Misplaced Pages

Part of a series on
Islam
Beliefs Oneness of God Angels Revealed Books Prophets Day of Resurrection Predestination
Practices Profession of Faith Prayer Almsgiving Fasting Pilgrimage
Texts Foundations Quran Sunnah (Hadith, Sirah) Tafsir (exegesis) Aqidah (creed) Qisas al-Anbiya ("Stories of the Prophets") Mathnawi (Poems) Fiqh (jurisprudence) Sharia (law)
History Timeline Jahiliyyah Muhammad Ahl al-Bayt Sahabah Rashidun Caliphate Imamate Spread of Islam Succession to Muhammad
Culture and society Academics Animals Art Association football Calendar Children Circumcision Demographics Diaspora Denominations Sunni Shia Economics Education Ethics Exorcism Feminism Festivals Finance Madrasa Moral teachings Mosque Music Mysticism Philosophy Poetry Politics Proselytizing Science Sexuality LGBTQ Slavery Concubinage Social welfare Women
Related topics Apostasy Criticism Muhammad Quran Hadith Arabic language Other religions Islamism Violence terrorism war Islamophobia Jihad Jihadism Salafi jihadism Deobandi jihadism Military laws Glossary
Islam portal
v t e

The first to criticize the Islamic prophet Muhammad were his non-Muslim Arab contemporaries, who decried him for preaching monotheism, and the Jewish tribes of Arabia, for what they claimed were unwarranted appropriation of Biblical narratives and figures and vituperation of the Jewish faith. For these reasons, medieval Jewish writers commonly referred to him by the derogatory nickname ha-Meshuggah (Hebrew: מְשֻׁגָּע‬, "the Madman" or "the Possessed").

During the Middle Ages, various Western and Byzantine Christian thinkers considered Muhammad to be a deplorable man, a false prophet, and even the Antichrist, as he was frequently seen in Christendom as a heretic or possessed by demons. Thomas Aquinas criticized Muhammad's handling of doctrinal matters and promises of what Aquinas described as "carnal pleasure" in the afterlife.

Modern criticism has concerned Muhammad's sincerity as a prophet, his morality, his marriages, his ownership of slaves and his psychological condition. Muhammad has also faced accusations of cruelty towards his enemies, including in the invasion of the Banu Qurayza tribe in Medina.

History of criticism

Early Middle Ages

The earliest documented Christian knowledge of Muhammad stems from Byzantine sources, written shortly after Muhammad's death in 632. In the Doctrina Jacobi nuper baptizati, a dialogue between a recent Christian convert and several Jews, one participant writes that his brother "wrote to saying that a deceiving prophet has appeared amidst the Saracens". Another participant in the Doctrina replies about Muhammad: "He is deceiving. For do prophets come with sword and chariot?, …ou will discover nothing true from the said prophet except human bloodshed". Another Greek source for Muhammad is Theophanes the Confessor, a 9th-century writer. The earliest Syriac source is the 7th-century writer John bar Penkaye.

One Christian who came under the early dominion of the Islamic Caliphate was John of Damascus (c. 676–749 AD), who was familiar with Islam and Arabic. The second chapter of his book, The Fount of Wisdom, titled "Concerning Heresies", presents a series of discussions between Christians and Muslims. John claimed that an Arian monk (whom he did not know was Bahira) influenced Muhammad and the writer viewed the Islamic doctrines as nothing more than a hodgepodge culled from the Bible.

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", 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.

From the 9th century onwards, highly negative biographies of Muhammad were written in Latin, such as the one by Álvaro of Córdoba proclaiming him the Antichrist. Since the 7th century, Muhammad and his name have been connected to several stereotypes. Many sources mentioned exaggerated and sometimes wrong stereotypes. These stereotypes are born in the East but adopted by or developed in Western cultures. These references played a principal role in introducing Muhammad and his religion to the West as the false prophet, Saracen prince or deity, the Biblical beast, a schismatic from Christianity and a satanic creature, and the Antichrist.

Secular criticism

Many early former Muslims such as Ibn al-Rawandi, Al-Ma'arri, and Abu Isa al-Warraq were religious skeptics, and philosophers who criticized Islam, the authority and reliability of the Qu'ran, Muhammad's morality, and his claims to be a prophet. MOS:NOLINKQUOTE 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.”

High to late middle Ages

During the 12th century Peter the Venerable, who saw Muhammad as the precursor to the Anti-Christ and the successor of Arius, ordered the translation of the Qur'an into Latin (Lex Mahumet pseudoprophete) and the collection of information on Muhammad so that Islamic teachings could be refuted by Christian scholars. During the 13th century a series of works by European scholars such as Pedro Pascual, Ricoldo de Monte Croce, and Ramon Llull depicted Muhammad as an Antichrist and argued that Islam was a Christian heresy.

According to Hossein Nasr, the earliest European literature often refers to Muhammad unfavorably. A few learned circles of Middle Ages Europe – primarily Latin-literate scholars – had access to fairly extensive biographical material about Muhammad. They interpreted the biography through a Christian religious filter, one that viewed Muhammad as a person who seduced the Saracens into his submission under religious guise. Popular European literature of the time portrayed Muhammad as though he were worshipped by Muslims, similar to an idol or a heathen god.

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, 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."

Some medieval ecclesiastical writers portrayed Muhammad as possessed by Satan, a "precursor of the Antichrist" or the Antichrist himself.

A more positive interpretation appears in the 13th-century Estoire del Saint Grail, the first book in the vast Arthurian cycle, the Lancelot-Grail. In describing the travels of Joseph of Arimathea, keeper of the Holy Grail, the author says that most residents of the Middle East were pagans until the coming of Muhammad, who is shown as a true prophet sent by God to bring Christianity to the region. This mission however failed when Muhammad's pride caused him to alter God's wishes, thereby deceiving his followers. Nevertheless, Muhammad's religion is portrayed as being greatly superior to paganism.

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.

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.

In Summa Contra Gentiles Thomas Aquinas wrote a critical view of Muhammad, suggesting that his teachings aligned closely with worldly desires and lacked strong support from earlier religious texts. Aquinas claimed that Muhammad's followers might have been discouraged from studying the Old and New Testaments, which he saw as incompatible with Muhammad's teachings.

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.

Early modern period

Martin Luther referred to Muhammad as "a devil and first-born child of Satan." 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.

Mahomet (French: Le fanatisme, ou Mahomet le Prophète, literally "Fanaticism, or Mahomet the Prophet") is a five-act tragedy written in 1736 by French playwright and philosopher Voltaire. It made its debut performance in Lille on 25 April 1741. The play is a study of religious fanaticism, drawing from an episode in traditional biographies of Muhammad. Voltaire described the play as "written in opposition to the founder of a false and barbarous sect to whom could I with more propriety inscribe a satire on the cruelty and errors of a false prophet". However, some scholars posit that the play targeted "the intolerance of the Catholic Church and its crimes done on behalf of the Christ."

In a 1740 letter to Frederick II of Prussia, Voltaire criticized Muhammad's actions, attributing his influence to superstition and a lack of Enlightenment values, and described him as "a Tartuffe with a sword in his hand."

However, Voltaire later conceded that while Muhammad's means were shocking, his civil laws were good, and he effectively removed much of Asia from idolatry. Voltaire also referred to Muhammad as a "poet" and recognized him as a literate figure and drew parallels between Arabs and ancient Hebrews, noting their shared fervor for battle in the name of God.

According to Malise Ruthven, Voltaire's view became more positive as he learned more about Islam. 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").

Late modern period

In the early 20th century Western scholarly views of Muhammad changed, including critical views. In the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia Gabriel Oussani states that Muhammad was inspired by an "imperfect understanding" of Judaism and Christianity, but that the views of Luther and those who call Muhammad a "wicked impostor", a "dastardly liar" and a "willful deceiver" are an "indiscriminate abuse" and "unsupported by facts." Instead, 19th-century Western scholars such as Aloys Sprenger, Theodor Noldeke, Gustav Weil, William Muir, Sigismund Koelle, Grimme [de] and D.S. Margoliouth "give us a more correct and unbiased estimate of Muhammad's life and character, and substantially agree as to his motives, prophetic call, personal qualifications, and sincerity."

Muir, Marcus Dods and others have suggested that Muhammad was at first sincere, but later became deceptive. Koelle finds "the key to the first period of Muhammad's life in Khadija, his first wife," after whose death he became prey to his "evil passions." Samuel Marinus Zwemer, a Christian missionary, criticised the life of Muhammad by the standards of the Old and New Testaments, by the pagan morality of his Arab compatriots, and last, by the new law which he brought. Quoting Johnstone, Zwemer concludes by claiming that his harsh judgment rests on evidence which "comes all from the lips and the pens of his own devoted adherents."

Hindu criticism

The Sair-e-Dozakh (1927), ("A walk through the Hell", an article critical of Islam published in a magazine called Risala-i-Vartman) was a take on the Isra and Mi'raj, Muhammad's journey to heaven and hell according to Islamic traditions. Described as a "brutal satire" by Gene Thursby, it described a dream purportedly experienced by the author in which he mounts a mysterious animal and sees various Hindu deities and Sikh gurus in the realm of salvation.

Contemporary history

Somali-Dutch feminist writer Ayaan Hirsi Ali has called him a "tyrant" and a "pervert". Neuroscientist and prominent ideological critic Sam Harris, contrasts Muhammad with Jesus Christ. While he regards Christ as something of a "hippie" figure, he describes Muhammad as a "conquering warlord" whose teachings promote spreading faith through subjugation.

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."

In 2012, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula released a film titled Innocence of Muslims. A Vanity Fair article described the film as poorly made with disjointed dialogue, erratic editing, and melodramatic performances. The film was intended to provoke, depicting Muhammad in a highly negative light, portraying him as a violent and immoral figure. Reactions to the film's release led to intense demonstrations and targeted actions against Western institutions across various countries in 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.

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. 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 them with kindness and compassion, and encouraged freeing of slaves, he still did not completely abolish the practice.

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. Muhammad would send his companions like Abu Bakr and Uthman ibn Affan to buy slaves to free. Many early converts to Islam were the poor and former slaves like Bilal ibn Rabah al-Habashi.

Treatment of enemies

Norman Geisler accuses Muhammad of "mercilessness" towards the Jewish tribes of Medina. 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." The Orientalist William Muir, in assessing Muhammad's character, described him as cruel and faithless in dealing with his enemies.

Jean de Sismondi suggests that Muhammad's successive attacks on powerful Jewish colonies located near Medina in Arabia were due to religious differences between them, and he claimed that he subjected the defeated to punishments that were not typical in other wars.

Muhammad has been often criticized outside of the Islamic world for his treatment of the Jewish tribes of Medina. 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.

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. 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."

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. 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. Esposito also argues that in Muhammad's time, traitors were executed and points to similar situations in the Bible. Esposito says that Muhammad's motivation was political rather than racial or theological; he was trying to establish Muslim dominance and rule in Arabia.

Some historians, such as W.N. Arafat and Barakat Ahmad, have disputed the historicity of the incident. Ahmad argues that only the leading members of the tribe were killed. Arafat argued based on accounts by Malik ibn Anas and Ibn Hajar that Ibn Ishaq gathered information from descendants of the Qurayza Jews, who exaggerated the details of the incident. He also maintained that not all adult males were killed but only those who actually fought in the battle, however, William Montgomery Watt described this argument as "not entirely convincing."

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.

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 polygynous marriages. According to American historian John Esposito, the Semitic cultures in general permitted polygamy (for example, the practice could be found in biblical and postbiblical Judaism); it was particularly a common practice among Arabs, especially among nobles and leaders.

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 monogamous to her for more than 24 years until she died. Norman Geisler frames Muhammad's marriages as a question of moral inconsistency, since Muhammad was unwilling to abide by the revealed limit of four wives that he enjoined on other men. Quran 33:50 states that the limit of four wives did not apply to Muhammad. Although he was not permitted any more wives according to Quran 33:52

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. Medieval Sufi, Ibn Arabi, sees Muhammad's relationships with his wives as a proof of his superiority amongst men. John Esposito states that polygamy served multiple purposes, including solidifying political alliances among Arab chiefs and marrying widows of companions who died in combat that needed protection.

Aisha

According to some classical sources, Aisha was six or seven years old when betrothed to Muhammad, with the marriage being consummated when she reached the age of nine or ten years old. Some sources, however, state her age to be twelve or older. Beginning in the early twentieth century, Christian polemicists and orientalists attacked what they deemed to be Muhammad's deviant sexuality, for having married an underage girl; criticisms came from the likes of Harvey Newcomb and David Samuel Margoliouth while others were mild, choosing to explain how the "heat of tropics" made "girls of Arabia" mature at an early age. While most Muslims defended the traditionally accepted age of Aisha with vigor emphasizing on cultural relativism, the political dimensions of the marriage, Aisha's "exceptional qualities" etc., some — Abbas Mahmoud al-Aqqad in Egypt and others — chose to re-calculate the age and fix it at late adolescence as a tool of social reform in their homelands or even, mere pandering to different audiences. In the late-twentieth century and early twenty-first century, people have used Aisha's age to accuse Muhammad of pedophilia, as well as explain a reported higher prevalence of child marriage in Muslim societies.

Zaynab bint Jahsh

Western criticism has focused especially on the marriage of Muhammad to his first cousin Zaynab bint Jahsh, the divorced wife of Zayd ibn Harithah, an ex-slave whom Muhammad had adopted as his son. Orientalists and critics such as Edward Sell have criticized the marriage, questioning its motivations and implications, while some like William St. Clair Tisdall have viewed certain aspects, such as the associated revelation, through a lens of self-interest. According to Tabari, taken from Al-Waqidi, Muhammad went in search of Zayd. A curtain covering the doorway had been moved by the wind, revealing Zaynab in her chamber. Zayd subsequently found her unattractive and divorced Zaynab.

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.

According to William Montgomery Watt, Zaynab herself was working for marriage with Muhammad and was not happy being married to Zayd. Watt also places doubt on the story outlined by Al-Waqidi and states that it should be taken with a "grain of salt." 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.

According to Mazheruddin Siddiqi, Zaynab as the cousin of Muhammad was seen by him many times before her marriage to Zayd. Siddiqi states: "He 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."

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. 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.

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. When Zaynab's waiting period from her divorce was complete, Muhammad married her. 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. 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".

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.

Thomas Patrick Hughes (b. 1838) said that the Hajj represents an expedient compromise between Muhammad's monotheistic principles and Arabian paganism.

Islamic scholar Yasir Qadhi stated that while non-Muslims believe Muhammad "adopted certain things from paganism and then added his own two cents for us", he instead states that Muhammad resurrected the original teachings of the Islamic prophet Ibrahim, citing an Islamic narrative of a man named Amr ibn Luhay who later introduced paganism in Arabia. Muḥammad ibn ʻAbd Allāh Azraqī mentions the story in his book titled Kitāb akhbār Makkah.

Psychological and medical condition

Muhammad is reported to have had mysterious seizures at the moments of inspiration. Philip Schaff (1819–1893) noted that Muhammad's revelations were accompanied by intense physical symptoms.

According to Temkin, the first attribution of epileptic seizures to Muhammad comes from the 8th century Byzantine historian Theophanes who wrote that Muhammad's wife "was very much grieved that she, being of noble descent, was tied to such a man, who was not only poor but epileptic as well." In the Middle Ages, the general perception of one who suffered epilepsy was that of an unclean and incurable wretch who might be possessed by the Devil. The political hostility between Islam and Christianity contributed to the continuation of the accusation of epilepsy throughout the Middle Ages. The Christian minister Archdeacon Humphrey Prideaux gave the following description of Muhammad's visions:

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." 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. Nineteenth-century orientalist Margoliouth claimed that Muhammad suffered from epilepsy and even occasionally faked it for effect.

Sprenger attributes Muhammad's revelations to epileptic fits or a "paroxysm of cataleptic insanity." In Schaff's view, Muhammad's "early and frequent epileptic fits" provided "some light on his revelations." The most famous epileptic of the 19th century, Fyodor Dostoyevsky (1821–1881) wrote that epileptic attacks have an inspirational quality; he said they are "a supreme exaltation of emotional subjectivity" in which time stands still. Dostoyevsky claimed that his own attacks were similar to those of Muhammad: "Probably it was of such an instant, that the epileptic Mahomet was speaking when he said that he had visited all the dwelling places of Allah within a shorter time than it took for his pitcher full of water to empty itself."

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."

Modern Western scholars of Islam have rejected the diagnosis of epilepsy. Tor Andrae rejects the idea that the inspired state is pathological attributing it to a scientifically superficial and hasty theory arguing that those who consider Muhammad epileptic should consider all types of semi-conscious and trance-like states, occasional loss of consciousness, and similar conditions as epileptic attacks. Andrae writes that "f epilepsy is to denote only those severe attacks which involve serious consequences for the physical and mental health, then the statement that Mohammad suffered from epilepsy must be emphatically rejected." Caesar Farah suggests that "hese insinuations resulted from the 19th-century infatuation with scientifically superficial theories of medical psychology." Noth, in the Encyclopedia of Islam, states that such accusations were a typical feature of medieval European Christian polemic.

Maxime Rodinson says that it is most probable that Muhammad's condition was basically of the same kind as that found in many mystics rather than epilepsy. 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.

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."

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.

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. In his differential diagnosis, Freemon rejects schizophrenic hallucinations, drug-induced mental changes such as might occur after eating plants containing hallucinogenic materials, transient ischemic attacks, hypoglycemia, labyrinthitis, Ménière's disease, or other inner ear maladies.

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. 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 to communicate with a person in an abnormal state of mind.

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. In reaction to Freemon's article, GM. S. Megahed, a Muslim neurologist criticized the article arguing that there are no scientific explanations for many religious phenomena, and that if Muhammad's message is a result of psychomotor seizures, then on the same basis Moses' and Jesus' message would be the result of psychomotor seizures. In response, Freemon attributed such negative reactions to his article to the general misconceptions about epilepsy as a demeaning condition. Freemon said that he did plan to write an article on the inspirational spells of St. Paul, but the existence of such misconceptions caused him to cancel it.

Legacy

Some scholars claim that following Muhammad's death, the Muslim community who were joined together by the unity of the faith, became "leaderless" and a "haphazard" group. In the absence of established dynastic traditions and political customs, divisions emerged among Muslims. Muhammad did not compile the Quranic revelations into a single text during his lifetime; this task was later undertaken during Uthman's Caliphate. He did not 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.

According to both Sunni and Shia Muslims, on his way back from his last pilgrimage to Mecca, Muhammad stopped in a place called Ghadir Khumm, and appointed his cousin Ali as his executor of his last will and his Wali. The word Wali was interpreted differently by Sunni and Shia Muslims. Shia believes Muhammad explicitly appointed Ali as his successor at the location. Shia also believe Muhammad's Ahl al-Bayt, are the trusted collectors and transmitters of Muhammad's ahadith and trusted interpreters of Quran.

By stating that Muslims should perpetually be ruled by a member of his own Quraysh tribe after him, Muhammed is accused of creating an Islamic aristocracy, contrary to the religion's ostensibly egalitarian principles. In this reckoning, he introduced a hereditary elite topped by his own family and descendants (the Ahlul Bayt and sayyids), followed by his clan (Banu Hashim) then tribe (Quraysh).

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—Meccan and Medinan. He asserts that "in the Meccan period of life there certainly can be traced no personal ends or unworthy motives," painting him as a man of good faith and a genuine reformer. However, that all changed after the Hijra, according to Muir. "There temporal power, aggrandisement, and self-gratification mingled rapidly with the grand object of the Prophet's life, and they were sought and attained by just the same instrumentality." From that point on, he accuses Muhammad of manufacturing "messages from heaven" in order to justify a lust for women and reprisals against enemies, among other sins.

Philip Schaff says that "in the earlier part of his life he 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."

D.S. Margoliouth, another 19th-century scholar, sees Muhammad as a charlatan who beguiled his followers with techniques like those used by fraudulent mediums today. He has expressed a view that Muhammad faked his religious sincerity, playing the part of a messenger from God like a man in a play, adjusting his performances to create an illusion of spirituality. He viewed Muhammad's behavior as opportunistic, prioritizing political ends over consistent doctrine.

Late 20th century

According to William Montgomery Watt and Richard Bell, recent writers have generally dismissed the idea that Muhammad deliberately deceived his followers, arguing that Muhammad "was absolutely sincere and acted in complete good faith". According to Nasr,

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.

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." Watt says that sincerity does not directly imply correctness: In contemporary terms, Muhammad might have mistaken for divine revelation his own unconscious. 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. ...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.

Rudi Paret agrees, writing that "Muhammad was not a deceiver," 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."

Bernard Lewis, another modern historian, commenting on the common Western Medieval view of Muhammad as a self-seeking impostor, states that

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."

See also

• Censorship in Islamic societies
• Criticism of the Quran
• Criticism of Islam
• Depictions of Muhammad
• Historicity of Muhammad
• Islam and other religions
• Hindu–Islamic relations
• Muhammad and Joseph Smith
• Islam and war
• Sex segregation in Islam

References

Footnotes

1. August Wilhelm Schlegel considered Goethe "a heathen who converted to Islam."
3. 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. 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. 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.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. Scholars have noted such underage marriages to be common in premodern world 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.
4. However, such revisionism was critiqued by conservative scholars.
5. 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.
6. "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."
7. "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."

Notes

1. Thomas Patrick Hughes also accuses Muhammad of cruelty. "A striking instance of the cruelty of Muḥammad's character occurs in a tradition given in the Ṣaḥīḥu 'l-Bukhārī (p. 1019). Anas relates, "Some of the people of the tribe of 'Ukl came to the Prophet and embraced Islām; but the air of al-Madīnah did not agree with them, and they wanted to leave the place. And the Prophet ordered them to go where the camels given in alms were assembled, and to drink their milk, which they did, and recovered from their sickness. But after this they became apostates, and renounced Islām, and stole the camels. Then the Prophet sent some people after them, and they were seized and brought back to al-Madīnah. Then the Prophet ordered their hands and their feet to be cut off as a punishment for theft, and their eyes to be pulled out. But the Prophet did not stop the bleeding, and they died". And in another it reads, "The Prophet ordered hot irons to be drawn across their eyes, and then to be cast on the plain of al-Madīnah; and when they asked for water it was not given them, and they died"." 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.
2. 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.
3. Freemon starts his own differential diagnosis by arguing that "one must remember that Muhammad's inspired followers lived closely with him in his early and unsuccessful ministry; these same individuals demonstrated brilliant leadership of the explosively expanding Islamic state after his death". He thus rejects schizophrenic hallucinations thesis arguing that the 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 disorder could guide the political and military fortunes of the early Islamic state."
4. 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.
5. 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."
6. Freemon argues that long duration, absence of worsening, and paroxysmal onset make hypoglycemia unlikely
7. He argues that absence of vertigo rules out labyrinthitis, Meniere's disease, or other inner ear maladies.
8. 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.
9. 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

1. Inferno, Canto XXVIII Archived 4 October 2018 at the Wayback Machine, lines 22-63; translation by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow (1867).
2. ^ Buhl, F.; Ehlert, Trude; Noth, A.; Schimmel, Annemarie; Welch, A. T. (2012) . "Muḥammad". In Bearman, P. J.; Bianquis, Th.; Bosworth, C. E.; van Donzel, E. J.; Heinrichs, W. P. (eds.). Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Leiden and Boston: Brill Publishers. pp. 360–376. doi:10.1163/1573-3912_islam_COM_0780. ISBN 978-90-04-16121-4.
3. ^ Quinn, Frederick (2008). "The Prophet as Antichrist and Arab Lucifer (Early Times to 1600)". The Sum of All Heresies: The Image of Islam in Western Thought. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 17–54. ISBN 978-0195325638.
4. ^ Hartmann, Heiko (2013). "Wolfram's Islam: The Beliefs of the Muslim Pagans in Parzival and Willehalm". In Classen, Albrecht (ed.). East Meets West in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Times: Transcultural Experiences in the Premodern World. Fundamentals of Medieval and Early Modern Culture. Vol. 14. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter. pp. 427–442. doi:10.1515/9783110321517.427. ISBN 9783110328783. ISSN 1864-3396.
5. ^ Goddard, Hugh (2000). "The First Age of Christian-Muslim Interaction (c. 830/215)". A History of Christian-Muslim Relations. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. pp. 34–49. ISBN 978-1-56663-340-6.
6. ^

   Criticism by Christians was voiced soon after the advent of Islam starting with St. John of Damascus in the late seventh century, who wrote of "the false prophet", Muhammad. Rivalry, and often enmity, continued between the European Christian world and the Islamic world . For Christian theologians, the "Other" was the infidel, the Muslim. Theological disputes in Baghdad and Damascus, in the eighth to the tenth century, and in Andalusia up to the fourteenth century led Christian Orthodox and Byzantine theologians and rulers to continue seeing Islam as a threat. In the twelfth century, Peter the Venerable who had the Koran translated into Latin, regarded Islam as a Christian heresy and Muhammad as a sexually self-indulgent and a murderer. However, he called for the conversion, not the extermination, of Muslims. A century later, St. Thomas Aquinas in Summa contra Gentiles accused Muhammad of seducing people by promises of carnal pleasure, uttering truths mingled with many fables and announcing utterly false decisions that had no divine inspiration. Those who followed Muhammad were regarded by Aquinas as brutal, ignorant "beast-like men" and desert wanderers. Through them Muhammad, who asserted he was "sent in the power of arms", forced others to become followers by violence and armed power.

   — Michael Curtis, Orientalism and Islam: European Thinkers on Oriental Despotism in the Middle East and India (2009), p. 31, Cambridge University Press, New York, ISBN 978-0521767255.

7. ^

   The Jews could not let pass unchallenged the way in which the Koran appropriated Biblical accounts and personages; for instance, its making Abraham an Arab and the founder of the Ka'bah at Mecca. The prophet, who looked upon every evident correction of his gospel as an attack upon his own reputation, brooked no contradiction, and unhesitatingly threw down the gauntlet to the Jews. Numerous passages in the Koran show how he gradually went from slight thrusts to malicious vituperations and brutal attacks on the customs and beliefs of the Jews. When they justified themselves by referring to the Bible, Muhammad, who had taken nothing therefrom at first hand, accused them of intentionally concealing its true meaning or of entirely misunderstanding it, and taunted them with being "asses who carry books" (sura lxii. 5). The increasing bitterness of this vituperation, which was similarly directed against the less numerous Christians of Medina, indicated that in time Muhammad would not hesitate to proceed to actual hostilities. The outbreak of the latter was deferred by the fact that the hatred of the prophet was turned more forcibly in another direction, namely, against the people of Mecca, whose earlier refusal of Islam and whose attitude toward the community appeared to him at Medina as a personal insult which constituted a sufficient cause for war.

   — Richard Gottheil, Mary W. Montgomery, Hubert Grimme, "Mohammed" (1906), Jewish Encyclopedia, Kopelman Foundation.

8. ^ Norman A. Stillman (1979). The Jews of Arab Lands: A History and Source Book. Jewish Publication Society. p. 236. ISBN 978-0827601987.
9. Ibn Warraq, Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said's Orientalism, p. 255.
10. Andrew G. Bostom, The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism: From Sacred Texts to Solemn History, p. 21.
11. ^ John of Damascus, De Haeresibus. See Migne, Patrologia Graeca, Vol. 94, 1864, cols 763–73. An English translation by the Reverend John W. Voorhis appeared in The Moslem World, October 1954, pp. 392–98.
12. Cimino, Richard P. (December 2005). ""No God in Common": American Evangelical Discourse on Islam after 9/11". Review of Religious Research. 47 (2). Springer Verlag on behalf of the Religious Research Association: 162–174. doi:10.2307/3512048. ISSN 2211-4866. JSTOR 3512048. S2CID 143510803.
13. Willis, John Ralph, ed. (2013). Slaves and Slavery in Muslim Africa: Islam and the Ideology of Enslavement. Vol. 1. New York: Routledge. pp. vii–xi, 3–26. ISBN 978-0-7146-3142-4.; Willis, John Ralph, ed. (1985). Slaves and Slavery in Muslim Africa: The Servile Estate. Vol. 2. New York: Routledge. pp. vii–xi. ISBN 978-0-7146-3201-8.
14. Spellberg, Denise A. (1996). Politics, Gender, and the Islamic Past: The Legacy of 'A'isha Bint Abi Bakr. Columbia University Press. pp. 39–40. ISBN 978-0-231-07999-0.

15. The messenger of God went out into the marketplace of Medina and had trenches dug in it; then he sent for them and had them beheaded in those trenches. They were brought out to him in groups. Among them were the enemy of God, Huyayy b. Akhtab, and Ka’b b. Asad, the head of the tribe. They numbered 600 or 700—the largest estimate says they were between 800 and 900. As they were being taken in groups to the Messenger of God, they said to Ka’b b. Asad, "Ka’b, what do you understand. Do you not see that the summoner does not discharge and that those of you who are taken away do not come back? By God, it is death!" the affair continued until the Messenger of God had finished with them.

    — Al-Tabari, Victory of Islam, Volume 8, translated by Michael Fishbein (1997), State University of New York Press, pp. 35–36, ISBN 978-0791431504.

16. Watt, W. Montgomery (July 1952). "The Condemnation of the Jews of Banu Qurayzah". The Muslim World. 42 (3). Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell: 160–171. doi:10.1111/j.1478-1913.1952.tb02149.x. ISSN 1478-1913.
17. Kaegi, Walter Emil Jr. (1969). "Initial Byzantine Reactions to the Arab Conquest". Church History. 38 (2): 139–42. doi:10.2307/3162702. JSTOR 3162702. S2CID 162340890, quoting from Doctrina Jacobi nuper baptizati 86–87
18. Walter Emil Kaegi, Jr., "Initial Byzantine Reactions to the Arab Conquest", Church History, Vol. 38, No. 2 (Jun., 1969), pp. 139–49 , quoting from Doctrina Jacobi nuper baptizati 86–87
19. Philip K. Hitti, History of the Arabs, 10th edition (1970), p. 112.
20. From Writings, by St John of Damascus, The Fathers of the Church, vol. 37 (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1958), pp. 153–60. Posted 26 March 2006 to The Orthodox Christian Information Center – St. John of Damascus's Critique of Islam Archived 30 June 2017 at the Wayback Machine
21. Critique of Islam Archived 30 June 2017 at the Wayback Machine St. John of Damascus, From Writings, by St John of Damascus, The Fathers of the Church, vol. 37 (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1958), pp. 153–60. Posted 26 March 2006 on the Orthodox Information Center website Archived 2 February 2011 at the Wayback Machine.
22. Cited by Powers, David Stephan. 2009. Muḥammad is not the Father of any of your Men: the Making of the Last Prophet. USA: University of Pennsylvania Press, p. 29.
23. Sbaihat, Ahlam (2015), "Stereotypes associated with real prototypes of the prophet of Islam's name till the 19th century". Jordan Journal of Modern Languages and Literature Vol. 7, No. 1, 2015, p. 25. http://journals.yu.edu.jo/jjmll/Issues/vol7no12015/Nom2.pdf Archived 22 December 2015 at the Wayback Machine
24. ^ "Muhammad." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2007. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 10 Jan. 2007, .
25. ^ Kenneth Meyer Setton (1 July 1992). "Western Hostility to Islam and Prophecies of Turkish Doom". Diane Publishing. ISBN 0871692015. pp. 4–15
26. See Sbaihat, Ahlam (2015), "Stereotypes associated with real prototypes of the prophet of Islam's name till the 19th century". Jordan Journal of Modern Languages and Literature Vol. 7, No. 1, 2015, pp. 21–38. http://journals.yu.edu.jo/jjmll/Issues/vol7no12015/Nom2.pdf Archived 22 December 2015 at the Wayback Machine
27. Tariq Ali (2003), The Clash of Fundamentalisms: Crusades, Jihads and Modernity, Verso, pp. 55-56.
28. Surah Al-Furqan 25
29. ^ Hossein Nasr. Muhammad. Encycloedia of Islam.
30. ^ "Catholic Encyclopedia: Mohammed and Mohammedanism (Islam)". Newadvent.org. Archived from the original on 25 May 2017. Retrieved 29 September 2015.
31. Lacy, Norris J. (Ed.) (1 December 1992). Lancelot-Grail: The Old French Arthurian Vulgate and Post-Vulgate in Translation, Volume 1 of 5. New York: Garland. ISBN 0824077334.
32. ^ J. Tolan, Medieval Christian Perceptions of Islam (1996) pp. 100–01
33. Summa Contra Gentiles Book 1, Chapter 16, Art.4
34. "Mohammed and Mohammedanism", Catholic Encyclopedia, 1913
35. Moncure Daniel Conway (1879). Demonology and Devil-lore, Volume 2. H. Holt. p. 249.
36. The Works of Voltaire: The Dramatic Works of Voltaire. Voltaire, Tobias George Smollett, John Morley, William F. Fleming, Oliver Herbrand Gordon Leigh. Publisher Werner, 1905. Original from Princeton University. p. 12
37. Pierre Milza, Voltaire p.638, Librairie Académique Perrin, 2007
38. Voltaire, Lettres inédites de Voltaire, Didier, 1856, t.1, Lettre à M. César De Missy, 1 septembre 1742, p.450
39. "But that a camel-merchant should stir up insurrection in his village; that in league with some miserable followers he persuades them that he talks with the angel Gabriel; that he boasts of having been carried to heaven, where he received in part this unintelligible book, each page of which makes common sense shudder; that, to pay homage to this book, he delivers his country to iron and flame; that he cuts the throats of fathers and kidnaps daughters; that he gives to the defeated the choice of his religion or death: this is assuredly nothing any man can excuse, at least if he was not born a Turk, or if superstition has not extinguished all natural light in him." – Referring to Muhammad, in a letter to Frederick II of Prussia (December 1740), published in Oeuvres complètes de Voltaire, Vol. 7 (1869), edited by Georges Avenel, p. 105
40. Georges Minois (12 October 2012). The Atheist's Bible: The Most Dangerous Book That Never Existed. University of Chicago Press. p. 198. ISBN 978-0226530307.
41. "Je sais que Mahomet n’a pas tramé précisément l’espèce de trahison qui fait le sujet de cette tragédie... Je n’ai pas prétendu mettre seulement une action vraie sur la scène, mais des moeurs vraies; faire penser les hommes comme ils pensent dans les circonstances où ils se trouvent, et représenter enfin ce que la fourberie peut inventer de plus atroce, et ce que le fanatisme peut exécuter de plus horrible. Mahomet n’est ici autre chose que Tartuffe les armes à la main." – Letter D2386, to Frederick II of Prussia (January 1740), published in The Complete Works of Voltaire, Institus et Musée Voltaire, 1971, XCI, p. 383
42. Smollett, Tobias; Morley, John (1901). The Works of Voltaire: A philosophical dictionary. pp. 102–04.
43. Avez-vous oublié que ce poète était astronome, et qu'il réforma le calendrier des Arabes ?, Lettre civile et honnête à l'auteur malhonnête de la "Critique de l'histoire universelle de M. de Voltaire" (1760), dans Œuvres complètes de Voltaire, Voltaire. Moland, 1875, Vol. 24, p. 164.
44. Gunny, Ahmad (1996). Images of Islam in 18th Century Writings. p. 142.
45. Malise Ruthven (26 November 2018). "Voltaire's Fanaticism, or Mahomet the Prophet: A New Translation". As Voltaire's knowledge of Islam deepened, he clearly became better disposed towards the faith.
46. Krimmer, Elisabeth; Simpson, Patricia Anne (2013). Religion, Reason, and Culture in the Age of Goethe. Boydell & Brewer. p. 99.
47. Nasr, Seyyed Hossein. Muhammad. Encyclopedia Britannica. Archived from the original on 20 March 2016.
48. Zwemer suggests Muhammad defied Arab ethical traditions, and that he personally violated the strict sexual morality of his own moral system.
49. Zwemer, "Islam, a Challenge to Faith" (New York, 1907)
50. Ambedkar, Bhimrao Ramji (1941). Thoughts On Pakistan. p. 165. OCLC 730034469.
51. Thursby, Gene R. (1975). Hindu-Muslim Relations in British India: A Study of Controversy, Conflict, and Communal Movements in Northern India, 1923–1928: Volume 35 of Studies in the History of Religions. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill Publishers. pp. 40–61. ISBN 978-9004043800. Retrieved 6 May 2012.
52. "Slaughter And 'Submission'". CBS News. 11 March 2005. Archived from the original on 14 May 2007. Retrieved 29 September 2015.
53. "SPIEGEL Interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali: 'Everyone Is Afraid to Criticize Islam'". Spiegel Online. Spiegel.de. 6 February 2006. Archived from the original on 21 December 2007. Retrieved 29 September 2015.
54. "Debate Chris Hedges vs Sam Harris Religion". YouTube. 25 November 2011. Archived from the original on 26 April 2015. Retrieved 29 September 2015.
55. "Sam Harris. Islam, Quran, Perfect Man Muhammad's Hair Hazrat Bal Shrine in Kashmir. All Truth". YouTube. 12 June 2014. Archived from the original on 19 December 2021. Retrieved 29 September 2015.
56. Pipes, Daniel (2002). In the Path of God : Islam and Political Power. Transaction Publishers. p. 43. ISBN 978-0765809810.
57. Gross, Michael Joseph (27 December 2012). "The Making of The Innocence of Muslims: Cast Members Discuss the Film That Set Fire to the Arab World". Vanity Fair. Archived from the original on 14 June 2013. Retrieved 22 May 2013.
58. Waananen, Lisa; Watkins, Derek. "Spread of Protests Sparked by Anti-Muslim Video". archive.nytimes.com.
59. Waananen, Lisa; Watkins, Derek. "Spread of Protests Sparked by Anti-Muslim Video". archive.nytimes.com.
60. "Timeline: Protests over anti-Islam video". www.aljazeera.com.
61. George, Daniel P (14 September 2012). "US consulate targeted in Chennai over anti-Prophet Muhammad film". Internet Archive. Wayback Machine. Archived from the original on 21 October 2012. Retrieved 16 August 2024.
62. Rodney Stark, "For the Glory of God: How Monotheism Led to Reformations, Science, Witch-Hunts, and the End of Slavery", p. 338, 2003, Princeton University Press, ISBN 0691114366
63. ^ "Slavery in Islam". BBC. 7 September 2009. Archived from the original on 6 October 2018. Retrieved 7 March 2019.
64. Gordon, Murray (1989). "The Attitude of Islam Toward Slavery". Slavery in the Arab World. New York: Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 18–47. ISBN 978-0941533300.
65. Levy, Reuben (2000). "Slavery in Islam". The Social Structure of Islam. NY: Routledge. pp. 73–90. ISBN 978-0415209106.
66. "Islam and Slavery". State University of New York at Oswego. Archived from the original on 30 September 2018. Retrieved 30 September 2018.
67. See Tahfeem ul Qur'an by Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi, Vol. 2, pp. 112–13, footnote 44; Also see commentary on verses 23:1-6: Vol. 3, notes 7-1, p. 241; 2000, Islamic Publications.
68. Ali Ünal, The Qur'an with Annotated Interpretation in Modern English, p. 1323
69. Encyclopedia of the Qur'an, Slaves and Slavery
70. Janeh, Sabarr. Learning from the Life of Prophet Muhammad (SAW): Peace and Blessing of God Be upon Him. Milton Keynes: AuthorHouse, 2010. Print. ISBN 1467899666 Pgs. 235-238
71. ^ Geisler, N.L. (1999). In Baker encyclopedia of Christian apologetics. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books. Article on Muhammad, Character of.
72. Muir, W. (1861). The Life of Mahomet, Volume IV (pp. 307–09). London: Smith, Elder and Co.
73. de Sismondi, Jean. Histoire de la chute de Rome et du déclin de la civilisation occidentale (in French). 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)
74. ^ John Esposito, Islam the Straight Path, Oxford University Press, pp. 17–18
75. Bukhari 5:59:362
76. Daniel W. Brown, A New Introduction to Islam, p. 81, 2003, Blackwell Publishers, ISBN 0-631-21604-9
77. Yusuf Ali, "The Meaning of the Holy Quran", (11th Edition), p. 1059, Amana Publications, 1989, ISBN 0915957760
78. Ibn Ishaq, A. Guillaume (translator), The Life of Muhammad, p. 464, 2002, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0196360331
79. ^ Nasr, Seyyed Hossein. Muhammad. Encyclopedia Britannica. Archived from the original on 2 April 2016.
80. Stillman (1974), p. 16
81. Quoted in Stillman (1974), p. 16
82. BBC Radio 4, Beyond Belief, 2 Oct 2006, Islam and the sword
83. Meri, p. 754.
84. Barakat Ahmad, Muhammad and the Jews: A Re-examination, holds that only the leaders of the Qurayza were killed.
85. Nemoy, Leon. Barakat Ahmad's "Muhammad and the Jews". The Jewish Quarterly Review, New Ser., Vol. 72, No. 4. (Apr. 1982), p. 325. Nemoy is sourcing Ahmed's Muhammad and the Jews.
86. Walid Najib Arafat (1976). "New Light on the Story of Banū Qurayẓa and the Jews of Medina". Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, pp. 100–07.
87. Watt, Encyclopaedia of Islam, vol. 5, p. 436, "Kurayza, Banu".
88. Samuel Rosenblatt, Essays on Antisemitism: The Jews of Islam, p. 112
89. Pinson; Rosenblatt (1946) pp. 112–119
90. John L. Esposito, Islam: The Straight Path, Third Edition, Oxford University Press, 1998, p. 16.
91. Fazlur Rahman, Islam, p. 28
92. "Before leaving the subject of marriages, it may be proper to take notice of some peculiar privileges in relation thereto, which, as is asserted, were granted by God to Muhammad, to the exclusion of all other Muslims. One of them was, that he might lawfully marry as many wives and have as many concubines as he pleased, without being confined to any particular number; a privilege which, he asserted, had been granted to the prophets before him. Another was, that he might alter the turns of his wives, and favour such of them as he thought fit, without being tied to that order and equality which others are obliged to observe. A third privilege was, that no man might marry any of his wives, either such as he should divorce during his lifetime, or such as he should leave widows at his death." Wollaston, A.N. (1905). The Sword of Islam (p. 327). New York: E.P. Dutton and Company.
93. "Muhammad received a revelation from God that a man should have no more than four wives at once, yet he had many more. A Muslim defender of Muhammad, writing in The Prophet of Islam as the Ideal Husband, admitted that he had fifteen wives. Yet he tells others they may have only four. How can someone be a perfect moral example and not live by one of the basic laws he laid down for others as from God?" Geisler, N.L. (1999). In Baker encyclopedia of Christian apologetics. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books. Article on Muhammad, Character of.
94. Green, Michael (2002). But Don't All Religions Lead to God?: Navigating the Multi-Faith Maze. Baker Books. Muhammad took eleven wives and numerous concubines (sura 33.50), although he claimed divine revelation for the maximum of four wives (sura 4.3)!
95. https://quran.com/33?startingVerse=52
96. Yahiya Emerick (2014). Critical Lives: Muhammad. Alpha Books. p. 136. ISBN 978-0028643717. Retrieved 22 March 2015.
97. Afzal-ur-Rahman (1981). Muhammad: Encyclopaedia of Seerah (Volume 5 ed.). Muslim Schools Trust. p. 698. ISBN 9780907052142.
98. Ibn Arabi. "The Seals of Wisdom (Fusus Al-Hikam)". Aisha Bewley. Archived from the original on 28 February 2015. Retrieved 22 March 2015.
99. Esposito, John L. (2005). Islam: The Straight Path (PDF) (Revised Third ed.). Oxford University Press. pp. 16–17. Archived (PDF) from the original on 27 January 2018. 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.
100. ^ Watt, Aisha, Encyclopaedia of Islam.
101. ^ D. A. Spellberg, Politics, Gender, and the Islamic Past: the Legacy of A'isha bint Abi Bakr, Columbia University Press, 1994, p. 40.
102. Karen Armstrong, Muhammad: A Biography of the Prophet, Harper San Francisco, 1992, p. 145.
103. Yusuf al-Qaradawi (1999). The Lawful and the Prohibited in Islam (Al-Halal Wal Haram Fil Islam) (reprint, revised ed.). American Trust Publications. pp. 103–04. ISBN 978-0892590162.
104. Karen Armstrong, Muhammad: Prophet For Our Time, HarperPress, 2006, p. 105.
105. Muhammad Husayn Haykal, The Life of Muhammad, North American Trust Publications (1976), p. 139.
106. Barlas (2002), pp. 125–26.
107. A.C. Brown, Jonathan (2014). Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy. Oneworld Publications. pp. 143–44. ISBN 978-1-78074-420-9.
108. A.C. Brown, Jonathan (2014). Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy. Oneworld Publications. p. 316. ISBN 978-1-78074-420-9. 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;
109. Sahih al-Bukhari, 5:58:234, Sahih al-Bukhari, 5:58:236, Sahih al-Bukhari, 7:62:64, Sahih al-Bukhari, 7:62:65, Sahih al-Bukhari, 7:62:88, Sahih Muslim, 8:3309, 8:3310, 8:3311, 41:4915, Sunan Abu Dawood, 41:4917
110. Tabari, volume 9, page 131; Tabari, volume 7, page 7.
111. ^ Spellberg 1996, pp. 39–40
112. ^ A.C. Brown, Jonathan (2014). Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy. Oneworld Publications. pp. 142–148. ISBN 978-1780744209.
113. Ali, Kecia (2014). "Mother of the Faithful". The lives of Muhammad. Harvard: Harvard University Press. pp. 156–171. ISBN 9780674050600.
114. Spellberg 1996, pp. 34–40
115. Ali, Kecia (2014). "Mother of the Faithful". The lives of Muhammad. Harvard: Harvard University Press. p. 157. ISBN 9780674050600.
116. ^ Karen Armstrong, Muhammad: Prophet for Our Time, HarperPress, 2006, p. 167 ISBN 0007232454
117. Ali, Kecia (2014). "Mother of the Faithful". The lives of Muhammad. Harvard: Harvard University Press. p. 158. ISBN 9780674050600.
118. Ali, Kecia (2014). "Mother of the Faithful". The lives of Muhammad. Harvard: Harvard University Press. pp. 165, 177–178. ISBN 9780674050600.
119. Ali, Kecia (2014). "Mother of the Faithful". The lives of Muhammad. Harvard: Harvard University Press. pp. 133, 155–199. ISBN 9780674050600.
120. Barlas, Asma (2012). 'Believing Women in Islam: Unreading Patriarchal Interpretations of the Qur'an. University of Texas Press. p. 126.
121. Ali, Kecia (2014). "Mother of the Faithful". The lives of Muhammad. Harvard: Harvard University Press. pp. 187–191. ISBN 9780674050600.
122. A modern Arabic biography of Muḥammad. Antonie Wessels. Publisher Brill Archive, 1972. ISBN 9004034153 pp. 100–15
123. Tisdall, W.S.C. (1895). The Religion of the Crescent, or Islâm: Its Strength, Its Weakness, Its Origin, Its Influence. Non-Christian Religious Systems (p. 177). London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge.
124. "But we learn the same lesson from all such investigations, and that is how completely Muḥammad adapted his pretended revelations to what he believed to be the need of the moment. The same thing is true with regard to what we read in Sûrah Al Aḥzâb regarding the circumstances attending his marriage with Zainab, whom his adopted son Zaid divorced for his sake. ... a reference to what the Qur’ân itself (Sûrah XXXIII., 37) says about the matter, coupled with the explanations afforded by the Commentators and the Traditions, will prove that Muḥammad's own character and disposition have left their mark upon the moral law of Islâm and upon the Qur’ân itself." Tisdall, W.S.C. (1911). The Original Sources of the Qur’ân (pp. 278–79). London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge.
125. "Being the wife of an adopted son, she was unlawful to the Prophet, but a pretended revelation (see Qur’ān, Sūrah xxxiii. 37) settled the difficulty, and Muḥammad married her. "Hughes, T.P. (1885). 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.
126. "However, Muhammad did this, and had to justify his action by alleging that he had for it the direct sanction of God. It was first necessary to show that God did not approve of the general objection to marriage with wives of adopted sons, and so the revelation came thus: Nor hath He made your adopted sons to be as your sons. – Súratu’l Ahzáb (33) v. 4. ... Having thus settled the general principle, the way was clear for Muhammad to act in this particular case, and to claim divine sanction for setting at nought the sentiment of the Arab people. So the revelation goes on to say: And remember when thou (i.e. Muhammad) said to him (i.e. Zaid), unto whom God had shown favour and to whom thou also hadst shown favour, 'Keep thy wife to thyself and fear God;’ and thou didst hide in thy mind what God would bring to light and thou didst fear man; but more right had it been to fear God. And when Zaid had settled to divorce her, we married her to thee, that it might not be a crime in the faithful to marry the wives of their adopted sons when they have settled the affairs concerning them. And the order of God is to be performed. No blame attaches to the Prophet where God hath given him a permission. – Súratu’l Ahzáb (33) vv. 37–38. This relaxation of the moral law for Muhammad's benefit, because he was a prophet, shows how easy the divorce between religion and morality becomes in Islám." Sell, E. (1905). The Historical Development of the Quran (pp. 150–52). London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge.
127. "But we learn the same lesson from all such investigations, and that is how completely Muḥammad adapted his pretended revelations to what he believed to be the need of the moment. The same thing is true with regard to what we read in Sûrah Al Aḥzâb regarding the circumstances attending his marriage with Zainab, whom his adopted son Zaid divorced for his sake. The subject is too unsavoury for us to deal with at any length, but a reference to what the Qur’ân itself (Sûrah XXXIII., 37) says about the matter, coupled with the explanations afforded by the Commentators and the Traditions, will prove that Muḥammad's own character and disposition have left their mark upon the moral law of Islâm and upon the Qur’ân itself." Tisdall, W. S. C. (1911). The Original Sources of the Qur’ân (pp. 278–79). London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge.
128. "The scandal of the marriage was removed by this extraordinary revelation, and Zeid was thenceforward called not "the son of Mahomet", as heretofore, but by his proper name, "Zeid, the son of Hârith". Our only matter of wonder is, that the Revelations of Mahomet continued after this to be regarded by his people as inspired communications from the Almighty, when they were so palpably formed to secure his own objects, and pander even to his evil desires. We hear of no doubts or questionings; and we can only attribute the confiding and credulous spirit of his followers to the absolute ascendancy of his powerful mind over all who came within its influence." Muir, W. (1861). The Life of Mahomet (Vol. 3, p. 231). London: Smith, Elder and Co.
129. Tabari VIII:3 ^ Tabari VIII:4
130. William Montgomery Watt (1961), Muhammad: Prophet and Statesman, Oxford University Press, p. 158, ISBN 978-0198810780
131. Watt (1961), p. 157
132. ^ Watt (1961), p. 158
133. Mazheruddin Siddiqi (1980), The Holy Prophet and the Orientalists, Islamic Research Institute, p. 163)
134. Siddiqi (1980), p. 163
135. Watt, "Aisha bint Abu Bakr", Encyclopaedia of Islam Online
136. "...the marriage of a man with the wife of his adopted son, even though divorced, was looked upon by the Arabs as a very wrong thing indeed." Sell, E. (1905). The Historical Development of the Quran (pp. 149–50). London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge.
137. "This liberality did not prevent severe comments from those who regarded adopted sonship as real sonship—for which view Mohammed's institution of brotherhoods gave some support—and who, therefore, regarded this union as incestuous." Margoliouth, D.S. (1905). Mohammed and the Rise of Islam (Third Edition., p. 321). New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons.
138. Watt (1956), pp. 330–31
139. Watt, p. 156.
140. ^ Lecker, M (2002). "Zayd B. Haritha". Encyclopaedia of Islam. Vol. 11 (2nd ed.). Brill Academic Publishers. p. 475. ISBN 978-9004127562.
141. Watt, W.M. (1956). Muhammad at Medina, pp. 330-31. Oxford: The Clarendon Press.
142. Landau-Tasseron/Tabari, p. 9.
143. ^ Neale, J.M. (1847). A History of the Holy Eastern Church: The Patriarchate of Alexandria. London: Joseph Masters. Volume II, Section I "Rise of Mahometanism" (p. 68)
144. ^ 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. p. 159.
145. Yasir Qadhi (23 July 2012), Seerah of Prophet Muhammed 4 – Religious status of the world before Islam, YouTube, archived from the original on 19 December 2021, retrieved 30 September 2018
146. ^ Al-Azraqī: Akhbār Makkah. Vol. 1, p. 100.
147. ^ Schaff, P., & Schaff, D.S. (1910). History of the Christian church. Third edition. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. Volume 4, Chapter III, section 42 "Life and Character of Mohammed"
148. ^ Frank R. Freemon, A Differential Diagnosis of the Inspirational Spells of Muhammad the Prophet of Islam, Journal of Epilepsia, 17:4 23–427, 1976
149. Margoliouth, David Samuel (1905). Mohammed and the Rise of Islam. Putnam. p. 46.
150. Jeffery, Arthur (2000). The Quest for the Historical Muhammad. Prometheus Books. p. 346. ISBN 978-1573927871.
151. Caesar Farah (2003). Islam: Beliefs and Observances. Barron's Educational Series. ISBN 0764122266.
152. Tor Andrae (1960). Mohammad: The Man and his Faith. Translated by Theophil Menzel. New York: Harper Torch Book Series. p. 51.
153. ^ "Muhammad". Encyclopedia of Islam.
154. Maxime Rodinson, Muhammad: Prophet of Islam, p. 56
155. Rahman, Fazlur (2007). Islam. University of Chicago Press. p. 13. ISBN 9780226702810.
156. ^ Watt, W. Montgomery; Bell, Richard (1995). Bell's Introduction to the Qur'an. Edinburgh University Press. pp. 17–18. ISBN 0748605975.
157. ^ Watt, W. Montgomery (1961). Muhammad: Prophet and Statesman. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0198810780. Retrieved 22 October 2006.
158. Nasr, Seyyed Hossein. Muhammad. Encyclopedia Britannica. Archived from the original on 1 December 2015.
159. Letters to the Editor, Journal of Epilepsia. 18(2), 1977.
160. Maurice Gaudefroy-Demombynes (2013). Muslim Institutions (reprint ed.). Routledge. pp. 18–19. ISBN 978-1135030261.
161. Maurice Gaudefroy-Demombynes (2013). Muslim Institutions (reprint ed.). Routledge. pp. 18–19. ISBN 978-1135030261.
162. William Hare (1995). The Struggle for the Holy Land: Arabs, Jews, and the Emergence of Israel. Madison Books. p. 73. ISBN 978-1568330402.
163. Spectrum: Journal of the Association of Adventist Forums, Volume 30. The Association. 2002. p. 19.
164. Joseph Morrison Skelly (2009). Political Islam from Muhammad to Ahmadinejad: Defenders, Detractors, and Definitions. ABC-CLIO. p. 38. ISBN 978-0313372247.
165. Gaudefroy-Demombynes 2013, p. 19.
166. Gaudefroy-Demombynes 2013, p. 21.
167. Taha Hussein (1966). The Great Division. p. 35.
168. A History of Pakistan and Its Origins, Christophe Jaffrelot, p.195
169. Muir, William (1878). Life of Mahomet. Kessinger Publishing. p. 583. ISBN 978-0766177413.
170. Margoliouth, David Samuel (1905). Mohammed and the Rise of Islam. Putnam. pp. 88–89, 104–06.
171. Margoliouth, David Samuel (1926). Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics (Volume 8). T&T Clark. p. 878. ISBN 978-0567094896.
172. Nasr, Seyyed Hossein. Muhammad. Encyclopedia Britannica. Archived from the original on 25 March 2016.
173. ^ P.M. Holt; Ann Lambton; Bernard Lewis, eds. (1970). The Cambridge History of Islam. Cambridge University Press. p. 30. ISBN 9780521291354.
174. Reeves, Minou; Stewart, P J (2000). Muhammad in Europe. New York University Press. p. 6. ISBN 9780814775332.
175. Lewis, Bernard (2002). The Arabs in History. Oxford University Press. pp. 45–46. ISBN 9780191587665.

• Criticism of Islam
• Criticism of individuals
• Muhammad
• Islam-related controversies