Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1II, 141, ‘Those to whom we have given the Book know him as they know their own sons, although a sect of them do surely hide the truth, the while they know ;’ and again, VI, 20, ‘Those to whom we have brought the Book know him as they know their sons,—those who lose their souls do not believe.’ The allusion is said to be to the promise of the Paraclete in John xvi. 7, the suggestion being that the word mapdxAnros in the Greek has been substituted for mepixAurés, which would be exactly translated by the name A‘hmed, or Mohammed. Mohammed, however, certainly had not access to the Greek Testament, and it is doubtful whether an Arabic version even existed at the time, Syriac only being the ecclesiastical language of the Christians of the day: it is more probable that Mohammed may have received the suggestion from some of his Christian friends. The monotheistic idea, which is the key-word to El Isl4m, was not new to the Arabs, but it was distasteful, and particularly so to the Qurdis, whose supremacy over the other tribes, and whose worldly prosperity arose from the fact that they were the hereditary guardians of the national collection of idols kept in the sanctuary at Mecca. Mohammed’s message, therefore, sounded like a revolutionary watchword, a radical party-cry, which the conservative Meccans could not afford to despise, and which they combated very energetically. The prophet, therefore, in the first place, met with but little success. ‘Hadigah accepted her husband’s mission without hesitation, so did - her cousin Waraqah; and Zaid, ‘the enquirer,’ a man who had spent his life in seeking for the truth, and in fighting against this same idolatry that was so repugnant to Mohammed’s ideas, at once gave in his adherence to the new doctrine. For three years, however, only fourteen converts were added to the Muslim church. The mission of Mohammed, then, appealed forcibly to the Arabs on many grounds. Compared with the prevalent [6] 1 THE QuR’AN.
2For three years, however, only fourteen converts were added to the Muslim church. The mission of Mohammed, then, appealed forcibly to the Arabs on many grounds. Compared with the prevalent [6] 1 THE QuR’AN. idolatry of the time, the idea as presented was so grand, so simple, and so true, that reason could scarcely hesitate between the two systems, unless, as in the case of the Qurais, self-interest were thrown into the scale. Side by side with the religion of the Jews and Christians, as practised in Arabia at least, it appeared more spiritual and more divine, and presented the truths of both religions without the blemishes, It harmonized with the traditional Semitic belief, Arab as well as Jewish, of the coming of a Messiah, or at least of a prophet, who should reveal the truth at last, and set right the order of things which had spiritually and temporally gone so wrong. And lastly, it made no call .on their credulity; it only asked them to believe what they might well accept as self-evident, and it only laid claim to one miracle, that of the marvellous eloquence of its delivery, and this neither friends nor foes could deny. It must not be forgotten that this claim of the Qur’4n to miraculous eloquence, however absurd it may sound to Western ears, was and is to the Arab incontrovertible. In order to understand the immense influence which the Qur’4n has always exercised upon the Arab mind, it is necessary to remember that it consists not merely of the enthusiastic utterances of an individual, but of the popular sayings, choice pieces of eloquence, and favourite legends current among the desert tribes for ages before his time. Arabic authors speak frequently of the celebrity attained by the ancient Arabic orators, such as Shaib4n Wéil, but unfortunately no specimen of their works have come down to us. The Qur'an, however, enables us to judge of the nature of the speeches which took so strong a hold upon their countrymen. The essence of Mohammedanism is its assertion of the unity of God, as opposed to polytheism and even to trinitarianism. And this central truth was, we repeat, nothing new ; it was, as Mohammed said of it, the ancient faith of Abraham, and it was upon that faith that the greatness of the Jewish nation was founded ; nay, it was the truth which Christ himself made more fully known and understood. INTRODUCTION. li
3And this central truth was, we repeat, nothing new ; it was, as Mohammed said of it, the ancient faith of Abraham, and it was upon that faith that the greatness of the Jewish nation was founded ; nay, it was the truth which Christ himself made more fully known and understood. INTRODUCTION. li One great difference between Judaism and Isl4m is that the former is not a proselytising religion, while the latter emphatically is so. All the laws and ordinances of the Pentateuch, all the revelations of the Old Testament, are for the Jew alone, and the Gentile was excluded with jealous care from the enjoyment of any of the divine privileges until Christianity proclaimed that revelation was for the world at large. The Arab, on the contrary, was enjoined to propagate his religion. ‘There is no god but God,’ and man must be ‘resigned to His will,’ and if he will not, he must be made to; this is what Islim or ‘resignation’ really means. But, it may be asked, why, if Mohammed preached nothing more than the central truth of Judaism and Christianity, did he not rather accept one or other of these creeds, than found a new one? To answer this question, we must regard Judaism and Christianity not as they are understood now, but as they existed in Arabia in Mohammed’s time. Judaism was effete, Christianity corrupt. The Hebrew nation had fallen, and Magian superstitions and Rabbinic inventions had obscured the primeval simplicity of the Hebrew faith and marred the grandeur of its law. The Christians were forgetful alike of the old revelation and of the new, and neglecting the teachings of their Master, were split up into numerous sects—‘ Homoousians and Homoiousians, Monothelites and Monophysites, Jacobites and Eutychians, and the like—who had little in common but the name of Christians, and the cordial hatred with which they regarded each other. Mohammed certainly wished his religion to be looked upon as a further fulfilment of Christianity, just as Christianity is the fulfilment of Judaism. He regards our Lord with particular veneration, and even goes so far as to call Him the ‘ Spirit’ and ‘Word’ of God; ‘the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, is but the apostle of God and His Word, which He cast into Mary and a spirit from Him’ (Sarah IV, 169). The reservation, ‘is but the apostle,’ &c., is directed against the misconception of the Christian’doctrine which d2 li THE QUR'AN. was then prevalent in Arabia, and which was the only one with which Mohammed was acquainted. With the Arab Christian, the Trinity meant nothing more nor less than tritheism, and these three the Father, Virgin-Mother, and Son.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1II, 141, ‘Those to whom we have given the Book know him as they know their own sons, although a sect of them do surely hide the truth, the while they know ;’ and again, VI, 20, ‘Those to whom we have brought the Book know him as they know their sons,—those who lose their souls do not believe.’ The allusion is said to be to the promise of the Paraclete in John xvi. 7, the suggestion being that the word mapdxAnros in the Greek has been substituted for mepixAurés, which would be exactly translated by the name A‘hmed, or Mohammed. Mohammed, however, certainly had not access to the Greek Testament, and it is doubtful whether an Arabic version even existed at the time, Syriac only being the ecclesiastical language of the Christians of the day: it is more probable that Mohammed may have received the suggestion from some of his Christian friends. The monotheistic idea, which is the key-word to El Isl4m, was not new to the Arabs, but it was distasteful, and particularly so to the Qurdis, whose supremacy over the other tribes, and whose worldly prosperity arose from the fact that they were the hereditary guardians of the national collection of idols kept in the sanctuary at Mecca. Mohammed’s message, therefore, sounded like a revolutionary watchword, a radical party-cry, which the conservative Meccans could not afford to despise, and which they combated very energetically. The prophet, therefore, in the first place, met with but little success. ‘Hadigah accepted her husband’s mission without hesitation, so did - her cousin Waraqah; and Zaid, ‘the enquirer,’ a man who had spent his life in seeking for the truth, and in fighting against this same idolatry that was so repugnant to Mohammed’s ideas, at once gave in his adherence to the new doctrine. For three years, however, only fourteen converts were added to the Muslim church. The mission of Mohammed, then, appealed forcibly to the Arabs on many grounds. Compared with the prevalent [6] 1 THE QuR’AN.
2For three years, however, only fourteen converts were added to the Muslim church. The mission of Mohammed, then, appealed forcibly to the Arabs on many grounds. Compared with the prevalent [6] 1 THE QuR’AN. idolatry of the time, the idea as presented was so grand, so simple, and so true, that reason could scarcely hesitate between the two systems, unless, as in the case of the Qurais, self-interest were thrown into the scale. Side by side with the religion of the Jews and Christians, as practised in Arabia at least, it appeared more spiritual and more divine, and presented the truths of both religions without the blemishes, It harmonized with the traditional Semitic belief, Arab as well as Jewish, of the coming of a Messiah, or at least of a prophet, who should reveal the truth at last, and set right the order of things which had spiritually and temporally gone so wrong. And lastly, it made no call .on their credulity; it only asked them to believe what they might well accept as self-evident, and it only laid claim to one miracle, that of the marvellous eloquence of its delivery, and this neither friends nor foes could deny. It must not be forgotten that this claim of the Qur’4n to miraculous eloquence, however absurd it may sound to Western ears, was and is to the Arab incontrovertible. In order to understand the immense influence which the Qur’4n has always exercised upon the Arab mind, it is necessary to remember that it consists not merely of the enthusiastic utterances of an individual, but of the popular sayings, choice pieces of eloquence, and favourite legends current among the desert tribes for ages before his time. Arabic authors speak frequently of the celebrity attained by the ancient Arabic orators, such as Shaib4n Wéil, but unfortunately no specimen of their works have come down to us. The Qur'an, however, enables us to judge of the nature of the speeches which took so strong a hold upon their countrymen. The essence of Mohammedanism is its assertion of the unity of God, as opposed to polytheism and even to trinitarianism. And this central truth was, we repeat, nothing new ; it was, as Mohammed said of it, the ancient faith of Abraham, and it was upon that faith that the greatness of the Jewish nation was founded ; nay, it was the truth which Christ himself made more fully known and understood. INTRODUCTION. li
3And this central truth was, we repeat, nothing new ; it was, as Mohammed said of it, the ancient faith of Abraham, and it was upon that faith that the greatness of the Jewish nation was founded ; nay, it was the truth which Christ himself made more fully known and understood. INTRODUCTION. li One great difference between Judaism and Isl4m is that the former is not a proselytising religion, while the latter emphatically is so. All the laws and ordinances of the Pentateuch, all the revelations of the Old Testament, are for the Jew alone, and the Gentile was excluded with jealous care from the enjoyment of any of the divine privileges until Christianity proclaimed that revelation was for the world at large. The Arab, on the contrary, was enjoined to propagate his religion. ‘There is no god but God,’ and man must be ‘resigned to His will,’ and if he will not, he must be made to; this is what Islim or ‘resignation’ really means. But, it may be asked, why, if Mohammed preached nothing more than the central truth of Judaism and Christianity, did he not rather accept one or other of these creeds, than found a new one? To answer this question, we must regard Judaism and Christianity not as they are understood now, but as they existed in Arabia in Mohammed’s time. Judaism was effete, Christianity corrupt. The Hebrew nation had fallen, and Magian superstitions and Rabbinic inventions had obscured the primeval simplicity of the Hebrew faith and marred the grandeur of its law. The Christians were forgetful alike of the old revelation and of the new, and neglecting the teachings of their Master, were split up into numerous sects—‘ Homoousians and Homoiousians, Monothelites and Monophysites, Jacobites and Eutychians, and the like—who had little in common but the name of Christians, and the cordial hatred with which they regarded each other. Mohammed certainly wished his religion to be looked upon as a further fulfilment of Christianity, just as Christianity is the fulfilment of Judaism. He regards our Lord with particular veneration, and even goes so far as to call Him the ‘ Spirit’ and ‘Word’ of God; ‘the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, is but the apostle of God and His Word, which He cast into Mary and a spirit from Him’ (Sarah IV, 169). The reservation, ‘is but the apostle,’ &c., is directed against the misconception of the Christian’doctrine which d2 li THE QUR'AN. was then prevalent in Arabia, and which was the only one with which Mohammed was acquainted. With the Arab Christian, the Trinity meant nothing more nor less than tritheism, and these three the Father, Virgin-Mother, and Son.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.