The Covenants Of The Prophet: Read An Excerpt

Now Featured in the Patheos Book Club The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World By John Andrew Morrow Book Excerpt: Chapter Two Commentary on the Content of the Covenant with the Monks of Mount Sinai The Covenant of the Prophet Muhammad with the Monks of Mount Sinai commences with the invocation of God's greatness and quickly moves into specifics: "As God is great and governs, from whom all the prophets are come, for there remains no record of injustice against God." Not only is God great, dictates the Prophet, but He also governs. The point is important both theologically and politically. Theologically, the Jews and Christians were engaged in a series of polemics concerning the role of the Creator. Some Jewish scholars argued that God has retired from active participation in the world after Creation, a view shared by the Deists of the Enlightenment and also by some contemporary Christian thinkers, such as Ernesto Cardenal. The Islamic position, espoused by the Prophet, is in agreement with the Catholic tradition which holds that God is actively engaged in a continuous process of Creation and Re-Creation. Hence, He is very much the Creator and Sustainer of the Universe. If God rules, then, it follows that the rule of God should be established upon the earth; as the Lord's Prayer beseeches, "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven." This raises the critical questions of who is invested with the authority to implement the Law of Allah upon the land. Islam answers: none other than the prophets of God; among whom Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah, represents the completion of the prophetic mission. Hence, the importance of Muhammad as khatim al-anbiya or the Seal of the Prophets, he who is the "careful guardian of the whole world." As such, the covenant he bequeathed to the monks of Mount Sinai is directed, not only to the entire Muslim ummah , but to the Christian Nation as well. As the Prophet proclaimed: he "has written the present instrument to all those who are in his national people, and of his own religion, as a secure and positive promise to be accomplished to the Christian nation." During a period in which class was everything and strictly defined one's role in society, the Prophet did not direct his covenant to the rich, the powerful, and the noble. He did not give his word simply to the ecclesiastic establishment. His covenant was concluded with each and every Christian: "whosoever they may be, whether they be the noble or the vulgar, the honorable or otherwise." The Covenant , then, conveyed a clear rejection of classism, elitism, and racism. It is thus in complete agreement with the contents of the Constitution of Medina : all are equal before God for whom the most important thing is not language, skin color, social status or class position which exclude others, but rather the degree of piety, humanity, love for others (which includes not only human beings but the entire natural order), sincerity of faith, the acceptance of His Commandments, and complete certainty as to the special place occupied by His Prophets, Messengers, and Imams. As the covenant was made in the Name of Allah and His Most Noble Messenger, it was binding upon all Muslims at all times. The first item of the covenant is a stern warning directed to those who violate the Prophet's promise: I. Whosoever of my nation shall presume to break my promise and oath, which is contained in this present agreement, destroys the promise of God, acts contrary to the oath, and will be a resister of the faith, (which God forbid) for he becomes worthy of the curse.... Once again, the Prophet reiterates his rejection of racism, elitism, and classism, warning that the curse of Almighty Allah will befall on any of those who betray his oath "whether he be the King himself, or a poor man." If a man's word is gold, the Prophet's word was made of platinum and the most precious and priceless jewels. The Prophet personally promised to grant protection and safety to all Christians covered by the covenant: whenever any of the monks in his travels shall happen to settle upon any mountain, hill, village, or other habitable place, on the sea, or in deserts, or in any convent, church, or house of prayer, I shall be in the midst of them, as the preserver and protector of them, their goods and effects, with my soul, aid, and protection.... Since all Muslims must submit to the will of Allah and His Messenger, the Covenant of the Prophe t is binding on all believers. The promise of protection is made, not only in the name of God and His Prophet, but in the name of all of his followers. As the Prophet makes explicitly clear, the covenant is concluded "jointly with all my national people." Rather than view Christians as Others and Outsiders, the Messenger of Allah insists that "they are a part of my own people, and an honor to me," clearly comprehending that those who possess power are judged on the basis of how they treat the minorities in their midst. As categorically demonstrated by this covenant, there is truly nothing honorable in exterminating members of minorities or engaging in religious, ethnic or racial "cleansing." The honor of the law resides in embracing diversity and multiculturalism, as the Qur'an affirms (49:13). The French, the English, and the Spanish, on the other hand (to cite only a few examples), spent over a millennium attempting to impose a single language and a single religion upon their nations to the detriment of religious and linguistic minorities. Australia—which, like Canada, earlier promoted multiculturalism—now advocates assimilation. By defending diversity, the Prophet Muhammad established a norm of social justice rare in any time. The Prophet never imposed shari'ah law on non-Muslims. Jewish people were judged on the basis of Jewish law and Christians were judged on the basis of Christian law. The example of the Prophet was emulated by Imam 'Ali (d. 661 CE). After receiving the pledge of allegiance from the people, Imam 'Ali made the following famous statement: Question me before you lose me. Question me, for I have the knowledge of those who came earlier and those who will come after. If the cushion (on which a judge sits) was folded for me (to sit on), I could give judgments to the people of the Torah by their Torah, to the people of the Gospels by their Gospels, to the people of Psalms by their Psalms, and to the people of the Furqan (i.e. Qur'an) by their Furqan , so that each one of these books will be fulfilled and will declare, 'O Lord, indeed 'Ali has given judgment according to Your Decree.' (Mufid 21) Because the monks comprised a religious community, as opposed to a commercial enterprise, the Prophet granted them tax-free status. "I command all officers," he wrote, "not to require any poll-tax of them, or any other tribute, because they shall not be forced or compelled to anything of this kind." Unlike despots and dictators, from both past and present, who have often raided the coffers of religious authorities, the Prophet viewed them as non-profit entities engaged in charitable, social service, and spiritual activities. Not only did he grant them ecclesiastic autonomy, he even granted them politically autonomy, like a free associated state or an autonomous region. However, unlike free associated states such as Puerto Rico, whose people are deprived of the right to vote, the Christian communities were free to elect their own political representatives and members of their judiciary: "None shall presume to change their judges or governors," declares the Prophet, "but they shall remain in their office, without being deported." Again, in contrast to other rulers who would eliminate the previous administration after assuming power, removing—by exile, imprisonment or execution—the remnants of any earlier regime and replacing them with loyalists, the Prophet would keep the same administrative and judiciary structures in place, seeking only love and loyalty in return. Most leaders of the time, and many leaders of the present, act according to the animal order. Like dominant lions and bears, who go to the extreme of killing cubs of previous or potential competitors, many victorious political and/or military leaders still physically purge the leaders of the preceding administration. Based on his actions, it is clear that the Messenger of Allah was not a centrist but rather a federalist. Centrism is the concentration of political power in a single center. Federalism is a political organization based on the voluntary integration of provinces or states which delegate some of their powers to the central power while maintaining their autonomy. Federalism is thus the most pragmatic and convenient method of constructing a government that recognizes diversity of its constituents and allows them to maintain their principles. So, what the Prophet was creating were provinces or states that had a wide range of rights and freedoms within the larger framework of the Islamic ummah. This is federalism. It may be Islamic Federalism but it is federalism nonetheless. The fifth item promised by the Prophet was freedom of movement, a right taken for granted by many people in the world today. Yet, even in recent times, freedom of movement was not granted in most Communist countries. Even non-Communist countries, like Saudi Arabia, require its citizens to obtain permits to travel within their own homeland. In the kingdom in question, women cannot even drive much less travel without the permission of their father, husband, or senior male relatives. In Morocco, a grand taxi needs a special authorization simply to leave the outskirts of a city. Papers are routinely checked at check-points throughout the country. All entrances and exits to towns in certain regions are blocked by military check-points and barracks. One has to permanently carry identification at the risk of immediate imprisonment. The movement of people in many nations is controlled at all times. However, before the dawn of Islam, and in its early years, there was no freedom of travel or, more specifically, little assumption of safety with regard to travel. The lands were overrun with highwaymen, robbers, thieves, rapists, pillagers, murderers, and human traffickers. Consequently, the Arabs always had to be armed and travel in large groups for the purpose of protection. In lands under the rule of Islam, the Muslim State promised, and provided, protection for travelers along the vast trade and travel routes. Whether they were Jews, Christians, Muslims, or members of other faiths, the Prophet promised that "No one shall molest them when they are travelling on the road." In item six, the Prophet provided protection to all religious establishments. "Whatever churches they are possessed of, no one is to deprive them of them." In most Communist countries, religious communities had few or no rights. In the Soviet Union and China, for example, tens of thousands of mosques were destroyed. Muslims in France are denied places of worship through deliberate governmental policies. Even in the 21st century United States, Muslims in certain areas face almost insurmountable obstacles when they apply to build mosques. In many Western countries, even those which purport to uphold "human rights" and "religious liberty," mosques have been vandalized and set ablaze while authorities turn a blind eye. The Prophet, however, personally promised to protect all places of worship. Consequently, the building of synagogues and churches actually flourished during the Golden Age of Islam. This is not to say that an Islamic State can allow prosyletization within its midst. While non-Muslims are allowed freedom of religious practice; they are not allowed to engage in missionary activity among Muslims. Nothing prevents them, however, to spread the Gospel among pagans and polytheists. In the manner of a great teacher, the Prophet regularly repeated his most important points. Item seven is not a right: it is the repetition of his initial warning: "Whosoever shall annul any of one of these my decrees, let him know positively that he annuls the ordinance of God." As for those who pretend to be ahl al-Qur'an and yet reject the Sunnah, they should know that they stand in opposition to both. As we read in the Holy Qur'an, Muslims are obliged to obey both Allah and His Messenger (2:285; 3:32; 4:13; 4:14; 8:1; 8:20; 8:24; 8:46; 9:71; 24:51; 24:52; 33:33; 33:66; 33:71; 48:17; 49:14; 58:13; 64:12; 72:23). While the Qur'an takes precedence, and though the Sunnah must be subjected to the highest degree of scientific scrutiny, it is an obligation to follow the true traditions of the Messenger of Allah. While a majority of Muslims meticulously follow the teachings of the Prophet on a myriad of issues, many, if not most of them, have neglected his instructions concerning tolerance towards religious minorities living in their midst. If mosques were historically open to anyone interested in Islam, they are now closed to non-Muslims in many countries. If "Allah" is merely the name of the One God in Arabic, the Malaysians seek to prohibit Christians from employing it when they should be encouraging it. Rather than honor their Jewish and Christian minorities, many Muslim countries have oppressed them and expelled them. While "Islam has traditionally been tolerant of religious minorities," writes William Dalrymple, "that Islamic tradition of tolerance is today wearing distinctly thin" (19). "After centuries of generally peaceful co-existence with their Muslim neighbors," he laments, "things are suddenly becoming difficult for the last Christians of the Middle East" (19). Muslims, of course, are not entirely to blame for failing to live up to the ideals of early Islam. Often, they are responding to centuries of Crusades, colonialism, imperialism, and neo-imperialism. If Muslims were generally tolerant of the People of the Book, their attitude gradually changed in response to changing circumstances. By the 14th and 15th century, Muslim jurists adopted a more restrictive approach towards non-Muslims. As Humphreys observes, "Many of these texts are quite late... and represent a period when the status of non-Muslims had sharply degenerated from earlier times; here as elsewhere no one text should be made the basis for sweeping generalizations" (259). In other words, for every action, there comes a reaction. If Jews and Muslims once lived in harmony in many Arab countries, sharing the same common language, culture, and traditions, the establishment of the State of Israel ruined a millennium and a half of conviviality. Centuries of colonial aggression, which continues to the present through Western intervention, invasion, and occupation, has done nothing but increase animosity towards Christians as a whole. Campaigns to convert Muslims to the Christian faith, and continued attacks against everything Muslims hold to be sacred, such as the Qur'an and the Prophet Muhammad, have led many Muslims to view all Christians with suspicion and their churches as Trojan horses. Expanding upon the fifth item, the Prophet addresses the issue of taxation, for a second time, in item eight: "Neither their judges, governors, monks, servants, disciples, or any others depending on them, shall pay any poll-tax, or be molested on that account." Fearing, rightfully so, that those who would succeed him might attempt to "read between the lines" of item five and argue that only the monks were granted tax-free status, and that such status did not apply to their judiciary, servants, students or dependents, the Prophet stresses that the freedom from the poll-tax applies to the entire Christian community at Mount Sinai. Once again, he reiterates his warning. In the words of the Most Noble Messenger, "I am their protector, wherever they shall be, either by land or sea, east or west, north or south; because both they and all that belong to them are included in this my promissory oath and patent." The Prophet is not merely their ruler. He is their protector. The Messenger of Allah was not merely the local warlord who reigned over Medina. He was not simply the leader of the Muslim community. He was, as he says so himself, the Rightful Ruler of the World, by the grace of God, and the guardian, not only of Islam, but of all Abrahamic religions. As such, he was the Patron of the People of the Book. Because pan-Arabia contained a relatively large number of hermits, monks and wandering ascetics, including the likes of Bahira and other famous figures, the Prophet provided protection for all of them: And of those that live quietly and solitary upon the mountains, they shall exact neither poll-tax nor tithes from their incomes, neither shall any Muslim partake of what they have; for they labor only to maintain themselves. Not only did he extend protection to the pious contemplatives among the People of the Book, he required that they be provided for: "Whenever the crop of the earth shall be plentiful in its due time, the inhabitants shall be obliged out of every bushel to give them a certain measure." In so doing, the Prophet demonstrated that he cared, not only for their spiritual vocation, but for their physical well-being. By supporting the People of the Book, the Prophet aimed to encourage good-will and cordial relations between the Christian and Muslim communities. When a government cares for its people, those people, save for the treacherous, will always be loyal and loving. The Prophet's policy was to win the hearts of the non-Muslims through selfless acts of kindness and consideration. Since the monks of the Monastery of Saint Catherine were a peaceful people who had devoted their lives to prayer, the Prophet could never conceive of an occasion which would warrant sending them off to war. Consequently, he excluded them from military service. As item eleven establishes, "Neither in time of war shall they take them out of their habitations, nor compel them to go to the wars, nor even then shall they require of them any poll-tax." When dealing with Jewish and Christian tribes and communities, the Prophet typically accepted the poll-tax in lieu of military service. These communities in question could independently decide whether they wanted to pay the tax or whether they wanted to join the military when required. However, that distinction was for general populations, not the monastery. From them, the Messenger of Allah required neither taxes nor military service. In short, they were provided with rights and protections without any obligations save loyalty to the Prophet Muhammad. With regard to this "loyalty," it was not a dog-like loyalty to one's master or the servile attitude of lackeys such as was shown by some Hindus towards the British occupiers. Instead, loyalty meant a sincere respect for the covenants that had been concluded. As the document explains, the previous eleven items applied specifically to the monks of Mount Sinai. The seven items which follow are applicable to Christians as a whole. Item twelve deals once again with the issue of taxation. These were not black-taxes or extortion as existed and continue to exist in many parts of the world. These were government taxes used to provide services to all the inhabitants of the Islamic ummah regardless of their religion. For those who argue that the Prophet Muhammad was merely a religious leader, that "there are no politics in Islam," or that "politics has always been secondary in Islam," the evidence shows that they are far afield of the historic reality. These erroneous beliefs may cause them to act in clear contravention of authoritative and unquestionable testimony. Politics is what propelled Islam into the broader global arena. The aim of Islam was not only a promising berth in the hereafter as well as a deepening sense of the presence of Allah in this life but also the creation of a just, ethically-based socio-economic system on earth which would help cultivate the best of human and spiritual values. It is this expansive and humanitarian system that helps the spirit to soar. Corrupt systems are corrupting. Immoral systems are demoralizing. It is only through a righteous Islamic Republic that Muslims can reach their highest potential securing what is best in both worlds: this life, and the Hereafter. The Messenger of Allah made sure, through such documents as these, that all People of the Book were invited into this balanced political body. Fearing, once again, that his followers might eventually impose excessive taxation upon the People of the Book, the Prophet specified a limit. As item twelve establishes, "Those Christians who are inhabitants, and with their riches and traffic are able to pay the poll-tax, shall pay no more than twelve drachms." Clearly, this limit was not set in stone and could be changed in the future are a result of inflation. However, any increase would have to be justified. In other words, any future taxes would have to represent the equivalent of what 12 drachms were for the economy of the time. There is little doubt that the Prophet acknowledged a possible change in situation, society, and cultures. Unlike many nations, such as the United States, which provides the rich with many tax loopholes not available to the middle class, the Islamic State created by the Prophet taxed all parties equally. It should be noted, however, that although this is not mentioned in the covenant, Islamic law does not tax the poor. And the definition of poor determined by Islamic law is most generous. People are considered poor if they do not have enough savings to survive for an entire year without working. In the United States, that would represent an income of less than $20,000.00 per year in 2013 depending on where one resides. This does not have to be cash in hand. It could also be collateral as in the partial payment of a home mortgage and the value of vehicles. Still, people who live pay-check to pay-check are not obliged to pay taxes under Islamic rule. If post-medieval Europe was infamous for taxation which oppressed the poor (the Jews were crushed by these onerous taxes; large numbers of Christians from throughout Europe immigrated to the Americas to escape them), Islamic rule represented liberation. Although a great deal of fuss is made, by the foes of Islam, about the poll-tax imposed on dhimmis or Muslim subjects, the truth eludes most people. The poll-tax required of non-Muslims is actually much lower than the 2.5% zakat paid by Sunni Muslims and vastly less than the 20% of khums paid by Shi'ite Muslims. Non-Muslims are actually taxed far less than Muslims in an Islamic State. Such is the price Muslims are prepared to pay for peace. As for the political pundits who decry the "crushing taxes" that Muslims imposed on dhimmis , some economic contextualization is in order. What exactly did ten dirhams represent in the time of the Prophet? According to Muhammad Hamidullah (1908–2002 CE), the sum "represented the expenses of an average family for ten days" (Introduction 149). This is far from being the "exorbitant annual poll-tax" denounced by Habib Levy (165). Some may claim that the poll-tax was discriminatory since it targeted only Jews and Christians and excluded other non-Muslims. They fail to note that the jizyah did not exist in the early days of Islam and that many jurists believe that it can legally be discontinued (Hamidullah 149–150). Hence, it is not an issue that any non-Muslim can hold over the heads of Muslims in good faith. In truth, the poll-tax was eventually abolished. What was never abolished, though, was the protection granted, not only to Jews and Christians, but to all other citizens of the Islamic State. While conservative clerics insisted that only Jews and Christians were People of the Book entitled to the status of dhimmah or protected people, others argued that it also embraced Zoroastrians, Manicheans, Buddhists, and even Hindus. Scholars like al-Biruni (937–1048 CE), Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (1837–1897 CE), Muhammad 'Abduh (1849–1905 CE), and Rashid Rida (1865–1935 CE) all believed in expanding the bounds of those considered as protected subjects. Their arguments were based on the Qur'an and the Sunnah. They claimed that followers of other cosmogonies followed "hidden scriptures" (56: 77–80) from prophets of the past. They pointed to the example of Imam 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (d. 661 CE), who required his governor in Egypt to treat all of his subjects with mercy, love, and kindness, as they were "equals in creation" (278). In Moghul India, for example, "the emperors and their officers gave like justice to all; they permitted every man to worship according to the rites of his forefathers" (Lybyer 298). The arguments of Muslim Modernists, however, are not without flaws, for the Vedas, the Zend Avesta, and the Buddhist scriptures were not hidden. Furthermore, as "liberal" and "progressive" as they may have been, it is seriously doubtful that they ever accepted these as valid Books. If Muslims grant rights to the followers of other religions, it is in the guise of human as opposed to religious rights. All of the children of Adam are entitled to dignity. Item thirteen is a continuation of the Prophet's policy of promoting peace and prosperity. He warns Muslims not to bother believers be they Jews or Christians: Excepting this, nothing shall be required of them, according to the express order of God, that says, 'Do not molest those that have a veneration for the books that are sent from God, but rather in a kind manner give of your good things to them, and converse with them, and hinder everyone from molesting them.' Not only must Muslims be kind and considerate to them, they must also prevent others from indulging in any form of harassment. If nobody is to make a mockery of Islam and the Prophet, nobody is permitted to make a mockery of Judaism and Christianity. As the Prophet taught, to insult one divinely-revealed religion is to insult them all. He who opposes one religion opposes all religion. Embracing the principle that the sacred is superior to the profane, Islam outlaws abuse towards God, His Messengers, and revealed religions, as well as anything that believers hold sacred. Islam's respect for the People of the Book applies to all domains of social co-existence, even into the context of marriage. As the Prophet professed in item fourteen, If a Christian woman shall happen to marry a Muslim, the Muslim shall not cross the inclination of his wife, to keep her from her church and prayers, and the practice of her religion. While Twelver Shi'ite Islam prohibits permanent marriages between Muslims and the People of the Book, it does allow for fixed-term marriage, which can legally apply for a lifetime. Though some Westerners would view this as a "double-standard" and a form of discrimination, the same types of marriages, both permanent and fixed-term, are routinely entered into by Muslim couples. If True Islam requires that a Muslim man and a Christian woman contract a fixed-term marriage, it is because this form of marriage provides the non-Muslim woman with a greater degree of rights, liberties, and protections. Although the Muslim community may hope and wish for the Christian woman to eventually embrace Islam, she is free to remain faithful to the faith of her forefathers. True Islam is actually tolerant to the extreme. While a Muslim is categorically prohibited from consuming wine or pork, Islamic law allows a Christian wife to do so. Though a Muslim wife would be expected to wear the hijab , the Christian woman is allowed to dress as she pleases, according to the standards of her own religious community. However, for the purpose of self-preservation, Islam requires that any child produced by mixed unions be raised in the Muslim faith. The same rule applies to Roman Catholics who enter into mixed marriages: all children are to be raised as Catholics. Strictly speaking a marriage between a Catholic of either sex and any non-Catholic is against Canon Law, which is more restrictive than the shari'ah in this regard. However, Bishops regularly grant permission for such marriages as long as the promise to raise all children as Catholics is made. And if Islam does not allow Muslim women to marry non-Muslim men, the reason is obvious. As a man, and head of the household, a faithful Muslim would never dishonor or disgrace Jesus Christ, Moses or Abraham. No such assurances could ever be provided by a Jewish or Christian man, who may be intolerant, or consider Muhammad as a false prophet and a charlatan. When the Prophet provided for the protection of churches and monasteries, he also ensured that they would be regularly maintained. As item fifteen declares "that no person hinder them from repairing their churches." Some misguided Muslims, though they might refrain from destroying churches, would have simply allowed them to fall into decay and disuse. Through this edict, the Prophet arranged for the continuity of the Christian community. As far as Islam is concerned, the greater the number of people who worship the one God, the better humanity will be served. Islam views religion as a positive social force. While there might be differences in certain theological matters, all monotheistic religions share the same guiding principles. Islam, under the leadership and divine guidance of the Prophet, focused on similarity as opposed to difference, seeking to unite Judaism and Christianity under the protective cover of Islam, as one cohesive monotheistic movement. By protecting other religions, Islam also protects itself from the cancerous spread of secularism, liberalism, and materialism. If the earlier warnings were not sufficiently clear, the Prophet intensifies his admonition in item sixteen. He decrees that "Whosoever acts contrary to my grant, or gives credit to anything contrary to it, becomes truly an apostate to God, and to his divine apostle, because this protection I have granted to them according to this promise." He reiterates his pledge to exclude the Christians from military service. While Christians are not required to protect the Islamic State, the Islamic State is required to protect them. As the Prophet establishes in item seventeen, "No one shall bear arms against them, but, on the contrary, the Muslims shall wage war for them." The Prophet closes the covenant with authority in item eighteen: "And by this I ordain, that none of my nation shall presume to do or act contrary to this my promise, until the end of the world." It bears noticing that the phrase "none of my nation shall presume to do or act contrary to this my promise" lays a charge on all Muslims everywhere, yet many millions of believers have no knowledge of this covenant or its intentions. Doubtless, the promise of protection until the Day of Judgment was contingent upon the Christians upholding their side of the bargain. If they rebelled against Islamic rule, if they aided and abetted the enemies of Islam, such as the Crusaders, or, more recently, European colonizers, and American imperialists, the covenant would no longer apply to them and would be effectively annulled. This is not to suggest that the covenant is currently null and void or that it represents a missed opportunity which cannot be recovered; the fact is, it has been largely adhered to for more than a millennium. Nor does this imply that the Prophet was oblivious to the flaws and devilish nature of men. It remains, as always, a model for relations between Muslims and Christians and the basis on which to build bridges. It is the foundational stepping-stone for all negotiations, treaties, and accords between Muslims and Christians. Although many Christian communities violated their oaths, the monks of Mount Sinai have always maintained the utmost respect for Muhammad. Not only have they upheld the covenant made with the Prophet, they have cherished it always as their most valued possession. In a recent statement, the Monastery of Saint Catherine had this to say about the Prophet Muhammad, his contacts with the monks of Mount Sinai, and the covenant he concluded with them: According to the tradition preserved at Sinai, Muhammad (AS) both knew and visited the monastery and the Sinai fathers. The Koran makes mention of the Sinai holy sites. In the second year of the Hegira, corresponding to ad 626, a delegation from Sinai requested a letter of protection from Muhammad (S). This was granted, and authorized by him when he placed his hand upon the document. In AD 1517, Sultan Selim I confirmed the monastery's prerogatives, but took the original letter of protection for safekeeping to the royal treasury in Constantinople. At the same time, he gave the monastery certified copies of this document, each depicting the hand print of Muhammad (S) in token of his having touched the original. (Sinai Monastery) Considering that the Monastery of Saint Catherine contains the largest collection of Christian documents and codices after the Vatican Library, and is described as a "veritable conservatory of the Christian Orient" (Géhin 163), the library at Mount Sinai is precisely the place where one would expect to find a priceless document like the Patent or Covenant of Muhammad. While Muslims and Christians may differ on certain issues, they largely agree on the content of the covenant. Besides the monks of Mount Sinai, the authenticity of the Patent of Muhammad has been attested to by John Davenport in his Apology for Mohammed and the Koran (148). For Davenport, "[t]he... facts and arguments" contained in the covenant "will, it is presumed, suffice to convince every candid and unprejudiced mind that this second charge against Mohammed," namely, the allegation that Islam was propagated by the sword, causing an enormous waste of human blood, and a vast amount of human misery, "being utterly devoid of foundation, is, therefore, both false and scandalous" (151). In fact, the authenticity of The Covenant of the Prophet Muhammad with the Monks of Mount Sinai has been recognized by a long list of Muslim scholars, including, Dr. A. Zahoor, Dr. Z. Haq, Dr. Muqtedar Khan, Dr. Reza Shah-Kazemi, and endorsed by numerous Islamic associations such as the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada. Such is the example of true Christian-Muslim relations. If the content of the Covenant of the Prophet Muhammad with the Monks of Mount Sinai provides a rich source for academic exegesis, so do the notes found in the various copies of the treaty. The copy of the covenant that has been commented upon in this book is the one which is on display in the Holy Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai and which was copied by Moritz. The covenant in question notes that This promise of protection [ 'ahd ] was written in his own hand by 'Ali ibn Abi Talib in the Mosque of the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, on the third of Muharram in the second year of the Prophet's Hegira. Although it is accurate that 'Ali acted as the Prophet's scribe, as he did on many occasions, the year of composition may be a later addition. Until the time of 'Umar (r. 634–644 CE), the Arabs simply used to sign documents mentioning the day and month, but not the year. This explains why the dates of certain documents appear to be off. However, such a shortcoming is not grounds to dismiss the documents themselves. The scribe notes that A copy of this covenant has been deposited in the treasury [ khizanah ] of the Sultan. It was signed with the seal of the Prophet, peace be upon him. It was written on a piece of leather from Ta'if. This copy of the covenant is not dated but this could easily be done by determining the lifespan of the scribe and judge who are signatories. It appears, at this point, to date from 1800/01 CE. The meaning of "seal" here is somewhat ambiguous. Does it refer to the palm-print of the Prophet or to the actual seal from his ring which he would dip in ink and use to mark documents? The Arabic version in my possession clearly states that the covenant was written on jild or leather which is consistent with early prophetic practice. The surviving segments of the Qur'an, which were written by the scribes of Revelation, are all found on leather. Sidney H. Griffith, however, has translated the word as "parchment" (63). While it is possible that the original was written on parchment, this is not the accurate rendition of the Arabic word found on the covenant. The scribe in question clearly believed that the covenant was authentic. Otherwise, there would be no placed for the pious formula: "Blessed be he who abides by its contents. Blessed be he for he belongs to those who can expect the forgiveness of Allah." The document mentions that This copy, which is copied from the original, is sealed with the signature of the noble Sultan [ sharif al-Sultani ]. This reproduction was copied from the copy that was copied from the copy written in the handwriting of the Leader of the Believers, 'Ali ibn Abi Talib, may Allah bless his countenance. This confirms that the first official copy, provided by Selim I to the monks of Mount Sinai in 1517 CE, was sealed with his signature. The meaning of the following sentence is ambiguous. Does it indicate that the copy in question was the third copy of the original which had been written in the hand of Imam 'Ali (d. 661 CE)? Or does it indicate that the copy taken by Sultan Selim I was the third copy of the original document? Although the document provides more indications, they do not necessarily help to elucidate this mystery. It reads: With the order of the noble Sultan [ sharif al-Sultani ], that is still in effect, with the help of Allah, which was given to a community of monks who inhabit the Mountain of Tur-Sina'i because the copy, which was copied from the copy written by the Leader of the Believers, was lost, in order that his document be a support of the Sultan's royal decrees which are evidenced by the records in the hands of the community in question. Since the name of the Sultan is not stipulated, it is unclear if it refers to Selim I or the Sultan who reigned when this copy, dating from the 1800s was made. The Arabic, as far as I understand, states that the original covenant was lost, and that the copy was provided by the Sultan to replace it. Was it not simply taken by the Sultan as opposed to lost? While a true muhaddith or hadith scholar focuses on the isnad-cum-matn , namely, the chain of authorities and the content of the tradition, this is clearly not possible in the case of a document purporting to be a copy of an original dictated by the Prophet himself; we are no longer dealing with hearsay, no matter how well-attested, but with documentary evidence. With the Covenant of the Prophet Muhammad with the Monks of Mount Sinai , its authority, or lack thereof, must be exclusively determined on the basis of content analysis. In this regard, the covenant has passed the test. Notes found on other copies of the covenant convey even more confidence. One copy of the covenant, written in Turkish Arabic script, which was made in 1858 and bears the seal of the Sinai dependency of Canea, Crete, contains the following heading: "Here is the reason for the writing of this document of eloquent language and the condition that necessitated the formulation of this document of true statements" (Griffith 63–64). That "[t]he Testament was confirmed by Sultan Selim, and by subsequent rulers, to the time of Sultan Abdul Hamid II in 1904" (64) should therefore suffice to ease the qualms of most scholars. Conclusions While there will always be those who seek to cast doubt on anything and everything that might reveal Islam as a positive force, most academics not bound to "the hermeneutics of suspicion" have good grounds for considering The Covenant of the Prophet Muhammad with the Monks of Mount Sinai to be authentic in the absence of definitive evidence of forgery. To date, no scholar has presented any solid proof that the covenant is a fake. On the contrary, Muhammad's extensive travels throughout the Greater Levant, his confirmed contacts with Christians in various regions, the remarkable stability of the account of his contact with the Monastery of Saint Catherine, the historic recognition of the achtiname by both the monks of Mount Sinai and Muslim scholars from all schools of jurisprudence, the discovery of the firman of Selim I in a Turkish collection, and the comparative study of the Prophet's numerous treaties and covenants, all seem to support the authentic nature of The Covenant of the Prophet Muhammad with the Monks of Mount Sinai.

The Covenants of the Prophet: Read an Excerpt