Non Muslims' Tributes to the prophet
With the passing of Oriental Studies from the hands of Christian
missionaries and divines into those of independent scholars the
appreciation of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and his message is growing in
the West.
Here arc two extracts about Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) from a recent hook
by a learned American professor:
"Pure-hearted and beloved in his circle, he was, it is said, of sweet
and gentle disposition. His bereavements having made him sensitive to
human suffering in every form, he was always ready to help others,
especially the poor and the weak. His sense of honour, duty and
fidelity won him as he grew older the high and enviable title of "The
True', The Upright', The Trustworthy One'. Yet despite his concern for
others he remained removed from them in outlook and ways, isolated in
the midst of an effetic and chaotic society. As he grew from childhood
to youth and from youth to manhood the lawless strife of his
contemporaries, the repeated outbursts of pointless quarrels among the
tribes frequenting the Meccan fairs, and the general immorality and
cynicism of the day combined to produce in the prophet-to-be sustained
reaction of horror and disgust. Silently, brooding, his thoughts
turned inward"."( Huston Smith, The Religions of Man, Mentor Books,
p.203.) "In an age charged with a supernaturalism, when miracles were
accepted as the stock-in-trade of the most ordinary saint, Muhammad
refused to traffic with human weakness and credulity. To
miracle-hungry idolaters seeking signs and portents he cut the issue
clean: 'God has not sent me to work wonders; He has sent me to preach
to you. My Lord be praised! Am I more than a man sent as an apostle?' From
first to last he resisted every impulse to glamorize his o»-n person.
'1 never said that Allah's treasures are in my hand, that 1 knew the
hidden things, or that I was an angel ... 1 am only a preacher of
God's words, the bringer of God's message to mankind.' If signs be
sought, let them be not of Muhammad's greatness, but of God's, and for
these one need only open one's eyes. The heavenly bodies holding their
swift silent course in the vault of heaven, the incredible order of
the universe, the rain that falls to relieve the parched earth, palms
bending with golden fruit, ships that glide across the seas laden with
goodness for man - can these be the handiwork of gods of stone? What
fools to cry for signs when creation harbuors nothing else! In an age
of credulity, Muhammad taught respect for the world's incontrovertible
order which was to awaken Muslim science before Christian." (luston
Smith. The. Religions ufMan, Mentor Books, pp. 205, 206)
And this is how the well-known historian, Lanc-Poole, sums up the
character of Prophet Muhammad:
"He who, standing alone, braved for years the hatred of his people, is
the same who was never the first to withdraw his hand from another's
clasp; the beloved of children, who never passed a group of little
ones without a smile from his wonderful eyes and kind word for them,
sounding all the kinder in that sweet-toned voice... He was one of
those happy few who have attained the supreme joy of making one great
truth their very life-spring. He was the messenger of the One God; and
never to his life's end did he forget who he was, or the message which
was the marrow of his being. He brought his tiding to his people with
a grand dignity sprung from the consciousness of his high office
together with a most sweet humility whose roots lay in the knowledge
of his own weakness."*'*
Major A.G. 1-conard refers to the sincerity of the Prophet and the
truth of his message in these words in his book Islam, Her Moral and
Spiritual Value.
"He must at the outset recognise that Mohammed was no mere spiritual
pedlar, no vulgar time-serving vagrant, but one of the most profoundly
sincere and earnest spirits of any age or epoch. A man not only great
but one of the greatest - i.e., truest-men that humanity has ever
produced. Great i.e., not simply as a prophet but as a patriot and a
statesman: a material as well as a spiritual builder who constructed a
great nation, a great empire, and more even than all these, a still
greater Faith. Trtic, moreover, because he was true to himself, to his
people, and above all to his God. Recognising this, he will thus
acknowledge that Islam Ls a profound and true cult, which strives to
uplift its votaries from the depths of human darkness into the higher
realms of Light and Truth.'"-'
Finally, this is what Lamartine. one of the greatest poets of France,
writes about the greatness of Muhammad (phuh):
"Never has a man set himself, voluntarily or
involuntarily, a more sublime aim, since this aim was superhuman: to
subvert superstitions which had been interposed between man and his
Creator, to render God unto man and man unto God; to restore the
rational and sacred idea of divinity amidst the chaos for the material
and disfigured gods of idolatry then existing. Never has a man
undertaken a work so far beyond human power with so feeble means, for
he had in the conception as well as in the execution of such a great
design no other instrument than himself, and no other aid, except a
handful of men living in a comer of the desert. Finally, never has a
man accomplished such a huge and lasting revolution in the world,
because in less than two centuries alter its appearance. Islam, in
faith and arms, reigned over the whole of Arabia, and conquered in
God's name Persia, Khurasan, Transoxania, Western India, Syria,
Abyssinia, all the known continent of Northern Africa, numerous
Islands of the Mediterranean, Spain, and a part of Gaul."
"If greatness of purpose, smallness of means, and astounding results
are the three criteria of human genius, who could dare to compare any
great men in modern history to Muhammad? The most famous men created
arm, laws, and empires only. They founded, if anything, at all, no
more than material powers which often crumbled away before their eyes.
This man moved not only armies, legislation, empires, peoples, and
dynasties, but millions of men in one-third of the then inhabited
world; and more than that, he moved the altars, the gods, the
religions, the ideas, the beliefs and the souls. On the basis of a
Book, every letter of which has become law, he created a spiritual
nationality which has blended together peoples of every tongue and of
every race. He has left to us as (he indelible characteristic of this
Muslim nationality, the hatred of false gods and the passion lor the
One and Immaterial God. This avenging patriotism against the
profanation of Heaven formed the virtue of the followers of Muhammad:
the conquest of one-third of the earth to his dogma was his miracle;
or ralher it was not the miracle of a man but that of reason. The idea
of the unity of God proclaimed amidst the exhaustion of fabulous
theogenies, was in itself such a miracle that upon its utterance from
his lips it destroyed all the ancient temples of idols and set on fire
one-third of the world. His life, his meditations, his heroic
revilings against the superstitions, of his country, and his boldness
in defying the furies of idolatry; his firmness in endurring them for
fifteen years at Mecca, his acceptance of the role of public scorn and
almost of being a victim of his fellow-countrymen: all these and,
finally his incessant preaching, his wars against odds, his faith in
his success and his superhuman security in misfortune, his forbearance
in victory, his ambition which was entirely devoted to one idea and in
no manner striving for an empire; his endless prayer, his mystic
conversations with God, his death and his triumph after death; all
these attest not to an imposture but to a firm conviction. It was his
conviction which gave him the power to restore a dogma. This dogma was
two-fold, the unity of God and the immateriality of God; the former
telling what God is; the latter telling what God is not. 'Philosopher,
orator, apostle, legislator, warrior, conqueror of ideas, restorer of
rational dogmas, of a cult without images; the founder of twenty
terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire, that is Muhammad'. As
regards all standards by which human greatness may be measured, we may
well ask: is there any man greater than he?
' Complete Model
Although on the basis of the Glorious Qur'an I regard the characters
of Jesus and Prophet Muhammad to be equally godly, pure, noble and
inspiring, yet Jesus did not get the opportunity to become a perfect
model for men in all walks of life as Prophet Muhammad did. We have no
doubt that if Jesus had got the chance, he would have behaved exactly
as Prophet Muhammad did; for both of them were prophets of the same God.
Jesus never married and so he could not become an ideal husband and
father. He did not triumph over his enemies and so had no chance of
showing how a victor should behave towards his vanquished foes who
have spared no pains to annihilate him and his followers. He did not
have his persecutors at his mercy and so had no occasion to show real
forbearance and forgiveness. Jesus did not rise to power to become the
model of a benevolent and just ruler and judge.
We must turn to Prophet Muhammad, and not Jesus, if we want to see the
picture of an ideally happy and pious married life and of a wise, just
and benevolent ruler whom nothing could corrupt or divert from working
for the material and moral amelioration of his people. Prophet
Muhammad witnessed the phases of both persecution and success. He
showed rare patience, fortitude, courage and love for his foes as a
persecuted preacher of religion and in the hours of deepest gloom, and
unparalleled self-control and mercy when his bitterest foes were
helpless before him.
Jesus did not get the chance to put into practice many of his precepts
and teachings. For instance, he advised his followers to sell their
garments and purchase swords (Luke 22:36), but he could not
demonstrate to them the right use of the sword. To resist violence and
aggression sometimes becomes our highest duty - for instance, when
helpless men, women and children are being slaughtered and the freedom
to believe and practice the religion of their own choice is denied by
fanatics and tyrants. It was Prophet Muhammad who showed how a true
soldier of God, the protector of the victims of intolerance and cruel
violence, should behave on the battlefield and in moments of defeat
and triumph.
The life of Jesus runs parallel to the early life of Prophet Muhammad,
but Jesus did not live long enough to give a practical shape to his
teachings and work out the social implications of his message. He did
not have the chance to enlarge his teachings to cover all the
situations of life and to bring about the tremendous social reforms
that Prophet Muhammad did. The modern man, who has to lead a life as a
son, a husband, a father, a poor worker, a citizen, a neighbor, a
despised advocate of new ideas and ways, a victim of religious and
political bigotry, a man with authority, a successful leader, a
soldier, a business-man, a judge, and a ruler, will find Prophet
Muhammad as a perfect model for him in all situations and walks of life.
God's Justice:
The second part of the Christian doctrine of the Atonement is that
God's Justice requires that a price must be paid for the original and
other sins of man. If God were to pardon a sinner without punishing
him would be a denial of His Justice. The Rev. W. Goldsack writes in
this connection:
"It should be clear as day light to anyone that God cannot break His
own Law: He cannot forgive a sinner without first giving him an
appropriate punishment. For if He did so, who would call Him Just and
Equitable.""'
This view shows complete ignorance God. God is not a mere judge or
king. He is, as the Qur'an describes Him, "Master of the Day of
Judgment". He is not only Just but also Merciful and Forgiving. If He
finds some real good in a man or sees that he is sincerely repentant,
having a real urge to conquer the evil within him, then He may forgive
his failings and sins altogether. And this stretch of imagination can
be called a violation of His Justice. After all, the only proper
motive for punishment is to check evil and reform the offender. To
punish a person for his past sins, even after he has repented and
reformed himself, is a sign of vengeance and not of justice. A God,
Whose 'Justice' requires compensation for every fall and sin of man is
no better than Shylock. The God that we worship - the Creator and
Sustainer of all the worlds - is the God of Love and Mercy. If He
prescribes a law and a way and demands obedience, it is not for His
own benefit, but for the benefit of mankind. And if He punishes a man
for his faults and sins it is not for His own satisfaction or
compensation, as the Christian dogma proclaims,
but to check evil and purify the sinner. Hell itself is like a
hospital, where the spiritually ill - those afflicted with the
diseases of malice, hatred, selfishness, callousness, falsehood,
dishonesty, greed, impurity, arrogance, etc. - are cured through the
fire of suffering and remorse. But those who have the persistent urge
to do good and the sincerely repentant will find God Ever-Ready to
forgive their failures and sins without demanding any compensation
from them, or from any one else. Is this not what the prophet Ezekiel
proclaimed in the verses of the Bible that we have quoted above? And
is this not what Jesus taught in his beautiful parables of the Lost
Sheep, the Lost Coin and the Prodigal Son? Can we trace the origin of
the doctrine that unless every sin is compensated for and someone
punished, God's Justice would be outraged to the man who taught us to
pray to God in these words "Forgive us our debts as we have forgiven
our debtors"? Forgiveness of a sinner after punishing him, or someone
else on his behalf, is no forgiveness at all. God can and does forgive
the faults and sins of those in whom He. sees real goodness and those
who have turned away from their sins and reformed themselves without
punishing them or any other person on their behalf, and this is not
against God's Justice. In fact this alone is true forgiveness. Thus we
read in the Glorious Qur'an:
( Say: O My people, who have acted extravagantly against your own
souls, despair not of the Mercy of God, for He forgiveth the sins
altogether. Lo! He is All-Forgiving, All-Merciful. So tarn unto Him
repentant, and surrender unto Him, before there come unto you the
chastisement, when ye cannot be helped. )
(39:53.54)
4 Whoso doeth evil or wrongeth his own soul, then seeketh Pardon of
God (and reformeth himself), will find God Forgiving, Merciful. Whoso
committeth sin, committeth it only against himself. God is
All-Knowing, All-Wise. §
(4:110-111)
The Blood Atonement.
The third part of the Christian dogma of the Atonement is that Jesus
paid the penalty for the original and other sins of men by his death
on the cross of Calvary, and that salvation cannot be obtained without
belief in the saving power of his blood. This is what we read in the
First Epistle of St. Peter:
"Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible
things, as silver and gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, as
of a lamb without blemish and without spot."'"
And this is what two modern Christian apologists (a Protestant
and a Roman Catholic) have written,:
"We pass on now to the doctrine of the Atonement, which is that
Christ's death was in some sense a sacrifice for sin, and thus
reconciled (or made 'at - one') God the Father and sinful man. And
though not actually stated in the Creeds, it is implied in the words,
was crucified also for us, and who suffered for our salvation"'2'
"Since Christ, God and man, had taken upon Himself our sins (by His
death on the cross) in order to atone for them by giving satisfaction
to God's outraged justice, he is the mediator between God and man.
"(1) This dogma is not only a denial of the Mercy of God but also of
His Justice. To demand the price of blood in order to forgive the sins
of men is to show a complete lack of mercy, and to punish a man who is
not guilty for the sins of others, whether the former is willing or
not, is the height of injustice.
Christian apologists try to defend this by saying that Jesus Christ
willingly suffered death to pay the price for the sins of men. To this
our reply is:
Firstly, it is not historically correct to say that Jesus had come to
die willingly and deliberately for the sins of men. We read in the
Bible that he did not wish to die on the cross. For, when he knew that
his enemies were plotting against his life, he declared that his "soul
was exceedingly sorrowful unto death", he asked his disciples to keep
watch over him to protect him from his enemies and he prayed to God,
"Abba, Father, all things are possible unto Thee; take '••• away this
cup from me; nevertheless not what 1 will, but what Thou wilt."
(Mark 14:36)
Secondly, we fail to see how the suffering and death of one man can
wipe out the sins of others. It sounds something like the physician
breaking his own head to cure the headache of his patients. The idea
of substitutionary or vicarious sacrifice is illogical, meaningless
and unjust.
Thirdly, the idea that shedding of blood is necessary to appease the
Wrath of God has come into Christianity from the primitive man's image
of God as an all-powerful demon. We see no connection at all between
sin and blood. What is necessary to wash away sin is not blood but
repentance, remorse, persistent struggle against evil inclinations,
development of greater sympathy for mankind and determination to carry
out the Will of God as revealed to us through the prophets. The Qur'an
says:
<^ To God does not reach the flesh or the blood I of animals they
sacrifice), but unto Him is acceptable righteousness on , your
part, fy'1 (22:37>
The doctrine of the Atonement makes the First Person of Godhead into a
blood-thirsty tyrant in order to demonstrate the self-sacrificing love
of the Second Person. To a dispassionate critic, the sacrifice of the
Second Person appears as much misplaced and meaningless as the demand
of the First Person is cruel and sadistic.
Arthur Weigall makes the following significant comment on the doctrine
of the Atonement:
"We can no longer accept the appalling theological 'j: doctrine that
for some mystic reason a propitiatory * sacrifice was necessary. It
outrages either our conception '•' of God as Almighty or else our
conception of Him as i :?l All-Loving. The famous Dr. Cruden
believed that for the : purpose of this sacrifice 'Christ suffered
dreadful pains inflicted by God', and this of course, is a standpoint
which nauseates the modem mind and which may well be termed a hideous
doctrine, not unconnected with the sadistic tendencies of primitive
human nature. Actually, it is of pagan origin, being, indeed, perhaps
the most obvious relic of heathendom in the Faith."11'
The Christian scheme of salvation is not only morally and rationally
unsound, but also has no support of the words of Jesus. Jesus may be
said to have suffered for the sins of men in the sense that, in order
to take them out of darkness into light, he incurred the wrath of the
evildoers and was tortured by them; but that does not mean that his
death was an atonement for the sins of others and that only those who
believe in his blood would be forgiven. Jesus had come to rescue men
from sin by his teaching and the example of his godly life, and not by
deliberately dying for them on the cross and offering his blood as a
propitiation for their sins. When a young man came and asked him "Good
Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?" he mentioned
nothing about his atoning sacrifice and the redeeming power of Iris
blood. His reply was the same as that of every other prophet. For he said:
"Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God;
but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments."
(Matthew 19:17)
"Keep the commandments" that, according to Jesus, was the way to
eternal life. Salvation could be gained by believing in God, eschewing
evil and doing good, and not by accepting Jesus as the redeemer and
believing in his blood atonement.
The dogma of the Atonement is unsound, for (1) man is not bom in sin.
(2) God does not require a price to forgive the sinners, and (3) the
idea of substitutionary or vicarious sacrifice is unjust and cruel. By
sinning we do not harm God, but ourselves. The stain of sin on our
souls can be removed, not by the suffering or death of any other
person, whether the latter be willing or unwilling, but by our own
repentance, turning away from evil and doing good. And so, when Adam,
after the act of disobedience, repented and submitted himself
completely to God, his sin was forgiven. Neither is the sin of Adam
inherited by the children of Adam, nor did it require the suffering
and death of Jesus Christ to be forgiven. The truth is that Jesus did
not die on the cross at all. The doctrine of the Atonement is a denial
of the Justice and Mercy of God.
Islam rejects this dogma. It declares that the forgiveness of sins
cannot be obtained by the suffering and sacrifice of any other person,
human or divine, but by the Grace of God and our own sincere and
persistent efforts to fight against evil and do good:
(that no laden one shall bear another's load, and that man hath only
that for which he maketh effort, and that his effort will be seen)
(The Glorious Qur'un 53:38,40)
(Whosoever goeth right, it is only for the good of his own soul that
he goeth right, and whosoever erreth, erreth only to its hurt. No
laden soul can bear another's load)
(17:15)
----------------------
this was the last part
for more please visit these links
http://www.muslim-answers.org/
http://www.it-is-truth.org/
http://www.islam-qa.com/
http://www.khayma.com/librarians/call2islaam
