Historicity of Muhammad _Did Muhammad Exist?,

His life, his examples and his psychology
User avatar
manfred
Posts: 11602
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: Historicity of Muhammad _Did Muhammad Exist?,

Post by manfred »

Links please., That is not true and there is NO proof of that. His first wife Khadija was alive all the way until alleged Islam is 10 year old. You are obviously taking that from Sirah and hadith but according that he had more protectors with in a year after her death ...
Well, in fact we know that Khadija in fact for some 25 years provided financial security for some 25 years for Mohammed, and the sources also say that she was instrumental in "setting up" his career as a "prophet". She was his ONLY wife all that time. She died 2 years before he left for Medina. Mohammed is not reported to carry on his business, so, for a time, he lived off the his inheritance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khadija_bint_Khuwaylid" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And sure, there must have been some annoyance with Mohammed in Mecca, but to can in an a out "persecution" is perhaps exaggerated. Abu Talib, Mohammed's uncle, had kept a controlling and protection hand over Mohammed, we are told, but he also had died just a year before Khadija.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Talib_ ... l-Muttalib" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So two important supports had gone out of his life in short succession, and his position in Mecca became more and more precarious. I am not convinced he was in actual physical danger, but it must have been clear to him that his attempts to gain control in Mecca would not succeed with his existing strategy.

He would would have left with frustration, bitterness and anger, feeling that all he had tried had failed, and he needed to change strategy, or maybe give up. In addition, by the time he packed his bags his financial situation would be tight, as he had used his late wife's resources for 2 years and created any form of income of his own . It was this financial pressure that was the decisive factor in the way Mohammed evolved in Medina. People looked at him for leadership, and he simply could not see any other option to the path he chose.

So, he did what worked: He changed his approach, and became the "prophet-warlord".

I would agree that surely there was hostility to Mohammed's actions in Mecca, but not to the extent that his life was in danger, as some sources say. As you say, by the time many of the hadith were recorded much myth-building had already happened, and some things got exaggerated and embroidered.
Jesus: "Ask and you will receive." Mohammed: "Take and give me 20%"
yeezevee
Posts: 6547
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 9:17 pm

Re: Historicity of Muhammad _Did Muhammad Exist?,

Post by yeezevee »

manfred wrote:
Links please., That is not true and there is NO proof of that. His first wife Khadija was alive all the way until alleged Islam is 10 year old. You are obviously taking that from Sirah and hadith but according that he had more protectors with in a year after her death ...
..................
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khadija_bint_Khuwaylid" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

.Abu Talib, Mohammed's uncle, had kept a controlling and protection hand over Mohammed,we are told, but he also had died just a year before Khadija.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Talib_ ... l-Muttalib" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
well we got to go little deeper than that wiki links on Muhammad, his life and his character "manfred" .. I wrote about that character from Sirah & hadith here and there and I will put that here in this thread again...

................
He would would have left with frustration, bitterness and anger, feeling that all he had tried had failed, and he needed to change strategy, or maybe give up. In addition, by the time he packed his bags his financial situation would be tight, as he had used his late wife's resources for 2 years and created any form of income of his own . It was this financial pressure that was the decisive factor in the way Mohammed evolved in Medina. People looked at him for leadership, and he simply could not see any other option to the path he chose.
well he may have been like that.... "he would have left with frustration, bitterness and anger,.". such statements are obviously your assumptions and understanding of Muhammad from whatever you read.. But even that real alleged history of Muhammad from hadith doesn't give that information
So, he did what worked: He changed his approach, and became the "prophet-warlord".

I would agree that surely there was hostility to Mohammed's actions in Mecca, but not to the extent that his life was in danger, as some sources say. As you say, by the time many of the hadith were recorded much myth-building had already happened, and some things got exaggerated and embroidered.
You have to give me Hadith or Sirah references on that ., I am not sure what kind of myths you are talking, but all/most of the Myth that is created around Muhammad are after he allegedly moved to Madina or after his alleged death. In fact most of these silly myths from hadith put hims as criminal or a stupid guy ., Do you see any Muhammad Character and myths from Quran?? ..
Last edited by yeezevee on Tue Jun 17, 2014 12:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Nosuperstition
Posts: 3815
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:45 am

Re: Historicity of Muhammad _Did Muhammad Exist?,

Post by Nosuperstition »

yeezevee wrote:Shoko Asahara , Jim Jones , Charles Manson, Joseph Di Mambro, Marshall Applewhite, David Koresh .. those are deadly cults and plenty more so-called new age religious movements have come out None of the old ones and none of the news one can beat Islam.. if you consider Islam as cult...
Now when cults of Rajneesh and Osho caused some disturbance or nuisance,Western nations are said to have kicked them out.So I think they will once again kick out hard line Islamic cults as and when they perceive that they have had enough.
palli or halli in Dravidian languages means a village just like gaav in Aryan languages means a village.palli or halli in Aryan Mauryan Imperial era around 200 B.C designates a tribal hamlet.So many of those in South India are indeed descendants of tribals and are still keeping up that heritage.
yeezevee
Posts: 6547
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 9:17 pm

Re: Historicity of Muhammad _Did Muhammad Exist?,

Post by yeezevee »

Nosuperstition wrote:
yeezevee wrote:Shoko Asahara , Jim Jones , Charles Manson, Joseph Di Mambro, Marshall Applewhite, David Koresh .. those are deadly cults and plenty more so-called new age religious movements have come out None of the old ones and none of the news one can beat Islam.. if you consider Islam as cult...
Now when cults of Rajneesh and Osho caused some disturbance or nuisance,Western nations are said to have kicked them out.So I think they will once again kick out hard line Islamic cults [/b]as and when they perceive that they have had enough.

Good ..good.. hello Mr. Nosuperstition"., I am not sure where you are going with cults that started by Indians or from stories of Indians., but you may not know Muslims are the 2nd largest population of America and Mr. Barack Hussein Obama II is the 44th and current President of the United States is also a son of Converted Muslims. But that is irrelevant for the "Historicity of Muhammad _Did Muhammad Exist?,"

So let me add a counter argument from Islamic intellectuals on that issue of "Did Muhammad Exist?,.."
Tom Holland. The paper will address each of the main claims made by Holland.

1. The claim that there is no valid historical evidence in the seventh century on the origins of Islam:

Tom Holland's assertion that there is no valid historical evidence for the seventh century origins of Islam is historically inaccurate. This notion cannot be sustained in light of the contemporary non-Islamic material evidence. For instance, early Christian chronicles in the seventh century elaborate on the origins of Islam, the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), and some of the laws practised by the early Muslims. In the documentary Holland admits the existence of these Christian narratives, but seems to dismiss their validity without justification. Below are some examples of these chronicles:

Doctrina Jacobi written in 635 CE

A document called Doctrina Jacobi written only two years after the death of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) clearly mentions that a prophet had appeared amongst the Arabs:

"I, Abraham, went off to Sykamina and referred the matter to an old man very well-versed in the Scriptures. I asked him: “What is your view, master and teacher, of the prophet who has appeared among the Saracens”.(1)

Here it can be clearly seen that a prophet among Saracens [i.e. the Arabs] is mentioned. The questions is: who was this prophet among Arabs? And what does a prophet do? The Prophet of Arabs was none other than Muhammad (peace be upon him) and it appears that the meaning of the term “prophet” was clearly understood by the author of this narrative. A prophet, in a Judeo-Christian sense, leads his people and teaches them about God and this is exactly what the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) did. A Christian chronicler couldn't have understood the term differently. Holland’s claim that there is no valid evidence of Islam before the early Islamic conquests is anachronistic. If there is evidence of a prophet among Arabs, why then one should doubt the existence of the teachings of that prophet?

A record of the Arab conquest of Syria written in 637 CE

A record of the Arab conquest of Syria written in 637 CE, just 5 years after the death of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), clearly mentions him by name. Interestingly, the date of the document agrees with the best Arab date for the battle of Yarmuk:

"...and in January, they took the word for their lives did the sons of Emesa, and many villages were ruined with killing by the Arabs of Mụhammad and a great number of people were killed and captives were taken from Galilee as far as Bēth." (2)

In this record, the name of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is clearly mentioned. Holland’s claim that the Prophet does not appear in records until 60 years after his death is historically inaccurate.

Sebeos, Bishop of the Bagratunis (Writing c.660 CE)

A mid seventh century account of Islam comes from Sebeos who was a bishop of the House of Bagratunis. This chronicle suggests that he lived through many of the events he relates. As for Muhammad (peace be upon him), he had the following to say:

"At that time a certain man from along those same sons of Ishmael, whose name was Mahmet [i.e., Mụhammad], a merchant, as if by God's command appeared to them as a preacher [and] the path of truth. He taught them to recognize the God of Abraham, especially because he was learned and informed in the history of Moses. Now because the command was from on high, at a single order they all came together in unity of religion. Abandoning their vain cults, they turned to the living God who had appeared to their father, Abraham. So, Mahmet legislated for them: not to eat carrion, not to drink wine, not to speak falsely, and not to engage in fornication. He said: with an oath God promised this land to Abraham and his seed after him forever. And he brought about as he promised during that time while he loved Ishmael. But now you are the sons of Abraham and God is accomplishing his promise to Abraham and his seed for you. Love sincerely only the God of Abraham, and go and seize the land which God gave to your father Abraham. No one will be able to resist you in battle, because God is with you." (3)

This narrative by Sebeos clearly undermines Holland's assertion that there are no valid historical records elaborating on the life, teachings and mission of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). In fact this particular narrative suggests that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) had taught his companions about Islam and the tenets of this faith were well established and understood by the time Sebeos was writing his chronicle. Holland, for some reason, did not justify his dismissal of these important non-Muslim testimonies as to the established existence of Islam as a way of life in the mid seventh century. Some more evidence of the early mention of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) can be seen here:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Histor ... lysaw.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Holland appears to have turned a blind eye to the rich Islamic historical tradition. There are no “black holes” and there is no missing information. There is plenty of material evidence available to substantiate the accuracy of the Islamic narrative on the early history of Islam. For instance, there are thousands of inscriptions on rocks in Saudi Arabia confirming the chronological accuracy of the Islamic historical records such as Hadith and Sira/Maghazi literature. One such inscription can be found here:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Histor ... csaud.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

This inscription states ‘In the name of Allah, I, Zuhayr, wrote [this] at the time Umar died in the year four and twenty (i.e. 24 AH)’. This dated early text confirms the established existence of the Islamic Hijri calendar, the truth of the event of Hijrah (migration) of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), the existence of Umar bin Khattab (the second Caliph of Islam), and the accuracy of the Islamic chronology, as according the Islamic historical records, the second Caliph of Islam died in the year 24 AH (644 CE). Also, there is an undated early seventh century inscription, which documents the Islamic Shahadah proclamation. It can be found here:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Histor ... amid3.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

There is also plenty of Papyri evidence available to confirm the chronological as well as the factual accuracy of the Islamic narrative. Some of this papyri evidence can be witnessed here:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Papyri/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Why would Holland dismiss all of this visible evidence?

2. Unjustified rejection of the Islamic narrative:

Tom Holland’s presentation was clearly biased in the programme, as he ignored other scholarly views that would call his approach into question. For example, Michael Cook, a historian specialising in early Islamic history explains the importance of early non-Muslim accounts of the origins of Islam:

"What does this material tell us? We may begin with the major points on which it agrees with the Islamic tradition. It precludes any doubts as to whether Muhammad was a real person: he is named in a Syriac source that is likely to date from the time of the conquests, and there is an account of him in a Greek source of the same period. From the 640s we have confirmation that the term muhajir was a central one in the new religion, since its followers are known as 'Magaritai' or 'Mahgraye' in Greek and Syriac respectively. At the same time, a papyrus of 643 is dated 'year twenty two', creating a strong presumption that something did happen in AD 622. The Armenian chronicler of the 660s attests that Muhammad was a merchant, and confirms the centrality of Abraham in his preaching. The Abrahamic sanctuary appears in an early source dated (insecurely) to the 670s." (4)

Holland's rejection of the Islamic narrative lacks academic rigour. Commenting on Holland's approach Peter Webb, who teaches Classical Arabic literature at SOAS, the University of London, explains the "resilient" and "robust" nature of the Islamic tradition:

"Over the past century, the Muslim tradition has been challenged by many academics and it has proven remarkably resilient in its own defence...but the Muslim account of history, the textual integrity of the Koran and the mnemonic capacity of oral traditions are more robust than Holland gives them credit...few scholars today would claim it was entirely fabricated. Holland would have done better to adopt a cautious and sensitive approach to the Arabic sources, rather than abandoning them in favour of a sensational rewriting of history." (5)

Professor Robert Hoyland from the University of Oxford highlights how conclusions similar to Holland's, including the view that Mecca was in a different place, is a result of not studying the Islamic material and developing scenarios not based on evidence:

"..the historical memory of the Muslim community is more robust than some have claimed. For example, many of the deities, kings and tribes of the pre-Islamic Arabs that are depicted by ninth-century Muslim historians also feature in the epigraphic record, as do many of the rulers and governors of the early Islamic state. This makes it difficult to see how historical scenarios that require for their acceptance a total discontinuity in the historical memory of the Muslim community - such as that Muhammad did not exist, the Quran was not written in Arabic, Mecca was originally in a different place etc. - can really be justified. Many of these scenarios rely on absence of evidence, but it seems a shame to make such a recourse when there are so many very vocal forms of material evidence still waiting to be studied." (6)

3. Rejecting the Islamic oral tradition:

As discussed above, Holland's approach is inherently biased as he unjustifiably rejects the entire corpus of the Islamic tradition, including the oral Prophetic traditions. Patricia Crone asserts in the documentary that with oral traditions "you remember what you want to remember". With this assertion Holland attempts to undermine the entire science of Hadith (Prophetic traditions). The science of the Prophetic traditions is based upon scrutinising the isnad (chain of narrations) and the matn (the text). Nabia Abbot, a prominent academic who has conducted extensive study on the Prophetic traditions, explains how the growth of these traditions was as a result of parallel and multiple chains of transmission which highlights that these traditions are trustworthy and a valid source of historical information. She writes:

"...the traditions of Muhammad as transmitted by his Companions and their Successors were, as a rule, scrupulously scrutinised at each step of the transmission, and that the so called phenomenal growth of Tradition in the second and third centuries of Islam was not primarily growth of content, so far as the hadith of Muhammad and the hadith of the Companions are concerned, but represents largely the progressive increase in parallel and multiple chains of transmission." (7)

Harald Motzki, an academic on Hadith literature, has similar sentiments. In an essay that appeared in the Journal of Near Eastern Studies he concludes that the Prophetic traditions are an important and useful type of source concerning the study of early Islam:

"While studying the Musannaf of `Abd al-Razzaq, I came to the conclusion that the theory championed by Goldziher, Schacht and in their footsteps many others - myself included - which in general, reject hadith literature as a historically reliable sources for the first century AH, deprives the historical study of early Islam of an important and a useful type of source." (8)

Hence, even a sceptic like Motzki couldn't resist the strength of the preservation the Islamic Prophetic tradition. On what basis then people like Holland reject the entire Islamic literary corpus?

4. The absurdity of rejecting the oral tradition:

Even if we were to follow Holland's line of enquiry, it would lead us to absurdities. The philosophical implications of rejecting the Prophetic traditions are quite damning. In epistemology - which is narrowly defined as the study of knowledge and belief - testimony is considered as one of the sources of knowledge, and when applied properly it can form justified beliefs. Testimony is a valid source of knowledge only when it comes from a reliable source especially if there are multiple sources in agreement. Obviously there are conditions as to how we can use testimony, but in the majority cases we consider testimony as a valid source of knowledge. For instance, take our certainty on the fact that China exists. Many people have never been to China, eaten Chinese food in China or spoken to someone in China. All they have as evidence is a map of the world and people telling them they have travelled to China and others claiming to be from China but is this sufficient? However, if we examine why we have such a high level of certainty that China exists, regardless of the above questions, we will conclude that it is due to recurrent testimony. Recurrent testimony is when such a large number of people have reported a claim to knowledge (such as the existence of China) that it is impossible for them to agree upon a lie or to simultaneously lie. This is accentuated by the fact that most of these people never met and lived in different places and different times. Therefore to claim that they have lied is tantamount to propose the existence of an impossible conspiracy.

Linking this to the Prophetic traditions, not only do we have mass testimony of events and statements of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), we have a detailed science dedicated to authenticate these traditions. Prophetic traditions consist of two components: isnad (chain of narrations) and matn (text). Each of these have detailed criteria that scrutinise the chain and the text to a degree that leaves very little room for doubt. To reject these traditions is tantamount to rejecting facts such as the existence of China or the entirety of history, as these events have been verified via recurrent testimony also. Moreover, each Prophetic tradition has been scrutinised more rigorously than any historical fact we have with us today. Thousands of companions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) narrated reports from him and these reports were then transmitted to subsequent generations with maximum care and authenticity. An anonymous report or a narration originating from an unknown source was immediately rejected. Companions such as Abdullah bin Umar, Anas bin Malik, Abu Hurairah, Aysha, Hudaifah bin Yamaan and many more narrated reports from the Prophet and they were then passed onto the next generation. A very good treatment of this subject can be found in M. M. Azami’s “Studies in Early Hadith Literature”.

The criteria used to verify prophetic traditions are summarised below:

Some criteria for the evaluation of Isnad

The unblemished and undisputed character of the narrator was the most important consideration for the acceptance of a prophetic tradition. A branch of the science of hadith ('ilm al-hadith) known as asma' ar-rijal (the biographies of the people) was developed to evaluate the credibility of narrators. The following are a few of the criteria utilized for this purpose:

The name, nickname, title, parentage and occupation of the narrator should be known.
The original narrator should have stated that he heard the hadith directly from the Prophet.
If a narrator referred his hadith to another narrator, the two should have lived in the same period and have had the possibility of meeting each other.
At the time of hearing and transmitting the hadith, the narrator should have been physically and mentally capable of understanding and remembering it.
The narrator should have been known as a pious and virtuous person.
The narrator should not have been accused of having lied, given false evidence or committed a crime.
The narrator should not have spoken against other reliable people.
The narrator's religious beliefs and practices should have been known to be correct.
The narrator should not have carried out and practiced peculiar religious beliefs of his own.

Some criteria for the evaluation of Man

The text should have been stated in plain and simple language as this was the undisputed manner of speech of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).
A text in non-Arabic or containing indecent language was rejected (for the same reason as above).
A text prescribing heavy punishment for minor sins or exceptionally large reward for small virtues was rejected.
A text which referred to actions that should have been commonly known and practiced by others but were not known and practiced was rejected.
A text contrary to the basic teachings of the Qur'an was rejected.
A text contrary to another established prophetic tradition was rejected.
A text inconsistent with historical facts was rejected.

Extreme care was taken to ensure the text was the original narration of the Prophet and not the sense of what the narrator heard. The meaning of the Prophet tradition was accepted only when the narrator was well known for his piety and integrity of character.

A text by an obscure narrator which was not known during the age of the Prophet's companions or of the subsequent generation was rejected.

It is clear from the above that the criteria for verifying the Prophetic traditions is comprehensive and robust. Even in the philosophy of history we do not find such comprehensive criteria.
5. The textual Islamic tradition:

Holland continues to espouse his uninformed perspective by claiming that there is an absence of textual evidence from the Islamic narrative. In response to this there are a myriad of written works in the early period of Islam. Below is a list of some of the early works:

Saheefah Saadiqah: Compiled by Abdullaah Ibn ‘Amr ibn al-Aas during the life of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). His treatise is composed of about 1000 prophetic traditions and it remained secure and preserved.

Saheefah Saheehah: Compiled by Humaam Ibn Munabbih. He was from the famous students of Abu Hurairah (the eminent companion of the Prophet). He wrote all the prophetic traditions from his teacher. Copies of this manuscript are available from libraries in Berlin and Damascus.

Saheefah Basheer Ibn Naheek: Ibn Naheek was also a student of Abu Hurairah. He gathered and wrote a treatise of Prophetic traditions which he read to Abu Hurairah, before they departed and the former verified it. (9)

One of the early Hadith compilations was Muatta of Imam Malik , compiled by Malik bin Anas (d. 179 AH/795 CE). A fragmentary papyri manuscript of this collection from the time of the author is extant to this day. It can be seen here:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/PERF731.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

This clearly shows that the Hadith literature existed in textual form and was written with extreme care and enthusiasm. Malik bin Anas was a student of Nafi’, who was a student of Abdullah bin Umar and Abdullah narrated directly from the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). This is an uninterrupted chain of Hadith (also known as the Golden Chain). Malik narrates extensively from Nafi’ in his book and all these reports reach the Prophet Muhammad directly and some of these reports can be verified in manuscript form in international libraries.

In light of the above, the claim that there were no hadith documentated in the early seventh century is a false one, and clearly undermines the integrity of the programme. All authentic Hadith literature can be traced back to the Prophet and much of this literature existed in written form in the early days of Islam.

6. Further baseless assumptions:

Holland's unjustified rejection of the oral and textual Islamic tradition forces him to attempt a coherent alternative. Admitting that he cannot do this, many times describing his source of information as a "black hole", he uses certain Quranic verses in an attempt to justify his revisionist approach to the Islamic narrative. Holland uses the story of the Prophet Lot and the so-called ambiguous mention of the city of Mecca as means to justify his alternative theory.
The Story of Lot

Holland argues that the Qur'an alludes to places, landscapes and geography that are not descriptive of Mecca and the immediate surrounding areas. He claims that this implies that the Qur'an originates from a location other than Mecca or southern Arabia. He mentions the following verse of the Qur'an:

"And indeed, Lot was among the messengers. [So mention] when We saved him and his family, all, except his wife among those who remained [with the evildoers]. Then We destroyed the others. And indeed, you pass by them in the morning. And at night. Then will you not use reason?" (10)

Holland claims that the words "you pass by them in the morning and at night" indicate a place outside of Mecca because the ruins are nowhere to be found in Mecca. With this conclusion Holland makes some bold assumptions. He assumes that Meccans did not travel. This is a blunder as the historian Ira M. Lapidus in his book, "A History of Islamic Societies", clearly states that the Arabs in Mecca were established traders travelling far and wide:

"By the mid-sixth century, as heir to Petra and Palmyra, Mecca became one of the important caravan cities of the Middle East. The Meccans carried spices, leather, drugs, cloth and slaves which had come from Africa or the Far East to Syria, and returned money, weapons, cereals, and wine to Arabia." (11)

If Holland had carefully read the Qur'an, he would have understood that the context of these verses was explained elsewhere in the book, as the Qur'an rhetorically asks the Meccans if they had travelled through the land to see the ends of other civilisations and cities:

"Have they not travelled through the land and observed how was the end of those before them? They were more numerous than themselves and greater in strength and in impression on the land, but they were not availed by what they used to earn." (12)

The "ambiguous" of Mecca

Holland claims that the city of Mecca is mentioned ambiguously in the Qur'an and therefore justifies his revisionist perspective. The Quran in the forty-eighth chapter clearly mentions the city of Mecca.

"And it is He who withheld their hands from you and your hands from them within [the area of] Makkah after He caused you to overcome them. And ever is Allah of what you do, Seeing." (13)

Far from being ambiguous, this verse clearly refers to how Allah prevented war in Makkah between the Muslims and the polytheists. The classical exegetical material elaborates on this, for instance Ibn Kathir writes:

"Allah the Exalted reminds His faithful servants of His favor when He restrained the hands of the idolators, and thereby, no harm touched the Muslims from the idolators. Allah restrained the hands of the believers and they did not fight the idolaters near Al-Masjid Al-Haram [Makkah]. Rather, Allah saved both parties from battle and brought forth a peace treaty that produced good results for the believers, in addition to, earning them the good end in this life and the Hereafter."(14)

This in itself shows as to how reckless, ill-informed and biased was Holland’s approach to the whole subject.

7. Did the Arab Empire create Islam?

Although this contention of Holland's does not provide a strong argument against Islamic tradition, it is worthwhile pointing out that his view that Islam emerged as a result of the Arab empire does not make sense when the historical events are viewed objectively. The late professor of Islamic studies William Montgomery Watt asserts:

"Islamic ideology alone gave the Arabs that outward – looking attitude which enabled them to become sufficiently united to defeat the Byzantine and Persian empires. Many of them may have been concerned chiefly with booty for themselves. But men who were merely raiders out for booty could not have held together as the Arabs did. The ideology was no mere epiphenomenon but an essential factor in the historical process." (15)

Hence, according to Watt, it was the religion of Islam that inspired the Arabs to unite and consequently carve an empire, not the other way around. In a similar vein the author Dr. Lex Hixon writes:

"Neither as Christians or Jews, nor simply as intellectually responsible individuals, have members of Western Civilisation been sensitively educated or even accurately informed about Islam…even some persons of goodwill who have gained acquaintance with Islam continue to interpret the reverence for the prophet Muhammad and the global acceptance of his message as an inexplicable survival of the zeal of an ancient desert tribe. This view ignores fourteen centuries of Islamic civilisation, burgeoning with artists, scholars, statesmen, philanthropists, scientists, chivalrous warriors, philosophers…as well as countless men and women of devotion and wisdom from almost every nation of the planet. The coherent world civilisation called Islam, founded in the vision of the Qur'an, cannot be regarded as the product of individual and national ambition, supported by historical accident." (16)

To claim that the empire of the Arabs produced a religion called Islam is to assert that a child gave birth to his mother. Holland was certainly attempting to challenge all established historical laws.

8. What if the Qur'an is God's word?

One of the key reasons of why the Muslim narrative has remained resilient against baseless and uninformed polemics is based on the fact that the Qur'an is from God. The argument is simple yet profound. If it can be shown that the Qur'an is from God, an Infallible and Omnipotent being, then it follows that whatever is in the Qur’an is true. This will include the fact that Islam is a religion sent by God and not the development of an Arab empire, as claimed by Holland.

How can we ascertain that the Qur'an is from the Divine?

The Qur’an, the book of Islam, is no ordinary book. It has been described by many who engage with the book as an imposing text, but the way it imposes itself on the reader is not negative, rather it is positive. This is because it seeks to positively engage with one's mind and emotions, and it achieves this by asking profound questions, such as:

“So where are you people going? This is a message for all people; for those who wish to take the straight path.” (17)

“Are the disbelievers not aware that the heavens and the earth used to be joined together and that We ripped them apart, that We made every living thing from water? Will they not believe?” (18)

“Have they not thought about their own selves?" (19)

However the Qur’an doesn’t stop there, it actually challenges the whole of mankind with regards to its authorship, it boldly states:

“If you have doubts about the revelation we have sent down to Our servant, then produce a single chapter like it – enlist whatever supporters you have other than God – if you truly think you can. If you cannot do this – and you never will – then beware of the Fire prepared for the disbelievers, whose fuel is men and stones.” (20)

This challenge refers to the various wonders in the Qur’an, even within its smallest chapter, that give us good reasons to believe it is from God. Some of these reasons are the existence of supernatural linguistic, historical and factual statements in the Quran and these statements couldn't possibly have originated from the mind of an unlettered seventh century Arabian inhabitant of Mecca i.e. the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

Linguistic

The Qur’an’s use of the Arabic language has never been achieved before by anyone who has mastered the language past or present. As Forster Fitzgerald Arbuthnot, a notable British Orientalist, states:

“…and that though several attempts have been made to produce a work equal to it as far as elegant writing is concerned, none has as yet succeeded.” (21)

The Qur’an is the most eloquent of all speeches that achieves the peak of excellence, it renders peoples attempts to match its miraculous style as null and void. It is no wonder Professor Bruce Lawrence writes:
“As tangible signs Qur’anic verses are expressive of inexhaustible truth, the signify meaning layered within meaning, light upon light, miracle after miracle.” (22)

For more information please read the essays "The Qur'an's Challenge: A Literary and Linguistic Miracle" and "The Philosophical Implications on the Uniqueness of the Qur'an".

Historical

There are many historically factual statements in the Qur’an that show us that it is from God. One of them is that the Qur’an is the only religious text to use different words for the rulers of Egypt at different times. For instance while addressing the Egyptian ruler at the time of Prophet Yusuf (Joseph), the word "Al-Malik" in Arabic is used which refers to a ruler, king or sultan.

“The King said, 'Bring him to me straight away!'…”(23)

In contrast, the ruler of Egypt at the time of the Prophet Musa (Moses) is referred to as "Pharaoh", in Arabic “Firaown”. This particular title began to be employed in the 14th century B.C., during the reign of Amenhotep IV. This is confirmed by the Encyclopaedia Britannica which states that the word "Pharaoh" was a title of respect used from the New Kingdom (beginning with the 18th dynasty; B.C. 1539-1292) until the 22nd dynasty (B.C. 945-730), after which this term of address became the title of the king. So the Qur’an is historically accurate as the Prophet Yusuf lived at least 200 years before 18th dynasty, and the word “al-Malik” or “King” was used for the king of Egypt at the time, not the title “Pharaoh”.

In light of this, how could have the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) known such a minute historical detail? Especially when all other religious texts, such as the Bible are mistaking in this regard? Also, since people at the time of revelation did not know this information (as the Hieroglyphs was a dead language at the time), what does this then say about the authorship of the Qur’an?

There are many more reasons for the Muslim belief in the Qur'an. We hope this provides the window of opportunity for the reader to study further and engage with a text that not only changed Arabia, but the entire world. Johnston , an authority on early Islamic history, agrees:

"Seldom, if ever, has a set of ideas had so great an effect on human societies as Islam has done, above all in the first half of the seventh century. In little more than twenty years, the religious and political configuration of Arabia was changed out of all recognition. Within another twenty all of the rich, highly developed, militarily powerful world enveloping Arabia was conquered, save for Asia Minor and north Africa." (24)

One of the biggest effects of the Quran on human history was the survival of Jews and some minor Christian sects due to the protection of Islam. This outcome of the teachings of the Quran in itself was a phenomenon, please see “Islam’s War on Terror” for details here:

http://www.iera.org.uk/downloads/Islam_ ... Terror.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

9. Selective Scholarship of Holland

Holland's choice of scholarship was very selective and was carefully planned to substantiate his argument. He appears to have ignored a bulk, in fact the majority, of scholarship to make his point stand out. He relied heavily upon the opinions of Patricia Crone (featured in the documentary), whose theories on the early Islamic history are discarded by most historians today. She has expressed her erroneous views on Islamic sources in a number of works. She went as far as to assert that some of the Islamic sources are ‘"debris of obliterated past"; and some of the early works, including Ibn Ishaq’s Sira (biography of the Prophet), are "mere piles of desperate traditions". (25)

Crone has been heavily criticised by fellow historians for her radical views. Even Fred M. Donner, another historian featured in the documentary, rejected Crone's approach. Referring to people like Crone, Cook and Wansbrough, Donner asserts that:

"...the sceptics have encountered some scepticism about their own approach, because some of their claims seem overstated – or even unfounded. Moreover, their work has to date been almost entirely negative – that is, while they have tried to cast doubt on the received version of ‘what happened’ in early Islamic history by impugning the sources, they have not yet offered a convincing alternative reconstruction of what might have happened." (26)

Angelika Neuwirth, a German scholar on the Quran, has expressed similar sentiments on Patricia Crone and her likes. She states:

"As a whole, however, the theories of the so called sceptic or revisionist scholars who, arguing historically, make a radical break with the transmitted picture of Islamic origins, shifting them in both time and place from the seventh to the eighth or ninth century and from the Arabian Peninsula to the Fertile Crescent, have by now been discarded...New findings of Quranic text fragments, moreover, can be adduced to affirm rather than call into question the traditional picture of the Quran as an early fixed text composed of the suras we have...The alternative visions about the genesis of the Quran presented by Wansbrough, Crone and Cook, Luling and Luxenberg are not only mutually exclusive, but rely on textual observations that are too selective to be compatible with the comprehensive quranic textual evidence that can be drawn only from a systematically microstructural reading." (27)

Carole Hillenbrand has also rejected the extremely negative and selective approach of Patricia Crone and her school. (28)

It is clear from above, mainstream scholarly opinions that the Islamic historical narrative is far richer and trustworthy than most historical traditions. Most historians, who have no underlying political or religious agendas, accept the historical validity of Islamic sources.

In summary, Tom Holland has cherry picked from evidence as well as scholarship to take an unsubstantiated and marginalised view on the origins of Islam. His exclusion of established academic positions and material facts points to the only conclusion of justifying his own prejudices and unjustified dismissal of Islamic tradition.


References:

Spoiler! :
1. Doctrina Jacobi, Readings in Late Antiquity: A Sourcebook, Routledge, 2005, p. 354.
2. A. Palmer (with contributions from S. P. Brock and R. G. Hoyland), The Seventh Century In The West-Syrian Chronicles Including Two Seventh-Century Syriac Apocalyptic Texts, 1993, Liverpool University Press: Liverpool (UK), pp. 2-3; Also see R. G. Hoyland, Seeing Islam As Others Saw It: A Survey And Evaluation Of Christian, Jewish And Zoroastrian Writings On Early Islam, 1997, op. cit., pp. 116-117.
3. R. W. Thomson (with contributions from J. Howard-Johnson & T. Greenwood), The Armenian History Attributed To Sebeos Part - I: Translation and Notes, 1999, Translated Texts For Historians - Volume 31, Liverpool University Press, pp. 95-96. Other translations can also be seen in P. Crone & M. Cook, Hagarism: The Making Of The Islamic World, 1977, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, pp. 6-7; R. G. Hoyland, Seeing Islam As Others Saw It: A Survey And Evaluation Of Christian, Jewish And Zoroastrian Writings On Early Islam, 1997, op. cit., p. 129; idem., "Sebeos, The Jews And The Rise Of Islam" in R. L. Nettler (Ed.), Medieval And Modern Perspectives On Muslim-Jewish Relations, 1995, Harwood Academic Publishers GmbH in cooperation with the Oxford Centre for Postgraduate Hebrew Studies, p. 89.
4. Michael Cook. Muhammad, Past Masters Oxford University Press, Page 74. First published 1983 as an Oxford University Press paperback. Reissued 1996
5. http://www.standard.co.uk/arts/book/isl ... 40194.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
6. Robert Hoyland, New Documentary Texts and the Early Islamic State, 2006
7. N. Abbott, Studies In Arabic Literary Papyri, Volume II (Qur'anic Commentary & Tradition), 1967, The University Of Chicago Press, p. 2.
8. H. Motzki, "The Musannaf Of `Abd al-Razzaq Al-San`ani As A Source of Authentic Ahadith of The First Century A.H.", Journal Of Near Eastern Studies, 1991, Volume 50, p. 21.
9. M. M. Azami. Studies in Early Hadith Literature. 2001. American Trust Publications.
10. Qur'an 37: 133 - 138
11. Ira M. Lapidus, ‘A History of Islamic Societies’, Cambridge, p.14.
12. Qur'an 40: 82
13. Qur'an 48: 24
14. Ibn Kathir on Qur'an 48:24
15. William Montgomery Watt, ‘Economic and Social Aspects of the Origin of Islam’ in Islamic Quarterly 1 (1954), p. 102-3.
16. Lex Hixon. The Heart of the Qur'an: An Introduction to Islamic Spirituality. Quest Books. 2003, page 3.
17. Qur'an 81: 26 – 28
18. Qur'an 21: 30
19. Qur'an 30: 8
20. Qur'an 2: 23
21. F. F. Arbuthnot. The Construction of the Bible and the Koran. London, p 5.
22. Bruce Lawrence. The Qur’an: A Biography. Atlantic Books, p 8.
23. Qur'an 12: 50
24. Johnston, Witnesses to a World Crises (Oxford, 2010), p. 357-8.
25. Patricia Crone, Slaves on Horses (Cambridge, 2003), p. 10.
26. Fred M. Donner, Modern Approaches to Early Islamic History, New Cambridge History of Islam v. 1, 2010, p. 633.
27. Angelika Neuwirth, Structural, Linguistic and Literary Features, the Cambridge Companion to the Quran, 2006, p. 100-1.
28. Carole Hillenbrand. Muhammad and the Rise of Islam. New Cambridge Medieval History.

Well if not all some of it appears to be Oral Diarrhea .. Let me go through that and keep it as reference here..
Nosuperstition
Posts: 3815
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:45 am

Re: Historicity of Muhammad _Did Muhammad Exist?,

Post by Nosuperstition »

yeezevee wrote:I am not sure where you are going with cults that started by Indians or from stories of Indians., but you may not know Muslims are the 2nd largest population of America and Mr. Barack Hussein Obama II is the 44th and current President of the United States is also a son of Converted Muslims.
U.S took the drastic step of quarantining all the Japanese during the 2nd world war.Would it not do that if ever it once again faces an existential threat from muslims?And regards to Obama , more drone attacks on terrorists are said to have occurred during his tenure than in Bush's period.
palli or halli in Dravidian languages means a village just like gaav in Aryan languages means a village.palli or halli in Aryan Mauryan Imperial era around 200 B.C designates a tribal hamlet.So many of those in South India are indeed descendants of tribals and are still keeping up that heritage.
yeezevee
Posts: 6547
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 9:17 pm

Re: Historicity of Muhammad _Did Muhammad Exist?,

Post by yeezevee »

Nosuperstition wrote:
yeezevee wrote:I am not sure where you are going with cults that started by Indians or from stories of Indians., but you may not know Muslims are the 2nd largest population of America and Mr. Barack Hussein Obama II is the 44th and current President of the United States is also a son of Converted Muslims.
U.S took the drastic step of quarantining all the Japanese during the 2nd world war.Would it not do that if ever it once again faces an existential threat from muslims?And regards to Obama , more drone attacks [/color]on terrorists are said to have occurred during his tenure than in Bush's period.
I am not sure where you are talking this subject of "Historicity of Muhammad" but the events of 2nd world war or drones attacks on individuals is different from "How Islam expands to engulf a political thought/individual freedoms or cultural background of people . So let us not confuse the issues.. and on the way let me add an article of M.A.Hussain who asks a question
Is Islam a failed Jewish Conspiracy?

Like religion, gossip tries to explain the origin of the things and events which people fail to comprehend. It can also be an attempt to confuse people so that they might not understand these rationally. One reason for abundance of anti-Jewish conspiracy theories on the internet fast emerging marketplace all kinds of gossips, is that Jews along with apostates, atheist,pagans,pigs and polytheists have been condemned in Quran in no uncertain words
In Muslim world, once you discredit your political rival by exposing his Jewish connection, you have won half the battle. Hence Jews are behind everything evil in Muslim societies. Here I will present my conspiracy theory. Historically, Islam is the result of a failed conspiracy of Jews of Medina against Mecca pagans. Before I present my conspiracy theory,let me tell you what induced me to write this article. A year ago, I stumbled upon a paper written by Ihsan Yilmaz, “Was Rumi the Chief Architect of Islamism?"(1)The author argues against the misuse of the term Islamism and how this misuse makes “the first prophet, his companions and all observant Muslims” Islamists. In fact, there are substantial reasons to call all those who follow Mohammad in the letter, and spirit as Islamists. When we examine Islam in its varied manifestations, we find something fundamentally wrong with Mohammad’s Islam that is exploited by some of its adherents, and that gives Islamists an edge over all other shades of Islam.

The problem with Islam is its mind-boggling diversity that does not reflect its principle of oneness but its disintegration, pragmatism and adaptation to local customs, including pagan and barbaric customs like female genital mutilation; recent adaptation is market capitalism. Islamization of capitalism is a recent trend in Muslim countries. It has become a fashion to put the word “Islamic”as a prefix to every product and process of capitalism, for example, Islamic finance, Islamic banking, Islamic fashion etc. Muslims fail to tell us what is Islamic in Islamic finance and banking. It is capitalism repacked.There is a need is to identify and deconstruct Medina Islam to confront Islamists and that has to be done on Mosque pulpit. Research articles, academic debates, papers, conferences, TV shows will not help to defeat Islamists or defend 98% of civil Muslims. Islamist constitutes only 1 % of the Muslim world and so do the moderates, progressive’s, feminists, etc.,and both use Islam for their political ends. A vast majority of Muslims does not follow Mohammad and cannot be labeled as Islamists.

Living as an economic man, they are Dr. JohnNash’s (father of game theory) Ummah. However, at some occasions 98% Muslims also turn to be bad Muslims under the influence 1% Islamists.This results in confusion in the minds of media men and non Muslims.I am not so much worried about Islamism than the emergence of the vast growing middle class in Muslim societies. A person coming from middle class can become Marx, Hitler, Mussolini, and Al Hallaj, and this depends on the cultural milieu he imbibes and the period of history he lives in.As the counter cultures like Sufism, modernism and feminism are

marginalized in Muslim societies, there are more possibilities that Islamism may mutate into neo-fascism; more so under economic crisis, underdevelopment of resources in these societies and crisis ridden capitalist world order.I consider Islamism as a result of transition of Muslim societies into capitalist social relations. It will lose its force as new classes emerge and get embedded with the present-day world order at the local, national and international level. Now, let me indulge in little gossip. Islam is the result of a failed conspiracy of Jews of Medina against Mecca pagans. Jews helped Mohammad; they served him as scribes, helped him to understand Judaism and Christian traditions, and supported him in his struggle against Meccan pagans to strengthen monotheism. Had they opposed him and confronted him from the very beginning in Medina, Mohammad would not have been able to establish Muslim community.

Later, Mohammad adopted all pagan customs he had vehemently opposed in Mecca. Jews were driven out of Medina, killed, disposed and enslaved by Mohammad. So Jews failed to promote monotheism in Meccan pagans. Islam has resulted in spiritual improvishment of Arabs, and they are still bogged in the morass of tribalism. Known for turning every catastrophe into an opportunity; Jews actively participated, contributed and benefited themselves in trade and commerce, science and technology during ancient globalization under Islam. However “The Zoroastrians (of the defeated Persian Empire), the Christians (of the defeated Eastern Roman Empire), and the Jews (who had been expelled by the Muslims) grieved for the old days. In their private counsel, these defeated elements had reached the conclusion that it was impossible to fight Muslims on the battlefield. Therefore, they resolved to sow the seed of discord among Muslims, using the model of the Jews of Yathrib.”(4)


Later they created Shi'ism, Bhaiism, Wahahbism Sufism, etc.against Islam.(8)(9)(12)(13) Jews are terrible people and can do anything. They created the concept of Tawheed and are destroying shrines of Muslim saints the world over. (2)It has been found that the grand father of Muhammad Ibn Abd Al Wahhab was, in fact, from Jewish origin in Turkey.(14) “The Zionist conspiracy is thought to have supported the "despotic'' rule of the Shah; for example, soldiers who are supposed to have massacred "thousands" of innocent people on Black Friday (8 September 1978) are said to have been Israelis. Some people have argued that Israel supported the Islamic revolution in order to weaken its only potential rival for domination in the region by replacing the Shah with a "vulnerable and dependent Islamic regime.”(2)(13)Jews have created toys like Pokeman and Barbie doll to promote anti-Islamic behavior. Sheik Sadeq Abdallah bin Al-Majid interviewed by Al-Jazeera TV is reported to have said that vaccination of Muslim children is a Jewish conspiracy to harm Muslims.(16)(17)One percent American Jews are trying very hardt o turn America into a communist state. “A Jewish population of exactly that percentage brought communism to Russia. The most murderous and anti-Christ system the world has ever known (having starved to death or

slaughtered over 150 million) was overwhelmingly inspired and birthed by a tiny minority of Jews.”(5)(7)(11)Jews haven't only crucified son of almighty God (who remained a salient spectator to the killing of his own innocent son) and tortured him brutally. Even the Bible is said to be a Jewish conspiracy. “Christians are deluded under a powerful spell. Christianity is nothing more than a vicious program, with the goals of”Forcing the Gentiles to submission.(6)(12)

Let me sum up what we learnt from this gossip:

1. Jews are after Muslims, and Muslims are after the Jews.Except this article,Jews arebehind everything critical of Islam.

2. Whatever Jews did against Islam,did not work properly. May it be Sufism, Shiaism,Wahabism, Communism,Baha’ism and Zionism to name a few.

3. Jews are at the root of religions, revolutions, chaos and anti-religious movements. They have been punished by God. The pogroms against Jews in the past are the divine punishment for their rebellion.

4. They are terrible people and can do anything
along with these references
Spoiler! :
References

1.IhsanYilmaz, WasRumitheChiefArchitectofIslamism?http://fatih.academia.edu/IhsanYilmaz/P ... m_Islamism_

2.Al Wahhab’s Jewish origins http://thegulfblog.com/2008/04/10/al-wa ... to-saddam/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

3.Iran's Conspiracy Industry http://www.islamicpluralism.org/1711/ir ... y-industry" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

4.Origins of the Shia Sect http://www.discoveringislam.org/origins_of_shiism.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

5.JEWISH ACTIVISTS CREATED COMMUNISM http://rense.com/general76/commun.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

6.The Bible:Jewish Conspiracy and Hoax on the Gentiles http://www.666blacksun.org/satanic-nati ... e-gentiles" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

7.Jewish Bolshevism Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Bolshevism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

8.Shi'a Islam in Saudi Arabia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shi%27a_Is ... udi_Arabia" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

9.A Conspiracy Plotted by the Jews against Islam, under the guise of Tawheedhttp://www.imamreza.net/eng/imamreza.php?id=6098" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

10.Bible conspiracy theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_conspiracy_theory" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

11.Gerrits, André The Myth of Jewish Communism (2009) peterlang.com

12.On ConspiracyTheories and Religion http://www.bahaiviews.net/2009/04/02/on ... nni-islam/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

13.Conspiracy theories and the Persian Mind http://www.iranian.com/May96/Opinion/Conspiracy.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

14.Conspiracy Of Zionism [Haram] http://boltwolf.tripod.com/id194.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

15.Jews, Conspiracy, and Islam http://www.aobm.org/articles/jews-conspiracy-and-islam/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

16.Arabs See Jewish Conspiracy in Pokemonhttp://articles.latimes.com/2001/apr/24/news/mn-54861" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

17.Islamic cleric claims vaccinations are a Jewish conspiracy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBOZyx68QQw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That is Fact and FANTASTIC ARTICLE .. is it not Nosuperstition??
Nosuperstition
Posts: 3815
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:45 am

Re: Historicity of Muhammad _Did Muhammad Exist?,

Post by Nosuperstition »

I am not sure where you are talking this subject of "Historicity of Muhammad" but the events of 2nd world war or drones attacks on individuals is different from "How Islam expands to engulf a political thought/individual freedoms or cultural background of people
.

I was just pointing out that even though his parents were cultural muslims,it did not engulf the political thought/individual freedom/individual thoughts of Obama in dealing with his co-religionists with a firm hand.No supposed brotherhood of faith.

And regards to events of 2nd world war,they were posted just to show that a minority can still be dealt with even if they are a cult and even if they form 2nd largest religious minority unless ofcourse the minority is sizeable.For example one muslim cleric in India is said to have remarked after riots in Gujarat in India that they will be able to compensate for the losses in riots in terms of number of lives lost in less than 2 hours by breeding at a faster rate.That is because India has a sizeable uneducated socially backward Muslim minority.
yeezevee wrote:None of the old ones and none of the news one can beat Islam.. if you consider Islam as cult
yeezevee wrote:but you may not know Muslims are the 2nd largest population of America
palli or halli in Dravidian languages means a village just like gaav in Aryan languages means a village.palli or halli in Aryan Mauryan Imperial era around 200 B.C designates a tribal hamlet.So many of those in South India are indeed descendants of tribals and are still keeping up that heritage.
User avatar
Fernando
Posts: 4949
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 1:27 pm

Re: Historicity of Muhammad _Did Muhammad Exist?,

Post by Fernando »

yeezevee wrote: So let me add a counter argument from Islamic intellectuals on that issue of "Did Muhammad Exist?,.."
Tom Holland. The paper will address each of the main claims made by Holland.
Well if not all some of it appears to be Oral Diarrhea .. Let me go through that and keep it as reference here..
I think we must first consider the standpoint of the group you cite. IERA is the proselytising crew who got themselves banned from University College London after enforcing gender segregation at a meeting. I've not come across anyone describing them as scholars. They cite the Islamic tradition to counter Holland's arguments which are specifically framed to AVOID reliance on that tradition. They cherry-pick Doctrina Jacobi which, under other circumstances, I have no doubt, they would reject: Wikipedia states
The text provides one of the earliest external accounts of Islam, presenting a significantly different Islamic historiography than found in traditional Islamic texts.
[...and...]
It records a prophet in Arabia during the birth time of Islamic tradition proclaiming the advent of a Jewish Messiah. The document contradicts the notion in Islamic tradition that the prophet was dead at the time of the conquest of Palestine but agrees with some traditions of other peoples of the time.
[Not to mention:]
So I, Abraham, inquired and heard from those who had met him that there was no truth to be found in the so-called prophet, only the shedding of men's blood. He says also that he has the keys of paradise, which is incredible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teaching_of_Jacob
This scholarly organisation was only founded in 2006 and, again according to Wikipedia 's report of its mission
iERA is a global dawah organisation committed to presenting Islam to wider society.
Besides the UCL trouble,
Charities Commission investigation

In May 2014, the Telegraph reported that the iERA is being investigated by the Charity Commission "amid allegations that its leaders promote anti-Semitism and have called for homosexuals and female adulterers to be stoned to death." The Telegraph reported that Abdur Raheem Green "has been caught on camera preaching at Hyde Park Corner, calling for a Jewish man to be removed from his sight. 'Why don’t you take the Yahoudi [Jew] over there, far away so his stench doesn’t disturb us?' he can be heard to say."[14][15]
CEMB report

On May 19, 2014, the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain (CEMB) released a 44-page report that contains direct quotes from iERA staff and guest speakers condoning female genital mutilation, the killing of apostates from Islam, the death penalty for homosexuality, and wife beating.[16] The report is free to download and contains citations for each quote by an iERA member, staff, or affiliate. iERA has posted a response to the CEMB report.[17]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IERA
‘Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs and literary traditions. They neither intermarry nor eat together, and indeed they belong to two different civilisations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions.’ Muhammad Ali Jinnah
Nosuperstition
Posts: 3815
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:45 am

Re: Historicity of Muhammad _Did Muhammad Exist?,

Post by Nosuperstition »

yeezevee wrote:Now, let me indulge in little gossip. Islam is the result of a failed conspiracy of Jews of Medina against Mecca pagans. Jews helped Mohammad; they served him as scribes, helped him to understand Judaism and Christian traditions, and supported him in his struggle against Meccan pagans to strengthen monotheism. Had they opposed him and confronted him from the very beginning in Medina, Mohammad would not have been able to establish Muslim community.
Purim commemorates the events described in the Book of Esther. In Esther 3:8, the anti-Semitic Haman, Grand Vizier of the Persian Empire, tells Persian King Ahasuerus that, “There is a certain people scattered abroad and dispersed among all the peoples... in your kingdom. Their laws are different from those of every people, neither do they keep the king's laws. Therefore, it does the king no profit to suffer them. If it please the king, let it be written that they be destroyed...” Thus, Haman coined one of the most infamous anti-Semitic canards: That the Jews are a clannish and alien people who do not obey the laws of the land. At Haman's contrivance, a decree is then issued for all Jews in the Persian Empire to be massacred. But, as the Book of Esther subsequently relates, Haman’s plot was foiled and, “The Jews had light and gladness, and joy and honor...a feast and a good day.” (8:16-17)
http://gpo.gov.il/English/PressRoom/Pag ... m2014.aspx

Well there is a little twist here.Jews of yesteryears were accused of being violaters of laws of land whereas in the present day it is Muslims who are accused of doing the same.Might be Muslims learnt even that from the Jews.Now Esther ,the Jewish prostitute close to king Ahasuerus or Xerxes was instrumental in foiling Haman's plot and instead massacring 75,000 Persians.

Now perhaps that is the reason why it is said in the O.T that those pagan females who try to lure Jews waywards with sex must be put to death.Not only that but the whole tribe of Medianites was put to death for the same reason if I am correct.But Jews can lure pagan males with their harlots.Does seem to be full of clannishness and hypocrisy to me.

In the end might be even Muslims will find someone like Esther to salvage them from the likes of you.
palli or halli in Dravidian languages means a village just like gaav in Aryan languages means a village.palli or halli in Aryan Mauryan Imperial era around 200 B.C designates a tribal hamlet.So many of those in South India are indeed descendants of tribals and are still keeping up that heritage.
Post Reply