There are two very significant remarks
about John the Baptist made by Jesus Christ, but recorded
in a mysterious way. The first remark about the Baptist is
that in which John is presented to the world as the
reincarnate Eliah (Elijah) the Old Testament. The mystery
with which this appellation is enveloped consists in the
significant silence of Christ about the identity of the
person whom Eliah (not Elias) was expected to officially
announce and introduce to the world as the Last Prophet.
The language of Jesus in this respect is exceedingly
obscure, ambiguous, and mysterious. If John was Eliah, as
is expressly and fearlessly declared, why, then, is the
person whose precursor was Eliah not expressly and
fearlessly mentioned? If Jesus were the "Messenger of
the Covenant" and the Dominator [as the Vulgate
translates the Hebrew Adon (Mal. iii. 1)], why does he not
openly say so? If he courageously declared that it was not
he himself but another Prophet who was that 'Dominator' it
must, indeed, have been a criminal hand which erased and
effaced the words of Jesus from the original Gospel. At
all events, it is the Gospels that are responsible for
this ambiguity and obscurity. It cannot but be described
as diabolical tampering with the text that has misled
billions of Christians for so many centuries. Jesus,
whatever he believed he represented, ought to have, to say
the least, shown himself straightforward, and to have
frankly declared: "John is the Eliah who was sent as
a precursor to prepare the way for me!" Or if such
was not the case, then he could have made the following
declaration: "John is the Eliah who was sent to
prepare the way for Prophet Muhammad." Perhaps this
is due to the love of Jesus for ambiguity. There are, in
fact, several instances - as reported in the Gospels -
where Jesus gives an answer or makes a statement which is
obscure and entirely unintelligible. Leaving his godhead
aside, as a Prophet, no, even as a teacher, he was
expected to be a straightforward teacher and leader.
The other remark is shrouded in still a
thicker mystery. "No man born of woman was ever
greater than John the Baptist," says Jesus, "but
the least in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than
John." Does Jesus Christ mean to teach us that John
the Baptist and all the Prophets and the righteous men
were outside the Kingdom of God? Who is the
"least" that was "greater" than John,
and consequently than all the people of God preceding the
Baptist? Does Jesus mean by the "least" himself,
or the "least" among the baptized Christians? It
cannot be himself, because in his time that Kingdom was
not yet established on earth; if it is, then he could not
be the "least" in it since he was its founder.
The Churches - rather each Church, orthodox or heterodox,
from its own peculiar point of view - have discovered a
very abstruse or a very absurd solution for this problem;
and that solution is that the "]east" Christian
washed with the blood of Jesus - either through the
Sacrament of Baptism, according to the belief of the
Sacerdotalists, or through the regeneration of some kind,
according to the superstition of the Evangelicals -
becomes "greater" than the Baptist and all the
army of the holy men and women, including Prophets Adam,
Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, Eliah, Daniel, and John the
Baptist! And the reason or proof of this marvelous claim
is that the Christian, however, sinful, ignorant, low, and
poor he may be, providing he has faith in Jesus as his
Savior, has the privileges which the holy Prophets coveted
to have but did not enjoy. These privileges are
innumerable; purification from original sin through the
Christian Baptism; the knowledge of the "Holy
Trinity" (!!! hasha! astaghfiru 'llah! - Allah forbid
and pardon this term); the feeding upon the flesh and the
blood of Jesus in the Sacrament of the Eucharist; the
grace of making the sign of a cross; the privilege of the
keys of Heaven and of Hell delivered to the Sovereign
Pontiff; and the rapturous ecstasies of the Puritans,
Quakers, Brethren, and all other sects called
Nonconformists who, each in its own way, while claiming
the same privileges and perogatives, all agree that each
good Christian will become on the Day of Resurrection a
pure virgin and present herself as a bride to the
"Lamb of God"!
Do you not think, then, that the
Christians are right to believe that the "least"
among them is "greater" than all the Prophets?
Do you not think, then, that a sturdy Patagonian monk and
a penitentiary Parisian nun are higher than Adam and Eve,
because the mystery of the Trinity is revealed to these
confused people and not to our first parents who lived in
the Paradise of Allah before their fall? Or, don't you
think that this sort of belief is most unbecoming and
undignified in these lofty times of advanced science and
civilization? To claim that an English prince or an orphan
negro is "greater" that John the Baptist because
they are Christians is, to say the least, abominable!
Yet all these diverse beliefs and creeds
are derived from the New Testament and from the words put
into the mouth of Jesus and of his Apostles. For us
Muslim, however, there are a few scintillating sparkles
left in the Gospels; and they are enough for us to
discover the truth about the real Jesus and his cousin,
Yohannan Ma'mdana (John-Baptist).
JOHN THE BAPTIST FORETOLD PROPHET
MUHAMMAD
1. According to the testimony of Prophet
Jesus, no man born of woman was ever greater than John the
Baptist. But the "least" in the Kingdom of
Heaven is greater than John. The comparison made by the
"Spirit of Allah" (Ruhu 'llah, i.e. Jesus) is
between John and all the preceding Prophets as the
officers and administrators of the Kingdom of Heaven. Now
in chronological order the last Prophet would be the least
of them all, he would be their junior and their youngest.
The word "zira" in the Aramaic, like the Arabic
"saghir," signifies "little, small
young." The Pshittha Version uses the word "zira
or "z'eira" in apposition to "rabba"
for "great, old." Every Christian will admit
that Jesus is not the "last" Prophet, and
therefore he cannot be the "least." Not only
were the Apostles themselves endowed with the gift of
prophecy, but also many other holy men in the apostolic
age were favored with it according to (Acts xi. 27, 28;
xiii. 1; xv. 32; xxi, 9, 10, etc)!
And as we cannot determine which of
these numerous Church Prophets was the "last",
we are naturally forced to seek elsewhere a Prophet who is
indisputably the Last and the Seal of the Prophetic List.
Can we imagine a stronger and more brilliant evidence in
favor of Prophet Muhammad than the fulfillment, in his
holy person, of this wonderful prophecy of Jesus Christ?
In the long list of the prophetic
family, certainly the "youngest," the
"least" is Prophet Muhammad; he is the
"Benjamin" of the Prophets; yet he is their
Sultan, their "Adon" and their
"Glory." To deny the prophetical and apostolical
character and nature of Prophet Muhammad's mission is a
fundamental denial of the whole Divine Revelation and all
the Prophets who preached it. For all other Prophets put
together had not accomplished the gigantic work which the
Prophet of Mecca did alone in the short period of but
twenty-three years of his mission.
The mystery of the pre-existence of the
spirits of the Prophets has not been revealed to us, but
every true Muslim believes it. It was that pre-existing
spirit that by the power of the Word of Allah
"Kun" ("Be!") a Sarah, a Hanna, and a
Blessed Virgin Mary gave birth to Isaac, to the Baptist,
and to Jesus. There are several other names as recorded in
the Old Testament - for instance, Samson, Jeremiah.
The Gospel of Barnabas reports Jesus as
speaking of the Spirit of Prophet Muhammad which he
declares to have been created before everything else.
Hence the Baptist's witness about the Prophet whom he
foretold: "He who comes after me has become before
me, for he was before me" (John i. 15).
It is useless to interpret these
wonderful words of the Baptist about Prophet Muhammad as
referring to Prophet Jesus as the author of the Fourth
Gospel attempts to do.
There is a remarkable chapter about John
the Baptist in the well-known book of Ernest Renan on La
vie de Jesu. Long ago I carefully read this work. If the
learned French writer had the least consideration for
Prophet Muhammad's claim in the world of Prophets, I am
sure his profound investigations and comments would have
led him entirely to a different conclusion. He, like all
other dissident and Biblical critics, instead of finding
out the truth, criticizes religion adversely and leads his
readers to skepticism.
I am happy to say that it is my
privilege, by the Grace of Allah, to solve the problem, to
ring up the curtain of mystery which has covered the true
sense and meaning of "the Least in the Kingdom of
Heaven!"
2. John the Baptist recognizes Prophet
Muhammad as superior and more powerful than himself. That
significant expression made to the Jewish multitudes,
"He that cometh after me" reminded their
Scribes, Pharisees, and lawyers of the ancient prophecy of
their great ancestor Prophet Jacob, in which that
patriarch uses the unique title of "Shilokhah"
for the "Rasul Allah," the epithet frequently
used by Prophet Jesus for the Messenger Muhammad as
preserved in the Gospel of Barnabas. At the time of
writing my article on the "Shiloh" (l) I said
that the word might be a corruption of
"shiloukh" or "Shilokhah," (2) which
means the Messenger of Allah, but I did not then recollect
that St. Jerome, as well, had understood the Hebrew form
in that sense, for he has translated it as "qui
mittendis est."
------------Footnotes: (1). Cf.
Islamic Review for September, 1928, p. 313 et seq. (2).
The Oriental Hebrews and Assyrians pronounce the word
"Shilokha" or "Shiloakh." It is very
difficult to write or transliterate the Semitic languages
in the Latin characters. ------------- end of footnotes
We have only an epitome of John's sermon
in a few lines, written not by himself but by an unknown
hand - at least not in his own original tongue - and much
tampered with by transcribers and redactors who had
already made his disciple Jesus an idol or a god. But when
we come to compare this sermon preached in the wilderness
of Judea and on the shores of the Jordan with the
marvelous grace, elegance, eloquence, and power so
manifest in every verse and page of the Holy Qur'an, we
understand the sense of the words, "He is more
powerful than I!"
When I picture to myself the ascetic
Baptist preaching aloud in the wilderness, or on the banks
of the Jordan, to the masses of the Jewish believers, with
a theocratic history of some four thousand years old
behind them, and then make a brief review of the quiet,
orderly, and dignified manner in which Prophet Muhammad
proclaimed the celestial verses of the Qur'an to the
unbelieving Arabs; and, finally, when I examine and behold
the effect of the two preachings upon the hearers and the
final result, I understand the magnitude of the contrast
between them, and of the significance of the words
"He is more powerful than I!"
When I contemplate the seizure and
imprisonment of the helpless Baptist by Herod Antipas (l)
and his cruel decapitation - or when I peruse the confused
but tragical biblical accounts of the flagellation of
Jesus (or Judah Ishariot) by Pilate, his coronation with a
crown of thorns by Herod, and the catastrophe upon the
Calvary - and then turn my eyes upon the triumphal entry
of the great Adon - the Sultan of the Prophets - into
Mecca, the total destruction of all the ancient idols and
the purification of the Holy Ka'ba; upon the thrilling
scene of the vanquished deadly enemy headed by Abu Sufyan
at the feet of the victorious Shilohah - the Prophet of
Allah - begging his clemency and making the profession of
faith; and upon the glorious worship, devotion, and the
final sermon of the Seal of the Prophets in these solemn
Divine words: "Al-yauma akmaltu lakum dmakum."
"This day I have perfected your Relgion and completed
My favor to you. I have approved Islam to be your
Religion..." Ch.5:3 Qur'an then I fully understand
the weight and value of the Baptist's confession, "He
is more powerful than I!"
-----------Footnote: (1). There is
anachronism in the account of John's martyrdom concerning
the family of Herod the Great in the Gospels (Matt. xiv,
etc.), the reader can consult the Antiquities of Joseph
Flavius. ------------ end of footnote
3. "The Coming Wrath." Have
you ever met with a sensible, judicious, and convincing
interpretation of this phrase in any of the numerous
commentaries on the Gospels? What does John mean, or wish
his audience to understand, by his expression:
"Behold the axe is already set at the root of the
tree"? Or his remark: "He holds the van in his
hand to purge out his threshing-floor"? Or when he
reduced the title "Children of Abraham" to
nothing?
I will not detain you on the vagaries of
the commentators, for they are reveries which neither John
nor his hearers had ever dreamed of. Could John ever teach
those haughty Pharisees, and those rationalistic Saduqees
(1) who denied the corporeal resurrection, that on the day
of the last judgment Jesus of Nazareth would pour down
upon them his wrath and burn them like the fruitless trees
and like the chaff in the fire of Hell? There is not a
single word in all the literature of the Scriptures about
the resurrection of bodies or about Hell-fire. These
Talmudistic writings are full of eschatological material
very similar to those of the Zardushtees, but have no
distinct origin in the canonical books. The Prophet of
repentance and of good tidings does not speak about the
remote and indefinite wrath which certainly awaits the
unbelievers and the impious, but of the near and proximate
catastrophe of the Jewish nation. He threatened the wrath
of Allah awaiting that people if they persisted in their
sins and the rejection of his mission and that of his
colleague, the Prophet Jesus Christ. The coming calamity
was the destruction of Jerusalem and the final dispersion
of Israel which took place some thirty years afterwards
during the lifetime of many among his hearers. Both he and
Jesus announced the coming of the Great Prophet of Allah
whom the Patriarch Jacob had announced under the title of
Shiloha, and that at his advent all prophetic and royal
privileges and authority would be taken away from the
Jews; and, indeed, such was the case some six centuries
later, when their last strongholds in the Hijaz were razed
to the ground and their principalities destroyed by
Prophet Muhammad. The increasingly dominating power of
Rome in Syria and Palestine was threatening the
quasiautonomy of the Jews, and the emigration current
among the Jews had already begun. And it was on this
account that the preacher inquires, "Who has informed
you to flee from the coming wrath?" They were warned
and exhorted to bear good fruits and good harvest by
repentance and belief in the true Messengers of God,
especially in the Rasul Allah, who was the true and the
last powerful Commander.
------------Footnote: (1). This
Hebrew name is wrongly written "Saducees."
------------- end of footnote
4. The Jews and the Christians have
always charged Prophet Muhammad of having established the
religion of Islam by force, coercion, and the sword. The
Muslim modernists have always tried to refute this charge.
But this does not mean to say that Prophet Muhammad never
wielded the sword. He had to use it to preserve the Name
of Allah. Every patience has limits, every favor has an
end. It is not that the Patience or Favor of Allah is
finite; with Him all is settled, defined and fixed. The
chance and the time graciously granted by Allah to the
Jews, to the Arabs, and to the Gentiles lasted for more
than four thousand years. It was only after the expiry of
this period that Allah sends His beloved Prophet Muhammad
with power and sword, with fire and spirit, to deal with
the wicked unbelievers, with the ungrateful children of
Prophet Abraham - both the Ishmaelites and the Israelites
- and to deal with the power of the devil, once for all.
The whole of the Old Testament is a tale
of theocracy and of idolatry. Now and then a little
sparkle of Islam - that is, the Religion of Allah -
glittered in Jerusalem and in Mecca; but it was always
persecuted by the power of the devil. The four diabolical
Beasts had to come and trample under their feet the
handful of believers in Allah. Then comes Prophet Muhammad
to crush and kill the Venemous Serpent and to give him the
opprobrious title of "Iblis" - the
"Bruised" Satan. Certainly Prophet Muhammad was
a fighting Prophet, but the object of that fighting was
victory not vengeance, defeat of the enemy and not his
extermination, and, in a word, to establish the Religion
of Islam as the Kingdom of God upon the earth. In fact,
when the Crier in the desert shouted, aloud, "Prepare
the way of the Lord, and make straight His paths," he
was alluding to the Religion of the Lord in the form of a
Kingdom which was drawing nigh. Seven centuries before,
the Prophet Isaiah had cried out and pronounced the same
words (Isa. xl. 1-4); and a couple of centuries later
Allah Himself paved the way for Cyrus by raising and
filling up every valley, and by lowering every hill and
mountain, in order to make the conquest easy and the march
rapid (xlv. 1-3). History repeats itself, they say; the
language and its meaning is the same in both cases, the
former being a prototype of the latter. Allah had smoothed
the path for Cyrus, subdued his enemies to the Persian
conqueror because of His House in Jerusalem and His chosen
people in the captivity. Now again He was repeating the
same providence, but on a larger and wider scale. Before
the preaching of Prophet Muhammad, idols and falsehood
disappeared; before his sword empires tumbled down; and
the children of the Kingdom of Allah became equals and
formed a "people of the Saints of the Most
High." For it is only in Islam that all the believers
are equal, no priest, no sacrament; no Muslim high as a
hill, or low like a valley; and no caste or distinction of
race and rank. All believers are one, except in virtue and
piety, in which they can excel each other. It is only the
religion of Islam that does not recognize any being,
however great and holy, as an absolute mediator between
Allah and man.