“We see him [Muhammad ’alaihi ’s-salâm] again in Hubeshâ [Yemen] and in the country of the Abdulgaises [Eastern Arabia, Bahrain, Oman] as a merchant. It may even be thought that he went to Ethiopia, perhaps by sea. All these journeys provided him with the acquirement of the commercial and administrative traditions and laws of Byzantium, Persia, Yemen and Ethiopia. In his age of maturity, this experienced man of forty attempted to reform his nation.”
On the contrary, Muslim historians say unanimously that Rasűlullah (’alaihi ’s-salâm) was suckled by his mother for three days, then by Abű Lahab’s jâriya named Suwaiba for 40 or 120 days and then by Halîma Khâtűn until he was five years old. At his age six, his blessed mother, Âmina Khâtűn, took him to Medîna to see his maternal uncles. After having stayed there for a month, she passed away on the way back, near the place named Abwâ, when she was twenty. He came to Mecca with Umm Ayman, a jâriya, whom he had inherited from his blessed father, ’Abdullah, and stayed with his blessed grandfather, ’Abd al-Muttalib. When he was eight, his grandfather passed away and he stayed with his eldest paternal uncle, Abű Tâlib.
He was amongst those who went to Damascus once with Abű Tâlib when he was nine or twelve years old, once with Abű Bakr (radiy Allâhu ’anh) at his twenty, and once with Khadîja’s (radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ) caravan at his twenty-five. In all these three expeditions, when they came to a place named Busrâ,[1] the priests of the local church, Bahîra and then Nastűra, saw in him the signs of the Last Prophet (’alaihi ’s-salâm), whom they read about in the Injîl, and they said, “Don’t go to Damascus! Jews in Damascus will recognize and kill this boy.” So, they traded there
---------------------------------
[1] Busrâ is located
and returned. When he was fourteen or seventeen years old, his uncle Zubair, who was going to Yemen, took him along so that his trade be blessed. After twenty years of age, he began to live on tending sheep. There is not any dependable information about his going to Bahrein; nor has anyone, besides those who disbelieve his prophethood, thought of his having travelled to Ethiopia. Those who say, “He was heard speak Ethiopian language. This makes one think that he may have gone to Ethiopia,” are wrong. For, he answered the foreigners who came to him in their own dialects of Arabic, which was more difficult than speaking foreign languages. This speaking of his was one of the innumerable mu’jizas which Allâhu ta’âlâ bestowed upon him. None of the three or four
expeditions mentioned above did he join out of personal concerns; he was taken in order to get blessed with his honourable existence. In the last expedition to Damascus, Maisara, leader of the caravan, wanted to send him to Khadîja (radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ) to give her the good news. But Abű Jahl, who was in the caravan, said, “Muhammad is young yet. He is inexperienced. He has never travelled to any place. He may lose his way. Send someone else.” This indicates that Hamidullah’s mentality is wrong and eccentric. To say that he went to Byzantium, Persia, Ethiopia and Yemen and attempted to reform his nation by exploiting what he had learned in these places, and to behave insolently towards Rasűlullâh (sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam) by saying “this experienced man” are not what a Muslim would do.
It is written on page 391 of Qisâs Anbiyâ’ that Rasűlullah (sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam) was ummî, that is, he had not learned anything from anybody. He did not use to write or read. He had grown up amongst illiterate people. In Mecca, there was not a scholar who knew the history of old peoples. He had not gone to other places to learn anything from anybody. He had not started a job for earnings. So as he was, he communicated the knowledge in the Tawrâ, in the Injîl, and in all other books that had descended from heaven and the facts about past people. In those days, historical knowledge had been interpolated and defiled. There were very few people to distinguish the correct from the incorrect. He responded to men of every religion and silenced them all. These accomplishments show that he was and is the Prophet (’alaihi ’s-salâm) sent down by Allâhu ta’âlâ. Though he defied
the literary men and the poets of his time, none was able to express even a line like the Qur’ân he revealed. Indeed, the Meccans were interested in reading poems and making speeches and strove hard and competed with one another in this way. They took pride in speaking coherently. The Qur’ân beat all the poets. They could not compete against the Qur’ân. In desperation, they threw their swords into the scale, which would mean ‘to fight’ and, if necessary, ‘to die’. Unais, Abű Dharr’s brother (radiy-Allâhu ’anhumâ) was a famous poet who had outdone twelve poets. As soon as he heard the Qur’ân, he understood that it was Allâhu ta’âlâ’s word and embraced Islam. The 48th âyat of the sűrat al-Ankabűt says,
“You had not read any book before the Our’ân descended; you had not written. If you had been literate, they would have said that you had learned it from others.” Seeing these witnesses of Allâhu ta’âlâ and of Islamic scholars anybody with îmân and reason will not have difficulty in deciding definitely about Hamidullah’s writing above. On the fortieth page, he says:
“For an unknown reason he bit his foster-sister’s shoulder so severely that its scar remainded all through her life. In a holy war, his foster-sister Shaimâ, too, was amongst the slaves captivated. When she told him the event and showed him the scar, Rasűlullâh recognized her.”
The enemies of Islam fabricated many slanders about Rasűlullah (’alaihi ’s-salâm). They said he was black. In order to alienate youngsters from him, they called black dogs “arab”. Hamidullah goes even further and attempts to misrepresent that exalted Prophet (’alaihi ’s-salâm) as a cannibal to youngsters. On the contrary, Halîma Khâtűn always kept him with her and would not let him go far away. One day, he somehow slipped out of her attention for a moment. He went among the lambs with his foster-sister Shaimâ. Halîma, when she noticed his absence, looked for him and found him. She asked Shaimâ, “Why did you go out? It is so hot.” Shaimâ said, “Mummy! A cloud keeps over my brother’s head. It always shades him.” Let alone complaining about him, she praised him.
Everybody who stayed with him, young or old, praised and liked him. No one said to have been hurt by him. He never hurt his foster-sister. He respected her rights and even her milk and he did not suck the teat which she sucked. Halîmah said, “When he sucked, my own son respected him and did not suck.” This indicates that his foster-brother and sister were never hurt by
him and they liked and respected him. “As he sucked his milk, (his beautiful face commanded such strong admiration that) I could not endure looking at his beautiful face. He began to talk by uttering the words of the Kalimat at-tawhîd first. When he held something, he said ‘Bismi’llâh’. He did not join in children’s playing. He said, “We were not created for playing.’ He never cried or hurt anybody.” In the eighth year of the Hegira, after the Hunain Ghazâ, a woman named Shaimâ amongst the captives said, “O Rasűl-Allah! I am your foster-sister,” and told some of what had happened in those days. He listened to Shaimâ’s words. He recognized her and gave her many gifts. When he was only a child, so many mu’jizas and wonderfully beautiful manners were seen in him that they have been written in very many books. Instead of doing an honourable service such as writing about those superiorities, which make the readers love him, and finding and adding those that have remained unknown, does it befit a professor of Islam to write in his book a thing which may happen among children, under the title of “The Life of the Prophet of Islam”? And can the man who selects and narrates
an ugly slander which was invented afterwards be regarded a real Muslim? Does such an attitude indicate a service to knowledge, or an effort in fault-finding? Every Muslim should tremble not to allow anything to be said against his Prophet (’alaihi ’s-salâm), whom he believes and whom he loves more than himself.
On the forty-eighth page, he says:
“In order to protect himself from the burning heat of noon, he would shelter under the shade of ’Abdullah ibn Jud’a’s arch [or wall].”
All Siyar books write that a cloud kept over Rasűlullah’s (a’alaihi ’s-salâm) head and moved with him and shaded him, thus protecting him against the sun until nubuwwa (the time when he was informed with prophethood). To say that he used to shelter a shade, means to disbelieve this mu’jiza. He may have sat there not in order to sit in the shade, but in order to guide those who sat in the shade. On the forty-eighth page, he says:
“Ibn Kalbî narrates that Muhammad himself has sacrificed a dark sheep before an idol.”
These writings display clearly that the writer observes Islam from bird’s eye view, from far away, and that he knows nothing
about Imân and Islam. It is written in every book that he would not let idols’ names be mentioned and that he expressed his hostility against them when very young yet. Hamidullah himself wrote on page 67 that Rasűlullah (’alaihi ’s-salâm) hated idols. Every Muslim should believe that no prophet has ever committed anything that is forbidden in any religion, in any stage of his life. It is written in the books Tuhfat al-ithnâ ’ashariyya and Asmâ al-mu’allifîn that Ibn Kalbi, whom Hamidullah puts forth as a reference in order to mislead Muslims, is an insolent lâ-madhhabî person. Yes, Rasűlullah (’alaihi ’s-salâm) sacrificed a dark sheep, but he sacrificed it on the ’îd al-adha in Medina. On the fifty-eighth page, he says:
“He admitted a delegation from the Abdulqais clan. He told them that he had visited their country before Islam.”
Many books like the Sahîh of al-Bukhârî and al-Mawâhib al-ladunniyya provide detailed information about the messengers who came from the Abdulqais clan in Bahrein. None of them reports that Rasűlullah (’alaihi ’s-salâm) had been to the country of the Abdulqais clan. To claim on the one hand that he had gone to distant places and to commercial centers and learned many facts, and on the other hand to narrate Islam’s basic beliefs in a manner as if they were pieces of historical knowledge! It makes one think that insidious and base plans are being put into practice.
On the fifty-fourth page, he says:
“His eyebrows extended to his nose and were curved. His legs were thin.”
With such impudent words, he tries to liken Rasűlullah (’alaihi ’s-salâm) to an ogre. On the other hand, it is written in Qisâs-i Anbiyâ’, “Allâhu ta’âlâ collected all kinds of beauty in His beloved Prophet (’alaihi ’s-salâm). His blessed arms and legs were big and thick. He had crescent eyebrows, a well-shaped nose and long eyelashes.” It is written in al-Mawâhib al-ladunniyya, “His blessed eyebrows were thin. His blessed hands and feet were big.” Each of his companions told about the symmetry in his blessed limbs, and his beauty and lovableness have been a general topic of conversation. It is written in books that so many people loved his beauty at first sight and converted to Islam without searching for anything else. Those who loved him as soon as seeing his beauty tried to describe it as well as they could and said that human sense
would not be able to portray his beauty. Some of the eulogies delivered by those lovers are provided in the first part of Se’âdet-i ebediyye. Those who read them will immediately realize that Allâhu ta’âlâ created His beloved Prophet (’alaihi ’s-salâm) in an inconceivable proportion and a beauty which one would not become tired of looking at; they will begin to love him without seeing him. Those who love Habîb-Allah (sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam) feel the taste of his love in the coolness of air which goes into their lungs with each inhaling. Whenever they look at the moon, they get the pleasure of looking for the reflections of the rays that have come from his blessed eyes. Each mote of those who have attained one drop of the ocean of his beauty says:
“Who knows thy lovely cheek will never look at the rose!
Who melts in thy love will not search for repose!”
Hadrat Mawlânâ Khâlid al-Baghdâdî, one of those who loved him without seeing him, in his Persian divân (collection of poems), wrote about his beauty, his greatness, which the human mind cannot comprehend and which the human imagination cannot reach, very laconically and beautifully through the words coming out of his sensitive soul and his great literary skill. Those who read and can understand them admire them. In its translation into English, it is impossible to express that fine art, those deep meanings. Yet, let us render our book valuable by writing the translation of a few of the couplets which he said when visiting Qabr as-Sa’âda:
“O the most beautiful of the beautiful, you burn me with your love!
I care nothing; always with your dream is my mind!
You are the Shah of “Ka’ba Qawsain”, and me a disobedient slave,
How can this confused speak of being a guest of you?
When you glanced once with pity, you enlivened dead hearts,
Refuging your endless mercy, I knocked at your door.
The source of goodness, the ocean of pity you are!
Favour me a drop, I am at a loss of remedy!
Everybody comes to Mecca, Ka’ba, Safâ and Marwa.
As for me, for you I passed over mounts and hills.
Last night I dreamt of my head touching the skies,
I felt as if your servants had stepped on my neck.
O Hadrat Jâmi, the nightingale of my darling!
From amongst your poems, I selected this couplet:
‘Like mangy dogs, with tongues hanging down,
Hoping a tiny drop, to your ocean of favour I came’.”
In another poem of his, he expresses as follows:
“O the shelter of sinners, to take refuge in thee I come!
I committed many guilts, here to beg thee I come!
I deviated into dark places, I got stuck in bogs,
To the source of light, the illuminator of right path I come.
I have only a life left to lose, O the life of all lives!
Will it be proper to say ‘to sacrifice my life I come’?
You are the healer of the sufferer, and me is a sick at heart,
For the remedy of my heart’s sore, to knock at your door I come?
It is improper to take something to the door of the generous,
To kiss the honoured earth which you have trodden on I come.
My sins are a lot like mountains, my face black like tar,
Entirely to get rid of this burden, this darkness, I come.
A drop of your ocean of favour will certainly clean all,
Although with my deed-book as black as my face I come.
If I can only kiss the soil of your door, O darling dearer than my life!
Works impossible with water arises from that soil!”
On the eighty-second page, Hamidullah writes that it was historians who wrote about the dividing of the moon into two. He does not write that it was written in the Qur’ân and the Hadîth.
Furthermore, he does not say if he believes it or not. He says:
“First his wife, and then his uncle passed away. The majority of Muslims were in Ethiopia. He did not have anybody besides Allah to depend on.”
Rasűlullah (’alaihi ’s-salâm) and his companions and every Muslim trusted only in Allâhu ta’âlâ in everything they did. Yet, they held on to the causes because He commanded so. They did not depend upon the causes. They believed that the causes were intermediaries rather than makers. On the ninety-second and third pages, he says:
“The Mi’râj is a state of mood. It was done when he forgot about his body and when his soul was dominant. The sűra Isrâ says that one night Hadrat Prophet was taken from the holy center on earth to the holy center in the sky (Masjid Aqsâ). The distant masjid cannot be thought to be in Jerusalem. For there was not a masjid in Jerusalem then. The sűra Rűm declares that Palestine is the nearest place. A masjid which is far away cannot be a place which is near. Allâhu ta’âlâ consoles him by reminding him of the history of the ancient prophets.”
Allâhu ta’âlâ declares, “I took My ’Abd from the Masjid al-Harâm to Masjid al-Aqsâ at night.” Man is called “ ’Abd” (human creature). It is not his soul or state of mood which is called “ ’Abd”. It is written in the long Hadîth in the Sahîh of al-Bukhârî, in the Qur’ân commantaries of the Ahl as-Sunna scholars and in all the books dealing with the Mi’râj that Rasűlullah (alaihi ’s-salâm) said, “I went to Masjid al-Aqsâ in Jerusalem and saw it.” In those days, Masjid al-Aqsâ existed in Jerusalem. Long ago, Sulaimân (’alaihi ’s-salâm) had had it built. Later it had come into the possession of Persians and Greeks. After ’Îsâ’s (’alaihi ’s-salâm) Ascension to Heaven,[1] it came into the Romans’ possession. It collapsed and was repaired several times. Lastly, ’Umar (radiy-Allâhu ’anh) had it repaired. Palestine is a neighbor to Arabia. Since it was nearer than other countries, it was called “the Nearest Place”. Amongst the masjids on earth Masjid al-Aqsâ was the one farthest to Mecca then. Therefore, it
---------------------------------
[1] It goes without saying that Allâhu ta’âlâ lifted Îsâ ‘alaihis-salâm’ to heaven, alive as he was. This truth belies the Christian superstition which instructs that he was ‘crucified and interred, and then somehow ascended to heaven’.
was called “the Farthest Masjid”. Why should not the farthest masjid be at the nearest place? For sixteen months after the Hegira, Muslims had performed salât towards Masjid al-Aqsâ. If a masjid had not existed in Jerusalem then, would it have been commanded to perform salât towards there? Would Rasűlullâh (’alaihi ’s-salâm) have said that he had performed salât in Masjid al-Aqsâ? Since Hamidullah’s intellect, thought and scientific understanding cannot comprehend that Rasűlullah (’alaihi ’s-salâm) was taken to Jerusalem and thence to heaven with his blessed body, he cannot believe it. He means that the Mi’râj was a state of spirit. Therefore, he misinterprets the Qur’ân. He strives to prove his thought to be right by evasive words. If the Mi’râj had been
a state, none of those who had heard of it would oppose it. Nor would the disbelievers say anything against it. Because he said, “I went in body,” many people denied it. It is declared unanimously by Islamic scholars that he who does not believe that Rasűlullah (’alaihi ’s-salâm) was taken to Jerusalem from Mecca will be kâfir. And he who does not believe that he was lifted to heaven, will be a man of bid’a, a heretic.
The books written by Indian scholars contain apposite answers to this writing of the Indian Hamidullah who has dived so deep into disbelief. Hadrat ’Abdulhaq ad-Dahlawî, a great scholar of the Hadîth, says in his Persian Madârij an-nubuwwa: “One of the most honourable blessings of Allâhu ta’âlâ on Muhammad (’alaihi ’s-salâm) is His lifting him up to heaven in the Mi’râj. He has not given this miracle to any other prophet. It is declared clearly in the Qur’ân that he was taken from Mecca to Masjid al-Aqsâ; he who does not believe this becomes a disbeliever. Mashhűr hadîths inform with the fact that he was taken
up to heaven from Masjid al-Aqsâ; a person who denies this becomes a man of bid’a, a sinner. The majority of the Sahâbat al-kirâm, of the Tâbi’űn, of the scholars of the Hadîth, of the scholars of fiqh and of the scholars of kalâm communicate that the Mi’râj happened as he was awake and physically. Also sahîh hadîths communicate that this happened so. Mi’râj took place many times. One of them was when he was awake and in body. Others happened spiritually only. ’Âisha (radiy-Allâhu ’anh) told about one which happened spiritually in his dream. This narration of hers does not necessarily show that the Mi’râj which happened when he was awake and physically was untrue. Nevertheless,
Islamic scholars communicate unanimously that prophets’ dreams were wahî. There is no way for doubt in these. While their eyes were closed, their blessed hearts were awake. Those which happened spiritually before were intended to prepare him for the Mi’râj that would happen physically. Because the disbelievers would not believe in the Mi’râj and asked for information about Masjid al-Aqsâ in order to test him, it was declared clearly in the sűrat al-Isrâ that he was taken to Masjid al-Aqsâ. In this sűra, the âyat, ‘I took him to show Mine Âyat,’ shows the fact that he was taken up to heaven. The sixtieth âyat of the same sűra purports: “We have made the dream which We showed you a fitna for people.’ The dream mentioned here denotes the Mi’râj. Some scholars said, ‘It was the dream in which he saw that he would go to Mecca and perform tawâf (hajj) together with as-Sahâba. Because they did not go into Mecca but turned and went back from Hudaibiya in the year when he communicated this dream to as-Sahâba, the munâfiqs aroused fitna.’ However, he did not have that dream that year;
why should it have caused fitna, then? Many of the scholars of tafsîr have informed that the word ‘ruyâ’ (dream) is used in the sense ‘seeing while awake at night’ here, and they have put forward examples for this from the Dîvân of the poet Mutanabbî. The Bâtinîs, i.e., members of the Ismâ’îlism, have said that the Mi’râj was not a journey in body, but it was the soul’s getting exalted passing beyond the ecstasies and ranks; this argument of theirs is kufr and ilhâd, that is, it is something which makes one a zindîq; it is enmity against Islam.” Hamidullah’s writing shows that he belongs to the Ismâilî group. The fact that he is from Hyderabad, center of the Ismâîlîs, corroborates this belief of ours. Most of the Sahâbat al-kirâm reported the hadîth about the Mi’râj. It is written with details by al-Bukhârî and Muslim. Those who have îmân should also believe the mu’jiza of the Mi’râj.
It is seen that Hamidullah, in all his books, tries to explain Islam in two different points of view; one according to history and one according to his own understanding. The majority of the facts that he derives and communicates from history books narrate the events correctly. But his own heretical points of view and corrupt beliefs, which he has secretly inserted among the former, undermine the îmân of those who read and believe them and annihilate their respect and love towards Rasűlullah (’alaihi ’s-