DICTIONARY OF ISLĀM. (continued 4)

The Christianity of this period is described by Mosheim as “expiring under a motley and enormous heap of superstitious inventions, with neither the courage nor the force to raise her head or display her national charms to a darkened and deluded world.” Doubtless much of the success of Islām in its earlier stage was due to the state of degradation into which the Christian Church had fallen. The bitter dissensions of the Greeks, Nestorians, Eutychians, and Monophysites are matters of history, and must have held up the religion of Jesus to the ridicule of the heathen world. The controversies regarding the nature and person of our Divine Lord had begotten a sect of Tritheists, led by a Syrian philosopher named John Philoponus of Alexandria, and are sufficient to account for Muḥammad’s conception of the Blessed Trinity. The worship of the Virgin Mary had also given rise to a religious controversy between the Antiduo-Marianites and the Collyridians; the former holding that the Virgin was not immaculate, and the latter raising her to a position of a goddess. Under the circumstances it is not surprising to find that the mind of the Arabian reformer turned away from Christianity and endeavoured to construct a religion on the lines of Judaism. [JUDAISM.]

Al-Baiẓāwī and other Muslim commentators, admit that Muḥammad received Christian instruction from learned Christians, named Jubrā and Yasāra (al-Baiẓāwī on Sūrah xvi. 105), and that on this account the Quraish said, “It is only some mortal that teaches him!” For the Traditions relate that Muḥammad used to stop and listen to these two Christians as they read aloud the Books of Moses (Taurāt) and the New Testament (Injīl). But it is remarkable that Muḥammad should, after all, have obtained such a cursory knowledge of Christianity. For from the text of the Qurʾān (extracts of which are subjoined), it is evident that he was under the impression that the Sacrament of Baptism was Ṣibg͟hah, or the dyeing of the Christians’ clothes; and if the Chapter of the Table refers to the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper (which is uncertain), it was “a table sent out of heaven that it may be a recurring festival.” The doctrine of the Trinity is supposed to be a Tritheism of God, Jesus Christ, and the Virgin Mary; and a proof against the Divinity of Christ is urged from the fact that He and His mother “both ate food.” The crucifixion is denied, and Mary the mother of Jesus is confounded with Mary the sister of Aaron. Such mistakes and omissions could only arise from a most imperfect acquaintance with the ordinary institutions and beliefs of the Christian communities, with whom Muḥammad must have been brought in contact. The gentler tone and spirit of the Christians seems to have won the sympathy of Muḥammad, and his expressions regarding them are less severe than with reference to the Jews; but the abstruse character of their creed, as shown in their endless schisms regarding the nature of the Trinity and the person of Christ, and the idolatrous character of their worship, as still seen in the ancient Syrian and Coptic churches, led him to turn from Christianity to Judaism as a model whereby to effect the reformation of a degraded and idolatrous people like the ancient Arabians. The Jewish and Mosaic character of Muḥammad’s system will be treated of in another place. [JUDAISM.]

The following selections from the Qurʾān will show the actual teaching of that book regarding Christianity. In the whole of the Qurʾān there is not a single quotation from the New Testament, and it is noticeable that nearly all the allusions to Christianity are contained in Meccan Sūrahs; Sūrah ii. being according to Jalālu ʾd-din Suyūt̤ī, one of the earliest chapters given at Makkah, and Sūrah v. the last.

Sūrah v. 85:—

“Of all men thou wilt certainly find the Jews, and those who join other gods with God, to be the most intense in hatred of those who believe; and thou shalt certainly find those to be nearest in affection to them who say, ‘We are Christians.’ This, because there are amongst them priests (qissīsūn) and monks, and because they are not proud.”

Sūrah ii. 59:—

“Verily, they who believe (Muslims), and they who follow the Jewish religion, and the Christians, and the Sabeites—whoever of these believeth in God and the last day, and doeth that which is right, shall have their reward with their Lord: fear shall not come upon them, neither shall they be grieved.”

(The same verse occurs again in Sūrah v. 74.)

Sūrah ii. 105:—

“And they say, ‘None but Jews or Christians shall enter Paradise:’ This is their wish. Say: Give your proofs if ye speak the truth. But they who set their face with resignation Godward, and do what is right,—their reward is with their Lord; no fear shall come on them, neither shall they be grieved. Moreover, the Jews say, ‘The Christians lean on naught:’ ‘On naught lean the Jews,’ say the Christians. Yet both are readers of the Book. So with like words say they who have no knowledge. But on the resurrection day, God shall judge between them as to that in which they differ. And who committeth a greater wrong than he who hindereth God’s name from being remembered in His temples, and who hasteth to ruin them? Such men cannot enter them but with fear. Theirs is shame in this world, and a severe torment in the next. The East and the West is God’s: therefore, whichever way ye turn, there is the face of God. Truly God is immense and knoweth all. And they say, ‘God hath a son:’ No! Praise be to Him! But—His, whatever is in the Heavens and the Earth! All obeyeth Him, sole maker of the Heavens and of the Earth! And when He decreeth a thing, He only saith to it, ‘Be,’ and it is. And they who have no knowledge say, ‘Unless God speak to us, or thou shew us a sign …!’ So, with like words, said those who were before them: their hearts are alike. Clear signs have we already shown for those who have firm faith. Verily, with the Truth have we sent thee, a bearer of good tidings and a warner: and of the people of Hell thou shalt not be questioned. But until thou follow their religion, neither Jews nor Christians will be satisfied with thee. Say: Verily, guidance of God,—that is the guidance! And if, after ‘the Knowledge,’ which hath reached thee, thou follow their desires, thou shalt find neither helper nor protector against God.”

Sūrah iv. 156:—

“Nay, but God hath sealed them up for their unbelief, so that but few believe. And for their unbelief,—and for their having spoken against Mary a grievous calumny,—and for their saying, ‘Verily we have slain the Messiah (Masīḥ), Jesus (ʿĪsā) the son of Mary, an Apostle of God.’ Yet they slew him not, and they crucified him not, but they had only his likeness. And they who differed about him were in doubt concerning him. No sure knowledge had they about him, but followed only an opinion, and they did not really slay him, but God took him up to Himself. And God is Mighty, Wise!”

Sūrah ii. 130:—

“They say, moreover, ‘Become Jews or Christians that ye may have the true guidance.’ Say: Nay! the religion of Abraham, the sound in faith, and not one of those who join gods with God! Say ye: ‘We believe in God, and that which hath been sent down to us, and that which hath been sent down to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the tribes: and that which hath been given to Moses and to Jesus, and that which was given to the prophets from their Lord. No difference do we make between any of them: and to God are we resigned (Muslims).’ If, therefore, they believe even as ye believe, then have they true guidance; but if they turn back, then do they cut themselves off from you: and God will suffice to protect thee against them, for He is the Hearer, the Knower. The Baptism of God, and who is better to baptize than God? And Him do we serve.”

Sūrah v. 75:—

“They surely are Infidels who say, ‘God is the third of three:’ for there is no God but one God: and if they refrain not from what they say, a grievous chastisement shall light on such of them as are Infidels. Will they not, therefore, be turned unto God, and ask pardon of Him? since God is Forgiving, Merciful! The Messiah, Son of Mary, is but an Apostle; other Apostles have flourished before him; and his mother was a just person: they both ate food. Behold! how we make clear to them the signs! then behold how they turn aside! Say: Will ye worship, beside God, that which can neither hurt nor help? But God! He only Heareth, Knoweth. Say: O people of the Book! outstep not bounds of truth in your religion; neither follow the desires of those who have already gone astray, and who have caused many to go astray, and have themselves gone astray from the evenness of the way. Those among the children of Israel who believed not were cursed by the tongue of David, and of Jesus, Son of Mary. This, because they were rebellious, and became transgressors: they forbade not one another the iniquity which they wrought! detestable are their actions!”

Sūrah v. 18:—

“And of those who say, ‘We are Christians,’ have we accepted the covenant. But they too have forgotten a part of what they were taught; wherefore we have stirred up enmity and hatred among them that shall last till the day of the Resurrection; and in the end will God tell them of their doings. O people of the Scriptures! now is our Apostle come to you to clear up to you much that ye concealed of those Scriptures, and to pass over many things. Now hath a light and a clear Book come to you from God, by which God will guide him who shall follow after His good pleasure to paths of peace, and will bring them out of the darkness to the light, by His will: and to the straight path will He guide them. Infidels now are they who say, ‘Verily God is al-Masīḥ Ibn Maryam (the Messiah, son of Mary)!’ Say: And who could aught obtain from God, if He chose to destroy al-Masīḥ Ibn Maryam, and his mother, and all who are on the earth together? For with God is the sovereignty of the Heavens and of the Earth, and of all that is between them! He createth what He will; and over all things is God potent. Say the Jews and Christians, ‘Sons are we of God and His beloved.’ Say: Why then doth He chastise you for your sins? Nay! ye are but a part of the men whom He hath created!”

Sūrah v. 58:—

“O Believers! take not the Jews or Christians as friends. They are but one another’s friends. If any one of you taketh them for his friends, he surely is one of them! God will not guide the evil-doers. So shalt thou see the diseased at heart speed away to them, and say, ‘We fear lest a change of fortune befall us.’ But haply God will of Himself bring about some victory or event of His own ordering: then soon will they repent them of their secret imaginings.”

Sūrah xxii. 18:—

“As to those who believe, and the Jews, and the Sabeites, and the Christians, and the Magians, and those who join other gods with God, of a truth, God shall decide between them on the day of resurrection: for God is witness of all things.”

Sūrah v. 112:—

“Remember when the Apostles said—‘O Jesus, Son of Mary! is Thy Lord able to send down a furnished TABLE to us out of Heaven?’ He said—‘Fear God if ye be believers.’ They said—‘We desire to eat therefrom, and to have our hearts assured; and to know that thou hast indeed spoken truth to us, and to be witnesses thereof.’ Jesus, Son of Mary, said—‘O God, our Lord! send down a table to us out of Heaven, that it may become a recurring festival to us, to the first of us and to the last of us, and a sign from Thee; and do Thou nourish us, for Thou art the best of nourishers.’ And God said—Verily, I will cause it to descend unto you; but whoever among you after that shall disbelieve, I will surely chastise him with a chastisement wherewith I will not chastise any other creature. And when God shall say—‘O Jesus, Son of Mary, hast Thou said unto mankind—“Take me and my mother as two Gods, beside God?” ’ He shall say—‘Glory be unto Thee! it is not for me to say that which I know to be not the truth; had I said that, verily Thou wouldest have known it: Thou knowest what is in me, but I know not what is in Thee; for Thou well knowest things unseen!’”

Sūrah xix. 35:—

“This is Jesus, the son of Mary; this is a statement of the truth concerning which they doubt. It beseemeth not God to beget a son. Glory be to Him! when He decreeth a thing, He only saith to it, Be, and it is. And verily, God is my Lord and your Lord; adore Him then. This is the right way. But The Sects have fallen to variance among themselves about Jesus: but woe, because of the assembly of a great day, to those who believe not!”

The only New Testament saints mentioned by name in the Qurʾān, are John the Baptist, Zacharias, and the Virgin Mary.

In the Mishkātu ʾl-Maṣābīḥ, there are recorded in the traditional sayings of Muḥammad, about six apparent plagiarisms from the New Testament; but whether they are the plagiarisms of Muḥammad himself or of those who profess to record his sayings, it is impossible to tell:—

Abū Hurairah says the Prophet said, “Of the seven persons whom God, in the last day, will draw to Himself, will be a man who has given alms and concealed it, so that his left hand knoweth not what the right hand doeth.” (Book i. c. viii. pt. 1; comp. Matt. vi. 3.)

Again: “God accepts not the prayers of those who pray in long robes.” (Book i. c. ix. pt. 2; comp. Matt. xii. 38.)

Again: “The doors of the celestial regions shall not open to them (the wicked) until a camel pass through the eye of a needle.” (Book v. c. iii. pt. 3; comp. Mark x. 25.)

Abū Umamah relates that the Prophet said, “Blessed be Him who hath seen me. And blessed be him who hath not seen me and yet hath believed.” (Book xxiv. c. xxvi. pt. 3; comp. John xx. 29.)

Muʿāẕ relates that the Prophet said, “Do unto all men as you would they should do unto you, and reject for others what you would reject for yourself.” (Book i. c. i. pt. 3; Matt. vii. 12.)

Abū Hurairah relates that the Prophet said, “Verily God will say in the day of resurrection, O ye sons of men! I was sick and ye did not visit me. And the sons of men will say, O Thou defender, how could we visit Thee, for Thou art the Lord of the universe, and art free from sickness? And God will say, O ye sons of men, did you not know that such a one of my servants was sick and ye did not visit him,” &c. &c. (Book v. c. i. pt. 1; comp. Matt. xxv. 21.)

Although it would be difficult to prove it from the text of the Qurʾān, the general belief of Muḥammadans is that Christians are not in a state of salvation, and Laz̤a, or the “blazing fire,” mentioned in Sūrah lxx. 15, is, according to the Imām al-Bag͟hawī, reserved for them.

The condition of a Christian in a Muslim state is that of a Ẕimmī, or one who pays tribute to a Muḥammadan governor, for which he enjoys protection. He is allowed to repair any old church which may have been in existence at the time the country was subdued by Islām, but he is not allowed to erect new ones; “for,” says Abū Ḥanīfah, “the construction of churches or synagogues in Muslim territory is unlawful, being forbidden in the Traditions.” “It also behoves the Imām to make distinction between Muslims and Ẕimmīs (i.e. Christians, Jews, and others paying tribute). It is therefore not allowable for them to ride upon horses or use armour, or to wear the same dresses as Muslims.” The reason for this, says Abū Ḥanīfah, “is that Muḥammadans are to be held in honour and Ẕimmīs are not.”

The wives also of Ẕimmīs are to be kept apart from those of Muslims on the public roads and baths. And it is also ordered that a mark should be placed on their doors, in order that when Muslim beggars come to them they should not pray for them!

The learned have ruled that a Ẕimmī should not be allowed to ride at all, except in cases of necessity, and if he be thus of necessity allowed to ride, he should dismount when he meets a Muslim. (Hidāyah, vol. ii. 219.)

A judge when he administers an oath to a Christian, must direct him to say: “I swear by God who sent the Gospel to Jesus.”

It is a singular ruling of the Muḥammadan law that a claim of parentage made by a Christian is preferable to a claim of bondage advanced by a Muslim. Abū Ḥanīfah says if a boy be in the possession of two men, the one a Muslim and the other a Christian, and the Christian assert that the boy is his son, and the Muslim assert that he is his slave, he must be decreed to be the son of the Christian and free, because although Islām is the superior religion, there can be no balance between the claim of offspring and the claim of bondage. (Idem, vol. iv. 133.)

Sir William Muir, referring to Muḥammad’s reception of the Banū Ḥanīfah and other Christian tribes, A.H. 9, says, “On the departure of the embassy the Prophet gave them a vessel with some water in it running over from his own ablutions, and said to them, ‘When ye reach your country break down your church, sprinkle its site with this water, and build a Masjid in its place.’ These commands they carried into effect, and abandoned Christianity without compunction. To another Christian tribe he prohibited the practice of baptism; so that although the adults continued to be nominally Christian, their children grew up with no provision but that of the Qurʾān.… It is no wonder that Christianity, thus insulted and trampled under foot, languished and soon disappeared from the peninsula.” (Life of Mahomet, vol. iv. 219.)

CHURCHES. Arabic Bīaʾh and Kanīsah, which terms include equally churches and synagogues. The construction of churches or synagogues in Muslim territory is unlawful, this being forbidden in the Traditions; but as for places of worship which belonged to the Jews or Christians before the country was conquered by the Muḥammadan power, they are at liberty to repair them, because the buildings cannot endure for ever, and, as the Imām of the Muslim army has left these people to the exercise of their own religion, it is a necessary inference that he has engaged not to prevent them from building or repairing their churches or synagogues. If, however, they attempt to remove these, and to build them in a place different from their former situation, the Imām must prevent them, since this is an actual construction. Monasteries and hermitages are under the same law. Places of prayer within their dwellings are allowed to be constructed, because they are merely an appurtenance to a private habitation. What is here said is held to be the rule with regard to cities, but not with respect to villages, because as the “tokens of Islām” (i.e. prayer, festivals, &c.) appear in cities, ẕimmīs (i.e. those paying tax for protection) should not be permitted to exhibit the tokens of their infidelity in the face of Islām. But as the tokens of Islām do not appear in villages, the erection of churches and synagogues is not prohibited there. But the Imām Abū Ḥanīfah held that this exemption merely applied to the village of Kusa, where the greater part of the inhabitants were ẕimmīs. He adds that in the country of Arabia, Jews and Christians are prohibited from constructing synagogues and churches, either in cities or villages, according to the saying of the Prophet, “Two religions cannot exist in the country of Arabia.” (Hidāyah, book ix. c. viii.)

If a Jew or a Christian, being in sound health, build a church or a synagogue and then die, such building is an inheritance, and descends to the heirs of the founder. According to Abū Ḥanīfah, it is a pious appropriation; but his two disciples hold such erections to be sinful, and only to be considered as ordinary property. If a Jew or a Christian will that his house after his death shall be converted into either a synagogue or church, the bequest is valid. (Hidāyah, book lii. c. vi.)

The following tradition related by T̤alāq ibn ʿAlī (Mishkāt, iv. c. viii. 2) exhibits Muḥammad’s determination to destroy Christian churches: “We told the Prophet that there was a church on our ground; and we requested the favour of his giving us the water which remained after he had performed waẓū. And the Prophet called for water, performed waẓū and washed out his mouth; after which he poured the water for us into a vessel and ordered us to return, saying, ‘When you arrive, destroy your church (Arabic bīʿah), and pour this water on the spot, and build a mosque there.’”

CIRCUMCISION. Arabic K͟hitān, k͟hitānah, or k͟hatnah. Circumcision is not once alluded to in the Qurʾān. The omission is remarkable, and Muslim writers do not attempt any explanation of it. It is held to be sunnah, or founded upon the customs of the Prophet (Fatāwa ʿĀlamgīrī, vol. iv. p. 237), and dating its institution from the time of Abraham. There is no authentic account of the circumcision of Muḥammad, but it is asserted by some writers that he was born circumcised. This, however, is denied by the most eminent scholars. (Radduʾl-Muk͟htār, vol. v. p. 835.)

In the Ṣaḥīḥu ʾl-Buk͟hārī, p. 931, a short chapter is devoted to the subject of k͟hitān, or “circumcision,” in which there are three traditions:—

Abū Hurairah relates that the Prophet said one of the observances of Fit̤rah is circumcision.

Abū Hurairah relates that the Prophet said that Abraham was circumcised when he was eighty years old.

Said ibn Jubair relates that it was asked of Ibn ʿAbbās, “How old were you when the Prophet died?” He said, “I was circumcised in the days when it occurred.” And Jubair says they did not circumcise in those days until men were full grown.

It is recommended to be performed upon a boy between the ages of seven and twelve, but it is lawful to circumcise a child seven days after his birth. In the case of a convert to Islām from some other creed, to whom the operation may be an occasion of great suffering, it can be dispensed with, although it is considered expedient and proper for all new converts to be circumcised. In all cases an adult is expected to circumcise himself, as it is a shame for an adult person to uncover himself to another.

The circumcision of females is also allowed, and is commonly practised in Arabia. (Fatāwa ʿĀlamgīrī, vol. iv. p. 237.)

The barber is generally the person employed for the circumcision of boys, and the operation as practised by Muḥammadans in India is performed in the following manner. A bit of stick is used as a probe, and carried round and round between the glans and prepuce, to ascertain the exact extent of the frænum, and that no unnatural adhesions exist. The foreskin is then drawn forwards and a pair of forceps, consisting of a couple of pieces of split bamboo, five or six inches long and a quarter of an inch thick, tied firmly together at one end with a string to the extent of an inch, applied from above in an oblique direction, so as to exclude about an inch and a half of the prepuce above and three-quarters of an inch below. The forceps severely grasping it, causes a good deal of pain, but this state of suffering does not continue long, since the next thing to be done is the removal, which is done by one stroke of the razor drawn directly downwards. The hæmorrhage which follows is inconsiderable and easily stopped by the application of burnt rags and ashes.

According to several Muḥammadan doctors, there were seventeen of the prophets born in a circumcised state, namely, Zakarīyā, Shīs, Idrīs, Yūsuf, Ḥanz̤alah, ʿĪsā, Mūsā, Ādam, Nūḥ, Shuʿaib, Sām, Lūt̤, Ṣāliḥ, Sulaimān, Yaḥyā, Hūd, and Muḥammad. (Durru ʾl-Muk͟htār, p. 619.)

CLEAN AND UNCLEAN ANIMALS. All quadrupeds that seize their prey with their teeth, and all birds which seize it with their talons, are unlawful (ḥarām), the Prophet having prohibited mankind from eating them.

Hyenas and foxes, being both included under the class of animals of prey, are unlawful. (This is the doctrine of Abū Ḥanīfah, but ash-Shāfiʿī holds that they are lawful.) Elephants and weasels are also animals of prey. Pelicans and kites are abominable (makrūh), because they devour dead bodies.

Crows which feed on grain are mubāḥ, or indifferent, but carrion crows and ravens are unlawful. Abū Ḥanīfah says the magpie is indifferent (mubāḥ), but the Imām Yūsuf says it is abominable (makrūh).

Crocodiles and otters and wasps, and, in general, all insects are makrūh, or abominable. The ass and the mule are both unlawful. According to Abū Ḥanīfah and Mālik, horse-flesh is unlawful, but ash-Shāfiʿī says it is indifferent. The flesh of hares is also indifferent.

No animal that lives in the water, except fish, is lawful. But Mālik allows them.

Fishes dying of themselves are unlawful, and so are all animals who are not slain by ẕabāḥ. (Hidāyah, vol. iv. p. 74.) [ZABIHAH.]

It must be observed that in Muḥammadan law animals are either ḥalāl, “lawful,” or mubāḥ, “indifferent,” or makrūh, “abominable” (i.e. which is condemned but still is lawful), or ḥarām, “unlawful.”

CLERGY. The Christian clergy are mentioned in the Qurʾān with expressions of comparative praise. Sūrah v. 85: “Thou wilt surely find that the strongest in enmity against those who believe are the Jews, and the idolaters; and thou wilt find those to be nearest in affection to them who say ‘We are Christians’; that is because there are amongst them priests (qissīsūn) and monks, and because they are not proud.”

The Muḥammadans have no class of people occupying the precise position of priests or clergy, although the Imāms, or leaders of prayers in the public assembly, are persons of learning appointed by the congregation. In Central Asia, it is usual to set apart a learned man (well skilled in theology) by binding the turban round his head, the act being performed by a leading maulawī or scholar.

In Turkey and the western portion of Islām, those who are qualified to give an opinion in religious matters, and to take the lead in guiding the people in spiritual affairs, are called ʿulamāʾ (pl. of ʿālim), a term which has, in Hindustān and Central Asia, assumed the form of maulawī, a word derived from maulā, “lord.”

The recognised offices in Islām corresponding to that of a priest or religious teacher, are, Imām, Muftī, and Qāẓī. Imām (in addition to its being used for the K͟halīfah, or Caliph, in the Traditions), is the person who leads the public prayers, an office answering to the Latin Antistes. This official is appointed either by the congregation, or by the parish or section of the town or village, who frequent the mosque in which he leads the prayers. Muftī is the legal adviser, who decides difficult religious questions, and assists the Qāẓī, or judge. Qāẓī is the judge and the administrator of the law. The appointments of Muftī and Qāẓī are in the hands of the Muslim government of the place. It is usual for the Qāẓī to take the lead in prayers at funerals, whilst the Imām of the parish generally performs the nikāḥ, or religious service at marriages. [MARRIAGE.]

These offices are not necessarily hereditary, but it is usual in Muḥammadan countries for them to pass from father to son. In India at the present time there are families who retain the titles of Muftī and Qāẓī, although the duties connected with these offices are no longer performed by them.

CAUTION (Arabic Ḥaẕar) is enjoined by Muḥammad, who is related to have said, “A Muslim is not bitten twice at the same hole.” “He is no perfect man who has not fallen into trouble, for there is no skilful physician but experience.” “When a man has spoken, and has then looked first to his right and then to his left, what he has said is sacred to those present, and they must not disclose it to others.” (Mishkāt, xxii. c. xviii.)

COINAGE. [MONEY.]

COLLECTOR OF TAXES. Arabic ʿĀshir, a collector of the tenths; and ʿĀmil mutaṣaddiq, a collector of alms.

The K͟halīfah is to allow the officer employed in the collection of the zakāt as much out of it as is in proportion to his labour, and will remunerate himself and his assistants. (Hidāyah, vol. i. p. 54.)

COMMANDMENTS, The Ten. In the Qurʾān it is stated that God gave Moses certain monitions on tables (of stone), and also that he gave him nine clear signs. (See Sūrah vii. 142, and Sūrah xvii. 103.) These two statements have perplexed the commentators very much, and every effort is made by them to reconcile the nine signs with the Ten Commandments, although it is evident from the Qurʾān itself, that the nine clear signs refer to the miracles of Moses. [PLAGUES OF EGYPT.]

According to the Traditions, the Prophet himself was a little confused in the matter, and may to some extent be responsible for the mistakes of the commentators on his book, for it is related (Mishkāt, book i. c. ii. pt. 2) that a Jew came to the Prophet and asked him about the nine (sic) wonders which appeared by the hands of Moses. The Prophet said, “Do not associate anything with God, do not steal, do not commit adultery, do not kill, do not take an innocent before the king to be killed, do not practise magic, do not take interest, do not accuse an innocent woman of adultery, do not run away in battle, and especially for you, O Jews, not to work on the Sabbath.” ʿAbdu ʾl-Ḥaqq remarks on this tradition that the Jew asked about the nine (sic) miracles (or plagues) of Egypt, and the Prophet gave him the Ten Commandments.

A comparison of the Ten Commandments given by the great Jewish law-giver with those recorded in the above tradition and in the VIth Sūrah of the Qurʾān, verse 152, will show how imperfectly the Arabian Prophet was acquainted with the Old Testament scriptures.

The commentator Ḥusain, who wrote four hundred years ago, says the following verses in the Sūratu ʾl-Anʿām (vi.) are those Ten Commandments which in every dispensation are incumbent on mankind, and cannot be abrogated (meaning undoubtedly the Ten Commandments given to Moses).

“Say: Come, I will rehearse what your Lord hath made binding on you—(1) that ye assign not aught to Him as partner: (2) and that ye be good to your parents: (3) and that ye slay not your children, because of poverty; for them and for you will we provide: (4) and that ye come not near to pollutions, outward or inward: (5) and that ye slay not anyone whom God hath forbidden you, unless for a just cause. This hath he enjoined on you, to the intent that ye may understand. (6) And come not nigh to the substance of the orphan, but to improve it, until he come of age: (7) and use a full measure, and a just balance: We will not task a soul beyond its ability. (8) And when ye give judgment, observe justice, even though it be the affair of a kinsman, (9) and fulfil the covenant of God. This hath God enjoined you for your monition—And, ‘this is my right way.’ Follow it then: (10) and follow not other paths lest ye be scattered from His path. This hath He enjoined you, that ye may fear Him.” (Sūrah vi. 152.)

COMMANDER OF THE FAITHFUL. Arabic Amīru ʾl-Muʾminīn (امير المومنين‎). A title given by the Muslims in the first instance to the first K͟halīfah, Abū Bakr, and afterwards retained by succeeding K͟halīfahs. It is assumed by almost any Muḥammadan ruler in the present day.

COMMENTARIES. [QURʾAN.]

COMMERCE. Arabic Tijārah (تجارة‎). Commerce and merchandise are said in the Qurʾān to be of God. Sūrah xvii. 68: “It is your Lord who drives the ships for you in the sea that ye may seek after plenty from Him; verily He is ever merciful to you. And when distress touches you in the sea, those whom ye call upon, except Him, stray away from you; but when He has brought you safe to shore, ye also turn away (from God); for man is ever ungrateful.”

Zakāt is due on merchandise of every description, in proportion to 5 per cent.

COMPANIONS, The. [ASHAB.]

COMPULSION. Arabic Ikrāh (اكراه‎). Muḥammadan law makes provision for persons acting under compulsion, when the person who compels has it in his power to execute what he orders, be he a king or a thief. (Hidāyah, vol. iii. p. 452.) E.g. a person forced into a contract may dissolve it. A Muslim may lawfully eat food which is prohibited if he be compelled to do so, being threatened with loss of life or limb. Nor is a Muslim guilty of sin who declares himself an unbeliever when the loss of a limb or of life is threatened. According to the Imām Abū Ḥanīfah, if a Muslim be compelled to divorce his wife, the divorce is valid; but with him the other three Imāms are not agreed in this ruling.

CONCUBINE. Arabic Surrīyah (سرية‎), pl. sarārī. The Muḥammadan religion appears to give almost unlimited license to concubinage, provided the woman be a slave, and not a free Muslim woman.

These female slaves must be either (1) taken captive in war, (2) or purchased by money, (3) or the descendants of slaves. Even married women, if taken in war, are, according to an injunction of the Qurʾān, Sūrah iv. 28, entirely at the disposal of the Muslim conqueror. “(Unlawful) to you are married women, except such as your right hand possess (i.e. taken in war, or purchased slaves).” This institution of concubinage is founded upon the example of Muḥammad himself, who took Rīḥānah the Jewess as his concubine after the battle with the Banū Quraiz̤ah (A.H. 5), and also Maria the Copt, who was sent him as a slave by the Governor of Egypt.

Should a concubine bear her master a child, the Muḥammadan law rules that she and her offspring are ipso facto free. For a further treatment of this subject, see article on SLAVES.

Amongst the Shīʿahs, the temporary marriage called Mutʿah exhibits the worst form of concubinage. [MUTʿAH.]

It is interesting to compare the condition of the concubine under Muslim law and under the Mosaic. Under the law of Moses, a concubine would generally be either a Hebrew girl bought of her father, or a Gentile captive taken in war. So that whilst the Muḥammadan law forbids concubinage with a free woman, the Mosaic law permitted it and legislated for it. See Exodus xxi.: “If a man sell his daughter to be a maid-servant, she shall not go out as men-servants do. If she please not her master who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed; to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.”

With regard to female slaves taken in war, the Mosaic law ruled. Deut. xxi. 10: “When thou goest to war against thine enemies, and the Lord thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, and seest a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldst have her to thy wife; then thou shalt bring her to thine home, &c.… And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her,” &c.

CONGREGATION. The Assembly of people in a mosque is called Jamʿah (جمعة‎), the term also being used in Afghanistan for the mosque itself.

There are special rewards for those Muḥammadans who assemble together for the stated prayers; for Muḥammad has said, “The prayers which are said in a congregation increase the rewards of the worshipper twenty-seven degrees.” “Say your prayers in a congregation, for a wolf does not eat the sheep except one has strayed from the flock.” (Mishkāt, book iv. ch. xxiv.)

The Sunnī style themselves Ahlu Sunnah wa Jamʿah, i.e. “the people of the traditions and of the congregation,” in contradistinction to the Shīʿahs, who do not worship in a congregation unless the Imām, or leader, be a man entirely free from sin. [IMAM.]

The word jamʿah is also used for an assembly of people collected to decide a question of law or theology, the ijmāʿ being their decision, more frequently called ijmāʿu ʾl-ummah.

CONSCIENCE. There is no word in the Qurʾān which exactly expresses the Christian conception of conscience. The word nafs (نفس‎), which, according to Arabic lexicons, expresses very much the same idea as the Hebrew ‏נֶפֶשׁ‎ nephesh, “life, animal spirit, breath” (Job xli. 21), seems to be used in the Qurʾān to convey the meaning of conscience, although English translators render it “soul.” Muslim theologians say there are four kinds of consciences spoken of in the Qurʾān: (1) Nafs lawwāmah, the “self-accusing soul or conscience” (Sūrah lxxv. 3). (2) Nafs ammārah, the “soul or conscience prone to evil” (Sūrah xii. 53). (3) Nafs mut̤maʾinnah, the “peaceful soul or conscience” (Sūrah lxxxix. 12). (4) Nafs mulhammah, the “soul or conscience in which is breathed both bad and good” (Sūrah lxxxiv. 27).

It occurs also in the sense of conscience in the Traditions (Mishkāt, book i. ch. i. pt. 3): “When anything pricks your soul (nafs) forsake it.” ʿAbdu ʾl-Ḥaqq, in his Persian commentary on the Mishkāt, renders it by zāt, but the English word conscience would seem to express the precise idea. In Persian Muḥammadan works, as well as in common conversation, the word nafs is now used in its evil sense, of desire or passion, but it must be evident that this is not its Qurʾānic meaning. The word ذمة‎ ẕimmah, which in later Arabic, together with ضمير‎ ẓamīr, is used to express conscience, has in the only passage where it occurs in the Qurʾān a decidedly different meaning, e.g. Sūrah ix. 8, 10, where it means clientship. Sale and Rodwell both translate it “faith,” but Palmer more accurately renders it “ties of clientship.”

CONVERSATION. The following instructions are given in the Qurʾān regarding talking and conversation. Sūrah xxxi. 17, “Be moderate in thy walk, and lower thy voice; verily the most disagreeable of voices is the voice of asses.” Sūrah ii. 77, “Speak to men kindly.” In the Traditions, Ibn Masʿūd relates that Muḥammad said, “May those people go to the fire of hell who speak much.”

On the subject of conversation, Faqīr Jani Muḥammad Asʿad, the author of the celebrated ethical work entitled the Ak͟hlāq-i-Jalālī, p. 288, says:—

“He should not talk much, for it is a sign of levity in feeling and weakness in judgment, and tends to lower him in point of consideration and position. We are told that the Prophet used to observe the strictest medium in his language; so much so, that, in the most protracted interviews, you might have counted the words he uttered. Buzurg Jamihr used to say, ‘When you see a person talking much without occasion, be sure he is out of his senses.’ Let him not give vent to expressions till he has determined in his own mind what he is going to say. When anyone is relating a story, however well known to the listener, the latter is not to intimate his acquaintance with it till the narrative is concluded. A question put to others he must not himself reply to; if put to a body of which he is a member, let him not prevent the others; and if another is engaged in answering what himself could answer better, let him keep silence till the other’s statement is completed, and then give his own, but in such sort as not to annoy the former speaker. Let him not commence his reply till the querist’s sentence is concluded. Conversations and discussions which do not concern him, although held in his presence, he is not to interfere in; and if people conceal what they are saying, he must not attempt furtively to overhear. To his elders he should speak with judgment, pitching his voice at a medium between high and low. Should any abstruse topic present itself, he should give it perspicuity by comparison. Prolixity he should never aim at, when not absolutely required; on the contrary, let it be his endeavour to compress all he has to say. Neither should he employ unusual terms or far-fetched figures. He should beware of obscenity and bad language; or if he must needs refer to an indecent subject, let him be content with allusion by metaphor. Of all things, let him keep clear of a taste for indelicacy, which tends to lower his breeding, degrade his respectability, and bring him into general disagreement and dislike. Let his language upon every occasion correspond with the exigency of his position; and if accompanied by gesticulation of the hand or eye or eyebrow, let it be only of that graceful sort which his situation calls for. Let him never, for right or wrong, engage in disputes with others of the company; least of all with the elders or the triflers of it: and when embarked in such dispute, let him be rigidly observant of the rules of candour.

“Let him not deal in profound observation beyond the intellect of those he is addressing, but adapt his discourse to the judgment of his hearers. Thus even the Prophet has declared—‘We of the prophetic order are enjoined to address men in the measure of their understandings’: and Jesus (blessed be he) said, ‘Use not wisdom with the unwise to their annoyance’ (St. Matthew vii. 6?). In all his conversation let him adhere to the ways of courtesy. Never let him mimic anyone’s gestures, actions, or words, nor give utterance to the language of menace.

“When addressing a great person, let him begin with something ominous of good, as the permanence of his fortune, felicity, and so forth.

“From all back-biting, carping, slander, and falsehood, whether heard or spoken, let him hold it essential to keep clear; nay, even from any partnership with those addicted to such practices. Let him listen more than he speaks. It was the answer of a wise man to those who asked him why he did so, ‘Because,’ said he, ‘God has given me two ears and only one tongue’; which was as much as to say, ‘Hear twice as much as you speak.’ ”

CONVERTS TO THE MUḤAMMADAN RELIGION. According to the author of the Hidāyah (vol. ii. 170), if a hostile infidel embrace Islām in a hostile country, his person is his own, and he is not made a slave, nor can his children be enslaved. His property is also his own. But it is not so in the case of one who has been first conquered and then embraces Islām, for his own person and his children become slaves, and his wives are at the mercy of the victorious Muslim, whilst his lands also become the property of the State.

COVENANT. The word in the Qurʾān and the Traditions for God’s Covenant with His people is Mīs̤āq. Muḥammad taught, both in the Qurʾān and in the Traditions, that in the beginning God called all the souls of mankind together and took a promise (waʿdah) and a covenant (mīs̤āq) from them.

The account of this transaction is given as follows in the Qurʾān, Sūrah vii. 171:—

“Thy Lord brought forth their descendants from the reins of the sons of Adam and took them to witness against themselves, ‘Am I not,’ said He, ‘your Lord?’ They said, ‘Yes, we witness it.’ This we did, lest ye should say on the Day of Resurrection, ‘Truly, of this were we heedless, because uninformed.’

“Or lest ye should say, ‘Our fathers, indeed, aforetime joined other gods with our God, and we are their seed after them: wilt thou destroy us for the doings of vain men?’ ”

But the story as told in the Traditions is more graphic:—

“Ubai ibn Kaʿb relates, in explanation of the verse in the Sūratu ʾl-Aʿrāf (verse 171): When God created (the spirits of) the sons of Adam, he collected them together and made them of different tribes, and of different appearances, and gave them powers of speech. Then they began to speak, and God took from them a promise (waʿdah), and a covenant (mīs̤āq), and said, ‘Am I not thy Lord?’ They all answered and said, ‘Thou art.’ Then God said, ‘Swear by the seven heavens and the seven earths, and by Adam your father, that you will not say in the resurrection, We did not understand this. Know ye therefore that there is no Deity but Me, and there is no God but Me. Do not associate anything with Me. I will verily send to you your own apostles who shall remind you of this Promise and of this Covenant, and I will send to you your own books.’ The sons of Adam then replied, ‘We are witnesses that Thou art our Lord (Rabb), and our God (Allah). There is no Lord but Thee and no God but Thee.’ Then they confessed this and made it known to Adam. Then Adam looked at them and beheld that there were amongst them those that were rich and poor, handsome and ugly, and he said, ‘O Lord, why didst Thou not make them all alike?’ And the Lord said, ‘Truly I willed it thus in order that some of my servants may be thankful.’ Then Adam saw amongst his posterity, prophets, like unto lamps, and upon these lamps there were lights, and they were appointed by special covenants of prophecy (nabūwah) and of apostleship (rasālah). And thus it is written in the Qurʾān (Sūrah xxxiii. 7), ‘Remember we have entered into covenant with the Prophets, with thee Muḥammad, and with Noah, and with Abraham, and with Mūsā, and with Jesus the Son of Mary, and we made with them a covenant.’ And (continues Ubai) Jesus was amongst the spirits.” (Mishkāt, Arabic Ed. Bābu ʾl-Qadr.)

COVERING THE HEAD. There is no injunction in either the Qurʾān or Traditions as to a man covering his head during prayers, although it is generally held to be more modest and correct for him to do so.

With reference to women, the law is imperative, for ʿĀyishah relates that Muḥammad said, “God accepts not the prayer of an adult woman unless she cover her head.” (Mishkāt, iv. c. ix.)

CORRUPTION OF THE SCRIPTURES. Muḥammadans charge the Jews and Christians with having altered their sacred books. The word used by Muḥammadan writers for this supposed corruption of the sacred Scriptures of the Jews and Christians is Taḥrīf.

The Imām Fak͟hru ʾd-dīn Rāẓī, in his commentary, Tafsīr-i-Kabīr, explains Taḥrīf to mean “to change, alter, or turn aside anything from the truth.” Muslim divines say there are two kinds of taḥrīf, namely, taḥrīf-i-maʿnawī, a corruption of the meaning; and taḥrīf-i-lafz̤ī, a corruption of the words.

Muḥammadan controversialists, when they become acquainted with the nature of the contents of the sacred books of the Jews and Christians, and of the impossibility of reconciling the contents of the Qurʾān with those of the sacred Scriptures, charge the Christians with the taḥrīf-i-lafz̤ī. They say the Christians have expunged the word aḥmad from the prophecies, and have inserted the expression “Son of God,” and the story of the crucifixion, death, and resurrection of our blessed Lord. This view, however, is not the one held by the most celebrated of the Muslim commentators.

The Imām Muḥammad Ismāʿīl al-Buk͟hārī (p. 1127, line 7), records that Ibn ʿAbbās said that “the word Taḥrīf (corruption) signifies to change a thing from its original nature; and that there is no man who could corrupt a single word of what proceeded from God, so that the Jews and Christians could corrupt only by misrepresenting the meaning of the words of God.”

Ibn Mazar and Ibn Abī Hātim state, in the commentary known as the Tafsīr Durr-i-Manṣūr, that they have it on the authority of Ibn Munīyah, that the Taurāt (i.e. the books of Moses), and the Injīl (i.e. the Gospels), are in the same state of purity in which they were sent down from heaven, and that no alterations had been made in them, but that the Jews were wont to deceive the people by unsound arguments, and by wresting the sense of Scripture.

Shāh Walīyu ʾllāh, in his commentary, the Fauzu ʾl-Kabīr, and also Ibn ʿAbbās, support the same view.

This appears to be the correct interpretation of the various verses of the Qurʾān charging the Jews with having corrupted the meaning of the sacred Scriptures.

For example, Sūratu Āli ʿImrān (iii.), 72: “There are certainly some of them who read the Scriptures perversely, that ye may think what they read to be really in the Scriptures, yet it is not in the Scriptures; and they say this is from God, but it is not from God; and they speak that which is false concerning God against their own knowledge.”

The Imām Fak͟hru ʾd-dīn, in his commentary on this verse, and many others of the same character which occur in the Qurʾān, says it refers to a taḥrīf-i-maʿnawī, and that it does not mean that the Jews altered the text, but merely that they made alterations in the course of reading.

But whilst all the old commentators, who most probably had never seen a copy of the sacred books of the Jews and Christians, only charge them with a taḥrīf-i-maʿnawī, all modern controversialists amongst the Muḥammadans contend for a taḥrīf-i-lafz̤ī, as being the only solution of the difficulty.

In dealing with such opponents, the Christian divine will avail himself of the following arguments:—

1. The Qurʾān does not charge the Jews and Christians with corrupting the text of their sacred books; and many learned Muslim commentators admit that such is not the case.

2. The Qurʾān asserts that the Holy Scriptures of the Jews and Christians existed in the days of Muḥammad, who invariably speaks of them with reverence and respect.

3. There now exist manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments of an earlier date than that of Muḥammad (A.D. 610–632).

4. There are versions of the Old and New Testaments now extant, which existed before Muḥammad; for example, the Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate, the Syriac, the Coptic, and the Armenian versions.

5. The Hexapla, or Octapla of Origen, which dates four centuries before Muḥammad, gives various versions of the Old Testament Scriptures in parallel columns.

6. The Syrian Christians of St. Thomas, of Malabar and Travancore, in the south of India, who were separated from the western world for centuries, possess the same Scriptures.

7. In the works of Justin Martyr, who lived from A.D. 103 to 167, there are numerous quotations from our sacred books, which prove that they were exactly the same as those we have now. The same may be said of other early Christian writers.

Muḥammadan controversialists of the present day urge that the numerous readings which exist in the Christian books are a proof that they have been corrupted. But these do not affect, in the least, the main points at issue between the Christian and the Muslim. The Divine Sonship of Christ, the Fatherhood of God, the Crucifixion, Death, and Resurrection of Christ, and the Atonement, are all clearly stated in almost every book of the New Testament, whilst they are rejected by the Qurʾān.

The most plausible of modern objections urged by Muslim divines is, that the Christians have lost the Injīl which was sent down from heaven to Jesus; and that the New Testament contains merely the Ḥadīs̤, or Sunnah—the traditions handed down by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, and others. It is, of course, a mere assertion, unsupported by any proof; but it appears to be a line of argument which commends itself to many modern Muslims.

CREATION. Arabic K͟halqah. The following are the allusions to the Creation which occur in the Qurʾān, Sūrah l. 37: “Of old We (God) created the heavens and the earth and all that is between them in six days, and no weariness touched Us.” Sūrah xli. 8: “Do ye indeed disbelieve in Him who in two days created the earth? Do ye assign Him equals? The Lord of the World is He. And He hath placed on the earth the firm mountains which tower above it, and He hath blessed it, and distributed its nourishments throughout it (for the cravings of all are alike), in four days. Then He applied Himself to the heaven, which was but smoke: and to it and to the earth He said, “Come ye, in obedience or against your will?” and they both said, “We come obedient.” And He completed them as seven heavens in two days, and in each heaven made known its office; and We furnished the lower heaven with lights and guardian angels. This is the disposition of the Almighty, the all-knowing one.” Sūrah xvi. 3: “He created the heavens and the earth to set forth his truth, high let Him be exalted above the gods they join with Him! Man hath He created out of a moist germ; yet lo! man is an open caviller. And the cattle! for you hath He created them, &c.… Shall He who hath created be as he who hath not created? Will ye not consider?” Sūrah xiii. 2: “It is God who hath reared the heavens without pillars, thou canst behold; then seated Himself upon His throne, and imposed laws on the sun and moon; each travelleth to its appointeth goal. He ordereth all things. He maketh His signs clear. Haply ye will have firm faith in a meeting with your Lord. And He it is who hath outstretched the earth, and placed on it the firm mountains, and rivers; and of every fruit He hath placed on it two kinds. He causeth the night to enshroud the day.” Sūrah xxxv. 12: “God created you of dust—then of the germs of life—then made you two sexes.”

According to the Traditions (Mishkāt, xxiv. c. i. pt. 3), God created the earth on Saturday, the hills on Sunday, the trees on Monday, all unpleasant things on Tuesday, the light on Wednesday, the beasts on Thursday, and Adam, who was the last of Creation, was created after the time of afternoon prayers on Friday.

CREED. The Muḥammadan Creed, or Kalimatu ʾsh-shahādah (shortly Kalimah) is the well-known formula:—

“I testify that there is no deity but God, and Muḥammad is the Apostle of God.”

It is the belief of Muḥammadans that the first part of this creed, which is called the nafī wa is̤bāt, namely, “There is no deity but God,” has been the expression of belief of every prophet since the days of Adam, and that the second portion has been changed according to the dispensation; for example, that in the days of Moses it would be: “There is no deity but God, and Moses is the Converser with God.” In the Christian dispensation it was: “There is no deity but God, and Jesus is the Spirit of God.”

Jābir relates that Muḥammad said “the keys of Paradise are bearing witness that there is no deity but God.”

The recital of the Kalimah, or Creed, is the first of five pillars of practical religion in Islām; and when anyone is converted to Islām he is required to repeat this formula, and the following are the conditions required of every Muslim with reference to it:—

1. That it shall be repeated aloud, at least once in a life-time.

2. That the meaning of it shall be fully understood.

3. That it shall be believed in “by the heart.”

4. That it shall be professed until death.

5. That it shall be recited correctly.

6. That it shall be always professed and declared without hesitation.

(Sharḥu ʾl-Wiqāyah.)

CREMATION. [BURNING THE DEAD.]

CRESCENT. The figure of the crescent is the Turkish symbol, and hence it has been regarded by Europeans as the special emblem of the Muḥammadan religion, although it is unknown to the Muḥammadans of the East. This figure, however, did not originate with the Turks, but it was the symbol of sovereignty in the city of Byzantium previous to the Muslim conquest, as may be seen from the medals struck in honour of Augustus Trajan and others. The crescent has been the symbol of three different orders of knighthood; the first of which was instituted by Charles I., King of Naples, A.D. 1268; the second in 1448 by René of Anjou; the third by Sultan Selim in 1801. It must have been adopted by Muḥammadans for the first time upon the overthrow of the Byzantine Empire by Muḥammad II., and it is now generally used by the Turks as the insignia of their creed.

CROCODILE. Arabic Timsāḥ. The flesh of a crocodile is unlawful for food to a Muḥammadan. (Hamilton’s Hidāyah, iv. 74.)

CROSS, The. Arabic Aṣ-Ṣalīb. The Qurʾān denies the crucifixion of our blessed Lord [CRUCIFIXION], and it is related by al-Wāqidī that Muḥammad had such a repugnance to the form of the cross that he broke everything brought into his house with that figure upon it. (Muir, iii. 61.) According to Abū Hurairah, the Prophet said, “I swear by heaven, it is near, when Jesus the Son of Mary will descend from heaven upon your people, a just king, and He will break the cross, and kill the swine.” (Mishkāt, xxiii. c. vi.) The Imām Abū Yūsuf says that if a cross or a crucifix is stolen from a church, amputation (the punishment for theft) is not incurred; but if it is stolen from a private dwelling it is theft. (Hamilton’s Hidāyah, vol. ii. p. 90.)

CRUCIFIXION. The Crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ is denied by the teaching of the Qurʾān. [JESUS CHRIST.] It is a punishment sanctioned by the Muḥammadan religion for highway robbers. (Hamilton’s Hidāyah, vol. ii. 131.)

CRUELTY. A striking instance of the cruelty of Muḥammad’s character occurs in a tradition given in the Ṣaḥīḥu ʾl-Buk͟hārī (p. 1019). Anas relates, “Some of the people of the tribe of ʿUkl came to the Prophet and embraced Islām; but the air of al-Madīnah did not agree with them, and they wanted to leave the place. And the Prophet ordered them to go where the camels given in alms were assembled, and to drink their milk, which they did, and recovered from their sickness. But after this they became apostates, and renounced Islām, and stole the camels. Then the Prophet sent some people after them, and they were seized and brought back to al-Madīnah. Then the Prophet ordered their hands and their feet to be cut off as a punishment for theft, and their eyes to be pulled out. But the Prophet did not stop the bleeding, and they died.” And in another it reads, “The Prophet ordered hot irons to be drawn across their eyes, and then to be cast on the plain of al-Madīnah; and when they asked for water it was not given them, and they died.”

Sir William Muir (vol. iv. p. 307) says: “Magnanimity or moderation are nowhere discernible as features in the conduct of Muḥammad towards such of his enemies as failed to tender a timely allegiance. Over the bodies of the Quraish who fell at Badr he exulted with savage satisfaction; and several prisoners, accused of no crime but of scepticism and political opposition, were deliberately executed at his command. The Prince of K͟haibar, after being subjected to inhuman torture for the purpose of discovering the treasures of his tribe, was, with his cousin, put to death on the pretext of having treacherously concealed them, and his wife was led away captive to the tent of the conqueror. Sentence of exile was enforced by Muḥammad with rigorous severity on two whole Jewish tribes at al-Madīnah; and of a third, likewise his neighbours, the women and children were sold into distant captivity, while the men, amounting to several hundreds, were butchered in cold blood before his eyes.”

D.

DĀBBATU ʾL-ARẒ (دابة الارض‎). Lit. “The Reptile of the Earth.” A monster who shall arise in the last day, and shall cry unto the people of the earth that mankind have not believed in the revelations of God (vide Qurʾān, Sūrah xxvii. 84): “And when sentence falls upon them we will bring forth a beast out of the earth, that shall speak to them and say, ‘Men of our signs would not be sure.’ ” According to the Traditions he will be the third sign of the coming resurrection, and will come forth from the mountain of Ṣufah. (Mishkāt, xxiii. c. iv.) Both Sale and Rodwell have confounded the Dābbatu ʾl-Arẓ with Al-Jassāsah, the spy, mentioned in a tradition by Fāt̤imah (Mishkāt, xxiii. c. iv.), and which is held to be a demon now in existence. [AL-JASSASAH.] For a description of the Dābbah, see the article on the RESURRECTION.

DABŪR (دبور‎). “The West wind.” A term used by the Ṣūfīs to express the lust of the flesh, and its overwhelming power in the heart of man. (ʿAbdu ʾr-Razzāq’s Dictionary of Ṣūfī Terms.)

DAHHĀ (ده​ها‎). Plural of the Persian ده‎, ten. The ten days of the Muḥarram, during which public mourning for ʿAlī and his sons is observed by Shīʿah Muḥammadans. (Wilson’s Glossary of Indian Terms.)

AD-DAHR (الدهر‎). “A long space of time.” A title given to the LXXVIth chapter of the Qurʾān; called also Sūratu ʾl-Insān, “The Chapter of Man.” The title is taken from the first verse of the chapter: “Did not there pass over man a long space of time?”

DAHRĪ (دهرى‎). One who believes in the eternity of matter, and asserts that the duration of this world is from eternity, and denies the Day of Resurrection and Judgment; an Atheist. (G͟hiyās̤u ʾl-Lug͟hāt, in loco.)

DAIN (دين‎). A debt contracted with some definite term fixed for repayment, as distinguished from qarẓ, which is used for a loan given without any fixed term for repayment. [DEBT.]

DAJJĀL (دجال‎). Lit. “false, lying.” The name given in the Ḥadīs̤ to certain religious impostors who shall appear in the world; a term equivalent to our use of the word Antichrist. Muḥammad is related to have said there would be about thirty.

The Masīḥu ʾd-Dajjāl, or “the lying Christ,” it is said, will be the last of the Dajjāls, for an account of whom refer to article on MASIHU ʾD-DAJJAL.

DALĪL (دليل‎). “An argument; a proof.” Dalīl burhānī, “a convincing argument.” Dalīl qat̤īʿ, “a decisive proof.”

DAMASCUS. Arabic Dimashq. According to Jalālu ʾd-dīn Suyūt̤ī, Damascus is the second sacred city in Syria, Jerusalem being the first; and some have thought it must be the “Iram of the columns” mentioned in the Qurʾān, Sūrah lxxxix. 6, although this is not the view of most Muslim writers. [IRAM.] Damascus is not mentioned in the Qurʾān. With regard to the date of the erection of the city, Muḥammadan historians differ. Some say it was built by a slave named Dimashq, who belonged to Abraham, having been given to the patriarch by Nimrod; others say Dimashq was a slave belonging to Alexander the Great, and that the city was built in his day.

Damascus was taken by K͟hālid in the reign of the K͟halīfah ʿUmar, A.H. 13, and it became the capital of the Umaiyade K͟halīfahs under Muʿāwiyah, A.H. 41, and remained the chief city of Islām until the fall of that dynasty, A.H. 132, when the Abbasides moved their capital first to al-Kūfah and then to Bag͟hdād.

The great mosque at Damascus was erected by ʿAbdu ʾl-Malik ibn Marwān, the fifth K͟halīfah of the Umaiyades. It was commenced A.H. 86, and finished in ten years, being erected on the ruins of an ancient Greek temple and of a Christian church.

The account, as given by Jalālu ʾd-dīn Suyūt̤ī, in his History of the Temple of Jerusalem, is curious and interesting, showing that for a time the Muslims and Christians worshipped in the same building together.

“Here (in Damascus) all the servants of God joined, and built a church to worship God in. Some say, however, that this church was built by the Greeks: for ʿAbdu ʾllāh Ibn ʿAbbās, having marched against Damascus and besieged it, demolished the walls, after he had entered the city by storm. Then there fell down a stone, having certain letters inscribed thereon in the Greek language. They therefore sent to bring a certain monk who could read Greek; but he said, ‘Bring me in pitch the impression of the letters on the stone,’ which he found to be as follows: ‘Woe unto thee, mother of shame! Pious is he who inflicts upon thee with usury the ill which God designs for thee in retribution. Woe unto thee from five eyes, who shall destroy thy wall after four thousand years.’ Now, ʿAbdu ʾllāh’s entire name was ʿAbdu ʾllāh Ibn ʿAlī Ibn ʿAbdi ʾllāh Ibn ʿAbbās Ibn ʿAbdu ʾl-Muqallib.

“Again, the historian Ibn Isahir says: When God had granted unto the Muslims the possession, as conquerors of the whole of Syria, He granted them among other cities that of Damascus with its dependencies. Thus God sent down His mercy upon them, and the commander-in-chief of the army (besieging Damascus), who was either Abū ʿUbaidah or, as some say, K͟hālid Ibn al-Walīd, wrote a treaty of capitulation and articles of surrender. By these he settled and appointed fourteen churches to remain in the hands of the Muslims. The church of which we have spoken above was left open and free for future consideration. This was on the plea that K͟hālid had entered the city at the sword’s point by the eastern gate; but that the Christians at the same time were allowed to surrender by Abū ʿUbaidah, who entered at the western gate, opened under articles. This caused dissension; but at length it was agreed that half the place should be regarded as having capitulated and half as stormed.

“The Muslims therefore took this church, and Abū ʿUbaidah made it into a mosque. He was afterwards appointed Emir of Syria, and was the first who prayed here, all the company of Companions praying after him in the open area, now called the Companions’ Tower; but the wall must then have been cut through, hard by the leaning tower, if the Companions really prayed in the ‘blessed precinct.’ At first the Christians and Muslims entered by the same gate, which was ‘the gate of Adoration and Prayer,’ over against the Qiblah, where the great tower now stands. Afterwards the Christians changed and went into their church by the gate facing the west; the Muslims taking the right-hand mosque. But the Christians were not suffered to chant aloud, or recite their books or strike their bells (or clappers), in order to honour the Companions with reverence and fear. Also, Muʿāwiyah built in his days a house for the Amīr, right opposite the mosque. Here he built a green chapel. This palace was noted for its perfection. Here Muʿāwiyah dwelt forty years; nor did this state of things change from A.H. 14 to A.H. 86. But Al-Walīd Ibn ʿAbdu ʾl-Malik began to think of destroying the churches, and of adding some to those already in the hands of the Muslims, so as to construct one great mosque; and this because some of the Muslims were sore troubled by hearing the recitations of the Christians from the Gospel, and their uplifted voices in prayer. He designed, therefore, to remove them from the Muslims and to annex this spot to the other, so as to make one great mosque. Therefore he called for the Christians, and asked them whether they would depart from those places which were in their hands, receiving in exchange greater portions in lieu thereof; and also retaining four churches not mentioned in the treaty—the Church of Maria, the Church of the Crucified, just within the eastern gate, the church Tallu ʾl-Ḥabn, and the Church of the Glorious Mother, occupied previously by the burnishers. This, however, they vehemently refused to do. Thereupon the K͟halīfah said, ‘Bring me then the treaty which you possess since the time of the Companions.’ They brought it, therefore, and it was read in al-Walīd’s presence; when, lo! the Church of Thomas, outside the gate of Thomas, hard by the river, did not enter into the treaty, and was one of those called ‘the greater of churches left upon’ (for future disposal). ‘There,’ he said, ‘this will I destroy and convert it into a mosque.’ They said, ‘Nay, let it alone, O commander of the Faithful, even although not mentioned among the churches, for we are content that you take the chapel of the church.’ To this agreement, then, he held them, and received from them the Qubbah (or chapel vault, dome) of the church. Then he summoned workmen able to pull down, and assembled all the amīrs, chiefs, and great men. But the Christian bishops and priests coming, said, ‘O commander of the Faithful, we find in our books that whosoever shall demolish this church will go mad.’ Then said the K͟halīfah, ‘And I am very willing to be mad with God’s inspiration; therefore no one shall demolish it before me.’ Then he ascended the western tower, which had two spires, and contained a monastic cell. Here he found a monk, whom he ordered to descend. The monk making difficulties, and lingering, al-Walīd took him by the back of his neck, and ceased not pushing him until he had thrown him down stairs. Then he ascended to the most lofty spot in the church, above the great altar, called ‘the Altar of the Martyrs.’ Here he seized the ends of his sash, which was of a bright yellow colour, and fixed them into his belt. Taking, then, an axe into his hand, he struck against the very topmost stone, and brought it down. Then he called the amīrs, and desired them to pull down the building as quickly as possible. Hereupon all the Muslims shouted, ‘God is great!’ three times; also the Christians loudly cried out with their wailing and woe upon the steps of Jairūn, where they had assembled. Al-Walīd therefore desired the commander of his guard to inflict blows upon them until they should depart, which he did. The Muslims then demolished all that the Christians had built in the great square here—altars and buildings and cloisters—until the whole square was one flat surface. He then resolved to build a splendid pile, unrivalled for beauty of architecture, which none could hereafter surpass. Al-Walīd therefore commissioned the most eminent architects and mathematicians to build the mosque, according to the model they most preferred. His brother chiefly moved and stirred him up to this undertaking, and next to him presided Sulaimān ʿAbdu ʾl-Malik. It is said that al-Walīd sent to the king of Greece to demand stone-masons and other workmen, for the purpose of building this mosque in the way he desired, sending word, that if the king refused, he would overrun his territory with his army, and reduce to utter ruin every church in his dominions, even the Church of the Holy City, and the Church of Edessa, and utterly destroy every vestige of the Greeks still remaining. The king of Greece, sent, therefore, numerous workmen, with a letter, expressing himself thus: ‘If thy father knoweth what thou doest, and permits it, then truly I accuse him of disgraceful conduct, and blame him more than thee. If he understandeth it not, but thou only art conscious, then I blame thee above him.’ When the letter came to al-Walīd, he wished to reply unto it, and assembled several persons for consultation. One of these was a well-known poet, who said, ‘I will answer him, O Commander of the Faithful! out of the Book of God.’ So said al-Walīd, ‘Where, then, is that answer?’ He replied this verse, ‘David and Solomon, lo! they assume a right to the corn-field, a right to the place where the people are shearing their sheep. Also, we are witnesses of their decree; for Solomon hath given us to understand it, and both (David and Solomon) have come to us as judges and learned men.’ Al-Walīd, by this reply, caused great surprise to the king of Greece. Al-Firsuk alludes to this in these verses:—

“I have made a separation between the Christians and their churches, and between the people who shine and those who are in darkness.”

“I neglected for a season thus to apportion their happiness, I being a procrastinating vindicator of their grievances.”

“Thy Lord hath made thee to resolve upon removing their churches from those mosques wherein good words are recited.”

“Whilst they were together in one place, some were praying and prostrating themselves on their faces, slightly separated from others who, behold! were adoring God and idols.”

“How shall the people of the Cross unite to ring their bells, when the reading of the Qurʾān is perpetually intermingled?”

“I resolved then to remove them, just as did those wise men when they decreed themselves a right to the seed-field and the flocks.”

“When al-Walīd resolved to build the chapel which is in the midst of the cloister, called ‘the Vulture’s Chapel’ (a name given to it by the country-people, because the porticos on each side look like two wings), he dug deep at the four corners of the intended chapel, until they came to sweet and limpid water. Here they first placed the foundation of the wall of the vineyard. Upon this they built with stone, and when the four corners were of sufficient height, they then built thereon the chapel; but it fell down again. Then said al-Walīd to some one of the mathematicians, who well knew the plan of the Vulture’s Chapel, ‘I wish you to build this chapel; for the injunction of God hath been given me, and I am confident that no one but thyself may build it.’ He therefore built the four corners, and covered them with wicker, and disappeared for a whole year, al-Walīd not knowing where he was. After a year, al-Walīd dug down to the four corner foundations. Then he (i.e. the architect) said, ‘Do not be in a hurry, O commander of the Faithful!’ Then he found the mathematician, who had a man’s head with him. He came to the four corners, and uncovered the wicker work, and lo! all that had been built above the earth had fallen down, until they were on a level with the earth. So he said, ‘From this (work have I come).’ Then he proceeded to build, and firmly fixed and supported a beautiful fabric.

“Some person also said al-Walīd wished to construct a brilliant chapel of pure gold, whereby the rank of the mosque might be magnified. Hereupon the superintendent said unto him, ‘You cannot effect this.’ Upon which al-Walīd struck him fifty blows with a whip, saying, ‘Am I then incapable of effecting this?’ The man replied, ‘Certainly.’ Then he said, ‘I will, then, find out a way to know the truth. Bring forth all the gold thou hast’; which he did: and al-Walīd melted it, and formed it into one large brick, which contained one thousand pieces of gold. But the man said, ‘O Commander of the Faithful! we shall require so many thousand bricks of this sort, if thou dost possess them; nor will this suffice for our work.’ Al-Walīd seeing that he was true and just, presented him with fifty dīnārs; and when al-Walīd roofed the great precinct, he adorned the roof, as well as the whole extent of the pavement, with a surface of gold. Some of al-Walīd’s family also said unto him, ‘They who come after thee will emulate thee in rendering the outer roof of this mosque more commodious every year.’ Upon this al-Walīd ordered all the lead of the country to be collected together, in order to construct therewith an exterior outward covering, answering to the interior, which should be light upon the roof, and on the side-posts that supported the roof. So they collected lead throughout all Syria and many other countries; and whilst they were returning, they met with a certain woman who possessed a weight of lead—a weight of many talents. They began to chaffer with the woman for it; but she refused to sell it, except for its weight in silver. So they wrote to the Commander of the Faithful, informing him of this, who replied, ‘Buy it from her, even for its weight in silver.’ When, then, they offered this sum unto her, she said, ‘Now that you have agreed to my proposal, and are satisfied to give the weight in silver, I give the weight as an offering unto God, to serve for the roof of the mosque.’ Hereupon they marked one corner of the weight with the impression of a seal, ‘This is God’s.’ Some say the woman was an Israelite; some say that they sought for lead in open ditches or holes, and came to a stone sepulchre, within which was a leaden sepulchre, whence they brought forth a dead body, and laid it on the ground. Whilst dragging it out, the head fell to the ground, and the neck being broken, much blood flowed forth from the mouth, which terrified them so much, that they rapidly fled away. This is said to have been the burial-place of King Saul. Also, the guardian of the mosque came unto al-Walīd and said, ‘O Commander of the Faithful! men say that al-Walīd hath expended the money of the treasury unjustly.’ Hereupon al-Walīd desired that all the people should be summoned to prayer. When all were assembled, al-Walīd mounted the pulpit, and said, ‘Such and such reports have reached me.’ Then he said, ‘O ʿUmar Ibn al-Muhājir! stand up and produce the money of the treasury.’ Now it was carried upon mules. Therefore, pieces of hide being placed in the midst, beneath the chapel, he poured out all the gold and silver, to such a height, that those who stood on either side could not see one another. Scales being then brought out, the whole was weighed, when it was found that the amount would suffice for the public use for three years to come, even if nothing were added to the amount. Then all the people rejoiced, praising and glorifying God for this. Then said the K͟halīfah, ‘O people of Damascus! you boast among men of four things; of your air, of your water, of your cheerfulness, and of your gracefulness. Would that you would add to these a fifth, and become of the number of those who praise God, and are liberal in his service. Would that, thus changing, you would become thankful suppliants.’

“In the Qiblah of this mosque were three golden scimitars, enamelled in lapis lazuli. Upon each scimitar was engraved the following sentence: ‘In the name of God, the Merciful and Compassionate! There is no god but God. He is the ever-living, the self-subsisting Being, who never slumbers nor sleeps. There is no god but God. He has no partner. We will never adore any but our Lord, the one God. Our faith is Islām, and our Prophet is Muḥammad. This mosque was built, and the churches which stood on the site of the chapel were demolished, by order of the servant of God, the Commander of the Faithful, al-Walīd Ibn ʿAbdu ʾl-Malik Ibn Marwān, in the month Ẕū ʾl-Qaʿdah, A.H. 86.’ Upon another tablet was inscribed the whole of the first chapter of the Qurʾān. Here also were depicted the stars, then the morning twilight, then the spiral course of the sun, then the way of living which obtained after the arrival of the Faithful at Damascus. Also, it is said, that all the floor of this mosque was divided into small slabs, and that the stone (carving) of the walls extended to the utmost pinnacle. Above was a great golden vine, and above this were splendid enamelled knobs of green, red, blue, and white, whereby were figured and expressed all countries and regions, especially the Kaʿbah, above the tower; also all the countries to the right and left (of Makkah), and all the most beautiful shrubs and trees of every region, famous either for their fruits or flowers. The roof had cornices of gold. Here was suspended a chain of gold and silver, which branched off into seven separate lights. In the tower of the Companions were two stones—beryls (some say they were the jewels called pearls); they were called ‘The Little Ones.’ When the candles were put out, they inflamed the eyes by their brilliant light. In the time of al-Amīn Ibn ar-Rashīd, Sulaimān, captain of the guard, was sent by that K͟halīfah to Damascus, to steal those stones and bring them to him; which he did. When al-Maʾmūn discovered this, he sent them to Damascus, as a proof of his brother’s misconduct. They afterwards again vanished, and in their place is a glass vessel. In this mosque all the gates, from the dome (gallery) unto the entrance, are open, and have no bars or locks. Over each is a loose curtain. In like manner there is a curtain upon all the walls as far as the bases of the golden vine, above which are the enamelled knobs. The capitals of the pillars were thickly covered with dead gilding. Here were also small galleries, to look down from, enclosed on the four sides of the skirting wall. Al-Walīd also built the northern minaret, now called ‘the Bridegroom’s Tower.’ As to the western gallery, that existed many ages before, in each corner of this was a cell, raised upon very lofty walls, and used by the Greeks as an observatory. The two northern of these fell, and the two opposite remained. In the year 740, part of the eastern had been burnt. It then fell down, but was built up anew out of the Christians’ money, because they had meditated the destruction (of it) by fire. It then was restored after a most beautiful plan. This is the tower (but God knows) upon which Jesus son of Maria will alight, for Muḥammad is reported to have said, ‘I saw Jesus son of Maria come forth from near the white minaret, east of the mosque, placing his hands upon the wings of two angels, firmly bound to him. Upon him was the Divine glory (the Shechinah). He was marked by the red tinge of baptism. This is the mark of original sin.’ Jesus (it is also said) shall come forth from the White Tower by the eastern gate, and shall enter the mosque. Then shall the word come forth for Jesus to fight with Antichrist at the corner of the city, as long as it shall please God. Now, when this mosque (the slaves’ mosque) was completed, there was not to be found upon the face of the earth a building more beautiful, more splendid, more graceful, than this. On whatever side, or area, or place, the spectator looked, he still thought that side or spot the most preferable for beauty. In this mosque were certain talismans, placed therein since the time of the Greeks; so that no venomous or stinging creature could by any means obtain entrance into this enclosure, neither serpent, scorpion, beetle, nor spider. They say, also, that neither sparrows nor pigeons built their nests there, nor was anything to be found there which could annoy people. Most, or all, of those talismans were burnt by the fire that consumed the mosque, which fire took place in the night of Shaʿbān, A.H. 461. Al-Walīd frequently prayed in the mosque. One night (it is related) he said to his people, ‘I wish to pray to-night in the mosque; let no one remain there whilst I pray therein.’ So when he came unto the gate of the Two Moments, he desired the gate to be opened, and entering in, he saw a man standing between the gate of the Two Moments and the gate of St. George, praying. He was rather nearer to the gate of St. George than to the other. So the K͟halīfah said unto his people, ‘Did I not charge you that no one should remain whilst I was praying in the mosque?’ Then one of them said, ‘O Commander of the Faithful! this is St. George, who prays every night in the mosque.’ Again, one prayer in this mosque equals thirty thousand prayers.

“Again. A certain man, going out of the gate of the mosque which is near the Jairūn, met Kaʿb the scribe, who said, ‘Whither bound?’ He replied, ‘To the Baitu ʾl-Muqaddas, therein to pray.’ Then said Kaʿb, ‘I will show you a spot wherein whosoever prayeth shall receive the same blessings as if he prayed in the Baitu ʾl-Muqaddas.’ The man, therefore, went with him. Then Kaʿb showed him the space between the little gate from whence you go to Abyssinia, that is, the space covered by the arch of the gate, containing about one hundred yards, to the west, and said, ‘Whoso prayeth within those two points shall be regarded as praying within the Baitu ʾl-Muqaddas.’ Now, this spot is said to be a spot fit to be sought by pilgrims. Here, it is asserted, is the head of John, son of Zacharias (Peace be with him!). For al-Walīd Ibn Muslim being desired to show where John’s head was to be found, pointed with his hand to the plastered pillar—the fourth from the east corner. Zaid Ibn Wakad says, ‘At the time it was proposed to build the mosque of Damascus, I saw the head of John, son of Zacharias, brought forth from underneath one of the corners of the chapel. The hair of the head was unchanged.’ He says in another place, ‘Being nominated by al-Walīd superintendent of the building, we found a cave, of which discovery we informed al-Walīd. He came, therefore, unto us at night, with a wax taper in his hand. Upon descending we found an elaborately carved little shrine, three within three (i.e. within the first a second, within the second a third). Within this last was a sarcophagus, and within this a casket; within which was the head of John, son of Zacharias. Over the casket was written, “Here is the head of John, son of Zacharias. Peace be with him!” By al-Walīd’s command we restored the head to the spot whence it had been taken. The pillars which are above this spot are inclined obliquely to the others to distinguish the place. There is also over it a pillar with a head in plaster.’ He asserts again, that when the happy event occurred of the conquest of Damascus, a certain person went up the stairs which led to the church, then standing where the mosque now stands. Here the blood of John, son of Zacharias was seen to flow in torrents and to boil up, nor did the blood sink down and become still until that seventy thousand had been slain over him. The spot where the head was found is now called al-Sakasak (perhaps, the Nail of the Narrow Cave).

“In the days of ʿUmar, the Christians requested that he would confirm their claim to the right of meeting in those places which al-Walīd had taken from them and converted into mosques. They, therefore, claimed the whole inner area as their own from ʿUmar. The latter thought it right to restore them what al-Walīd had taken from them, but upon examination he found that the churches without the suburbs were not comprehended in the articles of surrender by the Companions, such, for example, as the great Church of the Monastery of Observants or Carmelites, the Church of the Convent behind the Church of St. Thomas, and all the churches of the neighbouring villages. ʿUmar therefore gave them the choice, either to restore them the churches they demanded, demolishing in that case all the other churches, or to leave those churches unmolested, and to receive from them a full consent to the free use of the open space by the Muslims. To this latter proposal they, after three days deliberation, agreed; and proper writings were drawn up on both sides. They gave the Muslims a deed of grant, and ʿUmar gave them full security and assurance of protection. Nothing was to be compared to this mosque. It is said to be one of the strongholds of Paradise, and that no inhabitant of Damascus would long for Paradise when he looks upon his beautiful mosque. Al-Maʾmūn came to Damascus in company with his brother al-Muʿtaṣim, and the Qāẓī Yaḥyā Ibn Aks̤am. Whilst viewing the mosque he said, ‘What is the most wondrous sight here?’ His brother said, ‘These offerings and pledges.’ The Qāẓī said, ‘The marble and the columns.’ Then said al-Maʾmūn, ‘The most wondrous thing to me is, whether any other could be built at all like this.’ ” (Hist. Temple of Jerusalem, by Jalālu ʾd-dīn, translated by Reynolds, p. 407.)

DANCING. Arabic Raqs. Dancing is generally held to be unlawful, although it does not appear to be forbidden in either the Qurʾān or the Traditions, but according to al-Buk͟hārī (Arabic ed., p. 135), the Prophet expressly permitted it on the day of the great festival. Those who hold it to be unlawful quote the following verse from the Qurʾān, Sūrah xvii. 39, “Walk not proudly on the earth,” as a prohibition, although it does not seem to refer to the subject.

The Ṣūfīs make dancing a religious exercise, but the Sunnī Muslims consider it unlawful. (Hidāyatu ʾs-Sāʾil, p. 107.)

DANIEL. Arabic Dāniyāl. A prophet celebrated amongst Muḥammadans as an interpreter of dreams. He is not mentioned in either the Qurʾān or the Traditions, but in the Qaṣaṣu ʾl-Ambiyāʾ, p. 231, it is stated that in the reign of Buk͟htu Naṣṣar (Nebuchadnezzar) he was imprisoned; and when he was in prison, the king had a dream which he had forgotten, and hearing that Daniel was an interpreter of dreams, he sent for him. When Daniel was in the presence of the King, he refused to prostrate, saying, it was lawful to prostrate alone to the Lord Almighty. For this he nearly lost his life, but was spared to interpret the king’s dream, which was as follows: “He saw a great idol, the head of which was of gold, above the navel of silver, below the navel of copper, the legs of iron, and the feet of clay. And suddenly a stone fell from heaven upon the idol, and ground it to powder, and mixed all the substances, so that the wind blew them in all directions; but the stone grew gradually, and to such an extent that it covered the whole earth.” The interpretation of it, as given by Daniel is said to be this: The idol represented different nations; the gold was the kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar, the silver the kingdom of his son, the copper the Romans, the iron the Persians, and the clay the tribe Zauzan, from which the kings of Persia and Rome should be descended; the great stone being a religion which should spread itself over the whole earth in the last day.

DĀR (دار‎). “A house, dwelling, habitation, land, country.” A word which is used in various combinations, e.g.:—

ad-Dār The abode—the city of al-Madīnah.

ad-Dārain The two abodes—this world and the next.

Dāru ʾl-adab A seat of learning; a university.

Dāru ʾl-baqāʾ The abode which remaineth—heaven.

Dāru ʾl-fanā The abode which passeth away—earth.

Dāru ʾl-g͟hurūr The abode of delusion—the world.

Dāru ʾl-ḥuzn The vale of tears—the earth.

Dāru ʾl-ibtilāʾ The abode of temptation—the world.

Dāru ʾl-k͟hilāfah The seat of the Imām or K͟halīfah—capital.

Dāru ʾl-kutub A library.

Dāru ʾl-k͟huld The home of eternity—Paradise.

ad-Dāru ʾn-naʿīm The blessed abode—Paradise.

Dāru ʾl-qaẓāʾ The Qāẓī’s court.

Dāru ʾsh-shifāʾ A hospital.

Dāru ʾs-surur The abode of joy—Paradise.

Dāru ʾẓ-ẓarb A mint.

Dāru ʾẓ-ẓiyāfah A banqueting-room.

[DARU ʾL-BAWAR, DARU ʾL-HARB, DARU ʾL-ISLAM, DARU ʾL-QARAR, DARU ʾS-SALAM, DARU ʾS-SALTANAH, DARU ʾS-SAWAB.]

DARGĀH (درگاه‎). A royal court (Persian). In India it is a term used for a Muḥammadan shrine or tomb of some reputed holy person, and which is the object of pilgrimage and adoration. (Wilson’s Glossary of Indian Terms.)

DĀRU ʾL-BAWĀR (دار البوار‎). Lit. “The abode of perdition.” A term used for hell in the Qurʾān, Sūrah xiv. 33: “And have made their people to alight at the abode of perdition.”

DĀRU ʾL-ḤARB (دار الحرب‎). “The land of warfare.” According to the Dictionary G͟hiyās̤u ʾl-Lug͟hāt, Dāru ʾl-ḥārb is “a country belonging to infidels which has not been subdued by Islām.” According to the Qāmūs, it is “a country in which peace has not been proclaimed between Muslims and unbelievers.”

In the Fatāwā ʿĀlamgīrī, vol. ii. p. 854, it is written that a Dāru ʾl-ḥarb becomes a Dāru ʾl-Islām on one condition, namely, the promulgation of the edicts of Islām. The Imām Muḥammad, in his book called the Ziyādah, says a Dāru ʾl-Islām again becomes a Dāru ʾl-ḥarb, according to Abū Ḥanīfah, on three conditions, namely: (1) That the edicts of the unbelievers be promulgated, and the edicts of Islām be suppressed; (2) That the country in question be adjoining a Dāru ʾl-ḥarb and no other Muslim country lie between them (that is, when the duty of Jihād or religious war becomes incumbent on them, and they have not the power to carry it on); (3) That no protection (amān) remains for either a Muslim or a ẕimmī; viz. that amānu ʾl-awwal, or that first protection which was given them when the country was first conquered by Islām. The Imāms Yūsuf and Muḥammad both say that when the edicts of unbelievers are promulgated in a country, it is sufficient to constitute it a Dāru ʾl-ḥarb.

In the Raddu ʾl-Muk͟htār, vol. iii. p. 391, it is stated, “If the edicts of Islām remain in force, together with the edicts of the unbelievers, then the country cannot be said to be a Dāru ʾl-ḥarb.” The important question as to whether a country in the position of Hindustān may be considered a Dāru ʾl-Islām or a Dāru ʾl-ḥarb has been fully discussed by Dr. W. W. Hunter, of the Bengal Civil Service, in his work entitled, Indian Musulmāns, which is the result of careful inquiry as to the necessary conditions of a Jihād, or a Crescentade, instituted at the time of the excitement which existed in India in 1870–71, in consequence of a Wahhābī conspiracy for the overthrow of Christian rule in that country. The whole matter, according to the Sunnī Musulmāns, hinges upon the question whether India is Dāru ʾl-ḥarb, “a land of warfare,” or Dāru ʾl-Islām, “a land of Islām.”