ITS ORIGIN, ITS STRENGTH, AND ITS WEAKNESS. 169 
upon the place where it is offered. “A prayer in this Mosque 
of mine,’* said the “Prophet,” “is better than a thousand 
prayers anywhere else, except in the Holy Mosque” at 
Mecca, At another time he said, “A man’s prayerf in the 
congregation exceeds in value twenty-five times his prayer 
in his own house.” Public prayers must always be in Arabic, 
even though the great mass of the worshippers may be utterly 
unable to comprehend the words they utter. Even when 
offered privately, the prescribed prayers at the five stated 
times of worship each day must be in Arabic, though when he 
has offered these the worshipper may then, if he will, address 
GOD in any other language he pleases. 
2. One of the gravest defects in Islam is the very shallow 
conception of sint which it mculcates. Sinis, a Muslim holds, 
the transgression of an arbitrary decree passed by the Deity, 
which He may rescind at His pleasure. ‘hus many actions 
which are sinful, because prohibited, here, will be perfectly 
innocent in the next world. For example, there are indica- 
tions in the Quran that Muhammad regarded a very great 
excess of unchastity on earth as a sin; and yet in the same 
volume he encouraged his followers to exertions in the cause 
of their “Prophet” by promising them as a reward a 
practically unlimited indulgence in this vileness in Paradise,§ 
even before the very throne of Gop! Why Gop should have 
seen fit to forbid such conduct here on earth no Mushm can 
tell, but if we deny ourselves in this matter here, we shall, as 
a reward, be permitted the unlimited indulgence of our 
lower appetites] in the unending After-life! Again, the 
* Mishkat, p. 59. 
+ Ibid., p. 60. 
{ This is well shown tn Dr. Hooper’s “Christian Doctrine in contrast 
with Hindtism and Isl4m,” pp. 5-28. 
§ Cf. Sarahs XLVII, 13, 16,17; LV, 46-fim. ; LVI, 11-39, ete. 
|| What a great influence such promises of sensual pieasure have had 
upon Muslims ever since the “ Prophet’s” time, Arabian historians bear wit- 
ness. Another evidence is afforded by the care with which every (genuine 
or not) Tradition bearing on the subject has been collected and recorded. 
Many of these Traditions greatly exaggerate the pictures drawn in the 
Qur'an, but are of the same kind for the most part. Attempts have been 
made to explain away all these things by understanding them in a spiritual 
sense, but this is not possible, nor is it at all to the taste of the orthodox 
Muslim, though it may please the Mystic. A good example of such 
attempts is afforded by Muhiyyw’ddin’s commentary on, e.g., Sarah LVI 
11, sgqg. So also Al Ghazzali. The author of the controversial work 
“ Mizanu’l Mawazin,” however, can only urge in defence of such passages 
that they are “supported by the Gemara and Talmud.” 
N 2 
, 
