Читать книгу Muhammad: His Character and Conduct - Adil Salahi - Страница 10

CHAPTER 3

THE KEY TO THE PROPHET’S CHARACTER

EVERY PERSON has a key to his or her character. When the key is identified, it is easy to deal with that person. This key allows us to explain their attitudes and behaviour, and to anticipate their reaction to events. This is just like a house key: it may be small, but it opens into a spacious place with all its contents. Without the key, the inside of the house remains unknown, and we can only hazard a blind guess as to what it contains. Similarly, the key to a person enables us to understand their behaviour, even when they act in a way that others find odd.

For the Prophet, we can only look for a key to his personality on the basis of his life before prophethood, that is, before he started to receive Divine revelations. At that time he acted on his own, knowing nothing about a Divine message that was to be assigned to him. Later, when he began to receive his message, he assumed a role that was unlike any other, and he was also receiving guidance from on high. His mission, responsibilities and actions benefited from this guidance and were based on it. Non-Muslims who wrote about his life in isolation of this fact came up with explanations that Muslims find problematic. Some of these accounts are unbiased, and some even admire him. Nevertheless, studying his life in ordinary human terms, giving no weight to the Divine guidance he received, will show some of his actions as questionable, and perhaps unjustifiable. His attitude in the negotiations with the Quraysh leading to the Ḥudaybiyah peace agreement appeared odd, even to his closest Companions. He consulted no one, which was contrary to his previous patterns of behaviour, and he accepted all of the terms that were imposed by the enemy. In any human situation, what would historians, critics or analysts say about a negotiator who declared at the outset – as the Prophet did – that they would accept any offer, and who actually sought no concession from the other side in return for agreeing to their terms?

When we set about looking for the key to Muhammad’s personality in his life prior to the start of revelations, we soon discover that we will have some difficulty, as the reports we have of that period provide insufficient details and may be unreliable. Only those reports that the Prophet or his close Companions mentioned about his early years can be verified with regard to their authenticity. For example, one report states that as a suckling baby, Muhammad used to take his feed from only one of the breasts of his wet nurse. Muslim historians suggest, “it was as if he was made to do so by God to leave the other breast full for Ḥalīmah’s own son.” How can we verify this in the absence of later confirmation by the Prophet or by Ḥalīmah?

The reports that can be considered reliable point to a particular quality that we can consider to be the key to the Prophet’s personality: the pursuit of right. When we examine Muhammad’s personal history, we find this quality is consistent in his character, both before and after prophethood. This quality was even enhanced by the Divine message he delivered to mankind. As mentioned in Chapter 1, Muhammad was twenty years old when he took part in forging the noble ‘al-Fuḍūl’ alliance, which committed the Quraysh clans to stand united in support of anyone who was subjected to injustice in Makkah, whether this person belonged to Makkah or was a visitor. This was a bright moment in his pre-Islamic life, and one that he mentioned with fondness after prophethood. He was settled in Madinah when he said that he would not exchange his participation in that alliance for anything in the world; he stated that he would even honour it under Islam, should anyone appeal to him for help under its terms. The fact that this alliance was concluded in pre-Islamic days by idolatrous people did not detract from the fact that it was a noble alliance that aimed to give everyone their rights. This declaration by the Prophet confirms a sense of honour and integrity that can only be nurtured by a man who pursues what is right and stands up for it.

Throughout his life, Muhammad consciously maintained a very high standard of integrity. He would not knowingly tell a lie. In many societies, people do not look with abhorrence at telling lies. Of course, no one openly says that lying is something to be proud of, but people often advise a relative or a friend to lie in order to get out of a tricky situation. In the Arabian society of pre-Islamic days, lying was not a matter of great concern. Today, many societies expect a person to tell the truth in formal situations: for example, a witness who gives a false testimony in court is prosecuted. However, in small matters of daily life people do not give a second thought about telling a lie when it serves their purpose. They even admit to the lie and do not expect to be censured; others often laugh or express approval. Muhammad, however, was widely known among his people for speaking the truth in all situations. The testimonies to this are numerous, coming from friend and foe alike.

In the fifth year of Muhammad’s prophethood he advised a large number of his Companions to immigrate to Abyssinia. Fearing the consequences of such immigration, the Quraysh sent a delegation to Negus, the ruler of Abyssinia, requesting their extradition. The delegation tried hard to get Negus to order such extradition without questioning the immigrants. Negus, however, was a fair man. Therefore, he called the immigrants to his court and asked them about their religion. Their spokesman, Jaʿfar, described their conditions before Islam. He then went on to say: “Then God sent us a Messenger whom we have always known to be a man of truth and honesty.”¹

Those who opposed the Prophet in Makkah had no hesitation in stating that he was a man of truth. When Muhammad received God’s order to advocate Islam in public, he stood on the hill of al-Ṣafā in the centre of Makkah and called on all clans to come over to him. When they had gathered, he said to them:

“If I were to tell you that armed horsemen are beyond this valley heading towards Makkah to attack you, would you believe me?”

“You are trustworthy, and we have never known you to tell lies,” they answered.

“Well, then,” he said, “I am sent to you to warn you against grievous suffering.”²

Shaykh Abu al-Hasan Ali al-Hasani Nadwi says that the Arabs’ first answer in Makkah was evidence of their realistic and practical approach. They were responding to a man whom they had known to be honest and truthful and to always give sincere advice. He was standing on top of a hill where he could see what was beyond. In their position, they could not see anything beyond what was in their valley. They had no reason not to believe him, whatever he said. This was a natural opening, which secured a testimony: in other words, it established Muhammad’s credentials, which were well known to his audience.³

An example of testimony from his adversaries occurred at the time when the Prophet and his Companions went to Makkah for their compensatory ʿUmrah (mini-pilgrimage). As noted in Chapter 2, according to the peace agreement signed a year earlier between the Prophet and the unbelievers in Makkah, the Prophet and his Companions were to be allowed entry in Makkah and a stay of three days, but they were to have no armament other than swords in their sheaths. As the Muslims were about to start their journey from Madinah, the Prophet ordered that sufficient armament should be carried with them, so that they would be ready in case the Quraysh were bent on mounting a treacherous attack. When the Muslims were drawing near to Makkah, its people were informed by their advance party that the Muslims carried their armament with them. The Quraysh immediately sent Mikraz ibn Ḥafs with a few of its dignitaries to determine his intentions. Mikraz said to him:

“Muhammad, you were never known to be treacherous, neither when you were young nor in your old age. Are you intending to get into the holy city where your own people live carrying arms, when you had promised that your party will carry only the ordinary arms of travellers: swords in sheaths?”

The Prophet answered: “I am not bringing arms into the city.”

Mikraz said: “This is a man who is a model of honesty and sincerity.”⁴

It was enough for the Quraysh delegation that Muhammad said he would not be bringing in the arms. They immediately returned to their people to reassure them that he would honour the agreement. Those people had been fighting him for nearly two decades, accusing him of every evil. Yet, they had no hesitation to accept his word as describing his true intention.

The pursuit of right requires the seeker to ensure that any trust afforded to them is well-placed. Muhammad was trusted throughout his life, and no one ever accused him of being unworthy of trust. On the contrary, long before Islam, the people of Makkah gave him the nickname al-Amīn (which means “trustworthy”). We see, for instance, that he was only in his early twenties when Khadījah, a wealthy widow, entrusted him to manage her own trade with a caravan travelling to Syria. She would not have given him such an important task unless she was certain that her trust would not be misplaced. She had an informed opinion of him, as she had tried him in the local bazaars. It was Muhammad’s integrity and honesty in all situations that made Khadījah propose to him that they should get married. She had refused many earlier suitors, feeling that they were after her wealth. In Muhammad’s case, she was the suitor because she recognized that he was a man of trust.

We have already mentioned that the Quraysh plotted to assassinate him in order to prevent his immigration. They moved with speed to carry out their plan. However, Muhammad had been given deposits for safekeeping. These deposits did not belong to Muslims in Makkah, as almost all Makkan Muslims had already immigrated to Madinah. Rather, the deposits belonged to unbelievers who were in the enemy camp. Despite the hostility of the people of Makkah to Muhammad and his message, they had no doubt whatsoever of his integrity and honesty. Anyone who had something precious would entrust it to Muhammad for safekeeping, certain that they would find it safe whenever they wanted it. As an aside, I find it amazing in this situation that they did not realise that a person of such honesty and integrity would not lie to God.

It stands to reason that this practice of keeping valuables with Muhammad did not begin after he became a Prophet and a Messenger of God, but would have started much earlier. People continued to recognize his honesty after he started to receive and advocate God’s message: if anything, they felt that he was even more reliable and trustworthy. Muhammad gave ʿAlī, his cousin, the task of returning people’s deposits. By returning people’s valuables after escaping an assassination attempt and after being chased out of the city, he confirmed that their trust in him was well placed. To him, it was inconceivable that he would change his practice, despite all the problems his people heaped on him. He always looked for what was right and did it; it was right that people who trusted him with their valuables should get their valuables back when he was leaving the city and could no longer keep them safe. The fact that they were hostile to him and his message altered nothing.

The pursuit of right requires fairness in any situation where people are at odds. The Prophet was always keen to establish justice, no matter who the quarrelling parties were. This was his aim before he was chosen for his great role as the Prophet, and it continued to be his aim whenever two parties put their dispute to him for judgement. For example, in Chapter 1 we noted the situation when he was asked to arbitrate in the case of the dispute between the Quraysh clans over the honourable act of putting the black stone back in place. There were several options open to him. He could have argued a case for his own clan (the Hāshim clan) to do that honourable job, as the Hāshimites were the most honourable clan. He could have ruled in favour of the clan, or clans, that had little to do with the Kaʿbah and the pilgrimage. Such a ruling would have given them something to enhance their position. He could have chosen a neutral person, or argued for his own neutrality. He did nothing of that. Rather, he recognized that the situation required a measure of total fairness and opted for a verdict in which all clans shared on equal footing. That was a verdict of complete justice: achieving what is right.

After prophethood, Muhammad was the judge in all disputes within the Muslim community, or between Muslims and non-Muslims. He declared to all concerned that he could only judge on the basis of the evidence presented to him:

“Any of you,” he warned, “may come up with apparently stronger evidence, and I would rule in his favour. Let him consider: if I give him something that by right belongs to his brother, I am only giving him a brand of hellfire. He may choose to take it or leave it.”⁵

To a believer, this is a very strong warning, as it gives responsibility to the people concerned. They should know whether they have a rightful claim or not; or if they are in doubt, they should seek clarification. With this, the Prophet set a high standard of responsibility and made all people share in it, so that right and justice can be established.

In pre-Islamic days, Muhammad was very keen to be fair to all. When he was called upon to arbitrate, he ruled in fairness to all, because right requires fairness. When he became a Messenger of God, he elevated that to an even higher standard. An example pertains to the Jewish communities in Madinah. As stated in the previous chapter, the Jews were very unhappy about Islam and tried every method to undermine the Muslim community. They violated their treaty with the Prophet and sided with his enemies. However, when it came to judging cases involving the Jews, the Prophet set a clear example of ensuring justice. In one case, someone stole a shield of armour from another. Both belonged to the Anṣār, but apparently the thief was suspected of hypocrisy. When the evidence pointed to the real thief, he secretly hid the stolen shield in the home of a Jewish neighbour. He then asked his relatives to tell the Prophet that they had spotted the stolen shield in the Jew’s home. They did, and the Prophet rebuked the accuser. However, the Prophet received Qur’ānic revelations telling him the facts. These were recorded in verses 105-113 of Sūrah 4 (“Women”). What would any ruler do in such a situation, where the accused enemy is innocent and the unsuspected friend is guilty? Let us look at the argument for keeping matters as they appeared with the material evidence pointing to the Jew as the thief, since the stolen shield was found in his home. Sayyid Qutb writes:

Had human or worldly standards or considerations been the deciding factor in the Islamic code and its method of implementation, there would have been several reasons to overlook the whole event. A cover-up would have been concocted and the reality of the matter would not have been exposed in such a way as to approach a scandal. The first and clearest reason was that the accused himself was a Jew belonging to a Jewish community which was engaged in a tooth and nail fight against Islam, using every piece of armament at its disposal. The Muslims of that period were suffering much from the Jews’ wicked designs. [God has willed that the Muslims should suffer much from the Jews at all times!] Those Jews in Madinah were not restrained by considerations of right or justice. They applied no moral standard in their dealings with the Muslim community.

Another reason stems from the fact that the issue directly concerned a group of the Anṣār, the Muslims of Madinah who provided the Prophet and his Makkan Companions with refuge, support and protection. Such an incident could have easily caused much disunity and hatred among their different groups. To direct accusations at a Jew would have averted any likelihood of division among them.

A third reason for approving a cover-up was that it would have avoided giving the Jews in Madinah more armament with which to attack the Anṣār. Exposure would allow the Jews to denounce the Anṣār as stealing from one another and then falsely and knowingly accusing the Jews of committing their own crimes. The Jews were certain not to allow such an opportunity to pass them by.⁶

Without hesitation, the Prophet declared the Jew innocent. He was unconcerned with any of the considerations that would have swayed people in favour of a cover up. He was concerned with the establishment of rightness and fairness. He impressed on all his Companions that unfairness would lead to ruin, of both individual and community, because justice establishes right and strengthens the community. We see clearly how the pursuit of right led Muhammad to be fair in his verdict long before the advent Islam, and we can see how, under Islam, the pursuit of rightness made him set justice at a superior standard.

The pursuit of rightness appears to be something implanted in the nature of Muhammad from a very early age. This is clear in the report of his encounter with a Christian monk in Syria when he was still a child of twelve. The report is widely circulated in the sources of Islamic history, but its reliability cannot be absolutely ascertained. Several Orientalists consider it to be an important piece of evidence, and one that supports their claims that Muhammad met Christian clerics and learned from them. We do not need to discuss these claims here: except to say that if this is their evidence, then their case remains weak.

The report in question mentions that at the age of twelve Muhammad clung to his uncle Abū Ṭālib as the latter was about to set on a business trip to Syria with a trade caravan. A soft hearted uncle, Abū Ṭālib took his beloved nephew with him. The caravan route passed close to the hermitage of Baḥīrā, a Christian monk, who invited the people of the caravan to have a meal with him. As he served them, he kept looking at Muhammad. He then took him aside and questioned him about himself. He then asked him under an oath by al-Lāt and al-ʿUzzā, two of the main Arab idols. Muhammad interrupted him, saying: “Do not ask me by al-Lāt and al-ʿUzzā, for I hate nothing as I hate them.” Baḥīrā rephrased his question, putting it with an oath by God, and Muhammad answered him normally. After this conversation, Baḥīrā asked Abū Ṭālib what relation Muhammad was to him. When he confirmed that Muhammad’s father died before his birth, Baḥīrā told Abū Ṭālib to take extra care of his nephew as the Jews, in particular, could harm him.

The point here is the hatred expressed by a twelve-year-old to the idols worshipped by his people: this is not an attitude based on any religious principle. At that time Muhammad had no exposure to any religious teachings, other than what was known in Makkah, which was a very low form of idolatry. There were some people in Makkah who rejected idolatry, but none of them showed any inclination to start advocating a new religion. Even those whose rejection of idolatry was well known and reported were either still looking for a better faith, such as Waraqah ibn Nawfal, or were very young, such as Zayd ibn ʿAmr. This was an instinctive dislike based, perhaps, on personal observation that those deities were no more than man-made statutes.

The rejection of idolatry remained with Muhammad throughout his life. He was an adult when the incident of the idol Buwābah (reported in Chapter 1) occurred. As someone who was loved by all his family, he yielded to his aunts’ pressure and went to the festival of that idol, because it meant much to his family. Whenever he came near any idol, he was told to stay away from it. That is an aspect of the Divine protection from anything to do with pagan worship. More relevant here is his refusal to attend this festival year after year despite pressure from his aunts to take part in it. This tells us that he was totally unconvinced by the worship of such idols, as it did not meet his criteria for what was right. To him those idols were useless objects, made by people, placed in position by people and venerated by people: this was absurd to Muhammad, who always looked for what was right.

These are but two examples of a lifetime in which he always steered away from idolatry. At no time in his life before prophethood did Muhammad address himself to any of those deities worshipped by his people. He neither touched any of them nor sought to be blessed by any. He simply removed himself from the rudimentary religion of his people, rejecting it in totality.

If we examine Muhammad’s life before prophethood, we see a man who is dedicated to his family. When he lost loved ones, he passionately grieved; when he was in his uncle’s home, his interaction with the family was that of a caring person; when he was twelve, he clung to his uncle at the point of his departure because he did not want to lose him even for a few weeks; when he got married, he was a model husband and father. He participated in every noble thing his family and clan did, including fighting alongside his uncles. He took part in the alliance to remove injustice. Seeing him so involved with his family and clan, we wonder what reason he could have to absent himself from religious festivals to which his family attached much importance. The only reason for this is that such worship was contrary to his sense of truth and his keen pursuit of right.

When he was in his mid-thirties, Muhammad began to seek solitude as a form of refuge from the disgusting aspects of life in Makkah: its pagan worship and loose morality. He would go to a cave in Mount Ḥirā’, a few kilometres outside Makkah, and stay there for several days in a sort of worship that had no recognized form or pattern. The cave was small and totally isolated, with room for only one person to stand, sit or lie down. At the entrance, the Kaʿbah could be clearly seen at a distance through a small opening at the other end. In front of the cave, there was a small open area shaded from the sun by two large rock masses on two sides, with the fourth side totally open, giving a slight refreshing breeze. There Muhammad would stay for several days, in total devotion. The Arabic term for such devotion is taḥannuth, which means “self purification.” The Prophet did not tell us what sort of worship he used to offer in those days. The Qur’ān, however, tells us that he never expected to receive revelations from on high prior to the moment when the angel came to him with the first revelation.⁷ It also states that he never read any book nor could he write with his hand.⁸ During this period, Muhammad had no clear concept of God. As one of those individuals who sought to follow a religion that provided a clear vision, Zayd ibn ʿAmr used to address God and say: “My Lord, I do not know a proper method of how to worship you.” Probably Muhammad would have said the same during that time.

Some Muslim historians say that before prophethood, Muhammad worshipped according to the religion of Abraham. In pre-Islamic days, the Arabs used to take pride in the fact that they were the descendants of Abraham through his son Ishmael. However, the religion their ancestors followed, as taught to them by the Prophet Ishmael, had become so blurred that only some rudimentary aspects of it remained, mostly in connection with the pilgrimage. Even the pilgrimage rituals had been vastly distorted. They continued to believe in God as the Creator of the heavens and the earth, but to them God was distant. Hence, they believed that they needed to worship deities and idols, which would bring them closer to God.⁹ Therefore, what we understand by the statement that Muhammad in those days of solitude worshipped according to Abraham’s religion is that he addressed his devotion to God, the Creator of the heavens and the earth. He, however, had no clear notion of God or how to worship Him. His devotion was merely an attempt to have a better notion through solitude and contemplation. Hence, we take his periods of solitude, which became more frequent in his late thirties, as consistent with his pursuit of right. What he was after was a correct understanding of man’s position and life.

During one of those periods of solitude the angel came to him for the first time (as related in Chapter 1). This was his first communication with the realm beyond. No human being is ever prepared for such contacts; hence, Muhammad trembled and felt fear. He did not know the nature of the contact, nor the nature of the angel he received. He could not tell anything about it. This explains his speedy flight home, and his appeal to his wife to cover him and wrap him with something warm. Reassurances by his wife did not give him any certainty, however; how could he be certain when she had no knowledge of the matter either? Yet her reassurances were based on the fact that he was of noble character. She said to him: “You are kind to your kinsfolk; you help the weak; you are generous to the poor; you welcome guests.”¹⁰ She also said that he always told the truth. She added that a person of such qualities could never be let down by God.

Muhammad was not satisfied with his wife’s reassurance, as it was merely a logical argument, and he wanted more. Hence, he went with his wife to Waraqah ibn Nawfal, a cousin of hers. Waraqah was an old blind man who had travelled far and wide in pursuit of the right faith. He converted to Christianity and was well versed with the Bible. Waraqah listened to every detail of the encounter with the angel before he made his conclusion: “You have met the archangel who used to come to the Prophet Moses.” Waraqah also told him that he would be the Messenger that had been promised in all Divine scriptures. He further stated that Muhammad’s task would be difficult, and that his people would drive him out: “I wish I will be alive then, for I will be certain to give you unwavering support.”¹¹ It appears from the reports we have that Waraqah met him more than once over the next few days, giving him reassurance. However, Waraqah was soon to die.

Here we see a man who has had a unique experience, the like of which was unknown to anyone among his people. There was no record of anyone who was a Prophet among the Arabs since Ishmael. Hence, the truth of the matter should be arrived at, and that was the purpose of those meetings with Waraqah. From him, as a human scholar who was keenly interested in religion, Muhammad had received some insight into prophethood. Therefore, he could better understand the reassurances given by the angel on the subsequent visits, and the truth was soon arrived at.

Hence, the next revelation reassured Muhammad about the future, but advised him that he needed to get ready for the task assigned to him, which was to be a difficult one. He could only prepare himself for it through long hours of devotion and prayer during the night:

You enfolded one! Stand in prayer at night, all but a small part of it, half of it, or a little less, or add to it. Recite the Qur’ān calmly and distinctly. We shall bestow on you a weighty message. The night hours are strongest of tread and most upright of speech. During the day you have a long chain of things to attend to. Therefore, remember your Lord’s name and devote yourself wholeheartedly to Him. He is the Lord of the east and the west. There is no deity other than Him. Take Him for your guardian (73: 1-9)

The Prophet complied: he stood in worship for long hours every night for a whole year. He knew that it was his duty, and this gave him further reassurance. He realized that he had been assigned a difficult task that would put humanity on the right course in the most important questions of religion and worship. This was the absolute truth coming to him from the right source, God Almighty. He no longer needed to pursue right, as he would know it in every situation for the remainder of his life.

¹ Ibn Hishām, Al-Sīrah al-Nabawiyyah, vol, 1. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, (n.d.), p. 359.

² Ibn Hishām, op. cit., pp. 280-281. Also, Amīn Duwaydār, Ṣuwar Min Ḥayāt al-Rasūl, op. cit., pp. 144-145; Al-Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ (Arabic) vol. 2, al-Maktabah al-Raḥīmiyyah, India, pp. 702-703.

³ Abu al-Hasan Ali al-Hasani Nadwi, Muhammad Rasulullah (The Life of the Prophet Mu-hammad) Academy of Islamic Research and Publications, Lucknow, India, p. 111.

⁴ Aḥmad ibn Ḥusayn al-Bayhaqī, Dalā’il al-Nubuwwah, vol. 4, Cairo, Dār al-Rayyān, 1988, p. 321. See also, Al-Wāqidī, Kitāb al-Maghāzī, vol. 2, Beirut, ʿĀlam al-Kutub, 1984, pp. 734-735.

⁵ Al-Bukhārī, chapter on “Testimonies”, ḥadīth No. 2680.

⁶ Sayyid Quṭb, In the Shade of the Qur’ān, vol. 3, The Islamic Foundation, Leicestershire, 2001, pp. 299-300.

⁷ The Qur’ān: 28: 86.

⁸ The Qur’ān: 29: 48.

⁹ The Qur’ān: 39: 3.

¹⁰ Al-Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ (Book of the Start of Revelations).

¹¹ Ibid.