This may be preaching to the choir, but over at Choice in Dying Eric has a nice post called “Seeing Muhammed in Context,” a severe critique of Islam.
One thing I hadn’t known is that there seems to be some doubt about Muhammed’s existence:
There is now, apparently, some reasonable doubt that Muhammad himself, as the central figure of the religion, ever existed. At least Robert Spencer believes this to be so, and Tom Holland has pointed out that he is a shadowy figure whose name itself is not mentioned until much later than the time he is supposed to have flourished. The Qur’an, as the supposed revelation directly from God through the medium of an angel, is so obviously a pastiche cribbed from other sources, Jewish, Christian, Zoroastrian, and animistic, and it is, in itself, so unremittingly violent and fascistical in its attitude to believers and unbelievers alike that it does not deserve even to stand with other sacred scriptures, even though all of them have little credence as documents that have been inspired by an other than human sources.
Well, we all know the debate about the historicity of Jesus, but any reader with references to doubts about Mohammed’s should give some references below.
If you’ve read Reza Aslan’s bestseller, No god but God, which to my mind is a complete whitewash of Muhammed, you’ll see that Aslan manages to excuse every one of the Prophet’s reported deeds, including his raiding of caravans and his deflowering of a child bride. That is execrable, but it’s made Aslan is America’s #1 Muslim apologist. He is the go-to source for those who accuse critics of “Islamophobia” and tout Islam as “a religion of peace.” After all, says Aslan, the true message of Islam has simply been deeply corrupted by its adherents in the last five centuries. But of course we are dealing with Islam as it exists, not as it was supposedly taught by its founder.
Eric notes:
Perhaps nothing captures the essence of Muhammad so much as his sexual lust, and its exercise even upon the bodies of children. I was reminded of this by the story of the 8-year-old girl who was recently raped to death by her “husband” in the Yemen. It is important to bear her age in mind, for she was just one year younger than Aisha, one of Muhammad’s “wives,” whose marriage was consummated when she was only 9-years-old. Put Muhammad in that context, and does he seem one whit more worthy of respect than the Yemini pedophile who raped his supposed “wife” to death? Of course, we could pull a “William Lane Craig” on this story, and suppose that it is justified by God’s command. For if ethnic cleansing can be justified by a supposed command of God, why not the rape of an 8-year-old girl? But there is no reasonable argument that can justify either ethnic cleansing or the “marriage” of children, and using a god to justify either is to derogate from the supposed goodness of the god being imagined.
And his analysis of the appeal of Islam, to men at least, makes some sense:
Given the kinds of radicalism and violence to which Islam often gives rise, and the obviously “boys club” aspect of Islam, it is not surprising that young men might well find Islam an attractive proposition. A religion which consists largely in a celebration of masculinity, especially as these are expressed in military conflict and the oppression of women, would be all but irresistible to young men brought up in a culture where both their masculinity is challenged by the equality of women, and their colour, or their lack of achievement at school, have a tendency to relegate them to second-class status.
“In The Shadow Of The Sword”, Tom Holland, 2013.
I just bought that on Sunday! Don’t have any time to read it yet but wanted to learn more about the Late Antiquities.
An excellent book, I highly recommend it.
Did Muhammad Exist? , By Robert Spencer (2012)
http://www.amazon.com/Did-Muhammad-Exist-Inquiry-Obscure/dp/161017061X
It explains the major doubts of the historicity of Mohammed. Proofs that until late 7th century, an Islamic kingdom in middle east did not recognize Mohammed or Koran, in actual coins that depicted a kind of christianity (a cross).
The Mohammed in Koran is most likely a composite of actual persons and idealized persons that represent the idea for an arabic kingdom.
Very similar to Roman needs of a religion that is accepted by the empire of the time … so that Constantine created christianity ..
//
++
+++
The question of Muhammad’s historicity is an almost exact parallel for that of Jesus. He was a larger-than-life figure who upset and overturned the local sociopolitical system, yet no contemporary mentions of him are made. The only way we know of him is through a generations-later text that was the subject of great political and sectarian wrangling…and, ohbytheway, his life is not only inextricable from the preposterous (dancing with the angels, flying off into the sunset on a wingèd horse, etc.) but a patchwork quilt of then-popular mythic heroic archetypes.
Even if there was an individual with that name central to the founding of the movement — and there’s no good reason to think so and every reason to think otherwise — we’re still left with the problem of said individual being so radically different from the Muhammad of the Q’ran that it’s laughable to equate the two.
Cheers,
b&
sub
The possible nonexistence of Mohammed is discussed in Ibn Warraq’s Why I am not a Muslim, but that is not a primary source. Lots of references though.
To paraphrase Henry Ford the first: “All religion is bunk!”
As if what’s related here isn’t bad enough we are now meant to believe that the Qur’an contain “Islamic science”; which makes it plain that those who claim as much don’t have the slightest incling of what science is or how it works.
Ooh look, a bright shiny thingy, let’s grab it and claim it’s ours.
Not sure if it touches on Muhammad’s historicity, But Hagarism by Patricia Crone and Michael Cook. was a radical examination of the early traditions that made up Islam. So radical, in fact, that the authors, under fear of Muslim reprisal, ended up disowning the work.
(There seems to be a problem loading this page at the moment. My initial attempt at posting disappeared into cyberspace, but may turn up again. Precis’d version 🙂
You mean this book?
5 copies available at around £390/ $450/ € 400, which is bloody expensive.
I wasn’t aware that this idea had been touted seriously. For some time I’ve occasionally pushed the meme that Jews, Christians, Muslims and Mormons are all just different septs of Judaism, who differ on the fairly trivial question of who the “last inspired prophet” was. But to be honest, I do it to annoy people who don’t like being grouped with Mormons (all the rest of the above list), or who don’t like being grouped with anyone else (Mormons).
I’m almost interested to find a copy of this book and read it. Almost. But not a couple of day’s earnings worth.
Vee haff veys uff making zee web talk
Looks like you have your choice of PDF or “deja vu” formats, and either the 1977 or the 1980 editions. You’re welcome.
Steve
whoops… “web” ==> “veb”
Yep, that’s it. And as Anonypuss says, it’s available as a PDF online.
I’m not sure how it’s received today. Probably not very well I should imagine. If you Google ‘Hagarism’ the second hit is a scornful article on the book’s qualities.
I haven’t read all of Hagarism, so can’t offer any definitive opinion, but I seem to remember Ibn Warraq commenting favourably on it in ‘Why I’m Not a Muslim’, and Robert Price on The Bible Geek also mentions it frequently when discussing Islamic origins. Hardly mainstream scholars, I admit, but then when it comes to religious scholarship I’m coming to respect the ‘mainstream’ less and less these days.
If the above link doesn’t seem to work (getting mixed results at the moment), just try going here:
http://libgen.org/
and putting hagarism in the search box.
That looks … a VERY useful resource.
/
I find it interesting that Reza Aslan excuses Mohammed’s ‘questionable’ behaviour. This would suggest that (a) he was worried about upsetting other Muslims, and/or (b) he is less critical of his own religion.
Considering his defense of his book ‘Zealot’, “I am a religious scholar who has studied Christianity for decades”, that would appear to undermine his defense.
Reza Aslan wants to appeal to mainstream liberals, who want to believe that all religions are the same and teach peace, tolerance and equality at their core.
Previously his message had been: “Mohammed was really just like Jesus.” With “Zealot”, he simply added: “And Jesus was actually more like Mohammed”. It is the same message, only presented from opposite ends.
Aslan could have picked or presented any number of the numerous historical Jesus hypotheses. But he chose the theory that fits into his form of islamic apolegetics.
Who is Harry Potter just like? Frodo?
Ibn Warraq’s 1995 book “Why I am not a muslim” is still the most comprehensive book about Islam that any new atheist should read. It is a criticism of Islam from our point of view and contains a chapter on the questionable historicity of Muhammed. He also followed up in the year 2000 with “The Quest for the Historical Muhammad”.
Both books predate 9/11, so they are not entwined with the whole histrionic war on terror debate that ensued.
The historicity question is in my consideration the achilles’ heel of Islam and the most promising approach to push Islam into moderation.
Aslan seems like he is probably a genuinely nice person, but he is a classic example of a Sophisticated Theologian™.
His ideas about religion, which he energetically defends while accusing critic’s ideas about religion as being “profoundly unsophisticated,” are nebulous crap with little to no resemblance to religion as it is practiced by the large majority of believers.
He is one who thinks that culture and religion are completely separate things. I have never heard (or read) him admit to religion being a major cause of any specific or general nasty behavior. He virtually always (no exceptions in my experience) blames it on culture, and socioeconomic issues as well, while claiming that it is “profoundly unsophisticated” to blame religion.
He is also one of those that claims that it doesn’t matter if anything of a religion’s beliefs or holy writings are accurate. That to consider that to be of any importance is to miss the whole point of religion, and exhibits a “profoundly unsophisticated” approach to understanding religion.
Oh, and since he has studied religions he is an expert and you are not so, who are you gonna trust?
Aslan would be a bit more credible if he was just as critical of the “unsophisticated” understanding of 90% of the subscribing members of whatever religion as he is of the “unsophisticated” understanding of sceptical critics. But that never seems to happen. It seems to be a double standard.
sub
Not positive evidence as much as the lack of it, the lack of historicity.
As Ben notes, this mythical figure should have been mentioned in contemporary texts. But in an almost exact parallel to Jesus he is first mentioned generations later, about 150 years after the alleged period. And many miles away from where eye witnesses or social elaborations such as statues or a grave should have been present.
“… historical works by writers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries of the Muslim era (AH – 8th and 9th century CE).[34] These include the traditional Muslim biographies of Muhammad (the sira literature), which provide further information on Muhammad’s life.[35]
The earliest surviving written sira (biographies of Muhammad and quotes attributed to him) is Ibn Ishaq’s Life of God’s Messenger written c. 767 CE (150 AH). The work is lost, but was used verbatim at great length by Ibn Hisham and Al-Tabari.[36][37] Another early source is the history of Muhammad’s campaigns by al-Waqidi (death 207 of Muslim era), and the work of his secretary Ibn Sa’d al-Baghdadi (death 230 of Muslim era).[34]”
[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad#Early_biographies ]
“The 8th century BL Add. 14,643 was published by Wright who first brought to attention the mention of an early date of 947 AG (635-6 CE).[37] The contents of this manuscript has puzzled many scholars for their apparent lack of coherence as it contains an assembly of texts with diverse nature.[38] In relation to Arabs of Mohamed, there are two important dates mentioned in this manuscript.
“AG 945, indiction VII: On Friday, 4 February, [i.e., 634 CE / Dhul Qa‘dah 12 AH] at the ninth hour, there was a battle between the Romans and the Arabs of Mụhammad [Syr. tayyāyē d-Ṃhmt] in Palestine twelve miles east of Gaza. The Romans fled, leaving behind the patrician YRDN (Syr. BRYRDN), whom the Arabs killed. Some 4000 poor villagers of Palestine were killed there, Christians, Jews and Samaritans. The Arabs ravaged the whole region. AG 947, indiction IX: The Arabs invaded the whole of Syria and went down to Persia and conquered it; the Arabs climbed mountain of Mardin and killed many monks there in [the monasteries of] Kedar and Benōthō. There died the blessed man Simon, doorkeeper of Qedar, brother of Thomas the priest.[39]”
It is the first date above which is of great importance as it provides the first explicit reference to Muhammad in a non-Muslim source. The account is usually identified with the battle of Dathin.[40] According to Hoyland, “its precise dating inspires confidence that it ultimately derives from first-hand knowledge”.[41]”
[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Muhammad ]
So not only isn’t there a mention of this myth figure itself in the outside world by the time there starts to be a mass production of biographies in the islamic world. But the reference is to the (warring) religion.
The remaining references are even more fragmentary, non-descript (often describing a “Muhammad” in the way of the many alternative messianic figures mentioned around Palestine) or disputed.
Compare with the historicity of similar conquerors or state founders like Alexander. Even our first kings around here in Sweden 400 years later (~ 1000 CE) has quite a historical record in early texts, contemporary runes, archaeology of royal settlements and graves, despite being in the transition between asa and christian beliefs.
Also to note with these early fragments is that they would have been subject to the same urge to retrofit a myth figure into them as we know happened with the Jesus myth.
Which makes identification of genuine eye witness description or biographies difficult.
American atheists/skeptics seem to be just about the only group that is both highly critical of Islam while not buying into a lot of bogus right-wing myths about Obama being allegedly a secret Muslim, or the Muslim brotherhood being responsible for 9/11 as three dense Senators from America recently implied.
IMO, politically correct niceness to Islam is a backlash against such right-wing mythology, putting us in the same quagmire re Islam now as we were with Communism, 60 years ago. Yes Soviet Russia was a military security threat to the USA, and an oppressive state. No, floridation of water was not a Communist plot, nor was Dwight Eisenhower secretly Communist, etc.
When informed and good-faith criticism is drowned out by paranoia driven criticism, the body politic is in trouble.
Yes.
There’s a lot of this kind of mindless groupthink on the far left. Anyone who criticizes Islam is an “islamophobe.” Anyone who criticizes an Al Gore-style response to climate change is a “denialist.” Anyone who criticizes gun control proposals is a “gun nut.” And so on.
From where you sit, I suppose almost everybody is on the far left.
From where you sit, I suppose almost everybody to the right of Michael Moore is on the far right.
An Islamic advertising exec. made this pitch for Lynx’s latest promotional campaign.
“Imagine this: Heaven as a Garden; a Garden through which rivers flow; the Garden of Eden; the Garden of delight; the blessed enjoy luxuries of many kinds; they recline on couches, they eat fruit, they have wine served to them by ever-youthful boys; there is milk and honey and ever-flowing springs; they experience forgiveness, peace and satisfaction of the soul.
There are wide-eyed houris, maidens who are companions of the blessed; they are spotless virgins, amorous, like of age; they resemble hidden pearls or ruby and coral, with swelling breasts, untouched by men or jinn, who modestly keep their eyes cast down and are enclosed in pavilions.”
Boss Lynx says, “Yes, that’s it!”
Adverts exec. thinks, “Ha, ha. Subliminal Islamic propaganda. And every idea nicked from the Koran. Ker-ching!”
Interesting article in this month’s English version of ‘Le Monde Diplomatique’, on buyas, (from the English ‘boy’).
There’s a new fashion amongst young Saudi women. I quote, “Buya…describes young women who wear masculine clothes that mask their feminine form: they avoid close-fitting clothes and wear men’s shirts, football shirts or other loose tops and sometimes a band to flatten their breasts. This differs from the Islamic way of concealing body shape, intended to hide physical female attributes but leaving no doubts as to gender…” The article also mentions “deviant” symbols such as skulls, piercings in the chin, mouth, top of ears or eyebrows. Amélie le Renard is the author, “The fashion for boy-girls”, the title.
I have no idea if this story is true, you make your own mind up.
I had an acquaintance in the British Navy who told me this. Bear in mind that he was the manager of the on-board shit-house orderlies (as Spike Milligan would say), natheless he swore it was gospel.
Apparently, the bus-bombers in Israel a few years back were found to have wrapped their genitalia in what can only be described as adult super-strength nappies; in order, presumably, to retain the use of their tackle for the houris with swelling breasts who awaited them in Paradise after they had done God’s self-immolating and murderous work in Tel Aviv.
Religion poisons every thong.
I think that there was an Arab figure like Muhammed. Certainly some early texts such as the ‘Teaching of Jacob’ mention a prophet and dismiss him as too warlike to be a prophet. I think Robert Spencer is on to something when he says Islam didn’t exist in the early 7th century. There is a BBC Documentary ‘Islam: The Untold Story’ that comes to a similar conclusion. I know the BBC documentaries and Spencer’s writings aren’t scholarship in a professional sense but so much real scholarship on Islam in virtually inaccessible to a non-scholar. I wish scholars would write survey history for the general audience, but they don’t.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122669909279629451.html
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/dispute-among-islam-scholars-did-muhammad-ever-really-live-a-579052.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Syro-Aramaic_Reading_of_the_Koran
A number of important German scholars, as well as at least one at Notre Dame, work in this tradition.
If Muhammad wasn’t real, then ascended to Heaven on a white, winged horse?
Religion has convinced people that there’s an invisible man … living in the sky. Who watches everything you do every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a list of ten specific things he doesn’t want you to do. And if you do any of these things, he will send you to a special place, of burning and fire and smoke and torture and anguish for you to live forever, and suffer, and suffer, and burn, and scream, until the end of time. But he loves you. He loves you. He loves you and he needs money.”
– George Carlin
That says it all!
I’ll see you George Carlin and raise you South Park [Season 5, Ep 13]:
sub
I’d like to comment the last part attractivity.
IMHO, those “holy” books are testimonies of their times, when specialization was not so large. They have the ambition of explaining everything. For whoever is in doubt, it’s a great trap. I’ve seen many boys & girls converting, to christianism, or to islam, usually when in despair. Some of them even escaped criminal behaviours in the same time : for them, a wrong but comprehensive reference was better than no reference at all.
The “boys club” aspect is probably what makes those books(not only quran) so dangerous, but it’s by far not the main appeal of them. I know a colleague who stopped compulsive gambling when her husband promised her to go together to Mekkah.
Few years ago, I did receive a leaflet from the local evangelical church. It began by “You are in need of certainties…”. Everything is there : life is tough, people are lost, and those books of everything give them directions. Wrong ones, as everything is wrong. But directions. And when you’re lost, a wrong direction seem muuuuuch better than no directions at all.
That’s why I’m not confident those books will disappear soon. Their appeal is far too strong for people in despair. Unfortunately.
sub
I agree with the sentiment of the article, but the author needs an editor. FTFA, the following is a single sentence. Can you count the commas? LOL: “But, as if to reinforce the conflict that lies at the heart of the Qur’an, the story of Islam’s prophet Muhammad displays the features of a man consumed by bloodlust, sexual lust, and cupidity that makes him, of all supposedly holy men, one of the least deserving of respect or emulation; and yet, in expressing a clearly masculine ideal, in which women are mere counters, and human life is meant to serve the purposes of Allah and his prophet, which may taken, for the purposes of aggrandising his followers and their victories, with the casualness of a stockman slaughtering a goat for dinner, Islam, as a male cult, has underwritten, throughout history, a martial patriarchy that has an immediate appeal to the male ego, whose testosterone fuelled desires it sanctifies and consecrates. “
I’m wondering if there is a regional canon of Arab(ic) literature from the late 6th century/early 7th century at all. To say he “isn’t mentioned” in contemporary records when there may not be contemporary writings is problematical. But if there are many contemporary sources from the region and these do not mention Mohammed, Islam, or the events in question then there obviously would be a problem.
I don’t know if this issue is resolvable since a critical analysis of Quranic scripture and contemporary archaeology is unlikely under the current regime. Saudi Arabia impedes discovery of pre-Islamic archaeology or assessment of pre-Islamic literature. There might be something in Yemen, or Ethiopia (referential to the Hijra). But it’s not like the area was attached to a society with a semblance of a literary tradition like the Roman Empire.
Reblogged this on π's blog.