra.

3

Ibid., in Gittin.

4

Ibid., in Rosh hashana.

5

Levit xix. 9, 10; Deut. xxiv. 19, &c.

6

Vide Genmar. Hierosol. in Peah, and Maimon. in Halachoth matanoth Aniyyim., c. 6. Coni. Pirke Avoth, v. 9.

7

Luke xix. 8.

8

Vide Reland, Ant. Sacr. Vet. Hebr., p. 402.

9

Vide ibid., p. 138.

10

Al Ghazáli, Al Mustatraf.

1

Qurán, c. 2, vv 185-195.

2

Hence we read that the Virgin Mary, to avoid answering the reflections cast on her for bringing home a child, was advised by the Angel Gabriel to feign she had vowed a fast, and therefore she ought not to speak. See Qurán, c. 19, v. 27.

3

The words of the Qurán (cap. 2, v. 187) are: “Until ye can distinguish a white thread from a black thread by the daybreak”—a form of speaking borrowed by Muhammad from the Jews, who determine the time when they are to begin their morning lesson to be so soon as a man can discern blue from white, i.e the blue threads from the white threads in the fringes of their garments. But this explication the commentators do not approve, pretending that by the white thread and the black thread are to be understood the light and dark streaks of the daybreak; and they say the passage was at first revealed without the words “of the daybreak;” but Muhammad’s followers, taking the expression in the first sense, regulated their practice accordingly, and continued eating and drinking till they could distinguish a white thread from a black thread, as they lay before them—to prevent which for the future, the words “of the daybreak” were added as explanatory of the former. Al Baídháwi. Vide Poceck, not. in Carmen Tograi, p. 89, &c. Chardin, Voy. de Perse, tom. 2, p. 423.

4

Vide Chardin, ibid., p. 421. &c. Reland, De Relig Moh., p. 109, &c.

5

See post, Sect. VI.

1

Qurán, c. 2, v. 185. See also c. 97.

2

Al Baidháwi, ex Trad. Mohammedis.

3

See Qurán, c. 2, v. 185.

4

Siphra, f. 252, 2.

5

Tosephoth ad Gemar. Yoma, f. 34.

6

Vide Gemar. Yoma, f. 40, and Maimon. in Halachoth Tanioth, c. 5. § 5.

7

Vide Gemar. Tánith, f 12, and Yoma, f. 83, and Es Hayim. Tánith, c. 1.

1

Al Ghazáli.

2

Al Bárezí in Comment. ad Orat. Ibn Nobátæ.

3

Levit. xvi. 29, and xxiii. 27.

4

Ibn al Athir. Vide Poc Spec., p. 309

1

Al Ghazáli.

2

Cap. 3, v. 97. See also c. 22, 36 and c. 2, v. 125, &c

3

Chardin, Voy. de Perse, t 2, p. 428, &c.; Bremond, Descrittioni dell’ Egitto, &c.; l. 1. c. 29; Pitts’ Account of the Rel., &c., of the Mohammedans, p. 98, &c.; and Boulainvilliers, Vie de Mah. p. 54, &c., which last author is the most particular.

4

Ahmad Ibn Yusaf.

5

Sharíf al Edrisí, and Kitab Masalik, apud Poc. Spec., p. 125, &c.

6

Sharíf al Edrísí, ibid.

*

“The interior, of the Caaba censists of a single room, the roof of which is supported by two columns, and it has no other light than what is received by the door. The ceiling, the upper half of the two columns, and the side walls to within about five feet of the floor, are hung with a thick stuff of red silk, richly interwoven with flowers and inscriptions in large characters of silver. The lower part of each pillar is lined with sweet aloe wood; and that part of the walls below the silk hangings is lined with fine white marble, ornamented with inscriptions cut in relief, and with elegant arabesques; the whole being of exquisite workmanship. The floor, which is upon a level with the door, and therefore about seven feet above the level of the area of the mosque, is laid with marble of different colours. Between the pillars numerous lamps are suspended—donations of the faithful, and said to be of solid gold. In the north-west corner of the chamber is a small gate, which leads up to the flat roof of the building. The interior ornaments are coeval with the restoration of the Caaba, which took place ad 1627.”—Burckhardt’s Travels in Arabia quoted from Lane’s Kurán, p. 7.

e. m. w.

1

Sharif al Edrisi, ibid.

2

Poc. Spec.; p. 116.

3

Gol. not. in Alfrag., p. 99. [The present limits extend much farther. Burckhardt’s Travels in Arabia, p. 466]

4

Gab. Sionita et Joh. Hesronita, de nonnullis Orient. urbib. ad calc. Geogr. Nub., p. 21. Al Mughultai in his Life of Muhammad, says the pigeons, of the temple of Makkah are of the best breed of those which laid their eggs at the mouth of the cave where the prophet and Abu Baqr hid themselves when they fled from that city. See ante. p. 86.

1

See ante, p. 38.

2

Some say that the Bait al Mámúr itself was the Kasbah of Adam, which, having been let down to him from heaven was, at the Flood, taken up again into heaven, and is there kept. Al Zamakh in Qurán, c. 2.

3

Al Júzi, ex Trad. Ibn Abbás. It has been observed that the primitive Christian Church held a parallel opinion as to the situation of the celestial Jerusalem with respect to the terrestrial; for in the apocryphal book of the Revelations of St. Peter (cap. 27), after Jesus has mentioned unto Peter the creation of the seven heavens—whence, by the way, it appears that this number of heavens was not devised by Muhammad—and of the angels, begins the description of the heavenly Jerusalem in these words: “We have created the upper Jerusalem above the waters, which are above the third heaven, hanging directly over the lower Jerusalem,” &c. Vide Gagnier, not. ad Abulfed. Vit. Moh., p. 28

4

Al Shahristáni.

5

Vide Qurán. c. 2, v. 125.

6

Al Jannábi, in Vita Abraham.

7

Vide Abulfed. Vit. Moh., p. 13

1

Abulfed. in Hist. Gen al Jannábi, &c.

2

Al Jannábi.

3

Idem, Ahmad Ibn Yusaf. Vide Poc. Spec., p. 115, &c

*

“At the (north) east corner of the Kaaba, near the door, is the famous ‘black stone;’ it forms a part of the sharp angle of the building, at four or five feet above the ground. It is an irregular oval, about seven inches in diameter, with an undulated surface, composed of about a dozen smaller stones of different sizes and shapes, well joined together with a small quantity of cement, and periectly smoothed; it looks as if the whole had been broken into many pieces by a violent blow, and then united again. It is very difficult to determine accurately the quality of his stone, which has been worn to its present surface by the million of touches and kisses it has received. It appears to me like a lava, containing several small extraneous particles of a whitish and a yellowish substance. Its colour is now a deep reddish brown, approaching to black: it is surrounded on all sides by a border, composed of a substance which I took to be a close cement of pitch and gravel, of a similar, but not quite the same, brownish colour. This border serves to support its detached pieces; it is two or three inches in breadth and rises a little above the surface of the stone.”—Burckhardt, pp. 137, 138, quoted in Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. ii. chap. ii.

Burton thinks it is an aërolite.

e. m. w.

1

Al Zamakh, &c., in Qurán. Ahmad Ibn Yusaf.

2

Poc. Spec., p. 117, &c.

3

These Karmatians were a sect which arose in the year of the Hijra 278, and whose opinions overturned the fundamental points of Muhammadism. See D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., Art. Carmath, and hercafter § viii.

4

D’Herbel., p. 40.

5

Ahmad Ibn Yusaf, Abulfeda. Vide Poc. Spec., p. 119.

1

Abulfeda.

2

Vide Hyde, De Rel. Vet Pers., p. 35.

3

Ahmad Ibn Yusal Satiu’ddin.

4

Ahmad Ibn Yusaf

5

Cap. 2, v. 125.

6

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 120, &c

7

Gen xxi. 19.

8

G. Sionit et J. Hesr. de non. urb. Orient, p. 19.

9

D’Herbel., p. 5.

10

See Qurán, c. 3. v. 97, and the notes thereon.

1

Vide Bobov. de Peregr Mecc., p. 12, &c.

2

Qurán, c 5, vv. 95-97.

3

Ibid

4

Al Baid.

5

Bobov. de Peregr. Mecc., p 11. &c.; Chardin, Voy. de Perse, t. 2, p. 440, &c. See also Pitts’ Account of the Rel., &c., of the Muhammadans, p. 92, &c.; Gagnier, Vie de Moh., t. 2, p. 258, &c.; Abulfed., Vit. Muh., p. 130,&c., and Reland De Rel. Moh., p. 113, &c.

1

Ibn al Athír.

2

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 314.

3

See ante, p. 42.

4

Al Ghazáli.

5

Reland, De Rel. Moh., p. 121.

6

Ibn al Athír.

7

See Qurán, c. 2, v. 198, and note there.

1

See Qurán, c. 2, v. 188. M. Gagnier has been guilty of a mistake in coniounding this monument with the sacred enclosure of the Kaabah. Vide Gagn. not. ad Abulfed. Vit. Moh., p. 131, and Vie do Moh., t. 2, p. 262.

2

Dr Pocock from al Ghazáli, says seventy, at different times and places. Poc. Spec., p. 315.

3

Al Ghazáli, Ahmad Ibn Yusaf.

4

Ibn al Athír.

5

Vide Reland, ubi sup., p. 117

6

See Qurán, c. 2, v. 196.

7

Qurán, c. 7, v 27, 32.

1

Al Faik, de Tempore Ignor. Arábum, apud Mill. de Mohammed ante Moh., p. 322 Comp. Isa. lxiv. 6.

2

Jalál. al Baid This notion comes very near if it be not the same with that of the Adamites.

3

Al Ghazáli. Vide Abulfar. Hist. Dyn., p. 171

4

Abu Jáafar Ibn Tufail. in Vita Hai Ibn Yukdhán, p. 151. See Mr. Ockley’s English translation thereof, p. 117.

5

De Rel. Moh., p. 123.

6

Piutarch, in Numa.

7

Maimonides (in Epist. ad Prosel. Rel.) pretends that the worship of Mercury was performed by throwing of stones, and that of Chemosh by making bare the head and putting on unsewn garidents.

1

According to the maxim, Tutius est mutate mulare quam unum magnum.

2

Al Shahrietáni.

3

See Qurán. c. 2, v. 147, &c.

4

Fzek. xx. 25 Vide Spencer de Urim et Thummim, c. 4, § 7.

*

For a clear and accurate description of the rites and ceremonies of the Muslim raligion, the reader is referred to Hughes’ Notes on Muhammadanism.

e. m. w.

1

See c. 2, v. 218, and c. 5. v. 92

2

Cap. 2, v. 218, and c. 16, v. 69. Vide D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., p. 696.

3

Vide Smith, De Morib. et Instit. Turcar Ep. 2, p. 28, &c.

4

Vide Chardin, ubi supra, p. 212.

1

Chardin, ubi sup., p. 344.

2

Abd al Qádír Muhammad al Ansári has written a treatise concerning coffee, wherein he argues for its lawfulness. Vide D’Herbel., art. Cahvah.

3

Vide Le Traité Historique de l’Origine et du Progrés du Café, à la fin du Voy. de l’Arabie Heur. de la Roque.

4

Reland, Dissert Miscall., t. 2, p. 280. Vide Chardin, Voy. de Perse, t, 2, pp. 14 and 66.

*

Opium is very commonly used by Muslims in India.

e. m. w.

1

Vide Chardin, ibid., p. 68, &c., and D’Herbel., p. 200.

2

Vide Prid., Life of Mah., p. 82, &c.; Busbeq., Epist. 3, p. 255; and Mandeville’s Travels, p 170.

3

Qurán, c. 2, v. 218: c. 5, v. 92; and c. 4, v 42 and note. See Prov. xxiii. 29, &c

4

Levit. x. 9.

5

Numb. vi. 2.

6

Jerem xxxv. 5, &c.

7

This was the heresy of those called Encratitæ, and Aquarij. Khuáf, a Magian heretic, also declared wine unlawful; but this was after Muhammad’s time. Hyde, De Rel. Vet Pers., p. 300.

8

Vide Reland, De Rel. Moh., p. 271.

9

Cap. 2, v 218; c. 5, v. 92.

1

Some writers, as al Zamakh, and al Shirázi, mention but three blank arrows.

2

Auctores Nodhm al dorr, et Nothr al dorr, al Zamakh, al Firauzábádi, al Shirázi in Orat. al Hariri, al Baidháwi. &c. Vide Poc. Spec., p. 324, &c.

3

Qurán, c. 5, v. 4.

4

Vide Hyde, De Ludis Oriental. in Proleg. ad Shahiludium.

1

Vide Hyde, De Ludis Oriental. in Proleg. ad Shahiludium.

2

Vide eundem, ibid., and in Hist. Shahiludij, p. 135, &c.

3

Cap. 5, v. 92.

4

Sukaikar al Dimishki, and Auctor libri al Mustatraf, apud Hyde, ubi sup., p. 8.

5

Khondemir. apud eund. ibid., p. 41.

6

Vide Hyde, ubi sup., p. 9.

*

This statement is more than doubtful.

e. m. w.

7

Vide eundem, in Proleg., and Chardin, Voy. de Perse, t. 2, p. 46.

8

Lib. iv. ad Nicom.

9

Vide Horat., l. 3. Carm. Od. 24

1

ft. de Aleatoridus. Novell Just. 123, &c. Vide Hyde. ubi sup. in Hist. Aleæ, p. 119.

2

Authent. interdichous, c. de episcopal.

3

In Com. ad Legem Præd.

4

Du Fresne. in Glosa.

5

Bava Mesia, 84. 1; Rosh hasbana and Sanhedr. 24, 2. Vide etiam Maimon. in Tract. Gezila. Among the modern civilians, Mascardus thought common gamesters were not to be admitted as witnesses, being infamous persons. Vide Hyde, ubi sup. in Proleg. et in Hist. Aleæ, § 3.

6

Qurán, c. 5, v. 4.

7

See ante, p. 42.

1

Ibn al Athir, al Zamakh., and al Baid. in Qurán, c. 5, v. 4. Al Mustatraf. &c Vide Poc. Spec., p. 327, &c., and D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., art. Kodáh.

2

Vide Potter, Antiq. of Greece, vol. i. p. 334.

3

Ezek. xxi. 21.

4

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 329, &c.

5

Cap. 2, v. 174; c. 5. v. 4; c. 6, v. 146; and c 16, v. 116.

6

Levit xi 4.

7

See Qurán, c. 3. vv. 49 and 93, and c. 6, v. 146.

1

Quran, c. 5, v. 2, &c., and in the other passages last quoted.

2

Vide Maimon. in Halachoth Melachim, c. 8, § i., &c.

3

Nothr al dorr, al F raus., al Zamakh., and al Baid.

4

Poc. Spec., p. 320.

5

Compare Acts xv. 29 with 1 Cor. viii. 4, &c.

6

See the fifth chapter of the Qurán, v. 4, and the notes there.

7

Solin. de Arab., c. 33.

8

Hieronym. in Jovin. l. 2, c. 6.

9

Idem, ibid.

10

Solinus, ubi supra.

1

Qurán, c. 2, v. 275.

2

Cap. 5, v. 102.

3

Al Firauzábádi.

1

Al Zamakh., al Baidbawi, al Mustatraf.

2

Ibn al Athir.

3

Al Firauzáb., al Zamakh.

4

Al Jawhari, Ibn al Athír.

5

Al Firauz.

6

Idem, al Jawhari, &c.

7

Nothr al dorr and Nodhm al dorr.

8

Al Firauz.

1

Al Firauz., al Zamakh.

2

Al Jawbari.

3

Al Mutarrezi.

1

Al Firauz., al Jawbari.

2

Jalál. in Qurán.

3

Qurán, c. 5, v. 102, and c. 6, v. 142-145. Vide Poc. Spec., pp. 330-334.

4

Al Baidháwi, al Zamakh., al Mustatraf.

5

See Qurán, c. 16, vv. 60, 61.

6

Al Maidáni

7

Al Zamakh.

1

Al Mustatraf.

2

Cap. 5, v. 35

3

Al Mustatraf. Vide Ibn Khaliqán, in Vita al Farazdak, and Poc. Spec., p. 334.

4

Strabo, l. 17. Vide Diodor Sic., l. 1, c. 80.

5

Vide Plutarch, in Lycurgo.

6

Vide Pufendorf, de Jure Nat. et Gent., l. 6, c. 7, § 6. The Crecians also treated daughters especially in this manner—whence that saying of Poeidippus:

ϓιὸν τρέϕεί τις κ[Editor: illegible character]ν ωένης [Editor: illegible character]ν τὺχῃ.

Θυγατέρα δὲ [Editor: illegible character]κτίθησι κ[Editor: illegible character]ν [Editor: illegible character] πλοισιος—

“A man, tho’ poor, will not expose his son;

But if he’s rich, will scarce preserve his daughter.”—

See Potter’s Antiq. of Greece, vol. ii p. 333.

*

The same practice was common among several castes of the Hindus. It is worthy of note that the motives for the act were the same as those which influenced the heathen Arabs.

e. m. w.

1

Cap. 6, vv. 137 and 151; c. 16, vv. 60, 61; and c. 17, v. 33. See also chap. 81, v. 8.

2

Al Zamakht, al Baid

1

See Sect. VIII.

2

See ante, Sect. II p. 72.

3

Nic. Cusanus in Cribrat. Alcor., l 2, c. 19. olearius, in Itinerar. P. Greg. Tholosanus, in Synt Jnris. l. 9, c. 2. § 22. Septemcastrensis (De. Morib Turc., p. 24) says the Muhammadans may have twelve lawful wives and no more Ricaut falsely asserts the restraint of the number of their wives to be no precept of their religion, but a rule superinduced on a politic consideration. Press State of the Ottoman Empire, bk iii. c. 31.

4

Marrace, in Prodr ad Refut, Alcor., part iv. pp 52 and 71. Prideaux late of Mah., p. 114. Chardin, Voy. de Perse, t. 1, p. 166. Du Ryer, Sommaire de la Rel. des Turcs, mie à la tête de sa version de l’Alcor. Ricaut ubi supra. Pufendorf, De Jure Nat. et Gent., l. 6, c. 1, § 18.

1

Cap. 4, v. 3.

2

Vide Gagnier, in Notis ad Abulfedæ Vit. Moh., p. 150. Reland, De Rel Moh., p. 243, &c., and Selden, Ux. Hebr., l. 1, c. 9.

*

Muir (Life of Mahomel, vol. iii. p. 303) says, “There is no limit, as supposed by Sale, to the number of slave-girls, with whom (irrespective of his four wives) a Moslem may, without any antecedent ceremony or any guarantee of continuance, cohabit. Female slavery, being a condition necessary to the legality of this illimitable indulgence, will never be put down, with a willing or hearty co-operation, by any Mussalman community.”

e m. w.

3

Vide Reland, ubi sup., p. 244.

4

Quran, c. 4, v. 3.

5

Sir J Mandeville (who, excepting a few silly stories be tells from hearsay, deserves more credit than some travellers of better reputation), speaking of the Qurán, observes, among several other truths, that Muhammad therein commanded a man should have two wives, or three, or four; though the Muhammadans then took nine wives, and lemans as many as they might sustain. Mandev. Travels, p. 164.

†

Surely the “peculiar privileges” of the prophet, whereby all limit as to the number of his wives and concubines was set aside, added to his example, wherein he appeared as the possessor of ten wives besides his concubines, must have gone far to weaken the force of his explicit precepts, given for the guidance of his followers. Would not the holy precepts of Jesus, as recorded in the Sermon on the Mount, have lost much of their power over Christian hearts, had he claimed for himself the special privilege of total exemption from them, and, more so, had his example illustrated a lower grade of moral rectitude?

e. m. w.

1

Maimon, in Halachoth Ishoth., c. 14.

2

Idem, ibid. Vide Selden, Uxor. Hebr., l. 1, c. 9.

3

Deut. xxiv. 3, 4. Jerem. iii. 1. Vide Selden, ubi sup., l. 1, c. 11.

4

Qurán, c. 2, v. 230.

5

Vide Selden, ubi sup., l. 3, c. 21, and Ricaut’s State of the Ottom. Empire, bk. ii. c. 21.

*

The large dowry, fixed on the bride by the groom before the marriage is consummated, to be paid in case of a divorce without proper cause, is more potent than the Qurán in preventing divorce.

e. m. w.

1

Deut. xxiv. 1. Leon. Modena, Hist de gli Riti. Hebr., part i. c. 6. Vide Selden, ubi sup.

2

Vide Busbeq., Ep. 3, p. 184; Smith, De Morib, ac Instit. Turcar Ep. 2, p. 52; and Chardin, Voy. de Perse, t. 1, p. 169.

3

Qurán, c. 4, v. 18, &c.

4

Qurán, c. 2, v. 228, and c. 65, v. 1, &c.

5

Ibid., c. 33, v. 48.

6

Ibid., c. 2, v. 237.

7

Ibid., c. 2, vv. 233-235, and v. 65, v. 1, &c.

1

Mishna, tit. Yabimoth, c. 4. Gemar. Babyl. ad eund. tit. Maimen. in Halach Girushin, Shylhán Aruch, part iii.

2

Mishna, and Gemara, and Maimon., ubi supra. Gem. Babyl. ad tit. Cetuboth, c. 5, and Jos Karo, in Shylhán Aruch, c. 50, § 2. Vide Selden, Ux. Hebr., l. 2, c. 11, and l 3, c. 10, in fin.

3

And the adulterer also, according to a passage once extant in the Qurán, and still in force, as some suppose. See the notes to Qurán, c. 3, v. 23, and the Prel. Disc., p. 111.

4

Qurán, c. 4, vs. 14, 15. See the notes there.

5

Ibid., v. 24

6

Ibid., c. 4, v. 14.

7

Ibid., c. 24, v. 4.

8

Ibid., vs., 1-3. This law relates not to married people, as Selden supposes, Ux. Heb., l. 3, c. 12.

1

Qurán, c. 24, vv. 6-9. See the notes there.

2

Levit. xx. 10; Deut. xxii. 22. The kind of death to be inflicted on adulterers in common cases being not expressed, the Talmudists generally suppose it to be strangling, which they think is designed wherever the phrase “shall be put to death,” or “shall die the death,” is used, as they imagine stoning is by the expression, “his blood shall be upon him;” and hence it has been concluded by some that the woman taken in adultery mentioned in the Gospel (John viii.) was a betrothed maiden, because such a one and her accomplice were plainly ordered to be stoned (Deut. xxii. 23, 24). But the ancients seem to have been of a different opinion, and to have understood stening to be the punishment of adulterers in general. Vide Selden, Ux. Heb., l. 3, c. 11 and 12.

3

Levit. xix. 20.

4

Deut. xix. 15, xvii. 6, and Numb xxxv. 30.

5

Deut. xxii. 13-19.

6

Numb. v. 11, &c.

7

Vide Selden, ubi sup., l. 3, c. 15; and Leon. Modena, de’ Riti Hebraici, parte iv. c. 6.

1

Qurán, c. 2, v. 222.

2

Ibid., c. 4, v. 24, &c.

3

Ibid., vs. 20-22.

4

See Levit. xv. 24, xviii. 19, and xx. 18; Exod. xxi. 8-11; Deut. xxi. 10-14; Levit. xviii. and xx.

*

They, however, did permit a son to inherit his deceased father’s widows, which custom Muhammad abolished. See Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. ii. p. 52, and vol. iii. p. 303.

e. m. w.

5

Abulfed., Hist. Gen. al Sharistáni, apud Poc. Spec., pp. 321, 338.

6

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 337, &c.

7

Qurán, c. 4, v. 20.

8

Ibid., c. 33, v. 49. See also c. 66, and the notes there.

9

Ibid., c. 33, v. 51. See the notes there.

10

Ibid., v. 53.

1

Mishna, tit. Sanhedr., c. 2, and Gamar. in eund. tit. Maimoo. Halachoth Melachim, c. 2. Vide Selden, Ux. Heb., l. 1, c. 10. Prid., Life of Mah., p. 118.

2

See c. 4, vs. 21, &c., and the notes there. Vide etiam Poc Spec., p. 337.

3

Qurán, c 4, vs. 31, 32.

4

Ibid., vs. 10 and 175 Vide Chardin, Voy. de Perse, t. 2, p. 293.

1

Qurán, c. 4, v. 10.

2

Ibid., and v. 175.

3

Ibid., c. 5, v. 105.

4

Ibid., c. 4, v. 7.

5

Ibid., c. 8 v. 73.

6

Ibid., and c. 33, v. 6

1

Quran, c. 5, v. 1; c. 17; c. 2, v. 282, &c.

2

Ibid., c. 2, v. 282.

3

The same seems to have been required by the Jewish law, even in cases where life was not concerned. See Deut. xix 15; Matt. xviii. 16; John viii. 17; 2 Cor. xiii. 1.

4

Qurán, c. 2. v. 282.

5

Vide Chardin, Voy. de Perse, t. 2, p. 294, &c., and the notes to Qurán, c. 5, v. 106.

6

Qurán, c. 4, vs. 91, 92.

7

Ibid., c. 2, v. 178; c. 17, v. 35. Vide Chardin, ubi sup., p. 299, &c.

1

Numb. xxxv. 31.

2

This is particularly forbidden in the Qurán, c. 17, v. 35.

3

Quran, c. 4, v. 91.

4

See the notes to c. 47.

5

Qurán, c. 4, v. 91.

1

See Numb. xxxv. 26-28.,

2

Ibid., v. 32.

3

Qurán, c. 5, v. 42.

4

Novel’., 134, c. 13.

5

Vide Pufendorf, De Jure Nat. et Gent., I. 8. c. 3, § 26.

6

See the notes to c. 5, v. 42.

7

Exod. xxi. 24, &c.; Levit. xxiv. 20; Deut, xix. 21.

8

Cap. 5, v. 49.

9

Vide Grotium, De Jure Belli et Pacis. I. 1. c. 2 § 8.

10

Vide Chardin, t. 2, p 299. The talio, likewise established among the old Romans by the laws of the twelve tables, was not to be inflicted unless the delinquent could not agree with the person injured. Vide A. Gell. Noct. Attic. I. 20, c. 1, and Festum, in voce Talio.

1

See Exod. xxi. 18, 19, and 22.

2

Barbeyrac in Grot., ubi supra, Vide Cleric. in Exod. xxi 24, and ut. xix. 21.

3

See Deut. xxv 2, 3.

4

Vide Grelot, Voy. de Constant., p. 220, and Chardin, ubi supra, p. 302.

1

Vide Chardin, ubi supra, p. 290, &c.

2

Cap 22; c. 2, v. 190-193; c. 4, v. 83, &c., c. 8; c. 9; c. 47 and c. 61, &c.

3

Cap. 2, v. 155; c. 3. v. 142; c. 47; c. 61.

4

Reland, De Jure Milit. Moham p. 5, &c.

5

Vide c. 9; c. 3, v. 143, &c.

6

See ante, p. 83.

7

Halach. Melachim, c. 7.

1

Jer. xiv. 8.

2

Job xiii. 14.

3

Deut, xx. 8.

4

Jer. xlviii. 10.

5

1 Sam. xxv. 28, 29.

6

Nicolaus, in Jure Canon., c. omnium 23, quæst. 5.

1

Leo IV; op. cit., quæst. 8

*

Though Muhammad undoubtedly took Moses as his pattern, and supposed himself following in his footsteps when he gave the command to fight against the infidels, yet there is no comparison between them whatever so far as warring against infidels is concerned. The Israelites were commanded to slay the Canaanites as divinely ordained instruments of destruction but Muhammad inaugurated war as a means of proselytiam. The Israelite was not permitted to proselytise from among the Canaanites, Exod. xxiii. 27-33; but Muslims are required to proselytise by sword-power.

e. m. w

2

In his treatise De Jure Militari Mohammedanor, in the third vol. of his Dissertationes Miscellaneæ.

1

See Qurán, c. 47, v. 5, and the notes there; and c. 4, v. 89: c. 5, v. 38.

2

Deut. xx. 16-18.

3

Ibid., c. xxv. 17-19

4

Numb. xxxi. 17.

5

See c. 9, and the notes there.

6

See the notes to c. 37.

7

Deut. xx. 10-15.

*

The difference seems to me to be very great. The Israelites might make peace with idolaters on condition of their becoming tributaries. The Muslims might not do so on any condition but that of conversion to Islam. With the Jew it was a case of policy—with the Muslim, of religion.

e. m. w.

1

Talmud Hierosol. apud Maimonid. Halach. Melachim, c. 6 § 5. R. Bechai, ex lib. Siphre. Vide Selden, De Jure Nat. et Gent. Sec. Hebr., l. 6, c. 13 and 14; and Schickardi, Jus Regium Heh., c. 5, Theor. 16.

2

Josh. xi. 20. The Jews, however, say that the Girgashites, believing they could not escape the destruction with which they were threatened by God if they persisted in defending themselves, fled into Africa in great numbers. (Vide Talm. Hieros., ubi sup.) And this is assigned as the reason why the Girgashites are not mentioned among the other Canaanitish nations who assembled to fight against Joshua (Josh. ix. 1), and who were doomed to utter extirpation (Deut. xx. 17). But it is observable that the Girgashites are not omitted by the Septuagint in either of those texts, and that their name appears in the latter of them in the Samaritan Pentateuch: they are also joined with the other Canaanites as having fought against Israel in Josh. xxiv. 11.

3

Qurán, c. 8

4

Ibid.

1

Abulfed. in Vit. Moh., p. 118, &c. Vide Qurán, c. 9, and the notes there.

2

Qurán, c. 59, v. 6, see the notes there.

3

Vide Abulfed., ubi sup., p. 91.

4

Vide Qurán, c 59, v. 6.

5

Gemar. Babyl. ad tit. Sanhedr., c. 2. Vide Selden, De Jure Nat. et Gent. Sec. Heb., lib. 6, c. 16.

6

Numb. xxxi. 27.

7

Vide Maim. Halach. Melach., c 4

8

Josh. xxii. 8.

9

See Qurán, c. 8, and the notes there

1

1 Sam. xxx. 21-25.

2

Qurán, c. 8.

3

Note. al Sháfíi himself was descended from this letter.

4

Al Baid. Vide Reland, De Jure Milit. Moham., p. 42. &c.

5

Idem.

1

Reland, De Jure Milit. Moham., p. 42, &c.

2

Idem.

3

Idem.

4

Idem.

1

Al Kazwíni; apud Golium in notis ad Alfrag., p. 4. &c Al Shahristáni, apud Poc. Spec., p. 311. Al Jawhari, al Firauzab.

2

Golius, ubi supra, p. 5.

3

Al Shahristáni, ubi supra. See ante, p. 190.

4

Al Mughultai.

1

Abulfeda, Vit. Moh., p. 11.

2

Al Kudái, al Firauz, apud Poc. Spec., p. 174. Al Mughultai mentions both opinions.

3

Mr. Bayl. (Dict. Hist. et Crit. art. la Mecque, Rem. F.) accuses Dr. Prideaux of an inconsistency for saying in one place (Life of Mahomet, p. 64) that these sacred months were the first, the seventh, the eleventh, and the twelfth, and intimating in another place (ibid., p. 89) that three of them were contiguous. But this must be more absence of mind in Mr. Bayle; for are not the eleventh, the twelfth, and the first months contiguous? The two learned professors, Golius and Reland, have also made a small slip in speaking of these sacred months which they tell us are the two first and the two last in the year. Vide Golii, Lex Arab., col. 601. and Reland. De Jure Milit. Mohammedanor, 5.

4

Vide Gol. in Alfrag., p. 9

5

Vide ibid., p. 6.

6

Al Makizi, apud Poc. ubi supra.

7

Idem, and Auctor Neshk al Ashár, ibid.

8

See Qurán, c. 106

9

Al Edrisí, apud Poc. Spec., p. 127.

1

Cap. 9; c. 2, v. 194; c. 5, v. 3; c 5, v. 98, &c.

2

Cap 9; c 2, v. 194.

3

See the notes to c. 9, ubi sup.

4

Cap. 9, ibid.

5

Life of Mahomet, p. 66

6

In Alfrag., p. 12.

7

See Prid., Preface to the first vol. of his Connect., p. 6. &c.

8

Vide Gol., ubi supra.

1

Qurán, c. 9. See also c. 2, v. 194.

2

See c. 63, and the notes there.

3

Al Baldháwi.

4

Ibn al Athir et al Chazáli, apud Poc. Spec., p. 317.

5

Vide ibid.

6

Al Ghazáli, ibid.

1

Cap. 63, ubi supra.

2

Al Ghamli, ubi supra, p. 318.

3

The word Bairám is Turkish, and properly signifies a feast-day or holiday.

4

See c. 9, and ante, Sect. IV., p. 94.

5

Vide Reland, De Relig. Moh., p. 109, and D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., art. Bairám.

6

Hyde, in notis ad Robov., p 16; Chardin, Voy. de Perse, tom 2, p. 450; Ricaut’s State of the Ottoman Empire, l. 2, c. 24, &c.

7

Vide Chardin and Ricaut, ubi supra.

*

In India this feast is popularly known as the Baqr Id, or Feast of the Cow, and is celebrated with great ceremony by all Muslinis A goat or a sheep is sacrificed and its flesh eaten by the family making the offering. For a clear account of the manner of celebrating the various feasts of the Muslims, the reader is referred to the excellent work of the Rev. Edward Sell. entitled The Faith of Islám, chapter vi.

e. m. w.

1

Poc. Spec p. 196.

2

Apud Ibn Sina, in Libello de Divisione Scientiar., et Nasiru’ddin al Tusi in Prætat ad Ethic.

3

More Nevoch., l. 1, c. 71 and 73.

4

Al Ghazáli, apud Poc. Spec., ubi supra

1

Apud Poc. Spec., ubi supra.

2

Ibid., p. 197.

3

Ibid.

4

Ibn al Koasá, apud eund., ibid., p. 198.

1

Al Ghazáli, Poc. Spec., pp. 198-204.

2

Vide ibid. p. 204

3

Vide Abulfarag Hist. Dynast., p. 166.

4

Al Shahristani apúd Pec. Spec., ubi supra p. 204, &c.

1

Al Shahristáni, apud Poc., ubi sup., p. 205.

2

Idam, ibid., p. 206.

3

Idem, ibid.

1

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 298. Prid., Lite of Mahomet, p. 51, &c. Reland, De Rel. Moh., p. 68, &c Millium, De Mohammedismo ante Moh., pp. 368, 369

2

See ante, p. 205.

3

Vide Poc. Spec, p. 293.

4

Ibn Khallikán

5

This was the true cause of his imprisonment and death, and not his refusing to subscribe to the opinion of absolute predestination, as D’Herbelot writes (Bibl. Orient., p. 21), misled by the dubious acceptation of the word “qadá,” which signifies not only God’s decree in particular, but also the giving sentence as a judge in general; nor could Abu Hanífa have been reckoned orthodox had he denied one of the principal articles of faith.

1

Poc. Spec., pp. 297, 298.

2

Al Sharistáni, ibid.

3

Idem.

4

Vide D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., pp. 21 and 22.

5

Albufeda.

6

Ibn Khallikán.

7

Idem.

8

Abulfeda.

9

Ehnacinus, p. 114

10

Ibn Khallikán. Vide Poc. Spec. p. 294.

1

Ibn Khallikán, Poc. Spec., apud eund. ibid.

2

Al Ghazali, ibid.

3

Ibu Khallikán.

4

Yet Abulfeda says he lived fifty-eight years.

5

Ibn Khallikán.

6

Idem.

7

Idem.

1

Al Záfaráni, apud Poc. Spec., p. 296.

2

See ante, p. 118.

3

Vide Poc. Spec., pp. 295-297.

4

Ibn Khallikan.

5

Ibn Khallikán.

6

Idem.

7

See ante, Sect. III., p. 111, &c.

8

Ibn Khallikán, Abulfarag, Hist. Dyn., p. 252, &c.

1

Ibn Khallikán.

2

Abulfar., ubi supra, p. 301, &c.

3

Al Shahristáni, apud Poc Spec., p. 194; Auctor Sharh al Mawákif, apud eund., p. 210.

1

Vide Poc. Spec., ubi sup.

2

Al Shahristáni, apud eund., p. 211.

3

Idem, and Auctor Sharh al Mawákit, ubi sup.

4

Idem, ibid., pp. 211, 212, and Ibn Khallikán in Vita Wásili.

5

Al Shahristam, who also reduces them to four chief sects, puts the Qadarians in the place of the Mutazilites. Abulfaragins (Hist. Dyn., p. 166) reckons six principal sects, adding the Jabarians and the Murjians; and the author of “Sharh al Mawákif” sight, viz., the Mutazilites, the Shiites, the Khárijites, the Murjians, the Najarians the Jabarians, the Mushábbihites, and the sect which he calls al Nájia, because that alone will be saved, being according to him the sect of the Asharians. Vide Poc. Spec., p. 209

1

Maímonides teaches the same, not as the doctrine of the Mutazilites, but his own. Vide More, Nev. l. 1, c. 57.

2

Al Shahristáni, apud. Poc. Spec., p. 214; Abulfarag, p. 167

3

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 224.

4

Sharh al Mawákif, and al Shahrist., apud Poc., p. 216. Maimonides (in Proleg. ad Pirke Aboth., § 8) asserts the same thing.

5

Vide Poc. Spec., ibid

6

Al Shahrist., ibid., p. 215.

7

Abulfarag and al Shahrist., ubi sup., p 217. See supra Sect. III, p. 112

8

Vide Poc. Spec., p. 240.

1

Al Shahrist and Sharh al Mawakif, apud Poc., ubi sup., p 214.

2

Marrace, Prodr ad ref. Alcor., part 3, p 74.

3

Idem, ibid.

4

Vide Poc., Spec., p. 213, and D’Herbel., art. Mutazilah

5

Auctor al Mawákif, apud Poc., ibid.

6

Al Shahristáni apud Poc pp. 215, 216, 217.

7

Idem, apud eund., p. 217, &c

8

In Prodr., part 3, p. 74.

9

Al Shahristáni.

1

Al Shahristani, apud Poc. Spec., p. 215

2

Idem, and Auctor al Mawákif, ibid., p. 218.

3

Marracci, ubi sup., p 75, ex a Shahristáni.

4

Idem, ibid.

5

Al Shahrist., apud Poc p. 215.

6

Idem. ibid., p. 242.

1

Ibn Khallikán, in Vitis Eorem

2

Al Shahrist., ubi supl, pp. 241, 242, Vide Marracc., Prod., part 3, p. 74.

3

See supra, Sect. III., p. 113.

4

Al Shahrist., ubi sup., p. 218; Abulfarag, p. 167.

5

Al Shahrist., al Mawákif et Ibn Kussá, apud Poc Spec., ubi sup. p. 219

6

Vide Poc. Spec., ibid

7

Marracc. et al Shahrist., ubi sup

8

Marracc., ibid., p. 75.

1

Vide D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., art. Giahedh

2

Al Shahrist., ubi sup., p. 260

3

Marracc., ubi sup.

4

Sect. III., p. 113

5

Vide ibid., and p. 112.

6

Al Shahrist., apud Poc., p. 241.

7

Marracc., ubi sup., p. 75.

8

Al Shahrist., ubi sup., p. 220.

9

Poc. Spec., p. 221

1

Marracc., ubi sup.

2

Idem, ibid.

3

Al Shahrist.

4

Al Firauráb. Vide Poc Spec., pp. 231, 232, and 214.

5

Al Shahrist Vide Poc. Spec. pp. 235 and 240. &c.

6

Vide Poc. Spec., ibid. p. 238.

7

Al Mutarrizi al Shahrist Vide ibid., p. 232.

1

Al Mutarrizi al Shahrist. &c., ibid.

2

Idem ibid.

2

Vide Poc., ibid, p. 233, &c.

4

Vide ibid., p. 237.

1

Ibn al Athír, al Bokhári, apud Poc. Spec, p. 236.

2

Cap. 7, v. 89.

3

Al Mutarrizl, apud eund., pp. 237, 238.

4

Al Shahrist., Poc. Spec., p 223.

1

Vide Poc. Spec. ibid., p. 224

2

Vide eund. ibid

1

Auctor al Mawákif, et al Safadi, apud Poc., ubi sup., p. 230, &c. Ibn Khallikán in Vita al Jobbái

2

Al Shalirist., apud Poc. Spec., p. 230.

3

Idém, apud eund.; p. 228, &c.

1

Vide Poc Spec. ibid.

2

Al Shahrist., apud eund p. 245, &c.

3

Idem, ibid., p 246.

4

Al Shahrist., apud Poc Spec., p 245, &c.

4

Al Shahrist., apud Poc Spec., p 245, &c.

1

Auctor Sharh al Mawákif, apud eund., p. 247.

2

Al Shahrist., ibid., p. 248.

3

Auctor Sharh al Tawáliya, apud eund. ibid., p. 248 &c.

1

Auctor Sharh al Tawaliya, ibid. pp. 249, 250.

2

Idem, ibid., pp. 250, 251. I trust the reader will not be offended if, as a further illustration of what has been said on this subject (in preducing of which I have purposely kept to the original Muhammadan expressions) I transcribe a passage or two from a postscript subjoined to the epistle I have quoted above (§ 4, p, 85), in which the point of free will is treated ex profeste. Therein the Moorish author, having mentioned the two opposite opinions of the Qadarjans, who allow free will, and the Jabarians, who make man a necessary agent (the former of which opinions, he says, seems to approach nearest to that of the greater part of Christians and of the Jews), declares the true opinion to be that of the Sunnis, who assert that man hath power and will to choose, good and evd. and can moreover know he shall be rewarded if he do well, and shall be punished if he do ill; but that he depends, notwithstanding, on God’s power, and willeth, if God willeth, but not otherwise Thenhe proceeds briefly to refute the two extreme opinions, and first to prove that of the Qadarians, though it be agreeable to God’s justice, inconsistent with his attributes of wisdom and power: “Sapientia enim Dei,” says he, “comprehendit quicquid fuit et futurum est ab seternitate in finem usque mundi et postea. Et Ita novit ab æterno omnia opera creaturarum, sive bona, sive mala. quæ fuerint creata cuin potentia Dei. et. èjus fibera et determinata veluntate, sicut ipsi visum fuit. Denique novit eum qui futurus erat maius. et tamen creavit eum, et similiter bonum, quem etiam creavit: neque negari potest quin, si ipsi libuisset, potuisset omnes creare bonos: placuit tamen Deo creare bonos et malos, cùm Deo soli sit absolata et libera voluntas, et perfecta electio, et non homini. Ita enim Salomon in suis proverbiis dixit, Vitam et mortem, bonum et malum, divitias et pauperlatem esse et venire à Deo. Christiani etiam dicunt S. Paulum dixisse in suis epistolis; Dicet etiam lutum figulo, quare facis unum vas ad honorem. et aliud vas ad contumeliam? Cum igitur miser homo fuerit creatus à voluntate Dei et potentis, nihil aliud potest tribui ipsi quam ipse sensus cognoscendi et sentiendi an bene vel male faciat. Quæ unica cause (id est. sensus cognoscandi) erit ejus gloriæ vel pœnæ causa: per talem enim sensum novit quid vel mah adversus Dei præcepta fecerit.” The opinion of the Jabarians, on the other hand, he rejects as contrary to man’s consciousness of his own power and choice, and inconsistent with God’s justice, and his having given mankind laws, to the observing or transgressing of which he has annexed rewards and punishments. After this be proceeds to explain the third opinion in the following words: “Tertia opinio Zunis (i.e., Sonnitarum) quæ vera est, affirmat homini potestatem esse, sed limitatem à sua causa, id est dependentem à Dei potentia et voluntate, et propter illam cognitionem qua deliberat benè vel malè facere, esse dignum prena vel præmio. Manifestum est in æternitate non fuisse alism poteutiam præter Dei nostri omnipotentis, e cums potentia pendebant omnia possibilla, id est, quæ poterant ease, cum ab ipso fuerint creata. Sapientia verò Dei novit etiam quæ non sunt futura: et potentia, ejus, etsi non creaverit capotuit tamen, si ita Deo placuisset. Ita novit sapientia Dei quæ orant impossibilia, id est, quæ non poterant esse; quæ tamen millo pacto pendent ab ejns potentia; ab ejus enim potentia nulla pendent nisi posaibilia. Dicimus enim a Dei potentia non pendere creare aliquid aliam ipsi similem, nec cresre aliquid quod moveatur et quiescat simul eodem tempore, cum hæc sint ex impossibilibus: comprehendit tamen suâ sapientiâ tale aliquid non pendere ab ejus potentiâ. A potentiâ igitur Dei pendet solúm quod potest esse, et possibile est esse: quæ semper parata est dare esse possibilibus. Et si hoc penitus cognoscamus, cognos cemus pariter omne quod est, seu futurum est. sive sint opera nostra, sive quidvis aliud, pendere à sola potentia Dei. Et hoc non privatim intelligitur, sed in genere de omni eo quod est et movetur, sive in cœlis sive in terrâ; et nec aliquà potentiâ potest impediri Dei potentia, cùm nulla alia potentia absolute sit, præ ter Dei; potentia verò nostra non est a se, nisi à Dei potentia: et cum potentia nostra dicitur esse a causa sua, ideo dicimus potential nostram esse atraminis comparatam cum potentia Dei: eo euim modo quo stramen movetur à motu maris. ita nestra potentia et voluntas à Dei potentia. Itaque Dei potentia semper est parata etiam ad occidendum ali quem; ut ai quis hominem occidat, non dicimus potentiâ hominis id factum. sed æterna potentia Dei: error enim est id tribuere potentiæ horsinis. Potentia enim Dei, cum semper sit parata, et ante ipsum hominem, ad occidendum: si solâ hominis potentiâ id factum esse diceremus, et moreretur, potentia sanè Dei (quæ antè erat) jam ibi esset frustra: quia post mortem non potest potentia Dei eum iterum occi dere; ex quo sequeretur potentiam Dei impediri à potentia hominis, et potentiam hominis anteire et antecellere potentiam Dei: quod est absurdum et impossibile. Igitur Deus est qui operatur æternâ suâ potentiâ: si verò homini injiciatur culpa, eive in tali homicidio, sive in aliis hoc est quantùm ad præcepta et legem. Homini tribuitur solùm opus externe, et ejùs electio, quæ est a voluntate ejus et potentia: non verò internè.—Hoc est punctum illud indivisibile et secretum. quod à paucissimis capitur, ut sapientissinuls Sidi Abo Hamet Elgaceli (i.e., Dominus Abu Hàmed al Ghazáli) affirmat (cujus spiritui Deus concedat gloriam, Amen !) sequentibus verbis: Ita abditum et profundum et abstrusum est intelligere punctum illud Liberi Arbitrii, ut neque characteres ad scribendum, neque ullæ rationes ad experimendum sufficiant, et omnes, quotquot de hac re locuti sunt, hæserunt confusi in ripa tanti et tain spaciosi marís.”

1

Al Shahrist., apud Poc., p. 258.

2

Vide Poc., ibid., p. 255, &c.; Abulfar., p. 167, &c.

3

Al Mawákif, apud Poc., ibid

1

Al Shahrist., apud eund., ibid., p. 226.

2

Vide Marracc., Prodr., part 3, p. 76.

3

Al Shahrist., ubi sup.

4

Idem, ibid., p. 225.

5

Idem, ibid., pp. 226, 227.

1

Al Shahrist., ibid., pp. 227, 228.

2

Talm. Berachoth. c. 1. Vide Poc., ubi sup., p. 228.

3

Vide Abulfarag, p. 168.

4

Al Shahrist., al Mawákif, et Ibn al Kussá, apud Poc., ibid., p. 238, &c.

1

Al Shahrist., al Mutarizzi, et Ibn al Kussá, apud eund., pp. 239, 243, &c.

2

Idem, ibid., p. 260.

3

Al Shahrist.

4

Ibn al Kussá et al Mawákif

5

Ibn al Kussá, apud Poc., ubi sup., p. 240.

1

Al Shahriat., apud eund., p. 245.

2

Idem, ibid.

3

Abulfarag, p. 168, &c.

4

Al Shahriatáni, ubi sup., p. 252, &c.

5

Sharh al Tawáliya, ibid. To the same effect writes the Moorish author quoted above, from whom I will venture to transcribe the following passage, with which he concludes his Discourse on Freewill:—“Intellectus ferè lumine naturall novit Deum esse rectum judicem et justum, qui non aliter afficit creaturam quàm juste: etiam Deum esse absolutum Dominum, et hanc orbis machinam esse ejus, et ab eo creatam; Deum nullis debere rationem reddere, cùm quiexuid agat, agat jure proprio sibi: et ita absolute poterit afficere præmio vel pœna quem vult. cùm omnis creatura sit ejus, nec facit cuiquam injuriam, etsi eam tormentis et pœnis æternis afficiat: plus enim boni et commodi accepit creatura quando accepit ease a suo creatore, quàm incommodi et damni quando ab eo damnata est et aifecta tormentis et pœnis. Hoc autem intelligitur si Deus absolute id faceret Quando enim Deus, pietate et misericordia motus, eligit aliquos ut ipsa serviant, Dominus Deus gratiâ suâ id facit ex infiuitâ bonitate: et quando aliquos derelinouit, et pœnis et tormentis afficit, ex justitia et rectitudine. Et tandem dicimus omnés pœnas esse justas quæ a Deo veniunt, et nostrâ tantum culpâ, et omnia bona esse à pietate et misericordia ejus infinita.”

6

Al Shahrist., ubi sup., p. 256.

1

Abulfarag, p. 169.

2

Al Firaus.

3

Ibn al Athír, al Mutarrizi.

4

Al Shahrist., ubi sup., p. 254, &c.

5

Idem, ibid.

6

See supra, Sect. IV., p. 147.

7

Al Shahrist., ubi sup., p. 257

1

Al Shahrist., ubi sup., p. 261.

2

See Ockley’s Hist. of the Saracens, vol. i. p. 60, &c.

3

Al Shahrist., ubi sup., p. 270.

4

Idem, ibid.

5

Abulfeda, al Jannábi, Elmacinus, p. 40.

1

Al Shahristáni. See Ockley’s Hist of the Saracens ubi sup., p. 63.

2

Abulfar., p. 169; Al Shahrist., apud Poc Spec., p. 256

3

Vide Poc., ibid., p. 257

1

Al Shahrist., ibid., p. 261; Abulfarag, p. 169.

2

Al Shahrist., ibid., p. 262.

3

Idem. ibid. Vide D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., art Schiab.

4

Vide Poc., ibid.

1

Al Shahrist., ibid., p. 263.

2

Idem, et Ibn al Kussá, ibid., p. 260, &c.

3

Idem, ibid.

4

Idem, ibid., p. 264. Vide Marrac., Prodr., part 3, p. 80, &c.

1

Al Shahristáni, ibid., p 265.

2

Vide D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., art. Hakem Beamrillah.

3

Idem, ibid., Abulfar., p. 169.

*

Talboys Wheeler, in his History of India, vol. iv. part i. p. 86, attributes these notions to all Shíahs. He says, “They believe in God as the Supreme Spirit; in Muhammad and his family as emanations from the Supreme Spirit.” This statement is too sweeping; the views here attributed to all belong to the Súfi portion of the sect.

e. m. w.

4

See Prid., Life of Mah., p. 93.

5

Al Shahrist., ubi sup., p. 266.

1

Poc Spec., p. 267.

2

Vide D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., art. Haliage.

3

Vide ibid., art. Bastham.

4

Al Chazáli, apud Poc. Spec., ubi sup.

1

The reader may meet with some account of them in Ricaut’s State of the Ottoman Empire, l. 2. c. 12.

2

Vide ibid., c. 10, and Chardin, Voy. de Perse, t. 2, pp. 169, 170 &c.

1

The words of Spinoza are:—“Ordinem Romanæ ecclesiæ—politicum et plurimis lucrosum esse fateor; nec ad decipiendam plebem, et hominum animos coercendum commodiorem isto crederem. ni ordo Mahumedanæ ecclesiæ esset, qui longè eundem antecellit. Nam à quo tempore hæc superstitio incepit, nulla in eorum ecclesia schismata orta sunt.” Opera Posth., p. 613.

2

Abulfed, p. 100.

3

Idem, Eimac., p. 9.

4

Hist. Dynast., p. 164.

5

Abulfed., ubi sup.

1

Al Baidhawi, in Ourán, c. 5.

2

Abulfed., ubi sup

3

Idem, ibid.; Abulfarag, p. 173; Elmac., p. 16, &c. See Ockley’s Hist. of the Saracens, vol. i. p. 15. &c.

4

Al Suhaili, apud Gagnier, in not, ad Abulf. Vit. Moh., p. 158.

5

Elmac., p. 9.

6

Abulfedu, ubi sup.

7

Al Suhaili, ubi sup.

8

Abulfeda, ubi sup.

1

Abulfeda et Elmacínus, ubi sup.

2

Idem, al Jannabi, ul sup.

3

Idem, ibid.

4

Ibn Sholmsh and Elmacinus call her the daugh or of al Hárith.

1

Elmacinus, p. 16; al Baidháwi, in Quran, c. 5.

2

Ibn Shohnah. Vide Elmacinus, p. 16.

3

Or Ibn Atá, according to Ibn Shohnah.

1

This explains a doubt of Mr. Bayle concerning a passage of El macinus, as translated by Erpenius and corrected by Bespier. Vide Bayle, Dic. Hist., art, Abumuslimus, vers la fin, et Rem. B.

1

They were a sect in the days of Abulfaragius, who lived about five hundred years after this extraordinary event, and may for aught I know, be so still.

2

Ex Abulfarag, Hist. Dyn., p. 226; Lobb al Tawáríkh Ibn Shohnah, al Tabari, and Khondamir. Vide D’Herbel., Bibl. Orient., art. Hakim Ben Haschem.

1

Ex Abulfarag, p. 252, &c.; Elmacinus, p. 141, &c., and Khondamir. Vide D’Herbel., art. Bábik.

1

Ibn Shohnah. Vide D’Harbel., p. 537.

1

Apud Abulfarag, p. 275.

1

Ex Abulfar., ibid.; Elmacin., p. 174, &c.; Ibu Shohnah, Khondamir. Vide D’Herbel., art. Carmath.

2

Abulfar., p. 505, &c.; D’Herbel., pp. 104, 437, 505, 620, and 784.

3

Vide Elmacin., pp. 174 and 286; D’Herbel., p. 194.

4

Vide Abulfar., pp. 361, 374, 380, 483.

1

Praef, in Opera Motanabbis MS. Vide D’Herbel., p. 638, &c.

1

Abulfarag, p. 479; Ibn Shohnah; D’Herbel., art. Bába.

*

The, Wahhábís of Arabia and India have figured too prominently in history and still exercise too powerful an influence upon Islám to justify the omission of any mention of them in a work like this; accordingly we add the following account of this sect, taken by permission from Hughes’ Notes on Muhammadanism, second edition —

“This sect was founded by Muhammad, son of Abdul Wahháb, but as their opponents could not call them Muhammadans, they have been distinguished by the name of the father of the founder of their sect, and are called Wahhábis.

“Shekh Muhammad was born at Ayína, a village in the province of Arad, in the country of Najd, in the year ad 1691. Having been carefully instructed in the tenets of the Muslim religion according to the teachings of the Hambalí sect, he in due time left his native place, in company with his father, to pertorm the pilgrimage to Mecca. At Madina he was instructed by Shekh Abdullah-ibo-Ibrahim of Najd, and it is supposed that whilst sitting at the feet of this celebrated teacher the son of Abdul Wahhab first realised how far the rigid lines of Islám had been stretched, almost to breaking, in the endeavour to adapt its stern principles to the superstitions of idolatrous Arabia. He accompanied his father to Harimala, and after his father’s death he returned to his native village of Ayína, where he assumed the position of a religions teacher. His teaching met with acceptance, and he soon acquired so great an influence over the people of those parts that the Governor of Hassa compelled him to leave the district, and the reformer found a friendly asylum in Deraiah, under the protection of Muhammad-ibn-Saud, a chief of considerable influence, who made the protection of Ibn-Abdul Wahháb a pretext for war with the Shekh of Hassa. Ibn Saud married the daughter of Ibn-Ábdul-Wahhab, and established in his family the Wahhábí dynasty, which, after a chequered existence of more than a hundred years, still exists in the person of the Wahhábi chief at Ryadh.1

“The whole of Eastern Arabia has embraced the reformed doctrines of the Wahhábís, and Mr. Palgrave, in his account of his travels in those parts, has given an interesting sketch of the Wahhábí religionists, although he is not always correct as to the distinctive principles of their religious creed.

“In the great Wahhábi revival, political interests were united with religious reform, as was the case in the great Puritan struggle in England, and the Wahhábís soon pushed their conquests over the whole of Arabia. In ad 1803 they conquered Mecca and Madina, and for many years threatened the subjugation of the whole Turkish Empire; but in ad 1811, Muhammad Ali, the celebrated Pasha of Egypt, commenced a war against the Wahhábis, and soon recovered Mecca and Madina; and in 1818 his son, Ibrahím Pasha, totally defeated Abdullah, the Wahhábí leader, and sent him a prisoner to Constantinople, where he was executed in the public square of St. Sophia, December 19, 1818. But although the temporal power of the Wahhábís has been subdued, they still continue secretly to propagate their peculiar tenets, and in the present day there are numerous disciples of the sect, not only in Arabia but in Turkey and India. It is a movement which has influenced religious thought in every part of Islám.”

After giving a brief account of the Wahhábí movement in India, under the leadership of Sayyid Ahmad, who was slain in battle by the Sikh general Sher Singh at Bálakot in 1831, our author describes the tenets of the Wahhábí faith as follows:—

“1. They do not receive the decisions of the four orthodox sects, but say that any man who can read and understand the Qurán and the sacred Hadís can judge for himself in matters of doctrine. They therefore reject Ijma’2 after the death of the companions of the Prophet.

“2. That no one but God can know the secrets of men, and that prayers should not be offered to any prophet, Walí. Pír, or Saint; but that God may be asked to grant a petition for the sake of a saint.

“3. That at the last day Muhammad will obtain permission (izn) of God to intercede for his people. The Sunnís believe that permission has already been given.

“4. That it is unlawful to illuminate the shrines of departed saints, or to prostrate before them, or to perambulate (tawáf) round them.

“5. That women should not be allowed to visit the graves of the dead on account of their immoderate weeping.

“6. That only four festivals ought to be observed, namely, ’Id-ul-Fitr, ’Id-ul-Azhá, ’Áshúráa, and Shab-i-Barát.

“7. They do not observe the ceremonies of Maulúd, which are celebrated on the anniversary of Muhammad’s birth.

“8. They do not present offerings (nazr) at any shrine.

“9. They count the ninety-nine names of God on their fingers, and not on a rosary.

“10. They understand the terms ‘sitting of God’ and ‘hand of God,’ which occur in the Qurán, in their líteral (haqíqí) sense, and not figuratively (majázi); but, at the same time, they say it is not revealed how God sits, or in what sense he has a hand, &c.”

From this description it therefore appears that Wahhábíism is Muslim Protestantism. It rejects everything contrary to the teaching of the Qurán and the Hadís, or inspired sayings of Muhammad. It asserts the right of private judgment in the interpretation of Scripture. Yet how different from Christian Protestantism! This delivers man from the thraldom of a priestcraft born of the dark ages of Christianity, and sweeps away that accumulation of error which had hidden for centuries the light of that Gospel which guides the world to wisdom founded on the fear of God, to civilisation based on human freedom and brotherly love. But Wahhábíism, whilst reforming the religion of Islám, would sweep away the civilisation and learning which have been added to a narrow and imperfect faith, and carry the world back “to the dark age of the Arabian Prophet,” and keep it there to the end of time.

e. m. w.

1

The following are the names of the Wahhábí chiefs from the establishment of the dynasty:—Muhammad - ibn - Saud, died ad 1765; Abdul - Azíz, assassinated 1803; Saud-ibn-Abdul Azíz, died 1814; Abdullah-ibn-Saud, beheaded 1818; Turkí, assassinated 1830; Fayzu died 1866; Abdullah, still living.

2

By Ijma is meant “the unanimous consent of the learned doctors” = “the unanimous consent of the Fathers.”

(1)

Lord of all creatures. “The original words are Rabbi’lálumm, which literally signify, Lord of the worlds: but alamina, in this and other places of the Qurán, properly means the three species of rational creatures, men, genii, and angels.”—Sale. Savary translates it, “Sovereign of the worlds.” Rodwell has it, “Lord of worlds.” Abdul Qádir of Delhi has it, “Lord of the whole world.” In the Persian translation it is rendered “Cherisher of the worlds.”

(5-7)

“This last sentence,” says Sale. “contains a petition that God would lead the supplicant into the true religion, by which is meant the Muhammadan, in the Qurán often called the right way: in this place more particularly defined to be the way of those to whom God hath been gracious, that is, of the prophets and faithful who preceded Muhammad; under which appellations are also comprehended the Jews and Christians, such as they were in the times of their primitive purity, before they had deviated from their respective institutions; not the way of the modern Jews, whose signal calamities are marks of the just anger of God against them for their obstinacy and disobedience; nor of the Christians of this age, who have departed from the true doctrine of Jesus, and are bewildered in a labyrinth of error (Jaláluddín, Baidháwi. &c.) This is the common exposition of the passage, though al Zamakhshari and some others, oy a different application of the negatives, refer the whole to the true believers, and then the sense will run thus: The way of those to whom thou hast been gracious, against whom thou art not incensed, and who have not erred, which translation the original will very well bear.”

These two views really coincide, inasmuch as the claim of Islám is that all true believers among Jews and Christians were Muslims.

Abdul Qádir says that by these words we are to understand four classes—the prophets, the righteous, the martyrs, and the good: and by “those against whom God is incensed,” the Jews are indicated; and if any othei class be included, it is that of the Nazarenes.

(1)

A. L. M. There are twenty-nine chapters which begin with certain letters, and these the Muhammadans believe to conceal profound mysteries that have not been communicated to any but the prophet; notwithstanding which, various explanations of them have been proffered (see Prelim. Disc., sec. iii.) Sale says, “None of the numerous conjectures as to the meaning of these letters is more plausible than that of Golius, who suggests the idea that they were originally inserted by the amanuensis, and that they stood for the phrase Amar li Muhammad, i.e., by the command of Muhammad.”

(2)

There is no doubt in this book. The author of the notes in the Roman Urdú Qurán well observes, that Muhammad has cast doubt upon his Qurán by the constant effort to show that there is no room for doubt. For where there is no consciousness of guilt, there is no anticipation of a criminal charge. The contrast between the Qurán and the Christian Scriptures in this respect is very striking.

The Tafsír-i-Raufi explains that when the infidels charged Muhammad with being a juggler, a poet, and a collector of stories, many were in doubt about the truth of the Qurán. Accordingly some said one thing, some another; wherefore God settled the minds of the faithful by the declaration of this verse. The same writer regards these words as an answer to the prayer of the previous chapter.

(3)

Mysteries of faith. “The Arabic word is Ghaib, which properly signifies a thing that is absent, at a great distance, or invisible, such as the resurrection, paradise, and hell. And this is agreeable to the language of Scripture, which defines faith to be the evidence of things not seen (Heb. xi 1; 2 Cor. iv. 18, and v. 7).”—Sale. Rodwell translates it “unseen.”

Are not Muslims chargeable with disobedience to this precept of the Qurán when they refuse to believe the mysteries of the former Scriptures, the Trinity in unity, the Sonship of Christ, &c.?

Appointed times of prayer. See Prelim. Discourse, sec. iv. p. 169.

(4)

That which hath been sent down before thee. “The Muhammadans believe that God gave written revelations not only to Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad, but to several prophets, though they acknowledge none of those which preceded the Qurán to be now extant except the Pentateuch of Moses, the Psalms of David, and the Gospel of Jesus, which yet they say were, even before Muhammad’s time, altered and corrupted by the Jews and Christians, and therefore will not allow our present copies to be genuine”—Sale.

Sent down. For the Muslim belief as to the manner in which God revealed the Scriptures, see Prelim. Discourse, sec. iii. p. 108.

Firm assurance of the life to come. “The original word, al akhirat, properly signifies the latter part of anything, and by way of excellence the next life, the latter or future state after death; and is opposed to al dunya, this world, and al aula, the former or present life.”—Sale. Rodwell translates, “And full faith have they in the life to come.”

The assurance predicated of the true believers is in regard to the fact of a judgment-day and a future state, not of their certain participation in the joys of heaven. Muhammadans regard anything like assurance of faith, in a Christian sense, as gross presumption, and as tending to sin by breaking down the barriers against its commission. Nevertheless, the plain teaching of the Qurán and of the traditions—see Mishqát-ul-Masábih, chap. i.—clearly assures final salvation to all Muslims. Why any Muslim should express a doubt, or rather hesitate to confess his assurance as to salvation, may be accounted for partly by his unwillingness to anticipate the divine decree, partly because of the teachings of the theologians respecting purgatory, and lastly, because of the protest of the conscience against a plan of salvation without atonement.

(6)

They will not believe. The Tafsír-i-Raufi raises the inquiry why God sent prophets to infidels whom he knew would not believe, and in reply says they were sent (1) to pronounce condemnation against them, and (2) to deprive them of the possible excuse that no prophet had been sent to them.

(7)

The doctrine of this verse is that infidels “who will not believe” have been condemned to judicial blindness, which portends the more awful punishment of hell. Sate says: “Muhammad here and elsewhere imitates the truly inspired writers in making God, by operation on the minds of reprobates, prevent their conversion.”

(8-10)

The persons referred to here were probably hypocritical disciples from among the Jews. Abdul Qádir says the reference is to Ibn Abi and his friands, who, when reproached by the prophet for his hypocrisy, declared themselves to be true followers of Islám. Muslim commentators, however, never want for historical characters wherewith to illustrate the Qurán.

(11)

Act not corruptly. “Some expositors understand by this the sowing of false doctrine, and corrupting people’s principles.”—Sale.

(13)

Believe ye as others believe, i.e., as the first followers of Islám believe.

(14)

Devils. Their leaders and friends, so Tafsír-i-Raufi.

(15)

Shall wander in confusion. For the manner see next verse.

(16)

Their traffic hath not been gainful, &c. According to the Tafsír-i-Raufi, the reward of their hypocrisy is that they are infidels, whilst regarding themselves as of the faithful; heretics, whilst thinking themselves sound in doctrine; ignorant, whilst thinking themselves learned; doomed to destruction, whilst fancying themselves in the way of salvation. Compare this with the teaching of Paul in 2 Thess. ii. 11, 12. Was there ever a more striking example of this very kind of reprobation than the Arabian prophet himself? The earnest reformer of Makkah becomes the cruel and sensual deceiver, and yet the apparently self-deceived politician of Madína.

(17)

Like unto one who kindleth a fire, &c. The author of the notes in the Roman Urdu Qurán, referring to the claim that the Qurán is in every respect absolutely perfect, and therefore in itself a standing miracle, calls attention to the want of agreement in the number of the first and last parts of this verse. The first half of the sentence, and consequently the parable also, is incomplete. Sale suggests the number may have been thus changed in affectation of the prophetic style, and that the sense “may be completed by adding the words, he turns from it, shuts his eyes, or the like.” “Muhammad compares those who believed not in him to a man who wants to kindle a fire, but as soon as it burns up and the flames give a light, shuts his eyes, lest he should see. As if he had said, You, O Arabians, have long desired a prophet of your own nation, and now I am sent unto you, and have plainly proved my mission by the excellence of my doctrine and revelation, you resist convietion, and refuse to believe in me; therefore shall God leave you in your ignorance.”—Sale.

(19, 20)

Or like a stormy cloud from heaven, &c. “Here Muhammad compares the unbelieving Arabs to people caught in a violent storm.To perceive the beauty of this comparison, it must be observed that the Muhammadan doctors say this tempest is a type or image of the Qurán itself: the thunder signifying the threats therein contained; the lightning, the promises; and the darkness, the mysteries. The terror of the threats makes them stop their ears, unwilling to hear truths so disagreeable; when the promises are read to them they attend with pleasure; but when anything mysterious or difficult of belief occurs, they stand stock-still, and will not submit to be directed.”—Sale, Jaláluddin.

Abdul Qádir observes that up to this point three classes have been described—true believers, infidels, and hypocrites. This latter class is referred to in this parable. They fear the difficulties of their profession as a traveller fears the thunder in a dark night. As a traveller guided by the lightning moves on, but finding himself enveloped in darkness again stops stock-still, so the hypocrite sometimes professes his faith, at other times denies it, according as his circumstances are those of peace or danger.

The Tafsír-i-Raufi explains the storm as symbolic of the dangers incurred in fighting against the infidels. The hypocrites through fear hid themselves, desiring to escape the danger; but as soon as they saw the glitter of the booty, they made great professions of loyalty to Islám. “In short, while they had the hope of securing a share in the booty, they professed themselves friendly and were fulsome in praises; but when they were confronted by the fear and toil (of the battle), they became inimical fault-finders.”

(21)

O men of Makkah. The passage beginning with this verse and ending with verse 38 belongs to the Makkan period of Muhammad’s mission.

(22)

Set not up therefore any equals unto God, &c. This is the rational conclusion from the considerations before mentioned. It reveals to us the grand motive-power within the bosom of the Makkan reformer. He has listened to the testimony of conscience to a Supreme Being, the Creator, Preserver, and Benefactor. He here appeals to his countrymen to come to this same source of light, and to abandon idolatry, which contradicts their own reason. The passage has something of the sublimity of similar passages in the Old Testament.

(23)

If ye be in doubt . . . produce a chapter like unto it. In chap. xvii. ver. 90, this challenge is presented in the following boastful declaration: “Verily if men and genii were purposely assembled that they might produce a book like this Qurán, they could not produce one like unto it, although the one of them assisted the other.” Will those who would exonerate Muhammad from the charge of being an impostor explain how an honest man could put these words into the mouth of God? If Muhammad be the author of the Qurán—and all apologists regard him as such—he must have known that even the most excellent human composition had no claim to be called inspired; yea, further, it is inconceivable that he should have been so self-deceived as to fancy that when he put these words into the mouth of God, he was speaking the words of God, and not those of his own invention. Which is greater, the credulity which can believe an honest man, of high intelligence and poetic genius, capable of such self-deception as this, or that which believes a wicked man and a deliberate impostor capable of feigning sincerity and honest piety? Let it be observed this claim was ever set up at Makkah. It was there that the question of being an honest reformer or a prophet of Arabia was decided.

“If any one has a mind to test this boastful claim, let him read the 40th chapter of Isaiah, the 145th Psalm, the 38th of Job, and a hundred other passages in the Christian Scriptures, which are in style and diction superior to the Qurán. It may be said that the beauty of the original cannot be rendered in a translation. Very woll; this is equally true or the translations of the Christian Scriptures. Besides these there are hundreds of books which, in point of matter, arrangement, and instruction, are superior to the Qurán.” Thus writes the author of the notes on the Roman Urdú Qurán. The same author gives the names and titles of a number of Arabic authors and books, which deny the claim of Muhammad and Muhammadans respecting the divine perfection of the Qurán, among whom are the founder of the sect of the Muzdáryans, Isa-bín-Sábíh, al Muzdár, and others. Gibbon describes the Qurán as an “incoherent rhapsody of fable, and precept, and declamation, which sometimes crawls in the dust, and sometimes is lost in the clouds.”—Decline and Fall of Roman Empire, vol. i. p. 365, Milman’s edition. See also Prelim. Discourse, sect. iii. p. 103.

Your witnesses besides God. Your false gods and idols—said in ridicule

(24)

Whose fuel is men and stones. Men and idols. The Tafsír-i-Raufi gives the opinion of some commentators that clouds, apparently laden with refreshing showers, will pour down torrents of stones, which will greatly increase the heat and torments of hell!

(25)

This is what we have formerly eaten of. “Some commentators (Jalálain) approve of this sense, supposing the fruits of paradise, though of various tastes, are alike in colour and outward appearance; but others (Zamakhshari) think the meaning to be, that the inhabitants of that place will find there fruits of the same or the like kinds as they used to eat while on earth.”—Sale.

There they shall enjoy wives subject to no impurity. “It is very remarkable that the notices in the Coran of this voluptuous paradise are almost entirely confined to a time when, whatever the tendency of his desires, Mahomet was living chaste and temperate with a single wife of threescore years of age.

“It is noteworthy that in the Medina Surás, that is, in all the voluminous revelations of the ten years following the Hegira, women are only twice referred to as constituting one of the delights of paradise, and on both occasions in these simple words: And to them (believers) there shall be therein pure wives. Was it that the soul of Mahomet had at that period no longings after what he had then to satiety the enjoyment of? Or that a closer contact with Jewish principles and morality repressed the budding pruriency of the revelation, and covered with merited confusion the picture of his sensual paradise which had been drawn at Mecca?”—Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. ii. p. 143.

The paradise of Islám is the garden of Eden inhabited by men and women with carnal appetites of infinite capacity, and with ability and opportunity to indulge them to the full. We strain our eyes in vain to catch a glimpse of a spiritual heaven anywhere in the Qurán.

(26)

God will not be ashamed to propound in a parable a gnat. “God is no more ashamed to propound a gnat as a parable than to use a more dignified illustration.”—Savary. This was revealed to refute the objection of infidels, that the employment of such parables was beneath the dignity of God.—Abdul Qádir, Yahya, &c.

The transgressors. Infidels and hypocrites. The Tafsír-i-Raufi says the transgressors are distinguished by three characteristics: covenant-breaking, dissolving all connection with one’s relatives, and quarrelsomeness. This is, of course, a mere paraphrase of the next verse.

(28)

Ye were dead, &c. Sale, on the authority of Jaláluddín, paraphrases thus: “Ye were dead while in the loins of your fathers, and he gave you life in your mothers’ wombs; and after death ye shall again be raised at the resurrection.”

(29)

Seven heavens. See the same expression in chapters xli. 11, lxv. 12, lxvii. 13, and lxxi. 14. It is probably borrowed from the Jews.

(30)

A substitute on earth. Literally, a khalífah, vioegerent.

“Concerning the creation of Adam, hare intimated, the Muhammadans have several peculiar traditions. They say the angels Gabriel, Michael, and Israfil were sent by God, one after another, to fetch for that purpose seven handfuls of earth from different depths and of different colours (whence some account for the various complexions of mankind); but the earth being apprehensive of the consequence, and desiring them to represent her fear to God that the creature he designed to form would rebel against him and draw down his curse upon her, they returned without performing God’s command; whereupon he sent Azraíl on the same errand, who executed his commission without remorse; for which reason God appointed that angel to separate the souls from the bodies, being therefore called the angel of death. The earth he had taken war carried into Arabia, to a place between Makkah and Tayíf, where being first kneaded by theangels, it was afterwards fashioned by God himself into a human form, and left to dry (Qurán, chap. lv. v. 13) for the space of forty days, or, as others say, as many years, the angels in the meantime often visiting it, and Iblis (then one of the angels who are nearest to God’s presence, afterwards the devil) among the rest; but he, not contented with looking on it, kicked it with his foot till it rung and knowing God designed that creature to be his superior, took a secret resolution never to acknowledge him as such. After this God animated the figure of clay, and endued it with an intelligent soul, and when he had placed him in paradise formed Eve out of his left side (Jaláluddín, &c.)”—Sale.

They said, Wilt thou place there one, &c. This knowledge on the part of the angels, says the Tafsír-i-Raufi, was either derived from a divine revelation to that effect, or from a perusal of the writings on the preserved tables.

(32, 33)

God said, O Adam, tell them their names. “This story Muhammad borrowed from the Jewish traditions, which say that the angels having spoken of man with some contempt when God consulted them about his creation, God made answer that the man was wiser than they; and to convince them of it he brought all kinds of animals to them, and asked them their names; which they not being able to tell, he put the same question to the man, who named them one after another: and being asked his own name and God’s name, he answered very justly, and gave God the name of Jehovah.”—Sale.

(34)

When we said unto the angels, Worship Aádm. Sale says the angels’ adoring Adam is mentioned in the Talmud. “The original word signifies properly to prostrate oneself till the forehead touches the ground, which is the humblest posture of adoration, and strictly due to God only; but it is sometimes, as in this place, used to express the civil worship or homage which may be paid to creatures (Jaláluddin.)”

Except Iblís. The story of Iblís and the angels probably owes its origin to Jewish tradition. The name Iblís, from balas, a wicked person, may have been derived by translation from the ό πονηρός of the New Testament, Matt. xiii. 19, 38; 1 John ii. 13, 14. The Tafsír-i-Raufi says the name of Iblis before this disobedience was Azasíl, and that this name was given to indicate his now hopeless condition. Muhammad probably adopted the name most familiar to his countrymen whilst relating a story derived from Jewish sources. Muslim commentators, believing the angels to be impeccable, and denying that they propagate their species, argue that Iblis is of the genii, and the Qurán, chap. xviii. 48, seems to prove that Muhammad regarded him as the father of the genii.

The whole doctrine of the Qurán concerning Iblis and the genii, or Satans of the Qurán, has been borrowed for the most part from the Magi of Persia, and the attempt to identify them in the Qurán with the Satan and evil spirits of the Bible is so unsuccessful as to form a plain indication of the forger’s hand. A comparison of the two books on this subject will reveal more than one instance wherein the Qurán, notwithstanding its boast that it preserves and confirms the teaching of the former Scriptures, fails to attest the teaching of the Bible.

Because of the number of unbelievers. Sale says, “The occasion of the devil’s fall has some affinity with an opinion which has been pretty much entertained among Christians (Irenæus, Lact., Greg. Nyssen, &c.), viz., that the angels being informed of God’s intention to create man after his own image, and to dignify human nature by Christ’s assuming it, some of them, thinking their glory to be eclipsed thereby, envied man’s happiness, and so revolted.”

(35)

Dwell thou and thy wife in the garden. Muhammadans believe the residence of Adam and Eve before the Fall to have been paradise or heaven, the place to which all good Muslims go.

This tree. “Concerning this tree, or the forbidden fruit, the Muhammadans, as well as the Christians, have various opinions. Some say it was an ear of wheat; some will have it to have been a-fig-tree, and others a vine. The story of the Fall is told, with some further circumstances, in the beginning of the seventh chapter.”—Sale.

But Satan. Rodwell calls attention to the change from Iblis, the calumniator, to Satan, the hater “They have a tradition that the devil, offering to get into paradise to tempt Adam, was not admitted by the guard; whereupon he begged of the animals, one after another, to carry him in, that he might speak to Adam and his wife; but they all refused him, except the serpent, who took him between two of his teeth, and so introduced him. They add that the serpent was then of a beautiful form, and not in the shape he now bears. — Sale.

We said, Get ye down. “The Muhammadans say that when they were cast down from paradise, Adam fell on the isle of Ceylon or Sarandib, and Eve near Jiddah (the port of Makkah) in Arabia; and that after a separation of two hundred years Adam was, on his repentance, conducted by the Angel Gabriel to a mountain near Makkah, where he found and knew his wife, the mountain being thence named Arifát, and that he afterwards retired with her to Ceylon.

“It may not be improper here to mention another tradition concerning the gigantic stature of our first parents. Their prophet, they say, affirmed Adam to have been as tall as a high palm-tree; but this would be too much in proportion, if that were really the print of his foot, which is pretended to be such, on the top of a mountain in the isle of Ceylon, thence named Pico de Adam, and by the Arab writers Rahun, being somewhat above two spans long (though others say it is seventy cubits long, and that when Adam set one foot here he had the other in the sea), and too little, if Eve were of so enormous a size, as is said, when her head lay on one hill near Makkah, her knees rested on two others in the plain, about two musket-shots asunder.”—Sale.

The Tafsír-i-Raufi regards these words as being addressed to the serpent as well as to Adam and Eve.

The one of you an enemy unto the other, i.e., Satan an enemy of man, or the allusion may be to enmity between Adam and Eve, typifying the enmity between the faithful and the infidels.—Tafeír-i-Raufi.

(36)

Adam learned words of prayer, &c. There is a difference of opinion among the commentators as to what these words were. The Tafsír-i-Raufi accepts the opinion that they were the words of the creed, “Lá-iláha-illal-láho, Muhammad-ur-Rusul-ulláh,” God he is God, and Muhammad is the apostle of God. But all such traditionary statements are the outgrowth of a desire to exalt Muhammad. One of the traditions makes Adam say that “As soon as the breath came into my body I opened my eyes, and saw the words, Lá-iláha-illal-láho, Muhammad-ur-Rusúl-ulláh written on the heavens.”

The purport of the verse seems to be that God taught Adam, in a general way, the words he then revealed for the benefit of himself and his children, Adam being regarded as the prophet of God to his generation.

God turned to him, for he is easy to be reconciled. Rodwell translates, “For he loveth to turn.” All the Qurán requires to secure the favour of God is to repent. i.e., to submit to thewill of God and ask pardon for sin.

(37, 38)

Hereafter shall cause . . . a direction. “God here promises Adam that his will should be revealed to him and his posterity; which promise the Muhammadans believe was fulfilled at several times by the ministry of several prophets, from Adam himself, who was the first, to Muhammad, who was the last. The number of books revealed unto Adam they saw was ten” (Jaláluddín).—Sale.

And whoever shall follow my direction, &c. The Tafsír-i-Raufi conceives the idea that the story of Adam was placed at the very beginning of the Qurán as a warning to all his posterity. He says, “God has narrated the story of Adam before he fells of others, in order that by showing his people how they were adored by the angels, through Adam, in whose loins they were hidden, and yet, instead of being drawn to him by his goodness, they have turned from him, broken his commandments, and have not been ashamed. Then in the expulsion of Adam from paradise, as hererelated, he intimates that notwithstanding the nearness of Adam to himself, and the adoration of angels bestowed upon him, yet, for one act of disobedience, was expailed from paradise. Wherefore he says, Fear me, and dare not to disobey my commands, lest I refuse to receive you into paradise at the judgment-day.”

And accuse our signs of falsehood. Concerning the word here translated signs Sale says. “This word has various significations in the Qurán; sometimes, as in this passage, it signifies divine revelation or Scripture in general, sometimes the verses of the Qurán in particular, and at other times visible miracles. But the sense is easily distinguished by the context.”

They shall be the companions of hell-fire, therein shall they remain for ever. The sufferings of the damned are described in chap. xiv. 19-21, xxv. 11-15, xxx-vii. 61 71, and lvi. 40-56. This punishment is eternal, and varies in intensity according to the heinousness of sin.

Hell is divided into seven apartments. For description of each see Preliminary Discourse, sec. iv p. 148.

(39, 40)

O children of Israel. . . . believe in the revelation which I have sent down confirming that which is with you. “The Jews are here called upon to receive the Qurán, as verifying and confirming the Pentateuch, particularly with respect to the unity of God and the mission of Muhammad. And they are exhorted not to conceal the passages of their law which bear witness to those truths, nor to corrupt them by publishing false copies of the Pentateuch, for which the writers were but poorly paid.”—Sale; on the authority of Yahya and Jaláluddín.

For passages of the Qurán attesting the genuineness of the Christian and Jewish Scriptures, see Index under the word Qurán.

A careful consideration of the import of such passages as this ought to convince every honest Muslim of the fact that Muhammad certainly did regard the Scriptures then current among Jews and Christians as the pure Word of God. If he did not, then the Qurán, attests, verifies, and confirms a lie! See chap. iii. 93, v. 70, vi. 90, 91, x. 97, and xlvi. 11.

(41)

Clothe not the truth with vanity; neither conceal the truth against your own knowledge. Rodwell translates the latter part of the verse thus: Hide not the truth when ye know it. On this he writes as follows: “Muhammad rarely accused the Jews and Christians of corrupting, but often of misrepresenting, their ascred books, in order to evade his claims. His charges, however, are always very vaguely worded, and his utterances upon this subject are tantamount to a strong testimony in favour of the unimpeachable integrity of the sacred books, both of the Jews and Christians, so far as he knew them.” The Tafsír-i-Raufi confirms the position taken above. It paraphrases thus: “Do not mingle with the truth that the praise of Muhammad is recorded in the Pentateuch the lie of a denial, and do not hide the truth that he is the prophet of the last times, for you know that this prophet is a prophet indeed. Why then do ye deliberately hide his praise and title (of prophet), and make yourselves the prisoners of hell?”

The whole force of this exposition rests on the admission that the Jews were in possession of the uncorrupted Scriptures.

Again, it is noteworthy that the corruption charged is not directed against the Scriptures, but against their interpretation of those Scriptures. The author of the notes on the Roman Urdú Qurán calls attention to the fact, that while Muhammad would conciliate Jews and Christians by the pretence that his Qurán confirms their Scriptures, he constantly misrepresents and falsifies them. This is true of both their doctrinal teaching and historical statement. It must, however, be observed that this inconsistency was not always due to the intention of the Arabian prophet, but generally to his ignorance.

(42)

Stated times of prayer . . . legal alms. The prayer (sulát) of the Muslim differs from what the Christian calls prayer in that it consists invariably of the repetition of ascriptions of praise to God and of petitions for divine blessing uttered in the Arabic language, and is almost entirely mechanical. The mind and the heart of the worshippers are alike shut up to the words and forms of the stereotyped prayer. The Arabic dúa expresses more nearly the Christian idea of prayer. This, too, probably corresponded more nearly to Muhammad’s own idea of sulát.

Legal alms (zikát) are levied on money, grain, fruit, cattle, and merchandise. The object for which it is levied is the support of the poor. It amounts to about two and a half or three per cent. on annual profits.

Although these words are addressed to Jews, the prayer and alms, concerning which exhortation is made, are Muslim, i.e., of the kind and form belonging to the last dispensation of the one true religion.

For nearly all the rites and forms of religion, Islám finds sanction in the volume of traditions. This fact affords a strong argument against the Qurán as the inspired Scripture of a new dispensation.

(43)

Ye read the book of the law, i.e., the Pentateuch. This verse affords another proof that Muhammad believed the Jewish Scriptures then extant to be the genuine Word of God.

(44, 45)

Ask help with perseverance and prayer, &c. Abdul Qádir translates, “Get strength by toil and prayer,” &c., and paraphrases, “Make it (prayer) a habit, and the duties of religion will become easy.”

The humble, who seriously think they shall meet their Lord, and that to him they shall return. Sentiments like these exhibit the vast moral superiority of Muhammad’s teaching with regard to God and man’s relation to him over that of his idolatrous countrymen and of idolaters of any country. The influence of passages like this must be taken into account if we would understand the power which the Qurán exerts over Muslims.

(46)

O children of Israel, remember my favour, &c. The object of passages like this was to conciliate the Jews by appeals to their national pride, and by an attempt to imitate the style of their prophets in his exhortations to them. Passages of the Qurán like this concerning the children of Israel evince considerable knowledge of the history of the chosen people. And yet the error which is here mixed up with the truth, without any apparent design, would seem to show, that Muhammad had not access to the Jewish Scriptures directly. It is therefore most probable that he obtained his infermation from Jewish friends, who had themselves an imperfect knowledge of their own Scriptures. See on this subject Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. ii., supplement to chap. v.

(47)

Dread the day wherein one soul shall not make satisfaction for another soul. “This verse, often repeated, contradicts the notion of Muhammad as an intercessor, and, of course, contradicts Scripture also, unless understood thus:—‘The guilty shall not atone for the guilty.’ ”—Brinckman’s Notes on Islám.

The author of the Tafsír-i-Raufi thinks this verse is addressed to unbelievers, and regards it as teaching the certain damnation of all who have not secured the intercession of Muhammad.

(48)

They slew your male children. The Tafsír-i-Raufi gives a story which illustrates the habit of Muslim commentators of inventing history to explain the indefinite statements of the Qurán. The story is that Pharaoh had a dream, in which he saw a fire issue forth from the Temple at Jerusalem. The fire consumed him and his people. Calling his wise men, he asked the meaning of his dream. They told him that a person would be born from among the children of Israel who would destroy both him and his nation. Accordingly he ordered all the male children of the Israelites to be destroyed. When some twelve thousand—according to others seventy thousand—infants had been destroyed, his subjects interfered, and so far modified Pharaoh’s intention that he spared the children born every alternate year. During one of these years Aaron was born; but Moses, being born the following year, was placed in a basket and allowed to float down the Nile. On its reaching the palace, Pharaoh drew the basket to shore and found the infant Moses in it. His wife at once declared that the child did not belong to the Jews, and proposed to adopt it as their own, inasmuch as they had no children. Thus Moses was preserved by his enemy. See also Qurán, chaps. vii., xx., and xxvi., &c.

(50)

Then took ye the calf for your God, and did evil. “The person who cast this calf, the Muhammadans say, was (not Aaron, but) al Sámairi, one of the principal men among the children of Israel, some of whose descendants, it is pretended, still inhabit an island of that name in the Arabian Gulf. It was made of the rings and bracelets of gold, silver, and other materials which the Israelites had borrowed of the Egyptians; for Aaron, who commanded in his brother’s absence, having ordered Sámairi to collect those ornaments from the people, who carried on a wicked commerce with them, and to keep them together till the return of Moses, al Sámairi, understanding the founder’s art, put them all together into a furnace to melt them down into one mass, which came out in the form of a calf. The Israelites, accustomed to the Egyptian idolatry, paying a religious worship to this image, al Sámairi went further, and took some dust from the footsteps of the horse of the Angel Gabriel, who marched at the head of the people, and threw it into the mouth of the calf, which immediately began to low, and became animated; for such was the virtue of that dust.”—Sale, on authority of Jalaludáín.

Some writers explain that Sámairi discovered the virtue of this dust of the footsteps of Gabriel’s horse by observing that wherever such footsteps were there green grass immediately appeared. Others account for the voice in the golden calf by referring it to Satan, who, entering it, began to say to the people, “I am your preserver, wherefore worship me.”

(51)

Yet afterwards we forgave you, i.e., those who did not actually worship the golden calf. See ver. 53.

(52)

When we gave Moses the book. We have here one instance, of which this chapter furnishes many, wherein the Quran shows the ignerence of Muhammad with respect to the history of the Jews as contained in the books of Moses. The “Book” of the law (the Torah or Pentateuch) is here represented as given to Moses in the Mount, whereas the story refers to the giving of the two tables (Arabic, Alwáh, meaning tablets) containing the ten commandments only. See Exod. xxxiv. 28.

For further exposition of discrepancy between the Qurán and the Pentateuch, see comments on chap. vii., vers. 104-163, where is recorded the most detailed account of the exodus of Israel from Egypt and God’s dealings with them in the wilderness to be found in the Qurán.

And the distinction between good and evil. Rodwell translates, “and the illumination,” chap. xxi. 49.

The Arabic word here translated distinction is Furqán, a name which, among Muslims, is given solely to the Qurán. The author of the notes on the Roman Urdú Qurán argues from the use of this word, which is derived from the Syraic, that Muhammad must have had access to the writings of Syrian Christians, and especially to the commentary of the Old and New Testaments by Ephraim, a Syrian, in which a great many stories similar to those of the Qurán are said to be recorded, and in which the Pentateuch is uniformly called the Furqán.

That this word may have been introduced into Muhammad’s vocabulary from Syrian sources is altogether probable, but the stories of the Qurán bear no traces of having been copied from, or even learned from, any written record. On the contrary, they everywhere bear the marks of having been recorded in the Qurán from hearsay sources. Any written record in the hands of Muhammad would have enabled him to give more accurate statements of fact, and thus would have better confirmed his claim that the Qurán attests the former Scriptures.

The meaning of the term Furqan, as applied to Scripture, is not “that which is divided into sections” (Hughes’ Notes on Muhammadanism, p. 11), but that which divides between good and evil, “that peradventure ye might be directed.”

(53)

Ye have injured your own souls. Rodwell has it, “Ye have sinned to your own hurt.” The allusion is to the slaying of certain of their number for the sin of idolatry.

Slay those among you, &c. Lit. slay one another.

“In this particular the narration agrees with that of Moses, who ordered the Levites to slay every man his brother; but the Scripture says there fell of the people that day about three thousand (the Vulgate says 23,000) men; whereas the commentators of the Qurán make the number of the slain to amount to 70,000; and add, that God sent a dark cloud which hindered them from seeing one another, lest the sight should move those who executed the sentence to compassion.”—Sale and Jaláluddín.

(54)

When ye said, O Moses, we will not believe thee, until we see God manifestly. “The persons here meant are said to have been seventy men, who were made choice of by Moses, and heard the voice of God talking with him. But not being satisfied with that, they demanded to see God; whereupon they were all struck dead by lightning.”—Sale, Ismaíl ibn Ali, Tafsír-i-Raufi.

As this statement is nowhere corroborated in the Bible, it is probably derived from Jewish tradition.

(55)

Then we raised you to life. The Tafsír-i-Raufi states that Moses, seeing his seventy companions stricken dead, immediately interceded for their restoration to life, on the ground that the people might suspect him of their murder. God then, on Moses’ intercession, restored them to life. See also Rodwell’s note on this passage.

(56)

We caused clouds to overshadow you. The pillar of cloud, and may be the pillar of fire also (Exod. xiii. 21, 22). Some commentators say that the cloud was as a canopy over the Israelites to shield them from the heat of the sun (Tafsír-i-Raufi).

Manna and quails. “The Eastern writers say these quails were of a peculiar kind, to be found nowhere but in Yaman, from whence they were brought by a south wind in great numbers to the Israelites’ camp in the desert. The Arabs call these birds Salwá, which is plainly the same with the Hebrew Salwim, and say they have no bones, but are eaten whole.”—Sale.

A great variety of opinions have been entertained among Muslim commentators as to what manna represents, e.g., flour, honey, heavenly gifts bestowed secretly, &c. As to the quails, some have it that they were dressed in the air and baked by the heat of the sun before they fell on the ground.

As to the Salwá having no bones (see Sale’s note above), the fact is, their bones are so tender that many eat them along with the flesh.

And they injured not us, but injured their own souls. Savary translates this passage, “Your murmurs have been injurious only to yourselves.”

The Tafsír-i-Raufi seems to refer the injury spoken of in this verse to the wandering in the wilderness.

(57)

Enter this city. Some commentators suppose this city to be Jericho, others Jerusalem.—Sale.

The author of the notes on the Roman Urdú Qurán takes the allusion to be to a “city of refuge.” This mixing up of events, some of which happened in the wilderness, others in the Holy Land, and still others which happened nowhere, added to which is the narration of events as occurring successively, whose chronological order is widely different, shows the ignorance of the Arabian prophet.

Say forgiveness. “The Arabic word is Hittaton, which some take to signify that profession of the unity of God so frequently used by the Muhammadans, Lá iláha illa ’lláho, There is no God but God.”—Sale, Jaláluddín.

(58)

But the ungodly changed the expression, &c. “According to Jaláluddín, instead of Hittaton, they cried Hubbat fi shaírat, i.e., a grain in an ear of barley; and in ridicule of the divine command to enter the city in an humble posture, they indecently crept in upon their breech.”—Sale, Yahya.

Indignation from heaven. “A pestilence which carried off near seventy thousand of them.”—Sale.

(59)

Strike the rock. “The commentators say this was a stone which Moses brought from Mount Sinai, and the same that fled away with his garments which he had laid upon it one day while he washed.

“They describe it to be a square piece of white marble, shaped like a man’s head; wherein they differ not much from the accounts of European travellers, who say this rock stands among several lesser ones, about a hundred paces from Mount Horeb, and appears to have been loosened from the neighbouring mountains, having no coherence with the others; that it is a huge mass of red granite, almost round on one side, and flat on the other, twelve feet high, and as many thick, but broader than it is high, and about fifty feet in circumference.”—Sale, Jaláluddín.

Twelve fountains. “Marracci thinks this circumstance looks like a Rabbinical fiction, or else that Muhammad confounds the water of the rock at Horeb with the twelve wells at Elim.”—Sale.

All men knew their drinking-place. Rodwell translates, “all men,” but understands “each tribe.” He adds, “This incident is perhaps inadvertently borrowed from Exed. xv. 27.”

(60)

We will by no means be satisfied with one kind of food. This refers to the second murmuring of the Israelites. See Num. xi. 5, &c.

Moses answered . . . Get ye down to Egypt. According to the Pentateuch, this is not only not what Moses said, but what he would not have said. Cf. Exod. xxxii. 9-14, with Num. xiv. 13, &c.

this they suffered, because they . . . killed the prophets. Muslim commentators, following the anachronism of this passage, instance John Baptist and Zachariah as being among the martyred prophets referred to here!

(61)

Surely those who believe, &c. “From these words, which are repeated in the fifth chapter, several writers have wrongly concluded that the Muhammadans hold it to be the doctrine of their prophet that every man may be saved in his own religion, provided he be sincere and lead a good life. It is true some of their doctors do agree this to be the purport of the words: but then they say the latitude hereby granted was soon revoked, for that this passage is abrogated by several others in the Qurán, which expressly declare that none can be saved who is not of the Muhammadan faith; and particularly by those words of the third chapter (ver. 84), Whoever followeth any other religion than Islâm (i.e., the Muhammadan), it shall not be accepted of him and at the last day he shall be of those who perish. However, others are of opinion that this passage is not abrogated, but interpret it differently, taking the meaning of it to be, that no man, whether he be a Jew, a Christian, or a Sabian, shall be excluded from salvation, provided he quit his erroneous religion and become a Muslim, which they say is intended by the following words, Whoever believeth in God and the last day, and doth that which is right. And this interpretation is approved by Mr. Reland, who thinks the words here import no more than those of the apostle, In every nation he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted of him (Acts x. 35); from which it must not be inferred that the religion of nature, or any other, is sufficient to save, without faith in Christ (Relig. Moham., p. 128).”—Sale.

Rodwell identifies the Sabeites with the so-called Christians of St. John. See his note on this passage.

Brinckman thinks the fairest interpretation of this passage to be as follows:—“Jews, Christians, Sabians, whoever become Moslems, shall be saved if they become Moslems, and they shall be safe no matter what was their previous religion.”—Notes on Islám, p. 53.

Abdul Qádir and the Tafsír-i-Raufi render the passage as making faith in God and the last day and the performance of required duty the condition of salvation, no matter what a man’s infidelity may have consisted in before he believed. They agree in regarding Jews and Christians as infidels.

The true explanation of this passage, so often quoted in controversy, will be made evident from the following considerations:—

(1.) The passage is addressed to the People of the Book (Abl-i-kitáb), as appears from the context. Rodwell describes the “Sabeans” correctly.

(2.) Muhammad did not regard all Jews and Christians as infidels (chap. iii. 113 and 199). He everywhere describes Islám as the one only true religion given by God to men through the medium of the prophets. It was the religion of Adam, of Noah, of Abraham, of Moses, and of Jesus. Jews and Christians, &c., therefore, who believed “in God and the last day,” and did “that which was right,” were true Muslims. Only those Jews and Christians who rejected Muhammad as the prophet of God are stigmatised as infidels. In this passage and passages of similar purport Muhammad assumes that he is the prophet of the true faith, and really strives to conciliate Jews and Christians by endorsing their religion as true. He would have them abjure the errors into which they had fallen, and return to the simple faith and practice of their, or rather God’s religion, as now taught by the prophet of God.

It follows from this, that as a true Jew must receive Jesus Christ, and hence become a Christian, if he would be saved, so a true Christian must receive Muhammad, and hence become a Muhammadan, if he would be saved.

Granting, as Muslims do, that Muhammad is the prophet he claimed to be, there is nothing in this passage inconsistent with his usual teaching as to the way of salvation.

(62)

Lifted up the mountain of Sinaí over you. “The Muhammadan tradition is, that the Israelites refusing to receive the law of Moses, God tore up the mountain by the roots, and shook it over their heads to terrify them into a compliance.”—Sale and Abdul Qádir.

Rodwell has clearly demonstrated the Jewish origin of this statement.

(63)

After this ye again turned back. Some commentators (Tafsír-i-Raufi) think these words refer to the rejection of Jesus, but more probably they refer to the rebellion at Kadesh-Barnea, or some similar event connected with the journey in the wilderness.

(64, 65)

Be ye changed into apes, &c. “The story to which this passage refers is as follows:—In the days of David some Israelites dwelt at Ailah or Elath, on the Red Sea, where on the night of the Sabbath the fish used to come in great numbers to the shore, and stay there all the Sabbath to tempt them; but the night following they returned into the sea again. At length some of the inhabitants, neglecting God’s command, catched the fish on the Sabbath, and dressed and ate them; and afterwards cut canals from the sea for the fish to enter, with sluices, which they shut on the Sabbath, to prevent their return to the sea. The other part of the inhabitants, who strictly observed the Sabbath, used both oersuasion and force to stop this impiety, but to no purpose, the offenders growing only more and more obstinate; whereupon David cursed the Sabbath-breakers, and God transformed them into apes. It is said that one going to see a friend of his that was among them, found him in the shape of an ape, moving his eyes about wildly, and asking him whether he was not such a one, the ape made a sign with his head that it was he: whereupon the friend said to him, ‘Did not I advise you to desist? at which the ape wept. They add that these unhappy people remained three days in this condition, and were afterwards destroyed by a wind which swept them all into the sea.”—Sale.

Rodwell says there is no trace of this legend in the Talmudists. Comp. chap. vii. 164.

The Tafsír-i-Raufi says the number thus changed into apes was seventy thousand, a number very commonly assigned by Muslim writers to every display of divine judgment.

(66)

Verily God commandeth you to sacrifice a cow. “The occasion of this sacrifice is thus related:—A certain man at his death left his son, then a child, a cow-calf, which wandered in the desert till he came to age, at which time his mother told him the heifer was his, and bid him fetch her and sell her for three pieces of gold. When the young man came to the market with his heifer, an angel in the shape of a man accosted him, and bid him six pieces of gold for her; but he would not take the money till he had asked his mother’s consent, which when he had obtained, he returned to the marketplace, and met the angel, who now offered him twice as much for the heifer, provided he would say nothing of it to his mother; but the young man refusing, went and acquainted her with the additional offer. The woman perceiving it was an angel, bid her son go back and ask him what must be done with the heifer; whereupon the angel told the young man that in a little time the children of Israel would buy that heifer of him at any price. And soon after it happened that an Israelite, named Hammiel, was killed by a relation of his, who, to prevent discovery, conveyed the body to a place considerably distant from that where the fact was committed. The friends of the slain man accused some other persons of the murder before Moses; but they denying the fact, and there being no evidence to convict them, God commanded a cow, of such and such particular marks, to be killed; but there being no other which answered the description except the orphan’s heifer, they were obliged to buy her for as much gold as her hide would hold; according to some, for her full weight in gold, and as others say, for ten times as much. This heifer they sacrificed, and the dead body being, by divine direction, struck with a part of it, revived, and standing up, named the person who had killed him, after which it immediately fell down dead again. The whole story seems to be borrowed from the red heifer, which was ordered by the Jewish law to be burnt, and the ashes kept for purifying those who happened to touch a dead corpse (Num. xix.), and from the heifer directed to be slain for the expiation of a certain murder. See Deut. xxi. 1-9.”—Sale, on authority of Abulfeda.

The Tafsír-i-Raufi, dilating on this story at great length, gives it with some variations from the version given above, yet substantially the same story.

This piece of history is manifestly manufactured by the commentators to explain a very obscure passage. The substance of the story is gathered from the Qurán (see succeeding verses). The passage is an additional proof that Muhammad was not in possession of a copy of the Jewish Scriptures. His information must have been received from some one who was himself ignorant of the Scriptures. Certainly Muhammad could not have garbled the Mosaic account to make his Qurán appear as a new revelation, as has been charged upon him (Notes on Roman Urdú Qurán). A deliberate garbler, with the Pentateuch before him, would have done better work. The passage is perfectly incoherent, as the invented history of the Muslim commentators shows.

(68)

She is a red cow, intensely red. “The original is yellow, but this word we do not use in speaking of the colour of cattle.”—Sale.

It seems to me the peculiar colour is here intended as a sign to indicate what cow. The succeeding question, as well as the preceding, desiring that Moses should pray for them, is presented to show the unbelief and hardness of heart on the part of the Jews. They doubt the inspiration of Moses, wherefore these numerous questions. See Tafsír-i-Raufi, in loco.

(70)

Moses answered. He saith, &c. Muhammad here presents Moses as a prophet of God like himself. He, like Muhammad, the inspired prophet, delivers the precise message of God word for word. But the inspiration here and elsewhere attributed to the prophets in the Qurán is a very different thing from that attributed to them in the Bible. This fact affords another instance of the falsehood of the claim that the Qurán attests the Christian Scriptures ch. xii. 111).

They wanted but little of leaving it undone. “Because of the exorbitant price which they were obliged to pay for the heifer. —Sale, and the Tafsír-i-Raufi.

(71)

When ye slew a man, &c. The commentators are troubled to reconcile this charge of murder against the, whole nation, when, according to their history of the transaction, it was the act of only one man. The Tafsír-i-Raufi conceives the Jews generally as becoming partners in crime with the one guilty person by their unwillingness to use the divine instrumentality to discover the murderer, and their readiness to charge the crime upon one another.

(72)

Strike the dead body with part of the sacrificed cow. There is considerable learning displayed in the discussion as to what part of the cow was used for this purpose. The weight of learning is pretty well divided between the tongue and the end of the tail!

(73)

Hardened after this, i.e., after the sacrifice of the cow, the restoration to life of the murdered, and the conviction of the murderer. The events here alluded to are not, for a wonder, described by the commentators. From what follows, it appears to me the allusion is to their rejection of the prophets, and especially of Muhammad (ver. 74).

Others have fallen down for fear of God. Some think the allusion here to be to the tottering of the rocks from the mountain-side under an earthquake shock. Others have quoted much tradition to show the literal fulfilment of this in connection with the prophet, stones doing obeisance to him. See Tafsír-i-Raufi.

(74)

Do ye therefore desire the Jews should believe you? Rodwell translates, “Desire ye then that for your sakes (i.e., to please you, O Muslims) the Jews should believe?”

The negative here suggested as an answer to this question throws some light on the various examples of Jewish unbelief related in the preceding context, the narration of which closes with the preceding verse. The object of these statements is primarily to show the similarity of Arabia’s prophet to Moses, and, secondarily, to arouse in Arab minds that fanatical hatred of the Jews which was soon to vent itself on the Bani Quraidha and other tribes. See Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. iii. pp. 255-291.

Yet a part of them heard . . . then perverted it. They listened with apparent interest to the words of the Qurán, and gave Muhammad reason to believe they received it as the Word of God, but afterwards were led to change their minds, probably through the influence of their more stable-minded brethren.

(75)

And when they meet the true believers, they say, We believe. These are the hypocrites referred to in ver. 74. More likely they were ignorant Jews, who were really drawn toward Muhammad when in his presence and under his influence, but who were drawn away again by the influence of other Jews who were adverse to Muhammad. Failure to ally themselves to him was quite sufficient to put them under the ban of hypocrisy.

The Tafsír-i-Raufi instances Qáb, who was assassinated about this time by the order or consent of Muhammad, on account of his opposition to Islám, as one of these hypocrites.

When they are privately assembled together, they say, &c. Abdul Qádir translates “one says to another,” instead of “they say.” He comments as follows:—“The hypocrites were in the habit of telling the Muslims, in order to win their favour, what was written in their books concerning Muhammad; but his enemies, finding fault with them, objected to their placing such proofs in their hands,” i.e., of the Muslims. Does not this verse throw some light on the source from which Muhammad obtained the garbled accounts of the history and experience of the prophets found in his Qurán? Ignorant Jews related the stories imperfectly to the followers of Muhammad, who repeated them still more imperfectly to their prophet, who embodied them in the Qurán.

(77)

Illiterate men . . . who know not the book. “Among them the vulgar know the Pentateuch only by tradition. They have but a blind belief.”—Savary.

The author of the notes to the Roman Urdú Qurán well observes that this passage implies that, in Muhammad’s estimate, the Jewish Scriptures were extant and entirely credible, and that they were read and understood by their doctors.

(78)

Woe unto them, who transcribe corruptly the book of the Law with their hands, and then say, This is from God. “These are they who form sentences as they please for the people, and then ascribe them to God or his prophet.”—Abdul Qádir.

The inference drawn by modern Muslims from passages like this, that, according to the Qurán, the Jewish and Christian Scriptures have been corrupted, and are therefore no longer credible, is entirely unjustifiable. Admitting the charge made here against certain Jews to be true (and the Christian need not deny it), it proves nothing concerning the text of present copies. On the contrary, the charge implies the existence, at that date, of genuine copies.

That they may sell it for a small price. This formula occurs repeatedly in the Qurán. Its meaning is, that the gain arising from such a course would be small compared with the loss of the soul in hell.

The Tafsír-i-Raufi relates a story to the effect that certain Jews were bribed to pervert the Mosaic description of Antichrist or Dajjál, so as to make him correspond in size, complexion, and otherwise to Muhammad.

(79)

A certain number of days. “That is, says Jaláluddín, forty, being the number of days that their forefathers worshipped the golden calf, after which they gave out that their punishment should cease. It is a received opinion among the Jews at present that no person, be he ever so wicked, or of whatever sect, shall remain in hell above eleven months, or at most a year, except Dathan and Abiram and atheists, who will be tormented there to all eternity.”—Sale.

(80)

Whoso doeth evil. “By evil in this case the commentators generally understand polytheiam or idolatry, which sin, the Muhammadans believe, unless repented of in this life, is unpardonable, and will be punished by eternal damnation; but all other sins they hold will at length be forgiven.”—Sale.

The final pardon of sin, however, is true only of Muslims. For the káfir or infidel, i.e., any one who rejects Islám, there is eternal burning (chaps. xi. 53 and xli. 28).

Companions of fire. The Qurán everywhere represents the pains of hell as being those produced by fire. Everywhere the prophet seems to gloat over the horrors of the punishment meted out to the lost in perdition. See references in Index under the word Hell.

(81)

But they who believe and do good works, i.e., Muslims performing the duties required by their profession.

The statement made in these verses would seem to contradict that of such passages as speak of salvation by the grace of God, e.g., chap. xxiv. 21. But there is not necessarily any more contradiction here than in similar passages of the Bible, where the doctrines of faith and works seem to be inconsistent with each other. The grace of God is bestowed upon the ground of faith, which is inseparable from good works.

(82)

The covenant of the children of Israel, &c. It is noteworthy that the Qurán nowhere makes allusion to the ceremonial rites of sacrifice as a sin-offering, when narrating the religious duties of the Jews. Even the famous passage in chap. xxii. 36-40, where sacrifice is recognised as a rite appointed by God unto every nation, and the story of the “Yellow Cow” (vers. 66-70), do not indicate a sacrifice in any Jewish sense as having atoning efficacy. Muhammad could hardly have known so much of Judaism as is manifest in the Qurán—could not have met with so many Jews as he did in Madina, without knowing something at least of their ideas of sacrifice. The conclusion would seem well founded that he deliberately eliminated the whole idea of atonement from what he declared to be the Word of God, and, therefore, never permitted the doctrine of salvation by atonement to appear as having divine sanction in any dispensation. With facts like this before us, it is very difficult to exonerate the author of the Qurán from the charge of deliberate forgery and conscious imposture.

(83)

Shall not shed your brother’s blood. Rodwell translates, “your own blood,” and explains as follows: “The blood of those who are as your own flesh.”

(84)

Yet it is equally unlawful for you to dispossess them. “This passage was revealed on occasion of some quarrels which arose between the Jews of the tribes of Quraidha, and those of al Aws, al Nadhír, and al Khazraj, and came to that height that they took arms and destroyed one another’s habitations, and turned one another out of their houses; but when any were taken captive, they redeemed them. When they were asked the reason of their acting in this manner, they answered, that they were commanded by their law to redeem the captives, but that they fought out of shame, lest their chiefs should be despised.”—Sale, on authority of Jaláluddín.

(85)

Who have purchased this present life, &c. This clear recognition of the importance of seeking happiness in the life to come, together with the personal character given to the Judge of all men, have not been the least potent factors in gaining influence for Islám among its votaries.

Shall not be helped. By the intercession of prophets and angels to save them from wrath on the judgment-day.

(86)

And caused apostles to succeed him. “It is recorded that there were four thousand prophets, more or less, between Moses and Jesus, all of whom obeyed the precepts of the Pentateuch, e.g., Joshua, Simeon, Job, David, Solomon, Elijah, Zacharaya, and John Baptist. They were sent in order to proclaim and enforce the law, for the corruptions (of the text of the Word of God) made by Jewish doctors had been spread abroad. Wherefore these apostles were, so to speak, divine teachers and renewers of the true religion. Such are referred to in this verse.”—Tafsír-i-Raufi.

This authority states, in this same connection, that a prophet was sent at the beginning of every century, and that at the beginning of each millennium a great prophet (Nabi ul Ázim) was sent. This state of things continued until the coming of Muhammad, who, being the last of the prophets, closed the book of inspiration and established the true faith in perfection. He does not, however, seem to see the inconsistency of this theory with the fact of the four thousand prophets belonging to the Mosaic dispensation before mentioned, nor does he show by what process the disposition of doctors of divinity to corrupt the text of Scripture has been changed in the last dispensation. If the former Scriptures were corrupted in spite of the four thousand prophets, how about the Qurán in a dispensation devoid of prophets?

And gave evident miracles to Jesus the son of Mary. These were—(1) speaking when an infant in his mother’s arms; (2) making birds of clay when a child, and causing them to fly away; (3) healing the blind-born; (4) cleansing lepers; and (5) raising the dead. See chaps. iii. 48 and v. 110.

These passages, while recognising Jesus as a worker of miracles, everywhere ascribe them to divine power external to him. He is only “the son of Mary.”

And strengthened him with the holy spirit. “We must not imagine Muhammad here means the Holy Ghost in the Christian acceptation. The commentators say this spirit was the angel Gabriel, who sanctified Jesus and constantly attended on him.”—Sale, Jaláluddín.

In chap. iv. 169, Jesus is said to be “a spirit proceeding from God,” so that he would appear, according to the Qurán, to be the Holy Ghost. Muslims even accord to his followers the creed, “There is one God, and Jesus is the Spirit of God,” as expressive of the truth. In chap. xxi. 91, Mary’s conception is said to have been due to the breathing by God of his spirit into her. And in chap. iii. 45, Jesus is called the “Word proceeding from Himself,” i.e., God. Now, while it is certain that these expressions, and many others of a similar import in the Qurán, do express the doctrine of the divinity of Jesus, as well as of the Holy Ghost, it is perfectly clear that Muhammad never intended to express that idea. For instance, in chap. iii. 47, it is evident that Muhammad regarded Jesus as a creature. And in chap iv. 169, 170, where Jesus is called the “word which he (God) conveyed into Mary, and a spirit proceeding from him,” this very expression, which is one of the strongest in the Qurán, is followed by the command, “Say not, there are three Gods,” which is evidently intended to deny the idea of the divinity of Jesus as well as of Mary. Nevertheless, the fact of such expressions being used in the Qurán can only be explained on the ground that they were in use among the Arabs in Muhammad’s time in a Christian sense, and that Muhammad either used them, while explaining away their meaning, in order to commend his doctrine to Christians, or, as is more probable, he used them without understanding their Christian import himself. See Muir’s Life of Mohamet, vol. ii. p. 138.

The unintentional testimony of Muhammad to the character of Jesus is a subject worthy the study of the Christian controversialist.

The Tafsír-i-Husaini gives four opinions of Muslim commentators as to the import of the expression “holy spirit:” (1.) The holy soul of Jesus; (2.) the angel Gabriel; (3.) a potent name whereby he was able to raise the dead; and (4.) the Gospel.

And accuse some of imposture. The prophet of Arabia, as is his wont, here likens the treatment he received at the hands of the Jews to that endured by Jesus, whom they rejected as an impostor. The passage shows that Muhammad was regarded as an impostor by the Jews of Madína at least.

(87)

But God hath cursed them with their infidelity, therefore few shall believe. Rodwell renders it, “God hath cursed them in their infidelity: few are they who believe.”

Savary has it: “God cursed them because of their perfidy. Oh, how small is the number of the true believers!”

(88)

And when a book came unto them from God. The Qurán, which Muhammad here distinctly claims to be the Word of God.

They had before prayed, &c. “The Jews, in expectation of the coming of Muhammad (according to the tradition of his followers), used this prayer: O God, help us against the unbelievers by the prophet who is to be sent in the last times.”—Sale.

Which they knew to be from God. Another charge of deliberate rejection of his claims.

(89)

Out of envy, because God sendeth down his favours to such of his servants as he pleaseth. Eavious of “the gift of the prophetic office, &c., to a pagan Arab, and not to a Jew.”—Rodwell.

“It is remarkable that Muhammad accuses the Jews of rejecting him for the same reason their elders and priests had refused Christ, namely, for envy.”—Brinckman, Notes on Islam.

This assumption of Muhammad, like that of deliberate rejection of him whom they knew to be the prophet of God, and of that which they knew to be the Word of God (i.e., the Qurán, see ver. 88), is purely gratuitous. He had failed to give his Jewish hearers one single good reason for believing him to be sent of God as a prophet.

R. Bosworth Smith (Mohammed and Mohammedanism, p. 14, second edition) is surprised “that the avowed relation of Christianity to Judaism has not protected Islám from the assaults of Christian apologists, grounded on its no less explicitly avowed relation to the two together.” But surely “avowed” relationship can afford no protection to any religion against assault. The avowed relationship must be proven to be genuine. Mere assertions on the part of Jesus never could have established any relationship between Christianity and Judaism. This relationship is only established by showing Christianity to be a development of Judaism—a development demanded by Judaism itself. Until it can be shown that Islám is a further development of both Judaism and Christianity, all “avowed” relationship counts for nothing. The ground of assault on the part of Christian apologists is the manifest disagreement between Islám and its “avowed relation” to Christianity.

(90)

That which God hath sent down. The Qurán. The Tafsír-i-Raufi understands the allusion to be to the Gospel also, but this opinion is not well founded. The latter part of the verse undoubtedly refers to the Qurán alone, and the allusion here must be to the same thing.

That which hath been sent down to us. The Pentateuch.

They reject . . . the truth, confirming that which is with them. See note on ver. 40. This statement, so frequently reiterated, is one of the chief of the points inviting attack upon the Qurán. The question to be decided is one of fact. Does the Qurán confirm the doctrine, the history, and the plan of salvation by atonement set forth in the writings of Moses? If not, then the Qurán is a forgery, and Muhammad an impostor, the Qurán being witness.

Muslims are so thoroughly convinced of the force of this argument against them that they see no way of evading it except in the claim that the Pentateuch now in use among Jews and Christians is either in whole or in part a forgery.

Say, Why therefore have ye slain the prophets of God? See Matt. xxiii. 37. So Redwell; but see also notes on ver. 60.

(91)

The calf. See notes on ver. 50.

(92)

Lifted the mountain of Sinai over you. See note on ver. 62.

We have heard and rebelled. Muslim commentators express a variety of opinions in regard to these words, e.g., they cried aloud “we have heard,” but said softly “and rebelled,” or “we have heard” with our ears “and rebelled” with our hearts, or that their fathers heard and they rebelled; or that some said “we have heard,” and others “and rebelled;” or, finally, that two different occasions are referred to, one of obedience and another of rebellion. See Tafsír-i-Raufi.

Say, A grievous thing, &c. “Muhammad here infers from their forefathers disobedience in worshipping the calf, at the same time that they pretended to believe in the law of Moses, that the faith of the Jews in his time was as vain and hypocritical, since they rejected him, who was foretold therein, as an impostor.”—Sale, Yahya, Baidháwí.

(93)

If the future mansion . . . wish for death, if ye say truth. This same claim can be set up with equal justice against Muslims, who hold ont no hope of salvation to such as reject Islám. The Tafsír-i-Raufi regards the words as being addressed to believers as a test of their faith. Tried by such a test, there are indeed very few true Muslims.

(94)

That which their hands have sent before them. “That is, by reason of the wicked forgeries which they have been guilty of in respect to the Scriptures. An expression much like that of St. Paul where he says, that some men’s sins are open beforehand, going before to judgment.”—Sale.

God knoweth the wicked-doers. This, with a multitude of similar passages in the Qurán, clearly emphasises the truth of God’s omniscience. It is one of those truths which has given Islám so much moral power, and which asserts its superiority over the various forms of heathenism with which it comes in contact. Such truths regarding God account in great measure for its influence as a “missionary religion.”

(96)

Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel. “The commentators say that the Jews asked what angel it was that brought the divine revelations to Muhammad; and being told that it was Gabriel, they replied that he was their enemy, and the messenger of wrath and punishment; but if it had been Michael, they would have believed on him, because that angel was their friend, and the messenger of peace and plenty. And on this occasion, they say, this passage was revealed.

That Michael was really the protector or guardian angel of the Jews we know from Scripture (Dan. xii. 1); and it seems that Gabriel was, as the Persians call him, the angel of revelations, being frequently sent on messages of that kind (Dan. viii. 16; ix. 21; Luke i. 19, 26); for which reason it is probable Muhámmad pretended he was the angel from whom he received the Qurán.”—Sale, Jaláluddín, Yahya.

(98)

Evident signs, “i.e., the revelations of this book.”—Sale. “The Qurán and miracles.”—Tafsír-i-Raufi. The word Ayát, here translated signs, is that which is used to denote the various sections or verses of the Qurán. As these verses were claimed to be a standing miracle, and were for this reason called signs, the allusion of the passage is to the revelations of the Qurán, as Sale has it.

As to the claim of Muslim tradition and of modern Muhammadans that Muhámmad wrought miracles, it is sufficient to say that such a claim is made directly in opposition to the repeated declaration of the Qurán to the contrary. See vers. 118, 119: chap. iii. 184, 185; chap. vii. 34-36, 109, 111; chap. x. 21, &c.

(100)

An apostle from God, confirming that scripture which was with them. Muhammad here reiterates his claim to be an apostle confirming the Jewish Scriptures. He would also be recognised as an apostle of God because he confirms the Jewish Scriptures. He therefore attests the divine character of the Scriptures extant in his time. See also note on ver. 90.

(101)

The device which the devils devised. “The devils having, by God’s permission, tempted Solomon without success, they made use of a trick to blast his character. For they wrote several books of magic, and hid them under that prince’s throne, and after his death told the chief men that if they wanted to know by what means Solomon had obtained his absolute power over men, genii, and the winds, they should dig under his throne; which having done, they found the aforesaid books, which contained impious superstitions. The better sort refused to learn the evil arts therein delivered, but the common people did; and the priests published this scandalous story of Solomon, which obtained credit among the Jews, till God, say the Muhammadans, cleared that king by the mouth of their prophet, declaring that Solomon was no idolater.”—Sale, Yahya, Jaláluddín.

“Babel is regarded by the Muslims as the fountain-head of the science of magic. They suppose Hárút and Márút to be two angels who, in consequence of their want of compassion for the frailues of mankind, were sent down to earth to be tempted. They both sinned; and being permitted to choose whether they would be punished now or hereafter, chose the former, and are still suspended by the feet at Babel in a rocky pit, and are the great teachers of magic.”—Lane on chap. iii., note 14, of the Thousand and One Nights. See also Rodwell’s note.

Hárút and Márút. “Some say only that these were two magicians or angels sent by God to teach men magic and to tempt them; but others tell a longer fable, that the angels expressing their surprise at the wickedness of the sons of Adam, after prophets had been sent to them with divine commissions, God bid them choose two out of their own number to be sent down to be judges on earth. Whereupon they pitched upon Hárút and Márút, who executed their office with integrity for some time, till Zuharah, or the planet Venus, descended and appeared before them in the shape of a beautiful woman, bringing a complaint against her husband (though others say she was a real woman). As soon as they saw her they fell in love with her, and endeavoured to prevail on her to satisfy their desires; but she flew up again to heaven, whither the two angels also returned, but were not admitted. However, on the intercession of a certain pious man, they were allowed to choose whether they would be punished in this life or in the other; whereupon they chose the former, and now suffer punishment accordingly in Babel, where they are to remain till the day of judgment. They add that if a man has a fancy to learn magic, he may go to them, and hear their voice, but cannot see them.

“The Jews have something like this of the angel Shamhozai, who having debauched himself with women, repented, and by way of penance hung himself up between heaven and earth. (See Bereshit Rabbah in Gen. vi. 2).”—Sale, Yahya, Jaláluddín, &c.

(103)

Say not to our apostle, “Raina;” but say “Undhúrna.” “Those two Arabic words have both the same signification, viz., Look on us, and are a kind of salutation. Muhammad had a great aversion to the first, because the Jews frequently used it in derision, it being a word of reproach in their tongue. They alluded, it seems, to the Hebrew verb רוע, rua, which signifies to be bad or mischievous.”—Sale, Jalôluddin.

“Raina,” as pronounced, means in Hebrew, “our bad one;” but in Arabic, “look on us.”—Rodwell, Abdul Qádir.

(105)

Whatever verse we shall abrogate, or cause thee to forget, we will bring a better than it, or one like unto it. “Imám Baghawí says, that the number of abrogated verses has been variously estimated from five to five hundred.”—Hughes’ Introduction to the Roman Urdú Qurán, 1876, p. xix.

The Tafsír Fatah-ul-Aziz describes three classes of abrogated passages: (1.) where one verse or passage is substituted for another; (2.) where the meaning and force of a passage is abrogated by the addition of another passage, both passages being retained in the book; and (3.) where the passage is removed entirely from both the book and the memory of those who may have heard it. See on this subject Introduction to Muir’s Life of Mahomet, pp. xxii. and xxvi., also Preliminary Discourse, p. 110.

Brinckman, in his Notes on Islam, draws from this passage the following conclusion:—“If God gave verses to Muhammad and then cancelled them, it utterly destroys the notion that the original of the present Qurán, as we now have it, was written on the preserved table from all eternity by God. If it be said that God thought it better to withdraw some verses after declaring them, it looks as if God, like man, did not know the future; and as we do not know fer a certainty what words were cancelled, we cannot tell which verse it is best for us to attend to.”

The doctrine of abrogation, as taught in this passage and others (xiii. 39 and xvi. 103), sprang up during Muhammad’s prophetic career as a matter of necessity. The prophetic passages being delivered piecemeal, and generally as the religions or political circumstances of the prophet demanded, it came to pass that some of the later deliverances were contradictory to former ones. The Jews, ever alert in their opposition to the pretensions of the new religion, pointed out the discrepancies already manifest in the so-called revelations. Objections of this order could not but seriously influence the popularity of the prophet among his countrymen, and even jeopardise his credit in the eyes of his own followers. Under circumstances like these Muhammad promulgated the doctrine of abrogation, a doctrine which not only secured the allegiance of those whose faith had been shaken by Jewish objections, but which has served to strengthen his followers in all ages in their controversy with Jews and Christians.

The claim of the commentators is: (1.) That God is a sovereign, and is therefore at liberty to change or abolish his laws at his own discretion; (2.) that abrogation on his part does not imply any imperfection in the laws changed or abolished, as Jews and Christians had declared, but that circumstances of time, place, &c., called forth new laws, rites, and ceremonies. All God’s laws, rites, and ceremonies, ordained for the guidance of his creatures, are good and true for the time and under the circumstances in which they were given and for which they were intended.

Now, while it may be admitted that the abrogated passages of the Qurán may thus be upheld against the objection that they militate against the perfection of the divine character, assuming, as Muslims do, the inspiration of the Qurán, yet this doctrine will not serve their purpose when applied to the alleged abrogation of the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments.

On this point it becomes us to admit freely that God has abrogated in one age rites, ceremonies, and laws which were commanded in another. We claim this much in our controversy with Jews concerning the rites and ordinances of the Mósaic dispensation relating to clean and unclean meats, sacrifices and offerings, the observance of certain feasts, holy days, pilgrimages, &c. This doctrine is clearly maintained by the Apostle Paul in his Epistle to the Galatians and by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews.

But when the Muslim seeks to apply this principle of abrogation to the great cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith, as taught consistently throughout the whole Bible, and thus attempts to reconcile the former Scriptures with the contradictory teachings of the Qurán concerning the being and attributes of God, the Trinity, the Sonship of Christ, the Holy Spirit, and the Atonement, not to mention historical facts and the spirit of prophecy, the Christian does fairly take exception to this doctrine of abrogation. No amount of argument can ever so reconcile the Qurán with the former Scriptures, which it professes to confirm, as to make it possible to accept both as the Word of God. If the Bible be acknowledged to be the Word of God (and every Muslim is bound to do so), then, all reasonable concession to the doctrine of abrogation being made, the Qurán must still be rejected.

Dost not thou know that God is Almighty? This is given as the reason why God may abrogate any portion of his Word. It is the reason given by all Muslim commentators. “He can do as he pleases.” But God cannot lie. He cannot deny eternal truth, historical facts, and his own nature. “He cannotdeny himself.” Compare the teaching of Jesus in Matt. v. 17.

(107)

That which was formerly required of Moses? “Jaláluddín says that what the Jews required of Moses was that they might see God manifestly. The Tafsír Husaini, however, has it that they demanded that Muhammad should show them such a complete book, given at one time, as was given to Moses. Whatever the allusion may be, one thing is evident, viz., that Muhammad was troubled and displeased at the disposition of his followers to require of him similar evidence of his prophetic mission to that given by Moses.”—Notes on Roman Urdú Qurán.

(108)

Out of envy from their souls, &c. See notes on ver. 89.

But forgive them, and avoid them. These words indicate the policy of Muhammad, so long as he was too weak to use the more convincing argument of the sword in the controversy with the powerful Jewish tribes of Madína. The faithful were not to wage war against them, but to forgive them, and to prevent their exercising any evil influence, they were to be avoided. The Tafsír-i-Raufi paraphrases this passage thus: “Forgive and pass them by, until God reveal his command concerning their slaughter or their payment of tribute.”

(109)

Be constant in prayer. Prayer is the first of the five principal duties of the Muslim. It consists in the offering or ascriptions of praise to the deity with supplication for divine blessing five times a day. The times for prayer are: (1.) In the evening at four minutes after sunset; (2.) just after nightfall; (3.) at daybreak in the morning; (4.) at noon, as soon as the sun begins to decline from the meridian; (5.) midway between noon and sunset. See also note on ver. 42.

And alms. The giving of zakát, or legal and obligatory alms, is another of the five duties. The idea was probably borrowed from the Jewish tithes. See note on ver. 42, and Preliminary Discourse, p. 172.

(110)

They say, Verily none shall enter paradise, except they who are Jews or Christians. “This passage was revealed on occasion of a dispute which Muhammad had with the Jews of Madína and the Christians of Najrán, each of them asserting that those of their religion only should be saved.”—Sale. Jaláluddín. See note on ver. 61.

(111)

Nay, but he who resigneth himself to God, and doth that which is right, &c. Here we have first a denial of the teaching of Jews and Christians that a profession of, and obedience to, the requirements of their religion is necessary to salvation. As this is also the teaching of the Muslims, the force of this denial of it by Muhammad can only be evaded by the convenient doctrine of abrogation. Secondly, we have here a declaration that resignation to the will of God and right doing, which Jaláluddín interprets as “asserting the unity of God,” are the sole conditions of salvation. If so, then men are still under the law, and so cannot be saved, seeing none can fulfil its requirements. If so, then the Gospel of Jesus, which the Qurán claims to have attested, is untrue.

(112)

The Jews say, The Christians are grounded on nothing, &c. “The Jews and Christians are here accused of denying the truth of each other’s religion, notwithstanding they read the Scriptures; whereas the Pentateuch bears testimony to Jesus, and the Gospel bears testimony to Moses.”—Sale, Jaláluddín.

Yet they both read the Scriptures. This is further testimony to the Jewish and Christian Scriptures, as not only extant and in general use among Jews and Christians, but also to their credibility. The plain inference from this passage is that Muhammad regarded them as genuine. Whence then the ground for the charge made by him that the Jews and Christians changed and corrupted their Scriptures (ver. 41)? The answer is, that he did not charge upon them the crime of corrupting the text, but of perverting and concealing the meaning of their Scriptures.

The charge made by modern Muslims as to the corruption of the Bible text cannot be justified by any fair interpretation of the Qurán. This is an arrow borrowed from the quiver of Christian infidelity.

They who know not the Scripture. The heathen Arabs, who sided with Jews and Christians in their debates.

(113, 114)

Who is more unjust than he who prohibiteth the temples of God, &c. “Or hindereth men from paying their adorations to God in those sacred places. This passage, says Jaláluddín, was revealed on news being brought that the Romans had spoiled the temple of Jerusalem; or else when the idolatrous Arabs obstructed Muhammad’s visiting the temple of Makkah in the expedition of al Hudaibiya, which happened in the sixth year of the Hijra.”—Sale.

But Rodwell points out that this verse is misplaced here, in case it has reference to the Makkans who obstructed Muhammad’s visit to the Kaabah in the sixth year of the Hijra.

“Muhammad little thought how this verse foreshadowed his successors. The Mosque of Omer at Jerusalem and the Mosque of St. Sophia will occur to the reader.”—Brinckman’s Notes on Islám.

Those men cannot enter therein but with fear. This verse is referred to as authority for excluding Christians from the Musjid, especially from the Kaabah.

(115)

Whithersoever ye turn yourselves to pray, there is the face of God. This verse is regarded by all commentators as abrogated by ver. 145. It is said to have been revealed in the interval between the abrogation of the command to pray toward Jerusalem and the final command to turn toward Makkah. A multitude of stories have been invented to explain the verse, but their recital would be unprofitable.

For God is omnipresent and omniscient. This is given as the reason for requiring no Qibla. Even the Muslim must be struck with the very strange inconsistency between this reasonable statement and the reason assigned in ver. 145 for the command to turn to Makkah as the Qibla.

(116)

They say, God hath begotten children. “This is spoken not only of the Christians and of the Jews (for they are accused of holding Uzair or Ezra to be the Son of God), but also the pagan Arabs, who imagined the angels to be daughters of God.”—Sale, Tafsír-i-Raufi.

This charge indicates the ignorance of the Arabian prophet. Neither Jews nor Christians ever said God begot children in the sense here ascribed. Thecharge was probably due to an inference drawn from the language used by Christians, and perhaps by Jews, in speaking of Christ and his people as the “Son of God” and “the children of God” The charge against the Jews that they called Ezra the Son of God (chap. x. 30) is entirely without proof, and altogether beyond the region of probability.

(117)

Be, and it is. The doctrine that God creates out of nothing is here clearly recognised. Also his entire sovereignty over all things.

(118)

Or thou show us a sign. This passage points to the strong pressure brought to bear upon Muhammad, not only by Jews and Christians, but also by the Arabs, in their constant demand for miracles. Such passages also clearly show that Muhammad wrought no miracles.

We have already shown manifest signs. Muhammad here probably alludes to the verses (Ayát, signs) of the Qurán as manifest signs to believers.

(119)

We have sent thee . . . a preacher. This is Muhammad’s claim concerning himself. He ever sets himself forth as a preacher, yet as a messenger of God, an apostle, by whom the Qurán was to be conveyed to and enforced upon the world. The power by which it was to be enforced, at the time this passage was written, was persuasion. The pains consequent on unbelief were the pains of hell-fire. Believers were not yet made by the power of the sword.

Thou shalt not be questioned concerning the companions of hell. The Tafsír Husaíni says these words were spoken in reply to the inquiry of Muhammad concerning his parents, who had died in idolatry. The meaning, however, seems to be that the prophet was not to dispute, but simply to proclaim the truth. If men would not believe, the responsibility rested with them. They thereby proved themselves to be companions of hell.

(120)

Until thou follow their religion. We learn from this passage the growing division between the Jews and Christians and Muhammad, who is now regarded as teaching doctrine which is far from attesting the laith of Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. Even Muhammad recognises “their religion” as different from his own, but yet different only as heresy differs from orthodoxy.

(121)

They to whom we have given the book. Sale, in his translation, supplies the words “of the Qurán” after this sentence. Some Muslim commentators understand the passage in the same way; but the sentiment of the whole passage, as well as the interpretation of most Muslim commentators, is against it. The reference is to the Jewish and Christian Scriptures, and the meaning of the passage then is, “The direction of God is the true direction,” i.e., Islám, and those Jews and Christians who read their own Scriptures “with its true reading,” i.e., who do not change or twist the evident import thereof, “they believe therein.”

We have in this passage a distinct witness of Muhammad himself to the genuineness and credibility of the Scriptures extant in his own time, and in use among Jews and Christians.

(122)

O children of Israel. . . . I have preferred you before all nations, i.e., “until the time of Muhammad. Then the descendants of Ishmael were not so approved by God.”—Brinckman’s Notes on Islám.

This verse and the next are identical with vers. 46 and 47.

(124)

Remember when the Lord tried Abraham. “God tried Abraham chiefly by commanding him to leave his native country and to offer his son. But the commentators suppose the trial here meant related only to some particular ceremonies, such as circumcision, pilgrimageto the Kaabah, several rites of purification, and the like.”—Sale.

Which he fulfilled. Which Abraham fulfilled by leaving his home and country, and, as Muslims believe, by offering up Ismaíl as a sacrifice. See chap. xxxvii. 101-107.

Verily I will constitute thee a model of religion. “I will establish thee the leader of the people.”—Savary.

“I have rather expressed the meaning than truly translated the Arabic word Imám, which answers to the Latin Antistes. This title the Muhammadans give to their priests who begin the prayers in their mosques, and whom all the congregation follow.”—Sale.

(125)

The holy house. “That is, the Kaabah, which is usually called, by way of eminence, the house. Of the sanctity of this building and other particulars relating to it, see the Preliminary Discourse, p. 180.”—Sale.

The station of Abraham. “A place so called within the inner enclosure of the Kaabah, where they pretend to show the print of his foot in a stone.”—Sale.

According to the Tafsír-i-Raufi, Abraham visited the house of Ismaíl in his absence, but not liking the treatment he received from his wife, left with her a message for his son, which was understood by Ismaíl to express a desire that he should divorce his wife. This he did, when he married another. Abraham came again in the absence of his son, and being urged by his daughter-in-law to descend from his camel and to permit her to wash his head, he declared that, owing to a vow not to leave his camel till he had completed his journey, he could not get down. Being pressed, however, he so far consented, that with one foot on his camel and the other on a stone he had his head washed: This is “the place of Abraham.”

And we covenanted with Abraham and Ismaíl, &c. The purpose of this passage seems to have been: (1.) To confirm in Arab minds their own traditions respecting Abraham and Ismaíl as the founders of the temple at Makkah, and (2.) to present the prophet of Arabia as a reformer of Makkan idolatry, as Abraham was said to have been.

Throughout the Qurán Muhammad endeavours very adroitly on the one hand to imitate the Old Testament prophets, and on the other to make it appear that the circumstances of trial and opposition under which the Old Testament prophets laboured were precisely similar to those under which he laboured.

For most satisfactory reasons for regarding this whole Muslim history of Abraham and Ismaíl as utterly unworthy of the least credit, see Introduction to Muir’s Life of Mahomet, pp. cxciii., cxciv., and ccix. note.

The adoption of Arab and Jewish legend current in his day as true, and the promulgation of it as of divine authority, might be reconciled with the theory that Muhammad, though self-deceived, yet was honest in his prophetic character. But when we add to this his vacillation between the temples at Makkah and Jerusalem, fixing on the latter first, then expressing himself indifferent to either, and finally settling on Makkah, the incomistency is a little too striking to tally with such a theory.

(127)

And when Abraham and Ismaíl raised the foundations of the house, &c. Muir, in his Life of Mahomet, Introduction, pp. cxci. and cxcii., shows the whole story to be most clearly a legendary fiction.

(128)

Lord, make us also resigned. “The Arabic word is Muslimana, in the singular Muslim, which the Muhammadans take as a title peculiar to themselves. The Europeans generally write and pronounce it Musalman.”—Sale.

Rodwell has greatly improved the translation by retaining the original form of the word, “Lord, make us also Muslims, and our posterity a Muslim people,” &c.

(129)

Lord, send them likewise an apostle from among them, who may declare thy signs unto them, &c. If these words had been put into the mouth of Moses, we might regard them as an allusion to Deut. xviii. 15. As they stand, and regarded in the light of Muhammad’s prophetic pretensions, the resemblance is probably accidental.

Underlying these words there is the claim of the Quraish to be the children of Abraham, a claim which has little positive evidence in its favour. The negative proof derived from the fact that the Jews never denied it is, after all, very much weakened when we consider that a claim to be an Ishmaelite would be a matter of small interest to a Jew; besides, the general ignorance of Arabia and its people prevalent everywhere would naturally lead them to regard all Arabs as Ishmaelites. Under such circumstances, the silence of the Jews carries little weight with it.

“And wisdom, i.e., the meaning of the Qurán, or its declarations as to things required and forbidden, as to things clean and unclean, and thus through the law to purify them.”—Tafsír-i-Raufi

(130)

The religion of Abraham, i.e., Islám. Whilst such language was intended to serve the purpose of winning the Jews, it expresses no real concession to them. In so far as they differed from Islám, just so far had they departed from “the religion of Abraham.”

(132)

And Abraham bequeathed this religion to his children, and Jacob did the same, &c. That the religion referred to here is Islám is evident from the latter part of the verse. Understood in the sense intended by Muhammad, viz., that the Muslim faith was the religion of Abraham and the patriarchs, this statement is false. Accordingly, we have here a statement, which, if overthrown, carries with it the whole fabric of Muhammadanism built upon it. Either the religion of Islám was the religion of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, or it was not. If it was, let us have the evidence of the former Scriptures, the witness of the former prophets. Failure here must stigmatise the whole system as a forgery.

(134)

They have what they have gained. “Or, deserved. The Muhammadan notion, as to the imputation of moral actions to man, which they call gain or acquisition, is sufficiently explained in the Preliminary Discourse,” p. 156.—Sale.

Ye shall not be questioned concerning that which they have done. Neither their virtues nor their vices will be accredited to you. Every man shall answer for his own sin. See chap. xxxv. 19.

(135)

They say, Become Jews or Christians, that ye may be directed. Say, Nay, &c. We here learn the estimate which Muhammad put upon the Judaism and Christianity of his day. They were systems of idolatry: the Jews regarding Ezra as the Son of God, as the commentators allege; the Christians holding to a Trinity which, with Muhammad, consisted of God, Mary, and Jesus. See chap. iv. 169; comp. chap. v. 116, and chap. xix. 36. The Muslim is taught to regard himself as a follower of that faith from which both Jew and Christian had wandered, the faith of Abraham, “who was no idolater.”

The orthodox, Arabic Haníf, meaning one who has turned from good to bad, or from bad to good. Here the meaning is one who has turned from idolatry to the worship of the true God. See Rodwell’s note on chap. xvi. 121.

(136)

Say, We believe in God and that which hath been sent down to us, &c. No passage in the Qurán sets forth more clearly than this the claims of Islám. It is the one true religion of all the prophets and apostles of God. It was the religion of Abraham, of Moses, and of Jesus. Upon this foundation the whole structure of Islám stands. The controversy between the Christian and the Muslim is, mainly, one as to fact. The principal question is, Does Islám conserve within itself the system of spiritual truth, the historical facts, and the plan of salvation set forth in the teachings of the patriarchs and prophets of the Old Testament dispensation, and of Jesus and his Apostles in the New? This is the point which Muslims ever seek to evade, and yet this is the point which, above all others, they are bound to establish (see also above on ver. 132).

That which hath been sent down unto Abraham, &c., . . . we make no distinction between any of them. Two points of importance in the controversy with Muslims may be noted here:—First, it is here asserted that written revelations (books) like unto the Qurán were “sent down” from God “unto Abraham, and Ismaíl, and Isaac, and Jacob.” Where is the evidence of the truth of these statements? Where the proof that Ismaíl was a prophet at all? The Muslim will say that the testimony of the Qurán is sufficient evidence. This is the argument of Muhammad himself in the next verse. But this same statement declares that the writings of Moses and Jesus are, equally with the Qurán, to be regarded as the inspired Word of God. This is our second point. If, now, the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments contradict or fail to corroborate these assertions of the Qurán, then the Qurán points to the evidence which refutes its own statements. The assertion of modern Muslims, that these books, the writings of Moses and Jesus included, are no longer extant, and that the books in the hands of Jews and Christians are either forgeries or old copies of the Scripture so full of corruptions as to be no longer credible, is itself evidence of the desperation of the Muslim apologist. Such an assertion is, of course, incapable of proof. Notwithstanding, it is marvellous with what pertinacity the assertion continues to be made.

(137)

If they turn back, they are in schism. This last clause is translated in Rodwell, “they cut themselves off from you;” in the Tafsír-i-Raufi, “are in opposition and enmity to you;” in Abdul Qádir’s translation, “are opposed to you.”

On his entry into Madína, Muhammad courted the favour of the Jews. Hoping to bring them over to acknowledge his prophetic pretensions, he expressed much reverence for the patriarchs of the Jews, and especially for Abraham, “the orthodox.” A similar desire to win the influence of the Abyssinian “Najáshi,” and the Christian tribes of Yaman, drew forth from him similar expressions of respect for Jesus. His was the religion of Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. Why should they not acknowledge him, seeing he had been sent to confirm the Scriptures of both Jew and Christian? His neighbours and fellow-townsmen, the Jews, demanded of him the proof of his claim. Failing to satisfy this very reasonable demand, he soon found the Jews to be his keenest opponents, whose objections he could not silence, save by the assassin’s knife and the fanatic’s sword. This verse marks the growing antipathy towards these. Failure to obey the “prophet” was now evident apostasy from God; refusal to accept the doctrines of Islám, evidence of enmity toward the Muslims.

God will support thee against them. The bloody triumph over the Bani Quraidha and the Bani Nadhír is here foreshadowed. Argument and miracle being denied him, Muhammad still relies on God. With this faith he instigates the assassination of Abu Afak, of Káb, and Ibn Sanína; exiles the Bani Nadhír and Qainucáa; and orders the slaughter of eight hundred men of the Bani Quraidha in cold blood.

It is said that the blood of the Khalífah Othmán, which was shed by an assassin’s hand while reading the Qurán, fell upon the words of this verse. See Rodwell in loco.

(138)

The baptism of God have we received. Rodwell translates this passage, “Islam is the baptism of God,” but says, “The original simply has ‘Baptism of God.’ This may be understood either of Islám generally, or, with Ullman, in the more restricted sense of circumcision.”

Sale says, “By baptism is to be understood the religion which God instituted in the beginning; because the signs of it appear in the person who professes it, as the signs of water appear in the clothes of him that is baptized.”

Abdul Qádir translates it “The Colour of God,” and comments thus in the margin: “The Christians had a custom that when any one was introduced into their religion, they prepared a yellow colouring matter with which they coloured the man’s clothes and person. This verse was spoken in opposition to this practice.” The Tafsír-i-Raufi gives the same translation, and refers it to the baptism of infants by immersion in water coloured yellow, which was used for their purification. He understands the verse to mean, “that purification of Muslims from the contamination of idols by faith in God.”

(139)

Will ye dispute with us concerning God, &c.? “These words were revealed because the Jews insisted that they first received the Scriptures, that their Qibla was more ancient, and that no prophets could arise among the Arabs; and therefore if Muhammad was a prophet, he must have been of their nation.”—Sale, Jaláluddín.

(140)

Jews or Christians. The author of the notes on the Roman Urdú Qurán calls attention to the anachronism of applying the names “Jew” and “Christian” to those who were dead centuries before these titles had any existence.

Who hideth the testimony, &c. “The Jews are again accused of corrupting and suppressing the prophecies in the Pentateuch relating to Muhammad.”—Sale.

On this subject see further Prelim. Disc., p. 106, and notes on verse 74.

(142)

What hath turned them from their Qibla, &c.? “At first, Muhammad and his followers observed no particular rite in turning their faces towards any certain place or quarter of the world when they prayed, it being declared to be perfectly indifferent (ver. 115). Afterwards, when the prophet fled to Madína, he directed them to turn towards the temple of Jerusalem (probably to ingratiate himself with the Jews), which continued to be their Qibla for six or seven months; but either finding the Jews too intractable, or despairing otherwise to gain the pagan Arabs, who could not forget their respect to the temple of Makkah, he ordered that prayers for the future should be towards the last. This change was made in the second year of the Hijra, and occasioned many to fall from him, taking offence at his inconstancy.”—Sale, Jaláluddín.

The “foolish men” were the Jews and the disaffected among the people of Madína. Their folly consisted in their inability to reconcile the statement of Muhammad in ver. 115, and his practice, for fifteen months, in turning towards Jerusalem, with the new command to turn towards the temple of the idolaters. Every appeal to reason was deprecated, and those claiming the right of private judgment were stigmatised as fools. All who failed to acquiesce in every proposal of the “prophet” were disaffected. Islám then, as now, demanded the entire submission of the intellect, as well as the will, to the dictum of the infallible prophet of an unattested revelation.

Say, Unto God belongeth the east and the west. This is used as an argument to justify the change of Qibla. God may do as he pleaseth with his own. The same statement is used in ver. 115 to show that no Qibla was necessary on the ground that God is everywhere present. “Whithersoever ye turn yourselves to pray, there is the face of God.” It is a very convenient argument that will both prove the rationality of turning from one Qibla to another, and at the same time disprove the necessity for a Qibla at all!

(143)

Thus have we placed you, O Arabians, an intermediate nation, &c. Savary translates thus: “We have established you, O chosen people, to bear witness against the rest of the nation, as your apostle will bear it against you.”

Rodwell says, “A central people,” instead of “intermediate nation.”

Sale says, “The commentators (Jaláluddín, Yahya, &c.) will have the meaning to be, that the Arabians are here declared to be a most just and good nation.”

The idea intended seems to me to be this: Makkah with the Kaabah being now constituted the sacred city of Islám, as Jerusalem with the temple was the sacred city of the Jews, Arabia was thereby made, so to speak, the centre of the world in matters of religion, and, consequently, the Arabians were constituted witnesses for the true religion against the rest of mankind even as Muhammad was a witness for Islám against them, or, as Rodwell translates “in regard to them.”

Thus early we see the idea of a universal Islám leveloped in the mind of Muhammad.

(144)

We appointed the Qibla, . . . only that we might know him who followeth the apostle, from him who turneth back on the heels. Many of Muhammad’s followers, especially those who had come out from among the Jews, were offended at the manifest inconsistency of changing the Qibla from Jerusalem to the idolatrous city of Makkah with its pantheon. They naturally apostatised and returned to the faith of their fathers. Muhammad now pretends that the change was made as a test of their faith, whereas nothing is clearer than the fact, that, failing in his attempt to win over the Jews by the deference he had shown to their religion and the holy city, he now adopts a similar policy in recognising the Kaabah as the holy place, towards which prayer is to be made, in order to conciliate the favour of the Arabians. The duplicity and worldly policy of the “prophet” was too manifest to escape the notice of even many of his own disciples. These are the “fools” and “disaffected.” When facts were against the prophet of Arabia, it was only so much the worse for the facts!

But God will not render your faith of none effect. “Or will not suffer it to go without its reward, while ye prayed towards Jerusalem.”—Sale.

(145)

Turn, therefore, thy face towards the holy temple, &c. Abdul Qádir says that whilst Jerusalem was the Qibla, Muhammad desired to turn toward the Kaabah, and accordingly prayed “toward heaven,” hoping for the command to change the Qibla to Makkah!

They to whom the Scripture hath been given know this to be truth from their Lord; i.e., the Jews know that this change of Qibla is in accordance with the divine command. The Tafsír-i-Raufi understands Christians to be also alluded to under the expression “they to whom the Scripture hath been given;” but the circumstances under which the passage was written, viz., the final breach between Muhammad and Judaism, would limit the application here to the Jews. Of course, the words have an equally fit application to Christians. In this verse we find distinct traces of deliberate deception and falsehood on the part of Muhammad. (a.) In his pretending to have been displeased with Jerusalem as the Qibla. He had been praying toward it for fifteen months, had taught others to pray in like manner, and had even built the first mosque of Islám with the pulpit towards Jerusalem. His “displeasure,” therefore, evidently grew out of his failure to win over the Jews, coupled with his desire to gain influence among the Arabs by constituting their sacred city the Qibla of his religion. (b.) Again, the assertion that the Jews knew by the teaching of their Scriptures that such a change was from the Lord, is so plainly false as to render it impossible to account for it on any rational ground other than that of deliberate fabrication.

It may be said that Muhammad was deceived by the representations of his converts from Judaism. If so, it would truly show him to be the “ignorant prophet.” But it must be remembered that this is not the word of Muhammad but, according to Muhammad’s claim, the Word of God. He it is who is here made to sanction “the representations” of such converts. But regarding these statements as made by Muhammad, we think his character, his shrewdness, his profound knowledge of the men he had to deal with, all combine to make the theory of his being himself deceived exceedingly improbable.

(146)

Verily although thou shouldest show . . . all kinds of signs, &c. The opposition of the Jews had become so decided as to leave no hope of a reconciliation. They now charged him with worshipping toward a heathen temple, and with fickleness. These objections he now strives to meet by such “revelations” as this. “But it was the victory at Badr, one or two months after, and the subsequent hostilities against the Jews, which furnished the only effective means for silencing their objections.”—Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. iii. p. 45.

Nor will one part of them follow the Qibla of the other. “That is, each religion has its own (appointed) Kibla; he refers, apparently, to Christians turning towards the east, and Jews towards Jerusalem; whence Mahomet would argue a propriety in his having a peculiar and distinctive Kibla for Islám.”—Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. iii. p. 45, note.

Muslim commentators refer the words to the Jews and Christians. I think the reference is to the Jews entirely. The preceding and succeeding context seems to demand this limitation. The history of the passage seems also to demand it. The reference, then, may be to one of three possible differences of opinion among the Jews: (a.) Some may have questioned the propriety of worshipping towards any Qibla, seeing the holy temple was destroyed; or (b.) the allusion may be to those who had espoused the cause of Islám; or, (c.) what is most probable, reference may be had to the ancient difference in the holy mounts of Jew and Samaritan (John iv. 20 and references.

(147)

They to whom we have given the Scripture know our apostle, even as they know their own children. “That is, the Jews are really convinced of the truth of Muhammad’s mission.”—Rodwell.

Is not the allusion to those who had now become the converts of Islám? Such a view is favoured by the concluding sentence, “but some of them hide the truth,” &c., referring to the unbelieving Jews. If it do not have such a reference, then we must place this statement in the catalogue of deliberate fabrications. See note on ver. 145.

According to Abdul Qádir’s translation, the reference is not to Muhammad but to the propriety of the change of Qibla. The passage then merely reiterates the statement of ver. 145.

(148)

Truth is from thy Lord. The “truth” referred to here is the new doctrine of the Qibla. See the same expression in vers. 145 and 150.

(151)

Lest men have master of dispute against you. Muhammad had acquired sufficient experience of the injury likely to be inflicted upon his religion by disputes concerning the proper Qibla to allow the possibility of any such disputes in the future. All must hereafter turn toward Makkah in prayer.

Unjust doers; i.e., Jews and disaffected Arabs.

(152)

An apostle from among you. The former nations, thus distinguished, having rejected their prophets, are here regarded as apostates. Compare with chap. x. 14. The Arabs are now declared to be the chosen people of God, and, by implication, the Jews are stigmatised as rejected of God. The policy of the “prophet” is now to flatter the national pride of his countrymen, and to quicken their zeal for religion by the doctrine that they are now, as believers, the favourites of Heaven.

To rehearse our signs, i.e., the verses of the Qurán, regarded as self-evidently divine.

To purify you from idolatry and ceremonial defilement. The Tafsír-i-Raufi adds, “He (the apostle) asks pardon for you, that you may be pure from your sins.” Muhammad, however, never claimed any such mediatorial office. In the Qurán he repeatedly rejects the idea of a mediator altogether. See chap. vi. 50; vii. 188; xxxix. 42, &c. Islám requires no mediator; Muslims will be saved because they are Muslims.

The fact, however, that Muhammad has been constituted a mediator by his followers, notwithstanding the teaching of the Qurán, constitutes a powerful argument against Islám. Muslims, like other fallen men, feel their need of a mediator. They chose Muhammad for their intercessor; but the Qurán rejects the idea altogether. See chap. xliv. 41, 42, and references noted above. Islám, therefore, fails to satisfy the felt wants of sinful men everywhere.

The book of the Qurán. The term book, which is here used to describe the collection of passages of Muhammad’s revelation, gives us reason to believe that the Qurán was recorded in book form in the days of Muhammad himself. It is so often referred to under this appellation—the same as is applied to the writings of Moses—as to leave the impression that numerous copies were extant among the Muslims.

(153)

Remember me, and I will remember you. The Tafsír-i-Raufi comments on this as follows:—“Remember me with gifts, that I may remember you with favours; or remember me with worship, that I may remember you with benefits; or remember me with prayer, that I may remember you with blessings; or remember me among the people, that I may remember you among the angels.”

This passage, with the commentary, expresses the legal spirit of Muhammadanism, notwithstanding the constant declaration that God is “merciful and gracious.”

(155)

And say not of those who are slain in fight for the religion of God, that they are dead. Rodwell renders “in fight” by the phrase “on God’s path.”

“The original words are literally, who are slain in the way of God; by which expression, frequently occurring in the Qurán, is always meant war undertaken against unbelievers for the propagation of the Muhammadan faith.”—Sale.

Abdul Qádir says “that believers are here encouraged to labour and gather strength for the crusade.”

Yea, they are living. “The souls of martyrs (for such they esteem those who die in battle against infidels), says Jaláluddín, are in the crops of green birds,which have liberty to fly wherever they please in paradise, and feed on the fruits thereof.”—Sale.

(156)

We will surely prove you by afflicting you in some measure with fear and hunger, &c. This passage,beginning with ver. 154, was intended to comfort those who had lost friends among the slain at the battle of Badr, and also those of the companions who, having suffered loss of property and health in the emigration from Makkah, had not yet enriched themselves by the plunder of the caravans of the unbelievers.

(157)

We are God’s, and unto him shall we surely return. “An expression frequently in the mouths of the Muhammadans when under any great affliction or in any imminent danger.”—Sale.

This sentence is believed to be laden with merit to those who use it in circumstances of trial and affliction. Even when the trial is past, if the pious repeat it at the remembrance of their grief, it is said to bestow great merit. The commentators have drawn from this verse and the one following the doctrine that sin is washed away from the souls of believers by means of suffering. The Tafsír-i-Raufi declares, on the authority of Tirmuzi and others, that the man who has lost three sons by death may be absolutely certain of entering paradise; the gates of hell, or rather purgatory, are closed against him, and much more to the same effect. Affliction is therefore submitted to by the Muslim in the perfect assurance that he will be the recipient of blessing hereafter. Thus it is robbed of its uses as a warning or as a judgment from God on account of sin.

(159)

Moreover Safá and Marwah are two of the monuments of God, &c. Savary translates this verse as follows:—“He who shall have performed the pilgrimage of Makkah, and shall have visited the holy house, shall be exempted, from offering an expiatory victim, provided that he maketh the circuit of those two mountains. He who goeth beyond what the precept requireth shall experience the gratitude of the Lord.”

“Safá and Marwa are two mountains near Makkah, whereon were anciently two idols, to which the pagan Arabs used to pay a superstitious veneration (Prelim. Disc., p. 42). Jaláluddin says this passage was revealed because the followers of Muhammad made a scruple of going round these mountains, as the idolaters did. But the true reason of his allowing this relic of ancient superstition seems to be the difficulty he found in preventing it. Abu’l Qásim Hibatullah thinks these last words are abrogated by those other, Who will reject the religion of Abraham, except he who hath infatuated his soul? (ver. 130). So that he will have the meaning to be quite contrary to the letter, as if it had been, it shall be no crime in him if he do not compass them. However, the expositors are all against him, and the ceremony of running between these two hills is still observed at the pilgrimage” (Prelim. Disc., p. 187).—Sale.

The Tafsír-i-Raufi and Tafsír Fatah al azíz relate that in former times two pillars were erected on these two hills to commemorate the judgment of God upon two notable sinners, Asáf, a man, and Náila, a woman, who had committed adultery in the holy Kaabah. When the people fell into idolatry they worshipped these as images of God. This worship Muhammad abolished, whereupon some doubted the propriety of going round these hills. This verse was revealed to remove their scruples.

The true reason for this “revelation” is given by Sale in his note quoted above. Muhammad found it easier to break the idols of his countrymen than to overcome their superstitions, hence the toleration of an idolatrous custom, which the commentators would have us believe to be a relic of the religion of Abraham.

God is grateful. The author of the notes on the Roman Urdu Quran says, “The teaching of this verse is that whoever performs the pilgrimage to the Kaabah, according to the commandment, has great merit; but he who of his own accord makes the circuit of these two mountains, has such great reward that God becomes grateful and obligated to him!” He then compares with this the contrary teaching of the Bible (see Job xxii. 3, and Luke xvii. 10).

But surely gratitude may be ascribed to God on the same principle that repentance is attributed to him in the Bible.

(160)

They who conceal any of the evident signs, &c.; i.e., the Jews. See note on ver. 145.

In the Scripture. Rod well says, “in the Book,” the allusion being to the Jewish Scriptures.

They who curse. The Tafsír-i-Raufi understands the reference to the “angels, men, and genii.” He also promulgates the strange doctrine that when Muslims curse one another, seeing that curses cannot affect one of the faithful, they fall upon the Jews and others, who are justly exposed to a curse.

“Yahya interprets it of the curses which will be given to the wicked, when they cry out because of the punishment of the sepulchre (see Prelim. Disc., p. 127), by all who hear them, that is, by all creatures except men and genii.”—Sale.

(161)

Make known what they concealed. Rodwell translates “make known the truth,” i.e., of Islám

(162, 163)

Upon them chall be the curse of God. These verses clearly teach that all are lost except Muslims. Their punishment is also eternal.

Neither shall they be regarded. “God will not wait for their repentance.”—Jaláluddín.

(164)

Your God is one God. The passage beginning with this verse and ending with verse 172 is probably Makkan. The truth here enunciated is taught with equal clearness in the Bible (Deut. vi. 4, Mark xii. 29). It might have been addressed to Jews at Madína, but the verses following, being addressed to idolaters, decide against this view. The idolaters of the Madína period of Muhammad’s ministry were spoken of in different terms.

(165)

This verse, says the Tafsír-i-Raufi, contains eight signs of divine power, thereby demonstrating the superiority of the one true God over the three hundred and sixty idols which the Makkans worshipped. The Christian will be reminded of a similar style of argument used by the Apostle Paul at Lystra, and also at Athens (Acts xiv. 15-17, and xviii. 24-29).

Compelled to do service. “The original word signifies properly that are pressed or compelled to do personal service without hire, which kind of service is often exacted by the Eastern princes of their subjects, and is called by the Greek and Latin writers angaria. The Scripture often mentions this source of compulsion or force, Matt. v. 41, xxvii. 32, &c.”—Sale.

(166)

True believers are more fervent in love towards God. Love towards God is here recognised as a characteristic of believers. And yet this is a doctrine rarely taught in the Qurán. In the Christian Scriptures this doctrine may be compared to Jordan, flowing continually in an ever-widening stream through the length of the Holy Land; but, in the Qurán, it is like the occasional spring in the desert. The love of God is rarely presented as a motive to obedience.

Oh, that they who act unjustly did perceives. “Or it may be translated, Although the ungodly will perceive, &c. But, some copies, instead of yara, in the third person, read tara, in the second; and then it must be rendered, Oh, if thou didst see when the ungodly beheld their punishment, &c.”—Sale.

We have here an illustration of the fact that the Qurán, in its original text, is not entirely pure, as some writers seem to think. It has its various readings, like other ancient writings. A critical examination of any considerable number of old manuscripts would probably reveal a great many more such readings than are now known. Yet it may be safely asserted that the text of the Qurán is the purest of all works of a like antiquity.

(167)

Those who have beer followed, &c. “That is, when the broachers or heads of new sects shall at the last day forsake or wash their hands of their disciples, as if they were not accomplices in their superstitions.”—Sale.

(168)

The followers shall say, &c. There shall be mutual antipathy between the leaders of false systems of religion and their followers. They shall spend an eternity of sighing and regret in the flames of hell.

(169)

Eat of that which is lawful. Addressed to the Makkans, who, in the “times of ignorance,” had departed from the religion of Abraham, and being idolaters, ate things forbidden, especially swine’s flesh. So faithfully do Muslims obey this command that they regard even the name of the forbidden meat as polluting.

The devil. Satan is the avowed enemy of mankind, and the instigator to idolatry and blasphemy. See chap. vii. 16, 17.

(171)

We will follow that which we found our fathers practise. The reproof here administered contains an important rule which may well be urged upon modern Muslims themselves. Nothing is more manifest than their perfect satisfaction with the religion of their fathers, and their unwillingness to consider even the possibility of their fathers having been mistaken. Such texts as this are very useful for those who would arouse them to examine the grounds of their faith.

(172)

Like one who crieth aloud, &c. Abdul Qádir paraphrases thus: “Teaching infidels is like calling to wild animals, who may hear a sound, but who do not understand.”

(173)

A true believer. Addressed to the people of Madína. See Rodwell on ver. 21. The exhortation corresponds with that of ver. 169, addressed to the Makkans. The teaching here is, however, more explicit, detailing the articles forbidden.

The redundancy found here is probably due to the judgment of those who compiled the Qurán under the direction of Othman. Had this portion of the chapter been recited by Muhammad himself, we should not have this medley of Makkan and Madína passages. A tradition, on the authority of Hudhaìfáh, relates that Muhammad was in the habit of repeating the chapter of the Cow several times during a single night, besides other portions of the Qurán (Matthews’ Mishqát-ul-Masábih, chap. xxxii.) Such an exercise, in addition to ordinary sleep, would be impossible. It is therefore probable that much additional matter was added to these chapters by the compilers of the volume now called the Qurán, though the names of the chapters and some portions of them were undoubtedly in use in the days of Muhammad. To these were added other revelations gathered from the contents of the box in Hafza’s keeping and from the memories of men.

(174)

He hath forbidden, &c. Godfrey Higgins, in his Apology for the Life and Character of Mahomet, p. 33, expresses the belief that these prohibitions were made for sanitary reasons. But it is much more likely that he adopted them from the religion of the Jews. Sanitary considerations would have required the prohibition of camel’s flesh as well as that of swine. Yet modifications were made out of deference to Arab prejudice, as was done in the changing of the Qibla. An illustration of this is found in the permission to eat camel’s flesh, already alluded to.

On which any other name, &c. “For this reason, whenever the Muhammadans kill any animal for food, they always say Bismillah, or, In the name of God; which, if it be neglected, they think it not lawful to eat of it.”—Sale.

Forced by necessity. That is, if forbidden meats be eaten under compulsion, or to save one’s life.—Abdul Qádir, Tafsír-i-Raufi.

(175)

See notes on ver. 160.

(176)

Sold direction for error, &c. An exposition of the phrase, “Selling for a small price,” ver. 175.

God sent down the book of the Qurán. Many Muslim commentators agree in referring the “book” to the Pentateuch. The meaning then would be that the Jews shall be accounted worthy of the punishment above described, because, having the Pentateuch by them, with its prophecies concerning Muhammad, they have “concealed the Scriptures which God hath sent down unto them.” The passage is not explicit, and may refer also to the Qurán. The former view agrees best with the preceding context, the latter with what follows. Modern Muslims, by their “concealment of the former Scriptures,” and their constant disputing “concerning that Book,” bring themselves under the condemnation of their own prophet.

(177)

Righteousness is of him who believeth in God, &c. This is one of the noblest verses in the Qurán. It clearly distinguishes between a formal and a practical piety. Faith in God and benevolence towards man is clearly set forth as the essence of religion. It contains a compendium of doctrine to be believed as well as of precept to be practised in life.

The Scriptures. Not only the Qurán, but the “former Scriptures,” accepted by Jews and Christians, besides the writings (Sahífe) of Adam, ten, of Seth, fifty, of Enoch (Idrís), thirty, and of Abraham, ten, in all one hundred and four books.

The prophets. This word being in the masculine plural, Muslim commentators generally agree that there were no prophetesses. For doctrine and practice set forth here, see Preliminary Discourse. p. 117.

(178)

For the Mosaic “law of retaliation,” see Levit. xxiv. 17-22. The Qurán modifies this law, which was probably nearly identical with the ancient Arab law, so as to distinguish between the life of a freeman and that of a slave, between the life of a woman and that of a man, and to provide for the settlement of a blood-claim by the payment of money. It is scarcely necessary to point out the fact that this law deals a blow at the equality of man, based on a universal brotherhood, and that it opens the door to untold oppression and tyranny of masters over servants, of husbands over wives, and of man over woman. It cannot be fairly claimed that the moral and social laws of Islám are even an advance on those of Judaism, much less on those of Christianity. The law as here stated is abrogated by chap. v. 49, and xvii. 35.

The free shall die for the free, . . . woman for woman. “This is not to be strictly taken; for, according to the Sunnat, a man also is to be put to death for the murder of a woman. Regard is also to be had to difference in religion, so that a Muhammadan, though a slave, is not to be put to death for an infidel, though a freeman. But the civil magistrates do not think themselves always obliged to conform to this last determination of the Sunnat.”—Sale, Jaláluddín.

He whom his brother shall forgive, &c.—Rodwell translates this passage: “He to whom his brother shall make any remission (that is, by killing the manslayer), is to be dealt with equitably; and to him should he pay a fine with liberality.” Savary translates thus: “He who forgiveth the murderer of his brother (brother used in a religious seuse) shall have the right of requiring a reasonable reparation, which shall be thankfully paid.” So, too, in the main, Abdul Qádir, Husaini, and Tafsir-i-Raufi. The meaning is, that whenever a murderer has been spared by the avenger of blood, he must pay a fine to the said avenger. This must then be regarded as a final settlement. If, after receiving the amount of the fine, he avenger kill the manslayer, he “shall suffer a grievous punishment.” Presumably he would be regarded as a common murderer. Sale says, “This is the common practice in Muhammadan countries, particularly in Persia.”

(179)

In this law . . . ye have life; i.e., this law has been enacted as a benevolent measure, whereby blood-feuds might be finally settled, and thus life be saved.

(180)

A legacy to his parents. &c. Muslim commentators, on the authority of Baidháwi, say this law was enacted to correct the custom of the ancient Arabs, whereby parents and relatives were sometimes disinherited in favour of the religious mendicant. These translate the words rendered in the text, “This is a duty incumbent on,” &c., so as to read, “There is a duty toward the temperate,” i.e., faqírs or mendicants; and they understand that not more than one-third of the property of the testator may be devoted to such persons. However, they believe this law to have been abrogated by the law concerning inheritance in chap. iv., and that there is therefore now no law requiring them to will any of their substance to charitable objects. See Abdul Qádir in loco.

The principal passages of the Qurán relating to the law of inheritance are the following:—chaps. iv. 6-13, 175, and v. 105-107.

(181, 182)

These verses contain a warning to those who would tamper with a will after it has been made, and at the same time provide for the correction of a will made contrary to law. Some writers understand them to refer to the friendly mediation of those who succeed in securing a change in the will, in the interest of justice, before the death of the testator. See Tafsír-i-Raufi.

(183)

A fast is ordained, &c. Muir, in his Life of Mahomet, vol. iii. pp. 47, 48, conjectures that fasting was not observed by the Muslims till after the flight to Madína. The following is his account of its institution —

“Two or three months after his arrival in Medina, Mahomet observed the Jews, on the tenth day of their seven month, keeping the great fast of the Atonement, and be readily adopted it for his own people. Prior to this, fasting does not appear to have been a prescribed ordinance of Islam. It was established at a period when the great object of Mahomet was to symbolise with the Jews in all their rules and ceremonies.

“But when it became his endeavour to cast off Judaism and its customs, this fast was superseded by another. Eighteen months after his arrival in Medina, Mahomet promulgated, as a divine command, that the following month, or Ramadhán, was to be henceforth observed as an annual fast. Although the new ordinance was professedly similar in principle to that of the Jews, the mode of its observance was entirely different.”

This verse is said to be abrogated by ver. 187.

(184)

A certain number of days; the whole of the month Ramadhán. See next verse.

Those who can keep it, &c. Sale says, “The expositors differ much about the meaning of this passage, thinking it very improbable that people should be left entirely at liberty either to fast or not, on compounding for it in this manner. Jaláluddín, therefore, supposes the negative particle not to be understood, and that this is allowed only to those who are not able to fast, by reason of age or dangerous sickness; but afterwards he says, that in the beginning of Muhammadanism it was free for them to choose whether they would fast or maintain a poor man, which liberty was soon after taken away, and this passage abrogated by the following: Therefore let him who shall be present in this month, fast the same month. Yet this abrogation, he says, does not extend to women with child or that give suck, lest the infant suffer.

“Al Zamakhshari, having first given an explanation of Ibn Abbás, who, by a different interpretation of the Arabic word Yutikúnáhu, which signifies can or are able to fast, renders it, Those who find great difficulty therein, &c., adds an exposition of his own, by supposing something to be understood, according to which the sense will be, Those who can fast, and yet have a legal excuse to break it, must redeem it,” &c.

Abdul Qádir understands that those who are able to fast and do not are here required to redeem their neglect, as Sale has it in the text, by feeding a poor man for one day. So, too, the Tafsír-i-Raufi. Rodwell, also, in his translation, recognises the same meaning.

(185)

Ramadhán. The ninth month of the Muslim year, in the latter part of which occurs the Laylut ul Qadr, or Night of Power, in which the Qurán was brought down to the lowest heaven. See Hughes’ Notes on Muhammadanism, chap. xx.; also Prelim. Disc., p. 177.

The distinction. The Arabic word is furqán, a term derived from the Hebrew, and applied to the Pentateuch as well as to the Qurán. See ver. 52.

Shall be present; i.e., “at home, and not in a strange country, where the fast cannot be performed, or on a journey.”—Sale.

Children who have not reached the age of puberty are exempt from the observance of this fast.

God would make this an ease unto you. This is said in reference to the sick and others exempted above. It may also refer to what is said below in ver. 187. With all these alleviating circumstances, however, the strict observance of this fast, during the long days of a tropical summer, is anything but an ease to the Muslim. Muir thinks Muhammad did not foresee the hardship that would ensue in the observance of this fast, when he changed the Jewish intercalary year for the lunar (Life of Mahomet, chap. iii. p. 49). But there is reason to believe the month occurred originally during the hot season, the word Ramadhán being derived from ramadh, to burn. The words of the text, therefore, probably refer to the present observance as being easy in comparison with the more rigid practice in the beginning. This interpretation presumes that this passage was revealed some time after ver. 183.

(186)

I will hear the prayer. The special reference is to prayers offered during the fast. Faith and obedience are here declared to be necessary to successful prayer. A tradition says, “The person who observes the prayers particularly appointed for the nights of Ramadhán, shall be forgiven all his past faults!” Surely if the fast be of difficult observance, the way of pardon seems easy enough.

(187)

This verse seems to show clearly that the Muslims at first felt bound to continue, in some measure, the rigour of the fast during the night.

They are a garment unto you, &c. “A metaphorical expression, to signify the mutual comfort a man and his wife find in each other.”—Sale.

Earnestly desire. Some commentators understand this to have special reference to the desire for children.

A white thread from a black thread. A form of expression used by the Jews also (see Rodwell), signifying early dawn.

Be constantly pressing, &c. This seclusion is called ’Itiqáf, and is observed by remaining in the mosque during the day, abstaining from all worldly thoughts and conversation, and by reading the Qurán and religious books. Hughes Notes on Muhammadanism, chap. xx.

(188)

This verse is understood by Muslim commentators to forbid every species of prodigality and dishonesty in dealing with one another. If so, scarcely any precept of the Qurán is so universally transgressed as this

(189)

Enter your houses, &c. “Some of the Arabs had a superstitious custom after they had been at Makkah (in pilgrimage, as it seems), on their return home, not to enter their house by the old door, but to make a hole through the back part for a passage, which practice is here reprehended.”—Sale.

(190-193)

Fight for the religion of God. This is, perhaps, the first expressed command of the Arabian prophet to establish his religion by the sword. Whilst in Makkah he appeared in the simple garb of a preacher, and this he retained for a while at Madína (ver. 119 supra). There he advised his persecuted followers to flee from their enemies. Even at Madína he advises them to “forgive and avoid” their adversaries (ver. 108). He now finds himself in circumstances to take a bolder, though certainly a less noble stand. The Muslims are now to fight not only in defence of their faith, but are enjoined to overthrow idolatry by the sword (see ver. 193). It is probable that a number of injunctions, delivered at different times at Madína, are gathered together in this passage, inasmuch as the strong language of vers. 192 and 193 is scarcely reconcilable with the injunction of ver. 190 to fight simply in defence of Islám.

(191)

Kill them, &c. Much is made of expressions like this, by some Christian apolegists, to show the cruel character of the Arabian prophet, and the inference is thence drawn that he was an impostor and his Qurán a fraud. Without denying that Muhammad was cruel, we think this mode of assault to be very unsatisfactory to say the least, as it is capable of being turned against the Old Testament Scriptures. If the claim of Muhammad to have received a divine command to exterminate idolatry by the slaughter of all impenitent idolaters be admitted, I can see no objection to his practice. The question at issue is this, Did God command such slaughter of idolaters, as he commanded the destruction of the Canaanites or of the Amalekites? Taking the stand of the Muslim, that God did so command Muhammad and his followers, his morality in this respect may be defended on precisely the same ground that the morality of Moses and Joshua is defended by the Christian.

Fight not . . . in the holy temple: i.e., the Kaabah. Ordinarily, the sanctity of the temple at Makkah would have been a safeguard to an enemy, but the antipathy between the Makkans and the Muslims was now so great as to make it probable that the latter might be attacked even in the Kaabah. This permission is, however, abrogated by chap. ix. 5.

(192)

If they desist, &c. If they repent and accept Islám, Tafsír-i-Raufi.

(193)

Until . . . the religion be God’s. This expresses the breadth of the claim of Islám. Idolatry must be extirpated, and the religion of Islám be vindicated by God as his own, through the overthrow of idolatry. It is probable that Muhammad had as yet no idea of extending his religion beyond the borders of Arabia, but the idea here attached to it would logically lead to its propagation everywhere.

Except against the ungodly; i.e., those who were worthy of punishment on other grounds than that of their faith.

(194)

A sacred month. See Prelim. Disc., p. 228. Rodwell translates: “The sacred month and the sacred precincts are under the safeguard of reprisals,” and says, “The meaning of this difficult passage is, that in wars for the cause of religion, the sacred month and the temple of Mecca may be made the time and scene of contests, which then and there are usually prohibited.”

Transgress against him. Contrast this with the teaching of Christ (Luke vi. 27-31). Love to enemies is a doctrine unknown to Islám. Forgiveness of such, whenever enjoined (ver. 108), was dictated as a matter of policy, not of compassion or love.

(195)

Contribute of your substance. The duty enjoined here is not identical with that of giving Zikát or legal alms. It means more, having reference to all that may be necessary to carry on a holy war. The verse is closely connected with those preceding. The faithful are therefore not only to kill the infidels, but spend their substance freely to help others, especially the Gházís or fanatical crusaders of Islám, by supplying them with food and the materials of war.

Throw not yourselves . . . into perdition; i.e., “be not accessory to your own destruction, by neglecting your contributions towards the wars against infidels, and thereby suffering them to gather strength.”—Sale.

Do good. Do good to the Gházís. If they are in want, give them money; if on foot, give them carriage; if married and unprovided, give them equipment. Without doubt God is a friend of them that do good.—Tafsír-i-Raufi.

This passage illustrates how easily readers of the English translation of the Qurán may be misled by the bias of their own language.

(196)

Perform the pilgrimage and the visitation; i.e., the Hajj or greater pilgrimage, and Umrah or lesser pilgrimage. The former is absolutely necessary, provided the Muslim possesses the means necessary for the journey. The latter is meritorious, and its rites may be performed at any time, while the rites of the Hajj may only be performed on the three days intervening between the seventh and tenth of the month Dhul Hajja. See Prelim. Disc., pp. 186-188, and Hughes’ Notes on Muhammadanism, second edition, chap. xxii.

The rites and ceremonies connected with the Hajj and Umrah are exceedingly puerile, and decidedly inconsistent with the spirit of Islám. The idolatrous customs of the ancient Arabs, though sanctified by the teaching of the Qurán and the example of Muhammad, but poorly comport with the monotheistic teaching of the reformer of Makkah, and come far short of “confirming the former Scriptures.” Its sanction by Muhammad is one of the darkest blots on his religion, and shows at the same time how far the politician of Madína differed from the preacher of Makkah. How his apologists fail to see the inconsistency of his conduct and teaching here, not only with the dignity of a prophet of God, but with the character of an honest man, is beyond our comprehension. The kissing of the Black Stone and the Yamáni Pillar was so manifestly inconsistent with the doctrine of Islám, that naught but the example of the prophet and the implicit obedience of his followers secured its perpetuation. The fiery Omar, kissing the stone, said, “Verily I know that thou art a stone; thou dost no good or harm in the world, and if it was not that I saw the prophet kiss thee, I would not kiss thee!”—Matthews’ Mishqát ul Masábih, book xi. chap. iv. part iii.

If ye be besieged. By sickness as well as by enemies.

Send that offering, &c. The offering must be at the rate of one goat for a single person, or a cow or a camel for every seven persons.

Shave not your heads, &c. “For this was a sign they had completed their vow, and performed all the ceremonies of the pilgrimage.”—Sale, Jaláluddín.

Fasting, or alms, or some offering; i.e., “either by fasting three days, or feeding six poor people, or sacrificing a sheep.”—Sale.

He who tarrieth, &c. “This passage is somewhat obscure. Yahya interprets it of him who marries a wife during the visitation, and performs the pilgrimage the year following. But Jaláluddín expounds it of him who stays within the sacred enclosures, in order to complete the ceremonies which (as it should seem) he had not been able to do within the prescribed time.”—Sale.

(197)

The known months; i.e., Shawál, Dhul Qáada, and Dhul Hajja. See Prelim. Disc., p. 186.

(198)

It shall be no crime, &c. In the days of Muhammad, as at the present time, Makkah was dependent for its importance as a city upon the great annual pilgrimage. Situated in a comparatively barren region, not only its own food-supply was brought from a distance, but also the provisions necessary for the multitudes flocking to it from all parts of Arabia had to be procured by caravans from the surrounding country. For this reason it was possible for many pilgrims to carry on a profitable trade while fulfilling the requirements of their religion. The service of God and mammon could thus be undertaken at the same time. The temporising policy of the Arabian prophet is here again apparent in sanctioning a practice which he either could not prevent, or which, if condoned, would minister to the purposes of his religion. He not only does so, but actually suggests a worldly motive as an incentive to the performance of an otherwise hard duty. The gifts of mammon now became “an increase from your Lord.” Compare with our Lord’s treatment of the servants of mammon at Jerusalem (John ii. 14-16).

Procession. “The original word signifies to rush forward impetuously, as the pilgrims do when they proceed from Arafát to Muzdalífa.”—Sale.

Arafát. “A mountain near Makkah, so called because Adam there met and knew his wife after a long separation. Yet others say that Gabriel, after he had instructed Abraham in all the sacred ceremonies, coming to Arafát, there asked him if he knew the ceremonies which had been shown him, to which Abraham answering in the affirmative, the mountain had thence its name.”—Sale. These stories are probably inventions, suggested by the meaning of the word Arafát. See also note on ver. 35.

The holy monument. “In Arabic, Al Mashar al harám. It is a mountain in the farther part of Muzdalífa, where it is said Muhammad stood praying and praising God, till his face became extremely shining.”—Sale. This legend is probably adapted from the story of the shining of Moses’ face on Sinai.

Remember him, &c. The heathen customs of circling round the Kaabah, kissing the Black Stone, capering between Arafát and Muzdalífa, and throwing pebbles in Mína, are to be sanctified by prayers and praise to Allah. The skeleton of Arab stone-worship and magianism was thus clothed in the habiliments of Islám. See, on this subject, Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. i., introduction, pp. ccxii. and ccxiii.

(199)

Go in procession. Rodwell translates, “Pass on quickly.” Abdul Qádir has it, “Go to the circling,” i.e., of the Kaabah (tawáf). It is generally understood by the commentators to refer to the return from Muzdalífa to the Kaabah.

Ask pardon of God. The Mishqát ul Masábih gives a tradition, on the authority of Ibn Omar, as follows: “The apostle of God said, When you see a pilgrim, salám to him, and shake him by the hand; and tell him to ask pardon for you, before he enters into his own house; because his faults have been forgiven, and his supplications are approved.”—Book xi. chap i. part 3.

The duty of asking pardon was commanded the prophet himself as well as his followers (see chap. xlvii. 21). Tradition repeatedly represents Muhammad as seeking pardon for sin. “Verily I ask pardon of God, and turn from sin towards him, more than seventy times daily.” “I ask pardon of God one hundred times a day.” Such are the sayings ascribed to Muhammad.—Mishqát ul Masábih, book x. chap. iii. part 1. In another place in this same chapter Muhammad is declared to have taught the monstrous doctrine, that when a Muslim says, “O my patron! I have been guilty of a fault, forgive it,” God says to the angels, “Did my servant know that he had a defender who forgives and punishes? I have pardoned him: then tell my servant to commit faults as often as he likes, as long as he asks pardon!” With such doctrines implicitly received, is it any wonder that Muslims are immoral? that ordinary sins should seem to them a light thing? Is it any wonder they should fail to see the need of an atonement, seeing God may even license sin for the delight he has in hearing his servants asking pardon? This is perhaps the most damning doctrine of Islám. It says, Peace, peace, where there is no peace; it lulls the vilest sinners to the sleep of death; it dishonours the God of holiness, and saps the foundations of morality and true piety.

(200)

Remember God according as ye remember your fathers. Abdul Qádir tells us that the Arabs, after completing the rites of pilgrimage, spent three days in Makkah in rejoicing, during which they recounted the deeds performed by their fathers. The Muslims are here commanded to spend these three days, called Ayám-ut-Tashríq, in remembering God instead of remembering their fathers.

There are some men; i.e., unbelievers.—Tafsír-i-Raufi.

(201)

There are others; i.e., hypocrites.—Tafsír-i-Raufi.

They shall have a portion. They will be rewarded according to their works.

Swift in taking account. “For he will judge all creatures, says Jaláluddín, in the space of half a day.”—Sale.

(202)

Appointed number of days. Three days (see note on ver. 200).

(203)

There is a man, &c. “This person was al Akhnas Ibn Shuraiq, a fair-spoken dissembler, who swore that he believed in Muhammad, and pretended to be one of his friends, and to contemn this world. But God here reveals to the prophet his hypocrisy and wickedness.”—Sale, Jaláluddín.

(204)

To destroy, &c. “Setting fire to his neighbour’s corn, and killing his asses by night.”—Sale, Jaláludain.

The Tafsír-i-Raufi regards these verses as descriptive of all hypocrites.

(206)

A man who selleth, &c. “The person here meant was one Suhaib, who being persecuted by the idolaters of Makkah, forsook all he had, and fled to Medína.”—Sale, Jaláluddín.

A great variety of stories have been invented by the commentators to illustrate passages like this. See Tafsír-i-Raufi in loco.

(207)

Enter into the true religion wholly. This exhortation is thought to refer to such Jewish and Arab converts at Madína as had not yet adopted all the rites and customs of the new religion. Jewish converts had scruples about using the flesh and milk of camels for food, being contrary to the teaching of the Mosaic law. The Arabs were not all hearty in accepting the innovations made upon the customs of their fathers in order to make a difference between them and the unbelievers, especially in the rites and ceremonies of the pilgrimage described above. The temptation of such to apostatise from Islám is here ascribed to Satan.

(208)

If ye have slipped. Rodwell’s translation is preferable: “If ye lapse.”

God is mighty and wise. Mighty to punish apostasy, and wise to discern it.

(209)

Overshadowed with clouds. The allusion here is to the storm which destroyed the infidels in the days of the prophet Shuaib. See chap. vii. 92.

Angels. Referred to as the ministers of judgment and the keepers of hell. See chap. lxxiv. 29.

(210)

Evident signs; i.e., the miracles wrought among them by former prophets, especially by Moses.—Tafsír-i-Raufi.

Whoever shall change the grace of God. By the grace (translated boon) of God, Rodwell understands the Quran to be intended. The Tafsír-i-Raufi seems to refer the expression to the Pentateuch or Jewish Scriptures. The meaning would then be that those Jews, who objected to Muslim practice on the ground that it contradicted their Scriptures were guilty of changing or perverting the Word of God. This I believe to be the true interpretation of this passage, inasmuch as there is no reason to believe the Jews ever attempted to change the Qurán in any way. Certainly they did not at this stage in the history of Islám. Such being the case, Muhammad lays himself open to the charge of having committed the crime he here threatens with the “severe punishment” of God. The fear of incurring this punishment is one of the reasons why Muslims have been so scrupulously careful to preserve the text of the Qurán.

(211)

The present life, &c. Savary translates thus: “The life of this world is strewed with flowers for the unbelievers. They make a scoff of the faithful. Those who have the fear of the Lord shall be raised above them at the day of resurrection. God dispenseth as he pleaseth his innumerable gifts.”

The Tafsír-i-Raufi tells us that the very reason why infidels are prospered is that they may be filled with contemptuous pride and run madly on the way to destruction. But although they scoff at the poor slave-followers of Muhammad, such as Bilál and Amár, yet these shall be exalted far above them at the resurrection day.

This kind of consolation satisfied the poor companions during the trials of the early days of their exile in Madína, but the successes of Muslim arms soon secured a glory sufficiently comforting to the Arab mind for the present life at least. Their prosperity has brought with it a pride not unlike that ascribed to the unbelievers by the commentators.

(212)

Mankind was of one faith. Muhammad here teaches the truth, that originally there was but one religion in the world. But this religion from time to time became corrupt. Hence prophets were sent to correct abuses and restore the religion of God to the children of men. They brought with them Scriptures, breathing “good tidings and denouncing threats,” and “judging between men concerning which they disagreed” This religion, according to the Qurán, is Islám. The Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are then “the Scripture in truth.” If, therefore, Muhammad be a prophet of God, his doctrine must agree in all essential particulars with the teachings of Moses and Jesus. Do they? If not, Muhammad is a false prophet, on his own showing.

None disagreed . . . except those, &c. The reference is to the Jews who refused to accept the Qurán as the Word of God. The statement, however, is not literally true, for multitudes of heathen in India, China, and Africa still “disagree.” The passage, however, shows that at this stage Muhammad had only the Jews and Arabs in mind. The idea of a universal Islám, though logically involved in his doctrine, does not seem to have been yet fully developed in his mind.

God directeth whom he pleaseth. The doctrine of election is here expressly taught.

(213)

Did ye think ye should enter paradise? &c. This verse was addressed to the Makkan fugitives who suffered grievously from hunger and poverty during the first years of their exile. They are pointed to the sufferings of God’s people in former ages. So Tafsír-i-Raufi. The allusion may, however, be to the sufferings endured by himself and the first believers in Makkah, when persecuted by the Quraish. There is apparently evidence of great courage in adversity and firm trust in God in the words, “Is not the help of God nigh?” The expression may, however, simply point to the prospect of success due to the now growing political power of the Muslims at Madína.

(214)

What they shall bestow in alms. That “charity begins at home” was a truth of Islám as well as of Christianity is evident from the injunction in this verse. The contributions of the Muslims were as yet too meagre to supply the wants of any outside their own community, yet we see the “stranger” is still to share the benefit of Arab hospitality and generosity. On the subject of legal alms, see notes on vers. 42 and 109. This verse was afterwards abrogated. See chap. ix. 60.

(215)

War is enjoined you. See note on ver. 191.

This is hateful unto you: yet, &c. The hatefulness referred to here was probably due to the reluctance of some of the Muslims to fight against their own relatives and fellow-townsmen. By the infidels we must understand the Makkans specially to be designated. Muhammad had now determined to resort to the sword to accomplish what his preaching had failed to do. The divine sanction to his belligerent purpose was now promulgated. But the doctrine was unpalatable to some, and Muhammad had no little difficulty in securing obedience to it. Even the rule limiting the distribution of booty to those who assisted in the fight for it was scarcely sufficient to arouse their martial spirit. See chap. xlviii. 15, 16.

(216)

To war therein is grievous. See notes on vers. 190-194.

The commentators agree in assigning the occasion of this revelation to the attack of Abdullah Ibn Jahash and his party of Muslims upon a Quraish caravan at Nakhla, between Makkah and Tayif, during the sacred month of Rajab. The attack was made by the express order of Muhammad, though afterwards be denied having ordered them to attack during the sacred month. The unbelievers taunted him and his Muslims, charging them with perfidy and cowardice in attacking men secured from assault by the customs of the times. Even the Muslims felt the disgrace thus brought upon them. They reproached Abdullah and his followers for what they had done. But the prophet was equal to the occasion. He affected displeasure. The booty was put aside without division until this revelation was made, declaring war at such a time to be “grievous,” but assuring the Muslims that the conduct of the Makkans and the temptation to idolatry was more grievous than killing in the sacred months. After the reception of this revelation the booty was divided among the marauders, Muhammad receiving the fifth part thereof, thus condoning, if not actually sanctioning, the conduct of the transgressors. Can it be believed that Muhammad was not guilty of imposture in producing such a revelation under such circumstances? For a fuller account of this affair, see Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. iii. pp. 70-74.

(217)

They who . . . fight in God’s cause. Literally, They, who strive carnestly in the way of God. “The word (Jihád) is the same as that subsequently used for a religious war; but it had not yet probably acquired its fixed application. It was employed in its general sense before the Hegira, and probably up to the battle of Badr.”—Muir’s Life of Mahomet, vol. iii. p. 74, note.

This verse is said to have been revealed for the special purpose of comforting Abdullah and his companions.

(218)

Concerning wine. “Under the name of wine all sorts of strong and inebriating liquors are comprehended.”—Prelim. Disc., p. 191.

And lots. “The original word, al Maisar, properly signifies a particular game performed with arrows, and much in use with the pagan Arabs. But by lots we are here to understand all games whatsoever, which are subject to chance or hazard, as dice, cards, &c.”—Sale.

Though lots are forbidden to Muslims on the ground that they are “a great sin” and “an abomination of the work of Satan” (chap. v. 92), yet the angels are said to have cast lots to determine which of them “should have the education of Mary” (chap. iii. 44).

Some things of use unto men. “From these words some suppose that only drinking to excess and too frequent gaming are prohibited. And the moderate use of wine they also think is allowed by these words of the 16th chapter (ver. 69), And of the fruits of palm-trees and grapes ye obtain inebriating drink, and also good nourishment. But the more received opinion is, that both drinking wine or other strong liquors in any quantity, and playing at any game of chance, are absolutely forbidden.”—Sale, on the authority of Jaláluddín and Zamakhshari.

Comparing this passage with chap. iv. 42, chap. v. 92, and chap. xvi. 69, the conclusion seems fairly drawn that wine and lots were forbidden on the ground that their abuse was fraught with great evil, as stated in the text, though their occasional use to men is admitted. Muslims came to prayer in a state of drunkenness, and quarrels and blood feuds grew out of the use of lots. They were therefore totally forbidden.

(219)

What ye have to spare. See note on ver. 214. There the question relates to beneficiaries, here to the amount to be bestowed. But see also notes on ver. 42.

(220)

Concerning orphans. The following, from R. Bosworth Smith’s Mohammed and Mohammedanism, p. 251, second edition, is eloquently misleading:—“The orphan was not less than the slave the object of the prophet’s peculiar care, for he had been an orphan himself; and what God had done for him, he was anxious, as far as might be, to do for others. The poor were always present with him, and their condition never absent from his mind.” He should not have forgotten to say that this solicitude, so far as it went, did not go beyond the Muslim circle; that, having made thousands of orphans by his wars against the infidels, he was in duty bound to care for them; and that orphans being Muslims (for the children of infidels and Jews or Christians, slain for their unbelief, were made Muslims by compulsion) were to be cares for, not only because they were orphans, but because they were brethren Whilst giving the Arabian prophet due credit for that kindliness of feeling which he sometimes exhibited towards the poor and helpless, and which finds expression in the Qurán, we cannot shut our eyes to the fact that he was an utter stranger to that universal charity which is the chief glory of Christianity.

If ye intermeddle, i.e., if you make use of their money or property in carrying on your own business affairs, “do them no wrong.”

Will surely distress you, viz., “By his curse, which will certainly bring to nothing what ye shall wrong the orphans of”—Sale.

(221)

Marry not . . . idolaters. This law was probably copied from the requirements of both Judaism and Christianity (cf. Deut. vii. 3, 4, and 2 Cor. vi. 14-16). Abdul Qadir says this prohibition does not apply to Jews and Christians, and that Muslims are permitted to intermarry with them.

(222, 223)

These verses, with the disgusting comments of Muslim expositors, too indecent to find a place in this work, reveal the sensual character of the Arabian prophet and his followers. They account for the degradation of Muslim women. And yet this licentious mandate is clothed in the garb of piety, and its performance is to be accompanied by acts of devotion and charity. See Sale in loco.

(224, 225)

Make not God the object of your oaths; i.e., “So as to swear frequently by him. The word translated object properly signifies a butt to shoot at with arrows.”—Sale.

Yet the example of the prophet himself, as testified by scores of traditions, and the teaching of the Qurán (see chaps. li., lxxix., lxxxvi., xci., xcii., xciv., &c.), justify the most promiscuous and varied use of oaths by all things in heaven and earth, Allah not excepted. Compare our Lord’s teaching on this subject (Matt. v. 34-37, xxiii. 16-22), and it will be seen how far the Qurán comes short of “confirming the former Scriptures” on this point.

That ye will deal justly, &c. “Some commentators (Jaláluddín, Yahya, &c.) expound this negatively, That ye will not deal justly, nor be devout, &c. For such wicked oaths, they say, were customary among the idolatrous inhabitants of Makkah, which gave occasion to the following saying of Muhammad: When you swear to do a thing, and afterwards find it better to do otherwise, do that which is better, and make void your oath.”—Sale.

The positive rendering is clearly the right one. The exhortation then seems to be, that by abstaining from the use of God’s name in ordinary oaths, men would feel at liberty to break their rash vows when their fulfilment would involve the performance of a wicked act. This view is borne out by the teaching of the next verse.

(226)

Those who vow to abstain, &c. Rodwell translates thus: “Those who intend to abstain,” &c. The Tafsír-i-Raufi and Abdul Qádir understand an oath, and not an intention, to be meant, and translate accordingly. The passage therefore supplies an instance in which an oath may be violated, but the oath must not be in the name of God (ver. 224). Indeed it seems to us that this is the special case provided for by the general principle enunciated in ver. 225.

Four months. “That is, they may take so much time to consider; and shall not, by a rash oath, be obliged actually to divorce them.”—Sale.

Others are of opinion that such an oath does not have the force of an actual divorce for the period of four months. If, however, it be maintained for that period, a divorce is thereby declared, and the parties would have to be married again to render their living together lawful. See Tafsír-i-Raufi in loco.

(227)

If they resolve on a divorce; i.e., within, or at the termination of, the four months.

God is he who heareth and knoweth. These words, so often repeated in the Qurán, express alike the pleasure and displeasure of God. The context decides which is intended. Compare vers. 127, 137, 244, and 256. They generally have reference to matters of faith. Exhortations in regard to the practice of religion usually end with the expression, “God knoweth that which ye do,” or “God seeth that which ye do.” Here, while divorce is permitted and legislated for, the will of God seems to be against it.

(228)

The divorced shall wait, &c. “This is to be understood of those only with whom the marriage has been consummated; for as to the others there is no time limited. Those who are not quite past child-bearing (which a woman is reckoned to be after her courses cease, and she is about fifty-five lunar years, or about fifty-three solar years old), and those who are too young to have children, are allowed three months only; but they who are with child must wait till they be delivered.”—Sale, Jaláluddín.

For the various kinds of divorce recognised by Muslim law, see Prelim. Disc., pp. 207, 208, and Hughes’ Notes on Muhammadanism, p. 182.

That which God hath created, &c. “That is, they shall tell the real truth, whether they have their courses, or be with child, or not; and shall not, by deceiving their husband, obtain a separation from him before the term be accomplished, lest the first husband’s child should, by that means, go to the second, or the wife, in case of the first husband’s death, should set up her child as his heir, or demand her maintenance during the time she went with such child, and the expenses of her lying-in, under pretence that she waited not her full prescribed time.”—Sale, Yahya.

The women ought also to behave towards their husbands, &c. Husbands were exhorted to “bring back” their wives during the prescribed peried of waiting, provided the wives desired a reconciliation. The only meaning of the exhortation to the women is that they should be willing to go back to their husbands, provided the husbands desired to be reconciled. Lest such a statement should predicare equality between the sexes, the clause is added, “but the men ought to have a superiority over them.”

(229)

Ye may divorce your wives twice. Compare the Mosaic law, Deut. xxiv. 1-4. Here we find the Qurán, which professes to attest the former Scriptures, giving sanction to that which is declared by Moses to be “abomination before the Lord.” The doctrine of abrogation cannot be made to apply in such a case, unless it be admitted that what is “abomination before the Lord” in one age may be acceptable to him in another.

What ye have given them; i.e., the dowry, which must not be less than ten dirhams (Hughes’ Notes on Muhammadanism, p. 177). The difficulty of divorce among Muslims is greatly increased by their insisting on large dowries being settled upon their daughters when given in marriage. Unless this dowry be voluntarily remitted by the wife, it must be paid by the husband divorcing her against her will.

Unless both fear, &c. In this case the wife consents to the divorcement, thereby forfeiting her dowry.

It shall be no crime, &c.; i.e., “If she prevail on her husband to dismiss her, by releasing part of her dowry.”—Sale.

This release is usually obtained by the most outrageous abuse of the wife, often making her willing to forfeit the whole of her dower rather than live with her brutal husband. This law of the Qurán is responsible for such treatment of women. It makes her the helpiess victim of her husband’s cupidity and tyranny.

(230)

But if her husband divorce her a third time, &c. See Prelim. Disc., p. 207. The Mishqát ul Musábih relates a number of traditions on this subject, too indecent for reproduction here, showing how this law is to be fulfilled, and how pious Muslims have vainly sought to evade the rigour of its requirement. See Bombay edition in Urdú, vol. iii. pp. 176-178.

Muir, in his Life of Mahomet, vol. iii. p. 306, new edition, p. 349, referring to this law, says: “In the rules regarding divorce there is one which (much as I might desire) cannot be passed over in silence. A husband may twice divorce his wife, and each time receive her back again. But when the words of separation have been thrice repeated, the divorce is irreversible. However unjust or injurious the action, how much soever the result of passion or of caprice, however it may affect the interests not only of an innocent wife but also of her innocent children, however desirous the husband may be of undoing the wrong, the decision cannot be recalied; the divorced wife can return to her husband but on one condition, and that is that she shall first be married to another, and after cohabitation be again divorced. The tone of Mahometan manners may be imagined from the functions of the temporary husband (Mostahil), hired to legalise remarriage with a thrice-divorced wife, having passed into a proverb.1 Such flagrant breach of decency, such cruel violation of the modesty of an unoffending wife, may be an abuse the full extent of which was not at the time contemplated by Mahomet, but it is not the less an abuse for which, as a direct result of the unnatural and revolting provision framed by him, Mahomet is justly responsible.”

But if he also divorce her. The Qurán everywhere presumes that divorce is the sole prerogative of the husband. The idea of a wife claiming the right was foreign to Muhammad’s mind. He regarded women as a lower order of beings, intervening between the slave and their lords. The elevation of woman to her true position is impossible under Islám.

It shall be no crime, &c. This is a direct contradiction of the teaching of the Bible. See note on ver. 229.

1

“A thousand lovers rather than one Mostahil—Burckhardt’s Arabic Proverbs, p. 21.

(231)

Retain them not by violence; i.e., by obliging them to purchase their liberty with part of their dowry.—Sale.

(232)

Hinder them not from marrying their husbands; i.e., their former husbands, from whom they have been divorced. If the parties are willing to remarry, their relatives are not to interfere.—Tafsír-i-Raufi.

(233)

And the heir, &c.; i.e., in case the father die before the child is weaned.

(234)

Four months and ten days. “That is to say, before they marry again; and this not only for decency sake, but that it may be known whether they be with child by the deceased or not.”—Sale.

It shall be no crime; i.e., “if they look out for new husbands.”—Sale.

(237)

Unless they release any part, &c.; i.e., “unless the wife agree to take less than half her dowry, or unless the husband be so generous as to give her more than half, or the whole, which is here approved of as most commendable.”—Sale.

(238)

Carefully observe the appointed prayers. The command has reference to the five daily prayers. See Prelim. Disc., p. 165. Four of these are distinctly mentioned in chap. xxx. 16, 17, and all Muslim commentators understand the fifth to be included in the “evening” prayer of ver. 16. Mr. Bosworth Smith is therefore mistaken in saying that “the five daily prayers, like the rite of circumcision, are not enjoined in the Koran itself.”—Mohammed and Mohammedanism, note on p. 196.

Apologists for Muhammadanism are fond of dilating at great length upon the fervour of Muslims in prayer, and “missionaries and the like” are severely condemned for bringing against Muslim prayers the charge of being “merely liteless forms and vain repetitions.”1 If fervour in prayer consists in punctilious performance of a prescribed round of bowing and prostration, or the repetition of a formal service of prayer in a foreign tongue,then the fervour and reality of Muslim prayer must be acknowledged. But, whatever may be thought of the probable character of Muslim prayer in the earlier days of Islám, we think no man acquainted with the worship of modern Muslims can accredit them generally with having any true conception of the spiritual character of prayer, much less of striving after real heart communion with God. Granting that Muhammad had a correct idea of prayer, no system could have been invented to destroy all vestige of real prayer which would have succeeded better than this stereotyped service of Islám. So far as the great mass of Muslims are concerned, the merit of prayer consists in its performance according to the external rite, and not in putting forth heart desires after God.

The middle prayer; i.e., ’Asar.

With devotion. The devotion consists in the punctilious performance of the prescribed round of bowing and prostration, previous ablution, and perfect silence during prayer. Here again the English reader is misled by the language of an English translation. See any Muslim commentary on the passage.

1

Introduction to Lane’s Selections from the Koran by Stanley Lane Poole, p. lxxxiii.

(240)

Abdul Qádir says this law was abrogated by the law of inheritance, in which each heir’s portion is definitely fixed (see chap. iv. 11, which refers to the wife’s share); and the Tafsír-i-Raufi declares it abrogated by ver. 234. Rodwell says this passage “is certainly older than the commencement of Sura iv.” The view of Abdul Qádir is therefore probably correct. So far as we are aware, the Muslim law of inheritance is based upon chap. iv. 11, in so far as it relates to the share of the wife or wives in the property of a deceased husband. It is fortunate for the millions of Muslim widows that the spirit of the prophet became more liberal in this respect as the years rolled by. It is difficult to estimate the amount of misery that would have resulted had the law of this verse remained in force.

(241)

Unto those who are divorced. The husband, in making his bequest, is required to provide for the support of his divorced wives during the period of waiting (ver. 228), provided such period be not accomplished at the time of making bequest. The Tafsír-i-Raufi regards this law as still in force.

(243)

Those who left their habitations. “These were some of the children of Israel, who abandoned their dwellings because of a pestilence, or, as others say, to avoid serving in a religious war; but, as they fled, God struck them all dead in a certain valley. About eight days or more after, when their bodies were corrupted, the prophet Ezekiel, the son of Buzi, happening to pass that way, at the sight of their bones wept; whereupon God said to him, Call to them, O Ezekiel, and I will restore them to life. And accordingly on the prophet’s call they all arose, and lived several years after; but they retained the colour and stench of dead corpses as long as they lived, and the clothes they wore changed as black as pitch, which qualities they transmitted to their posterity. As to the number of these Israelites the commentators are not agreed; they who reckon least say they were 3000, and they who reckon most, 70,000. This story seems to have been taken from Ezekiel’s vision of the resurrection of dry bones.

“Some of the Mohammedan writers will have Ezekiel to have been one of the judges of Israel, and to have succeeded Othoniel the son of Caleb. They also call this prophet Ibn al ajuz, or the son of the old woman, because they say his mother obtained him by her prayers in her old age.”—Sale, Jaláluddín, Yahya, &c.

This is another instance of the failure of the Qurán to confirm the teaching of the “former Scriptures.” The purpose of Muhammad in relating this story appears in the exhortation of the next verse. Muslims must not fear death, lest they be punished with death and disgrace.

(244)

Fight for the religion of God. (See notes on vers. 190 and 191.) Rodwell regards the exhortation of these verses as having special reference to the coming struggle with the people of Madína. We think the purpose of Muhammad had a much wider range. He certainly had special reference to the conflict with the Makkans in the exhortations of vers. 191-193. All his teaching concerning the Qibla and the pilgrimage, all his legislation for the company of the faithful, points to the conquest of Arabia, and the establishment of Islám throughout its bounds by the sword.

(245)

Who is he that will lend, &c.; i.e “by contributing towards the establishment of his true religion.”—Sale.

(246)

That we may fight for the religion of God. The children of Israel said, “We will have a king over us: that we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles” (1 Sam. viii. 19, 20).

The garbled rendering of Israelitish history in this verse and those following illustrates at once Muhammad’s ignorance of the Bible story, and his unscrupulous adaptation of Jewish tradition to the purposes of his prophetic ambition. Granting that he was unacquainted with the Scripture narrative, and that he was dependent for his information on Jewish tradition, I cannot see how he can be fairly exonerated from the charge of deliberate imposition here.

Seeing we are dispossessed, &c. The commentators relate a story in illustration of this passage to the effect that God, on account of their defection from the true faith,permitted Goliath to invade their country, and to destroy their habitations, and carry their children into captivity.

(247)

And their prophet. The name of this prophet is not given in the original. Some commentators think he was Ishmuíl (Samuel): others, that Joshua is referred to; and others, that his name, was Shimaún.—Tafsír-i-Raufi.

Tálút, Saul.

(248)

The sign of his kingdom. &c. Compare this story with the Biblical account (1 Sam. chap. xi.)

The ark. Arabic [Editor: Arabic word - please see p. 380 of the facsimile PDF] = Coptic Hebrew חָבחֵ. “This ark, says Jaláluddín, contained the images of the prophets, and was sent down from heaven to Adam, and at length came to the Israelites, who put great confidence therein, and continually carried it in the front of their army, till it was taken by the Amalekites. But on this occasion the angels brought it back, in the sight of all the people, and placed it at the feet of Tálút, who was thereupon unanimously acknowledged for their king.

“This relation seems to have arisen from some imperfect tradition of the taking and sending back the ark by the Philistines.”—Sale.

Tranquillity. Arabic [Editor: Arabic word - please see p. 380 of the facsimile PDF]. See Rodwell’s note in loco. Also Penrice’s Dictionary and Glossary of the Korán under [Editor: Arabic word - please see p. 380 of the facsimile PDF]

“Tranquillity. That is, because of the great confidence the Israelites placed in it, having won several battles by its miraculous assistance. I imagine, however, that the Arabic word Sakínat, which signifies tranquillity or security of mind, and is so understood by the commentators, may not improbably mean the divine presence or glory, which used to appear on the ark, and which the Jews expressed by the same word, Shechinah.”—Sale.

The relics. “These were the shoes and rod of Moses, the mitre of Aaron, a pot of manna, and the broken pieces of the two tables of the law.”—Sale, Jaláluddín.

The angels shall bring it. The author of the Notes on the Roman Urdú Qurán points out that these angels were “two milch kine.” Abdul Qádir says the angels drove the kine.

(249)

God will prove you by the river. The story of Saul is hereconfounded with that of Gideon (comp. Judges vii.), and with David’s conflict with Goliath! And yet this ridiculous jumble is declared below (252) to be rehearsed by God unto Muhammad “with truth.” Is it possible to believe Muhammad sincere and consciously truthful while making a statement like this? He must have received his information respecting Israelitish history from the Jews or Jewish converts to Islám, either directly, or, as is more probable, indirectly. How could he imagine that he had received it by a divine revelation? I confess my entire inability to reconcile such facts with any theory of balluciuation or self-deception.

(251)

And God . . . taught him his will. “Or what he pleased to teach him. Yahya most rationally understands hereby the divine revelations which David received from God; but Jaláluddín, the art of making coats of mail (which the Muhammadans believe was that prophet’s peculiar trade) and the knowledge of the language of birds.”—Sale.

(252)

Thou art surely . . . sent by God. Look at this statement in the light of my note on (249).

(253)

Jesus the son of Mary. “Christ was, with Mohammed, the greatest of prophets. He had the power of working miracles; he spoke in his cradle; he made a bird out of clay. He could give sight to the blind, and even raise the dead to life. He is the Word proceeding from God; his name is the Messiah. Illustrious in this world and in the next, and one of those who have near access to God. ‘He is strengthened by the Holy Spirit,’ for so Mohammed, in more than one passage, calls the Angel Gabriel.”—R. Bosworth Smith, Mohammed and Mohammedanism, p. 271, second edition.

But that which, beyond all question, exalts Jesus above all the prophets of Islám, Muhammad himself not being excepted, is his sinlessness. Both the Qurán and the Sunnat attribute a sinful character to all the prophets excepting Jesus, who appears everywhere as being absolutely immaculate. He is the Sinless Prophet of Islám.

With the holy spirit. “It is clear that at a later period at least, if not from the first, Mahomet confounded Gabriel with the Holy Ghost. The idea may have arisen from some such misapprehension as the following:—Mary conceived Jesus by the power of the Holy Ghost which overshadowed her. But it was Gabriel who visited Mary to announce the conception of the Saviour. The Holy Ghost was, therefore, another name for Gabriel. We need hardly wonder at this ignorance, when Mahomet seems to have believed that Christians held Mary to be the third person in the Trinity.—Muir’s Life of Mahomet, new edition, p. 47, note. See also notes on ver. 86

They fell at variance. The allusion is to the various sects into which the followers of former “apostles” became divided. This was in accordance with the will of God. It would seem that God willed that the followers of Muhammad should be no exception in this respect.

(254)

Give alms. See notes on vers. 42, 109, and 214.

(255)

God! there is no God, &c. “This verse contains a magnificent description of the divine majesty and providence; but it must not be supposed the translation comes up to the dignity of the original. This passage is justly admired by the Muhammadans, who recite it in their prayers; and some of them wear it about them, engraved on an agate or other precious stone.”—Sale.

This verse is called the ’Ayat ul Kursí, or The Throne verse, and is frequently used by Muslims in prayer. The Mishqát ul Masábih (Matthews’ edition, vol. i. p. 303) records the following tradition concerning it:—“Ali Ibn Abú Tálib said, ‘I heard the prophet say in the pulpit, “That person who repeats ’Ayat ul Kursí after every prayer, nothing prevents him entering into paradise but life; and whoever says ’Ayat ul Kursi when he goes to his bedchamber, God will keep him in safety, his house, and the house of his neighbour.” ’ ”

His throne. “This throne, in Arabic called Kursi, is by the Muhammadans supposed to be God’s tribunal or seat of justice, being placed under that other called al Arsh, which they say is his imperial throne. The Kursi allegorically signifies the divine providence, which sustains and governs the heaven and the earth, and is infinitely above human comprehension.”—Sale.

This is, without doubt, one of the grandest verses of the Qurán. Its place in the text does not seem natural. It sounds more like one of the impassioned effusions of the preacher of Makkah than the utterance of the Madína politician.

(256)

No violence in religion. “This passage was particularly directed to some of Muhammad’s first proselytes, who having sons that had been brought up in idolatry or Judaism, would oblige them to embrace Muhammadism by force.”—Sale, Jaláladdin.

There is an apparent contradiction between this verse and verses 191-193 and 244 of this chapter. The comment of Jaláluddín given by Sale as quoted here affords a key to reconciliation. It was still politic to exercise moderation at Madina, but being at war with the Makkans, and anticipating the coming conflict with the unbelievers elsewhere, the Muslims were incited to “fight for the religion of God.” This warfare was for the present ostensibly in self-defence, but the warriors were being educated for a career of conquest in the not distant future.

Taghut. “This word properly signifies an idol, or whatever is worshipped besides God—particularly the two idols of the Makkans, al Lát and al Uzza; and also the devil, or any seducer.”—Sale

(258)

Him who disputed with Abraham. “This was Nimrod. who, as the commentators say, to prove his power of life and death by ocular demonstration, caused two men to be brought before him at the same time, one of whom he slew and saved the other alive. As to this tyrant’s persecution of Abraham, see chap. xxi. (vers. 52-70), and the notes thereon.”—Sale.

(259)

He who passed by a city, &c. “The person here meant was Uzair or Ezra, who riding on an ass by the ruins of Jerusalem, after it had been destroyed by the Chaldeans, doubted in his mind by what means God could raise the city and its inhabitants again; whereupon God caused him to die, and he remained in that condition one hundred years; at the end of which God restored him to life, and he found a basket of figs and a cruse of wine he had with him not in the least spoiled or corrupted; but his ass was dead, the bones only remaining, and these, while the prophet looked on, were raised and clothed with flesh becoming an ass again, which being inspired with life, began immediately to bray (Jaláluddín, Yahya). This apocryphal story may perhaps have taken its rise from Nehemiah’s viewing of the ruins of Jerusalem” (Neh. ii.)—Sale.

The Qurán is here again at variance with the facts of Jewish history.

(260)

Show me how thou wilt raise the dead. “The occasion of this request of Abraham is said to have been on a doubt proposed to him by the devil, in human form, how it was possible for the several parts of the corpse of a man which lay on the seashore, and had been partly devoured by the wild beasts, the birds, and the fish, to be brought together at the resurrection.”—Sale.

Take four birds and divide them. “These birds, according to the commentators, were an eagle (a dove, say others), a peacock, a raven, and a cock, which Abraham cut to pieces, and mingled their flesh and feathers together, or, as some tell us, pounded all in a mortar, and dividing the mass into four parts laid them on so many mountains, but kept the heads, which he had preserved whole, in his hand. Then he called them each by their name, and immediately one part flew to the other, till they all recovered their first shape, and then came to be joined to their respective heads.

“This seems to be taken from Abraham’s sacrifice of birds mentioned by Moses (Gen. xv.), with some additional circumstances.”—Sale, Jaláluddín, Abdul Qádir.

(262)

Reproaches or mischief; i.e., either by reproaching the person whom they have relieved with what they have done for him, or by exposing his poverty to his prejudice.”— Sale, Jaláluddín.

See notes on vers. 42, 109, and 214.

(266)

A garden of palm-trees, &c. “This garden is an emblem of alms given out of hypocrisy or attended with reproaches, which perish, and will be of no service hereafter to the giver.”—Sale, Jaláluddín.

(267)

Otherwise than by connivance. “That is, on having some amends made by the seller of such goods, either by abatement of the price, or giving something else to the buyer to make up the value.”—Sale.

(268)

The devil threateneth . . . but God promiseth. Satan deters from giving by suggesting possible poverty. God encourages to give by the promise of pardon and salvation. Compare ver. 271, infra.

(271)

If you make your alms to appear, it is well. This contradicts the teaching of our Lord (Matt. vi. 1-4). The whole of Muhammad’s exhortation in these verses (271-274) is based upon the idea that almsgiving is profitable both in this world and the world to come. As an additional motive, he condones and thereby encourages that human pride which is willing to give for the sake of the reputation for liberality acquired thereby.

If ye conceal them . . . this will be better for you. This translation agrees with that of Abdul Qádir, the Tafsír Hussaini, and the Tafsír-i-Raufi. This part of the exhortation is then in agreement with that of Matt. vi. 1-4. Both public giving and private charity are commended. See also ver. 274.

But Rodwell translates this clause thus: “Do ye conceal them and give them to the poor? This, too, will be of advantage to you.”

Abdul Qádir paraphrases the verse thus: “If you make your alms to appear, it is well, for others will be encouraged to give; but if you conceal them, it is better, because the poor will not be made ashamed by exposing their poverty.”

Will atone for your sins. This sentiment contradicts the teaching of the Bible, that “without shedding of blood there is no remission.”

(272)

Ye shall not give unless, &c.; i.e., “for the sake of a reward hereafter, and not for any worldly consideration.”—Sale.

(273)

The poor wholly employed in fighting (see notes on ver. 195). Here we observe that Muhammad’s exhortations to the performance of religious duty were closely connected with his scheme for political advancement.

Their modesty. If ever this virtue belonged to a gházi or Muslim warrior, it has long since been supplanted by the most impudent an cruel audacity.

(274)

See notes on ver. 271.

(275)

Whom Satan hath infected; viz., “like demoniacs or possessed persons; that is, in great horror and distraction of mind, and convulsive agitation of body.”—Sale.

Usury is one of the seventeen kabíra or great sins. Hughes’ Notes on Muhammadanism, p. 139.

Shall have what is past forgiven. Repentance thus atones for past sin. This, again, contradicts the teaching of the “former Scriptures.” The Tafsír-i-Raufi, while recognising the above as a possible interpretation, prefers another, viz., that those who had borrowed money before the date of the prohibition of usury, are hereby relieved from the responsibility of payment of interest on their debts. This is ex post facto law of a kind scarcely creditable to Islám. And yet this interpretation seems to be borne out by the exhortation of ver. 278.

(277)

See notes on vers. 3-5, 37, 38, and 177.

(278)

Remit which remaineth; i.e., “the interest due before usury was prohibited. For this some of Muhammad’s followers exacted of their debtors, supposing they lawfully might.”—Sale, Jaláluddín. See also note on ver. 275.

(280)

Wait till it be easy for him, &c. This regulation does great credit to Muhammad, and is yet carried out in practice by many of his followers.

(281)

And fear the day, &c. “The fear rather than the love of God is the spur of Islám.”—Poole in Introduction to Lane’s Selections from the Koran, p. lxxx.

(282)

His agent. “Whoever manages his affairs, whether his father, heir, guardian, or interpreter.”—Sale, Jaláluddín.

A man and two women. Another illustration of the Muslim estimate of woman She is but half a man! A man, too ignorant to dictate an article of agreement, may still be equal to any two women, however intelligent; for “if one of those women should mistake, the other of them will cause her to recollect!”

(283)

Return what he is trusted with. Forbids a breach of trust and all embezzlement.—Tafsír-i-Raufi.

(284)

Whether ye manifest that which is in your minds, &c. Abdul Qádir says that on hearing these words, one of the companions said that this command was exceedingly difficult to perform, whereupon the following two verses were revealed. He understands these verses as mitigating in some degree the rigour of this command. Modern Muslims generally agree that thoughts of evil only acquire a moral character by their manifestation in word or deed.

Will forgive whom he pleaseth. Pardon of sin here depends on the will of God alone. Compare notes on vers. 271 and 275.

(285)

We make no distination at all between his apostles. This verse contradicts ver. 253 and chap. xvii. 57.

“But this, say the Muhammadans, the Jews do, who receive Moses, but reject Jesus; and the Christians, who receive both those prophets, but reject Muhammad.”—Sale, Jaláluddín.

(286)

A burden like that which thou hast laid on those who, &c. “That is, on the Jews, who, as the commentators tell us, were ordered to kill a man by way of atonement, to give one-fourth of their substance in alms, and to cut off an unclean ulcerous part, and were forbidden to eat fat, or animals that divide the hoof, and were obliged to observe the sabbath, and other particulars wherein the Muhammadans are at liberty.”—Sale, Jaláluddín, Yahya.

See note on ver. 284.

Abdul Qádir says, “God approved of this prayer and accepted it. This command no longer rests heavily upon us, so that the thoughts of the heart are no longer taken into account, and sins of carelessness are forgiven!”

The Qurán, then, seems to be responsible for the general insensibility of Muslims to sin, and especially to sinful states of the heart. The doctrine of personal holiness is alike foreign to the Qurán and the experience of the followers of Islám.

Liberty Fund, Inc.

Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established in 1960 to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.

The Foundation develops, supervises, and finances its own educational activities to foster thought and encourage discourse on enduring intellectual issues pertaining to liberty. This is done through the implementation of different programs:

Each year, Liberty Fund conducts over 150 conferences throughout the United States, Canada, Latin America, and Europe.

Liberty Fund has a book publishing program. There is an online catalog where these books can be ordered <http://www.libertyfund.org/books.aspx>.

Liberty Fund has produced a series of videos called The Intellectual Portrait Series which are conversations with some of the most significant contemporary thinkers about individual liberty.

Liberty Fund hosts several websites which contain books, articles, discussion, and podcasts about liberty.

These programs focus on the place individual liberty has in an intellectual heritage evident from ancient times and continuing through our own times. The programs are intended to enrich understanding and appreciation of the complex nature of a society of free and responsible individuals and to contribute to its preservation.

Liberty Fund also sponsors the following websites:

Liberty Fund’s main website <http://www.libertyfund.org>

LF online catalog <http://www.libertyfund.org/books.aspx>

The Online Library of Liberty <http://oll.libertyfund.org/>

The Library of Economics and Liberty <http://www.econlib.org/>

The Library of Law and Liberty <http://www.libertylawsite.org/>

As a tax-exempt, private operating foundation, Liberty Fund’s purposes are educational. It does not, therefore, engage in political action of any kind. It fulfills its mission by conducting programs, not by awarding grants to outside organizations or individuals.

The cuneiform inscription that appears in the logo and serves as a design element in all Liberty Fund books and websites is the earliest-known written appearance of the word “freedom” (amagi), or “liberty.” It is taken from a clay document written about 2300 B.C. in the Sumerian city-state of Lagash.

LIBERTY FUND, INC.
8335 Allison Pointe Trail, Suite 300
Indianapolis, Indiana 46250-1684
U.S.A.
Phone no.: 1.800.955.8335

Liberty Fund’s Collection of ePub Titles on Liberty

The text you are currently reading comes from Liberty Fund’s Online Library of Liberty (OLL) <http://oll.libertyfund.org>. Additional titles in ePub format can be downloaded from the main OLL website from each title’s Table of Contents page or from this list <http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/epub/>. One convenient way to load titles directly into your iPad is to email yourself this link, click on the title of your choice, and open it directly in iBook on your iPad (thus circumventing the need to load titles from your laptop or desktop computer.

ePub and Kindle versions of books published by Liberty Fund are not available for free download. They can be purchased from Amazon.com.

The Online Library of Liberty

The OLL was established in 2004 in order to further the educational goals of Liberty Fund, Inc, namely “to encourage study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals”. It is a multi-award winning website which makes available at no charge to the public outstanding resources for teaching and learning about the humanities and the social sciences.

Awards

The OLL has won a number of international awards for its outstanding collection of online material in the humanities and social sciences. It has been recognised by

the Library of Congress for its Minerva archiving project

the National Endowment for the Humanities

the British Arts and Humanities Research Council, and

the International Political Science Association.

copyright symbol Copyright and Fair Use Statement

There are four different types of texts which Liberty Fund has made available as part of the Online Library of Liberty website:

public domain texts published before 1923. These texts are no longer under copyright and are in the public domain. We have put them online in order to further the educational aims of Liberty Fund.

texts to which the Liberty Fund has electronic rights, such as the books published by Liberty Fund in both print and online formats

other texts to which Liberty Fund has acquired the electronic rights from third parties, such as the journal Literature of Liberty (from the Institute for Humane Studies)

titles which are put online under license from third parties, such as the Collected Works of John Stuart Mill (from the University of Toronto Press).

For titles in the first three categories listed above, no special permission from Liberty Fund is required for quoting material in papers and essays, or for limited photocopying and distribution for academic or other educational or non-profit purposes. The only requirements are that you include proper attribution on the first page of the document being distributed - e.g. for John Locke’s The Two Treatises of Government you would say one of the following:

if using the OLL website - “This material originally appeared on the Online Library of Liberty hosted by Liberty Fund, Inc. URL: http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/222 and accessed on 2016-04-26.” This information can be found in the section called “Edition used” on the title’s table of contents page.

or if using the ePub version on a portable reading device: “This material is part of the collection of ePub titles in the Online Library of Liberty website hosted by Liberty Fund, Inc. Source Text URL http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/222 accessed on 2016-04-26.” This information can be found on the “Introduction to the Book” page in this file.

For titles in category two and three, any reprint of material “for profit”, such as a chapter or a substantial section of an online book for inclusion in a book or other publication for sale, requires written permission from Liberty Fund.

For titles in the fourth category you must follow the specific requirements of the copyright holder whose work we publish online under license. This information can be found in the “Introduction to the Book” page under the section “Copyright Information.” In the case of the Collected Works of John Stuart Mill published under license from the University of Toronto Press, for reprint or copying permission you need to contact UTP directly. Under our contractual obligations with UTP we have placed the following declaration on the front page of every book and section of the online version of the Collected Works of John Stuart Mill:

The online edition of the Collected Works is published under licence from the copyright holder, The University of Toronto Press. ©2006 The University of Toronto Press. All rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form or medium without the permission of The University of Toronto Press.

Thus, for reprint or copying permission you need to contact UTP directly. Liberty Fund cannot grant you this permission because it is not the copyright holder.