to conclude that he was indeed recorded in their scriptures. For there is no doubt—among all who have taken stock of Muhammad’s circumstances, whether believer or unbeliever—that he was one of the most intelligent people on earth. Even those who rejected him concede that he possessed such expertise, knowledge, and acumen as enabled him to establish this momentous cause, unparalleled before or after him. It is therefore self-evident that a man so keen to be believed, so versed in the ways that secure belief, and so averse to anything that would lead to his being called a liar, would never act or speak in a manner that undermined his own truthfulness.

Had he not known that his description was written in their books—indeed, had he known it to be absent—he would never have made that claim time and again, summoned their testimony, or presented it alike to his supporters and opponents, his friends and foes. Only someone of the feeblest intellect would behave in that way, for it would expose his lie to those who believed in him once they consulted the very people he had cited—a result diametrically opposed to his purpose. It would be like a man who wishes to produce witnesses for his claim, approaches people he knows to be truthful yet also knows were not present at the incident, and says, “This one will testify for me; that one will testify for me, for they were present when the matter occurred.” The supposed witnesses respond, “We do not testify for him, nor were we present at that affair.” No rational person who knows they were absent and will deny him would ever act so foolishly.

Fourth: Once the unmistakable signs of his truthfulness have been established, his statement that he is written in the earlier scriptures and that the prophets gave glad tidings of him must be accepted as accurate. Nevertheless, this point is to be mentioned only after an independent proof of his prophethood has first been set forth.