10. Surah Yunus

1. This introductory statement carries a subtle note of warning. For the unbelievers, out of their sheer stupidity looked upon the Qur'an which was presented to them by the Prophet (peace be on him) as merely a literary masterpiece, an embodiment of spellbinding poetic imagination, a fascinating discourse on a very sublime, illusive plane in the manner of soothsayers. The unbelievers are told that such notions are pure misconceptions. On the contrary, the Qur'anic verses are part of a Book which abounds in wisdom. Hence, if they disregard the Qur'an, they are merely depriving themselves of a treasure-house of wisdom.

2. The unbelievers are asked why they are astonished that a human being has been designated to warn other human beings. Would it have been reasonable to designate some angel Jinn or animal rather than a human being to warn other human beings? Similarly, is there anything weird or exotic about the appointment of a Prophet? For if people are found engrossed in error and are oblivious to the truth, what then is truly strange: that their Creator and Lord should make arrangements to guide them or let them continue stumbling in their error? And if Divine Guidance is made available to human beings, does it not stand to reason that it is those who follow, rather than those who reject it, that deserve to be held in honour and esteem? Those who express their astonishment at this should reconsider what it is that truly merits astonishment. 3. The unbelievers' allegation that the Prophet (peace be on him) is a sorcerer is devoid of even an iota of truth. The mere fact that a person, by dint of his capacity to express himself effectively, influences people and captivates their hearts and minds does not warrant being called a sorcerer. What is worth considering is the purpose for which he employs his oratorical skill, and the kind of influence that his oration has on the audience. Any orator who uses his skill for an evil purpose will naturally be considered a demagogue, an unbridled and irresponsible speaker. For his only interest lies in casting a spell over his audience, even if he might have to resort to making false and exaggerated statements or saying things that are altogether unjust. The discourse of such speakers is bereft of all wisdom. For all it aims to do is to hoodwink and bamboozle the gullible masses. Such speakers have no coherent set of ideas to offer. What they say is full of contradiction and incoherence. Such speakers lack moderation and lean towards extremism. For their purpose is to prove their capacity to spellbind their audiences by verbal flamboyance or to intoxicate them with inflammatory eloquence in order to pit one group against another. Such oratory is not conducive to moral improvement, and the lives of the audience are by no means reformed. Neither does the eloquence of such speakers bring about any healthy change in the outlook of the audience nor in the quality of their lives. In fact, such eloquence may even have an evil and corrupting influence. In sharp contrast to all this, the Prophet's oration is characterized by wisdom and coherence, balance and moderation of the highest order, and strict adherence to the truth. Each word of the Prophet (peace be on him) is pregnant with purposiveness and manifests a keen sense of proportion. In addition, all his oration is directed to just one purpose - to guide and reform mankind. In all that he says there is no trace of any concern for worldly interests - personal, familial or national. He only warns people against the evil consequences of their heedlessness and invites them to something that would lead to their own well-being. Furthermore, the effect of the Prophet's oration on his audience is radically different from that of sorcerers. For, all those who accept the Prophet's message undergo a change for the better; their moral conduct improves, and all in all they become oriented to righteousness and benevolence. It was, therefore, for the Prophet's detractors to consider whether sorcerers achieve such results and whether their professional skills are directed towards such noble purposes.

4. There is no reason to believe that after having created everything God chose to consign Himself to the limbo of unconcern. On the contrary, after His great act of creation He established Himself on the Throne and holds the reins of the entire universe so that He not only reigns but in fact also effectively rules over the universe. The Qur'an considers it a colossal error - an error to which the ignorant have succumbed - to believe that after creating the universe God either left it to run on its own, or entrusted its affairs to others to govern it as they please. On the contrary, the Qur'an emphasizes that it is God Who is directing all the affairs of His creation; that all power effectively rests with Him alone. The Qur'an constantly drives home the point that God alone has all authority so that all that takes place in the universe or in any part of it takes place by His command or His leave. God's relationship with the universe is not simply that He created it; rather the reins of the universe are with Him and He is in effective and continual control of its affairs. It is He alone Who keeps the universe in existence and it is He alone Who directs it as He pleases. {See Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. III, al-A'raf, nn. 41-2, pp. 33-4.) 5. No one is in a position to interfere with God in His governance of the universe, or has the power to effectively intercede with God on anyone else's behalf and to prevail upon Him to change any of His decisions. Nor is anyone in such a position of power with God that his intercession would make or unmake anyone else's destiny. The utmost that a person can do is to pray to God. However, the acceptance or non-acceptance of such prayers rests solely with Him. No one is so powerful that his desire will, of necessity, always prevail with God, nor does anyone's intercession bind God to act according to the former's desire. 6. After emphasizing the given fact of God's lordship in the first part of the verse, man is now informed of its logical consequences. Since all authority rests solely with God, it is incumbent upon man to serve Him exclusively. God's lordship embraces the three-fold attributes of His being (i) the Sustainer, (ii) the Master, and (iii) the Sovereign. In like manner, the term 'ibadah embraces the three-fold corresponding implications that man should (i)worship, (ii) serve, and (iii) obey God. 7. Since man has been informed of the fundamental truths and has been shown the right way, there is no justification for him to remain engrossed in those false conceptions which have caused him to act in a manner altogether inconsistent with the reality.

8. The Prophet's teachings comprise two fundamental doctrines: (i) that God alone is man's Lord and hence man should worship Him, and (ii) that man is bound to return to his Lord in the Next Life wherein he will be made to render an account to his Lord. This particular verse focuses on the second of these two doctrines. 9. This Qur'anic statement combines the enunciation of a basic doctrine with its supporting argument. The doctrine that is being enunciated here is that God will resurrect man. This is supported by the argument that it is God Who brought about the creation in the first place. All those who believe that the original creation was an act of God can neither consider it impossible nor 10. The present verse sets forth the rationale of resurrection. The preceding verses had conclusively established that resurrection is possible, that there is no reasonable ground to dub it as a far-fetched idea. Drawing upon the above, the verse under consideration points out that the requirements of justice and reason can only be fulfilled by resurrection, and that this calls for a repetition of the original act of creation by God. The point that is being made here is that those who accept God as their One and the Only Lord and truly live in service and devotion to Him deserve to be fully rewarded for their righteous conduct. Likewise, those who reject the truth and act according to their own whim deserve to be duly punished for their unrighteous conduct. The present life is so constituted that reward and punishment are not being meted out and cannot be meted out in the manner described above. This is a plain fact, and one which is evident to all except those who are obstinate, This being the case, reason and justice demand fresh creation in order that such reward and punishment be meted out. (For further

11. This provides yet another argument in support of the doctrine of the Hereafter. The argument is derived from the orderly nature of the universe. This vast universe - the handiwork of God - is spread out before our eyes. It is full of signs of God's power and wisdom such as those which underlie the sun and the moon and the alternation of night and day. Even a superficial glance at the universe is enough to convince one that the Creator of this enormous universe is not at all like a child who creates something to play with and after enjoying it for a while whimsically destroys it. For it is quite evident that every act of the Creator is characterized by order and wisdom, and that a strong purposiveness underlies everything, even a speck of dust. Now, since the Creator is All-Wise - as is evident from His creation - it is absurd to assume that He Who has also invested man with reason, moral consciousness and free-will, will not call man to account for his conduct; that He will altogether disregard the need for retribution arising from man's responsibility which in turn stems from his inherent rational and moral endowments. Apart from expounding the doctrine of the Hereafter, the above verses also adduce the following three arguments in support of that doctrine: First, a persuasive case is made out in support of the possibility of a second life. The basis of the argument is that the creation of man in the first instance is indicative of God's creative power. (There is no reason to believe that God has become bereft of that power of creation, and hence would be unable to create man afresh - Ed.) Second, the Next Life is needed in order that man might be rewarded or punished in consideration of his performance, whether good or bad. Both justice and reason seem to call for a new life wherein everyone would be able to see, in a fair manner, the consequence of his deeds. Third, that the Next Life, which is a requirement of justice and reason, will certainly come to pass. This is because the Creator, Who created man and the universe, is All-Wise, and it is inconceivable that such a Being will not respond to an unmistakable requirement of justice and reason. After careful consideration it appears that the above are the only possible arguments that might be adduced and they suffice to establish that there is life after death. The only possible question that remains, after having established that the Next Life is demanded by both reason and justice, and also that it is a requisite of God's wisdom, is whether it is possible to visually observe the Next Life in the manner in which people observe other objects. Now it should he clearly understood that this inability will remain during the present phase of existence. The reason for it is that God asks man to believe in cerium truths and such a demand in respect of objects which can be observed with human eyes would be utterly meaningless. The test to which man has been put consists precisely of this; whether man can affirm certain truths which belong to the suprasensory realm by the use of his rational faculties. Another point which has been stated in this context also deserves serious consideration. This is embodied in the following Qur'anic statement: 'He expounds His signs for the people who know' (Yunus 10: 5);'. . . and in all that Allah has created in the heavens and the earth there are signs for the people who seek to avoid (error of outlook and conduct)' (Yunus 10: 6). This means that God in His infinite wisdom has seen to it that in the multifarious phenomena of existence there should be plenty of signs which betoken the hidden realities underlying that phenomena. However, not all men will be able to benefit from those signs. Those who will be able to benefit are those (i) who liberate themselves from prejudices and seek knowledge with the help of the natural endowments bestowed upon them by God. and (ii) those who are Keen not to fall into error and who earnestly seek to adhere to the right way.

12. Here again a doctrine has been put forth along with its supporting argument. (For another such instance seen. 9 above-Ed.)The statement that is being made here is that rejection of the doctrine of the Hereafter necessarily entails the punishment of Hell, and the argument that is being proffered in support of it is that those who are oblivious to the Hereafter commit, because of their disbelief in it, evil deeds which can only lead to them suffering the torments of Hell. This argument is corroborated by the entire record of man's past. It is quite clear that the lives of those who do not believe that they, will not be held to account by God for their deeds; who work on the assumption that life is merely confined to the span of worldly existence; who measure human success or failure only in terms of the extent of material comfort, fame and power that a person is able to enjoy: who under the influence of such materialistic notions do not even care to pay attention to those signs of God which point to reality, assume an altogether wrong direction with the result that their life is vitiated. Hence they live a totally unbridled life, develop the worst possible character traits, and fill God's earth with injustice and corruption, with sin and transgression, and ultimately end up meriting the punishment of Hell. It will be seen that whereas the three arguments mentioned earlier were of a theoretical nature the above argument about the Hereafter is drawn from. human experience itself. Although in the present verse the argument is found only in an implicit form, it is spelt out at several other places in the Qur'an. The argument essentially is that unless man's character rests on the consciousness and conviction that he will have to render an account for all his deeds to God, both man's individual and collective behaviour will fail to have sound basis and direction. It would seem, therefore, to be worth asking: why is this so? Why is it that once this consciousness and conviction are altogether ended or greatly enfeebled, the human character turns to iniquity and corruption? Had affirmation of the Hereafter not been in conformity with reality, and conversely, had its denial not been opposed to it, then the evil consequences flowing from the denial of the Hereafter would not have been found with such unfailing regularity. If adherence to a proposition invariably leads to good results, and failure to adhere to it invariably leads to evil consequences, then this definitely proves the proposition to be true. In an attempt to refute the above argument it is sometimes contended that even atheists who reject the Hereafter and follow a materialistic approach to life often lead lives that are on the whole good and decent, that they hold themselves free from corruption and injustice. Not only that but also that their actual conduct is characterized by righteousness and benevolence. However, only a little reflection will make apparent the fallacy underlying this argument. For if one were to examine any atheistic or materialistic philosophy or ideology one will not find in them any basis for righteous behaviour which draws such lavish praise from so-called 'righteous' atheists. Nor can it be established by logical reasoning that an atheistic philosophy of life provides any incentive to embrace such virtues as truthfulness, trustworthiness, honesty, faithfulness to one's commitment, benevolence, generosity, preferring the interests of others to one's own, self-restraint, chastity, recognition of the rights of others, and fulfilment of one's obligations. The fact is that once God and the Hereafter are relegated to oblivion, the only practicable course left for man is to anchor his morality on utilitarianism. All other philosophical ideas which are expounded are merely theoretical embellishments and have no relevance for man's practical life. As for utilitarian morality - no matter how hard we might try to broaden its scope - it does not go beyond teaching man that he ought to do that which will yield to him or to his society some worldly benefit. Now since utility is the criterion of all acts, such a philosophy tends to make man cynical, with the result that in order to derive benefits, he will not differentiate between truth and lie; between trustworthiness and treachery; between honesty and dishonesty; between loyalty and perfidy; between observing justice and committing wrong. In short, a person under the spell of utilitarian ideas will be ready to do a thing or its opposite, depending on what serves his interests best. The conduct of the British is illustrative of this stance. It is sometimes contended that though the British have a materialistic outlook on life and generally do not believe in the Hereafter, they are more truthful, fairer, and more straightforward and faithful to their commitment. The fact, however, is that the tenuous character of moral values under a utilitarian moral philosophy is amply illustrated by the character of the British. For their actual conduct clearly shows that they do not consider moral values to have any intrinsic worth. This is evident from the fact that even those values which are held by the British to be good in their individual lives are brazenly flouted when they act as a nation. Had the qualities of truthfulness, justice, honesty and faithfulness to one's committed word been regarded as intrinsic virtues, it would have been altogether out of the question for the elected rulers of Britain to cynically violate all moral principles in governmental and international affairs and yet continue to retain the confidence of the British people. Does such a behaviour of a people who do not take the Hereafter seriously prove that they do not believe in absolute moral values? Does it also not prove that, guided by concern for material interests, such people are capable of following mutually opposed views simultaneously? Nevertheless, if we do find some people who, in spite of their not believing in God and the Hereafter, consistently adhere to some moral virtues and abstain from evil, there should be no mistaking that their righteous conduct and piety represents the continuing influence which religious ideas and practices have over them - even if unconsciously - rather than their subscription to a materialistic philosophy of life. If they possess any portion of the wealth of morality, there can be no doubt that it was stolen from the treasure-house of religion. It is ironical that such persons are now using the same wealth derived from religious sources, to promote an irreligious way of life. We consider this an act of theft because irreligiousness and materialism are altogether bereft of morality.

13. This Qur'anic statement calls for serious reflection. The sequence of ideas presented here is also quite significant because answers have been systematically provided to a number of highly relevant basic questions. Let us look at these answers in their sequence. Why will the righteous enter Paradise? The answer is: because they have followed the straight way in their worldly life. That is, in all matters and in every walk of life, in all affairs relating to the personal or collective life they have been righteous and have abstained from false ways. This gives rise to another question: how were the righteous able to obtain a criterion that would enable them to distinguish, at every turn and crossroad of life, between right and wrong, between good and evil, between fair and unfair? And how did they come to have the strength to adhere to what is right and avoid what is wrong? All this, of course, came from their Lord Who bestowed upon them both the guidance which they needed to know the right way and the succour required to follow it. In answer to why their Lord bestowed upon them this guidance and succour, we are reminded that all this was in consideration for their faith. It is also made clear that this reward is not in lieu of merely a verbal profession to faith, a profession that is no more than a formal acceptance of certain propositions. Rather, the reward is in consideration for a faith that became the moving spirit of a believer's character and personality, the force that led him lo righteous deeds and conduct. We can observe in our own physical lives that a person's survival, state of health, level of energy, and joy of living all depend upon sustenance from the right kind of food. This food, once digested, provides blood to the veins and arteries, provides energy to the whole body and enables the different limbs to function properly. The same holds true of man's success in the moral domain. It is sound beliefs which ensure that he will have the correct outlook, sound orientation and right behaviour that will ultimately lead to his success. Such results, however, do not ensue from that kind of believing which either consists of a mere profession to faith, or is confined to some obscure corner of man's head or heart. The wholesome results mentioned above can only be produced by a faith which deeply permeates man's entire being, shaping his mental outlook, even becoming his instinct; a faith which is fully reflected in his character, conduct and outlook on life. We have just noted the importance of food. We know that the person who, in spite of eating remains like one who has not partaken of any food, would not be able to enjoy the healthy results that are the lot of the person who has fully assimilated what he ate. How can it be conceived that it would be different in the moral domain of human life? How can it be that he who remains, even after believing, like the one who does not believe, will derive the benefit and receive the reward meant for those whose believing leads to righteous living?

14. This should remove any misconceptions about Paradise which seem to have been formed by some people of frail understanding. Subtly, the verse suggests that when people are admitted to Paradise, they will not instantly pounce upon the objects of their desire as the starved and hungry are wont to do when they observe food. Nor will they frantically go about giving vent to their lusts, impatiently demanding their cherished objects of enjoyment - beautiful women, wine, dissolute singing and music. The fact is that the men of faith and righteousness who are admitted to Paradise will be those who, during their life in the world, have embellished their lives with sublime ideas and noble deeds, who have refined their emotions, who have oriented their desires in the right direction, and who have purified their conduct and character. Thus, the nobility which they have developed in their personalities will shine in even greater splendour when they set their feet in the pure and clean environment of Paradise. Those same traits which characterized their behaviour in the world will appear with even greater lustre. The favourite occupation of such people in Paradise will be the same as during their life on the earth - to celebrate the praise of God. Likewise, their relationships in Paradise will be imbued with feelings of mutual harmony and concern for each other's well-being as had been the case in this world.

15. These introductory remarks are followed by a discourse which comprises the admonition and explanation of certain important points. For a fuller appreciation of the discourse, it is better to take note first of the following points about its background. First, that the prolonged and acute famine which had virtually destroyed the people of Makka had ended just a little before the revelation of these verses. The famine was so severe that even the most arrogant leaders of the Quraysh had been humbled. As a result, idol-worship had declined and people turned increasingly, with prayer and sincere supplication, to the One True God. The famine was so acute that at one stage Abu Sufyan had approached the Prophet (peace be on him) with a request to implore God to deliver them from the calamity. However, no sooner had the famine ended and heavy rains brought about a rich harvest and prosperity than the Makkans reverted to their old evil habits, to their rebellion against God, to their hostile machinations against Islam. Those who had turned to God for a short while once again became engrossed in their former apathy and wickedness. (See also al-Nahl 16: 113; al-Mu'minun23: 75-7; andal-Dukhan44: 10-16. See also al-Bukhari,Abwab al-lstisqa , Bab idha istashfa'a al-Mushrikun bi al-Muslimin 'ind al-Qaht -Ed.) Second, whenever the Prophet (peace be on him) warned the Makkans of God' s punishment as a consequence of their rejecting the truth, they retorted by asking: why had God's punishment not befallen them there and then? Why was it being delayed? In response, the Qur'an states that when it comes to punishing human beings God does not resort to the same haste which He resorts to when He wants to show mercy. The Makkans had seen that God had quickly halted the famine when they had prayed for its removal. They thought that if they were considered by God to be an evil people. He would have afflicted them with a calamitous punishment as soon as they had asked for it, or as soon as they engaged in rebellion against God. But that is not God's way. No matter how rebellious a people become, God grants them ample time to make amends. He also warns them over and over again and grants them a long respite. It is only when leniency has run its full course that His law of retribution comes into action. In sharp contrast to this is the attitude of men of low mettle. This is amply reflected in the ways of the rebellious ones among the Quraysh. When they encountered a disaster, they remembered God and bewailed and bemoaned of the same to Him. As soon as hard times were over, however, they forgot everything about God. It is precisely this kind of behaviour by different nations which invites God's punishment.

16. In Arabic, the word qarn, which occurs in the above verse, usually denotes 'the people of a given age'. However, the word in its several usages in the Qur'an, connotes a 'nation' which, wielded in its heyday, whether fully or partially, the reins of world leadership. When it is said that a certain nation was 'destroyed' this does not necessarily mean its total annihilation. When any such nation suffers the loss of its ascendancy and leadership, when its culture and civilization become extinct, when its identity is effaced, in fact, when such a nation disintegrates and its component pans become assimilated into other nations, then it is fair to say that it has suffered destruction. 17. The expression zulm (wrong-doing, injustice) in the above verse has not been used in the limited sense in which it is generally used. Instead, here the word embraces the whole range of sins which consists of man exceeding the limits of service and obedience to God. (For further explanation see Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. I, al-Baqarah, 2, n. 49, p. 64 - Ed.)

18. One should not lose sight of the fact that the immediate addressees of the present discourse were the people of Arabia. Here they are told that all previous nations were granted the opportunity to show their potential to do good. Instead, they took to wrong-doing and rebellion and rejected the message of the Prophets who had been raised solely to guide them. Thus they failed in the test to which they were put by God and were accordingly removed from the scene of history. Now the turn of the Arabs has come and they have also been granted the opportunity to prove their worth. They have also been put to the same test to which the previous nations had been put and in which they had failed. If the people of Arabia want to avoid meeting a similarly tragic fate, they would be well advised to avail themselves of the opportunity granted them, to learn the lessons from the history of the previous nations, and to avoid the mistakes which led to the undoing of many in the past.

19. This statement of the unbelievers was based, first of all, on the misconception that the Qur'an, which the Prophet (peace he on him) presented in them as the 'Word of God'. was in fact a product of his own mind which he had ascribed to God merely to invest it with authority. Moreover, they wanted to impress upon the Prophet (peace he on him) that the contents of his message were of little practical, worldly use. The emphasis on the unity of God, on the Life to Come and on the moral principles which people were asked to follow -all these were of no practical consequence to them. They virtually told the Prophet 'peace be on him. that if he wanted to lead them he should come forth with something that would be of benefit to them and ameliorate their worldly life. And if this was not possible, then he should at least show some flexibility in his attitude which would enable them to strike a compromise with him by effecting mutual accommodation between the Makkan unbelievers and the Prophet (peace be on him) himself In other words, the Makkans felt that the Prophet's doctrine of God's unity should not totally exclude their polytheism: that his conception of devotion to God should be such as to allow them some scope for their worldliness and self-indulgence; that the call to believe in the Hereafter should be such that it might still be possible for them to behave in the world as they pleased and yet entertain the hope of somehow attaining salvation in the Next World. Likewise, the absolute and categorical nature of moral principles enunciated by the Prophet (peace be on him) was also unpalatable to them. They wanted moral principles to be propounded in a manner that would provide concessions to their predilections and biases, to their customs and usages, to their personal and national interests, and to the lusts and desires that they wished to satisfy. In effect, they suggested a compromise according to which one sphere of life should be earmarked as 'religious', and in this sphere men should render to God what rightfully belongs to Him. Beyond this sphere, however, it should be left to people's discretion to run their worldly affairs as they pleased, It seemed altogether outrageous to them that the doctrines of the unity of God and accountability in the Hereafter should embrace the whole gamut of human life, and that man should be asked to subject himself entirely to the Law of God. 20. This is the Prophet's response to what has been said above (see n. 19 above). It is made clear that the Prophet (peace be on him) was not the author of the Qur'an; and that since it had only been revealed to him, he had no authority therefore to make any alteration in it whatsoever. It is also made clear that the question was not one that could be the subject of any bargain. The unbelievers should either accept the faith propounded by the Prophet (peace be on him) in toto or reject it in toto.

21. This is indeed a very weighty argument in refutation of the unbelievers' allegation that the Prophet (peace be on him) had himself authored the Qur'an and subsequently ascribed it to God. So far as other arguments are concerned, they might be considered as somewhat remote. But the argument based on the life and character of the Prophet (peace be on him) was particularly weighty since the Makkans were thoroughly familiar with the whole of his life. Before his designation as a Prophet, he had spent a full forty years in their midst. He was born in their city. They had observed his childhood, and then his youth, and it was in their city that he had reached his middle age. He had also had a variety of dealings with them. He had had social interaction, business transactions, matrimonial ties, and relationships of every conceivable nature with his people so that no aspect of his life was hidden from their view. Could there be a more powerful testimony to the truth of his claim to prophethood than his blameless life and character? Two things about the life of the Prophet (peace be on him) were especially clear and were quite well known to all Makkans. First, that during the forty years of his life before his designation as a Prophet, he had received no instruction from, or even enjoyed the company of learned people which could have served as the source of the ideas which began to flow, as would a stream, from his lips as soon as he claimed, at the age of forty, that he had been designated as a Prophet. Before that he was never seen to have been concerned with the problems, or to have discussed the subjects, or to have expressed the ideas which frequently recur in the Qur'an. In fact none of his closest friends and relatives had foreseen in his pre-Prophetic life any signs indicative of the great message which he suddenly started to preach at the age of forty. These pieces of evidence, taken together, provide incontrovertible evidence that the Qur'an is not a product of the Prophet's mind; that it had come to the Prophet (peace be on him) from without. For no human being can produce something for which traces of growth and evolution are not found in the earlier period of his life. This explains the fact that when some of the more crafty Makkan unbelievers realized the sheer absurdity of their allegation that the Prophet (peace be on him) was the author of the Qur'an, they chose to propagate that there must be some other person who had taught the Prophet (peace be on him) the Qur'an. Such a statement, however, was even more preposterous since they failed to convincingly point out who that other person was who was the true source of the Qur'an. Even leaving aside Makka, the fact is that there was not a single person throughout the length and breadth of Arabia who possessed the competence needed for the authorship of the Qur'an. Had such an extraordinary person existed, how could he have remained hidden from the sight of others? Second, the pre-Prophetic life of Muhammad (peace be on him) clearly shows him to be a man of exceptionally high moral character for there was not the least trace of any evil - whether lies, deceit, vile cunning or trickery. On the contrary, all those who came into contact with the Prophet (peace be on him) were impressed by him as a person of flawless character, as one utterly truthful and trustworthy. An illustration in point is the incident related in connection with the re-building of the Ka'bah five years before his designation as a Prophet. There was a serious dispute between the various families of the Quraysh on the question as to who should have the privilege of placing the Black Stone in its place in the edifice of the Ka'bah, In order to reach an amicable accord, they resolved that they would abide by the ruling given by the first person who entered the Ka'bah the following day. The next day people saw it was the Prophet (peace be on him) who was the first to enter. They exclaimed: 'Here is a trustworthy man (amin). We agree [to follow his ruling]. He is Muhammad.' (Ibn Sa'd, al-Tabaqat, vol. 1, p. 146 - Ed.) Thus, before designating Muhammad (peace be on him) as a Prophet, God had the whole body of the Quraysh testify to his trustworthiness. No room was left, therefore, for suspecting that he who had never resorted to lying or deceit throughout his life would suddenly resort to fabricating a gigantic lie; that he would first compose something, then deny that it was his work, and would then ascribe it to God. In view of the above, God directs the Prophet (peace be on him) to ask the unbelievers to use their brains before levelling such a stupid allegation against him. For the Prophet (peace be on him) was after all no stranger to them; he had spent virtually a whole lifetime in their midst. In view of the well-known and uniformly high level of his conduct and character, how could it even be conceived that he would falsely ascribe the Qur'an to God if God had not actually revealed it to him. (For further elaboration see al-Qasas 28, n. 109.)