Imâm-ý Fahreddin Râzî (rahmatullahi ’alaih), the great Islâmic
savant, the author of Tafsîr-i kabîr and also of various other valuable books,
wrote while interpreting the sixty-first âyat of Sűrat-u Âl-i ’Imrân:
When I was in Hârazm[1], I heard that a priest came to the city
and that he was striving to spread Christianity. I called on him. We began to
talk. He asked what was the evidence to demonstrate the fact that Muhammad
(alayhissalâm) was the Prophet. I answered him:
Fahredin Râzî – As it is communicated that
Műsâ, Îsâ and other prophets (’alaihimussalâm) demonstrated wonders and
miracles, so we read and hear about the miracles of Hadrat Muhammad (alahissalâm).
This news is unanimous. You are free to accept or refuse these unanimous
reports. If you refuse and say that manifesting miracles does not signify
prophethood, you will have to disbelieve the other prophets, too. If you admit
that the reports transmitted in a common way are correct, and that the person
who performs miracles is a prophet, you will have to admit that Muhammad
(’alaihi’s-salâm) was a prophet, too. For, Muhammad (’alaihi’s-salâm) performed
miracles and those miracles were communicated to us commonly and unanimously so
they must be dependable. Since you believe the other prophets because of the
fact that they performed miracles, which also were communicated commonly and
unanimously, you have to believe that Muhammad (’alaihi’s-salâm) was a prophet,
also.
Priest – I believe that Îsâ
(’alaihi’s-salâm) was a god, not a prophet.
[God means idol. All the things that are
worshipped are called ‘god.’ The name of Allâhu ta’âlâ is ‘Allah,’ not ‘god.’
There is no ‘god’ except Allâhu ta’âlâ. It is wrong and very disgusting to use
the word god instead of Allah.].
Fahreddin Râzî - Now we are talking about
‘Prophethood.’ We should understand first ‘what prophethood is’ before talking
about ‘Divinity.’ Moreover, your claiming that Jesus
------------------------------------
[1] A large area between Lake Aral and the
Caspian Sea. Also, there is a city named Harezm there. Of the cities there,
Hiveh is the most famous.
(’alaihiss’salâm) was God is completely
false. God has to always exist. Then, substances, objects, things that occupy a place cannot be gods. Îsâ ‘alaihis-salâm’ was a substance. He came into being
after he had been nonexistent and, according to you, he was killed. Formerly,
he was a child; then he grew up. He ate and drank. He talked as we do now. He
went to bed, slept, woke up and walked. He needed many things in order to stay
alive, as any man would. Can a needy person ever be free from want? Can
something which has come into being after having been nonexistent exist
eternally? Can a changing object exist eternally?
You say that Jews caught and hanged Îsâ
‘alaihis-salâm’ though he ran away and hid himself. You say that Îsâ
‘alaihis-salâm’ was very sorrowful then. You say that he looked for ways to
save himself from this plight. If he had been a god or a part of a god,
wouldn’t he have protected himself against the Jews? Wouldn’t he have
annihilated them? Why did he become sorrowful? Why did he look for a place to
hide himself? By Allah! It amazes me to hear these words. How can these words
be said and believed by a man who has a brain. Wisdom is a witness to prove
that these words are false.
You say it in three different ways:
1- You claim that Jesus was a physical god
who could be seen with the eyes. Saying that the God of creatures is Jesus
(’alaihi’s-salâm), who was a human and a physical body, would mean that, when
he was killed by the Jews, the God of creatures was killed. In this case, there
would be no God for creatures in the end. Nonetheless, it is impossible for
creatures not to have a God. Moreover, is it possible for someone to be
unjustly caught and killed by the Jews and at the same time to be the God of
creatures?
It has been commonly known that Jesus
(’alaihi’s-salâm) used to worship Allâhu ta’âlâ profusely and was fond of ta’ât
(obedience). If Jesus (’alaihi’s-salâm) had been God, he would not have
worshipped, nor been fond of ta’ât. It is never possible for God to worship
himself. [On the contrary, he is worshipped by others. So, it is understood
that the words of the priest are nonsensical.]
2- You claim that God penetrated into him,
and he is the son of God. This belief is wrong because God cannot be a
substance or araz (attribute). It is impossible for God to penetrate into a
substance. If God were a substance, He could penetrate another substance. If
something penetrates into a substance it must be a
substance, too, and after penetration, two
substances will be mixed together. This requires God to be divided into pieces.
If God were an araz (attribute), He would need a locality, a residence. And
again, this would mean that God needed something else. Someone who needs
something else cannot be God. [What was the reason for God penetrating into Jesus
(’alaihi’s-salâm)? Penetration without a reason is ‘tarjîhun bilâ murajjeh.’ We
have already proven that this is nonsense, and we have explained this fact in
our book Could Not
Answer, where we have also proven that Allâhu ta’âlâ is
one.]
3- You say he is not God, but some part of
God penetrated and settled into him. In this case, if the part that entered him
is effective enough to make Him God, when the part left God, He would be
incomplete in being God. If the part is not effective enough to become a God,
this part cannot be deemed to be a part of God.
What is your proof to claim that Jesus
(’alaihi’s-salâm) was God?
The priest – He is a god because he used to
enliven the dead, cure the congenital blind, and heal the itchy white specks on
the skin, which are called leprosy. These kinds of things can be done by God
only.
Fahreddîn Râzî – If there is no proof, no sign
to demonstrate the existence of something, can that thing be said to be
non-existing? If you say that it can be said, and that it does not exist, you
will have denied the existence of a Creator when you say that there was nothing
eternally before. In this case your words will be nonsensical. It is because
all creatures are proofs and signs which demonstrate the existence of Allâhu
ta’âlâ.
If you say that the thing inferred through
a proof may exist even if there is no proof, in this case, you will have
accepted the existence of a Creator when there was nothing in the past
eternity. If you say that when Jesus was nonexistent in the past eternity God
penetrated into him, in this case, your claim will be something accepted
without a proof. It is because Jesus was created later on. His existing in the
past eternity means there is no proof. While you acccept, without proof, that
God entered Jesus (’alaihi’s-salâm), how do you know that He has not entered
me, you, animals or even plants and stones? Why do not you accept, without
proof, that these also may be penetrated?
Priest – The reason why He entered
Jesus (’alaihi’s-salâm),
and did not enter you, me, or others, is
clear. It is because he performed mu’jizas. No unusual things were performed by
you, me, or others. Hence, it is understood that God penetrated into Jesus, but
not any others.
Fahreddîn Râzî – You show his mu’jizas as a
proof to claim that God entered him. How can you claim that unless we perform a
mu’jiza God cannot enter? It is impossible for you to claim that God does not
penetrate into you, me and others since we and they have not done unusual
things. It is because we have already agreed with you that there is no need to
prove the existence of the thing inferred. Hence, having been penetrated does
not require one to perform mu’jizas, that is, unusual, extraordinary things.
Then, you have to believe that God has entered me, you, the cat, the dog, and
the rat. Then is it possible for a religion to be true that causes us to
believe that God has entered these low creatures?
Making a snake from a stick must be more
difficult than enlivening the dead, for the stick and the snake are not close
to each other in any respect. While you do not call Hadrat Moses a god, or the
son of God, though you believe that he made his rod turn into a snake, why do
you call Hadrat Jesus God or such and such?
The priest, being unable to find an answer
to these words of mine, had to stop talking.
[Islâmic savants have written many books to refute Christianity. Some of the famous ones are: Tuhfat-ul-arîb, Arabic and Turkish; Diyâ-ul-qulűb, Turkish; Idhhâr-ul-haq, Arabic and Turkish; as-Sirât-ul-mustaqîm, Arabic; Idhâh-ul-merâm, Turkish; Cevâb Veremedi, Turkish; Could Not Answer, English; Mîdhân-ul-mewâdhîn, Persian; Irshâd-ul-hiyâra, Arabic; Radd-ul-jamîl, Arabic and French. A few earlier pages from the book Idhâh-ul-merâm have been appended to the end of the book Could Not Answer.] Confessions of a British Spy was published in the Arabic, English and Turkish languages in Istanbul in 1991.