Islamic Theologian's Theory: It's Likely the Prophet Muhammad Never Existed
-
Islamic Theologian's Theory It's Likely the Prophet Muhammad Never Existed
by Andrew Higgins, WSJ
Thanks to Jeff for the link.Reposted from
http//online.wsj.com/article/SB122669909279629451.htmlProfessor Hired for Outreach to Muslims Delivers a Jolt
M?NSTER, Germany -- Muhammad Sven Kalisch, a Muslim convert and Germany's first professor of Islamic theology, fasts during the Muslim holy month, doesn't like to shake hands with Muslim women and has spent years studying Islamic scripture. Islam, he says, guides his life.
So it came as something of a surprise when Prof. Kalisch announced the fruit of his theological research. His conclusion The Prophet Muhammad probably never existed.
Muslims, not surprisingly, are outraged. Even Danish cartoonists who triggered global protests a couple of years ago didn't portray the Prophet as fictional. German police, worried about a violent backlash, told the professor to move his religious-studies center to more-secure premises.
"We had no idea he would have ideas like this," says Thomas Bauer, a fellow academic at M?nster University who sat on a committee that appointed Prof. Kalisch. "I'm a more orthodox Muslim than he is, and I'm not a Muslim."
When Prof. Kalisch took up his theology chair four years ago, he was seen as proof that modern Western scholarship and Islamic ways can mingle -- and counter the influence of radical preachers in Germany. He was put in charge of a new program at M?nster, one of Germany's oldest and most respected universities, to train teachers in state schools to teach Muslim pupils about their faith.
Muslim leaders cheered and joined an advisory board at his Center for Religious Studies. Politicians hailed the appointment as a sign of Germany's readiness to absorb some three million Muslims into mainstream society. But, says Andreas Pinkwart, a minister responsible for higher education in this north German region, "the results are disappointing."
Prof. Kalisch, who insists he's still a Muslim, says he knew he would get in trouble but wanted to subject Islam to the same scrutiny as Christianity and Judaism. German scholars of the 19th century, he notes, were among the first to raise questions about the historical accuracy of the Bible.
Many scholars of Islam question the accuracy of ancient sources on Muhammad's life. The earliest biography, of which no copies survive, dated from roughly a century after the generally accepted year of his death, 632, and is known only by references to it in much later texts. But only a few scholars have doubted Muhammad's existence. Most say his life is better documented than that of Jesus.
"Of course Muhammad existed," says Tilman Nagel, a scholar in G?ttingen and author of a new book, "Muhammad Life and Legend." The Prophet differed from the flawless figure of Islamic tradition, Prof. Nagel says, but "it is quite astonishing to say that thousands and thousands of pages about him were all forged" and there was no such person.
All the same, Prof. Nagel has signed a petition in support of Prof. Kalisch, who has faced blistering criticism from Muslim groups and some secular German academics. "We are in Europe," Prof. Nagel says. "Education is about thinking, not just learning by heart."
Prof. Kalisch's religious studies center recently removed a sign and erased its address from its Web site. The professor, a burly 42-year-old, says he has received no specific threats but has been denounced as apostate, a capital offense in some readings of Islam.
"Maybe people are speculating that some idiot will come and cut off my head," he said during an interview in his study.
A few minutes later, an assistant arrived in a panic to say a suspicious-looking digital clock had been found lying in the hallway. Police, called to the scene, declared the clock harmless.
A convert to Islam at age 15, Prof. Kalisch says he was drawn to the faith because it seemed more rational than others. He embraced a branch of Shiite Islam noted for its skeptical bent. After working briefly as a lawyer, he began work in 2001 on a postdoctoral thesis in Islamic law in Hamburg, to go through the elaborate process required to become a professor in Germany.
The Sept. 11 attacks in the U.S. that year appalled Mr. Kalisch but didn't dent his devotion. Indeed, after he arrived at M?nster University in 2004, he struck some as too conservative. Sami Alrabaa, a scholar at a nearby college, recalls attending a lecture by Prof. Kalisch and being upset by his doctrinaire defense of Islamic law, known as Sharia.
In private, he was moving in a different direction. He devoured works questioning the existence of Abraham, Moses and Jesus. Then "I said to myself You've dealt with Christianity and Judaism but what about your own religion? Can you take it for granted that Muhammad existed?"
He had no doubts at first, but slowly they emerged. He was struck, he says, by the fact that the first coins bearing Muhammad's name did not appear until the late 7th century -- six decades after the religion did.
He traded ideas with some scholars in Saarbr?cken who in recent years have been pushing the idea of Muhammad's nonexistence. They claim that "Muhammad" wasn't the name of a person but a title, and that Islam began as a Christian heresy.
Prof. Kalisch didn't buy all of this. Contributing last year to a book on Islam, he weighed the odds and called Muhammad's existence "more probable than not." By early this year, though, his thinking had shifted. "The more I read, the historical person at the root of the whole thing became more and more improbable," he says.
He has doubts, too, about the Quran. "God doesn't write books," Prof. Kalisch says.
Some of his students voiced alarm at the direction of his teaching. "I began to wonder if he would one day say he doesn't exist himself," says one. A few boycotted his lectures. Others sang his praises.
Prof. Kalisch says he "never told students 'just believe what Kalisch thinks' " but seeks to teach them to think independently. Religions, he says, are "crutches" that help believers get to "the spiritual truth behind them." To him, what matters isn't whether Muhammad actually lived but the philosophy presented in his name.
This summer, the dispute hit the headlines. A Turkish-language German newspaper reported on it with gusto. Media in the Muslim world picked up on it.
Germany's Muslim Coordinating Council withdrew from the advisory board of Prof. Kalisch's center. Some Council members refused to address him by his adopted Muslim name, Muhammad, saying that he should now be known as Sven.
German academics split. Michael Marx, a Quran scholar at the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences, warned that Prof. Kalisch's views would discredit German scholarship and make it difficult for German scholars to work in Muslim lands. But Ursula Spuler-Stegemann, an Islamic studies scholar at the University of Marburg, set up a Web site called solidaritymuhammadkalisch.com and started an online petition of support.
Alarmed that a pioneering effort at Muslim outreach was only stoking antagonism, M?nster University decided to douse the flames. Prof. Kalisch was told he could keep his professorship but must stop teaching Islam to future school teachers.
The professor says he's more determined than ever to keep probing his faith. He is finishing a book to explain his thoughts. It's in English instead of German because he wants to make a bigger impact. "I'm convinced that what I'm doing is necessary. There must be a free discussion of Islam," he says.
?Almut Schoenfeld in Berlin contributed to this article
-
id be very interested in reading his book once it comes out...
He had no doubts at first, but slowly they emerged. He was struck, he says, by the fact that the first coins bearing Muhammad's name did not appear until the late 7th century -- six decades after the religion did.
The FM interpretation of the coins is different to his if i remember correctly... was it an article or discussion about the coins?
Also theories about Mohammad not being in Mecca, Arabia but somewhere else entirely... maybe he was just looking for evidence in the wrong place?
No mention in the article about when we can expect his publicaion though... if anyone hears anything please keep us informed....
-
Mohamed means "Praiseworthy" and it is said of a man. Lets look at all the verses in which the word Mohamed occurs
3144 And Mohammed is but a messenger, like many messengers that have passed before him. If he dies or is killed will you turn back on your heels? And whoever turns back on his heels, he will not harm God in the least. And God will reward the thankful.
3340 Mohammed was not the father of any of your men, but he is the messenger of God and the seal of the prophets. And God is fully aware of all things.
472 And those who believe and do good works, and believe in what was sent down to Mohammed, for it is the truth from their Lord, He cancels for them their sins, and relieves their concern.
4829 Mohammed is the messenger of God, and those who are with him are severe against the rejecters, but merciful between themselves. You see them kneeling and prostrating, they seek God?s blessings and approval. Their distinction is in their faces, as a result of prostrating. Such is their example in the Torah. And their example in the Injeel is like a plant which shoots out and becomes strong and thick and it stands straight on its trunk, pleasing to the farmers. That He may enrage the rejecters with them. God promises those among them who believe and do good works a forgiveness and a great reward.
Ahmed, which means "Most acclaimed", occurs in one verse only
616 When Jesus, son of Mary, said, "O children of Israel, I am God's messenger to you, authenticating what is present with me of the Torah and bringing good news of a messenger to come after me whose name will be ?most acclaimed.'" But when he showed them the clear proofs, they said, ?This is clearly magic.'
Perhaps the "most acclaimed" one is the same as the "praiseworthy" man. Maybe Mohamed isn't the name of the messenger mentioned in 3144, 3340, 472, and 4829; maybe it is just an honorific title for the messenger mentioned in those verses and perhaps the same is also true for Ahmed.
-
Mohamed means "Praiseworthy" and it is said of a man. Lets look at all the verses in which the word Mohamed occurs
3144 And Mohammed is but a messenger, like many messengers that have passed before him. If he dies or is killed will you turn back on your heels? And whoever turns back on his heels, he will not harm God in the least. And God will reward the thankful.
3340 Mohammed was not the father of any of your men, but he is the messenger of God and the seal of the prophets. And God is fully aware of all things.
472 And those who believe and do good works, and believe in what was sent down to Mohammed, for it is the truth from their Lord, He cancels for them their sins, and relieves their concern.
4829 Mohammed is the messenger of God, and those who are with him are severe against the rejecters, but merciful between themselves. You see them kneeling and prostrating, they seek God?s blessings and approval. Their distinction is in their faces, as a result of prostrating. Such is their example in the Torah. And their example in the Injeel is like a plant which shoots out and becomes strong and thick and it stands straight on its trunk, pleasing to the farmers. That He may enrage the rejecters with them. God promises those among them who believe and do good works a forgiveness and a great reward.
Ahmed, which means "Most acclaimed", occurs in one verse only
616 When Jesus, son of Mary, said, "O children of Israel, I am God's messenger to you, authenticating what is present with me of the Torah and bringing good news of a messenger to come after me whose name will be ?most acclaimed.'" But when he showed them the clear proofs, they said, ?This is clearly magic.'
Perhaps the "most acclaimed" one is the same as the "praiseworthy" man. Maybe Mohamed isn't the name of the messenger mentioned in 3144, 3340, 472, and 4829; maybe it is just an honorific title for the messenger mentioned in those verses and perhaps the same is also true for Ahmed.
Peace
Mohamed means "Praiseworthy
i]Ahmed, which means "Most acclaimed", occurs in one verse only
You alllready answerd it ;D
-
Islamic Theologian's Theory It's Likely the Prophet Muhammad Never Existed
by Andrew Higgins, WSJ
Thanks to Jeff for the link.A rebuttal of Kilsch's views by Michal Marx
Excerpt
"You have to be a bit delicate about it. In general, when it comes to history, you can't point to any scientific proof. How would we, for example, prove the existence of Charlemagne? We can't conduct any experiments; we have to work with evidence. And, for this issue, the evidentiary thread is the Koran. In this case, the evidentiary situation is better than it is for any other religion. We know of manuscripts of the Koran and Islamic inscriptions already 40-50 years after the Prophet died."
http//www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,579052,00.html
-
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=16127.msg195354#new
please read the last 2 posts by me and please state what you think. The Mohammed that we know today via traditions is no different than the fictional Jesus (isa) that we all too familiar with.
peace
-
@ Rajah,
#1 The Prophet is not the speaker in the text of the Quran, therefore
he is addressed as the third person.#2 The three translations I read of 3340 are all in the present tense
http//www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/quran/033.qmt.html
You should also note that time is not related in the Quran in an ordinary way.
Judgment Day for example is frequently mentioned in the Quran in the present tense,
because for God (the author of the Quran) everything has already happened, in a sense.#3 Similar speculations can be raised against any historical figure, from the distant past.
In the fields, for example archeology, it is accepted that you will find less fossils
the farther back in time you look... this is just the way it goes. But the archeologists do
not discount the dinosaurs just because their fossil record is much less prevalent in the soil
then for more recent animals. Like Marx said in the article I provided, these things have to
be analyzed delicately. To make sweeping statements like "the prophet never existed" or
that "he probably died in battle" etc. is basically undue speculation.PeAcE
-
Code,
I don think it is a sweeping statement when I/we say Muhammed could have died in a battle.If one is killed in the sake of God it could be a battle or at least engaged in a struggle. It is a posibility but not a speculation. God provides the possibility.3144 And Mohammed is but a messenger, like many messengers that have passed before him. If he dies or is killed will you turn back on your heels? And whoever turns back on his heels, he will not harm God in the least. And God will reward the thankful...
The translation provided by freeminds has 2 tenses used in 3340. Anyone with good arabic knowledge might want to look into this.
I hope to make myself a little clearer.The whole reason why i wrote is this..to do away with the myth that mohammed was the only person involved in receiving the revelation if at all. If Mohammed had died before the whole compilation we call the quran was completed, there were someone else who carried on the work. Traditionalists and like minded folks here at free-minds always use "mohammed" in hypothesis.They will do this 'oh prophet (mohammed)' when what they are doing is simply adding words.Jesus,Moses were always addressed by their names or by unique titles,for e.g Messiah. If 3340 acknowledges the death of Mohammed, then it would be clear that a messenger had come after mohammed who was not called by his given name to authenticate what was with the prophet (regardless who it was really), and also he explained who was mohammed. maybe he was talking to the arabs. This messenger could have presented the quran in arabic and the 'compilation' could have been a 'mere' translation.this is my take. If these were the true happeinings, we had been cheated all this while.
These could be sweeping statements
Mohammed was an arab*. Mohammed was an illiterate.Mohammed received the whole quran.Mohammed married little girls.Meccan sura Medinan Sura*this is what islam is.I am not a racist. Some opportunistic arabs/assimilated folks hijacked the whole 'happening' and turned into a (gasp) a 'religion' based on a concortion that the last prophet was an arab. In other words, they could have replaced their original arabic religion and replaed it with the newly manufactured one.Then they began to destroy others' civilization/culture by imposing theirs on them. 'Believers' had to take on arabic names (slave names-sweeping statement or the truth?).An indirect worship of the arabic language by selling words ( a possible replacement of idols but nevertheless arabic) from the quran in arabic as some sorta talisamn,charm etc.Arabic words are so revered in fact if I write the word 'toilet' in arabic and give it to someone who does not understand arabic he might place it on his door thinking it will save him from evil. Ever heard about the Al-qudsi joke? ok I will end this here..
3928 A compilation in Arabic, without any crookedness, that they may be righteous....yeah sure..16103 And We are aware that they say ?A human is teaching him.? The language of the one they refer to is foreign, while this is a clear Arabic language. Maybe this could be a clue to something we donno yet...
About time, I donno what is time. All I know i use a watch to help me with my daily activities and beyond that I donno what it could be,seriously.
We know the quran is not chronically arranged and just donno why.The book from God is not arranged properly..It is a crying shame..Even a kindegarten book is neatly layed out but the quran..sad man sad..I personally believe it was left that way to confuse the masses..
The 'muslims' desperately needed a 'jesus' and they came up with their own version of mohammed..Oh that man existed no doubt..it is in the quran.....
sad.....