To us, a mu’jiza is something that proving the truthfulness of a
person who said he was a Prophet. There were conditions for a mu’jiza:
1- Allâhu
ta’âlâ made it in the absence of
ordinary means, whereby to help His Prophet be
confirmed.
2- It had to be extraordinary. Ordinary things, such
as the sun’s rising in the East every day or flowers blooming in the spring,
could not be mu’jizas.
3- Others had to be incapable of doing it.
4- It had to happen whenever the person who announced
his prophethood wished it to.
5- It had to agree with his wish. For example, if he
said that he would enliven a certain dead person and if some other marvel took
place, for example, if a mountain was broken into two, instead, it would not be
a mu’jiza.
6- The mu’jiza happening upon his wish should not
belie him. For example, while he was miraculously talking with a certain beast,
if the beast said, “This man is a liar,” it would not be a mu’jiza.
7- The mu’jiza should not happen before he said he
was a Prophet. Wonders that happened before [the announcement of
his prophethood], such as ‘Îsâ’s[1] (’alaihi
’s-salâm) talking when he was in a cradle, his being handed dates when he asked for dates from a
withered-up tree, and in Muhammad’s (‘alaihi ‘s-salâm) childhood, the cleavage
of his chest and his heart being cleansed by washing, there being a cloud over
his head continuously and his being greeted by trees and stones were not
mu’jizas, but karâmas. They are called irhâsât (preparatory signs of a Prophet). They
emphasized prophethood. It is possible for such karâmas to happen through
Awliyâ as well. Before Prophets were informed of their prophethood, their
status was not lower than that of the Awliyâ’. Karâmas were seen from them. A
mu’jiza could happen immediately after a Prophet was
informed of his prophethood. For example, if he had said that such and such an
event would take place a month later, the event would become a mu’jiza when
---------------------------------
[1] Jesus.
it took place. But it would not be necessary to
believe in his prophethood before it took place.
A mu’jiza demonstrating that a Prophet is
telling the truth is not only a requirement of the intellect. That is, it is
unlike the case of some work denoting the existence of its agent. For the
intellect’s realizing that something is the proof of something else requires
some relationship between the two things. When the proof is seen, the existence of the related thing,
not the existence of something else, is realized. The case is not so with a
mu’jiza. For example, heavens being broken into pieces, stars being scattered
and mountains being pulverized will take place when the end of the world comes,
at the time of Doomsday. This will not be the time for the coming of a Prophet. These
are the mu’jizas foretold by every Prophet. But, it is
not necessary for those who hear about them to know that they are mu’jizas. So
is the case with a Walî’s karâma being the mu’jiza of a Prophet,
though it does not have any connection with that Prophet. What we
have stated so far is explained in detail in the book Sharh-i
mawâqif by Sayyid Sherîf
al-Jurjânî.
According to most ‘ulamâ’, though open tahaddî
(challenge), that is, saying,
“Go ahead and do the same! But you can’t!” is not a condition for a mu’jiza,
the meaning of a mu’jiza contains tahaddî. Because a tahaddî is not a matter of
question in the reports made about the states of the Rising Day and future
events, these are not mu’jizas against disbelievers. Believers believe that
these reports are mu’jizas. The karâmas of Awliyâ’ are not mu’jizas because
they do not claim prophethood and because there is no tahaddî in them. The fact
that such non-challenging wonders do not prove the truthfulness of a person
claiming prophethood does not necessarily show that mu’jizas do not prove it.
On the contrary, this is what is expected from a mu’jiza.
Question:
“Mu’jizas prove the truthfulness
of the person claiming prophethood because they are wonders. Does a mu’jiza
have a special effect on proving [prophethood]?”
Answer:
Such is not the actual case. A
mu’jiza’s proving the validity of a claim of prophethood is due to the fact
that others cannot do it, which means a mu’jiza has a special effect. In fact,
this is the real proof.
Question:
“In Sharh-i Mawâqif, Sayyid Sherîf al-Jurjânî says, ‘Naql (narration) cannot be a
proof by itself because it is necessary also to believe in the truthfulness of
the person who says that he is a Prophet, and
this takes place by the intellect’s
admitting it. Upon seeing a mu’jiza, the intellect believes that
a Prophet has told the truth.’ This passage from
al-Jurjânî says that a mu’jiza demonstrating a Prophet’s
truthfulness is judged through the intellect, whereas a while before he said
that it would not be judged through the intellect. Don’t these two statements
of his contradict each other?”
Answer:
The passage immediately above says that the
intellect studies the mu’jiza that proves the truthfulness of a Prophet. It does not say whether or not the intellect
has an effect on the mu’jiza’s proving his truthfulness. Even if we were to
admit that it says that it has some effect, it still does not say that this is
judged only through the intellect. Since there is no one saying that the
intellect has no effect in this matter, such a contradiction is out of place. Sayyid
al-Jurjânî’s statement was made while explaining a narrated (naqlî) mu’jiza,
for which such a statement is most appropriate.
A mu’jiza’s denoting a Prophet’s
truthfulness is not a belief resulting out of hearing, either. It is a natural
indication. That is, when a mu’jiza is seen, Allâhu ta’âlâ creates
in the person who sees it the knowledge that the person announcing his
prophethood is telling the truth. Such is Allâhu ta’âlâ’s divine
law. This is so because, though it is possible for a liar to display a mu’jiza,
it has never happened. If the person announcing his prophethood lifts up a
mountain and says, “If you believe me, this mountain shall go back to its
place. If you don’t believe me, it will fall on your heads,” and if they see
that the mountain moves back towards its place when they want to believe and
towards them when they think of not believing, it will be understood, through
divine law, that he is telling the truth. Yes, it is possible – in view of the intellect – for such
an absolute mu’jiza to happen from a liar, but it is not the divine law of Allâhu ta’âlâ. That is, it has never been seen.[1] This is exemplified as follows: A man claimed
to be a
---------------------------------
[1] Intellect admits a liar’s displaying mu’jizas and says, “Since Allâhu ta’âlâ is Almighty, He can do this, too.” This conclusion, which is not compatible with divine law, or even the rare occurrence of events suitable with this conclusion, does not harm our knowledge of events that are compatible with the divine law of Allâhu ta’âlâ. For example, killing or revivifying by the ad-Dajjâl, the liar who will come towards Doomsday, does not change our knowledge about his being a liar. The fact that Nimrod’s fire did not burn Ibrâhîm (’alaihi ’s-salâm) does not change Allâhu ta’âlâ’s law that gives a burning capacity to fire. However, the occurrence of events contradicting information acquired by the intellect through proofs gives harm to this information.
ruler’s messenger and said, “If you don’t believe me,
take my letter to the ruler.” The letter read: “If it is true that I am your
messenger, get down from your throne and sit on the floor!” They took the
letter to the ruler, who read it and did as it was written. Those who saw this
believed definitely that he told the truth. This belief is unlike the case of
“likening the unknown to the witnessed,” that is, understanding [the existence
of] something not seen by seeing something else. For, a mu’jiza definitely
proves truthfulness. According to the Mu’tazila, it is not possible for a liar
to display a mu’jiza.
Magic and similar things are the occurrence of
certain events by doing the things that are their causes, or, sometimes, they
are illusions which figure up in one’s imagination though they do not really
exist. They are not wonders.