THE BOOK
THE KORAN:
‘And say: The Truth has come and falsehood vanished. Surely falsehood is ever bound to vanish.a’
(17:81 M.M. Ali.) (Ref: Index; Spirit of truth, Jesus’ prophecy of coming of,)
Ali’s commentary on 81a:
‘The advent of the Prophet is here spoken of as the advent of the Truth, in reference to the prophecy in John 16:13 as to the coming of the “Spirit of truth” to guide men into all truth: “Howbeit when He, the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you into all truth; for he shall not speak of himself, but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak; and he will show you things to come ”.’
Ali’s continuing commentary on just this one verse is very telling as he, through his unflinching loyalty to his religion, actually but unknowingly portends the very future of Islam; for he writes thus:
‘The vanishing of falsehood is here spoken of in the past tense to indicate the
certainty of its occurrence. Falsehood finally disappeared from Makkah [Mecca]
when the Prophet entered it as a conqueror, and as the House of the Holy One
was cleared of the idols, the Prophet recited this verse, The Truth has come and
falsehood vanished, thus showing that he understood it to contain the prophecy of
the conquest of Makkah. According to another report, he also recited on this
occasion 34:49: “Truth has come, and falsehood neither originates, nor
reproduces,” showing that idol-worship was being swept away from Arabia
forever. The statement made here, however, is general and it means that
falsehood cannot stand before Truth and that Truth must finally prevail in the
whole world, as it prevailed in Arabia in the lifetime of the Prophet.’
(Emphases mine.)
Scriptural pronouncements or prophecies inherently carry within them the “two-edged sword” characteristic in that Scripture and Verse can be interpreted in many different ways -– and certainly to fit a given belief. Of course, I accept that I may be accused of doing the same thing. Nonetheless, this is my commentary on Ali’s interpretation in this case:
Despite the fact that Ali has tempered his views somewhat by referring to “Truth’s Coming” as a ‘general statement’, he nonetheless makes the mistake of applying the “disappearance of falsehood” with the “Coming of Truth” to a strictly and obviously narrow, Arabian/Muslim setting. Yet that very same Truth in its pristine state was always ordained to be “gifted” for all of mankind by “Its Bringer”, and not for or through any single religion. And, moreover, it was for the time in history known as the “last days” -– our time now --- not 1,400 years ago. Interestingly, my underlined portion of Ali’s commentary ultimately stands as a ‘double-edged’ “Proclamation of Absolute Truth” in its own right.
The very fact that he has placed into print -- thus for all time and for all the world to read, the words; “...falsehood cannot stand before Truth and that Truth must finally prevail in the whole world...”, forever stand as either a truism in itself, or as a serious indictment of ‘falsehood’ in this case. It cannot possibly be both at the same time, so it is one or the other. Islam’s stance, of course, will clearly be for “the truism” aspect.
It is singularly important to hammer this topic of The Spirit of Truth to as far as we can take it, for on this ultimate recognition actually rests the final fate of billions of human souls.
In tracking towards that recognition, we probably need to let Islam speak its case more strongly, and M.M. Ali is the ideal Muslim for that role. To that end, two more effusive commentaries from him should suffice to anchor Islam’s position in this first and crucially-important Discourse. For in terms of Islam and its 1.4 billion Muslim adherents determinedly claiming Muhammad as the final Prophet of all truth -– the actual “Spirit of Truth” --- Ali’s previous reference to John 16:13 and Mohammad, vis-à-vis; “The statement made here, however, is general...”, does not give us a sufficiently “solid” indicator of that assertion.
Therefore, so that we can better assess in future Discourses which religion or Teaching offers the greatest detail and revelation to the “Great Questions to Life” --- just to begin with --- we need a noted Koranic scholar like M.M. Ali to unequivocally state, to reinforce, to a far greater degree than that which we have thus far noted, exactly where Muslims and Koranic verse stands with regard to Islam’s “Spirit Of Truth”. The following verse and extensive commentary will unequivocally confirm M.M. Ali’s, and thus Islam’s, position on this critical question. Because this verse is so explicit in its intention and meaning, we will also quote from four other Korans.
‘And [mention] when Jesus, son of Mary, said: “O children of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you, confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad”. But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said: This is obvious magic.’ (61:6 Saheeh Int.).
‘And remember when Jesus, son of Mary, said: “O children of Israel, surely I am Allah’s Messenger unto you, fulfilling that which is before me of the Torah, and giving glad tidings of a Messenger who will come after me. His name will be Ahmad.” And when he came to them with clear proofs, they said, ‘This is clear enchantment.’ (61:6 M.S. Ali).
‘And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: “O children of Israel! I am the Messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Taurat (which came) before me, and giving glad tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad.” But when he came to them with clear Signs,. They said, “This is evident sorcery!” (61:6 A.Y. Ali).
‘And remember when Jesus the son of Mary said, “O children of Israel! of a truth I am God’s apostle to you to confirm the Law which was given before me, and to announce an apostle that shall come after me whose name shall be Ahmad.” But when he (Ahmad) presented himself with clear proofs of his mission, they said, ‘This is manifest sorcery!” (61:6 J.M. Rodwell.)
‘And when Jesus, son of Mary, said: O children of Israel, surely I am the messenger of Allah to you verifying that which is before me of the Torah and giving the good news of a Messenger who will come after me, his name being Ahmad. a But when he came to them with clear arguments, they said: This is clear enchantment.b’ (61:6 M.M. Ali. All emphases mine.)
Here we have an interesting spread of translations from Arabic to English, but with only one translation really clarifying who came to whom. For in terms of ‘phrasing’, only Rodwell ‘spells out’ that it was actually Ahmad who went to them, and not Jesus as the Messenger -– as could be construed from the other texts. This point may be considered rather pedantic but correct interpretation is crucial when clarity of thought in translation is called for, and certainly when it comes to Westerners trying to understand a “way of thinking” that is, literally, “completely foreign”.
So, we have a strong and very explicit verse, but clearly one not acceptable to Christianity. [It is no wonder that the Crusades lasted for so long and took tens of thousands of lives in ongoing battles characterised by brutal bloodshed.]
Now, the key point of a range of Korans to illustrate this particular verse is to focus Ali’s extensive commentary on the obvious ramifications of it, for whilst there are many verses about Jesus, this one provides the definitive kind of declaration we need for this first Discourse, i.e.: “Ownership” of The “Spirit of Truth”! Ali’s extensive Islamic commentary on 6a:
‘We are told here that Jesus had given the good news of the advent of a Prophet whose name was Ahmad coming after him. That our Prophet was known by two names Muhammad and Ahmad is a well-known fact of history. The famous poet Hassan mentions the Prophet, in one of his verses, by the name Ahmad:... [From Arabic],... i.e., Allah blesses the blessed Ahmad and so do those who go round about His Throne of Majesty and all pure ones.’
The next and more extensive part of Ali’s commentary really gets to the heart of this really quite strange Islam/Christianity “Ownership” enigma.
‘The next question is, Does Jesus really speak of the coming of Ahmad? As regards his sayings, we have to depend on a Greek translation, in which we find the word Paraclete, which is translated in English as Comforter. We are well aware how translations are sometimes misleading, and therefore the use of the word Paraclete in the Greek version, or that of Comforter in the English version, does not show what the actual word in the language spoken by Jesus was. But all these qualifications which are given in John 14:16 and 16:7 are met with in the person of the Holy Prophet. He is stated to be the one who shall abide forever, and so is the Prophet’s law; for after him comes no prophet to promulgate a new law. He is spoken of as teaching all things, and it was with a perfect law that the Holy Prophet came. And clearest of all are the words of John 16:12:14: “I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you into all truth; for he shall not speak of himself, but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak; and he will show you things to come. He shall glorify me”. Now, this prophecy about the Spirit of Truth, which is the same as the Comforter, clearly stated in John 14:17, establishes the following points: (1) Jesus could not guide into all truth because his teaching was really directed to the reform of the Israelites, and he denounced only their crying evils; but the teaching of the Comforter would be a perfect one, guiding men into all truth, and the Holy Qur’an is the only book which claims to be a perfect law. (2) That the Comforter would not speak of himself, but that which he shall hear he shall speak; the words conveying exactly the same idea as those of Deut. 18:18: “And I will put my words in his mouth”, a qualification which is met with only in the person of the holy Prophet Muhammad. (3) That he will glorify Jesus, and the Holy Prophet did glorify Jesus denouncing as utterly false all those calumnies which were heaped upon Jesus and his mother.’
‘It is argued, however, that the Comforter is here called the Spirit of Truth, and hence the words cannot be applicable to a man.(*) But it is equally difficult to see why Jesus would call him another Comforter; evidently he was referring to a human being as he himself was. Moreover, we cannot imagine a spirit not speaking of himself but speaking only that which he shall hear, which a comparison with Deut. 18:18 clearly shows to be a prophet like Moses. And it should be noted that the Holy Prophet is frequently called The Truth in the Holy Qur’an, as in 17:81.’
(*) Ali is correct here. The words, “Spirit of Truth” certainly ‘cannot be applicable to a man’ in the ordinary sense. Yes, a ‘man among men’ after the earthly incarnation and ongoing adult life whilst in ‘our human world’, but that is all. The “Inner Core”, the “Life Force”, the “Living Part”, is not that of earth- man! ------ Ali continues:
‘Another point worth mentioning is that the different prophecies about the Holy Prophet really refer to the different phases of his life. The two aspects of the life of the Holy Prophet are jalal and jamal, i.e., an aspect of glory and an aspect of beauty, the first finding its manifestation in the name Muhammad and the second in Ahmad. Each of the two prophets, Moses and Jesus, prophesied about the Holy Prophet in words expressing that aspect of his life which was in consonance with his own nature – glory finding greater expression in Moses, who was prophet, lawgiver and king at the same time, and beauty in Jesus, on account of the beauty of his moral teachings, while both these elements were combined in the person of the Holy Prophet.’
It is striking and curious how Ali and Islam in general keep quoting John -– the ‘Beloved of Jesus’ -– and the Book of John, to hammer home the claim that Mohammad was always going to be the ‘Spirit of Truth” as prophesied, when John describes Jesus in the following terms?
”And the WORD became incarnate and encamped among us -– and we gazed upon His majesty, such majesty as that of a Fathers only Son -– full of beneficence and truth.”
John clearly regards Jesus as the only person worthy of such praise; he does not refer to any other anywhere in the same way in his Gospel. Of course, he states the aspect of sonship — anathema to Islam –- very definitively here. (That, also, is a major question we will address in its relevant Discourse.)
To rely so heavily on the Bible for a definitive Islamic declaration seems to fly in the face of all reasonable logic. Is it a case of Koranic scholars grasping at perhaps the only place of “perceived real authority” to argue its case?
The second and shorter commentary we indicated would be added here comes from M.M. Ali’s: INTRODUCTION, Part 3, ‘RELATION TO EARLIER SCRIPTURES’. His Sub-Intro. p. I -37, offers a further insight into the Islamic view of John 16:12-13. The Sub-Intro Title is very revealing, vis-à-vis:
Perfect Revelation of Divine Will
‘Further, as a result of what has been said above, the Holy Qur’an
claims that it came as a perfect revelation of Divine will:
“This day I have perfected for you your religion and competed My favour
to you and chosen for you Islam as a religion” (5:3).
The finality of the Quranic revelation is, therefore, based on its perfection. New scriptures were revealed as long as they were needed, but when perfect light was cast on all essentials of religion in the Holy Qur’an, no prophet was needed after Muhammad. Six hundred years before him, Jesus Christ, who was the last among these national prophets -– the Holy Prophet Muhammed being the prophet not of one nation but of the whole world -– had declared in plain words that he could not guide the world to Perfect Truth, because the world at that stage was not in a fit condition to receive that truth:
“I have yet many things to say unto you; but ye cannot bear them now. When, howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth” (John 16 12:13).
Among the scriptures of the world the Holy Qur’an, therefore, occupies a unique position as a perfect revelation of Divine will.”
That must surely be the most monumental statement of, shall we say, “religious certainty” ever. From the Christian perspective, the Scripture of the ‘Coming’ of ‘The Spirit of Truth’ in the Book of John, when quoted, is invariably ‘shortened to just 16:13, which is supposed to tell the whole story and thus be sufficient for both “religions” to claim “Ownership” of HIM.
There is more, of course, and we should examine the Scriptures before and after verse 13. For, preceding that definitive Scripture is a ‘lead-in’ to it; and one that has triggered several different opinions as to its actual meaning! We will quote from Fenton’s Bible in the following specific sub-Chapters of John 16:5-16.