Al-An‘ām 6:37
The verses
They say: Why hath no portent been sent down upon him from his Lord? Say: Lo! Allah is Able to send down a portent. But most of them know not. — Marmaduke Pickthall
Say (O Muhammad, to the disbelievers): I say not unto you (that) I possess the treasures of Allah, nor that I have knowledge of the Unseen; and I say not unto you: Lo! I am an angel. I follow only that which is inspired in me. Say: Are the blind man and the seer equal? Will ye not then take thought? — Marmaduke Pickthall
The issue
Muhammad’s opponents had repeatedly requested a miracle from him to prove that
He was a prophet. It appears that a discussion had taken place between Muhammad
and his opponents indicating that if Muhammad was the true prophet as he claimed,
Allah would have given him a miracle or a sign.The people of Mecca shared this view.
Their belief came from their contact with the Jewish tribes around them.
When Muhammad heard about this opposition from the people, he said to them,
“Verily, God is able to send down a sign...” (Q 6.37). But he was satisfied with this saying without presenting a sign. It seems that some people wanted Muhammad to live a life of prosperity as a proof of the verity of his prophecy. However, Muhammad continued defending himself by saying that he was not wealthy and did know what the future held: “I do not say to you, mine are the treasuries of God” (Q 6.50).
These two verses clearly declare that Muhammad did not perform a single miracle
and they also confirm his inability to perform any miracles.
Question: Was simply saying “Verily, God is able to send down a sign” a sufficient proof
of the prophetic reliability of any self-proclaimed prophet? Would anyone be satisfied
with his saying that “God is able” without performing a corresponding, tangible miracle
or getting any result from it?
A defender of Islām might say, “The Qur’ān is Muhammad’s miracle.” Such a defender
is invited to read these very pages and consider Muhammad’s “miracle” is truly a miracle.
Arabic text of this item
كثيراً ما كان معارضو محمد يطلبون منه الإتيان بمعجزةً تبرهن على نبوته، ويبدو أن حواراً ما قد دار بينهم يفيد بأنه لو كان محمد نبياً لكان قد جاء بمعجزة أو أُنزلت عليه آية.
كان أهل مكة يعتقدون أنه لو كان محمد نبياً لأنزل الله عليه آيةً، إذ كان لديهم تصور عن النبوة وهو أن النبي يأتي بالآيات برهاناً على مصداقيته، وهذا التصور قد جاءهم من الاتصال باليهود من حولهم.
لما سمع محمد التعريض به، أقر بذلك وقال: <إِنَّ اللّهَ قَادِرٌ عَلَى أَن يُنَزِّل آيَةً> (الأنعام 6: 37). ولكنه قد اكتفى بهذا القول دون أى فعل. ويظهر أن بعضهم طلب من محمدٍ أن يعيش في رغد كبرهان على النبوة، فاستكمل محمد الدفاع مقرراً أنه لا يملك ثروات ولا يعلم الغيب: <لاَّ أَقُولُ لَكُمْ عِندِي خَزَآئِنُ اللّهِ> (الأنعام 50).
هاتان الآيتان تعلنان صراحةً بأن محمداً لم يأت بأي معجزة، وتؤكدان عدم قدرته على الإتيان بالمعجزات.
ونسأل، هل كان الرد بـعبارة<إِنَّ اللّهَ قَادِرٌ عَلَى أَن يُنَزِّل آيَةً> ليقبل من أي مدعي نبوة كحجة على صدق ما جاء به، وهل يكتفى بقوله: <إِنَّ اللّهَ قَادِرٌ> دون أن يأتي بمعجزة عملية ولا أن يترتب على ذلك أي أثر ؟
ولربما قال أحد المدافعين: «إن القرآن معجزة محمد»، فندعوه لأن يقرأ ما في صفحتنا هذه، وليقلْ رأيه بعدها في هذه «المعجزة»!
Sources cited
- الرازي 12: 220.
This item merges 2 entries of the original site that carried the same text across the passage (old ids 95, 96; the old ids redirect here).