Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Huon · 07-06-2013, 03:01 AM

The Middle East (now Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, the Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Israel) was a battlefield between the the Byzantine Empire (395-1453), and the Sassanid Empire (224-677). They had local allies, among whom the Ghassanids, also Banū Ghassān "Sons of Ghassān", and the Lakhmids ruled by the Banu Lakhm.
The history of Muhammad and the beginnings of the developement of Islam during the 7th century CE are dependent of the history of the Byzantine Empire, and of the history of the end of the Sassanid Empire.

Duvduv · 07-16-2013, 09:51 AM

Therefore it is worth following along the investigative lines of Ibn Warraq and others. Was there an *Islamic* conquest of North Africa (as opposed to a gradual *Arab* settlement)?

Did Mohammed of the Quran exist, and did the Quran exist before the onset of the caliphate in Baghdad?

Was Mecca a trading center at the time of the alleged life of Mohammed?

Did Shi'ism actually exist before the onset of the Safavid dynasty under Ismael I in Persia?

Was Shi'ism a separate religion of Imamism that syncretized with Abbasid Islam, and did Shi'ism actually originate as a branch of esoteric Imamism in Lebanon along with what became the Druze sect, the Alawite sect (and other sects that venerate Ali even more than they do Mohammed)?

Was Ali (who does not get a mention in the Quran itself) integrated into Islam itself as a way of integrating those who venerated a figure of Imamism named Ali?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

The Middle East (now Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, the Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Israel) was a battlefield between the the Byzantine Empire (395-1453), and the Sassanid Empire (224-677). They had local allies, among whom the Ghassanids, also Banū Ghassān "Sons of Ghassān", and the Lakhmids ruled by the Banu Lakhm.
The history of Muhammad and the beginnings of the developement of Islam during the 7th century CE are dependent of the history of the Byzantine Empire, and of the history of the end of the Sassanid Empire.

Duvduv · 07-19-2013, 02:29 PM

In three days no one has addressed any of the points of this thread.
However, I will add to it.
One of the main stories that hardly ever gets challenged is the conflict that Mohammed had with Jewish tribes in Arabia such as the Quraysh and the Qunayqa, who are said to have betrayed the Muslims in assorted ways.
However, there is not a single source in ancient Jewish texts of which I am aware who EVEN MENTION the existence of Jews in the area of Medina and Mecca at all, much less any conflict with Muhammed and the Muslims.
However, we DO KNOW of the large Jewish populations in Iraq under the Abbasid caliphate for which such stories would have had more significance in the struggle to create the successor Islamic faith.
Interestingly enough even in the sources of the Karaites I am not aware of any mention at all of Islam as we know it or aspects of its religion in the early 8th century in relation to Anan ben David, but merely of his association with the caliph who is not identified with Muslim characteristics.

Huon · 07-20-2013, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

... the conflict that Mohammed had with Jewish tribes in Arabia such as the Quraysh and the Qunayqa, who are said to have betrayed the Muslims in assorted ways.

The Quraysh were the the tribe of Muhammad.
The Jewish tribes were the Banu Qaynuqa, Banu Quraizah, Banu Mustaliq, Banu Nadir, and some other less important.

Roger Pearse · 07-20-2013, 11:50 AM

I am by no means an Islamicist, but I will do my best.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

1) Why is there no biography among the Arabs at all of Muhammad for some 200 years after he allegedly died?

I presume you mean "why do we not have any copies of the biographies of Mohammed written in the first two centuries after he died"?

Arabic literature is a bit hard for all of us to access. Even the handbook, Brockelmann's "Geschichte der arabischen Litteratur", is a mess. However it does contain material on early accounts of Mohammed, and I translated it and placed it here. I apologise if it seems unreadable itself; Brockelmann is horribly badly written.

The key point is that the early accounts are mostly gone, because replaced by later, more definitive accounts. Al-Wakidi exists, tho, and there is an English version. Ibn Ishaq is gone, but exists to some extent in Ibn Hisham.

Quote:

2) How could there have been an Islamic caliphate in Damascus under Muawiyya so soon after Muhammed had died?

I'm not sure that I see your problem here. That Mohammed died, after unifying Arabia; that his empire promptly fell apart; that it was reunified by a certain amount of head-bashing and kept united by the prospect of loot; that the desert raiders met little resistance because of the wars of Heraclius, and, rather to their surprise, fluked into control of Damascus ... all this seems reasonable to me.

Quote:

3) What actual evidence exists supporting the idea of a massive Islamic (as opposed to Arab) conquest of North Africa??

There are references in Greek and Syriac literature to the fact that the Arabs practiced some new religion.

Quote:

4) Why are so many figures associated with Muhammad never mentioned in the Quran, i.e. Ali??

This seems merely vituperation to me. People put into books what they are interested in.

Quote:

5) How could Ali and then Hussein have engaged in a "war" with the Damascus Islamic caliphate in Kufa, Iraq which is so far away from Damascus?

It isn't very far away.

Quote:

6) Why are so many suras in the Quran taken from Jewish midrashic sources such as Midrash Rabba and Pirkei de Rabbi Eliezer though often out of context?

You would need to be sure that this is actually the case. But there were Jewish kingdoms in the Yemen. Indeed the Himyarite martyrs were put to death by one; and the king of Axum did a punitive expedition against him, at the time when Cosmas Indicopleustes was in Axum on his way to India.

Quote:

7) Why does the Quran appear to be a cut and paste job involving pre-existing stories from among Jewish-friendly or Christian-friendly sources?

I don't understand the question. It sounds like a statement phrased as a question. I don't know whether the statement is true, or why we care.

Quote:

8) Why is there no actual evidence for the existence of any Shia regimes in Islamic history before the Safavvid dynasty of Iran, and why does Shia Islam appear to be a syncretic religion combining elements of historical Islam with Ali veneration and Imamism, which would appear to have been similar but distinct religious movements?

Ditto.

I don't honestly see why we should question the Islamic account of their own origins. It seems discreditable enough by itself.

Never tell yourself nonsense, merely because you dislike somebody else. It's called "cutting your nose off, to spite your face."

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Net2004 · 07-20-2013, 02:13 PM

Greetings mr pierce

Is there a dated manuscript of mark which mentions muhammads name? Ive heard some muslims claim that muhammads name is written in the margin section in a dated manuscript of mark.

Duvduv · 07-20-2013, 07:23 PM

Yes, I stand corrected on the names. Of course there is no mention in any Jewish literature of such "tribes" in Arabia, much less of any conflict between Jews and "Muslims"/Mohammadans in Arabia.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

... the conflict that Mohammed had with Jewish tribes in Arabia such as the Quraysh and the Qunayqa, who are said to have betrayed the Muslims in assorted ways.

The Quraysh were the the tribe of Muhammad.
The Jewish tribes were the Banu Qaynuqa, Banu Quraizah, Banu Mustaliq, Banu Nadir, and some other less important.

Duvduv · 07-20-2013, 07:25 PM

Why is it alright to question origins of Judaism or Christianity, but not of Islam, whether Sunni or Shia or both? I think your various answer sound apologetical for the standard Islamic narrative rather than substantive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

I am by no means an Islamicist, but I will do my best.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

1) Why is there no biography among the Arabs at all of Muhammad for some 200 years after he allegedly died?

I presume you mean "why do we not have any copies of the biographies of Mohammed written in the first two centuries after he died"?

Arabic literature is a bit hard for all of us to access. Even the handbook, Brockelmann's "Geschichte der arabischen Litteratur", is a mess. However it does contain material on early accounts of Mohammed, and I translated it and placed it here. I apologise if it seems unreadable itself; Brockelmann is horribly badly written.

The key point is that the early accounts are mostly gone, because replaced by later, more definitive accounts. Al-Wakidi exists, tho, and there is an English version. Ibn Ishaq is gone, but exists to some extent in Ibn Hisham.

I'm not sure that I see your problem here. That Mohammed died, after unifying Arabia; that his empire promptly fell apart; that it was reunified by a certain amount of head-bashing and kept united by the prospect of loot; that the desert raiders met little resistance because of the wars of Heraclius, and, rather to their surprise, fluked into control of Damascus ... all this seems reasonable to me.

There are references in Greek and Syriac literature to the fact that the Arabs practiced some new religion.

This seems merely vituperation to me. People put into books what they are interested in.

It isn't very far away.

You would need to be sure that this is actually the case. But there were Jewish kingdoms in the Yemen. Indeed the Himyarite martyrs were put to death by one; and the king of Axum did a punitive expedition against him, at the time when Cosmas Indicopleustes was in Axum on his way to India.

I don't understand the question. It sounds like a statement phrased as a question. I don't know whether the statement is true, or why we care.

Quote:

8) Why is there no actual evidence for the existence of any Shia regimes in Islamic history before the Safavvid dynasty of Iran, and why does Shia Islam appear to be a syncretic religion combining elements of historical Islam with Ali veneration and Imamism, which would appear to have been similar but distinct religious movements?

Ditto.

I don't honestly see why we should question the Islamic account of their own origins. It seems discreditable enough by itself.

Never tell yourself nonsense, merely because you dislike somebody else. It's called "cutting your nose off, to spite your face."

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Huon · 07-21-2013, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

Yes, I stand corrected on the names. Of course there is no mention in any Jewish literature of such "tribes" in Arabia, much less of any conflict between Jews and "Muslims"/Mohammadans in Arabia.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

The Quraysh were the the tribe of Muhammad.
The Jewish tribes were the Banu Qaynuqa, Banu Quraizah, Banu Mustaliq, Banu Nadir, and some other less important.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Perhaps the Jewish tribes of Arabia were not "good Jews"...

Duvduv · 07-21-2013, 03:06 AM

More likely that these tribes did not exist, and that the Quranic narrative is untrue.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-06-2013, 03:01 AM	#31
Huon Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Bordeaux France Posts: 2,796	The Middle East (now Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, the Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Israel) was a battlefield between the the Byzantine Empire (395-1453), and the Sassanid Empire (224-677). They had local allies, among whom the Ghassanids, also Banū Ghassān "Sons of Ghassān", and the Lakhmids ruled by the Banu Lakhm. The history of Muhammad and the beginnings of the developement of Islam during the 7th century CE are dependent of the history of the Byzantine Empire, and of the history of the end of the Sassanid Empire.

07-19-2013, 02:29 PM	#33
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	In three days no one has addressed any of the points of this thread. However, I will add to it. One of the main stories that hardly ever gets challenged is the conflict that Mohammed had with Jewish tribes in Arabia such as the Quraysh and the Qunayqa, who are said to have betrayed the Muslims in assorted ways. However, there is not a single source in ancient Jewish texts of which I am aware who EVEN MENTION the existence of Jews in the area of Medina and Mecca at all, much less any conflict with Muhammed and the Muslims. However, we DO KNOW of the large Jewish populations in Iraq under the Abbasid caliphate for which such stories would have had more significance in the struggle to create the successor Islamic faith. Interestingly enough even in the sources of the Karaites I am not aware of any mention at all of Islam as we know it or aspects of its religion in the early 8th century in relation to Anan ben David, but merely of his association with the caliph who is not identified with Muslim characteristics.

07-20-2013, 02:13 PM	#36
Net2004 Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: U.K Posts: 217	Greetings mr pierce Is there a dated manuscript of mark which mentions muhammads name? Ive heard some muslims claim that muhammads name is written in the margin section in a dated manuscript of mark.

07-21-2013, 03:06 AM	#40
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	More likely that these tribes did not exist, and that the Quranic narrative is untrue.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.