He is saying to us: Why don’t you worship Shakespeare because of his linguistic brilliance?

We may refute his claim with a simple argument that is
available to all Muslims and is mentioned in the Holy Qur’an, but man’s
mind is weak and he is forgetful, heedless and prone to mistakes. This
argument is as follows: did Shakespeare challenge other literary
figures, before and after him, to produce the like of what he produced,
or did Shakespeare claim to be a Prophet so that people should believe
in him?

If your friend thinks that eloquence is a miracle or sign of
Prophethood, then he is mistaken, because he has not paid attention to the
idea that there should be a challenge in addition to there not being
anything that matches it. These are important conditions with regard to
belief in miracles.

Is this the way to discuss major concepts and matters that
determine one’s ultimate fate, such as the Prophethood of the Prophets
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon them)?

Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The Qur’an is that miracle that will abide until the end of
time; since it was first brought by the Messenger, the verses that
challenged mankind have been recited, including the following verses
(interpretation of the meaning):

“Let them
then produce a recital like unto it (the Quran) if they are truthful”

[at-Toor 52:34]

“Say: Bring
you then ten forged Soorah (chapters) like unto it”

[Hood 11:13]

“Say: Bring
then a Soorah (chapter) like unto it”

[Yoonus 10:38]

“Say: If the
mankind and the jinns were together to produce the like of this Quran, they
could not produce the like thereof, even if they helped one another”

[al-Isra’ 17:88].

The mere fact that the Messenger told the people about this
challenge from the very beginning, and these verses stated definitively that
they could never do that, knowing the large numbers of mankind, is evidence
in itself that the Qur’an was something extraordinary, that the two races
(i.e., mankind and the jinn) would be unable to match. Such a miracle cannot
be for anyone except the Prophets.

Then, with the passage of time, it was heard by people who
believed in it and people who did not believe in it, Arabs and non-Arabs,
and there has never been anyone among the nations who produced a book that
people would read and say that it was like the Qur’an. This is something
that everyone knows.

There is nothing that people uttered or wrote, even if it was
of the highest level of quality in terms of words and meanings, but there
were other people who came up with something equal to it or like it or close
to it, whether it was poetry, oratory, words of knowledge, aphorisms,
argument, exhortation, essays, or the like. Nothing of that exists, but
there was something equal to it or like it or close to it.

The Qur’an, as people – Arabs and non-Arabs alike – know, is
something for which no equal has ever existed, despite the keenness of the
Arabs and the non-Arabs to produce something to match it. So its wording is
a miracle, its composition is a miracle, its telling of the unseen is a
miracle, its commands and prohibitions are a miracle, its promises and
warnings are a miracle, its majestic nature, greatness and impact on
people’s hearts are a miracle. If it is translated into a language other
than Arabic, its meanings are a miracle. All of that is unmatched by
anything in the world.

If it is said that there is nothing like the Torah, the
Gospel and the Psalms either, that does not undermine our argument, because
we say: Miracles performed by the Prophets cannot be performed by anyone
else. If any miracle was of that nature, such as telling of the unseen, this
is a miracle that was common to all of them. The same applies to raising the
dead, for these types of miracles were known for more than one of the
Prophets other than the Messiah, such as Moosaa (Moses) and others.

End quote from an-Nubuwwaat (1/515).

What we mean here is that linguistic eloquence is not
necessarily indicative of Prophethood or proof that the message is from a
divine source; rather there should be other clear conditions, namely:

1.
that eloquent person should claim to be a Prophet

2.
he should challenge mankind with his eloquence in a clear
manner, then they fail to meet his challenge

3.
he should fulfil the conditions of Prophethood and other
requirements to support his message, which we will discuss below.

Moreover, this argumentative person asked: “Why don’t you
worship Shakespeare if the matter has to do with language?” Who told him
that we worship our Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon
him)? Does any of mankind deserve worship? Didn’t Shakespeare die? So how
can a god die?

Does he not know that the Muslims worship Allah, may He be
glorified and exalted? Rather they believe in Muhammad (blessings and peace
of Allah be upon him) and all the other Prophets as messengers sent by
Allah, may He be glorified, to convey His message and remind people of the
necessity of faith, worshipping Allah alone, and following the laws and
regulations that will protect the land and its people, in both their
religious and worldly affairs.

We think that this information is basic Islamic principles
that Muslim children learn before they grow up, but they are not known to
some of those whose main aim is to argue and who focus on presenting
specious arguments. What matters to these people is to present their
specious argument, whatever it may be and no matter what its source, merely
for the purpose of increasing the number of specious arguments, without
respecting the intelligence of the readers or listeners.

Here we also want to ask an important question: who told this
person that the evidence for the Prophethood of our Prophet Muhammad
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) is limited to the linguistic
miracle of the Holy Qur’an only?

Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, supported most of the
Prophets with various miracles and signs to confirm the truth of their
Prophethood. For example, in the case of Moosaa (Moses), his staff turned
into a fast-moving snake, the sea was parted for him, and he put his hand
into his garment and it was healed of its ailment. Allah, may He be
glorified and exalted, said to him (interpretation of the meaning):

“ ‘And throw
your stick!’ But when he saw it moving as if it were a snake, he turned in
flight, and looked not back. (It was said): ‘O Moosa (Moses)! Draw near, and
fear not. Verily, you are of those who are secure.’

Put your hand in your bosom, it will come forth white without
a disease, and draw your hand close to your side to be free from fear (that
which you suffered from the snake, and also by that your hand will return to
its original state). These are two Burhan (signs, miracles, evidences,
proofs) from your Lord to Firaun (Pharaoh) and his chiefs. Verily, they are
the people who are Fasiqoon (rebellious, disobedient to Allah).’”

[al-Qasas 28:31-32].

‘Eesaa (Jesus – peace be upon him) spoke in the cradle as an
infant, and he used to heal those who had been born blind and lepers, and
raise the dead by Allah’s leave, and a table from heaven were sent down to
him for his people.

The Holy Qur’an was sent down to our Prophet Muhammad
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), and he challenged all the Arabs
with it to produce something like it. He spoke of unseen matters of the past
and future, despite the fact that he was unlettered and there were no
scholars of the previous scriptures in his land. He was known for all good
values, generosity and kindness among his people. He was taken by night from
Makkah to al-Masjid al-Aqsa [in Jerusalem; this event is known as the Isra’
or Night Journey] in a single night. The moon was split as a sign for his
people. Water sprang from between his fingers and the pebbles in his hand
glorified Allah… And there were many other signs and miracles to confirm his
Prophethood and his message. All of that does not indicate anything more
than the fact that he was a Messenger from the Lord of the Worlds; the One
Who sent him is the Creator and Provider Who is deserving of worship, to the
exclusion of all others.

This argumentative person should understand that
circumstantial evidence and the laws of Allah that govern His creation are
among the greatest evidence to confirm the Prophethood of the Prophets, and
it is not merely the matter of tangible miracles that people debate and
argue about.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him)
said:

Prophethood includes knowledge and the deeds that a Prophet
must have; it is the noblest of knowledge and the noblest of deeds. How can
we be confused between a true claimant to Prophethood and a liar? How could
it not be clear which of them is telling the truth and which is telling lies
in many ways, especially since the world is not devoid of some prophetic
legacies from the time of Adam until our own time, and the type of teachings
that the Prophets and Messengers brought, and what they called people to and
enjoined them to do, are well-known? There are still some of the teachings
of the Messengers on earth, and people still know some of the teachings of
the Messengers through which they can know what type of teachings the
Messengers brought, and on that basis they are able to differentiate between
those who are messengers and those who are not.

If we assume that a man came at a time when it was still
possible for Messengers to be sent, and he enjoined people to ascribe
partners to Allah and worship idols, and made immorality, wrongdoing and
telling lies permissible, and he did not tell people to worship Allah alone,
or to believe in the Last Day, is there a need to demand a miracle from such
a person? Could there be any doubt that he is lying in his claim?

Even if we assume that he performed what is thought to be a
miracle, it would be known that it was merely a kind of extraordinary feat,
or it was a test or trial. Therefore when the Dajjaal claims divinity, the
miracles that he will perform will not constitute proof that he is telling
the truth, because it is known that his claim cannot be true in and of
itself, and that he is a liar.

End quote from Sharh al-‘Aqeedah al-Asfahaaniyyah
(140).

With regard to our Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace of
Allah be upon him), all circumstantial evidence of that nature is available
to confirm that he was truly a Prophet:

Firstly: the promise of Allah to support the Messengers was
fulfilled for him, and the promise to cause the truth he brought to prevail
was also fulfilled, as was the case for Moosaa (Moses), ‘Eesaa (Jesus) and
Muhammad; their followers filled the world and Allah, may He be glorified
and exalted, wrought vengeance upon their enemies and caused the word of
truth with which they were sent to prevail.

Secondly: he also fulfilled the condition of evidence having
to do with the quality and content of the message he brought. His message
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was of the same nature as
previous messages. It enjoins affirmation of the Oneness of Allah and
prohibits the ascription of partners to Him; it enjoins values and virtues,
and prohibits shameful and evil deeds.

Thirdly: he also fulfilled the condition of personal
character, which refers to the manners and attitudes that the Prophets had
and their absolute honesty, for which they were known among their people,
and similar signs.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him)
said:

The first criterion is the quality and content of the
message, which is what the Negus (ruler of Ethiopia) regarded as proof for
his Prophethood, because when he asked the Muslims about what the Prophet
told people, and asked them to recite Qur’an for him, and they did so, he
said: “This and what Moosa brought came from the same source.”

Before him, Waraqah ibn Nawfal said the same thing, when the
Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) told him about what he
had seen. Waraqah had become a Christian, and he used to write the Gospel in
Hebrew. He said: “This is the Namoos (i.e., Jibreel (Gabriel)) that used to
come to Moosaa.”

The second criterion is personal character, which Heraclius,
the Byzantine ruler, referred to when the Prophet (blessings and peace of
Allah be upon him) wrote a letter to him, inviting him to Islam. Heraclius
asked who of the Arabs was there, and Abu Sufyaan had come with a group of
Quraysh to do trade in Gaza. He summoned them and asked them for information
about the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). He directed
his questions to Abu Sufyaan, and he instructed the others, if he lied, to
say that he was lying. But he found that they agreed with everything he
said. He asked them: Was there any king among his forefathers? They said:
No. He asked them: Did anyone say such things before him? They said: No. He
asked them: Does he have good lineage among you? They said: Yes. He asked
them: Did you ever accuse him of lying before he said what he said? They
said: No, we have never known him to tell a lie. He asked them: Do the lowly
people follow him or the nobles? And they said that the lowly followed him.
He asked them: Are they increasing in number or decreasing? And they said
that they were increasing. He asked them:
Have any of them turned away from his religion after entering it, out of
dissatisfaction? They said: No. He asked: Have you fought him? They said:
Yes. He asked them about the (outcome of) fighting between them and him, and
they said: Sometimes he prevails over us and sometimes we prevail over him.
He asked whether he acted treacherously, and they said that he never acted
treacherously. He asked: What does he instruct you to do? They said: He
instructs us to worship Allah alone, and not to associate anything with Him;
he forbids us to worship that which our fathers worshipped; he instructs us
to pray, give charity, remain chaste and uphold ties of kinship.

These are more than ten issues that the Byzantine ruler asked
about. Then it became clear to them what there was in these issues of
indications. He asked them whether there were any reasons for him to lie or
any signs of lying, and he saw that there were no signs of lying. He asked
them about signs of honesty and truthfulness, and he found them there.

End quote from Sharh al-‘Aqeedah al-Asfahaaniyyah (p.
142)

Look at how Khadeejah (may Allah be pleased with her),
Waraqah ibn Nawfal, the Negus and Heraclius reached the conclusion that the
Prophethood of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was
real by enquiring about the content of his message and his character, with
no need for tangible miracles, and even before hearing the Qur’an and before
the challenge to match it was issued.

This argumentative person should realise that it is not
objective or fair to focus on one particular proof and limit the conclusion
to that. The ways of knowing about the message of the Messengers are many
and varied. If we learn on the basis of certain knowledge about the lives
and character of the Prophets and about their followers and enemies, we will
reach the conclusion, by many means, that they were sincere and were
followers of truth, as it says in Sharh al-Asfahaaniyyah (155)

See also the answers to questions no.
183770 and 182059 

If this person claims that all these ways are valid in the
case of Shakespeare, then he is arrogant and it is not worth debating and
arguing with him. If they were really available, you would see him having
followers who would be called “the cult of Shakespeare”. If he claims that
such a thing does exist, then give yourself a break and do not continue
debating with him. Guard your time and sanity, for not everything that is
said in this world is worth paying attention to. 

And Allah knows best.