CHAPTER XIV

MOHAMMEDAN VIEWS OF THE SOUL AND ITS DESTINY

Sale's widely-circulated version of the Koran having familiarized multitudes with the text of the faith of Islam, it is generally presumed that the fairly educated public is everywhere aware of the leading tenets of the faith professed by the several hundred millions who follow the prophet of Mecca and worship God under the name of Allah. Such, indeed, in barest outline, may be the case; a searching scrutiny of Mohammedanism will, however, reveal an esoteric as well as an exoteric faith. Sir Edwin Arnold's beautiful saying:

“ All is love
Viewed from Allah's home above ”

strikes a very different note from that harshly sounded by those who see only the literal surface of the Koran, which closely resembles the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures in much of its external form, and from them it was indisputably, in large measure, compiled.

Mohammed's career was a most remarkable one, and no matter from what viewpoint we may attempt to study it, we can only remain convinced that the Arabian camel-driver, who became renowned as the founder of a system of religion which to-day numbers its adherents by hundreds of millions, was a man of no ordinary capacity or common enterprise. Like all personal founders of systems, he who founded the faith of Islam was one who could and did accommodate himself, with extraordinary readiness, to the demands of the age in which he lived and the people whom he sought to influence. There are many discrepancies in the Koran, and many fanciful tales and floating legends, but so there are in all Bibles; therefore, in this respect the Koran and its teachings cannot be regarded as in any sense unique.

Mohammed has been called an impostor, an epileptic, who imagined his distorted ravings to be heaven-sent illumination, a wily schemer who only sought his own aggrandizement, and much else that is uninviting and discreditable. But, though this wonderful “prophet” was by no means an immaculate hero, he was undoubtedly a man of many excellent parts, though vice as well as virtue, and weakness as well as strength, figured in his character and influenced his career.

Upholders of strictly monogamic marriage relations cannot endorse polygamy, even in the restricted sense in which Mohammed taught or, at least, permitted it; but when we remember that in his day polygamy and polyandry ran riot in those very lands in which he sought to spread his influence, we may trace the hand of a shrewd statesman in the teaching of a man who limited the wives of a “true believer” to four, and was perfectly willing that the “faithful” should live in a strictly monogamous relation if they so preferred. Had it been the aim or mission of Mohammed to fashion a restricted cult adapted only to a limited section of humanity, his system would probably have been far less ingenious and complex than we find it to be. James Freeman Clarke, in “Ten Great Religions” classes Mohammedanism among missionary and eclectic systems, in which category he also places Buddhism and Christianity, while Brahmanism he places among the purely ethnic cults which seem indigenous to a certain soil and incapable of successful migration or transplantation.

As Mohammed's period was about six hundred years after the inception of the Christian system, he had much material to work with which had been partly Christianized but had not accepted the authority of the institutionalized Christian church, which, by that time, had grown numerous and powerful, and in many districts oppressive also.

There is a strange fascination attaching to the earlier years of Mohammed's ministry, for it was not till after thirteen years of peaceful endeavor to propagate his system that he had recourse to the sword or even permitted warfare as a means of religious propaganda. It was only —so all reliable historians have declared—after the failure of peaceful measures that Mohammed allowed his band of devoted, though decidedly ambitious, followers to resort to intimidation to convert “unbelievers” to the prophet's creed. At one time Spain was a stronghold for Mohammedanism, and it must be admitted that the Mussulman was often a better civilizer than the Christian, and certainly not more bigoted or fanatical. At present no European nation, except Turkey, is under Mohammed's sway, but large portions of Asia and Africa are completely given over to the faith of Islam, and in many instances that form of religion seems well adapted to the general need.

There are two great Mohammedan sects or parties; one called Sunnees, the other Sheeahs. The former are usually very rigid in their adhesion to the letter of the Koran and the observance of every ceremonial injunction of their faith; the latter are more elastic in their interpretations and applications and are regarded as somewhat heretical by their more strenuously observing brethren. Turks, Arabs and Tartars are nearly all Sunnees; Persians are usually Sheeahs. The most bigoted among both parties lay great stress upon minute ritual practices and indulge in uncharitable comments upon all who differ from them in even the smallest particular; but all highly intelligent Mohammedans, and there are many such, while holding fast to what may be termed the fundamentals of their faith, are by no means rigid in the case of minor details, nor do they condemn everybody whose practice differs from their own.

Mohammedan tenets as expounded in Chicago in 1893 were quite liberal in many respects, indeed, Alexander Russell Webb, who had become a convert to Mohammedanism and was authorized to proclaim its teachings at the Parliament of Religions, said very little that would not be classed as liberal teaching in modern America. It is a great mistake to suppose that the devotees of any system are all narrow-minded or bigoted, or that any religion traced to its foundation is devoid of charitable and reasonable sentiments. The Sufis, who are Mohammedan Theosophists, constitute an esoteric party and put the same sort of symbolic interpretation upon the Koran that Philo of Alexandria placed upon the Pentateuch. Sufism is Gnosticism, and from the Gnostic standpoint every holy saying has an interior meaning which is discoverable by the application of a system similar to Swedenborg’s doctrine of Correspondence, which is employed as an all-sufficing key to unlock the inner mystery contained in even the obscurest and the most outwardly revolting statements and commands attributed to Deity or to some of the heavenly messengers who figure as prominently in the Koran as anywhere else in reputedly inspired literature. All Mohammedans believe in angels of various ranks and degrees, ranging from infernal to celestial. Eblis corresponds to Satan, and the story of his fall from heaven agrees well with popular Christian tradition.

Predestination is also a cardinal point in the faith of Islam, and often it is so taught that absolute fatalism is the only conclusion one can draw from the utterances of Mohammedan teachers; there are, however, those among them who greatly modify this doctrine until it comes to bear a close resemblance to the Jewish doctrine as set forth in the Talmud, which declares that everything is regulated by divine providence except human conduct; and, unless this exception be made, it is impossible to see how any idea of vice or virtue, punishment or reward, in this world or any other, can possibly be entertained. It is unthinkable that any soul can be held responsible for purely automatic action, and if Allah has decreed every event so that whatever occurs is divinely necessitated, it is impossible to believe that the Supreme Being, or even any tutelar divinity, can be displeased with the carrying out of his own will and the fulfilment of his own purpose. Calvinism is a Christian phase of the worst features of Mohammedanism as any student of the Koran can readily perceive, and nowhere has a more monstrous absurdity been taught than that God punishes, or is angry with human beings for acting automatically in accordance with divine decrees.

There is, however, a bright side to the doctrine of predestination which Theists and Universalists have often gladly perceived, and that is the idea that the whole universe is subject to the sovereign sway of a perfectly beneficent ruling intelligence, and that in consequence thereof the lot of every individual is divinely appointed and apportioned; therefore, though at present it appears to our dim vision that some are God’s beloved and others objects of divine disfavor, when we see more clearly we shall come to know that those conditions we call hells are just as necessary to cosmic harmony as those we call heavens, and that when the purpose of all events is clearly perceived every one will be satisfied with the condition to which he has been assigned.

It is said that Mohammed, in a vision, beheld a mighty tablet whereon was inscribed every event which Allah had decreed must occur before the Day of Judgment. There is no possible reconciliation between God’s absolute sovereignty and complete control over every event between the dawn of creation and the end of the world,—a doctrine taught with the greatest possible insistence by Mohammed,—and the other doctrine which is strenuously advocated in the Koran that God rewards obedience and punishes disobedience to his will. Without some degree of freedom to act as one pleases there can be no disobedience: there can be only automatic fulfilment of a predetermined purpose; it stands to reason, therefore, that limited human freedom must have been one of Mohammed’s concepts, otherwise he taught what was evidently self-contradictory, and must have been too intellectually blind, as was Calvin, to realize the contradiction in his own most positive assertions. The cruel and foolish statements of Calvinism and Mohammedanism are all of a piece, for they all alike grow out of the monstrous attempt to teach two diametrically opposed doctrines in one breath. This same fatal absurdity mars the theology of the Athanasian Creed, which has long been the source of bitter controversy among members of the Church of England, clergy and laity alike being hopelessly divided in their views concerning it. Augustine fell into the same error as did Mohammed and Calvin, and the great mistake of them all is in seeking to reconcile what is essentially irreconcilable. Predestination can be accepted rationally in one of two ways: we may believe that God is perfectly satisfied with the condition of affairs throughout the universe because it is the divine will that things should be as they are; or we may believe that foreordination only concerns the immutable relation between cause and effect, —therefore that God has not predetermined what exact course any individual shall pursue, but has only so regulated the course of events that our reaping in this, and in every other state of existence, must be in exact accordance with the nature of our sowing, because it is the inevitable outcome thereof. Either of these doctrines can be held by a devout and rational mind, but no one who yields to reason or employs sane logic can possibly hold a fatalistic doctrine to the effect that man is merely a machine for executing God’s designs, and though all parts of the machine equally fulfil the divine purpose, the creator of the machine is pleased with one part and rewards it, but is angry with another part and condemns it.

Neither can any reasoning mind believe that we are saved by believing certain doctrines and condemned if we do not believe them, and at the same time hold that those who have done good shall enter heaven, and those who have done evil shall be cast into a hell of fire. Doing good and doing evil, as every observer of human conduct knows, is something totally apart from believing or disbelieving some theological doctrine, even though it be confessed that all beliefs must, to some extent, exert an influence on conduct; and for that reason no belief seriously entertained is altogether unimportant.

To grasp fully Mohammed’s doctrine of the spirit-world one must make such allowance for the glowing imagery in which he clothed his speech and the intensely material models on which he founded his descriptions of the bliss of Paradise. Suffice it to say that when denuded of all superfluous accretions Mohammed’s detailed accounts of the life to come are founded upon a close acquaintance with the demands of undeveloped human nature, not yet emancipated from the grip of sensationalism; and these accommodations are supplemented by a considerable amount of knowing contact with the “borderland,” beyond which, in spite of all his rapturous claims to communion with the highest heavens, we do not believe Mohammed ever really penetrated. Those who have read Swedenborg’s “Heaven and Hell” and believe in his seership can readily credit Mohammed’s glowing accounts; those, on the other hand, who fully endorse Emerson’s essay on Swedenborg will certainly discredit a large amount of Mohammed’s particularization. For our own part, we believe the Mohammedan system to be a strange compound of truth and error, enforcing many moral lessons, temperance in particular, with great earnestness, but not presenting as a whole any very edifying views of the spiritual universe, unless we accept a purely esoteric interpretation of all Koranic metaphors.

Concerning the final judgment, we must admit that Mohammed’s account of it is not destitute of ethical value, for he evidently, when discoursing on that stupendous theme, has forgotten his fatalism and brought to the front the true and solemn doctrine of each soul's individual responsibility. Allah is pictured as relentless but supremely just. Every soul is rewarded or punished in precise accord with the amount of good or evil done by thought and word and deed, and the Scales of Justice are adjusted to weigh as accurately according to the Koran as according to the Egyptian Book of the Dead.

Mohammedans who are strictly orthodox, profess to believe that on the day of judgment the entire human family will be assembled before the judgment seat. Mohammed will lead the procession, and will appear as intercessor on behalf of all who have professed the faith of Islam. Prophets of other religions will also appear and intercede on behalf of their respective followers. Gabriel, the mighty archangel, who figures with equal prominence in Christian mythology, will hold a balance so stupendous that when suspended one scale will cover heaven and the other scale will cover hell. The Koran declares that at the judgment seat all shall be judged with such exact impartiality that no deed, good or evil, “the weight of an ant,” shall be overlooked. No one soul shall be able to obtain anything on behalf of another. There is no vicarious sacrifice to plead, no substituted or imputed righteousness in Mohammed’s creed, but every soul is weighed and judged in exact accordance with individual righteousness or demerit. Mohammedanism in this respect teaches a doctrine which certainly has its roots in Judaism rather than in Christianity, and from Jewish sources it was without question largely derived.

Predestination is utterly absent from Mohammed’s picture of the judgment, for the sentence passed on every soul is utterly without favoritism, though, as it is claimed that “true believers” have lived less wicked lives, for the most part, than unbelievers, they as a rule receive the milder sentences. There is a teaching to the effect that no Mohammedan will remain in hell forever, though idolaters may never escape from a place of suffering if by their wicked lives they have earned the doom of entering it. Idolatry had to be extirpated, so said Mohammed, and he found no surer way for creating a profound horror of it than by declaring that it was the one sin above all others which would receive most awful condemnation at the day of judgment.

So great is the discrepancy among Mohammedans as to the duration of the period of judgment that some have contended that the judgment of the whole human family will be completed in “the twinkling of an eye,” while others have stretched it in their imagination to fifty thousand years. All souls must eventually cross the bridge Sirat, which is described as “thinner than a hair and sharper than a razor,” and that bridge spans in one frail arch the immeasurable distance over hell from earth to paradise. Curious interpretations are given of Sirat, ranging from the purely metaphysical to the grossly literal, evidencing, in the case of Mohammedanism, as with all other cults, the influence of refinement and barbarity of thought upon the same symbolism.

Once again we acknowledge indebtedness to Dr. Alger for a vivid word-picture which he has drawn in the following sentences taken freely from the Koran. “As soon as the righteous have passed Sirat they obtain the first taste of their approaching felicity by a refreshing draught from ‘Mohammed’s Pond.’ This is a square lake, a month’s journey in circuit; its water is whiter than milk or silver and more fragrant than to be comparable to anything known by mortals. As many cups are set around it as there are stars in the firmament; and whoever drinks from it will never thirst more. Then comes paradise an ecstatic dream of pleasure—filled with sparkling streams, flowing fountains, shady groves, precious stones, all flowers and fruits, blooming youths, circulating goblets, black-eyed houris, incense, brilliant birds, delightful music, unbroken peace. A Sheeah tradition makes the prophet promise to Ali twelve palaces built of gold and silver bricks laid in a cement of musk and amber. The pebbles around them are diamonds and rubies, the earth saffron, its hillocks camphor. Rivers of honey, wine, milk and water flow through the court of each palace, their banks adorned with various resplendent trees, interspersed with bowers consisting each of one hollow transparent pearl. In each of these bowers is an emerald throne with a houri upon it arrayed in seventy green robes and seventy yellow robes of so fine a texture, and she herself so transparent, that the narrow of her ankle, notwithstanding robes, flesh and bone, is as distinctly visible as a flame in a glass vessel. Each houri has seventy locks of hair, every one under the care of a maid, who perfumes it with a censer which God has made to smoke with incense without the presence of fire; and no mortal has ever breathed such fragrance as is there exhaled.

“Such a doctrine of the future life as that here set forth, it is plain, was strikingly adapted to win and work fervidly on the minds of the imaginative, voluptuous, indolent, passionate races of the Orient. It possesses a nucleus of just and natural moral conviction and senti­ment, around which is grouped a composite of a score of superstitions afloat before the rise of Islam, set off with the arbitrary drapery of a poetic fancy, colored by the peculiar idiosyncrasies of Mohammed emphasized to suit his special ends.”

We have no reliable information concerning the attitude of Mohammedans in general as to their views on spirit-communion, though we know that they often lay stress upon the ministry of angels and do not hesitate to aver that the faithful on earth are attended by celestial spirits. There is much to admire and much that is repugnant in Mahommedan theories of the spiritual universe, but sifting out its best elements and discarding what is unworthy of credence and not calculated to advance any ethical purpose, we may well maintain that the prophet of Mecca deserves to be ranked among those intrepid religious leaders who have not been destitute of concern for human welfare, even though swayed by much personal ambition.

When men arise in our own day like Joseph Smith who founded Mormonism, Cyrus Teed, the founder of “Koreshan Science,” John Alexander Dowie with his scheme of non-Jewish Zionism, and other powerful and dominating intellects who sway a multitude quite easily, we can understand something of the nature of Mohammed’s influence.