The Holy Prophet on Idolatory

23 The Holy Prophet on Idolatory by Nur-ud-Din Muneer William Muir, Montgommery Watt and many other orientalists allege that the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of God be on him), had at one time compromised with idolatory and invested the Arab goddesses, Lat, Uzza and Manat with the power of interceding with Allah. They maintain that the verses of the Holy Quran conferring this status on these idols were later on replaced by condemnatory verses. According to Muir, the satanic verses continued to be a part of the Holy Quran for at least “some days, probably indeed longer to allow of the report going forth and reaching the exiles (Muslim refugees in Abyssinia) in the shape sufficient to inspire them with confidence (and return to Mecca)i. Montgommery Watt asserts that these verses, before abrogation subsisted in the Quran for “some weeks or even months’^. Brockelmann says that the Holy Prophet’ ‘disavowed (the satanic verses) the very next day “3. This wide difference of opinion about the duration of the alleged compromise itself shows that the whole story is subjective and a clever device to malign the Holy Prophet, the greatest Iconoclast of all times. In proof of this stand, they cite some traditions and a few verses of the Holy Quran. Before we examine them let us first set down below the story as told by them. They say: “In view of the low status of his followers and of the prestige which he would gain if the Quraysh joined his faith, the Holy Prophet was contemplating to acceding to their wishes and defy their idols. Then on one day, nearly at the end of the 5th year of his Call, he came beside the Ka’ba, where some of his followers were already sitting. Seating himself near them he began to recite the chapter al-Najm. When he reached the verse mentioning Arab goddesses, Satan in response to his longing, threw upon his tongue the following verses: Now tell me about al-Lat, Uzza and Manat, The third besides, These are exalted females, whose intercession Is to be sought after; Now when the Holy Prophet ended the recitation of the surah with the verse, “So prostrate yourselves before Allah and worship Him”, the whole congregation prostrated themselves on the ground. The Quraysh were very happy that a compromise had at last been effected between them and the Holy Prophet. 1. Life of Muhammed Page 83 2. Muhammed at Mecca Page 103 3. History of The Islamic People Page 14 REVIEW OF RELIGIONS 24 But afterwards, realising that the compromise would harm his mission more than benefit it, and at the remonstration of Gabriel on his aberration, these verses were replaced with the following: What! for you the males and for Him the females? That, indeed, is an unfair division; These are but names which you have named — you and Your fathers — for which Allah sent down no authority. (53:21-23). >. In the meantime the rumour spread that the Quraysh had joined Islam. The believers who had gone to Abyssinia, some two or three months before were very happy at hearing this news, and considering that they would not be persecuted now, hurried back to Mecca. They were, however, sorely disappointed to learn that it was only a hoax. Most of them returned to Abyssinia, but some stayed on in the town. This in brief is the story of the “compromise” as told by orientalists on the authority of Wakidi and Tabari and which they exultingly call the ‘Lapse of Muhammad”4. When we look into the narratives which Muri and Montgommery Watt have cited and of which a summary has been given above, we find that they are full of inconsistencies and fall short of the standards accepted for credibility. The very first allegation relegating the early Muslims to a low and humble status is contrary to facts. The stories quoted by Montgommery Watt on the authority of Tabari depicts them as “the slaves of so and so and the clients of so and so”5, which is not true. With the exception of a few slaves, the early Muslims, who had joined Islam by the year 5th of the Holy Prophet’s Call, according to Montgommery Watt, were free and independent men, belonging to the middle class, some of them enjoying even higher status .6. It is amazing that on page 96 of his book “Muhammad at Mecca”, Montgommery Watt ascribes to the early Muslims a very high status and on page 102 of the same book, holds a tale which puts them unreservedly as “slaves and clients” to be genuine. The charge that the Holy Prophet was contemplating obliging the Quraysh by defying their idols is also wrong. Muir is very keen to foist these thoughts to him. He alleges that the Holy Prophet was extremely eager to gain the support of Quraysh but they were irrevocably wedded to idolatory. On these assumptions he concludes that the Holy Prophet had no choice but to relent and acknowledge the divinity of their idols.7. 4. Life Page 80/82; Muhammed at Mecca p. 102/103; R.R. Buhl, Shorter Edit ion of Encyclopaedia of Islam, 1953, p. 396; H.G. Wells, Outline of History p. 599; Kenneth Cragg, The Call of The Minaret, p. 103, Noted; Richard Bell, The Origin of Islam in its Christian Environment, p. 55/57. 5. Muhammed At Mecca: p. 102. 6. Ibid, p. 96. 7. Life, p. 83/84. 25 THE HOLY PROPHET ON 1DOLATORY This is, however, purely a case of wishful thinking. In his bid to make his charge look plausible, Muir attributes to the Holy Prophet, thoughts and sentiments which never crossed his mind. As regards the Holy Prophet’s state of mind, the Holy Quran expressly affirms that “he does not speak out of his own desires”8, meaning thereby that his ideas and sentiments strictly conformed to the revelations received by him which rejected idolatory altogether. Moreover, according to the Holy Quran, it was the disbelievers who thought in these terms and persistently strove without success to secure some sort of concession from the Holy Prophet. The Holy Quran attributes the act of wishing for a compromise solely to the disbelievers, without the slightest hint that the Holy Prophet reciprocated their sentiments.9 The charge then claims that the Holy Prophet sang praises of idols in the precincts of the Ka’ba. This again is against the pattern of the Holy Prophet’s character. He could not do what he had always been denouncing. The Quraysh had constantly offered him attractive inducements and even threats of vengeance if he did not comply with their wishes to which he never succumbed. Three delegations of Meccan chiefs met his uncle, Abu Talib, and pressed him to dissuade his nephew from condemning idolatory. Abu Talib counselled his nephew but the Holy Prophet firmly refused to yield. Once, when it seemed that Abu Talib, no more able to withstand the pressure, would forsake him, the Holy Prophet firmly stood by his convictions and said: ” If they brought the sun on my right hand and the moon on my left to force me from my undertaking, verily, I will not desist therefrom until the Lord make manifest my cause or I should perish in the attempt”10. The high resolve with which the Holy Prophet adhered to his cause at the crucial hour rules out the possibility of his alleged fall. It must be kept in mind that on that particular occasion, he was facing the most critical moment of his life as he was in a mortal danger of losing the sympathy and protection of his only benefactor. But even then he did not flinch and refused to show even a whit of recognition to idols. How is it then possible, as orientalists allege, that on a certain day, in the course of his routine daily recitation of the Holy Quran in the precinct of the Holy Ka’ba — while the disbelievers, far from being coercive to him in any way were listening spell bound — he, out of his own accord would acknowledge the divinity of their idols. This, on face value, is not only inconceivable but contrary to reason. There is another point noteworthy in this context. Ibne Hisham puts these delegations before the return of the emigrants from Abyssinia and prior to the 8.The Holy Quran 53:3 9. Ibid 68:9 10. Life, p. 87 I REVIEW OF RELIGIONS 26 alleged episode of the satanic verses. But Muir and Montgommery Watt put them after these incidents and in this way contradict their own charge. For, if the episode of the satanic verses was true, there was no need of sending such delegations, as in that case the Quraysh had already gained their objective. Moreover, according to Ibne Sa’d the emigration to Abyssinia took place in the month of Rajab in the 5th year of the Holy Prophet’s Call. Three months had already passed when hoodwinked by the rumoured conversion of the Meccans, the refugees reappeared in the town.” In view of these facts, the episode of the satanic verses must have taken place in one of the three months of Rajab, Sha’baan and Ramdhan. Now according to Noldeke, the chapter al—Kafirun was revealed to the Holy Prophet in the 4th year of his Call. The surah categorically denounces the idea of a compromise with idolatory and emphatically proclaims the Unity of God. How could it then be insigned, that only a few months after this absolute proclamation, the Holy Prophet could utter such blasphemy. There is another striking discrepency in the tradition. It says that when the Holy Prophet knew what satan had caused to come forth from his tongue, it weighed upon him and he was sorely distressed. So God Almighty consoled him by revealing to him the verse 22:52. This suggests that the narrator of this tradition is miserably ignorant of the Quranic chronology. The verse 22:52 was revealed to the Holy Prophet in the 13th year of his Call, some eight years after the alleged revelation of the satanic verses. This anachronism alone is sufficient to discredit the tradition. Muir has rejected this part of the tradition on this very ground. Thus, when a vital part of a tradition is proved a fabrication the whole tradition must be rejected as such.’ – It may further be pointed out that the verse 22:52 has nothing to do with the alleged satanic verses. It embodies a general truth, i.e. whenever a Prophet plans to establish the Unity of God, evil minded persons put all sorts of obstacles in his way and try to frustrate his mission but they fail to do so. God Almighty removes all these obstacles and makes the cause of truth to triumph. Muir comes out with another argument concerning the authenticity of these traditions. Hestatesthat “The authorities are too strong to be dismissed”. Let us see what worth, if any, is possessed by his authorities. The traditions cited by him are reported by Tabari and Wakidi. Tabari, as is evident from his “History of Nations and Kings” is a credulous and indiscriminate writer. As regards Wakidi the following verdict by his contemporary critics will show that he is extremely untrustworthy. More scholars holding the similar views about him could be cited, but the following 11.Life, p. 80. 12.Life, 1912, p. 82. 27 THE HOLY PROPHET ON IDOLATORY three ought to suffice as one of them is a traditionist par-excellence and tr other two are well-known founders of the juristic schools. In view of the verdii of these renowned scholars, it is clear that the traditions cited by Wakidi are nc to be taken for granted but should be subjected to minute scrutiny. 1. Wakidi does not deserve that any tradition be received from him.13 2. Wakidi is an outrageous liar. He is addicted to concocting of traditions. 3. Wakidi’s writings are without any exception a heap of lies’. He used t fabricate authorities.15 Orientalists accept Wakidi as above criticism simply because he suits the purposes better, otherwise they have nothing to refute the scholarly opinioi against him. It should be appreciated that the traditions quoted by Montgommery Wa from al-Tabari are attributed to a certain Abul Aliya, who joined Islam tv years after the demise of the Holy Prophet (peace on him). According to h own confession he took 10 years, after embracing Islam, to learn the Ho Quran.16 When he accepted Islam, some 20 years had elapsed on the alleg