Come to Common Terms

Come to Common Terms

“Muslims have been quick to ask Christians about the Trinity; it is time we ask them about tawheed and Muhammad.”- Samuel Green

 

Question Mark

Introduction

 

As a “response” to an open letter published by Muslim Scholars – Samuel Green objects that Muslims quote Qur’an 3:64 in the letter and want Christians to worship only one God when they are themselves guilty of deifying Mohammad (peace be upon him) as a partnering deity with Allah (SWT):

“…challenge Islam about the way it associates Muhammad with God… Muhammad is associated with God in every area of Islam.”

It is our privilege to accept Samuel’s “challenge” and to analyze all the arguments and ‘proofs’ which he has put forth in support of the alleged deification of Mohammad (peace be upon him) and breach of Islamic Monotheism.

Inviting the Challenge

 

Samuel Green has got seven arguments, A through G, to prove that Islam deifies Mohammad (peace be upon him). Let us visit each one of them.

            “A. Muhammad is associated with God in the Shahada, the Islamic confession of faith.

“There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.”

To be a Muslim and enter paradise you must confess Muhammad with God. Compare this to the Shema of Moses where God alone is confessed.

Here, O Israel: The Lord our God, the LORD is one. Love the LORD your God with all your heart … (Deuteronomy 6:4-5, NIV)

The Christian confession is of God alone too with no requirement to confess Moses, Paul or anyone else but Muhammad is associated with God in the Shahada.”

The above quotation was the first argument coming from a person who claims to have understood “Tawheed and Shirk” so much so that he explains it to Muslims what the terms mean and its imports in the sub – section of his paper “TAWHEED AND SHIRK”!

It needs to be pointed out that although Mohammad (peace be upon him) is mentioned in the Shahada – he is not associated in any way to God which would breach “Tawheed”.

 Often Christian apologists in their haste to attack straw – man forget the capacity in which Mohammad (peace be upon him) is to be confessed in the Official Islamic Shahada. He is not confessed as a deity beside Allah (SWT) rather as a slave and a messenger:

 

“There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.”

More than that, there are proofs in Islamic literature, which further establishes the status of Mohammad (peace be upon him) as no more than a mere mortal messenger and slave who will even die:

 

“Muhammad is no more than a messenger: many Were the messenger that passed away before him. If he died or were slain, will ye then Turn back on your heels? If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to Allah; but Allah (on the other hand) will swiftly reward those who (serve Him) with gratitude. (Qur’an 3:144, Yusuf Ali Translation)

And,

Narrated Abu Ma’bad:
(the slave of Ibn Abbas) Allah’s Apostle said to Muadh when he sent him to Yemen, “You will go to the people of the Scripture. So, when you reach there, invite them to testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah, and that Muhammad is His Apostle. And if they obey you in that, tell them that Allah has enjoined on them five prayers in each day and night. And if they obey you in that tell them that Allah has made it obligatory on them to pay the Zakat which will be taken from the rich among them and given to the poor among them. If they obey you in that, then avoid taking the best of their possessions, and be afraid of the curse of an oppressed person because there is no screen between his invocation and Allah.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 24, Number 573)

… Abu Dhar went to the Mosque, where some people from Quraish were present, and said, ‘O folk of Quraish! I testify that none has the right to be worshipped except Allah, and I (also) testify that Muhammad is Allah’s Slave and His Apostle.‘ (Hearing that) the Quraishi men said, ‘Get at this Sabi (i.e. Muslim)!’ (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 56, Number 725)

And,

Narrated ‘Ubada:
The Prophet said, “If anyone testifies that None has the right to be worshipped but Allah Alone Who has no partners, and that Muhammad is His Slave and His Apostle, and that Jesus is Allah’s Slave and His Apostle and His Word which He bestowed on Mary and a Spirit from Him, and that Paradise is true, and Hell is true, Allah will admit him into Paradise with the deeds which he had done even if those deeds were few.” (Junada, the sub-narrator said, ” ‘Ubada added, ‘Such a person can enter Paradise through any of its eight gates he likes.”) (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 644)

And,

It is narrated on the authority of Ubadah b. Samit that the messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) observed: He who said: “There is no god but Allah, He is One and there is no associate with Him, that Muhammad is his servant and His messenger, that Christ is servant and the son of His slave-girl and he (Christ) His word which He communicated to Mary and is His Spirit, that Paradise is a fact and Hell is a fact,” Allah would make him (he who affirms these truths enter Paradise through any one of its eight doors which he would like. (Sahih Muslim, Book 1, Number 0043)

It is observable that the Holy Scriptures establishes that Mohammad (peace be upon him) is just another mortal who will die one day or that he could be slain in a battle. Furthermore, they also speak that he is a slave of Allah (SWT). What is interesting to note is how can a mortal and a slave of God be co – equal to God. Samuel needs to provide more proofs to establish his case.

On the contrary, Mohammad (peace be upon him) warns Muslims not to deify him as Christians, like Samuel Green, deified Jesus (peace be upon him):

            “Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 55, Number 654:

Narrated ‘Umar:

I heard the Prophet saying, “Do not exaggerate in praising me as the Christians praised the son of Mary, for I am only a Slave. So, call me the Slave of Allah and His Apostle.”

Doing more damage to Samuel’s already flimsy argument, we have Mohammad (peace be upon him) disowning any divine attributes to himself which befits God alone:

“Say: “I tell you not that with me are the treasures of Allah, nor do I know what is hidden, nor do I tell you I am an angel. I but follow what is revealed to me.” Say: “can the blind be held equal to the seeing?” Will ye then consider not? (Qur’an 6:50, Yusuf Ali Translation)

Say: “I have no power over any good or harm to myself except as Allah willeth. If I had knowledge of the unseen, I should have multiplied all good, and no evil should have touched me: I am but a warner, and a bringer of glad tidings to those who have faith.” (Qur’an 7:188, Yusuf Ali Translation)

The forgoing verses have made it abundantly clear that there is no divine association except for the association of slave to master and messenger to God between Mohammad (peace be upon him) and Allah (SWT). Thus, Samuel needs to understand concepts before attacking straw – man.

Further Readings on the above argument:

• Islamic Shahada – The Only True Shahada
• Islamic Shahada – The Invincible Shahada
• True Shahada Indeed
• The True Shahada Indeed: Revisited [Part 1]
• The True Shahada Indeed: Revisited [Part 2]
• The True Shahada Indeed: Revisited [Part 3]

By now we already have a glimpse of the quality of arguments to follow from Samuel’s paper.

Let us turn to his second argument, namely “B.”

“B. Muhammad is associated with God in prayer (Salaat). The Salaat is the Islamic prayer ritual prayed five times a day. Even though Muhammad is dead he is addressed in this prayer.

Greetings to you (As Salaamu ‘alaika ), O Prophet, and the mercy and blessings of Allah.

Prayer should be to God alone (tawheed). Christian prayer is to God alone but the Salaat is shirk.”

 

Many replies are in line to one of the weakest arguments.

Notice that Samuel assumes that prophet (peace be upon him) is associated with God in Salaah because (1.) He is addressed even though he is dead (2.) He is greeted.

We accept that Mohammad (peace be upon him) is addressed in the prayer (Salaah), however, the common mistake which many Christian apologists commit is they hardly consider the capacity in which Mohammad (peace be upon him) is addressed and greeted.

Samuel will have a case if Mohammad (peace be upon him) is addressed and greeted in a way which befits God – Almighty with this forgoing let us see at some of the proofs of how he is addressed in the Salaah.

“[Sahih Bukhari: Volume 6, Book 60, Number 320]

Narrated Ka’b bin Ujra (Radi Allah Anhu): It was said, “O Allah’s Apostle (sal-allahu-alleihi-wasallam)! We know how to greet you, but how to invoke Allah for you?” The Prophet (sal-allahu-alleihi-wasallam) said, “Say: Allahumma salli ala Muhammadin wa’ala Ali Muhammaddin, kama sallaita ‘ala all Ibrahim, innaka Hamidun Majid. Allahumma barik ‘ala Muhammaddin, kama barakata ‘ala ali Ibrahim, innaka Hamidun Majid”

“[Sahih Bukhari: Volume 6, Book 60, Number 321]

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri (Radi Allah Anhu): We said, “O Allah’s Apostle! (sal-allahu-alleihi-wasallam) (We know) this greeting (to you) but how shall we invoke Allah for you?” He (sal-allahu-alleihi-wasallam) said, “Say! Allahumma salli ala Muhammadin ‘Abdika wa rasulika kama- sallaita ‘ala all Ibrahim wa barik ala Muhammadin wa’ala all Muhammadin kama barakta ‘ala all Ibrahim.’ Al-Laith said: ‘Ala Muhammadin wa ‘ala all Muhammadin kama barakta ala all Ibrahim.”

As is perspicuous that Mohammad (peace be upon him) is not invoked. It is Allah (SWT) who is invoked for Mohammad (peace be upon him). This means:

• Because Mohammad (peace be upon him) is not invoked there is no question of him being deified.
• Because Allah (SWT) is invoked for Mohammad (peace be upon him) further corroborates that Allah (SWT) is the only true deity, as one does not invoke prayers for a deity – it is absurd.
• Finally, greeting is not invocation. We greet daily in our lives, however, if greetings has anything to prove for deification then consider a fact that even Abraham (peace be upon him) is greeted in Islam in the very same way as is Mohammad (peace be upon him) and in the same “Salaah”, not merely that, even the family members of Mohammad (peace be upon him) and Abraham (peace be upon him) are also greeted!:

“ALLAHUMMA SALLI ALA MUHAMMADIW WA ALA AALI MUHAMMADIN KAMAA SALLAITA ALA IBRAHIMA WA ALA AALI IBRAHIMA INNAKA HAMIDUM MAJID. ALLAHUMMA BAARIK ALA MUHAMMADIW WA ALA AALI MUHAMMADIN KAMAA BAARAKTA ALA IBRAHIMA WA ALA AALI IBRAHIMA INNAKA HAMIDUM MAJID.

“O Allah, let Your Blessings come upon Muhammad and the family of Muhammad, AS you have blessed Ibrahim and his family. Truly, You are Praiseworthy and Glorious. Allah, bless Muhammad and the family of Muhammad, AS you have blessed Ibrahim and his family. Truly, You are Praiseworthy and Glorious”” (Source)

Therefore, in order that Samuel Green’s argument (B.), make any sense he should address the following points:

1. How does invoking to Allah (SWT) deify Mohammad (peace be upon him)
2. How does greeting Mohammad (peace be upon him) deify him when:

1. Greeting is not any exclusive act of worship for God – Almighty.
2. Even family of Mohammad (peace be upon him) is greeted.
3. Even Abraham (peace be upon him) and his family is greeted.

Or, should we expect Samuel to write, in his next paper, that even family of Mohammad (peace be upon him) and Abraham (peace be upon him) and his family are also deified in Islam! Or should we expect Samuel to be more objective and less subjective in his next paper.

Samuel’s third argument, namely, (C.):

“C. Muhammad is associated with God in location. Mosques are to be places of worship to God alone (tawheed). For this reason no one is ever to be buried inside a mosque; nor are mosques to be erected over graves. This would be to associate a person with a space that is for God alone.

And the places of worship are only for Allah, so pray not unto anyone along with Allah. (Qur’an 72:18, Pickthall)

Narrated ‘Aisha and ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abbas: When the last moment of the life of Allah’s Apostle came he started putting his ‘Khamisa’ on his face and when he felt hot and short of breath he took it off his face and said, “May Allah curse the Jews and Christians for they built the places of worship at the graves of their Prophets.” The Prophet was warning (Muslims) of what those had done. (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 1, bk. 8, no. 427, Khan)

Yet, Muhammad’s grave is inside the mosque in Medina. The mosque in Medina is a major place of pilgrimage for devout Muslims and yet it is shirk.”

We would respond Samuel by two approaches, namely, concordant approach where we will accept his argument on the face of it and discordant approach were we do not accept his argument.

Concordant Approach:

The reason why prophet (peace be upon him) cursed the Jews and Christians is because by building places of worship at the graves of their prophets they started to worship the prophets rather than worshipping God (cf. Qur’an 9:30 & Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 93, Number 532s), however, even if we agree to Samuel’s argument that Mohammad’s (peace be upon him) grave is in the Mosque yet Muslims neither worship him nor his grave like the Jews and Christians.

In fact the Hadith which Samuel pulled out has back fired against his charges because it exhorts Muslims not to worship prophets (or their graves) like the Jews and the Christians did.

A similar Hadith, with a slightly different rendering is found in Sahih Muslim:

            “Muslim :: Book 4 : Hadith 1082

‘A’isha and Abdullah reported: As the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) was about to breathe his last, he drew his sheet upon his face and when he felt uneasy, he uncovered his face and said in that very state: Let there be curse upon the Jews and the Christians that they have taken the graves of their apostles as places of worship. He in fact warned (his men) against what they (the Jews and the Christians) did.

Notice that according to this Hadith, Jews and Christians are condemned for transmuting the graves of their prophets into places of worship. Contrary to this practice, Muslims do not worship Mohammad (peace be upon him) neither his grave, neither have they turned his grave into a place of worship; as a matter of fact prophet’s grave is separated out in a cubicle in the Mosque in Medina.

Notwithstanding the fact that (a.) Muslims do not worship Mohammad (peace be upon him) (b.) nor his grave (c.) nor have they turned his grave into a place of worship – let us know consider Samuel’s objection – the mere presence of Mohammad’s (peace be upon him) grave in the Mosque in Medina in the sub – sequent section.

Discordant Approach:

Historically, Prophet (peace be upon him) had his house in the Mosque of Medina right from the early days of its construction:

“The construction (of the Mosque of Medina) took some twelve days. It was after its completion that the quarters for his wives were built in the same manner; and it was after the construction was complete for them that the Prophet (peace be upon him) moved out from the house of Abu Ayyub. Both Sawdah (RAA) and Aishah (RAA) had a house each. Subsequently, as he married more women, more houses were built.” (A Biography of the Prophet of Islam – In the light of the Original Sources – An Analytical Study. Volume 1, By: Dr. Mahdi Rizqullah Ahmad, Translated by: Syed Iqbal Zaheer, Maktaba Darussalam 2005)

Mohammad (peace be upon him) died in one of the quarters of his wife:

“His grave was dug where he died, in Aishah’s cottage” (A Biography of the Prophet of Islam – In the light of the Original Sources – An Analytical Study. Volume 1, By: Dr. Mahdi Rizqullah Ahmad, Translated by: Syed Iqbal Zaheer, Maktaba Darussalam 2005)

It is a traditional practice in Islam that prophets are buried wherever they die:

            “Malik :: Book 16 : Hadith 16.10.27

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, died on Monday and was buried on Tuesday and people prayed over him individually with no one leading them. Some people said that he would be buried near the mimbar, and others said that he would be buried in al-Baqi. Abu Bakr as-Siddiq came and said, “I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, say, ‘No prophet was ever buried except in the place where he died.’ “So a grave was dug for him there. When he was about to be washed they wished to take off his shirt but they heard a voice saying “Don’t take off his shirt,” so they did not take off his shirt and he was washed with it on, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.

And,

Aboo Bakr told them that the Prophet (r) had said, “Prophets should be buried wherever they die.” Thus a grave was dug immediately below the bed on which he died in the house of ‘Aa’ishah. (Source)

With the forgoing, firstly, we see that:

• Mohammad (peace be upon him) had his house in the Mosque of Medina right from the early days of its construction.
• He died in one of the quarters in the mosque.
• And it is an Islamic fact that prophets are buried where ever they die.

Therefore, it is not Muslims who made prophet’s grave in the mosque or turned his grave into a place of worship but the Mosque was already there even before the death of the prophet and it was coincidental that he died in one of the quarters where he resided which was in the mosque and subsequently he was buried not in the mosque but at the place where he died which happened to be a mosque.

Thus, it is poor understanding of Samuel to charge Muslims of “Shirk” by having prophets grave in the Mosque without having sufficient background knowledge.

Secondly, the prophet’s grave has been well secluded from the rest of the Mosque to avoid any disturbance or worship (if any) from or to it.

Thirdly, according to the Hadith which Samuel quoted in conjunction with the Sahih Muslim Hadith we quoted, Muslims are exhorted explicitly not to worship Mohammad’s grave (peace be upon him) like the Jews and the Christians did. Thus, we have no substantial proof against Islam which would establish that Mohammad (peace be upon him) is deified because his grave is in the Mosque of Medina especially when we have explicit statements condemning the worship of his grave.

Here is Samuel’s another weak argument, fourth argument:

“D. Muhammad is associated with God in love and forgiveness. Love and forgiveness in Islam do not come from God alone to us (tawheed), instead they are through Muhammad (shirk).

Say, (O Muhammad, to mankind): If you love Allah, follow me; Allah will love you and forgive you your sins. Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (Qur’an 3:31, Pickthall”

Notice how presumptuously Samuel has claimed that love and forgiveness does not come from God alone. And he quoted Qur’an 3:31, however, hardly did he read the verse carefully. The inspired verse does not claim that divine love and forgiveness comes from Mohammad (peace be upon him), on the contrary, it says that they come from Allah (SWT) alone and to achieve it, one needs to just follow Mohammad – following – which is not even remotely near to worshipping! Samuel needs to get his comprehension, especially of Sacred Scriptures, correct before claiming anything or prove us how the verse claims divine love and forgiveness from Mohammad (peace be upon him) besides Allah (SWT).

One shows true love to Allah (SWT) by following Mohammad (peace be upon him) because it is ordained by Allah (SWT) himself that everyone should follow the prophets,

“We sent not a messenger, but to be obeyed, in accordance with the will of Allah.” (Qur’an 4:64, Yusuf Ali Translation)

So by following prophets/Mohammad (peace be upon him) we are indirectly obeying Allah (SWT) and thus worshipping Him and loving Him.

Yet again, Samuel’s allegation begs for more support from Scriptures to establish anything even close to substantial.

Samuel’s fifth argument, (E.),

“E. Muhammad is associated with God in blessing. The idea of relics giving God’s blessing is shirk because the power of God would be associated with his creation in some way. However, Muhammad gave out the relics of his hair as a blessing to others.

Abu Bakr reported: (He called for) the barber and, pointing towards the right side of his head, said: (Start from) here, and then distributed his hair among those who were near him. He then pointed to the barber (to shave) the left side and he shaved it, and he gave (this hair) to Umm Sulaim (Allah be pleased with her). … (Sahih Muslim: bk. 7, no. 2992, Siddique)

To paraphrase Samuel’s argument, because Mohammad (peace be upon him) gave his hair to some one that is why he turned himself into God – Almighty!

This argument is ludicrous to say the least. Samuel needs to bring in more substantial proofs if he wants to convince Muslims about the deification of Mohammad (peace be upon him).

However, firstly, the Hadith under consideration does not indicate that his hairs had something divine in them. Rather the Hadith only specify that he gave his hair to other – they might have kept it as a loving memoir of their prophet (or for any other reason) which has got nothing to do with its divinity.

Furthermore, even if the hairs have got any blessing in them, it still needs to be established that they become divine because of it and that Muslims started to worship hair(s) or Mohammad (peace be upon him) due to it because we have no such incident recorded in Islamic traditions.

Samuel’s second last argument:

“F. Muhammad is associated with God in salvation. Salvation in Islam does not come from God alone to us (tawheed), instead it is through Muhammad (shirk).

Narrated Ibn Umar: On the Day of Resurrection the people will fall on their knees and every nation will follow their prophet and they will say, “O so-and-so! Intercede (for us with Allah), “till (the right) intercession is given to the Prophet (Muhammad) and that will be the day when Allah will raise him into a station of praise and glory (i.e. Al-Maqam -al-Mahmud). (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 60, no. 242, Khan)

O Prophet! … accept their allegiance and ask Allah to forgive them. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (Qu’ran 60:12, Pickthall)”

Firstly, we fail to realize how does the Hadith and the Qur’anic verse quoted by Samuel establish that salvation comes from Mohammad (peace be upon him) because they do not talk about salvation coming from Mohammad (peace be upon him) at all.

Secondly, we feel proud to proclaim that Muslim salvation does not just depend on Mohammad (peace be upon him) but on the belief in all earlier Messengers, Prophets, Books, Angels etc:

“O ye who believe! Believe in Allah and His Messenger, and the scripture which He hath sent to His Messenger and the scripture which He sent to those before (him). Any who denieth Allah, His angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Day of Judgment, hath gone far, far astray.” (Qur’an 4:136, Yusuf Ali Translation)

Observe that the verse says that anyone who disbeliefs in any one of the messenger or books etc has gone astray, in other words, in order to be successful or to gain salvation we need to believe in all messengers, books etc thus, a Muslim salvation does depend on the belief in all prior messengers – not just Mohammad (peace be upon him) himself. So, in the next response we expect Samuel Green to claim that Muslims have deified all messengers, books, angels etc! and, thereby further expose his ignorance of Islamic Theology.

Let us now analyze Samuel’s last argument:

“G. Muhammad practised shirk. In the Law of Moses and the Prophets it is very clear that we are not to venerate sacred stones.

Do not make idols or set up an image or a sacred stone for yourselves, and do not place a carved stone in your land to bow down before it. I am the LORD your God. (Leviticus 26:1, NIV)

Yet, Muhammad continued the pre-Islamic practice of venerating the Black Stone.

Bukhari, Muslim and Abu Daw’ud reported that ‘Umar approached the Black Stone and kissed it. Then he said: “I know that you are a mere stone that can neither harm nor do any good. If I had not seen the Prophet (peace be upon him) kissing you, I would have never kissed you.” Al-Khatabi said: “This shows that abiding by the Sunnah (custom) of the Prophet (peace be upon him) is binding, regardless of whether or not we understand its reason or the wisdom behind it.” Such information devolves obligation on all those whom it reaches, even if they may not fully comprehend its significance. It is known, however, that kissing the Black Stone signifies respect for it, recognition of our obligation toward it, and using it as a means of seeking Allah’s blessings. (As-Sayyid Sabiq, Fiqh us-Sunnah (Hajj and `Umrah), Indianapolis: American Trust Publications, 1992, vol.5, p. 75.)

All Muslims today must continue this idolatrous practice when they go on pilgrimage (Hajj) to Mecca, even though it is such obvious shirk. Why must they do it? Because Muhammad did it.”

Several responses are in order to this erroneous misconception which many emotional Christian Apologists harbor:

Firstly, the so called Old Testament verse is about the condemnation of the worship of idols, images and stones; as the verse itself claims, however, the Black Stone of Islam is an object of respect and not of worship. So Samuel first needs that it is an act of worship to substantiate his case. Consider these back firing statements from authority Samuel quoted:

“I know that you are a mere stone that can neither harm nor do any good… It is known, however, that kissing the Black Stone signifies respect for it…”

Ironically, even Samuel knew that Muslims do not worship but only respect the Black Stone:

“Yet, Muhammad continued the pre-Islamic practice of VENERATING the Black Stone.”

We are startled to ask why did Samuel choose the word “veneration” to “worship” especially when he was up to prove worship of it. It is because he knows no Muslim has ever worshipped the Black Stone!

Therefore, in order that at least Samuel’s last argument does any good to his case he should at least do one of the following to substantiate his case:

• Prove that veneration (as shown by Muslims for the Stone) or respect is the same as worship.
• Muslims ever worshipped the Black Stone.

But if he cannot do that, and of surety he will not be able to do that (inshallah), then he should consider showing his so called divinely inspired Leviticus verse to biblical Aaron, a revered biblical ‘monotheist’ prophet, who was caught amidst defiling himself and others with the very same Idols and Stones Samuel is fussing about:

      “And when the people saw that Moses delayed to come down out of the mount, the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron, and said unto him, Up, make us gods, which shall go before us; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.

And Aaron said unto them, Break off the golden earrings, which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, and bring them unto me.

And all the people brake off the golden earrings which were in their ears, and brought them unto Aaron.

And he received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made it a molten calf: and they said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.” (Bible, Exodus 32:1-4, King James Version)

Conclusion and Invitation

 

We have seen that none of the objections which Samuel Green had against Islam and its pure monotheism had any substantial argument in it except for flimsy assumptions, misconceptions, ignorance etc about the subject of Islam.

However, we invite learned Christians like Samuel Green (and others) into a more concrete discussion about Islam and Christianity. We cordially invite Christians (and Jews) to worship none but Allah (SWT) alone, desist from the worship of Jesus (peace be upon him) and accept the message of the last and final messenger, Mohammad (peace be upon him) through the Qur’anic verse:

“Say: “O People of the Book! come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than Allah.” If then they turn back, say ye: “Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah’s Will). (Qur’an 3:64, Yusuf Ali Translation)

But if they turn on their heels then “I bear witness that there is no God but Allah (SWT) and Mohammad (peace be upon him) is His messenger”

Note: Emphasizes like Bold, Italics, Capital, Underline etc wherever not found in the original, is ours.

Appendix

 

Muslim author and Da’ee Ahmed Eldin provides another perspective to important issues raised by Samuel Green, particularly, to his arguments “B.” and “C.”.

As a response to argument “B.” which was the blessings invoked for Mohammad (peace be upon him) in the daily ritual prayers, – Eldin quotes:

“Praise be to Allaah.  

These are some of the versions of the Tashahhud which are narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). 

1 – Ibn Mas’ood (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) taught me the Tashahhud, holding my hand between his hands, just as he would teach me a Soorah from the Qur’aan:

‘At-tahiyyaatu Lillaahi wa’s-salawaatu wa’t-tayyibaat, as-salaamu ‘alayka ayyuha’n-Nabiyyu wa rahmat-Allaahi wa barakaatuhu. As-salaamu ‘alayna wa ‘alaa ‘ibaad-Illaah is-saaliheen. Ash-hadu an laa ilaaha ill-Allaah wa ash-hadu anna Muhammadan ‘abduhu wa rasooluhu (All compliments, prayers and pure words are due to Allaah. Peace be upon you, O Prophet, and the mercy of Allaah and His blessings. Peace be upon us, and on the righteous slaves of Allaah. I bear witness that none has the right to be worshipped except Allaah, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His slave and Messenger).’

This was whilst he was among us, but after he was taken, we would say ‘as-salaam ‘ala’n-Nabi (peace be upon the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)).’”(Narrated by al-Bukhaari, al-Isti’dhaan, 6265) 

This is the soundest version of the wording of the Tashahhud according to the scholars. This should be said in the first Tashahhud, and in the second Tashahhud there should be added to it al-Salaah ‘ala’n-Nabi (sending blessings upon the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)). Ibn al-Qayyim said: “It is prescribed for his ummah to send blessings upon him in the last Tashahhud.” (al-Salaah wa Hukm Taarikihaa, 1/284) 

2 – The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“Say: ‘Allaahumma salli ‘ala Muhammadin wa ‘ala aali Muhammadin kamaa salayta ‘ala aali Ibraaheem, wa baarik ‘ala Muhammadin wa ‘ala aali Muhammadin kamaa baarakta ‘ala aali Ibraaheem fi’l-‘aalameen innaka Hameedun Majeed (O Allaah, send prayer upon Muhammad and upon the family of Muhammad, as You sent prayers upon the family of Ibraaheem. And send blessings upon Muhammad and upon the family of Muhammad, as You sent blessings upon the family of Ibraaheem among the nations; You are indeed Worthy of Praise, Full of Glory)’ – and the salaam is as you know.”

(Narrated by Muslim, al-Salaah, 405) 

The Sunnah is to make du’aa’ (supplication) after the Tashahhud and before the tasleem (salaams). See Question # 5236

Islam Q&A
Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid

According to the above citation also “Tashahhud” only implies seeking peace for the prophet (peace be upon him), hence, there is no supplication made to him which would otherwise violate Islamic Monotheism. As a matter of fact, we seek peace for all the prophets – no wonder we suffix “Assalato wassalam” (peace be on you) whenever referring to any prophet including Jesus (peace be upon him). 

On the issue of prophet’s grave inside the mosque in Medina, argument “C.”, – Eldin enlightens:

“”The Prophet’s Grave
The presence of the Prophet’s grave in his masjid in Madeenah can neither be
used to justify the placing of bodies in other masjids nor the building of masjids
over graves. The Prophet (r) did not order that he be buried in his masjid, nor did
his companions put his grave into the masjid. The companions of the Prophet (r)

wisely avoided burying the Prophet (r) in the local graveyard for fear that later
generations would become overly attached to his grave. ‘Umar, the freed slave of
Ghafrah, related that when the sahaabah (companions of the Prophet (r) gathered
to decide on the Prophet’s (r) burial, one said: “Let us bury him in the place where
he used to pray.” Abu Bakr replied, “May Allaah protect us from making him an
idol to be worshipped.” Others said, “Let us bury him in al-Baqee’ (a graveyard in
Madeenah) where his brothers among the Muhaajireen (migrants from Makkah)
are buried.” Abu Bakr replied: “Verily burying the Prophet in al-Baqee‘ is
detestable because some people may try to seek refuge in him which is a right
belonging only to Allaah. So, if we take him out (to the graveyard), we will ruin
Allaah’s right, even if we carefully guard the Messenger’s grave.” They then
asked, “What is your opinion, O Abu Bakr?” He replied, “I heard Allaah’s
Messenger say: ‘Allaah has not taken the life of any of his prophets except that
were buried where they died.” Some of them said, “By Allaah, what you have
said is pleasing and convincing.” Then they made a line around the Prophet’s bed
(in ‘Aa’eshah’s house) and dug the grave where his bed was. ‘Alee, al-‘Abbaas,
al-Fadl, and the Prophet’s family took his body and prepared it for burial.95

‘Aa’eshah’s house was separated from the masjid by a wall and it had a door
through which the Prophet (r) used to enter the masjid to lead salaah. The
companions sealed off this doorway in order to complete the separation of the
Prophet’s grave from his masjid. Consequently, the only way that his grave could
be visited at that time was from outside the masjid.
Expansions of the masjid took place in the time of the second Caliph ‘Umar and
the third Caliph ‘Uthmaan. But both of them cautiously avoided the inclusion of
either ‘Aa’eshah’s house or that of any of the other wives of the Prophet (r).
Expansion in the direction of the houses of the wives of the Prophet (r) would
have automatically included the Prophet’s grave in the masjid. However, after the
death of all the sahaabah who were in Medinah,96 Caliph al-Waleed ibn ‘Abdil-
Malik (reign 705-715 C.E.) was the first to extend the masjid in an easterly
direction. He included ‘Aa’eshah’s house inside the masjid, but demolished the
houses of the other wives of the Prophet (r). The expansion was reported to have
been carried out by al-Waleed’s governor ‘Umar ibn ‘Abdul-‘Azeez.
When ‘Aa’eshah’s house was included inside the masjid, a high circular wall was
built around it so that it would not be visible at all from inside the masjid. Two
additional walls were later built at an angle from the two northern corners of the

house in such a way that they met each other forming a triangle. This was down to
prevent anyone from facing the grave directly.97
Many years later, the familiar dome was added to the roof of the masjid and was
placed directly above the Prophet’s (r) grave.98 The grave was later surrounded by
a brass cage with doors and windows, and the walls of the grave itself were
draped in green cloth. In spite of the barriers which have been placed around the
Prophet’s grave, the error still remains to be corrected. Walls should once again
be placed to separate it from the masjid so that no one could pray in its direction
nor visit it inside the masjid.
Salaah in the Prophet’s Masjid
The prohibition of salaah in masjids with graves in them is applicable to all
masjids except that of the Prophet (r). This is due to the many special virtues
attributed to prayer in it, not found in any other masjid containing a grave.99 The
Prophet (r) himself pointed out this special feature saying, “Do not journey
except to three masjids: al-Masjid al-Haraam, al-masjid al-Aqsaa, and this
Masjid of mine.” 100 He also said: “ Asingle salaah in this masjid ofmine, is better
than 1,000 salaahs elsewhere, except al-Masjid al-Haraam.” 101 He even assigned
special significance to a part of his masjid saying: “ The area between my house
and my pulpit is a garden from the gardens of paradise.” 102 If salaah in the
Prophet’s masjid was considered makrooh (disliked), the virtues of his masjid
would be negated and it would be made equal with all other masjids. Just as
salaah in general has been forbidden at certain times, yet allowed if it has a
defined purpose (e.g., janaazah) other than optional prayer, salaah in the
Prophet’s masjid is likewise desirable due to its exceptional nature.103 And,
Allaah forbid, if a grave were to be put in either al-Masjid al-Haraam or al-Masjid

al-Aqsaa, salaah would still be desirable in them due to their special virtues and
place of honor in the sight of God.104″

SOURCE: USOOL AL AQEEDAH FROM DR BILAL PHILIPS

Notice that according to this version, (a.) the grave was intentionally “sealed” off of the Masjid once the prophet (peace be upon him) was buried, moreover, (b.) righteous Caliphs of the likes of Umar (raa) and Uthman (raa) carefully excluded prophet’s (peace be upon him) grave during the expansion of the Masjid, (c.) even when the later Caliphs, – Caliphs after the companions of the prophet (peace be upon him) – included the grave inside the Masjid they made sufficient structural modifications in order to keep the grave out of the sight of the worshippers.

In a nut shell, Muslims were taking all sorts of precautions so that Mohammad (peace be upon him) is not given the status which is not permissible in Islam, yet we find Christian apologists like Samuel Green pay any care to Islamic traditions before attacking straw – man.

Emphasize wherever not found in the original is ours.