husk is done when the young shoot appears above the earth, and begins to drink in the sunlight that streams down upon it from heaven.

Let it not be overlooked that the precepts of the Torah are of two different kinds, (1) the Ceremonial, and (2) the Moral. The former were binding on the Jewish nation alone, and for the most part did not become so until the Law (شريعة) was given1 at Sinai. They were not generally binding on Abraham: only the ordinance of circumcision (with possibly a few others) was enjoined on him. This fact is admitted by all. It is of great importance, because it shows that such ordinances were not always matters of obligation even for Abraham's descendants, still less were they binding upon other men. In the Torah we learn that they were given hundreds of years after Abraham's time. They seem to have been appointed mainly, as has already been said, for two reasons: (1) To make a clear distinction between the Children of Israel and all other nations until the establishment of the Messiah's kingdom: thus keeping them free from the temptation to fall into the idolatry practised by the rest of the world. (2) To make them learn by experience that even Divinely sanctioned rites and ceremonies could not satisfy man's spiritual needs, though some spiritual meaning underlay them, and must be sought. This search was a preparation for the fuller spiritual worship of which the Prophets taught so much (compare Ps. li. 16, 17), and which was fully established by the Lord Jesus Christ. The ceremonial precepts of the Jewish Law were never imposed by God upon Gentiles. Even upon Jews they ceased to be binding when Christ's Kingdom had been fully established by His Resurrection from the dead.

But the Moral precepts, on the other hand, are of eternal (ازلي و ابدي) obligation upon all men everywhere. They were included in the Shari'at (Law) given on

1 See Surah iii. 22 and 87, and Baizawi's commentary on these verses.

Mount Sinai, but were binding on all men from the time of the creation of Adam, and will never cease to be binding. It was never right and in accordance with God's Law to commit adultery, to steal, to murder, to be an idolater, to worship any but the One True God. This Moral Law, being in accord with God's Most Holy Nature (ذات), is therefore eternal and everlasting, and can never be abrogated. Hence it is clear that the fancy that the Injil has abrogated the Torah is wrong, and is due to want of knowledge of the latter. The Injil has not abrogated the Torah. On the contrary, it forms the complement of the Torah and completes its teaching, Hence it is that in the New Testament there are so many verses from the Old Testament quoted and explained. The Injil thus most truly confirms the Torah, as indeed the Qur'an asserts: "And We caused Jesus the Son of Mary to follow upon their footsteps, confirming what was before Him of the Torah, and We gave Him the Injil" (Surah v, Al Ma'idah, v. 50).

We must repeat that those Old Testament precepts which are not binding upon Christians are merely those which are ceremonial, and were as ceremonies imposed only on the Israelites at Mount Sinai. Even the latter are not annulled by the Gospel: they are fulfilled. For instance, in the Torah God sanctioned and regulated the very ancient custom of animal sacrifice, which from very early days had been common to all nations. The Torah commanded that different animals should be offered on different occasions and for different purposes. One of these purposes was to make atonement for sin. Yet it is clear that the sacrifice of animals can never take away human sin. Hence the Prophet David said: "Thou delightest not in sacrifice; else would I give it: Thou hast no pleasure in burnt offering" (Ps. li. 16). In complete accordance with this is what we read in the Epistle to the Hebrews: "The Law having a shadow of the good things to come, not the very image of the things, they can never with the same sacrifices