Criticism of Muhammad
Part of a series on |
Muhammad |
---|
Part of a series on |
Islam |
---|
The first to criticize the
During the
Modern
History of criticism
This article is of a series on |
Criticism of religion |
---|
Early Middle Ages
The earliest documented Christian knowledge of Muhammad stems from
One Christian who came under the early dominion of the Islamic
Among the first sources representing Muhammad is the polemical work "Concerning Heresy" (Perì hairéseōn) of John of Damascus, translated from Greek into Latin. In this manuscript, the Syrian priest represents Muhammad as a "false prophet," and an "Antichrist". Some demonstrate that Muhammad was pointed out in this manuscript as "Mamed",[22] but this study was corrected by Ahlam Sbaihat who affirmed that it is the form ΜΩΑΜΕΘ (Moameth) which is mentioned in this manuscript. The phoneme h and the gemination of m do not exist in Greek so it has disappeared from John's uses.[23]
From the 9th century onwards, highly negative biographies of Muhammad were written in Latin,
Secular criticism
Many early
The Quran also mentions critics of Muhammad; for example Quran 25:4-6 says the critics complained that Muhammad was passing off what others were telling him as revelations:
The disbelievers say, “This ˹Quran˺ is nothing but a fabrication which he made up with the help of others.” Their claim is totally unjustified and untrue! And they say, “˹These revelations are only˺ ancient fables which he has had written down, and they are rehearsed to him morning and evening.”[28]
High to late middle Ages
During the 12th century
According to
In later ages, Muhammad came to be seen as a schismatic: Brunetto Latini's 13th century Li livres dou tresor represents him as a former monk and cardinal,[29] and Dante's Divine Comedy (Inferno, Canto 28), written in the early 1300s, puts Muhammad and his son-in-law, Ali, in Hell "among the sowers of discord and the schismatics, being lacerated by devils again and again."[29]
The fact that Muhammad was unlettered, that he married a wealthy widow, that in his later life he had several wives, that he ruled over a human community, was involved in several wars, and that he died like an ordinary person in contrast to the Christian belief in the supernatural end of
Some medieval ecclesiastical writers portrayed Muhammad as possessed by
A more positive interpretation appears in the 13th-century Estoire del Saint Grail, the first book in the vast
The Tultusceptru de libro domni Metobii, an Andalusian manuscript with unknown dating, recounts how Muhammad (called Ozim, from Hashim) was tricked by Satan into adulterating an originally pure divine revelation. The story argues God was concerned about the spiritual fate of the Arabs and wanted to correct their deviation from the faith. He then sends an angel to the monk Osius who orders him to preach to the Arabs.[33]
Osius however is in ill-health and orders a young monk, Ozim, to carry out the angel's orders instead. Ozim sets out to follow his orders, but gets stopped by an evil angel on the way. The ignorant Ozim believes him to be the same angel that spoke to Osius before. The evil angel modifies and corrupts the original message given to Ozim by Osius, and renames Ozim Muhammad. From this followed the erroneous teachings of Islam, according to the Tultusceptru.[33]
Jewish criticism
In the Middle Ages, it was common for Jewish writers to describe Muhammad as ha-Meshuggah ("The Madman"), a term of contempt frequently used in the Bible for those who believe themselves to be prophets.[8]
Thomas Aquinas
""[Muhammad] seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh goads us. His teaching also contained precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a very modest wisdom... Nor do divine pronouncements on the part of preceding prophets offer him any witness. On the contrary, he perverts almost all the testimonies of the Old and New Testaments by making them into fabrications of his own, as can be seen by anyone who examines his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to forbid his followers to read the Old and New Testaments, lest these books convict him of falsity. It is thus clear that those who place any faith in his words believe foolishly".[34]
Early modern period
Martin Luther referred to Muhammad as "a devil and first-born child of Satan."[35] Luther's primary target of criticism at the time was the Pope, and Luther's characterization of Muhammad was intended to draw a comparison to show that the Pope was worse.[36]
Voltaire
In a letter to
According to Malise Ruthven, Voltaire's view became more positive as he learned more about Islam.[41] As a result, his book Fanaticism (Mohammad the Prophet), inspired Goethe, who was attracted to Islam, to write a drama on this theme, though completed only the poem Mahomets-Gesang ("Mahomet's Singing").[a] [43]
Late modern period
In the early 20th century Western scholarly views of Muhammad changed, including critical views. In the 1911
Muir,
Hindu criticism
In his 1875 work
The
Contemporary history
Modern critics have criticized Muhammad for preaching beliefs that are incompatible with
Neuroscientist and prominent ideological critic Sam Harris contrasts the example of Muhammad with that of Jesus Christ. While he regards Christ as something of a "hippie" figure, Muhammad is an altogether different character and one whose example "as held in Islam is universally not [that of] a pacifist," but rather one of a "conquering warlord who spread the faith by the sword." Harris notes that while sayings such as "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's" provide Christianity with a "rationale for peace," it is impossible to justify non-violence as central to Islam. Harris says that the example of Muhammad provides an imperative to "convert, subjugate, or kill" and "the core principle of Islam is Jihad."[52] Harris also suggests that Muhammad "may well have been schizophrenic," dismissing Muhammad's claim that the Koran was dictated to him by the archangel Gabriel.[53]
American historian Daniel Pipes sees Muhammad as a politician, stating that "because Muhammad created a new community, the religion that was its raison d'être had to meet the political needs of its adherents."[54]
In 2012 a film titled to the release of the film, violent demonstrations and attacks targeted western institutions through the Muslim world.
Points of contention
Ownership of slaves
According to sociologist Rodney Stark, "the fundamental problem facing Muslim theologians vis-à-vis the morality of slavery" is that Muhammad himself engaged in activities such as purchasing, selling, and owning slaves, and that his followers saw him as the perfect example to emulate. Stark contrasts Islam with Christianity, writing that Christian theologians wouldn't have been able to "work their way around the biblical acceptance of slavery" if Jesus had owned slaves, as Muhammad did.[56]
According to Forough Jahanbaksh, Muhammad never preached the abolition of slavery as a doctrine, although he did moderate the age-old institution of slavery, which was also accepted and endorsed by the other monotheistic religions, Christianity and Judaism, and was a well-established custom of the pre-Islamic world.[57][58][59] According to Murray Gordon, Muhammad saw it "as part of the natural order of things". While Muhammad did improve the condition of slaves, and exhorted his followers to treat kindness and compassion, and encouraged freeing of slaves, he still did not completely abolish the practice.[60][57]
His decrees greatly limited those who could be enslaved and under what circumstances (including barring Muslims from enslaving other Muslims), allowed slaves to achieve their freedom and made freeing slaves a virtuous act. Some slaves earned respectable incomes and achieved considerable power, although elite slaves still remained in the power of their owners. He made it legal for his men to marry their slaves and their concubines they captured in war.
Treatment of enemies
Norman Geisler accuses Muhammad of "mercilessness" towards the Jewish tribes of Medina.[65] Geisler also argues that Muhammad "had no aversion to politically expedient assassinations", "was not indisposed to breaking promises when he found it advantageous" and "engaged in retaliation towards those who mocked him."[65] The Orientalist William Muir, in assessing Muhammad's character, described him as cruel and faithless in dealing with his enemies.[66][Note 1]
Muhammad has been often criticized outside of the Islamic world for his treatment of the Jewish tribes of Medina.[68] An example is the mass killing of the men of the Banu Qurayza, a Jewish tribe of Medina. The tribe was accused of having engaged in treasonous agreements with the enemies besieging Medina in the Battle of the Trench in 627.[69][70]
After the Qurayẓah were found to be complicit with the enemy during the Battle of the Ditch, the Muslim general Sa'd ibn Mu'adh ordered the men to be put to death and the women and children to be enslaved. Moreover, Muslims believe that the Prophet did not order the execution of the Jews of Medina, but many Western historians believe that he must have been, at the very least, informed of it.[71] Regardless, "this tragic episode cast a shadow upon the relations between the two communities for many centuries, even though the Jews, a "People of the Book" [...] generally enjoyed the protection of their lives, property, and religion under Islamic rule and fared better in the Muslim world than in the West."[71]
Ibn Ishaq writes that Muhammad approved the beheading of some 600–700 in all, with some saying as high as 800–900, who surrendered after a siege that lasted several weeks.[72] (Also see Bukhari 5:59:362) (Yusuf Ali notes that the Qur'an discusses this battle in verses 33:10-27 [73] They were buried in a mass grave in the Medina market place, and the women and children were sold into slavery.
According to Norman Stillman, the incident cannot be judged by present-day moral standards. Citing Deut. 20:13–14 as an example, Stillman states that the slaughter of adult males and the enslavement of women and children—though no doubt causing bitter suffering—was common practice throughout the ancient world.[74] According to Rudi Paret, adverse public opinion was more a point of concern to Muhammad when he had some date palms cut down during a siege, than after this incident.[75] Esposito also argues that in Muhammad's time, traitors were executed and points to similar situations in the Bible.[76] Esposito says that Muhammad's motivation was political rather than racial or theological; he was trying to establish Muslim dominance and rule in Arabia.[68]
Some historians, such as W.N. Arafat and
Rabbi Samuel Rosenblatt has said that Muhammad's policies were not directed exclusively against Jews (referring to his conflicts with Jewish tribes) and that Muhammad was more severe with his pagan Arab kinsmen.[82][83]
Death of Kenana ibn al-Rabi
According to one account, after the last fort of the Jewish settlement called
Critics take these events, especially the story of the torture of Kinana, to be another blot on Muhammad's character.[66][85] Those few Western scholars who discuss the alleged torture of Kinana, like William Muir, have generally not questioned the validity of the story.[86] Muslims generally dispute this incident. Some claim that this was yet another story that Ibn Ishaq heard second-hand from Jewish sources, casting doubt on its authenticity.[citation needed] Others argue that Kinana was killed in battle and never taken captive.[87]
Muhammad's marriages
Muhammad's marriages have long provided another source of Western criticism of the moral character of the prophet.
One of the popular historical criticisms of Muhammad in the West has been his
Muslims have often pointed out that Muhammad married Khadija (a widow whose age is estimated to have been 40), when he was 25 years old, and remained
Muslims have generally responded that the marriages of Muhammad were not conducted to satisfy worldly desires or lusts, but rather they were done for a higher purpose and due to God's command.
Contrary to Islamic law, Muhammed is accused of treating his wives unequally. He is accused of clearly favouring Aisha among his living wives, explicitly rated Khadija his best wife overall and had the Quranic dispensation to consort with his wives in an Islamically inequitable manner. These actions created jealousy and dissension among his wives and "illustrate the inability of husbands to give equal consideration to multiple wives."[97]
Aisha
According to traditional sources, Aisha was six or seven years old when betrothed to Muhammad,
In the late-twentieth century and early twenty-first century, opponents of Islam have used Aisha's age to accuse Muhammad of pedophilia, as well as explain a reported higher prevalence of child marriage in Muslim societies.[119]
Zaynab bint Jahsh
Western criticism has focused especially on the marriage of Muhammad to his first cousin
In Karen Armstrong's 2006 biography of Muhammad, she contextualizes this event by describing Zaynab as a pious woman and skilled leather-worker who devoted her craft's proceeds to charity. Muhammad's newfound affection for her reportedly developed during an unplanned visit to her home when Zayd was absent, and Zaynab was dressed more revealingly than usual.[114]
According to William Montgomery Watt, Zaynab herself was working for marriage with Muhammad and was not happy being married to Zayd.[126][127] Watt also places doubt on the story outlined by Al-Waqidi and states that it should be taken with a "grain of salt."[128] According to Watt, Zaynab was either thirty-five or thirty-eight years old at the time and that the story initially outlined by Al-Waqidi in which he detailed Muhammad's incident with Zaynab during the absence of Zayd may have been tampered with in the course of transmission.[128]
According to Mazheruddin Siddiqi, Zaynab as the cousin of Muhammad was seen by him many times before her marriage to Zayd.[129] Siddiqi states: "He [Muhammad] had seen her many times before but he was never attracted to her physical beauty, else he would have married her, instead of insisting on her that she should marry Zaid."[130]
In the book "The Wives of the Messenger of Allah" by Muhammad Swaleh Awadh, it is noted that Zaynab married Muhammad during the fifth year of Hijra in Dhul Qa'adah.[131] This marriage was unconventional and disapproved by the standards of pre-Islamic Arabia, due to the prevailing belief that adopted sons were considered as true sons, making marriage to an adopted son's former wife uncommon, even after divorce.[132][133]
Munafiqs of Medina used the marriage to discredit Muhammad on two fronts, one of double standards as she was his fifth wife, while everyone else was restricted to four, and marrying his adopted son's wife. This was exactly what Muhammad feared and was initially hesitant in marrying her. The Qur'an, however, confirmed that this marriage was valid. Thus Muhammad, confident of his faith in the Qur'an, proceeded to reject the existing Arabic norms.[134] When Zaynab's waiting period from her divorce was complete, Muhammad married her.[135] In reference to this incident, Quran 33:37 says:
Behold! Thou didst say to one who had received the grace of Allah and thy favour: "Retain thou (in wedlock) thy wife, and fear Allah." But thou didst hide in thy heart that which Allah was about to make manifest: thou didst fear the people, but it is more fitting that thou shouldst fear Allah. Then when Zaid had dissolved (his marriage) with her, with the necessary (formality), We joined her in marriage to thee: in order that (in future) there may be no difficulty to the Believers in (the matter of) marriage with the wives of their adopted sons, when the latter have dissolved with the necessary (formality) (their marriage) with them. And Allah's command must be fulfilled.
Following the revelation of this verse, Muhammad rejected the prevailing Arab customs that prohibited marrying the wives of adopted sons, which was considered taboo and culturally inappropriate.[136][137] Thereafter the legal status of adoption was not recognised under Islam. Zayd reverted to being known by his original name of "Zayd ibn Harithah" instead of "Zayd ibn Muhammad".[138][136]
Religious syncretism and compromise
John Mason Neale (1818–1866) accused Muhammad of pandering "to the passions of his followers", arguing that he constructed Islam out of a mixture of beliefs that provided something for everyone.[139][f]
Psychological and medical condition
Muhammad is reported to have had mysterious seizures at the moments of inspiration. According to
According to Welch, these seizures should have been the most convincing evidence for the superhuman origin of Muhammad's inspirations for people around him. Others adopted alternative explanations for these seizures and claimed that he was possessed, a soothsayer, or a magician. Welch states it remains uncertain whether Muhammad had such experiences before he began to see himself as a prophet and if so how long did he have such experiences.[144][full citation needed]
According to
He pretended to receive all his revelations from the Angel Gabriel, and that he was sent from God of purpose to deliver them unto him. And whereas he was subject to the falling-sickness, whenever the fit was upon him, he pretended it to be a Trance, and that the Angel Gabriel comes from God with some Revelations unto him.
Some modern Western scholars also have a skeptical view of Muhammad's seizures. Frank R. Freemon states Muhammad had "conscious control over the course of the spells and can pretend to be in a religious trance."[145] During the nineteenth century, as Islam was no longer a political or military threat to Western society, and perceptions of epilepsy changed, the theological and moral associations with epilepsy were removed; epilepsy was now viewed as a medical disorder.[145] Nineteenth-century orientalist Margoliouth claimed that Muhammad suffered from epilepsy and even occasionally faked it for effect.[146]
Sprenger attributes
In an essay that discusses views of Muhammad's psychology, Franz Bul (1903) is said to have observed that "hysterical natures find unusual difficulty and often complete inability to distinguish the false from the true", and to have thought this to be "the safest way to interpret the strange inconsistencies in the life of the Prophet." In the same essay Duncan Black Macdonald (1911) is credited with the opinion that "fruitful investigation of the Prophet's life (should) proceed upon the assumption that he was fundamentally a pathological case."[147]
Modern Western scholars of Islam have rejected the diagnosis of epilepsy.
Maxime Rodinson says that it is most probable that Muhammad's conditions was basically of the same kind as that found in many mystics rather than epilepsy.[150] Fazlur Rahman refutes epileptic fits for the following reasons: Muhammad's condition begins with his career at the age of 40; according to the tradition seizures are invariably associated with the revelation and never occur by itself. Lastly, a sophisticated society like the Meccan or Medinese would have identified epilepsy clearly and definitely.[151]
William Montgomery Watt also disagrees with the epilepsy diagnosis, saying that "there are no real grounds for such a view." Elaborating, he says that "epilepsy leads to physical and mental degeneration, and there are no signs of that in Muhammad." He then goes further and states that Muhammad was psychologically sound in general: "he (Muhammad) was clearly in full possession of his faculties to the very end of his life." Watt concludes by stating "It is incredible that a person subject to epilepsy, or hysteria, or even ungovernable fits of emotion, could have been the active leader of military expeditions, or the cool far-seeing guide of a city-state and a growing religious community; but all this we know Muhammad to have been."[152] [153]: 19
According to Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Muhammad's sense of fairness and justice was famous, even before his claim of prophet-hood, as people called him al-Amin, the trusted one.[154]
Frank R. Freemon (1976) thinks that the above reasons given by modern biographers of Muhammad in rejection of epilepsy come from the widespread misconceptions about the various types of epilepsy.[145] In his differential diagnosis, Freemon rejects schizophrenic hallucinations,[Note 3] drug-induced mental changes such as might occur after eating plants containing hallucinogenic materials,[Note 4] transient ischemic attacks,[Note 5] hypoglycemia,[Note 6] labyrinthitis, Ménière's disease, or other inner ear maladies.[Note 7]
At the end, Freemon argues that if one were forced to make a diagnosis psychomotor seizures of temporal lobe epilepsy would be the most tenable one, although our lack of scientific as well as historical knowledge makes unequivocal decision impossible. Freemon cites evidences supporting and opposing this diagnosis.[Note 8] In the end, Freemon points out that a medical diagnosis should not ignore Muhammad's moral message because it is just as likely, perhaps more likely, for God communicate with a person in an abnormal state of mind.[Note 9]
From a Muslim point of view, Freemon says, Muhammed's mental state at the time of revelation was unique and is not therefore amenable to medical or scientific discourse.
Neglected legacy
Muhammad has been criticized for several omissions during his prophethood: he left the Muslim community leaderless and divided following his death by failing to clearly and indisputably declare the individual, selection process or institution that should succeed him,[156][157][158][159] he failed to collect the Quran in a definitive text (later achieved during Uthman's Caliphate),[160] and he failed to collect and codify his prophetic tradition, which work was later undertaken by scholars in the 8th and 9th centuries and became the second most important source of Islam's teachings.[161]
According to both Sunni and Shia Muslims, on his way back from his last pilgrimage to Mecca, Muhammad stopped in a place called
Tribalism
By stating that Muslims should perpetually be ruled by a member of his own
Criticism of Muhammad's personal motivations
19th century and early 20th century
William Muir, like many other 19th-century scholars divides Muhammad's life into two periods—
Philip Schaff says that "in the earlier part of his life he [Muhammad] was a sincere reformer and enthusiast, but after the establishment of his kingdom a slave of ambition for conquest" and describes him as "a slave of sensual passion."[143] William St. Clair Tisdall also accused Muhammad of inventing revelations to justify his own desires.[165][166]
But at Medina he seems to have cast off all shame; and the incidents connected with his marital relations, more especially the story of his marriage with Zainab the wife of his adopted son Zaid, and his connexion with Mary the Coptic slave-girl, are sufficient proof of his unbridled licentiousness and of his daring impiety in venturing to ascribe to GOD Most High the verses which he composed to sanction such conduct.[165]
In order to gain his ends he (Muhammad) recoils from no expedient, and he approves of similar unscrupulousness on the part of his adherents, when exercised in his interest. He profits to the utmost from the chivalry of the Meccans, but rarely requites it with the like... For whatever he does he is prepared to plead the express authorization of the deity. It is, however, impossible to find any doctrine which he is not prepared to abandon in order to secure a political end.[168]
Late 20th century
According to
Like Jesus Christ, Muhammad loved spiritual poverty and was also close to the economically poor, living very simply even after he had become "the ruler of a whole world." He was also always severe with himself and emphasized that, if exertion in the path of God (al-jihād; commonly translated as "holy war") can sometimes mean fighting to preserve one's life and religion, the greater jihad is to fight against the dispersing tendencies of the concupiscent soul.[169]
Modern secular historians generally decline to address the question of whether the messages Muhammad reported being revealed to him were from "his unconscious, the collective unconscious functioning in him, or from some divine source", but they acknowledge that the material came from "beyond his conscious mind."[170][full citation needed] Watt says that sincerity does not directly imply correctness: In contemporary terms, Muhammad might have mistaken for divine revelation his own unconscious.[153]: 17 William Montgomery Watt states:
Only a profound belief in himself and his mission explains Muhammad's readiness to endure hardship and persecution during the Meccan period when from a secular point of view there was no prospect of success. Without sincerity how could he have won the allegiance and even devotion of men of strong and upright character like Abu-Bakr and 'Umar ? ... There is thus a strong case for holding that Muhammad was sincere. If in some respects he was mistaken, his mistakes were not due to deliberate lying or imposture.[153]: 232 ...the important point is that the message was not the product of Muhammad's conscious mind. He believed that he could easily distinguish between his own thinking and these revelations. His sincerity in this belief must be accepted by the modern historian, for this alone makes credible the development of a great religion. The further question, however, whether the messages came from Muhammad's unconscious, or the collective unconscious functioning in him, or from some divine source, is beyond the competence of the historian.[170]
Rudi Paret agrees, writing that "Muhammad was not a deceiver,"[171] and Welch also holds that "the really powerful factor in Muhammad's life and the essential clue to his extraordinary success was his unshakable belief from beginning to end that he had been called by God. A conviction such as this, which, once firmly established, does not admit of the slightest doubt, exercises an incalculable influence on others. The certainty with which he came forward as the executor of God's will gave his words and ordinances an authority that proved finally compelling."[144]
Bernard Lewis, another modern historian, commenting on the common Western Medieval view of Muhammad as a self-seeking impostor, states that[172]
The modern historian will not readily believe that so great and significant a movement was started by a self-seeking impostor. Nor will he be satisfied with a purely supernatural explanation, whether it postulates aid of divine or diabolical origin; rather, like Gibbon, will he seek 'with becoming submission, to ask not indeed what were the first, but what were the secondary causes of the rapid growth' of the new faith.
Watt rejects the idea that Muhammad's moral behavior deteriorated after he migrated to Medina. He argues that "it is based on too facile a use of the principle that all power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely". Watt interprets incidents in the Medinan period in such a way that they mark "no failure in Muhammad to live to his ideals and no lapse from his moral principles."[153]: 229
See also
References
Footnotes
- ^ August Wilhelm Schlegel considered Goethe "a heathen who converted to Islam."[42]
- ^ [98][99][102][103][104][105][106][107][108]
- ^ Islamic sources of the classical era differ among themselves about her precise age at the time of marriage and consummation but converge on her pre-menarcheal status.[109] Ibn Sa'd's corpus of biography varies her age at the time of marriage between six and seven, and holds her age at consummation to be nine; Al-Tabari notes that Aisha stayed with her parents even after the marriage, which would be consummated only at nine years of age upon her reaching sexual maturity but in another place, remarks her to have been born before the dawning of Islam (610 C.E), which translates to an age of about twelve or more at marriage; Ibn Hisham's biography of Muhammad notes her to have been ten years old at consummation.[109][110][111] Aisha herself recollected to have been married at seven years of age — as transmitted in Sahih al-Bukhari —, and would leverage her being the only virgin-wife of Muhammad to attract support in the successional disputes that ensued upon Muhammad's death.[112]Spellberg finds attempts in proving the "real age" of Aisha at the time of marriage (or consummation) as an exercise in futility; Kecia Ali agrees.[113] Scholars have noted such underage marriages to be common in premodern world[114] and such exclusive focus on the young age of Aisha might have been a ploy to assert that Aisha was born to a Muslim family, who deserved greater reverence.[115]
- ^ However, such revisionism was critiqued by conservative scholars.[110]
- ^ One such attempt corroborates information known about her older sister Asma to suggest that Aisha was over thirteen — probably between seventeen and nineteen — at the time of her marriage.[118]
- ^ "The Christians were conciliated by the acknowledgment of our LORD as the Greatest of Prophets; the Jews, by the respectful mention of Moses and their other Lawgivers; the idolaters, by the veneration which the Impostor professed for the Temple of Mecca, and the black stone which it contained; and the Chaldeans, by the pre-eminence which he gives to the ministrations of the Angel Gabriel, and his whole scheme of the Seven Heavens. To a people devoted to the gratification of their passions and addicted to Oriental luxury, he appealed, not unsuccessfully, by the promise of a Paradise whose sensual delights were unbounded, and the permission of a free exercise of pleasures in this world."[139]
- ^ "The Makkan pilgrimage admits of no other explanation than this, that the Prophet of Arabia found it expedient to compromise with Arabian idolatry. And hence we find the superstition and silly customs of the Ḥajj grafted on to a religion which professes to be both monotheistic in its principle, and iconoclastic in its practices. A careful and critical study of Islām will, we think, convince any candid mind that at first Muḥammad intended to construct his religion on the lines of the Old Testament. Abraham, the true Muslim, was his prototype, Moses his law-giver, and Jerusalem his Qiblah. But circumstances were ever wont to change not only the Prophet's revelations, but also his moral standards. Makkah became the Qiblah; and the spectacle of the Muslim world bowing in the direction of a black stone, whilst they worship the one God, marks Islām, with its Makkan pilgrimage; as a religion of compromise.[140]"
Notes
- Hughes, T.P.(1885). In A Dictionary of Islam: Being a Cyclopædia of the Doctrines, Rites, Ceremonies, and Customs, together with the Technical and Theological Terms, of the Muhammadan Religion. London: W.H. Allen & Co.
- ^ See for example William Muir, who says "Shortly after the death of Khadîja, the Prophet married again; but it was not till the mature age of fifty-four that he made the dangerous trial of polygamy, by taking Ayesha, yet a child, as the rival of Sauda. Once the natural limits of restraint were overpassed, Mahomet fell an easy prey to his strong passion for the sex. In his fifty-sixth year he married Haphsa; and the following year, in two succeeding months, Zeinab bint Khozeima, and Omm Salma. But his desires were not to be satisfied by the range of a harem already greater than was permitted to any of his followers; rather, as age advanced, they were stimulated to seek for new and varied indulgence. A few months after his nuptials with Zeinab and Omm Salma, the charms of a second Zeinab were by accident discovered too fully before the Prophet's admiring gaze. She was the wife of Zeid, his adopted son and bosom friend; but he was unable to smother the flame she had kindled in his breast; and, by divine command she was taken to his bed. In the same year he married a seventh wife, and also a concubine. And at last, when he was full threescore years of age, no fewer than three new wives, besides Mary the Coptic slave, were within the space of seven months added to his already well filled harem. The bare recital of these facts may justify the saying of Ibn Abbâs,—"Verily the chiefest among the Moslems (meaning Mahomet) was the foremost of them in his passion for women;"—a fatal example imitated too readily by his followers, who adopt the Prince of Medîna, rather than the Prophet of Mecca, for their pattern." Muir, W. (1861). The Life of Mahomet (Vol. 4, pp. 309–11). London: Smith, Elder and Co.
- blunted affect of the schizophrenic can hardly inspire the tenacious loyalty of the early followers. "It is also unlikely that a person with loose associations and other elements of schizophrenic thought disordercould guide the political and military fortunes of the early Islamic state."
- ^ Freemon does so for two reasons: It can not justify the rapid, almost paroxysmal onset of these spells. Furthermore, without personal conviction of the reality of his visions, Muhammad could not have convinced his astute followers.
- ^ According to Freemon, "Too many of these spells occurred over too long a period of time to suggest transient ischemic attacks, and no neurologic deficits outside the mental sphere were observed."
- ^ Freemon argues that long duration, absence of worsening, and paroxysmal onset make hypoglycemia unlikely
- ^ He argues that absence of vertigo rules out labyrinthitis, Meniere's disease, or other inner ear maladies.
- ^ Supporting this diagnosis, he cites Paroxysmal onset, failing to the ground with loss of conscious, autonomic dysfunction and hallucinatory imagery. On the evidences opposing the diagnosis he mentions the late age of onset, lack of recognition as seizures by his contemporaries, and lastly poetic, organized statements in immediate postictal period.
- ^ Freemon explains this by quoting William James"Just as our primary wide-awake consciousness throws open our senses to the touch of things material, so it is logically conceivable that if there be higher spiritual agencies that can directly touch us, the psychological condition of their doing so might be our possession of a subconscious region which alone should yield access to them. The hubbub of the waking life might close a door which in the dreamy subliminal might remain ajar or open."
Citations
- ^ Inferno, Canto XXVIII Archived 4 October 2018 at the Wayback Machine, lines 22-63; translation by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow (1867).
- ^ ISBN 978-90-04-16121-4.
- ^ ISBN 978-0195325638.
- ^ ISSN 1864-3396.
- ^ ISBN 978-1-56663-340-6.
- ^ ISBN 978-0521767255.
As Voltaire's knowledge of Islam deepened, he clearly became better disposed towards the faith.
Mahomet devoit aux juifs une partie de ses connoissances et de sa religion; mais il éprouvoit contre eux cette haine qui semble s'animer dans les sectes religieuses, lorsqu'il n'y a entre elles qu'une seule différence au milieu de nombreux rapports. De puissantes colonies de cette nation, riches, commerçantes et dépourvues de toutes vertus guerrières, étoient établies en Arabie, à peu de distance de Médine. Mahomet les attaqua successivement, de l'an 628 à l'an 627; il né se contenta pas de partager leurs richesses, il abandonna presque tous les vaincus à des supplices qui, dans d'autres guerres, souilloient rarement ses armes.(book 2, pp. 27-28)
As was customary for Arab chiefs, many were political marriages to cement alliances. Others were marriages to the widows of his companions who had fallen in combat and were in need of protection. Remarriage was difficult in a society that emphasized virgin marriages. Aisha was the only virgin that Muhammad married and the wife with whom he had the closest relationship. Fifth, as we shall see later, Muhammad's teachings and actions, as well as the Quranic message, improved the status of all women—wives, daughters, mothers, widows, and orphans.
Evidence that the Prophet waited for Aisha to reach physical maturity before consummation comes from al-Ṭabarī, who says she was too young for intercourse at the time of the marriage contract;