Patricia Crone - What do we (historians) know about Muhammad

Bigmo

It is notoriously difficult to know anything for sure about the founder of a world religion. Just as one shrine after the other obliterates the contours of the localities in which he was active, so one doctrine after another reshapes him as a figure for veneration and imitation for a vast number of people in times and places that he never knew.

In the case of Mohammed, Muslim literary sources for his life only begin around 750-800 CE (common era), some four to five generations after his death, and few Islamicists (specialists in the history and study of Islam) these days assume them to be straightforward historical accounts. For all that, we probably know more about Mohammed than we do about Jesus (let alone Moses or the Buddha), and we certainly have the potential to know a great deal more.

There is no doubt that Mohammed existed, occasional attempts to deny it notwithstanding. His neighbours in Byzantine Syria got to hear of him within two years of his death at the latest; a Greek text written during the Arab invasion of Syria between 632 and 634 mentions that "a false prophet has appeared among the Saracens" and dismisses him as an impostor on the ground that prophets do not come "with sword and chariot". It thus conveys the impression that he was actually leading the invasions.

Mohammed's death is normally placed in 632, but the possibility that it should be placed two or three years later cannot be completely excluded. The Muslim calendar was instituted after Mohammed's death, with a starting-point of his emigration (hijra) to Medina (then Yathrib) ten years earlier. Some Muslims, however, seem to have correlated this point of origin with the year which came to span 624-5 in the Gregorian calendar rather than the canonical year of 622.

If such a revised date is accurate, the evidence of the Greek text would mean that Mohammed is the only founder of a world religion who is attested in a contemporary source. But in any case, this source gives us pretty irrefutable evidence that he was an historical figure. Moreover, an Armenian document probably written shortly after 661 identifies him by name and gives a recognisable account of his monotheist preaching.

For more on this article follow link

http//www.opendemocracy.net/faith-europe_islam/mohammed_3866.jsp

So she finally accepts Koran as historically authentic. She however seems to lack a theological understanding. Also it seems she is influenced by Sunni or rather salafi thoughts. But a definent good read. She is of course an atheist which explains why her theological understanding is weak.

Bigmo

It is notoriously difficult to know anything for sure about the founder of a world religion. Just as one shrine after the other obliterates the contours of the localities in which he was active, so one doctrine after another reshapes him as a figure for veneration and imitation for a vast number of people in times and places that he never knew.

In the case of Mohammed, Muslim literary sources for his life only begin around 750-800 CE (common era), some four to five generations after his death, and few Islamicists (specialists in the history and study of Islam) these days assume them to be straightforward historical accounts. For all that, we probably know more about Mohammed than we do about Jesus (let alone Moses or the Buddha), and we certainly have the potential to know a great deal more.

There is no doubt that Mohammed existed, occasional attempts to deny it notwithstanding. His neighbours in Byzantine Syria got to hear of him within two years of his death at the latest; a Greek text written during the Arab invasion of Syria between 632 and 634 mentions that "a false prophet has appeared among the Saracens" and dismisses him as an impostor on the ground that prophets do not come "with sword and chariot". It thus conveys the impression that he was actually leading the invasions.

Mohammed's death is normally placed in 632, but the possibility that it should be placed two or three years later cannot be completely excluded. The Muslim calendar was instituted after Mohammed's death, with a starting-point of his emigration (hijra) to Medina (then Yathrib) ten years earlier. Some Muslims, however, seem to have correlated this point of origin with the year which came to span 624-5 in the Gregorian calendar rather than the canonical year of 622.

If such a revised date is accurate, the evidence of the Greek text would mean that Mohammed is the only founder of a world religion who is attested in a contemporary source. But in any case, this source gives us pretty irrefutable evidence that he was an historical figure. Moreover, an Armenian document probably written shortly after 661 identifies him by name and gives a recognisable account of his monotheist preaching.

For more on this article follow link

http//www.opendemocracy.net/faith-europe_islam/mohammed_3866.jsp

So she finally accepts Koran as historically authentic. She however seems to lack a theological understanding. Also it seems she is influenced by Sunni or rather salafi thoughts. But a definent good read. She is of course an atheist which explains why her theological understanding is weak.

She says in the article regarding Mecca

"The suspicion that the location is doctrinally inspired is reinforced by the fact that the Qur'an describes the polytheist opponents as agriculturalists who cultivated wheat, grapes, olives, and date palms. Wheat, grapes and olives are the three staples of the Mediterranean; date palms take us southwards, but Mecca was not suitable for any kind of agriculture, and one could not possibly have produced olives there.

In addition, the Qur'an twice describes its opponents as living in the site of a vanished nation, that is to say a town destroyed by God for its sins. There were many such ruined sites in northwest Arabia. The prophet frequently tells his opponents to consider their significance and on one occasion remarks, with reference to the remains of Lot's people, that "you pass by them in the morning and in the evening". This takes us to somewhere in the Dead Sea region. Respect for the traditional account has prevailed to such an extent among modern historians that the first two points have passed unnoticed until quite recently, while the third has been ignored. The exegetes said that the Quraysh passed by Lot's remains on their annual journeys to Syria, but the only way in which one can pass by a place in the morning and the evening is evidently by living somewhere in the vicinity"

The problem here is that the Quran does not all talk about what the Meccans are doing but also what they know. So whether they cultivated olives or not is not relevant as other nations did. She seems to think that the Meccans knew nothing about whats outside their domain. More importantly the Koran talked about many aspects of life alien to the Meccans but may be relevant to other readers of the Koran like Jews. Eevn to this day most Muslim scholars do not understand many of the issues the Koran was refering to when debating Jews like the Talmud. Most Muslim scholars do not seperate the Old Testament from the Talmud as they do not seperate the Koran from the Sunnah. She also points to the day and night and Lot. The problem is day and night is an expression. She takes it literally. If someone says I was wroking day and night, it means I was working a lot and not necessarily in that time frame. The Koran refers to the day of judgement as the hour and also the moment and also describes its duration in multiple ways. She tends to assume linguism in the Koran as stationary. I know from this forum that linguistic interpretation of the Koran is very trick as the Koran uses terms variantly.

She also has a "salafi" interpretation of the pagans. That they were monotheist who simply practiced some sort of Tawassul (intercession) with angels. She also think that the Koran accused the Vhristians of the same thing (even though they were monotheist she says). Once again its that salafi influence.

But paganism is radically different. I am not sure she is trained in Theology. Maybe she is.

raginggaijin

She says in the article regarding Mecca

"The suspicion that the location is doctrinally inspired is reinforced by the fact that the Qur'an describes the polytheist opponents as agriculturalists who cultivated wheat, grapes, olives, and date palms. Wheat, grapes and olives are the three staples of the Mediterranean; date palms take us southwards, but Mecca was not suitable for any kind of agriculture, and one could not possibly have produced olives there.

It is obvious she did not read the Quran then. P

Provision is provided for them ? sown land is not near
"Our Lord, I have made some of my seed to dwell in a valley where is no sown land by Thy Holy House; Our Lord, let them perform the prayer, and make hearts of men yearn towards them, and provide them with fruits; haply they will be thankful." Surah 14 37

?And when Abraham said, 'My Lord, make this a land secure, and provide its people with fruits, such of them as believe in God and the Last Day.' He said, 'And whoso disbelieves, to him I shall give enjoyment a little, then I shall compel him to the chastisement of the Fire -- how evil a homecoming!'? Surah 2126

?O believers, the idolaters are indeed unclean; so let them not come near the Holy Mosque after this year of theirs. If you fear poverty, God shall surely enrich you of His bounty, if He will; God is All-knowing; All-wise.? Surah 928

?They say, 'Should we follow the guidance with thee, we shall be snatched from our land.' Have We not established for them a sanctuary secure, to which are collected the fruits of everything, as a provision from Us? But most of them know not.? Surah 2857

Yet every year sacrifices are made at Masjid Al-Haram, and the meat given to the poor.
Allah is clear the Kaaba is the place of sacrifice/donation Surah 595-97, 2233

While focusing on where the qiblah is, the majority lose sight of why the qiblah was established.

Patricia Crone is an outspoken opponent of Al-Islam.
Be careful lest you be led astray by fancy discourse of satans.

The Quran contains an explanation for all things.

?And certainly We have explained in this Quran every kind of example, and man is most of all given to contention.? Surah 1854

?And certainly We have made clear for men in this Quran every kind of description, but most men consent naught save denying.? Surah 1789

?In their stories is surely a lesson to men possessed of minds; it is not a tale forged, but a confirmation of what is before it, and a distinguishing of every thing, and a guidance, and a mercy to a people who believe.? Surah 12111

"And this Quran is not such as could be forged by those besides Allah, but it is a verification of that which is before it and a clear explanation of the Book, there is no doubt in it, from the Lord of the worlds." Surah 1037

Peace.

Bigmo

It is obvious she did not read the Quran then. P

Provision is provided for them ? sown land is not near
"Our Lord, I have made some of my seed to dwell in a valley where is no sown land by Thy Holy House; Our Lord, let them perform the prayer, and make hearts of men yearn towards them, and provide them with fruits; haply they will be thankful." Surah 14 37

?And when Abraham said, 'My Lord, make this a land secure, and provide its people with fruits, such of them as believe in God and the Last Day.' He said, 'And whoso disbelieves, to him I shall give enjoyment a little, then I shall compel him to the chastisement of the Fire -- how evil a homecoming!'? Surah 2126

?O believers, the idolaters are indeed unclean; so let them not come near the Holy Mosque after this year of theirs. If you fear poverty, God shall surely enrich you of His bounty, if He will; God is All-knowing; All-wise.? Surah 928

?They say, 'Should we follow the guidance with thee, we shall be snatched from our land.' Have We not established for them a sanctuary secure, to which are collected the fruits of everything, as a provision from Us? But most of them know not.? Surah 2857

Yet every year sacrifices are made at Masjid Al-Haram, and the meat given to the poor.
Allah is clear the Kaaba is the place of sacrifice/donation Surah 595-97, 2233

While focusing on where the qiblah is, the majority lose sight of why the qiblah was established.

Patricia Crone is an outspoken opponent of Al-Islam.
Be careful lest you be led astray by fancy discourse of satans.

The Quran contains an explanation for all things.

?And certainly We have explained in this Quran every kind of example, and man is most of all given to contention.? Surah 1854

?And certainly We have made clear for men in this Quran every kind of description, but most men consent naught save denying.? Surah 1789

?In their stories is surely a lesson to men possessed of minds; it is not a tale forged, but a confirmation of what is before it, and a distinguishing of every thing, and a guidance, and a mercy to a people who believe.? Surah 12111

"And this Quran is not such as could be forged by those besides Allah, but it is a verification of that which is before it and a clear explanation of the Book, there is no doubt in it, from the Lord of the worlds." Surah 1037

Peace.

I don't care about what she believes. She is no opponent of Islam as such, but she did admit she is a non believer (atheist). But she brings some important points at least froma HISTORICAL persepective. The Koran is not easy for a non believer to understand. As the case with the Bible.

raginggaijin

The Koran is not easy for a non believer to understand. As the case with the Bible.

For a reason. Insincere readers are diverted from the Truth.

I see no reason to seek the views of disbelievers when every explanation, every detail I need, is in the Quran.

Your mileage may vary.

Peace.

Bigmo

For a reason. Insincere readers are diverted from the Truth.

I see no reason to seek the views of disbelievers when every explanation, every detail I need, is in the Quran.

Your mileage may vary.

Peace.

Every explanation and detail for salvation is in the Koran. But to understand and interpret its verses might force you to seek knowledge of other religions and debate others as the Koran ordered the prophet to do.

raginggaijin

Every explanation and detail for salvation is in the Koran. But to understand and interpret its verses might force you to seek knowledge of other religions and debate others as the Koran ordered the prophet to do.

What is an enemy of Al-Islam?

"Many of the People of the Book wish they might restore you as unbelievers, after you have believed, in the jealousy of their souls, after the truth has become clear to them; yet do you pardon and be forgiving, till God brings His command; truly God is powerful over everything." Surah 2109

"Those who have turned back in their traces after the guidance has become clear to them, Satan it was that tempted them, and God respited them." Surah 4725

She has studied the Quran and the deen of Al-Islam. She knows what the guidance is. She continues to uphold disbelief after this knowledge is clear, and to dispute about the revelation.

"Surely We have sent down to thee the Book with the truth, so that thou mayest judge between the people by that God has shown thee. So be not an advocate for the traitors;" Surah 4105

Allah warns about associating with people when they mock His revelation

"He has sent down upon you in the Book 'When you hear God's signs being disbelieved and made mock of, do not sit with them until they plunge into some other talk, or else you will surely be like to them.' God will gather the hypocrites and the unbelievers all in Gehenna." Surah 4140

When a person is proven wrong in their teachings, as Patricia Crone was just shown to be wrong, I see no reason to pay them any attention. Especially when the Quran contains detailed explanations that often prove archeological and historical accounts of their forgetfulness or error.

Allah tells us to use the Quran to verify the Truth in previous Books, but no where does He tell us to debate others. He tells us our only obligation is to remind. That's it.

"Nothing of their account falls upon those that are godfearing but a reminding; haply they will be godfearing." Surah 669

Why would I continue to seek knowledge from a person who it is proven gets it wrong? Not in my nature, Bigmo. That is what kept me in disbelief as a Trinitarian Christian, and I won't return to disbelief. I'm only responsible for myself.

?God forbids you not, as regards those who have not fought you in religion's cause, nor expelled you from your habitations, that you should be kindly to them, and act justly towards them; surely God loves the just.
God only forbids you as to those who have fought you in religion's cause, and expelled you from your habitations, and have supported in your expulsion, that you should take them for friends. And whosoever takes them for friends, those -- they are the evildoers.? Surah 608-9

So for myself, I see the name 'Patricia Crone' and I dismiss her works - throw them out.
The Quran contains an explanation and a description of all things. Allah tells me to go about in the world and see how He originated the creation, to see what was the end of those who disbelieved. He even points us towards knowledge He gives that the unbelievers will discover, as Surah 2130 shows.

Evidence will be found in the world as I explore it.
Sure enough, it is. D

Peace.

Bigmo