My personal reflections on this blog take inspiration from the Bahá’í teachings.

Saturday, 9 December 2006

The Prophet Muhammad's genius for peace


Muhammad first announced His mission as a Prophet to his kin and the people of Mecca, the city where He lived, around A.D. 614. But because Muhammad’s message was strongly opposed to idolatry, and Mecca was the main centre in that region for the worship of idols, Muhammad and his small group of followers suffered serious persecutions at the hands of the city’s tribal leaders and the populace at large. Eventually the Muslims found refuge in the town of Yathrib (now known as Medina), most of whose inhabitants also converted to Islam, and the Muslim community began to flourish. The leaders of Mecca launched three great attacks against Medina, in 623, 625, and 627. The Muslims were not defeated, and indeed Muhammad was steadily gaining a greater following in many parts of Arabia. In 628, Muhammad, through superb diplomacy, initiated a “ten year truce” with Mecca. Within two years, this truce had been broken by the actions of a few hotheaded youth of a tribe allied to Mecca. Shortly thereafter, a Muslim army, which on the way grew to be ten thousand strong, marched on Mecca.

The fall of Mecca

That night a desert wasteland came alive,

as countless bonfires blazed across the plain,

where troops encamped before their final drive,

in multitudes, that made defences vain.

Abú Sufyán, who climbed a hill and saw

the burning threat, knew Mecca’s doom stood by.

That greying chief had no more heart for war –

conceived surrender as the only course to try.

He thought to act as envoy, then, and plead

with He whose Cause advanced relentlessly –

resile from battle with that potent Creed

on terms that might avert catastrophe.

At dawn, escorted through a watchful crowd,

the pagan chief attained the Prophet’s tent –

on entering which, he found himself endowed

with awe, at scenes commanding – wonderment.

A splendour charged the aura of that place

that not Byzantium nor yet Pars could claim.

No king had glory like Muhammad’s grace –

and those who served Him, served with hearts aflame.

Addressing gently now His bitter foe,

Muhammad sought an answer of His guest –

would he admit, for surely he must know –

the one true God, no idol can contest.

The meek reply: “Your hosts grow more and more,

while no stone god rewards my loyal oath.

Allah, alone, full well, I will adore –

and vow to You, His Messenger, my troth.”

Muhammad pledged that those forswearing force

would see but blessings fall upon their fate –

nor placid homes find vengeance at their doors,

nor swordless men, regret their helpless state.

Before Abú Sufyán rushed home to warn

his tribe they must give in or die, he watched

as rank on rank of armoured men marched on

and passed him by, and left him badly shocked.

Though briefly led to fear a grim attack

by hostile hordes with bloody debts to pay

firm reassurance sent him quickly back

to keep his city’s braves from futile fray.

The legions of Islám prevailed with ease

and spilt the blood of few upon the ground.

Though Mecca fell, its folk would rise to seize

the gift of faith the Victor would propound.

Inside the ka’bah built by Abraham

false deities long mocked the true Divine.

At once the Prophet struck to end their sham –

hurled out the noxious idols, cleansed the Shrine.

And “Truth has come”, He said. “The false is gone.”

And said again, for each stone god He felled.

The Faith He taught asserts the living One

is merciful – which truth, His deeds upheld.

Historical background

Most of the following information is from Muhammad and the Course of Islam, by the historian, H.M. Balyuzi, published by George Ronald, Oxford, 1976.

As is often said, “Islam means peace.” It has had this meaning, from the start, even though the battles that occurred in the early days of Islam admittedly loom large in its history. That the early Muslims committed acts of violence in the course of serving their Faith, is undeniable. But the nature of the battles can be misconstrued, if the reality of the situation of those times is not accounted for. The warfare conducted by Muhammad was primarily defensive, and He took every opportunity to avoid bloodshed, if at all possible. Indeed, it seems His victories were mainly won by the effectiveness of his defensive strategies, reversing the saying that attack is the best form of defence. The historical record shows that His vanquished enemies were not forced to convert to Islam, for some of them, including a number of pagans in Mecca, after the city was defeated, freely chose to stay outside the Islamic fold. That “there is no compusion in religion”, was a principle that Muhammad maintained throughout his life.

But Muhammad’s unique role was to serve not only as Prophet but also as the founder and leader of a nation. To an ignorant people accustomed to feuding and fiercely loyal to their tribes, he brought unity and enlightenment. A fair reading of history needs to appreciate the responsibilities He had in His dual role as Prophet and Statesman, and His extraordinary achievements in transforming a fractious land into an orderly society. It was for this purpose that He fought. In wielding the forces that kings and rulers must wield, he did so with a genius for peace, and a forbearance, that no other commander in chief has ever approached. But the military victories were insignificant beside His service to humankind in revealing the Qur’an, which established a pattern of civilisation and spirituality that flowered centuries afer His death, producing Islam’s golden age, whose intellectual and spiritual benefits underpin the modern world.

Muhammad was a resident of the city of Mecca when His prophetic mission began, around A.D. 610. Mecca was the centre of idol-worship in Arabia, where pilgrims paid homage to al-Lat, Manat, Hubal, and a pantheon of others. The Revelation Muhammad received, as recorded in the Qur’an, commanded him: “So, call not upon another god, with God, lest thou be of those who are chastised. And warn thy clan, thy nearest kin. And lower thy wing to those who follow thee, being believers.” (Surah xxvi, 213-30) Over time, Muhammad’s vigorous opposition to idolatry led to an increasing number of repressive measures against him by the leaders of Mecca. Eventually, He and His followers were welcomed and given refuge by the people of Yathrib (now called Medina), where they settled in relative safety and could prosper. The Medinites themselves, as the whole, accepted Islam. The armies of Mecca proceeded to attack Medina, particularly in three great campaigns: the battles of Badr in 623 and Uhud in 625, and the investment of Medina in 627. The senior leader of Mecca during this period was Abú Sufyán, high chieftain of the Quraysh, the major tribe of the city. In March 628 Muhammad initiated a truce with Mecca that was intended to last ten years. This was readily accepted by the Quraysh, who were tired of the fruitless fighting and the resulting damage to their trading activities. Yet, within a couple of years, the truce was broken as a result of the actions of a few hot-headed young men of a tribe allied to the Quraysh. Hoping to avert retaliation, Abú Sufyán visited Medina, seeking a meeting with the Prophet. He was rebuffed and went home deeply despondent. Soon after, Muhammad’s army marched on Mecca.

The poem recounts the exceptional achievement of Muhammad in achieving an almost bloodless victory over a veteran enemy. The facts alluded to in the poem are as follows. By the time the Muslim army reached Mar-az-Zahran, some 20 kilometres out of Mecca, it had swelled to a force ten-thousand strong, including contingents from a number of tribes that had only recently embracd Islam. The army stopped there for the night, and Muhammad gave an order for bonfires to be lit across the plain. Abú Sufyán came out of Mecca that night with two companions, sensing trouble was on the way. Upon seeing the blazing fires, his suspicions were confirmed. Meeting up with an uncle of the Prophet who was friendly towards him, He managed to obtain safe conduct past the sentries to Muhammad’s tent, but was asked to wait until morning before a meeting could take place. At dawn, he heard the call to prayer, chanted by the Ethiopian former slave, Bilal, the first muezzin. The historian, Hasan Balyuzi, writes: “Abú Sufyán was amazed and his amazement was boundless when he noticed how the Muslims would not let a drop of water, with which Muhammad made his ablutions, reach the ground. Not even at the courts of the Sasanians [monarchs of Persia, or Pars] and the Byzantines, had he seen such devotion.” An earlier Meccan envoy to Muhammad had similarly reported, Balyuzi states, “that though he had been to the courts of Chosroes, Caesar and the Negus, nowhere had he seen the like or equal of the reverence which Muslims rendered to Muhammad.”

Following dawn prayers, Abú Sufyán was welcomed by the Prophet. In the course of the interview that followed, he admitted the ineffectualness of the deities he had lifelong worshipped, and declared his allegiance to Islam, testifying: "Ilaha illa Allah. Muhammad rasul Allah." "There is no God but God. Muhammad is the messenger of God." This is the shahada, the great confession.1 Muhammad then promised the chief, “Whoever enters the house of Abú Sufyán in the upper regions of Mecca, and whoever enters the house of Hakim in the lower regions of Mecca, he shall be secure; and whoever lays down his arms, he shall be secure; and whoever shuts himself behind his own door, he shall be secure; and whoever enters the [Ka’bah], he shall be secure.” At the end of the meeting, Abú Sufyán was invited to watch while contingents of the army rode past the spot where he stood, lest he be tempted to doubt what Mecca was up against. During this parade of strength, the standard-bearer of Muhammad’s escort caught sight of Abú Sufyán, and was so upset by the sight that he threatened, “O Abú Sufyán, this is the day of blood-letting, when God shall abase the Quraysh.” Balyuzi writes: “Abú Sufyán trembled with fear, and begged Muhammad, when the Prophet drew level with him, not to change His mind, but to be compassionate towards His people ... Muhammad assured him that [the standard-bearer] had spoken in haste: ‘O Abú Sufyán, nay, today is the day of mercy. Today God shall exalt the Quraysh.’” The chief returned home to warn his people, and to face the rage of his wife, Hind, who rained blows on him and called (unsuccessfully) on bystanders to kill this “old, decrepit fool.”

The Muslim army entered Mecca against negligible resistance. The standard-bearer who had threatened Abú Sufyán was told to hand over the banner to his son, in his stead. There were admittedly heavy casualties among a small band of “irreconcilables”, but this outbreak of fighting soon came to an end, and the ringleaders fled. It is said that this incident would have been less bloody if not for a mistake by a messenger who conveyed Muhammad’s order to hold back the sword as an order to “put the sword on them”. After a period of rest, Muhammad rode on horseback to the Ka’bah, still dressed in mail. According to Balyuzi, “It is related that three hundred and sixty idols were ranged around the court of the Ka’bah. As the Prophet moved from one to the other, to hurl them down, He exclaimed: ‘Truth has come and the false has departed, indeed the false has truly gone.’ This was the climax, the supreme moment of the mission of Muhammad.”

Next, on Mount Safa, Meccans crowded to pledge fealty to Muhammad. Muhammad forgave even those among the Meccans who had caused the most severe of difficulties for Him and His Cause. However, seven unrepentant individuals, four men and three women, were put to death for grave crimes. Seven other condemned men, and three women, escaped punishment, through their own contrition or an appeal on their behalf by a Muslim. Some fighting occurred in regions nearby to Mecca within the next few weeks, but within a short time, a young man of Mecca was appointed administrator, and Muhummad returned to Medina, leaving behind one of his close associates to teach the precepts of Islam. One among those he forgave before he left was Wahshi, who had killed Hamzah, who was a cherished friend of the Prophet, at the battle of Uhud. Wahshi despaired of ever being forgiven. For him, this verse of the Qur’an was revealed:

Say: “O my people who have been prodigal against yourselves, do not despair of God’s mercy; surely God forgives sins altogether; surely He is the All-forgiving, the All-compassionate.”2

This verse was regarded by no less than Ali, the first Imam of the Shi’ah, as the most far-reaching in the whole of the Qur’an. He took his cue in this from comments made by Muhammad Himself.

As to Abú Sufyán, he lived to the age of 95, and the Caliph, Uthman, led his funeral prayer.3


2Verse 54 of Surah xxxix.

3For a biographical article on Abú Sufyán’s life, see

Nature's gifts (do we need them?)


An essay on the question, "do we need nature", written in 2003. It was written as an entry for a competition by the Economist magazine, on the issues outlined by the magazine as follows:

"Do we need nature? What are the difficult choices that need to be made in politics, economics, society and public policy? And who is right…? Those whose actions (or inactions) seek to increase man's control over nature, or those who seek to reduce man's control? Those who seek to bypass nature, or those who hope to work with it? Those who put a higher value on human development, or those who value the preservation, even the reconstitution of nature?"


In human eyes, nature sometimes seems to have a multiple personality disorder. It is both kind and cruel; both our humble servant and the capricious master of our fate. And we humans are likewise inconsistent. We seek to exploit nature’s resources, sometimes rapaciously, yet we worship its virginal beauty. We lord it over nature, but we fear the power of its tempests. These attitudes are evidence of a troubled relationship. Arising from our lack of understanding of nature, we are causing great damage to the global environment—polluting its air and poisoning its water. Our growing technological prowess threatens further problems.

Our conflict with nature originates from our nature as intelligent beings. All creatures thrive within their natural element: birds in the air, fish in the sea, worms in the soil. However, through science and technology, humans are able to overcome the laws that govern matter and all other life forms. The natural condition of our bodies is to walk the land and breathe the air, but we make artificial wings with which to fly, and scuba gear for breathing under water. Unfortunately, many of the outcomes of our ingenuity and enterprise are harmful to the natural environment, and therefore to ourselves.

The solution lies partly in acquiring greater scientific knowledge about nature’s processes, so as to better foresee the harmful consequences of proposed innovations. However, more significantly, we need a deeper understanding of our place in the universe. Not only does nature provide us with material resources, it also provides us with experiences that touch the soul, as poets like to remind us. There is an aspect of nature that is greater than ourselves, an immanence of the Divine. Through appreciation of this aspect of nature, we will be moved to treat it better.


Nature is a chameleon, a creature of changing colours. Nature is a nurturing mother and a ravenous beast; a treasure-store to be plundered and a sacred refuge for the sensitive soul; a wild jungle to be tamed and an eden of innocence to be preserved.

Our attitudes to nature tell us a lot about ourselves. If we see nature as the provider of infinite resources, as a whirlwind of capricious forces, as a mirror of the divine, or as the domain for scientific exploration—it is because we are beings who desire, who fear, who experience wonder, and who seek knowledge. Acting on these impulses, what we ask of nature, and the degree of our willingness to care for it in return, largely determine the character of our civilisation. There are many signs that our present global civilisation is asking too much and giving too little. The relationship between humanity and nature is under great strain; and yet the relationship absolutely must be made to work. We need to reach a better understanding of—and with—that tantalizing, ever-changing creature. We need a balanced perspective.

Daily new evidence appears of serious damage occurring to the environment as a result of human activity. One recent report was from the explorer, Jean Michel Cousteau, when he visited a chain of remote uninhabited islands north-west of Hawaii. He and the crew of his research ship expected to find an unspoiled wilderness, but instead they found tons of trash. The islands are located at a spot in the Pacific Ocean where currents converge and bring in flotsam from far away. On the beaches, Cousteau and his team found plastic toys, intact vials of medical drugs, miniature whiskey bottles, and assorted products of industry from all over the world. Numerous dead seabirds on the shores had perished due to eating morsels of plastic.

Those unpleasant products of human ingenuity washing up on remote shores highlight some of the major themes of our interaction with nature. Among them: human technological prowess and its negative effects, the complexity of the ecosystem, our inadequate understanding of that complexity, the global scope of environmental problems, and the grievous impact on the environment of our use-and-discard culture of consumerism. On the other hand, our inherent love for nature is reflected in the instinctive disgust provoked in us by hearing such a graphic tale of environmental degradation. Our relationship to nature is an emotional subject because it means everything to us. Outlined in broad strokes, nature’s gifts to us are:

  • Existence: our being alive is an outcome of nature’s evolutionary processes.

  • Sustenance: our food, drink, shelter, clothing, and all the resources that we use for survival and enjoyment, are provided by nature.

  • Intelligence: being endowed by nature with intelligence, we have the ability to understand nature’s laws and use them to our advantage.

  • Immanencei: through the contemplation of the divine beauty reflected in nature, we obtain insight and joy. Nature feeds the soul as well as the body.

When nature’s gifts are described in this way, obviously a definition of nature is being used that encompasses the whole of existence. The word “nature” has 20 definitions, according to one dictionaryii, the broadest and most abstract being: “the sum total of the forces at work throughout the universe”. A small step down the ladder of abstraction is: “the universe, with all its phenomena”. A few rungs lower is the definition that we as human beings we are mostly concerned with, in our parochial way: “the material world, especially as surrounding humankind and existing independently of human activities”. This last definition encapsulates a crucial dilemma of the human condition: we are surrounded by nature, totally dependent on it, but somehow separate from it, for it exists “independently of human activities”.

O body swayed to music, O brightening glance,
How can we know the dancer from the dance?

—W.B. Yeatsiii

What separates us from nature is our scientific and technological prowess. Natural phenomena, in contrast to human beings, unalterably obey natural laws. Fire always burns, water always flows, plants simply go on growing. Even animals, although sentient and having freedom of movement, are limited in their range of activities. Humans, uniquely, fashion wheels to reduce distance, telescopes to augment eyesight, and vaccines to prevent disease. The human mind is a remarkable instrument, able to imaginatively project itself outward to distant galaxies, and peer down into the atom, in order to discover the secrets of nature through observation, experimentation and reason. So powerful is this instrument that we can even seriously pose the question: “do we need nature?” Of course we do, but the question is meaningful because we know that we are in some degree independent of nature. Probing just how far this independence goes is crucial for our self-understanding and progress.

To start such a probe we might ask: how did it come to be that humanity, a creature of nature, finds itself independent of it? A plausible answer is that the appearance of intelligent beings is inherent in nature itself. This theory runs along the following lines. As discovered by physics, the universe began with a “big bang” about 15 billion years ago. At that moment, the whole universe existed in the form of a single point (mathematically termed a “singularity”). All matter, space and time were compressed into this singularity, which exploded outwards and has continued to expand ever since. An observation by astronomers confirming the expansion is that the galaxies are not in fixed positions, but are rushing away from each other. Furthermore, not only is the cosmos expanding spatially, but it is also becoming more complex. The trend towards greater complexity is manifested in the evolution of life. Based on this scenario, it is argued that everything that has existed and will exist in the universe, including intelligent life (e.g., us), is an outcome of the properties inherent in the universe at the beginning. An analogy is that the pattern for the whole of a tree—its trunk, branches, leaves and fruit—is contained within the seed. If this view of the universe is correct, then it is natural for human beings to be unnatural!

As a result of our unnatural abilities, human intervention in nature has far-reaching effects. This is evident in cities, where concrete covers the soil—but in the country, nature is only relatively more liberated. The roof over our head may be of thatch or steel; our home may be surrounded by a formal garden or untamed weeds; our mode of transport may be a donkey (an animal under our control) or a Ferarri (a metal beast possibly under our control). The human interface with nature has thousands of such nuances. How may we judge that any of these variations is better or worse?

The choices we make are important because they determine our environment. We act on nature to create our environment, and in turn the environment influences our health and happiness, in a continuous loop. Although we can utilise and channel nature’s forces, we cannot dominate it. At times we have the illusion that we can, because of our ability to divert rivers, breed cattle, grow genetically engineered crops, overcome human fertility problems, and perform endless other feats. However, when nature is treated with disdain, it bites back. We know this from many examples constantly reported, of suffering resulting from things that go wrong. The poisoned air of big cities, the pollution of rivers, the destruction of rainforests, global warming, the hole in the ozone layer, and the unforeseen side-effects of wonder-drugs, are familiar stories. Clearly we need to be making better choices, based on a more realistic and holistic understanding of nature.

Poets have traditionally been sensitive nature’s gifts. In the springtime, when nature’s power is most lavishly displayed, they have often been moved to heights of eloquence. Yet T.S. Eliot’s 1922 poem, “The Wasteland”iv, begins by saying that April, springtime in the northern hemisphere, “is the cruellest month”. It is an apt symbol for the discord between humanity and nature in modern civilisation. Similarly, Gerard Manley Hopkins, a few decades earlier, wrote of nature: “All is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil”.v But Hopkins’ poem went on: “And for all this, nature is never spent; There lives the dearest freshness deep down in things”. For Hopkins, the world was “charged with the grandeur of God”. Such awe and respect for the aspect of nature which is greater than ourselves is the antidote to materialistic greed. An appreciation for the true significance of nature will empower us to rise to the best that we can be. As stated by Bahá’u’lláh:

How resplendent the luminaries of knowledge that shine in an atom, and how vast the oceans of wisdom that surge within a drop! To a supreme degree is this true of man, who, among all created things, hath been invested with the robe of such gifts, and hath been singled out for the glory of such distinction. For in him are potentially revealed all the attributes and names of God to a degree that no other created being hath excelled or

This essay has not tried to answer specific questions on the wisdom of genetic modification, nuclear power and the like. Such questions need to be weighed up in each case by taking into account a wide variety of information from the physical sciences, economics, sociology and politics. However, when a sense of spiritual principle guides the decision-making process, it is less likely that dreadful mistakes will be made. We gain a truer perspective on nature when we seek to rise to our potential as human beings and practice virtues such as justice, generosity, wisdom, and detachment. Then, when we utilise the earth’s resources, we also remember to preserve its beauty. When we seek to channel its forces, we do so with due regard for the consequences. As we seek knowledge of its processes, we experience wonder in the face of its mysteries. We see the earth as our home for a time, and as a legacy to be passed on to future generations. We need nature, and so will they.


Nature’s Nest

Like birds that flit around a mountain crest
All creatures thrive within their element
Then do we humans — need nature’s nest?

Who crazed or blessed with intellectual zest
Traverse the earth in constant discontent
Like birds that flit around a mountain crest

Unceasing in our restless human quest
To shape the world as our intent is bent
Then do we humans — need nature’s nest?

Cruelly our crude aims nature will contest
And blow us on its rocky slopes all spent
Like birds that flit around a mountain crest

But when we turn our minds to seek its best
Reveals a richer realm for our ascent
Then do we humans — need nature’s nest?

Not less than a babe at the mother’s breast
We grow in a world for us most clement
Then do we humans — need nature’s nest?
Like birds that flit around a mountain crest


iEntry for “immanence” in the encyclopedia at

immanence [Lat.,=dwelling in], in metaphysics, the presence within the natural world of a spiritual or cosmic principle, especially of the Deity. It is contrasted with transcendence. The immanence of God in the world is the basic feature of pantheism. Among the most important philosophies using the concept of immanence are Stoicism and the systems of Giordano Bruno and Spinoza. In general, the great monotheistic religions have held that God is both immanent and transcendent, although individual thinkers have tended to emphasize one or the other aspect.

iiThe definitions of “nature” referred to here are from the dictionary at

iiiLast two lines of W.B. Yeats’ poem, “Among School Children”. See The Yeats Reader: A Portable Compendium of Poetry, Drama and Prose, Richard J. Finneran, ed., Scribner Poetry, 1997, pp. 90–92

ivT.S. Eliot, The Waste Land and Other Poems, Frank Kermode, ed., Penguin Books, 2003.

vFrom “God’s Grandeur” in Poems and Prose of Gerard Manley Hopkins, W.H. Gardner, ed., Penguin Books, 1963, p. 27.

viBaha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 177