INFIDEL. There are several words used for those in a state of infidelity: 1, kāfir (كافر), one who hides or denies the truth; 2, mushrik (مشرك), one who gives companions to God; 3, mulḥid (ملحد), one who has deviated from the truth; 4, zandīq (زنديق), an infidel or a zend-worshipper; 5, munāfiq (منافق), one who secretly disbelieves in the mission of Muḥammad; 6, murtadd (مرتد), an apostate from Islām; 7, dahrī (دهرى), an atheist; 8, was̤anīy (وثنى), a pagan or idolater.
AL-INFIT̤ĀR (الانـفـطـار). “The cleaving asunder.” The title of the LXXXIInd Sūrah of the Qurʾān, in which the word occurs. Zamak͟hsharī, according to Savary, says that “the Muslims who shall recite this chapter shall receive a divine favour for every drop of water that drops from the clouds, and another for each grave on the face of the earth.”
INHERITANCE. Arabic Farāʾiẓ (فرائض), Mīrās̤ (ميراث). The law of inheritance is called ʿilmu ʾl-farāʾiẓ, or ʿilm-i-mīrās̤. The verses in the Qurʾān upon which the law of inheritance is founded are called Ayātu ʾl-Mawārīs̤, the Verses of Inheritance; they begin at the 12th verse of Sūratu ʾn-Nisāʾ, or the IVth chapter of the Qurʾān, and are as follows:—
“With regard to your children, God commandeth you to give the male the portion of two females; and if they be females more than two, then they shall have two-thirds of that which their father hath left: but if she be an only daughter, she shall have the half; and the father and mother of the deceased shall each of them have a sixth part of what he hath left, if he have a child; but if he have no child, and his parents be his heirs, then his mother shall have the third; and if he have brethren, his mother shall have the sixth, after paying the bequests he shall have bequeathed, and his debts. As to your fathers, or your children, ye know not which of them is the most advantageous to you. This is the law of God. Verily, God is Knowing, Wise!
“Half of what your wives leave shall be yours, if they have no issue; but if they have issue, then a fourth of what they leave shall be yours, after paying the bequests they shall bequeath, and debts.
“And your wives shall have a fourth part of what ye leave, if ye have no issue; but if ye have issue, then they shall have an eighth part of what ye leave, after paying the bequests ye shall bequeath, and debts.
“If a man or woman make a distant relation their heir, and he or she have a brother or a sister, each of these two shall have a sixth; but if there are more than this, then shall they be sharers in a third, after payment of the bequests he shall have bequeathed, and debts,
“Without loss to any one. This is the ordinance of God, and God is Knowing, Gracious!”
The earliest authority in the Traditions on the subject of inheritance is Zaid ibn S̤ābit, and the present law is chiefly collected from his sayings, as recorded in the Ḥadīs̤. There are no very important differences between the Sunnī and Shīʿah law with reference to this question. The highest authority amongst the former is the book as-Sirājīyah, by Sirāju ʾd-dīn Muḥammad, A.H. 600, which has been published with a commentary entitled Mamzūj, by Sir W. Jones, Calcutta, 1792.
The Shīʿah law of inheritance will be found in the Mafātīḥ and the Jāmiʿu ʾsh-Shatāt.
The property of a deceased Muslim is applicable, in the first place, to the payment of his funeral expenses; secondly, to the discharge of his debts; and, thirdly, to the payment of legacies as far as one-third of the residue. The remaining two-thirds, with so much of the third as is not absorbed by legacies are the patrimony of the heirs. A Muḥammadan is therefore disabled from disposing of more than a third of his property by will. (See As-Sirājīyah.)
The clear residue of the estate after the payment of funeral expenses, debts, and legacies, descends to the heirs; and among these the first are persons for whom the law has provided certain specific shares or portions, and who are thence denominated Sharers, or ẕawū ʾl-furūẓ.
In most cases there must be a residue after the shares have been satisfied; and this passes to another class of persons who from that circumstance may be termed Residuaries, or ʿaṣabah.
It can seldom happen that the deceased should have no individual connected with him who would fall under these two classes; but to guard against this possible contingency, the law has provided another class of persons, who, though many of them may be nearly related to the deceased, by reason of their remote position with respect to the inheritance, have been denominated Distant kindred, or ẕawū ʾl-arḥām.
“As a general rule,” says Mr. Ameer Ali, “the law of succession, both among the Shiahs (Shīʿahs) and the Sunnis, proceeds on the assumption of intestacy. During his lifetime a Mussulman has absolute power over his property, whether it is ancestral or self-acquired, or whether it is real or personal. He may dispose of it in whatever way he likes. But such dispositions in order to be valid and effective, are required to have operation given to them during the lifetime of the owner. If a gift be made, the subject matter of the gift must be made over to the donee during the lifetime of the donor; he must, in fact, divest himself of all proprietary rights in it, and place the donee in possession. To make the operation of the gift dependent upon the donor’s death, would invalidate the donation. So also in the case of endowments for charitable or religious purposes. A disposition in favour of a charity, in order to be valid, should be accompanied by the complete divestment of all proprietary rights. As regards testamentary dispositions, the power is limited to one-third of the property, provided it is not in favour of one who is entitled to share in the inheritance. For example, the proprietor may devise by will one-third of his property to a stranger; should the devise, however, relate to more than one-third, or should it be in favour of an heir, it would be invalid.
“This restriction on the testamentary powers of a Mussulman, which is not without analogy in some of the Western systems, leads to the consequence that, as far as the major portion of the estate and effects of a deceased propositus is concerned, the distribution takes place as if he had died intestate.
“Intestacy is accordingly the general rule among the Mussulmans; and as almost in every case there are more heirs than one entitled to share in the inheritance of the deceased, it is important to bear in mind the points of contact as well as of divergence between the Shiah and the Sunni schools.
“As regards the points of contact, it may be stated generally that both the Sunnis and the Shiahs are agreed on the principle by which the individuals who are entitled to an inheritance in the estate of the deceased can be distinguished from those who have no right. For example, a Mussulman upon his death, may leave behind him a numerous body of relations. In the absence of certain determinate rules, it would be extremely difficult to distinguish between the inheriting and the non-inheriting relations. In order to obviate this difficulty and to render it easy to distinguish between the two classes of heirs, it is recognized by both the schools as a general rule, and one capable of universal application, that when a deceased Mussulman leaves behind him two relations, one of whom is connected with him through the other, the former shall not succeed whilst the intermediate person is alive. For example, if a person on his death leave behind him a son and that son’s son, this latter will not succeed to his grandfather’s estate while his father is alive. The other rule, which is also framed with the object of discovering the heirs of a deceased individual, is adopted with some modification by the two schools. For example, on the succession of male agnates, the Sunnis prefer the nearer in degree to the more remote, whilst the Shiahs apply the rule of nearness or propinquity to all cases, without distinction of class or sex. If a person die leaving behind him a brother’s son, and a brother’s grandson, and his own daughter’s son, among the Sunnis, the brother’s son being a male agnate and nearer to the deceased than the brother’s grandson, takes the inheritance in preference to the others; whilst among the Shiahs, the daughter’s son, being nearer in blood, would exclude the others.” (Personal Law, by Ameer Ali, p. 41.)
The law of inheritance, even according to Muslim doctors of law, is acknowledged to be an exceedingly difficult object of study; it will, therefore, be impossible to follow it out in all its intricacies, but we give a carefully-drawn table by Mr. A. Ramsey, on the Sunnī law, and a more simple one on Shīʿah inheritance by Mr. Ameer Ali.
I.—SHARERS.
* Are always entitled to some shares.
† Are liable to exclusion by others who are nearer.
R Denotes those who benefit by the return.
* 1o Father. (α).—As mere sharer, when a son or a son’s son, how low soever, he takes ⅙. (β).—As mere residuary, when no successor but himself, he takes the whole: or with a sharer, not a child or son’s child, how low soever, he takes what is left by such sharer. (γ).—As sharer and residuary, as when there are daughters and son’s daughter, but no son or son’s son, he, as sharer, takes ⅙; daughter takes ½, or two or more daughters, ⅔; son’s daughter ⅙; and father the remainder as residuary.
† 2o True Grandfather, i.e. father’s father, his father and so forth, into whose line of relationship to deceased no mother enters, is excluded by father, and excludes brothers and sisters; comes into father’s place when no father, but does not, like father, reduce mother’s share to ⅓ of residue, nor entirely exclude paternal grandmother.
† 3o Half Brothers by same Mother, take, in the absence of children, or son’s descendants, and father and true grandfather, one ⅙, two or more between them ⅓. R
* 4o Daughters; when no sons, take, one ½; two or more, ⅔ between them: with sons become residuaries and take each half a son’s share. R
† 5o Son’s Daughters; take as daughters, when there is no child; take nothing when there is a son or more daughters than one; take ⅙ when only one daughter; are made residuaries by brother or male cousin how low soever. R
* 6o Mother: takes ⅙, when there is a child or son’s child, how low soever, or two or more brothers or sisters of whole or half blood; takes ⅓, when none of these: when husband or wife and both parents, takes ⅓ of remainder after deducting their shares, the residue going to father: if no father, but grandfather, takes ⅓ of the whole. R
† 7o True Grandmother, i.e. father’s or mother’s mother, how high soever; when no mother, takes ⅙: if more than one, ⅙ between them. Paternal grandmother is excluded by both father and mother; maternal grandmother by mother only. R
† 8o Full Sisters, take as daughters when no children, son’s children, how low soever, father, true grandfather or full brother: with full brother, take half share of male: when daughters or son’s daughters, how low soever, but neither sons, nor sons’ sons, nor father, nor true grandfather, nor brothers, the full sisters take as residuaries what remains after daughter or son’s daughter have had their share. R
† 9o Half Sisters by same Father: as full sisters, when there are none: with one full sister, take ⅙; when two full sisters, take nothing, unless they have a brother who makes them residuaries, and then they take half a male’s share. R
† 10o Half Sisters by Mother only: when no children or son’s children how low soever, or father or true grandfather, take one ⅙; two or more ⅓ between them. R
* 11o Husband: if no child or son’s child, how low soever, takes ½; otherwise ¼.
* 12o Wife: if no child or son’s child, how low soever, takes ¼; if otherwise, ⅛. Several widows share equally.
Corollary.—All brothers and sisters are excluded by son, son’s son, how low soever, father or true grandfather. Half brothers and sisters, on father’s side, are excluded by these and also by full brother. Half brothers and sisters on mother’s side are excluded by any child or son’s child, by father and true grandfather.
II.—RESIDUARIES.
A.—Residuaries in their own right, being males into whose line of relationship to the deceased no female enters.
(a.) Descendants.
(b.) Ascendants.
(c.) Collaterals.
N.B.—α. A nearer Residuary in the above Table is preferred to and excludes a more remote.
β. Where several Residuaries are in the same degree, they take per capita, not per stirpes, i.e. they share equally.
γ. The whole blood is preferred to and excludes the half blood at each stage.
B.—Residuaries in another’s right, being certain females, who are made residuaries by males parallel to them; but who, in the absence of such males, are only entitled to legal shares. These female Residuaries take each half as much as the parallel male who makes them Residuaries.
1. Daughter made Residuary by son.
2. Son’s daughter made Residuary by son’s son.
3. Full sister made Residuary by full brother.
4. Half sister by father made Residuary by her brother.
C. Residuaries with another, being certain females who become residuaries with other females.
1. Full sisters with daughters or daughters’ sons.
2. Half sisters by father.
N.B.—When there are several Residuaries of different kinds or classes, e.g. residuaries in their own right and residuaries with another, propinquity to deceased gives a preference: so that the residuary with another, when nearer to the deceased than the residuary is himself, is the first.
If there be Residuaries and no Sharers, the Residuaries take all the property.
If there be Sharers, and no Residuaries, the Sharers take all the property by the doctrine of the “Return.” Seven persons are entitled to the Return. 1st, mother; 2nd, grandmother; 3rd, daughter; 4th, son’s daughter; 5th, full sister; 6th, half sister by father; 7th, half brother or sister by mother.
A posthumous child inherits. There is no presumption as to commorients, who are supposed to die at the same time unless there be proof otherwise.
If there be neither Sharers nor Residuaries, the property will go to the following class (Distant Kindred).
III.—DISTANT KINDRED.
Comprising all relatives, who are neither Shares nor Residuaries.
Class 1.
Descendants: Children of daughters and son’s daughters.
1. Daughter’s son.
2. Daughter’s daughter.
3. Son of No. 1.
4. Daughter of No. 1.
5. Son of No. 2.
6. Daughter of No. 2, and so on, how low soever, and whether male or female.
7. Son’s daughter’s son.
8. Son’s daughter’s daughter.
9. Son of No. 7.
10. Daughter of No. 7.
11. Son of No. 8.
12. Daughter of No. 8, and so on, how low soever, and whether male or female.
N.B.—(α)—Distant kindred of the first class take according to proximity of degree; but, when equal in this respect, those who claim through an heir, i.e. sharer or residuary, have a preference over those who claim through one not an heir.
(β)—When the sexes of their ancestors differ, distribution is made having regard to such difference of sex, e.g. daughter of daughter’s son gets a portion double that of son of daughter’s daughter, and when the claimants are equal in degree, but different in sex, males take twice as much as females.
Class 2.
Ascendants: False grandfathers and false grandmothers.
13. Maternal grandfather.
14. Father of No. 13, father of No. 14, and so on, how high soever (i.e. all false grandfathers).
15. Maternal grandfather’s mother.
16. Mother of No. 15, and so on, how high soever (i.e. all false grandmothers).
N.B.—Rules (α) and (β), applicable to class 1, apply also to class 2. Further (γ) when the sides of relation differ, the claimant by the paternal side gets twice as much as the claimant by the maternal side.
Class 3.
Parents’ Descendants.
17. Full brother’s daughter and her descendants.
18. Full sister’s son.
19. Full sister’s daughters and their descendants, how low soever.
20. Daughter of half brother by father, and her descendants.
21. Son of half sister by father.
22. Daughter of half sister by father, and their descendants, how low soever.
23. Son of half brother by mother.
24. Daughter of half brother by mother and their descendants, how low soever.
25. Son of half sister by mother.
26. Daughter of half sister by mother, and their descendants, how low soever.
N.B.—Rules (α) and (β) applicable to class 1, apply also to class 3. Further (δ) when two claimants are equal in respect of proximity, one who claims through a residuary is preferred to one who cannot so claim.
Class 4.
Descendants of the two grandfathers and the two grandmothers.
27. Full paternal aunt and her descendants.*
28. Half paternal aunt and her descendants.*
29. Father’s half brother by mother and his descendants.*
30. Father’s half sister by mother and her descendants.*
31. Maternal uncle and his descendants.*
32. Maternal aunt and her descendants.*
* Male or Female, and how low soever.
N.B. (ε)—The sides of relation being equal, uncles and aunts of the whole blood are preferred to those of the half, and those connected by same father only, whether males or females, are preferred to those connected by the same mother only. (η) Where sides of relation differ, the claimant by paternal relation gets twice as much as the claimant by maternal relation. (θ) Where sides and strength of relation are equal, the male gets twice as much as the female.
General Rule.—Each of these classes excludes the next following class.
IV.—Successor by Contract or Mutual Friendship.
V.—Successor of acknowledged Kindred.
VI.—Universal Legatee.
VII.—Public Treasury.
A Synoptical Table of Shiʿah Inheritance.
| I.—Consanguinity, or Nasab | |||||||
| First Class. | Second Class. | Third Class. | |||||
| (1) Immediate ascendants, viz. father and mother. | (2) Lineal descendants, sons and daughters and grandchildren. | (1) Paternal uncles and aunts and their children. | (2) Maternal uncles and aunts and their children. | ||||
| (1) Ascendants of second and third degrees viz. grand-parents and their parents. | (2) Brothers and sisters and their children. | ||||||
| II.—Special Cause, or Sabab. | |||||||
| Matrimony. | Walāʾ. | ||||||
| Husband or Wife. | (1) Emancipation. | (2) Suretyship. | (3) Spiritual Headship. | ||||
[For the Muḥammadan law of inheritance in English, refer to Sir William Jones’ translation of the Sirājīyah (Calcutta, A.D. 1792), reprinted by Mr. Almaric Ramsey, A.D. 1869. The Muḥammadan Law of Inheritance, by Mr. N. B. E. Baillie, A.D. 1832; by Mr. S. G. Grady, A.D. 1869; also Personal Law of the Muḥammadans, by Mr. Ameer Ali, 1880. The Arabic works on the subject are: For Sunnī law, as-Sirājīyah, ash-Sharīfīyah, Hidāyah, Durru ʾl-Muk͟htār; for Shīʿah law, Jāmiʿu ʾsh-Shatāt, Mafātīḥ, Sharāʾiʿu ʾl-Islām, Irshād-i-Allāmah.]
INHIBITION. Arabic ḥijr (حجر), which, in its primitive sense, means “interdiction or prevention.” In the language of the law it signifies an interdiction of action with respect to a particular person; the causes of inhibition being three: infancy, insanity, and servitude.
The acts of an infant, i.e. one under puberty, are unlawful, unless sanctioned by his guardian. The acts of a lunatic who has no lucid intervals are not at all lawful; and so are those of a male or female slave. (Hidāyah, iii. p. 468.)
INITIAL LETTERS of the Qurʾān. [QURʾAN.]
INJĪL (انجيل). Gr. Εὐαγγέλιον. Evangel. Injīl is used in the Qurʾān, and in the Traditions, and in all Muḥammadan theological works of an early date, for the revelations made by God to Jesus. But in recent works it is applied by Muḥammadans to the New Testament. The word occurs twelve times in the Qurʾān, as in the following Sūrahs, which we have arranged chronologically, and not as they occur in the Qurʾān. (It will be seen that the expression Injīl is not mentioned in the earlier Sūrahs. See chronological table of Sūrahs in article QURʾAN.)
Sūrah vii. 156: “Who follow the Apostle—the illiterate Prophet, whom they find written down with them in the Law (Taurāt) and the Gospel (Injīl).”
Sūrah iii. 2: “He has sent thee a book (i.e. the Qurʾān) confirming what was before it, and has revealed the Law, and the Gospel before, for the guidance of men.”
Sūrah iii. 43: “He will teach him the Book and Wisdom, and the Law and the Gospel.”
Sūrah iii. 58: “Why do ye dispute about Abraham, when the Law and the Gospel were not revealed until after him.”
Sūrah lvii. 27: “We gave him (Jesus) the Gospel, and we placed in the hearts of those who followed him kindness and compassion.”
Sūrah xlviii. 29: “Their marks are in their faces from the effects of adoration: that is their similitude in the Law, and their similitude in the Gospel.”
Sūrah ix. 112: “Promised in truth in the Law, in the Gospel, and in the Qurʾān.”
Sūrah v. 50: “We brought him (Jesus) the Gospel.”
Sūrah v. 51: “Then let the people of the Gospel judge by what is revealed therein.”
Sūrah v. 70: “And were they steadfast in the Law and in the Gospel?”
Sūrah v. 72: “Ye rest on nought until ye stand fast by the Law and the Gospel and what is revealed to you from your Lord.”
Sūrah v. 110: “When I taught thee the Book, and Wisdom, and the Law, and the Gospel.”
There are also allusions to the Christian Scriptures in the following verses:—
Sūrah xix. 31. (The infant Jesus said,) “Verily, I am the servant of God: He hath given me the book, and He hath made me a prophet.”
Muḥammad was much more indebted to Judaism than Christianity for the teaching he received, which enabled him to overthrow Arabian idolatry and to establish the worship of the One True God [CHRISTIANITY, JUDAISM], and consequently we find more frequent allusions to the Law of Moses than to the Gospel of Christ; and, as it has been already stated, the references to the Gospel as a revelation are in the later Sūrahs. But in all references to the Injīl as an inspired record, there is not one single statement to the effect that the Christians of Muḥammad’s day did not possess the genuine Scriptures. In Sūrah iv. 169, (which is an al-Madīnah Sūrah), the Christians are charged with extravagance, or error in doctrine, but not with not possessing the true Gospels:—
“Ye people of the Book! commit not extravagance in your religion; and say not of God other than the truth. For verily the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, is an apostle of God, and His word which He placed in Mary, and a spirit from Him. Wherefore, believe in God, and in His apostle; and say not,—‘the Trinity’;—refrain; it will be better for you. For verily God is one God; far exalted is He above the possibility that there should be unto Him progeny! to Him belongeth whatever is in the heavens and in the earth, and He sufficeth as a guardian.”
In Sūrah lxi. 6, there is an appeal to the Gospel in support of Muḥammad’s mission, and the appeal is made without any doubt that he was referring to a genuine saying of Christ, well known to the Christians of that day. The verse is as follows:—
“When Jesus, the son of Mary, said: ‘O children of Israel! verily, I am the apostle of God to you, verifying the law that was before me, and giving you glad tidings of an apostle who shall come after me, whose name shall be Aḥmad!’ But when he did come to them with manifest signs, they said, ‘This is manifest sorcery!’ ”
The allusion is to the promise of the Paraclete in John xvi. 7, the Muslims declaring that the word παράκλητος has been substituted for the Greek περικλυτός, the word Aḥmad, which is equivalent to Muḥammad, meaning “Praised.” The charge which modern Muslims bring against the Christians of having either lost, or changed the original Scriptures, is treated of under the head of CORRUPTION OF THE SCRIPTURES; but some curious statements on the subject will be found in an article in the Kashfu ʾz̤-Z̤unūn. It is a Bibliographical Dictionary, compiled by Ḥājjī K͟halīfah about 200 years ago. The statements in its article on INJIL are such a strange mixture of fact and fiction that we translate the article from the Arabic in extenso:—
“The Injīl is a book which God revealed to ʿĪsā ibn Maryam. In the work entitled al-Muwāhib (by Shihābu ʾd-Dīn Aḥmad al-Qast̤alānī, died A.H. 923), it is recorded that the Injīl was first revealed in the Syriac tongue, and has since been translated into seventeen languages. But in the Ṣaḥīḥu ʾl-Buk͟hārī (A.H. 256), in the story of Waraqah ibn Naufal, it is related that the Injīl was revealed in Hebrew. According to Wahb ibn Munabbih, as quoted by Zamak͟hsharī (A.H. 538) in the Kashshāf, the Injīl was revealed to Jesus on the 13th day of the month Ramaẓān, although some say it was on the 18th day of that month, 1200 years after the revelation of the Zabūr (Psalms) to Moses.
“It is a disputed question whether or not the Injīl abrogates the Law of Moses (Taurāt). Some say that Jesus was not a Sāḥibu ʾsh-Sharīʿah (a law-giver); for it is said in the Injīl:—
قال عيسى انى ما جئت لتبديل شرع موسى عليه السلام بل لتكميله
‘I am not come to abrogate (tabdīl) the Law of Moses, peace be upon him, but to fulfil it (takmīl).’
“But al-Baiẓāwī (A.H. 685), in his commentary the Anwāru ʾt-Tanzīl, seems to prove that the Law of Jesus does abrogate the Law of Moses (Sharʿu Mūsā), for there are certain things revealed to Jesus which were not revealed to Moses.
“At the commencement of the Injīl is Inscribed باسم الاب و الابن الخم, ‘In the name of the Father and of the Son,’ &c. And the Injīl, which is now in the hands of the Christians, is merely a history of the Christ (Sīratu ʾl-Masīḥ), collected by his four companions Matta, Lūqā, Marqūṣ and Yūḥannā.
“In the book entitled the Tuḥfatu ʾl-Adīb fi Raddi ʿalā Ahli ʾṣ-Ṣalīb, or ‘A refutation of the servants of the Cross’ (written by ʿAbdu ʾllāh, a pervert from Christianity to Islām, A.H. 823), it is said that these four Companions are they who corrupted the religion of Jesus, and have added to it. And that they were not of the Ḥawārīyūn, or Apostles, mentioned in the Qurʾān. Matta did not see Jesus until the year he was taken up to heaven; and after the Ascension of Jesus he wrote in the city of Alexandria, with his own hand, his Injīl, in which he gives an account of the birth and life of Jesus, mentioning several circumstances which are not mentioned by others. Lūqā also did not see Jesus, but he was converted to Christianity by one Būlis (Paul), who was an Israelite, who himself had not seen Jesus, but was converted by Anānīyā (Ananias). Marqūṣ also did not see Jesus at all, but was converted to Christianity, after the Ascension of Jesus, by the Apostle Bītrū, and received the Injīl (Gospel) from that Apostle in the city of Rome. And his Gospel in many respects contradicts the statements of the other three. Yūḥannā was the son of the sister of Maryam, the mother of Jesus, and the Christians assert that Jesus was present at the marriage of Yūḥannā, when Jesus changed the water into wine. It was the first miracle performed by Jesus.
“When Yūḥannā saw the miracle, he was converted to Christianity, and left his wife and followed Jesus. He was the writer of the fourth Injīl (Gospel). It was written in Greek, in the city of Ephesus. These are the four persons who altered and changed the true Injīl, for there was only one Injīl revealed to Jesus, in which there was no contradiction or discrepancy. These people have invented lies concerning God and His Prophet Jesus, upon whom be peace, as it is a well known fact, although the Christians (Naṣāra) deny it. For example, Marqūṣ has written in the first chapter of his Gospel that in the book of the Prophet Isaiah it is said by God, ‘I have sent an angel before thy face, namely, before the face of Jesus,’ whereas the words are not in the book of Isaiah but in that of Malachi. [See Mark i. 2. In the Received Version the words are “in the Prophets”; but in the Revised Version we have “in Isaiah the prophet.”]
“Again, it is related by Matta, in the first or rather thirteenth chapter of his Gospel [sic; see, however, Matt. xii. 40], that Jesus said, ‘My body will remain in the belly of the earth three days and three nights after my death, just as Jonas was in the whale’s belly;’ and it is evident it was not true, for Matta agrees with the three other writers of the Gospels that Jesus died in the sixth hour on Friday, and was buried in the first hour of the night on Saturday, and rose from the dead early on Sunday morning, so that he remained in the belly of the earth one day and two nights. So there remains no doubt that the writers of the Gospels told the untruth. For neither Jesus said of himself, nor did God in his Injīl say of him, that Jesus will be killed or buried in the earth, for God has said (i.e. in the Qurʾān, Sūrah iv. 156), ‘They slew him not, for certain! Nay, God raised him up unto Himself.’ For this cause there were various divisions amongst the Christians. Other circumstances similar to these are mentioned in the Tuḥfatu ʾl-Adīb. Then there are the fundamental rules and doctrines (al-Qawāʾid), upon which the Christians are, with very few exceptions, universally agreed, namely: (1) At-Tag͟ht̤īs (Baptism); (2) Faith in the Tas̤līs̤, or Trinity; (3) the Incarnation of the Uqnūm (i.e. the essence) of the Son in the womb of Mary; (4) a belief in the Fit̤rah (i.e. the Holy Communion); (5) the Confession of all sins to the Priest (Qissīs). These five foundations also are full of falsehood, corruption, and ignorance.”
“In the work entitled al-Insānu ʾl-Kāmil (written by the Shaik͟h ʿAbdu ʾl-Karīm ibn Ibrahīm al-Jīlī, lived A.H. 767–811) it is said that when the Christians found that there was at the commencement of the Injīl the superscription باسم الاب و الابن, i.e. ‘in the name of the Father and Son,’ they took the words in their natural meaning, and [thinking it ought to be Ab, father, Umm, mother, and Ibn, son] understood by Ab, the Spirit, by Umm, Mary, and by Ibn, Jesus; and on this account they said, S̤ālis̤u S̤alās̤atin, i.e. ‘(God is) the third of three.’ (Sūrah v. 77.) But they did not understand that by Ab is meant God Most High, by Umm, the Mahīyatu ʾl-Ḥaqāʾiq, or ‘Essence of Truth’ (Quidditas veritatum), and by Ibn, the Book of God, which is called the Wujūdu ʾl-Mut̤laq, or ‘Absolute Existence,’ being an emanation of the Essence of Truth, as it is implied in the words of the Qurʾān, Sūrah xiii. 9: ‘And with him is the Ummu ʾl-Kitāb, or the Mother of the Book.’ ”
AL-INSĀN (الانسان). “Man.” The title of the LXXVIth Sūrah of the Qurʾān, called also Sūratu ʾd-Dahr, both words occurring in the first verse: “Did there not pass over man (insān) a long space of time (dahr), during which he was a thing not worthy of remembrance.”
Some take these words to be spoken of Adam, whose body, according to tradition, was first a figure of clay, and was left for forty years to dry, before God breathed into it; but others understand them of man in general and of the time he lies in the womb. (See al-Baiẓāwī, in loco.)