While in the main I agree with the author, I disagree with his point that Islam hasbenefited the polytheistic tribes ofAfrica by elevating their religion, thoughts, culture,etc. As Zwemer quotes Osborn in The Moslem Doctrine ofGed, "'BecauseMohammed taugbt the unity ofGod it has been too hastily concluded that he was agreat social and moral reformer as well. But there is no charm in the abstract doctrineofthe unity ofGod to elevate humanity'" (p. 16); and Noble, "'The crowning benefitbestowed upon the benighted Negro by Islam, its advocate exclaims, is the belief inthe one true God. Is not this an advance, an immense advance, upon fetichism andidolatry? This depends on the content and effect ofthe idea ofGed in Islam and inAfrican paganism. Ifthe two members ofthe religious equation prove ofequal value,the answer must be: x=y and the gain is zero.' This is very strong language" (p. 20).

ELY LECTURES.

THE EVIDENCES OF' CHRISTIANITY IN THE NINETEENTHCENTURY. By R..... Albert Barnes, D.O., LL.D.

CHRISTIANITY AND POSITIVISM. By Rev. James MeCosh,0.0" L.L.D,

COMPARATIVE EVIDENCES OF SCIENCE AND CHRISTI­ANITY. By Rev. A. tJ. Peabody, D.O., LL.D.

THE DIVINE ORIGIN OF CHRISTIANITY INDICATED BYITS HISTORICAL EFFECTS. By Rev. Richard $. Storn,

0,0" LL.D.

PHILOSOPHY AND CHRISTIANITY, By Prof.not Geora:e S.Morris, Ph.D.

THE MIRACULOUS ELEMENT IN THE GOSPELS. ByProfusot A. W. BrtJce, D.O.

THE i:.VIDENCE OF CHRISTIAN EXPERIENCE. By Rev.Lewis F. Stearn., D.O.

ORIENTAL RELIGIONS AND CHRISTIANITY. By RIV. FrankF. Ellinwood, 0,0.

THE BIBLE AND ISLAM, By R,v. Htnry Pr.urvtd Smith, D.O.

THE BIBLE AND ISLAMOR

THE INFLUENCE OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS

ON THE RELIGION OF MOHAMMED

BEING

THE ELY LECTURES FOR 1897

BY

HENRY PRESERVED SMITH, D.O.

NEW YORK

CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS

1897

•

I'

COPYRIGHT, 1897, BY

CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS

T~OW Dill-ECTOR"P~IHTJHO A"o BOOl(Bl/lO;NO eOMP",UY

HEW YORK

THE MEMORY OF

PRBSERVED SMITHAND

LUCY MAYO SMITH

PREFACETHE importance and the timeliness of the subject

treated in these lectures are sufficiently evident. Asto the method of treatment, I leave the reader tojudge. The references given are sufficient to showhow far I have gone to the sources. The citations

from the Koran may be thought too extensive. Myonly defence is that I could not well have left anyout; in fact, I have considerably reduced the num­bel' contained in the first draft of the leotures.

The Arabic words transcribed are not numerous,and the most of them are already current in Eng­lish. I have not thought it necessary to make anychange in these, nor to attempt an exact transliter-

ation.I have been favored with the loan of books from

the Yale University library, the library of UnionThilological Seminary, and the library of the Theo­logical Seminary at Pdnceton. It gives me pleas­ure to acknowledge this courtesy in this public

manner.

L.utEWOOD, N. J.

\"

THE ELY FOUNDATION

THE lectures contained in this volume were ·deliv­ered to the students of Union Theological Seminaryin the spring of the year 1897, as one of the coursesestablished in the Seminary by Mr. Zebulon StilesEly, in the following terms:

" The undersigned gives the sum of ten thousand dol­lars to the Union Theological Seminary of the City of NewYork to found a lectureship in the same, the title of whichshall be The Elias P. Ely Lectures on the Evidences ofChristiaDity.

"The course of lectures given on this Foundation is tocomprise any topics serving to establish the propositionthat Christianity is a religion from God, or that it is theperfect and final form. of religion for man.

U Among the subjects discussed may be: The Natureand Need of a Revelation; The Oharacter and Influenceof Christ and His Apcstles; The Authenticity and Credi­bilityof the Scriptures, Miracles, and Prophecy; The Dif­fusion and Benefits of Christianity, and The Philosophy ofReligion in its Relations to the Christian System.

u Upon ono or more of such subjects a course of tenpublic lectures shall be given, at least once in two or threeyears. The appointment of the lecturers is to be by theconcurrent action of the Faculty and Directors of saidSeminary and the undersigned, and it shall ordinarily bemade two years in advance. "

CONTENTSLJWrURE l'A.a"

I. TIlE ApOSTLE OF ALLAH 1

II. THE COMMON BASIS IN I1EATHENISll( 38

III. THE KORAN NARRATIVES 60

IV. THI!J DOCTRINE OF GOD 98

V. THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 182

VI. REVELATION AND PROPHECY 186

VIr. SIN AND SJ..LVATION 199

VIII. THE SERVICE OF GOD 231

IX. THE FUTURE IdEE 286

X. CHUROH AND STATE 290

I

!II:

THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

LECTURE I.

THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH

IN the seventh century of our era Christianityseemed triumphant over its enemies in the EasternEmpire. Paganism was destroyed, the heresies hadbeen overcome, the faith had received its full definitionin what was supposed to be the final creed. The bish­ops and monks, at least, might be justified in suppos­ing that the kingdom of God was already established.In the reign of Heraclius the political situation wasalmost as promising as the ecclesiastical. For thatmonarch, with almost Roman energy, repulsed thePersians, the hereditary foes of Byzantium, and ex­tended the bounds of the empire almost to the pointwhich they had reached in the days when the statewas Roman in fact as well as in name. In this pe­riod of triumph and of apparent prosperity no onecould have foretold the appearance of a new powerupon the scene-a power which would threaten thewhole fabric of civilizatioll and change the map ofthe known world. Yet such a power appeared, over­came the armies sent against it, and with unexampled

2 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 3

rapidity took possession of the fairest provinces ofthe East.

Until 'this time Ambia had not played a leadingpart in the drama of history. All carlier knowledgeof this country shows its inhabitants to be scatteredtribes separated by their deserts and by their mutualhostility. Persia and Byzantium had indeed weldedthe clans nearest their borders into petty kingdomswhich they used each to annoy the other. But ofArabia as a single power they did not dream. Oc­casional forays of the bold desert dwellers in searchof booty they were accustomed to suffer. NolU therecame the invasion of a new created nation. Thescattered Bedawin were fired by a single purpose.Attila, the Scourge of God, was overmatched byChalid, the Sword of God, and this terrible weaponhewed the devoted provinces of the East with tire­less energy. Syria and Egypt fell at a single blow.Babylonia and Persia followed in an instant. In lessthan half a centmy from the time when Mohammedfled with a single companion from Mecca, the arms ofhis followers were triumphant from the Oxus to thesite of Carthage. In another half century they hadcrossed the borders of India on the east, and to thewest were checked only by the waves of the Atlantic.Their conquest of Spain and invasion of France arefacts familiar to you, as is the battle of Tours orPoitiers by which Charles Martel preserved to EuropeRoman Christianity and the civilization with whichit was allied.

That such a movement deserves the attention ofall students of history, is the merest truism. Its

i

political importance alone, however, would not makeit the proper subject of this course of lectmes. Whatmakes it appropriate for this place and this occasionis its religious character. in this, to be smc, it is notunique. Many, I might say most, of the great moVe.ments of history have been religious. But few if anyhave shown their religious character so distinctly asthe one before us. It calls itself by a religious namewhen it calls itself Islam, for Islam means resignationto the will of God. . The War cry of the clans whichcrushed the arms of Byzantium was a profession offaith-H There is no God but Allah, and Moham­med is the Apostle of Allah." Islam has never deniedor outgrown its religious character, for the same pro­fession of faith is to this day repeated by one-tenthof the human race. Politically we may think it nolonger formidable, but religiously it seems as strongas ever. With obstinate confidence in its own posses­sion of tho truth it resists tho preaching of the Chris­tian missionary, while itself sending missionaries intoheathen lands. Because of this tenacity it must bereckoned with as a living force. Its dynasties maybecome extinct; its kingdoms may fall into thehands of foreigners; but ideas do not yield to force.Thoyare not subjugated by the heavier artillery orcrushed by the stronger battalions. Material forcesenable Great Britain to govern the empire of theGreat Mogul j they put Holland into possession ofthe Malay archipelago, and give France control of Al.giers. But the real power which holds the hearts ofthe people in all these regions is the idea of Allahand His Apostle. For a long time now we have

flattered ourselves with hopes of the regeneration ofthe East, because a few young men in Constantinoplehave a varnish of Western education and of Westemmanners. The illusion has vanished and we see thatthe mass of the people are living in the ideas of athousand yeal's ago. There may be a more agree­able, there could scarcely be a more convincing, ex­ample of the tenacity of religion.

In a certain sense, our own time is able to appre­ciate the nature of this force as no preceding age hasappreciated it. We have begun to see that there is ascience of religion-a science which deals both withthe history and with the philosophy of religion. Andyet it is too much to say that this point of view isuniversally recognized. Even in the CD.'le of Islam,the attempt is still made to account for the phenomenaby supposing some other force behind them. Themost recent life of Mohammed" tries to explain hismovement as a social rather than a religious revolution.Social distress bulks so largely in our own philosophythat we are tempted to give it an equally large placein the thoughts of other times. It is a sufficientpresent answer to this theory to say that we hearnothing of social claims in connection with the rise andspread of Islam. The cry of the hosts which subduedAsia was not for freedom of land or for relief fromfendal burdens, either of taxation or service; it wasnot a demand for liberty or equality. Some of thesethings were more or less distinctly involved; butthey were only indirectly involved. The formulateddemand of the Moslem army was for the recognition

... Grimme, Mohammed, Erster Teil, Das Leben, MUnster, 18~2.

of Allah as the one God, and of Mohammed as HisApostle. They brought a creed for their watchword,and offered a Bible as their boon. This is where wemay easily find the strength of Islam to-day. Yonmay talk to an intelligent Mohammedan of the benefitsgiven by modern progress. He will aclmowledge thatthe civilization of Europe has some material advan­tages; but, in his heart, he will say that these are onlythe temporary enjoyments of a transitory world, andhe will thank Allah that He has given him the betterpart in the promise of the world to come. To thisday Mecca numbers among its inhabitants men whohave emigrated from the countries where they enjoyedpeace and security under Christian rule-emigrateilbecause they could not feel at home under such rule,in spite of its material advantages, Thcse men de­sire more than material arlvantages-u They desireto study the sacred sciences in a sacred place, tolive in the neighborhood of celebrated and piousscholars or devotees, to do penanco for former trans­gressions, to cleanse their filthy lucre by using itpartly in religious works, or to spend their last daysand to die on holy ground." . This is the testimonyof II man" who had unusual 0ppOl'tunities to knowwhereof he affirms. And all observers who have?ecome acquainted with the real life of the people111 Moslem lands confirm this testimony. The lead­ing force in Eastern society is still religion.

What has been said is enough to show the impor­tance of a study of this great religious movement.The inquirer into the history of mankind cannot

• SnonckMHungronje, Mekka , n., p. 5.

-

4 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM7'llE APOSTLE OF ALLAll 5

-

6 THE BIBLE AND ISLkM THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH

ignore this striking episode.. In ~ny ?f its nume~'ot~saspects, Islam will repay lllvestlgatlOn. But It IS

obvious that, for a single course of lectures, we mustlimit our field; and, for the present course, it is mypurpose to eonsider only the beginnings. The his­tory of a quarter of the globe through a period ofthirteen eenturies, is an immense subject. Internaland external wars, the. rise and fall of dynasties,revolutions, crusades, philosophies, and theologies­these would require many volumes for their adequatetreatment. To get a ele"'r impression, we must limitour field; and the best place to begin is at the begin­ning. We do not ignore the faot that the Islam ofto-day is in many respeots different from the Islamwhioh emorged from the wilderness twelve oenturiesagO. It may be true, as has been olaimed, that onewho studies the Koran and thinks himself acquaintedwith the Islam of to-dny, is as far wrong as he wouldbe who should study the Gospels and think himseliaoquainted with the Christianity of Hildebrand orof Pius the Ninth. We need to oaution ourselves atthis point, anil not to assume that what is true ofMohammed and Omar is true also of the now rul­ing Sultan. But, when all is said, we know a gooildeal about a system when we know its beginnings.The stream is purest at its souree. Prineiples aresimpler when they first show their activity. Laterdevelopments may obscure them, but oannot changetheir essence. The later developments are betterunderstood by the mastery of the earlier and simplerstages. And what is true in genel'al is true, in avery special sense, of the movement before us. The

r,

religion of Mohammed developed with great rapidity.During the lifetime of its founder it passed throughthe stages whioh Christianity took three centuries totraverse. In one sense this is a disadvantage. Thegrowth would have been more healthy if it had beenmore deliberate. But it adds to the importance ofthe earliest period when this period contains so much.It is only the natural result that the dogmatic systemof Islam not only assumed its final shape at a veryearly date, but that it adhered to one type with greattenacity. Development there was;' but the develop­ment eady became seetarian. The offieial, orthodoxdogma overoame the seots, and this orthodox dogmawas only the oodifioation of ideas already prevalentin the first oentury of the Flight. For these reasonsknowledge of the origin of Islam is the knowledgeof the whole system, more truly than is the oase inany other of the great historio religions.

But we must still further limit our inquiry. A gen­eral sketoh of the rise of Mohammedanism would nodoubt be of great interest, but it would still requiremore spMe than we oan givo it. 'Ve must ohoose someone of its many aspeots, and fix our attention uponthis single point, in the hope that the smallness of thefield will eonduee to clearness in the picture. Now,the point which I propose to oxamine is the influencewhich the Old and New Testaments have exertedupon this religion whieh is neither Judaism norChristianity, though it shows suoh eurious resem­blanoes to both. These resemblanoes foroe them­solvos upon the notioe of evon the most superficialobserver. Never was there a religion so little origin:tl

-

8 TON BIBLN ANIJ ISLAM TilE APOSTLE OJ!' ALLAH

as this one. The dependence of one religion uponanother is, however, not a rare phenomenon. Relig­ious ideas emigrate more rapidly than the religionsof which they are a part. All the religions of whichwe have competent knowledge, not excepting thereligion of Israel, show foreign influence. The godsand myths of Greece were emigrants from Asia;J mlaism borrowed from BabyIonia; Christianity builtupon the foundation inherited from Judaism. It isnot strange, therefore, that Islam should use bothJewish and Christian ideas. So far from the lack oforiginality being a reason for ignoring the study ofthis religion, we may say .. that it is a special reasonfor studying it. Here is a great fact-the migrationof religious beliefs. It is set before us in a strikingexample. Every consideration urges us to its closeand ·attentive examination.

In examining the dependence of Islam upon thee"rlier religions we are met at the outset by onecapital difficulty. Islam we know; the sources flolVfor us with greater copiousness than is true of anyother religion. But the Judaism anel Christianityof Arabia are almost unknown quantities. Therewas Judaism in Arabia. We suppose that it con­formed in general to the type of othor post·biblic"lJudaism. But how far it may have been affectedby its surroundings is hard for us to say. Therewas Christianity in Arabia. But of its characterwe are even more ignorant than we are of ArabianJudaism. It seems quite certain that it was not theChristianity of the Gl'eek Church. In all prob­ability it existed in the form of some of the sects

stigmatized by the theologians as heretical. ThetYfJe of h~resy represented, however, c,m be onlyfamtly con~ectured. Now, in this state of ignorance,we are oblIged to seek some fixed point and thisfixed point can be no other than the Bible. What­eyer :he J ud~ism of Arabia had, or had not, we m'esafe m assumlllg that it had the Hebrew Bible. Inlike manner, it is true of the Christianity of Ambiathat it had a Bible, which, for the most part, was thesame as the one which we ourselves hold sacred.For the comparison which we propose to make theonly practicable thing to do is to note what Biblicalfeatures appear in the religion of Mohammed. It is,of course, perfectly legitimate to note the form whichthese features assume in their new combination. Ifthese are suoh as appear elsewhere in the Judaismof the Talmud, it will be perfectly legitimate to as­sume that Talmudic influence was at work. If theNew Testament influences appear olouded by thetendencies which show themselyes in the ApocryphalGospels, we shall conclude that these tendencieswere at work among the nominal Christians of Ambia.Nevertheless, the featUl'es which we seek are Biblicalin their substance and their origin. Our two knownquantities are the Bible and the sources of Islam.

It is signiflCllnt at the very outset to notice thatMohammed, the founder of Islam, designated him­self by two words borrowed from the Scriptures.One was borrowed directly in the Hebrew form­naby-and waS intended to rank him with the OldT~stament organs of revelation, the prophets of thatdlsponsation. The other, rasul, was the trl1llslation of

the New Testament word which we render apostle,and was equally intended to class him with the 01'­

gr<lls of revelation in the Christian Church. We see,therefore, that the very terms in which the founderof the new religion announced himself expressed hisadoption of Hebrew and Christian ideas. And that,with the words which he adopted, he had the Biblicalidca is made plain by many passages of the Koran:" We have sent thee with the truth, as a bringer oftidings and a warner." * The prophets and apostlesare well described by this word, for it was their workto warn their people of the judgments of God. It isevident, therefore, that Mohammed's starting-pointwas the fundamental position of revealed religion­that God speaks through chosen men, to make Hiswill known to the world. This position is the keyto his activity.

There are thinkers, however, to whom it is incom­prehensible that a man should, in all honesty, putforward a claim to speak as the messenger of God.They are compelled to seek some ulterior motive forhis activity. The whole mediroval world was ofcourse incapable of understanding the Prophet ofIslam. The only thing which those centuries couldsee was that Mohammed was the deadly enemy oftheir civilization. They could explain his impulseonly as the direct act of Satan. In truth, the hordesof fiercs and savage warriors which poured fromArabia and overran a l!1l'ge part of· the known world,must have made upon their victims the impression

'" Koran 2IU, cf. 488, Olll, It should be noticed that God is uni..formly the speaker in the Koran.

:I< The reverse opinion-that the Mohammedans were God's instru­ments of punishment for heresy or Bchism-was also maintained.Cf. KeUer, Det(' Geisteskampj des Olwistmtums gegen den islam,1896, pp. 12, 56.

t My copy is of the seventh edition, London, 1818 but the pref-a.ce is dated 1606··91. '

that hell had let loose all its demons. According tothe prevalent theory of Chl'istian writers down tovery recent times, therefore, Mohammed was themost distinguished instrument of Satan.* Anti­christ is one of the names frequently applied to him.At the present day we may fairly regard this view asantiquated. Satan is not a preacher of truth, and wecan hardly doubt that Mohammed was sincere inpreaching the truth.

The seventeenth century had another explanationof the career of Mohammed. This explanation isexplicitly stated in a treatise by the celebrated Dr.Prideaux, entitled, "The True Nature of Imposture,Fully Displayed in the Life of Mahomet." t Thepolemic nature of this tract (for it is little more) issufficiently indicated in its title. The author con­ceives Mohammed to be moved by a desire to regaina?cestr~l honors and wealth, which had been lost byhis family. "These considerations meeting with anambitious, aspiring mind, soon put him upon de­signs of raising himself to the supreme governmentof the country; and being a very subtile, craftyman, after having maturely weighed all ways andmeans whereby to bring this to pass, [he] conclndednone so likely to effect it as the framing of that im­posture which he afterward vented with so much

10 THE BIBLE AND ISLAMTIlE APOSTLE OF ALLAIl 11

12 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE APOSTLE a}' ALLAH 13

mischief to the world." * The authOl' of the treatise,therefore, supposes Mohammed to go deliberately towork and frame a new religion as a means to theroyal power, Substantially the same theory was 001'­

ried out in the Bampton Lectures of 1784, whiehhave for their subject: "A Comparison of Mahomet­anism and Christianity in their History, their Evi­denees and their Effects." In these lectures it isthroughout assumed that the founder of Islam was animpostor, who, "by the mere force of a bold and fer­tile genius, assisted by a concunence of circumstancesuniversally auspicious to his design, was enabled toobtain the most unbounded empire over the minds,as well as persons, of a very large portion of man­kind." t It is intel'esting to note that the positiontaken by these writers, who were moved thereto bythe desire to defend Christianity, was also taken byVoltaire, who embodied it in his tragedy: "Le Fan­atisme, ou Mahomet Ie Prophete.":\: By the author'sowu letter of dedication, this tragedy was directedagainst an imposture which brought into play thehypocrisy of some and the fury of others. In theplay itself Mohammed is made to confess the ambi­tion that is his motive. He is made to see with the

'" Prideaux, I. (lo, p. 7.t Joseph White, 8e'lwwns preached beJo1'e the University of Oa;~

ford in the year 1784 at the Lecture founded by the Rev. JohnHampton, M.A. Second Edition. London, 1811, p. 47. Cf. alsop. 85, where Mohammed is described as the impostor" whose falseand impious pretences to divine revelation were . . . crownedwith success,"

~ (Eu.res Comptetes de Voltaire, 1785, Tome III. The Tragedywas fir8t acted August 9, 1742.

eye of a modern historian, and discovel's that Persiais feeble and Byzantium tottering. It is now theturn of Arabia to step upon the scene of action, anderect a monarchy npon the ruins of these. To securethis end a new religion is the best means, and for thisend it is invented.*

Neither the English churchman nor the French~eptic had the key to Islam. Both judged the mo­tIve from the event. History shows US however

f . "very ew mstances in which the course of great move-ments was foreseen by those who originated them.Mohammed was no exception to the rule j in fact, hehad less than the average prescience of what was tocome. To show this, we nced only look at the out­line of his life.

It seems well established that throughout his earlymanhood, and until middle life, Mohammed showedno special ambition and nO special capacity. Weknow very little of this period of his life, except thathe w~? an orpha~ a~d poor, until his marriage withChadlJa placed hIm lU easy circumstances. He hadestabli?hed a character for honesty, for he was calledt";e Fmtliful. But his religion was the religion of hisCIty, as is abundantly shown by the fact that henamed a son Abd Mena! for one of the heathen dei­ties. When about forty years old t the crisis of his

*Op. cu. Acto n., Scene v.t I give the traditional data. Grent uncertn.inty hangs over Mo·

ha~med'8 ,early life, especia.lly over the chronology. For theepIthet Fadhful Bee: Das Leben lIfohwJnmed's nach /lfoham1Mcl lbnIshak otarbeitet 'Von Ibn II1.'seharn, iibtrsetzt 'Von Dr. GU8tatJ Weil.Stuttgart, 1864-, I., p. !H, and Sprenger, Leben Mohammeds, I"p. 526. Tho name Abd MenU for Mohammed'13 Bon is given by

--------------...;...-.---

MUller, Dcr Islam im lIforgen-und Abenillande, L, p. 48; and thetradition tbatMohammed offered a white sheep to the goddess Uzzah,by Wellhau1geU, Skizzen und Vo,.,wbeiten, III" p. 30.

life came. He passed through a severe spiritualconfiict, and, at the end of it, came forth as a preacher.He began to reason with his countrymen concerningrighteousness and a judgment to come, and, at realrisk to himself, denounced their idolatry as contraryto the will of God. Before attributing interestedmotives to such a man we should have clear and con­vincing proofs. As to his personality, the impressionmade upon us by the records of this early ministry,and to a considerable extent confirmed by his laterhistory, is that of a modest, retiring man. He was,even when in possession of power, rather reticent,shrinking from prominent activity, lacking in deci­sion. The internal conflict from which he sufferedwas brought about by what he felt was a call topreach. His conscience urged him to obey, buthis natural timidity held him back. In all this hebetrays no deep -laid scheme of any kind. Hewould apparently have been satisfied with the con­version of his native city, and would have been con­tent to leave the government in the hands of the·chiefs who already possessed it. The singleness ofhis motive was indicated moreOV!'lr by his steadfast­ness through years of negleet, contempt, abuse, andeven persecution. The Meccans had no special ob­jection to his religion so long as it was simply a per­sonal matter. They would have been quite contentto have him get salvation in his own way, if only hewould not preach against the publicly established

worship. But it was precisely this which Moham­med felt called to do. The chiefs of the Meccanscame to Abu Talib (Mohammed's uncle and protec­tor) and complained of the preaching, whereupon theuncle remonstrated with his nephew. Mohammedsupposed that he was going to lose the protection ofthe clan, in which case his life wonld not have beensafe for an hour. Nevertheless, he said, with tears inhis eyes: "Though the sun at my right hand and themoon at my left were to command me to give up thismatter, I would not give it up."*

In this persistence in his calling Mohammed is notunworthy of being compared with the Old Testamentprophets. He reminds us of Jeremiah, who was com­manded to preach though he was told that the kingsof Judah, and the princes, priests, and people wonldfight against him. The parallel with some of the OldTestament prophets is the more exact in that Moham­med was apparently slow of speech. In his privatelife he was taciturn. That when he spoke in publi(lhe had difficulty in expressing his thought, seemsevident from the phenomena of the Koran. The fre­quent repetition of the same thoughts, and even thesame phrases, shows lack of facility. In many pas­sages we are compelled to think that he was not ableto express his thought with clearness. He is fondof figures and metaphors, yet he rarely succeeds incarrying one out oonsistently. He was far from beinga natural orator, and he would have been strangelyself-deceived if he had supposed that his eloquencewould make his countrymen subservient to his de-

*Wei1, Ibn llisckam, 1" P' 125.

14 TEE BIBLE AND ISLAMTEE APOSTLE OF' ALLAH 15

signs. And his experienoe is just in line with theother evidenoe on this head. His oountrymen hadsmall patience with his harangues. They stigmatizedthem as the ravings of one possessed, or as the fablesof the ancients. Putting these indioations togetherwe must agree with an eminent authority on this sub­ject* when he says: "He was not a master of thelanguage-which explains the frequent repetitions inthe Koran. He oomposed with diftioulty; he rarelyfound at onoe the word which oorrectly expressed histhought. He tried it therefore in different ways, andhenoe we find the same ideas recur continually inthe Koran, only in different words. More than oneexample shows us that the prophet did not findthe appropriate form until after repeated attempts."'fhe matter coneerns us here only so far as it affeotsthe sinoerity of Mohammed. All the indications pointhim out as one of the last men to attempt a oareerwhioh should make him play the part of an orator.

Looking at him more closely, it may be oonfessedwithout hesitation that Mohammed was not a man afterthe pattern whioh most oommends itself to us. Hispersonality is one of the most diffioult to comprehendin all history, for it seems to us to unite oontradio­tory traits. Frugality aud lavishness, temperanceand sensual groBBness, indeoision and firmness, gen­tleness and oruelty, piety and treachery, all appearby turns; and the opposites are often in immediatejuxtaposition. It is diffioult for uS modern men of theAryan race to oombine these features in a single piot-

* Dozy, Essai sur l'Histoire de II!slam1'sme, Traduit par Chauvin,Leyde et Paris, 187n, p. 119.

ure.. It is no more than a oommonplace to say that aSemIte, a Bedawy, an Arab brought up in heathenism,must be measured by the Semitio standard of twelvehundred years ago. That, measured by this standardhe .was no ordinary man is olear from the influenc~WhlOh he exerted during his life, and whioh has onlyincreased since his death. To the present day, theProph~t enters into the life of his fOllowe,s to an ex­te~t difticult for us to imagine. Nearly all bookswrItten by Moslems contain in the prefaoe a eulogyof Mohammed-even works of the imagination likethe Arab!an Nights. Onoe a year the birthday of theProphet IS oelebrated by the Moslem world and it isthe uni:,ersa! cust?m to heal' the story of his life, orP?e~s 10 Ins praIse. The number of biographies ofhIm IS very great j almost every Arabic author of notehas written pne. To cast a slur on the name of Mo.hammed in a Moslem country will exoite a mob muohmore oertainly than blasphemy of the name of Jesusw!ll exoite one in any Ohristian country. The Ara­bl0 press oontinues to issue yearly new biographies orbooks of devoti~n, in whioh the exemplary characterof the Prophet IS set forth for the imitation of thefait?ful. Even in Mecoa, where one would expeotfeehng.to ?e made oallous to this theme by loug use,the remtatlOn of a poem in his honor oalls forth sighsand tears of longing: *

" My heart yearns, 0 Apostle of God to theeBut Ahl I am heavy luden with ~lY Bins.l~"

It need not be denied that in this devotion there is*Snouck~Hul'gronje, Mckka l II" p. 74.

~

16 THE BIBLE AND ISLAMTHE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 17

18 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE APOSTLE OF' ALLAH 111

something of superstition. The Bedawin, like mostpeople in a comparatively low state of civilization,are prone to reverence saints. And when we read howthe people in Mohammed's campaigns would take thewater in which he had performed his ablutions andrub it on their hands and faces, we confess that hewas the object of an unreasoning devotion. But thisis recorded only of the later years of his life, whenhis following was increased by the scarcely converteddesert tribes, to whom a prophet was only a sooth­sayer 01' magician under another name. The earlyand more intimate companions of the Prophet were notof this class. Omar impresses us as one of the san­est, clearest headed men that eyer liyed. Abu Beh',also, though a man of tender religious sensibilities,possessed a sober and practical common-sense, farremoved from fanaticism. That this was not meresuperstitious devotion to a supposed wonder-workingwizard which Mohammed called forth, is evident fromothers besides these intimate friends. When SaadIbn Rabia lay on· the battle-field in the article ofdeath, he said to a friend who watched by him; "Iam dying; greet the Apostle of Allah for me andsay; God reward thee for what thou hast done forus, as He rewarded the other prophets. Greet alsothe Helpers for me and say; God will not forgivethem if harm comes to theil' prophet." In one of thec:>mpaigns Zeid Ibn al-Dathana was taken captiveand brought to },Iooca, where he waS put to death.Just bofore he was executed one of the spect:>torsasked: "Would you not rather be with your familyand that Mohammed should be in your place here? "

Tho reply was: "I would not have Mohammedprioked with a thorn if thereby I might be in safetywith my family." Nowhere was this loyalty moreevident than when there was a real gJ-·ievance. In oneof his later campaigns Mohammed disposed of thebooty in a manner that quite overlooked the o!l\imsof his veteran followers. Their murmurs eame to hisears, aud gathering them around hhn he spoke a fewwords of reoognition. All hearts turned to him andthe Helpers * broke down in teal's, crying : We arecontent with our portion and our lot. Another ex­ample reoalls to us the chivalry of Uriah the Hittite.Abu Chaithama oame home from the army to fetchgrain. The day was hot, and his wives had pitohedthe tents in the shade of his garden. They alsosprinklod them for coolness and prepared refreshingmeat and drink. He looked at it all and said; "TheApostle of Allah is exposed to the sun and the windand the heat; and shall I spend my time with mywife in the cool shade before a spread table? Thatis not right. I will not enter your tent but followMohammed." He tumed away and as soon as his grainwas ready he mounted his eamel and went his way.t

These examples, whioh might easily be multiplied,show that it was not mere superstition which drewfollowers to the Prophet. They felt that this manhad brought them real benefit, and their hearts weredrawn not only by the benefit they had experienoedbut also by the qualities of the man. Some of these

I« The Helpers (An9ar) are the people of Medina who welcomedMohammed when he fled from Meecll.

t Thcsp ~xample8 are taken from Weil, lbn Hischam, pp. 81, 71,252, 261.

20 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE APOS1'LE OF ALLAH 21

qualities we can appreciate. For one thing, he wasmodest in his opinion of himself. When he first cameto Medina and saw the people fertilizing the pistillatepalms with sprigs of the staminate blossoms, he re­marked that it might be as well not to do it. Here.­upon some of the people left off, and when their cr?psof dates came short, they naturally reproached hIm.He made no defence, but confessed that he wasfallible except where divinely guided. Although hisfollowers persisted in discovering miracles wroughtby him, he expressly declared his inability to workthem, and that in a passage which reveals his greatdesire to work them: "I cannot provide myself withwhat is useful or [ward off) what is hurtful except asGod wills. If I knew the secret things I would de­sire great good, and evil should not touch me; but Iam only a warner and bringer of tidings to a peoplewho believe." * According to an early tradition hedeprecates extravagant honors: H Praise me not asJesus the son of Mary is praised; call me the servantof God and His Apostle." t When one of his follow­ers and a Jew were disputing about the comparativemerits of their respective prophets, Mohammed said:" Do not put me above Moses." He had, moreover,a distinct sense of his own sinfulness. Ayesha askedhim: Do none enter Paradise except through thefavor of God? No! he replied, none enter but throughGod's favor. The question was asked and answered

* Koran 7188, and cf. 636 d at. In Bochari, III., p. 149, Mo~

hammed intimates that his jUdgment in legal decisions is not In­fallible.

t Cited by Goldziher, MlIhammedanische StucUen, II., p. 219.

three times. Then she said: You, also, 0 Prophet,will not you enter but by God's compassion? Puttinghis hand upon his head he replied: I also shall notenter unless God cover me with His mercy.* Theconsciousness of sin was, in fact, the starting-pointof his religion. His prayers always contained a peti­tion for forgiveness. He desired the intercession ofhis friends, as lie in turn interceded for them. Thathe also laid the case of his enemies before God, andinvoked punishment upon them need cause llll nosurprise·t

Mohammed was gentle and considerate in his inter­course with men. He rebukes himself in the Koranbecause in his anxiety to conciliate a nobleman, heonce turned away from a poor blind man who wishedto inquire of him.t A poor negro who swept themosque at Medina died and was buried without theProphet being informed. On hearing of it later, herebuked those who had neglected to tell him, inquiredfor the grave, and prayed over it as he was acc~­

tomed to do for his friends.§ The support of IllS

household was often a matter of anxiety to him, buthe was always miudful of those more needy, so thatit waS not without ground that his followers calledhim the protector of orphans and the defence of thepoor. More surprising, in an oriental, is his kindnesstowi1rd animals. Although the dog is unclean of the

• MisMal ul Ma,.bik (Engll.h tran.lation), r., p. 260.fBocka"i, r., p.140; II., p. 14.tKoran 801 f, This is the traditional occasion for _the passage.

Grimme objects to the tradition) but I see no eufficient reason forrejecting it.

§ Bochari, II., p. 84.

-

22 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE APOSTLE OF' ALLAH 23

Moslem, as he is to the Jew, yet Mohammed praisedthe man who showed kindness to a thirsty dog.* Hepromised a reward also to the man who watered astray camel, and, consistently with this, he threateneda woman with hell because she had starved a cat.t

Quite as prominent as his kindness was the goodsense he showed in matters where, if he were a fanatic,he might be expected to be extreme. At one time heinclined to ascetic devotion, and stood in prayer solong that his feet swelled, or so long that their skincracked and they bled. But when his followersshowed similar excess of zeal, he restrained them,saying: The body has a claim on you.t Although notwithout superstition himself, he discouraged it inothers even where it might have seemed to his advan­tage to connive at it. The day that his infant sonIbrahim died, there was an eclipse of the sun. TheMoslems were inclined to connect the two events.But Mohammed said: "No I the sun is not eclipsedfor the death of any human being j eclipses are amongthe mimcles of God j when you see them, engage inprayer."

If Mohammed shows many attractive personal... "When a man journeys and hiB thirst consumes him and he

comes to a well and drinks, then comes away and seca fL famisheddog gnawing the dirt in his thirst, and says: This animal is in thecondition in which I was j then fiUs his boot and holds its mouthand comes and gives the dog to drink-God rewards Buch a manand forgives him. The people said: 0, Apostle of Allah, do wereceive a reward in the matter of animals? He replied: For everyanimal [literary: IO'J' every moist liver] there is a reward."~Boahari,IlL, p. 71. Cf. also WeBhauscu'a Vakidi, p. 327.

t Mishcat, II" p. 4-2.j Bo'hari, II., pp. 41, 226.

characteristics, hs shows also many that are repul­sive, especially to our age. That they were not ob­noxious in the eyes of his own age is evident from thevery devotion which we have been considering. Thestandard of the times was not very elevated. Mterthe battle of Ohod, Hind, the wife of one of Moham­med's enemies, songht out among the slain the bodyof Hamza, Mohammed's uncle, who had fallen in theMoslem cause. Having found it, she cut off the noseand ears, which she made into bracelets. She thentore open the trunk and cut out the liver, which shehad vowed to eat. Although she was not able tooarry out the vow, the whole scene casts a lurid lightupon the state of society in which Mohammed grewnp. In such a society, the faults which are so prom­inent to us did not attract sel'ious attention. It isalways difficult to say just how far a man should bejudged by the standard of his own times. But wemay fairly claim that any indulgence granted to Bibli­cal heroes on this plea should be granted also to Mo­hammed. The state of Arabia in the seventh centurywas not unlike the state of Canaan two millenniumsearlier. The assassinations prompted by Mohammedshould be judged as we judge the deeds of Ehud andJ ael. His slaughter of the Jews stands by the sideof Joshua's extermination of the Canaanites. Hisindulgence in wives was not more profuse thanDavid's, and fell far short of Solomon's luxury. LikeDavid, he coveted his neighbor's wife, but he did notmurder her husband, and he did not take posseRsionof her until she had been divorced. He cursed hisenemies, but so did the Psalmist; and the plea made

24 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

!THE APOS2'LE OF ALLAH 25

for the Psalmist, that the objects of his imprecationswere the enemies of the cause of God, was preciselythe plea that Mohammed would have made in allsincerity.

These things are not said as a justification. Triedby any standard the Prophet of Mecca falls short ofperfection. But if we are to appreciate his work wemust not let his faults blind us to his real character.That character is defined when we say he was a sin­cerely religious man. "Did you kuow what I know(he is reported to have said)-did you know what Iknow of the future state, you would laugh little andweep much." * This sentence gives us the key to hislife and to his power. He had a vivid sense of thegreat verities-the being of God, the evil of sin, thefuture life. He succeeded in impressing these uponthe movement of which he was the head, and theymake it what it is-one of the great religions of thewodd.

Before we proceed further it will be necessary todefine the sources from which we get our knowledgeof Islam. The difficulty which confronts us is the em­barrassment of riches. Islam has a long history anda copious literature. In the course of its history ithas developed sectal'ian differences, as great as thosewhich divide professing Christians. Seventy-threesects of Mohammcdans wore long ago counted, andin the number was found the fulfillment of a proph­ecy ascribed to Mohammed.t But as we have limited

• Mish<al, 1., p. 321.t The tradition appears in different forms: "The Banu Israel

were divided into seventy-two tribes, and mypeople will be seventy-

our inquiry to the origin and early stages of Islam,sectarian differences do not concern us. For this in­quiry, one document is of the very first importanceand that document is, of course, the Koran. Thi~book is recognized by all parties of Moslems as thefoundation of their faith. Even if there were doubtas to its integl'ity and its authenticity it would stillbe of prime importance for the history of Islam. Butthere is no reaSon to suspect either its integrity er itsauthenticity. The assurances we have on this pointare very complete. The prime fact is that the reve­lations were committed to memory by a large body ofconverts during the life of ~fohammed. He empha­sized this as a meritorious act, and thereby increasedthe number of living custodians of the word. Thebook was formally edited and published soon afterhis death, and when divergences began to appear inthe copies of this edition, a new one was publishedwith new safeguards for its correctness. There canbe no reasenable doubt that the copies in our handscorrespond very closely with this original, and thatthis original does not vary in any important partic­ular from the text recited by Mohammed himself.This does not mean that we have the complete bodyof what he published. Some revelations have prob­ably perished; others were worked over and changedby Mohammed him'self. But we may rest assured

three. Everyone will go to hell except one."-Mishtat, I., .p. 50.The more elaborate form gives the Zoroastrians seventy sects theJews seventy-one, Christians seventy-two, and Islam seventy-three.Dozy, l'Islarnisme, p 196. HaarbrUcker, Schah1'astani's Religions­parlhet'en und Ph'Uosophenschulm (1850),1" p.3. The tradition isno doubt un invention.

that what we have in this volume represents histhought as he uttered it during some part of hiscareer.

It is well known that the Koran is regarded as theBook of God, in the strictest sense. God appearsthroughout as the speaker, and the devout Moslemhas the most exalted idea of its excellence. " Peopleare not assembled together in mosques to read theBook of God without light and comfort descendingupon them; the favor of God covers them, angelsencompass them rouud about, and God reckons themamong His angels." * This tradition, ascribed toMohammed, correctly represents his idea, aud that ofhis fo11owers. He is reported to have said further:" The most illustrious of my fo11owers are those whoknow the Koran by heart, and those who pray in thenight." t When a number of Moslems had fallenin battle, those among them who knew the most ofthe Koran were most honored in their burial. Omarexpressed surprise that one of his governors shouldappoint a freedman to an important office. Whentold that the man knew the Koran, he approved theappointment. Mohammed challenged his contempo­raries to produce a single chapter equal to his in ex­cellence, and it is noW an article of faith that thechallenge cannot be met. All these are indications ofthe fundamental importanco of this book.

When we come to the Koran for information, how­ever, we are much perplexed, for we find it to be abook without form or plan. It is a collection of dis-

THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

lie A sura is one of the divisioD8 (chapters) of tbe Koran.. Theword seems to be borrowed from the Hebrew, where it meant a rowof stones in a wall. The principle of arrangement, if we lnaycall it so, is not applied with lJ,bsolute rigor. The first Bura. ia ashort one.

connected compositions, which were uttered at inter­vals during a period of more than twenty years. Whenthey were written down, no pains were taken to indi­cata date or occasion of composition. Fragments ofdifferent dates were joined to make a single chapter,or new sections were interpolated in chapters alreadycomplete. When the final redaction was mooe, itwas altogether mechanical in its arrangement. Theonly principle discoverable is that the longest chap­ters come first and the shortest last. Within theseveral chapters the transitions are abrupt and with­out apparent motive, and when we add that therepetition of set phrases is a standing feature, we arenot surprised that, to the Western mind, the book isunattractive and its study anything but a pleasure.For our present purpose, however, these drawbacksdo not weigh so heavily as they would if our purposewere purely historical. For a life of Mohammed it. 'IS a great disadvantage not to be able to date thesul'as.* But our present inquiry is less concernedwith the progressive ,stages of the Prophet's thought,than with the total of his religion. We might almostsay that it is not of so much importance for us todiscover what he meant as it is to discover what hiscontemporaries supposed him to mean. For it isthis which has mooe Islam what it is. What theysupposed him to mean we can generally discover, for

27TIlE APOSTLE OF ALLAH

tIhid., p. 264.II< Alishcat, 1'1 p. 55.

26

exegetical tradition is, in its main features, constant.In one respect we are better off than the exegetesthemselves, for they are under a dogmatic bias fromwhich we are free.

Seccnd to the Koran-but second to it alone-wehave auother source for the knowledge of Islam ina great body of traditions concerning the Prophet.To understand the place which it occupies we needonly recall the position of the Moslem com~unityafter the death of Mohammed. Up to that tIme, hehad been accustomed to answer every question thatarose. He was the law. When he was taken away,they still had a law in the Koran. But this was notenough. No book of rules can provide for every casethat may arise. Mohammed, moreover, ha~ ~lwaysleft something to oral teaching. It was not hIS lUten­tion that the Koran alone should be the rule of life.His own example was to be a guide, as is expresslystated in the Koran itself.* In a tl'l1dition, he isreported as saying: "What I have commanded tobelievers outside the Koran is equal in quality tothe Koran itself, or even greater." l' Whether the tra­dition is authentic or not, it undoubtedly representsthe consensus of Mohammedan opinion. From it wecan understand the anxiety to preserve the remem­brance of Mohammed's deeds and words.

The neccssity of collecting the traditions was notsimply private or pel'Sonal. Questions arose con-

* H The Apostle of Allah is an excellent pattern to him whofeatS Allah and the I.ast Day." (33~1.) The tradition confirme tIde.-Boc:hari, II., 152.

t /lfishcat, I" p. 48.

cerning the state. Public law and administrationhad to be dealt with in just the same way asmatters of individual right and wrong. If thesequestions were not answered by the Koran, theymust be answered in some other way. Here, too,the most natural recourse was the precedents set bythe original ruler. 'fhere was, to be sure, a possi­bility of arguing by analogy, and so of making thewritten law cover cases which were not directly pro­vided for. But analogy is not always convincing,and the jurists early showed their distrust of it.*Even with the best will in the world, the Koran couldnot be made to decide every question that arose.

'fhese considerations show the importance whichtradition early assumed in the public and privatelife of the Moslem. It is not different in other relig­ions. The Jews have their Talmud for an authorityalong with the Bible. The early Church recognizedApostolic tradition as part u; the rule of faith, andeven those modern ehurchcs which have discardedtradition, find the need of Oonfessions, Oanons, andBooks of Discipline. In like manner thcre stands bythe side of the Koran a body of tradition, almostequally venerated and more exactly obeyed. Theprocess in this case stands in the clear light of his­tory. When, immediately after the death of Moham­med, all Arabia seemed to revolt from Islam, attemptswere made to treat with Abu Bekr for new conditionsof peace. But the Caliph was like iron in maintain­ing what the Prophet had imposed-" If they with.hold a kid from that which the Prophet required of

'" Cf. Goldziher. Die Zahv,.iitn (1884), p. ~ ff.

28 TIlE BIBLE .AND ISLAM

j

!TIlE .APOS1'LE OF ALLAIl 29

30 THE BIBLE AND ISLAH THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 31

them, I will deolare war," was his deolaration.* Theprecedent was decisive. Henceforth the example ofthe Prophet was law to the whole of Islam.

The consequence could easily be foreseen. Theintellectual activity of the new religion was turnedto two subjects-the study of the Koran and thecollection of traditions. This was the beginning ofMoslem science, and seldom has science had moredevoted disciples. For two centuries the tradition­ists pursued their task, undisturbed by the storm ofwar which raged about them. They collected andpreserved from the Helpers and Companions all thatthese could remember of the sayings and deeds ofthe Prophet. They took at second, third, and fourthhand all that was alleged to have come from theHelpers and Companiolls. The result was an enor­mous mass of material, which the more eal'llest and lessbiassed minds saw must be proved and sifted. Ofthe zeal in collecting, we have an example in GabirIbn Abdullah, who went a month's journey to heara single tradition.t Not a few journeyed from oneend of the Mohammedan world to the other for thosake of this knowledge. What was done in the wayof testing and editing may be judged from the state­ment of Boohari that from six hundred thousandtraditions he had seleoted only a little over seventhousand·t

.. Kremer, Kultlwgesohickte des Orients unte'1' den Ol~alifen

(1875), 1., p. 14.t Bochari, I., p. 25.~ The system of traditional science is set forth by Professor

Salisbury in n paper entitled Conm'butions to our Knowledge of

It is apart from our present pUll'0se to go atlength into the subject of tradition. Yet to illustratethe pains taken by Mohammedans in preserving therecollections of their prophet, I will venture to quote asingle example. It reads as follows: " Adam Ibn AbiIyas tells us that Shayban tells us from Mansur fromMujahed from Taus from Ibn Abblis (God be pleasedwith both of them) that the Prophet (God bless andsave him) said on the day of the surrender of Mecoa:There is no more [duty of] Flight, but the Holy Warand the Intention; and when you are called to theHoly War, then go!" * The substance of the tradi­tion is here a saying of the Prophet. But it mightbe as well, an aotion of his or a refusal to act, or hissilenoe. The meaning of the saying here given isthat, whereas beforo the conquest of Mecca, thererested upon believers an obligation to flee from thatcity as Mohammed himself had done, the obligationwas now abrogated. But the merit of the actionwill be acquired by him who engages in war withunbelievers, or who sets his mind to accomplish theend which could formerly be reached only by flight,that is, to avoid temptation to apostasy. The im­portance of preserving such a dictum will be scen atonce.the &ienc;t. of Muslim Tradition in the Journal of the AmericnDOriental Society, Vol. VII. (1860), pp. 60-142.

Six c.ollection$ of traditions enjoy favor among tIle Moslems. Icannorclaim a.cquaintance with any but Bochnri, for which I ha.veused the vocalized version, Bulak, without date. I cite from tbilfby volume and page, as the traditions are not numbered. I haveread, also, Captain Matthew's English translation of the 1J{ishcat~ul·

It/asabih, Calcutta, 1809, 1810, two volumes, quarto.* Boahari, IV., p. 35. The same traditionl II., p. 197.

32 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 33

Equally important is it that the diotum should beknown to oome from Mohammed. And it was with thedesire to assure this, that the traditionists preservedin every case the chain of witnesses who reported thetradition. In the case cited, the saying went throughsix h'mds before it reached the author who put it onpaper. It is obvious that defective memory or lackof veracity on the part of anyone of these wouldvitiate thc credibility of the tradition. The Moham.medan authors are well aware of this, and the criticalactivity which resulted in the rejection of so large anumher of traditions consisted largely in an exami.nation of the credibility of the narrators. That theeditol'S were not free from bias in their decisions isonly what we might expeot. They were novices inthe scienoe of criticism, and could hardly be expectedrightly to weigh tendoncies whioh our own time hasonly begun to appreciate. In truth the Hadith*must be regarded with marked scepticism, so far asit is used as a source for the life of Mohammed.The forgery or invention of traditions began veryearly. The Companions were not always too scrupu.lous to clothe their own opinions in the form of anec­dotes. The greatest number of traditions are relatedby men who were very young when the Prophet cameto Medina. One of these defends himself for re­membering so many things that others could not re­callt-a oase whero scH-oxouso is seH-acousation. To

.. Hadith is the technicnl term for a tradition of whatever kind.Sunna is customary law, generally, but not necessarily, based ontradition. Cf. Goldziher) Afuhammedanische Stu€Uen, 11., p. 11.

t Bochan" Hr., p. 2.

invent what would cast honor on the name of theApostle of God would seem to those times a merito.rious fault, if fault at all, while there would be evenstronger temptation to suppress anything that wouldnot comport with his reputation. The same Com­panion (Abu Horaira) who defended himself for theprofuseness of his memory, also confessed that he hadtwo sorts of recollections; one sort he was acous­tomed to relate, but it would have been as much ashis life was worth to relate to others. These naturaltendencies were magnified by the party spirit whichearly became rife in Islam. Eaoh party countedamong its adherents immediate followers of Moham·med. Eaoh was anxious to justify itself by an appealto his words and deeds. It is only the natural resultthat traditions with a notoriously party bias were cir.culated at an early day. A traditionist of the firstrank admits that pious men were inolined to no sortof fraud so muoh as to the inveution of traditions.*The jurists moreover found that new legal prece.dents wore almost a neoessity, and (as in other sys­tems of law) fiction was used as a means of adapt·ing old laws to new cases. The jurists therefore en­couraged the multiplication of traditions without anyclose inquiry into their authenticity.

From our point of view, therefore, many traditions,even if well authentioated to external appeamnce,beal' internal evidence of forgery. For example, weread that the Apostle of Allah said: " The resurrec­tion will not take place until people kill their own

'" See tho citation, Goldziher, Jlfuhammedlmische Studiw, H.,p. H.

3

34 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE APOSTLE OF ALLAH 35

Imam [or divinely appointed rnler] and kill oneanother with swords and until a tyrannioal king shallreign." * There is an evident reference here to thekilling of Ali and the succession of the Ommayads tothe throne. An orthodox Moslem would see no ob­jection to the probability of Mohammed's utteringsuch a prediction. His criticism could hard!y beexpected to question it; while to us it bears evidentmarks of a later date.

I may give here an anecdote whioh illustrates theway in which the pious mind shrinks from too sharpcriticism, or indeed from any criticism, of the docu­ments which it has been accustomed to regard as sa­cred. A leading authority on the Hadith was oncelecturing on the evidence for and against doubtfultraditions, when a friend dropped in at the exercise.On being asked the subject of discussion, the lect­urer replied: I am inquiring into the reliability andunreliability of certain scholars. "Are you notasbamed before God," asked the intruder, "to slan­der men who have already been in Pamdise a hun­dred 01' two hundred years?" The lecturer brokedown in tears, and said: "Oh I if my ears had onlyheard these words boforo I bogan my work, I wouldnever have composed it!" The book fell from hishand and he was so much moved that he conld notcontinue the leoture.t

Whero tho pious feeling enlists itself on the sideof tradition we can hardly expeet oritioism to be veryradioal. The leading Moslem traditionists were men

* M",'shcat, II., p. 533.f Goldziher, Mukammedanische Btudien, II.) p. 272 f.

of this cast. Boohari never recorded a traditionwithout pOl'forming the ablution, and a prayer of fourprostrations. He sinoerely desired to get at the truth,and it is greatly to hIs oredit that he brought himselfto reject so large a proportion of the literature whiohhe had been taught to regm'd with reverence. Butwe cannot suppose that his work or that of other edi­tors like-minded with him is final.

Our oonclusion is that for the life of Mohammedthis great body of material must be used with greatcaution. But when the interest is rather in the firstgenerations of Moslems than in Mohammed individ­ually, the oase is somewhat better. It has alreadybeen remarked of the Koran, that what the early be­lievers supposed it to mean is nearly as valuable tous as what it actually means, or as what Mohammedintsnded it to mean. In the smne way we can say ofthe traditions - what the early Moslems supposeMohammed to have said is nearly as valuable for usas what he actually did say. For we are ooncernedwith the formative period of his religion, and thisperiod extends beyond his death. Let me supposein illustration that some Christian at the end of thesecond century had gathered and recorded for us allthat oral tradition had to say of the wOl·ds and ac­tions of J eSI1S Christ. Seven thousand suoh frag­ments would be of priceless value. We oonld not besure that in more than a small fraction of cases thetmdi tion was reliable. The material oould not beused for a life of Christ without great caution. Oraltradition is a doubtfnl thing. It is liable to suspioionin an increasing ratio as it passes through three, four,

or five mouths. Yet such a collection would revealto us the thoughts, beliefs, and customs of the earlyChurch, and in this regard it would be beyond price.Such a collection we have for Islam. Bochari, theeditor to whom I have alluded, lived through the firsthalf of the third centmy of the Mohammedan era (hedied A..H. 256). We cannot doubt that, with the carehe took, the material he gathered was all considerablyolder than himself. It is not too much to assumethat the traditions represent the views of the firsthundred years after the death of "Mohammed, and wemay therefore use them to form am picture of prim-

itive Islam.So much it was necessary to say in order to justify

the use of the traditions in am inquiry. We mustnot come to them, however, with extravagant expec­tations. We are inclined to suppose that the Bibli­cal element in these will be large from the fact thatso many converts were early made from both Judaismand Christianity. But the expectation is disap­pointed. For one thing, the interest of the compilersof tradition is very different from our own. Theyhave preserved what is of secondary importance tous, while doubtless much of what they have discardedwould be to US a welcome source of light. It seems,moreover, that the Koran had already, even in thefirst century of Islam, fully impressed itself as thesupreme law, so that the tradition, while it illustrates,does not often add anything to its essential contents.The Koran remains the chief source of our knowl-

edge.The purpose of this lecture is fulfilled if it has set

36 THE BIBLE AND ISLAMTHE APOSTLE OF' ALLAH 37

before you the nature of the r bl . .have to deal Th 1 f Ph o em With WhlOh we. e p an 0 t e lectur uffi'shows the order whieh the in u' ,os s mentlyplan itself indicates the 1 q rry will.follow. The, , c ose connectlOn of I 1m itS structure with th . s amJudaism and in Christ' e.tsysteIfm whlOh prevails in

b. laill y. the plan

e in accordance with th f t proves tosources alread d . e ac s presented by theinquiry is bot;in~~:;~ed, I dshall consider that themg an pl·ofitable.

LECTURE II.

THE COMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM

No religion has bcen successful which did not bor­row something from the predecessor which it tried todisplace. The Church discovered this when it adopt­ed and consecrated heathen festivals, heathen shrines,and even heathen divinities, making them into Chris­tian feasts, Christian altars, and Christian saints.Islam had a similar experience. Its immediate pred­ecessor was a heathenism from which Mohammedturned away and which he would have entirely BUP­

pI'essed had it been possible. But, without himselfrealizing what he did, he was dliven to borrow fromheathenism. We readily see how this came about.He was brought up in heathenism-until he was fortyyears old he conformed to its customs. Whate~erreligion 1,e had until that time was connected wlththe WOl'ship of the Meccans. We have no reason todoubt that he was a sincerely religious man, when hesamificed a kid to Uzza at the Kaaba, 01' when hecalled a son Abd MenM for one of the false gods.When his new convictions came, he gave up what­ever was contradictory to them. Probably he triedat first to make a clean sweep of the old religion. Hegave up the sanctuary, for at Medina he made Jem-

36

THE aOlrllrlo"y BASIS IN HliiATHliiNISlrl 39

~lem the point toward which the prayers of the be­lievers should be directed. But even this was a strainon his habit. So after a time the Kibla was changedto the ~aaba ~ain. Partly this may be accountedfor by h,S expel'lence with the Jews. When he cameto Medina he.felt that he could gain them to his party.He was convmced that his religion and theirs wereone in substance, and of course he saw no reason whythey should not at once unite with him. In tbis heoverrated his knowledge of their religion, and under­rated the obstinacy of their convictions. When hesaw that his hopes were not likely to be realized hechanged the Kibla. That his motive was to gr:tifyhis afl'ection for the ancestral sanctuary rather thanto alienate the Jews, is evident from the Koran, whichsays: "We have seen thee turning thy face aboutt~wards the [different parts of the] heavens, and Wewill cause thee to turn to a Kibla that will please thee.Therefore turn thy face in the direction of the sacred~ous~,* and wherever you are, turn your faces in itsdlrectlOn, and those who rec~ive the Book will know~hat this is the truth from thy Lord; and God is notIgnorant of what they do." The plain implication ofthe passage is that Mohammed was restless under hisown ordinance which fixed the Kibla at JerusalemHis heal·t yearned toward the ancient sanctuary:His desire was gratified by the command to makethat again the central point of his religion.

Although the motive in this was so largely per­sonal, yet there is no doubt that it was a real steptoward gaining the Arabs. The new Kibla was to

II< Literally, Mosque, or place of prostration. The passage is 2m,

them a notification that the new religion was to benatioUl11. The reconciliation between Mohammed'sbelief in the genuinencss of Judaism and his beliefin the genuineness of the Kaaba, was effected byan ingenious use of Abraham. How he came tothis is difficult to make out. The theory of Moslemwriters that the heathen Arabs already knew Abra­ham as the builder of the Kaaba must be viewedwith suspicion. Still there is a possibility thatAbraham, or an Abraham was known to the Mec­C:J,IlS and connected with their worship.* The motiveof Mohammed is evident. All great religious leadershave sought points of union with the past. It seemsto them evident that a purer faith was acceptedin the earlier ages, and they claim therefore to berestorers rather than originators. Such was the claimof Moho,mmed. Christianity and Judaism both hadmado Abraham the :I!'ather of the Faithful. TheOld Testament account makes him a buildcr ofaltars. What more natural than that Mohammedshould suppose him the founde)' of the Kaaba?Later tradition was not content with even this an­tiquity. It supposes the sacred building to havebeen first erected by Adam in inlitation of theheavenly sanctuary which he had seen in Para.diso before his expulsion. It also affirms that this

Ii' The Station of Abraham is mentioned in tradition as though itwere a pa.rt of the Kaaba (or possibly a name for the whole Kaaha)before the conquest of Mecca. Cf. Bo-chwri, T., p. 91t where Omarsa.ys that he suggested to Mohammed the words (Kor., 211t

): "Andtake the Station of Abraham as a place of prayer." The Station ofAbraham is the name now given to a part of the a-roa of the Haramat Mecca..

40 THE BIBLE AND ISLAN

I,I

,

THE OONNON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 41

heavenly House is located just over the earthly Kaaba..But these refinements are later than the time of Mo­hammed, who was satisfied to carry the sacred placeback to Abraham.*Th~ Kibla-that is, turning the faee to a particu­

lar pomt of the compass in worship-is itself an in­stitution of great antiquity. It is perhaps never abosent from early religions. When men have a dis­tinct place in which their Deity dwells, they natural­ly turn toward that place in paying their devotions.One of the gravest accusations against Israel is thatthey turn their faces to the sun and their backs tothe Temple of Yahweh.t The prayer of Solomon in­timates that worshippers even in distant lands wouldpray toward the temple.t The custom of Daniel iswell known. The institution of the Kibla is there­fore .":lCient· in ~udaism and very likely goes back toSem1tw heathemsm. In Islam it is really a survival.For Mohammed made God's dwelling-place to beheaven, and there waS no real meaning in an earthlysanctuary. He himself says: "To God belongs theEost and the West; wherever you turn, there is the~ace of. God." And again: "Piety doee not consist1n turmng your faces toward the East or toward the

* Judaism also locates the heavenly throne just above the earthly:remple,. and this seems to have been adopted by Mohammed. ForIn the NIght JOluoey he went first to Jerusalem and thence ascendedto hea.ven. The Mohammedan tradition which ascribed the firstbuilding to Adam, allows that thiB struoture 'WaB destroyed in theDeluge aud rebuilt by Abrabam.

t EZ~k. BU', where the text has heen purposely changed to obscurea drastic phrMe.

11 Klug. S. Cf. Dau. 0".

42 1'HE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE COMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 43

West. Pious is he who believes in God an~ theLast Day." * Bnt cnstom was too ~tr~)Ug for 10glC, ashas often been the case in other rehglOns.

To custom also aided by a sense of expediency, wemust attribnte th~ retention of the Raaba itself as afetish-I know of no other word that will fit the ca.se.For the Kaaba is one of the 'sacred stones of whlChSemitic religion knows so many. The process bywhich they become sacred is vividly bronght beforeus by the experience of JMob. The wayfa~er has adream in which a diville being appears to hlm. Onwaking he associates the divinity with seme con­spicno~s stone-perhaps the one which .he has usedas a pillow. The stone becomes ~n object of wor­ship. It receives the oblation of 011 or a vow of thetithes. From this time on, the stone and the.Godare identified' the more ignorant worshippers lden­tify them ab~olutely, the mor~ intelligent say th~.tthe God dwells in the stone, whlCh therefore becomesa Beth-El. A number of such idols or fetishes areknown to have existed in Arab heathenism. Dhu-l­Chala<;a, a white stone, once an idol, i~ now thethreshold of a mosque at Tabala, where It was for­merly worshipped. Dusares of Petra, a still more an­cient example is deseribed as a blaek, rectangular, un­cut stone four 'feethigh aud two feet thick. One of thenames for it seems to havebeen loaaba. t Theprevalenceof stone worship among the heathen Arabs is attestedby the Moslem writers, in that they were compelled

* Koran 210., In. .t The examples are from Wellhausen, Skizzen uml VorarbeJten,

III., pp. 42 f., 46; cf••1'0 pp. UO, M.

to invent a theory to account for it. The theory isthus given by the earliest biographers of Mohammedwhose work has come down to us: * "Others believethat the beginnillg of idolatry among the sons ofIshmael was that the Meccan.s, when their land be­came too straight for them, spread abroad over thecountry, and all took stones from their sanctuary [theKaaba], out of reverence for their temple, and theyset them up wherever they formed a settlement;and they walked around them as they used to goabout the Holy House. This led them at last toworship every stone that pleased their fancy; andtheir descendants, who forgot the earlier faith, aban­doned the religion of Abraham and Ishmael andworshipped idols and fell into the errors of thepeople who had preoeded them." The tradition isinteresting as showing how easily historical theoryexactly reverses the facts, and also as showing theMoslem's inability to oomprehend the religion of hisancestors. But here it interests us especially asgiving unbiassed testimony to the existenoe of stoneworship before Islam.

The Kaaba is sueh a Beth-El. It is in faot calledthe House of God. But let us not be misled by thisname, and by the fact that the Kaaba is a building, intosupposing that it was a temple. The God resided init only lIS Uzza resided in the tree which was identi­fied with her. The four walls which constitut.ed theoriginal building were only an extension or enlarge­ment of the sacred stono. No special omphasis wasever laid upon the room within these walls. The

.. Ibn Hisoham, Uebersetzt von Weil, I., p. 39.

44 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE OOMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 45

walls themselves were the sacrum. And, when theroof was added, the building was a cube-simply anenlarged block. rrhe black stone near one corner wasmost sacred, but the whole cube was an obj~ct ofworship.* The house of the God was added III thecurtain which was stretched over the structure, andwhich is still annually renewed. In all this-thesacredness of the stone, the cubical form of thesacred object, and the tent which was stretched o~erit-we see remarkable resemblances to Hebrew antlq­uity. Jacob's stone at Bethel has already beenalluded to. But this is not the only sacred stone ofHebrew history. In Jacob's covenant with Labanwe find another, and in fact the Maweba appears tohave been a regular accompaniment of the altar ofYahweh down to a comparatively late period.t Weremember also that the Most Holy pa.rt in both Ta.b­el'llacle and Temple was a cube in form; that overit was spread a tent in the desert; and that the cen­tral point even in the Temple of Solomon was apeculiar rock.

All these rema.rkable parallels a.re due to survivalfrom early Semitic heathenism. Mohammed in hisl'ejeotion of the idols should have rejeoted the Kaabaa.s well. Omar used to say, after the death of theProphet, when he stroked the black stone- of theKaaba: "I know thou art only a stone a.nd canstneither harm nor help; and had I not seen theApostle of Allah do this I would never do it." But

* On other instanoes in which the sacred object was fL building, cf.

Wellhauscu, 1. C., p. 39 f.t Cf. W. It Smith, Religion oftk< Semites, p. 185 f1'.

custom was too strong for logic. The reverence withwhich Mohammed had learned to regard the sanetu­a.ry in his youth clung to him in his ma.nhood, a.nd itcarried the sanctuary and the Kibla. into Islam.Va.rious puritan sects have arisen in Islam which havetried to carry out the logic of the Prophet, to do awaywith the sacred stone, a.nd to destroy the whole sanet­na.ry. But the result has been only to establish thesuperstition the more strongly.*

The rites of the pilgrimage are also a.n instance ofresemblance which is not dependence. They orig­inate in Semitic heathenism, from which commonsource they passed over into Hebraism a.nd into Is­lam. The pilgrimage is called by the name haj-thesame word was used by the Hebrews for the yearlyfestivals.t The Arabic lexicographers define it as avisit. But it seems originally to have been the pro­cession or dance around the sacred stone 01' the altar.A Psalmist speaks of going about the altar, and an-

* Snouck-!Iurgronje, !lfekka, I., pp. 49, 60. The later trad1tiondeclares that Allah ga.ve Adam a model of the Kaaba.. in curtainsof light, pitching it on the spot on which the Kaaba now stands.This tradition is doubtless influenced by the Biblical account of thecommand given to Moses concerning the Tabernacle and the patternwhich was showed him in the mount. Ex. 25 t"'. Cf. Prideaux)Life of Mahamet , p. 56. On the covering of the Kaaba in heathentimes) 8nouck~Hurgronje, Mekkat 1., 5. The theologians find R

reMan for kissing tho black stone in tho legend that it \vft,8 origi..nally a jew'el from Paradise, which has become black by contactwith sinful men. At the last day it will receive eyes and -tongueand will bear witness for the believers.

It is interesting to note thaL the Heavenly Jerusalem is also acube (Apoc. 21").

t Exod. 1214, 23u, Lev. 2311 and often.

other was accustomed to lead the procession on festi­valoccasions.* David danced before the ark. So wefind in Arabia that the worshippers walk around theRaaba and run between Safa and Merwa, two othersaored spots in Mecca.t The number of circuits isseven, t whioh reminds us of the prominence of sevenas a sacred number in Judaism. The theologians areready with a theory that Adam was the originator ofthis custom, having seen the angels maroh about thethrone of God in Paradi8\l.

Other oustoms of the pilgrimage show notableanalogies with those enjoined in the Old Testament,the analogies being due to their common heathensource. One of these is the shouting of the pilgrims.When the Haj reaches the saored territory its mem­bers shout Lahbaikar--at Thy service I This shout­ing is called by a name derived from the root fromwhich we find in the Bible Hallelujah. The Halle­lujah also is a shout of greeting. The verb meansto shout just like the corresponding Arabic verb. Ifthe cirouit of the saored objeot was originally adance, the shouting was the song that accompaniedit. But all festivals are noisy occasions. So late asthe time of the Psalms, worship is described as" shouting aloud to God." § In the sacrificial ritual

* Ps. 26', 42~.t On the rites of the pilgrimage as now performed, cf. Durton,

P~rsonal N(1/r'1'at1AJ~ of a Pilgrimage wMecca. ana Medina. I haveonly the Tauchnitz edition (1874), in which the third volume is de­

voted to Mecca.~ Mohammed used to make three out of the seven with a. quick

step, the others more deliberately.-Bochari, II , p. 148.§ Pa. 81'. On the ,vord hallal and its meaning, cf. Wellhaul'len.,

----

46 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

"

7'HE OOMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 47

both of Arabia and of Phenicia. the name of theGod was shouted by the worshippers. The Arabiccu~tom therefore was not borrowed (as SprengerthlUl~s!, from !srael,. but was a part of primitiveSemItIC worshIp whICh passed over into Israel andinto Islam.

To our view the charaoteristic rite of the Hebrewreligion was saclifice, and this rite, as we know, isfound in nearly all religions. In Arabie heathenismit existed in a very primitive form. The victim wasnot burned upon an altar-the blood was smeared onthe sacred stone or poured out at its base. The ap­plication of the blood to the altar (or on the mostsacred ocoasions to the Ark, the speoial seat of thedivinity), continued in the Old Testament religiondown. to its lates~ development. In Islam, thoughthe rIte was retained,* the application of the bloodto the sacred object (the Kaaba itself, of course, wouldhave been the proper object), was lost. The meaningof sacrifice is therefore totally obsoured. For we oan~ardly doubt that its early significance was in mak­mg the God partake 6f the feast, either by himself?r ~ the .cOl~munion with the worshippers. In re:Jectmg thIS Idea, Mohammed was consistent withthe general trend of his theology. God is, to him,supersensuous, and He oannot partake of food. Onthis the Koran has a very explioit deolaration. Thesacredness of the blood disappears-except that itcannot be eaten. There is no longer any idea either

Skizzen, I.Uo, p. ~O!; Sprenger, Leben jluhamm,~d'$, III., p. 527;W. R. SmIth, Reltgwn ofth~ &mites, p. 411.

'" Cf. below, on the Service of God.

of expiation or communion connected with the rite.We should expect the rite to be done away. But itsurvives. Its mcrit is in fact emphasized, as is usu­ally the case with unmeaning rites. But its mel-it issolely that it is obedience to a command of God.* Itdoes not disprove Mohammed's independence of Juda­ism in this matter, that the theologians bring thegreat sacrifice at Mecca into 'connection with Abra­ham's willingness to sacrifice his son.t

In connection with the pilgrimage we notice, asanother survival, the shaving of the head. ForIslam, it is assumed to be a part of the pilgrimage(Kor. 2"'). The references to it in Arabic heathen­ism are unambiguous,:\: and we see that the shornhair is an offering to the God of the worshipper. Inthe Old Testament also the Nazarite shaved his headat the completion of his term of devotion, and tbehair waS burnt upon the altar. In Islam the ritenow completes the pilgrimage, and its significance isapparently exhausted in marking the passage fromtbe "holy" to the" common" state of life. This wastrue to a certain extent in Judaism, wbere shavingtbe head marked the accomplishment of any vow.The original sacrificial meaning still shows itself inanother rite, wbich has sUl'vived in Islam and is en·

• The traditions on the merit of sacrifice are given by Hughes,

Diclwna;ry oj Islam, p. 662.tMohammed said (according to a tradition) that the sacrifices are

conformable to the laws of Abraham.-Hughea, p. 552b• The com­

plete divorce of the rite from its early meaning is seen in thefnet that the sacrifice of the Haj is offered in the valley of Mina­

not at the Kaaba."t Cf. Krehl, Ueber die Religt'Qn ,kt VO'fislamismen Araber, p. 14.

48 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

\c,.,~

"

TIlE OOJDfON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 40

joined in tradition though not in the Koran. Whena cbild is seveu days old its head is shaved and agoat is sacrificed, that is, slain, and the fle~h dis­tributcd to the poor. We are expressly told that inheathenism the Same oustom prevailed, and that theblood of the slain'animal was rubbed ou the child'shead.* This points to a dedication of the child tothe God, and the shaving of the head must have hadthe Same meaning. An analogue is circumcisionwhich also has survived in Islam thongh not enjoinedin the Koran,

The list of customs which have survived fromSemitic heathenism in both Hebraism and Islam isnot yet complete. One of them is the changing ofclothes by the pilgrim when he enters the sacredterritory. This is not expressly enjoined uponIsmel, but when they appear before God at Sinai,they are oommanded to consecrate themselves andwash their olothes. The Psalmist exhorts to wor­ship in "the beauty of holiness," by which he meflnsvestments oonsecrated to the servico. It is an ex­pression of the Same idea, when the priests are oom­l~an~ecl.to oond~ct their service in sacred garments.EzekJells espeCially clear, for he onjoins that whenthe priosts go into the outer court to the people, theyshall put off the garments in which they ministerand put on others. t The Same regulation passedinto the priestly Tara. We cannot donbt that wehave here a custom of Semitic heathenism which hassurvived into the later religions. In Israel it was

'" Buraida, cited by IIughe,'3 1 D~'ctionMY of Islam, p. 554.t Ezck. HIn.

4

specialized because 0. distinct order of priests wasdeveloped. Originally it was the whole people whowere subjcct to this regulation. Islam has thereforemore nearly preserved the original usage, We maynoto, in this connection, the law which forbids inter­course of the sexes during the pilgrimage - a lawwhich has its counterpart in the Old Testament.*

The sacrcdness of a particular territory is one ofthe ideas originating in Semitic heathenism and sur­viving into the revcaled religions. In his farewellpilgrimage, Mohammed said: "God consecratedthis land in the day in which he made heaven andearth, and it is consecrated with His consecrationuntil the day of resurrection. And killing was notJ.n.wful in it to any before me, and it was lawful to mefor one hour of one day only. And it shall be con­secrated with God's consecration until the day ofResnrrection-its brambles shall not be cut, nor itsgame hunted, nor shall one pick up a lost articlewithout advertising it, nor shall its fresh herbage begathered." t This was simply the continuation ofthe heathen regulation. We find, besides Mecca,other sacred tracts mentioned in heathen times­hima is their name-within which animals couldpasture at will and none could molest them. Noteven stray animals could be reclaimed when they

'" Kor. 21t3, cf. Ex. 19 le'. The priest at Nob rcfuaea to give Davidthe sacred bread until M8ured that the young men have kept them­selves from women.-l Sam. 214

•

t Boehm, II., p. 191. At the suggestion of Abbns, the Prophetma.de an exception in favor of the cutting of certain fragrant rushes;ci. W. R. Smith, Religion of the SemAtes, p. 1341 Snouck-Hurgronjc,

JVekka, 1'1 p. 23.

50 THE BIBLE AND ISLAMTHE OOM}[ON BASIS IN HEA7'IlENI8M 51

had once crossed the boundary of the hima. The~an.d was sacred to the Gcd who had his dwellingIn It, and whatever came into contact with the landpartcok of the sacredness. It was not only the prop­erty of the God; it partook of his inviolability, sothat whoever injured it was guilty of sacrilege. Aswe are not studying Arabic heathenism, we need notstop to inquire whether the earliest idea was that theGod dwelt in the territory and therefore made itsacred, 01' whether it· was the tel'ritory that wassacred, and therefore, the God dwelt in it. Whatinterests us is that the primitive idea passed overinto Judaism and Islam-and, indeed, into traditionalChristianity. The sanctuary of God is a sanctuaryfor men-those in danger find an asylum there.J oab, when he knows his life to be threatened, fieesto the altar and lays hold of it, and although in hiscase the asylum was not respected, this is the ex­ception that proves the rule. The cities of refugehumanely provided in the later legislation for theprotection of the manslayer, were doubtless originallyseats of worship. The asylum has in them survivedthe sanctuary. It is not improbable that the pro­vision for the cattle of the Levites in the "suburbs"of their cities is a relic of the same idea.* TheLevites are consecrated pel'sons, Theil' cities withthe territory about them are sacred. The only cattlethat can be allowed there must be the property ofthe sacred persons. It does not seem far-fetched tosuppose that the Sabbatic year rests upon the samebasis. The whole land of Israel belongs to Yahweh;

*Num. 35~,

>I< Judges 0::17, The coincidence is pointed out by Krehl, Relig~'on

de?' V01·islam. Araber, pp. 75, 78 f.t Images of Abraham and Ishmael are said to have been wor­

shipped in the Kaaba.-Bochari, II., p. 147. This is perhaps a de­duction from the alleged foundation of the sanctuary by them. Oneaint--wofship in Islam, ci. Goldziher, Muhammedanische Studien,II., p. 281 ff., and I., p. 220 fl'.

His property in it is, therefore, shown by its beingleft uncultivated-the !lima was always left in itsnatural state. To plough the hima is profanation. Itwas, of course, impossible to ordain that the land ofIsrael should be left uncultivated all the time, for itspeoplo had become cultivators. But the recognitionof its s!lOredness might be made one year out of seven.This ordinance has had no influence on Islam; butthe idea of holiness, or sacredness, which shows itselfin Islam is evidently the samo which appeal'S in thesevarious provisions of the Hebrew Law.

There are a number of heathen customs whichho,ve maintained their place in Islo,m, bnt which aretolerated rather thftn ftuthorized. Sacred trees stillhave a sort of worship paid them. There are tracesof such also in the Old Testament. It is, at least, acurious coincidence, that the tree of Uzza was an om­cle, and that in Israel we have a t?"ee oftlle diviners.*The wOl'Ship of the dead has left traces in the ous­toms of Israel and in the customs of Islam. TheJews builded the tombs of the prophets, and so dothe Moslems to the present day.t With the sacredfountains at Kadesh and elsewhere, we may comparethe sacred well Zemzem at M",,~a, whose characterwas left undisturbed by Mohammed.

We shall have occasion to notice that the name of

52 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE OOMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 53

God adopted by Mohammed is one of the names cur­rent in Arabia hefore his time, and that it is thesamo name used in Hebrew and Syriac. He had noneed to borrow it from any other source than Arabcustom. The name must have existed among theprimitive Semites before the rise of the Hebrew re­ligion.

The characteristic greeting of Islam is Salaam'This is well known to he identical with the HebrewPeace' (Shalom.) Our first impnlse is to deriveMohammed's custom from Judaism. But this wouldprobably not be correct. In the desert the state ofnature is a state of war, and every stranger is takenfor an enemy. The most appropriate assurance whenmen meet is that it is peace. So we explain the cus­tom in Hebraism, and we suppose the state of Arabsociety had given rise to the same custom in primitivetimes. The salutation would be a survival in bothJudaism and Islam. The Meccana were accustomedto use another form; * but this does not prove thatMohammed adopted his from the Jews.

Tho f!lOt that the Arabic and the Hebrew are soclosely related, and that the state of society inwhich the two languages were spoken was so nearlytho same, causes a similarity in phraseology whichmay deceive us. We are likely to suppose there wasborrowing, when, in fact, there was none. Or, again,

>I< According to Wakidi l Um,"r, who came from Mecca. to Medinaostensibly to treat with Mohammed for the ransom of prisoners,used the salutation: "A Pleasant Morning i" Wellhausen, Mo­ham,n,d in M'dina, p. 75; cf. Goldziher in the Z. D. M. G., 46,p.22.

54 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE OOMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 55

there may have been borrowing before the time ofMohammed. In either of these cases it would bewrong to argue for Biblical influence on Mohammed,on the ground of resemblance. For example, the con­junction of riches and children as marks of pl'Osper­ity is found in the Koran: * "Like those who werebefore you-they were more powerful than you andsurpassed you in riches and in cllild1·en." This andsimilar expressions remind us of the Psalmist's lan­guage: "Whose belly thou flllest with treasure, theyare satisfled with children:," and other passages to thesame intent. The resemblance is the more markedin that both Bible and Koran thus describe thewicked in their prosperity. But there is probablyno dependence. It is the Semitic idea which putslarge possessions and numerous offspring side byside as elements of good fortune. Another resem­blance is found in the following: t "Those who denyOur signs [or accuse Our verses of falsehood] andshow themselves proud against thee-for these thegates of heaven shall not be opened, nor shall theyenter Paradise until a camel shall enter the eye oj aneedle." In spite of the similarity to a well-kuownsaying of the Gospel, it is probable that there is nodirect influence to be assumed. The proverbialphrase was current before Mohammed (perhaps evenbefore Ohrist), and Mohammed used it without anyknowledge of the Gospel precedent. The same cau­tion which is advisable in arguing from these cases istrue of such resemblances in language as the follow­icg: "Every soul must taste oj death." :j: " God puts* Koran 9'°, cf. Pa. 17 14 , t Jbid. 7n, cf. Ma.tt. 19". t lhid. 818~

before you as a parable a man who is the slave of[two or more] incompatible masters, and the one whobelongs to a single master-are they alike? ,,* Thisreadily suggests the assertion that it is impossible toserve God and mammon. Again, the comparison ofthose who hear and obey with those who hear but donot obey, seems to flnd an echo in the following: "Ishe who has founded his walls upon the fear of Godand His power better, or he who has founded his wallsupon the edge of a crumbling precipice and falls withit into the flre of hell?" t With the Psalmist's asser·tion that God derides the plotters against His Anoint­ed, compare: "God mocks at them, and leaves themperplexed in their disobedience." :j: We must admitthat in suoh passages there is always a possibility ofBiblioal influenoe. But the other possibility-thatthe resemblances are due to the other causes I havenamed-is constantly to be kept in mind. Thestrength of the argument to be based upon the re­semblanoes depends somewhat upon the oontext ofeach particular passage. When we read ic the ao­oount of Pharaoh, § that Moses said: "Your heartsbeoame hard after this, and were like the rock orharder," we suspeot from the conneotion that Mo­hammed's language is affected by Biblioal influenoe.But in the other cases oited we are not warranted inassuming, as the cause of the resembla~oe, anythingmore than the general Semitio oast of thought andlanguage in both Bible and Koran.

Before we leave this part of the subjeot it will be1(1 Koran 89 1<1, ef. Matt. 6u, t ibid. 9110, of. Matt. 7~H'.• lbid. 2". § lbid. 2".

56 TilE BIBLE AND ISLAM 2'HE GaMMON BASIS IN HEA2'HENISM 57

legitimate to inquire what nanative material Mo­hammed took from Arabio heathenism. The Koranis a book nearly as large as the New Tesmment.* Itwould be diffioult to fill so large a book with the sim­ple dogmas and maxims of Islam. We are not sup­prised to find in it eonsiderable narrative material.But very little of this ml\terial is drawn from Ambiosouroes-that is, from souroes outside of Judaism andChristianity. Exoept two stories of some lengththere is nothing more than brief allusions. Amongthe brief allusions, I count wlUlt is said of Lokmanthe Sage.t For although this extends to ten verses,tho verses are filled with a sermon of Mohammed'sl'lIther than with the story of Lokman. The versesthrow no light npon the source of Mohammed's in­formation, but it is evident that Lokman had alreadyreceived in tradition a place among Arab heroes.

Scarcely mom than an aJlusion is whl\t is saidconoeming the amlY of the elephant. The event towhioh the aooount refers, is the destruotion of theAbyssinians, which took place some forty years beforethe oall of Mohammed-tmdition dates it in tho yeal'of the Prophet's birth. The Abyssinians had a trib·utary kingdom in southern Arabia, and attempted toextend their power. In the vicinity of Mecoa' thearmy was oompelled to halt, appl\rently by au epi­demio of small-pox, by whioh, and by the Bedawin, it

• It contains about eighty-five per cent. of the number of wordsin the Arabic translation of the New Testament published by theAm. Bible Society.

t Koran 311l~18. On the speculations of the commentators, cf.Maracci, Refutationes, p. IH1.

was wholly destroyed. Mohammed's acoonnt, whichis oontained in one ~f his early snms, is as follows: *

"Dost thou not see how thy Lord wrought with the armyof the elephant?

Did He not turn their cunning into confusion?And send upon them birds in companies,Which threw upon them stones [like] graven seals l

And left them like stubble where cattle have grazed? "

Later writel'S have enriched the story with manydetails, none of which can be considered historical.The only historic fact we discover is that the armywas defeated. Popnlar story ascribed their destruc­tion to an army of birds which threw pebbles nponthem. Whether the language-graven seals-impliesthat Mohammed believed the stones to be engravedwith the names of those for whom they were destinedis not certain. But it is evident that he was inter­ested in the history solely for its religious bearing.A concern for history as history would have beenunintelligible to him. What he valued was the illus·tmtion of tho power of God.

He was moved by the same religious interest inselecting the two longer stories from Arabic historyto which I referred above. These are the stories ofAd and Thamnd which he uses a number of times.It is indeed almost an abuse of language to speak ofthese legends as history. Ad, deseribed as a peopleof sonthern Arabia, may be wholly mythical. Thamud,on the other hand, is the name of a tribe which really

• Koran 105, The Abys,inian King rode an elephanl, whence thetitle of his army.

58 THE BIBLE AND ISLAMTHE aOMMON BASIS IN HEATHENISM 59

existed. The feature of their civilization which standsout prominently in Mohammed's description, is thatthey make rock dwellings like those of Petra: "Andye hew the mountain into houses." * From the tra­ditions of Mohammed's expedition to Tabuk, it seemsquite certain that these" houses" are the rock tombsat Medain Salih, visited and described by Doughty.tThey had probably been Seen by Mohammed in oneof his earlier journeys, for they lie on the caravanroad from the Hejaz to Syria. The impression madeupon his mind was very strong. A people once pow­erful enough to sculpture the mountains has disap­peared by an act of God-this was the fact that wasso startlingly told by these wonderful remains. Thisfact exactly suited his scheme of history. His wasnot the first religious mind to despise details and toconstruct history to fit a theory. In this case hefilled in the bare outlines given by tmdition with de­tails suggested by his theory. Ad and Thamud al'emade to conform to the scheme already impressedupon him by the Biblical narratives. What thisscheme is, is told uS in his own words: t

" Have they not travelled in the land and BBBn the endof those who preceded them, though they were more nu­merous than they, and more powerful, and [though they)had more imposing monuments in the land? But whatthey had gained was of no avail. When Our Apostlesbrought them clear credentials, they rejoiced in whatknowledge they [already) possessed;' but that which theyscoffed at came upon them. And when they saw the pain

sent by Ds, they said: We believe In God alone, and wedisbelieve in what we [hitherto] associated with Him. Butthe faith which they professed when they saw the pain sentby Ds, did not profit them. Such was God's method withthose of Ris creatures who have passed away, and thus theunbelievers perished.'!

This is the philosophy of history according to Mo­hammed. It needs no argument to show that it iseuggested by the Bible. What interests us here isthat it is applied not only to the Bible stories, butalso to the legends received from Ambic tradition.Like the Kaaba, the pilgrimage, the Kibla, the narra­tive material taken from heathenism was traneformedby the new theology. The theology was strongenough to weld the apparently incongruous materialinto one system.

• Koran 7''J.tKoran 401hl.85.

t Doughty, Travels in Arabia Desert(/,.

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 61

LECTURE III.

THE KORAN NARRATIVES

THE dependence of the Koran upon the Bible­whether the dependence be mediate or immcdiate wedo not now inquire-is evident at a glance. Thereis not a page whose language does not rcmind uS ofthe Old Testament or of the New. This is partlyaccounted for by the similarity of the Arabic lan­guage to the Hebrew, and also by the resemblance ofthe civilizations represented in the two books. Aswas noticed in the last lecture, not every verbalparallel can be taken as an evidence of dependence.To the examples there given we might add the fol­lowing: We read in one insta.nce a thJ:eat againstevil-doers, which will be accomplished" though theircunning were such that mountains would be movedby it,"" We need not suppose a reminiscence of aNew Testament phrase. The figure is natural to onewho lives in a mouutainous country. Again, the evil­doers are said to devour the heritage of the orphan.tThe phmse is strikingly like some of those wit~

which we nre familiar in the New Testament, but Itdoes not follow that it is borrowed from that source.So those who expend their money in the sight of men

* Koran un,t Ibid. 4:11 , I cite tho Koran always from F1Ugel'B edition.

60

;;

are strikingly like those who do alms that they maybe seen of men,* but the phenomenon of ostentatiousalmsgiving is probably witnessed in all rcligions, andthe identity of phenomena has produced tbe resem­blance of language.

These resermtions are not numerous or important.For considerable portions of the Koran we cannotbe in doubt. Nearly all its narratives are Biblicalstories. But in no case are they exact translationsof the Biblical text. Quotations even of a singleverse al'e not easy to find. The most diligent searchdoes not discover more than two or three. Thereasons for this are obvious. For one thing, thereexisted no Arabic translation of the Scriptures in thetime of Mohammed. The Jews or Christians fromwhom he got his infOl'mation were obliged to givethe stories in their own words. But besides this,the Prophet evidently worked over the material hereceived, to fit it to his own purpose. He was not ahistorian, but a preacher. He used the history toconvey a lesson. He may have had the idea that hecould entertain his hearers and attract them by relat­ing these histories. If so, he was disappointed. TheMeccans openly preferred a reciter of fairy-storieswho set up as his rival-perhaps a lesson to thosewho think the pulpit succeeds if it entertains itshearers. How far Mohammed indulged the hope ofmaking his message attractive by putting it in theform of stories, it is not easy to say. For the' mostpart the narratives were made strictly subordinateto his main purpose, and we can understand the nar-

II< Koran 44', cf. Matt. 61•

62 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE KORAN NARRATIVES 63

ratives. only as we keep the purpose in mind. Towarn his hearers of the wrath to come-this is hismain aim, and this explains his choice of material, aswell as the form in which the material is presented.As has already been remarked, this purpose is seenin his use of material from other than Biblicalsources. The two histories which he takes fromArab antiquity are cast by him in Biblical form. Ashe tells them, both relate that a prophet was sent tohis tribe. The tribe rejects the prophet and is pun­ished. These brief sentences give the key to a largepart of what we find in the Koran. His own experi­ence is the light in which the author sees all history.The only proof necessary to adduce for this propo­sition is the choice of material.

The Old Testament stories used by Mohammedare those of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Lot, Joseph, andMoses. These are all from the Pentateuch, and someof them are repeated a number of times. The de­struction of Sodom is given eight times, as is the ac­count of the fiood. The creation and fall of Adamare recounted five times, while there are no less thanthirteen somewhat extended references to Abraham.It must be evident from this that the Peutateuchfurnishes the largest part of the material borrowedfor narrative purposes. From the rest of the OldTestament he takes Saul, David, and Solomon, andhe has allusions to Elijah, Job, Jonah, and Gog andMagog. But none of these receives anything likethe space given to the characters taken from thePentateuch.

To illustrate what I have said of Mohammed's

motive and his method of treatment I will quoteone of the accounts concerning Noah. It reads asfollows: *

"We sent Noah to his people [to say] : I am a plain­speaking warner, to tell you that you must not serve anybut Allah. I fear for you the punishment of a distres.ingday. The chiefs of his people who disbelieved, said: Wesee that thou art nothing but a man like us, and we seethat thy followers are only the basest 01 us, men of rashresolution. We do not discover that you are better thanwe-in fact we think you to be liars. He replied: °mypeople, if I have received a commission from my Lord, andHe has given me a special grace which Is unknown to you,do you think that I shall loree it upon you when you areunwilling 1 0, my people, I do not ask riches-my rewarddepeuds ou God alone, and I wl\l not drive away those whohave belieVed; they shall meet their Lord. But I see youto be a people in Ignorance. Moreover, °my people, whowl\l be my helper against God if I drive these away? WI\lyou not consider? I do not say that I have the treasuresof God [at my command], and I do not know the secretthings; nor do I say that I am an angel, nor do I say [...you would have me] that God will not bring good to thosewhom your eyes despise-God knoweth what is in theirhearts. In case I should do this thing I should be a wrong­doer. The chlers replied: 0, Noah. thou h...t disputedpersistently with us-bring now upon us what thou hastthreatened, if thou art truthful I He said: God alone canbring it upon you when He will, and you cannot thwart it.My advice wl\l uot profit you, if I wish to advise you, whenGod wl\ls to lead you astray. He is your Lord and untoHim you shall be brought [at thc last Day]. Do they say :He hath Invented It [i. e., his message]? If I have Inventedit, theu the guilt of it rests upon me-but I am innocent ofwhat you do. Then it was revealed to Noah: No more of

'" !{oran ll~MO.

64 THE! BIBLE AND ISLAM TIIE KORAN NARRATIVES 65

thy people wl1l believe than have believed already, bnt donot he distressed at what they do. Make an ark in Onrsight and according to Onr revelation and do not speakto Me concerning those who sin-they shall certainly bedrowned. Then he made the ark, and whenever the chiefsof his people passed by, they scoffed at him, He said: Ifyou scoff at us, we shall scoff at you as you are scoft1ng­then shall you know upon whom shall come a punishmentth"t shall disgrace him, and npon whom an abiding punish­ment shall fall. [So they seoffed] nntil Our eommandcame and the fountain broke forth.' We said: Place in ittwo of every kind, and thy family (except the one on whomthe deeree has passed) and those who have believed-butthe believers were few. Noah said: Embark I In the nameof God shall belts sailing and its mooring; my Lord is theForgiving, the Compassionate. And it sailed with themon the mountain-like waves, and Noah called his son whostood aloof: My son I come with us and be not of the un­believers. He replied: I wl1l betake myself to a mountainwhich will save me from the water. Noah said: Nothingto-day will save from the deerea of God unless He take pity.Then the waves same between them and he was drowned.Then came the command: 0, Earth, swallow up thewater,and, 0 Heaven, cease [from rain]: and the water was di­minished and the deerea was sarriedout, and [theark] restedon "l-Judee,t and It was said: Away withthewrong·doersl

.. Then Noah salled to his Lord and said: My Lord, myson belonged to my family; and Thy promiSe is true andThou art the most Jnst of judges.t God replied: 0 Noah,he was not of thy family. It were an unrighteous deed [to

... Literally, until the oven boiled. As the word which ordinarilymeans oven also means afountain on occasion, there is no need tosuppose Rabbinic or Persian influence.

t A mountain in Mesopotamia.~ Noah is pleading for his BOll, though he does not express his

petition in so many words. God replies to the unspoken prayer,intimating that the son has out himself oir by his unbelief.

spare him], so do not ask of me that of whieh thou hast noknowledge; I warn thee lest thou be of the ignorant.Noah said: My I,ord, I take refuge In Thee from askingthat of which I have no knowledge; unless Thou forgiveme and take pity on me I shall be lost. Then the COIll'

mand was given: 0 Noah, descend in peace from USJ andblessings upon thee ll.nd upon peoples yet to eome fromthose with thee-but there are peoples whom We shall cre­ate, upon whom a grievous punifJhment sha.ll come,"

You will agree with me that the Bible story is usedin this passage only to fUl'llish a framework for aserlllon to Mohammed's contemporaries. The detailsof the story, those whioh in the Old Testament makeit so realistio, are absent. We heal' nothing of thewiokedness of the sons of God in man-ying daughtersof men-which in Genesis gives a reason for the 001'­

ruption of the earth. The violence, whioh is thespeoifio sin mentioned there, does not appear in theKoran. We hear nothing of the size of the ark, orits material. The duration of the rain, the time oftho subsidonoe of the waters, the sending out of thebirds, the sacrifice at the end of the voyage, and thegift of the rainbow are all passed over in silence. Onthe other hand we hear an extended dialogue betweenNoah and his people, of whieh the Bible gives us nohint. One hint indeed we find which might give riseto this conception. It is oontained in the New 'rcs­tmnent where we finel Noah desoribed as a herald ofriyhtcousnc88.* It is this hiut, as I suppose, whiohwas worth more to :fifohammed than all the Old Tes-

"" II. Pet. 25, The Christian tradition in the Apocalypse of Paul(Walker, Apocryphal Gospels, 1873, p. 401 j Anteniccne Fathers,1886, Vol. VIII., p. 581), where Noah Bays: II I ceased not to

5

66 THE BIBLE AND ISLAH THE KORAN NARRATIVES 67

tament details. With this hint he reconstructed thehistory along the lines of his own experience. Thesinfulness of the antediluvians now becomes idolatry.Noah is the Warner sent to turn them to the one God.In the dialogue we hear the voices of Mohammedand the Meccan aristocracy. As in the oase of Mo­hammed, it is the aristocracy who oppose the preachedword. Noah is told that only the lowest men hearhim-just as at Mecca it was mostly slaves and freed­men who made up the infant church. Noah musthear that he is a man and not an angel-the implica­tion being that he is not fit to be a divinely sent meS­senger. Such was one of the objections made toMohammed. He is obliged to declare that he is notseeking earthly reward-an avowal elsewhere madeby Mohammed for himself. He is Ul'ged to dismisshis followers; he refuses, and then is challenged tobring the threatened punishment. It is scarcelynecessary to read between the lines to discover thatMohammed had just this experience. So far doesthis go that Mohammed really falls out of the 1'01e inone verse, where he replies to the accusation that hehad invented his message. At least it sounds as ifhe had forgotten for the moment that he was person­ating Noah. In one of the parallel passages heshows a similar lack of historic imagination wherethe aristooraoy of Noah's time are made to say to thepeople: "Do not abandon your Gods, do not aban­don Wadd and Suwa,', and Yaghuth and Ya'uk and

procla.im to men: Repent, for, behold, a deluge is coming i and noone paid heed, but all derided me." .l!"orJewishtraditioD, WUnache,,1fidra"h Koheleth, p. 130.

Nasr." * But these false Gods are Gods of the Arabtribes who lived in the time of Mohammed. Thecommentators, who could not suppose their Prophetguilty of an anachronism, have had great difficulty inexplaining how the Gods of Noah's time survived theFlood and continued to be worshipped in Arabia.tThe problem causes us no perplexity. We see howMohammed identifies himself with his predecessorNoah so fully that he hardly distinguishes what isproper to each personage. It is an artistic fault. Butit testifies to the religious earnestness of the man, thathe cannot get out of his mind the idolatry which isthe crying sin of his people.

In another verse Mohammed reveals to us some.thing of his experience-I mean the one where Godcommands Noah not to be distressed at the smallnumber of those who believed. He himself was nodoubt often perplexed and grieved at the smallnessof his following. In his perplexity he could only saythat it was the will of God and therefore must beright.

So far, the story has been freely remodelled on theBiblical basis. But now we come to a feature whichreally contradicts the Biblioal data. Noah is represent­ed as having an unbelieving son. To this we may addthat in another passage his wife is also represented asunbelieving and as perishing: "God sets forth as anexamplo to those who disbelieve the wife of Noah andthe wife of Lot; they were married to two of- Ourrighteous servants, and were unfaithful to them-theirhusbands did not avail for them with God, and the

'" Koran l1~~r. t Cf. Wellha.usen, Skizzen, 111.\ p. 11 if.

68 THE BIBLE AND ISLA,lf THE KORAN NARRA1'IJTES 69

command went forth: Enter the Fire with those whoare entering therein." '" These divergences showhow freely Mohammed treats his sources. For thepreaching of Noah and the scoffing of his contempo- .raries he had authority in Jewish or Christian tradi­tion. But no one has yet pointed out a precedentfor the particulars we are now considering. Weareauthorized in' supposing that the preacher drew onhis own experience for these as for other matters ofdetail. And we do not have far to seek for the ex­perience. Doubtless there were families in Meccawhich were divided-father against son. In fact, wehear of such in the traditions, and we know that Mo­hammed's own nearest relatives did not believe onhim. It is not unlikely that he found here the onlyprecedent he needed in order to suppose members ofNoah's family unsaved in the great catastrophe.

The Biblical character which next claims our atten­tion is Abraham, whose importance to Mohammedis greater than that of any other Biblical character.Whether he were already adopted in the legends ofthe heathen Arabs, as has been supposed, is verydoubtful. Mohammed makes him the builder of theKaaba and therefore the founder of Mecca; but this, . .may be a construction of his own. The other IDOl-

dents of Abraham's history given in the Koran arethe following: He disputed with someone abo~t tbetrue God, and was the victor; he prayed for eVIdenceof the resurrection, and was commanded to cut fourbirds in pieces, to lay the pieces on separate hill-tops,and then to call tbe birds. On following out the di·

* Koran 6610,

rections, the pieces flew together and the birds wererestored to life. He entcrtained the angels who weresent to destroy Sodom, received from them the prom­ise of a son, and interceded for the preservation ofSodom, though without success. He refused to adorethe idols of his father; for this he was thrown intothe fire, but came out unbarmed. He was drivenfrom home by his fathel'. lIe was commanded in adream to sacrifice his son (whose name is not given),and was about to consummate the sacrifice when hewas allowed to substitute an animal.'" A point em­phasized is that he was neither Jew nor Ohristian,but (if I may so say) a simple believer without thesectarian marks which distinguish, and therefore di­vide, these: "0 People of Scripture I Why do youdispute concerning Abraham? The Tora and theGospel were not revealed until after his time-do younot comprehend? Abraham was neither Jew norChristian, but he was a hanif, he was resigned, andhe was not one of the idolaters." 1" The word llanifhas given rise to much speculation. For our presentpurpose it is enough to note that in the Koran itmeans turning aside from idolB. It is the appropriateword to describe a man like Abraham who abandonedthe false Gods and became a monotheist. It is thischaracteristic which makes Abraham of so much im­portance to Mohammed. He sees in him his prede­cessor and model. The Jews and the Ohristians br.dreceived revelations in written form-this is what he

'" Koran 2uo rt, Ill! ff, 16.1 1ft 51~~.s~, 21s8 i, 31u, 19(7, 8710iJ ".Abraham is mentioned in twenty-sil:: different Buras

t Ibid. 358.fl.

70 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM 1'HE KORAN NARRA1'IVES 71

recognizes in calling them people of the Book. Butthe result had been to produce division and mutualrecrimination. "The Jews (he says) say: TheChristians have no firm foundation; and the C1n:is­tians say: The Jews have no firm foundation. Yetthey read the Scripture." * The only way to put anend to the disputes of these sects is to go back to thesimple monotheism of Abraham. In this theory Mo­hammed was the pioneer of church union, and his isnot the only attempt to unite two bodies of believerswhich has resulted in forming a third.

But this is aside from our main purpose. Moham­med regards Abraham as his model, and describeshimself in the terms which he applies to Abraham:" Who has a more excellent religion than one who re­signs himself to God while doing good works, andwho follows the faith of Abraham as one who turnsaside from idols [literally, as a hanifJ-for God tookAbraham as His fdend;" "The nearest of men toAbraham are those who follow him, and this prophet[Mohammed] also is one of them." t In taking thisposition, Mohammed was only following the precedentset by the Apostle Paul. In justifying himself forgiving up the Jewish Law, while still claiming to bc­long to the true seed of Abraham, Paul argued by theexample of Abraham. It was conceded that Abra­ham was a true believer, the Father of the Faithful.But if this be so, religion cannot consist in the ob­servance of the Law, for the Law came into forcelong after Abraham's death. For the true believer itmust be enough to go back to the simplicity of Abra-

... Koran 2 07, tlbid. 41~', a~l.

ham's religion. The argument of Mohammed is justthe same, only he does not set it forth with the samearray of logic. To the Jews who insisted that hemust become a Jew in order to be saved, and to theChristians who insisted that he must become a Chris­tian in order to be saved, Mohammed made the per­tinent reply that Abraham lived the life of faith beforethe coming of either of their codes. The essentialsof religion must consist in such faith as Abrahamhad, and this (according to his light) Mohammedadopted and preached. To him, just as truly as toPaul, Abraham was the Father of the Faithful.

How much direct New Testament influence led tothis view of Abraham? In the meagreness of thesources we are not able to answer this question withpositiveness. In geueral, Mohammed does not showmuch familiarity with the thought of the ApostlePaul. But I am inclined to think that some NewTestament hint concerning the position of Abrahamas the Father of Believers had come to him. Itneeds only a hint of that with which we are in sym­pathy to give us a flood of light. As showing thatthere was New Testament influence we may note thatwe find Mohammed calling Abraham the Friend ofGod-a point mentioned both in the Old Tcstamentand in the New, but more distinctly brought out inthe New.*

For other features of the Koran picture we mustconsult both Bible and tradition. Even then we dis­cover that Mohammed dealt freely with his sources.The incident of the birds and the night covenant was

*18. USj James 2~8.

72 1'HE BIBLE AND ISLAM1'IlE KORA.N NARRATIVES 73

unintelligible to him, as it doubtless is to many a Chris­tian reader as well. But he could use it as a proofof the resurrection-something of which he felt theneed in his preaching. He therefore transformed itinto something quite different from the Biblical story.In regard to the dispute concerning the power of God,the Koran tells US only of an anonymous opponentwho claimed to be the giver of life and of death­and therefore to be God. Abraham replied: MyLord makes the sun to rise in the East, do thou makeit rise in the West ?-whereat the infidel was put toconfusion. In this story we have the tradition ofAbraham's dispute with Nimrod, which was currentamong Jews and Christians before Mohammed's time.It was especially pat to Mohammed's purpose becauseit confounded the idolater.

Another legend CUlTent among both Jews andChristians was useful in the same line. It makesTerah, Abraham's father, to be a dealer in idols.One day Abraham was left in charge of the shop, anda woman came with an offering of food. Abrahamset it before the largest idol, broke all the other idolsand put a club in the hands of the large one. Whenhis father asked about it he said: the idols quarrelledover the food; then the largest one became angry,took the club and broke the rest in pieces. Terahdeclared this to be impossible because the imagescould not move, whereupon Abraham convicted himout of his own mouth, which confessed him to be aworshipper of that which had no power. Neverthe­less Abraham was brought before Nimrod and throwninto a fiery furnace, from which he was saved by a

miracle. Mohammed had no objection to taking astory from tradition rather than from the Biblicaltext-if indeed he knew the difference. That he tookthis one from a Christian source is indicated by thefact that he calls Abraham's father by the nameAzar, which is quite similar to what we find in aChristian writer, though quite nulike the HebrewTerah.* The Book of Jubilees, which circulatedlargely among both Jews and Christians, knows thestory of Abraham's controversy with his father aboutthe idols, so that there is no difficulty in attributingMohammed's knowledge to Christian tradition.t

But it is clear that we cannot trace all the feat­ures of Mohammed's Abraham to preceding authori­ties, either Jewish or Christian. The main incidentscame odginal1y il'om the Bible-so much is evident.Some of the variations or additions can be acconut­ed for on the theory that they are borrowed fromJewish or Christian sources outside the Bible. Butothers cannot be so accounted for, and can, in the

* Athar is the name of Abraham's father in Eusebius according toSale, note on 6H , He probably got bis knowledge from Maracci,PrOd1·Orrw.S ad Refuta:tionem Auo?'ani (1698), Pars IV., p. 90, whichis also cited by Geiger, Was hat Mohammed am dem judtmtlmmAufgenom-men. (1833), p 128. Maraeci only says: apud Eusebiumin. Historia Ecdesiastica. The story of Abraham and the idols isfound in lIfiwrasch Be'l'escMth Rabba, Ueber"3etzt yon Wiinaahe, Par.38 (p. 113). It is quoted also by Geiger, t. c., p. 124. AmongChristian autllorltie!l Jerome, Qu~stionelJ II~b,,.ai«e i~n Gmesim (onGen. 11211), Gp. ed. Vallarsiu8 (1767), 111., c. 323, eft IV., c.779,speake of Abraham's being thrown into the fire.

t Ewald, JalwMiche1", III., p. 3. GrUnbauDl, Nelle Beitrage Z1tr

Semitischm Sagmkunde (1893), p. 96, 811YS that the story is alsogiven by Ephracm Byrus.

THE BIBLE AND ISLAM l'IlE KORAN NARRATIVES 75

present state of our knowledge, be attributed only toMohammed himself, working under the belief thatAbraham was for him a predecessor and a model.

As we have seen, Mohammed's scheme .of historyis writ lal'ge in these stories of former prophets. Ac­cording to him, the past ages are a series of propheticcrises. In each one, a prophet has been sent to hispeople to warn them against sin. His usual experi­ence is that his hearers refuse the message and mockor persecute him. Not long after, the calamity over­takes them and they perish. The prophet, with afew followers, is spared. In each of these cycles, theaccount is colored by Mohammed's own experience.Even the tribes of Arabia which have perished, haveperished for the same reasons, and their prophetsspeak the language of rebuke and warning just liketheh' brethren of the Biblical history. This con­stant iteration is one rooson for the tediousness ofthe Koran. But a little reflection will show us thatsomething of the same monotony is found in allpreaching. The truths of religion are comparativelyfew and simple. The prophet is not infrequentlyaccused of repeating himself. Even an Isaiah wasmocked for bringing line upon line and precept uponpreeept, hero a little and them a little, as though hewere teaching ehildren just weaned from the milk.We shall not be surprised to find in the Koran thesame lesson repeatedly enforced when we rememberhow long the prophet of Mecca addressed deaf earsand unbelieving hearts. The sameness of the lesson,whatever the particular incident which illustrates it,makes it unnecessary for us to go at length into all

,

the material. There is one character, however, towhioh we must devote a little time, and that is Moses.

From what has been said about Abraham, it isevident that Mohammed would have formulated hissoheme of the world's history about as follows: Therehas always been in the world one true religion. Thishas been revealed without substantial variation todifferent prophets from Adam down: "[God] hasestablished for you the religion which He oommand­ed Noah, and that whioh We revealed to thee, andthat which We commanded Abraham and Moses andJesus, saying: Observe the true religion and do notbe divided among yourselves." * When the Jews andChristians insisted on the oonfession of their faith asnecess9.l'y for salvation, Mohammed instructed hisfollowers to say: "We believe in God and in whathas been revealed to ns, and in what was revealed toAbraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jaoob and thetwelve tribes, and in what was given to Moses and toJesus, and what was given to the prophets by tIleirLord. We make no difference between them and weare resigned to Him." The position could scarcely bestated more clearly, and the choice of Noah, Abraham,Moses, and Jesus is a partioularly happy one, andshows that Mohammed had really grasped the Bibli­cal scheme-for these men stand at the opening ofthe great epochs of sacred history.

The name of Moses, the one to whom we nowcome, occurs in thirty-fonr suras of the Koran; andhis history is given at length in a number of these.t

llc 421l, cf. 213o,t 2U .103, 7101 .154, 20M " 269'15 ate the mOBt extended. Somewhat

briefer are 211 !l, 28 i '38, lOu·~i.

The fact that it is given so many times should cantionus against seeking the origin of the variations fromthe Biblical text in Rabbinical or Patriatic sourees.It is not likely that l\'1ohammed received the accountfrom an informant more than once. Having it oncein his possession, he felt at liberty to treat it accord·ing to the varying exigencies of different times. Theaccount which is earliest in point of time (to all ap­pearance) is comparatively brief, and it shows thatthe Prophet was moved; as in all his earlier preaching,by the thought of God's judgment: "Has the storyof Moses come to thee? When his Lord called himin the sacred valley of Tuwa [He said]: Go toPharaoh the arrogant and say to him: Wilt thou be­come pure? I will guide thee to thy Lord, and thoushalt fear Him. Then he showed him a great mir­acle But Pharaoh accused him of deceit and wasrebellious. He turned his back, exciting disorder.Then he collected the people and said: I am yourJ.Jord most high! But God destroyed him with thepunishments of this world and of the world to come.Verily this is a warning to him that fears God." * Forthe purpose of the speaker this is an admirable epit­ome of the story of Moses. It shows just the pointswhich Mohammed wished to emphasize, that is:those parallel with his own case. Even here he doesnot adhere strictly to the Biblical account, for wenowhere read that Pharaoh claimed to be God. Thisis borrowed evidently from Mohammed's informant,and the same feature is found in fact in Jewishauthorities.

... 2811, 253,60, 7m,t 7w , 20'10. On the Rabbinical Buthorities cf. Geiger, Was hat

~fo1wlmmed, etc., pp. 155-172. The lowing of the golden calf atGilgal on the day of Elisha's birth is spoken of in the Book ~f th,Bee, Budge's translation, p. 70.

t Ex. 81&1 English version au; Kora.n 20a cr,§ II. Tim. 3', cf. Dillmann in P. R. E.', XII., p. 365.

In the more extended accounts which Mohammedelsewhere gives, we find details taken from Christianas well as Jewish sources, besides some which aredue to the narrator's own imagination. From Jewishtradition ho asserts: that Moses refused all Egyptiannurses; that the people at Mount Sinai demandedto see God, and on seeing Him fell dead, but wererevived by divine power; and that they refused toacc~pt the covenant until the mountain was lifted upbodily and held over them.* The information thattile golden calf, through the magie of its maker,bellowed, is found in Rabbinical sources, and a similaraffirmation is made of another golden calf in a Chris­tian writer of the tenth century.t Mohammed makesthe magicians of Pharaoh repent and confess the trueGod. This is perhaps a legitimate dednction fromthe Old Testament account, in which they are said torecognize the finger of God.t No Jewish documenthas been found which makes the deduction, but weknow of a Christian apocryphon, now lost, which wasentitled: Liber Pcenitemire Jamnce etMamlYJ·re. Jamnesand Mambres, I hardly need say, are the traditionalnames of the magicians.§ We aro justified, there­foro, in supposing this itom borrowed from a Chris­tian sourco.

There remain a number of data which are due to

76 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

" "I~

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 77

78 1'HE BIBLE AND ISLAM TIlE KORAN NARRATIVES 79

Mohammed's own imagination, or which simply wit­ness to his ignorance of the Bible account. Thus:he gives the plagues at one time as five and again asnine in number; * he makes Haman one of the coun­sellors of Pharaoh; t he supposes the buildings ofPharaoh to have been destroyed, and that the mur­mUrers against Moses returned to Egypt;:j: yet, inanother passage, he seems to affirm that Israel pos­sessed the country of Pharaoh after him.§ ThatMoses repented of having killed the Egyptian is aminor addition which we can easily account for, and itis not a serious error that Pharaoh's wife is made tocare for Moses, instead of his daughter. II Confusionof Moses with Jacob is the evident oause of theassertion that Moses served eight years for a wife,and a similar confusion of Egypt with Babylon showsitself when Phamoh orders the people to make brick:"that I may make a lofty building, so as to becomeacquainted with the God of Moses-though, indeed,I think him to be a liar." 'If

Almost all these departures from the Biblioal nar­rative occur in late ohapters, and they show whathas already been remarked, that as time went on,the preacher became less careful (if, indeed, he everwas careful) of historical accuracy, and adapted hismaterial more freely to the purpose in hand. In theuse of this material we oan see the influence of hisoWn changed ciroumstances. Few oharacters in his­tory have experienoed a greater ohange of fortunethan fell to the lot of Mohammed in going from

'" 7m, 171n•§ zan .u .

t 2838•

11288,1-11,

t 7188, 2~.

, 2821, 38,

Meooa to Medina. At Meoca he was the proscribedpreacher of a new religion. His followers were fewin number, and the majority of these had fled toAbyssinia. His persecution by the leading men ofthe oity took away from him every ocoupation of aseoular nature. Even the public proolamation of hismessage was forbidden after a time. All that wasopen to him was meditation, prayer, and the enoour­agement of a very narrow oircle of friends. With theremoval to Medina all this was ohanged. The oaresof administration were thrust upon him. His lifebecame a life of activity instead of oontemplation,and his sermons necessarily dealt with the concreteissues of the hour.

The reason for calling attention to this fact at justthis point is that one of the longer histories of Mosesin the Koran oan be understood only from this situa­tion of the Prophet. It is really a polemic againstthe Jews. We have reason to believe that Moham­med came to lI'Iedina with great expectations, bssedon the fact that a considemble part of the populationwas Jewish. He sincerely believed his religion tobe the same as theirs. He was sure that he was thelegitimate successor of their prophets. What wouldbe more natural than that they should join his com­munity, or at least that his followers and they shouldunite on a common basis of recognition? With thisidea he made J emsalem his Kibla, and assimilatedhis doctrine to theirs. But he was speedily unde­ceived. The Jews were wholly guided by theirRabbis, who had no mind to a prophet born out ofPalestine. They refused to see the marks of their

-

80 THE BIBLE AND ISLA},[ THE KORAN NARRATIVES 81

expected Messiah in ~he Mecca~ a~ventnrer. Theywere moreover oonsCiOUS of theIr mtelleotual supe­riority. They 'had studied the sacred Books whiohwera in their hands. Mohammed conceded theauthority of these Books, but he was onl~ slightlyaoquainted with their oontents. In argumg fromthem the Jews had an evident advantage, and oftenput the Moslems to silenoe. At last Moham~ed wasobliged to forbid his followers to argue WIth theJews, and he aooused these of oonoealing portions oftheir revelation.

This certainly oould not conduce to harmony, a~dMohammed early realized that he had to deal Wlthmen less open to conviction than the heathen. . ~heJews, on their part, did not see the danger of trrlhngwith a man who was in dead earnest, and who nowhad the sword in his hand. Their more instruotedmen woulil lay traps for Mohammed in their talkswith him, and when he betrayed his ignomnce, as hewould naturally betray it in suoh oiroumstanoes, theywould go away and in their own oiro~e make merryover his laughable blunders. Arab satIre trav.els fast,it travels fal' and it bites bard. We oan easIly oon­ceive the sit~ationof a prophet in a mixed community,ridiouled in oouplets that were in the mouths of allwho were hostile or who were lukewarm. The insultswere the harder to bear in that they were directedagainst beliefs whioh bad beoome saored to him. Theyseemed to him blasphemies against the Holy Ghostand he never forgave them. The expatriation of oneJewish tribe, and the extermination of another, wereonly part of his answer.

It was before the open breaoh oame that the follow­ing review of the history of Israel was delivered:

"0 Children of Israeli Remember My grace whieh I con­ferred upon you [when I said]: Keep the covenant with Meand I will keep the covenant with you; and fear Me andbelieve in what I have revealed in confirmation of what youalready possess, • and be not the first to disbelieve. Anddo not sell My wonders for a small price, t but fear Me. Donot cover up the truth with falsehood, nor conceal thetruth which you kuow.t But observe prayer aud give almsand bow with those who bow down. Will you commandmen good actions but forget them yourselves?§ Yet youread the Scriptures; do you not comprehend? Practisetherefore patience and prayer-this is difficult except forthe humble, who are mindful that one day they must meettheir Lord and that they are to return to Him.

"0, Children of Israeli Remember My grace whioh Ihave conferred upon yon, in that I have distinguished youabove the worlds; and fear the day when one soul shall notpay the debt of another, nor shall its intercession be receivednor a ransom be accepted nor aid be given. And [remem­ber] when We saved you from the tribe of Pharaoh who in­flicted upon you a grievous calamity in that they slew yourBOns while they preserved alive your daughters (this was aBevere trial from your Lord); and when We divided the seafor you and delivered you, but drowned the host of Pha­raoh while you looked on. But when We gave the promises

• That is, the Scriptures.t An accusation elsewhere made against the Jews , reminding us

of Paul's charge that the idolaters exchange the truth of God for alie. Possibly Mohammed thought the Jewish scribes forged verseswhich they sold as Biblical.

:t This meaDs: the Jews deny that their Scriptures contain whatMvhnmmed says they contain.

§ Paul also accuses the JeWB of teaching the Law to others, at theBame lime violating it themselves, Rom. 2.

6

• The book which distinguishes between right and wrong. Pos­sibly Mohammed thinks of the Mosaic tradition (the Mishna.) whichexpounds the regulations of the La.w more en.ctly.

t Orl

Kill yOUll'selves. The seuse is obscure. The Arab com~mentator makes it mean mortify Yo'WY' lusts, but that is hardly Mo~hammed's intention. I suape,ct a reminiscence of the fact that theLevitcs fell upon the idolatrous people and slew them.

t Evidentiy the pillar of cloud.

to Moses forty nights, then you took the calf in his absenceand transgressed. Yet We forgave you, thinking perhapsyou wuuld be grateful. We gave Moses the Book and theDistinction,' that you might be rightly led; and Moses saidto his people: 0, my people I you have wronged your ownsouls in taking the calf j repent in presence of your Cre~ator or else kill each other t-this were better for yon withHim-He will forgive you, He is the Forgiving, the Com­passionate. And when you said: 0, Moses, we will notbelieve In thee unless we see God clearly, the thunderboltstruck you while you gazed, but We brought you to Ilfeafter you had died, thinking perhaps you would be grate­ful. And We shaded you with the cloud *and sent you themanna and the qualls, saying: Eat of the good things withwhich We nourish you (they did not harm Us but It wastheir own souls that they harmed). And when We said:Enter this city and eat of it abundantly whenever youchoose, but enter the gate bowing down and asking forgive­ness-We will forgive your sins and will certainly prosperthose who do well-then the evil-doers substituted a worddifferent from the one which was commanded them, and wesent upon the evil-doers a pestilence for theh·lnlquity. Andwhen MoseB asked water for hiB people, We said' Strikethe rock with thy Btaff; and there broke from It twelvefountainB, everyone knew hiB drinking place [and WeBaid] , Eat and drink of the sustenance given by God, anddo not deal unjuBtly In the earth, creating diBorder. Andwhen you Bald: 0, MaBes, we cannot bear thlB one kind offood, ask of thy Lord that He bring forth for UB of the

fruits of the earth, vegetables and cucumbers, and garlicand lentils, and onions, he Bald: Will you prefer the worseto the better 1 Return to Egypt and you shali have whatyou ask. And they were smitten with abasement and pov­erty and returned with the anger of God upon them. '1'hiswas because they disbelieved In the signs of God and ldliedthe prophets wrongfully; this it was in which they rebelledand transgressed. Those who believe, though they be Jewsor Ohristians or Sabeans-whoever believes in God and theLast Day, and does good, receives a reward from hiB Lord.Fear shall not COIue upon them nor Bhall they be grieved.

"And when We made a covenant with you and liftedthe mountain above you, saying: Receive with steadfast­ness what We have brought you and remember what itcontains-perchance you will be God-fearing-then youturned back; and had not the grace of God been upon youand His luercy, you would have been lost. You know whoof you tranBgressed the Sabbath, and We Bald to them:Become abhorred apes! Thus We made them an exam­ple to their fellowB, and to those who Bhould come afterthem and a warning to those ,vho feared God. And whenMoses Baid to hiB people, God commandB you to sacrillce aheifer i they replied: Art thou making a mock of us? HeBald, I take refuge in God from being one of the ignorant!Then they Baid : Pray thy Lord for us that He would ex­plain to us what BOrt of a heifer it should be. MoseB re­plied, She iB to be neither old nor young, but of a mediumage, therefore do what you are commanded I They Baid :Pray thy Lord to tell us plainly of what color Bhe Bhouldbe. He replied: It is commanded that she should be of abright red, a color which pleaseB the beholder. Then theysaid: Pray thy Lord to deBCribe her plainly to UB-we havecattle that look alike, and we would bo guide,l If Godplease. MoseB replied: It is commanded that she be notbroken to till the ground or to water the lIelds, Bou;'d,'and without BPOt. They said: Now thou bringest a true

* Not approached by the malc.

-

82 THE BIBLE AND ISLAMTHE KORAN NARRA1'IVES &3

message. So they sacrificed her, but they were near notdoing it. And when you killed a man, and quarrelled con­ceruing the deed (but God brought to light what you .wereconcealing), then We said: Touch the d~ad man with apart of the heifer; thus God brings to l~fe the dead, an~shows you His signs-perchance you Will comp;ehend.But even after this your hearts were hard, even like rockor harder, for there are rocks from which streams spring,and there are those which open and let the water flow; andthere are [hearts] which bow in fear of God, and God is notunmindful of what you do." t

When we read this tremendous indictment we seethat the Biblical facts are used for a purpose. Andthey are used with skill. The Jews could not ~enythe most of the facts here recited. They were gUIlty,or at least their fathers were guilty - as charged.The position of Mohammed is precisely the positionof the New Testament, as shown in the speech ofStephen. Mohammed had no such orderly kuowl­edge of the history as Stephen had, but he uses whatknowledge he had in just the wa~ in ~hich S~phenused his. The climax of Stephen s dIscourse IS thereal burden of Mohammed's: "Ye stiff-necked anduncircumcised in heart and ears t Ye do always re­sist the Holy Ghost; as your fathers did so do yeoWhich of the prophets did not your fathers persecute. . . ye who received the Law as it WaS ordainedby angels and kept it not I" Whether th~~e wassome knowledge of the New Testament pOSItIOn onMohammed's part we cannot certainly say. As a case

... The implication is that the murdered man was raised to life longenough to testify ngalnst his murderer.

t239•n .

of history repeating itself, the parallel is certainlyinteresting and instructive. The similarity extendsfurther than the two discourses. In eaeh ease thediscourse showed that the breaeh was at hand. TheJews eould not deny the guilt charged by Mohammedor by Stephen. It did not follow that they would beeonverted. The divergenee was already hopeless.*

Turning now to the New Testament, we discoverthat only two of its histories are known to Moham-

... For the Bake of completeness, we may notice that Mohammadhas some other incidents not yet traced to their original. He knowsof a time when the Children of Israel were commanded to enter acity in a certain way, but they changed the word which was com·manded. The Mohammedan commentators say that out of wanton·ness they went in in an indecent posture and instead of saying hitta(forgiveness) they said huMa, a grain of corn. For this they werepunished, apparently with a pestilence. This is simply a conjectureon the basis of the Koran text. I am inclined to see in the passagethe incident of the spies. The people were commanded to enterthe land (the distinction between land and city is easily lost) and toact righteously there. The spies substituted their evil reportjo?' thecommand of God. The people then, having first refused to gO, in­sisted upon going wilfully and were smitten. The resemblances arenot very marked, but thc Biblical story might give rise to what wefind in the Koran. (This identification is not original with me.)

Again we have the story of the violators of the Sabbath who werechanged into apes. The only Rabbinical para.llel yet pointed out isthe Midrash that a part of tlw people of the Tower of Babel wercchanged into apes, demons , and evil spirits. Cf. Hirschfeld, JildischttEle-mtnte im Koran (1878), p. 65, who ciws Talmud, Sanhedrin100 n. Possibly the Arabs in Medina had turned this story agnlnstthe Jews before the coming of Mohammed. It is scarcely necessaryto point out that the narrative of the red heifer has mixed twoMosaic ordinances-the sacrifice of the red heifer in the Book ofNumbers (chap. 19) and the l>euteronornic enactment (cllap. 21) thatn heifer should be slain to atone for a murder the author of whichis unkno''I'"n.

84 THE BIBLE AND ISLAMTHE KOllAN NARRATIVES 85

86 l'HE BIBLE AND ISLAM THM KORAN NARRA1'IVES 87med. These are the history of J olm the ~aptist,

and the life of J esllS. John is a prophet, and, hke theother prophets, l"eceives a book, that is, ~ l"evel~tion.*Zachariah his father, is also once mentlOned 1ll thelist of pro~hets. Elsewhere he comes in incidentally,in oonnection with the birth of his son. Zachariah'sprayer and its answer are l'Cconnted ~omewhat atlength, following in the main the l:arratIve of Luke.John is a pl'Ophet entil"ely after the pattern of thosealready known to us from the Old Testament.t .

Concerning Jesus, the first fact that we meet ISthat he is not mentioned in the earliest group ofsuras. But as very few Biblioal chamoters are me.n­tioned in this period, the fact may have no. speCIalsignificance. Mohammed's thought at this time w~s

much upon the approaching judgment. The few his­tories to which he alludes are those which enfo~ce thelesson of God's chastisement, the destruotlOn ofSodom, the ovel"throw of Pharaoh, the judgments onAd and Thamud, the oatastrophe of the Lord of ~he

Elephant. These are almost the only events to whichhe alludes. The life of Jesus presents no featurewhioh would bring it into relation. wit!, these e;e~ts,

so that although there are distlllotIvely ChristIan

* 19 13 311

t It n:a.y be, as supposed by Sprenger (Leben Muhammed's, II"184) thnt Mohammed thonght John the founder of the sect of thoSab~anB (or Mandreans). But this is not proved by the fact that hedescribes John as receiving a book. He conceives that all theprophets receive sacred books: "If they accuse thee of falsehood[remember that] the apostles before thee were Mcmed ,of false­hood, they who brought signs and Psalms and an enlIghteningBook," 31l:lI,

,

features in these early l"evelations, they present nonatural opening for a life of Jesus.

Again: it is noticeable that Jesus is nearly alwaysmentioned in connection with Mary. It almostSeems as if Mohammed were more impressed withMary than with Jesus: "[Remember] her who kepther virginity, and We made her and hel" son a signfor the worlds" is said in one of the earliest passagesin which either one is mentioned.* In another, ofthe same period, Mohammed gives an account ofthe Annunciation and of the bhth of Jesus withoutmentioning him otherwise than as the infant,t untilat the close, apparently as an afterthought, he adds:"This [that is, the infant] is Jesus, son of Mary, theWord of Truth, concerning whom they are in doubt." tStill another reference of this period is the following:" And We made the Son of Mary and his mother asign, and We gave them an asylum in a lofty place,still and wall-watered." § We can hardly be mistakenin finding here a referenoe to the Revelation of John,where the woman who gives birth to the man child,flees into the wildemess where" she has a place pre­pared of God that they may nourish her." Perhapsthis passage of the Revelation was already broughtinto connection with the Flight into Egypt. In anycase, up to this point there is no indioation of thepre-eminence of J eeus, but rather a tendenoy to holdup Mary as the chief oharacter. A further evidence

*21'1,t 19 1a-u .

~ This translation makes a alight change in the pointing, I sup­pose the sense to be the Bam~ as in 41~/.

§ 235", cf. Rev. 121.d•

THE KORAN NARRA7'IVES 89

* 19~1l.

t " Thou wast not among them when they threw their reeds to Becwhich of them should carc for Mary, Dor wert thou with them whenthey disputedt 3:;v.

t The main references are 31H\ 191

8-t1.

§These incidents arc narrated in the various Ap,ocryphal GOB.p~181cf. the volume in the Antenicene Olvristian Ltb"l'ary contal~1Dg

translations of these by Walker, American edition of the Antenu-meFathers, Vol. VIII. Some of them are also found in the Book oj

the Bet, translated by Budge.

of this is the space given to the life of Mary. In ~e.lating this, Mohammed draws from sources o~tsl~ethe Canon. His own property we can see only m hiscalling her the daughter of Imran and t~e sis~~r ofAaron *-doubtless a confusion of Mary wIth MITlam,the names being identical in Arabic.

Concerning her, we hear that she was dedicate~ byher parents to the service of God, and thus ~ame mtothe care of Zaeharias, to whom she was assIgned bythe sacred lot.t She resi,les in the Temple, whereshe is fed by the angels. She is visited by the angel,who announees that she is to become the mother ofJesus. A spring of water breaks forth at he; feetand a palm-tree supplies her with dates. The mfantJesus speaks to vindicate his mother.:!: The mostof these details can be identified in the ApooryphalGospels which have come down to us. Accordingto these Mary was dedicated to God by her parentswhen th~ee years old and taken to live in the Temple.There she was fed by the angels. When fourteenyears old she was assigned to Joseph, from whose ro,lthere came forth a dove. In her need, a palm bendsdown to supply her with dates and a spring flows ather' feet.§ We do not find in any of these souroes

88 THE BIBLE AND ISLAMthat Jesus speaks immediately after his birth, but asimilar incident is narrated in a Syriac Christiansource,* by whioh (indireotly) Mohammed was pos­sibly infiuenced.

'I.'he prominence of extra oanonical sources seen inthe life of Mary is less marked in the life of Jesus.When we are told, however, that he made birds ofoby and that when he blew upon them they becamealive, we remember the similar acoount in the Apoo­ryphal Gospels. Mohammed has also an extendedacoount of Jesus bringing a table with food fromheaven for his disciples. On the faoe of it, this seemsto be derived from the institution of the Supper, withreminiscences of Peter's vision at Joppa. We hearin general of Jesus's miracles, that he healed a manblind from his birth, and a leper, and that he raiseda dead man to life. Beyond this, Jesus is affirmed tobe a prophet, the Word of God and His Spirit, andone who received a Book of revelations.

Mohammed was compelled to define his position inregard to Jesus, first by the assertions of the Meooansand then by the ohims of the Jews. We know of thedilemma proposed by the Meccans from the followingpassage :t

"And when the son of Mary is proposedasa likeness, thenthy people turn their backs to him and say: A.re OUI' godsbetter, or is he? They say this only out of contention, andvorily they are a oontentious people. In truth he was onlya servant on whom We bestowed Our grace, and We madehim an example to the Children of Israel. (If We had

* The Life of Ephraem contained in Uhlemann's Syrt'fJcht- Ohre8­tomat.hie gives a similar incident.

t43·~H~.

90 THE BIBLE AND ISLAN THE KORAN NARRATIVES 91willed We would have produced from you angels to succeedau i~ the earth.) And he is a sign of the [~ppro,:"hof the]

YH * Therefore do not dispute concernmg thIS but fol-our. t t S t turn youlow-this is the straight path-and Je no a an

. he is your declared enemy. When Jesus broughtaway, . t "sdom andsigns and wonders he said: I brIng you rue WI. '.I '11 make plain to you a part of that concermng whIChy;': dispute. fear God and obey. God is my Lord and yourLord theref~reserve Him-this i. the straight path. Butthe .'eets disputed among themseJves. Woe to those ,,:~odo evil; for them is the punishment of a day of torture.

The most natural interpretation of this passage isthe one suggested by the commentl\tors. Moham?,edhad threatened that the idolators should be cast lUtohell and with them their false gods. The Meccansknew enough of Christ,ianity to say that Jesus alsowas an object of worship. They therefor~ held. upthe dilemma-either all objects of worshIp besIdesAllah were not cast into hell, or else J esns, wh~mMohammed held up as an example, must go WIthth In either case Mohammed had spoken falsely.

em. . hh JThis is the meaning of their questIOn w et er esuswas better than their gods.

The reply is in effect, that Jesus was only a manlike the ether' prophets, !l:nd that he himself calle.dmen to the worship of the one God. As to h,salleged divinity, not all even of the Chri~ti~ns .a~eagreed about it, and in the difference of 0plUlOn It ISbest to adhere to that of which we are fully con­vinced, namely: that there is but one God, and thatJesus was an Apostle like Abraham and Moses, butnot worthy of higher honor than they.

• Jesus's second coming will precede the judgment.

The temptation at Medina was of another sort.There Mohammed was trying to win the Jews, towhom Jesus was an abomination. It would havebeen one obstacle removed if he eouJd have taken Je­sus out of the oompany of Abraham and Moses. ButMohammed was firm in the position once taken.While still denying the divinity of Jesus, he reaffirmedhis Apostleship. The following are all from Medinansuras:

"And Jesus the son of Mary, sald to his people: 0.Children of Israeli I am the Apostle of God to you, testi­fying to the truth of what you have already received in theTora, and bringing you tidings of an Apostle to come afterme whose name is Ahmed. But wheu he showed themmiracles they said: This is evident magic.' I *

"Then [after Noah and Abraham] We sent Jesus the BOnof Mary, and We gave him the Gospel, and We placed inthe hearte of those who followed him, tenderness and com­passion. " t

"[The Day when God assembles the Apostles] He willsay: 0, Jesus, Sonof Mary I IWmember My grace bestowedupon tbee and tby Mother, when I strengthened thee withthe Spirit of Holiness, that thou shouldst speak to menwhen in the cradle and when full grown. And I taughtthee the Book and the Wisdom and the Tara and the Gos­pel. " t

This passage is followed by an account of the mir­acles; other passages of this period also affirm thatJesus performed miraoles, that he reoeived the HolySpirit, and that he was an Apostle sent with a Book.

Mohammed adhered therefore to the position oncetaken. But with the sarno persistency he refused to

·61'.

THE KORAN NARRATIVES 93

go further and acknowledge that Jesus was more thana prophet. The knowledgo that the Christians af­firmed a Trinity in the Godhead found nO responsein his heart exeept one of denial. We can scarcelywonder at this. The knowledge seems not to havecome to him until his system was settled in his ownmind. His mind was unschooled in theological defi­nition and could apprehend the doctrine only asTritheism, and therefore as a modification of thepolytheism which ho was opposing. Some have in­deed found a Trinitarian teuclency in his adoption oftho name R<lhman for God. But this is nnlikely, forthe vigor with which he rejected the Christian doc­trine is evident. The following passages cannotleave any doubt in our minds:

.. The Jcws say : Ezra is the son of God; and the Chris­tians say: The Messiah, Son of Mary, is the son of God.This word of theirs in their mouths is like the word ofthose who were uubelieving in old time. God has declaredwar against them. Why should they lie?" *

.. They are unbelievers who say that the Messiah, theson of Mary, is God. The Messiah said [on the contrary] :0, Children of Israel, serve God, my Lord and your Lord ;whoever associates anything with God [as an object ofworship], God has shut Paradise against hiw, and hisabode is the Fire, and the evildoers have no helper. Theyare unbeliovers who say: God is ono of three. There is noGod but One, and if they do not ce.ase saying this a pain­ful punishment shall overtake the unbelievera. . . .The Messiah, Son of Mary, was only an Apostle who waspreceded by other Apoatlea. His mother also waa truthful[and would not permit such an assertion]. They were bothaccuatamed ta eat [mortal] food." t

92 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM . "0, ya w~o possess the Scriptures! Be not extravagantIn your religIOn, and do not say concerning God anythingbut the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, wasthe Apostle of God and His Word which He communicatedto :Mary, and a spirit from Him. Believe therefore in Godand His Apostles and do not say: Three I Cease doi Itthat will be better for you. One God alone ia God n~ 'be it from Him that He ahould have a son I To Him b::longs what is in heaven and what is on earth-and Gods~fB.ces us as an administrator. The Messiah, Son of Mary,did not disdain to be a servant to God, nor do the angelswho draw near to him. " *• These passa~es, ~'ith others, show the sharp recoillU the Prophet s IlllUd from the doctrine of the Trin­ity. But we sho~ld. remember that the Trinity, as hesupposed the Chrlstians to teach it, was made up ofFather, Sou, and Mary. Thus only can we interprethis constant association of Mary and J esue and hisvory sparing mention of the Holy Spirit.' Amongthe Christian sects of the East, Mary was early liftedto the ~hrone of heaven. "Her cultus is [still]equa~y III v~gue among orthodox and heretics." t Itwas III ArabIa that the Collyridians invested her withthe nam? and honors of a goddess.:!: This reflection~hrows light npon a passage of the Koran where God:~ represented as saying to Jesus at the Last Day:

0, Jesus, Son of Mary I didet thou say to men: takeme and my mother as gods besides Allah? He willreply: Far be it I It does not belong to me to say

"4U~.

t Kattenbusch, L6Mbuck der Verglcickende OonJessions-Kunde(1892), I., p. 464.

t Gibbon, Decline and FaU, Chapter L. Cf. Sale Pr Ii .Discourse, § II. ' e mlUary

11' 9~O.

what is not true. Thou knowest whether I have saidit. Thou knowest what is in my soul." * This pas­sage seems to show conclusively that Mohammed con­ceived of the Christian Trinity as made up of Allah,Mary, and Jesus.

Now such a Trinity wonld seem the more distinctlyheathen to him, because the heathen also related theirgods in families. The Meccans had a considerablepantheon. The question of the relationship existingbetween its members had probably already occurredto them. If not, it was forced upon them by Moham­med's claim that two Gods ODuld not coexist withoutwar. The natural theory, as we see in other polythe­istie religions, is that the gods make a family. Notonly was this the theory of the Moocans, it was a pointat which Mohammed at one time made concessions tothem, though he afterward retracted. This experi­ence made him more than ever determined to main­tain the absolute unity of God. A number of passageswhich deny that God has children are directed prima­ri~y against the Meccan doctrine. It is probably soWIth the early profession of faith: "God is One; thesell-existent God; He begets not and is not begotten;and nothing is to be likened to Him." And again:" He it is to whom belongs the kingdom of heaven andof earth, and He has not taken any as son, nor has Hean associate in the kingdom. He created all things,ami determined them by His decree; yet they takeas gods hesides Him things which do not ereate, butare themselves created." t And once more: "Theysay: The Compassionate has a son. Far be it from

• 5116, t Sura 112, and 25'1.3.

'" 2196-3°. t 199j

r.t Of course the JeW8 would not call him either the Mesl!liah or

the Apostle of God. Mohammed gives the sense of their claim as

it lay in his mind.

Him. Nay, these are honoreel servants. They donot anticipate Him in speaking, and they performHis commands. He knows what is before and whatis behind them, and they can intercede only SO faras He gives permission, and they tremble with fear ofHim. Should one of them say: I am a God besidesHim-such an one We will reward with Gehenna.Thus we reward the evildoers." * It is abundantlyevident that this is directed against the gods of theMeccans. But having taken this position in regardto the daughters of God, as they called their goddesses,no way was opeu to him to acknowledge the sonshipef Christ. In truth, he shows no desire to recognizeit, and in one place goes so far as to say that, at theaffirmation that God has a son, the heavens are readyto be rent in twain, the earth to cleave asunder, andthe mOlll1tains to faU into ruin·t

One thing more must be noticed in this connection.In regard to tho death of Jesus, Mohammed tookwhat is known as the Doketic position. His lan­guage is this: "They [that is, the Jews] say: Weslew the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the Apos­tle of God.t But they did not slay him, and theydid not crucify him, but a likeness was presented tothem, and they who disputed concerning bim were iudoubt-they bad no certain knowledge, but followedan opinion. Tbey did not kill bim in reality; Godraised bim to Himself. God is almigbty a.nd wise.

94 TIlE BIBLE AND ISLAMnIEtJ KOUAN NAUUATIVES 95

There are none of the people of the Scriptures whowill not believe on him before their death, and in theday of resurrection he will be a witness againstthem." * It is clear from this language that the doc­trine adopted by Mohammed came from those Gnostioseots whioh denied that Jesus was really oruoified,holding that Judas was substituted for him, and nailedto the cross, while Jesus asoendcd directly to heaven.tThe variations of this view held by the different sectsdo not here coneern us. What interests us is themotive of Mohammed in adopting it, as he did, at acomparatively late date. In earlier chapters he al­ludes to the death of J esns in the same terms whiohhe employs in speaking of the other prophets. t

It is perhaps significant that Mohammed SO oftenreproaches the people of the Scriptures with theirdifferences and disputes. He had primarily in mind,we may suppose, the disputes between Jews andChristians. But it is not unlikely that he also knewof the differenees between the Christian sects. If sowe may conclude that he had become aware of thedifferent views of the death of Jesus, and that he wascompelled to ehoose between them. The motive inadopting the one on whioh he finally settled was fur­nished by the Jews at Medina. The passage beforeus shows that the Jews tannted him with the olaimthat they had put to death one of the Apostles whomhe olaimed as a predeoessor.§ Now, in his general

• 4'" t. t Of. Herzog, P.R.E.', IX., p. 241. t 19".§ An interesting parallel is found in the language used by the

Jewish King Dbu Nowas to the Christian inhabitants of Nagran:" The Grecks know that our fathers, who were priests and Pharisees

and lawyers in Jerusalem, crucified a man in Jerusalem j and theysmote and mocked and killed him because they saw and were con~

villced that be 'vas not God. Why will you cherish your delusioncoucernlng this man?" The siege of Nagran WilS in the centurybefore Mohammed'a call, and while the- {Etbiopic) accoun~ fromwhich this language is quoted is comparatively late, we have noreason to suspect Moslem influence. Cf. Fell, Dt'~ Oh?'tstentJer..folgungen in SildwraMen l Z.D.M.G., XXXV., p. 56.

soheme, Mohammed found no room for the early deathof a prophet. In the oases already discussed, theprophet was uniformly delivered, while the unbelieVe?'8were destroyed. The life of Jesus as it is given inthe Gospels does not oonform to this seheme. Thetheory that J esns offered himself for His people didnot eommend itself to him if he ever heard of it, norwould it really answer the argument of the Jews.The relief sought was fonnd in the Doketie doetrine,which was therefore adopted. In this way the life ofJesus was brought into harmony with Mohammed'sgeneral scheme of history as already exemplified inthe aeeount of the earlier prophets.

Our study of this evening has shown us the methodand the aim of one religious leader. It shows himwilling to take historical material wherever he couldfind it, to serve the great end he had at heart. Itshows him moulding the material according to his ownexperiences, and making it serve the edification ofhis own followers. In all this I conceive that we arediscovering something like a law of spiritual progress.

In the next leeture we shall approaeh the moredistinetly theologieal part of our subjeet, in lookingat Mohammed's doctrine of God.

96 THE BIBLE AND ISLA,lITHE KORAN NARRATIVES 97

7

TIlE DOOTRINE OF GOD 99

LECTURE IV.

THE DOCTRINE OF GOD

MOHAMMED, like other reformers, raised his voicein conscious opposition to the existing system. Inone of his first revelations he is bidden to say: "0,you that disbelieve; I will not serve what you serve,nor do you serVe what I serve. . . . You haveyour religion and I have miue," * The point atwhich he was consciously and most distinctly in op­position to his contemporaries was the unity of God,There is no God but Allah, was, and continues to be,the watchword of Islam. The infidels are most oftendescribed as those who associate other beings withAllah as objects of worship. In the sura just quotedMohammed seems, indeed, to say that the Meccansdid not worship the same God which he worshipped,But it is plain from other passages that he did notdeny that Allah was one of the deities in their pan­theon. He meant that their worship was so vitiatedby its polytheistic character that it was no true wor­ship. Allah, like Yahweh, tolerates no partners."Thou shalt have no other gods in My presence"was with him, as with the Hebrews, the first com­mandment, and he appreciated it to the full, Thedeclaration of God's unity: "God is Ono; the Self.

'" Sura. 109.98

existent God; He begets not and is not begotten;and there is none like to Him," may'be put besidethe declaration of Moses: "Ileal', °18rael, Yahwehour God, Yahweh is One ; and thou shalt love Yahwehthy God with all thy mind and with all thy soul andwith all thy strength." The oneness of God is areason for the exclusive nature of the worship paidto Him. The Biblical statement that Yahweh is ajealous God is simply the affirmation of the truthknown to Mohammed, that Allah admits no partners.With him, as with the Hebrew law-giver, there was aconviction of the infinite worthiness of the one God,a worthiness which admits none to comparison withHim.

Mohammed was not the first of the Arabs to recog­nize this truth, There is a very strong current oftradition to the effect that in this case also therewere Reformers before the Reformation. Reflectingmen had become dissatisfied with the popular re­ligion, Some of them had sought refuge in Judaismor Christianity. Others were not drawn to thesereligions, but adopted monotheism and abandonedthe worship of idols. An example is Zaid Ibn Amr,of whom Mohammed's earliest biographer says: "Headopted neither Christianity nor Judaism, but he gaveup the religion of his people; he abandoned the idols,kept himself from what was strangled, from blood,from what was offered to idols and from infanticide.He professed to worship the Lord of Abraham." *This Zaid was known to Mohammed who on hearin"

" 0

'" Wei), Das Leben lIfohannmul's nach JJIQhammed llnf, Ishak bear~b,it,t oem ]b" Hischam (1864), I , p. 108,

THE DOOTRINE OF' GOD 101

of his death, said: In the Resurrection he will forma communion by himself.* Several such hanifs aathey are called-the same word is applied to Abrahamas we saw-are mentioned in the time of Mohammed.Some of them joined him, some rejeeted him. Theyare an indication that the more eamest spirits werealready breaking away from heathenism. .

The difference between them and Mohammed ISthat they were eontent to work out their own salva­tion and let other people alone-to go to heaven theirway, and let the others go to the other place theirway, as a medern writer describes toleration:-w~ere.as Mohammed felt the impulse to preach against Idol­atry. This it was which ronsed the Meccans. Theirreligion was a part of the standing ord.er, ~nd tochange it meant revolntion. Mecca owed ItS Impor­tance and its wealth to the fact that it was all empo­rinm. Its trade was secured by its being an asylumin which tribes otherwise hostile eould meet in safety.The visible pledge of aaylum waa the presence of thegods of aU the tribes at the Meccan sanctuary. Todemand that these gods should be destroyed andAllah alone worshipped, waa to demand the overthrowof their soeial and political institutions, and, as theyregarded it, such a movement would be followed byfinancial ruin. Their first theory was that the demandcould come only from a man possessed by a devil.But aa Mohammed showed much method in his mad­ness, they took active measures against him, so thatat last he found safety only in flight.

Mere negations, however, do not triumph. The• Sprenger l Leben Ml~1I.ammed'sl 1., p. 83.

100 THE BIBLE AND ISLAMcreed of Islam is indeed there is no God but Allah.But behind this creed, which is negative in form, therelies a positive conception of the character of Allah-­a conception which was clearly set forth by Moham­med, which attracted his followers, and which is stillthe real belief of all reflecting Moslems. Even in theearliest suras, Allah is a definite and active person­ality. Mohammed would heartily have accepted thestatement of the Westminster Shorter Catechism:"There is but one only, the living and true God."Note the following Koran passages:

., He is God, besides whom there is no God. He is theKnower of the sooret and of the manifest. He is the Merci.ful, the Compassionate. He is the King, the All·Holy, theComplete, the Protector, the Guardian, the Almighty, theRuler, the Glorious. Far from Him be that which theyassociate with Him. He is God, the Creator, the Maker,the Fashioner-all excellent names arc Hi.. Whatever i. inheaven and on earth praises Him. He is the Almighty theAll-wise. " '* '

.. Say to them: To whom belongs the earth and all thatis in it-do you know? They will say : It belongs to Allah.Answer them: Will you not then praise Him? Who is theLord of the seven heavens, and the spacious canopy? Theywill say: Allah. Answer them: Will you not then fearHim? In whose hand is the rule of the universe, who pro­tects, but against whom no one protectB-do you know?They will say : It is Allah. Answer them: Then why willyou be bewitched [by idolatry]? Verily, we have sent themthe truth, but they are liars. " t

Biblical pamllels to several of these predicatesreadily suggest themselves. But in ordel' to get a

t 23ss.n .

102 THE BIBLE AND lSLAJf THE DOOTRINE OF GOD 103

clearer view of the doctrine of the Koran, we shall beobliged to adopt some sort of arrangement underwhich we can group together the great variety ofdicta probantia. Let us note, then:

1. The Ged of Mohammed is Allah, the God al­ready known by name to the Arabs. In the passagejust quoted, Mohammed conducts a dialogue with hisadversaries in which they show themselves no stran­gers to Allah. It would be precarious to build onsuch a passage a theory that Allah was already roc­ONnized as the supreme God of the pantheon. But itat least shows that the heathen knew Him by name,and that they could not seriously object to the doc­trine of the Prophet as new and unheard of. Proba­bly they had never reflected on th~ ~ubjects Qn wh~chhe questioned them. In early reh!SlOns the questlO!,of creation, for example, is not raised; the world IS

taken as it is, and no theory of its origin is formu­lated. When the question is raised, the Meccans aremore likely to answer Allah than anything else,because Allah is the most general name for God.The word means simply the divinity, and could be ap­plied to any God. Hobal was Al}ah at Mecca, andanother God was Allah at Taif. Two Arabs mightswear by Allah, and each have his own divinity inmind, just as Abraham and Abimel~ch might bothswear by Elohim, though the Elohim of Abrahamwas Yahweh and the Elohim of Abimelech was an­other.

It is not necessary to assume, therefore, as somehave done, that there was already a fully developeddoctrine of Allah Taala-God Most High-among

the Arabs before Mohammed.* The case was notdifferent from that of the Hebrews. When Yahwehannounced His proper name, he was careful to iden­tify Himself with the Elohim already known to thepeople and to their fathers. The only difference isthat Mohammed contented himself (at least finally)with the general name, while the Hebrew kept bothnames, though insisting that Yaltweh is the onlyElohim.

As a visible and substantial evidence that Allahwas not an unknown God, Mohammed retained theancient sanctuary of the Kaaba. So long as he wasat Mecca he seems to have had no hesitation in this.When he went to Medina he tried to make a change.But he was obliged to return, after no long time, tohis original position. As evidence that it was hisoriginal position, we have Sura 106, apparently anearly one, in which he exhorts the Koreish to invokethe Lord of this house. In other religions we see thetendency to identify the newly revealed God withone already known. Even the Apostle Paul inti­mates that the God whom he preaches at Athens isone already worshipped there.

The proposition that Allah is the only God doesnot necessarily mean that the other so-called godshave absolutely no existence. This was too radical astep to take all at once. Mohammed conceded theexistence of spirits or demons who had seduced mento their worship. The Arabic word for these beings isJinn (collective), and as we have no exact equivalentit is better te retain this word in translation: "But

iii Dozy, Essai sur t' Histovre de t'Islamisme (1879), p. 5.

.. 6100,

t 2a6~f and 4111•

~ With Lev. 17' C£.2 Chron. 1115• With Deut. 321' cf. Pa. 10631

,

Gunkel combines with these Pa. 405 where the ido1!l llre culled"'eha,bi'fl~: U evil beingsl enemics to Ullln,"

§I. Cor. 102D•

they giYe associates to God, tho Jinn, whom He ore­ated; and ont of ignoranoe they falsely attribute toHim sons and daughters. Far be this from Him!He is exalted aboye what they ascribe to Him." * Inanother passage, the false gods are questioned byAllah at the Judgment, and avow that they havemisled their worshippers; and again we are told thatthe idolaters worship only Satan the rebellious.t Itis not mere dramatic imagery intended to emphasizethe eyil of polytheism that is presented in these pas­sages. Mohammed admitted that the false gods havea real existence. What he denied was not theirreality hut their divinity-their power to help orharm.

We find in this a distinct pamllel to hoth Old Tes­tamentand New. Itwill suffice to quote Leviticus 17' :" They shall no longer sacrifice their sacrifices to thesatyrs (se'irim, the desert demons) after which theyhave [heretofore] gone astray." In Deuteronomyalso we read that they sacrificed to demons (shedim)instead of God.t For the New Testament, we havePaul's assertions that the things which the Gentilessacrifice they sacrifice to demons and not to God." §The helief in spirits which infest the desert is veryold among the Semites-indeed beliefs of this kindare found among all nations. It was therefore nat­ural that Mohammed should identify these beings

104 l'BE BIBLE AND ISLA.'!Il'HE D007'RINE OF GOD 105

with the divinities worshippec} by the heathen Ambs.It is not unlikely, however, that he was also influencedremotely by the Biblical statements just quoted.

2. The God of Mohammed is also the God of Jewsand Christians. This also is indicated by the name(Allah, AI-i1ah), which is found in Hebrew (Eloah,Elohim) and in the Christian Syriao. The identity isnot only clear from the name itself, but from directassertions of the Koran: "Debate with those whohave the Soriptures only in the most honorable man­ner . . . I1lld say: We believe in what is re­vealed to US and in what is revealed to you; yourGod and our God are one God, and we are resignedto Him."" The dootrine of Mohammed is like thedoctrine of Christianity in its universalism. Allah isnot the God of a partioular moo only; He is God ofthe whole earth. This was also the doctrine of theOld Testament in its latest stages. The religiousimpulse seems to find in the oneness of God theunifying principle of human history. Hence comesthe necessity of finding our God in the God of thefathers. The pamllel between Abraham, Moses, andJ esns, which Mohammed extended to himself wasanother expression of the oontinuity of the one Gad­a God who has never left Himself withont witness.By some one of His prophets He has repeatedlyoalled men to repentance and obedience. That inthis respect Mohammed ooonpies ground which ismore distinctly Christian than Jewish, needs no dem­onstration.

3. This God enters into personal relation with* 2!)1~.

those who believe on Him. He Himself is n person-there is no pantheism in the Koran. The Gnostioseots whioh swarmed in the farther East had notpenetrated Arabia with their emanistio speoulations.At least we find no trace of their influence in thetheology of Mohammed. God and the universe ap­pear to him as shal}lly distinguished as man and theworld. Not even in polemic does he betray any sus­picion of pantheism. The whole impression madeby what he says, and by what he does not say, is tothe effeot that he oould not even conceive of a Godwithout personality.

To a certain extent, his view was anthropomorphic.If we mean by anthropomorphism every ascriptionof thought or feeling to God, then all religions exceptBuddhism are infected with anthropomorphism. Is­lam, or at least the Koran, is not extreme in attribut­ing a human form to God. To speak of His hands (asis done a few times) is almost unavoidable in describ·ing His activity. Beyond this He does not receivebodily members. That the traditions are mOl'epronounced than the Koran, is only what we shouldexpect, but how far we can rely upon these is diffi­cult to decide. We shall have no hesitancy in ac­cepting tradition where it makes Mohammed say thatin Paradise the believer shall see God, for this is ahope common to other believers. On the whole theanthropomorphism of the Koran- is not more pro­nounced than that of the Bible.

Now, as to the communion which exists betweenGod and his worShippers-we must recognize thisalso as a principle of all religion. Even in heathen-

ism the gods enter into personal relations with theirworshippers: "They take the Satans as thei,' pro­tectors besides Allah, yet think they are guidedaright;" "Allah is the protector of those who be­lieve; He brings them from darkness into light.But as for those who disbelieve, their protectorsare the devils; they bring them from light to dark­ness." * The word translated protector (walt) meansthe next of kin, who has the right and the obligationof blood revenge-the go'el of the Old Testament.Mohammed's eonception is precisely that of Job, whoregards God as his" Redeemer" in exactly the senseiu which this passage speaks of protectors. Moham­med allows that the idolaters have entered into therelation of clientage (if I may so say) to their gcds.The protection promised is of no avail, not becausethe relation does not exist, but beoause the protec­tors have no power to carry out what they havepromised. In the next world the worshipped andthe worshippers shallaliJw be brought to oonfusion.On the other hand the God and Protector of Moham­med is all powerful, and therefore, able to oarry outHis promise.

The sense of loyalty to God is expressed in thefrequent use of the term my L01'd, in which thespeaker embodies his claim on God, and God's claimon him. In the earliest gronp of suras this term isused about three times as often as the name Allah,and thus shows the vivid sense of God's presencewith which the Prophet entered on his mission. In

... 7~9 and 2219'. The word Taghut used for the false gods iso~8cure; but there can be no doubt of its meaning in this context.

106 1'HE BIBLE AND ISLAMTHE DOC1'RINE OF' GOD 107

lOS THE BIBLE AND ISLAMTHE DOOTRINE OF GOD 109

His imperial throne upon water." * The reference ofthe last clause is so obviously to the account in Gen­esis, where the Spirit of God brooded on the face ofthe waters, that we may assume Biblicl11 influence onthe tradition. Probably the influence extended toMohammed himself, for his account of the creation islargely borrowed from tbe Bible. For example, weare told that: "God creates what He will; when Hedecides upon a thing He says; Be I and it is." tThe Biblical parallel is familiar. Another feature ofthe Biblical account found in the Koran, is the ac­complishment of the work in six days: "And it isHe who created the heavens and the earth in thespace of six days, while His throne was on thewaters." t An evidence of Mohammed's freedom intreating Biblical materials is found, however, in hisassertion that God was not affected by fatigue §-l1nevident rejection of the Old Testament word thatGod rested the scventh day. Moreover he does notseem to he clear as to the order of the six days'work: He says in one passage: "Will you disbe­lieve in God who made the earth in two days . . .and made the mountains which tower above it, andWho arranged provision upon it in four days, snf­ficient for those who ask. Thon He ascended to thehel1vens when they were yet smoke, and said to themand to the ol1rth: Come, willingly or unwillingly I Theyreplied: We come willingly. And He divided theminto seven heavens in two days, and communicatedto each heaven ita order, and We decked the lower

the choice of the term he was doubtless under Script­ural influence, for God is Lord of all both in the OldTestament and in the New.* The vividness of Mo­hammed's fl1ith, which impels him to say my LorddoeB not canBe him to forget the cll1ims of othel'S.God iB the Lord of Abraham, of Moses, even of theunbelievers.t In the prayer which in Isll1m takes theplace of the Lord's Prayer-the Fatiha-He is theLord of the worlds.t But He is also the one to whomthe believer cries for help.

4. Allah is the Creator. This is a conceptionwhich can be adeqnately held only in a monotheisticreligion. Polytheism, so far as it has a doctrine ofcreation, thinks of the universe as modified by thestrife of many gods. But where God is one, crea.­tion and lordship go together. Mohammed followedBiblical precedent in emphasizing their union. Oneof his most frequent argnments is that Allah is Crea­tor and therefore Lord, or even that He is Creatorand therefore the only true God. There is no sus­picion of the eternity of matter in the Koran. In atradition we find this question put to Mohammed:"0, Apostle of Allah, where was our Cherisherbefore creating His creation?" He replied: "GodWI1S, and nothing was with Him, and God created

• The word Rabb, Mohammed's word for L01'd, is not used of Godin Hebrew. In Aramaic it is said to be 80 used by the Mandreans(Michaelis l Lexuon 8yr. sub voce). This is another indication thatMohammed's ideas were derived from some" heretical tI source.

t5130, 79Ja, 51 014, d. 6910,tI l , cf. 69 t3• The word for wadds (or ages it may be) is bor~

rowed from the Aramaic, whether Christian or Jewish is impossibleto tell. Cf. I. Tim. II'. • Jfis71<aJ, II., 650.

t llD, cf. 50;\\ 514 •

t ga, 164~•

§ GO".

110 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE DOOTRINE OF GOD 111

heaven with lamps and guardians-this was the de­cree of the Almighty, the Wise." * By couuting thetwo days first mentioned as part of the four, we canmake ont the requisite total of six. But even then itis impossible to find traces of the Biblical arrange­ment, in which the creation of the heavenly bodiestakes place on the fourth day. But from the religiouspoint of view Mohammed had thoroughly adopted thedoctrine of the Bible, as the following somewhat ex­tended quotation will make plain:

" It is God who raised the heavens without visible pil­lars: then He ascended to the throne, and made the sunand moon obedient [to His will], so that each runs to itsappointed goal. He regulates affairs and makes plain Hissigns, that you may be sure of the meeting with your Lord.And it is He who spread out the earth and made in itmountains and rivers; and of every fruit He made twokinds. He makes the night succeed the day-in this aresigns for people who reflect. And in the earth are tracts[different though] bordering on each other: vineyards andflelds and palms, in groups or isolated. They are suppliedwith the same watsr, yet We make the quality of one bet­ter than that of another-verily in this are signs for peoplewho understand. . . . It is He who shows you thelightning. an object of terror and of desire, and who bringsup the clouds heavy with rain. The thunder celebratesHis praise, the angels also, moved by fear of Him. Hescnds the thunderbolts and smites whom He will. Yet alltho whilo mon 00l'0 dispnting concerning God, though He isthe mighty in power. To Him sincere prayer should bemade, and those whom men invoke besIdes Him shall notanswer them in any rcspoot, any more than one stretchingout his hands to the water which he cannot reach to bringit to his mouth. The prayer of the unbellevers is only loss.

... 41 (8 -11).

All that are in heaven and in earth bow to God willingly orunwillingly---even their shadows bow morning and evening.Who is Lord of heaven and earth 1 It is God. And willyou take as protector those who cannot benefit or harmeven themselves 1 Are the bllnd and the clear-eyed allke 1Is the darkness the samo as the light 1 Will they give Godassocia.tes who create as He creates, so that the creation isconfused between them 1 [Nay I] God is the Creator, He isthe One, the Victorious."*

The passage shows how creation and governmentare intertwined. Although not parallel to any singleBiblical text, it is full of Biblical allusions. God isin both Old Testament and New, the Creator ofheaven and earth; He makes the sun run its ap­pointed course; He spreads out the earth and whatgrows upon it; and He also makes fast the mountains.Further: it is He who created the fruit trees, aswell as herb for the service of man, bringing forthbread out of the earth. He brings up the thunder­storms also, and smites the Egyptians with this asone of His visitations; and He is of course the giverof rain.t The figure of the thuuder as the voice ofGod which we find in the Old Testament is not re­peated by Mohammed, but in every other respect hisconception of Allah as the master of the storm isparallel to that of the Bible. And so we may say ofthe conception that the creation is for the benefit ofman, whose gratitude should lead him to worshiphis Creator. All created things adore Him. Not

... 13~'" 13.1',

t For the Biblical phraseology consult Gen. 11. Il, Ps. 19~, IMl.,Is. 42\ Pa. 65', lO'P", 29. Other passages will suggest themselvesto the reader.

THE DOOTRINE OF GOD 113

only does ~he thunder chant His praise, and theangels bow before Him, all things on earth join w~ththem: "All that are in heaven and on earth praIseGod, His is the kingdom and He is the Ruler overall." *

It is also in accord with Biblical ideas that the O1'e­ation should be used as evidence of the character ofGod. It is, first of all, an evidence of His power.When men scoffed at the idea of a resurrection asbeing a thing impossible, Mohammed pointed outthat to bring men from dust the second time wouldnot be difficult for Him who created them out of clayat the first. The creation is an evidence that Godcan do (and therefore will do) what He promises orthreatens. The argument is the same used by Deu­tero-Isaiah. When the people are faint-hearted con­cerning the promises of God, this prophet remindsthem that the promises come from the One "whomade all things, who stretched out the heavens alone,and spread abroad the earth by Himself." Moham­med was more concerned with the doubts of unbe­lievers than with the discouragements of believers,but in bringing his message te his people, he remindsthem that the pewer shown in creation may be tmnedupon them in chastisement.

The creation is, further, an evidencs of God'sknowledge. He that made all things must certainlyknow all things. There is perhaps no attribute whichis more frequently mentiened than this. He is theKnowing, the Wise, or, God is a disce1'ner o/lohat theydo, have become to Mohammed stereotype phralles

• 641•

with which he rounds off his periods. That he wasnot unmindful of their significance is seen from themore extended propositions such as the following:" Do they not know that God knows what they con­ceal and what they discourse about in private, andthat God is the knower of secrets." * Again:" Threedo not sit in secret converse except that He makesthe fourth, or five without His being the sixth; andwhether there be few or more, He is with them where­evel' they are. In the day of resurrection He will tellthem what they have done-verily God is omnis­cient." t The Biblical parallels are too numerous toquote. The particular kind of knowledge which thePsalmist finds wonderful when he says: "Thine eyessaw my formless substance and in Thy book all waswritten in the days when it was taking shape" t isalso emphasized by Mohammed. And where theNew Testament gives the fall of a sparrow as withinthe omniscient eye, Mohammed adduces the fall of aleaf.§

5. God not only creates, He also governs. Thekingdom of heaven and earth is His: "Verily yourLord is the God who created the heavens and theearth in six days; then He took His seat upon thetjIrone, making the night darken the day, which [inits turn] follows swiftly; and the sun and moon andthe constellations are obedient to His command. Donot creation and rule belong to Him? Blessed beGod, Lord of the worlds."n The mind of the speakersees in God the great efficiem cause of all. He is

112 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

*" 9~91 cf. 21 110,

t Pa. 1391~, cf. Karan 13',S

t 5Se, cf. 3t1 .

§ 6", cf. Matt. 10". II 7".

the active mover of the constellations and the sea­sons. In another passage He is said to sit npon thethrone corulucting the affairs of the universe. He notody gives rain, driving the clouds as He will; Herules in the affairs of men: "0 God, Ruler of theKingdom, Thou givest the kingdom to whom Thouwilt, and Thou takest away the kingdom from whomThou wilt. Thou strengthenest whom Thou wilt, andThou humblest whom Thou wilt, and in Thy hand isgood j Thou art omnipotent."" We are reminded ofthe Song of Hannah j "Yahweh makes poor and makesrich: He makes low and also raises on high." Howfar God employs second causes we need not nowstop to inquire.

6. AiJ the ruler of the universe, God is also theGod of history. The principle of His government isvery simple: He rewards those who obey and Hepunishes the disobedient. This implies some reve·lation of His will. As we saw in Mohammed's treat­ment of his nalTative material, all history falls intoepochs, each of which rounds out the same cycle. Godfirst makes His will known by a prophet. Men eitherreceive the message and obey, or they reject itand are destroyed. It may not always be necessarythat a prophet interpret the will of God. Creationis itself a revelation: "In the heavens and the earthare signs for those who believe j in your creationalso and in the animals which are disporsed [over theearth] are signs for those who are firm in their faith,and in the succession of night and day, and in theportion which God sends down from the heavens,

... 325, cf. 1. Sam. 2',

114 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE DOOTRINE OF GOD 115

~ith w~ich ;S:e revives the earth after its death, analU the dire.ctIOn.of the winds-in these are signs for~eople of mtelhgence." * There is in nature there­fore a revelation of God. Whether this alone is asufficient guide does not appear. The ProphetseemS not to have raised this question. In historyae he s~w it, God was accnstomed to send additionaire~elat:ons by the band of His messengers. Fromt~IS pomt of view His justice becomes manifest-Hegives me~ the alternative of obedience or disobedience.~e can rightly punish those who disobey and He canrIghtly reward those who obey.

It follo.ws therefore that Allah is a God of justice.Here agam, Mohammed had a practical rather than aspeculative interest. It had never OCCUlTed to him(apparently) to inquire whethor right or wrong aredependent on the will of God. If the question had?een put to hi;n he would very likely have answeredIII the affirmative. Goe! is an absolute monarch j Hedoes what He pleases. So far Mohammed would havesaid that the will of God is the ground of right andv:rong. But it is nevertheless the constant assump­tron of th~ Kor~n t~at God is a morally perfect char­a.cter. HIS actIOn IS such that it meets our idea ofrrght.t Thoui5h none can restrain or call Him to ac­co.unt, yet He does not punish without cause. If wefml to find perfect justice in His dealings with men inthis present life, we must turn to the future when all

'" 45'l-5tt " The Apostle of God said: When God created the creation H

wrote a. book which is near Him upon the imp-erial throne an:what is written in it is this: Verily My compa.asion Qvercorn:fJ 'Myauger. "-Misltcat, 1. , p. 063.

116 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM'l'HE DOCTRINE OF GOD 117

will be made plain. The thought of the Day of Judg­ment is therefore indispensable to our idea of God'sjustice. That day completes the purpose of creation." Did you reckon that We oreated you in sport, andthat you would not appear before Us?" * This isone of God's questions at the Judgment. It impliesthat the purpose of creation is attaincd only in thefiual apportionment of rewan1 and punishment. With­out this, the creation of man would have been a vainact.

God does not always act according to our desiresor hopes. This is a matter of universal experience.The explanation of it in the Koran, as in the Bible, isthat God proves men: "Verily, We proved them aswe proved the owners of the garden, who swore thatthey would gather its fruits the next morning. Theyswore without reservation, but while they slept therecame a visitation from the Lord, and in the morningit [the garden] was like a field of stubble." t Suchan experience is sent to try the state of man's heart;he must learn from it that he is not independent ofGod. The conclusion is plain, and is expressed inlanguage which agrees almost verbally with an exhor­tation of the New Testament: "Do not say concern­ing anything: I will do it to-morrow, without addingif God will, and remember thy Lord when thou hastforgotten Him, and say: Perhaps my Lord willguide me to the accomplishment of this affair.":j:The alternations of fortune in the experience of theMoslem community are explained as a part of theirprobation: "We make the days [of good and evil

fortune] to alt~rnate among men, that God may knowthose who beheve, and may take from you martyrsfor Himself." * Were oonstant good the lot of manh~ ."'o~ld become insupportable: "If God gave pro­VISlOn 1ll abundance to His servants they would actinsolently in the earth. He therefore apportions ac­cording to His will-He knows and sees His ser­vants." t God's purpose is plain: "We will proveyou by ill fortune and by good, as a test, and unto Usshall you be brought.":j: The thought is distinctlyBiblical. Abraham is tested by the command to offerhis son. So the Koran says in giviug an account ofthe same incident.§ That Mohammed so understoodthe experience of Job, to which he also alludes, ismade probable by the concluding sentence of thatpassage: "We found him possessed of patience." IIHow thoroughly Mohammed adopted the doctrine isseeu in his statement that even the game which camein sight of the pilgrims to Mecca was sent to provethem, to discover whether they would obey the law:"That God may know him who fears Him in hisheart." 1 Apparent caSes in whieh God's actionsoannot be explained on our ideas of justice are thero­fore ~nly appar.ent. He acts in a mysterious waysometimes, but 1ll the end all will be plain, and weshall see the wicked punished and the good rewarded.

The reward of those who do well is affirmed onalmost every page of the Koran. The great burdenof Moha=ed's preaching is the Day of Judgment.This day will result in endless pleasure for the good,

*81:J4. t4226• t2ptl,§ 31106, cf. 2118, 113813. ,. 595.

118 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM 7'HE DOOTRINE OF GOD 119

as it will bring endless pain to the evil: "Shall Itell you what is better [than the pleasures of thisworld]? Those who fear God shall possess in thepresence of their Lord Gardens in which are peren­nial streams and pure wives, and the good favor ofGod' God has regard to His servants," " Those whofear 'God shall dwell in the midst of gardens andfountains. partaking of what their Lor~ give~ them;they are the ones who did well in theu earlier [thatis their earthly] life," * God. therefore, does notd~sire to bring men into evil. After speaking of thefuture life, the speaker adds: "These are the won­ders of God which we recite to thee; God does notdesire injustice to the universe," t The passage re­minds us of Ezekiel's declaration, that God does notdesire the death of the wicked, and the resemblance isthe mOl'e marked in that both cases imply that theprophet is sent because God does not desire to doinjustice, His desire is rather that mau may haveopportunity to repent. Nevertheless, He must takecognizance of men's actions. This is one e;ide~ce ofHis superiority over the idols: "~e who IS mmdf~lof every soul with regard to what It has ~arned-wl!lthey take others besides such a God? tHere 18

where His omniscience most nearly concerns us.Because He is all-seeing, He can vindicate justice:"How will it be when We assemble you to a Dayconce1'lling which there is no doubt, and every soulshall be paid what it has earned. and none shall betreated unjustly? II § ,

As for God's justice in punishing, we may find It• 3\' nd 51"

, t 3·... t 1333• § 3".. ,

even in the present world. Historically it appears inthe destruction of Pharaoh and other wrong-doers inthe past: "God seized them for their sins, and Godis strict in taking account," * Elsewhere God is de­scribed as quick in reckoning, so that He does not failin determining the just dues of each one: "We willestablish the scales of equity in the Day of Itesurrec­tion, and no soul shall be wronged in any matter;were it the weight of a grain of mustard seed, We willpay it, and We are sufficient as accountants," t Thephrase grain 0/ mustard seed makes us suspect NewTestament influence, but it may be only a proverbialphrase, of whose New Testament origin Mohammedhad no knowledge, The conception of the scales ofjustice is found in the Bible, though also found inextra-Biblical sources. In the Bible it is generallythe men who are weighed instead of their actions.The figure is natural and appropriate in either fOl'Ul.The specific statement that God calls men to accountis also Biblica1.:j:

Because of His justice God hates the evil: "Thosewho disbelieve will be summoned [and told]: Thehatred of God is greater than your hatred of eachother [was] when you were invited to the faith anddisbelieved," § The path in which the believer de­sires to be led is the path of those with whom Godis not angry. The Israelites who murmured at themanna., returned with the anger of God upon them.When a believer kills another believer, his portion

'" 3'i. t 2148,

t Compare Rom. 141~, I. Sam. 2\ Ps. 6210, Dan. og,.§40",

120 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM TIlE DOOTRINE OF GOD 121

... 4115, cf. 2~8.

~ Ex. 32101 Ps. 71~, and IJ.om. Ill!..

will be hell fire: " God is angry with him and curseshim and prepares for him a grievous punishment." *Similar language is used of the Israelites who werechanged into apes and swine, and.also of the ~y?o­crites at Medina.t How closely lt follows Blbhcalprecedent, I need scal'cely say. In t~e Old Testa­ment, God is a just judge, and as such lS angry eve~y

day. When the people worship the golden calf Hisanger burns against them.+ In the New Testa~entalso, the wrath of God is revealed from heaven agamstall ungodliness and unrighteousness of men. . .

7. Strict justice would result in the extermJ~atl?n

of the race : " If God should take men in thelr sm,He would not leave upon the earth a living creature.But He grants them delay till a fixed term. Whentheir term shall comll it will not be delayed or ad­vanced an hour;" § God is therefore long-suffeoring;He does not hasten His punishment. This is the ex­planation of a fact which proba~ly. perpl?xed Mo­hammed as it had perplexed the Blbhoal wrlters. Wesee that in this world wioked men often enjoy goodfortune for a long time. The perplexity does notarise merely from the inequality in the lot of the goodand the bad. The prolongation of the life of a wiokedman gives him a prolonged opportunity to do theevil things that God hates. Why does not Godspeedily out suoh men off? Two answers are. pos­sible. God may be giving them the opportUnlt~ torepent. or on the other hand, He may be allowmgthem t~ fili up the measure of their iniquity, so as to

t 5" and 48'•§ 1G~3.

;,

earn the more oomplete and exemplary punishment.Both these solutions of the problem are presented inthe Bible, and Mohammed also seems to have enter­tained both, though he does not sharply distinguishbetween them. The passage quoted above seems tosay only that a strict administration of justice oannotbe oarried out, beoause no one oould stand before it.It agrees with the Psalmist who Sltys: "If Yahwehshould closely watoh iniquities, 0 Lord, who couldstand? "* On this side, God's meroy is simply aconcession to humau weakness. But that He alsospares men in order that they mltY repent, while notdireotly stltted, is implied in mltny passages whiohspeltk of Him as merciful ltnd gmoious, as invitingmen to repent..'\noe and Himself loving to turn tothose who tnrn to Him. But we find also the theorythat the wioked are spared in order that they may(like the Amorites) fill up the measure of their iniq­uity: "Let not those who disbelieve reokon that thelong life which We grant them is a good to them. Wegrant it only that they may increase their guilt, andthey shall reoeive It shameful punishment." t

Although this threat is uttered against those whopersist in their iniquity, there is 11 distinct doctrineof forgiveness taught in the Koran. Sins committedbefore the ooming of the l'evelation are passed overwith indulgenoe, beoause allowanoe is made for thestate of ignorance. There is here a very close parallelto Paul's declaration that God overlooked the timesof ignorance, but now calls on ltll men everywhere torepent.+ A striking parallel with a Biblicltl pltssage* P8. 130:1, t 311~, cf. Gen. 1516, ~ Acts IP\ d. Kor. 5"1(1.

122 THE BIBLE AND ISLAMTHE DOOTRINE OF' GOD 123

t 67 19• t GI~3.

II Dozy, L'!slar1l1'sme, p. 315.

is found again where tho justice and tho mercy ofGod aro placed side by side: "'fhe revelation of thoBook from God, the Mighty, the Wise; the one whoforgives sin, accepting repentance, strict in His pun­ishments, the Bountiful, besides whom there is noGod." * The Biblical parallel which I have in mindis of course the Name proclaimed before Moses inHoreb: "Yahweh, a merciful and gracious God, slowto anger and plenteous in kindness and truth, keepingkindness for thousands, forgiving iuiquity and trans­gression and sin; but who will not pronounce inuo­cent-visiting the iniquities of fathers upon childrenand grandchildren, upon the third generation and uponthe fourth." t In the case of Mohammed, at any rate,there seems to be no consciousness that justice couldconflict with mercy. In other words, there is notheory of an atonement. The words expiation andredemption may be said: to exist in Arabic but theyhave sunk to almost trivial importance. In certainooses of transgression, a sort of equivalent must bepaid. If a man breaks his oath, he must, as an ex­piation,~ feed or clothe ten poor men, or free a slave.n either of these be beyond his powor he must fasta ce1·tain numbor of days. Redemption is used of asimilar fine or satisfaction. In no caso is there anintimation that this is more than a punishment in­flicted for the sin. It is nowhere brought into rela­tion with the wrath of God. Atonement or propitia-

'" 401-3. t Ex, 346".

t The ,vord used is Kajfwra, corresponding to the Hebrew Kap·porath. Fidya, redemption, is also from a root used in Hebrew.But Arabic usage seems independent of Old Testament influence inthis case.

tion. i~ the sense in which they are understood inClll'lshan theology do not appear in the Koran.

That goodness is one of the attributes of God mustbe evident from what has already been said. Thisgoodness extends to all His creatures: "There is nota living thing in the earth whose nourishment is notdepe~dent ~po~, God. He knows its abiding placeand 1tS restmg. * Even the birds are sustained intheir flight by Him.t He adapts His burdens tothose who carry thcm: "We do not lay upon anysoul more than it can bear." ~ The consequence isgiven in the words: "If you remember the favorsof God, you will not be able to cOljUt them." § In anumber of passages the Koran rises to the affirmationof the love of God. But the objects of His love arethose who do well. The sublime declaration of theNew Testament: "God commendeth His love towardus ~~ that, while w~ were yet sinners, Christ died forus, seems to be w1thout parallel in the sacrad bookof Islam.

Here is where Mohammed and Christianity (atle~st in. the .ort.hodo~ form) part· company. Up tot~IS pomt, h18 1dsa IS essentially the theism of theBible. He may be said (as he has been said) to main­tain the separation of God from the world with moreprecision and rigor than does Judaism even. II Butm substnnce he holds the Biblical idea of God andhe would not have objected to thc definition c~Tentamong us-that God is a Spirit, infinite, eternal andunchangeable in His bcing, wisdom, power, holi~eS8,

• lIS.§ 16", cf. r,. 40\

124 THE BIBLE AND IBL.1N THE DOOTRINE 01? GOD 125

justice, goodness, and truth. Moreover he holds toGod as a present personality, "nearer to man than thevein of his neck." * But he was not led to the thoughtthat God could or would come to man by an incarna­tion. As we saw in the last lecture, this doctrine wasprobably not fairly presented to him. He learned. ofit as the deification of 0. man, rather than as the m·carnation of God. In this form he could not help reojecting the doctrine. Nor on the side of ~he media­torial work of Christ did he have any leanmg towardthe Christian view. The necessity of bridging overthe chasm between God and the world-a necessitythat appeals very strongly to some minds-seems notto have existed for him. We should remember thatthe doctrine of mediation was associated with what hemust class as idolatry. In the Eastern Church, themediation of saints and angels is held very stronglyeven to the present day, and leads to the exoessivedevotion paid to them and to their pictures.t Inheathenism the subordinate divinities are intercessorswith the higher gods. The whole idea of mediationtherefore presented itself to Mohammed under an un·favorable aspect. This was especially true after hehad made his expeliment at compromise with theMeccaus. There was a time when ho tried to makouse of this doctrine of medi>\tion, to proc1uce some·thing on whioh he and his countrymen could unite.His plan was to recognize thc threc Goddcsses, uponwhose worship the Meccans hlid the most stress, asdaughters of Allah and mcdiators with Him, . Everyworldly motive urged him to such a compromIse, and

II< 5015, t Cf. I\:attcnbusch, Conjessionskunde, I., p. 401.

he probably flattered himself that he would therebyseCUl'e the essentials of his system. The Arabs havebeen willing to forget what actually took place. Itseems probable that a formal agreement was made,by which the Meccans recognized the supremacy ofAllah, while Mohammed and his followers were toallow the worship of the three Goddesses as inter­cessors with Allah. All that has come down to us, isa tradition to the effect that Mohammed, in recitingthe fifty-thin1 sura of the Koran, included in it thesewords: "Do you not see Lat and Uzza and Manat,the third besides? These are the exalted maidens *and their intercession is to be hoped for." The Mec­cans who were present were surprised and delightedat the mention of their divinities and at the close ofthe recitation all prostrated themselves, following theexample of the Prophot. The tradition goes on tosay, that in the evening he was visited by Gabrielwho heard him repoat the sura and disavowed thecompromising words. Mohammed was convincedthat he had been misled by Satan and he at onceadopted the true reading and published it the nextday in the words: "Do you not see Lat and Uzzaand Manat the third besides? Shall yon have sonsand Ho have drmghte1'8? t That were, indeed, awrong division. These are but names which yonand your fathers have named; God has not delegated

'* The word is obscure and the Arabs themselves are divided as toits meaning. I choose among the meanings (or conjectures) the"wordmost appropriate to the context. The authorities are given bySprenger, Leben llfuhammed's, II., p. 45 if.; Muir, Life of Ala·homet, II., p. 150 if.

t Daughters are inferior to sons in the view of tho Arabs, cf. 4316 ,

126 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE DOOTRINE OF GOD 127

to them any power. [The unbelievers] follow onlyconjecture and what their souls desire, though therehas come to them guidance from their Lord." * Sofar tradition; whatever the actual course of events,it seems probable that Mohammed made a seriousattempt to introduce authorized mediators of a divinecharacter into his religion. But the scheme wouldnot work. His idea of the unity of God was tooabsolute to admit even subordinate divinities. Afterthis experience, he was careful to defend the strictoneness and transcendentaJity of God.

The incarnation and the mediatorial work of Christ,therefore, fall (for him) under the same condemnationwith the heathen ideas which he rejected: "Menserve, besides God, that which cannot harm nor profitthcm, and they say: 'l'hese are our intercessors withGod. Say to them: Will you inform God concern­ing what He does not know cither in the heavens orin the earth? Praise be to Him; He is exaltedabove what they associate with Him." "Men say:The Compassionate has taken a son. Far be it fromHim! Rathel', these are honored servants; they donot speak to Him before He speaks to them, and theydo according to His commands. He knows what isbefore them and what is behind them, and none in­tercede exccpt for the one for whom permission isgiven, and they constantly tremble in fear of Him." tIntercession is here denied on two grounds: the in­tercessors cannot tell God anything He does not al­ready know; and no created being dares to speak toHim without His permission, which permission will

not be given in case the intercession concerns a manwith whom He is already displeased. It is in accordwith this that we read: "And warn those who fearGod that they shall be gathered to their Lord; be­sides Him they have neither protector nor interces­sor." *

But, like the most of us, Mohammed was not al­ways entirely consistent. On this point he was ledto modify his position. Probably his own experiencefurnishes the explanation. He was himself oftenasked by his followers to pray for them. He foundsatisfaction also in praying for those he loved. Hisexperience of the value of intercession in this worldled him to believe that in the other world he wouldbe allowed thus to help his followers. The traditionsreport him as saying that in the Day of Judgment hewill intercede eveu when the other prophets declaretheir inability. It is possible that these traditions tare colored by the views of later times. But we aretempted to allow them some weight, because someKoran passages seem to allow the intercession ofthose to whom God gives permission, by which hemeans the greater prophets-those who had foundedreligions. These would be allowed to intercede fortheir followers and to bring them into Paradise.

All this shows how far Mohammed was from enter­taining the ideas of incarnation, atonement, or medi­ation, as thcso have been developed in Christian the­ology. It has been supposed by some that he madeone attempt at postulating a difference of persons (touse the established theological term) in the Godhead.

*' 651 and cf. 21\ t Cf, J1liskcat, IL, p. 603 ff.

128 X'HE BIBLE AND ISLAJITHE DOOTRINE OF GOD 129

In one group of smas, he uses predominantly thename Rahman as a name of God. AI3 the word oc­curs in Hebrew and Aramaic, it is probable that heborrowed it. It is a perfectly good Arabic form how­ever, and oceurs in inseriptions from southern Arabiawhieh are apparently older than the time of Moham­med.* It means the Compassionate and is used as anexact equivalent for the name Allah. Thus: Rahmanpunishcs the wicked; He sits on the throne; Hissigns [or revelations] are recited to men; to HimSatan is disobedient; and at the Last Day men shallbe congregated to Him.t There is here no traee ofa second person of the Godhead, a Divine Mediator,or an Emanation from the Supreme. All we canbase on the phenomena, is the theory that Moham­med wished to introduce another name for God, per­haps beeause Allah was the name associated with theold heathenism. Possibly the mistake he made inthe eoncession to the Meccans, eaused in his mind al'evolt even against their vocabulary. Rahmanan wasthe name of God the Father among the Christians ofSouthern Arabia. Its meaning was appropriate tohis purpose. The choiee was tberefore a good one,and the motive of the choico was honorable. But theobstacles were too man:}'. Tho small but earnestband of Moslems were already attached to the oldname. They had taken up the cause of Allah and

• The adjective form rtihmani occurs once in the Old Testament,Lam. 410, For the Talmud d. Levy, N. H. W. B. sttb voce, andGeiger in Z. D. M. G., XXI., p. 488 fi'. The latter also discussesthe Syrinc use, For tIle inscriptions, Glaser, Skizze der GesckichteA,1'abims (1889), pp. 4, 13.

t H)I~: 20 1, Hl~9, 45. 811,

His Apostle. Rahman they knew not. In their per­plexity and in the renewed and bitter perseeutionwhich eame upon them, Mohammed had enough todo to hold on to what he had already attained. Theattempt to introduce the new name was thereforeabandoned with the words: "Call upon Allah, or callupon Rahman; by whatever name you call uponHim [He hears] ; all beautiful names are His." * Inall this there was no inconsistency, and no near ap­proach to Christian doctrine.

One thing more must be said. The name whichour Lord adopted and by which He taught us to callupon God was our Father. Mohammed nowhererose to this assurance of faith. God was his Lord,his Protector, his Cherisher, but so far as I can dis­cover, he never calls Him Father. It is likely that,in this respect also, tho Prophet was restrained bythe heathen conceptions which expressed themselvesin similar language. We havo some evidence thattho primitive religions of the Semites, like those ofother races, looked upon the God of a particular tribeas the father of the tribe.t The physical and ma­terial sense in which this was understood, would pre­vent Mohammed's adoption or a similar conception.And it is doubtful whether the Christianity of hisday was capable of giving him a clear presentation ofthe Biblical idea. To the early Church, God was thosupreme Lord who, so far from condescen<ling toman, must be invoked through the saints, the mar­tyrs, anel the angels. The confession of faith· was"the recognition of God as the One, the Supramull-

... 17 11°. tWo R. Smith, Religt'on of the Semites, p. 31 ff.n

130 TIlE BIBLE AND ISLAilI THE DOOTllINE OJ' GOD 131

dane, the Spiritual, the Almighty. God is the Creatorand Ruler of the world and therefore the Lord." *This was probably as much as 1Iiohammed ever heardfrom Christian sources. To this height he rose; wecan hardly blame him for not rising higher.

Reviewing what has been said in this lecture, weare entitled to say that Mohammed made a gl'eat ad­vance over the doctrine of God (if we may call it so)hcld by his contempOl·aries. All the indications pointto the low esteem in which the heathen Arabs holdtheir gods. " When the oracle at Tabala forbade thepoet Imraulcais to make war on the slayers of his fa­ther, he broke the lot and dashed the pieces in the faceof the god, exclaiming, with a gross and insulting ex­pletive: 'If it had been thy father that was killed,thou wouldst not have refused me vengeance.' "t Theincident is characteristic of heathenism. The gods,being gods of pal·ticular tribes, are of limited power,and, consequently, limited reverence is paid them.They stand on much the same plane with t\leir wor­shippers, whose kinsmen, fellows, allies, they are.Mohammed had the view of a God more exalted, morepowerful, infinite in His perfections (or at least be­yond any human standard), and, therefore, more wor­thy of reverence and adoration. When Mohammedfirst came to Medhm, his new followers used to say intheir prayers, "Peace be to Allah," using the saluta­tion with which they were accustomed to greet theirfriends. Mohammed commanded: "Do not say:peace to Allah! for Allah Himself is peace. Say,

... Harnack, Grundriss d. Dogmengeschichte'!, p. 35.t W. R. Smith, op. cit., p. 47.

rather: Eternal life belongs to Allah, and mercies andgoodness." * The incident illustrates how the con­verts brought with them the old familial' way ofregarding God, and how Mohammed inculcated aworthier estimation, and a more becoming devotion.It is no doubt a mistake to put God too far away fromus, and Islam, especially in its rigid theological sys­tem, as developed after the death of Mohammed,made this mistake. But, on the other hand, familiar­ity breeds contempt, and the light-minded Arabswere inclined to this extreme. The old fear of thegods had largely disappeared. Mohammed renewedthe fear of God by showing a God worthy of beingfeared, the fear of whom could become genuine rev­erence. The idea of this God came to him from theBible, but colored by the Jewish or Christian con­ceptions et1l'rent in that age. It was perhaps inevi­table that his idea should fall short of the Biblicalfurness. Had it been more adequate, it would per­haps have been less adapted to the people to whom hemade it knovm. The wonder is that, unlettered as hewas, himself the child of heathenism, and receivingtho Biblical conception through so imperfect a me­clium, he was able to assimilate so muoh, and to pre­sent it 80 powerfully to his equally rude and untaughtoountrymen.

* Bochar,;" I., p. 181.

LEOTURE V.

TIlE DIVINE GOVERNMENT

IN the last lecture we saw that in the system ofMohammed God is the Ruler of the universe. Heis the Kin,,' the Lord of the ages. Like the Bibli­cal writers~Mohammed conceived this very literally.To him God is the active mover of the constella­tions and the seasons. Our notion of second causesor of a fixed law of nature had not entered his ~iu~.God works by means of His creatures, but H1S (h­rect command passes upon them for each of the~racts. In this sense he delegates a part o~ H1Spower to man. In the account of the Cr?atlOn ofman, God says that He is about to place a vlCegerenton the earth; and again: "Do you. n~t see that Godh made subscrvient to you what lS m the heavensas .and what is in the earth?" .» The doctrllle, as you

discover is that of the Bible. Man is the ruler, , dover nature, and nature is created for man s use anbenefit.

The existence of intelligent creatures who arestrictly obedient to God makes no difficulty with Hisgovernment. But when we u~sert the ~r~e~om ofthese creatures, there is imphed a posslbility thatthey muy act contrary to His command, und a prob.

• Koran 3119, of. 2'18.132

TilE DIVINE GGVERNMENT 133

lem emerges. AE soon as we assert the existence ofsin the problem becomes acute. For sin is the free­dom of the created will asserting itself against thewill of the Oreator. This is the great qucstion withwhich philosophy has wrestled since first man beganto reflect upon his relation to the universe.

The question aSsumes its largest proportions inmonotheism. In polytheism there is no single willwhich claims to rule the sum of things. The godsare necessarily limited in power, because there aJ.·eseveral of them. In dU!1lism the solution is found byassuming an eternal conflict between two powers-asolution which projccts the shadow of evil into theinfinite both before and behind. For Mohammed,with whom we have now to deal, this solution had noattractions, and he does not betray an acquaintancewith it even in his polemic.

The most religious minds seem to answer our prob.lem by determinism-that is, they cling to the sover­eignty of God and let the freedom of the creatureexist only in appearance. Even in heathenism thistheory asserts itself. The Greeks in their theologyfound l'oom for an all-deciding fate against whomZeus himself was powerless. The heathen Arabsaw in what went on around him the working of Des­tiny-a power that mles the world and accomplishesits will in spite of gods and men. The Bedawy(says Wellhausen) is the independent man-" hisOwn arm helps him, and his brother; no god assistshim; he commends his sonl to no saint. Allah is tohim fate, and nothing more: Fate is generally spokenof without qualification-not as the docree of Allah.

134 7'HE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 135

But the conviction that all is decreeu anu predestinedspurs on the Arab hero and poet to do what he hasundertaken without consideration of danger. ' Fearnot to march against danger, for the danger which aman tries to avoid is just the one that he meets ,­the dog bites tho oue who is afraid of him. Fatalism,if we may call it so, does not lead the Ara? t? foldhis hands in his bosom. On the contrary, 1t 1S thesource of desperate energy-it is of no use to avoiddeath' therefore Forward I And, further, the cer­tainty'of death is a motive to ghoe freely and not. tobe anxious for the morrow; 'I know that an evenmgis coming,. after which no fear and no want can befallme' then I shall make the House of Truth a longvieit. Why, then, should I take care for that whio~decays and falls into ruins? Let othe1's foul theirwatering-places; I will keep my camels ready to slayfor the guest.' " •.

We have hoard so much of Moslem fatalism that weare accustomed to ascribe this doctrine to Mohammed.But this extract shows that it was already ourrentbefore his time. Not unlikely the popular idea of itis derived from later literature. You remember thestory of Ajeeb in "A Thousand and One Nights."Ajeeb was shipwrecked on an uninhab~ted island.Seeing a boat approach, he screened h1mself fromobservation and watched. He saw a party land andenter a subterranean dwelling, prep!tred with greatcare. There they left a young man and departed,concealing the only door to the hiding-place. Theyoung man is one f01' whom lln astrologer has pre-

* Wellbausen, Skizzen und VOf'a'rLeitcn, III" p. 195.

,

dicted death at the hands of Ajeeb on a day cer­tain-now near at hand. 'fhe father takes this mealiSof protecting his son. But fate is inexorable. Againsthis own will, Ajeeb shikes the fatal blow and theprophecy is fulfilled to the letter. Ai! the writer saysin an apt quotation:

"We trod the steps appointed for us: and the man whosesteps are appointed must tread them.

He whose death is decreed to take place in a certain land,will not die in any land but that." •

Moro impressive perhaps, and preserving more of theprimitive sense of that Destiny which broods overthe world, are such stories as that of the City of Brass.The traveller through the desert sees in the distancea lofty city wall. He approaches it, but meets noliving being. He enters its streets and wlliks throughits palaces. Spacious halls open before him, shadedcourts, lofty pavilions. But all are empty. If theinhabitants can be said to exist, they exist only in theform of statues, having been tUl'lled into stone by aninexorable decrce. And the visitor fails not to find atablet graven with an admonition which recites theshortness of life, the vanity of worldly pomp andpleasure, and the certainty of fate. He reads and isovercome by emotion. He bursts into tears or fallsin a swoon. And when he recovers, he goes forth insadness reflecting on the lot of man.~·

What I am trying to show is that the fatalistic

*r...ane, A Thousand and One Nights (1871), I., p.13Gj Beirutedition of the text,!., p. 42.

t Ibid., III., p. 109 ff.

136 THE BIBLE ./iND ISLAMTHE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 137

doctrine of which we now speak runs through Arabliterature. It is found in the early poets; it is foundin the later story-tellers. 'fhe latter are, to be sure,influenced by the theologians, and these claim to rep­resent the mind of Mohammed. But we must nottoo readily assume that they correctly represent themind of Mohammed. It is not impossible that theyare under a bias. In Islam, as in other religions, thefiercest battles have been fought over this very ques­tion of predestination and freedom. The two ele­ments of the problem being really irreconcilable, twoparties arose, according as one factor or the otherwas emphasized. When Greek philosophy was madeknown to Moslem thinkel'S under the Abbaside Ca­liphs, there came into prominence a rationalisticschool of theologians called the Motazilites, that is :the Seceders. We are not here concerned with theirtheology in general. The point which interests us isthat they denied an absolute decree or predestinationon the part of God. They did this with the desireto protect the responsibility of man as a free agent,and also with the desire to establish the justice ofGod. For they reasoned that, if the actions of manare done in accordance with an unalterable decree,there is no justice in punishing. They call them­selves therefore believers in the Unity and Justice qfGod. Their teaching on this point is set forth by anative authority * in these words: "They affirm thatman has freedom and that he is the originator of hisactions, both good and bad, and that he is therefore a

* SchahrastD.ui's Rtliglonspartkeim und Philosophenschulen,iibersetzt von Dr. Th. HlLUrbriicker (1850), 1., p. 43.

,

being who deserves reward and puniShment in thenext world for what he has done. But [they affirm]that God cannot be brought into connection with eviland unrighteousness and unbelief and disobedience[as their cause]. For as He is righteous whenHe brings forth righteousness, so He would be un­righteous if He were the cause of unrighteousness."So far the Motazilites. Their opponents took theirstand on the divine omnipotence and did not shrinkfrom the conclusion that God is the author of sin,and that ml\n has no power over his own acts.* Al­though the school which finally prevailed tried tomediate, its members rescued £01' man only the sem­blance of freedom. The accepted Mohammedan the­ology is undoubtodly deterministic.

For this reason we must look with suspicion onsome of ,the traditions which ascribe to Mohammedhigh predestinarianism. We have already foundreason to believe that traditions were invented by theadherents of the different theological schools, in ordorto SeCure the Prophet's name tor their dootrine. Onesuch tradition, as I believe, has done much to formour idea of Moslem fatalism. It is the one given byPalgrave in these words: "When God resolved tocreate the hnman race, He took into His hands a massof eal·th-the same whence all mankind were to beformed, and in which they after a manner pre-existed.Having divided the clod into two parts, Ho threw thoone-half into hell and said: These to eternal fire, andI oare not; and projected the other half into heaven,

• Schuhraetani, 1., pp. 92, 102. Dugat, Histoire des Philosopheset des Theologiens Musulmans (1878), p. 45.

• I have cited from Hughes's Dict-iona'ry of Islam, p. HB, wherethe passage is ascribed to Palgrave, who gives the reference, Mish­cat, Bab-ul-Q.adr. I do not find the tradition in the English Mishcat.

t Mishcat l 1., p. 3G.

adding: Thcse to Paradise and I oare not." * 80 faras this tradition makcs the impression of brutalindiJIerence on the part of God, wo need not hesitateto say that it misrepresents the mind of Mohammed.The impression made by the whole body of traditions011 this subject is vcry different. Even the ono whichis ncarost iu fmm to the onO just quoted, aud whichmay be a modification of the same tradition, has adifferont toue: "God created Adam and struck himon the right sido and brought out white children­you would say they were pcarls; then He struck hisleft side and brought out black children, you wouldS!\y they were coals. Then God said: Those of theright side aro towards Paradise, and I have no fear;and He said of those of the left side: 'fhey are tow­ards hell and I have no fear." t The words trans­lated I have no fear may indeed moan I have no con­cern in the mattej·. But they may moan also: I haveno foar that their !\Ctions will not bear out what Ihave detormiued concerning thom. This latter is atleast a plausible interpretation, as we seo from anothertradition, which is given in immcdiate connectionwith tho forogoing, and which is reported thus: "Godtook an engagement from the family of Adam, andbrought out a family from the back of Adam and scat­tered them before Him. After that God spoke tothem in his presence saying: Am not I your Creator?They said: Yes, we bear witness to Thy Godhoad-

138 TIlE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 139

that they might not plead ignomnce on the Day of Res­urrection." This tradition is quite opposed to thedoctrine of arbitrary election. The ovident endeavoris to supply a reason for meu's final sentence. Thereason why the unbelievers are condemned is thatthey have acted contmry to the profession which theymade in their pre-oxistent state-hence God canjustly punish them for apostasy. This tradition ismoreover almost idontical with a Komn verse: "Godtook the descondants of tho sons of Adam from theirbacks, and made them testify against themselves:~ not I your Lord ? They replied: Yoa, we testify.ThIS was that you mIght not say at the ResulTection:We were forgetful in this matter, or should say: Itwas only that our fathers were idolaters aforetime andwe ar? their posterity; wilt Thou dostroy us for whattho hal'S have done?" * vVe may also cite hereanother tradition: "Mohammed was asked about thechildren of idolators, whcther they would go to heavon0: helL He replied: God knows best what their ac­tIOns would have been; it depends upon this." Inanother place he says that infants are born with nat­uml roligion; their parents give them the special turnof Jew or Christian.t Once more we are told thatwhen a heliever is examiued after death, he is shownthe place prepared for him in the Fire, which Godhas exchanged for a seat in Paradise. Here is noabsolute predestination, but provision for a doubleI:0ssibility, the final decision depending on the ac­tIOns of the individuaL

Mohammed, aeoording to these indioations, was'" Koran 7111 " t Boclta1'i, II.) p. 95.

140 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE DIVINE GOVERNJIENT 141

not what we should call a fatalist. In fact, he wasnot a systematic theologian. 'He knew nothing ofphilosophy, and the endcavor to teach it to him wouldprobably have failed. But he was a man of l'eligiousconviction. His statements on the doctrine beforeus are to be interpreted by his religious, not by anydogmatic, faith. All of us who have a living faith ina living God accept His sovereignty over the universe.So far as this is in us, we interpret the experienceof our daily lives in conformity with His rule overthe universe. Our comfort in adversity is that ourFather does all things well, and our joy in prosperitysprings from the thought that it is He who is activein providing for our wants. The religious leader en­courages [l,nd comforts his followers by this faith. Ifthey lose heart, he points them to God who is able tohelp, and who surely will not abandon the right. Ifthey meet misfortune, he gives them the assurancethat even this is in God's plan for thcm. When theyare successful he makes the success confirm their faiththat God is working for them. In all this, emphasisis naturally laid upon the almighty power and the all­determining will of God. Mohammed's declarations.on this point are to be explained along these lines.They are not philosophieal propositions concerningthe univel'Sal scheme of things. They are the ap­plication of a living faith to the partieular circum­stances of an individual experience. When his situ­ation was gloomy or even (to human eye) desperate,he was compelled to take strong hold on the powerand grace of God. He says: "Every condition isbest for the believer. . . . If he is pleased, he

t~anks God; ~nd if ~is condition is bad he has pa­hence, for whICh he IS rewarded." This is .wt thestatement of a theory of the universe. It is an ex­pression of religious trust, a trust which traces one'sindividual lot to the goodness of God. It remindsus of the Biblical assertion that all things work to­gether for good to them that love God, to them whoare t~e called. a:ccording to His purpose.* Again weread In a tradItIOn: "Seek for that which will benefityou, and ask God for assistance and do not tire in sodoing; and if any misfortune b~falls you de not say:If I had done so and so; but say: God ordained it,and He does what He will-because the word if opensthe Devil's busi?ess."t This was a practical philos­oph! of huma? :If~. It was not intended to be a speo­ulahve l'econClhatIOn of sovereignty and freedom.

If the speculative question was ever foroed uponMohammed, he probably declined to answer it. Hecame once upon a company engaged in debating aboutfate; and he became angry, so that he was red in theface, and said: "Has God ordered you to debate offate, or was I sent te you for this? Your forefatherswer~ destroyed for debating about fate and destiny.I ad!~re you not to argue on these points.":j: This~radItion seems to me much less likely to have beenInvented than some of the others we have been con­sidering, and it therefore seems to me more nearly toropre~ent the mind of the Prophet. He had no ideaof !aymg upon the doctrine of the divine decrees theemphasis which was afterward laid upon it by thedogmatic theologians. We shall bear this in mind in

·Rom. 8". t Mi,lwat, II., p. 517. t IMd., I., p. 31.

142 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 143

exammmg the statements of the Koran-and theKoran is here, as elsewhere, our most valuable source.

At the beginning of his mission the mind of Mo­hammed was occupied with the great thought of theDay of Judgment. Nearly all the earliest suras dwellupon this subject. The terrors which usher in theDay are described with great variety of imagery, andthese descriptions are followed by a picture of Para­dise with its bliss, or of Gehenna with its torments.The implication of this whole series of revelations isthat man is responsible. He is punished or rewardedfor his actions, and these (we may conclude) are withinhis own power. The terms in which the evil-doers aredescribed generally express an activity. When theangels say that they are sent against a people of evil­doers, we notice that it is an active participle of themost active form of the verb that is used. The samepeople are described a little later on as lJransgressors-those who pass beyond the due hounds. Thamudturned with disdain from the commandment of theirLord; Pharaoh, and before him, the people of thecities whioh were overturned for their sin, disobeyedthe messenger of their Lord.* He who receives hisbook in his left hand at the Judgment has his indict­ment formulated in these terms: "He did not be­lieve in God Most High, nor did he emulate athOl'Sin feeding the poor." t It agrees with these wordsof action that jinn and men are created only 10 serveGod but that they disobeyed.t Man was created up­right, therefore, but sought out many inventions.Even where it is said that man was created with nat-

*Korllll 51;j~, 34. 44, 69" 1~16. t G9~3 f. t ol~.

ural infirmities, it is implied that these do not inter­fere with his responsibility. The plain and obviousinterpretation of these passages is in line with thedeclaration of Ezekiel, who rejected with indignationthe thought that the children are punished for thesins of the parents, and who proclaimed with all hisenergy: The soul that sinneth it shall die.

We find it distinctly asserted in a second group ofpassages, that recompense is according to works:"Those who believe and do good works receive anunstinted reward "-" these receive a garden in whichthe streams flow perennially." * This is set forth fig­urativelyiu the words: "He whose scale is heavy shallhave a life of delight, but he whose scale is light,his dwelling is the abyss." "On that day a manshall bs told what he brought forward and what hekept back-yea a man shall bo witness against him­self, though he proffer his excuses,"t Whether thereis a specific reference here to sins of commission andsins of omission as is sometimes supposed, it cannotbe doubted that the enumeration of sins is in orderto a proportionate punishment. Those who are con­demned will know that it is because of what theyhave done: "Every soul is a pledge for what it hasgained-but the men of the right hand when in thegarden shall ask the evil-doers: What thrust you iutothe Fire? They will reply: We were not in thehabit of prayer and we did not feed tho poor, and wonsed to enter into idle discourSe with the vain talkers,and we used to deny the coming of the JudgmentDay," t Quite in accord with this is the following:

* 8405, 8511 , t 1015 " 7511 t. t 14"1 ft.

144 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 145

"Has [the unbeliever] not been told of what is inthe rolls of Moses and of Abraham, who was fllithful,namely .. that no soul is burdened with the burden ofanother, and that a man receives ouly that which hehas wrought, and that he shall certainly be shown hiswork? Then shall he be recompensed with a com­plete recompense." * As Mohammed professes toquote here from the earlier Scriptures we may lookfor a Biblieal reminiscenee. And we find a closeparallel in a New Testament passage which declaresthat each man shall bear his own burden, and in thatconnection we read; "whatsoever a man soweth, thatshall he also reap."

'fhe same doctrine is virtually contained in the fre­quent exhortations to repent which we find in thisearly period. There have been preachers who calledmen to repentance, though convinced that men hadno ability to follow the call. But we m~st rememberthat Mohammed had no theological training. Withhim the natural supposition is that when he calledmen to turn from their evil ways, they had somepower of choice in the matter. So we interpret thequestions addressed to the unhappy inhabitants ofhell-" Why did you not believe? " or, "Why did younot reHect?" or again, "Why were you not grate­ful? "t Even Pharaoh has the possibility of repent­ance, for Moses says to him; "Wilt thou purify thy­self, that I may direct thee to thy Lord and thou shaltfear Him? " :j: It is to the same effect when we findtwo alternatives set before man, that he may make achoice: "w0 led him to the two roads, but he does

* 533t {f, d. Gal. 65. 1, t 5GH, 62, 69, l19a•

not climb the ascont. How wilt thou know what isthe ascont? It is the setting free of the slavo, and thenourishment of one's orphan kinsmen in the day offamine, or the feeding of the poor who cleaves to thedUBt."*

If at this period of his activity the Prophet hadhad tho dootrine of absoluto predestination in mind,it is probable that he would have asserted it in con­neetion with some of these passages. But he doesnot assert it, even in expressing his idea of God'smethod of working. What we find emphasized isnot God's decree, but His knowledge; "Does not theunbeliever know that God sees? "-" Doth he notknow that when what is in the graves comes forthand what is in the breasts is brought to light, in thatday their Lord will be informed concerning them? " tAnother expression of the same thing is the figure ofthe heavenly book. There are passages in which thisis apparently the book of fate, but these are later.The primary conception was of a book of record. Itis said of the one who receives his book behind hisback: "He thought indeed that he would not be putto grief i but his Lord was observant of him." Thisreeord is made by the angels: "And verily there aroover you guardians, holy scribes who know what youdo,":j: In a passage which probably refers to the ac­tions of men, God says: "They indeed did not fearan accounting, and accused Our revelation of false.hood. But we registered everything in a book. Tastethen I We will only inorease your punishment." §To the same effect are tho passages already alluded

*901()-IG. t 9614 and lOO~ ft, ~ 8414 f, 8210, § 78~8 It,

10

'" 68'. There is an apparent exception to this statement in 7434

where God is said actively to lead astray. But this is an interpola­tion of a later date. In another instance (91', 8) as commonly in­terpreted, God is said to create the 80ul and inspire it with evil andwith good. But as the word translated inspired may also meantaught it is safer to suppose that the verse is DO exception to thoconse~8us of theBe early Buras; and that the meaning is l:limply thatGod gives the soul a knowledge of good a.nd evil.

t 2104. :I: 510~.

to, in which God is said to try men. For this periodfurther the assertion that God directs men does notmean tilat He exerts irresistible grace. The verb isused of one who puts travellers in the desert on theright path. He points out the road, as Moses pointedit out to Pharaoh. It does not follow that the direc­tion will be effectual. In the early revelations, whichwe are now eonsidering, God is not said to lead menastray. He knows those who go astray and Heknows those who let themselves be gnided,* is theutmost that is affirmed.

As we turn to the later sections of the Koran wenotice first, that the view we have been consideringis still affirmed: "Observe prayer and give alms;whatever good you lay up in store for yourselves youshall find in the preseuce of God," t The verse re­minds us of the New Testament exhortation to lay uptreasures in heaven. "0, you who believe, you hl1vethe care of your own sonls; do yourselves no harm IWhoever goes astray after yon have been rightlyguided-you shall all be brought to God and He willinform you of your actions," t The doctrine of rec­ompense is here sharply asserted, and it is assumedthat there is a possibility of going astray even after

146 THE BIBLE AND ISLAMTHE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 147

once being gnided into the right path. Again wehear: "0, Men, the truth has come to you from yourLord; whoever lets himself be gnided does so tohis own benefit, and whoever goes astray does soto his own hurt." * That God is a ready reckoneris frequently affirmed and also that He is just­not wronging one "even to the snapping of the fin­gers."t God tests men moreover, and He puts theiractions upon record just as was affirmed in the ear­·lier period.t

But in this later period we find a distinctly morepronounced theory that God's activity extends eveninto the sphere of human choice. We can see to acertain extent how this problem became more com­plox as the Prophet advanced in his career. At firsthe was controlled by the great thought of the Judg­ment and its near approach. This thought and theconsequent dnty of warning men, absorbed him. Forthe world about him, he assumed one simple thing­that every one should repent and accept his message.But as time went on, he was perplexed not only bythe delay of the Judgment-he never claimed to knowits exact date-but by the obstinacy of the unbe­lievers. A few men recognized his mission-enoughto show that there was something in his message. Butthe majority were rendered apparently more obstinate,for they passed from simple indifference to activehostility. The problem of the mvine will and thehuman will assumed a practical meaning. It wasnow a question whether God could allow His designsto be thwarted. The little communion of Moslems

148 THE BIBLE AND ISLAlrf THE DIVINE GOVERNlrfENT 149

looked to their Prophet to answer them this question.For their relief and to strengthen his own soul, hewas compelled to assert that even the evil actions,unbelief, and persecutions, of the wicked are withinthe plan of God.

This ground was apparently taken even at Mecca.The experience at Medina only fortified the position.For at Medina an infant state was strnggling into ex­istence. The little community had frequent occasionto realize that God's ways are not as our ways. Some­times, indeed, His cal'e was notably manifest, Butquite as often the expectations of the believers weredisappointed. They were visited by fever; they suf­fered from famine; they were disappointed by thelukewarmness or even hostility of some in whom theytrusted. The Jews were a thorn in their side. In­stead of becoming converts or, at least, allies of theProphet, they plotted against him, murmured at hisclaims, insinnated doubts of his mission, and provokedhis followers to break the peace. It is evident thatthe problem of the universe was becoming more com­plicated.

Weare able to trace the working of the Prophet'smind on one phase of this problem with considerabledistInct"e"e, In the second year after the Flight hefought a s'1Ccessful battle against the Meccans at aplace called Bedr. As the first pitched battle ofIslam, this encounter deserves a place among the de­cisive battles of the world; for had the Moslems beendefeated it is not unlikely that their movement wouldhave ceascd to be impol'tant; and in this case theface of the world's history would have been entirely

changed. The victory was the more remarkable, inthat Mohammed had only three hundred men againstnine hundred and fifty of the Meccans. The decisivevictory was taken at Medina to be a pledge of God'spresence and approval, and at the same time as aforetaste of His judgment on His enemies. The eyeof faith even saw the angels engage in the battle onthe side of truth, and we may be sure that no ques.tions were raised when the Prophet used the event asan illustration of God's will toward the believers.

The difficulty came when, a year later at Ohod, theMoslems suffered a humiliating defeat at the hands ofthe same foe, upon which they had seen the ven·geance of God take effect at Bedr. On human rea­soning, indeed, the defeat was easily accounted for.The Moslems were overconfident. They disregardedthe advice of the wiser heads, and, instead of actingon the defensive, rushed to the conflict against largeodds." At the first appearance of success, the archersposted by Mohammed to defend his left flank de­serted their station in the hope of booty. All thismakes us wonder that the defeat was not more com·plete than it actually was. But, in any case, it wasa bitter experience to men who had counted on thecontinued favor of God. It became necessary forMohammed to explain the ways of God and this hedoes, as follows: "If you suffer from wounds, so haveother peoples suffered from the like; and We makethe fortune of men in battle vary, that God may knowthose who believe and may take from you wit.

* Seven hundred Moslems against three thousand Meccans l thelatter also better armed.

150 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 151

nesses * (God loves not the evil-doers); and that Godmay try those who believe, and may destroy the unbe·lievers. Or do you think to enter Paradise beforeGod knows those of you who are zealous and stead.fast? . . . A soul does not die except by thepcrmission of God [contained in] a definite decree." tThe speaker then points out that God is faithful toHis promise, but that the believers had bcen seducedby the booty and had disobeyed their leader. Hethen adds: "Their desires mislead them to think un­justly of God-thoughts of heathenism-in that theysaid: Have we any part in this affair? Say to them:The whole belongs to God. 'rhey conceal in theirhearts what they do not reveal to thee, saying: If wehad had our way in the matter we [that is, our breth­ren] had not been slain here. Say: Had ye remainedin your houses, yet those whose death was decre?dwould have gone forth to the places where they he,that God might search what is in your breasts andmight try what is in your hcarts. God knows whatis in the breasts of men. As for those who tmnedback on the day of encounter, Satan made them slipfor something which they had done. But God haspardoned them-God is forgiving and forbearing. aBelievers I Be not like the unbelievers, who say con­cerning their brethren, when they travel or are on araid: If they had remained with us they had notdied, or they bed not been slain, [This came to pass]that God might place grief in their hearts-God

'" Or, martyrs as it is ordinarily translated. Those who die inbattle are e.peeially di,tinguished.

t 31U,139.

giveth life or giveth death, and God knows what youdo." * Making allowance for a little incoherence, wefind here a full statement of the later position of Mo­hammed, a position which we may summarize undertwo heads.

1. All comes to pass by the decree of God. Hehas ordained even the defeat of the believers, as Heinflicted similar defeat npon other generations: "Howmany a prophet has there been with whom manythousands have fought, yet they did not f,\int at whatcame upon them in the cause of God, nor did theygrow weak nor submit-God loves the persevering.Their only word was: Our Lord, forgive our sins andour transgressions in the oause committed to ns;establish our footsteps and help us against the unbe­lievers." t The old point of view, that this is for thepurpose of testing believers, is still held, but newpoints of view are opened. The deoree is made moreabsolute. It sets the term of a man's life, so that hewill go to meet death at the appointed time, no mat·ter what efforts are made to detain him. Other menmight have remained at home on the day of Ohod,but those whose death was deoreed would have goneforth to the field of death in spite of all. So we find inother places: "Death will overtake you, even thoughyou be in lofty fortresses." The book of record nowbecomes a book of fate: "None receives long life,and the life of no one is cut short, except it is [re­corded] in a book." t

2. We find more distinctly affirmed that God isactive in the unbelief of mall. He now leads some

152 7'HE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 153

astray, as well as leads some into the right pat.h.As we had reason to suppose that His guidance issimply the pointing out of the right path, in whichmen are free to walk or not, we might also think thateven if He presents misleading indications, men havethe ability to disregard these and still to find theright path. But the weakness of man is such thatwhen God misleads him he is sure to go wrong. Insuch a case there is no hope of the man, he is irrevo­cably lost. Such is evidently the teaching of theKoran in the period we have now reached. " If thyLord had willed, all that are in the earth would havebelieved. Wilt thou then force men to believe? Itis not possible for a sonl to believe except by perrnis­sian of its Lord." "God leads astray whom He willand leads aright whom He will; He is the Powerfnl,the Wise." "Whom God leads astray, for him thouwilt not find a road." "And why should you be di.vided concerning the hypocrites, when God has over­turned them on account of what they have done?Wilt thou direct those whom God has led astray?" *Yet, although the action of God may be supposed tobe irresistible in such eases, we find a certain syner­gism (to usea theological term) allowed. Man co-oper­ates in his own salvation, and man also has part inhis own destruction. God conducts to Himself himwho repents, t but the wicked are not directed becausethey will not be: "How shall God guide aright a

.109~ I, 14"', 414~, !KI, cf. 16~9', H Whoever will, let him take thepath to his IJord; but ye will not unless God. wills,'; and Jno. 1239 :

U Therefore they could not believe."t 42 1i•

people who disbelieve after once believing and testi­fying that the Apostle is true, when [alsoJ evidentproofs have come to them? God will not gnide thepeople who do evil." *

On this last point we find a variety of statements.In some cases men are said to be blinded by the se­ductions of the world: "Cease from those who usetheir religion as a sport and a pastime, whom the lifeof the world has beguiled; and Temind them that asoul is corrupted by what it has acquired." t Butthis life of the wodd is ordained of God for this pur­paso. Moses pTays thus: "0 Lord, Thou hast givenPhal'll.oh and his nobles pomp and riches in thiswodd to make them wander from Thy path; Our Lord,destroy their riches and harden their hearts, that theymay not believe until they see exemplary punish­ment.":I: In other passages God is more directly ac­tive on the hearts of the wicked: "There are thosewho come to listen to thee, but on whose hearts Wehave placed veils lest they should understand, and inwhose ears deafness; and if they should see everykind of sign they would not believe in it-so thatthey would [even thenJ come disputing with thee andsaying: Verily this is nought but old wives' fables."" These are they whose hearts and heaTing and sightGod has sealed: they are the heedless and withoutdoubt they shall be the losers in the world to come."And again: "When thou recitest. the KOl'an, Weplace between thee and those who do not believe inthe world to come, a thick veil, and We have placedon their hearts coverings that they may not under-

.. 380 t 669. 130. : 10118.

154 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM TIlE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 155

stand, and in their ears deafness; and when thounamest thy Lord, the Only One, in the recitation,they tnrn away in disgust."" In these and other pas­sages we must not lose sight of the possibility thatGoil's activity is conceived of as the infliction ofiudicial blindness. By the divine ordering, the man'ssin becomes a cause of further sin: "That whichthey have done has covered their hearts" we read inone place; and again: "We turn away their heartsand eyes [from the truth] becausB they do not believein it at the first, and We leave them to wander aboutin their disobedience." t

On the other hand, Satan is the agent who bringsmen into sin, though not without the divine permis­sion. He himself was tried by God and disobeyed.He then asked a reprieve from his sentence for atime, that he might become the tempter 01 men. Hereceived permission and began his career with ourfirst parents: "Satan made them slip from Paradiseand bronght them out from the place whem theywere.":j: And he is still active: "Those of you whoturned their backs in the day of encounter-this wasonly because Satan caused them to slip, for some­thing which they had done." § 'fhe passage is note­worthy because the new temptation was a penalty forsin already committed. But whatever takes place,all is so thoroughly in the plan of God that He issaid to have created men for this purpose: "If thyLord had willed He would have made mankind onepeople. But [as it is] they will not cease disputing,

II< 695, 1611°, 17.1.1 U,

p".t 8314, OliO.§ 31~9.

except the one on whom thy Lord has mercy. Andfor this He created them, and the word of thy Lordshall surely be accomplished [to wit]: "Verily I willfill Gehenna with men and with jinn." "

If what has been said is correct, we must admitthat Mohammed held both sides of the doctrine weare considering. He had the religious sense whichaffirms God's absolute sovereignty; at the same timehe had the moral sense which declares man's respon­sibility for his sin and the justice of his punishment.The latter judgment was more prominent in his earlierlife, the other was added to it at a later time. But atno time was he a fa~alist, for we mean by fatalism theassertiou of God's activity to the entire extinction ofhuman freedom. In holding on to the two apparentlycontradictory propositions, he was in line with mostreligious leaders-certainly in line with the Biblicalwriters. Everyone of the sentences quoted from theKoran can be paralleled by a verse from the Bible.The prophets, as preachers of righteousness, empha­size the self-origination of the sinner's acts. Theydescribe the evil-doers in the same terms of activitywhich we have read in the Koran. Israel is "a sinningnation . . . children who corrupt their way; theyhave forsaken Yahweh, they have rejected the HolyOne of Israel, they have estranged themselves, turningbackward."t Elsewhere the wicked are describedas violent, as corrupters, as oppressors, as sheddersof blood, as transgressors of the commandments.The resemblance to the terms cited above is· striking.Another parallel is in the call to repent and in the

'" 111~D, cf. 32'3• t Is. I'.

156 7'HE BIBLE AND ISLAN THE DIVINE GOVERNNENT 157

assertion of the justice of God, both which could beabundautly illustrated by quotation. God's knowl­edge of men's actions is spoken of in almost the sameterms employed by Mohammed-including the bookof record: "I saw a great white throne and Him thatS(Lt upon it, from whose face earth and heaveu f1cdaway and there was found no place for them, AndI sa; the dead, the great and the small, standing be­fore the throne; and books were opened . . .and the dead were judged out of the things whichwere written in the books, according to their works.""So thoroughly had Mohammed adopted the Biblicalidea that we should have no sense of incongruitywere We to find this passage incorporated bodily inthe Koran. In this, as in some other matters thatWe have considered, he had apprehended and adoptedthe Biblical position.

And in his later doctrine he was also in line withBiblical assertions. The perplexities which,. besethim were not unlike what the Prophets of Israel met,It seems ludicrous to compare the battle of Ohod tothe capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadrezzar. Andyet, on a small scale, the bat~le o.f ?ho~ ';aB a testof faith to the infant Islam qmte Slmllar III lts effectsto the capture of Jerusalem as it appeared to believ­ing Hebrews. The Prophets were driven in this greatcrisis to take a firmer hold on God as the ruler ofthe universe. They were compelled to clarify theirview of the test imposed by calamity; and they cameout of the conflict with the conviction that if God'sways are not our ways, this is because His ways are

It Rev. 2011 .13•

higher than our ways. Mohammed's declarationsare a weaker echo of these. But they are enough toshow that he had apprehended and appropriatedtheir thought.

In other particulars than those just mentioned wemay discover Biblical influence. 'rhe sinner's de­struction of himsel£, for example, is affirmed in thosepassages which speak of him that digs a pit and fallsinto it himself, or of him whose violence comes downon his own head. Again: it is "because men do notlike to retain God in their-knowledge" that God givesthem up to a reprobate mind.* If men are said inthe Komn to be beguiled by the world so they are inthe New Testament: "The cares of the world andthe deceitfulness of riches choke the Word." t Inboth documents also, Satan is the tempter. Wherethe part of God is prominently in the mind of theBiblical writer, he does not hesitate to say that Godblinds those who sin. Isaiah is commanded: "Makethe heart of this people fat [that is, stupid] and maketheir ears heavy, and shut [literally, plaster over]their eyes, lest they see with thcir eycs and heal' withtheir ears and understand with their heart, and turnagain and be healed." + The Biblical passage goesbeyond Mohammed in making the blindness an effectof the preaching. The familiar texts which speak ofGod's hardening men's hearts also have their parallelin the Koran, and to the declaration of the latter thatGod leads men astray we may compare: "Why,-OYahweh, dost Thou make us to wander from Thyway - dost harden our hearts so as not to fear

:>« Rom. 1'18. t Matt. .l3~~. +Is. 610•

158 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 159

Thee." * Finally, the purpose to fill Gehenna withmen and jinn reminds us that the wicked are sentto the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his

angels·tOur consideration of the divine gevernment up to

this point has been mainly occupied with the prob­lem of sovereignty and freedom. Concerning these,we fine] that Mohammed holds positions strictly anal­ogous to those held by Biblical writers. He had ap­prehended the Biblical doctrine. Before leaving thesubject we may briefly consider his doctrine of de­mons and angels. For it is evident that these alsoare subjects of the government of God, and theil' ac­tivity furnishes problems similar to those presentedby the freedom of man. In its strong sense of thereality of intelligent beings other than man, Islam isin line with mediroval Christianity and Judaism.With the luxuriant fancy which has crowded Arabicliterature with superhuman agencies we have nothingto do. But so far as they form a part of Moslem re­ligion we cannot pass them by.

Arabic heathenism peopled the desOl·t with a classof beings called collectively jinn (the singular isjinnee). We have no word which is exactly equiva­lent,so that it is best to retain the Arabic term. Thebelief in the jinn goes back to the time when animalswere an object of superstitious reverence. The wordjann t is applied in the Koran to serpents, and theidentity of serpents and jinn was endorsed by Mo­hammed himself. At least a tradition tells us of a

• Is. 68,1'. t Matt. 25 11•

tUBed also interchangeably withj1:nn. The passage is 2831

,

young Moslem who on return from the wars had thise~perience: He found his young wife standing out­sld~ the house, and in jealous anger lifted his spearagamsb her. She told him to enter the house andSee what had driven her forth. He entered and founda serpent coiled upon the bed. Transfixing it withthe spear he brought it into the court where it writhedawhile about the shaft and then died. But at thesame time the young man who was holding the spearalso fell dead, though not having received a visiblewound. Mohammed on being questioned declaredthat this. was ajinnce, and that many such who weretrue behevers came into the houses of the Mos­lems. ~he proper method of treating them, he said,was pohtely to e~treat their departure. Only afterthree ~ays (the tIme for which it is obligatory toentertam a guest) was it lawful to Use violenceagainst them. We see that the line between ani.mals and demons (in the Greek sense) was not clearlydrawn.O~ ~he b~li~f in this class of beings in the primitive

Sem1tlC rehglOn We have traces in the Old Testament.T~e satyrs wh~- danced among the ruins are clearlyallIed to the Jmn, and so are the shedim which wehave already had occasion to mention. In the ac­?oun.t of the battle of Ohod a jhmee named HaiJ'y-heelsIS saId to have proclaimed the death of Mohammed.~ b?e satyrs of the Hebrew are also hairy beings,th.1~ IS a ~ote;vorthy coincidence. The night monsterL1hth whlCh IS mentioned with the satyrs and whichlater Judaism cmssed with the Ghlil belongs in thesame company, and so does Azazel of whom we hear

160 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 161

in the book of Leviticus.* Mohammed had thereforea precedent for retaining th~ popula~ superstition inhis religion. It enabled hlm plauslbly to accountfor some things in heathenism, as we have alreadyseen; and it furnished a basis for the more completescheme of angels and devils which he adopted fromJudaism and Christianity.

The early Church had an elabora~e theory conce,?­ing angels and demons. An authorlty on Chnrch hlS­tory defines the position of the Fathers as follows:"In regard to the heavenly spirits who belong to theupper world, and in fact constit~te it, ~he orthodoxFathers hold fast to the followmg pomts: (1) thatthey were created by God.; (2) that th~y are e?dowedwith freedom but are wlth.out matel'lal bodies; (3)that they had passed through a probation in whichpart of them had persevered in good, others ha:"!fallen' (4) that the good spirits are organs of the di­vine ~ovel'llment, and their actions are useful andhelpful to mau and, indeed, belong to the means ofgrace; (5) that the actual evil in ~he world i~ to .beattributed to the evil spirits, espeClally to thelr chlef,the Devil and that these have almost unboundedpower on' earth, but can only tempt man to ~in, notcompel him; and that they can be put to fhght bythe name of Christ, the sign of the cross, and ~~e sac­raments." t This describes exactly the posltlon ofMohammed except that for the means of defencehere named, he would substituteprayer. This scheme

• Cf. W. R. Smith, Religion of the Semites, p. 113 If. The Bibli·cal references are Lev. 17', Deut. 321", Is. 13!H, 3414~ Pa. 106

3'.

t Harnack, Dogmengesckichte, II., p. 125 f.

was comb.in~d with the belief in the jinn in such away that lt lS not always easy to distin"uish betweent~e various classes of supematural b~ings. Some­tImes all are classed as jinn. Iblis is said to be anangel and he is also said to be of the jinn.* In gen­eral, however, the angels appear to be of higher rank.

From the allusions to the jinn in the Koran wemake out that Mohammed carried into their worldthe division of believers and unbelievers. They, likeme~, were cr~ate~ to serve but have disobeyed, andthelr reprobatIOn lS described in the same terms as thereprobation of men: "We have created for Gehen­na a great number of the jinn and of mankind whohave hearts with which they do not comprehend andwho have eyes with which they do not see and'whohave ears with which they do not hear-th~y fire likethe brutes; yea, even more wayward: these are theheedless." t .The enmity of the evil ones among themtoward mankmd, shows itself in leading men to idol­atry: "In the day when He shall gather them to­gether [He shall say]: a people of the jinn, youhav.e had too much advantage from men. Then willthelr devotees say: Our Lord, we profited eachother, and we have reached the term Thou has set forus. Then will He reply: The Fire is your abode for­ever." ~:ve ha~e already noticed the Biblical parallel totlns doctrmo. Another point of resemblance is thetheory of demoniacal possession. The KaMn or sooth­saxer in heathen Arabia spoke under the influence ofa Jlnn. The Old Testament belief that a man could

>II Koran 2~2, 710, ISIS, t 7m, : 6128.

11

prophesy by means of a familiar spirit is well known.It is also well known that to the present day in Mo­hammedan countries an insane person is supposed tobe possessed by a jinnee. No clear line can here bedrawn between the jinn and the Satans. 'rhe latter,however, are certainly borrowed from the older relig­ions. Their chief is Iblis, whose name is a corrup­tion of Diribolos, and therefore from a Christiansource. Iblis was an augel ; he refused to bow to manbecause he was created of fire, wbile man was createdof clay-therefore, in his view, man was tho inferior.For this disobedience he was banished from Paradise.In his further career, he beoame the tempter of man,and will continue to practise his arts uutil the finalJudgment. The Satans are his helpers: "They turnmen from the path, when these think they are guidedaright." * We are told that Satan says to a man:Disbelieve I "But when he disbelieves [Satan] says:Verily I am innocent of thy transgressions: I fearGod, the Lord of the worlds." In the New Testa­ment also we hear of devils who believe and shudder.Satan tried Job by sending calamities upon him.tAlthough he has no power over those who committhemselves to God,t he insinuatos evil thoughts intothe minds of believers when they al'e careless, so thathe made even Mohammed forget part of his mes­sage. § "He makes promises and excites desires,but Satan promises only in order to deceive." II Allthis is done in order to destroy men, though it is notdone withont the pel'mission of God; and God's aimin permitting it, is to prove men's faith and steadfast­*43&0, t3840.4~. 1.16101 . §6". 114

m•

162 l'ilE BIBLE AND ISLAM TilE DIVINE GOVERNMENT 163

ness.. That this is in accord with New Testamentteaehmg, I need not stop to point out:~ The mindof Mohammed, like that of the Biblical writers wasconcerned.with this as a practical matter. He: like~hey, saw m the temptation to sin an evil personal­lty arrayed against the believer. Satan is a wolfto a man, " as a wolf to the sheep which seizes oneseparated from the fiock" t - just as in the NewTostament he is a roaring lion seeking whom he maydevour.

;And if we ~nd the Biblical doctrine adopted forthlS class of bemgs, so we find it adopted for theircounterpart, the angels. These were created to adore~od, a:1d they fulfil the purpose of their creation:

To H1m belongs what is in heaven and on earthand they w~o aro in His presenco are not too proudto serve H,m, nor do they tire; they utter praiseby night and by day and do not cease.":I: Howthoroughly Biblical this is, wo see from Isaiah's vision(where tho Seraphim adore God) and from several

... An extra~~ib1ical nasertion is tbat Solomon had power over thode~ons. ,ThiS apparently comes from ll. Jewish Bource, thoughGeIg'er pomts out nothing earlier than the Second Targum toEsther.

While on this subject I may mention a theory which appears inthe Koran,. that the shooting stars are heavenly darts thrown to driveaway t,he, jllln who l~rk near heaven to get information (Kor. 816 ,).A Chnstlan source IS pointed out by Harnack (Texte und Unte,'­suchungen, VIII" p. 111) in the words of Tertullilln: U Since thedemons dwell in the air, neaf the stars, and in connection with theclol~~s, they know what is preparing there, nnd so are able to proph·eay. In the clear air of Arabia, the shooting stars naturallyfitted into this view.

t~Vi$hcat, I., p. 51. !211~1.

164 THE BIBLE AND ISLAH 'i'HE DIVINE aOYEllNHENZ' 165

passages in the Apocalypse. It is probably a remi­niscence of Isallth's vision whcn the angcls are dc­scribed as baving two, three, or four pair of wings.*They carry the thronc of God, as do the living creat­ures of Ezekiel's vision.t They are, moreover, thelllesscnaers of God and the organs of revelation j andthe Biblical influence goes so far that Mohammedborrows the names Gabriel and Michael. In thetraditions it is uniformly Gabriel who brings theKorau, and this is apparently the mind of the Proph­et, though only once in the Koran itsel.f does he na~e

Gahriel in connection with the rcvelatIOns. You wIiIremember that Gabriel appears in the New Testa­meut as the brinaer of God's messages.

Besides this, the angels have charge of the believer;" Each one has attendants who succeed each other,who guard him by the command of God.":j: Theykeep the record of man's actions: "'When the twobeings meet seated lit the right and left [of a man],he does not utter II word that there is not for it awatcher ready." § They are especially interested inthe believer's worship. When one is praying in themosque, the IIngels do not cease interceding for him,lind the Amen of the leader in worship is taken upand repeated by them. II In heaven they inte~cede

for the believers: "The angels repeat the pralse oftheir Lord lind ask pardon for those on earth." '\IThis goes further than the Biblical statements, whichonly say in general tllat the angels have charge overthe believer and minister to him.** But the develop-

ment is the same which we find in post-BiblicalChristittnity.

The resnlts of our inquiry may be summed np ina very few words. In Mohammed we soo the relig­ious conception of II single Ruler of the universeunitcd with the moml conception of the SupremeJudge. Without attempting to reconcile these, theProphet does not hesitate to affirm them and toapply them to his own circumstances. He extendsthem also to the extra-human communities which headopts partly from Arabic tradition, and partly fromJewish and Christian belief. Throughout, he showsdependence on Biblical ideas thongh without verbalquotation of Biblical language.

II< Koran 351• t 401, 6917•

II Rochari, 1., pp. 146, 110.t 13". § 50" '.-U Koran 421, ... '" Pa. ~nl1, Heb. 114

•

LECTURE VI.

REVELATION AND PROPHECY

THE present lecture will examine concep~ionsrun~a­mental to all religions, at least to all the hI~her ;eh?­ions. Granted the existence of a God, how IS HIS willmade known to man? It is obvious that He does notspeak audibly to all men. Alt~o~h He mak~s Him­self known in nature, the majOrIty of mankmd aretoo blind or too heedless to attend to this word. Ifmen are to know God they must have a more distinctmessage. And this message is given by the voice ormen to whom God has communicated it, and whomHe calls to the office of His heralds. The doctrine ofsuch a message is fully adopted in Islam. Along-sideof the declamtion that there is no God but Allah, wehear the equally emphatic declaration that Mohammedis the Apostle of Allah. Mohammed so desc~bedhimself, having borrowed the title, as well as the Idea,from the earlier revealed religions.

The conception of prophecy is, in the case of Mo­hammed, complicated by the further i~ea that therevelations given by a prophet constItute a book.The two do not necessarily go together. Take theearlier prophets of Israel. Elijah and Elisha seem tohave felt no impulse to put their utterances into per­manent form. Their expectation was probably the

166

REVELATION AND PROPHEOY 167

same to which the Book of Deuteronomy gives ex­pression-that God would provide a succession ofprophets for His people. Their guidance would becontinuous and constant; the people would always beable to appeal to a living organ of revelation. Godwo,uld always be in touch with them and they withHim.

Curiously enough the publication of the very Bookwhich formulated this expectation of a constant suc­cession of prophets, introduced another conception,which has now displaced the former both in Judaismand in Christianity. Instead of looking to the manof God and inquiring: what saith the Lord?-we nowopen the pages of the Book of God and inquire: whatdo we find written? The spoken word of God hasbecome the recorded Book of God. Mohammed re­ceived the idea in this form. With him revelationand Seripture belonged together. Allow meta showthis in a few words.

In the first place, it is very doubtful whether Mo­hammed himself could read or write. The questionhas been debated more fully than its importance war­rants. The zealous Moslem is very willing to argue thathe could not, because the miracle of the Koran seemsthereby to be made the greater. Modem scholars,whose culture is inseparably connected with books,cannot conceive of a man of such influence being ig­norant. All that we know is, that when Mohammedhad occasion to write, he employed an amanuensis, a;'dthat in one place in the Koran he is addressed thus :" Thou wast not accustomed before this to read a booknor to write with thy right hand-then the deceivers

168 TIIJiJ BIBLE AND ISLAM REVELATION AND PROPHEOY 16V

were in doubt.""' As in the immediate context he isspeaking of sacred books, he may mean no more thanthat he had not been a reader of such books; thoughthe general terms which he uses naturally imply thathe had no acquaintance with any books.

But if we hesitate to draw this conclusion, and soleave the general question undecided, we may: yet.ac­ccpt the plain statement of the passage: Untll a tlmewhen he was fairly launched upon his career, Moham­med had not read the Bible.

This conclusion is confirmed by the contents of theKoran. Although (as we have seen) a large part ofthis book is derived ultimately from the Bible, yet inno instance does it show, on the part of the author,such exact knowledge as would come from the study,or even the reading, of its text. He makes but oneor two quotations from it. Even when he professesto giTe the substance of certain parts of it-as thecovenant between God and Israel-he reproducesthem very imperfectly. The.storics he ta:kes ~r~m it,vary in a multitude of details from therr orlgmals.He makes gross chronological blunders, as where heidentifies the Virgin Mary with the Old TestamentMiriam. He so misunderstood Judaism that he saysthe Jews make Ezra the son of God-something whicheven superficial acquaintance with the Old Testamentwould have prevented. In a tradition it is related thatwhen he built his mosque at Medina, he was asked

*J(oran 29·' Those who wish to Bee n fuller discussion of Mo­bammed's'titerary attainments may consult Nt>ldeke, Geschichte desKorans, p. 8; Goldziher, n'ie Zahirite1l1 p. 171; Sprenger, Leben

des MuJw.mmm, II., p. 398.

why he did not make it of more substantial materials.He replied: "My temple shall be like the tabernacleof Moses, which was made of wood and straw." *

All the evidence, then, goes to show that Moham­mcers acquaintance with the Bible came from oralcommunication with Jews and Christians. Althoughour knowledge of Mecca during Mohammed's earlylife is very imperfect we are tolerably certain thatthere was no considerable number of either Jews orChristians there. Of the Jews at Medina we haveample knowledge, and if there had been either syna­gogue or church at l\fecca the fact would doubtlesshave been prcserved by tradition. All that traditiontells us is that there were a very few Christians atMecca, the most of them slaves. It speaks also ofWaraka, a cousin of Chadija, Mohammod's first wife,who was a Christian" and aocustomed to write theGospels in Hebrew "-by which, lIO doubt, Syriac is~eant. This Waraka is made by tradition to recog.lllze Mohammed as a prophet at the very beginningof his oareer; and it is possible that such a man ex.isted, lind that he influonced lIfohammeelt But thedesire of tradition to secure Christian recognition andendorsement for Mohammed is so strong, that We areobliged to be cautious in receiving this account asthough it was a historic fllct. More weight may beallowed to the assertion that thore woro Christianslaves t at Mecca to whom Mohammed's attentionwas oalled by their ohanting of the Scriptures.

* Sprenger, III., p. 14. cr. Koran 217, 930.tOn 'Varakn, d. Bocluwi, I. p. 3.t Muir refers to three such slu.ves all of whom became Moslems,

JJet us imagine a religious inquirer led to conversewith such slavcs. We may assume that they had noAmbic translation of the Biblo. Their Bible wasprobably in Syriac: Besides this, it is e~tremelyU;l­likely that they had any books, oven Syrlac b~oks, mtheir possession. Books were a rare commodity andnot owned by slaves. But Ohristian slaves woultlhave some knowledge of the Bible, especially of thoseparts of the Bible most frequently used in the publicservicc. This would include the Psalms and Gospelsquite certainly, for these were used in the .churchesfrom vcry early times. I,et us supposc th~lr kno,"'l­ed<Ye to be limited in amount and crude m quahty.TI~e question with us is: "~hat.effec~ would their US?of Scripture have upon an mqUirer hke Moha;nmed?

For one thing it would satisfy a want of Ins soul.We can hardly help supposing that he was ~lreadyreligiously awakened. He was dissatisfte~ with theancestral religion antI longing for somethmg better.This desire would lead him to inquire for a WOi'­

thy service of God. Liturgy is. an ~mp~rbant p~~tof every religion. Mohammed IS. dlss~tlsfied wltnheathenism; he is seeking a mty 10 wlnch to serveGod. He comes across thcse youug men and hearstheir chant. Asking what it means, he is to\<1 thatthey are celebrating the praises of God. On furtherinquiry he is told that the words t~ey use are formssupplied by God Himself from H;s h.oly ~ook..Itseems to me tbat he would recogmze m thiS servICe

Life of Mahomet, II., p. 122. It ia interesting to note thntZaid , whomay he called a forerunner of Mohammed, was exercised ahout therigbt way to worship God.-lbn Ilischam, I., p. 108.

170 1'HE BIBLE AND ISLAMREVELATION AND PROPHIWY 17l

just what he was looking for; that he would find thisan ontirely worbhy servicc, and would have a greatdesire to adopt such a service for himself.

Now tradition assures us that for some time beforehis call, Mohammed used to retire to a cave nearMecca, aud give himself, for days at a time, to exer­cises of devotion. It does not seem fanciful to sup­pose that he was endeavoring to serve God after themanner just described. In this endeavor we can seethat he would meet with some perplexities. The ser­vice of Jews and Ohristians, he had learned, is basedupon a divine book. This book was inaccessible tohim. If he could get a copy it would be useless tohim because in a foreign language. The brokenArabic of his Christian friends would be inadequatein form. In this perplexity, he would natumlly throwhimself upon God. If God in His mercy would onlysend him portions of His Book, as He had sent por­tions to the prophets, how gladly would he receivethem and use them in a service of praise I

Such desires would raise the further question-whymay not God send an Arabic prophet? To Moham­med all the world was organized in tribes like thoseof Arabia. Tho tribe of the Jews had been favoredby God with more than one prophet. Tho tribe ofthe Ohristians had had Jesus. It would not be strangeif Arabia should be visited by the divine grace. Ifsuch a prophet were to arise he would be furnishedwith such divinely appointed liturgical compositionsas the Psalms. Not that Mohammed would lay anyspecial stress upon their being written down. Hisconception of a book was not like ours. IVe think of

172 TilE BIBLE AND ISLAM REVELATION AND PROPHEOY 173

a hook as something to be read in a quiet corner, andstudied, and pondered over, '1'0 him a book was arepository of words that were to be read aloud or re­cited. If its contents were known by heart, the writ­ten document was unnecessary.

1uJ we well know, Mohammed called his revelationsJ(omn, A single chapter is a Koran, and the wholocollection is the Koran. The verb from which thisname is derived does not mean to read in our sense,but to read aloud, to recite, or to chant-precisely theact which is performed in the public service of theChurch, the Synagogue, and the Mosque. The pres­ence 01' ahsence of a written exemplar makes no dif­ference. The recitation is a <jur'an just the same.The words recited may be called a book, even althoughthey are not committed to paper. Mohammed makesthe infant Jesus in the cradle speak and describehimself thus: "I am the servant of God, He has givenme the Book and made me a prophet." * It would beabsurd to suppose the new-born babe holding a ma­terial book in his hand. What is meant is that theinfant prophet had the tl'l1th in his hea1't. With thisagrees tIle description of the Koran as "clear versesin the breasts of those who have received knowledge";and in another passage the revelation is sent upon thehea1·t of the Prophet himself that he should becomeone of the warners,t

Let us look now at the tradition of the call of Mo­hammed. 'Ve must use it with a certain reserve, forAycsha, from whom it is received, was only eighteen)'ears old at the time of her husband's death, and the

* Kornn, 19:1I , t 20-1e, 20 '91 ,

event of which she speaks took place before her birth.All she could have heard was Mohammed's recollec­tions of his call; and whether she was capable of un­derstanding clearly what he attempted to describe,or of repeating his account without additions sug­gested by her own lively imagination, is a question.However, the information is the best we fuwe, andwe must make the best we can out of it. It reads asfollows:

"'fhe first of the revelations which came to theApostle of Allah was 0. good dream; and he did nothave a dream without there coming something likethe break of day. Then he liked to be alone and heused to go to the cave of Him and purify himself­this [purification] was 0. performance of religious ex­ercises several nights-until he desired [to return to]his family. And he used to provide himself withfoo~ for these periods and did so again and again,untIl [finally] the tl'l1th came to him. And he was inthe cave of Hirn, an4 the angel came to him and said:Recite! He replied: I cannot l'ecite,* Then, saidhe [that is, Mohammed] he took hold of me andsqueezed me to the utmost of my endurance. Thenhe let me go and said again: Recite!" The Sameanswer was given and the Same action repeated asecond and a third time. At the last the angel re­peated these verses, which now constitute a part ofthe Koran:

.. Recite in the name of thy Lord who created,Created man from a clot of blood;Reeite I Thy Lord is bountiful;

* Literally: I am not a ,-ecitcf'.

174 THE BIBLE AND ISLAHREVELATION AND l'ROl'HEOY 175

He who has taught mau by the pen:Taught him what he did not know.But man is rebelliousAs soon as he Bees himself becoming rich;Yet verily to thy Lord they shall return I" *

The verses are in rhymed prose-a form which ex­tends thronghont the Koran. We should note how­ever that in the earlier suras we have a much nearerapproach to a regular metre than in the later com­positions. In the revelation before us, the ve1'Ses arenearly equal in length and also short, so that therhyme and the rhythm strike the ear at once. Theseearly sums are all well adopted for the cantillation 01'intonation which prevails in the public service of theOriental Church as well as in that of the Synagogue.

It must be confessed that the account of Moham­med's call is uot altogether clear. But the main factsseem worthy of credence. The first of these is thatMohammed was deeply concerned on the subject ofreligion. This is evidenced by his frequent and pro­longed visits to the lonely cave. There is a traditionwhich even affirms that his religious anxiety bronghthim to the verge of suicide. If this be true, it onlyshows more clearly the depth of his emotion. Thenext fact indicated is that he had a vision of the night.This is not the only indication that his early mvela­tions were received in the night. For the present itis sufficient to note that tradition brings his earliestexperience of this kind into connection with a vividdream. Lastly we notice that the vision brings himsomething which we suppose he would greatly desire,

.. Koran, 961•8•

that is, a form which he could use for the worship ofGod.

The endeavor to make the experiences of a religiousmind psychologically intelligible is one frequentlymade but rarely successful. It is doubtful whether ifwe could cross-question Mohammed himself, we couldexplain all his experiences. But tentatively we maybe allowed to constmct from the data before us a storysuch as he would tell us, and which would be logicallyconsistent. We suppose him anxious on the subjectof religion, convinced that the one true God doesreveal Himself to His servants, and possessed by astrong desire to know His way more perfectly. Withthis on his mind Mohammed spends days in his cave,meditating on these things and calling upon God. Atlast in the midst of the little sleep he allows himself,he has a vivid dream. A bright light seems to breakupon him. He sees a radiant form, which speaks andgives him what he has sought. The evidence of thetruth of the vision is the stanza which remains in hismemory after he awakes, a form of words which hecan use in the praise of his Lord. If this were 1110­hammed's experience it was an experience whichbrings him into the company of many others. Formany seekers after truth and beauty have confessedthat after long striving-a striving which has broughtthem to despair-the object of their search has cometo them suddenly like the rising of the dawn.

The next sura in point of time is said to be onethat begins: "0 Thon who art wrapped in a 'gar­ment!" Tradition has fastened on these words, nndhas invented a situation for them. It tells us that

176 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM REVELATION AND PROPHECY 1'17

Mohammed was subject to epileptic fits, and that,when he felt these coming on, he would have Chadijawrap him in a covering so that he would be protectedfrom the air, or from the gaze of curious visitors. Onthe basis of this tmclition a modern scholar" hasbuilt up an elaborate theory of Mohammed's epilepticor hysterical disease. Bnt the foundation is insuffi­cient. The tradition is built upon the singlc phrasejust quoted which describes the one addressed aswrapped in a garment. But every oriental wrapshimself in a garment when he lies down to sleep.All that we can legitimately conclude from the wordsis that the revelation came to the Prophet when hewas asleep. " Awake; thou that sleepest! " is the nat­ural meaning of the address, and we havc here an­other evidence that these earlier revelations came asvisions of the night. Tho famous night joumey toJorusalem is evidence in the same direction.t

Because his first visions were visions of the night,it does not follow that all the later ones were of theSame kind. The statements are many to the effectthat the Prophet had visions also in his waking hours.He would become apparently unconscious; breathedheavily; the perspiration broke out upon him evenin a wintry day. t After such a fit, he would give ananswer to a question that lk'l.d perplexed him, orwould recount a visiou that he had seen. How far

* $prenR'er in his Leben und Lehre des Muhammed.t The night visit is alluded to 17', It should be noted that hyo

Buras (73 and 14) begin with an address to the ODe wrapped in aga.rment.

t Bo'hMi, t, p. 8, II., pp. 117, 182, 186; Vakidi (Wcllh,uBen),p. 181.

, ,',

he was subject to physical disease, and how far theseextraordinary states may be explained as the l'esult ofmental excitement, is difficult to say. We can readilysee the strong emotion which anyone would feel atthe approach of a heavenly messenger. Any man ofordinary sensibility, if convinced that he was aboutto receive a superhuman revelation, would become ex­cited, and his emotion might produce physical effectssuch as are here described for us. In order to ac­count for them, it is not necessary to suppose eitherthat Mohammed was epileptic or that he was playinga part.

It is to our present purpose to point out that, bothin the matter of dreams and of waking visions, Mo­hammed's experience was similar to that of the Bibli­cal organs of revelation. The importance of dreamsis evident upon the face of the Old Testament narra­tive. Jacob has a decisive revelation in a dream.Joseph's dreams foreshadowed God's dealings withhim. The author of the Book of Job assumes thatGod speaks to men" in thoughts from the visions ofthe night when deep sleep falleth on men." So inthe New Testament; the angel which encouragedPaul stood by him in the night, the most natural in­terpretation of the words being that he appeared ina dream. Without laying stress upon the cases whcrethe dream is sent to startle the unbeliever (asPharnohor Nebuchadrezzar) it is clearly made out that, to thoOld Testament writers, the dream was one methodof revelation. Jeremiah, to be sure, speaks slighting­ly of dreams and seems to contrast theu: with thevoice which came to the prophet. But tlns we must

12

'" Koran, 74Jo10• The rhyme changes in the next verse, flO thatthis section is probably n. revelation by itself.

u 0, thou who art wrapped in a ga.rment ;Rise and warn IAnd magnify thy Lord,And cleanse thy garments,And Ilee iniquity IAnd do not spend with the desire of gain;And wait patiently for thy Lord IWhen a blast is blown upon the trumpetThat will be a distressfnl day,Nat easy for the unbelievers. " '*

explain as a reaction against the abuse of dreams bythe prophets of his time.

And if the waking vision produced extmordhU1ryphysical manifestations, or was accompanied by ex­traordinary physical manifestations in Mohammed,the same is seen in the Old Testament prophets.Balaam speaks of himself as falling down when hehad the vision of the Almighty. Ezekiel fell uponhis face when he saw the chariot of glory. So .didDaniel at the appearance of Gabriel; and John, when!l.e had a revelation of the Son of Man, fell at hisfeet like one dead. The phenomena are strikinglyalike, though a direct connection does not seem toexist.

But it is time to look beyond these externals to thesubstanoe of Mohammed's revelations. What was itto whioh he was called? To answer this question wemay look at one or two of these early chapters. Onehas been already quoted. Another, to which allusionhas been made, reads as follows:

The message is evidently a command to preach." Arise and warn" is its key-note. The rest is inter­preted by this. In order to warn, he must himself bean example of faith. That is, he must worship in anacceptsble manner, purifying his garments and call­ing upon the name.of his Lord. It is this which wasemphasized in the first revelation. The Prophet isthere called upon to recite the praises of God, thatis, to spend the time in worship. In both, the com­mand is motived by the thought of the approaohingjudgment. Man is rebellious and will be brought toan account. The trumpet will be blown and a dis­tressful day ensue. These are evidently reasons forthe command to warn men of their danger. In thisrespect, the call of Mohammed is like the call to theOld Testament prophets. Isaiah, Jeremiah, and theprophets in general, are sent to rebuke a sinfulnation, to declare the wrath of God, and to threatenapproaching calamity.

If we desire further light upon what Mohammedfelt call~~ to do, we may examine othel'S of his earlycomposItIOns, for we may be sure that in them hetries to oaITy out the oommand of God. What wefind on suoh examination is, that some of these areforms of prayer. Thus:

" Praise be to God, Lord of the Ages,. The Oompasslonate, the Merciful,

King of the nay of Judgment:Thee we serve and to Thee we cry for help,Lead us in the straight path.The path of those to whom Thou art gracious,Upon Whom is no wrath and who do not stray," *

'" Koran, I) the ,veIl known Fatllta.

179REVELATION AND PROPHEOYZ'HE BIBLE AND ISLAM178

REVELATI,ON AND PROPHEOY 181

0, mD,n though thou strive hard agaiust thy Lord, yetshalt thou meet Him.

And he who receives his book in his right handShall be judged leniently,And shall return to his frieuds with joy.But he who receives his book behind his baekShall wish for annihilation,And shall suffer the Fire.Once he rejoiced amid his friends-He thought he should not be moved.Yet verily, thy Lord was observiug him.

But whD,t ails them, that they do not believe?And, when the Scripture is reeited, do not bow?The unbelievers even accuse it of being false IBut God knoweth their seeret thought,Therefore bring them tidings of a severe punishment,But those who believe and do well receive an unstinted

reward." *

These citations are enough to show whatMohammedunderstood to be his mission. He had received a callto worship God and to preach. This call he obeyedto the best of his ability. Doubtless he had someshrinking before appearing in publie, as is indiootedin the tradition-where the angel uses force before hesecures obodionce. In this also he will be found inline with the Biblical prophets. Moses seeks to beexcused from the work to which he is called, on theground of inability to speak, and Jeremiah pleads hisyonth as l\ rellSon why he shonldnot be sent to Judah.This is, of course, a natural experience; we can hardlysuppose that Mohammed was influenced here by hisBiblical knowledge.

. ;

that

* Koran, 112.

"When the hoovens shall open,And shall hear their J..or'l and obey;When the earth shall be laid flat,And shall cast away what is in it and be empty,And shall hoor its Lord and obey-

t 102.

II God is one,The Self-existent;He begets not and is not begotten,

t H' Jl *And none is equal 0 1m.

Evidently designed to be ~sed ~n w?rship ar~ sOl~ethers as the fifty-fifth, whICh WIth Its reeurnng le-

o , ' 'd of Psalm 136. Far more numerousfram remm s us . dare the addresses designed to warn men of their an-

ger. For example:

" The desire of gain absorbs you,Until you visit the tomb,Yet you shall certainly know,Then shall you certainly know INa 1 If you kncw with c100r knowledgeYo~ would certainly see the flame;Then would you see it with clear e)'e, ,In that day you shall be asked concermng

"tyour pleasures.

Th' is somewhat vague in its description of18 one 1 't' . t t' g for

tl t d punl'shment thoug IllS meres mleexpece , f'its aCCllBation of covetousness lIS th? root. 0 me~ s

'1 t' Usually the J' udament IS depwted WItheVl ac Ions. 0

vividness, as in the following:

180 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

A profession of fait!: is a part of worship, sowe put here the followmg :

182 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

In his later life, however, he elab?rated tho ~~eoryof revelation more distinctly, and ill the add1tlOnald t 'Is we can clearly trace Biblical ideas. Up totl~i:~ointwe have had only tradition to go up?n, forthe modo of revelation. For the later perlOd wehave more positive assertions in the Koran. As tothe objective reality of what he saw he never had au.y

1 bt But he was sometimes obliged to assure h1S(oU . • t' f h'followers of it. So we have a desonp lOn 0 1S ex-periences in the following:

" By the Pleiades when they set IYour fellow-citizen is not astray or erring.He does not speak his own fancy.[What he speaks] is a revelation sen~ to him.The Mighty in power taught it to hunThe Possessor of strength. He stood erectIn the upper horizon iThen he drew near and condescended, .And was two bows' lengths [from him] or nearer.And he made known to his servan~what he made ~nown.The heart did not deceive concernmg what it saW ,And wl1l you dispute concerning what he saw?He saw him another time,By the sidm tree of the border,Near which is the garden of abode; .Then covered the sidra tree that which covered it,The eye did not turn aside nor refuse [to .look], ,,*And he saw the greatest of the signs of hiS Lord.

The lauguage is obsmlre in places and is made moreso, rather than less, by the oommentators. The~esuppose the sidra tree spoken of, to be located ill

heaven. It seems to me, on the contrary, to be onlit' Koran, 531018 •

, !,..

, 'l,

l/BWELAl'ION AND Pl/OPIIEOY 183

earth, in fact to he a well-known tree at Mecca, men­tioned for the purpose of looating the experience ofwhioh the Prophet speaks. He saw this tree ooveredwith something-he purposely does not describe itmore exactly-probably a bright light such ns wasspoken of in tradition and compared to the daybreak.This miraole, upon which his eye was able to looksteadfastly, was one of the theophanies in his expeli­ence. It is impossihle not to see ill it a reminiscenoeof the burning bush in Exodus. At another time, theProphet tells us, he saw a figure appear in the holizonwhioh desoended to the place where he himself was,and talked with him. So in Israel the angel of Yah­weh oalls out of heaven,* or descends thence, as isevidenoed by his ascending in the fill-me of the sacri­fioe when his errand is performed.t These analogieswould lead us to suppose the nll-meless being of Mo­hammed's vision ll-lso to be ll-n ll-ngel. So he is oll-lledby the interpreters, ll-nd later by Mohammed himself.But I suspeot thll-t in the original mMning of thissura, the one Mighty in power is Allll-h Himself. If,however, Mohammod did not clearly distinguish be­tween Allll-h ll-nd His Angel, we have ll-nother BibliOll-1resemblll-noe. For, as we know, the Old Testamentpresents the Angel of Yll-hweh spell-king lind lIctinglike Yahweh Himself.

In his Ill-ter revelations Mohammed speaks dis­tinotly of the ll-Ilgel who is sent to him. In one in­stance only is this aHgel oalled Gll-bliel: "Say tothem: Who is the enemy of Gabriel? It is he whobrought down [the revelation] to thy heart by the

*Gen. 22"' lI$. tJudg. 132G•

184 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM REVELA1'lON AND PROPHECY 185

command of God, to confirm what was belore re­vealed, a guidance and good tidings to the believ­ers," * We recall that Gabriel is the messenger ofGod both in the Old Testament and in the New. Thatit was New Testament infiuence, rather than Old, whichled Mohammed to adopt him is evident from this verypassage. The Jews had the theory that Gabriel wasthe angel sent with bad tidings to Israel, while thebriuger of good tidings was Michael. 'rhey thereforerefused to accept Mohammed, or rather made thisthe ostensible ground of their relusal. Had he beenunder Jewish influence he would have called the an­gel Michael rather than Gabriel.

We must note again that Mohammed"in some casesattributes his l'evelations to the Spirit: "This is arevelation of the Lord of the Ages with which thefaithful spirit came down into thy heart that thoushouldst be one of the warners;" "The spirit ofholiness brought it down from thy Lord in truth tostrengthen those who believe," t As Mohammed re­fused to adopt the doctrine of the Trinity, he couldhave no idea of the Spirit as a distinct person 01 theGodhead. He seems to have wavered between theconception that the Spirit is one of the angels, andthe conception that it is an influence carried by theangels to the prophets. The variations in his doctrinedo not concem us here. All that we need to bear inmind is, that he had adopted the Biblical teaching­that the Spirit is the Rcvealer-so far as this doc­trine agreed with his theology in general.

'rhe fact once established in his mind that he was*Koran,291. t2GI?1', 10101,

. {

,,

.', !

commissioned as a Prophet, Mohammed drew certaininferences, which became important parts of his sys­tem, and which we canndt ignore in treating his doc­trine of revelation. The first of these was that byhis call he became one in the line of prophets audreligious leaders, of which the world had already seenseve1'l1l. This point has been already touched uponiu our discussion of the narrative material in theKoran. As wo there saw, the characters most prom­inent1y in his mind were the great founders of relig­ion, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. These formedtho chain of which now, by his election, he becamethe concluding link. It went with this that his relig­ion was not new. He only claimed to reproduce whathad been revealed to his predecessors. Every relig­ious movement seems naturally to seek itself in thepast. Thus the Hebrews saw faith exemplified inNoah and Abraham; Judaism claimed Moses as itsfounder; the Apostles pointed back to David andIsaiah; the Reformers renewed the Christianity ofthe Apostles. Mohammed's course is parallel withthese. And, like them, he tried to link his religionwith earlier ones not only by his renewal of theirprinciples, but by their supposed prophecies of him.This claim-that he was predicted in the earlierScriptures-is unmistakably, though not very fre­quently, put forward in the Korau. In a compara­tively late sum we find; "Jesus the son of Mary said:0, Children 01 Israel, verily I am the Apostle of Godto you confirming the Tara which yon already have,and bringing tidings of an Apostlc to come after mewhose name is Ahmed," * In another p!t\ce he is

"* Koran, f,lll,

186 THE BIBLE AND ISLAMREVELATION AND PROPHEOY 187

spoken of as "the vernacu1ir·' prophet whom theyfind described in their own [books], in the Tom audthe Gospel." What predictions Mohammed himselfhad in mind in these declarations seems impossibleto make onto The Arabic commentators do not hesi­tate to refer to him all the Messianic passages of theOld Tcstament. The Messianic hope, as we know,did not cease with the corning of Christ, and we Canscarcely wonder that lYIohammed applied it to him­self. For the words of Jesus which he claims in thepassage quoted, tradition points to the promise ofthe Paraclete in the Gospel of J olm. It is signif:\cantthat this promise had already becn appropriated byMani,t for there are some indications that Moham­med got his Christianity from a heretical source.What interests us here is not the particular passagein the Prophet's mind, but the general claim that hewas not only the legitimate successor of the carlierMcssengers of God, but was also foreseen anel expeCt~cd by them as thc "seal" or culmination of thcirmission.

Another inference from the firmly held belief thathe was a prophet, is prominently put forward in the

* The translation is only probable. Mohammed elsewhere em~

phasizcs the fact that he brings an ,Arabic revelation. The refer­ence here is 7ua. For a discussion of the passages of Scripture ap­plied by Moslems to Mohammed cf. Drockelmann, "Muhammed­nnisclle WeiasllRungen im Alten Testament," Z.A.T.W'l XV. pp.138 if., 312, with remarks by Bacher, 'ibid., p. 309; also Goldziher,Z.D.M.G., XLII., and Revue des Etudes Juives, XXX., pp. 1-23.One Mohammedan author finds no les8 than fifty-one prophecies ofllilnm in the Bible.

t Cf. Herzog, !J.R.E.2, IX., p. 231. The passage in John is citedby Ibn liihuk, cf. \Veil's ibn, Ilischarn, I., p. 112.

'i:

,\ ','.'

Koran, to wit: that his revelation, as embodied inthe Koran, is the same in substanoe with the sacredbooks which had preceded. Remember that he madethe Boole an abstraction. He made it at least an in­tellectual and spiritual entity, not a material thing ofpaper and ink. His revelations were generally writ­ten down, to be sure; they were collected at lastfrom fragments of papyrus and parchment and bones,bnt also from the breasts of men. The record uponwhich Mohammed relied however waS the memory ofhis followers. Nevertheless he regarded his detachedfragments as parts of a transcendental nnity whichhe called the Book, and whose real existence was inheaven.

Looking more nanowly at what he says of thisBook, we discover that he has combined two concep­tions originally separate. In connection with thegreat thought of the judgment, he had adopted thetheory of a book of reoord kept in heaven. In the endysuras there are several refercncos to this book which,seems to be either a record of actions or a record ofnames.* It needed only a little expansion of this tomake the book a book of fato containing the wholcof God's will for !ill history. Bnt a book of God wasalso revealed to the Jews and Christians. They meantby it, to be sure, an earthly codex. Yet the earthlycodex might bo but the transcript of a heavenly orig­inal. According to Jewish tradition,t the Tora. wascreated before the creation of the heavens and the

* Koran, 781T02~, 834.9, 11·10

t Midrasch B",,,hith Rabba (WUnsche). p. 81. And of. Weber,Altsynagogale l'heologie , p. 14.

188 TIlE BIBLE LiND ISLLiM REVELA TION LiND PROPIlEOY 189

earth. Indeod we see that the natural implioationof the phrase Book of God is that the original is writ­ten in heaven. The inferenoe was made by Moham­med: "This is a noble Koran, in a carefully guardedbook, touched only by the pure, a revelation from theLord of the Ages." *

Mohammed's conception therefore may be definedas follows: there is a great book of God's decrees,written in heaven. From this book, portions are sentdown to the successive prophets. These are theparts of the Book fitted for the guidance of men intotrue faith, true worship, and right conduct. ThePentateuch, the Gospel, and the Koran, are all ex­tructs from this original. They are therefore identicalin substance, and one cerroborates the other. Oneof the earliest of Mohammed's revelations alludes tothe rolls of Abraham and Moses, as containing awarning similar to the one just delivered by him­self. It is unnecessary to suppose, with Sprenger,that there is a reference here to pseudepigraphawhich circulated under these titles. The Pentateuchmight well be described under the name of the roll ofAbraham or the roll of Moses. In later passages wefind it distinctly said that the Koran confirms thepreceding revelations: " Before this was the Bookof Moses, a guide and a gift of grace, and this [Koran]is a book which asserts the truth [of the other] inArabic, that it may warn the evil.doers." t The atti­tude of the Prophet is well brought out in what he iscommanded to say to the Jews of Medina who per-

* Koran. 5G~"u, cf. 85~1 t., 80" r.t 46\1, of. 2~3, 69~, 12111 , 35~~ C.

..

, ~

msted in asking him troublesome questions about theTara: "Say to them: We believe in God and whatis revoaled to us, and in what was revealed to Abra­ham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the [twelve]tribes, and in what Moses and Jesus and the Prophetsreceived from their Lord. We make no differencebetween them and we are resigned to Him." * Al­though Koran was the proper name of the portionrevealed to him, he seems in one instance to call thewhole body of revealed books by this name. This iswhere he denounces the dividers who make the K01'anparts. The most natural explanation of the words isthat they refer to the Jews and Christians who, byrejecting the later while accepting the earlier revela­tion, put asunder what Mohammed joined together.

The theory of Mohammed is a perfectly consistentone, and when he had formulated it, he did not waver.The Jews, we may well believe, made strenuous ef­forts to convict him of error, in that he representedtheir Tara to be identical with his revelations. Theonly effect on his mind was to strengthen the convic­tion of their obstinacy and deceit. We wonder alittle that he did not take more pains to acquainthimself with the exact contents of Tara and Gospel.Yet not a few theologians, before his time and since,have been willing to rest in their a pri01'i system, andhave ignored or denied those facts which confliotedwith it. The attitude of Mohammed is seen in theaneodote that Omar brought a Pentateuch to· Mo.hammed and offered to read out of it. The anger ofthe Prophet appeared in his face and Omar desisted,

*Koran, 3t~.

190 1'HIiJ BIBLE AND ISLAM REVELATION AND PROPHEOY 191

saying: "God protect me from the anger of God undHis Apostle I It suffices me that God is my Oherisher,and Islam my religion, and Mohammed my prophet."Then Mohammed said: "If Moses were alive andknew my prophecy he would follow me." * The posi­tion of J\lIohammed is quite intelligible. The princi­ples of Islam were established; for tho faith of itsdisciples the confirmation of these principles fromthe Bible was unnecessary. On the other hand thefacts might be inconvenient. On either view, it wasbest to let well enough alone.

It was not the facts of the older Scriptures alonethat were troublesome. The Koran itself did not al­ways seem to bear out the character given it. It couldnot be expected that a collection of occasional leaflets,published at intervals during more than twcnty years,should be free from inconsistencies or even contra­dictions. Such inconsistencies were admitted byMohammed himself. Some of them he removed byerasure. In some cases he laid the blame on his ownmemory, and once he confessed that Satan had mis­led him. Finally he declared that God abrogatedsome regulations by later enactments.t It is possiblethat the theory of abrogation was at fttst invented tollCeount for discrepancies between the Bible and theKoran. Two of the passages which state the theoryare in a context which has to do with the Jews; andthe thought in Mohammed's mind seems to have beensomcthing like this: "Should the Jews object that

III Jfishcat , I., p. 03.t The theory, with a. li6t of the abrogated verses, is given in

Ilu~hcSI D,,"ctionary of Islam, p. 520.

i ~!

'.:~

this revelation does not agree with theirs, we replythat God is able to erase parts of His revelation-Hemay do what He will with His own." The theoryonce accepted was a welcome recourse, when dis­crepancies came to light in the Koran itself.*

It seems strange to us that Mohammed made noforecast of the future. One would suppose that theexperience which led him to abrogate regulationsonly a few years old, would show him that other lawswould need to be modified after his death. But thisseems not to hl\ve occurred to him. The. necessitiesof the hour absorbed his thoughts. In the main, nodoubt, he felt that the principles laid down by himwould be a sufficient guide for all time to come. Itmust be remembered also that he gave tradition apart in the regulation of his community. In this re­spect he never took the Protestant position whichmakes the Scriptures the exclusive arbiter in mattersof faith and life. He would have llCcepted, rather, therule of the eaJ.'ly Ohurch in which Apostolic traditionhad so large a part.

Koran and tradition together make up the infalliblerule of faith and prllCtice in the Moslem Ohurch. Ofthe two parts, the Koran must always have the firstplace-a clear sentence in the Koran, unless it is one

* The Koran passa.ges are 2100, 1835 I, both of which are in con­nection with allusions to the earlier revelations. A tradition givesa Koran verse which was not only abrogated but obliterated-Bo­chari, III., p. 190. The fact that the Tora did not contnin B"Omethings which ought to be in it on his theory, Mohammed explainsby Iilaying that the Jews concealed them from the Moslems j U OurApostle bas come to you revealing a great part of what you are ac­customed to conceal of the Book." 518•

thl,t has been abrogated by another sentence in theKoran, is decisive. This position of arbiter is parallelto what is asserted of the older revelation: "We sentdown the Tora as a guide and a light; by it the piousprophets judged the Jews; and the Rabbis and theScribes [still] judge by what is committed to them ofthe Book of God, and are witnesses concerning it."Mohammed goes on to give a summary of the Old'restament lex tali01lis and adds: "And whoever doesnot judge by what God has revealed, these are thewicked." * A little later in the same chapter Jesusis said to have received the Gospel-"that the peo­ple of the Gospel should judge by what God re­vealed." Then comes Mohammed, who also has re­ceived a book and who is exhorted thus: "Then judgebetween them by what God has revealed, and do J;l.otfollow their desires, turning away from what hascome to thee of the truth. To each of you we havegiven a law and a plain path." t .

This declaration puts the Koran iuto the same po­sition of supreme law for the Moslem which the Toraoccupies for the Jew, and which.the Gospel occur:iesfor the Christian. The conceptIOn of the revelatIOnlUI law becomes especially prominent in the laterperiod of Mohammed's life. We can readily ~ountfor this. At Medina the simple warner and brmgerof tidings had become the theocratic ruler and judgeover a small but heterogeneous community, unused toa settled form of government. His decisions, there­fore, became precedents and his regulations bec~melaws. These were embodied in the Koran, whICh,

*Korau,04sr, t5~9.

in this period differs materially in character fromthe earlier revelations. The later Suras are in asenSe the archives of the infant state. "The con­duct of the disaffected, the treatment of allies theformation of treaties, the acceptance of terms' ando~h~r political matters [now] fonnd a place among thedmne messages. Liberality in contributing towardthe expe~sesof :war-t~e only object requiring a publicpUl'Se-lS contmuallymculcated. The elements of acode both criminal and civil are also introduced. Pun­ishmcnts for certain offences are specified, and a massof Icgisl~tion [i~] laid down for the tutelage of orphans,for marnagc, dlvorce, sales, bargains, wills, evidence,USUl'y, and other similar concerns. FUl'ther, thereare copious instructions for the guidance of the bc.liever in his private life and special provisions . . •rcgulating the intercourse of Mahomet with his sub­jects and with his own family." * This occasionalch~racter of the Koran is most conspicuous in its al­lUSIOns to the experiences· of Mohammed himself.~any of. these are interesting for the glimpse theyglVO us l~to the heart of the spcaker j as whcre hebetrays h18 great anxiety to work a miracle. Some ofthcm are comical; as whcro ho tcaches etiquette tothe too familial' 01' too noisy Bedawin: "0 Believersdo not lift your voices above the voice of the Prophet'anel do not shout at him as you shout at eachother;. elsc your deeds are of no avail, though youknow It not. They who speak low in the presenceof the Apostle of God, these are they whose heartsGod has disposed toward picty." t And again: "0,

• Muir, Lif' of Mahomet, III., 295. t Iror•• 49' '.13 '

192 TilE BIBLE AND ISLAMREVELA1'ION AND PROPHEOY 193

* Koron, 33~3 The houses of the Prophet ,vere a row of hutsaround a court, Each wife had one, and Mohammed dW'elt withthem by turns.

t Mohammed bad ordered his followera to take not more thanfour wives. He incrcnscd bis own bareem to nine or more andjustified himself by a revelation (33~~). He was seized wIth It pas"sian for the wife of his adopted son Zaid. Znld divorced ber, butit was, against customa.ry morals for a man to marry the divorcedwife 6f an adopted Bon. After some wavering, Mohammed com..manded himself (in a revelation) to take herj and of course be thusset aside the old law (3331). In forbidding remarriage on the partof the widows he might leave, he possibly had Jewish precedent illmind, according to Sale, P1"cl1'm. Dis., who cites Misbna Sanhed1"i711to pro"e that the widow· of n prince should not remarry.

Believers, do not enter the houses of the Prophetexcept he invite you to eat with him; and do sowithout looking at his furniture, But when you areinvited, then enter; and when you have eaten, thengo your ways, and do not be familiar in your con·versation, This pains the Prophet, though he isashamed to tell you; but God is not ashamed of thetruth. And when you ask anything of them [that is,his wives], ask it from the other side of a curtain­this is more innocent for your hearts and for theirs.It is not becoming in you to pain the Prophet, norto marry his wives after his death. This were inthe sight of God a great sin," * To bring in a divinerevelation in order to ease the jealous heart of a fondold man, seems to us to border on blasphemy. Andwhen the same method is taken to justify him inviolating the rule which he had himself made on thesubject of marriage,t and again to vindicate his fa­vorito wife when she was the subject of scandal, weare shocked and disgusted,

194 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

" .j

:.. ·'1"i

, ,

REVELATION AND PROPHEOY 195

, In vie~ of such exhibitions of selfish weakness, ourImpulse IS to s~t down their author as a vulgar im.po~tor, whose 111m from the beginning was to seCUl'eenJo~ent and in~uence by a forged and fraudulentreve:a~lOn: In dOlllg this we should easily do himan lllJustlCe. Even these exhibitions of weaknessmay be explained as the defect of a quality. Mo.ham~ed had placed his trust in Allah, and he wasconvlllced that Allah had distinguished him b h'fIt' yISavor. IS of the essence of faith to believe thatGod loves us and cares for us individually. One oft?e most fleasing suras of tho Koran is the expres­sIOn of thIS faith:

'4 By tho morning;By the night when It.grows dark'Thy Lord has not forsaken nor rejeeted thee .And the future shall be better than the past, 'Thy Lord will give thee and thou shalt be satisfiedDid He not find thee an orphan and adopt thee 1 •And find thee poor and enrich thee 1Then do not oppress the orphan;And do not repulse the one who asks'And recount the mercies of thy Lord.:' *

I~ a mind whose early moral training has been de­fectIve. we can B~e that such a faith may lead to self.~eceptlOn. It IS to be feared that not a few Chris­tIans have taken virtually the position of Mohammed-that God so loves them as to indulge their weak-nesses even as an earthly father indulges a f 'tchild. avorl e

To pursue this subject would take us beyond theif Sura 93, and d. 04.

196 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM REVELATION AND PROPHEOY 197

proper limits of this inquiry. We are here ill,vesti­gating the nature of the influence exerted by theBible on the religion of Mohammcd. For the sub­ject of this lecture we may describe this influence asfollows:

1. Mohammed's general doctrine of revelation wasundoubtedly derived from the Bible. The doctrineis that God reveals His will to chosen men who arecommanded to speak for Him, and who are calledprophets or apostles. . .

2. The revelation which the prophet receIves ISbrought by an angel. This method of revelation,which is only occasional in the Bible, is made the ruleby Mohammed, for he identifies revelation by theSpirit with this, bemmse he makes the Spirit to bean angel. In some cases he so completely adoptsthe Biblical view that he gives the angel of revela­tion the name Gabriel.

3. He speaks always (when delivering the messagerevealed to him) for God, using the pronoun of thefirst person, not to express his own mind, but to. e:­press the mind of God. In this al~o he follows Blbl~­cal precedent, where, in the heIght of prophetICspeech, the ego of tho prophot disappear;' befo~e thoHigher Ego.* Here also, what is occasIOnal In theOld Testament has become the rule with Mohammed.That the cause of God is identified with the cause ofthe prophet, is the natural consequence of this view.

And in this connection we must not shut our eyesto the fact that God's care for His cause is, in the OldTestament, extended to the personal affairs of the

*Ewald, P1'opheten des Allm Bundes 2, p. 33.

prophet. Jeremiah was informed by revelation ofthe intended treachery of his fellow-townsmen. Sam­nel was directed by revelation in making use of a sub­terfuge to deceive Saul, and thus to l'elieve his ownfear. God identifies Elisha s honor with His own,and whcre the pl'ophet relieves his feelings with nCill-se, God makes the CUl'se effective in avenging theinsult. Such exnmples show that Mohnmmed's pre·sumption is not nltogether without precedent.

4. The revelation received by the prophet is re­gal'deil by Mohammed as a transcript from a heavenlyoriginal. In this he has gone farther than any ex­press declaration of the Bible, but it is not unfair tosay that the general thonght is Biblical. Besideswhat has already been said, we may notiee that whenEzekiell'eceived his revelation, n roll was given himby a heavenly hand. When he had eaten the book(i1ovonred its contents we should say) he was preparedto speak to Israel.* The meaning is that his proph­ocy was the communication of a heavenly original.The author of tho Apocalypse has a similar experi­ence in vision. On the basis of these passages theiilea of a heavenly original, of which revealed booksare transcripts, had arisen befol'e Mohammed. ThusEnoch has tho heavonly tablots shown him in whichhe reads" aU the deeds of men to the latest genera­tions."t He is then able to embody these in his own

* Ezck. 211\ 31_4•

t Da' Buck Heno<h, von Dillmnnn (1853), Knp. 81, p. 51. In theBook of Jubilees the Bible itself seems to be described a.8 theheavenly tablets. Cf. Das Buth der Jubiliien, Ewa1d, Jakrblleher,II., pp. 237, 256.

198 'l'HB BIBLE AND IBLAM

book. But as Mohammed's idea of propheoy is moredistinotly Biblical than that found in tho Book ofEnooh, there is probably no direot inflnenoe here tobe discovered.

5. The sum of the revelations reoeived by theprophet makes up a mle of f~it~ and life.. This i~eais also Biblioal; at least, thls IS the pomt of Vlewfrom whioh the New 1'estament regards the Old Tes­tament, though it at the same time formulatos II

theory of abrogation similar to the one foroed uponMohammed.

Mohammed, therefore, held substantially Biblioalviews of Revelation and Propheoy.

LECTURE VII.

SIN AND SALVATION

SOME years ago it was the fashion to desoribe theProtestant Reformation as based upon two prinoiples.One of these-the sufficiency of the Holy Soripturesas the mle of faith-was oalled the formal principle,the other - justifioation by faith-was oalled thematerial principle. The present tendency is to dis­miss this definition as having no partioular value.But I have the impression that it oonveys a distinottruth whioh is of wider applioation than is given itin this one division of Churoh History. Every re­ligion - at least every positive religion-brings adootrine to whioh it demands assent. The first ques­tion whioh its preaohers must answer is: how do youknow the dootrine to be tme ? But no religion suc­ceeds without bringing more than a dootrine. Re­ligion must satisfy the craving of the heart, as wellllS the curiosity of the intelleot. The seoond questionwhioh the Apostles of any religion must meet is:whllt good do you bring?

Now the answer to the first question must definethe source of doctrine. In the Protestant Reforma­tion this source was defined to be the Holy Soript­ures in their natural sense, independent of the tradi­tion of the Church. The answer to the seoond question

199

200 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM SiN AND SALVATION 201

must defiue the salvation offered by the preacher. Inthe Reformation this was defined as justification byfaith alone, that is, the grace of God imparted im­mediately to the believer, not condi:ioned ?y t~eChurch's ministration. Without pauslOg to lOqUlrehow far these two answers are correctly labelled,formal and material, let us notice that correspondinganswers are given in Islam. Mohammed preached. adoctrine and was obliged to tell where he got 1t.This he'did in his assertion of divine revelation tohimself, at the same time justifying his claim by anappeal to the earlier prophets. He offered also an­other boon-salvation. He waS obliged here also todefine his position. This definition forms. the sub­ject of the present lecture.

I have already said that Mohammed offered salva­tion. Salvation implies something from which onemust be saved, and this something is, of course, sin.The doctrine of sin must be treated before we 0>\0

unde1"Stand the doctrine of salvation. Our starting­point is the nature of man. In this the position. ofthe Koran is very simple: man consists of amatcrlnlpart, the body, and an immaterial part, the SOlll.This was taken over from Arabie heathenism, wherethe eustom of offering saorifices to the dead implies aeontinued existenee of the soul after the death of thebody. This separate existence of the soul howeverseems to have been conceived of as shadowy and un­real-much like the unsubstantial and unsatisfyingstate in which the Old Testament pictures the inhab·itants of Sheo1. It was because this conceptionfailed to meet his idea of the future state, that Mo-

hammed laid so much emphasis on the resu1'l'ection.His leading thought was the thought of the JudgmentDay. But a judgment which should deal only withthe unsubstantial incorporeal shades would be itselfuusub~tanti!\l and.shadowy. The thought of the J udg­ment 1S necessarlly accompanied by·tllO thought ofth~ Resurrection-thus only does it become a reality.W1th the restored body, the whole man meets hislIfaker, and both parts of his nature are punished orrewarded for that for which both parts are respon­sible.

This matter interests us here only so far as itthl'O:"s light on the nature of man. At the beginningof h1s career, Mohammed found the doctrine of theresulTection necessary, because he had diffieulty inconceiving the independent existence of the soul. Itseems as if the dectrine helped him in this 1'espect Sothat he was able partly to dispense with it in hislater teaching. What I mean is, not that he evergave up the rcsurrection or wavered in regard to it;but that when he had accustomed himself to the doc­trine of the resurrection, the soul itself had more Con­sistency, it began to stand more distinctly for theman. . He never seems to have been troubled by thequestIOn where the soul resides during the intervalbetween death and the resurreetion. Tradition hasindeed busied itself with this question, as we shouldexpect. But the Koran has no intimation of amiddle state, such as we should find had it beeu amatter of importance in the mind of Mohammed.

After the battles of Islam began, we find a distinetassurance that the souls of believers enter at once on

202 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM SIN AND SALVATION 203

the joys of paradise. This implies, of course, thatthe soul is cllp"ble of its full life apart from the body.The l'esurrection therefore would seem to be super­fluous. The soul is the man and can dispense withthe body, as it does in death and even in sleep.* Be­cause the soul is the man it may be spoken of whenthe whole man is meant.

The souls which tremble in the day of judgmentare the souls reclothed with their bodies, that is, thepersons. When it is said that every soul shall tasteof death, evidently every human being is meant. Thesoul being the active principle, is that which desiresgood or evil,t just as in Hebrew; the word for soulis, in fact, the same in the two languages.

A close parallel with the Hebrew also is the Arabicconnection of the soul and the heart. The heart isthe seat of the soul-not the affeotions only, but theintellect as well. What may be predicated of the soulmay be predicated eqnally of the heart. Thus: thesoul believes, 01' the man believes with the heart.tThe heart is terrified; it is the seat of the intelli­gence. God seals or covers the hearts so that mendo not understand; the hearts of believers find peacein remembering God.§ You will already have no­ticed the great similarity between these affirmations

~ In 660 God is said to take the Bouls in the night (that is, in sleep)with the BRme language with which the angels are said to take theBouls at death, 6ftl , cf. also 8913• Those ,~ho have heen slain inbattle for the good cause cannot be called dead-they are the trulyliving, though beyond our sight, 2 1U1

•

t Koran 53~\ 41u,t 10 10°, 16 108

,

§ 50361 HP\ G~\ 13'18,

I!

and the language of the Old Testament. It is notprobable, however, that there was direot dependence.The simple psychology was common to Hebrew andto Arabic thought before the rise of Islam.

The result which we have reached is impOl·tant foronr present inquiry in two ways. First, there is notrichotomy in man according to the Koran; secondly,the seat of sin is not the body alone.

There is no clear indioation of a triohotomy in man.It is indeed said that man's life or soul is derivedfrom the spirit of God. God Himself says to theangels: "I am about to make man of oIay, and whenI have formed him and breathed into him of my spirit,then bow down to him."* In adopting this Biblioallanguage, Mohammed was probably ignorant of theChristian speoulation, whioh would see in it author­ity for a third element of the human personality, dif­ferent from body and soul. He speaks of the orea­tion of animals in language similar to what was justquoted, where he says that Jesus made birds of clayand breathed into them so that they became alive.tMohammed seems to conoeive of the breathing as themethod of introducing life into the creature. He no­where speaks of the spirit of man. In this respectthe Mohammedan theologians have gone beyondtheir master, and have learned from the Christians todistinguish between the spirit and the soul of man.:\:But this is foreign to the Koran, which knows but oneimmateril11 part of man-the soul, whioh has its Seatin the heart.

'" I{oran 32R, d. 152', 381'1, t ollQ,t My wisdom comes from Lane, Arabic Lexicon, p. 2827.

1'IlE BIBLE AND ISL.1J,[ SIN AND SALVATION 205

The doctrine thnt the soul is the mnn, preclulleHthe idea thnt sin is [he edl of the bOlly-Ol' that thollesh is the seat of sin. This is not contradietec1 bythe prominence givon to the <1esires ns a source ofsin, for the c1csil'eH pertain to the soul. Orientalspeoulation on this subject seems not to hnve reachellMohammed. If it reached him, it lun,le no impres.siou upon him. In bet, os we havo h,,,l oc~n:,ion toremark, he was no philosopher or speculative theo­loo-ian. The problem which confrontec1 him waS npl~cticnl problem. Defore him, senttered indivillunlsthroughout the tribes-the lIanifs alrenlly allullc,lto-had lll.borec1 with it os a practical problem. TIll'Ysonght a peaco of conscience which tho rit.os of hea­thenism could not give. Nohammec1's interest waS noothor. In him os in them, tho sonso of sin was arouse,lexperimentall)" Hence came the loug practice. ofpmyer and ascetic exercises in thc cave of Hm,.When he found assurance, he found it in the senseof parllon. The fact of sin und ill descrt was notthereby abolished; it wus rnthor cstablished. Thothought of the Day of Judgment took strong hoMupon him,jusl becu,.,e he so strongly realizell the f"ctof sin in himself. 'What he experieneell in himselfhe observecl in others. The call to preat'h, of whichhe was so ,·jyiilly conscious, waS based upon the con·"iction that his contemporaries were in sin nnd unclerthe wrath of God.

On the bnsis of his personal experience Nohnmmetlbelieved in the universality of sin. Ho transfenellhis own experience to other men nnd classed themwith himsl'lf. 'fhis we conclude from indirect in-

timations rather than from express affirmations oftho. Kol'an. He nowhere asserts categorically thesinfulness of the whole race. He had to clo with acondition, not a theory. In a tradition he is :report­ecl as saying: "'fhere is not of the sons of Adam ex­cept Mary and hel' Son, one born but is touched bythe devil at the time of his bil'th; and the child makesa loud noise from the touch." * The tradition isdoubtless influeneed by some theory of natural de­pravity. But it does not affirm the transmission ofsin from father to son-the idea is mther that fromthe moment of birth every human being is assailedby Satan. The universality of actual transgressiondoes not necessarily follow.

It is in fact mther remarkable that Mohammedshould so fully adopt the Diblical account of the sinof Adam, and yet not connect with it the doctrine ofthe corruption of the race. Let me hasten to saythat he does not show any oloser adherence to theletter of the Dible in this than in the other Biblicalnanatives, in fact tho departures are rather more no­ticeable in this than in the others. His account is tothe effect that Adam and his wife were Cl'eated ofolay and placed in the Garden of Paradise, whioh isin heaven. God oommands the angels to bow downto Adam as His vicegerent. All obey except Iblis,who refuses on the ground that Adam is his inferior.Iblis is then expolled from the Garden beeause of hisarroganoe, but receives permission to act as thetempter of man. Adam and his wife are commandednot to eat of one tree in the Garden, and are warned

* ltlisheat, I 1 p. 23.

206 TIlE BIBLE AND ISLAM SIN AND SALYATION 207

against the wiles of Satan. Nevertheless Satan in­sinuates that the tree is forbidden to them becallse,if they eat, they will become angels or immortal. Sothey eat, and both tempter and tempted are cast downto earth to live in mutual enmity until the day of finaldoom. The story, which is given several times in theKoran, may be said to embody :Mohammed's theoryof the origin of sin. This was to him a very simplematter-sin is disobedience to the commands of God.It came into being when the pride of Iblis revoltedagainst a command of God. It was transmitted fromIblis to Adam by way of suggestion, and in him itsessence was disobedience to the command of God.That Adam was originally endowed with holiness andlost it in his fall, is nowhere affirmed. No more issuch a solidarity of the race affirmed or assumed aswould make all mankind sin in Adam and fall withhim in his first transgression.

Although we find' nO theory of an organio connectionbetween tho sin of Adam and the sinfulness of the race,yet the story of the first man is not unmeaning. It isall example of the universal experience. All men aresubject to temptation. This comes from their desires.We read of the wicked: "In their hearts is a discase,ana God increases their disease" ;* and again: "Evilis that which their sallis have put before them." t Inthis passage the soul seems put for the desn-es, as wefind it also in the old Testament. In the accountgiven of Joseph the hero himself confesses that" thesoul inclines to evil except my Lord have mercy." tElsewhere l\fohammed is warned against him who

• Koran 29• t 583• t 12s3•

follows his inclination; and virtue is said to consistin restraining the soul from its inc1ination.* Thesepassages show that Mohammed was not far from theNew Testament treatment of concupiscence as the rootof sin. When desire conceives, it brings forth sin.

These desires are stimulated by the allurements ofthe world and the suggestions of Satan. In the gl'eatDay, men and jinn will be asked: "Did there notcome to you Apostles from your own number, repeat­ing to you My revo1ations and warning you of thisday ? They will say: We testify against ourse1ves­the life of the world beguiled us." t The result ofthe natural constitution of things is that men goastray. In this view of it, it is entirely correct tospeak of the lost estate of man. But this is not dueto the sin of Ada.m.

We have already noticed instances in which tradi­tion shows a nearer approach to Ohristian theologythan we find in the Koran. This is illustrated in thesubject before us. :Mohammed is said to have re­lated a legend conceming Adam and to have added:"So Adam denied and his childmn have inheritedthis vice: and Adam forgot and ate of the tree, andhis children have inherited forgetfulness from him;and Adam committed a fault and his children inher­itcd crimes from him." t This goes beyond any­thing in the Koran in its assertion of inherited de­pravity, and we are compelled to suppose that it iscolored by the views of the traditionist. We find alsoa story in the biographies which has obtained 'cur­rency in most modern accounts of Mohammed to this

'" Koran 18~7t 79~o. t 6IJO, +Mishtat, I., p. 35.

208 TllE BIBLE AND ISLAM SIN AND SALVATION 209

effect: When the Prophet was an infant (in anotherform of the story when he was twelve years old), twoangels cut open his breast and took out his heartwhich they washed with snow and then restored tohis bosom. The story in this form is undoubtedly"meant to teach that the infant's heart was thus cleansedof hereditary depravity. But we are able to say thatthe story in this form is comparatively late. As firsttold, H was connected not with the Prophet's infancybut with the beginning of his ministry. In this formH meant only that when God called Mohammed, Hecleansed him from the guilt of his former sins-es­pecially from the idolatry which he had practised inhis earlier life. In this form we cannot find any ref­erence to the doctrine of original sin.

The origin of sin is in the conflict between the nat­ural desil'Cs of men and the command of God. " Thetruth [has come] from yonI' Lord i whoever will, lethim believe, and whoever will, let him disbelieve," *Whether the light of nature is enough to indnco obo­dienoe we are not told. In practice the command ofGod comes through the prophets. The sin which isin the world is disobeclieuce to these oommands.Those who disobey, following the allurements of theworld or of Satan, are lost, To realize how muchthis word meant to Mohammed we mnst picture toourselves the condition of the traveller in the desert.Tho pathless wasto stretches ant on every hand. TheweUs are few and hidden in the sand. The pitilcsssun burns upon him from above and the heated soilscorches his feet from below. The scanty water-skins

* Koran 18~\

are soon exhausted. Unless some friendly hand pointthe way to water, the oaravan must lie down and die.Such is the condition of man in the present world.He is a wanderer in a desert-in hopeless perplexityunless he has a guide. In this sense all men are lostunless God intervenes for their rescue.

That this was Mohammed's view we cannot doubt.He had in his own heart an abiding sense of his needof guidance. The only real petition in his modelprayer (the Fatiha) asks for guidance i and he inter­prets the petition for us in the words: "Our Lord,do not let our hearts wander, after Thou hast directedus; give us grace from Thee-Thou art the bountifulGiver." * And a "further commentary is afforded bythe traditions. Mohammed was asked what he wasaccustomed to say in his private devotions, He re­plied: "I say": 0 God pnt my sins as far away fromme as Thou hast put the East from the West; P God,cleanse me from sin as the white garment is cleansedfrom its filth; 0 God, wash away my sins with waterand with snow aneI with hail." t I need hardly callyour attention to the Scripture affirmation that God"has put our sins as far from us as the East is fromthe West," and to the language of Job concerningwashing himself in snow water. The resemblancemay be owing partly to the traditionist, but there isno reason to snppose that the sentiment is not genu­inely Mohammed's.

The sense of sin thus revealed is found also in Mo­hammed's companions. Abu Bekr asked Mohammedto teach him a prayer to be used in his private devo-

'II" Koran 36, t EochaN, I., p. 167.14

210 TIlE BIBLE AND ISLAM SIN AND SALVATION 211

tions. The form given was: "0, God, I havewronged my own soul with grievous s~n, and none ~or­gives sins but Thou i forgive me With Thy forgive­ness, and have compassion unto mo-verily Thou artthe Forgiving, the Compassionate." * Abu Be~r wasof an emotional nature, and we are not surpnsed tofind such desires in him. But Omar, the man of ironwill and cool head, was affected with tho same con­cern: "I heard the sobbing of Omar (says one of theCompanions), when I was in the last row [in themosquo] as he recited: I show my grief and mysorrow to God alone." t Others of the early Mos­lems wept whon prosperity came to them, fearingthat they were receiving their recompense in t~lis

life. One of the Companions oame to consult lum,and the Prophet said: Are you come to ask what isgoodness and what is badness? On re?e~ving ~naffirmative reply (says the narrator), he Jomed hISfingers together and struck them upon my bre~st,

that is, he mf1de a sign toward my heart, and said:Ask the sentence from thine own heart. This he re­peated three times and added: "Goodness is a thingfrom which the heart finds firmness and rest, andbadness is a thing which throws thee into doubt,though men may approve." t 1.'he sentence remindsus of Paul's treatment of conscience, but it is notquoted for that analogy. It is in place here, becauseit throws light upon the mind of Mohammed and his

* Boc:hwri, I., p. 181.t Ibid., p. 162. Omar, was, of course, in the front row of those

praying.~ Mishcat, II., p. 4. For some striking examples of the dread of

sin, see Kremer, Herrschmde Ideen des Islam, p. 24.

followers. We can scarcely interpret it otherwisethan as indicating a sincere dread of sin and a sinceredesire for righteousness.

We must conclude that the power of Mohammed'smessage consisted in its appeal to the conscience. Itthreatened punishment which was felt to be deserved.It was therefore a message of salvation. And thevividness of the sense of ill desert was such as topaint a picture of impending doom, from which menwould be glad to fiee. This doom was conceived ofeither as a Day of the Lord-that is, a great catas­trophe sueh as had overtaken Sodom and destroyedPharaoh-or as the Day of final Judgment. Asto the great catastrophe, it is pQssible, even proh­able, that Mohammed's early preaching set a timefor its coming more definitely than now appears.The present text of the Koran is rather guarded inits language: "Perhaps a portion of that which youdesire to hasten is close upon you;" "Men ask theeconcerning the Hour. Say: The knowledge of it iswith God alone, and how dost thou know whether itmay not be near? " .• In a few instances we find ap­parently categorical statements that the Hour is near,and that its signs are already discernible. It is prob­able that theso were once more numerou... But theurgency of his opponents that Mohammed should fix adefinite time for the punishment, taught him caution.

1£ there was some uncertainty as to God's inter­vention in an overthrow of the Meccan state, therecould be none as to the final JUdgment. That WaH

certain, and its decision would be irreversible. In* Koran 27J~, 33~a.

212 l'HE BIBLE AND I8LAJI SIN AND SALVA1'ION 213

that day repentance will no longer avail, and thosewho are confronted with the list of their sins willwish in vain for one hour of earthly life iu whieh toaeeept the message of their prophet. They w~ll beasked whether they had not had the opportumty torepent; whether apostles had not eome to warn themof their danger. They will be obliged to confess thatthey have brought their punishment on themselves.Salvation (this is the eonelusion) is offered to men bythe apostles of God. It was offered to Adam afterhis fall: "Adam reeeived from his Lord words, andrepented (He is the Indulgent, the Compassionate)­·We said: Go down henee, and when there eomes toyou guidance from. Me, whoeve,' follows My guidanee,no fear shall rest upon such nor shall they begrieved." * Adam thus reeeived the wor.ds of gracedireetly from God, and with them a prom,se of futurerevelation to the race.

In what has been said thus far, you will discoverthe substantial agreement of Mohammed with Bibli­Oill doetrine. Aside from Paul, whose philosophicaldiseussion has perhaps unduly colored later theology,the Biblieal writers lay no emphasis upon the fall ofman in Adam. At the same time they assume theprevalence of sin, and its practical uni~ersality.Their conviction is based upon the testImony oftheir own consciences. They feel, therefore, theneed of salvation. This feeling is quickened by thepreaching of the Prophets who proclaim a Day ofYahweh, a day of calamity upon the evil-do~rs. Inthe New Testament this Day of the Lord 's com-

III Koran 235 f.

bined with the final Judgment. The time is evi­dently thought to be near, though it is expresslydeclared that no man knows the day nor the hour.The emphasis of the message is wd upon the way ofescape provided by God Himself. This way of es­cape was apparently open to Adam and was indicatedby a promise made to him for his descendants. Inall these respects, Mohammed took strictly Biblicalground.

Looking more narrowly at the idea of sn,lvation asset forth in Islam, we discover first that it is ofG d' ' ,o .s .free ~race. He has provided in His ordinaryadmmlStratIOll olthe world (that is, in nature) all that~an co~ld require a~ His hands. But this has provedInSuffiCIent. Man IS ungrateful and inaccessible tosuch evidences. God therefore adds something morein giving His revelation. Not that Mohammed draw~a definite line marking off God's goodness in naturefrom His goodness in the scheme of salvation. Hespeaks of the grace of God in both. 1'his word *means the state of mind which leads one to help orp.ardon the un~eserving; graee, mercy, or compas­SIOn are our eqmvalents. This state of mind in God isshown by His ordinm:y providenee. The rain is anexpression of His grace, and the winds whioh bringthe el~uds .are its preeursors. The succession of dayand mght IS adapted to the needs of man and this isof His graoe. When trouble eomes upo~ men theypray to God, and He makes them taste His grace· inthat He sends them relief.t

* Rahma; the root is found also in Hebrew.t Koran 25SO, 28 111, 80n.

otherwiso to interpret those passages which pray fordirection, like the one already quoted-" Lord, let notour hearts stray from the right path after Thou hastonce directed us." The revelation was already there.What the speaker desired further was grace in theChl'istian sense, that is: a positive movement of Godupon his heart. Again:" Were not the bounty ofGod and His grace upon you, not one of you wouldever be pure; bnt God purifies whom He will, andGod is the one who hears and knows." * The Prophetis here exhorting his own followers and warning themagainst following the footsteps of Satan. He evi­dently means that something more than tho revela­tion is the efficient cause of their purification, In onepassage he classes himself with those just addressed:"Had not the bounty and the grace of thy Lordbeen upon thee, a party of them had purposed to leadthee astray [and succeeded]. But they shall leadastray only themselves, and shall not harm thee inany respect. God hath sent down upon thee the Bookand the grace, and hath taught theo what thou didstnot know, and the bounty of God toward thee wasgl'eat," t It is evident on the face of the passage thatsome trap was prepared for Mohammed from whichhe escaped. He ascribed his escape to a special ex­ercise of grace on the part of God.

This is the place to inquire for the doctrine of par­ticular election, We must, however, be careful notto put more into words than the author intended.The general assertion that God chooses His instru­ments does not imply an absolute decree extending

*Koran 2421• t 41U•

214 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

Salvation is another evidence and outworking ofthc same grace. The prophets of earlier times weresavcd from the destruction which overtook the un­believers by a grace (or mercy) from God,* !3y thesame grace those who are admitted to Paradise a~'eaved and they I'ecognize the fact, t The speClal~roof 'of this mind on the part of God is the ~ift ?f

1 t ' The prophet Salih remonstrates With hiSrave a lon.1 ' "0 my people! Do you not see? If Ipeope, , d d 'f

have received a plain sign from my Lor , an. Ithere has come to me from Him a gra~e [~hat IS, arevelation], who will defend me from Him If I rebel'against him?" t In a nearly related sense theprophet is himself said to be a grace f~om God, Sothe angel of the lJ,nnunciation, speakmg for. God,says to Mary: "We have made him [Jesus] a Sign ~omankind, and a grace from Us,§ Mohammed also IS_Ad d 'n the words: "We have sent thee lJ,S au.u resse I . l' dgrace to the universe," The. sa~e word I,S ~pp Ieto the revelation when embodied m a book . Wh~nMoses' anger was lJ,ppeased ho took up the Tables mwhoso characters was a direction and a grace to th?sewho fear their Lord, "II The" grace of Go~ whIChbringeth salvaHon" is a Biblical phrase whl~h wellsums up the view of Mohammed as set forth III these

passagee. . . . . 'dBut the grace of God does notHmlt ,Itself ,to provi ,-

ing the revelation which guides mon mto hfe. It 18

also exerted efficlWiously upon the hearts of men,moving them to obey the revelation. I know not how

t 3''',7''. T 1166

,*Koran 77°1 BU. T

§ 1921• U1210)", 71U•

SIN AND SAL VATION 215

216 TilE BIBLE AND ISLAM SIN AND SALVATION 217

those who are born under the Law; Paul replies thatHe has meroy on whom He will have memy. This isnot an assertion of the absoluteness of the deoree. Itis a protest against the narrowness of those wholimit the grace of Goel by the absolnteness of an elec­tion once made.

Still, the protest assumes the actuality of the decree.The election is there, although no longer confined bylines of descent. God not only chooses the prophetsas His distinguished instruments; He chooses alsothe other believers: "Of their [that is, the Prophets']lathers, and of their children, and of their brothers,have IVe ohosen, and have led them on the strai"ht

"path. This is the guidance of God by whom Heguides whom He will of His servants; but if they be­come polytheists, what they have done will be of noaccount. These are they to whom We have giventhe Book and wisdom and prophecy; and if they dis­believe in it, We will appoiut for it a people who donot disbeliove." * The divine choice is here assertedbut it is not an absolute ehoice. Even those who ar~chosen may become polytheists, thus falling away.In one passage, however, we finel that the will of thebeliever is dependent upon the divine will: "This. . ,now, IS a remmder; whoever will let him choose theway to his J.Jord. But you will not will unless Godwill."t Some other passages bearing on this subjecthave already been quoted in the lecture on the Gov­ernment of God. What we there discovered is oon­firmed here--that Mohammed had no I'igiel theory outhe subject.

to the lot of all mankind. The question of such a de­cree seems to have been brought home to Mohammellby the Jews. They insisted that they were an electpeople, and the implication was obvious that God hadrejected the othel' nations. Against this implicationMohammed asserted God's sovereign freedom. Theelection of Israel·he acknowledged: "God chose forHimself Adam and Noah and the family of Abrahamand the family of Imran [the father of Mary] aboveall the world." * But he refused to acknowledge thevalidity of the inference drawn by the Jews. " IfGod had pleased, He had made them [that is, man­kind] a single nation. But He lets whom He willpartake of His grace, and the evil-doers have neitherprotector nor helper." t That is to say: true religionis not a matter of race; all mankind might have beenthe favored recipients of revelation; the preferenceof one part over another rests in the will of God; Hemay and does admit othel'S to His grace as well asthe Jews. The verse, therefore, vindicates the free­dom of God against a too ll!tl'l'OW doctrine of election·tIt reminds us that Paul reasons in a similar wayThe Jew claims that God has bonnd Himself to save

"Koran 32ll, t 42e.+Against the maxim of the Jews to trust none but those of their

own religion, Mohammed says: "Say: Verily the Guidance isGod's Guidance, that any man may receive the like of what youhave received, or may even surpass you in the sight of your Lord.Say: Verily the bounty is in the hand of God j He hestows it uponwhom He will, and Gad is liberal, wise. He distinguishes by Hisgrace whom He will, and He is the possessor of enormOU8 bounty U

(3fJ5 t). It must be clear that the opposition is between the narrow~

ness of Judaism, ,vhich recognizes no religion but its own, and thebreadth of a divine choice which is not confined within lines of ra.ce.

,* Koran 6~7 ft. FG" '.

218 TIlE BIBLE AND ISLAM~ SIN AND SALVATION 219

The general theory of predestilll1tion (as we SIlW) isan aflirmation that the disbelief of man cannot reallythwart the will of God. On the side of faith, thisconviction is aided by the soul's conseiousness of itsown wettkness. The awakened man finds within him.self no ability to meet the commands of God. Hisjudgment concerning his own will is, that it. is aVerseto good and dead in sin. When he finds 111mself be·lieving in God and appropriating His groce, he. feelsthat this is not his own unaided act. The doctnne ofgrace is a judgment founded on this experience. Sav·ing faith must be explttined as the effect of grace. Mo­hammed's view is seen in the following, addressed tobelievers: "God has made you love faith, and hasmade it attractive in your hearts, and has made in­fidelity and vice and rebellion odious to you." ·x, Withthis compare the following: "We sent Jesus, the sonof Mary and gave Him the Gospel, and placed in thehearts of those who followed him compassion andgrace ,." and again: "It is He who sent the Shekinainto the hearts of the believers to incrense them infaith after they had once believed." t The doctrineof election, as far as it is held, is a part of the doc­trine of grace.

The same thing is true of the Scripture doctrine,whcre it is apparently asserted that faith is a gift fromGod, and whore the bcliever is encouraged to workout his own salvation because it is God who is workingin him to will and to do of His good pleasure. Therevelation alone does not save men. This is evidentfrom its different effects upon different men. To some

*ICoran 4fP and d. 58~~. t 57~\ 48 l•

it is a savor from death unto death, to others a savorfrom life unt-o life. No other, as I understand it, isthe position of Mohammed. In one place he saysdirectly that what has been revealed to him increasesthe disobedience and unbelief of some who heal'.*In 0,11 these respects therefore the doctrine of Islamshows Biblical inflnence.

The next thing to be noted is that the mark of sal­vation is faith. Up to this point we have discussedtho divine provision. This consists not only in a rev­elation of God's will, but also in efficient grace forthose who are to be saved. The evidence that thegrace has taken effect is that its subjects believe.Those who believe are saved and those who disbelieveare lost. These two classes appear on almost everypage of the Koran. The fundamental importanco offaith, however, is not so clearly marked in the earliersnras as in the later. At first Mohammed seems tohave been under the influence of the Gospel descrip.tion of the judgment-where the saved and the lostare distinguished rather by their works than by theirfaith. They who have fed the hnngry, clothed thenaked, visited the sick and the pdsoners-these arethe ones who are welcomed to the place prepared forthem. So in the earlier chapters of the Koran wofind good works specified as the reason why someenter Paradise. They are the olles who have keptthemselves pure, who have set the captives free, whohave nourished the orphans, and the poor.t Faithappears, but it appears as one among many virtues.As time goes on, its fundamental importance seems to

* Roran 5?~. cf. 9lU r, t 768, 8714 " 92\

220 TilE BIBLE AND ISLAM SIN AND SALVATION 221

emerge more distinctly. The great obstacle whichmet the Prophet revealed itself as unbelief; and con­vel'sely, the distinctive mal'k of those who acceptedthe new mligion was seen to be faith. After the veryearliest period of his ministry, therefore, he adoptee]fully the declaration: "He that believeth shall besaved, and he that believeth not shall be damned:'

The Arabic word which Mohammed used to ex­press the idea of faith is essentially the same wordused both in the Hebl'ew of the Old 'restament andin the Syriac translation of the New Testament. Heused it to describe (historically) the state of mind ofthe prophets, his predecessors, and those who followedthem. It is Abraham especially who is the exampleof faith: "Abraham was neither Jew nor Chl'istian,yet he waS pious, resigned, and not an idolater. Thenearnst of men to Abmham are those who followhim-that is: the Prophet [Mohammed] ana those~Ql!O believe." "Who is more excellent in the matterof religion than he who resigns himself to God, whodoes good works and follows the way of Abrahamthe pious, whom God took as His friend." * Thethought is eviaently borrowed from the New Testa­ment. Ana our first definition of faith is taken fromthe behavior of Abl'aham-he was not an idolater.That is to say: Faith is acceptance of the propositionthat there is no Goa but one. " Abraham saia to hisfather: I am pure from the service which you l'en­der." t That Mohammed did not mean the mere in­tellectual faith, however, is evident from other pas­sages, such as the following: "The believers commit

* Koran 3!lll f l 41~t. t 48>1~.

themselves to God; and why should we not commitourselves to Him, when He has guided us on ourways? " * Other passages which speak of the believ­ers taking God as their protector imply that theirfaith is trust in Him.t

The man who believes in God must believe themessenger of God and his message. God and HisApostle are often joined together as the objectof faith; so are Goa and His revelation. Or, faithmay be spoken of as belief in the Apostle or in therevelation, where belief in God is implied. As withus, belief in the Word necessarily includes belief inGod. This faith is assent to the truth of the message.The most frequent charge against the unbelievers isthat they accuse the revelation of falsehood. Exam­ples are so numerous that I need not quote. t

In other passages faith is defined as believing inGod and the Last Day,§ or simply as believing in tholife to come. Believers are once described as having

'* Koran 14-1-1 r. t tl~I.

t It is perhaps nn evidence of the affinity of Mohammed's doc.trine with that curr(>nt among Christians that he found the Christianathe most ready to receive him: "Thou wilt find the nearcst in friend­ship to the believers those who call themselves Christians. This isbecause they have priests and monks, and arc not arrogant. Whenthey hear what is revealed to the Prophet, thou wilt see their eyesoverfloW' with tears on account of the truth which they recognize,while they say lOur Lord, we believe! Enroll us among those whotestify [to the truth]. And why should we not believe in God andin the truth which hns come to us, Ilnd [why should we not] desirethat OUf Lord may place us among the righteous? II 58S '. We canhardly suppose the words to have bc~n spoken without some basisin fact.

§ 2511 •

222 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM SIN AND SALVATION 223

as8urance of the life to oome, and once as believingin the unseen. The unbeliof whioh opposed Moham­med made its stand on this point more obstinatelythan on any other. That men should be restored tolife with fully reconstructed bodies after once becom­ing dust and mouldering bones, they would not believe,and, indeed, they ridiculed so absurd a proposition.The preacher had often to denounce the guilt of suohunbelief. Conversely, faith in the future life is oftenmentioned in connection with faith in God and HisApostle: "Those who believe in the future life bo­lieve [also] in the Koran, and are watchful untoprayer."* And again: The believers, all of them,believe in God and His angels, and His Books andHis Apostles-witbout distinguishing between theApostles-and they say: We have heard and weobey! Grant us Thy forgiveness, 0 Lord; untoThee we tend." t Faith, theu, is not a mere intel­lectun1 assent to certain propositions; it is a dispos­ing of the will toward the Author of the l'evelation,with a desire to obey His commands.

We can readily understand now, why faith andgood works are so often mentioned together. Theywho believe and do good works is the most freqnentphrase descriptive of the righteous. More elabol'l1tedesoriptions are suoh as the following: "The good<1oes not oonsist in turning your faces to the East orthe West. But good is he who believes in God andthe Last Day, and the angels and the Book and theProphets; anel who for the love of Him gives hispl'operty to his kinsmen, and to tho orphans, and the

*Kornn G··~. t 2~85.

I

1

I•

..

, .!

poor, and the wayfarer, and the mendieant, and forfrecing slaves; and who observes prayer and whogives alms, and [good are] those who fulfil their en­gagements when they have made them, aud thosewho are patient in misfortunes and distresses and inthe time of oalamity. These are the righteous andthese are they who fear God."* Suoh descriptionsshow that Mohammed had reflected on the oonnec­tion of faith and works. Faith and the fear of Godare also joined together, as are faith and repentanoe.All this convinces us that Mohammed desired toawaken the affection of the heart and draw it towardGod. "Those only believe Our wmds t who, whenthey are reminded of them, fall prostrate and utterthe praise of their Lord; who do not exalt them­selves; whoso bodies do not rest upon their beds,beoause they oall upon their Lord in fear and indesire."

Iu praotico, and when he had become ruler of astato, the Pl'Ophet recognized that the profession ofthe lips was all that he could require from men. Inthis he was doing what political leaders are obligedto do. But what has boen said, shows that his idealwas vory near tho one set forth in the Bible. Wherehe says that the hearts of believers find rest in mak­ing mention of God,t we are reminded of the Biblioalpromises of peace to the believer. The traditionwhich declares that the intention makes the quality

*KOfilD 2m ,

t OIW signs, where signs is put for the verses of the Kornn. Thopassage is 32ln r.

t 13",

224 THE BIBLE AND ISLA"'f SIN AND SALVATION 225

for faith: " When [Abraham's] Lord said to him'Be resigned! he replied: I am resigned to the Lordof the universe." When Abraham went to offer hisson~ tho son encouraged his father, promising to bepatlOnt-"And when both had [thus] resigned them­selves, he threw him upon his face but We calledto him." * As submission to the will of God Islamis a principle common to the three great reiigions.The Jews and Christians claim to have been resigned(Moslems) before the coming of Mohammedt Itfollows that Mohammed did not intend to makeIsla~ th~ distinguishing principle of his religion.lIe Identified his religion with Judaism and Chris­tianity. In all three, faith was the principle in theheart, Islam the profession with the lips. In theNew Testament also, "with the heart man believethnnto righteousness, and with the mouth confession ismo.de unto salvation." :\:~ut what is the salvation secured by those who

beheve? Most prominently it is deliverance frompunishment. As we have seen, the future state bulkslargely in the preaching of Mohammed. He had notimidity in painting either the joys of the blessed orthe torments of the doomed. The thought of the~udgment Was the overmastering thought of his ear­her career, and the motive for his preaching. That hewas here under Christian influence needs no demon­stration. To modern taste his appeal to the fear ofpunishment is mo.de too prominent. But it is doubt­ful whether it would have seemed so to the Churchof the Middle Age.

of the action* is very near the Old Testament declar­ation that" as a mo.n thinketh in his heart, so is he."Again, 0. tro.dition gives the following: "Moho.mmedsaid: None of you believes until he loves his brotheras he lovcs himself." t New Testo.ment influence isthe more mo.rked, tho.t the Peshito ho.s thy brothel' forthy neighbor in the second greo.t commandment. Andago.in: "None of you believes until I lim dearer tohim than his father and his child.":\: We rememberthat Jesus also said: "He that loveth father ormother more than me is not worthy of me; and hethat loveth son or daughter more than me is notworthy of me." Once more: "Mohammed said:There is a piece of flesh in the body [of which it istrue that] when it is right, the whole body is right,and when it is unsound the whole body is unsound."§Out of the heart are the issues of life is the paralleldeclaration of the Gospel.

Islam is another name for faith; or, where a dis­tinction is mo.de, Islam is the outward profession;lman (faith) is the inward state. Mohammed saysof the Bedo.win: "The Arabs say: We believe.So.y to them: Nay you do not believe, you shouldsay rather: We have accepted Islam, \I for faith h[18not yet cntered your hearts." He knew his Arabsand knew that the great part of thorn ho.d made anexternal submission to his rule while their hearts wereunchanged. Still, as the submission may be the ex­pression of sincority, Islam is not infrequently used

• Bochan, I., p. 2. t Ibid., p. 8. Ci. Matt. 22" (Peshito).!Ibid., p. 9. Cl. Matt, 10". § Ihid., p. 17.nAslamnn, we Me resigned. The passage is 49 1t

•"'" Koran 21~6, 31103 ,

15t28~:2 r.

* Bocharil I. l p. 9.f Compendium TheQl. ilfoham. apud Eeland. De Relig. Moham.,

p.5.

but God; and that he dreads returning to unbeliefas he dreads being throwu into the fire."·* The mo­tivo here urged is the sweetness of a complete faithconsidered by itself, and not looking for anotherreward.

But while wo find some indications of a real spirit­ual apprehension of religion, it must be confessed thatthe emphasis of Mohammed is placed largely uponexternals. His imagination was unequal to the taskof describing pure spiritual joys except under sensu­ous images. Hence comes the wearisome repetitionsin his picture of the rewards of heaven. In layingso much stress upon the rewards of piety, he fellshort of the New Testament ideal. And this is ac­counted for largely by his conception of revelationas a law. It is indeed a grace of God, that men arepointed to the right path. They do attain salvationby following the direction thus imparted. But inpractice, this means that their salvation consists inthe performance of ceremonies, whose only reason isthat they are enjoined by God. A treatise of Mos­lem theology which represents the established or­thodoxy t says the foundations of Islam are five, towit: (1) the confession that there is no God butAllah and that Mohammed is His Apostle, (2) theobservance of prayer, (3) the giving of alms, (4) theobservance of Ramadhan, and (5) the performanceof the pilgrimage. Four parts of religion out of fiyetherefore consist in external observances. This is no

226 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

We shonld wrong Mohammed, however, if we sup­posed his conception of salvation .to be me~ely e~­ternal. The happiness of the behever C?nSlsts. lU

obtaining the forgiveness of God, and. thIs forgIVo­ness is valned for itself-not because It secures ~n­

trance to Paradise. 'fho wrath of God rests on SlO­

ners, bnt He forgives those who believo. So?e hasmanifested His grace in the past. When DaVId wasreproved by a pamble-" then he discovered howWe had tested him and, falling prostrate, he beggedforgiveness of his Lord and repented; and We for­gave him his sin, and he had acc~ss to "?s'. and.anexcellent refuge." * Of true belIevers It IS SaI~:

"These when they have done wrong or harmed tholrsouls, r~member God and ask forgiveness for theirsins (and who forgives sins except God ?) and do ~ot

persist in what thcy have d~ne, when they k~ow [ItSharm] . their portion is forgIveness from thOlr Lord,

, . 1 t ".J­and Gardens in which flow perenma s reams.Althou"h the future roward is mentioned here, theforgive~ess is evidently regarded as a good in i!Belf.And we can scarcely doubt the spiritual emphaSIS ofsuch a passage as the following: "If you l?ve Godfollow me and God will love you and fOI'gIve yoursins-God is loving and gracious.":j: It is relatedin a tradition that Mohammed was accustomed to pmyfor forgiveness seventy times a day; ~nd th~t hesaid: "There are three things p,osBessmg which .£1

man finds the sweetness of faith: that Allah and HISProphet are dearer to him than anything besidesthom; that he loves the man who is loved by none

t 3'''. 13"* Koran 38~3.

SIN AND SALVATION 22'1

tions of life, civil, social, and individual, these cannotchange because it cannot chauge.* There is nopower which can amend it, because it is a transcriptfrom the heavenly tablet, and no one now has accessto the original. The Pentateuch and the Gospel areindeeil from the same exalted source. But in theirpresent form these are open to suspicion as havingpossibly been corrupted by those who have them incharge, The authentic law is the Koran; and faithin God means obedience to this law. Multitudes ofearnest and conscientious men are making it theaim of their lives to conform to this law. They actu­ally attain a high degree of virtue measured by thestandard of the Middle Age; and their conscientiousfidelity to principle must command our respect, meas­ure it by what standard we will, But their devotionto the light which came to their ancestors nearlythirteen hundred years ago, shuts their eyes to thelight of the present time. All the wonderful progressof which we boast, is to them only apostasy from thetruth of God. Hence arises the tragedy of the East-a tragedy at which the civilized world standsaghast to-day, and the last act in which, it is to befoo.red, is not yet played.

This is not the place in which to discuss this sub­ject at length. Our topio is sin and salvation, andwe have disoovered in this as in the other parts of

'* The traditions rightly express the mind of Islam when theymake Mohammed Bay: "Verily the best word is the word of God j

and the best rule of conduct is that delivered by Mohammed, andthe worst of all acts are those which are innova.tioDs . . . andevery innovation is abandoning the right road."-Misheai, I., p.44.

228 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

doubt au exaggerated statement, as co~pared withwhat Mohammed himself would have sald. But .heopened the way to such a conception b.y presentmghis revelation as a legal system. Here 1S one of thepoints in which he failed to rise to the New Testa­ment view and in which his system more nearly re­sembled the legalism into which the Jews fell bytheir one-sided emphasis of their Tora.

But while admitting that Islam did not rise to theheight of the Gospel, we must remember that, theOhristianity of that day did not rise to the ~C1ghtof the Gospel either. The early Ohurch saw 1U theNew Testament a new Law of essontially the sa.menature with the old.* This being the ~o~ce~tionwhich Mohammed received from the Ohnstl~U1ty ofhis timo we cannot wonder that he adopted 1t, espe­cially as circumstances emphasized the need of at . t d He had to. do with men converted froms rIC co e. If

heathenism. They were men little used to S? -con­trol. AI> a matter of state policy, he was obhged toprovide them with specific l'ules of cond~ot, and t:oenforce obedience by supernatural SltnctlO~s. H1Srules were not as l'estrictive as those of Juila1sm, butthe principle on which the system was based was

really the same. I' 't'The result of placing the revelation in t 11S I?OSl lOn

has been to make Islam the most conservatiVe sys­tem the world has ever seen. Mohammed was, as hehinlself claimed, the last of the prophets-:-th~ seal ofthat long line of messengers. His revelatlOn 1S there­fore the final revelation, and being a law for aU. reI0.-

* Harnack, Dogmtllgeschichte l II" p. 140.

.1

• I

i, l

SIN AND SALVATION 229

230 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

Mohammed's doctrine a decisive Biblical influence.His system is that of the Old and New Testament,.sofar as he was able to adapt it to the people wlthwhom he came in contact. To a consid~rable ext.enth rehended the doctrine of salvatlOn by falth.B:tK~hampered his system by tying faith down to a

d hi h under the ""ise of an unohangeable reve-co ewe , "-. flation, made the customs of his tIme a mattel' 0 per-petual obligation.

.:

, "

!

l, 'I', .

LECTURE VIII.

THE SERVICE OF GOD

THERE is probably no religion whioh has not someethical quality. There are always moral obligationsimposed by the gods, even in heathenism. In Arabheathenism we have examples, in those engagementsto which the gods were themselves party. When atreaty was made between two tribes, the solemn aotwas performed at a sanotuary, and the deity wasmade a contracting party. This was done in thebelief that he would punish the party which broke itsengagement. The gods were therefore protectors ofoaths. To a certain extent they were also helpers ofthe helpless. Fugitives, upon whom the guilt ofblood rested, found an asylum at the sanctuary, andthe god became their patron. But in geneml, whatwe know of the gods of the Arabs does not impress uswith their high moral character. They do not appearas the judges of conduot except where their Ownrights are invaded-as in the cases already speoified.The morality which existed was developed withouttheir influenoe. It was the result of social foroesworking independently. For example, the heathenArab was strong ill, endurance. The scanty nourish­ment of the desert enforces this as a lesson of nature.To the present day among the Bedawin the chiefest

231

232 TIIE BIBLE AND ISLAM 1'HE SEl/VIaE OF GOD 233

virtue is patience - "a courageous fOl·beo.ring andabiding of hunger. "* So it was before Mohammed.There were no religious motives brought to bcar uponthe conscience in f"vor of this virtue. Public opinionand the individual affections were enough. So it waswith the martial virtues. Tribal society lives in astate of warfare. In such a society, courage in battle,fidelity to the blood, self-sacrifiCe for the clan. (oreven for its lowliest members) easily become the Idealof nobility, without the aid of religion. So it was inArab heathenism. The hospitality for which theBedawy has become famous, is another social virtuewhose roots can be traced as far back as our knowl­edge of Arab heathenism goes. And th~s hospitalit!was not only exercised toward the pasSlllg guest-Itflowed constantly for the needy. The songs of II~dhailspeak of ,. Chalid to whom came for s~pp~rt wld~~swho found no abiding place among thell' klllsfolk. t

Weare the more bound to recognize the virtues ofheathenism, that the Moslems have no eye for them.The revolution produced by Islam allows them tothink of the virtues of their ancestors only as brilliantvices. In reality they were more than this, and thebest of them were adopted by the neW religion. Thecharacteristic thing, however, is, that in heathenismthey were indepcndent of religion; in Islam theywere brought into vital connection with it,t The

* Goldzihcr, MuhCTl'trl/m.edawisthe StucUen, 1., p. 252, quoting fromDoughty, Travels in Arabia Dese1'ta.

t Wellbauscn, Skizzen 'Uoo Vora1'beuen-, I., p. 109.t The Mcccans, when exhorted to obey Allah, reply that ~hey

obey (not their gods but) the customs of their fa.thers. Goldzlher.I. ,., I., p. 10.

,, '

change was made possible by the new doctrine of theunity of God; 'it was actively fostered by the schemeof future rewards and punishments. In Islam thewil~ of Albh becomes the supreme rule of life. Thebeh~v61:, bec?me~, by.his faith, a servant whose onlymotive IS te ~nq~ll'e Ius Lord's will and to perform it.Why that Wlll IS so, aud not otherwise does notconcern him. Mohammed describes hims~lf and hismotive to virtue wilen he speaks of himself as a grate­ful servant. We remember that the Apostle Paulalso liked to call himself the bend-servant of JesusChrist.. All e?n?uct. eomes under this point of view. ThereIS no dlstllletlOn between ceremonial law and morallaw. The servant is to do what he is bid, whether itbe to abst~in from killing game when on a pilgrimage,or to aVOld adultery and murder. Ritual and ethicscome under the same head-all conduct is ritual orall is ethical, as you please to view it. That thi~ isalso the view of the Old Testament is evident. Thec?m~an?sof the Pentateuch are given without dis­tlllctlOn lUto classes, and all are motived in the sameway. Israel is a people set apart to the service ofGod. The service consists in obedience to His re­vealed will-whether the command be to abstain frompork or to abstain from murder. This is preciselywhat is meant by calling Israel a holy (consecrated)people.. 1V!oh~m;nedhad the idea, and possibly ex­pressed It III Similar language. The New TestamElllthas the idea but spiritualizes it. The ritual of theChristian consists in visiting the widow and thefatherless in their affliction, and in keeping himself

unspotted from the world. Bnt the Church ~as n?tyet risen to the height of this ideal. Certamly mthe time of Mohammed it stood with the Synagoguein emphasizing ritual quite as much as moralit~.

It is for convenience only, therefore, that I dISCUSSthe service of God under the two heads of ritual andethics. The distinction has no basis in Islam itself.In both divisions of the subje.ct we see the ouriousintel'play of two factors-one the influence of t~e oldheathenism the other the influence of the earher re­vealed reli~ions. Mohammed seems to have desireda more oomplete break with heathenism than he wasaotually able to effect. An exa~ple is the ~ibla-thepoint toward whioh the worshIpper turns ill praye~.

When he went to Medina he fixed Jerusalem as thlScentral point. But be found it impossible to main­tain the regulation. Either beeause of bis own af­feotion for the anoestral sanotuary, which he hlldalrelldy recognized as the House of God,* or in orderto strengthen his elluse with the Arabs, he ohangedhis Kibla to Mecoll after about II year. The inoidentis typieal of his oareer. At the beginning he w~ in­clined to make II radioal departnre from hellthemsm.In the end he had adopted a oonsiderable portion of

its ritnal.This is further exemplified in the rites of pilgrim-

age and sacrifioe. Tbese, as he adopted them,. weretaken from heathenism rather than from Judalsm­though not without analogies in Judaism. In adopt­ing sacrifiee he was careful to disavow its heathensignificance.' The most natural interpretation of suoh

* In Sura lOG.

234 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM

; ,, .'[

I, ';

THE SERVICE OF (JOD 285

a ~te is that the God pal·takes of the offering. Againstth,S J\fohammed pronounces' "As for th 'fi . I. . 'e sacrl CIaammals, .We ~ave ,made them to be a part of the ritesof God, 111 whlOh IS a benefit. Therefore pronounoethe name of God over them as they stand in rows'and, when they are slain, eat their flesh and feed th~contented [poor] and the one who is ashamed to ask.Thus We have madG the cattle submissive to youperhaps you may be grateful. Their flesh and thei;blood do not ascend to God, but the piety shown byy~u .ascends to Him-thus He has made them sub­~,ss,~e to you, that yon may praise God for the wayill WhlOh He has led you." * These words contradictnot only the theory that the sacrifice is a gift to God,but al~o the. theory that it constitutes a sacramentalmeal, 111 whIch He partak~with the worshipper, andfurth?r, ~e theory that It is a propitiation for sin.~othlDg IS left except an undefined benefit to the be­liever, ~hioh was probably conceived of as the meritof hav111g obeyed a oommand of God. Evidently~ohammed adopted as little of the ancient institu­tIOn as he could adopt if he retained it at all and wemay suppose that in reduoing it to suohnarro~ limitshe w~ to so~e extent under Chl'istian influence. '

In ImmedIate collllection with sacrifice we mustnotioe the pilgrimage. The only official sacrifices (ifI m~y USe .this phrase) in ISlam are offered in oon­neotion WIth the pilgrimage.t Acoording to tradi-

* Koran, 22a7 t. .

k~kPn)'vate sacrifice is offered when an infant is seven days old (thea t a. Mohammed offered it for his grandsons M1'shcat II 316F~r regulations prescribing the kind of animal ~ be aacrillc~~ Cf'}f1Shcat, I., pp. 3191 821. The regular sacrillce (of the nn~uai

236 THE BIBLE AND ISLAMTHE SERVIOlIJ OF GOD 237

tion it is inculllbent on every Moslem, once in hislifetime, to visit the sanctuary at Mecca. Moham­med, who lived at Medina, seems to have intendedthat this should be done every year by those IVhowere not specially hindered. In performing this dutythe pilgrim wears a special garb from the time of en­tering the sacred territory. He makes the circuit ofthe Kaaba and takes part in other ceremonies, nowcarefully regulated by tradition, and, finally, he offersa sacrifice in the valley of Mina. He then shaveshis head and resnmes his ordinary clothing. 'rhewhole resembles what we find in Judaism, wbereit isincumbent npon the Israelite to visit the central sanc­tuary at stated times. Those Jews who were con·verted to Christianity did not abandon the custom,for we find the Apostle Paul resolved to keep thefeast of Pentecost at Jerusalem. With this precedent,we are not surprised to find pilgrimnge establishedas a meritorious work in Christianity from very earlytimes. Its prominence in the 1I'Iiddle Age and theiufluence which its interruption had in aronsing Eu­rope to the Crusades are well known. It is possible,therefore, that Mohammed, in establishing this rite,justified himself by both Jewish and Christian prec­edent. But the resemblance which its extern!ll feat­ures show to Judaism must not make us think thatthey are borrowed from Judaism. The resemblauceis really owing to the older Semitic heathenism, uponwhich both Judaism and Islam rest. The shaving ofthe head, for example, which we find in Islam, and

Feast of Sacrifice) is offered at other places tha.n Mecca.. But thisis because it is the day on which the pilgrims offer it.

, ,

of which we find examples both in the Old Testament~nd the New, is found also in Arabic henthenism. ItIS really a survival from the earliest Semitio heathen­ism .of which we have any knowledge, in whioh thesacrlfioe of the hair played a prominent part.

Again, the donning of special garments at the sanct­uary, whioh at first sight we think peouliar to Islamhas its fi.nalogies in many other religions. The oom~mand givon to the Israelites to wash their clothesbefore th~ appearanc~ of God at Sinni is based uponthe same Idea, and so IS the exhortation of the Psalm­ist to worship in the beauty of holines,9, by whioh hemeans the sacred vestments. The idea is of coursethat nothing ceremonially unolean should 'appear be~fore God. In the later Old Testament law the laityare kept altogether from approaohing the holy partof the Temple, so that this regulation is for them un­necessary. So muoh the more stringent is the com­mand that the priests should approaoh God only inthe oonseorated garments.* On the other hand weare told that at 1I'lecoa, before the time of Moham­med, the pilgrims nsed to hire garments kept speciallyfor them, and wear them in making the oirouit of the:K;aaba. The natural oonclusion is that MohammeddId not borrow from the earlier revealed religionsbut that he adopted the heathen oustom, purging itof what seemed to him incompatible with the faith.The question of religious .observances gave him some

*On these resemblances cf. Wellbauaen, Skizz~n una Vorarbti­ten, IlL, ~p. 51 f:, .100, who cites Gen. a5~, II. Kings l 10'1'1 i alsoW. R. Smith l Rel1-glon olthe Semites, p. 433, and what was said inLecture II. uboyc.

238 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE SERVIOE OF' GOD 230

thought, even at Mecca, if we may judge by the Ko­ran passage which says: "We have ordained forevery nation rites which they obsel'Ve. Let none dis·pute with thee in this matter, but pray to thy Lord­verily thou art in the straight path." * The theorythat the early religion of Mecca went back to Abra­ham would involve the belief that the pilgrimage wasdivinely ordained, and this would easily be confirmedby what Mohammed knew of Jewish and Christiancustoms. The emphasis which he laid upon thematter of pilgrimage is indicated, and perhaps exag­gerated, by the tradition whioh makes him say, thathe who worthily performs the pilgrimage retul'US asinnooent as he was the day his mother bore him.t

The next ritual obsel'Vance whioh is prominent inIslam is fasting. It is a matter of oommon fame thatthe Mohammedan world observes the month of Ra­madhan by abstaining from food during the daylighthours. It must be confessed that the month is nowoharacterized as much by feasting at night as it is byfasting dming the day, bnt this was hardly the inten­tion of the founder. His idea seems to have beenthat as God is nearer to men at some places than Heis at others, so He is nearer at some times than He isat others. Suoh a season should be marked by somespecial observanoes. With this he may have had theidea that a month of self-denial would be well pleas­ing to God. In regard to this rite we have less dis­tinct testimony from Arabic heathenism that we havein regard to some of the others whioh have been

* Koran, 22M , a Meccan suro. according to the superscription.t Bocha1'i, II. I p. 102.

,'1-I! J

I!

j ,,. ~

. ~

, c

mentioned. Certainly the direct precedent is foundin Judaism and in Christianity. Tradition distinotlyasserts that Mohammed first established a fast in im­itation of the Jews. When he oame to Medina * hefound them observing the Day of Atonement, and inimitation of them he commanded his followers toobserve the same day in the same way. In the fol.lowing year, however, he appointed Ramadhan asa month of fasting. There is no Jewish fast of thisextent, and as in that year he began to show his in.dependence of the Jews, he was probably influencedby the Christian Lent. There can be no question thathe believed a precedent set in other religions: "0,believers, fasting is ordained for you as it was or­dained for those before you, that you may observepiety." t That a month should be the time fixed, in­stead of forty days, need not cause surprise. Theforty days had no special significance in Islam, andin faot was not constant in Chlistianity, whereasMohammed was already familiar with the idea of asacred month or months in heathenism. His sense ofthe importance of the moon as a measnre of timewaS very marked. He not infrequently alludes to themoon's being oreated for this purpose, and he wentso far as to rearrange the calendar, making his yeara striotly lunar year. This was undoubtedly a misfort-

*The day i. c.Ued A.hura (Teuth) aud i••till ob.erved by .omezealous Moslems. Bochari, who gives this tradition, gives apotherto the effect that the Rareish also fasted on tha.t day in heathentimes. But this requires confirmation. Cf. Bockari, II., p. 231 iMishcat, I., p. 486.

t Koran, 2m,

240 THE BIBLE AND ISLAMTIlE SERVIaS OF GOD 241

une for the Moslem world, but we can trace the rea­soning which led to the action. God had made themoon for seasons. Out of every twelve monthswhich make a year He has made certain ODes sacred.By the intercalation of a month-which was theMeccan device for making the solar and lunar yearkeep in harmony-these were thrown out of theirproper place: "The number of months in the sightof God is twelve, written in the Book of God on theday when He created heaven and earth. . . .Postponement [of the sacred months by intercala­tion] is only excess of infidelity. The infidels leadastray by it, making a month profane one yearand making [the same month] sacred another year,that they may agree with the number of months *which God has made sacred. Thus they profanewhat God has consecrated. The evil of their deedsis beautiful in their eyes, but God does not directthe people of unbelievers." With this high idea ofthe month as the unit of time, it is natural that theProphet should order his fast accordingly. This givesus no light on the meaning of the observance, but thepassage quoted above seems to show that it w~s ameans of showing piety. It is also brought mtospecial connection with ~abriel's visit to Mo~amm~d,and this would agree wlth what has been smd of ltSbeing a time when God comes nearer to men than Hecomes at other times.

We next come upon a religious regulation which is

• They agree in the n1tmber of months but do not observe the ex­act ones which God has designated, Beems to be the meaning. Thepassage is U~6 r,

so foreign to our modern thought that we have diffi­culty in entering into the state of mind which liesbehind it-1 mean the distinction between clean andunclean. From the Old Testament we have learnedthat there are certain things which tho Hebrew couldnot touch, and certain acts which he conld not do,without thereby becoming unfit for approach to God.This defilement extended over a louger or sh01ierperiod of time, according to its intensity, and couldonly be removed by a religious rite. Of the actswhich render men unclean, the eatiug of certain kindsof food is one of the most prominent, and at firstsight we think we discover the reason for this pro­hibition. Some of the f01'bidden objects are repul­sive to our taste (mostly because we are unfamiliarwith them) and we attribute like repulsion to the an­cients. Or else we take refuge in sanitary hypothe­ses and suppose the animals prohibited to be dele­terious to health. But it is doubtful whether eitherof these reasons will apply to any system of cleanund unclean. The natural repulsion certainly docsnot exist among the peoples who are most affected bythese laws; and considerations of health were for­eign to their mode of thinking. The whole mutter isa mutter of religious regulation, and must be ac­counted for in the sphere of religion. When we givethis consideration full weight, we see that clean lindnnclean are associated with the recognition of differ­ent goels. He who has consecrated himself by wor­shipping one god cannot immediately come into thepresence of another god; his first consecration mustbe washed oft', or at least worn off by the lapse of

10

242 l'IIE BIBLE AND ISLAMTHE SERVICE OF' GOD 243

time. All the more, where the god is conecived ofas a jealous god like Yahweh. The marks of a rivaldeity upon a worshipper would make His anger flameout upon him. In Israel nearly all animals exceptthe animals of the f10ek and herd were supposed tobelong to some of the false gods or demons. Theycould not be eaten without bringing the worshipperinto communion with these divinities. Even the en­lightcned Paul would not have his converts drink ofthe cup of the Lord and also of the cup of devils.

This Old Testament thought, which is also slightlyshadowed forth in some New Testament passages, wasfamiliar to Mohammed. Some regulations of thiskinil ho adopted instinctively. He and his followcrswould not eat of flesh offered to idols, taking thus theposition of the more scmpulous CIn:istians in theApostolic age. The point of view comes out clearlyin the Koran prohibition: "Do not eat of that overwhich the name of Allah has not been pronounced,for this is sinful. The Satans come down to theircompanions to disputo with you, and if you eat ofthem you become idolators." * The exact meaningof the phrase the SatallS come down to their compan­ions to dispute with you is uncertain. But it probablyexpresses Mohammed's belief that the demons are soassooiated with these offerings that the believers, ineating of the offerings, put themseIYes in the powerof the demons-precisely the position of Paul justalluded to. Mohammed carried out the ilrgumentlogically, His final decree forbids: "that which has

• Koran, 6121, According to Origen, the blood is the food of thedemons. Cf. Conybearc ill the Jewish Qum"te"ly Review, October,1896, p. 61.

died [of itself], and blood, the swine, and that overwhich any name except the name of God has boonpronounced, that which is strangled, that whioh issmitten down with a club, that whioh falls from II

precipice, that which is gored, that which the beast ofprey has torn (unless you are able to bleed it), andthat which is sacrificed to idols."* Although thelist gives a large number of items, we see that it issubstantially covered by the New Testament prin­ciple. For the Council of Jerusalem laid uponGeutile Christians abstinence from things offered toidols, from things strangled, and from blood.

In view of what has been quotod from Paul thereoan hardly be any doubt as to the reasoning uponwhioh this decree is based. The things offered to idolsare tho property of the demons. The Christian by eat­ing of them comes into commnnion with the demons.Bnt he thereby loscs communion with God. Thingsstrangled aro forbidden for the same reason as thatfor which blood is forbidden. The blood belongs toGod and is unlawful to man-if it cannot be sacrificedit must at least be carefully separated from the flesh.All Mohammed's list may be explained on this veryprinciple-that blood and idol sacrifices are unlawful.Iu this he considerably modified the Old Tostamentlaw, dealing freelJ' with it, as he did in some otherCases we have noticed,t but influenced also by NewTestament precedent.

... Koran, 54,

t Tradition increases the Jiat of prohibited foods. The !las wasadded toward the close of Mohammed's life. He himself refusedto eat some things which he allowed to bis followers. Possibly ho'Gas influenced by his habit acquired in youth. For the distinc-

244 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE SERVICE OF GOD

The means ordinarily nsed to remove ceremonialdefilement is water. For the Moslem, therefore, theablution is one of the most important parts of theservice of God. The Koran commands: "0, believ­ers, when you are ready for worship, wash your facesani[ your hands as far as the elbows, and wipe yourheads, and [wash] your feet as far as your ankles." *In addition to this, which is the ordinary l\blution, afull bl\th is ordered for certain kinds of defilement­as was the case in Judaism. The subject interests ushere only as it is connected to all appearance withtho Old Testament and Rabbinioal washings, ratherthl\n with Christian Baptism. Bl\ptism is referredto but onoe in the Komn, if indeed it is referre(l toat alU It is possible however that Mohammed'spractice was influenoed not by the Jews alone, but bytho various Gnostic or Pseudo-Christian seots whichinsisted on frequent baptisms or ablutions.t

We come now to the most importl\nt part of theJllohammedl\n ritual-the act of worship which we callprayer. This is hardly ,m exact rendering, as whenwe speak of prayor, we think most prominently of

tion of clean and unclean in Arab heathenism cf. Wellhausen,Skizzen una Vorarbeiten, II!., p. 52.

* 58. The command to wipe the head means to draw the wet handsover the heoo. Ha.d the main verb continued its force over thisclause it would have enjoined sc:rll.obing the head. On Lhe wllo1esubject cf. Lane, Modern Egyptians, c. III. j Retand, De Relig1·oncIIfoham-medanica (1111), TIP. 66-77; Hughes. Dic!1'QrI.(Z."f'y of Islam,Articles Ablut1'on and GhU8l.

t Koran, 2m is usually supposed to name Christian TIapthnn.t The Elkcsaitcs and Mandreana (probably the SnbeaDs of the

Koran) a.re among these Bcets. Cf. Herzog, P. R. El, IV., p. 185.

, .

: I

'. r,'

, I,

supplication. But the galat of the Moslem does notoontain any large element of supplication. It is anact of divin~ servie~, an act pe~formed for the gloryof God ~nd l.n ?bedlenoe to HIm. Like other partsof the l'ltual1t 1S not left to the discretion of the be­liever, but is oarefully regulated by tradition, both asto the ti~es w~en it is to be performed, and as to theceremomes whlOh must be observed. Five times inthe day, the believer must perform this aet of devo­tion, wherever he may be; and Christian travellers intl~e East.have frequent occasion to admire the fidelityw1th WhlOh the Moslem turns asido from his busi­ness or his amusement to show his obedience to hisMaker.

It is unnecessary to describo the postures whichare enjoined by tradition for this serviee. The bo­liever stands, bows, kneels, and prostrates himselfwith his forehead touehing the ground. These aetsfoll?w a certain soquence making up a rekah or pros­tratIOn. A pmyor (to use the conventional term) ismade up of at least two prostrations, and the nnmbermay be inereased to ten 01' more. In these variouspostures the worshipper repoats portions of theKoran * and ejaculations of praise. At certain pointshe declares his belief in the unity of God and theapostleship of Mohammed. At the olose he salutesthe angels to his right and left. The ehiof contentof what the boliever recites is tho praise of God.Whon Mohammed was asked why he spent 80 much

'" Including always the Fatiha or opening chapter. Other portionsare chosen according to taste. The ejaculations are; "Praise beto God! "-" I extol the perfection of God the Grent."

246 7'HE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE SERVJ(JE OF GOD 247

time in devotion he replied: "Shall I not be a thank­ful servant?" 'Worship then is the recognition ofGod's goodness and of His Kingship. It is not ~analone who praises his Maker. The whole creatlOnjoins in ascriptions to Him: "Dost th~u not see thatwhatever is in heaven and on earth praISes God, eventhe birds with expanded wings? Each knows itsworship [galat] and its doxology, and God rega~swhat they do." * Such expressions are frequent III

the Koran, and they show what Mohammed regardedas the proper service of the creature. .

The importance of worship waS rated very hIghlyby Mohammed. He came out of. the house one dayin winter when leaves were fallmg from the trees.He took two l:ll;anches from a tree, and the leaves be­gan to drop from them. Remarking this, he said tohis companion: "Believers say their prayers for thesatisfaction of God, and their faults drop from themlike the leaves from these branches." t In anothertradition he is represented as saying that the mostpleasing thing to God is prayer at its appo~ntedtimes. Again, he called prayer a K affara, that IS anatonement which covers sins from the sight of God.In :mothe; place he says: "If one washed five timesa day in a river which flowed at his door, how muchfilth would remain upon him? So God washes a;;aysin by the five daily praye~s.". If we ~ay behevetradition further he carried his VIew of the Importanceof prayer to such an extreme as to say a man is justi­fied in repulsing one who interrupts his prayers e~en

if he thereby kills him. As it is added for he ~8 a* Korau,24:u. t Mishcat, I., p. 180.

Satan, we may suppose that Mohammed was disturbedin his devotions by the evil one in visible form-theparallel with Luther will occur to every one. Othertraditions affirm that he had often to contend againstthe distraction of his thoughts in his devotions, andthat he ascribed this to Satan. In the tradition beforeus, therefore, he was only counselling strenuous resis.tance to such an interrupter of prayers; against adiabolical enemy one may use any violence.*

Another evidence of Mohammed's estinlate of thevalue of the prescribed worship is seen in anothertradition. This is to the effeet that Moslems whoare eondemned to hell will be known by the callousesmade upon their knees by their habit of prayer, forover these spots the fire will have no power; andmen thus marked will finally be redeemed from theplllCe of torment.

Turning now to the question whem Mohammed gothis idea of worship, we cannot doubt that he got itfrom a Christian source. Anyone who has seenpublic service in the Eastern Church, in any of itsbranches, will have noticed how the congregationtake part by kneeling, bowing, crossing themselves,and joining in the responses. Very likely in someof his jonrneyings Mohammed had seen such a ser­vice. If not, we can readily suppose that his Chris­tian friends at Mecca wonld exemplify such a service.The sacraments, of course, they could not illustrate,not being priests; and these, being mysteries of thefaith, they would be shy even of describing to aforeigner. With such elements as they gave him,

.. The cxo.mples are taken from Boc1l.wril I., pp. 123 f., 119.

248 TIlE BIBLE AND ISLAM l'HliJ SERVICE OF' GOD 241l

Mohammed arranged a ritnal for himself. Its ele­ments were the various attitudes of worship exempli­fied by the Christians, and such words of pr~ise aswere recited by them from the Psalms. W1th nomind for mysteries or a priesthood, the Prophetfound his simple liturgy snflicient for himself, andfor the commnnity that gathered about him.

The number of five prayers daily has no directBiblical precedent. Daniel seems to .have pra!edthree times daily and the Psalmist speClfies mornmg,, I .evening, and noon as the times of prayer. t 1S acurious coincidence that the only passage of theKoran which gives the number of prayers also speci­fics three: "Perform worship at tho sotting of thosun, up to the darkness of night, and the. Re~itation

of the dawn (the recitation of the dawn 1S Wltnessedby tho angels), and in the night. Awake to prayer,therefore, perchance thy Lord will prepare for thee aglorious place." * Exegesis has found a way to makethese verses prescribe the five customary seasons, buton their face they speak of only three. In the Chu~ch

the canonical hours vary from three to seven daily.Tho Manichlllans are said to have had four and thoMandlllans five.t It is' possible that Mohammed'sown custom varied at different times. Tradition saysthat in the Night-jourlley, God commanded him atfirst fifty prayers daily. At the advice of Moses, whohad had experience with human weakness, ~e .askedsuccessive reductions of the number until 1t was

* Kornu, 11~O r, cf. Ps. 00 18, .' •

t Herzog, P. R. E~, IX., p. Ml. Brnndt, Jfandduche Rdtglon,p. 92\ ascribes seven to the Mandroulls.

Ij

IIf

" I

brought down to five. We have already seen an ascetictendency in Mohammed's earlier impulse. It is pos­sible that he began with the observance of more fre­quent hours of worship than he was able to keep upin his later practice. In fact he has supplementedone of his early revelations with a command to mod.erate the excesses of his devotion (73'").

Although the rllf,'Ular prayers are largely formal,we must not forget tlmt Islllolll encomages voluntaryprayers. I do not refer here to works of superero­gation, to which pions Moslems are much addicted.When Mohammed says: "And remember thy Lordin thy soul in humility and fear, and without raisingthe voice,"" we can hardly suppose he means to com·mand the eonstant repetition of the name of Godwhich forms the worship of the dervishes. He is,rathel', eneouraging the believer in communing withGod. He laid stress on the correct performance ofprayer, but he also laid stress on the intention. Hewas accustomed himself to offer voluntary petitions,both after the regular prayers and at other times.He gives in the Koran examples of prayer, and theseare real prayers; that is, petitions for blessings bothspiritual and temporal, the spiritual being promi­nent. For example: "0 Lord do not punish us forour sins of negligenee or for OUl' errors; and do notlay upon us a law sueh as Thou didst lay upon thosewho preceded us: t 0 Lord do not enjoin upon usthat for which we have not the ability; blot out our

.. Koran, 7~1)f,.

tHe menna the Children of laruel, whose Law he thought bur~

densome. The verse is 21jj3 •

250 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE SERVIOE OF GOD 251

sins and forgive us; be gracious to us, Thou ourLord, and aid us against a people of unbelievers." Itseems impossible to suppose such a prayer composedwithout a vivid sense of sin, and without assurancethat God is the rewarder of those who seek Him.In anothel' verse of the same chapter we read; "WhenMy servants ask thee concerniug Me-then verily Iam near, and I answer the petition of the worshipperwhen he prays to Me; then let them seek Me andbelieve in Me that they may walk in the right way." *The example of tho Prophet was in accordance withthis, for he embodied in his daily worship petitionsfor himself and his· friends. There is a traditionwhioh even affirms that a man shut out of Paradisecould got in by importunate prayer. But it is doubt­ful whcther this oorrectly represents the mind ofMohammed. As to the efficacy of prayer in the pres­ent life, however, he seems to have had no doubt.

So much for that part of the service of God whichconsists in l·itual. We cannot deny that in the relit,>iouslaw too much emphasis is laid upon external observ­ances. But what has just been said is enough to showthat mere formality was not Mohammed's ideal. Hedesired to foster spiritual faith and unfeigned piety.Turning now to the other side of the service of God,what we include under the head of morals, we dis­cover that there was a great advance over heathenism,in that the sense of responsibility to God was en­forced by all the preaching of Mohammed; "A manis a sbepherd, and what is committed to him (as hisfamily and his property) is his flock and he will be

* Koran, 21b2•

inquired of concerning it in the Last Day-even aslave will give account of the way in which he hasadministered his mastel"s property." * The traditionreminds us of the New Testament parable of thetalents, and we cannot doubt that the thought is thesame: Man is responsible to his Maker, and for allhis actions he must give acconnt.

The distinctly ethical charaoter of the obligationthus laid upon men is seen on ahnost every page ofthe Koran. Several extended passages might bequoted which were evidently intended to set forth thewhole duty of man. Let me quote just one;

H The servants of the Compassionate are they who walkhumbly on the earth, and, when the barbarians addre,sthem, say; Peace be with you! And [they are they] whopMS the night prostrate before their Lord or standing [inprayer]; and who say: Our Lord avert from us the punish­ment of Gehenna, for its punishment is lasting IlJld it is anevil place of abode; who, when they expend, are neitherlavish nor niggardly but maintain a just mean between thetwo; who do not call upon any God In the presence ofAllah; and who do not slay human beings-which Godforbids-except in the cause of justice; and who do not com­mit adultery, for whoever does this shall incur punishment(his pain shall be doubled In the Day of Resurrection, andhe shall be an objeet of contempt forever, unless he repentand belleve and do goOd-as for such, God will exchangetheir evil deeds for good deeds; God Is forgiving andcompassionate, and he who repents and does good issiucere In his turning towards God). And [they arc they]who do not bear false witness; and, when they pass bOy vaindiscourse, pass by in honor i and who, when they are toldof the revelations of their Lord, do not depart [as though]

l(. Boehm'i, I.) p. 198.

deaf and blind; and [they are] those who say: Our Lord,give us comfort in our wives and children, and make 'Us anexample to those who feur Thee. These shall be recom­pensed with Paradise * because they have endured; andthere shAll they obtain life and peace. Beautiful is snch aplace of abode I " t

Such passages show the distinctly ethical characterof Islam; and the fact that the virtues here com­manded may easily he classified nndel' ten heads,makes ns inquire what infiuence the Decalogue hadon the thought of Mohammed. We easily discoyerthat he had some knowledge of the fundamental TenWords, though he nowhere cDolis them by this nDome.He endeDovors to roproduce them in the followingpassage addressed to the Jews:

II Come, I will repeat what your Lord forbade you to dOj[He commanded] that you should not associate anythingwith Him; and [He commanded] good conduct towardsparents; and do not kill your children on account ofpoverty-We will nourish you and them-and do not ap-

* Literally: a high plate, meaning apparently the most exaltedof the heavens.

t Koran, 258('''. In the Traditions we find 80me resemblance to theChristian classification of seven deadly aina: "Flee the aeven thatcast into hell. They asked what those were and he replied: Poly~

theism, magic, murder, usury, devouring the property of orphans,fleeing in time of war, and accusing chaste women of unbecomingconduct." Bochwri, III., p. 179. Mohammed said also: H There areseven whom God will shade with bis shadow in the day when therewill be no other shade than His: a just ruler, a young man whogrows up in the service of God, a man whose heart cleaves to themosques, two men who love each other for the love of God, a manwho resists temptation by the feRr of God, find a man who givesalms and conceals it so tlUJ.t his left band does not know what hisright hand does."-Bocha1·i, II., p. lOG.

proach anything evil, whether it be concealed or manifest;and do not kill a human being (which God has forbiddenexcept in accordance with justice, and He enjoined yon thisthat you might have nnderstanding); and do not approachthe property of the orphan, e~cept to Ws profit, until hereaches his majority; and use a just measure and scale­We, on Our part, do not exact from any soul more than itsability; and when you speak be just, even to relatives: andkeep the covenant of God. These things He commandedyou that you should_ remember." *

If we count up the separate commands embodiedin this list we shall find them to be nine in number.In a tradition also we find that the Jews came todiscuss with Mohammed concerning the nine com­mands of God. This is in fact the Jewish computa­tion, for of the Ten Words in their division, the firstis the opening annonncement: I am Yahweh thyGod which brought thee ont of the land of Egypt, outof the house of slaves. There are therefore nine com­mands. But when we examine the nine of Mohammedwe see that they do not correspond with those of theHebrew code. He left the Sabbath out of view alto.gether. He knows it, as we discover from other refer.ences, but he does not give it a place among God'scommands. We easily discover the reason for this.The Sabbath is practicable only among agriculturalor haud-working people. A pastoral people must·herdthe flocks and milk them seven days in the week,or their subsistence perishes. The Jew were an in­dustrial people. Those at Medina were mainly culti­vators or goldsmiths. They observed the Sabbath.But Mohammed's people were mainly Bedawin. It

.. Koran, 6U~ t,

252 THE BIBLE .AND ISLAM

!,I

1i

J'lIE SERVIOE OF GOD 253

254 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE SERVIOE OF GOD 255

seemed impossible to impose a day of rest upon them.He did not hesitate therefore to abrogate it- theSabbath is intended only for the Jews, is in fact hisround assertion.*

We see from this instance, that Mohammed did notfeel that an unchangeable God would enact an un­changeable code. In regard to some other Mosaicregulations, he admitteel their divine character butdenied that they were binding upon later sects: "Andfor the sin of the Jews, We forbade them gooel thingsthat had been lawful to them, and because theyturncd away from the path of Goel."t We rememberthat in the New Testament also, some of the Mosaioordinances are said to have been given the people forthe hardness of their hearts. A polemic uUOl'anoeagainst the Old Testament reason for the Sabbath,seems contained in the words: "We oreated theheavens anel the earth and what is between them insix days, anel no fatigue affecteel Us.":t: It is scarcelypossible to doubt that there is a referenoe here to thedeclaration that Goel rested the seventh elay. Sinceneither the advantages of the Sabbath, nor the reasongiven for its observance, commended themselves to Mo.hammed, he refused to rc-enact it, The Friday whichhe chose as his elay of religious observance was notintended as a Sabbath in the Old Testament sense.

The first commanel of Mohammed's Decalogue for-

II< " Tho Sabbath is made only for those who dispute concerningit "-by which he meaosthe Jews who were arguing with himforitfJadoption-Koran, 161U•

t4 1&8.

:l: 50",

I:i

biels associating any other object of worship with thetrue God. With his dootrine of the unity of Godthis is what we may expect. And in his common­wealth, as soon as he was strong enough, he madethis a crime to be punisheel by the judges. So in theOld Testament we find stringent measures com­manded against every one who practised 01' encour­ageel the worship of false goels.* It follows thatapostasy from Islam is punished with eleath: "Ifthey turn their backs, then take them and kill them,and elo not take any of them as friends or helpers. "t1'his was probably intended for those who relapsedinto heathenism after having professeel Islam. Itwas early applied, however, to those Moslems whowere converted to Judaism or Christianity. It is stillthe theory of Mohammedan law everywhere that suchconverts should be put to death.

The other commands of the Decalogue given byMohammed cover very fairly the second table ofMoses' Law. To ILppreciate his view of man's obli­gations toward his fellow we need to look at the dif­ference in principle between him and the heathenismwhich he overthrew. In heathen Arabia, as in allearly society, moral obligations were connected withthe blood. The members of the clan were brothers.In such a society, virtue consists in acting for thecommon blood, either in defending it from attackfrom the outside, or in fostering it by liberality with·in. This tribal system was in fnll force in Moham­med's time even in Mecca, where the different clanslived in different quarters of the city, each with its

II< Dent 13. t Kora.n, 4:~I.

256 THE BIBLE AND ISLA.1I THE SliJRVIOE OF' GOD 257

separate wall and gates. The common interest of thecity was protected only by treaties between the clans.In Medina the different elans were frequently at war,and before the coming of Mohammed, a continuousfeud had been carried on so long as to threaten the ex­termination of the population. Now Mohammed snb­sHtuted the bond of faith for the bond of blood: "0,you who believe I Fear God in sincerity, and do notdie without being resigned [to Him]; and hold fast, allof you, on the bond of God, and be not divided; andremember the grace of God towards you when youwere enemies, how He united your hearts, and by Hisgrace you became brethren." * The men whom he ad­dressed had been members of different tribes andtherefore enemies. The word of Paul concerningChristians before their eonversion-that theyhad beenfull of hate-was true also of those whom Mohammedaddressed. It is diffieuit for us to eoneeive the great­ness of the ehange wrought in them by the substitutionof the new tie of faith for the old tie of family. Thegreatness of the ehange is shown by the diffieulty withwhich it was brought about. In the stormy timesthrough whieh the infl\llt commonwealth passed, itseemed again and again as if the old feuds would breakout. But faith triumphed over the old bonds, and thebrotherhood of believers was established. Traditionhas preserved some striking instances of the reality ofthe change. One was the case of the son of AbdallahIbn Obay. Abdallah had been the most influential manin Medina before the coming of Mohammed. Althoughhe yielded to the majority, and professed allegiance

lie Koran) 3~' t,

t~ Mohammed, he was never heartily a believer, andhIS lukewarmness or his secret machinations placedmany a thorn in the pillow of Mohammed. At onetime he so far forgot his ordinary prudence !IS toapeak openly of Mohammed in abusive language.Thereupon the son went to Mohammed and offeredto kill his fllther with his own hand, declaring that itwas better for him to be the executioner than another-for if another should do it he would be moved totake blood revenge, and so become a transgressor.In another instance, a Moslem at Mohammed's in­stigation put to death a Jew who had shown himmany favors in times past. The brother of the ex­ecutioner reproached him with murdering his bene.factor. The only reply was: "If he who ordered meto kill him should order me to kill thee I wouldobey." When the brother assured himself that thiswas said in earnest, he was so impressed with thepower of the new religion, that he became a convert ­on the spot.* These examples show how the newpI1noiple was realized. They show its less attrac­tive side, to be sure. But we cannot doubt that itsst~'ength against enemies is the measure of its strengthWIthin the community. In his farewell pilgrimageMohammed deelared that, like the sacred month andthe saered territory, God had made the life and prop­erty of every Moslem inviolable to every other Mos­lem until the end of time.t

In adopting faith as the prinoiple of his commu-nity instead of blood, Mohammed was probably under

*Wellhausen, Vakidi, p. 98.t Muir, Life of iJlahomet, IV., p. 23l.),17

258 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE SERVIOE OF GOD 259

Christian influence. The social organization in viewin the Old Testament was the chosen people. Andthis people was a group of clans !tHied by blood !tndtr!tCing descent from a common ancestor--Abrahamor Israel as the case may be. In substance this wasthe constitution of the Arabs before Mohammed.The Prophets, indeed, in their visions of the comingkingdom see that all men are to partake of the bless­ings of Israel. But they do not seem to proclaimthat simple faith in Yahweh is enough to make allmen kin. They are eontent to leave the great con­summation to the future, where divine power willeffect what is incomprehensible to men. It was theNew Testament which brought believers into abrotherhood" where there is neither Jew nor Greek,neither bond nOlO free, neither male nor female," Mo­hammed· must have heard of this from Christians.The Jews who came under his obscrvation were asexclusive as the heathen. They were in fact organ­ized on the principle of the Arab clans, and they didnot let their faith keep them even from warringagainst each other, clan against clan. Mohammedgrasped the Christi!tn idea of the brotherhood of be­lievers and organized his society on that basis. Th!tthe did not !'ise t~ the height of the Christian concep­tion of the brotherhood of all men can scarcely excitesurprise, when we see how far the Church is from ap­prehending this conception even to the present day.

Christian influence is suggested further by variousexpressions used by Mohammed-though as we getour knowledge of them from tradition, we may sus­pect that they are colored somewhat by the memory

of the narrators. In regard to the brotherhood ofbelievers, he is reporbed to have said: "Believersare like a building, one part of which strengthensanother "-and he interlaced his fingers to illustratethe union of materials in a building. So in theNew Testament, believers are builded togethe,' intoa temple. In some Koran passages he describes be­lievers as those who repel evil with good, where we aretempted to see a reminiscence of the New Testamentexhortation to overcome evil with good.

Somc other verbal resemblances might be pointedout, but it is time for us to turn our attention to twosubjects in which the Moslem world now sharply dis­tinguishes itself from Christendom. The first ofthese is slavery. This institution already existed infull vigor in Arabia in the time of Mohammed. Aslave market existed at Mecca into which came thoseArabs who were made captive in the wars betweenthe tribes, as well as the human merchandise im­ported from beyond the borders of the peninsula.Even in time of peace, a defenceless man might bekidnapped and sold. Mohammed diel not dream ofabolishing slavery. But he greatly mitigated its evils.He exhorted masters to clothe their slaves withthe same kind of garments which they wore them­selves, and. to feed them with the same kind of foodwhich they themselves ate. And he added as areason: "They are your brothers whom God hasmade subject to you." * Further, he encomaged

* Goldziher, Multammedanische Studien, 1" p. 73. I have notnow the reference to BocJuwi. On the slave market in Meccn. cf.W. R. Smith, Kinship and Marriage, p. 78 j 'VcllhauseD, Skizzenund V01"a1°beiten\ ro, p. 119.

260 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE SERVIOE OF GOD 261

manumission, making it a meritorious work and rec­ommending it as one of the means of atoning forsins of omission. Finally, by the emphasis of thebl'otherhood of believers he did much to securemild treatment of slaves on the part of their masters.In all this, Islam did as much as was done either byJudaism or Christianity. Islam has, however, failedto keep up with tho progress of humanity in this asin so many other l'espects. That, in the Middle Age,Christianity had little to boast of as compared withIslam, is shown by the fact that slaves were a stapleof the Venetian trade to the East, and were expol'tedfrom the domains of the Pope himself. Prelates evenwere accused of taking the children of their serfs andselling them to the Jews, through whose hands theypassed into the possession of the Moslems.*

The other matter is one in which the custom of Is­lam is most repugnant to our ideas-l meltn the lawof marriage and divorce.t In our dislike of the pres­ent practice of Moslems, however, we must not fOl'getthat Mohammed did improve upon the customs of helt­thenism. Among the sins which he most strictly for­bade was adultery. When the deputation fl'om Me-

* Kremer, Kulturgeschuhte des Orients unter den ChaUfen l II.,p.153.

t In addition to what has been said about the duties of man toman we should in justice to Islam notice the following points: (1)HOllor to parents is emplutsized, cf. Koran 17t.j , j (2) The punish­ment of the murder of a Moslem is den.th, and for injury of theperson the lex tatiom's is enforced a8 in the Old Testament j (3) Thepayment of just dues is enforced, and (hy tradition) trade is regu­lated so as to prevent unfl1irness; (4) Usury is prohibited as in theOld Testament.

dina swore allegiance to him before the Flight, hepledged them not to commit this sin.* When askedto name the three greatest crimes, this was one of thethree.t In the passage cited above, he says: "Donot approach anything evil." He probably means toprohibit incitements to lust. He forbade the priceof a dog, the reward of fornication, and the pay of asoothsltyer-a conjunction that reminds us of ltn OldTestam.ent prohibition. In the eady pal't of his reignat Medina he ordel'ed one of his followers to be stonedon confession of ltdultery. When a deputation fromthe important city of Taif came with the offer thatthe eity would become Moslem if the commandsagainst usury, adultery, and wine were modified, theProphet refused any concession.:\: These are suffi­cient proof that Mohltmmed had no desire to encour­age license, ltnd that, in fact, his law was considemblymore strict thltn the custom of his ancestors. Hisidcal of mltrriage was high, for he Sltys: "A Moslemhas not obtltinec1, after righteousness, anything bet­ter than a geod dispositioned, beautiful wife' such awife as, whe~ ordered by her husband to do a~ything,obey~; and if her husband looks at hel', is hltppy;and, lf her husband swears by her to do anything,she does it, to make him a swearer to the truth'ltnd if he is absent from her she wishes him well andguards her person and takes care of his property." §

* Or fornication, the Arabic word includes botb.t Polytheism, infanticide, and adultery. M£shcat , r., pp. 8, 18, 20.t WeUhauscn, Valddi, p.883. In addition to these indicatiolls I. I 'mIg It adduce the tradition that Mohammed prohibited the Aluta

marriages-marriages for a. specified time.§ Miskeat, II. p. 19.

262 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE SERVIOE OF GOD 263

With such an ideal, it seems as if he might havedone more for the elevation of marriage.

That he did not do more is probably due to his nothaving had knowledge of what Christianity reallyteaches. As we very well know, the Church earlyobscured the true doctrine of marriage by the prom­inence it gave to celibacy. Now the doctrine thatmarriage is inferior to celibacy is one from. whichthe Arab revolts. The importance of preservmg thefamily name, and of keeping up the strength of theclan causes him to value children above all otherbles~ings. He stands just where the Hebrews ?f theOld Testament stood. He has therefore no mmd tothe doctrine of the Church. " We sent Jesus the Sonof Mary (he says in the Koran *) and gave him theGospel, and placed in the hearts of those wh? f?l­lowed him pity and <lOmpassion-but the monastto lifethey themselves invented." This shows th~t ~o~am.med finding the ideal presented by Chrlsttamty aper:erted one, fell back upon the position common toHebrews and Arabs. He justifies himself in his ownpolygamy by the example of the prophets who.hadpreceded him, having David and Solomon espeCiallyin mind.

The roal evil in Eastern socicty is not so muchpolygamy as tho freedom of divorce. Comparativelyfew Mohammedans have more than one wife at a time.But there are comparatively few who have not putaway more than one wife in order to take another. Nowdivorce was repugnant to Mohammed. He never sentaway a wife, though some of them gave him anything

* Koran, 57~1.

but a peaceful time. He tried to regulate divorce,making it more difficult. That the attempted regula­tion would produce new evils he did not foresee. Itdid not occur to him that he could prohibit divorce-the disciples of Jesus also found it impossible tosuppose such a prohibition practicable. In fact,Mohammed stood substantially upon Jewish ground,for the Jewish law allows the hushand to put awayhis wife if he find any serious fault in her.*

A curious but not edifying phase of this subject,is the influence which Mohammed's own experienceswith women had upon his legislation. As it does notbear directly upon our subject we need not discussit here. Probably thel'e is in all history no morestriking example of the extent to which a regulationbased on the experience of a single individual hasaffected a vast multitudo of men for a long period oftime.t The failure to distinguish between personalimpulses and eternal laws ho.s inflicted this lastingoalamity On Eo.stern society.

In the lo.st lecture we discovered that the revela­tion of Mohammed is regarded as a Law. What wasthore said is fully borne out by what we have seen

, It: Even if abe burn the bread in baking, according to one Bcbool ofScribes:.

t The jealousy of the uxorious old man led to the command thataU women should wear veils, which ia still the rule of Eastern so­ciety. The desire to shield his favorite wife from a scandal, pro­duced the law' tha.t four witnesses should be brought to prove a.charge of adultery, and the accuser who cannot produce these mustreceive eighty stripes. This law causes Eastern husbands to keeptheir wives under constant guard because of the difficulty of provingunfaithfulness. What the seclusion of women has done for Moslemsociety I need not say.

2640 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE SERVIOE OF GOD 265

to-day. Koran and tradition occupy, to the Moham­medan, exactly the place which the Jew giv~s .toTora and Mishna. Life is to be regulated In Itsmost minuto details by the law given by God Him­self. The conservatism which is thereby given toIslam has already been noticed. A further conse­quence is only too evident. The emphasis laid uponobedience to a set of rules, stimulates a formal andexternal righteousness. The process is precisely thatillustrated in Judaism. On one side it becomes allimportant to know the law. The Kor~n, like theTOl'a, is a complicated code. It contaIns a greatvariety of enactments, and these. are not always cl?aror self-consistent. Moreover, It does not prOVIdefor all cases of conscience. The traditions must beconsulted by the man who wishes to please God; andthe traditions form an extensive literature. But weare not yet at the end. Cases in real life still forceupon the believer question~ that cannot be ans,;e:edby direct declaration of eIther Koran or tradItIon.But it will not do to remain in doubt. Of twopossible courses of action, one must be pleasing toGod and the other not. The development of casuistryis the result. In fact the religious science of Islam islargely casuistry. The learned have the issues of lifein their hands, and the result has been to foster thepride which in old times led the Scribes to. say:"this people which knoweth not the Law IS ac­cursed."

In this respect, Islam has failed to rise to the NewTestament view. As we have seen, its ethical idealfrequently shows Biblical influence. In the point

now under consideration it has adopted the one-sidedlegalism which characterized Pharisaism. The Scribeswho sat in Moses' seat have their counterpart in theScribes who still sit in the seat of Mohammed. Theconscience of the Moslem world is still in the handsof these scholastics, whose ideal is the ideal of thir­teen centuries ago.

And if, in this respect, Mohammedanism must beclassed with Talmudic Judaism, the same must be saidof the character of its momlity.The ,,"orlts pleasingto God aro largely works of the law-that is, they areceremonial and external. If even in Christianity,which professes to free men from the law, men willtake refuge in formalism, how much more must thisbe true in Islam! In fact, the righteousness of thefollowers of Mohammed consists in what the Apostlecalls dead works. Here is where the system mostneeds I'egenemtion, and here is where the spirituallight of Protestant Christianity should come to itshelp.

THE FUTURE LIFE 267

LECTURE IX.

THE FUTURE LIFE

WE have already had occasion to notice the prom­inence which the doctrine of thc J ndgment assumedin the system of Mohammed, and in connection withit thc doctrine of the resurrection. In more than oneplace he intimates that the great st~mbling-bl.ock

which his message put in the way of h18 compatnotswas the doctrine of the resurrection. The unbelieversare represented as saying to their friends: * " Shallwe bring you to a man who tells that after you arescattered, bythe decay of your members, you w~ll be­come new creatures?" Elsewhere the unbelleversare characterized as those who do not believe in thefuture life while the believers are frequently de­scribed as'those who believe in the future life-theworld to come lIS we may well translate the won1.tThe stress of the message is laid upon this: "Letthose who exchange the present life for the life tocome fi<Yht in the cause of God.":j: The idea thatthos~who lose the present life in order to gain theother make a good bargaill is also found in the NewTestament. 'rhe future is in fact the true good, thepresent is only a delusion: "Say to them: The pres-

>/< Koran, 841,

t AI·ac1Wra: that which comes after this life, 2\ 69~ and often.

t 4".266

ent life is a little thing, and the life to come is [thetrue] good to the one who fears God; " "The presentlife is only play and pastime, but the future home isbetter to those who fear God-do you not under­stand? ,,*

Belief in the future life is, then, one of the funda­mentals of Moslem faith. How mueh this article ofthe creed includes to orthodox Mohammedans can beseen from the following synopsis of the chapters de­voted to this subject in a treatise on theology: 1"

" Section 64. To show that the inquisition of Munkaraud Nakir, and the punishment of the tomb, and its felicity,and all that is handed down concerning it, are true. . . .Followers of tradition assert that this inquisition of Mun­kar and Naklr comes to every man equally, whether he heburled, or devoured by heasts or by birds, or evenit his dustbe scattered by the wind.

" Section 65. To show that all the signs of the Hour,concerning wWch the Lawgiver has told UB, are true, andthat it is necessary that all of them come to pass before thecoming of the Hour. These are: the appearance of theMahdi, then of the Antichrist, then of Jesus: next thecoming of the Beast, the rising of the sun in the west, theascension of the Koran, the opening of the barrier of Gogand Magog. Though there remained for the world but thespace of one day, all this would come to pass.

" Section 66. To show the necessity of a tlrm helief thatGod will restore us to life in the form in which he tlrstbrought us into it; and the possible modes In which thebodies shall receive the spirit": to explain the form of theTrumpet, and the reviving of those who are in the tombs.

"Section 67. To show that the assembly after the resur­lit Koran, 471, 632, cf. 1326,

t From Flugel, Scha'nlni una sein Werk iibe1" d'ie Muhammmedan~,,,I., mal/b'ns/'lvr' in the Z. D. M. G., XX. (1866), pp. 22-24.

26S TIlE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE FUTURE LIFE 269

rection is true, and so of the change of the earth to anotherearth and also of the heavens [to other heavens]. As tothe assembly, it is the collection of all created beings thatthey may appear before God and give acconnt before Him.It extends to all creatures, both the distinguished and thevnlgar. All the pions, the prophets, the saints, and thebelievers shall appear in the presence of the Compassionate,and the evil-doers of different classes shall assemble beforethe Almighty and the Avenger.

" Section 68. To show that the Pool and the Bridge andthe Scales are true.

" Section 69. To show that the books kept by the record­ing angels are true and that they shall be laid before Godin the day of resurrection according to the express tradi~

tions. But as to the records men have different iots: oneshall hold his in his right hand, and another shall hold hisin his left, and another shall hold his behind Ws back.Those who hold their books in theil' right hands are thedifferent classes of believers; those whose books are giveninto their left hands, these are the hypocrites, but not idol­ators' those who hold their books behind their backs are,those who received the Scripture but cast it behind them.

" Section 70. To show that our prophet Mohammed (Godbless and save him) will be the first intercessor in the Dayof Resurrection and the first whose intercession will be ac·cepted and the best of them, and no one shall have preee·dence of him.

II l!Jeati01l. 71. To sho,v that Paradise and the Fire aretrue, and that they were created before Adam (peace be onhim) as has been already set forth at large. "

The citation, though only from a synopsis, isenough to show the extent to which Mohammedaneschatology has been developed. The theologianshave been obliged to find room in their system forevery saying on this subject which is attributed toMohammed by tradition, as well as every declara-

tion contained in the Koran. Their harmonisticefforts are evident enough in some sections of thistreatise, as where those who receive the book of rec­ord are divided into three classes. This division isbased on different texts of the Koran, in each ofwhich only two classes of men are specified. Thus,we find in several instances that the good are calledmen oj the right and the bad men oj the left. Thesephrases are apparently borrowed from the Gospelaccount of the Judgment, in which the sheep areplaced on the right hand and the goats on the left.Inflnenced by this phraseology we have in these pas­sages the two elasses designated as those who receivetheir book (or account) in thei1' 1'ight hand or in theirlpft hand as the ease may be.* In another passagethe one receives his book in his right hand and theother receives it behind his back.t It is clear thatthe Prophet meant by this various imagery to de­scribe two elasses and only two. But the literalismof tho theologians compels them to adopt a schemewhich will allow all the texts to be literally true­hence tho three classes in our anthor's presentation.

So extended and well-ordered a system as is herepresented was not in the mind of Mohammed. It isnot unlikely, however, that he was hospitable to in­timations concerning the life beyond the grave whichcame to him from various qnarters. The curious as­sertion attributed to him by tradition to the effectthat the sonls of the martyrs abide in the crops' ofgreen birds which inhabit Paradise, is almost cer­tainlya snrvival from Arabic heathenism, in which

*Koran, 60 19. 's, t84:,.IO,

270 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE PUTURE LIPE 271

the departed soul was supposed to take the form of abird.* On the same evidence (that of tradition) weare warranted in asserting that he took the idea ofthe punishments of the grave from the Jews at Me­dina·t

The hypothesis of a future life seems to be a ne­cessity to a faith which will maintain its hold on thejustice of God. The inequalities of this life are somarked, the lot of man is here so glaringly appor­tioned without reference to his deserts, that we mustlook for another world in which the injustices maybe remedied. 'rhe perplexity of the Old Testamentwriters in their attempt to discover God's justice inthe assignment of prosperity and calamity in thisworld, is sufficiently evident from the Book of Job.That they were able to keep their faith in God inspite of the dal'1rness which (to the most of them)hung over the future, is evidence of the intensity ofthe faith itself. Mohammed never had to go throughtheir struggle. But he felt the force of the moral ar­gument for the future life, if we may judge from thefollowing: t "Or do those who do evil think thatWe will treat them like those who believe and dogood, making their life and their death the same?Evil is the opinion they have formed. God has madethe heavens and the earth in accordance with justice,und in order that every soul may be recompensed forwhat it has done, und they shall not be wronged."The thought is plain j God has a purpose in His

>Ie Kremer, lfe1'1'schende Ideen, p. 166,t Bochari, II., p. 93\ also p. 2! f.tKoran, 4520 f,

I I

dealings with men. This purpose is the manifesta­tion of His justice. The purpose will be accomplishedonly when all receive their recompense. It followsfrom the notorious inequalities of this life that therecompense of the other life is the more certain. Itis perhaps with some such thought in mind thatMohammed said: * "the poor Refugees will reachheaven before the rich by forty years at the reSur­rection."

It is hardly to be supposed that Mohammedworked out the logic of this view. His whole ideacame ready formulated from Christianity. The pointat which it met his religious needs was this-theJudgment solves the difficulties which force them­selves upon us as we contemplate the divine govern­ment of the world. The Judgment, then, is the pointof departure for the whole eschatology of the Koran.It appears prominently in the earliest Buras. In theFatil'a, God is King of the Day of Judgment. Thephrase Day of Judgment occurs elsewhere in the earlyperiod, and is doubtless borrowed from a Christiansource.t It reminds us of New Testament usage also,that the Hour is made the name of the Judgment. 1:

The Koran conception of the J uclgment is the dra­matic one known to us by the Gospel description.§The world shall suddenly he visited by great por-

• Miahcat, II., p. 501.t Koran, 51", 56". Tbe word din bere u,ed for judgm<nt '~em.

not to have had that sense in Arabic, but to have been borrowedfrom Hebrew or Aramaic.

t 6tl , 40, 12101, 22~4, etc. Cf. that day and hour, Matt. 34u.§ Matt. 24~~'3~, 25!!·t8,

272 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE FUTURE LIFE 273

tents; the Judge will sit on His throne; all nationsshall be gathered before Him; the good shall beplaced on His right hand and be welcomed to happi­ness; the evil shall be placed on the left hand and beconsigned to punishment. The picture recurs in allits features in the Komn, except that the Judge isGod, lIlld not the Son of Man. In the Gospel, theportents are the darkening of the sun and moon, thefalling of the stars from heaven, and the sending outof the angels with the trumpet. To this should beadded earthquakes, and the various convulsions ofnature which the Old Testament prophets associatewith the Day of Yahweh. Compare the Koran:

H When the sun shall be darkened,And when the stars shaH be scattered,When the mountains shall be removed,And when the camels shaH be uncared for,When the beasts shall be collected,And when the seas shall be dried up,When the souls shall be united,And the girl buried alive shall be askedFor what crime she was slain j

When the books shall be opened,And the heavens shall be folded together,When the fire shall burn fiercely,And Paradiso shall be brought into view-Then each soul shall know what it has wrought." *

Tho Biblical resemblances of tho passage are ob­vious, and many other passages of similar importmight be cited. Quite in accord with tho New Testa­ment, is the division of those who are judged into

* Koran, 81 H ., The meaning is not always certain.

men of the right hand and men of the left hand. Wecan scarcely doubt that this goes back to tho Gospelpicture. As already noted, these two divisions COIll­

prise all mankind. Those who believe are the menof the right and those who disbelieve are the men oftho left.* In one passago there are said to be threedivisions. But this is for the purpose of throwingthe prophets into relief, they being allowed to go firstto thoir reward. The fundamental distinction is be­tween the good and the bad. Possibly nnder Persianinfluence, room Was found later for an intermediateclass. That tho judgment takes place by the help ofbooks of record we have noticed in an earlier lect·ure, as also that this is based on Jewish or Cluistianideas. The use of the Balance to determine the meritof each one is affirmed in some passages,t and thisvery natural figure has given the theologians trouble,because, in their meralism, they did not see howactions could be weighed.

In order to tho complete vindication of divinejustice, all responsible beings must be judged. Hencethe importaneo of the doctrine of the l'esurrection ofthe dead. The original form of the doctrine seema tohave been different. The Old Testament believerwas much exercised that the final triumph of Isrnelshould take place without the presence of those whohe,d suffered most for the good cause. In th.e Book ofD"niel, the faith that Israel shall triumph over theGontiles is acoompanied by the faith that many" ofthose who have died without the sight shall be raisedto participate in the glory for which they have longed,.

* Koran, 90172°, cf. 1441 ,568 r. t 23104 " 214R ,

18

274 TIlE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE FU1'URE LIFE 275

These are they who amused themselves with vanity.The day on whieh they are roughly thrust into the fire

of Gehenna [they shall be told],This is the fire whose existence you denied." *

The passage seems to assert categorieally both thatthe day of punishment is near, and that there is nointerval between its appearance and the condemna­tion of the unbelievers. Other assertions that theDay is near can easily be found.t Some of them areguarded in their language. Even these remind us ofthe New Testament, whieh is eareful to assure us thatthe exact time is known to God alone. Koran andNew Testament agree also in affirming the suddennesswith whioh the Hour shall announoe itself: "ToGod belong the secrets of heaven and earth. Thematter of the Hour is like a glance of the eye, or evennearer;" I' They shall discern nothing but a single<Jry; it shall come upon them while they are disput­ing, and they shall not be able to make their testa­ments or return to their families. A blast shall beblown and men shall hasten from the tombs to theirLord. They shall say: Woe to us I Who has broughtus from our resting place? This is what the Com­passionate threatened, and tho messengers were truth­ful. There shall come a single ory and all [createdthings] shall appear before Us. On that day no soulshall be wronged at all, nor sh...ll they be recom­pcnscd exoept f01' what they have done.":I: Elsewherealso the single blast of the trumpet is followed at ouceby the resurrection.§ In one passage, however, this

In mediroval JUdaism, the emphasis of the resurrec­tion is laid upon this thought. Saadia, for example,goes into a calculation of the space which would be oc­cupied by Israel when all its dead should be raised.*The earthly kingdom of the Messiah thus preeedesthe final apportionment of rewards and punishments.For the doctrine in this form, Mohammed had notaste, as is evident from his connecting the resurrec­tion and the Judgment closely together. In his earlierpreaching (and perhaps to the close of his life) hethought the Judgment to be near at hand. He re­garded it as a Day of Yahwch which should comesuddenly upon the nations. His denunciation ofcalamity upou Mecca was doubtless based upon a bonafide expectation of the early appearance of God inJudgment. Iu this he reminds us of the expeetation,so common in New Tcstament times, that the Lordwould soon return for judgment. This expectlttionis not confined to New Testament times. The most re­ligious (or the most emotional) minds have frequentlyfelt the course of the world to be so bad, that theremust be an immediate intervention of diYine power.Thus the Fifth Mouarchy expectation becomes acuteat times when reverses overtake the Church. ForMohammed we may notice:U Verily the chastisement of thy Lord is at hand,

None can turn it away.A day when the heavens shall be iI! commotion,And the mountains shall removelWoe, on that <la.y, to those who accuse [the revolation]

of falsehood I

* Emunol we-DtQt, odtr GlaubensleM'e und Ph'lwsophievon Saad4ja Fajjumi, libersetzt von FUrst (Leipzig, 1845), p. 408.

*Koran, 521• 14.

t I6U , 36o,u.t E.g., 75~, 11', 2114, 33~3.

§ 371~, 21"9, 371~.

II 89'''.

• Koran, 4118.21 , cf. 24~4, 3665 and Geiger, t. c" p. 74.tKohut ift Z. D. M. G., XXI. (1867), p. 565 f. The argumeut

that the resurrection of men is no more difficult to God than 'theircreation, is also given by Zoroaster, adopted by the JeWB and foundin the Komn-Kohut, t. c., p. 578 f. ;. Saadia, Emunot (FUrst), p. 38l.The same liue of argument is found in the Church Fathers, Har.nack, Dogmengeschichte, II., p. 65.

are, properly speaking, not necessary. Men shallbe recognized by their marks; they shall be com­pelled to testify against themselves; their memberswill bel1r witness against them: "Their hearing andtheir eyes and their skins shall testify concerningwhat they were accustomed to do; they will say totheir skins: "Why do you testify against us? Theywill reply: God who causes everything to speak,canses us to speak; it is He who created you at first,and to Him you return; you cannot so conceal your­selves that your ears and eyes and skins will notwitness-but you thought that God would not knowwhat you wore doing." * This feature appears alsoin Rabbinical sources. The thought that, as souland body are both concerned in the sins of this life,both must be punished in the other world, goes backto the Persian religion. t

The multitude of details must not cuuse us to losesight of the main point. This is, that the justice ofGod will be fully vindicated by a universal Judgmentfor which the dead will be raised. In this form theidea is undoubtedly Christian. This idea forms a mo­tive for faith and good works. Believers are to berewarded, unbelievers will be punished. This motiveis urged by all the religions which have a distinctconception of a future life. As to histOlical Chris-

276 l'IIE BIBLE AND ISLAM

is made two blasts: "The trumpet shall be ?lownand all that are in heaven and earth shall dIe, e~­cept whom God will, Thcn it shall be blown agamand they shall rise and see, Ancl the earth shallshine with the light of its Lord, and th~ bookshall be placed, and the prophets and the WItnessesshall be brought and men sho,ll be judged-none shall

be wronged,* ., .It is somewhut difficult to combme III a .sl~gle

pictnre all the features of Mohammed's descnptlOn.Besides the sound of the trumpet we have the call ofan angel: "On the day when one shall call to some­thing difficult with looks cast down they shall comeforth from the graves like the locusts in clo~ds." tIn their terror they shall flee their nearest fnends ;the nurse shall forget her charge; the pregn~ntwoman shall miscarry; men shall be drunken withterror.t All voices are put to silence, and the onlysonnd heard is the tramp of the millions m?ving totheir doom.§ Angels and men are range(ll~ ranks.The false gods are judged along w~th theIr wor­shippers. Each tries to exCuse hlmse~f and tothrow the blame upon others. Gehenna IS ~roughtnear-a flaming monster with fiory maw gapmg for

prcy.1I . ht . tEven the animals will be rl>lsecl and broug III 0

jud<,ment ,-though this is affirmed in but one pas­sl1g:. Although the books of record I1re brought, they

tH' f* Koran 3968 r. .:1:803:., 2~~. So in the Day of Yahweh men shall be Hdrunken

but not with wine."§ 20107 •

i"

j,"

THE FUTURE LIFE 277

278 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE FUTURE LIFE 279

tianity there can be no doubt on this point, a~d if wecompare Mohammed's desc~ptions. of. ParadIse andGehenna with those found III ChrIstIan sources weshall not be in doubt as to his dependence uponthem. These descriptions are probably the bestknown portions of the Koran, so that their treatmenthere may be brief.

Paradise is the Garden, or the Garden of Eden, orwith translation of the word Eden, the Garden ofPleasure. This abode of the blessed is watered b!perennial streams' the inhabitants repose at theIrease in shady bow~rs; they eat of the most ~eliciousfl'Uits; cups of a delicious beverage but whICh doesnot intoxicate, are served to them as often as theydesire; they are clothed magnificently and adOl'lledwith jewels.

To these delights are added the damsels of Para­dise, virgins whose beauty passes description. Thedelights are not all sensuous. The thI'one of Godis in the midst of the Garden, and the blessed he­hold the worship of the angels and hear the praiseswhich they sing.* No vain discourse will be uttered,but the universal salutation will be: Peace I Theyshall receive visits of congratulation from the angels.Better than all, is the consciousness of the favor ofGod.t That the saved shall behold the face of Godseems to be nowhere asserted in the Koran, thoughtradition affirms it very strongly. It is perhaps

* Koran, 39n . It is unnecessary to give references for the otherparticulars.

t Such aeems to he the meaning of 973,

implied in the Koran phI-ase: "Those who endurethrough demre of the face of their Lord." *

On the whole this must be admitted to be a sensu­ous paradise. Mohammed showed his own weaknessin introducing the Huris into the picture. For this hehad no precedent in the Bible. But for the rest ofhis description he could plead Jewish and Christianprecedent. A recent author calls attention to the de­scription of Eden in the hymns of Ephraem Syrus.This Father speaks of its fI-agrant fountains, its flow­ers and crowns; the blessed are served by angels whobring them wine from the vine of Paradise.t John ofDamascus describes Paradise in similar terms.t Thatthe same features are found in Rabbinical writings iswell known.§ It is aside from our present purposeto notice the resemblances further than to show thatMohammed adopted substantially the view of hispredecessors. This went so far as to assert sevenheavens, and to affirm that the good arc rewarded indifferent degrees, both which propositions may befound in Jewish and Christian authorities. II

It need scarcely be added that the woes of the

* Koran, IBu, On seeing the face of God cf. Pocolck, Nota Mt,"s.ceUanea, in his Works, I. (1740), p. 236; Mishcat, II., 620.

t Grimme, Mohammed, II., p. 161.:I: Harnack,Dogmengeschichte, II" p. 154.§ Wcher, Altsynagogale Thea/ogit, p. 881.II On the seven heavens 2~7. The idea is Persian, cf. Z. D. M. G.,

XXI., p. 562, and Talmudic, ibid., p. 561. That the blessed havedifferent degrees of reward is less distinctly asserted in the Koranthough abundantly developed in Tradition, as Boc:hari, IlL, p. 185.The same idea. is found in Christianity (Harnack, t. c'

lII., p. 66),

nnd in Jndaism (Weber, p. 332).

280 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE FUTURE LIFE 281

damned are also developed along the lines of Jew­ish and Christian belief. The fundamental idea isthat Gehenna is a place of fire. The name is bor­rowed with the idea.* The description is frequentlygiven. Sometimes Gehenna is almost an animatemonster. Its voracity is such that after it has rc­ceived all its portion of men and demons and isasked whether it is satisfied, it will reply: Is thereanything more? We are reminded of the Biblicalproverb which puts Sheol as one of the things insati­able. The unhappy souls are dragged to that abodeloaded with chains, As they enter they am greetedwith curses and reproaches, which they return uponthe heads of those who have preceded them. The fireburns with an intensity sufficient to consume stones,and it completely envelops its victims, It consumestheir members, which grow again to' be a fresh sourceof torture. They are given to eat of an infernal treecalled Zakkum, "whose fruit is like the heads ofdevils," i' and when eaten "boils within them likemolten meta!." They receive to drink boiling water,or a yet more disgusting liquid. Their prayer for re­lief is in vain. Though continually enduring thepangs of death, death never eomes to their ~elief. Ofspecial punishments we hear only that the mIsers whohave heaped up gold and silver will be branded withred hot coins on forehead and side and back.:\: On the

* Gehannwm, approaching the Hebrew more nearly than the Chris­tian Srriac.

t Koran, 37G3 r, cf. 4443 t.t 935, The Hlldith ndds that those who have refused the poor~tax

of cattle shun be trampled by the. e:l.ttle\ Bocluwi, II., p. 101.

whole, the description of these torments falls shod ofthe ingenuity of Ohristian and Rabbinic writers.*

. What we havo now considered makes up the mainVlOW of the Koran. So long as the expectation of anearly coming of the Judgment could be entertaineu itwas sufficient. But the Judgment delayed. ~yof the believel'S were taken away from earth, andmany of the enemies of the -Prophet were put todeath. The question must arise-where are thesesou~s for the pres~nt time? Do they simply sleepuntil the resill'rectIOn? The natural answer is thatthey sleep with the body, and this answer seems tobe implied in the assertion that those who are raised~ill think that they have l'ested only a brief timeill the tomb. In one instance we have the accountof a man who was sceptical about the rcsill'rectionwhereupon God caused him to die, and aftor a hun~dred years r~vive~ him. On being asked how longhe had remamed ill that state, he replicd: a day OJ'

part oj a day.t So the scoffers, when they are raisedat the last day, shall think that they have been in thegrave only an hour, or only a little time.:\: The onlyrational hypothesis to account for this state of mindis that the souls have passed the time in sleep' and~his w~ suppose to have been Mohammed's or~inalintentIOn. But the impatience of his followers forparadise, and his o'wn impatience for the punishment

* Cf. th,e Acts of Thomas (Walker's Apocryphal Gospel.), p, '419f. j Antentcene FatheJrs, VIII" p. 547; Eisenmenger, Entdecktes Ju.dmthum, II., p. 341.

t Koran, 2~&'.

~ 4G:J5, 1754, cf. also, 20m', 30s~ f.

282 THE BIBLE AND ISLAJf THE FUTURE LIFE 288of his enemies, could not rest in tho simple hypothe­sis of sleeping souls. Jewish and Christian traditioncame to his help. These, although they asserted aJ udgment, found room for a series of soenes to pre­cede the final oonsummation. For the individual soul,moreover, they had provided a~ extended experie~ce

between death and the resurreotlOn. As these theonesbeoame known to Mohammed, he seems to haveadopted them more or less oompletely, but withoutdigesting them into a self-consistent soheme. Asfurther developed by tradition they have all foundplace in the Moslem eschatology, which thus becomesthe oomplicated thing which we have already oontom­plated in the extract from Sha'rani. These additionaldetails deserve some attention. 'rhey are concernedeither with the experienoes of the individual soul orwith the course of the world's history, and we mayoonveniently arrange them under these two heads. .

Death is the separation of soul and body. It IS

natural to suppose that it is effected by the angels.Such was the theory of Judaism, going back to Par­soeism,* and adopted in popular Christianity.t Sowe find in the Koran: "If only thou couldst see whenthe evil-doers are in the pangs of death, while theangels stretch forth their hands [saying]: Give forthyour souls! To-day you shall be recompensed by

* In Parsceism the man's good deeds appear to him in the form ofa beautiful maiden at biB death. Kohut (Z. D. M. G., XXI., p. 564)cites also a passage in which the angels accompany tha soul. ForJudaism, Weber, p. 324, Saadin. (FUrst's Translation), p. 364.

t The Revelation oj Paul in WoJker's translntion (ApocryphalGospels), p. 480 i Antenicene Fathers, VIII., p, 516'j Budge, Bookoj 1M B", p. 131.

"

seVere punishment for what you have falsely spokenoonoerning God," * and more vividly: "If only thouoonldst see when the unbelievers die, how the angelsstrike their faces and baoks [saying]: Taste the pun­ishment of the fire I This is for what your hands havelaid up in store." Aocording to tradition, an inquisi­tion is held in the grave as to whether the deoeasedis a sinoere believer. If he turns out to be such, hisgrave is expanded for him and he is given a viewof Paradise. If the reverse be the oase, the body isbeateu and the grave is oontracted so as to press uponthe body. These are the pains of the grave adoptedfrom Judaism.t The soul remains joined to the bodytherefore, and is affected by its experiences.

Properly speaking, then, there are three theoriesdisooverable on this point. Aooording to one, thesoul sleeps between death and the resurrection, Thisis implied in the pltSsages already oited, in whioh themiqed think they have been but an hour or a day inthe tomb. The seoond is developed by tradition inthe form just noted-that the soul is present with thebody reoeiving a foretaste of its final state. And,thirdly, there are traces of a theory that the soulsenter at onoe upon the enjoyment of heaven or thesuffering of hell. The only traoe of this in the Koranis in an allusion to Pharaoh and his people, who aresaid to be brought to the fire morning and evening,

* Koran, 6i3, an '. The reader who is interested in the theological

development of these passages may consult Gautier, La Perle P'l'eRA<"" d, Ghazilll (1877), pp. 9, 16, 16.

tef. Nt'skeat, I., pp. 38-43; Bochan, II., pp. $4,92 f.; Weber,I. c., p. 325 j Suadia, p. 368.

284 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE FUTURE LIFE 285

"and when the Hom shall dawn it shall be said:Take the people of Pharaoh to the severest punish­ment! " * In the traditions, however, we have fre­quent assertions that the souls of those who die inthe holy war go at once to Paradise. It is not forus to endeavor to reconcile these three propositions.But it is fair to point out that a similar confusion pre­vails in the Christian treatment of the life which comesimmediately after death and before the resurrection.

As remarked above, the Christian theory of thelast things embraces more than the final Judgment.When it became evident that tho great consummationwas not so imminent as Mohammed had supposed,these additional events began to assert themselves,even to Mohammed himself. He was willing at leastto allow room for the signs of the H<fur. Such signshe described in the convulsions of nature which areso frequently mentioned in connection with the Judg­ment. But later ho extended the list. One of themost prominent of the additional signs was the ap­pear,ance of Gog and Magog: "A curse shall rest onthe city we have destroyed. They shall not reviveuntil Gog and Magog shall have free course and theyshall come down in crowds from every height." tThe explanation is given in another Sura which re­lates at length the story of Alexander the Great(Dhu-I-Karnain). Among other things, this King issaid to have made a wall of iron cemented withmolten brass.t The object of the wall was to keep

* Koran, 40t~.

t 21 'is f. I have BubstitllWd the familiar Gog and Jfagog for the

Arabic form Yajl~i and May'lIi.tThe story fills 18 '~."'i, and is dcri"ed from a Christia.u source.

I

out the ferocious Tartar tribes here called Go" andMagog. It is evident at a glance that we hav: herean apocalyptic sign which goes back to Ezekiel andwliich reappears in the New Testament Revelation.*Beyond the assertion that these nations shall comein crowds as a sign of the Day, Mohammed makesno use of them; and in his presentation there seemsto be no room for the extended campaign of Gogwhich is implied in Ezekiel's account.

Another sign of which tradition makes much isthe Beast, mentioned once in the Koran: "Andwhen the decree is pronounced upon them, We willbring from the earth a beast which shall say to themthat mankind has not kept firm hold of our revela­tion." tHere ie evidently a reminiscence of theBeast of the New Testament Revelation. But Mo­hammed only alludes to it iu connection with theHour, as one of its signs. The connection is onlyexternal. The same may be said of the SecondComing of J esns, which is once said to be a sign ofthe approach of the Hour. The coming of Anti­christ is certified by tradition only, as it wonld seem.The expected Mahdi who is also predicted in tradi­tion, is another product of the perennial Messianichope of the Eastern wodd.:): Tradition goes counterto the tenor of the Koran when it makes Jesus the

* Ezek. 38 and 39; Rev. 20:'\01(1. On the influence which the pre·diction has had in Christian literature, d. Bousset, Der Anticlvrist(1895) pp. 29, 33 f. For Judaism, Weber, I. e., p. 369 f.

t Koran, 2184 ; Rev. 18.t An extended discussion of these matters is given by Pocock,

Nota Miscellanea, in his Works (1140) I" p. 213 if.; of. alBo Ruling,Eschatowgi< des I,lam (1895).

286 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE FUTURE LIFE 287

Judge at the Day of Resurrection. The Bridge onwhich those who are judged will attempt to pass toheaven, only the believers succeeding, has also alarge place in tradition, having been borrowed fromPersian sources. These embellishments show howmany incongruous elements may be swallowed, andin a sense assimilated, by tradition.

One point rcmains to be noticed. The eternity ofreward and punishment seems distinctly affirmed inthe Koran. In fact a distinct polemic is fOlIDdagainst the Jews who had the eontrary theory:" They say: The fire shall affect us only a limitednumber of days. Say to the)ll: Have you receivedan engagement from God such that He will notchange, or do you say concerning God what you donot know? Nay I Whoever has deserved evil, andwhose sin has encompassed him-these are inhabi­tants of the Fire, and they remain forever in it. Butthose who believe and do good, they are inhabitantsof the Garden. They remain forever in it." •. Weare able to trace the Jewish doctrine to which allu­sion is here made. The importance of the covenantmade with Abraham was so great, that the Jewishthinkers could not conceive it to be annnlied by anyact on the part of man. One who had received cir­cumcision, and who was thus marked as being incovenant with God, conld not be punished eternally,no matter how bad he had been. It was recognizeelby the Rabbis, therefore, that Gehenna was only apurgatory for the Jews, and that when their purifica­tion was accomplished they would be set free. It was

'" Koran, 271 H, cf. 3~3.

even said that their sojourn wonld be only twelvemonths.* Similar reasoning has led to the theory ofthe Church that no baptized person can be eternallylost. It is against this theory that Mohammed ar­gues, and yet the theory has appeared among hisfollowers. Tradition makes him say that the peopleof Paradise will enter Paradise, and the people ofGehenna will enter the fire; then God will bring outwhoever has in his heart the weight of a grain ofmustard seed of faith. Then they will come out withfaces already burnt to a coal and be plunged in theriver of life, whereby they will revive as the grainsprings up by the side of a river.t In another pas­sage he who is thus delivered is said to be the onewho says there is no God but AllaJ, and in whoseheart is a grain of good. The case seems to be onein whioh the traditions have invented a doctrine con­trary to the express words of the Koran.

One somewhat confused passage should be noticedlest we seem to ignore some part of Mohammed'~doctrine. It is the following: "Between the two is[l, w~ll, and on the ArM are men who recognize all bytheIr marks; and they call to the inhabitants of Para­dis~:. Peace be upon you! They do not enter thoughdesirIDg to. And when their looks are directedtoward tho men of the Fire, they say: Our Lord,place us not with the unbelievers! " t It is evident

*Weber, 1. C., p. 827 if. It is intimated that an Q,ceRsiona! sin­ner might be found who must be remanded eternally. In that casethe distinguishing mark would be effaced.

t BoehM;,!., pp. 10, 15.t Koran, 7i,1 r.

288 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM THE FUTURE LIFE 289

that we have hero no doctrine of purgatory. Themest that we can conclude from the passage is thatsome few will be found whese deserts are so equallybalanced that it is impossible to consign them toeither place, so they are left perched on the dividingwall. But it is not certain that Mohammed laid anystress on this single passage-which indeed may havebeen uttered for dramatic effect.

The results of this inquiry may be briefly formu­lated thus: In regard to the life beyond the graveMohammed was powerfully influenced by the doc­trine of the preceding revealed re}igions, especiallyby the doctrine of Christianity. We have no reasonto doubt that it appealed to him on its moral andspiritual side-on its moral side because it vindicatedthe justice of God; on its religious side because itgave promise of satisfaction in the presence of God.The good pleasure of God was one of the joys towhich he looked forward. " Do not count those whohave been slain in the cause of God as dead-nay!they live with Him, and there they are nourished,rejoicing in what God gives them of His bounty, andreceiving the good tidings that those who have notyet attained, but are following after them, shall notsuffer fear or grief." * In view of such expressionsand the declarations already noted, that the presentlife is of no value as compared with the life to come,we cannot doubt the real religious conviction of Mo­hammed. That, in adopting it, he fitted it to his owntaste is only what we find in other religions. Thematerial and the sensuous appoaled to him and to his

... Koran, 31~~ f.

Arabs as it appealed to Jews and Christians of thatage. His heaven is not very different from theheaven of Ephraem Byrus nor his hell different inkind from that painted by Dante or Miehelangelo.The accretions to his doctrine which came from theMessianic expectations of the Jews or the Chilissticexpectation of the Christians, are due rather to thetraditionists than to Mohammed himself.

19

OHUROH AND STATE 291

LEOTURE X.

CHURCH AND STATE

WHEN David the Bethlehemite inourred the suspi­cion of Saul his sovereign, he was iu an evil case.He could not depend upon the Ismelites to harborhim because they were servants of Saul. The exter­mination of the priestly clan at Nob showed how per­ilous it was to fall under the suspicion of the king.David's own clan could not proteet him except at therisk of a similar fate. If the fugitive should seekasylum with the neighboring tribes - it was theyagainst whom he had carried arms in times past, andthere was no Philistine or Amalekite or Ammonitewho would not be glad to take blood revenge uponthe unprotected Israelite. The man cut off from theprotection of his kin is an outlaw, and his blood isfree to the first comer. The only way he can be sllofeis to gather about him others as desperately situatedas himself, to make of them a b"nd of brothers, and toestablish their right at the point of the sword. Daviddid this and Soon bec"me formidable, w"s gladly re­ceived as a vass"l by the Emir of Gath, obtained atown for himself and his men, and grew in strengthby carrying war against the Bedawin.

Nor was this all. At the death of Saul the king­dom fell to piecos. The powor of Ishbaal was never

200

more th~n a shadow. The clans, under the Philistine?ppreSSlOn, lost the feoling of unity and the hope ofmd~pendence. This was David's opportunity. TheS~eik~s of Hebron fond the alliance of a captainWith SIX huridred men an advantage if accepted-thedanger of rejecting it was equally obvious. It is nowonder that they received him and made him theirking. Once the rule of a vigorous man was estab­lished~ his kingdom could not help growing by theaccretIOn of the fragments into which the kingdom ofSaul had broken. The sequel is well known. Thepower of David extended far beyond the boundariesof Israel, and the impetus was not wholly spent inthe reign of Solomon. But when Solomon's rash andill-advise~ son came to the throno, the centrifugalforce agalll asserted itself. The tributaries revoltedthe northern tribes elected a king of their own andthe house of David was left with only a weak re­minder of its former greatness.

This very familiar story illustrates a law which wefind exemplified again and again in the history of theEast. Its opemtion may be observed in Middle Ara­bia ~ven ~ our own day-for there the tribal societysurvives III much the Same form in which it enstedin Israel in the time of the Judges. The unit of so­ciety is the clan. Each clan has its own territorywhioh it defends against all comers, while itself readyat ~:r minute to invade the pasture of its neighbors.Within the clan all are brothers. Beyond the ollln allare enemies. There is no government in our sense ofthe word. Evel'y man does that whioh is right in hisOwn oyes. The Sheikhs have a moral influence only.

292 TUE BIBLE AND ISLAM OUUROU AND STATE 298The clans enter into association with each other bytreaty, but this constitutes simply a larger clan unitedby the fiction of adoption or artificial brotherhood.Such association does not make a state. But if anenterprising man in one of the clans is able to attacha band of soldiers to his person, government, in oursense of the word, begins. The case of David is acase in point. So is the case of Abimelech of Shec­hem who established l.limself as Emir of Israel bymeans of a band of mercenaries. Having secured theallegiance of his immediate kinsmen, such a chiefrapidly extends his power. His power is in fact largelydependent on the ability to content his subjects withthe spoil of their enemies. The normal COUl'Se ofsuch a kingdom is to keep on expanding as long as itis ruled by a capable and energetic prince. But itfalls to pieces as rapidly as it was built up, if once aweakling comes to the throne.

This law wrought in favor of Mohammed. Butthere was a difference between him and an ordinaryfreebooter. He brought a principle into play whichhad not earlier had a chance to show its power inArabia; that principle was religious faith. Had itnot been for this, his kingdom would have been nomore enduring than the hundreds of little monarchieswhich all along the course of history have alisen inArabia and have disappeared leaving no trace behind.In this also there is a resemblance'between Islam andthe Old Testament history. For the tenacity of theKingdom of David is no doubt due to the fact that itbased itself distinctly on the religion of Yahweh.

These considerations enable us to understand Mo-

hammed's cs-reer when he became a ruler of men. Inthe eighteenth century, great indignation was ex­pressed against hint-a man who left his native landto turn his hand against her. He was said thus tohave thrown off the mask which he had hithertoworn, and to have discovered his treasonable designs.These charges totally mistake the position. 'rheArab has no country in the sense in which We use theword. His attachment is solely to his clan. ButMohammed's clan cast him off. They no longer de­fended him against their allies. He was already anoutlaw. The state of war existed between him and theMeccans by their act, not by his. The Meccans un­derstood this. If we may believe tradition, they triedto intercept him and kill him on his journey to Me­dina. From their own point of view this was theonly l'easanable thing to do. That they were notmore strenuous in the matter is probably to be ac­counted for by their contempt for him. They sup­posed the poor fanatic unable to do them harm.

It is probable, moreover, that the Meccans lookedupon Medina as a harmless or insignificant city. Itwas in fact far from formidable. Medina was not acity in onr sense of the word. It was simply anoasis Ovcr which the inhabitants were scattered invillages. A group of villages occupied ilie place wherethc city proper now stands. But it had no commonwall for some time after the arrival of MohammedBurckhardt * describes thc suburbs of the presentcity as consisting of "large courtyards, with low apart-

* Travels in Arabia (1829), p. 326; WcllhauJ3en, Skizzen undVOl'arlJeltenl IV" p. 18.

294 TUE BIBLE AND ISL.L1lJ: OUURon .L1ND STATE 295

ments built around them on the ground floor, andseparated from each other by gardens and planta­tions. . . . Each Hosh [oourt] oontains thirty orforty families, thus forming so many separate hamlets,whioh in times of unsettled government are frequentlyengaged in desperate feuds with each other." Suoh aloose agglomeration of settlements was the so-oalledoity in the time of Mohammed. Exoept that theywere settled more olosely together, its inhabitantsdiffered in nothing from the dwellers in the desert.There was the same laok of government whioh existsamong the Bedawin. The history of the people be­fore the coming of Mohammed is a chroniole of littlewars between the elans. Two of these olans had lit­erally exterminated each other, one having beendestroyed to the last man, the other having two menleft who soon after died without issue. Not long be­fore the coming of Mohammed all the olans hadjoined on one side or the other in a pitched battle,which endsd in the exhaustion of all parties. Eventhen there was no peace, but war was oarried on byisolated murders and assassinations. The oommunitywas, in fact, in a state of anarohy."

Into this anarohy Mohammed oame as a flxed pointupon whioh peaoe oould take hold. He was the headof a small band of Meooan oonverts who had under­gone the loss of all things for his sake: . These weresoon joined by the fugitives of AbysslllIa, who wereno less devoted to him. His religion had beenpreaohed at Medina for mor~ than a year before ~is

ooming, and there was a oonsiderable number of sm·* For n more extended description cf. WellhnusPD, IV., p. 21 if.

cere oonverts. With this following, it is not strangethat Mohammed was recognized as the leading manin tire community.

Had he not been a man of charaoter, however, it isdoubtful whether he would have become the autooratthat he aotually beoame. One great souroe of powerto a man in his position is the ability to arbitrate be­tween oontending parties. A judge who will not takebribes nor regard persons is hard to find. He is prizedall the more when he is found. Now Mohammedwas honest; he was generally free from bias-so faras an Arab can be free from bias; he claimed divinedireotion. He naturally beoame the judge of the oom­munity, just as naturally as Moses beoame the judgeof Israel.

Now to the Semitio mind, the king is the judge ofthe nation. The Old Testament is full of passagesto prove this. The desoription of the ideal king inthe Seventy-second Psalm emphasizes this fIillotion :.. He shall judge thy people with righteousness, andthy poor with justice." When a man establishes him­self as supreme judge of a people, he is well on theway to kingly power. The other funotion of the kingis oarrying on war. It is to go out before them againsttheir enemies, that Israel demands a king in the daysof Samuel: "We will have a king over us . • .that our king may judge us and go out before us andfight our battles." * This work also fell to Moh.am­med. The state of war was in Arabia the state ofnaturo. The only way in whioh the Moslems couldsustain themselves WI18 by raids upon their enemies.

* 1 Sam. But.

296 THE BIBLE AND ISLAH OHUROH AND STATE 297

In these Mohammed, by his 'Very position, WllS forcedto be the leader. Although he had had no experiencein fighting, and although he waS not a man of physi­cal courage, yet he was on the whole a successful gen­eral. He knew how to maintain discipline, and heknew how to encourage his followers in the face ofdefeat. As judge .and as general he fulfilled theSemitic ideal of kingship. It cannot be wondered atthat the kingship eame to him.

The oourse of history then runs a olose parallel be­tween Ierael and Islam. It is difficult to make outhow much Biblical influence was at work in the proc­ess. At Mecca we cannot discover that Mohammedhad any kingly aspirations. He is careful to disclaimany power over his people j he declares that he seeksno reward from them j he oalls himself only a wamerand a bringer of tidings; he does not (apparently)adduce the preceding prophets as claiming sover­eignty over their people. To all appenrance, he ex­pected the government of Mecca to remain in thehands of the Sheikhs, even if the people should IIC­

cept Islam. A seat in their oounell as adviser wasperhaps the most that he expected. He seems to haveknown of no Biblical precedent for claiming more.At Medina, however, where the .oares of govemmentwere forced upon him, he may have had a differentlight. In this period he tells an Old Testament storythat wonld serve him as precedent. It is lIS follows:

II Dost thou not know concerning the aristocracy of Is..rael after the time of Moses, how they said to one of theirprophets. Raise us up a king and we will fight in the wayof God I He replied. Perchance when you are ordered to

fight, you will refuse. But they said: Why should· we notfight in the way of God, when we have been thrust out of ourhomes and away from our children? Yet, when they wereordered to fight, they turned their backs except a fcw ofthem, and God knows the evil-doers. Their prophet said tothem. God has sent you Talut as king. They replied: Howcan the kingdom be his, when we are more worthy of itthan he, and he has not received abundance of property!The prophet said: God hllll chosen him above you, and hllllincreased him in excellence both of mind and body; Godgives the kingdom to whom He will, and God is benevolentand wise. The prophet added: A sign of his kingship isthat he will bring you the Ark, on which is the Shekinafrom your Lord, a relic left by the people of Moses andAaron; angels will bear it-in this is a sign for you if youar? believers. And when TaJut set out with the troops, hesaId. God will test you by a stream; whoever drinks of itis none of mine, and he who does not taste it, except bytaking up a little in his hand, shall be mine. But all ex­cept a few drank. And wheu he and those who belieVedhad crossed the stream, they said: We have no power againstGoliath and his soldiers to-day I But those who were mind­ful that theymuBt meet God said: How many a small troophas overcome a larger one by the permiBBion of God forGod is on the side of those who are steadfast. And "':henthey went out against Goliath and his soldiers, they said:o Lord, supply us with steadfastness, and make our feetfirm, and help us against the unbelievers I So they putthem to flight by permfJ3sion of God, and David killed Go­liath, and God gave him the kingdom and wisdom, andtaught him what He would. " •

We See that the narrative is a eonfused reminis­cence of the election of Saul, the march of Gideon,and the battle of David with Goliath. The point ofinterest is the manner in which the incident is mads* !{oran 4~,,·,n. Saul is named TaInt to rhyme with Jalut (Goliath).

298 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM OHUROH AND STATE 299

to reflect the situation at Medina. 'fhe king is de­manded in order that the people may fight in the wayof God where we should say fight in the cause ofGod, 'The phrase is the standing phrase used forthe wars of Mohammed against the unbelievers. Theprophet in the text expresses the donb~ whether thepeople wonld be willing to fight, r~hIS doubt was areflection of Mohammed's own experIence, for a partyof Medinans under an inflnential leader was alwaysready to dissuade their fel1ow-citize~s fr?m joiningMohammed's campaigns. The Israehtes, III the nar­rative, complain that they have b~en thrust.out oftheir homes and away from their chIldren-wInch wasexactly the case with Mohammed and the Fugitives.These features of his own situation, being found inthe narrative, make it probable that Mohammedre"ards himself as the antitype of Saul, or of Sauland David both. We have, therefore, one instancein which Biblioal precedent influenoed Mohammed:sview of his own position as civil ruler. There ISauother possibly in the verse which speaks of theprophets as warriors: "It never came to pass that aprophet made captives until he had made greatslau"hter." * But the assertion seems evolved fromthe :ituation rather than from any Biblical preoedent.

It is rather remarkable that Mohammed makes nouse of some Biblical precedents whioh he would mostnaturally have cited had he laid emphasis upon t,hi,smatter of kingship. Moses was prophet and CIVIlruler' Dllvid was prophet and king; so was Solomon.But Mohammeil nowhere oa1ls attention to them in

*Koran BU.

order to justify his own assumption of power. Thereason is, that when he published the narrativeswhich deal with these chat'acters, he did not himselfexpect to booome a worldly ruler. We are led to thesame conclusion by his not making use of the Mes­sianic idea. The Jews at Medina held the Messianiohope. They taunted their Arab neighbors with theexpectation that the Messiah would oome and put thepower into their hands while reducing the Gentilesto servitude. This expeotation influenoed the Arabs,so that when they heard of Mohammed, they arguedthat this was the expeoted Messiah, and that byadopting him as theirs they could antioipate the Jewsand disappoint them of their hopes. But while theMessianic hope had thus an undoubted influencein establishing Mohammed at Medina, we find himmaking no fnrther use of it. The nama or title ofMessiah, he conneots always with Jesus, the son ofMary.

The growth of the state in Islam was much morerapid than in Ismel, but it followed the same course.As we learn from the book of Judges Israel ob­tained a foethold in Canaan by slow degrees. First afew families would settle upon unoccupied territory.Then they would take possession of part of a town.In this they would naturally havo their own quarter,and their relations with the Canaanites would be reg­ulated by a treaty or covenant. So Canaanites andIsraelites dwelt together in Sheohem in the time ofAbimeleoh. As the Israelites grew stronger theywould reduce the Canaanites to the position of clientsII' "Th'or sOJoill'llers. us, In many towus, tho CallA,O'),.

300 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM OHUROS AND STATE 301

ites paid tribute. A process of amalgamation goingon all the time, at last those Canaanites who weremost tenacious of their separate custom would bewee,k enough to be exterminated, e,s were the Gibeon­ites by Saul. Precisely such was the history of Is­le,m. Mohammed and his followers first occupiedground given them by the Medinans. They then en­tered upon a covene,nt rele,tion with e,ll the tribes ofthe oasis. Gradullily the community of true believersabsorbed a considerable part of the older inhabi­tants. The Jews which refused to amalgamate withthe Moslems were driven out or exterminated. Butthe process which in IS1'&el extended over some cen­turies occupied in Islam only ten yeal'S.

It seems a pity that the development was so rapid.Had it stopped at the stage upon which it enteredwhen Mohe,mmed promulgated his covenant with theinhabitants of Medina, it would have been better forthe after world. Copies of that instrument havecome down to us.* It is remarkable for the modestposition which IIfohammed claims for himself inrelation to the community at large. He evidentlydesires to leave the socie,l organization as nearly aspossible just as it is. The autonomy of the clans isnot disturbed except in certain matters in which com­mon action is necessary. There is no endeavor toenforce uniformity of religion. Even the heathenare Mlowed to remain pee,ceably in their old rele,tions.The Jews are continued under the clientage, and of

* It is translated by WellhnuBcn, Skizzen, IV., p. 61 if. The gen~

uinenc88 seems proved by the fact that it embodies none of the theo­cratic ideas of the later time.

?ourse ~nder the protection, of the Ara\Js. The onlymnovatlOns concern common enmity to the Koreish(of Mecca), common action in deJe7U1ive war and thebringing of disputes before God e,nd Moha~med forarbitration. Had all parties been willing to live to­gether under this constitution, we should have seena stato arise with some measure of religious tolera­tion.

But unfortnnately toleration was not nnd81'Stood atthat time. Mohammed valned his docnment only asthe best that conld be done nndor the circumstances.The Jews, on their side, had no higher ide"l. Theywere as far from desiring to live in intimacy with menof another religion as was Mohammed. They he,d norealizing sense of the danger of their position. Theycould not keep from giving provocation to theirneighbor; and so, when he grew stronger, he crushedthem as Saul crushed the Gibeonites, and as Davidcrushed the J ebusites. With their defeat and expul­sion, the principle of one religion in the state vil'tu­ally triumphed.

The principle of Islam is fixed by the experienceof Mohammed. What history actually brought fol'thhas become binding precedent and is justified bythe theologians. The Moslem has now no thoughtof the state except that it is a theocracy. Its basisis the true religion j its ruler is the spiritual as well astho secular head of the commonwealth. There is nodifference between church and state. The church isthe state. Instead of a state church, there is a churchstate. We can make the theory clear to our mindsby looking at the Pape,cy. The actual rise of the

302 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM OHUROH AND STATE 303

Pope to temporal powel' was not unlike the rise ofMohammed. The Bishop of Rome was the spiritualhead of a spiritual society, So long as the civil powerwas vigorous, he was nothing more, But when thecivil power was broken, then what there was of socialorder rallied around the only authority that existed.Had he so willed, the Pope himself could not haveprevented this process. But we may suppose, with­out any injurious reflections upon the Pontiff, that hewas not unwilling to see his power increase. To himit was increased power to do good, and-so far-atriumph of the kingdom of God. Even the ApostlePaul assumes that if the saints are competent tojudge the world, they are competent to decide thepetty issues of a civil lawsuit, It was not by vio­lent usurpation therefore that the Pope becamecivil administrator of Italy. Had the process goneon until the ambition of the ablest Popes was grati­fied, we should have seen Europe united under aruler who combined in himself the offices of Emperorand of High Priest. This would have divided theworld between a Christian Caliph and a Moslem Popo.The Ultramontano doctrine of the temporal power ofthe Pope is in fact exactly the Moslem doctrine ofthe Caliphate.

The name theocracy, we are told, was first inventedby Josephus. But it expresses a theOl'Y which hasbeen almost universally accepted except among themost barbarous of men. That God is in fact theruler of men, follows logically from His attributes.It is equally obvious that the man actually appointedby God to mle, rules by divine right. He is God's

representative on the earth. The ancient Persiansare said to have seen in their kings incarnations ofthe Godhead. Divine honors were paid to RomanEmperors. In Israel it was no strange thing to haveGod say to the reigning monarch: "Thou art mySon, to-day have I begotten thee." The King ofIsrael, even Saul, was the Anointed of Yahweh. Inthe theory of some of tho Hebrew writers, at least,the prophetic office brought with it kingly power.Samuel, in the picture drawn of him in one Old Tes­tament document, is the theocratic ruler of the na­tion-so absolute that he makes and unmakes kings,always, of course, by the divine direction. The con­clusion is indeed easily drawn, tIlat if God sends Hiscommands by a messenger, obedience to the messen­ger is obedience to God. We rather wonder that tIleconclusion was not more stringently drawn in Israel,and we can easily see that if Elijah, the Tishbite, hadcalled about him those seven thousand who had notbowed the knee to Baal, he might easily have seateda prophetic dynasty on the throne of Ahab. It wasjust because tho kingly authority already had a divinesanction that the prophets of Israel did not draw theconclusion which Mohammed, in the absence of aking, was able to draw and to enforce. The Maeca­bean dynasty is another example of the way in whichthe religious and the secular power natnrally combinein the samo hands.

It is the happiness of Christianity that it escapedmaking any declaration concerning divine right. ItsfOl'mative period fell in a time when the civil govern­ment was taken care of by the Romans. It therefore

304 THE BIBLE AND ISLAH OHUROH AND STATE 305

necessarily separated Church and State and learnedto distinguish between them. The civil ruler is stillordained of God to be a terror to evil-doers. But heis dissociated from the care for religion which theJews, and after them the Moslems, thought to be apart of the monarch's functions. MedilBval Christi­anity (we should not forget) took substantially thesame position with Jews and Moslems. It failed toapprehend the teaching of the New Testament. Thetestimony of the New Testament to the divine sanc­tion of the stat~ as a separate entity is only now be­ginning to be understood in enlightened Europe andAmerica. It is a part of the present misery of theEastern world tbat all classes of society are unable toconceive even the possibility of such testimony.

The system which sees in the state a theocracynecessarily regulates religion by law. How Islamcame near toleration and how it failed, we have alreadyseen. Islam does not, however, even now, treat Ju­daism and Christianity as it treate heathenism. Thelatter must be destroyed because it is false, and be­cause it is disobedience to God. The first conse­quence is the importance of the sacred war, that is :the war for the spread of Islam. The reason for theemphasis placed upon this, is seen in what has alreadybeen said about the fortunes of Medina. It was amatter of life and death there, to make a successfulcampaign. The Koran of the latter part of Moham­med's life is full of exhortations to take part in thewar. Those who may fall in the cause of God arepromised the highest place in Paradise. Those whoare backward in entering this service are blamed and

denounced for their hypocrisy. It is assumed, finally,that war must go on until all heathenism has been putdown. "Say to the unbelievers, that if they make anend [of doing evil] they shall be forgiven. But ifthey repeat it-the sentence of ancient peoples wascarried out I Then fight them until there is no moredivision of opinion, and the religion is wholly Al­lah's." * Tradition correctly interprets this and simi­lar passages when it says that Mohammed was com·manded to make war on men until they should say:there is no God but Allah; or more fully: "I amcommanded to make war on men until they shall con­fess that there is no God but Allah aud that Moham.med is His Apostle, shall be steadfast in prayer, andgive the legal alms: and when one shall performthese things, his blood and his property shall be se·cure from me except in conformity with the laws." tThe right and duty of propagating Islam by the swordhas therefore become fully established as a part of thesystem. But we should remember that in Mohammed'sview, this was against idolaters only. He was contentwith the submission of Jews and Christiaus, withoutconversion. As we have seen, he at first supposed thatthe three faiths were one in substance, and that theiradherents could be welded into one commnnion.But he was undeceived by the conduct of the Jewsof Medina. These adhered to their own peculiar cus­toms with the tenacity whioh their race has alwaysshown in the matter of their faith. The more Mo·hammed saw of their exclusiveness, the more clear itbecame to him that no real union with them was pos.

* Koran au r. t Mishcat , I., p. 5, cf. Bochari, IV., p. 5.20

306 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM OHUROH AND STATE 307

sible. Undel' the plea of treachery on their part heexpelled them from Medina. But elsewhere in Am.bill. he was willing that they should remain, on condi.tion of payment of tribute. At Chaibar, for example,he spared their lives and left them in possession oftheir lands, but on the condition of paying one-haHthe fruits to the Moslems. This precedent becamelaw for the treatment of Jews and Ch11stians, andis formally sanctioned by this verse of the Koran:" Make war on those who do not believe in God andthe Last Day, and who do not prohibit what God andHis Apostle have prohibited, and on those of thepeoples who have received a Scripture but do notprofess the true religion, until they pay a tax foreach one and humble themselves." * The termsused leave no doubt that Jews and Christians aremeant.

For the extermination of idolaters, Mohammedmight have pleaded the precedcnt of the Book ofJoshua. The Book of Joshua makes no formal pro­vision for conversion of the Canaanites. But it isevident, from the example of Rabab, that it was opento the Canaanites to join the Hebrew community ifthey would. Nor do I find that other parts of theOld Testament take a less rigid position. Idolatryis sin and its devotees must be punished, such is thegeneral tenor of these writings. Their view, indeed,does not generally extend beyond the boundaries oftheir own land. When the Hebrews were able tobring other natiolls under tribute, they did so withouttoo curious inquiry into their religion, though in some

*Koran 9~1I.

instances, at least, the gods of the conquered nationswere destroyed.

This need not be developed'fat length, because theprecedents seem to have been unknown to Mo­hammed. But the general principle on which his rulewas based was common to him and other religiousleaders. No religion oan admit that other religionsare as good as itself. The high claims of Ohris­tianity to be the one true religion are writ large inthe New Testament. To a certain stage of humanthought it seems natural, indeed it seems inevitable,that so important a thing as religion should be fos­tered by the state. If it be the truth, why not makeit triumph by the civil power? What Christianitywould have done had it been compelled to organize acivil government in the Apostolic age we cannot tell.The Apostles were but men. They had the ideals oftheir age. It is not unlikely that they would have in­stituted a state much like that of the Oaliphs. Wehave reason to be thankful that they were not allowedto try the experiment. We know what happenedwhen Ohristianity actually came to control the throneof the Empire. Justinian l'equired all his subjects toacknowledge the orthodox creed,* and the persecu­tion of heretics is the standing subject of Byzantineaunals. Had Mohammed cared to inquire into Chris­tiau practice, as illustrated in the Byzantium of histime, he would have found abundant precedent forhis course. And at a later day, the Crusaders' andthe persecutors of the Jews showed the Moslem prin­ciple in full force in Christian lands.

* I<attenbuBch, OonJessionskunde, I., p. 817.

308 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM aHUROH AND STATE 309

The identity of Church and State in Islam involvesalso this proposition: The Korau is the civil as wellas the religious law of all Moslems. As we have seen,there is no distinction of obligation. A man is asmuch bound to perform the ablution as he is to payhis taxes. In theory the judge is as competent topUDish him for neglect of the one as he is to punishhim for neglect of the other. In practice it is ofcourse not easy to call men to account for religiousdereliction. But in the more strict Mohammedanstates, officers are not infrequently appointed whoseduty it is to see that all the citizens come to thestated prayers. Now the introduction of a code forArabia was an almost unmixed blessing. There hadbeen no law in the desert. With the triumph of Islam,the tribes came into the peace of Allah. Society wasbrought into order, and there was a recognized stand­ard of judgment. But the establishment of any codeas a perpet1tallaw is a misfortune. Yet Mohammedwas only following Biblical precedent. For it is evi­dent that the Pentateuoh oooupies, for the Jew, justthe plaoe taken by the Koran among the Moslems.Were the eonservative Jews to be put into·possessionof Palestine to-morrow, we cannot doubt that theywould attempt to restore the Tora to its place as thesupreme oivil and ecclesiastieal law of that land.Every violation of its provisions ooneerning ritual­sacrifiee, lawful food, purifications-would beeome anoffence against the civil law, and wonld be within thecognizanee of the eourts. The Sl1me theory has pre­vailed more or less among Christians. The West­miuster Assembly of Divines defined it as the duty

of the civil magistrate: "to take order that unity andpeace be preserved in the Churoh, that the truth ofGod be kept pure and entire, that all blasphemiesand heresies be suppressed, all corruptions andabuses in wOl'Ship or diseipline [be] prevented or re­formed, and all the ordinanoes of God duly settled,administered, and observed-for the better effeotingwhereof he hath power to call synods, to be presentat them, and to provide that whatever is transaetedin them be aoeording to the mind of God."* Intheory, Protestantism and Mohammedanism stood onthe same ground as late as the seventeenth centuryof our era. Our present condemnation of the posi­tion of Islam, shows how far we have advanced inthe last two centuries in apprehending the true natureof the New Testament Churoh.

It may be briefly mentioned here that the reoogni­tion of a single supreme oode has not prevented divis­ions among Mohammedans any more than it pre­vented them among Jews and Christians. The pointat whioh the most bitter confliot arose, was this veryone of the divine right of the ruler. Concerning Mo­hammed himself, of eourse, there neverwas any doubt.But he made no provision for a suooessor. It seemsstrange to us that he failed to regnlate so importanta matter. But he was as shortsighted as the rest ofus, and did not expect death to oome so soon. Pos­sibly he expected to see the Judgment oome boforehis death; or he may have relied on God to give hima long life. The fact remains. The neglect was themore remarkable in that the Prophet loft no male

* Schaff, a~eetls of Ohristendom, 111., p. 603.

310 TRlC BIBLlC AND ISLAM ORunOR AND STATE 311

children. In the emergency which actually arose,Abu Bekr, one of the earliest and most trusted of theCompanions, was made Successor by a vote of ac­clamation, led by the firm and clear-minded Omar.It is evident that here is a precedent for popular elec­tion. On the other hand, Ali, the son-in-law (andadopted son) of Mohammed, seems to have held fromthe first that the principle of inheritance should ob­tain. When he himself came to the Caliphate, threedistinct parties arose. One held that the throneshould go, according to old Arab custom, to the rec­ognized Sheikh of the Koreish (the clan of theProphet). Another held strictly to the prinoiple ofle<ritimacy, believing that the blood of Mohammed inhi~ descendants (the ohildren of Ali and Fatima) gavetho only claim. A third was democratic, demandingan election by the whole body of true believers. Itincreases our sense of the importance of ideas to seehow bitterly the adherents of these three views con­tended with each other for decades, making a recordof bloodshed and suffering which has not been sur­passed in the annals of the race.* In this conflictthere are traces of Christian ideas among the hetero­dox sects. They adopted the Messianio hope, and theyre<Yarded Ali and his legitimate followers as incarna­ti<~ns of the Godhead. The party whioh finallytriumphed in the Caliphatet adopted substantiallyOld Testament ground. According to them the ruler

.. On this subject of. Briinnow, Die Oharidsclvtten (1884) i DeSacy, Histowe des Druse.s, T., p. xxvii. j Kremer, Geschickte aetHt.rrschtnilen Idem des /$lam, p. 409.

t The Shiites, or partisans of Ali, retuined possession of Persia.

should be the defender of the faith, and should sup­press heresy; he should judge the people, protect thepublic peaoe, punish evil-doers, make war on the infi­dels, oolleot and disburse the taxes, and appoint trust­worthy and oompetent offioers. These qualifioationsare muoh the same whioh would have been named byan Old Testament prophet. Should the ruler fail inthese, the people have a right to depose him-whiohagain reminds us of the Old Testament principle, asillustrated by the freedom with which the elders ofIsrael assert themselves in the presence of Jeroboam,or the boldness with which Elisha oommissions Jehuto depose and suooeod the reigning monarch of theNorthern Kingdom. But these parallels are theresult of similar conditions rather than of direct in­fluenoe.

The question of government is closely conneotedwith the question of property. Especially where relig­ion is the basis of government, we expect some reg­ulation of property. In any monotheistio religionGod is, of oourse, the ultimate owner of everything,and all human holders get their title from Rim.Where the religion emphasizes the brotherhood ofbelievers, we have additional reason to look for someenaotment ooncerning property. In the case of Islamwe find, on the whole, a conservative position taken.It has indeed been supposed of late that Mohammedcame forward as a social reformer, and that his firstpreaohing urged a state tax to be paid by the rioh forthe support of the poor. This he tried to enforce (onthis theory) by his threat of the JUdgment Day.But if what has already been said in these loctures be

312 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM OHUROH ANI> STATE 313

true, this theory just inverts the order of ideas. Theidea of the Judgment is an idea great enough to en­force itself. Mohammed's mind was impressed withthis idea first. With it he had a realizing sense ofthe sin of men. It was only because sins of propertyhave a large place among the sins of men, that hewas impressed by them. Because of their prominencehe gives them proportionate attention. He had, ofcourse, great sympathy with the poor, and great in­dignation at oppression. One of his earliest surasrebukes the wicked in this way: "You do not treatthe orphan generously, nor do you incite othersto feed the poor, and you devour inheritance withgreedy appetite, and you love wealth with an intenselove." * Liberality is a virtue, avarice is a sin j theseare his axioms, and in adopting them he was no moresocialistic than was the Apostle Paul. He takes thedifferences between men to he part of the divine or­dering: "It is He who made you succeed [formergonemtions] in the earth, and has raised some of youabove others in rank that He may try you by whatHe has given you.Ut The matter of wealth or riches,however, is comparatively unimportant; the presentworld and its possessions are only fleeting. The realwealth is yonder. In all this he took the religious,and not the socialistic, view.

What roused his indignation was injustice and op­pression, and the most of his laws concerning prop·erty were directed against these. We find, therefore,stringent injunctions designed to protect the orphan.From the samo point of view we undershllld the pro.

* Koran 8918 ft. t 6155•

hibition of usury. That a man who loaned anothermoney should get back twice as much, seemed to himthe use of a false weight and measure. He does notdenounce those who have wealth, but those who getit wrongfully. He does not advocate lavish benefi·cence. He describes the good man as the one whoin his expenditure is neither niggardly nor lavish. Inall this we discover nO social revolution.

That he who has should be ready to help him whohlls not, is, of course, one of the elementary truths ofhis religion. But it does not seem thllt the tax whichWllS assessed upon the well-to-do, was based upon thisduty. It was rather a recognition of God's right. Itis called a purijWation, and the name would indicatethe view taken in the Old Testament-that the prop­el·ty cannot be lawfully used until it is consecratedby giving a portion to God. This portion, like thetithe of Deuteronomy, belonged to God, and, like that,it was given by God to the poor, the stranger, thefatherless and the widow," * This afterward becameamong the Moslems a regular state tax which cameinto the public treasury, just as in the later legis­lation in Israel the tithe became a regular provisionfor the support of the priesthood. But Mohammedhad nO idea of a state treasury, and his tax was in­tended for the support of the poor. In some casesit was sent to him to distribute j in others he allowedeach tribe to assess it upon its own wealthy menand distribll-te it to its OWn poor. In the whole ar­rangement he stands very much upon the ground ofearly Israel.

* Dent. 14~'.

OONOLUSION 315

CONOLUSION

IN reviewing what has been said in these lectureswe form a tolerably clear conception of the forceswhich have made Islam. In the first place, we mustsuppose that Mohammed was a religious nature­capable of appreciating religious truth and of apply­ing it to himself. For religious truth is only ade­quately apprehended when it is made practical. Thisdoes not mean that Mohammed was mornlly perfect.He was not free from the defects of his age andof his race. He was not incapable of self-decep­tion - possibly not incapable of deceiving others.But he had the religious impulse, and when hocame in contact with the truths of Christianity, theyburned in his soul. This was the spark which setArabia on fire.

I have said that it was when he came in contactwith the truths of Christianity that his soul was fired.It is commonly supposed that his impulse was J ew­ish rather than Christian; and his system does, infact, more nearly resemble Judaism than it resemblesProtestant Christianity. But we shall be guilty ofan anachronism if we make this comparison. TheChristianity with which Mohammed came in contactwas the Christianity of Arabia or Mesopotamia in theseventh century. Its type was, no doubt, that of

314

primitive Ebionism rather tban that even of Byzan­tine orthodoxy. The fact that Mohammed took solarge a part of his material from the Old Testamentdoes not disprove this. The Old Testament was apart of the Church's Bible from the first-for a timeit was the Church's only Bible. The narrativeswhich we find in the Koran are from that part of thoOld Testament which is familiar to every child evenamong us. They would be equally familiar to theearly Christians for the same reason. Adam andNoah and Abraham and Moses are Christian saintsquite as distinctly as they are Jewish patriarchs.

And if we find no reason why Mohammed shouldnot take these from a Christian source, we do findthings which he could not have got from a Jewishsource. His description of the Judgment shows feat­ures borrowed from the Gospell\CCount. He recog­nized J esns as a prophet and one of the chiefest ofthem-this could not have come from the Jews to,whom Jesus was the arch traitor, the detested onewho hung upon the l\CCursed cross. Putting thesetwo considerations together with some minor indica­tions (all the more weighty because they are indirect)we need have no hesitation in concluding that theimpulse came from Christianity.

But, as we have had occasion to remark, theProphet of Arabia was not able to assimilate themost spiritual part of the Christianity of the NewTestament. It was not fairly presented to hiin, forone thing. What is transferred in religion is not thepure source, but a tradition colored by individual ex­perience. Think of a Roman Catholic missionary-

316 THE BIBLE AND ISLAM OONOLUSION 317

as sincere, as devout, and as intelligent as you canimagine-think of him as preaching to the Moslemsof Baghdad. Does he preach the simple truths ofthe New Testament, or does he preach those truthsin the form in which they exist in his consciousness?You cannot doubt that he will preach a tradition-atradition in which is much of truth, but a traditionnevertheless. Now think of the Baptist, or Method­ist, or Episoopal missionary, is not the same thingtrue to some degree of each of these? But if thisbe so in this age of the world, we cannot tind itstrange that Mohammed received from the humbleChristians with whom he came in contact somethingless and something more than the pure Gospel. Onthe whole it is rather remarkable that he received somuoh of the truth. The unity of God; the oertaintyo~ judgment; the fact of revelation; God's will tosave men; the appropriation of salvation by faith;good works the fruits of faith-these dootrines makeup no small part of our religion. And these headopted and proolaimed. That he presented themin his own form is only what we should expeot.

If it is true that not all Christian truths were pre­sented to Mohammed it is also true that he was in­capable of assimilating some dootrines even had theybeen presented to him. The chief of these is the doe­trine of the Trinity. In the metaphysical affirmationsof the creed of Niorea ooneerning substanoe and per­son, he would not have been able to tind himself. Asfor the Sonsbip of Christ, we have already seen thatthis was coupled in his mind with the eonceptions ofheathenism; while the idea of a love of God which

could lead to an incarnation would probably haveseemed to him fanoiful and extravagant. The sameis true of the dootrine of the atonement. Saoriticehad to him lost its propitiatory sense-perhaps be­cause it was already a meaningless rite in Arabicheathenism.

Concerning these doctrines, which have so large III

part in the Christianity that we know, we are in doubtwhether they were ever fairly presented to Mo­hammed, and we are also in doubt whether he couldhave used them in his system if they had been so pre.sented. In either case the result is the same. Hissystem is a Judaistio Christianity adapted to Arabicconditions.

But even in this imperfeot form we cannot helpadmiring in Islam the power of the truth. It cannotfor a moment be denied that the progress of Islam,which is one of the wonders of history, was due tomany causes. It was not the truth alone which tri­umphed, but the truth in alliance with all worldlyand selfish motives. Islam is not the only religionin which the world, the flesh, and the devil have foughton the side of the truth, but for their own ends. Still,when all allowance has been made, we see that thetruth in Islam has been a power. As compared withheathenism, Islam is a society in which God andrighteousness are living and aotive forces. Everyonewho has been admitted to intimacy with Mohamme­dans will testify that men are not rare among themwho live in the fear of God, who strive to do Hiswill, and whose kindness and benevolence are theoutworking of sincere faith in Him. The hold of Is·

318 THE BIBLE AND ISLAH OONOLUSION 319

lam on its adherents is because it has so much of thetruth.

This is the excellence of Islam. It waS a great ad­vance on the heathenism which it displaced. Wecannot doubt that even now it carries into the heartof Africa a civilization and a morality that are an im­mense advance on the fetishism in which the degradednegroes welter.

But with its excellence in bringing men one step inadvance, we must contrast the tenacity with which itrestrains them from taking another. It is like ironin the conservatism with which it holds its systemagainst every attempt at change. Its formalism, itsscholasticism, its unchangeable law embodied in acompleted code-these shut up its conscientious ad.herents to medioovalism as their ideal. There can beno real liberty and no real progress where a scholasticsystem has thus intrenched itself. The position ofChristians in the Turkish Empire throws a lurid lightupon this truth. Again and again has Europeanpressure, aided by a few educated Turks, endeavoredto secure equality before the laws for all subjects ofthe Sublime Porte. But as often as the attsmpt ismade it proves a failure-each new failure moreghastly than the last. The roason is that the con­science and the faith of the most sincere and uprightMoslems are bound up with the Koran and its sys­tem. You cannot introduce a reform against theconscience aud against the faith of those who mustbe depended upon to make the reform operative.Before Islam can be reformed, new truth must bebrought to henr upon its henrt and conscience. Civ-

ilization cannot effect this. Rifles and ironclads, theCafe, the Theatre, the written Constitution, Repre­sentative Institutions-none of these can reach belowthe surfaoe. A. larger truth, a deeper religious expe­rience, a higher life than the one supplied by theirown faith-this must be brought home to the henrtsof these believers before they oan enter into thelarger liberty which we enjoy.