Duvduv

In a recent exchange I have had with a very knowledgeable person in the subject of Islam, it appears that in fact the entirety of Islam after the 7th century was very fluid. Thus the famous Islamic teachers identified by the Shia as their imams may have indeed existed and proposed some ideas that the Shia eventually recreated as their own in contrast to the Sunni, but that these people were not Shia and did not intend to create Shiism.

This would explain exposure of "Islamoid" (for want of a better term) movements to ideas from many sources including Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians and then Ottomans that impacted on the political dynamics of the various movements, and account for the contrasting beliefs not only between Shiites and Sunnis but between Twelver Shiites and Ismailis as well.

Although he professes Islam, he tells me that he has serious doubts even about the form of contemporary Sunni Islam that he believes was influenced heavily by the Ottomans.

His view is "Both Sunnis and Shiites are right, and both Sunnis and Shiites are wrong."

Duvduv

Was Muhammad a real person or was he a spiritual concept rooted in mysticism or gnosticism akin to a "Christ"? Amazingly the Quran only mentions the name Muhammad the "messenger" four or five times with no context whatsoever as to who "Muhammad" is.

Since so much spiritual significance is given by mystics, Ismailis and Shia to "Muhammad," one wonders whether in fact he wasn't a real person, and "orthodox Islam" did not exist for a while, allowing various competing sects to emerge who spiritualize the concept of Muhammad (and Ali).

in fact, no biography of a man called Muhammad is identified before the mid-9th century, over 200 years after he is said to have died. The first biography was written by Ibn Yishaq but did not survive, and it was written at least 150 years after Muhammad is said to have died.

Adam

D--
I've heard this before, but I think only here on FRDB and very recently (from you?). What is your source for Mohammed-mythicism?

Duvduv

There is alot online and wikipedia about the historicity of Muhammad, the mysticism of Shia sects, and Sunni views about the origins of Shiism. The historical facts of the development of Islam in relation to the biography and the hadiths.

Where did the Ismailis, Druze etc. get the idea of spiritualizing Mohammed, i.e. that his soul preceded the creation of the world, and that Ali plays some great cosmic role? It would appear that a religion of Imamism that even preceded Islam may have latched onto Islam along the way and developed in Lebanon as I mentioned.

It would appear that what eventually got out there as the Quran is a collection of all sorts of writings from monotheistic Arabian sects including ones close to Judaism and Christianity. There seem to be different layers in the Quran: The Medina warrior layer; the Judeophile layer; the Christianophile layer.

Maybe some viewed a person "Mohammed" as a heavenly being "Praised One" who is not described in the Quran at all beyond mention of the name 4 or 5 times but who was historicized.

Duvduv

There is probably a good argument to be made that the "Mohammed" of the Quran is an obscure individual. Were he the important prophet he would be mentioned frequently throughout the Quran as a unified text rather than a composite of various sources whose life in hadith and biographies does not even emerge for 200 years. Early external sources make reference to Arab conquests but describe Arabs who are quite different from anything described in orthodox Muslim literature.

The Arabs had their own versions of Eusebius, Tertullian and Origen.......

It would appear that the legend of the Messenger-Rassullah who transcribed the Quran did not emerge for at least 150 years after the usual date of death in 632, i.e. around 800, long after Muhammad is said to have lived, and long after the 4 right caliphates (Rashidun). An obscure individual named Mahmud or Mohammed as a desert warrior leader who identified with Jewish/Christian monotheism was the prototype for Mohammed of Islam much like Yeshu ben Pandera was the prototype for Jesus of the NT.

Duvduv

The entire scenario surrounding the events of the martyrdom of Ali when he was killed by the army of the illegitimate caliph Yazid according to the Shia has echoes of the tragedy felt by Catholics of the crucifixion because Ali was the divinely appointed imam over all Muslims and died in a tragedy. This is somewhat ironic because the Quran denies that the HJ was crucified. So in fact Jesus did not suffer like Hussein, but the benefit for the followers is similar.

On the other hand, all those events as recorded by either Sunnis or Shia in the battle in Qarbala evoke nothing of Muslim faith per se in the name of the Prophet whose grandson Ali ostensibly was, something known by their opponents.

Did the legends surrounding Ali represent an Abrahamic Arabian sect originally unrelated to "Mohammedan Islam" and that became integrated into Islam later?
Did the later Shia adopt the legend as preserved by a competing sect of imamists who consider the imams as God's representative on Earth not directly having anything to do with Mohammadan Islam?

This clearly expresses indications of a separate sect other than that identified originally with Mohammed and the Quran which both apparently emerged only at the end of the 8th century. This sect of Imamism would have incorporated gnostic, Christian and Persian elements and predate Mohammedan Islam, being later extended with the notion of the occultation of the 12th imam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shia_Is...002._p._46_8-0
It is believed in Twelver and Ismaili Shia Islam that 'aql, divine wisdom, was the source of the souls of the prophets and imams and gave them esoteric knowledge called ḥikmah and that their sufferings were a means of divine grace to their devotees.[4][18][19] Although the Imam was not the recipient of a divine revelation, he had a close relationship with God, through which God guides him, and the imam in turn guides the people. Imamate, or belief in the divine guide, is a fundamental belief in the Twelver and Ismaili Shia branches and is based on the concept that God would not leave humanity without access to divine guidance.[20]

Duvduv

The reliability of any mention of Muhammed in the earliest non-Arab sources seem rather iffy and even anachronistic, especially because no mention or biography of Muhammad was even produced by the Muslims before the end of the 8th century.

The names used in the earliest sources are MHMD, MHMT (which could also be Mahmud,), and the people are Ishmaelites, Sarcens, Mhaggare, Hagarites, but not Muslims, with descriptions of the man as a conqueror, source of "fables" (but not of a sacred book).
http://www.christianorigins.com/islamrefs.html

andrewcriddle

This seems to be confusing the violent deaths (in very different circumstances) of Ali and his son Hussein.

Andrew Criddle

sotto voce

Not half. Made them absolutely bloody furious.

Duvduv

My mistake. I meant Hussein, not Ali.
However the Shia have their own Passion to experience. It's ironic since no Muslims believe Jesus was crucified.