The Holy Quran with Five Volume Commentary (Vol 3) — Page 513
PT. 14 AN-NAHL CH. 16 Suhaib. The names of Salmān, the Persian, and of ‘Abdullah bin Salām and of the Nestorian monk, Sergius, who according to Mas‘ūdī is the well- known Buḥairah, have also been mentioned in this connection. Prophet received help in composing among them being ‘Ammār and the Quran. According to some reports, it was a Christian slave named Jabr, who read the Christian Scriptures while making swords. The Prophet used to go and sit with him. According to another report, it was 'Aish or Ya'ish, a servant of al- Huwaitib Ibn 'Abdul-‘Uzzā, who knew the previous Scriptures and had embraced Islam and held firmly to the Faith. According to yet another report a slave named Abū Fuqaih who was also known as Yasār and was a Jew assisted the Holy Prophet in preparing the Quran. He was subjected to much persecution for his adoption of Islam and probably died sometime before the Hijrah. Again, 'Abdullah bin Muslim al-Hadrami is reported to have said that his two Christian slaves named Yasār and Jabr, natives of 'Ain at-Tamar, followed the trade of sword-cutters at Mecca. They used to read the Gospels while engaged in their work. When the Holy Prophet passed by their shop and saw them reading the Gospels he would stop there for a while. A report says that when one of them was asked whether he taught Muḥammad the Bible he replied, 'No, but he teaches me. ' Ibn 'Abbās reports that the Holy Prophet gave instruction in Islam to a Roman slave named Bal'ām. The Quraish taunted the Prophet that he learned many things from him. The same is said of ‘Adas or 'Addās, a slave of Ausa bin Rabī (Ma'ānī & Fath). The names of sundry other persons have also been mentioned from whom the Prophet was alleged by the Quraish to have received help, From the verse under comment, it appears that Meccans accused the Prophet of receiving help from a certain person in preparing the Quran and the verse answers the allegation by saying, But the tongue of him to whom they unjustly incline in making this insinuation is foreign, while this is Arabic tongue, plain and clear. The Christian critics say that this answer is irrelevant, for, as Arnold says: "admitting they were foreigners, they might nevertheless supply him with material" (Sherr's Commentary of the Bible). It was the necessary material or subject matter, they allege, with which the foreigners supplied the Prophet and to say in reply that the tongue of the person who was alleged to teach him was not Arabic betrayed the irrelevancy of the answer. But these reverend gentlemen seem conveniently to ignore the patent fact that this was not the only objection with which the Quran was assailed. It has not hesitated to mention many other similar objections of disbelievers and has refuted them thoroughly. If the Quran could successfully rebut so many other objections of disbelievers, it could answer this one also. In fact it has adequately done so even in the verse under comment, but the reverend gentlemen themselves have not been able to understand the answer. 1721