[10:17]
قُلۡ لَّوۡ شَآءَ اللّٰہُ مَا تَلَوۡتُہٗ عَلَیۡکُمۡ وَ لَاۤ اَدۡرٰٮکُمۡ بِہٖ ۫ۖ فَقَدۡ لَبِثۡتُ فِیۡکُمۡ عُمُرًا مِّنۡ قَبۡلِہٖ ؕ اَفَلَا تَعۡقِلُوۡنَ ﴿۱۷﴾
ENGLISH
Say, ‘If Allah had so willed, I should not have recited it to you nor would He have made it known to you. I have indeed lived among you a whole lifetime before this. Will you not then understand?’
Let's take a look at a commentary of this verse:
1292. Commentary: The argument against the abrogation theory which was begun in the previous verse is continued in the present one. Such commandments may be abrogated as are needed only for a particular time, the commandments changing with the change of circumstances. But, if any commandments were to be changed without any change having taken place in the circumstances of men, then it would be a proof of the fact that such commandments were misplaced and their promulgation quite useless.
It is regarding this fact that the Holy Prophet is made to say to the disbelievers "If the teachings given by me had not been useful and some other teachings had been more adapted to bring about a change in you, then I would not have delivered these teachings to you, neither would God have revealed them to me."
The words, I have indeed lived among you a whole lifetime before this. Will you not then understand?, embody a great criterion to test the truth of a claimant to prophethood. The Holy Prophet is here asked to refer disbelievers to the period of life he had already passed among them as proof of his sincerity and the truth of his claims. If the period of his life before he claimed to be a Prophet had presented an extraordinarily high standard of truthfulness and integrity and between that period and his claim to prophethood there was no interval during which it might be supposed that he had fallen from that high standard of moral excellence, his claim to prophethood must be accepted as coming from a highly moral and truthful man. When even the Prophet’s opponents admitted that all his lifetime he had been a singularly upright man and had even won from them the title of al-Amin (the Trustworthy) on account of his unimpeachable integrity, he could not suddenly turn an impostor. How was it possible that one who was the most upright and righteous of men a day before should have become a hardened liar the next day (for there is no greater liar than he who forges lies about God). Naturally a person confirmed in a certain course of conduct through habit or temperament takes a long time to develop in himself a major change for either good or evil. How then could the Prophet of Islam suddenly turn into an impostor? There never was a time when the Prophet’s life was hidden from the gaze of his compatriots. He was a resident of Mecca, belonged to a well-known Meccan tribe, and was popularly known in the city as االمنی) the Truthful). In view of these established historical facts, the Quran, as it were, says to the disbelievers, "You ascribe to Our Messenger the most heinous of all lies, viz. forging lies against God, but you cannot produce any evidence to show when this change for the worse developed in him. On the contrary, you admit that right up to the time when he claimed to be a Prophet, he continued to live among you day and night; and you looked upon him as an exceptionally righteous and truthful man. How then can you now say that all of a sudden he has begun to forge lies against God?"
The words, before this, are intended to point to the great psychological fact that the objections of the Holy Prophet’s enemies after he laid claim to prophethood should carry no weight with right-thinking people, because it always happens that after a person has announced himself to be a Messenger of God, people naturally turn against him and begin to impute to him all sorts of evil things. The fact that the Emperor Heraclius asked of Abu Sufyan, when the latter was brought before him at Jerusalem, what his people thought of the Prophet before he laid claim to prophethood, also shows that he too had realized the force of this great argument.
The words, Will you not then understand?, draw our attention to the established psychological truth that a sudden change does not come upon a man except either (1) through some physical injury, etc. (for instance when a man happens to receive a blow on the head causing loss of memory or change in manners, etc.) or (2) through some great spiritual influence. History provides instances when a great shock or calamity has made a person give way to despair and thereby inclined him to evil or when the discovery of some great truth has created a sudden change in him for good. A study of the life history of the Holy Prophet shows that he had never been subject to either of these two influences. Before his exaltation to prophethood, he led a life of retirement, giving himself up to prayer and meditation. At the same time he had not despaired of his countrymen but, like a true well-wisher, earnestly worked for their good. In such circumstances it is an insult to human reason and to all known laws of human psychology to say that though before he claimed to be a Messenger of God the Prophet of Islam was a model of piety and righteousness, yet the very day he made that claim he became the greatest of liars.
For a discussion of the "illiteracy" of the Holy Prophet see under 7:158.
[5 Volume Commentary Under 10:17]
Since the topic of Abu Sufyan and Heraculius's conversation came up it is important to mention the entire incident.Throughout his prophethood, Prophet Muhammad(sa) sent letters to numerous kings and emperors of his time, inviting them to accept Islam. Perchance, Abu Sufyan was in Ghaza, near Jerusalem, where Heraclius Caesar received Prophet Muhammad’s letter. This incident occurred after the Treaty of Hudaibiyah was signed, but before the Meccans violated it. Caesar held a grand court and invited Abu Sufyan to approach. When Abu Sufyan approached, Caesar questioned him about the Prophet:
Caesar: To what sort of family does the Claimant to prophethood belong?
Abu Sufyan: A noble one.
Caesar: Did someone else in his family claim Prophethood?
Abu Sufyan: No.
Caesar: Did someone from his family happen to be a king?
Abu Sufyan: No.
Caesar: Are the people who have accepted this religion poor or influential?
Abu Sufyan: They are poor people.
Caesar: Are his followers growing in number or decreasing?
Abu Sufyan: They are growing.
Caesar: Have you ever experienced untruthfulness from him?
Abu Sufyan: No.
Caesar: Does he ever break a promise or agreement?
Abu Sufyan: Thus far he has never done it. But it is seen if he adheres to the new peace pact which has just been concluded.
Caesar: Have you ever fought a battle against him?
Abu Sufyan: Yes.
Caesar: What was the result of the battle?
Abu Sufyan: Sometimes we were victorious and sometime he was successful.
Caesar: What does he teach?
Abu Sufyan: He says, “Worship One God—Allah. Associate none else with Allah. Offer prayers. Take to piety. Speak the truth. Treat relatives with kindness.”
Caesar: Did anyone else make such a claim before him in his people?
Abu Sufyan: No.
Later Abu Sufyan exclaimed, “By God! Throughout the conversation, except the statement [regarding the new pact], I did not get any chance to say anything against Muhammad.” The discussion continued and Heraclius Caesar then explained why he asked those particular questions.
Caesar: When I asked you about the lineage of the claimant of the prophethood, you stated that he belongs to a very noble family. Messengers always belong to noble families. I asked you if there has been a king in his forefathers? You responded, No. From this I concluded that had there been a king in his forefathers, he might be desirous of regaining the kingdom of his forefathers. I asked you about his followers, whether they are rich and powerful? You replied they are weak and poor. In the beginning, always the poor and weak accept the messengers. I asked you, Did you ever blame him for telling a lie before he claimed to be a prophet? You said, “No.” I was convinced that the one who does not tell a lie to the people, how can he tell a lie about God? Then I asked you, Did anyone of his followers apostatize after accepting Islam due to disliking Islam? You said, “No.” This is the case with a true faith. When someone accepts a faith with clarity of mind, it is very difficult for him to turn away from that faith. I asked you, whether they are increasing or decreasing in number? You said that they are increasing in number and also in steadfastness. This is always the case with true faiths. I asked you, Did you ever fight a battle with him? You said, We have fought several battles. Sometimes they had the upper hand in the battle and other times we had the upper hand. Sometimes we were successful while the other times they were successful. This is the case with the messengers of God. In the beginning, they went through many trials but ultimately they were triumphant. I asked you, Did he ever break an agreement or deal treacherously? You said, “No.” Such is the high status of the prophets. They never break an agreement. Then I asked, has anyone among your people claimed to be a prophet before him? You said, “No.” From this, I concluded that since there had not been a prophet in his people he is not imitating anyone.
Abu Sufyan said then, Heraclius asked him, “What did [Muhammad] command you to do?” I said, “He commanded us to observe Prayer, pay Zakat, strengthen the ties of kinship, tell the truth, be pious and chaste.” Hearing this Heraclius said,
If everything you have told is true, then definitely he is a prophet. I was expecting the coming of a prophet. However, I did not know that the prophet would be commissioned from among your people. Had the circumstances permitted me, I certainly would have gone to see this prophet. Had I visited him, I would have washed his feet. The kingdom of this prophet will reach the land where I stand.
Heraclius Caesar then asked for Prophet Muhammad’s letter and read it before his court.
[Bukhari, Vol. 4, Book 52, #191]
Abu Sufyan, the leader and general of the Meccans, cannot help but admit that Prophet Muhammad(sa) was truthful, just, honest, and noble. Heraclius Caesar cannot help but admit Prophet Muhammad(sa) was indeed God’s true prophet, dignified and honorable. This is the true story of Prophet Muhammad’s life and victory at Mecca. In short, Prophet Muhammad(sa) broke no treaty, and let alone with justice, he acted with unprecedented compassion upon returning to Mecca. This is what even his enemies readily admitted to then, and this is what non-Muslim scholars admit to today.
Finally, I will show a powerful incident from the life story of the Prophet of Islam (pbuh) wich shows he was indeed a truthful prophet.
Anguish Inflicted upon the Holy Prophet(sa)
In comparison to these hardships inflicted upon the Muslims, the personal state of the Holy Prophetsa in this storm of dishonour was not well either. No doubt, after the decision of the Banū Hāshim and Banū Muṭṭalib, although the Holy Prophetsa commanded the general support of his dear ones and relatives, and in intertribal politics, this support held significant weight, yet first and foremost, because of the disloyalty and betrayal of the Holy Prophet’ssa paternal uncle, Abū Lahab, the strength of this decision was weakened. Secondly, the Quraish had also threatened that if the Banū Hāshim and Banū Muṭṭalib did not refrain from backing and protecting the Holy Prophetsa, they would fight them all. Until now, although they had not given this threat a practical form, they were engaged in its preparation. However, through reproach and slander, and by mockery, whilst safeguarding themselves they would instigate physical confrontations as well. The first thing they did was to organize a meeting and deliberated upon the issue that with the season of Ḥajj in the offing, Islām would definitely find popularity among the pilgrims and people will flock to us to inquire about this new prophet, and what he claims. For this reason, through mutual consultation, we should think up an answer, so that our inter-discrepancy does not give a negative impression to the pilgrims. Therefore, all the chieftains of the Quraish gathered at the home of Walīd bin Mughīrah. Walīd made an inaugural speech and elucidated the entire issue. He explained:
“Now the time for Ḥajj has arrived and word of Muḥammad’s [peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him] claim has reached out, and the people who shall come for Ḥajj shall most definitely question us about him. Therefore, by consultation, we should agree upon a compelling answer, so that we do not negate one another and thus lessen the influence of our plan.
At this, one person suggested, “Our answer is simple: This man is a soothsayer. And through his soothsaying, he has gathered a few people around him.” Walīd said:
“How can we call him a soothsayer, when none of his qualities correspond to this? He does not sing like a soothsayer, nor does he possess the precise exposition of a soothsayer.”
Another person said, “Then we can say that Muḥammad [peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him] is mad and tends to speak in the vehemence of his madness.” Walīd said:
“Who will believe us? And what symptoms of insanity can we possibly justify in Muḥammad [peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him]? There is no anxiety in him, no restlessness, nor does he possess the necessary distraction of mind that is found in an insane man. Who will believe our claim?”
A third person said, “We can say that this person is a poet, and is pulling people towards himself through his enchantingly persuasive couplets.” Walīd responded “By calling him a poet, how shall we display examples of poetic style such as Rajaz, Hazaj, Qarīḍ, Maqbūḍ and Mabsūṭ1 in his poetry.” Upon this, a fourth person said, “We should project him as a magician.” Walīd said, “Then how shall we show him as one who casts spells and performs tricks.” People said, “O ‘Abdu Shams, then you ought to tell us what we should do.” Walīd responded:
“In this regard, I am myself perplexed, as to the proper course of action. Whatever we suggest does not seem to apply to Muḥammad [peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him] and to make a statement that the people do not accept shall make us the target of laughter.”
In this way, discussions continued and it was ultimately decided that since nothing else comes to mind, the suggestion of declaring him a magician seems to hold more weight among the suggestions presented in the meeting. Hence, it was decided that on the occasion of Ḥajj, everyone would tell the people coming from outside that Muḥammad [peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him] was a magician who, through his secret magic was separating son and father, brother and brother, and husband and wife from one another. Therefore, on the occasion of Ḥajj, the talk of the town was that Muḥammad [peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him] is a magician who sows the seed of separation and divergence in every home that he enters. Moreover, this propaganda spurred a dangerous uproar throughout the tribes of Arabia against the Holy Prophet(sa). 2
2 As-Sīratun-Nabawiyyah, By Abū Muḥammad ‘Abdul-Malik bin Hishām, pp. 203-204, Bābu TaḥayyurilWalīd-ibnil-Mughīrati fīmā Yaṣifu bihil-Qur’ān, Dārul-Kutubil-‘Ilmiyyah, Beirut, Lebanon, First Edition (2001)
[The Life & Character of the Seal of Prophets(sa) – Volume I pages 198-198]
Why does all of this matter?
• Was he a liar? No, because he was known as “Truthful and Trustworthy”, even by his enemies. Also, liars often lie for worldly gain, yet the Prophet (peace be upon him) rejected worldly aspirations for the Hereafter.
• Was he deluded? A deluded person is one who speaks falsehood while believing it to be true. However, the Prophet was not deluded because, during his lifetime he foretold many prophecies that actually came true. For example, the beduoin Arabs building tall buildings. How is this possible unless he was given knowledge by the AllKnowledgeable? Moreover, his teachings are not those of a deluded man.
• Conclusion: He spoke the Truth!