With all the greatness of Mohammed there was mingled not a little of the frailty incident to human nature,—a considerable portion of which, however, is to be credited to his want of education and to the superstitious prejudices of the age in which he lived. He abhorred darkness, and feared to be left alone without a light; he cried like a child under the slightest physical suffering; he was an implicit believer in the virtues of even numbers, and lived in constant apprehension of sorcery; while the evil-eye was to him, as to the most ignorant of his countrymen, a calamitous and dreaded reality. His conduct was frequently regulated by dreams and omens; some of the latter being not less puerile than those evoked by the arts of divination which he so resolutely condemned. He was guilty of petty affectations and exhibitions of weakness scarcely to be expected in one of his genius and position; he dyed his hair and stained his hands with henna, and displayed an amusing self-consciousness and vanity when in the presence of any of the female sex. He was inordinately jealous, and to this failing, for which history has admitted that at times he had sufficient cause, is to be attributed the seraglio, the veil, the escort of eunuchs, and the seclusion of women. His polygamous connections, which have elicited the censure of European casuists and theologians, were, in the main, measures adopted for political effect; for by these matrimonial alliances he cemented his influence and extended his power. While it would be vain to deny his amorous susceptibilities,—for we have his own testimony that of all things he loved women and perfumes,—it must be remembered that he controlled his passions until after middle life; and it is certainly less worthy of remark that he should have permitted himself the indulgence of a harem, than that, with his opportunities, he did not abandon himself to unbridled and vicious indulgence. The moral aspect of polygamy, moreover, seems to vary with the locality, and to be after all only a question of latitude. In the scorching heat of the torrid zone, which causes no appreciable deterioration in man’s virility and endurance, woman matures when but a child in years, and is old and wrinkled long before her partner has reached the prime of life. Again, as is well known, the passions of Orientals are far stronger than those of Western nations, bearing to each other a ratio approximating to that of the warm-blooded mammalia to the sluggish reptilia, the voluptuous temperament of the Arabs is repeatedly mentioned by classic writers, and under the tropics the imperious demands of nature may not be disdained or neglected save in the cavern of the starving and emaciated anchorite. The civil institutions of the East have from time immemorial legalized the custom of polygamous marriage, and the words monogamist and Oriental are antithetical, and imply a contradiction in terms. Though distinguished ethnologists maintain with considerable acumen that polyandry is one of the first phases of social existence, their inferences are for the most part merely speculative; for history seldom, if ever, has recorded such alliances, and this apparently anomalous condition of family life is now found only in Thibet and Hindustan. The sacred books of the dominant religions of the world, Buddhist, Jewish, Christian, and Mohammedan, all of which are of Asiatic origin, either openly sanction polygamy or sedulously refrain from denouncing it. Every one knows that it is universal in China and India; the Zendavesta recognizes it; the student of history and legend need not be reminded of its prevalence among the Children of Israel; and the law of Islam permits its practice under certain wise and equitable restrictions. The Bible, from beginning to end, has not a single word to offer in condemnation of it; indeed, in the days of the patriarchs, prophets, and apostles, its utility in the lands where it prevailed appears to have been unquestioned. Although our ideas of social and domestic happiness do not tolerate this custom, which the rigor of our climate renders unnecessary and, in a measure, revolting; still, we should not attempt to measure by our arbitrary standard of propriety the habits of nations formed under far different circumstances, and satisfied with institutions consecrated by the experience of a hundred and fifty generations; nor can we, with justice, subject to our rigid canons of theological and political ethics the sentiments and actions of an illiterate man, bred among semi-barbarians, and who died nearly thirteen hundred years ago. While Mohammed shared with his countrymen all their cynical distrust of the feminine character, he is the only lawgiver claiming divine inspiration who has ever made any effort to improve the condition of women by restricting polygamy, and by the imposition of regulations which admit of no evasion without a forfeiture of legal rights. The beneficial effects of these ordinances in placing restraints upon divorce, in securing to widows immunity from destitution, and in preventing female infanticide, contribute of themselves no inconsiderable addition to the prestige of his name. Far more serious than superstitious weakness, the foibles of vanity, or predilection for women, are other accusations which have been brought against the Prophet. The employment of bravos and the assassination of prisoners, which, if not ordered, are said to have been at least connived at and rewarded by him, are ineffaceable stains upon his character; and it must be confessed that the evidence tending to establish the commission of these sanguinary deeds is but too well founded. They only indicate, however, that, while Mohammed was far in advance of his age, the passion for blood, esteemed the cardinal virtue of an Arab, had not been eradicated from his breast after a life devoted to prayer, alms-giving, and benevolence. The invocation of divine authority in the Koran to justify deeds of which even the lax morality of the age disapproved, while the exigencies of the occasion might have to some extent excused them, is also, under any circumstances, extremely discreditable. The glory of Mohammed consists in the fact that he fully realized the moral and political necessities of his people, and opened for them a career of unprecedented brilliancy; that his efforts for their substantial improvement, reacting, in turn, upon other nations utterly foreign to the Arab blood and language, will be felt to the end of time; that he abolished many cruel and degrading customs; that he elevated and dignified the character of all who received his teachings, and left devout worshippers of a single God those whom he had found polytheists and idolaters.
The Koran is believed by Mussulmans to have been delivered by the Almighty, through the angel Gabriel, to Mohammed, who communicated it orally to his companions as it was revealed, whence is derived its name, “Recitation.” Having thus a divine origin, it is considered sacrilegious by the Moslem Pharisees to question the authenticity or propriety of any of its statements, or to criticise its manifold contradictions, repetitions, and absurdities. As knowledge of writing was at that time a rare accomplishment in Arabia,—it being asserted by many scholars that Mohammed himself never acquired it,—only scattered portions of the revelation were inscribed upon such materials as fragments of leather, stones, palm-leaves, and the shoulder-blades of sheep, and the remaining verses and Suras, as they fell from the lips of the Prophet, were impressed upon the marvellously retentive memories of his auditors. In the course of events many of the latter were killed in battle, and the Khalif Abu-Bekr, fearing the loss of the sacred texts, took measures to collect and preserve them in a permanent form. When Othman was raised to the Khalifate, many different readings had already arisen from this manuscript; and innumerable editions, each claiming superiority and producing endless controversy and scandal, were distributed throughout his dominions. To secure uniformity, he caused copies of the first edition to be made, and all others not agreeing with the latter were destroyed; so that the work as published under the auspices of Othman is the Koran as we possess it, the spiritual guide of all true Moslems. It is not voluminous, containing only a little more than half as much matter as the New Testament, and is composed of one hundred and fourteen Suras, or chapters, grouped together apparently without any attention to rational connection or chronological order, and wherein the same sentiments are expressed and the same legends are repeated time and again. An attentive perusal of a translation of this book is an arduous task, and even in the original it is an undertaking well calculated to exhaust the patience and application of any one but a Mussulman theologian or saint. The compiler began with the longest chapters and ended with the shortest ones, the reverse order in which they were revealed, which suggests the hypothesis that the Koran may have been at first written in some language other than Arabic, and in which the characters were read from left to right. It is also suspected, upon plausible grounds, that the sacred book has suffered interpolations and omissions made in the interest of the successful faction to which Othman belonged; a theory which has gained credence from the well-known corruption of the Scriptures by the Jews. Be this as it may, no means of comparison existing, as in the case of the different versions of the Bible, the conclusions of the critic must necessarily be drawn from the internal evidence afforded by the text itself; a mode of examination at best but unreliable and unsatisfactory. Moslems love to cite the Koran as the one miracle of Mohammed, on account of its purity of language and perfection of style; leaving out of consideration its chaotic condition, its anachronisms, and the desultory, monotonous, and disconnected rhapsodies with which it abounds. Having no diacritical points to indicate the vowels, its meaning is often ambiguous, and seven different readings exist, all of which are admitted by theologians to be correct. Though written in the dialect of Mecca, the most polished of the Arabic tongue, it contains, nevertheless, many grammatical errors; probably traceable to the illiterate persons from whose recollection was obtained much of the first compilation, and whose words, taken down verbatim, would obviously require correction, which the scribe naturally hesitated to make through fear of sacrilege. In view of the suspicion not unjustly attaching to the motives of those who revised it, and which, to a certain extent, affects its authenticity as a whole, it is scarcely proper to subject the volume to searching and invidious criticism. Nor is it creditable to attribute to the teachings of Mohammed doctrines adopted by subsequent Moslem theologians which he would probably have been the first to condemn. The bulk of the Koran is composed of Jewish and Christian legends; rules for the ceremonial of Islam; excuses for the conduct of the Prophet when the indignation and suspicious temper of his followers threatened his ascendency; the foundation of a code of law, and a large number of moral precepts breathing a spirit of enlightened piety, impartial justice, and self-abnegation, unsurpassed by any collection of maxims ever offered for the guidance of mankind. The popular anthropomorphic idea of the Deity is rejected, all His physical attributes being now regarded as figurative; triads are classed with idols as manifestations of polytheism; and the exalted conception of God without equal or rival is perpetually impressed upon the mind of the reader in phrases glowing with the fire of religious zeal and impassioned eloquence. The poetic talent of the untutored Arab appears in all its wonderful perfection in the Koran, and yet Mohammed did not acknowledge his possession of this faculty, and persistently discouraged its exercise as a reminiscence of Paganism. Throughout the entire volume no assumption is made of divine powers by the Prophet; the ability to work miracles is especially repudiated by him as unnecessary for religious conviction, and is mentioned as an unavailing and unprofitable accomplishment of his inspired predecessors. The prevalent idea that a blind fatalism is inculcated in the pages of the Koran is a fallacy. The entire substance of its teachings is contrary to this doctrine, and would be worthless if belief in it were enjoined; passages constantly occur admitting the exercise of the utmost freedom of will, and thoroughly inconsistent with any theory depending upon the foreordained destiny of man. The fact is that the misapprehension of the meaning of Islam—absolute resignation to the will of God—is responsible for this perverted principle, which, like the crescent now universally adopted as a Moslem religious symbol, is an invention of the Turks, and was absolutely unknown as such to the early followers of Mohammed.
To the Kaaba, whose deities had received the pious homage of so many centuries, an additional importance was communicated by its adoption as the central point of Mussulman worship. In time it became invested with a mystical character resembling the personification of a female principle of faith, which, while anomalous in the practice of Islam, is so familiar to the constitution of almost all religions. A black covering representing a veil, and renewed each year with impressive ceremonies, screened the sacred building from the public gaze. A guard of eunuchs, fifty in number, the dignity and importance of whose office, as custodians of the shrine, entitled them to the superstitious reverence of the devout, were in constant attendance. In these singular regulations, which suggest both the adoration of the Virgin and the restraints of the harem, can be detected an expression of the innate and irrepressible desire of mankind for a material representation of feminine divinity.
The licentious character alleged to belong to the Mohammedan paradise has provoked much unreasonable vituperation from those who are unfamiliar with the literary peculiarities and highly imaginative temperament of the people of the East. The mind of the Oriental has ever delighted to wander in the mystic realm of parable and allegory. His sacred books, from the Zendavesta to the Koran, abound with examples of this method of impressing important truths, and even the lighter productions destined to beguile his leisure are not free from it. No educated Mussulman believes, no candid and well-informed Orientalist thinks, that the famous houris, with their unfading charms, their graceful presence, their intoxicating embraces, and their peculiar physical endowments, are anything more than the shadowy personages of allegorical imagery. Allusion is made to them in terms of vague and mysterious import susceptible of various construction; and, even if we should admit the belief in their actual existence, and adopt a literal interpretation of the verses relative to this recompense of the blest, the descriptions of their attractions are not comparable in minuteness of detail and carnal suggestiveness to the voluptuous inspirations of the Song of Solomon, which no reader, however credulous, will venture to construe otherwise than as an allegory. In the romantic and highly embellished visions of the Koran, uncultivated Moslems, imbued with the imaginative credulity of the East, have been only too ready to accept metaphor and parable for absolute fact.
The other pleasures to be found in heaven are connected with what would be most precious and refreshing to the poor and thirsty dwellers in the Desert,—the domes of pearl; the dust of musk; the pebbles of hyacinth and emerald; the sumptuous banquets; the robes of satin and gold; the exhilarating but harmless draughts of generous wine; the forests of stately palms; the everlasting verdure; the luscious fruits; the sparkling fountains; the shady gardens watered by cool and limpid streams. It was not without reason that green became the distinctive color of the returned pilgrim, a color selected by the Prophet as emblematic of the fields and groves of Paradise.
Mohammed, having derived his idea of heaven indirectly from the Chaldean accounts of the Garden of Eden, and that of the devil from the dualism of Persian mythology, borrowed the name and description of the place of torment from the Jews, who denominated hell Ge-Hinnom, literally, the “Vale of Hinnom,” from a fertile and pleasant valley near Jerusalem, which, however, was rendered execrable in spite of its attractions, on account of its being the home of the relentless Moloch, upon whose altar was periodically immolated the flower of the Hebrew youth. The rabbinical division into seven stages, entered by as many gates, and each set apart for a different degree of punishment, is adopted without sensible alteration. If reference to Paradise is seldom made in the Koran, the details of the tortures of the damned are, on the other hand, remarkable for their vividness and frequency, and, conceived by the flights of an unbridled imagination, are delineated with all the earnestness of a mind convinced of their fearful reality.
The Koran, like the Zendavesta, which enjoins the tilling of the soil as an indispensable religious duty, recommends the practice of agricultural pursuits, the extension of commerce, and the foundation and development of every species of manufacturing industry. The encouragement of these occupations, by representing them as praiseworthy and agreeable to God, with a view to their general adoption by a people who had hitherto considered trade and manual labor as contemptible, was naturally a task of considerable difficulty. But expectations of pecuniary advantage, joined to the prospect of individual distinction and national glory, speedily removed this prejudice; especially in a society which contained no privileged classes, and recognized none of the artificial and depressing obligations of feudalism. In consequence of this wise recommendation, the restrictions of caste—which had never prevailed in Arabia to the extent common to the kingdoms of Asia, probably because it possessed no hierarchy and no organized system of government—were eradicated; all employments of an honorable character were placed upon an equal footing; and the merchant and the artisan each enjoyed a degree of dignity, popular esteem, and social importance proportionate to his talents and success.
Although the Koran has been made the subject of interminable commentaries, numbering forty thousand as near as can be estimated, and isolated precepts have been expanded and distorted for the purpose of forming an elaborate system of jurisprudence, it was never intended as a general text-book of law. The few maxims upon this subject which it contains were borrowed partly from the Hebrews, but chiefly from the sanguinary code of the early Arabians. Some, in addition to those above mentioned, grew out of the requirements of particular cases; the majority of them, however, relate to the domestic difficulties of the Prophet and to the regulation of the harem. Notwithstanding the latter preferably adopted the Koran as the basis of his legal decisions whenever it was practicable, it is a well-known fact that after his death the collections of the Sunnah furnished a standard of broader application, and of scarcely less authoritative character, in the settlement of the principles of Mohammedan law.
The Koran commands relief of the oppressed, protection of the defenceless, mercy to the orphan, and kindness to animals. It enjoins the strict performance of engagements, even though entered into with members of a hostile creed; in humiliating contrast with the policy of Catholic Rome, whose children were perpetually absolved from the observance of contracts concluded with infidels. It denounces awful penalties against the murderer and the suicide. In its pages the profound deference that usually attaches to aristocratic birth and distinguished station is ignored; titled insolence is not permitted to assert superiority over the unpretending worshipper, and the monarch and the beggar meet as brethren before the throne of Almighty God. The right of private judgment is repeatedly and authoritatively declared to be the privilege of every believer; the humblest Moslem may place his own interpretation on the texts of the alleged revelation; and his conception of their meaning and application is entirely independent of the edicts of priests or the suspicious decisions of synods and councils.
Abstinence from swine’s flesh and from the blood of all animals is enforced through hygienic considerations arising from experience of the injurious effects of such food in tropical climates; and the requirement of personal cleanliness by frequent and regular lustration has its origin in the same vigilant solicitude for the public welfare.