The Missing Books of the Bible

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله

Prayers and peace upon you, Apostle of Allah

As I have already explained, my position, as a Sunni Muslim, to the Bible is a balanced and nuanced one in contrast to some of the Muslim debaters and apologists who focus on refuting and debating Christians. In my view, the Bible is, for the most part, a faithful record of the original revelation and Scriptures that God revealed to various Israelite Prophets. The Holy Quran not only testifies of the Torah, the Zabur (Psalms of David) and the Injil (Evangel or Gospel given to Jesus), it also confirms the Scriptures in general:

أَوَلَمْ تَأْتِهِم بَيِّنَةُ مَا فِي الصُّحُفِ الْأُولَىٰ

Has there not come to them clarification of that which is in the former Scriptures?

(Surah 20, Ayah 133)

I understand as-Suhuf al-Ula (prior Scriptures) as a reference to not only the Torah, or not only the Torah, Psalms and Gospel of Jesus, but also the Scriptures inspired to various other Israelite Prophets, such as Joshua, Samuel, Job, King Solomon, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Jonah, and even the so-called “minor Prophets” like Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. Whether the Scriptures attributed to the names of Joshua, Samuel, Job, Jonah and others are a record of their inspirations and visions, or merely a historical account of their prophetic ministries, their contents are surely true, or at the very least do not conflict with the Holy Quran. This is also true of other books in the Bible such as the Book of Kings and Chronicles, which although read more as accounts of history than actual revealed Scripture to a Prophet, nonetheless contain, from an Islamic perspective, mostly true and correct information.

I go even further and argue that the much of the Talmud, in its relaying of historical events, teachings and laws, is also true and correct from an Islamic perspective, and have been confirmed in the Holy Quran and the Sunnah. The Rabbinic Jewish doctrine that at Mount Sinai Moses received both a written Torah and an unwritten or oral Torah, is also correct from an Islamic perspective, though virtually all Christians and even many Muslims reject this.

Yet, it must also be acknowledged that the current Biblical canon is incomplete, and there were several other texts that were either omitted or genuinely lost. The Bible itself references some of these texts, for instance:

1. Book of the Wars of the Lord (mentioned in Numbers 21:14)

2. Book of Jasher (mentioned in Joshua 10:13; 2 Samuel 1:18)

3. Book of the Acts of Solomon (1 Kings 11:41)

4. Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel (mentioned in 1 Kings and 2 Kings)

5. Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah (mentioned in 1 Kings and 2 Kings)

6. Book of Samuel the Seer (mentioned in 1 Chronicles 29:29)

7. Book of Nathan the Prophet (mentioned in 1 Chronicles 29:29; 2 Chronicles 9:29)

8. Book of Gad the Seer (mentioned in 1 Chronicles 29:29)

9. Book of Ahijah the Shilonite (mentioned in 2 Chronicles 9:29)

10. Visions of Iddo the Seer (mentioned in 2 Chronicles 9:29, 12:15, 13:22)

11. Book of Shemaiah the Prophet (mentioned in 2 Chronicles 12:15)

12. Book of Jehu son of Hanani (mentioned in 2 Chronicles 20:34)

13. Sayings of the Seers (mentioned in 2 Chronicles 33:19)

It should be especially concerning to Christians and Jews that there were Scriptures attributed to several Prophets, namely,  Nathan, Gad, Ahijah, Iddo, Shemaiah, and Jehu, which are not found in their canon.

Mirza Qadiani: Killing Blasphemers

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله

Prayers and peace upon you, Apostle of Allah

Qadianis of our time, under direction and encouragement of their organization, voice their condemnation and opposition to the mainstream Sunni Islamic narrative that blasphemy against the Holy Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is an egregious crime in which the blasphemer should be killed. This is obviously to gain the sympathy, confidence and partiality of non-Muslims in the West who are entirely critical of the laws in certain Muslims countries, especially Pakistan, in which blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is a death penalty offense. The Qadianis argue that although blasphemy is damned by God, it has no worldly penalty but is in fact a right guaranteed to the people as part of their freedom of religion and conscience. Catastrophically, this view is held by some Muslims too, influenced by modernity and liberalism. In our time, the chief defenders of executing those guilty of blasphemy against the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم are the Ulama and Mashayikh associated with the eminent Sunni Mujaddid, Ala Hadrat, Imam Ahmad Rida Khan رحمة الله عليه

We are the ones who celebrate and take pride in the actions of the ghazi, Ilm Din, and likewise, the ghazi, Mumtaz Hussain Qadiri رحمة الله عليهما who dispatched to Hell the one guilty of blasphemy and the one who publicly defended a blasphemer. Tragically, these two champions of Islam and guardians of the honor of the Holy Prophet were martyred by their respective governments for their noble and courageous acts. Indeed, it was due to the lobbying of the Sunni Barelwi clergy and spiritual leaders that Pakistan made blasphemy against the Prophet a death penalty offense (295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code).

Yet, interestingly, the founder of the Qadiani religion—the false prophet and antichrist Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian—admitted that those who have honor for the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم are committed to killing those who blaspheme against him:

لکھا ہے کہ ایک صحابی نے رسول اللہ صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کی توہین اپنی ماں سے سن کر اس کو مار دیا تھا۔ یہ غیرت اور حمیت تھی مسلمانوں کی

“It is written that a Sahabi heard blasphemy against the Apostle of Allah, sall Allahu alaihi wasallam, from his own mother and killed her. This was the jealousy and zeal of the Muslims!” (Malfuzat, v.1, p.159)

Mirza was likely referring to a blind Sahabi رضى الله عنه who killed his concubine, who bore him two sons, with a dagger. Mirza erroneously said she was his mother (one of countless errors by this false prophet). The blessed Sahabi murdered her for her repeated blasphemy against the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and then presented himself in the gathering of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم expecting to be punished for the crime of murder, but the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم did not punish him, rather said:

أَلاَ اشْهَدُوا أَنَّ دَمَهَا هَدَرٌ

“I testify that [the spilling of] her blood is licit” (Sunan Abi Dawud)

The Hadith is a proof for the mainstream Sunni sentiment that it is virtuous to immediately kill a blasphemer of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم for that is pleasing to Allah Most High and a sign of faith and jealously for God and His Prophet.

Pir of Herat: Abu Ismail Abdullah al-Ansari al-Harawi

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله

Prayers and peace upon you, Apostle of Allah

One of the eminent Saints of Islam is Abu Isma’il Abdullah al-Ansari al-Harawi (d. 1089 CE), affectionately known as the Pir of Herat رحمة الله عليه

He was a strictly orthodox Hanbali theologian and charismatic mystic.

Some bigoted and extremist individuals from among the Asha’irah are deeply critical of him and have even labelled him a heretic, God forbid!

Tragically, Tajuddin as-Subki (d. 1370 CE), an otherwise erudite and respectable Sunni scholar of the Shafi’i-Ash’ari tradition, was among those who criticized the Pir of Herat, having said:

فَاعْلَم أَن أَبَا إِسْمَاعِيل عبد الله بن مُحَمَّد الهروى الذى تسميه المجسمة شيخ الْإِسْلَام

“Know that Aba Isma’il Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Harawi, whom the Mujassimah named ‘Shaikh ul-Islam…’” (Tabaqat ash-Shafi’iyyah al-Kubra, v.3, p.132)

The implication here is that it is only the Mujassimah (corporealists—those who predicate a body to God) that respect the Pir of Herat and refer to him with the honorific title Shaikh ul-Islam.

But the truth is that Shaikh ul-Islam, the Pir of Herat, Hadrat Abdullah al-Ansari رحمة الله عليه was an eminent mystic and theologian of Islam who is highly regarded by the Sufis and the generality of the Sunni Muslims, especially in the eastern lands.

He was a disciple of the great Sufi mystic Abu l-Hasan al-Kharaqani (d. 1033 CE), may Allah have mercy on his blessed soul.

The way of the Sufis is to generally avoid the hairsplitting theological controversies and embrace all the great Saints of our Sunni Islamic tradition regardless of the camp or school they belonged to.

Sharh us-Sunnah of Al-Barbahari

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله

Prayers and peace upon you, Apostle of Allah

The text Sharh us-Sunnah has been published and widely distributed by Salafis. It is attributed to al-Hasan bin Ali al-Barbahari (d. 329 H), the Shaikh of the Hanabilah in the 10th century CE, based in Baghdad, although some believe the actual author was Ghulam Khalil al-Bahili (d. 275 H). The latter was a rabid opponent and persecutor of the Sufis in addition to being a fabricator of Hadith, such that the eminent Muhaddith, Abu Dawud as-Sijistani (d. 275 H), declared him the “Dajjal of Baghdad”.

But I think that Sharh us-Sunnah was not authored by Ghulam Khalil due to the total and conspicuous absence of any anti-Sufi polemics. In fact, it is generally a very good and orthodox Sunni manual of creed and methodology which is not at all offensive to mainstream Sunni Islam.

Al-Barbahari was a highly influential scholar and preacher among the early Hanbalis of Baghdad. They had a particularly pietist strain. Al-Barbahari and his circle of students and followers were known for their praiseworthy vigilante activities against public sinful activity, such as music and drinking. Al-Barbahari was also a proponent of Taqlid and was a strict Hanbali, in stark opposition to modern-day Salafis who reject Taqlid or the necessity of following one of the four schools of jurisprudence in Sunni Islam.

That a certain trend among the Salafis—commonly referred to as Madkhalis—have latched on to this text does not necessitate that we mainstream Sunni Muslims should disavow it. 

Now let us examine some of the points mentioned by al-Barbahari, may Allah have mercy on him, in Sharh us-Sunnah, especially those which establish it as a manifestly Sunni text.

Yes, there may be some minor points of fiqh in which Sharh us-Sunnah mandates the Hanbali view, such as that a marriage is not valid except with the guardian’s approval (in opposition to the Hanafi school), and some instances in which the Hanbali theological difference with the Ash’ari school is emphasized, but overall this is a text that is quite orthodox and should be embraced by mainstream Sunni Muslims. As a matter of fact, Sharh us-Sunnah makes no negative reference to Imam al-Ash’ari (d. 324 H) or the Ash’ari school. 

Al-Barbahari describes the Saved Sect of Islam, the Jama’ah, as

السَّوَادُ الأَعْظَمُ

“The Main Body” (p.37, #4)

The term as-Sawad ul-A’zam literally means the great blackness, indicating that the Saved Sect or the Jama’ah of the Muslims is that denomination that composes its majority, like a densely packed crowd which from a distance or a bird’s eye view appears to be a large blackness. The deviant schismatics are those which have broken away from the crowd into small groups, out of the mainstream. Although the Salafis today claim al-Barbahari and the text of his Sharh us-Sunnah, they are clearly not the Sawad ul-A’zam—the Main Body of the Muslims.

The madhhab of orthodox Sunni Islam is to make Tafwid with regard to those matters attributed to Allah that are from the Mutashabbihat. Al-Barbahari says:

فَعَلَيْكَ بالتَّسْلِيم وَالتَّصْدِيقِ وَالتَّفْوِيضِ

“Upon you is to accept, affirm and perform Tafwid” (p.68, #42)

He gives examples of narrations that are subject to Tafwid; “The hearts of the servants are between the two fingers of Ar-Rahman”, “Verily, Allah descends to the lowest Heaven”, “He descends on the Day of Arafah”, “He descends on the Day of Resurrection”, “He places His foot upon it (Hell)”, “If you walk toward Me, I run toward you”, “Allah created Adam in His image”, “I saw my Lord in the best form”. Rather than interpreting and explaining these narrations and their like literally, the way of the Sunni Muslims is to perform Tafwid—to consign the true meaning to the knowledge of Allah and to refrain from making any interpretation or explanation.

In repudiation of the Khawarij, the Shi’ah, and other tendencies which encourage political revolution, anarchy or disobedience to the Muslim ruler, al-Barbahari emphasizes in Sharh us-Sunnah the necessity of obeying the ruler, “It is neither permissible to fight the ruler or to rebel against him, even if he oppresses.”

I believe it is these points in Sharh us-Sunnah which certain people find unbearable due to their Kharijite and revolutionary tendencies that they have attempted to malign this text or distance the Muslims from it. This despite the fact that the teaching against disobedience or revolt against any Muslim ruler by his subjects is manifestly established from the Quran and Sunnah, not to mention wisdom and intellect.

The Ikhwani modernist Yasir Qadhi and others wrongly claim that this text was composed by the fabricator Ghulam Khalil in order to discredit it.

I say that whether this text was written by Ghulam Khalil or al-Barbahari, the content of it is solid and true. I do not find anything controversial in it. We mainstream Sunnis should reclaim this text from the Salafis who have apparently hijacked it.

Al-Barbahari affirms the orthodox Sunni belief that the dead can hear in some instances, contrary to the heresy of the Mamatis, and says one must believe the slain polytheists whose corpses were thrown into a well in the aftermath of the Battle of Badr heard the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلمwhen he addressed them.

كَانُوا يَسْمَعُونَ كَلَامَهُ

“They heard his speech” (p.77, #61)

He also refutes another heresy of the Mamatis (that the souls of the deceased are not returned to their corpses in their earthly graves) and says:

وَالإِيمَانُ بِأَنَّ المَيِّتَ يُقْعَدُ فِي قَبْرِهِ وَيُرْسِلُ اللهُ فِيهِ الرُّوحَ

“To have faith that the deceased is made to sit up in his grave and Allah sends back to it the spirit” (p.83, #70)

The Wahhabis accuse of the orthodox and mainstream Sunni Muslims of heresy because we believe Allah revealed everything that will happen till the Resurrection to His beloved, the Prophet Muhammad صلوات الله والسلام عليه who therefore has knowledge of the unseen of all that which shall occur till Judgment Day. However, al-Barbahari concurs with us and says:

وَالإِيمَانُ بِأَنَّ اللهَ تبارك وتعالى أَطْلَعَ نَبِيَّهُ عَلَى مَا يَكُونُ فِي أُمَّتِهِ إِلَى يَومِ القِيَامَةِ

“To have faith that Allah, blessed and exalted, informed His Prophet of that which will happen in his Ummah till the Day of Resurrection” (p.90, #89)

In conclusion, today the text of Sharh us-Sunnah has been made controversial by those influenced by the political Ikhwani ideology and also the neo-Kharijites of our time. Some of them seek to distance ordinary Sunni Muslims from this text and the way of the early Hanbalis who predate the likes of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Abd ul-Wahhab of Najd by exploiting the fact that the text is today published and distributed by the Salafis. Yet I have highlighted several important points in Sharh us-Sunnah which illustrate the divergence of Salafism from the teaching of al-Barbahari and by extension the early Hanabilah, a teaching that is more in accordance with the mainstream Sunnis and Sufis.

Children of Israel Cursed Upon Tongue of David (5:78)

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

Salutations and peace upon you, my master, Apostle of Allah

Allah, holy and exalted is He, says:

لُعِنَ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوۡا مِنۡۢ بَنِیۡۤ اِسۡرَآءِیۡلَ عَلٰی لِسَانِ دَاوٗدَ وَعِیۡسَی ابۡنِ مَرۡیَمَ ؕ ذٰلِکَ بِمَا عَصَوۡا وَّکَانُوۡا یَعۡتَدُوۡنَ

Cursed were those who disbelieved from the children of Israel upon the tongue of David and Jesus son of Mary. That is because they disobeyed and used to transgress

(Surah 5, Ayah 78)

As for King David, refer to Psalm 37 for his curse upon the Israelites: "And they that be cursed of him shall be cut off" (Psalm 37:22).

Psalm 37 is special for it is quoted elsewhere in the Holy Quran:

وَلَقَدۡ کَتَبۡنَا فِی الزَّبُوۡرِ مِنۡۢ بَعۡدِ الذِّکۡرِ اَنَّ الۡاَرۡضَ یَرِثُہَا عِبَادِیَ الصّٰلِحُوۡنَ

And We have written in the Zabur from after the Reminder that the Earth—it shall be inherited by My righteous servants

(Surah 21, Ayah 105)

This is clearly a reference to "but those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the earth" (Psalm 37:9), "But the meek shall inherit the earth" (Psalm 37:11), "For such as be blessed of him shall inherit the earth" (Psalm 37:22), "the righteous shall inherit the land" (Psalm 37:29). It is particularly this Psalm that I have quoted last that is being directly cited in the Holy Quran

צַדִּיקִ֥ים יִֽירְשׁוּ־אָ֑רֶץ

Saddiqim yireshu ares

The righteous will inherit the land

From this we can reasonably conclude that Psalm 37 is truly a Psalm of David and an original inspiration to King David by God Himself.

Elsewhere, David expresses his anger and resentment and invokes God against his enemies: "Fight against them that fight against me" (Psalm 35:1), "Let them be confounded and put to shame that seek after my soul: let them be turned back and brought to confusion that devise my hurt. Let them be as chaff before the wind: and let the angel of the Lord chase them. Let their way be dark and slippery: and let the angel of the Lord persecute them. For without cause have they hid for me their net in a pit, which without cause they have digged for my soul. Let destruction come upon him at unawares; and let his net that he hath hid catch himself: into that very destruction let him fall" (Psalm 35:4-8), "Let them be ashamed and brought to confusion together that rejoice at mine hurt: let them be clothed with shame and dishonour that magnify themselves against me" (Psalm 35:26), "Destroy, O Lord, and divide their tongues" (Psalm 55:9), "Let death seize upon them, and let them go down quick into hell: for wickedness is in their dwellings, and among them" (Psalm 55:15), "Pour out thine indignation upon them, and let thy wrathful anger take hold of them. Let their habitation be desolate; and let none dwell in their tents" (Psalm 69:24-25), "Add iniquity unto their iniquity: and let them not come into thy righteousness. Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous" (Psalm 69:27-28), "Let them be confounded and consumed that are adversaries to my soul; let them be covered with reproach and dishonour that seek my hurt" (Psalm 71:13), "Let mine adversaries be clothed with shame, and let them cover themselves with their own confusion, as with a mantle" (Psalm 109:29). This is but a glimpse into the Psalms of David in which he invokes God against his enemies who are his own people, the Israelites that troubled him and falsely accused him, conspired against him or sought to kill him. All these Psalms in which David cried out to God to pour out His wrath against these enemies have been summarized in the Quran with the words "Cursed were those who disbelieved from the Children of Israel upon the tongue of David".

Angel Gabriel Appearing to Prophet Muhammad at the Mountain

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

Salutations and peace upon you, my master, Apostle of Allah

Only two Angels are mentioned in the Bible by name, and they are the Archangels Gabriel and Michael. In the Old Testament, they are only mentioned by name in the Book of Daniel. In the New Testament, the Angel Gabriel appeared to both Zechariah and the virgin Mary, as mentioned in the first chapter of the Gospel according to Luke, while the Angel Michael is mentioned in the Book of Revelation as the general who led the Angelic forces in battle against Satan and his minions, driving them out of Heaven. These two Archangels are mentioned by name in the Holy Quran too, for instance:

مَن كَانَ عَدُوًّا لِّلَّهِ وَمَلَائِكَتِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ وَجِبْرِيلَ وَمِيكَالَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ عَدُوٌّ لِّلْكَافِرِينَ

Whoever is an enemy to Allah and His Angels and His Apostles and Gabriel and Michael—then indeed, Allah is an enemy to the disbelievers

(Surah 2, Ayah 98)

It is not a coincidence that these two Angels which alone are mentioned by name in the Bible are the two principal Angels in Islam too. They are strongly associated with the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, during his prophetic ministry. They could be seen fighting on his right and on his left in battle, often clothed in pure white garments, looking radiant and majestic. When invoking Allah, the Prophet would often refer to Him as the "Lord of Gabriel and Michael".

But the antichrist and false prophet Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, however, claimed to receive revelations, visions and visitations of Angels with strange names through which we come to know that he was a liar, and that those were not true Angels. Mirza spoke of Angels allegedly named "Tichi Tichi", "Darshani", "Khairati", "Mithan Lal" and "Sher Ali".

According to the Bible, when Jesus was led into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil, "Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple, And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone" (Matthew 4:5-6; Luke 4:9-11).

This is quite similar to what reportedly happened to the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him:

ثُمَّ لَمْ يَنْشَبْ وَرَقَةُ أَنْ تُوُفِّيَ وَفَتَرَ الْوَحْىُ فَتْرَةً حَتَّى حَزِنَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم فِيمَا بَلَغَنَا حُزْنًا غَدَا مِنْهُ مِرَارًا كَىْ يَتَرَدَّى مِنْ رُءُوسِ شَوَاهِقِ الْجِبَالِ فَكُلَّمَا أَوْفَى بِذِرْوَةِ جَبَلٍ لِكَىْ يُلْقِيَ مِنْهُ نَفْسَهُ تَبَدَّى لَهُ جِبْرِيلُ فَقَالَ يَا مُحَمَّدُ إِنَّكَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ حَقًّا فَيَسْكُنُ لِذَلِكَ جَأْشُهُ وَتَقِرُّ نَفْسُهُ فَيَرْجِعُ فَإِذَا طَالَتْ عَلَيْهِ فَتْرَةُ الْوَحْىِ غَدَا لِمِثْلِ ذَلِكَ فَإِذَا أَوْفَى بِذِرْوَةِ جَبَلٍ تَبَدَّى لَهُ جِبْرِيلُ فَقَالَ لَهُ مِثْلَ ذَلِكَ

Then, not long after Waraqah died, and the revelation ceased for a period, until the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, became so distressed, as we have been told, that he repeatedly considered throwing himself from the mountain peaks. Each time he reached the summit of a mountain to throw himself off, Gabriel would appear to him and say, "O Muhammad, you are truly the Messenger of God," and his heart would be calmed and his soul would find peace. Then he would return, and if the period of revelation had been long for him, he would go again the next day for the same purpose. When he reached the summit of a mountain, Gabriel would appear to him and say the same thing to him (Sahih al-Bukhari)

Although the Devil was trying to convince our Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, to throw himself from the cliff of the mountain, he never did so as the Angel Gabriel would appear to him and reassure him.

Some people have objected to this account, saying it is not possible that the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, could ever intend to commit suicide. While their objection bears merit, especially considering that it is in fact the irsal of Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri and not the narration of Umm al-Mu'minin A'ishah, may Allah be pleased with her.

Yet I do not necessarily find the story objectionable since it says that the Prophet, peace be upon him, did not throw himself from the mountain, but like Jesus was merely tempted to do so, a temptation he successfully resisted. 

And the story states that the Angel Gabriel would appear to the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, when he reached the summit of the mountain, and would reassure him by saying "O Muhammad! You are truly the Messenger of Allah".

If the story is true, and there is a likelihood it is, I understand it to mean that during long pauses in the revelation, the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, desirous to see the Angel, would climb the summit of the mountain but in reality he had no intention of committing suicide as he knew the Angel would appear to him, and surely he did appear to him. And Allah and His Apostle know best!