The previous two topics revealed the status of the Quraysh tribe and the noble merchant to most traders and employees of Arad and about the occupation of the honorable messenger of God, peace be upon him and his family, which was trade.
His companionship with cattle began in his childhood to ward off the mischief of enemies and for educational purposes.
This has also happened in the lives of most of us, that we spend a day, a week, or a month with livestock, which does not mean that we should be called a shepherd or have the occupation of a shepherd.
On the other hand, it is certain that the Messenger of God was never illiterate.
Thanks to God, most of the Aradis have accepted this fact and engraved it in their hearts and souls.
But unfortunately, a few Aradis probably do not read the texts accurately and superficially attribute the same false beliefs to the Prophet with other reasons.
In this article, we will briefly present the reasons for rejecting them and praise God for this insight.
Reason for rejecting the occupation of shepherding
First, some have pointed out that shepherding is an honorable profession and there is no objection to the Messenger of God having the occupation of a shepherd.
Where did we say that shepherding is a dirty or impure profession?
Any legitimate source of income is certainly honorable, but don't you want to admit that occupations have different levels and ranks in terms of dignity, and God has not made them all equal?
I swear to God
If the commercial supporters of Arad save your name as "little shepherd" in their phones and every time there is communication between you, they call you a shepherd or little shepherd, you wouldn't feel uncomfortable?
Do you mean to say that shepherding and trade are the same and there is no difference in people's perception between them?
So other than being promoters of the Prophet as a shepherd, you had role models in your life who have called the Prophet a shepherd, and now it's hard for you to admit that you have insulted the Prophet of God and portrayed his status as despicable in the eyes of people?
Otherwise, it is common knowledge that there is a difference between trade and shepherding.
We say this for your own sake:
When you equate these two, God will deprive you of success in trade and leave you as nothing more than a shepherd because God grants growth according to intellect, and when you combine trade and shepherding, He says, "Then remain as the shepherd."
What you were saying is honorable and has no flaws.
There is no valid evidence from the Quran or the traditions of the Prophet that he was a shepherd.
Yes, being a shepherd is honorable, but its honor does not reach the level of the honor of trade.
Black peppercorn and black beauty spots are both pungent, but they are different.
The Prophet of God is the beginning and the end of knowledge.
As for the second matter that some insist on, that the Prophet of God was illiterate, and they presented two reasons for this.
Their first reason is that when God spoke to His Prophet, He said, "Read," and the Prophet said, "What shall I read when I am illiterate?"
Where did you get such an interpretation?
Where in the Quran does it mention such a statement attributed to the Prophet of God?
The Quran says:
"Read in the name of your Lord who created."
Where in the Quran is this conversation between God and His Prophet mentioned, which the scholars and wise men have not seen?
Were you present next to the Prophet at that time and heard such a statement, or has this statement reached you from a few illiterates who have made it up themselves?
Set aside the Prophet and God.
If you tell an illiterate person to read, have you acted wisely?
When God says "read," it means that His prophet knows how to read that God has commanded him to do something within his ability.
No wise person commands someone to do something beyond their ability, let alone God.
Commanding someone to do something beyond their ability is a form of insult and mockery, and God is free from any derogatory attributes.
The second point is that the Quran was revealed to the Prophet both at once on the Night of Decree and gradually.
The gradual revelation of Surah Al-Alaq was a gradual revelation of the Quran, and the periodic revelation of the Quran was before the gradual revelation therefore, the Prophet was already aware of the entire Quran, and it was not as if he had just become acquainted with it.
Another reason they mentioned is that God has stated in Surah Al-Ankabut, verse 48:
"And thou wast not [able] to recite a Book before this [Book came], nor art thou [able] to transcribe it with thy right hand: In that case, indeed, would the talkers of vanities have doubted."
And they mistranslate this verse as:
"And you did not recite before the prophethood any scripture, nor did you inscribe one with your hand otherwise the falsifiers would have had [cause for] doubt perhaps the Quran is one of your own writings and readings."
The reason for refutation is, which word did you to translate to "not knowing" that we did not see?
The correct translation of the verse is: "You did not recite any scripture before this, nor did you transcribe one with your hands."
If someone does not recite a book for people and does not write with his hands, does it mean he is illiterate?
It is possible for someone to be knowledgeable but neither read nor write, even though he is capable of writing and reading.
It has been narrated from Imam Reza (AS) under the same verse that he said:
"It means that he did not go to any school nor did he see any teacher who could say, 'I taught him these sciences,' and have a favor upon the Prophet."
Then he said: "We are the people who have acquired our knowledge from the Lord, and no one has taught us."
And when Imam Askari was asked about the comparison of the knowledge of the Prophet and the honorable Gabriel, peace be upon them, he said:
"Gabriel tasted the unripe fruit of our knowledge from the lush garden.
As Allah sent the words to His messenger through him, he did not know the meaning of those words. Then the Prophet taught him the meaning of the words from the Lord."
How can God entrust the guidance and leadership of His servants to someone who does not even know how to read and write?
He is the one affirmed by the Quran as the beginning and the end of knowledge.
He who knows all 72 letters of knowledge in his heart.
He who all scholars and dignitaries are his students in learning and debate, how can he not even have the ability to read and write?
In Surah An-Nisa, verse 34, God has entrusted the leadership of women to men because of the superiority they should have and the hardships they should endure in worldly affairs.
Among historians, there is no doubt that Khadijeh was the only woman who was fully literate and knowledgeable in the age of ignorance.
Can it be that her blessed existence would choose an illiterate husband and then see herself as completely obedient and submissive to him?
Meaning, a knowledgeable lady with a doctoral degree marrying an illiterate man who does not even know how to read and write at an elementary level.
Is this the meaning of a man's virtue over his wife?
May God protect us from such great slander.
Leave the Prophet.
If you are the father of a knowledgeable and wise daughter who, by fate, is independent of worldly wealth and has complete knowledge, would you marry her to an illiterate shepherd?
Why do you think that Mr. Khawilad ibn Asad, the father of Hazrat Khadijeh, may peace be upon her, was a person of limited intelligence who would marry such a perfect daughter to a man like that?
However, all the great figures and historians have testified to the greatness of this man, Mr. Khawilad, who is the great father of our Ahl al-Bayt.
To completely refute this matter, you can refer to the link about the Prophet's literacy in the Wikifeqh and see all the evidence, which we also rely on two narrations.
Imam Javad, peace be upon him, was asked:
"O son of the Messenger of God
Why did they call the Prophet of Islam 'Ummi'?"
He asked: "What do people (opponents of Shia) say?"
They said: "People think that he was called 'Ummi' because he could not write."
Imam Javad replied:
"They are lying.
May God curse them.
How could he not write when the Lord says in the firm verses of His Quran:
'He is the One who has sent among the unlettered a Messenger from themselves reciting to them His verses and purifying them and teaching them the Book and wisdom.'
How could someone who cannot write teach the book to others?
I swear to God, the Messenger of God, peace be upon him and his family, used to read and write in seventy-three languages.
They called him 'Ummi' for this reason because he was from Mecca, and Mecca was considered 'Umm al-Qura' at that time.
Just as the Lord says in His Quran:
'We have sent you to the people of Umm al-Qura (Mecca) and those around it to warn them and give them good tidings.'
Even from the prominent figures of the Sunni community, such as Mohammad ibn Ismail Bukhari, it is acknowledged in the most authentic book of the Sunnis, named Sahih Bukhari, that during the peace treaty of Hudaybiyyah, where there was a disagreement between the Muslims and the disbelievers of Quraysh over writing the words "Messenger of Allah" in the treaty, the Prophet of Islam, peace be upon him, personally took the treaty and wrote the text himself:
"This is what Mohammad, the son of Abdullah, has agreed to. They shall not enter Mecca for the purpose of performing the pilgrimage except in the following year."
The Prophet of Islam took the contract and wrote:
This is what Mohammad judged...
It is also notable that the Prophet had scribes because it was not customary for rulers to personally write their decrees, instead, they would dictate while scribes would write.
This is evident in historical films such as "Mokhtarnameh" and many others, despite all these rulers having the ability to read and write.
Important advice: Refrain from calling the Prophet of God illiterate, as per the warning of Imam Javad, peace be upon him, lest you incur the curse of God.
If you absolutely must choose between illiteracy and being a shepherd, and your heart does not allow you to accept both defamations, abandon illiteracy and adhere to the belief of being a shepherd, for the sin of illiteracy about the Prophet of God is far greater than the sin of being a shepherd.
In summary, it is difficult for many to repent over a night and accept that two wrong beliefs they have held for a lifetime, and to which they have invited many others.