“Anyone who says that the Prophet is black should be killed”: The ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

310/923). 185 Rounding out this quartet al-Bal§dhurÊ (d. 297/892) reports that the Prophet had a shinning face (tala"lu") and a luminous complexion (azhar) or a white one (abya∙ al-lawn mushrab Èumra), but he cites neither of the reports attributing a dark complexion. 186 In contrast, it is the fair-complexioned MuÈammad that is conspicuously absent from the two ‘aÈÊÈ hadith collections: in the chapter on the ‘Description of the Prophet’ the famed Persian traditionist al- Bukh§rÊ (d. 256/870) cites only those reports describing MuÈammad as abya∙ and azhar, 187 as does Muslim. 188 Without the qualifier mushrab bi-Èumra, these descriptions could refer to an Arab prophet with a blemish-free and radiant black-complexion. 189 While no portraits of the Prophet dating to this period have been found, the mention of such portraits in the literature is relevant. There is for example the famous story of the Meccan Arabs (from the Banå Umayya!) who travel to the Byzantine emperor Heraclius (r. 610-641) in an attempt to covert him to Islam. While there, the emperor is said to have pulled out for his Meccan guests a cubed object with compartments, in each of which was a silk portrait of one of the prophets from Adam to MuÈammad. When Heraclius pulls out a black silk cloth on which is a white figure, the Arabs weep, for they recognize the portrait as that of MuÈammad, the Messenger of God. 190 While the setting of this tale is the Byzantine realm during the lifetime of the Prophet, the earliest version is found in al-DÊnawarÊ’s al-Akhb§r al-ãiw§l, completed around 895. 191 185 Al-•abarÊ doesn’t mention any of these reports, e.g., in his The History of al-•abarÊ, VI: MuÈammad at Mecca (trans. W. Montgomery Watt and M.V. McDonald: Albany: State University of New York Press, 1988). 186 Al-Bal§dhurÊ, Ans§b, I:386-3396. 187 ‘aÈÊÈ BukharÊ, b§b ßifat al-nabÊ, nos. 744, 747. 188 ‘aÈÊÈ Muslim, b§b: k§na al-nabÊ (s) abya∙, malÊÈ al-wajh, apud al-NawawÊ, Minhaj sharÈ ‘aÈÊÈ Muslim, XV: 92-97 nos. 6025, 6026, 6033-6035. 189 The absence of the ruddy (aÈmar)-complexioned MuÈammad from the top three of the Six Books is worth emphasizing further, an absence the most popular translations of these collections conceal. Thus in these the Prophet is an abya∙ rajul, not a ‘white(-skinned) man’ (‘aÈÊÈ BukharÊ, III/1, no. 63 (=Translation, I:54); he was luminous (azhar/abya∙), not ‘rosy’ or ‘white-complexioned’ (‘aÈÊÈ BukharÊ, LVI/22 nos. 744, 747 (=Translation, IV:486, 487); Muslim, ‘aÈÊÈ Muslim, apud al-NawawÊ, Minhaj XV, nos. 6026, 6035 and translation IV: 1250-1251 nos. 5778, 5786; Abå D§wåd, Sunan, V/xxxv, no. 4864 and translation). These collections report on the Prophet’s exposed bay§∙, not white (aÈmar), leg, forearm, armpits, abdomen, and face (‘aÈÊÈ BukharÊ, LVI/22, no. 767 (=Translation, IV:493); VIII/12, no. 367 (=Translation, I:224); LXXXVI/15, no. 108 (=Translation, IX:89); LXXXIX/41, no. 305 (=Translation, IX: 234-235), etc; XC/7, no. 342 (=Translation, IX: 259); LII/34, no. 90 (=Translation, IV:65; Muslim, ‘aÈÊÈ Muslim, apud al-NawawÊ, Minhaj V, no. 84; VI, no. 120 and translation II/viii, no. 3325; III/xvii no. 4437; Abå D§wåd, Sunan, I/ii, nos. 899, 996; IV/xx, no. 3206 and translation). This is quite remarkable. The only deviation from this clear privileging of azhar/abya∙ as the only legitimate descriptors of MuÈammad’s complexion is a number of reports that describe the #ufra of his armpits (‘aÈÊÈ BukharÊ, XLVII/17, no. 769 [=Translation, III:464]; LXXVIII/3, no. 631 [=Translation, VIII:411-412]; LXXXIX/24, no. 286 [=Translation, IX: 217-218]). Dr. MuÈammad MuÈsin Kh§n translates ‘the whiteness of his armpits’. But #ufra has a different connotation than a white-complexion. The verb #afara means ‘to cover with dust’ and #afar/#ufar is dust. #ufra is therefore dust-colored inclining to a dull white (see Lane, Lexicon, II:2090 s.v. ﺮﻔﻋ), but probably dustcovered as well. The possibility that #ufra ibãayhi means here ‘his dusty armpits’ rather than ‘his white(-complexioned) armpits’ is reinforced by a report on the authority of al-Bara’ b. ‘Azib who, as the Prophet was carrying earth on the day of the battle of al-AÈz§b, saw dust (al-turab) covering the bay§∙ of MuÈammd’s abdomen ((‘aÈÊÈ BukharÊ,….). White dust on a white complexion would not have been easily noticeable. However, dull white dust on a bay§∙ or blemish-free black complexion would have been noticible when MuÈammad raised his hands high. 190 On this tradition and its appearance in Muslim literature see Oleg Grabar and Mika Naif, “The Story of Portraits of the Prophet Muhammad,” Studia Islamica 96 (2003): 19-38+VI-IX. 191 AÈmad b. D§"åd al-DÊnawarÊ, al-Akhb§r al-ãiw§l, ed. #Abd al-Mu"nim AmÊn (Tehran, 1960) 18-19; Grabar and Naif, “Story of Portraits of the Prophet,” 23-24. 26
genre. 192 It featured prominently in the Dal§"il al-nubuwwah, “Proofs of Prophethood,” literature, By the tenth century this tale circulated among writers of every major literary 193 suggesting a growing popularity for a white-skinned MuÈammad. This coincides with what Khalidi describes as the following age of the canonical SÊra, during which the Prophet’s biography was subjected to critical assessment and pruned of its objectionable or heretical materials, in sum reconstructed. The divergent material is specifically addressed and that material that distracts from the grandiose image of the Prophet as the community imagined it at the time is excluded. 194 This stage, which Khalidi dates to the eleventh-twelfth centuries, introduces a reconstituted SÊra with a reconstructed image of MuÈammad. 195 Representative of this stage of sÊra-writing is al-Q§∙Ê ‘Iy§∙ and his canonical al- Shif§ bi-ta#rÊf Èuqåq al-Mußãaf§, “The Remedy Concerning the Determination of the Just Merits of the Chosen (i.e. MuÈammad).” Al-Q§∙Ê ‘Iy§∙ addresses himself to the controversies of his day regarding the Prophet and ‘remedies’ them. Along with clarifying the perfect qualities – internal and external – of God’s apostle, the Q§∙Ê enumerates the judgments against those – Muslim and non-Muslim – who affirm for him imperfections. For example, twice he reports the judgment that “Anyone who says that the Prophet is black (aswad) should be killed.” The Prophet, of course, was not black, and saying so disparages him and attributes to him what does not befit him! 196 Clearly there were Muslims who were still claiming such, no doubt based on, among other things, the description of MuÈammad as asmar, a description that does not figure in the Q§∙Ê’s description of his Chosen. The Q§∙Ê found such talk disparaging to the Prophet, for by his time and in his environment ‘blackness’ has clearly acquired a negative valuation. But this is not the only conspicuous absence from the Q§∙Ê’s enumeration of the Prophet’s perfect physical qualities. If al-Q§∙Ê’s MuÈammad was emphatically not black, he yet was not unambiguously fair-skinned either. Al-Q§∙Ê never describes the Prophet as aÈmar nor does he report those traditions that do. He doesn’t even use abya∙. Rather his Chosen of God had a luminous complexion (azhar al-lawn), was bright (ablaj) with an illuminated body (anwara almajarrad) and face that shinned like the sun and moon. 197 Al-Q§∙Ê’s decision to exclude abya∙ as a ‘just merit’ may be due to his recognition that the term, unqualified, indicates a black complexion and for whatever reason he chose not to qualify it (or the Prophet) with aÈmar as will later become standard. On the other hand it might be argued that, by this time luminosity and chromaticity have converged (i.e. azhar = aÈmar), as will certainly be the case later, and thus the Q§∙Ê clearly had a fair-skinned prophet in mind. Be that as it may, the exclusion of both aÈmar and abya∙ as legitimate descriptors of the Prophet is notable. By the seventeenth century commentators were going great exegetical distances to make MuÈammad white-skinned. Al-Q§rÊ al-HarawÊ (d. 1605) even claimed that the description of the Prophet as brown, asmar, intends to deny to MuÈammad any whiteness that does not involve 192 Grabar and Naif, “Story of Portraits of the Prophet,” 27. 193 Al-BayhaqÊ, Dal§"il al-nubuwwah, I:384-391; Abå Nu#aym al-IsfahanÊ, Dal§"il al-nubuwwah, ed. MuÈammad al-Qala"anji (Damascus, 1970) 55-64. 194 Khalidi, Images, 17-18, and Chapter VII. 195 Khalidi, Images, 176. 196 Al-Q§∙Ê ‘Iy§∙, al-Shif§, 540, 558 (=Muhammad: Messenger of Allah, 375, 387). See also Q§wÊ al- HarawÊ, Kit§b jam# al-was§"il, 56. 197 Al-Q§∙Ê ‘Iy§∙, al-Shif§, 77-80, 172, 173. In her popular translation of this text and undoubtedly under the influence of the popular iconography, Bewley inappropriately renders ablaj (bright, clear) and azhar al-lawn as ‘fair’ and ‘very fair’ skinned, respectively: Muhammad: Messenger of Allah,34,80. 27
Page 1 and 2: “Anyone who says that the Prophet
Page 3 and 4: likeness of the Prophet could easil
Page 5 and 6: Semites, probably all genealogicall
Page 7 and 8: centuries BCE, 34 though the Africo
Page 9 and 10: Veddoid-Dravidoid racial type of In
Page 11 and 12: Arabs is white [al-baya∙ wa l-Èu
Page 13 and 14: One of these ‘deep black and tall
Page 15 and 16: throne in 801 by Tu Yu; and in the
Page 17 and 18: Awf b. al-Khazraj, 106 thus a pure,
Page 19 and 20: Yet, the sources Powers cites are u
Page 21 and 22: shades or degrees of ‘black’ in
Page 23 and 24: To speak of someone as white comple
Page 25: surpass us in appearance (al-ßåra
Page 29 and 30: Ottoman culture on Islamic traditio
Page 31 and 32: epresentation of MuÈammad therein
Page 33 and 34: VII.2. Hellenizing the Prophet It w
Page 35 and 36: pen-boxes, necklaces, and posters.
Page 37: This study has a number of implicat

“Anyone who says that the Prophet is black should be killed”: The ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?