A Dictionary of Islam Being a cyclopedia of the...

“It would be easy to multiply extracts of similar purport; but the above will suffice by way of illustration. There are modern biographers of the Prophet who would have us believe that he was not conscious of falsehood when making these assertions. He was under a hallucination, of course, but he believed what he said. This to me is incredible. The legends in the Qurʾān are derived chiefly from Talmudic sources. Muḥammad must have learned them from some Jew resident in or near Mekka. To work them up into the form of rhymed Sūrahs, to put his own peculiar doctrines in the mouth of Jewish patriarchs, the Virgin Mary, and the infant Jesus (who talks like a good Moslem the moment after his birth), must have required time, thought, and labour. It is not possible that the man who had done this could have forgotten all about it, and believed that these legends had been brought to him ready prepared by an angelic visitor. Muḥammad was guilty of falsehood under circumstances where he deemed the end justified the means.” (Islām under the Arabs, p. 21.)

(9) The character of Muḥammad is a historic problem, and many have been the conjectures as to his motives and designs. Was he an impostor, a fanatic, or an honest man—“a very prophet of God”? And the problem might have for ever remained unsolved, had not the Prophet himself appealed to the Old and New Testaments in proof of his mission. This is the crucial test, established by the Prophet himself. He claims to be weighed in the balance with the divine Jesus.

Objection has often been made to the manner in which Christian divines have attacked the private character of Muḥammad. Why reject the prophetic mission of Muḥammad on account of his private vices, when you receive as inspired the sayings of a Balaam, a David, or a Solomon? Missionaries should not, as a rule, attack the character of Muḥammad in dealing with Islām; it rouses opposition, and is an offensive line of argument. Still, in forming an estimate of his prophetic claims, we maintain that the character of Muḥammad in an important consideration. We readily admit that bad men have sometimes been, like Balaam and others, the divinely appointed organs of inspiration; but in the case of Muḥammad, his professed inspiration sanctioned and encouraged his own vices. That which ought to have been the fountain of purity was, in fact, the cover of the Prophet’s depravity. But how different it is in the case of the true prophet David, where, in the words of inspiration, he lays bare to public gaze the enormity of his own crimes. The deep contrition of his inmost soul is manifest in every line—“I acknowledge my transgression, and my sin is ever before me: against Thee, Thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in Thy sight.”

The best defenders of the Arabian Prophet are obliged to admit that the matter of Zainab, the wife of Zaid, and again, of Mary, the Coptic slave, are “an indelible stain” upon his memory; that “he is once or twice untrue to the kind and forgiving disposition of his best nature; that he is once or twice unrelenting in the punishment of his personal enemies; and that he is guilty even more than once of conniving at the assassination of inveterate opponents”; but they give no satisfactory explanation or apology for all this being done under the supposed sanction of God in the Qurʾān.

In forming an estimate of Muḥammad’s prophetical pretensions, it must be remembered that he did not claim to be the founder of a new religion, but merely of a new covenant. He is the last and greatest of all God’s prophets. He is sent to convert the world to the one true religion which God had before revealed to the five great law-givers—Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus! The creed of Muḥammad, therefore, claims to supersede that of the Lord Jesus. And it is here that we take our stand. We give Muḥammad credit as a warrior, as a legislator, as a poet, as a man of uncommon genius raising himself amidst great opposition to the pinnacle of renown; we admit that he is, without doubt, one of the greatest heroes the world has ever seen; but when we consider his claims to supersede the mission of the divine Jesus, we strip him of his borrowed plumes, and reduce him to the condition of an impostor! For whilst he has adopted and avowed his belief in the sacred books of the Jew and the Christian, and has given them all the stamp and currency which his authority and influence could impart, he has attempted to rob Christianity of every distinctive truth which it possesses—its divine Saviour, its Heavenly Comforter, its two Sacraments, its pure code of social morals, its spirit of love and truth—and has written his own refutation and condemnation with his own hand, by professing to confirm the divine oracles which sap the very foundations of his religious system.

We follow the Prophet in his self-asserted mission from the cave of Ḥirāʾ to the closing scene, when he dies in the midst of the lamentations of his ḥarīm, and the contentions of his friends—the visions of Gabriel, the period of mental depression, the contemplated suicide, the assumption of the prophetic office, his struggles with Makkan unbelief, his flight to al-Madīnah, his triumphant entry into Makkah—and whilst we wonder at the genius of the hero, we pause at every stage and inquire, “Is this the Apostle of God, whose mission is to claim universal dominion, to the suppression not merely of idolatry, but of Christianity itself?” Then it is that the divine and holy character of Jesus rises to our view, and the inquiring mind sickens at the thought of the beloved, the pure, the lowly Jesus giving place to that of the ambitious, the sensual, the time-serving hero of Arabia. In the study of Islām, the character of Muḥammad needs an apology or a defence at every stage; but in the contemplation of the Christian system, whilst we everywhere read of Jesus, and see the reflection of His image in everything we read, the heart revels in the contemplation, the inner pulsations of our spiritual life bound within us at the study of a character so divine, so pure.

We are not insensible to the beauties of the Qurʾān as a literary production (although they have, without doubt, been overrated); but as we admire its conceptions of the Divine nature, its deep and fervent trust in the power of God, its frequent deep moral earnestness, and its sententious wisdom, we would gladly rid ourselves of our recollections of the Prophet, his licentious ḥarīm, his sanguinary battle-fields, his ambitious schemes; whilst as we peruse the Christian Scriptures, we find the grand central charm in the divine character of its Founder. It is the divine character of Jesus which gives fragrance to His words; it is the divine form of Jesus which shines through all He says or does; it is the divine life of Jesus which is the great central point in Gospel history. How, then, we ask, can the creed of Muḥammad, the son of ʿAbdu ʾllāh, supersede and abrogate that of Jesus, the Son of God? And it is a remarkable coincidence that, whilst the founder of Islām died feeling that he had but imperfectly fulfilled his mission, the Founder of Christianity died in the full consciousness that His work was done—“It is finished.” It was in professing to produce a revelation which should supersede that of Jesus, that Muḥammad set the seal of his own refutation. (Hughes, Notes on Muhammadanism, p. 2.)

(1) K͟hadījah (خديجة), a Quraish lady, the daughter of K͟huwailid ibn Asad. She was a rich widow lady, who had been twice married. She was married to Muḥammad when he was 25 years old, and she was 40 years, and remained his only wife for twenty-five years, until she died (A.D. 619), aged 65, Muḥammad being 50 years old. She bore Muḥammad two sons, al-Qāṣim and ʿAbdu ʾllāh, surnamed at̤-T̤āhir and at̤-T̤aiyib, and four daughters, Zainab, Ruqaiyah, Fāt̤imah, and Ummu Kuls̤ūm. Of these children, only Fāt̤imah (the wife of ʿAlī) survived Muḥammad.

(4) Juwairīyah (جويرية), a widow, the daughter of al-Ḥāris̤ ibn Abī Ẓirār, the chief of the Banū Muṣt̤aliq. Muḥammad ransomed her from a citizen who had fixed her ransom at nine ounces of gold. It is related that ʿĀyishah said, “No woman was ever a greater blessing to her people than this Juwairīyah.”

(6) Zainab, the daughter of K͟huzaimah (زينب بنت خزيمة), the widow of Muḥammad’s cousin ʿUbaidah, who was killed at the battle of Badr. She was called the “Mother of the Poor,” Ummu ʾl-Masākīn, on account of her care of destitute converts. She died before Muḥammad.

(8) Zainab the daughter of Jaḥsh (زينب بنت جحش), the wife of Muḥammad’s adopted son Zaid. Zaid divorced her to please the Prophet. She was (being the wife of an adopted son) unlawful to him, but Sūrah xxxiii. 36 was produced to settle the difficulty.

(10) Ummu Ḥabībah (ام حبيبة), the daughter of Abū Sufyān and the widow of ʿUbaidu ʾllāh, one of the “Four Enquirers,” who, after emigrating as a Muslim to Abyssinia, had embraced Christianity there, and died in the profession of that faith.

According to the Shīʿahs, Muḥammad had, in all, twenty-two wives. Eight of these never consummated the marriage. Their names are ʿAlīyah bint Zabyān, Fatīlah bint Qais, Fāt̤imah bint Ẓaḥḥāf, Asmāʾ bint Kanaʿān, Mulaikah bint Suwaid, Lailah bint K͟hāt̤ib, and Shabah bint Ṣīlah. Twelve were duly married. Their names are K͟hadījah, Saudah, Hind (or Ummu Salimah), ʿĀyishah, Ḥafṣah, Zainab bint Jaḥsh, Ramalah bint Abī Sufyān (or Ummu Ḥabībah), Maimūnah, Zainab bint ʿUmais, Juwairīyah bint al-Ḥāris̤ of the Banū Muṣt̤aliq, Ṣafīyah, K͟haulah bint Ḥakīm, and Ummiāni, a sister to ʿAlī. Two were bondwomen: Māriyatu ʾl-Qibt̤īyah and Rīḥānah. (See Jannātu ʾl-K͟hulūd, p. 14.)

The two sons by K͟hadījah were al-Qāsim and ʿAbdu ʾllāh (called also at̤-T̤āhir and at̤-T̤aiyib); and the four daughters were Zainab, Ruqaiyah, Fāt̤imah, and Ummu Kuls̤ūm. The son by his bondwoman Mary was Ibrāhīm. All these children died before Muḥammad, with the exception of Fāt̤imah, who married ʿAlī, the fourth K͟halīfah, and from whom are descended the Saiyids. [SAIYID.]

MUḤAMMADAN. Arabic Muḥammadī (محمدى). A name seldom used in Muḥammadan works for the followers of Muḥammad, who call themselves either Muʾmins, Muslims, or Musalmāns. It is, however, sometimes used in Indian papers and other popular publications, and it is not, as many European scholars suppose, an offensive term to Muslims.

MUḤAMMADANISM. The religion of Muḥammad is called by its followers al-Islām (الاسلام), a word which implies the entire surrender of the will of man to God. [ISLAM.] Its adherents speak of themselves as Muslims, pl. Muslimūn, or Muʾmin, pl. Muʾminūn; a Muʾmin being a “believer.” In Persian these terms are rendered by the word Musalmān, pl. Musalmānān.